Cargando…

Qualitative differences in the mindsets associated with dual nature of normative commitment

This study aims to o uncover how employees’ normative commitment (sense of obligation) to their organization is experienced in terms of dual normative commitment (moral imperative or indebted obligation) and to describe the potential for different mindsets arising through the dynamic combination of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Oh, Hyun Sung, Sawang, Sukanlaya
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8211279/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34138854
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0251193
_version_ 1783709450778968064
author Oh, Hyun Sung
Sawang, Sukanlaya
author_facet Oh, Hyun Sung
Sawang, Sukanlaya
author_sort Oh, Hyun Sung
collection PubMed
description This study aims to o uncover how employees’ normative commitment (sense of obligation) to their organization is experienced in terms of dual normative commitment (moral imperative or indebted obligation) and to describe the potential for different mindsets arising through the dynamic combination of the various components in the commitment profile. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 16 participants. The interviews were designed to identify the respondents’ perceptions of obligation to their organisation, and their underlying motivational mindset associating with dual nature of normative commitment The interview findings for the affective-normative commitment dominant and the continuance commitment dominant participants were consistent with normative commitment experienced as either moral imperative or an indebted obligation, depending on the relative levels of affective and continuance commitment. All participants irrespective of their commitment profile noted that they had commitment to multiple foci, however, the alignment between commitment to these various foci differed by commitment profile. The qualitative differences among the commitment profiles indicated that the interaction of the commitment components is more complex than current commitment profile propositions suggest and that further theory development beyond the mindsets associated with continuance commitment and affective-normative commitment dominant profiles is required.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8211279
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82112792021-06-29 Qualitative differences in the mindsets associated with dual nature of normative commitment Oh, Hyun Sung Sawang, Sukanlaya PLoS One Research Article This study aims to o uncover how employees’ normative commitment (sense of obligation) to their organization is experienced in terms of dual normative commitment (moral imperative or indebted obligation) and to describe the potential for different mindsets arising through the dynamic combination of the various components in the commitment profile. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 16 participants. The interviews were designed to identify the respondents’ perceptions of obligation to their organisation, and their underlying motivational mindset associating with dual nature of normative commitment The interview findings for the affective-normative commitment dominant and the continuance commitment dominant participants were consistent with normative commitment experienced as either moral imperative or an indebted obligation, depending on the relative levels of affective and continuance commitment. All participants irrespective of their commitment profile noted that they had commitment to multiple foci, however, the alignment between commitment to these various foci differed by commitment profile. The qualitative differences among the commitment profiles indicated that the interaction of the commitment components is more complex than current commitment profile propositions suggest and that further theory development beyond the mindsets associated with continuance commitment and affective-normative commitment dominant profiles is required. Public Library of Science 2021-06-17 /pmc/articles/PMC8211279/ /pubmed/34138854 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0251193 Text en © 2021 Oh, Sawang https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Oh, Hyun Sung
Sawang, Sukanlaya
Qualitative differences in the mindsets associated with dual nature of normative commitment
title Qualitative differences in the mindsets associated with dual nature of normative commitment
title_full Qualitative differences in the mindsets associated with dual nature of normative commitment
title_fullStr Qualitative differences in the mindsets associated with dual nature of normative commitment
title_full_unstemmed Qualitative differences in the mindsets associated with dual nature of normative commitment
title_short Qualitative differences in the mindsets associated with dual nature of normative commitment
title_sort qualitative differences in the mindsets associated with dual nature of normative commitment
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8211279/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34138854
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0251193
work_keys_str_mv AT ohhyunsung qualitativedifferencesinthemindsetsassociatedwithdualnatureofnormativecommitment
AT sawangsukanlaya qualitativedifferencesinthemindsetsassociatedwithdualnatureofnormativecommitment