J BIJSN RES

49
1993:26:49-61

Organizational Commitment: Evidence of

Career Stage Effects?

Natalie J. Allen
John P. Meyer
The University of Western Ontario

Research examining work attitudes from a career stage perspective addresses two
issues: changes in attitudes across stages and the relations between work experiences
and attitudes at different stages. Unfortunately, employee age, organizational ten-
ure, and positional tenure are all used to define career stages, making cross-study
comparisons difficult. In this study, affective, continuance, and normative com-
mitment to the organization were examined as a function of all three career stage
variables. Also examined were the contributions, across stages, of various work
experiences to the prediction of affective commitment. Results indicate that al-
though affective and normative commitment increase significantly with employee
age, increases in continuance commitment are more closely related to increases in
organizational and positional tenure. Further, the relationships between work ex-
periences and affective commitment differ only slightly across tenure levels, and
not at all across employee age groups.

Introduction
Research examining the relationships between work attitudes and career stages has
focused on two related issues. One is whether there are changes in work attitudes
that occur as employees proceed from one career stage to another. The other,
somewhat more complex, issue involves the possibility that particular work ex-
periences are differentially related to work attitudes at different career stages.
From a practical perspective, both issues are important. Being able to anticipate
the course of work attitudes over career stages would be useful for both employers
and employees. Moreover, if particular work experiences are more closely linked
to work attitudes in some career stages than in others, it might be possible to
manage work experiences to optimize these attitudes.

Address correspondence to Natalie J. Allen, Centre for Administrative and Information Studies, The University
of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, N6A 5C2, Canada.
This research was supported by grants from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (No.
41&89-0379) and Imperial Oil Limited. We gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Sue Tessier in data analysis and
Wendy Bichard in preparing the tables and we thank three anonymous reviewers for their thoughtful comments on
an earlier version of the article.

Journal of Business Research 26, 49-61 (1993) 0148-2963/93/$5.00

0 1993 Elsevier Science Publishing Co., Inc.
655 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10010
50 J BUSN RES
1993:26:49-61
N. J. Allen and J. P. Meyer

The present research focuses specifically on the relationship between career stage
and one work attitude: organizational commitment. With its demonstrated link to
turnover and other outcomes (e.g., Mowday et al., 1982; Meyer et al., 1989),
commitment seems particularly important to consider from a career stage per-
spective, especially given the existence of an aging and mobile work force.

Operationalizing the Career Stage Construct

Comparisons across the few studies in which work attitudes and career stage vari-
ables were examined are hampered by diversity in the way the career stage construct
has been operationalized. As Morrow and McElroy (1987) noted, employee age,
organizational tenure, and positional (job) tenure all have been used to define
career stages. Variability also exists with respect to the time frames researchers
have used to demarcate the stages. Further, although the term “career stage”
suggests discrete time periods, some researchers have treated age and tenure as
continuous variables. Given the operational inconsistencies, this latter strategy has
merit; however, if researchers only conducted linear analyses, the strategy may
serve to obscure curvilinear relationships between attitudinal and career stage
variables. Finally, although career stage variables such as age, organizational ten-
ure, and positional tenure are correlated, they are obviously not identical con-
structs. Despite this, few attempts have been made to isolate the relative influence
of each variable on work attitudes (e.g., using partial correlation or multiple regres-
sion analyses).

Organizational Commitment and Career Stage: Theoretical and

Empirical Links
As others have noted (e.g., Morrow, 1983), organizational commitment has also
been conceptualized and measured in various ways. The view of commitment taken
here is based on a three-component model incorporating the major conceptuali-
zations described in the literature (Allen and Meyer, 1990; Meyer and Allen, 1991).
Specifically, the model proposes that employees remain with an organization be-
cause of their: (1) desire to remain (affective commitment), (2) recognition that
the costs associated with leaving would be high (continuance commitment), and/
or (3) feelings of obligation to remain (normative commitment). Each component
is considered to develop independently and to exert different effects on work
behavior. Affective commitment is expected to develop on the basis of work ex-
periences that increase the employees’ feelings of challenge and “comfort” in the
organization. Continuance commitment, on the other hand, develops as a function
of the number and magnitude of investments employees make in their organizations
(e.g., pension contributions) and the degree to which they feel they have employ-
ment alternatives. Finally, it is argued that the antecedents of normative commit-
ment include early socialization experiences (e.g., parental emphasis on loyalty to
an employer) as well as those that occur after organizational entry.
Changes in Organizational Commitment Across Career Stages. Results of several
studies (Meyer and Allen, 1987; 1988; Mowday and McDade, 1980) suggest that
affective commitment declines in the first year of employment. A reasonable ex-
planation for this is that newcomers enter organizations with unrealistically high
 J BUSN RES 51
Organizational Commitment and Career Stage 1993:26:49-61

