EMPLOYEE EMPOWERMENT

AND ITS RELATION TO

AFFECTIVE COMMITMENT

Eveliene Westgeest
Student nr.: 337965
Thesis Coach: dr. Michala Schippers
Co-reader: dr. Peter van Baalen
Date: September, 2011
Master Thesis MSc. Business Administration
Human Resource Management, RSM Erasmus University

New World of Work

For the first time in human history, we now can have the best of both worlds
the economic and scale efficiencies of large organizations, and the human
benefits of small ones: freedom, motivation, creativity, and flexibility.
- Thomas W. Malone in: The Future of Work (2004) -

The author declares that the text and work presented in this Master thesis is original and that
no sources other than those mentioned in the text and its references have been used in creating
this Master thesis.

The copyright of the Master thesis rests with the author. The author is responsible for its
contents. RSM Erasmus University is only responsible for the educational coaching and
beyond that cannot be held responsible for the content.
i

Acknowledgments
This thesis is the final challenge that I took up in order to finish my master Human Resource
Management. The moment I am writing this preface makes me look back on the last months,
and on the process that led me to reach my final goal. Finishing this assignment means that I
will no longer be a student at the Erasmus University. The end of my student life also implies
a new starting point with many new challenges ahead. I was able to finish my thesis in only a
few months' time and therefore I would like to thank especially some of my colleagues and
friends who have been supportive.
First of all I would like to thank the Erasmus@work research group for enabling me to
join the New World of Work Research project. Being part of this group increased my
enthusiasm and determination to write my thesis. I owe many thanks to my coach, Dr.
Michaela Schippers ,who stood by me at critical moments during the process of writing my
thesis. I would also like to thank my co-reader Dr. Van Baalen, who reviewed my thesis in a
critical way, while thinking along with me. Writing my master thesis would not have been
possible without the cooperation of Rabobank, I would therefore like to thank the employees
who filled out the questionnaire.
Finally, I would like to thank my family and friends. From the moment of choosing a
topic until the moment I handed in my thesis, they always supported me. Their everlasting
trust encouraged me to persevere and made me believe that this challenge was not impossible
for me.

Eveliene Westgeest
Amsterdam, September 2011

ii

Executive Summary
Empowerment can be of great value for a company and its employees. However, to be able to
benefit most from giving employees empowerment, it is not only important to focus on the
achievements that could be gained by giving employees empowerment, but also to take into
account the possible disadvantages and risks. This study investigates the relations between the
dimensions of empowerment (impact, competence, meaning and self-determination) and
affective commitment. This study also investigates the interactional effects of the dimensions
of empowerment with job engagement and trust in the management on affective commitment.
The research was done among Dutch employees working at the Rabobank. Rabobank
has an internal program which is focused on giving employees more responsibilities and more
autonomy in their work. This program has been implemented gradually, and employees who
were just acquainted with the program have been approached for this study.
The results of this study show two main effects, the first main effect is a marginally
significant one with empowerment meaning and the second one is a significant inverted ushaped relationship. Besides significant moderating effects are shown. The results show that
empowerment meaning is positively related to affective commitment. Thus, when an
employee feels his work is meaningful and fits in with his personal ideals, it positively relates
to affective commitment. An inverted u-shaped relation is found between self-determination
and affective commitment. This means that an increase from low to moderate levels of selfdetermination is associated with an increase in affective commitment. However, affective
commitment decreases at relatively high levels of self-determination.
In addition to these effects, there are also certain moderating effects. The results show
that job engagement can strengthen or weaken the relationship between empowerment
competence and affective commitment. The highest degree of affective commitment can be
achieved by a low level of competence and a high level of job engagement. The results also
show moderating effects with trust in the management and three dimensions of
empowerment: impact, meaning and competence. When an employee scores low on
empowerment meaning, the degree of identification with organizational goals, and scores high
on trust in the management, this leads to the highest degree of affective commitment. When
the employee has already identified his own goals with those of the organization, trust in the
management does not play a large role. The second interaction to achieve the highest degree
of affective commitment, shows the employee has to feel he has an impact on the
organizational outcome and trusts the management. Finally, a low score on an employees
iii

competence in combination with a high score on trust in the management causes the highest
score on affective commitment. For these latter two interactions with the dimensions impact
and competence, the degree of trust in the management is especially important when the
employee already has a high score on these dimensions.
Empowering people does not automatically cause benefits for the organization. It is
important to take into account the degree in which employees are empowered, as well as the
role of job engagement and trust in the management.

iv

Table of Contents
1.

Introduction............................................................................................................................... 1

2.

Literature................................................................................................................................... 4

3.

4.

5.

2.1

Current environment ......................................................................................................... 4

2.2

Knowledge workers .......................................................................................................... 4

2.3

Empowerment ................................................................................................................... 6

2.4

Affective commitment ...................................................................................................... 8

2.5

Relationship between empowerment and affective commitment ................................... 10

2.6

Extra analysis .................................................................................................................. 11

2.7

Job engagement ............................................................................................................... 13

2.8

The interaction between job engagement and empowerment ......................................... 13

2.9

The interaction between job engagement and the dimensions of empowerment ............ 14

2.10

Trust in management ....................................................................................................... 16

2.11

The interaction between trust management and empowerment ...................................... 16

2.12

The interaction between trust management and the dimensions of empowerment......... 16

Relevance, Research Goal & Contribution ............................................................................. 18

3.1

Relevance ........................................................................................................................ 18

3.2

Research goal .................................................................................................................. 19

3.3

Contribution .................................................................................................................... 20

Research model and hypotheses ............................................................................................. 21

4.1

Research model ............................................................................................................... 21

4.2

Summary of hypotheses .................................................................................................. 21

Research methods ................................................................................................................... 24

5.1

Sample ............................................................................................................................. 24

5.2

Procedure ........................................................................................................................ 24

5.3

Measures ......................................................................................................................... 25

5.3.1 Empowerment ................................................................................................................ 25

5.3.2 Affective commitment ................................................................................................... 25
5.3.3 Job engagement ............................................................................................................. 26
5.3.4 Trust in management ..................................................................................................... 26
5.3.5 Control variables ............................................................................................................ 26
5.3.6 Summary Descriptives ................................................................................................... 27
6.

Results..................................................................................................................................... 28
6.1

Factor Analysis ............................................................................................................... 28

v

6.2

Correlations ..................................................................................................................... 29

6.3

Regression analysis ......................................................................................................... 32

6.3.1 Exploring Regression Analysis: Empowerment divided in four dimensions ................ 32

6.3.2 Final Regression Analysis: Empowerment divided in four dimensions ........................ 33
6.3.3 Multicollinearity ............................................................................................................ 34
6.4

Hypotheses testing .......................................................................................................... 36

6.4.1 Relationship between empowerment and affective commitment .................................. 36

6.4.2 Relationships between dimensions empowerment and affective commitment ............ 36
6.4.3. Moderating effect of Job engagement .......................................................................... 37
6.4.4. Moderating effect of trust in the management .............................................................. 37
6.4.5. Final results interactions ............................................................................................... 39
6.5
7.

Extra analysis .................................................................................................................. 43

Discussion ............................................................................................................................... 44

8. Conclusion .................................................................................................................................. 47
8.1

Strengths, limitations and future research ....................................................................... 49

8.2

Practical implications ...................................................................................................... 50

8.2.1 Putting it into practice .................................................................................................... 51

Bibliography ................................................................................................................................... 53
Appendix A: Measurements concepts ............................................................................................ 57
Appendix B: Explorative Regression Analysis with dependent variable Affective Commitment. 58
Appendix C: Tolerance and VIF values ......................................................................................... 59

vi

1.

Introduction

Imagine, you have a full-time nine to five job and the office is one hour by car from your
house. Taking the traffic into account, you depart at half past seven in the morning. When you
are lucky, your working day ends at five o clock, but usually the meeting takes longer and
you will not make it on time for dinner. During your car drive you think about the day at the
office and realize you did a great job for the boss, you finished all the tasks your manager
specified for you. However, if you look closer it was a great job for your boss, but are you
really satisfied by performing precisely what your boss wanted you to do? This is not why
you did four years of study! Fortunately, your lovely spouse already heated up your food and
you are exactly on time to watch the evening news. Unfortunately, the children are sleeping
already as it is almost every time on a midweek day. After a while, you get used to it, but this
is obviously not an ideal situation.
Now imagine the situation from a different point of view. You are the manager of an
organization, having a lot of deadlines, impossible to achieve all by yourself. Whats more,
you have the feeling that the expectations of your employees are changing; they seem to want
to solve problems by themselves and do not want to be told in detail what to do day after day.
Sometimes you secretly think of a way to delegate decision making by giving your employees
in the organization some of your responsibilities. But how do you know for sure that they can
manage these responsibilities? Giving employees autonomy in their jobs, but still telling them
how to perform the task in detail and controlling their behavior, does not make a lot of sense.
In the last few decades, a lot has changed for organizations, leadership and employees. In this
rapidly changing environment, in which globalizing organizations have to deal with a lot of
competition, and which is characterized by immense developments in technology, by
employees who attach great importance to self-employment and self-determination and by
organizations processes and rules that are no longer top-down, there is a need for research.
In contemporary economy, concepts like autonomy, empowerment, knowledge
workers, commitment and job engagement are widely used to improve performance in several
ways. Companies and in scientific literature show great differences in their approach to
organization management. There are different kinds of organizations varying for example in
products, in technology facilities, size, workforce and purpose which requires a unique
approach. And even organizations which are very similar to each other may well show a lot of
differences in, for example the delegation of power.

Our economy has changed from an industrial economy into a knowledge economy
(Drucker, 1993). During this period a lot has changed, the focus has shifted away from the
manual worker to the knowledge worker. In his book The future of work, Malone (2004)
states that we are in a revolution. In the past it was accepted that people could exercise power
over others in society, and this was also common practice within companies. In the current
revolution mentioned by Malone, personal desires are more important. For example the
knowledge workers attach great importance to personal desires like flexibility, freedom,
creativity and motivation. According to Davenport (2005) knowledge workers are
characterized by their need for a certain degree of autonomy in their work and their
unwillingness to share knowledge. This is because their knowledge can be seen as a
competitive advantage, something that makes a knowledge worker special and valuable for
the organization, which the employee would want to protect. However his unwillingness to
share knowledge also can be caused by a lack of trust. In both cases this leads to a situation in
which employees will not share knowledge in the interest of the organization, but will only
think of their individual interests. The degree in which employees have an energetic and
effective connection with their work activities and see themselves as able to deal completely
with the demands of their job is called engagement (Schaufeli et al, 2002).
In present-day knowledge economy it is important to know how to deal with the needs
and characteristics of the knowledge worker and his degree of job engagement. A concept that
concerns power and preferred autonomy is the concept of empowerment. There is a growing
consensus that employee empowerment can be a source of competitive advantage for
contemporary organizations (Quinn & Spreitzer, 1999). The concept of empowerment may
play an important role in meeting organizations' demands.
One of the outcomes influenced by empowerment is commitment. Commitment refers,
according to Porter et al. (1974), to the strength of an individual's identification with and
involvement in a particular organization. The degree of commitment can positively influence
several organizations outcomes. However, besides this positive image around the concept of
empowerment, is there any chance a company empowers its employees too much? In general,
is there a positive relationship between empowerment and commitment, in which an increase
in empowerment causes an increase in commitment, or is there a chance that this relationship
might change from a certain degree of empowerment? In other words, is there a risk of losing
the employees connection with the company because they are allowed too much
empowerment? Committing the knowledge workers can be of great importance to keep them
focused on the overall goal of the organization so that the knowledge workers will not become
2

too individualistic and to make them more willing to share their knowledge and not behave in
a selfish way, which eventually can lead to better overall performance. Prior research has
already shown that empowerment and commitment are related, but could there be variables
that influence this relationship? For example, what is the role of job engagement in this
relationship or the role of trust?
The aim of this thesis is to gain a clear insight into the relation between employees
involvement and their identification with the organization, and empowerment to knowledge
workers, taking into account the new (flexible) working environment with its rapidly
changing technologies. In specific, the focus will be on affective commitment, in the sense of
the employee who prefers to stay within the organization. Affective commitment is related to
several beneficial behaviors. As already mentioned it is important to keep the knowledge
worker focused on the overall goal of the organization and besides it is important to keep the
knowledge worker within the organization in order to keep the knowledge. Besides, the
effects of job engagement and trust in the management in this relationship will be examined.
The following research question has been formulated:

How does empowerment influence the employees affective commitment to the organization
and what is the role of job engagement and trust in management in this relationship?

In this thesis first the literature will be discussed related to the study. In addition the
hypotheses are specified. In the third chapter the relevance, the research goal and contribution
are defined. In the fourth chapter the research model and a summary of the hypotheses are
presented. How the model is tested is specified in chapter 5. In chapter 6 the results found in
this research are presented. These main findings and results serve as a basis for a conclusion
and for future research.

