Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Organizational commitment: do workplace practices matter?

By Alex Bryson and Michael White

Abstract

Using nationally-representative linked employer-employee data for Britain this paper considers whether employers are able to influence the organizational commitment (OC) of their employees through the practices they deploy. We examine the association between OC and two broad groups of HRM practices emphasised in two different strands of the literature, namely “High-Performance Workplace Practices” (HPWPs) and practices associated with “Perceived Organizational Support” (POS). We consider their associations with mean workplace-level OC and individual employees’ OC. Although employers may be able to engender greater OC on the part of their employees, the practices that do so are not those emphasized in the HPWP literature, with the exception of consultation and the involvement of employees in decision-taking. POS practices fare a little better but, again, the findings are far from unequivocal. Furthermore, those practices that are ‘effective’ in engendering higher OC such as tolerance of absence, recruiting on ‘values’ and allowing employees to make decisions, tend to have a fairly low incidence in British workplaces. There is, however, one finding which chimes with the ideas underpinning the HPWP literature, namely that there are returns to the use of practices in combination. Analyses of both mean workplace-level OC and individual employee OC find an independent positive association between OC and the deployment of multiple practices in combination. This evidence is consistent with practices having synergies, as emphasised in some of the HPWP literature

Topics: HN Social history and conditions. Social problems. Social reform, HD Industries. Land use. Labor
Publisher: Centre for Economic Performance, London School of Economics and Political Science
Year: 2008
OAI identifier: oai:eprints.lse.ac.uk:28498
Provided by: LSE Research Online

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. (1975). A Comparative Analysis of Complex Organizations, revised and enlarged edition, doi
  2. (2004). A Critical Assessment of the High-Performance Paradigm’, doi
  3. (2001). Affective Commitment to the Organization: the Contribution of Perceived Organizational Support’, doi
  4. (1989). Career Experiences, Perceptions of Employment Practices, and Psychological Commitment to the Organization’, Human Relations, doi
  5. (1990). Culture, Control and Commitment. A Study of Work Organization and Work Attitudes in the United States and Japan, Cambridge: doi
  6. (1994). Effects of Human Resource Systems on Manufacturing Performance and Turnover’, doi
  7. (2000). Employees and High-Performance Work Systems: Testing Inside the Black Box’, doi
  8. (2001). Employer Policies and Organizational Commitment in Britain 1992-7’, doi
  9. (1985). From Control to Commitment in the Workplace’,
  10. (1997). Handbook of Organizational Measurement’, doi
  11. (2001). High-Involvement Work Systems and Performance Outcomes: the Strength of Variable, Contingent and Context-Bound Relationships’, doi
  12. (2003). High–Performance’ Management Practices, Working Hours and Work-Life Balance’, doi
  13. (1995). Human Resource Bundles and Manufacturing Performance: Organizational Logic and Flexible Production Systems in the World Auto Industry’, doi
  14. (1999). Human Resource Management and Performance’, doi
  15. (2002). Human Resource Management, Corporate Performance, and Employee Well-Being: Building the Worker into HRM’, doi
  16. (1987). Innovating to Compete, doi
  17. (1957). Leadership in Administration: A Sociological Interpretation, doi
  18. (1984). Managing Human Assets, doi
  19. (2000). Manufacturing Advantage: Why High-Performance Work Systems Pay Off, doi
  20. (1996). Methodological Issues in Cross-Sectional and Panel Estimates of the Human Resource-Firm Performance Link’, doi
  21. (1974). Organizational Commitment, Job Satisfaction, and Turnover Among Psychiatric Nurses’, doi
  22. (1973). Organizational, Work and Personal Factors in Employee Turnover and Absenteeism’, doi
  23. (1996). Organizations in America: Analysing their Structures and Human Resource Practices, Thousand Oaks CA: doi
  24. (1990). Perceived Organizational Support and Employee Diligence, Commitment and Innovation’, doi
  25. (1999). Perceived Organizational Support: Inferior Versus Superior Performance by Wary Employees’, doi
  26. (1986). Perceived Organizational Support’, doi
  27. (1965). Reciprocation: The Relationship Between Man and Organization’, doi
  28. (1998). Restructuring the Employment Relationship, doi
  29. (2005). Satisfaction with HR Practices and Commitment to the Organisation: Why One Size Does Not Fit All’, doi
  30. (1984). Testing the “Side-Bet” Theory of Organizational Commitment: Influences of Work Positions and Family Roles’,
  31. (1998). The Human Equation, doi
  32. (1995). The Impact of Human Resource Management Practices on Turnover, Productivity, and Corporate Financial Performance’, doi
  33. (1994). The Mutual Gains Enterprise, doi
  34. (1986). The Role of Human Resource Management Practices doi
  35. (2003). The Role of Perceived Organizational Support and Supportive Human Resource Practices in the Turnover Process’, doi
  36. (1985). Toward a Strategy of Eliciting Employee Commitment Based on Policies of Mutuality’,

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.