Predictors of Job Satis-faction and Organiza-tional Connmitment inHuman Service Organi-zations

Charles GlissonUniversity of TennesseeMark DurickUnited States Army

© 1988 by Cornell University,0001 -8392/88/3301 -0061/$1.00.

A study of 319 human service workers in 22 human ser-vice organizations was used to analyze simultaneouslythe effects on both satisfaction and commitment of mul-tiple predictors from the three categories of job character-istics, organization characteristics, and workercharacteristics. The study shows that job satisfaction andorganizational commitment are each affected by a uniquehierarchy of predictors. Results indicate that two job char-acteristics, skill variety and role ambiguity, are the bestpredictors of satisfaction, while two organization charac-teristics, leadership and the organization's age, are thebest predictors of commitment. One worker characteristic,education, was found to be a significant predictor of com-mitment, while no worker characteristics predicted jobsatisfaction.

Over the last two decades researchers have identified anumber of variables that appear to contribute to either jobsatisfaction or organizational commitment. These variablescan be divided roughly into three groups: (1) variables thatdescribe characteristics of the job tasks performed by theworkers; (2) variables that describe characteristics of the or-ganizations in which the tasks are perfornned; and (3) vari-ables that describe characteristics of the workers whoperform the tasks.

With sonne exceptions (Herman and Hulin, 1972; Buchanan,1974; Herman, Dunham, and Hulin, 1975; Steers, 1977;Rousseau, 1978; Stevens, Beyer, and Trice, 1978; Morris andSherman, 1981; Staw and Ross, 1985), research efforts havetended to examine variables from only one (or occasionallytwo) of the three categories of predictors at a time, makingsimultaneous comparisons of the unique effects of variablesfrom ali categories impossible. Also with some exceptions(Porter et al., 1974; Marsh and Mannah, 1977; O'Reilly andCaldweli, 1981; Bateman and Strasser, 1984; Williams andHazer, 1986; Lee and Mowday, 1987), individual studies havetended to investigate either the predictors of satisfaction orthose of commitment, making comparisons impossible be-tween the relative effects on satisfaction and commitment ofeach predictor studied. Finally, less research has been con-ducted with human service organizations, which have beenreported to have particularly low levels of job satisfaction rel-ative to other types of organizations (Schoderbek, Scho-derbek, and Plambeck, 1979; Solomon, 1986).

Several studies have reported a relationship between job sat-isfaction and organizational commitment but there continuesto be disagreement regarding any causal ordering. Batemanand Strasser (1984) found commitment to be a precursor ofsatisfaction; Marsh and Mannari (1977) and Williams andHazer (1986) found satisfaction to be a precursor of commit-ment; and Porter et al. (1974) simply found the two to becorrelated. More recently. Curry et al. (1986) found no evi-dence of a causal relationship in either direction.

There has been tittle or no attempt to challenge that satisfac-tion and commitment covary or that they are separate anddistinct variables, but there has developed little consensus todate about the differences between the predictors of each.The purpose of the present study is to identify the differences

61/Administrattve Quarterly, 33(1988):61-81

between the predictors of satisfaction and the predictors ofcommitment within the same work environnnent, using job,organizational, and worker characteristics as three categoriesof predictors. The identification of these differences is neces-sary for an understanding of the development of worker atti-tudes. The study examined these characteristics and workerattitudes in a sample of 319 workers from 47 workgroups lo-cated in 22 different human service organizations. The designwent beyond previous studies by assessing the simultaneouseffects of multiple variables from all three categories of pre-dictors on both the job satisfaction and the organizationalcommitment of human service workers.

WORKER ATTITUDES

There has been considerable disagreement among theoristsconcerning the mechanisms by which workers form attitudesabout their jobs and the organizations in which they work.The early needs-satisfaction models, which posit relativelystraightforward relationships between job characteristics thatsatisfy needs and positive worker attitudes, have beeneroded from at least two sides (Herzberg, 1966). Subsequentmodels have identified as a source of variation in attitudes ei-ther the characteristics of the individual worker or the charac-teristics of the broader organizational or situational context.The result has been that researchers studying worker atti-tudes have tended more recently to refocus their attentionaway from job characteristics to concentrate either on the in-dividual worker or on the broader organizational context.

The individual worker is considered a source of variation inattitudes in several ways. First, moderating variables de-scribing the individual worker, such as alienation and growth-need strength, have been introduced (Hulin and Blood, 1968;Hackman and Oldham, 1976), These variables are hypothe-sized to moderate the strength and/or direction of the effectof a job characteristic on the attitude of the worker,

Second, it has been argued that a worker's subjective valuesplay a more important role than do his or her needs in the re-lationship between job characteristics and attitudes (Locke,1976), From this perspective, subjective values are consid-ered to be more heterogeneous across workers than areneeds, and relationships among job characteristics andworker attitudes are therefore seen as less stable than theywould be in needs-satisfaction models.

Third, the dispositionai model describes workers as predis-posed to certain attitudes (Staw and Ross, 1985; Staw, Bell,and Clausen, 1986). This view is at odds with the needs-sat-isfaction and values-satisfaction modeis because it depictsworker attitudes as imported into the organization by the indi-vidual worker. Therefore, the dispositionai perspective is thatattitudes persist independent of the extent to which eitherneeds or values are satisfied by job characteristics and inde-pendent of other situational characteristics.

In contrast to the models emphasizing the importance of ei-ther job characteristics or the individual worker, the broaderorganizational or situational context of the work is also identi-fied as a major source of variation in the attitudes of theworkers. For example, the attitudes of workers have been

62/ASa March 1988

UKI Commlttnent

found to be more related to the structural context withinwhich the work occurs than to the individual characteristics ofthe worker (Hennan and Hulin, 1972; Herman, Dunham, andHulin, 1975; O'Reilly and Roberts, 1975). Social informationprocessing theory suggests that worker attitudes are con-structed through social interaction with other workers in theworkplace rather than determined either by individual workercharacteristics or by objective job characteristics (Salancik andPfeffer, 1978).

Rousseau (1978) emphasized that the context in which workattitudes occur is actually multidimensional, including organi-zational characteristics, job characteristics, and worker char-acteristics. Her argument for the importance of all threedimensions is based, in part, on the sociotechnical model oforganization (Perrow, 1967; Rousseau, 1977), which depictsthe organization as a work system of interrelated componentsthat includes a technology to transform raw material intooutput and a social structure to link workers to the technologyand to each other.

Attitudes of Human Service Workers

Rousseau's (1978) use of the sociotechnical model in under-standing the etiology of worker attitudes is especially relevantto the present study of human service workers. Of particularimportance is the conceptual separation of job characteristicsfrom technological characteristics. The importance of this dis-tinction is that it separates purely technologically defined ac-tivities from those closely related job tasks that are defined inpart by social structure. While technological activities are de-termined primarily by the existing knowledge of the raw ma-terial and the processes required to produce the desired endproduct, job characteristics are determined by both the tech-nology and the structure in which it is implemented. Thismakes it possible to conceive of two organizations that usethe same technology, with workers in one organization expe-riencing very different job characteristics from those experi-enced by workers in the other.

If job characteristics are conceptually separated from techno-logical activities, however, there is no justification for as-sumptions such as that made by O'Reilly, Parlette, and Bloom(1980), who assumed that nurses who perform similar tech-nological activities experience the same job characteristicsregardless of the organizational unit in which they performthose activities. As a result of this assumption, they con-cluded that any perceptual differences of job characteristicsthat occur among nurses between organizational units mustnecessarily be a function of differences in the nurses' subjec-tive perceptions of their jobs rather than of any real differ-ences.

