Research purpose: This study focused on the validation of a shortened, six-item version of the turnover intention scale (TIS-6).

Motivation for the study: The research question of whether the TIS-6 is a reliable and a valid scale for measuring turnover intention and for predicting actual turnover was addressed in this study.

Research design, approach and method: The study was based on a census-based sample (n = 2429) of employees in an information, communication and technology (ICT) sector company (N = 23 134) where the TIS-6 was used as one of the criterion variables. The leavers (those who left the company) in this sample were compared with the stayers (those who remained in the employ of the company) in this sample in respect of different variables used in the study.

Main findings: It was established that the TIS-6 could measure turnover intentions reliably (α = 0.80). The TIS-6 could significantly distinguish between leavers and stayers (actual turnover), thereby confirming its criterion-predictive validity. The scale also established statistically significant differences between leavers and stayers in respect of a number of the remaining theoretical variables used in the study, thereby also confirming its differential validity. These comparisons were conducted for both the 4-month and the 4-year period after the survey was conducted.

Practical/managerial implications: Turnover intention is related to a number of variables in the study which necessitates a reappraisal and a reconceptualisation of existing turnover intention models.

Contribution/value-add: The TIS-6 can be used as a reliable and valid scale to assess turnover intentions and can therefore be used in research to validly and reliably assess turnover intentions or to predict actual turnover.

Although turnover intention is covered well in the literature, the need remains to validate turnover cognition scales (Sager, Griffeth & Horn, 1998). The motivation for validating the shortened version of the turnover intention scale (TIS-6) is that most other scales use only a limited number of scale items. Martin (2007) observed that various researchers have only used single item scales (Guimaraes, 1997; Lambert, Hogan, & Barton, 2001), with obvious metric limitations. According to Martin (2007), only a limited number of other studies have used more than three items in their instruments (Becker, 1992; Fox & Fallon, 2003; Lum, Kervin, Clark, Reid & Sirola, 1998). It seems that information on the metric properties of such instruments is lacking and that no validation research is reported specifically on the TIS-6 (the studies by Jacobs [2005] and Martin [2007] report on the longer TIS versions).

The main research question of this study is therefore as follows: is the shortened TIS-6 a reliable and valid scale for measuring turnover intention and for predicting actual turnover? The objectives of the study are to investigate, (1) the reliability, (2) the construct (factorial) validity, (3) the criterion-predictive validity and (4) the differential validity of the TIS-6 within the context of a large South African information, communication and technology (ICT) sector company. The contribution of this study would be that a valid and reliable turnover intention scale is developed for future use as a criterion or predictor variable. It is also important to use valid and reliable scales as a proxy for predicting actual turnover.

Against the background of Fishbein and Ajzen’s (1975) theoretical framework, behavioural intention is a reliable determinant of actual behaviour (Jaros, Jermier, Koehler & Sincich, 1993; Muliawan, Green & Robb, 2009). It has also been empirically established that turnover intention (conation) has a positive relationship with actual turnover (actual behaviour) (Byrne, 2005; Hendrix, Robbins, Miller & Summers, 1998; Steensma, Van Breukelen & Sturm, 2004). Several authors argued that turnover intention can be used as a valid proxy for actual labour turnover (Jaros et al., 1993; Muliawan et al., 2009; Tett & Meyer, 1993). Turnover is the result of a coping strategy used by employees to escape the current situation (cf. Petriglieri, 2011). Turnover can be permanent, when employees leave the employment institution, or it can be characterised by horizontal mobility when employees seek and accept transfers to other departments (Kirpal, 2004). Tett and Meyer (1993, p. 262) referred to turnover as ‘… the last in a sequence of withdrawal cognitions …’, a practice that Petriglieri (2011, p. 648) named an ‘identity exit’.

The finding that the absence of job resources stimulated turnover intention was also supported in a study that did not use the JD-R model (Agarwal, Ferrat & De, 2007). Along a similar line, Du Plooy and Roodt (2010) indicated on a bivariate level that both work engagement and organisational citizenship behaviour are negatively related to turnover intention, whilst work alienation and burnout are positively related. In a stepwise multiple regression, however, work alienation explains the largest amount of variance (54%) in turnover intention, whilst the beta weight of organisational citizenship behaviour (β = 0.064) in the prediction model turned positive. These findings therefore suggest that work engagement and work alienation should rather be viewed as polar opposites with organisational citizenship behaviours and burnout, respectively, as resulting consequences. It seems that in tight economic or labour market conditions, individuals do not wish to ‘burn bridges’, which may explain the positive relationship between organisational citizenship behaviours and turnover intention.

Jacobs (2005) proposed a different turnover intention model, where positive or negative perceptions of organisational culture (predictors) were related to turnover intentions (criterion). A number of variables mediated this said relationship, such as job satisfaction, organisational citizenship behaviour, organisational commitment and knowledge sharing (cf. Boshoff, Van Wyk, Hoole & Owen, 2002; Wasti, 2003 for similar types of models). Individuals’ perception of organisational culture may therefore trigger key mediating variables, which may, again in turn, lead to decisions to leave or stay with the organisation.

