Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) among Bank Employees ...

© 2018 IJRAR August 2018, Volume 5, Issue 3

www.ijrar.org (E-ISSN 2348-1269, P- ISSN 2349-5138)

Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) among Bank Employees -Validating scale for OCB in the Banks of South Assam Zareen Mazumder1 Dr. Arup Barman2 1 Research Scholar, 2Professor, Department of Business Administration, Assam University Email: [email protected]

Abstract: The concept of OCB has received extensive coverage across the world in multifaceted forms, nevertheless, the amount of study undertaken in the North Eastern part of India has remained comparatively scarce. In that backdrop the present piece of work aims to highlight upon conceptual background of OCB as well as present the results of a survey carried out among 264 respondents associated in the banking sector in South Assam. A well designed structured questionnaire was used in order to collect data from the respondents. The study utilized factor analysis in order to extract factors influencing the exhibition of citizenship behaviour at workplace and concluded by commenting on ways to enhance citizenship behaviour at work. Keywords: Organizational citizenship behavior, Banking sector, South Assam, Factor Analysis _____________________________________________________________________________________________ 1. INTRODUCTION Researches undertaken by Organ (1988) found that OCB is one of the primary forces contributing towards the continuation and welfare of the organisation. Katz (1964) used the term “citizenship” to emphasize on those set of employees who display “extrarole behaviors”. Studies even revealed that demonstration of “citizenship behavior” is highly valued by the supervisors and managers alike since they make the work environment much smoother leading to involvement in spontaneous and innovative behaviors thus helping the organisation to survive. Other terms used to describe such category of behaviour, include cooperation (Barnard,1938), spontaneous behaviour (Katz & Kahn,1966), organizational spontaneity (George & Brief,1992). Organ (1988) defined it as discretionary individual behavior, explained firstly as a matter of personal choice and secondly as something which is not explicitly recognized by the formal reward system but which promotes the effective functioning of the organization. Turnip seed & Rassuli (2005) looked at OCB as something which aimed to defend and protect the reputation of the organisation or the workers investing in the overall wellbeing of the organisation. Activities such as assisting a fellow worker, or giving a free ride to him, following the stipulated guidelines, not taking unnecessary breaks between work, working on measures to check unwanted situations to arise at workplace and a general sense of concern towards the organisation all come under the ambit of the study of OCB. 2. CONTEXT OF EXPLORATION The banking sector in India comprising of both the public and private sector is moving towards a considerable rate of growth coupled with advancements in technology and innovation. The banking system in India is comprised of 27 public sector banks, 22 private sector banks, 44 foreign banks, 56 regional rural banks. Every organization has the basic obligation to not only provide for the security in terms of salary, but also look after the career progress of each of the employees. It is equally significant on the part of the organization to see that the employees not only fulfill their job description successfully but also are provided with enough possibilities which drives them to take the ‘extra mile’ for the overall wellbeing of the organization. The concept of OCB arises in this context where the employee out of his own choice decides to contribute his bit for the overall wellbeing of the organization without any anticipation of reward, applause or appreciation. There are plenty of researches that has been carried out throughout the world related to the conceptual framework of OCB, its meaning and significance, the antecedents and consequences of OCB. The area which has still remained comparatively virgin is with reference to the North Eastern part of India, with special focus on the Southern part of Assam mainly comprising of three districts Cachar, Karimganj and Hailakandi and too taking the banking sector into account. OCB traces its origin to the display of cooperative behaviors in the efforts put forth by individual members. Researchers like Gautam et al. (2005) are of the view that change in geographic context along with cultural variations may lead to differences in citizenship behavior exhibited at workplace. In order to effectively attain goals for the organization, a urge and a willingness to contribute cooperative efforts has been found to be a primary force (Barnard, 1938). There is scarcity of research undertaken with respect to assessing the various forces or predictors influencing the exhibition of citizenship behavior at workplace and thus the present study aims to contribute towards that end. 3. OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY  To review the major dimensions that makes up the construct of organizational citizenship behavior;  To examine validity and to modify the scale for assessment for organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) in the context of bank employees in South Assam. 4. THE CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK 4.1. Dimensions of OCB - Organ in 1988 introduced the five dimensional OCB and this has come to be known as one of the most popular conceptualization of OCB comprising of altruism, conscientiousness, courtesy, sportsmanship and civic virtue. Altruism takes into account the helping nature, conscientiousness goes beyond the specified duty hours, while sportsmanship focuses on IJRAR1903406

