Allen and Meyer refer to affective commitment as the employees emotional attachment to, identification with and involvement in the organization. Affective commitment involves three aspects; the formation of an emotional attachment to an organization, identification with and the desire to maintain organizational membership. Allen and Meyer (1990) argue that individuals will develop emotional attachment to an organization when they identify with the goals of the organization and are willing to assist the organization in achieving these goals. They further explain that identification with an organization happens when the employee's own values are in
harmony with organizational values and the employee is able to internalize the values and goals of the organization.
Mowday, Steers and Porter (1979) also described affective organizational commitment as an active relationship with the organization such that individuals are willing to give something of themselves in order to contribute to the organization's well-being. From the above descriptions, a
psychological identification and pride of association with the organization is evident. Employees with a strong affective commitment continue to be a member of the organization because they want to do so.
Jaros, Jermier, Koehler and Sincich (1993) suggest that affective commitment is the most widely discussed form of psychological attachment to an employing organization. This is primarily because of its association with desirable work behaviors such as increased productivity, personnel stability, lower absenteeism rate, job satisfaction and organizational citizenship (Mowday, Porter & Steers, 1982). Meyer and Herscovitch (2001) report that affective commitment has been found to correlate with a wide range of positive outcomes with respect to turnover, absenteeism, job performance and organizational citizenship behaviour.
2.2.2.2 Continuance Commitment
The second of Allen and Meyer's (1990) dimensions of organizational commitment is continuance commitment, which is based on Becker's (1960) side-bet theory. The theory states that as individuals remain in the employment of an organization for longer periods, they accumulate investments, which become costly to lose the longer an individual stays.
These investments include time, job effort, and organization specific skills that might not be transferable or greater costs of leaving the organization that discourage them from seeking alternative employment, work friendships and political deals. Allen and Meyer (1990) describe continuance commitment as a form of psychological attachment to an employing organization that reflects the employees' participation as the loss that would otherwise be suffered if they were to leave the organization.
Romzek (1990) argues that employees calculate their investments in the organization based on what they have put into the organization and what they stand to gain if they remain with the organization. Sometimes employees express continuance commitment because of personal investments in non-transferable investments. The investments could include time and money tied up in an organization's retirement plan, special skills that are unique to a particular organization, close working relationships with co-workers and other benefits that make it too costly for one to leave the organization and seek employment elsewhere.
In addition to the fear of losing investments, individuals develop continuance commitment because of a perceived lack of alternatives. Allen and Meyer (1990) as well as Meyer and Allen (1991) argue that such an individual's commitment to the organization would be based on perceptions of employment options outside the organization. This occurs when employees start to believe that their skills are not marketable or that they do not have the skills required to compete for positions in another field. Such employees would feel tied to their current organization.
Employees who work in environments where the skills and training they get are very industry specific can possibly develop such commitment. As a result, such employees could feel compelled to commit to the organization because of the monetary, social, psychological and other costs associated with leaving the organization. Unlike affective commitment, which involves emotional attachment, continuance commitment reflects a calculation of the costs of leaving versus the benefits of staying.
2.2.2.3 Normative Commitment
The third dimension of organizational commitment is normative commitment, which reflects a feeling of obligation to continue employment. Employees with a high level of normative commitment feel they ought to remain with the organization (Allen & Meyer, 1990).
Randall and Cote (1991) regard normative commitment in terms of the moral obligation the employees develop after the organization has invested in them. They argue that when employees start to feel that the organization has spent either too much time or money developing and training them, such employees might feel an obligation to stay with the organization. For example, individuals whose organization paid for their tuition while they were improving qualifications might believe that they can reimburse the organization by continuing to work for it. In general, normative commitment is most likely when individuals find it difficult to reciprocate the organization's investment in them.
Jaros and his colleagues (1993) refer to normative commitment as moral commitment. They emphasize the difference between this kind of commitment and affective commitment, because normative commitment reflects a sense of duty, obligation or calling to work in the organization and not emotional attachment. They describe it as the degree to which an individual is psychologically attached to an employing organization through internalization of its goals, values and missions. This type of commitment differs from continuance commitment, because it is not dependent on the personal calculations of sun costs.
