African Journal of
Business Management

  • Abbreviation: Afr. J. Bus. Manage.
  • Language: English
  • ISSN: 1993-8233
  • DOI: 10.5897/AJBM
  • Start Year: 2007
  • Published Articles: 4137

Full Length Research Paper

The relation between organizational trust, organizational support and organizational commitment

EGRIBOYUN Dursun
  • EGRIBOYUN Dursun
  • Turkish Land Forces? Training and Doctrine Command (EDOK), Turkey.
  • Google Scholar


  •  Received: 31 October 2014
  •  Accepted: 10 February 2015
  •  Published: 28 February 2015

 ABSTRACT

Organizations are bodies composed of people who gather in order to reach specific objectives. This situation prompts the organizations to produce people oriented policies and increase the interest in the subject of organizational commitment. However, there are not much academic studies in Turkey on organizational commitment. The general objective of this research was to assess the relationship between organizational trust, organizational support and organizational commitment of administrators/teachers. The participants of this research were administrators/teachers who are employed in the secondary education schools in the provincial centre of Bolu, Turkey. The sample was not taken in the research and it was worked on all universe. This research is in the form of a relational screening model and was both descriptive and explanatory in terms of aim. 601 usable surveys were gathered for this research using three scales. The explanation of the relation between the organizational trust, organizational support and organizational commitment levels of the teachers and administrators with a mathematical model has been realized via multiple linear regression analysis and in the analyses enter method has been used. When the variance analysis regarding the perceptions of the administrators and teachers about organizational trust, organizational support and organizational commitment is inspected, the organizational commitments of the administrators and teachers exhibit a meaningful difference according to the joint impact of organizational trust and organizational support. The multiple linear regression model calculated has been also supported by LISREL software. According to the findings obtained as a result of the studies carried out within this framework, it is concluded that organizational trust and organizational support are the most substantial factors that affect the organizational commitment. In accordance with the findings of this research, it can be stated that organizational trust and organizational commitment of the administrators/teachers will be stronger when they feel that their organizations are supportive and bound up in them.

 

Key words: Organizational trust, organizational support and organizational commitment.


 INTRODUCTION

Our age is experiencing a major change. The age in which we are living is the one that witnesses the maximum and fastest change (Erdogan, 2004, p.1). Therefore, the strategies to be developed in the field of education and the methods that will be implemented in schools in which these strategies will be realized need to be contemplated in accordance with this age. The formation of this environment requires the existence of well-educated people and the implementation of human-centric policies towards staff (Rossen, 1999). This can be achieved with the well planned and applicable education policies.

In our age, the importance and power of education is approved to be a meaningful factor for the happiness of both the individuals and the nation. Within this scope, education is used as a valid instrument to ensure the happiness of the individuals and the nation and gains strength day by day, by increasing its importance (Basaran, 1999). Therefore, in order for education to fulfill its individual, social and economic functions, it can be said that there should be a balance and harmony between the social and economic development objectives of the society and the objectives of education. Such a harmony is only possible when employees are supported in their jobs, their trust in their organizations is provided and their productivity is increased by developing their organizational commitment.

Organizations are bodies composed of people who gather in order to reach specific objectives. Organizations need to utilize effectively the human factor which is one of the most important resources in order to reach their aims and maintain their continuity in the competitive world (Topaloglu, 2010, p.1). Moreover, today individuals who are educated, productive, accordant with organiza-tional objectives and loyal to the organization enable the organization to meet with success. This situation prompts the organizations to produce people oriented policies and increases the interest in the subject of organizational commitment (Çetinel, 2008, p.1).

Social systems also have missions that can be identified as maintaining their presence and carrying out productive activities. Within this scope, finding motivating factors in fulfilling organizational roles in an organization and improving these factors are of prime importance for organizational effectiveness and productivity (Akalin, 2006, p.1). Organizations have been developing methods that will increase the organizational commitments of the employees and; researching the factors underlying their commitments; making evaluations regarding the benefits that this commitment will provide, and analyzing the bonds between these factors and organizational commitment. According to the findings obtained as a result of the studies carried out within this framework, it is concluded that organizational trust and organizational support are the most substantial factors that affect the organizational commitment (Kaplan, 2010, p.106).

Organizational trust, organizational support and organizational commitment in educational institutions are not the phenomena that have been newly discovered. Organizational trust, organizational support and organiza-tional commitment are the approaches that have been known, whose benefits have been believed in and that have been implemented for a long time.  However, these implementations are limited to people and cannot be institutionalized adequately.

In the literature, different research regarding organiza-tional trust, organizational support and organizational commitment has been conducted in the fields of psychology, business, health, tourism etc. However, the frequency of occurrence of the implementations about organizational trust, organizational support and organiza-tional commitment especially in the official educational institutions is very limited. In this research, the perceptions of the administrators and teachers who are employed in the secondary education schools, regarding organizational trust, organizational support and organiza-tional commitment and the relation between them, have been analyzed.

Organizational trust

Organizational trust means that even though employees do not have the possibility to affect the decision makers, they believe that the organization will work for their benefit or at least will not harm them, and they are voluntary to be undefended against the behaviors they will not control (Cetinel, 2008, p.2). Increase in the rate of environmental and economic changes, rise of the need for flexibility and cooperation, appreciation of the team and team works, and transformation of the relations with the employees and career patterns have raised the importance of organizational trust. It is estimated that organizations cannot reach their goals without trust. Moreover, trust is one of the most important elements of efficient relationships and mutual trust is a vital situation (Iscan and Sayin, 2010, p.196).

In the studies of Nyhan and Marlowe (1997, p.615), trust consists of three dimensions that measure the belief that an individual or group makes confidential efforts to behave in accordance with any commitment, is honest in negotiations; doesn’t take excessive advantage of another. Therefore, organizational trust is assessed by emotional, cognitive and intended behavior dimensions.

In the researches regarding trust, firstly it engaged psychologists, sociologists, political scientists and economists, and then it became the subject of studies in the fields of organization theory, management and organizational behavior (Asunakutlu, 2006, p.18). In the most general sense, trust is perceived as honesty and a concept based on truth (Koc and Yaz?c?oglu, 2011, p.47).

According to Ozer et al., 2006, p.106, trust comprises the belief in commitments of an individual or a group to their behavior and intentions, their expectations regarding moral, fair and constructive behaviors, and considering the rights of others; and according to Luhmann (1979, cited by Vo, 2010, p.18), it represents the level of reasonable, moral and predictable confidence of someone in someone else. In the studies performed, trust comes into existence at both individual and organizational level, but trust in a person and trust in an organization are different concepts. In the studies of Nyhan and Marlowe (1997, p.618), organizational trust generally involves trust in organization and trust in supervisor, and in the literature, a combination of these two concepts is named organizational trust. Within this context, trust underlies all the intraorganizational relationships horizontally and vertically (Demircan and Ceylan, 2003, p.142).

Gilbert and Li-Pang (1998, cited by Ribbers, 2009, p.7) formulated organizational trust as “a feeling of confidence and support in an employee; it is a belief that an employer will be straightforward and succeed in his/her commitments”. Mishra et al. (1990, cited by Durdag and Naktiyok, 2011, p.15) summarized it as “perceptions of the employees concerning the support provided by the organization, and their belief that the leader will be honest and stand by his/her word’’. In one sense, this is the work environment where the employees feel intimate with and adopt each other.

Within this context, trust models become prominent in institutionalizing trust. In order to reflect the accepted differentiation of system and staff trust, researchers adopt generally the model developed by Luhmann. In this model, trust in supervisor represents the staff trust towards the present supervisor that is the most important mediator of organizational or environmental complexity and the organizational trust distinguishes the attitude of trust towards the organization as a whole (Nyhan and Marlowe, 1997, p.617).

Organizational support

In recent years, behaviors towards increasing the efficiency and productivity in organizations have been examined widely in the literature. Especially the subject of organizational support is the one which gains impor-tance because of the competition, chaos and uncertainty in the business world of the 21st Century. Therefore, the efforts of organizations to deal with the needs of their employees and satisfy them enable the employees to feel themselves precious, capable and necessary. As a result of this, the concept of organizational support comes into existence (Kose and Gonulluoglu, 2010, p.87). Organiza-tional support is the belief that employees develop about how much the organization for which they work values their contributions and cares about their well-being (Akalin, 2006, p.9).

