530047 research-article2014

WJNXXX10.1177/0193945914530047Western Journal of Nursing ResearchChang

Research Report

Moderating Effects of Nurses’ Organizational Support on the Relationship Between Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment

Western Journal of Nursing Research 2015, Vol. 37(6) 724­–745 © The Author(s) 2014 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0193945914530047 wjn.sagepub.com

Ching-Sheng Chang1

Abstract The aim was to investigate whether job satisfaction enhances organizational commitment among nursing personnel while exploring whether organizational support perception has a moderating effect on the relationship between their job satisfaction and organizational commitment. A crosssectional survey was sent to 400 nurses; 386 valid questionnaires were collected, with a valid response rate of 96.5%. According to the research findings, nurses’ job satisfaction has a positive and significant influence on organizational commitment. Results also indicated that the moderating effect of nurses’ organizational support perception on the relationship between their job satisfaction and organizational commitment was stronger for high organizational support perception than it was for low organizational support perception. This study suggests that organizational support perception will develop a sense of belonging, and this will help improve nurses’ job satisfaction and organizational commitment. This kind of relationship is

1Republic

of China Naval Academy, Kaohsiung, Taiwan

Corresponding Author: Ching-Sheng Chang, Republic of China Naval Academy, 19F, No. 25, Fu-Kuo Road, Kaohsiung 81357, Taiwan. Email: [email protected]

Chang

725

rarely discussed in the research literature, and it can be applied for human resources management of nursing staff. Keywords organizational support, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, moderating effect, nursing staff

It is important and urgent for hospitals to retain excellent nursing staff to improve patient satisfaction and hospital performance. Based on some scholarly research, salary is not the best way to retain excellent nursing staff. Miller (2008) conducted a research on the effect of policies on the market of nursing human resources, and found that simply increasing the salary is not a good method to resolve the problem of lacking nursing staff; it is necessary to focus on the impact of non-monetary factors (C. S. Chang & Chang, 2010a; Chang, Chen, & Lan, 2011). Seashore and Taber (1975) held that job satisfaction can act as an indicator providing organizations with early warnings and an important reference basis during decision making or planning within organizational management. Organizations can use job satisfaction to discover improper allocation phenomena and deficiencies in strategy or planning early. This helps them perform the appropriate remedies. Job satisfaction is also an important reference basis when organizations develop strategies. In particular, Wernimont (1972) indicated that when workers feel satisfied in their jobs, they cooperate with their organizations voluntarily to achieve organizational goals, increase their loyalty toward organizational managers, perform with good discipline, are willing to suffer through hard times with their organizations, are unlikely to leave their positions, show increasing interest in their work, put spontaneous effort into their jobs, and become proud members of their organizations. Perceived organizational support is the perceptions of workers’ behavior as developed in social exchange theory. Perceived organizational support has been defined as workers’ perceptions of the motivating force behind organizational welfare (Eisenberger, Cummings, Armeli, & Lynch, 1997). Studies have defined perceived organizational support as whether individuals’ values and contributions to their organizations have been valued (Eisenberger, Fasolo, & Davis-LaMastro, 1990). Social exchange theory indicates that workers display positive job attitudes and behaviors when they perceive organizational support because of reciprocity mechanisms (Blau, 1964; Gouldner, 1960; Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002). Perceptions of organizational support are beneficial to improving comprehensive job

726

Western Journal of Nursing Research 37(6)

satisfaction. Because perceptions of organizational support can satisfy socio-emotional needs, increase performance-reward expectations, and facilitate the acquisition of signals for assistance when required by workers, they increase workers’ job satisfaction. Perceived organizational support is whether workers are treated using methods they prefer when managers or decision makers within an organization perform organizational favors (Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002). Perceived organizational support is the overall faith of workers. This faith involves workers’ perceptions of organizational contributions and whether their organizations are concerned for their welfare. Job performance and satisfaction increases as this faith strengthens (Farh, Hackett, & Liang, 2007), thereby improving workers’ commitment and loyalty to their organizations. Organizational commitment is a major contributor to employees’ organizational behavior. It is especially closely associated with employees’ attendance, resignation, and performance. This shows the importance of organizational commitment. Holistic management systems and policy implementation are required to establish organizational commitment in workers. Dessler (2000) suggested that organizational values and philosophy be stated clearly in the beginning. Organizations should employ appropriate managers to interact and communicate with employees to clarify the mission objectives of their organizations. They should guarantee organizational fairness and generally adopt teamwork methods. They should establish a sense of community within their organizations. Finally, they should challenge and empower their workers and support their development. Only continuous effort over time can improve organizational commitment, creating win–win situations for organizations and their employees. The delicate relationship between perceived organizational support, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment requires investigation and clarification from more studies if application in nursing practice is to be expected. However, the lack of existing literature on the correlation between organizational support, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment has created a research gap in previous evidence-based practice studies on nursing personnel. The purpose of this study is to investigate whether job satisfaction enhances organizational commitment among nursing personnel while exploring whether organizational support perception has a moderating effect on the relationship between nursing personnel’s job satisfaction and organizational commitment to bridge such a gap in the existing literature on nursing personnel.

