Turnover intentions in Jordanian Universities: The role of leadership behaviour, organizational commitment and organizational culture

Article history: Received 2 August 2017 Received in revised form 13 November 2017 Accepted 2 December 2017 Evidence gathered in relation to academic situation in Jordan is alarming. About 3000 Jordanian academics left their job during the last 25 years. During the last eight years, twenty percent of working academics were planning to search for opportunities in other, mostly foreign, universities. This particular percentage is expected to increase to more than 60% by the end of 2020. Although low turnover rates are beneficial by opening doors for new talents and new ideas, high rates are disruptive and negatively impacts the image of academic sector in Jordan. To address this issue, this research endeavors to investigate the impact of leadership behaviour, organizational commitment and organizational culture on turnover intentions in Jordanian higher educational Institutes. The participants in this study were limited to Jordanian academicians who work in any Jordanian University. A structured questionnaire was adopted from the past literature and a total number of 300 questionnaires were sent, out of which 270 were collected back. SmartPLS version 2 was used to run SEM to analyze the model. Results showed that the entire exogenous variables have significant impact on the endogenous variable. The implication of this study is that managers should recognize the behaviour of leadership in which the behaviour that able to motivate the level of employee commitment to organization and reduce employee turnover intention.


Introduction
*The issue of voluntary turnover has been rigorously studied over the past few decades. Empirical evidence indicates that a high rate of voluntary turnover is costly for organizations because it negatively affects organizational effectiveness and success (Memon et al., 2016a). Losing good employees can negatively affect an organization's competitive advantage, lowering the morale of other staff (Sanjeev Kumar, 2012), as well as reducing productivity and work quality (Holtom and Burch, 2016). Despite these unfavorable consequences, the voluntary turnover rate across the globe remains relatively high. About 2.8 million quits (i.e. voluntary separations) were documented in the month of November 2015. An international survey of 2,500 business leaders by Schwartz et al. (2014) revealed that employee retention was one of the top challenges facing businesses today. These statistics suggest that voluntary turnover is a global phenomenon that is rapidly becoming a significant barrier to organizations achieving their strategic objectives. Despite the volumes of literature already on the subject, it is clear that we do not yet understand the factors affecting voluntary turnover (Memon et al., 2016a). According Voon et al. (2011), employees are the most priceless assets for an organization. Thus, successful organizations tend to have strategies that prioritize the best interest of their employees. Such strategies include provision for higher pay scale, profit share and a conducive working environment. This encourages more productivity and increase retention among the staff members. In this light, the employees would have lower turnover intention when they needs are met, and they feel committed to their employers.
Over the last decades, many studies have focused on employee turnover (Callea et al., 2016;Han et al., 2016;Memon et al., 2016b;Ahmed et al., 2015;Rabbi et al., 2015). This reflects the significance of turnover, and how many organizations perceive turnover negatively, as stipulated by Lee et al. (2010). According to Koh and Goh (1995) and Balsam and Miharjo (2007), high turnover not only incurs higher cost for requirement and training of new staff members, but it also affects work progress, productivity, it also brings negative reputation to the organization. Furthermore, the organization might lose expertise and valuable human resource when a staff member quits. Meanwhile, from the organizational point of view, turnover can lead to higher hiring and training costs, loss of profits and the attrition of the relationship built with customers. Here, Johnson et al. (2000) posited that the whole staff members might be affected by the exit of just employee.
Past studies, like Awang et al. (2013), have highlighted factors leading to turnover intention, as well as factors that can predict turnover intention among employees, including organizational factors as well as individual factors like attitude and personality.
Moreover, some studies had investigated the determinants of turnover intention, such as factors related to the job, one's personality and other external factors. In this regard, Bajwa et al. (2014) suggested that a cross sectional study would be provide more comprehensive outcome in investigating turnover intention compared to a longitudinal study.

Problem statement
Evidence gathered in relation to academic situation in Jordan is alarming. About 3000 Jordanian academics left their job during the last 25 years. During the last eight years, twenty percent of working academics were planning to search for opportunities in other, mostly foreign, universities. This particular percentage is expected to increase to more than 60% by the end of 2020 (Ghadi and Ghadi, 2017). Although low turnover rates are beneficial by opening doors for new talents and new ideas, high rates are disruptive and negatively impacts the image of academic sector in Jordan (Ghadi and Ghadi, 2017). Studies by Miroshnik (2002) and Randeree and Chaudhry (2012) showed that culture differences could cause different leadership behaviors, while leaders are responsible in creating differences in organizational culture, and they have the decisive power to create, management, and in some cases, destruct the organizational culture.
According to Schein (2010), culture and leadership go hand in hand, and both should be analyzed together for better understanding. Consequently, the nature of an organizational culture is disseminated by the leaders among their followers, thus, leaders should facilitate a medium to develop and reinforce organizational culture among their staff members (Bass and Avolio, 1993). Choosawat (2001) mentioned that organizational culture can affect organization's management and development.
Past studies showed that organizational culture can affect turnover, as well as numerous organizationally and individually desired outcomes that could lead to the organization's success or failure (MacIntosh and Doherty, 2010;Messner, 2013;Nongo and Ikyanyon, 2012;Sabir et al., 2010). Ghina (2012) claimed that organizational commitment is an integral for all organizations, as it is linked to an organization's sustenance. In addition, Randeree and Chaudhry (2012) claimed that organizational commitment is a crucial, fixed and stable attitude. Past studies had acknowledged that factors like leadership behaviors, employee turnover intention, and organizational culture influence organizational commitment (Davidson et al., 2010). Hence, as mentioned by Joo (2010), it is integral to probe on the relationship between organizational commitment and turnover intention in a variety of cultural and organizational contexts. In this light, this study will investigate the link between leadership behaviour, organizational culture, organizational commitment and turnover intention in the context of the IT industry. Mujtaba et al. (2011) and Steers et al. (2012) observed that leadership behaviors differs across societies. Thus, organizational culture and leadership behaviors are significant determiner of an organization's success or failure, and significantly influence an employee's intention to either remain or quit an organization (Cuong and Swierczek, 2008;Trang, 2013). Hence, this study strives to examine how aspects of leadership behaviour, organizational culture and organizational commitment affect turnover intention.

