Journal of Advance Management Research, ISSN: 2393-9664
Vol.06 Issue-04, (April 2018), Impact Factor: 4.73
Double-Blind Peer Reviewed Refereed International Journal - Included in the International Serial Directories
Journal of Advance Management Research, ISSN: 2393-9664 (JAMR) http://www.jamrpublication.com email id- [email protected] Page 264
ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOUR AND JOB SATISFACTION :
A Theoretical Review
Dr. Debendra P Kar
Associate Professor
Institute of Management Technology, Hyderabad
Abstract
The concept of Organizational Citizenship Behaviour (OCB) is comparatively new in the area
of behavioural research. However, very quickly it could manage to grab full attention of
researchers and now is one of the most studied aspect of organizational behaviour. The
concept basically talks about the extra-role behaviour of employees which are helpful to
maintain the overall effectiveness of the organization. This is much more critical to the
organization because these behaviours can not be managed or manipulated through any
actions or sanctions of the organizational processes. A lot of research works have been carried
out on OCB since its inception in 1983. These research works deal with identifying measures,
designing a construct, evaluating the antecedents and consequences of OCB etc. However, a lot
many of those researches directly or indirectly are getting connected to the area of Job
Satisfaction of employees. The present paper tries to give a theoretical perspective of the
relationship between Job Satisfaction and OCB.
Keywords: Organizational Citizenship Behaviour (OCB), Job Satisfaction, Job performance, Job
description, Organizational commitment
Introduction
The concept of help is as old as the human civilization itself. This distinct character of human
beings is found in almost all organizations. We come across a number of persons who extend
all possible help and co-operation to their fellow beings. A good number of research has been
carried out on the nature, causes and implications of helping behaviour and co-operation in
organizations (Moore et al.1973; Berkowitz and Connor, 1966; Cialdini et al.1973;
Konecni,1972; Rawlings,1968; Regan,1971; Barnard,1938). However, in organizations these
helping behaviours are mainly characterized under a number of situations. These situations
may vary in its range from positive to negative mood. It may be compensatory or prosocial
in nature.
Organizational Citizenship Behaviour (OCB): Organizational Citizenship Behaviour is a
concept which refers to the performances those are not included in the prescribed job
description or job specification for a given job. These behaviours include any/all of those
gestures which are very often taken for granted. Though they lubricate the social machinery
of the organization, they do not directly fall within the usual notion of task performance.
Examples of such behaviours include helping co-workers with a job related problem,
accepting orders without a fuss, tolerating temporary impositions without complaint,
Journal of Advance Management Research, ISSN: 2393-9664
Vol.06 Issue-04, (April 2018), Impact Factor: 4.73
Double-Blind Peer Reviewed Refereed International Journal - Included in the International Serial Directories
Journal of Advance Management Research, ISSN: 2393-9664 (JAMR) http://www.jamrpublication.com email id- [email protected] Page 265
helping to keep the work area cleaned and uncluttered, making timely and constructive statements about the work area/ unit, promoting a work climate that is tolerable, conserving and protecting organizational resources etc.
Organizational Citizenship Behaviour is proposed as a form of job performance which may be more strongly related to job satisfaction than performance measures employed in previous job satisfaction - job performance research. This concept holds more promise for organizational behaviours research than merely its relationship with job satisfaction. Organ (1988) argues that organizational citizenship, in aggregate, promotes the effective functioning of the organization. It is defined as supra-role behaviour, i.e. behaviour that goes beyond formal job descriptions but which is desired by an organization. Examples include punctuality, helping other employees, volunteering for things that are not required in the job, making innovative suggestions to improve department/ organization, not wasting time, keeping the work area cleaned and uncluttered, preserving/ minimising wastage of organizational resources etc. It also includes behaviour that a person refrains from doing even though he/she has every right to do so. Behaviours, like not finding fault with other employees frequently, expressing resentment, complaining about insignificant/ trivial matters are also included in this category. These supra-role behaviours appear to be largely unaffected by organizational reward/ punishment system for several reasons (Katz and Kahn, 1966). Firstly, citizenship behaviours are often very subtle and difficult to measure. It is very difficult
to include them in the formal performance appraisal system. While managers may see these
behaviours and consider them in subjective ratings of employees performance, the direct
linkage between reward and citizenship is likely to be very weak.
Secondly, engaging in citizenship behaviour may actually damage individual job performance.