International Journal of Research and Analytical Reviews (IJRAR) www.ijrar.org

187



going beyond trivial issues and matters and displaying constructive endeavors. Courtesy emphasizes on being polite and understanding of others while civic virtue as a whole promotes the interests of the organization, such as attending meetings so as to enhance company image, keeping up to date with company events and affairs or taking a stand in order to defend the organization. On the other hand, Williams and Anderson (1991) also described a two-dimensional definition of OCB. The first part being of benefit to the entire organization (OCBO) like taking measures to defend the organisation while the second aspect is of benefits directed at individuals within the organization (OCBI) such as helping a fellow colleague. Studies undertaken by Graham (1991) titled “An Essay on Organizational Citizenship Behavior” revealed three major elements which make up the concept of citizenship behaviour. These are organisational obedience, organisational loyalty and organisational participation. Podsakoff and colleagues (2000) after an analysis of 30 different varieties of citizenship behaviour arrived at the conclusion about the existence of seven common dimensions of citizenship behaviors. These dimensions are helping behavior, sportsmanship, civic virtue, organizational loyalty, organizational compliance, individual initiative and self-development. 4.2. Perceived Organizational Support (POS) – Employees develop a general understanding regarding the amount of effort the organization is willing to put in to provide the best in terms of caring for the welfare and wellbeing of the individual. This sense of higher degree of concern shown towards the employees equates to a higher perceived organizational support. The 17 item scale developed by Eisenberger, Huntington, Hutchinson & Sown, 1986 was adopted eight items have been taken up for the study. Items such as “organization values my contribution to its well-being”, “pays heed to complaint from my side” were used to extract responses from the employees with high loadings for all the items. 4.3. Organizational Commitment (OC) – It refers to an employee’s association and involvement with the organization (Porter et al., 1974). The construct of organizational commitment was measured using items adopted from the scale developed by Yilmaz and Hunt (2001).It included seven items in the questionnaire and included items such as “willing to put in great deal of effort than normally expected”, “talk about my organization as a great place to work”, etc were included in the questionnaire. 4.4. Organizational Justice (OJ) – Organizational justice basically deals with how fairly an organization treats its employees in terms of meting out policy decisions or fulfilling procedures, or in terms of resource allocation. Ten items were drawn from the 36 item scale developed by Rahim, Magner & Shapiro (2000). The questionnaire included items such as “I believe that my rewards accurately reflect my contribution to the organization”, “the most productive employees in my organisation receives the highest rewards”, etc to measure for organizational justice responses. 4.5. Antecedents of OCB – Multitude of factors have been studied in the past and there is hardly any consensus with respect to which factors exercise more of an influence than the other. Some literature has classified the predictors into broad divisions one being the organisational characteristics while the other being the individual characteristics. Most commonly known predictors of OCB as established by various researchers include job satisfaction and organizational commitment (Van Dyne and Ang, 1995), leadership behaviors and role perceptions (Podsakoff et al., 2000). On the other hand, many other researchers focused on employee attitudes and dispositions and leader supportiveness as antecedents of OCB (Bateman & Organ, 1983; Organ, 1988; Smith et al., 1983; Organ, 1994). Attitudinal variables like organizational commitment, perceptions of justice, perceived organisational support were also found to be the major determinants of OCB. Individual characteristics like positive affectivity, agreeableness among the employees were also found to play a influential role in OCB. Other determining variable that were found to play a role within the organisational environment were leadership behaviour, organizational supportiveness and task characteristics. 5. METHODOLOGY 5.1. Respondents Profile and Data Collection The study used survey method of data collection in order to collect information from 264 respondents from each of the fifteen branches belonging to the five banks of Barak Valley comprising of three districts. Table 1.1 presents the set of respondents belonging to the five different banks from each of the three districts considered for the purpose of the study. The demographic profile (Table 1.2) speaks about the different details such as age, gender, income, educational qualification, designation, experience etc associated with respondents involved in the study. 5.2. Research Tools and Construction of Scale A well designed questionnaire comprising of questions related to the demographic profile along with items related to factors influencing citizenship behavior at work was distributed to the respondents associated in the banking sector in South Assam. Table 1.2 (in Appendix) highlights the demographic representation of respondents taken up for the study. The collected responses were measured in the 7 point Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree (SD) =1; disagree (D) =2; slightly disagree (SLD) = 3; neutral (N) = 4; slightly agree (SLA) = 5; agree (A) = 6; strongly agree (SA) = 7 with a total of 25 items comprising of three chosen factors, namely Perceived organisational support (POS), Organisational commitment (OC), and organisational justice (OJ) as the influencing factors. 5.3. Reliability Analysis Reliability analysis was also conducted in order to determine the internal homogeneity of the data. The table below (Table 1.3) shows the Cronbach’s alpha score to stand at 0.854 while the Cronbach’s alpha standardized item score stood at 0.852 for the set of 25 items selected for arriving at the major factors influencing citizenship behaviour. It indicates that the scale is good since the alpha value is more than the thumb rule of 0.7 (Nunnally, 1978).

