Mallick 2014
Mallick 2014
Mallick 2014
Eeman Mallick1
Rabindra Kumar Pradhan1
Hare Ram Tewari1
Lalatendu Kesari Jena1
Abstract
Organizational citizenship behaviour (OCB) is defined as actions or behaviours that employees are
willing to engage beyond their recommended role requirements. Several empirical studies have shown
that OCB is positively related to indicators of individual, unit and organizational performance. In view of
OCB’s positive relation with individual and organizational performance, there is an increasing concern
among organizations for enhancing these contextual behaviours. The present study aims to explore the
relationship between OCB and job performance. It has also tried to examine the interactive relation-
ship between OCB and human resources (HR) practices with its corresponding impact on job perfor-
mance. The findings revealed that OCB is having a significant relationship with job performance. Among
the different dimensions of OCB, we have found that altruistic dimension has the strongest relationship
with job performance, whereas the civic virtue dimension has an insignificant one. Further, HR practices
have significantly moderated the relationship between OCB and job performance. However, the inter-
action between both the constructs was found to have an inverse effect on the relationship between
OCB and job performance. The findings have advocated that the involvement of employees in altruistic
behaviour enhances productivity and performance at workplace.
Keywords
Organizational citizenship behaviour (OCB), job performance, HR practices, altruistic behaviour
1
Department of Humanities and Social Science, IIT Kharagpur, India.
Corresponding Author:
Rabindra Kumar Pradhan, Department of Humanities and Social Science, IIT Kharagpur, 721 302, India.
E-mails: rkpradhan@hss.iitkgp.ernet.in; rabi2020@gmail.com
Downloaded from mls.sagepub.com at The University of Hong Kong Libraries on October 5, 2015
450 Management and Labour Studies 39(4)
Introduction
Organizational realities have undergone a sea change in the present-day competitive economic scenario,
and accordingly, perceptions about them have also considerably changed. Significant importance is
placed on factors that are inimitable or unique such as culture, knowledge and human resource (HR)
in organizations. The aspects leading to such differentiable identities are difficult to understand from
within the formal boundaries of organizational mechanisms. Thus, in the context of social and behavi-
oural science, concepts such as organizational citizenship behaviour (OCB) have gained significant
prominence to establish its far-reaching implications on an individual performance and organizational
functioning. OCB can be defined as a behaviour of employees that is voluntary or discretionary and not
recognized within formal job descriptions laid out by organizations. But these behaviours go a long way
in maintaining positive organizational culture that reinforces employee engagement, employee
commitment, employee motivation and job performance. Strategic human resource management (HRM)
leading to high-performing HR practices motivates OCB that leads to superior job performance and
efficient organizational functioning. The current study attempts to examine the relationship between
OCB and job performance. It further tries to establish the moderating role of HR practices in its
relationship with the expected job outcome.
Downloaded from mls.sagepub.com at The University of Hong Kong Libraries on October 5, 2015
Mallick et al. 451
given a firm foundation to its underlying construct. However, cooperation was predominantly considered
to be influenced by the workplace culture and environment (Smith et al., 1983). OCB is an important
phenomenon in the informal organization concept since two of its main aspects are trust and strength of
interpersonal relationships. Thus, just like social capital, OCB has also found by researchers to have a
profound impact on organizational performance and individual development. OCB encom-passes five
dimensions: altruism, generalized compliance, sportsmanship, courtesy and civic virtue (Organ, 1988;
Podsakoff et al., 2000). Furthermore, a three-factor model of citizenship behaviour emerged from the
work of Borman, Penner, Allen and Motowidlo (2001), which are interpersonal citizenship performance,
organizational citizenship performance and job/task citizenship performance.