Turnover intention
Employee turnover refers to the termination of an official and psychological contract between an employee and an organization (Krausz, 2002;Macdonald, 1999). There are two major types of employee turnover: involuntary and voluntary. Involuntary turnover is initiated by the organization to terminate the relationship with an employee, whereas voluntary turnover is primarily initiated by the employees themselves (Zhao et al., 2013;Price, 1977). In the academic literature, turnover intention is commonly used as a measure of anticipated workplace turnover (Bigliardi et al., 2005). Intent to leave, intent to quit, intention to leave, and turnover intention are often used interchangeably. Although turnover intention does not necessarily equate with actual employee turnover, turnover intention is a strong predictor of turnover behaviour (Mobley, 1982). The relationship between employee turnover intention and actual turnover has been confirmed by previous studies (Bluedorn, 1982). For example, Lucas et al. (1993) found that a turnover intention model successfully predicted 73% of actual turnover among registered health staff. Mobley (1977) stated that turnover intention is perceived as a cognitive process of thinking, planning and wanting to quit the job at hand. However, turnover intention is the final cognitive step in a withdrawal cognitions sequence and intermediates between evaluations related to decision-making about leaving the organization shortly (Chiu and Francesco, 2003;Kuean et al., 2010;Labatmediene et al., 2007). Mobley et al. (1978) and Tett and Meyer (1993) suggested that turnover intention is about the likelihood an individual perceives making up their mind whether to stay or quit the organization and their intention to search for a new job. Additionally, different variables have been identified in previous studies to associate with turnover, such as satisfaction, commitment and intention to quit, which are generally accepted as crucial antecedents to turnover. Turnover intention is the last and most significant cognitive variable having an immediate causal effect on turnover. Factually, Mobley et al. (1979) believed turnover intention better clarifies turnover for it considers one's perception and determination.

Leadership behaviour
Leadership comprises of an influence process between a leaders and his followers. Here, the leader wants to influence his followers to demonstrate behaviors that can help achieve organizational goals. Hence, Voon et al. (2011) stipulated that the leaders, and their leadership behaviors are responsible in ensuring that an organization's goals could be achieved. Meanwhile, Limsila and Ogunlana (2008) mentioned that leadership could be discussed from the angles of behaviors, position, responsibility and personality. Thus, a leader should encourage activities that stimulate their followers and define each individual's or group's role in achieving organizational goals (Awan and Mahmood, 2010;Hersey e al., 2008;Taleghani et al., 2010).
In the meantime, studies by Awan and Mahmood (2010) and Randeree and Chaudhry (2012) claimed that leadership style comprises of behaviors patterns characterizing a leader's approach in tackling organizational issues. There are many different leadership styles adopted by different leaders, and each style has its own set of positive and negative traits. This could be caused by the different work settings (Jogulu, 2010;Mujtaba et al., 2011;Rad and Yarmohammadian, 2006). Meanwhile, Huang et al. (2010) outlined two significant determinants of leadership behaviors, first, the job level of employee, which influence their perception of participative leadership behaviors, and second, the participative leadership which influences performance and consequently, help practitioners to design effective training and development programs which improve participative management. Furthermore, studies by Detert and Burris (2007), Gerstner and Day (1997), Tyler (2010), and Vondey (2008) confirmed that aspects like employee behaviors, employees' perception of the organization and employee performance, are influenced by leadership behaviors. ErKutlu (2008) claimed that employee organizational commitment and productivity are directly affected by leaders' behaviors, while Sribenjachot (2007) mentioned that subordinate performance and leader's outcomes could be affected by leadership behaviors. In other words, employees will perform better if they are satisfied with the leader. Moreover, effective leadership has such tremendous influence in how organizational goals could be fulfilled by improving workforce commitment innovation, productivity, and satisfaction (Johns and Saks, 2008).

