THE INFLUENCE OF OCCUPATIONAL RANK ON

ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT OF FACULTY MEMBERS

Pooja Sharma *
Vinita Sinha **

Received: 17. 12. 2014 Preliminary communication

Accepted: 28. 10. 2015 UDC 005.7:378-057.85>(540)

This study investigates the impact of rank on organizational commitment and

explores the individual relationships between affective, normative and continuance
commitment. The study comprised a sample of 505 academic staff from 28
privately-owned technical institutes in Haryana state, India. Three way ANOVA
results reveal that overall organizational commitment increases progressively with
rank. Results further show that rank does not have a positive influence on
affective, continuance and normative commitment. Female faculty found more
committed than their male counterparts. The findings have been thoroughly
discussed in terms of the influential role of rank on organizational commitments
for faculty members.

Keywords: organizational commitment; occupational rank; faculty members,

influence; India.

1. INTRODUCTION

The impact of organizational commitment on individual’s attitudes,

behaviour and outcomes has long been a concern for behavioural scientists.
Much of the research has investigated the relationship between job satisfaction,
turnover intentions, organizational culture, leadership styles (Gunlu et al., 2010;
Lam and Zhang, 2003; Yousef, 2000; Lee et al., 2008; Stallworth, 2003; Calisir
et al., 2011; Awan and Mahmood, 201); Lok and Crawford, 2004). The research
is motivated primarily by finding effect of organizational commitment on

*
Pooja Sharma, Symbiosis International University, Pune, India,
E-mail: [email protected]
**
Vinita Sinha, PhD, assistant professor, Symbiosis International University, Pune, India,
E-mail: [email protected]

71
Management, Vol. 20, 2015, 2, pp. 71-91
P. Sharma, V. Sinha: The influence of occupational rank on organizational commitment of...

organizational variables and outcomes. The work environment dimension

related specifically to workers attachment with his/ her organization has
received significant research attention. However, less has been said about the
effect of organizational demography on organizational commitment. This study
examines the impact of one of the organizational demography variable, i.e., ran,
on organizational commitment. A study of assistant professors, associate
professors, readers and professors in 28 privately-owned technical institutes in
Haryana, revealed the extent of the influence of rank on organizational
commitment level of faculty members. Findings elucidate on the effect of rank
on overall organizational commitment and on three forms of commitment i.e.,
affective, continuance and normative commitment.

1.1. Defining organizational commitment

Organizational commitment, of interest to behavioural researchers for over

a quarter of the century, has evolved from a single to a multidimensional
construct. Despite its conceptual and methodological uncertainties the topic has
gained wide interest among researchers and practitioners in both public and
private sector. The concept of commitment is often associated with both
attitudes and emotions. There are various definitions of commitment in the
related literature stemming from various approaches to this concept. According
to Mowday et al., (1979) organizational commitment is the relative strength of a
person’s identification with and involvement in an organization. Buchanan
(1974) defined commitment as “a partisan or affective attachment to the aims
and values of an organization for its own sake”. Lee and Mitchell (1991)
characterised commitment as a shared belief and acceptance of the values and
goals of the commitment and the eagerness to go above and beyond the call of
duty to enhance the organization’s goals, values as well as the desire to
maintain membership with the organization. O’Reilly and Chatman (1986)
defined organizational commitment as a psychological attachment to the
organization predicted by three independent constructs, those of compliance,
identification and internalization.

Compliance is defined as involvement for extrinsic awards. Identification

is the involvement with the organization because of the desire for affiliation and
is an important mechanism for developing the process of psychological
attachment (Bowlby, 1982). Internalization is the involvement based on
individual’s acceptance of the organization’s values. Alternatively, Hunt and
Morgan (1994) advocated the multiple commitment view of organizational
commitment. They reported commitment to be defined as multiple
commitments to various groups comprising the organization such as

72
 Management, Vol. 20, 2015, 2, pp. 71-91
P. Sharma, V. Sinha: The influence of occupational rank on organizational commitment of...

commitment to work group, to one’s superior and to the top management.

Researchers studying organizational commitment have also revealed it to be a
multifaceted concept; there are various dimensions to an individual’s
commitment. Commitment to managers, owners, and customers (Reichers,
1985); commitment to top management and supervisors (Gregersen, 1993;
Erickson and Roloff, 2007); commitment to careers (Chang, 1999; Joo and
Park, 2010; Bambaca, 2010); commitment to a profession (Wallace, 1993;
Vandenberg and Scapello, 1994; Rowlinson, 2001); commitment to a job
(Aremu and Adeyoju, 2003; Simola, 2010) and commitment to colleagues
(Yoon et al., 1994; Paille et al., 2011).

Organizational commitment involves a wide range of feelings, attitudes,

values and practices. Organizational commitment is also reflected in the degree
of attachment and dedication of an employee to his or her organization.
Measuring organizational commitment is an assessment of the congruence
between an individual’s own values and beliefs and those of the organisation
(Swailes, 2002). Ismail (2012) characterized organizational commitment as
employee’s willingness to contribute to organizational goals. Allen and Meyer
(1993) distinguished three elements of organizational commitment:
1. psychological attachment between the employees (affective commitment),
2. perceived cost associated with leaving the organization (continuance
commitment),
3. obligation to stay with the organization (normative commitment).

