Organizational Commitment and Leadership Styles

Abstract
This study attempts at examining organizational approach to leadership and workforce dedication among five private firms in Lahore, Pakistan. The study sample will be a total of 185 personnel (both females and males), chosen via convenience sampling. Subjects’ organizational dedication and leadership approach will be evaluated with the aid of the OCQ (Organizational Commitment Questionnaire) and MLQ (Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire). Data analysis will be conducted by relying on ANOVA (Analysis of Variance), correlation analysis, and regression analysis techniques. Research results will expand the extant knowledge pool.
Introduction
The term ‘organizational commitment’ encompasses an emotional bond, motivation, and a feeling of belongingness, which play a part in corporate development. An employee believes it is his/her ethical and moral obligation to consider and strive for the organization’s long-term development, which will also ultimately serve to help the employee fulfil individual goals (Gautam, Van Dick, & Wagner, 2004, p. 301). Essentially, this dedication is the bridge linking the organization and its workforce. It is a measure of their level of focus and engagement. Further, it informs one of the level of integration of individual and corporate goals (Feather & Rauter, 2004, p. 85). Personnel retention or dedication to a firm may occur for a number of reasons (e.g., psychological association with the firm resulting in love for one’s job, a lucrative compensation package, or financial stability which might be lost if the individual loses his/her job) (Loi, Hang? Yue, & Foley, 2006, p. 110).
Hence, by examining the multitude of reasons which might be responsible for ensuring an individual remains attached to the organization, one can clearly witness negative as well as positive impacts on personnel self-worth and job satisfaction (Lee & Peccei, 2007, p. 671). Corporate commitment reveals employees’ emotional attachment to the corporation and level of involvement (including motivation and the zeal to go the extra mile) displayed when it comes to fulfilling organizational goals. Thus, corporate commitment deals with measuring employees’ levels of association, interest, motivation and engagement with regard to a given company (Meyer, Becker, & Vandenberghe, 2004, p. 665). For the purpose of retaining personnel and paying closer attention to the reasons underlying their choice to continue working for the organization, the three-dimensional corporate commitment model will be used. The three dimensions of the model assist in understanding personnel conduct and ways of improving their commitment levels through taking those dimensions into account (Hennig-Thurau, 2004, p. 470).
Clearly, corporate commitment has major organizational as well as workforce implications, which have been studied by a number of research scholars in their many research works. According to Durkin and Bennett (2000, p. 127), resignations and truancy are a couple of adverse impacts linked to absence of personnel commitment to their job. As Drucker (1999, p. 112) suggests, modern-day corporations have been shifting towards organizational structures wherein rank implies responsibility rather than power, with the supervisor required to motivate and encourage rather than order his/her subordinates around. Thus, for being effective, managers must encourage their coworkers, superiors, and juniors to back their ideas and strategies, and inspire them to ensure the decisions taken are carried to fruition (Blickle, 2003, p. 51). Organizations must be aware of the elements significantly contributing to or affecting personnel commitment enhancement. Swanepoel, Scheck, Erasmus, and Van Wyk (2000, p. 64) underlined the fact that it is pivotal to adopt leadership approaches conducive to workforce commitment for successful organizational implementation of business plans, goal achievement, human resource optimization, and gaining an edge over competition. Prior managerial performance studies underscore the fact that a key element of effective management is managers’ capability of influencing other people. Committed workers are naturally more devoted and motivated to fulfil corporate goals (Pfeffer, 1998, 98).
Affective commitment. The term ‘affective commitment’ is used to refer to the degree of employees’ affection for and attachment to their organization. At times, personnel do get psychologically attached to the organization, which may be for a number of reasons, including healthy internal relations, peer motivation, and a friendly and good workplace climate (Knippenberg & Sleebos, 2006). According to this element of affective commitment, a workforce member remains with the company for the simple reason that he desires not to quit. Here, a congruence is witnessed between individual and corporate goals. In fact, workforce members who exhibit a high level of this dimension are typically shown to hold positive attitudes with regard to accomplishment of organizational goals owing to the fact that they lack an economic motive to remain with the organization (Powell & Meyer, 2004, p. 163).
Continuance commitment. The element of continuance commitment deals with the costs and risks linked to quitting a job. This dimension addresses personnel needs driving their decision to continue working for a given company. A workforce member may not quit his/her job for any of the following reasons: evaluation, compensation package, additional benefits like health insurance, or hopes of a promotion in the near future. Hence, the need for one or more of the aforementioned benefits will cause them to remain with the company (Powell & Meyer, 2004, p. 163). Therefore, this element reveals that personnel remain on account of their lack of more lucrative or advantageous substitutes and alternatives, in addition to their considerable degree of investment in the form of efforts, time, and potential future gain at the company where they are presently employed (Meyer et al., 2004, 991).
