Impact of Work Motivation and Locus of Control on Organizational Commitment amongst the Private University Teachers

Dr. Amardeep kaur Ahluwalia,

Assistant Professor, Guru Nanak Dev University, Regional Campus, Gurdaspur

Kamal Preet,

Research Scholar, Guru Nanak Dev University, Regional Campus, Gurdaspur.

 

 

Email id: kmlprt203@gmail.com, Contact no.: 9815625505

Postal Address: H no. 24/1, Mohalla Aryanagar, Jail Road, Tehsil and District Gurdaspur, Punjab-143521.

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to investigate the levels of organizational commitment, work motivation and locus of control among the Private university teachers of Punjab. The data was collected from the sample of 210 teachers. Work preference inventory scale (Amabile et al. 1994), organizational commitment questionnaire (Meyer et al. 1993) and work locus of control scale (Spector, 1998) were used. Data was analyzed by using weighted average scores. Relationship of constructs was analyzed by using structural equation modeling. Findings revealed higher level of extrinsic motivation than intrinsic motivation amongst the teachers. Highest level of normative commitment followed by continuance and affective commitment was found. Also, externally oriented locus of control was found predominant amongst them. It is found that external locus of control positively leads to normative commitment and intrinsic motivation negatively leads to the normative commitment. Negative impact of extrinsic motivation is found on affective commitment.

Keywords: intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, affective commitment, continuance commitment, normative commitment, locus of control, university teachers.

Introduction

There has been a sudden mushrooming of private universities in the state of Punjab. From 2005 to 2016 more than 15 private universities have come up and more are in the pipeline. A teacher has an unending list of roles to be played in student’s life that of an educator, facilitator, mediator, instructor, moderator, guide etc. Therefore, the teachers are rightly known as the Nation builders. The motivation, the commitment and the self belief of teachers would not only lead to a higher quality of education but would lay the foundation of a prosperous nation. Thus, the focus of management is to keep their employees motivated (Mitchell, 1973). This study throws light on the level of work motivation including intrinsic and extrinsic motivation; the type of internal locus of control or external locus of control and the organizational commitment including affective commitment, continuance commitment and normative commitment.

Work Motivation

“Motivation is the willingness of exerting high level of efforts for achievement of organizational goals, but that should be satisfying some individual needs” Robbins (1998, p.168). Hellriegal et al. (1992) “motivation is a drive that directs the individual’s behavior towards goal orientation” (p. 204). Motivation is categorized mainly into two types such as intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation. According to Vallerand and Bissonnette (1992) intrinsic motivation is derived from those activities which are carried out for enjoyment. Extrinsic motivation is derived from those activities which are carried out from the sense of obligation. The Present study focuses the aspects of ‘enjoyment’ and ‘challenge’ in the intrinsic motivation, whereas; the aspects of ‘outwards’ (i.e. dictates to others) and ‘compensation’ are included in the extrinsic motivation.

Locus of Control

Spector (1988) stated that work locus of control is a general human belief about controlling the events at the workplace. According to Rotter (1966) and Spector (1988) locus of control is categorized into two types such as internal locus of control and external locus of control. Individuals with internal locus of control generally believe that they have control over their destinies. They are often confident and are more motivated in controlling their external environments. On the other hand, individuals with external locus of control believe that they do not have direct control on their destinies. According to Robbins (2001, p.96) the externally oriented people generally have higher absenteeism rate, less job satisfaction, and are less involved in their occupational duties”. Jones and George (2003, p.79) stated that internally oriented people are more involved in problem solving situations than externally oriented people.

Organizational Commitment

Organizational Commitment refers to the acceptance of values and goals of organization and the desire to remain in the organization (Mowday et al. (1979). According to Nazari et al. (2012) and Mathieu and Zajac (1990, p.171) organizational commitment is a psychological bond and obligation to continue with the organization. Tongo (2015) stated that high level of enormous misuse of funds, within the governmental structures in paying workers’ salaries hampers the commitment level of employees. Meyer and Allen (1991) categorized organizational commitment into three dimensions i.e. affective commitment, continuance commitment and normative commitment. The Affective commitment refers to the level of emotional attachment of the employees towards their organization. The continuance commitment refers to an awareness of the cost associated with leaving the organization. The Normative commitment refers to the employee’s sense of moral obligation to remain with the organization.

