Investigating the Impact of Communication Satisfaction on Organizational Commitment: A Practical Approach to Increase Employees’ Loyalty

Abstract

Recently, employees are seen as important assets of organizations in which the majority of them cannot deal with employees properly or even underestimate their importance. One of the essential issues is increasing employees’ organizational commitment, which in turn minimizes customers’ switching behaviour and the way organizations usually communicate appropriately their internal market strategy. In order to have a better vision about such issue, this study is planned to investigate the impact of communicational satisfaction on organizational commitment. A variety of communicational satisfaction dimensions are taken into analysis; such dimensions include: communication climate, relationship to superiors, organizational integration, media quality, horizontal and informal communication, organizational perspective, relationship with subordinates and the personal feedback. In addition, three factors of organizational commitment were taken into considerations that are affective commitment, continuance commitment and normative commitment. The study followes the qualitative approach in collecting data from employees of Yahoo- Maktoob office in Amman/Jordan. Eight sub-hypotheses are developed and tested accordingly to conclude with the fact that communicational satisfaction has a significant and direct impact on organizational commitment.

Full text

International Journal of Marketing Studies; Vol. 9, No. 2; 2017
ISSN 1918-719X E-ISSN 1918-7203
Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education
113
Investigating the Impact of Communication Satisfaction on
Organizational Commitment: A Practical Approach to Increase
Employees’ Loyalty
Ghalia Ammari1, Barween Al Kurdi2, Muhammad Alshurideh1, Bader Obeidat1, Al-Hareth Abu Hussien2 &
Ala’aldin Alrowwad1
1 School of Business, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan
2 Marketing Department, Faculty of Business, Amman Arab University, Amman, Jordan
Correspondence: Muhammad Turki Alshurideh, Marketing Department, School of Business, University of
Jordan, Amman, Jordan. E-mail: m.alshurideh@ju.edu.jo
Received: June 20, 2015 Accepted: February 27, 2017 Online Published: March 8, 2017
doi:10.5539/ijms.v9n2p113 URL: http://doi.org/10.5539/ijms.v9n2p113
Abstract
Recently, employees are seen as important assets of organizations in which the majority of them cannot deal with
employees properly or even underestimate their importance. One of the essential issues is increasing employees’
organizational commitment, which in turn minimizes customers’ switching behaviour and the way organizations
usually communicate appropriately their internal market strategy. In order to have a better vision about such
issue, this study is planned to investigate the impact of communicational satisfaction on organizational
commitment. A variety of communicational satisfaction dimensions are taken into analysis; such dimensions
include: communication climate, relationship to superiors, organizational integration, media quality, horizontal
and informal communication, organizational perspective, relationship with subordinates and the personal
feedback. In addition, three factors of organizational commitment were taken into considerations that are
affective commitment, continuance commitment and normative commitment. The study followes the qualitative
approach in collecting data from employees of Yahoo- Maktoob office in Amman/Jordan. Eight sub-hypotheses
are developed and tested accordingly to conclude with the fact that communicational satisfaction has a
significant and direct impact on organizational commitment.
Keywords: communication satisfaction, employees’ loyalty, Jordan, organizational commitment
1. Introduction
Nowadays, communication plays an important role in achieving the goals and the missions of different
organizations, since effective communication between stakeholders during service encounters helps to solve
various potential problems inherent in the exchange of information and knowledge (Moorman et al., 1993;
Shannak et al., 2010; Masa’deh, 2012; Almajali et al., 2016). However, Rousseau (1998) observes that since
careers, in recent years, are described by changability rather than stability especially within the high competitive
environments in the surrounding organizations, employees are unlikely and strongly identified with their
employers. From an organization’s perspective, this trend is disturbing because weak organizational commitment
may mean that employees’ productivity is less than optimal (Meyer et al., 1989; Vratskikh et al., 2016). Then by
effective management communicational methods, opportunity for learning and work schedule flexibility
(Rousseau, 1998), organizations can enhance their position among competitors, depending on the strong
commitment of employees.
Communication is a critical interpersonal process consisting of a repetitive cycle of initiating, maintaining and
terminating informational exchange (Applbaum, 1973) through verbal and nonverbal methods occurring at the
actual IT service encounter (Sundaram et al., 2000; Altamony et al., 2012). Choosing the right communicational
medium, the quality of interaction and the trust formed between service providers and clients at the service
encounter are critical criteria used in evaluating further commitment to the relationship (Mattila et al., 2002;
Obeidat et al., 2012).
Advances in informational and communicational technology have led to dramatic changes in the structure of
industry and business environments (Michael et al., 2002; Obeidat et al., 2016). In order to compete efficiently in

ijms.ccsenet.org International Journal of Marketing Studies Vol. 9, No. 2; 2017
114
the market, organizations need to take advantage of communicational technologies, in order to support the
internal operations, satisfy the customers’ needs by producing customized products and services depending on
their preferences. This research is intended to examine the effect of good communication on organizational
commitment, knowing that increasing the level of commitment can enhance the organizational position which in
turn leads to higher revenues and lower costs as a result of increasing both employees and customers’ loyalty and
minimizing switching behavior.
1.1 Research Problem and Importance
The large development of informational technology gives Internet organizations many opportunities that support
their products and improve the quality of their services, yet some of these organizations either cannot achieve
high revenues or cannot use their technologies efficiently within their internal activities. This may be due to
some reasons like: the nature of different communicational channels and methods by which the top management
can reach its employees within the organization, the rapid development of technologies, the lack of
understanding which informational technologies are necessary and suitable for the organization, and the
changing and demanding environment surrounding the organization. Accordingly, organizations have started to
think deeply about creating methods and ways that can help to them reach their employees on both the
organizational and personal levels around the globe regardless their physical location or their cultural
availablility in different countries. If they employ global strategies in multinational organizations to recognize
their brands, and to deliver the customers’ needs and wants, they will improve their revenues.
This research aims at answering two main questions: First, What is the relationship between communicational
satisfaction and organizational commitment? Second, how can communicational channels improve the
commitment and loyalty of employees in internet organizations? Based on the previous questions, the study
needs to investigate how communication affects employees who witnessed the differences in two organizations
which are Maktoob and Yahoo! before and after the acquisition. Maktoob and Yahoo! organizational acquisition
process took place in 2010 and this study tends to have a look at the implications of different al channels and
methods and test their effect on the commitment of employees in addition to overall performance. Moreover, this
research tries to provide different tools and methods which can be used by Internet firms to develop and enhance
their communicational processes which in turn play an essentialrole inenhancing organizational commitment,
and their subsequent implications on performance, gaining profits, and establishing a strong brand image among
competitors.
Rousseau (1998) has suggested two ways through which organizations may strengthen employees’
organizational commitment today. First, organizations can enhance employees’ perceptions of organizational
membership. Second, organizations can demonstrate to employees that they are cared for and valued by their
employers. Significantly, these organizations in recent years have been struggling to find effective ways to
enhance employees’ organizational commitment (Mitchell et al., 2001). Thus, the importance of this study can be
summarized as building strong evidence regarding the communicational channels which internally can influence
organizational commitment, so internet firms can benefit from such techniques to add value in one way, and to
enhance and improve the relationships between different parties within the whole organization. In addition, the
review of literature explores how previous studies did not focus on the relationship between the two variables
which are: communication and commitment. Keeping in mind that this research provides recommendations and
suggestions that can be used in future studies to create a distinctive competitive advantage based on the internal
capabilities and competences and to gain bigger market share and to expand in new markets. To sum up, the goal
of this research is to determine the effect of communicational satisfaction on organizational commitment and to
provide a deep understanding of the communicational management process depending on the team structure used
in multinational organizations.
2. Literature Review
This part provides a deep theoretical analysis of the fields of communication satisfaction and organizational
commitment.
2.1 Communicational Satisfaction
Organizations and institutional communication professions have been continually exploring effective
measurement metrics for their communication initiatives, focusing on how communication practices can be
effectively linked to improved financial performance at the organizational level (Broom & Dozier, 1983; Menget
al., 2012; Masa’deh et al., 2015). On the other hand, a research by Yammarino et al. (1988) who studied the
relationship between the communication among the employees of the organization and work importance, like the
effort spent by them, and the level of job satisfaction. Garnett & Kouzmin (1997, cited Lorch, 1978) stated that

