The Relationship Between Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment in Female Employees

In this study the relationship between job satisfaction and organizational commitment in female employees has been examined. The structural equation modelling technique was used to analyze complex models with both direct and indirect relationships. Quantitative data was gathered by utilizing questionnaires. To demonstrate convergence validity, confirmatory factor analysis was used. Composite reliability and AVE scores were calculated to assess the scales' reliability and discriminant validity. The AMOS statistical program's structural equation model method was used to test the hypotheses. Out of six hypotheses, two of them were supported. It has been empirically proven that Internal Job Satisfaction has a direct effect on Affective Commitment and Normative Commitment, where External Job Satisfaction does not have a direct effect on any sub-dimensions of organizational commitment. Although job satisfaction and organizational commitment have been examined individually in many studies, this research focused on female employees working in the service sector while evaluating the relationship between the two concepts in the light of current data.


Introduction 4
In today's economic climate, where businesses face numerous challenges, many attempts are being made to provide equal rights to persons of both genders in the workplace.Engaging men and women in the labour force is crucial for boosting countries' social and economic welfare.Enterprises all over the world attach importance to gender diversity on the female employees stand out as factors that will increase organizational success.Therefore, this research scrutinizes the relationship between the two structural concepts in female employees.
Females account for 49.6% of the global population (The World Bank, 2020).In European Union member countries, the gender ratio in management roles is 63% males and 37% women (European Union, 2021).Women CEOs account for 8.2% of Fortune 500 firms, according to the 2021 list (Fortune, 2021).These statistics show that women are offered fewer management role opportunities than their population.It is crucial to implement changes that will allow women to work comfortably in the workplaces to equalize the odds over time.From this perspective, job satisfaction and organizational commitment of female employees in a corporate setting is a topic that requires significant attention and additional research to understand the positive and negative consequences fully.
-Component Model of Organizational Commitment scales were used as measurement tools in this research.This study contributed to the former studies by investigating the relationship between job satisfaction and organizational commitment in female employees to gain a more profound understanding of management and organization research using recent data.

Conceptual Background
The main constructs of the study, Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment are explained in this part with respect to the literature.Also the Theoretical Model is developed accordingly.

Job Satisfaction
Job satisfaction is a significant concept for employees and societal factors in an organization.It has numerous positive consequences for people and institutions, including enhanced job productivity and motivation, physical and mental well-being, and inner serenity of personnel.Job satisfaction is linked to a person's job expectations and performance, and it is attained when outcomes fulfill expectations mutually.Therefore, employees are content with their jobs, and are thus expected to contribute more to their organizations (Brief, 1998).
Historically, during the 1930s, Hoppock (1935) made one of the initial studies to explore the concept.
hierarchy of needs on describing the stages of growth in humans has been a critical study that sheds light on the satisfaction of individuals.In the 1960s, psychologists began to develop critical theoretical perspectives.Herzberg et al. (1959) introduced two-factor theory; Porter (1962), Adams (1963), Locke (1969) worked on discrepancy theories of job satisfaction; Vroom (1964) developed a satisfaction theory derived from his more comprehensive expectation theory of motivation; also, Smith et al. scales were formulated.In the 1970s the social information processing theory by Salancik andPfeffer (1977, 1978), and the job characteristics model of Hackman and Oldham (1975) were some additional vital theoretical contributions to job satisfaction theory.A well-known job satisfaction model is Locke (1976)'s range of affect theory.The primary principle of this theory one has in a job.Likely, the narrower the gap between what an employee wants and gets the more satisfied the employee will be.In subsequent years, researchers have further examined job satisfaction.Newstrom & Davis (1985) explored the idea of job satisfaction in two fundamentally distinct sub-dimensions and categorized it as favourable or unfavourable view of work among employees.Arnold & Feldman (1986) interpreted job satisfaction through the employee's overall positive feelings and identified the employee's favorable sentiments toward the workplace as a significant input that positively influences job satisfaction.Additionally, Knoop (1995) evaluated the concept of job satisfaction via the perspective of the employees and contended that employees are engaged in a continual process of evaluating their job satisfaction, enhancing their perspective on the job.Similarly, Spector et al. (2006) delineated job satisfaction as the total of an employee's feelings regarding all facets of the work.Consequently, either excellent or negative job satisfaction findings will emerge.
Measures of job satisfaction vary depending on whether researchers focus more on the Satisfaction Questionnaire was applied a measurement tool.This scale identifies the elements of the job that employees are satisfied with, including the sense of accomplishment, appreciation, level of responsibility, working conditions, prospects for promotion and compensation, etc.The Minnesota Job Satisfaction Scale is utilized in numerous scientific research because it is a comprehensive evaluation method in internal and external aspects (Hirschfeld, 2000).According to this scale, higher ratings indicate greater job satisfaction.The scale has two dimensions: (1) Internal Job Satisfaction, (2) External Job Satisfaction.

