The association between training and organizational commitment ...

International Journal of Training and Development 7:3 ISSN 1360-3736

The association between training and organizational commitment among whitecollar workers in Malaysia Kamarul Zaman Ahmad and Raida Abu Bakar The exploration of the relationship between organizational commitment and training is still in its early stages. Although there have been several studies reported on training and organizational commitment in Western countries, very little has been done in respect of the local professionals in Malaysia. This research investigates the association between five training variables (availability of training, support for training, motivation to learn, training environment and perceived benefits of training), and various aspects of organizational commitment (affective commitment, normative commitment, continuance commitment and overall organizational commitment). The availability of training, support for training, motivation to learn, training environment, perceived benefits of training were all significantly correlated with affective commitment, normative commitment and overall organizational commitment. The training environment and perceived benefits were also significantly correlated with continuance commitment. However the availability of training, support for training and motivation to learn were not significantly correlated with continuance commitment. This suggests that despite other forms of commitment, Malaysian workers do not feel that they need to remain in an organization that has made available the training, given support for the training and were motivated to learn. Otherwise, results suggest that on the whole, training does seem to have an influence on organizar Kamarul Zaman Ahmad and Raida Abu Bakar, Faculty of Business & Accountancy, University Malaya, [email protected] © Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 2003, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

166

International Journal of Training and Development

tional commitment. The practical implication of this is that managers, who are so desirous of enhancing organizational commitment among their subordinates, should pay more attention to training. Annual income was found to correlate positively with affective commitment and overall commitment. Age and tenure were not significant predictors of overall organizational commitment contradicting studies in the West. This demonstrated that Malaysians might have different attitudes towards organizational commitment. The older they are and the longer they stay within an organization do not imply that they will be committed towards their organization. This phenomenon can be attributed to the uncertain business environment in Malaysia.

Introduction Today, the antecedents of employee performance are becoming increasingly complex and demanding. There must be a continuous effort in determining the important factors of effective training and helping human resource managers focus on issues that can help the organization achieve its objectives. The exploration of the relationship between organizational commitment and training is still in its early stages. Although there have been several studies conducted regarding training and organizational commitment in Western countries, very little has been done in respect of the local professionals in Malaysia. Most of the studies on training in Malaysia seem to focus on need identification and facilities for training (e.g. Quah, 1976; Abdullah, 1992; Hamid et al., 1987) and training activities in Malaysia (Saiyadain and Juhary, 1995). Buckley and Caple (1995) defined training as ‘a planned and systematic effort to modify or develop knowledge, skill, and attitude through learning experience, to achieve effective performance in an activity or range of activities’. Training can be viewed as a management practice that can be controlled or managed to elicit a desired set of unwritten, reciprocal attitudes and behaviors, including job involvement, motivation, and organizational commitment (Sparrow, 1998). Furthermore, several factors are known to affect the effectiveness of training such as the behavior of individual learner, the training program, the environment in which the trainee works, and the support from the trainee’s immediate supervisor (Montesino, 2002). Despite the availability of training programs, there is still a concern over the contribution of training to the desired organizational outcomes such as commitment. The effect of training on commitment has received less attention than it deserves. There has only been some studies conducted that provide some evidence to suggest that organizations can influence employees’ commitment through their training practices. Gaertner and Nollen (1989) found that employees’ commitment was related to the actual and perceived human resource management practices such as training. Lang (1992) also suggested that training should be designed to achieve increased organizational commitment. The issue of organizational commitment has received a great deal of interest in the past decade. Today, the aspect of organizational commitment is even more important since it is considered as the driving force behind an organization’s performance. It is also an important variable in explaining work-related behavior and its impact on performance (Benkhoff, 1997). Numerous studies by international scholars (Williams and Hazer, 1986; Allen and Meyer, 1990; Ngo and Tsang, 1998) have been directed at determining its antecedents. Due to the increasing speed and scale of change in organizations, managers are constantly seeking ways to generate greater employee commitment and competitive advantage. Nowadays, their expectations of employee performance are becoming more complex and demanding as a result of substantial © Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 2003.

Training and organizational commitment 167

transformation in the human resource sector. Further, Randall (1990) found that higher levels of commitment had stronger positive relationships with attendance, effort, and continuing employment with the organization than with actual job performance. Employees who are more committed are less likely to intend to leave their jobs and more likely to perform well (Mathieu and Zajac, 1990). Internationally, organizational commitment has been associated with lower intent to leave in India (Agarwal, 1993) and Japan (Marsh and Mannari, 1977), and higher organizational citizenship behavior in Israel (Koslowsky et al., 1988). In addition, in Jordan and the other Arab countries, there is a belief that commitment is an important issue for work organizations, and that it fosters better superior-subordinate relationships and improves organizational climate development, growth and survival (Awamleh, 1996). It is rather clear that voluntary turnover is a major problem for companies in many Asian countries such as South Korea, Malaysia, Singapore and Taiwan (Barnett, 1995; Syrett, 1994). Job-hopping had become so rampant in these Asian countries that it has, in fact, become a culture. In a study by Khatri et al. (2001), organizational commitment was found to be the most important factor influencing turnover intention. It is also important to observe whether such differences exist between the Westerners and Malaysian employees.

Organizational commitment Webster’s dictionary (1992) defines commitment as ‘the state of intellectual and emotional adherence to some political, social or religious theory or action or practice . . . something which engages one to do something . . . a continuing obligation’ and ‘the state to being obligated or bound’ (as by intellectual or emotional ties) or ‘engagement or involvement’ (Brown, 1996). Commitment means desire and acceptance. An individual wants to strive for the object, certain goals and values, or he or she wants to be a member in some system or social aspect (Jarvi, 1997). There is a psychological link between an individual and an object, an integration of goals and values (Allen and Meyer, 1996). Organizational commitment refers to the strength of attachment of a person to his or her organization (Arnold et al., 1998). Many of the previous studies on the positive consequences of organizational commitment have been based on Porter et al. (1974), Meyer and Allen (1991, 1997), and Randall (1990). Previous research has also stated that commitment is a multidimensional work attitude. Allen and Meyer (1990) contended that the net sum of a person’s commitment to the organization reflects each of the separable psychological states, which are affective attachment, perceived costs and obligation. However, many researchers (e.g. Allen and Meyer, 1996; Benkhoff, 1997; Brown, 1996) have suggested that the multidimensional approach could bring an end to the disappointing and inconsistent results often reported for organizational commitment research. Meyer and Allen (1997) suggested that a ‘committed employee is one who will stay with the organization through thick and thin, attends work regularly, puts in a full day, protects company assets, and who shares company goals’. Positive outcomes or outputs at work will often cause higher commitment. Generally, outputs of an individual would mean fulfillment of the individual’s expectations and satisfaction. For example, an employee may have received things, which are important to him or her. Outputs could be ‘doing the job’ (certain work values), social interactions with fellow workers and organizational in nature (pay, promotions, good working conditions) (Mottaz, 1988). Thus, these outputs act as instruments in facilitating the level of commitment of an individual. Antecedents of organizational commitment It is now generally accepted that employees’ commitment to the organization can take various forms, and that the antecedents and consequences of each can be quite different (Meyer and Allen, 1997; O’Reilly and Chatman, 1986). If antecedents are posi168


© Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 2003.

tive, they cause commitment and an intention to stay in the organization and also involvement in work. Research within this perspective has tended to focus on individual differences as antecedents of commitment, revealing that factors such as age and organizational tenure tend to co-vary with one’s position in the organization and are known to positively correlate with commitment (Allen and Meyer, 1990; Lok and Crawford, 2001; Williams and Hazer, 1986; Mowday et al., 1982; Angle and Perry, 1981; Mathieu and Zajac, 1990; Steers, 1977). Mathieu and Zajac (1990) further suggested that older workers are more satisfied with their job, receiving better positions and having ‘cognitively justified’ their remaining in the organization. The proposition that younger and older workers may view work and self in fundamentally different ways is not new. Life-career-stage models (Levinson et al., 1978) suggested that the early years are years of establishment (e.g., establishing a niche and ‘making it’ so that progress can be monitored by self and others), later years are associated with a stronger sense of self, work, and life. Nevertheless, Irving et al. (1997) found that age did not significantly correlate with either normative or affective facets of commitment. They concluded that age could be a significant correlate of commitment in a homogeneous sample rather than in a heterogeneous sample like theirs. In addition, findings by other scholars (Tan and Akhtar, 1998) also support the fact that age and tenure did not correlate significantly with normative and affective commitment. In terms of gender, Aven et al. (1993) found that gender and affective commitment were unrelated. In addition, research done in the past reports a weak relationship between gender and commitment (Mathieu and Zajac, 1990). There has also been research indicating that gender has no direct effect on the overall organizational commitment (Ngo and Tsang, 1998). Another demographic variable that has been studied is the level of education. Educational level has been reported to be negatively correlated with organizational commitment (DeCotiis and Summers, 1987; Mathieu and Zajac, 1990; Mottaz, 1988; Mowday et al., 1982). It has been argued that this inverse relationship is attributable to the fact that more highly educated individuals have higher expectations. They are therefore, more likely to feel that they are not being rewarded adequately by their employers, and so the level of organizational commitment diminishes. They may also believe that they have many job alternatives. Becker et al. (1979) found income to be an important predictor of organizational commitment. In addition, organizational position is known to correlate negatively with normative and affective commitment (Tan and Akhtar, 1998). It should also be noted that organizational commitment could be divided into three components, which are affective, normative, and continuance commitment. Affective commitment refers to the psychological (emotional) attachment to the organization, normative commitment refers to a perceived obligation to remain with the organization and continuance commitment refers to the costs associated with leaving the organization such as losing benefits or seniority. Thus, this study will examine employee attitude towards training and its link to organizational commitment across these three components. Affective commitment Affective commitment has been described as a positive desire to act in a certain way (Mathieu and Zajac, 1990). It refers to the psychological attachment one has towards his/her organization (Meyer and Allen, 1991). Those who feel they have more access to training are more likely to exhibit higher feelings of affective commitment. Meyer and Allen (1991) also confirmed that correlations exist between the work experiences and commitment, especially affective commitment. Normative commitment Normative commitment means an obligation to stay (Allen and Meyer, 1990). Mathieu and Zajac (1990) describe normative commitment as general loyalty attitude and plays © Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 2003.


an important role in social interactions. Basically, it reflects a sense of obligation on the part of the employee to maintain membership in the organization. According to Meyer and Allen (1988), normative commitment is based on feelings of moral obligation or responsibility vis-à-vis the employing organization. Continuance commitment According to Meyer and Allen (1988), continuance commitment is predicated upon the employee’s pragmatic assessment of the costs and benefits of remaining with a given organization, i.e. where the individual perceives that withdrawal from the organization would incur costs for him or her. Because of investments one has made, one is motivated to commit further, and it is difficult to leave (Brown, 1996). An individual will stay with the organization due to the fear of losing their pension and other benefits. There has also been a study that stated training could enhance the level of employees’ continuance commitment (Bhuian and Shahidulislam, 1996). On the whole, the advantages to organizations of having a committed workforce tend to be greatest in the case of affective commitment whereas the consequences of high levels of continuance commitment can actually be negative (Allen and Meyer, 1996; Meyer and Allen, 1997). That is, affective commitment has been shown to have the strongest positive correlations with desirable work behavior; correlations between normative commitment and these same behaviors also tend to be positive, but somewhat weaker. However, correlations with continuance commitment are weak and in some cases negative (Meyer et al., 1989; Shore and Wayne, 1993).

The availability of training A study by Lowry et al. (2002) indicated that the availability and adequacy of training affected the level of job satisfaction and commitment among employees. The availability of training has been shown to have a strong relationship with affective and normative commitment, but no association with continuance commitment (Bartlett, 2001). Studies by several scholars (Caldwell et al., 1990; Morris et al., 1993) also show that availability of training courses are found to be related to commitment. Although the availability of training plays a major part in every organization, the empirical analysis of its relationship to commitment is very limited. Previous research has provided evidence to suggest that human resource practices such as training might have their greatest impact on affective commitment when it is believed that the organization is motivated by the desire to create a climate of concern and care (Kinicki et al., 1992). Employees are more likely to become committed to an organization if they believe that the organization is committed to them (Eisenberger et al., 1986). This commitment on the part of the organization can be demonstrated through the level of support provided to employees. Perceived organizational support has been found to correlate positively with employees’ affective commitment to the organization (Eisenberger et al., 1990; Guzza et al., 1994; Shore and Wayne, 1993; Settoon et al., 1996). In addition, a study by Allen and Meyer (1990) has shown that normative commitment also correlates positively with organizational support. Studies conducted to examine the link between organizational support and continuance commitment have reported only weak negative correlations (Allen and Meyer, 1990; Shore and Wayne, 1993). Thus, there is little reason to believe that perceived organizational support affects employees’ perceptions of the costs of leaving the organization. Some employees might develop a strong sense of perceived organizational support based upon the organization members’ willingness to provide them with additional opportunities for training in an area that was of particular interest to them. The influence of the immediate supervisor in encouraging or discouraging usage of training has been well documented in several studies (Brinkerhoff and Montensio, 1995; Huczynski and Lewis, 1980; Michalak, 1981; Tracey et al., 1995). Cheung (2000) 170



