Job Satisfaction as a Mediator of the Relationship Between Job Stressors and Affective, Continuance, and Normative Commitment: A Path Analytical Approach

International Journal of Stress Management, Vol. 9, No. 2, April 2002 ( 2002)

Job Satisfaction as a Mediator of theRelationship Between Job Stressorsand Affective, Continuance, and NormativeCommitment: A Path Analytical Approach

Darwish A. Yousef1,2

This article investigates the potential mediating role of job satisfaction betweenjob stressors—namely, role overload-quantitative, role overload-qualitative,and lack of career development—as sources of stress on the one hand, andvarious facets of organizational commitment—namely, affective, continuance,and normative—on the other hand. A sample of 361 employees in a number oforganizations in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) was used. Path analysis re-vealed that role overload-quantitative directly and negatively influences bothjob satisfaction and affective commitment and that lack of career developmentas a source of stress directly and negatively influences job satisfaction. Findingsalso suggest that job satisfaction mediates the influences of role overload-quan-titative on various facets of organizational commitment. Implications, futurelines of research, and limitations are discussed.

KEY WORDS: job satisfaction; job stressors; affective commitment; continuance commitment;normative commitment; role overload.

INTRODUCTION

Job satisfaction and its correlates have received considerable attention inthe Western as well as non-Western literature (e.g., Bhuian & Abdul-Muhmin,1997; Bhuian & Islam, 1996; Groot & Brink, 1999; Mumford, 1991; Weiss,

1United Arab Emirates University, Al-Ain.2Correspondence should be directed to Darwish A. Yousef, Department of Business Administration,College of Business & Economics, United Arab Emirates University, P.O. Box 17555, Al-Ain,United Arab Emirates; email: [email protected].

99

1072-5245/02/0400-0099/0 2002 Human Sciences Press, Inc.

100 Yousef

Dawis, England, & Lofquist, 1967). This is because job satisfaction has bothpositive and negative correlations with several variables. For instance, it has posi-tive correlation with life satisfaction (Iris & Barrett, 1977; Judge, Boudreau, &Bretz, 1994), organizational commitment (Bhuian & Abdul-Muhmin, 1997; Flet-cher & Williams, 1996; Yavas & Bodur, 1999), and job performance (Babin &Boles, 1996; Birnbaum & Somers, 1993), and negative association with absentee-ism (Muchinsky, 1977) and employee turnover (Locke, 1984; Muchinsky & Tut-tle, 1979). Job stressors, especially role conflict and role ambiguity, have alsoreceived special attention from researchers in Western as well as nonWesterncountries. However, the role of job satisfaction as a mediator of the influences ofjob stressors—particularly role overload-quantitative, role overload-qualitative,and lack of career development—on various facets of organizational commitment,namely, affective, continuance, and normative, has not been addressed adequatelyin either Western or non-Western literature. Additionally, those who have investi-gated role overload have concentrated largely on the impact of national culture onthe perceptions of role overload (Peterson, Smith, Akande, & Ayestaran, 1995;Vliert & Yperen, 1996). It is expected that this article will be valuable to bothacademicians and practitioners. For academicians, it may improve understandingof the potential mediating role job satisfaction might play between role overload-quantitative, role overload-qualitative, and lack of career development, and variousfacets of organizational commitment in a nonWestern context. For practitioners,it may draw attention to role overload and lack of career development as sourcesof stress, as well as their effects on job satisfaction and organizational commit-ment. This information may be used in combating these effects in order to improvejob satisfaction and organizational commitment.

JOB STRESSORS AND JOB SATISFACTION

Role overload is described as either quantitative—too much work to dowith too little time available—or qualitative, overly difficult and complex tasks,lack of training and experience to discharge duties properly. Lack of careerdevelopment stressors include lack of opportunities to advance in the organiza-tion and lack of opportunities to grow and acquire new knowledge and skills onthe job (Ivancevich & Mattenson, 1980). It is believed that those who perceivetheir workload and responsibilities as too heavy (quantitative), who regard theirwork as too difficult and demanding (qualitative), and who have few careerprospects would be less satisfied with the job.

