Organizational identification versus organizational commitment: self-definition, social exchange, and job attitudes

By D. van Knippenberg, Ed Sleebos. 2006

822 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4be16dc60c337cf19f260a47974b13aa64a0d379

How researchers see this paper

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

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

In Social Psychology

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Identification in Organizations: An Examination of Four Fundamental Questions (2008, background): “Furthermore, research suggests that commitment is more strongly associated with attitudinal variables such as job satisfaction (Riketta, 2005; van Knippenberg & Sleebos, 2006; cf. Cole & Bruch, 2006).10 In contrast, we would expect OI to be more strongly related to variables that suggest an…”
Organizational identification: Development and testing of a conceptually grounded measure (2007, neutral): “…2005; Riketta, 2005) used by researchers in the area (e.g., Bamber & Iyer, 2000; Cole & Bruch, 2006; Herrbach, 2006; Moye & Bartol, 2001; van Knippenberg & Sleebos, 2006, van Knippenberg, van Knippenberg, Monden, & de Lima, 2002; van Knippenberg & van Schie, 2000; Weisenfeld, Raghuram, &…”
Linking transformational leadership and work outcomes in temporary organizations: A social identity approach (2017, background): “A great deal of empirical studies support the notion that organizational identification is related to leadership and/or work outcomes (van Dick et al., 2004; van Knippenberg and Sleebos, 2006).”
Beyond the three-component model of organizational commitment. (2008, background): “Meyer, J. P., Becker, T. E., & Vandenberghe, C. (2004).”
Advancing Ethics in Public Organizations: The Impact of an Ethics Program on Employees’ Perceptions and Behaviors in a Regional Council (2013, background): “maintains a just and equitable working environment, they are likely to reciprocate with greater commitment (Baker et al. 2006; Knippenberg and Sleebos 2006).”
Organizational identity strength, identification, and commitment and their relationships to turnover intention: Does organizational hierarchy matter? (2006, background): “In the third study, van Knippenberg and Sleebos (2006) collected data from Dutch university faculty to further explore the differences between identification and commitment.”
A Temporal Analysis of the Relation between Organisational Commitment and Work Motivation (2008, background): “Organisational identification is the “extent to which individuals define the self in terms of the membership in the organisation” (van Knippenberg & Sleebos, 2006, p. 572; see also Meyer et al., 2006 for a discussion of the difference between commitment and social identity, which is similar to…”
Organizational commitment and intentions to quit: An examination of the moderating effects of psychological contract breach in Trinidad and Tobago (2006, background): “Such popularity is not surprising given that organizational commitment is related to a number of important employee attitudinal variables, such as job satisfaction ( Knippenberg and Sleebos, 2006”
Linking dimensions of career adaptability to adaptation results: A meta-analysis (2017, neutral): “Indeed, studies measuring job satisfaction consistently report higher associations with control than with any other adaptability dimension (Koen, Klehe, & Van Vianen, 2012; Maggiori, Johnston, Krings, Massoudi, & Rossier, 2013).”
Social Exchange Theory: A Critical Review with Theoretical Remedies (2017, background): “For example, in their study of extra-role behaviors, Van Dyne and LePine (1998) included two dimensions – voice and helping.”
Linking perceived organizational support with employee work outcomes in a Chinese context: Organizational identification as a mediator (2014, background): “However, it has been argued that some aspects of employee–employer relationship are better understood on the basis of self-definition and self-categorization, not simply in terms of reciprocity and exchange (e.g., Eisenberger & Stinglhamber, 2011; Van Knippenberg & Sleebos, 2006).”
Talk Up or Criticize? Customer Responses to WOM About Competitors During Social Interactions (2014, neutral): “Accordingly, the self is defined in collective rather than personal terms (Van Knippenberg & Sleebos, 2006).”
Perceived Parental Behaviors and Next-Generation Engagement in Family Firms: A Social Cognitive Perspective (2018, methodology): “…both by job characteristics and the quality of the exchange relationship between the individual and organizational members, such as colleagues and supervisors (Van Knippenberg & Sleebos, 2006), as well as family members, particularly senior generation incumbent leaders (Dawson et al., 2014; 2015).”