Another theoretical framework which may shed light on an individual’s decision to exit an organisation is Petriglieri’s (2011) theory of identity threat responses. In a nutshell, this theory argues that individuals assess the identity threat and possible coping responses against the threat strength and the background of existing social support. This results in two broad coping strategy categories of either identity protection responses or identity restructuring responses. Identity exit is one of the identity restructuring responses which will eliminate the identity threat. This model has particular relevance for turnover within the conceptual framework of work identity.

Bothma (2011) concluded that the turnover phenomenon has significant cost and other negative consequences for any organisation (Bluedorn, 1982; Greyling & Stanz, 2010; Mobley, 1982). Losing employees that are highly skilled may have disruptive implications for organisations, such as impaired organisational functioning, service delivery and administration. It may also contribute to increased costs of re-hiring and re-training employees (Roodt & Bothma, 1997; Sulu, Ceylan & Kaynak, 2010). These mentioned consequences provide a sound rationale for this validation study of the TIS-6.

In summary, this study will investigate and make comparisons of those that leave the employ of the organisation (leavers) versus those that stay in service (stayers) in respect of turnover intentions, work-based identity scores, the three dimensions of work engagement, the three dimensions of burnout, organisational citizenship behaviour, personal alienation and task performance.

Table 1 reflects that most participants were men (63.2%). The majority of the participants (44.1%) were White, followed by Black (26.3%), Coloured (16.3%) and Asian or Indian (13.3%). These ethnic proportions reflect the heterogeneity of the company’s work force. The mean age of the participants was about 40 years, which reflects a mature labour force. The majority of the respondents were from operational levels (55.0%) and were stationed in the corporate region (25.0%) of the company. About 41.0% of the participants had a Matric or lower qualification, followed by 27.0% that possessed a National or National Higher Diploma.

Turnover intention scale: Turnover intention (the intention to leave or stay) was measured with a six-item scale adapted from the 15-item scale initially developed by Roodt (2004). To enhance the reliability of responses, behaviour intention should be measured within a reasonable timeframe after accepting a position within a company. Based on recommendations from literature (Muliawan et al., 2009), this study used a 6-month period.

Examples of items included in the TIS-6 are: ‘How often have you considered leaving your job?’ and ‘How often do you look forward to another day at work?’ Jacobs (2005) reported a Cronbach alpha coefficient of 0.91 for the 15-item version of the TI scale. Martin (2007) and Martin and Roodt (2008) in their study reported a Cronbach alpha coefficient of 0.90 for a 13-item version of the scale. The reliability of the TIS-6 will be reported in the ‘Results’ section.

Alienation scale: The five-item alienation scale (AL) of Banai, Reisel and Probst (2004) is based on the personal alienation scale of Korman, Wittig-Berman and Lang (1981) and was also later used by Banai and Reisel (2007) to measure work alienation in a cross-national study.

Examples of the selected items are: ‘To what extent do you feel that your daily activities don’t reflect your real interests and values?’ and ‘How likely is it that you would prefer to live a different life than you are currently doing?’ Banai and Reisel (2007) reported a Cronbach alpha coefficient of 0.80 for the AL. The Cronbach alpha reliability for the scale in this study was 0.81.

Helping behaviour: According to Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine and Bachrach (2000), helping behaviour includes various conceptualisations such as altruism, peace-making, cheerleading and interpersonal helping. Helping behaviour was measured with a nine-item scale of which five items were from the helping behaviour scale (Van Dyne & LePine, 1998) and four items from the altruism dimension of the citizenship behaviour scale (Smith, Organ & Near, 1983).

Examples of the selected items are: ‘How often do you volunteer to do things in your work group?’ and ‘How often do help others who have heavy workloads?’ Van Dyne and LePine (1998) reported Cronbach alpha coefficients for the helping behaviour scale in a range from 0.88 to 0.95. This study reported a Cronbach alpha coefficient of 0.86 for helping behaviour measured by the combined and adjusted scale.

Maslach burnout inventory – human services survey: For the purpose of this study, the Maslach burnout inventory – human services survey (MBI-HSS-20) (Maslach & Jackson, 1981) was used to measure burnout at work. The 20-item instrument is composed of three dimensions, namely emotional exhaustion (EE) (eight items) with Cronbach alpha coefficients ranging from 0.85 to 0.90, depersonalisation (DP) (five items) with Cronbach alpha coefficients ranging from 0.58 to 0.79 and reduced personal accomplishment (PA) (seven items) with Cronbach alpha coefficients ranging from 0.70 to 0.71 (Gil-Monte, 2005; Maslach, Jackson & Leiter, 1996).

Examples of the selected items are: ‘I feel emotionally drained from my work’ and ‘I feel used up at the end of the work day.’ A seven-point Likert-type frequency rating scale ranging between extreme values of 0 (never) and 6 (always) was used to rate job burnout items (Maslach, Jackson & Leiter, 1986, 1996). This study found Cronbach alpha coefficients of 0.89 for emotional exhaustion, 0.70 for depersonalisation and 0.71 for reduced personal accomplishment.