Internal Job Satisfaction
Internal Job Satisfaction, as a term, describes the nature of actual job tasks and employees' feelings toward work (Spector, 1997).The internal dimension is assessed as a job satisfaction factor related to employees' emotions, personality, genetics, and psychological well-being.The study by Cote & Morgan (2002), indicates that enhancing positive emotions increases job satisfaction while suppressing negative emotions decreases job satisfaction and increases quitting.People's personalities immediately impact the internal dimension of their job satisfaction.Characteristics is essential to guide personality.However, characteristics are related to genetics and some people may be born with good intrinsic characteristics, while others may be born with negative innate features.The studies show that these genetic differences might be valid for up to 30% of employees at work (Arvey et al., 1989).Psychological well-being is related to life, work, family, and society.Numerous psychological and emotional aspects impact job satisfaction (Kammeyer-Mueller, 2008).Internal satisfaction and it varies from external satisfaction (Deniz, 2005).From the start of a person's working career until the end, changes in social life might have a good or negative impact on the internal job satisfaction dimension.The 20-item Minnesota Job Satisfaction Scale includes 12 items to measure internal dimensions; consequently, the internal satisfaction score is derived by dividing the total internal dimension.

External Job Satisfaction
External Job Satisfaction is the opposite of the internal dimension and is unrelated to one's personality traits and genetic characteristics.Organizational factors influence the external job satisfaction.This dimension encompasses all good actions that occur outside of the person.External job satisfaction refers to motivational components like rewards and appreciation statements that employees receive in exchange for good efforts.An organization's human work satisfaction.Therefore, salary, management style, working environment, and promotion conditions are various factors that influence external job satisfaction.Salary is among the major sources of motivation for employees to perform business.Fair salary management improves job satisfaction and, through increased individual productivity, slightly improves business financial satisfaction.Employees' job satisfaction and dedication will decline in a setting where salaries are insufficient or unfair (Kangas et al., 1999;Bartolo & Furlonger, 2000).Management style is another factor in external job satisfaction.Especially unpredictability in management style has a detrimental impact on employee work satisfaction whereas using accurate and concise job descriptions contributes to job satisfaction (Greenberg & Baron, 2003).The working environment is another factor for the employee's external job satisfaction (Youssef & Luthans, 2007).Workplace factors directly correlate with job satisfaction (Batugal & Tindowen, 2019), if employees perceive significant constraints in their workplace, they are more inclined to be dissatisfied at work (Spector, 1997).Promotion conditions are another factor.The results of earlier studies demonstrate a favourable link between job satisfaction, promotions, and title opportunities (Smucker, et al., 2003).Job satisfaction tends to improve -expression that influences the employee's authority over other employees and the prestige of the social environment, possible title confusion negatively affects job satisfaction (Robie et al., 1998).The factors forming the external dimension can change considerably more easily than the factors of the internal dimension.While internal satisfaction mostly consists of personal characteristics that people have made a habit of for many years, the external dimension has content that can evolve more easily compared to the flexible structure of organizations and can increase its effect on job satisfaction (Yousef, 1998).The 8 items of the 20-item Minnesota Job Satisfaction Scale are targeted at understanding the external dimensions.Because of this scale, the total scores acquired in the items of this dimension are divided by 8 and the external satisfaction score is achieved.