Roberts and Glick (1981) agreed with Rousseau (1978) bypointing out the confusion in the job-task-design research thatresults from investigators assuming that job tasks are invariantacross people in particular job categories. It cannot be as-sumed that workers share similar job characteristics simplybecause they are engaged in technologically similar activities.Rather, it is both the technical and the social components ofthe system that determine the characteristics of the jobs em-ployees perform (Rousseau, 1978:525).

63/ASQ, March

Although the traditional view of structure as designed to "f i t "the technology suggests that technology plays a major role inshaping structure and defining the job characteristics ofworkers who implement the technology (Perrow, 1967;Glisson, 1981), Glisson (1978) argued that human servicetechnologies of the type included in the present sample areespecially vulnerable to the influences of the organizationalcontext in which they are embedded. He described manyhuman service technologies as being so ill-defined and inde-terminate (primarily because of variable raw materials andlack of knowledge of them) that the technological imperativeis substantially weakened. This allows structural character-istics to be implemented without considering technologicalrequirements (Glisson and Martin. 1980; Martin, 1980).Structural characteristics then supplant technological require-ments in detemnining the nature of worker tasks (Patti, 1985).

Of particular importance is the variation in job characteristicsbetween different human service organizations that imple-ment similar technologies. The notion that job characteristicsmight impinge upon technological activities (for example, im-properly limit the discretion exercised by a human serviceworker) provides the theoretical basis for job characteristicsdetermining variation in the attitudes of workers who imple-ment similar human service technologies.

Several studies of either job satisfaction or organizationalcommitment have been conducted with human service orga-nizations. These include studies that examine predictors ofsatisfaction (Finch. 1978; Haynes, 1979; Bedeian and Ar-menakis, 1981; Jayaratne and Chess, 1984; McNeely, 1984;Schienker and Gutek, 1987); of commitment (Steers, 1977;Morris and Sherman, 1981); and of both satisfaction andcommitment (Bateman and Strasser, 1984). Because humanservice organizations are reported to have low levels of satis-faction when compared with other types of organizations, anunderstanding of the contributing factors within the humanservices is especially important (Schoderbek, Schoderbek,and Plambeck, 1979; Solomon, 1986), Also, because job sat-isfaction and organizational commitment seem to play keyroles in the occurrence of both turnover and burnout m thehuman services, the prescriptive implications of under-standing the etiology of satisfaction and commitment extendbeyond concerns for the well-being of employees to includethe quality of services and the well-being of clients who re-ceive those services {Porter et ai., 1974; Jayaratne andChess, 1984).

MODELS OF SATISFACTION AND COMMITMENT

Locke (1976:1300) defined job satisfaction as the "positiveemotional state resulting from the appraisal of one's job or jobexperiences/' Mowday, Porter, and Steers (1982:27) definedorganizational commitment as a strong belief in the organiza-tion's goals and values, a willingness to exert considerableeffort on behalf of the organization, and a strong desire to re-main a member of the organization. Mowday, Porter, andSteers {1982), Williams and Hazer (1986). and others havespecifically distinguished commitment from job satisfactionby defining the former as an affective response to beliefsabout the organization and the latter as a response to the ex-

64/ASQ, March 1988

Satisfaction and Commitment

perience of specific job tasks. "Hence, commitment empha-sizes attachment to the employing organization, including itsgoals and values, whereas satisfaction emphasizes the spe-cific task environment where an employee performs his orher duties" (Mowday, Porter, and Steers, 1982:28). Althoughthe two variables would be expected to be highly correlatedwithin a given sample, it is at the same time possible toimagine an employee who holds positive beliefs about and isattached to a specific organization and its goals and valuesbut is unhappy with the experience of certain aspects of aspecific job within that organization, and vice versa. Viteles(1953) suggested that employee morale may be a combina-tion of both satisfaction and commitment. That is, both an at-tachment to the organization and a positive reaction to one'sspecific job within the organization are necessary for highmorale.

Recent research efforts indicate that commitment may bemultidimensional, having both attitudinal and behavioral com-ponents (O'Reilly and Chatman, 1986; McGee and Ford,1987). Salancik (1977:4) emphasized that commitment isgrounded in behavior: "To act is to commit oneself." He de-scribed commitment as behavior resulting primarily from per-ceived constraints on a worker's ability to leave theorganization and from choices that bind him or her to the or-ganization. While Salancik (1977) disagreed that commitmentis an attachment that results from shared values and goals,he did suggest that workers' beliefs about alternatives forleaving an organization and about the irrevocability of theirdecisions are important in determining commitment behavior.

in the models developed in this paper, commitment is viewedas based on beliefs conceming the organization and satisfac-tion as resulting from one's perceptions of current job experi-ences. Postcognitive models (James and Tetrick, 1986) areused to explain the development of each attitude. The modelsdo not address the debate regarding the extent to which theexperience of attitude-relevant characteristics of a job or taskis constructed through social interactions (Salancik andPfeffer, 1978; O'Reilly and Caldyvell, 1979; White andMitchell, 1979; Glick, Jenkins, and Gupta, 1986). Rather, itprovides a basis for defining the role played by beliefs aboutthe organization and the role played by job experiences, withthe understanding that each can be influenced by social inter-action within the v\/orkplace.

When commitment is modeled as a function of beliefs aboutthe organization and satisfaction as a function of job experi-ences, the three dimensions of the context of work describedby Rousseau (1978) are differentially important in affectingeach attitude. The characteristics of the organization and ofthe individual worker should be the factors that influence theworker's beliefs about the organization and, hence, theworker's level of commitment; job characteristics should bethe major factors that influence job experiences and, hence,the worker's job satisfaction.

Predictors of Job Satisfaction

Of the three categories of predictors of attitudes, the cate-gory of variables that characterizes the job tasks performedby the worker has received the most empirical attention in

65/ASQ, March 1988

studies of job satisfaction (Glick, Jenkins, and Gupta, 1986).Role ambiguity (Rizzo, House, and Lirtzman, 1970; Haynes,1979; M)del-Ha!im, 1981; Bedeian and Armenakis, 1981) andskill variety, or complexity (Hackman and Oldham, 1975; Katz,1978; Dewarand Werbel, 1979; Haynes, 1979; Abdei-Halim,1981; Gerhart, 1987), are the two variables in this categorythat emerge as the strongest predictors of satisfaction. Thissuggests that the less confusion about responsibilities thatworkers experience in completing work tasks and the morethey are allowed to use an assortment of their abilities, themore satisfied they will be with their jobs. Other variablesfrom this category of predictors that are found to affect jobsatisfaction are role conflict, task identity, and task signifi-cance (Rizzo, House, and Lirtzman. 1970; Hackman andOldham, 1975; Katz, 1978; Haynes, 1979; Bedeian and Ar-menakis, 1981).

The only variables from the second category of predictors,those that characterize the organization in which the workerperforms his or her job tasks, that have received substantialattention in terms of possible effects on job satisfaction areleadership (House, Filley, and Kerr, 1971; Haynes, 1979; Bate-man and Strasser, 1984; Gladstein, 1984) and supervision(Brass, 1981; Hatfield and Huseman, 1982; Lopez, 1982;Podsakoff, Todor, and Skov, 1982; Bateman and Organ,1983). These variables are operationalized in various waysbut, together, generally refer to certain characteristics of thepeople under whose authority the respondent must functionin the organization.

