The Chittagong University Journal of Business Administration, Vol. 27, 2012, pp.

205-220

Perceived Organizational Support and Organizational Commitment:

Bangladesh Perspective

Md. Sahidur Rahman1

Rana Karan2
Abstract
This study mainly examines the relationship between perceived organizational support and organizational
commitment in Bangladesh with a view to providing deeper insights into the associations of perceived
organizational support with three dimensions of organizational commitment namely affective,
continuance, and normative commitment. To measure perceived organizational support and commitment
of the executives, Eisenberger et al’s (1986) and Allen and Meyer’s (1990) scales were used respectively.
Descriptive statistics, bivariate correlation, and linear regression analyses were used to analyze and
interpret the relationships among the variables. Based on the data collected from 173 executives working
in variety of organizations in Chittagong, the results of the current study suggest that employee
commitment to their organizations is strongly influenced by their perception regarding their
organizations’ support that they receive. A major implication of the study is that a manager should focus
on issues that increase employees’ perceived organizational support to boost up the employees’
commitment of all types to their organizations. Small sample size may be one of the major limitations that
may stand in the way of generalization of the results. Future research directions were also discussed in
the study.

Key words: Perceived organizational support, organizational commitment, affective

commitment, continuance commitment, and normative commitment.

Introduction

Employees are compensated for their labors through which organizations generate their profit.
Their efforts and performances are appraised because the ultimate achievement of any
organization’s goal entirely depends on its employees’ performances. In reality, not only
organizations evaluate their employees’ performances, but they (organizations) are also evaluated
by their employees. In other words, both the organization and their employees are evaluated by
each other. Employees consider how far their employing company, to which they are dedicating
their performances, is dedicated to their wellbeing and as expected, people will try to repay their
earnings that they receive from their organizations, through their efforts. According to the norm
of reciprocity, the recipient of benefits is morally obligated to recompense the donor (Gouldner,
1960, as cited in Eisenberger, Fasolo, & Davis-LaMastro, 1990). That means, individuals,
naturally feel obligation to those persons or organizations that provide benefits for them. It is a
reciprocal issue for both the organizations and their employees. This type of perceptions by
employees regarding their organization’s payback for their performances indisputably plays an
important role in developing employees’ level of positive attitude towards their organizations.
Perceived organizational support (POS) is such an issue that is defined as “the degree to which
employees believe the organization values their contributions and cares about their well-being”
(Robbins, Judge, & Vohra, 2012, p. 72). Eisenberger, Huntington, Hutchison, and Sowa (1986)
stated that, “to meet needs for approval, affiliation, and esteem and to determine the
organization’s readiness to compensate increased effort with greater rewards, employees form a
general perception concerning the extent to which the organization values their contributions and
1
Professor, Department of Management, University of Chittagong.
2
Associate Professor, FBA, BGC Trust University Bangladesh.
205
 The Chittagong University Journal of Business Administration, Vol. 27, 2012, pp. 205-220

cares about their well-being” (Eisenberger, et al, 1990, p. 51). As an important area of research,
POS, an attitude of employees, has drawn the attention of the researchers (e.g. Celep &
Yilmazturk, 2012; Eisenberger et al, 1986, 1990; Hutchison, 1997; O’Driscoll & Randall, 1999;
Randall et al., 1999; Rhoades, Eisenberger, & Armeli, 2001; Settoon, Bennett, & Liden, 1996).
Researchers also asserted that if employees perceive more support from the organization, they
tend to develop more positive attitudes (e.g. commitment) towards their organizations
(Eiesnberger et al., 1986).

Similarly, organizational commitment (OC), as an attitude, consists of individuals’ psychological

state which specifies the individuals’ relation with organization that leads to making decision
about continuing membership with the organization (Meyer & Allen, 1997). Committed
employees who are highly motivated to contribute their time and energy to the pursuit of
organizational goals are acknowledged as the vital assets for an organization (Pfeffer, 1998).
Studies found an organization’s considerable outcome from its employees’ commitment in terms
of lower rates of job movement, absenteeism, higher productivity, or work quality, or both (e.g.,
Mathieu & Zajac, 1990; Meyer & Allen, 1984; Mowday, Porter, & Steers, 1982; Rahman, Karan,
& Arif, 2014; Rahman, Ferdausy, & Karan, 2015). The three dimensions of OC such as affective
commitment (AC), continuance commitment (CC), and normative commitment (NC) have been
developed in the commitment literature (Meyer & Allen, 1997). AC implies the “positive
feelings of identification with, attachment to, and involvement in the work organization” (Meyer
& Allen, 1984, p. 375) and “continuance commitment is the perceived economic value of
remaining with an organization compared to leaving it” (Robbins & Judge, 2009, p. 114), while
normative commitment relates to an employee’s staying with the organization due to a sense of
moral obligation (Morrow, 1993).

