Exploring Organizational Commitment as a Driver of Administrative Management in Local Public Institutions: Insights from a Low- and Middle-Income Country Governance Context

Abstract

Administrative strategies are essential for ensuring efficiency and effectiveness in public institutions, particularly in the context of low- and middle-income countries where governance challenges and resource constraints persist. This study analyzes the relationship between organizational commitment and administrative management in a local public financial institution in Peru. Drawing on Meyer and Allen’s three-component model of commitment (affective, continuance, and normative) and classical administrative theory (planning, organizing, directing, and controlling), the research explores how psychosocial drivers influence perceptions of administrative practices. A cross-sectional, quantitative, non-experimental design was applied, surveying 31 employees using validated Likert-scale questionnaires. Fieldwork was conducted from January to June 2024. Non-parametric correlation analysis revealed a strong and statistically significant positive association between organizational commitment and administrative management (Spearman’s rho = 0.661, p < 0.01). Normative commitment was the most influential dimension, underscoring the role of loyalty and ethical obligation in sustaining perceived administrative management. These findings highlight the importance of strengthening human capital and organizational commitment as part of administrative strategies for institutional development. The study contributes to debates on governance and public sector reform by emphasizing how organizational dynamics in local institutions can shape broader trajectories of economic growth and development in emerging contexts.

1. Introduction

Public institutions in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) face persistent challenges in ensuring efficiency, transparency, and responsiveness to societal demands. Limited financial resources, bureaucratic inertia, and frequent political instability often hinder perceived administrative management, creating gaps between citizens’ expectations and institutional outcomes (Podsakoff et al., 2023; Caesens et al., 2017). Within this environment, the human factor becomes a central driver of organizational functioning. The literature widely acknowledges that commitment among employees is not only a psychological bond but also a determinant of institutional coherence and performance (Meyer & Allen, 1991; Gagné et al., 2019). In Latin America, and particularly in Peru, public administration reforms have repeatedly stressed the importance of strengthening human capital to modernize institutional practices. Decentralization processes, coupled with the need to improve service delivery in local financial and administrative entities, have placed renewed emphasis on organizational commitment (OC) as a lever for achieving efficiency and legitimacy (Avolio & Drummey, 2023; Podsakoff et al., 2023). At the same time, administrative management (AM) continues to be framed by the classical functions of planning, organizing, directing, and controlling, which remain essential for institutional sustainability (Koontz & Weihrich, 2013). The relevance of exploring the link between organizational commitment and administrative management lies in its implications for governance and economic development. In contexts where technical capacity is scarce, the loyalty, ethical responsibility, and motivation of employees are critical for ensuring compliance with procedures, safeguarding transparency, and building citizen trust. Several studies conducted in emerging economies suggest that when organizational commitment is strengthened, public institutions are better able to cope with resource constraints and deliver higher-quality services (Tang & Vandenberghe, 2022; Caesens et al., 2017). Conversely, low levels of commitment are associated with inefficiency, absenteeism, and resistance to institutional change. Peruvian public institutions, particularly municipal and financial entities, offer a compelling case for this analysis. They operate at the frontline of citizen interaction, directly managing programs, credits, and administrative services that shape local development. However, they are also exposed to high turnover, limited career incentives, and frequent regulatory changes. These conditions make organizational commitment a decisive factor for sustaining administrative strategies and achieving effective performance (Avolio & Drummey, 2023). Against this backdrop, the present study addresses a significant research gap by empirically examining the relationship between organizational commitment and administrative management within a local public financial institution. By focusing on employees’ affective, continuance, and normative commitment (NC), and linking these dimensions to the core functions of administrative management, the study contributes to a deeper understanding of how psychosocial variables interact with institutional processes. The findings are expected to inform both academic debates and practical initiatives aimed at strengthening public sector governance in resource-constrained environments. In summary, the study is relevant for three reasons: first, it addresses the pressing need to reinforce human capital in public institutions in developing contexts; second, it links psychological constructs with classical administrative theory, bridging organizational behavior and management studies; and third, it provides empirical evidence from a Latin American case, enriching international discussions on governance and administrative reform.

The effectiveness of public institutions depends not only on the availability of resources but also on the capacity of employees to align their behavior with organizational goals. In contexts marked by scarce funding, regulatory fragmentation, and social demands for transparency, the challenge of achieving efficient administrative management is particularly acute (Podsakoff et al., 2023; Koontz & Weihrich, 2013). The problem arises when institutional reforms and technical frameworks remain on paper, but the psychosocial foundations that sustain them—such as organizational commitment—are weak or inconsistent. Organizational commitment, conceptualized through the three-component model proposed by Meyer and Allen (1991), encompasses affective attachment, the perceived costs of leaving, and normative obligations toward the institution. Empirical research demonstrates that high levels of commitment correlate with increased performance, reduced turnover, and greater adaptability to change (Tang & Vandenberghe, 2022; Caesens et al., 2017). Administrative management, in turn, refers to the coordinated set of functions that shape institutional action and outcomes (Koontz & Weihrich, 2013). Despite their conceptual complementarity, little research has empirically addressed the direct relationship between these constructs in the setting of local public institutions in developing countries. In Peru, local financial entities play a pivotal role in facilitating economic participation and providing services that directly affect citizens’ quality of life. However, these organizations face systemic issues: limited professional development opportunities, high turnover, and frequent structural reforms. Such conditions risk undermining both organizational commitment and effective perceived administrative management (Avolio & Drummey, 2023). The gap identified is therefore twofold: first, a lack of empirical evidence on how commitment influences administrative functions in public sector contexts; second, the absence of studies focusing on institutions in low- and middle-income environments, where constraints intensify the importance of psychosocial factors. The general objective of this study is to determine the relationship between organizational commitment and administrative management in a local public financial institution. Accordingly, the study pursues four specific objectives: to measure the levels of affective, continuance, and normative commitment among employees; to assess the performance of administrative functions—planning, organizing, directing, and controlling—within the institution; to analyze the statistical association between organizational commitment and administrative management, identifying the strength and significance of the relationship; and to discuss the implications of these findings for institutional performance and governance in emerging contexts.

By addressing these objectives, the research seeks to clarify whether strengthening organizational commitment can serve as a strategy for improving administrative management, thereby contributing to institutional efficiency and public trust. In reference to the case selection, representativeness, and access, we selected a local public financial institution because municipal savings-and-credit entities operate at the frontline of citizen interaction with high administrative intensity (planning, organizing, directing, controlling) under regulatory formalization typical of LMIC public sectors. The institution had recently undertaken administrative modernization (2023–2024) and established a cooperation agreement that enabled full workforce coverage for a census survey. Objectively, the study covers all employees (n = 31; 100% within-site coverage) across administrative and operational units, thereby eliminating sampling error at site level and enhancing internal validity. Analytically, the site constitutes a typical case of mid-sized local public financial entities in semi-urban settings; accordingly, we bound external inference to organizations with comparable mandate, size, and governance.

Finally, the article is structured as follows: The Introduction situates the study in its broader academic and practical context. The Literature Review synthesizes national and international research on organizational commitment and administrative management, outlining their theoretical foundations. The Methodology explains the design, sample, instruments, and statistical techniques applied. The Results present descriptive findings and hypothesis testing. The Discussion interprets these results in light of existing literature and governance debates, and the Conclusions summarize contributions, limitations, and avenues for future research.