2.

Literature

2.1

Current environment

During the transition phase of the industrial economy to the knowledge economy, a lot has
changed. The focus has shifted away from the manual worker to the knowledge worker.
Todays society is characterized by individualization and quite some development in
information technology. In the past, people lived in communities. Within these communities
people shared beliefs, standards and values. Gradually this changed and people became more
detached of these communities and consequently more aware of their own interests and
desires. Besides, they became more independent in structuring their life. This trend can be
seen in business life as well, in a way that people are more demanding and attach more value
to freedom, flexibility and creativity (Malone 2004). Besides this change in society,
information technology has developed immensely. This has led to lower communication
costs, has ensured fading boundaries and has made the world smaller and larger
simultaneously. As to knowledge sharing, these developments make the world smaller,
because distance no longer plays an important role, and larger because more knowledge is
available. Increased opportunities to share knowledge have also influenced business life.
When information sharing is easier, organizations can operate outside their boundaries.
Within organizations information technology plays an important role as well. The revolution
in business life dealing with power and control mentioned by Malone (2004) is possible
because of information technology development. Employees or knowledge workers have the
possibility to share more information in a shorter period of time. Drucker (1993) mentioned
the need to pay more attention to knowledge work and knowledge workers influenced by the
development of information technology. He also emphasized that the most important
contribution of management in the 20th century was the immense fifty-fold increase of the
productivity of the manual worker. In the 21st century the most important contribution needs
to be a similar increase in productivity of the knowledge worker.

2.2

Knowledge workers

In his book Thinking for a living, Davenport (2005) defines knowledge workers as follows:
Knowledge workers have high degrees of expertise, education, or experience, and the
primary focus of their jobs involves the creation, distribution, or application of knowledge
(p.10).

This definition still does not make clear the exact characteristics of a knowledge
worker and how can be determined if an organization has to do with them. According to
Davenport (2005) a knowledge worker can be characterized by six characteristics, listed and
summarized underneath.
1. Knowledge workers like autonomy: Knowledge workers are hired for their
knowledge and are paid for their expertise, experience and education. As a result, they can be
offensive when someone else interferes in his or her area of expertise. However, the
knowledge worker does not want his work to be ignored by others and wants to be informed
about the broader significance of his task. A certain degree of autonomy is preferred.
2. Specifying the detailed steps and flow of knowledge-intensive processes is less
valuable and more difficult than of other types of work: In the first place it is not very useful
to analyze process workflows of a knowledge worker, because another knowledge worker
could perform the same task in a different way. Moreover, it could be very complex in some
cases. Sometimes it is impossible to describe the workflow when the number of variations is
too great.
3. You can observe a lot by watching: It is very hard to describe the working processes
of a knowledge worker, therefore the technique of observation is often used to get a better
insight in the process.
4. Knowledge workers often have good reasons for doing what they do: one needs to
take the workers at their word or deed. Knowledge workers have a certain way of working
and have their reasons for acting like they do.
5. Commitment matters: It is inconceivable for the knowledge worker to achieve a
great performance when he or she is not mentally and emotionally committed to the job. As
noted earlier, the knowledge worker prefers a certain degree of autonomy. A perception of
fairness and giving the knowledge worker a say can foster his commitment.
6. Knowledge workers value their knowledge, and dont share it easily: To a
knowledge worker, knowledge is his competitive advantage, as something very valuable and
distinctive. Knowing this, a knowledge worker is probably not willing to just share his
knowledge.
In short, managing knowledge workers with the aim of excellent performance,
demands a deliberate approach. Taken into account the preferred autonomy and the required
commitment to the job, attempts should be made to keep the knowledge worker within the
organization. Besides, the unclear work processes and thereby the need for trust in the

employee possibly calls for changes in leadership style. Finally, one needs to deal with the
unwillingness of the knowledge worker to share knowledge.

2.3

Empowerment

In his book The Future of Work Malone (2004) describes the current revolution in business
which involves power and control. There are several ways to deal with power and control in
an organization and it is important to take into account the present environment. In his book,
Malone states that because of the importance of knowledge workers and development in
information technology, decentralization in organizations can be expected. Malone defines
decentralization as participation of people in making the decisions that matter to them(P. 5).
The concept of decentralization described by Malone is close to another concept that deals
with power and control, empowerment. According to Liden & Tewksbury (1995)
empowerment is an important construct because it offers the potential to positively influence
outcomes that benefit both individuals and organizations. Besides Quinn and Spreitzer (1999)
mention that there is a growing consensus that employee empowerment can be a source of
competitive advantage for contemporary organizations. The concept of empowerment is
defined in a variety of ways, by a number of researchers.
According to Rodwells analysis (1996) the concept is widely used in society for
several ideologies. In this analysis she describes that the concept of empowerment would
appear to be a process of enabling or imparting power transfer from one individual or group to
another. This means for example that someone gets the right to make a decision while this
right previously belonged to someone else. Spreitzer and Doneson (2005) define the concept
with a focus on employees, and deepen the definition of Rodwell (1996) by stating that
empowering practices allow employees to decide on their own how they will deal with a
problem.
Aside from different definitions of empowerment, the concept is also in several ways
divided in literature. Quinn and Spreitzer (1999) discovered two very different perspectives of
empowerment during interviews in an organization that had started an empowerment
program. The researchers advocate two approaches, a mechanistic approach, referring to a top
down process in which empowerment is about delegating decision making within a set of
boundaries, and an organic approach implying a bottom up process in which empowerment is
seen as a process of risk taking and personal growth.

Spreitzer and Doneson (2005) review three perspectives used by contemporary

management scholars and practitioners to understand empowerment. First, the social
structural perspective emphasizes the importance of shifting away from organizational
policies and structures that foster powerlessness, toward high involvement practices. Second,
the psychological perspective refers to a set of psychological conditions necessary for
individuals to feel in control of their own destiny and third, the critical perspective argues that
feeling empowered is not the same as being empowered. Taking into account these different
perspectives, empowering people partly appears to be about implementation and facilitating
people and partly about awareness and allowing people time to get used to it. Saying to people
they are empowered, is also not the same as feeling empowered.
In their focus on the psychological perspective of empowerment, which takes into
account the internal processes of the employee, Thomas and Velthouse (1990) mention four
dimensions. Individuals make judgments with respect to various tasks and use them to
interpret their working situation. The four dimensions mentioned by Thomas and Velthouse
are meaning, competence, self-determination and impact. Meaning is the dimension in which
the individual assesses his working activities as meaningful, depending on the degree of fit
between work role or goals and personal beliefs, values and behaviors. Impact is about
making a difference in one's working environment and the extent to which outcomes in work
can be influenced. Competence refers to the belief of ones capability to perform work
activities, also called self-efficacy, which is comparable to self-esteem. The dimensions
impact and competence defer in the way that impact focuses on perceived control in the
working environment and competence focuses on control on ones work activities (Butts et
al., 2009). Self-determination refers to the sense of autonomy and the degree to which
decisions can be made about how to perform the task. According to Stander and Rothman
(2009) the four dimensions of psychological empowerment create an overall construct of
psychological empowerment. The lack of one of the four dimensions will cause a decrease,
but not completely eliminate the overall effect of experienced empowerment. For example, in
the case that someone cannot identify his own goals with the ones of the organization, he
could feel that he can contribute to the goals and outcomes of the organization to a high
degree. In this way, by splitting empowerment into four dimensions, it is possible to examine
the origin of a sense of empowerment.
Research already showed the influence of empowerment on several outcome variables
and in several environments. In a study conducted among staff nurses, empowerment showed
increased levels in trust, which in turn had a positive influence on affective commitment. This
7

research also showed an increased work effectiveness (Laschinger et al, 1999). Previous
research of Jun et al. (2006) and Spreitzer et al. (1997) showed that empowerment has a
significant influence on job satisfaction. The first research showed results in Maquiladoras in
Mexico, locations for off shoring manufacturing. And the research of Spreitzer et al. showed
results in a manufacturing and a service organization sample.

2.4

Affective commitment

According to Suliman and Iles (2000), organizational performance is determined for a

significant part by the level of organizational commitment. Besides, organizational
commitment affects or is related to other outcomes, like employees absenteeism (Sagie,
1998) and turnover (Somers, 1995). In literature commitment is defined in many ways. Porter
et al. (1974) describe commitment as the strength of an individual's identification with and
involvement in a particular organization (p. 604). Building on this definition, following the
article of Allen and Meyer (1990) organization commitment emphasizes the attachment to an
employing organization, including its goals and values and thereby define it as a mindset.
This mindset or psychological state concerns the employees relationship with the
organization. In this article organization commitment is divided in three components;
affective commitment, continuance commitment and normative commitment. First, affective
commitment refers to the employees emotional attachment to, identification with and
involvement in, the organization (p.1) or to the employees' emotional bond to their
organization (Rhoades et al, 2001, p.825). Secondly, continuance commitment refers to the
recognition of costs when leaving the organization. Kanter (1968, p. 504) defines continuance
commitment as profit associated with continued participation and a cost associated with
leaving and thus the importance and the benefits of remaining within the organization.
According to Meyer and Allen (1990) both components or views cause a decrease in leaving
the organization, but affective commitment is about the employee's wish to be part of the
organization and wants to stay in the organization and continuance commitment is about the
need to stay within the organization. Finally, normative commitment is about the obligation of
staying with the organization from a moral point of view. In their article on lifetime
commitment, Marsh and Manaari (1977) define this to be a sense of moral duty to stay within
the organization, independent of the satisfaction the employee gains by it. Allen and Meyer
(1990) use this definition for explaining normative commitment. In their concept, there is
again a link with turnover, but here it concerns a sense of expectation.
8

The insights mentioned above about commitment are important, because they show in
which ways employees can be committed to the organization. When viewing the metaanalysis conducted by Meyer et al. (2002), we can draw the overall conclusion that the
strongest correlations exist between affective commitment and the outcome variables. In this
analysis the three components are examined on turnover and withdrawal cognition,
absenteeism, job performance, organizational citizen behavior, and finally stress and workfamily conflict. For all these outcomes the correlation with affective commitment is
considered the strongest. Work behaviors like attendance, job performance and organizational
citizen behavior have the strongest positive relationship with affective commitment, followed
by normative commitment. Continuance commitment is not positively related to these
variables, but is unrelated or negatively related to these behaviors.
Apart from the results of this meta-analysis, other research also showed some positive
relations: Affective commitment is assumed to be positively related to behaviors that are
beneficial to the organization such as performance, attendance, and staying with the
organization (Mathieu & Zajac, 1990; Meyer & Allen, 1997; Mowday, Porter, & Steers,
1982; Randall, 1990).
When viewing the three above mentioned components of commitment, we assume that
empowerment will especially influence the affective component or the normative component
of commitment. The affective component because research already showed a positive relation
between empowerment and affective commitment (Laschinger et al., 1999). Also a
relationship between empowerment and job satisfaction has been demonstrated (Jun et al.,
2006; Spreitzer et al., 1997). Job satisfaction is defined here as the degree to which an
employee is proud of his or her company, and satisfied with the job. A relation between
empowerment and normative commitment can be expected because of a sense of obligation
caused by empowering the employee, for example when he is given more autonomy. A
relation between empowerment and continuance commitment is less obvious, because the
degree of continuance commitment depends on the need to stay in the organization and is
assumed not to be caused by empowerment. It can be very important to hold people within
the organization, working toward the same goal and achieving a good performance. For this
research there will be a focus on the relation between empowerment and affective
commitment, because of the strongest correlations found with desired outcomes (Meyer et al.,
2002). There will be examined how psychological empowerment is related to affective
commitment.

2.5

Relationship between empowerment and affective commitment

Regarding the characteristics and desires of the contemporary knowledge workers, the
concept of empowerment may play an important role by meeting their demands. One of the
outcomes influenced by empowerment is commitment. Previous research of Avolio et al.
(2004) already showed this relationship. In this research also is mentioned that empowered
employees are more willing to reciprocate with higher levels of commitment. In the research a
definition of organization commitment is used from Mowday et al. (1982). In their research
they define the concept as the relative strength of an identification and involvement in a
particular organization (1982, p.27). In another research of Laschinger et al. (1999) the
relationship between empowerment and affective commitment, in which trust plays an
important role, has already been shown. Does this relationship still exist in the contemporary
competitive and rapidly changing working environment, in which there is an increase in
knowledge workers?

H1: A relationship is expected between empowerment and affective commitment.

When we split the concept of empowerment up into the four dimensions specified by
Thomas and Velthouse (1990) we expect three relationships to be positive. First, we expect a
positive relationship between empowerment impact and affective commitment. Previous
research has not shown the relationship between impact and affective commitment. However,
Ashforth (1990) argues that fostering a sense of control can stimulate involvement. It may be
assumed that when an employee feels that he really contributes to department goals, affective
commitment will be higher.

H2A: People who score high on empowerment impact, will score high on affective
commitment.