ijms.ccsenet.org International Journal of Marketing Studies Vol. 9, No. 2; 2017
115
“perhaps nothing is more important to successful administration than successful communication” (p. 16). The
organizational context in which organizations communicate is scarcely considered as is illustrated by Pandey &
Garnett (2006). Keeping in mind that organizations deal with external environment, the continuous changes
made to information and communication societies and the increasing globalization of the economy result in a
growing complexity in economic and social systems. Consequently, this may lead to incomplete information and
uncertainty regarding possible courses of action, which then require increasingly trustworthy action on the part
of individuals, institutions and organizations. From that corner, the importance of communication appears.
Communication is related to technological methods used; like sophistication of the communication technologies,
ease of use, number of communication options, etc. Examples of technology types used in communication
include e-mail, voice mail, audio/video conferencing, and web-based ordering. In the internet organizations, the
online communication generally refers to the computer-mediated exchange of messages between sender and
receiver; whether it is between managers and employees, or between employees themselves, and the term is used
synonymously with the term computer-mediated communication.
Communication is an essential concept in organization and management theory (Thompkins, 1987) and emerged
from scholars of organizational communication (Goldhaber, 1993; Jablin et al., 1987). Within the same context,
communication audits consistently show that communication climate, communication with supervisors (Madlock,
2010), and personal feedback are the dimensions, most strongly, correlated with overall communication
satisfaction (Alshurideh, 2014; Pincus, 1986). Many scholars such as Holland et al. (1999), Alshurideh &
Al-dmour (2008), Al-Duhaish et al. (2014) suggested that employing communication tools such as reference
groups, newsletters, monthly bulletins or weekly meetings are used to keep users informed about the
implementation of many project progresses. Thus, the role of communication is an important factor in
understanding the value of intangible organizational assets (Ritter, 2003). Communication within organizations
is linked with higher levels of performance and service (Tourish & Hargie, 2009), generating communication
capital (Malmelin, 2007), and social capital (Lee, 2009; Alshurideh et al., 2015), are grounded in organizational
relationships. Hence, it is important for managers to be able to assess internal communication.
A study conducted by Postmes et al. (2001) indicated that organizational communication is regarded as a means
of creating conditions for commitment, while other studies have shown the importance of communication for
perceptions of jobs, work units, and supervisors. Recently minimal attention has been given to what employees
would like their organizations to communicate. As Chen et al. (2006, p. 242) mentioned, “a review of the
research on organizational processes concluded that member satisfaction with organizational communication
practices has been ignored”. But Goldhaber et al. (1978) found that an employee’s primary needs include more
information about personal, job-related matters, information about organizational decision making, and a greater
opportunity to voice complaints and evaluate superiors. According to the consultancy, Watson (2010), “most
firms do well at communicating about the business; however, less than half of firms report they are effective at
communicating to employees regarding how their actions affect the customer or increase productivity”(p. 9). In
order to satisfy the users, organizations should involve keeping customers happy both in day-to-day interactions
and in more global and long-term perspective (Hunt, 1977; Johnson & Fornell, 1991).
2.2 Organizational Commitment
Organizational commitment has been extensively studied in Western management research and remains of
substantial importance to managers, given the meta-analytic evidence of its association with withdrawal
behaviors such as absenteeism, intentions to quit, and turnover, as well as higher levels of organizational
citizenship behaviour (Mathieu & Zajac, 1990; Meyer et al., 2002). Organizational satisfaction and commitment
have been identified as a precedent to the construction of job’s satisfaction (Alshurideh et al., 2010; Alshurideh
et al., 2012; Alshurideh et al., 2014; Al-dweeri et al.,2017), organizational citizenship behavior (Alshurideh et al.,
2015), organizational performance (Alkalha et al., 2012), perceived organizational and management support
(Shannak et al., 2012; Zu’bi et al., 2012), organizational justice (Laschinger, 2004), productivity (Mathieu &
Zajac, 1990), service quality (ELSamen & Alshurideh, 2012), and job performance (Masa’deh et al., 2016).
Commitment depends upon the nature of job and the organizational context. If employees have high
commitment levels, they will work harder, and perform better than those with lower levels of commitment. On
the other hand, if employees have low levels of commitment, they may leave the organization and cause high
turnover. In terms of encouraging hard work, the practices of management within organization can highly affect
the level of commitment among employees. The changes in the workforce have a significant effect on
commitment; for example the downsizing strategies, and hiring employees with different values to the
organization, all these practices may lead to lower commitment levels (D’Amat et al., 2008). When there are

ijms.ccsenet.org International Journal of Marketing Studies Vol. 9, No. 2; 2017
116
many advantages associated with high commitment levels of employees, both Kwantes (2007) and Alshurideh et
al. (2012) pointed out that organizational commitment can increase: human capital, social capital, the retention of
knowledge in organizations and transfer of knowledge and experience in organizations’ units.
The individual level linkages between organizational commitment and turnover and between organizational
commitment and performance are strongly supported in analysis (Cooper-Hakim & Viswesvaran, 2005; Riketta,
2002). Al Kahtani (2013 cited Michaels et al., 2001) discussed the importance of organization commitment that
is usually shaped by business leaders whose responsibilities are mainly concerned with attracting, motivating and
retaining employees especially those who are seen as key talents in retaining customers (Alshurideh, 2016, 2016,
2016) and efficient in applying ethical business and marketing practices (Alshurideh et al., 2016).
In order to build high organizational commitment among employees, the top management of organizations must
build strategies and work have practices to reinforce one another in order to produce such settings (Hom et al.,
2009). Individuals with higher levels of organizational commitment have a sense of belonging and identification
with the organization that increases their desire to pursue the organization’s goals and activities, and their
willingness to remain a part of the organization (Meyer & Allen, 1991; Mowday et al., 1982). Furthermore,
organizational commitment continues to be valued by organizational leaders (Morrow, 2011) despite the fact that
organizations are currently operating in a historical era no longer characterized by long term employment (e.g.,
Cappelli, 2000). In addition, downsizing and the emergence of a new generation of employees have been
identified as possible explanations for lower commitment levels (D’Amato & Herzfeldt, 2008). Literature revew
has demonstrated that employees’ commitment to the organization has a variety of important organizational
consequences. Several studies report negative correlations between organizational commitment and both
employee intention to leave the organization and actual turnover. Additionally, literature revew indicates that
employees with strong affective commitment to the organization work harder at their jobs and perform better
than those with lower levels of affective commitment.
Many researches focused on studying organizational commitment. As a case in point, a study by Akroyd et al.
(2009) examines the predictive value of selected work rewards (task involvement, task significance, general
working conditions, supervision and salary) on organizational commitment. It comes at a conclusion that all of
the above variables had a significant and positive impact on organizational commitment, with salary accounting
for the smallest change in the variance of commitment. Another study provides valuable information about how
organizational commitment affects relevant outcomes, e.g., employees’ turnover intentions, organizational
citizenship behavior (OCB), and job satisfaction (Mathieu & Zajac, 1990; Meyer et al., 2002; Alshurideh et al.,
2015). Some studies give a hint about the link between organizational commitment and performance; however,
several meta-analyses have shown that this link is rather weak (Cohen, 1991; Mathieu & Zajac, 1990; Randall,
1990; Riketta, 2002). Additionally, some studies suggest that commitment develops even before an employee
enters a company (O’Reilly & Caldwell, 1981), or at a very early stage in a new job position (Porter et al., 1976).
In the rationalization process, organizational commitment in turn causes positive attitudes toward the job (Bem,
1967; Salancik & Pfeffer, 1978).
Giving the fact that organizational commitment is one of the main reasons for these employees to stay
(Hausknecht et al., 2009). However, in large organizations or after mergers or acquisitions, employees’
commitment to the organization as a whole may be questionable (Riketta & Van Dick, 2005; Van Dick & Riketta,
2006). As a result, organizational commitment has been conceptualized in terms of the strength of an employee’s
involvement in and identification with an organization (Mowday et al., 1982). Depending on the attitudinal
approach, commitment is a positive feeling toward the organization which depends on what employees
experience on the job and how they perceive the organization (Mowday et al., 1982).
The organizational commitment concept emerged from studies exploring employee-organization linkages.
Previous research has viewed that organizational commitment continues to be a powerful attitudinal response in
employees (Scott-Ladd et al., 2006). In fact, Rathi & Rastogi’s (2009) literature review on organizational
commitment and found that it has potential to predict organizational outcomes such as an increase in job
performance, reduced turn over and withdrawal cognitions, lower absenteeism rate, and increased organizational
behaviour. In this research, the focus is on the study of Meyer & Allen (1991) as they proposed the
three-component model, which distinguishes affective, continuous, and normative commitment. An employee
will remain with an organization because he/she wants to affective commitment, has to have continuous
commitment, or feels compelled to do so (normative commitment).
2.3 Communication Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment
Communication is the extent to which organizations provide their employees with organization-related