In today’s business world, employees need to be supported in  their  organization  as  a  matter  of  human psychology. Organizational support which is extremely important for employees is one of the meaningful resources for meeting the emotional needs such as being respected, accepted, approved and valued. With organizational support, organization remarks that it is aware of the employees’ contribution to the organization, it cares about their well-being and it is pleased to work with them, and meets the individual’s need to belong, be respected and approved  (Armeli et al., 1998, cited by Ozdemir, 2010, p.133; Martin, 1995, cited by Akin, 2008, p.142).

In the organizational support theory, Eisenberger et al. (1986, p.500) stated that employees form a general belief regarding how much the organization values their contributions and cares about their well-being. Moreover, in their definition, they focused on the perceptions concerning that the organization cares about the contribution of the employees and values their well-being, as well as the perceptions about whether the organization realizes the rules, policies and activities affecting the employees voluntarily or with external effects. Because it is stated that the faith in the fact that the organizations realize the organizational activities voluntarily in favor of employees affects perceived organizational support positively (Eisenberger et al., 1986, p.504). The concepts that can be deducted from the definitions made by researchers can be evaluated that the organization values the contributions of the employees, cares about the well-being of the employees and the policies, rules and activities that affect the employees are based on voluntariness.

While focusing on the consequences of perceived organizational support, Rhoades and Eisenberger (2002, p.699-701) define the factors affecting organizational support as characteristics such as justice, supervisor support, rewards such as recognition-payment-promo-tion, business conditions such as job safety, autonomy, stressful factors, education, magnitude of the organization, personal and demographical features of the employees, and express the consequences as impacts on work such as organizational commitment, job satisfaction and positive mood and interest in work, fulfillment, tension, desire to stay in the organization and behavior of separating from the organization.

Organizational commitment

In a general sense, commitment is characterized as the psychological power of someone, who commits themselves to an organization, by Maranto and Skelly (2003) and it is evaluated as the relative power of someone who identifies themselves with an organization and is involved in a specific organization (Lahiry, 1994, cited by Puusa and Tolvanen, 2006, p.31).

Mowday et al. (1979, p.225) identify commitment as a bond or loyalty. These researchers state that commitment has three components, which are the commitment to the values and objectives of the organization, the desire to belong to the organization and the request to endeavor for the benefit of the organization. As remarked by Cetin (2004, p.90), it is possible to conclude that organizational commitment means the psychological commitment of the individual such as participation in work, the loyalty to and the faith in organizational values.

Organizational commitment has been understood generally as psychological commitment in the research carried out so far and it has been identified in this direction. According to these identifications, organizational commitment is employee’s adoption of the objectives and values of the organization with the desire to stay in the organization and endeavor for it; the employee’s identification with the objectives and values of the organization without financial worries, as primary aim by feeling the desire to stay in the organization, and psychological commitment of the employee to the organization (Balay, 2000, p.16; Beckeri et al.,  1979, cited by Tella et al., 2007, p.6; Yuksel, 2003, p.176).

Today, the concept of organizational commitment has become one of the contemporary subjects that need to be focused on. In the organizational commitment model developed by Allen and Meyer (1990, p.2), commitment approach is defined as affective, continuance and normative commitment. Affective commitment is the atmosphere where the individuals adhering strictly to the organizations identify, and integrate themselves with the organization, and feel content to be a member of the organization. Continuance commitment is the situation in which gains occur when the employee continues to work and penalty occurs when he/she does not continue to work. Normative commitment is the responsibility for and faith in the organization the individual has.

In the forthcoming years, Allen and Meyer expanded the perspective of organizational commitment and developed a new model of universal organizational commitment in order to complete many definitions of rapidly increasing commitment in research literature in their study of 1991. In 1997 they identified organizational commitment as a psychological condition regarding the question how the individual seeks his/her organizational commitment, and the desire to stay in the organization. In this research, it is found out that according to the three-component model of organizational commitment of Meyer and Allen (1997, p.2), there are three tendencies characterized as the employee’s commitment to the organization.

It is assessed that the indicators of organizational commitment which Atak (2009, p.89) utilized in his research will be a good example to summarize the definitions of organizational commitment. Atak (2009) accepts the indicators of organizational commitment as follows: (a) Adopting the organizational objectives and values, (b) Making extraordinary  endeavors  and  sacrifices  for  the organization, (c) Feeling a great desire to stay in the organization, (d) Identification with the organization, (e) Internalizing the organizational objectives and values.

Within this context, emotional commitment of employees to the organization, their identification with the organization and their participation are expressed as “affective commitment’’ (Cetin, 2004, p.95). At the same time affective commitment can be described as emotional bond of employee to organization, its identification and its participation in the organization. The commitment of the employees to the organization as a result of the comparison of the cost of leaving from the organization with the cost of staying in the organization can be described as “continuance commitment’’. The employee, who understands that the cost of releasing from the organization is higher than the cost of staying in the organization, stays in the organization because he/she needs to (Cetin, 2004, p.95). “Normative commitment’’ can be explained as the commitment of the employees to the organization with the sense of obligation. This type of commitment stems from the fact that the employees feel obliged to stay in the organization continuously because of the personal commitment or loyalty (Cetin, 2004, p.96). These definitions are accentuated because studies about them are focused on and their relations with other variables are examined within the scope of the research.

The relationship between organizational trust, organizational support and organizational commitment

Organizational trust and organizational support are meaningful concepts for organizational commitment. As long as the employees feel the support of the supervisors in the activities they carry out and their endeavors are cared about and appreciated, the trust they feel for their organizations and supervisors will increase, their commitment will improve, consequently they will strive more for their organization to reach its goals and aims.

Consequently, much research has been conducted about organizational trust, organizational support and organizational commitment. For example in Akalin’s (2006, p.43) research, it is stated that  human resources applications affect the relation between perceived organizational support and organizational commitment or the trust felt for the management. Whitener (2001, cited by Akalin, 2006, p.43) revealed that as long as the employees feel the commitment and support of their organization, their trust and commitment become stronger because employees interpret the human resources applications and reliability of the management as an indicator of the organization’s commitment to them.

In Akalin’s (2006, p.102) research regarding this scope, results similar to these findings were obtained, a high level of relation between perceived organizational support and affective commitment was detected and it was concluded that as long as perceived organizational support increases, affective commitment increases, too.

While concentrating on the concept of trust, Büte, 2011 p.176 indicated that the commitment to organization and commitment to management are interrelated concepts but have different processor and consequences; while  trust in organization affects organizational commitment, low turnover rate and education level, trust in supervisor affects employee satisfaction and exhibiting the creative behavior.

Gadot and Talmud, 2010, p.2835, stated in the research that highly strong ties, increasing social support among the team members, reciprocity and mutual trust between the organization members are the strict and positive predictions of the job satisfaction and organiza-tional commitment, and established that within this context, perceived organizational support is a mediator between perceived organizational policies and a set comprising job consequences such as job satisfaction, organizational commitment, tension and job performance.

In Demirel’s (2008, p.192) research, it is underlined that supervisor support and trust increase the affective commitment of the employees to the organization; thus, supervisors need to pay more attention to the behaviors based on trust in order to provide employees with the commitment to the organizational values and enable them to identify themselves with the organization. Consequently, as stated by Ribbers (2009, p.7), organizational trust is the faith in the supervisor to be honest and succeed in the subject of commitment, thanks to the trust in supervisor and the feeling of support. This definition can be evaluated as one of the most meaningful expressions summarizing the relation between trust, support and commitment.

The purpose of the research

The purpose of this research is to determine the relation between organizational trust, organizational support and organizational commitment of the administrators and teachers who are employed in the secondary education schools in the city center of Bolu Province, Turkey and to reveal whether there are statistically meaningful differences between the organizational trust, organiza-tional support and organizational commitments of the administrators and teachers.

In order to reach this purpose, an answer has been sought to the question “whether there is a statistically meaningful relation between the organizational trust, organizational support and organizational commitments of the administrators and teachers who are employed in the secondary education schools’’. So the study was performed in four stages to respond to this question. These stages were analyzed in the form hereinafter set forth.

1. Is there a statistically meaningful relation between the organizational trust and organizational support of the administrators and teachers who are employed in the secondary education schools?

2. Is there a statistically meaningful relation between the organizational trust and organizational commitments of the administrators and teachers who are employed in the secondary education schools?

