CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1       BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Commitment is characterized as an individual's degree of pledging or binding to a series of actions that motivates them to act (Kiesler, 1971). Individuals are likely to become worried with the company's general interests, such as its prestige, sustainability, and continued success, until association with the entity starts. This generates activity and resource exchange (reflecting increased concern between firm and employee), encouraging more identity (Rousseau, 1998). An energized workforce, according to Katzenbach (2000), is high-performing (outperforming market norms) and emotionally committed, allowing them to create and offer goods or services that have a sustainable competitive edge. Understanding how individuals become loyal to an organisation is multifaceted (Meyer & Allen, 1997), with components, antecedents, and implications, as well as forms like organizational (affective), task, profession, team, and supervisory engagement. Organizational commitment, task commitment, employment commitment (Bashaw & Grant, 1994; Carson & Bedeian, 1994; Chang, 1999; Morrow & Wirth, 1989; Morrow & Goetz, 1998), and community (team) commitment (Ellemers, de Gilder, & van den Heuvel, 1998) all have sufficient discriminate validity (reduction of idea redundancy) to be considered individual ways of commitment in the workplace (Bashaw & Grant, 1994; Carson As a result, these two distinct levels of workplace commitment – corporate commitment (organization and supervisor) and employee commitment (job, profession, and team) – will be addressed after the elements of workplace commitment, as well as their antecedents and implications. Commitment Levels - Commitment Types Commitment has two levels: it influences both the organisation and the person. (a) Organizational loyalty, which is characterized as employees' psychological and emotional connection to their organizations and is influenced by organizational attributes (Morrow, 1993; Meyer & Allen, 1991; Mathieu & Zajac, 1990). Individual employee loyalty is characterized as the psychological and emotional connection of employees to their occupations, professions, work groups or teams, colleagues, and superiors, which is driven by qualities that specifically affect the person (Cohen, 2003). Commitment inside the organization. The extent of an employee's association with the organization's priorities and ideals (Mowday et al., 1982) and employer is measured by organizational engagement. Individuals who are loyal to the corporation put in extra time, choose to be a part of the organization (Morrow, 1993), secure group properties, and share the organization's aims and principles (Meyer & Allen, 1997). Supervisory loyalty is described as the degree to which you identify with your boss and internalize his or her beliefs. When a subordinate admires the supervisor's actions, behaviour, or achievements, he or she is said to be identified. Internalization happens as a subordinate adopts the supervisor's beliefs and actions when the supervisor's values and attitudes are compatible with the subordinate's (Becker, 1992; Gregersen & Black, 1993). Employee job satisfaction, morale, and success are both positively correlated with organizational commitment, whereas absenteeism and attrition are negatively correlated (Mathieu & Zajac, 1990). Attitudinal or calculative dedication may be calculated in an organization. Employees' subjective connection and association with the institution is referred to as affective (Meyer, Allen, & Smith 1993) or internalization and identification (O'Reilly & Chatman, 1986). (Meyer & Allen, 1997; Mowday et al., 1982; Cohen, 2003; Porter et al 1974). Employees stay with the company because they want to (Meyer & Allen, 1997; Mowday et al, 1982) and because they are happy to be a member of it, enjoying its ideals and achievements (O'Reilly & Chatman, 1986). The calculative or "side-bet" (Becker, 1960), also known as continuance (Meyer & Allen, 1997) and enforcement (O'Reilly & Chatman, 1986), refers to the degree to which workers feel attached to their company as a result of the perceived cost of quitting it and their desire to stay with it (Becker,1992; Meyer & Allen, 1997).

1.2       STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Person and subgroup dedication behaviour can not be extended to the whole company, resulting in unstable behavior within individual workers whose interests are at odds with the overall organization's goals (Cohen, 2003; Vandenberg & Scarpello, 1994). One example is the potential inverse association between corporate loyalty and job commitment. If the organization's priorities may not align with the employee's, the employee will become more dedicated to his or her job rather than the organization, negatively impacting organizational success (Cohen, 2003). The extent to which organizations engage in activities that enhance both organizational commitment (committed to the organization and supervisor) and individual employee commitment (committed to their employment, careers, and work groups) consequences will occur, leading to outcomes of Commitment in the workplace groups, or the organization. This may contribute to organizational success issues and low-performing personnel. Employees who are dedicated to the company but not to their individual goals (i.e. work or careers) or who are committed to their individual goals but not to the organizational principles may encounter tension with organizational values and goals, resulting in a status quo performance situation or lower than anticipated performance.

1.3       OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY

I.To assess if the administration in private companies have a major impact on employee motivation and loyalty.

II. To assess if organizational engagement, workplace participation, job satisfaction, and work characteristics both serve as interconnected significant markers of work motivation in the organizations studied.

1.4       RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS

I. The administration in private companies has a major impact on employee motivation and loyalty.

II. Organizational engagement, workplace participation, job satisfaction, and work characteristics both serve as interconnected significant markers of work motivation in the organizations studied.

1.5       SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

This research would be of benefit companies in Nigeria and also to employees as it covers the benefits of employees participation on the commitment if the company as this would help the company grow and also help serve the clients better.and lastly this research work would greatly benefit students and scholars who would want to carry out the same research work and are sourcing for work materials.

1.6       SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The research if focused on the impact of employee involvement on organizational commitment and the positive returns.

1.7       LIMITATION OF STUDY

Due to time and financial constraints, the research was limited to companies within Wuse, FCT.

1.8       DEFINITION OF TERMS

employee involvement: Employee involvement is defined as employees' direct interest in helping an organisation accomplish its purpose and achieve its goals by contributing their own thoughts, skills, and efforts to solving problems and making decisions.

organizational commitment:Organizational commitment refers to the connection or bond employees have with their employer (the organization).

REFERENCE

Bashaw, R. E., & Grant, E. S. (1994). Exploring the distinctive nature of work commitments: Their relationships with personal characteristics, job performance, and propensity to leave. Journal of Personal Selling & SalesManagement. 14, 41-56.

Becker, H. S. (1992). Foci and bases of commitment: Are they distinctions worth making? Academy of Management Journal, 35, 235-244.

Cohen, A. (2003). Multiple commitments in the workplace: An integrative approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Ellemers, N., de Gilder, D., & van den Heuvel, H. (1998). Career-oriented versus team-oriented commitment an behavior at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 717-739.

Katzenbach, Jon R. (2000). Peak performance, aligning the hearts and minds of your employees. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Kiesler, C.A. (1971). The psychology of commitment: Experiments linking behavior to belief. San Diego, CA:Academic Press. Mathieu, J.E., & Zajac, D.M. (1990). A review and meta- analysis of the antecedents, correlates and consequences of organizational commitment. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 171-194

Meyer, J.P., & Allen, N.J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1,

Morrow, P.C. (1983). Concept redundancy in organizational research: The case of work commitment. Academy of Management Review. 8, 486-500.

Mowday, R.T., Porter, L. W., & Steers, R. (1982). Organizational linkages: The psychology of commitment

O’Reilly, C.A. & Chatman, J. (1991). People and organizational culture: A profile comparison approach to assessing person-organizational fit. Academy of Management Journal. 34, 487-516. absenteeism, and turnover. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Rousseau, D. M. (1998). Why workers still identify with organizations. Journal of organizational Behaviors. 19, 217-233.

Get this material NGN 5,000

Message Us on WhatsApp  »