Vol 16 No 1, Januari 2012 Hal: 39 - 57 THE APPLICATIO N OF FORMATIVE MODEL PROCEDURES TO ASSESS THE QUALITY OF MEASUREMENTS: THE CASE OF JOB EMBEDDEDNESS’ DIMENSIONS

Gugup Kismono Fac ulty of Economics and Business Universitas Gadjah Mada e-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

Job embeddedness as a contemporary model of voluntary turnover has attracted attention from scholars and researchers. This model has been claimed to be more powerful in explaining employee voluntary turnover than the traditi onal models. Based on the taxonomy of multidime n- sional constructs, job embeddedness should be an aggregate model. The aggregate model requires that the construct (job embeddedness) are caused by indicators. As a consequent, job embedded- ness should be class ified within a formative measurement model. However, the evaluation of the job embeddedness measurements, so far, utilised reflective model procedures. Since job embedded- ness is formative or causal indicators, construct misspecification error may occur. Th is study o f- fered an alternative method yet suitable to assess the dimensions of job embeddedness measure- ment quality. The results showed that treating job embeddedness as reflective model may not be suitable .

Keywords: job embeddedness, voluntary turnover , formative model, reflective model, misspecif i- cation.

Abstrak

“Kelekatan pekerjaan” ( job embeddedness ) sebagai sebuah model kontemporer perputaran karyawan menarik perhatian para ilmuwan dan peneliti. Model ini telah dipandang lebih unggul dibanding model tradisional dalam menjelaskan perputaran sukarela karyawan. Berdasarkan pada taksonomi konstruk multidimensional, kelekatan pekerjaan harus diperlakukan sebagai model agregat. Model agregat mensyaratkan bahwa sebuah konstruk dibentuk atau disebabkan (bu kan menyebabkan) oleh indikator-indikator. Sebagai konsekuensinya, konstruk kelekatan pekerjaan harus diklasifikasikan ke dalam model alat ukur formatif. Namun demikian, sejauh ini evaluasi atas alat ukur kelekatan pekerjaan masih menggunakan prosedur model reflektif. Karena kelekatan pekerjaan merupakan konstruk formatif, penggunaan prosedur model reflektif untuk mengevaluasi alat ukurnya berpotensi menghasilkan kesalahan construct misspesification. Riset ini menawarkan metoda alternatif yang lebih sesuai untuk mengevaluasi kualitas alat ukur kelekatan pekerjaan, khususnya dimensi -dimensinya. Hasil riset menunjukkan bahwa penggunaan model reflektif tidak cocok. Hal ini ditunjukkan dengan adanya perbedaan hasil antara penggunaan model reflektif dan model formatif.

Kata kunci: kelekatan pekerjaan, perputaran sukarela karyawan, model formatif, model reflektif, misspecification.

INTRODUCTION tary turnover have been well identified (Dalton et al., 1982; Mobley , 1982), it has long been Turnover models to better understand the turn- assumed to pose serious negative consequences over process through which employees volu n- for the organisation as it may take the organis a- tarily leave an organisation hav e been deve l- tion by s urprise and causes unplanned for dis- oped for more than five decades (Price , 2004; ruption in operations (Boshoff and Mels , 2000). Maertz and Griffeth , 2004; March and Simon, Furthe rmore, resignations may lead to lower 1958). Even though positive aspects of volu n- 40 Jurnal Siasat Bisnis Vol. 16 No. 1, Januari 2012 39 -57

productivity, loss of high performers (Mobley , the extent to which people have links to other 1982), separation, r eplacement, and training people or activities at work or at home, (2) the and d evelopment costs (Bannister and Griffeth , extent to which their jobs and communities fit 1986; Pinkovitz et al. , 2004; Griffeth and Hom, with the other aspects in their life spaces, and 2001; Koys , 2001), along with potential sales (3) the ease with which links can be broken, costs (Bliss , 2006). especially if they leaved their jobs and move to Additionally, there are other turnover other cities or homes. costs that are hidden and perhaps harder to This new construct seems to be a much measure. Examples include potential hidden more powerful predictor of turnover intention, costs inherent in trade secrets being given to actual voluntary turnover, absenteeism, job pe r- competitors, loss of business opportunity to formance and citizenship behaviour than trad i- competit ors, loss of corporate and job knowl- tional concepts. Job embeddedness is a powe r- edge, temporary decrease in service quality, ful indicator because it accounts for more co m- loss of potential future leaders (Griffeth and ponents of a person's life and includes non- Hom, 2001), disruption of social and comm u- work factors not simply salary or whether or nication structures and subsequent negative not a person feel happy with the job. public relations (Mobley, 1982), and perceived Mitchell and Lee (2001) , Mitchell and demoralization of those who remain in the o r- associates (2001b) , and Lee and colleagues ganisation (Staw, 1980; Boshoff and Mels , (2004) asserted that job embeddedness is a 2000). Employees who leave their organization mu ltidimensional aggregate of the on-the-job voluntarily may speak negative but secret a s- and off -the-job forces that may prevent e m- pects of their workplace. Given these conse- ployee from leaving an organisation. Accord- quences, the concept of employee voluntary ingly, t he variable of jo b embeddedness was turnover continues to attract attention of both disaggregated into two major components ; on- researchers and practitioners. the-job embeddedness, and off -the-job e m- Turnover models can be classified into beddedness; and three dimensions that is fit, two broad categories namely the core model s or sacr ifice, and links (Lee et al. , 2004; Yao et al. , conventional/classical and altern ative/contem - 2004). On -the-job embeddedness is made up of porary model s. However, the mo dels ha ve long organisation fit , organisation sa crifice, a nd o r- been dominated by the core models (Steel , ganisation links . Off -the-job embeddedness is 2002). The core or traditional model s focus on composed of community fit, community sacr i- the role of some key factors namely job sati s- fice, and community links (Yao et al. , 2004). faction, organizational commitment, behav- Empirical findings showed that on-the- ioural intent ions, and job search mechanisms in job embeddedness and off -the-job embedded- influencing voluntary turnover. However, r e- ness significantly correlated with actual volu n- search fin dings have consistently shown that tary turnover (Lee et al., 2004). A previous r e- job satisfaction, and organizational commi t- search by Holtom and Lee (2 001a) , and ment play only small role in employee volu n- Mitchell and Lee (2001) found that job e m- tary turnover (Mitchell et al. , 2001b; Holtom beddedness related to intention to leave and and O'Neill , 2004; Griffeth et al. , 2000) . Addi- predicted subsequent actual voluntary turnover. tionally, measures derived from job search have These findings were shared by other researc h- little value as predictors of voluntary turnover ers including Holtom and O’Neill (2004) and (Steel , 2002). Cu nningham et al. (2005) . The most recent theory to explain vo l- The measurement of job embeddedness untary turnover process may be job embedded- initially developed by Mitchell and associates ness model, a concept focuses on why people (2001b) . In general, reflective model principles, choose to stay with a job rather than why they namely convergent validity and reliability test , choose to leave a job. Job embeddedness is a were utilis ed to evaluate the quality of the broad constellation of job -related fa ctors and measurement in previous studies. Since job non-job-related factors that keep a person from embeddedness is formative or causal indicators, leaving her or his job (Mitchell et al. , 2001b). co nstruct misspecification error may occur. As According to Mitchell and colleagues (2001b), a result, the research findings that treated job the critical aspects of job embeddedness are (1) The Application of Formative Model … (Gugup Kismono ) 41