Studies have indicated that employees who perceive that their organizations support them are
more likely to be committed to their jobs (Celep & Yilmazturk, 2012; Eisenberger, Armeli,
Rexwinkel, Lynch, & Rhoades, 2001; Hutchison, 1997; O’Driscoll & Randall, 1999; Randall et
al., 1999; Settoon, Bennett, & Liden, 1996). Studies also found that POS predicted the job
performance and citizenship behaviors of untraditional or low power-distance Chinese
employees-in short, those more likely to think work as an exchange rather than a moral
obligation (Farh, Hackett, Liang, 2007, as cited in Robbins, et. al., 2012). Even though different
empirical studies were conducted examining the associations of POS with the different
employees’ attitudes, there have been few studies investigating the associations of POS with OC,
and AC, CC and NC in the context of Bangladesh. This research gap has actually led the
researchers to carry out the current study. Therefore, this study is designed to make a
contribution to POS literature by showing the links between POS and OC in Bangladeshi culture.
Moreover, the current study intends to shed light on the associations of POS with affective,
continuance, and normative commitment distinctively. Consequently, the current study can
contribute to the HR and management practices in the prevailing business environment,
especially, in Bangladesh, and can offer a considerable intellectual challenge to the
industrial/organizational psychologists and behavioral scientists.

Literature Review

Perceived Organizational Support

206
 The Chittagong University Journal of Business Administration, Vol. 27, 2012, pp. 205-220

Perceived organizational support refers to an employee’s belief that the organization for which
s/he works values his/her contributions and cares for his/her wellbeing (Eisenberger, Huntington,
Hutchison & Sowa, 1986). Employees with high POS believe that their organization will
appreciate their added efforts that conduce to their organizations. They have a faith that their
organization will care for them and show adequate concern for them. Researchers demonstrate
that employees perceive their organization as supportive when they find that the rewards are fair,
when they have an opportunity for taking part in decisions and when employees see their
supervisors as supportive (Rhoades, Eisenberger, & Armeli, 2001). Eisenberger et al. (1986)
asserted that individuals showed a consistent pattern of agreement with statements concerning
whether their organizations appreciated their contributions and would treat them favorably or
unfavorably in varying circumstances. POS is affected by employees’ interactions with their
organizations with regard to the receipt of praise, support, or approval (Shore & Tetrick, 1991).
Researchers suggest that individuals with strong POS are more likely to have higher levels of
citizenship behaviors, lower level of tardiness, and better customer service (Vandenberghe,
Bentein, Michon, Chebat, Tremblay, & Fils, 2007; Eder & Eisenberger, 2008).

Organizational Commitment

Organizational commitment is “a state in which an employee identifies with a particular

organization and its goals and wishes to maintain membership in the organization” (Robbins &
Judge, 2009, p. 113). It concerns the degree to which an individual feels psychologically attached
to the organization in which s/he works (Kacmar, Carlson, & Brymer, 1999). Meyer and Allen
(1991) concentrated on three separate dimensions of OC that sustain membership in an
organization, such as a desire (affective commitment), a need (continuance commitment), and an
obligation (normative commitment). According to Robbins and Judge (2009), “affective
commitment is an emotional attachment to the organization and a belief in its values” (p. 113).
Affectively committed employees feel strong emotional attachment with their organizations’
norms and values. Individuals with higher AC feel themselves as a part of their organizations,
attending to their organizations like a family, and feel a strong sense of belonging to their
organizations. On the other hand, according to Meyer and Allen (1984), “continuance
commitment is the extent to which employees feel committed to their organizations by virtue of
the costs that they feel are associated with leaving” (p. 375). It is a calculative attachment which
is different from AC. Lack of other viable alternative job opportunities, the threat of losing
attractive extrinsic and intrinsic benefits, the risk of losing a good work-environment, of parting
with seniority-based privileges, and/or of undermining the job status or reputation, might be
some of the reasons for CC. Normative commitment refers to “commitment based on a sense of
obligation to the organization” (Allen & Meyer, 1996, p. 253). It is “an obligation to remain with
organization for moral or ethical reasons” (Robins & Judge, 2009, p.114). Moral and social
pressures that a person encounters through family and cultural interactions while entering the
organization are regarded as antecedents of normative commitment (Meyer & Allen, 1991). In
general, AC seems more strongly related to organization outcomes (e.g. performance, turnover)
than to the two other commitment dimensions (Robbins & Judge, 2009, P. 114).
Development of Research Hypotheses