and O’Driscoll and Randall (1999) also predicted that support for training from senior staff and from colleagues have positive association to the organizational commitment. Research has revealed that perceived organizational support is positively related to the tendency to help coworkers (Shore and Wayne, 1993), the tendency to offer constructive suggestions for organizational improvement, and organizational commitment (Eisenberger et al., 1990). It is also likely that employees working under supervisors with participative management style feel more favorable in predicting their future career paths, which in turn increases their commitment (Cheng, 2001). Motivation to learn Trainee motivation and attitudes play an important role in determining training effectiveness within their organization. Trainees with a high level of job involvement are more likely to be motivated to learn new skills. This is because participation in training activities is perceived by individuals as a way to increase skill levels, improve job performance and elevate feelings of self-worth (Noe, 1986). Mathieu and Zajac (1990) connect motivation and job satisfaction to the commitment process. Commitment begins to form when an individual is motivated. Learning motivation can be defined as the specific desire of a learner to learn the content of a training program (Noe, 1986; Noe and Schmitt, 1986). Noe (1986) suggested that, when there is no motivation, individuals, who may have the ability to master the training content, may fail to do so. In general, past studies have revealed that higher levels of motivation to learn result in improved performance in learning (Quinones, 1995). Studies done by Cheng (2001) revealed that commitment is positively related to learning motivation and learning transfer. Clark et al. (1993) further stated that training motivation is crucial for the more sophisticated training program to be effective. In a training situation, highly job-involved trainees anticipate greater performance as a result of doing well in training (Mathieu et al., 1992). Colarelli and Bishop (1990) suggested that career commitment is specifically relevant to individuals who try to develop a high level of skills, as it can help them persist long enough through years of training. A recent study by Bartlett (2001) indicated that there is a significant positive relationship between motivation to learn in training with affective and normative forms of commitment. He also explained that there is a negative but non-significant relationship that exists between motivation and continuance commitment. Although the focus of the present study is commitment as an outcome of training, previous research has considered organizational commitment as a variable that influences motivation for participation in training. However, in a study of US Navy recruits, organizational commitment was found to increase following participation in training (Tannenbaum et al., 1991). Thus, commitment is dependent on the level of employees’ participation. The training environment There have been many studies concerning the environment in training. One such is the study by Iles and Suliman (1998) where they explored the relationships between work climate, organizational commitment and job performance in Jordanian industrial firms. According to Forehand and Gilmer (1964), work climate is the set of characteristics that describe one organization and distinguish the organization from other organizations; are relatively enduring over time; and influence the behavior of people in the organization. Work climate has been linked to individual differences (Schneider and Bartlett, 1970), organizational structure (Payne and Pugh, 1976), and organizational communication (Poole and McPhee, 1983). It has also been argued that employees are frequently sensitive to relevant environmental and organizational constraints that might limit the ability to provide them with desired rewards (Eisenberger et al., 1997). Creating a positive work environment © Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 2003.


could be economical decisions of firms in terms of reducing costs associated with losing employees (Bhuian and Shahidulislam, 1996). A study by Montesino (2002) suggested that a company needs to pay close attention to linking its training programs with the corporation’s strategic direction in a way that is explicit, clearly communicated, and evident to the trainees. Research by Ford et al. (1998) also indicated that environmental factors such as rate of technology advancement and demands for new skills are expected to affect commitment. Further, Moskal (1993) argued that organizational commitment is ‘all but gone’ and can be resuscitated only when industry creates a mutually beneficial working environment. Whether an employee is undergoing training or working, the immediate environment function plays a vital role in affecting commitment. Simon (1969) also believed that the environment determined the conditions for goal attainment. Hence, training environment plays a key role in ensuring that training objectives are met. Perceived benefits of training Kinicki et al. (1992) found that the link between actual human resource management practices and work attitudes were mediated by perceptions of the organization’s commitment to the human resource activities that benefits employees. Training offers many benefits to employees and to the organization as a whole. Employees become more confident, open to change and supportive of each other (Donovan et al., 2001). In addition, employees are more motivated to achieve improved performance as a result of training. The perceived benefits of training have been found to affect participation and commitment in training. Nordhaug (1989) identifies three types of benefits that employees obtain from training: personal, career, and job-related benefits. Those who reflect positively on training benefits are thought to exhibit stronger feelings of commitment to the organization that provided the training. Development of hypotheses In line with the issues derived from the literature review, the following hypotheses were developed: Hypothesis A: There is a positive relationship between availability of training on the one hand and affective, normative, continuance and the overall organizational commitment on the other. Hypothesis B: There is a positive relationship between social support for training on the one hand and affective, normative, continuance and the overall organizational commitment on the other. Hypothesis C: Higher levels of motivation to learn in training will result in higher levels of affective, normative, continuance and overall organizational commitment. Hypothesis D: Training environment is an important factor in enhancing affective, normative, continuance and overall organizational commitment. Hypothesis E: There is a positive relationship between the recognized benefits of training along with affective, normative, continuance and overall organizational commitment.

Research methodology According to Brown (1990), organization size can be used as a control variable in the analysis. Previous research has shown that organizations with more than 100 employees provide more training. Therefore, organizations with more than 100 employees and conduct training were targeted in this research. The target population for the study is white-collar workers, employed in the private and public sector in Malaysia, who had participated in informal and/or formal training program(s) with their current organization. 37 companies participated in this study, which was conducted during 2002. 300 172



questionnaires were distributed and 204 were received and used for the final analyses. This represents an overall response rate of 68%. Survey research methodology was employed in this study. The survey instrument was a six-page questionnaire prepared in English. The questionnaire was divided into four parts. Section A was designed to measure the demographic information of the individual employees. Section B measured the dependent variable of organizational commitment (OC). The questions have a 19-item scale (Questions 1–19) and were divided into 3 sub-variables as follows: •

•

•

OC Variable 1: (Questions 1–7). Affective commitment was measured on a Likert scale using seven-items from Meyer and Allen’s (1984) affective commitment scale. Sample items are, ‘I feel a strong sense of belonging to my organization’ and ‘I feel like I am part of the family at the company for which I work’. OC Variable 2: (Questions 8–13). Normative commitment was measured with the scale developed by Meyer and Allen (1988; Allen and Meyer, 1990). Examples would be, ‘I feel a strong obligation to stay on my job’ and ‘My organization deserves my loyalty’. OC Variable 3: (Questions 14–19). Continuance commitment was measured with the scale developed by Meyer and Allen (1988; Allen and Meyer, 1990). Illustrative items are, ‘I don’t have any other choice but to stay on my present job’ and ‘It would be too costly for me to leave my organization now’.

Section C was developed to investigate the effect of variables in training towards organizational commitment. Section C also used the Likert-scale. Training was treated as the independent variable and was divided into four sub-variables as follows: •

•

• •

Training Variable 2: (Questions 20–26). Social support for training from top management was measured using a few statements from the survey of Perceived Organizational Support (Eisenberger et al., 1986). An example is, ‘The management takes pride in my accomplishment’. Training Variable 3: (Question 27–30). Motivation to learn was measured by using statements that are specifically related to respondents’ motivations to learn in training such as, ‘I am willing to put in a great deal of effort in training, beyond what is normally expected, in order to improve my performance and the organization as a whole’. Training Variable 4: (Question 31–35). Training environment was measured by statements such as, ‘My organization provides a good physical training environment’. Training Variable 5: (Question 36–41). Perceived benefits of training were measured by perceptual self-assessments such as, ‘Training helps me to enhance my performance and thus allows me to get a promotion sooner’.

Section D was designed merely to obtain further information regarding the types of training conducted at the respondent’s organizations. Further, respondents were also asked to list additional benefits they could acquire after training. Open-ended questions were used to identify additional factors that could help in explaining individuals’ commitment towards their organization.