expectations (Wanous, 1980). As they learn more about their work, however, many
experience “reality shock” and affective reactions alter accordingly. Many em-
ployees leave the organization during this period. For those who stay, however,
the affective commitment developed during this early period may set the stage for
subsequent levels of commitment (Mowday et al., 1982). There is very little evi-
dence, however, of a continuation of the downward trend observed during the first
year. Indeed, although there are exceptions, affective commitment to the orga-
nization has been shown to be positively correlated with age and tenure in several
studies (e.g., Adler and Aranya, 1984; Angle and Perry, 1983; Brief and Aldag,
1980).
As Cherrington et al. (1979) noted, with respect to the relationships between
age and work values, explanations for correlations involving age are equivocal.
Correlations between age and commitment, for example, might exist because (1)
something about aging, per se, predisposes older employees to be more committed
to organizations (a “maturity explanation”), (2) older employees actually have, or
perceive they have, more positive experiences in organizations than younger em-
ployees (a “better experiences explanation”), or (3) there are generational differ-
ences in organizational commitment (a “cohort explanation”). If the latter is true,
we might also expect to find age effects for normative commitment; possibly the
idea of the “organization man” (or woman) who is obliged to remain loyal to the
organization is more firmly held by those who began working during the post-war
period than by subsequent entrants to the work force.
The positive relationship between commitment and organizational tenure may
reflect the fact that more experienced employees have more attractive positions in
organizations. Another explanation is that, over time, less committed employees
are more likely to leave their organizations. It has also been suggested (e.g.,
Salancik, 1977) that tenure effects are due to self-justification processes (“I have
been here 20 years, I must like it”). Finally, as employee age and organizational
tenure are highly correlated, these effects may simply reflect “real” age effects.
The relationship between positional tenure and commitment has received little
attention. One might expect, however, that employees who remain in the same
job for a long time are those who have been passed over for promotions and, thus,
have little commitment to their organizations.
Evidence from Morrow and McElroy’s (1987) large cross-sectional study incor-
porating all three career stage variables and several work attitudes (including af-
fective commitment) suggests that the way the career stage variable is
operationalized influences the observed effects. They found that, when measured
as a continuous variable, employee age explained more of the variation in affective
commitment (r = .27) than did either organizational (I = .17) or positional tenure
(r = .09). Moreover, when subgroup analyses were conducted, a linear relationship
was observed only between affective commitment and age. Younger employees
were significantly less affectively committed to their organizations than those in
the middle age range, who were, in turn, less committed than the oldest employees.
Comparable subgroup analyses for organizational and positional tenure, however,
revealed weak curvilinear relationships, with employees in the middle tenure range
(organizational or positional) expressing less organizational commitment than those
with either short or long tenure. Morrow and McElroy (1987) concluded, however,
that the relationships between career stage variables and work attitudes are fairly
 J BUSN RES
52 1993:26:49-61
N. J. Allen and J. P. Meyer

