The influence of business process outsourcing on the relation between organizational commitment and turnover intention, proactive behavior and job stress

(1)

The influence of business process outsourcing on the relation

between organizational commitment and turnover intention,

proactive behavior and job stress

Faculty of Economics and Business Amsterdam Business School Roetersstraat 11

1018 WB Amsterdam Student: J.P.J Witteveen Student number: 6163394 Date: 24-08-2014

Master Bedrijfskunde Supervisor: Nesrien Abu Ghazaleh, PhD Master Thesis

(2)

Content

1. Introduction to related concepts and state of research ... 4

1.1 General research question... 4

1.2 Conceptual research model... 5

1.3 Structure of the report ... 6

2. Literature ... 7

2.1 Outsourcing ... 7

2.1.1 Definition of outsourcing ... 7

2.1.2 Development of outsourcing ... 8

2.1.3 Types of outsourcing ... 10

2.1.4 Process of business process outsourcing ... 10

2.1.5 Drivers for business process outsourcing ... 12

2.2 Business proces outsourcing & Change ... 14

2.3 Business process outsourcing & Commitment ... 15

2.3.1 Antecedents of organizational commitment ... 18

2.3.2 Effects of organizational commitment ... 20

3. Methodology and data ... 26

3.1 Sample ... 26

3.2 Procedure ... 27

3.3 Analysis ... 27

3.4 Measures ... 27

4. Results ... 29

4.1 Hypothesis concerning affective commitment ... 29

4.2 Hypothesis concerning continuance commitment ... 33

4.3 Hypothesis concerning normative commitment ... 37

5. Conclusion and recommendations ... 41

5.1 Conclusion and discussion ... 41

5.2 Theoretical contributions ... 42

5.3 Managerial contributions ... 43

5.4 Limitations... 43

6. Literature ... 44

(3)

Preface

I am proud to present my master thesis in this form, which allows me the completion of my master of science in business studies at the University of Amsterdam.

Without the support of my environment, this work would not be finished up to this dimension. First of all I would like to thank my supervisor Nesrien Abu Ghazaleh, who motivated and supported me in finalizing this research through critical and honest feedback at the right time. Besides that, I would like to thank the company who gave me the opportunity to perform my research by allowing me to conduct the survey on their location.

Furthermore, I want to thank my colleague Froukje Canter Cremers and my family for the mental support in finishing my report. At the end, conducting this research has been a great experience, not only to understand the aspects of research and the field of study of organizational commitment, but also to learn how to show dedication and discipline in order to accomplish the goal. Finally, I want to thank Tim Vissers, for sticking up with me along the ride.

The copyright of the master thesis rests with the author. UVA is only responsible for coaching, but cannot be held responsible for any content.

(4)

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this quantitative study is to understand how outsourcing influence the relation between organizational commitment and turnover intention, on the job behavior and job stress and to contribute to the existing models of organizational commitment.

Methodological Approach In this study a quantitative approach is chosen. The data was retrieved through self-administered survey’s at a company which specializes in claim handling. Two groups were formed, one of employees who were contracted directly by the company and the other group who started working at the company through business process outsourcing. Data was analyzed using the computer program SPSS. Several analysis were performed; correlation analysis has been done and in order to test moderation relationships, a multiple regression analysis is conducted including a product variable to test the moderation effect.

Findings The type of organizational commitment an employee has, effects the way how the

outsourcing process is experienced by the employees. There is a significant negative moderating effect between continuance commitment and the effects of commitment, turnover intention and proactive behavior. Furthermore, a large part of the model of Saks (1996) was confirmed.

Theoretical contribution The research has showed a negative moderating effect of outsourcing on the relation between continuance commitment and the variables job stress and proactive behavior. These results are significant for the field of human resource management in term of providing new insights that need deeper investigation and so provide a backbone and an agenda for further research. The results indicate a need for deeper investigation on continuance commitment and outsourcing over more than one company.

Managerial contribution Management can learn how to guide and support employees through the transformational change process that employees undergo in order to come to an efficient organization were employees perform and behave at their best.

Keywords Outsourcing, Organizational Commitment, Turnover Intention, Proactive Behavior, Stress on the Job

(5)

1. Introduction to related concepts and state of research

From the process perspective, as defined by Barthélemy (2003, p.87), outsourcing can be viewed as turning over all or a part of an organizational activity or process to an outside vendor. Business process outsourcing is the takeover of an entire business function to a third party – including process expertise, technology, operations and support. In all kind of industries outsourcing is a common strategy and growing. A lot of research was performed on the drivers for outsourcing; what are the main advantages and disadvantages and is outsourcing a successful solution for companies? This research specifies not on the financial or process motivations of outsourcing, but investigates the consequences that outsourcing has on employees who deal with a change in employer. As said by Embleton & Wright (1998): ,,The human aspect of outsourcing often is overlooked.”. When organizational changes occur within companies, this leads to some comments among workers in respect of the change itself and with respect to the organization (after the change). Organizational changes are associated with uncertainties for employees, increasing pressure, considerations of the justification of the change etc. These factors influence the degree of involvement (Oreg, 2003). Therefore the organizational commitment of employees will be different for those who dealt with outsourcing rather than those that were directly contracted by the company. Meyer & Allan (1991) distinguish three different types of commitment in their three component model, namely affective, continuance and normative commitment. These types of commitment lead to different outcomes or effects, for example, proactive behavior, turnover intention and level of stress. An employee with a high level of commitment is likely to have a higher level proactive behavior than those who have a lower level of commitment. The same principles go for turnover intention and job stress. It is not investigated yet what happens to these effects when employee deal with a hugs change like outsourcing. Prior research on outsourcing has also mainly focused on the company that makes the decision to turn over activities or processes including employees over to a third party, however little research was performed on the outsourcing party and how this company manages the change for their new employees. The theory on outsourcing is lacking on explaining the effects of outsourcing on employees. It is therefore crucial, to step by step, describe what possible effects outsourcing may have employees other than those who were not part of an outsourcing experience.

1.1 General research question

The current discussion on outsourcing, the advantages and disadvantages, recognizing the existing research gap, possible management solutions, as well as personal interest for outsourcing and employee commitment, motivated this research study and led to the believe that business process outsourcing is an organizational change for employees and that this change has an effect on the

(6)

organizational commitment of those employees. When organizations gain more insight in the theme commitment, they will be able to respond more adequately to organizational changes. Based on the literature described above a question is formulated. This research question is further detailed in the conceptual model in the next paragraph and entails:

How does outsourcing influence the relation between organizational commitment and turnover intention, on the job behavior and job stress ?

