INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY, 2011, 46 (4), 271287

Relationships between in-role performance and

individual values, commitment, and organizational
citizenship behavior among Israeli teachers
Aaron Cohen1 and Ying Liu2
1
2

School of Political Science, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel

School of Public Administration, Renmin University of China, Beijing, China

his study examines the relationship between (1) individual values, (2) organizational and occupational
commitment, and (3) organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) and in-role performance in a sample of
192 teachers employed in 10 secular Jewish schools (response rate of 64%). The results showed that individual
values were related to all commitment forms examined here, but contrary to expectations, there was no clear
distinction between values that represent conservation and self-transcendence and values that represent openness
to change and self-enhancement in terms of their relationship either to commitment or to behavioral outcomes.
Likewise, there was no clear distinction between the three dimensions of commitment (affective, continuance, and
normative) or two commitment foci (organizational and occupational) in terms of their relationships to different
values. Unsurprisingly, the findings showed a strong effect of commitment on OCB and in-role performance.
The findings show that both individual values and commitment are concepts that can increase our understanding
of employees behavior in the workplace. We conclude by emphasizing the need for further research on the
relationship between values, commitment, and performance and by suggesting some directions for such research.
Keywords: Individual values; Commitment in the workplace; Organizational citizenship behavior.

ette recherche porte sur la relation entre (1) les valeurs individuelles, (2) lengagement envers lorganisation
et la profession et (3) le comportement de citoyennete a` legard de lorganisation (OCB) de meme que sur la
performance a` linterieur dun role et ce, aupre`s dun echantillon de 192 enseignants de dix ecoles juives la ques
(taux de reponse de 64%). Les resultats montrent quil y a une relation entre les valeurs individuelles et toutes les
formes dengagement retenues, mais que, contrairement aux attentes, il ny a pas une distinction nette entre les
valeurs qui portent, dune part, sur la conservation et la transcendance de soi et, dautre part, les valeurs qui
portent sur louverture au changement et le depassement de soi en termes de leur relation a` la fois a` lengagement
et aux resultats du comportement. De la meme facon, Il ny a pas de distinction nette entre les trois dimensions de
lengagement (affective, de continuation et normative) en termes de leurs relations aux differentes valeurs. Il nest
pas etonnant que les resultats montrent un effet important de lengagement sur lOCB et la performance dans le
role. Les resultats montrent que les valeurs individuelles et lengagement sont des concepts qui peuvent favoriser
notre comprehension du comportement des employes sur leur lieu de travail. Nous concluons en mettant laccent
sur le besoin de nouvelles recherches sur la relation entre les valeurs, lengagement et la performance de meme
quen suggerant des pistes en ce sens.

l presente estudio analiza la relacion entre (1) los valores individuales, (2) el compromiso organizacional y
ocupacional, y (3) el comportamiento ciudadano organizacional (CCO), con el desempeno profesional en
una muestra de 192 docentes contratados por diez escuelas jud as seculares (64% de los encuestados contestaron).
Los resultados mostraron que los valores individuales estaban relacionados con todas las formas de compromiso
que se examinaron, aunque contrario a las expectativas, no hubo una clara distincion entre los valores que
representan la conservacion y la trascendencia personal, y los valores que representan una apertura hacia el
cambio y el desarrollo personal en terminos de su relacion con el compromiso o las consecuencias y resultados de
su comportamiento. Asimismo, no hubo una clara distincion entre las tres dimensiones de compromiso

Correspondence should be addressed to Aaron Cohen, School of Political Science, Division of Public Administration, University of
Haifa, Haifa 31905, Israel. (E-mail: acohen@poli.haifa.ac.il).

2011 International Union of Psychological Science

http://www.psypress.com/ijp

DOI: 10.1080/00207594.2010.539613

272

COHEN, LIU

(afectivo, de continuidad y normativo) o dos focos de compromiso (organizacional y ocupacional) en terminos

de su relacion con valores diferentes. No es de sorprender que los hallazgos mostraron un fuerte efecto de
compromiso en CCO y el desempeno de la funcion docente. Los resultados muestran que tanto los valores
individuales como el compromiso son conceptos que pueden ayudar a entender el comportamiento de los
empleados en el lugar de trabajo. En conclusion, se enfatiza la necesidad de continuar estudiando la relacion
entre los valores, el compromiso, y el desempeno, como tambien de ofrecer orientaciones para futuras
investigaciones.

Organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) has

become one of the more researched outcomes in
the field of organizational behavior and industrial
psychology, as shown in several comprehensive
literature reviews (LePine, Erez, & Johnson, 2002;
Organ & Ryan, 1995; Podsakoff, Mackenzie,
Paine, & Bacharach, 2000). The concept had its
roots in the work of Katz and Kahn (1966), who
identified three types of behavior required of
employees for the effective functioning of an
organization: the decision to join and remain in
the organization; the performance of prescribed
roles in a dependable manner; and the undertaking
of innovative and spontaneous activities beyond
the prescribed role requirements. The last of these
was termed extra-role behavior by Katz (1964)
and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB)
by Bateman and Organ (1983). The term OCB
was meant to denote organizationally beneficial
actions and behaviors that can neither be enforced
on the basis of formal role obligations nor elicited
by a contractual guarantee of compensation; it
includes both organizational OCB (impersonal
OCB directed towards the organization in general)
and altruistic OCB (helping a specific person
within the organization). According to Organs
definition, OCB represents individual behavior
that is discretionary, not directly or explicitly
recognized by the formal reward system, and in the
aggregate promotes the efficient and effective
functioning of the organization (Organ, 1988,
p. 4). Thus, OCB consists of informal contributions that participants can choose to make or
withhold, without regard to considerations of
sanctions or formal incentives. OCB derives its
practical importance from the premise that it
represents contributions that do not inhere in
formal role obligations, and that these contributions, aggregated over time and persons,
enhance organizational effectiveness (Organ &
Konovsky, 1989).
OCB is one way that employees can demonstrate their commitment to an organization.
Indeed, scholars have discussed the importance
of commitment in explaining work outcomes such
as OCB (e.g., Baruch, 1998). But the relationship
between commitment and OCB (as well as other

behavioral outcomes, such as in-role performance)

is not necessarily simple. First, commitment itself
is not a simple concept. While commitment was
once thought to apply mainly to the organization,
recent years have seen growing recognition that
employees in the workplace are exposed simultaneously to many objects of commitment, including
the work group, the occupation, work in general,
and ones particular job (Cohen, 1993, 1999b,
2003, 2007; Morrow, 1993; Randall & Cote, 1991).
During this time, the workforce has become more
educated, sophisticated, and flexible, and one can
no longer assume that organizational commitmentrather than, say, occupational considerationswill be the driving force behind an
employees decision to keep or leave a job
(Cohen, 2003). Moreover, the multiple commitment approach has been shown to predict important work outcomes such as withdrawal,
performance, absenteeism, and tardiness better
than a single-commitment outlook (e.g., Blau,
1986; Cohen, 1993, 1999b, 2003; Randall &
Cote, 1991).
Second, attitudes such as commitment and
behavior such as OCB or in-role performance
may themselves have common sources. In this
regard, the role of personality traits in workrelated behaviors and attitudes has received
renewed attention over the past decade
(Furnham, Petrides, Tsaosis, Pappas, & Garrod,
2005). Researchers have begun to examine the
effect of values on both commitment (Cohen,
2007; Kirkman & Shapiro, 2001; Pearson &
Chong, 1997; Wasti, 2003) and on organizational
OCB and performance (Ang, Van Dyne, & Begley,
2003; Farh, Hackett, & Liang, 2007). Fischer and
Smith (2006) highlight the importance of such an
examination, arguing that employees from different sociocultural backgrounds bring different
career aspirations and value systems to their
work. Their own research has shown that employees are influenced differently by justice perceptions
depending on their value orientation (Fischer &
Smith, 2006). But values are thought to play a
functional role in all sorts of work-related processes and outcomes (Lam, Schaubroeck, &
Aryee, 2002).

