Citizenship behaviors in the workplace: the relationships between psychological capital and Leader-Member Exchange. The mediating role of organizational justice and job satisfaction

• Authors: Turek, D.

Title variants

PL

Zachowania obywatelskie w miejscu pracy: związki pomiędzy kapitałem psychologicznym, LMX, sprawiedliwością organizacyjną i satysfakcją z pracy jako mediatorem

• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

The purpose of this article is to describe and explain how the positive qualities characterizing employees, e.g. optimism, hope, resilience, self-efficacy (defined as Psychological Capital) and relations, referred to as Leader-Member Exchange (LMX), enable to forecast the readiness of employees to engage in behaviors exceeding the frames of formal work duties. The reference literature indicate that dispositions of an individual, similarly to relations with supervisors, may provide a good factor for forecasting work behaviors, however, only if the attitudes of employees are intermediate variables. Consequently, a hypothetical model of linear dependencies was established, where Organizational Justice and Job Satisfaction were mediators of relations between independent variables and a dependent variable. The model was then subject to empirical verification. The conducted analyses (based on 226 surveys) show significantly small correlations between Psychological Capital and LMX and an OCB. Nevertheless, these variables explain well the readiness to engage in behaviours exceeding the frames of work duties, if Organizational Justice and Job Satisfaction are applied as complementary mediators. At the same time, it was indicated that the variable, which directly explains employee citizenship behaviors is job satisfaction.

PL

Celem artykułu jest ukazanie i wyjaśnienie, w jaki sposób pozytywne cechy pracowników (kapitał psychologiczny), tj. optymizm, nadzieja, odporność i poczucie samoskuteczności, a także relacje wymiany pracownik-przełożony wyzwalają gotowość jednostek do podejmowania aktywności wykraczającej poza formalnie zdefiniowaną rolę zawodową. Przesłanki teoretyczne wskazują, że dyspozycje jednostek, podobnie jak relacje pracowników z przełożonymi mogą stanowić dobry predyktor zachowań jedynie w sytuacjach, gdy jako zmienne pośredniczące (mediatory) ujmuje się postawy jednostek. Na podstawie analizy dotychczasowego dorobku badawczego skonstruowano model teoretyczny, zawierający bezpośrednie i pośrednie (mediująca rola sprawiedliwości organizacyjnej i satysfakcji z pracy) związki przyczynowe, który następnie poddano empirycznej weryfikacji. Na postawie badań na populacji 226 osób wykazano, że kapitał psychologiczny i LMX w sposób umiarkowany korelują z zachowaniami obywatelskimi (OCB). Okazuje się jednak, że zmienne te wyjaśniają OCB w sposób pośredni, poprzez mediację sprawiedliwości organizacyjnej i satysfakcji z pracy. Wykazano jednocześnie, że zmienną bezpośrednio tłumacząco zachowania obywatelskie jest satysfakcja z pracy.

Keywords

EN

Organizational Citizenship Behaviors; psychological capital; job satisfaction; organizational justice; Leader-Member Exchange; structural equation modeling; SEM

PL

organizacyjne zachowania obywatelskie; kapitał psychologiczny; satysfakcja z pracy; sprawiedliwość organizacyjna; relacje wymiany pracownik-przełożony; LMX; modelowanie równań strukturalnych

• Journal: Organizacja i Zarządzanie : kwartalnik naukowy
• Year: 2014
• Volume: nr 4
• Pages: 159--185
• Physical description: Bibliogr. 77 poz.

Contributors

author

Turek, D.