1.2 Conceptual research model

The conceptual model aims to visualize the main concepts of investigation. The concepts of this paper are both entailed in the general research question. Organizational commitment is the independent variable and the effects of organizational commitment are the dependent variables. It is suspected that the process employees undergo during a business process outsourcing placement impacts the level of organizational commitment. This can be explained by the moderating role of business process outsourcing. Fout! Verwijzingsbron niet gevonden. shows the conceptual model of this thesis.

(7)

1.3 Structure of the report

This research report is build up on theoretical and analysis phases. Figure 2outlines the structure of this report. Chapter two contains the literature review were the main concepts are discussed. The central research question and the research Hypothesis are also described here. Methodology and data are in chapter three. Chapter four contains the results whereas the conclusions and recommendation are in chapter five.

(8)

2. Literature

The overall goal of the literature review is to strengthen and specify the conceptual model in order to define measurements of the main concepts that serve as foundation for the research. In this chapter the following aspects of outsourcing will be elaborated: its definitions, the history and the process that starts from the moment a company considers to outsource something. The advantages and disadvantages are also discussed. Then the concepts of change management are described since outsourcing can be seen as strategic change in a company. The transformational change model is introduced to understand the process employees go through during outsourcing processes. The last topic of this chapter is organizational commitment. The definitions of commitment are described as well as the antecedents and the effects of organizational commitment. Finally, the relation between outsourcing and organizational commitment is described.

2.1 Outsourcing

According to Fill & Visser (2000) outsourcing is one of the most sustained trends of concurrent business. This chapter aims to provide a clarification of the definition of outsourcing and to introduce the research field. It is attempted to provide a critical view on the rise of the phenomena outsourcing, on existing theories and related concepts. A focus is on the change process that employees need to deal with when they are facing an outsourcing project. In this chapter first an overview of the definitions of outsourcing is given followed by the history and development of the outsourcing strategy. After that the different types of outsourcing are explained as well as the drivers for outsourcing.

2.1.1 Definition of outsourcing

Outsourcing is commonly defined as the transfer of activities and processes previously conducted internally to an external party (Ellram & Billington, 2001). The definition of Ellram & Billington (2001) of outsourcing can be viewed from two perspectives: product or process. From the process perspective, as defined by Barthélemy “outsourcing can be viewed as turning over all or a part of an organizational activity or process to an outside vendor” Barthélemy (2003, p.87). In business process outsourcing an entire business function is provided by a third party – including process expertise, technology, operations and support. For example an insurance company can choose to outsource all claim handling activities or the entire call center environment. Another example that relates to outsourcing only a part of an activity is the outsourcing of the salary administration of a human resource department. Ellram and Billington (2001, p.16) define outsourcing from the production view as “the transfer of the production of goods or services that had been performed internally to an external party”. This could be the production process of Nike shoes to a Third World country were labor costs

(9)

are low. In the transfer, the responsibilities of the management and continuous improvement of the processes are included.

2.1.2 Development of outsourcing

Hätönen and Eriksson (2009) describe three periods that were important in the development of outsourcing: outsourcing, strategic outsourcing and transformational outsourcing. During the first period that lasted from the 1980s to the early 1990s, organizations first began farming out call centers and other service-oriented operations (Lacity & Hirschheim, 1993). Companies outsourced noncore business processes basically to cut operational costs. The new word ‘outsourcing’ was a tool to make organizations more efficient economic units for profit maximization. Outsourcing mainly occurred domestically and the relationships between the company and the vendor relied on contracts (Hätönen & Eriksson 2009).

In the early 1990s, Hamel and Prahalad (1990) introduced a new management approach in order to replace the strategic business unit (SBU) thinking. A definition concerning strategic business units is described by Johnson and Scholes (1999). They describe a business unit as “a part of an organization for which there is a distinct external market for goods or services that is different from another business units” (Johnson and Scholes, 1999, p. 7). This can be a product or product line or a brand. For example, Becel (Unilever). In their article, Hamel and Prahalad (1990) looked at a company not as a collection of strategic business units, but as a portfolio of core competencies; the company’s collective knowledge about how to coordinate diverse production skills and technologies. Focusing on core competencies creates unique, integrated systems that reinforce fit among a firm’s diverse production and technology skills (Hamel & Prahalad 1990). Achieving cost efficiency was no longer the sole motive of outsourcing. Companies started to seek external skills, competences and knowledge to provide value to more complex and strategically important organizational processes.

A new word ‘strategic outsourcing’ emerged (Alexander & Young, 1996b; Quinn & Hilmer,1994). In contrast to traditional outsourcing, more strategic functions like human resource departments were outsourced. This change also meant that the cooperation between the company and the outsourcing partner became more important. As a result, firms started building closer relationships with their outsourcing partners. Organizations stretched their boundaries to gain competitive advantage through strategic outsourcing. The management ideology ,,focus on your core competence, and outsource the rest” (e.g., Porter, 1996, p.256) was gaining popularity in industries like the IT business and production companies. Although the resources, like knowledge, were primarily searched from domestic markets, already in the early 1990s firms also focused on the international resource pools.

(10)

The labor costs in Third World countries were lower than in Europe and it was therefore attractive to outsource a firms call center or production of materials to those countries.

By the turn of the millennium, outsourcing had become the norm rather than an exception (Lawton & Michaels, 2001). Global access to vendors, falling interaction costs, improved information technologies and communications links provided companies a possibility to restructure their businesses (Doig, Ritter, Speckhals & Woolson, 2001). The global resource pool had, as well, come available for companies regardless of their industry, geographical location or their size. These developments led to the current phase in the outsourcing history. This era traces an increasing trend towards organizational structures, in which boundaries have become blurry and fading. ‘Transformational outsourcing’ aims at creating new business models that generate competitive edge to firms and change the rules of the game in their industries (Engardio, 2006). The relationship between the vendor and the company is also changing; cooperation and co-development have become key issues in managing outsourcing relations. All enabling decomposition of knowledge-intensive and creative-in-nature activities. As a result, management executives have been forced to create competences in management of the portfolios of the value-adding supplier relations. The future competitive edge is seen to lie in flexibility that can be achieved through tight operational focus and leveraging external core competences outside this focus area (Engardio, 2006). So, outsourcing has evolved to a stage where firms can achieve operational flexibility without incurring the costs associated with bureaucracy. The above elaborated discussion is summarized in Tabel 1 below.