From the social exchange perspective, POS would strengthen commitment to the organization
(Eisenberger et al., 1986). Employees who feel supported by their organizations and care about

207
 The Chittagong University Journal of Business Administration, Vol. 27, 2012, pp. 205-220

the organizations would engage themselves in activities that help to further the organizations’
goals (Eisenberger et al., 1990). Connell, Ferres, and Travaglione (2003) found that POS is a
significant predictor of desired work outcomes like turnover intent and commitment. In
investigating the relationship between POS and OC, different studies also revealed that
perceptions about the organization’s supports and cares for them are positively related to AC
(Gutierrez, Candela, & Carver, 2012; Guzzo, Noonan, & Elron, 1994; Settoon, Bennett, & Liden,
1996; Shore & Wayne, 1993; Wayne, Shore, & Liden, 1997). It could be expected that if
employees feel that organizations are concerned with their supporting role regarding the
happiness and wellbeing of the employees, the employees may consider themselves as a part of
the organizations, and feel a sense of belongingness and loyalty towards the organizations and
may try to continue their jobs in the current companies. In another study, Rhoades, Eisenberger,
and Armeli (2001) found that the relationship between supervisor support and OC is mediated by
POS. In examining the relationships of POS with AC, Eisenberger et al., (1990) revealed that
POS is positively related to AC.

Probing into the relationships of POS with CC, Eisenberger et al., (1990) found that POS is
positively related to CC. However, Shore and Tetrick (1991, as cited in Rhoades and Eisenberger,
2002) stated that “POS might reduce feelings of entrapment (i.e., continuance commitment) that
occur when employees are forced to stay with an organization because of the high costs of
leaving” (p. 701). In terms of rewards, if employees receive better financial reward for their
contributions in their current organizations, which is improbable in other organizations in focus,
they will prioritize the existing financial support given in the form of reward that may be one of
the major reasons for their maintaining membership with their current organizations. Thus, when
employees intend to change the current organizations, their perceptions regarding benefits (e.g.
career growth, other financial and non-financial benefits etc.) that they have been receiving from
their current organizations, naturally affect their decisions as regards quitting or maintaining
membership in the current organizations. Gutierrez, Candela, and Carver, (2012) also found that
POS is positively related to CC.

Individuals with high normative commitment continue their jobs because loyalty matters great to
them and they feel a sense of moral obligation to remain with their current organizations.
Employees with higher NC continue their memberships in their current organizations even after
getting opportunities for a better job than the current one, only because they anticipate that their
departure will be harmful for their organizations. Based on the above discussions, it would be
rational to hypothesize that POS might have positive associations with organizational
commitment along with its three dimensions – AC, CC, and NC. Hence, the following
hypotheses have been proposed:

Hypothesis 1: There is a positive relationship between perceived organizational support and

organizational commitment.

Hypothesis 2: Perceived organizational support is positively associated with affective

commitment.

Hypothesis 3: Perceived organizational support is positively associated with continuance

commitment.

208
 The Chittagong University Journal of Business Administration, Vol. 27, 2012, pp. 205-220

Hypothesis 4: Perceived organizational support is positively associated with normative

commitment.

A hypothetical model has been developed to exhibit the relationships of POS with organizational
commitment, affective commitment, continuance commitment, and normative commitment as
follows:
H3

CC
H1

H2 AC OC
POS
H4

NC
Figure 1: Hypothetical Model

Source: Authors’ own contribution

(Note: POS = Perceived organizational support; OC = organizational commitment; AC = affective commitment; CC
= continuance commitment; NC = normative commitment.)