IJRAR1903406


188



Table1.3 Reliability statistics Cronbach’s Alpha .854

Cronbach’s alpha based on standardized items .852

No. of items 25

5.4. Sampling Adequacy The test reports about the fitness of the data for dimension reduction, as well as the validity of the responses collected through the survey instrument. Table 1.4 highlights that KMO measure in this case comes at .836, indicating great acceptable value for moving ahead with the analysis. The Bartlett’s test result also signified that the test values were significant and thus believed to be acceptable.

Table1.4: KMO and Barlett’s Test 0.836 1476.540

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square df

300

Sig.

.000

5.5. Analysis Tools The present study utilized factor analysis as the major technique of analysis applying Principal Component Analysis using the Promax rotation method and Kaiser normalization technique using SPSS Version 21. For the purpose of the study, it was decided to consider Perceived Organizational Support (POS), Organizational commitment (OC) and Organizational Justice (OJ) as the main contributing factors influencing citizenship behavior at workplace.

6. DERIVING FACTOR STRUCTURE For the Eigen value, the thumb rule, when the values is greater than 1 was used in order to extract the factors displayed in the table “Total variance explained” attached in the appendix section (Table1.5). The next section (Table 1.6) provides us with a representation relating to the dataset with clearly extracted 6 factors through the Pattern matrix. The thumb rule of loadings above 0.4 was taken into account for extracting the list of factors. The first factor as seen in the table has been found to comprise of six items, the second factor included five items, the third factor comprised of three variables, while the fourth factor is a combination of four items, the fifth factor comprising of two variables, while the last factor comprised of three variables. The following table (Table 1.7) presents the six components derived out of factor analysis, namely (Factor1) Organisational supportiveness, (Factor 2) Justice perception, (Factor 3) Supervisory support, (Factor 4) Organizational identification, (Factor 5) Promoting company image, (Factor 6) organisational loyalty along with the respective set of items reported as per the analysis. Table 1.7 Factors influencing Organisational Citizenship Behaviour Factor 1 Organisational Supportiveness Display concern

Factor 2 Justice Perception

Cares about individual wellbeing. Recognize a job welldone

Rewards matches with the level of performance Productive employee receive highest rewards Rewards reflect contribution to the organization Existence of formal procedure to prevent personal biases