According to Opkara (2004) when employees are sure that they will grow
and learn with their current organization, their commitment level for the
organization raises. Organizational commitment has gained prominence in
management discourse since it plays a vital role in the goal achievement,
innovation and stability of the organization. Organizational commitment has
been linked to workforce stability (Steers, 1977), decreased turnover (Mowday
et al., 1979), decreased intention to leave (Tett and Meyer, 1993), low
absenteeism (Cohen, 1993; Zahra, 1984), increased citizenship behaviour such
as suggesting improvements, assisting colleagues and putting forth extra efforts
(Brief et al., 1986). Researchers have found organizational commitment to be a
stable indicator of an employee’s intention to stay in the organization (Meyer
and Allen, 1997; Mowday et al., 1979 and Steers 1977).

1.1.1. Affective commitment

Affective commitment refers to an employee’s emotional attachment to,

identification with and involvement in an organization. Such employees

73
Management, Vol. 20, 2015, 2, pp. 71-91
P. Sharma, V. Sinha: The influence of occupational rank on organizational commitment of...

continue employment with an organization because they want to do so. There

are several mental processes that give rise to the development of affective
commitment, such as: retrospective, rationality, classical conditional, casual
attribution and personnel fulfilment (Meyer and Allen, 1997).
Researchers studying affective commitment have identified various
circumstances that help or develop affective commitment among employees.
Robbins (1997) found decentralized organization structure, Zangaro (2001)
found open and honest communication network, Parnell and Crandall (2003)
found participating organization culture, Somech and Bogler (2002) found
participative decision making, especially strategically important decisions
(Lines 2004; Celep 2000) especially when employees are affected by the
outcomes of these decision (Torka, 2004) to influence affective commitment of
the employees. In studies conducted by Firestone and Pennell (1993), Enriquez
et al., (2001); O’Creevy et al., (1997) and Oswald et al., (1994) the authors
found autonomy, strategic objectives, expectations and vision of the
organization, respectively, to have direct effect on the affective commitment of
the employees. Martin and Bennett (1996), Naumann et al., (1998) found fair
and just treatment to have influence on affective commitment, while Abdulla
and Shaw (1999), Schwepker, (1999), Peterson, (2003) and Janseen (2004)
found that conflict with management, adequate payment and congruence of
ethical values between employees and an organization to be relevant for the
development of affective commitment. Kidd and Smewing (2001), Hui et al.,
(2004) and Perry (2004) found supportive, facilitative and healthy and
relationship with supervisors to influence affective commitment among
employees working for an organization.

1.1.2. Continuance commitment

Continuance commitment refers to an awareness of the costs associated

with leaving from and the benefits associated with staying in an organization.
Such employees link to and remain in an organization because they need to do
so (Meyer and Allen, 1997). According to Becker (1960) employees attach
themselves to an organization through valuable investment (e.g., time, effort,
money). These investments have costs which reduce some degree of an
employee’s freedom in his/her future activity. Through investments, an
employee gets locked into an organization because of the costs associated with
him/her leaving the organization (e.g., pension plan security, firm specific
knowledge). Another precursor of continuance commitment is the perception of
employment alternatives. Employee’s perceptions about the viability and
availability of employment opportunities are negatively correlated with
continuance commitment. In the words of Meyer and Allen (1997) employees

74
 Management, Vol. 20, 2015, 2, pp. 71-91
P. Sharma, V. Sinha: The influence of occupational rank on organizational commitment of...

who think their alternatives are few develop stronger continuance commitment.
For most employees, with increase in their age and organizational tenure, their
perceived costs associated with leaving organization also increases because of
the accumulation of their investment (retirement money, job security, status,
unused vacations etc.) (Allen and Meyer, 1993; Abdulla and Shaw, 1999).
Thus, various studies conducted by researchers like Labatmediene et al., (2007);
Allen and Meyer (1990); Savery and Syme (1996); Rhodes (1983); Smith and
Hoy (1992); Luthans et al., (1987) and Popoola (2009) found age and job tenure
to have a positive correlation with organizational commitment

1.1.3. Normative commitment

Normative commitment reflects a feeling of obligation to continue

employment. Employees feel that they are in debt and ought to remain with the
organization. Individual family system, culture and organizational socialization
process play a vital role in developing an employee’s normative commitment.
Through conditioning (rewards and punishments) and modelling (observation
and limitations of others) people learn these values (Meyer and Allen, 1997).
Researchers like Fuller et al., (2003); Shore and Wayne, (1993); Haar and Spell,
(2004); Wheaton, (1999) found organization’s supportive practices and their
perceived importance for the employees to have a great influence on normative
commitment of the employees.

1.2. Literature review

While reviewing available literature on organizational commitment, it was

realized that the domain of organizational commitment and organizational
demography is still under-explored. Small amount of literature is available on
this area of research indicating a great scope for future scientific research which
would add to the existing body of knowledge. Some of the current contributions
to the topic are discussed below.

Ojha & Pradeep (1999) found a positive correlation with organizational

commitment; i.e., employees at higher ranks were found more committed
towards their organization; also they found women to be more committed than
their male counterparts. Singh and Vinnicombe (2000) suggested that, in the
workplace, women are perceived as having lower levels of organizational
commitment than men. Their study showed that women’s commitment involves
different emotional considerations to those of men. Their approach draws on the
shared and different meanings of commitment between male and female
engineers, utilizing a qualitative case-study approach. Elizur and Koslowsky

75
Management, Vol. 20, 2015, 2, pp. 71-91
P. Sharma, V. Sinha: The influence of occupational rank on organizational commitment of...

(2001) studied 204 students to examine the relationship between work values,
gender and organizational commitment. A moderated regression analysis
showed that work values especially cognitive ones, are positively related with
commitment and interaction of values with gender was also found to be a
significant predictor of commitment.

