The Effect of Employee Engagement on Continuance and Normative Commitment to the Organization
A Syed Musthafa
Associate Professor, Department of Information Technology, K.S.Rangasamy College of Technology, Tiruchengode, Tamil Nadu, India
Teacher, Department of Computer Science, K S R Matriculation Higher Secondary School, Tiruchengode, Tamil Nadu, India
Peer Review Report
Reviewer’s Comments to Authors
This analytical study on the effect of employee engagement on continuance and normative commitment to the organization is aimed to highlight conceptualized relationship between employees and the management and it is an indirect effect of employee voice on employee engagement and affective organizational commitment linkage. The study based on both primary and secondary sources of data collections. Well-structured questionnaire has been used for collecting primary data.
- Very important part of any research study is objective. This paper is not framed with any objective it seems. There is no any objective of the study in any part of the paper. Without objective a research study will not be a complete one. So, the researcher has to add objectives of the study.
- Abstract is not fulfilling its purpose. Abstract should cover the complete need of the study and more number of keywords can be given. So the readers of the article can get narrative view of the entire study.
- The descriptive details in introduction, Affective Organizational Commitment, Employee Engagement and Employee Voice as Mediator having lots of related literature with incomplete result of their research. It looks clumsiness and confusing data about the paper. There is no clear information on what the previous study suggests and what strategy used for the current study. So, the author is strongly advised to restructure such descriptive part of the paper.
- There was no mention of the limitations of the study as mentioned in the abstract, one of which is the apparently high dropout rate. Also, mention how your results compare to (reference given to author) another study which was published very recently.
- There is no information on period of study and area of the study. There is particular mentioning of demographic detail of the study like company name, zone name or district of the study area. The author should focus on the above mentioned parts which are mainly needed for a research study.
- The major findings of the study can be given. So that the readers of the paper can get clear idea about the entire analysis part of the study where there was lots of analysis report given in the study.
- Conclusion of the study is not a complete one. It will create diverse thinking about the entire study. The other readers of the paper can’t get the exact figure of result from the conclusion given in the paper. The author should write the conclusion based on the title, research findings.
- Too many information has given randomly in descriptive part of the study which is not particularly meet out the need for the study. The author should eliminate some data which is not relevant to the study.
- For every reference there should be a footnote in the relevant pages.
- Researcher can be highlight the research gap and pave the way for future research as mentioned in the abstract of the study (scope for future research).
Associate Editor’s Critique
The study has much strength where there was minor weakness also. The very important needed information of the study like objectives of the study, area of the study, period of the study and limitations of the study are missing. The author should include all the needed information for the study to strengthen the value of the paper.
Constructiveness of Comments
The review committee has given the constructive comments to the author /researcher.
Level of Detail of the Review
The review is fairly detailed, but the reviewer missed data inconsistence in the required field. There are minor corrections to be taken place before the final review.
Substantiation of Comments
The reviewer made comments on the paper with references.
Was the Review Biased?
The study was reviewed under ‘nil’ biased basis.
Recommendation from the Reviewer
I recommend that, this paper be accepted after the above mentioned minor revisions.