embeddedness as a reflective construct might construct level. 5) Indicators or items are inde- not be robust. pendent variables. This study offered an alternative method yet suitable to assess job embeddedness Indicator/items measurement qualit y. Formative model proce- X1 X2 X3 dures were applied to validate the measurement of job embeddedness using structural equation modelling with AMOS software. The utilization of formative model pro- cedures and structural equation modelling to Formative evaluate job embeddedness causal indicators e provided valuable contributions to the met h- Construct odological aspect. Proper evaluation used in Figur e 1: Measurement Model for Job Em- this study offered a different insight on how to beddedness as Formative Construct val idate job embeddedness indicators. The measurement (SEM) model of Review on Job Embeddedness: Formative construct within a reflective model suggests versus Reflective Mode l different characteristics. As described in Fi gure The validity and reliability tests done in prev i- 2, several key features of the SEM model for ous research to evaluate the quality of job e m- reflective constr uct (MacKenzie et al., 2005; beddedness measurement were derived from Diamantopoulos and Winklhofer , 2001; Jarvis the concepts of a reflective model. It might be et al., 2003; Coltman et al., 2007) include: 1) misleading. Based on the taxonomy of mult i- the direction of causality is from construct (l a- dimensional constructs proposed by Law, tent variable) to measures (X1, X2, X3). 2) Th e Wong and Mobley (1998), job embeddedness indicators or items are modelled as effects of should be an aggregate model. The aggregate the latent variable. 3) Indicator corr elations are model requires that the construct (job e m- explained by the latent variable. 4) A change in beddedness) are caused by indicators. As a the latent variable will result in changes in all consequent, job embeddedness should be indicators. 5) Measurement e rrors (e1, e2, e3) treated as a formative measurement model and or disturb ance (d) is modelled at the item level. needs di fferent validation process es (Hair et al., 6) Indicators or items are dependent variables. 2006; MacKenzie et al., 2005; Diamantopoulos and Winklhofer , 2001) . Internal consistency Indicator/items and convergent validity may not be useful val i- e1 e2 e3 dation criteria for formative indicators like job 1 1 1 embeddedness (Diamantopoulos and Siguaw , 2006; Bollen and Lennox , 1991). X1 X2 X3 Figure 1 presented a general measure- 1 ment (Structural Equation Modelling-SEM) model for job embeddedness. The measurement Reflective model of job embeddedness retains several i m- Construct portant characteristics (Diamantopoulos and Win klhofer , 2001; MacKenzie et al., 2005; Ja r- Figure 2: Measurement Model for Reflective vis et al., 2003; Coltman et al., 2007; Bollen Construct and Lennox, 1991) including: 1) the direction of causality is from measures (X1, X2, X3) to In general, it is sufficient to measure construct. 2) Indicators or items are modelled the quality of reflective construct using conve r- as causes of the latent var iable (the construct). gent v alidity and reliability (or internal consi s- 3) Indicator correlations are not explained by tency) (Diamantopoulos and Winklhofer , 2001; the latent variable. 4) Measurement errors (e1, MacKe nzie et al., 2005) . Convergent validity e2, e3) or disturbance (d) is modelled at the suggests the extent to which a set of measured items actually reflects the theoretical latent 42 Jurnal Siasat Bisnis Vol. 16 No. 1, Januari 2012 39 -57

construct that these items are designed to (Bollen and Lennox, 1991) . High multicolli n- measure (Hair et al., 2006) . Factor loading is earity among items might also suggest that the used to indicate the validity of the construct’s items give red undant information; hence it measures. When items present adequate factor might be necessary to eliminate some items that loadings’ values, the items can be judged as were highly correlated . Subsequently, in the good measures (Hair et al., 2006). Internal co n- second step the remaining items from step one sistency (reliability test) relates the indivi dual was correlated to the global item of the related measurement items to the relevant co nstruct co nstruct. The complete list of items was pre- and hence should display high inter -correlation sented in Appendix 1 and Appendix 2. (Hair et al., 2006) . The internal consistency The global item was a broad or global was calculated using corrected item to total question to measure respondents’ overall per- correlation and Cronbach’s alpha mea sure. A ception on the constructs, and therefore it was high correlation of the items is desirable (Bol- assumed that the global item validly represents len and Lennox, 1991) . This situation su ggests the construct. In this case, the global item was that the measures are reliable; high rel iability is used to alternatively measure the construct. represented by a high alpha score. Since the global item was an alternative mea s- ure of the construct, correlating indicators to Methods for Evaluating the Measurement of the global item were essentially comparable to Job Embeddedness Using Formative Model conducting an extern al validation process Procedures (Diamantopoulos and Winklhofer, 2001) . Thus, it was expected that high quality indicators In this research, the quality of job embed ded- were significantly correlated with the global ness items was tested using several steps as item (Diamantopoulos and Winklhofer, 2001; suggested by Diamantopoulos and Siguaw Diamantopoulos and Siguaw, 2006). Any items (2006) , and Diaman topoulos and Winklhofer with non-significant correlation c oefficients (2001) . The first step was to conduct an a s- should be removed. However, this step did not sessment of multicollinearity among items determine the contribution of individual indic a- within the constructs to measure organisation tors to the construct measured. Thus, in the fit, organisation sacrifice, organisation links, third and fourth steps, t he Multiple Indicators community fit, community sacrifice and co m- and Multiple Causes (MIMIC) model was uti l- munity links dimensions. High levels of mult i- ised to assess if there was a significant contr i- collinearity among items made it difficult to bution from any of the individual indicators. separate the distinct impact of individual ind i- cators on the construct or variable measured

e1 e2

Y1 Y2

Formative e Construct

X1 X2 X3 X4 X5 X6

Figure 3: MIMIC Model for Formative Construct with 2 Reflective Items The Application of Formative Model … (Gugup Kismono ) 43

