The Relationship Between Psychological Climate and Organizational Commitment
A. Z. Nammi
Maryam Zarra Nezhad
The aim of this study is to investigate the existence of relationships between components of psychological climate including autonomy, trust, pressure, cohesion, support, recognition, fairness and innovation and teachers, commitment to school, teaching occupation and work group. The study was conducted in one of the biggest cities (Ahvaz) in Iran, using a sample consisting of 170 teachers. Two methods were applied: Correlation analysis and multiple regression analysis. Support was found for the existence of statistically significant relationships between psychological climate and components of organizational commitment. The result of multiple regression analysis showed that trust, innovation support, fairness and recognition have significant effects on the explanation of variance of organization commitment.
Over the past three decades, impressive research efforts have been devoted
to understanding the antecedent of organizational commitment. Organizational
commitment means employees, loyalty and willingness to contribute to the organization.
Employee commitment is of great importance; because high levels of commitment
lead to several favorable organizational outcomes. Metaanalyses of commitment
studies indicate that commitment is related negatively to turnover (Cooper-Hakim
and Viswasvaarn, 2005), absenteeism (Farrel and Stam,
1988) and counterproductive behaviors (Dalal, 2005)
and positively to job satisfaction (Cooper-Hakim and Viswesvaran,
2005), motivation (Mathieu and Zajac, 1990) and organizational
citizenship behaviors (Riketta, 2002). This literature
has also dealt with effects of commitment on performance (Meyer
et al., 1989). The low level of commitment is associated with low
levels of morals (Decotiis and Summers, 1987) and altruism
and compliance (Schappe, 1998). The low level of commitment
from employees to their employers may harm reputation of the organization and
affect the organizations ability to recruit high-equality employees (Mowday
et al., 1982). Most of these research efforts have been focused on
industrial, organizational or occupational commitment (Mueller et al.,
1992). In the literature of which we are aware, only little research on organizational
commitment in relation to educational organizations has been conducted. Mottaz
(1986) investigated the relationship between education and organizational
commitment. In this study the relationship between education and organizational
commitment in a variety of occupational groups has been analyzed. Results indicated
that education has an indirect positive effect on organizational commitment
by increasing work rewards, but a direct negative effect when work rewards are
held constant. The latter finding is due to the higher work values associated
with increased education. In his study Celep (2000) investigated Turkish teachers
levels of commitment to their schools, the tasks involved in teaching, work
groups and the occupation. Teachers were asked about their commitment to the
school, commitment to the teaching occupation, commitment to the daily work
of teaching and commitment to collaborating with other working groups within
the organization. The findings indicated that there is a direct relationship
between teachers organizational commitment and working group. There was a close
relationship between variables related to teachers commitment to their schools,
the working group and the teaching occupation. Dee et
al. (2006) examined the effects of four team-based structures on the
organizational commitment of elementary teachers in an urban school district.
The study model focuses on organizational commitment and includes three intervening,
endogenous variables: teacher empowerment, school communication and work autonomy.
Team teaching had both direct and indirect effects on commitment to the school.
Curriculum teamwork, governance teamwork and community-relations teamwork each
contributed indirectly to higher levels of teacher commitment.
The concept of commitment from teachers to their educational organizations
is a multidimensional notion. It has four dimensions. The first dimension is
commitment to school which is defined as teachers belief and acceptance of
the goals and values and teacher,s strong desires to keep up membership in the
school. This definition is based on the concept of organizational commitment
(Mowday et al., 1979).
The second dimension is commitment to teaching occupation that is defined as
teachers attitudes toward their occupation. Commitment to teaching occupation
was formulated in accordance with the concept that is professional commitment,
career orientation, career commitment (Blau, 1985). The
other dimension is commitment to teaching work which has been put forward by
Morrows (1983) approach. Commitment to teaching work
is the physical and psychological occupied level of a teacher in his or her
daily life. The last dimension is commitment to work group defined as the employees
sense of faith fullness and collaboration with other working group within an
organization (Randall and Cote, 1991). In this respect,
the commitment of teachers to work group in the school is based on density of
the teachers sense of faithfulness and collaboration with other teachers.
