The Relationships Among Work-Related Percep-Tions, Employee Attitudes, and Employee Perfor - Mance: The Integral Role of Communication

1099050x, 1998, 3-4, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/(SICI)1099-050X(199823/24)37:3/4<277::AID-HRM9>3.0.CO;2-E by Edinburgh Napier University, Wiley Online Library on [17/02/2023].
See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
The Relationships Among Work-Related Perceptions, Employee Attitudes, and Employee Performance • 277
THE RELATIONSHIPS AMONG WORK-RELATED PERCEP-

TIONS, EMPLOYEE ATTITUDES, AND EMPLOYEE PERFOR-
MANCE: THE INTEGRAL ROLE OF COMMUNICATION
John J. Rodwell, René Kienzle, and Mark A. Shadur
This article explores the nature of organizational communication in the human resource man-
agement context. An analysis of survey data collected from employees of an Australian informa-
tion technology company found that employee perceptions of teamwork, communication, em-
ployee job satisfaction, commitment, and stress significantly predicted self-rated performance.
Unexpectedly, communication was found to be negatively related to performance. Analysis of the
pattern of relationships indicates that while the direct relationship between communication and
performance is negative, the role of communication is one of enhancing teamwork, job satisfac-
tion, and commitment. The article relates the findings to the “communication metamyth” which
assumes that more communication is necessarily good.
Introduction 1996). The focus of this article is to explore from

the perspective of the employees, the nature of com- The focus of this
Recent increases in competitive demands placed munication as an element of human resource man- article is to
explore from the
on industries around the world have forced com- agement (HRM).
perspective of the
panies to adopt practices aimed at creating Within a given organization, the objective employees, the
higher involvement and higher performing or- of these approaches to work organization is to nature of
ganizations. Approaches such as lean produc- bring about a superior level of performance communication
tion (Krafcik, 1988), total quality management from employees; however, a range of organi- as an element of
(Deming, 1986), just in time (JIT) (Abegglen & zational and human resource factors impact human resource
management
Stalk, 1985), and other “best practices” (Shadur, on the successful adoption and implementa- (HRM).
Rodwell, Simmons, & Bamber, 1994) are a few tion of these practices (Wall, Jackson, &
among many approaches that require organiza- Davids, 1992). The human resource practices
tional managers to consider employee involve- used within organizations and the effects of
ment and the impact it has on organizational these practices on the perceptions of indi-
performance. The end goal of progressive man- vidual employees are critical to the overall
agement practices, such as those described in competitive drive of organizations. Human re-
Dertouzos, Lester, and Solow (1989); Womack, source practices that seek to increase employee
Jones, and Roos (1990) and others, is to obtain involvement should be carefully considered and
market success in an environment of world-class the components of involvement recognized.
competition. A major component of these ap- The traditional rationale of HR managers,
proaches is to foster increased involvement so that in attempting to increase employee involve-
improved quality, improved employee attitudes, and ment, has drawn the link between the number
increased productivity can be achieved (Cotton, of programs (whether they are participative
Human Resource Management, Fall / Winter 1998, Vol. 37, No. 3 & 4, Pp. 277–293
© 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. CCC 0090-4848/98/030277-17
1099050x, 1998, 3-4, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/(SICI)1099-050X(199823/24)37:3/4<277::AID-HRM9>3.0.CO;2-E by Edinburgh Napier University, Wiley Online Library on [17/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
278 • H UMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, Fall / Winter 1998
management or some other type of program) Unfortunately, employee attitudes toward as-
and the level of employee involvement. In an pects of employee involvement programs, such
analysis of employee involvement that focused on as teamwork, communication, and participa-
formal programs, Cotton (1996) found that self- tion in decision making, are often not heeded
directed work teams, gainsharing, direct participa- by organizational decision makers. Similarly,
tion in decision making (not participation through outcomes of employee involvement programs,
representatives, which is limited to making recom- such as job satisfaction, commitment, and
mendations), and an ongoing process of change employee stress, can have important implica-
marked successful employee involvement pro- tions for the success of these programs.
grams. For this article we consider that at the core This article has the following structure:
of these change processes there are a number of First, we introduce communication, partici-
factors, namely, participation in decision making, pation in decision making and teamwork as
teamwork, and communication. the “building blocks” of employee involvement
Some attempts to increase employee in- and as important contributors to organiza-
volvement do not account for the perceptions tional performance. Second, we introduce or-
of individuals and affective reactions that may ganizational commitment, job satisfaction, and
arise. Employee involvement programs con- stress as elements of employees’ affective atti-
sist of a number of factors whose relationship tudes. Affective attitudes are employees’ emo-
may be mediated (e.g., by commitment), and tional and psychological reactions to the work
their success is not based on a one-to-one re- setting. We discuss how employees’ affective
lationship between the number of programs attitudes significantly contribute to self-rated
and the degree of success (Coye & Belohlav, performance beyond the employee involve-
1995). Further, an application of Kurt Lewin’s ment variables introduced earlier. Third, fol-
Field Theory suggests that: lowing the presentation of results, the
relationship among employees’ self-rated per-
individuals’ behaviors are influenced most formance and employee involvement and af-
immediately by how they react to the fective attitudes are examined. Finally, we
environment as they perceive it [and] in explore communication in relation to em-
turn, affective reactions are products of ployee involvement and affective attitudes and
both how they perceive the environment introduce the notion of a communication
and individual characteristics (Kohler & metamyth existing in organizations that may
Mathieu, 1993, p. 518). hinder the acquirement of higher employee
and organizational performance.
Kohler and Mathieu go on to point out that Zimmerman, Sypher, and Haas (1996) iden-
individual characteristics and perceptions of the tified the communication metamyth, which as-
environment may influence individuals’ behav- sumes that more communication is better. In
ior directly, but the most likely outcome of these the past, practitioners and researchers have
influences is manifested in reactions to the situ- tended to take for granted that developing com-
ation. Overall, while the elements of communi- munication is inherently good. However,
cation and employee involvement may be worthy Zimmerman, Sypher and Haas (1996) encour-
ends in themselves, they impact on other cru- age us to reconsider that assumption. These
cial elements of human resources, especially writers also posit that organizational processes
from the perspective of the employees. such as participation “map onto” the organiza-
The extent of employee involvement is tional communication canvass. The section be-
determined by the attitude of employees to- low provides an outline of communication in
ward various organizational involvement pro- organizations. The discussion then addresses the
grams just as much as it is determined by the specific relationships between communication and
number and type of involvement programs put employee involvement and employee attitudes.
in place by HR managers. This simple notion
is often lost from sight when HR managers Communication
are enlisted into the company to achieve “to-
tal quality” or “best practice,” for example, and Lawler (1989) identifies HR professionals as
involvement programs are rolled out en masse. being in a position to encourage the flow of
information throughout the organization. ing, or problem solving endeavors (Wagner,

