Perceived organizational support and affective commitment: the mediating role of organization-based self-esteem in the context of job insecurity

Perceived organizational support andaffective commitment: the mediating roleof organization-based self-esteem in thecontext of job insecurity

JAEWON LEE1 AND RICCARDO PECCEI2*1Kyung Hee University, School of Business, 1 Hoegi-dong, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul, Korea2Department of Management, King’s College London, London, U.K.

Summary Research on the relationship between perceived organizational support (POS) and affectiveorganizational commitment (AC) has primarily adopted a social exchange perspective. In thisstudy we considered complementary socio-emotional explanations of the POS–AC relation-ship. We focused on the mediating role of organization-based self-esteem (OBSE) and testedcompeting models of the POS–OBSE-AC relationship separately on data from two Koreanbanks that experienced different levels of downsizing following the 1997 Korean financialcrisis. We further extended the analysis by examining the extent to which the relationshipbetween POS and OBSE and AC, respectively, was affected by employees’ perceived sense ofjob insecurity in the two banks. The results showed that OBSE was a significant mediator of thePOS–AC relationship in both organizations. POS, however, also retained a strong independentdirect effect on commitment. Moreover, as expected, perceived job insecurity tended toattenuate the POS–OBSE relationship, but augmented the direct relationship between perceivedorganizational support and affective commitment. Copyright# 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Introduction

Perceived organizational support (POS) is commonly defined in the literature as the extent to which

individuals believe that their employing organization values their contributions and cares for their

well-being (Eisenberger, Huntington, Hutchison, & Sowa, 1986; Shore & Shore, 1995). Perceived

organizational support has been shown to be related to a range of positive employee attitudes and

behaviors at work, including, for example, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, various forms of

citizenship and discretionary behavior, attendance and intention to stay (Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002).

As a result, POS has attracted increasing interest among both organizational scholars and practitioners in

recent years (Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002). Despite the acknowledged importance of POS to outcomes

that are favorable to both employees and the organization, however, our understanding of the processes

that underlie these various associations is still limited. The specific mechanisms involved are likely to

Journal of Organizational Behavior

J. Organiz. Behav. 28, 661–685 (2007)

Published online 7 December 2006 in Wiley InterScience

(www.interscience.wiley.com) DOI: 10.1002/job.431

*Correspondence to: Riccardo Peccei, Department of Management, King’s College London, 150 Stamford Street, London, SE19NN, U.K. E-mail: [email protected]

Copyright # 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Received 12 April 2006Revised 18 September 2006Accepted 2 October 2006

vary depending on the outcome under consideration. Our focus in this study is on the link between

perceived organizational support and employee affective commitment (AC) to the organization.

AC refers to the relative strength of employees’ emotional attachment to, identification with and

involvement in their employing organization (Meyer & Allen, 1991; Mowday, Porter, & Steers, 1982).

The reason for focusing on the POS–AC link is that AC is a key indicator of employee integration at work

which, because of its reported positive effects on important organizational phenomena, such as turnover,

voluntary absenteeism, and various aspects of both in-role and discretionary performance, is of central

interest to organizational scholars and practitioners alike (Mathieu & Zajac, 1990; Meyer & Allen, 1997;

Meyer, Stanley, Herscovitch, & Topolnytsky, 2002; Mowday et al., 1982).

Two main explanations of the link between perceived organizational support and AC have been

advanced in the literature. The first is in terms of reciprocity and social exchange. According to this

view, employees who believe that their organization values them and cares for their well-being are

more likely to feel a sense of obligation toward the organization and, therefore, to reciprocate the

favorable treatment with increased loyalty and commitment. The second explanation is in terms of

socio-emotional needs. This is the idea that perceived organizational support can help to fulfill

important socio-emotional needs of individuals, such as needs for approval, esteem and affiliation, and

that such need fulfillment, in turn, enhances employees’ affective attachment to and identification with

the organization (Eisenberger et al., 1986; Meyer & Allen, 1997).

Either explicitly or implicitly, the social exchange approach has been the dominant framework

underpinning much of the research dealing not only with the specific link between perceived

organizational support and AC, but also with the antecedents of organizational commitment more

generally (Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002; Meyer & Allen, 1997; Mottaz, 1988). Socio-emotional

explanations have received far less attention both in the general commitment literature and in studies

dealing specifically with the POS–AC relationship. In this study we seek to address this gap by focusing on

organization-based self-esteem (OBSE) and exploring the role that this potentially key socio-emotional

mechanism plays in mediating the relationship between perceived organizational support and AC.We test

for the mediating role of OBSE using employee survey data from two Korean banks that experienced

varying levels of job insecurity following Korea’s major financial crisis in 1997.

As we explain more fully below, in line with both social exchange and socio-emotional arguments, job

insecurity can be expected to have amoderating effect on the pattern of relationships between POS, OBSE,

and AC. A systematic consideration of the potential moderating effects of job insecurity can, therefore,

contribute to a fuller understanding of the conditions under which key relationships between POS, OBSE,

and AC are more likely to hold. Hence, in a second step of the analysis, we explicitly focus on employees’

perceived level of job insecurity as a potential moderator of the observed links between POS, OBSE, and

AC. Specifically, in linewith socio-emotional and social exchange arguments, we first present a number of

hypotheses about the moderating effects of job insecurity on the links between POS and OBSE, and POS

and AC, respectively, and then test these hypotheses using data from the two case study banks.

Theoretical Framework and Hypotheses

Social exchange and felt obligation

The most common explanation of the relationship between perceived organizational support and AC is

in terms of reciprocity and social exchange. Central to this explanation is the idea that, for a variety of

reasons, employees tend to ascribe human-like characteristics to the organization (Levinson, 1965) and

Copyright # 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 28, 661–685 (2007)

DOI: 10.1002/job

662 J. LEE AND R. PECCEI

that, in line with the norm of reciprocity (Gouldner, 1960), favorable treatment by the organization

creates a sense of indebtedness among employees to the personified organization (Eisenberger et al.,

1986). This sense of indebtedness, in turn, becomes the basis for a stronger affective attachment to the

organization. Specifically, organizational support theory (Eisenberger, Cummings, Armeli, & Lynch,

1997; Eisenberger et al., 1986; Shore & Shore, 1995) suggests that perceived organizational support

increases AC by creating a felt obligation to care about the organization and help it meet its objectives.

Employees who perceive the organization as caring for their well-being are, therefore, assumed to be

more likely to reciprocate not only by engaging in various forms of prosocial behavior directed toward

the organization, but also by developing a stronger AC to the organization.

As noted by Eisenberger, Armeli, Rexwinkel, Lynch, and Rhoades (2001), the felt obligation to

reciprocate caring with caring, in both behavioral and attitudinal terms, can be expected to be more

pronounced among employees who have a stronger exchange ideology. It can also be expected to be

more marked where the organization is thought to provide valued support on a voluntary basis, rather

than out of necessity or because it is forced to do so by outside agencies (Eisenberger et al., 1986;

Eisenberg et al., 1986, 1997). In the former situation perceived organizational support can be expected

to have a stronger effect on AC because its impact on felt obligation is likely to be correspondingly

more pronounced. Felt obligation, however, remains the core factor through which POS is assumed to

affect AC. In other words, dominant social exchange explanations suggest that felt obligation, via the

norm of reciprocity, is a key mechanism mediating the relationship between perceived organizational

support and AC.

The fulfillment of socio-emotional needs

An alternative, but complementary, explanation of the POS–AC link focuses on socio-emotional needs.

The standard argument in this respect is that advanced by Eisenberger and his colleagues in their

original 1986 article on perceived organizational support. This posits that to the extent that perceived

organizational support meets important socio-emotional needs for esteem, approval and affiliation, ‘the

employee would incorporate organizational membership into self-identity and thereby develop a

positive emotional bond (affective attachment) to the organization’ (Eisenberger et al., 1986: 501).

With minor variations, this formulation has been repeated in most subsequent references to the

socio-emotional approach in the POS literature (e.g., Armeli, Eisenberger, Fasolo, & Lynch, 1998;

Eisenberger, Fasolo, & Davis-LaMastro, 1990; Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002; Rhoades, Eisenberger,

& Armeli, 2001).

Although not always systematically articulated, central to the socio-emotional argument is the idea

that perceived organizational support helps to meet important individual needs for esteem and approval

at work. Because it is explicitly associated with the personified organization in the mind of employees,

this need fulfillment, in turn, leads to the development of a stronger affective attachment to the

organization. Specifically, as argued by Meyer and Allen (1991, 1997), the satisfaction of important

higher-order needs by the organization through the provision of valued rewards and support is

experienced as psychologically fulfilling by employees. And it is precisely these psychologically

rewarding experiences that are at the basis of the development of AC. This is in line with the associative

theory of attitude formation and with the tenets of classical conditioning (Byrne & Clore, 1970;

Zimbardo & Leippe, 1991). As noted both by Meyer and Allen (1997) and by Eisenberger and his

colleagues (2001), repeated association of psychologically fulfilling experiences with the organization

can be expected to result in a positive emotional link of the individual to the organization whereby the

individual not only develops a strong affective attachment to the organization, but also identifies with it

and internalizes its goals and values. The development of this emotional attachment can be quite


DOI: 10.1002/job

PERCEIVED ORGANIZATIONAL SUPPORT AND AFFECTIVE COMMITMENT 663

unconscious (Meyer & Allen, 1997). However, to the extent that perceived organizational support

fulfills important socio-emotional needs, it can be expected to have a positive impact on AC. In this

case, though, the impact of perceived organizational support is not assumed to be mediated by felt

obligation, but rather, by the satisfaction of socio-emotional needs reflected, for example, in a

heightened sense of self-worth and self-esteem by employees.