Normative commitment. The element of normative commitment deals with the level of engagement required of an employee in a given company. Personnel exhibiting normative commitment remain with the company as they think they ought to be doing so (Meyer & Parfyonova, 2010, p. 285). Normative commitment connects personnel’s ethical and moral beliefs with regard to their company. Personnel believe they are obliged to remain loyal to an organization which does them something good (Gellatly, Meyer, & Luchak, 2006, p. 336).
A workforce member who displays this form of commitment is dedicated to a firm owing to their belief that the firm offers them relevant benefits and caters to their individual needs. Such personnel remain with a company despite sometimes not experiencing adequate job satisfaction or despite having access to better job opportunities elsewhere (Gellatly et al., 2006, p. 336).
Leadership
One way of defining the term ‘leadership’ is: leadership denotes the exertion of influence on the part of one individual over others for facilitating the achievement of corporate or team objectives. It is widely believed that a leader is capable of making a difference by influencing individual employees, teams, or even whole companies. A leader is lauded if everything goes right and blamed if anything goes wrong. Leadership efficacy refers to how far leaders aid companies or teams in accomplishing their goals. Research scholars have attempted at finding an answer to the following question: why are certain leaders more effective as compared to others? The leadership behavior model revolves around what a leader actually does (or, in other words, the distinct behaviors that are performed by efficient leaders, which inefficient ones fail to carry out). This approach attempted at identifying leadership behaviors which facilitate individual, corporate or team goal attainment. A number of different researches have helped identify the following leadership behavior categories – initiating structure and consideration. The former class of behaviors refers to behaviors conducted for ensuring completion of corporate tasks and adequate subordinate performance of their respective jobs. Goal establishment, determination of a strategy for achieving set goals, work delegation among subordinates, and subordinate encouragement to perform tasks assigned come under initiating structure behaviors. On the other hand, the latter category of behaviors includes leadership trust in subordinates, and value and respect for sound leader-subordinate relationships (e.g., friendliness, making subordinates feel they are at equal rank with their leader, and adequately explaining their actions) (Hunter & Thatcher, 2007, p. 956).
Yukl (2005, p. 55) states that the wealth of research works on leadership theories may be classified into the following 5 general theories: behavioral, trait, situational or contingency, influence and power, and contemporary integrative approaches. The trait theory deals with intrinsic individual traits of leaders; the initial trait leadership theory was grounded in the idea that: a set of universal traits exist within a leader, which end up making them effective leaders; these traits are innate, fairly unchanging, and apply to diverse situations. The leadership models grouped under the behavioral theories deal with leaders’ behaviors.
The transactional approach to leadership is a give-take leadership approach (Bass, 1985, p. 112). The chief emphasis of transactional leaders is process; they follow systems wherein they are responsible for controlling their subordinates and activities to be performed on the basis of pre-determined targets. Subordinates are rewarded on the basis of how well they perform their jobs. For instance, personnel displaying poor performance are penalized, while good performance is appropriately rewarded. To put it simply, leaders decide on rewards for personnel based on task accomplishment levels (Hand, Hicks, & Bahr, 2015, p. 43).
The transformational style of leadership involves leaders and their subordinates helping one another progress to a more superior level of motivation and confidence (Nemanich & Keller, 2007, p. 51). A transformational leader, using his/her strong personality and corporate vision, can motivate those working under his/her wing to alter current perceptions, expectations, and drives, and strive to achieve shared objectives. According to Piccolo and Judge (2004, p. 760), a large number of positive results have been associated with the transformational leadership style. Research evidence indicates that a transformational leader has the capability of bringing about outcomes valued by a majority of employees, managers and overall organizations.
Transformational leaders effectively persuade their followers to put in extra efforts through directly boosting the latter’s self-confidence and expanding followers’ needs level and transcendental interests, thereby improving value of results (Bass, 1985). Subordinates in an organization that adopts the transformational approach to leadership display greater satisfaction with their superiors and their jobs, as compared to those wherein the laissez-faire leadership style is adopted. According to research evidence, a robust relationship can be found between the transformational approach to leadership and workforce members going the extra mile when it comes to accomplishing corporate tasks and goals (also called corporate citizenship behavior) (Judge & Picollo, 2004, p. 762). Furthermore, a transformational leader displays the potential to inspire followers to devote themselves to performing beyond what is ordinarily expected of them (Howell & Avolio, 1992, p. 44). In Bass’s (1990) view, this can happen in three chief ways, namely: 1) increasing personnel awareness of corporate goals; 2) urging colleagues to prioritize corporate goals over individual interests; and 3) stimulation and fulfilment of the higher-order requirements of subordinates on the part of organizational leaders.