The dimension meaning is also assumed to be related to affective commitment. A

positive relation is expected between empowerment meaning and affective commitment.
Spreitzer (1995) and Liden et al. (2000) already showed a positive relationship between the
dimension meaning and organizational commitment. When an employee feels the work is
very meaningful and fits in with his personal ideals, a higher score of affective commitment
can be expected.

10

H2B: People who score high on empowerment meaning will score high on affective
commitment.

We do not know how empowerment competence will influence affective commitment.

On the one hand it might have a positive influence on the variable, because a feeling of
competence and confidence of ones capabilities to perform work activities can cause a sense
of willingness to stay in the organization and may motivate the employee to discuss the
organization with people from outside, influencing the degree of affective commitment. On
the other hand a strong belief in ones capabilities can also cause a sense of prevalence or
over-confidence. This independence may create a certain distance to the organization.

H2C: A relationship between empowerment competence and affective commitment is

expected.

The fourth dimension of empowerment is self-determination and is expected to be

positively related to affective commitment. Previous research has not indicated a relationship
between self-determination and affective commitment. However, Ashforth (1989), showed
that powerlessness, defined as a lack of autonomy and participation (P.207), is related to
work alienation. Thereby, when an employee feels he can decide on his own how to perform
his tasks, this can cause a sense of reciprocity, which probably causes a higher degree of
affective commitment.

H2D: A positive relationship between empowerment self-determination and affective

commitment is expected.

2.6

Extra analysis

Extra attention is paid to the last hypothesis formulated to describe a relation between selfdetermination and affective commitment. Self-determination refers to the sense of autonomy
and the degree to which decisions can be made on how to perform a certain task. Affective
commitment subsequently refers to the employees emotional attachment to, identification
with and involvement in, the organization. When it is assumed that reciprocity comes into
play by giving employees autonomy in their tasks causing a sense of self-determination, a
positive relationship with affective commitment can be expected. However, another approach
11

might also be possible. In this approach an inverted u-shaped relationship is expected. If the
degree of employees self-determination is very low, because there is no opportunity for the
employees to make decisions about how to perform the task on their own, employees are
unlikely to be committed in an affective way to the organization. Contrary, if the degree of
employees self-determination is very high, because they have the opportunity to decide a lot
of things on their own, a certain distance to the organization could arise, which could
influence the degree of affective commitment to the organization in a negative way. Finally,
affective commitment of employees will probably be highest, when the degree of selfdetermination is moderate. This is not supported by any literature so far, but in this study the
inverted u-shaped relationship will be assumed.

H2D*: The relation of empowerment self-determination and affective commitment shows an

inverted u-shaped curve. When there is a moderated degree of self-determination affective
commitment will be high; when the level of self-determination is low or high, the relation with
affective commitment will be low.

An example of an inverted u-shaped relationship is shown in figure 2.1. The relationship

starts out to be positive, but on a certain degree, this relation is changing into a negative one.
For the relation between self-determination and affective commitment it is expected that from
a low level up to a moderate level of self-determination, the relation with affective
commitment is positive. Subsequently, the relation changes into a negative one.

Figure 2.1: Inverted u-curved relationship

12

2.7

Job engagement

Following Robinson et al (2004), researchers at the institute for employment studies (IES),
engagement is large in the consultancy market, but there is a lack of academic research in this
area. IES declares that engagement brings clear business benefits, but that raising and
maintaining certain engagement levels means making an effort, taking time and doing an
investment. In academic literature, engagement is defined in different ways. Kahn (1990)
describes personal engagement and personal disengagement as behaviors by which people
bring in or leave out their personal selves during work role performances (p.694). People
will, when engaged, employ and express themselves physically, cognitively, and emotionally
during role performances and be present in their job role. Schaufeli et al. (2002) define
engagement as the degree in which employees have an energetic and effective connection
with their work activities and see themselves as able to deal completely with the demands of
their job. In this article they define the concept from the perspective of the employee as a
positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind that is characterized by vigor, dedication, and
absorption (p.74). In this article these three aspects are characterized as follows: vigor by
energy, dedication by involvement and absorption by attachment to ones job. Thus, first
vigor refers to energy, to the energy and willingness to put effort in ones work, both in daily
and normal situations and in difficult situations. When there is a lack of vigor, it could be that
workers just work to survive and will not achieve results in a difficult task. Second,
dedication is characterized by involvement in ones work, in which enthusiasm,
meaningfulness, inspiration, pride and challenge are experienced. When a worker is not
dedicated, he is probably not willing to signal opportunities for the organization. Finally,
absorption refers to the attachment to ones job, to be fully concentrated and hardly able to
detach oneself. A lack of absorption can also have the consequence of suboptimal outcomes,
because of a lack of concentration.
2.8

The interaction between job engagement and empowerment

In an environment in which there is a lot of competition and where employees are

autonomous, it is easier for them to commit themselves to their jobs than to the organization.
Engaging employees to the organization might be very important in a situation in which
employees, knowledge workers, may be at risk of losing the necessary connection with the
organization to perform their jobs. Previous research has shown that engagement is the
antipode of burnout (Schaufeli et al, 2006), leads people to behave altruistically and behave as

13

good team players (Robinson, 2004), and influences company success (Harter et al, 2002).
These are important aspects influencing the performance of the organization.
As already been mentioned, job engagement influences the employees behavior and
attitude. In this research the role of job engagement in the relationship between empowerment
and affective commitment is further examined. Does job engagement strengthen the
relationship between the dimensions of empowerment and affective commitment, or in the
contrary, does it weaken the relationship? Previous research showed a positive relationship
between job engagement and several outcomes, so we expect a change in the relationship
between empowerment and affective commitment when the relationship is moderated by job
engagement.

H3: The relationship between empowerment and affective commitment is moderated by job
engagement.

2.9

The interaction between job engagement and the dimensions of empowerment

In this study, hypotheses are also formulated in order to test interactions between the
dimensions of empowerment and job engagement and the influence on affective commitment.
Previous research has not investigated these relations yet. For this reason, assumptions will be
made and the hypotheses are exploratory. It is plausible to think that the highest affective
commitment will be reached by a high degree of empowerment impact in combination with a
high degree of job engagement. When an employee has the feeling that he can influence the
organizational outcomes by doing his or her job, and besides is very concentrated to do the
job and wants to put a lot of effort in the job, high affective commitment can be expected.

H4A: The positive relation between impact and affective commitment is stronger for
employees which score high on job engagement.

When an employee scores high on the dimension of empowerment meaning, the

moderator job engagement will positively influence the relationship with affective
commitment. The assumption is that a high identification with the organizational goals causes
more satisfaction in work and this in combination with absorption in the job will lead to a
higher affective commitment to the organization. When an employee scores low on the
dimension meaning, we expect a low score on affective commitment, and we do not expect
14

affective commitment to be higher when the employees job engagement is high. On the
contrary, we expect even a lower score on affective commitment in case the employee is very
engaged in his job. This is assumed because the employee does not identify his own goals
with the ones of the organization, which is not really satisfying. Besides he is concentrated to
his work activities and this causes a chance that the employee is not really committed to the
organization and is not really involved with the willingness to stay there.

H4B: The positive relation between meaning and affective commitment is stronger for
employees which score high on job engagement. This is only the case when an employee
already scores high on empowerment meaning.

The direction of the hypothesis set up to test the direct relationship between
empowerment competence and affective commitment is not mentioned. Because we do not
know if a high degree of competence is likely to cause a distance to the organization, or on the
contrary, a willingness to stay in the organization, we do not know for sure what happens
when the moderation occurs. We assume the relationship in both cases is influenced by job
engagement.

H4C: The relationship between competence and affective commitment will be moderated by
job engagement.

In the direct hypothesis, a positive relationship between empowerment selfdetermination and affective commitment is expected. When an employee has the feeling he
can determine the way he performs his tasks, and he is very engaged in his job as well, there
is a chance a certain distance arises between the employee and the organization. For this
hypothesis we assume the positive direct relationship changes into a negative one when the
moderator job engagement comes into play.

H4D: The interaction between self-determination and job engagement causes a negative
influence on affective commitment.

15

2.10

Trust in management

Trust is defined by Mayer & Davis (1995) as the willingness of a party to be vulnerable to
the actions of another party based on the expectation that the other will perform a particular
action important to the trustor, irrespective of the ability to monitor or control that other
party. (P.712) In this research it refers to the willingness of the employee to trust the
management in their actions. Previous research by Konovsky and Pugh (1994) has already
shown that trust in supervisors was positively related to organizational citizen behavior.
Furthermore, research by Whitney (1994) has shown that trust in organizational authorities
influenced subordinates' attitudes and behaviors. Being aware of the competitive environment
and the characteristics of knowledge workers and their unwillingness to share knowledge, it is
assumed in this research that trust in management can influence the relationship between
empowerment and affective commitment. Besides, research by Allen and Meyer (1990) has
already shown a strong correlation between dependability and affective commitment (p.61).
Dependability is defined here as the degree in which the organization can be trusted to behave
as it said it would.

2.11

The interaction between trust management and empowerment

We expect that the degree of trust in management will influence the relationship between
empowerment and affective commitment. In specific, we assume the relationship between
empowerment and affective commitment will be moderated by trust in the management.

H5: The relationship between empowerment and affective commitment is moderated by trust
in the management. In such a way that, when trust in management is high, the relationship
between empowerment and affective commitment will be stronger.

2.12

The interaction between trust management and the dimensions of empowerment

Hypotheses are also formulated in order to test interactions between the dimensions of
empowerment and trust in the management on affective commitment. An interaction effect
between empowerment impact and trust in management is expected. It is assumed that when
an employee feels he has a lot of influence on the organizational outcomes and trusts the
management, this could improve affective commitment. However, we assume the interaction
effect of a high degree of trust in management is stronger for an employee scoring low on
impact.
16

H6A: The positive relation between impact and affective commitment is enhanced when
employees are high on trust in management. This effect is stronger when empowerment
impact is low than when empowerment impact is high.

When an employee can identify his personal goals and ideals with those of the
organization, the trust in management will play a less important role in the degree of affective
commitment than in case the employee cannot identify his personal goals and ideals with
those of the organization.

H6B: The positive relation between meaning and affective commitment is enhanced when
employees are high on trust in management. This effect is stronger when empowerment
meaning is low than when empowerment meaning is high.

In the previous hypotheses we did not know for sure how the dimension empowerment
competence would influence affective commitment. When an employee feels very competent
in his or her work, it is assumed that an interaction with trust in management would have a
positive influence on affective commitment.

H6C: The interaction between competence and trust in management effects affective
commitment in such a way that affective commitment will be higher when trust in
management is high.

In the direct hypothesis a positive relationship between empowerment selfdetermination and affective commitment is expected. In this study it is assumed that selfdetermination interacting with trust in management has a positive influence on affective
commitment.

H6D: The positive relation between self-determination and affective commitment is stronger
for employees which are high on trust in management. This effect is stronger when
empowerment self-determination is low than when empowerment self-determination is high.

17

3.

Relevance, Research Goal & Contribution

3.1

Relevance

In order to remain attractive for the current and the next generation employees, it is important
for organizations to (re)consider their policy in the rapidly changing environment. In the past
it has always been accepted that people could exercise power over the behavior of others. This
not only applies to society, but to companies and their employees as well (Malone, 2004).
During the transition phase of the industrial economy to the knowledge economy, a lot has
changed, and the focus has shifted away from the manual worker to the knowledge worker.
Todays society is characterized by increasing individualization and the development
of information technology. The trend of individualization is noticed in business life in the way
that people are more demanding and attach more value to freedom, flexibility and creativity.
Further development of information technology, causing lower communication costs, also
influences business life. When information sharing becomes easier, organizations can also
operate outside their boundaries. Within organizations, information technology also plays an
important role. It has enabled the revolution in business life as to dealing with power and
control, mentioned by Malone (2004). Moreover, it has enabled employees to share more
information in a faster way. Besides, physical presence is hardly necessary anymore. In all, it
has led to a new world of working.
Erasmus@work, a research program by the Erasmus University, started the New
World of Work project. The aim of this project is to gain knowledge of and insight in new
ways of working. Within this project several innovative organizations are participating. Some
of the consequences mentioned by the new ways of working are for example an increase in
access to information, changes in decision making and the flexibility of workplace and
working hours. The knowledge workers' desires, globalizing organizations together with the
flexibility and possibility to work without physical presence led to the contemporary resultoriented organization. This new way of working also forces organizations to rethink their
policies. A concept that relates to the new ways of working, taking into account control,
current working environment, and the desires of the knowledge workers, is the concept of
empowerment. When people are given empowerment, is there a risk of losing the employees
connection with the company? Literature focuses on creativity and productivity, but what
happens to the employees attitude toward the company? Committed employees deliver many
benefits for the organizations. Affective commitment is assumed to be positive related to
behaviors that are beneficial to the organization, such as performance, attendance, and staying
18

with the organization (Mathieu & Zajac, 1990; Meyer & Allen, 1997; Mowday, Porter, &
Steers, 1982, Randall, 1990).
In short, working environments require research, especially when organizations are
result-orientated and peoples physical presence is not necessary anymore.