3. Is there a statistically meaningful relation between the organizational support and organizational commitments of the administrators and teachers who are employed in the secondary education schools?

4. Is there a statistically meaningful relation between the organizational trust, organizational support and organiza-tional commitments of the administrators and teachers who are employed in the secondary education schools?


 METHOD

Research model

This research sought to identify organizational trust, organizational support and organizational commitment perceived by the administrators and teachers who are employed in the secondary education schools and the type and level of the relation between them. This research is a study in the relational screening (survey) model.

The research is both descriptive and explanatory in terms of its purpose because in the theoretical framework organizational trust, organizational support and organizational commitment have been addressed in all their parts and defined with reference to various perspectives and approaches.

Data collection method and tools

In the research, data were collected from the administrators and teachers through several scales. To that end, a data collection tool was prepared and applied to the whole administrators and teachers in order to measure the demographical characteristics and the variables to be utilized in the research. In the research, data on organizational trust, organizational support and organizational commitment were collected by conducting a literature review and implementation of data collection tool (scale). Within this context, resources about the research were detected, national and foreign research, publications and books were reviewed, and the foreign ones were translated into Turkish. Finally the theoretical framework of the research was established. In the selection of data collection tools, relative literature was reviewed, previously applied data collection tools regarding organizational trust, organizational support and organizational commitment were analyzed and it was concluded that the Organizational Trust Inventory (OTI) developed by Nyhan and Marlowe (1997),  the short form of the Survey of Organizational Support (Survey of POS) developed by Eisenberger et al. (1986) and the Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (OCQ) developed by Allen and Meyer (1990) are suitable data collection tools for the purpose of the research.

These three data collection tools were utilized in the research. Organizational Trust Inventory developed by Nyhan and Marlowe to determine the organizational trust perceptions of the administrators and teachers was adapted to Turkish by Demircan (2003). The reliability, explanatory factor analysis and validity tests of the data collection tool were performed by Nyhan and  Marlowe  (1997)  and the coefficient of internal consistency (Cronbach Alpha) was calculated as .96. This value is the indicator of high reliability in the literature of statistics.

The Organizational Trust Scale has two sub-dimensions, which are trust in supervisor and trust in organization, consists of 12 items and assesses the organizational trust as emotional, cognitive and intended behavior. The sub-dimension of trust in supervisor is made up of 8 items and covers items 1-8. The sub-dimension of trust in organization is made up of 4 items and covers items 9-12.

The Survey of Organizational Support was used secondarily, and developed by Eisenberger et al. (1986) in order to determine the organizational support perceptions of the administrators and teachers was adapted to Turkish by Akin (2008). Reliability, explanatory factor analysis and validity tests of the data collection tool were performed by Eisenberger et al. (1986) and the coefficient of internal consistency was calculated as (Cronbach Alpha) .97. This value indicates that the data collection tool has a high reliability. 

The Survey of Organizational Support has one dimension and 36 items. However, this data collection tool can be used as a short form consisting of 16 items created by the researchers through selection among the items in the scale. In this research, the short form was utilized. 2nd, 3rd, 5th, 6th, 9th, 12nd, 13rd questions were prepared as reverse questions in the original text in English and this characteristic was preserved in their Turkish adaptation.

The Organizational Commitment Questionnaire was used thirdly, and developed by Allen and Meyer (1990) to determine the organizational commitment perceptions of the administrators and teachers. This was adapted to Turkish by Wasti (2000). Reliability, explanatory factor analysis and validity tests of the data collection tool were performed by Allen and Meyer (1990) and the coefficient of internal consistency (Cronbach Alpha) was calculated as .87 for affective commitment, .75 for continuance commitment and .79 for normative commitment. This value indicates that the data collection tool has high reliability and can be used in the researches to be conducted. At the same time, this model covers multidimensional organizational commitment models and represents the components establishing organizational commitment. The sub-dimensions of these components form the entirety of the organizational commitment.

Organizational Commitment Questionnaire is a data collection tool which has three sub-dimensions, which are affective commitment, continuance commitment and normative commitment, and 24 items. Sub-dimension of affective commitment is made up of 8 items and covers items 1-8, sub-dimension of continuance commitment is made up of 8 items and covers items 9-16, sub-dimension of normative commitment is made up of 8 items and covers items 17-24. 4th, 5th, 6th 8th, 9th, 12nd, 18th, 19th and 24th questions were prepared as reverse questions in the original text in English and this characteristic was preserved in their Turkish adaptation.

All of three data collection tools have a Likert-type scale, as 1 (Strongly disagree), 2 (Disagree), 3 (Generally disagree), 4 (Not sure), 5 (Generally agree), 6 (Agree), 7 (Strongly agree).

Participants

The participants are composed of the school administrators and teachers who are employed in the secondary education schools in the center of Bolu Province, Turkey. According to the data received from Bolu Provincial Directorate of National Education, there are 17 secondary schools in the city center.  In these schools, there are 812 educators including 90 administrators and 722 teachers in total. In this research, the whole administrators and teachers have been studied on, rather than sampling. Within the scope of the study, data collection tools were distributed to 812 educators in total including 90 administrators and 722 teachers. The data collection tools were withdrawn after 20 days.

After being checked, 601 data collection tools in total, 72 of which belonged to administrators and 529 of which belonged to teachers, were proved to be appropriate for the research and were used in the assessment. The personal data of participants to the study are shown in Table 1.

 

 

Implementation of pilot study and data collection tool

Before commencing the research, a pilot study was carried out in order to prevent possible errors in the implementation, control whether the articles in the data collection tools were understood correctly, and test the reliability levels in terms of the factor structures of the data collection tools. In the pilot study, the data collection tools (scales) were applied to 60 educators in a secondary education school in the center of Bolu Province and it was checked whether the questions were understood correctly. The prepared scale was applied to both administrators and teachers in the same form and the same questions were directed.

Moreover, in addition to this application, three lecturers who can give information in this regard in Abant Izzet Baysal University were interviewed, the received opinions and recommendations were analyzed, and the data collection tool was finalized. 

Validity and reliability

For reliability in this research, both pilot application and the test and test again method were utilized, and Cronbach Alpha values were used in the main research performed over the pilot application and the whole participants, and while evaluating the results of the research, the distinctiveness of each article was examined by analyzing the correlation of the edited article total. The pilot application was realized with a 15- day break as preliminary test and final text, and the results are given in Table 2.

 

 

When Table 2 is analyzed, a direct (positive) relation of medium level has been found between preliminary and final tests of organizational trust, organizational support and organizational commitment (Ural and K?l?c, 2005, p.220). In the factor analysis made according to the data achieved from preliminary and final tests, it is established that factors are properly distributed; explain-ing 50 percent of total variance and their eigenvalue is over 1. 

Firstly, research questions were assessed while meetings were held with experts so as to assess the validity of structure, content and application of this question form and afterwards, the statistical analysis method, with which these questions will be tested, and the data collection tool appropriate for that method were determined. Lastly, the data collection tool in the research was tested on a sample group of 60 educators in order to establish the validity of application while also aiming to assess the content and clarity of the scale. Since opinions and suggestions of the experts in the field regarding the scale items were taken and no problems regarding the content and clarity of the scale were encountered, it was concluded that the contents of the data collection tools were valid.

Since the data collection tools employed in the research were used in a different culture and on a different sample, the data had to go through a factor analysis and the reliabilities of the data regarding the obtained factors had to be ensured. Therefore, in the conducted research the factor analysis method was used in the testing of the structural validity of the data collection tools which were used for the measurement of the organizational trust, organizational support and organizational commitment. With this technique, it was determined whether each data collection tool measured more than one structure, in other words, whether it was one-dimensional or not. After the validity and reliability of the data collection tools were tested, confirmatory factor analyses were also conducted by the LISREL software in order to ascertain whether the factor structure of the data collection tools had the same dimensions as the ones suggested by the researchers who developed the scale.

While the statistics regarding the common variances (communalities) in the conducted work were examined, a value of 0.30 was taken as a base. Items that were loaded onto values regarding factor loads under 0,30 were eliminated. This showed that the items significantly contributed to the measurement of their relevant dimensions. The Varimax rotation method was employed in the factor analysis, since it made the variables loaded into a factor more distinct and minimized the correlation of a factor with other factors.