Relationship Between Organizational Support, Job Satisfaction, and Organizational Commitment The concept of job satisfaction originated in the Hawthorne experiments. These research results indicated that workers’ emotions influence their work

Chang

727

behavior. Workers’ social and psychological factors are the main sources of influence on job satisfaction and productivity (Robbins & Judge, 2007). Since Hoppock (1935) presented the construct of job satisfaction, a considerable number of studies have examined job satisfaction. Porter (1962) held that job satisfaction is workers’ perceived emotional reactions generated by the gap between what workers actually obtain from their jobs and the working environment and what they feel that they deserve. Job satisfaction includes internal satisfaction (such as sense of accomplishment, self-esteem, autonomy, feedback, and control) and external satisfaction (such as affirmation and praise from supervisors, harmonious relationships among coworkers, good working environments, welfare, high pay, and promotions). Locke (1976) defined job satisfaction as the individual’s measurement of job achievement and value. Churchill, Ford, and Walker (1974) described job satisfaction as the degree to which workers are satisfied with the characteristics and environments of their jobs. The theoretical foundation of organizational commitment can be divided into two concepts: the psychological perspective and the exchange perspective. The psychological perspective was inspired by need-satisfaction theory (Maslow, 1954) and two-factor theory (Herzberg, Mausner, & Snyderman, 1959). It examines organizational commitment from the perspective of motivation and self-realization. The psychological perspective is also called the normative, moral, or attitudinal perspective. The exchange perspective originates in social exchange theory (Homans, 1958) and equity theory (Adams, 1965). This perspective uses utilitarian ideas of compensation and costs to investigate organizational commitment. This school of thought holds that organizational members compare their contributions with the organization and their compensation from the organization. If they feel that the balance is in their favor, organizational commitment increases. If not, it decreases. This perspective is also called the instrumental, calculative, or behavioral perspective. Porter, Steer, Mowday, and Boulian (1974) stated that organizational commitment is the individual’s overall response to the organization as a whole and that job satisfaction is the individual’s reaction to specific working environments. Thus, job satisfaction is easier to generate and change than organizational commitment is. Based on the instability and frequent variability of job satisfaction, it should be viewed as an antecedent of organizational commitment, not a consequence. The most widely accepted viewpoint is the argument that job satisfaction influences employees’ commitment to an organization (Clive & Richard, 1996; Mowday, Porter, & Steers, 1982; Trimble, 2006). As pointed out by the scholars who agree with this argument, the concept of job satisfaction tends to be created from a micro viewpoint, while organizational commitment

728

Western Journal of Nursing Research 37(6)

inclines to a macro viewpoint (Ingersoll, Olsan, Drew-Cates, DeVinney, & Davies, 2002; Munevver, 2006). Thus, job satisfaction is just a determinant of organizational commitment (Cun, 2012; Ho, Chang, Shih, & Liang, 2009; Parlalis, 2011). Best and Thurston (2004), Lambert and Hogan (2001), and Tourangeau and Cranley (2006) showed that employees with high job satisfaction are willing to accept hardships and to cooperate in overcoming predicaments when difficulties occur in an organization (Ahmad & Oranye, 2010; Buitendach & De Witte, 2005; Han & Jekel, 2011). According to Ahmad and Oranye (2010), employees with high job satisfaction are most likely to recognize organizational values and goals, to remain with the organization, and to dedicate effort to achieving organizational objectives (Fisk & Friesen, 2012). Accordingly, an organization which effectively enhances the job satisfaction of employees can enhance the organizational commitment and retain outstanding employees. The above concepts suggest that perceived job satisfaction positively influences the organizational commitment of nurses. Thus, we can infer that nurses’ job satisfaction perceptions are associated with increased organizational commitment. Allen, Shore, and Griffeth (2003) discussed the effect of perceived organizational support and human resource policies on intention to quit by sampling 402 subjects and found via regression analysis that perceived organizational support has a significant positive impact on job satisfaction. The analysis on social effect of perceived organizational support by Zagenczyk, Gibney, Few, and Scott (2011) suggested that many researchers believe that when employees have exceptional performance and expect compensation, the high level of perceived organizational support makes employees feel job satisfaction. This view has been supported as employees who experience high levels of perceived organizational support perceive that organization will provide rewards for their hard work. Many research studies also support the abovementioned view and provide strong support (Eisenberger et al., 1997; Masterson, Lewis, Goldman, & Taylor, 2000). Therefore, perceived organizational support is of situational personality trait and is also one of the prerequisite factors for job satisfaction that affects job satisfaction. Several studies support the positive effect of perceived organizational support on job satisfaction (Allen et al., 2003; Eisenberger et al., 1997; Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2006). Eisenberger et al. (1990) suggested that organizational commitment is a deciding factor in mutual relationships. They believe that the basis of perceived organizational support is organizational commitment and loyalty (Eisenberger, Stinglhamber, Vandenberghe, Sucharski, & Rhoades, 2002). From research that proves the positive impact of perceived organizational