• Warsaw School of Economics. Institute of Enterprise

References

• 1. Avey J.B., Luthans F., Jensen S.M.: Psychological capital: A positive resources for combating employee stress and turnover. “Human Resource Management”, No. 48(5), 2009, p. 677-693.
• 2. Avey J.B., Nimnicht J.L., Pigeon N.G.: Two field studies examining the association between positive psychological capital and employee performance. “Leadership & Organization Development Journal”, No. 31(5), 2010, p. 384-401.
• 3. Baron R.M., Kenny D.A.: The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. “Journal of Personality and Social Psychology”, No. 51, 1986, p. 1173-1182.
• 4. Bhal K.T.: LMX-citizenship behavior relationship: Justice as a mediator. “Leadership & Organization Development Journal”, No. 27(2), 2006, p. 106-117.
• 5. Bolino M.C., Turnley W.H., Gilstrap J.B., Suazo M.M.: Citizenship under pressure: what‟s a “good soldier” to do? “Journal of Organizational Behavior”, No. 31, 2010, p. 835-855.
• 6. Bolino M.C., Harvey J., Bachrach D.G.: A self-regulation approach to understanding citizenship behavior in organizations. “Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes”, No. 119, 2012, p. 126-139.
• 7. Bolino M.C., Klotz A.C., Turnley W.H., Harvey J.: Exploring the dark side of organizational citizenship behaviour. “Journal of Organizational Behavior”, No. 34, 2013, p. 542-559.
• 8. Brief A.P., Motowidlo S.J.: Pro-social organizational behaviour. “Academy Management Review”, No. 11, 1986, p. 710-725.
• 9. Britt T.W., McKibben E.S., Greene-Shortridge T.M., Odle-Dusseau H.N., Herleman H.A.: Self-engagement moderates the mediated relationship between organizational constraints and organizational citizenship behaviors via rated leadership. “Journal of Applied Social Psychology”, No. 42(8), 2012, p. 1830-1846.
• 10. Burmann Ch., Zeplin S., Riley N.: Key determinants of internal brand management success: an exploratory empirical analysis brand management. “Brand Management”, No. 16(4), 2009, p. 264-284.
• 11. Chen Ch.V., Kao R.H.: A multilevel study on the relationships between work characteristics, self-efficacy, collective efficacy, and organizational citizenship behavior: The case of Taiwanese police duty-executing organizations. “Journal of Psychology”, No. 145(4), 2011, p. 361-390.
• 12. Chen Ch.V., Tang Y.Y., Wang S.J.: Interdependence and organizational citizenship behavior: exploring the mediating effect of group cohesion in multilevel analysis. “Journal of Psychology”, No. 143(6), 2009, p. 625-640.
• 13. Cohen-Charash Y., Spector P.E.: The role of justice in organizations: a meta-analysis. “Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes”, No. 86, 2001, p. 278-321.
• 14. Colquitt J.A., Conlon D.E., Wesson M.J., Porter C.O.L.H., Ng K.Y.: Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. “Journal of Applied Psychology”, No. 86, 2001, p. 425-445.
• 15. Colquitt J.A., Shaw J.C.: How should organizational justice be measured, [in:] Greenberg J., Colquitt J.A. (eds.): Handbook of organizational justice. Lawrence Erlbaum, New Jersey 2005, p. 113-152.
• 16. Colquitt J.A.: Two decades of organizational justice: findings, controversies and future directions, [in:] Barling J., Cooper C.L. (eds.): Organizational behavior. Micro approaches. Sage, Newbury Park, CA 2008, p. 73-88.
• 17. Coyne I., Ong T.: Organizational citizenship behaviour and turnover intention: a cross-cultural study. “International Journal of Human Resource Management”, No. 18(6), 2007, p. 1085-1097.
• 18. Cropanzano R., Wright T.A.: When a „happy‟ worker is really a „productive‟ worker: A review and further refinement of the happy-productive worker thesis. “Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research”, No. 53, 2006, p. 182-199.
• 19. Erdogan B., Liden R.C., Kraimer M.L.: Justice and leader-member exchange: The moderating role of organizational culture. “Academy of Management Journal”, No. 49, 2006, p. 395-406.
