68
THE IMPACT OF EMPLOYEE COMMITMENT ON EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION ROLE OF EMPLOYEE
PERFORMANCE AS A MODERATING VARIABLE
Dr. Mubbsher Munawar Khan (1), Zia-ur-Rehman(2), Muhammad Wasim Akram(3) (PAKISTAN) (1)Associate Professor, Institute of Business Administration, University of the Punjab Lahore, Pakistan
(2)Lecturer, Hailey College of Commerce, University of the Punjab, Lahore (3)
Research scholar Hailey College of Commerce, University of the Punjab, Lahore ABSTRACT
Role of employee commitment is always been accepted as an active catalyst for improving
organizational satisfaction. In this research employee satisfaction is taken as dependent variable and
employee commitment is employed as independent variable, whereas employee performance is used
as moderating variable. Sample for this study is selected from employees working in various private
and public organizations of major cities of Lahore, Faisalabad and Karachi. Data is collected through
close- ended questionnaire and statistically analyzed through SPSS by applying descriptive statistics
and t-test, results revealed that the there is a moderate level of interdependence between these
variables. So we will reject alternate hypothesis and accept null hypothesis.
69 LITERATURE VIEW
Employee Satisfaction:
Past studies depict bidirectional relationship between employee satisfaction and job performance
while recent studies give more insight of unidirectional relationship that employee satisfaction leads
to job performance but weak relationship exists when job satisfaction was analyzed as a result of job
performance (Fried, Shirom, Gilboa, & Cooper, 2008). Choo & Bowley (2007) awoed that employee
satisfaction and job performance are directly related and that job satisfaction is the result of job
performance.Performance dimensions e.g. task and contextual performance were found to be weakly
associated with employee satisfaction and factors of job descriptive index (JDI) were more affected by
employee satisfaction level (Shaikh, Bhutto, & Maitlo, 2012).Hong & Waheed (2011) investigated the
link between motivation, employee satisfaction and job performance and found that motivation
increases employee satisfaction which leads to increase injob performance. Khan,Nawaz, Aleem, &
Hamed, (2012)explored the impact of employee satisfaction on job performance and found that
employee performance is considered to be the result of job satisfaction. Employee performance is
measured by various factors like absenteeism, turnover, productivity and employee satisfaction
(Gibson, 1990). Performance management system also focuses on employee satisfaction (Tinofirei,
2011). Works of Kirkman & Rosen (1999) and Stewart (2000) showed that workers’ autonomy has
positive relationship with employee satisfaction and job performance.
Employee Performance:
Performance is defined as the attained outcome of actions with the skills of employees who perform
in some situation (Prasetya & Kato, 2011). According to (Suhartini, 1995), employee performance is a
mutual result of effort, ability, and perception of tasks. Good performance is step towards the
achievement of organizational aims. Hence more struggle is required to improve the organizational
performance.Dharma (1991) said that performance is something that is done, or products formed and
offered by a group of people. Swasto (1996) said that employee performance is the actions or the
completion of errands that were done by individuals within specific period of time.Employee
70
organizational objectives and peers assessment to make sure that employees are working for the
development of the company.
According to Cummings and Schwab (1973), employer must prioritize the organizational objectives
over his personal objectives.Bass& Avolio (1997) said that the individual and organizational
performance is greatly affected by the efficient participation of leadership. Organizational success
depends on active utilization of human resources. Employees are the assets of an organization. At
another place Wall, Solam and Sobal; and Maritz (1995) remarks that valued organizations need
efficient leaders.
According to Fiedler and House (1988); Maritz (1995), successful leadership helps in accomplishment
of employees’ need which results in active performance. Kotler (1988) claims that growing
significance of leadership in organizations is due to changes in business environment such as change
in competitive forces and the desire for moreinvolvement of total workforce. Cummings and Schwab
(1973), claims that leadership is the most significant factor for judging the employee performance.