As presented in Figure 3, the MIMIC nity fit (CF) , community sa crifice (CS) , and model might be composed of formative indic a- community links (CL) dimensions were tors (X1, X2, X3, X4, X5, X6) and one or more adapted from c oncepts developed by Cross reflective items (Y1 and Y2). The reflective (2003) , and Mitchell and colleagues (2001b). items w ere items that describe the condition caused by the formative construct. The incl usion Participants of reflective items was necessary for identific a- The total participants involved in this study tion purposes (Diamantopoulos and Siguaw, were 151 participants from Executive MBA 2006; Diamantopoulos and Winklhofer, 20 01; students at Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogy a- Diamantopoulos, 1999) when covariance stru c- karta. They were working for a variety of co m- ture modelling software packages (e.g. LISREL - panies, particularly the banking industry. Thus, linear structural rel ations, EQS, and AMOS - it was a good sample since the participants analysis of moment structures) were used. In this came from different bac kgrounds. Of the 151 study, the reflective items of organisation fit, questionnaires conveniently distributed, 145 organisation sacrifi ce, and organ isation links for were fully completed and utilised fo r the study the MIMIC model were developed based on (n = 145). studies by Kristof -Brown et al. (2005) , Mitchell and colleagues (2001b) , and Verquer et al. Results 1 (2003) . Step One Furthermore, reflective items of co m- munity fit, community sacrifice and community This research used 0.9 point of inter -correlation links were modified from Cross (2003), and as a sign of very high multicollinearity that Mitchell and colleagues (2001b). Those refle c- may result in serious problem of redundant i n- tive items were theoretically an effect of the formation and influence a predic tability power formative constructs measured. This study used of a model. The 0.90 poin t is a common value two (2) reflective items fo r each formative co n- usually used as a cut off point (Hair et al., struct of sub-dimensions of job embeddedness. 2006; Grewal et al., 2004; Mason and Pe r- The application of these reflective items in the reault , 1991). The statistics program utilised in MIMIC model was previously used by Di a- this analysis was SPSS 15 (SPSS -Inc. , 2006). ma ntopoulos and Winklhofer (2001) , Diama n- The analysis showed that no items to topoulos and Sig uaw (2006), MacKenzie et al. measure dimension of job embeddedness that is (2005) . organisation fit, organisation sacrifice, organ i- An identified MIMIC model provided sation links, community fit, community sacr i- information on the relative contribution and fice and community links were highly inter - significance of individual indicators to the co n- correla ted. Thus, all items were carried over to struct. The quality of individual indicators was the next step. judged by referring to the p-value associated with the parameters of the indicators (the a r- Step Two rows from X1, X2, X3, X4, X5, and X6 to the In this step, the quality of measures retained formative construct) in the MIMIC model. In- from Step One were further analysed by corr e- dicators were considered valid when th ey were lating them with related global items. The significantly associated with the construct with analysis showed that items measuring organis a- a p-value equal to or less than 0.05 (Diama n- tion fit, organisation sacrifice, and o rganis ation topoulos and Siguaw, 2006) . Any items with a links were statistically correlated with related non-significant p-value were elim inated. global items. All items measuring community As presented in Appendix 2 , t his study fit and community links were also correlated included six (6) global items and 12 reflective significantly with the related global items. items for the MIMIC model. The global items There was one item (CS3) measuring comm u- of organisation fit (OF) , organisation sacrifice nity sacrifice was correlated insignificantly (OS) and organisation links (OL) were deve l- oped based on research by Crossley and co l- 1 Due to space limitation, the statistical analysis of Step leagues (2007) , Mitchell and colleagues One and Step Two were not presented in this paper. For (2001b) , and Watson-Wyatt (2005) . Comm u- the Step Four, only the final model was presented. 44 Jurnal Siasat Bisnis Vol. 16 No. 1, Januari 2012 39 -57

with the global item for community sa crifice. was considered fit when it showed a low or an This item was removed and left out for further insignificant chi-square (x²) value, a RMSEA analysis. of 0.08 or lower, a GFI of greater than 0.90, and a CFI of close to 0.95 or higher than 0.95 Step Three (Byrne 2001; Hair et al., 2006; Arbuckle, 2006a; Medsker et al., 1994). In this step, the In this step, the items retained from the prev ious evaluation was applied to the measurement step ( Step Two ) were further analys ed by utili s- model. The individual items were not evaluated ing Multiple Indicators and Multiple Causes at this point. All items were carried forward to (MIMIC) model estimation. The model co n- the next step (step 4) if the model provided a tai ned two reflective measures. The incl usion of good fit. reflective items is necessary for ident ification Amos 7 (Arbuckle , 2006b) was e m- purposes (Diamantopoulo s and Siguaw, 2006; ployed to estimate the parameters in the mea s- Diamantopoulos and Winklhofer, 2001; Di a- urement models. The reason for utilising Amos mantopoulos , 1999) when covariance structure was mainly because this software package pro- modelling software packages (e.g. LISREL - vides a user -friendly graphical interface. The linear structural rel ations, EQS, and AMOS - estimation method was maximum likelihood analysis of moment structures) are used. This (MLE) . The MLE is a default method and research used two re flective items for each fo r- commonly used for doing SEM. mative construct of dimensions of job e m- beddedness. The applic ation of two reflective MIMIC model of organisation fit items in the MIMIC model was previously done by Diamantopoulos and Winklhofer (2001) , Figure 4 showed the MIMIC model e stimation Diamantopou los and Siguaw (2006) , MacKenzie of organisation fit. The MIMIC model estim a- et al. (2005) and produced adequate r esults. tion of organisation fit was adequate a ccording The goodness of fit of the (SEM) to the goodness of fit cri teria su ggested. The MIMIC model was assessed using several crit e- chi-square was insignificant with 0.148 (higher ria as suggested by researchers such as A r- than 0.05) p-value. RMSEA of the model was buckle (2006a) , Bentler (1990) , Breckler 0.066 far below the cut -off value. GFI and CFI (1990) , Byrne (2001) , Hair and colleagues were also sufficient with value of 0.986 and (2006) , and Medsker et al. (1994). This study 0.995 respectively. employed absolute fit indexes and incremental fit index. The absolute indexes used were chi- MIMIC model of organisation sa crifice square (x²), goodness -of-fit index (GFI), and The model fit of organisation sacrifice was r e- Root Mean Square E rror of Approximation ported in Figure 5. All indexes were ad equate (RMSEA). The incremental index utilised was according to the predetermined criteria. The the comparative fit index (CFI). chi-square was insignificant ( p-value 0.097).

