Journal of Applied Psychology 1986, Vol. 71, No. 3,500-507

Copyright 19S6 by the American Psychological Association, Inc.

0021 -90 i 0/86/S00.7 5

Perceived Organizational Support

Robert Eisenberger and Robin Huntington University of Delaware

Steven Hutchison Debora Sowa

U.S. Army Human Engineering Laboratory, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Aberdeen Proving Grounds, Maryland

Evidence is presented that (a) employees in an organization form global beliefs concerning the extent to which the organization values their contributions and cares about their well-being, (b) such perceived organizational support reduces absenteeism, and (c) the relation between perceived organizational support and absenteeism is greater for employees with a strong exchange ideology than those with a weak exchange ideology. These findings support the social exchange view that employeesrsquo; commitment to the organization is strongly influenced by their perception of the organizationrsquo;s commitment to them. Perceived organizational support is assumed to increase the employeersquo;s affective attachment to the organization and his or her expectancy that greater effort toward meeting organizational goals will be rewarded. The extent to which these factors increase work effort would depend on the strength of the employeersquo;s exchange ideology favoring the trade of work effort for material and symbolic benefits.

The word commitment is often used in everyday language to denote the “sense of being bound emotionally or intellectually to some course of action” (American Heritage Dictionary, 1979), which may include a personrsquo;s relationship with another individual, group, or organization. There has been an increasing concern with factors that influence the stability and intensity of employee dedication to organizations as employers. The frequent allusion to employment as the trade of effort and loyalty for material commodities or social rewards (e.g., Etzioni, 1961; Gould, 1979; Levinson, 1965; March amp; Simon, 1958; Mowday, Porter, amp; Steers, 1982) suggests the usefulness of developing a detailed social exchange interpretation of organizational commitment. The present research investigates processes involved in employeesrsquo; inferences concerning the organizationrsquo;s commitment to them, and the contribution of such perceived organizational support to employees commitment to the organization.

One major view of organizational commitment emphasizes the economic costs of leaving a current employer (Becker, 1960; Farrell amp; Rosbult, 1981). For example, employees may believe that specialized skills acquired in their present job have less application elsewhere and would therefore be less valued (Scholl, 1981) or that frequent job changes may damage a personrsquo;s reputation for stability or loyalty (Becker, 1960; Staw, 1981). The

We are indebted to the following individuals for their suggestions and efforts on behalf of this project: Chaudene Baker, Jane Bradshaw, Linda Fox, James Jones, D. Michael Kuhlman, Donna Manzo, John Ogilvie, Liane Schaeffer, Jeff Quinn, Jerry Seibert, Robin Sigman, and Georg- anne Walters.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Robert Eisenberger, Department of Psychology, University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware 19716.

degree of involvement in organizational activities may similarly depend on such economic benefits as anticipated promotions and pay raises (Etzioni, 1961; Gould, 1979; March amp; Simon, 1958). In contrast to these economic views of commitment, others have stressed emotional ties to the organization (e.g., Buchanan, 1974, 1975; Etzioni, 1961; Hrebiniak, 1974; Kelman, 1961; Levinson, 1965). The most detailed account to date of affective attachment to the organization characterizes organizational commitment as an “employeersquo;s identification with and involvement in a particular organization” (Mowday, Steers, amp; Porter, 1979; Porter, Steers, Mowday, amp; Boulian, 1974). Identification, in this case, means the employeersquo;s sense of unity with the organization. Such affective attachment, as assessed by the Organizational Commitment Questionnaire, has been found to influence productivity, absenteeism, and turnover (Meyer amp; Allen, 1984; Mowday etal., 1982).

The preceding economic and affective interpretations of organizational commitment may be integrated and extended into a social exchange approach that emphasizes employeesrsquo; beliefs concerning commitment to them by the organization. Beliefs in organizational support or malevolence may be fostered by employeesrsquo; anthropomorphic ascription of dispositional traits to the organization. Levinson (1965) noted that employees tend to view actions by agents of the organization as actions of the organization itself. The personification of the organization, Levinson suggested, is abetted by the following factors: (a) the organization has a legal, moral, and financial responsibility for the actions of its agents; (b) organizational precedents, traditions, policies, and norms provide continuity and prescribe role behaviors; and (c) the organization, through its agents, exerts power over individual employees. The personification of the organization was assumed to represent an employeersquo;s distillation of views concerning all the other members who control that individualrsquo;s material and symbolic resources.