To our knowledge, the socio-emotional argument outlined above has not been systematically tested by

researchers. It has only been examined indirectly in a recent study by Eisenberger and his colleagues (2001)

that compared the relative importance of felt obligation and of positive mood as potential mediators of the

POS–AC relationship among a sample ofUS postal workers. The results of this study indicated that, although

the path through felt obligation was stronger than the one via positive mood, there were additional

mechanisms through which perceived organizational support was likely to have an impact on AC. Included

among thesemechanisms, as the researchers themselves note, are ones directly related to the socio-emotional

perspective, such as POS’ enhancement of organizational identification through its fulfillment of key

individual needs for esteem and affiliation at the workplace (Eisenberger et al., 2001: 49–50).

In summary, the existing evidence suggests that felt obligation only partially mediates the impact of

perceived organizational support on AC and that socio-emotional factors may well be important in

explaining the relationship between POS and AC. However, the mediating role of socio-emotional

variables in the POS–AC relationship has not been explicitly examined to date and, therefore, is the

central focus of the present study.

The role of organization-based self-esteem

As part of the socio-emotional perspective, there are a number of psychological needs and/or feelings

that, as we have seen, have been identified as potentially important mediators of the relationship between

perceived organizational support and AC. These include, for example, esteem, self-worth, approval,

respect, and affiliation. To a degree, these various feelings and needs are likely to be interrelated

(Brockner, 1988). In practice, therefore, they may be difficult to distinguish clearly from one another.

While acknowledging this potential overlap, in the present study we focus on self-esteem as one of the

core contributors to individuals’ sense of psychological well-being. Specifically, self-esteem refers to the

‘self-evaluation that individuals make with regard to themselves’ (Pierce, Gardner, Cummings, &

Dunham, 1989: 625). It expresses their attitude of approval or disapproval toward themselves, their

overall assessment of their own value as a person. In other words, self-esteem reflects individuals’

personal judgment and belief about their own worthiness and, as such, serves a crucial anxiety-buffering

function (Greenberg et al., 1999). Hence the importance of self-esteem which is viewed as a fundamental

requirement of a healthy consciousness (Locke, McClear, & Knight, 1996), or, as Baumeister (1995) has

argued, as one of the main factors that make life meaningful, regardless of cultural differences.

Different forms of self-esteem have been identified in the literature including, for example, global,

organization, role and task or situation-specific self-esteem (Pierce et al., 1989). Our focus is on OBSE

defined as ‘the degree to which organizational members believe that they can satisfy their needs by

participating in roles within the context of the organization’ (Pierce et al., 1989: 625). In other words, OBSE

reflects employees’ evaluation of their personal adequacy and worthiness as organizational members so that,

as noted by Pierce and his colleagues (1989), individuals with high OBSE perceive themselves as important,

meaningful, and worthwhile within their employing organization. The reason for focusing on OBSE, rather

than on other forms of self-esteem, is that the principle of compatibility suggests that attitudes are likely to be

more closely related to other attitudinal or behavioral variables of interest when they are framed at a level that

is similar to that of these other variables (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1977). Our interest here is in examining the role

of self-esteem as a potential mediator of the relationship between perceived organizational support and AC.


DOI: 10.1002/job


The point of reference of both POS and AC is the organization. The appropriate referent for self-esteem in

this case, therefore, is also the organization. Hence the specific focus on OBSE.

Underpinning the analysis of OBSE as a mediator of the POS–AC relationship are two key

arguments. The first, based on symbolic interactionism, concerns the link between perceived

organizational support and OBSE. Central to symbolic interactionism is the idea that individuals,

through a variety of processes, view themselves through how they are viewed by others (Blumer, 1969;

Brockner, 1988; Hewitt, 1997). Thus, as individuals interact with other people and entities that

encourage certain systems of beliefs about the self, it becomes more likely that they will internalize

those beliefs and that others’ views will become a part of the self (Korman, 1971). Particularly

important in this respect are the views and reactions of significant others, of people and entities that

individuals respect and regard as important (Hewitt, 1997). If significant others hold the self in high

regard, one’s own sense of self-esteem will be high (Harter, 1993). Within an organizational context,

the organization itself may be an important significant other for employees (Van Dyne, Vandewalle,

Kostova, Latham, & Cummings, 2000). Thus, the appraisal of the organization, reflected in employees’

perceived sense of organizational support, may play a key role in enhancing individuals’ sense of

OBSE. Consistent with symbolic interactionist arguments, therefore, to the extent that employees

perceive the organization as valuing their contributions and caring for their well-being, they can be

expected to develop a stronger sense of organization-based self esteem.

The second argument concerns the link between OBSE and AC. Consistent with the arguments of the

socio-emotional perspective outlined above, a heightened sense of OBSE is likely to be

psychologically satisfying to employees. To the extent that, in the minds of individuals, this

psychological satisfaction is associated with the organization through perceived organizational

support, OBSE can be expected to enhance their AC to the organization. In line with Meyer and Allen’s

(1997) arguments and with the tenets of classical conditioning and the associative theory of attitude

formation (Byrne &Clore, 1970; Zimbardo&Leippe, 1991) highlighted above, therefore, a heightened

sense of POS–related OBSE is expected to facilitate the development of AC.

In this context it is worth noting that there may also be other mechanisms underpinning the link

between OBSE and AC. These include some of the self-regulatory mechanisms reviewed by Pierce and

Gardner (2004), such as the self-consistency motivations identified by Korman (1970). Self-

consistency arguments suggest that individuals who have a positive image of themselves will tend to

adopt attitudes that reinforce that positive image (Korman, 1970). On this basis, therefore, employees

who enjoy a stronger sense of self-esteem related to their perception of themselves as capable,

significant and worthy organizational members, can be expected to exhibit a stronger sense of AC to

their employing organization than their low OBSE counterparts. Irrespective of the specific

mechanisms involved, however, empirical work in the area suggests a positive link between OBSE and

AC (Hui & Lee, 2000; Pierce et al., 1989; Van Dyne & Pierce, 2004). This positive link has been

confirmed by Pierce and Gardner’s (2004) recent comprehensive review of OBSE research.

Based on the above arguments and evidence, we hypothesize that OBSE will mediate the relationship

between perceived organizational support and AC. Specifically, we hypothesize that POS will have a

positive impact on OBSE, which will, in turn, have a positive impact on AC. As noted earlier, however,

there are other factors, apart from OBSE, that are likely to help to account for the positive link between

POS and AC. These include not only feelings of reciprocity and a sense of felt obligation, but also other

non-OBSE related higher-order socio-emotional feelings and needs. To the extent that these other

mechanisms are operative and effective, perceived organizational support can be expected to have a

separate additional impact on AC which is not necessarily mediated by OBSE. On this basis, therefore,

we hypothesize that POS will have both a direct and indirect positive effect on AC. Specifically, we

propose the following overall partialmediation hypothesis, which is summarized in themodel in Figure 1.


DOI: 10.1002/job


Hypothesis 1: The effect of perceived organizational support on affective commitment will be

partially mediated by organization-based self-esteem, so that:

(a) POS will have a positive effect on OBSE,

(b) OBSE will have a positive effect on AC, and

(c) POS will have a direct positive effect on AC above and beyond its indirect effect through OBSE.

The moderating role of perceived job insecurity

The hypothesized links between POS, OBSE, and AC shown in Figure 1 can be expected to be

moderated by a number of factors. As noted above, research by Eisenberger and his colleagues

(Eisenberger et al., 1986, 1997, 2001) suggests, for example, that the impact of perceived organizational

support on AC is moderated by individuals’ exchange ideology and by the extent to which employees

perceive that the relevant support is provided voluntarily by the organization. Here we extend this

moderator analysis by looking at the extent to which the hypothesized relationships between POS,

OBSE, and AC are affected by employees’ perceptions of their level of job insecurity. We focus on the

potential moderator role of perceived job insecurity for two reasons. First, as we explain more fully

below, both of the banks covered in the present study experienced significant turbulence and uncertainty

as a result of the 1997 Korean financial crisis. In response to its more precarious economic and financial

situation, one of the banks instituted a more extensive program of downsizing. Although after the

downsizing programs, at the time the research was conducted, levels of job insecurity varied

considerably across both banks, they continued to remain high, especially in the organization that had

experienced the more drastic job cuts. In other words, job uncertainty formed an important part of the

broader organizational context experienced by employees at the two case study banks.

