Relationship Between Emotional Commitment Task Performance And Organizational SI


The concept of Organizational Silence is a condition that can prevent negative feedback, changes and development that should prevent organizational communication. As a result of this situation, decrease in employee loyalty, inability to cope with the problems encountered in the process and failure of the employee to protect the organizational values, leads to a decrease in performance and deviation in goals. The data were collected through a questionnaire distributed to healthcare workers randomly from nine hospitals in Turkey between the years of 2018-2019. In this context, the relationship between Emotional Commitment Task Performance of Organizational Silence was tested. Data were analyzed through the SPSS statistical packet program and four proposed relations were tested through Squared Multiple Correlations analyses. The scales used were Organizational Silence, Emotional Commitment and Task Performance. For this purpose, 507 questionnaires were analyzed by face to face interviews with employees from nine hospitals in Istanbul. Interestingly at the end of the study, Organizational Silence increases the Task Performance in the health sector. On the other hand, Emotional Commitment improves Task Performance.

Keywords: Emotinonal commıtmentemotıinonal commitmenttask performance


In order for organizations to cope with today's tough competition conditions and survive and maintain their continuity, employees need to be involved in an enthusiastic, willing, highly motivated fashion production process. It is closely related to the ability of different creative skills to approach events and phenomena with critical thinking style in each individual creating competitive advantage in organizations. The concept of organizational silence emerges when organizations perceive such environments as objectionable and activate the organizational silence mechanism by activating fear among employees (Milliken et al., 2003). When the employees express their discomfort, the problems they face, they show that they are treated with a reactive approach, that they are not taken very seriously or even treated as the source of the problem (Detert & Edmondson, 2005). The constantly uneasy, restless and suspicious climate of the environment reduces the desire to work, motivation and organizational commitment. It is inevitable to take the spiral of silence. When it is experienced that speaking during the process does not solve the problems, it is an indication of incompatibility, it is stigmatized as the individual who opposes the managers and who misses the peace of the environment (Çavuşoğlu & Köse, 2016). Thus, silence becomes normalized and accepted for the employee. This situation jeopardizes the employee's adoption and internalization of the values of the organization and the continuation of the organization under all circumstances. The increase in the employee turnover rate of the organization, job satisfaction creates significant reductions in the organizational commitment rate, creates significant reductions in job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Organizational performance decreases as it poses a big threat to the efficient and efficient use of organizational resources. Therefore, the aim of the study was to investigate the relationship between organizational silence, emotional commitment and task performance.

Organizational Silence

In today's organizations, sharing and harmony gain importance every day. Organizational competitiveness is ensured through harmonious and healthy relationships between employees. For this reason, it is very important for the organizational development that the employees have the opportunity and possibility to deal with a problem and gain a new perspective or to propose a completely different proposal (Yürür & Sima, 2016). In terms of organizational benefit, it is the creation of environments that will improve the employees' ability to express in order to achieve their goals and objectives (Eisenberger et al., 2016). The solution of the problems encountered in the organizational production process brings a successful and efficient result by reaching the source of the correct information filtered through the multiplicity of more perspectives.

Silence is also evaluated in different ways for organizations. Silence is also different according to cultures, while some traditions treat silence on the basis of respect, while others comment that everything is normal in the normal process. On the other hand, silence in organizations is closely related to organizational culture. In some cultures, silence is the belief that everything is fine, that organizational values are possessed when no one is heard, and that organizational commitment is strong (Cohen, 1990). Organizational silence, which includes punishment imposed by the organization for failing to express them in the face of unfair treatment suffered by the employee (Dyne et al., 2003). İt is the forcing of the employee to silence as a result of organizational practices and behaviors that offend the employee and reduce the motivation for the work request (Kish-Gephart et al., 2009; Milliken et al., 2003; Noelle-Neumann, 1974). To the extent the environment allows, employees can reveal and express their discomfort. Based on employee experience, it constitutes the next form of behavior by evaluating the treatment it has received before. If he receives positive feedback from the cat when he informs the higher authorities of the negativity he feels uncomfortable in the organization, he can repeat this behavior. When faced with the opposite treatment, humiliated, battered, subjected to severe punishment, he chooses to remain silent in the name of not making a sound and not being contrary (Alparslan & Kayalar, 2012; Çakıcı, 2007). This situation works in parallel with organizational trust, freedom of expression and the support it will receive (Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002). Organizational silence is the form of behavior that every effort of the employees for the benefit and development of the organization develops as a result of being exposed to unequal behaviors, unfair practices and heavy penalties (Çavuşoğlu & Köse, 2016; Pinder & Karen, 2001).