RMSEA, GFI, and CFI of the model were also Table 1: Criteria for Assessing Goodness of Fit favourable. Goodness of Fit Cut Off Indices MIMIC mod el of organisation links a. Chi-square Relatively small and/or statistically Figure 6 showed that the chi-square of organ i- insignificant sation links for MIMIC model was insignif icant (p-value 0.429). The value of RMSEA was b. Probabilit y (p-value) > = 0.05 0.000, GFI was 0.991, and CFI was 1.000. c. RMSEA < = 0.08 Based on the cut-off values suggested, the d. GFI > = 0.90 model was adequ ately fit, and all items were e. CFI Close to or higher further analysed in Step Four. than 0.95 MIMIC model of community fit

Table 1 described the criteria applied to Based on the cut-off values suggested, the assess the model goodness of fit. The model MIMIC model of community fit (Figure 7) was The Application of Formative Model … (Gugup Kismono ) 45

robust. The chi-square was statistically insi g- with values of 0.999 and 1.000 respectively. nificant. The RMSEA value was below the cut- Thus, all community fit items were further an a- off point. GFI and CFI were also acceptable lysed in Step Four.

,85 ,32 e8 e9 1 1 Chi Square= 8,157 Probability= ,148 OF8 OF9 RMSEA= ,066 GFI= ,986 1,00 1,21 CFI= ,995 ,25 1 OF e

-,03 ,28 ,15 -,04 ,05 ,19

1,15 1,29 1,33 1,57 1,29 1,33

OF1 OF2 OF3 OF4 OF5 OF6

,58 ,56 1,07 1,20 ,73

,55 ,48 ,93 ,70

,55 ,53 ,62

,56 ,61

,68

Figure 4: MIMIC Model Organisation Fit

-,84 2,28 e11 e12 1 1 Chi-square= 13,457

OS11 OS12 Probability= ,097 1,00 ,23 RMSEA= ,069 1,92 GFI= ,984 1 CFI= ,990 OS e

,25 ,16 -,02 ,16 ,19 ,18 -,34 -,03 ,11

1,44 ,95 1,44 1,37 1,55 1,77 2,08 1,56 1,76

OS1 OS2 OS3 OS4 OS5 OS6 OS7 OS8 OS9

,63 ,67 ,73 ,75 ,70 1,26 ,96 ,56 ,76 ,41 ,57 ,50 ,75 ,90 ,48 ,42 ,38 ,72 ,50 ,66 ,36 ,17 ,47 ,45 ,85 ,47 ,57 ,42 ,86 ,53 ,35 ,61 ,32 ,69 ,20 ,34

Figure 5: MIMIC Model of Organisation Sacr ifice

46 Jurnal Siasat Bisnis Vol. 16 No. 1, Januari 2012 39 -57

Measurement Model of Organisational Links (OL) (On-the-job Embeddedness)

,45 ,20

e6 e7

1 1 Chi-square= 5,949 Probability= ,429 OL6 OL7 RMSEA= ,000 GFI= ,991 1,00 1,07 CFI= 1,000 ,36 1 OL e

,39 ,22 ,12 -,08 ,08 ,13 ,07

1,17 1,13 1,50 1,27 1,65 ,49 1,61

OL1 OL2 OL3 OL4 OL8 OL9 OL10

,78 ,69 ,95 ,01 ,48 ,47

,69 ,55 ,13 ,05 1,41

,55 ,17 ,02 ,05

,15 ,04 ,20

,08 ,17

,20

Figure 6: MIMIC Model of Organisation Links

,97 ,07

e6 e7

1 1 Chi-square= ,418 Probability= ,937 CF6 CF7 RMSEA= ,000 1,00 1,39 GFI= ,999 CFI= 1,000 ,24 1 e CF

,13 ,19 ,24 ,12

1,23 1,25 1,93 1,04

CF1 CF2 CF3 CF4

,69 ,46 ,54

,43 ,74

,76 Figure 7: MIMIC Model of Community Fit

MIMIC model of community sacrifice with chi-square value of 4.788, statistically i n- significant, and RMSEA value of 0.064. The MIMIC model of community sacrifice can The values of GFI and CFI were 0.989 be observed in Figure 8. One item, CS3, was and 0.993 respectively. Based on the fit model not included in the model because t he indicator cr iteria, all community sacr ifice items were was dropped in Step Two . The model was fit further analysed in Step Four. The Application of Formative Model … (Gugup Kismono ) 47

Measurement Model of Community Sacrifice (CS) (Off-the-job Embeddedness

,24 ,80

e7 e8

1 1 Chi-square= 4,788 CS7 CS8 Probability= ,188 RMSEA= ,064 1,00 ,81 GFI= ,989 1,19 CFI= ,993 1 e CS

,34 ,26 ,17 -,28

,88 1,09 1,03 1,96

CS1 CS2 CS4 CS5

,59 ,48 ,53

,49 ,34 ,35 Figure 8: MIMIC Model of Community Sacrifice

MIMIC model of community links fairly high (0.941), but it was still well below 0.95. Based on the CFI value suggested for Figure 9 reported the model fit of co mmunity model fit, all community links items might be links. The Figure showed that the chi -square dropped. However, further a nalysis was co n- value was statistically insignifican t. The ducted to double check whether any individual RMSEA and GFI values were adequate. Unfo r- item was statistically significant. tunately, even though the value of CFI was

Measurement Model of Community Links (CL) (Off-the-job Embeddedness)

1,61 -5,29

e6 e7

1 1 Chi-square= 11,326 CL6 CL7 Probability= ,079 1,00 6,89 RMSEA= ,079

,14 GFI= ,983

1 CFI= ,941 e CL

,01 ,02 ,00 ,00 ,02 ,01 ,02

1,75 1,22 1,71 1,46 ,99 1,81 1,28

CL1 CL2 CL3 CL4 CL8 CL9 CL10

,69 ,71 ,71 ,13 -,08 ,22 1,03 ,82 ,36 ,24 ,05 ,63 ,15 ,30 ,34 ,32 ,15 ,15 ,28 ,24 ,05

Figure 9: MIMIC Model of Community Links 48 Jurnal Siasat Bisnis Vol. 16 No. 1, Januari 2012 39 -57

