Investigating The Relationship Between ...

World Applied Sciences Journal 18 (1): 113-122, 2012 ISSN 1818-4952 © IDOSI Publications, 2012 DOI: 10.5829/idosi.wasj.2012.18.01.197

Investigating the Relationship Between Perceptions of Organizational Justice and Organizational Citizenship Behavior among Teachers of Abadeh 1

Marzieh Heidari, 2Saeed Rajaeepoor, 3Sayyed Mohammad Reza Davoodi and 4Nima Bozorgzadeh 1

Educational Management in Isfahan University, Isfahan, Iran 2 Department of Educational Science, Faculty of Educational Science and Psychology, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran 3 Department of Management, Dehaghan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran 4 Business Management, Dehaghan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran Abstract: The purpose of this study is to find the relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behavior. The population under study was all teachers teaching in Abadeh (913) in 2010. Using statistical random sampling based on the size of statistical community, 131 teachers (41 from primary schools, 36 from secondary schools and 54 teachers teaching in high schools) were selected as our sample. The study had a descriptive correlational design and the required data were collected through using the validated form of organizational justice questionnaire (Niehoff and Moorman) containing 21 questions and validated form of organizational citizenship behavior questionnaire (Podsakoff and MacKenzie)containing 24 questions. The faceandcontentvalidityofthe questionnairesas well as its reliability were estimatedusingCronbach's alphacoefficientto be (0.88) fororganizational justice and (0.89) fororganizational citizenship behavior. The obtained data were analyzed using Pearson's correlation coefficient, stepwise regression, path analysis and multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA). Results showed that there is a significant relationship between perceptions of organizational justice and organizational citizenship behavior and dimensions of organizational justice (distributive, procedural and interactive) and organizational citizenship behavior. In addition, procedural justice had been the best predictor of organizational citizenship behavior. The results of stepwise regression showed that the best predictor of organizational citizenship behavior in the dimension of civic virtue and conscientiousness had been interactive justice and in the dimension of sportsmanship, it had been procedural justice. Moreover, the results obtained through MANOVA showed that there is no significant difference between components of justice based on sex, education, academic level and working experiment but the difference between civic virtue components based on sex, education and conscientiousness based on academic level is significant. Key words: Organizational justice % Distributive justice % Procedural justice % Interactive justice % Organizational citizenship behavior % Teachers INTRODUCTION

influential in improving the organization's performance. One of these factors is maintaining justice in the organization. Perceiving justice in organizations is one of the principles of organization's effective functioning and individuals' satisfaction. Without providing the background for perceiving justice in organizations, providing motivation and leading individuals might be difficult for managers. The term "organizational justice" was coined by Greenberg (1987). He believes that the

Achieving objectives of organization is not possible without inner acceptance and organization's adherence to those goals [1]. One of the main objectives of each active and dynamic organization is enhancing individual and organizational performance and since one of the most important elements of improving the organizational performance is "human resources", examining the influential variables on their performance might be very

Corresponding Author: Saeed Rajaeepoor, Department of Educational Science, Faculty of Educational Science and Psychology, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran.

113

World Appl. Sci. J., 18 (1): 113-122, 2012

perception of organizational justice is necessary for better performance of organizationand individuals' satisfaction and organizations should make every attempt to achieve this goal. Moreover, the study of organizational justice will explain the behavioral consequences of most consequences of organizations' behaviors [2]. So, the existence of justice in managers' speech, behavior and manners and ways of distributing organizations' rewards and resources will be effective in adherence and commitment of employees to organization's goals [3]. In organizational justice the ways of behaving toward employees so that they feel they are behaved with fairness are discussed [4]. According to Bies, organizational justice is employees' feeling toward fairness of rules, procedures and organizational policies related to their job. Cropanzano, know organizational justice related to individuals' general judgments aboutjustice [5]. In fact, organizational justice that has long been of interest to scientists relates to staff's perception of fairness and fair employment practices [6]. Greenberg and Colquitt believe that organizational justice points to those trials which seek to explain effects of justice in the organization and is a factor made based on working opportunities. So, managers and leaders should constantly try to maintain justice and help employees perceive fairness and consider justice as a basic for moral behavior and act according tomoral standards, rules and principles [5].