The research began with the reliability analysis (Construct Validity by Using Consistency Criteria). This analysis was applied to test the reliability of the factors amongst themselves. Afterwards Squared Multiple Correlation and Corrected Item- Total Correlation values were also examined. In the research, a value of 0,20 was taken as the lower values for both values.

While the reliability analysis was conducted, Cronbach-Alpha coefficients were also calculated. After the assessments done in this context, the factor structures and Cronbach-Alpha internal consistency coefficients obtained for each scale were presented below.

The validity and reliability of the organizational trust scale: Organizational trust was measured by 12 items. The internal consistency coefficient was calculated as α = .895. It was proposed that the organizational trust items would be collected under two factors; one of them being trust in supervisor, and the other trust in organization. After the factor analysis with Varimax rotation, it was observed that the two factors became apparent as expected. The first factor is composed of eight items and is named trust in supervisor. The internal consistency coefficient of the factor was calculated as α = .881.

The internal consistency efficiency of the second factor was calculated as α = .851. It was observed that four items in the second factor were items that measured the trust in organization.

As a result of the reliability analysis made again by examining communalities and corrected item correlation value, the following coefficients were determined: organizational trust internal consistency coefficient α = .893, trust in supervisor internal consistency coefficient α = .898 and trust in the organization α = .888. In order to specify the variables in these factors, the rotating process was also repeated. This process was again carried out by the varimax method. The variables in the factors and also factor loads were determined by examining the factor matrix that developed as a result of the rotating process. These values are shown in Table 3.

 

 

The validity and reliability of the organizational support scale. The organizational support was measured by 16 items. Internal consistency coefficient was calculated as α = .921. It was proposed that the organizational support items be collected under one single factor. As a result of the factor analysis with varimax rotation, only one factor was observed to become apparent as it had been expected.

No values, whose corrected item correlation value and the square of their multiple correlations were below 0.20, were found. These coefficients indicate that the factors are very reliable in themselves and that they have internal validity. The factor loads in the factor were also determined by examining the factor matrix that developed as a result of the rotating process. These values are shown in Table 4.

 

 

The validity and reliability of the organizational commitment scale: The organizational commitment was measured by 24 items. Internal consistency coefficient was calculated as α = .892. It was proposed that the organizational commitment items be collected under three factors, which are affective commitment, continuance commitment and normative commitment. As a result of the factor analysis with varimax rotation, three factors were observed to become apparent as it had been expected. The first factor consists of eight items and is referred to as affective commitment. The internal consistency coefficient of the factor was calculated as α = .881.

The internal consistency coefficient of the second factor was calculated as α = .725. It was observed that the eight items in the second factor were items that measured continuance commitment. The third factor also consists of eight items and is referred to as normative commitment. The internal consistency coefficient of the factor was calculated as α = .821.

As a result of the reliability analysis made again by examining communalities and corrected item correlation value, the following coefficients were determined: organizational commitment internal consistency coefficient α = .859; affective commitment internal consistency coefficient α = .829; continuance commitment internal consistency coefficient α = .705 and normative commitment internal consistency coefficient α = .771. In order to specify the variables in these factors, the rotating process was also repeated. This process was again carried out by the varimax method.

The variables in the factors and also factor loads were also determined by examining the factor matrix that developed as a result of the rotating process. These values are shown in Table 5.

 

 

Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was also used in the research to examine the obtained values as well as to test the theoretical structures. In this research, in the interpretation of fit indexes, x2/Sd, RMSEA (Root Mean Square Error of Approximation), S-RMR (Standardized Root Mean Square Residual), NNFI (Non-Norrmed Fit Index) and CFI (Comparative Fit Index) values were taken as measures. As a result of the assessments, the scale index values for the CFA used in the research and the obtained values are shown in Tables 6 and 7. For the confirmatory factor analysis of the research model, structural equation modeling path analysis was used and the obtained values were confirmed by the essential requirement t-values. In the path analysis the efforts were made to define the relation between  organizational  trust,  organizational support and organizational commitment and it was checked whether the paths of the relation, which were researched with the t-values, had any significance. The values obtained as a result of the first analysis are shown in Table 6.

 

 

 

According to these results, it was concluded that the goodness-of-fit values were statistically not at an acceptable level. According to the results, the ratio of the 4361,44 chi-square to the 1214 degree of freedom is 3,59 and since it is above the recommended value of 3, it is not acceptable. According to these values, the acceptability of the researched relation is not at the acceptable level.

Model goodness-of-fit index values obtained after the examination as a result of the elimination of the correlation of the article sums edited with low factor load values and the variables whose multiple correlations are unacceptable by re-inspecting the relation researched are given in Table 7.

These values were, however, ranked among accep-table values (x2 =2305,56 ; Sd = 807 and x2/Sd = 2,86). The obtained x2/Sd, RMSEA and SRMR values indicate an acceptable fit, while NNFI(TLI) and CFI values indicate a good fit. When the values of the data collection tool obtained as a result of CFA, the essential requirement t-values and the path analysis are examined, it can be stated that the relation intended for the research is appropriate.

All statistical analyses conducted in the research were made with a reliability rate of .95 and the findings obtained as a result of the analysis were interpreted by turning these findings into tables in accordance with the purpose of the study and the questions that the research sought answers for. In this research, relational analysis was done through the correlational kind of relation. In the case when the parametric test conditions were met for the aim of determining the level and direction of the relation between organizational trust- organizational support, organizational trust-organizational commitment and organizational support-organizational commitment variables, Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient was used; and when those conditions could not be met, the Spearman test was used. The explanation of the relation between the perceptions about organizational trust, organizational support and organizational commit-ment through a mathematical model was carried out by multiple linear regression analysis, while a variance analysis was employed to ascertain if the researched relation had any significance. Moreover, the relation between the researched perceptions was confirmed by the path diagram regarding the coefficients standardized by the LISREL software and the path diagram regarding the T-values.

Average points were used when interpreting the analyses obtained from all three scaling tools (descriptive statistics results), while class interval method was used for grading in accordance with the Likert scale.

Analysis of the data

After the data collection tool was applied and collected, all analyses were made being based on the number of valid and acceptable data collection tools. The research includes the answers that administrators and teachers have given to the items in the scale in the scope of the descriptive analysis.

SPSS statistics software was used when analyzing the data collected for the purpose of the research. After the descriptive findings were shown, LISREL software was also used for the relational findings and accordingly, the necessary confirmatory analyses were conducted. 

 

 

 

 


 RESULTS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In the second stage of the research; it has been researched whether there is a meaningful relation between the perceptions of the administrators and teachers who are employed in the secondary education schools regarding organizational trust and organizational commitment. In order to determine the level and direction of the perceptions regarding organizational trust and organizational commitment, normal distribution test of Shapiro-Wilk has been used in this sub-problem. According to the results, because of the fact that administrators’ perceptions regarding organizational trust and organizational commitment complied with the normal distribution, Basic Correlation Analysis (Table 10) has been used in the calculation; because of the fact that teachers’ perceptions regarding  organizational  trust  and organizational commitment didn’t comply with the normal distribution, Spearman Analysis (Table 11) has been used. When the findings obtained have been analyzed, the results are as follows:

 

 

 

1. There is a meaningful, p<0.05 level relation between the perceptions of the administrators regarding organizational trust and organizational commitment and perceptions of affective commitment. As their perceptions of organizational trust increase, their perceptions of organizational commitment and affective commitment increase, too.

2. There is a positive, medium level relation at p<0,01 level between the administrators’ perceptions of trust-in-organization and their perceptions of organizational commitment and affective commitment; a meaningful relation at p<0,05 level between the perceptions of continuance commitment and normative commitment. As their perceptions of trust-in-organization increase, their perceptions of organizational commitment, affective commitment, continuance commitment and normative commitment increase, too.

When the findings concerning the teachers have beenanalyzed, the results are shown in Table 11.

With regard to the teachers, following conclusions have been drawn:

1. There is a positive, medium level relation between the teachers’ perceptions of organizational trust and perceptions of organizational commitment, affective commitment and normative commitment and a  positive and low level (p<0,01) relation between their perceptions of organiza-tional trust and perceptions of continuance commitment. As their perceptions of organizational trust increase, their perceptions of organizational commitment, affective commitment, continuance commitment and normative commitment increase, too.