Research Methods

Participants

Data for this study were collected from 173 executives working at different organizations in
Chittagong, the second largest city of Bangladesh. Respondents were requested to rate their
perceptions regarding their organizational support and commitment. Respondents voluntarily
participated in the survey. To prompt responses, a written assurance was given to the respondents
clarifying that the data provided by them will be used only for academic purpose. Moreover,
during data collection, the name of the respondents and their organizations were not inquired for
assuring surer confidentiality. The respondents were also asked to provide their demographic
information (i.e. age, gender, tenure, educational background, organizational level, and
organization type). The organizations were classified into five categories, namely manufacturing,
finance, education, service, and others. The respondents were further categorized in view of their
positions in their respective organizational structures namely: higher-level, mid-level, and lower-
level.

Table 1: Respondents’ demographic characteristics

Demographic characteristics Mean SD N %
(in years) (in years)
Respondents’ age: 37.50 8.60 - -
Respondents’ experience: 9.80 6.50 - -
Respondents’ gender: H1 DWB
Male (-)
- - 143 83.70
EI 209 (-) H3
H2

(+)
JP
 The Chittagong University Journal of Business Administration, Vol. 27, 2012, pp. 205-220

Female 30 17.30
Respondents’ position level:
Top - - 40 23.10
Middle 133 76.90
Lower - -
Respondents’ educational qualifications:
Bachelors - - 47 27.20
Masters 105 60.70
Others 21 12.10
Respondents’ organization category:
Manufacturing 34 19.70
Education - - 30 17.30
Finance 54 31.20
Services 30 17.30
Others 25 14.50
Source: Authors’ own research, 2015

Respondents varied in age that ranges between 24 to 61 years, with a mean of 37.5 (SD = 8.6)
years. Their average job experience was 9.8 (SD = 6.5) years. Among 173 executives, 143 (83.7
%) were male while 30 (17.3%) were female. The respondents were well-educated as 47 (27.2%)
and 105 (60.7%) of them completed bachelor and master degrees respectively while the rest 21
(12.1%) of them completed other degrees. There were 40 (23.1%) and 133 (76.9%)
representations by the top and mid-level participants respectively, as no respondents from the
lower-level were found. Though equal number (60) of questionnaires was sent out to each
category (manufacturing, education, finance, services and others) of industry, finally 173 usable
questionnaires were received from the respondents. Among the 173 respondents, 34 (19.7%)
respondents belonged to manufacturing, 30 (17.3%) to education, 54 (31.2%) to finance, 30
(17.3%) to services, and 25 (14.5%) to other industries.

Survey Instruments

In order to measure the POS and OC of the executives, self-rated printed questionnaires were
supplied. All the questionnaires used in this study were measured on a 7-point Likert-scale
ranging from 7 (strongly agree) to 1 (strongly disagree). This study adopts the following
measures to collect data from the participants:

Perceived Organizational Support

POS was measured via an eight high-loading items from the Survey of Perceived Organization
Support (SPOS) developed by Eisenberger et al. (1986). Sample items were: “My organization
really cares about my wellbeing”, “The organization cares about my general satisfaction at
work”. The Cronbach alpha value for SPOS scale was .93.

Organizational Commitment
210
 The Chittagong University Journal of Business Administration, Vol. 27, 2012, pp. 205-220

To measure OC of the executives, Organizational Commitment Scale developed by Allen and

Meyer (1990) was adopted in this study. Sample items for the organizational commitments were
“I really feel as if this organization’s problems are my own” (affective commitment), “It would
be very hard for me to leave my organization right now, even if I wanted to” (continuance
commitment), and “I would not leave my organization right now because I have a sense of
obligation to the people in it” (normative commitment). The reliability of the Organizational
Commitment Scale in this study was found .85, while it was found .77, .67, and .75 for AC, CC,
and NC respectively.

Data Collection Procedure and Analysis of Data

In order to collect data, printed survey instruments with a cover letter were distributed among
300 executives working at different organizations in Chittagong. In selecting respondents,
purposive sampling techniques were used. The participants were assured that all the information
provided by them would be kept confidential and used only for academic purpose. The
executives volunteered to complete the survey. Finally, 173 (58%) usable responses were
received. Descriptive, correlation, and regression analyses were used to justify the associations
among the studied variables. The SPSS 18.0 was used to analyze the data. Due to some
constraints, it was not possible to collect an equal number of responses from each of the
organizations concerned.