Review of Literature

Buchanan (1975) conducted a research on middle managers (76 in federal agencies, 69 in 4 sectors of industrial firms) in USA. He found less job involvement in the public sectors employees.

Analyzed the factors influencing ‘organizational commitment’ of lecturers in higher educational institutions. Gender-wise positive influence on ‘organizational commitment’ was found with regard to age, educational level, academic rank, job satisfaction and work load. Also, ‘marital status’, ‘incentives and faculty’ influence the level of ‘organizational commitment’ of female lecturers, whereas, ‘economic dependents’ and ‘absenteeism’ showed significant affect on ‘organizational commitment’ of male lecturers.

Gagne et al. (2008) conducted a study on employees of Canadian Telecommunication Company and an Italian auto parts company. It was found that ‘motivation’ influence ‘organizational commitment’ over a time, in case of ‘affective’ and ‘normative commitment’ except ‘continuance Commitment’.

organizational commitment among 1111 employees. Differences were found only between different professional groups instead of sectors. Teachers, journalists and preschool teachers were found highly committed towards their organization. Engineers/business graduates, administration graduates/librarians, and social workers were found less committed towards their organization.

and Sajid (2010) conducted a study to investigate the relationship between ‘locus of control’ (LOC) and ‘organizational commitment’ of different university teachers of Pakistan. Results showed that ‘Locus of control’ was significantly and positively related to ‘organizational commitment’. Findings revealed that respondents with more ‘internal locus of control’ tend to have high ‘affective’ and ‘normative commitment’, whereas; respondents with more ‘external locus of control’ showed high ‘continuance commitment’.

Popoola (2011) conducted a study on medical records personnel of university teaching hospitals in Nigeria and investigated influence of ‘locus of control’ and ‘job satisfaction’ on ‘organizational commitment’. Findings revealed significant inverse relationship of ‘work locus of control’ and ‘organizational commitment’. Respondents were found more with ‘external work locus of control’ due to which their ‘organizational commitment’ declined because of high degree of externality. Therefore, more the ‘external work locus of control’ among medical records personnel; less committed they would be. Also, significant positive relationship of ‘job satisfaction’ with ‘organizational commitment’ was found. Hence, highly satisfied medical records personnel tend to have a high degree of commitment towards their hospitals.

George and Sabapathy (2011) investigated the, affect of ‘organizational commitment’ on ‘work motivation’ of teachers. Sample size comprised of 450 teachers of various colleges of Bangalore city. The sample was categorized into ‘Government’, ‘Private aided’ and ‘Private unaided’ college teachers. Findings revealed that ‘work motivation’ of these teachers was positively correlated with ‘affective’ and ‘normative organizational commitment’ except ‘continuance commitment’. It was also found that ‘work motivation’ of degree college teachers were influenced by their level of ‘organizational commitment’.

Altindis (2011) conducted study to investigate level of ‘organizational commitment’ and ‘motivation’. ‘Organizational commitment’ was grouped into three variables i.e. (emotional commitment, continuance commitment and normative commitment) and ‘motivation’ was grouped into two variables i.e. (intrinsic and extrinsic motivation). Results revealed that ‘affective’ and ‘normative commitment’ had more impact on ‘intrinsic Motivation’ than ‘continuance commitment’. Whereas; ‘normative commitment’ showed more influence on ‘extrinsic motivation’ as compared to ‘continuance commitment’ followed by ‘affective commitment’.

