Content uploaded by Hasan Oudah Abdullah
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Hasan Oudah Abdullah on May 14, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
Impact of perceived organisational
justice, support and identity on
workplace behaviour through
job attitudes: verification
in the role of LOC
Hasan Oudah Abdullah and Hadi Al-Abrrow
Business Administration Department, College of Administration and Economics,
University of Basrah, Basrah, Iraq
Abstract
Purpose –This study used attribution and social exchange theories as bases to test a model
comprising the most significant variables, namely, perception, attitudes and positive behaviour. The
current research concentrated on the effects of three variables (i.e. organisational justice, support and
identity) on task performance and organizational citizenship behaviour via job satisfaction,
organisational commitment and work engagement. Additionally, this study aims to determine the
external locus of control’s moderator role.
Design/methodology/approach –A questionnaire-based quantitative design was used as basis in
collecting data from 1,125 industrial sector (i.e. electricity and oil industry) employees in southern
Iraq.
Findings –Analysis of data reinforced the majority of the relationships in the research model. Results
showed the mediator variables’significance in providing explanation to the majority of the relationships and
the external locus of control’s role in moderating such relationships. Research outcomes were used as basesin
discussing several theoretical and practical implications, as well as presenting a few recommendations for
studies in the future.
Originality/value –This research centres on determining the antecedents of positive behaviours via six
circumstantial variables and one personal variable in a single model. Moreover, this study is applied in a
developing country’s industrial sector with a moderately large sample size to yield evident and significant
outcomes. Consequently, practitioners and academics are provided with a reference on managing and
changing workplace behaviour.
Keywords Justice, Support, Identity, Satisfaction, Commitment, Engagement, Task performance,
OCB
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Organisational behaviour analyses individuals and groups’influences on organisations’
general behaviour (Abdullah et al.,2021), thereby affecting these organisations’performance
and effectiveness. The majority of studies in the organisational behaviour field uses
different methods in attempting to comprehend factors and variables creating positive
individual behaviour at work (Ces
ario and Chambel, 2017;Ahmad and Begum, 2020). Given
the significance of comprehending individual behaviour in effective management
(Ivancevich et al.,2013), individual behaviour is considered by members of organisations a
means of working, thereby affecting directly or indirectly organisations effectiveness
Perceived
organisational
justice
Received 3 January2022
Revised 7 April 2022
20 April 2022
Accepted 20 April2022
International Journal of
Organizational Analysis
© Emerald Publishing Limited
1934-8835
DOI 10.1108/IJOA-01-2022-3099
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
https://www.emerald.com/insight/1934-8835.htm
(Griffin and Moorhead, 2014). Therefore, this research centres on investigating individual-
level behaviour, given that it is the foundation for organisational behaviour. Specifically, an
event referring to an action or reaction for a particular objective denotes individual
behaviour, which is typically moved by the environment (Peng et al., 2021). Such an action/
reaction (e.g. can be conscious or unconscious or voluntary or involuntary) has a significant
effect on individuals’external world (Lambert et al.,2008;Abdullah et al.,2022). Thus, the
nature of individuals’relationships with each other or with organisations is determined by
individual behaviour (Minton and Khale, 2014).
Prior research has endeavoured to ascertain the antecedents of positive behaviours
in the workplace by considering several situational or personal variables (Yongxing
et al., 2017;Farid et al., 2019;Siswanto and Darus, 2020). However, failure to test these
variables in a particular model may lead to confusing results or meanings that are
unclear. Additionally, the majority of the studies have been conducted in developed
countries, particularly in service sectors (Jun et al., 2014;Baba and Abdullahi, 2019;
Turksoy and Tutuncu, 2021). The present research fills in the research gap by
conducting a test on the effects of six situational variables and a personal variable,
thereby determining the nature of working individuals’response to such situational
variables (e.g. locus of control). Additionally, this research centres on behaviour in a
developing country’s industrial sector. The current study focuses on a large sample size
to gain results that are accurate and clear.
Perception and the perceptual process are explained by attribution theory and social
exchange theory (SET), specifically by concentrating on comprehending working
individuals’assessment of events surrounding them via sensory and non-sensory
interpretations, as well as their responses to such interpretations (Ivancevich et al.,2013).
SET provides a general explanation of perception and specific elucidation of positive
perception. That is, the exchange concept is the foundation of any organisation’s formation,
thereby indicating the close relationship between positive perception and social exchange.
This situation resolves when working individuals’course is positive on the bases of their
perception process’results. These individuals will be positively engaged physically
(behaviour) when they are cognitively attentive (perception) and highly connected
(emotionally) (AL-Abrrow et al., 2019). Attribution theory states that external causes
(outside individuals’control) or internal causes (within their control) are individuals’reasons
for their perception of the work environment (Turban et al., 2007). Thus, attribution is
represented by primary reasons, thereby forming individuals’motivations for behaviour
(Turksoy and Tutuncu, 2021). Accordingly, the nature of perception is defined by
attribution theory on the basis of attributing people to the causes of their workplace
experience of organisational phenomena, thereby affecting their attitudes and behaviour
(Haslam et al.,2017).
A strong theoretical structure for comprehending the perceptions of organisational
phenomena and the corresponding responses are provided by SET and attribution theory
provides, particularly on concepts developed via positive phenomena, including justice,
support and identity (Blau, 1964). Evaluation will yield positive as reflected in behaviour
owing to the realisation that organisations are just and supportive, with features attuned
with employees’values and beliefs (Ahmad and Begum, 2020). The role of positive attitudes,
including satisfaction, commitment and work engagement can provide an explanation to the
aforementioned situation. Cognitive evaluation does not proceed primarily to the behaviour
but goes through an emotional aspect with an essential characteristic (Momeni and Hayavi,
2017;Abdullah et al.,2021).
IJOA
By fixing the study model with the perception, attitude and behaviour path, this research
attempts to address a few shortcomings of previous studies. Additionally, the test that
engagement functions is a consequence of job satisfaction and organisational commitment
and not preceded by these aspects. The determination of the external locus of control’s role in
the characteristic of the perception of organisational phenomena has not been relatively
clarified. Lastly, we observe that the majority of past research has generally centred on the
service sectors, whilst relatively disregarding the industrial sector.
This research will endeavour to determine the consequences of organisational justice,
support and identity on task performance and organisational citizenship behaviour. That is,
through the job satisfaction, organisational commitment and work engagement variables.
Additionally, the current study will determine the external locus of control’s moderator role.
To realise the research objective, the following sections will present the theoretical
development and hypotheses, as well as the methodology and procedures. Thereafter,
the results will be provided and discussed, along with a few theoretical and practical
recommendations.
Theoretical development and hypotheses
Positive variables are included in this study, representing perception, attitudes and
behaviour. Attribution theory and SET explain the cognitive process and its outcomes on
attitudes and behaviour variables. Individuals assess and deduce events around them on the
basis of reasonably stable phenomena, and embrace tendencies and behaviours based on
the outcomes of such interpretation (Ivancevich et al.,2013). Organisational justice,
organisational support and organisational identity are the three most important phenomena
perceived by workers.
Theory of organizational justice provides an explanation to perceived organisational
justice (POJ). The fairness level in operations and gains is evaluated by individuals against
the effort exerted by organisations (Köse and Uzun, 2018). Within organisations, employees
consistently relate and assess themselves with other employees. Hence, these employees’
perceptions of justice are the bases in forming their attitudes (Köse and Uzun, 2018;Pérez-
Rodríguez et al.,2019;Abbas et al.,2021). Perceived organizational support (POS) is
explained by organisational support theory (Eisenberger et al., 1986). Organisational
support is interpreted as tangible and/or intangible support from organisations towards
their employees, thereby providing a positive sign of organisations’extent in considering
their members in a cognitive and emotional manner (Eisenberger et al.,1986;Kang et al.,
2015). Consequently, such a support provides a normative commitment in people to give
importance to organisational interest and assist organisations realise their objectives
(Rhoades et al., 2001). Social identity theory states the importance of individuals’identities
originating from their group membership in comprehending their self-identity (Tajfel et al.,
1979;Haslam et al., 2017). Social identity theory was applied by Ashforth and Mael (1989) in
the context of organisations to determine perceived organisational identity (POI) as an
alternate viewpoint to comprehend organisational behaviour and work-related results.