2. Theoretical Framework

2.1. Backgrounds

Research on organizational commitment and administrative management has evolved over several decades, with international studies emphasizing their role in strengthening institutional performance and governance. Early works by Gagné et al. (2019) and Meyer and Allen (1991) established that organizational commitment is multidimensional, encompassing emotional attachment, perceived costs of withdrawal, and normative obligations. These studies have become foundational in organizational behavior literature, providing validated models for examining employee attitudes in both private and public institutions. In the international context, Asif and Rathore (2021) underline the positive association between commitment and organizational outcomes such as productivity, job satisfaction, and reduced absenteeism. Similarly, Asif and Rathore (2021) highlights how commitment contributes to creating organizational climates conducive to efficiency and innovation, especially when linked with administrative practices. Koontz and Weihrich (2013), drawing from classical management theory, emphasize that effective perceived administrative management is critical for achieving institutional objectives. When these managerial functions align with strong employee commitment, institutions demonstrate higher levels of performance and adaptability. Recent international studies in emerging economies further support this connection. For instance, Avolio and Drummey (2023) reports that in Latin American organizations, normative commitment plays a decisive role in maintaining institutional continuity, especially under conditions of limited resources and structural reforms. Other comparative studies indicate that organizations in resource-constrained contexts rely heavily on psychosocial factors such as loyalty, ethical duty, and identity with the institution, given the frequent absence of material incentives. This underscores the particular importance of commitment as a driver of effective management practices in developing countries. At the national level, Peruvian research has increasingly examined the interplay between organizational commitment and administrative efficiency in public institutions. Avolio and Drummey (2023) and local empirical studies referenced in Thesis note that municipal and financial institutions face significant challenges, including bureaucratic rigidity, lack of professional incentives, and political instability. These conditions weaken administrative functions and erode employee motivation. Studies applying the Meyer and Allen model in Peruvian settings confirm that normative commitment is often the most influential dimension, as employees perceive a moral obligation to remain loyal to the institution despite limited rewards. Empirical work in Peru also highlights administrative management as a determinant of institutional outcomes. However, deficiencies in these functions—such as inadequate planning, weak supervision, and poor organizational design—are common, often exacerbated by high turnover and insufficient training. Taken together, the national and international literature provides strong theoretical and empirical justification for examining the relationship between organizational commitment and administrative management in local public institutions.

While the present study builds on the three-component model of organizational commitment (Meyer & Allen, 1991) and on classical administrative functions, its contribution lies in re-positioning these well-established constructs within contemporary public administration debates and a lower-middle-income institutional setting. First, we connect commitment components with perspectives that are salient in current public management research—such as Public Service Motivation (PSM), New Public Governance (NPG), organizational learning, and capacity-building—to articulate why different commitment bases should differentially relate to perceived administrative practices. Specifically, we argue that affective (value congruence, identification) and normative (obligation, reciprocity) commitment are more tightly aligned with PSM and with NPG’s emphasis on collaborative norms and shared purpose, whereas continuance commitment (retention due to perceived costs) has weaker theoretical links to proactive administrative behaviors. Second, by testing the relative strength of these associations in a Peruvian public institution, we add context-sensitive evidence from Latin America, where institutional features (e.g., proceduralism, high formalization, resource constraints) may make duty/loyalty and mission identification especially consequential for how administrative practices are perceived. Thus, our study refines the understanding of which commitment levers matter most for perceived administrative management in public organizations and why.

As a critical synthesis, prior evidence often treats commitment as a unitary driver of performance perceptions; however, recent public administration research underscores the importance of mechanisms—mission attachment (PSM), collaborative routines (NPG), and learning capabilities—that activate or mute the effect of commitment on how managerial processes are interpreted. Our findings speak to this debate by suggesting that value-laden forms of commitment (affective, normative) align with climates that reward contribution, reciprocity, and sense-making, whereas cost-based continuance ties may not translate into positive appraisals of planning, organizing, directing, and controlling. Conceptually, we therefore contribute a configurational view: not all commitment bases are equal—those embedded in values and obligations are more consistently associated with favorable perceptions of administrative management. Evidence directly connecting commitment and perceived administrative management in resource-constrained public agencies remains comparatively scarce in the international literature; our single-agency findings add context-specific nuance but do not substitute for multi-site studies. Future research should examine agencies with varying resource endowments and governance arrangements to test whether the observed commitment–management pattern generalizes across contexts. By contributing evidence from Peru, the present study not only complements international findings but also adds a nuanced understanding of how commitment can mitigate the structural and resource constraints characteristic of low- and middle-income countries.

2.2. Theoretical and Scientific Bases of the Variables

Theoretical foundation of this study rests on two interrelated constructs: organizational commitment and administrative management. Both have been extensively addressed in management and organizational behavior literature, though their integration in empirical research—particularly in public sector settings of developing countries—remains limited.

2.2.1. Organizational Commitment

Organizational commitment has been widely conceptualized as a psychological state that characterizes the relationship between employees and their institution, influencing decisions to remain and perform within the organization. The seminal framework of Meyer and Allen (1991) defines three core components: affective commitment (AC), reflecting emotional attachment and identification with the institution; continuance commitment (CC), linked to the perceived costs of leaving; and normative commitment (NC), grounded in moral obligation and loyalty. This tripartite model has been validated across diverse cultural and institutional contexts, making it a robust theoretical basis for analyzing employee behavior (Gagné et al., 2019; Caesens et al., 2017). From a scientific perspective, commitment is not merely attitudinal but has measurable consequences for organizational outcomes. Empirical studies demonstrate its role in reducing absenteeism and turnover, improving organizational citizenship behaviors, and enhancing institutional effectiveness (Tang & Vandenberghe, 2022; Podsakoff et al., 2023). In the public sector, commitment is particularly relevant because financial incentives are often limited, making psychosocial bonds a decisive factor for sustaining motivation and performance (Avolio & Drummey, 2023).

Organizational commitment has been consistently defined as the degree to which an individual identifies with an organization, is willing to exert effort on its behalf, and desires to maintain membership (Gagné et al., 2019). It is a psychological state that not only reflects attachment to the institution but also predicts stability of employment and discretionary contributions beyond formal job requirements. This variable is crucial in understanding how employees’ attitudes influence institutional effectiveness, particularly in public organizations where extrinsic rewards are often limited (Caesens et al., 2017). The most widely adopted model in contemporary research is that of Meyer and Allen (1991), who conceptualized organizational commitment as a multidimensional construct comprising three distinct but related components:

In line with the three-component framework, affective commitment reflects emotional attachment and identification with the institution; continuance commitment reflects perceived costs of leaving (retention driven by necessity rather than identification); and normative commitment reflects a felt obligation and loyalty to remain. Prior evidence links affective commitment most strongly to job satisfaction, citizenship, and performance, whereas continuance ties often secure retention with weaker motivational depth; normative commitment, particularly in public organizations, aligns with duty, reciprocity, and collective responsibility. These three components together provide a comprehensive framework that explains both why employees remain with organizations and how their commitment translates into behaviors that sustain institutional effectiveness. Importantly, the dimensions are not mutually exclusive; individuals may simultaneously exhibit affective, continuance, and normative commitment to varying degrees, resulting in complex patterns of behavior (Tang & Vandenberghe, 2022). From a conceptual standpoint, organizational commitment can also be understood in relation to other constructs. It is linked to motivation theories, such as Herzberg’s two-factor model and Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, which emphasize the importance of intrinsic and extrinsic factors in sustaining employee engagement (Caesens et al., 2017). It also interacts with organizational culture, job satisfaction, and leadership styles, serving as a mediating variable that channels these influences into tangible outcomes like productivity and institutional legitimacy. In the context of public administration, organizational commitment acquires heightened relevance. Limited financial resources and bureaucratic constraints make it difficult to rely solely on material incentives. Instead, institutions depend on the commitment of their personnel to implement reforms, maintain service quality, and uphold accountability mechanisms (Podsakoff et al., 2023; Avolio & Drummey, 2023). This makes the construct not only a theoretical concept but also a practical determinant of governance and institutional development.