Communication is important in organizational 1994). Similarly, empowerment has been pro-
functioning and has been proposed as a means posed to essentially involve “passing decision-
of bringing about greater organizational effec- making authority and responsibility from man-
tiveness (Bush & Frohman, 1991). The view agers to employees” (Ford & Fottler, 1995, p.
of communication as a panacea for all prob- 21). These activities and other seemingly posi-
lems, however, has tended to obscure and con- tive procedures that are associated with in-
fuse the study of communication in the work- creased participation have had a mixed response,
place (Zimmerman, Sypher, & Haas, 1996). and analysis has moved past the position that
The pervasiveness of communication participation benefits performance.
makes it difficult to separate it out as a phe- Increased participation in decision mak-
nomenon for investigation and a target for ing by lower-level members of the organiza-
management by HR professionals. Sharing tion has been found to have a positive effect
information is one of the easiest and most ef- on the efficiency of the decision-making pro- The perva-
fective ways that managers can foster em- cess (Heller, Drenth, Koopman, & Rus, 1988). siveness of
communication
ployee involvement within organizations Research has shown that employees who par-
makes it difficult
(Lawler, 1989). Practitioners often propose ticipate in decisions involving them have to separate it out
that employees must be given information higher levels of organizational commitment as a phenomenon
about the company, its activities, goals, and (Boshoff & Mels, 1995). In an extensive re- for investigation
directions, as well as be allowed to have chan- view of the effect of participation on perfor- and a target for
nels through which to pass information up to mance, Wagner (1994) concluded that management by
HR professionals.
management. Regardless of how much infor- participation can have a statistically signifi-
mation employees are given, however, they cant effect on both performance and satisfac-
want more (Zimmerman, Sypher, & Haas, tion, but the average size of these effects is
1996). This belief, that more communication small enough to raise concerns about its prac-
is better, appears to be part of Western cul- tical significance.
ture. Despite this belief, there has been some Programs that are intended to improve
debate as to whether having more communi- employee performance or satisfaction through
cation is better for a number of outcomes increasing employee participation, although
(Zimmerman, Sypher, & Haas, 1996). The yielding small effects, may, however, be worth-
research on the contribution of communica- while to adopt if they cost little to implement
tion to performance has not been clear (Pettit, and maintain (Wagner, 1994). The differences
Goris, & Vaught, 1997), with studies often between the studies that find a relationship
finding complex relationships. For example, between participation and performance and
Pincus (1986) found that communication was those that do not may be contingent—that is,
positively related to performance, but not as due to differing conditions and contexts across
strongly as communication was related to sat- the studies.
isfaction. This study will look at other factors
that may be elements in the chain between Teamwork
communication in the workplace and impor-
tant outcomes (Zimmerman, Sypher, & Haas, Along with developed autonomy and control,
1996) such as participation. a flat lean structure, and sophisticated per-
sonnel management practices, one basis of
Participation in Decision Making high performance organizations is a team or
group approach (Morley & Heraty, 1995).
There has been a steady rise in the adoption of Teams, in their many forms, have been found
participatory management techniques and strat- to create a broad set of positive changes in
egies in organizations nationally and interna- organizations. These benefits include in-
tionally (Erez, Earley, & Hulin, 1985). Partici- creased communication, increased innovation
patory management practices attempt to dimin- that can drive continuous improvement
ish the hierarchical structure of the organiza- (Tjosvold, 1991), and increased work satisfac-
tion in order to involve managers and subordi- tion (Morley & Heraty, 1995).
nates in information processing, decision mak- Teamwork has been emphasized as a key
feature of the flexible organization of the agement practices (Yankelovich, 1983). In this
1990s (Scully, Kirkpatrick, & Locke, 1995). study we include job satisfaction, organiza-
This orientation involves group members’ per- tional commitment, and employee well being
ceptions that their interactions, communica- in order to gain a better understanding of the
tion patterns, and levels of trust and contribution of management practice and
participation all enhance working toward the employee contributions to performance.
group’s goals (Hare, 1976; Isabella & Conceptualizations of employee involve-
Waddock, 1994). Furthermore, management ment that seek to influence such factors as par-
is responsible for clarifying the rationale for ticipation, teamwork, and other beneficial
the team and must also leave enough flexibil- employee behaviors imply a direct link between
ity for the team to develop commitment management and human resource practices and
around its own interpretation of that purpose the performance of employees without fully
(Katzenbach & Smith, 1993). Employees must accounting for the role of employee attitudes.
be integrated into and committed to the orga- Employee attitudes should be considered in or-
nization in order for teams to be effective der to understand more fully the relationship
(Tjosvold, 1991), a mechanism that requires between HR practices and organizational per-
effective communication systems. Critics of formance. Other authors have also called for a
teamwork argue that, from the employees’ closer examination of the role of employee atti-
perspective, teams can have disadvantages in tudes, for example, Boshoff and Mels (1995, p.
terms of peer group pressure and can become 38) called for future research to examine the
a means of "management by stress" (Parker & links between attitudes such as commitment and
Slaughter, 1988, p. 16ff). Stress and other performance to include variables such as com-
employee attitudes are therefore important munication, teamwork, and group cohesiveness.
elements of the HRM context and are subse- In summary, there is a need to understand
quently the focus of the next main section. what factors and/or practices, such as team-
The above sections have outlined three work, participation, etc., in the presence of a
major employee involvement “building blocks”: management strategy, can lead to higher per-
communication, teamwork, and participation formance. To achieve this understanding there
in decision making. This study goes beyond is a need to see what effects these practices
many studies of the above building blocks by have on performance and then to check
incorporating a range of factors that reflect whether the practices have direct effects or
employee perceptions. The importance of in- whether they are "channeled" or moderated
cluding employee perceptions is central here, by employee attitudes. This article includes a
given that for the potential benefits from em- number of work organization and employee
ployee involvement programs to be realized attitude variables, which are examined in more
they must be well received, accepted, and sup- detail below.
ported by employees (Allen, Lucero, & Van
Norman, 1997). Job Satisfaction
Within the
communication Involvement and Employee Attitudes Within the communication literature there has
literature there been consistent support for a positive relation-
has been The impact of employee perceptions of in- ship between communication and job satis-
consistent support volvement on employee and organizational faction (King, Lahiff, & Hatfield, 1988). Stud-
for a positive
performance has been extensively researched ies confirming this positive relationship have
relationship
between and documented (e.g., Dertouzos, Lester, & been found in situations ranging from hospi-
communication Solow, 1989). Of the many changes that have tals (e.g., Pincus, 1986) to public sector
and job been made to the organization of work over organisations (Wheeless, Wheeless, &
satisfaction. the years, the most predominant have included Howard, 1983). The relationship between job
the creation of teams, alterations to commu- satisfaction and performance, however, has
nication, and the creation of a participatory undergone extensive examination and remains
management practice. Employee attitudes are almost a "holy grail" for researchers (Landy,
a major factor contributing to productivity and 1989).
the introduction of high commitment man- Despite the low correlations found be-
tween job satisfaction and performance, the The affective component of the commit-
relationships between satisfaction and a range ment model has emerged as the consistent
of other factors that are important in the ex- predictor of withdrawal intentions, turnover,
amination of employee behavior (e.g., com- and absenteeism (Somers, 1995) and is the
mitment and participation), and in turn their aspect of commitment most central to the
impact on performance, lead us to include practices examined here. Furthermore, recent
satisfaction in our study. For example, Pettit, research examining the relationship between
Goris, and Vaught (1997) found that organi- commitment and performance has shown a
zational communication significantly pre- significant relationship between individuals’ Organizations
dicted job satisfaction but was a weak commitment and performance (Hackett, have a major
moderator of the job performance/job satis- Bycio, & Hausdorf, 1991; Meyer, Paunonen, stake in
promoting a
faction relationship. Gellalty, Goffin, & Jackson, 1989). Again, healthier life
An extra incentive to unraveling the job some studies have found a relationship be- style for
satisfaction/performance relationship has been tween communication and commitment (e.g., employees
to disprove the counter-intuitive findings that Putti, Ayree, & Phua, 1990; Varona, 1996), because of the
only a small correlation exists between job yet these studies often have not incorporated potential benefits
in reduced
satisfaction and performance (Iaffaldano & other important elements such as those just insurance costs,
Muchinsky, 1985; Petty, McGee, & Cavender, discussed. decreased
1984). Research on job satisfaction has sought absenteeism,
to overcome this conundrum by focusing on Stress and Well-Being improved
potential moderators of the performance-sat- productivity, and
better morale.
isfaction relationship (Griffin & Bateman, Stress has a wide range of effects on worker
1986). For example, there has been consider- behavior, including adaptive and maladaptive
able discussion about the relationship between responses resulting in short- and long-term
participation and satisfaction, with reviews of health implications (including substance
a range of these studies concluding that there abuse, depression, anxiety, sleep disorders, and
was a positive association between participa- eating habits) (Smith, 1990). Stress has been
tion and satisfaction (Cotton, Volrath, related to lower productivity and to higher
Droggatt, Lengnick-Hall, & Jennings, 1988). medical costs and absenteeism (Miller, 1988),
Similarly, many elements of work organization to performance (Beehr & Newman, 1978), and
have a direct or indirect relationship with com- to turnover (Parasuraman & Alluto, 1984).
munication, a relationship that also links com- Organizations have a major stake in promot-
munication with commitment and satisfaction ing a healthier life style for employees because
(Smith, 1991). of the potential benefits in reduced insurance
costs, decreased absenteeism, improved pro-
Organizational Commitment ductivity, and better morale (McKenna, 1987).
With stress seen to be a possible outcome of
The conceptualization of organizational com- certain modern HRM practices (Froiland,
mitment has come about in two distinct ways 1993), the ability of communication to ame-
(Legge, 1994). First, commitment has been liorate this damaging outcome, as implied by
conceptualized as an individual’s psychologi- Hilton (1992) and Lefkoe (1992), could be
cal bond to an organization (Coopey & Hartley, an important relationship.
1991); others have conceptualized commit-
ment as the binding of the individual to the Other Variables of Interest
organization by past behavior (Salanick, 1977).
A three-component measurement model of Demographics, particularly age and tenure,
commitment proposed by Meyer and Allen have been demonstrated to play a role in or-
(1991) includes three facets of commitment: ganizational communication (Zenger &
affective, continuance, and normative. This Lawrence, 1989). At the group level, Katz
model links each component of commitment (1982) found a positive relationship between
to specific work outcomes, namely: employee the tenure of the group and the level of group
retention (turnover) and on-the-job behaviors communication. Steers and Rhodes (1978)
(performance, absenteeism, and citizenship). developed a model of employee absenteeism
that suggests that job satisfaction and pres- contracts with suppliers and its customers,
sures to attend work interact to determine at- although it does not export its products.
tendance motivation. The demographic vari- The company has a wide range of team-
ables are included in this study in order to oriented procedures in place. Although not a
explore and overcome the limitations of ear- formal part of the managers’ work, teams are
lier research that has overly focused on man- very frequently used in operating, marketing,
agement practices without considering the and R&D decisions, and in planning the long-
impact of employee variables and attitudes on term strategies of the firm. Employee involve-
Although not a performance, an important inclusion given the ment is very important in the company, with
formal part of the relationship between attitudes and perfor- employees’ opinions frequently being sought
managers’ work,
mance described above. and accepted. Furthermore, the company is
teams are very
frequently used The aim of many management practices in the process of implementing total quality
in operating, or workforce management strategies is often management programs and has a few quality
marketing, and unclear as evidenced by analyses that have circles and team-based work groups success-
R&D decisions, concentrated on “involvement,” “commit- fully in operation.
and in planning
ment,” or “quality.” As argued earlier, the ob- Data were collected using self-report sur-
the long-term
strategies of the jective of the practices and techniques is to veys of all employees within the company.
firm. enhance worker and organizational perfor- Each participant was given a one-page out-
mance. The value of the management prac- line of the purpose of the survey, with assur-
tices, per se, in determining performance is ances that their responses would be kept
tested by first removing the effects of the confidential, and a pre-paid envelope in which
employee’s characteristics and other covariates to place the completed survey for return to
such as age, tenure, and absenteeism. By in- the researchers. Follow-up processes (e.g.,
cluding measures of both management prac- reminder letters) aimed at increasing the re-
tices (e.g., teamwork, participation) and sponse rate were also employed. A response
employee attitudes (e.g., commitment) our rate of almost 82% was achieved out of a total
analyses can begin to clarify the role of com- of 329 employees who were given the survey
munication in modern organizations. Commu- to complete. The survey was constructed us-
nication is inherent to the nature of all of the ing the scales and questionnaires detailed be-
management practices; therefore, the direct low. All noncategorical data was measured
impact of communication on performance is using a five-point Likert scale ranging from
assessed by examining its influence on per- (1) “strongly disagree” to (5) “strongly agree.”
formance, above and beyond its indirect rela- Questions relating to demographic data in-
tionships through other practices. These cluded age, gender, absenteeism, and length
multivariate analyses will go beyond the typi- of job tenure, were also included in the ques-
cal two or three variables of interest in this tionnaire.
field (e.g., Pettit, Goris, & Vaught, 1997) and Three scales were used to assess employ-
will thereby help us to understand and ana- ees’ perceptions of involvement. Communica-
lyze the complex relationships between these tion was measured using the eight-item
HRM factors and the role of communication. Organizational Communication Scale designed
by House and Rizzo (1972). The overall quality
Method of communications in the organization was as-
sessed by asking “Compared to other compa-
Sample and Procedures nies in Australia, this company has better
communications with employees.” Participation
The company that forms the basis of this study in decision making was defined as the extent to
is a medium- to large-sized domestically based which the participant perceives himself or her-
firm in the Australian information technology self as being involved in making operational
industry. The absenteeism rate in the company, decisions. The five-item Participation in Deci-
for the year prior to this study, was less than sion-Making Scale designed by White and Ruh
1%, with approximately 1% labor turnover. The (1973) was used. The teamwork scale was a
company has a variety of long-term contracts seven-item measure that assessed employees’
with other companies in the industry and has perceptions of teamwork. The authors developed
a teamwork questionnaire based on current re- SPSS REGRESSION and regression