Labatmedien et al., (2007), in a study of 105 employees, from various

Lithuanian organizations, found age and level of education to be significantly
correlated to organizational commitment; illustrating that organizational
commitment of individuals increases with age and that individuals with higher
academic qualifications have higher organizational commitment. Joolideh and
Yeshodhara (2009), in a study of 721 Indian and Iranian teachers, using Meyer
and Allen instrument of organizational commitment, found Indian teachers to
have higher affective and normative commitment; whereas Iranian teachers had
higher continuance commitment. Interestingly, they found age to have no
influence on organizational commitment among teachers from both the
countries.

Popoola (2009) investigated the effect of socio - demographic variables

such as gender, age, marital status, education level and job tenure on
organizational commitment of 220 management personnel in Nigerian
Universities. Results of the study revealed a significant relationship between
gender, marital status and organizational commitment. Age and job tenure were
found to be positively correlated with organizational commitment. Therefore,
older employees and employees with long job tenure were more committed
towards their organization. Level of education was found to have a negative
influence on organizational commitment.

2. METHODOLOGY

Rank, as used in this article, refers to the individual’s job status in an

organization. It indicates an employee’s job level in a particular occupational
classification. Within the context of technical education in Haryana, it indicates
whether an academic worker is assistant professor, associate professor, reader
or a professor. The objectives of this study are as follows:

1. The primary objective of the present study is to investigate whether rank

affects an individual’s organizational commitment and if so, how?
2. Another objective is to explore the individual relationships that exist
between affective, continuance and normative commitment and overall

76
 Management, Vol. 20, 2015, 2, pp. 71-91
P. Sharma, V. Sinha: The influence of occupational rank on organizational commitment of...

organizational commitment among teachers in privately-governed technical

institutes in Haryana.
3. To investigate the effect of organizational commitment on the faculty
members of technical education the following research methodology was
employed in the study.

A survey was conducted in 2012-13. The population for this study was
comprised of faculty members from all the private technical institutes in
Haryana. A total of 650 questionnaires were administered to potential
respondents randomly chosen from 28 institutes. The institutes were selected to
include sample institutes from all the districts of Haryana. A total of 505 usable
questionnaires were returned giving a response rate of 77.69%. Of these 505
respondents, 292 (57.82%) were assistant professors, 101 (20%) were associate
professors, 60 (11.88%) were readers and 52 (9.90%) were professors.

To measure Organizational Commitment, a questionnaire comprising a

slightly modified form of the Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (Allen
and Meyer, 1990), with additional demographic items. The Organizational
Commitment Questionnaire OCQ) is one of the popular measures of
organizational commitment and has been found to produce highly reliable
results. For the present study reliability of the measurements was assessed by
calculating Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for each of the eight-item scales
measuring affective commitment, continuance commitment and normative
commitment and for organizational commitment scale as a whole. In the current
study the reliability of affective commitment scale was alpha coefficient 0.82.
The reliability of continuance commitment scale was 0.77. Normative
commitment scale alpha coefficient was 0.65. The Cronbach alpha for the
whole organizational commitment scale was 0.80.

Each item in the scale was measured from a range of (1) representing
extremely dissatisfied to (7) representing extremely satisfied. Thus, (4) on the
measuring scale represented indifference, i.e., neither satisfaction nor
dissatisfaction. The total of the three scale, therefore, gives a summary measure
of total organizational commitment. The demographic questions in the
questionnaire included rank and commitment, with respect to affective,
continuance and normative commitment. The questions on age and gender were
asked to see if relationship between rank and organizational commitment is
moderated by age and gender.

Table 1 shows the distribution of respondents by rank, age and gender.

77
Management, Vol. 20, 2015, 2, pp. 71-91
P. Sharma, V. Sinha: The influence of occupational rank on organizational commitment of...

Table 1. Respondents by rank, gender and age

Overall organizational
N Percentage
commitment
Rank
Assistant 292 57.82 4.118
professor
Associate 101 20 4.238
professor
Reader 60 11.88 4.327
Professor 52 9.90 4.484
Gender
Male 310 61.38 4.206
Female 195 38.61 4.220
Age
20-30 195 38.61 4.173
30-40 110 21.78 4.196
40-50 120 23.76 4.208
50 and above 80 15.84 4.290

Note: Overall Organizational Commitment Score for all respondents= 4.212

Standard deviation= 0.798

To study the effect of rank on organizational commitment of teachers,

allowing for age and gender effects, a three way analysis of variance, i.e. a three
way ANOVA, was performed. A direct effect of rank, age and gender and all
the interactive effects between rank, age and gender, were investigated.
Investigations were made, not only on overall organizational commitment in
relation to rank, but also on affective, continuance and normative commitment
in relation to rank. Descriptive statics were also calculated to examine the
overall organizational commitment levels among different classification of
faculty in private technical institutions. In addition, histogram showing the
nature of relationship between rank and overall organizational commitment and
between rank and affective, continuance and normative commitment were
presented to depict the nature of these relationships graphically.

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

As demonstrated by Table 1, when rank is considered in isolation, the

overall organizational commitment score is lowest for assistant professors
(4.118) and it increases progressively for each higher rank and final
organizational commitment score of 4.484 for professors. This indicates that the
faculty in higher positions are generally more committed to their organization
than their lower-ranking colleagues and this result is consistent with the

78
 Management, Vol. 20, 2015, 2, pp. 71-91
P. Sharma, V. Sinha: The influence of occupational rank on organizational commitment of...

findings of Ojha and Pradeep (1999) who reported that organizational

commitment increases with occupational rank. Table 1 shows that female
faculty are generally more committed to their organization, with overall
organizational commitment score of 4.220 than their male counterparts whose
overall organizational score is only 4.206. This finding is in consistency with
those of Cohen and Lowenberg (1990); Mathieu and Zajac (1990); Ahmad and
Abubakar (2003) of Singh et al., (2004); Marchiori and Henkin (2004); Dixon
et al., (2005); Angle and Perry (1981); Opayemi (2004) and Smith and Hoy
(1992) who also found females to be more committed than their male
counterparts.