2. There is a positive, medium level relation between the teachers’ perceptions of  trust-in-supervisor  and  perceptions of organizational commitment, affective commitment and normative commitment; a positive, low level (p<0,01) relation between their perceptions of trust-in-supervisor and their perceptions of continuance commitment. As their perceptions of trust-in-supervisor increase, their perceptions of organizational commitment, affective commitment, continuance commitment and normative commitment increase, too.

3. There is a positive, medium level relation between the teachers’ perceptions of trust-in-organization and perceptions of organizational commitment, affective commitment and normative commitment; a positive, low level (p<0,01) relation between their perceptions of trust-in-organization and their perceptions of continuance commitment. As their perceptions of trust-in-organization increase, their perceptions of organizational commitment, affective commitment, continuance commitment and normative commitment increase, too.

Moreover, in the relational model (Figure 1) realized with LISREL analysis, the fact that path coefficient of organizational trust-organizational commitment is meaningful as r=.60 (p<0,01) and positive shows the significance level and direction of the relation between these two factors. On the other hand, the result is realized in the relation between these factors as follows: t>1,96 (t=12,83), chi-square=2305,56 df=807 and RMSEA=.056 (Figure.2). According to these findings, it can be said that trust perceived by the administrators and teachers in the organization increases the commitment to the organization.

In the third stage of the research; it has been researched whether there is a meaningful relation between the perceptions of the administrators and teachers who are employed in the secondary education schools regarding organizational support and organiza-tional commitment. In order to determine the level and direction of the perceptions regarding organizational support and organizational commitment, normal distribution test of Shapiro-Wilk has been used in this sub-problem. According to the results, because of the fact that administrators’ perceptions regarding organizational support and organizational commitment comply with the normal distribution, Basic Correlation Analysis (Table 12) has been used in the calculation; because of the fact that the teachers’ perceptions regarding organizational support and organizational commitment do not comply with the normal distribution, Spearman Analysis (Table 13) has been used;. When the findings obtained have been analyzed, the following results have been reached:

 

 

 

There is a relation at p<0,01 level between perceptions of the administrators regarding organizational support and organizational commitment (a positive and medium level relation);  a positive and strong relation between their perceptions of organizational support and perceptions of affective commitment; a relation at p<0,05 level between their perceptions of organizational support and perceptions of normative commitment. As their perceptions of organizational support increase, their perceptions of organizational commitment, affective commitment and normative commitment increase, too.

With regard to teachers, the following results were reached:

There is a positive, medium level relation between the teachers’ perceptions of organizational support and perceptions of organizational commitment, affective commitment and normative commitment; a positive,  low level (p<0,01) relation between their perceptions of organizational support and their perceptions of continuance commitment. As their perceptions of organizational support increase, their perceptions of organizational commitment, affective commitment, continuance commitment and normative commitment increase, too.

Moreover, in the relational model (Figure 1) realized with LISREL analysis, the fact that path coefficient of organizational support-organizational commitment is meaningful as r=.88 (p<0,01) and positive shows the significance level and direction of the relation between these two factors. On the other hand, it is realized in the relation between these factors (Figure.2) as follows: t>1,96 (t=34,18), chi-square=2305,56 df=807 and RMSEA=.056. According to these findings, it can be said that support perceived by the administrators and teachers in the organization increases the commitment to the organization.

In the final stage of the research; it has been researched whether there is a meaningful relation between the perceptions of the administrators and teachers who are employed in the secondary education schools regarding organizational trust, organizational support and organizational commitment. The explanation of the relation between the organizational trust, organizational support and organizational commitment levels of the teachers and administrators with a mathematical model has been realized via multiple linear regression analysis and in the analyses enter method has been used. The reason why multiple linear regression model has been used in the research is that the number of the independent variables is more than one and the relation between variables is linear.

In the research organizational commitment has been evaluated as the dependent variable and organizational trust and organizational support as the independent variables. In order to research the reliability of the evaluations made after the multiple linear regression model is established, the model has been tested. Whether the model is proved meaningful, that is, whether is a linear relation between dependent variable and independent variables, and the dependent variable is explained by independent variables have been tested via variance analysis (Table 14). 

 

 

When the variance analysis regarding the perceptions of the administrators and teachers about organizational trust, organizational support and organizational commit-ment is inspected, the organizational commitments of the administrators and teachers exhibit a meaningful difference according to the joint impact of organizational trust and organizational support (F= 1,524 and p=,002; p<0,01). This result shows that the model is meaningful.

Within this context, according to the results obtained from the multiple linear regression model established for the perceptions of administrators, the relation between the perceptions of the administrators regarding organiza-tional trust, organizational support and organizational commitment has been found statistically meaningful (p= ,000; p<0,01) (Table 15). 

 

 

According to the results of the relation between variables regarding perceptions of the administrators, there is a positive and medium level relation (r= ,598) between variables (Table 16).

 

 

As per the multiple linear model for administrators established in accordance with the findings obtained parameters regarding regression model as to perceptions of the administrators (Table 17), it can be said that while the perceptions of administrators regarding organizational commitment are evaluated, their perceptions regarding organizational support (p= ,000) have much more impact than their perceptions of organizational trust (p= ,212).

 

 

According to the results obtained from the multiple linear regression model established as per the percep-tions of the teachers, the relation in multiple linear regression model established between the perceptions of teachers regarding organizational trust and organizational support, and the perceptions of organizational commitment has been found statistically meaningful (p= ,000; p<0,01) (Table 18).

 

 

According to the results of relation between variables regarding perceptions of teachers, there is a positive and medium level relation (r= ,667) between variables (Table 19).

 

 

As per the multiple linear model for teachers established in accordance with the findings obtained parameters regarding regression model as to perceptions of the teachers (Table 20), it can be said that while the perceptions of teachers regarding organizational commitment are evaluated, their perceptions regarding organizational support (p= ,000) have much more impact than their perceptions of organizational trust (p= ,003). 

 

 

The multiple linear regression model calculated has been also supported by LISREL software. Since the LISREL evaluations are affected by the sample size and complexity of the model, it could be realized on the basis of the values belonging to the 601 administrators and teachers evaluated in the research. Another reason why the evaluations made in the regression model for the administrators and teachers respectively cannot be made on LISREL software is the insufficient number (72) of administrators.

Moreover, in the researches carried out with LISREL software, every latent variable needs to have more than one indicator. However, the articles of the organizational support scale have a single factoral structure. This problem can be solved by classifying the scale articles corresponding to each latent variable and increasing the number of the indicators. So, in the research, the articles of the organizational support scale have been separated into two, average points for each part have been calculated and the relevant latent variable has been given two indicators.

The results of the relation researched via LISREL software indicate that the model has harmonized well (Figure 1). It is obvious that the relation of organizational trust with organizational support and (r= .70  p<.05) organizational commitment (r= .60  p<.05), the relation of organizational support with organizational commitment (r= .88  p<.05)   are meaningful. According to fix indexes of the research, goodness of fit indexes presenting how much the findings suit the relation being researched have exhibited high levels. In accordance with the findings obtained within this context, the relation being researched has been supported. In addition, basic requirement T values (t<-1,96 and t> 1,96 and p< .05) have been provided in the research and the ways of the relation being researched have been found meaningful (Figure 2). 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 DISCUSSION

When the literature is analyzed, a great deal of evidence can be found proving that there is a meaningful relation between organizational support and organizational trust. Ng (2011) and Ngang (2012) have established a meaningful relation between perceived supervisor support and the trust-in-organization of the employees, in their research. Riggle (2007) has revealed that perceived organizational support affects trust in a positive way. Annamali et al. (2010) and Hughes et al. (2008) have also acquired a positive relation between supportive environment and trust. In Eser’s (2011) research, a low level, positive and meaningful relation has been detected between trust tendency and organizational support. Gadot and Talmut (2010) state in their research that there is a positive and meaningful relation between provided support and trust-in-organization. Polat (2010) has also confirmed the high level and positive relation between perceptions of organizational support and perceptions of organizational trust.

Also in this research, both administrators’ and teachers’ perceptions of organizational support and perceptions of organizational trust, trust-in-supervisor and trust-in-organization have been found meaningful at medium level. This result has supported the evaluations mentioned above and the results achieved.