Utrecht work engagement scale: The Utrecht work engagement scale (UWES-17) was used to measure work engagement in this study. The 17-item version consists of three dimensions, namely vigour (VI) (six items) with Cronbach alpha coefficients ranging from 0.75 to 0.82, dedication (DE) (five items) with Cronbach alpha coefficients ranging from 0.88 to 0.90 and absorption (AB) (six items) with Cronbach alpha coefficients ranging from 0.70 to 0.77 (Schaufeli, Salanova, Conźalez-Romá & Bakker, 2002).

Examples of scale items are: ‘At my work, I feel bursting with energy’ and ‘Time flies when I’m working’. A seven-point Likert-type frequency rating scale ranging between extreme values of 0 (never) and 6 (always) was used to rate work engagement items (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2003). This study found a Cronbach alpha coefficient of 0.91 for the UWES-17.

Task performance scale: Task performance assessment was independently conducted by participants’ supervisors. These assessments were measured with an adaptation of a nine-item scale (Rotenberry & Moberg, 2007; Williams & Anderson, 1991).

Examples of the scale items are: ‘How often does this employee perform the tasks that are expected from him or her?’ and ‘How frequently does this employee fail to perform essential duties?’ Care was taken that the scale did not overlap with items related to contextual, helping behaviour performance as discussed above. Rotenberry and Moberg (2007) reported a Cronbach alpha coefficient of 0.91 for the task performance scale. This study found a Cronbach alpha coefficient of 0.94 for task performance.

Work-based identity scale: Previous attempts were made to measure work-based identity (Aryee & Luk, 1996; Buche, 2003, 2006, 2008; Walsh & Gordon, 2007; Wayne, Randel & Stevens, 2006), but no suitable measuring instrument was found that complied with the theoretical definition of work-based identity. Different scales that measure different facets of work-based identity as defined in the work-based identity prototype (refer to Bothma, 2011), such as work role centrality, person–environment fit, organisational identification, job involvement, occupational and/or professional identity and career identity were sourced, adapted and combined to measure work-based identity (Lauver & Kristof-Brown, 2001; Lodahl & Kejner, 1965; Mael & Ashforth, 1992; Roodt, 1997; Roodt, De Braine, Bothma & Jansen, 2009; Serafini, Maitland & Adams, 2006).

A proposed work-based identity scale was compiled, consisting of 36 items representing the different facets of work-based identity, selected from a number of various pre-existing scales. Firstly, items were selected from the organisational-related commitment scale of Roodt (1997). Examples of selected items are: ‘To what extent do you regard work as the most important aspect in your life?’ and ‘To what extent does your job allow for the achievement of personal goals?’ Secondly, job involvement was measured with items that were selected from Lodahl and Kejner’s (1965) job involvement scale, such as: ‘How likely are you to regard your work as only a small part of who you are?’ Thirdly, items were selected from three subscales from the functions of identity scale of Serafini et al. (2006). The items were selected from the subscales: ‘structure’ – defined as ‘… the structure of understanding of who one is’ (p. 1), ‘goals’ – defined as ‘… meaning and direction through commitments, values and goals’ (p. 1) and ‘future’ – defined as ‘… meaning and direction through commitments, values and goals and sense of future’ (p. 1). Fourthly, organisational identification was measured with the scale of Mael and Ashforth (1992). Examples of the adapted items are: ‘How often do you say “we” rather than “they” when you talk about the organisation that you work for?’ and ‘How interested are you in what others think about the organisation that you work for?’ Finally, person-organisation fit was measured with items selected from the scale of Lauver and Kristof-Brown (2001). Examples of the selected items are: ‘To what degree do your values match or fit the values of the organisation that you work for?’ and ‘To what degree are you able to maintain your values at the organisation that you work for?’

Reliability and validity of the instrument was determined by submitting the 36-item questionnaire to first-level and second-level factor analyses to determine the factor structure (Figure 1). Three columns can be identified in Figure 1. The left-hand column shows the theoretical sub-constructs as explained above with their respective reliabilities. The middle column shows the results of the first-level factor analysis based on the six postulated factors and their respective reliabilities. The right-hand column shows the results of the second-level factor analysis and the respective reliabilities of the two postulated factors. The factor analyses yielded a 28-item, one-dimensional work-based identity scale with a Cronbach alpha coefficient of 0.95 (Roodt et al., 2009). The second factor, labelled ‘future’, was omitted because it was based on experimental items.

FIGURE 1: Factor analyses results of the work-based identity scale.

In the 4-month period after the initial survey was conducted it was established that 84 respondents left the service of the company (identified by means of the company’s PERSAL system) – this group was labelled the ‘leavers’. A random sub-sample of 88 was drawn from the remainder of the initial sample – and this group was labelled the ‘stayers’. The leavers and stayers were compared in terms of the different variable mean scores. The same procedure was then repeated after a 4-year period, where 405 leavers of the same initial sample were compared with 405 randomly selected stayers from the remaining sample. By only using their PERSAL numbers, all the participants remained anonymous to the researchers.