1980s to early 1990s

Early 1990s to early 2000 From early 2000 onwards

Prime motives Cut costs Cut costs, capability enhancement, process improvement

Organizational transformation

Key word Outsourcing Strategic outsourcing Transformational outsourcing

Strategic rationalization

Profit maximizing Strategic and competitive edge Survival

Main theories Transaction theory Resource / competence-based view Organizational theories

(11)

2.1.3 Types of outsourcing

Hiemstra and Van Tilburg (1993) distinguish two types of outsourcing: capacity outsourcing and non-capacity outsourcing. Capacity outsourcing refers to the outsourcing of activities when the company has temporarily insufficient production facilities. For example due to seasonal demand, or when during the summer holiday more travel insurance claims are claimed by the insured while and the regular occupation of the department is understaffed during a few months. Non-capacity outsourcing means the outsourcing of activities which are no longer produced or executed by the company itself like the Nike shoes. Mylot (1995) distinguishes full outsourcing, selective outsourcing and everything in between outsourcing. Full outsourcing means that the vendor is in charge of all activities. When using selective outsourcing, the vendor will provide services for one or a few activities such as payroll. Between these two types of outsourcing many forms lie in between. For example consultancy or project outsourcing. Figure 3 shows that outsourcing can be seen as a continuum and that it has many forms: from a market exchange structure were a company needs temporarily help to a strategic partnership structure whereby long-term deliverables are desired.

Figure 3 The Outsourcing Spectrum, Fill & Visser (2000)

2.1.4 Process of business process outsourcing

Halvey and Melby (2007) describe four periods in the contractual outsourcing process. This is the process that starts from the moment the company has made the decision to transfer its activity or process to an external vendor. These four periods are shown in Figure 4:

1. Preparation: During this first period the company decides whether to outsource or not. If the company decides to outsource (this usually takes several months in which multiple internal analysis are performed in order to answer the question: can we do it ourselves or not?),

(12)

information is gathered about the processes or services that should be outsourced and the scope of the possible transaction is defined.

2. Selection: During this period a group of potential vendors is selected. The potential vendors are given a ‘Request for Information’ in which the vendor can introduce himself to the company. The next step is the ‘Request for Proposal (RFP)’. The RFP outlines the bidding process and contract terms, and provides guidance on how the bid should be formatted and presented. A RFP is typically open to a wide range of bidders, creating open competition between possible vendors.

3. Negotiation: In this period of forging the legal relationship the company has to analyze and evaluate the proposals and notify the preferred suppliers. Then the negotiation process starts were due diligence investigation is done by the vendors and the company. It is possible that the company and the provider write a letter of intent. This is a brief document that in most cases is a legal non-binding letter. It represents a written picture of the process that is followed by the company. Both parties say they have confidence in the process they start during the real negotiation were the prices are discussed.

4. Contract: During this period companies make the outsourcing choice final and the outsourcing contract is signed. The formalization of the outsourcing contract is the last period where companies make the outsourcing choice final and the outsourcing contract is signed. Service Level Agreements and other legal documentation are written by the vendor and the company.

Figure 4 The outsourcing process, Keyser & Vulder (2004)

In the period after signing the contract, an implementation project starts where different departments are involved in. The relation between the company and the vendor has to be managed, the service levels need to be achieved, the logistics need to be in order, the IT processes need to be managed and the human resource activities have to be handled. Minten (2006) describes the human resource process after the contract is signed by the company and the vendor. This process is divided into three stages as shown in figure 3: the pre-transition, transition and transformation period.

1. Pre-transition: The period after the official announcement that the contract is signed and the transfer of the employees to the new provider is in process, is called the pre-transition period. In this period attention is paid to questions employees have regarding their new employer. Attention is paid to the new company values and the working conditions.

(13)

1.1.1 Transition: During this period a customer organization moves from its current mode of operation to a managed mode operation. Transition includes the takeover of the as-is environment as well as contractual requirements necessary to facilitate the transfer. The transition starts after the transfer of the employees and lasts three to six months. There is a growing awareness under employees that their work environment will change.

2. Transformation is the implementation of contractually defined projects within a specified period of time that leads to service enhancements. It consists of both technical and corresponding business transformation to improve the ongoing management (Minten, 2006.)

Figure 5 Periods of transformation during outsourcing, Minten (2006)

2.1.5 Drivers for business process outsourcing

Kremic et al. (2006) performed research in order to make a framework for the different drivers for outsourcing. They distinguish three major categories: cost, strategy and politics. The first two commonly drive outsourcing by private industries. Politics often drive outsourcing by public organizations (Kakabadse & Kakabadse, 2000a). Cost and strategy categories are discussed in more detail in the following sub-sections.

Cost driven outsourcing

Most literature identifies the desire to save costs as an explanation for outsourcing (Arnold, 2000). Outsourcing for cost reasons can occur when suppliers' costs are low enough that even with added overhead, profit, and transaction costs suppliers can still deliver a service for a lower price (Harler, 2000). Specialization and economies of scale are mechanisms used to achieve this level of efficiency (Kakabadse and Kakabadse, 2000a). A desire to save indirect costs may also drive outsourcing. Having fewer employees (requires) less infrastructure and support systems is required (Hubbard, 1993) which may result in a more flexible and efficient organization. Some organizations outsource to achieve better cost control (Alexander & Young, 1996) while others try to shift fixed costs into variable costs (Anderson, 1997).

(14)

Strategy-driven outsourcing

More recently, the main drivers for outsourcing appear to be shifting from cost to strategic issues such as core competence and flexibility (Quinn, 1994). In general, the literature supports outsourcing as a strategy, which may offer improved business performance on numerous dimensions (Prahalad & Hamel, 1990; Quinn et al., 1990a, b). Perhaps the most often cited strategic reason for outsourcing is to make it possible for the organization to better focus on its core competencies (Quinn, 1999). In addition to refocusing resources into core competencies, other strategy issues which encourage the consideration of outsourcing are restructuring, rapid organizational growth, changing technology and the need for greater flexibility to manage demand swings (Kakabadse & Kakabadse, 2000a). Flexibility appears to be an important driver not just from a scale perspective but also regarding the scope of product or service. Organizations need to react quicker to customer requirements and outsourcing is seen as a vehicle to accomplish this. Embleton & Wright (1998) explain in their research that on average, companies can reduce costs for 9 percent and increase their productivity and quality with 15% through outsourcing. They also gave an overview of the common advantages and disadvantages. Advantages of business process outsourcing are:

 Cost savings: small companies have the possibility to benefit from economies of scale, large companies could benefit by separating what usually are not really good management activities. Next to that, there are many organizations which have hidden costs that are not discovered until a process is being outsourced. Furthermore, there are several assets which could be sold for cash infusion if a process is being outsourced. Stock performance often is enhanced, as investors expect cost reductions.

 Core activities: if specific areas outside the core business have been preoccupying management attention, outsourcing could be a way to get rid from these issues.

 Talent availability: outsourcing provides access to talents or maybe even specialist that are not available in-house.

 Evaluation: bringing in an outsourcing partner allows managers to reevaluate their business processes.