VALUES, COMMITMENT, AND OCB IN ISRAEL

As yet, few studies have examined the effect of

values on attitudes and behaviors at the individual
level (Clugston, Howell, & Dorfman, 2000; Fischer
& Smith, 2006; Kirkman & Shapiro, 2001; Wasti,
2003). Most studies on values have focused on the
national level of analysis, in that they have
compared aggregated scales of values across
countries (key examples are Hofstede, 1980;
Schwartz, 1999). Yet individuals both within and
across societies may have quite different value
priorities that reflect their heritage, personal
experiences, socioeconomic level, and acculturation (Schwartz & Bardi, 2001). Values can
influence how an individual perceives and interprets a given situation and the importance he or
she gives it (Schwartz, Sagiv, & Boehnke, 2000), as
well as how he or she reacts and behaves in given
circumstances (Schwartz, 1996). Further, values
play a central role in determining the fit between
individuals and the employment organization
(Berings, De Fruyt, & Bouwen, 2004). The underlying assumption is that people will be happier and
more motivated, satisfied, and committed when
their values are congruent with those emphasized
in the group or organization (Berings et al., 2004).
All of this suggests that an understanding of
individual-level differences in values may offer
insights into better ways of managing different
employees (Francesco & Chen, 2004).
The current study seeks to assess the interplay
between individual values, commitment, and
in-role performance and organizational citizenship
behavior. First, the study examines the relationship between individual values and two commitment forms: organizational commitment, the
traditional focus of attention, and occupational
commitmenta new focus that has been examined
extensively in recent years because of its relevance
to growing segments in the workforce. (The term
occupation is preferred to profession or
career because it can be generalized to a larger
group of employees, nonprofessionals as well as
professionals, as noted by Lee, Carswell, and
Allen, 2000.) It goes on to examine how values
and commitment are related to OCB and in-role
performance. The findings clarify the relative
effect of values and commitment on performance
and answer a number of important questions
raised in the literature. For example, in light of
Baruchs (1998) argument about the relevance of
commitment in explaining work outcomes, this
study helps us determine the effect of commitment
on performance when individual values are
included in the equation.
This study makes an additional important
contribution by exploring the relationship between

273

individual values and outcomes in Israel, a culture

not often examined in the context of this conceptual framework. Most of what we know about
values and work comes from studies set in North
America or Western Europe. Setting the current
investigation outside the typical Western context
will expand and enhance our understanding of the
conceptual relationship outlined here.
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK AND
RESEARCH HYPOTHESES
Schwartzs individual values model
Scwartz and Sagiv (1995) defined human values
as desirable, trans-situational goals, varying in
importance, that serve as guiding principles in
peoples lives. They identified 10 distinct value
types structured in patterns of conflict and
compatibility. Figure 1 presents the value system
as conceived by Schwartz and Sagiv (1995).
Competing value types emanate in opposing
directions from the center; compatible types
appear in close proximity around the circle. As
shown in the figure, the values fall into higherorder dimensions: Openness to Change,
Conservation, Self-Enhancement, and SelfTranscendence. Evidence for this theoretical structure has been found in samples from 67 nations
(Schwartz, 1992, 2005; Schwartz & Sagiv, 1995) as
well as in recent data from 38 countries (Fontaine,
Poortinga, Delbeke, & Schwartz, 2008). The
findings provide substantial support for both the
content and structure postulates of the theory, and
specifically for the claim that 10 motivationally
distinct value types are recognized across cultures
and are used to express value priorities.
Organizational and occupational
commitment
Research into commitment has been heavily
influenced by Meyer and Allens (1984) early
work on organizational commitment (OC),
which, as noted above, was traditionally the
main focus of attention in this area. Arguing that
OC can be better understood as a multidimensional concept, Meyer and Allen (1984) proposed
a two-dimensional model of OC. They called their
first dimension affective commitment, defined as
positive feelings of identification with, attachment to, and involvement in, the work organization (Meyer & Allen, 1984, p. 375). They termed
the second dimension continuance commitment,
defined as the extent to which employees feel

274

COHEN, LIU

Figure 1. Theoretical model of relations among 10 types of values.

committed to their organizations by virtue of the

costs that they feel are associated with leaving
(e.g., investments or lack of attractive alternatives) (Meyer & Allen, 1984, p. 375). Later, Allen
and Meyer (1990) added a third dimension,
normative commitment, defined as employees
feelings of obligation to remain with the organization. The three-component model of organizational commitment was extended to occupational
commitment (Meyer, Allen, & Smith, 1993) using
similar definitions, albeit with some changes in the
scales. As a result, the three-component approach
not only has dominated the study of organizational commitment, as demonstrated in the extensive meta-analysis conducted by Meyer, Stanley,
Herscovitch, and Topolnytsky (2002), but also has
affected the study of occupational commitment.
The setting
The general setting
Israel gained its independence in 1948, and since
its early days has been characterized by rapid
growth as well as by a continuous state of war with

the Arab nations surrounding it. The pioneering

generation that established the new state, mainly
immigrants from Eastern Europe, were in large
part committed socialists, eager to form a socialist
society in Israel (Lewis, 1972). It is not surprising,
then, that socialism was the leading socioeconomic
ideology during the first decades of Israels
existence (Tzafrir, Meshoulam, and Baruch,
2007); its dominance was demonstrated particularly in the collectivist communities known as
kibbutzim. This helped to generate a strong sense
of cohesion in the country, and enabled it to cope
with enormous difficulties in areas such as security
(which remains an issue today) and the heterogeneity of its population, caused by a number of
waves of mass immigration from various countries
(Lecker & Shachmurove, 1999). Mainly because of
these waves of immigration, Israels original
population of 600,000 in 1948 has grown more
than tenfold since, to around 6,689,700 (statistic
from the Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics, 2004).
The late 1970s saw the beginning of a new era
in the Israeli labor market that continues up to the
present, as external changes have caused shifts and
transformations in Israels economy and a

VALUES, COMMITMENT, AND OCB IN ISRAEL

modernization of its industrial system. The pressures of the 1973 war against its Arab neighbors,
and the following global and local recessions,
considerably slowed Israels economic growth
(from an average growth of 10% in the early
years to 3.2% in 1980, and 1.2% in 1983; Central
Bureau of Statistics, Israel, 1980, 1983). Because of
global and political changes (among them the
growth of the high-tech industry, and the end of
hegemony for the ruling Labor Party in 1977), the
prevailing ideology has changed and today tends
to follow the American capitalist model (Sagie &
Weisberg, 2001).
Since 1977, all governments have adopted
the principles of liberalization and privatization.
Furthermore, recent peace efforts have signaled to
foreign companies and investors that Israel is no
longer a risky partner, supplier, or purchaser (de
Fontenay & Carmel, 2001). These processes have
opened Israel to the international market. Indeed,
Israeli firms have been vigorous in their efforts to
establish business ties with companies from other
countries (Lavie & Fiegenbaum, 2000; Sagie &
Weisberg, 2001). One important process during
this era has been the emergence of alternatives
to the diminishing Histadrut (the national trade
union) and government industry organizations,
with engineers and workers in high-tech firms
often forgoing union membership in favor of
personal contracts. During this period, the countrys civilian workforce more than doubled, mostly
due to immigration from the former Soviet Union
(data from the Central Bureau of Statistics, Israel,
1970, 2002). The country faced the new challenge
of managing a multicultural, multi-value
workforce.
Israels Jewish population tends to be
modern, democratic, and Western in outlook
(Pines & Zaidman, 2003). During the 60-plus
years of Israels existence as a nation, the Israeli
identity has shifted from being uniformly collectivist in character to the more diversified, individualistic identity apparent today. Nevertheless, the
influence of the early socialist ideology, along with
a commitment to democratic values in both the
family and society at large, means that Israeli Jews
tend to be egalitarian, with little respect for
authority and status. Research shows strong
family and peer support among Israeli adolescents:
A comparison of Israeli and American social
networks found the Israelis networks to be
denser (Fischer & Shavit, 1995). The reliance on
peers is strengthened during mandatory army
service, an experience that is a major rite of
passage for Israeli Jewish youth. Israeli Jews
believe that lifes trials and tribulations help form