2.2.2. Administrative Management

Administrative management is grounded in the classical school of management, which has been updated with contributions such as Sowa and Selden (2020) and Koontz and Weihrich (2013). The construct encompasses four fundamental functions: planning, organizing, directing, and controlling. These functions provide the structural and procedural basis for coordinating resources, setting objectives, guiding personnel, and ensuring accountability. The persistence of this model in contemporary literature highlights its explanatory power for understanding organizational functioning, even as management practices evolve with digitalization and participatory approaches. Scientifically, administrative management is associated with efficiency, rationalization of processes, and institutional effectiveness. In public organizations, it is also linked to transparency and citizen trust, as effective planning and control mechanisms reduce opportunities for inefficiency and mismanagement (Caesens et al., 2017). Empirical studies confirm that deficiencies in any of the four functions lead to systemic weaknesses, such as poor service delivery, lack of coordination, or weak accountability mechanisms (Podsakoff et al., 2023).

Administrative management is a foundational construct in management science, rooted in classical theories and later elaborated by scholars such as Koontz and Weihrich (2013) or Sowa and Selden (2020). It is defined as the systematic process of planning, organizing, directing, and controlling institutional resources to achieve predetermined objectives efficiently and effectively. These functions represent the structural backbone of organizations and remain central to understanding how institutions operate, adapt, and sustain performance in changing environments (Podsakoff et al., 2023; Caesens et al., 2017).

Planning refers to setting goals, defining strategies, and specifying actions to achieve them, providing orientation and accountability through measurable objectives in public institutions (Koontz & Weihrich, 2013). Organizing concerns arranging tasks, responsibilities, and authority relationships—structuring roles and allocating resources to enable coordination and reduce role ambiguity (Podsakoff et al., 2023). Directing captures the leadership and communication processes through which employees are guided and motivated to achieve organizational objectives, including ethical role modeling in public-sector contexts (Caesens et al., 2017). Controlling involves monitoring results against standards and implementing corrective actions; in public organizations, control mechanisms are central to compliance, accountability, and trust (Koontz & Weihrich, 2013).

These four dimensions are interdependent, forming a dynamic cycle that enables organizations to adapt and improve continuously. Planning provides the direction, organizing creates the structure, directing mobilizes people, and controlling ensures feedback and correction. When effectively integrated, they foster institutional efficiency and responsiveness; when fragmented, they generate systemic weaknesses. From a conceptual perspective, administrative management is not limited to technical processes but also encompasses cultural and behavioral elements. Studies in emerging economies emphasize that the effectiveness of administrative functions often depends on the level of organizational commitment among employees (Avolio & Drummey, 2023). Thus, management structures cannot be detached from the psychosocial variables that sustain them. In summary, administrative management constitutes the operational framework through which organizations transform resources into results. Its relevance in public institutions is heightened by the demand for efficiency, transparency, and accountability in contexts where resources are limited. As such, examining its relationship with organizational commitment provides insights into how human and structural dimensions combine to shape institutional performance and governance outcomes.

2.2.3. Integration of Constructs

The intersection of organizational commitment and administrative management provides a framework for analyzing how psychosocial and structural dimensions reinforce each other. Linking individual-level commitment to organizational-level administrative functioning is theoretically coherent when commitment is understood as a driver of role behaviors that underpin managerial routines (planning, organizing, directing, controlling). Prior work associates commitment with organizational citizenship, coordination, and adherence to procedures that sustain effectiveness and accountability in public entities (e.g., Podsakoff et al., 2023; Sowa & Selden, 2020; Caesens et al., 2017). While the present study examines employees’ perceptions of administrative management, Theoretical connection rests on the idea that value-laden commitment (affective, normative) supports the behaviors and climates through which administrative processes are enacted at the organizational level in public settings. The literature suggests that committed employees are more likely to contribute to effective planning, participate constructively in organizational structures, adhere to directives, and respect control mechanisms (Tang & Vandenberghe, 2022; Avolio & Drummey, 2023). Conversely, weak commitment undermines managerial coherence, making administrative systems vulnerable to inefficiency. This integration is particularly relevant in low- and middle-income countries, where institutional performance often depends less on technological or financial resources and more on human capital and organizational culture. By situating the study within these theoretical bases, the research underscores that organizational dynamics cannot be disentangled from managerial structures. Commitment represents the motivational foundation, while administrative management provides the operational framework for institutional sustainability. To ensure currency, the review emphasizes recent contributions (2019–2025) alongside foundational sources, situating the present work within contemporary public-sector debates. As foundational anchors, we rely on Meyer and Allen’s (1991) three-component model for organizational commitment and on the classical administrative functions as synthesized by Koontz and Weihrich (2013), while drawing on contemporary public-sector syntheses for administrative capacity (e.g., Sowa & Selden, 2020). Conceptually, the link between individual commitment and organizational administrative management is strengthened when administrative management is interpreted as a set of routines and controls that depend on employees’ discretionary cooperation, compliance, and coordination. Commitment—especially affective and normative forms—has been associated with organizational citizenship behaviors, adherence to procedures, and prosocial climates that support reliable execution of planning, organizing, directing, and controlling (Meyer & Allen, 1991; Meyer & Maltin, 2010; Caesens et al., 2017; Podsakoff et al., 2023). In public organizations, such behavioral and cultural mechanisms are integral to administrative capacity and accountability (Sowa & Selden, 2020), providing a theoretically coherent basis for expecting stronger associations between value-laden commitment and perceived administrative management. To further connect the individual–organizational link, we draw on work showing that employee attitudes and commitments shape collective routines through aggregated discretionary behaviors and compliance, which in turn influence process reliability and service outcomes in public organizations. This perspective is consistent with established evidence on the attitudinal–behavioral link in organizations and with public administration research emphasizing administrative capacity as enacted through day-to-day routines and coordination, particularly under constraints (Ajzen, 1991; Organ, 1988). To make the micro–macro bridge explicit, we frame administrative management as an organizational capability that emerges from the repeated enactment of routines across employees and supervisory roles. When commitment increases the prevalence of behaviors such as proactive problem solving, constructive voice, knowledge sharing, conscientious rule compliance, and discretionary helping, these micro-level actions accumulate into more reliable administrative routines (e.g., clearer planning discipline, stronger coordination, more consistent supervision, and more effective control). Over time, more reliable routines are expected to translate into observable public-sector capacity and organizational performance indicators (e.g., processing timeliness, error and rework rates, audit findings, service continuity, and citizen/user satisfaction), consistent with capacity- and performance-oriented perspectives in public administration (e.g., Sowa & Selden, 2020). Although the present study operationalizes the outcome as employees’ perceived administrative management, this pathway clarifies why perceptions may serve as an informative proxy for underlying administrative capacity and motivates future triangulation with objective performance data.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Research Methods and Design

In the context of this research, hypotheses were constructed regarding the relationship between organizational commitment and administrative management, both of which were operationalized through established theoretical dimensions. The hypothetical-deductive approach was selected because it allows for rigorous testing of the proposed relationships between variables, combining deductive reasoning with empirical analysis. Specifically, the study began by defining theoretical frameworks: Meyer and Allen’s (1991) three-component model of organizational commitment (affective, continuance, and normative) and the classical administrative theory emphasizing planning, organizing, directing, and controlling. From these models, a general hypothesis was derived: there is a significant positive relationship between organizational commitment and administrative management in local public institutions. This was subsequently disaggregated into specific hypotheses that examined the correlation between each dimension of organizational commitment and the components of administrative management. Guided by Theoretical frameworks of Meyer and Allen (1991) and classical administrative theory, we formulated the following hypotheses regarding the direction and significance of the associations:

We tested four hypotheses: (H0) organizational commitment is positively associated with administrative management; (H1) affective commitment is positively associated with administrative management; (H2) continuance commitment is positively associated with administrative management, but weaker than affective and normative commitment; and (H3) normative commitment is positively associated with administrative management and is expected to be the strongest association among the three components. The methodological design followed the principles of quantitative research, ensuring objectivity and replicability through the use of structured instruments and statistical analysis. Data were collected through Likert-scale questionnaires previously validated in similar contexts, thereby increasing reliability and comparability across studies (

Table 1. Instrument operationalization matrix.

