Basic Concepts

AIM: To analyse and compare the organizational culture of some colleges of Delhi University and to
study its relationship with organizational citizenship behaviour.

Organizational culture

Organizational culture as a construct is a relatively recent addition to contemporary organizational

behaviour literature. The term first appeared in the 1960s as a synonym of ‘climate’ (Lewin, Lippitt
and White, 1939). The term organizational culture entered the U.S. academic literature with an article
in Administrative Science Quarterly by Pettigrew in 1979. Although, a few decades have passed since
the term was first used in the context of organizational studies, it is difficult to define culture and quite
hard to specify or delineate it.

Organizational culture may be reflected in how the things are done (Flanagan, 1995) and how the
problems are solved in an organization. It may be defined as the ethos of a company or the shared
values and team spirit. There are very few areas of general consensus about the organizational culture,
these include the following (Ott, 1989):
 Organizational culture is the culture that exists in an organization.
 Each organization is relatively unique.
 Organizational culture is a socially constructed concept.
 Organizational culture provides organizational members with a way of understanding and making
sense of events and symbols
 Organizational culture is a powerful level for guiding organizational behaviour. It functions as
“organizational control mechanism, informally approving or prohibiting some patterns of
behaviour.” (Martin and Siehl, 1983)

However, in general, Organizational culture is defined as s set of basic assumptions that a given
group has invented, discovered, or developed in learning to cope with its problems of external
adaptation and internal integration that have worked well enough to be considered valid and therefore,
to be taught to new members as a correct way to perceive, think and feel in relations to the problems.

Jaques(1952) defined organizational culture as “the customary and traditional way of doing things,
which is shared to greater or lesser degree by all the members, and which the new members must learn
and at least partially accept in order to be accepted into the services of the firm.”
 In most of the definitions of organizational culture assume that it is a ‘cue’ for values, beliefs, customs
or any other string of convenient identifiers chosen from cultural anthropology (Allaire & Firsirotu,
1984).

Edgar Schein (1992), who is recognized as the foremost scholar in the study or organisation culture
defined it as “a pattern of basic assumptions- invented, discovered or developed by a given group as it
learns to cope with its problems of external adaption and integration that has worked well enough to be
considered valuable, and, therefore, to be taught to new members as the correct way to perceive, think
and feel in relation to these problem.”

According to Hofstede (1980), who is amongst the first authors to research differences in cultural
values and shifted the unit of analysis from the individual to the society. He defined organization
culture as “the collective programming of mind which distinguishes the members of one organization
from another.” (Hofstede, 1980).

Chatman & Jehn (1994) identified seven elements or organizational culture which may be used to
describe organization. Such elements are as follows:

1. Innovation: the extent to which people are expected to be creative and generate new ideas.
2. Stability: valuing a stable, predictable rule-oriented environment.
3. Orientation towards people: being fair, supportive, and sharing respect for individuals’ rights.
4. Result orientation: the strength of its concern for achieving desired results
5. Easygoingness: the extent to which the work atmosphere is relaxed and laid back.
6. Attention to detail: concern for being analytical and precise.
7. Collaborative orientation: emphasis on working in teams, as opposed to individually.

Functions of Organizational culture

A culture in organization plays a crucial role and acts as an intangible force which has far reaching
consequences. Few of the functions of organisation culture are as follows:
 Fosters a sense of identity to its member: A sense of identity is provided to a member through the
organizational culture. Defining the values & beliefs valued by the organization enhances the
people strongly and make them feel that they a part of mission.
 Generation of commitment among employees: The presence of the strong overarching culture,
makes the people feel that they are a part of something larger, well-defined whole & involved in the
 entire organizations. It does not focus on one’s individual interest but reminder of what the
organization is all about.
 Culture serves to clarify and reinforce standards of behaviour: The organizational culture
provides a sense of stability to behaviour, in the respects of what an individual do at different times
and what individuals may do at the same time. This makes it clear that culture is an important factor
influencing behaviours in the organizations.