Silence in organizations, value given to employees, democratic internal functioning, participation, fair salary increase, promotion policies can be indicative (Şehitoğlu & Zehir, 2010). Organizational silence is divided into three categories: accepted silence, silence for the benefit of the organization, and silence for defensive purposes. A new sub dimension called Opportunistic silence has been added to these types of silence (Bayram et al., 2017; Göksel & Güneş, 2017). Organizational silence degrades organizational commitment and employee performance. It has been determined by the studies that it prevents the achievement of organizational goals and objectives and the effective and efficient use of resource.

Emotional Commitment

Emotional attachment is a state of emotional attachment to the other party through an individual's inner impulses. This can be an individual, an item, a phenomenon. Organizational commitment is a form of willing, enthusiastic and highly motivated behavior that employees develop with their organizations in an internal way to achieve goals and goals based on organizational values (Allen & Meyer, 1990; Vandenberghe et al., 2004). Individuals voluntarily want to stay in the workplace and make willing efforts to maximize organizational values (Becker, 1960; Grusky, 1966; Hall et al., 1970). Good functioning of the justice mechanism, balanced wages and salary increases, inclusion of employees in the decision process and feeling supported constitute conditions that increase emotional commitment (İnce & Gül, 2005). Emotional commitment is also closely related to open and functional communication channels of the organization (Akça & Yurtçu, 2017; Poyraz & Kama, 2008). When the employee's knowledge, opinion and thoughts are applied and valued, he approaches his organization faithfully and strives to work harder. Balay’s (2000) organizational commitment; to come to work on time, to fulfill the tasks and responsibilities given, to maintain organizational values, to convert organizational resources into effective and efficient output, to be willing to work more, etc. results for the benefit of the organization.

The strong employee, emotionally connected with the organization, takes and accepts the rules to be followed in the organization and is determined to continue with the organization no matter what (Loi et al., 2006). It is able to produce more creative and easy solutions to the problems that arise in this process. They integrate with organizational values, focus on expected and desired outcomes, and have strong confidence in the organization. The fact that organizational commitment is permanent, continuous and widespread among employees is closely related to strategic organizational policies. Organizational commitment has been treated as three subspecies by researchers (Allen & Meyer, 1990; Rusbult & Farrell, 1983; Stebbins, 1970). They are emotional, normative, and commitment to carry on.

Emotional commitment; the employee's ownership and internalization of the organization with all its values, wants to stay in the organization in this context (Clugston, 2000; Riketta, 2002).

Normative commitment is a form of moral behavior and attitude that it develops as a result of outweighing its organizational duties and responsibilities. In short, it is a strong sense of responsibility that keeps him in the organization.

Commitment to Continued; When the individual leaves the organization or left to make a measurement between the loss and gain for the future whichever is more advantageous makes the choice in that direction. As a result, organizational commitment is a powerful emotional resource for motivating employees to goals and objectives. For this purpose, organizations can reduce the rate of qualified labor turnover by increasing job satisfaction and satisfaction.

Task Performance

Performance is the realization of goals and objectives in the expected and desired direction. Task performance is that every contribution that the employee adds to the organization's output as a result of duties and responsibilities to the production process leads to a numerical increase (Befort & Hattrup, 2003). Performance is also the effectiveness of transforming organizational resources into products and services on the basis of quality standards at the appropriate place at the appropriate time (Inuwa, 2016; Rıfat & Akgün, 2011). When the values of the organization are internalized by the employee, the skills and abilities that provide competitive advantage are revealed. Strategic organizational policies direct employees to stay in the organization, work with desire and enthusiasm (Şehitoğlu & Zehir, 2010). The positive impact of organizational attitudes and behaviors on employees increases task performance. As a result, an increase in organizational values in a positive sense constitutes a prerequisite for the future existence of organizations. In the light of all these studies, we believe that when Organizational Silence increase, emotional commitment decrease and consequently the task performance also decrease. The hypotheses we have developed in line with this assumption.