Chang

729

support and organizational commitment, to obtain work commitment from employees, the organization itself must express its way of commitment to the employees (Karatepe & Kilic, 2007). Eisenberger et al. (1990) proposed that this commitment relationship is based on the social exchange model. Furthermore, Tansky and Cohen (2001) pointed out that an organization can internally provide opportunities for continuing development, upgrading employee skills and capability, and individual professional development (De Vos, Dewettinck, & Buyens, 2009). Thus, the organization can expect a positive attitude in return from employees or more specifically, the employees’ commitment to contributing to the organization (Wegge, Dick, Fisher, Wecking, & Moltzen, 2006). This also proves that perceived organizational support is considered an important construct by the organization, as it affects attitude factors (emotional organizational commitment; Robbins & Judge, 2007). Robbins and Judge (2007) also believed that perceived organizational support not only directly leads to work behaviors directly beneficial to the organization but also exerts a positive impact on organizational commitment (Eisenberger, Armeli, Rexwinkel, Lynch, & Rhoades, 2001; Hutchison & Garstka, 1996). Hence, we can conclude that higher levels of nurses’ organizational support perception will lead to more job satisfaction and better organizational commitment among nurses.

Theoretical Framework The above concepts for evidence-based practice studies suggest the following hypotheses: Hypothesis 1: Nurses’ job satisfaction positively influences their organizational commitment. Hypothesis 2: Nurses’ organizational support perception has a positive moderating effect on the relationship between their job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Therefore, in this study, job satisfaction serves as an independent variable, organizational commitment as the dependent variable, and organizational support perception as the moderating variable (see Figure 1).

Method Sample We adopted a cross-sectional design using a questionnaire survey. To survey a diverse and representative sample of registered nurses (RNs), nursing staff

730

Western Journal of Nursing Research 37(6)

0RGHUDWLQJ9DULDEOH 2UJDQL]DWLRQDOVXSSRUW +RVSLWDOVXSSRUW 6XSHUYLVRU\VXSSRUW ,QGHSHQGHQW9DULDEOH

+\SRWKHVLV 

-REVDWLVIDFWLRQ

2UJDQL]DWLRQDOFRPPLWPHQW

:RUNLQJVDWLVIDFWLRQ ,QWHUSHUVRQDOVDWLVIDFWLRQ 5HPXQHUDWLYHVDWLVIDFWLRQ

'HSHQGHQW9DULDEOH

$IIHFWLYHFRPPLWPHQW

+\SRWKHVLV 

&RQWLQXDOFRPPLWPHQW 1RUPDWLYHFRPPLWPHQW

Figure 1.  Theoretical framework of the relationship among organizational support perception, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment.

members of one large hospital (a teaching hospital and medical center, and had more than 1,200 beds) in Taiwan were surveyed.

Instruments The following was the explanation of the questionnaire. First, constructs of questionnaire forms were obtained from the literature and used to compile questionnaires. Second, the constructs were slightly modified to create initial questionnaires based on the research purposes and industry features. Third, tests were repeatedly administered to three professors, four medical experts, and seven nurses with long-term clinical experience before a pre-test was performed. Fourth, a pilot run of the questionnaire was administered to 38 voluntary nurses in the medical centers. A total of 35 valid questionnaire forms (more than 30, that is, a large sample size) were gathered, and the results indicated that the reliability was .77 to .91 and the scale content validity index (CVI) was 0.86 to 1.00 (under seven judges of three professors and four medical experts), meeting the acceptable standard of 0.70 recommended by Nunnally (1978) and 0.78 by Lynn (1986). Finally, the questionnaire was officially released. Organizational support. Based on different industry characteristics and the goals of this study, we referenced Eisenberger, Huntington, Hutchison, and Sowa (1986) and Liu and Ding (2012) to revise and form the variables and questionnaire items in this study. The sample data collected in this study formed the two variables (hospital support and supervisory support), each of which had three questions (see Table 1). Cronbach’s alpha values were .903 and .883. The explained variances after rotation were 42.168% and 32.095%.

731

Hospital support—The degree to which the hospital employees think that the hospital care about them and their well-being.   1. My hospital cares about personal welfare and needs.   2. My hospital provides assistance on personal career development.   3. My hospital provides sufficient educational and training. Supervisory support—The degree to which the hospital employees think that the hospital’s management cares about them and their well-being.   4. My direct supervisor is willing to take responsibilities for his or her subordinates.   5. My direct supervisor allows each individual to exert his or her expertise.   6. My direct supervisor cares about personal welfare and rights.

Variable (Factor Name)/Question Item/ Operational Definition

0.17 0.28 0.31

0.34 0.42 0.33

0.85a 0.83a

0.81a 0.76a 0.82a

Job satisfaction

Working satisfaction—The degree to which the hospital employees are satisfied with their jobs.   1.  I enjoy working at the hospital.   2. My capabilities allow me to do the current job well at the hospital.   3. The current job at the hospital gives me the opportunity to work on the job individually.

Measurement Error

0.91a

Standardized Loading

0.13 0.31 0.26

0.93a 0.83a 0.86a

Goodness of fit: χ2/df = 3.01, GFI = .91, AGFI = .86, NFI = .90, RMSR = .07

Organizational support

Construct

.94

.82

.87

Composite Reliability (>.6)

Table 1.  Factor Naming and Results of Reliability Analysis and Convergent Validity Analysis.