The third category of predictors, the characteristics of theworker, has received less attention in the job satisfaction re-search literature. Although Staw and Ross (1985) and Staw,Belt, and Clausen (1986) have provided evidence that job sat-isfaction is primarily a function of an individual's disposition,with the exception of age (Dewar and Werbel, 1979, reportedolder workers to be more satisfied) and sex (McNeely, 1984,reported females to be more intrinsically satisfied), there islittle empirical support for the importance of individual workercharacteristics in detemiining job satisfaction.

Predictors of Organizational Commitment

Worker characteristics have played a major role in researchaimed at predicting organizational commitment. If it is as-sumed that the characteristics of the workers are associatedwith their beliefs about the organization, then these studiessupport the notion that such beliefs may account for morevariation in commitment than do experiences in the job set-ting. A variety of worker characteristics that describe theworker's personality, personal needs, and values have beenreported to be associated with commitment (Hulin and Blood,1968; Hall and Schneider, 1972; Goodale, 1973; Buchanan,1974; Dubin, Champoux, and Porter, 1975; Rabinowitz andHalt, 1977; Steers and Spencer, 1977; Kidron, 1978), In asample of human service workers, Morris and Sherman(1981) reported that older employees, less educated em-ployees, and employees with a greater sense of competencehad higher leveis of organizational commitment. O'Reilly andCaldwell 0981) reported that workers who perceived fewer

66/ASQ, March 1988

&rttefaction and CommHmant

alternative options for employment tended to have greaterorganizational commitment. Stevens, Beyer, and Trice (1978)found that several worker characteristics predict organiza-tional commitment: The total number of years the worker hadbeen in the organization and the extent of their ego involve-ment with the job were each positively related to commit-ment, while the number of years the worker had been in thesame position and the more the worker was favorably dis-posed to change were each negatively associated with com-mitment. In a large sample of hospital employees. Steers(1977) found a negative effect of education and positive ef-fects for both age and the need for achievement. Overall, forvarious types of organizations, age and tenure have generallybeen reported to be positively associated with commitment(Hall, Schneider, and Nygren, 1970; Lee, 1971; Sheldon,1971; Hrebiniak, 1974), and education has been reported tobe negatively related to commitment (Morris and Steers,1980; Angle and Perry, 1981).

Predictors from the characteristics of the job tasks that areshown to affect commitment include role conflict (a negativerelationship reported by Morris and Koch, 1979, and Morrisand Sherman, 1981), task identity, the extent to which workerexpectations are met by job tasks, the opportunity for optionalsocial interaction in completing tasks (Steers, 1977), the skilllevel of subordinates (Stevens, Beyer, and Trice, 1978), andjob scope (Hall and Schneider, 1972; Buchanan, 1974; Marshand Mannari, 1977; Steers and Spencer, 1977). There is in-sufficient evidence, however, to identify the best predictorsof commitment in the job-task category.

Less attention has been given to organizational characteristicsas predictors of commitment. The extent to which the orga-nization is seen as dependable (Buchanan, 1974; Hrebiniak,1974; Steers, 1977) and leadership, in the form of initiatingstructure, consideration, and punishment behavior (Morris andSherman, 1981; Bateman and Strasser, 1984), however, haveemerged as significant predictors of organizational commit-ment. Morris and Sherman (1981) believed their findings indi-cated that leadership is an underresearched predictor oforganizational commitment.

Hypotheses

Based on the models presented above that describe satisfac-tion as a function of the experience of performing job tasksand commitment as a function of beliefs about the organiza-tion, the following hypotheses are proposed:

Hypothesis 1: The characteristics of the job tasks performed by theworkers, particularly role ambiguity and skill variety, will be excellentpredictors of job satisfaction but moderate predictors of commit-ment.

Hypothesis 2: The characteristics of the workers, particularly edu-cation and age, will be excellent predictors of commitment but poorpredictors of satisfaction.Hypothesis 3: The characteristics of the organization in which thetasks are performed, particularly organizational age as an indicator ofdependability, and leadership, will be excellent predictors of com-mitment but moderate predictors of satisfaction.

67/ASQ, March

METHOD

The study sample included 319 individuals from 47 work-groups in 22 different human service organizations. A work-group was defined as a group of workers who provide directhuman services to clients under the authority of a commonleader to whom the members of the group are responsibledirectly. The number of workgroups sampled from each orga-nization ranged from one to six, with an average of abouttwo workgroups per organization. The types of services pro-vided by these workgroups included social services to fami-lies and children (eight groups), medical social services (sevengroups), mental health services (three groups), correctionalsociai services (six groups), services to victims of crime (twogroups), recreational services (four groups), services to thephysically handicapped (five groups), gerontological services(eight groups), social services to adolescents (two groups),and crisis intervention services (two groups).

Following a letter and phone call to the CEO of each organi-zation, one of the authors met with the CEO to explain thestudy and to obtain descriptive information about the organi-zation and workgroups. The purpose of the study was ex-plained as an effort to understand worker attitudes, and eachCEO was promised a summary of the results. It was ex-plained that no individual responses would be available andthat all respondents would remain anonymous. An authorthen met with available members of each workgroup and dis-tributed packets containing the questionnaires. The subjectswere told that a summary report would be provided to the or-ganization but that all respondents would remain anonymous.To insure anonymity, respondents were instructed to seal thepackets after they had responded to the questionnaires,which required about 30 minutes to complete. Workgroupmembers were included in the sample only if completedquestionnaires were obtained from a majority of their work-group. Ninety-one percent of the packets distributed to avail-abie workgroup members were returned, resulting in asample of approximately 60 percent of ail members of allworkgroups sampled. Twelve of the 331 returned question-naires could not be used because of incomplete responses orbecause completed questionnaires were obtained from a mi-nority of the members of a particular workgroup.

Characteristics of workers. The sample was 70 percent fe-male, with a majority holding college degrees and 44 percenthaving graduate degrees. The most frequently occurringgraduate degree was a master's degree in sociai work. Mostof the respondents were between 30 and 60 years of age,with an average of seven years of experience working in thehuman service area in which they were employed at the timeof the study.

Characteristics of the workgroups. The workgroups had, onthe average, about 12 members, an annual budget of morethan $400,000. and had been in existence about 14 years.The organizations in which they were located had an averageage of 76 years, and the types of services provided by theworkgroups were divided among walk-in (12 groups), resi-dential (16 groups), and,both walk-in and residential services(19 groups).

68/ASQ, March 1988

Sati^action and Commitment

Questionnaire Data

In addition to characteristics of individuals and groups, infor-mation was collected from respondents regarding character-istics of their job tasks, qualities of their workgroup leader,their job satisfaction, and their organizational commitment.Role conflict and role ambiguity were measured with scalesdeveloped by Rizzo, House and Lirtzman {1970). Skill variety,task significance, and task identity were measured withscales developed by Hackman and Oldham {1980). Organiza-tional commitment was measured by the scale developed byPorter et al. (1974), and job satisfaction was measured withthe scale developed by Hackman and Oldham {1980}. Leader-ship was measured by the scale developed by Levinson(1980), which requires the respondent to characterize a leaderon intellect, the ability to maintain positive relationships withothers, and behavioral characteristics associated with goodleadership. Alpha reliability coefficients for each scale were asfollows: leadership (.93), role conflict (.81), rote ambiguity(.81), skill variety {.71), task identity {.59). task significance(.66), commitment (.91), and satisfaction (.86).