Berg (2011) analyzed the relationship between ‘intrinsic motivations’, ‘extrinsic motivation’ and two forms of ‘commitment’ i.e. ‘occupational commitment’ and ‘organizational commitment’. Further these two types of commitments were divided into three dimensions i.e. (affective, normative and continuance). Findings revealed negative relationship between ‘intrinsic motivation’ and ‘affective commitment’ which was partially mediated by ‘work engagement’. Positive and significant relationship between ‘extrinsic motivation’ and ‘continuance commitment’ was found.

Chhabra (2013) investigated the relationship of job satisfaction and locus of control on organizational commitment. Sample size comprised of 449 Indian IT professionals. Findings revealed positive relation of job satisfaction and internal locus of control with organizational commitment.

Khan (2015) conducted research on organizational commitment among public and private school teachers (150 school teachers; 75 each from public and private schools). Analysis of the data was done by applying Mean, SD and t-test. Results indicated high level of commitment for private school teachers as compare to public school teachers.

 

Objectives of the Study

1.      To identify the level of organizational commitment (affective, continuance and normative commitment), work motivation (intrinsic motivation/ extrinsic motivation) and locus of control (internal locus of control/ external locus of control) amongst the Private University teachers.

2.      To investigate the relation of work motivation and locus of control with affective, continuance and normative commitment amongst the Private university teachers.

 

 

 

Research Methodology

Sample size

Self administrated questionnaires were distributed personally by visiting the universities of Punjab. Data was collected by using convenience sampling method. Permanent teachers and whosoever has crossed their probation period were selected as the sample of the study. Total 210 samples size was effectively used in the study. Work preference inventory scale (Amabile et. al 1994), work locus of control scale (Spector’s, 1988) and Organizational commitment scale (Meyer, Allen, & Smith, 1993) was used in the study. The study was carried out during October 2016- February 2017.

Abbreviations used:

INM= intrinsic motivation

EXM= extrinsic motivation

loci = internal locus of control

loce = external locus of control

Aff= affective commitment

Con= continuance commitment

Nor= normative commitment

 

Techniques used

Data was analyzed by using weighted average scores, standard deviation, and structural equation modeling (SEM). Weighted average scores (WAS) were used to investigate level of work motivation, organizational commitment and locus of control. Relationship of these three variables was investigated through SEM.

 

Discussions & Findings

Table- 1: Level of work motivation (intrinsic & extrinsic work motivation) amongst the Private University teachers

Labels	Intrinsic & Extrinsic Work Motivation (Statements)	Mean
Intrinsic Work Motivation
M13	I enjoy tackling problems that are completely new to me	2.18
M17	I'm more comfortable when I can set my own goals	2.20
M20	It is important for me to be able to do what I most enjoy	2.21
M23	I enjoy doing work that is so absorbing that I forget about everything else	2.09
M26	I enjoy trying to solve complex problems	2.19
M27	It is important for me to have an outlet for self expression	2.18
M28	I want to find out how good I really can be at my work	2.29
M30	What matters most to me is enjoying what I do	2.13
Extrinsic Work Motivation
M2	I prefer having someone set clear goals for me in my work	4.03
M4	I am keenly aware of the income goals I have for myself	4.04
M6	To me, success means doing better than other people.	4.11
M10	I am keenly aware of the promotion goals I have for myself	4.05
M12	I'm less concerned with what work I do than what I get for it	4.12
M15	I'm concerned about how other people are going to react to my ideas	4.13
M16	I seldom think about salary and promotions (R)	3.92
M18	I believe that there is no point in doing a good job if nobody else knows about it	4.01
M19	I am strongly motivated by the money I can earn.	4.01
M21	I prefer working on projects with clearly specified procedures	4.13
M22	As long as I can do what I enjoy, I'm not that concerned about exactly what I'm paid (R)	3.94
M24	I am strongly motivated by the recognition I can earn from other people	4.11
M25	I have to feel that I'm earning something for what I do	4.02
M29	I want other people to find out how good I really can be at my work	4.08
Intrinsic Motivation		2.1821
Extrinsic Motivation		4.0510
Work Motivation		3.3714

 

The weighted average scores of the statements regarding the intrinsic motivation range from as high as 2.29 for the statement M29 (I want to find out how good I really can be at my work) to as low as 2.09 on the statement M23 (I enjoy doing work that is so absorbing that I forget about everything else).

