Literature Review On Organizational Citizenship Behavior

Discussion

Give the literature review on organizational citizenship behavior?

Organizational Citizenship Behavior also called OCB has been analyzed and explored plus researched by several scholars for past twenty five years. Also it constantly is a field of interest and charm for all the scholars (Allen, 2006). OCB actually refers to voluntary carry outs and behaviors exhibited by staffs while in organization, like a good citizens of the firm. This study is an attempt to understand actual meaning, and nature as well as scope of the OCB. These paper even attempts to research and analyze various dimensions of that are included within the OCB (Deckop, Jurkiewicz and Giacalone, 2010). There is also a very detailed discussion upon five dimensions of this concept provided by the scholar named Organ in the year 1988 and paper even makes reference towards other extents of OCB provided by various other scholars with the passing time.  During the time when a staff remains in a firm, there are assured behaviors that they are anticipated to perform and carry out. These behaviors are abiding upon him by rules plus regulations of the firm. Moreover staffs at times display certain behaviors which also go beyond call of duty. This behavior is also named as Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB). OCB actually is an extra role of behavior (Jones and Jones, 2010). It is behavior over plus above normal course of task and beyond field of legislations and rules as well as regulations (Bolino et al., 2006). The idea and concept of the OCB was first proposed as well as studied in US. Because of vitality of proper citizenship for firm, understanding real nature as well as sources of the OCB has since years been considered of high priority intended for organizational researchers and also remains to be field of major interest for several scholars (Lagomarsino and Cardona, n.d.).

While defining OCB many literatures in past have actually identified two vital approaches said as role and extra role behavior. Extra role behavior is one which goes beyond particular role requirements as well as is not known by formal reward scheme. It is rightly said by the scholars named Castro, Ruiz and Armario  in the year 2004 that  it is actually not very easy to distinguish amid the “role” plus the “extra role” carry outs as managerial plus employee awareness of subordinates’ carry outs and performances do never correspond as well as subject to satisfaction of subordinates in workplace. Many researches point towards the reality that there exist five essential personality factors that affect all the variances within the human personality and such dimensions are also called Big Five dimensions that are divided like conscientiousness, sportsmanship, altruism, courtesy and the civic virtue (Ma et al., 2013). All these five dimensions also cover organizational behaviors like helping the co-labors, following firm’s rules, participating within all affairs of the firm and not complaining about people as well as adjustment. Altruism in other words refers to helping otherwise helpfulness. Podsakoff and his colleagues in the year 2000 demonstrated altruism as considerably related to act evaluations as well as correspondingly, optimistic affectivity (Kim, 2006). Conscientiousness as per them is a discretionary behavior which also goes beyond least role need level of the firm, like obeying rules as well as regulations and also not taking any additional breaks, working for some extra-hours and days. It is very interesting to know that Kidder & McLean Parks (2003) posited the truth that males actually are more probable to get engaged in the conscientious behavior as compared to women in view of fact that the males have partiality towards equity above equality (McLean Parks, Kidder and Gallagher, 1998).

Antecedents of Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB)

OCB characteristically refers to the behaviors which positively impact any firm otherwise its participants (Poncheri, 2006). It could also be said as defending firm while it is condemned or is influencing the peers towards investment in firm (Turnipseed, 2005), otherwise a behavior which exceeds the routine prospect (Tan, 2002).

OCB as per researchers get exaggerated by instilling within staffs an insight about the proficiency within their jobs (Lagomarsino and Cardona, 2003). There also is a persuasive proof that this concept of OCB is just outcome consistent along with some social exchange relations. Organizational worries emerged as all motives mostly related to the OCB moved towards firm (Dick et al. 2006). OCBs also yield vitally higher results in long run as compared to the short run for the firms (Tan, 2002). Significance of OCB could also be realized through argument of scholar named Koys which he gave in the year 2001 and suggested that OCB has vital impact upon profitability yet not on any kind of satisfaction among the customer. Also individuals that are engaged within the OCB become a type of organizational treatment on basis of reciprocity. The ‘excellent’ resulting workers also shaped strongest linkage amid the performance plus the practical participation that is a supporting-type of OCB, which is established by the scholars named Turnipseed & Rassuli in the year 2005. Employee stance also was seen to sway all the consequent organizational citizenship. Certainly, as this comes out to include the flexible behaviors, like the way in which staffs perceives the firm like proof by his/her approach toward it will also probably influence such staffs towards either well perform otherwise hold back all these performances. Results even designate that the insight of the citizenship performance forecast general performance evenly well all through the performance of the task phases. Outcomes from researches of scholar named Yorges (1999) also recommends that building an ambiance can actually have damaging penalty, chiefly concerning the OCB because to immense rivalry all around. It is even argue d by scholars that, for staff’s commitment lower in value and payment-for-performance scheme seems to be very deterrent intended for appealing within the OCB. To the degree organizations could actually supervise all of their relationships along with staffs; they also are more probable to engage within the OCB (Poncheri, 2006). There exist a belief amongst the theorists that as additional staffs get engaged within the OCB; organization tends to become extra successful. OCB plus CWB which is called Counterproductive Behavior at work actually were considerably unhelpfully correlated, that also means that any person who is high upon the OCB level would not demonstrate a behavior that puts an unfavorable effect towards the fabrication. Fascinatingly, study made by Deckop in the year 2006 demonstrates that age of the staff had a unenthusiastic and a slightly significant effect upon the OCB. Such performance like the OCB also might improve the colleagues otherwise supervisors’ output, help the synchronize actions, add to the stability of the firm’s performance, as well as will also help the firm to attract as well as retain staffs for longer period of time. Scholars also argue that behavior within several firms might vary along with alterations in the geographic framework. Also OCB is enacted dissimilarly in dissimilar cultural backgrounds – that what this actually means to become a ‘very good citizen’ might also vary from nation to nation and also from one firm to another. Staffs that really perform the citizenship behaviors might also be extra likely to draw out support from all of their firms. After all the arguments there even exist a good view regarding the OCB which is that OCB being a concept is the extra-role behavior which is not officially evaluated. 2.2 Antecedents of Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) There are many factors that can contribute towards determination of the actual OCB within the firm based on individual firm’s culture and beliefs and performances and also on the basis of the senior staffs within the firm (Yorges, Weiss and Strickland, 1999). This also includes Altruism, sportsmanship, conscientiousness and also civic virtue as well as Courtesy and many more that have direct impact upon the staffs behavior and attitude that they carry within the firm (Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Its Nature, Antecedents, and Consequences, 2006). Factors that are till date and are yet being researched to bring a significant relation along with the Organizational Behavior are basically three elements and they are Altruism, Civic culture and also the Conscientiousness (Ueda and Ohzono, 2013).