Schein (1985, 1990, 1992) suggested that the primary function of an organization’s culture is to
enhance the organization’s responsiveness to the problems of external adaptation (which help the
group to survive in and adapt the external environment) and internal organization (which help an
organization to integrate its internal processes in order to survive and adapt). Organizational culture
affects organizational effectiveness and individual satisfaction in the following ways:
- Determining and limiting strategy.
- Determine failure of mergers, acquisitions, and diversifications due to cultural mismatch.
- Determine failure to integrate new technologies due to the problem of meshing several
occupational subcultures and/or changing the dominant organizational culture.
- May result in Intergroup conflicts with organization.
- May lead to ineffective meetings and communication breakdowns in face-to-face relationships.
- May cause socialisation failures when the new member does not learn the culture of host group,
resulting in feelings of alienation, discomfort, and possibly unproductivity.

Further, Siehl & Martin (1984) provided the following four functions of organizational culture:
1. It provides shared patterns of cognitive interpretations or perceptions
2. It provides shared patterns of affect, an emotional sense of involvement and commitment to
organizational values and moral codes;
3. It provides and maintains boundaries, allowing identification of members and non-members, and
4. It functions as an organizational control system, prescribing and prohibiting certain behaviours.

Models of Organization Culture

Given the lack of consensus over the definition of the construct itself, it is no surprise that several
frameworks have emerged , each of them putting forth their own idea of culture in an organizational
context. Some of such frameworks are:
1. Schein’s framework
Schein (1992) defines organizational culture as “a pattern of basic assumptions- invented, discovered
or developed by a given group as it learns to cope with its problems of external adaption and
integration that has worked well enough to be considered valuable, and, therefore, to be taught to new
members as the correct way to perceive, think and feel in relation to these problems.”

Schein (1990) conceptualised the organisational culture as the ‘layered’ phenomenon which has three
interrelated levels of meanings:

1. Basic Assumptions: These lie at the inner most core of the value. In Schein’s view they are
the fundamental beliefs that are so taken for granted that most people in a cultural unit subscribe to
them but not in a conscious way. It is not difficult to identify the basic assumptions in the cultures of
different organisations. For instance, they are quite different in the major political parties in the Great
Britain. The Labour Party has an assumption that society is or should be a collective body, in which
individuals should display a high degree of social responsibility towards each other. Conversely,
Conservatives believe that individual is paramount and their responsibility is their own welfare.

2. Values and Beliefs: These lie at the next level of visibility. The consist of reasons for
justifications for people behaving as they do. Values are consciously held, as compared to basic
assumptions. They flow directly from the underlying assumptions and are moral or ethical codes that
guide behaviour in putting the assumptions into practices. There are parallel ways in which the
values serve as guidelines for the actions in organizations, such as whether the customer’s interests
should come first, and whether conflict should be suppressed or is best brought out into the open
where it can be handled and resolved.

3. Artefacts & Creations: These are the most visible manifestations of a culture. They include
any and everything from the physical layout of the building to the way people dress, the way they
talk to each other and the things that are being talked about. Some of these features are very subtle
and it can be dangerous to view them in isolation.
 Norms- These are the code of behaviour brought into being by the underlying assumptions
and values, they are perpetuated when people observe the norms. If people only reach high
positions by working a 60-hour week, this sets up an expectation that these hours are criterion for
promotion, which permeated downwards and becomes accepted as the normal behaviour for
ambitious people.
  Language- The language which is used by the people can be valuable indication of culture.
How the managers talk to subordinates and vice versa can reveal much about the status values at
work, and jargon and ‘lingo’ or ‘buzzwords’ are often used to signal who is accepted and who is
not.
 Symbols- The status symbols communicate social position and pecking order in the
hierarchy, and their grandness gives a good indication about how much importance is attached to
hierarchy as an organizing people. These symbols can express other things, like the people sitting
next to the boss usually have higher designations than the rest of the employees.