on their perceptions of procedures not on the truth value of procedures. Since psychologically people do not behave based on truths, rather they behave in accordance to their perceptions of reality [8]. Interactive Justice: Interactive Justice attractedbies and moag in 1986 for the first time. Based on this dimension individual are sensitive toward the quality of interactions in personal interactive relations and the constructive dimensions of decision-making [3]. According to Niehoff and Moorman, interactive justice points to the interactive behaviors that people perceive in procedures and is transferred from supervisors to their workers. This type of justice is related to some aspects of communication process such as respect and politeness between the addressor and the addressee. In Moorman's view, distributive, procedural and interactive justice are correlated and each one distinctive aspect of organizational justice; in his idea, organizational justice is the sum of distributive, procedural and interactive justice [4]. Organizational Citizenship Behavior: One other area which has attracted psychologists and sociologists in the last two decades is organizational citizenship behavior. Though it was Bateman and Organ whofirst coined this concept, it had been drawn on Barnard’s concept of the “willingness to cooperate,” and Katz andKahn's study, of the distinction between dependable role performance and “innovative and spontaneous behaviors. Bateman and Organ (1983) define citizenship behaviors to those desired behaviors of employees. One of the most accepted definitions of organizational citizenship behavior is that of Organ who regards it as a unique, discretionary and beyond one's routine duties which is influential in enhancingthe effective functioning of the organization. Organizational citizenship behaviorrefers to behaviors that provide assistance to the organization through maintaining and strengthening the social and psychological context and are not carried out for job's demands and might be indirect to the organization's rewards [9]. Podsakoff believes that good organizational citizen is an idea which includes various employees' behaviors such as performing ancillary tasks, giving voluntary aid to others in their tasks, professional developing of one's business and regulating agencies even when no one has control over it, trying to promote the organizational and maintaining positive attitude in the working environment [10].

Dimensions of Organizational Justice: Few studies were carried out on justice in organizations in early 1960s and it gained more attention in early 1990s when more in-depth studies resulted to the recognition of its three types: distributive, procedural and interactive. Distributive Justice: Distributive Justice denotes employees' perceptions of maintaining justice in the distribution of resources and rewards [4]. Procedural Justice: Arguments regarding procedural justice that gained attention from early 1980s point to individual or people's perceptions of the fair behavior received from the organization [8]. Niehoff and Moorman regard individuals' perceptions of the fairness of organizations' procedures as procedural justice. Rezaeian believes that people's perceptions play a very important role in procedural justice as it is the case for equity theory and people's reactions toward these procedures depends

114

World Appl. Sci. J., 18 (1): 113-122, 2012

C

Dimensions of Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Graham knows organizational citizenship behaviors (or civic organizational behaviors as he calls it) as respecting the organization's rules, doing one's tasks, sacrificing for the interests of the organization, supporting and defending the organization, attending the meetings and sharing their ideas with others and having awareness of the current issues of the organization [11]. Other researchers identified other factors such as social customs, friendship and work ethics altruism and conscientiousness of work, sportsmanship (Organ, 1995), interpersonal management and protecting organization's resources (Farh, Earle and Lin, 1997) and giving aid and positive and active help and avoiding behaviors which have negative impact on the organization [12]. Podsakoff and MacKenzie (1997) introduced five dimensions for organizational citizenship behavior which include altruism, courtesy, sportsmanship, conscientiousness and civic virtue. In this article these five dimensions of Podsakoff and MacKenzie are sued. So, we go though each dimension briefly here: C

C

C

C

Courtesy is the way one behaves with his colleagues, supervisors and organizational addressees. Those who behave in a polite manner with others have high citizenship behavior [17].