The multidimensionality of organizational commitment reflects its highly complex nature. It is important to realize that the three different dimensions of organizational commitment are not mutually exclusive. An employee can develop one, any combination or all of the three aspects of commitment. These aspects of organizational commitments differ only on the bases of their underlying motives and outcomes (Becker, 1992). For example an employee with affective commitment will stay with an organization and be willing to exert more effort in organizational activities while an employee with continuance commitment may remain with the organization and not be willing to exert any more effort than is expected.
2.3 Leadership Style and Organizational Commitment
According to Stum (1999), employee commitment reflects the quality of the leadership in the organization. Therefore it is logical to assume that leadership behaviour would have a significant relationship with the development of organizational commitment. Previous research suggests a
positive direct relationship between leadership behaviour and organizational commitment.
A relationship between commitment and leadership style has been reported in the organizational and management literature. Billingsley and Cross (1992) reported a positive relationship between leader support and commitment.
In three separate studies, Popper, Mayseless and Castelnovo (2000) found evidence to support the hypothesis that a positive correlation existed between transformational leadership and attachment. Hayward, Goss and Tolmay (2004) also found that transformational leadership has moderate positive correlation with affective commitment (r = 0.5278, p < 0.0001).
Lower correlation coefficients between transformational leadership and normative, as well as continuance, commitment were found. No correlation was found between transactional leadership and affective, normative and continuance commitment.
In his research, Nyengane (2007) indicated that there is a positive relationship between transformational leadership behaviors and commitment. The correlation analysis also indicated a weak but significant positive relationship between transactional leadership behaviors and continuance commitment. The correlation results again showed a weak but significant negative correlation between laissez-faire leadership behaviors and affective commitment.
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction
The previous chapter reviewed the literature related to leadership style and organizational commitment. This chapter describes the research methodology used in this study to test the hypothesis. The population, sample and the sampling approach is also described. Furthermore, the two instruments that were used in the research are described and their applicability discussed. Moreover, research variables are also identified. Finally, a brief description of the relevant statistical techniques used in the research for the collection and analysis of data is also provided.
3.2 Research Objectives and Hypotheses
The overall goal of the research is to identify different dimensions of leadership style that have an influence on organizational commitment in general and be able to determine the relationship between the two. Thus, the main objective of the study is to investigate the relationship between
various leadership styles and various organizational commitment styles to a production facility in Saudi Arabia.
From the identification of the objectives of the research, the hypothesis was formulated. The hypotheses are concerned with the relationship between the various leadership styles being practiced within the organization and its influence on the various organizational commitment styles. The results of the research could shape how future leadership training will be configured within the company being researched.
Therefore, the hypotheses for this research are as follows:
Hypothesis 1.1: There is no statistical significant relationship between transformational leadership and affective commitment.
Hypothesis 1.2: There is a statistical significant relationship between transformational leadership and affective commitment.
Hypothesis 2.1: There is no statistical significant relationship between transformational leadership and continuance commitment.
Hypothesis 2.2: There is a statistical significant relationship between transformational leadership and continuance commitment.
Hypothesis 3.1: There is no statistical significant relationship between transformational leadership and normative commitment.
Hypothesis 3.2: There is a statistical significant relationship between transformational leadership and normative commitment.
Hypothesis 4.1: There is no statistical significant relationship between transactional leadership and affective commitment.
Hypothesis 4.2: There is a statistical significant relationship between transactional leadership and affective commitment.
Hypothesis 5.1: There is no statistical significant relationship between transactional leadership and continuance commitment.
Hypothesis 5.2: There is a statistical significant relationship between transactional leadership and continuance commitment.
Hypothesis 6.1: There is no statistical significant relationship between transactional leadership and normative commitment.
Hypothesis 6.2: There is a statistical significant relationship between transactional leadership and normative commitment.
Hypothesis 7.1: There is no statistical significant relationship between laissez-faire leadership and affective commitment.
Hypothesis 7.2: There is a statistical significant relationship between laissez-faire leadership and affective commitment.