Second, research on downsizing suggests that the turbulence and uncertainty associated with major

programs of job cuts tend, by and large, to have a negative effect on employee work attitudes and behavior

(Luthans & Sommer, 1999; Mone, 1994; Wagar, 1998). On this basis, job insecurity can be expected to be

negatively related to all three of the main variables in our model, including POS, OBSE, and AC. More

fundamentally, however, in line with the social exchange and socio-emotional arguments outlined above,

job insecurity can be expected tomoderate both the POS–AC relationship and the POS–OBSE relationship

in the model. Specifically, in terms of the POS–OBSE relationship, the symbolic interactionist arguments

outlined above suggest that job insecurity is likely to undermine and counteract the positive effect of POS

on individuals’ sense of OBSE. Employees who are unsure of their future in the organization may, in fact,

find it more difficult than employees who enjoy a greater sense of job security to form a clear view not only

of the extent to which the organization does indeed care for their well-being, but also of the reasons why

they may be receiving preferential treatment, and whether this treatment is likely to continue in the future

(Luthans & Sommer, 1999; Mone, 1994). Hence our first moderator argument suggests that perceived job

insecurity is likely to attenuate (negatively moderate) the POS–OBSE relationship.

H1(c): (+)

H1(a): (+) H1(b): (+) PerceivedOrganizationalSupport

Organization-basedSelf-esteem

AffectiveCommitment

Figure 1. Hypothesized partial mediation model of the POS–OBSE-AC relationship


DOI: 10.1002/job


Hypothesis 2: The greater the sense of job insecurity, the less pronounced the positive association

between perceived organizational support and organization-based self-esteem will be.

In contrast, the moderating effect of job insecurity on the POS–AC relationship in our basic research

model is less clear since it is possible to identify two contrasting ways in which job insecurity may affect

the impact of perceived organizational support on AC. The first, more straightforward possibility is that

job insecurity has a negative moderating effect on (i.e., attenuates) the direct relationship between POS

and AC. In linewith social exchange arguments, individuals whose job in the organization is insecure and

uncertain, are less likely to feel a sense of obligation to the organization itself. As such, job insecurity is

likely to undermine any sense of POS–related felt obligation that individuals may have toward the

organization and, consequently, can be expected to attenuate the positive effect of POS on AC.

Hypothesis 3a: The greater the sense of job insecurity, the less pronounced the positive association

between perceived organizational support and affective commitment will be.

The second, more complex possibility is that job insecurity has a positive, rather than a negative,

moderating effect on (i.e., augments) the direct relationship between POS and AC in our basic research

model. Specifically, job insecurity can be expected to affect the very nature of any social exchange that

may underpin the POS–AC relationship. To an important extent, the terms of this exchange depend on

the position of the individual in relation to the organization. Employees who face greater job insecurity

and, therefore, a more uncertain future in the organization, tend, on the whole, to be in a weaker

position vis-a-vis the organization than employees whose jobs are more secure. As a result, employees

whose jobs are more insecure are likely to ascribe greater importance to any additional signs of support

they receive from the organization than are employees who enjoy greater security of employment. They

are also likely to be more ready to reciprocate any act of goodwill from the organization as a basis for

improving their employment chances and reducing their uncertainty. Consequently, employees who are

more insecure in their jobs are likely to react more positively to positive treatment by the organization

than employees who enjoy a more secure position. Hence, our alternative moderator argument

suggests that, to the extent that the relationship between POS and AC is underpinned by a sense of

felt obligations, then job insecurity can be expected to augment (positively moderate) this

relationship.

Hypothesis 3b: The greater the sense of job insecurity, the more pronounced the positive association

between perceived organizational support and affective commitment will be.

The above moderator hypotheses1 are shown schematically in Figure 2. These hypo-

theses, together with the main partial mediation hypothesis outlined above, were

1Although not of direct concern in the present analysis, it is worth noting that job insecurity is not expected to have a significanteffect on the third main relationship in our research model, namely that between OBSE and AC. This expectation is in line withrecent research by Hui and Lee (2000). As part of their study, Hui and Lee (2000) examined the moderating effect of OBSE on therelationship between job insecurity and organizational commitment. They found a significant negative relationship between jobinsecurity and commitment, as well as a significant positive relationship between OBSE and commitment. The job insecurity xOBSE interaction, however, was not significant in their analysis, thereby suggesting that, consonant with our own expectations,OBSE tends to have a consistent positive effect on organizational commitment that does not vary depending on employees’perceived level of job insecurity. This conclusion found confirmation in our own data. As expected, in additional analysisperceived job insecurity was not found to significantly moderate the relationship between OBSE and AC in either bank. Thus, amodel that included the OBSE x job insecurity interaction term did not yield a better fit to the data in either sample than a modelthat excluded the interaction term (bank A: D x2¼ 0.35, D df¼ 1, p> 0.10; bank B: D x2¼ 1.17, D df¼ 1, p> 0.10). Moreover,the OBSE x perceived job insecurity term was not significantly related to AC in either sample (bank A: b¼ 0.01, p> 0.10; bankB: b¼ 0 .05, p> 0.10).


DOI: 10.1002/job


tested using data from two independent samples of employees from two Korean banking

organizations.

Organizational Context

The study was carried out in two large Korean banks, referred to here as bank A and bank B,

respectively. Bank A was primarily a retail bank. Bank B, on the other hand, was a mixed

wholesale-retail organization that, after the 1997 financial crisis, refocused primarily on retail

activities. The two banks also shared a number of other similarities. They both were among the top

10 largest banks in Korea with a nation-wide network of local branches. Prior to the 1997 crisis,

bank A had approximately 13 500 employees and 504 branches, while bank B had 8000 employees

and 306 branches. The two banks also had similar job design and human resource practices, such as

salary and promotion systems, as well as performance appraisal and employee development

policies. Moreover, prior to the 1997 crisis, both banks were financially highly successful.

Following the 1997 financial crisis the position of the two banks became more differentiated.

Bank B was severely affected by the crisis and became insolvent in 1998 due to the successive

bankruptcies of several big Korean companies which were its main customers. In response, the

Korean government injected 4820 billion Korean Won of fresh capital into the bank in 1998. In

return, the bank had to carry out massive job cuts and salary reductions. Between 1998 and 1999 it

reduced its workforce by about 40 per cent, from 8067 to 4809 employees. The branch network was

also reduced from 306 to 291 sites. At the same time, salaries were cut by an average of 20–30 per

cent depending on employees’ position in the organization. In contrast, bank Awas not significantly

affected by the financial crisis. However, bank A also engaged in downsizing in order to strengthen

its competitiveness and reduced its workforce by about 15 per cent between 1998 and 1999, from

13 519 to 10 212 employees. But in bank A, unlike in bank B, this process of downsizing was not

accompanied by salary cuts.

H3(a): (-) H3(b): (+)

H2: (-)

PerceivedOrganizationalSupport

Organization-based Self-esteem

AffectiveCommitment

Perceived Job Insecurity


Figure 2. Hypothesized moderation of the POS–OBSE and POS–AC relationships by perceived job insecurity


DOI: 10.1002/job


In both banks, these major programs of rationalization and restructuring were

accompanied by significant changes in the work environment, as well as in existing

systems of employment. In terms of the work environment, in-depth interviews with

survivors indicated that, in both banks, job pressure and workloads increased after the job

cuts since fewer employees were expected to perform the same or a greater amount of work.

At the same time, survivors also reported greater autonomy and responsibility at work since,

due to increased spans of control, supervisors could no longer monitor and supervise staff as

closely as before.

The key features of the employment system of both banks before the financial crisis were

lifetime employment, seniority-based pay and promotion. With the advent of the crisis, the

lifetime employment system broke down. In both banks, the main criterion used for making

people redundant was their merit rating, irrespective of whether they worked in headquarters or

branches, and employees perceived that future potential redundancies would also be based on

individual performance criteria. Moreover, at the time the research was conducted, both banks

planned to change their salary and promotion systems to performance-related pay and

capability-based promotion. These major prospective changes in established pay and promotion

systems added a further element of turbulence and insecurity for the workforce in both

organizations, but especially for employees in bank B due to the more precarious economic

position of this organization and the consequently higher levels of uncertainty surrounding its

future.

Method

Samples and procedures

The data used in the present study were collected as part of a larger research project designed to

examine the impact of the 1997 financial crisis and of downsizing on a range of employee attitudes

and behaviors in the two case study banks described above (Lee, 2003a,b; Lee & Corbett, 2006)2.

Separate employee surveys were conducted in the two banks between November 1999 and March

2000, after the implementation of the main programs of restructuring and downsizing in the two

organizations. Questionnaires were distributed to a sample of between 6 and 25 employees in 58

branches of bank A and 50 of bank B, as well as in the regional headquarters and in selected

departments at head office of each of the two organizations. Both banks comprised three

organizational levels—headquarters, regional headquarters, and branches. In both banks,

employment at headquarters constituted about 16 per cent of total employment; employment at

regional headquarters, about 4 per cent; and employment in the branches, about 80 per cent.

2Lee’s (2003a) first study examined the antecedents of organization-based self-esteem and tested the cross-validation of theconcept of OBSE in the Korean context, while his second study (Lee, 2003b) examined the extent to which OBSE actuallymediated the relationship between a range of positive employee work experiences and organizational citizenship behavior in thetwo banks. Finally, the third study (Lee & Corbett, 2006) examined both the direct and indirect impact of downsizing on affectivecommitment in the two banks through its impact on a range of day-to-day employee work experiences in the two case studyorganizations.


