Co-worker support and affective commitment during a global crisis: evidence from an emerging economy

Figures & data

Figure 1. Conceptual framework.

Table 1. Socio-demographic characteristics of respondents.

Variable	Attribute	Frequency	Percentage
Gender	Male	185	74.0
	Female	65	26.0
	Total	250	100
Age	20-30 years	99	39.6
	31-40 years	103	41.2
	41-50 years	43	17.2
	51-60 years	5	2.0
	Total	250	100
Job Position	Manager	9	3.6
	Supervisor	39	15.6
	Regular employees	181	72.4
	Other	21	8.4
	Total	250	100
Work Experience (with study organization)	Less than 5 years	149	59.6
	6-10 years	68	27.2
	11-15 years	22	8.8
	16-20 years	7	2.8
	Over 21 years	4	1.6
	Total	250	100
Educational Qualification	PhD	6	2.4
	Masters	57	22.8
	Bachelors	128	51.2
	HND/Diploma	53	21.2
	Professional	6	2.4
	Total	250	100

Table 2. Measurement of variables.

Variables	Items Adapted	Source/Citation
ICS	My co-workers help me when things get demanding.	Settoon and Mossholder (2002)
	My co-workers help me even when I don’t directly ask for help.
	My co-workers assist me with heavy workloads.
	My co-workers help me when I am running behind in my work.
	My co-workers go out of their way to help me with work problems.
ECS	My co-workers listen to me when I must get something off my chest.	Settoon and Mossholder (2002)
	My co-workers take time to listen to my concerns.
	My co-workers take a personal interest in me.
	My co-workers try to cheer me up when I am having a bad day.
	My co-workers try to make me feel welcome in the work group.
	My co-workers treat me as one of the team.
JSAT	All in all, I am satisfied with my job	Cammann et al. (1979)
	In general, I don’t like my job.
	In general, I like working here
AC	I would be very happy to spend the rest of my career with this organization.	Ahmad et al. (2018)
	I really feel as if this organization’s problems are my own.
	I do not feel like ‘part of the family’ at this organization
	I do not feel ‘emotionally attached’ to this organization.
	This organization has a great deal of personal meaning for me.
	I do not feel a strong sense of belonging to this organization.

Table 3. Confirmatory factors analysis.

Constructs	Codes	Items	Loadings	T-values	CA	CR	AVE
ECS	ECS1	My co-workers listen to me when I must get something off my chest	.62	Fixed	.778	.784	.43
	ECS2	My co-workers take time to listen to my concerns	.64	10.15
	ECS4	My co-workers try to cheer me up when I am having a bad day	.61	9.66
	ECS5	My co-workers try to make me feel welcome in the work group	.64	10.16
	ECS6	My co-workers treat me as one of the team	.72	11.8
ICS	ICS1	My co-workers help me when things get demanding	.68	Fixed	.787	.791	.49
	ICS2	My co-workers help me with difficult assignments, even when I don’t directly ask for help	.72	11.66
	ICS3	My co-workers assist me with heavy workloads	.70	11.25
	ICS4	My co-workers help me when I am running behind in my work.	.69	11.06
JSAT	JSAT1	All in all, I am satisfied with my job	.66	Fixed	.658	.665	.50
	JSAT3	In general, I like working here	.75	9.87
AC	AC3	I do not feel like ‘part of the family’ at this organization	.69	Fixed	.761	.784	.55
	AC4	I do not feel ‘emotionally attached’ to this organization.	.68	10.47
	AC6	I do not feel a strong sense of belonging to this organization	.79	12.34
Model Fit Indices

Chi-Square = 127.97; df = 71; X²/df = 1.80; P-value = 0.00; RMSEA = 0.055; GFI=.93; CFI=.94; SRMR=.05; NNFI=.93.

Table 4. Correlation and discriminant validity.

	Construct	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mean	S.D
1	Age	1									1.8	.79
2	Gender	−.05	1								1.5	.50
3	Job Position	−.44**	−.04	1							2.86	.60
4	Job Tenure	.56**	.08	−.55**	1						1.6	.88
5	Educational Level	−.16*	−.09	.45**	−.12	1					2.98	.80
6	ECS	.04	−.14*	.02	.02	−.08	.66				3.92	.78
7	ICS	.07	−.04	.02	−.04	−.07	.46**	.70			3.77	.84
8	JSAT	.02	−.11	.01	.11	.07	.38**	.29**	.71		4.04	.82
9	AC	.01	.12	−.18**	−.01	−.04	−.22**	−.19**	−.34**	.74	3.64	.95

Note(s): *p<.05; **p < 0.01. The square root of the AVEs is presented in bolds in the diagonals.

*ECS – Emotional Co-worker Support; *ICS – Instrumental Co-worker Support; *JSAT – Job Satisfaction; *AC – Affective Commitment

Table 5. Results of hypotheses testing.

Direct Effects
Paths	β	S.E	C.R	P
ECS --> AC	.229	.062	3.688	***
ICS --> AC	.205	.065	3.163	.002**
Indirect Effects
Paths	β	S.E	LCI	UCI
ECS --> JSAT --> AC	.08	.027	.029	.136
ICS --> JSAT --> AC	.075	.025	.03	.128

Note: *LCI-Lower Confidence Interval, *UCI-Upper Confidence Interval; *ECS-Emotional Co-worker Support; ICS-Instrumental Co-worker Support; AC-Affective Commitment; JSAT-Job Satisfaction.

Figure 2. Summary of results.

Source: Authors Own Construct (2022)

Settoon, R. P., & Mossholder, K. W. (2002). Relationship quality and relationship context as antecedents of person-and task-focused interpersonal citizenship behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(2), 255. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.2.255

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Cammann, C., Fichman, M., Jenkins, D., & Kelsh, J. (1979). The Michigan Organizational Assessment Questionnaire. As cited in Cook, JD, Hepworth, SJ, Wall, TD, & Warr, PB (Eds), The experience of work: A compendium and review of 249 measures and their use.

 Google Scholar

Ahmad, M., Firman, K., Smith, H., & Smith, A. (2018). Short measures of organizational commitment, citizenship behaviour and other employee attitudes and behaviours. Business and Management Studies: An International Journal, 6(3), 516–550. https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v6i3.391

 Google Scholar