There was a significant difference in the work-based identity scores of those who resigned (M = 4.16, SD = 1.22) compared to those who stayed (M = 4.96, SD = 0.92): t(153.8) = -4.84, p ≤ 0.001 (two-tailed). The difference in the means (mean difference = -0.79, 95% CI: -1.12 to -0.47) has a moderate effect (η_p² = 0.12).

There was a significant difference in the personal alienation scores of those who resigned (M = 4.85, SD = 1.40) and those who stayed (M = 4.12, SD = 1.37): t(170) = 3.43, p ≤ 0.001 (two-tailed). The difference in the means (mean difference = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.31 to 1.14) has a moderate effect (η_p² = 0.07).

There was a significant difference in the emotional exhaustion (BO1) scores of those who resigned (M = 3.06, SD = 1.36) compared to those who stayed (M = 2.19, SD = 1.42): t(170) = -2.18, p = 0.030 (two-tailed). The difference in the means (mean difference = 0.86, 95% CI: -0.65 to -0.03) has a small effect (η_p² = 0.03).

There was a significant difference in the depersonalisation (BO2) scores of those who resigned (M = 1.93, SD = 1.31) compared to those who stayed (M = 1.48, SD = 1.23): t(170) = 4.06, p ≤ 0.001 (two-tailed). The difference in the means (mean difference = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.46 to 1.28) has a moderate effect (η_p² = 0.09).

There was a significant difference in the reduced personal accomplishment (BO3) scores of those who resigned (M = 3.92, SD = 0.98) compared to those who stayed (M = 4.26, SD = 1.06): t(170) = 2.32, p = 0.021 (two-tailed). The difference in the means (mean difference = -0.34, 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.83) has a small effect (η_p² = 0.04).

There was a significant difference in the vigour (WE1) scores of those who resigned (M = 3.96, SD = 1.38) compared to those who stayed (M = 4.73, SD = 1.00): t(151) = -4.24, p ≤ 0.001 (two-tailed). The difference in the means (mean difference = -0.78, 95% CI: -1.14 to -0.42) has a moderate effect (η_p² = 0.09).

There was a significant difference in the dedication (WE2) scores of those who resigned (M = 3.60, SD = 1.78) compared to those who stayed (M = 4.60, SD = 1.21): t(145) = -4.32, p ≤ 0.001 (two-tailed). The difference in the means (mean difference = -1.00, 95% CI: -1.46 to -0.54) has a moderate effect (η_p² = 0.10).

There was a significant difference in the absorption (WE3) scores of those who resigned (M = 3.86, SD = 1.43) compared to those who stayed (M = 4.59, SD = 0.97): t(145.3) = -3.94, p ≤ 0.001 (two-tailed). The difference in the means (mean difference = -0.73, 95% CI: -1.10 to -0.36) has a moderate effect (η_p² = 0.08). All the effect sizes in respect of individual variables as reported above support the criterion-predictive and the differential validity of the TIS-6 in the 4-month period after the survey.

There was no significant difference in the helping behaviour scores of those who resigned (M = 5.27, SD = 1.13) compared to those who stayed (M = 5.51, SD = 0.95): t(170) = -1.565, p = 0.119 (two-tailed). The difference in the means (mean difference = -0.25, 95% CI: -0.56 to 0.07) was insignificant.

There was no significant difference in the task performance of those who resigned (M = 5.51, SD = 1.07) compared to those who stayed (M = 5.76, SD = 0.93): t(154) = -1.566, p = 0.120 (two-tailed). The difference in the means (mean difference = -0.25, 95% CI: -0.57 to 0.07) was insignificant.

The data profiles of the 405 employees who resigned from the ICT company over the 4-year period after the survey was conducted were compared with the data profiles of 405 employees drawn randomly from the remaining sample (n = 2024) who stayed with the company. Independent-sample t-tests were conducted to compare the different variable scores of those employees who resigned versus those who stayed. The following analyses (displayed in Table 5) provide evidence that turnover intention scores can be used as a proxy for actual labour turnover.

There was a significant difference in the work-based identity scores of those who resigned (M = 4.71, SD = 1.13) and those who stayed (M = 4.99, SD = 0.99): t(793) = 3.88; p ≤ 0.001 (two-tailed). The difference in the means (mean difference = 0.29, 95% CI: 0.14 to 0.43) has a small effect (η_p² = 0.02).

There was a significant difference in the personal alienation scores of those who resigned (M = 4.34, SD = 1.49) and those who stayed (M = 3.89, SD = 1.34): t(798.9) = -4.55; p ≤ 0.001 (two-tailed). The difference in the means (mean difference = -0.45, 95% CI: -0.65 to -0.26) has a small effect (η_p² = 0.02).

There was no significant difference in the emotional exhaustion (BO1) scores of those who resigned (M = 2.73, SD = 1.57) and those who stayed (M = 2.56, SD = 1.49): t(808) = -1.58; p = 0.113 (two-tailed). The difference in the means (mean difference = -0.17, 95% CI: -0.38 to 0.04) was insignificant.