search in the field. The scale is presented in subprocedures.
Appendix A. SPSS FREQUENCIES were used to
Employee affective reactions were as- evaluate assumptions.1 Table I presents the
sessed using three scales. Job satisfaction was correlations among the ten variables in the
defined as an affective evaluative response of regression. Performance was found to be sig-
individuals to their jobs and was measured nificantly correlated with teamwork (r = 0.31),
using five items from the Job Diagnostic Sur- participation (r = 0.21), job satisfaction (r =
vey (Hackman & Oldham, 1980). Organiza- 0.31), and commitment (r = 0.30). Commit-
tional commitment was defined as the strength ment and job satisfaction had the highest cor-
of an individual’s identification with and in- relation in the matrix (r = 0.69). Moderate
volvement in a particular organization. Orga- positive correlations were found among team-
nizational commitment was measured using work, communication, participation, job sat-
the 15-item Organizational Commitment isfaction, and commitment. Stress had
Questionnaire as validated by Mowday, Steers, significant negative correlations with team-
and Porter (1979). Stress was measured us- work, participation, job satisfaction, and com-
ing a seven-item scale (see Appendix A). The mitment, although these correlations were
stress scale was scored so that a high score low. Table I also shows the means and stan-
indicated low stress. dard deviations of the variables before trans-
Employee performance was measured us- formation. Stress had
ing a five-item self-rating scale (see Appendix A list-wise deletion of cases was carried significant
A). Self-report measures of performance have out, which reduced the sample size to 191 negative
correlations with
been contentious in the literature with argu- cases. Table II presents the three-step hierar- teamwork,
ments that such measures are inflated, an ar- chical regression showing the unstandardized participation, job
gument refuted by meta-analytic research coefficients (b), the standardized regression satisfaction, and
(Churchill, Ford, Hartley, & Walker, 1985). coefficients (ß), R squared, change in R commitment,
Furthermore, self-ratings may be considered squared, and the partial correlations of the although these
correlations were
more appropriate in the context of this study variables in the equation. After the first step low.
because the individual is uniquely aware of of the hierarchical regression, none of the vari-
the elements of high performance, and the ables significantly predicted individual perfor-
focus here is on the perspective of the em- mance.2
ployee (Bommer, Johnson, Rich, Podsakoff, & After step two, teamwork significantly pre-
MacKenzie, 1995). To complement these as- dicted performance at p < 0.001 while commu-
surances, the performance scale was exam- nication and participation showed a
ined in relation to its correlations with other nonsignificant trend. Overall for step 2, both
variables. R2 and R2 change were significant (see Table
II), indicating that perceptions of involvement
Results significantly predicted individual performance.3
After the final step (i.e., step 3) of the re-
A three-step hierarchical regression was used gression (R = 0.47, and R2 = 0.23),4 there was
to determine the importance of employee per- a significant change in R2 of 0.10 from step
ceptions of involvement and employee atti- two to step three (p < .001). Teamwork, com-
tudes in predicting self-rated performance. In munication, job satisfaction, commitment, and
the first step of the hierarchical regression, stress significantly predicted individual per-
the demographics variables (age, education, formance while tenure showed a nonsignifi-
and tenure) were entered. In the second step cant trend. Communication was the strongest
of the hierarchical regression, the three in- predictor of individual performance, accounting
volvement scales (teamwork, communication, for over 6% of the variance in performance; how-
and participation) were entered. In the third ever, it was loaded negatively on individual perfor-
step of the hierarchical regression the em- mance, indicating that as perceptions of
ployee attitude variables (job satisfaction, com- organizational communication quality increased,
mitment, and stress) were entered into the self-rated individual performance decreased.
equation. Analyses were performed using The pattern of simple correlations and
TABLE I Scale Reliabilities Means Standard Deviations and Correlation Matrix.
Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1. Performance 0.77
2. Age 0.04 na
3. Education -0.01 -0.02 na
4. Tenure 0.01 0.04 0.07 na
5. Teamwork 0.31*** 0.03 0.02 -0.18* (0.82)
6. Communication 0.03 0.10 -0.12 -0.14 0.40*** (0.77)
7. Participation 0.21** 0.09 -0.04 -0.29*** 0.40*** 0.35*** (0.80)
8. Job Satisfaction 0.31*** 0.02 -0.09 -0.30*** 0.47*** 0.47*** 0.49*** (0.78)
9. Commitment 0.30*** 0.09 -0.11 -0.28*** 0.46*** 0.56*** 0.53*** 0.69*** (0.91)
10. Stress 0.06 -0.11 0.08 -0.07 -0.13* -0.11 -0.18* -0.28*** -0.19** (0.91)
Mean 28.94 33.73 15.09 3.57 24.44 29.08 17.22 17.14 52.91 20.7
S.D. 3.35 7.84 3.53 2.90 7.85 5.67 4.10 4.02 10.22 3.52
Note. ***= p < .001, **= p < .01, *= p < .05
regression weights for communication with variance in communication.