Variables	Dimensions	Indicators	Measurement Scale
Variable 1 Organizational Commitment	Affective Commitment	Identification with the organization	(1) Never (2) Almost never (3) Sometimes (4) Almost always (5) Always
		Involvement
		Organizational Citizenship
		Satisfaction
	Continuance commitment	Time investment
		Action
		Benefits
		Comfort
	Normative Commitment	Moral obligation
		Reciprocity
		Loyalty
		Personalized treatment
Variable 2 Administrative Management	Planning	Vision
		Mission
		Goals
		Policies
		Activities
		Strategies
	Organizing	Division of labor
		Specialization
		Hierarchy
	Directing	Motivation
		Leadership
		Communication
		Teamwork
	Controlling	Measurement
		Comparison
		Taking administrative action

). The use of a census sample of 31 employees ensured that the entire population under study was included, minimizing sampling error and enhancing the internal validity of the findings.

The decision to employ a correlational, non-experimental, cross-sectional design is consistent with the nature of the research objectives. The correlational approach allows for the identification of relationships between variables without manipulating them, which is essential in social and organizational contexts where experimental manipulation is impractical or unethical. The cross-sectional perspective provides a snapshot of these relationships at a single point in time, reflecting the prevailing conditions of organizational commitment and administrative management in the institution under study. The hypothetical-deductive method also informed the statistical analysis strategy. Non-parametric tests, specifically Spearman’s rank correlation, were chosen because they are robust for small samples and do not assume normal distribution of the data (Vargha & Delaney, 2000). This ensured that the results were not biased by distributional assumptions and that the strength and significance of the observed relationships could be properly assessed.

Methodologically, the study employed a quantitative, non-experimental, cross-sectional correlational design. This approach examined the associations between organizational commitment and administrative management without manipulating variables, using a single time-point “snapshot,” and is suitable for organizational settings where intervention is impractical or unethical. Non-parametric inference relied on Spearman’s rank correlation, which is robust for small samples and does not assume normality. The use of this design is consistent with the research objectives and the contextual limitations of the study. As the research was conducted in a local public financial institution, it was not feasible to manipulate variables such as commitment or administrative practices. Instead, the design allowed for the identification of statistically significant associations, providing valuable insights into the psychosocial drivers of perceived administrative management. This methodological choice ensured that the investigation could rigorously analyze the proposed hypotheses, generating empirical evidence that enriches theoretical discussions while respecting the practical and ethical constraints of the organizational setting.

The population of this study consisted of employees from a local public financial institution, representing the total set of individuals directly involved in administrative and operational activities. Organizational type and mandate. The focal unit is an agency of a publicly owned municipal savings-and-credit bank (CMAC-type), operating under a public mandate at the local level. Given the single-agency design and the regulatory/operational specificities of CMACs, external validity is explicitly bounded to comparable public financial agencies in similar LMIC governance environments. According to Aguinis et al. (2018), a population is defined as the entire group of elements that share the same characteristics and to which the researcher intends to generalize the results. In this case, the population was deliberately delimited to ensure alignment with the research objectives, focusing on organizational commitment and administrative management within a specific institutional environment. The study identified 31 employees working in administrative and operational roles as the accessible population. These individuals were responsible for tasks related to planning, organizing, directing, and controlling activities—the core dimensions of administrative management—while also embodying varying degrees of organizational commitment. Given the small size of the institution, the population and sample coincided, resulting in a census-based sampling strategy. The focal unit of analysis is the agency level of a municipal savings-and-credit bank. We conducted a within-agency census: all eligible employees were invited and 31 completed the survey (final n = 31). The parent institution comprises multiple agencies; the sampling frame and inference are deliberately bounded to the focal agency. Census sampling is particularly recommended when the population is small and manageable, as it allows for the inclusion of every subject and thereby eliminates sampling error (Asif & Rathore, 2021). The sample therefore comprised all 31 employees. Data collection took place between January and June 2024 within the focal agency. The census design was selected because the institution’s size allowed the inclusion of every employee directly involved in administrative and operational tasks, thereby eliminating within-site sampling error and improving internal validity. For clarity, “administrative roles” include planning and control, human resources/administration, and compliance; “operational roles” include front-office service, loan origination/collection, and customer support. All such roles were included in the census at the agency level; no eligible roles were excluded.

Our case-selection rationale emphasizes analytic typicality (administrative intensity, semi-urban coverage, and public mandate); accordingly, we refrain from extrapolating beyond organizations with comparable scale and governance arrangements. To avoid ambiguity, we clarify that, at the time of data collection, no employee had fewer than six months of service and all employees opted to participate; therefore, no records were excluded based on the inclusion criteria or non-response. The pilot test was conducted with staff from another unit of the same institution, not part of the focal agency; its sole purpose was to check wording and administration logistics, and none of the pilot testers participated in the final census. As participation was universal, the risk of non-response bias is minimal; nevertheless, the use of self-report instruments still warrants caution regarding potential response tendencies. This approach guaranteed comprehensive data collection and provided a complete view of the institutional reality under study. It also ensured that the research captured the diversity of perspectives across the different organizational areas, ranging from administrative staff to operational personnel, thus enriching the analysis of the variables. To ensure reliability and validity, the criteria for inclusion were clearly established. Participants had to (a) be formally employed in the institution at the time of data collection, (b) have at least six months of service, which ensured familiarity with institutional processes, and (c) be willing to complete the research instruments under conditions of confidentiality and voluntary participation. These criteria safeguarded both the representativeness of the data and the ethical standards of the investigation. The use of the entire population as the sample offered notable advantages. First, it minimized the risk of bias associated with probabilistic or non-probabilistic sampling techniques. Second, it allowed for a more accurate and nuanced analysis of correlations between organizational commitment and administrative management, since all possible cases within the institution were included. However, this choice also implied a limitation: the findings are directly generalizable only to the institution studied and not necessarily to other contexts, particularly larger or structurally different organizations. In summary, the population and sample of this research consisted of the 31 employees of the selected public financial institution. By adopting a census-based sampling strategy, the study ensured a comprehensive and unbiased representation of the organizational reality, enabling a robust analysis of the relationship between commitment and administrative management. This methodological decision provided a solid foundation for the statistical procedures that followed, reinforcing the internal validity of the research.

3.2. Techniques and Instruments for Data Collection, Processing and Analysis

To examine the relationship between organizational commitment and administrative management, the study employed survey-based data collection techniques. According to Aguinis et al. (2018), surveys are widely used in organizational research as they facilitate the systematic gathering of data from a defined population, allowing for quantitative analysis of perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors. The technique was selected due to its efficiency, adaptability, and ability to capture multidimensional constructs within a single administration. The main instrument was a structured questionnaire, designed to measure the variables of interest through validated scales. The questionnaire was organized into two sections, each corresponding to one of the study variables: The instrument comprised two sections aligned with the study constructs. Organizational commitment followed Meyer and Allen’s three-component model (affective, continuance, normative); dimension–item mapping and wording are provided in Appendix A (

Table A1. Instrument development matrix. Variable 1: Organizational Commitment.