Furthermore, by classifying faculty members by age, Table 1 shows that

faculty members, who are between 20-30 years of age are least committed, with
overall organizational commitment score of 4.173 followed by faculty aged
between 30-40 (4.196) than by those aged between 40-50 (4.208) with faculty
above the age of 50 being the most committed category of staff, with overall
organizational commitment score of 4.290. This result comes as no surprise and
it is in line with the earlier findings of Smith and Hoy (1992); Steers (1977);
Hrebiniak and Alutto (1972); Angle and Perry (1981); Morris and Sherman
(1981); Morris and Steers (1980) and Sheldon (1971). A further breakdown of
the overall organizational commitment score by categories is provided by Table
2. Unfortunately, the three way cross-tabulation makes it difficult to extract
findings from visual inspection. Hence, statistical analyses were especially
helpful at this point. It was obvious from the data in Table 2 that female
professors recorded very high organizational commitment.

Table 2. Overall organizational commitment score by categories

Assistant Associate
Age Reader Professors All types
professors professors
Male faculty
20-30 4.169 4.031 - - 4.155
30-40 4.108 4.168 3.938 4.458 4.138
40-50 4.215 4.228 4.250 4.357 4.249
50& above 3.941 4.429 4.563 4.513 4.285
All age groups 4.133 4.245 4.213 4.416 4.206
Female faculty
20-30 4.188 4.188 - - 4.193
30-40 4.253 4.212 - 5.750* 4.275
40-50 3.781 4.425 - 5.125* 4.129
50& above 4.016 4.422 - 5.125* 4.272
All age groups 4.091 4.338 - 5.333 4.220
Note: *Only one valid case - no response in the category

79
Management, Vol. 20, 2015, 2, pp. 71-91
P. Sharma, V. Sinha: The influence of occupational rank on organizational commitment of...

Table 3 represents the ANOVA results, which show that, for the direct
effects and the 0.05 significant level, gender and age are not statistically
significant, but rank is, with the p-value of 0.021. This implies that
organizational commitment of faculty in privately-owned technical institutions
is significantly dependent on rank but not on age and gender. It should be noted
that although gender by itself is not statistically significant, the interaction
effect of rank and gender is significant (p<0.012). This means that although
gender by itself is not significantly related with organizational commitment, it is
significant when compared together with rank of the teachers in private
technical institutions. All other interactions effects are not significantly
significant with respect to overall organizational commitment (see Table 3).

ANOVA results of the interactive effects of rank and gender are presented
graphically in Figure 1. It is evident that both male and female Assistant
professors are about equally committed to their organizations, while female
faculty experience higher organizational commitment than their male
counterparts for the ranks of associate professors, readers and professors. In
essence, the findings show that female faculty of senior ranks are more
committed than their male counterparts of the comparable rank. For the rank of
Professors, in particular, the difference between the organizational commitment
levels of male and female faculty is considerable (overall organizational
commitment scores of 5 versus 3.946).

Table 3. ANOVA results - overall organizational, affective continuance and

normative commitment

Aspect of Overall Affective Continuance Normative

organizational organizational commitment commitment commitment
commitment commitment
F- F- F- F-
Source df Pr>F Pr>F Pr>F Pr>F
value value value value
Age 4 0.228 0.923 1.095 0.358 0.437 0.782 1.577 0.179
Gender 1 0.37 0.848 7.634 0.006 0.091 0.763 4.634 0.032
Rank 4 2.925 0.021** 6.378 0.000*** 23.699 0.000*** 2.198 0.068*
Gender * age 6 0.453 0.843 2.927 0.008 0.868 0.518 1.443 0.196
Rank * gender 6 2.976 0.012** 3.938 0.001*** 12.697 0.000*** 2.077 0.054*
Rank * age 7 0.791 0.595 2.920 0.005*** 6.622 0.000*** 1.570 0.142
Rank*gender*age 7 0.575 0.776 1.668 0.115 1.442 0.187 1.935 0.063*

*p<0.10; **p<0.05; ***p<0.01

Table 3 also shows ANOVA results for affective commitment, continuance

commitment and normative commitment of the faculty members. Two results
stand out clearly from the tables. Organizational commitment levels with
respect to rank and interactive effect of rank and gender are significant not only
80
 Management, Vol. 20, 2015, 2, pp. 71-91
P. Sharma, V. Sinha: The influence of occupational rank on organizational commitment of...

for the overall organizational commitment, but also for affective commitment,
continuance commitment and normative commitment. It is of interest to observe
that continuance commitment, in particular, the variables, i.e., rank and
interactive effect of rank and gender, are each significant at 99% confidence
level. The F-values are as high as 12.697 for rank and gender and 23.699 with
respect to commitment level on rank alone. Compared to variables such as age
and gender, therefore, rank appears to be significant predictor of organizational
commitment in academic staff.