weak and may have been overstated in the literature. More importantly, they called
for attention to the ways in which career stage variables are operationalized. In
our view, at least two additional issues need to be addressed. First, as indicated
above, the intercorrelations among the three career stage variables must be ac-
knowledged. An effect attributed to age, for example, may really be an organi-
zational tenure effect; an apparent tenure effect actually may be due to employee
age differences. Thus, analyses are needed in which the independent effects of age,
organizational tenure, and positional tenure are isolated. Second, given that com-
mitment to the organization can take multiple forms (Meyer and Allen, 1991),
attempts should be made to examine age, organizational tenure, and positional
tenure differences not only in affective commitment, but also in continuance and
normative commitment.
Work Experiences and Affective Commitment Links Across Career Stages. Much
research attention has focused on the links between work experiences and the
attitudes people have toward work (e.g., Hackman and Oldham, 1975; Mowday
et al., 1982). In addition, it has been argued that people go through temporally
ordered phases, or stages, across which work-related experiences, and their inter-
pretations, vary considerably (Levinson, 1978; Super, 1957; Van Maanen and
Schein, 1979). These lines of research suggest that people may care more about,
or be more affected by, particular work experiences at some stages in their careers
than they will at others. If so, we would expect that career stage variables moderate
the relationships between work experiences and individuals’ affective reaction to
that work. Thus far, research examining this possibility has focused primarily on
one work attitude, job satisfaction. Building on the work of Van Maanen and
Schein (1979), Katz (1978, 1980) hypothesized that for those in the very early and
uncertain stage in a job, “fitting in” and gaining feedback is of most importance.
Later, employees become more concerned with influencing the organization; thus,
challenging experiences matter more. Finally, in what Katz calls the “adaptation
stage,” employees become relatively unresponsive to work characteristics.
To test this, Katz (1978) examined the relationships, at various career stages,
between several job characteristics and job satisfaction. Although the effects were
modest, results of moderated multiple regression analyses indicated that positional
tenure moderated the relationships between each job characteristic and job sat-
isfaction. Parallel analyses involving age, however, failed to produce moderator
effects, a finding that is inconsistent with Gould’s (1979) report that the relationship
between job complexity and satisfaction was stronger for younger than older em-
ployees. Finally, positional tenure did not moderate the job complexity-job sat-
isfaction relationship in either sample examined by Kemp and Cook (1983), causing
these authors to question the generalizability of Katz’s findings.
Less is known about whether career stage moderates the links between work
experiences and organizational commitment, although Buchanan’s (1974) study of
employees at three organizational tenure stages is instructive. He found that, for
newcomers (< 1 year), affective commitment was best predicted by job challenge,
while for those in the l-5 year range, feelings of acceptance and a belief that their
work was important to the organization contributed the most. Finally, for those
with 5 or more years’ tenure, commitment was most strongly related to perceptions
that the organization had a commitment norm and the extent to which employee
expectations had been met.
 J BUSN RES 53
Organizational Commitment and Career Stage 1993:26:49-61

Research Overview

The purpose of this research was to examine organizational commitment in relation

to three operationalizations of the career stage construct. This was accomplished
in two ways. First, like Morrow and McElroy (1987), we compared the commitment
levels reported by employees of differing ages and levels of organizational, and
positional, tenure. To isolate which career stage variables were most influential,
the relative contributions of each stage to each of the three commitment components
were also examined. Second, we tested the hypothesis that some work experiences
are more strongly linked to employees’ affective reaction to work at particular
career stages than at others. Specifically, we examined the extent to which the
three career stage variables moderated relationships between affective commitment
to the organization and those work experience variables that are hypothesized to
be antecedent to affective commitment (Meyer and Allen, 1991).

Method
Subjects and Data Collection Procedures

Questionnaires were distributed by a member of the personnel department in each

of two organizations along with a letter explaining the study and a return envelope.
All participation was voluntary and responses were made anonymously. Respon-
dents in Sample 1 (n = 123) were employed by a university library, their average
age was 38.5 years, and females made up 82.1% of the sample. Professional li-
brarians and non-professional library employees were included. Respondents in
Sample 2 (n = 168) were clerical, supervisory, and managerial employees in a
general hospital. Neither physicians nor nurses were included. Respondents’ av-
erage age was 39.4 years and females made up 81.5% of the sample.