As found in the literature, OCBs are optional pro-social behaviour of an individual, different from
official job requirements and duties that are not a part of the stipulated job description, and they benefit
others as well as the organization (Organ et al., 2006). OCBs have been shown to be positively related to
organizational success (Dunlop & Lee, 2004; Organ et al., 2006). OCB is found to influence managerial
evaluation of employees although it is not a part of their formal job description (Podsakoff et al.,
2000; Whiting et al., 2008). This implies that there is a belief of management that OCB is beneficial
to organizations in terms of its performance, and the attitude of voluntary participation is perceived
as a sign of organizational dedication (Organ et al., 2006). Whiting et al. (2008) suggested OCB to be
equally important as task performance for evaluation of its employees.
The research on OCB’s antecedents and consequences has brought forth both the positive and negative
consequences of OCB. Organ’s definition was mostly inclined towards the positive aspects; however,
later studies have thrown light on the negative antecedents (Vigoda-Gadot, 2006, 2007) and negative
effects (Bolino, Turnley & Niehoff, 2004). These studies have investigated OCBs’ effects on groups
where a drop in effort occurs.
Downloaded from mls.sagepub.com at The University of Hong Kong Libraries on October 5, 2015
452 Management and Labour Studies 39(4)
In order to examine the above-mentioned objectives, the following hypotheses were proposed
for study:
Methodology
Downloaded from mls.sagepub.com at The University of Hong Kong Libraries on October 5, 2015
Mallick et al. 453
Measures
A set of standardized tools were used for data collection on OCB, job performance and HR practices.
All these scales were presented in the form of questionnaires to all participants. Each question-
naire consisted of certain statements or questions and is answered on a five-point rating scales,
varying from strongly disagree (1), disagree (2), neither agree nor disagree (3), agree (4) to strongly
disagree (5).
3. Job Performance
The scale for job performance consists of 16 items, and it is taken from Sarmiento et al. (2007).
The items to assess are quality of work, dependability, knowledge of work, leadership qualities, manag-
ing ability, discipline and integrity, being proactive and innovative, teamwork and relationship and
initiative.
Procedure
After taking the permission from the management of the organizations under study, the respective
respondents were approached. The respondents were randomly selected by applying purposive sampling
techniques.
The objectives of the study and the method of filling up the questionnaire were explained to them.
They were assured that the present survey was being done for academic purpose, and therefore
the information and opinion collected from them would be kept confidential. They were further assured
that in the process of data analysis, their individual identity would never be disclosed and the
conclusion derived subsequently would be a generalized one. As soon as a rapport was established
with the respondents, they were given the questionnaire. The subjects were asked to give their frank
opinion and judgement. For better understanding, they were also interviewed to supplement the
data. However, because of their busy schedule, some refused to fill up the questionnaires (n = 70)
and some returned with incomplete information (n = 29). These questionnaires were not included
in the study. The respondents were requested to return the filled in questionnaire. They had answered
the questions in the presence of the investigator. The average time taken for each questionnaire was
about one hour.
Downloaded from mls.sagepub.com at The University of Hong Kong Libraries on October 5, 2015
454 Management and Labour Studies 39(4)
Preliminary Analysis
Data were examined for outliers and possible errors prior to analysis, and none was detected. The results
(Table 2) indicated that means of OCB (91.27), HR practices (83.63) and job performance (62.92) are
Downloaded from mls.sagepub.com at The University of Hong Kong Libraries on October 5, 2015
Mallick et al. 455
Job
Altruism Conscientiousness Courtesy Sportsmanship Civic Virtue Performance
Altruism 1
Conscientiousness 0.510** 1
Courtesy 0.498** 0.551** 1
Sportsmanship 0.191** –.015 0.103* 1
Civic Virtue 0.394** 0.337** 0.358** 0.456** 1
Job Performance 0.623** 0.518** 0.486** 0.360** 0.458** 1
Source: Primary data.
Notes: *Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
above the scale mean (3). The sub-dimensions of OCB, HR practices and job performance also score
more than the scale mean. It shows that there is a kind of relationship between the underlying constructs
of OCB, HR practices and job performance.