A number of researchers, especially in the West, have examined the rela-tionship between job satisfaction and job stressors with an emphasis on roleconflict and role ambiguity. Many researchers have reported negative correla-tions between both role conflict and role ambiguity, and job satisfaction (Jamal,

101Job Satisfaction as a Mediator

1997; Sin, 1997). Other researchers have reported that role conflict has a nega-tive relationship with job satisfaction, whereas role ambiguity has no significantrelationship with job satisfaction (Babin & Boles, 1998; Coverman, 1989).Hartenian, Hadaway, and Badovick (1994) reported a negative correlation be-tween role conflict and job satisfaction and a positive correlation between roleambiguity and job satisfaction. Siu, Lu, and Cooper (1999) found that workloadhas a significant negative correlation with job satisfaction. Jamal (1990) re-ported that role overload has no significant relationship with job satisfaction.

JOB STRESSORS AND ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT

It is believed also that those who perceive their workload and responsibilitiesas too heavy (quantitative), who regard their work as too difficult and demanding(qualitative), and who have few career prospects would be less committed to theorganization. However, it should be noted that previous research has concentratedlargely on the relationship between organizational commitment, role conflict, androle ambiguity as sources of stress. Several researchers reported negative correla-tions between both role conflict and role ambiguity, and organizational commit-ment (Babakus, Cravens, Johnston & Moncrief, 1996; Fisher & Gitelson, 1983;Zahra, 1985). However, Agarwal and Ramaswami (1993) reached the conclusionthat role ambiguity directly and negatively influences affective commitment, al-though role conflict has no effect on affective commitment.

Hartenian and colleagues (1994) reported a negative correlation betweenrole conflict and organizational commitment and a positive correlation betweenrole clarity and organizational commitment. King and Sethi (1997) reported neg-ative correlations between role stressors (role conflict and role ambiguity) andaffective commitment and positive correlations between role stressors and con-tinuance commitment.

Based on the above considerations, the following hypotheses were testedin the present study:

H1a. Role overload (quantitative) directly and negatively influences affec-tive, normative, and continuance commitment (low perceived alterna-tives/high personal sacrifice).

H1b. Role overload (qualitative) directly and negatively influences affec-tive, normative, and continuance commitment (low perceived alterna-tives/high personal sacrifice).

H2a. Job satisfaction mediates the influences of role overload (quantita-tive) on affective commitment, continuance commitment (low per-

102 Yousef

ceived alternatives/high personal sacrifice), and normative commit-ment.

H2b. Job satisfaction mediates the influences of role overload (qualitative)on affective commitment, continuance commitment (low perceivedalternatives/high personal sacrifice), and normative commitment.

H3. Role overload (quantitative, qualitative) and lack of career develop-ment directly and negatively influence job satisfaction.

Figure 1 depicts the model of the interrelationships between job stressors,job satisfaction and affective, continuance, and normative commitments.

BACKGROUND OF THE WORK SETTING

The United Arab Emirates (UAE) depends heavily on multicultural expatri-ate workers because of an acute shortage of domestic manpower. According tothe 1995 census, 75% (1,718,000) of the UAE population are expatriates, ofwhom 61% (1,435, 000) are Asian expatriates, 12% (292,000) are Arab expatri-

Fig. 1. Model of the study.

Note: ROQ = Role overload-quantitative, ROQU = Role overload-qualitative, LCD = Lack of careerdevelopment, JS = Job satisfaction, AC = Affective commitment, CCL = Continuance commitment-low perceived alternatives, CCH = Continuance commitment-high personal sacrifice, NC = Norma-tive commitment.

103Job Satisfaction as a Mediator

ates, and 2% (53,000) are of other nationalities. Eighty-five percent of workingexpatriates are Asians, 13% are Arabs, 1.5% are Europeans, and 0.5% are ofother nationalities (GCC Economic Data Book, 1996). Therefore, multicultur-alism is a dominant feature of the workforce in the UAE.