Step Four: Assessment of Individual Items items quality was based on the p-value. When Qua lity the p-value associated with the parameters of on-the-job and off -the-job embeddedness items This step was taken to evaluate the validity of in the MIMIC model estimation were not on-the-job and off -the-job embeddedness significant or above 0.05, they were el iminated. individual items. Following Anderson (1987), a The analysis was performed step by step, typical 0 .05 p-value of the un-standardised starting from the highest or insignificant p- regression weights or coefficient values was value, until all items were statistically applied to assess the significance of individual significant. In this report, only the final model items structural parameter. In this case, the was presented. structural parameters were the numbers that describe the magnitudes of the effects of Assessment of organisation fit individual indicators on the construct measured (Edwards items and Bagozzi , 2000). For instance, Figure 10 showed the structural parameter of OF4 on OF Figu re 10 and the un-standardised regression was 0 .21. Thus, the effect of OF4 on OF was weights (Table 2) showed that three items , 0.21. namely OF4, OF5, and OF6, hold significant Furthermore, reflective indicators, Y1 parameters/coefficients of 0.21, 0.27, and 0.13 and Y2, were used to make the model identified respectively. The p-values were below 0.05. and therefore the goodness of fit of the Those items could be included in the questio n- measurement model could be identified . So , the naire to collect data. The regression weights of structural parameters or the effect of OF on Y1 OF4, OF5, and OF6 to OF, and the p-value and Y2 were not analysed. The evaluation of (significant level) were shown in Table 2.

,85 ,31 e8 e9 Chi Square= ,172 1 1 Probability= ,918 OF8 OF9 RMSEA= ,000 GFI= 1,000 1,00 1,23 CFI= 1,000 ,25 1 OF e

,21 ,13 ,27 1,57 1,29 1,33 OF4 OF5 OF6

1,20 ,73

,70 Figure 10 : Validity of Organisation Fit Individual Items

Table 2: Regression Weights of Organisation Fit Estimate S.E. C.R. P Label OF
OF4 0.212 0.083 2.554 0.011 par_3 OF
OF5 0.275 0.099 2.779 0.005 par_4 OF
OF6 0.128 0.058 2.207 0.027 par_7 OF8
OF 1.000 OF9
OF 1.226 0.163 7.543 *** par_1 The Application of Formative Model … (Gugup Kismono ) 49

Assessment of organisation sacrifice indivi d- CF3, were statistically significant because their ual items p-value were below 0.05. Based on the pred e- termined criteria, those items were reasonably Figure 11 and the regression weights, Table 3, included in the final measurement. described the measurement model and signif i- The regression weights of CF1, CF2, cant organisation sacrifice individual items. and CF3 to CF were shown in Table 5 below. There were four items with significant param e- ter values namely OS1, OS5, OS8, and OS9. Assessment of community sacrifice indivi d- The regression weights (structur al paths) of ual items OS1, OS5, OS8, and OS9 to OS were reported in Table 3. Three community sacrifice individual items were valid. Figure 14 and the regression Assessment of organisation links individual weights, T able 6, reported that CS1, CS 4, and items CS5 were statistically significant. Those items could be included in the questionnaire to collect There were three organisation links items r e- data. Table 7 below showed the structural paths ported as statistically significant, namely OL1, parameter of CS1, CS4, and CS5 to CS. OL3, and OL10. The model could be observed in Figure 12. The structural parameters for Assessment of community links individual OL1, OL3, and OL10 were 0.46, 0.19, 0.17 items respectively. The parameters of the regression weights of OL1, OL3, and OL10 items to OL As reported previ ously in Step three, Figure 9, were pr esented in Table 4. the CFI value of community links measurement model was below the cut -off points. Based on Assessment of community fit individual items the criteria preset, the model did not provide a good fit. The regression weights in Table 8 also Figure 13 and the regression weights, Table 5, showed unfavourable figures. indicated that three items, namely CF1, CF2,

-2,68 2,34 e11 e12 1 1 Chi-square= 7,105

OS11 OS12 Probability= ,069 1,00 ,13 RMSEA= ,097 3,81 GFI= ,984 1 CFI= ,972 OS e

,30 -,25 ,30 ,19

1,44 1,55 1,56 1,76

OS1 OS5 OS8 OS9

,66 ,56 ,17

,47 ,69

,34

Fig ure 11 : Validity of Organisation Sacrifice Individual Items

Table 3: Regression Weights of Organisation Sacrifice Estimate S.E. C.R. P Label OS
OS1 0.299 0.083 3.626 *** par_5 OS
OS8 0.301 0.088 3.417 *** par_6 OS
OS9 0.186 0.077 2.411 0.016 par_7 OS
OS5 -0.250 0.079 - 3.176 0.001 par_8 OS11
OS 1.000 OS12
OS 0.132 0.193 0.687 0.492 par_4 50 Jurnal Siasat Bisnis Vol. 16 No. 1, Januari 2012 39 -57

,46 ,19

e6 e7

1 1 Chi-square= ,266 Probability= ,875 OL6 OL7 RMSEA= ,000 GFI= ,999 1,00 1,08 CFI= 1,000 ,37 1 OL e

,46 ,17 ,19

1,17 1,50 1,61

OL1 OL3 OL10

,69 ,20

,20 Figure 12 : Validity of Organisation Links Individual Items

Table 4: Regression Weights of Organisation Links Estimate S.E. C.R. P Label OL
OL3 0.188 0.057 3.294 *** Par_1 OL
OL10 0.172 0.048 3.616 *** Par_5 OL
OL1 0.465 0.072 6.479 *** Par_7 OL6
OL 1.000 OL7
OL 1.085 0.099 10.934 *** Par_6

Measurement Model of Community Fit (CF) Valid Items

,98 ,06

e6 e7

1 1 Chi-square= ,375 Probability= ,829 CF6 CF7 RMSEA= ,000 1,00 1,39 GFI= ,999 CFI= 1,000 ,24 1 e CF

,24 ,28 ,13

1,23 1,25 1,93

CF1 CF2 CF3

,69 ,46

,43 Figure 13 : Validity of Community Fit Individual Items

Table 5: Regression Weights of Community Fit Estimate S.E. C.R. P Label CF
CF2 0.280 0.061 4.554 *** par_1 CF
CF3 0.129 0.038 3.377 *** par_2 CF
CF1 0.241 0.057 4.209 *** par_3 CF6
CF 1.000 CF7
CF 1.392 0.196 7.100 *** par_7 The Application of Formative Model … (Gugup Kismono ) 51

Measurement Model of Community Sacrifice (CS) Valid Items

,15 ,85

e7 e8

1 1 Chi-square= 3,915 CS7 CS8 Probability= ,141 RMSEA= ,082 1,00 ,77 GFI= ,989 1,29 CFI= ,989 1 e CS