Power distance has been linked more to the transactional leadership approach since, here, personnel are instructed by their superiors on task performance, thereby resulting in a larger superior-subordinate communication gap that, in turn, results in a particular degree of power distance.
This study attempts at investigating the association between leadership approach and organizational commitment among private sector firms in Lahore, Pakistan. A total of five private organizations were chosen (N=125).
Research Question(s)
This study attempts at resolving the research question outlined below:
How does leadership approach (transactional and transformational) impact organizational commitment within Pakistani private sector firms?
This research is significant since knowledge and understanding of the elements which ensure personnel commitment to the organization is imperative. It is essential to identify the leadership traits required of managers, to ensure personnel commitment to the company.
Literature Review
García-Morales, Gutiérrez-Gutiérrez, and Jiménez-Barrionuevo’s (2012) research work reveals the fact that a transformational style of leadership facilitates enhancement of overall corporate performance. They address organizational learning and innovation, which are causes underlying this improvement. Avolio, Koh, Bhatia, and Zhu (2004) surveyed a hospital setting and came to the conclusion that a transformational leadership approach improves organizational commitment. Seo, Hill, Taylor and Kang (2012) examined transformational leadership impacts on workforce’s normative commitment to the company. Their survey results proved that distinct corporate hierarchical levels make internal change implementation somewhat difficult. On the other hand, in case a transformational leadership style is adopted, with personnel positively motivated to support and adopt change, likelihood of resistance to change will be lower and that of adaptability, higher.
Joo, Jeung and Yoon (2012) discovered that personnel exhibit greater job commitment and satisfaction if their workplace climate is friendly, with superiors sharing and expressing their mission and vision in an open, friendly way. A majority of workers desire to be allowed to take part in the corporate decision-making process, or at least voice their opinions and ideas. Avolio and Bass (1993), when explaining the transformational style of leadership, state that individuals adopting this leadership strategy always first attempt at understanding an organization’s existing state of affairs, followed by analyzing the scenario and forming an opinion, and lastly discussing the matter with subordinates by making them feel they are a valuable part of their organization, and not mere followers. Transformational leaders treat subordinates as equals, thereby making the latter feel comfortable and guaranteeing long-term organizational commitment on the subordinates’ part.
Lo, Min and Ramayah (2009) explored personnel commitment and corporate leadership approach among organizations in Malaysia. A total of 156 Malaysian managers voluntarily took part in the research. Study findings suggested that a number of elements of the transformational and transactional approaches to leadership are positively linked to corporate commitment, with effects found to be more profound in case of the latter approach.  Mclaggan, Botha and Bezuidenhout’s (2013) research attempted at ascertaining the link between corporate commitment (gauged using the OCQ), and the aforementioned two approaches to leadership (gauged using the MLQ 5X), at a Phola-based coal mining site. The study sample included a total of 88 subjects using random sampling technique. A cross-sectional, quantitative survey design method was utilized for data collection. Both research instruments depicted satisfactory internal consistencies. A statistically significant linkage was revealed between the study variables.
Yarmohammadian and Rad (2006) theorized that a significant linkage exists between corporate commitment and approach to leadership, since leaders practicing sound leadership when it comes to corporate function planning and implementation will be able to successfully inspire the workforce to remain committed to their firm. Moreover, Lee (2005) holds that a positive relationship exists between corporate commitment and a transformational style of leadership, as transformational leaders’ regard for subordinates’ uniqueness and independence, and their readiness to coach subordinates accordingly will, essentially, result in meaningful superior-subordinate exchanges (Lee, 2005).
Rothmann and Stander (2008) discovered that leadership behavior positively influences personnel’s job-related attitudes, which, successively, lead to personnel commitment to the organization. A research into the subject of leadership in the form of a commitment predictor revealed a major positive association between the two aspects (Yousef, 1998). Devos and Hulpia’s (2010) study findings indicate that commitment of secondary school educators to their educational institution was greater in schools where leaders could be easily accessed, everyday educator practices were regularly monitored, educators were empowered to take part in problem solving, and issues were effectively dealt with. Leach’s (2005) staff nurse-, nurse executive-, and nurse manager- focused research revealed that an inverse linkage exists between alienative commitment and nurse executives’ adoption of transactional and transformational leadership styles.
