Effects of work environment variables on Chinese prison staff organizational commitment
| DOI | 10.1177/0004865817720628 |
| Date | 01 June 2018 |
| Published date | 01 June 2018 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Article
Australian & New Zealand
Journal of Criminology
Effects of work environment
2018, Vol. 51(2) 275–292
! The Author(s) 2017
variables on Chinese prison
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
staff organizational
DOI: 10.1177/0004865817720628
journals.sagepub.com/home/anj
commitment
Shanhe Jiang
Wayne State University, USA
Eric G Lambert
The University of Mississippi, USA
Jianhong Liu
The University of Macau, China
Thomas M Kelley
Wayne State University, USA
Jinwu Zhang
The University of Macau, China
Abstract
Staff are critical for the proper functioning of a prison; empirical research into the forces that
affect salient organizational attitudes of staff, such as organizational commitment, is equally
important. A survey instrument measuring affective commitment and personal (i.e. gender,
tenure, age, and educational level), job (i.e. perceived dangerousness of the job, job variety,
and supervision), and organizational variables (i.e. instrumental communication and input into
decision-making) was completed by 322 employees in two prisons in southern China. The
results of ordinary least squares regression showed that job and organizational variables of
perceived dangerousness of the job, job variety, supervision, instrumental communication,
and decentralization explained 54% of the variance in the dependent variable organizational
commitment and were much stronger predictors than personal characteristics. Among the
significant variables, decentralization had the largest sized effect, followed by perceived job
dangerousness, job variety, and instrumental communication. Except for the organizational
variable of perceived supervision quality, the job and organizational predictors of affective
commitment for these Chinese prison staff appear to mirror those typically found for staff in
US prisons.
Corresponding author:
Shanhe Jiang, Department of Criminal Justice, 3281 Faculty/Administration Building, Wayne State University, 656
West Kirby, Detroit, Michigan 48202, USA.
Email: fx6954@wayne.edu
276
Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology 51(2)
Keywords
China, correctional staff, organizational commitment, prison, work environment
Date received: 28 July 2016; accepted: 9 March 2017
The attitudes and behaviors of prison staff are critical for the success (or failure) of a
prison. Organizational commitment is a particularly important staff attitude. High levels
of commitment among prison staff are typically associated with positive organizational
outcomes, such as increased organizational citizenship and heightened job performance.
On the other hand, low levels of commitment are often linked with negative outcomes
for an organization, such as increased turnover intent/turnover, absenteeism, and staff
burnout (Camp, 1994; Hogan, Lambert, & Griffin, 2013; Lambert, Edwards, Camp, &
Saylor, 2005; Lambert & Hogan, 2009; Lambert, Hogan, & Griffin, 2008; Lincoln &
Kalleberg, 1990; Stohr, Self, & Lovrich, 1992).
Organizational commitment refers to an employee’s level of psychological attachment
to the employing organization (Allen & Meyer, 1990), his or her psychological identifi-
cation with the organization, acceptance of the organization’s values and goals,
intention to remain a member of the organization, and willingness to put forth effort
to help the organization be successful (Mowday, Porter, & Steers, 1982). Meyer and
Allen (1991) distinguished three forms of organizational commitment—affective,
continuance, and normative—each form corresponding with a particular psychological
state of mind. Affective commitment refers to an employee’s ‘‘emotional attachment to,
identification with, and involvement in the organization’’ (Meyer & Allen, 1991, p. 67).
Continuance commitment refers to the investments an employee makes in the organiza-
tion, such as pension plans and non-transferable job skills, which results in continued
organizational membership because the employee perceives the price of leaving the
organization as too high (Allen & Meyer, 1990; Jaros, Jermier, Koehler, & Sincich,
1993). Normative commitment, also known as moral commitment, refers to an
employee’s beliefs and values formed prior to and after joining the organization
(Allen & Meyer, 1990), or as Wiener (1982) stated, ‘‘the totality of internalized norma-
tive pressures to act in a way which meets organizational goals and interests’’ (p. 421).
