| Literature DB >> 32581929 |
Marina Romeo1, Montserrat Yepes-Baldó1, Claudia Lins1.
Abstract
With the goal of contributing to the growth of research on people with disabilities in employment, in particular in relation to their job satisfaction (JS), organizational commitment (OC), and turnover intention (TI), this study explores the effect of JS on TI among employees with disabilities and the moderation effect of OC and its four dimensions on this main relationship. A total of 245 Special Employment Center (SEC) employees in Spain answered a questionnaire. To analyze the results, a descriptive analysis with bivariate correlations across the variables was performed, and the moderation model was tested subsequently using macro PROCESS for SPSS by Hayes. For the significant effects, a pick-a-point approximation was used to interpret the results. The results show that OC and its dimensions have no significant effect on the direct relationship. However, some components of JS, such as the relationship with co-workers and with supervisors, play a significant role in the relationship with TI when moderated by affective and value commitment. Our results show that it is important that human resources departments create conditions favoring a work environment with positive interpersonal relationships between employees and managers in order to minimize TI at SECs.Entities:
Keywords: Special Employment Centers; employees with disabilities; job satisfaction; organizational commitment; turnover intention
Year: 2020 PMID: 32581929 PMCID: PMC7283776 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01035
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
Descriptive analysis, Spearman’s correlation coefficients, and Cronbach’s alpha.
| Variables | N | Mean | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 | 3.1 | 3.2 | 3.3 | 3.4 |
| 1. Job satisfaction | 245 | 3.30 | 0.85 | (0.78) | ||||||
| 2. Turnover intention | 238 | 2.88 | 1.02 | –0.11 | (–) | |||||
| 3. Commitment | 242 | 3.50 | 0.65 | 0.47** | −0.43** | (0.78) | ||||
| 3.1 Need | 242 | 2.35 | 0.91 | −0.32** | 0.10 | −0.60** | (0.44) | |||
| 3.2 Exchange | 242 | 3.26 | 0.93 | 0.53** | −0.17** | 0.77** | −0.20** | (0.75) | ||
| 3.3 Affective | 242 | 3.66 | 0.82 | 0.47** | –0.06 | 0.86** | −0.38** | 0.63** | (0.67) | |
| 3.4 Values | 241 | 3.44 | 0.83 | 0.50** | –0.09 | 0.75** | −0.29** | 0.48** | 0.59** | (0.60) |
FIGURE 1Moderation effect of affective commitment on the relationship between satisfaction and turnover intention.
FIGURE 2Moderation effect of affective commitment on the relation between turnover intention and satisfaction with the relationship with co-workers and supervisors.
FIGURE 3Moderation effect of values commitment on the relation between turnover intention and satisfaction with the relationship with supervisors.