Dimensions	Indicators	Items
Affective Commitment	Identification with the organization	1. Have you identified yourself with a sense of belonging or feeling towards The Municipal Savings and Credit Fund (anonymized)?
		2. There is an atmosphere at The Municipal Savings and Credit Fund (anonymized) that makes you feel like part of a family.
	Involvement	3. Do you consider the problems of the Municipal Savings and Credit Fund?
	Organizational Citizenship	4. You voluntarily engage in constructive behavior that benefits your colleagues and The Municipal Savings and Credit Fund (anonymized)
	Satisfaction	5. There is a state of well-being and happiness that would like to spend the rest of your working life at The Municipal Savings and Credit Fund (anonymized)
		6. I speak with pleasure about The Municipal Savings and Credit Fund (anonymized), with people who are not members of it.
Continuance Commitment	Time investment	7. You have identified the time you have available for your daily activities and which ones you spend the most time on, so as not to deviate from your goals.
	Benefits	8. You are identified with The Municipal Savings and Credit Fund (anonymized) in its projects and achievements.
		9. The vision of senior management is far from the real experience they live in their teams.
	Comfort	10. Do you think there is comfort in The Municipal Savings and Credit Fund (anonymized)?
		11. You have been assigned clothing and work equipment for your care and protection.
Normative Commitment	Moral obligation	12. You feel grateful to The Municipal Savings and Credit Fund (anonymized), which motivates you to continue working.
		13. You have identified events or experiences that have had a positive impact on you.
	Reciprocity	14. There is reciprocity (benefits) on the part of The Municipal Savings and Credit Fund (anonymized), from you and vice versa.
	Loyalty	15. Do you consider that there is loyalty on the part of The Municipal Savings and Credit Fund (anonymized)?
	Personalized treatment	16. At Municipal Savings and Credit Fund, there is personalized service from superiors to take into account the institution’s needs and the achievement of its objectives.

). Administrative management drew on the classical functional dimensions (planning, organizing, directing, controlling) as synthesized for public-sector capacity; items captured employees’ perceptions of the efficiency and effectiveness of these processes within the agency (Appendix A,

Table A2. Instrument development matrix. Variable 2: Administrative Management.

Dimensions	Indicators	Items
Planning	Vision	1. The collaborators of the Municipal Savings and Credit Fund knows the purpose of the institutional vision.
	Mission	2. The institutional mission is put into practice by the collaborators of The Municipal Savings and Credit Fund (anonymized)
	Goals	3. The collaborators of the Municipal Savings and Credit Fund knows the objectives (specific and measurable actions) that it intends to achieve as an institution.
		4. The employees of The Municipal Savings and Credit Fund (anonymized) are aware of the goals (which is why objectives are determined) that the institution aims to achieve.
	Policies	5. The Municipal Savings and Credit Fund (anonymized) have an institutional policy that explains the functions, organization, and execution of its activities with the goal of performing its work efficiently.
	Activities	6. Activities are carried out based on the objectives and goals set by The Municipal Savings and Credit Fund (anonymized)
	Strategies	7. At Municipal Savings and Credit Fund, all employees are informed about the strategies they must follow to fulfill their plans.
Organizing	Division of labor	8. At The Municipal Savings and Credit Fund (anonymized), the division of labor is carried out for the development of its functions.
	Specialization	9. At the Municipal Savings and Credit Fund, operational staff are provided with specialized training in topics related to their duties.
	Hierarchy	10. There is a hierarchical organization at The Municipal Savings and Credit Fund (anonymized) that allows work to be carried out efficiently.
Directing	Motivation	11. At The Municipal Savings and Credit Fund (anonymized), workshops and motivational talks are offered to employees.
	Leadership	12. At the Municipal Savings and Credit Fund, the leadership of its managers inspires all employees to achieve their goals.
	Communication	13. At the Municipal Savings and Credit Fund, there is clear communication about the activities and functions that must be performed.
	Teamwork	14. At the Municipal Savings and Credit Fund, the teamwork of its employees enables them to achieve their goals effectively.
Controlling	Measurement	15. Measurements are carried out by superiors, with the aim of reducing management errors.
	Comparison	16. A comparison is made between the work carried out and the expected work, with the aim of improving management at The Municipal Savings and Credit Fund (anonymized)
	Taking administrative action	17. Administrative actions are being taken at The Municipal Savings and Credit Fund (anonymized) to correct errors in the work performed.

). Both sections used five-point Likert scales (“strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”).

Both sections of the questionnaire used a five-point Likert scale, ranging from “strongly disagree” (1) to “strongly agree” (5). This format was chosen because it allows for nuanced responses while maintaining simplicity and reliability in analysis (Van Zyl & Ten Klooster, 2022). Given the ordinal nature of Likert-type responses, the small sample size (n = 31), and mixed normality (Shapiro–Wilk), we employed Spearman’s rho as a non-parametric measure of association and refrained from causal modeling.

Before data collection, the instrument underwent a validity and reliability assessment. Validity was examined through expert judgment, ensuring that the items were aligned with Theoretical constructs and appropriate for the institutional context. Reliability was tested through a pilot study, applying the instrument to a small group of employees not included in the final sample. Cronbach’s alpha was used to evaluate internal consistency, with coefficients above 0.70 indicating acceptable reliability levels (McNeish & Wolf, 2020). The data collection procedure followed an ethical protocol. Participation was voluntary, informed consent was obtained, and confidentiality was guaranteed. Questionnaires were administered directly in the workplace to maximize the response rate, with researchers providing instructions and clarifications as needed. Design considerations to mitigate common-source bias. To reduce potential common-method concerns inherent to single-source self-reports, the questionnaire used neutral wording and mixed the order of items across constructs; administration preserved anonymity and confidentiality (sealed returns); and no individual identifiers were collected. Results are interpreted as associational and bounded to the focal agency; future work can triangulate perceptions with qualitative evidence (e.g., semi-structured interviews or observations) and administrative process indicators to strengthen inference.

The instrument was self-administered in paper-and-pencil format on-site. A member of the research team was present in the agency during administration windows to resolve questions and to coordinate with supervisors so that employees could complete the questionnaire individually at their workstations without group sessions. Completed forms were returned in sealed envelopes to a collection box to preserve confidentiality. The administration was completed within a defined time frame to avoid disruptions to institutional operations. In summary, a validated Likert-scale questionnaire was administered to the full agency workforce (census), providing reliable input for the subsequent statistical analysis.

The processing and analysis of data were designed to ensure methodological rigor and interpretability despite the small sample size. First, survey responses were coded and aggregated into composite scores for each variable and dimension. Second, descriptive analyses were used to generate frequency distributions across Low/Medium/High categories for interpretability. Third, normality tests (Kolmogorov–Smirnov and Shapiro–Wilk) were conducted to guide the choice of inferential techniques. Given the ordinal nature of the data, the small sample size (n = 31), and mixed normality across dimensions, we used non-parametric statistics (Spearman’s ρ) for hypothesis testing and emphasized effect magnitudes alongside statistical significance (Conover, 1999; Zar, 1999). We report ρ, two-tailed p-values (as thresholds when software rounding applies), and n. Finally, results are interpreted in relation to hypotheses and theoretical expectations. Regarding design limitations and scope of inference, the present study relies on a single-institution census (n = 31), self-reported Likert-type measures, and a cross-sectional design. These features limit external validity and preclude causal claims. Correlational estimates should be interpreted as associations rather than effects, and generalizations beyond similar public institutions and contexts should be made cautiously. To strengthen analytical depth in future work, we suggest (a) confirmatory factor analysis to assess construct validity at the dimension level; (b) multivariate regression/SEM to estimate partial associations controlling for demographics and role characteristics; (c) robustness checks for possible common-method variance; and (d) multi-site samples to enhance power and transportability of findings. With a census of 31 respondents, inferential tests are necessarily power-constrained for small effects but informative for medium-to-large associations. In non-parametric settings with ordinal (Likert-type) data, Spearman’s ρ is appropriate and exact two-tailed p-values remain valid for small samples; interpretation should emphasize effect size (magnitude) over mere significance (Cohen, 1988; Conover, 1999; Zar, 1999). Accordingly, we frame our findings as associations and highlight that observed coefficients (e.g., ρ = 0.66–0.79) fall in the medium-to-large range by conventional benchmarks, while cautioning that smaller effects may be undetected.