Mean organizational commitment score

6

0
Assistant professor Associate professor Reader Professor

Male Female

Figure 1. Histogram of ANOVA results (rank vs. gender)

For affective commitment and continuance commitment, the interactive

effect of rank and age are also statistically significant while the combined effect
of rank, age and gender is significant with continuance commitment. This
means that rank and age together explain affective and normative commitment
while normative commitment is explained by the interactive effects of rank, age
and gender.

Normative commitment is statistically significant with respect to rank, the

interactive effect of rank and gender and combined effect of rank, age and
gender (Table 3). The results are hardly surprising as employees at higher ranks
have spent many years with the organization, which has developed in them a
sense of obligation to remain with the organization. Moreover, older employees
face very limited employment opportunities which forces them to stay with the
organization which, in turn, affects their commitment level.

Figure 2 depicts the nature of the relationship between rank and overall
organizational commitment and between rank and affective, continuance and

81
Management, Vol. 20, 2015, 2, pp. 71-91
P. Sharma, V. Sinha: The influence of occupational rank on organizational commitment of...

normative commitment which exists in privately governed technical institutions

in Haryana. As shown below, organizational commitment level rises
proportionally with rank, Assistant professors being the least committed and
Professors being the most committed category of staff. The results of the test of
difference of overall organizational commitment levels between ranks are
statistically significant (Table 3). Tests on differences for affective, continuance
and normative commitment are also statistically significant but the nature of the
relationships is unique for every consideration (see Figure 2).

Mean organizational commitment score

6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Overall organizational Affective Continuance Normative
commitment commitment commitment commitment

Assistant professors Associate professors Reader Professor

Figure 2. Relationships between rank and overall organizational commitment and

between rank and affective, continuance and normative commitment

Regarding the affective commitment, the information in Figure 2 shows

that organizational commitment levels of academic faculty follows this pattern:
Associate professors, Professors, Assistant professors and Readers in that order
i.e., Associate professors are most committed while Readers are the least
committed category. The results with affective commitment are therefore not
dependent on rank. One explanation for this possibility is that Associate
professors after having spent few years in the institution and worked for it
develop an emotional bond with it and they see their future growth attached to
that of the institution. Affective commitment in privately-owned technical
institutes would, therefore, not appear to be a function of one’s rank.

Professors were found to have the highest continuance commitment after

having attained pinnacle of their academic ladder. With all the material and
non-material benefits they find it hard to leave the organization. Associate
professors are next to professors, whereas assistant professors were found to

82
 Management, Vol. 20, 2015, 2, pp. 71-91
P. Sharma, V. Sinha: The influence of occupational rank on organizational commitment of...

have the lowest continuance commitment. Assistant professors being lowest in

the academic rank and new to the institute have no sense of loss as they have
more opportunities of employment then their senior counterparts. Researchers
studying continuance commitment have found continuance commitment to be a
function of two sub sections: high (personnel) sacrifice commitment and low
(perceived) alternatives commitment (Culpepper et al., 2004; Jaros 1997;
McGree and Ford 1987; Meyer et al., 1990; Powell and Meyer 2004 and
Somers 1993). Thus, Professors perceive a high sacrifice, in terms of factors
that would be given up or disputed by leaving the organization whereas they
consider perceived opportunities outside the institute to be very weak which
directs their continuance commitment levels and make them more committed
towards the organization.

The figures for normative commitment show higher commitment levels

among readers, professors, assistant professors and associate professors,
respectively (Figure 2). Rank, therefore, does not seem to offer a consistent
indication of commitment level for this aspect of commitment. As readers are
on threshold of their academic career ladder, they feel more obligated to stay
with the institution. As our results show, normative commitment of teachers at
privately-governed technical institutes is not consistently related with rank.

4. CONCLUSION

The present study examines the effect of rank on organizational

commitment of teachers in privately-owned technical institutes in Haryana. By
analysing frequency distribution of responses, we found that overall
organizational commitment increases progressively with rank. This finding was
supported by three way analysis of variance which is significant at 95 percent
confidence level. ANOVA results also reveal that the interaction effect of rank
and gender does affect teachers’ organizational commitment level significantly
(p<0.012). This means that within certain ranks, gender does affect the
organizational commitment level of teachers working in privately-owned
technical institutes. Specifically, within the ranks of Associate professor and
Professors female faculty are more committed than their male counterparts of
the comparable ranks. In conclusion, the results of our study show that there is a
positive correlation between rank and organization commitment as found in
earlier literature Nancy (20001), Hossaini et al (2005); Ojha and Pradeep
(1999); Luthans et al., (1987) and Smith and Hoy (1992).

Furthermore, for the current study of teachers in privately-owned technical

institutes, an inaction effect between age and gender also exists. In other words,

83
Management, Vol. 20, 2015, 2, pp. 71-91
P. Sharma, V. Sinha: The influence of occupational rank on organizational commitment of...

the effect of gender on organizational commitment depends on rank. This

finding supports earlier ones which state that there is a positive correlation
between rank and organizational commitment. In addition, the analysis also
confirms that gender, by itself, does not affect organizational commitment of
teachers in private technical institutes.

5. LIMITATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE

RESEARCH

In conclusion, we can state that the results of the study show the
associative relationship between ranks (as well as the interaction between rank
and gender) and organizational commitment but they do not suggest causal
relationship. By concluding that the lower rank teachers are less committed to
their organizations we do not imply that rank is the cause of organizational
commitment. This limitation suggests possible directions for further research. It
will be interesting to investigate how and why rank, among other factors, affects
organizational commitment. It will be helpful if rank and other factors can be
quantified as this would contribute significantly to the current literature on
organizational commitment.