The mean response to commitment items for this samplewas 4.96, placing the sample at the 48.31 percentile for fe-males {54.60 percentile for males), according to norms pub-lished by Mowday. Steers, and Porter {1979) and Mowday,Porter, and Steers (1982). The mean response to satisfactionitems was very low. 2.86, fully two standard deviations belowthe norm mean satisfaction levels reported by Hackman andOldham (1980). Respondents in the sample, then, appear tohave had a moderate level of commitment and a very lowlevel of satisfaction.

Of the seventeen predictors of satisfaction and commitmentincluded in the study, two-thirds were objective measures:organization age; workgroup size, budget, and age; type ofservice; worker's years in the organization, years of experi-ence, age, sex. education, and salary. Measures for the re-maining predictors were subjective. The validities of thesesubjective measures are supported in several ways. First, thecontent validities are supported by the methods used in de-veloping items {described in the above references) combinedwith the homogeneity of responses to those items as re-flected in the alpha coefficients reported above (Ghiseiti,Campbell, and Zedeck. 1981).

Second, the six measures included five measures of job-taskcharacteristics and one measure of leadership. Because themembers of a particular workgroup were engaged in similarjob tasks and because they shared a common leader, thewithin-workgroup variances of responses to these six mea-sures should be significantly smaller than the between-work-group variances of responses. As shown in Table 1. this isconfirmed. Between-workgroup variances range from two toas much as six times as great as within-workgroup variances,and all ratios are statistically significant. These data showthat individual responses to questions about job tasks andleadership are patterned according to workgroup member-ship, as would be expected for scales that are valid measuresof the job-task and leadership variables.

69/ASQ, March 1988

Table 1

Beftwaan-WoriigRuip and VWthin-Workgroup Variam^s for JobCtiaractMiitics and Laadarri^

VariableBetween-

workgroupWithin-

workgroup F-ratio

Role conflictRote ambiguitySkill varietyTask IdentityTask significanceLeadership

309.19216.8433.5225.9616.65

525.55

150.5764.2811.9813.228.95

87.38

2.05-3.37*2.80»1,96'1.86«6.0T

•p< .001.

Third, the correlations among the subjective measures rangefrom .00 to .45, indicating that there is no consistency of re-sponse artifact resulting from the common method of mea-surement used in assessing these variables. Moreover, thepattern of correlations among the measures lends support tothe criterion validities of the measures. Skill variety, for ex-ample, is completely unrelated to rote conflict (.00) but ishighly related to task significance (.41), This indicates thatthere is no relationship between the extent to which an indi-vidual exercises a variety of skills and the amount of role con-flict encountered on the job but that those individuals whoexercise higher skill variety also experience higher task signif-icance. As another example, ratings of leadership are uncor-related with skill variety (.01) but are negatively correlatedwith role ambiguity (-.42), indicating that respondents who

Table 2

Corralatton Matrix {N = 319)

1. Job satisfaction2, Organi2ationa) commitment

Job-task characteristics3. Role conflict4, Role annbiguity5. Skill variety6, Task identity7, Task significance

Organizational characteristics8, Workgroup size9. Workgroup budget

10. Organization age11. Workgroup age12. Leadership13. Residential services14, Residential/walk-inWorker characteristics15. Yeare in organization16. Years of experience17, Age18, Sex19. Education20. Salary

• p < . 0 5 ; - p < ,01;«*p< .001.

1

-64«*'

- .29—-.68—

,30—.44—.47—

.08

.01

.29—

.03,38—.17^

- 1 6 ^

,04.03.25—

- . 1 1 *- .07-.04

2

- .43—-,57—

.09

.29—,33—

,05.03.42—

-,02,51—.21—

-,U*

- .02-.04

,33—-.IT- ,19—- . IT

3

, 41 -.00

-38—-,24—

.07-.02-,14--,15"-- .32—

.07

.00

.00

.02-.03

.03- .08-.02

4

- .03- .45—- . 3 1 —

- ,16~,10

- .23—.05

- .42—-,29—

.30—

.02

.00- ,30—

.08

.28—

.23—

5

.20—,41 —

-,12».16^

- 0 4.20—.01

- .26—I T

.24—,26—

- . 1 6 ^.0644***,48—

6

,29—

-.03-.01

,00.06.17-

-,01.00

,10.09,00.08.05.03

7

- ,06,14'

- . 1 1 ".04,22—.00

- 0 3

.10

.12-

.02- .04

,18—.16~

70/ASQ. March 1988

Sctlalaction snd Cotnmibnwit

experience ambiguity about their role within a workgroup ratethe leader of the workgroup more negatively.

Finally, patterns of correlations between the subjective scalesand the objective measures also provide evidence of criterionvalidities. For example, education is uncorrelated with roleconflict ( - .08) and leadership ( - .03) but is highly correlatedwith skill variety (.44). This indicates that more highly edu-cated respondents assume job tasks requiring the use of awider variety of skills, but they do not experience any more orless role conflict or rate their leader higher or lower than lesseducated respondents. While the education of the respon-dent is related to some job characteristics, as would be ex-pected in this sample the sex of the respondent is unrelatedto any of the job characteristics or to ratings of leadership.

RESULTS

Table 2 presents the correlation matrix of the two criteria and17 predictor variables. At the zero-order level, variables fromall three categories of predictors correlate significantly withboth satisfaction and commitment. The highest zero-ordercorrelations with satisfaction are reported for role ambiguity( - .68), task identity (.44), and task significance (.47). Thehighest zero-order correlations with commitment are reportedfor role conflict (-.43), role ambiguity (-.57). organizationage (.42), and leadership (.51).

As shown, satisfaction and commitment are significantly cor-related (.64). Because both variables are dependent variables,a canonical analysis was conducted to establish that the pre-dictors as a set are able to explain a significant amount ofvariation in satisfaction and commitment simultaneously as acriterion set. If the predictors are unable to explain a signifi-cant amount of variation in the two criteria as a set, subse-

10 n 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

0527—080160—35—

20—19—37—093 1 —3 1 —

-.04,19—.00

- . 1 1 *.23—

,29—.25—.00.10.20—.37—

-.01.18—.33—

-21^

- . 1 6 --.14»

,45—-,13*-.19—-.10

- . 1 7 --.38—

,09

,13-.15-

- 1 7 -,04.30—,35—

,13*- , 1 6 -

-.06- 0 4

,18—-,03-.03- . 1 5 -

-.50—

-.22—-.22—

,65—-,14»-,60—-.56—

,15-.15-

- . 2 9 -.18—.30—.24—

.83—,17-.02.14*.42—

,18—,08,18—,42—

-.13--,47—- 2 9 —

,14.10 .63—

71/ASQ, March 1988

quent analyses of each criterion are not permitted. Thisprotects against explaining repeatedly the same variationshared by correlated dependent variables, in this case, oncefor satisfaction and again for commitment.

Table 3 presents a canonical analysis of the variation ex-plained in both satisfaction and commitment simultaneouslyas a set. The predictors explain over 67 percent (the canonicalcorrelation squared) of the variation in the combined set ofcriteria. The slightly larger canonical weight for satisfactionthan for commitment indicates that a somewhat stronger re-lationship exists between the set of predictors and satisfac-tion than between the set of predictors and commitment. Thecanonical weights for the predictors indicate that the bestpredictor of the criterion set is role ambiguity; the more am-biguity, the less the respondent is satisfied and committed.The predictors having the next greatest effect are leadership,organization age, and skill variety; the more highly rated theleaders, the older the organization, and the more variety in theskills applied by workers, the greater the job satisfaction andorganizational commitment of the respondent. The strengthand significance of the relationship between the predictorsand the criteria and the relatively equal canonical coefficientsfor the criteria indicate that the predictors are able to explainvariation in each criterion unrelated to the other and that sub-sequent general linear model (GLM) analyses are appropriate.