In summary, we applied a five-stage pipeline and report Spearman’s ρ with exact two-tailed p-values and n, emphasizing effect magnitudes and associational interpretation.

4. Results

4.1. Sample Profile and Distributional Summary

To preserve confidentiality in a small, single-agency census, the research team was authorized to export only aggregated outputs (category frequencies and correlation matrices), rather than row-level responses. Accordingly, instead of reporting raw means and standard deviations for composite scales, we present a distributional summary of the study variables across Low/Medium/High ranges based on Likert-scale aggregation (see Table 2, Table 3, Table 4, Table 5, Table 6, Table 7, Table 8, Table 9 and Table 10).

Both administrative and operational role families were represented in the sample, and all respondents met the minimum tenure threshold of six months. To ensure anonymity in this within-agency census, the instrument did not collect individual identifiers (e.g., gender, rank, or seniority). We acknowledge that the absence of raw means and standard deviations limits direct comparability with other studies; however, the available distributional summaries and correlation coefficients enable transparent and methodologically appropriate reporting within the institution’s data-protection constraints (see Appendix A,

Table A3. Distributional summary: proportion in Medium/High categories (n = 31).

Variable/Dimension	% Medium + High
Organizational commitment (overall)	80.64
Affective commitment	58.06
Continuance commitment	74.19
Normative commitment	93.55
Administrative management (overall)	87.10
Planning	77.42
Organizing	80.64
Directing	87.10
Controlling	70.97

Note. Proportions reflect the share of respondents classified in Medium or High categories based on equal-interval trichotomization of Likert-scale aggregates. Values are derived from the frequency distributions reported in Table 2, Table 3, Table 4, Table 5, Table 6, Table 7, Table 8, Table 9 and Table 10 and are provided for descriptive and comparative purposes only.

).

4.2. Descriptive Analysis and Normality Test

The first step in presenting the results involved a descriptive analysis of the two main variables: organizational commitment and administrative management. For all variables and dimensions, scores were computed as the sum of Likert-type items. To aid interpretation, we applied an equal-interval trichotomization of each scale’s theoretical minimum–maximum to define Low/Medium/High categories. Because each (sub)scale comprises a different number of items (e.g., 6 items for affective commitment; 3–7 for the administrative dimensions), the resulting category ranges differ across Table 2, Table 3, Table 4, Table 5, Table 6, Table 7, Table 8, Table 9 and Table 10 while remaining proportional to each scale’s length. For organizational commitment, the results (see Table 2, Table 3, Table 4 and Table 5) showed generally favorable levels of agreement above the midpoint of the scale, suggesting that employees generally expressed positive perceptions of affective, continuance, and normative commitment.

Table 2. Variable 1—Organizational commitment.

Level	Category	Frequency (n)	Percent (%)
Low	16 to 35	6	19.35%
Medium	36 to 59	23	74.19%
High	60 to 80	2	6.45%
Total		31	100%

Table 2. Variable 1—Organizational commitment.

Level	Category	Frequency (n)	Percent (%)
Low	16 to 35	6	19.35%
Medium	36 to 59	23	74.19%
High	60 to 80	2	6.45%
Total		31	100%

Table 3. Dimension 1 Variable 1: Affective commitment.

Level	Category	Frequency (n)	Percent (%)
Low	6 to 14	13	41.94%
Medium	15 to 23	16	51.61%
High	24 to 30	2	6.45%
Total		31	100%

Table 3. Dimension 1 Variable 1: Affective commitment.

Level	Category	Frequency (n)	Percent (%)
Low	6 to 14	13	41.94%
Medium	15 to 23	16	51.61%
High	24 to 30	2	6.45%
Total		31	100%

Table 4. Dimension 2 Variable 1: Continuance commitment.

Level	Category	Frequency (n)	Percent (%)
Low	05 to 11	8	25.81%
Medium	12 to 18	16	51.61%
High	19 to 25	7	22.58%
Total		31	100%

Table 4. Dimension 2 Variable 1: Continuance commitment.

Level	Category	Frequency (n)	Percent (%)
Low	05 to 11	8	25.81%
Medium	12 to 18	16	51.61%
High	19 to 25	7	22.58%
Total		31	100%

Table 5. Dimension 3 Variable 1: Normative commitment.

Level	Category	Frequency (n)	Percent (%)
Low	5 to 11	2	6.45%
Medium	12 to 18	25	80.65%
High	19 to 25	4	12.90%
Total		31	100%

Table 5. Dimension 3 Variable 1: Normative commitment.

Level	Category	Frequency (n)	Percent (%)
Low	5 to 11	2	6.45%
Medium	12 to 18	25	80.65%
High	19 to 25	4	12.90%
Total		31	100%

Among these, normative commitment showed the most favorable distribution (highest concentration in the Medium/High categories), reflecting a strong sense of ethical duty and loyalty among the respondents toward the institution. This pattern is consistent with theoretical expectations in public institutions where moral obligation often sustains engagement (Meyer & Allen, 1991). For administrative management, the distributional results (Table 6, Table 7, Table 8, Table 9 and Table 10) were similarly favorable across the four classical dimensions: planning, organizing, directing, and controlling. Planning and organizing showed the most favorable distributions (greater concentration in Medium/High categories), whereas directing and controlling displayed slightly less favorable distributions, suggesting areas with potential for reinforcement.

Table 6. Variable 2—Administrative Management.

Level	Category	Frequency (n)	Percent (%)
Low	17 to 39	4	12.90%
Medium	40 to 62	24	77.42%
High	63 to 85	3	9.68%
Total		31	100%

Table 6. Variable 2—Administrative Management.

Level	Category	Frequency (n)	Percent (%)
Low	17 to 39	4	12.90%
Medium	40 to 62	24	77.42%
High	63 to 85	3	9.68%
Total		31	100%

Table 7. Dimension 1 Variable 2: Planning.

Level	Category	Frequency (n)	Percent (%)
Low	7 to 16	7	22.58%
Medium	17 to 26	22	70.97%
High	27 to 35	2	6.45%
Total		31	100%

Table 7. Dimension 1 Variable 2: Planning.

Level	Category	Frequency (n)	Percent (%)
Low	7 to 16	7	22.58%
Medium	17 to 26	22	70.97%
High	27 to 35	2	6.45%
Total		31	100%

Table 8. Dimension 2—Variable 2: Organizing.

Level	Category	Frequency (n)	Percent (%)
Low	3 to 7	6	19.35%
Medium	8 to 12	23	74.19%
High	13 to 15	2	6.45%
Total		31	100%

Table 8. Dimension 2—Variable 2: Organizing.

Level	Category	Frequency (n)	Percent (%)
Low	3 to 7	6	19.35%
Medium	8 to 12	23	74.19%
High	13 to 15	2	6.45%
Total		31	100%

Table 9. Dimension 3—Variable 2: Directing.

Level	Category	Frequency (n)	Percent (%)
Low	4 to 9	4	12.90%
Medium	10 to 14	25	80.65%
High	15 to 20	2	6.45%
Total		31	100%

Table 9. Dimension 3—Variable 2: Directing.

Level	Category	Frequency (n)	Percent (%)
Low	4 to 9	4	12.90%
Medium	10 to 14	25	80.65%
High	15 to 20	2	6.45%
Total		31	100%

Table 10. Dimension 4—Variable 2: Controlling.