Questionnaire Measures

Organizational Commitment. Organizational commitment was assessed using the

Affective (ACS), Continuance (CCS), and Normative Commitment (NCS) Scales,
each of which is made up of 8 items (Allen and Meyer, 1990). Scale reliabilities
are reported in Table 1.
Career Stage Variables. Respondents were also asked their age, how long they
had worked for their organization, and how long they had been in their particular
position in the organization.
Work Experiences. Several two-item work experience measures were taken.
Specifically, we assessed respondents’ perceptions of the extent to which their roles
were clearly defined, jobs were challenging, management was receptive to employee
input, employees were treated equitably and made to feel important to the orga-
nization, the organization was dependable, employees participated in decisions
regarding their work, and feedback about performance was provided. Some meas-
ures were modifications of those used by Buchanan (1974); others were developed
by, and are available from, the authors. All items had 7-point response formats
(strongly disagree to strongly agree) and scale scores were averaged across items.
Reliabilities are reported in Table 1.
Table 1. Means, Standard Deviations, Reliabilities and Correlations of Measures.
Measures 12 345 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 M SD
1. Affective commitment (86) 4.37 1.39
2. Continuance commitment 05 (81) 4.55 1.35
3. Normative commitment 51 19 (76) 3.81 1.14
4. Role clarity 35 -04 30 (70) 4.96 1.56
5. Challenge 61 -13 25 31 (87) 4.72 1.89
6. Management receptiveness 49 - 14 24 41 43 (75) 3.89 1.76
7. Equity 51 -06 22 37 37 52 (61) 3.67 1.53
8. Importance 69 - 14 34 40 62 66 52 (75) 4.52 1.80
9. Organizational dependability 62 -03 39 48 45 53 56 56 (72) 4.54 1.75
10. Participation 48 - 10 25 36 52 61 44 58 49 (63) 4.39 1.65
11. Feedback 35 - 12 15 32 34 40 25 44 31 43 (77) 3.88 1.87
12. Age 36 12 35 19 25 16 25 29 29 16 08 - 39.02 11.10
13. Organizational tenure 24 22 21 08 11 07 14 10 09 08 -01 59 - 8.68 6.42
14. Positional tenure 15 23 25 05 04 -01 -01 04 01 -02 -06 52 73 - 5.63 5.21

Now: Due to missing data, analyses repated here are based on N’s that vary from 263 to 291. Decimal paints have been omitted in the correlation matrix. All correlations > .12are
significant @ < .05). Reliability estimates (coeflicent alpha) are shown in the diagonal. All commitment and work experience variables are on a 7-point scale. Age and tenure are
reported in years. Separate correlation matrices for the two samples are available from the authors.
 J BUSN RES
Organizational Commitment and Career Stage 1993:26:49-61
55

Table 2. Organizational Commitment Components at Three Age, Organizational Tenure,

and Positional Tenure Levels

Sample and Levels of the Career Stage Variables

Commitment
Component AGl AG2 AG3 OTl 0T2 0T3 FTl pT2 PT3

Sample 1
Affective 3.42” 4.17b 5.06 3.01” 3.91* 4.68 3.76” 4.1Tb 4.82b
Continuance 4.64 4.74 5.17 4.85 4.65 5.08 4.47 4.95 5.19
Normative 3.41” 3.32 4.40b 3.6eb 3.39” 3.98’ 3.43” 3.57” 4.34b
n 36 41 35 10 57 56 33 66 24

Sample 2

Affective 4.05” 4.47” 5.1ob 4.14” 4.4ad 4.91b 4.31 4.60 4.91
Continuance 4.29 4.16 4.56 3.64” 4.39b 4.68’ 3.85” 4.67b 4.67b
Normative 3.49” 3.78” 4.46b 3.55” 3.81” 4.32’ 3.60 3.94 4.57b
n 44 67 52 37 80 51 72 67 29

bite: Within each commitment componentkareer stage grouping (e.g., Affective commitment/Age), those means with different
supe~cripts differ significantly (p < .05). Those that share a superscript, or for which no superscripts appear, are not significantly
different from each other (p > .05). For employee age: AGl = < 31 yrs., AG2 = 31-44 yrs., AG3 = > 44 yrs. For organizational
and positional tenure: OTlPTl = -C 2 yrs., OT2/FT2 = 2-10 yrs., OT31PT3 = > lo yrs.

Results and Discussion

Two related issues were addressed in this study. The first involved the relationships
between the three components of commitment and the career stage variables; the
second, the relationships between work experiences and affective commitment at
different career stages. Descriptive statistics and intercorrelations for all study
variables are reported in Table 1. Analyses dealing with the two issues are presented
and discussed separately.