In summary, organizational citizenship behaviors are those beneficial behaviors which are not based on any prescribed job rules and there is no contract for performing them. Based on Organ's (1990) idea, it is those informal associations in which participants can perform voluntarily [18]. Rezaeian (2008) believes that to encourage citizenship behaviors we should find their backgrounds and manage and improve them. One of theimportant backgrounds which influence citizenship behavior is perceived organizational justice. Moorman (1991) showed that interactive and procedural justices are important predictors of organizational citizenship behaviors. The existence of such relationship is based on the view that when employees regard their working environment based on justice and fairness, they will naturally behave in a friendly and politely manner with conscientiousnesstoward colleagues, customers and others. Moreover, if organizational citizenship behaviors are regarded as employees' inputs to the organization, their distributive perceived justice will lead to an alternation in these behaviors [18].Considering the importance of maintain justice and fairness in education and the impact it might have on employees and especially teachers' performances, this study investigated the relationship between perceived organizational justice and organizational citizenship behavior among teachers.

Civic virtue: some behaviors like attending extra meetings, supporting developments and changes made by organization's managers and paying attention to one's mails [13]. So, a good citizen should not only attend meetings but also express his opinions and have an active role in solving them. Conscientiousness is a pattern in which organization's members do certain behaviors and go beyond minimally required duties such as levels of attendance, punctuality, conserving resources and related matters of internal maintenance [14]. Sportsmanship is regarded as tolerating the inevitable inconveniences and impositions of work without grievance. Podsakoff et al (2000) take " good sports” as "people who not only do not complain when they are inconvenienced by others, but also maintain a positive attitude even when things do not go their way, are not offended when others do not follow their suggestions, are willing to sacrifice their personal interest for the good of the work group and do not take the rejection of their ideas personally" [15]. Altruismisregarded as effective and beneficial behaviors such as maintaining friendship, sympathy and intimacy among coworkers which directly or indirectly help those with working problems [14]. Also it is those voluntary helps toward others with a workproblem to avoid further accidents and working problems [16].

Literature Review: Justice and fair processes are regarded as basic principles in organizational life. Rezaeian (2008) in his study found that managers should develop a system based on justice and trust. He believes that we can develop an atmosphere of trust, vitality, power and citizenship behavior with justice and equity [7]. Yilmaz and Tasdan in a study on organizational citizenship behavior and organizational justice in schools found that there is a positive relationship between perceived organizational citizenship and organizational justice [19]. In another attempt, Podsakoff, Whiting, Podsakoff and Blumepointed to organizational citizenship behaviors with a number of individual-level outputs such as managers scaling of employee's' performances, decision-making about reward giving and a number of organizational-level outputs like efficiency, customer satisfaction and relocation at single level [20]. Masterson, Lewise, Goldman, Taylor in their studies found the effect of procedural justice on organizational 115

World Appl. Sci. J., 18 (1): 113-122, 2012

citizenship behavior [21]. Rezaeian and Rahimi showed that when employees perceive that the organizational procedures are true, suitable and fair, they will show more organizational behavior [7]. Goudarzvand Chegini in an attempt to find the relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behavior found that there is a significant relationship between dimensions of organizational justice (distributive, political, intrapersonal and informal justice) and organizational citizenship behavior [22]. Moreover, results of another study showed that the interaction between political justice and distributive justice might predict turnover intentions and citizenship behaviors towards the union [23]. Results of Ortac's study show that having trust to supervisors completely mediates the relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behavior with regard to the organization and it partially mediates the relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behavior with regard to individuals. Messeer and White investigating employees' mood on organizational citizenship behavior showed that employees' perceptions of fairness affected their likelihood to perform organizational citizenship behaviors and had a more enduring effect, in comparison to their mood, on increasing their extra role work behaviors. Moreover, organizational justice might enhance one's performance through affecting their conscientiousness [24]. In addition, organizational justice has powerful influences on individuals' attitudes and different behaviors like job satisfaction, organizational commitment, trust, job performance and organizational citizenship behavior [6]. Results of Na'ami and Shekarkan showed that organizational justice and its three components have significant positive relationship with organizational citizenship behavior and its dimensions (altruism, courtesy, sportsmanship, conscientiousness and civic virtue) and the three types of or ganizational justice have significant multiple correlation with organizational citizenship behavior [25]. Organ and Konovsky examined the relative importance of subjective appraisals of the job versus mood state in accounting for organizational citizenship behavior. They found that since fair behavior might affect employees' perceptions of their relation with the organization, employees' fairness interpretation might be important in nurturing organizational citizenship behavior [26]. In addition, Organ and Ryan in their meta-analytic study found that job attitudes are robust predictors of organizational citizenship behavior. Moreover, their results showed