Accordingly, organisational identity is defined as a psychological connection between
individuals and organisations, in which the former has a profound cognitive, emotional and
subjective bond with thelatter as a social entity (Karanika-Murray et al.,2015).
Job satisfaction, organisational commitment and work engagement are the three most
important variables representing the attitudes of individuals towards work in organisations
that have been relied upon. In the organizational behaviour literature, job satisfaction was
and remains the most investigated variable (Ahmad et al.,2010). Generally, job satisfaction’s
definition is a set of emotional responses to cognitive assessment of job characteristics and
Perceived
organisational
justice
their surrounding work environment (Locke, 1976;Hulin and Judge, 2003). That is,
organizational factors are the bases of working individuals in developing their satisfaction
for their work and their happiness in their jobs (Ahmad et al.,2010;Noah and Steve, 2012).
Organisational commitment refers to individuals’loyalty organisations (Ullah et al.,2020).
Organisational commitment is dependent on the evaluation of working individuals of the
psychological contracts’quality. After a cognitive evaluation process, people hold beliefs on
what they are entitled to in return for what they offer to organisations (Mercurio, 2015;
Lapointe and Vandenberghe, 2017). Positive psychology indicates that work engagement is
amongst the most significant positive concepts in the workplace, thereby benefiting
individuals and organisations (Bakker et al.,2008;Abdullah et al.,2021). Moreover, positive
psychology is defined as a mental and emotional state characterised by vitality, dedication
and understanding, as well as is positively associated with work and the corresponding
challenges (Schaufeli et al.,2002;AL-Abrrow et al., 2019). Consequently, the presence of a
good manager at work and a sense of appreciation and justice in organisations are amongst
the reasons for the aforementioned positive psychological feeling (Harrell-Cook et al., 2017).
Amongst the most important joint outcomes of POJ are job satisfaction and
organisational commitment (Lambert et al., 2007;Kim, 2017;Saks, 2019). Job satisfaction
and employees’commitment to their organisations are the result of a sense of organisational
justice (Jun et al., 2014;Li, 2020). The aforementioned feeling will necessitate employees to
have positive reactions to organisations (Li et al.,2018). Moreover, the extent of
organisational support received by workers from their organisations has a significant
impact on their job satisfaction, specifically via the organisations’ability to make working
individuals experience considerable safety and psychological stability, thereby resulting in
high-level job satisfaction and organisational commitment (Kim, 2017;Saks, 2019;Rhoades
et al., 2001;Rahimi and Zaheri, 2020). Additionally, an important aspect in determining
employees’attitudes and behaviours is identity (Haynie et al.,2019). What makes
individuals satisfied with their jobs is the coherence of their feeling with the rudimentary
characteristics of organisations (Marique and Stinglhamber, 2011;Zhang et al.,2018).
Carmeli et al. (2006) indicated that working individuals assessing the status of organisations
defines their cognitive identity, as well as feelings of love and enjoyment of work and their
commitment (Zhang et al.,2018).
Additionally, a significant indicator of work engagement is organisational justice (Park
et al.,2016;Köse and Uzun, 2018). The reason is this indicator’s significantly positive ability
to influence people to considerably develop work engagement (Lee and Wei, 2017).
Additionally, another aspect that positively affects work engagement is POS (Gupta et al.,
2016;Saks, 2006). People who integrate significantly with their work are those who perceive
a work environment that is supportive (Adil et al., 2020). Generally, a type of social identity
motivating people to work engagement contributing to organisations’success is
organisational identity organisation (Liu and Chao, 2019). Therefore, the following
hypotheses are drawn on the bases of the preceding arguments:
H1,2,3. Organisational justice has a positive effect on job satisfaction, organisational
commitment and work engagement.
H4,5,6. Organisational support has a positive effect on (job satisfaction, organisational
commitment and work engagement).
H7,8,9. Organisational identity has a positive effect on job satisfaction, organisational
commitment and work engagement.
IJOA
The characteristics of task performance are indicated in the formal descriptions of various
job (Borman and Motowidlo, 1993). Task performance has two forms. The first form
involves tasks directly transforming raw materials into goods and services representing the
products of organisations (Shamim and Siddiqui, 2019). The other form pertains to
undertakings that serve and continue the core of the first type of tasks as follows:
restocking their raw material supplies;
distributing the completed goods; and
providing significant functions of planning, coordination and supervision of
personnel, enabling them to effectively and efficiently function (Koopmans et al.,
2014).
In an organizational context, citizenship is comparable to a lubricant, reducing friction in
organisations’social relations (Podsakoff et al.,2000). As argued by Borman and Motowidlo
(1993), the formal reward system does not explicitly recognise organisational citizenship
behaviour, and such a behaviour generally improves organisations’effective performance
(Organ, 1990). Such an enhancement is seen through the effects on the psychological, social
and organisational work context. This situation can be achieved as follows:
exerting influence on other members of organisations; and
enhancing individuals’willingness to voluntarily or additionally demonstrate
organisational value behaviours (Lambert et al., 2008;Banerjee and Banerjee, 2013).
The outcomes of the relationship amongst the job satisfaction, organisational commitment
and work engagement variables show a discrepancy. Biswas and Bhatnagar (2013)
explained that amongst the outcomes of work engagement are job satisfaction and
commitment. Abu-Shamaa et al. (2015) and Jung and Yoon (2021) maintained that a result of
work engagement and job satisfaction is commitment. The majority of the studies have
evaluated the three variables as outcomes of variables that are circumstantial or personal in
nature (Geisler et al.,2019;Snead, 2021). The present research will endeavor to assess work
engagement as an outcome of job satisfaction and organisational commitment. This idea is
consistent with the argument of Rayton et al. (2019), in which important prerequisites of
work engagement are job satisfaction and organisational commitment (Brunetto et al.,2012).
Meanwhile, closely related to job satisfaction are performance behaviours, in which those
who are working are likely to turn in better job performances (Alnoor et al.,2021). People are
highly likely to perform their tasks in a superior manner owing to the nature of jobs that
satisfy their feelings, expectations and desires (Saks, 2019). However, this idea is no longer
confined to task performance; further role behaviours, particularly organisational
citizenship behaviours, are likewise generally caused by workers’sense of considerable
satisfaction with their jobs (Caesens and Stinglhamber, 2014). A few studies have concluded
that positive relationships exist amongst job satisfaction, task performance and
organisational citizenship behaviours (Saks, 2019).
The ability to develop an emotional connection between organisations and their workers
is expressed in organizational commitment (AL-Abrrow et al., 2020), specifically via the
positive association between workers’performance and their commitment (Jaramillo et al.,
2006). Task performance level is affected by organisational commitment (Baba, and
Abdullahi, 2019;Atshan et al., 2021) because employees seem to demonstrate significant
commitment to value and effort to enhance task performance (Tseng and Lee, 2011;Jun
et al., 2014). Additionally, organisational citizenship behaviours are substantially affected
by organizational commitment via reflecting the positive attitudes of individuals towards
Perceived
organisational
justice
organisations in an “outside the role”manner (AL-Abrrow et al., 2020). People highly
committed to organisations are markedly focused on exhibiting organisational citizenship
behaviours and completing job tasks (AL-Abrrow et al., 2020).