For example, helping a co-worker who has fallen behind may cause the “good citizen"
employees to produce less than would otherwise be the case.
Finally, since citizenship behaviours do not find place in the formal role prescriptions,
punishment for failing to engage in these behaviour seems unlikely.
Measurement of OCB: Bateman and Organ (1983) popularised the concept of organizational
citizenship behaviour to denote those organizationally beneficial behaviours and gestures
that can neither be enforced on the basis of formal role obligations nor elicited contractual
guarantee of compensation. They are the first researchers who tried to develop a measure
(scale) of organizational citizenship behaviour by enumerating a list of employees’
behaviours that managers typically appreciate but are ill-equipped to demand except perhaps
to a limited degree. The Bateman and Organ scale provides a means for preliminary
investigation into correlates of organizational citizenship behaviour. They tried to establish a
causal connection between prior overall satisfaction and subsequent display of a host of
citizenship behaviours. In this context, they predict that there is a strong connection between
supervision and job satisfaction. Their contention for this prediction was that the immediate
supervisor represents the most direct source of variance in events that arouse a felt need to
reciprocate or that influence positive affect. Though the sample size (N=77) limits the
confidence to some extent, still they found a stronger statistical relation-ship between general
job satisfaction and the aggregate measure of organizational citizenship behaviour. They gave
the rationale for this strong relationship as organizational citizenship represents actions
Journal of Advance Management Research, ISSN: 2393-9664
Vol.06 Issue-04, (April 2018), Impact Factor: 4.73
Double-Blind Peer Reviewed Refereed International Journal - Included in the International Serial Directories
Journal of Advance Management Research, ISSN: 2393-9664 (JAMR) http://www.jamrpublication.com email id- [email protected] Page 266
more under volitional control of workers than conventional productivity measures. Prosocial
gestures are less likely to be constrained by other situational forces, and they pose very little
in the ability requirements.
Though Beteman and Organ's study is a novel and pioneering one, it offered little insight into
the dimensional structure of organizational citizenship behaviour. The factor analysis of the
measure proved almost uninterpretable. The entire factor loading of the 30 items
exclusively explained one general factor. Several other factors had no distinctive meaning
common to their respective group of items.
Smith et al. (1983) developed a more streamlined measure of organizational citizenship
behaviour through semi-structured interview conducted with the supervisory personnel
in two manufacturing organizations. The interviewers asked the supervisors to describe
actions of subordinates that they appreciated and regarded as helpful but could scarcely
demand on the basis of supervisory authority or remuneration. They tried to measure 16
such items pre-tested with a group of 67 managerial and professional people enrolled in an
evening MBA programme. They could find two clear factors from the analysis. They are
altruism (ALT) which comprises factors like, helping a specific person (either the supervisor
or a co-worker or any client) and generalised compliance comprising factors, like
conscientiousness in attendance, use of work time properly and adherence to various rules.
The study of Smith et al. (1983) was comparatively broader in its scope as it attempted to
assess the extent to which certain environmental forces and individual difference variables
could independently predict citizenship behaviours. The result obtained from the study shows
that factors, like job satisfaction and leader supportive behaviour are instrumental in
fostering citizenship behaviour. Urban/ rural background and education also proved to be
significant as antecedents of organizational citizenship behaviour. However, the citizenship
behaviour measure used in this study is rather simplistic and the dimensionality of citizenship
behaviour is not definite. The study did not address longitudinal relationships. The causal
models used to interpret the findings of this study may be viewed as somewhat arbitrary
regardless of the goodness of fit. Nevertheless, the study results show enough consistency
with previous social-psychological studies of prosocial behaviour. Interestingly, the results
suggest that citizenship behaviour in the work setting is worthy of study in its own rights.
From the review of the existing literature, it is clear that a good number of theoretical work
and empirical tests have been done to explain the construct, causes and effects of
organizational citizenship behaviour (Bateman and Organ,1983; Smith et al.1983; Organ, 1977,
1988; Organ and Konovsky, 1989; Podsakoff et al.1990; Moorman, 1991). Also presently
research on organizational citizenship behaviour is progressing at rapid pace. A number of
models have been suggested linking organizational citizenship behaviour with job attitudes,
like job satisfaction (Bateman and Organ, 1983; Smith et al.1983; Williams and Anderson,
1991), Organizational commitment (Becker, 1960), and perceptions of fairness (Moorman,
1991). It has also been related to leadership style (Farh et al.1990), inter-personal trust
(Podsakoff et al.1990) and leader member exchange relationship (Wayne and Green, 1993).