.883

.903

Cronbach’s α References Allen, Shore, and Griffeth (2003); Parlalis (2011)

0.78

.891

(continued)

Ladebo (2008); Bateman and Organ (1983)

Bagozzi and Yi (1988); Bentler and Bonnett (1980); Browne and Cudeck (1993)

0.75

0.80

AVE (>0.5)

732

  4. The job at the hospital allows me to exercise my expertise.   5.  Overall speaking, I enjoy my job. Interpersonal satisfaction—The degree to which the hospital employees are satisfied with their interpersonal relationships.   6. My coworkers at the hospital help one another.   7. My coworkers at the hospital get along well.   8. My coworkers at the hospital have good communication.   9. My coworkers care about my opinions and feelings. 10. Overall speaking, I like my coworkers at the hospital. Remunerative satisfaction—The degree to which the hospital employees are satisfied with their actual compensation. 11.  I am satisfied with my job promotion. 12.  I am satisfied with my compensation. 13.  I am satisfied with the benefits. 14. Overall speaking, I like the welfare at the hospital. 15. At the hospital, everyone has the equal opportunity for promotion.

0.17 0.33

0.37 0.32 0.27 0.18 0.36

0.38 0.29 0.25 0.25 0.39

0.91a 0.82a

0.79a 0.82a 0.86a 0.91a 0.80a

0.79a 0.84a 0.87a 0.87a 0.78a

Goodness of fit: χ2/df = 3.01, GFI = .91, AGFI = .86, NFI = .90, RMSR = .07

Table 1.  (continued)

.85

.87

0.74

0.75

.850

.872

(continued)

Bagozzi and Yi (1988); Bentler and Bonnett (1980); Browne and Cudeck (1993)

733

Affective commitment—The degree that the nursing staff keep working at the hospital because they want to do so.   1. I am glad that I am able to devote my future career life to this hospital.   2. I am happy to talk about my hospital with those who are not related to the hospital.   3. I am emotionally attached and belonged to this hospital.   4. I strongly feel that I am part of the hospital. Continual commitment—The degree that the nursing staff keep working at the hospital because they have to do so.   5. It would be a great loss for me to quit from this hospital.   6. I have the desire to keep working at this hospital at this moment.   7. I think that there will be less job options for me if I leave this hospital.   8. The main reason for me to stay at this hospital is that other companies won’t necessarily provide me with better compensation and benefits. Normative commitment—The degree that the nursing staff keep working at the hospital because they are obliged to do so.   9. I think it is unethical to change jobs constantly. 10. The main reasons for me to keep working at this hospital are being loyal and ethical. 11. I was taught to be loyal to the hospital I serve. 12. I think that staying at the same hospital will have better career development. 0.56 0.49 0.34 0.51

0.33 0.29 0.56 0.49

0.64 0.48 0.63 0.34

0.66a 0.71a 0.81a 0.70a

0.82a 0.84a 0.55a 0.71a

0.60a 0.72a 0.61a 0.81a

.77

.81

.79

.827

.931

.873

Mirza and Redzuan (2012); Moorman, Niehoff, and Organ (1993)

Bagozzi and Yi (1988); Bentler and Bonnett (1980); Browne and Cudeck (1993)

0.75

0.78

0.79

Bagozzi and Yi (1988); Bentler and Bonnett (1980); Browne and Cudeck (1993)

Note. AVE = average variance extracted; χ2/df = ratio of chi-square; GFI = goodness-of-fit index; AGFI = adjusted GFI; NFI = normed fit index; RMSR = root mean square of standardized residual. a. t value > 2.

Goodness of fit: χ2/df = 2.36, GFI = .92, AGFI = .88, NFI = .91, RMSR = .03

Organizational commitment

Goodness of fit: χ2/df = 2.71, GFI = .93, AGFI = .86, NFI = .91, RMSR = .06

Table 1.  (continued)

734

Western Journal of Nursing Research 37(6)

Cumulative explained variance was 74.263%. These data indicate that Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficients for each dimension of the scale were higher than the .7 recommended by Anderson, Sweeney, and Williams (2004). Therefore, this scale had extremely high reliability. Job satisfaction.  We adopted the scales developed by Chang et al. (2011) and Hoffman and Ingram (1992) to revise and form the variables and questionnaire items in this study. Three factors formed after factor analysis: working satisfaction, interpersonal satisfaction, and remunerative satisfaction. Each factor had five items. Cronbach’s alpha values were .891, .872, and .850, respectively. Explained variance after rotation was 35.591%, 27.126%, and 22.338%, respectively. Cumulative explained variance was 85.055%. Therefore, this scale also had extremely high reliability. Organizational commitment.  Based on differences between Eastern and Western cultures (Farh, Earley, & Lin, 1997), we primarily referenced the scales developed by C. S. Chang and Chang (2009) and Feather and Rauter (2004) to revise and form the variables and questionnaire items in this study. Three factors formed after factor analysis: affective commitment, continual commitment, and normative commitment. Each factor had four items. Cronbach’s alpha values were .873, .931, and .827, respectively. Explained variance after rotation was 26.792%, 33.137%, and 24.156%, respectively. Cumulative explained variance was 84.085%. This also indicates that this scale also had extremely high reliability. The questionnaire scale used was a 5-point Likert-type scale, where 1 represents extreme disagreement and 5 represents extreme agreement. Table 1 summarizes the constructs and variables, including operational definitions and questions for all variables.