DOI: 10.1002/job


Questionnaires were distributed proportionately to the three levels in each bank, with the

participating sites/branches being selected randomly. The questionnaires themselves were

personally distributed at each bank site by the first author who visited each site and asked a

member of staff to distribute an appropriate number of questionnaires randomly to colleagues and

then collect them. Jaewon Lee then collected each batch of completed questionnaire a week later

from each of the participating sites.

In bank A, 545 out of 770 questionnaires were returned, making for a response rate of around 71 per

cent. The number of usable questionnaire was 4563. The number of returned questionnaires at each

level corresponded quite closely to the distribution of the population (i.e., for headquarters, 13.8 per

cent; for regional headquarters, 3.9 per cent; for branches, 82.3 per cent). Seventy one per cent of the

sample was comprised of men (population¼ 71.9 per cent), the average age of respondents was

33.9 years (population¼ 34.3) and their average level of education was 14 years. On all three

dimensions (i.e., age, gender, and the number of returned questionnaire at each level) the sample was

representative of the broader employee population in bank A.

In bank B, 480 out of 660 questionnaires were returned, equivalent to a response rate of about

72 per cent. The number of usable questionnaire was 454. Here too the number of returned

questionnaire at each level corresponded quite closely to the distribution of the population (i.e., for

headquarters, 16.3 per cent; for regional headquarters, 3.8 per cent; for branches, 80 per cent).

Seventy-two per cent of respondents in bank B were men (population¼ 73.4 per cent), the average

age of the sample was 34 years (population¼ 35.7) and the average level of education was 15 years.

On all three counts this sample also was representative of the broader employee population in

bank B.

Measures

All the main constructs included in the analysis were assessed with perceptual self-report measures

based on multi-item scales whose psychometric properties are well established. Responses to all items

were made on 7-point Likert-type scales (1¼ strongly disagree, 7¼ strongly agree). To ensure that

there was linguistic and psychometric equivalence between the English and Korean versions of the

questionnaire (Hulin & Mayer, 1986), the English version of the instrument was first translated by

Jaewon Lee and then checked independently by three Korean social scientist with a detailed knowledge

of English. To ensure that there was contextual equivalence between the Korean and English versions of

the instrument, the questionnaire was then piloted with a group of employees from the two banks. The

specific measures used in the analysis, along with sample items of the relevant constructs, are outlined

below.

Perceived organizational support (POS) was measured using Eisenberger et al.’s (1986) 17-item

scale. Much previous research (e.g., Eigenberger et al., 1986, 1990) has provided validation evidence

for this scale. A sample item was ‘The organization values my contribution to its well-being.’ OBSE

(OBSE) was assessed using 8-items from Pierce et al.’s (1989) 10-item scale (e.g., ‘I am an important

3Employees in all Korean banks periodically rotate internally to other sites/locations (for example, from departments atheadquarters to branches and from branches to departments at headquarters). Especially in bank A, many employees rotated toother branches in the interval between the distribution and collection of the questionnaires in late January 2000 and, among thequestionnaires that were distributed at that time, there were a number that were returned but left blank. Thus, some of the returnedquestionnaires were not usable, especially in bank A.


DOI: 10.1002/job


part of my workplace,’ and ‘I am trusted in my workplace’)4. Validation evidence for the OBSE scale is

found in Pierce et al. (1989). Organizational affective commitment (AC) was measured using Meyer

and Allen’s (1997) 6-item Revised Affective Commitment Scale. Much previous research (e.g., Ko,

Price, & Mueller, 1997) provides validation evidence for this scale. Sample items included ‘I would be

very happy to spend the rest of my career in this bank’ and ‘I really feel as if this bank’s problems are

my own.’ Perceived job insecurity refers to the perceived likelihood of becoming unemployed (Garst,

Frese, & Molenaar, 2000). In order to measure this variable, Price’s (1991) three-item scale (that

measures perceived job security) was reversed and this reversed scale was used. A sample item

included ‘I am confident that I will be able to work for this bank as long as I wish.’

No controls were used in the main analysis. However, to check for the sensitivity of results to

different model specifications, we also ran some subsidiary analyses using a number of controls. These

controls were designed to capture basic demographic factors and individual dispositions that might

have an impact on AC as well as on perceived organizational support and OBSE (Meyer & Allen, 1997;

Pierce & Gardner, 2004; Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002). The controls used included respondents’ age,

organizational and job tenure, gender, marital status, years of education, and positive affectivity and

negative affectivity, defined as ‘the tendency to experience pleasant and unpleasant emotions

respectively’ (Price, 1997: 435). Positive affectivity and negative affectivity were measured using

Watson, Clark, and Tellegen’s (1988) PANAS scales.

Analysis procedures

The examination of the hypothesized effects was conducted using latent variable analysis and structural

equations. The analyses (employing LISREL 8.30) were conducted in line with major

recommendations proposed in the literature (e.g., Anderson & Gerbing, 1988; Bagozzi & Yi,

1988; Hair, Anderson, Tatham, & Black, 1998; Harris & Schaubroeck, 1990; Joreskog & Sorbom,

1993). First, missing data were dealt with using mean substitution. Second, to prevent problems with

parameter estimation, the POS, OBSE, and AC scales were arbitrarily trichotomized into three

non-overlapping subscales and these subscales were then used as the manifest indicators in the analysis.

Third, in order to assign a unit of measurement for the latent variables, all latent variables were scaled

with one loading, in each case, set to 1.00. Finally, multiple goodness-of-fit indices were employed,

including the chi-square test, goodness-of-fit index (GFI), non-normed fit index (NNFI), root mean

4Organization-based self-esteem was originally assessed using Pierce et al.’s (1989) 10-item scale. However, the results ofpreliminary exploratory factor analysis showed that two items loaded on a distinct factor in both samples. As a further check,therefore, a one-factor confirmatory model where all 10 original OBSE items were constrained to load onto a single overall latentvariable was compared to a two-factor model where the two items that loaded separately in the exploratory factor analysis wereconstrained to load onto a separate latent construct from the remaining eight items. In both banks the two-factor model provided asignificantly better fit to the data than did the one-factor model (for bank A: D x2¼ 139.96, df¼ 1, p< 0.005), for bank B: Dx2¼ 168.12, df¼ 1, p< 0.005), thereby providing additional support for using the 8-item scale in the present study. The twoitems that were excluded were, ‘I can make a difference in my workplace’ and ‘I am a valuable part of my workplace’. Koreans’construal of the self may be helpful in interpreting the above results. As Inumiya, Choi, Yoon, Seo, and Han’s (1999) study hasshown, compared to Westerners, Koreans have a more interdependent construal of the self which becomes most meaningful andcomplete within the context of social relationships with others. In countries where people have such an interdependent construalof the self, emphasizing one’s own individuality and trying to stand out are regarded as inappropriate (Markus&Kitayama, 1991).Hence, statements such as ‘I can make a difference in my workplace’ and ‘I am a valuable part of my workplace,’ may well beinterpreted differently from the other OBSE items in a Korean than in a Western context where individuals have a moreindependent construal of the self. In a Korean context these items may well be interpreted as referring to a more individualisticand, therefore, potentially less harmonious notion of the self, rather than to a more integrative sense of whether the respondentsfeel that they are meaningful and important within their organization. Hence the tendency for these two items to factor analyzeseparately from the other OBSE items in both banks, and our decision, therefore, to drop them from the final OBSE scale used inthe analysis.


DOI: 10.1002/job


square error of approximation (RMSEA), incremental fit index (IFI), comparative fit index (CFI), and

the relative fit index (RFI).

Results

Preliminary analysis

Table 1 reports descriptive statistics, reliabilities, and zero-order correlations for the main variables

used in the analysis for banks A and B separately.

The psychometric properties of the main measures used in the analysis were examined separately in

the two banks. According to the results of the confirmatory factor analysis, a four-factor model where

the items used to assess POS, OBSE, AC, and perceived job insecurity were assumed to load onto their

corresponding latent constructs, yielded a good fit to the data in each sample [for bank A: x2 (with

48 degree of freedom)¼ 136.92 (p< 0.001), GFI¼ 0.95, NFI¼ 0.98, NNFI¼ 0.98, CFI¼ 0.99,

IFI¼ 0.99, RMSEA¼ 0.064; for bank B: x2 (with 48 degree of freedom)¼ 117.40 (p< 0.001),

GFI¼ 0.96, NFI¼ 0.98, NNFI¼ 0.98, CFI¼ 0.99, IFI¼ 0.99, RMSEA¼ 0.056]. In additional

analysis, a one-factor confirmatory model where all the items were constrained to load onto a

single overall latent variable was also tested [for bank A: x2 (with 54 degree of freedom)¼ 2392.68

(p< 0.001); for bank B: x2 (with 54 degree of freedom)¼ 2754.46 (p< 0.001)]. In both banks the

four-factor model provided a significantly better fit to the data than did the one-factor model [for bank

A: D x2¼ 2255.76, df¼ 6 (p< 0.005); for bank B: D x2¼ 2637.06, df¼ 6 (p< 0.005)]. Multi-group

analysis was also conducted to compare the equivalence of the measurement models across the two

banks. The results yielded an acceptable model fit to the data [x2 (with 126 degree of

freedom)¼ 456.92 (p< 0.001), GFI¼ 0.92, NFI¼ 0.96, NNFI¼ 0.97, CFI¼ 0.97, IFI¼ 0.97,

RMSEA¼ 0.076], thereby indicating that the measurement models across the two banks were

equivalent. In addition, as can be seen from Table 1, when scaled, all four multi-item measures

exhibited adequate levels of internal reliability in both banks, with the relevant alpha coefficients

ranging from 0.82 to 0.96.