Problem Statement

Organizational success is possible only if the employees experience the production process in voluntary and motivated emotions. The more voluntary and willing, the more the value and quality of production and service increase or decrease. In organizations where there are no safe working environments, employees are not supported, and fear and anxiety prevails, employees choose not to express their problems and remain silent. This causes larger problems to develop. The emotional disconnection of the employee with the organization prevents him from turning to his talents and skills. The motivation of employees, who will turn organizational resources into maximum benefit, decreases. The expected and desired efficiency of the service and production process is not achieved. The hypotheses we have developed in line with this assumption;

H1: There is a significant negative relationship between Organizational Silence and Emotional Commitment.

H2: There is a negative relationship between Organizational Silence and Task Performance

H3: There is a positive relationship between Emotional Commitment and Task Performance

H4: Emotional Commitment has an indirect effect on the relationship between Organizational Silence and Task Performance.

Research Questions

In this study, the effect of employees' emotional commitment to the organization on task performance. Whether there is a relationship between employee silence, task performance. what kind of interaction exists, In addition, research was conducted on the basis of the questions of how emotional commitment interacts with organizational silence.

Purpose of the Study

It is aimed to reveal how Organizational Silence changes as the concepts in which organizational efficiency and effectiveness interact, how employee emotional commitment affects task performance, causes and results, and organizational outcomes.

Research Method

Sample and Data Collection

The data were collected through a questionnaire distributed to healthcare workers randomly from nine hospitalsin Turkey between the years of 2018-2019.In this study, face to face interviews were conducted with a total of 507 hospital employees and questionnaire data were used. This study also was conducted on 507 valid questionnaires. Data were analyzed through the SPSS statistical packet program and four proposed relations were tested through Squared Multiple Correlations analyses. The scales used were Organizational Silence, Emotional Commitment and Task Performance.


To measure organizational silence, 27 item-scale was developed in 2003 by Dyne et al. (2003). The scale was adopted from Erdoğan's (2011) master's thesis titled Lider the relationship Between Effective Leadership, Organizational Silence and Performance. Each of the questions in the organization is a 5 Likert-type scale are used to measure organizational silence and contains 27 statements in three dimensions.

Emotional commitment scale developed by Meyer and Allen in 1990 was used in the study. Validity study of the scale Wasti et al. (2007). As a result of the confirmatory factor analysis of the author, each item was found to be a single factor. The Cronbach’s Alpha values for each factors exceeds 0.70 (Gürbüz & Bekmezci, 2012). Which indicates the reliability of scales in that survey.

The Business Performance Scale was developed by Goodman and Svyantek (1999). The first 16 expressions of the scale, which includes 25 expressions of 5 Likert type, are for contextual performance and the last 9 are for task performance (Turunç & Çelik, 2010). Eight expressions of the scale of the authors were used in the study.


With this study, hypotheses were tested and analysis was carried out to define the direction and strength of the relationships. As a result of the literature survey, hypotheses and research model are formed as follows in Figure 01 .

Figure 1: The model of the research
The model of the research
See Full Size >
Table 1 -
See Full Size >

In Table 1 , mean, standard deviation and correlation values of the variables included in the analysis are given. The reliability values of the sub-factors are given as the diagonal values of the correlations. When the reliability coefficient values given are examined, Cronbach Alpha, which is the most used value in the reliability measurement of the questions, is examined (Hair et al., 2014; Pallant, 2013) value is greater than 0.70 and the internal consistency of the variables used in the analysis is high.

Table 2 -
See Full Size >

Factor analysis results for the variables given in the analysis are given in Table 2 . According to these results, 5 factors such as Emotional Commitment (EC), Task Performance (TP), silence for defensive purposes (SDP), silence for the benefit of the organization (SBO) and accepted silence (AS) were obtained. Some variables were excluded from the analysis due to low factor loads and communalities.

According to the results, the explanatory value of the factors obtained was 69.708%.KMO value of the factor model is over 0.80, The Bartlett Sphericity test is also meaningful, and it appears that the data are appropriate for factor analysis (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2001).