Organizational Commitment
Organizational commitment is acknowledged as a crucial factor in understanding employee behaviour in the workplace, such as satisfaction, intention to leave, or loyalty (Juaneda-Ayensa, et al., 2017).It is a psychological condition that influences employees' relationships with the company and their decision to stay or leave (Meyer & Allen, 1991).At least three interconnected aspects describe the theoretical construct in the literature: a powerful conviction of the purpose of the organization; a readiness to show significant endeavor for the organization's ideals, and an aspiration to continue being a part of the group (Mowday et al., 1979).Organizational commitment encompasses belongingness and the willingness to put in additional effort for the company (Drummond, 2000).
Due to its favourable effects on business practices, organizational commitment is a topic that draws the utmost attention in the literature from organizational behaviour and organizational psychology.Numerous scholars have conducted in-depth studies on organizational commitment (Etzioni, 1961;Kanter 1968;Buchanan II, 1974;Salancik, 1977;Mowday et al., 1979;Reichers, 1985;O'Reilly & Chatman, 1986).These researchers have all classified organizational commitment under specific dimensions.However, the most important concern was the discrepancy in construct descriptions.Meyer & Allen (1991) developed an approach based on earlier commitment research in response to the many viewpoints and studies.This approach incorporates various attitude phenomena and gauges employees' attitudes toward the organization.In their view, to fully understand the conceptual framework, each of the three constructs of organizational commitment affective, continuance, and normative commitment should be analyzed separately.Each element is thought to emerge because of several circumstances and to have various consequences for behaviour at work.This conceptual model, which attaches three features of past commitment studies, is still often hailed in much research for evaluating organizational commitment.Due to this fact, also in this research, Meyer -Component Model of Organizational Commitment survey has been utilized as the measurement tool.

Affective Commitment
Affective Commitment describes an individual's emotional connection, involvement, and integration with the organization.As a major aspect of organizational commitment, affective commitment is an important factor determining how strongly an employee feels a bond to the organization.An employee that is effectively devoted passionately supports the organization's aims and wants to stay there.Affective commitment strengthens with encounters with upper staff and organizational units.High-affective-commitment workers show up to work each day and put their skills to use (Lok & Crawford, 1999).Compared to the other components, affective commitment strongly influences work behaviors (Mercurio, 2015).Many studies have significantly proved that affective commitment can lead to positive outcomes, which are seen in decreased absenteeism, decreased turnover, improved organizational behavior, and increased organizational performance (Noraazian & Khalip, 2016;Gonzalez & Guillen, 2007;Meyer & Allen, 1997;Wasti, 2012).

Continuance Commitment
Continuance Commitment is measured by the willingness of an employee to stay with the company.Generally, employees make reasonable decisions and weigh the cost of quitting.Employees choose to stay in the company longer if quitting would incur significant fees.Everything that raises the cost of leaving an organization fosters continuation commitment, with side bets and the presence of alternatives serving as its precursors (Allen & Meyer, 1990).The financial penalty of quitting the company so sheds light on ongoing commitment.Becker (1960) highlights the fundamentals of continuing commitment and raises the challenges a worker would encounter if they left the position.These hurdles include the possible dangers that may make the person feel anxious and concerned, such as the emotional emptiness the person would feel after leaving work, the drop in income, and the disruption of professional progress.Additionally, stressful circumstances like the hassle of finding a new job, the possibility of not getting one, and a reduction of negotiating power because of unemployment might be included among these losses.Therefore, employees' loyalty to their current company will be higher if they perceive there are fewer potential alternatives obtainable (Allen & Meyer, 1990;Wiener, 1982).

Normative Commitment
Normative Commitment is strong when employees constantly witness the employer's dedication to their welfare.A committed employee has a higher chance of having a favourable influence on the company's success, is frequently satisfied with the job, and is more devoted to the company.Employees who feel that remaining with the company is a responsibility and a moral obligation are normatively committed.As a result, high normatively committed personnel engage more with the company.High work satisfaction levels lower staff turnover and improves an organization's capacity for talent acquisition and retention (Gregson, 1992).In for the good of the company (Weiner, 1982).People internalize it fully and demonstrate an ethical commitment to their organizations when they are exposed to socialization in which loyalty to one's bosses is praised and valued (Randall, 1987).This gives employees the impression that they should be doing something to earn the company's cash rewards and incentives.Employees who feel appreciated form a normative bond with their employers (Meyer, et al., 1993).