ijms.ccsenet.org International Journal of Marketing Studies Vol. 9, No. 2; 2017
117
information, such as information about changes in organizational policies and procedures, financial results,
employee and group successes, and customer feedback (Vandenberg et al., 1999). Construction of organizational
commitment has been researched extensively. Some of these studies have demonstrated the relationships
between commitment and several other organizational variables:, such as: (a) absenteeism (Steers, 1977; Larson
& Fukami, 1984); (b) leadership style (Morris & Sherman, 1981); (c) job performance (Mowday et al., 1974;
Steers, 1977); (d) turnover (Angel & Perry, 1981); and (e) communication openness (Argyris in Housel &
Warren, 1977). In fact, there is a lack of research on the relationship between organizational communication and
commitment and any relationship that may exist between these two variables is more implied than demonstrated
(Putti et al., 1990). According to Downs et al. (1995), few studies have supported the relationship between
communication satisfaction and organizational commitment.
Keyton (2005) defined organizational communication as “a complex and continuous process through which
organizational members create, maintain, and change the organization” (p. 33). Based on this definition,
communication has been linked to organizational commitment of continuous development in several ways. Allen
(1992), for example, found that, especially in organizations involved in total quality management,
communication variables explained up to 59 percent of the variance in organizational commitment. Ridder (2004)
found task-related information to be important for organizational commitment, while McDonald & Gandz (1991)
suggested that commitment was especially important for the human relations within the organization.
Organization interrelated information can be bridged to the whole employees via a set of channels such as group
meetings, group leaders, brochures and newsletters, managers, company websites, and organisation mission
statements and objectives (Argenti, 1998; Soupata, 2005). Accordingly, these methods can affect organizational
commitment, because employees feel they have a sense of ownership. In addition, knowing more about the
internal procedures, will increase the employees’ attachment to their employers because they will see themselves
as core members, and contribute to the organization’s goals. Some researchers have traditionally divided the
organizational commitment interrelated concepts or components known as: the attitudinal and the behavioral
commitment (McCarthy et al., 2013, p. 52 Cited Kuvass, 2003). Attitudinal commitment represents the strength
of an individual’s loyalty to the organization and emphasizes his/her identification and involvement with it.
Behavioural commitment, on the other hand, reflects the process whereby individuals link themselves to an
organization, because of the costs involved in leaving it. Keyton (2005) defines organizational communication as
“a complex and continuous process through which organizational members create, maintain, and change the
organization. Managers usually play an important role in this process, as they have to provide a bigger picture of
the organization and the environment around it (Robson & Tourish, 2005). The centrality of managers in the
process suggests that there is a link between managerial communication and attitudes about the organization, so
the subordinates can create attitudes from the messages they receive from the managers, and behave according to
the information they have. Therefore, one of the consequences associated with such behaviour is, the
commitment of employees to the organization.
Organizational communications, commitment, and job satisfaction are all variables that affect organizational
performance, so poor organizational communication has been found to lower organizational commitment
(Kramer, 1999; Rodwell et al., 1998). The effect of organizational communication on the levels of commitment
between employees has attracted the attention of some researchers (Goris et al., 2000; Pettit et al., 1997; Stuart,
1999). As Stuart (1999) argued, communication construction can affect empowerment of employees, which in
turn affects organizational commitment. Additionally, organizational commitment has three basic components:
identification with the organization’s goals and values; involvement in the organization through effort; and
loyalty to the organization (Al-Meer, 1989), so it’s important to link the effort of communicating the goals,
values, policies, and the waybehined dealing with customers with superiors and subordinates across the
organization, and the overall enhancement of the levels of commitment among employees. Although it is hard to
manage employees’ commitment (Gould-Williams, 2003), communicational methods play a significant role in
enhancing commitment levels, through the Human Resource Management (HRM) practices, and to ensure the
future vision and the strategy for the organization. Consequently, increasing the ownership practices by
increasing the involvement of employees in the decision making process, and through the delegation of some
tasks to them and accounting them responsible for the actions they make, will affect overall organizational
commitment. On the other hand, communication satisfaction can be seen as a specialty and there is a need to
determine the skills and knowledge that should be available inside the firm. The knowledge-skill attributes were
identified in the first round of Delphi’s study such as knowledge of multiple languages, writing and editing, basic
psychology, organizing events, communicating and understanding different cultures, understanding of various
media (online, video, print, etc.), understanding of research techniques, change management, project

ijms.ccsen
e
managem
e
organizati
o
action rel
e
To su m u
p
and organ
i
to the ob
j
relationsh
i
3. Theore
t
The mod
e
hypothesi
z
discussed
organizati
o
explained
commitm
e
4. H
y
pot
h
Dependin
g
H1
0
: The
r
commitm
e
To te st t
h
hypothesi
s
H1a
0
: Th
commitm
e
H1
b0
: Th
e
commitm
e
H1
c0
: Th
e
commitm
e
H1d0: Th
e
H1e0: T
h
organizati
o
H1f0: Th
e
commitm
e
H1g0: Th
e
commitm
e
H1h0: T
h
commitm
e
e
t.org
e
nt, marketin
g
o
nal commit
m
e
vant” to the o
r
p
, while a nu
m
i
zational com
m
j
ectives of th
i
i
ps among stu
d
t
ical Framew
o
e
l illustrated
z
ed linkage i
n
p
reviously,
t
o
nal commit
m
in more de
e
nt.
h
eses
g
on the theor
e
r
e is no statis
t
e
nt.
h
e relationshi
p
s
is further div
ere is no sta
t
e
nt.
e
re is no stati
s
e
nt.
e
re is no stat
i
e
nt.
e
re is no statis
h
ere is no sta
t
o
nal commit
m
e
re is no stat
i
e
nt.
e
re is no stati
s
e
nt.
h
ere is no
s
e
nt.
I
g
, working wit
h
m
ent is a “psy
c
r
ganization (B
m
ber of studie
s
m
itment, there
i
s study, the
d
ied variables
o
r
k
in the above
n
dicates that
c
t
he problem
m
ent, and imp
r
tails earlier,
e
tical framew
o
t
ically signifi
c
p
between co
m
ided into the
f
t
istically sign
s
tically signifi
c
i
stically signi
f
tically signifi
c
t
istically signi
m
ent.
i
stically signi
f
s
tically signifi
c
s
tatistically s
i
I
nternational Jo
u
h
media, bran
c
hological s
t
a
b
entein et al.,
2
s
exist to inve
s
is no evidenc
e
research tries
as shown in t
h
Figure 1. The
figure is c
o
c
ommunicatio
n
statement ar
g
r
ove the level
communicati
o
o
rk above the
m
c
ant relations
h
m
munication
s
f
ollowing sub-
h
ificant relatio
c
ant relations
h
f
icant relation
s
c
ant relationsh
ficant relatio
n
f
icant relation
s
c
ant relations
h
i
gnificant rel
a
u
rnal of Market
i
118
n
ding and desi
g
b
ilizing or obl
i
2
005, p. 358).
s
tigate the rel
a
e
on the said r
to contribut
e
h
e study frame
theoretical fr
a
o
nstructed ac
c
n satisfaction
g
ues that co
m
of loyalty of
o
n satisfactio
n
m
ain hypothes
i
h
ip between
c
s
atisfaction a
n
h
ypotheses:
nship betwee
n
h
ip between t
h
ship between
ip between m
e
n
ship betwee
n
s
hip between
h
ip between r
e
a
tionship bet
w
i
ng Studies
g
n. Moreover,
i
ging force th
a
a
tionship bet
w
elationship in
e
to the exist
i
work below.
a
mewor
k
c
ording to th
e
is linked to
m
munication
employees in
n
has a pos
i
s is as follow
s
c
ommunicatio
n
n
d organizatio
n
communic
a
h
e relationshi
p
organization
a
e
dia quality a
n
n
horizontal a
n
organization
a
e
lationship wi
t
w
een person
a
communicati
a
t binds indivi
w
een communi
c
Jordan. Thus,
i
ng literature
e
objectives
o
organization
a
satisfaction
h
the organizat
i
itive impact
s
:
n
satisfaction
nal commitm
e
a
tion climate
p
to superiors
a
l integration
n
d organizatio
n
n
d informal c
a
l perspective
t
h subordinate
a
l feedback
a
Vo l . 9, No . 2 ;
on satisfactio
n
duals to cour
s
cations satisf
a
and with refe
r
by explainin
g
o
f this study.
a
l commitmen
t
h
as an impa
c
i
on. In additi
o
on organiza
t
and organiza
t
e
nt, the first
and organiza
t
and organiza
t
and organiza
t
n
al commitme
n
ommunicatio
n
and organiza
t
and organiza
t
a
nd organiza
t
2017
n
and
es of
a
ction
r
ence
g
the
The
t
. As
c
t on
o
n, as
ional
t
ional
main
t
ional
t
ional
ional
n
t.
n
and
t
ional
ional
t
ional