Organizational culture
Organizational culture is integral for improving an organization's capacity, hence, many past studies the field of organizational behaviour had focused on this topic (Silverthorne, 2004). Moreover, past research defined organizational culture as the philosophy in the management of an organization so that it can increase its outcome efficiency (Boon et al., 2006). Organizational culture can be defined in various ways, Schein (1990), posited organizational culture as a pattern of the that are provide , group invented, found or developed fundamental assumptions which act as a learned coping mechanisms in dealing with problems that are externally adaptive and integrated problems. These mechanisms should be effective and valid so that they can be decimated to new employees, reflecting the accepted way of thinking and responding to the problem. In a similar note, organizational culture comprises of the shared beliefs, values, and assumptions of members in an organization. These aspects ascertain not only the norms, but also the developing and patterning behaviors that emerge from the norms. In this light, John and Saks (2008) argued that shared does not guarantee that all members agree on these matters. George et al. (2005) agreed with Schein's argument and suggested that organizational culture comprises of the shared values, beliefs, and norms in a community. These aspects influence how the employees think, feel and behave toward each other, and towards nonmembers of the organization. Moreover, Linn (2008) mentioned that organizational culture could enhance cooperation among group members as they are bounded by the common practices, beliefs, and assumptions, while Tseng (2010) observed that organizational culture represents norms that dictate the organizational members' behaviour and attitude.

Organizational commitment
On the other hand, organizational commitment represents one's emotional and functional attachments to where he/she. It represents an attitude indicating the degree of the employee's connection with an organization, which influences one's turnover intention, as shown in studies by Allen and Meyer (1990), Meyer and Allen (1991), and Johns and Saks, 2008. Mowday et al. (1982) noted that this bond will be strengthened when an employee agrees and believes in an organization's goals and values. Moreover, organizational commitment is an integral aspect of an employee's psychological state; in this regard, employees with degree of organizational commitment may be engaged in many desired behaviors, such as low turnover intention and excellent work performance, which bring benefits to an organization. On a similar terms, organizational commitment is described by Porter et al. (1974) as consisting having a minimum of three tenets, first, the strong agreement and belief in the goals and values of the organization's , second, the inclination to employ substantial effort to benefit the organization; and three, demonstrating the desire to maintain in the organization. Furthermore, Jaros (1997) and Paille (2011) suggested that organization leaders particularly value high organizational commitment among their employees. Kumar et al. (2012) also claimed that employees' commitment can minimize turnover intention, and organizations with high level of employees' commitment will be able to efficiently and effectively achieve their goals. Kreitner and Kinicki (2007) stated that organizational commitment represents the degree of which an employee commits him/herself to achieve the organizational goal, and how one identifies with an organization, moreover, Kacmar et al. (2009)  described organizational commitment one's emotional attachment to the organization which is parallel to both personal and organizational goals and values. Mowday et al. (1982) and Perryer et al. (2010) also observed that organizational commitment is highly dependent on employer's personal views and attitudes, where highly committed employees usually demonstrate calm, stable attitude, highly involved and perform better. In this light, Cohen (1991) and Hunt and Morgan (l994) claimed that it will be less like for highly committed employees to quit the organization. Consequently, Allen and Meyer (1996) and Meyer and Allen (1997) suggested that researchers could investigate employees' bond with an organization through analyzing the aspects of organizational commitment. This is organizational commitment is grounded on aspects such as feelings of obligation, emotional attachment and perceived costs. Furthermore, Carmeli et al. (2007) stated that the various facets in organizational commitment are more inclusive, rather than being a single, individual components. Thus, Felfe and Yan (2009) posited that these three facets should be considered as distinguishable measures. On the other hand, Felte and Yan (2009) argued that there is a limited amount of studies that had focused on organizational commitment in the context of Asian organizations. In this light, Allen and Meyer (1996) stated that it is crucial to study organizational commitment across different cultures to ensure whether such multidimensional conceptualization is valid and applicable. Thus, this study was conducted in the Jordanian context, where there are relatively a limited number of studies conducted.

The relationship between variable
The following reviews the literature regarding the relationship between, leadership behaviour and turnover intention, organizational culture and turnover intention, leadership behaviour and organizational commitment, organizational culture and organizational commitment, and organizational commitment and turnover intention.