Reliability of Scales and Validity of Data

Reliability illustrates the individual differences concerning the amount of agreement or

disagreement of the concepts or variables studies. Cronbach’s alpha is the most widely used
method to measure the reliability of the scale (Malhotra, 2002; Cooper & Schinder, 2001). It may
be mentioned that Cronbach’s alpha value ranges from 0 to 1, but satisfactory value is required to
be more than .60 for the scale to be reliable (Malhotra, 2002; Cronbach, 1951). However,
Cronbach’s alpha of the POS, OC, AC, and NC scale adopted in the current study were
respectively 0.93, 0.85, 0.77, 0.67, and 0.75. Hence, all these survey instruments were highly
reliable for data collection.

The validity refers to the extent to which differences in observed scales scores reflect true
differences among objects on the characteristics being measured, rather than systematic or
random error (Malhotra, 2002). Validity was not an essential factor for the research because the
authors used the established survey instruments in this study.

Results

The mean (M), standard deviation (SD), and reliability calculated for and the correlation among
perceived organizational support, organizational commitment, affective commitment, and
normative commitment are presented in Table 2.

Table 2: Means, Standard Deviations, Reliabilities, and Correlations among Variables

Variables / M SD α Correlations

211
 The Chittagong University Journal of Business Administration, Vol. 27, 2012, pp. 205-220

Components 1 2 3 4 5
1. POS 5.34 1.1 .93 1
2. OC 5.17 .74 .85 .57** 1
3. AC 5.76 .82 .77 .58** .84** 1
4. CC 4.51 .87 .67 .24** .78** .42** 1
4. NC 5.26 1.0 .75 .62** .87** .70** .50** 1
Source: Authors’ own research, 2015
(**.
Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed); N = 173; POS = perceived organizational support; OC =
organizational commitment; AC = affective commitment; CC = continuance commitment; NC = normative
commitment.)

The results of Table 2 show that there is a significant positive correlation (r = 0.57, p < 0.01)
between POS and OC. Significant relationships between POS and AC, (r = 0.58, p < 0.01),
between POS and CC (r = 0.24, p < 0.01), and between POS and NC (r = 0.62, p < 0.01) were
also found. However, the relationship of POS with CC is found weaker in comparison with the
relationships of POS with AC and NC. An explanation of the result suggests that POS may be an
important indicator of OC.

Table 3: Summary of Regression Analysis of Socio-Demographic Characteristics with Perceived

Organizational Support and Organizational Commitment
Co-efficient S.E. Value of Value of Value of
2
Covariates (β) (β) t-statistic R F –statistic
POS OC POS OC POS OC POS OC POS OC
** **
Age .08 .05 .02 .01 3.56 3.38
Gender .16 .06 .23 .15 .69 .42
*
Tenure -.08 -.04 .03 .02 -2.62 -1.98* .08 .09 3.3** 3.5**
Education .19 -.09 .14 .09 1.34 -1.05
Position .19 .08 .20 .13 .92 .62
Source: Authors’ own research, 2015
(** Significant at the 0.01 level; *Significant at 0.05 level; N = 173; POS= perceived organizational support; OC =
organizational commitment.)

An explanation of Table 3 demonstrates that 8% and 9% of the variances in POS and OC were
explained by the socio-demographic characteristics (e.g. age, gender, tenure, education, and
position respectively) in which age and tenure of the respondents were found significant for both
POS and OC. The result of this study indicates that a larger portion of variance in POS and OC
remain unexplained. The presence of unexplained variance suggests that there might be other
potential variables that account for variations in POS and OC.
Table 4: Summary of Regression Analysis regarding Perceived Organizational Support and
Organizational Commitment.
Perceived Organizational Support (Predictor)
Predictand Co-efficient S.E. Value of Value of Value of
(β) (β) t-statistic R2 F–statistic
OC .37 .04 9.0** .32 81.07**
AC .41 .05 9.22** .33 85.0**
CC .18 .06 3.19** .06 10.19**
212
 The Chittagong University Journal of Business Administration, Vol. 27, 2012, pp. 205-220

NC .55 .05 10.41** .39 108.25**

Source: Authors’ own research, 2015
(** Significant at the 0.01 level; N = 173; POS = perceived organizational support; OC = organizational
commitment; AC = affective commitment; CC = continuance commitment; NC = normative commitment.)

An explanation of result stated in Table 4 points out that about 32% of the variances in OC are
explained by POS where the t-value is found significant. Moreover, 33% and 39% of the
variances in AC and NC explained by POS respectively, however, only 6% variances in CC is
explained by POS. It suggests that organizational support is accounted for significant changes in
OC. Although a proportion of variances in OC is unexplained, it has been suggested that
organizational supports are the significant predictors in explaining the OC as perceived by the
respondents.