ijms.ccsenet.org International Journal of Marketing Studies Vol. 9, No. 2; 2017
119
5. Type of Research
To achieve the objectives of the study, hypotheses are developed and tested via using comparative and
quantitative research design. In quantitative research, sampling is typically representative and randomized, to
ensure that results can be generalized from a sample to a population and also that participants with certain
characteristics are adequately represented in the sample. In contrast, sampling in qualitative studies is typically
purposeful, with the goal of intentionally sampling cases that can best help the investigator understand the
central problem under study (Jane Forman et al., 2008). Yet, due to the fact that population in this study is small,
the whole population will be used to test the hypothesis above.
5.1 Questionnaire Design
A Questionnaire was used to test the hypotheses, so a quantitative research design was implemented since such
type of research’s measurement provides the fundamental connection between empirical observation and
mathematical expression of quantitative relationships, where Yahoo-Maktoob is the company under study. This
part of the questionnaire contains five questions. Each question addresses one of the respondent’s demographic
characteristic such as gender, age, academic degree, experience years, and the management level.
5.2 Population and Sampling
Saunders et al. (2011) explained that the choice of sampling techniques and sample size depended on the
feasibility of collecting data which will lead to answering the main research questions, as well as addressing it is
objectives as a matter that it is also influenced by the availability of resources. They explained: “All your choices
will be dependent on your ability to gain access to organizations” (p. 235). Because this study is conducted to
examine the relationship between communication satisfaction and organizational commitment in Yahoo!
Maktoob, the population consists of all the employees of Yahoo! Maktoob office in Amman/ Jordan, which are:
107 employees (2012). Based on that, total of (107) employee have accepted to cooperate with this study. Such
number representes the successful questionnaires that are suitable for the analysis.
5.3 Validity, Reliability and Piloting
Reliability is the degree to which an instrument produces the same results with repeated administration
(Beanland et al., 1999; Polit & Hungler, 1999; Considine et al., 2005). A high level of reliability is important
when the effect of an intervention on knowledge is measured using a pre-test/post-test design. Concepts related
to reliability are consistency, precision, stability, equivalence and internal consistency (Beanland et al., 1999).
Regarding how to measure reliability; it can be measured using correlation coefficients or reliability coefficients
(Beanland et al., 1999; Polit & Hungler, 1999; Considine et al., 2005). The data used for reliability and validity
analysis in this study are typically obtained during a pilot study. Such ample, as a materr of fact, is a
representative of the eventual target population in terms of range and level of ability. Moreover, it is employed to
ensure the most effective and understandable wording method and to determine whether the data collection
procedures are effective and successful. The initial draft of questionnaire has been prepared and initial data have
been gathered from a group of 25 employees (a sample of all the employees) who work in different departments
and in different managerial levels. In addition, notes and feedback about the clarity of the questions and how
employees understood each question they were provided with, and the questions that were not clear enough to
the employees were re-written.
6. Data Collection and Analysis
The questionnaire was intended to be self-completed. In a sense that this approach entailed in-person delivery of
hand copies of the questionnaires to respondents and follow up until collecting the responses. The first part of the
questionnaire is concerned with five employees’ demographic characteristics which are: gender, age, academic
degree, experience years, and management level. Results explores that about 62% of study respondents are males
and the rest are females. Regarding the sample’s age and educational distribution, results indicate that the
majority of study sample ages (91.6%) are less than 35 years old and (81.3%) are holding Bachelor degrees.
Regarding the respondents’ experience longevity, results show that 62.6% of respondents have less than 5 years
experience and 26.6% of them have from 5 to less than 10 years experience. With-in the same line, about 84% of
study respondents are employees and the rest are managers.
7. Inferential Statistics: Hypotheses Testing Results
Simple regression and multiple regression, alongside with other statistical tests are utilized to accomplish the
hypotheses testing objective. Results of hypotheses testing are further discussed and analyzed to come up with
conclusions and results of the research.

ijms.ccsenet.org International Journal of Marketing Studies Vol. 9, No. 2; 2017
120
7.1 The First Main Hypothesis—H10
H10: There is no statistically significant relationship between communication satisfaction and organizational
commitment.
A crucial step in hypothesis testing is to determine the significance level (α); the maximum allowable type I error.
Often 0.05 is used, and it is considered to be acceptable for this research. Thus the decision rule is to reject the
null hypothesis if the ρ-value <= 0.05. As listed in the table below, the ρ-value 0.000 < 0.05. Thus, the implied
decision is to reject H10.
Table 1. Communication satisfaction regressed against organizational commitment—model summary
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate
1 .759a .576 .572 .737
a. Predictors: (Constant), Communication-Satisfaction
Table 2. Communication satisfaction regressed against organizational commitment—Anova
Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1 Regression 77.527 1 77.527 142.859 .000a
Residual 56.982 105 .543
Total 134.508 106
Table 3. Communication satisfaction regressed against organizational commitment—coefficients
Model
Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients
t Sig. B Std. Error Beta
1 (Constant) 1.055 .315 3.350 .001
Communication Satisfaction .774 .065 .759 11.952 .000
The correlation coefficient R= 0.759 indicates that there is a positive correlation between communication
satisfaction and organizational commitment. This means that the independent variable and dependent variable
change in the same direction. The correlation coefficient is a gauge of how well the model predicts the observed
data. In terms of the variability of organizational commitment accounted for the model, R square represents this
variability. The value of R square 0.576, indicates the amount of variations in the organizational commitment
variable that is accounted by the fitted model. It plots that 57.6% of the variability of organizational commitment
has been explained by communication satisfaction. The adjusted R square tells us about the generalizability of
the model. It allows us to generalize the results taken from the respondents to the whole population. In this case
it equals 0.572. It is noticed that the adjusted R square has almost the same value as R square. If the adjusted R
square is excluded from R square (0.576 - 0.572= 0.004), a value of 0.004can be found which shrinkage means
that if the model has been fitted when the whole population participates rather than those responded in the study.
The next step is the analysis of variance (ANOVA) that allows to statistically test the null hypothesis. Looking at
the ANOVA analysis, it can be concluded that F- ratio for these data is 142.859 which is significant at ρ < 0.05
(Alpha in this case equals sig= 0.000).The result shows that there is less than a 0.05% chance that an F- ratio of
this value would happen by chance alone. Therefore, it can be concluded that there is statistically significant
relationship between communications satisfaction and organizational commitment and thus reject the null
hypothesis and accept the alternative hypothesis. Finally, communications satisfaction has a statistically
significant relationship with organizational commitment, where hypothesis 1 has been tested.
7.2 The First Sub Hypothesis—H1a0
Since the hypotheses H2 to H9 imply exploring linear relationships between the predictor (independent) variable
that is represented by eight dimensions and the criterion (dependent) variable that is represented by three
dimensions. Multiple Regression is the statistical technique used to test it.
H1a0: There is no statistically significant relationship between communication climate and organizational
commitment.

ijms.ccsenet.org International Journal of Marketing Studies Vol. 9, No. 2; 2017
121
Table 4. Communication climate regressed against organizational commitment—model summary
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate
1 .727a .529 .496 .800
Table 5. Communication climate regressed against organizational commitment—Avova
Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1 Regression 71.177 7 10.168 15.895 .000a
Residual 63.331 99 .640
Total 134.508 106
Table 6. Communication climate regressed against organizational commitment—coefficients
Model
Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients
t Sig.
Collinearity Statistics
B Std. Error Beta Tolerance VIF
1 (Constant) 1.116 .392 2.847 .005
Communication Climate1 .082 .062 .119 1.316 .191 .579 1.728
Communication Climate2 .163 .079 .212 2.054 .043 .448 2.230
Communication Climate3 .058 .070 .080 .825 .411 .509 1.966
Communication Climate4 .114 .080 .150 1.427 .157 .428 2.335
Communication Climate5 -.013 .044 -.021 -.285 .776 .890 1.123
Communication Climate6 .257 .073 .327 3.547 .001 .560 1.786
Communication Climate7 .056 .063 .078 .884 .379 .612 1.635
The adjusted R square value indicates that the model has accounted for 49.6% of the variance in the criterion
variable; organizational commitment. The standardized Beta Coefficient reported in the table above give a
measure of the contribution of each variable to the model. Beta values indicate that these are all significant
variables in the model. In addition, it has been noted that Communication Climate item (number 5) “Extent to
which communication practices in Yahoo-Maktoob which are adaptable to emergencies” has the largest impact
on organizational commitment. Regarding the VIF value, it should not be higher than 10.0, which is the case in
the data in hand.
7.3 The Second Sub Hypothesis—H1b0
H1b0: There is no statistically significant relationship between the relationship to superiors and organizational
commitment.
Table 7. The relationship to superiors regressed against organizational commitment—model summary
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate
1 .591a .349 .324 .926
Table 8. The relationship to superiors regressed against organizational commitment—ANOVA
Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1 Regression 46.971 4 11.743 13.683 .000a
Residual 87.537 102 .858
Total 134.508 106

ijms.ccsenet.org International Journal of Marketing Studies Vol. 9, No. 2; 2017
122
Table 9. The relationship to superiors regressed against organizational commitment—coefficients
Model
Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients
t Sig.
Collinearity Statistics
B Std. Error Beta Tolerance VIF
1 (Constant) 2.833 .289 9.812 .000
Relationship To Superiors1 .121 .083 .186 1.457 .148 .393 2.545
Relationship To Superiors2 -.078 .098 -.120 -.792 .430 .277 3.616
Relationship To Superiors3 .175 .082 .295 2.120 .036 .329 3.042
Relationship To Superiors4 .183 .077 .293 2.396 .018 .426 2.347
7.4 The Third Sub Hypothesis—H1c0
H1c0: There is no statistically significant relationship between organizational integration and organizational
commitment.
Table 10. Organizational integration regressed against organizational commitment—model summary
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate
1 .711a .505 .480 .812
Table 11. Organizational integration regressed against organizational commitment—ANOVA
Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1 Regression 67.917 5 13.583 20.602 .000a
Residual 66.591 101 .659
Total 134.508 106
Table 12. Organizational integration regressed against organizational commitment—coefficients
Model
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t Sig.
Collinearity Statistics
B Std. Error Beta Tolerance VIF
1 (Constant) 2.050 .300 6.826 .000
Organizational Integration1 .094 .073 .131 1.302 .196 .484 2.066
Organizational Integration2 -.049 .068 -.069 -.721 .472 .534 1.874
Organizational Integration3 .156 .074 .211 2.105 .038 .486 2.056
Organizational Integration4 .258 .074 .376 3.499 .001 .423 2.362
Organizational Integration5 .111 .064 .172 1.748 .084 .504 1.982
The adjusted R square value indicates that the model has accounted for 48% of the variance in the criterion
variable; organizational commitment. The standardized Beta Coefficient reported in the table above give a
measure of the contribution of each variable to the model. Beta values indicate that these are significant variables
in the model. And that item 4 (Information about the requirements of my job) has the largest impact on the
organizational commitment. Regarding the VIF value, it should not be higher than 10.0, which is the case in the
data available.
7.5 The Fourth Sub Hypothesis—H1d0
H1d0: There is no statistically significant relationship between media quality and organizational commitment.
Table 13. Media quality regressed against organizational commitment—model summary
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate
1 .668a .446 .429 .851