 Increase in flexibility: management has greater flexibility in allocating human resources. Control: the outsourcing partner is bound by contract to perform on agreed levels of service, while internal departments do not always control these levels.

 Possibilities for in house staff: in-house staff can be freed up for more interesting or challenging tasks.

 Increase in performance: outsourcing can be used to increase productivity.

 Increase in quality: outsourcing can improve quality, as the outsourcing partner is a specialist in a specific area.

(15)

Disadvantages of business process outsourcing are for example: • Control: outsourcing cedes control to the outsourcing partner.

• Morale: severe cuts in staff can damage the morale of existing workers.

• Contract costs: the time that is needed to manage the contract could costs a lot of money. • Quality of service: the quality of the good or service have to be supervised.

• Staff degradation: A decrease in employee morale could encourage the best and most talented staff to seek new another job with more opportunities.

• Loss of flexibility: the cooperation with most outsourcing partners require long-term contracts that will provide them with solvable and stable revenues. These contracts have to be negotiated to allow variability in demand and cost. This flexibility costs a lot of money.

• Outsourcer profit: the outsourcing partner need to make a profit on work the organization did. • Public image: a large employee lay-offs are not beneficial to the corporate image

It becomes clear as described in the literature concerning outsourcing there is a research gap concerning the effects on the employees that are outsourced. Next to that, the literature is mainly written from the companies perspective and not from the perspective of the outsourcer.

2.2 Business proces outsourcing & Change

Organizational change often happens in the context of failure of for example a product or a business unit. A typical storyline is: “first there were losses, then there was a plan of change, and then there was an implementation, which led to unexpected results” (Czarniawska & Joerges, 1996, p.20).

Organizational change challenges the ‘way things are done in here’ and, as a result, individuals experience uncertainty and start having fears about the potential failure in coping with the new situation (Coch & French, 1948). Moreover, Armenakis and Bedeian (1999, p. 307) considered stress as “an obstacle to change planning and implementation and they argued that: Receptivity, resistance, commitment, cynicism, stress and related personal reactions are clearly relevant criterion variables to be considered in the framework of planning and implementing an organizational change”. Change can obviously cause cynicism and stress, thereby inhibiting success. The most influential model to implement and manage organizational change is that of Kotter (1996). He identified eight stages that management should follow to successfully implement change from establishing a sense of urgency as step one, to anchoring new changes in the culture in the last step. This model is somewhat general especially concerning a specific change namely an outsourcing project. Here employees shift from one employer to a new one, without making this choice his or her self. Minten (2006) describes the change process before, during and after the outsourcing of employees. This is shown in the figure below.

(16)

Figure 6 the transformational change process (Minten, 2006, p...)

The different transition stages can take several years to complete. When employees need to deal with these fases it is like to assume that during these periods the commitment of these employees change overtime, more specifically the change might have a negative effects on the organizational commitment in comparison to employees that already work at the outsourcing company. Those employees do have face the change process of Minten (2006).

2.3 Business process outsourcing & Commitment

According to Meyer and Herscovith (2001) commitment in the workplace can take various forms and have the potential to influence organizational effectiveness and employee well-being (Meyer & Herscovith, 2001, p 229). The literature distinguishes between commitment in general, organizational commitment and job commitment.

Commitment in general

“A state of being in which an individual becomes bound by his actions and through these actions to beliefs that sustain the activities of his own involvement”… (Salanik, 1977, p.62).

Organizational commitment

Porter, Steers, Mowday and Boulian, (1974, p.604) define organizational commitment ,,to involve an internalization of the organization's values, a willingness to effort toward helping the organization

(17)

achieve its goals, and a strong desire to maintain membership in the organization…”. Another definition was given by Mowdey et al. (1979), who define organizational commitment as “…the relative strength of an individual’s identification with and involvement in a particular organization…” Mowdey et al. (1979, p.234).

Job commitment

Job commitment refers to the likelihood that an individual will stick with a job and feel psychologically attached to it, whether it is satisfying or not (Rusbult & Farrell, 1983).

There is consensus that commitment is seen as a mindset. For commitment in the workplace the following general definition is used: “Commitment in the workplace is a force that binds an individual to a course of action of relevance to one or more targets…” (Meyer & Herscovith, 2001, p301). Managers show interest in the topic of organizational commitment since research indicates that identification, as described above, has important behavioral outcomes like performance (Mowday, Porter & Dubin, 1974), absenteeism (Steers, 1977) and turnover (Hom, Katerberg, & Hulin, 1979; Porter, Steers, Mowday, & Boulian, 1974). Recent study of Riketta (2002) shows that commitment results in almost any type of behavior that benefits the organization such as work performance. Research concerning this topic describes the importance of commitment to these organizational behavior outcomes. Having committed employees means that their performance increases and the level of absenteeism and turnover decreases which is good for the company’s success. Therefore, much effort has been directed toward identifying variables that may influence levels of commitment (Brown, 1969; Buchanan, 1974; Hall & Schneider, 1972; Hrebiniak & Alutto, 1972; Steers, 1977).

Meyer & Allen (1991) have found three components within the literature on organizational commitment: affective, continuity and normative commitment. They created a model based on the observation that the belief that commitment binds an individual to an organization, and thereby reduced the likelihood of turnover. The key differences were in the mind-sets presumed to characterize the commitment. This model has been subjected to the greatest empirical scrutiny and has arguably received the greatest support (e.g., Meyer, Stanley, Herscovitz &Topolnyutsky, 2002). Affective commitment means that the employee is emotional attached to, identified with and involved in the organization. Employees with a strong affective commitment continue to work with the organization because they want to do so. Continuity involvement means that the worker looks at the costs if he wants to leave the organization, for example salary or employee benefits. Employees remain working at the company because they need to. Normative commitment means that the employee feels he has a duty towards the company to stay. Employees remain working at the company because they feel they ought to do so. Figure 7 makes this visual.

(18)

Figure 7 Organizational commitment model Meyer and Allen (1991)

Research by Mowday et al. (1982) shows that affective commitment contributes most to the success of the organization in general. Previous research showed that affective commitment has the strongest positive correlation with job performance, organizational citizenship behavior and attendance. The second strongest relation is with normative commitment. Continuance commitment seems to be unrelated or even negatively related to these factors. The study by Meyer & Allen (1991) showed that continuous commitment increases when employees realize that they have invested in the organization and they feel that there is little in return, beyond their salary. Continuance commitment can also arise when the employees realize that the same or similar jobs with better working conditions are limited.

