Solinger Omar N, van Olffen Woody, Roe Robert A
Department of Organization and Strategy, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
J Appl Psychol. 2008 Jan;93(1):70-83. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.93.1.70.
This article offers a conceptual critique of the three-component model (TCM) of organizational commitment (Allen & Meyer, 1990) and proposes a reconceptualization based on standard attitude theory. The authors use the attitude-behavior model by Eagly and Chaiken (1993) to demonstrate that the TCM combines fundamentally different attitudinal phenomena. They argue that general organizational commitment can best be understood as an attitude regarding the organization, while normative and continuance commitment are attitudes regarding specific forms of behavior (i.e., staying or leaving). The conceptual analysis shows that the TCM fails to qualify as general model of organizational commitment but instead represents a specific model for predicting turnover. The authors suggest that the use of the TCM be restricted to this purpose and that Eagly and Chaiken's model be adopted as a generic commitment model template from which a range of models for predicting specific organizational behaviors can be extracted. Finally, they discuss the definition and measurement of the organizational commitment attitude. Covering the affective, cognitive, and behavioral facets of this attitude helps to enhance construct validity and to differentiate the construct from other constructs.
本文对组织承诺的三成分模型（TCM）（艾伦和迈耶，1990）进行了概念性批判，并基于标准态度理论提出了一种重新概念化的观点。作者运用伊格利和柴肯（1993）的态度-行为模型来证明三成分模型将根本不同的态度现象结合在了一起。他们认为，一般组织承诺最好被理解为对组织的一种态度，而规范承诺和持续承诺则是对特定行为形式（即留下或离开）的态度。概念分析表明，三成分模型不能算作组织承诺的通用模型，而更像是一个预测离职率的特定模型。作者建议将三成分模型的使用局限于这一目的，并采用伊格利和柴肯的模型作为通用承诺模型模板，从中可以提取出一系列预测特定组织行为的模型。最后，他们讨论了组织承诺态度的定义和测量。涵盖这种态度的情感、认知和行为方面有助于提高结构效度，并将该结构与其他结构区分开来。
