The Influence of Perceived Organizational Support on Employee
Commitment: A Systematic Review
WONG CHEE HOO*, WONG CHUN TATT, TAN SENG TECK
Faculty of Business and Communications (FBC)
INTI International University, Nilai, Negeri Sembilan,
MALAYSIA
*Corresponding Author
Abstract: - Employee commitment is always associated with employee turnover intention and employee
performance. Employee commitment refers to the relative strength of an individual’s identification with and
involvement in a particular organization. The study used a systematic literature review to understand perceived
organizational support as a factor of employee commitment from some literature published in two well-known
databases, which are Ebsco Host and Google Scholar from 2018 to 2022. The goal is to synthesize the research
findings by using both perceived organizational support and employee commitment as the determined
variables and determine the research trend from the published literature in the past five years. It is found that
more than half of the recent research (57%) used both perceived organizational support and employee
commitment as intermediate variables. Most of the research sources have come from Indonesia, followed by
the Middle East, Pakistan, and China. The limitations of the current study are that this study is limited to
subjects that discuss the impact of perceived organizational support and employee commitment, and a limited
number of databases have been considered.
Key-Words: - Perceived Organization Support, Employee Commitment, Systematic Review. Ebsco Host
Received: March 11, 2023. Revised: August 25, 2023. Accepted: September 23, 2023. Available online: November 2, 2023.
1 Introduction
Employee commitment is always associated with
employee turnover intention and employee
performance, especially when it comes to poor
organizational citizenship, unethical behavior, and
absenteeism, [1], [2]. Organizational management
paradigms are becoming increasingly complex for
humans in the twenty-first century. For a business to
succeed, all of its employees must offer their ideas,
thoughts, and creative solutions to enhance overall
production value across a variety of industries, [3].
Those who understand the organization's vision,
mission, and objectives are better able to achieve the
objectives that the management has set for the
organization, [4].
Employees with strong commitments would
experience less work-related stress and produce
more competitive and high-quality work than those
with weaker commitments, and the employees who
lack commitment skills will negatively affect the
organization's capacity to carry on with operations
and meet problems in the future, [5]. Employee
commitment is therefore linked to several desirable
behavioral outcomes, including employee retention,
presence, performance, quality of time off work, and
personal sacrifice for the success of the organization,
[6].
One of the consequences of low employee
commitment is high employee turnover. High
employee turnover could burden organizations by
increasing direct costs such as recruitment and
training costs, and also indirect costs such as the loss
of productivity and performance, [7]. Low employee
performance is another consequence of low
employee performance. Low employee performance
could bring losses to stakeholders such as a drop in
share prices to pay shareholders and a drop in cash
flows to pay suppliers, [8], [9].
To promote committed attitudes among
employees, it is important for an organization to
encourage employees to become committed to the
organization’s mission, vision, and objectives, and
such influences can be recognized as perceived
organizational support by caring for the well-being
of the individual employee and valuing employee
efforts, [10]. Therefore, this study aims to assess the
empirical pieces of evidence of perceived
organizational support causes employee
commitment. To understand the trend of perceived
organizational support and employee commitment
research, the researcher will focus on the following
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2024.21.11
Wong Chee Hoo, Wong Chun Tatt, Tan Seng Teck
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
121
Volume 21, 2024
research questions (RQs) to which the answer will be
given, namely: -
RQ1: What years and from which countries the
reports of perceived organizational support and
employee commitment are published?
RQ2: What are the categories of perceived
organizational support and employee commitment
reports?
RQ3: What are the sampling strategies used in
perceived organizational support and employee
commitment reports?
2 Problem Formulation
2.1 Employee Commitment
Employee commitment is defined as “the relative
strength of an individual’s identification with and
involvement in a particular organization”, which is to
characterize an employee's level of commitment to
the company, as well as their identification with the
company's values and objectives, [11]. Employee
commitment is classified into affective commitment,
continuance commitment, and normative
commitment under Mayer’s three-component model
of commitment, [12].
According to, [13], affective commitment occurs
when employees want to stay in an organization;
continuance commitment occurs when employees
need to stay in an organization; normative
commitment occurs when an employee ought to stay
in an organization. Employee commitment is not a
new concept and it has been a prominent research
topic, especially in healthcare and higher education
sectors over the years because of the significant
motivational consequences of commitment, [14],
[15], [16].