Journal of Advance Management Research, ISSN: 2393-9664
Vol.06 Issue-04, (April 2018), Impact Factor: 4.73
Double-Blind Peer Reviewed Refereed International Journal - Included in the International Serial Directories
Journal of Advance Management Research, ISSN: 2393-9664 (JAMR) http://www.jamrpublication.com email id- [email protected] Page 267
However, there have been questions regarding the nature of the construct and the ways in
which the concept has been operationalised (Schnake,1991). For example, two differing
operationalisations of organizational citizenship behaviour have surfaced in the recent years.
The first one is the traditional view forwarded by Organ (1988) which describes
organizational citizenship behaviour in a social exchange framework. In this framework
organizational citizenship behaviour includes those behaviours which aid the maintenance of
the pleasant and helpful relationships between organizational members. The second view,
suggested by Graham (1986, 1989), is grounded by the definition and dimensions of
organizational citizenship behaviour in political science theory. In this framework,
organizational citizenship behaviour becomes more controversial. Organizational citizen-
ship behaviour in one person's eye may not be organizational citizenship behaviour for others.
These two frameworks also do have the measurement construct in two different ways. The
first construct is developed by Organ and his colleagues in Indiana University and the second
one is developed by Graham.
Bateman and Organ (1983) for the first time attempted to measure organizational citizenship
behaviour in a longitudinal study designed to test if measures of job satisfaction are causally
related to organizational citizenship behaviour. However, the scale developed by them could
tap only one factor which explained the majority of variance and they termed it as
organizational citizenship behaviour. As it seems highly illogical (all behaviours under
organizational citizenship behaviour can be described under one factor), Smith et al. (1983)
refined the 30-item scale to 16-item scale and could explain the result in a more descriptive
and multidimensional model. They labelled these behaviours under two heads namely
altruism (behaviours which are directly and intentionally aimed at helping a specific person
in face to face situations) and generalized compliance (behaviours which pertain to a more
impersonal form of conscientiousness that does not provide immediate aid to any specific
person but are indirectly helpful to others involved in the system). This factor is labelled as
conscientiousness by Organ.
A number of studies have been done to develop a more refined construct of organizational
citizenship behaviour measurement taking the Smith et al. model as the base (Williams et
al.1986; Konovsky, 1986; Organ and Konovsky, 1989; Williams and Anderson, 1991). Organ
(1988) has recently proposed a five factor model of organizational citizenship behaviour.
This expanded model consists of the two Smith et al. dimensions, i.e. altruism and
conscientiousness and three new dimensions called courtesy, sportsmanship and civic
virtue.
Podsakoff et al. (1990) have developed an instrument designed to capture the five factors
suggested by Organ (1988). This measure has been used in two studies (Podsakoff et al.
1990; Moorman, 1991). In both the studies confirmatory factor analysis supports for the
psychometric properties of the scale and reports that the scale taps five organizational
citizenship behaviour factors.
Journal of Advance Management Research, ISSN: 2393-9664
Vol.06 Issue-04, (April 2018), Impact Factor: 4.73
Double-Blind Peer Reviewed Refereed International Journal - Included in the International Serial Directories
Journal of Advance Management Research, ISSN: 2393-9664 (JAMR) http://www.jamrpublication.com email id- [email protected] Page 268
Job Satisfaction and Organizational Citizenship Behaviour: It is believed that
organizational citizenship behaviour is highly influenced by job satisfaction. There are two
distinct conceptual bases for this thought. Firstly, Social Exchange Theory (Adams,1965;
Balu,1964) predicts that, given certain conditions, people seek to reciprocate those who benefit
them. To the extent that a person's satisfaction results from the efforts of organizational
officials and such efforts are interpreted as volitional and non-manipulative in intent, the
person will seek to reciprocate those efforts. The person may not have the ability or
opportunity to reciprocate with greater work output or creative solutions to work related
problems. Citizenship behaviours are more likely to be under the person's control and thus,
more likely to be a salient mode of reciprocation.