Results The number of male respondents was more than female respondents. There were 114 males (55.9%) as compared to 90 females (44.1%) in this sample. The majority of the respondents were below 30 years old (61.8%). Also in the sample a large proportion of the respondents report that they have earned a bachelor degree (65.7%), while the remaining only completed high school (9.3%), earned diplomas (13.2%), and masters (11.8%). Slightly more than 50% of the total respondents were employed in the service industry. The remainder were either in manufacturing or other sectors such as banking, IT, construction and so forth. In terms of annual income, the range was from © Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 2003.


Table 1: Reliability tests Statement

Cronbach’s alpha values N = 204

1–7 8–13 14–19 20–26 27–30 31–35 36–41 Overall statements (1–41)

0.8809 0.7465 0.6905 0.8989 0.8167 0.8591 0.8920 0.9345

$25,000 to $50,000. The data also revealed that the average tenure was between 1 and 5 years, which was in line with the young age of respondents. With respect to training, most organizations (72.5%) conducted both informal and formal types of training. These organizations often performed training approximately more than three times a year and each training session would often last from as brief as one day to as long as one week. Table 1 indicates the Cronbach alpha values for the 41 statements in the questionnaire. According to Nunnaly (1967), an alpha coefficient of 0.5 or higher is necessary for an exploratory research such as a survey to be considered reliable. Thus, it can be concluded that the reliability of the scaled-items and the overall items are acceptable. Factor analysis Commitment items (Statement 1–19) were not factorized due to the fact that the statements were quoted by several scholars in the past. Thus, the data are reliable and the integrity of the original instrument measuring commitment needs to be maintained. However, the 21 items comprising statements on training that were developed for the purpose of this paper were factor analyzed using Varimax rotation. The purpose was to determine whether the scaled-item fall in the same construct. The result shows a good indicator of well-segregated questions in the original questionnaires. All the statements with the exception of Statement 36 are factorized according to the group developed in the questionnaires, which are: • • • •

Factor 1: Support for training (S20–26) Factor 2: Motivation to learn (S27–S30) Factor 3: Training environment (S31–S35) Factor 4: Benefits of training (S37–S41)

Statement 36 (S36), ‘Training allows me to acquire new knowledge and skills’, was previously categorized under the scale ‘Benefits of training’. Subsequent to factor analysis, S36 was loaded under Factor 2 with factor loading of 0.529. This signifies that S36 should be categorized under ‘Motivation to learn’ scale. Thus, for the remaining of the analysis in this study, the scores for Statement 36 were calculated under the scale ‘Motivation to learn’. Relationship between availability of training and commitment (Hypothesis A) The data in Table 2 reveal that availability of training is positively correlated with affective, normative, and the overall organizational commitment. In particular, the availability of training accounts for as much as 13% of the variance in affective commitment. The test of significance showed that independent variables were significant at p < 0.01 and p < 0.05 level. Therefore, the results partially supported Hypothesis A. There is a positive relationship between availability of training along with affective, normative and the overall organizational commitment as measured by the types of training, 174



frequency, and duration of training. However, there was no correlation between availability of training and continuance commitment. The results supported the findings by Bartlett (2001), which indicated that availability of training has a strong relationship with affective and normative commitment, but no association with continuance commitment. With the presence of training, employees are more likely to feel loyal and morally obliged to remain with their company. According to the results, employees in Malaysia do not feel that the cost of leaving the organization has any association with the availability of training within their organization. Hence, although they could have access to training, employees would not take this factor under consideration when choosing to leave their company. In other words, they do not consider the availability of training as a high cost or benefit that they have to forgo when leaving their organization. Relationship between support for training and commitment (Hypothesis B) The results in Table 3 give an indication that support for training is highly correlated with affective commitment accounting for as much as 52% of the variance. It must also be noted that normative and the overall organizational commitment is affected too. The test of significance showed that the said relationships were significant at p < 0.01 level. Thus, Hypothesis B is partially supported because support for training is positively correlated with all levels of commitment with the exception of continuance commitment. The results show a strong linear relationship between support for training and affective commitment, that is, the greater the support given to employees in training, the higher will be the affective commitment. This study confirmed the findings and suggestions of several scholars (Allen and Meyer, 1996; Eisenberger et al., 1990, 1986; Guzzo et al., 1994; Settoon et al., 1996; Shore and Wayne, 1993) who stressed that the support given by top management or supervisors play an important role in increasing affective commitment of employees. Employees who felt valued and supported by their organizations were more emotionally attached to their organization and profession. In the case of normative commitment, employees in Malaysia feel a greater sense of obligation to remain in their organizations when they view their organization as supportive, particularly in training. Employees are more likely to be committed to stay within their organization if employers are willing to support their long-term career

Table 2: Correlation analysis between availability of training and commitment

Affective commitment Normative commitment Continuance commitment Organizational commitment

R

Significance

0.362 0.137 Not significant 0.252

0.000 (p < 0.01) 0.025 (p < 0.05) – 0.000 (p < 0.01)

Table 3: Correlation analysis between support for training and commitment r

Significance



0.000 (p < 0.01) 0.000 (p < 0.01) – 0.000 (p < 0.01)



development and personal career aspirations through training. This also confirmed the study by Allen and Meyer (1990) for the fact that normative commitment correlates positively with organizational support. Research done by Allen and Meyer (1990) and Shore and Wayne (1993) reported weak negative correlations between continuance commitment and support for training, which slightly contrasted with the findings of this research. Nevertheless, the results concurred with Meyer and Smith (2000) who found there is no correlation between support and continuance commitment. Therefore, support for training appeared to have no effects on employees’ perceptions of the costs of leaving the organization. Individuals do not feel that there is lack of attractive alternative in other organizations or that their life would be disrupted if they leave the organization they are currently working for. Clearly, the results indicate that there is a need in building partnerships among trainers, trainees, and managers to support training usage as believed by Brinkerhoff and Montesino (1995), Huczynski and Lewis (1980), and Michalak (1981). Employees are often more enthusiastic in performing good work when they feel valued by their organization and if they can depend upon the organization for support. Thus, organizations that take an active role in helping employees to prepare themselves for advancement in the organization by undergoing training, will foster a stronger bond from the employees. Relationship between motivation to learn in training and commitment (Hypothesis C) Motivation to learn in training was found to be significantly and positively correlated with affective, normative, and the overall organizational commitment. These relationships were significant at the p < 0.01 level. In particular, the motivation to learn accounts for as much as 19% of the variance in affective commitment. On the other hand, continuance commitment shows no association with motivation to learn. Thus, Hypothesis C is partially supported because employees with higher levels of motivation to learn in training will result in higher levels of affective, normative, and overall organizational commitment, but not continuance commitment. The present findings indicate that affective and normative commitment can be enhanced by the increase of motivation to learn in training. The result is consistent with the research by Bartlett (2001), which indicated that there is a significant positive relationship between motivation to learn in training with affective and normative forms of commitment. Thus, it can also be reasoned that motivated employees want to remain with their organization and feel a strong sense of belonging to their organization. Some of the interesting comments made during interview were: Basically, I put my best effort in training so I can improve my performance and earn respect from my manager. I really feel that the company’s problems are also mine, so I put a lot of hours into work which cuts down my family time. I attend the training course that was offered because I wanted to be more independent at work. Plus the flexibility that I can gain after attending training really helps to cut down the extra hours of work.