275

ones personality. Personal strength, stemming

from a solid inner core, is considered crucial for
a mature identity. These values encourage Israeli
Jews to actively and directly face challenges,
confront problems, and cope with loss or failure.
They also influence the way Israelis utilize sources
of social support (Pines & Zaidman, 2003).
The educational setting
Israels 7 million citizens include 1.5 million
students in the educational system. Israeli schools
are divided into four tracks: state, state-religious,
Orthodox religious (Haredi), and Arab. Regular
state schools offer a secular education with a
minimum of religious content; most Israeli children attend such schools. State-religious schools,
catering to youngsters from the Orthodox Jewish
sector, offer intensive Jewish studies programs as
well as secular studies. The Haredi schools operate
independently but must adhere to a core curriculum determined by the Ministry of Education in
order to receive funding (Wikipedia, 2009).
Schools in the Arab sector teach in Arabic and
offer a curriculum that emphasizes Arab history,
religion, and culture. This study focuses on the
secular state educational system.
The education system consists of three tiers:
primary education (grades 16, approximate ages
612), middle school (grades 79, ages 1215) and
high school (grades 1012, ages 1518).
Compulsory education is from kindergarten
through 10th grade, though most students complete the 12th grade.
Despite Israels top-quality education system,
government budget cuts and underpaid teachers
have taken their toll. Israel was among the topranked nations internationally in science and
mathematics in the 1960s, but dropped to 33rd
out of 41 nations in the 2002 Organization for
Economic
Cooperation
and
Development
(OECD) survey (Wikipedia, 2009). Wages for
Israeli teachers are low compared to other
industrialized countries, according to the OECD,
and many teachers have opted to leave education
for better-paying jobs or work abroad, causing a
brain drain (Wikipedia, 2009).
Research hypotheses
Values and commitment
Schwartz described several possible processes
that might link peoples value priorities to their
attitudes and behaviors. To start with, highpriority values are enduring goals that guide

276

COHEN, LIU

people to look for and to pay attention to valuerelevant aspects of a situation (Schwartz, Sagiv, &
Boehnke, 2000). Values can influence the attention
given to, the perception of, and the interpretation
of various situations; these, in turn, can affect
attitudes such as commitment. Schwartz (1996)
argued that to develop specific hypotheses regarding the relationship between values and attitudes
and behaviors, one should closely analyze the
consequences of a behavior or attitude for the
expression or attainment of the motivational goals
of the value types, leading to the identification of
the most relevant type.
The first group of hypotheses focuses on the
relationship between individual values and organizational and occupational commitments. Several
explanations can be advanced as to why individual
values would be related to commitment. Lydon
(1996) contended that people feel especially
committed to goals, projects, and life tasks that
express their core values as well as their beliefs and
identities. Thus, a person would feel most committed to those goals and projects that are seen as
relevant to important personal values. Lydons
explanation is somewhat general and bears some
resemblance to the theory of personorganization
fit (OReilly & Chatman, 1986). Furnham et al.
(2005) argued that affective disposition has a
pervasive influence on how people view the
world, including their job. It is possible that
dispositions influence job-related choices, with
people whose outlook is generally negative seeking
or willing to accept less appealing jobs than people
whose outlook is generally positive. In other
words, it is possible that people with different
personalities sort themselves into different jobs or
react to different aspects of their work environment (Furnham et al., 2005).
Based on the above explanations, the research
hypotheses here expect a strong relationship
between the values of tradition, conformity,
security, benevolence, and universalism and all
commitment forms. They expect no relationship or
a weak relationship between the values of achievement, stimulation, power, hedonism, and selfdirection and commitment. The specific rationale
for the suggested relationships follows, in general,
Schwartzs typology as shown in Figure 1.
Schwartzs first dimensionOpenness to Change
vs. Conservationjuxtaposes values emphasizing
independent thought and action and favoring
change (self-direction, hedonism, and stimulation)
with those emphasizing submissive self-restriction,
preservation of traditional practices, and protection of stability (security, conformity, and tradition). The second group is expected to be related to

commitment more strongly than the first group.

This makes sense, as commitment implies development of a long-term relationship, a goal also
inherent in values such as conformity and security;
likewise, commitment implies concern for the
collective, a goal incompatible with hedonism
and self-direction. The second dimensionSelfTranscendence vs. Self-Enhancementjuxtaposes
values emphasizing acceptance of others as equals
and concern for their welfare (universalism and
benevolence) with those emphasizing the pursuit of
personal success and dominance over others
(achievement and power). Here, the first group is
expected to be related more strongly to commitment than the second. Again, the reasons are
self-evident. People with higher levels of achievement are likely to invest less in helping their
colleagues or others in the organization or field, a
tendency suggesting low commitment. By the same
token, the pursuit of power and dominance
suggests an elevation of the individual over the
collective and therefore low commitment to the
larger group.
We can expect that the relationships between
values and commitment will be similar for the two
commitment foci, the organization and the occupation. We can also expect that these relationships
will hold true for all three dimensions of commitmentaffective, continuance and normative.
These expectations are based on previous findings
showing similarities in the relationships between
correlates and both normative and affective
organizational and occupational commitment
(Meyer et al., 1993), and on findings showing
that continuance organizational commitment is
also related to Schwartzs values (Glazer, Daniel,
& Short, 2004).
Hypothesis 1a Affective organizational commitment will be positively related to higher levels of
tradition, conformity, security, benevolence, and
universalism. It will have a weak or negative
relationship with hedonism, stimulation, achievement, power, and self-direction.
Hypothesis 1b Continuance of organizational
commitment will be positively related to higher
levels of tradition, conformity, security, benevolence, and universalism. It will have a
weak or negative relationship with hedonism,
stimulation,
achievement,
power,
and
self-direction.
Hypothesis 1c Normative organizational commitment will be positively related to higher levels
of tradition, conformity, security, benevolence,
and universalism. It will have a weak or negative

VALUES, COMMITMENT, AND OCB IN ISRAEL

relationship with hedonism, stimulation, achievement, power, and self-direction.

Hypothesis 2a Affective occupational commitment will be positively related to higher levels of
tradition, conformity, security, benevolence, and
universalism. It will have a weak or negative
relationship with hedonism, stimulation, achievement, power, and self-direction.
Hypothesis 2b Continuance of occupational commitment will be positively related to higher levels
of tradition, conformity, security, benevolence,
and universalism. It will have a weak or negative
relationship with hedonism, stimulation, achievement, power, and self-direction.
Hypothesis 2c Normative occupational commitment will be positively related to higher levels of
tradition, conformity, security, benevolence, and
universalism. It will have a weak or negative
relationship with hedonism, stimulation, achievement, power, and self-direction.
While, as noted above, we can expect the
general pattern to hold true for both commitment
foci, some differences in the relationships between
the independent variables and the two foci can be
expected. Lawlers (1992) principle of proximal
rules may help clarify this question, as it explains
why actors develop stronger affective ties to
subgroups within a social system rather than to the
social system, to local communities rather than to
states, to work organizations, and so forth
(p. 334). Interpersonal attachment produces a
stronger commitment to subgroups than to the
larger group because the credit for positive results
from interpersonal bonds is likely to be attributed
to the proximal subgroups, while the blame for
negative effects is likely to be attributed to the
larger group (Lawler, 1992). Organizational commitment represents the more proximal focus of
commitment, while occupational commitment
represents the more distant focus. This logic can
explain why one might develop a stronger personal
attachment to ones organization, which is a
proximal target in terms of providing the immediate work unit, than to ones occupation, which is a
much more distant target.
Gregerson (1993) and Mueller and Lawler
(1999) argue that proximal foci exert the most
significant influence on employees actions because
proximity provides more opportunities for
exchange relationships. Following from this argument, in the workplace context values will be more
strongly related to commitment foci that provide
more opportunities for exchange relationships,
because these exchange relationships provide