Because this study uses self-report measures, there exists the risk of common method variance that

may inflate or deflate the strength of the associations between constructs. To check for the potential

impact of common method variance, the procedure for controlling for the effects of an unmeasured

latent methods factor recommended by Podsakoff, MacKenzie, and Podsakoff (2003) was used. That

is, the model in Figure 1 was re-estimated with all the indicators from the same source (i.e., OBSE,

POS, AC, and perceived job insecurity) loading on a general methods factor. In both banks, when

commonmethod variance was controlled for, the overall pattern of relationships between the constructs

was not affected (results available from the authors). In turn, this suggests the absence of substantial

commonmethod variance problems capable of confounding the interpretation of the substantive results

of the main statistical analysis.

At a descriptive level the results in Table 1 show that average levels of POS, OBSE, and AC differed

significantly between the two organizations. As expected, the organization that experienced a more

stable environment (i.e., bank A) exhibited significantly higher scores on all three variables than the

organization that experienced higher levels of uncertainty (i.e., bank B) (mean POS: bank A¼ 4.49,

bank B¼ 3.96, difference p< 0.001; mean OBSE: bank A¼ 4.99, bank B¼ 4.61, difference p< 0.001;

mean AC: bank A¼ 5.02, bank B¼ 4.58, difference p< 0.001). On the other hand, also as expected,

employees in bank B exhibited a significantly higher average level of perceived job insecurity than


DOI: 10.1002/job


Table

1.Descriptivestatistics

andzero-order

correlationsofstudyvariables

Variables

Mean

SD

NCronbacha

Correlations

BankA

BankB

BankA

BankB

BankA

BankB

BankA

BankB

12

34

Perceived

jobinsecurity

3.73

4.18

1.41

1.29

455

454

0.88

0.82

—�0

.29��

��0

.30��

��0

.09�

Perceived

organizational

support

4.49

3.96

0.86

0.84

456

454

0.95

0.96

�0.32��

�—

0.43��

�0.40��

�

Organization-based

self-esteem

(OBSE)

4.99

4.61

0.85

0.80

456

454

0.94

0.93

�0.34��

�0.53��

�—

0.46��

�

Affectivecommitment(A

C)

5.02

4.58

1.04

1.24

456

454

0.90

0.92

�0.22��

�0.54��

�0.55��

�—

BankA

correlationsarebelow

thediagonal.

BankB

correlationsareabovethediagonal.

� p�0.05;��p<0.01;�� p

<0.001.


DOI: 10.1002/job


employees in bank A (mean perceived job insecurity: bank A¼ 3.73, bank B¼ 4.18, difference

p< 0.001). In this context it is also worth noting that POS, OBSE AC, and perceived job insecurity

were moderately intercorrelated in both samples. In bank A the correlations ranged between�0.22 and

0.55, while in bank B they ranged from �0.29 to 0.46.

Main analysis: mediating role of OBSE

The main hypothesized partial mediation model shown in Figure 1 yielded an acceptable fit to the data

in each organization [for bank A: x2 (with 24 degree of freedom)¼ 106.57 (p< 0.001), GFI¼ 0.95,

NFI¼ 0.98, NNFI¼ 0.98, CFI¼ 0.98, IFI¼ 0.98, RMSEA¼ 0.087; for bank B: x2 (with 24 degree offreedom)¼ 61.80 (p< 0.001), GFI¼ 0.97, NFI¼ 0.99, NNFI¼ 0.99, CFI¼ 0.99, IFI¼ 0.99,

RMSEA¼ 0.059]. However, in line with Holmbeck’s (1997) recommendations, in order to determine

whether OBSE mediated the relationship between POS and AC, we compared the fit of the

hypothesized partial mediation model to that of a reduced model where the path between OBSE and AC

was deleted. In bank A, the partial mediation model (x2¼ 106.57 with df¼ 24, p< 0.001) provided a

significantly better fit to the data than the reduced model (x2¼ 132.74 with df¼ 25, p< 0.001).

Specifically, the difference in chi-square between the partial mediation and the reduced model was

statistically significant (D x2¼ 26.17, df¼ 1, p< 0.005), indicating that the path between OBSE and

AC should be included in the model. The size of the direct effect of POS on AC in the partial mediation

model was 0.40, while the size of the total effect of POS on AC in the reduced model was 0.58. In other

words, the results indicated that the direct effect was reduced by about 31 per cent [i.e., (0.58–0.40)/

0.58] when OBSE was included as a mediating variable. Thus, in bank A OBSE played a partial

mediator role between POS and AC, given that 69 per cent of the direct effect was maintained in the

relationship.

In bank B, the partial mediation model (x2¼ 61.80 with df¼ 24, p< 0.001) also provided a

significantly better fit to the data than the reduced model (x2¼ 109.86 with df¼ 25, p< 0.001).

Specifically, the difference in chi-square between the partial mediation and the reduced model was

statistically significant (D x2¼ 48.06, D df¼ 1, p< 0.005), indicating that the path between OBSE and

AC should be included in the model. The size of the direct effect of POS on AC in the partial mediation

model was 0.23, while the size of the total effect of POS on AC in the reduced model was 0.40. The

results indicated that the direct effect was reduced by about 42.5 per cent [(i.e., (0.40–0.23)/0.40] when

OBSE was included as a mediating variable. Thus, OBSE played a partial mediator role between POS

and AC also in bank B, given that 57.5 per cent of the direct effect was maintained in the relationship.

Therefore, in line with hypothesis 1, POS in both banks was found to have a significant direct positive

effect on AC, as well as a significant indirect positive effect on AC mediated through OBSE.

LISREL estimates (completely standardized coefficients) of the relationship between POS, OBSE,

and AC from the best-fitting partial mediation model for each bank are summarized in Figure 3. As can

be seen, in both organizations perceived organizational support was significantly positively related to

OBSE (bank A: b¼ 0.57, p< 0.001; bank B: b¼ 0.46, p< 0.001) which, in turn, was significantly

positively associated to AC (bank A: b¼ 0.31; p< 0.001; bank B: b¼ 0 .36, p< 0.001). In addition, in

both organizations perceived organizational support had a direct positive impact on AC (bank A:

b¼ 0.40, p< 0.001; bank B: b¼ 0.23, p< 0.001).

The direct, indirect and total effects of perceived organizational support and OBSE on AC in each

organization are summarized in Table 2. The table shows that POS had a significant positive total effect

on AC in both organizations. In both cases, however, the direct effect was considerably stronger than

the indirect one. Overall, however, the results of the analysis provide clear support to mediation

hypotheses 1 (a), 1 (b), and 1 (c).


DOI: 10.1002/job


Main analysis: moderating role of perceived job insecurity

Although several procedures for investigating moderator effects have been proposed for use with

structural equation models, these various approaches appear to produce similar results (Joreskog &Yang,

1996; Mathieu, Tannenbaum, & Salas, 1992; Ping, 1995). Here we adopted the procedure proposed by

Ping (1995) since, both conceptually and operationally, this is one of the most straightforward approaches

to the analysis of moderator effects. Before conducting the moderator analysis, all observed variables

used to obtain the interaction (product) terms were centered and a residual centering approach was

adopted in order to minimize potential problems of multicollinearity and identification (Cortina, Chen, &

Dunlap, 2001; Lang, 1988). The significance of the moderator effects was tested by comparing the

chi-square values for models including and excluding the interaction terms.

We start with the analysis of the moderating effect of perceived job insecurity on the relationship

between POS and OBSE (see Hypothesis 2). The model that included the POS x perceived job

insecurity interaction term yielded a better fit to the data than did the model that excluded the

interaction term only in the bank A sample (bank A: D x2¼ 4.36, D df¼ 1, p< 0.05; bank B: Dx2¼ 0.59, D df¼ 1, p> 0.05). Moreover, as can be seen from the POS x perceived job insecurity

coefficients reported in Figure 4, the effect of the interaction between these two variables on OBSE was

statistically significant and negative only in bank A (bank A: b¼�0.09, p< 0.05; bank B: b¼�0.06,

p> 0.05). The precise form of the interactions for banks A and B are shown in Figures 5 (a) and 5 (b),

respectively. In brief, our results indicate that perceived job insecurity negatively moderated the

positive POS–OBSE relationship in bank A but not in bank B, thereby providing only partial support

for Hypothesis 2.