Leadership behaviour and turnover intention
As mentioned in past studies, transformational leaders help fulfil the high order needs of their employees, while transactional leaders are concerned with provisioning rewards for employees' accomplishment. Consequently, Hamstra et al. (2011) and Long et al. (2012) argued that both transactional leadership and transformational leadership behaviors present could affect employee turnover in an organization. Russell (2001) examined how employee turnover intention relationship is linked to transformational and transactional leadership in a large financial institution and a medical center in Broward County, Florida; the study found that there is a negative relation between transformational leadership and employee turnover intention; hence, lower turnover intention is caused by higher transformational leadership. Meanwhile, there is a significant relationship between transactional leadership styles, where leaders focused on contingent reward and passive management by exception. Wells and Peachey (2011) examined the link between leadership behaviors and turnover intention among National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I softball and volleyball assistant coaches. They found that transformational leadership directly and negatively linked to turnover intention. On the other hand, turnover intention is negatively linked to transactional leadership. Here, they explained that negative link between transactional leadership and employee turnover intention by using Cobb et al. (1995) justice theory. This theory explains that if employees are satisfied and perceive that the processes of the organization are fair they will feel good in their workplace and remain with the organization.
Moreover, Sellgren et al. (2007) examined the relationship between nursing managers' leadership behaviors and staff turnover to identify variables affecting the job satisfaction and work climate at the Korolinska Hospital in Stockholm, Sweden. The results show strong correlations between leadership behaviors, job satisfaction and work climate, as well as a strong inter-correlation between work climate and job satisfaction. On the other hand, there is a weak but direct correlation between leadership behaviors and actual staff turnover, even when staff turnover is influenced by work climate and job satisfaction, here, job satisfaction was identified as the construct that has the most significant, direct correlation with staff turnover. This implies that leadership behaviors are linked to staff turnover as it shapes the work climate and promote job satisfaction and consequently, affecting staff turnover. The study also found a positive, significant correlation was between staff turnover and a work climate variable (challenge), as well as between staff turnover and a job satisfaction variable, (feeling). Finally, the study showed that the work climate variable has a strong, negative correlation with staff turnover.
Sharif Heravi et al. (2010) investigated the relationship between leadership behaviors and personnel turnover intention in Iranian IT companies and illustrated that turnover intention is negatively linked to transformational leadership while the relationship between transactional leadership and turnover intention is not significant.
Similarly, Gul et al. (2012) studied the relationship turnover intention and transformational and transactional leadership among firms in the Pakistani insurance sector. The study distributed and analyzed 121 sets of questionnaires and found a negative relationship between turnover intention and transformational and transactional leadership styles. Furthermore, the study concluded that the relationship between turnover intentions with transformational leadership is more significant compared to transactional leadership.
A study by Long et al. (2012) focused on the relationship between leadership style and employees' turnover intention among academic staff in Malaysia. The study argued that both leadership behaviors (transformational and transactional leadership) are negatively linked to turnover intention, while the correlation is not significant.
Ali et al. (2014) studied leadership style through focusing on transformational and transactional leadership behaviour among employees of private schools in Pakistan. Three hundred and fifty six questionnaires were analyzed and the study found that transformational and transactional leadership behaviors are negatively linked to turnover intention. Wu et al. (2013) examined the relationship between transformational leadership and turnover intention, and the role of affective commitment as a mediating variable. The study involved 490 employees of large telecommunication company call center in Northern China and found that transformational leadership has a negative relationship with turnover intention and that the relationship is mediated by affective commitment. Finally, Ekong et al. (2013) studied the relationship between leadership style and employee turnover by conducting a survey involving employees of Nigerian banks and collected 500 questionnaires. The study concluded that leadership style is related to employee turnover intention.
Therefore, this study hypothesized the relationship between leadership behaviors and employee turnover intention, as follows: H1: Leadership behaviour is negatively related to turnover intention of employees.

Organizational culture and turnover intention
Organizational culture is one of the strongest variables that can be used to predict employee turnover. A strong organizational culture can help establish interpersonal relationship with culture that is concerned with team orientation (Sheridan, 1992). In this light, organizational culture could primary influence employees' decision to either leave or stay in an organization (Booth and Hamer, 2007;MacIntosh and Doherty, 2010). Moreover, Shim (2010) investigated the role of organizational culture in predicting employee turnover. Consequently, there is less turnover intention if employees have a high value of organizational culture.
Booth and Hamer (2007) stipulated that having a strong culture could improve the sense of respect and self-worth among employees, creating a perception on a better working life that will be less likely is found in another organization, while DelCampo (2006) stated that turnover rate is smaller in organizations that demonstrate strong organizational culture and congruous set of values. The study by Carmeli (2005) observed the link between organizational culture and withdrawal intention. The study examined the influence of organizational culture dimensions (communication, job challenge, innovation trust, and social cohesiveness) on employees' behaviors (absenteeism) and withdrawal intention, by focusing on three dimensions of withdrawal intention; withdrawal intention from the occupation, withdrawal intention from the job; and withdrawal intention from the organization. The study found that organizational culture could provide an interesting job experience, minimizing absenteeism and withdrawal intention from the occupation, job and organization among the employees'. Meanwhile, other organizational culture dimensions showed no significant correlation with the dependent variables, with exception to the relationship between innovation and culture employees' intention to quit the job.
Meanwhile, Deery and Shaw (1999) studied the relationship between organizational culture and employee turnover, focusing on both organizational culture and employee turnover behaviors in the hotel industry. The study sampled four hotels different star hotels under the same hotel chain in the Melbourne Central Business District. However, the study did not involve any of the hotels' supervisory staff. The study showed that employees with a positive attitude take pride in the organization and are willing work hard for the organization and put in extra effort to make it successful. On the other hand, the absent of supports from the management and organization would increase stress levels among the employee stress, resulting in higher desire to quit working with the organization. Lee and Yu (2004) investigated the likely relationship between organizational performance and corporate culture in Singaporean companies, and focus specifically on organizations in three distinct industries, healthcare, high-tech manufacturing firms, and insurance. The study showed that the strength of cultural values has high correlation with organizational performance, while both innovation and cultural value strength are significantly correlated with business growth the insurance industry. Moreover, supportiveness and management are significantly correlated with in net profit growth in the manufacturing industry while staff turnover is significantly correlated with team orientation in hospitals. Park and Kim (2009) examined the relationship between turnover intention organizational culture and among nurses in Korean public hospitals and concluded that organizational culture is directly linked with turnover intention , and influence the organizational facet of turnover intention while out of all the dimensions, rational culture has the most significant influence on turnover intention Park and Kim (2009) stated that employees who are exposed to positive work cultures oriented will be more satisfied with their jobs, hence, they will have more commitment to their organizations, and have higher retention. Thus, improving the organizational culture could increase organizational commitment and minimize staff turnover. Based on the above discussion, this study hypothesizes that: H2: Organizational culture is negatively related to turnover intention of Employees