Fig. 1: The study's conceptual model that other attitudinal measures such as perceived fairness, organizational commitment and leader supportiveness correlate with organizational citizenship behavior at roughly the same level as satisfaction [27]. In a more recent study, Williams, Pitre and Zainubafound that dimensions of organizational justice have strong positive effect on organizational citizenship behavior [28]. Sayyar believes that employees will have loyalty toward the organization when they see that they have social rights which include fair behaviors with employees such as increasing their salary, benefits and social status and they will show citizenship behavior of loyalty type. In addition, when their political rights in the organization are respected and they are given partnership and decisionmaking rights in organization' political realms, they show organizational citizenship behavior of participatory type [14]. The Study's Conceptual Model: Considering the theoretical basic of organizational justice concepts and organizational citizenship behaviors and their dimensions, the study's conceptual model was designed (Figure 1) and based this model the research hypotheses were presented. In this model, the organizational justice is the independent variable and organizational citizenship behavior is the dependent variable. Research Hypotheses: The main hypothesis: there is a relationship between teachers' perceptions of organizational justice and their organizational citizenship behavior. Secondary Hypotheses: C There is a relationship between teachers' perceptions of distributive justice and their organizational citizenship behavior. C There is a relationship between teachers' perceptions of procedural justice and their organizational citizenship behavior. 116

World Appl. Sci. J., 18 (1): 113-122, 2012

C

C

C

Table 1: Sample distribution based on gender and academic level

There is a relationship between teachers' perceptions of interactive justice and their organizational citizenship behavior. There is a difference between teachers' perceptions of organizational justice with regard to demographic characteristics (sex, education, academic level and working experiment). There is a difference between teachers' organizational citizenship behavior with regard to demographic characteristics (sex, education,academic level and workingexperiment).

Sex/academic Level

Population and Sampling Procedure: The population under study was all 913teachers of primary, secondary and high schools who were working full-time in 2010-2011. Since in the current study the population's variance was unknown, a primary study was carried out to find the population's variance. So a total of 30 teachers were randomly selected and the questionnaires were distributed among them and after extracting the data related to the sample and estimating the population's variance the sample was found to be 131 based on the Cochran's formula.

n N p q d t

( N − 1) d 2 + t 2 pq

= Sample = Population = Percentage of people with the study's characteristics = Percentage of people without the study's characteristics = Desired error = 0.05 = Confidence interval 95% = 1.96 2

( 913) × ( 0.05 )2 + (1.96 )2 × 0.88 × 0.12

21 15

Higher school 22 32

Total 71 60

Total

41

36

54

131

Instruments: Organizational justice questionnaire: to assess organizational justice the validated form of organizational justice questionnaire (Niehoff and Moorman,1993) containing 21 questions that is assessed with its three dimensions of distributive (5 questions), procedural (9 questions) and interactive organizational justice (9 questions) was used. The questions are answered on a 5 point Likert-scale (ranging from 1=strongly disagree, to 5 = strongly agree). The faceandcontentvalidityofquestionnaires were checked by 7 experts of management and its reliability coefficient was 0.87 in Niehoff and Moorman's (1993)study. In this study the reliability coefficient was estimated to be 0.88 based on Cronbach's alpha for the total questionnaire and 0.76 for distributive, 0.82 for procedural and 0.86 for interactive justice which shows the reliability and validity of the research instrument. Organizational citizenship behavior questionnaire: Podsakoff and MacKenzie's (1990) organizational citizenship behavior questionnaire containing 24 questions with its 5 dimensions altruism (7 items), courtesy (2 items), sportsmanship (4 items), conscientiousness (7 items) and civic virtue (4 items) was used to assess the organizational citizenship behavior. The questions are answered on a 5 point Likertscale (ranging from 1=strongly disagree, to 5 = strongly agree) and questions 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 17 are counternumbered (5=strongly disagree, to 1 = strongly agree). The faceandcontentvalidityofquestionnaires were checked by 7 experts of management and its reliability coefficient was 0.88 in Na'ami and Shekarkan's (2001)

Nt 2 pq

913 × (1.96 ) × 0.88 × 0.12

Secondary

28 13

population in different academic levels and with regard to their sex. Table 1 illustrates the sample's frequency distribution categorized based on their sex and their academic level. To collect the required data, first a questionnaire with necessary information about the current study, considering the confidentiality of personal information and profiles of subjects, was distributed among 150 teachers. One of the researchers was present in all phases of questionnaire distribution and completion to help subjects with regard to study's aim and its importance and how to answer questions. From 150 questionnaires distributed, 131 were collected and used for data analysis.