Table 3 -
See Full Size >

When the results given in Table 3 are examined, it is seen that the goodness of fit values of the model give excellent fit results (Hayes, 2009; Schermelleh-Engel et al., 2003).

The direct and indirect relationships given in the model were found to be significant. Accordingly, the total effect of Emotional Commitment on Task Performance was measured as (β = 0.028 ***).

Emotional Commitment also has a positive and significant effect on Task Performance (β = 0.381 ***). The effect of Organizational silence on Emotional Commitment was also found to be negative (β = -0.610 ***).

The indirect effect size was β = -0.233 ***) and this effect was significant according to the Bootstrap method at 5000 sample level (Preacher & Hayes, 2008).

Squared Multiple Correlations values obtained in the model were found to be 0.372 for EC and 0.092 for TP, respectively. According to these results, Organizational silence increases Task Performance and reduces Emotional Commitment.

Emotional Commitment enhances Task Performance. In conclusion, H1, H3, H4 were accepted as the hypotheses of our research and our hypothesis H2 was found to be inverse and significant (See Figure 02 ).

Figure 2: Squared Multiple Model for Organizational silence Emotional Commitment and Task Performance
Squared Multiple Model for Organizational silence Emotional Commitment and Task Performance
See Full Size >


In this study conducted on the health sector, the relationship between Organizational Silence, Emotional Commitment and Task Performance was tested. The most striking result from the data is that as organizational silence increases, so does task performance. Therefore, H2 (There is a negative relationship between Organizational Silence and Task Performance) Hypothesis is not supported. On the other hand, as organizational silence increases, emotional commitment decreases, H1(There is a negative relationship between Organizational Silence and Emotional Commitment.), H3(There is a positive relationship between Emotional Commitment and Task Performance.). H4(Emotional Commitment has an indirect effect on the relationship between Organizational Silence and Task Performance.) H4(Emotional Commitment has an indirect effect on the relationship between Organizational Silence and Task Performance.), H1, H3, and H4 are fully supported. These findings are consistent with the literature on organizational silence and emotional commitment. Many studies on organizational silence and emotional commitment have been studied in the literatüre (Çavuşoğlu & Köse, 2016; Milliken et al., 2003; Noelle-Neumann, 1974; Pinder & Karen, 2001; Şehitoğlu & Zehir, 2010). Emotional commitment and performance studies (Allen & Meyer, 1990; Rusbult & Farrell, 1983; Vandenberghe et al., 2004). Although H1, H3, H4 hypotheses are supported by literature studies, H2 hypothesis is not supported. However, these studies were performed only with the data obtained from nine hospitals serving the health sector in Turkey. Therefore, these findings may not be transmitted to any organization. Therefore, further studies in different sectors and more countries are recommended to generalize these findings.