Commitment from teachers to their schools, students, teaching activities, occupation
and colleagues, has positive influences on the effectiveness of school. One
of the factors that impact on the teachers commitment is psychological climate.
Psychological climate refers to how organizational environments are perceived
and interpreted by their employees (James and James, 1989;
James et al., 1990). James and
James (1989) proposed that individuals cognitively appraise their work-related
values. The appraisal is a reflection of the extent the organizational characteristics
are important to the individual and his or her personal and organizational well-being
(James et al., 1990). Thus, psychological climate
reflects a judgment by the individual about the degree to which the work environment
is beneficial to their sense of well-being. Psychological climate can be distinguished
from organizational climate (Rousseau, 1988) in that
the latter represents a shared or summary perception that people attach to organizational
practices and characteristics of the study setting (Schneider
and Reichers, 1983). Organizational climate is base don individuals, perceptions
of the organizational features, events and processes. When consensus among individuals
exists, the perceptions are aggregated to represent organizational climate (Ostrff
et al., 2003).
The focus of present research was psychological climate. Psychological climate
is important because it is the individual employees perception and evaluations
of the work environment, rather than the actual environment that mediates attitudinal
and behavioral response (James and Jones, 1974; James
et al., 1978; Johns et al., 1992).
Researchers have assessed an array of psychological climate dimension, for example:
work structure, role clarity, supportive management, team work, decision centralization
and leader goal facilitation (Brown and Leigh, 1996,
James and James, 1989; Kozlowski and
Dohery, 1989; Prithard and Karasick, 1973). The approach
taken in this study is based on the research of Koys and
Decottis (1991) in which psychological climate is conceptualized as a multidimensional
construct consisting of eight dimensions. Autonomy: the perception of self-determination
with respect to work procedures, goals and priorities. Cohesion: the perception
of togetherness of sharing within the organization setting, including the willingness
of members of provides material aid. Trust: the perception of freedom to communicate
openly with members at higher organizational levels about sensitive personal
issues with the expectation that the integrity of such communication will not
be violated. Pressure: the perception of time demands with respect to task completion
and performance standards. Support: including the willingness to let members
learn from their mistakes without fear of reprisal reorganization are acknowledged.
Fairness: the perception that organizational practices are equitable and no
arbitrary or capricious. Innovation: the perception that change and creativity
are encouraged, including risk-taking into new areas or areas where the member
has little or no prior experience.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The study has been conducted in Ahvaz, Iran in 2007. The related population
consists of the teachers from the all public elementary schools in the Ahvaz
city. The questionnaires were administrated to 200 teachers who were included
to the sample and 180 questionnaires were taken back. But 170 questionnaires
of the returned were evaluated in this research. Two questionnaires were used
in this study to measure teachers organizational commitment and psychological
climate. Teachers organizational commitment is assessed by teachers organizational
commitment scale (Celep, 2004). The Cranach alpha coefficient
of reliability of 28 items of the organizational commitment scale in educational
organizations was determined as 0.88. The Cranach alpha coefficient of reliability
of the factors was found out as commitment to school with 7 items is 0.75; commitment
to teaching occupation with 6 item is 0.78; commitment to work group with 6
items is 0.81, commitment to teaching work with 7 items is 0.75. The reliability
and validity of 28 items is 91 and 45. The reliability and validity of commitment
to school is 77 and 43; commitment to teaching work is 80 and 51; commitment
to teaching occupation is 82 and 52.
Psychological climate was measured by a 40 items scale developed and validated
by Koys and de cotiis (1991). The scale has eight sub-scales:
autonomy (5 items, α = 0.79), cohesion (5 items, α = 0.80), trust (5 items,
α = 0.71), pressure (5 items, α = 0.77), support (5 items, α = 0.82), recognition
(5 items, α = 0.80), fairness (5 items, 0.81) and innovation (5 items, 0.80).