Hypothesis 8.1: There is no statistical significant relationship between laissez-faire leadership and continuance commitment.
Hypothesis 8.2: There is a statistical significant relationship between laissez-faire leadership and continuance commitment.
Hypothesis 9.1: There is no statistical significant relationship between laissez-faire leadership and normative commitment.
Hypothesis 9.2: There is a statistical significant relationship between laissez-faire leadership and normative commitment.
3.3 Research Design
According to Adams and Schvaneveldt (1985) "research design refers to a plan, blueprint or guide for data collection and interpretation - a set of rules that enable the investigator to conceptualize and observe the problem under study". From the hypotheses it is evident that the research is of a quantitative nature. Figure (3.1) provides a flowchart of the research method proposed. This method consists of the following steps: Selection of basic esearch method, Survey, Questionnaire, Selection of sample design, Nonprobability Sampling, Collection of data, Editing and coding data, Data processing and analysis, Interpretation of findings, and Report.
According to Babbie and Mouton (2004), there are different types of social research methods that can be identified from the literature, namely exploratory research, descriptive research and explanatory research. This research is the first of its kind in a production facility in the eastern province of Saudi Arabia. Thus, the nature of this study lends towards exploratory research, exploring the relationship between leadership style being practiced within Saudi Steel Pipes and organizational commitment to the organization. Babbie and Mouton (2004) concluded that the aims for social research vary a great deal, ranging from, gaining new sights into the phenomenon; undertaking preliminary investigation before a more structured study of the phenomenon is done; describing central concepts and constructs of a phenomenon; determining priorities for the research and developing new hypotheses about existing phenomena.
Selltiz, Johoda, Deutsch and Cook (1966) suggested that for any research to be purposeful, it should discover answers to the research questions. They emphasize that there are three research strategies by means of which exploratory research can be conducted: (1) A review of related social science and other pertinent literature. (2) A survey of people who have had practical experience with the problem to be researched. (3) An analysis of "insight-stimulating" examples.
The above three exploratory research strategies apply to this study as it involves the review of the relevant literature, the relationship between the leadership style and organizational commitment, as well as the analysis of one production facility as an insight-stimulating example.
From an ethical consideration, the research dealt with the information gathered from Saudi Steel Pipes in complete confidentiality and privacy. A conscious effort was made at all times in a way that the respondents' names were not revealed in the research report. In order to ensure the success of the research, managers were linked to subordinates in such a manner that each subordinates' response remained anonymous apart from being linked to a particular manager. Finally, the organization will be given a copy of the final report.
3.4 Population and Sampling Procedure
Trochin (2000) describes a research population as a group that the researcher wants to generalize to and the sample as the group of people that are selected to be in the study. This was supported by Zikmund (2003) when he defined a sample as a subset, or some part, of a larger population.
The definition of the sample is of vital importance as the results of an investigation are not trustworthy more than the quality of the population or representativeness of the sample. The targeted population for this study is professionals (managers, engineers, technicians, and supervisors) who have been with the company for at least a year. Managers and their subordinates are also required to have been with each other for at least a year.
3.5 Research Instruments
Two questionnaires were used in this research to obtain information on leadership and organizational commitment, respectively, namely the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) and Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (OCQ).
3.5.1 Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ)
The MLQ was formulated from the Full Range Leadership Development Theory (Bass & Avolio, 1997). Thus, the MLQ is based on the work of renowned leadership theorists like Bass, Avolio and Yammarino (Avolio & Bass, 1997). The MLQ has been improved and tested since 1985 with the result that many versions of the questionnaire have been developed. The latest versions, Form 5X (Revised), were used in this study. The MLQ takes the form of a number of statements about the leadership style of the individual being tested. The questionnaire used in this study contains 45 statements that identify and measure the key aspects of leadership behaviors. Each statement corresponds to one of the nine components of transformational, transactional or laissez-faire leadership factors.
The transformational leadership style is divided into idealized charismatic behaviors and attributes. Factors representing transformational leadership include idealized influence (attributed), idealized influence (behavior), inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation and individualized consideration. Transactional leadership style is represented by two factors called contingent rewards and management-by-exception. Management-by-exception is also divided into Management-by-exception-active (MBEA) and Management-by-exception-passive (MBEP). Thus, MLQ 5X (Revised) contains nine factors.
