Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Does Organizational Commitment Help to Promote University Faculty’s Performance and Effectiveness?

  • Regular Article
  • Published:
The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

To investigate the strategy of promoting university faculty’s performance and effectiveness through cultivating organizational commitment, the mixed-methods research collected data from a survey of 188 academics and interviews of 35 survey participants in Beijing. Analysis of survey and interview responses suggested that (a) it was appropriate to measure Chinese academics’ organizational commitment in terms of affective, normative, ideal, choice, and economic commitment; (b) normative and ideal commitment helped to promote faculty’s performance and effectiveness; while affective and choice commitment tended to be dysfunctional in faculty’s work; (c) economic commitment did not present significant relationships to performance and effectiveness; and (d) these relationships could be partly explained with the individual and interactive contributions of faculty’s personal goals, available resources, and perceptions of cost/benefit balance. These findings provided practical implications for university administrators from China and other countries influenced by Confucian culture in their efforts to promote academic excellence in higher education institutional performance review.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abrami, P. C., d’Apollonia, S., & Rosenfield, S. (1997). The dimensionality of student ratings of instruction: What we know and what we do not. In R. P. Perry & J. C. Smart (Eds.), Effective teaching in higher education: Research and practice (pp. 321–367). New York: Agathon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ballantyne, R., Bain, J. D., & Packer, J. (1999). Researching university teaching in Australia: Themes and issues in academics’ reflections. Studies in Higher Education, 24(2), 237–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker, H. S. (1960). Note on the concept of commitment. American Journal of Sociology, 66, 32–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1997). Task performance and contextual performance: The meaning for personnel selection research. Human Performance, 10(2), 99–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brew, A. (1999). Research and teaching: Changing relationships in a changing context. Studies in Higher Education, 24(3), 291–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J. P. (1994). Alternative models of job performance and their implications for selection and classification. In M. G. Rumsey, C. B. Walker, & J. H. Harris (Eds.), Personnel selection and classification (pp. 33–52). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Association, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Centra, J. A. (1993). Reflective faculty evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, M. K. (1998). Predicting unethical behavior: A comparison of the theory of reasoned action and the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 17, 1825–1834.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, Y. C. (1990). The relationship of job attitudes and organizational commitment to organizational environment. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston, MA.

  • Chughtai, A. A., & Zafar, S. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of organizational commitment among Pakistani university teachers. Applied Human Resource Management Research, 11(1), 39–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, A. (2003). Multiple commitments in the workplace: An integrative approach. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dill, D., & Soo, M. (2005). Academic quality, league tables, and public policy: A cross-national analysis of university ranking systems. Higher Education, 49(4), 495–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dilts, D., Bialik, D., & Harber, L. (1994). Assessing what professors do: An introduction to academic performance appraisal in higher education. Westport: Greenwood Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dramstad, S. A. (2004). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment among teachers in Norway: A comparative study of selected schools from public and private educational systems. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunham, R. B., Grube, J. A., & Castaneda, M. B. (1994). Organizational commitment: The utility of an integrative definition. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(3), 370–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisinga, R., Teelken, C., & Doorewaard, H. (2010). Assessing cross-national invariance of the three-component model of organizational commitment: A six-country study of European university faculty. Cross-Cultural Research, 44(4), 341–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, J. L., & Cation, L. J. (2005). Developments: Impact of a residency research program on research activity, faculty involvement, and institutional cost. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 17(2), 159–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graneheim, U. H., & Lundman, B. (2004). Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: Concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Education Today, 24, 105–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hakanen, J. J., Schaufeli, W. B., & Ahola, K. (2008). The job demands-resources model: A three-year cross-lagged study of burnout, depression, commitment, and work engagement. Work and Stress, 22(3), 224–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho, K. K. (1998). Research output among the three faculties of Business, Education, Humanities and Social Sciences in six Hong Kong universities. Higher Education, 36, 195–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, Q., & Gill, T. G. (2000). IS faculty research output: Influential factors and implications. Information Resources Management Journal, 13(2), 15–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu, J., & Mo, Y. (2005). A research on organizational commitment and job performance of university teachers. Journal of Zhejiang Institute of Science and Technology, 22(4), 420–429.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jing, L. Z. (2010). The impact of work stress and organizational commitment on university faculty’s task performance and effectiveness in Mainland China. The University of Hong Kong.