However, the results of this research provided little evidence for the impact of motivation to learn on continuance commitment. Bartlett (2001) reported that there is a

Table 4: Correlation analysis between motivation to learn and commitment

Affective commitment Normative commitment Continuance commitment Organizational commitment 176

r

Significance


0.000 (p < 0.01) 0.000 (p < 0.01) – 0.000 (p < 0.01)



negative but non-significant relationship between motivation and continuance commitment. However the results of this study showed that no such correlation exists. Thus, it appears that individuals’ motivation to learn and participate in training have no impact towards their assessment on the costs of leaving the organization. Relationship between training environment and commitment (Hypothesis D) According to the results in Table 5, there were positive correlations between training environment and the three levels of organizational commitment. The test of significance showed that the relationships involving continuance commitment were significant at p < 0.05 level while the affective, normative, and overall organizational commitment were significant at p < 0.01 level respectively. In particular, the training environment accounted for as much as 32% of the variance in affective commitment. Thus Hypothesis D, which stated that training environment is an important factor in enhancing organizational commitment, is fully supported. The results illustrate that training environment correlates positively and significantly with affective commitment. It also correlates, albeit not as strongly, with normative commitment. Undoubtedly, comfortable and pleasant work surroundings influence development of employees’ attachment towards their organization (Poole and McPhee, 1983). During an interview with a 40-year-old manager from the service industry, the critical importance of training environment was made quite clear. I am very happy to remain with the organization I am working for. I have been working here for 15 years and I must say that the one major factor that kept me staying is the working environment, in terms of its people and the physical surrounding. When we undergo training, there are always clear guidelines being prepared by the HR department. The workspace for training is positioned in such a way that all of us are able to communicate with each other easily. Also, the advantage is that we are given the flexibility to learn at our own pace.

The results show that training environment also has a slight impact on continuance commitment. This denotes that employees do take training environment into consideration as one of the costs of leaving an organization. Judging from the overall results, managers should establish a satisfying workplace particularly in training to ignite employee commitment. Relationship between benefits of training and commitment (Hypothesis E) Employees’ assessment of the benefits they could gain from training was found to contribute to commitment. In particular, the benefits of training accounts for as much as Table 5: Correlation analysis between training environment and commitment


r

Significance

0.569 0.374 0.162 0.517

0.000 (p < 0.01) 0.001 (p < 0.01) 0.010 (p < 0.005) 0.000 (p < 0.01)

Table 6: Correlation analysis between benefits of training and commitment

Affective commitment Normative commitment Continuance commitment Organizational commitment © Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 2003.

r

Significance

0.434 0.382 0.146 0.441

0.000 (p < 0.01) 0.000 (p < 0.01) 0.019 (p < 0.005) 0.000 (p < 0.01)


19% of the variance in affective commitment. Hypothesis E, which stated that there is a significant, positive relationship between the recognized benefits of training and all the variables in organizational commitment, is fully supported. The result of this study is therefore consistent with Nordhaug (1989), in that employees who reflect positively on training benefits are thought to exhibit stronger feelings of commitment to the organization. Thus, the more a person learns and acquires skills and knowledge in training, the more likely they would be to develop a strong bond towards their company. Employees develop a greater desire to remain with their employer due to the selfimprovement that they gain from attending training courses. Although a relationship exists between continuance commitment and benefits in training, the correlation is very weak. It can be assumed that although individuals believed that training is advantageous to them, it does not necessarily mean that it will affect their perception of the cost of leaving. Analysis on training and demographic variables Stepwise regression analysis was used to identify the important factors that influence each level of commitment when all the factors (training and demographic) were taken into consideration. The findings are shown in Table 7. Table 7 shows that in this study, support for training was the best predictor of affective commitment. Benefits of training and age were the second and third most important factors respectively. Together, all these variables accounted for 56.1% of the total variance. Table 8 shows support for training was the best predictor of affective commitment, followed by benefits of training. Together, these two variables explained 35.5% of the total variance of normative commitment. Motivation appears to be the third most important factor influencing normative commitment. The level of involvement and experiences in training could very well be the main reason these employees remain with their organization. Table 7: Stepwise regression analysis for affective commitment Step 1 2 3

Training variables

R2

Significant R

Support for training Benefits of training Age

0.523 0.546 0.561

0.000 0.002 0.010

Table 8: Stepwise regression analysis for normative commitment Step 1 2 3

Training variables

R2

Significant R

Support for training Benefits of training Motivation to learn

0.328 0.355 0.368

0.000 0.004 0.038

Table 9: Stepwise regression analysis for continuance commitment Step 1 2 178

Training variables

R2

Significant R

Training environment Education

0.026 0.050

0.020 0.025



Table 10: Stepwise regression analysis for overall organizational commitment Step 1 2

Training variables Support for training Benefits of training

R2 0.435 0.471

Significant R 0.000 0.000

Training environment was still the most important criteria in explaining continuance commitment (see Table 9). The level of education of employees was the second most important reason for wanting to stay or leave their organization. Although both predictors are significant, they explained only 5% of the variance in continuance commitment. The final result (Table 10) demonstrated that the most important training factors in determining overall organizational commitment were support for training followed by the benefits of training. Jointly, they explained 47.1% of the total variance in overall organizational commitment. It is important to recognize that benefits of training, although listed as the second factor, plays an important part in increasing commitment among employees. As stated by several scholars (Donovan et al., 2001), employees become more confident, open to change and supportive of each other when they achieved the benefits of training. Many respondents made an important comment during interviews. One of them stated: Employees of today can no longer afford to be committed to an organization that does not offer them favorable benefits. We are living in a materialistic world where everyone is in competition with each other, we want to be better than others, earn more than our friends, drive better cars, etc. We must be ready to take the risk to find available alternatives to achieve what we want. And when we are content with what a company has to offer, then we would stay. Definitely.

Differences in commitment among demographic groups In relation to affective commitment, tests of Anova revealed that employees between the ages of 40–49 have significantly higher affective commitment scores than those who are less than 30. This finding is consistent with previous research such as that conducted by Allen and Meyer, 1990; Mowday et al., 1982; Mathieu and Zajac, 1990; Lok and Crawford, 2001; Hrebiniak and Alutto, 1972; Steers, 1977; Williams and Hazer, 1986. Employees who worked more than 10 years have significantly higher affective commitment scores than those who worked less than a year. On the other hand, the findings suggest that age and tenure were unimportant in predicting normative or continuance commitment. According to the interview done with several employees, many feel that even though they are emotionally attached to their organization, it would not stop them from leaving the organization to gain higher income or benefits. Findings by several scholars (Tan and Akhtar, 1998; Irving, Coleman, and Cooper, 1997) also support the fact that age and tenure did not correlate significantly with normative commitment. Thus, the length of time spent within an organization is not highly predictive of workers’ feelings of obligation to stay. It is important to note the fact that the overall findings are not wholly consistent with the previous literature that suggested age has statistically significant positive effects on the overall commitment (Lok and Crawford, 2001; Hrebiniak and Alutto, 1972; Steers, 1977; Mathieu and Zajac, 1990; Williams and Hazer, 1986). The contradictory findings for age and tenure could be attributed to the relatively young executives involved in the survey. They may not be prepared to have a long-term engagement with the organizations in which they work. This is fairly consistent with the work culture in Malaysia that is rather volatile across time. This is due to various reasons such as uncertain business environment, pressure to cut costs, and restructuring. The results indicate that gender and race have no correlation with commitment. This confirms previous studies that specify gender has no direct effect on organiza© Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 2003.