Level	Category	Frequency (n)	Percent (%)
Low	3 to 7	9	29.03%
Medium	8 to 12	19	61.29%
High	13 to 15	3	9.68%
Total		31	100%

Table 10. Dimension 4—Variable 2: Controlling.

Level	Category	Frequency (n)	Percent (%)
Low	3 to 7	9	29.03%
Medium	8 to 12	19	61.29%
High	13 to 15	3	9.68%
Total		31	100%

Once the descriptive profile of the data was established, the next step was to assess whether the distributions of the variables met the assumptions of normality, which is a prerequisite for parametric analysis. The Shapiro–Wilk test was applied to the global scores of each variable and to their specific dimensions. Normality diagnostics indicated mixed results across variables and dimensions. For example, the global score of organizational commitment met Shapiro–Wilk normality (W = 0.966, p = 0.420), whereas administrative management did not (W = 0.925, p = 0.031). Given the small sample size (n = 31) and the inconsistent normality across measures, we employed non-parametric statistics (Spearman’s rho) for hypothesis testing. Similar results were observed across individual dimensions, confirming the non-normal behavior of the data set (

Table 11. Normality Test—Inferential Statistics.

	Kolmogorov–Smirnov (*)			Shapiro–Wilk
	Statistic	df	Sig.	Statistic	df	Sig.
Organizational Commitment	0.136	31	0.153	0.966	31	0.420
Administrative Management	0.187	31	0.007	0.925	31	0.031

(*) Lilliefors significance correction.

).

The failure to meet normality assumptions justified the application of non-parametric techniques for subsequent analysis, particularly Spearman’s rank-order correlation. This decision aligns with methodological standards in small samples and ordinal data contexts, ensuring the robustness of the statistical conclusions. The combination of descriptive analysis and normality testing provided a solid foundation for hypothesis testing.

4.3. Hypothesis Testing

The central hypothesis of the study proposed that organizational commitment is positively and significantly associated with administrative management in the analyzed public institution. To test this relationship, Spearman’s rank-order correlation coefficient was calculated, given that the data did not meet the assumptions of normality. The results, summarized in

Table 12. Correlation between the variable organizational commitment and the variable administrative management.

			Administrative Management
Spearman’s Rho	Organizational commitment	Correlation coefficient	0.661 **
		Sig. (2-tailed)	<0.01
		n	31

** The correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed). Note. Author-compiled from the analytical output; layout mirrors SPSS for transparency and reproducibility. No software screenshots are included.

, confirmed a strong and statistically significant positive correlation between the two variables.

For transparency, correlation results are reported from author-compiled analytical outputs (no software screenshots). Given the confidentiality constraints described in Section 4.1, we complement the correlation tests with distributional (category-level) summaries rather than raw means/SDs. Specifically, the global correlation coefficient was ρ = 0.661, p < 0.01, supporting the general hypothesis. This indicates that higher levels of organizational commitment among employees were systematically associated with higher ratings of administrative management practices.

Beyond the general hypothesis, the study formulated three specific hypotheses, each examining the relationship between the dimensions of organizational commitment (affective, continuance, normative) and the global measure of administrative management. The correlation results are presented in

Table 13. Correlation between the variable administrative management and the dimension affective commitment.

			Administrative Management
Spearman’s Rho	Affective commitment	Correlation coefficient	0.603 **
		Sig. (2-tailed)	<0.01
		n	31

**. The correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed). Note. Author-compiled from the analytical output; layout mirrors SPSS for transparency and reproducibility. No software screenshots are included.

,

Table 14. Correlation between the administrative management variable and the Continuance commitment dimension.

			Administrative Management
Spearman’s Rho	Continuance commitment	Correlation coefficient	0.589 **
		Sig. (2-tailed)	<0.01
		n	31

** The correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed). Note. Author-compiled from the analytical output; layout mirrors SPSS for transparency and reproducibility. No software screenshots are included.

and

Table 15. Correlation between the administrative management variable and the Normative commitment dimension.

			Administrative Management
Spearman’s Rho	Normative commitment	Correlation coefficient	0.787 **
		Sig. (2-tailed)	<0.01
		n	31

** The correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed). Note. Author-compiled from the analytical output; layout mirrors SPSS for transparency and reproducibility. No software screenshots are included.

, which details Spearman’s rho coefficients and corresponding significance levels for each specific hypothesis.

Hypothesis 1 proposed that affective commitment is significantly associated with administrative management. The analysis yielded a correlation coefficient of ρ = 0.603, p < 0.01, confirming a moderate and statistically significant relationship. This suggests that employees who feel emotionally attached to their institution tend to evaluate managerial practices more positively. The finding highlights the motivational value of emotional bonds in enhancing perceived administrative management, though the effect is not as strong as that of other commitment components.

Hypothesis 2 tested the relationship between continuance commitment and administrative management. The results indicated a weaker but still significant correlation of ρ = 0.589, p < 0.01. This outcome demonstrates that employees’ perception of costs associated with leaving the institution has a modest influence on how they perceive managerial efficiency. While continuance commitment contributes to stability, its lower effect size suggests that instrumental considerations alone are insufficient to drive strong administrative outcomes.

Hypothesis 3 examined whether normative commitment is significantly related to administrative management. The analysis revealed the strongest coefficient among the three dimensions, with ρ = 0.787, p < 0.01. This result underscores the critical role of loyalty and ethical obligation in sustaining perceived administrative processes. Employees with a heightened sense of duty and responsibility toward their organization are more likely to support planning, organizing, directing, and controlling practices.

5. Discussion

The primary objective of this study was to determine the relationship between organizational commitment and perceived administrative management in a local public institution. The results, particularly the strong and statistically significant global correlation (ρ = 0.661, p < 0.01; see Table 12), confirmed the hypothesis, demonstrating that higher levels of employee commitment are associated with perceptions of more effective administrative practices. Following Cohen’s (1988) conventions for correlation effect sizes—small ≈ 0.10, medium ≈ 0.30, large ≈ 0.50—the observed coefficients (ρ = 0.59–0.79) fall within the medium-to-large range, so we emphasize effect magnitude alongside statistical significance. This finding validates Theoretical expectation that organizational psychology and human capital are crucial determinants of managerial effectiveness in public institutions (Meyer & Allen, 1991; Asif & Rathore, 2021). Importantly, studying a local public financial entity with complete workforce coverage (n = 31) provides a high-resolution view of how employees interpret administrative functions under LMIC governance constraints. Although the scope is bounded, the census design reduces internal sampling bias and offers site-valid evidence on the mechanisms linking commitment and perceived administrative management. As interpretation and implications, beyond statistical significance, the pattern of effects is theoretically meaningful. The comparatively stronger associations for normative and affective commitment suggest that, in public institutions, internalized duty/loyalty and emotional identification with the mission are more consequential for process evaluations than purely instrumental calculations (Meyer & Allen, 1991; Meyer & Maltin, 2010; Tang & Vandenberghe, 2022). This is consistent with evidence that prosocial climates and ethical norms bolster citizenship behaviors and adherence to procedures (Caesens et al., 2017). By contrast, the relatively lower coefficient for continuance commitment indicates that “remaining because one has to” (e.g., sunk costs or lack of alternatives) is insufficient to sustain positive perceptions of planning, organizing, directing, and controlling (Solinger et al., 2020). Contextualizing why normative commitment is strongest, it is important to highlight that, in Latin American public institutions—characterized in many settings by high procedural formalization, resource scarcity, and a strong emphasis on public service ethos—norms of reciprocity, duty, and fairness can become key lenses through which employees evaluate administrative practices. Where material incentives or advancement opportunities are constrained, obligation-based adherence and collective orientation may stabilize routines and reinforce the perceived coherence of planning and control. This helps explain why normative commitment—more than continuance ties—emerges as the strongest correlate of perceived administrative management in our data. From a governance standpoint, interventions that cultivate ethical climate, mission-consistent role modeling, and transparent reciprocity between leaders and staff are likely to yield greater improvements in perceived administrative management than policies that merely increase retention costs. Importantly, these perception-based assessments are theoretically consequential because they capture the internal functioning of administrative capacity: when employees collectively perceive clearer planning, coherent organizing, fair directing, and effective control, these managerial routines are more likely to be enacted consistently in day-to-day operations. When such enactment is widespread, it should plausibly manifest in measurable organizational outcomes (e.g., fewer process deviations, faster cycle times, improved compliance and audit results, and better service continuity), even though objective performance indicators were not observed in the present study. This distinction reinforces both the value of perceptions as an internal proxy of capacity and the need for future studies to test the full micro–macro chain with administrative records and external performance metrics.