In the UAE, a single organization is often comprised of many differentnationalities—each with his own role perception, attitudes toward other nation-alities, cultural orientation, and educational background. A number of research-ers have observed that individuals from different cultures exhibit dissimilar lev-els of organizational commitment (Al-Meer, 1989, 1995; Near, 1989) and jobsatisfaction (Griffeth & Hom, 1987; Lincoln & Kalleberg, 1985; Yavas, Luq-mani, & Quraeshi, 1990). Furthermore, they may perceive some stressors differ-ently and exhibit different relationships between stressors and work attitudes(Perrewe, Ralston, & Fernandez, 1995). Additionally, the literature reveals thatexpatriate employees experience a variety of challenges in the host environmentand have difficulties adjusting to the work environment and new organizationaldemands (Adler, 1986; Black, 1992; Boyacigiller, 1990). Moreover, expatriates’national cultures influence how individuals perceive and react to their environ-ment (Adler, 1990; Ali, 1989; Lincoln, Hanada, & Olson, 1981).

The UAE setting is characterized as having large power distance, low indi-vidualism (collectivism), strong uncertainty avoidance, and average masculinity(Hofstede, 1984). The UAE culture differs from Western cultures especially theUS culture, which is below average on power distance and uncertainty avoid-ance, highly individualistic, and fairly masculine (Hofstede, 1983). In conclu-sion, one would expect that this sort of work setting might yield different resultsfrom those found in a Western context.

METHOD

Sample and Data Collection

A list of 50 major organizations of different sizes, activities, and ownershipin five main districts in the UAE was compiled by the author with the assistanceof a number of experts. A random sample of 30 organizations from this list wasselected, from which a random sample of the employees in each organization30 was chosen. This procedure was adopted because of the absence of anylisting that could serve as sampling frames for drawing random samples. Thetotal sample of this study was 600 individuals. The author distributed 600 ques-tionnaires, using drop-off and pick-up methods. Four hundred-fifty question-naires were returned, resulting in a 75% response rate. Of the returned question-naires, 361 questionnaires were usable; 89 questionnaires were excluded eitherbecause of missing data or because of improper completion of the questionnaire.

104 Yousef

Of the participants, 59% were less than 35 years old, and 60% held a graduate orpostgraduate degree. Approximately 53% had 5 years or more experience intheir present occupation. About 73% of the participants were male, and 67% hadbeen working with their present organization for 5 years or more. About 62%held positions in supervisory management. In addition, 56% were UAE nation-als, 39% were Arab expatriates, and about 5% were non-Arab expatriates. Themain characteristics of the sample are presented in Table 1.

Measures

Job Satisfaction was measured using the Hackman and Oldham (1974)scale. This scale consists of five items. Examples of the items include: “Gener-ally speaking, I am very satisfied with this job,” and “I frequently think of

Table 1. The Main Characteristics of the Sample (N = 361)

Characteristics Frequency %

GenderMale 262 73Female 99 27

Age< 35 years 214 5935–45 94 26> 45 53 15

Education levelLess than university 142 39University 197 55Postgraduate 20 6

Tenure in present organization< 5 years 137 385–10 119 33> 10 105 29

Marital statusMarried 251 70Single 106 29Other 4 1

NationalityArab 345 96Non-Arab 16 4

Job levelTop management 17 5Middle management 121 34Lower management 223 61

Tenure in present job< 5 years 142 395–10 97 27> 10 122 34

105Job Satisfaction as a Mediator

quitting this job.” A 7-point response scale was employed, ranging from 1(strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Scores on the five items (after reversecoding items 3 and 5) were averaged to yield a summary score reflecting jobsatisfaction. The internal consistency of the scale in this study was 0.75.