277

more opportunities for the attainment of personal

motivational goals, as argued by Schwartz (1996).
The organization, as a more proximal focus than
the occupation, offers room for more intensive
exchange relationships. Employees will likely show
more indifference with regard to the occupation,
which offers fewer opportunities to attain personal
goals within the organizational setting. We can
thus expect individual values to be related more
strongly to organizational than to occupational
commitment.
Hypothesis 3 Individual values will be related to
organizational commitment more strongly than to
occupational commitment. This will be demonstrated by more values related to organizational
commitment than to occupational commitment.
Values, commitment and work outcomes
While commitment seems to be rooted more in
values that represent conservation and/or
self-transcendence, we assume that performance,
particularly in-role performance, is rooted more in
values that represent openness to change and/or
self-enhancement. One reason for this is that
valuesas noted aboveplay a key role in
determining the fit between employees and the
organization, meaning that people will be more
motivated, satisfied, and committed when their
values are congruent with those of the organization or group (Berings et al., 2004). Because most
organizational cultures strongly emphasize performance, employees whose value system has a better
fit with the notion of performance will adjust
better to their work environment, and will perform
better. Therefore, we can expect that in the current
sample, subjects who show higher levels of
self-direction, achievement, stimulation, power,
and hedonism will score higher in in-role performance and organizational OCB than those who
place greater value on tradition, conformity,
security, benevolence, and universalism.
Hypothesis 4 Employees who have higher levels
of hedonism, achievement, self-direction, power,
and stimulation will score higher in organizational
OCB and in-role performance than those who
have higher levels of tradition, conformity, security, benevolence, and universalism.
Values that represent conservation and
self-transcendence will be related more strongly
to altruistic OCB than values that represent
openness to change and self-enhancement, as
altruistic OCB involves behaviors aimed at helping
other people (whether managers or colleagues)

278

COHEN, LIU

at work. This fits with the notion that a person

whose values represent conservation and
self-transcendence is likely to regard the group or
collective as more important than the individual,
and therefore will be more likely to demonstrate
altruistic OCB in her/his relationships at work.
Hypothesis 5 Employees who have higher levels
of tradition, conformity, security, benevolence,
and universalism will score higher in altruistic
OCB than those who have higher levels of
hedonism, achievement, self-direction, power,
and stimulation.
Another expectation is that commitment will
be related to OCB and in-role performance. It
seems logical that commitment to the organization
will improve job performance (Somers &
Birnbaum, 1998). One explanation for this
expected pattern is the congruity effect advanced
by Sagiv and Schwartz (2000). According to their
thesis, a congruity between the value system of a
given group and their work setting, represented
here by organizational and occupational commitment, will have a favorable effect on work
outcomes such as OCB and performance.
Another explanation as to why commitment
forms should be related to outcomes follows the
exchange approach. Employees who experience
positive exchanges with the organization will
reciprocate with higher levels of commitment,
which will motivate them to contribute to the
organization in other ways, through, for example,
better performance or higher levels of OCB
(Cohen, 2003; OReilly & Chatman, 1986).
It should be noted that we do not suggest
specific relationships for each commitment form
because we believe that the pattern of relationships
as presented here will be similar for all commitment forms. Following the logic of Hypothesis 3
we also expect that dimensions of organizational
commitment will have a stronger effect on outcomes than dimensions of occupational
commitment.
Hypothesis 6 All commitment forms will be
related positively to in-role performance and
OCB. Organizational commitment will have a
stronger effect on outcomes than occupational
commitment.
Another expectation that will be examined
here is that commitment forms will explain
variations in OCB and in-role performance above
and beyond the variance explained by individual
values. Values are acquired early in life during the
socialization process. They are expected to affect
behaviors in the workplace based on the

explanations outlined above. However, the commitment attitudes examined here are mainly
acquired through experiences in the workplace.
As commitment forms are more related to the
current experiences of life, they are expected to
affect OCB and in-role performance above and
beyond the effect of individual values.
Hypothesis 7 Commitment forms will explain
variations in OCB and in-role performance above
and beyond the variance already explained by
individual values.
METHOD
Subjects and procedure
The population of this study was secular Israeli
teachers working in secular Jewish schools. We
focused on this particular group in order to
minimize variations that might be caused by
including members of other, culturally different
populations, such as Arabs or religious Jews. We
distributed questionnaires to 300 teachers in
10 schools (including both elementary and secondary schools) located in the North of Israel; of
these, 192 usable questionnaires were returned, a
response rate of 64%. The questionnaires included
items on individual values, commitment forms,
and demographic characteristics. The principals of
the 10 schools provided data on OCB and in-role
performance only for those teachers who returned
usable questionnaires, in most cases a month or
two after the questionnaires were collected. The
teachers indicated their national identity numbers
on the questionnaires to allow us to match their
responses with the principals evaluations. The
questionnaires, which were in Hebrew, were
administered on-site and took about 15 min to
complete; no compensation was provided.
Demographic characteristics of the final sample
were as follows: 90.5% of the respondents were
female, the average age was 41.3, and the average
tenure in the occupation and in the school was 16.5
years and 10.7 years respectively. Most of the
respondents, 86.1%, were married. The sample can
be defined as homogeneous in several aspects. All
the respondents were teachers and the majority of
them were females (90.5%). In addition, most of
the respondents were married (86.1%) and most
were born in Israel (63%). In other aspects there
is more heterogeneity in the characteristics of the
sample as demonstrated in the relatively high
standard deviations of some of the demographic
variables such as age (mean 41.3; SD 9.4),
tenure in the school (mean 10.65; SD 8.9),

VALUES, COMMITMENT, AND OCB IN ISRAEL

and tenure in the occupation (mean 16.5;

SD 10.12).
Scales
Individual values
The Portrait Values Questionnaire (PVQ) was
applied to measure the 10 basic values (Schwartz,
2005; Schwartz, Melech, Lehmann, Burgess, &
Harris, 2001). The PVQ consists of short verbal
portraits of 40 different people, gender-matched
with the respondent. Each portrait highlights goals
and aspirations that point implicitly to the
importance of a particular value, without naming
the value or referring to it directly. The portraits
describe each person in terms of what is important
to him or her; thus, they capture the persons
values without explicitly identifying values as the
topic of investigation.
For each portrait in the PVQ, respondents
are asked how much like you is this person?
Responses are given on a scale ranging from 1 (not
like me at all) to 6 (very much like me). Sample
items include: 1. Thinking up new ideas and being
creative is important to her. She likes to do things
in her own original way (self-direction). 2. It is
important to her to live in secure surroundings.
She avoids anything that might endanger her
safety (security). 3. Its very important to her
to help the people around her. She wants to care
for their well-being (benevolence). The number of
portraits for each value ranges from three (stimulation, hedonism, and power) to six (universalism),
reflecting the conceptual breadth of the values.
The score for the importance of each value is the
average rating given to these items. All the value
items have demonstrated near equivalence of
meaning across cultures in analyses using multidimensional scaling (MDS; Schwartz, 2005).
Organizational and occupational
commitment levels
These were measured using Meyer et al. (1993).
These scales are based on three dimensions for
each of the commitment fociaffective, continuance and normativeand include six items for
each. All the commitment constructs are measured
on a seven-point scale (1 strongly disagree to
7 strongly agree). It should be noted that while
all items of the original scales were included in the
analysis, we ultimately omitted some items in
order to increase reliability. One item was
omitted from the affective organizational commitment scale: I would be very happy to spend the

279

rest of my career with this organization. Three

items were omitted from the continuance organizational commitment scale: Right now, staying
with my organization is a matter of necessity as
much as desire; I feel I have too few options to
consider leaving this organization; and One of
the few serious consequences of leaving this
organization would be the scarcity of available
alternatives. One item was omitted from the
continuance occupational commitment scale:
There are no pressures that keep me from
changing professions.
Organizational citizenship behavior
(OCB) and in-role performance
The Williams and Anderson (1991) scale, a
21-item list, was applied in this study. The
principals of the schools were asked to evaluate
each of the teachers in the final sample on these
items. The 21 items represent three dimensions,
where seven items measure in-role performance,
seven measure organizational OCB (impersonal
OCB directed towards the organization in general), and seven measure altruistic OCB (helping a
specific person). Each item is measured on a scale
ranging from 1 (never) to 5 (always). One item was
omitted from the organizational OCB scale in
order to increase reliability: A great deal of time
is spent on personal phone conversations.
Data analysis
As the sample included teachers from 10 different
schools, we analyzed the data using hierarchical
linear modeling (HLM; Bryk & Raudenbush,
1992, pp. 8486). The advantage of HLM is that
by modeling both individual and group-level
residuals, it acknowledges that individuals within
one group may be more similar to one another
than to individuals in other groups (Bryk &
Raudenbush, 1992). In other words, HLM allows
us to control for variances among the different
schools, and to determine whether the explained
variances are affected by the schools, or whether
the results represent only individual differences
among the research participants. We used the
SPSS mixed-model procedure.