 Rites & Ceremonies- The formal & informal ceremonies abound in organization and these
often have important meanings for those involved. Retirement or farewell parties can be used to
signal the idea of a happy family or a caring organization. The ritual of taking a newcomer around
and introducing the person to new colleagues is often a way of speeding up the integration
process. Eg. A boss arriving five minutes late for a meeting can be used to signal that he or she is
not prepared to waste valuable time by being there before everyone else.
 Myths & Stories- These are often a way of communicating core values and assumptions to
people. Anecdotes are useful for this purpose because they often have an element of drama and
are interesting to hear (Martin & Siehl, 1983). Myths are stories which are partly fictional and
are of questionable accuracy (Ott, 1983). They tend to convey the central message in a more
dramatic form and increases its salience, particularly were the focal character in the story is a
legendary past figure in the organization.
 Taboos- These signal what should not be done, because the myths and stories are often used
to convey prescribed behaviour does not necessarily mean they are never talked about. Eg. The
story about the junior employee who addressed a director by his first time, which can be used to
provide a humorous illustration for a newcomer that respect for someone higher up is a
fundamental part of the culture. It is convenient to describe signs separately, it is important to
recognise that they complement each other and are often used in combination as reminders of
what the culture is and what is expected (Harrison et al, 1984).

2. Deal & Kennedy’s approach

According to Deal & Kennedy (1982) “In culture, there is strength “. Such a conceptualisation
considers culture as a powerful lever for guiding behaviour and helps employees do their jobs better
and can be considered to be the driving force behind success in business. Corporate culture according
to them is composed of the following elements:
1. Business environment: the environment in which a company operates determines what it must do
to become a success, and is the single greatest influence in shaping a corporate firm.

2. Values: These are the basic concepts and beliefs of the organisation often forming the ‘heart of an
organization’. They represent a company’s philosophy for achieving success and provide a sense
of common direction for all employees and guidelines for their day to day behaviour.

3. Heroes: Heroes personify the organizational values by providing tangible role models foe
employees to follow. They are pivotal figures in a strong culture and represent the strength of an
organization.
4. Rites and Rituals: These are the systematic and programmed routines of the day to day life in the
company. Rituals show employees the kind of behaviour that is expected of them , while
ceremonies provide visible and potent examples of what the company stands for.
5. The Cultural Network: The cultural network is similar to an informal communications network,
which is sometimes known as ‘the grapevine’. It is often considered the primary means of
communication within an organization. They emphasise its importance and acknowledge that it is
an organization’s quickest and most effective communication system which, if used properly, can
be valuable in passing on information and reinforcing corporate values. An effective manager will
learn to use it constructively and pay particular attention to people who play important roles in the
network, for example those who are story-tellers who relate the organization’s myths and
remember its heroes.

Drawing on Deal and Kennedy’s work, Hofstede et al. (1990) concluded that cultural differences may
manifest themselves in four ways: symbols, heroes, rituals and values. The manifestations of various
levels of culture are indicated in the diagram:

Rituals
Symbols
Values Practices

Heroes
 The above diagram illustrates the successive levels of an onion, indicating that
symbols represent the most superficial and values the deepest manifestation of culture.
Symbols, heroes and rituals come under ‘practices’, because they are visible to an
observer although their cultural meaning lies in the way they are perceived by the
insiders.

3. Peters and Waterman 7S Framework

McKinsey 7-S framework developed Tom Peters and Robert Waterman in the early 1980s is
based on the basic premise that there are seven internal aspects of an organization that need to
be aligned if it is to be successful. Developed by two consultants working at the McKinsey &
Company consulting firm, the 7-S model can be used in a wide variety of situations where an
alignment perspective is useful, for example, to improve the performance of a company, to
examine the likely effects of future changes within a company. The elements of the model are
as follows:

Hard Elements
1. Strategy: Purpose of the business and the way the organization seeks to enhance its
competitive advantage. It is the plan devised to maintain and build competitive advantage
over the competition.