Discussions

The present study mainly intends to examine the relationships between POS and OC. It also
investigates the associations of POS with AC, CC, and NC. In the proposed hypotheses, it is
assumed that there would be significant positive relationships among the variables. The results of
the study support all the hypotheses adopted for the research. It is found that POS are
significantly and positively correlated to OC along with its three dimensions (AC, CC, and NC);
however, in comparison with the relationships of POS with AC and NC, the relationship between
POS and CC is found weaker. In addition, only 6% variance in CC is explained by POS, which
indicates the weaker influential role of POS on CC. It specifies that individuals’ affective,
normative, and overall commitment is significantly influenced by their perceptions of
organization support that they receive from their organizations. So the study pertinently supports
the theoretical argument that POS may be an important aspect in improving individual’s
commitment in Bangladeshi culture too.

Implications

An explanation of the current findings provides a clear evidence of significant positive

association between POS and OC especially in Bangladeshi culture. Hence, the employees’
perceptions regarding the level of supportive organizational climate can contribute to the
employees’ commitment to their organizations. In other words, employees who perceive higher
support from their organizations exhibit stronger attachment with and loyalty to their
organizations and show the tendency of continuing their current jobs due to emotional
attachment, fear of financial loss, and moral obligation to their organizations. Conversely,
individuals with low POS would be less committed to their organizations and be more inclined to
seek a job in other organizations. Hence, one of the major implications is that the managers
should have better theoretical and practical understanding about the significant positive link
between POS and OC. Therefore, managers should increase organizational support that
ultimately intensifies employees’ commitment to their organizations. In other words, for boosting
up the employees’ commitment, managers should emphasize factors like organization’s rules and
policies, reward volume and system, decision-making procedure etc. for the well-being of the
employees. Steps should be taken so that organizations value employees’ efforts and care about
their well-being.

Limitations
213
 The Chittagong University Journal of Business Administration, Vol. 27, 2012, pp. 205-220

In this study, the data were collected only from Chittagong city that may seem to be limiting the
study range by restricting the generalizability of the findings. The sample size (N = 173) of the
executives posed another limitation to this study. Larger and more representative sample from
organizations of different types and from executives of varied levels from all over the country is
needed to investigate further into the relationships among the variables that could be the best
viable alternative to assuring generalizability of the results in the perspective of the Bangladeshi
culture. Another limitation of the study is that the presence of common method variance (CMV)
in the measures may have caused inflated relationships between the independent and dependent
variables.

Future Directions

In terms of future research directions, subsequent studies should be endeavoured to examine the
association of POS with OC of employees in different industries of all over the country and at
different organizational levels longitudinally. Future research would be benefited from a large
sample size, using a variety of samples. More studies should be conducted meticulously with a
view to explaining the positive relationship of POS with CC in the Bangladeshi culture to
generalize the relationships among the variables. Research examining the relationship between
POS and OC mediated by other factors could advance more satisfying results. Research ventures
examining the relationships of organizational support with other variables, such as job
involvement, employee productivity, deviant workplace behavior, social loafing, and turnover
intentions, are also highly recommended.

References

Allen N. J., & Meyer J. P. (1990). The Measurement and Antecedents of Affective, Continuance
and Normative Commitment to the Organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63,
1-18.
Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1996). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the
organization: An examination of construct validity. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 49,
252–276.
Celep, C., & Yilmazturk, E.O. (2012). The Relationship among Organizational Trust,
Multidimensional organizational commitment and perceived organizational support in
Educational organizations. Procedia-Social and Behavioral sciences. 46, 5763-5776.
doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.512
Connell, J., Ferres, N., & Travaglione, T. (2003). Engendering trust in manager-subordinate
relationships. Personnel Review, 32, 569-587. doi:10.1108/00483480310488342
Cooper, D., & Schindler, P. (2001). Business Research Methods. Sydney: McGraw-Hill.
Cronbach, L. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 6(3),
297-334.
Eder. P., & Eisenberger, R. (2008). Perceived organizational support: reducing the negative
influence of Co-worker withdrawal behavior. Journal of Management, 34 (1), 55-68.
Eisenberger, R., Armeli, S., Rexwinkel, B., Lynch, P. D., & Rhoades, L. (2001). Reciprocation of
perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 42-51.