GLM analyses were performed for each criterion variable to

Table 3

Canonical Analysis

Variable

Job satisfactionOrganizational commitment

Characteristics of job tasksRole conflictRole ambiguitySkill varietyTask identityTask significance

Characteristics of organizationWorkgroup sizeWorkgroup budgetOrganization ageWorkgroup ageLeadershipResidential servicesBoth residential and v^aik-in

Characteristics of the workersYears in the organizationYears of experienceAgeSexEducationSalary

Canonical correlationdfF-ratio

• p < .0001.

Standardizedcanonical coefficients

.65

.45

-.03- .56

.23- .11

.19

- .08.02.23.07.23

- .01.10

.06- .15

.13-.07- .09

.01

.8236/59816.B9"

72/ASQ, March 1988

Satisfaction and Commftment

determine which predictors have the greatest impact on sat-isfaction and commitment individually. Simultaneous sums ofsquares and associated F-ratios are reported to assess theunique variation explained in each criterion by each predictorafter controlling for all other variables (Pedhazur, 1982; Cohenand Cohen, 1983). This is a conservative approach in that therelationship between each predictor and criterion is assessedonly after the variation explained in the criterion by ail otherpredictors has been removed. In this way, only the variationthat each predictor explains over and above all other pre-dictors is attributed to each predictor.

In addition, hierarchical sums of squares were calculated foreach of the three sets of predictors: job characteristics, orga-nization characteristics, and worker characteristics. Followingthe strategy outlined by Cohen and Cohen (1983:133-177)for hierarchical analyses of sets, the variation explained byeach of the three sets of predictors was assessed accordingto the hypothesized order of effects of the sets on each cri-terion.

As shown in Table 4, 62 percent of the variation in satisfac-tion is explained by the predictors. As anticipated in hy-pothesis 1, this analysis reveals that the best category ofpredictors is the characteristics of the job tasks performed bythe worker. Role ambiguity has a significant negative effect

Table 4

Partitioning of the Variation in Job Satisfaction

Source df

Model 18Error 300Total 318

Variable

Characteristics of job tasksRole conflictRole ambiguitySkill varietyTask identityTask significance

Characteristics of organizationWorkgroup $izeWorkgroup budgetOrganization ageWorkgroup ageLeadershipType of service

Residential/walk-in - walk-inWaik-in - residentialResidentialAwalk-in - residential

Characteristics of workersYears in the organizationYears of experienceAgeSexEducationSalary

• p < .05; —p < .01; —"p < .001,

Sum of squares

14,903,559,012.69

23,916.23

6

.04- ,48

,48,28,47

- .03,00,02,03.07

.80

.13

.93

.07- .13

.05-1.22- .03- .03

* Sums of squares for sets of characteristics are hierarchical;

Mean square

827.9730.04

F

27.56—

df Sum of squares*

51111

1

7111112

6111111

for predictors, sums

13,917,3875.77

3.013,04674.43246.86485.96

764,5611,821.39

228,3649,11

150.3638.90

221.2110,8764.3355.1084.20

.233.43

R

.79

F

92.66—2.52

103,29—22.45—8,22-

16,18—

3.64-.39,05

7.60-1.635.00*

,65

1.23.36

2.141.832.80

.01

.11

i of squares are simultaneous.

73/ASa March 1988

and skill variety a significant positive effect on job satisfaction.These are the two variables that have emerged as stror)gpredictors in previous research and are the strongest pre-dictors in the present research. Leadership, which has alsoemerged as a strong predictor in previous research, plays asignificant but smaller role in predicting satisfaction in thepresent sample. Worker characteristics, however, play no rolein predicting satisfaction.

Table 5 shows that, as would be expected from the canonicalanalysis, the predictors explain slightly less variation in com-mitment than in satisfaction (56 percent). The characteristicsof the organization are the strongest predictors of commit-ment, with organization age and leadership having the largestimpact. This finding supports hypothesis 3 and underscoresthe earlier conclusion of Morris and Sherman {1981) thatleadership is an underresearched predictor of organizationalcommitment, The effect of organization age may supportSteers' (1977) finding that beliefs about organizational de-pendability significantly predict commitment, since thoseworkers in the older organizations reported greater organiza-tional commitment.

Two additional variables from the characteristics of the orga-nization are significant predictors of commitment, the size ofthe workgroup and the type of service provided by the work-

Table 5

Partitioning of the Variation in Organizational Commftment

Source df

Model 18Error 300Total 318

Variable

Characteristics of job tasksRole conflictRole ambiguitySkill varietyTask identityTask significance

Characteristics of organizationWorkgroup sizeWorkgroup budgetOrganization ageWorkgroup ageLeadershipType of service

ResidentiaJ/walk-in - waik-inResidential - walk-inResidential/walk-in - residential

Characteristics of workersYears in the organizationYears of experienceAgeSexEducationSalary

• p < .05;*»p< , 0 1 ; " ^ p < .001.

Sum of squares

46.783,1035.546.9282.330,02

b

- .20-.47

.41

.08

.47

-.16.00.09.05.36

3.94*1.022.91

- 1 6- .34

.13-1.37-1.91

.10

Mean square

2,599.06118.49

F

21.93*^

df Sum of Squares*

511111

7111112

6111111

12.012.001.401.222.990.81

483.7518.61

477.84

32.710.40457.7862.60

3.019.08110.82

4.409.26801.33

2.060.7158.93

410.01379.46107.18790.00

55.71

R

.75

F

20.28^11.83^25.24*^4.08"

.164.03*

39.44*^3,86*

.5325.48^

.9437.21*^3.38-

2.90*.50

3.463.20

.906.67-

.47

* Sums of squares for sets of characteristics are hierarchical; for predictors, sums of squares are simultaneous.

74/ASQ, March 1988

S^sfactton and Commitmant

group. The respondents in larger workgroups rated them-selves as less committed, and respondents in workgroupsthat provided both residential and waJk-in services were sig-nificantly more committed than those providing more limitedservices. This finding is linked to the kinds of problems work-group members address in programs that provide both walk-in and residential services.

Job characteristics, primarily role ambiguity and role conflict,play a significant but smaller role in predicting commitment.This replicates some earlier research and could indicate eitherthat experience has some effect on commitment, althoughless than the effect of beliefs, or that beliefs about the orga-nization are affected to some extent by experiences on thejob. It is important to note in this regard that role conflict sig-nificantly predicts organizational commitment but does notpredict job satisfaction.

Worker characteristics explain a smaller but significantamount of variation in commitment. This is primarily the resultof the effect of the worker's education, the more educatedworker reporting less commitment.

The findings thus confirm, in part, all three hypotheses. Thecharacteristics of the job tasks are the best predictors of sat-isfaction, while the characteristics of the organization are thebest predictors of commitment. As anticipated, role ambiguityand skill variety are the best predictors of satisfaction, but jobcharacteristics are also significant, although relatively lesspowerful predictors of commitment. The second hypothesisanticipated that the characteristics of the worker would beexcellent predictors of commitment and poor predictors ofsatisfaction. This is supported, although only education fromthat categon/ explains a sign'ificant amount of unique variationin commitment. The third hypothesis anticipated that thecharacteristics of the organization would be excellent pre-dictors of commitment. The results support this hypothesis,however, the findings also provide support for previous re-search showing a relationship between organizational charac-teristics (particularly leadership) and satisfaction.