ijms.ccsenet.org International Journal of Marketing Studies Vol. 9, No. 2; 2017
123
Table 14. Media quality regressed against organizational commitment—ANOVA
Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1 Regression 59.939 3 19.980 27.597 .000a
Residual 74.569 103 .724
Total 134.508 106
Table 15. Media quality regressed against organizational commitment—coefficients
Model
Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients
T Sig.
Collinearity Statistics
B Std. Error Beta Tolerance VIF
1 (Constant) 2.141 .296 7.244 .000
Media Quality1 .280 .082 .392 3.430 .001 .411 2.432
Media Quality2 .097 .088 .134 1.097 .275 .360 2.776
Media Quality3 .153 .063 .231 2.417 .017 .589 1.699
The adjusted R square value indicates that the model has accounted for 42.9% of the variance in the criterion
variable; organizational commitment. The standardized Beta Coefficient reported in the table above give a
measure of the contribution of each variable to the model. Beta values indicate that these are all significant
variables in the model and it can be noted that Media Quality item number 1 of “Extent to which the
organization's communications are interesting and helpful” has the largest impact on organizational commitment.
Regarding the VIF value, it should not be higher than 10.0, which is the case in the data in hand.
7.6 The FifthSub Hypothesis—H1e0
H1e0: There is no statistically significant relationship between horizontal and informal communication and
organizational commitment.
Table 16. Horizontal and informal communication regressed against organizational commitment—model summary
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate
1 .592a .350 .332 .921
Table 17. Horizontal and informal communication regressed against organizational commitment—ANOVA
Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1 Regression 47.138 3 15.713 18.524 .000a
Residual 87.370 103 .848
Total 134.508 106
Table 18. Horizontal and informal communication regressed against organizational commitment—coefficients
Model
Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients
t Sig.
Collinearity Statistics
B Std. Error Beta Tolerance VIF
1 (Constant) 2.234 .376 5.937 .000
Horizontal And Informal
Communication1 .101 .084 .128 1.210 .229 .560 1.785
Horizontal And Informal
Communication2 .102 .075 .125 1.351 .180 .739 1.353
Horizontal And Informal
Communication3 .311 .069 .442 4.495 .000 .651 1.535
The adjusted R square value indicates that the model has accounted for 33.2% of the variance in the criterion
variable; organizational commitment. The standardized Beta Coefficient reported in the table above give a

ijms.ccsenet.org International Journal of Marketing Studies Vol. 9, No. 2; 2017
124
measure of the contribution of each variable to the model. Beta values indicate that these are all significant
variables in the model and horizontal and informal item number 3 of “Extent to which my subordinates feel
responsible for initiating accurate upward communication” has the largest impact on organizational commitment.
Regarding the VIF value, it should not be higher than 10.0, which is the case in the data in hand.
7.7 The Sixth Sub Hypothesis—H1f0
H1f0: There is no statistically significant relationship between organizational perspective and organizational
commitment.
Table 19. Organizational perspective regressed against organizational commitment—model summary
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate
1 .731a .535 .507 .791
Table 20. Organizational perspective regressed against organizational commitment—ANOVA
Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1 Regression 71.925 6 11.988 19.155 .000a
Residual 62.583 100 .626
Total 134.508 106
Table 21. Organizational perspective regressed against organizational commitment—coefficients
Model
Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig. Collinearity Statistics
B Std. Error Beta Tolerance VIF
1 (Constant) 1.840 .286 6.437 .000
Organizational Perspective1 .262 .080 .377 3.271 .001 .350 2.858
Organizational Perspective2 -.088 .069 -.150 -1.283 .202 .343 2.919
Organizational Perspective3 .077 .092 .114 .832 .408 .247 4.046
Organizational Perspective4 .058 .083 .091 .702 .485 .277 3.609
Organizational Perspective5 .056 .070 .085 .805 .423 .416 2.405
Organizational Perspective6 .217 .064 .310 3.392 .001 .558 1.792
The adjusted R square value indicates that the model has accounted for 50.7% of the variance in the criterion
variable; organizational commitment. The standardized Beta Coefficient reported in the table above give a
measure of the contribution of each variable to the model. Beta values indicate that these are significant variables
in the model and organizational perspective item number 1 of “Information about organizational policies and
goals” has the largest impact on organizational commitment. Regarding the VIF value, it should not be higher
than 10.0, which is the case in the data in hand.
7.8 The Seventh Sub Hypothesis—H1g0
H1g0: There is no statistically significant relationship between relationship with subordinate and organizational
commitment.
Table 22. The relationship with subordinate regressed against organizational commitment—model summary
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate
1 .694a .481 .461 .827

ijms.ccsenet.org International Journal of Marketing Studies Vol. 9, No. 2; 2017
125
Table 23. Relationship with subordinate regressed against organizational commitment—Anova
Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1 Regression 64.714 4 16.178 23.644 .000a
Residual 69.794 102 .684
Total 134.508 106
Table 24. Relationship with subordinate regressed against organizational commitment—coefficients
Model
Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients
t Sig.
Collinearity Statistics
B Std. Error Beta Tolerance VIF
1 (Constant) 2.034 .291 6.982 .000
Relationship With Subordinates1 .125 .080 .178 1.578 .118 .401 2.491
Relationship With Subordinates2 .352 .094 .465 3.733 .000 .328 3.048
Relationship With Subordinates3 .059 .082 .083 .715 .476 .382 2.615
Relationship With Subordinates4 .019 .061 .030 .303 .763 .521 1.919
The adjusted R square value indicates that the model has accounted for 46.1% of the variance in the criterion
variable; organizational commitment. The standardized Beta Coefficient reported in the table above give a
measure of the contribution of each variable to the model. Beta values indicate that these are all significant
variables in the modeland therelationship with subordinates item number 2 of “Extent to which my subordinates
are responsive to downward directive communication.” has the largest impact on organizational commitment.
Regarding the VIF value, it should not be higher than 10.0, which is the case in the data in hand.
7.9 The Eighth Sub Hypothesis—H1h0
H1h0: There is no statistically significant relationship between personal feedback and organizational
commitment.
Table 25. The personal feedback regressed against organizational commitment—model summary
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate
1 .611a .373 .348 .909
Table 26. The personal feedback regressed against organizational commitment—Anova
Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1 Regression 50.183 4 12.546 15.175 .000a
Residual 84.325 102 .827
Total 134.508 106
Table 27. The personal feedback regressed against organizational commitment—coefficients
Model
Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients
t Sig.
Collinearity Statistics
B Std. Error Beta Tolerance VIF
1 (Constant) 2.454 .315 7.780 .000
The Personal Feedback1 .169 .094 .246 1.797 .075 .328 3.047
The Personal Feedback2 .108 .092 .146 1.168 .246 .391 2.560
The Personal Feedback3 .007 .085 .010 .079 .937 .407 2.459
The Personal Feedback4 .196 .082 .282 2.394 .019 .442 2.262
The adjusted R square value indicates that the model has accounted for 34.8% of the variance in the criterion
variable; organizational commitment. The standardized Beta Coefficient reported in the table above give a
measure of the contribution of each variable to the model. Beta values indicate that these are all significant

ijms.ccsenet.org International Journal of Marketing Studies Vol. 9, No. 2; 2017
126
variables in the model. In addition, it has been found that the personal feedback item number 4 of “Reports on
how problems in my job are being handled.” has the largest impact on organizational commitment. Regarding
the VIF value, it should not be higher than 10.0, which is the case in the data in hand.
8. Discussion and Summary
The nature of different communicational channels and methods by which the top management can reach its
employees within the organization is one of the most essential aspects of managing the organizing and delivery
of high quality products and services. The success of communication satisfaction is mainly determined through
the communicational methods, processes, and techniques, making them vital for organizational commitment
among employees.
The literature review showed that communication satisfaction has been related positively to organizational
commitment. Allen (1992), for example, found that, especially in organizations involved in total quality
management, communication variables explained up to 59 percent of the variance in organizational commitment.
Ridder (2004) found that having organizational commitment is the function of task-related information that
should be clearly determined, while McDonald & Gandz (1991) denoted that commitment was important for the
human relations inside and outside any organization. As the hypothesized model of this research indicates; that
communication satisfaction has a significant direct impact on organizational commitment. Furthermore, Argenti
(1998) and Soupata (2005) studies’ results showed that organization related information can be distributed to
employees through a variety of channels such as supervisors, group meetings, brochures and newsletters,
company websites, and mission statements. So these methods can affect organizational commitment, because
employees feel as though they have a sense of ownership, and knowing more about the internal procedures, will
increase the employees’ attachments to their employers because they will see themselves as core members, and
contribute to the organization’s goals. Also, it has been shown that communication satisfaction and
organizational commitment is a “psychological stabilizing or obliging force that binds individuals to courses of
action relevant” to the organization (Bentein et al., 2005), and that is what has been found from the statistical
results from the analyses conducted.
The first main hypothesis is tested via using Simple Regression statistical technique; the testing shows that there
is a statistically significant relationship between communication satisfaction (The independent variable) and
organizational commitment (The dependent variable). The correlation coefficient R= 0.759 which is the value
taken from the first table indicated that there is a positive correlation between communication satisfaction and
organizational commitment. This means that independent variables and dependent variable are changeable
within in the same direction. So the null hypothesis was rejected because the significant value resulted from the
AVOVA table was 0.000 which is < the ρ value (0.05). Regarding the sub hypothesis H1a0 (There is no
statistically significant relationship between communication climate and organizational commitment), it was
rejected since it was tested using a multiple regression statistical technique, and the correlation coefficient of R=
0.0727 indicated that there is a positive relationship between communication climate and organizational
commitment. In addition, Beta values indicated that all the values are significant variables in the model. So the
second null hypothesis was also rejected as the significant value < 0.05. The sub hypothesis H1b0 (There is no
statistically significant relationship between the relationship to superiors and organizational commitment). This
hypothesis was tested and the value of correlation coefficient R= 0.591, and the beta values, and the significant
value ρ indicated that the null hypothesis should be rejected and that there is a significant relationship between
the relationship to superiors and organizational commitment.
In the sub hypothesis H1c0 (There is no statistically significant relationship between organizational integration
and organizational commitment), the statistical technique of multiple regression indicates that standardized Beta
Coefficient reported give a measure of the contribution of each variable to the model. Beta values indicated that
these are significant variables in the model, so this null hypothesis was rejected since the correlation coefficient
R= 0.711 indicated that there is a relationship between organizational integration and organizational commitment.
Within the same line, testing the sub hypothesis H1d0 (There is no statistically significant relationship between
media quality and organizational commitment) indicated that the Beta values showed that these are all significant
variables in the model, as well as the R= 0.668 indicated that the null hypothesis was rejected and that there is a
relationship between media quality and organizational commitment.
Regarding the sub hypothesis H1e0 (There is no statistically significant relationship between horizontal and
informal communication and organizational commitment), the multiple regression technique showed that the
Beta values indicated that these are all significant variables in the model, as well as the R= 0.592, indicated that
the null hypothesis was rejected and the alternative hypothesis was taken in its the place and that there is a real