2. Structure: Division of activities; integration and coordination mechanisms. It is the

way the organization is structured and who reports to whom.

3. Systems: Formal procedures for measurement, reward and resource allocation. They

are the the daily activities and procedures that staff members engage in to get the job
done.

Soft Elements

4. Shared Values: They are the norms and standards that guide employee behavior and
company actions and thus, are the foundation of every organization. They are called
"superordinate goals" when the model was first developed, these are the core values of
the company that are evidenced in the corporate culture and the general work ethic.
They are at the core of McKinsey 7s model.
 5. Style: Typical behaviour patterns of company’s leaders. It refers to the style of
leadership adopted.

6. Staff: Organization's human resources, demographic, educational and attitudinal

characteristics. How the staff is recruited, trained, motivated and rewarded. They are
the employees and their general capabilities.
7. Skills: The organization's core competencies and distinctive capabilities. They are the
actual skills and competencies of the employees working for the company.

The model can be summarised through the following diagram:

4. The Ouchi approach

Ouchi (1981), in the late 1970s analysed the cultures of a number of firms which were
categorised into three groups: American firms, typical Japanese firms, type Z American
firms. He compared the seven different dimensions to compare the groups, arguing that
American and Japanese firms have very distinct & different cultural levels, while type
Z American firms are somewhere in the middle.
The seven different dimensions given by him are as follows:
1. Commitment to employees: According to Ouchi, typical Japanese and type Z US
firms share the cultural value where they try to retain employees. Both types of
firms lay off employees only as their last resort. In Japan, the value of ‘keeping
employees on’ is often related to the employment for the lifetime. This cultural
value manifests commitment through ‘long-term employment’.
2. Evaluation: It was observed that in the Japanese and type z companies, an
appropriate evaluation of workers and managers is thought to take very long time,
and requires the use of qualitative as well as quantitative information. This is the
reason why the promotion of such firms is time consuming and takes place very
slowly. The employees are promoted only when the decisions are made after the
interviews with many people who have had contacts with the person being
evaluated.
3. Careers: The careers in the Japanese and type Z firms value careers that are not
specialised but span several avenues and foundations, which leads to a very broad
career path. In the Japanese companies, it is much more prominent, where a long-
serving employee sometimes has experienced of up to seven distinct business
functions. In the American companies, however, the career paths are very narrow
and most managers perform only one or two different business functions in their
entire working lives.
4. Control: All the organizations must exert some level of control to achieve
coordinated value. Most Japanese and type Z firms assume that control is
exercised through implicit, informal mechanisms. One of the most powerful
mechanisms is the organizational culture. In contrast, the typical US firms expect
guidance to come through explicit directions in the form of job descriptions,
delineation of authority, and various rules and procedures rather than informal and
implicit cultural values.
5. Decision making: There is a strong cultural expectation in the Japanese and type
Z firms, which are based on that decision making will take place in groups and
will be based on the principles of full information sharing and consensus.
Whereas, in the American companies individual decision making is desired and is
considered appropriate. The managers who are responsible for making decisions
are not expected to share them with their subordinates.
6. Responsibility: The parallels between the Japanese companies and type Z US
firms breakdown. In Japan, strong cultural norms supportive responsibilities show
that the group is a single whole unit rather than a single person being held
responsible for the decisions made by the group. However, in type Z US firms and
typical US firms, the individuals are expected to take responsibility for decisions.
7. Concern for people: In the Japanese and type Z organizations, the cultural values
which dominates is a holistic concern for the workers and managers. The holistic
 cultures extend beyond the concern for the employee simply as a worker and
concerns about one’s personal home life, hobbies, personal beliefs, hopes, fears,
and aspirations. In typical US firms, the concern for people is a narrow one that
focuses on the workplace. A culture that emphasizes a strong concern for people,
rather than the one that describes a work task orientation can decrease worker
turnover. (Powell and Mainiero, 1993)

