IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cep/cepdps/dp0149.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Dimensionality and Stability of Organizational Commitment: A Longitudinal Examination of Cook and Walls (1980) Organizational Commitment Scale (BOCS)

Author

Listed:
  • D Guest
  • R Peccei

Abstract

The dimensionality and the temporal stability of Cook and Wall's (1980) measure of organizational commitment, referred to here as the British Organizational Commitment Scale (BOCS), were examined using two-wave longitudinal data collected from a sample of 218 employees in British Rail. Alternative one-, two-, and three-factor models of the BOCS were evaluated using both the standard nine-item version of the scale and a shorter (positive) six-item version. Confirmatory factor analyses revealed that (a) the BOCS is a multi-dimensional scale made up of three empirically distinct but related components corresponding to the Identification, Involvement and Loyalty subscales, (b) the positive six-item version of the scale was psychometrically superior to the nine-item version, and ® the measurement properties of the six-item BOCS were stable over time. Based on these results the casual (time-lagged) relations between the three empirically derived sub-components of attitudinal commitment were then examined by applying structural-relations analyses to the longitudinal data. No clear causal ordering was found among the three sub-components, which were also found to exhibit differential stability over time. The implications of the findings for use of the BOCS and for future research are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • D Guest & R Peccei, 1993. "The Dimensionality and Stability of Organizational Commitment: A Longitudinal Examination of Cook and Walls (1980) Organizational Commitment Scale (BOCS)," CEP Discussion Papers dp0149, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
  • Handle: RePEc:cep:cepdps:dp0149
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cep:cepdps:dp0149. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://cep.lse.ac.uk/_new/publications/discussion-papers/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.