FINDINGS
Table 1 presents the basic statistics of the variables
and the intercorrelations among them. Results
show acceptable reliabilities of the research

280

COHEN, LIU
TABLE 1
Descriptive statistics, reliabilities (in parentheses), and intercorrelations among research variables

Variable
Individual values
1. Conformity
2. Tradition
3. Benevolence
4. Universalism
5. Self-direction
6. Stimulation
7. Hedonism
8. Achievement
9. Power
10. Security
Commitment forms
11. ORGAFFEC
12. ORGCONT
13. ORGNORM
14. OCCUAFFEC
15. OCCUCONT
16. OCCUNORM
Performance
17. In-role
18. OCBA
19. OCBO

Mean SD

(.66)
.42
.28
.38
.33
.28

(.60)
.53
.37
.32
.08

3.80
2.46
4.17
3.80
4.01
2.66
3.12
3.36
2.29
3.89

.80
1.01
.72
.71
.75
.96
1.15
.95
.99
.71

(.67)
.43
.42
.35
.06
.05
.08
.23
.00
.45

(.62)
.28
.16
.06
.05
.13
.07
.02
.27

(.70)
.39
.30
.19
.13
.22
.00
.33

(.62)
.40
.19
.21
.23
.14
.41

5.79
3.19
5.26
5.60
4.08
4.91

1.08
1.43
1.10
1.01
1.31
1.23

.26
.03
.23
.15
.03
.26

.05
.10
.12
.17
.10
.23

.28
.11
.16
.23
.10
.20

.08
.11
.07
.04
.03
.12

10

11

12

.17
.02
.14
.15
.04
.17

(.79)
.14
.68
.44
.27
.54

(.64)
.23
.22
.28
.13

.17
.02
.06

.28
.35
.27

.02
.02
.00

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

(.81)
.41 (.77)
.38 .46 (.66)
.18 .28 .22 (.54)

.08 .08 .00 .16 .05

.08 .02 .02 .17 .17
.02 .10 .08 .08 .12
.11 .14 .12 .13 .06
.05 .10 .06 .06 .06
.10 .13 .11 .10 .01
.
4.44 .51 .02 .08 .16 .01 .05 .07 .01 .11 .08
3.67 .87 .07 .04 .27 .01 .06 .14 .13 .09 .04
4.24 .61 .00 .13 .11 .02 .12 .09 .06 .11 .05

(.79)
.46 (.78)
.32 .28 (.74)
.67 .63 .46 (.83)
.14
.22
.17

.31
.28
.30

.11
.14
.12

.13 (.85)
.18 .58 (.93)
.14 .77 .72 (.77)

ORGAFFEC Affective
organizational
commitment;
ORGCONT Continuance
organizational
commitment;
ORGNORM Normative
organizational
commitment;
OCCUAFFEC Affective
occupational
commitment;
OCCUCONT Continuance occupational commitment; OCCUNORM Normative occupational commitment; In-role In-role
performance; OCBA OCBaltruism; OCBO OCBorganization. N 192. Correlation  .15 significant at .05; correlation  .19
significant at .01; correlation  .23 significant at .001.

variables following DeVelliss (1991) criterion of

.60 and above. Even among the individual values,
Table 1 shows a reliability below .60 for only one
value (security .54). This is a positive indication,
considering Schwartz et al.s (2001) warning not to
expect high internal reliabilities for the values; this
is both because the indices include only a few items
and because many values have conceptually broad
definitions. For these reasons we considered it
unnecessary to omit the security variable to
increase reliability, especially as doing so might
affect the generalizability of Schwartzs scales.
The correlations among the independent variables were in general not high. In only a few cases
were correlations above .60, and none exceeds .70.
While these correlations introduce the possibility
of multicollinearity, it should be noted that such
correlations are quite common in research on
individual values (Schwartz et al., 2001) and in
organizational commitment research (Meyer et al.,
2002).
To further establish the discriminant validity of
the study scales, several procedures recommended
by Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, and Podsakoff
(2003) were applied. First, confirmatory factor
analysis (CFA) was performed using the AMOS

structural equation modeling program. This analysis was performed following the procedure outlined by Brooke, Russell, and Price (1988),
Mathieu and Farr (1991), and Cohen (1999a).
Three indicators were established for each multiitem measure by first fitting a single-factor
solution to each set of items and then averaging
the items with highest and lowest loadings to form
the first indicator, averaging the items with the
next highest and lowest loadings to form the
second indicator, and so forth until all items were
assigned to one of the three indicators for each
variable. This procedure was necessary to reduce
the number of parameters estimated in the
measurement models. In effect, this strategy
reduced the scale items to three parallel indicators
of each construct, in much the same manner that
parallel test forms are developed (see Nunnally,
1978). The extent to which the three indicators
adequately tapped the more general underlying
constructs was then assessed by fitting the CFA
models.
We first compared the fit of a three-factor model
for the two dimensions of OCB (altruistic and
organizational OCB) and in-role performance to
the alternative fit of a single, one-factor model.

VALUES, COMMITMENT, AND OCB IN ISRAEL

The results for the three-factor model revealed the

following fit indices: V 2 68.57 (df 24);
V 2/df 2.86; CFI .97; IFI .97; NFI .95; and
RMSEA .10. In the second model tested, all
items were loaded onto a single factor, producing
V 2 295.35 (df 27); V 2/df 10.94; CFI .79;
IFI .79; NFI .78; and RMSEA .23. The
findings support the superiority of the three-factor
model over the one-factor model. To further
examine this contention a chi-square difference
test was conducted. The chi-square difference test
indicated that the three-factor model fit significantly better than the one-factor model
(2 difference 81.21; df 3; p  .001).
We also performed CFA for the commitment
scales. We first compared the fit of the three-factor
model for the three dimensions of organizational
commitment (affective, continuance, and normative) to the alternative fit of a one-factor model.
The results for the three-factor model revealed the
following fit indices: V 2 42.86 (df 24);
V 2/df 1.79; CFI .96; IFI .96; NFI .92; and
RMSEA .06. In the second model, all 14 items
were loaded onto a single factor, producing
V 2 124.07 (df 27); V 2/df 4.60; CFI .81;
IFI .81; NFI .77; and RMSEA .14. The
findings support the superiority of the three-factor
model over the one-factor model. Again, a
chi-square difference test indicated that the
three-factor model fit significantly better than the
one-factor model (2 difference 95.99; df 3;
p  .001).
The same procedure was performed for the three
dimensions of occupational commitment. The
results for the three-factor model produced the
following: V 2 56.35 (df 24); V 2/df 2.35;
CFI .95;
IFI .95;
NFI .91;
and
RMSEA .08. In the second model, all 17 items
were loaded onto a single factor, producing
V 2 176.15 (df 27); V 2/df 6.52; CFI .76;
IFI .76; NFI .73; and RMSEA .17. The
findings again support the superiority of the
three-factor model, and this was again buttressed
by
a
chi-square
difference
test
(2
difference 119.80; df 3; p  .001).
In the final CFA we compared the fit of a
six-factor model for the six dimensions of organizational and occupational commitment (affective,
continuance, and normative for each commitment)
to the alternative fit of a one-factor model. The
six-factor model was again shown to be superior,
with fit indices of V 2 258.82 (df 120); V 2/df
2.16; CFI .90; IFI .90; NFI .83; and
RMSEA .08, compared with V 2 595.42 (df
135); V 2/ df 4.41; CFI .66; IFI .66; NFI
.61; and RMSEA .13 for the one-factor model.