Procedures and Data Collection Ten units of thirty-three were then randomly selected by balloting from the medical center, where 40 copies of the questionnaire were distributed by the nursing director of the selected unit to nursing personnel, who voluntarily filled out the questionnaires. The nurse supervisor made the questionnaires available for nurses to fill out anonymously on-site; respondent nurses could ask questions directly of the supervisor, and the supervisors collected even those questionnaires not filled out on-site. Four hundred questionnaires were distributed, 392 were returned between April 2013 and May 2013, and 386 were collected after the incomplete and incorrect questionnaires were filtered out, for a valid response rate of 96.5%. Although the questionnaire data

Chang

735

collected in this study were confirmed to conform to a normal distribution, an exploratory factor analysis (which is a reliability analysis) and a confirmatory factory analysis (which is a convergent validity analysis) were performed to analyze the reliability and validity, respectively (C. S. Chang & Chang, 2009; Hair, Anderson, Tatham, & Black, 1998). The analysis is as follows. Reliability analysis (exploratory factor analysis).  Principal components analysis was used to extract major contributing factors, and varimax rotation was performed to maximize the differences in factor loadings carried by every common factor after the rotation to help recognize common factors. As Table 1 illustrates, all Cronbach’s alpha values exceeded .7, meeting the acceptable standard of more than .7, and no single factor included only one question (Chang, Chen, & Lan, 2013; Hair et al., 1998; Nunnally, 1978). The analytical results of all scales had reached this standard. Convergent validity analysis (confirmatory factor analysis). The parameter (λ) between each latent variable and manifest variable was estimated to determine the statistical significance of the estimated parameter (λ) to evaluate convergent validity. As Table 1 shows, all t values exceeded 2, which indicated satisfactory convergent validity. In addition, the composite reliability values for all constructs were greater than .6, which showed that manifest variables could derive latent variables (Bagozzi & Yi, 1988; Chang, Chen, & Lan, 2012; Joreskog & Sorbom, 1989).

Analysis Structural equation modeling (SEM), also known as covariance structure analysis, is a method that combines path analysis, regression analysis, and common factor analysis. It is used to process complicated multivariate data, and is a statistical method that can predict the relationship between manifest variables and latent variables. Similar to other multivariate statistical approaches, it is established on linear statistical models and hypotheses regarding some observed values; however, SEM possesses three advantages: isolation, association, and direction of causality (Bagozzi & Yi, 1988; C. S. Chang & Chang, 2010b). The reason SEM is adopted in this study is based on the suggestion by Joreskog and Sorbom (1989): When multicollinearity occurs among independent variables or dependent variables, it is inappropriate to perform individual estimation using simple regression analysis, but SEM can prevent such a problem. The examination of the goodness of fit is to determine whether the theoretical models constructed by researchers are capable of providing reasonable explanations from the data obtained through

736

Western Journal of Nursing Research 37(6)

observation. The major fit indices used for the evaluation of the goodness of fit of confirmatory factor analysis and overall model measurement include the chi-square ratio ( .9), adjusted goodness-of-fit index (AGFI > .8), and root mean square of standardized residual (RMSR < .08), which are used in this study (Browne & Cudeck, 1993; Hair et al., 1998). Therefore, SPSS 17.0 and Amos 17.0 (SEM) statistical software packages were used for data analysis and processing.

Ethical Considerations On approval by the hospital Institutional Review Board, the researcher, also the co-director, invited all nursing supervisors to a seminar to explain the details of the study. The study was then carried out with participants’ written consent; each participant’s personal data were kept anonymous and confidential and used only for research purposes to comply with the spirit of the Declaration of Helsinki (2008), and avoid and reduce the occurrence of common method variance (CMV), which might raise the possibility of overestimation and underestimation by the nurses. The response period was limited to 2 months and an introduction letter was attached to the questionnaire to explain the study purpose and to assure respondents of confidentiality. Anyone who was also interested in learning about the result of this study was able to request a copy through the contact address provided in the questionnaire.

Results Sample Characteristics Table 2 shows the demographic data of the sample population in this study. In terms of age, most were 31 to 40 years old (45.3%). In terms of educational level, most had a bachelor’s degree (85.0%). In terms of marital status, most were married (56.5%). As for seniority, most had spent 10 years or above (41.7%), and for job department, most were working in the surgical department (37.6%). With regard to position, 58.3% were N2 level (see Table 2). The results of this study also indicate that the average scores for each measurement item on the scale for perceived organizational support were between 3.70 and 4.23. Supervisory support had the lowest assessments. On the scale for job satisfaction, the average scores for each measurement item were between 3.95 and 4.37. Remunerative satisfaction had the lowest assessments. On the scale for organizational commitment, the average scores for each measurement items were between 3.56 and 4.18.

737

Chang Table 2.  Sample Characteristics (n = 386). Description Gender  Male  Female Age (years)   30 or under  31-40  41-50   51 or above Marriage  Married   Not married Education   College or under  Bachelor   Master or above Seniority (years)   3.84

Hypothesis

Results

χ2 = 177.362

χ2 = 203.420

26.058**

Hypothesis 2

Confirmed

(df = 189)

(p = .001)

(+)

 

(df = 188)

Note. χ2/df = ratio of chi-square; GFI = goodness-of-fit index; AGFI = adjusted GFI; RMSR = root mean square of standardized residual. **p < .01.

