Toward an Integrative Model of Organizational Commitment and Identity: An Empirical Examination of a Model Linking These Constructs

Jordan Robbins

Advisor: Lois E Tetrick, PhD, Department of Psychology

Committee Members: Seth Kaplan, Ph.D., Anupam Jaju, Ph.D., Robert Kilcullen, Ph.D.

Johnson Center, Room B
May 17, 2011, 06:30 AM to 07:30 AM

Abstract:

The organizational commitment and social identity literature present two important frameworks for understanding employee’s behaviors and attitudes at work. Both have been used to explain similar outcomes, however, there is relatively little work examining how the two are related and how the two frameworks can be integrated.  This paper represents the first formal attempt at empirically testing a model that integrates these two important literatures, as some important antecedents (i.e. dispositional factors such as need for organizational identification, positive and negative affectivity, and achievement orientation) and outcomes (i.e. satisfaction, performance, intent to stay in the organization, and psychological contract breach committed by the employee).  Notably, this study incorporates the notion of psychological contract breach committed by the employee within the model.  This aspect of the employee-employer relationship is generally overlooked by psychological contract literature.  Results suggest that deep-structured organizational identity and organizational commitment are distinct constructs that can influence one another over time.  This work also shows that dispositions can impact the types of identities formed early in employees careers suggesting that researchers should look beyond the situational factors generally examined in identity research. Deep-structured organizational identity and organizational commitment differentially predicted important organizational outcomes suggesting that identity may be more predictive of attitudinal outcomes in certain circumstances. Furthermore, psychological contract breach committed by the employee appeared to act similarly to a retaliatory or counterproductive work behavior.