5. OCTAPACE
According to Udai Pareek (2002), there are eight values that govern the culture of the
organization. The acronym of these values OCTAPACE, indicates eight (octa) and
steps (pace) needed to create a functional ethos. These eight values are together
responsible to make the culture of an organization, strong or weak.
The eight values of organization culture are as follows:
1. Openness: This refers to the free sharing of the thoughts, ideas and feelings with
each other in an organization. The open environment of the organization results in
a culture where employees have no reservation or negative hidden feelings against
each other. In the situations of disagreement, they are able to come out openly and
share their concerns with each other. Openness also deals with doing away with
the physical boundaries and erected walls in the organizations. Openness has to be
practiced both in terms of giving as well as receiving information at all levels in
the organization.
Openness gives an individual the ability to face the situation as it comes rather
than moving away from it.
2. Confrontation: It can be defined as facing, rather than shying away from the
problems. It also implies a deeper analysis of interpersonal problems. It involves
taking up challenges. It is used with some reservation and means putting up a
front as contrasted with turning one’s back to (escaping from) the problem.
A better term would be confrontation-cum-exploration (CE). CE looks at facing a
problem and works jointly with others to find a solution to the problem.
3. Trust: The surety with which people can share their confidential information with
each other without the fear of it being known all over organization reflects the
level of trust in the organization. In the organizations where the trust is high
among the employees, there is better problem solving and less stress. It is also
 reflected in a sense of assurance that others will help when it is needed, and will
honour mutual commitments and obligations.
4. Authenticity: Authenticity is the congruence between what one feels, says, and
does. It is reflected in owning up to one’s own mistakes and in an unreserved
sharing of feelings. It refers to the equivalence that members in an organization
have between their words and deeds. It is related to openness and trust. The
outcome of authenticity in an organization is reduction in distortion of
communication. This can be seen in correspondence between members in an
organization.
5. Proactivity: Proactivity means taking initiative, pre-planning, taking preventive
action and calculating the pay-offs of an alternative course before taking action.
The term ‘proact’ can be contrasted with the term ‘react’. The organizations are
ready to face any eventuality and are prepared for the adversities too. Proactive
individuals are more calm and relaxed in their behaviours towards others. With
proactivity, there is a possibility of thinking and planning ahead and being
prepared to encountered
6. Autonomy: Autonomy is using and giving freedom to plan and act in one’s own
sphere. It means respecting and encouraging individual and role autonomy. It
involves giving enough space to other individuals in the organization as one
would seek themselves. It develops mutual respect and is likely to result in
willingness to take responsibility and individual initiative and better succession
planning. The main indicator of autonomy is effective delegation in an
organization and reduction of references to seniors for approval of planes action.
7. Collaboration: Collaboration is giving help to, and asking for help from others. It
means working together (both individuals and groups) to solve problems and
developing a team spirit. The outcomes of collaboration include time help,
teamwork, sharing of experiences, improved communication, and improved
resource sharing. The indicators could be productivity reports, frequent meetings,
involvement of staff in decision-making, more-joint decisions, better resource
utilization, and ‘quality’ meetings.
8. Experimentation: Experimentation means using and encouraging innovative
approaches to solve problems, using feedback for improvement, taking a fresh
look at things, and encouraging creativity. Individuals as well as organizations
sustains themselves only if they are able to experiment with the available
 resources and identity and develop better approaches to deal with the problems.
Creativity is reflected in a new suggestions generated by employees, attempts at
improving upon older ways of working, trying out a new idea to which one has
been exposed, originating new methods, and ignoring the so-called constraints
while thinking about a problem. It is also called lateral thing, which aims at
generating alternatives.

Managing Organizational Culture

Managing organizational culture entails 3 main components:

a. Taking advantage of the existing culture

The importance of organizational culture to the success of sustainability initiatives is not

surprising, since organizational culture has previously been linked to the long‐term financial
success and improved effectiveness of organizations (Cameron and Ettingson, 1988; Denison,
1990). A strong, distinctive organizational culture has been identified as one of the key
components of a successful company (Trice and Beyer, 1993). When all leaders, managers
and staff within an organization have a clear sense of their shared culture, it creates social
order, continuity, collective identity, commitment, and common vision while reducing
organizational uncertainties—all of which all lead to improved organizational performance
(Cameron and Quinn, 2006).

b. Transmitting organizational culture

In order to keep the organisational culture alive, the organisation has to ensure that its culture
is transmitted to organisational members (Martins & Martins, 2003). Brown (1998) presents
the following three basic stages in which organisational culture can be sustained in the
organisation:

Pre-selection: The first stage of sustaining organisational culture is the pre-selection stage.
The pre-selection stage is characterised by potential recruits who aspire to become members
of an organisation, who may make great efforts to learn about its history and culture (Brown,
1998). The selection process is also used by the organisation to appoint individuals who will
fit into the organisation’s culture; the values of such individuals should be consistent with
those of the organisation (Martins & Martins, 2003).
Socialisation: The socialisation stage follows the pre-selection stage of sustaining
organisational culture. According to Brown (1998) this stage can be described as the
“enculturation process by which participants learn the culturally accepted beliefs, values and
behaviours, so that they are able to act as effective members of the group”. This suggests that
during the socialisation stage, the organisation helps new organisational members to adapt to
its culture (Martins & Martins, 2003).

Incorporation/Rejection: The incorporation or rejection stage is the final stage of sustaining

organisational culture. It is through the socialisation process that organisational members may
be incorporated or rejected (Brown, 1998). Indicators that the individual member has reached
full incorporation includes acceptance by the work group, understanding and acceptance of
the organisation’s culture (Martins & Martins, 2003). On the other hand rejection may lead to
loss of key goals, values and assumptions; which ultimately create a crisis of identity for
organisational members (Schein, 1985).

c. Changing organizational culture

There are different theoretical views on changing or managing organisational culture, which
suggest that the process of culture change is complex. O’Reilly (1989) believes that it is
possible to change or manage organisational culture by choosing the attitudes and behaviours
that are required, identifying the norms that promote or impede them, and then taking action
to create the desired effect.

In relation to that, Arnold (2005) states that “culture can be seen as something that can be
managed or changed when the existing culture is inappropriate or even detrimental to the
organisation’s competitive needs”. Therefore, organisations undertake conscious culture
change because it is necessary to do so (Harrison, 1993). On the other hand, Martins and
Martins (2003) states that “changing an organisation’s culture is extremely difficult but
cultures can be changed”. Thus, Harrison (1993) highlights that although it is possible to
change organisational culture, changing the fundamental cultural orientation of an
organisation has the following drawbacks:

It is difficult to achieve, requiring deep changes in values and management style and in
organisation systems, structures, and rewards systems. It takes a long time, several years. It
creates turmoil and stress within the organisation.
Schein (1985) argues that before any attempt is made to change organisational culture, it is
imperative to understand the existing culture and how it is sustained through organisational
culture diagnosis. According to Martins and Martins (2003) organisational culture change can
only take place when most or all of the following conditions exist:

A dramatic crisis. This is the shock that undermines the status quo and calls into question the
relevance of the current culture.

Turnover in leadership. New top leadership which can provide an alternative set of key
values may be perceived as more capable of responding to the crisis.

Young and small organisation. The younger the organisation, the less entrenched its culture
will be and it is easier for management to communicate its new values when the organisation
is small.

Weak culture. The more widely held a culture is and the more members agree with its values,
the more difficult it will be to change; thus, weak cultures are more amenable to change than
strong ones.

Therefore, it is clear that changing the organisation’s culture is possible, but attempts to
initiate such a process should take into consideration the complexity of culture.