DISCUSSION

No previous studies have examined simultaneously the abilityof multiple variables from all three categories (worker, job,and organizational characteristics) to predict both satisfactionand commitment. Moreover, only a few studies have exam-ined any predictors of both satisfaction and commitment in asingle sample (Porter et al., 1974; O'Reilly and Caldwell,1981; Bateman and Strasser, 1984; Williams and Hazer,1986; Lee and Mowday, 1987). These findings are unique,therefore, in identifying the similarities and differences thatexist between the hierarchies of predictors of the two criteria.The hierarchy of effects points clearly to the dominance of jobcharacteristics in predicting satisfaction and the dominance oforganizational characteristics in predicting commitment. Re-sults also indicate that worker characteristics significantlypredict commitment but play no role in predicting satisfaction.These findings support the importance of job experiences inthe development of job satisfaction and the importance of

75/ASQ, March 1988

beliefs about the organization in the development of organiza-tional commitment.

A worker's beliefs and experiences are necessarily filteredthrough the same subjective lens, tying satisfaction and com-mitment together. This results in some degree of correlation,but it does not suggest that workers must have either high-high or low-low values on the two variables. In fact, thesample in the present study had a very low level of satisfac-tion along with a moderate level of commitment. Within thesample, however, those workers with the highest levels ofsatisfaction relative to the overall very low mean tended to bethose with the higher commitment levels relative to theoverall moderate mean. The relationship between satisfactionand commitment possibly results from some direct linkagebetween the two variables, although recent efforts by Curryet al. (1986) have failed to support a causal relationship in ei-ther direction. The relationship could also result from the twovariables sharing common predictors, although the hierarchyof effects of those predictors is different for each attitude.

Although satisfaction and commitment are correlated, thefindings, that the predictors explain a significant amount ofvariation in the two attitudes as a set and that a different hi-erarchy of predictors exists for each attitude individually, pro-vide evidence that the two attitudes are distinct and separateconstructs. This study therefore responds to the suggestionsof Mowday. Porter, and Steers (1982) that more compiexpredictive models be examined, especially those that ex-amine the antecedents of commitment. While Mowday andhis colleagues also suggested that researchers move awayfrom correlational studies, this attempt goes beyond previouscorrelational studies in providing evidence that satisfactionand commitment are correlated but conceptually separate at-titudes that are related differently to dimensions of the samework context.

This study also responds to suggestions made by Robertsand Glick (1981) that work tasks not be considered invariantwithin similar job categories and that higher-order multivariateapproaches be used to analyze data. The findings of thisstudy allow us to make conclusions about the role of jobcharacteristics in affecting the attitudes of workers per-forming technologically similar tasks, while controlling for andassessing the unique effects of other variables correlatedwith job characteristics, which describe both the worker andthe organization.

Findings concerning the unique variation explained in eachcriterion by individual predictors, with the others being simul-taneously partialed, are among the most valuable findings ob-tained from multivariate analyses of cross-sectional data.Although causality cannot be inferred from nonexperimentaldesigns, the relationships that remain after statistically con-trolling the effects of the multiple predictors included hereshed light on the differences between the factors associatedwith satisfaction and with commitment across similar job po-sitions. These differences provide evidence that the observedrelationships are not merely those that result from the con-sistency artifacts that plague this type of study (Roberts andGlick, 1981). Because satisfaction and commitment are highly

76/ASa March 1988

Satisfaction and Commilmant

correlated, consistency artifacts would contribute to findingthat the same hierarchy of factors are related to both. In con-trast, the actual finding that a different hierarchy of factors(some of which rely on the perception of respondents andsome of which do not) is related to each attitude suggeststhat consistency of responses is not responsible for the rela-tionships observed between predictors and criteria (Glick,Jenkins, and Gupta, 1986).

Moreover, the fact that the differences between the hierar-chies complement the proposed theoretical distinction be-tween satisfaction and commitment further supports thevalidity of the observed relationships. Therefore, although thestudy design pfaces restrictions on inferences and signalscaution in interpretations, the value of these findings is thatthe two criteria are differentially related to predictors from thethree categories in a pattern that supports certain conceptualand theoretical differences between satisfaction and commit-ment.

The present findings support the traditional research em-phasis on job characteristics as determinants of job satisfac-tion, and to a lesser extent, the more recent examinations oforganizational determinants such as leadership (Bateman andStrasser, 1984). These results indicate that job satisfactiondepends largely on the opportunity for the human serviceworker to use a variety of skills in performing job tasks and onthe clarity of the requirements and responsibilities of the job.They support Schtenker and Gutek's (1987) recent researchshowing that role loss (a reduction in skill variety) among so-cial workers has a greater impact on job satisfaction than dothe characteristics of the social worker. The results, there-fore, do not provide justification for the recent interest inworker characteristics as determinants of job satisfaction.

These findings provide less support for the previous researchconcerning organizational commitment than for that con-cerning satisfaction. The commitment literature has beensomewhat varied, but more emphasis has been placed gen-erally on worker and job characteristics than on examinationsof organizational characteristics. In contrast, in the presentstudy organizational characteristics were found to be the pri-mary predictors of commitment, and the findings support thefew studies that examine relationships with variables such asorganizational dependability and leadership (Steers, 1977;Morris and Sherman, 1981). The secondary role played by jobcharacteristics replicates some previous research, especiallyconcerning the importance of role conflict to commitment.The tertiary effect of worker characteristics in these resultsalso replicates earlier findings, but the effect is not as strongas would be expected, given the general level of emphasisplaced on worker characteristics in the commitment litera-ture. The significant effect of the worker's education supportsO'Reilly and Caldweli's (1981) notion that the worker cancreate commitment by rationalizing the available options forleaving the organization. These results suggest that morehighly educated workers hold beliefs regarding work alterna-tives that temper levels of commitment to the organization.However, the findings do not support O'Reilly and Caldweli's

77/ASQ, March 1988

REFERENCES

Abdel-Halinfi, Ahmed H.1^1 "Effects of role stress-iob de-

sign-technolc^y interaction onemployee work satisfaction."Academy of ManagementJoumal, 24: 260-273.

Angle, Harold L, and James L.Perry1981 "An empirical assessment of

organizational taammitment andorganizational effectiveness."Administrative Science Quar-teriy, 28: 1-14.

0981) extension of the same explanation to understandingjob satisfaction.

The types of human services sampled in the present studyare beset by low morale, bumout high turnover, and poorquality. Because these services depend on intense worker-client interactions for the resolution of problems for whichavailable intervention technologies and resources are fre-quently inadequate, the attitudes of workers are important tothe success of the services. If human service workers' atti-tudes are a function of organization and job-task character-istics, as these findings indicate, then the success of humanservice systems could depend as much on the organizationand administration of those services as on the skill andknowledge of the line workers. This means, for example, thata social worker's successful intervention m a child abusecase or successful treatment of an adolescent drug usercould be as dependent on the design and administration ofthe organization in which the social worker is employed as onthe social worker's knowledge of relevant intervention andtreatment approaches.