performance indicates the operation of sup-
pressor variables in the analysis. Using the Discussion
methodology described by Tabachnick and
Fidell (1989), variables that exhibited congru- The results presented in this article support
ent regression coefficients and simple corre- the overall importance of employee percep-
lations were systematically removed to observe tions of teamwork and communication as part
changes in the communication variable. The of the organizational involvement construct in
only solution that was found was when team- predicting employees’ self-rated performance.
work, participation, job satisfaction, and com- A perception of teamwork was the most con-
mitment were removed from the equation, sistent and significant predictor of self-rated
indicating the presence of a group suppressor performance, being significant before and af-
effect on communication. The correlation ter employee attitudes and stress were ac-
matrix supports this finding with moderate counted for. Additionally, employee attitudes
correlations found among the involvement and such as job satisfaction and commitment, and
attitude variables (excluding stress) while all stress are crucial to achieving involvement and
the involvement and attitude variables had low employee performance both through their di-
correlations with performance except for com- rect links to performance as well as their links
munication. Tabachnick and Fidell (1989) to communication. Interestingly, on closer
recommend that suppressor variables, in this examination of the regression analysis, while
case teamwork, participation, job satisfaction, perceptions of communication were found to
and commitment, be interpreted as variables be significantly related to self-rated perfor-
that enhance the importance of communica- mance, these were a result of its relationship
tion through the suppression of the irrelevant with teamwork, participation, job satisfaction,
TABLE II Hierarchical Regression of Employee Perceptions of Involvement and Employee Attitude

Variables on Self-Rated Performance.
Partial
Variables b ß R2 R2 Change Correlation
Step 1 Age 0.019 0.041 0.04