According to Maritz (1995) and Bass and Avolio (1997) leadership is the most significant factor for
examining the employee performance. For an organization to be outstanding, it need to have an
outstanding leadership and provides as a model for growing organizations.Jones and George (2000)
notes that leaders are efficient when they influence their subordinates by effectively achieving the
organizational objectives. According to Bass and Avolio (1997) leadership is the most important aspect
for determining the organizational performance.
Compensation is the major element that affects the employee performance. If employees are satisfied
that organization is offering a good compensation then their motivation level is enhanced and as a
result their performance to work also increases. Robbins (2001) said when employees feel happy
about their compensation they are more motivated towards their work and the performance of the
company also boosts.
Cameron and Pierce (1996) said that all organizations use pay, promotion and benefits to give
71
depending on the power and responsibility of such employees and these expectations are different
from organization to organization. According to Shahzad, Bashir and Ramay, (2008) there is a direct
link between employee performance and compensation practices.
Human resource management is considered the backbone of all businesses. To improve the
performance, organizations are trying to improve the performance of human capital. Many
researchers are trying to describe the relationship between organizational performance and the
performance of employees. According to Cohen & Single (2001) there is lot of pressure on the
management of the organization to turn into a friendlier one. Grover and Crooker (1995); and
Scandura and Lankau (1997) have found that the sense of employees’ obligation to organization
become more positive when flexible time scheduling is being adopted by the organization.
Brandt, Krawczyk & Kalinowski (2008) examined that there exist a disagreement among personal life
and employees’ performance. According to Ali and Baloch (1999) commitment affect the personal life
of employees which results in low performance of employees. Aminah (2008) said that work and
family conflict is inversely linked to employees’ performance. It is examined that work and family
conflict decreases employee satisfaction, increases employees stress and decreases performance.
A lot of research has taken place which holds that inverse relation exists between conflict and
performance level of employees. Hence it is assumed that there is negative relation between conflict
and performance level of employees in Pakistan.
Employee Commitment:
It is necessary for every organization to have full level of its employee commitment in order to have
outstanding performance on long term basisMowday, Porter, & Steers (1982). Currently employees
act like entrepreneurs when they work in a team and every member of the team tries his level best to
prove one the best amongst all others (Mowday et al., 1982). Increase in commitment level of
employees in organization ultimately increases the performance of their employees. In past
organizations provide job security to its employees to improve their commitment level in the
72
in the organization for individual projects or to the business is assumed as a major reason for better
employee performance that leads to organizational success. The employee performance can also be
increased when the employees are more satisfied with their job and duties as well. Their satisfaction
may depend on the rewards system, the organizational culture and employee knowledge sharing
(Mowday et al., 1982).
Continuous research on employee commitment and its effect on employees’ efficiency and
organizational performance are being done since four decades. (Becker, 1960).In Pakistan, the
enduring commitment to organization is traditional because here many people do not choose job as a
profession or more properly a life-long profession.Meyer and Allen (1991) classify employee
commitment into three groups namely: (a) Affective Commitment; (b) Continuance Commitment; and
(c) Normative Commitment.Employees who have a strong affective commitment continue to do work
with the organization because they want to do so. Employees with continuance commitment remain
with the organization because they need to do so. Employees with a high level of normative
commitment stay with the organization because they think they ought to remain it. Many studies
have proved that affective commitment is positively connected with employee commitment.
(Whitener & Walz, 1993; Somers, 1995; Jaros 1997).
Where there is a high level of employee commitment, there will be low turnover and that employee
will perform better with less absenteeism (Price & Mueller, 1981).There are certain things that really
affect employee commitment like: work load, less acknowledgement and less compensation. Dorgan
(1994) defines commitment as the enhanced functional and operational performance, including
quality as the main principal.
Epitropaki and & Martin (2005) has shown positive relationship between the job related well-being
and affective commitment. Addae and Wang, (2006) have establishes a negative relationship between
the employee commitment and stress. Irving & Colemen (2003) has shown the positive relationship
between the stress and continuance commitment. Somers (2009) has shown insignificant relationship
between the job stress and continuance commitment. Witting-Berman, & Lang, (1990) shows
73 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
Fig 1: Effect of employee commitment on employee satisfaction keeping employee performance as
moderating variable
Hypothesis:
H1: Employee satisfaction can be enhanced through increasing employee commitment.