On the other hand, weighted average scores of the statements relating to extrinsic motivation range from as high as 4.13 for the statement M15 (I'm concerned about how other people are going to react to my ideas) & M21 (I prefer working on projects with clearly specified procedures) to as low as 4.01 on the statement M16 (I seldom think about salary and promotions (R)).

Overall extrinsic motivation WAS (4.0510) shows higher scoring than intrinsic motivation with WAS (2.1821). This shows that the Private University teachers are more motivated through extrinsic factors (in terms of outwards and compensation) than intrinsic factors (in terms of enjoyment and challenge).

Table- 2: Level of organizational commitment (affective, continuance and normative Commitment) amongst the Private University teachers.

 

Labels	(Statements)	Mean
Affective commitment
ac1	I would be very happy to spend the rest of my career with this organization	2.28
ac2	I really feel as if this organization's problems are my own.	2.23
ac3	I do not feel a strong sense of "belonging" to my organization (R)	2.35
ac4	I do not feel "emotionally attached" to this organization (R)	2.23
ac5	I do not feel like "part of the family" at my organization (R)	2.21
ac6	This organization has a great deal of personal meaning for me	2.20
Continuance commitment
cc1	Right now, staying with my organization is a matter of necessity as much as desire	3.76
cc2	It would be very hard for me to leave my organization right now, even if I wanted to	3.80
cc3	Too much of my life would be disrupted if I decided I wanted to leave my organization now.	3.73
cc4	I feel that I have too few options to consider leaving this organization	3.94
cc5	If I had not already put so much of myself into this organization, I might consider working elsewhere	3.81
cc6	One of the few negative consequences of leaving this organization would be the scarcity of available alternatives.	3.97
Normative commitment
nc1	I do not feel any obligation to remain with my current employer (R)	3.84
nc2	Even if it were to my advantage, I do not feel it would be right to leave my organization now.	3.92
nc3	I would feel guilty if I left my organization now.	4.20
nc4	This organization deserves my loyalty	4.30
nc5	I would not leave my organization right now because I have a sense of obligation to the people in it	4.29
nc6	I owe a great deal to my organization	4.16
Affective commitment		2.2492
Continuance commitment		3.8357
Normative commitment		4.1183
Organizational commitment		3.4011

 

The weighted average scores of the statements regarding commitment range from as high as 4.30 for the statement nc4 (This organization deserves my loyalty) to as low as 2.20 on the statement ac6 (This organization has a great deal of personal meaning for me).

Overall the normative commitment scores were the high with WAS (4.1183); followed by continuance commitment (WAS =3.8357) and least weighted scores of the affective commitment (2.2492). This shows that the teachers of the Private Universities are highly obligated towards their organization. Secondly, they consider that they don’t have many alternative job options. Lastly, they feel that they have an emotional attachment due to which they stay with their present employer.

Table- 3: Level of Internal and External Locus of Control amongst the Private University teachers.

Labels	Internal Locus of Control & External Locus of Control (Statements)	Mean
loc1	A job is what you make of it.	1.70
loc2	On most jobs, people can pretty much accomplish whatever they set out to accomplish	1.87
loc3	If you know what you want out of a job, you can find a job that gives it to you	1.79
loc4	If employees are unhappy with a decision made by their boss, they should do something about it	1.74
loc5	Getting the job you want is mostly a matter of luck	4.36
loc6	Making money is primarily a matter of good fortune	4.17
loc7	Most people are capable of doing their jobs well if they make the effort	1.70
loc8	In order to get a really good job, you need to have family members or friends in high places	4.24
loc9	Promotions are usually a matter of good fortune	4.27
loc10	When it comes to landing a really good job, who you know is more important than what you know	4.48
loc11	Promotions are given to employees who perform well on the job	1.79
loc12	To make a lot of money you have to know the right people	4.36
loc13	It takes a lot of luck to be an outstanding employee on most jobs	4.31
loc14	People who perform their jobs well generally get rewarded	1.83
loc15	Most employees have more influence on their supervisors than they think they do	1.91
loc16	The main difference between people who make a lot of money and people who make a little money is luck	4.28
Internal Locus of Control		1.7911
External Locus of Control		4.3083