tional commitment (Ngo and Tsang, 1998). In terms of race, no empirical analysis has directly addressed the issue of race differences in commitment. Although the results did not show a negative correlation between the level of education and the overall commitment, which was found in some previous studies (DeCotiis and Summers, 1987), there is a significant negative correlation associated with continuance commitment (r = -0.130, p = 0.032). This signifies that less educated employees perceive that the costs of leaving their organization are high. On the other hand, more educated employees feel that they have little to lose if they leave their job, thus they are less committed in that respect. Annual income was found to correlate positively with affective commitment (r = 0.220, p = 0.001), which implies that higher income causes stronger feelings of attachment towards the organization. Income was also significantly and positively correlated with the overall commitment (r = 0.137, p = 0.026). This is consistent with the previous findings by Becker et al. (1979). Conversely, the position that one holds has a negative effect on affective and the overall commitment. This is most likely due to the fact that people with higher status do not feel they should commit to one specific organization.

Conclusion and recommendations The present study explored the relationship between training and organizational commitment. There are three levels or types of commitment, which are affective, normative, and continuance. As Allen and Meyer (1990) stated: Employees with strong affective commitment remain because they want to, those with strong continuance commitment remain because they need to, and those with strong normative commitment remain because they feel they ought to do so.

Specifically, the three types of commitment were examined in association with several aspects of training such as the availability of training, support for training, motivation to learn, training environment, and the benefits of training. Relationship of commitment to demographic variables was also observed. Findings demonstrate fairly strong support for the proposed hypotheses, although there were a few notable contradictions. The major findings of this study suggested that individual perception on training plays an important role in affecting organizational commitment. It was found that availability of training, support for training, and motivation to learn were significantly and positively associated with affective, normative, and overall organizational commitment but not continuance commitment. On the other hand, training environment and benefits of training seemed to correlate with all three types of commitment as well as overall commitment. The most striking relationship was found between support for training and affective commitment with the former predicting as much as 56% of the variance of the latter. Support for training was also important in predicting normative commitment, the former explaining 33% of the variance of the latter. It therefore appears that encouragement from trainers or top management influences an employee’s sense of attachment to the organization and feelings of moral obligation to stay. Benefits of training were the second most important predictor of affective and normative commitment. The training environment appeared to be the most important predictor of continuance commitment. However, the former explained only 5% of the variance of the latter. The results of this research indicated that support and benefits of training were important predictors of overall commitment. Support of training alone accounted for as much as 43% of the variance of overall commitment indicating that it can be a critical factor in influencing loyalty, retaining employees and overcoming the problem of high turnover. Demographically, the survey revealed that age and tenure only correlates positively with affective commitment. The application of analysis of variance further revealed that affective commitment differs significantly across the age and tenure 180



group. It was found that older employees have a significantly higher affective commitment than younger employees. This indicates that older employees are more attached to the organization they are working for. On the other hand, younger employees are still new to the working world and believe that there is immense opportunity out there for them. Thus, they do not feel that they have to be loyal to their current organization. In the case of tenure, a similar conclusion can be assumed. People who have spent longer time in the working world have considerably higher affective commitment than those who are new. The study also revealed that gender and race have no effect on commitment while education has negative relationship with continuance commitment. This signifies that less educated employees thought the cost of leaving their organization is very high. On the other hand, more educated employees feel that they have little to lose if they leave the organization. The results regarding annual income were consistent with previous studies by Becker et al. (1979), which found that annual income has positive relationship with affective commitment and overall organizational commitment. Conversely, the position that one holds has negative effect on affective and the overall commitment. This is most likely due to the fact that people with higher status do not feel they should commit to one specific organization. Their ability, knowledge and diverse experiences give them plenty of opportunity to work with various organizations and thus lessened their loyalty to their current organization. Practical implications of the research The results obtained indicate that training significantly enhances various types of employee commitment. Correlations to affective commitment were strongest. Therefore, organizations should focus on developing initiatives that matter most to affective form of commitment, such as support given in training and benefits offered in training. Management should be aware that there is a need to offer employees something more than monetary rewards in order to keep them committed. Studies in the past (Saiyadain and Juhary, 1995) revealed that top management is not very supportive of training efforts. However, the findings of this research suggest that, managers or trainers ought to play a more active role in influencing employees’ attitudes towards the organization. High involvement not only helps to build employees’ commitment, but also to foster their development in coping with rapid conditions. It is also important to note that this can be achieved only when the management itself commits to acknowledging the contribution of their employees, understanding factors that enhance employee commitment, and helping employees to maximize their potential through training. Training can be a big incentive, and helps foster loyalty to the company. It must also be noted that only affective commitment is related to age and tenure. A study by Tung (1982) indicated that different people from different parts of the world will act differently. From the findings of this study, it has been shown that the relationship between age and tenure with the overall organizational commitment contradicted the previous findings by Western scholars particularly, Lok and Crawford (2001), Hrebiniak and Zajac (1990), Steers (1977), Mathieu and Zajac (1990), and Williams and Hazer (1986). This demonstrates that Malaysians have different attitudes towards organizational commitment. The older they are and the longer they stay within an organization do not imply that they will be committed towards their organization. This can be mainly attributed to the uncertain business environment in Malaysia. This difference in findings can be viewed as an important contribution to knowledge. Limitations of the study This study was limited to the target population within Malaysia only. However, the study was for the most part consistent with previous studies conducted in Western © Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 2003.