In the research conducted by Embleton & Wright (1998) where they discuss the advantages and disadvantages of outsourcing, they stated at disadvantage: ,”Severe cuts in staff can damage the morale of existing workers”. “The human aspect of outsourcing often is overlooked” (Embleton & Wrhight, 1998, p.99). The social costs of outsourcing may be difficult to quantify, but they can be significant. Outsourcing may result in low morale, high absenteeism, lower productivity, etc. (Eisele, 1994; Kakabadse & Kakabadse, 2000a; Walsh, 1996). Kessler et al. (2006) claim that the knowledge of the impact of outsourcing on employee attitude and behavior remains extremely limited. Kessler et al. (2006) examine employee responses to outsourcing. They identify three factors that can influence the way in which employees react to a change:

- How do employees feel they are treated by their existing employer?

- How attractive employment is viewed with the new employer by the employees? - How are employees experiences the reality of the change in employer?

Organizational commitment Affective commitment I want to stay Continuance commitment I need to stay Normative commitment I ought to stay

(19)

2.3.1 Antecedents of organizational commitment

Mowday et al. (1982) noted that the antecedents of organizational commitment fall generally into four categories: personal characteristics, structural characteristics, job-related characteristics and work experiences. Saks (1996) has developed a model of antecedents and consequences of commitment in the workplace. This model is shown in Figure 8.

Figure 8 Model of antecedents and consequences of organizational commitment (Saks, 1996, p. 604)

Affective commitment

The model above, shows that antecedents concerning affective commitment are personal characteristics and work experience. According to Mathieu & Zajac, (1990), a number of demographic variables are related to affective commitment. For example, age is a positive predictor of affective commitment. This is because for employees who are getting older, the number of alternative job opportunities decreasing. Automatically the current job is better appreciated. Older employees have a long history with the company which they are involved in. Next to that they feel that they have united with the culture and history of the company and because they invested in this more than younger workers (Dunham et al, 1994). So tenure of the organization is also related to affective commitment. But what happens when these older, high experienced employees are told to that they will need to leave the organization because their work is being outsourced? Would it not be more difficult for older people to adjust to a new work environment? So would age not be a negative influence on the

(20)

commitment when people face outsourcing? Another variable is gender: women are more involved with a company than men (Mathieu & Zajac, 1990) because women pass more barriers to be part of the company within the meaning of the obtain membership (Grusky, 1966). Conversely one can say that it reflects a higher level of affective commitment when women show more commitment to a to be part of an organization. Also, marital status is related to commitment (Mathieu & Zajac, 1990). The theory behind this is that married or cohabited employees feel more financial uncertainty and have a greater familial responsibility. This makes them more likely to stay compared to singles. Meyer & Allan (1991) noted that the strongest and most consistent relationships have been obtained with work experienced. Employees whose experiences within the organization are consistent with their expectations and satisfy their basis needs tent to develop a stronger affective attachment to the organization than to those whose experiences are less satisfying. Work experience that satisfies employees: equity in reward distribution and personal importance to the organization.

Normative commitment

Antecedents of normative commitment include the personal characters as is described in the section about affective commitment. Next to this, normative commitment is based on the socialization experiences and organizational investments, both cumulated to the feeling that employees are moral attached to the company. Meyer and Allan (1991) describe the example of parents who stress the importance of remaining loyal to one employer, set the stage for a strong normative commitment to the organization in their children. With the change in employer the outsourcing causes, it is likely to assume that normative commitment decreases.

Continuance commitment

The antecedents for continuance commitment are also personal characteristics and the alternatives for another job and the investments employees have made in the current job. Because continuance commitment reflects the recognition of costs associated with leaving the organization, anything that increases perceived costs can be considered an antecedent. The most frequently studied antecedents have been side bets, or investments and the availability of alternatives. Side bets can take many forms, for example the threat of wasting time and effort spend acquiring non-transferable skills, of losing attractive benefits or giving up seniority-based privileges or having to disrupt personal relationships can be perceived as potential costs of leaving a company. An employee can mostly make a decision whether or not to go to the new outsourcing employer. However, the antecedents of continuance commitment are likely to be a huge factor in making this decision. Employees at an older age might have little alternatives for another job and therefore undergo the outsourcing process, however at low level of affective commitment, but high level of continuance commitment.

(21)

2.3.2 Effects of organizational commitment

Turnover intention

Turnover within an organization often results from a combination of events within a company, conditions under which an employee must work and psychological factors whereby the attitude of the worker to the organization has worsened (Hwang & Chang, 2006). Turnover is the actual event of leaving an organization, where turnover intention only is the thought of leaving. Turnover intention was conceived to be a conscious and deliberate willfulness to leave the organization. It is often measured with reference to a specific interval (for example within the coming six months), and has been described as the last in a sequence of withdrawal cognitions, a set to which thinking of quitting and intent to search for alternative employment also belong.

Several studies have demonstrated that turnover intention is highly correlated to actual turnover (Hwang & Chang, 2006). Hwang and Chang (2006) argue that several factors may be leading to turnover intention. Three factors that point to this are: individual factors, economic factors and work-related factors. Job Satisfaction (Fochsen et al, 2005) and organizational commitment (Sourdif, 2004) are identified by researchers as factors that are work-related. Job Satisfaction and organizational commitment are factors with a negative correlation with turnover intention.

According to Mathieu and Zajac, 1990, it is logically that employees who are not involved with a company are more inclined to leave than employees who are affectively committed. The emotional connection that employees feel with the organization creates a low tendency to leave the organization. (Meyer & Allen, 1997, 2002). The model of Saks (1996) shows that there is a negative relation between the organizational commitment types and turnover intention. Therefore it is likely that when this model is retested, the same results are shown. The outsourcing process employees undergo, cause a new contract between the employee and the new employer (the outsourcing partner). Hereby it is expected the business process outsourcing process is something employees have not chosen for themselves and therefore turnover intention is rising. This leads to the Hypothesis as stated on the next page.

(22)

Hypothesis 1a: Affective commitment correlates negatively with turnover intention

Hypothesis 1b: Business process outsourcing is a negative moderator in the relation between affective commitment and turnover intention. Therefore it is expected that the level of turnover intention is higher for employees who deal with an outsourcing process.

Hypothesis 2a: Continuance commitment correlates negatively with turnover intention

Hypothesis 2b: Business process outsourcing is a negative moderator in the relation between continuance commitment and turnover intention. Therefore it is expected that the level of turnover intention is higher for employees who deal with an outsourcing process.

Hypothesis 3a: Normative commitment correlates negatively with turnover intention

Hypothesis 3b: Business process outsourcing is a negative moderator in the relation between continuance commitment and turnover intention. Therefore it is expected that the level of turnover intention is higher for employees who deal with an outsourcing process.