ijms.ccsenet.org International Journal of Marketing Studies Vol. 9, No. 2; 2017
127
relationship between the said variables. To add more, in the process of testing sub hypothesis H1f0 (There is no
statistically significant relationship between organizational perspective and organizational commitment), the
multiple regression indicated that the standardized Beta Coefficient reported gave a measure of the contribution
of each variable to the model. Beta values indicated that those were significant variables in the model, and the
R= 0.731 showed that the alternative hypothesis took place and the null hypothesis was rejected, as a result there
is a relationship between organizational perspective and organizational commitment. Regarding the sub
hypothesis H1g0 (There is no statistically significant relationship between relationship with subordinate and
organizational commitment) the value of R= 0.694 indicated that there is a relationship between the said
variables as the ρ value (which was 0.00) is less than 0.05. In the hypothesis is H1h0 (There is no statistically
significant relationship between personal feedback and organizational commitment) Multiple Regression
statistical technique was used to test this hypothesis and the ρ value (significant value) was 0.000 which is <α
value which is (0.05). Beta values indicated that those were all significant variables in the model and indicated
that there is a statistically significant relationship between personal feedback and organizational commitment.
9. Study Contributions—Future Research Insights and Study Limitation
This study adds new knowledge to internet organizations, the adoption of new technology and techniques to
deliver high levels of communication satisfaction among subordinates and superiors, and how it affects
organizational commitment. Furthermore, it proposed a new measure of communication satisfaction applied in
the internet companies in Jordan, and examined the impact of communication satisfaction on organizational
commitment. The main contribution of this study comes from the fact that this study is one of the few to be
carried out with the aim of addressing communication satisfaction in the internet industry in Jordan. Moreover,
the literature does not record efforts for measuring communication satisfaction with organizational commitment
while this study reveals a positive relationship between communication satisfaction and organizational
commitment. It would be interesting to explore the relationship between communication satisfaction and a new
intervening variable and then study its impact on the organizational commitment. A number of limitations were
associated with the quantitative part of this study. First, the results in this study were based on a single
organization with a small population of 107 employees, so caution must be exercised in generalizing to other
organizations. Second, the use of only one data collection method, the questionnaire, brings to light the lack of
support for findings results from data analyses. In addition, although random sampling method was used, the
seriousness of respondents was somewhat questionable. Such access-related, sampling-related, and cultural
issues add more to the limitations and difficulties confronted this research. Furthermore, although the knowledge
transforming function was hypothesized in this study, no data were available that can directly test the importance
of this matter. That enhance the fact that these data should also be collected in the future. It is important to
mention that managers will not be able to encourage effective organizational commitment through
communication practices unless they recognize and understand what information is valued by subordinates.
References
Akroyd, D., Legg, J., Jackowski, M. B., & Adams, R. D. (2009). The impact of selected organizational variables
and managerial leadership on radiation therapists’ organizational commitment. Radiography, 15(2), 113-120.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2008.05.004
Al Kahtani, A., & Sulayman, A. (2013). Leader Charisma, Employee Organizational Commitment, and
Organizational Change: A Proposed Theoretical Framework. International Journal of Academic Research in
Business and Social Sciences, 3(5), 377-399.
Al-Duhaish, A., Alshurideh, M., Masa’deh, R. E., & Al-Zu’bi, Z. B. M. (2014). The Impact of the Basic
Reference Group Usage on the Purchasing Decision of Clothes (A Field Study of Saudi Youth in Riyadh
City). Dirasat: Administrative Sciences, 41(2), 201-221.
Al-dweeri, R. M., Obeidat, Z. M., Al-dwiry, M. A., Alshurideh, M. T., & Alhorani, A. M. (2017). The Impact of
E-Service Quality and E-Loyalty on Online Shopping: Moderating Effect of E-Satisfaction and
E-Trust. International Journal of Marketing Studies, 9(2), 92-103. http:/doi.org/10.5539/ijms.v9n2p92
Alkalha, Z., Al-Zu’bi, Z., Al-Dmour, H., Alshurideh, M., & Masa’deh, R. (2012). Investigating the effects of
human resource policies on organizational performance: An empirical study on commercial banks operating
in Jordan. European Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Sciences, 51, 44-64.
Allen, M. W. (1992). Communication and organizational commitment: Perceived organizational support as a
mediating factor. Communication Quarterly, 40(4), 357-367. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01463379209369852
Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1997). Commitment in the workplace: Theory, research and application. Thousand

ijms.ccsenet.org International Journal of Marketing Studies Vol. 9, No. 2; 2017
128
Oaks: Sage.
Almajali, D. A., Masa’deh, R., & Tarhini, A. (2016). Antecedents of ERP Systems Implementation Success: A
Study on Jordanian Healthcare Sector. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 29(4), 549-565.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-03-2015-0024
Al-Meer, A. A. (1989). Organizational commitment: a comparison of westerners, Asians and Saudis.
International Studies of Management and Organizations, 19(2), 74-84.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00208825.1989.11656505
Alshurideh, M. (2010). Customer Service Retention—A Behavioural Perspective of the UK Mobile Market. PhD
dissertation. Durham University.
Alshurideh, M. (2014). The Factors Predicting Students' Satisfaction with Universities’ Healthcare Clinics’
Services: A Case-Study from the Jordanian Higher Education Sector. Dirasat: Administrative Sciences,
41(2), 451-464. https://doi.org/10.12816/0007482
Alshurideh, M. (2016). Is Customer Retention Beneficial for Customers: A Conceptual Background. Journal of
Research in Marketing, 5(3), 382-389. http://dx.doi.org/10.17722/jorm.v5i3.126
Alshurideh, M. T. (2014). A Qualitative Analysis of Customer Repeat Purchase Behaviour in the UK Mobile
Phone Market. Journal of Management Research, 6(1), 109-125. http://dx.doi.org/10.5296/jmr.v6i1.4659
Alshurideh, M. T. (2016). Exploring the Main Factors Affecting Consumer Choice of Mobile Phone Service
Provider Contracts. Int. J. Communications, Network and System Sciences, 9, 563-581.
http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ijcns.2016.912044
Alshurideh, M., & Al-dmour, H. (2008). The Influence of Promotional Mix Elements on Jordanian Consumer’s
Decision Cell Phone Services Usage: An Analytical Study Jordan. Journal of Business Administration, 4(4),
375-392.
Alshurideh, M., (2016). Scope of Customer Retention Problem in the Mobile Phone Sector: A Theoretical
Perspective. Journal of Marketing and Consumer Research, 20, 64-69.
Alshurideh, M., Alhadeed, A. Y., & Barween, A. (2015). The effect of internal marketing on organizational
citizenship behavior an applicable study on the University of Jordan employees. International Journal of
Marketing Studies, 7(1), 138-145. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ijms.v7n1p138
Alshurideh, M., Al Kurdi, B. H., Vij, A., Obiedat, Z., & Naser, A. (2016). Marketing Ethics and Relationship
Marketing: An Empirical Study that Measure the Effect of Ethics Practices Application on Maintaining
Relationships with Customers. International Business Research, 9(9), 8-90.
http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v9n9p78
Alshurideh, M., Bataineh, A., Alkurdi, B., & Alasmr, N. (2015). Factors affect Mobile Phone Brand
Choices—Studying the Case of Jordan Universities Students. International Business Research, 8(3),
141-155. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v8n3p141
Alshurideh, M., Masa’deh, R., & Alkurdi, B. (2012). The Effect of Customer Satisfaction upon Customer
Retention in the Jordanian Mobile Market: An Empirical Investigation. European Journal of Economics,
Finance and Administrative Sciences, 47, 69-78.
Alshurideh, M., Nicholson, M., & Xiao, S. (2012). The Effect of Previous Experience on Mobile Subscribers’
Repeat Purchase Behaviour. European Journal of Social Sciences, 30(3), 366-376.
Alshurideh, M. T., Shaltoni, A. M., & Hijawi, D. A. S. (2014). Marketing Communications Role in Shaping
Consumer Awareness of Cause-Related Marketing Campaigns. International Journal of Marketing Studies,
6(2), 163-168. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ijms.v6n2p163
Altamony, H., Alshurideh, M., & Obeidat, B. (2012). Information Systems for Competitive Advantage:
Implementation of an Organisational Strategic Management Process. Proceedings of the 18th IBIMA
Conference on Innovation and Sustainable Economic Competitive Advantage: From Regional Development
to World Economic, Istanbul, Turkey, 9th-10th May.
Angel, H. L., & Perry, S. L. (1981). An Empirical Assessment of Organizational Communication and
Organizational Effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392596
Applbaum, R. L. (1973). Fundamental concepts in human communication. San Francisco: Canfield Press.
Argenti, P. A. (1998). Strategic employee communications. Human Resource Management (1986-1998), 37(3-4),