Conclusion:

From proper survey of about 500 public segment labors, Smith & Brown in the year 2002 found that the majority of them undertook a minimum of one properly-recognized type of OCB. 
Also it was found that OCB is a field of interest for all the researchers intended for more 25 years. Several scholars have actually discussed and there has been a lot of talking about the topic and many dimensions of the OCB also have been found out. Additionally to such dissimilar dimensions of the OCB, there also are different motives intended for carrying out the OCB. Also there has been major research upon individual as well as organizational OCB as well. Several levels have also till date been developed to measure several dimensions of the concept. This paper has touched upon five dimensions and thus has attempted to make a transitory reference to all dimensions that are discussed by several scholars. It is yet felt that there still is a plenty room intended for research within this field yet lack of sources poses a very serious limitation towards the issue. Lastly, it is even advised to future scholars to include backgrounds like the Tenure, Salary as well as Job Satisfaction and also the Organizational Commitment plus many more. In a nutshell here are the facts related to OCB.

References

Allen, T. (2006). Rewarding Good Citizens: The Relationship Between Citizenship Behavior, Gender, and Organizational Rewards1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36(1), pp.120-143.

Bolino, M., Varela, J., Bande, B. and Turnley, W. (2006). The impact of impression-management tactics on supervisor ratings of organizational citizenship behavior. J. Organiz. Behav., 27(3), pp.281-297.

Deckop, J. (2006). The Effects of CEO Pay Structure on Corporate Social Performance. Journal of Management, 32(3), pp.329-342.

Deckop, J., Jurkiewicz, C. and Giacalone, R. (2010). Effects of materialism on work-related personal well-being. Human Relations, 63(7), pp.1007-1030.

Jones, and Jones, (2010). finance sector workers.

Kim, S. (2006). Public service motivation and organizational citizenship behavior in Korea. Int J of Manpower, 27(8), pp.722-740.

Lagomarsino, R. and Cardona, P. (n.d.). Relationships Among Leadership, Organizational Commitment, and OCB in Uruguayan Health Institutions. SSRN Journal.

Ma, E., Qu, H., Wilson, M. and Eastman, K. (2013). Modeling OCB for Hotels: Don’t Forget the Customers. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 54(3), pp.308-317.

McLean Parks, J., Kidder, D. and Gallagher, D. (1998). Fitting square pegs into round holes: mapping the domain of contingent work arrangements onto the psychological contract. J. Organiz. Behav., 19(S1), pp.697-730.

Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Its Nature, Antecedents, and Consequences. (2006). Personnel Psychology, 59(2), pp.484-487.

Poncheri, (2006). Organizational Citizenship Behavior. 4th ed.

Ralph, (2002). non-profit volunteers.

Smith, and Brown, (2002). local government employees.

Tan, K. (2002). Paediatric Respiratory Examination: C O’Callaghan, W Stannard. Leicester, UK: OCB Media, 2001, pound49.95 (students pound25.00). ISBN 190403906. Thorax, 57(2), pp.188-188.

Turnipseed, D. (2005). Handbook of organizational citizenship behavior. New York: Nova Science Publishers.

Ueda, Y. and Ohzono, Y. (2013). Effects of Workers’ Careers and Family Situations on OCB-Related Work Values. IJBM, 8(10).

Yorges, S., Weiss, H. and Strickland, O. (1999). The effect of leader outcomes on influence, attributions, and perceptions of charisma. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(3), pp.428-436.