Content uploaded by Farzana Quoquab
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Farzana Quoquab on Jan 04, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
BMQR Vol.1, No.3, 2010
© University Publication Centre (UPENA) and Institute of Business Excellence 2180-2777
28
ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOR
AND COMMITMENT:
DO AGE AND TENURE MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE?
Jihad Mohammad
Farzana Quoquab Habib
Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
Sabarudin Zakaria
Multimedia University
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to examine the effect of age and tenure upon organizational
citizenship behavior (OCB) and organizational commitment (OC) in the context of higher
learning institution in Malaysia. A survey method has been carried out to collect the data
by using self-administered questionnaire to the academic staffs of a public university in
Malaysia. Implications and limitations of the study are discussed along with suggestions
for future research.
Keywords: Organizational citizenship behavior, age, higher learning institution,
Malaysia
Introduction
According to Katz (1964), there are three basic behaviors which are important for any
organization to achieve its goals and to become more effective and competitive in its
environment. These are: (i) employees must be induced to remain within the system, (ii)
employees must carry out there responsibilities in a dependable way, and (iii) employees
must be innovative and spontaneous in achieving the organizational goals that goes
beyond the official roles. Smith et al. (1983) labeled the last category of employee
behavior as Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) and they have defined it as the
discretionary behavior that goes beyond the official role and intend to help other
employees in the organization.
Researches (see Bateman and organ, 1983; Moorman, 1991; Organ, 1990; Organ,
1994; Organ and Lingl, 1995; Penner et al., 1997; Smith et al., 1983; Tang and Ibrahim,
1998) have found that employee satisfaction, organizational commitment, organizational
justice, career development, age, tenure, personality, motivation, leadership and
leadership behavior are antecedent for OCB. According to Smith et al. (1983), OCB
significantly contributes in lubricating the social machinery of the organization. In
addition, Organ (1988) has stressed that OCB is the vital and important factor that can
help the organization to be innovative. Due to its increased importance, it is crucial to
understand the different factors that contribute significantly in forming this desirable
behavior within the organization (Organ, 1988).
BMQR Vol.1, No.3, 2010
© University Publication Centre (UPENA) and Institute of Business Excellence 2180-2777
29
Motivation of the study
Since its inception, OCB and Organizational Commitment (OC) have got considerable
research interest. Many studies have tried to identify the antecedents that can lead to
OCB and OC (e.g., Bateman and organ, 1983; Moorman, 1993; Smith et al., 1983; Organ,
1990; Organ, 1994; Organ and Lingl, 1995; Skarlicki and Lathman, 1996). However,
little attention has been paid to know the effect of demographic variables upon OC and
OCB. In one study in the industrial context, Salami (2008) has found that age, tenure, and
educational level have clear and significant effect on organizational commitment. In
addition, Wagner and Rush (2000) indicated that older employees are more likely to be
engaged in OCB than younger employees. Nonetheless, both studies have been
conducted in European context, whereas, Asian culture is very rich culture and may hold
and contain different or similar perception than the European concepts. Therefore,
studying Asian culture would add value to the understanding of OC and OCB literature
and its practices. Choosing Malaysia as the research context is being considered as the
perfect choice of the researchers as this country is a great place of different races and
different cultures. Therefore, it can be assumed that the findings from this study will
contribute in the theory development and in practice significantly.
Besides, research about the specific factors that promote OCBs under differing
organizational context is scarce (Erturk, 2007). Specially, research has been neglected in
education institutions (Yilmaz and Bokeoglu, 2008). Employees‟ voluntary behavior is
quite important in education organizations as it is in where the extra role behavior is
performed as well as the official works. Moreover, in the education context, OC and
OCB have an important role in terms of analyzing the relationship the education workers
have with each other and with the organization. Therefore, this study has tried to fill up
this gap by considering the Higher Learning Institutions (HLI) as its research setting. It is
being expected that, the nature of management and employee relationship may vary from
the other traditional manufacturing company settings. By attempting to address this
specific problem at the institutions of higher education, this study could positively
contribute towards the overall improvement of the universities. Thus, objective of this
research is two folds. First, the present study has tried to examine the effect of age and
tenure as the demographic variables upon OCB and OC. Second, this study has examined
the relationship between organizational citizenship behavior and commitment in the HLI
context. In the following sections, a brief literature review has been discussed. Next,
based on the literature, a conceptual model has been proposed followed by the
methodology, discussion and findings, and managerial implications and limitations.