Downloaded from mls.sagepub.com at The University of Hong Kong Libraries on October 5, 2015
456 Management and Labour Studies 39(4)
of variance in job performance was explained by OCB. The different dimensions have significant
unique contribution in predicting job performance. The beta values indicate the unique contribution
of the dimensions in predicting job performance. In order of importance, they are altruism
(Beta = 0.361), conscientiousness and sportsmanship (Beta = 0.248), courtesy (Beta = 0.116) and
civic virtue (Beta = 0.078). As shown in the results, since OCB significantly predicts job performance,
the hypothesis H1 is accepted.
Downloaded from mls.sagepub.com at The University of Hong Kong Libraries on October 5, 2015
Mallick et al. 457
OCB (Beta = –1.23) and HR practices (Beta = 1.12). Results show OCB and HR practices explain
54 per cent (R2 = 0.54) variance in dependent variable job performance and the interaction effect explains
55 per cent (R2 = 0.55) variance in dependent variable.
Thus, the interaction effect between OCB and HR practices significantly predicts the dependent
variable job performance rather than the individual variables separately. In fact, if we assess the individual
unique contribution of each variable, we will see that OCB makes a greater contribution in predict-
ing productivity than HR practices. But with both the variables together, the contribution in predicting
productivity is more with a higher beta value. However, it is seen from the results that HR practices
inversely moderate the relationship between OCB and job performance. However, since moderation is
significant, the hypothesis H2 is accepted.
Downloaded from mls.sagepub.com at The University of Hong Kong Libraries on October 5, 2015
458 Management and Labour Studies 39(4)
References
Appelbaum, E., Bailey, T., Berg, P., & Kalleberg, A.L. (2000). Manufacturing advantage: Why high–performance
work systems pay off. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.
Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley.
Borman, W.C., White, L.A. & Dorsey, D.W. (1995). Effects of ratee task performance and interpersonal factors on
supervisor and peer performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80(1), 168–77.
Boxall, P., & Macky, K., (2009). Research and theory on high–performance work systems: progressing the
high–involvement stream. Human Resource Management Journal, 19(1), 3–23.
Cascio, W.C., (1992). Managing human resources: Productivity, quality of work life, profits. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Ferris, G.R., Hochwarter, W.A., Buckley, M.R., Harrell–Cook, G., & Frink, D.D. (1999). Human resources
management: Some new directions. Journal of Management, 25(3), 385–415.
Gardner, T.M., Moynihan, L.M., Park, H.J. & Wright, P.M. (2001). Beginning to unlock the black box in the HR
firm performance relationship: The impact of HR practices on employee attitudes and employee outcomes
(CAHRS Working Paper #01–12). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, School of Industrial and Labor Relations,
Center for Advanced Human Resource Studies.
Downloaded from mls.sagepub.com at The University of Hong Kong Libraries on October 5, 2015
Mallick et al. 459
George, J.M., & Bettenhausen, K. (1990). Understanding prosocial behavior, sales performance, and turnover:
A group level analysis in a service context. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(6), 698–709.
Gerhart, B., (2005). Human resources and business performance: Findings, unanswered questions, and an alternative
approach. Management Review, 16(2), 174–185.
Hui, C., Lee, C., & Rousseau, D.M. (2004). Psychological contract and organizational citizenship behavior in
China: investigating generalizability and instrumentality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(2), 311.
Huselid, M.A. (1995). The impact of human resource practices on turnover, productivity, and corporate financial
performance. Academy of Management Journal, 38(3), 635–667.
Katz, D. & Kahn, R.L. (1966). The social psychology of organizations. New York: Wiley.
Lepak D.P., Liao H, Chung Y, & Harden E.E. (2006). A conceptual review of human resource management systems
in strategic human resource management research. In Martocchio J (Ed.), Research in personnel and human
resources management, Vol. 25 (pp. 217–271). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
MacKenzie, S.B., Podsakoff, P.M., & Fetter, R. (1991). Organizational citizenship behavior and objective
productivity as determinants of managerial evaluations of salespersons’ performance. Organizational Behavior
and Human Decision Processes, 50(1), 123–150.