,44 ,26 -,26

,88 1,03 1,96

CS1 CS4 CS5

,53 ,49

,35 Figure 14 : Validity of Community Sacrif ice Individual Items

Table 7: Regression Weight of Community Sacrifice Estimate S.E. C.R. P Label CS
CS4 -0.265 0.128 -2.068 0.039 par_1 CS
CS5 0.261 0.078 3.352 *** par_2 CS
CS1 0.444 0.132 3.362 *** par_7 CS7
CS 1.000 CS8
CS 0.768 0. 168 4.571 *** par_6

Table 8: Regression Weights of Community Links Estimate S.E. C.R. P Label CL
CL2 0.019 0.058 0.336 0.737 par_1 CL
CL3 0.019 0.060 0.310 0.756 par_2 CL
CL4 0.006 0.031 0.180 0.857 par_3 CL
CL8 0.020 0.064 0.313 0.754 par _20 CL
CL1 0.005 0.023 0.228 0.819 par_27 CL
CL10 0.002 0.011 0.169 0.866 par_28 CL
CL9 0.002 0.009 0.244 0.807 par_29 CL6
CL 1.000 CL7
CL 6.888 20.875 0.330 0.741 par_10

There was no individual item’s p a- ve rgent validity (factor loadings) and internal ram eter that showed an adequate value. The p- consistency or reliability (A lpha) tests. Ho w- values in the regression weighs were below ever, the factor loadings of indicators and the 0.05. As a result, all community links items Alpha scores of every dimensions of job e m- were eliminated and might not be included in beddedness o btained from previous research the questionnaire for data collection. significantly varied . The seminal s tudy by The regression weights described in Mitchell and associates (2001b), for example, Table 8 showed the significance of structural showed that the factor loading might be as high paths of CL1, CL2, CL3, CL4, CL8, CL9, and as ( 0.93) or as low as ( 0.06). On the other hand, CL10 to CL construct. the highest Alpha score was 0.86 for organis a- tion fit (hospital employees sa mple), and the Discussion lowest was 0.50 for community links (hospital employees sample). There were 3 community Traditionally, the quality of job embeddedness links indicators in the study done by Mitchell measurements was evaluated by applying co n- 52 Jurnal Siasat Bisnis Vol. 16 No. 1, Januari 2012 39 -57

and coll eagues (2001b) for hospital e mployees nificantly differ ent. This research finding su g- sample showed relati vely low factor loadings gested that focus should be given to several scores. Those indicators are “My family roots dimensions with related items. Community are in this community” (0 .06 factor loading), links m ight not be too relevant in measuring “How many family members live nearby?” job embeddedness. Ho wever, re -testing of the (0.07 factor loading), and “How many of your measurements into different research context close friends live nearby?” (0 .13 factor loa ding). may b e required to promote gen eralizabilty or Th ose scores indicate d that, as a new stability of the measurements. construct, the measure of job embeddedness is The adoption of formative procedures not yet established. Lee et al. (2004) state d: in evaluating job embeddedness measurements “....the measures of on- and off -the-job offered fruitfull perspective s to consider. The embeddedness are still preliminary and results might differ from those analysed utili z- evolving. Although our data on factor ing refl ective principles. However, further structure and internal consistencies evaluation on the application of formative pro- produce empirical findings similar to cedures is needed to determine the “real” a d- earlier work, these measures ar e not yet vantages of the application of formative proce- established and standard research i n- dures compare to using the reflective practices. struments”. Summary However, numerous studies (Lee et al., 2004; The evaluation of indicato rs/measurements of Crossley et al., 2007; Mallol et al., 2007; Be rgiel on-the-job embeddedness and off -the-job e m- et al., 2009) consistently use d the concepts and beddedness dimensions by using formative measures o f job embeddedness developed by procedures result ed in different conclusion Mitchell et al. (2001b) . All items were uti lised to compare to that of evaluation by using conve r- analyse the relationships between job e m- gent validity and reliability test (reflective beddedness and other variables (Mitchell et al., model) . Inconsiste nt with results obtained from 2001b; Holtom and O'Neill , 2004; Lee et al., the reflective practices utilised by previous r e- 2004) . The adherence to the reflective pra ctice search, formative model procedures applied in might l ed to misspecification errors . As a result, this research resulted 16 items for five dime n- organisational policies developed based on the sions valid. No item was valid for community previous research findings that applied the r e- links dimension. However, this research d id not flective model principles might not be suitable . attempt to claim that a formative procedure to This study showed that the valid d i- validate the measurements was superior to a mensions of on-the-job embeddedness were reflective principle . Other tests using different organisation fit, organisation sacrifice, and o r- data sets are suggested to observe and find out ganisation links. On the other hand, the valid another insight. Additional yet important co n- dimensions of off -the-job embeddedness are siderations should also be judged before deci d- community fit and community sacrifice. Or- ing to use the result of any evaluation methods. ganisation fit dimension was made up of three items; OF4, OF5, OF6. Org anisation sacrifice REFERENCES and organisation links dime nsions were made up of four items; OS1, OS5, OS8, OS9; and Anderson, JC. 1987. An approach for confirm a- three items; OL1, OL3, OL10; r espectively. tory measurement and structural equ a- Further, community fit and community sacr i- tion modeling of organizational proper- fice dimensions were validly assessed by three ties. Management Science . 33 (4) . 525- measures; CF1, CF2 , CF3; and CS1, CS4, CS5, 541. correspondingly. Therefore, the total items to Arbuckle, JL. 2006a. Amos 7.0 user's guide . measure on-the-job embeddedness were 10 i n- Chicago: SPSS. dicators/items and those to measure dimension of off -the-job embeddedness were six indic a- Amos (version 7.0) computer program. Amos tors/items. Devel opment Corporation (SPSS, Inc.). Compare to Mitchell and colleagues Ch icago. (2001b) the results of this research were si g- The Application of Formative Model … (Gugup Kismono ) 53