Until now, concern for the success of the types of humanservices included in the present sample has taken one of twoforms. First, an exclusively clinical focus has examinedworker-client interactions and the extent to which clientsbenefit from those interactions. This approach has ignoredthe human service organization in which those interactionstake place and the effects of organization and job-task char-acteristics on those interactions. Second, an exclusively orga-nizational focus has examined the effects of human serviceorganization characteristics and processes on such "bottom-line" variables as resource acquisition, client head-counts, andcosts. This approach to understanding success has ignoredworker-client interactions and the extent to which clients ac-tually benefit from services. As Patti (1985) has argued, how-ever, the most important but ignored, bottom-line criterion formeasunng the success of a human service organization is theextent to which clients benefit from its services. This studypoints to the need for a combined organizational/clinical focusthat examines the relationships among organizational and job-task characteristics, worker behaviors and attitudes, and thebenefit of services to clients. Outcomes of such researchcould guide the design and administration of human serviceorganizations that decrease rates of burnout and turnover andincrease morale, service quality, and the organizations' suc-cess in benefiting clients.

Bateman, Thomas S., and DennisW. Organ1983 "Job satisfaction and the good

soldier: The relationship be-tween affect and employee'citizenship'." Academy ofManagement Journal. 26:687-595.

Bateman, Thomas S., and StephenStrasser1984 "A longitudinal analysis of the

antecedents of organizationalcommitment," Academy ofManagement Joumal, 27:95-112.

Bedetan, Arthur G., and Achilles A.Armanakis1981 "A path-analytic study of the

consequences of role conflictand ambiguity," Academy ofManagement Joumal, 24:417-424.

7S/ASQ, March 1988

Satisiaction and CcHrnnttmant

Brass,. Daniel J.1981 "Structural relationships, job

characteristics, and woritersatisfaction and performance."Administrative Science Quar-terly, 26: 331-348.

Buchanan, Bruce1974 "Building organizational com-

mitment: The socialization ofmanagers in work organiza-tions." Administrative ScienceQuarterly. 19: 533-546.

Cohen, Jacob, and Patricia Cohen1983 ^p t i ed Multiple Regression/

Correlation Analysis for theBehavioral Sciences. Hillsdale,NJ: Lawrence Eribaum.

Curry, James P., Douglas S.Wakefietd, James L. Price, andCharles W. Mueller1986 "Qn the causal ordering of job

satisfaction and organizationalcommitment." Academy ofManagement Journal. 29:847-858.

Dewar, Robert, and James Werbel1979 "Universalistic and contin-

gency predictions of employeesatisfaction and conflict." Ad-ministrative Science Quarterly,24: 426-446.

Dubin, R., J. E. Champoux, andL. W. Porter1975 "Central life interests and or-

ganizational commitment ofblue-collar and clericalworkers." AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 20:411-421.

Finch, Wilbur A.1978 "Administrative priorities: The

impact of employee percep-tions on agency functioningand worker satisfaction." Ad-ministration in Social Work, 2:391 -399.

Gerhart, Barry1987 "How important are disposi-

tional factors as determinantsof job satisfaction? Implicationsfor job design and other per-sonnel programs," Journal ofApplied Psychology, 72:366-373,

Ghiselli, Edwin £., John P.Campbell, and Sheldon Zedeck1981 Measurement Theory for the

Behavioral Sciences. San Fran-cisco: W. H. Freeman.

Gladstein, Deborah1984 "Groups in context: A mode!

of task group effectiveness."Administrative Science Quar-terly. 29: 499-517.

Glick, WiHiam H., G. DouglasJenkins, and Nina Gupta1986 "Method versus substance:

How strong are underlying re-lationships between job char-acteristics ar>d attitudinaloutcomes?" Academy of Man-agement Joumal, 29:441 -464.

Glisson, Charles1978 "Dependence of technological

routinization on structural vari-ables in human service organi-zations," AdministrativeScience Quarterly. 23:383-395.

1981 "A contingency model of socialwelfare administration." Ad-ministration in Social Work. 5:15-30,

Glisson, Charles, and PatriciaMartin1980 "Productivity and efficiency in

human service organizations asrelated to structure, size andage," Academy of Manage-ment Journal, 23: 21-37.

Goodale, J. G.1973 "Effects of personal back-

ground and training on workvalues of the hard-core unem-ployed." Journal of AppliedPsychology. 57: 1-9.

Hackman, J. Richard, and Greg R.Qldham1975 "Development of the job diag-

nostic survey." Journal of Ap-plied Psychology. 60:159-170,

1976 "Motivation through the designof work: Test of a theory." Qr-ganizational Behavior andHuman Performance, 16:250-279,

1980 Work Redesign. Reading, MA:Addi son-Wesley.

Hall, Douglas T., and BenjaminSchneider1972 "Correlates of organizational

identification as a function ofcareer pattern and organiza-tional type." AdministrativeScience Quarterly. 17:340-350.

Hall, Douglas T., BenjaminSchneider, and Harold T. Nygren1970 "Personal factors in organiza-

tional identification," Adminis-trative Science Quarterly. 15:176-190.

Hatfield, John D., and Richard C.Huseman1982 "Perceptual congruence about

communication as related tosatisfaction: Moderating ef-fects of individual character-istics." Academy ofManagement Joumal. 25:349-358,

Haynes, Karen1979 "Job satisfaction of mid-man-

ag|ement social workers," Ad-ministration in Social Work, 3:207-217.

Herman, Jeanne B., Randall B.Dunham, and Charles L. Hulin1975 "Organizational structure, de-

mographic characteristics, andemployee responses." Organi-zational Behavior and HumanPerformance, 13: 206-232.

Herman, Jeanne Brett, and CharlesL Hulin1972 "Studying organizational atti-

tudes from individual and or-ganizational frames ofreference." Organizational Be-havior and Human Perfor-mance. 8: 84-108.

Herzberg, Frederick1966 Work and the Nature of Man.

Cleveland: World.

House, Robert J., Alan C. Filley,and Steven Kerr1971 "Relation of leader consider-

ation and initiating structure toR and D subordinates' satis-faction," AdministrativeScience Ouarterly. 16: 19-30.

Hrebiniak, Lawrence G.1974 "Effects of job level and par-

ticipation on employee atti-tudes and perception ofinfluence." Academy of Man-agement Journal, 17:649-662.

Hulin, Charles L., and Milton I.Blood1968 "Job enlargement, individual

differences, and worker re-sponses." Psychological Bul-letin, 69: 41-45.

James, Lawrence R., and Lois E.Tetrick1986 "Confirmatory analytic tests of

three causal models relatingjob perceptions to job satisfac-tion." Joumal of Applied Psy-chology, 71: 77-82.

Jayaratne, Shrinika, and Wayne A.Chess1984 "Job satisfaction, burnout and

turnover: A national survey."Social Work, 29: 448-453.

Katz, Ralph1978 "Job longevity as a situational

factor in job satisfaction." Ad-ministrative Science Quarterly,23: 204-223.

Kidron, Aryeh1978 "Work values and organiza-

tional commitment." Academyof Management Joumal, 21:239-247.

79/ASa, March 1988

Lee,. Sang M.1971 "An empirical analysis of orga-

nizational identification."Academy of ManagementJournal, 14: 213-226.

Lee, Thomas W., and Richard T.Mowday1987 "Voluntary leaving an organiza-

tion: An empirical investigationof Steers and Mowday'smodel of tumover." Academyof Management Joumat, 30:721-743.