• 20. Fassina N.E., Jones D.A., Uggerslev K.L.: Meta-analytic tests of relationships between organizational justice and citizenship behavior: Testing agent-system and shared-variance models. “Journal of Organizational Behavior”, No. 29, 2008, p. 805-828.
• 21. Fernandes C., Awamleh R.: Impact of organizational justice in an expatriate work environment. “Management Research News”, No. 29(11), 2006, p. 701-712.
• 22. Fisk G.M., Friesen J.P.: Perceptions of leader emotion regulation and LMX as predictors of followers' job satisfaction and organizational citizenship behaviors. “Leadership Quarterly”, No. 23, 2012, p. 1-12.
• 23. Gerstner C.R., Day D.V.: Meta-analytic review of leader-member exchange theory: Correlates and construct issues. “Journal of Applied Psychology”, No. 82, 2007, p. 827-844.
• 24. Glomb T.M., Bhave D.P., Miner A.G., Wall M.: Doing good, feeling good: Examining the role of organizational citizenship behaviors in changing mood. “Personnel Psychology”, No. 64(1), 2011, p. 191-224.
• 25. Gore J.S., Kiefner A.E., Combs K.M.: Personality traits that predict academic citizenship behaviour. “Journal of Applied Social Psychology”, No. 42(10), 2012, p. 2433-2456.
• 26. Grant A.M., Mayer D.M.: Good soldiers and good actors: pro-social and impression management motives as interactive predictors of affiliative citizenship behaviors. “Journal of Applied Psychology”, No. 94, 2009, p. 900-912.
• 27. Greguras G.J., Diefendorff J.M.: Why does proactive personality predict employee life satisfaction and work behaviors? A field investigation of the mediating role of the self-concordance model. “Personnel Psychology”, No. 63, 2010, p. 539-560.
• 28. Hamel G., Prahalad C.K.: Strategic intent. “Harvard Business Review”, May-June 1989, p. 63-76.
• 29. Hsiung H., Lin C.W., Lin C.S.: Nourishing or suppressing? The contradictory influences of perception of organizational politics on organizational citizenship behaviour. “Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology”, No. 85, 2012, p. 258-276.
• 30. Ilgen D.R., Hollenbeck J.R., Johnson M., Jundt D.: Teams in organizations: From input-process-output models to IMOI models. “Annual Review of Psychology”, No. 56, 2005, p. 517-543.
• 31. Ilies R., Scott B.A., Judge T.A.: The interactive effects of personal traits and experienced states on intra-individual patterns of citizenship behavior. “Academy of Management Journal”, No. 49(3), 2006, p. 561-575.
• 32. James L.R., Mulaik S.A., Brett J.M.: A tale of two methods. “Organizational Research Methods”, No. 9, 2006, p. 233-244.
• 33. Kidder D.L.: The influence of gender on the performance of organizational citizenship behaviors. “Journal of Management”, No. 28, 2002, p. 629-648.
• 34. Larson M., Luthans F.: Potential added value of psychological capital in predicting work attitudes. “Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies”, No. 13(2), 2006, p. 75-92.
• 35. Liden R.C., Maslyn J.M.: Multidimensionality of leader-member exchange: an empirical assessment through scale development. “Journal of Management”, No. 24(1), 1998, p. 43-72.
• 36. Luthans F., Avolio B.J., Avey J.B., Norman S.M.: Positive psychological capital: Measurement and relationship with performance and satisfaction. “Personnel Psychology”, No. 60, 2007, p. 541-572.
• 37. Luthans F., Youssef C.M., Avolio B.J.: Psychological capital: Developing the human competitive edge. Oxford University Press, Oxford 2007.
• 38. Luthans F., Norman S.M., Avolio B.J., Avey J.B.: The mediating role of psychological capital in the supportive organizational climate – employee performance relationship. “Journal of Organizational Behavior”, No. 29(2), 2008, p. 219-238.
• 39. Luthans F., Avolio B.J.: The „point‟ of positive organizational behavior. “Journal of Organizational Behavior”, No. 30(2), 2009, p. 291-307.
• 40. Lv A., Shen X., Cao Y., Su Y., Chen X.: Conscientiousness and organizational citizenship behavior: The mediating role of organizational justice. “Social Behavior and Personality”, No. 40(8), 2012, p. 1293-1300.