Method: Since the study's aim is to find the causal relations between organizational justice variables (distributive, procedural and interactive) and organizational citizenship behavior, the study was applied research and because of the type of data collection it was of descriptive correlational type.

n=

Primary

Female Male

n==131

The sampling process was classified random sampling based on the population. First the ratio of percentages of the current groups to the total population was estimated and then the different classes of the sample were selected based on that ratio. In this study the samples were randomly selected based on teachers' 117

World Appl. Sci. J., 18 (1): 113-122, 2012

study. In this study the reliability coefficient was estimated to be 0.89 based on Cronbach's alpha for the total questionnaire and for its 5 dimensions altruism (0.89), courtesy (0.84), sportsmanship (0.82), conscientiousness (0.77) and civic virtue (0.86) was which shows the reliability and validity of the research instrument. In this study organizational justice is the independent variable, organizational citizenship behavior the dependent one and sex, education, academic level and working experiments were control variables.

According to Table 2, the correlation coefficient of organizational justice and organizational citizenship behavior is r = 0.279 andthis relationship is significant at the level of 0.05 (p=0.001 # 0.05). In addition, the correlation coefficients of distributive, procedural and interactive justice are significant at the level of 0.05. Thus, there is a significant relationship between organizational justice and its dimensions and organizational citizenship behavior. Which component of organizational justice is the predictor of organizational citizenship behavior? Based on the results of Table 3, procedural justice explains 7% variance of organizational citizenship behavior. According to Table 4, procedural justice is the best predictor of organizational citizenship behavior. Based on Beta coefficients, when one unit is added to procedural justice, organizational citizenship behavior is added to 0.261 units. Which dimensions of organizational justice is the predictor of organizational citizenship behavior in civic virtue,sportsmanship andconscientiousness? Based on Table 5, interactive and procedural justice explain 5% variance of organizational citizenship behavior in dimensions of civic virtue, sportsmanship and conscientiousness. According to Table 6, the best predictor of organizational citizenship behavior in the civic virtue dimension had been interactive justice. Based on Beta coefficients, when one unit is added to interactive justice,

Data Analysis Procedure: The obtained data were analyzed using Pearson's correlation coefficient (to find the relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behavior), stepwise regression (to predict organizational citizenship behavior dimensions from organizational justice dimensions) and multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was sued to compare organizational justice dimensions and organizational citizenship behavior dimensions based on demographic variables. RESULTS In this section first the correlation coefficients between research variables are presented followed by results of stepwise regression and MANOVA. Hypothesis: there is a relationship between organizational justice and its dimensions and organizational citizenship behavior.

Table 2: Correlation coefficients between organizational justice and its dimensions and organizational citizenship behavior organizational citizenship behavior --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Correlation Coefficient

r

Organizational justice

0.279

0.001*

p

131

n

Distributive justice

0.212

0.05*

131

Procedural justice Interactive justice

0.261 0.239

0.003* 0.006*

131 131

*Shows the existence of the significant relationship at the level of 0.05. Table 3: Multiple correlation coefficients between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behavior Model 1

R

R2

0.261

0.068

Ad R2 0.061

F

Sig

9.46

0.001

Vif 1

Table 4: Multiple (Stepwise) Regression of predicting organizational citizenship behavior based on organizational justice dimensions.

