Abstract
It is well established that employee commitment can take different forms (e.g., affective, normative, and continuance), yet it is only recently that theory has been advanced to explain how these different forms combine to influence behavior (Meyer & Herscovitch, 2001). We tested this theory with data from employees in three human services organizations (N = 403). Using latent profile analyses, we identified six distinct profile groups and found that they differed on measures of need satisfaction, regulation, affect, engagement, organizational citizenship behavior, and well-being. The observed differences are consistent with the notion that a commitment profile provides a context that determines how the individual components are experienced (Gellatly, Meyer, & Luchak, 2006). We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of this context effect.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