A second basis for predicting this relationship is derived from a series of social psychological
experiments (Rosenhan et al.1974; Clark and Isen,1982). This strongly supports the contention
that prosocial gestures are most likely to occur when a person experiences a generalized
mood state characterized by positive affect. To the extent that job satisfaction (as
conventionally measured) reflects this positive affective state, it is likely that more satisfied
persons display more of the prosocial/ citizenship behaviour. As Rosenhan et al.(1974)
phrased it, positive affect tends to generalize whatever caused it to other stimuli (notably
persons) in the temporal and social context.
In the citizenship behaviour research it is convincingly argued that job satisfaction measures
reliably correlate with measures of organizational citizenship behaviour (Bateman and Organ,
1983; Smith et al.1983). Millar and Tesser (1986) have established that when both the
evaluation and the behaviour are driven by the same component- whether it be affective or
cognitive; the correlation between attitude and behaviour would be greater. In this context,
Organ and Konovsky (1989) tried to answer some fundamental questions of job satisfaction-
organizational citizenship behaviour correlation. They attempted to find which attitudinal
component predominates in job satisfaction measures and which component drives
organizational citizenship behaviour. It was further attempted by them to answer a crucial
question, like what difference does it make whether organizational citizenship behaviour is
cognitively or affectively driven. Organ and Konovsky (1986) summarised the findings from a
vast amount of data as organizational citizenship behaviour has a deliberate, controlled
character somewhat akin to conscious decision making rather than expressive emotional
behaviour.
However, the limitation of the study is that the interpretation has proceeded with overtones
of causality not strictly admissible from the cross-sectional nature of the data. Those who
consistently render higher levels of organizational citizenship behaviour may elicit in-formal
responses from their supervisors, co-workers or clients that express appreciation or provide
informal rewards. This, in turn, may enhance subjective appraisals of the work situation and
generalise judgements about such specific outcomes as pay. Also, those who freely offer
themselves in terms of organizational citizenship behaviour, for whatever dimly perceived
reasons, may experience a need to justify such inputs thereby cognitively augmenting
outcomes from the exchange with the organization. So, it needs additional evidence from
Journal of Advance Management Research, ISSN: 2393-9664
Vol.06 Issue-04, (April 2018), Impact Factor: 4.73
Double-Blind Peer Reviewed Refereed International Journal - Included in the International Serial Directories
Journal of Advance Management Research, ISSN: 2393-9664 (JAMR) http://www.jamrpublication.com email id- [email protected] Page 269
other types of research design to permit confident attributions of cause and effect. Also as the
predictor variables in the study of Organ and Konovsky could not explain more than 50 per
cent of variance of organizational citizenship behaviour, it seems that some important
variables are missing in the study.
The legacy of the work with job satisfaction and citizenship has not yielded unqualified
support for the causal power of all types of job satisfaction. Research on job satisfaction
measures and the causes of organizational citizenship behaviour suggest that the relationship
between job satisfaction and organizational citizenship behaviour may be more complex than
realized (Moorman,1993). In this context, two issues in the measurement of this relationship
are pertinent to be analysed. They are
a) the attitudinal basis underlying job satisfaction measures,
b) the relative effect of pure indicators of affect and cognition on job satisfaction.
Organ (1988,1990) has suggested that job satisfaction measures may differ to the extent to
which they tap more of an affective satisfaction or a cognitive satisfaction. Affective satisfaction
is the satisfaction that is based on overall positive emotional appraisal of the job. This
satisfaction focuses on whether the job evokes a good mood and positive feelings. Affectively
oriented measures of job satisfaction would include questions about a respondent's feelings
about the job or his mood while working. Positive feelings or a positive mood would then
indicate high job satisfaction.
On the other hand, cognitive satisfaction is the satisfaction that is based on a more logical and
rational evaluation of the job conditions. Cognitive satisfaction is an appraisal based on
comparisons which do not rely on emotional judgements but , instead, are evaluations of
conditions, opportunities or outcomes. Job satisfaction scale which reflects job cognition
include questions about the nature of job, the working conditions and the opportunities to
satisfy important needs. The questions seek information for appraisals of the job, not
descriptions of their feelings.