The MLQ comprises a 5 point Likert scale and the respondents were instructed during the administration of the questionnaires by the researcher to mark the most suitable answer. The scale ranges from 0 to 4 as follows:
0 - Not at all
1 - Once in a while
2 - Sometimes
3 - Fairly often, and
4 - Frequently if not always
Each respondent was required to assess and testify as to how frequently the behaviors described by each of the statements are exhibited by their leader. The MLQ consists of two booklets known as the 'rater booklet' and the 'leader booklet' (see Appendices A & B respectively).
These two versions consist of exactly the same statements, except that they are written from different perspectives. The leader, for example, would be given the statement, 'I spend time teaching and coaching', whereas the subordinate's questionnaire would say, 'The person I am rating spends time teaching and coaching'.
In this research, leaders completed the leader MLQ, by rating themselves in terms of the transformational, transactional or laissez-faire leadership factors. Subordinates also completed the rater booklet of the same questionnaire. The leaders were rated in terms of the same criteria on which they have rated themselves. In order to gain an accurate picture of the leader's ability, the rater MLQ is preferred to be completed by three or more respondents (Bass, 1985b), and since the sample is small, we were able to have two or more subordinates to rate the leader.
3.5.2 Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (OCQ)
Meyer and Allen (1984) initially distinguished between two types of commitment: affective commitment and continuance commitment. Affective commitment denoted a sense of belonging and emotional attachment to the organization, whereas continuance commitment emphasized the perceived costs of leaving the organization. Allen and Meyer (1990) subsequently introduced a third component of commitment, normative commitment, which reflected the perceived obligation to remain with the organization. They created a pool of 51 items for the scale. The scale was tested with approximately 500 employees from two manufacturing firms and a university. Clerical, managerial and supervisory employees were represented in the sample. Females represented 57 percent of the sample.
Scale items for measuring affective, normative and continuance commitment were selected for inclusion in the scales based on a series of decision rules that took into consideration item endorsement proportions, item-total correlations, direction of scoring and content redundancy (Allen & Meyer, 1990). Later, Meyer, Allen and Smith (1993) revised the normative commitment scale to clarify the distinction between affective commitment and normative commitment.
While the earlier versions (Allen & Meyer, 1990; Meyer & Allen, 1984; 1991) of the OCQ contained 24 items (8 items for each scale), the later version by Meyer, Allen and Smith (1993) only contained 18 items (6 items for each scale). In this study, the affective, continuance and normative commitment of employees was assessed through the administration of Meyer, Allen, and Smith's (1993) 18 items' three dimensional commitment measure. Examples of items from the OCQ include: (a) affective commitment - "I really feel as if this organization's problems are my own"; (b) continuance commitment - "I feel that I have too few options to consider leaving this organization"; and (c) normative commitment - "I would feel guilty if I left my organization now".
The OCQ comprises a 5 point Likert scale and the respondents were instructed during the administration of the questionnaires by the researcher to mark the most suitable answer (see Appendix C). The scale ranges from 0 to 4 as follows:
0 - Strongly Disagree
1 - Disagree
2 - Neutral
3 - Agree
4 - Strongly Agree
3.5.3 Reliability and Validity of Research Instruments
Reliability and validity are two key components to be considered when evaluating a particular instrument. According to Zikmund (2003), reliability refers to the measuring instrument's ability to provide consistent results in repeated uses. The validity of an instrument refers to how well an instrument measures the particular concept it is supposed to measure (Whitelaw, 2001).
He also argues that an instrument must be reliable before it can be valid, implying that the instrument must be consistently reproducible; and that once this has been achieved, the instrument can then be scrutinized to assess whether it is what it purports to be.
