2003
DOI: 10.1080/0958519032000106218
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Validating the dimensionality of Porteret al.'s measurement of organizational commitment in a non-Western culture setting

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
31
0
14

Year Published

2008
2008
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 50 publications
(45 citation statements)
references
References 52 publications
0
31
0
14
Order By: Relevance
“…As the majority of commitment studies have been conducted in North America, the cross-cultural generalizability of commitment measures is a significant methodological issue. The Mowday et al (1979) inventory, however, has been widely used in cross-cultural research on commitment and its cross-cultural generalizability is established (Luthans, McCaul and Dodd 1985;Harrison and Hubbard 1998;Yousef 2000Yousef , 2003Peterson, Puia and Suess 2003). On the other hand, the cross-cultural generalizability of less parsimonious commitment measures is still in question, as several studies conducted outside North America did not replicate the multidimensionality of commitment measures.…”
Section: Organizational Commitmentmentioning
confidence: 97%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…As the majority of commitment studies have been conducted in North America, the cross-cultural generalizability of commitment measures is a significant methodological issue. The Mowday et al (1979) inventory, however, has been widely used in cross-cultural research on commitment and its cross-cultural generalizability is established (Luthans, McCaul and Dodd 1985;Harrison and Hubbard 1998;Yousef 2000Yousef , 2003Peterson, Puia and Suess 2003). On the other hand, the cross-cultural generalizability of less parsimonious commitment measures is still in question, as several studies conducted outside North America did not replicate the multidimensionality of commitment measures.…”
Section: Organizational Commitmentmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…First, the study has several implications for the study of commitment. While various studies of commitment in international contexts have been conducted (Koh, Steers and Terbog 1995;Yousef 2003), almost none have been conducted in organizations that span multiple countries with the attendant negative forces on commitment formation such as geographic and cultural diversity. Confirming that HRM can, as has been found in some single country settings, have a positive impact on commitment in organizations that span multiple countries is one contribution to the literature.…”
Section: Implications and Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They also defined organizational commitment as a psychological link between employees and their organizations that makes less likely to leave the organizations voluntarily for the employees (Meyer & Allen, 1997, p. 252). Yousef (2003Yousef ( , p. 1068) points out such differentiations in the organizational commitment definitions ended up diverse measures of the construct.…”
Section: Organizational Commitmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Örgütsel bağlılık örgütsel davranış alanında önemli bir yeri vardır ve örgütsel davranış ile örgütsel tutum ve davranışlar arasında çeşitli ilişkiler bulunmuş ve buna binaen de çeşitli tanımlamalarda bulunulmuştur (Eslami ve Gharakhani, 2012;Natarajan ve Nagar, 2011;Yousef, 2003;Wahn, 1998;Porter ve diğerleri, 1974;Steers, 1977). Örgütsel bağlılık çalışanların örgüt içerisindeki işle ilgili davranışlarını açıklamada ve anlamada bir rehber olarak değerlendirilebilir (Bakhshi ve diğerleri, 2009: 147 (Meyer ve Allen, 1991: 67).…”
Section: öRgütsel Bağlilikunclassified