There was a significant difference in the depersonalisation (BO2) scores of those who resigned (M = 1.74, SD = 1.29) and those who stayed (M = 1.63, SD = 1.24): t(808) = -1.22; p = 0.223 (two-tailed). The difference in the means (mean difference = -0.11, 95% CI: -0.28 to -0.07) was insignificant.

There was no significant difference in the reduced personal accomplishment (BO3) scores of those who resigned (M = 1.87, SD = 1.11) and those who stayed (M = 1.81, SD = 1.00): t(808) = -0.96; p = 0.339 (two-tailed). The difference in the means (mean difference = -0.07, 95% CI: -0.22 to 0.07) was insignificant.

There was a significant difference in the vigour (WE1) scores of those who resigned (M = 4.45, SD = 1.26) and those who stayed (M = 4.71, SD = 1.16): t(802.5) = 3.07; p ≤ 0.001 (two-tailed). The difference in the means (mean difference = 0.26, 95% CI: 0.09 to 0.43) has a small effect (η_p² = 0.01).

There was a significant difference in the dedication (WE2) scores of those who resigned (M = 4.15, SD = 1.60) and those who stayed (M = 4.55, SD = 1.44): t(797.9) = 3.49; p ≤ 0.001 (two-tailed). The difference in the means (mean difference = 0.38, 95% CI: 0.17 to 0.59) has a small effect (η_p² = 0.01).

There was a significant difference in the absorption (WE3) scores of those who resigned (M = 3.53, SD = 1.31) and those who stayed (M = 3.84, SD = 1.16): t(797) = 3.57; p ≤ 0.001 (two-tailed). The difference in the means (mean difference = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.14 to 0.48) has a small effect (η_p² = 0.02).

There was no significant difference in the helping behaviour scores of those who resigned (M = 5.12, SD = 0.75) and those who stayed (M = 5.12, SD = 0.75): t(808) = 0.02; p = 0.983 (two-tailed). The difference in the means (mean difference = 0.00, 95% CI: -0.10 to 0.11) was insignificant.

There was a significant difference in the task performance of those who resigned (M = 5.70, SD = 0.99) and those who stayed (M = 5.87, SD = 0.93): t(808) = 2.69; p = 0.007 (two-tailed). The difference in the means (mean difference = 0.18, 95% CI: 0.05 to 0.31) has a small effect (η_p² = 0.01). All the effect sizes in respect of the individual variables reported above are small, but still significant (except where stated as insignificant) and do therefore still support the criterion-predictive and the differential validity of the TIS-6 in the 4-year period after the survey.

The independent sample t-tests that were conducted to compare the different variable scores of those employees who resigned and those who stayed differed significantly in nine of the 11 t-tests (over a 4-month period after the initial survey) and seven of the 11 t-tests (after a 4-year period after the initial survey). These results confirm the differential validity of the turnover intention scale over these two time periods, as well as its use as a proxy for actual labour turnover.

In order to establish the criterion-predictive validity of the scale the TIS-6, mean score differences for those who resigned were compared to a randomly selected group from the sample of those who stayed with the organisation (respectively for the 4-month and 4-year periods after the survey). The obtained TIS-6 mean score differences were significant and the effect size was large (for the 4-month period), which suggest that the TIS-6 could effectively predict actual turnover. These findings confirm previous research conducted by Byrne (2005), Hendrix et al. (1998) and Steensma et al. (2004) that turnover intention and actual turnover are positively related. It also confirms the research by Jaros et al. (1993), Muliawan et al. (2009) and Tett and Meyer (1993) that turnover intentions can be used as a proxy for actual turnover. The criterion-predictive validity of actual turnover of the TIS-6 was hereby established.

In order to establish the differential validity of the scale, independent-sample t-tests were conducted in respect of the other variables to establish whether the mean scores of those employees who resigned (n = 84) and those who stayed (n = 88) differed significantly. More specifically, significant mean score differences (independent-sample t-tests) were found in eight of the 10 remaining variables (work-based identity, personal alienation, three work engagement dimensions and three burnout dimensions), with effect sizes ranging between moderate and small (in the 4-month period after the survey).

The same procedure was repeated on a data set in a 4-year period after the survey where scores of leavers (n = 405) and stayers (n = 405) were compared in respect of the same variables. More specifically, significant mean score differences were found in six of the 10 remaining variables (work-based identity, personal alienation, three work engagement dimensions and task performance), but in this case all the effect sizes were small. No previous research could shed light on these longitudinal findings over both a short term and a medium term.

These results (both on a 4-month and a 4-year period after the survey) confirm the differential validity of the TIS-6. These results show that the TIS-6 is a reliable and valid measure to assess the construct turnover intention and to validly predict actual turnover behaviour, as was suggested by Jaros et al. (1993) and Muliawan et al. (2009). These results also confirm the differential validity of the TIS-6 as well as its use as a proxy for actual labour turnover.