  1. Akça, M., & Yurtçu, B. G. (2017). Çalışma ortamı özelliklerinin hekimlerin görev ve bağlamsal performansına etkisi [Effects of work environment characteristics on physicians' task and contextual performance]. International Journal of Academic Value Studies, 3(15), 197-207.
  2. Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of occupational psychology, 63(1), 1-18.
  3. Alparslan, A. M., & Kayalar, M. (2012). Örgütsel Sessizlik: Sessizlik Davranışları, Örgütsel ve Bireysel Etkileri [Organizational Silence: Silence Behaviors, Organizational and Individual Effects]. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 6, 136-147.
  4. Balay, R. (2000). Yönetici ve Öğretmenlerde Örgütsel Bağlılık [Organizational Commitment in Administrators and Teachers]. Nobel Yayıncılık.
  5. Bayram, A., Gökhan, Ç., & Yusuf, Y. (2017). The Relationshıp Between Organizational Silence And Life Satisfaction In Football Referees.  PressAcademia Procedia, 3(1), 423-430.
  6. Becker, S. H. (1960). Notes on the Concept of Commitment. American Journal of Sociology, 66(1), 32-40.
  7. Befort, N., & Hattrup, K. (2003). Valuing task and contextual performance: Experience, job roles, and ratings of the importance of job behaviors. Applied HRM Research, 8(1), 17-32.
  8. Clugston, M. (2000). The Mediating Effects of Multidimensional Commitment on Job Satisfaction and Intent to Leave. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21(4), 477-486.
  9. Cohen, J. (1990). Things I Have Learned (So Far). American Psychologist, 45(12), 1304-1312.
  10. Çakıcı, A. (2007). Örgütlerde Sessizlik: Sessizliğin Teorik Temelleri ve Dinamikleri [Silence in Organizations: Theoretical Foundations and Dynamics of Silence]. Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 16(1), 145-162.
  11. Çavuşoğlu, S., & Köse, S. (2016). Örgüt Kültürünün Örgütsel Sessizlik Davranışına Etkisi [The Effect of Organizational Culture on Organizational Silence Behavior]. Dokuz Eylul University Journal of Graduate School of Social Sciences, 18(1), 115-146.
  12. Detert, J. R., & Edmondson, A. C. (2005). Everyday failures in organizational learning: Explaining the high threshold for speaking up at work. Division of Research, Harvard Business School.
  13. Dyne, L. V., Ang, S., & Botero, I. C. (2003). Conceptualizing employee silence and employee voice as multidimensional constructs. Journal of management studies, 40(6), 1359-1392.
  14. Eisenberger, R., Malone, G. P., & Presson, W. D. (2016). Optimizing perceived organizational support to enhance employee engagement. Society for Human Resource Management and Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2, 22.
  15. Erdoğan, E. (2011). Örgütsel Sessizlik ve Performans İlişkisi [Organizational Silence and Performance Relationship]. (Unpublished Master's Thesis). Gebze İleri Teknoloji Enstitüsü.
  16. Goodman, S. A., & Svyantek, D. J. (1999). Person–organization fit and contextual performance: Do shared values matter. Journal of vocational behavior, 55(2), 254-275.
  17. Göksel, A., & Güneş, G. (2017). Kuşaklar Arasi Farklılaşma: X ve Y Kuşaklarının Örgütsel Sessizlik Davranışı Bağlamında Analizi [Generational Differentiation: Analysis of Generations X and Y in the Context of Organizational Silence Behavior]. Gazi Üniversitesi İktisadi veİdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 19(3), 807-828.
  18. Grusky, O. (1966). Career Mobility and Organzational Commitment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 488-503.
  19. Gürbüz, S., & Bekmezci, M. (2012). İnsan Kaynakları Yönetimi Uygulamalarının Bilgi İşçilerinin İşten Ayrılma Niyetine Etkisinde Duygusal Bağlılığın Aracılık ve Düzenleyicilik Rolü [The Mediating and Regulatory Role of Emotional Commitment in the Effect of Human Resources Management Practices on the Quit Intention of Knowledge Workers]. İstanbul Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi, 41(2), 189-213.
  20. Hair, J. F., William, C. B., Barry, J. B., & Rolph, E. A. (2014). Multivariate Data Analysis. (7th ed). Pearson Education Limited.
  21. Hall, D. T., Schneider, B., & Nygren, H. T. (1970). Personal factors in organizational identification. Administrative science quarterly, 176-190.
  22. Hayes, A. F. (2009). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Publications.
  23. İnce, M., & Gül, H. (2005). Yönetimde Yeni Bir Paradigma [A New Paradigm in Management]. Organizational commitment. Çizgi Yayıncılık.
  24. Inuwa, M. (2016). Job Satisfaction And Employee Performance: An Empirical Approach. The Millennium University Journal, 1(1), 9-103.
  25. Kish-Gephart, J. J., Detert, J. R., Treviño, L. K., & Edmondson, A. C. (2009). Silenced by fear: The nature, sources, and consequences of fear at work. Research in organizational behavior, 29, 163-193.