Figure 9 Hypothesis 1

(23)

Proactive behavior

Crant (2000) defines proactive behavior as “taking initiative in improving current circumstances or creating new ones; it involves challenging the status quo rather than passively adapting to present conditions” (Crant, 2000, p. 436). Employees can engage in proactive activities as part of their in-role behavior in which they fulfill basic job requirements. For example, call center agents might ask feedback on their communication technique to improve their job performance. Extra-rol behavior can also be proactive, for example the enrolment in a traineeship or other career network by identifying and acting on opportunities to change the scope of their job or move to another department.

Bateman and Crant (1993) argued that proactive individuals actively create environmental change, while less proactive people take a more reactive approach toward their jobs. The proactive personality concept was extended to the work-team level in a field study of 101 work teams from four organizations with formal teamwork systems (Kirkman & Rosen, 1999). Kirkman and Rosen’s data showed that team-level proactivity was positively related to productivity. More proactive teams also experienced higher levels of organizational commitment

There is some evidence that scores on the measure of the organizational commitment questionnaire of Mowday et al (1982) correlate positively with indexes of performance (Steers 1977). Thus, employee who are affectively committed to the organization tend to perform at a higher level than those who are not. Meyer & Allen (1986) found negative correlations between continuance commitment and self-report measures of motivation and performance. Thus, employees who indicated that it would be costly for them to leave their current employers described themselves as contributing less to organizational effectiveness than those who perceived lower costs associated with leaving. Given the theory on performance and commitment, which is not completely the same as the effect of commitment on proactive behavior, one can state that the more one is affected committed to an organization, the more proactive behavior he or she will show. It is also expected that as well as with job performance, the level of proactive behavior will decrease when employees feel more aspects of continuance or normative commitment. When business process outsourcing is added to this relation, the effect is likely to be negative. This can be explained by the transformational process the employees must undergo which brings uncertainty to hem. It is expected that this uncertainty and new environment has a negative impact on the level of proactive behavior. This leads to the following Hypothesis:

(24)

Hypothesis 4a: Affective commitment correlated positively to proactive behavior

Hypothesis 4b: Business process outsourcing is a negative moderator in the relation between affective commitment and proactive behavior. Therefore it is expected that the level of proactive behavior is lower for employees who deal with an outsourcing process.

Hypothesis 5a: Continuance commitment correlated negatively to proactive behavior

Hypothesis 5b: Business process outsourcing is a negative moderator in the relation between continuance commitment and proactive behavior. Therefore it is expected that the level of proactive behavior is lower for employees who deal with an outsourcing process.

Hypothesis 6a: Normative commitment correlated positively to proactive behavior

Hypothesis 6b: Business process outsourcing is a negative moderator in the relation between normative commitment and proactive behavior. Therefore it is expected that the level of proactive behavior is lower for employees who deal with an outsourcing process.

(25)

Job stress

Job-related stress is defined as an uncomfortable and undesirable feeling experienced by an individual 'who is required to deviate from normal or self-desired functioning in the work place as the result of opportunities, constraints or demands relating to potentially important related outcomes' (Parker and DeCotiis, 1983, p. 165) Job-related stress has been linked to decreased individual performance (Jamal, 1990) and decreased organizational effectiveness (Beehr & Newman, 1978). Job stress can also be viewed as an individual’s reactions to work environment characteristics that appear threatening to the individual. It indicated a poor fit between the individual abilities and the work environment in which either excessive demands are made from the individual, or the individual is not fully equipped to handle a particular situation. (Sosik & Godshalk, 2000, p. 366).

Jamal (1990) found a negative relation between job stress and organizational commitment. Based on the research available it seems reasonable to assume that employees willingness to contribute to organizational effectiveness will be influenced by the nature of the commitment they experience. Employees who would like to belong to the company might be more likely than those who need to belong or feel obligated to belong, to exert effort on behalf of the organization (Sosik & Godshalk, 2000). Therefore it would be likely that affective commitment is positively related to employees health or negatively related to the level of job stress that is experienced by the employee.

The model of Saks (1996), which is discussed on chapter 2.3.1, shows a relation between commitment and employee health / wellbeing. Affective commitment and normative commitment show a positive relation to health and continuance commitment a negative. Taken this theory in account, it is expected that experiencing an outsourcing as employee, it comes with a great deal of stress. Therefore the influence of business process outsourcing could have a negative moderating effect, since the process is a change for employees which can increase the level of stress employees experience. This leads to the following Hypothesis:

(26)

Hypothesis 7a: Affective commitment correlates negatively with job stress

Hypothesis 7b: Business process outsourcing is a negative moderator in the relation between affective commitment and stress. Therefore it is expected that the level of stress is higher for employees who deal with an outsourcing process.

Hypothesis 8a: Continuance commitment correlates positively with job stress

Hypothesis 8b: Business process outsourcing is a negative moderator in the relation between continuance commitment and stress. Therefore it is expected that the level of stress is higher for employees who deal with an outsourcing process.

Hypothesis 9a: Normative commitment correlates negatively with job stress

Hypothesis 9b: Business process outsourcing is a negative moderator in the relation between normative and stress. Therefore it is expected that the level of stress is higher for employees who deal with an outsourcing process.

(27)

3. Methodology and data

The purpose of the research that is described above is an explanatory research, because it focuses on explaining the relation between variables. (Saunders et al,, 2007, p.140). The existing theory about the chosen variables is narrowed down into nine specific Hypothesis that are tested. In order to answer the research question, apart from a literature study, also quantitative research was done. An appropriate strategy is the use of self-administered questionnaires. Saunders et al. (2007) use a questionnaire as a general term to include all techniques of data collection in which all respondents are asked to respond to the same set of questions in a predetermined order. In this type of survey there is no interviewer present (Saunders et al. 2007). The questions in this survey are standardized. By using standardized questions, respondents interpreted them the way which increases the reliability and validity. To be able to test the Hypothesis and generalize the results to a certain extent, a large amount of data needs to be collected. All respondents were promised strict confidentiality of any information provided. After entering the gathered data into SPSS, a pre-analysis is performed. An overview of the descriptive such as average age, gender and work experience is made. The next step will be examining the reliability. For this a Cronbach’s Alpha can be used. Subsequently regression analysis can be made.

3.1 Sample

The respondents in this study are employees at a company which is specialized in claim handling. The company is an international company with more than 500 employees working in several locations in Europe. The respondents are divided in two groups: one group of employees who are submitted to the effects of outsourcing and one group that were directly contracted by the company. They work in operational teams in either the front office or the back office and are all claim handlers, staff members or managers. The control variables are year of birth, gender, work experience and number of years the employee is outsourced. The constructs defined in the conceptual model needs to be implemented in the questionnaire. This is done by using validated, translated and back-translated questionnaires from previous studies. The sample were 113 male (55,1%) and 92 (44,9%) female respondents. The average age of the respondents is 38,82 years (SD = 12,03) and 52,2% have a higher education degree. The respondents have an average of 3,10 years (SD = 3,11) of work experience at the company.