The findings of this study further suggest that the TIS-6 can be used as a reliable and valid measure to assess turnover intention. The TIS-6 can therefore be used for business applications and academic research to validly and reliably assess turnover intention or to predict actual turnover.

Akgün, A.E., & Lynn, G.S. (2002). Antecedents and consequences of team stability on new product development performance. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 19, 263–286. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0923-4748(02)00021-8

Allen, M.J., & Yen, W.M. (1979). Introduction to measurement theory. Monterey: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.

Allen, N.J., & Meyer, J.P. (1996). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organisation: An examination of construct validity. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 49, 252–276. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1996.0043, PMid:8980084

Aryee, S., & Luk, V. (1996). Work and non-work influences on the career satisfaction of dual-earner couples. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 49, 38–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1996.0032

Bakker, A.B., & Demerouti, E. (2006). The job demands-resources model: State of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22(3), 309–328. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02683940710733115

Bakker, A.B., Demerouti, E., & Verbeke, W. (2004). Using the job demands-resources model to predict burnout and performance. Human Resource Management, 43(1), 83–104. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hrm.20004

Banai, M., & Reisel, W.D. (2007). The influence of supportive leadership and job characteristics on work alienation: A six-country investigation. Journal of World Business, 42, 463–476. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2007.06.007

Banai, M., Reisel, W.D., & Probst, T.M. (2004). A managerial and personal control model: predictions of work alienation and organisational commitment in Hungary. Journal of International Management, 10, 375–392. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.intman.2004.05.002

Becker, T.E. (1992). Foci and bases of commitment: Are they distinctions worth making? Academy of Management Journal, 35(1), 232–244. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/256481

Bellou, V. (2008). Exploring civic virtue and turnover intention during organisational changes. Journal of Business Research, 61, 778–789. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.09.001

Bester, F. (2012). A model of work identity in multicultural work settings. Unpublished DPhil thesis, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg.

Bluedorn, A.C. (1982). Managing turnover strategically. Business Horizons, March–April, 6–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0007-6813(82)90097-0

Boies, K., & Rothstein, M.G. (2002). Managers’ interest in international assignments: The role of work and career satisfaction. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 26, 233–253. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0147-1767(02)00002-0

Boshoff, A.B., Van Wyk, R., Hoole, C., & Owen, J.H. (2002). The prediction of intention to quit by means of biographic variables, work commitment, role strain and psychological climate. Management Dynamics, 11(4), 14–28.

Bothma, F.C. (2011). The consequences of employees’ work-based identity. Unpublished DCom thesis, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg.

Bothma, F.C., & Roodt, G. (2012). Work-based identity and work engagement as potential antecedents of task performance and turnover intention: Unravelling a complex relationship. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 38(1), Art. #893, 17 pages. http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/sajip.v38i1.893

Brown, S.P. (1996). A meta-analysis and review of organisational research on job involvement. Psychological Bulletin, 120(2), 235–255. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.120.2.235

Buche, M.W. (2003). IT professional work identity: Construct and outcomes. Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Kansas, Kansas City.

Buche, M.W. (2006). Gender and IT professional work identity. In E.M. Trauth (Ed.), Encyclopedia of gender and information technology, (pp. 434–439). Hershey: Idea Group Reference.

Buche, M.W. (2008). Influence of gender on IT professional work identity: Outcomes from a PLS study. Retrieved October 10, 2008, from http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1355272

Byrne, Z. (2005). Fairness reduces the negative effects of organisational politics on turnover intentions, citizenship behaviour and job performance. Journal of Business and Psychology, 20, 175–200. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10869-005-8258-0

Carmeli, A., & Gefen, D. (2005). The relationship between work commitment models and employee withdrawal intentions. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 20(2), 63–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02683940510579731

Chen, H.C., Chu, C.I., Wang, Y.H., & Lin, L.C. (2008). Turnover factors revisited: A longitudinal study of Taiwan-based staff nurses. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 45, 277–285. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2006.08.010, PMid:17011564

Cohen, J.W. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. (2nd edn.). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Demerouti, E., Bakker, A.B., Nachreiner, F., & Schaufeli, W.B. (2000). A model of burnout and life satisfaction among nurses. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 32, 454–464. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.2000.01496.x, PMid:10964195

Du Plooy, J., & Roodt, G. (2010). Work engagement, burnout and related constructs as predictors of turnover intentions. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 36(1), Art. #910, 13 pages. http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/sajip.v36i1.910

Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

Fox, S.R., & Fallon, B.J. (2003). Modeling the effect of work/life balance on job satisfaction and turnover intentions. Symposium paper presented at the 5th Australian Industrial and Organisational Psychology Conference, Melbourne, Australia.