3.5.3.1 Reliability and Validity of the MLQ
The MLQ has been tested for reliability and validity in many settings (Pruijn and Boucher, 1994). Bass (1985b), Bass and Avolio (1989) as well as Yammarino and Bass (1990) have proved the content and concurrent validity of the MLQ. Avolio and Bass (1997) also proved the construct validity of the MLQ. According to Bass and Avolio (1997), further reliability of the MLQ has been proven many times through test-retest, internal consistency methods and alternative methods.
Avolio, Bass and Jung (1995) confirmed the reliability of the MLQ by using a large pool of data (N = 1394). According to Avolio and his colleagues the MLQ scales exhibited high internal consistency and factor loadings. They reported reliabilities for total items and for each leadership factor scale that ranged from 0.74 to 0.94.
Den Hartog, Van Muijen and Koopman (1997) also investigated the internal consistency of the MLQ subscales. Their study group consisted of approximately 1200 employees from several diverse organizations (commercial businesses, health-care organizations, welfare institutions and
local governments). Reliability (Cronbach's Alpha coefficient) for the subscales of transformational leadership ranged from 0.72 to 0.93; transactional leadership ranged from 0.58 to 0.78; and laissez-faire leadership was 0.49.
3.5.3.2 Reliability and validity of the OCQ
Several studies have been conducted to examine the reliability (Cronbach's Alpha coefficient) of the OCQ. Allen and Meyer (1990) reported the reliability of the affective commitment scale as 0.87, continuance commitment scale as 0.75 and the normative commitment scale as 0.79. Dunham, Grube and Castaneda (1994) found alpha ranges of 0.74 to 0.87 for affective, 0.73 to
0.81 for continuance and 0.67 to 0.78 for normative commitment. Cohen (1996) discovered alphas of 0.79 for affective, 0.69 for continuance and 0.65 for normative commitment.
Meyer, Stanley, Herscovitch and Topolnytsky (2002) performed a meta-analysis of studies using both the 6-item and 8-item OCQ. They collected data from people who had sought permission to use the OCQ during the last 15 years as well as from computer databases dating back to 1985. The mean reliability from all the studies was 0.82 for affective, 0.73 for continuance and 0.76 for normative. These results showed that the three commitment constructs could be reliably measured.
3.6 Research Variables
Nine independent measures of this research were identified for the multifactor leadership questionnaire. Five separate measures of transformational leadership were used as independent variables; these are idealized influence (attributed), idealized influence (behavior), inspirational
motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individual consideration. Moreover, three separate measures of transactional leadership were used also as independent variables; contingent reward, management-by-exception (active), and management-by-exception (passive). The last measure which was used as independent variable is the laissez-faire measure of laissez-faire leadership.
On the other hand, three separate measures of organizational commitment were used as dependent variables. These measures are the affective commitment scale, continuance commitment scale, and normative commitment scale of the organizational commitment questionnaire.
3.7 Data Collection
The data collection method used in this research is questionnaire. Sekaran (2000) suggests that questionnaires are an efficient data collection mechanism provided the researcher knows exactly what is required and how to measure the variables of interest. Questionnaires can be administered personally, mailed to the respondents or even electronically distributed depending on the situation (Sekaran, 2000).
A list of all managers and professional employees in the sample was obtained from the Human Resource Manager in Saudi Steel Pipes. The For the purposes of this research, the questionnaires were used to gather the necessary information. In an attempt not to disrupt business operations and to ensure that the respondents would receive the documents in the shortest possible time, questionnaires could be distributed through the internal mailing system of the company. This is a non-personal technique of data collection due to the fact that the respondents complete the questionnaires without the interviewer being present. This technique of data collection addressed issues of cost, time and geographical constraints.
3.8 Data Analysis
Once the questionnaires had been completed, the researcher then codes the responses in each questionnaire. These scores would be captured in a Microsoft EXCEL spreadsheet for statistical analysis with respect to Leader, Rater, Organizational Commitment and Demographic variables.
Once data was collected, it was necessary to use statistical techniques to analyze the information, as this study is quantitative in nature. The scores captured onto the Microsoft Excel spreadsheet would be then imported into SPSS, where a two-tailed Pearson correlation analysis would be conducted to test the hypothesis of this research (using SPSS 15.0). The correlation analysis helped in determining both the form and degree of the relationship between the leadership style and employee commitment. Thus, both the strength of the relationship between variables and the level of statistical significance were assessed.