Education 0.055 0.009 -0.01
Tenure -0.152 -0.012 .00 .00 -0.01
Step 2 Age 0.014 0.030 0.03
Education 0.127 0.021 -0.02
Tenure 0.927 0.071 0.07
Teamwork 0.219 0.322 0.29***
Communication -0.092 -0.144 -0.14†
Participation -0.705 -0.418 .13*** .13*** -0.14†
Step 3 Age 0.020 0.043 0.05
Education 0.082 0.014 -0.02
Tenure 1.636 0.125 0.13†
Teamwork 0.162 0.238 0.22**
Communication -0.183 -0.285 -0.25***
Participation -0.183 -0.038 0.04
Satisfaction -1.105 -0.219 0.17*
Commitment -0.784 -0.241 0.18*
Stress 0.151 0.155 .23*** .10*** 0.17*
Note. ***= p < .001, **= p < .01, *= p < .05, †= p < 0.10.
and commitment rather than any direct rela- it into the involvement and employee attitude
tionship to performance. It appears that percep- variables in this analysis. In general, it can be
tions of communication do not have a direct link said that employee perceptions of involvement
to organizational performance but could be acting warrant consideration when contemporary man-
on teamwork, participation, job satisfaction, and agement strategies that include teamwork, com-
commitment and thereby influencing performance munication, and participation are being used.
through the relationship that these variables have The employee involvement variables and
with self-rated performance. employee attitudes included in the regression
Despite the importance placed on em- equation, as a whole, predicted a significant
ployee participation in decision making in the amount (approximately 19% of the variance)
literature, it was not found that employee per- of the key variable, performance. Performance
ceptions of greater participation in decision is improved when perceptions of teamwork
making was a direct and significant predictor increase, stress increases, satisfaction in- A perception of
of employees’ self-rated performance after creases, and commitment increases. Unex- participation in
decision making
employee attitudes had been accounted for. A pectedly, perceptions of communication (while was found to
perception of participation in decision mak- being a significant predictor of self-rated per- have a trended
ing was found to have a trended significant formance) had a negative relationship with significant
relationship with self-rated performance be- self-rated performance. These will be exam- relationship with
fore employee attitude was accounted for. This ined in more depth below and require closer self-rated
indicates that perceptions of employee partici- performance
examination of the suppressor relationship
before employee
pation in decision making might be precur- found in the analysis. attitude was
sors of higher order determinants of employee accounted for.
attitudes, although not to the same extent as Communication
perceptions of teamwork, as found in this
analysis. However, the relationship between Counter-intuitively, the analyses found that
perceptions of communication and participa- the regression coefficient for the communi-
tion in decision making was significant, tying cation variable was negatively related to per-
formance. Higher “quality” communication nications. The employees suggested that the
included clearer, more accurate communica- organization’s communications were substan-
tions, more informed employees, and more tially poorer than the communication systems
avenues for employees to communicate with used in other companies. Perhaps the solu-
management and other employees than did tion to the interesting, negative finding be-
poor quality communication. Achieving higher tween communication and performance is a
quality communication appears to decrease comparative factor—that communication is
employees’ performance while also having a considered relative to what the employees per-
significant positive relationship with job sat- ceive to be "comparison" companies. That is,
isfaction, commitment, teamwork, and partici- the quality of the communication systems rela-
pation in decision making. tive to other organizations is critical to the
The simple correlation between percep- impact of communication and how it is per-
tions of communication and performance mis- ceived. Hence, attempts by human resource
represents the role that communication could managers to push a poor communication ap-
be playing in increasing performance. Analy- proach upon the organization may have nega-
sis of the pattern of relationships among vari- tive impacts on employee perceptions,
ables indicates that while the direct producing the opposite effect desired by man-
relationship between perceptions of commu- agement. It would be expected that employ-
nication and performance is negative (as ees perform better when they have less contact
The finding that shown in the regression), the role of commu- with the company’s relatively poor communi-
perceptions of nication is one of enhancing perceptions of cation processes.
communication teamwork, participation, employee job satis- Alternatively, the results may provide evi-
are significant
faction, and commitment as shown by its posi- dence, in an organizational context, for the
negative
predictors of tive correlations with these factors. Similarly, existence of a communication metamyth.
performance after accounting for individual-based factors Communication may indeed be inherent to
presents an in the first step of the regression, participa- many organizational processes and could pro-
intriguing tion does not predict performance directly, vide the framework that processes such as
situation given its
although the degree of perception of team- teamwork could “map onto,” as posited by
positive
relationship to a work (a factor that is strongly associated with Zimmerman, Sypher, and Haas (1996). Simi-
number of communication and participation) does di- larly, it is possible to have a negative relation-
variables, all of rectly predict performance. In the light of ship with performance if, regardless of how
which have a these findings, it appears that communication much information employees are given, they
positive is the basis for obtaining commitment and want more. For example, with higher levels of
relationship to
performance. increased job satisfaction. communication, the employees would be more
The finding that perceptions of commu- aware of the contribution they make and then
nication are significant negative predictors of may be disillusioned with their work, to the
performance presents an intriguing situation point where it is detrimental to their commit-
given its positive relationship to a number of ment and satisfaction, and in turn, their per-
variables, all of which have a positive relation- formance.
ship to performance. For example, perceptions The pattern of the findings may indicate
of communication appear to be related to the that some practices operate more effectively
view that the organization has greater team- within a system of directed autonomy, where
based work organization and perceptions of management sets the direction and goals of
more participative decision making; nonethe- involvement activities such as teamwork and
less, perceptions of more and better commu- participation, but employees are able to de-
nication could result in lower performance. velop communication processes within the
Two sets of possibly compatible explana- organizational guidelines. By structurally di-
tions may make clearer the negative relation- recting the activities of the employees through
ship between communication and the mechanism of teams, managers can in-
performance. First, the relationship between crease employee involvement and perfor-
communication and performance may be clari- mance. In this case, while perceptions of
fied by examining the related issue of the teamwork and participative decision making
overall quality of the organization’s commu- have positive impacts on self-rated perfor-
mance, the aim of managers to also control tive association between perceptions of par-
communication systems may militate against ticipation and job satisfaction, job satisfaction
a positive relationship between improved per- is significantly related to performance above
ceptions of communication and individual and beyond the influence of participation. On
performance. The structures in this organiza- a perceptual level, the direct relationship be-
tion may be incompatible with involvement tween job satisfaction and self-rated perfor-
and empowerment approaches that devolve mance extends previous research by examining
decision making and employ strong employee- the association between participation and job
generated communication systems. satisfaction in terms of their respective
Perceptions of teamwork were found to strengths of prediction of performance. The results,
be associated with a broad set of positive Our findings confirm and extend the ear- however,
changes in organizations. These benefits in- lier commitment and stress research that highlight the
positive
cluded perceptions of increased communica- found a significant relationship between indi- relationship
tion and job satisfaction (confirming Morley viduals’ commitment, well-being, and perfor- between
& Heraty, 1995). Similarly, employees who mance; and expands those findings by perceptions of
were integrated into the organization struc- proposing that the relationships can exist af- participative
turally, and committed to the organization, ter accounting for employee perceptions of decision making
and commitment
enhanced team effectiveness (Tjosvold, 1991), involvement in the organization. and job
and this was associated with effective com- satisfaction.
munication systems. These results based on Limitations
employee perceptions reflect the findings of
the relationship between teamwork and com- The findings of this study are limited by the
mitment, and teamwork and communication company-specific nature of the sample. The
that has been found in other studies. limitation that presents the best opportuni-
In an extensive review of the effect of par- ties for future research is that the current
ticipation on performance, Wagner (1994) project does not include companies that vary
concluded that participation can have a sta- in the quality of their communication systems.
tistically significant effect on both perfor- In particular, a company with relatively good
mance and satisfaction, but the average size communication systems, as perceived by the
of these effects is small enough to raise con- employees, would add further useful data to
cerns about its practical significance. This the analysis. A comparative analysis of this
study found that there was not a predictive, nature would allow clarification of the notion
independent relationship between perceptions that when employee involvement is concerned,
of participation and performance. Participa- more communication is better, without regard
tory management practices attempt to collapse for the relative quality of the systems being
the hierarchical structure of the organization put into place.
in order to involve managers and subordinates This study also used a self-report survey
in information processing, decision making, design that targeted employee perceptions and
or problem solving endeavors (Wagner, 1994). incorporated a performance scale that allowed
Perhaps in other contexts participation may employees to assess their own level of perfor-
be important for performance; however, this mance. There has been some debate about
“collapsing” mechanism or perceptions that self-rated measures of employee performance
it exists, does not appear to be necessary to as opposed to external measures of employee
achieve higher levels of employee perfor- performance. It is important to note that in
mance. The results, however, highlight the this study, employee perceptions were held as
positive relationship between perceptions of important factors in understanding the role
participative decision making and commit- of communication. In general, an alternative
ment and job satisfaction. approach that allowed migration away from a
By including potential moderators in the self-report survey method may be beneficial;
analysis, the counter-intuitive small relation- however, a number of authors have noted the
ship between job satisfaction and performance importance of employee perceptions, and it
found in much of the literature has not been would be remiss to equate a one-to-one rela-
found. Although there is a moderate and posi- tionship between the level of implementation
of involvement programs with the perceptions • Communication provides the context