Chelladurai and Kent (2001) suggested that personalized consideration relates positively to normative as well as affective commitment. Likewise, intellectual stimulation is positively linked to normative as well as affective commitment. According to Avolio and Bass (1994), a transformational leader who urges subordinates to engage in innovative and critical thinking has the potential to impact subordinate commitment. Lawler and Walumbwa (2003) corroborate the above finding, claiming transformational leaders are able to inspire and improve subordinate commitment and motivation, through comprehending their distinctive needs and ensuring they arrive at creative resolutions to corporate issues. Lastly, Price (1997) believes personnel will display far greater likelihood of organizational commitment if they trust their superiors.
Hypotheses
1. A transactional leadership style is associated positively with organizational commitment.
1. A transformational leadership style is associated positively with organizational commitment.
Model of the Study

Research Design: Data Collection and Analysis
This is a quantitative research which will adopt a correlational study design. The study sample will be a total of 125 subjects (both female and male) employed at five private firms in Lahore, Pakistan. Samples will be selected using convenience sampling. Research subjects would have diverse qualification levels and represent diverse organizational roles.
Research Questionnaires
The MLQ (Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire) (Bass & Avolio, 1990): The 32-question MLQ measures transformational as well as transactional leadership behavior. Individual elements of transactional as well as transformational leadership are measured, including idealized influence (behavior), idealized influence (attributes), intellectual stimulation, inspirational motivation, management by exception active, individualized consideration, and contingent rewards.
The OCQ (Organizational Commitment Questionnaire) (Meyer, Allen & Smith, 1993): The 18-item OCQ helps gauge the following dimensions of workforce organizational commitment, namely: normative, affective, and continuance commitment. Participants are required to respond using a 5-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree, and 5=strongly agree).
Data Table
Concept
Who possesses the information
How will the information be collected
How will the information be measured

Leadership approach
Private companies’ employees
Survey method (questionnaires)
36 item questionnaire

Organizational commitment
Private companies’ employees
Survey method (questionnaires)
18 item questionnaire
5-point Likert scale (1-5)



Data Analysis
The SPSS data analysis software will be employed for analyzing collected information. ANOVA, correlation analysis, and regression will help determine the link between variables and their impact on one another.
Research Issues
This study may be expected to encounter a number of potential obstacles and problems from start to completion. For instance, incomplete or incorrect information may be provided by participants, owing to anonymity and confidentiality concerns. Thus, participants will be assured that their answers to questionnaire items and any other information disclosed by them will remain confidential. Expected time frame for research completion is: between 7 and 9 months. Research conclusions will be grounded entirely in information that is gleaned by the research subjects. Since the subjects are small in number (i.e., 125 only), it will not be possible to make any strong claim for or against the study. The basis for analysis of the subject will be information gleaned from a total of 5 organizations within one single city (i.e., Lahore, Pakistan), thereby not representing all cities in the nation. Thus, outcome generalization is not possible. Future studies may examine gaps in approaches to leadership which potentially hamper organizational performance and prevent corporate development, impact of these gaps on a nation’s overall economic advancement, and ways of alleviating them. Researchers may also address other elements which may help improve upon the existing strategies of organizations, and their future plans.
Though the survey questions utilized for the purpose of this study have been made as clear and concise as possible, one cannot know whether participants will be able to properly understand questions’ intended contextual meaning.


References
Avolio, B. J., Zhu, W., Koh, W., & Bhatia, P. (2004). Transformational leadership and organizational commitment: Mediating role of psychological empowerment and moderating role of structural distance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(8), 951–968.
Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1993). Transformational leadership and organizational culture. Public Administration Quarterly, 112–121.
Bass, B.M., & Avolio, B.J. (1990). Developing transformational leadership: 1992 and beyond. Journal of European Industrial Training, 14(5), 21–27. 
Bennet H, Durkin M (2000). The effects of organisational change on employee psychological attachment: An exploratory study. J. Manage. Psychol, 15, 126-147.
Blickle, G. (2003). Convergence of agents’ and targets’ reports on intraorganizational influence attempts. Eur. J. Psychol, 19, 40-53.
Drucker, P. F. (1999). The shape of things to come. In F. Hesselbein and P. Cohen (Eds.). Leader to leader: Enduring insights on leadership from the Drucker Foundation’s award-winning J. pp. 109-120). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
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(1), 81–94.
García-Morales, V. J., Jiménez-Barrionuevo, M. M., & Gutiérrez-Gutiérrez, L. (2012). Transformational leadership influence on organizational performance through organizational learning and innovation. Journal of Business Research, 65(7), 1040–1050
Gautam, T., Van Dick, R., & Wagner, U. (2004). Organizational identification and organizational commitment: Distinct aspects of two related concepts. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 7(3), 301–315.
