Factors That Impact Clinical Laboratory Scientists' Commitment to Their Work Organizations

Richard Bamberg; Duane Akroyd; Ti'eshia M Moore

doi:10.29074/ascls.21.3.167

This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.

Richard Bamberg, PhD CLDir(NCA)⇑
1. is professor and chair, Department of Clinical Laboratory Science, College of Allied Health Sciences, East Carolina University, Greenville NC
Duane Akroyd, PhD RT(R)
1. is professor and director, Health Professions Education Program, Department of Adult and Higher Education, College of Education, North Carolina State University, Raleigh NC
Ti'eshia M Moore, MA
1. is of the Department of Adult and Higher Education, College of Education, North Carolina State University, Raleigh NC

Address for correspondence: Richard Bamberg PhD CLDir(NCA), professor and chair, Department of Clinical Laboratory Science, College of Allied Health Sciences, Health Science Building, 3410, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC 27858-4353. (252) 744-6060, (252)744-6068 (fax). bambergw{at}ecu.edu.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the predictive ability of various aspects of the work environment for organizational commitment.

METHODS: A questionnaire measuring three dimensions of organizational commitment along with five aspects of work environment and 10 demographic and work setting characteristics was sent to a national, convenience sample of clinical laboratory professionals.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: All persons obtaining the CLS certification by NCA from January 1, 1997 to December 31, 2006. Only respondents who worked full-time in a clinical laboratory setting were included in the database.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Levels of affective, normative, and continuance organizational commitment, organizational support, role clarity, role conflict, transformational leadership behavior of supervisor, and organizational type, total years work experience in clinical laboratories, and educational level of respondents. Questionnaire items used either a 7-point or 5-point Likert response scale.

RESULTS: Based on multiple regression analysis for the 427 respondents, organizational support and transformational leadership behavior were found to be significant positive predictors of affective and normative organizational commitment. Work setting (non-hospital laboratory) and total years of work experience in clinical laboratories were found to be significant positive predictors of continuance organizational commitment. Overall the organizational commitment levels for all three dimensions were at the neutral rating or below in the slightly disagree range.

CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate a less than optimal level of organizational commitment to employers, which were predominantly hospitals, by CLS practitioners. This may result in continuing retention problems for hospital laboratories. The results offer strategies for improving organizational commitment via the significant predictors.

ABBREVIATIONS: ASCP = American Society for Clinical Pathology; CLS= clinical laboratory scientist as certified by NCA; MT = medical technologist as certified by ASCP; NCA=National Credentialing Agency for Laboratory Personnel; RT(R) = registered radiologic technologist as certified by the American Registry of Radiologic Technologists.