1

Fixed Coefficient Procedural Justice

Non-standard Coefficients

Standard Coefficient

--------------------------------------------B Standard Error

-------------------------Beta

80.33 0.463

3.98 0.150

0.261

118

t

p

20.13 3.07

0.001 0.003

World Appl. Sci. J., 18 (1): 113-122, 2012 Table 5: Multiple Correlation coefficients between dimensions of organizational justice and organizational citizenship behavior in civic virtue, sportsmanship and conscientiousness Model

Criterion Variable

1 1 1

civic virtue sportsmanship conscientiousness

Predicting variable Distributive Procedural Interactive

R

R2

Ad R2

F

0.231 0.176 0.287

0.054 0.031 0.082

0.046 0.023 0.075

7.28 4.10 11.58

Sig

Vif

0.008 0.045 0.001

1 1 1

Table 6: Multiple (Stepwise) Regression of predicting organizational citizenship behavior in dimensions of civic virtue, sportsmanship and conscientiousness based on organizational justice dimensions Non-standard Coefficients -----------------------------------B Standard Error

Standard Coefficient -------------------------Beta

Model

Organizational citizenship behavior dimensions

Organizational justice dimensions

1

civic virtue

Fixed Coefficient DistributiveJustice

12.20 0.081

1.09 0.030

0.231

11.18 2.69

0.001 0.008

1

Sportsmanship

Fixed Coefficient Procedural Justice

11.21 0.112

1.46 0.055

0.176

7.68 2.02

0.001 0.045

1

conscientiousness

Fixed Coefficient Interactive Justice

22.03 0.188

1.99 0.055

0.287

11.03 2.40

0.001 0.001

t

p

Table 7: MANOVA results of comparing organizational citizenship behavior based on demographic variables P

Eta

Power

Sex

Dimensions Civic Virtue Sportsmanship Conscientiousness Altruism Courtesy

5.52 0.003 1.14 0.354 0.047

F

0.021 0.958 0.288 0.553 0.829

0.054 0.000 0.012 0.004 0.000

0.643 0.050 0.185 0.091 0.055

Education

Civic Virtue Sportsmanship Conscientiousness Altruism Courtesy

4.43 0.913 1.40 1.03 0.745

0.014 0.405 0.250 0.360 0.478

0.084 0.019 0.028 0.021 0.015

0.750 0.204 0.295 0.226 0.173

Academic Level


3.03 0.054 5.22 0.201 0.686

0.052 0.948 0.007 0.819 0.504

0.060 0.001 0.098 0.004 0.014

0.576 0.058 0.820 0.080 0.163

Working Experience


0.859 0.170 0.521 0.052 0.155

0.427 0.844 0.595 0.949 0.857

0.018 0.004 0.011 0.001 0.003

0.194 0.076 0.134 0.058 0.073

Table 8: MANOVA results of comparing organizational justice based ondemographic variables P

Eta

Power

Sex

Dimensions Distributive Procedural Interactive

1.08 0.338 0.388

F

0.300 0.562 0.535

0.011 0.004 0.004

0.178 0.089 0.095

Education

Distributive Procedural Interactive

0.852 0.717 1.35

0.430 0.491 0.262

0.017 0.015 0.028

0.194 0.168 0.286

Academic Level


1.71 2.47 1.61

0.185 0.089 0.204

0.035 0.049 0.033

0.352 0.478 0.335

Working Experience


2.29 1.50 0.825

0.106 0.228 0.441

0.046 0.030 0.017

0.456 0.313 0.188

119

World Appl. Sci. J., 18 (1): 113-122, 2012

organizational citizenship behavior in civic virtue dimension is added to 0.231 units. Moreover, the best predictor of organizational citizenship behavior in the sportsmanship dimension is procedural justice. Based on Beta coefficients, when one unit is added to procedural justice, organizational citizenship behavior in sportsmanship dimension is added to 0.176 units. Moreover, the best predictor of organizational citizenship behavior in the conscientiousness dimension is interactive justice. Based on Beta coefficients, when one unit is added to interactive justice, organizational citizenship behavior in conscientiousness dimension is added to 0.287 units. According to Table 7, it was found that results were significant at the level of 0.05 for civic virtue in terms of sex, education and conscientiousness regarding academic level. Based on results of Table 8, the observed F was not significant at level of 0.05. Therefore, there are not significant differences between dimensions of justice based on sex, education, academic level and working experience.