In resource-constrained public settings, values-based onboarding, purpose-driven leadership communication, and codified recognition practices can strengthen affective and normative ties, thereby improving how planning, organizing, directing, and controlling are interpreted on the ground (Gagné et al., 2019). Ensuring timely feedback loops and visibility of purpose can further enhance sense-making around administrative directives, aligning daily routines with organizational goals (Koontz & Weihrich, 2013; Podsakoff et al., 2023).

The first specific objective aimed to analyze the role of affective commitment in shaping administrative management. The results (ρ = 0.603, p < 0.01; see Table 13) showed a moderate but meaningful influence, suggesting that emotional attachment fosters positive perceptions of planning, organizing, directing, and controlling. This aligns with prior studies emphasizing the motivational strength of affective commitment in sustaining performance (Kucharska, 2020; Gagné et al., 2019). The second specific objective addressed continuance commitment. Although the correlation (ρ = 0.589, p < 0.01, see Table 14) was weaker, it nonetheless confirms that the perceived costs of leaving the institution contribute, at least modestly, to administrative outcomes. Employees remain engaged not only because of emotional or moral identification but also due to pragmatic considerations. However, the limited strength of this relationship echoes critiques that continuance commitment may lack the motivational depth needed to significantly enhance performance (Solinger et al., 2020). The third specific objective focused on normative commitment, which proved to be the strongest predictor of perceived administrative management (ρ = 0.787, p < 0.01, see Table 15). This outcome underscores the relevance of loyalty, ethical obligation, and moral responsibility in sustaining organizational functioning. Such findings resonate with public sector contexts, where bureaucratic stability and service delivery often depend on employees’ internalized sense of duty rather than purely instrumental motivations (Meyer & Maltin, 2010). Overall, the objectives of the study were fully achieved. The results confirm that organizational commitment, in its three dimensions, contributes significantly to the effectiveness of administrative management, with normative commitment exerting the most decisive influence. These findings reinforce the multidimensional nature of commitment and highlight the interplay between psychological, moral, and pragmatic factors in shaping employee behavior. From a practical perspective, the study demonstrates that strengthening organizational commitment—particularly its normative and affective dimensions—can serve as a strategic lever to improve public sector performance. By fostering loyalty, emotional engagement, and a shared sense of responsibility, institutions can enhance their administrative processes, even in environments constrained by limited resources. The results align consistently with the study’s objectives, showing that organizational commitment is not only a determinant of administrative management but also a potential pathway to reinforce governance and institutional development in low- and middle-income country contexts.

Although this study provides significant insights into the relationship between organizational commitment and administrative management, several limitations should be acknowledged. First, the research design was cross-sectional, which restricts the ability to establish causal relationships between the variables. While the findings confirm strong correlations, longitudinal studies would be necessary to determine how commitment and administrative practices evolve over time (Meyer & Allen, 1991). Second, the sample size was relatively small, consisting of 31 employees in a single local public institution. While the census approach ensured representativeness within the organization, the limited scope reduces the generalizability of the results to other public institutions or contexts. Broader studies incorporating multiple institutions and larger populations could validate and expand the applicability of these findings (Asif & Rathore, 2021). Moreover, because institutional data-protection restrictions limited exports to aggregated outputs, we could not report raw means and standard deviations for composite scales; this further constrains comparability with international benchmarks and meta-analytic evidence, reinforcing the context-specific interpretation of the findings. Third, the study relied on self-reported questionnaires, which may be subject to social desirability bias and response tendencies. Although validated Likert-scale instruments were employed, future research could complement surveys with qualitative methods such as interviews or focus groups to capture deeper insights into employees’ motivations and perceptions (Meyer & Maltin, 2010). Fourth, the results showed that the correlation between organizational commitment and administrative management, while strong overall, was not uniform across dimensions. Continuance commitment displayed only a weak association, echoing prior concerns about its limited motivational influence (Solinger et al., 2020). Future studies should investigate the contextual factors—such as job stability, labor regulations, or cultural values—that moderate the relative strength of each commitment dimension. Finally, the research was conducted within the specific socio-economic conditions of a low- and middle-income country, where public institutions face resource constraints and governance challenges. This contextual specificity is both a strength and a limitation: it highlights the importance of psychosocial factors in such environments but also raises questions about the extent to which the findings can be extrapolated to other governance contexts. Comparative studies across countries and institutional types could provide a richer understanding of how organizational commitment operates under different structural conditions (Meyer & Maltin, 2010). Future research should expand to multi-site designs to enhance transportability, employ longitudinal and mixed-method approaches to probe causal dynamics and richer mechanisms, examine contextual moderators such as leadership, culture, and policy frameworks, and link commitment not only to perceived administrative management but also to governance outcomes such as citizen satisfaction or service quality. In conclusion, while the study successfully demonstrates the importance of organizational commitment in shaping administrative practices, its limitations underscore the need for continued inquiry. Future research should address these constraints to further consolidate organizational commitment as a strategic lever for public administration and governance reform.

6. Conclusions

This study examined the association between organizational commitment and perceived administrative management in a local public financial institution operating in an LMIC governance context. Consistent with commitment theory (Meyer & Allen, 1991) and contemporary public-sector perspectives that emphasize mission attachment and collaborative norms (e.g., public service motivation, new public governance, organizational learning), the evidence indicates that affective and normative commitment are more strongly related to employees’ perceptions of planning, organizing, directing, and controlling than continuance commitment. Importantly, the observed correlations fall in the medium-to-large range (e.g., ρ ≈ 0.59–0.79), which—following conventional benchmarks for effect sizes (Cohen, 1988)—supports the substantive (not merely statistical) relevance of these associations in this setting. In resource-constrained, highly formalized public organizations, value-laden ties (identification, reciprocity, duty) appear to be more consequential for how administrative practices are appraised than cost-based retention.

The pattern of results suggests that strengthening ethical climate, identification with mission, and supportive work relationships is a plausible route to improving perceived administrative management. Practically, this entails values-based onboarding and leadership communication, transparent reciprocity and recognition practices, and timely feedback loops that align day-to-day routines with institutional goals—interventions that are coherent with the mechanisms highlighted in the literature for public organizations.

Findings derive from a single-site census (n = 31) using cross-sectional, self-report measures; results are therefore associational (non-causal) and externally bounded to institutions with similar mandate, size, and governance. With small samples, power to detect small effects is limited, whereas medium-to-large associations are still informative; accordingly, we emphasize effect magnitudes alongside p-values (Cohen, 1988). Additionally, the absence of raw descriptive statistics (means/SDs) due to data-protection constraints further limits cross-study comparability and benchmarking against international reference values. Future work should (i) expand to multi-site designs to enhance transportability, (ii) examine measurement validity with CFA, and (iii) estimate multivariate/SEM models with robustness checks (e.g., common-method variance), thereby deepening the analysis of mechanisms that link commitment bases to perceived administrative management.