Gil-Monte, P.R. (2005). Validacao factorial de Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI-HSS) para profissionais espanhois [Factorial validity of the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI-HSS) of Spanish professionals]. Revista Saúde Pública, 39(1), 1–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0034-89102005000100001

Greyling, J., & Stanz, K. (2010). Turnover of nursing employees in a Gauteng hospital group. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 36(1), Art. #850, 11 pages. http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/sajip.v36i1.850

Griffeth, R.W., Horn, P.W., & Gaertner, S. (2000). A meta-analysis of antecedents and correlations of employee turnover: Update, moderator tests, and research implications for the next millennium. Journal of Management, 26, 463–488. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/014920630002600305

Guimaraes, T. (1997). Assessing employee turnover intentions before/after TQM. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 14(1), 46–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02656719710156770

Hendrix, W., Robbins, T., Miller, J., & Summers, T. (1998). Effects of procedural and distributive justice on factors predictive of turnover. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 13(4), 611–632.

Horn, P.W., Griffeth, R.W., & Sellaro, L. (1984). The validity of Mobley’s (1977) turnover model. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 34, 141–174. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(84)90001-1

Jacobs, E.J. (2005). The development of a predictive model of turnover intentions of professional nurses. Unpublished DCom thesis, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg.

Jaros, S.J., Jermier, J., Koehler, J., & Sincich, T. (1993). Effects of continuance, affective and moral commitment on the withdrawal process: An evaluation of eight structural equation models. Academic Management Journal, 36(5), 951–995. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/256642

Kirpal, S. (2004). Work identities of nurses. Between caring and efficiency demands. Career Development International, 9(3), 274–304. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13620430410535850

Korman, A.K., Wittig-Berman, U., & Lang, D. (1981). Career success and personal failure: Alienation in professionals and managers. Academy of Management Journal, 24, 342–361. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/255846

Kotzé, K., & Roodt, G. (2005). Factors that affect the retention of managerial and specialist staff: An exploratory study of an employee commitment model. SA Journal of Human Resource Management, 3, 48–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/sajhrm.v3i2.65

Lacity, M.C., Lyer, V.V., & Rudramuniyaiah, P.S. (2008). Turnover intentions of Indian IS professionals. Information Systems Frontiers on Outsourcing, 10, 225–241. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10796-007-9062-3

Lambert, E.G., Hogan, N.L., & Barton, S.M. (2001). The impact of job satisfaction on turnover intent: A test of a structural measurement model using a national sample of workers. Social Science Journal, 38(2), 233–250. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0362-3319(01)00110-0

Lauver, K.J., & Kristof-Brown, A. (2001). Distinguishing between employees’ perceptions of person-job and person-organization fit. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 59, 454–470. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.2001.1807

Lee, T.W., & Mitchell, T.R. (1994). An alternative approach: The unfolding model of voluntary employee turnover. Academy of Management Review, 19(1), 51–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1994.9410122008

Lodahl, T.M., & Kejner, M. (1965). The definition and measurement of job involvement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 49, 24–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0021692, PMid:14279757

Lum, L., Kervin, J., Clark, K., Reid, F., & Sirola, W. (1998). Explaining nursing turnover intent: Job satisfaction, pay satisfaction, or organizational commitment. Journal of Organisational Behaviour, 19(3), 305–320. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(199805)19:3<305::AID-JOB843>3.0.CO;2-N

Mael, F., & Ashforth, B.E. (1992). Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the reformulated model of organisation. Journal of Organisational Behaviour, 13, 103–124. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.4030130202

Martin, A. (2007). Employee perceptions of organisational commitment, job satisfaction and turnover intentions in a post-merger institution. Unpublished MCom dissertation, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg.

Martin, A., & Roodt, G. (2008). Perceptions of organisational commitment, job satisfaction and turnover intentions in a post-merger tertiary institution. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 34(1), 23–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/sajip.v34i1.415

Maslach, C., & Jackson, S.E. (1981). The measurement of experienced burnout. Journal of Occupational Behaviour, 2(2), 99–113. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.4030020205

Maslach, C., Jackson, S.E., & Leiter, M.P. (1986). Maslach burnout inventory: Manual. (2nd edn.). Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Maslach, C., Jackson, S.E., & Leiter, M.P. (1996). Maslach burnout inventory: Manual. (3rd edn.). Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Mendes, F., & Stander, M.W. (2011). Positive organisation: The role of leader behaviour in work engagement and retention. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 37(1), Art. #900, 13 pages, http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/sajip.v37i1.900

Mobley, W.H. (1982). Some unanswered questions in turnover and withdrawal research. Academy of Management Review, 7, 111–116. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1982.4285493

Morrell, K., Loan-Clarke, J., Arnold, J., & Wilkinson, A. (2008). Mapping the decision to quit: A refinement and test of the unfolding model of voluntary turnover. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 57(1), 128–150. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2007.00286.x

Mowday, R., Steers, R., & Porter, L. (1979). The measurement of organizational commitment. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 14, 224–247. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0001-8791(79)90072-1

Muliawan, A.D., Green, P.F., & Robb, D.A. (2009). The turnover intentions of information systems auditors. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 10(3), 117–136. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.accinf.2009.03.001

Pallant, J. (2007). SPSS survival manual: A step-by-step guide to data analysis using SPSS version 15. (3rd edn.). New York: Open University Press.