Pay attention to a complaint Satisfaction at workplace

Presence of formal channels

Factor 3 Supervisory Support Supervisor shows kindness Supervisor treats in a polite manner Supervisor shows respect to me

Factor 4 Organisational identification Individual and organisation values are similar Concern about the future of the organisation Impact of action over the employees

Factor 5 Promoting company image Organisation great place to work

Factor 6 Organisational loyalty Best place to work

Proud to tell others about organisation

Organization values contribution Organization appreciates extra effort

Willing to put in extra effort for the organisation

Pride in work accomplishments Source: Derived out of primary data analysis

Factor 1: Organizational Supportiveness 1. Organisation shows concern for me. 2. Organisation cares about my well being 3. Organisation recognizes if a job is well done. 4. Organisation pays attention to complaint from my side. 5. Organisation cares about my satisfaction at workplace. 6. Organisation takes pride in my work accomplishments. Factor 2: Justice Perception 1. Dependence on formal channels to openly express views before final decisions is made. 2. Rewards match with the level of performance. 3. Most productive employee receives highest rewards. 4. Rewards are in tune with the contributions made towards the organization. 5. Existences of formal procedures to ensure personal biases do not take place. IJRAR1903406


189



Factor 3: Supervisory Support 1. Supervisor treats in a kind manner. 2. Supervisor is polite in interactions. 3. Supervisor shows respect towards the coworkers. Factor 4: Organizational Identification 1. Similarity in individual and organization’s value. 2. Concern about the future of the organization. 3. Supervisor showing concern for his action towards the subordinates. 4. Going extra mile to help the company succeed. Factor 5: Promoting Company Image 1. Organisation as a great place to work. 2. Proud to tell others about the organization. Factor 6: Organizational Loyalty 1. Best possible organization to work for. 2. Organisation values contribution to its well being. 3. Organisation appreciates extra effort from individual side 7. SUGGESTIONS AND IMPLICATIONS The management may work on taking proactive measures such as taking care of employee well being as well as attending to his complaints or redesigning jobs, or bringing in job elements thus challenging and motivating an employee at the same time thereby helping in create a connect with the organisation at large. The supervisors and the managers involved in the banking arena may be further enlightened about the need and significance of OCB. Developing higher levels of supervisory and organisational support can easily help foster the spirit of altruistic tendency among the employees. Focusing on fairness and transparency in organisational policy making and implementation will also help build and acquire more organizationally inclined citizens. An emphasis on making communication flow easily among and between the employees along with a sense of empowerment helps to develop the spirit to contribute beyond the stated job requirements. Multiple factors have been found to be differently responsible for the exhibition of citizenship behaviour in the banking sector in South Assam. Many employees lack the basic idea that job roles may exist beyond job boundaries and that task requirements may extend beyond fulfilling task specifications. The study in this regard aims to impart an understanding of citizenship behaviour about the influencing forces and its benefits to the organisational environment at large, thereby helping the individual to develop a sense of connect and oneness with the organisational value set. An exploration of the major factors having an impact on the exhibition of citizenship behaviour goes a long way in promoting the spirit of citizenship behaviour among the employees at their work place. 8. CONCLUSION Individuals once they are hired into the organisation are generally expected to fulfill work related roles and obligations to the best of their abilities. However, not every role is stated and clearly specified and it is simply expected out of the employee by virtue of him being a part of the organization. Herein, comes the concept of extra role contribution, going ahead of job role boundaries and giving one’s best effort for the overall upliftment of the organization. One of the important ways towards encouraging citizenship behaviour at workplace is to work on improvising the organizational system through the introduction of fair and transparent policies and procedures in terms of how promotion, appraisal, rewards, recognition programs are decided upon. Organizations can also work on developing a character of oneness, loyalty and belongingness among all the employees through promoting an environment of sharing, support, coordination and free will to contribute and participate in organizational functioning. Such measures are few of the mechanisms the organization can associate itself with, thereby building in easier transformation from work associated job boundaries to going beyond those job boundaries.