of employees of these programs. Furthermore, for core HRM approaches. A good
several variables not included in these analy- communication system is the oil of the
ses, for example, organizational culture or cli- company engine.
mate, may also influence the impact of
communication systems and other involve- Conclusions
ment approaches in organizations and would
require consideration for inclusion in a Perception of communication is an important
broader analysis of communication within or- correlate of perception of teamwork, employee
ganizations. job satisfaction, and commitment. All of these
Consideration of the data analysis technique factors are important human resource manage-
used in the analysis is also warranted. Because ment concerns and are integral to the perfor-
of the nature of the data and the collection pro- mance of most organizations. We argue that
cess employed, the authors, due to a number of communication is not the crux of enhancing
statistical and practical concerns, chose mul- performance, but it is the foundation of other
tiple regression analysis. Future research, given mechanisms, such as teamwork and employee
the benefit of other methodologies and larger attitudes, that are key direct factors that enhance
samples, might employ more in-depth data ana- performance. Additionally, human resource
lytic techniques. In particular, it is important managers must be aware of the perceptual fil-
that the data analysis technique being used can ter that is used by employees to interpret the
more clearly highlight the causal relationship success or failure of involvement programs, and
of the variables being studied. it is this filter that must be recognized when
considering implementation of organizational
HR Implications change and involvement programs.
The pervasiveness of communication, es-
• HR practitioners may want to focus pecially as an inherent and vital characteris-
their attention on the quality of the tic of organizations, makes it difficult to
communication systems they put in separate out as a phenomenon for investiga-
place and maintain, rather than focus- tion. This article has directly engaged the or-
ing on more communication for ganizational milieu, as represented by
communication’s sake. More commu- employee perceptions of participation, empow-
nication initiatives do not equal bet- erment, teamwork, and employee attitudes, in
ter communication. order to clarify whether it is perceptions of
• Communication systems work as part various involvement factors (e.g., teamwork,
of the infrastructure of the organiza- participation) or employee attitudes (e.g., com-
tion and should not be an end in them- mitment, job satisfaction) that are having the
selves. The communication systems most direct influence on employees’ self-rated
support contemporary HR practices performance. The positive determinants of
such as teamwork, but it is the appro- performance were found to be perceptions of
priate use of teamwork that will en- teamwork, commitment, and job satisfaction.
The positive hance employees’ performance, not When this triumvirate is present and operat-
determinants of the communication systems per se. ing, a synergistic relationship is created, a re-
performance were • The perennials of HR, employee atti- lationship, however, that is intertwined with
found to be tudes, and the use of contemporary perceptions of the nature of communication
perceptions of
HR practices are still critical to orga- within the organization.
teamwork,
commitment, and nizational success. With the increas- The importance and inherent nature of
job satisfaction. ing emphasis on modes of com- communication reflects the need for contin-
munication within organizations, HR ued investigation of communication in orga-
practitioners must not take their eyes nizations (Pettit, et al., 1997). Communication
off achieving the basics—motivated is important for many key organizational struc-
and committed employees that bring tures and processes such as team-based work
their efforts to bear through workplace and change processes. It also provides a con-
structures are still important. duit for many aspects of organizational life to
be conducted. Accordingly, communication is come of central concern to managers and re-

a complex phenomenon that appears to be searchers. Managers need to move beyond the
linked to almost all other aspects of organiza- metamyth that more communication is bet-
tional functioning. Often, too, employee atti- ter, and focus more precisely on what forms
tude surveys suggest that “communication” is of communication can actually be more ef-
an area that needs attention. Both employees fective. The findings of this study can be
and managers suggest that if “communication” summed up by applying the metaphor of Por-
can be improved or somehow “fixed,” then ter and Roberts (1976), whereby communi-
many organizational problems can be over- cation appears to be the “water” of the
come. It is important, therefore, to analyze organizational context and moving through
carefully the complex manner in which com- that water can cause drag and reduce the
munication is associated with human resource progress of the fish. Communication, in other
variables such as involvement and employee words, can have dual influences to facilitate
attitudes. The type and delivery of communi- the ambient functioning of the organization
cation systems and processes therefore be- and yet impede individuals’ performance.
JOHN RODWELL is a lecturer in the Bowater School of Management and Marketing at

Deakin University, Australia. He is involved in several research projects including ex-
amining the factors involved in strategy formation, the effects of work practices on
employees, and the structures that enhance the outcomes of Equal Employment Op-
portunity programs. John obtained his degrees (BA (Psych), PGDipPsych) from The
University of Queensland. His research interests are in strategic management, work
practices, and organizational psychology.
RENÉ K IENZLE is a research officer in the Australian Centre in Strategic Management,

Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia. He is involved in a number
of major research projects including the measurement and management of intangible
assets and the changing employment relations in the telecommunications sector in
Australia. René obtained his degrees (BSc (Psych) PGDipPsych) from the University of
Queensland.
MARK A. SHADUR is principal research fellow in the Australian Centre in Strategic Man-
agement, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia. He is leader of
several major research projects including the impact of strategy and structure in Aus-
tralian industry, and changing employment relations in the information technology and
telecommunications sector in Australia and Asia. Mark obtained his Ph.D. from the
Australian National University and has previously lectured in the Graduate School of
Management, The University of Queensland and the Department of Business Studies,
University of Zimbabwe. He has researched and published articles and books on HRM,
Japanese management, organizational design, quality, and strategic management.
Appendix A
Teamwork
1. I really feel that I belong to a team
2. I look forward to being with the members of my work group each day
3. There is a lot of support and encouragement within my work group
4. It is very difficult to settle problems in my work group (R)
5. The people I work with cooperate to get the job done
6. Group members keep their thoughts to themselves, rather than risk speaking out (R)
7. I often work in groups as part of my job
Well-Being/Stress Scale
1. I have enough time to do my job properly
2. There is too much stress in my job (R)
3. Most people in this job feel overwhelmed by the work (R)
4. Recently I have felt constantly under strain at work (R)
5. My job demands too much of me (R)
6. My job involves too much stress (R)
7. I think my workload is excessive (R)
Performance
1. I am currently working at my best performance level
2. It is my right to use all my sick leave allowance (R)
3. Employees should only do enough to get by (R)
4. I try to be at work as often as I can
5. I am one of the best at the work I do
6. I am one of the slowest at the work I do (R)
7. I set very high standards for my work
8. My work is always of high quality
9. I am proud of my work performance
REFERENCES
Abegglen, J.C., & Stalk, G. (1985). Kaisha: The Japa- tion and organizational commitment. Interna-
nese corporation. New York: Basic Books. tional Review of Industrial and Organizational
Allen, R.E., Lucero, M.A., & Van Norman, K. L. Psychology, 157-188.
(1997). An examination of the individual’s deci- Hackett, R., Bycio, P., & Hausdorf, P. (1991). Fur-
sion to participate in an employee involvement ther assessment of a three component model of
program. Group and Organization Management, organizational commitment. Proceedings of the
22(1), 117-143. Academy of Management, 212-216.
Beehr, T.A., & Newman, J.E. (1978). Job stress, em- Hackman, J.R. & Oldham, G.P. (1980). Work design.
ployee health, and organizational effectiveness: Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
A facet analysis, model, and literature review. Hare, A.P. (1976). Handbook of small group research.
Personnel Psychology, 31(4), 665-699. (2nd ed.) New York: Free Press.
Bommer, W.H., Johnson, J.L., Rich, G.A., Podsakoff, Heller, F., Drenth, P., Koopman, P., & Rus, V. (1988).
P.M., & MacKenzie, S.B. (1995). On the inter- Decisions in organisations: A three country com-
changeability of objective and subjective mea- parative study. London: Sage.
sures of employee performance: A meta-analysis. Hilton, P. (1992). Over-motivated workers a conse-
Personnel Psychology, 48, 587-605. quence of new management techniques. Person-
Boshoff, C. & Mels, G. (1995). A causal model to nel Management, 24, 12.
evaluate the relationship among supervision, role House, R.J., & Rizzo, J.R. (1972). Toward the mea-
stress, organizational commitment and internal surement of organizational practices: Scale de-
service quality. European Journal of Marketing, velopment and validation. Journal of Applied
29, 23-42. Psychology, 56, 388-396.
Bush, J.B., & Frohman, A.L. (1991). Communication Iaffaldano, M.T., & Muchinsky, P.M. (1985). Job sat-
in a “network” organization. Organizational Dy- isfaction and job performance: A meta-analysis.
namics, 20, 23-35. Psychological Bulletin, 97, 251-273.
Churchill, G.A., Ford, N.M., Hartley, S.W., Walker, Isabella, L.A., & Waddock, S.A. (1994). Top manage-
& O.C. (1985). The determinants of salesperson ment team certainty: environmental assessments,
performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Market- teamwork, and performance implications. Jour-
ing Research, 22, 103-118 nal of Management, 20(4), 835-859.
Coopey, J., & Hartley, J. (1991). Reconsidering the Katz, R. (1982). The effects of group longevity on
Case for Organizational Commitment. Human project communication and performance. Admin-
Resource Management Journal, 1(3), 18-32. istrative Science Quarterly, 27, 81-104.
Cotton, J.L. (1996). Employee Involvement, In C.L. Katzenbach, J.R., & Smith, D.K. (1993). The disci-
Cooper & I.T. Robertson. (Eds), International pline of teams. Harvard Business Review, 71, 111-
review of industrial and organizational psychol- 120.
ogy (vol. 11), New York: John Wiley & Sons. King, W., Lahiff, J., & Hatfield, J. (1988). A discrep-
Cotton, J.L., Volrath, D.A., Droggatt, K.L., Lengnick- ancy theory of the relationship between commu-
Hall, M.L., & Jennings, K.R. (1988). Employee nication and job satisfaction. Communication
participation: Diverse forms and different out- Research Reports, 5, 36-43.
comes. Academy of Management Review, 13, 8-22. Kohler, S.S., & Mathieu, J.E. (1993). Individual char-
Coye, R.W. & Belohlav, J.A. (1995). An exploratory acteristics, work perceptions, and affective reac-
analysis of employee participation. Group and Or- tions influences on differentiated absence
ganization Management, 20(1), 4-17. criteria. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 14,
Deming, W.E. (1986). Out of the Crisis. Cambridge, 515-530.
MA: MIT Centre for Advanced Engineering Krafcik, J.F. (1988). Triumph of the lean production
Study. system. Sloan Management Review, Fall, 41-52.
Dertouzos, M.L., Lester, R.K. & Solow, R.M. (1989). Landy, F.J. (1989). Psychology of work behavior. Pa-
Made in America, regaining the productive edge. cific Grove CA: Brooks Cole.
New York: Harper Perennial. Lawler, E.E. (1989). With HR help, all managers can
Erez, M., Earley, P.C., & Hulin, C.L. (1985). The practice high-involvement management. Person-
impact of participation on goal acceptance and nel, April, 26-31.
performance: A two-step model. Academy of Man- Lefkoe, M. (1992). Unhealthy business. Across the
agement Journal, 28, 50-66. Board, 29, 26-31.
Ford, R.C., & Fottler, M.D. (1995). Empowerment: Legge, K. (1994). Managing culture: Fact or fiction.
A matter of degree. Academy of Management In K. Sisson (Ed.), Personnel management: A com-
Executive, 9, 21-29. prehensive guide to theory and practice in Britain
Froiland, P. (1993). What cures job stress? Training, (2d ed.). Cornwall, England: Blackwell.
30, 32-36. McKenna, E.F. (1987). Psychology in business: Theory
Griffin, R.W., & Bateman, T.S. (1986). Job satisfac- and applications. London: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Meyer, J.P., Paunonen, S.V., Gellalty, I.R., Goffin, ferences from the Australian automotive sector.
R.D., & Jackson, D.N. (1989). Organizational International Journal of Human Resource Man-
commitment and job performance: It’s the na- agement, 5, 613-636.
ture of commitment that counts. Journal of Ap- Smith, A.L. (1991). Innovative employee communica-
plied Psychology, 74, 152-156. tion. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Meyer, J., & Allen, N. (1991). A three component Smith, M.J. (1990). Occupational stress. In G.
conceptualization of organizational commitment. Salvendy (Ed.), Handbook of human factors (pp.
Human Resource Management Review, 1, 64-98. 844-860). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Miller, A. (1988). Stress on the job. Newsweek, April Somers, M.J. (1995). Organizational commitment,
25, 40-45. turnover and absenteeism: An examination of di-
Morley, M., & Heraty, N. (1995). The high perfor- rect and interaction effects. Journal of Organiza-
mance organization: Developing teamwork where tional Behavior, 16, 49-58.
it counts. Management Decision, 33(2), 56-64. Steers, R.M., & Rhodes, S.R. (1978). Major influ-
Mowday, R.T., Steers, R.M., & Porter, L.W. (1979). ences on employee attendance: A process model.
The measurement of organizational commitment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63, 391-407.
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14, 224-247. Tabachnick, B.G., & Fidell, L.S. (1989). Using mul-
Parasuraman, S., & Alluto, J.A. (1984). Sources and tivariate statistics (2d ed.) New York: Harper
outcomes of stress in organizational settings. Collins.
Academy of Management Journal, 27, 330-350. Tjosvold, D. (1991). Team organization: An enduring
Parker, M., & Slaughter, J. (1988). Management by competitive advantage. Toronto: John Wiley & Sons.
stress. Technology Review, 37-44. Varona, F. (1996). Relationship between communi-
Pettit, J.D., Goris, J.R., & Vaught, B.C. (1997). An cation satisfaction and organizational commit-
examination of organizational communication as ment in three Guatemalan organizations. Journal
a moderator of the relationship between job per- of Business Communication, 33(2), 111-140.
formance and job satisfaction. Journal of Busi- Wall, T.D., Jackson, P.R., & Davids, K. (1992). Op-
ness Communication, 34. erator work design and robotics system perfor-
Petty, M.M., McGee, G.W., & Cavender, J.W. (1984). mance: A serendipitous field study. Journal of
A meta analysis of the relationship between in- Applied Psychology, 77, 353-362.
dividual job satisfaction and individual perfor- Wagner, J.A. III, (1994). Participation’s effects on
mance. Academy of Management Review, 2, performance and satisfaction: A reconsideration
712-721. of research evidence Academy of Management
Pincus, D. (1986). Communication satisfaction, job Review, 19(2), 312-330.
satisfaction, and job performance. Human Com- Wheeless, V., Wheeless, L., & Howard, R. (1983). An
munication Research, 12, 395-419. analysis of the contribution of participative deci-
Porter, L.W., & Roberts, K.H. (1976). Communica- sion making and communication with supervi-
tion in organizations. In M.D. Dunnette (Ed.), sor as predictors of job satisfaction. Research in
Handbook of industrial and organizational psy- Higher Education, 18, 145-160.
chology (pp. 1553-1589). Chicago: Rand White, J.K., & Ruh, R.A. (1973). Effects of personal
McNally. values on the relationship between participation
Putti, J.M., Aryee, S., & Phua, J. (1990). Communi- and job attitudes. Administrative Science Quar-
cation relationship satisfaction and organizational terly, 18, 506-514.
commitment. Group and Organization Studies, Womack, J.P., Jones, D.T., & Roos, D. (1990). The
15(1), 44-52. machine that changed the world. New York: Max-
Salanick, G.R. (1977). Commitment and control of well MacMillan.
organizational behavior and belief. In B.M. Staw Yankelovich, D. (1983). Yankelovich on today’s work-
& G.R. Salanick (Eds). New directions in organi- ers. In B.M. Straw (Ed.), Psychological founda-
zational behavior (pp. 1-54). Chicago: St. Clair tions of organizational behavior (pp. 23-20).
Press. Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman.
Scully, J.A., Kirkpatrick, S.A., & Locke E.A. (1995). Zenger, T.R., & Lawrence, B.S. (1989). Organizational
Locus of knowledge as a determinant of the ef- demography: The differential effects of age and
fects of participation on performance, affect and tenure distributions on technical communication.
perceptions, Organizational Behavior & Human Academy of Management Journal, 32, 353-376.
Decision Processes, 61(3), 276-289. Zimmerman, S., Sypher, B.D., & Haas, J.W. (1996).
Shadur, M.A., Rodwell, J.J., Simmons, D.E., & A communication metamyth in the workplace:
Bamber, G.J. (1994). International best practice, The assumption that more is better. Journal of
quality management and high performance: In- Business Communication, 33, 185-204.
ENDNOTES
1. Results of the evaluation of assumptions led to a logarithmic transformation of tenure and square root
transformation of teamwork, participation, job satisfaction, and commitment. The transformations suc-
cessfully resolved excessive skew in these variables. Two cases were deleted from the sample due to ex-
treme values on the age variable. With the use of Cook's distance, no other significant outliers were
identified.
2. R2 = 0.002, F(3,187) = 0.116, p > .05.
3. R2 = 0.13, F(6,184) = 4.479, p < .001; R2Change = 0.13, F(3,184) = 8.826, p < .001.
4. R2adj = 0.19, F(9,181) = 5.79, p < .001.