281

Again, this was supported by a chi-square

difference test (2 difference 336.60; df 15;
p  .001).
To further examine the validity of Schwartzs
model for our study, we performed MDS using
ALSCAL (SPSSX). The objective of MDS is to
array points in multidimensional space such that
the distances between points on the scatter plot(s)
reflect as closely as possible the subjective distances obtained by surveying subjects. That is,
MDS shows graphically how different objects of
comparison do or do not cluster. The
two-dimensional analysis in Figure 2 supports
the general model of Schwartz, with some differences in the clusters obtained that can be
attributed to the specific sample. Specifically, all
the conservation and self-transcendence values are
concentrated on the right-hand side of the figure,
and all the openness-to-change and self-enhancement values on the left-hand side. This finding
provides good support for the Schwartz model (see
Figure 1). Benevolence and universalism form the
strongest cluster. Tradition, security, and conformity seem to represent a second quite strong
cluster; and two other clusters are represented by
stimulation and self-direction and by power,
achievement, and hedonism. The fit measures
show a satisfying stress (phi) of 0.13 and a
satisfying squared correlation index (RSQ) of
0.90 (considering that any RSQ above 0.60 is
considered good).
To test for common method variance, a
Harmans one-factor test was performed
(Harman, 1967; Podsakoff & Organ, 1986). All
the values and organizational and occupational
commitment variables were entered into a principal components factor analysis with varimax
rotation. According to this technique, if a single
factor emerges from the factor analysis or one
general factor accounts for most of the variance,
common method variance is deemed present.
However, the results of the analysis revealed 22
factors with eigenvalues greater than one and with
only one factor accounting for more than 10%
(14.40%) of the variance. These results are
consistent with the absence of common method
variance. The findings showed that the respondents were able to differentiate among the different
scales applied in this study.
Table 2 presents the results of the HLM analyses
in which values were regressed on commitment
forms. The first set of hypotheses (1a2c) expected
all the commitment forms to show positive
relationships with the conservation and
self-transcendence values (tradition, conformity,
security, benevolence, and universalism), and weak

282

COHEN, LIU

1.5
Power
1.0

Dimension 2

Tradition
Security

Achievement

0.5

Conformity
Hedonism
0.0
Stimulation
0.5
Self-direction

Benevolence
Universalism

1.0
2

Dimension 1
Figure 2. Two-dimensional scaling of Schwartzs values.

TABLE 2
HLM results of individual values on organizational and occupational commitment
Commitment

Fixed effects

Affective
organizational
commitment

Effect
Estimate
Intercept
6.56***
Individual values
1. Conformity
.26*
2. Tradition
.09
3. Benevolence
.27*
4. Universalism
.12
5. Self-direction
.01
6. Stimulation
.08
7. Hedonism
.03
8. Achievement
.14
9. Power
.14
10. Security
.09
Random variance of group
0.16
2loglikelihood
556.26

Continuance
organizational
commitment

Normative
organizational
commitment

Affective
occupational
ommitment

Continuance
occupational
commitment

Normative
occupational
commitment

SE
.48

Estimate SE
3.03*** .64

Estimate S.E.
5.89*** .48

Estimate S.E.
6.50*** .43

Estimate S.E.
4.24*** .61

Estimate S.E.
6.63*** .55

.13
.09
.13
.13
.13
.10
.09
.11
.09
.13
.04

.04
.08
.28
.17
.20
.11
.08
.33*
.18
.20
.22
641.19

.20
.01
.07
.04
.06
.25*
.16
.09
.20
.18
.00
563.45

.03
.09
.20
.11
.04
.25**
.23**
.15
.14
.19
.00
508.50

.20
.20
.30
.03
.01
.25*
.21
.09
.05
.15
.12
597.45

.20
.15
.08
.01
.04
.28*
.25**
.11
.07
.11
.01
573.94

.17
.12
.17
.18
.17
.13
.12
.14
.12
.18
.15

.13
.09
.13
.14
.13
.10
.09
.11
.10
.14
.00

.12
.08
.12
.12
.12
.09
.08
.09
.08
.12
.00

.17
.11
.16
.17
.16
.13
.11
.13
.12
.17
.10

.15
.10
.15
.15
.15
.12
.10
.12
.11
.16
.05

*p  .05; **p  .01; ***p  .001. N 192.

or negative relationships with the openness to

change and self-enhancement values (hedonism,
stimulation, achievement, power, and self-direction). Hypothesis 1a was strongly supported by the
data, as shown in Table 2. As expected, affective
organizational commitment was positively related

to conformity and benevolence. However, the

other five hypotheses were supported only partly
or not at all. Hypothesis 1b was not supported by
the data; achievement was positively related to
continuance organizational commitment, while
the hypothesis expected no relationship or a

VALUES, COMMITMENT, AND OCB IN ISRAEL

283

TABLE 3
HLM results of individual values and commitment on OCB and in-role performance
Performance
Altruistic OCB
Fixed effects
Effect Intercept
Individual values
1. Conformity
2. Tradition
3. Benevolence
4. Universalism
5. Selfdirection
6. Stimulation
7. Hedonism
8. Achievement
9. Power
10. Security

Model 1

Model 2

Model 1

In-role performance

Model 2

Model 1

Model 2

Estimate SE Estimate SE Estimate SE Estimate SE Estimate SE Estimate SE

3.91
.39
1.61*** .70
4.12*** .26
2.77*** .45
4.27*** .22
3.11*** .39
.04
.07
.33***
.14
.03
.07
.03
.04
.08
.01

.10
.07
.10
.10
.10
.08
.07
.08
.07
.10

Commitment forms
11. Affective organizational commitment.
12. Continuance organizational commitment
13. Normative organizational commitment
14. Affective occupational commitment
14. Continuance occupational commitment
15. Normative occupational commitment
Random variance of group
2loglikelihood
D2loglikelihood

Organizational OCB

.10
466.73

.06

.03
.02
.25*
.10
.09
.02
.09
.01
.02
.11

.10
.07
.10
.10
.10
.08
.07
.08
.07
.11

.23**
.03
.01
.12
.02
.04

.08
.05
.09
.09
.06
.08

.02
.04
.03
.08
.06
.04
.06
.09
.08
.03

.10
.06
.11*
429.77
325.58
36.96***

.07
.05
.07
.07
.06
.05
.04
.05
.05
.07

.05

.02
.03
.02
.06
.05
.02
.01
.05
.03
.04

.07
.05
.07
.07
.06
.05
.04
.05
.05
.07

.10*
.01
.04
.12*
.01
.04

.05
.03
.06
.06
.04
.05

.11*
300.98
24.6***

.05

.04
.05
.07
.06
.04
.05
.08*
.10*
.08
.13*

.06
.04
.06
.06
.06
.04
.04
.05
.04
.06

.03
.05
.03
.03
.03
.00
.05
.07
.05
.09
.11*
.01
.02
.12*
.00
.07

.05
279.38

.03

.05
259.01
20.37**

.06
.04
.06
.06
.06
.05
.04
.05
.04
.06
.05
.03
.05
.05
.03
.05
.03

N 192. *p  .05; **p  .01; ***p  .001.

negative one. Hypothesis 1c was not supported,

with the data showing a positive relationship
between stimulation and normative organizational
commitment. For all three parts of Hypothesis 2,
the data showed an unexpected positive relationship between stimulation and the different commitment forms. However, Hypotheses 2a and 2c
were partly supported by the negative relationship
between hedonism and both affective and normative occupational commitment.
Hypothesis 3 was not supported by the data.
This hypothesis expected that more values would
be related to organizational commitment than to
occupational commitment. Table 2 shows no
substantial difference between the number of
values related to organizational commitment and
the number related to occupational commitment.
It is important to point out that, as can be seen
in Table 2, in all models the random variance of
the group was not significant. This insignificant
variability between groups indicates that these
models, which take random variance of the group
into account, are no better than assuming that all
groups on average are the same.
Hypothesis 4 was partly supported by the data.
This hypothesis expected that values such as

hedonism, achievement, self-direction, power,

and stimulation would be more strongly related
to in-role performance and organizational OCB
than values that represent conservation and selftranscendence. As Table 3 (Model 1) shows, the
positive relationship of achievement with in-role
performance supports this hypothesis. However,
the negative relationship of hedonism and the
positive relationship of security with in-role
performance were contrary to expectations.
Hypothesis 5 was supported by the data. This
hypothesis expected that the conservation and
self-transcendence values (tradition, conformity,
security, benevolence, and universalism) would be
more strongly related to OCBaltruism than the
openness to change and self-enhancement values.
As Table 3 (Model 1) shows, the positive relationship of benevolence with OCBaltruism supports
this hypothesis.
Hypothesis 6 expected that commitment forms
would be related to outcomes and that organizational commitment would have a stronger relationship
with
outcomes
than
occupational
commitment. This hypothesis was partly supported by the data. As expected, affective organizational commitment was positively related to