REFERENCES       

 

Bateman, T.S., and D.W. Organ, (1983). “Job satisfaction and the good soldier: The relationship between affect and employee citizenship”, Academy Management. J.,26: 587-595. C. I. Barnard. (1938). The functions of the executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S. & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 500-507. Gautam, T., Van Dick, R., Wagner, U., Upadhyay, N., & Davis, A. J. (2005).Organizational citizenship behavior and organizational commitment in Nepal. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 8(3),305–314. George, J. M., & Brief, A. P. 1992. Feeling good-doing good: A conceptual analysis of the mood at work-organizational spontaneity relationship.Psychological Bulletin, 112: 310 –329 Graham, J. W. 1991. An essay on organizational citizenship behavior.Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 4: 249 –270. Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1966). “The social psychology of organizations”, New York: Wiley. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory(2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Organ, D. W., (1988). “Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome”, Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

IJRAR1903406


190

© 2018 IJRAR August 2018, Volume 5, Issue 3    

     


Organ, D. W. (1994a). Organizational citizenship behavior and the good soldier. In M. G. Rumsey, C. B. Walker, and J. H. Harris (Eds.), Personnel selection and classification (pp. 53-67). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Organ, D. W. (1994b). Personality and organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Management, 20, 465-478. Pattanayak, B., Misra, R. K. and Niranjana, P., (2005). “Organizational Citizenship Behaviour Inventory: A Conceptual and Validation Analysis,” 2005 Annual: Vol.2, Consulting Pfeiffer, Jossey-Bass, USA. Podsakoff, P., MacKensie, S., Paine, J., & Bachrach, D.(2000). Organizational Citizenship Behaviors: A Critical Review of the Theoretical and Empirical Literature and Suggestions for Future Research. Journal of Management, 26, 513-563. Porter, Lyman W., Richard M, Steers, Richard T. Mowday, and Paul V. Boulian 1974 "Organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and turnover among psychiatric techni- cians." Journal of Applled Psychology, 59: 603-609 Rahim, M. A., Magner, N. R., & Shapiro, D. L. (2000). Do justice perceptions influence styles of handling conflict with supervisor? What justice perceptions, precisely? International Journal of Conflict Management, 11, 5–26 Smith, C., Organ, D., & Near, J. (1983). Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 653-663. Williams, L. J. & Anderson, S. E. (1991). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviours. Journal of Management, 17, 601-617. Van Dyne, L. and S. Ang, 1995. “Organizational citizenship behavior of contingent workers in Singapore”, Acad. Manage. J., 41: 692-703 Yilmaz, C., & Hunt, S. D. (2001). Salesperson cooperation: the influence of relational, task,organizational, and personal factors. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 29(4), 335-357.

Websites visited  https://www.ibef.org/industry/banking-india.aspx , Retrieved on 5th Aug 2018

Appendix Table1.1 Respondents’ Profile Bank

Sector

State Bank of India

Public

Assam GraminVikash Bank

Public

United Bank of India

ICICI Bank

Axis bank

District Cachar Karimganj Hailaikandi Cachar Karimganj Hailaikandi

Cachar Karimganj Hailaikandi Cachar Private Karimganj Hailaikandi Cachar Private Karimganj Hailaikandi Total Public

Name of the branch Park Road, Silchar Karimganj Branch Hailaikandi Branch Premtala Branch, Silchar Karimganj Branch Hailaikandi Branch Central Road, Silchar Karimganj Branch Hailakandi Branch Ranghirkari Branch, Silchar Karimganj Branch Hailakandi Branch ShillongpattyBranch,Silchar Karimganj Branch Hailakandi Branch

No. of employees 62 48 32 9 10 8 24 14 12 8 7 5 13 6 6 264

Table1.2 Demographic Profile of respondents Demographic variables Gender

Age

Qualification

IJRAR1903406

Category Male Female Total 20-30 31-40 41-50 51 and above Total HSLC HS Graduation