In fact, one of the important factors in establishing organizational citizenship behavior is maintain justice in organizations. Thus, managers of public organizations should try to increase justice in educational settings. If employees feel that they are behaved fairly, they will do their citizenship behaviors. Moreover, unfair distribution of resources and biased circulars and regulations and administrating them (unfair procedures) are main causes of low organizational citizenship behavior. As Organ and Konovsky (1989) maintain in their study, since fair behaviors might make a change in employees' attitude toward their relations with the organization, employees' perceptions of fairness in working environment are very important for the emersion of organizational citizenship behavior. Results obtained from stepwise regression showed that the best predictor of organizational citizenship behavior is procedural justice. Moreover, interactive justice is the best predictor of two dimensions of civic virtue and conscientiousness of organizational citizenship behavior (Beta = 0.231 for civic virtue and Beta = 0.287 for conscientiousness) and procedural justice is the best predictors for conscientiousness (Beta = 0.176). Moorman (1991) showed that procedural and interactive justice are important predictors of organizational citizenship behavior. The existence of such relationship is based on the view that when employees know their working environment based on fairness and justice, they will naturally behave in a friendly and politely manner with conscientiousness toward colleagues, customers and others. Based on results obtained from MANOVA, there exist significant differencesforcivic virtue with regard to sex and educationand for conscientiousness with regard to academic level. But, there is no difference between dimensions of justice with regard to sex, education, academic level and working experience.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION As pointed out before, the present study intends to investigate the relationship between perceptions of organizational justice and its dimensions and organizational citizenship behavior. To study these relationships statistical tests were used and their results pointed to a significant relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behavior. Thus, the first research hypothesis was confirmed, which was in accordance with Na'ami and Shekarkan (2006) and Williams et al. (2002). Moreover, findings showed the three dimensions of organizational justice (distributive, procedural and interactive) have significant relationships with organizational citizenship behavior and in this regard, hypotheses 2,3 and 4 were confirmed. These results were in agreement with Masterson et al. (2000) and Rezaeian (2007) with regard to the effectiveness of procedural justice on organizational citizenship behavior and with Goudarzvand Chegini (2009) with regard to the positive relationship between distributive justice and organizational citizenship behavior. Rezaeian (2007) showed that when employees feel that organization's procedures are true, compatible and f air, they will show more citizenship behavior.

Suggestions: Based on obtained results, it is suggested that to encourage citizenship behaviors, educational managers shouldfind appropriate backgrounds and manage and strengthen them. As investigated in this study, organizational justice is one of the important prefaces of organizational citizenship behavior. Moreover, results of this study showed that procedural justice highly correlates with teachers' organizational citizenship behavior. Thus, we should provide the opportunity for the emersion of organizational justice in educational

120

World Appl. Sci. J., 18 (1): 113-122, 2012

settings and to develop justice in organizations in organizations we should have a fair-based system and with some management actions the emersion of good citizen behaviors in teachers is strengthen. Moreover, we should try to increase procedural justice by making a fair system of salary, income and procedural justice or we can give teachers more authority and control in decision-making processes about income and reward. In addition, by making positive attitudes toward the organization and colleagues we can increase teachers' loyalty and fidelity toward the organization. REFERENCES 1. Oraizi, H. and M. Golparvar, 2006. The relationship between organizational justice with social orientation of Isfahan University students. The J. Psychology Sci., pp: 17. 2. Greenberg, J., 1987. A taxonomy of organization justice theories. Academy of Management Review, 12(1): 9-22. 3. Alvani, S.M., A.A. Pourezzat and A. Sayyar, 2003. Investigating the relationship between organizational justice and commitment. The J. Management and Human Resources in Oil Industry, 2(3): 30-36. 4. Niehoff, B.P. and R.H. Moorman, 1993. Justice as a Mediator of the Relationship Between Methods of Monitoring and Organizational Citizenship Behavior. Academy of Management J., 36: 527-56. 5. Barati, Hajar. 2008. The relationship between the variables of organizational justice, organizational climate and work ethic of employees with job performance in Esfahan Steel Co. MS Thesis, faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences University of Isfahan. 6. Oraizi, H., 2009. The relationship between organizational justice and perceived organizational support with organizational civic behavior of Staff of Iran's oil company. Unpublished M.A. thesis. Isfahan: University of Isfahan 7. Rezaeian, A. and F. Rahimi, 2008. Investigating the effectiveness of procedural justice on organizational citizenship behavior considering the role of organizational justice. The J. Management Perspective, 29: 69-87. 8. Amirkhani, T. and A.A. Pourezzat, 2008. A look at the possibility of the development of social capital in the light of organizational justice in government organizations. J. public administration, 1(1): 19-32. Faculty of management, University of Tehran (in Persian). 121