When the literature is reviewed, a great deal of evidence can be found proving that there is a meaningful relation between organizational trust and organizational commitment too. In their researches, Asgari et al. (2008), Cook and Wall (1980), Cetinel (2008), Çubukçu and Tarakç?o?lu (2010), Ngang (2012), Paker (2009), Topaloglu (2010), Vo (2010), and Yilmaz (2008) determined a strong and meaningful relation between trust and organizational commitment of employees. In Demirel’s (2008) research, it was found that there is a positive relation between trust-in-organization and trust-in-supervisor, and between affective commitment and continuance commitment. In the researches of Hughes et al. (2008) and Mathebula (2004), there is a meaningful relation between trust and affective commitment in particular. In their research, Gadot and Talmud (2010) stated that there is a positive, meaningful relation between organizational commitment and trust-in-organization.

In this research, the administrators’ perceptions of organizational trust and organizational commitment has been found meaningful at p<.05 level; perceptions of trust-in-organization and organizational commitment has been found meaningful at medium level; teachers’ perceptions of organizational trust, trust-in-supervisor, trust-in-organization and organizational commitment have been found meaningful at medium level. These results obtained in the research have supported the evaluations.

When the analysis results are examined, it is seen that trust-in-organization of administrators is more effective over their affective commitments. As stated by Cetinel (2008), affective commitment is the most desired dimension of commitment by the organizations, because it means the adoption of the organization’s objectives and values by the individuals and results in positive business behaviors. The result of the research regarding administrators has also supported this. It shows that administrators identify themselves with the organization. Therefore, administrators consider themselves as a part of the organization and feel that the organization has a great meaning and importance for them.

It is apparent that organizational trust, trust-in-supervisor and trust-in-organization of the teachers is more effective over their affective commitments. Here, as distinct from the administrators, it is obvious that the teachers trust in their administrators. This result is also supported by the findings of Straiter (2005). As stated by Ozdasli and Yucel (2010), trust-in-supervisor means believing that he/she fulfills his/her promise. The commitment-to-supervisor means accepting him/her emotionally and reasonably. It may be thought that commitment of an employee trusting his/her supervisor will increase. The result of the research has also supported this argument.

However, when the organizational trust of teachers is analyzed, it is revealed that their  normative  commitment is perceived, too. As stated by Cetinel (2008), normative commitment does not stem from the fact that employees perceive the commitment to their organizations as a duty, they are required to behave in that way for their own benefit, but also the fact that they believe that what they do is right and moral. This situation concerning teachers can result from the fact that teachers believe that they have responsibilities and duties for the organization in which they work and thus feel obliged to stay in that organization.

When the literature is analyzed, a great deal of evidence can be found proving that there is a meaningful relation between organizational support and organiza-tional commitment. In their researches, Asgari et al. (2008), and Ngang (2012) determined a strong and meaningful relation between supervisors’ support and organizational commitment of the employees. In Kaplan’s (2010) research, it has been revealed that one of the most important predecessors of organizational commitment is organizational support. Demir (2012), Kose and Gonulluoglu (2010), and Ozdevecioglu (2003) have stated in their researches that there is a positive relation between factors of organizational support and factors of organizational commitment. According to the researchers, there are so many factors that can affect the organizational commitments of the individuals. Organizational support is one of these factors. Akalin (2006), Eisenberger et al. (2001), Eisenberger et al. (1990) Hughes et al. (2008), and Rhoades, et al. (2001) have propounded in their researches that perceived organizational support has a meaningful and positive impact over affective commitment. Rhoades and Eisenberger (2002) have expressed in their research that there is a positive relation between perceived organizational support and organizational commitment, and affective commitment; a negatively meaningful relation between perceived organizational support and continuance commitment. Kaplan (2010) detected a positive relation between perceived organizational support and affective and normative commitment; a negative relation between perceived organizational support and continuance commitment.  Gadot and Talmud (2010) and Yih and Lawrance (2011) stated in their researches that there is a positively meaningful relation between provided support and organizational commitment. Ucar and Otken (2010) detected in their research a meaningful relation between organizational support and affective and normative commitment, but did not come across a meaningful relation between continuance commitment and organizational support.

In the research the perceptions of administrators and teachers regarding organizational support and organiza-tional commitment were found meaningful at medium level. As it is expected, according to the order of importance, perceptions of administrators and teachers regarding   organizational   support   is   like   this:    firstly affective, secondly normative and finally continuance commitment. The results reveal that employees perceiving more support from the organization show tendency to stay in the organization, as a result of this, organizational support increases employees’ perceptions of organizational commitment by creating a sense of dedication/devotion to the aims and objectives of the organization. These results achieved in the research have also supported the evaluations made.

There are also researches in the literature that examine the relation between organizational trust, organizational support and organizational commitment and achieve meaningful results. For example Ngang (2012) proved that organizational trust acted as a moderator between the perceived support of administrator and the teachers’ commitment, while Sheng et al. (2010) expressed in their research, in which they examined the relation between employee behavior, trust, perceived team support and team commitment, that teamwork behaviors, trust and perceived team support influenced team commitment in a meaningful way. Hughes et al. (2008) in their research examined whether trust and employees’ commitment acted as a mediator in explaining the relation between supportive climate and organizational commitment and found a statistically meaningful relation.

The results of this research are supportive of the research results mentioned above. The relation between organizational trust and organizational support and organizational commitment perceptions of both administrators and teachers has been found statistically meaningful. Moreover, it was determined that organiza-tional support perceptions of administrators and teachers were more influential than their perceptions of organizational trust when assessing their perceptions of organizational commitment. This supports the claim that perception of organizational support establishes the trust in organization. Therefore, it can be said that employees who receive social support feel more secure than employees who do not receive social support, and this trust that develops within the organization, as a result, increases their organizational commitments. Also, according to the results of the research, it can be said that if organizational trust level is high, then the organiza-tional commitments of the employees will correspondingly be influenced. The conducted researches show that when trust within the organization increases, the organizational commitments of employees also increase.

On the other hand, as a result of the research; the claim that the perceived organizational support creates a feeling of obligation for the employees that they have to contribute to the welfare of the organization and help the organization reach its goals and that the employees consequently feel more committed to the organization and make more efforts is also supported. As a result, it can be said that the research establishes that ‘the trust and  organizational   commitment  of  the  employees  are stronger when they feel their organization is committed to them and supportive of them’.

 

 


 CONCLUSION

The aim of this research was to determine the relation between the organizational trust, organizational support and organizational commitment of administrators and teachers. This research was conducted in the secondary schools in the city center of Bolu province and its participants consist of 601 educators with different individual characteristics, 72 of whom are administrators and the remaining 529 are teachers.

Most of the educators that make up the research universe are teachers and it is observed that the participants of the research mainly work at Vocational High Schools or the Social Sciences field. It is also observed that most of the participants are male educators, mostly in the 31-40 age range; they mainly have 11-15 years of experience and the majority have received a bachelor’s degree in their related fields. As a result of the conducted research;

a. According to the findings obtained from the research, it has been concluded that there is a meaningful relation between perceptions of the administrators and teachers regarding organizational trust, trust in supervisor and trust in organization trust and their perceptions of organizational support. 

b. Moreover, it has been concluded that there is a meaningful relation between the administrators’ perceptions of organizational trust and their perceptions of organizational commitment and affective commitment; their perceptions of trust in organization and organizational commitment, affective commitment, continuance commitment and normative commitment.  A meaningful relation between teacher’s perceptions of organizational trust, trust in supervisor and trust in organization and their perceptions of organizational commitment, affective commitment, continuance commitment and normative commitment has also been found. It is clear that organizational trust and their trust in organization are more effective on the administrators’ affective commitment. However, trust in organization and trust-in-supervisor has been found to be more effective on teachers’ affective commitment.

c. There is a meaningful relation between the administrators’ perceptions of organizational support and their perceptions of organizational commitment, affective commitment and normative commitment. A meaningful relation between teachers’ perceptions of organizational support and their perceptions of organizational commitment, affective commitment, continuance commitment and normative commitment was found. The order of importance for the administrators’ and teachers ‘perceptions of organizational support was as follows: affective commitment, normative commitment and continuance commitment.

d. According to the last review made in the research, a meaningful relation between administrators’ and teachers’ perceptions of organizational trust, organizational support and organizational commitment was found. The variance analysis with two factors for independent samples shows that the organizational commitments of administrators and teachers vary in a meaningful way according to the common influence of organizational trust and organizational support. In the multiple linear regression model created in this scope, the relation between administrators’ and teachers’ perceptions of organizational trust and organizational support and their perceptions of organizational commitment was found statistically meaningful. Moreover, it is observed that their perceptions of organizational support are more influential than their perceptions of organizational trust, when assessing administrators’ and teachers’ perceptions of organizational commitment.