Allen and Meyer (1990) distinguished the psychological states associated with the three
forms of organizational commitment stating, ‘‘employees with strong affective
commitment remain because they want to, those with strong continuance commitment
because the need to, and those with strong normative commitment because they feel that
they ought to stay’’ (p. 3).
The current study focused on the affective form of organizational commitment for sev-
eral reasons. First, as Mercurio (2015) contends, affective commitment goes to the core
essence of organizational commitment. Second, according to Allen and Meyer (1990),
the most prevalent approach to organizational commitment in the literature is one in which
commitment is considered an affective or emotional attachment to the organization such
that the strongly committed individual identifies with, is involved in, and enjoys membership
in the organization (p. 2).
Jiang et al.
277
Third, affective commitment is the most common form of organizational commitment
studied, including among correctional staff (Lambert, Hogan, & Jiang, 2008; Mathieu &
Zajac, 1990; Mercurio, 2015; Meyer et al., 2012). Fourth, compared to continuance and
normative commitment, affective commitment typically shows stronger associations with
salient work outcomes such as lower absenteeism, reduced turnover/turnover intent,
higher engagement in organizational citizenship behavior (i.e. going above what is
expected), and better work performance (Mercurio, 2015; Solinger, van Olffen, &
Roe, 2008). For example, Lambert, Kelley, and Hogan (2013a, 2013b) observed that
for US prison staff, job burnout had no association with normative commitment, a
positive association with continuance commitment, and a negative association with
affective commitment. Unless otherwise noted, henceforth, the term commitment
refers to affective organizational commitment.
The importance of commitment has led to a growing number of studies that
have explored its predictors for staff in Western prisons. Past research on several
public and private prisons, mainly in the US, has examined the relationship between
commitment and personal characteristics (e.g. age, gender, and tenure), job character-
istics (e.g. job variety, quality of supervision, perceived dangerousness of the job),
and organizational characteristics (e.g. input into decision-making, instrumental com-
munication, organizational support) (Garland, McCarty, & Zhao, 2009; Griffin,
Armstrong, & Hepburn, 2005; Griffin & Hepburn, 2005; Lambert & Hogan, 2009;
Lambert & Paoline, 2008; Lambert, Paoline, & Hogan, 2006; Rogers, 1991). These
studies have provided important information regarding the antecedents and effects of
commitment for Western prison staff.
While considerable research exists on commitment for staff in Western prisons, espe-
cially in the US, there has been a paucity of research regarding the antecedents and
effects of commitment for prison staff in non-Western nations in general, and China in
particular (Wong, Ngo, & Wong, 2002). Comparative criminologists have clearly
demonstrated the important influence of cultural variations (Jiang, Lambert, &
Jenkins, 2010; Liu 2009, 2016). Existing research on commitment in Chinese business
organizations suggests that the predictors of commitment may be different for Chinese
workers compared to workers in Western countries (Gamble & Huang, 2008). For
example, Chinese workers tend to view themselves from a collective perspective—as
organizational members—and tend to hold traditional values such as respect for
hierarchy, loyalty, duty, and reciprocity (i.e. pao), and an emphasis on interpersonal
relationships (i.e.
, guanxi) and reputation (i.e.
, mianzi or face). These differ-
ences in values may relate to differences in the predictors of commitment for Chinese
prison staff compared to those for staff in Western prisons. On the other hand, prison
staff in both China and the West must deal with inmates being held against their will.
The major goal for most prisons, whether in the West or in China, is to operate a secure,
humane, and safe facility. As such, regardless of cultural values, the predictors of com-
mitment for Chinese prison staff may be similar to those typically found for staff in
Western prisons.
The current study was undertaken to examine (1) the predictors of commitment for
Chinese prison staff and (2) how these predictors compare to those typically found for
staff in Western prisons. In other words, the main goals of this study were to determine
the degree to which the predictors of prison staff commitment from the well-established
278
Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology 51(2)
Western research apply to staff in Chinese prisons. To accomplish this goal, the current
study investigated the relationships of several personal, job, and organizational charac-
teristics with commitment for staff in two Chinese prisons and compared the findings
with those typically found for staff in Western, particularly US, prisons.
Literature review
Predictors of prison staff commitment
Based on past studies mainly involving...
To continue reading
Request your trial