Job Stressors were measured using the Stress Diagnostic Survey or SDS(Ivancevich & Mattenson, 1980). Three subscales of SDS—role overload-quan-titative, role overload-qualitative, and lack of career development—wereadopted in this study. Examples of the items included in the role overload (quan-titative) subscale include “I have to take work home in the evenings or on theweekends to stay caught up,” and “I am responsible for an almost unmanageablenumber of projects or assignment at the same time.” Examples of the itemsincluded in the role overload (qualitative) subscale include “My assigned tasksare sometimes too difficult and/or complex,” and “The organization expectsmore of me than my skills and/or abilities.” Examples of the items in the lackof career development subscale include “I lack the proper opportunities to ad-vance in this organization,” and “If I want to get promoted I have to look for ajob with another organization.” A 7-point response scale was employed, rangingfrom 1 (never) to 7 (always). Scores on the items of each subscale were aver-aged to yield a summary score reflecting that subscale. The internal consistency(Cronbach’s alpha) for role overload (quantitative), role overload (qualitative),and lack of career development subscales in this study were 0.71, 0.78, and0.77, respectively.

Organizational Commitment was measured using Meyer and Allen’s (1991)scale. This scale consists of 24 items. It has four subscales: affective, continu-ance (low perceived alternatives), continuance (high personal sacrifice), and nor-mative. This scale was adopted rather than the Mowday, Steers, and Porter(1979) questionnaire, which has recently been criticized for lack of homogeneity(Benkhoff, 1997). Examples of the items included in the affective subscale were“I would be very happy to spend the rest of my career with this organization,”“I really feel as if this organization’s problems are my own,” and “I feel emo-tionally attached to this organization.” Examples of the items included in thecontinuance (low perceived alternatives) subscale were “I am afraid of whatmight happen if I quit my job without having another one lined up,” and “Toomuch in my life would be disrupted if I decided I wanted to leave my organiza-tion now.” Examples of the items included in the continuance (high personalsacrifice) subscale were “It would be very hard for me to leave my organizationright now, even if wanted to,” and “I feel that I have too few options to considerleaving this organization.” Examples of items included in the normative subscalewere “I think that people these days move from company to company too of-ten,” “I was taught to believe in the value of remaining loyal to one organiza-tion,” and “I think that wanting to be a company man or company woman issensible.” A 7-point response scale was employed, ranging from 1 (strongly

106 Yousef

disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Scores on the items of each subscale were aver-aged to yield a summary score reflecting that subscale. The internal consistency(Cronbach’s alpha) for affective, continuance (low perceived alternatives), con-tinuance (high personal sacrifice), and normative subscales in this study were0.89, 0.77, 0.71, and 0.79, respectively.

Analysis

Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, such as frequencies andpercentages, to present the main characteristics of the sample. Additionally,means, standard deviations, and intercorrelations of the main variables of thestudy were calculated to present the general results of the study. Confirmatoryfactor analysis was also employed to confirm the dimensionality of both organi-zational commitment and job stressors scales. The outcomes of the confirmatoryfactor analysis revealed that the dimensionality of these scales was consistentwith what suggested by the original authors of these scales.

Path analysis using the LISREL 8 software package (Joreskog & Sorbom,1993) was utilized in this study to test the interrelationships among the mainconstructs of the study.

RESULTS

Table 2 presents the means, standard deviations, reliability coefficients, andintercorrelations of the main variables of the study. Results indicate that thereis a moderate relationship between role overload-quantitative and role overload-qualitative (.28). There is also a moderate relationship between role overload-quantitative and affective commitment (−.23), continuance commitment-low per-ceived alternatives (.32), continuance commitment-high personal sacrifice (.26),and a weak relationship between role overload-quantitative and normative com-mitment (−.15) and job satisfaction (−.17). Moreover, a moderate relationshipwas found between role overload-qualitative and affective commitment (−.33),continuance commitment-low perceived alternatives (.23), continuance commit-ment-high personal sacrifice (.22), normative commitment (−.26), and job satis-faction (−.31). Findings further indicate that there is also a weak to a moderaterelationship between lack of career development as a source of stress and affec-tive commitment (−.36), continuance commitment-low perceived alternatives(.33), continuance commitment-high personal sacrifice (.28), and normativecommitment (−.18), and a strong relationship with job satisfaction (−.45). Table3 shows the results of the path analysis. Figure 2 exhibits the trimmed modelof the study.