A contributing factor in motivating people to perform and complete previously assigned
tasks in the best possible manner is work engagement (Bakker et al., 2012;Monica, 2019),
thereby resulting in high-performance behaviours of job tasks (AL-Abrrow et al., 2021;Basit,
2019). Individuals become significantly motivated to engage in tasks assigned to them owing to
dedication, enthusiasm and understanding (Yongxing et al., 2017). Additionally, organizational
citizenship behaviour is positively affected by work engagement (Farid et al.,2019). Prior
research has concluded a positive relationship amongst work engagement, task performance
and organisational citizenship behaviours, particularly “voluntary behaviour”(Shantz et al.,
2013). Hence, the following hypotheses are derived on the basis of the preceding discussion:
H10,11. Job satisfaction and organisational commitment have a positive effect on work
engagement.
H12,13. Job satisfaction has a positive effect on task performance and OCB.
H14,15. Organisational commitment has a positive effect on task performance and
OCB.
H16,17. Work engagement has a positive effect on task performance and OCB.
Rotter (1966) explained that a significant determinant of the manner by which people
interpret situations they encounter is the locus of the control of subordinates as an
interactive variable, in which they attribute what they experience to internal factors (e.g.
skills, effort, perseverance) or external factors (e.g. coincidence, other individuals, divine
intervention) (Spector, 1988). Some personality characteristics possibly have a role in
ascertaining how the surrounding environment affects individuals (Shanteau, 1987). A
personality trait that can affect individual cognition is locus of control (Howell and Avolio,
1993). Locus of control theory states that, when faced with workplace threats, people with
different loci of control use varying measures and pursue a variety of strategies. Individuals
with external locus of control are considerably conscious of POJ, thereby positively affecting
their attitudes and behaviour (Chiang et al.,2019). External locus of control defines the level
of individuals’interaction with organisational phenomena, thereby doubling the positive
and negative perceptions of positive and negative things, respectively (Turnipseed, 2018;
Giao et al., 2020;Bani-Hani and Hamdan-Mansour, 2021). Accordingly, this role is nearly
associated with the moderator variable function, which was eventually adopted as a
moderator variable. Notwithstanding the logic of the impact of locus of control-related
personality traits on the perception of employees of their environment (Turksoy and
Tutuncu, 2021), a few studies have unsuccessfully sustained support for this role (Siswanto
and Darus, 2020). However, several studies have received support for the preceding outcome
because the external locus of control is an interactive role with workers’perceived support
on their work attitudes (Abdullah et al., 2021). External locus of control also has an
interactive role with POS in a manner mitigating negative feelings at work (Bajaj and
Krishnan, 2014). Hence, the following hypotheses can be formulated on the bases of the
preceding analysis:
H18,26. The positive relationship between (perceived organisational justice, support
and identity) and (job satisfaction, organisational commitment and work
engagement) is strong when external locus of control is high.
IJOA
Figure 1 shows the study model of study.
Method
Sample and procedure
Data were gathered from several electricity and oil sector companies in southern Iraq,
particularly by using and electronic questionnaire in coordination with human resources. A
total of 1,140 responses were obtained, 1,125 of which were valid. Specifically, we randomly
targeted workers by forwarding links to random databases available in human resources.
To comply with ethical considerations, a link that provides the research purpose and an
assurance to safeguard confidentiality of responses was sent to the workers. Data collection
lasted two and a half months.
Addressing the common problem of bias in behavioural studies was necessary in this
study because it would determine the accuracy of the results’generalisability. Therefore, a
few precautionary measures were pursued, including ensuring the answers’confidentiality
and formulation of a few reverse elements. Additionally, the single-factor Harman test
(Podsakoff et al., 2003) was performed. Variance of the first factor was 23.45% after loading
all factors (i.e. it will not exceed 50%). That is, bias in the data is no longer a problem. A test
was likewise conducted to determine significant differences between early and late
responses. Results obtained indicate no significant differences between early and late data,
thereby confirming no concern with bias.
The sample included 69% males, whilst the percentage of females was 31%. A total of
55% and 45% were in the oil industry and electricity sectors. Those married comprised 60%
of the sample population, whilst 28% were bachelors and 12% were divorced. A total of
54% of the sample held bachelor’s degrees, whilst 18% had high school diplomas, 11% with
diplomas and 17% with higher degrees. The age group from 31 to 40 years was the most
dominant with 46%, followed by the 41 to 50 group with 19%.
Measures
Short scales were used owing to the numerous variables and concerns on response length.
Moreover, the number of questionnaire items was decreased by selecting strong items that
received high loading coefficient (Rhoades and Eisenberger, 2002). Specialists translated the
Figure 1.
Model of study
Perceived
organisational
justice
questionnaire into Arabic. All items were measured using a five-point scale (1 = strongly
disagree; 5 = strongly agree).
Independent variables.
POJ (
a
= 0.87): We used the four-item scale of Lambert et al. (2007) to measure
procedural justice as organisational justice. The reason is that wage structure is
nearly fixed in the public sector and lacks sufficient flexibility for discrimination.
An example is “The criteria used to evaluate my performance in this company are
fair and objective”.
POS (
a
= 0.90): Four items were drawn from Eisenberger et al. (1997). An example
is “My organisation really cares about my well-being”.
POI (
a
= 0.87): To measure POI, we used four items from the scale of Mael and
Ashforth (1992). An example is “This company’s success is my successes”.
Mediator and moderator variables.
Job satisfaction (
a
= 0.91): Four items were used based on Wright and Cropanzano
(1998). An example is “In general, I am satisfied with my co-workers”.
Organisational commitment (
a
= 0.85): The emotional commitment scale was used
for representing organisations’core of commitment. Four items from the scale of
Meyer and Allen (1997) were used. An example is “I feel a strong sense of belonging
to my company”.
Work engagement (
a
= 0.83): A one-dimensional scale with four items and based on
the UWES-9 short scale was constructed: two items each for the primary dimension
of “strength and dedication”(Bakker et al., 2011), in line with (Albrecht and Marty,
2020). An example is “In my work, I feel energised”.
External locus of control (
a
= 0.89): Four items were used based on Spector (1988).
An example is “Getting the job you want is mostly a matter of luck”.
Dependent variables.
Task performance (
a
= 0.79): Four items adapted from the scale of Goodman and
Svyantek (1999) were used to measure task performance. An example is “My
performance achieves the job objectives”.
Organisational citizenship behaviour (
a
= 0.80): This study adapted four items from
the scale of Lambert et al.. (2008). An example is “I often volunteer to do things
without being asked”.
Analytical approach and analysis unit
Structural equation modelling based on partial least squares modelling (PLS-SEM) was used
in this research owing to the current study model’s complexity and the large data volume
(Hair et al.,2011). For this study’s measurement unit, the current research was realised at the
individual analysis level by maintaining the nature of the variables.
Results
Measurement model assessment
Validity of the convergent and discriminant was tested to evaluate the measurement model.
Firstly, several indicators were used to test convergent validity, thereby ensuring the
IJOA
convergence to the required extent of concepts that measure another concept. These indices
are as follows:
factor loading, which must be preferably above 0.5 or 0.7 for “perfect condition”;
average variance extracted (AVE), which must be over 0.5; and
composite reliability (CR) and Cronbach’s alpha, which must be above 0.7 (Shah and
Goldstein, 2006;Hair et al., 2011).
As shown in Table 1, the results confirm that the indicators are correctly met, particularly
after excluding weak elements (poj2, ocb3).
Secondly, discriminatory validity was evaluated to ensure the distinctiveness of
scales measuring various concepts. To realise this scenario, this study used the standard of
Table 1.