countries. Second, although the findings are fairly consistent with the hypotheses, we cannot rule out the possibility that there is bias because differences in employee attitudes and knowledge may affect how employees perceive the training activities within their organization. Recommendations for future research Due to the limitation of this study, it is highly recommended that further research should be done in other Asian countries. Perhaps interviews conducted in other countries can uncover other aspects of training that are important towards commitment, that have yet to be taken into consideration. References Abdullah, A. (1992), ‘The Influence of Ethnic Values on Managerial Practices in Malaysia’, Malaysian Management Review, 27, 1, 3–18. Allen, N. J. and Meyer, J. P. (1990), ‘The Measurement and Antecedents of Affective, Continuance and Normative Commitment to the Organization’, Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, 1–18. Allen, N. J. and Meyer, J. P. (1996), ‘Affective, Continuance, and Normative Commitment to the Organization: an Examination of Construct Validity’, Journal of Vocational Behavior, 49, 252–76. Angle, H. L. and Perry, J. L. (1981), ‘An Empirical Assessment of Organizational Commitment and Organizational Effectiveness’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 21, 1–14. Agarwal, S. (1993), ‘Influence of Formalization on Role Stress, Organizational Commitment, and Work Alienation of Salespersons: a Cross-national Comparative Study’, Journal of International Business Studies, 24, 715–39. Arnold, J., Cooper, C. L. and Robertson, I. T. (1998), Work Psychology: Understanding Human Behavior in the Workplace, 3rd edn (London: Financial Times). Aven, F. F., Parker, B. and McEvoy, G. M. (1993), ‘Gender and Attitudinal Commitment to Organizations: a Meta-analysis’, Journal of Business Research, 26, 63–73. Awamleh, N. A. (1996), ‘Organizational Commitment of Civil Service Managers in Jordan: a Field Study’, Journal of Management Development, 15, 65–74. Barnett, R. (1995), ‘Flexible Benefits: Communication is the Key’, Benefits and Compensation International, 24, 6, 25–8. Bartlett, K. R. (2001), ‘The Relationship between Training and Organizational Commitment: a Study in the Health Care Field’, Human Resource Development Quarterly, 12, 4, 325–52. Becker, L. B., Sobowale, I. A. and Cobbey, R. E. (1979), ‘Reporters and their Professional and Organizational Commitment’, Journalism Quarterly, 56, 753–63, 770. Benkhoff, B. (1997), ‘Ignoring Commitment is Costly: New Approaches Establish the Missing Link between Commitment and Performance’, Human Relations, 50, 701–26. Bhuian, S. N. and Shahidulislam, M. (1996), ‘Continuance Commitment and Extrinsic Job Satisfaction among a Novel Multicultural Expatriate Workforce’, Mid-Atlantic Journal of Business, 32, 1–9. Brinkerhoff, R. O. and Montesino, M. U. (1995), ‘Partnerships for Training Transfer: Lessons from a Corporate Study’, Human Resource Development Quarterly, 6, 3, 263–74. Brown, C. (1990), ‘Empirical Evidence on Private Training’, Research in Labor Economics, 11, 97–113. Brown, R. B. (1996), ‘Organizational Commitment: Clarifying the Concept and Simplifying Existing Construct Typology’, Journal of Vocational Behavior, 49, 230–51. Buckley, R. and Caple, J. (1995), The Theory and Practice of Training, 3rd edn (London: Kogan Page). Caldwell, D. F, Chatman, J. A. and O’Reilly, C. A. (1990), ‘Building Organizational Commitment: a Multifirm Study’, Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, 245–61. Cheng, W. L. (2001), ‘The Influence of Job and Career Attitudes on Learning Motivation and Transfer’, Career Development International, 6, 1, 20–8. Cheung, C. K. (2000), ‘Commitment to the Organization in Exchange for Support from the Organization’, Social Behavior and Personality, 28, 125–40. Clark, C. S., Dobbins, G. H. and Ladd, R. T. (1993), ‘Exploratory Field Study of Training Motivation: Influences of Involvement, Credibility, and Transfer Climate’, Group and Organization Management, 18, 3, 292–307. Colarelli, S. M. and Bishop, R. C. (1990), ‘Career Commitment: Functions, Correlates and Management’, Group and Organization Studies, 15, 158–76.

182



Debrah, Y. (1993), ‘Strategies for Coping with Employee Retention Problems in Small and Medium Enterprise in Singapore’, Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Change, 2, 2, 143–72. DeCotiis, T. A. and Summers, T. P. (1987), ‘A Path Analysis of a Model of the Antecedents and Consequences of Organizational Commitment’, Human Relations, 40, 445–70. Donovan, P., Hannigan, K. and Crowe, D. (2001), ‘The Learning Transfer System Approach to Estimating the Benefits of Training: Empirical Evidence’, Journal of European Industrial Training, 25, 2, 221. Eisenberger, R., Cummings, I., Armeli, S. and Lynch, P. (1997), ‘Perceived Organizational Support, Discretionary Treatment, and Job Satisfaction’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 812–20. Eisenberger, R., Fasolo, P. and Davis-LaMastro, V. (1990), ‘Perceived Organizational Support and Employee Diligence, Commitment, and Innovation’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 51–9. Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S. and Sowa, D. (1986), ‘Perceived Organizational Support’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 500–7. Ford, J. K., Smith, E. M., Weissbein, D. A., Gully, S. M. and Salas, E. (1998), ‘Relationships of Goal, Orientation, Metacognitive Activity, and Practice Strategies with Learning Outcomes and Transfer’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 2, 218–33. Forehand, G. A. and Gilmer, B. H. (1964), ‘Environmental Variation in Studies of Organizational Behavior’, Psychological Bulletin, 67, 361–82. Gaertner, K. N. and Nollen, S. D. (1989), ‘Career Experiences, Perceptions of Employment Practices, and Psychological Commitment to the Organization’, Human Relations, 42, 975–91. Guzzo, R. A., Noonan, K. A. and Elrod, E. (1994), ‘Expatriate Managers and the Psychological Contract’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 617–26. Hamid, A. A., Salleh, A. H., Muhamad, J. and Ismail, J. Z. (1987), ‘Management Education in Malaysia’, in Tan Jing Hee and You Poh Seng (eds), Developing Managers in Asia (Singapore: Addison Wesley). Hrebiniak, L. G. and Alutto, J. G. (1972), ‘Personal and Role Related Factors in the Development of Organizational Commitment’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 18, 555–73. Huczynski, A. A. and Lewis, J. W. (1980), ‘An Empirical Study into the Learning Transfer Process in Management Training’, Journal of Management Studies, 17, 3, 227–40. Iles, P. A. and Suliman, A. (1998), ‘The Relationship between Work Climate, Organizational Commitment, and Job Performance in Jordanian Industrial Firms’ (London: Edge Hill University College). Irving, P. G., Coleman, D. F. and Cooper, C. L. (1997), ‘Futher Assessment of a Three-component Model of Occupational Commitment: Generalizability and Differences across Occupations’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 444–52. Jarvi, P. (1997), ‘Commitment and Occupational Image’, The Occupational Image as a Part of the Vocational Oriented Process, Series A-10 (Turku: The Turku School of Economics and Business Administration). Khatri, N., Fern C. T. and Budhwar, P. (2001), ‘Explaining Employee Turnover in an Asian Context’, Human Resource Management Journal, 11, 54–74. Kinicki, A. J., Carson, K. P. and Bohlander, G. W. (1992), ‘Relationship between an Organization’s Actual Human Resource Efforts and Employee Attitudes’, Group and Organization Management, 17, 135–52. Koslowsky, M., Caspy, T. and Lazar, M. (1988), ‘Are Volunteers More Committed than Nonvolunteers?’ Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18, 985–91. Lang, D. L. (1992), ‘Organizational Culture and Commitment’, Human Resource Development Quarterly, 3, 2, 191–6. Levinson, D. J., Darrow, C. N., Klein, E. B., Levinson, M. H. and McKee, B. (1978), The Seasons of a Man’s Life (New York: Ballantine). Lok, P. and Crawford, J. (2001), ‘Antecedents of Organizational Commitment and the Mediating Role of Job Satisfaction’, Journal of Managerial Psychology, 16, 8, 594–613. Lowry, D. S., Simon, A. and Kimberley, N. (2002), ‘Toward Improved Employment Relations Practices of Casual Employees in the New South Wales Registered Clubs Industry’, Human Resource Development Quarterly, 13, 1, 53–70. Marsh, R. M. and Mannari, H. (1977), ‘Organizational Commitment and Turnover: a Prediction Study’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 22, 57–75. Mathieu, J. E. and Zajac, D. M. (1990), ‘A Review and Meta-analysis of the Antecedents, Correlates, and Consequences of Organizational Commitment’, Psychological Bulletin, 108, 171– 94. Mathieu, J. E., Tannenbaum, S. I. and Salas, E. (1992), ‘Influences of Individual and Situational Characteristics on Measures of Training Effectiveness’, Academy of Management Journal, 35, 4, 828–47. © Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 2003.