Literature review
The conceptualization of age and tenure
Aging refers to changes that occur in biological, psychological, and social functioning
through time and, therefore, affects each individual at the personal, organizational, and
societal level (DeLange et al., 2006; Sterns and Miklos, 1995). According to Kooij et al.
(2006), the term “older worker” can refer to workers from age 40 to 75, depending on the
purpose and field of study. Sterns and Doverspike (1989) defined age in various ways.
For example, chronological age, functional age, psychosocial age, organizational age and
life span.
BMQR Vol.1, No.3, 2010
© University Publication Centre (UPENA) and Institute of Business Excellence 2180-2777
30
The proposition that younger and older workers can view work and self in
different ways is existing. For example, Hall (1976) and Levinson et al., (1978) suggested
that the early years (between 20-34) are years of establishment and settling down; latter
years (between 35-45) are associated with stronger sense of self and location vis-a vis life
and work. Kegan‟s (1982) work with different stages of adults development suggested
different interpersonal orientations for younger and adults. Moreover, empirical evidence
also suggests that older workers tend to have lowers needs for achievement and higher
needs for affiliation than do younger (Doering et al., 1983). Therefore, it can be said that
younger and older workers may differs in their orientation toward self, others and works
(Wagner and Rush, 2000).
According to Kanfer and Ackerman (2004), the proportion of the workforce aged
over 45 is increasing rapidly in all over the world. As a consequence, organizations will
have to employ older workers, and hence adapt organizational policies to the needs and
abilities of older workers. It is therefore not surprising that chronological age has become
an important factor in organizational research (Greller and Stroh, 1995; Kanfer and
Ackerman, 2004). Cleveland and Shore (1992), found that the employee‟s chronological
age, the employee‟s subjective age, the employee‟s social age, and the employee‟s
relative age, differentially predict various work outcomes. They found that employees
who perceive themselves to be older than most of the people in their work group,
exhibited more job involvement, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment.
Therefore, chronological age (refers to the calendar age) and organizational age (tenure)
has been selected to achieve the research objectives. For the present study older employee
have been considered as 40 years and above which is in consistent with previous research
(Kooij et al. 2006). And tenure has been defined as the organizational age which refers to
the years of service within the organization. In this study it has been argued that the age
and tenure have positive effect on OC and OCB. It has been assumed that the longer the
workers stay with organization or the older they are the more positive attitude and
behaviors will demonstrate toward their organization.
Age, Tenure and Organizational Commitment
Commitment has been considered as an important factor in predicting and understanding
the behavior of employee within the organization. It is generally believed that highly
committed employees have greater loyalty, productivity and willing to carry more
responsibility (Chow, 1994). Moreover, Organizational commitment can lead to the
desire to remain in the organizations, exert more efforts to achieve the organizational
goals, and devote greater energy to achieve these goals (Porter et al., 1974).
According to Mowday et al. (1979), organizational commitment has been defined
as the relative strength of individual identification with and involvement in particular
organization, and involve strong believe and acceptance of organizational goals,
willingness to exert great effort on the behalf of the company, and strong desire to remain
with the organization and work hard to achieve its goals. Furthermore, Bateman and
Strasser (1984) have operationally defined the organizational commitment as
multidimensional construct that involve the employee loyalty, willingness to exert extra
effort on the behalf of the organization and desire to maintain organization membership.