H2: Employee performance does affect the relationship of the employee commitment and employee satisfaction.
H3: Employee performance has a moderating effect in the relationship of the employee commitment and employee satisfaction.
RESEARCH DESIGN
Research Objectives:
The objective of the research is to find the relationship of employee satisfaction and employee
commitment keeping employee performance as moderating variable. Here, employee commitment is
anindependent variable, employee performance is moderating variable and employee satisfaction is
dependent variable. The idea behind our research is to check the impact of employee commitment on
employee satisfaction keeping employee performance as moderating variable.
The Purpose of Research:
It is a descriptive research that can be appropriate for any kind of organization whether it is a public or
74
recognition and human resource management process in their working that will ultimately leads to
employee commitment and at last leads to higher organizational performance.
Study Setting:
The research was directed in non-contrived study settings or in other words we can say that in a
natural environment that shows the results is real case.
Unit of Analysis:
The study was organized in Lahore, Faisalabad and Karachi region. The main focus was on the
registered organizations. Questionnaires were filled out from the individuals belonging to different
public and private organizations.
Sampling Design:
Convenient sampling was used for data collection. Total 300 questionnaires were duly distributed and
collected after completing from Lahore, Faisalabad and Karachi.
Time Horizon:
It was a cross-sectional study; mainly the focus was on measuring the impact of employee
commitment on employee’s satisfaction keeping employee performance as moderating variable.
Data Collection:
Questionnaires are used to measure the employee commitment on employee satisfaction keeping
employee performance as moderating variable. The questionnaires are then analyzed through SPSS
software.
SAMPLING
In this research, data is collected from public and private sector employees from Lahore, Faisalabad
and Karachi. The total 300 respondents were approached for data collection. Out of these 300
respondents, 275 were answered correctly and 25 questionnaires were discarded. Total sample size of
our research was 275 employees working in public and private organizations. Among 275 respondents
75
Technology, Audit & Accountancy, Finance, Marketing, Procurement, Budgeting and Technical
Departments.
DATA ANALYSIS
The data was collected through questionnaires are then entered in Statistical Package for Social
Sciences (SPSS). Following tools were used for analysis:
Descriptive Statistics
Mean Std. Deviation N
Employee commitment 3.33 1.044 275
Employee performance 2.76 .990 275
Employee Satisfaction 2.89 .817 275
T-Test
Test value = 3
T df Sig. (2-Tailed)
Mean
Difference
95% Confidence Interval
of the Difference
Lower Upper
Employee
Commitment 52.860 274 .000 3.327 3.20 3.45
Employee
Performance 46.160 274 .000 2.756 2.64 2.87
Employee
Satisfaction 58.705 274 .000 2.891 2.79 2.99
- T- Value of employee commitment is 52.860 with P value of .000 which shows that the
respondents have agreed with the literature that employee satisfaction is one of the most
76
participation and norms of the organization affects the organizational growth are ingredients
of high level commitment in employee’s
- T- Value of employee’s performance is 46.160 with P value of .000 which depicts that
employee performance as one of major intervening variable without which employee’s
satisfaction could not be possible. The employee performance is measures with the elements
ofeffort from employees, ability, and perception of tasks, skills of employees, worker attitudes
that add to attaining organization’s objectives.
- T-Value of employee satisfaction is 58.706 with P value of .000 which shows that there is
clearly positive perception of employee satisfaction, which is not possible without the
elements of motivation, skill development and exact composition of their gender groups by
the way of forming their work groups.
LIMITATION OF THE RESEARCH
This research is conducted through a close ended questionnaire. Data collected was then used to find
impact of employee commitment on employee satisfaction having employee performance as
moderating variable was judged. Further study could also be conducted by taking employee
satisfaction as moderating variable and employee performance as dependent variable. In this study
sample is taken from three cities whereas more respondents could be included for research to get the
results more accurate and generalized. Quantitative research methods are used further research
77 REFERENCES
[1] Abelson, R. P. 1976. Script processing in attitude formation and decision-making. In J. S. Car-rol & J.