In addition to this, the calculated multiple linear regression model was also supported with the LISREL software. According to the results of the relation that was researched by using LISREL software, it is observed that the relation between organizational trust, organizational support and organizational commitment and the relation between organizational support and organizational commitment are meaningful. 

Limitations and future studies

The extent of this research is limited with the perceptions of the administrators and teachers who are employed in the secondary education schools in the provincial centre of Bolu, Turkey about organizational trust, organizational support and organizational commitment. This research is conducted in the secondary education schools which are appertained to the ministry of education and the special schools are exempted.

The failing of the extensive researches in the national and international literature which is relating to assess the relation between the organizational trust, organizational support and organizational commitment, contributes to carry out this research. The relation between the organizational trust, organizational support and organizational commitment can be framed in the larger area with the different researches which can be applied in the different socio-cultural structures which are both educational sciences and other social sciences oriented and the differences can be assessed. Thereby it can be significantly supplemented with the educational literature and an emphasis can be made on the necessity and priority of the subject in the other fields.


 CONFLICT OF INTERESTS

The author has not declared any conflict of interest.



 REFERENCES

Akalın C (2006). Duygusal örgütsel baÄŸlılık geliÅŸiminde çalışanların algıladığı örgütsel destek ve ara deÄŸiÅŸken olarak örgüt temelli öz-saygı [Word and thought: Organization based self-respect as the organizational support and intervening variable that the employees perceive in the development of affective organizational commitment.]. (Unpublished master's thesis). Hacettepe University Institute of Social Sciences, Ankara, Turkey.

 

Akın M (2008). Örgütsel destek, sosyal destek ve iÅŸ/aile çatışmalarının yaÅŸam tatmini üzerindeki etkileri [Word and thought: The effects of organizational support, social support and work/family conflicts on life satisfaction.]. Bozok Üniversitesi SBE Dergisi. 25(2):141-170.

 

Allen NJ, Meyer JP (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization. J. Occ. Psychol. (63):1-18.

 

Annamali T, Abdullah AGK, Alazidiyeen NJ (2010). The mediating effects of POS on the relation between organizational justice, trust, and performance appraisal in Malaysian secondary schools. Eur. J. Soc. Sci. 13(4):623-632.

 

Asgari A, Silong AD, Ahmad A, Samah BA (2008). The relation between transformational leadership behaviors, organizational justice, leader-member exchange, perceived organizational support, trust in management and organizational citizenship. Eur. J. Sci. Res. 23(2):227-242.

 

Asunakutlu T (2006). Çalışanlar ile yöneticiler arasında güven duygusunun araÅŸtırılması: Turizm sektöründe bir uygulama [Word and thought: Researching the feeling of trust between employees and managers: A practice in the tourism sector.]. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi. 8(4):16-33.

 

Atak M (2009). ÖÄŸrenen örgüt ve örgütsel baÄŸlılık iliÅŸkisi [Word and thought: The relation between a learning organization and organizational commitment.]. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Atatürk University Institute of Social Sciences, Erzurum, Turkey.

 

Balay R (2000). Yönetici ve ÖÄŸretmenlerde Örgütsel BaÄŸlılık [Word and thought: Organizational commitment in managers and teachers.]. Ankara, Turkey: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.

 

Başaran İE (1999). Eğitime Giriş [Word and thought: Introduction to education.]. (4th ed.) Ankara, Turkey: Umut Yayın Dağıtım.

 

Büte M (2011). Etik iklim, örgütsel güven ve bireysel performans arasındaki iliÅŸki [Word and thought: The relation between ethical climate, organizational trust and individual performance.]. Atatürk Üniversitesi Ä°ktisadi ve Ä°dari Bilimler Dergisi. 25(1):171-192.

 

Cook J, Wall T (1980). New work attitude measures of trust, organizational commitment and personal need non-fulfilment. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 53: 39-52.
Crossref

 

Çetin, M. Ö. (2004). Örgüt Kültürü ve Örgütsel BaÄŸlılık [Word and thought: Organization culture and organizational commitment.]. Ankara, Turkey: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.

 

Çetinel E (2008). Örgütsel güven ile örgütsel baÄŸlılık arasındaki iliÅŸki üzerine bir olay [Word and thought: An anecdote about the relation between organizational trust and organizational commitment.]. (Unpublished master's thesis). Sakarya University Institute of Social Sciences, Sakarya, Turkey.

 

Çubukçu K, TarakçıoÄŸlu S (2010). Örgütsel güven ve baÄŸlılık iliÅŸkisinin otelcilik ve turizm meslek lisesi öÄŸretmenleri üzerinde incelenmesi [Word and thought: Examining the relation between organizational trust and commitment on teachers of hotel management and tourism vocational high schools.]. Ä°ÅŸletme AraÅŸtırmaları Dergisi. 2(4): 57-78.

 

Demir M (2012). Örgütsel destek, örgütsel baÄŸlılık ve iÅŸten ayrılma eÄŸilimi iliÅŸkisi: Havalimanı yer hizmetleri iÅŸletmelerine yönelik bir araÅŸtırma [Word and thought: The relation between organizational trust, organizational commitment and the tendency to quit work: A research aimed at establishments of airport ground services.]. Ä°ÅŸ Güç Endüstri Ä°liÅŸkileri ve Ä°nsan Kaynakları Dergisi. 14(1): 47-64.

 

Demircan N, Ceylan A (2003). Örgütsel güven kavramı: Nedenleri ve sonuçları [Word and thought: The concept of organizational trust: Its causes and effects.]. Celal Bayar Üniversitesi Yönetim ve Ekonomi Dergisi. 10(2):139-150.

 

Demircan N (2003). Örgütsel güvenin bir ara deÄŸiÅŸken olarak örgütsel baÄŸlılık üzerindeki etkisi: EÄŸitim sektöründe bir uygulama [Word and thought: The effect of organizational trust as an intervening variable on organizational commitment: A practice in the education sector.]. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Institute of Advanced Technology, Institute of Social Sciences, Gebze, Turkey.

 

Demirel Y (2008). Örgütsel güvenin örgütsel baÄŸlılık üzerine etkisi: Tekstil sektörü çalışanlarına yönelik bir araÅŸtırma [Word and thought: The effect of organizational trust on organizational commitment: A research aimed at employees of the textile sector.]. Celal Bayar Üniversitesi Yönetim ve Ekonomi Dergisi.15(2):179-194.

 

DurdaÄŸ M, Naktiyok A (2011). Psikolojik taciz algısının örgütsel güven üzerindeki rolü [Word and thought: The role of psychological abuse perception in organizational trust.]. Kafkas Üniversitesi Ä°Ä°BF Dergisi. 1(2):5-37.

 

Eisenberger R, Huntington R, Hutchhison S, Sowa D (1986). Perceived organizational support. J. Appl. Psychol. 71(3):500-507.
Crossref

 

Eisenberger R, Armeli S, Rexwinkel B, Lynch PD, Rhoades L (2001). Reciprocation of perceived organizational support. J. Appl. Psychol. 86(1):42-51.
Crossref

 

Eisenberger R, Fasolo P, Davis-Lamastro V (1990). Perceived organizational support and employee diligence, commitment, and innovation. J. Appl. Psychol. 75(1):51-59.
Crossref

 

ErdoÄŸan Ä° (2004). EÄŸitimde DeÄŸiÅŸim Yönetimi [Word and thought: Change management in education.] (2th ed.). Ankara, Turkey: Pegem A Yayıncılık.

 

Eser G (2011). Güven eÄŸiliminin örgütsel destek üzerindeki etkisi [Word and thought: The effect of tendency of trust on organizational support.]. Marmara Üniversitesi Ä°Ä°BF Dergisi. 30(54):365-376.

 

Gadot EV, Talmud I (2010). Organizational politics and job outcomes: The moderating effect of trust and social support. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 40(11):2829-2861.
Crossref

 

Hughes LW, Avey JB, Norman SM (2008). A study of supportive climate, trust, engagement and organizational commitment. J. Bus. Leadership:Res. Prac. Teach. 4(2):51-59.