284

COHEN, LIU

altruistic OCB, and also to in-role performance

and organizational OCB. However, affective occupational commitment was also positively related to
in-role performance and organizational OCB.
Hypothesis 7 was supported by the data. The
Delta2 Log Likelihood (p 5 0.01 for all dependent variables) for each of these models indicates
that the inclusion of commitment forms contributes to the models explanatory power. It is
important to point out that, as can be seen in
Table 3, only for organizational OCB was the
random variance of the group significant. In other
words, only for organizational OCB is the model
that takes random variance of the group into
account better than assuming that all groups on
average perform the same.
DISCUSSION
Not many empirical studies have looked at Israeli
employees vis-a`-vis the concepts advanced in this
study. In fact, few studies have examined individual values in relation to behavioral outcomes in
any cultureunsurprisingly, given that this
research trend is relatively new (Fischer & Smith,
2006; Lam et al., 2002). Some studies have
examined the relationship between individual
values and commitment (Cohen, 2009, Cohen &
Shamai, 2010). However, the main contribution of
this study is the simultaneous examination of
values and commitment in their relationship to inrole and extra-role performance. Such an examination has rarely been performed in empirical
studies that examined individual values in the
workplace. The findings of this study show that
both individual values and commitment are concepts that can increase our understanding of
employees behavior in the workplace, particularly
their performance. The findings suggest a number
of interesting and important insights that provide
ideas and directions for future research, which will
be elaborated below.
First, the findings show that values are related to
commitment and should be considered as one of its
determinantsa conclusion that is consistent with
previous research (Fischer & Smith, 2006; Lam
et al., 2002). The importance of values arises from
the fact that values are determined quite early in the
socialization process and change very slowly, if at
all (Schwartz & Bardi, 2001). Naturally, commitment will also be affected by the work setting,
perhaps even more than by values. But values
clearly play an important role in determining
attitudes at work, and can help illuminate the

roots of commitment. Values also are often

distinguishable across cultures, and so can serve
as a useful jumping-off point for understanding
cross-cultural differences in commitment.
In the current study, the patterns of relationships between values and commitment are interesting. For example, affective organizational
commitment was related to conformity and
benevolence, as expected. However, these two
values were not related to any of the other
commitment forms. One possible explanation for
this finding is that affective organizational commitment represents the most important form of
commitment in terms of its proximity for employees (Cohen, 2003). This is interesting in light of
recent criticism challenging justifications for the
dimensionality of commitment (Ko, Price, &
Mueller, 1997; Solinger, van Olffen, & Roe,
2008). The findings here may be seen as providing
additional support for the argument that only
what we call affective commitment truly captures
the notion of commitment.
The finding that both affective and normative
occupational commitment were related positively
to stimulation and negatively to hedonism suggests
that these two values have different roles in their
relationship to occupational commitment, despite
their compatibility in Schwartzs (1992, 1999)
framework. A high score in stimulation can be
seen as consistent with seeking a difficult, interesting, and challenging occupation. The negative
relationship with hedonism suggests that teachers,
or at least Israeli teachers, who are not committed
to their occupation are in the teaching profession
not because they want to fulfill more intrinsic inner
needs but perhaps only for extrinsic rewards such
as having a job with a reasonable salary. Their
focus might be more on other aspects of their lives
than on the occupation. Different processes appear
to be at work here.
One of the more interesting findings of the
current study is the relationship between benevolence and altruistic OCB. This relationship was
strong and did not disappear when commitment
forms were entered into the equation. This finding
strongly suggests that altruism is rooted in ones
personality, and that employees who are more
willing to help others in the workplace are likely to
be those who value the group and the collective
over the individual. This finding challenges the
argument that OCB is affected less by personal
than by situational differences (Organ & Ryan,
1995). The fact that we found no relationship
between any of the values studied here and

VALUES, COMMITMENT, AND OCB IN ISRAEL

organizational OCB suggests that individual differences might be an important factor in shaping
both the magnitude and the type of OCB. In-role
performance seems to be related to an entirely
different set of values than OCBaltruism. The
fact that both achievement and security were
positively related to in-role performance is interesting in this regard. This relationship suggests
that employees who value personal success and
competence perform their formal duties more
successfully than those who do not. However, in
the Israeli educational system it appears that the
need for stability and security in employment also
drives teachers to perform better.
The strong relationship between commitment
and OCB is not surprising. Commitment, and
particularly organizational commitment, has been
found to be an important determinant of OCB
(OReilly & Chatman, 1986). It is interesting to
note that when commitment was included in the
equations the effect of benevolence on altruistic
OCB was untouched, but the effect of values on
in-role performance disappeared. This finding
supports the argument that altruistic OCB has
different roots than organizational OCB or in-role
performance.
Another important finding regarding commitment is that only the affective forms of commitment were related to OCB and in-role
performance. Neither continuance nor normative
commitment, whether organizational or occupational, was significantly related to either form of
OCB or to performance. This finding strongly
supports the challenge to the multidimensionality
of commitment discussed abovethat is, the idea
that affective commitment is a more valid and
useful construct than the continuance or normative dimensions.
Finally, several limitations of this research
should be noted. First, the study is based on data
collected from Israeli teachers, and one should be
cautious before generalizing the findings here to
other cultures or other occupations. More studies
that examine other cultures and occupations using
similar concepts are needed before firm conclusions regarding the findings here can be made.
Second, there is always the possibility of common
method errors when all independent variables were
collected from the same source, regardless of the
CFA performed here that showed that
the respondents were able to distinguish among
the concepts under consideration.
Despite these limitations, this study highlights
important findings and suggests some important

285

directions for future research. More such studies

can only increase our understanding of behavior
and attitudes in the workplace.
Manuscript received May 2010
Revised manuscript accepted October 2010
First published online January 2011

REFERENCES
Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement
and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of
Occupational Psychology, 63, 118.
Ang, S., Van Dyne, L., & Begley, T. M. (2003).
The employment relationships of foreign workers
versus local employees: A field study of organizational justice, job satisfaction, performance, and
OCB. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24,
561583.
Baruch, Y. (1998). The rise and fall of organizational
commitment. Human Systems Management, 17,
135143.
Bateman, T. S., & Organ, D. W. (1983). Job satisfaction
and the good soldier: The relationship between affect
and employee citizenship. Academy of Management
Journal, 26, 587595.
Berings, D., De Fruyt, F., & Bouwen, R. (2004). Work
values and personality traits as predictors of enterprising and social vocational interests. Personality
and Individual Differences, 36, 349364.
Blau, G. J. (1986). Job involvement and organizational
commitment as interactive predictors of tardiness and
absenteeism. Journal of Management, 12, 577584.
Brooke, P. P., Russell, D. W., & Price, J. L. (1988).
Discriminant validation of measures of job
satisfaction, job involvement and organizational
commitment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73,
139145.
Bryk, A., & Raudenbush, S. (1992). Hierarchical linear
models: Applications and data analysis methods.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Clugston, M., Howell, J. P., & Dorfman, P. W. (2000).
Does cultural socialization predict multiple bases and
foci of commitment? Journal of Management, 26,
530.
Cohen, A. (1993). Work commitment in relation to
withdrawal intentions and union effectiveness.
Journal of Business Research, 26, 7590.
Cohen., A. (1999a). Relationships among five forms of
commitment: An empirical examination. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 20, 285308.
Cohen, A. (1999b). The relation between commitment
forms and work outcomes in Jewish and Arab
culture. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 54, 371391.
Cohen, A. (2003). Multiple commitments in the workplace: An integrative approach. Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cohen, A. (2007). An examination of the relationship
between commitments and culture among five
cultural groups of Israeli teachers. Journal of
Cross-Cultural Psychology, 38, 3449.
Cohen, A. (2009). A value based perspective of
commitment in the workplace: An examination of

