Conflict between affective versus continuance commitment among casino dealers

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to empirically investigate the extent of the reported low affective commitment compared to continuance commitment of Chinese casino dealers, to discern if there is a significant difference between the two types of commitment, and to identify factors that could explain the difference between them. Design/methodology/approach – Questionnaire data were obtained from 247 Chinese casino dealers working for the three major casino groups in Macau. Correlations and regressions were used to analyze the data. Findings – Dealers’ affective commitment was significantly lower than their continuance commitment, suggesting dealers do not like their jobs but do not leave them, which indicates they have cognitive dissonance about their jobs. Organizational socialization, organizational support, and supervisor integrity were positively correlated with affective commitment; while value of money, pay satisfaction, and neuroticism, were positively correlated with continuance commitment. Organizational support was the strongest predictor of affective commitment, while the value they place on money was the strongest predictor of continuance commitment. Practical implications – Casino managers could improve dealers’ affective commitment by facilitating their organizational socialization, especially training and rewards for their work, providing greater organizational support, and fair and supportive treatment from their supervisors. Originality/value – This is the first study to provide evidence of the difference between affective and continuance commitment in Chinese society, and identifies factors that influence each type of commitment, and may help resolve the employees’ dilemma about their jobs, which is an important concern for Chinese managers.