Turning to the analysis of the moderating effect of perceived job insecurity on the relationship

between POS and AC, the model that included the POS x perceived job insecurity interaction term

provided a better fit to the data in each sample than did the model that excluded the interaction term

Bank A: 0.40*** Bank B: 0.23***

Bank A: 0.57*** Bank A: 0.31*** Bank B: 0.46*** Bank B: 0.36***

* = p < 0.05, ** = p < 0.01, *** = p < 0.001


AffectiveCommitment


Figure 3. LISREL estimates (standardized coefficients) for the relationship between POS, OBSE, and AC fromthe partial mediation model in each bank (test of hypotheses 1(a), 1(b), and 1 (c))

Table 2. LISREL estimates (standardized coefficients) of the decomposed direct, indirect, and total effects of POSand OBSE on AC in each bank

Main study variables

Direct effectson AC

Indirect effectson AC Total effects on AC

Bank A Bank B Bank A Bank B Bank A Bank B

Perceived organizational support 0.40�� 0.23�� 0.17�� 0.17�� 0.57�� 0.40��

Organization-based self-esteem (OBSE) 0.31�� 0.36�� 0.31�� 0.36��

�¼p� 0.05; ��¼p< 0.01; ��¼p< 0.001.


DOI: 10.1002/job


(bank A:D x2¼ 6.06, D df¼ 1, p< 0.05; bank B:D x2¼ 6.79, D df¼ 1, p< 0.01). Moreover, as shown

by the POS x perceived job insecurity coefficients reported in Figure 6, the effect of the interaction

between these two variables on ACwas statistically significant and positive in both organizations (bank

A: b¼ 0.09, p< 0.05; bank B: b¼ 0.11, p< 0.05). The precise nature of the interactions for banks A

and B are shown in Figures 7 (a) and 7 (b), respectively. As can be seen, the results show that perceived

job insecurity positively moderated the positive POS–AC relationship, thereby supporting hypothesis

3(b) over hypothesis 3(a), which suggested that job insecurity has a negative moderating effect on the

POS–AC relationship.5

Finally, it is worth noting that to check for the sensitivity of the results to different model

specifications, we also re-ran the analysis adding first, just the set of demographic variables (i.e., age,

gender, marital status, years of education, and organizational and job tenure) as controls in the analysis,

and then adding the demographic and the dispositional variables (i.e., positive and negative affectivity)

together as controls. The results of these additional analyses were virtually the same as those of the

main analysis reported above (results available from the authors). The only difference was that in the

main analysis, as we have seen, the coefficient of the POS x job insecurity interaction on OBSE for bank

B was negative but non-significant at either the 0.05 or even the 0.10 level, while in the additional

analysis this coefficient was still negative but significant at just below the 0.10 level. This suggests that

the tendency observed in bank A for job insecurity to moderate the relationship between POS and

OBSE potentially also holds in bank B, but in a much weaker form. More generally, though, the results

of the additional analyses indicate that the mediator and moderator effects observed in the main

analysis are quite stable, in the sense that, by and large, they remain virtually unchanged irrespective of

the controls that are included in the regressions.

Bank A: 0.40*** Bank B: 0.23***


Bank Aa: -0.09*

Bank Ba: -0.06

a coefficient = POS x perceived job insecurity

* = p < 0.05 ** = p < 0.01 *** = p < 0.001




AffectiveCommitment

Figure 4. LISREL estimates (standardized coefficients) for the moderating effect of perceived job insecurity onthe POS–OBSE relationship (test of hypothesis 2)

5As a further check on the results of the separate moderator analyses reported here, we also tested an overall model that includedboth moderator effects of interest together using, once again, the residual centering approach recommended by Lang (1988). Forboth banks the results of these additional analyses (available from the authors) were virtually the same as those reported aboveobtained with the separate models.


DOI: 10.1002/job


Discussion

Theoretically, work dealing with the relationship between perceived organizational support and

affective organizational commitment has, for the most part, adopted a social exchange perspective

linked to notions of reciprocity and felt obligation. Our aim in the present study was to contribute to

understanding in this area in two ways. First, by exploring complementary socio-emotional

explanations of the POS–AC relationship, focusing, in particular, on the mediating role played by

OBSE. And second, by examining the extent to which, in line with social exchange and

socio-emotional arguments, key relationships between POS, OBSE, and AC are moderated by

perceived job insecurity. To this end, we developed a number of mediator and moderator models of the

relationship between POS, OBSE, AC and job insecurity which we then tested in separate analyses

using employee data from two Korean banks which experienced different levels of turbulence and

uncertainty following the 1997 Korean financial crisis.

The results of our analysis direct attention to five main points. The first relates to the role of OBSE as

a mediator of the relationship between perceived organizational support and AC. Our findings indicate

(a)

(b)

Low perceived job insecurity = one standard deviation below the mean High perceived job insecurity = one standard deviation above the mean

OB

SEHigh perceived job insecurity

OB

SE

POS

POS

Low perceived job insecurity

High perceived job insecurity


Figure 5. (a) Interaction of POS and perceived job insecurity on OBSE (bank A). (b) Interaction of POS andperceived job insecurity on OBSE (bank B)


DOI: 10.1002/job


(a)

(b)

Low perceived job insecurity = one standard deviation below the mean High perceived job insecurity = one standard deviation above the mean

POS

POS

AC



AC



Figure 7. (a) Interaction of POS and perceived job insecurity on AC (bank A). (b) Interaction of POS andperceived job insecurity on AC (bank B)

Bank A : 0.09* a

Bank Ba: 0.11*

Bank A: 0.39*** Bank B: 0.25***


a coefficient = POS x perceived job insecurity

* = p < 0.05 ** = p < 0.01 *** = p < 0.001



AffectiveCommitment


Figure 6. LISREL estimates (standardized coefficients) for the moderating effect of perceived job insecurity onthe POS–AC relationship (test of hypotheses 3(a) and 3(b))


DOI: 10.1002/job


that, in line with Hypothesis 1 and the predictions of the socio-emotional perspective, OBSE is a

significant mediator of the POS–AC relationship. Consistent with symbolic interactionist arguments, in

both organizations examined, POS was found to have a positive impact on OBSE. And, in line with the

predictions of classical conditioning (Meyer & Allen, 1997), as well as with self-consistency

arguments (Korman, 1970), OBSE was, in turn, found to have a positive effect on AC.

The second point relates to the relative importance of OBSE as an explanatory mechanism in the

POS–AC relationship. In both organizations, the partial mediation model that was tested provided a

better fit to the data than did the reduced no mediation model positing a purely direct link between POS

and AC. In other words, although OBSE emerged as a significant mediator of the POS–AC relationship,

perceived organizational support was also found to have a direct effect on AC that did not go through

OBSE. This direct effect was substantial. On average, it accounted for about 58.8 per cent of the

relationship between perceived organizational support and AC across the two organizations, compared

to approximately 41.2 per cent via OBSE. More generally, therefore, our results indicate that although

OBSE is indeed an important mediator of the POS–AC link, there are other mechanisms through which

perceived organizational support has an impact on AC. These may include not only felt obligation, but

also other non-OBSE related socio-emotional factors. As we emphasize below, the systematic

identification of the full range of mechanisms involved is an important area for future research.

The third point relates to the moderating effects of perceived job insecurity. As expected, perceived

job insecurity was not found to have a significant moderating effect on the relationship between OBSE

and AC in either of the two case study organizations. More importantly, however, our results provided

at least partial support to the idea that job insecurity attenuates the positive relationship between POS

and OBSE (Hypothesis 2). As we have seen, this negative moderating effect of job insecurity on the

POS–OBSE relationship was far clearer and more pronounced in bank A than in bank B, where the

effect was, at best, marginal and apparent only in the analysis that included the controls. We return to

this point later. In contrast, job insecurity was found to have an equally strong moderating effect on the

direct relationship between POS and AC in both banks. In this case, however, our results provided

support to the idea that job insecurity augments (Hypothesis 3b), rather than attenuates (Hypothesis 3a),

the direct positive effect of POS on AC.

This differential pattern of interactions observed in our data is important since it reinforces the

relevance of both social exchange and socio-emotional arguments for the understanding of the links

between POS, OBSE, and AC. In other words, job insecurity, treated as a moderator variable, helps to

underscore the importance and usefulness of distinguishing social exchange from socio-emotionally

based explanations of the effects of perceived organizational support on AC. Specifically, in line with

Hypothesis 2, our results suggest that job insecurity and POS provide contradictory cues to employees

about the extent to which their organization actually values their contribution and cares for their

well-being. As a result, job insecurity tends to undermine the OBSE-enhancing effects of perceived

organizational support. Consistent with symbolic interactionist arguments in fact, our results indicate

that employees who are more insecure in their jobs need to perceive a comparatively higher level of

organizational support in order to experience the same level of commitment-enhancing OBSE as

employees who enjoy a greater level of job security.

At the same time, in line with Hypothesis 3b, and consistent with social exchange arguments, our

results also suggest that employees are likely to respond differently to support from the organization

depending on their sense of job insecurity. In particular, because of their greater vulnerability and

uncertainty, employees who are less secure in their jobs are more likely to ascribe greater symbolic and

practical value to any signs of support from the organization than are employees who enjoy a greater

sense of job security. A given level of organizational support, therefore, is likely to generate a stronger

sense of felt obligation among individuals who perceive their job to be less secure than among those

who perceive their job to be more secure. Hence, as our results show, individuals who are more


DOI: 10.1002/job


uncertain about their future in the organization tend, on the whole, to respond more positively to

perceived organizational support and are, therefore, more prone to reciprocate POS with AC than are

employees who enjoy a greater sense of job security. More generally, therefore, our results indicate that

job insecurity may well have contradictory moderating effects on the direct and indirect (through

OBSE) relationship between POS and AC. In practice, these effects may cancel each other out.