(28)

3.2 Procedure

Respondents were approached in July 2014 and were asked to participate in the current study by filling out the questionnaire while they were at their work. The questions and scales of the measured variables are translated from English into Dutch. The survey starts with some demographic questions. For example questions like age and gender are stated. Afterwards, questions were asked in order to measure the (in)dependent variables. The questionnaire took about ten minutes to fill in. The filled in questionnaires were handed over in a large bag, so the respondents could see that they are used anonymously.

3.3 Analysis

In order to test all Hypothesis, several analysis have been conducted. To test the main effects, correlation analysis has been done. In order to test moderation relationships, a multiple regression analysis is done including a product variable (moderator x independent variable) to test the moderation effect.

3.4 Measures

Affective Commitment

The antecedent ‘affective commitment’ of the commitment scale (M = 3,26; SD = 0,76) is measured according to the 5-item scale (α = .86) of Meyer and Allen (1991). Example of an item is: “I experience the problems of this organization as my own problems”. The scale ranged from 1 (totally not applicable) to 5 (totally applicable). The higher the score, the more the respondent feels affectively committed to the organization.

Continuance Commitment

The antecedent “continuance commitment” of the commitment scale (M = 3,25; SD = 0,89) is measured according to the 5-item scale (α = .80) of Meyer and Allan (1991). Example of an item is: “It should be hard for me to leave this organization, even if I would like to do so”. The scale ranged from 1 (totally not applicable) to 5 (totally applicable). The higher the score, the more the respondent is continuance committed.

Normative Commitment

The antecedent “normative commitment” of the commitment scale (M = 2,24; SD = 0,88) is measured according to the 5-item scale (α = .86) of Meyer and Allan (1991). Example of an item is: “Even if it is in my own advantage, it would not be justified to leave this organization now”. The scale ranged from

(29)

1 (totally not applicable) to 5 (totally applicable). The higher the score, the more the respondent is normative committed to the organization.

Business Process Outsourcing

Business process outsourcing is measured according to one question, which stated if the employee has come to the organization via an outsourcing project or not. The dichotomy variable has answers 0 (no) and 1 (yes). Of the respondents, 52,7% has been outsourced, while 47,3% has not.

Turnover Intention

To measure turnover intention (M =2,34; SD = 1,01) the scale of Abrams, Ando & Hinkle (1998) is used. The scale exists of 5 items (α = .90). Two items are reversed. Example of an item is: “I think about leaving this organization”. The scale ranged from 1 (totally not applicable) to 5 (totally applicable). The higher the score, the more the respondent have the intention to leave the organization. Pro Active Behavior

To measure pro-active behavior (M = 3,67; SD = 0,75) the scale of Griffin, Neal & Parker (2007) is used. The scale exists of 5 items (α = .81). Example of an item is: “How often last month do you have proposed ideas for improvements according to your work processes?”. The scale ranged from 1 (not very often) to 5 (very often). The higher the score, the more the respondent shows proactive behavior in their job performance.

Job stress

To measure job stress (M = 1,90; SD = 0,59) the scale of De Jong (2008) is used. The scale exists of 12 items (α = .87). Example of an item is: “I am bored at work” and “I am cynical about work”. The scale ranged from 1 (never; less than once every three months) to 5 (always; daily). The higher the score, the more the respondent experience stress because of work.

(30)

4. Results

The research question of this thesis is about the influence of outsourcing on the relationship between organizational commitment and turnover intention, on the job behavior and job stress. In order to answer the research question, several Hypothesis are stated. After testing the stated Hypothesis the research question could be answered. Within this section, the results are shown. In table 1 all correlations, means, standard deviations and Alpha’s are shown.

4.1 Hypothesis concerning affective commitment

To test hypothesis 1a and 1b, a correlation analysis and a regression analysis are carried out. Hypothesis 1a stated that affective commitment correlates negatively with turnover intention. Affective commitment has a significant, negative weak correlation with turnover intention (r = -0.36, p < 0,001). The more one feels affectively committed to the organization, the less the turnover intention

Figure 18 Result Hypothesis 1

Hypothesis 1b stated that business process outsourcing is a negative moderator in the relation between affective commitment and turnover intention. It is expected that the level of turnover intention is higher for employees who deal with an outsourcing process, compared to those who had not dealt with an outsourcing process. To test hypothesis 1b, a multiple regression analysis is conducted. The regression model with “turnover intention” as dependent variable, and “affective commitment” and “business process outsourcing” as independent variables was significant (F = 11,93, df = 3, p < 0,01). Therefore, the model can be used to predict turnover intention. 12,5% of the variance in turnover intention can be predicted according to this model (R2 = 0.13). There is a significant, negative association between turnover intention and affective commitment. However, being outsourced or not does not have a significant relationship (b = .71, t = 1.02, ns.) with turnover intention. The interaction effect between affective commitment and business process outsourcing does not have a significant relationship with turnover intention as well (b = -0,11, t = -0.55, ns.). Table 2 shows an overview of the coefficients.

(31)

Tabel 2 Summary of correlations, means and standard deviations of all variables Variabelena M Sd 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Affective Commitment 3,25 0,76 α = .86 Continuance Commitment 2,62 0,89 -.,02 α = .80 Normative Commitment 2,24 0,88 .31** .42** α = .86 Turnover Intention 2,34 1,01 -.36** -.29** -.24** α = .90

Pro Active Behavior 3,67 0,75 .46** -.13 .05 -.11 α = .81

Job Stress 1,90 0,59 -.24** .27** .03 .25** -.09 α = .87

Genderb - - -.03 .15* .11 -.02 -.11 .04 -

Age 38,82 12,02 -.07 .22** .03 -.29** -.10 .05 .23** -

Tabel 3 Coefficients

Modela _{Unstandardized coëfficients} _{Standardized coëfficient}

B Std. Error Beta t Sig.

(Constant) 4,62 0.60 7,73 0.00 Affective Commitment -0.53 0.12 -0.40 -4,50 0.00 Outsourcing -.71 0.70 -0.36 -1.02 0.31 Affective Commitment* Outsourcing -0.11 0.20 -0.21 -0.55 0.58

(32)

To test hypothesis 4a and 4b, a correlation analysis and a regression analysis are carried out for proactive behavior. Hypothesis 4a stated that affective commitment correlates positively with proactive behavior. Affective commitment has a significant, positive weak correlation with proactive behavior (r = .46, p < 0.001). The more the affective commitment one has, the more proactive behavior an employee shows at work.

