Organizational culture and commitment among Generation Z: The mediating role of employee engagement
-
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ppm.24(4).2026.13
-
Article InfoVolume 24 2026, Issue #4, pp. 191–207
- 27 Views
-
3 Downloads
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Type of the article: Research Article
Abstract
As the global workforce undergoes significant demographic change, organizations in Indonesia face increasing challenges in maintaining organizational commitment among Generation Z employees during shifting work values and high labor mobility. This study examines the effect of organizational culture on organizational commitment and investigates the mediating role of employee engagement. Based on job demands–resources theory and social exchange theory, a quantitative cross-sectional survey was conducted. Data were collected in 2025 through purposive sampling from 271 Generation Z employees working in organizations located in Jakarta, Indonesia. Data were analyzed using partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) in SmartPLS using a two-stage approach for higher-order constructs. The findings show that organizational culture is strongly positively associated with employee engagement (β = 0.793; t = 34.590; p < 0.001), explaining 62.9% of the variance in engagement (R2 = 0.629). Employee engagement significantly affects organizational commitment (β = 0.524; t = 4.847; p < 0.001) and demonstrates a significant indirect mediating role in the relationship between organizational culture and organizational commitment (β = 0.416; t = 4.685; p < 0.001). However, the direct association between organizational culture and organizational commitment is not statistically significant (β = 0.168; p = 0.092). These results suggest that organizational commitment is shaped mainly by engagement experiences rather than by organizational culture alone, highlighting engagement as an important instrument for sustaining workplace bonds.
- Keywords
-
JEL Classification (Paper profile tab)M14, J28, M12, J24
-
References34
-
Tables15
-
Figures4
-
- Figure 1. Conceptual model
- Figure 2. First-order measurement model results
- Figure 3. Second-order measurement model results
- Figure 4. Structural model with path coefficients and t-statistics
-
- Table 1. Demographics of respondents
- Table 2. Convergent validity assessment of first-order constructs
- Table 3. Discriminant validity assessment of first-order constructs using the heterotrait–monotrait ratio (HTMT)
- Table 4. Reliability assessment of first-order constructs
- Table 5. Variance inflation factor assessment of first-order constructs
- Table 6. Convergent validity and reliability of second-order constructs
- Table 7. Discriminant validity assessment of second-order constructs using the heterotrait–monotrait ratio (HTMT)
- Table 8. Variance inflation factor (VIF) assessment of second-order constructs
- Table 9. Coefficient of determination
- Table 10. Effect size (f2)
- Table 11. Predictive relevance (Q2)
- Table 12. Variance inflation factor (VIF) assessment
- Table 13. Model fit assessment
- Table 14. Hypothesis testing results
- Table 15. PLSpredict assessment
-
- Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63(1), 1-18.
- Aranibar, M. F., Baez-Lopez, Y., Limon-Romero, J., Ramírez-Barón, M. C., García Rivera, B. R., Ortega-Pérez Tejada, M., & Hernández Bejarano, J. (2022). The impact of social benefits on work commitment and organizational socialization in the manufacturing industry. Sustainability, 14(17), Article 10807.
- Chen, J. K. C., & Sriphon, T. (2022). Authentic leadership, trust, and social exchange relationships under the influence of leader behavior. Sustainability, 14(10), Article 5883.
- Deloitte. (2025, May 14). Deloitte Global’s 2025 Gen Z and Millennial Survey finds these generations focused on growth as they seek money, meaning, and well-being.
- Gallup. (2025). State of the global workplace: 2025 report.
- Giancaspro, M. L., Callea, A., & Manuti, A. (2022). “I like it like that”: A study on the relationship between psychological capital, work engagement and extra-role behavior. Sustainability, 14(4), Article 2022.
- Goff, K., Silver, E., & Sigfusdottir, I. D. (2022). Academic orientation as a function of moral fit: The role of individualizing morality. Sociology of Education, 95(2), 153-170.
- Hair, J. F., Jr., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2022). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (3rd ed.). SAGE.
- Hamid, R. S., & Anwar, S. M. (2019). Structural equation modeling (SEM) berbasis varian: Konsep dasar dan aplikasi dengan program SmartPLS 3.2.8 dalam riset bisnis [Variance-based structural equation modeling (SEM): Basic concepts and application with SmartPLS 3.2.8 in business research]. PT Inkubator Penulis Indonesia. (In Indonesian).
- Harlianto, J., & Imansari, W. R. (2025). Organization culture, employee engagement, organization commitment [Dataset]. Zenodo.
- Haryono, S. (2016). Metode SEM untuk penelitian manajemen dengan AMOS, LISREL, PLS [SEM methods for management research with AMOS, LISREL, PLS]. PT Intermedia Personalia Utama. (In Indonesian).
- Hilkenmeier, F., Goller, M., & Schaper, N. (2021). The differential influence of learner factors and learning context on different professional learning activities. Vocations and Learning, 14(3), 411-438.