214
 The Chittagong University Journal of Business Administration, Vol. 27, 2012, pp. 205-220

Eisenberger, R., Fasolo, P., & Davis-Lamastro, V. (1990). Perceived organizational support and
employee diligence, commitment, and innovation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 51-
59. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.75.1.51
Eisenberger, S., Huntingdon, R., Hutchinson, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived organizational
support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 500-507. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.71.3.500
Gutierrez, P. A., Candela, L. L., & Carver, L. (2012). The structural relationships between
organizational commitment, global job satisfaction, developmental experiences, work
values, organizational support, and person-organization fit among nursing faculty. Journal
of advanced nursing, 68 (7), 1601–1614.
Guzzo, R. A., Noonan, K. A., & Elron, E. (1994). Expatriate managers and the psychological
contract. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 617-626.
Hutchison, S. (1997). A path model of perceived organizational support. Journal of Social
Behavior and Personality, 12, 159–174.
Kacmar, K. M., Carlson, D. S., & Brymer, R. A. (1999). Antecedents and consequences of
organizational commitment: A comparison of two scales. Educational and Psychological
Measurement, 59, 976-994.
Malhotra, N. K. (2002). Marketing Research: an applied orientation (3rd ed.). New Delhi: Pearson
Education Asia.
Mathiew, J.E., & Zajac, D. M. A. (1990). Review and a metaanalysis of the antecedents, correlates
and consequences of organizational commitment. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 171-194.
Meyer, J. P. & Allen, N. J. (1997). Commitment in the workplace. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Meyer, J.P. & Allen, N. J. (1984). Testing the “Side-Bet Theory” of organizational commitment:
Some methodological considerations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 372-378.
Meyer, J.P., & Allen, N.J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational
commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1, 61-89.
Morrow, P.C. (1993). The theory and measurement of work commitment. Greenwich, Connecticut:
JAI Press Inc.
Mowday, R.T., Porter, L.W., & Steers, R.M. (1982). Employee-organisation linkages: The
psychology of commitment, absenteeism and turnover. New York: Academic Press, Inc.
O’Driscoll, M. P., & Randall, D. M. (1999). Perceived organisational support, satisfaction with
rewards, and employee job involvement and organisational commitment. Applied
Psychology: An International Review, 48, 197–209.
Pfeffer, J. (1998). The human equation. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Rahman, M.S., Ferdausy, S., & Karan, R. (2015). Determining the Relationship between the
Components of Organizational Commitment and Job Performance: an Empirical Study.
ABAC Journal, Thailand, 35(1), 30-45.
Rahman, S., Karan, R. & Arif, I. (2014). Investigating the Relationships among Job Satisfaction,
Organizational Commitment, and Turnover Intention: An Empirical Study. SIU Journal of
Management, 4 (1), 117-147.
Randall, M. L., Cropanzano, R., Bormann, C. A., & Birjulin, A. (1999). Organizational politics and
organizational support as predictors of work attitudes, job performance, and organizational
citizenship behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 159–174.

215
 The Chittagong University Journal of Business Administration, Vol. 27, 2012, pp. 205-220

Rhoades, L., & Eisenberger, R. (2002). Perceived Organizational Support: A Review of the
Literature Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 698–714
Rhoades, L., Eisenberger, R., & Armeli, S. (2001). Affective commitment to the organization: the
contribution of perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86 (5),
825-836. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.86.5.825
Robbins, S., & Judge, T. (2009). Organizational Behavior (13th ed.). USA: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Robbins, S., Judge, T., & Vohra, N. (2012). Organizational Behavior (14th ed.). New Delhi:
Pearson Prentice Hall of India.
Settoon, R. P., Bennett, N., & Liden, R. C. (1996). Social exchange in organizations: Perceived
organizational support, leader–member exchange, and employee reciprocity. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 81, 219–227.
Shore, L. M., & Tetrick, L. E. (1991). A construct validity study of the Survey of Perceived
Organizational Support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 637–643.
Shore, L. M., & Wayne, S. J. (1993). Commitment and employee behavior: comparison of
affective organizational commitment and continuance commitment with perceived
organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 774-780.
Vandenberghe, C., Bentein, K., Michon, R., Chebat. J., Tremblay, M., & Fils, J. (2007). An
examination of the role of perceived support and employee commitment in employee-
customer encounter. Journal of applied psychology, 92 (4), 1177-1187.
Wayne, S.J., Shore, L.M., & Liden, R.C. (1997). Perceived organizational support and leader-
member exchange: A social exchange perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 40,
82-111.

216