Petriglieri, J.L. (2011). Under threat: Responses to and the consequences of threats to individuals’ identities. The Academy of Management Review, 36(4), 641–662. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amr.2009.0087

Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Paine, J.B., & Bachrach, D.G. (2000). Organisational citizenship behaviours: A critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research. Journal of Management, 26(3), 513–563. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/014920630002600307

Roodt, G. (1997). Theoretical and empirical linkages between work-related commitment foci. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 23(2), 6–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/sajip.v23i2.624

Roodt, G. (2004). Turnover intentions. Unpublished document. Johannesburg: University of Johannesburg.

Roodt, G., & Bothma, F.C. (1997). Die koste van vrywillige, beheerbare arbeidsomset [The cost of voluntary, controlable labour turnover]. Journal of Industrial Psychology, 23(1), 26–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/sajip.v23i1.619

Roodt, G., De Braine, R., Bothma, F.C. & Jansen, P.G. (2009). The work-based identity questionnaire (WI-28). Unpublished questionnaire. Johannesburg: University of Johannesburg.

Rotenberry, P.F., & Moberg, P.J. (2007). Assessing the impact of job involvement on performance. Management Research News, 30(3), 203–215. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01409170710733278

Sager, J.K., Griffeth, R.W., & Horn, P.W. (1998). A comparison of structural models representing turnover cognitions. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 53(2), 254–273. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1997.1617

Schaufeli, W.B., & Bakker, A.B. (2001). Werk en welbevinden: Naar een positiewe benadering in de arbeids- en gezondheidspsychologie [Work and well-being: Towards a positive approach in the work and health psychology]. Gedrag en Organisatie, 14, 229–253.

Schaufeli, W.B., & Bakker, A.B. (2003). Utrecht work engagement scale, preliminary manual. Utrecht: Occupational Health Psychology Unit, Utrecht University.

Schaufeli, W.B., & Bakker, A.B. (2004). Job demands, job resources and their relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study. Journal of Organisational Behavior, 25, 293–315. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.248

Schaufeli, W.B., Salanova, M., Conźalez-Romá, V., & Bakker, A.B. (2002). The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3, 71–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1015630930326

Senter, J.L., & Martin, J.E. (2007). Factors affecting the turnover of different groups of part-time workers. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 71, 45–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2007.03.004

Serafini, T.E., Maitland, S.B., & Adams, G.R. (2006). The functions of identity scale: Revisions, validation and model testing. Poster presented at the Biennial Meeting of the Society for Research on Adolescence, San Francisco, California.

Smith, C.A., Organ, D.W., & Near, J.P. (1983). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 653–663. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.68.4.653

Steensma, H., Van Breukelen, W., & Sturm, M. (2004). Studying employee turnover by splitting up the usual comparison group. Journal of Individual Employment Rights, 11, 211–227. http://dx.doi.org/10.2190/46U9-T06L-8M32-PEFM

Steers, R. (1977). Antecedents and outcomes of organizational commitment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 22 (1), 46–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2391745

Sulu, S., Ceylan, A., & Kaynak, R. (2010). Work alienation as a mediator of the relationship between organisational injustice and organisational commitment: Implications for healthcare professionals. International Journal of Business and Management, 5(8), 27–38.

Sweetman, D., & Luthans, F. (2010). The power of positive psychology: Psychological capital and work engagement. In A.B. Bakker & M.P. Leiter (Eds.), Work engagement: A handbook of essential theory and research (pp. 54–68). New York: Psychology Press.

Tett, R.P., & Meyer, J.P. (1993). Job satisfaction, organisational commitment, turnover intention and turnover: Path analyses based on meta-analytic findings. Personnel Psychology, 46(2), 259–293. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1993.tb00874.x

Van Dyne, L., & LePine, J.A. (1998). Helping and voice extra-role behaviours: Evidence of construct and predictive validity. Academy of Management Journal, 41(1), 108–120. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/256902

Walsh, K., & Gordon, J.R. (2007). Creating an individual work identity. Human Resource Management Review, 18(1), 46–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2007.09.001

Wasti, A.S. (2003). Organisational commitment, turnover intentions and the influence of cultural values. Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, 76, 303–321. http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/096317903769647193

Wayne, J.H., Randel, A.E., & Stevens, J. (2006). The role of identity and work-family support in work-family enrichment and its work-related consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 69, 445–461. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2006.07.002

Wheeler, A.R., Gallagher, V.C., Brouer, R.L., & Sablynski, C.J. (2007). When person-organisation (mis)fit and (dis)satisfaction lead to turnover. The moderating role of perceived job mobility. Journal of Management Psychology, 22(2), 203–219. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02683940710726447

Williams, L.J., & Anderson, S.E. (1991). Job satisfaction and organisational commitment as predictors of organisational citizenship and in-role behaviours. Journal of Management, 17(3), 601–617. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700305

Zeffane, R.M. (1994). Understanding employee turnover: The need for a contingency approach. International Journal of Manpower, 15(9/10), 22−37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01437729410074182