Affective, Continuance, and Normative Commitment Across Career Stages

Following Morrow and McElroy (1987), employees were divided into career stage
groups on the basis of age (< 31 years, 31-44 years, > 44 years), organizational
tenure, and positional tenure (< 2 years, 2-10 years, > 10 years). Shown in Table
2 are the means, from both samples, for the ACS, CCS, and NCS scores of em-
ployees within each career stage, as well as a summary of the results of analyses
of variance comparing each commitment component across each career stage.
The patterns of means in the two samples differed only slightly. In both samples,
affective and normative commitment were significantly higher in older than younger
employees and in employees with longer, rather than shorter, tenure in the or-
ganization. Although normative commitment also increased significantly across
positional tenure levels in both samples, affective commitment did so only in Sample
1. Continuance commitment did not differ across age groups in either sample,
although it did increase across organizational tenure and positional tenure groups,
in Sample 2. Unlike Morrow and McElroy (1987), we found no evidence of a
curvilinear relationship between affective commitment and either tenure variable.
Similar information is presented in Table 3 in the form of correlations between
each commitment component and each career stage variable. Also shown are the
correlations between the components of commitment and each career variable with
56 J BUSN RES N. J. Allen and J. P. Meyer
1993:26:49-61

Table 3. Correlations and Partial Correlations between Career Stage Variables and Affective,
Continuance, and Normative Commitment
Sample
Career Stage Sample 1 Sample 2
Variable(s)

ACS ccs NCS ACS ccs NCS

Age .43*** .20’ .30” .31*** .09 .39”’
Age (OT) .28” .12 .24’* .24” - .Ol .31”’
Age (PT) .36”* .13 .24” .29”‘ - .Ol .28”’
Age (OTK’T) .28**’ .lI .24” .25” - .03 .28”’
OT .37”’ .17* .18* .20** .17’ .24”
OT (Age) .16 .06 - .03 .03 .lS .02
OT (W .28” .06 - .07 .18’ .07 .05
OT (Age/I?) .I3 .OO - .06 .08 .07 - .06
PT .26” .18’ .17’ .lI .18’ .30”’
PT (Age) .09 .I1 .03 -.06 .16* .ll
FI- (OT) .OO .09 .07 - .05 .08 .18’
PT (AgelOT) - .Ol .09 .06 -.lO .09 .12

Now: Variables in parentheses have been partialled out. OT = organizational tenure; PT = positional tenure; ACS = Affective
Commitment Scale; CCS = Continuance Commitment Scale; NCS = Normative Commitment Scale.
’ p < .05.
**p < .Ol.
“‘p < ,001.

the other two career stage variables partialled out. This allowed us to evaluate the
link between each career stage variable independent of the other two. Although
analysis of covariance would provide comparable information, it requires the use
of subgroups. Given that relationships between the commitment components and
career stage variables do not appear to be curvilinear, partial correlation analyses
are preferable.
Affective and normative commitment are most strongly related to employee age.
In both samples, when age was partialled out, the correlations between both ACS
and NCS scores and either organizational or positional tenure were reduced con-
siderably. When either organizational or positional tenure were partialled out,
however, the correlations between age and both the ACS and the NCS were reduced
only slightly. Although the effects were relatively weak, continuance commitment
appeared to share more variance with organizational and positional tenure than
with employee age. In both samples, CCS scores and organizational tenure were
positively correlated and, when positional tenure was partialled out, this relation-
ship became negligible. The same pattern was observed between the CCS and
positional tenure; when organizational tenure was partialled out, the correlation
was reduced. In Sample 2, when age was partialled out, relationships between the
CCS and either organizational or positional tenure diminished very little. When
either tenure variable was controlled, however, the CCS/age relationship (albeit
never strong) was reduced.
Like Morrow and McElroy (1987)) we found that affective commitment increased
with employee age and was more strongly linked to age than to the two other
career stage variables. As indicated earlier, “better experiences,” “maturity,” or
Organizational Commitment and Career Stage J BUSN RES
57
1993:26:49-61