2.2 Perceived Organizational Support
According to, [17], "perceived organizational
support" refers to "employees' perception concerning
the extent to which the organization values their
contribution and cares about their well-being". Both
the organizational support theory and the social
exchange theory are components of this approach.
According to the organizational support theory, [18],
an employee's understanding of the organization's
intentions for giving them favorable or unfavorable
treatment is a major factor in determining how much
support they feel they receive from their employer.
Therefore, employees feel obligated to assist the
organization in accomplishing its goals and
objectives as a result of perceived organizational
support, with the assumption that increased efforts
on behalf of the organization will result in greater
rewards, [19]. This social exchange process is
triggered when employees believe their organization
to be supportive of them. The fulfillment of
socioemotional criteria by perceived organizational
support results in increased organizational
identification and commitment, a heightened
yearning to contribute to the growth and success of
the organization, and enhanced psychological well-
being, [20].
2.3 Methodology
The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic
Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) were first
introduced in 2009 and then updated in 2020 by
adding new guidelines, [21]. In this case, the current
researcher follows the PRISMA 2020 guidelines by
adapting the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist to
determine the criteria of the systematic table, and
also adapting the PRISMA 2020 flow diagram to
narrow down the number of journals and
dissertations to be used in the systematic review of
the literature through identification of reports via two
well-known databases, namely Google Scholar and
Ebsco Host.
Concerning the abstract checklist, the current
researcher came out with a 10-criteria systematic
table. The 10 criteria are the author(s), year, title,
journal, research question(s) or research objective(s),
theory(ies), methodology, result(s), contribution(s) or
implication(s), and limitation(s) or
recommendation(s) for future researches. To ensure
the relevance of the systematic review in the current
study, the current researcher uses perceived
organizational support and employee commitment as
the keywords to search in databases.
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2024.21.11
Wong Chee Hoo, Wong Chun Tatt, Tan Seng Teck
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
122
Volume 21, 2024
Fig. 1: PRISMA 2020 Flow Diagram for the Systematic Review of Perceived Organizational Support and
Organizational Commitment
Identification of reports via databases
Records removed
before screening:
Duplicate
records removed
(n = 71)
Non-English
records removed
(n = 44)
Records excluded:
Unable to download
(n= 170)
Conference papers
(n=9)
Reports not
retrieved without
full text
(n=4)
Reports
assessed for
eligibility
(n= 135)
Reports excluded:
No findings (n =
1)
No methodology
(n =2)
No limitation or
recommendation
(n = 28)
No practical or
theoretical
implications (n=
5)
Conference
paper (n =6)
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2024.21.11
Wong Chee Hoo, Wong Chun Tatt, Tan Seng Teck
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
123
Volume 21, 2024
The above Figure 1 is the PRISMA 2020 flow
diagram for the systematic review of perceived
organizational support and organizational
commitment. To understand the flow diagram, three
terms need to be clarified, namely study which
refers to an investigation, report which refers to a
paper or electronic document of a study, and record
which refers to the title or abstract of a report
indexed in a database. The number of journals and
dissertations to be used are filtered by identification,
and screening and included as shown in the flow
diagram. All of the steps are performed manually,
the reports are downloaded as PDF documents, and
the systematic table is recorded as a Microsoft Excel
document.
In identification, the records are identified from
two databases, which are 276 records from Google
Scholar and 157 records from Ebsco Host. Google
Scholar is chosen as a database to be used because
of its low cost, user-friendly, and wide coverage
global. Meanwhile, Ebsco Host is chosen as another
database to be used because it is widely recognized
in the academic world and the EBSCO discovery
service is subscribed by Inti International
University. The records are identified by running the
database search individually in the year range from
2018 to 2022 and using perceived organizational
support and employee commitment as two keywords
for a title search. To avoid duplicate articles, there
were 71 duplicate records, and 44 non-English
records removed before screening.
In records screening, out of 318 records, 170
records are excluded because they are unable to
download in Portable Document Format (PDF) and
9 records are excluded because they are conference
papers. After that, there are 4 of the 139 reports not
retrieved without full text. In the last step of
screening, the full-text reports are assessed for
eligibility according to the criteria of the systematic
table, and reports are excluded due to several
reasons, which include 1 report without findings, 2
reports without methodology, 28 reports without
limitation or recommendation for further researches,
and 5 reports without practical or theoretical
implications. To look at the big picture of the study
results related to perceived organizational support
and employee commitment, the requirement of the
inclusion is the reports must use both the perceived
organizational support and employee commitment
as the main variables in the research framework of
the reports and met all of the 10 criteria in the
systematic table for eligibility screening. Finally,
there are 93 reports to be reviewed systematically.