Levinson, Harry1980 "Criteria for choosing execu-

tives." Harvard Business Re-view, 58: 113-120.

Locke, Edwin A.1976 "The nature and causes of job

satisfaction," In M. D. Dun-nette (ed.). Handbook of in-dustrial and OrganizationalPsychology: 1297-1349, NewYork: McGraw-HiH,

Lopez, Elsa M.1982 "A test of the self-consistency

theory of the job perfor-mance-job satisfaction rela-tionship," Academy ofManagement Joumat, 25:335-348.

Marsh, Robert M., and HiroshiMannari1977 "Organizational commitment

and tumover: A predictorstudy." Administrative ScienceOuarterly, 22: 57-75.

Martin, Patricia Y.1980 "MultipJe constituencies,

dominant societal values, andthe human service adminis-trator: Implications for servicedelivery." Administration inSocial Work. 4: 15-27,

McGee, GaiJ W., and Robert C.Ford1987 "Two (or more?) dimensions

of organizational commitment:Re-examination of the affectiveand continuance commitmentscales," Journal of AppliedPsychology, 72: 638-642.

McNeely, R. L.1^4 "Occupation, gender, and work

satisfaction in a comprehen-sive human services depart-ment," Administration in SocialWork, 8: 35-47,

Morris,. James, and J. Koch1979 "Impacts of rde perceptions

on organi2ationa! commitment,job involvement, and psycho-somatic illness among threevocational groupings." Joumalof Vocational Behavior, 14:88-101.

Morris, James H., ar>d J. DanielSherman1981 "Generalizability of an organi-

zational cwnmitment model,"Academy of Man^em^ i tJoumal, 24: 512-526.

Morris, James, and Richard M.Steers1980 "Structural influences on orga-

nizational commitment,"Joumal of Vocational Behavior,17: 50-57,

Mowday, Richard, Lyman Porter,and Richard Steers1982 Organizational Linkages: The

Psychology of Commitment,Absenteeism, and Tumover.New York: Academic Press.

Mowday, Richard T., Richard M.Steers, and Lyman W. Porter1979 "The measurement of organi-

zational commitment." Joumatof Vocational Behavior, 14:224-247.

O'Reilly, Charles A,, and David F.Caidweil1979 "Informational influence as a

determinant of perceived taskcharacteristics and job satis-faction," Journal of AppliedPsychology, 64: 157-165.

1981 "The commitment and jobtenure of new employees:Some evidence of postdeci-sional justification," Adminis-trative Science Ouarterly, 26:597-616,

O'Reilly, Charles A., (li, andJennifer Chatman1986 "Organizational commitment

and psychological attachment:The effects of compliance,identification, and internaliza-tion on prosocial behavior."Journal of Applied Psychology,71: 492-499.

O'Reilly, Charles A., ttl, G. NicholasParlette, and Joan R. Bloom1980 "Perceptual measures of task

characteristics: The biasing ef-fects of differing frames ofreference and job attitudes."Academy of ManagementJoumal. 23: 118-131,

O'Reilly Charles A., HI, and KarleneRoberts1975 "Individual differences in per-

sonality, position in the organi-zation, and job satisfaction,"Organizational Behavior andHuman Performance, 14:144-150.

Pattr, Rino1985 "In search of purpose for so-

cial welfare administration."Administration in Social Work,9: 1-14.

Padhazur, Elazar1982 Multiple Regression in Behav-

ioral Research. New York:Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Perrow, Charles1967 "A framework for the compar-

ative anaiysts of organiza-tions." American SociologicalReview, 32: 194-208.

Podsakoff, Philip M., William D.Todor, and Richard Skov1982 "Effects of leader contingent

and noncontingent reward andpunishment behaviors on sub-ordinate performance and sat-isfaction." Academy ofManagement Joumal. 25:810-821.

Porter, Lyman W., Richard M.Steers, Richard T. Mowday, andPaul V. Bouiian1974 "Organizational commitment,

job satisfaction, and turnoveramong psychiatric techni-cians," Journal of Applied Psy-chology, 59: 603-609,

Rabinowitz, S., and D. Hall1977 "Organizational research on job

involvement." PsychologicalBulletin, 84: 265-288,

Rizzo, John R., Robert J. House,and Sidney 1. Lirtzman1970 "Role conflict and ambiguity in

complex organizations." Ad-ministrative Science Ouarterly,15: 150-163.

Roberts, Karlene H., and WilliamGlick1981 "The job characteristics ap-

proach to task design: A crit-ical review." Journal of AppliedPsychology. 66: 193-217.

Rousseau, Denise M.1977 'Technological differences in

job characteristics, employeesatisfaction, and motivation: Asynthesis of job design re-search and sociotechnicalsystems theory." Organiza-tional Behavior and HumanPerformance, 19: 18-42.

1978 "Characteristics of depart-ments, positions, and indi-viduals: Contexts for attitudesand behavior." AdministrativeScience Ouarterly, 23:521-540,

Salancik, Gerald R.1977 "Commitment and the control

of organizational behavior andbelief." In B. M, Staw andG. R. Salancik (eds.). New Di-rections in Organizational Be-havior: 1-54. Chicago: St.Clair Press.

80/ASQ, March 1988

Satisfa^on and Commitment

Salancik, Geratd R., and JeffreyPfeffer1978 "A social information pro-

cessing approach to job atti-tudes and tasic design."Administrative Science Quar-terly, 23: 224-253.

Schlenker, Judith A., and BarbaraA. Gutek1987 "Effects of roie loss on work-

related attitudes," Journal ofApplied Psychology, 72;287-293.

Schoderbek, Peter P., Charies G.Schoderbek, and Donald L.Piambeck1979 "A comparative analysis of job

satisfaction." Administration inSocial Work, 3: 193-206,

Sheidon, Mary E,1971 "Investments and involve-

ments as mechanisms pro-ducing commitment to theorganization," AdministrativeScience Quarteriy, 16:142-150,

Solomon, Esther E.1986 "Private and public sector

managers: An empiricai inves-tigation of job characteristicsand organizational climate,"Journal of Applied Psychology,71: 247-259.

Staw, Barry M., Nancy E, Be!l, andJohn A, Ciausen1986 "The dispositionai approach to

job attitudes: A lifetime longi-tudinal test." AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 31: 56-77,

Staw, Barry M,, and Jerry Ross1985 "Stability in the midst of

change: A dispositionai ap-proach to job attitudes."Joumal of Applied Psychoiogy,70: 469-480,

Steers, Richard M.1977 "Antecedents and outcomes

of organizational commit-ment." Administrative ScienceQuarterly. 22: 46-56,

Steers, Richard M., and D. G.Spencer1977 "The role of achievement mo-

tivation in job design." Journaiof Applied Psychology, 62:472-479,

Stevens, John M., Janice M.Beyer, and Harrison M. Trice1978 "Assessing personal, rote and

organizational predictors ofmanagerial commitment."Academy of ManagementJournal, 21: 380-396.

Viteles, M. S.1953 Motivation and Morale in In-

dustry, New York: W, W,Norton.

White, Sam E., and Terence R.Mitchell1979 "Job enrichment versus social

cues: A comparison and com-petitive test." Joumal of Ap-plied Psychology, 64: 1-9.

Williams, Larry J., and John T.Hazer1986 "Antecedents and conse-

quences of satisfaction andcommitment in turnovermodels: A reanalysis using la-tent variable structural equa-tion methods," Journal ofApplied Psychology, 71:219-231.

81/ASQ, March 1988