2..3. Theoretical Model
This study sought to clarify the relationship between job satisfaction and organizational commitment dimensions.A theoretical model was developed in accordance with the theoretical underpinnings of these notions, as depicted in Figure 1.

Hypothesis Development
Many studies have been conducted on the relationship between job satisfaction and organizational commitment.For Mowday et al. (1979), commitment differs from work satisfaction as an attitude.Commitment denotes a broad affective engagement with the organization which develops slowly over time.In contrast, job satisfaction means a person's attitude toward the job or certain job-related aspects and reflects more instant reactions.As expressed by Williams & Hazer (1986), job satisfaction is a defining input of organizational commitment.As per Glisson and Durick (1988), an organic connection exists between the concepts, and each shouldn't be considered independently.According to various research that examines the link between the two concepts in terms of dimensions, job satisfaction is an essential requirement for organizational commitment (Testa, 2001;Currivan, 1999).Considering that the dimensions of job satisfaction, internal and external, both include different satisfaction processes, their relations with the dimensions of organizational commitment were tested with different hypotheses.Accordingly, the following hypothesis was developed for the objectives of the research considering the apparent relationship between the two concepts in the literature.

Research Methods
Permission from an Ethics Committee from a university is required in every survey conducted after 2020.Since a survey was used in this study as a data collection method, the permission has been obtained from Ethics Committee of the Istanbul Commerce University with a decision on the date of 30.10.2022 and document number 9-1.The research scales were derived from previous studies.Questionnaires have been used to collect quantitative data.The structural equation modeling approach was used to examine complex multiple-variable models and pinpoint relationships between direct or indirect variables.Confirmatory factor analyses were fulfilled to ascertain the convergent validity.Composite reliability and AVE values were calculated to evaluate the scales' reliability and discriminant validity, respectively.The theoretical model's hypotheses were tested in the AMOS statistics software by using structural equation modeling, a multivariable statistical approach .The approach has been utilized to comprehend the theoretical model's indirect and direct effects (Civelek, 2018).Furthermore, this method was preferred to reduce measurement errors (Byrne, 2010).The statistical programs SPSS and AMOS were utilized to perform the analyses.

Sampling and Measures
The constructs in the research's theoretical model are assessed using scales derived from existing literature.From strong disagreement to strong acceptance, 5-point Likert scales were applied.More than 500 questionnaires were distributed and 424 of them were valid.The questionnaires were collected from female employees working at service sector in Turkey.As m -Component Model of Organizational Commitment survey with 18 items were used.Both scales were translated into Turkish.

Construct Reliability and Validity
Before performing confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), exploratory factor analysis (EFA) is done to purify the research data (Anderson & Gerbing, 1988).Twenty-seven components were left after the principal component analysis.Convergent validity was subsequently determined using CFA.The fit indices values for the CFA were deemed adequate, (Civelek, 2018).In Table 1, the factor loads from the CFA outcomes displayed.Table 2 shows that the average extracted variance values fell within allowable bounds (i.e., 0.5).(Byrne, 2010).These results showed that the constructs had convergent validity.The square roots of each variable's AVE values were calculated to establish discriminant validity.The square root of the AVE values is displayed in Table 2's diagonals.The correlation values in the same column are all exceeded by the square root of AVE values.The evidence confirms that the discriminant validity (Civelek, 2018).Each structure's reliability was evaluated independently.Cronbach's alpha and composite reliability values are close to or greater than the proposed cutoff value of 0.7 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981).

Test of the Hypotheses
Covariance-based structural equation modelling (CB-SEM) was used to test the hypotheses.The results are as seen in Figure 2. CB-SEM is a confirmatory technique (Civelek, 2018), and so, it is employed in this study to support the hypotheses established using literaturebased foundational theories.The structural model's fit was evaluated using the goodness of fit indic CFI = 0.944, IFI = 0.945, RMSEA= 0.056) (Civelek, 2018).Note.Created by the authors.