W. Payne (Eds.), Cognition and social behavior: 33-45. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
[2] Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W., & Steers, R. M. 1982. Employee-organizational linkages: The
psychology of commitment, absenteeism, and turnover. New York: Academic Press
[3] Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. 1991 A three-component conceptualization of organizational
commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1: 61-89.
[4] Prasetya, A. & Kato, M. 2011. The Effect of Financial and Non Financial Compensation to the
Employee Performance. The 2nd International Research Symposium in Service Management.
Yogyakarta,Indonesia.
[5] Becker, H. S. 1960. Notes on the concept of commitment. American Journal of Sociology, 66(1),
32-42
[6] Jaros, S. J. 1997. An assessment of Meyer and Allen’s three-component model of organizational
commitment and turnover intentions. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 51(3), 319–337.
[7] Somers, M. J. 1995. Organizational commitment, turnover and absenteeism: An examination of
direct and interaction effects. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 16(1), 49-58.
[8] Whitener, E., & Walz, P. 1993. Exchange theory determinants of affective and continuance
commitment and turnover. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 42(3), 265–281.
[9] Price, J. and Mueller, C. 1981. A causal model of turnover for nurses. Academy of Management
Journal, 24(3), 543-565.
[10] Dorgan, C.E. (1994). Productivity link to the indoor environment estimated relative to Ashrae
1962-1989, Proceedings of Health Buildings, Budapest, 94, 461-472.
[11] Epitropaki, O., & Martin, R. 2005. The moderating role of individual differences in the relation
between transformational/transactional leadership perceptions and organizational identification. The
Leadership Quarterly, 16(4), 569-589.
[12] Addae, H. M., & Wang, X. 2006. Stress at work: Linear and curvilinear effects of psychological-,
job-, and organization-related factors: An exploratory study of Trinidad and Tobago. International
78
[13] Irving, P. G., & Coleman, D. F. 2003. The Moderating Effect of Different Forms of Commitment on
Role Ambiguity‐Job Tension Relations. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences/Revue Canadienne
des Sciences de l'Administration, 20(2), 97-106.
[14] Wittig-Berman, U., & Lang, D. 1990. Organizational commitment and its outcomes: Differing
effects of value commitment and continuance commitment on stress reactions, alienation and
organization-serving behaviours. Work and Stress, 4, 167-177.
[15] Somers, M. J. 2009. The combined influence of affective, continuance and normative
commitment on employee withdrawal. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 74(1), 75-81.
[16] Suhartini, 1995. Analisis factor-faktor yang mempengaruhi intensi peningkatan kinerja dosen
pada perguruan tinggi swasta Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta [Analysis of factors affecting intention
performance improvement lecturer at private universities in Yogyakarta] (Thesis). Surabaya, Program
Pascasarjana Unair.
[17] Dharma, Agus. 1991. Gaya Kepemimpinan Yang Efektif Bagi Para Manajer [The Effective
Leadership Styles for Managers]. Bandung: Sinar Baru.
[18] Swasto, Bambang 1996. Pengembangan Sumber Daya Manusia Pengaruhnya Terhadap Kinerja
dan Imbalan [Human resource development and its effect on performance and rewards], Malang: FIA
Unibraw-Malang.
[19] Cummings, L. L., & Schwab, D. P. 1973. Performance in Organizations: Determinants and
Appraisal. Glenview: Scott Foreman and Company.
[20] Wall, B., Solum, R. S., & Sobol, M. R. 1992. The visionary leader. Rocklin: Prima Publishing.
[21] Kotler, P. (1988). The potential contributions of marketing thinking to economic development.
Research in Marketing, 1(4).
[22] Jones, G. R., &George J. M. 2000. Essentials of managing organizational behavior. Upper Saddle
River: Prentice-Hall.
