The effects of HRM practices and antecedents on organizational commitment among university employees

S.G.A. Smeenk · Rob Eisinga · Christine Teelken · J.A.C.M. Doorewaard

178 citations0/0 files storedThe International Journal of Human Resource Management

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior Employee Performance and Management Human Resource and Talent Management

Abstract

This paper examines which factors affect organizational commitment among Dutch university employees in two faculties with different academic identities (separatist versus hegemonist, Stiles, 2004 Stiles, D. 2004. Narcissus Revisited: The Values of Management Academics and their Role in Business School Strategies in the UK and Canada. British Journal of Management, 15(2): 157–75. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]). The analyses of Web survey data reveal that in the separatist faculty decentralization, compensation, training/development, positional tenure and career mobility have significant effects. Age, organizational tenure, level of autonomy, working hours, social involvement and personal importance significantly affect the employees' organizational commitment in the hegemonist faculty. Participation, social interactions and job level are factors that are important in both faculties. The findings indicate that the set of factors affecting the organizational commitment of employees differs between the separatist and hegemonist faculties. The findings empirically support the argument that different configurations or ‘bundles’ of HRM practices (Delery and Doty, 1996 Delery, J.E. and Doty, D.H. 1996. Modes of Theorizing in Strategic Human Resource Management: Tests of Universalistic, Contingency, and Configurational Performance Predictions. Academy of Management Journal, 39(4): 802–35. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]; Guest, 1997 Guest, D.E. 1997. Human Resource Management and Performance: A Review and Research Agenda. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 8(3): 263–76. [Taylor & Francis Online] , [Google Scholar]) are suited for organizations with different identities. Explanations for the observed relationships, implications and limitations of the study are discussed.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 178 citations exist upstream.

References

2003Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies.1986Self-Reports in Organizational Research: Problems and Prospects 1990The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization 1991A PUBLIC MANAGEMENT FOR ALL SEASONS?1974Organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and turnover among psychiatric technicians.1970Role Conflict and Ambiguity in Complex Organizations 1984Employee-Organization Linkages: The Psychology of Commitment, Absenteeism, and Turnover.1983In search of excellence: Lessons from America's best- run companies

Cited by

2011Compliance or pragmatism: how do academics deal with managerialism in higher education? A comparative study in three countries 2014The impact of human resource management practices on performance 2011Exploring the Relationships Among Trust, Employee Satisfaction, and Organizational Commitment 2012Talent management in academia: performance systems and HRM policies 2019Human resources management practices and organizational commitment in higher education

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.