3 Problem Solution
3.1 Results and Discussions
The research findings of the 93 selected reports
discussed the impact of perceived organizational
support and employee commitment. The synthesis
of the 93 selected reports’ research findings will be
used to answer the qualitative research questions
shown as follows: -
RQ1: What years and from which countries the
reports of perceived organizational support and
employee commitment are published?
Fig. 2: Number of Reports by Years
Figure 2 above shows the number of reports by
year, specifically from 2018 to 2022. From the pie
chart, it can be observed that there are 93 reports to
be reviewed systematically, which are 20 reports
comprised 21% of the total reports in 2018, 22
reports comprised 24% of the total reports in 2019,
20 reports comprised 22% of the total reports in
2020, 19 reports comprised of 20% of the total
reports in 2021 and 12 reports comprised of 13% of
the total reports in 2022, showing that perceived
organizational support and employee commitment
are contemporary topics to be studied by
academicians, although the number of reports in
2022 is relatively less compared to other years.
20; 21%
22; 24%
20; 22%
19; 20%
12; 13%
Number of Reports by Years
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2024.21.11
Wong Chee Hoo, Wong Chun Tatt, Tan Seng Teck
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
124
Volume 21, 2024
Fig. 3: Number of Reports by Countries or Regions
from 2018 to 2022
Figure 3 above shows the number of reports by
countries or regions from 2018 to 2022 extracted
from the Google Scholar and Ebsco Host databases.
After reviewing the 93 reports, it was found that all
of the reports studied organizational commitment at
the individual level, specifically employee as their
research unit. About the study characteristics, the
current researcher has reviewed 93 reports
conducted in 13 countries or regions.
After the identification of reports via databases,
it can be observed that Indonesia has the highest
number of publications which are 22 reports
comprising 24% of the total number of reports,
followed by the Middle East’s 15 reports
comprising 16% of the total number of reports,
Pakistan’s 14 reports comprised of 15% of the total
number of reports, and China’s 11 reports
comprised of 12% of the total number of reports.
Meanwhile, Malaysia only has 2 reports comprising
0.02% of the total number of reports, showing that
studies are scarce about the relationships between
perceived organizational support and employee
commitment in Malaysia.
RQ2: What are the categories of perceived
organizational support and employee commitment
reports?
After conducting the domain-based systematic
review using PRISMA 2020, it was found that there
are different aspects of the relationship between
perceived organizational support and employee
commitment have been studied. These studies can
be grouped into five categories.
The first category is the studies that looked at
the connection between perceived organizational
support and employee commitment without
examining any effects of mediation or moderation,
the second category is the studies that looked at the
connection between perceived organizational
support and employee commitment with the effects
of moderation, the third category is the studies that
looked at the connection between perceived
organizational support and employee commitment
with the effects of mediation, the fourth category is
the studies that used perceived organizational
support and employee commitment as a moderator
or a mediator, the fifth category is the studies that
used both perceived organizational support and
employee commitment as independent variables or
both perceived organizational support and employee
commitment as dependent variables.
Fig. 4: Number of Reports by Categories
Figure 4 above shows the number of reports by
categories. In the first category, there are 21 reports
comprising 23% of the total reports only examined
the direct relationship of perceived organizational
support and employee commitment. Most of the
research findings showed that perceived
organizational support and employee commitment
had a significant positive direct relationship in all
dimensions, using a Nigerian study from, [22], as an
example. However, some research findings also
showed that perceived organizational support and
employee commitment did not have a significant
positive direct relationship in all dimensions. For
1
22
2
11 9
14 15
6
2331
4
0
5
10
15
20
25
Number of Reports by
Countries or Regions
Number of Reports
21; 23%
7; 7%
7; 8%
53; 57%
5; 5%
Number of Reports by
Categories
First Category Second Category Third Category
Fourth Category Fifth Category
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2024.21.11
Wong Chee Hoo, Wong Chun Tatt, Tan Seng Teck
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
125
Volume 21, 2024
example, [23], found that perceived organizational
support had a significant positive relationship
towards affective employee commitment only.
