Organizational Commitment
Every factor researchers have brought together to explain organizational commitment, combined from 8 study models into one ranked driver set — the model the priority engine reasons over.
24 drivers · 8 contributing models · Handbook entry →
§1The drivers, by consensus
Ranked by how many independent models include each driver (consensus), then pooled effect. “In N of 8” is a robustness signal — a driver in many models is one many researchers agreed matters; a driver in one is a single lead worth following.
| Driver | Consensus | Pooled r | Grade | Heterogeneity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Job Resources | 1 / 8 | +0.77 | A | — |
| Employee Engagement Score | 1 / 8 | +0.63 | A | — |
| Work Engagement | 1 / 8 | +0.61 | A | I²≈0.92 |
| Servant Leadership | 1 / 8 | +0.58 | A | I²≈0.98 |
| Organizational Justice | 1 / 8 | +0.57 | A | — |
| Procedural Justice | 1 / 8 | +0.57 | A | — |
| Authentic Leadership | 1 / 8 | +0.52 | A | — |
| Distributive Justice | 1 / 8 | +0.51 | A | — |
| Autonomy | 1 / 8 | +0.51 | A | I²≈1.00 |
| Learning Orientation | 1 / 8 | +0.50 | C | — |
| Organizational Learning | 1 / 8 | +0.50 | B | — |
| Person Job Fit | 1 / 8 | +0.47 | A | — |
| Ethical Leadership | 1 / 8 | +0.45 | A | — |
| Person Organization Fit | 1 / 8 | +0.45 | A | — |
| Performance Feedback | 1 / 8 | +0.39 | A | I²≈0.99 |
| Uncertainty Avoidance | 1 / 8 | +0.37 | C | — |
| Power Distance | 1 / 8 | +0.29 | B | — |
| Interactional Justice | 1 / 8 | +0.29 | B | — |
| Collectivism | 1 / 8 | +0.27 | A | — |
| Work Life Conflict Wlc | 1 / 8 | −0.23 | A | — |
| Person Group Fit | 1 / 8 | +0.19 | A | — |
| Work Family Conflict | 1 / 8 | −0.17 | A | — |
| Work Interference With Family Wif | 1 / 8 | −0.17 | A | — |
| Person Supervisor Fit | 1 / 8 | +0.09 | A | — |
“Pooled r” is the meta-analytic prior where one exists; drivers marked study-reported have a model but not yet a pooled prior — a concrete acquisition target. This is the value-of-information view in miniature: the priority engine can rank which driver to measure first by consensus, strength, and how much is still unknown.
§2The models it’s built from
Each contributing study model — the researcher’s theory of this outcome — with its size and grade, so the meta-model is auditable back to its sources.
| Source study | Predictors | Grade |
|---|---|---|
| doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.00672.x | 4 | A |
| doi:10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.425 | 4 | A |
| doi:10.1037/0021-9010.92.5.1332 | 3 | A |
| doi:10.1037/a0022170 | 3 | A |
| doi:10.1037/a0018938 | 3 | A |
| doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.872568 | 3 | A |
| doi:10.1177/1534484320987363 | 2 | B |
| doi:10.1177/00332941211051988 | 2 | A |