“cohort” explanations could all be offered for this finding. To test the possibility
that older employees actually have, or perceive that they have, better work ex-
periences than younger employees, we conducted three multivariate analyses of
variance (MANOVAs) comparing the means for each work experience variable
across each career stage variable. Although neither the MANOVA by organiza-
tional tenure (F(16,530) = 1.44, n.s.), nor by positional tenure (F(16,530) = 1.06,
n.s.), revealed significant differences in work experience variables across tenure
groups, the MANOVA by age showed differences across age groups (F(16,498)
= 3.16, p < .OOl). Although not shown here, results of the eight separate univariate
analyses of variance conducted across age groups revealed that, on all but one of
the variables (feedback), the oldest employees rated their experiences significantly
more positively than the youngest employees, thus providing evidence consistent
with a “better experiences” explanation.
It may be, then, that work experiences are the “real cause” of the stronger
commitment expressed by older workers and that employee age, per se, is only
spuriously involved. To examine this, we conducted a series of multiple regression
analyses in which employee age and one of each of the work experience variables
were entered as predictors of affective commitment. Although not reported here
in order to conserve space, the data formed a consistent pattern. In each of the
eight analyses, both the work experience variable and age made unique contri-
butions to the prediction of affective commitment. Moreover, in a ninth analysis,
age contributed significantly to the prediction of commitment, even after all eight
work experiences were entered as predictors. These results suggest that the ob-
served age effects are not due entirely to the fact that older workers experience
“better” work and that other explanations (e.g., maturity, cohort) may be tenable.
It is noteworthy, and consistent with a cohort explanation, that older employees
expressed significantly stronger feelings of obligation to the organization (normative
commitment) (Table 2). Of course, this finding provides no definitive evidence of
cohort effects, nor does it allow us to rule out a maturity explanation. Indeed,
without longitudinal data, it is impossible to determine whether there is something
about aging, per se, that contributes to increased affective and normative com-
mitment (maturity explanation) or whether those born before 1940 (our oldest age
group) were socialized to value organizational attachment more (cohort ex-
planation).
Attention should also be given to the correlations between organizational tenure
and ACS scores (r = .37, and .20, in Samples 1 and 2, respectively). As noted
earlier, multiple explanations for this relationship have been suggested (e.g., senior
employees have better jobs; self-justification processes). In the present data, how-
ever, the fact that the correlation became negligible when employee age was par-
tialled out suggests that it is more tenable to attribute the relationship to age (which
is often correlated with tenure), rather than to the effects of tenure.
The partial correlation results involving CCS scores, at least for Sample 2, suggest
that continuance commitment, unlike affective commitment, is linked to both or-
ganizational and positional tenure. The organizational tenure finding is consistent
with the conceptualization of continuance commitment as cost-based commitment
(Meyer and Allen, 1991). The longer one’s organizational tenure, the more or-
ganization-based investments one is likely to have made (Farrell and Rusbult, 1981))
58 J BUSN RES N. J. Allen and J. P. Meyer
1993:26:49-61

Table 4. Partial Correlations: Work Experience Variables and Affective Commitment”

Work Levels of Career Stage Variables
Experience
Variables AGl AG2 AG3 OTl OT2 0T3 PTl m-2 PT3

Role clarity .45 .28 .21 .51 .26 .I7 .44 .24 .29
Challenge .64 .53 .54 .I3 .54 .43 .64 .59 .28
Management .52 .40 .46 .69 .40 .39 .55 .41 .40
receptiveness
Equity .56 .49 .39 .63 .45 .39 .55 .43 .44
Importance .69 .64 .64 .I9 .64 .55 .68 .64 .65
Organizational .51 .62 .56 .59 .58 .55 .59 .56 .56

Participation .48 .46 .43 .59 .47 .34 .50 .44 .46
Feedback .34 .33 .31 .43 .34 .19 .39 .31 .23
n 80 108 87 47 137 107 105 133 53

“Each enby represents the correlation between a work experience variable and affective commitment at one level of a particular career
stage, with the other two career stage variables partialled out. All partial correlations > .17are significant (p < .05).

and consequently, the greater the costs associated with leaving the organization.
The almost parallel positional tenure results probably reflect the fact that organi-
zational and positional tenure were highly correlated (r = .73, p < .Ol), and thus,
may hold very similar psychological meaning for respondents in this study.