 

The weighted average scores of the statements regarding the locus of control range from as high as 4.48 (loc10: When it comes to landing a really good job, who you know is more important than what you know) to as low as 1.70 (loc1: A job is what you make of it & loc7; Most people are capable of doing their jobs well if they make the effort).

Higher agreements are found with the statements regarding external locus of control than internal locus of control. Higher external locus of control is found amongst the teachers of the Private university teachers with overall WAS (4.3083) than internal locus of control with overall WAS (1.7911). This suggests that the Private University teachers believe in fortune and fate.

 

Confirmatory Factor Analysis

CFA determines the reliability and validity of the model constructs and evaluates the fit between observed and estimated covariance matrices (Hair et al., 2010). There are total 30 statements in Work Preference Inventory Scale (15 items of intrinsic motivation & 15 items of extrinsic motivation). However, seven statements of intrinsic motivation (i.e. M3, M5, M7, M8, M9, M11 and M13) and one item of extrinsic motivation (i.e. M1) were found with factor loadings less than 0.40. Hence, these statements are omitted in order to improve the model fit to the data and ran a modified CFA model, where seven-factor model is found to fit in the Private University teachers. The rest of the remaining statements are finalized for the further analysis.

To evaluate convergent validity, standardized factor loadings, average variance extracted (AVE) and construct reliability (CR) are calculated for the private universities. The value of standardized factor loadings are more than 0.50, AVE is greater than 0.50 (Hair et al., 2010). Also, the value of AVE estimated for latent construct indicators ranged from .501 per cent to .751 in the case of the Private Universities. This reveals that at least 50 per cent in the Private universities. Also, values of construct reliability are more than 0.90 in the Private Universities (except in four cases of the Private universities, where it is above .80) which is acceptable. Hence, values of standardized factor loadings, average variance extracted and construct reliability confirm the convergent validity of the model.

 

Figure- 1: Standardized coefficients of the Seven-Factor Model of the Private Universities

 

Table- 4: Model fit indices of the measurement model.

 

Absolute Fit Indices	State Universities
Chi-square Degrees of freedom Normed chi-square/df	2170.834 1462 1.485
Root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA)	.048
Incremental Fit Indices
comparative fit index (CFI)	.907
Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI)/ NNFI	.902
Incremental Fit Index (IFI)	.908
Parsimony Fit Indices
Parsimony comparative fit index (PCFI)	.861
PRATIO	.949
Badness of Fit Measure
Root mean square residual (RMR)	.031

 

Measurement model for the Private Universities

As seen from Table- 4, the value of normed chi-square/degree of freedom is 1.485. For a better fit model, preferred value should be below 2 (Hair et al., 2010). The value of RMSEA is .048 which is below the recommended value by (Hu & Bentler, 1998, 1999). All fit indices are acceptable i.e. CFI, IFI, NNFI are greater than .85 (Browne and Cudeck, 1993). CFI value is .907, NNFI value is .902, IFI value is .908, value of PCFI and PRATIO is greater than .850. Thus, it supports model fit. Further, the value of RMR, which is an indicator of badness of fit, is 0.031. Lower RMR value indicates better fit and higher value indicates poor fit. Thus, by examining values of model fit, it is proved that the present seven-factor model is sufficient to explain work preference inventory scale; organizational commitment questionnaire and work locus of control scale amongst the Private University teachers.

