The Impact of the Four Dimensions of Psychological Empowerment on Organisational Commitment: Evidence from the Public Sector in Sri Lanka

G. K.  Hemamali  Ganewatta; Chathuni Adishka Wanniarachchi

doi:10.63029/43xgvx49

Authors

G. K. Hemamali Ganewatta University of Ruhuna Author
Chathuni Adishka Wanniarachchi Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.63029/43xgvx49

Keywords:

Organisational Commitment, Psychological Empowerment, Meaning, Competence, Self‐ determination, Impact

Abstract

The aim of this study is to examine the impact of the dimensions of psychological empowerment (meaning, competence, self-determination, and impact) on organisational commitment. This quantitative, cross-sectional study used data from 80 operational-level employees in a Sri Lankan public sector organization. Multiple regression analysis was conducted to examine the predictive power of the four aspect of psychological empowerment on organisational commitment. The findings demonstrate that meaning and impact have a positive and significant predictive effect on organisational commitment, while competence and self-determination have no significant relationship.These results corroborate prior studies of similar organizational settings suggesting that hierarchical structures, job security, and cultural dynamics in Sri Lanka might limit the influence of competence and self-determination on enhancing commitment.

Author Biography

G. K. Hemamali Ganewatta, University of Ruhuna

Dr. G. K. Hemamali Ganewatta is a Senior Lecturer in Human Resource Management at the University of Ruhuna, Sri Lanka. She holds a PhD in Management from Queensland University of Technology, Australia, and an MBA from the University of Ruhuna. With extensive teaching experience across undergraduate and postgraduate levels, her focus areas include Strategic HRM, International HRM, and Organizational Behavior. Her research interests lie in employee commitment, employee engagement, and Organizational Citizenship Behaviour. She has presented at international conferences and serves as a reviewer and editorial board member for academic journals. She is actively involved in curriculum development and university‐industry collaborations, supporting student development and institutional excellence.

References

Argyris, C. (1998), “Empowerment: the emperor’s new clothes”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 76,pp. 98-106.

Afshari, L., Young, S., Gibson, P., & Karimi, L. (2020). Organizational commitment: Exploring the role of identity. Personnel Review, 49(3), 774–790. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-04-2019-0148

Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 63(1), 1–18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8325.1990.tb00506.x

Bandura, A., & Locke, E. A. (2003). Negative self-efficacy and goal effects revisited. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(1), 87. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.1.87

Bin Jomah, N. (2017). Psychological empowerment on organizational commitment as perceived by Saudi academics. World Journal of Education, 7(1), 83–92. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5430/wje.v7n1p83

Choong, Y.-O., Wong, K.-L., & Lau, T.-C. (2011). Psychological empowerment and organizational commitment in the Malaysian private higher education institutions: A review and research agenda. Academic Research International, 1(3), 236–245.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). The general causality orientations scale: Self-determination in personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 19(2), 109–134. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-6566(85)90023-6

Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1(1), 61–89. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/1053-4822(91)90011-Z

Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W., & Steers, R. M. (2013). Employee—organization linkages: The psychology of commitment, absenteeism, and turnover. Academic press.

Spreitzer, G. M. (1995). Psychological empowerment in the workplace: Dimensions, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 38(5), 1442–1465. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/256865

Spreitzer, G. M., Kizilos, M. A., & Nason, S. W. (1997). A dimensional analysis of the relationship between psychological empowerment and effectiveness, satisfaction, and strain. Journal of Management, 23(5), 679–704. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639702300504

Thomas, K. W., & Velthouse, B. A. (1990). Cognitive elements of empowerment: An “interpretive” model of intrinsic task motivation. Academy of Management Review, 15(4), 666–681. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1990.4310926

Turnipseed, D. L., & VandeWaa, E. A. (2020). The little engine that could: The impact of psychological empowerment on organizational citizenship behavior. International Journal of Organization Theory & Behavior, 23(4), 281–296. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOTB-06-2019-0077. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOTB-06-2019-0077

Zimmerman, M. A. (1995). Psychological empowerment: Issues and illustrations. American Journal of Community Psychology, 23, 581–599. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02506983