Commitment to change is considered to be one of most important factors for the successful implementation of change initiatives (Herscovitch & Meyer, 2002). The purpose of the present research was to identify stressors and facilitators that could potentially have a bearing on employees’ commitment to change as well as factors that could mitigate the negative effects of these stressors on commitment to change. The relationship between commitment to change and related behavior is also a focus of the present thesis. A secondary purpose of the present research was also to validate the Herscovitch-Meyer (2002) three component (affective, continuance and normative) model of commitment to change in Pakistan. Survey data were collected from four large Pakistani public sector organizations where organizational restructuring had been initiated, in order to cross validate the research model across multiple samples. The rate of response varied, depending upon the level of support and access provided to the researcher by the respective organizations for data collection. The response rate was 43%, 21%, 28% and 60% for Organization 1, 2, 3, and 4 respectively. For the purpose of data analysis, exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis techniques were employed for validation of the Herscovitch-Meyer (2002) three component model of commitment to change. For testing hypotheses relating to the effect of stressors and facilitators on commitment to change, and for studying the effect of commitment to change dimensions on change related behavior, hierarchical multiple regression technique was used. Moderated multiple regression was used to test the effect of moderators on the relationship between stressors and commitment to change. iHierarchical multiple regression technique was also used to determine the relationship between commitment to change and change related behavior. The results provided support for the three component model despite some issues with the normative commitment to change scale. Job insecurity and role stressors were seen to be potent stressors having a negative relationship with affective and normative commitment to change and a positive relationship with continuance commitment to change. As expected, change related communication, employability and trust found support as facilitators of affective and normative commitment to change while their relationship with continuance commitment to change was observed to be negative. These facilitators were also seen to play a moderating role-albeit with limited support in present samples- in attenuating the negative relationship between stressors and affective/normative commitment to change and the positive relationship between stressors and continuance commitment to change. The present study is important for commitment research as it is an effort towards the identification of factors which may have a bearing upon the employees’ attitude towards commitment to change. For managers, the present study has important implications in terms of creating an organizational climate which minimizes stress and uncertainties. This positive environment can be made possible by ensuring an exchange of communication between decision makers and employees, provision of opportunities for employee development and allowing trust to develop between employer and employees which will have a positive impact on employee commitment to change. The results of the present study provide support for the generalizability of the Herscovitch-Meyer (2002) three component model of commitment to change in Pakistan. iiThere were however some issues concerning the reliability of normative commitment to change items due to which the analyses were performed after the removal of two items. Future research may be conducted on the construct employing cultural based items more suited to the Pakistani context. Future research may also explore the antecedents and consequences of commitment to change, taking stock of the limitations of the present study.