500

We suggest that in order to determine the personified organizationrsquo;s readiness to reward increased work effort and to meet needs for praise and approval, employees develop global beliefs concerning the extent to which the organization values their contributions and cares about their well-being. Such perceived organizational support would depend on the same attributional processes that people use generally to infer the commitment by others to social relationships. That is, perceived organizational support woul

剩余内容已隐藏，支付完成后下载完整资料

组织支持感

罗伯特·艾森伯格

罗宾·亨廷顿

史蒂文bull;哈钦森

德波拉bull;索瓦

“承诺”这个词经常在日常语言中被用来表示“情感上或智力上被某种行为所束缚的感觉”(American Heritage Dictionary, 1979)，这可能包括一个人与另一个个人、团体或组织的关系。作为雇主，影响雇员对组织奉献的稳定性和强度的因素越来越受到关注。经常提到就业是用努力和忠诚换取物质商品或社会报酬的交易(例如Etzioni, 1961年;古尔德,1979;莱文森,1965;March amp; Simon, 1958;Mowday, Porter， amp; Steers, 1982)提出了对组织承诺进行详细的社会交换解释的有用性。本研究调查了员工对组织承诺的推断过程，以及这种感知的组织支持对员工对组织承诺的贡献。组织承诺的一个主要观点强调离开当前雇主的经济成本(Becker, 1960;Farrell amp; Rosbult, 1981)。

例如，员工可能认为他们在当前工作中获得的专业技能在其他地方的应用更少，因此价值更低(Scholl, 1981)，或者频繁的换工作可能会损害一个人稳定或忠诚的声誉(Becker, 1960;Staw, 1981)。参与组织活动的程度也同样取决于预期的晋升和加薪等经济利益(Etzioni, 1961;古尔德,1979;March amp; Simon, 1958)。与这些承诺的经济观点相反，其他观点强调了与本组织的情感联系(例如，布坎南，1974年，1975年;他,1961;Hrebiniak, 1974;凯尔曼,1961;莱文森,1965)。迄今为止对组织情感依恋的最详细描述将组织承诺描述为“员工对特定组织的认同和参与”(Mowday, Steers， amp; Porter, 1979;波特，斯蒂尔斯，莫戴，amp;布里安，1974)。在这种情况下，认同意味着员工与组织的团结感。研究发现，组织承诺问卷评估的情感依恋会影响工作效率、缺勤和离职率(Meyer amp; Allen, 1984;Mowday等等,1982)。

上述对组织承诺的经济和情感解释可以整合并扩展为一种强调员工对组织承诺的信念的社会交换方法。对组织支持或恶意的信念可能是由员工对组织性格特征的拟人化归因所培养的。Levinson(1965)指出，员工倾向于将组织代理的行为视为组织本身的行为。莱文森认为，以下因素助长了本组织的人格化:(a)本组织对其代理人的行为负有法律、道德和财政责任;(b)组织先例、传统、政策和规范提供连续性并规定角色行为;(c)组织通过其代理人对个别雇员施加权力。组织的人格化被认为代表了一名雇员对控制该个人的物质和象征资源的所有其他成员的看法的精粹。

我们建议，为了确定拟人化的组织是否准备好奖励增加工作努力员工，并满足对其表扬和批准的需求，员工要形成一种全球性的信念，即组织在多大程度上重视他们的贡献和关心他们的福祉。这种感知到的组织支持依赖于人们通常用来推断他人对社会关系承诺的归因过程。也就是说，组织支持的感知会受到赞扬和赞同的频率、极端程度和判断的真诚程度的影响(Blau, 1964)。其他奖励，如薪酬、级别、工作充实程度和对组织政策的影响，将会影响感知支持，使其表示组织对员工的积极评价(cf. Brinberg amp; Castell, 1982)。