The Relationships Among Work-Related Percep-Tions, Employee Attitudes, and Employee Perfor - Mance: The Integral Role of Communication

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Relationships Among Work-Related Percep-Tions, Employee Attitudes, and Employee Perfor - Mance: The Integral Role of Communication

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1099050x, 1998, 3-4, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/(SICI)1099-050X(199823/24)37:3/4<277::AID-HRM9>3.0.CO;2-E by Edinburgh Napier University, Wiley Online Library on [17/02/2023].

THE RELATIONSHIPS AMONG WORK-RELATED PERCEP-

John J. Rodwell, René Kienzle, and Mark A. Shadur

Introduction 1996). The focus of this article is to explore from

information throughout the organization. ing, or problem solving endeavors (Wagner,

a teamwork questionnaire based on current re- SPSS REGRESSION and regression

TABLE I Scale Reliabilities Means Standard Deviations and Correlation Matrix.

3. Education -0.01 -0.02 na

4. Tenure 0.01 0.04 0.07 na

5. Teamwork 0.31*** 0.03 0.02 -0.18* (0.82)

6. Communication 0.03 0.10 -0.12 -0.14 0.40*** (0.77)

7. Participation 0.21 0.09 -0.04 -0.29* 0.40* 0.35* (0.80)

Note. = p < .001, = p < .01, = p < .05

regression weights for communication with variance in communication.

TABLE II Hierarchical Regression of Employee Perceptions of Involvement and Employee Attitude

Step 1 Age 0.019 0.041 0.04

of involvement programs with the perceptions • Communication provides the context

be conducted. Accordingly, communication is come of central concern to managers and re-

JOHN RODWELL is a lecturer in the Bowater School of Management and Marketing at

RENÉ K IENZLE is a research officer in the Australian Centre in Strategic Management,

You might also like