Alternative Measures of Employee Commitment: Assessment of Predictive Validity for Performance and Turnover

IF 2.9 4区心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED

Human Performance Pub Date : 2020-05-13 DOI:10.1080/08959285.2020.1759071

R. Vance, Stephen J. Jaros, Thomas E. Becker, Alexander S. McKay

{"title":"Alternative Measures of Employee Commitment: Assessment of Predictive Validity for Performance and Turnover","authors":"R. Vance, Stephen J. Jaros, Thomas E. Becker, Alexander S. McKay","doi":"10.1080/08959285.2020.1759071","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Two studies assessed the factor structures and predictive validities of alternative measures of workplace commitments. With the assisted living company and MTurk samples, Study 1 examined factor structures of the affective (AC), normative (NC), and continuance commitment (CC) scales and the unitary commitment scale. The internal structures of the AC and unitary commitment scales were sound, but problems were revealed in the structures of the NC and CC scales. Study 2 compared predictive validities of these scales to a simple one-item measure of attachment. Customer service employees of an energy company completed a commitment questionnaire. Subsequently, supervisors rated their job performance. The company provided objective performance metrics and 7 months of turnover records. Relative weight analyses revealed that predictive validities of the NC, CC, and unitary commitment scales were almost entirely subsumed by the AC scale and the attachment item when all measures competed to explain variance in outcomes. Considering the prevalence of use of the established measures, researchers should be aware of their deficiencies.","PeriodicalId":47825,"journal":{"name":"Human Performance","volume":"33 1","pages":"164 - 190"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/08959285.2020.1759071","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Performance","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08959285.2020.1759071","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 4

Abstract

ABSTRACT Two studies assessed the factor structures and predictive validities of alternative measures of workplace commitments. With the assisted living company and MTurk samples, Study 1 examined factor structures of the affective (AC), normative (NC), and continuance commitment (CC) scales and the unitary commitment scale. The internal structures of the AC and unitary commitment scales were sound, but problems were revealed in the structures of the NC and CC scales. Study 2 compared predictive validities of these scales to a simple one-item measure of attachment. Customer service employees of an energy company completed a commitment questionnaire. Subsequently, supervisors rated their job performance. The company provided objective performance metrics and 7 months of turnover records. Relative weight analyses revealed that predictive validities of the NC, CC, and unitary commitment scales were almost entirely subsumed by the AC scale and the attachment item when all measures competed to explain variance in outcomes. Considering the prevalence of use of the established measures, researchers should be aware of their deficiencies.

查看原文本刊更多论文

员工承诺的替代测量:绩效与离职的预测效度评估

两项研究评估了工作场所承诺替代测量的因素结构和预测效度。研究1以辅助生活公司和MTurk为样本，考察了情感承诺量表(AC)、规范承诺量表(NC)、持续承诺量表(CC)和单一承诺量表的因素结构。共同承诺量表和单一承诺量表的内部结构较为完善，而共同承诺量表和共同承诺量表的内部结构存在问题。研究2将这些量表的预测效度与简单的单项依恋测量进行了比较。某能源公司的客服人员完成了一份承诺问卷。随后，主管对他们的工作表现进行评估。公司提供了客观的绩效指标和7个月的营业额记录。相对权重分析显示，当所有测量都在竞争解释结果的差异时，NC、CC和单一承诺量表的预测效度几乎完全被AC量表和依恋项目所包含。考虑到现有措施的普遍使用，研究人员应该意识到它们的不足。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Human Performance PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED-

CiteScore

4.30

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Human Performance publishes research investigating the nature and role of performance in the workplace and in organizational settings and offers a rich variety of information going beyond the study of traditional job behavior. Dedicated to presenting original research, theory, and measurement methods, the journal investigates individual, team, and firm level performance factors that influence work and organizational effectiveness. Human Performance is a respected forum for behavioral scientists interested in variables that motivate and promote high-level human performance, particularly in organizational and occupational settings. The journal seeks to identify and stimulate relevant research, communication, and theory concerning human capabilities and effectiveness. It serves as a valuable intellectual link between such disciplines as industrial-organizational psychology, individual differences, work physiology, organizational behavior, human resource management, and human factors.