Discussion
A wide range of conclusions has been drawn from the former research when the relationships between the dimensions of the two theoretical constructs have been studied.The results of this research conform with the extant literature.The findings in the literature have revealed that improving organizational success depends on employee job satisfaction and organizational commitment.Many past studies distinguished positive relationships between job satisfaction and organizational commitment (Thomas & Kevin,20 .Accordingly, high organizational commitment is expected of employees who have greater job satisfaction, and raising organizational commitment has a positive effect on job satisfaction Additionally, it is presumed that job satisfaction is a requirement for organizational commitment (Doherty & Fulford, 2005;Sergeant & Frenkel, 2000).Many researchers determined positive relationships between the dimensions of these two constructs and described job satisfaction as a concept that fosters organizational commitment (Porter al., 1974;Dubinsky et al., 1992;Conley & Wooley, 2000;Ruyter et al., 2001;Top, 2012).Some of the research findings that reach similar results in the national literature are as follows: examined the relationships between the constructs based on their dimensions and determined that employees with high affective and normative commitment had high job satisfaction levels, while a similar link could not be found between continuance commitment and job satisfaction.
observed that internal and external job satisfaction affect affective and normative commitment but not continuance commitment.

Conclusion
Employees have a key role in an organization's success.The study contributes to the literature by delivering up-to-date insight into how female employees' job satisfaction relates to organizational commitment.Depending on the findings obtained from this research, it has been observed that internal job satisfaction directly affects affective commitment and normative commitment.Another notable outcome of the study is that there was no relationship between external job satisfaction and organizational commitment dimensions.The processual difference their job, and external satisfaction, which focuses on physical conditions and rewarding tment to the organization.Low, or high external job satisfaction among female employees is not identified as influencing organizational commitment in this study.In practice, the knowledge acquired by monitoring the link between internal job satisfaction factors and the participants' affective and normative commitment may be valuable in developing, supporting, and rewarding female employees.Internal satisfaction, in which emotional components are prominent, considerably impacts women's emotions about the organization according to the population of this study.These findings can be used to study further the link between women's internal job satisfaction and affective and normative organizational commitment.However, the findings cannot be extrapolated to other occupational settings and geographical areas because the research was focused on individuals working in the service sector in a single country.Future studies should aim to collect a broader and more representative sample of employees.
Figure 1Theoretical Model

H1:
Internal Job Satisfaction has a direct effect on Affective Commitment H2: Internal Job Satisfaction has a direct effect on Continuance Commitment H3: Internal Job Satisfaction has a direct effect on Normative Commitment H4: External Job Satisfaction has a direct effect on Affective Commitment H5: External Job Satisfaction has a direct effect on Continuance Commitment H6: External Job Satisfaction has a direct effect on Normative Commitment

Figure 2
Figure 2Results of the SEM Analysis

Table 1
Results of Confirmatory Factor AnalysisThe descriptive statistics for the dimensions, Cronbach's alpha, composite reliability coefficients, average extracted values for variance, and Pearson correlations between the dimensions are all displayed in Table2.Note.Values in diagonals represent the AVEs' square root.

Table 3
Results of TestsH1 hypothesis is confirmed.This means Internal Job Satisfaction (IJS) directly effects Affective Commitment (ACM).H2 hypothesis is unsupported.This means Internal Job Satisfaction (IJS) directly effects Continuance Commitment (CCM).H3 hypothesis is confirmed.This means Internal Job Satisfaction (IJS) has a direct effect on Normative Commitment (NCM).H4 hypothesis is unsupported.This indicates that External Job Satisfaction (EJS) does not directly affect Affective Commitment (ACM).H5 hypothesis is unsupported.This indicates that External Job Satisfaction (EJS) does not directly affects Continuance Commitment (CCM).H6 hypothesis is unsupported.This indicates that External Job Satisfaction (EJS) does not directly affect Normative Commitment (NCM).