In the second category, there are 7 reports
comprising 7% of the total reports that examined the
indirect relationship between perceived
organizational support and employee commitment
with the effect of moderation. For example, [24],
found that there was a significant correlation
between perceived organizational support and
employee commitment, and also suggested that job
experience played a significant role of moderator
between perceived organizational support and
employee commitment.
In the third category, there are 7 reports
comprised of 7% of the total reports that examined
the indirect relationship between perceived
organizational support and employee commitment
with the effect of mediation. For example, [25],
found that perceived organizational support had a
strong correlation with employee commitment, and
the relationship with employee commitment was
mediated by employee engagement.
In the fourth category, there are 53 reports
comprising 57% of the total reports that used
perceived organizational support and employee
commitment as a moderator or a mediator. For
example, [26], found that both affective employee
commitment and perceived organizational support
have a mediating effect in parallel on the
relationship between person-organization fit and
innovative work behavior.
In the fifth category, there are 5 reports
comprised of 5% of the total reports that used both
perceived organizational support and employee
commitment as independent variables or both
perceived organizational support and employee
commitment as dependent variables. For example,
[27], found that employee commitment was a more
influential factor for both intentions to leave and to
stay as compared to perceived organizational
support. Meanwhile, [28], found that the percentage
of time that weekly employees spend in virtual
workspaces had a significant positive relationship
towards both employee commitment and perceived
organizational support.
RQ3: What are the sampling methods used in
perceived organizational support and employee
commitment reports?
Fig. 5: Number of Reports by Sampling Strategies
All of the 93 reports are quantitative research,
utilize surveying to collect data, and focus on the
individual level of organizational behavior. Figure 5
above shows the number of reports by sampling
strategies. From the pie chart, it can be observed
that 45 reports comprised 48% of the total reports
that used non-probability sampling; 25 reports
comprised 27% of the total reports without
mentioning which sampling method was used; and
23 reports comprised 25% of the total reports used
non-probability sampling.
Probability sampling is based on the probability
theory, thus each instance with the characteristics
the researcher is interested in has the same chance
of being selected, while non-probability sampling
can be employed if it is difficult to collect a
sampling list or the research has research intentions,
[29]. The non-probability sampling used by the prior
researchers includes convenience sampling,
snowball sampling, purposive sampling, and total
sampling, [1], [30], [31], [32]. Meanwhile, the
probability sampling used by the prior researchers
includes random sampling, stratified sampling,
cluster sampling, and systematic sampling, [33],
[34], [35], [36]. Since most of the perceived
organizational support and employee commitment
reports used non-probability sampling instead of
probability sampling, the data generalizability of the
reports is open for improvement.
25; 27%
23; 25%
45; 48%
Number of Reports by Sampling
Strategies
Not Mentioned Probability Sampling
Non-Probability Sampling
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2024.21.11
Wong Chee Hoo, Wong Chun Tatt, Tan Seng Teck
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
126
Volume 21, 2024
4 Conclusion
From the study above, it can be concluded that most
of the recent research used both perceived
organizational support and employee commitment
as intermediate variables, which also shows that
there is a shortage of published literature on the
direct and indirect relationships between perceived
organizational support and employee commitment
in the recent years.
The findings of the current study fall into five
categories, which are the direct relationship between
perceived organizational support and employee
commitment, perceived organizational support and
employee commitment with the effect of
moderation, perceived organizational support and
employee commitment with the effect of mediation,
perceived organizational support and employee
commitment as a moderator or a mediator, and both
perceived organizational support and employee
commitment as independent variables or both
perceived organizational support and employee
commitment as dependent variables. Besides that,
most of the reports were published in Indonesia,
followed by the Middle East, Pakistan, and China. It
was found that the publications in 2022 were
relatively less compared to prior years.
4.1 Limitations and Recommendations
About the sampling strategies, it was found that
most of the reports used non-probability sampling
instead of probability sampling. In this case, it is
recommended that future researchers conduct
studies to examine direct and/or indirect
relationships between perceived organizational
support and employee commitment to provide more
empirical evidence, especially in the context of
Malaysia for the upcoming years.
Future researchers are also recommended to use
probability sampling rather than non-probability
sampling to enhance the generalizability of data.