Organizational commitment and turnover intention
Organizational commitment has been the most important predictor of turnover and turnover intention. It has been found that employees who are more committed to their organizations will have a lower level of turnover intention (Ali and Baloch, 2009;Elangovan, 2001;Griffeth and Hom, 2001;Hussain and Asif, 2012;Meyer et al., 2002;Rahman et al., 2008). On the other hand, Mowday et al. (1982) suggested that an organization's employees who have high levels of organizational commitment will remain with the organization. Furthermore, organizational commitment is an important attitude to evaluate employees' turnover intention; when employees are less committed, they will find another occasion to leave. If the occasions are inaccessible, their emotional or mental state may lead to their withdrawing from the organization (Lok and Crawford, 2004). Moreover, Buchko et al. (1998) noted that turnover and turnover intention are consequences of organizational commitment. Employees with a low level of organizational commitment are more likely to leave the organization. In other words, employee's turnover intention depends on the organizational commitment (Ahmad and Oranye, 2010).
Furthermore, Meyer et al. (2002) and Cheng and Stockdale (2003) suggested that organizational commitment's correlation with turnover intention is stronger than with just turnover. An earlier study among 212 Singapore companies identified that organizational commitment is the factor that most contributed to high employee turnover in Asia (Khatri et al., 2001). In addition, Griffeth et al. (2000) suggested that organizational commitment is the immediate antecedent to turnover. Sethi and King (1998) stated that commitment is important for organizations, and is related to turnover intention. Namely, affective commitment is negatively related to turnover intention; while continuance commitment shows an inverse relationship with turnover intention; continuance commitment is associated with lower turnover intention. Furthermore, Perryer et al. (2010) confirmed that organizational commitment is related to turnover intention. Affective and continuance commitment are negatively related to turnover intention. Paille (2011) opined that organizational commitment affects employees' turnover intention. Specifically, affective commitment is the best predictor of employee turnover intention. Similarly, Wasti (2003) stated that affective commitment is the most important dimension of organizational commitment to predict turnover intention. Abu Elanain (2010) stated that organizational commitment has a negative relationship to turnover intention and that higher level of organizational commitment lead to lower levels of turnover intention.
According to Jaros (1997) and Meyer and Allen (1991), there are three component models of organizational commitment and turnover intention. Data were collected from a sample of engineering personnel working at an aerospace firm and university students employed full time in a variety of organizations. The results showed that affective commitment had a significantly stronger relation with turnover intention than continuance commitment and normative commitment. In addition, continuance commitment and normative commitment did not differ in the force of the relationship with turnover intention. In addition, affective commitment was the most important component in predicting turnover intention; if employees have a high level of affective commitment, organizations can reduce voluntary turnover behaviors. Meyer et al. (2002) stated three components of negative organizational commitment and turnover relationship. Affective commitment has the highest strength, followed by normative and continuance commitment. Moreover, the correlation between organizational and cognitive commitment are stronger than actual turnover. Continuance commitment has a low level and does not lead to turnover intention, unless affective commitment and normative commitments are low. Similarly, Kuean et al. (2010) observed that three dimensions of organizational commitment are related to turnover intention. Among the three dimensions, affective commitment is the most important predictor of turnover intention. Therefore, employees are less likely to turnover when they are emotionally attached to their organization. Mathieu and Zajac (1990) stated that organizational commitment is a work attitude directly related to employee participation and the intention to remain with the organization. In addition, Tett and Meyer (1993) proposed organizational commitment as a determinant of work outcomes and show that organizational commitment explains turnover intention. Furthermore, Addae et al. (2006) suggested that organizations benefit from a committed workforce who is committed to the organization, as they tend to experience fewer turnovers and make positive contributions to the organization. Furthermore, Khatri et al. (2001) found that organizational commitment is the most important factor influencing turnover intention. Employee turnover may be conveyed by commitment.
Elangovan (2001) and Lambert et al. (2006) suggested that organizational commitment directly affects turnover intention, and has a negative relationship to turnover intentions. Lower levels of commitment lead to a higher propensity for the employee to leave. In addition, Muthuveloo and Rose (2005) found that higher organizational commitment leads to higher loyalty and reduces the intention to leave. Chen and Francesco (2000) suggested that organizational commitment and turnover intention are important for employee attitudes in maintaining a productive workforce. Similarly, Stallworth (2004) stated that organizational commitment can provide insight into how it is related to the intention to leave. Turnover is always costly to organizations given the large investment made in the selection, training and development of personnel. In addition, Labatmediene et al. (2007) stated that committed employees is less likely to leave the organization than less committed employees. The three-factor model (emotional, continuance, and normative) is more descriptive than the one factor model (emotional, continuance or normative) of organizational commitment. Law (2005) examined two components of organizational commitment, namely: affective and continuance, on intent to turnover among public accountants in the Pacific Northwest of the United States. The results indicated that affective commitment is more salient than continuance commitment in predicting turnover intention.
Yong-Tao (2007) explored the turnover intention determinant of organizational commitment; 196 respondents from self-reporting questionnaires were randomly selected among workers in one firm. The findings suggested that only affective commitment had a significant negative effect on turnover intention, and that continuous commitment did not. Wasti (2002) explored organizational commitment in Turkey. This study used two components, affective and continuance. Affective commitment was significant and negatively related to turnover intention, while continuance commitment was not significant. In addition, Somers (1995) studied the three-component model of organizational commitment on turnover intention. The results showed that only affective commitment emerged as predicting turnover while continuance and normative commitment had little effect on turnover. From the above statement, it is postulated that: H3: Organizational commitment is negatively related to turnover intention of employees.