Organizational Citizenship Behavior

Organizational citizenship behavior or OCB refers to behaviors that are not part of employees
formal job descriptions (eg helping a coworker who has been absent) or behaviors for which
employees are not formally rewarded. In aggregation, such behaviors are believed to enhance
the effectiveness of groups and organizations (George & Bettenhausen, 1990; Podsakoff,
1997). OCB is often studied as form of productive employee behavior.

Organ (1988) defines OCB as "individual behaviour that is discretionary, not directly or

explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, and that in the aggregate promotes the
effective functioning of the organization"

Organ also identifies 5 different types of OCB:

1. Altruism: represents what we typically think of as “helping behavior”. Some

examples of helping behaviour include volunteering to orient a new employee,
 solving conflicts among employees, and acknowledging fellow employees’
accomplishments.

2. Conscientiousness: refers to impersonal behaviour that benefits the organization as a

whole. In other words, it refers to behaviour that is not directed at another individual.
Examples of conscientiousness include an employee adhering to an organization’s
rules and regulations or an employee not using all of their vacation or sick days.

3. Sportsmanship: is an employee’s willingness to deal with poor situations without

complaining. It is the only form of OCB that involves declining to participate in
certain behaviours.

4. Courtesy: is demonstrated by preventing organization problems through

communication and general consideration for others. An example of courtesy involves
letting co-workers know how they can reach an employee who is on vacation. The
courteous behaviours attempt to prevent other employees from encountering
unpleasant surprises.

5. Civic virtue: is participating in the life and culture of the organization; this is not
considered behaviour that is targeted at individuals, rather, this behaviour targets the
organization.

Determinants of Organizational Citizenship Behaviour

A number of explanations have been proposed to explain as to why people engage in OCB.
Some of them are as follows:

1. The role of positive affect: The primary determinant of OCB is positive affect,
typically in the form of job satisfaction. Research in psychology has long shown how
positive mood increases the frequency of helping and of other forms of spontaneous
prosocial behaviour (George & Brief, 1992). Furthermore, positive mood and helping
behaviour are actually mutually reinforcing because helping others usually makes
people feel good. Bettencourt, Gwinner and Meuter (2001) found that positive job
attitudes were related to different types of OCB in service-oriented employees.
Researchers have also found that job involvement, a correlate of job satisfaction, is
 positively correlated with supervisor ratings of OCB (Diefendorff, Brown, & Kamin,
2002).
2. Cognitive evaluations of organizational fairness: Equity Theory (Adams, 1965) states
that employees evaluate their work situations by cognitively comparing their inputs to
the organization with the outcomes they receive in return. If employees perceive that
the organization is treating them fairly or justly, then they are likely to reciprocate the
organization by engaging in OCB. It seems, however, that certain forms of fairness or
justice predict OCB better than others. Interactional justice, or the manner in which
supervisors treat employees as they carry out organizational policies and procedures,
has been found to be the best predictor of OCB (Moorman ,1991). Some other studies
have found that procedural justice is a better predictor of OCB than is distributive
justice (Konovsky & Pugh, 1990).
3. Dispositional characteristics: Certain personality traits predispose individuals to
engage in OCB. Some people are naturally more helpful than others are. the
dispositional viewpoint has received much less attention in the OCB literature
because proponents of this view have been vague as to the specific personality traits
that should be related to OCB.
Organ and Ryan (1995) conducted a meta-analysis of 55 studies to evaluate the
relative impact of various antecedents of OCB. It was found that job satisfaction and
perceived fairness were correlated with OCB at approximately the same magnitude.
However dispositional variables such as conscientiousness, agreeableness, positive
affectivity, and negative affectivity were all unrelated to OCB. Thus, affective and
cognitive influences combine in an additive fashion to determine OCB.

