Career stage as a moderator of the relationships between organizational commitment and its outcomes: A meta‐analysis
Abstract
The existing career development and organizational commitment development theory suggests that career stage may moderate the relationship between organizational commitment and outcomes. However, the study of organizational commitment‐outcomes linkages across career stages has been a neglected area of research. In light of this insufficiency, a meta‐analysis review of 41 samples dealing with the relationships between organizational commitment and outcomes was conducted. The total sample was divided into different time frames according to two indicators of career stage: age and tenure. The findings support the proposition that career stage moderates the relationships between organizational commitment and outcomes. The relationship between commitment and turnover (actual and intended) is stronger in the early career stage than in the mid and late‐career stages. The relationships of commitment with performance and absenteeism are strongest in the late‐career stage. The findings are discussed in terms of the need for more research that examines organizational commitment‐outcomes relationships across career stages as well as across other potential moderators.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The relationship between commitment and turnover (actual and intended) is stronger in the early career stage than in the mid and late-career stage.
“A meta-analysis with age and career found that 'the relationship between commitment and turnover (actual and intended) is stronger in the early career stage than in the mid and late-career stage' (Cohen, 1991: 253).”
From Smart technology, artificial intelligence, robotics, and algorithms (STARA): employees' perceptions of our future workplace (2018) · cites this paper as Cohen, 1991
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Brougham, D., & Haar, J. (2018) · Journal of Management & Organization · doi:10.1017/jmo.2016.55 · Cited by 1,117 · see citing works
Mockaitis, A. I., Butler, C. L., & Ojo, A. (2022) · Journal of Vocational Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2022.103768 · Cited by 42 · see citing works
- Authors
- Cohen, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Lethbridge (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Cohen, Aaron
- ORCID
- Cohen, Aaron
- Venue
- Journal of Occupational Psychology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1991-09
- Volume
- 64
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 253-268
- ISSN
- 0305-8107 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2080854137
- Cited by
- 287
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 13
- FWCI
- 9.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Occupational Psychology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
- Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Employee Performance and Management
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Leadership and Management › Healthcare Education and Workforce Issues
- Keywords
- organizational commitment, career stages, moderating effect, turnover, turnover intention, employee performance, absenteeism, age, tenure, career development theory
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