Business

environment and peoples attitudes are changing and it is important to be aware of the
consequences.

3.2

Research goal

The new ways of working are fairly new in our current society. For this thesis we want to
obtain better insights in the effects of empowerment on the willingness to stay in the
organization within this new world of working. Empowerment, a concept which is often heard
nowadays, will be the focus of this research. This concept can be divided into four
dimensions: impact, self-determination, meaning and competence. In this research we use
these four dimensions to gain a better insight and to find out how each dimension of
empowerment influences a variable that has to deal with commitment to the organization and
the willingness to stay in the organization, affective commitment. However, apart from the
positive image of the concept of empowerment, could a company empower its employees too
much? In general, is there a positive relationship between empowerment and commitment, an
increase in empowerment causing an increase in commitment, or could this relationship
change when a certain degree of empowerment is reached? In other words, is there a risk of
losing the employees connection with the company caused by allowing them too much
empowerment? As has already been discussed, affective commitment is positively related to
behaviors that are beneficial to the organization, such as performance, attendance, and staying
within the organization. For this research it is an assumption that a high degree of
commitment to the organization is important for the organizations outcomes, which is also in
line with previous research. Thereby we assume, taking into account the characteristics of
knowledge workers and the competitive environment of today, that empowerment, trust and
job engagement can play an important role. To reach the research goal the following research
question has been formulated:
How does empowerment influence the employees affective commitment to the organization
and what is the role of job engagement and trust in management in this relationship?

19

3.3

Contribution

This thesis contributes to academic literature as well as to practice. For this thesis we want to
gain better insight into the effect of providing empowerment to knowledge workers, taking
into account the new (flexible) working environment with rapidly changing technologies. By
rapidly changing technologies we mean technologies which enable us to work in a flexible
way, for example by cloud computing, virtual working, etc. As already been stated, we will
assess the four dimensions of empowerment in relation to affective commitment. Previous
research (Laschinger et al., 2000) has shown a positive relation between empowerment and
affective commitment. However, the effect of the dimensions of empowerment on affective
commitment has not been established previously. In addition to

testing these direct

relationships, the examination of the effect of job engagement and of trust in management will
contribute to already existing literature about empowerment. With the New World of Work
project, RSM@work focuses on three elements, the three Ps: People, Planet and Profit. The
first element, People, focuses on the working conditions, flexibility, work/life balance and
employee satisfaction. The second P, Planet, focuses on the impact on the environment and
the last P, Profit, focuses on productivity and creativity. In this thesis we will make a
contribution to the People element. Several relations between empowerment and outcome
variables regarding the People element within the New World of Work have already been
examined. However, the relation between the dimensions of empowerment and affective
commitment has not been examined before.
One of the organizations participating in the project of the New World of Work is
Rabobank. Rabobank has an internal program which holds for the entire organization, called
Rabo Unplugged. The program focuses on giving employees responsibility and autonomy in
job performance. In recent years this program was implemented gradually. Research data has
been collected from employees working at Rabobank. The research will focus on two
departments and three locations of Rabobank. These departments just started the
implementation of the unplugged project. Rabobank will put this thesis to practical use by
gaining a better insight in the dimensions of empowerment, in the influence of job
engagement and in trust in management and in the relationship with affective commitment in
the unplugged environment. It will help to improve managing the employees working at
Rabobank. Besides, other organizations can benefit. It will help to improve managing
employees working in organizations implementing a comparable project.

20

4.

Research model and hypotheses

4.1

Research model

The conceptual model represents the relationships and hypotheses mentioned in the literature
review above. In the model below, these hypotheses are summarized.
Figure 4.1: Conceptual Model

Job
engagement

Empowerment
Self-determination

Trust in
management

?*
+

Empowerment
Competency

Empowerment
Impact

Empowerment
Meaning

4.2

Affective
commitment

Summary of hypotheses

In this study we first will test the hypotheses set up to test the direct relationships between
empowerment and affective commitment. Next in the test are hypotheses that have been
formulated to examine moderation effects. This paragraph lists the hypotheses mentioned
earlier.

21

Hypothesis on the relationship between empowerment and affective commitment

H1: A relationship is expected between empowerment and affective commitment.

Hypotheses on the relationships between the dimensions of empowerment and affective

commitment

H2 A: People who score high on empowerment impact, will score high on affective
commitment.

H2 B: People who score high on empowerment meaning will score high on affective
commitment.

H2 C: A relationship between empowerment competence and affective commitment is

expected.

H2 D: People who score high on empowerment self-determination, will score high on

affective commitment.

Extra analysis

H2 D*: The relation of empowerment self-determination and affective commitment

shows an inverted u-shaped curve. When there is a moderate degree of selfdetermination, affective commitment will be high; however, when the level of selfdetermination is low or high, the level of affective commitment will be low.

Hypothesis on the interaction between job engagement and empowerment

H3: The relationship between empowerment and affective commitment is moderated

by job engagement.

Hypotheses on the interaction between job engagement and dimensions of empowerment

H4 A: The positive relation between impact and affective commitment is stronger for
employees which score high on job engagement.

H4 B: The positive relation between meaning and affective commitment is stronger

for employees which score high on job engagement. This is only the case when an
employee already scores high on empowerment meaning.

H4 C: The relationship between competence and affective commitment is moderated

by job engagement.

H4 D: The interaction between self-determination and job engagement causes a

negative influence on affective commitment.

22

Hypotheses on the interaction between trust in management and empowerment

H5: The relationship between the dimensions of empowerment and affective

commitment is moderated by trust in the management. In such a way that when trust
in management is high, the relationship between empowerment and affective
commitment will be stronger.

Hypotheses on the interaction between trust in the management and dimensions

of

empowerment

H6 A: The positive relation between impact and affective commitment is enhanced

when employees are high on trust in management. This effect is stronger when
empowerment impact is low than when empowerment impact is high.

H6 B: The positive relation between meaning and affective commitment is enhanced

when employees are high on trust in management. This effect is stronger when
empowerment meaning is low than when empowerment meaning is high.

H6 C: The interaction between competence and trust in management effects affective

commitment in such a way that affective commitment will be higher when trust in
management is high.

H6 D: The positive relation between self-determination and affective commitment is

stronger for employees which are high on trust in management. This effect is stronger
when empowerment self-determination is low than when empowerment selfdetermination is high.

23

5.

Research methods

5.1

Sample

In this thesis, the participants are Dutch Rabobank employees in two divisions: banking
operations, and concern purchase. The research will focus on two departments and three
locations of Rabobank. The first department, Banking operations, consists of Marketing
Support (MaS), Site Management (SiM) and a customer service center. The second
department is a purchase center. Since spring 2010 the Marketing Support and Site
Management sections have moved to a new unplugged environment in Boxtel. However, both
sections have been in the process for as long as two years. Apart from gathering data from
these two sections, also data is collected from employees working in the customer contact
center in Tilburg. These people have not moved to the unplugged building and only have the
opportunity to work in the office. Finally, data was collected from the purchase department in
Eindhoven. In Eindhoven people have been unplugged for a longer period already and have
been working with a lot of unplugged dimensions. The participants included both executing
employees and managers of various educational backgrounds, all varying in age. Besides, the
employees have been working in different employments.

5.2

Procedure

The data used for this research is gathered on one moment in time and with one and the same
survey distributed to the three locations. For this research potential participants included 408
employees that could fill out the survey online. Questionnaires were distributed online by a
member of the department. Each questionnaire had an accompanying letter to explain the
purpose of the questionnaire. Employees were asked to share their experiences and opinions
with the new unplugged working approach and environment of RABO bank. Participation
was voluntary, but because of a low initial response rate, employees were

requested to

cooperate. Finally, we were able to gather useful data among 184 participants. When we put a
10 minutes' limit on the time allowed for filling out the survey, we filtered out one participant,
who could not satisfy this requirement.
Table 5.1: Respondents
Department

Employees

Participants

Response rate

Boxtel
Tilburg
Eindhoven

80
270
58

32
116
36

40%
43%
62%

24

5.3

Measures

Each variable has been measured in the survey according to the constructs defined to
represent the particular variable. The entire list of measured items can be found in appendix
A.
5.3.1 Empowerment
The concept of empowerment can be defined as giving someone the right to make a decision
while this right previously belonged to someone else. In this research we will focus on
psychological empowerment, or the employee's perception of empowerment. The degree of
empowerment was measured by using the 12 items in Spreitzer's article (1995). In this article
empowerment is divided into four dimensions. These four dimensions are meaning,
competence, self-determination and impact. The validation of these four dimensions allows us
to accurately examine behaviors that lead the employee to feel empowered (Gmez & Rosen,
2001). Each dimension is measured by three items. An example of one of the items to
measure meaning is: My work activities have a personal meaning to me. The Cronbachs
Alpha of meaning is .81. An example of one of the items to measure competence is: I have
confidence in my ability to do my work. The Cronbachs Alpha of competence is .69. An
example of one of the items to measure self-determination is: I can decide for myself how I
should tackle my work. The Cronbachs Alpha of self-determination is .88. And an example
of one of the items to measure impact is: I have considerable influence in what goes on
within my department. The Cronbachs Alpha of impact is .85. The items are measured on a
scale ranging from totally disagree (1) to totally agree (5).
5.3.2 Affective commitment
Affective commitment refers to the employees emotional attachment to, identification with
and involvement in the organization and was measured by using a part of the three component
conceptualization of organizational commitment, composed by Allen and Meyer (1990). De
Gilder et al. (1997) formulated a Dutch version of this construct. In this Dutch version some
items are defined differently. The direct translation into Dutch led to lengthy definitions.
Together with the negatively defined items, this brought down the validity of the scale. The
Dutch writers argue that these items were bad for the psychometric characteristics (p.97).
For this reason we have used the version of the scale in Dutch. An example of one of the
items to measure affective commitment is: I really feel as if this organizations problems are

25

my own. The items are measured on a scale ranging from totally disagree (1) to totally agree
(5). The Cronbachs Alpha of affective commitment is .87.
5.3.3 Job engagement
In this research, the concept of job engagement is defined as the degree in which an employee
is attentive and absorbed in his performance of the job. The concept will be measured using
the three aspects absorption, dedication and vigor. In the survey each aspect is measured by
three items formulated by Schaufeli et al. (2006). An example of one of the items to measure
absorption is: When I am working, I forget everything around me. An example of one of the
items to measure dedication is: My work inspires me. And an example to measure vigor is:
I am full of energy at work. Job engagement is evaluated on a scale ranging from totally
disagree (1) to totally agree (5). The Cronbachs Alpha of job engagement is .86
5.3.4 Trust in management
In this research, the concept of trust management is defined as employees' perceptions of the
level of their trust in management's honesty and competence to make effective decisions. The
concept of trust management is measured by four items based on the article of Cook and Wall
(1980). An example of an item to measure trust management is: The management carries out
its tasks efficiently, as far as I can assess. The Cronbachs Alpha of trust in management is
.83.
5.3.5 Control variables
The control variables used in this research are age and employment. Age is measured by
asking people their age. For this research it is assumed that the age of the employee can have
an influence on the affective commitment to the organization. Research by Finegold et al.
(2002) already indicated a significant influence of age on variables that predict commitment
and the willingness to stay in the company. Employment is measured by asking the question:
How many hours per week do you spend on your work on average? This concerns the actual
total number of working hours, including overtime, meetings, business travel and education.
This research covered participants with several employments. In this research it is assumed
that the average number of working hours can influence affective commitment. It is plausible
to think that an employment of 16 hours a week in comparison with an employment of 40
hours a week can cause a difference in ones identification with and attachment to the
organization.
26

5.3.6 Summary Descriptives

Table 5.2: Summary Descriptives
Cronbach's Alpha

Variable

Nr. Of items

SD

Meaning

3,77

0,6418

0,809

Impact

3,058

0,793

0,847

Competence

4,199

0,473

0,689

Self-determination

3,469

0,988

0,883

Affective commitment

3,482

0,583

0,865

Trust in Management

3,62

0,572

0,832

Job engagement

3,693

0,517

0,86

27

6.