The response format was a 5-point Likert scale with 1 representing strongly
disagree and 5 strongly agree. The evidence indicates that all subscales have
significant reliability and validity. The obtained reliability and validity
of these subscales are (respectively) as follows: autonomy with 0.78 and 0.42,
cohesion with 0.79 and 0.48), trust with 0.77 and 0.41, pressure with 0.77 and
0.50), support with 0.80 and 0.45, recognition with 0.71 and 0.41, fairness
with 0.82 and 0.46 and innovation with 0.73 and 0.45.
In this study four hypotheses have presented that shows there are relationships between components of psychological climate and aspects of teachers, organizational commitment.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The mean and standard deviations of the two measures are presented in Table
1.Table 2 shows the relationship between psychological
climate and teachers organizational commitment.
The second hypothesis proposed that the relationships between dimensions of
psychological climate and commitment to teaching occupation are statically significant.
The evidence is in favor of this hypothesis.
The third hypothesis anticipated that there are significant correlation between psychological climate and commitment to teaching work. The findings suggest the existing of high and significant correlations between psychological climate dimensions and commitment to teaching work.
The fourth hypothesis expected that the relationship between psychological
climate dimensions and commitment to work group are statically significant.
The results support this hypothesis; because correlations between autonomy,
cohesion, trust, pressure, support, recognition, fairness and innovation, with
commitment to work group statically significant at 95% level.
||Means and standard deviations of psychological climate and organizational
||Correlations between psychological climate components and teachers organizational
|*p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001, CS = Commitment to
school, CTO = Commitment to teaching occupation, CTW = Commitment to teaching
work, CWG = Commitment to work group
||Regression analysis of psychological climate on commitment to school with
||Regression analysis of psychological climate on commitment to teaching
work with stepwise model
||Regression analysis of psychological climate on commitment teaching occupation
by stepwise model
||Regression analysis of psychological climate on commitment work group
by stepwise model
The results of multiple regression analysis in Table 3 show
that only trust, innovation, support, recognition and fairness explain the variance
of commitment to school.
Table 4 shows that form the eight components of psychological climate only trust, innovation and support have a significant effect on the explanation of variance of commitment to teaching work.
Table 5 shows that form the dimensions of psychological climate only trust, innovation, support, fairness and recognition have a significant effect on the explanation of variance of commitment teaching occupation.
Table 6 shows that from the components of psychological climate,
trust, innovation, support and fairness have a significant effect on the explanation
of variance of commitment work group.
Five hypotheses were tested and confirmed in this research. The results demonstrated
clearly that teachers perception of their work environment influence directly
their level of organizational commitment. These result is similar to those of
Celep (2004) and Dee et al.
(2006). In other words teachers, perception of aspects of the work psychological
climate such as autonomy, cohesion, trust, pressure, support, recognition, fairness
and innovation has a strong influence of commitment to school, commitment to
teaching work, commitment to teaching occupation and commitment to work group.
It is possible to state that the teacher who has commitment himself/herself
to the school exerts great efforts for his school; is proud of his school and
is willing to have responsibilities for the achievement of school. On the other
hand, the teacher who has committed herself/himself to teaching work, helps
the students out of the classroom; struggles more for the unsuccessful students;
and creates possibilities for extra lesson on the case that routine class time
is not sufficient for the planned lesson. The teacher who has commitment herself/himself
to teaching occupation perceives his decision positively for choosing teaching
occupation; realizes her/his professional values more important then other professional
values; and is welling to work as a teacher even though he/she does not have
economical problems. The results of multiple regressions analysis of eight components
of psychological climate i.e., autonomy, trust, pressure, cohesion, support,
recognition, fairness and innovation have significant effect on the explanation
of variance of dimensions of organizational commitment.
1: Blau, G., 1985. The measurement and Prediction of career commitment. J. Occupat. Psychol., 28: 277-288.
2: Brown, S.P. and T.W. Leigh, 1996. A new look at psychological climate and its relationship to job involvement. J. Applied Psychol., 81: 358-368.
3: Celep,C., 2004. Teachers' organizational commitment in educational organizations. Psychology, 2: 52-67.
4: Cooper-Hakim, A. and C. Viswesvaran, 2005. The construct of work commitment: Testing an integrative framework. Psychol. Bull., 131: 241-259.
