The link between job satisfaction and organizational commitment:differences between public and private sector employees

Employees in the public and private sectors experience different working conditions and employment relationships. Therefore, it can be assumed that their attitudes toward their job and organizations, and relationships between them, are different. The existing literature has identified the relationship between organizational commitment and job satisfaction as interesting in this context. The present field study examines the satisfaction–commitment link with respect to differences between private and public sector employees. A sample of 617 Greek employees (257 from the private sector and 360 from the public sector) completed standardized questionnaires. Results confirmed the hypothesized relationship differences: Extrinsic satisfaction and intrinsic satisfaction are more strongly related to affective commitment and normative commitment for public sector employees than for private sector ones. The results are discussed, limitations are considered, and directions for future research are proposed.

Differences in market-oriented behaviour levels across firms' domestic and export marketing operations:a study of antecedents and consequences

Researchers are beginning to recognise that organisations often have different levels of market orientation across different aspects of their operations. Focusing on firms involved in export marketing, this study examines how market-oriented behaviour differs across firms' domestic and export marketing operations. In this respect, the study is the first of its kind since it investigates three main issues: (1) to what extent do differences exist in firms' levels of market-oriented behaviour in their domestic markets (i.e., their domestic market-oriented behaviour) and in their export markets (i.e., their export market-oriented behaviour), (2) what are the key drivers of such differences, and (3) what are the performance implications for firms of having different levels of domestic and export market-oriented behaviour. To shed light on these research questions, data were collected from 225 British exporting firms using a mail questionnaire. Structural equation modelling techniques were used to develop and purify measures of all construct of interest, and to test the theoretical models developed. The results indicate that many of businesses sampled have very different levels of market orientation in their domestic and exporting operations: typically, firms tend to be more market-oriented in their domestic markets relative to their export markets. Several key factors were identified as drivers of differences in market orientation levels across firms' domestic and export markets. In particular, it was found that differences were more pronounced when: (i) interfunctional interactions between domestic marketing and export marketing are rare, (ii) when domestic and export marketing follow asymmetric business strategies, (iii) when mutual dependence between the functions is low, (iv) when one or other of the functions dominates the firm's sales, and (v) when there are pronounced differences in the degree to which the domestic and the export markets are experiencing environmental turbulence. The consequences of differences in market-oriented behaviour across firms' domestic and export markets were also studied. The results indicate that overall sales performance of firms (as determined by the composite of firms' domestic sales and export sales performance) is positively related to levels of domestic market-oriented behaviour under high levels of environmental turbulence in firms' domestic markets. However, as domestic market turbulence decreases, so to does the strength of this positive relationship. On the other hand, export market-oriented behaviour provides a positive contribution to firms' overall sales success under conditions of relatively low export market turbulence. As the turbulence in export markets increases, this positive relationship becomes weaker. These findings indicate that there are numerous situations in which it is sub-optimal for firms to have identical levels of market-oriented behaviour in their domestic and exporting operations. The theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.

Mechanistic differences between GSH transport by multidrug resistance protein 1 (MRP1/ABCC1) and GSH modulation of MRP1-mediated transport

Multidrug resistance protein 1 (MRP1/ABCC1) is an ATP-dependent polytopic membrane protein that transports many anticancer drugs and organic anions. Its transport mechanism is multifaceted, especially with respect to the participation of GSH. For example, vincristine is cotransported with GSH, estrone sulfate transport is stimulated by GSH, or MRP1 can transport GSH alone, and this can be stimulated by compounds such as verapamil or apigenin. Thus, the interactions between GSH and MRP1 are mechanistically complex. To examine the similarities and differences among the various GSH-associated mechanisms of MRP1 transport, we have measured first the effect of GSH and several GSH-associated substrates/modulators on the binding and hydrolysis of ATP by MRP1 using 8-azidoadenosine-5'-[(32)P]-triphosphate ([(32)P]azidoATP) analogs, and second the initial binding of GSH and GSH-associated substrates/modulators to MRP1. We observed that GSH or its nonreducing derivative S-methylGSH (S-mGSH), but none of the GSH-associated substrate/modulators, caused a significant increase in [gamma-(32)P]azidoATP labeling of MRP1. Moreover, GSH and S-mGSH decreased levels of orthovanadate-induced trapping of [alpha-(32)P]azidoADP. [alpha-(32)P]azidoADP.Vi trapping was also decreased by estone sulfate, whereas vincristine, verapamil, and apigenin had no apparent effects on nucleotide interactions with MRP1. Furthermore, estrone sulfate and S-mGSH enhanced the effect of each other 15- and 10-fold, respectively. Second, although GSH binding increased the apparent affinity of MRP1 for all GSH-associated substrates/modulators tested, only estrone sulfate had a reciprocal effect on the apparent affinity of MRP1 for GSH. Overall, these results indicate significant mechanistic differences between MRP1-mediated transport of GSH and the ability of GSH to modulate MRP1 transport.

Spatial perspective taking is an embodied process, but not for everyone in the same way:differences predicted by sex and social skills score

We re-analysed visuo-spatial perspective taking data from Kessler and Thomson (2010) plus a previously unpublished pilot with respect to individual- and sex differences in embodied processing (defined as body-posture congruence effects). We found that so-called 'systemisers' (males/low-social-skills) showed weaker embodiment than so-called 'embodiers' (females/high-social-skills). We conclude that 'systemisers' either have difficulties with embodied processing or, alternatively, they have a strategic advantage in selecting different mechanisms or the appropriate level of embodiment. In contrast, 'embodiers' have an advantageous strategy of "deep" embodied processing reflecting their urge to empathise or, alternatively, less flexibility in fine-tuning the involvement of bodily representations. © 2012 Copyright Taylor and Francis Group, LLC.