Organizational Behaviour Comportement Organisationnel

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 1Descriptive Statistics and Zero-Order CorrelationsMeasures M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1516_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________1. Job Status (FT/PT) 1.44 .50 (---)2. Type of Facility 1.83 .37 -.010 (---)3. Sex 1.88 .32 .219 -.025 (---)4. Age 46.43 9.80 -.028 .110 .001 (---)5. Tenure 11.18 7.98 -.056 .208 .063 .500 (---)6. Transactional Obligations (Narrow) 2.18 .90 .035 -.107 -.062 -.056 -.016 (.74)7. Transactional Obligations (Short-term) 1.90 .85 .007 .052 -.013 -.026 -.013 .332 (.68)8. Relational Obligations (Loyalty) 3.50 .87 -.001 -.124 -.077 .148 .114 -.034 -.209 (.72)9. Relational Obligations (Security) 2.45 1.02 -.004 -.101 -.024 .152 .163 .056 -.205 .403 (.72)10. Affective Commitment 4.19 1.07 .032 -.082 .055 .135 .163 -.130 -.247 .433 .383 (.89)11. Continuance Commitment 3.66 1.24 -.056 -.069 .046 .093 .213 .155 -.120 .066 .168 .072 (.77)12. Normative Commitment 3.64 1.17 -.011 -.228 -.017 .141 -.003 -.114 -.358 .451 .380 .543 .196 (.80)13. Turnover Intention 2.48 1.17 -.070 .024 -.126 -.166 -.121 .117 .343 -.257 -.407 -.457 -.152 -.459 (.72)14. Attendance Norm 61.59 18.58 -.002 -.024 -.001 -.047 .042 -.069 -.017 .194 .144 .278 .054 .148 -.148 (---)15. Contextual Performance Norm 58.99 13.17 .045 .032 -.005 .049 .074 -.113 -.137 .249 .100 .326 -.013 .217 -.247 .596 (.85)16. Task Performance Norm 68.19 16.65 .034 .067 .019 .014 .059 -.061 -.071 .208 .073 .252 -.005 .087 -.167 .556 .702(---)________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Note. Listwise deletion of missing data, N = 428; r > .0948, p < .05 (2-tail test); Scale reliabilities (coefficient alpha) are presented in the diagonal. JobStatus (1=Full-time; 2=Part-time); Type of Facility (1=Chronic care; 2=Acute care), Sex (1=Male; 2= Female).156
Table 2Confirmatory Factor Analysis: Measures of Employees’ Perceived Obligations and <strong>Organizational</strong> CommitmentModels χ 2 dƒ GFI NFI NNFI CFI PNFI______________________________________________________________________________________________________Null 4838.56 210 NA NA NA NA NAModel A 2557.37 189 .66 .47 .43 .49 .42Model B 2132.94 188 .70 .56 .53 .58 .50Model C 944.14 179 .86 .80 .81 .83 .69Model D 428.96 168 .93 .91 .93 .94 .73_______________________________________________________________________________________________________Note. N=583. Null: Independence model. Model A: One factor. Model B: Two factors (1. Affective commitment, Normativecommitment,Relational obligations – loyalty and security; 2. Continuance commitment, Transactional obligations – narrow and short-term). Model C:Five factors (1. Affective commitment; 2. Continuance commitment; 3. Normative commitment; 4. Transactional obligations – narrow andshort-term; 5. Relational obligations – loyalty and security). Model D: Seven factors (1. Affective commitment; 2. Continuancecommitment; 3. Normative commitment; 4. Tranactional obligations – narrow; 5. Transactional obligations – short-term; 6. Relationalobligations – loyalty; 7 Relational obligations – security). GFI = Goodness of Fit Index; NFI = Normed Fit Index; NNFI = Non-NormedFit Index; CFI=Comparative Fit Index; `PNFI=Parsimony Normed Fit Index; NA = not applicable157
Page 1 and 2:
Volume 24, No. 5, 2003Edited by/Éd
Page 4 and 5:
Pursey HeugensGreg IrvingRoderick I
Page 6 and 7:
TABLE OF CONTENTS - TABLE DES MATI
Page 8 and 9:
study of power displays in mixed-ge
Page 10 and 11:
on expectations and behaviour (Berg
Page 12 and 13:
TaskThis study required the use of
Page 14 and 15:
Task-Gender (male-stereotyped or fe
Page 16 and 17:
It is important to understand the s
Page 18 and 19:
Crown, C.L. & Cummins, D.A. (1998).
Page 20 and 21:
Smith-Lovin, L., & Brody, C. (1989)
Page 22 and 23:
Table 2Summary of Descriptive Stati
Page 24 and 25:
Table 4Summary of Interaction of Ge