Morrison, W.E. (1994). Role definition and organizational citizenship behavior: the importance of the employee’s
perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 37(6), 1543–67.
Motowildo, S.J., & Van Scotter, J.R. (1994). Evidence that task performance should be distinguished from contextual
performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(4), 475–80.
Nishii, L.H., Lepak, D.P., & Schneider, B. (2008). Employee attributions of the “why” of HR: Their effects
on employee attitudes and behaviors, and customer satisfaction. Personnel Psychology, 61(3), 503–545.
Organ, D.W. (1988). Organizational Citizenship Behavior: The Good Soldier Syndrome, Lexington, MA: Lexington
Books.
———. (1997). Organizational citizenship behavior: it’s construct clean-up time. Human Performance, 10(2),
85–97.
Organ, D.W., Podsakoff, P.M. & MacKenzie, S.B. (2006). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature,
antecedents, and consequences. London: SAGE Publications.
Pfeffer, J., & Veiga, J.F., (1999). Putting people first for organizational success. The Academy of Management
Executive, 13(2), 37–38.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Moorman, RH., & Fetter, R. (1990). Transforming leader behavior and their
effects on followers’ trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behavior. Leadership Quarterly,
1(2), 107–42.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Paine, J.B., & Bachrach, D.G., (2000). Organizational citizenship behaviors:
A critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestion for future research. Journal of
Management, 26(3), 513–63.
Purcell, J., Kinnie, N., Hutchinson, S., Rayton, B., & Swart, J. (2003). Understanding the People and Performance
Link: Unlocking the Black Box. London: CIPD.
Purcell, J., & Hutchinson, S. (2007). Front–line managers as agents in the HRM performance causal chain: Theory,
analysis and evidence. Human Resource Management Journal, 17(1), 3–20.
Sarmiento, R., Beale, J., & Knowles, G., (2007). Determinants of performance amongst shop floor employees:
A preliminary investigation. Management Research News, 30(12), 915–927.
Schuler, R.S., & Jackson, S.E. (1987). Linking competitive strategies with human resource management practices.
The Academy of Management Executive, 1(3), 207–219.
Smith, C.A., Organ, D.W., & Near, J.P. (1983). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(4), 653–63.
Snell, S.A. (1999). Social Capital and Strategic HRM: It’s who you know. Human Resource Planning, 22(1),
62–66.
Truss, C., (2001). Complexities and controversies in linking HRM with organizational outcomes. Journal of
Management Studies, 38(8), 1122–1149.
Downloaded from mls.sagepub.com at The University of Hong Kong Libraries on October 5, 2015
460 Management and Labour Studies 39(4)
Tsui, A.S., Pearce, J.L., Porter, L.W., & Tripoli, A.M. (1997). Alternative approaches to the employee–organization
relationship: Does investment in employees pay off? Academy of Management Journal, 40(5), 1089–1121.
Van Scotter, J.R. & Motowildo, S.J. (1996). Evidence for two factors of contextual performance: job dedication and
interpersonal facilitation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(5), 525–31.
Vigoda–Gadot, E. (2006). Compulsory citizenship behavior: Theorizing some dark sides of good soldier syndrome
in organizations. Journal of the Theory of Social Behavior, 36(1), 77–93.
———. (2007). Redrawing the boundaries of OCB? An empirical examination of compulsory extra-role behavior
in the workplace. Journal of Business and Psychology, 21(3), 377–405.
Whiting, S.W., Podsakoff, P.M., & Pierce, J.R. (2008). Effects of task performance, helping voice and organizational
loyalty on performance appraisal ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(1), 125–139.
Downloaded from mls.sagepub.com at The University of Hong Kong Libraries on October 5, 2015