Convergent validity
test
Factors Items Factor loading AVE CR Cronbach’s
a
Perceived organizational justice poj1 0.725 0.619 0.751 0.785
poj2 0.423
poj3 0.861
poj4 0.767
Perceived organizational support pos1 0.824 0.651 0.829 0.855
pos2 0.751
pos3 0.813
pos4 0.837
Perceived organizational identity poi1 0.753 0.612 0.794 0.799
poi2 0.801
poi3 0.820
poi4 0.752
Job satisfaction js1 0.792 0.564 0.745 0.805
js2 0.754
js3 0.790
js4 0.662
Organizational commitment oc1 0.905 0.819 0.937 0.926
oc2 0.944
oc3 0.932
oc4 0.835
Work engagement we1 0.840 0.718 0.880 0.893
we2 0.869
we3 0.844
we4 0.836
Task performance tp1 0.914 0.532 0.926 0.936
tp2 0.846
tp3 0.926
tp4 0.884
Organizational citizenship behaviour ocb1 0.847 0.526 0.701 0.793
ocb2 0.866
ocb3 0.192
ocb4 0.775
Locus of control loc1 0.778 0.653 0.831 0.876
loc2 0.699
loc3 0.865
loc4 0.878
Note: poj2 and ocb3 items were deleted
Perceived
organisational
justice
Fornell and Larcker (1981). This technique involves setting the variable’s correlation values
with itself at the top of the matrix. However, these correlation values should be higher than
those of other variables at the given value’s bottom and left (Henseler et al., 2015). As
indicated in Table 2, the results show that the preceding test condition was satisfied by the
entire set of values. That is,discriminatory validity problem is no longer an issue.
Descriptive statistics
The descriptive statistics and correlation coefficient test between the study variables are
presented in Table 3. As indicated by the results the range of the mean was between 2.93
and 3.32, with a medium acceptance level. Additionally, standard deviation was good,
indicating a highly consistent data. Amongst the majority of the variables, the correlation
between them was morally and statistically significant. Hence, the hypotheses of this study
were initially supported.
Lastly, multicollinearity needed to be tested owing to the dependence on a complex
model of variables. In relying on the linear statistical variance inflation factor (VIF) values,
the VIF value must be either below 10 or below 5. As shown in Table 4, VIF values for all
relationships were below 5. Hence, multicollinearity is no longer a cause of concern.
Structural equation model and hypothesis test
SEM-PLS was used to evaluate the measurement model and for hypothesis testing.
Particularly, hypotheses were tested via a reliance on the p-value (i.e. below 0.05) to accept
the hypotheses. Meanwhile, coefficient of determination (R
2
) was used determine the extent
to which independent variables (external variables) explain the dependent variable (internal
Table 2.
Fornell–Larcker
criterion
Variables POJ POS POI JS OC WE TP OCB LOC
POJ 0.787
POS 0.584 0.807
POI 0.452 0.521 0.782
JS 0.398 0.412 0.621 0.751
OC 0.556 0.452 0.354 0.511 0.905
WE 0.425 0.336 0.452 0.421 0.632 0.847
TP 0.525 0.458 0.521 0.365 0.425 0.321 0.729
OCB 0.514 0.241 0.558 0.298 0.412 0.412 0.531 0.726
LOC 0.412 0.522 0.412 0.321 0.422 0.501 0.412 0.321 0.808
Notes: POJ = Perceived organizational justice; POS = Perceived organizational support; POI = Perceived
organizational identity; JS = Job satisfaction; OC = Organizational commitment; WE = Work engagement;
TP = Task performance; OCB = Organizational citizenship behaviour; LOC = Locus of control
Table 3.
Multicollinearity test
JS OC WE TP OCB
POI 1.083 1.083 1.615
POJ 1.423 1.423 1.687
POS 1.345 1.345 1.372
JS 1.763 1.628 1.628
OC 1.929 1.873 1.873
WE 2.108 2.108
IJOA
variable). Table 5 shows the results of the direct and indirect hypothesis testing,
respectively.
Table 5 shows that the mediating variable, except for work engagement, was positively
affected by POJ and POI, and that job satisfaction was the only one affected by POS.
Additionally, work engagement was clearly positively impacted by job satisfaction and
organizational commitment. Similarly, task performance and OCB were positively affected
by job satisfaction, organisational commitment and work engagement, although an
exception was the effect of job satisfaction on task performance. For the moderator
hypotheses, not all hypotheses were supported. In the relationships between POI and job
satisfaction, POS and work engagement and POJ and organisational commitment, this
study determined only a moderated role for external locus of control. Lastly, R
2
results show
Table 4.
Descriptive statistics
Variables Mean SD POJ POS POI JS OC WE TP OCB LOC
POJ 2.93 0.871 1
POS 2.33 0.852 0.449
**
1
POI 3.01 1.01 0.228
**
0.252
**
1
JS 3.21 1.121 0.213
**
0.249
**
0.609
**
1
OC 3.17 0.981 0.251
**
0.251
**
0.444
**
0.662
**
1
WE 3.13 0.814 0412
**
0.351
**
0.253
**
0.403
**
0.324
**
1
TP 3.08 0.821 0.313
**
0.314
**
0.242
**
0.210
**
0.163
*
0.423
**
1
OCB 3.21 0.821 0.318
**
0.254
**
0.229
**
0.177
*
0.185
*
0.483
**
0.477
**
1
LOC 3.32 0.969 0.041 0.421
**
0.103 0.128
*
0.241
**
0.321
**
0.422
**
0.161
*
1
Notes: (1) ** P<0.01; * P<0.05 (two-tailed). (2) POJ = Perceived organizational justice; POS = Perceived
organizational support; POI = Perceived organizational identity; JS = Job satisfaction; OC = Organizational
commitment; WE = Work engagement; TP = Task performance; OCB = Organizational citizenship
behaviour; LOC = Locus of control
Table 5.
Direct hypothesis
testing
Paths
b
t-value p-values Paths
b
t-value p-values
POJ !JS 0.371 8.290 0.000 WE !TP 0.340 4.525 0.000
POJ !OC 0.163 3.346 0.001 WE !OCB 0.454 7.373 0.000
POJ !WE 0.028 0.535 0.593 LOC !JS 0.255 5.545 0.000
POS !JS 0.113 2.664 0.008 LOC !OC 0.269 5.928 0.000
POS !OC 0.011 0.317 0.752 LOC !WE 0.170 3.543 0.000
POS !WE 0.055 1.569 0.117 LOC*POJ !JS 0.038 0.969 0.333
POI !JS 0.153 3.488 0.001 LOC*POS !JS 0.146 2.240 0.216
POI !OC 0.476 10.471 0.000 LOC*POI !JS 0.152 2.425 0.047
POI !WE 0.031 0.587 0.557 LOC*POJ !WE 0.021 0.512 0.609
JS !WE 0.313 6.369 0.000 LOC*POS !WE 0.119 2.619 0.037
OC !WE 0.396 6.949 0.000 LOC*POI !WE 0.009 0.226 0.821
JS !TP 0.090 1.597 0.111 LOC*POJ !OC 0.159 2.287 0.049
JS !OCB 0.177 3.034 0.003 LOC*POS !OC 0.011 0.266 0.790
OC !TP 0.137 2.146 0.032 LOC*POI !OC 0.017 0.379 0.705
OC !OCB 0.151 2.283 0.023
Notes: (1) POJ = Perceived organizational justice; POS = Perceived organizational support; POI =
Perceived organizational identity; JS = Job satisfaction; OC = Organizational commitment; WE = Work
engagement; TP = Task performance; OCB = Organizational citizenship behaviour; LOC = Locus of control
(2) R
2
for: JS = 0.631; OC = 0.540; WE = 0.686; TP = 0.198; OCB = 0.369
Perceived
organisational
justice
a significant explanatory power provided by the study model for changes in dependent
variables. That is, workers’POJ and identity make them satisfied and committed to work.