Links Between Work Experiences and Affective Commitment Across

Career Stages
Within each career stage grouping, partial correlations were calculated between
each of the eight work experience variables and ACS scores. In each case, the two
irrelevant career stage variables were partialled out. Thus, for example, correlations
were calculated between each work experience variable and ACS scores for em-
ployees in the youngest age group, with both organizational and positional tenure
partialled out. Because the patterns of partial correlations differed very little across
the two samples, the data for these samples were combined. The partial correlations
are shown in Table 4. As can be seen, although the magnitude of the correlations
varied across career stage, all but one were significant and positive. To determine
the extent to which work experiences were differentially related to affective com-
mitment across career stages, we conducted moderated multiple regression anal-
yses. A separate analysis was conducted for each of the 24 work experience variable/
career stage variable combinations, following a procedure similar to that used by
Katz (1978) and Kemp and Cook (1983). Predictors of affective commitment were
entered as follows: (1) the three career stage variables (entered as a block), (2)
the particular work experience variable, and (3) the interaction of the work ex-
perience variable and the particular career stage variable whose effects were being
assessed. Results of these analyses are summarized in Table 5. In only 4 of the 24
analyses was the prediction of ACS scores incremented significantly by the work
experience/career stage interaction term. Three of these terms involved organi-
zational tenure and one, positional tenure; all increased ACS prediction only very
modestly. Inspection of the relevant partial correlations, shown in Table 4, suggests
 J BUSN RES
Organizational Commitment and Career Stage 1993:26:49-61
59

Table 5. Multiple Correlations: Affective Commitment Regressed on Career Stage Variables, Work
Experience Variables and Their Products.
Work Experience Career Work Age X Org Ten X Pos Ten X
Variables Stage Exp Work Exp Work Exp Work Exp

Role clarity .31”’ .48”’ .48 .50” .48

Challenge .31”’ 64”’ .65 .65’ .65’
Management .36”* .56”’ .56 .51 .56
receptiveness
Equity .36”’ .56”* .51 .51 .51
Importance .36*** .70”’ .70 .71’ .70
Organizational .36”* .65*** .65 .65 .65
dependability
Participation .36”* .56”’ .56 .56 .56
Feedback .36”* .41”’ .48 .49 .48

Note: Probability levels refer to the significance of the increment in the multiple correlation attributable to each additional predictor.
* p < .05.
t* p i .Ol.
“‘p < ,001.

that the variables involved (role clarity, challenge, importance) were less strongly
related to affective commitment as tenure increased. (It should be noted here that
analyses paralleling those reported in Tables 4 and 5 were not conducted with CCS
or NCS scores. Because none of the work experiences are considered antecedents
of either continuance or normative commitment, such analyses would not be the-
oretically meaningful.)
Clearly, these results are inconsistent with the view that older workers have
affective responses to particular work experiences that differ from those of younger
workers. (Note that this is different from the finding, referred to earlier, that older
workers believe they have better work experiences than do younger workers.)
Employee age did not interact with any of the work experience variables in the
prediction of affective commitment. Thus, we would not expect organizations to
be at all successful in optimizing affective commitment by tailoring experiences to
employees’ ages.
There is some evidence, however, that employees are more affectively responsive
to particular experiences early in their organizational careers. Thus, organizations
interested in optimizing affective commitment may wish to pay particular attention
to ensuring, for example, that newcomers are given clearly-defined and challenging
jobs. In general, however, the interactive effects involving tenure, found in this
study, are modest enough that only very minimal advantages would accrue from
such tailoring. Organizations would be better advised, therefore, to examine the
overall pattern of correlates of affective commitment reported here and in other
studies (for reviews, see Meyer and Allen, 1991; Mowday et al., 1982) and to
provide work experiences that are consistent with that more general pattern. Of
course, we cannot rule out the possibility that there are other work experiences
not assessed in this study that interact more strongly with career stage in the
prediction of affective commitment. The work experiences examined here, how-
ever, appear to have links with affective commitment that are relatively independent
of career stage.
60 J BUSN RES
1993:26:49-61
N. J. Allen and J. P. Meyer

Conclusions
Two issues were addressed here: (1) differences in organizational commitment
across career stages, and (2) the relationships between work experiences and af-
fective commitment at different career stages. Regarding the first issue, the data
suggest that the way career stage is operationalized influences its relationships with
the three components of organizational commitment. Affective and normative
commitment increase across employee age, while continuance commitment in-
creases as organizational and positional tenure increase. Thus, the data are fairly
consistent with, and extend those reported by Morrow and McElroy (1987). It
should be noted, however, that these effects are all relatively modest, leading us
to echo Morrow and McElroy’s (1987) comment that “the importance of career
stage as a concept may be overstated” (p. 344). Turning to the second issue, there
appears little evidence that work experiences correlate differently with affective
commitment at different career stages, regardless of how career stage is opera-
tionalized. Thus, together with earlier research, these data suggest that the search
for interactive effects of career stage variables and work experiences on work
attitudes will yield few theoretical or practical insights.