Results

6.1

Factor Analysis

Factor analyses can be used for different purposes. For example, it can be useful to reduce
variables to a smaller number of dimensions or to investigate if items are measuring aspects of
an underlying dimension (Kim & Mueller, 1978). In this research a factor analysis is
performed of empowerment. In table 6.1 the loadings on the four dimensions of
empowerment are shown. In this factor analysis the Varimax rotation method is used. When
using this method it is desired to have an obvious variance between high and low loadings.
Moreover, it is important and desired that variables only have high loadings on one factor.
Following the article of Tinsley and Tinsley (1987) a rule of thumb is factor loadings of .30
are acceptable. Therefore, loadings should be at least .30
When assessing the factor loadings, it is obvious that the factors are not loaded in a
perfectly satisfying way. First, empowerment appears to consists of only three factors instead
of four. In specific, out of this figure emerges no obvious distinction between the dimension
of self-determination and impact. Secondly, one item should be removed from the second
factor measuring the dimension meaning. One item of the dimension impact has a fairly high
value on this factor. Which further meets the requirements of a satisfying factor. Thirdly, the
loadings on competence are not perfectly loaded; one item hardly meets the rule of thumb of
.30. Besides, this item has a much higher value in the fourth factor.
Despite these shortcomings, it is chosen in this research to continue with the four
dimensions of empowerment, containing three items per dimension. The four dimensions of
empowerment are common and widely accepted. Besides, previous research argue that each
of the four dimensions of empowerment adds a unique facet to the individuals experience of
empowerment (Thomas & Velthouse, 1990). Finally, we have evaluated the Cronbach
Alphas of the four dimensions. Three dimensions scored above .80, which is satisfying, and
only competence scored .689, which is still acceptable. When removing one item, the
Cronbachs Alpha only slightly improves.

28

Table 6.1: Factor analysis Empowerment

Component
1

I have considerable autonomy in determining

,849

,119

,084

,040

,858

,082

,203

-,092

,857

,077

,199

-,015

,599

,431

-,145

,297

,720

,261

-,089

,245

,757

,275

-,168

,271

The work that I do is very important to me

,224

,858

,221

-,087

My work activities have a personal meaning to

,177

,707

-,031

,303

The work that I do means a lot to me

,145

,843

,263

-,023

I have confidence in my ability to do my work

,021

,104

,801

,334

I am self-assured in respect of my capabilities

,151

,060

,362

,824

,080

,200

,827

,012

how I do my work
I can decide for myself how I should tackle my
work
I have ample opportunity and freedom
regarding the way in which I carry out my
work
My impact on what goes on within my
department is great
I have a great deal of control on what goes on
within my department
I have considerable influence on what goes on
within my department

me

to carry out my work

I have learnt the skills I need for my work

6.2

Correlations

This research aims to investigate the relationship between empowerment and affective
commitment. First, we will evaluate the direct influence of empowerment, divided into
subscales, on affective commitment. In addition, we examine the effect of two moderators,
trust in management and job engagement, on this relationships.
In order to determine if there are linear relationships between the subscales of
empowerment and affective commitment, we evaluated the correlations and their significance.
The correlations between the variables are shown in table 6.2.

29

Table 6.2: Correlations Matrix

Correlations
Variable
1 .Age

Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)

2. Employment

3. Meaning

4. Competence

5. Impact

6. Self-determination

7. Squared self-determination

8. Affective commitment

9. Job engagement

10. Trust management

Pearson Correlation

-,019

Sig. (2-tailed)

,802

Pearson Correlation

,016

,234

Sig. (2-tailed)

,835

,001

Pearson Correlation

,103

,232

,347

Sig. (2-tailed)

,163

,002

,000

Pearson Correlation

-,083

,421

,460

,183

Sig. (2-tailed)

,264

,000

,000

,013

Pearson Correlation

-,097

,500

,365

,243

,672

Sig. (2-tailed)

,192

,000

,000

,001

,000

Pearson Correlation

-,102

,507

,368

,280

,676

,988

Sig. (2-tailed)

,169

,000

,000

,000

,000

,000

Pearson Correlation

,059

,135

,463

,139

,187

,138

,125

Sig. (2-tailed)

,424

,068

,000

,060

,011

,061

,090

Pearson Correlation

,049

,127

,727

,230

,417

,300

,320

,541

Sig. (2-tailed)

,506

,086

,000

,002

,000

,000

,000

,000

Pearson Correlation

-,007

-,149

,234

,096

,183

,087

,087

,392

,363

Sig. (2-tailed)

,924

,044

,001

,197

,013

,241

,242

,000

,000

Direct relationships with dependent variable

Meaning and affective commitment are positively correlated, and significant. Competence
and affective commitment are positively correlated, but marginally significant. This means
that the relationship is significant on 10% instead of on 1% or 5%. Self-determination is
positively correlated to affective commitment, but also marginally significant. Impact and
affective commitment are positively correlated and significant.

Independent variables
The four dimensions of empowerment are positively related and significant. Strong relations
emerge between impact and self-determination as well as between impact and meaning.

Independent variables and job engagement

Job engagement and the dimensions of empowerment are positively related and significant.

30

10

Independent variables and trust management

Trust in management and the dimensions of empowerment are positively related. However,
not all relationships are significant. The relationship between meaning and trust in
management and the relationship between impact and trust in management proves to be
significant.

Job engagement, trust management and affective commitment

Job engagement is positively related to affective commitment and is significant. Trust in
management and affective commitment have a positive relationship which is also significant.

Control variables
Gender is slightly related in a positive way to affective commitment, but is not significant.
The relation between employment and affective commitment also appears to be positive and
is marginally significant.

Squared self-determination
In the hypotheses an extra hypothesis is set up in order to get a better insight in the dimension
self-determination. In specific, an inverted u-shaped relationship is expected between selfdetermination and affective commitment. As expected, positive correlations are found with
the three other dimensions of empowerment. Besides, a marginally significant relationship
with affective commitment is shown in the table.

Some correlations are remarkably high, for example between job engagement and meaning
and between self-determination and impact. In the next paragraph there will be paid more
attention to these observations.

31

6.3

Regression analysis

Regression analysis is used to analyse and to understand how the value of a dependent
variable, in our case affective commitment, changes or is influenced by changing the value of
an independent variable when others are held constant. Before we set up a regression
analysis, the means were centered, this is done to reduce multicollinearity (Aiken & West,
1991).
6.3.1 Exploring Regression Analysis: Empowerment divided in four dimensions
Several regression analyses need to be performed in order to determine a final model. In order
to get a first impression of the relationships between the variables of the dimensions of
empowerment, affective commitment and two moderators, a regression analysis is performed,
which includes all assumptions made for the hypotheses. This model, attached in appendix B,
consists of six steps, and each step adds new variables to the model. In the first step, the
control variables age and employment have been added in order to determine if they would
influence the dependent variable affective commitment. By adding these control variables,
each next step will be controlled for these variables. The model shows in the first step age has
no significant influence ( = .06, P = 0.401) and employment has a marginally significant
influence ( = .14, P = 0.066). This means that the variable is significant on 10% instead of
the desired 1% or 5%.
In the second step the four dimensions of empowerment are added to the model. In this
step employment is no longer marginally significant ( = .06, P = .442). The model shows a
positive causal relationship between the dimension meaning and affective commitment ( =
.49, P = 0.000). The other dimensions of empowerment are negatively related to affective
commitment. However, these relationships are not significant.
In the third model, job engagement and trust management are added to the model. In
this model the control variable employment is significant again ( = .18, P = .016). Besides,
the relation with the dimension meaning remains significant, however the significance
changed from 1% (P= 0.000) to 5% (P = 0.043) and the three other dimensions stay
insignificant. The significance of the two new variables is 1%.
In the fourth model the two-way interactions with job engagement are added to the
model. This step shows one significant interaction, namely the one with the dimension
competence ( = -.19, P = 0.04).
In the fifth model the interactions with trust management are added to the model. The
model shows three significant interactions. The interactions with impact ( = .25, P = 0.007)
32

and meaning ( = -.24, P = 0.004) are significant on 1% and the interaction with competence
( = .189, P = 0.014) is significant on 5%. The interaction with self-determination is negative
and almost marginally significant ( = -.14, P = 0.108). Finally, the interaction between
competence and job engagement is still significant ( = -.31, P = 0.002).
In the sixth step the squared term self-determination is added to the model. The direct
influence of meaning is changed into a marginally significant influence ( = .19, P = .060).
Besides, the interaction between competence and job engagement is stronger and still
significant ( = -.29, P = .004). Significant interactions still exist for three dimensions of
empowerment. The interaction between self-determination and trust management is less
significant in this step (-.128, P = .144). However, squared self-determination shows a
negative and significant relation with affective commitment ( = -.17, P = .035). This model
has served as an exploring model and for a first impression.
Trust in the management showed to be a very significant moderator in the relation
between the dimensions of empowerment and affective commitment. However, in the
relationship with job engagement, empowerment and affective commitment, only the
interaction between competence and job engagement shows a significant effect. Therefore we
can already reject hypotheses H4A, H4B and H4D. With these results a new model is set up,
in which only the significant interaction between job engagement and competence is
preserved. Furthermore, all interactions, significant and insignificant, with trust in
management remain in the model. Although the insignificant interactions with job
engagement have been removed from the model, the insignificant interaction between selfdetermination and trust management is preserved. This is on account of the P-values, which
were very high in the insignificant interactions between job engagement and the dimensions
of empowerment and less high in the interaction between trust management and selfdetermination ( = -.13, P = .14). To examine if significant interactions between squared selfdetermination and job engagement and between squared self-determination and trust
management exist, two new steps were added to the model. After this, the model was not
significant anymore. For this reason we let these steps out of our final regression model.
6.3.2 Final Regression Analysis: Empowerment divided in four dimensions
The results of the adjusted and final regression are shown in table 6.3. The regression model
consists of 6 steps and each step adds some new variables to the model. In the first step the
control variables age and employment are added to test if they influence the dependent
variable. By adding these variables, each next step will be controlled for these variables. In
33

the first step, the results show no significant influence of the control variable age, however
there is a slightly marginally significant influence of employment ( = .14, P = 0.066).
In the second step, the four dimensions of empowerment are added to the model. The
influence of the control variable employment is not marginally significant anymore. The
model shows that the dimension meaning is significant on 1% ( = .49, P = .000).
In the third step, job engagement and trust management are added to the model. In this
model one of the control variables, employment, is significant on 5 %. Besides, the dimension
meaning is still significant ( = .19, P = .043) and also the newly added variables job
engagement and trust management are significant on 1%.
In the fourth step, the two-way interaction of job engagement and competence is added
to the model and shows to be significant ( = -.16, P = .007).
In the fifth step, two-way interactions with trust management are added and all the
interactions are significant. Only the interaction with self-determination is marginally
significant; this means that the interaction is significant on 10% instead of the desired 1% or
5%. The interaction with competence is significant on 5% and the interactions with meaning
and impact are significant on 1%. Besides, the interaction between competence and job
engagement stays significant on 1% and the direct relation between meaning and affective
commitment also still exists in this model and is significant on 5%.
In the sixth step squared self-determination is added to the model. In this model the
direct relation between meaning and affective commitment is marginally significant ( = .16,
P = .084). The interaction between job engagement and competence still exists. Besides, three
interactions with trust management exist, only the interaction between self-determination and
trust management does not exist anymore. However, there is a significant relation between the
squared self-determination and affective commitment ( = -.15, P = .040).
6.3.3 Multicollinearity
In the correlation matrix high correlations were found for some of the variables. For this
reason the tolerance values are evaluated to check for multicollinearity. The rule of thumb
according to Van Dalen and De Lede (2009) is that there is no reason to suspect
multicollinearity when the tolerance value is above 0.2 and the Variance Inflation Factor
(VIF) is below 5. The final regression model shows a lowest tolerance value of 0.742 and a
highest VIF score of 1.348, for this reason multicollinearity is not plausible. The tolerance
values and the values of the Variance Inflation Factors are available in appendix C.

