Affective commitment within the public sector: antecedents and performance outcomes between ownership types

ABSTRACT

How to generate affective commitment and realize its performance potential is deemed critical to public management. But in the context of service outsourcing, does ownership type influence its antecedents and performance outcomes? Drawing on postal survey data for English leisure providers, we find training is an antecedent across public and private ownership types; performance appraisal is an antecedent for private ownership only; while performance-related pay carries an insignificant effect. Affective commitment holds business and customer performance outcomes for public ownership, but insignificant effects are observed for external ownership types. Implications of this contextual variation for public management theory are discussed.

KEYWORDS:

• Affective commitment
• antecedents
• outcomes
• ownership type
• training
• performance appraisal
• performance-related pay
• performance
• performance management

Acknowledgement

We thank the three anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments and support.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1. For clarification as raised by the review team, this is not a mediation model. We are focused on affective commitment between ownership types. A mediator is an explanatory for how an Independent Variable can affect a Dependent Variable. As such, the antecedent–commitment–outcome relationship is a completely different causal model that demands its own theoretical lens.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Ian R. Hodgkinson

Ian R Hodgkinson is a Senior Lecturer in Strategy at Loughborough University, School of Business and Economics. Ian’s research interests include strategy types and intent; strategic resources and resource-based theory; planning and improvisation in strategy development; and, strategic ambidexterity. Ian has published his work in leading academic journals including Public Administration, Australian Journal of Public Administration, Public Management Review, and Journal of World Business, among others. Ian currently serves as Associate Editor of Journal of Service Management.

Paul Hughes is Professor of Strategy at Leicester Castle Business School. Paul’s research interests are strategy failure and adherence to strategy; planning and improvisation in strategy-making; strategic resources and resource-based theory; and strategic exploration and exploitation (ambidexterity). Paul has published in leading academic outlets including Public Administration, Journal of World Business, Public Management Review, and Journal of Product Innovation Management, among many others.

Zoe Radnor is Professor of Service Operations Management and Dean of the School of Business, University of Leicester. Her main areas of research interest are in process improvement and service management in public sector organizations. She has led research projects in HealthCare, Local Government and Higher Education organizations, and for the Scottish Executive, HM Revenue and Customs, and HM Court Services. Professor Radnor has been a Management Practice Advanced Institute of Management (AIM) Fellow considering sustainability of lean in public services.

Russ Glennon is a Senior Lecturer in Management and Leadership at Nottingham Business School, Nottingham Trent University. Russ has previously held senior management positions in local government with particular oversight of performance management, policy, and continuous improvement. Russ’s research interests are in the legacy of public management performance and service improvement reform in English public sector bodies. Russ’s research has been published in Public Management Review, Public Money & Management, and Australian Journal of Public Administration.