感知到的组织支持会受到组织对待员工的各个方面的影响，反过来，也会影响员工对该对待背后的组织动机的理解。这意味着，在各种各样的情况下，员工对组织的支持程度将是一致的。这些包括组织可能对员工未来的疾病、错误和卓越表现的反应，以及组织希望支付公平的工资，使员工的工作有意义和有趣。感知到的支持会提高员工对组织实现目标的更大努力的期望(努力-结果期望)。当感知到的支持也满足了表扬和批准的需要时，员工将把组织成员纳入自我认同，从而发展对组织的积极情感纽带(情感依恋)。努力-结果期望和情感依恋将增加员工的努力，以满足组织的目标，通过更多的出席和表现。

有几项研究调查了员工对公司的特定信念，这些信念可能会让员工觉得公司重视他们的贡献，关心他们的幸福。通过增加努力-结果期望和情感依恋，这种信念应该对工作出勤率的规律性和工作绩效水平产生积极的影响。Buchanan(1974)发现，对于企业和政府的管理者来说，组织认可他们的贡献并可以依靠他们履行承诺的信念与组织承诺问卷测量的情感依恋呈正相关。Steers(1977)报道了相同信念对医院工作人员、工程师和科学家情感依恋的类似影响。Cook and Wall(1980)对英国蓝领工人进行了大量多样的抽样调查，发现对管理层公平对待员工的信任与独立的身份认同、参与度和忠诚度问卷测量呈正相关。Patchen(1960)调查了一家石油公司的非临时工的旷工情况，该公司向员工强调高出勤率的重要性。他指出，员工目前的薪酬水平与旷工几乎没有关系，但员工对薪酬公平性的感知与旷工呈负相关。Hrebiniak(1974)与医院工作人员发现，将组织环境视为“良性、合作或一致的”会增加组织中继续雇用的额定效用。这些结果与目前的观点是一致的，即感知到的组织支持增强了员工对组织的努力-结果期望和情感依恋，从而导致更大的努力来实现组织的目标。

我们假设，一个员工的工作努力的增加是由于更大的努力-结果期望和情感依恋的发展所导致的，这取决于一种有利于用工作努力换取物质和象征利益的交换意识形态(参看Etzioni, 1961;古尔德,1979;莱文森,1965;March amp; Simon, 1958;莫戴等，1982)。这种交换思想源于互惠原则，即人们应该帮助那些帮助过他们的人(Gouldner, 1960)。知觉组织支持对交换意识强的个体的旷工和绩效有显著影响，而对交换意识弱的个体影响不大。

我们报告了关于员工对组织承诺的信念的广度和一致性，以及这种感知到的组织支持和员工交流思想对旷工的影响的证据。假设是(a)雇员形成了关于组织在多大程度上重视他们的贡献和关心他们的福利的全球信念;(b)这种组织支助减少了旷工;(c)交换意识形态强的员工感知到的组织支持与缺勤之间的关系强度大于交换意识形态弱的员工感知到的组织支持与缺勤之间的关系强度。

研究一：组织支持的全球性看来，组织支持感可能会受到员工对待的不同方面的影响，进而影响员工对这种对待原因的推断。

为了检验员工关于组织支持的信念的全面性，我们构建了36个陈述，代表了组织对员工各种可能的评价判断，以及组织在不同情况下可能采取的对员工有利或有害的任意行动。证据表明员工形成全球有关组织承诺的信念将显示通过员工感知的组织的各种评价判断他或她一直有利或不利的程度高或低,和组织的期望会对员工有益或有害的情况。

方法：承诺陈述被纳入组织支持知觉调查(SPOS)，员工使用李克特7分制(1 =非常不同意，7 =非常同意)来表示他们对每个项目的同意程度。为了控制一致性反应偏差，一半的陈述是正面的，另一半是负面的。我们将对这些语句进行详细分类，以说明它们的多样性。

表1