SEM (Amos 17.0) and Path Analysis Verification of Hypothesis 1.  Hypothesis 1 of this study is demonstrated to be significant, as given in Table 3. Nurses’ job satisfaction positively influences their organizational commitment (γ11 = 0.53, p < .01). Verification of Hypothesis 2.  The cutoff point is 3.89, which is the average score of the whole samples to the scale of organizational support perception. Any responses equal to or lower than the average are classified under the group of low organizational support perception, and all the others are under the group of high organizational support perception. The data analysis assessed the existence of the moderating effect on the structural model according. Based on the mean of organizational support perception, 191

Chang

739

respondents were identified as the high organizational support perception group and 195 were as the low organizational support perception group. Two structural models, a constrained model and an unconstrained model, there then developed. The chi-square test of statistical difference between the “unconstrained” and “constrained” models (Δχ2 > 3.84) was then used to measure the moderating effects of organizational support perception. Table 3 shows that nurses’ organizational support perception had a significant moderating effect on the association between their job satisfaction and organizational commitment (Δχ2 = 26.058, p < .01). Furthermore, for test path estimate, the results indicated that the moderating effect of nurses’ organizational support perception relationship between the job satisfaction and organizational commitment is stronger for high organizational support perception (γ = 0.66) than low organizational support perception (γ = 0.52). Therefore, Hypothesis 2 can be verified.

Discussion The results of this study indicate that the research hypothesis regarding the influence of nurses’ job satisfaction on organizational commitment was established. This corresponds with the assertions of relevant studies in the past. For example, Ahmad and Oranye (2010) and Ingersoll et al. (2002) believed that a high level of employees’ job satisfaction represents their strong identification with, and loyalty to, an organization; willingness to go through the hardship and overcome the predicament together when the organization experiences difficulty; and higher interests in their jobs. Our empirical results indicate that the nurses’ working satisfaction, interpersonal satisfaction, and remunerative satisfaction within job satisfaction had significant positive influences on affective commitment, continual commitment, and normative commitment. Working satisfaction had the greatest influence among the three variables of job satisfaction and remunerative satisfaction had the least influence. Job satisfaction had its greatest influence on continual commitment within organizational commitment. It had its least influence on normative commitment. Therefore, the results of this study indicate that higher working satisfaction on the spiritual level among nurses was associated with higher organizational commitment toward hospitals. The results of this study also indicate that the research hypothesis regarding the positive moderating effect of nurses’ organizational support perception on the relationship between their job satisfaction and organizational commitment was established. This kind of relationship is almost never discussed in the research literature, and it can be applied for human resources

740

Western Journal of Nursing Research 37(6)

management of hospital nursing personnel. Our empirical results indicate that higher levels of perceived organizational support among nurses were associated with stronger positive influences from their job satisfaction on organizational commitment. That is, as nurses’ perceptions of organizational support increased, the positive influences of all three variables (working satisfaction and interpersonal satisfaction on the spiritual level, and remunerative satisfaction on the substantive level) on their organizational commitment strengthened. Therefore, heightened levels of perceived organizational support among nurses can strengthen their organizational commitment toward their hospitals. In particular, a greater influence on nurses’ continual commitment within organizational commitment makes them more willing to invest effort in their hospitals. Nurses and the general literature have provided virtually no investigation of this point in the past. This research shows that the hospital should care about nursing staff’s job satisfaction—if nursing staff have a high degree of job satisfaction, they will naturally spur their organizational commitment to the hospital. Therefore, four suggestions are made to raise nursing staff’s high awareness on organizational commitment: (a) the hospital should provide a meaningful work connection with nursing staff and that connection needs to correspond to nursing staff’s values; (b) the hospital should construct a mechanism where nursing staff can exert their expertise and accomplish their tasks, and this mechanism can elicit nursing staff’s potential; (c) the hospital should implant the idea of being self-responsible at work to improve the connection between nursing staff and the hospital; and (d) the hospital should build a system where support is always available so that nursing staff do not feel isolated and helpless at work. In addition, this research shows that nursing staff’s perceived organizational support has a significant impact on job satisfaction, and further on organizational commitment. Therefore, the hospital should focus on the development of nursing staff’s organizational support perception in the hospital. In this way, the hospital can improve nursing staff’s perceived hospital support and perceived supervisory support, and further improve nursing staff’s job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Following are some methods for developing nursing staff’s organizational support perception in the hospital. First, the hospital should provide nursing staff with equal rights and opportunities, and this will help improve nursing staff’s career development and support perception. Second, when nursing staff face difficulties, the hospital should try its best and provide necessary resources and needs to help resolve and overcome the issues. Finally, the hospital should provide sufficient support and welfare to nursing staff—if the hospital wants to be supported by its staff, it needs to show support first.