• 41. Mayfield C.O., Taber T.D.: A prosocial self-concept approach to understanding organizational citizenship behaviour. “Journal of Managerial Psychology”, No. 25(7), 2010, p. 741-776.
• 42. Moon H., Van Dyne L., Wrobel K.: The circumplex model and the future of OCB research, [in:] Turnipseed D.L. (ed.): Handbook of organizational citizenship behavior: A review of a good solider activity in organizations. Nova Science Publishers, New York 2005, p. 1-22.
• 43. Moorman R.H., Byrne Z.S.: How does organizational justice affect organizational citizenship behavior? [in:] Greenberg J., Colquitt J.A. (eds.): Handbook of organizational justice. Lawrence Erlbaum, New Jersey 2005, p. 355-380.
• 44. Morrison E.W.: Role definitions and organizational citizenship behavior: The importance of the employee‟s perspective. “Academy of Management Journal”, No. 37, 1994, p. 1543-1567.
• 45. Motowidlo S.J., Van Scotter J.R.: Evidence that task-performance should be distinguished from contextual performance. “Journal of Applied Psychology”, No. 79(4), 1994, p. 475-480.
• 46. Niehoff B.P., Moorman R.H.: Justice as a mediator of the relationship between methods of monitoring and organizational citizenship behavior. “Academy of Management Journal”, No. 36(3), 1993, p. 527-556.
• 47. O‟Brien K.E., Allen T.D.: The relative importance of correlates of organizational citizenship behavior and counterproductive work behavior using multiple sources of data. “Human Performance”, No. 21, 2008, p. 62-88.
• 48. Organ D.W., Ryan K.: A meta-analytic review of attitudinal and dispositional predictors of organizational citizenship behaviour. “Personnel Psychology”, No. 48(4), 1995, p. 775-802.
• 49. Organ D.W., Podsakoff P.M., MacKenzie S.B.: Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature, antecedents, and consequences. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA 2006.
• 50. Penhaligon N.L., Louis W.R., Lloyd S., Restubog D.: Feeling left out? The mediating role of perceived rejection on workgroup mistreatment and affective, behavioral, and organizational outcomes and the moderating role of organizational norms. “Journal of Applied Social Psychology”, No. 43, 2013, p. 480-497.
• 51. Podsakoff N.P., Whiting S.W., Podsakoff P.M., Blume B.D.: Individual- and organizational-level consequences of organizational citizenship behaviors: A meta-analysis. “Journal of Applied Psychology”, No. 94, 2009, p. 122-141.
• 52. Podsakoff N.P., Whiting S.W., Welsh D.W., Mai M.: Surveying for “artifacts”: The susceptibility of the OCB-performance evaluation relationship to common rater, item, and measurement context effects. “Journal of Applied Psychology”, No. 98, 2013, p. 863-874.
• 53. Podsakoff N.P., Podsakoff P.M., MacKenzie S.B., Maynes T.D., Spoelma T.M.: Consequences of unit-level organizational citizenship behaviors: A review and recommendations for future research. “Journal of Organizational Behavior”, No. 35, 2014, p. 87-119.
• 54. Podsakoff P.M., MacKenzie S.B., Lee J-Y., Podsakoff N.P.: Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. “Journal of Applied Psychology”, No. 88(5), 2003, p. 879-903.
• 55. Purcell J., Kinnie K., Hutchinson S. Rayton B., Stewart J.: People and performance: How people management impacts on organizational performance. CIPD, London 2003.
• 56. Richard F.D., Bond C.F. Jr., Stokes-Zoota J.J.: One hundred years of social psychology quantitatively described. “Review of General Psychology”, No. 7, 2003, p. 331-363.
• 57. Robbins S.P., Judge T.A.: Organizational behavior. Prentice Hall, New Jersey 2009.
• 58. Scandura T.A.: Rethinking leader-member exchange: An organizational justice perspective. “Leadership Quarterly”, No. 10, 1999, p. 25-40.
• 59. Shi J., Lin H., Wang L.: Linking the big five personality constructs to organizational justice. “Social Behavior and Personality”, No. 37(2), 2009, p. 209-222.