Thus, they become engaged in their jobs and motivated to exhibit positive workplace
behaviours.
Results of testing the indirect effect hypotheses are presented in Table 6. Generally, job
satisfaction and organisational commitment explain the effects of POJ on task performance
and OCB, particularly by work engagement. Moreover, this result is applicable to the effects
on task performance and OCB by POS. This result was not accepted through job satisfaction
but accepted upon entering work engagement into the indirect path. However, this role did
not emerge with the path involved in organisational commitment, the hypotheses of which
were rejected. The hypotheses of POI’s indirect influence on task performance and OCB
were accepted in a manner that emphasizes the criticality of identity in the study model.
Lastly, the job satisfaction, organisational commitment to task performance and OCB
through work engagement paths were all accepted. The indirect pathway results generally
signify that the effects of perceived justice, support and identity on positive behaviours can
be elucidated through satisfaction and commitment and work engagement thereafter.
Discussion
This research attempted to assess a model with multiple paths to reach the two most
important individual-level positive behaviours in the context of organisations: task
performance and OCB. Additionally, the current study endeavoured to ascertain the external
locus of control role in this model. Accordingly, our results reinforced the majority of the
hypotheses. We summarise the three most important results as follows. Firstly, this study’s
most prominent result was the reduction of the controversy involving the relationship
amongst the three mediator variables. Specifically, our results substantially validate that the
result of satisfaction and commitment is work engagement (Rayton et al.,2019). Evidently,
the mechanism through which attitudes are transformed from employees’emotional
component to their actual behavioural component will be work engagement. Secondly, the
current study results highlight the significance of perceived organisational identity
compared with organisational justice and support, which is in contrast with prevailing
findings (Marique and Stinglhamber, 2011;Zhang et al.,2018;Haynie et al., 2019). This
outcome may be justified, given that wage and incentive structures have limited flexibility
and do not substantially control workers’motivation towards work. Accordingly, this result
confirms that the correspondence between organisations and employees’values and
characteristics will significantly impact employee interaction with work goals and tasks.
Therefore, low-level justice or support may be compensated by high-level identity and
belonging (Zhang et al., 2018;Liu and Chao, 2019).
Lastly, the importance of the study model’slocus of control was not supported by the
current results compared with those of a few previous studies (Turnipseed, 2018;Giao et al.,
2020;Bani-Hani and Hamdan-Mansour, 2021). The possible explanation is the presence of
other personality variables considerably sensitive to people’s perceptions of organisational
phenomena (e.g. self-efficacy, emotional intelligence or the Big Five personality traits). As
moderator, personal variables’effects vary from one culture to another. However, our
observation is that the relationship between organisational justice and commitment is
moderated by the locus of control. That is, workers commitment will be strong if workers
with high external locus of control realise the fairness of organisations. Additionally, the
relationship between POS and work engagement is moderated by the locus of control. That
is, people with an external locus of control would be highly related to their work when they
are provided with organisational support. Lastly, the relationship between POI and job
IJOA
Paths
b
t-value p-values Paths
b
t-value p-values
POJ !JS !TP 0.033 1.558 0.120 POS !OC !WE !TP 0.001 0.311 0.756
POJ !JS !OCB 0.066 2.861 0.004 POS !OC !WE !OCB 0.002 0.319 0.750
POJ !JS !WE 0.116 5.337 0.000 POS !WE !TP 0.019 1.306 0.192
POJ !JS !WE !TP 0.039 3.593 0.000 POS !WE !OCB 0.025 1.421 0.156
POJ !JS !WE !OCB 0.052 4.577 0.000 POI !JS !TP 0.014 1.439 0.151
POJ !OC !TP 0.022 1.761 0.079 POI !JS !OCB 0.027 2.269 0.024
POJ !OC !OCB 0.025 1.851 0.065 POI !JS !WE 0.048 3.097 0.002
POJ !OC !WE 0.065 2.958 0.003 POI !JS !WE !TP 0.016 2.539 0.011
POJ !OC !WE !TP 0.022 2.319 0.021 POI !JS !WE !OCB 0.022 2.858 0.004
POJ !OC !WE !OCB 0.029 2.616 0.009 POI !OC !TP 0.065 2.142 0.033
POJ !WE !TP 0.009 0.525 0.600 POI !OC !OCB 0.072 2.334 0.020
POJ !WE !OCB 0.013 0.527 0.598 POI !OC !WE 0.189 5.515 0.000
POS !JS !TP 0.011 1.188 0.235 POI !OC !WE !TP 0.064 3.517 0.000
POS !JS !OCB 0.021 1.724 0.085 POI !OC !WE !OCB 0.086 4.269 0.000
POS !JS !WE 0.035 2.403 0.017 POI !WE !OCB 0.014 0.579 0.563
POS !JS !WE !TP 0.012 2.177 0.030 POI !WE !TP 0.010 0.587 0.557
POS !JS !WE !OCB 0.016 2.395 0.017 JS !WE !OCB 0.142 5.254 0.000
POS !OC !TP 0.002 0.281 0.779 JS !WE !TP 0.106 3.817 0.000
POS !OC !OCB 0.002 0.275 0.783 OC !WE !OCB 0.180 4.880 0.000
POS !OC !WE 0.004 0.319 0.750 OC !WE !TP 0.135 3.633 0.000
Table 6.
Indirect hypothesis
testing
Perceived
organisational
justice
satisfaction is moderated by the locus of control. That is, matching workers’characteristics
and values with the organisations where they work will make them satisfied with their jobs,
particularly with high external locus of control. This study’s outcomes are relatively close to
those of other studies (Siswanto and Darus, 2020;Turksoy and Tutuncu, 2021;Abdullah
et al.,2021).
Overall, our research results reinforced the perceptions of the current study on the
interpretation of the perceptual process of theory of attribution and SET. Additionally, the
results indicated the manner of transferring positive content from cognitive to emotional
component, resulting in the actual behaviour (i.e. task performance and OCB). According to
attribution theory, people assess their work environment and use evaluation findings as
bases in developing emotional and behavioural responses (Farid et al., 2019). This outcome
substantially reinforces the notion that the behaviour of employees in organisations can be
managed and modified by addressing the previously discussed three components (Khaw
et al.,2021). SET likewise reiterates that work engagement is impacted by POJ, POS and POI
during the early stages, when workers feel satisfied and committed to their jobs (Pérez-
Rodríguez et al.,2019;Farid et al., 2019). Thus, positive responses towards behaviours
benefit organisations when people gain a positive POJ, POS and POI in the workplace.
Practical implications
Several managerial implications must be elaborated on the basis of the discussion of the
results. Firstly, behaviour in organisations can be potentially managed and modified by
recommending and evaluating conceptual frameworks. For example, a considerably flexible
salary and bonus structure could be recommended and made an instrument used by
managers in managing and modifying the behaviour of employees. Secondly, human
resource managers should focus on and consider the congruence between individuals’
identities and those of organisations. The reason is that this congruence will provide
organisations with manifold benefits. Therefore, the polarisation and selection process
should be reviewed, and that its principles must be reformulated. This endeavour will
enable the recruitment of employees who are well integrated with organisations’identity
and culture. Thirdly, our results indicate that justice and support are and continue to be
amongst the most important organisational variables and phenomena. Additionally, these
variables can be managed in a manner that benefits organisations. Therefore, the creation of
a positive work environment for employees necessitates developing administrative leaders,
raising their levels of effective communication and increasing their awareness of
contemporary leadership theories. Fourthly, amongst the most important factors
contributing to the emergence of positive behaviours are job satisfaction and commitment.