Page 26 and 27:
ASAC 2003Halifax, Nova ScotiaIain L
Page 28 and 29:
the interrelationships among the MB
Page 30 and 31:
studies (Friedman and Sarros, 1989;
Page 32 and 33:
This study demonstrated that emotio
Page 34 and 35:
Anxiety, Stress and Coping, in pres
Page 36 and 37:
Washington, DC: Taylor and Francis,
Page 38 and 39:
Table 2Overall Goodness-of-Fit Indi
Page 40 and 41:
ζ 3Depersonalizationη 3β 3,1 (+)
Page 42 and 43:
ASAC 2003Halifax, Nova ScotiaWendy
Page 44 and 45:
views independently, gave rise to S
Page 46 and 47:
track assistant, associate, and ful
Page 48 and 49:
ole conflict are positively related
Page 50 and 51:
Table 3. Regression of climate and
Page 52 and 53:
interests.We speculate the null eff
Page 54 and 55:
DOOP and short for DOOP scales,”
Page 56 and 57:
Pelled, L. H., “Demographic diver
Page 58 and 59:
esulting increase in discretion ove
Page 60 and 61:
al., 1995). However, the distinctio
Page 62 and 63:
ise to strong pressures for conform
Page 64 and 65:
presented with a complete list of a
Page 66 and 67:
Table 3QAP Regression Coefficients
Page 68 and 69:
ConclusionResearchers of social inf
Page 70 and 71:
suggestions for further research.
Page 72 and 73:
performing on the job.” Presumabl
Page 74 and 75:
positively related to performance i
Page 76 and 77:
proposed hypotheses were supported.
Page 78 and 79:
ConclusionThis research has made se
Page 80 and 81:
Be more enthusiastic and exert extr
Page 82 and 83:
Table 2Correlations Among the Laten
Page 84 and 85:
performance expectations on feedbac
Page 86 and 87:
changements qui s’opèrent dans l
Page 88 and 89:
structures, politiques, systèmes,
Page 90 and 91:
comportements liés à la communica
Page 92 and 93:
Tableau 2Échelles de mesure de la
Page 94 and 95:
prédiction des compétences clés
Page 96 and 97:
organisation n’est pas uniforme e
Page 98 and 99:
complètement ce construit. Ces cha
Page 100 and 101:
Wagner, R.K. and Sternberg, R.J. (1
Page 102 and 103:
What is a toxin handler?In two arti
Page 104 and 105:
potentially limited scope and conte
Page 106 and 107:
work role demands. In this survey,
Page 108 and 109:
The three factors in this rotated f
Page 110 and 111: and service orientation, the abilit
Page 112 and 113: ASAC 2003Halifax, Nova ScotiaLisa M
Page 114 and 115: self-appraisal group reacted more n
Page 116 and 117: effect of voice are the value-expre
Page 118 and 119: “Strongly Disagree” to “Stron
Page 120 and 121: esults suggest that incorporating s
Page 122 and 123: Personality and Social Psychology,
Page 124 and 125: Table 1Means, Standard Deviations,
Page 126 and 127: Table 3Test of the Mediating Role o
Page 128 and 129: ASAC 2003Halifax, Nova ScotiaAnn Fr
Page 130 and 131: individual level, polychronicity is
Page 132 and 133: construct.Drawing on computer-media
Page 134 and 135: Consequence: Impact on Work Overloa
Page 136 and 137: Conversation complexity may also mo
Page 138: Implications for practiceFuture res
Page 141 and 142: ReferencesAncona, D.G., Goodman, P.
Page 143 and 144: no. 3 (1994): 381-391.Macan, T.H.,
Page 145 and 146: ASAC 2003Halifax, Nova ScotiaIan R.
Page 147 and 148: Assessing Measures: Affective Commi
Page 149 and 150: implications of psychological contr
Page 151 and 152: commitment, affective commitment, c
Page 153 and 154: Motivational Process Variables. Amo
Page 155 and 156: DiscussionThe main purpose of this
Page 157 and 158: approaches zero. In the present stu
Page 159 and 160: Extension and test of a three-compo
Page 164 and 165: Table 3Standardized Factor Loadings
Page 166 and 167: Table 5Hierarchical Regression Anal
Page 168 and 169: ASAC 2003Halifax, Nova ScotiaJoan F
Page 170 and 171: ASAC 2003Halifax, Nova ScotiaArla D
Page 172 and 173: ASAC 2003Halifax, Nova ScotiaIvy Ky
Page 174: ASAC 2003Halifax, Nova ScotiaNina D
show all

Organizational Behaviour Comportement Organisationnel

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?