3.8.1 Cronbach's Alpha Coefficient
Cronbach's Alpha coefficient is typically equated with internal consistency (De Vellis, 1991). The Cronbach's Alpha is interpreted as a coefficient Alpha and its value ranges from 0 to 1. Sekaran (2000) advises that when calculating Cronbach's reliability coefficient, reliabilities less than 0.6 are considered poor, reliabilities within 0.7 ranges are considered acceptable and those coefficients over 0.8 are considered good.
3.8.2 Hypothesis Testing
As mentioned previously, the hypothesis of the study is concerned with establishing a relationship between leadership style and employee commitment to the organization. Thus, it is necessary to use statistical tests to test the strength and direction of the relationship between these two variables of the hypothesis.
Pearson correlation analysis was conducted, using SPSS, in order to establish whether a relationship exists between the leadership style and employee commitment to Saudi Steel Pipes.
Correlation analysis is a statistical method to measure the co variation, or association, between two variables (Zikmund, 2003). Bryman and Cramer (1990) states that measures of correlation indicate both the strength and direction (+ or -) of the relationship between two variables. The statistic calculated is the Pearson correlation coefficients (r) and varies between -1 and +1. The nearer the value of r is to zero, the weaker the relationship, and the closer to unity (- or +), the stronger the relationship. In summary the sign of the Pearson correlation coefficient indicates the direction of the relationship, and its absolute value indicates the strength, with larger absolute values indicating stronger relationships. In this research, correlation coefficients represent the nature of the relationship between leadership style and organizational commitment, whereby a coefficient of above 0.8 represent a strong relationship, a coefficient of between 0.5 and 0.8 represent a moderate relationship, and a coefficient below 0.5 represent a weak relationship (Devore & Peck, 1993).
The statistical significance (p-level) of the results represents a decreasing index of the reliability of a result. The higher the p-level, the less we can believe that the observed relation between variables in the sample is a reliable indicator of the relation between the respective variables in the population.
The procedure to test the statistical significance of the hypothesis in this study is as follows: If the computer generates p-value that is less than the level of significance (alpha) of 0.05, the researcher will reject the null hypothesis. The researcher then concludes that there is a statistical
significant and positive/negative relationship between the variables under study. If the p-value is greater than the level of significance of 0.05, then the researcher will fail to reject the null hypothesis and conclude that there is no statistical significant and positive/negative relationship between the variables (Sekaran, 2000).
It is critical to specify whether the test is one-tailed or two-tailed. A one-tailed test is used when there is a specific direction to the hypothesis being tested. On the other hand, a two-tailed test is applied when a relationship is expected, but the direction of the relationship is not predicted (Field, 2000). Due to the nature of the hypothesis of the current study, the two-tailed test was used. The mean scores and standard deviations for each of the factors of transformational and transactional as well as organizational commitment were analyzed, with reference to the Pearson correlation test results for further understanding and analysis.
CHAPTER 4: DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS
4.1 Introduction
In chapter three, we covered the research methodology used, while the research objectives and the research hypotheses were clearly stated. The chapter also presented the research population, sample, and the instruments used with their respective reliability and validity. Data collection, analysis, and hypotheses testing were also discussed.
In this chapter, the results of the correlation analysis of the research hypotheses were discussed. In order to summarize the quantitative data and the relationships, a descriptive statistics was used.
4.2 Sample Characteristics and Demographic Data
4.2.1 Response rate
Let us assume that they were 100 participants only 85 of them gave back their feedback, then the response rate is 85%.
4.2.2 Demographic data
Demographic data could be collected in various aspects, like; all participants were males, Arabs (Arabic Native Speakers) and have experience in their organization and a bachelor degree as a minimum educational level.
4.3 Descriptive Statistics
Descriptive statistics are used to summarize quantitative data, enabling patterns and relationships to be discerned which are not apparent in the raw data (Hussey & Hussey, 1997). The common purpose of these techniques is to summarize both variability (that is the spread of the numbers) and the centre of data. Sekaran (2000:397) describes the mean of a sample as "a measure of central tendency that offers a general picture of the data without unnecessarily inundating one with each of the observations in a data set or sample". The standard deviation of a sample is defined as an index of the spread of a distribution or the variability in the data.