9. Podsakoff, P.M. and S.B. MacKenzie, 1997. The impact of organizational citizenship behavior on organizational performance: A review and suggestions for future research. Human Performance, pp: 10. 10. Bolino Mark and Turnley William, 2003. "Going the extra mile:cultivating and managing employee citizenship behavior", Academy of Management Executive, 17(3): 60-71 11. Bienstock, C.C., W.C. Demoranville and K.R. Smith, 2003. Organizational citizenship behavior and service quality. J. Services Marketing, 17(4): 357-378. 12. Vigoda, E., 2000. Internal politics in public administrationSystems: an empirical examination of its relationship with Jobcongruence, organizational citizenship behavior and in - roleperformance. Public Personnel Manage., 29(2): 185-203. 13. Organ, D.W., 1988. Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. 14. Eslami, H. and A. Sayar, 2008. Organizational citizenship behavior. Ofogh J., pp: 37. 15. Podsakoff, Mackenzie, Paine and Bachrach, 2000. "Organizational citizenship behaviours: a critical review or the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for futureresearch", J. Manage., 26( N3): 513-563. 16. Orgun, W.P., M.P. Podsakoff and B.S. Mackenzie, 2006. "Organizational Citizenship Behavior, is Nature, Antecedents and Consequences". India: A Sage Publication Series. India. (Series in Applied Paperback: 360 pages). 17. Castro, C.B., E. Armario and D. Ruiz, 2004. The influence of employee organizational citizenship behavior on customer loyalty. International J. Service Industry Manage., 15(1): 276-282. 18. Golparvar, M., et al. 1386. The role of participationin decision making, careerinterests andcareeralternativesinspecialschoolsin Isfahan. Islamic Azad University of Educational Sciences (Isfahan), 15: 25-46. 19. Yilmaz, K. and M. Tasdan, 2009. Organizational citizenship and organizational justice in Turkish primary schools. J. Educ. Adm., 47(1): 108-126. 20. Podsakoff, N.P., S.W. Whiting, P.M. Podsakoff and B.D. Blume, 2009. Individual-and organizational-level consequences of organizational citizenship behaviors: A meta-analysis. J. Applied Psychol., 94: 122-141.

World Appl. Sci. J., 18 (1): 113-122, 2012

21. Masterson, S.S., K. Lewise, B.S. Goldman and M.S. Taylor, 2000. Integrate justice and social exchange: the differing effect of fair procedure and treatment on work relationship. Academy of Management J., 43: 738-766. 22. Goudarzvand Chegini, M., 2009. The Relationship between Organizational Justice andOrganizational Citizenship Behavior. American J. Economics and Business Administration, 1(2): 171-174 23. Brown, G., B. Bemmels and L.J. Barclay, 2010. The importance of policy in perceptions of organizational justice. Human Relations, 63(10): 1587-16 24. Sarukhani, B. and A. Talebian, 2004. Working conscientiousness and social factors affecting it in petrochemical industry of Iran. The J. Iranian Sociol., 4: 162-188.

25. Na'ami, A. and H. Shekarkan, 2006. Investigating simple and multiple relationships of organizational justice with civic behavior of employees of an industrial organization in Ahvaz. The J. Educational Sciences and Psychology of University of Ahvaz, 13(1): 79-93. 26. Organ, D.W. and M. Konovsky, 1989. Cognitive versus affective determinants of organizational citizenship behavior. J. Applied Psychol., 74(1): 157-164 27. Organ, D. and K. Ryan, 1995. A Meta-Analytic Review of Attitudinal and Dispositional Predictors of Organizational Citizenship Behavior. Personnel Psychol., 48(4): 775-802. 28. Williams, S., R. Pitre and M. Zainuba, 2002. Justice and organizational citizenship behavior intentions: fair rewards versus fair treatment. The J. Social Psychol., 142(1): 33-44.

122