107Job Satisfaction as a Mediator

Table 2. Means, Standard Deviations, and Intercorrelations of the Variables of Interest

ReliabilityNo. Variables 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 M SD coefficients

1 ROQ .28* −.03 −.23* −.02 −.06 −.15* −.17* 3.33 1.396 0.712 ROQU — .21* −.13* −.03 −.02 −.06 −.31* 2.76 1.262 0.783 LCD — — −.36* −.33* −.28* −.18* −.45* 3.46 1.669 0.774 AC — — — .29* .22* .55* .52* 4.85 1.425 0.895 CCL — — — — .73* .34* −.16* 4.52 1.569 0.776 CCH — — — — — .24* −.19* 4.69 1.420 0.717 NC — — — — — — .36* 4.48 1.154 0.798 JS — — — — — — — 4.65 1.157 0.75

Note: ROQ = Role overload-quantitative; ROQU = Role overload-qualitative; LCD = Lack of careerdevelopment; AC = Affective commitment; CCL = Continuance commitment-low perceived alterna-tives; CCH = Continuance commitment-high personal sacrifice; NC = Normative commitment; JS= Job satisfaction.*p < .05.

Table 3. Results for Research Models

Path Trimmed model+ Full modelStandardized Standardized

From To path coeff. path coeff.

ROQ JS −0.13* −0.15*ROQU JS −0.05LCD JS −0.31* −0.30*ROQ AC −0.11* −0.18*ROQU AC −0.11*ROQ CCL −0.03ROQU CCL −0.06ROQ CCH −0.10*ROQU CCH −0.04ROQ NC −.09ROQU NC −0.05JS AC 0.44* 0.51*JS CCL −0.22* −0.25*JS CCH −0.22*JS NC 0.36* 0.32*

Goodness of Fit StatisticsChi-square 43.116 317.586NFI 0.86 .57GFI 0.95 .80AGFI 0.85 −.22IFI 0.88 .57NNFI 0.72 −1.05CFI 0.87 .56

+Only significant paths were retained.*p < 0.05.

108 Yousef

Fig. 2. Trimmed model.

Note: ROQ = Role overload-quantitative, LCD = Lack of career development, JS = Job satisfaction,AC = Affective commitment, CCL = Continuance commitment-low perceived alternatives, NC =Normative commitment.

Path analysis was used to detect the interrelationships between role over-load-quantitative, role overload-qualitative, lack of career development, job sat-isfaction, and various facets of organizational commitment. A comparison wasmade between two models, the full and the trimmed. The results of this compari-son revealed that the goodness of fit statistics for the trimmed model are muchhigher than those for the full model (see Table 3).

As shown in Table 3 and Figure 2, path analysis results indicate that roleoverload-quantitative directly and negatively influences affective commitment.This result partially supports H1a, which states that role overload-quantitativedirectly and negatively influences affective, normative, and continuance com-mitment (low perceived alternatives/high personal sacrifice). This result is in linewith previous findings of negative correlations between role conflict and roleambiguity and organizational commitment (Babakus et al., 1996; Fisher & Gitel-son, 1983).

It is also clear from Table 3 and Figure 2 that role overload-qualitative doesnot directly influence various facets of organizational commitment, thus not sup-porting H1b, which mentioned that role overload-qualitative directly and nega-tively influences affective, normative and continuance commitment.

Path analysis results further indicate that job satisfaction mediates the influ-ences of role overload-quantitative on affective, continuance (low perceived al-ternative and high personal sacrifice), and normative commitments, thus con-firming H2a.

Results also indicate that job satisfaction does not mediate the influencesof role overload-qualitative on various facets of organizational commitment,therefore not supporting H2b.