In addition, School (1981) identified commitment as a multi-dimensional construct,
which consist of two components i.e., attitudinal and behavioral. Attitudinal component
BMQR Vol.1, No.3, 2010
© University Publication Centre (UPENA) and Institute of Business Excellence 2180-2777
31
incorporates the desire to remain within the organization and feeling of attachment,
whereas, behavioral commitment is the probability of staying or quitting the organization.
According to Buchana (1974), organizational commitment is a bond between employee
and employer. It is determined by personal factors (e.g., age, tenure, disposition),
organizational factors (e.g., job design, and leadership style), and non organizational
factors (Nortcraft and Neale, 1996).
A few researchers have found age and tenure has its effect on the organizational
commitment (Wiedmer, 2006; Salami, 2008). Moreover, Allen and Meyer (1993),
Buchana (1974), and Hall and Doughlas (1977) have found a positive relationship
between employee‟s age and organizational commitment, whereas, Irving et al. (1997)
found that age was not related to organizational commitment. Tella et al. (2007) also did
not found any correlation between tenure and organizational commitment. In this study it
has been assumed that there is a positive relationship among age, tenure and
organizational commitment. Therefore, it has been proposed that the older the employee
or the longer they are staying in the organization the greater the likelihood that those
workers will show more positive attitudes and behaviors towards their organization. On
the basis of this assumption, the following hypotheses were proposed:
H1a: Older employees are more committed toward their organization compare to
younger employees.
H1b: Employees with long term tenure are more committed toward their organization
compare with employees with short term tenure.
Age, Tenure, and Organizational Citizenship Behavior
According to Schnake (1991), OCB is functional, extra-role, pro-social behaviors that is
directed toward individuals, groups and the organization. Katz and Kahn (1978) noticed
that when the members of any organization are confined to perform only what is required
by the organization (on the basis of their employment contract) the organizations will
collapse. Organ (1988) has indicated the importance of OCB for the organizational
efficiency, effectiveness, and adaptability within diverse organizations. OCB behavior
represents going the extra mile or being a good citizen (Chompookum, 2003). Some of
the examples of behavior include willingness to help others in solving problems related to
their works, taking steps to prevent problems with other workers, and respecting and
obeying the rules, procedures and policies within the company (Chompookum, 2003).
Williams (1988) has defined two dimensions of OCB. In the first dimension the
benefits in general is directed toward the organization, such as performing duties that are
not required but will improve the organizational image and performance (OCBO). The
second dimension is OCBI, in which the benefit is directed toward the individuals within
the organization, such as altruism, and interpersonal helping colleagues who are facing
issue or have heavy work load. Podsakoff et al. (2000) defined OCBO as the
organizational compliance which involve the internalization of the organization rules and
policies, whereas, Williams and Anderson (1991) defined OCBO as behaviors that
benefit the organization in general and adhere to organizational rules and policies and
volunteer to committees. In addition, OCBI are behaviors that immediately benefit
specific individuals and indirectly contribute to the organization effectiveness (Williams
and Anderson, 1991).
BMQR Vol.1, No.3, 2010
© University Publication Centre (UPENA) and Institute of Business Excellence 2180-2777
32
Kuehn and Al-Busaid (2002) have found significant relationship between age and
OCB. Furthermore, Wagner and Rush (2000) found significant differences between
younger and older in term of Altruistic OCB. Moreover, Cohen (1993) suggested that
age is an important antecedent of OCB because it is considered as main indicator of side
bets, a term that used to refer to accumulation of investments valued by individual which
would be lost if he or she were to leave the organization. On the other hand evidence
among U.S. samples showed that age was not related to altruism (Organ and Konovsky,
1989; Smith et al, 1983). In this research it has been assumed that the longer the
employee‟s stay with an organization or the older they are the more positive behaviors
they will demonstrate toward their organization. Based on the above discussion, it can be
assumed that there is a positive relationship between age and OCB from one side, and
positive relationship between tenure and OCB from other side. Therefore, it is being
hypothesized that:
H2a: Older employees are more oriented to perform OCB compare to younger employees.
H2b: Employees with long term tenure are more oriented to perform OCB compare to
employee with shot term tenure.
Organizational Commitment (OC) and Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB)
Meyer and Allen (1997) defined committed employee as one who stay with an
organization, attend work regularly, put in full days and more, protect company assets,
have strong believe in the organizational goals, and work hard to achieve these goals.
Moreover, Meyer and Allen (1997) have identified three components of commitment
which ties the employee to their organization, namely: (i) affective commitment, which
ties employees through their emotional attachment, involvement, and identification with
the organization. When employees feel their organization‟s values, believes, norms, and
objectives, they become more willing to exert extra effort to achieve organizational goals;
(ii) continuance commitment is the employees‟ willingness to stay in the organization
because of their awareness of the cost of leaving the organization; (iii) normative
commitment is the feeling of obligation toward employees‟ organization.
According to Meyer et al. (1993), employees with strong affective commitment
will remain with the organization as they want to, whereas, employee with strong
continuance commitment remain because they have to, while those with normative
commitment stay because they fell that they are bound to. Therefore, for the purpose of
this study, affective, continuance, and normative commitment has been considered as to
understand the employees‟ commitment dimensions within the organization. According
to Yilmaz (2008), OCB is the employee behaviors that are performed independently and
willingly. Myriad of researchers found that organizational commitment is premise to
organizational citizenship (Finegan, 2000; Karrasch, 2003; Organ and Lingl, 1995;
Podsakoff et al., 1996; Schappe, 1998; Williams and Anderson, 1991: Williams et al.,
2002). Several studies have found that the employee with high level of organizational
commitment tend to have high level of OCB (O‟Reilly and Chatman, 1986; Organ and
Ryan, 1995; Williams, 1988). Moreover, Podaskoff et al. (2005) stated that employee
satisfaction and organizational commitment are important factors that lead to the
organizational citizenship behavior. In contrast, Williams and Anderson (1991) found no
relationship between organizational commitment and two dimensions of OCB i.e., OCBO
and OCBI.
BMQR Vol.1, No.3, 2010
© University Publication Centre (UPENA) and Institute of Business Excellence 2180-2777
33
Again, Organ and Ryan (1995) found no relationship between continuous
commitment and OCB variables, whereas Shore and Wayne (1993) found that continuous
commitment was negatively related to OCBI and OCBO. In addition, Randall et al. (1999)
found that OCBI and OCBO were both positively correlated to affective commitment but
not related to continuous commitment. But little has been known regarding the normative
commitment in relation to it is effect upon OCB. In this study, it has been assumed a
positive relationship would exist between three dimension of OC (affective, continuous
and normative) and two dimensions of OCB (OCBO and OCBI). Based on the above
discussion, it has been assumed that there is a positive relationship between three
dimensions of OC (affective, continues, and normative commitment) and two dimensions
of OCB (OCBO, OCBI) in the context of HLI. Thus, the following hypotheses have been
proposed:
H3a: There is a positive relationship between affective commitment and OCBI
H3b: There is a positive relationship between affective commitment and OCBO.
H3c: There is a positive relationship between continuous commitment and OCBI.
H3d: There is a positive relationship between continuous commitment and OCBO
H3e: There is a positive relationship between normative commitment and OCBI
H3f: There is a positive relationship between normative commitment and OCBO
Conceptual Design
Figure 1: The proposed conceptual model in the study
Tenure
Age
OC
OCB
Independent Variables
Dependent Variable
H1a
H2a
H1b
H2b
AC
CC
NC
OCBI
OCBO
H3b
H3c
H3a
H3f
H3
d
H3e
BMQR Vol.1, No.3, 2010
© University Publication Centre (UPENA) and Institute of Business Excellence 2180-2777
34
Figure 1 depicts the proposed relationships among the constructs. It is
hypothesized that age and tenure has positive influence upon OC and OCB. Moreover,
OC influences OCB positively.