Organ and Near (1985) first suggested that measures of job satisfaction probably are based
on an employee's cognition about his/her job and not his/her affective responses. They noted
that most satisfaction measures ask respondents to compare facets of their job to some
referent (a cognitive process) and did not really ask for judgements about feelings and
emotions. However, empirical tests of this proposition by Brief and Roberson (1987) and
Williams (1988) found that while most measures of job satisfaction are cognitively based, some
measures are found to be based to some degree of affective influences. For example, Brief and
Roberson tested the relative effect of cognition and affect on three satisfaction measures and
found that both cognitive and affective influences are present. These three satisfaction
measures are
i) the job description index (JDI) (Smith et al. 1969),
ii) the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ), and
iii) the Faces Scale (Kunin, 1955, Dunham and Herman, 1975).
Journal of Advance Management Research, ISSN: 2393-9664
Vol.06 Issue-04, (April 2018), Impact Factor: 4.73
Double-Blind Peer Reviewed Refereed International Journal - Included in the International Serial Directories
Journal of Advance Management Research, ISSN: 2393-9664 (JAMR) http://www.jamrpublication.com email id- [email protected] Page 270
Canonical correlation and regressions analysis showed that of the three satisfaction measures,
MSQ is the most cognitive in its orientation while the Faces Scale is the most affective oriented.
JDI is found to be predominantly cognitive, but some affective influence is also present.
The partitioning of the above job satisfaction scales based on cognition or affect is not
surprising given the nature of the scales. For example, the MSQ is found to be mostly cognitive
in its orientation, consists of a list of job conditions which the respondent is asked to apprise.
The job conditions include the working condition, pay, quality of supervision and the degree of
autonomy and importance in the job. No mention is made about the types of feelings associated
with the work or the degree to which the work evokes positive or negative emotions. On the
other hand, the Faces Scale, found to be mostly affective; asks for no detailed appraisals. The
respondent simply reports which facial expression best approximates his/her own while
working. The faces range from very happy to very sad and clearly reflect an emotional
response to work.
Williams (1988) has also tested the relative cognitive and affective influence on job
satisfaction measures. In this study, he tested the Facet Free job satisfaction scale (Quinn and
Staines, 1979), the job diagnostic survey (JDS) satisfaction scale (Hackman and Oldham, 1975)
and the Brayfield and Rothe (1951) satisfaction scale. By examining the shared variance
among these satisfaction measures and factors represented by affect and cognition, he was
able to separate the variance in each measure into cognitive and affective components. His
results indicate that 27 per cent of the variance in the Facet Free scale and 18 per cent of the
variance in JDS could be explained by cognition, while only 10 per cent of the variance in the
Facet Frees and 12 per cent in the JDS could be explained by cognition. Conversely, 22 per
cent of the variance in the Brayfield and Rothe scale could be explained by affect and only 16
per cent by cognition.
Organ (1988) summarizing the researches on organizational citizenship behaviour concluded
that the researches do lend reasonable support to the hypothesis that organizational
citizenship behaviour and job satisfaction are bound together in a robust relationship. Though
a number of studies support that cognition would predict organizational citizenship
behaviour in a better way than affect, still the effect of affect on organizational citizenship
behaviour can never be ignored. Further the evidence related to mood and helping
behaviours also support the proposition that affective components influence behaviours in
an organization (Brown, 1985). It may also be argued that if cognition and effect are relatively
independent (Andrews and Witey, 1976; Organ and Near, 1985; Brief and Roberson, 1987),
cognition (perceived equity) may be more strongly related to certain type of organizational
citizenship behaviour such as generalized compliance while affect (job satisfaction) may be
more strongly related to dimensions like altruism. The studies on mood state (Berkowitz,
1972; Clark and Isen, 1982; Isen et al. 1976) support this conclusion.
Mel Schnake (1991) in his proposal for further research on organizational citizen-ship
behaviour has suggested that future research should untangle the relationship between job
satisfaction, perceived equity and organizational citizenship behaviour. This may require
replacing measures of job satisfaction with some new measures which tap only affect. In
this context, it may not be illogical to tap affect component of job satisfaction only. Though the
Journal of Advance Management Research, ISSN: 2393-9664
Vol.06 Issue-04, (April 2018), Impact Factor: 4.73
Double-Blind Peer Reviewed Refereed International Journal - Included in the International Serial Directories
Journal of Advance Management Research, ISSN: 2393-9664 (JAMR) http://www.jamrpublication.com email id- [email protected] Page 271
study of Bateman and Organ (1983) provide correlation evidence that job satisfaction and
citizenship behaviour are strongly related, the causal directionality between these two
could not be identified.
However, Smith et al. (1983) provide evidence for causal directionality between these two.