 

Ä°ÅŸcan ÖF, Sayın U (2010). Örgütsel adalet, iÅŸ tatmini ve örgütsel güven arasındaki iliÅŸki [Word and thought: The relation between organizational justice, work satisfaction and organizational trust.]. Atatürk Üniversitesi Ä°Ä°BF Dergisi. 24(4):195-216.

 

Kaplan M (2010). Otel iÅŸletmelerinde etiksel iklim ve örgütsel destek algılamalarının örgütsel baÄŸlılık üzerindeki etkisi: Kapadokya örneÄŸi [Word and thought: The effects of ethical climate and organizational support perceptions in hotel establishments on organizational commitment: The Cappadocia example.]. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Selçuk University Institute of Social Sciences, Ä°zmir, Turkey.

 

Koç H, YazıcıoÄŸlu Ä° (2011). Yöneticiye duyulan güven ile iÅŸ tatmini arasındaki iliÅŸki: Kamu ve özel sektör karşılaÅŸtırması [Word and thought: The relation between the trust in manager and work satisfaction: Comparison between the public and private sectors.]. DoÄŸuÅŸ Üniversitesi Dergisi. 12(1):46-57.

 

Köse S, GönüllüoÄŸlu S (2010). Örgütsel desteÄŸin örgütsel baÄŸlılık üzerindeki etkisini belirlemeye yönelik bir araÅŸtırma [Word and thought: A research aimed at determining the effect of organizational support on organizational commitment.]. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi. 27:85-94.

 

Mathebula MRL (2004). Modelling the relationship between organizational commitment, leadership style, human resources management practices and organizational trust. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Pretoria Faculty of Economic and Management Sciences, Pretoria, the Republic of South Africa.

 

Meyer JP, Allen NJ (1997). Commitment In The Workplace. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

 

Mowday RT, Steers RM, Porter LW (1979). The measurement of organizational commitment. J. Vacational Behav. 14:224-247.
Crossref

 

Ng M (2011). Unraveling the relationship between employee's perception to organization and turnover intentions: Exploring the mediating effects of trust to organization. Retrieved from http://academic-papers.org/ocs2/session7papers/F7/851_2141-1-Dr.doc.

 

Ngang TK (2012). Relationship between perceived organizational support and trust with teacher's commitment. Retrieved from http://ikp.um.edu.my/images/ipk/doc/DrTangKeowHang.pdf.

 

Nyhan RC, Marlowe HA (1997). Development and psychometric properties of the organizational trust inventory. Eval. Rev. 21(5):614-635.
Crossref

 

ÖzdaÅŸlı K, Yücel S (2010). Yöneticiye baÄŸlılıkta yöneticiye güvenin etkisi: Yapısal eÅŸitlik modeli ile bir analiz [Word and thought: The effect of trust in manager on commitment to manager: An analysis with the structural equation model.]. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi. 11:67-83.

 

Özdemir A (2010). Ä°lköÄŸretim okullarında algılanan örgütsel desteÄŸin öÄŸretmenlerin kiÅŸiler arası öz yeterlik inançları ile iliÅŸkisinin incelenmesi [Word and thought: Examining the relation between the perceived organizational support in primary schools and the faith of the teachers about interpersonal self-sufficiency.]. Gazi EÄŸitim Fakültesi Dergisi. 30(1):127-146.

 

ÖzdevecioÄŸlu M (2003). Algılanan örgütsel destek ile örgütsel baÄŸlılık arasındaki iliÅŸkilerin belirlenmesine yönelik bir araÅŸtırma [Word and thought: A research aimed at determining the relations between the perceived organizational support and organizational commitment.]. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Ä°Ä°BF Dergisi 180(2):113-130.

 

Özer N, DemirtaÅŸ H, Üstüner M, Cömert M (2006). OrtaöÄŸretim öÄŸretmenlerinin örgütsel güven algıları [Word and thought: The organizational trust perceptions of secondary school teachers.]. Ege EÄŸitim Dergisi. 7(1):103-124.

 

Paker N (2009). Ä°lköÄŸretim okulu öÄŸretmenlerinin örgütsel güvenleri ile örgütsel baÄŸlılıkları arasındaki iliÅŸki [Word and thought: The relation between the organizational trust and organizational commitment of primary school teachers.]. (Unpublished master's thesis). Sakarya University Institute of Social Sciences, Sakarya, Turkey.

 

Polat S (2010). The effect of organizational support; perception of teachers on organizational trust perception of their schools. Afr. J. Bus. Manage. 4(14):3134-3138.

 

Puusa A, Tolvanen U (2006). Organizational Identity and Trust. EJBO Elect. J. Bus. Ethics Org. Stud. 11(2):29-33.

 

Rhoades L, Eisenberger R (2002). Perceived organizational support: A review of the literature. J. Appl. Psychol. 87(4):698-714.
Crossref

 

Rhoades L, Eisenberger R, Armeli S (2001). Affective commitment to the organization: The contribution of perceived organizational support. J. Appl. Psychol. 86(5):825-836.
Crossref

 

Ribbers IL (2009). Trust, cnynicism, and organizational change: The role of management. (Unpublished master's thesis). University of Tilburg Department Organisation and Strategy, Tilburg, Netherlands.

 

Riggle RJ (2007). The impact of organizational climate variables of perceived organizational support, workplace isolation, and ethical climate on salesperson psychological and behavioral work outcomes. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of South Florida Department of Marketing, Florida, United States of America.

 

Rossen HR (1999). Ä°nsan Yönetimi [Word and thought: People management.]. (G. Bulut, Trans.). Ä°stanbul, Turkey: BZD. Yayıncılık.

 

Sheng CW, Tiang YF, Chen MC (2010). Relationships among teamwork behavior, trust, perceived team supoort, and team commitment. Soc. Behav. Pers. 38 (10):1297-1306.
Crossref

 

Straiter KL (2005). The effects of supervisor's trust of subordinates and their organization on job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Int. J. Leadership Stud. 1(1):86-101.

 

Tella A, Ayeni CO, Popoola SO (2007). Work motivation, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment of library personnel in academic and research libraries in Oyo State, Nigeria, University of Nebraska – Lincoln Library Philosophy and Practice. pp.1-16.

 

TopaloÄŸlu IG (2010). Ä°ÅŸgörenlerin adalet ve etik algılar açısından örgütsel güven ile örgütsel baÄŸlılık iliÅŸkisi [Word and thought: The relation between organizational trust and organizational commitment in terms of the justice and ethics perceptions of employees.]. (Unpublished master's thesis). Atılım University Institute of Social Sciences, Ankara, Turkey.

 

Uçar D, Ötken B (2010). Algılanan örgütsel destek ve ÅŸirkete baÄŸlılık: Örgüt temelli öz-saygının rolü [Word and thought: The perceived organizational support and commitment to the company: The role of organization based self-respect.]. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Ä°ktisadi ve Ä°dari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi. 25(2):85-105.

 

Ural A, Kılıç Ä° (2005). Bilimsel AraÅŸtırma Süreci ve SPSS Ä°le Veri Analizi [Word and thought: Process of scientific research and data analysis through SPSS.]. Ankara, Turkey: Detay Yayıncılık.

 

Wasti SA (2000). Meyer ve Allen üç boyutlu örgütsel baÄŸlılık ölçeÄŸinin geçerlilik ve güvenirlilik analizi [Word and thought: The validity and reliability analysis of Meyer and Allen three dimensional organizational commitment scale.]. 8th National Management & Organization Congress. Kayseri, Turkey: Erciyes University. pp.401-410

 

Vo TT (2010). Selection matters: Predicting intrinsic motivation and employee commitment in small Vietnamese firms. (Unpublished master's thesis). Concordia University The John Molson School of Business, Montreal, Canada.

 

Yılmaz K (2008). The relationship between organizational trust and organizational commitment in Turkish primary schools. J. Appl. Sci. 8(12):2293-2299.
Crossref

 

Yih WW, Lawrance SH (2011). The impacts of perceived organizational support, job satisfaction, and organizational comitment on job performance in hotel industry. The 11th International DSI and the 16th APDSI Joint Meeting. Taipei, Taiwan: National Cheng Kung University. pp.1-9.

 

Yüksel Ö (2003). Ä°nsan Kaynakları Yönetimi [Word and thought: Human resources management.]. Ankara, Turkey: Gazi Kitabevi.

 




          */?>