Results also indicate that role overload-quantitative and lack of career de-

109Job Satisfaction as a Mediator

velopment as sources of stress directly and negatively influence job satisfaction.These results largely support H3, which stated that role overload (quantitative,qualitative) and lack of career development directly and negatively influencejob satisfaction. These results are in line with prior research findings (Abdalla,1991; Siu et al., 1999).

DISCUSSION

Employees’ perceptions of low role overload-quantitative, role overload-qualitative, and lack of career development as sources of stress most likely resultin low job stress; in turn, this would benefit both the organizations and theemployees themselves. Low job stress should result in better job satisfaction andorganizational commitment, since researchers have found significant negativeassociations between job stress and both job satisfaction and organizationalcommitment (Jamal & Badawi, 1995). Therefore, it should be in the best interestof those organizations to maintain low perceptions of role overload and lack ofcareer development, thereby reducing job stress and achieving better job satis-faction and commitment to the organization.

The results show that role overload-quantitative directly and negatively in-fluences affective commitment, indicating that those who perceive the assign-ments and duties of the job as much greater than they can tolerate may be lesswilling to remain in the organization. This, of course, may have negative effectson the organization.

The results showing that job satisfaction mediates the influences of roleoverload-quantitative and lack of career development on organizational commit-ment suggest that: employees who perceive (a) the assignments and duties re-quired by the job to be far more than they can tolerate, and (b) that there are noopportunities or very few opportunities for advancement in the job will be lesssatisfied with the job and in turn less committed to the organization. Finally,the results showing that role overload-quantitative and lack of career develop-ment as sources of stress directly and negatively influence job satisfaction sug-gest that employees (a) who perceive the job as requiring greater assignmentsand duties than they can tolerate, or (b) that there are no opportunities or fewopportunities for advancement in the job will be less satisfied with the job.

This study has several implications. First, the findings that role overload-quantitative directly and negatively influences affective commitment shoulddraw managers’ attention to the necessity to develop appropriate strategies tocombat the influences of these stressors on organizational commitment. Second,the findings that job satisfaction mediates the influences of role overload-quanti-tative and lack of career development on various facets of organizational com-mitment should draw management’s attention to the fact that improving employ-

110 Yousef

ees’ satisfaction with the job and, in turn, commitment to the organization, requires(a) reducing assignments and duties of the job, and (b) improving career devel-opment opportunities. Finally, the results that role overload-quantitative andlack of career development directly and negatively influence job satisfactionshould draw attention to the importance of reducing workload and improvingcareer prospects in order to improve employees’ satisfaction.

As with any research, this study has a number of limitations. First, thecurrent study was limited to a small number of organizations; thus the general-ization of results may be limited to similar types of organizations. Second, thepreponderance of married, university-trained males less than 35 years old in thisstudy also might affect the generalizability of the results. Finally, this studyinvestigated only the effects of role stressors, such as role overload and lack ofcareer development, in turn excluding other role stressors such as role conflict,role ambiguity, resource inadequacy, and responsibility for others.

Several lines of research suggest themselves. First, a comparison betweendifferent national groups, as well as between employees in the private and publicsectors, in terms of perceptions of role overload-quantitative, role overload-qualitative, and lack of career development as sources of stress would be worth-while. Second, the study of the impact of demographic variables on the percep-tions of role overload and lack of career development as sources of stress alsomay be of interest. Third, the study of stressors such as role ambiguity, roleconflict, resource inadequacy, and responsibility for others also may be of inter-est. Finally, a longitudinal study is clearly called for to understand more aboutthe cause-effect relationships this study suggests.

REFERENCES

Abdalla, I. A. (1991). Social support and gender responses to job stress in an Arab culture. Journalof Social Behavior and Personality, 6, 273–288.

Adler, N. (1986). Expecting international success: Female manager overseas. Columbia Journal ofWorld Business, 19, 79–85.