They divide citizenship into two dimensions, namely altruism (helping behaviours directed
towards specific persons) and generalized compliance (being a good citizen and doing what
is right). Smith et al. found significant direct effects of job satisfaction on altruism but not
on generalized compliance. Thus, it appears that job satisfaction may increase citizenship
behaviour if directed towards helping specific persons only. These behaviours may emerge
only in response to a situation where a specific individual has faced a problem or has
asked for help. As Fisher (1980) has pointed out that narrowly defined attitude measures are
more predictive of narrowly defined performance measures than of global measures of
performance. Perhaps this is true of citizenship behaviour as well. Various dimensions of
job satisfaction may be causally related to some types of citizenship behaviours but not others.
A few more empirical research results of the recent times have also confirmed the relationship
between Job Satisfaction and citizenship behaviours. Shokrkon and Naami (2009) found that
there is a significant effect of job satisfaction on organizational citizenship behavior. The
findings of Shokrkon and Naami (2009) is also supported by Badawy et al. (2016) where they
have concluded that there is a significant relationship between job satisfactions on
organizational citizenship behavior. In a study carried out by Serpian et al (2016) it has been
convincingly argued that the effect of Organizational Culture and Job Satisfaction variables on
Organizational Citizenship Behavior is highly significant.
According to Brunetto et al (2012), satisfaction in job has a positive impact on an individual in
an organization which is strongly related to the emotional feeling of a worker in the work place.
The job satisfaction in many ways makes an employee feel whether the job is pleasant or
unpleasant to be done (Brunetto et al 2012). It is observed that a good feeling in the job and
the workplace will give employees an opportunity for fostering longer and lasting
Organizational Citizenship Behavior. It has been a general observation that those workers who
have been satisfied in their job will usually exhibit positive feeling about their organization
and may also be willing to help others and do more than it is usually expected from them. The
probable reason for this behaviour could be because they would like to reciprocate their
positive experiences from their previous experience.
In some of the recent studies Swaminathan and Jawahar (2013), have proved that there is a
positive relationship between Job satisfaction and organizational citizenship behaviors
especially help-oriented ones (i.e. civic virtue, conscientiousness, altruism and courtesy). In
the studies carried out by Jena and Goswami (2013), it has been reported that satisfied
workers have positive OCB. They also found significant positive correlations between
dimensions of job satisfaction and OCB .
Conclusion: Job satisfaction include reaction or attitude of cognitive, affective, and evaluative
parameters of a job. It is an emotional or psychological condition or state which is perceived
by the job holder that is how much happiness or positive emotions are derived from the job
Journal of Advance Management Research, ISSN: 2393-9664
Vol.06 Issue-04, (April 2018), Impact Factor: 4.73
Double-Blind Peer Reviewed Refereed International Journal - Included in the International Serial Directories
Journal of Advance Management Research, ISSN: 2393-9664 (JAMR) http://www.jamrpublication.com email id- [email protected] Page 272
or work experienced by them in their respective job or workplace. The same or similar job
can have different meanings and implications to different people at different context and time
frame (Handoko 2012). Employees frequently and constantly interact with their co-workers
and superiors, adhere and comply to the rules and policies of the organization, work in groups
and teams to achieve the standard of performance and very often live in and with working
conditions that are not the most ideal. However, all these complex factors and elements
influence the satisfaction of job in some way or the other. This means that the researchers
need to take extra care for assessment or evaluation of employee job satisfaction and
dissatisfaction. It can be safely concluded that job satisfaction or dissatisfaction is highly
subjective and is an individual phenomenon. A number of critical issues need to be properly
addressed before collecting the data through the questionnaire with regard to the accuracy
and legitimacy of the responses. While it is a fact that no employee provides misleading
answer intentionally, there is always a possibility that many uncontrollable situational factors
can affect the quality of data collected. This may also possibly happen either because of the
improper understanding of the question s by the respondents and the extent to which
employees want to really frank in answering. Hence, the capturing of accurate and authentic
information from the respondents on job satisfaction is very critical in the studies.
REFERENCES
Adams, J.S. (1965) Inequality in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed) Advances in experimental
social psychology, 267-299, New York : Academic Press.