Therefore, more future research is needed to explain
how an organization can improve its employees’
emotional attachment to the organization by caring
for their well-being as a preventive action to avoid
high employee turnover and low employee
performance. Last but not least, the limitations of
the current study are that this study is limited to
subjects that discuss the impact of perceived
organizational support and employee commitment,
and a limited number of databases have been
considered.
References:
[1] M. Ridwan, S. R. Mulyani, and H. Ali,
“Improving employee performance through
perceived organizational support,
organizational commitment and
organizational citizenship behavior,” Syst.
Rev. Pharm., vol. 11, no. 12, pp.839-849,
2020, doi: 10.31838/srp.2020.5.123.
[2] M. Mihalache and O. R. Mihalache, “How
workplace support for the COVID-19
pandemic and personality traits affect changes
in employees’ affective commitment to the
organization and job-related well-being,”
Hum. Resour. Manage., vol. 61, no. 3, pp.295-
314, May 2022, doi: 10.1002/HRM.22082.
[3] K. Aiginger and D. Rodrik, “Rebirth of
Industrial Policy and an Agenda for the
Twenty-First Century,” Journal of Industry,
Competition and Trade, vol. 20, no. 2.
Springer, pp.189-207, Jun. 01, 2020,
doi: 10.1007/s10842-019-00322-3.
[4] N. Y. Karakiliç, “Impacts of leadership styles
on organizational performance,” in New
Trends in Management Studies, vol. 2018,
2019, pp.99-114.
[5] I. M. Saadeh and T. S. Suifan, “Job stress and
organizational commitment in hospitals: The
mediating role of perceived organizational
support,” Int. J. Organ. Anal., vol. 28, no. 1,
pp. 226-242, Jan. 2020,
doi: 10.1108/IJOA-11-2018-1597.
[6] B. Ramachandran, “Perceived Organizational
Support, Perceived Supervisory Support, Job
Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment
among Employees in Companies at
Wesports.,” (Master dissertation, Universiti
Utara Malaysia), 2018.
[7] M. Abo-Murad and A. AL-Khrabsheh,
“Turnover culture and crisis management:
Insights from Malaysian hotel industry,”
Acad. Strategy. Manag. J., vol. 18, no. 2,
2019, [Online],
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/abdullah-
al-
khrabsheh/publication/332014556_turnover_c
ulture_and_crisis_management_insights_from
_malaysian_hotel_industry/links/5d2dee7129
9bf1547cbc91b6/turnover-culture-and-crisis-
management-insights-from-malaysian-ho
(Accessed Date: November 24, 2022).
[8] S. Milosevic-Avdalovic and I. Milenkovic,
“Impact of company performances on the
stock price: An empirical analysis on select
companies in Serbia,” Ekon. Poljopr., vol. 64,
no. 2, pp.561-570, 2017,
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2024.21.11
Wong Chee Hoo, Wong Chun Tatt, Tan Seng Teck
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
127
Volume 21, 2024
doi: 10.5937/ekopolj1702561m.
[9] S. Ferri, A. Tron, R. Fiume, and G. Della
Corte, “The relation between cash flows and
economic performance in the digital age: An
empirical analysis,” Corp. Ownersh. Control,
vol. 17, no. 3, pp.84-91, 2020,
doi: 10.22495/cocv17i3art6.
[10] M. T. H. Brambeck and T. M. H. Savmyr,
“Haunted By Change: Exploring and
explaining the influence of Perceived
Organizational Support and Perceived
Supervisor Support on Commitment to
Change.,” (Doctoral dissertation, Uppsala
University), 2018.
[11] R. T. Mowday, R. M. Steers, and L. W.
Porter, “The measurement of organizational
commitment,” J. Vocat. Behav., vol. 14, no. 2,
pp.224-247, Apr. 1979, doi: 10.1016/0001-
8791(79)90072-1.
[12] A. Singh and B. Gupta, “Job involvement,
organizational commitment, professional
commitment, and team commitment,”
Benchmarking, vol. 22, no. 6, pp.1192-1211,
Aug. 2015, doi: 10.1108/BIJ-01-2014-0007.
[13] N. J. Allen and J. P. Meyer, “The
measurement and antecedents of affective,
continuance and normative commitment to the
organization,” J. Occup. Psychol., vol. 63, no.
1, pp.1-18, 1990, doi: 10.1111/j.2044-
8325.1990.tb00506.x.