Methodology
This study uses the quantitative approach because of the following reasons: 1) allows the relationship to be determined between the variables using statistical methods. This corresponds with the objective of the present study, which is to examine the connection among organizational culture, leadership behaviors, organizational commitment and turnover intention; 2) allows the analysis to be carried out on a large sample, which can be generalized to the whole population; and 3) allows use of standard and formal sets of questionnaires.

Response format
All items of questionnaires use a 5-point Likert scale that ranged from 1-strongly disagree, 2disagree, 3-neither agree, 4-agree and 5-strongly agree. The result of Likert scale will illustrate the position and the attitude of an individual towards the purpose (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980). The most widely use this methodology because it is easy for respondent to use, understand and responses from such a scale are likely to be reliable and acceptable (Badara et al., 2014;Karageorge and Zajac, 2011;Myers and Gramling, 1997).

Turn over intention
Turnover intention scale is adopted from Jaros (1997).

Leadership behaviour
This study measured two kinds of leadership behaviour-transformational and Transformational leadership which measures five dimensions: Idealized influence (Attributed), Individualized consideration, Intellectual stimulation, Idealized influence (Behaviour), and Inspiration motivation. The questionnaire was adopted from Chen and Silverthorne (2005) and measured 20 items.
This construct measures three dimensions: conditional reward, management by exception-passive and management by exception-active. Typical leader behaviour was measured using the modified questionnaire from Chen and Silverthorne (2005).

Organizational culture
This section concerns the measurement of the dimensions of culture. The study examines the fundamental character and spirit of culture: which are hierarchical culture and rational culture. The 10 items adopted from Yang (2005).

Organizational commitment
The measures of the dimensions for organizational commitment were adopted from Stallworth (2004). The items were found reliable at Cronbach's Alpha of 0.84. The study examined the fundamental character and spirit of commitment. The instrument was developed to measure the basis of the three dimensions: normative commitment, continuance commitment, and affective commitment, and consisted of 24 items.

Sample size
The convenience sampling is used in this study because this method by obtaining units or Reponses who are most convenient available and are easily accessible and willing to participate in a study (Kitchenham and Pfleeger, 2002;Teddie and Yu, 2007;Zikmund, 2003). Furthermore, Lynch (1982) stated that convenience sample of comparative homogenous subjects is desirable. According to Zikmund (2003) convenienced sample is be suitable many responses and are best for exploratory research. The participants in this study were limited to Jordanian academicians who work in any Jordanian University. A structured questionnaire was adopted from the past literature and a total number of 300 questionnaires were sent, out of which 270 were collected back Jordanian university.

Data analysis
This study used the PLS (Partial Least Square) technique to analyze data by using SmartPLS 2.0 software for validating measurements and testing the hypothesis. PLS is a latent structural equation modelling technique employing a component-based approach to estimation. An advantage of using PLS method is that it allows the latent constructs to be modelled either as reflective or formative constructs (Chin et al., 2003). It also has the added advantage of enabling simultaneous assessment of both the measurement model and the structural model (Marcoulides and Saunders, 2006). Additionally, demands on measurement scales and sample size are minimal. Variables of the study i.e. organizational culture, organizational commitment, and leadership behaviour and turnover intentions have been operationalized as first order reflective constructs (Fig. 1).
Model evaluation by SmartPLS is twostep process, in the first step the quality criteria of measurement model is assessed, which includes Composite Reliability (CR), According to Hock and Ringle (2006), accepted value of CR is 0.60 or greater. Average variance extracted (AVE) is another criterion for the assessment of the measurement model and accepted value of AVE is 0.5 or greater.
Subsequently, a third quality criterion, discriminant validity was examined to indicate whether the latent variable measures the variance of its own indicators better than the variance of other latent variables (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). Also, this study compared the square root values of AVE with the correlations between the latent constructs. The quality criteria given in Table 1 and Table 2 show that all the required values were achieved, thus, our measurement model is fit for further processing.