Gellatly, I. R., Meyer, J. P., & Luchak, A. A. (2006). Combined effects of the three commitment components on focal and discretionary behaviors: A test of Meyer and Herscovitch’s propositions. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 69(2), 331–345.
Hand, L. E., Hicks, R., & Bahr, M. (2015). Relationships among transformational and transactional leadership styles, role pressures, stress levels, and coping resources in senior Queensland catholic education executives. Review of Business Research, 15(1), 43.
Hennig-Thurau, T. (2004). Customer orientation of service employees: Its impact on customer satisfaction, commitment, and retention. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 15(5), 460–478.
Hill, N. S., Seo, M.-G., Kang, J. H., & Taylor, M. S. (2012). Building employee commitment to change across organizational levels: The influence of hierarchical distance and direct managers’ transformational leadership. Organization Science, 23(3), 758–777.
Howell, J. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1992). The ethics of charismatic leadership: Submission or liberation. Academy of Management Executive, 6(2), 43–56.
Hunter, L. W. & Thatcher, S. M. B. (2007). Feeling the heat: Effects of stress, commitment, and job experience on job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 50(4) 953-968.
Joo, B.-K., Jun Yoon, H., & Jeung, C.-W. (2012). The effects of core self-evaluations and transformational leadership on organizational commitment. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 33(6), 564–582.
Judge, T.A., & Piccolo, R.F. (2004). Transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analytic test of their relative validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(5), 755–768.
Kent A, Chelladurai P (2001). Perceived transformational leadership, organizational commitment and citizenship behavior: A case study in intercollegiate athletics. J. Sport Manage. 15(2), 135-159.
Lee, J. (2005). Effects of leadership and leader-member exchange on commitment. Leadership and Organizational Development Journal, 26(8), 655–672. 
Lee, J., & Peccei, R. (2007). Perceived organizational support and affective commitment: the mediating role of organization?based self?esteem in the context of job insecurity. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28(6), 661–685.
Lo, May-Chiun, Ramayah, T., & Min, H. W. (2009). Leadership styles and organizational commitment: A test on Malaysia manufacturing industry. African Journal of Marketing Management, 1(6) pp. 133-139.
Loi, R., Hang?Yue, N., & Foley, S. (2006). Linking employees’ justice perceptions to organizational commitment and intention to leave: The mediating role of perceived organizational support. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 79(1), 101– 120.
Mclaggan, E., Bezuidenhout, A., & Botha, C. (2013). Leadership style and organisational commitment in the mining industry in Mpumalanga. SA Journal of Human Resource, 11(1).
Meyer, J. P., & Parfyonova, N. M. (2010). Normative commitment in the workplace: A theoretical analysis and re-conceptualization. Human Resource Management Review, 20(4), 283–294.
Meyer, J. P., Becker, T. E., & Vandenberghe, C. (2004). Employee commitment and motivation: a conceptual analysis and integrative model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(6), 991.
Meyer, J., Becker, T., & Van Dick, R. (2007). Social identities and commitments at work: Toward an integrative model. Human Resources Abstracts, 42, 660-665.
Meyer, J.P., Allen, N.J., & Smith, A. (1993). Commitment to organizations and occupations: Extension and test of a three-component conceptualization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 538–555. 
Nemanich, L.A., & Keller, R.T. (2007). Transformational leadership in an acquisition. A field of study of employees. Leadership Quarterly, 18, 49–68. 
Pfeffer J (1998). Seven practices of successful org Pavett anizations. Calif. Manage. Rev. 40: 96-123
Powell, D. M., & Meyer, J. P. (2004). Side-bet theory and the three-component model of organizational commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 65(1), 157–177.
Rad, A.M.M., & Yarmohammadian, M.H. (2006). A study of relationship between managers’ leadership style and employees’ job satisfaction. Leadership in Health Services, 19(2).
Stander, M.W., & Rothmann, S. (2008). The relationship between leadership, job satisfaction and organisational commitment. South African Journal of Human Resources, 6(3), 7–13.
Swanepoel, B., Erasmus, B., Van, W., & Scheck, H. (2000). South African Human Resource Management: Theory and Practice. Kenwyn: Juta.
Walumbwa, F. O., & Lawler, J. J. (2003). Building effective organizations: transformational leadership, collectivist orientation, work-related attitudes and withdrawal behaviors in three emerging economies. Int. J. Hum. Res. Manage, 14, 1083-1101.
Yousef DA (2000). Organizational commitment: a mediator of the relationships of leadership behavior with job satisfaction and performance in a non-western country. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 15(1), 6-24.
Yukl, G. A. (2005). Leadership in organizations (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.