Adler, N. (1990). International dimensions of organizational behavior. Boston: PWS Kent.Agarwal, S., & Ramaswami, S. N. (1993). Affective organizational commitment of salespeople: An

expanded model. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, XIII, 49–70.Ali, A. (1989). A comparative study of managerial beliefs about work in the Arab states. In B.

Prased (Ed.), Advances in International Comparative Management. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press,4, 95–112.

Al-Meer, A. A. (1989). Organizational commitment: A comparison of Westerners, Asians and Sau-dis. International Studies of Management and Organization, 19, 74–84.

Al-Meer, A. A. (1995). The relationship between work stress and organizational commitment, jobperformance, job satisfaction and personal variables: A comparative study. Public Administra-tion, 35, 207–252. (In Arabic)

Babakus, E., Cravens, S. W., Johnston, M., & Moncrief, W. C. (1996). Examining the role oforganizational variables in the Salesperson Job Satisfaction model. Journal of Personal Sell-ing & Sales Management, XVI, 33–46.

111Job Satisfaction as a Mediator

Babin, B. J., & Boles, J. S. (1996). The effects of perceived co-worker involvement and supervisorsupport on service provider role stress, performance and job satisfaction. Journal of Retailing,72, 57–75.

Babin, B. J., & Boles. J. S. (1998). Employee behavior in a service environment: A model and testof potential differences between men and women. Journal of Marketing, 62, 77–91.

Benkhoff, B. (1997). Disentangling organizational commitment: The dangers of the OCQ for re-search and policy. Personal Review, 26(1/2), 114–131.

Bhuian, S. N., & Abdul-Muhmin, A. G. (1997). Job satisfaction and organizational commitmentamong “guest-worker” salesforces: The case of Saudi Arabia. Journal of Global Marketing,10, 27–44.

Bhuian, S. N., & Islam, M. S. (1996). Continuance commitment and extrinsic job satisfaction amonga novel multicultural expatriate workforce. The Mid-Atlantic Journal of Business, 32, 35–46.

Birnbaum, D., & Somers, M. J. (1993). Fitting job performance into a turnover model: An examina-tion of the form of the job performance-turnover relationship and path model. Journal of Man-agement, 49, 1–11.

Black, J. (1992). Coming home: The relationship of expatriate expectations with repatriation adjust-ment and job performance. Human Relations, 45, 77–92.

Boyacigiller, N. (1990). The role of expatriates in the management of interdependence, complexityand risk in multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies, 21, 357–382.

Coverman, S. (1989). Role overload, role conflict, and stress: Addressing consequences of multiplerole demands. Social Forces, 67, 965–982.

Fisher, C. D., & Gitelson, R. (1983). A meta-analysis of the correlates of role conflict and roleambiguity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 320–333.

Fletcher, C., & Williams, R. (1996). Performance management, job satisfaction and organizationalcommitment. British Journal of Management, 7, 169–179. Leeds, UK.

GCC Economic Data Book. (1996). United Arab Emirates: Motivate Publishing.Griffeth, R. W., & Hom, P. W. (1987). Some multivariate comparisons of multinational managers.

Multivariate Behavioral Research, 22, 173–191.Groot, W., & Brink, H. M. (1999). Job satisfaction of older workers. International Journal of Man-

power, 20, 343–360.Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1974). The Job Diagnostic Survey: An instrument for the diagno-

sis of jobs and the evaluation of job design projects. Technical Report No. 4, Department ofAdministrative Sciences, Yale University.

Hartenian, L. S., Hadaway, F. J., & Badovick, G. J. (1994). Antecedents of role perceptions: A pathanalytic approach. Journal of Applied Business Research, 10, 40–50.

Hofstede, G. (1983). Cultural constraints in management theories. Academy of Management Execu-tive, 7, 81–94.

Hofstede, G. (1984). Culture dimensions in management and planning. Asia Pacific Journal of Manage-ment, 1, 81–99.

Iris, B., & Barrett, G. V. (1977). Some relations between job and life satisfaction and job impor-tance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 56, 301–304.

