Abstract
If the concept of organizational commitment is to have any analytical utility, it must be differentiated from the concept of expectancy. Viewing commitment and expectancy as two independent behavioral forces makes it possible to explain instances of commitment not explicable according to exchange or expectancy theories, such as remaining with an organization despite reward valences being reduced, inequity developing, and expectations not being met. Commitment defined as a force that maintains behavioral direction when expectancy/equity conditions are not met has at least four sources: investments, reciprocity, lack of alternatives, and identification.
Keywords
Affiliated Institutions
Related Publications
A Reward/Measurement Model of Organizational Buying Behavior
A new model of the organizational buying process is presented. The ontological framework of the model is based on the assumption that organizational buying behavior is essential...
Health Benefit Satisfaction in the Public and Private Sectors: The Role of Distributive and Procedural Justice
One of the most compelling problems outstanding in the field of employee benefits today is trying to control spiraling health care expenditures. Furthermore, as a result of the ...
A field experimental test of the moderating effects of growth need strength on productivity.
The literature on growth need strength (GNS) as a moderator in organizational research, particularly the job characteristics model of work motivation, is reviewed. This review r...
Compensation and Incentives: Practice vs. Theory
ABSTRACT A thorough understanding of internal incentive structures is critical to developing a viable theory of the firm, since these incentives determine to a large extent how ...
Publication Info
- Year
- 1981
- Type
- article
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 589-599
- Citations
- 482
- Access
- Closed
External Links
Social Impact
Social media, news, blog, policy document mentions
Citation Metrics
Cite This
Identifiers
- DOI
- 10.5465/amr.1981.4285698