Bannister, B. and RW. Griffeth. 1986. Apply- http://www.ruralsociology.org/annual - ing a causal analytic frame work to the meeting/2003/CrossJennifer.pdf. Mobley, Horner, and Hollingsworth Crossley, CD., RJ. Bennett, SM. Jex and JL. (1978) turnover model: a useful ree x- Burnfield. 2007. Development of a amination. Journal of Management. 12 global measure of job embeddedness (3). 433-443. and integration into a traditional model Bentler, P M. 1990. Comparative fit indexes in of voluntary turnover. Journal of A p- structural models. Psychological Bull e- plied Psychology. 92 (4) . 1031-1042. tin . 107 (2). 238 - 246. Cunningham, G B., JS. Fink and M. Sagas. Bergiel, E B., VQ. Nguyen, B F. Clenney, and 2005. Extension and further examin a- GS. Taylor. 2009. Human resources tion of the job embeddedness co nstruct. practices, job embeddedness and inte n- Journal of Sport Ma nagement. 19. 319 - tion to quit. Managerial Research 335. News . 32 (3). 205-219. Dalton, D R., W D. Todor and DM. Krac khardt. Bliss, W G. Cost of employee turnover 2006. 1982. Turnover overstated: the func- Available from tional taxonomy. The Academy of http://www.isquare.com/turnover.cfm/ . Management Review . 7 (1). 117-123. cited September 11, 2006. Diamantopoulos, A. 1999. Export perfor mance Bollen, KA. and R. Lennox. 1991. Conve n- measurement: ref lective versus form a- tional wisdom on measurement: a tive indicators. International Marketing structural equation perspective. Psy- Review . 16 (6). 444 -457. chological Bulletin . 110 (2). 305-314. Diamantopoulos, A. and J A. Siguaw. 2006. Boshoff, C. and G. Mels. 2000. Th e impact of Formative versus reflective indicators multiple commitments on inte ntions to in organizational measure develo p- resign: an empirical a ssessment. British ment: a comparison and empirical illu s- Journal of Ma nagement . 11 (3). 255- tration. British Jo urnal of Manage- 272. ment. 17. 263-282. Breckler, S J. 1990. Applications of covar iance Diamantopoulos, A. and HM. Winklhofer. structure modeling in psychology: 2001. Index construction with form a- cause for concern. Psychological Bull e- tive indicators: an alternative to scale tin . 107 (2). 260 - 273. development. Journal of Marketing R e- search . 38. 269-277. Byrne, B M. 2001. Structural equation model- ing with AMOS: basic concepts, appl i- Edwards, JR. and R P. Bagozzi. 2000. On the cations, and programming . Mahwah, nature and direction of relationships New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Ass o- between constructs and measures. Ps y- ciates. chological Methods. 5 (2) . 155-174. Coltman, TR., TM. Devinney, DF. Mid gley Grewal, R., JA. Cote and H. Baumgartner. and S. Venaik . 2007. Formative versus 2004. Multicollinearity and measure- reflec tive measurement models: two ment error in structural equation mo d- applications erroneous measurement. els: implications for theory testing. Available from MA RKETING SCIENCE 23. (4). 519- http://www2.agsm.edu.au/agsm/w eb.ns 529. f/AttachmentsByTitle/TD Form a- Griffeth, R W. and PW. Hom. 2001. Retaining tive_Paper/$FILE/Formative+Indicator valued employees . Thou sand Oaks. s.pdf. cited November 21, 2007. Sage. Cross, J E. 2003. Conceptualizing comm unity Griffeth, RW., P W. Hom and S. Gaertner. attachmen . Available from 2000. A meta -analysis of antecedents and correlates of employee turnover: 54 Jurnal Siasat Bisnis Vol. 16 No. 1, Januari 2012 39 -57

update, moderator tests, a nd research Maertz, CP. and RW. Griffeth. 2004. Eight m o- implications for the next millennium. tivational forces and voluntary turn- Journal of Ma nagement . 26 (3) . 463- over: a theoretical synthesis with i m- 488. plications for research. Aca demy of Management Journal. 30 (5) . 667-683. Hair, J F., WC. Black, BJ. Babin, RE. Anderson and RL. Tatham. 2006. Multivariate Mallol, CM., BC. Holtom and TW. Lee. 2007. data analysis . Sixth ed. Singapore . Job embeddedness in cultu rally diverse Pearson Education International. environment. Journal of Business and Psychology. 22 (1). 35 -44. Holtom, B C. and BS. O'Neill. 2004. Job e m- beddedness: a theoretical foundation March, JG. and HA. Simon. 1958. Organiz a- for developing a comprehensive nurse tons. New York: John Wile y & Sons. retention plan. JONA . 34 (5). 216-227. Mason, CH. and WD. Perreault. 1991. Colli n- Jarvis, C B., SB. MacKenzie and PM. Podsa- earity, power, and interpretation of koff. 2003. A critical review of co n- multiple regression analysis. Journal of struct indicators and measurement Marketing Reseacrh . 28 (3). 268-280. model mi sspecification in marketing Medsker, GJ., LJ. Williams and PJ. Holahan. and consumer research. Journal of 1994. A review of current practices for Consumer Research . 30 . 199 -218. evalu ating causal models in organiz a- Koys, D J. 2001. The effects of employee sati s- tional behavior and human resources faction, organizational citizenship b e- management research. Journal of Ma n- havior, and turnover on o rganizational agement. 20 (2). 439-464. effectiveness: a unit -level, longitudinal Mitchell, TR., BC. Holtom and TW. Lee. study. Pe rsonnel Psychology. 54. 101- 2001a. How to keep your best emplo y- 114. ees: developing an effective retention Kristof-Brown, A., R D. Zimmerman and EC. policy. Academy of Management E x- Johnson. 2005. Consequences of indi- ecutive . 15 (4). 96 -108. vid uals' fit at work: a meta -analysis of Mitchell, TR., BC. Holtom, TW. Lee, CJ. person -job, person-organization, per- Sablynski, and M. Erez. 2001b. Why son-group, and person-supervisor fit. People Stay: Using Job E mbeddedness Personnel Psychology. 58 (2). 281-342. to Predict Voluntary Turnover. Aca d- Law, K S., C. Wong and WH. Mobley. 1998. emy of Management Journal. 44 (6). Toward a taxonomy of multidime n- 1102-1121. sional constructs. Academy of Ma n- Mitchell, TR. and TW. Lee. 2001. The unfold- agement Review . 23 (4) . 741 -755. ing model of voluntary turnover and Lee, TW., T R. Mitchell, CJ. Sablynski, JP. job embeddedness: foundations for a Bu rton and BC. Holtom. 2004. The e f- comprehensive theory of attachment. fect of job embeddednes s on organiz a- Research in Organiz ational Behavior. tional citizenship, job performance, v o- 23. 189-246. litional absences, and voluntary turn- Mobley, WH. 1982. Some unanswered ques- over. Academy of Management Jour- tions in turnover and withdrawal r e- nal. 47 (5) . 711-722. sear ch. Academy of Management R e- MacKenzie, SB., PM. Podsakoff and CB. Ja r- view . 7 (1) . 111-116. vis. 2005. The problem of measure- Pinkovitz, WH., J. Moskal and G. Green. 2004. ment model misspecification in behav- How much does your em ployee turnover ioral and organizational research and cost? Available from some recommended s olutions. Journal http://www.uwex.edu/CES/cced/public of Applied Ps ychology . 90 (4) . 710- at/turn.html . cited September 11, 2006. 730. The Application of Formative Model … (Gugup Kismono ) 55