ijms.ccsenet.org International Journal of Marketing Studies Vol. 9, No. 2; 2017
129
199-206. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-050X(199823/24)37:3/4<199::AID-HRM3>3.0.CO;2-R
Beanland, C., Schneider, Z., LoBiondo-Wood, G., & Haber, J. (1999). Nursing research methods. Critical
Appraisal and Utilisation.
Bem, D. J. (1967). Self-perception: An alternative interpretation of cognitive dissonance. Psychological Review,
74, 183-200. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0024835
Bentein, K., Vandenberg, R., Vandenberghe, C., & Stinglhamber, L. (2005). The role of change in the
relationship between commitment and turnover: a latent growth modeling approach. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 90(3), 468-482. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.3.468
Broom, G. M., & Dozier, D. M. (1983). An overview: Evaluation research in public relations. Public Relations
Quarterly, 28(3), 5-8.
Cappelli, P. (2000). Managing without commitment. Organizational Dynamics, 28(4), 11-24.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0090-2616(00)00008-5
Chen, J., Silverthorne, C., & Hung, J. (2006). Organisation communication, job stress, organisational
commitment, and job performance of accounting professionals in Taiwan and America. Leadership &
Organisation Development Journal, 27(4), 242-249. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01437730610666000
Cohen, A. (1991). Career stage as a moderator of the relationships between organizational commitment and its
outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 64, 253-268.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8325.1991.tb00558.x
Considine, J., Botti, M., & Thomas, S. (2005). Design, format, validity and reliability of multiple choice
questions for use in nursing research and education. Collegian, 12(1), 19-24.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1322-7696(08)60478-3
Cooper-Hakim, A., & Viswesvaran, C. (2005). The construct of work commitment: testing an integrative
framework. Psychological Bulletin, 131(2), 241-259. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.131.2.241
D’Amato, A., & Herzfeldt, R. (2008). Learning orientation, organizational commitment and talent retention
across generations. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23(8), 929-953.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02683940810904402
De Meyer, A., Nakane, J., Miller, J. M., & Ferdows, K. (1989). Flexibility: the next competitive battle: the
manufacturing futures survey. Strategic Management Journal, 10(2), 135-144.
https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250100204
Downs, C. W., & Hazen, M. D. (1977). A factor analytic study of communication satisfaction. The Journal of
Business Communication, 14, 64-73. https://doi.org/10.1177/002194367701400306
Downs, C. W., Downs, A., Potvin, T., Varona, E., Gribas, J. S., & Ticehurst, W. (1995). A cross-cultural
comparison of relationships between organizational commitment and organizational communication. In
International Communication Association Convention (pp. 1-22). Albuquerque, NM.
ELSamen, A. A., & Alshurideh, M. (2012). The impact of internal marketing on internal service quality: A Case
study in a Jordanian pharmaceutical company. International Journal of Business and Management, 7(19),
84-95. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijbm.v7n19p84
Forman, J., Creswell, J. W., Damschroder, L., Kowalski, C. P., & Krein, S. L. (2008). Qualitative research
methods: Key features and insights gained from use in infection prevention research. American Journal of
Infection Control, 36(10), 764-771. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2008.03.010
Garnett, J. (1992). Communicating for Results in Government: A Strategic Approach for Public Managers.
SanFranciso, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Garnett, J., & Kouzmin, A. (1979). Handbook of Administrative Communication. New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc.
Ghannajeh, A. M., AlShurideh, M., Zu’bi, M. F., Abuhamad, A., Rumman, G. A., Suifan, T., & Akhorshaideh, A.
H. O. (2015). A qualitative analysis of product innovation in Jordan’s pharmaceutical sector. European
Scientific Journal, 11(4), 474-503.
Goldhaber, G. M. (1993). Organizational communication. Madison: Brown & Benchmark.
Goldhaber, G., Porter, D., Yates, M., & Lesniak, R. (1978). Organisational communication: 1978. Human
Communication Research, 5(1), 76-96. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1978.tb00624.x

ijms.ccsenet.org International Journal of Marketing Studies Vol. 9, No. 2; 2017
130
Goris, J., Vaught, B., & Pettit, J. (2000). Effects of communication direction on job performance and satisfaction:
a moderated regression analysis. The Journal of Business Communication, 37(4), 348-368.
https://doi.org/10.1177/002194360003700402
Gould-Williams, J. (2003). The importance of HR practices and workplace trust in achieving superior
performance: a study of public-sector organizations. International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 14(1), 28-54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09585190210158501
Hausknecht, J. P., Rodda, J., & Howard, M. J. (2009). Targeted employee retention: Performance-based and
job-related differences in reported reasons for staying. Human Resource Management, 48, 269-288.
https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.20279
Holland, C. P., Light, B., & Gibson, N. (1999). A critical success factors model for enterprise resource planning
implementation. In Proceedings of the 7th European Conference on Information Systems, 1, 273-287.
Hom, P. W., Tsui, A. S., Wu, J. B., Lee, T. W., Zhang, A. Y., Fu, P. P., & Li, L. (2009). Explaining employment
relationships with social exchange and job embeddedness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(2), 277-297.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0013453
Jablin, L. L. Putnam, K. H., & Porter, L. W. (Eds.) (1987). Handbook of organizational communication: An
interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 70-96). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Johnson, M. D., & Fornell, C. (1991). A framework for comparing customer satisfaction across individuals and
product categories. Journal Economic Psychology, 12(2), 267-286.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0167-4870(91)90016-M
Keyton, J. (2011).Communication and Organizational Culture: A key to understanding Work Experience (2nd
ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publication, Inc., USA.
Kim, T. Y., Cable, D. M., & Kim, S. P. (2005). Socialization tactics, employee proactivity, and
person-organization fit. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(2), 232-241.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.2.232
Kwantes, C. T. (2007). Organizational commitment, intellectual capital and organizational competitiveness,
South Asia Journal of Management, 14(3), 28-43.
Larson, E., & Fukami, C. (1984). Relationships between worker behavior and commitment to the organization
and union. Proceedings of the Academy of Management, 1, 222-226.
https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.1984.4979013
Laschinger, H. K. S. (2004). Hospital nurses’ perceptions of respect and organizational justice. Journal of
Nursing Administration, 34(7-8), 354-364. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005110-200407000-00009
Lee, R. (2009). Social capital and business and management: Setting a research agenda. International Journal of
Management Reviews, 11(3), 247-273. https://d oi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2008.00244.x
Madlock, P. E., & Kennedy-Lightsey, C. (2010). The effects of supervisors’ verbal aggressiveness and mentoring
on their subordinates. Journal of Business Communication, 47(1), 42-62.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0021943609353511
Malmelin, N. (2007). Communication capital: Modelling corporate communications as an organisational asset.
Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 12(3), 298-310.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13563280710776888
Masa’deh, R. (2012). The Impact of Management Information Systems (MIS) on Quality Assurance (QA): A
Case Study in Jordan. International Journal of Information, Business and Management, 4(2), 93-110.
Masa’deh, R., Obeidat, B., & Tarhini, A. (2016). A Jordanian Empirical Study of the Associations among
Transformational Leadership, Transactional Leadership, Knowledge Sharing, Job Performance, and Firm
Performance: A Structural Equation Modelling Approach. Journal of Management Development, 35(5),
681-705. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JMD-09-2015-0134
Masa’deh, R., Tayeh, M., & Al-Jarrah, I. M. (2015). Accounting vs. Market-based Measures of Firm
Performance Related to Information Technology Investments. International Review of Social Sciences and
Humanities, 9(1), 129-145.
Mathieu, J., & Zajac, D. M. (1990). A review and metaanalysis of the antecedents, correlates, and consequences
of organizational commitment. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 171-194.