 

Impact of internal locus of control (Loci), external locus of control (Loce), intrinsic motivation (INM) & extrinsic motivation (EXM) on affective commitment, continuance commitment and normative commitment amongst the Private University teachers

Figure- 2: *** demonstrate 1% of significance level; ** demonstrate 5% of significance level

Impact of Internal Locus of Control; External Locus of Control; Intrinsic Motivation and Extrinsic Motivation on Affective, Continuance and Normative Commitment

Among the Private University teachers, External locus control (.255, p<.05) has positive impact only on normative commitment out of three dimensions of organizational commitment. No significant impact of internal locus of control is found on any dimensions of organizational commitment. Significant and negative effect of intrinsic motivation (-.399, p<.01) is found on normative commitment. The result contradicts the findings of Eby et al. (1999) who have found positive relation between normative commitment and intrinsic motivation. On the other hand, Berg (2011) supports this, as he found the negative impact of intrinsic motivation on normative commitment in his study. At last, significant and positive impact of extrinsic motivation (.222**, p<.05) is found on affective commitment. This relation is supported by the findings of Altindis (2011), who has found positive relation between affective commitment and extrinsic motivation. But past researches indicated negative relation of affective commitment and extrinsic motivation.

Conclusion & Implications

This study finds a higher level of the extrinsic motivation as compared to the intrinsic motivation, amongst the Private University teachers. This implies that they believe more in extrinsic factors (‘outwards’ & ‘compensation’) and less in intrinsic factors (‘enjoyment’ & ‘challenge’). Results are supported by Khojasteh (1993) who states that the private sector employees are highly motivated by financial rewards as compared to the public sector employees. Lewis & Frank (2002) also stated in their study that individual, who gives high importance to salary; generally seek employment in the private sector.

Findings reveal higher normative commitment, followed by continuance commitment and affective commitment among the Private University teachers. This implies that they are more obligated towards their employer. Secondly, they believe that they have less job options, due to which they continue with their present organization or employer.

External locus of control is found among these teachers. It is inferred that these teachers believe more in luck, fate, destiny, etc. According to them their destinies are being controlled by external forces.

Positive impact of external locus control and negative impact of intrinsic motivation is found on normative commitment. This implies that the Private University teachers who believe more in fate, fortune etc. feel more obligated towards their organization. Also, the teachers with high intrinsic motivation feel lesser obligated towards their organization.

Further, results reveal the positive impact of extrinsic motivation on affective commitment. It indicates that the teachers who are highly motivated by the extrinsic factors are more emotionally attached with their place of work.

The present findings are supported by the study of Berg (2011), Altindi (2008); whereas it is contradicted by the study of Eby et al. (1999). This reveals that there is scope and need to study these relations further to come to some exact conclusion especially with regard to the private university teachers as the past research both contradicts as well as substantiates the present results.

References

Altindis, S. (2011). Job Motivation and Organizational Commitment among the Health Professionals: A questionnaire survey African Journal of Business Management, 5(21), 8601-8609.

Amabile, T. M., Hill, K.G., Hennessey, A. and Tighe, E.M. (1994). The work preference Inventory: Assessing intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations, Journal of personality and social Psychology, 66(5), 950-967.

Berg, I.F.W.V.D. (2011). Exploring possible relationships between motivation and commitment, Master thesis Psychology Specialization Work and Organization, 1- 42. www.pdffactory.com

Browne, M.W. and Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit, in A.B. Kenneth and J.S. Long (Eds.).Testing Structural Models, 136-162. Sage Publications, London.

Buchanan, B. (1975). Red tape and the service ethics: some unexpected differences between public and private managers, Administration and Society, 6, 423-444.

Chhabra, B. (2013). Locus of Control as A Moderator in the Relationship between Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment: A Study of Indian IT Professionals, Organizations and Markets in Emerging Economies, 4(2(8)), 25-41

Eby, L. T., Freeman, D. M., Rush, M. C. and Lance, C. E. (1999). Motivational bases of affective organizational commitment: A partial test of an integrative theoretical model, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 72, 463–483.