• 60. Shin C.T., Chuang C.H.: Individual differences, psychological contract breach, and organizational citizenship behavior: A moderated mediation study. “Asia Pacific Journal of Management”, No. 30, 2013, p. 191-210.
• 61. Snape E., Redman T.: HRM practices, organizational citizenship behaviour, and performance: a multi-level analysis. “Journal of Management Studies”, No. 47(7), 2010, p. 1219-1247.
• 62. Snell R.S., Wong Y.L.: Differentiating good soldiers from good actors. “Journal of Management Studies”, No. 44, 2007, p. 883-909.
• 63. Spector P.E.: Method variance in organizational research: Truth or urban legend? “Organizational Research Methods”, No. 9(2), 2006, p. 221-232.
• 64. Sun L.Y., Siu Chow I.H., Chiu R.K., Pan W.: Outcome favorability in the link between leader–member exchange and organizational citizenship behavior: Procedural fairness climate matters. “Leadership Quarterly”, No. 24, 2013, p. 215-226.
• 65. Swaminathan S., Jawahar P.D.: Job satisfaction as a predictor of organizational citizenship behavior: An empirical study. “Global Journal of Business Research”, No. 7(1), 2013, p. 71-80.
• 66. Teh P.L., Yong C.C.: Knowledge sharing in IS personnel: Organizational behavior‟s perspective. “Journal of Computer Information Systems”, Summer, 2011, p. 11-21.
• 67. Tekleab A.G., Takeuchi R., Taylor M.S.: Extending the chain of relationships among organizational justice, social exchange, and employee reactions: The role of contract violations. “Academy of Management Journal”, No. 48, 2005, p. 146-157.
• 68. Van Dyne L., Cummings L.L., McLan-Parks J.M.: Extra-role bahaviors: in pursuit of construct and definitional clarity, [in:] Cummings L.L., Staw B.M. (eds.): Research in organizational behavior, Vol. 17. JAI Press. Greenwich, CT 1995, p. 215-285.
• 69. Van Dyne L., Ellis J.B.: Job creep: a reactance theory perspective on organizational citizenship behavior as over-fulfilment of obligations, [in:] Coyle-Shapiro J.A.M., Shore L.M., Taylor M.S., Tetrick L.E. (eds.): The employment relationship: examining psychological and contextual perspectives. Oxford University Press, Oxford 2004, p. 181-205.
• 70. Vigoda-Gadot E.: Compulsory citizenship behavior: theorizing some dark sides of the good soldier syndrome in organizations. “Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour”, No. 36, 2006, p. 77-93.
• 71. Volmer J., Niessen C., Spurk D., Linz A., Abele A.E.: Reciprocal relationships between leader–member exchange (LMX) and job satisfaction: A cross-lagged analysis. “Applied Psychology: An International Review”, No. 60(4), 2011, p. 522-545.
• 72. Wang H., Law K.S., Hackett R.D., Wang D., Chen Z.X.: Leader-member exchange as a mediator of the relationship between transformational leadership and followers‟ performance and organizational citizenship. “Academy of Management Journal”, No. 48(3), 2005, p. 420-432.
• 73. Wayne S.J., Shore L.M., Liden R.C.: Perceived organizational support and leader-member exchange: A social exchange perspective. “Academy of Management Journal”, No. 40, 1997, p. 82-111.
• 74. Xerri M.J., Brunetto Y.: Fostering innovative behaviour: the importance of employee commitment and organisational citizenship behaviour. “International Journal of Human Resource Management”, No. 24(16), 2013, p. 3163-3177.
• 75. Xu E., Huang X., Lam C.K., Miao Q.: Abusive supervision and work behaviors: The mediating role of LMX. “Journal of Organizational Behavior”, No. 33, 2012, p. 531-543.
• 76. Yun S., Takeuchi R., Liu W.: Employee self-enhancement motives and job performance behaviors: investigating the moderating effects of employee role ambiguity and managerial perceptions of employee commitment. ”Journal of Applied Psychology”, No. 92, 2007, p. 745-756.
• 77. Zhong J.A., Lam W., Chen Z.: Relationship between leader–member exchange and organizational citizenship behaviors: Examining the moderating role of empowerment. “Asia Pacific Journal of Management”, No. 28, 2011, p. 609-626.

Notes

Rekord pochodzi z bazy danych BazTech.