REFERENCES

1. Abdulla, M., Shaw, J. (1999). Personal factors and organizational

commitment: Main and interactive effects in the United Arab Emirates.
Journal of Managerial Issues, 11(1), 77-93.
2. Ahmad, K., Abubakar, R. (2003). The association between training and
organizational commitment among white workers in Malaysia.
International Journal of Training and Development, 7(3), 166-85.
3. Allen, N., Meyer, J. (1990). Organizational socialization tactics: A
longitudinal analysis of links to newcomer's commitment and role
orientation. The Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 847-58.
4. Allen, N., Meyer, J. (1993). Organizational commitment: Evidence of
career stage effects? Journal of Business Research, 26(1), 49-62.
5. Angle, H., Perry, J. (1981). An empirical assessment of organizational
commitment and organizational effectiveness. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 1-13.
6. Aremu, A., Adeyoju, C. (2003). Job commitment, job satisfaction and
gender as predictor of mentoring in the Nigeria Police. Policing: An
International Journal of Police Strategies Management, 26(3), 377-85.
7. Awan, M., Mahmood, K. (2010). Relationship among leadership style,
organizational culture and employee commitment in university libraries.

84
 Management, Vol. 20, 2015, 2, pp. 71-91
P. Sharma, V. Sinha: The influence of occupational rank on organizational commitment of...

Library Management, 31(4/5), 253-266.

8. Bambacas, M. (2010). Organizational handling of careers influences
managers organizational commitment. Journal of Management
Development, 29(9), 807-827.
9. Becker, H. (1960). Notes on the concept of commitment. American Journal
of Sociology, 66(1), 32-40.
10. Bowlby, J. (1982). Attachment. New York: Basic Books.
11. Brief, A., Motowidlo, S. (1986). Prosocial organizational behaviors. The
Academy of Management Review, 11(4), 710-25.
12. Buchanan, B. (1974). Building organizational commitment: The
socialization of managers in work organization. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 22, 533-546.
13. Calisir, F., Gumussoy, C., Iskin, I. (2011). Factors affecting intention to quit
among IT professionals in Turkey. Personnel Review, 40(4), 514-533.
14. Celep, C. (2000). Organizational commitment in education and teachers.
Ankara: Ani Yagincihk.
15. Chang, E. (1999). Career commitment as a complex moderator of
organizational commitment and turnover intention. Human Relations,
52(10), 1257-8.
16. Cohen, A., Lowenberg, G. (1990). A re-examination of the side- bet theory
as applied to organizational commitment: A metaanalysis. Human
Relations, 43(10), 1015-50.
17. Cohen, A. (1993). Organizational commitment and turnover: A meta
analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 36(5), 1140-57.
18. Culpepper, R., Gamble, J., Blubaugh, M. (2004). Employee stock
ownership plans and three-component commitment. Journal of
Occupational Organizational Psychology, 77, 155-70.
19. Dixon, M., Cunningham, G., Sagas, M., Turner, B., Kent, A. (2005).
Challenge is key: An investigation of affective organizational commitment
in undergraduate interns. Journal of Education for Business, January/
February, 172-80.
20. Elizur, D., Koslowsky, M. (2001). Values and organizational commitment.
International Journal of Manpower, 22(7), 593-599.
21. Enriquez, V., McBride, J., Paxton, L. (2001). Improving knowledge of
strategic goals and the impact on organizational commitment. Health
Marketing Quarterly, 18(3/4), 119-32.
22. Erickson, R., Roloff, M. (2007). Reducing attrition after downsizing.
International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 15(1), 35-55.
23. Firestone, W., Pennell, J. (1993). Teacher commitment, working conditions,
and differential incentive policies. Review of Educational Research, 63(4),
489-525.

85
Management, Vol. 20, 2015, 2, pp. 71-91
P. Sharma, V. Sinha: The influence of occupational rank on organizational commitment of...

24. Fuller, J., Barnett, T., Hester, K., Relyea, C. (2003). A social identity
perspective on the relationship between perceived organizational support
and organizational commitment. Journal of Social Psychology, 143(6), 789-
91.
25. Gregersen, H. (1993). Multiple commitments at work and extra role
behavior during three stages of organizational tenure. Journal of Business
Research, 26(1), 31-48.
26. Gunlu, E., Aksarayli, M., Percin, N. (2010). Job satisfaction and
organizational commitment of hotel managers in Turkey. International
Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 22(8), 693-717.
27. Harr, J., Spell, C. (2004). Programme knowledge and value of work -family
practices and organizational commitment. The International Journal of
Human Resource Management, 15(6), 1040-55.
28. Hossaini, M., Amirtash, A., Mozafari, A. (2005). Relationship, comparison,
and explanation of different leadership styles with organizational
commitment among scientific boards of lecturers in Iran universities. Sport
Science Moving, 18(6), 83-94.
29. Hrebiniak, L., Alutto, J. (1972). Personal and role- related factors in the
development of organizational commitment. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 17, 555-72.
30. Hui, C., Lee, C., Rousseau, D. (2004). Employment relationships in China:
Do workers relate to the organization or to people. Organization Science,
15(2), 232-40.
31. Hunt, S., Morgan, R. (1994). Organizational commitment: One of many
commitments or key mediating construct? Academy of Management
Journal, 37(6), 1568-1587.
32. Janseen, O. (2004). The barrier effect of conflict with superiors in the
relationship between employee empowerment and organizational
commitment. Work Stress, 18(1), 56-65.
33. Jaros, S. (1997). An assessment of Meyer and Allen's (1991) three-
component model of organizational commitment and turnover intentions.
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 51(3), 319-37.
34. Joo, B., Park, S. (2010). Career satisfaction, organizational commitment and
turnover intention. Leadership amp; Organization Development Journal,
31(6), 482-500.
35. Joolideh, F., Yeshodhara, K. (2009). Organizational commitment among
high school teachers of India and Iran. Journal of Educational
Administration, 47(1), 127-136.
36. Kidd, J., Smewing, C. (2001). The role of the supervisor in career and
organizational commitment. European Journal of Work and Organizational
Psychology, 10(1), 25-40.