34

Table 6.3: Regression Model with dependent variable Affective commitment

Variable

Model 1

Model 2

Model 3

Model 4

Beta

Beta

Beta

.06

.84

.05

.75

.03

.54

Beta

Model 5
T

Beta

Model 6
T

Beta

.03

-.01

-0,18

2.73

0.2**

2.85

Control variables
Age
Employment

.14

1.85

.03

2.42

.19

.55
**

.00

.06

.77

.18

.49**

6.20**

.19*

2.04

.21*

2.31

.20*

2.61

.19

**

Empowerment
Meaning

2.22

.16

1.74

Competence

-.04

-.48

-.04

-.68

-.06

-.90

-.06

-.98

-.02

-.25

Self-determination

-.04

-.40

-.05

-.56

-.05

-.58

-.04

-.49

-.14

-1.44

Impact

-.03

-.28

-.13

-1.52

-.13

-1.48

-.14

-1.61

-.12

-1.41

.36**

3.91

.34**

3.71

.32**

3.54

.36**

3.96

4.18

**

4.46

.30

**

4.51

.28**

4.26

-2.73

-.21**

-3.11

-.18**

-2.68

.16*

2.21

.16*

2.22

-1.82

-.13

-1.53

2.78

.23**

2.68

-2.67

-.21**

-2.9

-.15*

-2.07

Moderators
Job engagement
Trust management

.28

**

.29

Two-way interaction with job engagement

-.16**

EngagementXCompetence
Two-way interaction with trust management
Trust management X Competence
Trust management X Self-determination

-.16

Trust management X Impact

.24

Trust management X Meaning

**

-.19

**

Squared self-determination
R Square

.02

.22**

.38**

.40**

.45**

.46*

Adjusted R square

.01

.20**

.35**

.37**

.40**

.42*

Note: ; p < .10; *p < .05; **p < .01; two-tailed

35

6.4

Hypotheses testing

In this paragraph first the hypotheses are tested to examine the direct effects of empowerment
on affective commitment. After this, the hypotheses are tested to examine the role of two
moderators in the relationships. The hypotheses are tested using the final regression model
(table 6.3).
6.4.1 Relationship between empowerment and affective commitment
Hypothesis 1 predicts a relationship between empowerment and affective commitment. To
examine the direct influence of the dimensions on the dependent variable, not taking into
account the possibility of the influence of moderators, the results of step 2 of the final
regression model are evaluated. The results of this step show no significant influence of the
control variables age and employment. The dimension of meaning is positive and significant
(=.49, P=0.00). The other three dimensions show a negative beta and are not significant.
This model explains 22% of the total variation in affective commitment (Rsquare =.22, P =
0.00). When we take into account the number of dependent variables, this model explains
20% of affective commitment (adjusted Rsquare = .195, P=0.00). Hypothesis 1 is partly
supported. The assumption was that the dimensions of empowerment would have an effect on
affective commitment, however only the dimension meaning is directly and positively related
to affective commitment, as well as significant.
6.4.2 Relationships between dimensions empowerment and affective commitment
In hypothesis 2 relationships between the dimensions of empowerment and affective
commitment are predicted. Hypothesis 2A predicts a positive relationship between the
dimension impact and affective commitment. In the sixth step the relationship is weak and not
significant ( = -.12, P = 0.16). The table shows no significant causal relation between impact
and affective commitment. Hypothesis 2A is not supported.
Hypothesis 2B predicts a positive relationship between meaning and affective
commitment. The table shows that from the second step up to the sixth step this relationship is
indeed positive and significant. However, the strength of the relationship varies in the
different steps. In the second step the relationship is the strongest (= .49, P=0.00). In
subsequent steps the relationship is a little weaker and less significant. However, in the sixth
step the relation still is positive and marginally significant ( = .16, P=0.084). Thus,
hypothesis 2B is supported.

36

Hypothesis 2C predicts a relationship between competence and affective commitment.

As this relationship could not be observed, the direction could not be determined either. The
model shows no significant relationship between the dimension competence and affective
commitment. A very weak negative relationship is shown, but this relationship is not
significant ( = -.02, P = 0.805). A significant direct causal relationship is not found between
competence and affective commitment, thus hypothesis 2C is not supported.
In hypothesis 2D a positive relationship between self-determination and affective
commitment is expected. The model shows no significant relationship between selfdetermination and affective commitment. In the sixth step the relationship shows to be
negative and very weak, and besides is not significant ( = -.14, P = 0.151). No direct positive
causal relationship is found between the dimension of self-determination and affective
commitment. Thus, hypothesis 2D is not supported.
6.4.3. Moderating effect of Job engagement
In this paragraph the hypotheses set up to test the relations involving job engagement are
discussed. We will test if the relationship between empowerment and affective commitment is
moderated by job engagement. In the sixth step, the model shows job engagement ( = .36, P
= 0.00) is positive and significant. In hypothesis 3 a moderating effect of job engagement is
expected in the relationship with affective commitment. The model only shows a significant
interaction between competence and job engagement on affective commitment. The
hypothesis predicted an overall moderating effect, so that hypothesis 3 can partly be
supported. During the examination of the exploring regression model, no significant
interactions could be found between job engagement and impact, meaning and selfdetermination. For this reason only the interaction between job engagement and competence
is discussed.
In hypothesis 4C a moderating effect of job engagement is expected in the relationship
between the dimension of competence and affective commitment. No direct effect between
competence and affective commitment has been found ( = -.02, P = 0.805). In the sixth step
of the regression model, a significant interaction is shown ( = -.18, P = 0.008).
6.4.4. Moderating effect of trust in the management
In this paragraph the hypotheses set up to test relations with trust in management are
discussed. We will test if the relationship between empowerment and affective commitment is

37

moderated by trust in management. In the sixth step, the model shows trust in management (
= .28, P = 0.00) is positive and significant.
In hypothesis 5 a moderating effect of trust in the management is expected in the
relationship with affective commitment. For three dimensions of empowerment, the model
shows significant interactions with trust in management. Overall we find a significant
influence of the moderator trust in management on the relationship between empowerment
and affective commitment. Therefore hypothesis 5 is supported.
First, the moderating effect of trust in management in the relationship between impact
and affective commitment is discussed. In hypothesis 6A a two-way interaction between
impact and affective commitment is expected. The model shows a two-way interaction effect.
The model shows a negative direct effect, however this relationship is not significant ( = .12, P = .16). The sixth model shows a significant two-way interaction between trust in
management and impact ( = .23, P = 0.008).
Secondly, the moderating effect of trust in management in the relationship between
meaning and affective commitment is discussed. In hypothesis 6B a two-way interaction
between meaning and affective commitment is expected. The model shows a two-way
interaction effect. A direct and positive relationship is shown in the second and in each next
step of de model. However, the direct relationship between meaning and affective
commitment differs in the steps. In the second step the direct relationship is stronger and more
significant ( = .49, P = 0.000) than in the sixth step ( = .16, P = 0.084). The model shows in
step six a significant two-way interaction between meaning and trust in the management ( =
-.21, P = 0.004).
The third moderating effect of trust in the management is shown in the relationship
between competence and affective commitment. In hypothesis 6C a moderating effect of trust
in management is expected in the relationship between competence and affective
commitment. The model shows a negative direct effect of competence on affective
commitment, however this relationship is not significant (= -.016, P=0.805) No direct and
significant effect in the relationship between competence and affective commitment is shown.
In step six an interaction effect between competence and affective commitment is shown in
the model and is significant ( = .16, P = 0.028).
Finally, the moderating effect of trust in management in the relationship between selfdetermination and affective commitment is discussed. In hypothesis 6D a moderating effect of
trust in management in expected in the relationship between self-determination and affective
commitment. The model shows a slightly negative direct relationship. However this
38

relationship is not significant ( = -.14, P = 0.151). No direct effect in the relationship is

found. In step 6 an interaction effect is shown in the model, however this interaction is not
significant ( = -.131, P = 0.127).
6.4.5. Final results interactions
The regression model showed one significant interaction between job engagement and the
dimension competence, and in addition the model showed three significant interactions
between trust in management and the dimensions of empowerment. These interactions are
assumed to affect the degree of affective commitment. To get a visual indication of the
effects, the significant interactions are plotted in the figures below. By means of these figures,
the hypotheses will be evaluated.
Hypothesis 4C predicts the relationship between competence and affective
commitment would be moderated by job engagement. The visualization of the significant
two-way interaction of competence and job engagement is shown in figure 6.1. The highest
degree of affective commitment is related to a low score on competence and a high score on
job engagement. This two-way interaction indicates that when an employee does not have the
feeling that he or she is competent and can perform his work activities very well, the degree
of job engagement influences his affective commitment to the organization. In specific, when
the employee is very concentrated in performing his tasks and wants to put a lot of effort in
the job as well, affective commitment will be high. However, when he already experiences a
high degree of competence, his engagement to the job will not influence the relationship with
affective commitment. Hypothesis 4C is supported.
Hypothesis 6A predicts that the positive relation between impact and affective
commitment is stronger for employees who are high on trust in management. It is expected
that this effect is stronger when empowerment impact is low than when empowerment impact
is high. The visualization of the significant two-way interaction of impact and trust in
management is shown in figure 6.2. The highest degree of affective commitment is achieved
when both impact and trust in management are high. This two-way interaction shows that
when an employee feels his or her work activities have significant influence on the
organizational outcomes, the way in which the employee trusts the management influences his
or her affective commitment to the organization. The highest and lowest degree of affective
commitment relate to the employee who feels he has a great influence on the organizational
outcomes. In specific, an employee who scores high on impact and has a high degree of trust
in management, will score high on affective commitment. Conversely, the lowest score on
39

affective commitment relates to the employee who has no trust in the management. However,
for an employee who does not experience a great sense of influence of his or her work
activities on the organizational outcomes, the degree of trust in management does not lead to
more affective commitment to the organization. Hypothesis 6A is partly supported.
Hypothesis 6B predicts a positive relation between meaning and affective commitment
is enhanced when employees are high on trust in management. This effect is stronger when
empowerment meaning is low than when empowerment meaning is high. In figure 6.3 the
visualization of the significant two-way interaction of meaning and trust in management is
shown. The highest degree of affective commitment is related to a low score on meaning and
a high score on trust in management. This two-way interaction indicates that the role of trust
in management is important when an employee cannot identify his or her personal ideals with
the organizational ideals and goals. Conversely, when the employee is able to identify his
personal ideals with the ones of the organization, trust in management makes no marked
difference to his affective commitment to the organization. Hypothesis 6B is supported.
Hypothesis 6C predicts that an interaction between competence and trust in
management effects in such a way that affective commitment will be higher when trust in
management is high. The visualization of the significant two-way interaction of competence
and trust in management is shown in figure 6.4. The highest degree of affective commitment
is reached when both competence and trust in management are high. This two-way interaction
indicates that when an employee feels he can perform his tasks very well, his trust in
management will influence his affective commitment . In particular, when the degree of trust
in the management of a competent employee is high, affective commitment will be high.
Conversely, when an employee who feels very competent scores low on trust in management,
the degree of affective commitment will be lowest. However, in the case of an employee who
does not feel very competent, the degree of trust in management will not make a marked
difference in affective commitment.

40

Figure 6.1.Moderating effect of job engagement on competence Affective commitment

Affective commitment

4,5
4
3,5
3

Low Job engagement

2,5

High Job engagement

2
1,5
1
Low Competence

High Competence

Figure 6.2. Moderating effect of trust in management on impact Affective commitment

Affective Commitment

4,5
4
3,5
Low Trust
management

3
2,5

High Trust
management

2
1,5
1
Low Impact

High Impact

41

Figure 6.3.Moderating effect of trust in management on meaning Affective commitment

Affective Commitment

4,5
4
3,5
3

Low Trust
management

2,5

High Trust
management

2
1,5
1
Low Meaning

High Meaning

6.4.Moderating effect of trust in management on competence Affective commitment

Affective Commitment

4,5
4
3,5
Low Trust
management

3
2,5

High Trust
management

2
1,5
1
Low Competence

42

High Competence

6.5

Extra analysis

At an earlier stage, two hypotheses have already been set up in order to get a better insight in
the relation between self-determination and affective commitment. The first hypothesis
predicts that self-determination is positively related to affective commitment. The second
hypothesis 2D*, set up to examine another possible relationship between empowerment selfdetermination and affective commitment, predicts that the relation between the two shows an
inverted u-shaped curve. It is assumed that a moderate degree of self-determination will lead
to a high level of affective commitment, whereas a low or high level of self-determination
will show a low level of affective commitment. In the regression model the sixth step does
indeed show a significant inverted u-shaped relationship between self-determination and
affective commitment, the squared term for self-determination being negative and significant
( = -.15, P = 0.040). In figure 6.5 this relationship is shown and a slightly inverted u-shaped
relationship is visualized. This supports our alternative hypothesis 2D*. Whereas an increase
from low to moderate levels of self-determination is associated with an increase in affective
commitment, affective commitment decreases at relatively high levels of self-determination.
Figure 6.5 Curvilinear relationship self-determination - Affective commitment

4,5

Affective commitment

3,5
3
2,5
2
1,5

1
Low self-determination

High self-determination

43

7.