[23] Robbins, S. P., 2001. Organizational Behavior, New Jersey: Pearson Education International.
[24] Cameron, J., & Pierce, W. D. 1996. The debate about rewards and intrinsic motivation: Protests
79
[25] Tessema, M., & Soeters, J. 2006. Challenges and prospects of HRM in developing countries:
testing the HRM-performance link in Eritrean civil service, International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 17, 86-105.
[26] Shahzad, K., Bashir, S., & Ramay, M. I. 2008. Impact of HR Practices on Perceived Performance of
University Teachers in Pakistan. International Review of Business Research Papers, 4, 302-315.
[27] Cohen, J. R., & Single, L. E. 2001. An examination of the perceived impact of flexible work
arrangements on professional opportunities in public accounting. Journal of Business Ethics, 32, 317–
328.
[28] Grover, S. L., & Crooker, K. J. 1995. Who appreciates family-responsive human recourse policies:
The impact of family –friendly policies on the organizational attachment parents and non-parents.
Personnel Psychology, 48, 271-288. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1995.tb01757.x
[29] Scandura, T. A., & Lankau, M. J. 1997. Relationships of gender, family responsibility, flexible work
hours to organizational commitment and job satisfaction. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18,
377-391.
[30] Brandt, J., Krawczyk, M. R., & Kalinowski, M. J. 2008. Personal and work-related predictors of
organizational commitment and life satisfaction of Slovak women in higher education. College
Teaching Methods & Styles Journal, 4, 7-14.
[31] Ali, N., & Baloch, Q. B. 1999. Predictors of organizational commitment and turnover intention of
medical representatives: An empirical evidence of Pakistan companies. Journal of Managerial
Sciences, 3 263-273.
[32] Aminah, A. 2008. Direct and indirect effects of work-family conflict on job performance. The
Journal of International Management Studies, 3, 176-180
[33] Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. 1997. Full range leadership: Manual for the multifactor leadership
questionnaire. Palo Alto, CA: Mind Garden.
[34] Fried, Y., Shirom, A., Gilboa, S., & Cooper, C. L. 2008. The mediating effects of job satisfaction and
propensity to leave on role stress-job performance relationships: combining meta-analysis and
80
[35] Choo, S., & Bowley, C. 2007. Emerald Article: Using training and development to affect job
satisfaction. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 14(2),339-352.
[36] Shaikh, M. A., Bhutto, D. N. A., & Maitlo, Q. 2012. Facets of Job Satisfaction and Its Association
with Performance. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(7), 322-326.
[37] Hong, T. T., & Waheed, A. 2011. HERZBERG'S MOTIVATION-HYGIENE THEORY AND JOB
SATISFACTION IN THE MALAYSIAN RETAIL SECTOR: THE MEDIATING EFFECT OF LOVE OF MONEY.
Asian Academy of Management Journal, 16 (1), 73-94.
[38] Khan, A. H., Nawaz, M. M., Aleem, M., & Hamed, W. 2012. Impact of job satisfaction on employee
performance: An empirical study of autonomous Medical Institutions of Pakistan. African Journal of
Business Management, 6 (7), 2697-2705. doi: 10.5897/AJBM11.2222
[39] Gibson, J.W. 1990. The supervisory challenge – principles and challenges. Ohio: Merrill Publishing
Company.
[40] Tinofirei, C. 2011. The unique factors affecting employee performance in non profit organizations.
Unpublished master’s thesis, University of South Africa, South Africa.
[41] Kirkman, B. L., & Rosen, B. 1999. Beyond self-management: Antecedents and consequences of
team empowerment. Academy of Management Journal, 42(1), 58-74.
[42] Stewart, G. L. 2000. Meta-analysis of work teams research published between 1977 and 1998.
Paper presented at 2000 Academy of Management Conference, Organizational Behavior Division,
Toronto.
[43] Fiedler, F. E., & House, R. J. 1988, Leadership theory and research: A report of progress.
International Review of Industrial and Organisational Psychology, 19(88), 73- 91.