References

Adler, S., and Aranya, N. A., A Comparison of the Work Needs, Attitudes and Preferences
of Professional Accountants at Different Career Stages. Journal of VocationaZ Behavior
22 (1984): 45-57.
Allen, N. J., and Meyer, J. P., The Measurement and Antecedents of Affective, Contin-
uance, and Normative Commitment to the Organization. Journal of Occupational Psy-
chology 63 (1990): l-18.
Angle, H. L., and Perry, J. L., Organizational Commitment: Individual and Organizational
Influences. Work and Occupations 10 (1983): 123-146.
Brief, A. P., and Aldag, R. J., Antecedents of Organizational Commitment Among Hospital
Nurses. Sociology of Work and Occupations 7 (1980): 210-221.
Buchanan, B., Building Organizational Commitment: The Socialization of Managers in
Work Organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly 19 (1974): 533-546.
Cherrington, D. J., Condie, S. J., and England, J. L., Age and Work Values. Academy of
Management Journal 22 (1979): 617-623.
Farrell, D., and Rusbult, C. E., Exchange Variables as Predictors of Job Satisfaction, Job
Commitment, and Turnover: The Impact of Rewards, Costs, Alternatives, and Invest-
ments. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 27 (1981): 78-95.
Gould, S., Age, Job Complexity, Satisfaction, and Performance. Journal of Occupational
Psychology 14 (1979): 209-223.
Hackman, J. R., and Oldham, G. R., Development of the Job Diagnostic Survey. Journal
of Applied Psychology 60 (1975): 159-170.
Katz, R., Job Longevity as a Situational Factor in Job Satisfaction. Administrative Science
Quarterly 23 (1978): 204-223.
Katz, R., Time and Work: Toward an Integrative Perspective, in Research in Organizational
Behavior. B. M. Staw and L. L. Cummings, eds., Vol. 2, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT.
1980.
Kemp, N. J., and Cook, J. D., Job Longevity and Growth Need Strength as Joint Moderators
of the Task Design-Job Satisfaction Relationship. Human Relations 36 (1983): 883-898.
Levinson, D. J., The Seasons of a Man’s Life, Knopf, New York. 1978.
Organizational Commitment and Career Stage J BUSN RES
61
1993:26:49-61

Meyer, J. P., and Allen, N. J., A Longitudinal Analysis of the Early Development and
Consequences of Organizational Commitment. CanadianJournal ofBehavioural Science
19 (1987): 199-215.
Meyer, J. P., and Allen, N. J., Links Between Work Experiences and Organizational
Commitment During the First Year of Employment. Journal of Occupational Psychology
61 (1988): 195-209.
Meyer, J. P., and Allen, N. J., A Three-Component Conceptualization of Organizational
Commitment. Human Resource Management Review 1 (1991): 61-89.
Meyer, J. P., Paunonen, S. V., Gellatly, I. R., Goffin, R. D., and Jackson, D. N., Orga-
nizational Commitment and Job Performance: It’s the Nature of the Commitment That
Counts. Journal of Applied Psychology 74 (1989): 152-156.
Morrow, P. C., Concept Redundancy in Organizational Research: The Case of Work Com-
mitment. Academy of Management Review 8 (1983): 486-500.
Morrow, P. C., and McElroy, J. C., Work Commitment and Job Satisfaction Over Three
Career Stages. Journal of Vocational Behavior 30 (1987): 330-346.
Mowday, R. T., and McDade, T. W., The Development of Job Attitudes, Job Perceptions,
and Withdraw1 Propensities During the Early Employment Period, paper presented at
40th Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Detroit, MI 1980.
Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W., and Steers, R. M., Employee-Organization Linkages: The
Psychology of Commitment, Absenteeism, and Turnover, Academic Press, New York.
1982.
Salancik, G. R., Commitment and the Control of Organizational Behavior and Belief, in
New Directions in Organizational Behavior. B. M. Staw and G. R. Salancik, eds., St.
Clair Press, Chicago. 1977.
Super, D. E., The Psychology of Careers, Harper and Row, New York. 1957.
Van Maanen, J., and Schein, E. H., Towards a Theory of Organizational Socialization, in
Research in Organizational Behavior. B. M. Staw, ed., Vol. 1, JAI Press, Greenwich,
CT. 1979.
Wanous, J. P., Organizational Entry, Addison-Wesley, Reading. 1980.