Discussion

The aim of this study was to assess the effects of empowerment on the employees
commitment to the organization, by examining the relationship between the four dimensions
of empowerment and affective commitment. In this research the characteristics of the
knowledge workers and the environment they are working in nowadays are examined as well.
Literature already showed that the current knowledge worker needs a certain degree of
commitment to the job in order to perform well (Davenport, 2005). Moreover, working in the
society of today, people do not work in the same place all the time, are assessed by results
achieved, and are not always willing to share their knowledge. For these reasons we assume
that job engagement and trust in management influence the relation between empowerment
and affective commitment. Attention is given to the possibility of moderating effects of job
engagement and the employee's trust in the management.
First, the direct relations between the dimensions of empowerment and affective
commitment are discussed. The results of the study show certain direct relationships between
empowerment and affective commitment. In particular, a significant relation between selfdetermination and affective commitment is shown and a relationship between meaning and
affective commitment. Self-determination is related to affective commitment in a curvilinear
way. At low and high levels of self-determination, employees are less committed than at
moderate levels. This result is in line with the alternative hypothesis formulated in order to
examine the relation between self-determination and affective commitment. Previous research
does not indicate such a curvilinear relation, but only show a linear relationship between a
lack of autonomy and work alienation. This relationship gives an indication for the relation
between self-determination and affective commitment. However, this study does not support
this relationship, but supports our alternative hypothesis, focusing specifically on the degree
of autonomy allowed to employees, revealing a certain risk in this respect.
Apart from the direct relationship between self-determination and affective
commitment, a direct relationship between meaning and affective commitment is found. This
result is also in line with the hypothesis mentioned earlier and is in line with literature
(Spreitzer, 1995 & Liden et al, 2000).
However, no direct relationships are found between impact and affective commitment
and competence and affective commitment. The two corresponding hypotheses formulated in
this study are not supported, which requires a new line of thinking. It could be true that these
two dimensions are not directly related to commitment to the organization, but to commitment
44

to the job instead. Besides, it might be due to the fact that only experiencing a degree of
impact or competence is not enough to influence affective commitment.
Secondly, indirect relations between the dimensions of empowerment and affective
commitment are discussed. A significant interaction between competence and job engagement
is found. This is in line with hypothesis 4C, which predicted that the relationship between
competence and affective commitment would be moderated by job engagement. In the
hypothesis formulated to test the direct relationship between competence and affective
commitment, the direction could not be assessed. In the literature review the chance of overconfidence and independence has already been discussed. Moreover, the positive outcomes
caused by job engagement, that have already been assessed previously, are discussed, and
prove to be in line with the results of this study. Namely, the highest degree of affective
commitment is related to a low score on competence and a high score on job engagement. No
support is found for hypotheses 4A, 4B and 4D, predicting interactions with job engagement
and the three dimensions of empowerment impact, meaning and self-determination.
Apart from the significant interaction found between competence and job engagement,
a significant interaction is found with trust in management. This is in line with hypothesis 6C
which predicts a moderating effect of trust in management in the relationship between
competence and affective commitment. A high score on competence interacting with high
trust in the management is related to the highest score on affective commitment. Regarding
these interactions, it might be noted that the former is primarily related to a low score on
competence and the latter to a high score on competence to achieve the highest level of
affective commitment. However, we think experiencing a high degree of confidence in one's
capacities in combination with a high degree of engagement to the job will cause a distance to
the overall goal of the organization. Confidence in one's capacities in combination with a high
degree of trust in management, causing positive feelings towards the organization, will make
the employee more committed to the organization. However, no evidence is found for this
outcome and interpretation in literature.
Apart from these interactions, a significant interaction is found as well between trust in
management and the dimension impact. This is in line with the first part of hypothesis 6A
which predicted that the positive relation between impact and affective commitment is
stronger for employees who have a high score on trust in management. The second part of the
hypothesis, predicting the effect is stronger when empowerment impact is low than when
empowerment impact is high, is not supported. This might be due the fact that when an
employee does not feel he is really contributing to the goals of the organization, trust in the
45

management does not make a real difference to his commitment to the organization. This
might be due a feeling of meaninglessness. However, when the employee does feel he
contributes to the goals of the organization, the degree of trust in the management does make
a real difference.
Finally, a significant interaction is found between meaning and trust in management.
Which is in line with hypothesis 6B predicting a positive relation between meaning and
affective commitment is enhanced when employees are high on trust in management. This
effect is stronger when empowerment meaning is low than when empowerment meaning is
high. In other words, when the employee does not feel he can identify his personal goals with
the goals of the organization, but does trust the management, a certain degree of affective
commitment can still be achieved. However, the combination of a low identification with the
organizations goals and a low degree of trust in management causes a noticeable decrease in
the degree of affective commitment.

46

8. Conclusion
This chapter presents the final conclusions of the research. Before presenting these, it is
important to realize that employees commitment to an organization is not self-evident. In
present-day environment in which there is a lot of competition between organizations as well
as between employees within an organization, we need more insight. In the current working
environment, in which the focus has shifted from the manual worker to the knowledge
worker, knowledge can be seen as a competitive advantage. A certain degree of autonomy and
a feeling of being of value are very important for employees. When knowledge workers view
their knowledge as a competitive advantage and have certain characteristics and desires, they
do not always share their knowledge. This might cause a loss of valuable knowledge when
they leave the organization.
In order to keep employees knowledge within the organization, commitment to the
organization might be important. In this research we have focused on affective commitment.
Affective commitment refers to the employees willingness to stay in the organization.
Affective commitment is positively related to behaviors that are beneficial to the organization
such as performance, attendance, and staying with the organization (Mathieu & Zajac, 1990;
Meyer & Allen, 1997; Mowday, Porter, & Steers, 1982, Randall, 1990).
A concept that relates to the preferred autonomy of employees is the concept of
empowerment. The focus of this research has been on the relation between empowerment and
affective commitment. The aim of this study was to examine the relation between the four
dimensions of empowerment and affective commitment. Apart from examining the direct
relations between the four dimensions of empowerment and affective commitment, attention
is also paid to the characteristics of the knowledge workers and the environment they work in
nowadays. This thesis has aimed to answer the following research question:
How does empowerment influence the employees affective commitment to the organization
and what is the role of job engagement and trust in management in this relationship?

This thesis has identified a relationship between dimensions of empowerment and affective
commitment. The four dimensions of empowerment are meaning, impact, competence and
self-determination. However, not every dimension of empowerment is directly related to
affective commitment. The results showed that the dimension empowerment meaning is
positively related to affective commitment. This means that an employee who can identify his
47

personal beliefs with the goals of the organization shows more emotional attachment,
identification and involvement in the organization. In addition to this direct relationship, a
direct relationship is also shown between self-determination and affective commitment.
However, this is a curvilinear relationship. This means that the employee who experiences a
moderate degree of autonomy in performing his job, shows the highest degree of affective
commitment.
Apart from these direct relationships, significant interaction effects are also found with
job engagement and trust in the management. Two significant interactions are found with
competence. First, competence and job engagement have a significant interaction effect. More
specifically, for an employee who does not have the feeling that he or she is competent and
can perform his work activities very well, job engagement will influence affective
commitment. The importance of job engagement only applies when the employee does not
experience a high degree of competence. Second, competence and trust in the management
show to have a significant interaction effect. More specifically, when a competent employee
has great trust in the management, his affective commitment will be high. Conversely, when
his trust in the management is low, the degree of affective commitment will be lowest. The
importance of trust in the management only applies in the case of a very competent employee.
The results show another interaction effect between the dimension empowerment
meaning and trust in the management. In this interaction, trust in the management is important
when an employee cannot identify his or her personal ideals with the organizational ideals and
goals. The highest degree of affective commitment is related to a low score on meaning and a
high score on trust in management.
Lastly, the results show an interaction effect between the dimension empowerment
impact and trust in the management. The highest degree of affective commitment occurs
when both impact and trust in management are high. The highest and lowest degree of
affective commitment relate to the employee who feels he has a great influence on
organizational outcomes. However, in the case of the employee who does not experience a
great sense of influence of his or her work activities on organizational outcomes, the degree of
trust in management does not affect his commitment to the organization.
Overall these results suggest that organizations should become aware of the direct
effects of empowerment on affective commitment and of the interaction effects of job
engagement and trust in the management with the dimensions of empowerment on affective
commitment.

48

8.1

Strengths, limitations and future research

Previous research showed relations between the dimensions of empowerment and several
work-related outcomes. A relation between empowerment and commitment is supported by
previous research as well, even a relation with affective commitment has already been proven.
Affective commitment has been found to be beneficial for organizations. However, the
relations between the dimensions of empowerment and affective commitment are not shown.
The findings of this research demonstrate a relation between the dimensions of empowerment
and affective commitment. However, this relation is not that simple for each dimension, and
relations are not self-evident for each dimension either. For some of the dimensions, the
findings show the importance of interactions with trust in the management and job
engagement for a significant relation with affective commitment. One of the important
contributions of this research is that it underscores the different dimensions of empowerment.
Each dimension is related to affective commitment in a direct way or through moderation
with job engagement or trust in management. Another important contribution of this research
is the inverted u-shaped relationship found between self-determination and empowerment. In
previous research an inverted u-shaped relation between self-determination and commitment
or comparable organization outcomes has not been shown.
The measurements used in this research have all been validated in previous scientific
research, which endorses the reliability of the research. However, a number of limitations
should be considered when interpreting these findings. First, the factor analysis, used in order
to gain a better insight in the dimensions of empowerment, shows that the factors are not
loaded in a perfectly satisfying way. That is, the three items per dimension are not loaded in
the desired dimensions of empowerment. However, the four dimensions of empowerment are
common and widely accepted. Besides, previous research has argued that each of the four
dimensions of empowerment adds a unique facet to the individuals experience of
empowerment (Thomas & Velthouse, 1990). Furthermore, after evaluating the Cronbachs
Alphas per dimension, each dimension is satisfying.
Secondly, a question that could arise from the foregoing is the reliability of the
respondents. Respondents were sampled from two departments working in three locations.
Possibly, respondents in different locations do not experience the unplugged environment in
the same way.
Thirdly, all measurements used are self-reports, therefore social desirability might
have affected the results. One must bear in mind that the measurements may not reflect the
actual performance of the respondents (Podsakoff & Organ, 1986). Fourthly, the research data
49

sample consists of 184 respondents, which is significant, but might be limited for
generalization to a larger population. In the fifth place, research data has been collected
within two departments of Rabobank. In order to make statements and judgements about other
departments of Rabobank, or about Rabobank in general, the results shown in this research
are not necessarily representative. This is because Rabobank has a lot of locations and
departments, having their own organizational culture.
Subsequently, taking into account the two different departments and the three different
locations, the sample cannot be described as homogeneous. It would be interesting to analyze
the groups separately. However, with a sample consisting of 184 respondents in all, separate
analysis would not yield in significant and reliable results.
Recommendations for future research are plentiful. First, replication of this research in
other organizations and in other industries could help to verify the current results. Possibly
this could be the next step to be able to generalize the results. Apart from a replication in other
organizations and in other industries, replication with a larger sample would be desirable.
Another possibility is to test other moderators in the relationship between
empowerment and affective commitment. For example, by measuring the degree to which the
employee is working outside the office and its possible effect on affective commitment in the
relationship with the dimensions of empowerment.

8.2

Practical implications

Previous research suggests that empowerment is related to several preferable outcome

variables. In addition, research showed several preferable outcomes could be predicted by
affective commitment. From this research, some practical implications can be derived. The
relationship between empowerment and affective commitment is affected by job engagement
and trust in management. Whereas we could not find a direct relation with affective
commitment for each dimension of empowerment, significant effects are shown in
interactions with job engagement and trust in management.
This means that organizations must pay attention to the knowledge workers'
characteristics and the way the management presents itself to its employees in order to be
trusted by them. In short, it is not enough to just empower your people, it would not
automatically lead to the commitment desired.

50

8.2.1 Putting it into practice

First, we will consider the main effects of meaning and self-determination. It is important to
communicate the organizations vision, goals and ideals to the employee. It might be wise to
do so during interviews already. Also during the employees appointment attention should be
paid to these aspects. The second issue concerns the relation between self-determination and
affective commitment, the willingness to stay in the organization. It is important to listen to
your employee and to give him a certain degree of autonomy for decision-making. However,
this autonomy must fit in a certain framework, in which the employee can make decisions, but
stays attached to the directions and goals of the organization. Without this there is a risk of
losing affective commitment, which probably leads to alienation.
The second part of the practical implications is about the interactions with job
engagement and trust in management. In the case of an employee who is not feeling very
competent in doing his job, job engagement might be important to retain a certain degree of
affective commitment. Both the lowest and the highest degree of affective commitment are
related to an employee scoring low on the dimension competence. Thus, it is important to
monitor employees scoring low on competence. In the case of an employee feeling very
competent in his job, job engagement does not really influence the relation with affective
commitment. However, in this case trust in management plays an important role. The lowest
and the highest degree of affective commitment is related to an employee who feels
competent, depending on the degree in which the employee trusts the management of the
organization. In this case it is important to keep an eye on employees scoring high on
competence.
In the latter interaction, trust in management plays an important role in the relationship
with affective commitment. A high degree of trust in management also plays an important
role in the interaction with meaning and impact. Focusing on the dimension meaning, it is
important to pay attention to the employee who cannot identify his personal goals with the
ones of the organization. When, in addition, he does not trust the management of the
organization to a high degree, he will obviously score lower on the willingness to stay within
the organization. Finally, the importance of trust in management applies to the interaction
with impact. However, attention should be paid to the employee who has the feeling he can
influence the outcomes of the organization. That is, when this employee does not trust the
management, this will obviously result in a lower degree of affective commitment.
In short, it is important for organizations to ensure a culture of trust. In the article of
Clark and Payne (1997), literature about trust and the antecedents is discussed. According to
51

this article, the five facets of Butler and Cantrell (1984) encompass the main elements of trust
identified in literature. These five facets are integrity, competence, consistent behavior,
loyalty and openness. Based on this, it can be important for organizations to give substance to
these facets. For example by fulfilling promises, sharing values and information, and by
giving their employees a fair treatment.

52

Bibliography
Aiken, L. & West, S. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Allen, N. & Meyer, J. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and
normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63,
1-18.
Ashforth, B. (1990). The experience of powerlessness in organizations. Organizational
behavior and human decision processes, 43, 207-242.
Avolio, B., 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, 951968.
Butler, J. & Cantrell, R. (1984). A behavioral decision theory approach to modelling dyadic
trust in superiors and subordinates. Psychological Reports, 55, 19-28.
Butts, M., Vandenberg, R., DeJoy, D., Schaffer, B. & Wilson, M. (2009). Individual
Reactions to high Involvement Work Processes: Investigating the role of
Empowerment and Perceived Organizational Support. Journal of Occupational
Health Psychology, 14 (2), 122-36.
Clark, M. & Payne, R. (1997). The Nature and Structure of Workers. Journal of
organizational behavior, Vol. 18 (3), 205-24.
Cook, J. & Wall, T. (1980). New York attitude measures of trust, organizational commitment
and personal need non-fulfilment. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 53, 39-52.
Davenport, T.H. (2005). Thinking for a living: How to get better performances and results of
knowledge workers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
De Gilder, D., van den Heuvel, H. & Ellemers, N. (1997). Het 3-componenten model van
commitment. Gedrag en organisaties, 10 (2), 95-105.
Drucker, P.F (1993). Post-Capitalist Society. New York, NY: Harper Collins Publishers.
Finegold, D., Mohrman, S. & Spreitzer G. (2002). Age effects on the predictiors of technicial
workerscommitment and willingness to turnover. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 23 (5), 655-674
Gmez, C. & Rosen, B. (2001). The leader-member Exchange as a link between managerial
trust and employee empowerment. Group & Organization Management, 26 (1), 53-69
Harter, J.K., Schmidt, F.L. and Keyes, C.L.M. (2002). Well-Being in the workplace and its
relationship to business outcomes: a review of the gallup studies. In Keyes, C.L.M &
53

Haidt, J. (Eds.), Flourishing: The positive Person and the good life (Chapter 9, pp.
205-224) Washington: American psychological association.
Jun, M., Shaohan, C. and Hojung, S. (2006). TQM practice in maquiladora: Antecedents of
employee satisfaction and loyalty. Journal of Operations Management, 24, (6): 791.
Kahn, W.A. (1990). Psychological Conditions of Personal Engagement and Disengagement at
Work. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 692-724.
Kanter, R. (1968). Commitment and social organization: A study of commitment mechanisms
in utopian communities. American Sociological Review, 33, 499-517.
Kim, J. & Mueller, C. (1978). Factor analysis: Statistical methods and practical issues.
Newbury Park CA: Sage Publications.
Konovsky, M. & Pugh, S. (1994). Citizen behavior and social exchange. Academy of
Management, 37, 656-669.
Laschinger, H., Wong, C., McMahon, L. and Kaufmann, C. (1999). Leader Behavior Impact
on Staff Nurse Empowerment, Job Tension, and Work Effectiveness. Journal of
Nursing Administration, 29 (5), 28-39.
Laschinger, H., Spence, R., Finegan, J. Shamian, J., Casier, S. (2000). Organizational Trust
and Empowerment in Restructured Healthcarre setting: Effects on Staff Nurse
Commitment. Journal of nursing administration, 30 (9) 413-425.
Liden, R., Wayne, S. & Sparrowe, R. (2000). An examination of the mediating role of
psychological empowerment on the relations between the job, interpersonal
relationships and work outcomes. Journal of applied psychology, 85 (3), 407-416.
Liden, R. C., & Tewksbury, T. W. (1995). Empowerment and work teams. In G. R. Ferris, S.
D. Rosen, & D. T. Barnum (Eds.), Handbook of human resources management (pp.
386403). Oxford, England: Blackwell.
Malone, T. (2004). The Future of Work: How the New Order of Business Will Shape Your
Organization, Your Management Style, and Your Life. Boston, MA: Harvard Business
School Publishing.
Marsh, R. & Manaari, H. (1977). Organizational commitment and turnover: A predictive
study. Administrative Science Quarterly, 22, 57-75.
Mathieu, J., Zajac, D. (1990). A review and meta-analysis of the antecedents, correlates, and
consequences of organizational commitment. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 171194.
Mayer, R. & Davis, J. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of
Management Review, 20 (3), 709-734.

54

Meyer, J. & Allen N. (1990). Affective and Continuance Commitment to the organization:
Evaluation of Measures and Analysis of Concurrent and Time-lagged Relations.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 75 (6), 710-20.
Meyer, J. & Allen, N. (1997). Commitment in the Workplace. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Meyer, J., Stanley, D., Herscovitch, L. and Topolnytsky, L. (2002). "Affective, continuance
and normative commitment to the organization", Journal of vocational behavior, 61,
20-52.
Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W., & Steers, R. M. (1982). Employee-organization linkages. New
York, NY: Academic Press.
Podsakoff, P. & Organ, D. (1986). Self-reports in organizational Research: Problems and
prospects. Journal of Management, 12 (4) 531-544.
Porter, L., Steers, R., Mowday, R., & Boulian, P. (1974). Organizational commitment, job
satisfaction, and turnover among psychiatric technicians. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 59, 603609.
Quinn, R. & Spreitzer, G. (1999). The road to empowerment: Seven Questions every leader
should consider. Organizational Dynamics, 26 (2), 37-49.
Randall, D. (1990). The consequences of organizational commitment: methodological
investigation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 11, 361378.
Rhoades, L., Eisenberger, R. & Armeli, S. (2001). Affective commitment to the organization:
The contribution of perceived organizational support. Journal of applied psychology,
85 (5), 825-836.
Robinson D, Perryman, S., Hayday, S. (2004). The drivers of employee engagement (Report
408, IES Research Networks).
Rodwell, C. (1996). An analysis of the concept of empowerment. Journal of Advanced
Nursing, 23, 305-13.
Sagie, A. (1998). Employee Absenteeism, Organizational Commitment, and Job Satisfaction:
Another Look. Journal of vocational behavior, 52 (2), 156-171.
Schaufeli, W., Salanova, V. & Bakker, A. (2002). The measurement of engagement and
burnout: a two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of happiness
studies, 3 (1), 71-92.
Schaufeli, W.B., Bakker, A.B., Salanova, M., (2006). The measurement of Work Engagement
with a short questionnaire. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66 (4), 70116.

55

Somers, M. (1995). Organizational commitment, turnover and absenteeism: an examination of

direct and interaction effects. Journal of organizational behavior, 16 (1), 49-58.
Spreitzer, G. (1995). Psychological Empowerment in the workplace: Dimensions,
Measurement, and Validation. The Academy of Management Journal, 38 (5), 14421462.
Spreitzer, G., Kizilos, M. & Nason, S. (1997). A dimensional analysis of the relation between
psychological empowerment and effectiveness, Satisfaction and strain. Journal of
management, 23 (5), 679-705
Spreitzer G. & Doneson D. (2005). Musings on the past and future of employee
Empowerment. In Cummings, T. (Ed.) Handbook of organizational development
(Chapter 17). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Stander, M.W. & Rothmann, S. (2009). Psychological empowerment of employees in selected
organisations in South Africa. SA Journal of industrial Psychology, 35 (1), 196-203.
Suliman, A. and Iles, P. (2000). Is continuance commitment beneficial to organizations?
Commitment-performance relationship: a new look. Journal of Managerial
Psychology, 15 (5), 407.
Thomas K.W. & Velthouse B.A. (1990). Cognitive Elements of Empowerment: An
Interpretive Model of Intrinsic Task Motivation. Academy of Management Review,
15, 666-81.
Whitney, J. (1994). The trust factor: Liberating profits and restoring corporate vitality. New
York: MvGraw-Hill.

56

Appendix A: Measurements concepts

Empowerment (Spreitzer, 1995)
Empowerment: meaning
The work that I do is very important to me
My work activities have a personal meaning to me
The work that I do means a lot to me

Totally disagree

Empowerment: Competence
I have confidence in my ability to do my work
I am self-assured in respect of my capabilities to carry out my work
I have learnt the skills I need for my work

1
1
1

Totally agree
2
2
2

3
3
3

4
4
4

Totally disagree
1
1
1

2
2
2

3
3
3

4
4
4

Totally agree
5
5
5

Empowerment: Self-determination
I have considerable autonomy in determining how I do my work
I can decide for myself how I should tackle my work
I have ample opportunity and freedom regarding the way in which I carry out my work

Totally disagree
1
1

2
2

3
3

4
4

Totally agree
5
5

Empowerment: Impact
My impact on what goes on within my department is great
I have a great deal of control on what goes on within my department
I have considerable influence on what goes on within my department

Totally disagree
1
1
1

2
2
2

3
3
3

4
4
4

Totally agree
5
5
5

Affective commitment (Meyer & Allen, 1995)

I really feel as if this organization's problems are my own
I do feel 'emotionally attached' to this organization
This organization has a great deal of personal meaning for me
I do feel a strong sense of belonging to my organization (R)
I do feel like 'part of the family' at my organization (R)
I enjoy discussing my organization with people outside it
I would be very happy to spend the rest of my career with this organization
I think that I could easily become as attached to another organization as I am to this one

Totally disagree
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2

3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3

4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4

Totally agree
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5

Job engagement (Schaufeli et al., 2006)

I am full of energy at work
At work I feel strong and energetic
When I wake up in the morning, I feel like going to work
I find the work I do to be very meaningful and worthwhile
I am very enthusiastic about my work
My work inspires me
Time flies when I am working
When I am working, I forget everything around me
I feel happy when I am concentrating hard on work

Totally disagree
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2

3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3

4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4

Totally agree
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5

Trust in management (Cook and Wall, 1980)

The management is sincere in its aim to accommodate the opinions of its employees
The management carries out its tasks efficiently, as far as I can assess
I trust that the management takes sound decisions on the future of the [organisation]
I have every confidence that [the organisation] will always try to treat me justly

Totally disagree
1
1
1
1

2
2
2
2

3
3
3
3

4
4
4
4

Totally agree
5
5
5
5

5
5
5

57

Appendix B: Explorative Regression Analysis with dependent variable Affective Commitment

Variable

Model 1
Beta

Model 2
T

Beta

Model 3
T

Beta

Model 4
T

Beta

Model 5
T

Beta

Model 6
T

Beta

Control variables
Age

.06

.84

.05

.75

.03

.54

.04

.628

.01

.19

.01

.11

Employment

.14

1.85

.06

.77

.18*

2.43

.19**

2.6

.19**

2.69

.19**

.194

.49**

6.20

.19*

2.04

.21*

2.15

.24*

2.5

.19

1.89

Competence

-.04

-.48

-.04

-.68

-.07

-1.02

-.09

-1.32

-.04

-.52

Self-determination

-.04

-.04

-.05

-.56

-.05

-.52

-.06

-.69

-0.16

-1.68

Impact

-.03

-.28

-.13

-1.52

-.13

-1.42

-.12

-1.42

-0.092

-1.07

Engagement

.36**

3.91

.36**

3.71

.34**

3.57

Trust management

.28**

4.18

.28**

4.14

.28**

4.07

0.27**

3.9

EngagementXCompetence

-.19*

-2.07

-.31**

-3.11

-.29**

-2.96

EngagementXSelf-det.

-.02

-.18

-.31

-3.11

0.05

0.48

EngagementXImpact

.09

.86

.06

.53

0.02

0.21

EngagementXMeaning

-.02

-.24

.12

1.16

0.11

1.06

VM_mean X Competence

.19*

2.47

0.19*

2.48

VM_mean X Self-det.

-.14

-1.62

-.13

-1.47

Empowerment
Meaning

Moderators
.37**

3.9

Two-way interaction with Engagement

Two-way interaction with VM_mean

VM_mean X Impact

.25**

2.76

.24**

2.66

VM_mean X Meaning

-.24**

-2.95

-.24**

-3.08

-.17*

-2.12

Squared Self-determination
R Square

.02

.22**

.38**

.41

.45**

.47*

Adjusted R square

.01

.2**

.35**

.37

.4**

.41*

Note: ; p < .10; *p < .05; **p < .01; two-tailed

58

Appendix C: Tolerance and VIF values

Variables
Meaning
Compentence
Self-determination
Impact
Engagement
Trust management
engagementXcompetence
Trust managementXCompetence
Trust managementXSelf-determination
Trust managementXImpact
Trust managementXMeaning
Squared Self-determination

Tolerance

VIF
0,945
0,935
0,742
0,817
0,981
0,978
0,996
0,997
0,996
0,977
0,984
0,97

1.058
1,07
1,348
1,224
1,019
1,022
1,004
1,003
1,004
1,024
1,016
1,031

Dependent variable: Affective Commitment

59