Price, JL. 2004. The development of a causal tween person-organization fit and work model of voluntary turnover. In Inno- attitudes. Journal of Vocational Beha v- vative theory and empirical research ior. 63 . 473-489. on employee turnover , edited by R. Watson-Wyatt. 2005. WorkIndonesia Griffeth and P. Hom. Greenwich: I n- 2004/2005: a study of e mployee att i- formation Age. 3-32. tudes in Indonesia, the keys to what SPSS (vers ion 15.0) computer program. SPSS, makes Indonesian employees tick: Inc., Chicago. Watson Wyatt Worldwide. Staw, BM. 1980. The consequences of tur n- Yao, X., TW. Lee, TR. Mitchell, JP. Bu rton over. Journal of Occupational Behav- and CJ. Sablynski. 2004. Job e m- iour. 1 (4) . 253-273. beddedness: current research and future directions. In Innovative theory and Steel, RP. 2002. Turnover theory at the empir i- empirical research on employee turn- cal interface: problem of fit and func- over , edited by R. Gri ffeth and P. Hom. tion. Academy of Manag emen t Review . Greenwich, Connecticut: Age Publis h- 27 (3) . 346-360. ing. 153-187. Verquer, ML., TA. Beehr and SH. Wa gner. 2003. A meta -analysis of relations b e-

56 Jurnal Siasat Bisnis Vol. 16 No. 1, Januari 2012 39 -57

Appendix: A Summary of Measurements

Code of Constructs Questions Items OF1 I like the members of my work group. Organisation Fit OF2 I have a lot in common with the people I work with. Adapted from OF3 My job utilises my skills and talents well. Mitchell and co l- OF4 I like the authority I have at this bank. lea gues (2001b) . OF5 I like the responsibility I have at this bank. OF6 I like the working environment of this bank . OS1 I have a lot of freedom in this job to get my work done. OS2 I feel that people at work respect me a great deal. OS3 My promotional opportunities are excellent here. Organisation Sacr i- OS4 I am well paid for the job I do. fice OS5 This bank gives me gre at bonuses regularly. Adapted from OS6 The health -care benefits provided by this organisation are exce llent. Mitchell and co l- The retirement benefits (e.g. pension plan) provided by this organisation OS7 leagues (2001b) . are e xcellent. OS8 The prospects for continuing employment with this bank a re exce llent. It would be hard to leave my job because I have such a great superv isor OS9 (that is, person to whom I am accoun table).* OL1 I have strong connections with my colleagues who work with me. I get along well with my superviso r (or person to whom I am accoun t- OL2 able).* Organisation Links I have excellent ties with many organisations within the Indonesian Adapted from OL3 Banking I ndustry. Mitchell and co l- OL4 I have strong relationships with colleagues who work at other banks. leagues (2001b) . OL8 How long have you worked for this bank? OL9 How long have you been in your current position? OL10 How long have you worked in the banking industry? Community Fit CF1 The weather where I live is suitable for me. Adapted from CF2 I think of the place where I live as home. Mitchell and co l- CF3 The location where I live offers the leisure activities that I like. leagues (2001b) . CF4 I feel comfortable with the home I live in. People respect me a lot in my community (or neighbourhood) where I Community Sacr i- CS1 live. fice CS2 My neighbourhood is safe. Adapted from CS3 It is convenient to reach my office from the home I live in.** Mitchell and co l- CS4 I easily can visit friends from the home I live in.** leagues (2001b) . CS5 I live in an area that makes it convenient for me to see my fa mily.** CL1 I feel connected to the home I live in. CL2 I have strong relationship with many people in the area where I live. I feel that my responsibility to my family causes me to stay in the area CL3 Community Links where I live.** Adapted from CL4 I have great ties with many organisations in the area where I live. Mitchell and co l- CL8 What is your marital status? leagues (2001b) . How many family mem bers (or relatives) live in the same location (or CL9 neighbou rhood) as you? How many of your close friends (or people you know well and trust) live CL10 in the same loc ation (or neighbourhood) as you? Notes: *Added items developed based on Mitchell and col leagues (2001b) and Watson -Wyatt (2005) . **Added items developed from concepts by Mitchell and colleagues (2001b) and Cross (2003) . Sentences in bold were valid items resulted from the evaluation utilizing formative model proc edures.

The Application of Formative Model … (Gugup Kismono ) 57

Appendix 2: Global Items and Questions for MIMIC Model Estimation to Validate Job Em- beddedness Measures Code Constructs of Questions Note Items Organisational Fit OF7 In general, I really enjoy working at this bank. Global Item Developed from OF8 The job I do at this bank fulfils most of my Item for Crossl ey et al. (2007) , needs. MIMIC Kristof -Brown, Zimme r- OF9 I am always motivated to come to this bank to Item for man and Johns on (2005) , work. MIMIC Mitchell et al. (2001b) , and Verquer, Beehr and Wagner (2003) . Organisational Sacr ifice OS10 I would sacrifice a lot if I left my job in this Global Item Developed from Crossley bank. et al. (2007) , Mitchell et OS11 Too much in my life would be disrupted if I left Item for al. (2001b) . this bank. MIMIC OS12 I am afraid that I would not be able to find a be t- Item for ter job if I decid ed to leave this bank. MIMIC Organisational Links OL5 I feel much attached to this bank. Global Item Developed from Crossley OL6 I can handle my job effectively because I get Item for et al. (2007) , Mitchell et strong support from my colleagues and/or s u- MIMIC al. (2001b) and Watson - pervisor (or person to whom I am a ccountable). Wyatt (2005) . OL7 I am pleased to work at this bank because the Item for working rel ationships are positive. MIMIC Community Fit CF5 I really like the place where I live. Global Item Developed from concepts CF6 I would not leave this community because the Item for by Cross (2003) , Mitchell neighbou rhood is lovely. MIMIC et al. (2001b) . CF7 I am pleased to live in this community. Item for MIMIC Community Sacrifice CS6 Leaving this community would be very hard for Global Item Developed from concepts me. by Cross (2003) , Mitchell CS7 Leaving this community may result in difficu l- Item for et al. (2001b) . ties to find the same quality of relationships MIMIC with neighbours. CS8 My personal life would be disrupted if I left this Item for comm unity. MIMIC Community Links CL5 I feel much attached to the community I live in. Global Item Developed from concepts CL6 I prefer to get home soon to stay with my fa mily Item for by Cross (2003) , Mitchell rather than spending extra hours at work. MIMIC et al. (2001b) . CL7 I feel that my home life is more exciting than Item for work l ife. MIMIC