Thus, effective management will provide substantial focus in following-up and reforming
these concepts’levels amongst employees, and on an ongoing basis. This aspect is achieved
via observation, providing open communication channels or conducting periodic surveys.
Lastly, modifying employees’personal characteristics may be impossible, but what can be
modified are organisational concepts contributing to the investment of characteristics that
will benefit organisations. Evidently, despite the simplicity of the preceding idea, it is a
necessary and crucial factor in the effectiveness of leaders in contemporary organisations.
Limitations and directions for future research
Despite the important contributions of the current study, a few limitations to its scope
should be presented. The most critical hindrance is the relatively large sample size, which is
contained in southern Iraq’s electricity and oil industry. Consequently, this aspect needs
caution when attempting to generalise the results. Another matter of concern is relying on
IJOA
procedural justice to measure organisational justice. Although the idea is justified, the
results may have been different if the measurement method had been modified, which is our
proposal to test in a future research. Similarly, this study was conducted in a developing
country (i.e. Iraq). Given the situation of the COVID-19 pandemic, the assumption is that
considerable changes had occurred over this period. Moreover, our study was unable to
generally prove external locus of control’s interactive role. However, this limitation does not
cancel the importance of other personal variables. Therefore, our recommendation is to test
other personality variables (e.g. personality, self-esteem or self-efficacy) to obtain results
that are markedly accurate. One other limitation is concerned with the nature of self-
reported measures that may result in potential bias in responses. Although mechanisms
have been provided to reduce bias, future studies will depend on the use of measurement
methods that are objective. Lastly, the nature of the cross-sectional study involving data
collection at a certain period will provide motivation for conducting longitudinal studies,
particularly those that accurately determine the causal relationships amongst variables.
References
Abbas, S., Al-Abrrow, H., Abdullah, H.O., Alnoor, A., Khattak, Z.Z. and Khaw, K.W. (2021),
“Encountering COVID-19 and perceived stress and the role of a health climate among medical
workers”,Current Psychology, pp. 1-14.
Abdullah, H., Ismail, I., Alnoor, A. and Yaqoub, E. (2021), “Effect of perceived support on employee’s
voice behaviour through the work engagement: a moderator role of locus of control”,
International Journal of Process Management and Benchmarking, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 60-79.
Abdullah, H., Thajil, K., Alnoor, A., Al-Abrrow, H., Khaw, K.W., Chew, X.Y. and Sadaa, A. (2022),
“Predicting determinants of use mobile commerce through modeling non-linear relationships”,
Central European Business Review, doi: 10.18267/j.cebr.306.
Abu-Shamaa, R., Al-Rabayah, W.A. and Khasawneh, R.T. (2015), “The effect of job satisfaction and
work engagement on organizational commitment”,IUP Journal of Organizational Behavior,
Vol. 14 No. 4, , pp. 7-27.
Adil, M.S., Hamid, K.B.A. and Waqas, M. (2020), “Impact of perceived organisational support and
workplace incivility on work engagement and creative work involvement: a moderating role of
creative self-efficacy”,International Journal of Management Practice, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 117-150.
Ahmad, I. and Begum, K. (2020), “Impact of abusive supervision on intention to leave: a moderated
mediation model of organizational-based self esteem and emotional exhaustion”,Asian Business
and Management, pp. 1-20.
Ahmad, H., Ahmad, K. and Shah, I.A. (2010), “Relationship between job satisfaction, job performance
attitude towards work and organizational commitment”,European Journal of Social Sciences,
Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 257-267.
Al-Abrrow, H., Abdullah, H. and Atshan, N. (2019), “Effect of organisational integrity and leadership
behaviour on organisational excellence: mediator role of work engagement”,International
Journal of Organizational Analysis, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 972-985.
Al-Abrrow, H., Thajil, K.M., Abdullah, H.O. and Abbas, S. (2020), “The dark triad and organizational
citizenship behavior in health care: the moderating role of positive emotions”,Global Business
and Organizational Excellence, Vol. 39 No. 5, pp. 6-17.
Al-Abrrow, H., Al-Maatoq, M., Alharbi, R.K., Alnoor, A., Abdullah, H.O., Abbas, S. and Khattak, Z.Z.
(2021), “Understanding employees’responses to the COVID-19 pandemic: the attractiveness of
healthcare jobs”,Global Business and Organizational Excellence, Vol. 40 No.2, pp. 19-33.
Albrecht, S.L. and Marty, A. (2020), “Personality, self-efficacy and job resources and their associations
with employee engagement, affective commitment and turnover intentions”,The International
Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 31 No. 5, pp. 657-681.
Perceived
organisational
justice
Alnoor, A., Abdullah, H.O., Al-Abrrow, H., Wah Khaw, K., Al-Awidi, I.A., Abbas, S. and Omrane, A.
(2021), “A fuzzy delphi analytic job demands-resources model to rank factors influencing open
innovation”,Transnational Corporations Review, pp. 1-15.
Ashforth, B.E. and Mael, F. (1989), “Social identity theory and the organization”,The Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 20-39.
Atshan, N.A., Al-Abrrow, H., Abdullah, H.O., Khaw, K.W., Alnoor, A. and Abbas, S. (2021), “The effect of
perceived organizational politics on responses to job dissatisfaction: the moderating roles of self-
efficacy and political skill”,Global Business and Organizational Excellence, Vol. 41 No. 2, pp. 43-54.
Baba, A.I. and Abdullahi, A. (2019), “Mediating role of affective commitment on the relationship
between employee’s innovative behaviour and task performance: lesson from Nigeria public
sector”,Asian Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 2348-7186.
Bajaj, H. and Krishnan, V.R. (2014), “Perceived organizational support and affect: the moderating effect
of locus of control”,Great Lakes Herald, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 22-31.
Bakker, A.B., Albrecht, S.L. and Leiter, M.P. (2011), “Key questions regarding work engagement”,
European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 4-28.
Bakker, A.B., Tims, M. and Derks, D. (2012), “Proactive personality and job performance: the role of job
crafting and work engagement”,Human Relations, Vol. 65 No. 10, pp. 1359-1378.
Bakker, A.B., Schaufeli, W.B., Leiter, M.P. and Taris, T.W. (2008), “Work engagement: an emerging
concept in occupational health psychology”,Work and Stress, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 187-200.
Banerjee, R. and Banerjee, S. (2013), “A study of perceived organizational justice, trust, and organisational
citizenship behaviour”,IOSR Journal of Business and Management, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 36-43.
Bani-Hani, M.A. and Hamdan-Mansour, A.M. (2021), “The moderation effect of locus of control on the
relationship between job demand and job satisfaction among nurses”,International Journal of
Nursing Practice, Vol. 27 No. 1, p. e12876
Basit, A.A. (2019), “Examining how respectful engagement affects task performance and affective
organizational commitment: the role of job engagement”,Personnel Review, Vol. 48 No. 3, pp. 644-658.
Biswas, S. and Bhatnagar, J. (2013), “Mediator analysis of employee engagement: role of perceived
organizational support, PO fit, organizational commitment and job satisfaction”,Vikalpa: The
Journal for Decision Makers, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 27-40.
Blau, P. (1964), Exchange and Power in Social Life, Wiley, New York, NY.
Borman, W.C. and Motowidlo, S.J. (1993), “Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of
contextual performance”, in Schmitt, N. and Borman, W.C. (Eds), Personnel Selection in
Organizations, Wiley, San Francisco, CA, pp. 71-98.
Brunetto, Y., Teo, S.T., Shacklock, K. and Farr-Wharton, R. (2012), “Emotional intelligence, job
satisfaction, well-being and engagement: explaining organisational commitment and turnover
intentions in policing”,Human Resource Management Journal, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 428-441.
