Support, Commitment, and Employee Outcomes in a Team Environment

By James Bishop, K. Scott, Susan M. Burroughs. 2000

554 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Communication, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/1c62ab9352f31ecb9c8ca981231449c81178b3c6

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Communication

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

Citations in the corpus

Teacher team commitment, teamwork and trust: exploring associations (2005, background): “Recent studies have suggested the need to shift attention beyond the dominant organizational paradigm toward other forms of commitment like commitment to groups to which an employee may feel attached (Becker, 1992; Bishop and Scott, 2000; Bishop et al., 2000; Reichers, 1985, 1986).”
A Cross-Level Test of Empowerment and Process Influences on Members’ Informal Learning and Team Commitment (2015, background): “Bishop et al. (2000) showed that team-level commitment mediated the relationship between perceived team support and job performance.”
Multilevel and Cross-Level Effects of Workplace Attitudes and Group Member Relations on Interpersonal Helping Behavior (2006, result): “This is consistent with previous studies showing that affective commitment mediated the effects of various job-related attitudes such as job satisfaction, fairness perception, 398 CHOI and perceived organizational support (Bishop et al., 2000; Schappe, 1998).”
Unpacking Commitment: Multiple Loyalties and Employee Behaviour* (2005, background): “To date, the research has tended to examine foci internal to the organization, such as top management, the supervisor or immediate boss, and fellow workers (Becker, 1992; Becker et al., 1995, 1996; Bishop et al., 2000; Clugston et al., 2000), with some research beginning to examine external foci suc”
New development of organizational commitment: A critical review (1960 - 2009) (2010, background): “With regular interaction and prompt feedback from the targets of their commitment, employees are likely to behave in a manner that matches the goals and values of those target domains (Bishop et al., 2000).”
Taking a Multifoci Approach to the Study of Justice, Social Exchange, and Citizenship Behavior: The Target Similarity Model† (2007, background): “In a team setting, Bishop et al. (2000) found that employee commitment to the team predicted job performance (path estimate = .45), whereas organizational commitment did not.”
Job satisfaction and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB): Does team commitment make a difference in self‐directed teams? (2008, methodology): “The relationship between team commitment and organizational citizenship behavior has been previously shown to be strong and significant (Bishop and Scott, 2000; Bishop et al., 2000; De Lara and Rodriguez, 2007).”
Employee organizational commitment: the influence of cultural and organizational factors in the Australian manufacturing industry (2009, background): “The importance of teams has been emphasized in the modern economy as they can increase employees' flexibility and productivity which are both essential components for organizational success (Cohen and Bailey 1997 ; Bishop, Scott and Burroughs 2000 ).”
The relationship of emotional exhaustion to work attitudes, job performance, and organizational citizenship behaviors. (2003, background): “Because social exchange relationships emphasize the obligations, attachments, and identification that employees feel toward their employers, past research has proposed using organizational commitment to operationalize an employee’s social exchange relationship with his or her employing organization ”
Affective commitment to the organization, supervisor, and work group: Antecedents and outcomes (2004, background): “However, future investigations should be conducted in organizational settings that make the work group a more salient focus of commitment (e.g., self-directed work teams, cf. Bishop & Scott, 2000; Bishop et al., 2000) with respect to some work outcomes, or to identify aspects of work behavior that m”