[14] A. Berberoglu, “Impact of organizational
climate on organizational commitment and
perceived organizational performance:
Empirical evidence from public hospitals,”
BMC Health Serv. Res., vol. 18, no. 1, pp.1-9,
Jun. 2018, doi: 10.1186/S12913-018-3149-
Z/FIGURES/1.
[15] M. Dahmardeh and N. Nastiezaie, “The
Impact of Organizational Trust on
Organizational Commitment Through the
Mediating Variable of Organizational
Participation,” Public Manag. Res., vol. 12,
no. 44, pp.155-180, Aug. 2019,
doi: 10.22111/JMR.2019.23818.3788.
[16] K. Adugna, B. Bezawit, K. Alemi, A. Gelila,
A. Yisalemush, G. Matebu, G. Gemechis,
and D. Beshea, “The Relationship Between
Organizational Commitment and
Organizational Justice Among Health Care
Workers in Ethiopian Jimma Zone Public
Health Facilities,” J. Healthc. Leadersh., vol.
14, p.5, Feb. 2022,
doi: 10.2147/JHL.S345528.
[17] G. Caesens, F. Stinglhamber, S. Demoulin, M.
De Wilde, and A. Mierop, “Perceived
organizational support and workplace conflict:
The mediating role of failure-related trust,”
Front. Psychol., vol. 9, no. JAN, p. 2704, Jan.
2019,
doi: 10.3389/FPSYG.2018.02704/BIBTEX.
[18] S. J. Wayne, L. M. Shore, and R. C. Liden,
“Perceived Organizational Support And
Leader-Member Exchange: A Social
Exchange Perspective,”
https://doi.org/10.5465/257021, vol. 40, no. 1,
pp.82-111, Nov. 2017, doi: 10.5465/257021.
[19] J. S. Dugan and P. E. Peinovich, “Perceived
Organizational Support, Social Exchange
Ideology, and Data Manipulation Behaviors
Among Substance Abuse Treatment
Utilization Reviewers,” 2006.
[20] J. N. Kurtessis, “Perceived Organizational
Support: A Meta-Analytic Evaluation of
Organizational Support Theory,” Artic. J.
Manag., 2015,
doi: 10.1177/0149206315575554.
[21] M. J. Page, J. E. McKenzie, P. M. Bossuyt, I.
Boutron, T. C. Hoffmann, C. D. Mulrow, L.
Shamseer, J. M. Tetzlaff, E. A. Akl, S. E.
Brennan, R. Chou, J. Glanville, J. M.
Grimshaw, A. Hróbjartsson, M. M. Lalu, T.
Li, E. W. Loder, E. Mayo-Wilson, S.
McDonald, L. A. McGuinness, L. A. Stewart,
J. Thomas, A. C. Tricco, V. A. Welch, P.
Whiting and D. Moher, “The PRISMA 2020
statement: an updated guideline for reporting
systematic reviews,” Syst. Rev., vol. 10, no. 1,
Dec. 2021, doi: 10.1186/s13643-021-01626-4.
[22] O. C. Ezeanya, “Perceived Organizational
Support as Correlated of Organizational
Commitment,” Humanit. Dev. Stud., vol. 2,
no. 1, pp.2695-2327, 2019.
[23] C. Kalkandelen and H. S. G. Beser, The
Relationship between Organizational
Commitment and Perceived Organizational
Support : Case of a Luxury Concept Hotel, no.
1. 2019.
[24] A. Saad, I. Shahid, S. Mariam, S. Faisal, J.
Sarwat, A, Bilal, and H. Syed Arslan,“Impact
of employee empowerment on organizational
commitment through job satisfaction in four
and five stars hotel industry,” Manag. Sci.
Lett., vol. 11, pp.813-822, 2021,
doi: 10.5267/j.msl.2020.10.022.
[25] M. A. Kuriakose, “Perceived Organizational
Support, Employee Engagement and
Organizational Commitment Among
Millennials,” (Master dissertation, Christ
University), 2019.
[26] A. Bibi, M. A. Khalid, and A. Hussain,
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2024.21.11
Wong Chee Hoo, Wong Chun Tatt, Tan Seng Teck
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
128
Volume 21, 2024
“Perceived organizational support and
organizational commitment among special
education teachers in Pakistan,” Int. J. Educ.
Manag., vol. 33, no. 5, pp.848-859, 2019,
doi: 10.1108/IJEM-12-2017-0365.