Meyer, J. P. and Allen, N. J. (1984), ‘Testing the “side-bet theory” of organizational commitment: Some methodological considerations’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 372–8. Meyer, J. P. and Allen, N. J. (1988), ‘Links between Work Experiences and Organizational Commitment during the First Year of Employment: a Longitudinal Analysis’, Journal of Occupational Psychology, 61, 195–210. Meyer, J. P. and Allen, N. J. (1991), ‘A Three-component Conceptualization of Organizational Commitment’, Human Resource Management Review, 1, 1, 61–89. Meyer, J. P. and Allen, N. J. (1997), Commitment in the Workplace: Theory, Research, and Application (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage). Meyer, J. P. and Smith, C. A. (2000), ‘HRM Practices and Organizational Commitment: Test of a Mediation Model’, Administrative Sciences Association of Canada, 17, 4, 319–31. Meyer, J. P., Paunonen, S. X., Gellatly, I. R., Goffin, R. D. and Jackson, D. N. (1989), ‘Organizational Commitment and Job Performance: It’s the Nature of the Commitment that Counts’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 152–6. Michalak, D. F. (1981), ‘The Neglected Half of Training’, Training and Development Journal, 35, 5, 22–8. Montesino, M. U. (2002), ‘Strategic Alignment of Training, Transfer-Enhancing Behaviors, and Training Usage: a Post-training Study’, Human Resource Development Quarterly, 13, 1, 89– 108. Morris, M., Lydka, H. and O’Creevy, M. F. (1993), ‘Can Commitment be Managed? A Longitudinal Analysis of Employee Commitment and Human Resource Policies’, Human Resource Management Journal, 3, 3, 21–30. Moskal, B. (1993), ‘Company Loyalty Dies, a Victim of Neglect’, Industry Week, 11–12. Mottaz, C. J. (1988), ‘Determinants of Organizational Commitment’, Human Relations, 6, 467–82. Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W. and Steers, R. M. (1982), Employee-organizational Linkages: the Psychology of Commitment, Absenteeism, and Turnover (New York: Academic). Ngo, H. Y. and Tsang W. N. (1998), ‘Employment Practices and Organizational Commitment: Differential Effects for Men and Women?’ International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 6, 3, 251–66. Noe, R. A. (1986), ‘Trainees’ Attributes and Attitudes: Neglected Influences on raining Effectiveness’, Academy of Management Review, 11, 4, 736–49. Noe, R. A. and Schmitt, N. (1986), ‘The Influence of Trainee Attitudes on Training Effectiveness: Test of a Model’, Personnel Psychology, 39, 497–523. Nordhaug, O. (1989), ‘Reward Functions of Personnel Training’, Human Relations, 42, 5, 373–88. Nunnaly, J. C. (1967), Psychometric Theory (New York: McGraw-Hill). O’Driscoll, M. P. and Randall, D. M. (1999), ‘Perceived Organizational Support, Satisfaction with Rewards, and Employee Job Involvement and Organizational Commitment’, Applied Psychology: An International Review, 48, 197–209. O’Reilly, C. A. and Chatman, J. (1986), ‘Organizational Commitment and Psychological Attachment: the Effects of Compliance, Identification, and Internalization on Pro-social Behavior’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 492–9. Payne, R. and Pugh, D. (1976), ‘Organizational Structure and Climate’, in M. D. Dunnette (ed.), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (Chicago: Rand McNally, 1125–73). Poole, M. and McPhee, R. (1983), ‘A Structural Analysis of Organizational Climate’, in L. I. Putnam and M. E. Paconowsky (eds), Communication and Organizations (Beverly Hills CA.: Sage). Porter, L. W., Steers, R. M., Mowday, R. T. and Boulian, P. V. (1974), ‘Organizational Commitment, Job Satisfaction, and Turnover Among Psychiatric Technicians’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 59, 603–9. Quah, P. S. E. (1976), ‘Management Training Needs in Peninsular Malaysia’, Unpublished MBA Thesis (Manila: Asia Institute of Management Library). Quinones, M. A. (1995), ‘Pre-training Context Effects: Training Assignment as Feedback’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 2, 226–38. Randall, D. M. (1990), ‘The Consequences of Organizational Commitment: Methodological Investigation’, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 11, 361–78. Saiyadain, M. S. and Juhary, A. (1995), Managerial Training and Development in Malaysia (Kuala Lumpur: Malaysian Institute of Management). Schneider, B. and Bartlett, C. (1970), ‘Individual Differences and Organizational Climate (II)’, Personnel Psychology, 23, 493–512. Settoon, R. P., Bennett, N. and Liden, R. C. (1996), ‘Social Exchange in Organizations: Perceived Organizational Support, Leader-member Exchange, and Employee Reciprocity’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 219–27.

184



Shore, L. M. and Wayne, S. J. (1993), ‘Commitment and Employee Behavior: Comparison of Affective and Continuance Commitment with Perceived Organizational Support’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 774–80. Simon, H. A. (1969), The Sciences of the Artificial (Cambridge MA: London, England: The MIT Press). Sparrow, P. R. (1998), ‘Reappraising Psychological Contracting’, International Studies of Management and Organization, 28, 1, 30–63. Steers, R. M. (1977), ‘Antecedents and Outcomes of Organizational Commitment’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 22, 46–56. Suliman, A. M. and Iles, P. A. (2000), ‘The Multi-dimensional Nature of Organisational Commitment in a Non-Western Context’, Journal of Management Development, 19, 1, 71–83. Syrett, M. (1994), ‘Through Thick and Thin’, Asian Business, 30, 12, 26–30. Tan, S. K. and Akhtar, S. (1998), ‘Organizational Commitment and Experienced Burnout: an Exploratory Study from a Chinese Cultural Perspective’, International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 6, 4, 310–33. Tannenbaum, S. I., Mathieu, J. E., Salas, E. and Cannon-Bowers, J. A. (1991), ’Meeting Trainees’ Expectations: The Influence of Training Fulfillment on the Development of Commitment, SelfEfficacy, and Motivation’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 6, 759–69. Tracey, J. B., Tannenbaum, S. L. and St.Kavanaugh, M. J. (1995), ‘Applying Training Skills on the Job: the Importance of the Work Environment’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 2, 239–52. Tung, R. L. (1982), ‘Selection and Training Procedures of U.S., European, and Japanese Multinations’, California Management Reviews, 25, 57–71. Webster (1992), New Webster’s Dictionary and Thesaurus of the English Languange (Danbury: Lexicon Publications). Williams, L. J. and Hazer, J. T. (1986), ‘Antecedents and Consequences of Satisfaction and Commitment in Turnover Models. A Reanalysis Using Latent Variable Structural Equation Methods’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 219–31.