Caesens, G. and Stinglhamber, F. (2014), “The relationship between perceived organizational support
and work engagement: the role of self-efficacy and its outcomes”,European Review of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 64 No. 5, pp. 259-267.
Carmeli, A., Gilat, G. and Weisberg, J. (2006), “Perceived external prestige, organizational identification and
affective commitment: a stakeholder approach”,Corporate Reputation Review,Vol.9No.2,pp.92-104.
Ces
ario, F. and Chambel, M.J. (2017), “Linking organizational commitment and work engagement to
employee performance”,Knowledge and Process Management, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 152-158.
Chiang, Y.T., Fang, W.T., Kaplan, U. and Ng, E. (2019), “Locus of control: the mediation effect between
emotional stabilityand pro-environmental behavior”,Sustainability, Vol. 11 No. 3, p. 820
Eisenberger, R., Cummings, J., Armeli, S. and Lynch, P. (1997), “Perceived organizational support,
discretionary treatment, and job satisfaction”,Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 82 No. 5,
pp. 812-820.
IJOA
Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S. and Sowa, D. (1986), “Perceived organizational support”,
Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 71 No. 3, pp. 500-507.
Farid, T., Iqbal, S., Ma, J., Castro-Gonz
alez, S., Khattak, A. and Khan, M.K. (2019), “Employees’
perceptions of CSR, work engagement, and organizational citizenship behavior: the mediating
effects of organizational justice”,International Journal of Environmental Research and Public
Health, Vol. 16 No. 10, pp. 1731-1747.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable
variables and measurement error”,Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50.
Geisler, M., Berthelsen, H. and Muhonen, T. (2019), “Retaining social workers: the role of quality of work and
psychosocial safety climate for work engagement, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment”,
Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership and Governance, Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 1-15.
Giao, H.N.K., Vuong, B.N. and Tushar, H. (2020), “The impact of social support on job-related behaviors
through the mediating role of job stress and the moderating role of locus of control: empirical evidence
from the Vietnamese banking industry”,Cogent Business and Management, Vol. 7 No. 1, p. 1841359
Goodman, S.A. and Svyantek, D.J. (1999), “Person–organization fit and contextual performance: do
shared values matter”,Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 55 No. 2, pp. 254-275.
Griffin, R.W. and Moorhead, G. (2014), Organizational Behavior Managing People and Organizations,
11th ed., South-Western, Cengage Learning, Boston.
Gupta, V., Agarwal, U.A. and Khatri, N. (2016), “The relationships between perceived organizational
support, affective commitment, psychological contract breach, organizational citizenship
behaviour and work engagement”,Journal of Advanced Nursing, Vol. 72 No. 11, pp. 2806-2817.
Hair, J.F., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2011), “PLS-SEM: indeed a silver bullet”,Journal of Marketing
Theory and Practice, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 139-152.
Harrell-Cook, G., Levitt, K. and Grimm, J. (2017), “From engagement to commitment: A new perspective on the
employee attitude-firm performance relationship”,International Leadership Journal, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 3-29.
Haslam, S.A., Steffens, N.K., Peters, K., Boyce, R.A., Mallett, C.J. and Fransen, K. (2017), “A social identity
approach to leadership development”,Journal of Personnel Psychology, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 113-124.
Haynie, J.J., Flynn, C.B. and Baur, J.E. (2019), “The organizational justice-job engagement relationship: how
social exchange and identity explain this effect”,Journal of Managerial Issues, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 28-45.
Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2015), “A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in
variance-based structural equation modeling”,Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 115-135.
Howell, J.M. and Avolio, B.J. (1993), “Transformational leadership, transactional leadership, locus of
control, and support for innovation: key predictors of consolidated-business-unit performance”,
Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 78 No. 6, pp. 891-902.
Hulin, C.L. and Judge, T.A. (2003), “Job attitudes”, in Borman, W.C. Ilgen, D.R. and Klimoski, R.J. (Eds),
Handbook of psychology: Industrial and Organizational Psychology, John Wiley & Sons Inc,
Vol. 12, pp. 255-276.
Ivancevich, J.M., Konopaske, R. and Matteson, M.T. (2013), Organizational Behavior and Management,
10th ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Jaramillo, F., Mulki, J.P. and Solomon, P. (2006), “The role of ethical climate on salesperson’s role stress,
job attitudes, turnover intention, and job performance”,Journal of Personal Selling and Sales
Management, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 271-282.
Jun, S.Y., Rho, H.J. and Lee, J.H. (2014), “The impact of organizational justice, empowerment on the nursing
task performance of nurses: focused on the mediating effect of job satisfaction and organizational
commitment”,Korean Journal of Occupational Health Nursing, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 55-66.
Jung, H.S. and Yoon, H.H. (2021), “Generational effects of workplace flexibility on work engagement,
satisfaction, and commitment in South Korean deluxe hotels”,Sustainability, Vol. 13 No. 16, p. 9143
Perceived
organisational
justice
Kang, H.J., Gatling, A. and Kim, J. (2015), “The impact of supervisory support on organizational
commitment, career satisfaction, and turnover intention for hospitality frontline employees”,
Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality and Tourism, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 68-89.
Karanika-Murray, M., Duncan, N., Pontes, H.M. and Griffiths, M.D. (2015), “Organizational identification, work
engagement, and job satisfaction”,JournalofManagerialPsychology, Vol. 30 No. 8, pp. 1019-1033.
Khaw, K.W., Thurasamy, R., Al-Abrrow, H., Alnoor, A., Tiberius, V., Abdullah, H.O. and Abbas, S.
(2021), “Influence of generational status on immigrants’entrepreneurial intentions to start new
ventures: a framework based on structural equation modeling and multicriteria decision-
making”,Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, doi: 10.1108/JEEE-04-2021-0141.
Kim, S. (2017), “Perceived organizational support as a mediator between distributive justice and sports referees’
job satisfaction and career commitment”,Annals of Leisure Research, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 169-187.
Koopmans, L., Coffeng, J.K., Bernaards, C.M., Boot, C.R., Hildebrandt, V.H., de Vet, H.C. and van der
Beek, A.J. (2014), “Responsiveness of the individual work performance questionnaire”,BMC
Public Health, Vol.14 No. 1, pp. 1-11.
Köse, A. and Uzun, M. (2018), “The relationship between work engagement and perceived
organizational justice”,Kuram ve Uygulamada E
gitim Yönetimi, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp.483-528.
Lambert, E.G., Hogan, N.L. and Griffin, M.L. (2007), “The impact of distributive and procedural justice
on correctional staff job stress, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment”,Journal of
Criminal Justice, Vol. 35 No. 6, pp. 644-656.
Lambert, E.G., Hogan, N.L. and Griffin, M.L. (2008), “Being the good soldier: organizational citizenship behavior
and commitment among correctional staff”,Criminal Justice and Behavior, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 56-68.
Lapointe, É. and Vandenberghe, C. (2017), “Supervisory mentoring and employee affective commitment
and turnover: the critical role of contextual factors”,Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 98,
pp. 98-107.
Lee, J. and Wei, F. (2017), “The moderating effect of leadership on perceived organizational justice and
affective commitment: a study in China”,The International Journal of Human Resource
Management, Vol. 28 No. 5, pp. 679-702.
Li, Y. (2020), “Linking organizational justice to affective commitment: the role of perceived supervisor
support in Chinese higher education settings”,Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 48
No. 3, pp. 237-250.
Li, G., He, Q., Shao, S. and Cao, J. (2018), “Environmental non-governmental organizations and urban
environmental governance: evidence from China”,Journal of Environmental Management,
Vol. 206, pp. 1296-1307.