Methodology
Sample and Sampling procedure
For the purpose of achieving the research objectives the convenience sampling has been
used in this study. In the organization studies, using convenience samples are very
common and are more prominent than are samples based on probability sampling
(Bryman, 1989). Moreover, when theoretical generalizability concerns, non probability
sampling suits best (Calder et al., 1981). Researchers have distributed 200 questionnaires
among the academic and non-academic staffs of a reputed public University in Malaysia.
Hundreds questionnaires have been distributed among the academic staff in different
faculties and another 100 questionnaires have been distributed among the non-academic
staff in library, admission and registration office, financial department and consultancy
department. One hundred and forty questionnaires have returned and 120 found usable.
Data collection
In this study, self administered questionnaires have been used. In the questionnaire the
purpose of the study has been stated clearly for the understanding of the respondents. An
English language questionnaire has been developed first. Because of the different levels
of proficiency in the English language among the Malaysian subjects, it was deemed
necessary to translate the questionnaire into Malay language or Bahasa Melayu, the
national language of Malaysia. The translation into Malay language could help overcome
some response biases stemming from language difficulties. In order to check the
constructs and translation of the questionnaire, back to back translation has been
conducted as suggested by Brislin (1970).
Measurement
The questionnaire was consisted of three parts: section one measuring the demographic
characteristics of the respondents, section two measuring OCBO and OCBI, and section
three measuring affective, continuous, and normative commitment. The full set of
questionnaire is given in the Appendix A.
Organizational Citizenship Behavior
OCBO and OCBI behaviors were measured by using 16 items based on Lee and Allen
(2002), which is also used by Williams and Anderson (1991). These items were divided
into two scales: (i) eight of theses items were employed for assessing the OCBI (e.g., „I
help other who has been absent‟) and (ii) the other eight items were employed for
assessing the OCBO (e.g., „I take action to protect the organization from potential
problems‟). Cronbah‟s alpha for the subscales measuring OCBI was .86 and OCBO
was .90. Respondent were asked to indicate there level of agreement for each statement
by using 5 point Likert scale ranging from „1= never‟ to „5= always‟. The overall OCB
scale was measured by adding up the two types of organizational citizenship behaviors
(OCBI and OCBO) and its overall Cronbach alpha was .92.
BMQR Vol.1, No.3, 2010
© University Publication Centre (UPENA) and Institute of Business Excellence 2180-2777
35
Organizational Commitment
Organizational commitment has been assessed by using 18 items that has been developed
by Meyer et al. (1993). These 18 items have been categorized into 3 aspects: affective
commitment which reflects employees‟ desire to stay within the organization because
they want to be the part of this system, continuance commitment which reflects
employees‟ desire to stay within then organization because they are aware of the cost of
leaving it, and normative commitment which reflects employees‟ willingness to stay
within the organization because they have to.
Using 5 point Likert type scale, respondents were asked to indicate there
agreement for each statement where „1= strongly disagree‟ and „5= strongly agree‟.
Employees were asked six questions that assessed their affective commitment (e.g., „I
really feel as if this organization problem is my own‟), next six items were asked to
assess employees‟ normative commitment (e.g., „I would feel guilty if I left my
organization right now‟), and the last six items were asked to assess the continuance
commitment (e.g., „I feel that I have very few options to consider leaving this
organization‟). Cronbah‟s alpha for these three subscales were .68, .68, and .73
respectively. The overall organizational commitment (OC) was measured by adding up
the above mentioned three types of OCs (affective, continuous, and normative).
Cronbah‟s alpha for the overall OC scale was .76. The demographic variables which are
related to age, gender, and year of working within the organization were measured by
asking direct questions like, „what is your age?‟, „what is your gender?‟, „how many
years you have been working in this institution?‟ etc.