  26. Loi, R., Hang‐Yue, N., & Foley, S. (2006). Linking employees' justice perceptions to organizational commitment and intention to leave: The mediating role of perceived organizational support. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 79(1), 101-120.
  27. Milliken, F. J., Morrison, E. W., & Hewlin, P. F. (2003). An exploratory study of employee silence: Issues that employees don’t communicate upward and why. Journal of management studies, 40(6), 1453-1476.
  28. Noelle-Neumann, E. (1974). The Spiral of Silence A Theory of Public Opinion. Journal of Communication, 24(2), 43-51.
  29. Pallant, J. (2013). SPSS Survival Manual. McGraw-Hill Education.
  30. Pinder, C. C., & Karen, P. H. (2001). Employee Silence: Quiescence And Acquiescence As Responses To Perceived İnjustice.» In Research in Personnel And Human Resources Management (331-369). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
  31. Poyraz, K., & Kama, B. (2008). Algılanan İş Güvencesinin, İş Tatmini, Örgütsel Bağlılık ve İşten Ayrılma Niyeti Üzerindeki Etkilerinin İncelenmesi [Investigation of the Effects of Perceived Job Security on Job Satisfaction, Organizational Commitment and Intention to Leave]. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 13(2), 143-164.
  32. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and Resampling Strategies for Assessing and Comparing Indirect Effects in Multiple Mediator Models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879–91.
  33. Rhoades, L., & Eisenberger, R. (2002). Perceived organizational support: a review of the literature. Journal of applied psychology, 87(4), 698.
  34. Rıfat, İ. R. A. Z., & Akgün, Ö. (2011). Örgütsel Bağlılığın Çalışan Performansı Üzerine Etkilerini Ölçmeye Yönelik Bir Çalışma [A Study to Measure the Effects of Mental Commitment on Employee Performance]. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Meslek Yüksek Okulu Dergisi, 14(1-2), 201-224.
  35. Riketta, M. (2002). Attitudinal Organizational Commitment And Job Performance: A Meta‐Analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational And Organizational Psychology And Behavior, 23(3), 257-266.
  36. Rusbult, C. E., & Farrell, D. (1983). A longitudinal test of the investment model: The impact on job satisfaction, job commitment, and turnover of variations in rewards, costs, alternatives, and investments. Journal of applied psychology, 68(3), 429.
  37. Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the Fit of Structural Equation Models: Tests of Significance and Descriptive Goodness-of-Fit Measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23-74.
  38. Şehitoğlu, Y., & Zehir, C. (2010). The Analysis of Employee Performance in the Context of Employee Silence and Organizational Citizenship Behaviour in Turkısh Public Institutions. Today’s Review of Public Administration, 4(4), 95-120.
  39. Stebbins, A. R. (1970). On Misunderstanding The Concept of Commitment: A Theoretical Clarification. Social Forces, 526-529.
  40. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using Multivariate Statistics. (4th ed). Allyn & Bacon, Boston.
  41. Turunç, Ö., & Çelik, M. (2010). Çalışanların algıladıkları örgütsel destek ve iş stresinin örgütsel özdeşleşme ve iş performansına etkisi [Organizational support perceived by employees and the effect of work stress on organizational identification and job performance]. Yönetim ve Ekonomi: Celal Bayar Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi 17.2, 183-206.
  42. Vandenberghe, C., Bentein, K., & Stinglhamber, F. (2004). Affective commitment to the organization, supervisor, and work group: Antecedents and outcomes. Journal of vocational behavior, 64(1), 47-71.
  43. Wasti, S. A., Tan, H. H., Brower, H. H., & Önder, Ç. (2007). Cross-cultural measurement of supervisor trustworthiness: An assessment of measurement invariance across three cultures. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(5), 477-489.
  44. Yürür, S., & Sima, N. (2016). Örgütsel Adalet Algısı Kamu Çalışanlarının İhbar Etme Niyetinin Belirleyicisi Midir? [Is Perception of Legal Justice Determinant of Public Servants' Intention to Report?]. Amme İdaresi Dergisi, 49(3), 117-148.

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

13 February 2021

eBook ISBN



European Publisher



Print ISBN (optional)


Edition Number

1st Edition




National interest, national identity, national security, national consciousness, social relations, public relation, public organizations, linguocultural identity, linguistics

Cite this article as:

Demir, B., & Zehir, C. (2021). Relationship Between Emotional Commitment Task Performance And Organizational SI. In C. Zehir, A. Kutlu, & T. Karaboğa (Eds.), Leadership, Innovation, Media and Communication, vol 101. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences (pp. 47-58). European Publisher.