دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی تعهد دوگانه در سازمان: تعامل تیم و تعهد سازمانی - نشریه الزویر

Abstract

Affective team and organizational commitment are among the most important employee attachments in the workplace. While past research has focused on identifying the differential relationships of these commitments with relevant workplace outcomes, the present study examines their additive and interactive effects based on a multi-foci research framework. Drawing on consistency and optimal distinctiveness theory, we predicted that team and organizational commitment add to and enhance each other's target-specific effects on teamand organization-directed citizenship behavior, efficacy beliefs, and turnover intentions. Furthermore, taking a person-centered perspective, we tested the hypothesis that dually committed employees score higher on the chosen outcomes than employees with unilateral commitments (to the team and the organization). Results from a survey study (n = 1,362) confirmed our hypotheses for citizenship behavior. With regard to efficacy beliefs and turnover intentions, however, compensatory interactions were observed and dually committed employees scored higher on the team-directed outcome components. The theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.

Discussion

In the light of a growing interest in the interplay of multiple commitments, dual commitment can be considered as a specific case when members of an organization are simultaneously committed to the entire organization and to their team or work unit that is nested in this organization. The aim of this study was to investigate the joint impact of team and organizational commitment on employees' team- and organization-directed citizenship behavior, efficacy beliefs, and turnover intentions from both a variable- and from a personcentered perspective. Existing research based on the target similarity principle (Lavelle et al., 2007) suggests that commitment to one target is sufficient to influence behavior directed at the same target. Therefore, commitment to the other target should be largely redundant in predicting target-specific behaviors, resulting in compensatory interactions. By contrast, for example, van Dick et al. (2008) proposed that team and organizational commitment should interact synergistically to enhance employee performance outcomes because of satisfied needs for self-consistency and optimal distinctiveness. Although our hypotheses primarily drew on and extended van Dick et al.’s (2008) reasoning, our study provides support for both perspectives and shows that interactions may work in one direction (e.g. organization) but not the other (e.g. team). Furthermore, the adoption of a person-centered approach provided insight into the meaning of dual commitment by showing that different team and organizational commitment profiles exist in terms of dual and unilateral commitment, and differentially relate to outcome criteria.