Whether they do or not, however, is an empirical question that needs to be examined situation by

situation.

This brings us to the fourth main point to emerge from the analysis. This relates to the stability of the

results across the two organizations covered in the study. Importantly, as we have seen, the partial

mediation model provided the best fit in both organizations and, in both cases, all the relationships

involved proved significant. Given the different levels of turbulence and uncertainty experienced by the

two organizations, this suggests that the links between POS, OBSE, and AC are quite robust. The same

applies to the job insecurity moderator effects examined, although here the effects involved tended to

be generally less pronounced, as well as less consistent.

Despite the overall robustness of the results, however, some variations were also apparent across the

two organizations. In particular, although there was a clear positive link between POS and both OBSE

and AC in both organizations, this link was found to be significantly weaker in the bank that

experienced the more massive program of downsizing (bank B). To formally test whether the impact of

perceived organizational support on OBSE and on ACwas significantly stronger in bank A than in bank

B, multi-group analysis was conducted to assess the invariance of the relevant parameter estimates

across the two samples. To this end, a partial mediation model in which the POS–OBSE and the

POS–AC parameters were assumed to be the same across the two organizations was compared to a

model in which these two parameters were not assumed to be invariant. The latter model fit the data

significantly better than the former one (D x2¼ 10.03, D df¼ 2, p< 0.01), indicating that the effect of

POS on both OBSE and AC was significantly stronger in bank A than in bank B.

The differential strength of the associations between POS, OBSE, and AC in the two banks suggests

that the effects of POS on OBSE, and AC may well vary depending not only on individuals’ personal

circumstances, such as their own particular level of job insecurity, but also depending on the more

general organizational context and situation. In particular, the weaker relationship found between POS

and both OBSE and AC in bank B than in bank A, suggests that the protracted uncertainty and

turbulence associated with major programs of job cuts and rationalization may well undermine

employee confidence and trust in the organization. In such circumstances, employees may be more

likely to view any support they receive from the organization in a more instrumental light, as a response

to immediate pressures rather than as a sign of the organization’s genuine concern for and commitment

to them as individuals. The greater the level of organizational turbulence and uncertainty, therefore, the

less readily are employee perceptions of organizational support likely to translate into higher levels of

self-esteem and commitment among the workforce. More generally, therefore, the level of

organizational turbulence and uncertainty may well constitute an important organizational-level

boundary condition affecting the impact of POS on OBSE. This is clearly a speculative argument that

would need to be tested across a larger sample of organizations experiencing varying degrees of

turbulence and uncertainty.

Avariant of the above boundary condition argument might also help to explain why there was a much

clearer tendency for job insecurity to attenuate the positive effect of POS on OBSE in bank A than in

bank B. One possible explanation for this result in fact is that, as hypothesized, a greater personal sense

of job security does indeed help to reinforce the positive effect of POS on individuals’ sense of OBSE.

However, in situations characterized by high levels of general turbulence and uncertainty about the very

future of the organization, even individuals who feel that their job in the organization is secure, are

likely to wonder for how long any preferential treatment that they may receive from the organization is


DOI: 10.1002/job


likely to last. In other words, irrespective of their own particular sense of job security, when the

potential survival of the organization is unclear, employees are more likely to question the extent to

which the organization can continue to value their contribution and care for their well-being in the

future. In such a situation, therefore, individual perceptions of job security or insecurity are less likely

significantly to affect the relationship between POS and OBSE. Hence, the much weaker moderating

effect of job insecurity on the POS–OBSE relationship in bank B than in bank A. Once again, however,

this argument remains speculative and needs to be tested across a larger sample of organizations.

Finally, in line with much of the recent literature on downsizing (Hui & Lee, 2000; Luthans &

Sommer, 1999; Mone, 1994; Wagar, 1998), our findings confirm the substantial negative effects that

major job cuts and a sense of job insecurity tend to have on employee attitudes, including both OBSE

and organizational commitment. In this context it is worth noting that, in our study, the negative effects

of organizational turbulence and downsizing on OBSE may well have been magnified by broader

socio-cultural factors specific to the Korean context. As a number of scholars have noted, in contrast to

Westerners’ so-called independent construal of the self which emphasizes the self as a separate being

with its own autonomy, in East Asia including Korea, the self is only meaningful in the context of

society as a whole (Inumiya, Choi, Yoon, Seo, & Han, 1999; Markus & Kitayama, 1991). Hence, in

Korea, society as a whole can be a ‘significant other’ and, in line with symbolic interactionist

arguments, the view from society at large can affect peoples’ conception of the self, including their

self-esteem. Before the 1997 financial crisis, bank B was a successful institution, which provided its

employees with high salaries, job security, and generous company-based welfare benefits, such as

family allowances, and children’s educational allowances. As a result, employment in the bank was

prized and was regarded as being highly prestigious within Korean society. However, after the financial

crisis, bank B came to be regarded as a weak institution with poor prospects. Hence, being an employee

of the bank no longer carried the same status and prestige as it had previously, thereby potentially

contributing to the significantly lower levels of OBSE observed in bank B than in bank A in our study.

More generally, as we have seen, the negative effects of downsizing and job insecurity can, to some

extent, be mitigated by providing effective support to employees. Such support can help to enhance

employee commitment to the organization in two main ways. First, is by creating a stronger sense of

felt obligation among the workforce. Second, and equally important, is by enhancing employees’ sense

of OBSE. Our findings suggest that such a support strategy is likely to be particular important in helping

to maintain levels of commitment among employees who feel less secure about their jobs. At the same

time, though, our findings also suggest that such a support strategy requires careful management. For it

to be effective, employees need to be convinced that the organization’s actions are motivated by good

intentions. Thus, as Meyer and Allen (1997) have argued more generally, to enhance workforce

commitment management should not only keep employees informed of its actions and intentions, but it

should also monitor their understanding of and reactions to major organizational initiatives and seek to

involve them in key decisions that directly affect their well-being. Our findings suggest that the

adoption by management of an explicitly proactive strategy of communication, involvement and

support of this kind is likely to be particularly important in helping to maintain levels of workforce

commitment during major programs of organizational restructuring and downsizing.

Study limitations and future research

As already noted, the self-report measures used in the present study did not pose significant problems of

commonmethod variance in the analysis. However, the cross-sectional nature of the data clearly did not

permit a systematic causal analysis of the links between POS, OBSE, and AC. This is an important

limitation of the study. So is the lack of data on alternative mechanisms through which perceived


DOI: 10.1002/job


organizational support may have an impact on commitment, including, for example, felt obligation, as

well as other non-OBSE related socio-emotional factors, such as individuals’ feelings of self-respect,

approval, growth, and affiliation. Additional data of these kind would have allowed for a better

understanding of the specific mediating role played by OBSE in the POS–AC relationship relative not

only to social exchange, but also to other possible socio-emotional mechanisms. A final limitation of

the study relates to the lack of data on other possible individual employee perceptions and orientations,

apart from perceived job insecurity, that might moderate the observed relationships between POS,

OBSE, and AC. In particular, data on employees’ exchange ideology and trust in management, as well

as data on their evaluation of management’s handling of the program of restructuring and downsizing,

would have allowed for a more fine-grained moderator analysis of the impact of POS on both OBSE

and AC in the two organizations.

Because of these various limitations, the results and conclusions of the present study need to be

treated with caution. To address these limitations, future research should seek to employ longitudinal

data designed to assess changes in employee levels of POS, OBSE, and AC over time. Ideally such data

should be collected not only before and after major programs of organizational restructuring and

downsizing, but also at various points during the implementation of such programs. This would allow

for a more systematic analysis of the way in which perceived organizational support, OBSE and AC

vary over the lifetime of such initiatives and, hence, provide a better understanding of underlying

patterns of causal relations between these variables. It would also allow for a more detailed analysis of

the way in which changes in perceived levels of job security affect the relationship between POS,

OBSE, and AC over time.

More research is clearly needed also to test the generalizability of the present findings. In particular,

further research is required to determine the extent towhich the pattern of results obtained in the present

study applies to other organizations in different societal, cultural, and economic contexts. Particularly

useful in this respect would be research designed to test whether the positive relationships between

POS, OBSE, and AC observed in the present study also hold in non-Korean organizations, as well as in

more successful organizations that are not going through major periods of turbulence and uncertainty.

Our expectation is that the present pattern of results is not only likely to apply more widely also to

non-Korean organizations, but that the positive links found between POS, OBSE, and AC are, if

anything, likely to be even more pronounced in successful organizations that are not going through

major programs of rationalization and restructuring. These expectations, however, require systematic

testing through further research.

In the process, it would also be useful to extend the analysis of the POS–OBSE-AC relationship in

two main ways. First, is by expanding the range of mediator variables included in the analysis so as to

allow for a more systematic comparison of social exchange and socio-emotional explanations of the

POS–AC relationship. And second, is by extending the analytical model to include a wider range of key

employee perceptions and orientations that may significantly moderate relationships of interest in

the area. The present study constitutes a first step in such a broader, longer-term program of

inquiry.

Acknowledgement

This research was supported by the Kyung Hee University Research Fund in 2004 (KHU-20040907).


DOI: 10.1002/job


Author biographies

Jaewon Lee received his PhD in Industrial and Business Studies at the University of Warwick and is

now an assistant professor of Business Administration at Kyung Hee University in Korea. His primary

research interests include organization-based self-esteem, organizational politics, and the impact of

HRM on organizational performance and employee well-being.

Riccardo Peccei received his DPhil in sociology at Oxford University and is now a professor of Human

Resource Management and Organisational Behaviour at King’s College, London. His primary research

interests include the study of the transformation of work and employment relations in the service sector,

gender demography, the impact of HRM on organizational performance and employee well-being, and

the nature and consequences of employee empowerment and participation at work.

References

Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1977). Attitude-behavior relations: A theoretical analysis and review of empiricalresearch. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 888–918.

Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommendedtwo-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 411–423.

Armeli, S., Eisenberger, R., Fasolo, P., & Lynch, P. (1998). Perceived organizational support and policeperformance: The moderating influence of socioemotional needs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 288–297.

Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy ofMarketing Science, 16, 74–94.

Baumeister, R. F. (1995). Self and identity: An introduction. In A. Tesser (Ed.), Advanced Social Psychology(pp. 51–97). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism. In R. Collins (Ed.), Four sociological traditions: Selected readings(pp. 69–112). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Brockner, J. (1988). Self-esteem at work: Research, theory, and practice. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.Byrne, D., & Clore, G. L. (1970). A reinforcement model of evaluative responses. Personality, 1, 103–127.Cortina, J. M., Chen, G., & Dunlap, W. P. (2001). Testing interaction effects in LISREL: Examination andillustration of available procedures. Organizational Research Methods, 4, 324–360.

Eisenberger, R., Cummings, J., Armeli, S., & Lynch, P. (1997). Perceived organizational support, discretionarytreatment, and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 812–820.

Eisenberger, R., Fasolo, P., & Davis-LaMastro, V. (1990). Perceived organizational support and employeediligence, commitment, and innovation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 51–59.

Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 71, 500–507.

Eisenberger, R., Armeli, S., Rexwinkle, B., Lynch, P. D., & Rhoades, L. (2001). Reciprocation of perceivedorganizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 45–54.

Garst, H., Frese, M., &Molenaar, P. C. M. (2000). The temporal factor of change in stressor-strain relationships: Agrowth curve model on a longitudinal study in East Germany. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 417–438.

Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25,161–178.

Greenberg, J., Solomon, S., Pyszczynski, T., Rosenblatt, A., Burling, J., Lyon, D., Simon, L., & Pinel, E. (1999).Why do people need self-esteem? Converging evidence that self-esteem serves an anxiety-buffering function. InR. F. Baumeister (ed.), The self in social psychology (pp. 24–49). Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.

Hair, J. F. Jr., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis (5th ed.). UpperSaddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.


DOI: 10.1002/job


Harris, M. M., & Schaubroeck, J. (1990). Confirmatory modeling in organizational behavior/human resourcemanagement: Issues and applications. Journal of Management, 16, 337–360.

Harter, S. (1993). Causes and consequences of low self-esteem in children and adolescents. In Baumeister R. F.(Ed.), Self-esteem: The puzzle of low self-regard (pp. 197–229). London: Plenum Press.

Hewitt, J. P. (1997). Self and Society: A symbolic interactionist social psychology (7th ed.). London: Allyn andBacon.

Holmbeck, G. N. (1997). Toward terminological, conceptual, and statistical clarity in the study of mediators andmoderators: Examples from child-clinical and pediatric psychology literatures. Journal of Consulting andClinical Psychology, 65, 599–610.

Hui, C., & Lee, C. (2000). Moderating effects of organization-based self-esteem on organizational uncertainty:Employee response relationships. Journal of Management, 26, 214–232.

Hulin, C. L., & Mayer, L. J. (1986). Psychometric equivalence of a translation of the job descriptive index intoHebrew. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 83–94.

Inumiya, Y., Choi, I., Yoon, D., Seo, D., & Han, S. (1999). The relationship between unrealistic optimism andindependent-interdependent construals of self in Korean culture. Korean Journal of Social and PersonalityPsychology, 13, 183–201.

Joreskog, K. G., & Sorbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8:Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS commandlanguage. Chicago. IL: Scientific Software International.

Joreskog, K. G., & Yang, F. (1996). Nonlinear structural equation models: The Kenny-Judd model with interactioneffects. In G. A. Marcoulides, & R. E. Schumacker (Eds.), Advanced Structural Equation Modeling Techniques(pp. 57–88). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Ko, J., Price, J. L., & Mueller, C. W. (1997). Assessment of Meyer and Allen’s three-component model oforganizational commitment in South Korea. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 961–973.

Korman, A. K. (1970). Toward an hypothesis of work behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 54, 31–41.Korman, A. K. (1971). Organizational achievement, aggression and creativity: Some suggestions toward anintegrated theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 6, 593–613.

Lang, C. E. (1988). Residual centering, exploratory and confirmatory moderator analysis, and decomposition ofeffects in path models containing interactions. Applied Psychological Measurement, 12, 163–175.

Lee, J. (2003a). An analysis of the antecedents of organization-based self-esteem in two Korean banks.International Journal of Human Resource Management, 14, 1046–1066.

Lee, J. (2003b). An analysis of organization-based self-esteem as a mediator of the relationship between itsantecedents and consequences. The Korean personnel Administration Journal, 28, 33–60.

Lee, J., & Corbett, J. M. (2006). The impact of downsizing on employees’ affective commitment. Journal ofManagerial Psychology, 21, 176–199.

Levinson, H. (1965). Reciprocation: The relationship between man and organization. Administrative ScienceQuarterly, 9, 370–390.

Locke, E. A., McClear, K., & Knight, D. (1996). Self-esteem and work. In C. L. Cooper, & I. T. Robertson (Eds.),International review of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 11, pp. 1–32.). New York: John Wiley &Sons.

Luthans, B. C., & Sommer, S. M. (1999). The impact of downsizing on workplace attitudes.Group &OrganizationManagement, 24, 46–70.

Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation.Psychological Review, 98, 224–253.

Mathieu, J. E., Tannenbaum, S. I., & Salas, E. (1992). Influences of individual and situational characteristics onmeasures of training effectiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 35, 828–847.

Mathieu, J. E., & Zajac, D.M. (1990). A review andmeta-analysis of the antecedents, correlates, and consequencesof organizational commitment. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 171–194.

Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991). A three–component conceptualization of organizational commitment. HumanResource Management Review, 1, 61–89.

Meyer, J. P., &Allen, N. J. (1997).Commitment in the workplace: Theory, research, and application. London: SagePublications.

Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnytsky, L. (2002). Affective, continuance, and normativecommitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, and consequences. Journal ofVocational Behavior, 61, 20–52.

Mone, M. A. (1994). Relationships between self-concepts, aspirations, emotional responses, and intent to leave adownsizing organization. Human Resource Management, 33, 281–298.

Mottaz, C. J. (1988). Determinants of organizational commitment. Human Relations, 41, 467–482.


DOI: 10.1002/job


Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W., & Steers, R. M. (1982). Employee-organization linkages: The psychology ofcommitment, absenteeism, and turnover. London: Academic Press.

Pierce, J. L., & Gardner, D. G. (2004). Self-esteem within the work and organizational context: A review of theorganization-based self-esteem literature. Journal of Management, 30, 591–622.

Pierce, J. L., Gardner, D. G., Cummings, L. L., & Dunham, R. B. (1989). Organization-based self-esteem:Construct definition, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 32, 622–648.

Ping, R. A. (1995). A parsimonious estimating technique for interaction and quadratic latent variables. Journal ofMarketing Research, 32, 336–347.

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: Acritical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903.

Price, J. L. (1991). Chicago Public Schools (CPS) Questionnaire Items Wave I.Price, J. L. (1997). Handbook of organizational measurement. International Journal of Manpower, 18, 303–558.Rhoades, L., & Eisenberger, R. (2002). Perceived organizational support: A review of the literature. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 87, 698–714.

Rhoades, L., Eisenberger, R., & Armeli, S. (2001). Affective commitment to the organization: The contribution ofperceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 825–836.

Shore, L. M., & Shore, T. H. (1995). Perceived organizational support and organizational justice. In R. S.Cropanzano, & K.M. Kacmar (Eds.),Organizational politics, justice, and support: Managing the social climateof the workplace (pp. 149–184). London: Quorum Books.

Van Dyne, L., & Pierce, J. L. (2004). Psychological ownership and feelings of possession: Three field studiespredicting employee attitudes and organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25,439–459.

Van Dyne, L., Vandewalle, D., Kostova, T., Latham, M. E., & Cummings, L. L. (2000). Collectivism, propensity totrust and self-esteem as predictors of organizational citizenship in a non-work setting. Journal of OrganizationalBehavior, 21, 3–23.

Wagar, T. H. (1998). Exploring the consequences of workforce reduction. Canadian Journal of AdministrativeSciences, 15, 300–309.

Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Carey, G. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive andnegative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063–1070.

Zimbardo, P. G., & Leippe, M. R. (1991). The psychology of attitude change and social influence. New York:McGraw-Hill.


DOI: 10.1002/job


Documents

Perceived organizational support and affective commitment: the mediating role of organization-based self-esteem in the context of job insecurity