Positive Affect

Organizational
citizenship behaviours

Fairness/ Equity
cognitions

Major Antecedents of Organizational Citizenship Behaviour (OCB), Organ and

Ryan (1995)
 Apart from the above three major factors, several other factors have been proposed in
numerous studies, although they haven’t received much research attention.
Chattopadhyay (1998) found evidence that OCB is predicted by the demographic
composition of work groups. It has also been found that the performance of OCB may
be influenced by factors such as job-related stressors (Jex, 1998) and employees’ level
of organizational commitment (Williams & Anderson, 1991). Wang, Law, Hackett,
Wang, and Chen (2005) have recently shown that leadership is an important predictor
of OCB. Positive perceptions of and trust in leaders have been found to be related to a
greater tendency to perform OCB. Further, Finkelstein and Penner (2004) found that
motives surrounding the desire to help co-workers and possessing a citizenship-role
identity (e.g., ‘‘helping the company is an important part of who I am’’) were more
strongly related to OCB than motives associated with impression management.

Debates and Issues

The concept of Organizational Citizenship behaviour has generated considerable amount of

research since its inception in 1977. The extensive research has generated many issues,
controversies and debate among researchers in this area. Some debates and issues in the
research area can be categorised as follows:

1. OCB and organizational effectiveness: The direction of causality underlying the

relationship between OCB and organizational effectiveness is not clear. Researchers
have largely operated under the assumption that OCB has a causal impact on group
and organizational effectiveness. However, it is also possible that the direction of
causality could be reversed. Members of effective groups may report high levels of
OCB, regardless of whether they actually exist. When a group is successful, group
members tend to perceive high levels of OCB. Staw (1975) found that group
members’ retrospective reports of group cohesiveness could be manipulated based on
false feedback about group performance. In this study group, members who were told
that their group had been successful reported higher levels of cohesiveness than did
group members who were told that their group had been unsuccessful. Similarly,
Bachrach, Bendoly, and Podsakoff (2001) found evidence that retrospective
perceptions of OCB may be influenced by group performance.
2. Validity of the OCB concept: According to Organ (1977), OCB represents behaviour
that is above employees’ formal job responsibilities, and for which there are no formal
rewards. It is seen that while performing their day-to-day activities, employees make
the job descriptive versus nonjob descriptive distinctions upon which OCB is based.
Thus, many employees view activities, such as helping other employees, being
courteous to others, and occasionally attending functions on behalf of their
organization, as part of their formal role responsibilities. Morrison (1994), for
example found in a sample of clerical employees, that many behaviors that are
considered OCB were classified by these employees as part of their normal job
responsibilities. She also found that there was very little correlation between
employees’ and supervisors’ classifications of OCBs. Thus, many of the behaviors
that supervisors consider OCB may simply represent employees’ doing things that
they consider to be part of their jobs. Morrison’s (1994) further reported that
employees were most likely to classify OCBs as in-role behaviors when they reported
high levels of both job satisfaction and affective organizational commitment. A study
by Bachrach and Jex (2000) further brought into question the in-role versus extra-
role distinction that has been implicit in OCB research.
3. Expectation of rewards: An important issue in OCB research is whether employees
really engage in OCB without the expectation that such behaviours will be rewarded.
Eastman(1994) showed that performing OCB positively influences formal
performance appraisals. According to Bolino (1999), when OCB is performed with
the expectation of future rewards, it then becomes a form of impression management
rather than truly altruistic behavior. According to Bolino, OCB is most likely to be
used as an impression management tool when it is highly visible to others, particularly
those responsible for the dispensation of rewards. Thus, an employee may help other
employees only when his or her supervisor is around to observe.
4. Viability of the concept: An important issue in OCB research is whether OCB will
remain a viable concept in the workplace of the future. Bridges (1994) has pointed out
a clear trend in recent years: Organizations have been moving away from formal job
descriptions. Bridges has even predicted that the concept of a job will eventually
cease to exist. As workplaces are becoming dynamic, employees in the future may
consider OCB as a ‘‘part of the job,’’ at least to the extent that they facilitate project
completion. Such a tendency will become a more pronounced trend because many
employees may not have formal job descriptions to guide their behaviours.
Thus, although the construct of OCB has received much research attention, a number of
debates and issues have also developed around the topic.