Factors Affecting Employee Commitment in the Workplace: An Analysis

Abstract

In today’s organizational settings whether private or government agencies are continuously facing different challenges concerning unrelenting productivity and producing committed workforce. No organization can perform at ultimate levels unless each employee is committed to the organization’s objectives and goals. Therefore, undeniably it is important that the organization understands the concept of employee commitment and its feasible outcome and viable impact. This study explored factors affecting employee commitment in the workplace of private and public higher education institutions. Specifically, it sought to answer the current work-relationship of the employee towards manager, colleagues and the perception on employee commitment in the workplace. In the present study, the models used to explore the work-relationship and commitment is the social exchange theory or norm of reciprocity, and psychological contract.

Full text

Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online)
Vol.11, No.27, 2020
160
Factors Affecting Employee Commitment in the Workplace: An
Analysis
Edison Estigoy1* Josephine Sulasula2
1. School of Oriental and African Studies, Xi’an International Studies University, No.1 Wenyuan Nanlu,
Guodu, Xi’an, Shaanxi, China
2. Zamboanga City State Polytechnic College, R.T. Lim Boulevard, Baliwasan, Zamboanga City,
Philippines
*edisonestigoy13@gmail.com
Abstract
In today’s organizational settings whether private or government agencies are continuously facing different
challenges concerning unrelenting productivity and producing committed workforce. No organization can perform
at ultimate levels unless each employee is committed to the organization’s objectives and goals. Therefore,
undeniably it is important that the organization understands the concept of employee commitment and its feasible
outcome and viable impact. This study explored factors affecting employee commitment in the workplace of
private and public higher education institutions. Specifically, it sought to answer the current work-relationship of
the employee towards manager, colleagues and the perception on employee commitment in the workplace. In the
present study, the models used to explore the work-relationship and commitment is the social exchange theory or
norm of reciprocity, and psychological contract. Psychological contract explained individuals’ beliefs about their
employment relationship and guide employee beliefs about what they think they are entitled to receive because of
real or perceived promises from their employing organization and as we are living in a social world, reciprocity
creates a normative bond among people and injects in them the obligation to return, any benefits received by them.
Keywords: Education, Management, Commitment, Workplace, Employees
DOI: 10.7176/JEP/11-27-19
Publication date:September 30th 2020
1. Introduction
This study attempts to analyze the possible factors that affect the commitment of both private and government
employees. In this study, employee commitment is conceptualized and operationalized as consisting of
commitment to the company worked for and commitment to the occupation, or the work done at the company. It
includes investigating the construct commitment, the impact of self-efficacy on employee commitment,
psychological contract, reciprocity and the possible interventions required. The focus of this study rounds the
concept on work-relationship with the line-managers and among employees that relates to the employee
commitment.
Over the last ten years, the study of commitment has advanced in many different directions. A variety of
disciplines have adopted the topic as a theme in the research and these have offered fresh and significant insights.
These recent advances include new approaches to both the conceptualization of employee commitment and the
particular human resource practices intended to increase it. What is now apparent is that, as long as the organization
has been able to attract the right sort of employees and has provided a suitable work environment, employee
commitment will be largely influenced by the interactions that occur between colleagues and with the immediate
and senior managers. The relationship between the organization and the employee, therefore, should be considered
as being no different from any other type of relationship. Commitment is complex and continuous, and requires
employers to discover ways of enhancing the work life of the employees.
In the stir of globalization and the changing demographics of the organization, organizational
commitment is indeed becoming an intriguing topic and is drawing attention from managers and human resource
professionals. The rapid development of information technology and global competition has placed organizations
under increased and stringent competition domestically and internationally. Over the last years, international
business has been drastically affected by global competition as well as the globalization of preferences and
business practices. Consequently, managing workers and companies across borders has become very arduous for
corporations everywhere due to increase in mergers, acquisitions, and employee turnover. With the attrition rate
touching all-time high, retaining employees has become a challenge for all the organizations and employers are
having tough times figuring out what it takes to retain the talent within the organization (George and Jones, 2012).

Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online)
Vol.11, No.27, 2020
161
In today’s fast-pacing competitive world, every organization constantly faces new challenges regarding
sustained productivity and creating committed workforce. Commitment in different forms display that there are
employees who chose to stay the whole life within the organization, there is certain abstract string that binds
individual to the organization, employees who are reactive if needed, and the factors found common to the
employees that leads to commitment. Being feeling involved and engaged is a different thing as a whole to the
organization. Committed employees are organization’s greatest assets and it is to believe that plays a vibrant role
in overall business efficiency and profitability.
It is in the aforementioned particulars; the researchers are interested to determine the work-relationship
of an employee towards colleagues and manager in relation to employee commitment in the workplace.
1.1 Statement of the Problem
The purpose of this study is to analyze the factors that affect the commitment of an employee in the workplace.
1. What is the work-relationship of employee towards managers in terms of employee commitment?
2. What is the work-relationship of employee towards colleagues in terms of employee commitment?
3. What is the perception of the employee towards commitment in the workplace?
1.2 Theoretical Framework
The main theories underpinning this study are the social exchange theory, psychological contract, and norm of
reciprocity. Psychological contract explained individuals’ beliefs about their employment relationship and guide
employee beliefs about what they think they are entitled to receive because of real or perceived promises from
their employing organization (Robinson, Kraatz, & Rousseau, 1994). The fact that organizations are stressing on
providing intangible rather than tangible benefits to its employees is affecting the commitment of the employees
towards the organization. Further, psychological contract concerns both concrete, which includes pay and working
conditions, as well as abstract elements, comprising of security and challenges, of the give- and- take between
employer and employee (Guzzo & Noonan, 1994). Human resource management practices are said to affect
psychological contract, and training is one such practice that can be controlled or managed to arouse a desired set
of reciprocal attitudes and behaviors, including job involvement, motivation, and organizational commitment
(Bartlett, 2001). Decreasing opportunities for training in today’s organizations is directly impacting the
commitment of the employees (Periera, 2006).
Gouldner (1959) submitted that we live in a social world and there is always an obligation to return or
repay whatever favor we have received from others. Gouldner holds that reciprocity is a generalized and probably
universal norm. This norm of reciprocating constitutes the fundamental idea of social exchange theory (Blau, 1964).
Reciprocity creates a normative bond among people and injects in them the obligation to return, any benefits
received by them. Whereas investments accrue as individuals make contributions that will be rewarded in the
future, reciprocity would work in the opposite way: an individual would receive a benefit, such as training or an
opportunity beyond his or her current ability, and would expect to repay it through future performance (Scholl,
1981). As aforementioned increasing inter-firm mobility is now making the organizations cautious not to invest
lavishly on their employees.
2.0 Literature Review
Commitment is a feeling of loyalty and oneness that an employee feels towards the organization. This is normally
based on personal experiences with regard to the organization’s policies and procedures and the interaction of
employees may have as agents of the organization. A feeling and beliefs of employee that being part of the
organization somewhat boosting the productivity of the employee. Organizational Commitment is a core predictor
of employee’s attitude to the organization and is a strong indicator of turnover behavior, withdrawal tendency and
organizational citizenship behavior (Sinclair and Wright, 2005). The bond of the employee interprets what are the
values and attitudes of employee. Committed employees are increasingly becoming a valued asset in organizations.
For the purpose of this study employee commitment is viewed as commitment to the organization as well as
employees’ commitment to their occupations (Robinson, 2009).
Organizational commitment is a psychological concept reflecting the relationship between the employees
and the organization (Becker, 1960; qtd. Wei, Tai, 2010: 904). It is the way of employees to perceive the
organization and response to it (Mowday, 1979; qtd. Uyguç, Çimrin 2004: 92). “The employees who are strongly
committed to the organization are those who are least likely to leave the organization” (Allen, Meyer, 1990). As
Balci in 1990 mentioned in his studies, the individuals who are committed to the organization, work as more
compatible, productive, and loyal (Bayram, 2005: 126). In 1960, Becker in his researches claimed that the
employees never commit to the organization emotionally, but they just do is to continue working because they

Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online)
Vol.11, No.27, 2020
162
don’t want to lose its status and salary (Gül, 2002: 39). According to side-bet theory, he pointed out that employees
don’t leave working in the organization in order to protect their hidden benefits. For instance, a person thinks to
give up his job which he took two months before because of a better job offer. But the ones giving up his job before
the end of a year are called as untrustworthy in his work circumstances. So the person refuses the new job offer to
be afraid of to be called such a way (Becker, 1960: 35-36).
2.1 Work – Relationship Variable
In the social sciences, social structures are the patterned social arrangements in society that agreement and
determinant of the actions of the individuals. Stated by Dey (2003) the social structure is ‘the relationship between
different entities or groups which are enduring and relatively stable’ (p. 51).'Structure' thus refers to a patterning
of relationships that is independent of particular individuals concerned. This emphasizes the idea that society is
grouped into structurally related groups or sets of roles, with different functions, meanings or purposes. As
mentioned before, interpersonal relations can play a key role in influencing commitment to organizational changes.
Rice and Aydin (1991) investigated attitudes toward a new introduced information technology in a
company. Results show that employees who shared supervisory-subordinate relationships were more likely to
share similar attitudes about this recently introduced technology (Rice & Aydin, 1991). It is also known that in
general work-relationships are associated with a number of positive outcomes, like happiness and less stress
(Chadsey & Beyer, 2001).
2.2 Relationships with managers:
Managers play a critical role in the turbulent, changing environment of this century (Allen, Eby, Lentz, Lima &
Poteet, 2004; Kram & Higgins, 2009; Tierney, 1999). When the relationship with the leader is good, it is common
to find a high degree of similarity or “leader-member agreement” between supervisor and employee along the
lines of values, attitudes and perceptions (Uhl-Bien et al., 2000). The quality of an individuals’ relationship can
ranging from a highly interactive and interpersonally supportive association, to a less interactive but very formal
association. The relationship can also be indicated by the extent to which a leader understands the problems and
needs of the employee and if the leader recognizes the potential of the employees. Also confidence in each other
and the willingness to help and solve problems is an indicator of quality.
2.3 Relationships with Colleagues:
(Baumeister & Leary, 1995) Although emotional attachment to colleagues in the workplace is an important
element of commitment, it is not enough on its own. This important aspect, however, must not be neglected but
maintained through frequent, pleasurable contact with peers. Unless there is occasion for frequent and rewarding
interaction, stronger feelings of belonging that can bind employees to the organization are unlikely to emerge.
Organizations that want to build high levels of commitment should look for ways to build this through group
activities both in and out of work.
2.4 Organizational Commitment
Meyer and Allen (1991) defined organizational commitment as "a psychological state that (a) characterizes the
employee's relationship with the organization and (b) has implications for the decision to continue membership
in the organization" (Meyer & Allen, 1991; p. 67). As mentioned previously, Meyer and Allen distinguished
between three states or components of organizational commitment. These three components differ in terms of the
sources of attraction for relationship with the organization1 and are referred to as affective commitment,
continuance commitment, and normative commitment. Affective commitment (AC) refers to the employee's
emotional attachment to, identification with, and involvement in the organization" (Meyer & Allen, 1997; p. 11).
Employees with strong AC remain in the organization because they want to. This component of commitment may
encourage adherence to the expectations and values of organization. "Continuance commitment (CC) refers to an
awareness of the costs associated with leaving the organization" (Meyer & Allen, 1997; p. 11). Employees with
strong CC remain in the organization because they need to. This component of commitment has been associated
with the side bets or investments an employee makes with an organization. Normative commitment refers to
employees’ feelings of obligation to the organization. Employees with high levels of normative commitment stay
with the organization because they feel they ought to.
Commitment affects the organization and the person, making two levels. (a) Organizational commitment
which is directed by organization attributes and defined as the psychological and emotional attachment of
employees to their organizations (Morrow, 1993; Meyer & Allen, 1991; Mathieu & Zajac, 1990). (b) Individual
employee commitment, guided by attributes that directly affect the person and is defined as the psychological and
emotional attachment of individuals to their jobs, careers, work groups or teams, peers and supervisors (Cohen,

Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online)
Vol.11, No.27, 2020
163
2003). Organizational commitment is the measure of strength of the employee’s identification with the goals and
values of the organization (Mowday et al., 1982) and supervisor. Individuals committed to the organization exert
extra effort, desire organizational membership (Morrow, 1993), protect company assets, and share company goals
and values (Meyer & Allen, 1997). Supervisory commitment is defined as the strength of identification with
supervisor and internalization of supervisor's values. Identification occurs when the subordinate admires certain
attributes of the supervisor, such as attitudes, behavior, and accomplishments. Internalization occurs when the
subordinate adopts the attitudes and behaviors of the supervisor because the supervisor's attitudes and behaviors
are congruent with the subordinate's value systems (Becker, 1992; Gregersen & Black, 1993). Commitment to
organization is related positively to a variety of desirable work outcomes including employee job satisfaction,
motivation and performance, and related negatively to absenteeism and turnover (Mathieu & Zajac, 1990).
Organizational commitment can be measured as either attitudinal or calculative. Attitudinal, referred to as affective
(Meyer, Allen, & Smith 1993), or internalization and identification (O’Reilly & Chatman, 1986) is the employee’s
emotional attachment and identification with the organization (Meyer & Allen, 1997; Mowday et al., 1982; Cohen,
2003; Porter et al 1974). Employees continue with the organization because they want to do so (Meyer & Allen,
1997; Mowday et al, 1982) and feel proud to be part of the organization, respecting its values and accomplishments
(O’Reilly & Chatman, 1986). The calculative or “side-bet” (Becker, 1960), also referred to as continuance (Meyer
& Allen, 1997) and compliance (O’Reilly & Chatman, 1986), signifies the extent to which employees feel
committed to their organization by virtue of the cost that they feel is associated with leaving it and their need to
remain with the organization (Becker,1992; Meyer & Allen, 1997).
According to Fornes and Rocco, 2004 a Cognitive mapping can be used as a model of the relationships
between the elements, antecedents, and consequences of workplace commitment, which lead to organizational
commitment and/or individual employee commitment. The antecedents to organizational commitment (clarity of
purpose, equity & fairness, empowerment, congruency, feedback & recognition, autonomy and interesting work)
lead to an employee’s perception of organizational and supervisory support creating an emotional attachment to
the organization (organizational commitment). The antecedents to individual commitment (congruency, feedback
& recognition, autonomy and interesting work) lead to meaningfulness of work, career, peers, and self, creating
an attachment to one’s job, career, and work teams (individual commitment). Organizational and individual
commitment results in positive outcomes and implications for the organization and the individual (consequences
of commitment).
Individual commitment is the measure of strength of the employee’s identification with the values of
other individuals and peers within the organization (team commitment), and their work (job commitment) and
careers (career commitment) and encourages individuals to exert extra organizational citizenship behavior as active
positive contributions to colleagues and avoid engaging in harmful behaviors. Team commitment is an individual’s
identification and sense of cohesiveness with other members of a group. The importance of team commitment is
its enhancement of social involvement that reinforces the social ties that the individual forms with the organization
(Randall & Cote, 1991).
2.5 Antecedents to Commitment in the Workplace
In this study, antecedents of commitment can be a driver variables and factors that would affect employee
commitment are Demographic Variables, Eby et al. 2000; Communication Variables, Wanber & Banas (2000);
Work – Relationships, Chadsey & Beyer, 2001; Individual Variables (George & Jones, 2012; O’Malley,2000;
Sturges and Guest, 2000; Mignerey et al., 1995); Hogg et al., 1995; Meyer and Allen, 1997; Schwarzwald et.
al.,1992 ; The Families & Work Institute, 1998.
Antecedents of commitment are actions or elements that cause commitment to occur. Congruency,
interesting work, clarity of purpose, feedback, equity /fairness, empowerment, and autonomy are antecedent
elements linked to organizational commitment that produces psychological states that lead to positive
consequences for the organization and individual. The antecedents that lead to individual employee commitment
are congruency, interesting work, feedback, and autonomy. Congruency is the quality of agreement that exists
between the employee’s values and interests and those of the organization. If congruency exists between a person's
interests, preferences, abilities (Holland, 1985) and values (Katzenbach, 2000), and organizational factors in the
work environment, employees become more emotionally committed to the organization leading to improved
performance (Holland, 1985; Katzenbach, 2000). Congruency or “fit” between the individual and his or her
job/career increases commitment to the career and/or job (O’Reilly, Chatman, & Cadwell, 1991).
Interesting work holds the individual’s attention, is challenging and rewarding, is significant to the
organization, and allows utilization of a variety of skills and knowledge. Job characteristics such as job challenge,
skill variety (different activities and talents the job requires), task identity (doing a job from beginning to end with

Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online)
Vol.11, No.27, 2020
164
visible results), task significance (the job’s impact on the lives of workers and the organization), degree of
autonomy (freedom, independence and discretion in scheduling work and determining procedures) all improve
commitment to the organization (Mathew & Zajac, 1990; Nelson, 1999), to the job (Hackman & Oldham, 1976;
Varona, 2002), and one’s career (Person, 1997). The more important a task or job component (job significance) is,
the greater the level of job commitment and job satisfaction, motivation and job performance (Hackman & Oldham,
1976). Organizations that ensure interesting work will improve employee commitment to the organization and the
job itself. Clarity of purpose provides a clear identification of the intentions, ideas, goals and plans of the
organization allowing employees to be informed, ask questions, share information, provide a clear sense of
direction. Lack of clarity, about purpose, lies at the core of organizational ineffectiveness and inefficiency
(Kaufman, 2000; Katzenbach, 2000). Organizations that provide a clear sense of direction (Greenberg, 1994),
adequate explanation of new policy (Rhodes & Steers, 1981; DeCotiis & Summers, 1987) and purposereport high
levels of organizational commitment (Mathleu & Zajac, 1990), workgroup commitment (Konovsky & Cropanzano,
1991) and individual commitment (Varona, 2002). Equity and fairness maintains a balance between and within the
organization and its employees.
Affective commitment and commitment between peers and supervisor is strengthening when employees’
perceptions are of a fair, trusting, and equitable environment (Konovsky & Cropanzano, 1991; Kim & Mauborgne,
1993; Rhodes & Steers, 1981). Feedback is the degree to which employees receive information that reveals how
well they are performing on the job. Feedback that promotes continuous improvement and constant communication
with employees leads to the development of organizational commitment (Luthans, 1998) and enhanced
performance (Katzenbach, 2000; Nelson, 1999; Varona, 2002).
Empowerment gives authority to the employees to make decisions about their work. Organizational
commitment is stronger among employees who are allowed to participate in decision-making and empowered to
carry out their work (Rhodes & Steers, 1981; DeCotiis & Summers, 1987; Meyers & Allen, 1997). Empowerment,
autonomy, and mutual accountability focus employees on doing a job well and encourage them to lend a hand to
a co-worker or department that needs help (Katzenbach, 2000). Giving people latitude, flexibility, and
empowerment to make decisions increases the chance that they will perform as desired bringing additional
initiative, ideas, and energy to their jobs (Nelson, 1999). Autonomy is the degree of freedom, independence and
discretion an employee is allowed in scheduling work and determining procedures. Increased autonomy
strengthens organizational commitment (Mathew & Zajac, 1990), increases job satisfaction (Fried & Ferris, 1987),
and contributes to job commitment (Person, 1997; Hackman & Oldsham, 1975).
2.6 Consequences of Workplace Commitment
The consequences of workplace commitment are the effects and outcomes that result from organizational
and individual employee commitment. Employees with strong organizational affective commitment are
emotionally attached to the organization having a greater desire to contribute meaningfully to the organization,
choose to be absent less, work harder (Mathieu & Zajac, 1990), improving production (Randal & Cote, 1994) and
overall performance on the job (Meyer & Allen, 1997). Managers with strong affective commitment report higher
levels of compliance with strategic decisions and avoidance of budgetary slack in financial planning (Kim &
Mauborgne, 1993; DeCotiis & Summers, 1987), are more willing to engage in organizational citizenship (Nouri,
1994) or extra-role performance (Meyer et al, 1993). The willingness to go above and beyond the call of duty
(extra-role performance) include things such as providing extra help to coworkers, volunteering for special work
activities, being particularly considerate of coworkers and customers, arrive early to work and/or leave late, and
make suggestions when problems arise (Meyer & Allen, 1997). Affective commitment leads to increased
competitiveness, accountability and the desire to improve overall performance of the job (Konovsky &
Cropanzano, 1991).
Affective organizational commitment is beneficial to the employee as well. Employees that have high
levels of affective commitment, experience lower stress levels even though they work longer and harder than those
not committed. Affective commitment encourages motivation (Meyer & Allen, 1997) and lower psychological
physical, work-related stress (Reilly & Orsak, 1991), less emotional exhaustions and depersonalization (Jamal,
1990).
Employees committed to the organization, their jobs and careers appear happier, and are able to exert
more quality time to their families and hobbies (Reilly & Orsak, 1991).
Individual employee commitment and commitment to work groups improves team performance, pro-
social behavior and group cohesion enhancing individual job performance and satisfaction (Bishop and Scott,
1997). Those committed to their jobs and/or careers are absent less and have lower intentions to quit (Bishop &
Scott, 1997), increased job satisfaction, and increased intrinsic motivation (Hackman & Oldham, 1976). Job

Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online)
Vol.11, No.27, 2020
165
characteristics or interesting work such as task identity, skill variety, task significance and autonomy increases
motivation, job satisfaction and job performance (Hackman & Oldham, 1976). Career commitment and job
involvement affect professionals' job satisfaction, turnover intention, role stress, productivity, and job migration
(Aranya & Ferris, 1984; Gunz & Gunz, 1994).
The common point of organizational commitment components is that the employees continue to remain
in the organization whatever they feel positive or negative (Özdevecio glu, 2003: 114). For instance, although the
employees have weak affective and normative commitment, the lack of alternatives can lead them to have a strong
continuance commitment (Ceylan, Bayram, 2006: 117). However, the main important point here for the
organization is the performance and efficiency of the employee. The altitudes and performance of employees in
workplace depends on what they perceive about the organization (Allen, Meyer 1990:4-15). For instance, when
employees perceive that “their” organization acts as a “true organization”, they form positive images about it. They
feel proud to identify with such an organization, develop their self-esteem, form affective bonds with the
organization, develop a sense of loyalty, and make efforts to perform better and to benefit the whole organization
(Dutton, 1994).
2.7 Commitment in the Workplace
If commitment behavior is not transferred from individuals and subgroups to the total organization,
dysfunctional behavior can exist among individual employees whose goals are in conflict with the goals of the
total organization (Cohen, 2003; Vandenberg & Scarpello, 1994). One example of this is the possible inverse
relationship between career commitment and organizational commitment. If the organization is not in line with
the employee’s career goals, it may cause the employee to be more committed to his or her career rather to the
organization, which would have an inverse effect on organizational performance (Cohen, 2003). Commitment in
the workplace reframed illustrates this issue of conflict which is explained by the extent to which organizations
engaging in activities (antecedents) that enhance both organizational commitment (committed to the organization
and supervisor) and individual employee commitment (committed to their jobs, careers, work groups)
consequences will occur, leading to outcomes of maximization of organizational and individual performance.
When the employee is committed at all levels, optimal organizational and individual performance occurs as well
as individual employee satisfaction. In organizations where employees are neither committed to the organization
nor to their job, careers, and/or work groups, or the organization, distress within the organization may occur leading
to organizational performance problems and low performing workers. Organizations where employees may either
be committed to the organization, but not committed at the individual level (i.e. to their jobs or careers) or
committed at the individual level, but not committed to the organizational level may experience conflict between
organizational values and goals of the employee leading to a status quo performance situation or performance
lower than expected.
The researches show that the individuals, who bond to their organization emotionally, have higher work
performance. There is a negative correlation between continuance commitment and work performance (Meyer, et
al., 2004) The results of Jing and Xiao-hua’s survey indicate that there is a positive relationship between affective
commitment and work performance (Jing, Xiaohua, 2009: 621). Also as the employee satisfaction increases, there
will be increase in work performance. The continuance commitment has a negative relationship with work
performance belonging to the survey. It is not surprising to obtain low work performance from those who have the
desire to give up and unwillingness with the organizational goals and conditions. Suitable working environments
which satisfy and motivate the employees, lead them to have higher works performance (Yüceler, 2009: 455).
In summary, as Rusbult & Buunk (1993) contend, people stay in relationships to the extent that they are
uniquely dependent on them relative to the alternatives. The more attractive the alternatives and the lower the
termination costs, the less people are reliant on the existing relationship for the source of their satisfaction.
3.0 Research Design
The study will employ a descriptive research design as this attempted to ascertain the perception of the
teachers towards employee commitment in terms of work-relationship. This design is deemed appropriate for the
study because it describes and interprets “what is”. This is concerned with conditions or relationships that exist,
opinions that are held, process that are going on, effects that are evident, or trends that are developing, although it
often considers past events and influences as they relate to current conditions (Best and Kant 1998).
3.1 Research Instrument
For the purposes of this study, a questionnaire was devised to gather data on the factors that affect the employee
commitment to a particular organization. The research-made instrument consists of two parts, namely Part I which

Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online)
Vol.11, No.27, 2020
166
requires general characteristics of the respondent, Part II on Employee commitment and Factors affecting
employee commitment.
The items of the researcher-made questionnaire-checklist were carefully constructed based on existing
literature. To ensure relevance and accuracy of the instrument, it was subjected to validation. The research
instrument was referred to our adviser to critic and make further improvement. All suggestions and corrections
were incorporated. Items found to be not relevant were omitted from the instrument and the items found ambiguous
were revised according to the suggestions of the advisers. Complete sets of the final and approved questionnaire-
checklist were properly distributed to the teacher-respondents.
3.2 Validity and Reliability of the Research Instrument
The survey questionnaire was constructed based on the research literature and problems of the study.
As to the validity of the instrument, the prepared survey questionnaire was submitted to an expert who
independently validated its content in terms of relevance, suitability and appropriateness to the research problems,
after consolidating the suggestions given by the expert, the research instrument was subjected for reliability testing.
3.3 Data Collection Procedure
To determine the actual population of the target respondents, permission for the conduct of the study were
sought from the head of agency through a formal letter to allow the administration of the instrument to the target
respondent. After permission was granted, the approved letter was presented to the teacher-respondents. The
researcher personally administered the complete set of instruments and retrieved from the teachers-respondent on
the same day for proper tabulation, analysis and interpretation of the data.
To facilitate data analysis, the researcher will utilize statistical software. It is for this reason that the tables
used probability values (p values) rather than critical or tabular values to determine significant difference or
relationship used in manual statistical computations.
4.0 Results and Discussion
Problem No. 1
What is the work-relationship of employee towards managers in terms of employee commitment?
TABLE 3.0
DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONSES ON WORK-RELATIONSHIP OF EMPLOYEE TOWARDS MANAGERS
IN TERMS OF EMPLOYEE COMMITMENT
Statement PRIVATE PUBLIC Total
Mean VI* Mean VI * Mean VI *
1. My manager gives enough supportive
feedback in work I do.
3.70 SA 2.90 A 3.30 SA
2. I feel I can rely on my manager to help me
with work problem. 3.60 SA 2.65 A 3.13 A
3.
I feel I can talk to my manager about something
that upset me at work. 3.60 SA 2.70 A 3.15 A
4. I feel that my manager supports me through
any emotionally demanding work. 3.65 SA 2.70 A 3.18 A
5. I feel my manager encourages me enough at
work.
3.65 SA 2.80 A 3.23 A
6. My manager treats people fairly. 3.60 SA 2.80 A 3.20 A
7. I feel my manager encourages me to get
involve in decision making. 3.75 SA 2.85 A 3.30 SA
8. I feel my manager recognizes my potential as
an employee. 3.70 SA 3.00 A 3.35 SA
9. My manager inspires me to achieve my
goals.
3.65 SA 2.85 A 3.25 SA
10. My manager understands my needs as an
employee. 3.65 SA 2.90 A 3.28 SA
Grand Mean 3.66 SA 2.82 A 3.24 A
*VI – Verbal Interpretation
3.25-4.00– Strongly Agree (SA) 1.75-2.49 – Disagree (D)
2.50-3.24 – Agree (A) 1.00-1.74 – Strongly Disagree (SD)

Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online)
Vol.11, No.27, 2020
167
Based on table 3.0 above, it can be observed that the grand mean of 3.66 reveals that the private HEI
teachers as a whole strongly agree on the items under work relationship of employees towards manager. It is also
notable that all the items garnered a verbal interpretation of strongly agree. This implies that Teachers in private
HEIs have a good working relationship towards managers. As supported by literature, there is a “leader-member
agreement” between supervisor and employee along the lines of values, attitudes and perceptions. This can be
attributed to the fact that private HEIs managers give high regards in supporting, encouraging, helping, and
understanding employees. Hence, it is likely that there is a high social responsibility in attaining goals and
objectives of the organizations regardless of status and level. Table 3.0 also shows a grand mean of 2.82 under
public HEI with a verbal interpretation of agree with a support that all the items gleaned a verbal interpretation of
agree on work-relationship of employee towards manager. In general, as Higher Education Institutions revealed a
grand mean of 3.24 with a verbal interpretation of agree. This shows that irrespective of whether private or public
HEI, teachers have a good regard on the work-relationship between employee and manager.
Problem No. 2
What is the work-relationship of employee towards colleagues in terms of employee commitment?
TABLE 4.0
DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONSES ON WORK-RELATIONSHIP OF EMPLOYEE TOWARDS
COLLEAGUES IN TERMS OF EMPLOYEE COMMITMENT
Statement PRIVATE PUBLIC Total
Mean
VI*
Mean VI * Mean VI *
1. I feel my colleagues will help me if work
becomes difficult.
3.35 SA 2.80 A 3.08 A
2. I get the support I needed from my colleagues. 3.40 SA 2.95 A 3.18 A
3. I get the respect at work which I deserve from
my colleagues. 3.35 SA 2.90 A 3.13 A
4. My colleagues are willing to listen to my work-
related problems. 3.35 SA 3.20 A 3.28 SA
5. I feel there is always unhealthy competition
between my colleagues.
(R)
2.80 D 1.65 SA 2.23 A
6. I experience being personally harassed, in the
form of unkind words and behavior. (R) 2.60 D 2.00 A 2.30 A
7. I feel friction between colleagues. (R) 2.85 D 1.85 A 2.35 A
8. I feel sense of belongingness between my
colleagues 3.60 SA 3.00 A 3.30 SA
9.
I experience c
are among employees.
3.60
SA
3.05
A
3.33
SA
10. My relationship with others strained me in
work. (R) 2.40 A 1.75 A 2.08 A
Grand Mean 3.13 A 2.52 A 2.82 A
Note: (R) indicates the item is reverse scored
*VI – Verbal Interpretation
3.25-4.00– Strongly Agree (SA) 1.75-2.49 – Disagree (D)
2.50-3.24 – Agree (A) 1.00-1.74 – Strongly Disagree (SD)
As shown in the Table 4.0, all the items under work-relationship towards colleagues that the teachers in
private HEI assessed vary from disagree to strongly agree.
Based in Table 4.0 it can be observed that the grand mean of 3.13 reveals that the teachers in private HEI
as a whole agree on the items under work-relationship between fellow teachers. In addition, public HEI gleaned a
grand mean of 2.52 with a verbal interpretation of agree on the items. It is also notable that only item “I feel there
is always unhealthy competition between my colleagues” garnered strongly agree. Overall, the grand mean is 2.82
as agree on the items. It is noteworthy that the items “My colleagues are willing to listen to my work-related
problems”, “I feel sense of belongingness between my colleagues”, and “I experience care among employees”
garnered strongly agree.

Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online)
Vol.11, No.27, 2020
168
Problem No. 3
What is the perception of the employee towards commitment in terms of work-relationship?
TABLE 5.0
DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONSES ON THE PERCEPTION OF THE EMPLOYEE TOWARDS
COMMITMENT IN TERMS OF WORK-RELATIONSHIP
Statement PRIVATE PUBLIC Total
Mean
VI*
Mean VI * Mean VI *
1.
I understand the
goals
of the organizati
on.
3.60
SA
2.95
SA
3.28
SA
2. I desire to remain a member of the organization. 3.50 SA 3.05 A 3.28 SA
3. It would be very hard for me to leave my
department right now, even if I wanted to. (R) 1.90 SA 1.90 SA 1.90 SA
4. I do not feel any obligation to remain with my
current employer. (R) 2.80 D 1.70 SA 2.25 A
5. I would be very happy to spend the rest of my
career with this organization.
3.10 A 3.15 A 3.13 A
6. One of the few negative consequences of
leaving this department would be the scarcity of
available alternatives. (R)
2.55 D 2.25 A 2.40 A
7. I do not feel a strong sense of “belonging” to my
organization. (R) 3.15 D 1.95 A 2.55 D
8. This organization deserves my loyalty. 3.50 SA 3.10 A 3.30 SA
9. My commitment to the organization has led to
high productivity.
3.40 SA 3.20 A 3.30 SA
10. I feel valued in the organization. 3.40 SA 2.90 A 3.15 A
Grand Mean 3.09 A 2.62 A 2.85 A
Note: (R) indicates the item is reverse scored
*VI – Verbal Interpretation
3.25-4.00– Strongly Agree (SA) 1.75-2.49 – Disagree (D)
2.50-3.24 – Agree (A) 1.00-1.74 – Strongly Disagree (SD)
As shown in the Table 5.0, all the items on the perception of employees towards commitment in terms of
work-relationship assessed vary from disagree to strongly agree.
Based in Table 5.0 it can be observed that the grand mean of 3.09 reveals that the teachers in private HEI
as a whole agree on the items under work-relationship between fellow teachers. It is striking that the items “I do
not feel any obligation to remain with my current employer”, “One of the few negative consequences of leaving
this department would be the scarcity of available alternatives”, and “I do not feel a strong sense of “belonging”
to my organization” garnered disagree. In addition, only item “I would be very happy to spend the rest of my career
with this organization” gleaned agree. Moreover, public HEI gathered a grand mean of 2.62 as agree on the items.
It is remarkable that items “I understand the goals of the organization”, “It would be very hard for me to leave my
department right now, even if I wanted to, and “I do not feel any obligation to remain with my current employer”
garnered a strongly agree. Overall, the grand mean is 2.85 as agree on the items. It is noteworthy that the item “I
do not feel a strong sense of “belonging” to my organization.” garnered disagree.
5. Conclusions
In view of the foregoing findings, the following conclusions are drawn:
1. As a whole, employees perceived agree on the items under work-relationship of employee towards managers
in terms of employee commitment. A comparison between private and public shows that private have a better
work-relationship towards manager. It is apparent that employees have good, sustaining and developing
relationship towards managers. An encouragement from the manager to get involve in decision making has a
great impact on the commitment of employee through understanding, inspiring, recognizing and giving
support to the employees. Relationship between managers and employees lies greatly on the manager. The
what, where, when, how and manner of dealing always start on the manager. Managers play a critical role in
altering the environment of the workplace and a positive relationship between the employees will surely
increase productivity.
2. In general, employees perceived agree on the items under work-relationship of employee towards colleagues
in terms of employee commitment. A comparison between private and public shows that private have a better

Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online)
Vol.11, No.27, 2020
169
work-relationship towards colleagues. It is superficial that employees help, support, respect each other and
there is a sense of belongingness among colleagues. An important element in a commitment of the employees
when there is a culture of serving, reverence and willingness to listen fellow employees. Good relationship
among employees must be upheld and continue to develop considering the diverse personality, profession and
characters that prompt in managing personnel resources with the attainment of common goals and objectives
of the institution. Surely, employees will feel elated and remain its commitment in a workplace where
colleagues understand and a feeling of part of one family.
3. The perception towards commitment in the workplace reveals that employees agree on the items or statements.
A comparison between private and public shows that both assessed commitment through the given statement
as agree. Both private and public understand the goals of the organization, a desire to remain a member,
deserve loyalty, and perceived that the commitment of the employees leads to a high productivity to the
organization. Commitment affects the organization and the person. Committed employees will desire
organizational membership and even exert extra effort to protect the resources of the institution. A committed
employee is directly related to desirable work outcomes or performance, satisfied on the current job and less
turnover of employees.
5.1 Recommendations
The findings previously mentioned serves as the basis upon which the following recommendations are anchored:
1. Public organization should strengthen relationships between supervisor and employees along the lines of
values, attitudes and perceptions. Team building can be done twice or more in the school calendar. Team
building should be well participated across employee status and level of employees. The event should include
courses or activities that require participation of employees from other offices, colleges, and managers at the
same time.
2. School administrators should institutionalize activities that build work-relationships and support in the
planning, funding and implementation of such activities.
3. Supervisors should promote a culture of openness, support and building employees through proper mentoring
and coaching. A system may establish through scheduled mentoring and coaching among colleagues or
between employee and manager. In addition, Rewards can be given to group of employees who has done
exemplary contribution in the attainment of goals.
References
Allen, N. J., 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., Meyer, J. P., (1996). Affective, Continuance, and Normative commitment to the organization: An
examination of construct validity, Journal of Vocational Behavior, 49: 252-276.
Allen, T.D., Eby, L.T., Poteet, M.L., Lentz, E. & Lima, L. (2004), Career benefits associated with mentoring for
proteges: A Meta-Analysis, Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(1), 127-136.
Aranya, N. and Ferris, K. 1984 “A reexamination of accountants’ organizational professional conflict”, The
Accounting Review, vol. LIX, no. 1, January, pp. 1-15.
Bartlett, Steve, Burton, Diana, Peim Nick (2001). Introduction to education studies. doi: ISBN – 0761970169,
9780761970163: Sage
Baumeister, Roy F., Leary, Mark R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as
fundamental human motivation. New York: Psychological Bulletin.
Bayram, L., 2005. Yönetimde Yeni Bir Paradigma: Örgütsel Bağlılık, Sayıştay Dergisi, 59: 125-139.
Becker, H. S., 1960. Notes on the concept of commitment, The American Journal of Sociology, 66(1): 32-40.
Bishop, James W., Scott, Dow (1997). Support, Commitment, and Employee outcomes in a team environment,
Journal of Management, doi: 10.1177/014920630002600.
Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. Wiley: New York
Caldwell, D., Chatman, J., & O'Reilly, C. 1990. Building organizational commitment: A multi-firm study.
Journal of Occupational Psychology 63 (3), 245–261.
Chadsey, J., & Beyer, S. (2001). Social relationships in the workplace. Mental retardation and developmental
disabilities research reviews, 7(2), 128-133.
Cohen, A. 2003. Multiple commitments in the workplace, An integrative approach. Mahvah: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Publishers.
DeCotiis, T.A., & Summers, T.P. (1987). A path analysis of a model of the antecedents and consequences of
organizational commitment. Human Relations, 40, 445-470.

Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online)
Vol.11, No.27, 2020
170
Dey, I. (2003). Qualitative data analysis: A user friendly guide for social scientists. London: Sage Publications.
London: Routledge.
Eby, L. T., Adams, D. M., Russell, J. E., & Gaby, S. H. (2000). Perceptions of organizational readiness for change:
Factors related to employees' reactions to the implementation of team-based selling. Human relations,
53(3), 419-442.
Fornes, S. L., Rocco, T. S., & Wollard, K. K. (2004). Workplace commitment: A conceptual model developed from
integrative review of the research connections. Human Resource Development Review, 7(3), 339-357.
George, Jennifer M., Jones, Gareth R. (2012). Understanding and managing organizational behavior. Prentice
Hall, One Lake Street, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey 07458: Pearson Education, Inc.
Goulder, A.W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity. American Sociological Revies, 25,161-178.
Gül, H., Örgütsel bağlılık yaklaşımlarının mukayesesi değerlendirilmesi, http://eab.ege.edu.tr/pdf/2_1/C2-S1-
M4.pdf, 37-56.
Gunz, H., Gunz, S. (1994). Professional/Organizational commitment and job satisfaction for employed lawyers.
Journal of Human Relations, 1994: Jul, Vol. 47:7, p. 801-828.
Guzzo, Richard A., Noonan, Katherine A. (September 1994). Human resource practices as communications and
the psychological contract. DOI: 10.1002/hrm.3930330311.
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1975), Development of the job diagnostic survey. Journal of Applied Psychology,
60, 159-170.
Hogg, Michael A., Deborah J. Terry, and Katherine M. White. (1995). “A tale of two theories: A Critical
comparison of identity theory with social identity theory.” Social Psychology Quarterly 58:255-69
Jing, C., Xiao-hua, S., 2009. The relationship research among organizational commitment, Employee satisfaction
and work performance, International Conference on Management Science & Engineering (16th), 619-
624.
Katzenbach, Jon R. (2000), Peak Performance: Aligning the hearts and minds of your employees, Retrieved from
http://www.amazon.com /Peak-Performance-Aligning-Hearts-Employees/dp/0875849369.
Kaufman, Allen (2000), Collaboration and technology linkages: A Strategies Supplier
Typology.doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(200006)21:6<649::AID-SMJ108>3.0.CO;2-U
Kim & Mauborgne (1993). Procedural justice, Strategic decision making, and The knowledge economy. DOI:
10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199804)19:4<323::AID-SMJ976>3.0.CO;2-F
Konovsky, M.A., & Cropanzano, R. (1991). Perceived fairness of employee drug testing as a predictor of employee
attitudes and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 698-707.
Kram, K.E. and Higgins, M.A. (2009). A new mindset on mentoring: Creating developmental networks at work.
Sloan Management Review, Cambridge, MA.
Mathieu, J. E. & Zajac, D. M. 1990. A review and meta-analysis of the antecedents, Correlates and consequences
of organizational commitment. Psychological Bulletin 108 (2), 171–194.
Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human
resource management review, 1(1), 61-89
Meyer, J.P., & Allen, N.J. (1997). Commitment in the workplace: Theory, Research, and Application. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Mignerey, J. T., Rubin, R. B., & Gorden, W. I. (1995). Organizational entry: An investigation of newcomer
communication behavior and uncertainty. Communication Research, 22(1), 54–85.
Morrow, Jeff (1993). Reason in the creature walk among us. New York: The New York Times
Mowday, Richard T. (April 1979). The measure of organizational commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior
14(2). doi: 10.1016/0001-8791(79)90072-1.
O'Reilly, C. A.,and Chatmanj-(1986) Organizational commitment and
Pereira, Monica (2006). Browsing 2006 Electronic Resources and Libraries Conference. Georgia
Institute of Technology. doi: 10.18153/23954.
O'Reilly, C. A.,and Chatmanj-(1986) Organizational commitment and
psychological attachment: The effects of compliance, Identification, and Internalization on prosocial
behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology. No. 71.Pp. 492-499.
Randal and Cote (1994), Exploring the organizational commitment performance linkage in marketing: A study of
Life Insurance Salespeople, Journal of Business Research 29(1):57-63, doi: 10.1016/0148-
2963(94)90027-2.
Reilly, N. P., & Orsak, C. L. (1991). A career stage analysis of career and organizational commitment in nursing.
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 39, 311-330.
Rice, R.E. & Aydin, C. (1991). Attitudes toward new organizational technology: network proximity as a mechanism

Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online)
Vol.11, No.27, 2020
171
for social information processing. Administrative Science Quarterly, 9, 219-244.
Robinson, Joan (2009). Aspects of development and underdevelopment. Cambridge, England: Cambridge
University Press.
Robinson, S.L., Kraatz, M., & Rousseau, D.M. (1994). Changing obligations and the psychological contract: A
longitudinal study: Academy of Management Journal, 37:137-152.
Rusbult C.E, Buunk BP.(1993).Commitment processes in close relationship: An interdependence analysis. Journal
of Social and Personal Relationships. 1993 May;10(2):175-204.
Schwarzwald J, Koslowsky M, Shalit B (1992), ‘A field study of employees’ attitudes and behaviours after
promotion decisions’, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 77, pp. 511-514.
Sinclair, Robert R., Wright, Chris (December 2005). Performance differences among four organizational
commitment profiles. Journal of Applied Psychology. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.90.61280. Source:
PubMed.
Sturges, J., Guest, D., & Mackenize Davey, K. (2000), “Who’s in charge? Graduates’ attitudes to and experiences
of career management and organizational commitment among graduates in the first ten years at work”,
Journal of Organization Behavior, 23(6), 731-748.
The Families and Work Institute (1998), Reported in USA Today, July, No. 43.
Tierney, P. (1999). Work relations as a precursor to a psychological climate for change: The role of work group
supervisors and peers. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 12(2), 120-134.
Uhl-Bien, M., Graen, G. B., & Scandura, T. A. (2000). Implications of leader-member exchange (LMX) for
strategic human resource management systems: Relationships as social capital for competitive
advantage. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 18, 137-186.
Uyguç, N., Çımrın, D., 2004. DEÜ. Araştırma ve Uygulama Hastanesi Merkez Labaratuvarı Çalışanlarının
Örgüte Bağlılıklarını ve İşten Ayrılma Niyetlerini Etkileyen Faktörler, D.E.Ü. İ.İ.B.F.Dergisi, 19(1):
91-99.
Wanberg, C. R., & Banas, J. T. (2000). Predictors and outcomes of openness to changes in a reorganizing
workplace. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(1), 132-142.
Wei, G., Tai, L., (2010). An empirical study on organizational commitment and turnover of IT industry,
International Conference on E-Business and EGovernment,904-906.
Yüceler, A., 2009. Örgütsel Bağlılık ve Örgüt İklimi İlişkisi: Teorik ve Uygulamalı Bir Çalışma, Selçuk
Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi,22: 445-458.
Edison B. Estigoy, Ed.D., earned his Bachelor of Elementary Education (2009), Master of Arts in Education major
in Educational Administration (2012) and finished his Doctor of Education (Ed.D) major in Educational
Administration (2020) at the College of Teacher Education, Western Mindanao State University (WMSU),
Philippines. Former Instructor in Field Study, Pedagogy and Curriculum courses with quasi assignments as Internal
Quality Audit Team Leader and Document Custodian for ISO 9001:2015. Currently a Language Foreign Teacher
in Xi’an International Studies University, Xi’an, China. Actively collaborating with researchers in line with the
area of Education, Administration, Language and other disciplines.
Josephine L. Sulasula, MPA, is the Supervising Administrative Officer of Zamboanga City State Polytechnic
College (ZCSCPC), Zamboanga City, Philippines and was previously the Head of Procurement, Inventory, and
Assets of the same college. Currently, she is also an Internal Auditor of ISO 9000:2015 and Accreditation. Likewise,
she is teaching Public Administration in Graduate School of ZCSPC. She earned her Master in Public
Administration Major Fiscal Administration in Western Mindanao State University (WMSU) in 2019. She handles
the review of Comprehensive Examination in College of Public Administration and Development Studies in
WMSU started 2019 until present in the key areas of Fiscal Administration, Organization and Management,
Personnel Management, and Project Administration.