When employees perceive highly the social responsibility of companies, they may feel highly engagement with company to establish better results. Therefore, the organizational performance will increase. When organizational performance increase, employees may evaluate higher organizational performance. Employees believe that in company, they will keep their commitments with company. They think that they have responsibility to keep company’s commitment with customers and other stakeholders. Employees’ continuance commitment increases service quality that company offer customers. Service quality depends largely on employees’ attitudes and responsibility.
Committed employees give a big contribution to organizations because they perform and behave on achieving organizations’ goals. Furthermore, workers who are committed to their organization are happy to be members of it, believe in and feel good about the organization and what it stands for, and intend to do what is good for the organization (George and Jones, 1996). In turn, the increase in job quality of employees leads to the improve in organizational performance. Therefore, employees will evaluate highly organizational performance. Thus, we could say that there is any relationship between organizational commitment and organizational performance.
However, surprisingly, previous research suggested that organizational commitment is largely unrelated to job performance (Mathieu and Zajac, 1990). Job performance will lead to the higher organizational performance.
Commitment, the other main concept examined in this study, has also seen a
shift in researchers’ approach. Traditionally, the organization was regarded as the only relevant object of commitment in the workplace. However, recent years have seen growing recognition that employees in the workplace are exposed simultaneously to more than one object of commitment: not only the organization, but also the work group, the occupation, work in general, and one’s particular job (Cohen, 1993, 1999, 2003, 2007a; Morrow, 1993; Randall and Cote, 1991).
The current research draws upon social capital theory and the theory of reasoned action to propose and test a model that examines relationships between human resource developmental initiative organizational investments in social capital (OISC) and service employees’ work-related attitudes, norms, and behaviors. The study responds to multiple calls for more insight into factors that improve service employee commitment to service quality and organizational performance and addresses several other gaps in the literature. First, as mentioned, the influence of human resource developmental initiatives as a means of creating and managing commitment to service quality is relatively under examined in services research.
Second, despite calls for research that examines how building social capital benefits organizations (Pastoriza, Arino, and Ricart, 2008), with the exception of Merlo, Bell, Menguc, and Whitwell’s (2006) study, current research devotes little attention to the issue of leveraging social capital to generate work-related returns in service industries. Third, this work responds to Batt’s (2002) call for research to identify mediating employee variables that better explain the link between managerial practices and organizational performance by assessing the influence of OISC as a managerial practice. Fourth, the examination of the association between OISC and organizational citizenship behavior responds to Mc Kenzie, Podsakoff, and
Ahearne’s (1998) call for research that investigates antecedents of extra-role performance.
Regarding the impacts of commitment, although all three forms of commitment relate negatively to turnover intentions, these manifests themselves differently in other relevant conduct in the employment context, such as assiduity, performance and organizational citizenship behaviors. More specifically, it is expected to observe a stronger positive relationship between these behaviors and affective commitment, followed by normative commitment; in contrast, it is expected instrumental commitment to be independent, or negatively related with these desirable work behaviors (Meyer, Stanley, Herscovitch, and Topolnytsky, 2002). Of the three types of commitment, affective commitment entails the biggest advantage for the organization, insofar as the emotional connection to the organization will result, most likely, in a more powerful contribution toward organizational objectives, in a lower turnover, lower absenteeism, higher performance and major incidence of organizational citizenship behaviors. The normative commitment also powers positive contributions to the organization, however, the underlay of feelings of obligation, does not instigate the same enthusiasm and commitment as the affective commitment type. Finally, the instrumental involvement leads to performances that tend not to exceed the minimum requirements (Rego and Souto,2004).
Research shows that it is between effective commitment and a positive impact on attendance, punctuality, citizenship behaviors and performance that registers higher correlation results. It is more likely to record intensely vigorous efforts when there is an emotional involvement of employees in the organization than when they
feel obliged or simply need to remain in it (Cunha, Rego, Cunha, and Cabral- Cardoso, 2007). Engaged and committed employees, willing to adopt spontaneous, innovative and citizenship behaviors represent an asset for organizational success.
Ultimately, the performance of the organization correlates with the level of involvement of its employees and their teams (Sezoes, 2012). Committed employees
“are more satisfied and motivated and are thus more productive and loyal” (Palma, Lopes, and Bancaleiro 2011). It is assumed, therefore, that a greater commitment of employees results in a greater chance of remaining in the organization and engages in the performance of their duties and the pursuit of organizational objectives (Cunha et al., 2007).
High commitment human resource management implies a long-term employment relationship and important feature of this for employees was their sense of employment security. Indeed, some authors have gone so far as to suggest that a promise of employment security is a central feature of a high commitment approach (Pfeiffer, 1998). A sense of job security is likely to promote trust and therefore a greater willingness to reciprocate within the employment relationship. While a promise of job security may not be an essential element within the set of HR practices, signals of concern for both short- and long-term well-being of employees in the content of HR practices, which is more likely to be a feature of high commitment HRM, should enhance the sense of job security. It has been suggested that increases in flexible working practices and the need to achieve rapid organizational change have resulted in increased job insecurity (Cappelli, 1999).
Within a number of European countries, and notably Spain, a sizeable minority
of workers are employed on temporary contracts. However, organizations have choices about how far to pursue human resource policies that create high security.
For example, Guest (2000) argued that one of the goals of human resource management should be to enhance employees’ commitment and that this could be best achieved through HR practices that promote job security and fair treatment. In contemporary organizations, enhancing employee perception of job security is likely to be a key element of the psychological climate to improve employee commitment to the organization. There is evidence that certain human resource practices can enhance the sense of job security. For example, Kammeyer-Mueller and Liao (2006) showed that in the context of downsizing the use of human resource practices, such as participation and communication, increased perceived job security, while training and development enhanced perceptions of employability. It therefore seems that high commitment HR practices could enhance perceived job security among employees.
Organizational commitment refers to the psychological attachment of workers to their workplaces (Allen and Meyer, 1990; O’Reiily and Chatman, 1986).
Commitment to organizations is positively related to such desirable outcomes as job satisfaction, motivation, and attendance and negatively related to such outcomes as absenteeism and turnover (Clegg, 1983; Cotton and Tuttle, 1986). Also, Horton stated that stronger commitment could result in less turnover and absenteeism, thus increasing an organization’s productivity. However, the relationship between organizational commitment and organizational performance is more tenuous (Becker, Billings, Eveleth, and Gilbert, 1996).