Structural model evaluation
The conceptual model was validated and the study hypotheses were tested by examining the results for the structural model produced by SmartPLS 2.0 after bootstrapping each model 5000 times. Table 3, reports the path coefficient (β), tvalues, the hypothesized direction, and the coefficients of determinant (R 2 ) for the endogenous constructs. Similar to regression analysis, the percentage of explained variance (R 2 value) could be used to assess the overall goodness-of-fit of the PLS model (Hulland, 1999). For the direct model, Table 3 shows that R 2 value is 0.23, which means that 23% of the variation in turnover intentions, measured by organizational culture, organizational commitment and leadership behaviour, In addition, the standardized path coefficient (PT) in the PLS structural model is used to determine the significance of the path. According to Hair et al. (2011), "significant paths showing the hypothesized direction empirically support the proposed causal relationship". For the direct model; Table 3 shows that all the hypotheses were supported.

Leadership behaviour, organizational culture and turnover intention
The first research hypothesis assesses the effect of leadership behaviour on turnover intention where it is hypothesized that leadership behaviour is negatively related to turnover intention.  The finding of the study supports this hypothesis, proving that leadership behaviour is negatively related to turnover intention. In this regard, leadership behaviour is integral in enhancing employee behaviors, work values and performance. Therefore, the relationship between leadership and turnover intention is reflected by the behaviors demonstrated by the leaders to employees which could affect employees and turnover intention. The results indicate that employees relate well to leadership behaviors, hence, the good relationship with the leader negatively affect employee turnover intention. This finding is in line with past studies by Gul et al. (2012), Long et al. (2012), Sharif Heravi et al. (2010), and Wells and Peachey (2011), which found that positive leadership behaviour had a positive relationship on turnover intention as this tended to reduce employee turnover intention. The factor analysis for this study indicates that transformational leadership behaviors and transactional leadership behaviors are put into one dimension which was labelled as "leadership behaviors".  In this regard, Yeh and Hong (2012) stipulated that a good leader should use both transformational and transactional leadership in line with suggestions from past study by Wells and Peachey (2011) which stated that managers should adopt both transformational leadership and transactional leadership behaviors. This is because both types of leadership behaviors could minimize the level of employee turnover intention. In this light, Burns (1997) argued that leadership behaviors theory has highlighted that leaders who demonstrate transformational leadership behaviors are generally more generous, friendly and are able to recognize employees' needs and use these aspects to develop employees to a higher level.
Consequently, employees experiencing transformational leadership style will be satisfied and see fairness and equality in the rules of an organization. This will decrease the level of turnover intention will be decreased. Meanwhile, transactional leadership behaviour is more concerned on a system of positive rewards (Burns, 1997), thus, leaders can minimize employee turnover intention by making employees consider staying with the organization, as the employees feel that the exchange is fair to them. Ekong et al. (2013) affirmed this notion as the study found that high turnover rate happens when the employees are dissatisfied with their leader's treatment.
This finding confirms Festinger (1957) cognitive consistency theory, which states that individuals would strive to maintain harmony between their attitude, behaviour and belief. For example, if an employee experience contrasting attitudes, beliefs or behaviors, they will change their attitudes or behaviors to reduce the feeling of uneasiness. Meanwhile, leaders who understand their employees' competencies would help the employees to develop their strength and minimize turnover intention. Furthermore, employees will normally stay in an organization if they are confident that their leaders recognize their efforts. This is in line with Hamastra et al. (2011) finding that leadership behaviour could reduce turnover intention when employees' performance are recognized and rewarded.
Organizational culture is hypothesized to be negatively related to turnover intention. The finding of this study supports the hypothesis that organizational culture is linked to turnover intention; hence, turnover intention would be decreased if an employee demonstrates a positive attitude and put high value to the organizational culture. This finding is supported by past studies such as in, Booth and Hamer (2007), Lok and Crawford (1999), MacIntosh and Doherty (2010), Park andKim (2009), Shim (2010), and Silverthorne (2004). All of these studies concluded that organizational culture is an integral variable in forecasting employee turnover intention. Schein (1992) also found that organizational culture comprises of the shared values, beliefs, and assumptions found in the employees' working environment. A positive can help reduce turnover intention working environment as the employees in such working environment would be more optimistic and friendly, (MacIntosh and Doherty, 2010).
Furthermore, if the employees feel that their organization has a fair system for employees' promotion and provide equality treatment for all employees, they will be less likely to find other opportunities.