86
 Management, Vol. 20, 2015, 2, pp. 71-91
P. Sharma, V. Sinha: The influence of occupational rank on organizational commitment of...

37. Labatmediene, L., Endriulaitiene, A., Gustainiene, L. (2007). Individual

correlates of organizational commitment and intention to leave the
organization. Baltic Journal of Management, 2(2), 196-212.
38. Lam, T., Zhang, H. (2003). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment
in the Hong Kong fast food industry. International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, 15(4), 214-220.
39. Lee, S., Lee, T., Lum, C. (2008). The effects of employee services on
organizational commitment and intention to quit. Personnel Review, 37(2),
222-237.
40. Lee, T., Mitchell, T. (1991). The unfolding effects of organizational
commitment and anticipated job satisfaction on voluntary employee
turnover. Motivation and Emotions, 15(1), 99-121.
41. Lines, R. (2004). Influence of participation in strategic change resistance,
organizational commitment and change goal achievement. Journal of
Change Management, 4(4), 193-215.
42. Lok, P., Crawford, J. (2004). The effect of organizational culture and
leadership style on job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Journal
of Management Development, 23(4), 321-338.
43. Luthans, F., Baack, D., Taylor, L. (1987). Organizational commitment:
Analysis of antecedents. Human Relations, 40(4), 219-236.
44. Marchiori, D., Henkin, A. (2004). Organizational commitment of a health
profession faculty: Dimensions, correlate and conditions. Medical Teacher,
26(4), 353-8.
45. Martin, C., Bennett, N. (1996). The role of justice judgments in explaining
the relationship between job satisfaction and organizational commitment.
Group Organization Management, 21(1), 84-105.
46. Mathieu, J., Zajac, D. (1990). A review and meta analysis of the
antecedent's correlates and consequences of organizational commitment.
Psychological Bulletin, 108(2), 171-99.
47. McGee, G., Ford, R. (1987). Two (or more?) dimensions of organizational
commitment: Reexamination of the affective and continuance commitment
scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 638-42.
48. Meyer, J., Allen, J. (1997). Commitment in the workplace - Theory,
research and application. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
49. Meyer, J., Allen, N., Gellatley, I. (1990). Affective and continuance
commitment in the organization: Evaluation of measures and analysis of
concurrent and time-lagged relations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(6),
710-20.
50. Morris, J., Steers, R. (1980). Structural influences on organizational
commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 15, 50-7.

87
Management, Vol. 20, 2015, 2, pp. 71-91
P. Sharma, V. Sinha: The influence of occupational rank on organizational commitment of...

51. Morris, J., Sherman, J. (1981). Generalizability of an organizational

commitment model. Academy of Management Journal, 24(3), 512-26.
52. Mowday, R., Steers, R., Porter, L. (1979). The measures of organizational
commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 142, 224-247.
53. Naumann, S., Bennett, N., Bies, R., Martin, C. (1998). Laid off, but still
loyal: The influence of perceived justice and organizational support.
International Journal of Conflict Management, 9(4), 356-8.
54. O'Creevy, M., Winfrow, P., Lydka, H., Morris, T. (1997). Company
prospects and employee commitment: An analysis of the dimensionality of
the BOCS and the influence of external events on those dimensions. British
Journal of Industrial Relations, 35(4), 593-608.
55. Ojha, K., Pradeep, N. (1999). Organizational commitment in software
firms: The impact of organizational demography. http://www.iimb.ernet.in/
research/sites/default/files/WP.IIMB_.135.pdf (retrieved on 12 Nov, 2012)
56. O'Reilly, C., Chatman, J. (1986). Organizational commitment and
psychological attachment: The effects of compliance, identification and
internalization on prosocial behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(3),
492-499.
57. Okpara, J. (2004). Personal characteristics as predictors of job satisfaction:
An exploratory study of IT managers in a developing economy. Information
Technology People, 17(3), 327-38.
58. Opayemi, A. (2004). Personal attributes and organizational commitment
among Nigerian police officers. African Journal of the Psychological Study
of Social Issues, 7(2), 251-63.
59. Oswald, S., Mossholder, K., Harris, S. (1994). Vision salience and strategic
involvement: Implications for psychological attachment to organization and
job. Strategic Management Journal, 15(6), 477-90.
60. Paille, P., Fournier, P., Lamontagne, S. (2011). Relationship between
commitments to the organization, the superior and colleagues, and intention
to leave among truckers. International Journal of Organizational Analysis,
19(2), 92-108.
61. Parnell, J., Crandall, W. (2003). Propensity for participative decision
making, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, organizational
citizenship behavior, and intentions to leave among Egyptian managers.
Multinational Business Review, 11(1), 45-65.
62. Perry, R. (2004). The relationship of affective organizational commitment
with supervisory trust. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 24(2),
133-49.
63. Peterson, D. (2003). The relationship between ethical pressure, relativistic
moral beliefs and organizational commitment. Journal of Managerial
Psychology, 18(6), 557-72.