Liu, H.T. and Chao, R.F. (2019), “The influence of procedural justice, workplace friendship,
organizational identification and moral identity on the job engagement of civil servants”.The
Journal of Global Business Management, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 12-22.
Locke, E.A. (1976), “The nature and causes of job satisfaction”, in Dunnette, M.D. (Ed.), Handbook of
Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Rand McNally, Chicago, IL, pp. 1297-1349.
Mael, F. and Ashforth, B.E. (1992), “Alumni and their alma mater: a partial test of the reformulated
model of organizational identification”,Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 13 No. 2,
pp. 103-123.
Marique, G. and Stinglhamber, F. (2011), “Identification to proximal targets and affective
organizational commitment”,Journal of Personnel Psychology, Vol. 10 No. 3,pp. 107-117.
Mercurio, Z.A. (2015), “Affective commitment as a core essence of organizational commitment: an
integrative literature review”,Human Resource Development Review, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 389-414.
Meyer, J.P. and Allen, N.J. (1997), Commitment in the Workplace: Theory, Research, and Application,
Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Minton, E.A. and Khale, L.R. (2014), Belief Systems, Religion, and Behavioral Economics, Business
Expert Press LLC, New York, NY.
IJOA
Momeni, K. and Hayavi, G. (2017), “The effect of perceived organizational politics on job stress and
turnover intention with mediating role of organizational cynicism”,Industrial and
Organizational Psychology Studies, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 1-20.
Monica, R. (2019), “Factors influencing work engagement and its impact on task performance”,
International Journal of Business Excellence, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 97-129.
Noah, Y. and Steve, M. (2012), “Work environment and job attitude among employees in a Nigerian
work organization”,Journal of Sustainable Society, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 36-43.
Organ, D.W. (1990), “The motivational basis of organizational citizenship behavior”,Research in
Organizational Behavior, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 43-72.
Park,Y.,Song,J.H.andLim,D.H.(2016),“Organizational justice and work engagement: the mediating effect
of self-leadership”,Leadership and Organization Development Journal, Vol. 37 No. 6, pp. 711-729.
Peng, J., Chen, X., Zou, Y. and Nie, Q. (2021), “Environmentally specific transformational leadership and
team pro-environmental behaviors: the roles of pro-environmental goal clarity, pro-environmental
harmonious passion, and power distance”,Human Relations, Vol. 74 No. 11, pp. 1864-1888.
Pérez-Rodríguez, V., Topa, G. and Beléndez, M. (2019), “Organizational justice and work stress: the
mediating role of negative, but not positive, emotions”,Personality and Individual Differences,
Vol. 151, p. 109392.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.Y. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003), “Common method biases in
behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies”,Journal of
Applied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 5, pp. 879-903.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Paine, J.B. and Bachrach, D.G. (2000), “Organizational citizenship
behaviors: a critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future
research”,Journal of Management, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 513-563.
Rahimi, E. and Zaheri, V. (2020), “Investigating the effect of perceived organizational support in
breaking the organizational silence with mediator role of affective commitment on employees of
governmental offices in qom”,Journal of Ergonomics, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 66-73.
Rayton, B., Yalabik, Z.Y. and Rapti, A. (2019), “Fit perceptions, work engagement, satisfaction and
commitment”,Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 34 No. 6, pp. 401-414.
Rhoades, L. and Eisenberger, R. (2002), “Perceived organizational support: a review of the literature”,
Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 87 No. 4, pp. 698-714.
Rhoades, L., Eisenberger, R. and Armeli, S. (2001), “Affective commitment to the organization: the contribution
of perceived organizational support”,Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 86 No. 5, pp. 825-836.
Rotter, J.B. (1966), “Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement”,
Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 80 No. 1, pp. 1-28.
Saks, A.M. (2006), “Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement”,Journal of Managerial
Psychology, Vol. 21 No. 7, pp. 600-619.
Saks, A.M. (2019), “Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement revisited”,Journal of
Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 19-38.
Schaufeli, W., Salanova, M., Gonz
aLez-Roma, V. and Bakker, A.B. (2002), “The measurement of
engagement and burnout: a two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach”,Journal of
Happiness Studies, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 71 -92.
Shah, R. and Goldstein, S.M. (2006), “Use of structural equation modeling in operations management
research: looking back and forward”,Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 148-169.
Shamim, M. and Siddiqui, D.A. (2019), “Impact of leader’s emotional intelligence on Sub-Ordinates’
organizational citizenship behavior and task performance: the mediatory role of organizational
culture”,Available at SSRN 3510571.
Shanteau, J. (1987), “Psychological characteristics of expert decision makers”,Expert Judgment and
Expert Systems, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 289-304.
Perceived
organisational
justice
Shantz, A., Alfes, K., Truss, C. and Soane, E. (2013), “The role of employee engagement in the
relationship between job design and task performance, citizenship and deviant behaviours”,The
International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 24 No. 13, pp. 2608-2627.
Siswanto, S. and Darus, U. (2020), “The moderating role of work discipline on the links between locus of
control and work ethics in local government employees”,Management and Economic Journal
(Mec-J), Vol. 4 No.2, pp. 117-134.
Snead, J. (2021), “Analysis of psychological contract breach with registered nurses’job satisfaction,
organizational commitment, and work engagement during global pandemic”, Doctoral
dissertation, Saint Leo University.
Spector, P.E. (1988), “Development of the work locus of control scale”,Journal of Occupational
Psychology, Vol. 61 No. 4, pp. 335-340.
Tajfel, H., Turner, J.C., Austin, W.G. and Worchel, S. (1979), “An integrative theory of intergroup
conflict”, in Austin, W.G. and Worchel, S. (Eds), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations,
Brooks/Cole, Monterey, CA, pp. 33-47.
Tseng, L.Y. and Lee, T.S. (2011), “Can high-tech companies enhance employee task performance
through organizational commitment?”,International Journal of Business Administration, Vol. 2
No. 2, pp. 94-113.
Turban, D.B., Tan, H.H., Brown, K.G. and Sheldon, K.M. (2007), “Antecedents and outcomes of
perceived locus of causality: an application of self-determination theory”,Journal of Applied
Social Psychology, Vol. 37 No. 10, pp. 2376-2404.
Turksoy, S. and Tutuncu, O. (2021), “An analysis of the relationship between work engagement, work
locus of control, passion, and parasitism in coastal hotels”,European Journal of Tourism
Research, Vol. 29, pp. 2912-2912.
Turnipseed, D.L. (2018), “Emotional intelligence and OCB: the moderating role of work locus of
control”,The Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 158 No. 3, pp. 322-336.
Ullah, I., Elahi, N.S., Abid, G. and Butt, M.U. (2020), “The impact of perceived organizational support
and proactive personality on affective commitment: mediating role of prosocial motivation”,
Business, Management and Education, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 183-205.
Wright, T.A. and Cropanzano, R. (1998), “Emotional exhaustion as a predictor of job performance and
voluntary turnover”,Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 83 No. 3, pp. 486-493.
Yongxing, G., Hongfei, D., Baoguo, X. and Lei, M. (2017), “Work engagement and job performance: the
moderating role of perceived organizational support”,Anales de Psicología, Vol. 33 No.3, pp. 708-713.
Zhang, W., Meng, H., Yang, S. and Liu, D. (2018), “The influence of professional identity, job
satisfaction, and work engagement on turnover intention among township health inspectors in
China”,International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, Vol. 15 No. 5, p. 988
Further reading
Davies, G., Mete, M. and Whelan, S. (2018), “When employer brand image aids employee satisfaction
and engagement”,Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance, Vol. 5 No. 1,
pp. 64-80.
Corresponding author
Hasan Oudah Abdullah can be contacted at: hasan_oudah@yahoo.com
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
IJOA