Ivancevich, J. M., & Mattenson, M. T. (1980). Stress at work: A managerial perspective. Glenview,IL: Scott, Foresman.

Jamal, M. (1990). Relationship of job stress and Type-A behavior to employees’ job satisfaction,organizational commitment, psychosomatic health problems, turnover, and motivation. HumanRelations, 43, 727–738.

Jamal, M. (1997). Job stress, satisfaction and mental health: An empirical examination of self-employed and non-self-employed Canadians. Journal of Small Business Management, 35,48–57.

Jamal, M., & Badawi, J. (1995). Job stress, Type-A behavior and employees’ well-being amongMuslim immigrants in North America: A study in workforce diversity. International Journalof Commerce & Management, 5, 6–23.

Joreskog, K. G., & Sorbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: User’s reference guide. Chicago: ScientificSoftware International.

Judge, T. A., Boudreau, J. W., & Bretz, Jr., R. D. (1994). Job and life attitudes of male executives.Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 767–782.

112 Yousef

King, R. C., & Sethi, V. (1997). The moderating effects of organizational commitment on burnoutin information systems professionals. European Journal of Information Systems, 6, 86–96.

Lincoln, J., Hanada, M., & Olson, J. (1981). Cultural orientations and individual reactions to organi-zations: A study of employees. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26, 93–115.

Lincoln, J. R., & Kalleberg, A. L. (1985). Work organization and workforce commitment: A studyof plant and employees in the U.S. and Japan. American Sociological Review, 50, 738–760.

Locke, E. A. (1984). Job satisfaction. In M. Gruneberb & T. Wall (Eds.), Social psychology andorganizational behavior (pp. 93–117). New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commit-ment. Human Resource Management Review, 1, 61–89.

Mowday, R. T., Steers, R. M., & Porter, L. W. (1979). The measurement of organizational commit-ment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14, 224–247.

Muchinsky, P. M. (1977). Employee absenteeism: A review of the literature. Journal of VocationalBehavior, 10, 316–340.

Muchinsky, P. M., & Tuttle, M. L. (1979). Employee turnover: An empirical and methodologicalassessment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14, 43–77.

Mumford, E. (1991). Job satisfaction: A method of analysis. Personnel Review, 20, 11–19.Near, J. P. (1989). Organizational commitment among Japanese and U.S. workers. Organization

Studies, 10, 281–300.Perrewe, P. L., Ralston, D. A., & Fernandez, D. R. (1995). A model depicting the relations among

perceived stressors, role conflict and organizational commitment: A comparative analysis ofHong Kong and the United States. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 12, 1–21.

Peterson, M. F., Smith, P. B., Akande, A., & Ayestaran, S., et al. (1995). Role conflict, ambiguity,and overload: A 21-nation study. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 429–452.

Sin, L. Y. (1997). Organizational variables, role stress, and job satisfaction of Hong Kong salesmen:A test of two competing models. International Journal of Management, 14, 127–139.

Siu, O. L., Lu, L., & Cooper, C. L. (1999). Managerial stress in Hong Kong and Taiwan: A compar-ative study. Journal of Managerial Study, 14, 6–25.

Vliert, E. V. D., & Yperen, N. W. V. (1996). Why cross-national differences in role overload?Don’t overlook ambient temperature. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 986–1004.

Weiss, D., Dawis, R., England, G., & Lofquist, L. (1967). Manual for the Minnesota SatisfactionQuestionnaire. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Industrial Relations Center.

Yavas, U. & Bodur, M. (1999). Satisfaction among expatriate managers: Correlates and conse-quences. Career Development International, 4, 261–269.

Yavas, U., Luqmani, M., & Quraeshi, Z. (1990). Organizational commitment, job satisfaction, workvalues: Saudi and expatriate managers. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 11,2–10.

Zahra, S. A. (1985). A comparative study of the effect of role ambiguity and conflict on employeeattitudes and performance. Akron Business and Economic Review, 6, 37–42.