286

COHEN, LIU

Schwartzs basic human values theory among bank

employees in Israel. International Journal of
Intercultural Relations, 33, 332345.
Cohen, A., & Shamai, O. (2010). The relationship
between individual values, psychological well-being,
and organizational commitment among Israeli police
officers. Policing, 33, 3051.
de Fontenay, C. & Carmel, E. (2001). Israels silicon
wadi: The forces behind cluster formation. SIEPR
Policy Paper No. 00-40, Stanford University,
Stanford, CA.
DeVellis, R. F. (1991). Scale development: Theory and
applications. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Farh, J. L., Hackett, R. D., & Liang, J. (2007).
Individual-level cultural values as moderators of
perceived organizational supportemployee outcomes relationships in China: Comparing the effects
of power distance and traditionality. Academy of
Management Journal, 50, 715729.
Fischer, C. S., & Shavit, Y. (1995). National differences
in network density: Israel and the United States.
Social Networks, 17, 129145.
Fischer, R., & Smith, P. B. (2006). Who cares about
justice? The moderating effect of values on the link
between organizational justice and work behavior.
Applied Psychology, 55, 541562.
Fontaine, J. R. J., Poortinga, Y. H., Delbeke, L., &
Schwartz, S. H. (2008). Structural equivalence of the
values domain across cultures: Distinguishing sampling fluctuations from meaningful variation. Journal
of Cross Cultural Psychology, 39, 345365.
Francesco, A. N., & Chen, Z. X. (2004). Collectivism in
action: Its moderating effects on the relationship
between organizational commitment and employee
performance in China. Group & Organization
Management, 29, 425441.
Furnham, A., Petrides, K. V., Tsaosis, I., Pappas, K., &
Garrod, D. (2005). A cross-cultural investigation into
the relationships between personality traits and work
values. Journal of Psychology, 139, 532.
Glazer, S., Daniel, S. K., & Short, K. M. (2004). A study
of the relationship between organizational commitment and human values in four countries. Human
Relations, 57, 323345.
Gregerson, H. B. (1993). Multiple commitments at work
and extra-role behavior during three stages of
organizational tenure. Journal of Business Research,
26, 3147.
Harman, H. (1967). Modern factor analysis. Chicago,
IL: University of Chicago Press.
Hofstede,
G.
(1980).
Cultures
consequences:
International differences in work related values.
Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Katz, D. (1964). The motivational basis of organizational behavior. Behavior Science, 9, 131133.
Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1966). The social psychology of
organizations. New York, NY: Wiley.
Kirkman, B. L., & Shapiro, D. L. (2001). The impact of
cultural values on job satisfaction and organizational
commitment in self-managing work teams: The
mediating role of employee resistance. Academy of
Management Journal, 44, 557569.
Ko, J. W., Price, J. L., & Mueller, C. W. (1997).
Assessment of Meyer and Allens three-component
model of organizational commitment in South
Korea. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 961973.

Lam, S. K. S., Schaubroeck, J., & Aryee, S. (2002).

Relationship between organizational justice and
employee work outcomes: A cross-national study.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 118.
Lavie, D., & Fiegenbaum, A. (2000). The strategic
reaction of domestic firms to foreign MNC dominance: The Israeli experience. Long Range Planning,
33, 651672.
Lawler, E. J. (1992). Affective attachment to nested
groups: A choice process theory. American
Sociological Review, 57, 327339.
Lecker, T., & Shachmurove, Y. (1999). Immigration and
socioeconomic gaps: Theory and applications.
Applied Economics, 31, 539549.
Lee, K., Carswell, J. J., & Allen, N. J. (2000). A metaanalytic review of occupational commitment:
Relations with person and work related variables.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 799811.
LePine, J. A., Erez, A., & Johnson, D. E. (2002). The
nature and dimensionality of organizational citizenship behavior: A critical review and meta-analysis.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 5275.
Lewis, B. (1972). The emergence of modern Israel.
Middle Eastern Studies, 8, 421427.
Lydon, J. (1996). Toward a theory of commitment.
In C. Seligman, J. M. Olsen, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.),
Values: The Ontario symposium (Vol. 8, pp. 191213).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Mathieu, J. E., & Farr, J. L. (1991). Further evidence of
the discriminant validity of measures of organizational commitment, job involvement, and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 127133.
Meyer, P. J., & Allen, J. N. (1984). Testing the side bet
theory of organizational commitment: Some methodological considerations. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 69, 372378.
Meyer, P. J., Allen, J. N., & Smith, C A. (1993).
Commitment to organizations and occupations:
Extension and test of a three-component conceptualization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 538551.
Meyer, P. J., Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L., &
Topolnytsky, L. (2002). Affective, continuance, and
normative commitment to the organization: A metaanalysis of antecedents, correlates, and consequences.
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61, 2052.
Morrow, P. C. (1993). The theory and measurement of
work commitment. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Mueller, C. W., & Lawler, E. J. (1999). Commitment
to nested organizational units: Some basic principles
and preliminary findings. Social Psychology
Quarterly, 62, 325346.
Nunnally, J. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.).
New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
OReilly, C. A., & Chatman, J. (1986). Organizational
commitment and psychological attachment: The
effects of compliance, identification and internalization on prosocial behavior. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 71, 492499.
Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome. Lexington, MA:
Lexington Books.
Organ, D. W., & Konovsky, M. (1989). Cognitive versus
affective determinants of organizational citizenship
behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 157164.
Organ, D. W., & Ryan, K. (1995). A meta-analytic
review of attitudinal and dispositional predictors of

VALUES, COMMITMENT, AND OCB IN ISRAEL

organizational citizenship behavior. Personnel

Psychology, 48, 775802.
Pearson, C. A. L., & Chong, J. (1997). Contributions of
job content and social information on organizational
commitment and job satisfaction: An exploration in a
Malaysian nursing context. Journal of Occupational
and Organizational Psychology, 70, 357374.
Pines, A. M., & Zaidman, N. (2003). Israeli Jews and
Arabs: Similarities and differences in the utilization
of social support. Journal of Cross-Cultural
Psychology, 34, 465480.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., &
Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in
behavioral research: A critical review of the literature
and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 88, 879903.
Podsakoff, P. M., Mackenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B., &
Bacharach, G. D. (2000). Organizational citizenship
behaviors: A critical review of the theoretical and
empirical literature and suggestions for future
research. Journal of Management, 26, 513563.
Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. (1986). Self-reports in
organizational research: Problems and prospects.
Journal of Management, 12, 531544.
Randall, D. M., & Cote, J. A. (1991). Interrelationships
of work commitment constructs. Work and
Occupation, 18, 194211.
Sagie, A., & Weisberg, J. (2001). The transformation in
human resource management in Israel. International
Journal of Manpower, 22, 226234.
Sagiv, L., & Schwartz, S. H. (2000). Value priority and
subjective well-being: Direct relations and congruity
effects. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30,
177198.
Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and
structure of values: Theory and empirical tests in 20
countries. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 165).
New York, NY: Academic Press.
Schwartz, S. H. (1996). Value priorities and behavior:
Applying a theory of integrated value systems.
In C. Seligman, J. M. Olsen, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.),
Values: The Ontario symposium (Vol. 8, pp. 125).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

287

Schwartz, S. H. (1999). A theory of cultural values and

some implications for work. Applied Psychology, 48,
2347.
Schwartz, S. H. (2005). Robustness and fruitfulness of a
theory on universals in individual human values.
In A. Tamayo, & J. B. Porto (Eds.), Valores e
comportamento nas organizacoes (pp. 5695).
Petropolis, Brazil: Vozes.
Schwartz, S. H., & Bardi, A. (2001). Value hierarchies
across cultures: Taking a similarities perspective.
Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 32, 268290.
Schwartz, S. H., Melech, G., Lehmann, A., Burgess, S.,
& Harris, M. (2001). Extending the cross-cultural
validity of the theory of basic human values with a
different method of measurement. Journal of
Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32, 519542.
Schwartz, S. H., & Sagiv, L. (1995). Identifying culturespecifics in the content and structure of values.
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 26, 92116.
Schwartz, S. H., Sagiv, L., & Boehnke, K. (2000).
Worries and values. Journal of Personality, 68,
309346.
Solinger, O., van Olffen, W., & Roe, R. (2008). Beyond
the three-component model of organizational commitment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 7083.
Somers, M. J., & Birnbaum, D. (1998). Work-related
commitment and job performance: Its also the
nature of the performance that counts. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 19, 621634.
Tzafrir, S. S., Meshoulam, I., & Baruch, Y. (2007).
HRM in Israel: New challenges. International
Journal of Human Resource Management, 18,
114131.
Wasti, S. A. (2003). The influence of cultural values on
antecedents of organizational commitment: An individual-level analysis. Applied Psychology, 52,
533554.
Wikipedia (2009). Education in Israel. Retrieved
September 2, 2009, from http://en.wikipedia.org/
wiki/Education_in_Israel
Williams, L. J., & Anderson, S. E. (1991). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors
of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors.
Journal of Management, 17, 601617.

Copyright of International Journal of Psychology is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied
or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission.
However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.