Hypothesis 4b stated that business process outsourcing is a positive moderator in the relation between affective commitment and job performance and proactive behavior. It is expected that the level of job performance is lower for employees who deal with an outsourcing process, compared to those who had not dealt with an outsourcing process. To test hypothesis 4b, a multiple regression analysis is conducted. It is expected that the level of proactive behavior is lower for employees who deal with an outsourcing process, compared to those who had not dealt with an outsourcing process. To test hypothesis 2b, a multiple regression analysis is conducted. The regression model with “proactive behavior” as dependent variable and “affective commitment” and “business process outsourcing” as independent variables was significant (F = 19,32, df = 3, p < 0.001). The model can be used to predict proactive behavior (R2 = 0.13). There is a significant, positive association between proactive behavior and affective commitment (b = .46, t = 5,56, p < 0.001). However, being outsourced does not have a significant relationship (b = .63, t = 1,25, ns) with proactive behavior. The interaction effect between affective commitment and business process outsourcing does not have a significant relationship with proactive behavior as well (b = -.15, t = -1.02, ns). Table 3 shows an overview of the coefficients.

(33)

(Constant) 2.14 0.25 8.49 0.00 Affective Commitment 0.46 0.08 0.48 5.56 0.00 Outsourcing 0.61 0.49 0.42 1.25 0.21 Affective Commitment* Outsourcing -0.15 0.14 -0.36 -1.02 0.31

a_{Dependent variable: Pro active behavior}

To test hypothesis 7a and 7b, a correlation analysis and a regression analysis are carried out. Hypothesis 7a stated that affective commitment correlates negatively with job stress. Affective commitment has a significant, negative very weak correlation with job stress (r = -.24, p < 0.01). When one has more affective commitment, one experience less job stress.

Hypothesis 7b stated that the level of stress is higher for employees who deal with an outsourcing process. It is expected that the level of job stress is higher for employees who deal with an outsourcing process, compared to those who had not dealt with an outsourcing process. To test hypothesis 3b, a multiple regression analysis is conducted. The regression model with “job stress” as dependent variable, and “business project outsourcing” and “affective commitment” as independent variables was significant (F = 4,04, df = 3, p < 0.01). The model can be used to predict job stress (R2 = 0.04). There is a significant, negative association between affective commitment and job stress (b = -.19, t = -2.56, p < 0.05). However, being outsourced does not have a significant relationship with job stress (b = -.11, t = -0.25, ns). The interaction effect between affective commitment and job stress does not have a significant relationship with job stress as well (b = -.02, t = -0.16, ns).Table 4 shows an overview of the coefficients.

(34)

Tabel 5Coefficients

(Constant) 2.60 0.37 7.04 0.00 Affective Commitment -0.19 0.07 -0.24 -2.56 0.01 Outsourcing -0.11 0.43 -0.09 -0.25 0.81 Affective Commitment* Outsourcing -0.20 0.13 -0.06 -0.16 0.87

a_{Dependent variable: Job stress}

4.2 Hypothesis concerning continuance commitment

To test hypothesis 2a and 2b, a correlation analysis and a regression analysis are carried out. Hypothesis 1a stated that continuance commitment correlates negatively with turnover intention. Continuance commitment has a significant, negative very weak correlation with turnover intention (r = -0.29, p < 0,001). The more one feels continuance commitment to the organization, the less the turnover intention.

Hypothesis 2b stated that business process outsourcing is a negative moderator in the relation between continuance commitment and turnover intention. It is expected that the level of turnover intention is higher for employees who deal with an outsourcing process, compared to those who had not dealt with an outsourcing process. To test hypothesis 2b, a multiple regression analysis is conducted. The regression model with “turnover intention” as dependent variable and “continuance commitment” and “business process outsourcing” as independent variables was significant (F = 8,54, df = 3, p < 0,01). Therefore, the model can be used to predict turnover intention. 10% of the variance in turnover intention can be predicted according to this model (R2 = 0.10). There is not a significant association

(35)

between turnover intention and continuance commitment (b = -0.09, t = -0.74, ns). However, being outsourced or not does have a significant positive relationship (b = .1.10, t = 2,62, p < 0.01.) with turnover intention. The interaction effect between continuance commitment and business process outsourcing does have a significant negative relationship with turnover intention as well (b = -.39, t = -2.51, p < 0.05.). Table 5 shows an overview of the coefficients and figure 22 shows the interaction effect.

(Constant) 2.55 0.32 7.95 0.00 Continuance Commitment -0.09 0.12 -0.08 -0.74 0.46 Outsourcing 1.11 0.42 0.55 2.62 0.01 Continuance Commitment* Outsourcing -0.39 0.16 -0.59 -2.51 0.02

a_{Dependent variable: Turnover intention}

Figure 22 Interaction effect hypothesis 2

To test hypothesis 5a and 5b, a correlation analysis and a regression analysis are carried out. Hypothesis 5a stated that continuance commitment correlates negatively with proactive behavior. Continuance commitment has a significant negative correlation with proactive behavior (r = -.13, p < 0.01). The more one feels continuance commitment, the less the proactive behavior.

0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5 No (0) Yes (1)

Business Process Outsourcing

T ur no v er I nt ent io n Low (<2) High (=>2)

(36)

Hypothesis 5b stated that business process outsourcing is a negative moderator in the relation between continuance commitment and proactive behavior. It is expected that the level of proactive behavior is lower for employees who deal with an outsourcing process, compared to those who had not dealt with an outsourcing process. To test hypothesis 2b, a multiple regression analysis is conducted. The regression model with “proactive behavior” as dependent variable and “continuance commitment” and “business process outsourcing” as independent variables was significant (F = 6,01, df = 3, p < 0,01). Therefore, the model can be used to predict job behavior. 6,9 % of the variance in turnover intention can be predicted according to this model (R2 = 0.07).

There is a significant, negative association between proactive behavior and continuance commitment (b = -.17, t = -1,81, p < 0.1). Being outsourced does have a significant negative relationship (b = -.70, t = -2,18, p < 0.1)) with proactive behavior. The interaction effect between continuance commitment and business process outsourcing does not have a significant relationship (b = .13, t = 1.10, ns). Table 6 shows an overview of the coefficients and figure 24 shows the interaction effect.

(Constant) 4,29 0.24 17.72 0.00 Continuance Commitment -0.17 0.09 -0.20 -1.82 0.07 Outsourcing -0.70 0.32 -0.47 -2.18 0.03 Continuance Commitment* Outsourcing 0.13 0.12 0.26 1.10 0.27 a

Dependent variable: Pro active behavior Tabel 7 Coefficients