[27] H. Ghazali, N. M. Nashuki, and M. Othman,
“The Influence of Perceived Organizational
Support (POS), Perceived Supervisory
Support (PSS) and Organizational
Commitment (OC) towards Intention to Leave
or Intention to Stay: A case of Casual Dining
Restaurants in Klang Valley, Malaysia,” Int.
J. Acad. Res. Bus. Soc. Sci., vol. 8, no. 9,
pp.1884-1902, 2018,
doi: 10.6007/ijarbss/v8-i9/4869.
[28] S. Csikortos, “Job Satisfaction, Organizational
Commitment, and Perceived Social Support
among Virtual Workers,” p.166, 2019,
[Online],
http://search.proquest.com/pqdtlocal1005747/
docview/2184252802/abstract/1A1EA200AC
60476BPQ/1 (Accessed Date: November 24,
2022).
[29] Q. Liu, “Linkages Between Work
Intensification, Employee Engagement and
Employee Outcomes: an Empirical
Investigation Into Chinese Manufacturing,”
(Doctoral dissertation, Aston University),
2021.
[30] A. Akram, M. Kamran, M. S. Iqbal, U.
Habibah, and M. Atif Ishaq, “The impact of
supervisory justice and perceived Supervisor
support on organizational citizenship behavior
and commitment to supervisor: the mediating
role of trust,” Cogent Bus. Manag., vol. 5, no.
1, pp.1-17, 2018,
doi: 10.1080/23311975.2018.1493902.
[31] A. Alshaabani, F. Naz, R. Magda, and I.
Rudnák, “Impact of perceived organizational
support on ocb in the time of covid-19
pandemic in hungary: Employee engagement
and affective commitment as mediators,”
Sustain., vol. 13, no. 14, 2021,
doi: 10.3390/su13147800.
[32] I. Astuty and U. D. I. N. Udin, “The Effect of
Perceived Organizational Support and
Transformational Leadership on Affective
Commitment and Employee Performance,” J.
Asian Finance. Econ. Bus., vol. 7, no. 10,
pp.401-411, 2020,
doi: 10.13106/jafeb.2020.vol7.no10.401.
[33] K. Beshlideh, R. Sharifi, S. E. Hashemi, and
A. Naami, “Testing a model of perceived
organizational support, citizenship behavior,
commitment, job satisfaction and leader-
member exchange as concequences of servant
leadership in cement factory employees in
Kermanshah,” Int. J. Psychol., vol. 12, no. 2,
pp.169-196, 2018,
doi: 10.24200/ijpb.2018.115440.
[34] A. Ateş and A. Ünal, “The relationship
between diversity management, job
satisfaction and organizational commitment in
teachers: A mediating role of perceived
organizational support,” Educ. Sci. Theory
Pract., vol. 21, no. 1, pp.18-32, 2021,
doi: 10.12738/jestp.2021.1.002.
[35] S. K. Tuna and H. Aslan, “The relationship
between perceived social support and
organizational commitment levels of primary
and secondary school teachers,” Univers. J.
Educ. Res., vol. 6, no. 5, pp.983-993, 2018,
doi: 10.13189/ujer.2018.060519.
[36] P. E. Quansah, E. Cobbinah, and S. A. Danso,
“Organizational Climate and Employee
Performance: Examining the Mediating Role
of Organizational Commitment and
Moderating Role of Perceived Organizational
Support,” Int. J. Hum. Resour. Stud., vol. 10,
no. 3, p.238, 2020,
doi: 10.5296/ijhrs.v10i3.17395.
Contribution of Individual Authors to the
Creation of a Scientific Article (Ghostwriting
Policy)
Wong Chun Tatt carried out the writing and
research of the article, and was responsible for the
Statistics. Assoc. Prof. Dr. Wong Chee Hoo and
Prof. Dr.Tan Seng Teck worked on the editing of
the review paper.
Sources of Funding for Research Presented in a
Scientific Article or Scientific Article Itself
Inti International University, Malaysia funding was
received for conducting this study.
Conflict of Interest
The authors have no conflict of interest to declare.
Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0
(Attribution 4.0 International, CC BY 4.0)
This article is published under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en
_US
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2024.21.11
Wong Chee Hoo, Wong Chun Tatt, Tan Seng Teck
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
129
Volume 21, 2024