- Jameel, A., Guo, W., Hussain, A., & Kanwel, S. (2025). Enhancing innovative work behavior through transformational leadership in tourism and hospitality employees: The mediating role of intrinsic motivation and employee creativity. BMC Psychology, 13(1), Article 1018.
- Kumar, B. V., & Shailaja, N. (2024). Social exchange theory: Exploring reciprocity, equity, and relationship management in diverse contexts. International Journal for Multidisciplinary Research, 6(6), 1-11.
- Li, Q., Mohamed, R., Mahomed, A., & Khan, H. (2022). The effect of perceived organizational support and employee care on turnover intention and work engagement: A mediated moderation model using age in the post pandemic period. Sustainability, 14(15), Article 9125.
- Luwei, W., & Huimin, M. (2024). From jobs to careers: Drivers and barriers to career development in emerging labor markets. Frontiers in Sociology, 9, Article 1486871.
- MacIntosh, E. W., & Doherty, A. (2010). The influence of organizational culture on job satisfaction and intention to leave. Sport Management Review, 13(2), 106-117.
- Meredith, C., Moolenaar, N., Struyve, C., Vandecandelaere, M., Gielen, S., & Kyndt, E. (2023). The importance of a collaborative culture for teachers’ job satisfaction and affective commitment. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 38(1), 43-62.
- Mondo, M., Cicotto, G., Pileri, J., Cois, E., & De Simone, S. (2023). Promote well-being and innovation in sustainable organizations: The role of job crafting as mediator. Sustainability, 15(11), Article 8899.
- Mutonyi, B. R., Slåtten, T., Lien, G., & González-Piñero, M. (2022). The impact of organizational culture and leadership climate on organizational attractiveness and innovative behavior: A study of Norwegian hospital employees. BMC Health Services Research, 22(1), Article 637.
- Randstad. (2025). The Gen Z workplace blueprint: Future focused, fast moving.
- Sanamthong, E., & Prabyai, S. (2023). A causal model of relationship between organizational climate influencing happiness at work and organization engagement. Emerging Science Journal, 7(2), 558-568.
- Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., González-Romá, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3(1), 71-92.
- Schein, E. H. (1991). What is culture? In P. J. Frost, L. F. Moore, M. R. Louis, C. C. Lundberg, & J. Martin (Eds.), Reframing organizational culture (pp. 243-253). Sage.
- Setiabudhi, H., Suwono, S., Setiawan, Y. A., & Karim, S. (2025). Analisis data kuantitatif dengan SmartPLS 4 [Quantitative data analysis with SmartPLS 4]. Borneo Novelty Publishing. (In Indonesian).
- Sihombing, P. R., Arsani, A. M., Oktaviani, M., Nugraheni, R., Wijaya, L., & Muhammad, I. (2024). Aplikasi SmartPLS 4.0 untuk statistisi pemula [SmartPLS 4.0 application for beginner statisticians]. Minhaj Pustaka. (In Indonesian).
- Slåtten, T., Lien, G., & Mutonyi, B. R. (2022). Precursors and outcomes of work engagement among nursing professionals – A cross-sectional study. BMC Health Services Research, 22(1), Article 21.
- Solms, L., van Vianen, A. E. M., Koen, J., Kan, K.-J., de Hoog, M., de Pagter, A. P. J., & Improve Research Network. (2023). Physician exhaustion and work engagement during the COVID-19 pandemic: A longitudinal survey into the role of resources and support interventions. PLOS ONE, 18(2), Article e0277489.
- Subramanian, S., Billsberry, J., & Barrett, M. (2023). A bibliometric analysis of person-organization fit research: Significant features and contemporary trends. Management Review Quarterly, 73(4), 1971-1999.
- Tan, S. H. E., & Chin, G. F. (2023). Generational effect on nurses’ work values, engagement, and satisfaction in an acute hospital. BMC Nursing, 22(1), Article 88.
- Tarigan, J., Cahya, J., Valentine, A., Hatane, S., & Jie, F. (2022). Total reward system, job satisfaction and employee productivity on company financial performance: Evidence from Indonesian Generation Z workers. Journal of Asia Business Studies, 16(6), 1041-1065.
- Trang, N. M., McKenna, B., Cai, W., & Morrison, A. M. (2024). I do not want to be perfect: Investigating Generation Z students’ personal brands on social media for job seeking. Information Technology & People, 37(2), 793-814.
- Uru, F. O., Gozukara, E., & Tezcan, L. (2022). The moderating roles of remote, hybrid, and onsite working on the relationship between work engagement and organizational identification during the COVID-19 pandemic. Sustainability, 14(24), Article 16828.
- Wiktorowicz, J., Warwas, I., Turek, D., & Kuchciak, I. (2022). Does generativity matter? A meta-analysis on individual work outcomes. European Journal of Ageing, 19(4), 977-995.