  • Kocak, R. (2006). The validity and reliability of the teachers’ performance evaluation scale. Educational Sciences: Theory and practice, 6(3), 799–808.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kreber, C. (2000). How university teaching award winners conceptualize academic work: Some further thoughts on the meaning of scholarship. Research in Higher Education, 5(1), 61–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lan, J. J., Liu, Z., Jian, J., & Li, L. (2005). Test of the level of working stress in young college teachers and analysis of the related factors. China Journal of Clinical Rehabilitation, 9, 102–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, J., Ott, M., & Bell, A. (2012). Faculty organizational commitment and citizenship. Research in Higher Education, 53(3), 325–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ling, W. Q., Fang, L. L., & Zhang, Z. C. (2002). Research on Chinese employees’ organizational commitment. Social Sciences in China (Autumn), 3, 59–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2006). New directions in goal-setting theory. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15(5), 265–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu, G. L. (2005). Research on organizational commitment of university teachers. Henan University.

  • Marsh, H. W., & Hattie, J. (2002). The relation between research productivity and teaching effectiveness: Complementary, antagonistic or independent constructs? Journal of Higher Education, 73(5), 603–638.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mathieu, J. E., & Zajac, D. (1990). A review and meta-analysis of the antecedents, correlates and consequences of organizational commitment. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 171–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1(1), 61–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J. P., & Herscovitch, L. (2001). Commitment in the workplace toward a general model. Human Resource Management Review, 11, 299–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Motowildo, S. J., Borman, W. C., & Schmit, M. J. (1997). A theory of individual differences in task and contextual performance. Human Performance, 10(2), 71–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W., & Steers, R. M. (1982). Employee-organizational linkages: The psychology of commitment, absenteeism, and turnover. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, P. R., & Jackson, S. E. (1999). Managing work role performance: Challenging the twenty-first century organizations and their employees. In D. R. Ilgen & E. D. Pulakos (Eds.), The changing nature of performance: Implications for staffing, motivations, and development (pp. 325–365). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Print, M., & Hattie, J. (1997). Measuring quality in universities: An approach to weighing research output. Higher Education, 33, 453–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Searle, B. J., Bright, J. E. H., & Bochner, S. (1999). Testing the 3-factor model of occupational stress: The impact of demands, control and social support on a mail sorting task. Work and Stress, 13(3), 268–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shirabe, M. (2004). Measures of performance of universities and their faculty in Japan. Information Knowledge Systems Management, 4, 167–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shong, A. H., & Cai, Y. H. (2005). Teacher organizational commitment construct: Confirmatory factor analysis. Psychological Development and Education, 2, 48–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shouksmith, G. (1994). Variables related to organizational commitment in health professionals. Psychological Reports, 74, 707–711.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegrist, J. (1996). Adverse health effects of high-effort/low-reward conditions. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 1, 27–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siu, Q. L. (2003). Job stress and job performance among employees in Hong Kong: The role of Chinese work values and organizational commitment. International Journal of Psychology, 38(6), 337–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smeby, J. C., & Try, S. (2005). Departmental contexts and faculty research activity in Norway. Research in Higher Education, 46(6), 593–619.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Song, S. Q., & Qin, J. L. (2006). Investigation on organizational commitment of kindergarten teachers. Theory and Practice of Education, 26(6), 59–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teodorescu, D. (2000). Correlates of faculty publication productivity: A cross-national analysis. Higher Education, 39, 201–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uctug, Y., & Koksal, G. (2003). An academic performance measurement system and its impact on quality of engineering faculty work at Middle East Technical University. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 28(3), 251–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, X., Liao, J., Xia, D., & Chang, T. (2010). The impact of organizational justice on work performance: Mediating effects of organizational commitment and leader-member exchange. International Journal of Manpower, 31(6), 660–677.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, M. D., & Marsh, E. E. (2006). Content analysis: A flexible methodology. Library Trends, 55(1), 22–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiener, Y. (1982). Commitment in organizations: A normative view. Academy of Management Review, 2(3), 418–428.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wong, C. S., Wong, T. Y., Hui, C., & Law, K. S. (2001). The significant role of Chinese employees’ organizational commitment: Implications for managing employees in Chinese societies. Journal of World Business, 36, 326–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, X. P., Xu, F. Y., & Zhou, Y. (2006). Determinants of university teachers’ job performance. Journal of East China Normal University (Educational Sciences), 24(1), 30–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xu, S. G., & Lu, G. L. (2008). Research on the relationships between organizational commitment of university teachers and their job performance. Psychological Science, 31(4), 987–988.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, X., Li, M., & Tan, T. (2009). The relationship between university faculty’s organizational commitment and job performance. Human Resource Management Review, 2, 99–100.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Foreign Studies, Minzu University of China, 27 Zhongguancun South Street, Haidian, Beijing, 100081, China

    Lizhen Jing

  2. School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Beijing Information Science and Technology University, 12, Xiaoying East Road, Haidian, Beijing, 100192, China

    Deshan Zhang

Authors
  1. Lizhen Jing
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Deshan Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lizhen Jing.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jing, L., Zhang, D. Does Organizational Commitment Help to Promote University Faculty’s Performance and Effectiveness?. Asia-Pacific Edu Res 23, 201–212 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-013-0097-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-013-0097-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation