A Review On Antecedents Of Organizational Commitment Among Gen Y

Abstract

Gen Y employees were found to have the lowest level of organizational commitment compared to older generations. It is an issue that organizations cannot afford to overlook as it leads to various withdrawal behaviors such as turnover intention, absenteeism and burnout. Numerous studies have examined the relationship between organizational commitment and its antecedents. Therefore, this article reviewed twenty studies conducted in the past ten years on organizational commitment among Gen Y. The principal concern of this study is to review and to evaluate the antecedents of organizational commitment among Gen Y. This review reveals that Gen Y’s organizational commitment is influenced by various factors. These factors can be categorized into personal characteristics, job characteristics, work experience, role-states, job satisfaction, and motivation. Among the various antecedents, personal characteristics emerges as the most researched area, while role-states and job satisfaction are the least being studied. This review also reports the variations in terms of organizational commitment dimension measurement, the context of the research setting and the relationship between the constructs. Then, this review provides general guideline for researchers to study Gen Y’s organizational commitment which can also assist the practitioners in generating and developing better retention strategies that could help meet the contemporary needs of Gen Y employees.

Keywords: Gen Yfactorsorganizational commitmentaffective commitmentcontinuance commitmentnormative commitment

Introduction

In recent years, Gen Y who are also known as Millennials and GenMe (Cogin, 2012; Tissen, Deprez, Burgers, & Van Montfort, 2010; Twenge, Campbell, Hoffman, & Lance, 2010), have been the main focus of many worldwide research undertakings (Papavasileiou & Lyons, 2015). According to Howe and Strauss (1991), each generation’s values, personalities and attitudes are shaped by the generation’s experience of life events. This indicates that Gen Y employees may have different needs and demands, characteristics and attitudes in comparison with other generations (Chen & Choi, 2008; Lub, Bijvank, Bal, Blomme, & Schalk, 2012; Solnet, Kralj, & Kandampully, 2012; Twenge et al., 2010) as they go through different life experiences.

One of the differences across generations is Gen Y workforce have been the least committed to stay with the same organization (Goh, 2012; Islam, Cheong, Yusuf, & Desa, 2011). Over the past 20 years, organizational commitment is one of the most frequently studied organizational behaviors. Organizational commitment refers to the employee’s emotional dependence on organization (Porter, Steers, Mowday, & Boulian, 1974). Initially, it was conceptualized as a unidimensional construct, but it is now known to be multidimensional in nature (Carriere & Bourque, 2009).

Meyer and Allen (1991) defined commitment as psychological state that exemplifies employees’ relationship with their organization and it influences their decisions whether to stay in or to leave the organization. These researchers developed a multidimensional model of organizational commitment namely affective commitment, continuance commitment, and normative commitment. The affective commitment takes into account the matter of employee’s emotional attachment, identification, and the extent of involvement in the organization. On the other hand, continuance commitment refers to the commitment to stay in the organization due to the investment involved between employees and the organization, while normative component refers to the employee’s sense of obligation to stay in the organization.

Problem Statement

Organizations cannot afford to overlook the issue of organizational commitment among Gen Y because retaining this young generation workforce has appeared to be one of the challenges faced by organizations today. Gen Y employees were found to have the lowest level of organizational commitment compared to older generations (Brunetto, Farr-Wharton, & Shacklock, 2012; Goh, 2012; Islam, Cheong, Yusuf, & Desa, 2011; Lub et al., 2012; Nelson, 2012; Solnet et al., 2012). There are widespread literatures that relate organizational commitment to various organizational outcomes such as turnover, as well as other withdrawal behaviors including turnover intention, absenteeism, burnout, and decreased organizational performance (Francesco & Chen, 2004; Meyer, Stanley, Herscovitch & Topolnytsky, 2002; Muthuveloo, & Che Rose, 2005). As there are generational differences exist, this might lead to different influences on organizational commitment. Hence, there is a need to review and to identify the antecedents of organizational commitment especially among Gen Y workforce.

Research Questions

Organizational commitment among Gen Y could be influenced by various factors. Therefore, the following question is raised: i) what are the most researched and the least researched factors influencing organizational commitment among Gen Y workforce? Since the existing studies were conducted across different sectors and countries, some researchers examined unidimensional construct, while the others preferred to study multidimensional construct of organizational commitment. Hence, another question to be answered is ii) are there any variations in the findings of the existing studies?

Purpose of the Study

Previous studies have reviewed the relationships between organizational commitment and its antecedents (Mathieu & Zajac, 1990; Mowday, Porter, & Steers, 1982). However, this present study intends to focus specifically on Gen Y workforce. The principal concern of this study is to review the antecedents of organizational commitment among Gen Y. Specifically, this study aims to identify the most researched and the least researched factors influencing organizational commitment among Gen Y workforce. In addition, this study aims to examine the findings in terms of organizational commitment dimension measurement, the context of the research setting (i.e., sector and countries) involved in the past studies and the relationship between the constructs.

Research Methods

A literature search was carried out by the researchers in the field of Organizational Behavior (OB), Work and Organizational Psychology, Human Resource Management (HRM), and Management. The reviewed articles used in this study were published from 2006 to 2016. In order to identify past studies with Gen Y and organizational commitment as the main interests, the researchers used scholarly internet search engine, known as Google Scholar, and several online databases including Emerald, Wiley, and Science Direct to retrieve the articles. In terms of search keyword, besides “Gen Y”, the researchers also included “Millennial”, “New generation”, “Echo Boomer”, and “Young generation.” Since the number of studies on Gen Y’s organizational commitment were limited, unpublished and published dissertations were also considered in this study. The literature search yielded 20 studies.

Findings

Based on the systematic literature search, the researchers sorted out the findings into two tables. Table 01 shows the summaries of literature review of the past studies. Meanwhile, Table 02 presents the categories of antecedents of organizational commitment.

Antecedents of Organizational Commitment

Table 01 represents the summaries of literature review on the antecedents of organizational commitment among Gen Y in the past ten years. The referred articles in this present study were published from 2006 to 2016.

Table 1 -
See Full Size >

In the earliest study, Remo (2006) examined how cultural beliefs and reciprocity norms influence normative commitment in education sector. The result showed that both cultural beliefs and reciprocity norms have a significant influence on normative commitment. Yang et al. (2008) investigated the influence of individual factors (i.e., need for growth, need for existence and perception of organizational politics) and an organizational factor (i.e., job characteristics) on organizational commitment. The study concluded that both individual and organizational factors (except for perceived organizational politics which was partly supported) have a significant influence on organizational commitment.

On the other hand, Cennamo and Gardner (2008) predicted that person organizational fit (P-O fit) could be related to affective commitment. The study partly supported the hypotheses as the researchers found that only employees with high P-O fit for status and extrinsic values were generally more committed, while other work values did not have any significant influence on affective commitment. Evangelista (2009) and Rajput et al. (2012) conducted a similar study but in a different research setting. Evangelista (2009) conducted the study in the Philippines whereas Rajput et al. (2012) concentrated on India and the researchers attempted to investigate whether work-life balance relates to organizational commitment in information technology (IT) firms. However, both studies reported that there was no significant relationship between the variables.

An investigation looking at the impact of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation on organizational commitment among Gen Y students in the United States was carried out by London (2009). The study revealed that extrinsic and intrinsic motivation factors have an impact on organizational commitment. Moreover, the study indicated that the respondents who received intrinsic rewards reported higher levels of organizational commitment compared to those who obtained extrinsic rewards. In another study, Bissola and Imperatori (2010) focused on the relationship between e-HRM systems and affective commitment in ten various sectors in Italy. The finding revealed that e-HRM system has a significant influence on affective commitment.

Other than that, Brunetto et al. (2012) investigated whether affective commitment influences perceptions of well-being, training and development satisfaction, and supervisor-nurse communication relationship among nurses in Australia. They found that all three variables have a significant influence on affective commitment. Meanwhile, Lim (2014) scrutinized the relationship of personal factor (personality traits) and organizational factors (employee involvement, leader interpersonal communication skills and trust in management) with organizational commitment (affective, continuance and normative) among non-managerial employees from various sectors in Malaysia. Significant relationships were observed in most variables except for the relationships of employee involvement and leader interpersonal communication skill with normative commitment which were found to be insignificant.

A study on the relationship of communication satisfaction and work centrality with affective commitment was conducted by De Stefano (2012) who focused on three different sectors which are marketing and media, banking and education sector. A significant relationship of communication satisfaction and work centrality with affective commitment was reported. Then, Khanolkar (2013) investigated the influence of employer branding on commitment in various industries in India and the study indicated that commitment is predicted by employer branding. Meanwhile, Silva et al. (2015) explored the relationship of work environment and perception of leadership with affective commitment. The finding revealed that work environment significantly and positively relates to affective commitment; however, perception of leadership did not significantly relate to affective commitment. On the other hand, Ling and Yuen (2014) attempted to identify the significant differences between demographic factors (age, gender, education level, tenure, and marital status) and organizational commitment. The results showed that there were significant differences between three demographic factors (i.e., age group, level of educational and organizational tenure) and organizational commitment.

In another study, Nkomo (2014) examined the relationship of work values and sources of motivation with affective, continuance and normative commitment in various sectors in Sri Lanka. Most of work value dimensions showed a positive significant relationship with all three dimensions of commitment except for extrinsic and prestige work values. There was no significant relationship between extrinsic work value and affective commitment. This is different from the finding obtained by Cennamo and Gardner (2008). Meanwhile, extrinsic work values did not have any significant relationship with continuance and normative commitment. Prestige work value also had no significant relationship with continuance commitment. Nkomo (2014) revealed that most of the source of motivation factors have no significant relationship with all three dimensions of commitment. The significant relationships were only found in the relationship of intrinsic motivation with normative commitment and the relationship of external self-motivation with affective commitment. Only goal internalization had shown significant relationship with all three dimensions of commitment.

Yi (2014), who focused on manufacturing sector in Malaysia, investigated the impact of distributive justice, procedural justice, job satisfaction and work-life balance on Gen Y’s organizational commitment. These aspects have shown a significant impact on Gen Y’s organizational commitment. In a different study, Wanjugu (2015) examined the effect of workplace relationship, work-life balance and technology support on commitment among generation Y government employees in Kenya, Africa. The findings revealed that workplace relationship, work-life balance and technology support aspects have a significant effect on Gen Y’s commitment.

Other than that, Wang (2015) studied the antecedents of commitment among Chinese potential successors based on organizational commitment theories and Chinese culture. The researcher concluded that identify alignment and career interest alignment have a positive significant influence on affective commitment. Besides that, financial cost and social cost have a positive significant influence on continuance commitment, while family expectation and confusion values have a significant influence on normative commitment. The findings showed that most of the variables have a positive significant influence on commitment, but for family expectation, it has no significant influence on normative commitment. Meanwhile, Daee (2016) attempted to identify the influence of personal values on the three types of organizational commitment among Gen Y from various sectors in the United States. The study revealed that there was a positive and significant influence on the relationships between personal values and all three types of commitment.

Then, Filiana (2016) investigated the relationship of intrinsic factors and extrinsic factors with affective, continuance and normative commitment in various sectors in Indonesia. Five factors were analyzed from intrinsic and extrinsic factors in job satisfaction. The finding, however, showed that only nature of job (one of intrinsic factors) significantly affected all components of organizational commitment. Intrinsic factors such as recognition revealed a significant influence on affective commitment whereas job supervision and responsibility significantly predicted affective commitment and continuance commitment. On the other hand, extrinsic factors such as pay and fringe benefits showed a significant impact on affective commitment, while operating policies and procedure revealed a significant relationship with continuance commitment. Orlowski et al. (2016) explored the influence of perceptions of task, process and relationship conflict on organizational commitment among Generation Y’s restaurant employees in the United States. The finding indicated that there was a negative influence of perceptions of task and process on organizational commitment. However, no significant influence on relationship of conflict with organizational commitment was revealed in the study.

Categorization of the Antecedents of Organizational Commitment

Table 02 shows the six categories of the variables. The categories include personal characteristics, job characteristics, work experience, role-states, job satisfaction and motivation.

Table 2 -
See Full Size >

As demonstrated in Table 02 , the researchers categorized the variables based on several frameworks developed by past researchers (Mathieu & Zajac, 1990; Meyer & Allen, 1991; Mowday et al., 1982; Steers, 1977). The past researchers who examined antecedents of organizational commitment classified the variables into several categories. Steers (1977) classified the variables into three categories which include personal characteristics, job characteristics and work experience. Then, Mathieu and Zajac (1990) proposed role-states category as one of the antecedents of organizational commitment. Other factors such as job satisfaction and motivation are also considered. Therefore, this study focuses on six categories of the variables as a guideline for the review.

Discussion

As shown in Table 01 , most of the past studies are multivariate rather than bivariate which means the past researchers had included two or more variables in their studies. This provides a broader insight on the factors that can affect Gen Y’s organizational commitment. Moreover, most of the factors were significantly related to organizational commitment. This shows that Gen Y’s organizational commitment is indeed influenced by a myriad of factors. Based on the review, past studies mainly focus on personal characteristic dimension rather than role-states and job satisfaction dimensions. This is supported by Howe and Strauss (1991) in which they claimed that each generation experiences different life events. Hence, each generation’s values, personalities as well as attitudes are bound to be different from one another and this could be the reason why past researchers heavily emphasize on personal characteristic dimension.

One of the insights gathered from the review highlights geographical factor. Little is known about Gen Y’s organizational commitment in non-Western countries such as in Malaysia as most of the previous studies were concentrated on Western countries. The findings obtained from the Western context could not be generalised to Malaysian Gen Y since they experience different life events than Gen Y in other countries. For example, Yi (2014) found that work-life balance of Malaysian Gen Y was significantly and positively related to organizational commitment. Differently, Rajput et al. (2012) found insignificant relationship between work-life balance and organizational commitment among Gen Y in India. Similar to Rajput et al. (2012), Evangelista (2009) also reported that there was insignificant relationship between work-life balance and organizational commitment among Gen Y in the Philippines. Therefore, different variations of findings on Gen Y’s organizational commitment can be found across different countries.

Besides geographical factor, the result could also be different between sectors. For instance, a significant and positive relationship between certain sectors and organizational commitment was found such as in public organization (Wanjugu, 2015) and manufacturing sector (Yi, 2014). However, the result was insignificant for information technology sector in both the Philippines (Evangelista, 2009) and India (Rajput et al., 2012). Thus, the findings could vary across different sectors.

Although most of the factors influencing organizational commitment indicated a significant relationship, the results were differed when each component of organizational commitment was tested individually. For example, Lim (2014) reported that there was a positive and significant relationship of employee involvement and leader interpersonal communication with affective and continuance commitment, but insignificant relationship with normative commitment. Similar result can also be seen in the study by Nkomo (2014) in which the researcher found a positive and significant relationship between prestige work values and affective as well as normative commitment. However, the relationship between prestige work values and continuance commitment was insignificant. Nkomo (2014) also found that intrinsic motivation has a positive and significant relationship with normative commitment but it has insignificant relationship with affective and continuance commitment. This shows that each factor has a different effect on each dimension of organizational commitment. However, as shown in Table 01 , not all past studies investigated each dimension of organizational commitment. Most of the studies focused on examining affective commitment compared to normative and continuance commitment. This implies that affective organizational commitment is the most desirable organizational outcome.

Another key finding from the review is that most studies merely assumed a linear relationship between independent and dependent variables. The cause of the relationship between the two variables, however, was not investigated. Thus, an intervening variable could explain why and how the relationship occurs. For instance, Nkomo (2014) found a positive and significant relationship between the overall work values and general organizational commitment across various sectors in South Africa. The findings, however, were inconsistent when the relationship between each dimension of work values and each dimension of organizational commitment was tested individually. This shows that the relationship is inconclusive and it requires further investigation.

Conclusion

In this review study, there are several important points that can be highlighted. Among all antecedents, personal characteristics emerges as the most researched antecedent, while role-states and job satisfaction are the least antecedents being studied. This review also found variations in terms of organizational commitment dimension measurement, the context of the research and the relationship between the constructs. Evidently, these variations appear to give different influences on the result of the studies.

The following implications emerge from this review on antecedents of organizational commitment among Generation Y. Firstly, the size of population of youngsters within the age range of 27 to 37 years old is bigger in China, India and Malaysia. Hence, researchers should focus on Generation Y’s commitment in non-Western countries. For instance, in Malaysia, Gen Y dominates more than 50 percent of the workforce (Ministry of Human Resources Malaysia, 2016; Queiri, Dwaikat, & Yelwa, 2016). Although the Gen Y population is increasing in the workplace, not much is known about this particular group specifically on the factors that can influence their organizational commitment.

In order to elucidate the antecedents of organizational commitment particularly among Gen Y in Malaysia, it is important for future researchers to first examine whether the characteristics of Gen Y developed by Western researchers are applicable and generalizable to Malaysian Gen Y. This is evident from the review whereby inconsistent result was found between different research settings (i.e., countries and sectors). In this review, it appears that there is a lack of research in the banking sector. Examining Gen Y working in banking sector is considered as significant because according to Asian Institute of Finance (2014), Gen Y workforce is estimated to increase to 50 percent within the next six to seven years. This implies that almost half of the percentage of people working in banks will be employees from the Gen Y group. Thus, it is imperative that organizations understand about Gen Y in order to manage them better. Past studies showed that Gen Y demonstrate distinct characteristics than the other generations (Chen & Choi, 2008; Lub et al., 2012; Solnet et al., 2012; Twenge et al., 2010), and this may have an implication on human resource management in general.

Last but not least, the review also highlights that Gen Y’s organizational commitment can be influenced by various factors; however, the causal relationship between the constructs has not yet been clarified. So, it is not obvious which factor is the most dominant in influencing Malaysian Gen Y’s organizational commitment. Therefore, more studies are required to understand about Malaysian Gen Y, their characteristics compared to other generations, and how these characteristics can influence their attitudes as well as their organizational outcomes.

Acknowledgments

I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my research supervisors, Dr. Rabeatul Husna Abdull Rahman and Dr. Halimah Mohd Yusof for their guidance as well as valuable and constructive suggestion to improve the article. I would also like to extend my appreciations to Mr. Selvam for his writing assistance, language editing and proofreading.

References

  1. Asian Institute of Finance. (2014). Gen Y in the workplace: An international comparison. Retrieved from http://www.aif.org.my/clients/aif_d01/assets/multimediaMS/publication/AIF-Gen-Y-Report-book-Final.pdf
  2. Bissola, R., & Imperatori, B. (2010, May). Generation Y at work: The role of e-HRM in building positive work attitudes. Paper presented at proceedings of the 3rd European Academic Workshop on electronic Human Resource Management, Bamberg, Germany. Retrieved from http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-570/paper022.pdf
  3. Brunetto, Y., Farr-Wharton, R., & Shacklock, K. (2012). Communication, training, well-being, and commitment across nurse generations. Nursing Outlook, 60(1), 7–15. DOI:
  4. Carriere, J., & Bourque, C. (2009). The effects of organizational communication on job satisfaction and organizational commitment in a land ambulance service and the mediating role of communication satisfaction. Career Development International, 14(1), 29-49.
  5. Cennamo, L., & Gardner, D. (2008). Generational differences in work values, outcomes and person-organization values fit. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23(8), 891-906.
  6. Chen, P., & Choi, Y. (2008). Generational differences in work values: A study of hospitality management. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 20(6), 595–615. DOI:
  7. Cogin, J. (2012). Are generational differences in work values fact or fiction? Multi-country evidence and implications. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 23(11), 2268-2294.
  8. Daee, N. (2016). Echo Boomers' personal values/professional expectations and organizational commitment: A quantitative study (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (Accession Order No. AAT 10127823)
  9. De Stefano, J. (2012). The Generational Divide: Understanding work centrality, organizational commitment and communication satisfaction (Unpublished master dissertation). Retrieved from Concordia University Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
  10. Evangelista, M. J. M. (2009). Work life balance and organizational commitment of generation Y employees (Unpublished bachelor dissertation), Retrieved from De La Salle University, Manila.
  11. Filiana, G. S. (2016). Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment among Generation-Y: The impact of intrinsic and extrinsic factors on affective, continuance, and normative commitment (Unpublished master dissertation). Retrieved from Aarhus University, Denmark.
  12. Francesco, A. M., & Chen, Z. X. (2004). Collectivism in action: Its moderating effects on the relationship between organizational commitment and employee performance in China. Group and Organization Management, 29(4): 425-441.
  13. Goh, L. (2012, February 19). Why job- hoppers hop. The Star Online. Retrieved from http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2012/2/19/nation/20120219070805andsec=nation
  14. Islam, M., Cheong, T. W., Yusuf, D. H. M., & Desa, H. (2011). A study on Generation Y' behaviours at workplace in Penang. Journal of Applied Sciences Research, 7(11), 1802-1812.
  15. Khanolkar, R. S. (2013). Influence of Employer Branding on Satisfaction and Commitment of Generation Y Employees. Paper presented at the 7th International Business Research Conference, Mumbai,India.
  16. London, A. (2009, April). The impact of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation on job choice in generation Y. Paper presented at the 4th Annual Siena College Student Conference in Business, New York, United States.
  17. Lub, X., Nije Bijvank, M., Matthijs Bal, P., Blomme, R., & Schalk, R. (2012). Different or alike? Exploring the psychological contract and commitment of different generations of hospitality workers. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 24(4), 553-573. DOI:
  18. Lim, X. Y. (2014). Factors that Affect Generation Y Workers’ Organizational Commitment (Unpublished Master dissertation). Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman, Malaysia.
  19. Ling, F. X., & Yuen, J. L. F. (2014). Organizational Commitment of White-Collar Employees in Damansara Heights, Kuala Lumpur. Journal of Social Economics Research, 1(7), 156-168.
  20. Mathieu, J. E., & Zajac, D. M. (1990). A review and meta-analysis of the antecedents, correlates, and consequences of organizational commitment. Psychological bulletin, 108(2), 171. DOI:
  21. Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human Resource Management review, 1(1), 61-89. DOI:
  22. Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnytsky, L. (2002). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61(1), 20-52. DOI: 10.1006/jvbe.2001.1842
  23. Ministry of Human Resources Malaysia. (2016). Employment and Labor Statistic. Retrieved from http://myhos.mohr.gov.my/ebook/istatistik2_2016/files/basic-html/index.html
  24. Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W., & Steers, R. (1982). Employee-organizational linkages: The psychology of commitment, turnover, and absenteeism. New York: Academic Press.
  25. Muthuveloo, R., & Rose, R. C. (2005). Typology of organizational commitment. American Journal of Applied Science, 2(6), 1078-1081.
  26. Nelson, S. A. (2012). Affective commitment of generational cohorts of Brazilian nurses. International Journal of Manpower, 33(7), 804-821. DOI:
  27. Nkomo, E. (2014). Motivation, work values, organizational commitment and job satisfaction: age and generational cohort effects (Unpublished master dissertation). University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
  28. Orlowski, M., Murphy, K. S., & Severt, D. (2016). Commitment and conflict in the restaurant industry: Perceptions from the Generation Y viewpoint. Journal of Foodservice Business Research, 1-20. DOI:
  29. Papavasileiou, E. F., & Lyons, S. T. (2015). A comparative analysis of the work values of Greece's ‘Millennial’ generation. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 26(17), 2166-2186. DOI:
  30. Porter, L. W., Steers, R. M., Mowday, R. T., & Boulian, P. V. (1974). Organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and turnover among psychiatric technicians. Journal of applied psychology, 59(5), 603. DOI:
  31. Queiri, A., Dwaikat, N., & Yelwa, H. (2016). Generation Y’s work values and fit assessment: A study in malaysian context. Journal of Southeast Asian Research, 1(1), 1-10.
  32. Rajput, N., Marwah, P., Balli, R., & Gupta, M. (2012). Maintaining Gen X-Gen Y: a study of work-life balance. South Asian Academic Research Journal, 2(7), 1-16.
  33. Remo, N. (2006). The Effects of the Reciprocity Norm and Culture on Normative Commitment for Generation Y (Unpublished master dissertation). Retrieved from Electronic Theses and Dissertations University of Windsor, Canada.
  34. Silva, R. C. D., Dutra, J. S., Veloso, E. F. R., Fischer, A. L., & Trevisan, L. N. (2015). Generational perceptions and their influences on organizational commitment. Management Research: The Journal of the Iberoamerican Academy of Management, 13(1), 5-30. DOI:
  35. Solnet, D., Kralj, A., & Kandampully, J. (2012). Generation Y employees: An examination of work attitude differences. Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, 17(3), 36.
  36. Steers, R. M. (1977). Antecedents and outcomes of organizational commitment. Administrative science quarterly, 22(1), 46-56.
  37. Howe, N., & Strauss, W. (1991). Generations: The history of America's future, 1584 to 2069. New York: William Morrow & Company.
  38. Tissen, R. J., Lekanne Deprez, F. R., Burgers, R. G., & Van Montfort, K. (2010). ‘Change or hold: Reexamining HRM to meet new challenges and demands’: The future of people at work: A reflection on diverging human resource management policies and practices in Dutch organizations. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 21(5), 637–652.
  39. Twenge, J. M., Campbell, S. M., Hoffman, B. J., & Lance, C. E. (2010). Generational difference in work values: Leisure and extrinsic values increasing, social and intrinsic values decreasing. Journal of Management, 36(5), 1117–1142. DOI:
  40. Wang, Y. (2015). Antecedents of organizational commitment in young generation with Chinese family business background (Unpublished master dissertation). Concordia University, Quebec, Canada.
  41. Wanjugu, K. O. M. (2015). Effect of Generation Y Motivators on Generation Y Organizational Commitment: A Case Study of Nakuru County Government Headquarters (Unpublished Master dissertation). Karabak University, Kenya.
  42. Yang, X. L., Li-Ping, W., & Lau, A. (2008, October). An empirical study on new generation worker's organizational commitment, motivation, work outcomes and HRM strategic implications. Paper presented at 2008 4th International Conference on Wireless Communications, Networking and Mobile Computing. Dalian, China. DOI:
  43. Yi, L. X. (2014). Factors that affect Generation Y workers’ organizational commitment (Unpublished master dissertation). Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman, Malaysia.

Copyright information

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

About this article

Publication Date

23 September 2019

eBook ISBN

978-1-80296-067-9

Publisher

Future Academy

Volume

68

Print ISBN (optional)

-

Edition Number

1st Edition

Pages

1-806

Subjects

Sociolinguistics, linguistics, literary theory, political science, political theory

Cite this article as:

Aziz*, K. A., Rahman, R. H. A., & Yusof, H. M. (2019). A Review On Antecedents Of Organizational Commitment Among Gen Y. In N. S. Mat Akhir, J. Sulong, M. A. Wan Harun, S. Muhammad, A. L. Wei Lin, N. F. Low Abdullah, & M. Pourya Asl (Eds.), Role(s) and Relevance of Humanities for Sustainable Development, vol 68. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences (pp. 106-119). Future Academy. https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2019.09.11