ijms.ccsenet.org International Journal of Marketing Studies Vol. 9, No. 2; 2017
131
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.108.2.171
Mattila, A. S., & Enz, C. A. (2002). The role of emotions in service encounters. Journal of Service Research, 4,
268-277. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670502004004004
McCarthy, Sh., Jaafar, J., Kamal, A., & Zubair, A. (2013). Psychology at work in Asia. Proceeds of the 3ed and
4th Asian Psychological Association Conference and the 4th international Conference on Organizational
Psychology. Newcastle, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Mcdonald, P., & Gandz, J. (1991). Identification of values relevant to business research. Human Resource
Management, 30(2), 217-236. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.3930300205
Meng, J., & Pan, P. L. (2012). Using a balanced set of measures to focus on long-term competency in internal
communication. Public Relations Review, 38, 484-490. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2012.03.005
Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human
Resource Management Review, 1(1), 61-89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/1053-4822(91)90011-Z
Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnytsky, L. (2002). Affective, continuance, and normative
commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, and consequences. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 61, 20-52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.2001.1842
Michael, J., Tarn, H., & Wen, J. (2002). Exploring organizational expansion modes and their associated
communication system requirements: consolidation and complementation. International Journal of
Information Management, 22(1), 3-26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0268-4012(01)00039-1
Mitchell, T. R., Holtom, B. C., & Lee, T. W. (2001). How to keep your best employees: Developing an effective
retention policy. The Academy of Management Executive, 15(4), 96-108.
https://doi.org/10.5465/AME.2001.5897929
Moorman, C., Deshpande, R., & Zaltman, G. (1993). Factors affecting trust in market research relationships. The
Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 81-101. https://doi.org/10.2307/1252059
Morris, J. H., & Sherman, J. D. (1981). Generalizability of an organizational commitment model. Academy of
Management Journal, 24(3), 512-526. https://doi.org/10.2307/255572
Morrow, P. C. (2011). Managing organizational commitment: Insights from longitudinal research. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 14, 18-35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2010.12.008
Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. M., & Steers, R. M. (1982). Employee-Organization Linkages: The Psychology of
Commitment, Absenteeism and Turnover. New York, NY: Academic Press.
Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W., & Dubin, R. (1974). Unit performance, situational factors, and employee attitudes
in spatially separated work units. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 12, 231-248.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(74)90048-8
Obeidat, B., Al-Suradi, M., & Tarhini, A. (2016). The Impact of Knowledge Management on Innovation: An
Empirical Study on Jordanian Consultancy Firms. Management Research Review, 39(10), 1214-1238.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/MRR-09-2015-0214
Obeidat, B., Sweis, R., Zyod, D., & Alshurideh, M. (2012). The effect of perceived service quality on customer
loyalty in internet service providers in Jordan. Journal of Management Research, 4(4), 224-242.
https://doi.org/10.5296/jmr.v4i4.2130
Pandey, S., & Garnett, J. (2006). Exploring public sector communication performance: testing a model and
drawing implications. Public Administration Review, 66, 37-51.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00554.x
Pettit, J., Goris, J., & Vaught, B. (1997). An examination of organisational communication as a moderator of the
relationship between job performance and job satisfaction. Journal of Business Communication, 34(1),
81-98. https://doi.org/10.1177/002194369703400105
Pincus, J. D. (1986). Communication satisfaction, job satisfaction, and job performance. Human Communication
Research, 12(3), 395-419. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1986.tb00084.x
Polit, D. F., & Hungler, B. P. (1999). Nursing Research: Principles and Methods (6th ed.). Philadelphia,
Lippincott.
Porter, L. W., Crampon, W. J., & Smith, F. W. (1976). Organizational commitment and managerial turnover: A
longitudinal study. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 15, 87-98.

ijms.ccsenet.org International Journal of Marketing Studies Vol. 9, No. 2; 2017
132
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(76)90030-1
Postmes, T., Tanis, M., & De Wit, B. (2001). Communication and commitment in organizations: A social identity
approach. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 4(3), 227-246.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430201004003004
Putti, J. M., Aryee, S., & Phua, J. (1990). Communication relationship satisfaction and organizational
commitment. Group & Organization Management, 15(1), 44-52.
https://doi.org/10.1177/105960119001500104
Randall, D. M. (1990). The consequences of organizational commitment: Methodological investigation. Journal
of Organizational Behavior, 11, 361-378. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030110504
Rathi, N., & Rastogi, R. (2009). Assessing the relationship between emotional intelligence, occupational
self-efficacy and organizational commitment. Journal of the Indian Academy of Applied Psychology, 35,
93-102.
Ridder, J. A. (2004). Organisational communication and supportive employees. Human Resource Management
Journal, 14(3), 20-30. https://do i.org/10.1111/j.1748-8583.2004.tb00124.x
Riketta, M. (2002). Attitudinal organizational commitment and job performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 23, 257-266. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.141
Riketta, M., & Van Dick, R. (2005). Foci of attachment in organizations: A meta-analytic comparison of the
strength and correlates of workgroup versus organizational identification and commitment. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 67, 490-510. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2004.06.001
Ritter, M. (2003). The use of balanced scorecards in the strategic management of corporate communication.
Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 8(1), 44-59.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13563280310458911
Robson, P. J. A., & Tourish, D. (2005). Managing internal communication: an organizational case study.
Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 10(3), 213-22.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13563280510614474
Rodwell, J. J., Kienzle, R., & Shadur, M. A. (1998). The relationships among work-related perceptions,
employee attitudes, and employee performance: the integral role of communication. Human Resource
Management, 37(3/4), 277-293.
https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-050X(199823/24)37:3/4<277::AID-HRM9>3.0.CO;2-E
Rousseau, D. M. (1998). Why workers still identify with organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior,
19(3), 217-233. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(199805)19:3<217::AID-JOB931>3.0.CO;2-N
Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. (1978). A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 23, 224-235. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392563
Saunders, M. N., Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2011). Research methods for business students (5th
ed.). Delhi, India: Pearson Education India.
Scott-Ladd, B., Travaglione, A., & Marshall, V. (2006). Causal inferences between participation in decision
making, task attributes, work effort, rewards, job satisfaction and commitment. Leadership & Organization
Development Journal, 27(5), 399-414. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01437730610677990
Shannak, R., Masa’deh, R., Al-Zu’bi, Z., Obeidat, B., Alshurideh, M., & Altamony, H. (2012). A theoretical
perspective on the relationship between knowledge management systems, customer knowledge
management, and firm competitive advantage. European Journal of Social Sciences, 32(4), 520-532.
Shannak, R., Masa'deh, R., Obeidat, B., & Almajali, D. (2010). Information Technology Investments: A
Literature Review. Proceedings of the 14th IBIMA Conference on Global Business Transformation through
Innovation and Knowledge Management: An Academic Perspective, Istanbul-Turkey, 23rd-24th June, pp.
1356-1368.
Soupata, L. (2005). Engaging employees in company success: The UPS approach to a winning team. Human
Resource Management, 44(1), 95-98. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.20046
Steers, R. M. (1977). Antecedents and outcomes of organizational commitment. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 22(1), 46-56. https://doi.org/10.2307/2391745
Stuart, H. (1999). Towards a definite model of the corporate identity management process. Corporate

ijms.ccsenet.org International Journal of Marketing Studies Vol. 9, No. 2; 2017
133
Communication, 4(4), 200-207. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13563289910299328
Sundaram, D. S., & Webster, C. (2000). The role of nonverbal communication in service encounters. Journal of
Services Marketing, 14, 378-391. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/08876040010341008
Thompkins, P. K. (1987). Translating organizational theory: Symbolism over substance. In F. M. Jablin, L. L.
Putnam, K. H. Roberts, & L. W. Porter (Eds.), Handbook of organizational communication: An
interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 70-96). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Tourish, D., & Hargie, O. (2009). Communication and organisational success. In O. Hargie, & D. Tourish (Eds.),
Auditing organisational success. London: Routledge.
Van Dick, R., & Riketta, M. (2006). Bindung von Mitarbeitern an Organisationen [Employees’commitment to
organizations]. Zeitschrift fur Personalpsychologie, 5, 83-84. https://doi.org/10.1026/1617-6391.5.3.83
Vandenberg, R. J., Richardson, H. A., & Eastman, L. J. (1999). The impact of high involvement work processes
on organizational effectiveness a second-order latent variable approach. Group & Organization
Management, 24(3), 300-339. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601199243004
Vedabrata, B., Hartono, E., Lederer, A. L., & Vijay, S. (2002). The impact of organizational commitment, senior
management involvement, and team involvement on strategic information systems planning. Information&
Management, 39(6), 513-524. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7206(01)00115-X
Vratskikh, I., Al-Lozi, M., & Maqableh, M. (2016). The Impact of Emotional Intelligence on Job Performance
via the Mediating Role of Job Satisfaction. International Journal of Business and Management, 11, 69-91.
https://doi.org/10.5539/ijbm.v11n2p69
Watson, T. (2010). Capitalizing on Effective Communication. Communication ROI Study Report.
Yammarino, F. J., & Naughton, T. J. (1988). Time spent communicating: A multiple levels of analysis approach.
Human Relations, 41(9), 655-676. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872678804100902
Zu’bi, M. F., Al-Lozi, M., Dahiyat, S. E., Alshurideh, M., & Al Majali, A. (2012). Examining the effects of
quality management practices on product variety. European Journal of Economics, Finance and
Administrative Sciences, 51, 10-19.
Copyrights
Copyright for this article is retained by the author, with first publication rights granted to the journal.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).