Gagné, M., Chemolli, E., Forest, J. and Koestner, R. (2008). A Temporal Analysis of the Relation between Organisational Commitment and Work Motivation, Psychologica Belgica, 48(2&3), 219- 241.

George, L., and Sabapathy, T. (2011). Work motivation of teachers: Relationship with organizational commitment/La motivation au travail des enseignants: la relation avec l'engagement organizational, Canadian Social Science, 7(1), 90.

Hair, Jr. J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J. and Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis, Pearson Education Inc., New Delhi, India.

Hellriegal, D.; R.W. Woodman and J.W. Slocum, Jr. (1992). Organizational Behaviour, 6^th edition, St. Paul: West Publishing Company.

Hu, L.T. and Bentler, P.M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: sensitivity to under parameterized model misspecification, Psychological Methods, 3, 424-453.

Hu, L.T. and Bentler, P.M. (1999). Cut-off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis” Conventional criteria versus new alternatives, Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55.

Igbeneghu, B. I. and Popoola, S. O. (2011). Influence of Locus of Control and Job Satisfaction on Organizational Commitment: A Study of Medical Records Personnel in University Teaching Hospitals in Nigeria, Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal).Paper 575.http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/575

Jones, G.R. and George, J.M. (2003). Contemporary Management, New York: McGraw-Hill.

Khan, S. (2015), Organizational Commitment among Public and Private School Teachers The International Journal of Indian Psychology, 2(3), 65-73

Khojasteh, M. (1993). Motivating the Private vs. Public Sector Managers, Public Personnel Management, 22 (3), 391 – 401.

Lewis, G. B., and Frank, S. A. (2002). Who wants to work for the government? Public Administration Review, 62(4), 395-404.

Mastekaasa, A. (2009). Organizational commitment among public and private sector professionals, SPS arbeidsnotat 1/2009. file:///C:/Users/Param/Downloads/1-2009_Organizational%20commitment,%20Mastekaasa.pdf

Mathieu, J.E. & Zajac, D.M. (1990). A review and meta-analysis of the antecedents, correlates and consequences of organizational commitment Psychological Bulletin, 108, 171- 194.

Meyer, J.P. and Allen, N.J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment, Human Resource Management Review, 1, 61-89.

Meyer, J.P.; Allen, N.J. and Smith, C.A. (1993). Commitment to organizations and occupation: Extensions and test of a three component conceptualization, Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 538-551.

Mitchell, T. R. (1973). Motivation and Participation: An Integration, The Academy of Management Journal, 16(4), 670-679.

Mowday, R., Steers, R.M., and Porter, L. (1979). The measurement of organizational commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14, 224-247.

Munir, S. and Sajid, M. (2010). Examining Locus of Control (LOC) as a Determinant of Organizational Commitment among University Professors in Pakistan, Journal of Business Studies Quarterly, 1(3), 78-93.

Nazari, K., Bte Lope Pihie, Z. A., Basri, R.B. and Idris, K. B. (2012). An Empirical Investigation of Lecturers’ Organizational Commitment in Technical and Vocational Colleges in Iran, International Refereed Research Journal, 3(1)1, 1- 10.

Peace, H. (1998). Organizational Commitment of Female Lecturers in Higher Institutions of Learning in Uganda: Its Nature and Determinant Factors, 1975 – 1993, Organization for Social Science Research in Eastern and Southern Africa, 1-40.

Robbins, S.P. (1998). Organizational behavior, Eighth edition, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 56-57.

Robbins, S.P. (2001). Organizational behavior, Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement, Psychological Monographs, 80, 609.

Spector, P. E. (1988). Development of the Work Locus of Control Scale, Journal of Occupational Psychology, 61, 335-340.

Tongo, C. (2015). Social Responsibility, Quality of Work Life and Motivation to Contribute In The Nigerian Society, Journal of Business Ethics, 126(2), 219-233

Vallerand, R. J. and Bissonnette, R. (1992). Intrinsic, Extrinsic, and Amotivational styles as predictors of behavior: A prospective study, Journal of Personality, 60, 599–620.