The impact of instrumental communication and integration on correctional staff

Here today, gone tomorrow, back again the next day: Antecedents of correctional absenteeism

“…In order to build job satisfaction and organizational commitment and to reduce job stress, effort should be placed in improving the work environment. There was a growing body of correctional literature that suggested that organizational fairness, instrumental communication, job autonomy, participation in decision-making, feedback, supervision, integration, instrumental communication, organizational fairness, role conflict, role ambiguity, and work-family conflict were important in shaping the level of job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and/or job stress experienced by correctional employees (Grossi, Keil, & Vito, 1996;Hepburn & Knepper, 1993;Jurik & Winn, 1987;Lambert, Barton, Hogan, & Clarke, 2002;Lambert, Hogan, & Barton, 2002bLindquist & Whitehead, 1986;Liou, 1995;Triplett, Mullings, & Scarborough, 1999;Wright, Saylor, Gilman, & Camp, 1997).…”

The impact of distributive and procedural justice on correctional staff job stress, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment

“…Role conflict, role ambiguity, role overload, dangerousness, and concerns over medical issues were associated with lower levels of job satisfaction (Lambert, Hogan, Paoline, & Clarke, 2005;Lambert, Reynolds, Paoline, & Watkins, 2004). Input into decision-making, job autonomy, integration, job variety, satisfaction with pay, availability of incentive program, training, perceptions of equitable treatment, and quality of supervision, training, and formalization were shown to lead to higher levels of job satisfaction (Dennis, 1998;Griffin, 2001;Hepburn, 1987;Hepburn & Knepper, 1993;Lambert, 2004;Lambert, Barton, Hogan, & Clarke, 2002;Lambert, Paoline, & Hogan, 2006;Lambert et al, 2004;Stohr, Lovrich, Monke, & Zupan, 1994;Whitehead & Lindquist, 1986;K. Wright et al, 1997).…”

Side-bets and reciprocity as determinants of organizational commitment among correctional officers

“…Participation in the decision-making process was found to have a positive effect on commitment (Wright, Saylor, Gilman, & Camp, 1997), as had job satisfaction and satisfaction with one's supervisor (Lambert, 2004;Robinson, Porporino, & Simourd, 1997). Lambert, Hogan, Barton, and Clarke (2002) found that increased instrumental communication and greater staff integration significantly increased affective commitment to the organization among a group of non-supervisory correctional officers. This study also found that age, education, gender, race, position, and tenure failed to have any effect on levels of affective commitment for this group.…”

“…This scale had been the most common method of assessing commitment within the correctional setting and measured the emotional response by correctional officers to the organization as a whole (Lambert, 2003(Lambert, , 2004Lambert et al, 2002). Continuance commitment, or commitment to stay, was operationalized by the officer's response to a single question which asked if the officer intended to stay with the organization until retirement (1 = ddefinitely notT to 5 = ddefinitely, yesT).…”