Respondents (F) 179 85 264 94 66 47 57 264 7 9 157

Percentage (%) 67.8 32.2 100 35.6 25 17.8 21.6 100 2.7 3.4 59.5


191



Post graduation Total Married Unmarried Total Sub staff Office assistant Special assistant Assistant manager Manager Deputy manager Branch manager Total Less than 2 years 2-4 years 5-7 years 8-10 years Above 10 years Total Less than 10,000 10,000-20,000 20,000-30,000 Above 30,000 Total Cachar Karimganj Hailakandi Total Public Private total

Marital status

Designation

Experience

Income

District

Sector

91 264 175 89 264 12 51 68 64 39 19 11 264 46 67 42 24 85 264 28 71 165 264 118 84 62 264 216 48 264

34.5 100 66.3 33.7 100 4.5 19.3 25.8 24.2 14.8 7.2 4.2 100 17.4 25.4 15.9 9.1 32.2 100 10.6 26.9 62.5 100 44.7 31.8 23.5 100 81.8 18.1 100

Table1.5 Total Variance Explained Component

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Initial Eigen values

Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings

Rotation Sums of Squared Loadingsa

Total

% of Variance

Cumulative %

Total

% of Variance

Cumulative %

Total

5.734 1.699 1.515 1.244 1.214 1.179 .987 .985 .963 .889 .823 .792 .737 .695 .670 .626 .623 .563 .543 .515 .488 .427 .394 .364

22.935 6.796 6.060 4.977 4.856 4.715 3.946 3.938 3.853 3.554 3.291 3.170 2.948 2.782 2.681 2.505 2.491 2.252 2.174 2.060 1.951 1.707 1.578 1.457

22.935 29.731 35.791 40.768 45.624 50.338 54.284 58.223 62.075 65.629 68.920 72.090 75.038 77.820 80.501 83.006 85.497 87.749 89.923 91.983 93.934 95.641 97.218 98.675

5.734 1.699 1.515 1.244 1.214 1.179

22.935 6.796 6.060 4.977 4.856 4.715

22.935 29.731 35.791 40.768 45.624 50.338

4.498 3.580 2.571 2.451 1.991 1.793

IJRAR1903406


192



25 .331 1.325 100.000 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. a. When components are correlated, sums of squared loadings cannot be added to obtain a total variance.

Table 1.6 Pattern Matrix Component Items

1 .712

The organization really cares about my well being

.660 .647 .632

The organization shows concern for me The organization recognizes when a job is well done The organization pays heed to complaint from my side The organization cares about my general satisfaction at work The organization takes pride in my accomplishments at work My organization has in place formal channels that allow employees to express their views and opinions before decisions are made

2

3

The most productive employees in my organization generally receives the highest rewards

.625

I believe that my rewards accurately reflect my contribution to the organization

.516

Formal procedures exist in my organization to ensure that officials do not allow personal biases to affect their decision

.478

My supervisor treats me in a kind manner

.719

In dealings with my supervisor, I find him/her to be polite

.658

I believe that my supervisor's actions show that s/he respects me

.572

I am willing to put in a great deal of effort beyond than normally expected to help this company to be successful

6

.717 .694

In my relationship with my supervisor s/he shows a concern for the impact that his/her actions will have on me

5

.627 .625

The rewards I receive from my organization are in accordance with my level of performance

I find that my values and the organization’s values are similar I really care about the future of my organization

4

.617 .600 .480 .427

I talk about my organization to my friends as a great place to work for

.776

I am proud to tell others that I am part of this organization

.749

For me this is the best of all possible organization for which to work

.671

The organization values my contribution to its well being

.465

The organization always appreciates any extra effort from my side Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis Rotation method:Promax with Kaiser Normalizationa a.Rotation converged in 31 iterations

.415

IJRAR1903406


193