Organizational commitment and turnover intention
The third research question addresses the influence of organizational commitment on turnover intention; here, organizational commitment is hypothesized to be negatively related to turnover intention. The finding supports the hypothesis that organizational commitment is related to turnover intention. In this regard, organizational commitment relatively depends on employees' attitudes and behaviors.
Consequently, organizational commitment influences employees' turnover intention when there is a high degree of organizational commitment. On the other hand, employees will quit the organization if they have low organizational commitment, this finding concurrent with past studies by Anvari and Amin (2011), Abu Elanain (2010), Elangovan (2001), Lambert (2006), Paille (2011), Perryer et al. (2010), and Yong-Tao (2007. This finding can be explained by the cognitive consistency theory that states that an individual will attempt to maintain harmony between his or her behaviors, belief, and attitude. For instance, employees with high desire to retain in the organization would develop an emotional attachment with the organization, and would change their attitude and behaviour accordingly. On the other hand, the employee's attitude dissonance would decrease the level of commitment and consequently, lead to turnover intention. In this light, an employee's decision to either leave or stay with an organization is influenced by whether what the organization offers and what an employee expects are parallel to each other. This is similar to the findings of Hussain and Asif (2012) and Tumwesigye (2010), which also found that employees who have strong organizational commitment would want to remain in the organization.

Theoretical implications
As mentioned, this study aims to investigate the influence of leadership behaviour organizational culture and organizational commitment on turnover intention. This study's findings are parallel to the theoretical relationships shown in the research model, specifically the link between organizational culture, leadership behaviors, organizational commitment, and turnover intention. Moreover, this study has found some new interesting findings, especially in turnover intention, adding to existing literature on this field. This study has presented a new perspective for the Jordanian context as it used a Jordanian sample to investigate the relationship between organizational culture leadership behaviour, and organizational commitment and turnover intention.
Until now, most past studies had only examined the relationship between leadership behaviors, organizational culture and turnover intention in the western context (Booth and Hamer, 2007;Deery and Shaw, 1999;MacIntosh and Doherty, 2010;Russell, 2001;Sellgren et al., 2007;Sharif Heravi et al., 2010;Shim, 2010;Wells and Peachey, 2011). Thus, this study shows that despite the different cultures, leadership behaviors and organizational culture also affect turnover intention in non-Western context, especially in Asian countries (Lee and Yu, 2004;Park and Kim, 2009).
As mentioned, there are no researches that have investigated effects of organizational commitment, leadership behaviors, and organizational culture on turnover intention systematically in a single study.
In this light, most past studies had focused on how leadership behaviors and organizational culture directly affect turnover intention. Consequently, leaders could encourage employee commitment, and minimizing turnover intention, by supporting the employees.
By focusing on employees' commitment to the organization, the present study has provided more in-depth information to the growing body of knowledge on the relationship between leadership behaviour, organizational culture, organizational commitment and turnover intention. Furthermore, the results of this study also provided empirical support for theory of Festinger (1957) especially the claim that dissonance exists when an individual holds cognition that is in line with his or her other cognitions in the same domain. Dissonance gives rise to measures to reduce, as well as to avoid increases in the dissonance. One way in which the individual can reduce dissonance is by altering the discrepant cognition and to bring it in line with one's other cognitions. Thus, it is integral for managers to understand cognitive dissonance as they should know how it can be used to motivate their employees. In this regard, the results emphasize the importance of exploring how turnover intention is influenced by leadership behaviors.

Managerial implications
This study found that employee turnover intention is largely influenced by leadership behaviors, organizational culture, and organizational commitment did affect. This study can show that leadership behaviors and organizational culture can be used to predict employee turnover intention. This finding has several integral implications for managers and researchers in Jordanian Higher educational institutes in the potential aspects that can influence turnover intentions among employees.
Leaders should be aware on the importance of motivation among their employees to sustain good employee-leadership relations as well to understand the local organizational culture. Such aspects are integral in minimizing employees' turnover intention. This could establish a people-oriented behaviour in leadership, and consequently, help cultivate positive which will minimize turnover intention. Training and development activities can be conducted to encourage organizational commitment, as well as maximizing employees' skills and abilities, and encourage the change in attitudes. On the other hand, when it comes to new employees, the organization should help familiarize them with their job before embarking on other programs, such as team training and diversity training. These subsequent programs will help motivate them and inculcate emotional attachment to the organization. Such on the job training could be done by coaching and mentoring the employees, helping them to enhance their work performance and employee potential.
Organizations should also implement a reward system by giving as monetary and non-monetary incentives to excellent employees to help retain them in the organization. As committed employees are important in ensuring productivity, such measure would generate more profit and cut turnover intention among the employees. Moreover a leader could encourage employees' retention by facilitating two-way communication such as through face-to-face conversation. This could ensure the clear understanding among the leadership and their employees on the importance of a good employer and employee relationship. Managers should invest time in providing feedback to employees through two-way communications, as an open communication channel can help overcoming problems plaguing them. At the same time, managers should act through promoting workplace interaction, providing appropriate and timely feedback to employees, and welcoming positive inputs from them, which will result in their self-confidence. Lastly, managers should strive in cultivating an organizational culture which encourages continuous learning and the knowledge sharing staff members.