5: Dalal, R.S., 2005. A meta-analysis of the relationship between organizational citizenship behavior and counterproductive work behavior. J. Applied Psychol., 90: 1241-1255.
6: Decotiis, T.A. and T.P. Summers, 1987. A path analysis of a model of the antecedents and consequences of organizational commitment. Hum. Relat., 40: 445-470.
7: Farrel, D. and C.L. Stam, 1988. Meta-analysis of the correlates of employee absence. Hum. Relat., 41: 211-227.
8: James, L.A. and L.R. James, 1989. Integrating work environment perceptions: Explorations into the measurement of meaning. J. Applied Psychol., 74: 739-751.
Direct Link |
9: James, L.R, and A.P. Jones, 1974. Organizational climate. Psychol. Bull., 81: 1096-1112.
10: James, L.R., J.J. Hart, M.J. Gent and J.R. Bruni, 1978. Psychological climate. Personnel Psychol., 31: 783-873.
11: James, L.R., L.A. James and A.K. Ashe, 1990. The Meaning of Organizations. In: Organizational Culture and Climate, Schneider, B. (Ed.). Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp: 40-84.
12: Johns, G., J.L. Xie and Y. Fang, 1992. Mediating and moderating effects in job design. J. Manage., 18: 657-676.
13: Koys, D. and F. Decottis, 1991. Psychological climate. Org. Behav., 2: 72-98.
14: Kozlowski, S.W. and M. Doherty, 1989. Integration of climate and leadership. J. Applied Psychol., 74: 546-553.
15: Mathieu, J.E. and D.M. Zajac, 1990. A review and meta-analysis of the antecedents, correlates and consequences of organizational commitment. Psychol. Bull., 108: 171-194.
16: Meyer, J.P., V. Paunon, I.R. Gellatly, R.D. Goffin and D.N. Jackson, 1989. Organizational commitment and job performance. J. Applied Psychol., 74: 152-156.
17: Morrow, P.C., 1983. Concept redundancy in organization research. Acad. Manage. Rev., 8: 486-500.
Direct Link |
18: Mowday, R.T., L.W. Porter and R.M. Steers, 1982. Employee-Organization Linkages: The Psychology of Commitment, Absenteeism and Turnover. Academic Press, New York.
19: Mowday, R.T., L.W. Porter and R.M. Steers, 1979. The measurement of organizational commitment. J. Manage. Rev., 8: 486-500.
20: Muller, C.W., J.E. Wallace and J.L. Price, 1992. Employee commitment. Work Occupat., 19: 211-236.
21: Ostrff, C., A.J. Kinick and M.M. Tamkins, 2003. Organizational culture and climate. Comp. Handbook Psychol., 12: 565-594.
Direct Link |
22: Prithard, D. and B.W. Karasick, 1973. The effects of organizational climate on managerial job performance and job satisfaction. Organ. Behav. Hum. Perform., 9: 126-146.
23: Randall, D.M. and J.A. Cote, 1991. Interrelationships of work commitment construct. Work. Occupat., 2: 194-211.
24: Riketta, M., 2002. Attitudinal organizational commitment and job performance. J. Organ. Behav., 23: 257-266.
25: Rousseau, D.M., 1988. The construction of climate in organizational research. Int. Rev. Ind. Org. Psychol., 3: 139-158.
Direct Link |
26: Schappe, S.P., 1998. The influence of job satisfaction, organizational commitment and fairness perceptions on organizational citizenship behavior. J. Psychol.: Interdiscip. Applied, 132: 277-290.
CrossRef | Direct Link |
27: Schneider, B. and A. Reichers, 1983. On the etiology of climate. Personnel Psychol., 36: 19-39.
Direct Link |
28: Mottaz, C.J., 1986. An analysis of the relationship between education and organizational commitment in a variety of occupational groups. J. Voc. Behav., 28: 214-228.
Direct Link |
29: Dee, J.R., A.B. Henkin and C.A. Singleton, 2006. Organizational commitment of teachers in urban schools: Examining the effects of team structures. Urban Education 41: 603-627.
CrossRef | Direct Link |