88
 Management, Vol. 20, 2015, 2, pp. 71-91
P. Sharma, V. Sinha: The influence of occupational rank on organizational commitment of...

64. Popoola, S. (2009). Organizational commitment of records management

personnel in Nigerian private universities. Records of Management Journal,
19(3), 204-217.
65. Powell, D., Meyer, J. (2004). Side- bet theory and the three component
model of organizational commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 65,
157-77.
66. Reichers, A. (1985). A review and reconceptualization of organizational
commitment. Academy of Management Review, 10(3), 465-76.
67. Rhodes, S. (1983). Age- related differences in work attitudes and behavior:
A review and conceptual analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 93, 328-67.
68. Robbins, S. (1997). Essentials of organizational behavior (5th ed.).
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
69. Rowlinson, S. (2001). Matrix organizational structure, culture and
commitment: A Hong Kong public sector case study of change.
Construction Management Economics, 19(7), 669-73.
70. Savery, L., Syme, P. (196). Organizational commitment and hospital
pharmacists. Journal of Management Development, 15(1), 14-22.
71. Schwepker, C. (1999). The relationship between ethical conflict,
organizational commitment and turnover intentions in the sales force. The
Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 19(1), 43-9.
72. Sheldon, M. (1971). Investments and involvements as mechanisms
producing commitment to the organization. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 16, 142-50.
73. Shore, L., Wayne, S. (1993). Commitment and employee behavior:
Comparison of affective commitment and continuance commitment with
perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(5),
774-81.
74. Simola, S. (2001). Relationship between occupational commitment and
ascribed importance of organizational characteristics. Education Training,
53(1), 67-81.
75. Singh, P., Finn, D., Goulet, L. (2004). Gender and job attitudes: A re-
examination and extension. Women in Management Review, 19(7), 345-55.
76. Singh, V., Vinnicombe, S. (2000). Gendered meaning of commitment from
high technology engineering managers in the United Kingdom and Sweden.
Gender, Work and Organization, 7(1), 1-19.
77. Smith, P., Hoy, F. (1992). Job satisfaction and commitment of older
workers in small businesses. Journal of Small Business Management, 30(4),
106-118.
78. Somech, A., Bogler, R. (2002). Antecedents and consequences of teacher
organizational and professional commitment. Educational Administration
Quarterly, 38(4), 555-77.

89
Management, Vol. 20, 2015, 2, pp. 71-91
P. Sharma, V. Sinha: The influence of occupational rank on organizational commitment of...

79. Somers, M. (1993). A test of the relationship between affective and

continuance commitment using non-recursive models. Journal of
Occupational Organizational Psychology, 66(2), 185-92.
80. Stallworth, H. (2003). Mentoring, organizational commitment and
intentions to leave public accounting. Managerial Auditing Journal, 18(5),
405-18.
81. Steers, R. (1977). Antecedents and outcomes of organizational
commitment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 22(1), 46-56.
82. Tett, R., Meyer, J. (1993). Job satisfaction, organizational commitment,
turnover intention and turnover: Path analyses based on meta analytic
findings. Personnel Psychology, 46(2), 259-61.
83. Torka, N. (2004). A typical employment relationships and commitment:
Wishful thinking or HR challenge? Management Review, 15(3), 324-43.
84. Vanderberg, R., Scarpello, V. (1994). A longitudinal assessment of the
determinant relationship between employee commitments to the occupation
and the organization. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15(6), 535-47.
85. Wallace, J. (1993). Professional and organizational commitment:
Compatible or incompatible? Journal of Vocational Behavior, 42(3), 333-
49.
86. Wheaton, A. (1999). The generation of organizational commitment in a
cross- cultural context. Asia Pacific Business Review, 6(1), 73-103.
87. Yoon, J., Baker, M., Ko, J. (1994). Interpersonal attachment and
organizational commitment: Subgroup hypothesis revisited. Human
Relations, 47(3), 329-52.
88. Yousef, D. (2000). Organizational commitment and job satisfaction as
predictors of attitudes towards organizational change in a non- western
setting. Personnel Review, 29(5), 567-592.
89. Zahra, S. (1984). Antecedents and consequences of organizational
commitment: An integrative approach. Akron Business and Economic
Review, 15, 36-42.
90. Zangaro, G. (2001). Organizational commitment: A concept analysis.
Nursing Forum, 36(2), 14-23.

UTJECAJ HIJERARHIJSKOG POLOŽAJA NA ORGANIZACIJSKU

PRIVRŽENOST SVEUČILIŠNIH NASTAVNIKA

Sažetak

U ovom se radu analizira utjecaj hijerarhijskog položaja na organizacijsku privrženost te

istražuju pojedinačni odnosi između afektivne, normativne i instrumentalne. Rad se

90
 Management, Vol. 20, 2015, 2, pp. 71-91
P. Sharma, V. Sinha: The influence of occupational rank on organizational commitment of...

temelji na uzorku 505 sveučilišnih nastavnika, zaposlenih na 28 privatnih visokih

učilišta tehničke struke u državi Haryana, u Indiji. Rezultati analize varijance pokazuju
da se ukupna organizacijska privrženost progresivno povećava s povećanjem
hijerarhijskog položaja. Nadalje se pokazuje da hijerarhijski položaj nema pozitivnog
učinka na afektivnu, instrumentalnu i normativnu privrženost. Žene su, nadalje,
privrženije organizaciji od muškaraca. O dobivenim se rezultatima opširno raspravlja u
kontekstu značajnosti utjecaja hijerarhijskog položaja na organizacijsku privrženost
sveučilišnih nastavnika.

91