Chang

741

Despite the attempt and efforts made to design a good study, attention should be paid to the following limitations, as these limitations may provide directions for future researchers. First, this study only discussed relationships among organizational support, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment. The factors affecting job satisfaction and organizational commitment are quite complicated, and include other variables such as job characteristics, work environment, work experience, management style, and so on, which were not included in the scope of discussion in this study. These should be interesting subjects for future studies. Second, the results of this study may thus be confined to the nurses in hospitals within Taiwan as this study was conducted in Taiwan. If the results of this study are to be applied in hospitals in other environments, the concern over the lack of generality may still occur. Finally, this study used one particular time period only, which was unlikely to derive a thorough investigation on long-term effective factors. We suggest using a multiple time period approach for follow-up study. Multiple periods of data may make the results of any study more complete and objective. Declaration of Conflicting Interests The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. New York, NY: Academic Press. Ahmad, N., & Oranye, O. (2010). Empowerment, job satisfaction and organizational commitment: A comparative analysis of nurses working in Malaysia and England. Journal of Nursing Management, 18, 582-591. Allen, D. G., Shore, L. M., & Griffeth, R. W. (2003). The role of perceived organizational support and supportive human resource practices in the turnover process. Journal of Management, 29, 99-118. Anderson, D. R., Sweeney, D. J., & Williams, T. A. (2004). Statistics for business and economics (9th ed.). Boston, MA: South-Western College Publishing. Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation for structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16, 74-94. Bateman, T. S., & Organ, D. W. (1983). Job satisfaction and the good soldier: The relationship between affect and employee citizenship. Academy of Management Journal, 26, 587-595.

742

Western Journal of Nursing Research 37(6)

Bentler, P. M., & Bonnett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness-of-fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588-606. Best, M. E., & Thurston, N. E. (2004). Measuring nurse job satisfaction. Journal of Nursing Administration, 34, 283-290. Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York, NY: Wiley. Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of accessing model fit. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Buitendach, J. H., & De Witte, H. (2005). Job insecurity, extrinsic and intrinsic job satisfaction and affective organisational commitment of maintenance workers in parastatal. South African Journal of Business Management, 36(2), 27-37. Chang, C. S., & Chang, H. C. (2009). Perceptions of internal marketing and organizational commitment by nurses. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 65, 92-100. Chang, C. S., & Chang, H. C. (2010a). Moderating effect of nurses’ customer-oriented perception between organizational citizenship behaviors and satisfaction. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 32, 628-643. Chang, C. S., & Chang, H. C. (2010b). Motivating nurses’ organizational citizenship behaviors by customer-oriented perception for evidence-based practice. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 7, 214-225. Chang, C. S., Chen, S. Y., & Lan, Y. T. (2011). Raising nurses’ job satisfaction through patient-oriented perception and organizational citizenship behaviors. Nursing Research, 60, 40-46. Chang, C. S., Chen, S. Y., & Lan, Y. T. (2012). Motivating medical information system performance by system quality, service quality, and job satisfaction for evidence-based practice. BMC Medical Informatics & Decision Making, 12, Article 135. Chang, C. S., Chen, S. Y., & Lan, Y. T. (2013). Service quality, trust, and patient satisfaction in interpersonal-based medical service encounters. BMC Health Services Research, 13, Article 22. Churchill, J. G. A., Ford, N. M., & Walker, J. O. C. (1974). Measuring the job satisfaction of industrial salesmen. Journal of Marketing Research, 11, 254-260. Clive, F., & Richard, W. (1996). Performance management, job satisfaction and organizational commitment. British Journal of Management, 7, 169-179. Cun, X. G. (2012). Public service motivation and job satisfaction, organizational citizenship behavior: An empirical study based on the sample of employees in Guangzhou public. Chinese Management Studies, 6, 331-341. Dessler, G. (2000). Human resource management. Champaign, NJ: Prentice Hall. De Vos, A., Dewettinck, K., & Buyens, D. (2009). The professional career on the right track: A study on the interaction between career self-management and career management satisfaction in explaining employee outcomes. European Journal of Work & Organizational Psychology, 18, 55-80. Eisenberger, R., Armeli, S., Rexwinkel, B., Lynch, P. D., & Rhoades, L. (2001). Reciprocation of perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 42-51.

Chang

743

Eisenberger, R., Cummings, J., Armeli, S., & Lynch, P. (1997). Perceived organizational support, discretionary treatment, and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 812-820. Eisenberger, R., Fasolo, P. M., & Davis-LaMastro, V. (1990). Effects of perceived organizational support on employee diligence, innovation, and commitment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 53, 51-59. Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 500-507. Eisenberger, R., Stinglhamber, F., Vandenberghe, C., Sucharski, I. L., & Rhoades, L. (2002). Perceived supervisor support: Contributions to perceived organizational support and employee retention. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 565-573. Farh, J. L., Earley, P. C., & Lin, S. C. (1997). Impetus for action: A cultural analysis of justice and organizational citizenship behavior in Chinese society. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 421-444. Farh, J. L., Hackett, R. D., & Liang, J. (2007). Individual level cultural values as moderators of the perceived organizational support-employee outcome relationships in China: Comparing the effects of power distance and traditionality. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 715-729. Feather, N. T., & Rauter, K. A. (2004). Organizational citizenship behaviours in relation to job status, job insecurity, organizational commitment and identification, job satisfaction and work values. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77, 81-94. Fisk, G. M., & Friesen, J. P. (2012). Perceptions of leader emotion regulation and LMX as predictors of followers’ job satisfaction and organizational citizenship behaviors. Leadership Quarterly, 23, 1-12. Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25, 161-178. Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis with reading. London, England: Prentice Hall. Han, G. H., & Jekel, M. (2011). The mediating role of job satisfaction between leadermember exchange and turnover intentions. Journal of Nursing Management, 19, 41-49. Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B. B. (1959). The motivation to work. New York, NY: Wiley. Ho, W. H., Chang, C. S., Shih, Y. L., & Liang, R. D. (2009). Effects of job rotation and role stress among nurses on job satisfaction and organizational commitment. BMC Health Services Research, 9, Article 8. Hoffman, K. D., & Ingram, T. N. (1992). Service provider job satisfaction and customer-oriented performance. Journal of Services Marketing, 6, 68-78. Homans, G. C. (1958). Social behavior as exchange. American Journal of Sociology, 63, 597-606. Hoppock, R. (1935). Job satisfaction. New York, NY: Harper & Row. Hutchison, S., & Garstka, M. L. (1996). Sources of perceived organizational support: Goal setting and feedback. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 26, 1351-1366.

