Organizational citizenship behavior and social exchange: a study of the effects of sources of positive benefits

Journal of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict, Jan, 2005 by Unnikammu Moideenkutty

ABSTRACT

This study tested the differential relationships of social exchange with the organization and social exchange with the supervisor to organization directed and supervisor directed organizational citizenship behavior. Data from approximately 157 employee-supervisor dyads indicated that social exchange with the organization represented by perceived organizational support was positively related to organization directed organizational citizenship behavior and social exchange with the supervisor represented by leader-member exchange quality was positively related to supervisor directed organizational citizenship behavior. As expected, leader-member exchange rather than perceived organizational support was more strongly related to supervisor directed organizational citizenship behavior. However, perceived organizational support was not more strongly related than leader-member exchange to organization directed organizational citizenship behavior. Theoretical and practical implications of the results, limitations of the study, and avenues for future research are discussed.

INTRODUCTION

Organ (1988) described Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) as behavior that is not formally prescribed or officially rewarded by the organization, but at the same time in the aggregate contributes to organizational effectiveness. In other words, OCB is discretionary behavior that is beneficial to the organization. Examples of OCB include, helping co-workers who are behind in their work, showing pride when representing the organization in public, volunteering for overtime work when needed, and not complaining about minor inconveniences that are a normal part of organizational life. From the above examples it is clear that OCB can contribute to organizational effectiveness in many ways. Podsakoff and MacKenzie (1997) argue that in general, OCB may enhance organizational effectiveness "by 'lubricating' the social machinery of the organization, reducing friction, and/or increasing efficiency" (Podsakoff & MacKenzie, 1997, 135). OCB may also contribute to organizational effectiveness by enhancing co-worker and managerial productivity, promoting better use of scarce resources, improving coordination, strengthening the organization's ability to attract and retain better employees, reducing variability of performance, and enabling better adaptation to environmental changes. Though limited, existing research indicates that OCB has a positive relationship to several indicators of organizational effectiveness (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine, & Bachrach, 2000).

Social exchange theory (Blau, 1964) is a common theoretical framework for guiding research on OCB (Deluga, 1994; Konovsky & Pugh, 1994; Masterson, Lewis, Goldman, & Taylor, 2000; Settoon, Bennett, & Liden, 1996; Wayne, Shore, & Liden, 1997). This study uses social exchange theory to hypothesize, and test, differential relationships for Perceived Organizational Support (POS; Eisenberger, Huntington, Hutchison, & Sowa, 1986) and Leader-Member Exchange (LMX; Graen & Scandura, 1987) to organization-directed OCB and supervisor-directed OCB.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Many social associations, including the employment relationship, can be considered as exchange relationships (Blau, 1964). According to Blau (1964), exchange relationships can be broadly categorized as either economic or social. In economic exchange the terms of exchange are clearly specified, usually through a formal contract. In social exchange, while there is an expectation of some return in the future for any favor rendered, the exact nature and timing of the return is not specified in advance. The nature and timing of the return is left to the discretion of the one who makes it. In addition, in social exchange, there is no formal mechanism for ensuring an appropriate return for a favor. In the absence of any formal mechanism, parties must trust each other to discharge their mutual obligations. Here the relationship itself develops an intrinsic value beyond the value of the resources exchanged. Social exchange thus leads to the development of feelings of personal obligation, gratitude and trust.

Employment relationships may have elements of both economic and social exchange. When it is an economic exchange, employees receive only contractual inducements and they are likely to confine their contributions to those prescribed by the contract. When the employment relationship is a social exchange, employees receive positive, beneficial treatment from the organization and/or its representatives. This in turn creates obligations on the part of employees to reciprocate in positive beneficial ways (Settoon et al. 1996). Since, OCB is generally discretionary, it is a social resource that can be exchanged by individuals who have been the recipients of social rewards (Foa & Foa, 1980; Moorman, 1991). Therefore, when the employment relationship is a social exchange, employees are more likely to engage in OCB (Organ, 1988).

Researchers have argued that social exchange in organizations can be conceptualized both as a global exchange between the individual and the organization, and as a more focused dyadic relationship between employees and their supervisors (McNeely & Meglino, 1994; Settoon et al. 1996; Wayne et al. 1997). When the social exchange is with the organization, employees are likely to reciprocate by engaging in behaviors that benefit the organization. When the social exchange is with the supervisor, employees are likely to reciprocate with behaviors that benefit the supervisor. This is because individuals who receive positive benefits from others, experience a sense of obligation that is uncomfortable and can be reduced only through reciprocation that is directed toward the donor of the positive benefits (McNeely & Meglino, 1994).