Balu, P. (1964) Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley
Barnard, C. (1938) The functions of the executive. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
Bateman, T.S. and Organ, D.W. (1983) Job satisfaction and the good soldier: The relation between
affect and citizenship. Academy of Management Journal, 26, 587-595
Berkowitz, L. (1977) Social norms, feelings and other factors affecting helping and altruism. In L.
Berkowitz (Ed) Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol 6, New York: Academic Press, 63-
68.
Berkowitz, L. and Connor, W.H. (1966) Success, failure and social responsibility. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 664-669.
Brayfield, A.H. and Rothe, H.F. (1951) An index of job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology,
35, 307-311.
Brief, A.P. and Roberson, L. (1987) Job attitude in organizations: An emploratory study. Paper
presented at National Meetings of Academy of Management, New Orleans, 1987.
Brown, R. (1985) Social Psychology. New York: Free Press.
Brunetto, Y., Teo, S. T., Shacklock , K., & Farr-Wharton , R. (2012). Emotional intelligence, job
satisfaction, well-being and engagement: explaining organisational commitment and turnover
intentions in policing . Human Resource Management Journal, 22 (4): 428-441
Journal of Advance Management Research, ISSN: 2393-9664
Vol.06 Issue-04, (April 2018), Impact Factor: 4.73
Double-Blind Peer Reviewed Refereed International Journal - Included in the International Serial Directories
Journal of Advance Management Research, ISSN: 2393-9664 (JAMR) http://www.jamrpublication.com email id- [email protected] Page 273
Cialdini, R.B., Darby, B.L. and Vincent J.E. (1973) Transgression and altruism: A case of hedonism.
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 9, 502-516.
Clark, M.S. and Isen, A.M. (1982) Towards understanding the relationship between feeling states
and social behaviour. In A. Hastorf and A.M. Isen (Eds). Cognitive Social Psychology, 73-108, New York:
Elsevier Science.
Cohen, R.L. and Greenberg, J. (1982) The justice concept in social psychology. In J. Greenberg and
R. L. Cohen (Eds) Equity and justice in social behaviour, New York: Academy Press.
Dunham, R. B. and Herman, J. B. (1975) Development of a female FACES scale for measuring job
satisfaction, Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 629- 631.
Farh, J., Podsakoff, P.M. and Organ, D.W. (1990) Accounting for Organizational Citizenship
Behaviour : Leader fairness and task scope versus satisfaction. Journal of Management, 6, 705-722.
Graham, J. (1986) Principled organizational dissent : A theoretical essay. In B.M. Staw and L.L.
Cumings (Eds.) Research in Organizational Behaviour, Vol. 8, 1-52,
Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Graham, J. (1989) Organizational citizenship behaviour: Construct redefinition and validation.
Unpublished manuscript, Loyola University, Chicago.
Graham, J. (1991) An essay on organizational citizenship behaviour. Employee Responsibilities and
Rights Journal. 4 (4), 249-270.
Graham, J and Organ, D.W. (1993) Commitment and the covenantal organization. Journal of
Managerial Issues, 5, 485-502.
Hackman,J.R.,& Oldham, G.R. (1975). Development of the job diagnostic survey. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 60, 159-170.
Isen, A.M., Clark, M. and Schwartz, M.F. (1976) Duration of the effect of good mood on helping:
“Foot-prints on the sand of time”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34. 385-393.
Jena, R. K. & Goswami, R. (2013). Exploring the relationship between organizational citizenship
behavior and job satisfaction among shift workers in India. Global Business and Organizational
Excellence, 32(6), 36-46.
Katz, D. and Kahn, R.L. (1966,1978) The social psychology of organizations. New York : Wiley.
Konecni, V.J. (1972) Some effects of guilt on compliance : A field replication. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 27, 239-247.
Kunin, T. (1955) The construction of a New Type of Attitude Measure. Personnel Psychology, 8, 65-
78.
Millar, M.G. and Tesser, A. (1986) Effects of affective and cognitive focus on the attitude-
behaviour relation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 270-276.
Moore, B.S., Underwood, B. and Rosenhan, D.L. (1973) Affect and altruism. Developmental
Psychology, 8, 99-104.
Journal of Advance Management Research, ISSN: 2393-9664
Vol.06 Issue-04, (April 2018), Impact Factor: 4.73
Double-Blind Peer Reviewed Refereed International Journal - Included in the International Serial Directories
Journal of Advance Management Research, ISSN: 2393-9664 (JAMR) http://www.jamrpublication.com email id- [email protected] Page 274
Moorman, R. H. (1991) Relationship between organizational justice and Organizational Citizen
Behaviour. Do fairness perceptions influence employee citizenship? Journal of Applied Psychology,
76, 845-855.
Moorman, R. H. (1993) The influence of cognitive and affective based job satisfaction measures on
the relationship between satisfaction and Organizational Citizenship Behaviour. Human Relations,
46(6), 759-776.
Organ, D.W. (1977) A reappraisal and reinterpretation of the satisfaction causes performance
hypothesis. Academy of Management Review, 2, 46-53.
Organ, D.W. (1988) Organizational Citizenship Behaviour: The good soldier syndrome. Lenington,
M.A. : Lexington Books.
Organ, D.W. (1990) The motivational basis of Organizational Citizen Behaviour. In B.M. Staw and
L.L. Cummings (Eds.) Research in Organizational Behaviour, Vol. 12, 43-72, Greenwich, CT : JAI
Press
Organ, D.W. and Near, J.P (1985) Cognitive Vs. Affect in measures of job satisfaction. International
Journal of Applied Psychology, 20, 241-253.
Organ, D.W. and Kanovsky, M.A. (1989) Cognitive versus affective determinants of
Organizational Citizen Behaviour. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 157-164.
Organ, D.W. and Lingl, A. (1995) Personality, Satisfaction and Organizational citizenship behaviour.
The Journal of Social Psychology, 135(3), 339-350.
Podsakoff, P.M., andMacKenzie, S. (1988). The structure of Organizational Citizenship Behavior.
Unpublished manuscript, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN.
Podsakoff, P.M., Mackenzie,S.B., Moorman, R.H. and Fetter, R. (1990) Transformational leader
behaviour and their effects on followers' trust in leader, satisfaction and organization citizenship
behaviour. Leadership Quarterly, 1, 107-142.
Quinn, R.P. and Staines, G.L. (1979) The 1977 quality of employment survey. Ann Arbor: Survey
Research Centre, Institute for Research, University of Michigan.
Rawlings, E.I. (1968) Witnessing harm to others : A reassessment of the role of guilt in altruistic
behaviour. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 10, 377-380.
Regan, J.W. (1971) Guilt, perceived injustice and altruistic behaviour. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 18, 124-132.
Rosenhan, D.L., Underwood, B. and Moore, B. (1974) Affect moderates self-gratification and
altruism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 30, 546-552.
Schnake, M. (1991) Organizational Citizenship : A review, proposed model and research agenda.
Human Relations, 44, 735-759.
Serpian*, Swasto Bambang, Utami Hamidah Nayati (2016), “The effect of organizational culture
and job satisfaction on organizational commitment, OCB and intention to leave”, RJOAS, 12(60),
December 2016.
Journal of Advance Management Research, ISSN: 2393-9664
Vol.06 Issue-04, (April 2018), Impact Factor: 4.73
Double-Blind Peer Reviewed Refereed International Journal - Included in the International Serial Directories
Journal of Advance Management Research, ISSN: 2393-9664 (JAMR) http://www.jamrpublication.com email id- [email protected] Page 275
Shokrkon, H. and Naami, A. (2009), “The relationship of job satisfaction with organizational
citizenship behaviour and job performance in Ahvaz factory workers”, Journal of
Education & Psychology, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 39-52.
Smith, C.A., Organ, D.W. and Near, J.P. (1983) Organizational citizenship behaviour : Its nature
and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 653-663.
Swaminathan, S. & Jawahar, P. D. (2013). Job satisfaction as a predictor of organizational
citizenship behaviour: An empirical study. Global Journal of Business Research, 7(1), 71-80.
Tarek A. El Badawy , Mona M. Kamel and Mariam M. Magdy (2016), Exploring the Relationship
between Organizational Culture, Job Satisfaction and Organizational Citizenship Behavior,
International Journal of Human Resource Studies2016, Vol. 6, No. 4 20
Wayne, S.J. and Green, S.A. (1993) The efects of leader member exchnge in employee citizenship
and impression management behaviour. Human Relations, 46(12), 1431-1440.
Williams, L.J. (1988) Affective and non-affective components of job satisfaction and organization
commitment as determinants of organizational citizenship and in-role
behaviours. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington.
Williams, L.J. and Anderson, S.E. (1991) Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as
predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviours. Journal of Management, 17, 601-617.