744

Western Journal of Nursing Research 37(6)

Ingersoll, G. L., Olsan, T., Drew-Cates, J., DeVinney, B. C., & Davies, J. (2002). Nurses’ job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and career intent. Journal of Nursing Administration, 32, 250-263. Joreskog, K. G., & Sorbom, D. (1989). LISREL 7 user’s reference guide. Mooresville, IN: Scientific Software. Karatepe, O. M., & Kilic, H. (2007). Relationships of supervisor support and conflicts in the work-family interface with the selected job outcomes of frontline employees. Tourism Management, 28, 238-252. Ladebo, O. J. (2008). Perceived supervisory support and organisational citizenship behaviours: Is job satisfaction a mediator? South African Journal of Psychology, 38, 479-488. Lambert, E., & Hogan, L. (2001). The impact of job satisfaction on turnover intent: A test of a structural measurement model using a national sample of workers. Social Science Journal, 38, 233-250. Liu, N. T., & Ding, C. G. (2012). General ethical judgments, perceived organizational support, interactional justice, and workplace deviance. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 23, 2712-2735. Locke, E. A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally. Lynn, M. R. (1986). Determination and quantification of content validity. Nursing Research, 35, 382-385. Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York, NY: Harper & Row. Masterson, S. S., Lewis, K., Goldman, G. B., & Taylor, M. S. (2000). Integrating justice and social exchange: The differing effects of fair procedures and treatment on work relationships. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 738-748. Miller, P. E. (2008). The relationship between job satisfaction and intention to leave of hospice nurses in a for-profit corporation. Journal of Hospice & Palliative Nursing, 10, 56-64. Mirza, M., & Redzuan, M. (2012). The relationship between principal’s leadership styles and teacher’s organizational trust and commitment. Life Science Journal– Acta Zhengzhou University Overseas Edition, 9, 1356-1362. Moorman, R. H., Niehoff, B. P., & Organ, D. W. (1993). Treating employees fairly and organizational citizenship behavior: Sorting the effects of job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and procedural justice. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 6, 209-225. Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W., & Steers, R. M. (1982). Employee-organization linkage: The psychology of commitment absenteeism, and turnover. New York, NY: Academic Press. Munevver, O. C. (2006). The relationship between job satisfaction, occupational and organizational commitment of academics. Journal of American Academy of Business, 8(1), 78-89. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Parlalis, S. K. (2011). Organizational changes and job satisfaction among support staff. Journal of Social Service Research, 37, 197-216.

Chang

745

Porter, L. W. (1962). What job attitudes tell about motivation? Harvard Business Review, 46, 118-126. Porter, L. W., Steer, R. M., Mowday, R. T., & Boulian, P. V. (1974). Organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and turnover among psychiatric technicians. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59, 603-609. Rhoades, L., & Eisenberger, R. (2002). Perceived organizational support: A review of the literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 698-714. Rhoades, L., & Eisenberger, R. (2006). When supervisors feel supported: Relationships with subordinates’ perceived supervisor support, perceived organizational support, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 689-695. Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. (2007). Organizational behavior (12th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Seashore, S. E., & Taber, T. D. (1975). Job satisfaction indicators and their correlates. American Behavioral Scientist, 18, 333-368. Tansky, J. W., & Cohen, D. J. (2001). The relationship between organizational support, employee development, and organizational commitment: An empirical study. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 12, 285-300. Tourangeau, A. E., & Cranley, L. A. (2006). Nurse intention to remain employed: Understanding and strengthening determinants. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 55, 497-509. Trimble, D. E. (2006). Organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and turnover intention of missionaries. Journal of Psychology & Theology, 34, 349-360. Wegge, J., Dick, R. V., Fisher, G. K., Wecking, C., & Moltzen, K. (2006). Work motivation, organizational identification, and well-being in call centre work. Work & Stress, 20, 60-83. Wernimont, P. F. (1972). A system’s view of job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 56, 173-176. Zagenczyk, T., Gibney, R., Few, W., & Scott, K. (2011). Psychological contracts and organizational identification: The mediating effect of perceived organizational support. Journal of Labor Research, 32, 254-281.

Copyright of Western Journal of Nursing Research is the property of Sage Publications Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.