4.4 Results of Correlation Analysis
As mentioned previously in section 3.2, the hypotheses of the study are concerned with establishing a relationship between leadership style and employee commitment. The relationship between leadership style and organizational commitment was investigated using two-tailed Pearson analysis. This provided correlation coefficients which indicated the strength and direction of linear relationship. The p-value indicated the probability of this relationship's significance.
The results of the correlation analysis would be presented after collecting data. As discussed earlier (in section 3.8.2), Devore and Peck (1993) provided a guideline for assessing resultant correlation coefficients as follows: coefficients less than 0.5 represent a weak relationship, coefficients greater than 0.5, but less than 0.8, represent a moderate relationship and coefficients greater than 0.8 represent a strong relationship.
CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION
Using virtual results for this research we might come up with the coming discussion;
5.1 Discussion of Results
The results obtained suggest that there is a strong positive relationship between the transformational leadership behaviors and organizational commitment with its three dimensions; affective commitment, continuance commitment and normative commitment.
This suggests that leadership behaviors which involve building trust, inspiring a shared vision, encouraging creativity and emphasizing development is positively related to organizational commitment. For affective commitment, the study suggests that these leadership behaviors are positively and moderately related to how employees feel about wanting to stay with the company. For normative commitment, the study also suggests that the same leadership behaviors are similarly positive, though weakly related to how employees feel about their obligation to stay with the company. Similarly for continuance commitment, the study indicates that the same leadership behaviors are similarly positive, though again weakly related to how employees feel about their needing to stay with the company.
The findings that transformational leadership behaviors have a weak relationship with normative commitment and continuance commitment while a moderate relationship with affective commitment. The overall relationship with organizational commitment is weak but positive. These results are appropriate since as stated by Meyer and Allen (1997), employees who stay with an organization because they feel obligated do not exhibit the same eagerness and involvement as employees who willingly stay with an organization. As such, transformational leadership behaviors are not as strongly related to both normative and continuance commitment as to affective commitment.
Other researchers have found similar weak positive relationships between transformational leadership behaviors and affective commitment, normative commitment, as well as, continuance commitment. In a study undertaken by Kent and Chelladurai (2001) in intercollegiate athletics at an American University, it was found that individualized consideration has a positive correlation with both affective commitment (r = 0.475) and normative commitment (r = 0.354,). They also found positive correlations between intellectual stimulation and both affective commitment (r = 0.487) and normative commitment (r = 0.292). Bycio, Hackett and Allen (1995) found a weak correlation between the transformational leadership dimensions and affective commitment. They found correlations of between r = 0.39 and r = 0.45.
Lo M.C., Ramayah T., Min H.W. and Songan P. (2010) found a positive direct relationship between three dimensions of transformational leadership styles, namely intellectual stimulation, idealized influence and inspirational motivation, and affective and normative commitment. They found also that two dimensions of transformational leadership, namely intellectual stimulation and individualized consideration, were found to have positive relationship with continuance commitment.
The results also indicated a moderate, but significant, positive relationship between transactional leadership and both continuance and normative commitment. On the other hand, there was a weak, but significant positive relationship between transactional leadership and affective commitment. These results show that the most dimension having a considerable moderate relationship with affective and normative commitment is contingency rewards but have no relationship with continuance commitment. The major dimension found to have a moderate positive relationship with continuous commitment is management-by-exception (active).
In the present study, negative feedback about tasks that was delayed had a negative effect on commitment. Therefore, improving the "timeliness" of negative feedback about tasks might reduce the negative effect on affective and normative commitment. Meyer and Allen (1997) state that employees who have a strong continuance commitment stay with the organization, because they do not want to lose the amount of time, money or effort invested or because they think they have no employment alternatives. While those who do not care about what they have invested into the organization and what they stand to gain if they remain with the organization will have weaker continuance commitment.