Data analysis
Several statistical techniques have been employed to analyze the data. The descriptive
statistics which manifested the respondent characteristics has been employed like the
mean, standard deviation, and variance. To justify the strength of correlation between the
dependent variables and independent variables, Pearson correlation coefficient was used.
A multiple liner regression model was built to measure the strength and influence of all
the independent variables in determining the employees‟ attitude and behavior in term of
OC and OCB. Lastly, the hierarchical regression analysis was used to understand the
importance of the independent variables in explaining the variance in the dependent
variables.
Finding and Discussion
Profile of respondents
Among the 200 distributed questionnaires, 120 were successfully completed (response
rate was 60%) and used in this study. The sample comprised of 55% males and 45%
females. Eighty percent respondents were Malay, 15% Chinese and the reset (5%) were
Indian. About 41.7% of the respondents‟ age is grater than 40, and 43.3% of respondents
were between the ages of 20 and 30, whereas respondent between the age 31 and 40 was
15%. Respondents who have secondary and upper secondary school educational
background comprised 23.34% percent, those who hold the diploma and first degree
represented 23.33%, and the other qualification groups have represented 53.87 percent
(academic staff basically). In term of tenure, 41.5% of the respondents have been serving
BMQR Vol.1, No.3, 2010
© University Publication Centre (UPENA) and Institute of Business Excellence 2180-2777
36
in the university more than 15 years; whereas 40% of the respondents are serving less
than 5 years, and 11.7% of respondents are working 6 to 10 years (see Table 1).
Table 1: Respondents’ demographic profile
Demographic Variables
Frequency (n)
Percentage (%)
Gender
Male
33
55.0
Female
27
45.0
Age
<20
0
0
20-30
26
43.3
31-40
9
15.0
> 41
25
41.7
Race
Education Level
Malay
Chinese
Indian
Secondary school
96
18
6
20
80%
15%
5%
16.67
Upper secondary
8
6.67
Diploma
12
10.00
First degree
16
13.33
Master
PhD
29
35
24.17
29.7
Tenure
<5
24
40.0
6-10
7
11.7
11-15
4
6.7
>15
25
41.7
Correlation Analysis
The correlation analysis has been employed upon age and tenure (independent variables)
and OC and OCB (dependent variable). Testing the research hypotheses was made based
on the positive association of the Pearson Correlation Coefficients calculated for pairs of
variables. The test for correlation was done for each independent variable with dependent
variables (see Table 2). While interpreting the results of the SPSS output, it has been
taken note that correlation coefficients give no indication of the direction of causality. In
any bivariate correlation, causality between two variables cannot be assumed because
there may be other measured or unmeasured variables affecting the results, known as the
third variable problem (Field, 2000).
For hypotheses H1a and H1b, it was hypothesized that a positive relationship
would exist between the two variables (employee‟s age and tenure with their overall
commitment (OC) toward their organization (see Table 2). For H1a, the result of the
correlation indicates that there is a low positive association between the two variables (r
=.124), and this value is not significant statistically (P>.05). Nevertheless, there is enough
evidence for the positive linearity between these two variables. This indicates that as
employees‟ age increases, employees‟ level of commitment towards their organization
also increases. Thus, hypothesis-1a is supported.
BMQR Vol.1, No.3, 2010
© University Publication Centre (UPENA) and Institute of Business Excellence 2180-2777
37
Again, for H1b, the result of the correlation indicates that there is also low positive
correlation exists between the two variables (r=.133). Although this value is also not
significant statistically (p>.05), it is evident that there is positive association exist
between these two variables, which indicates that as employee‟s organizational age
increase their level of commitment will increase as well. Therefore, hypothesis H1b is
also supported.
For hypotheses 2a and 2b, it was hypothesized that a positive relationship would
exist between the two variables: employee‟s age and tenure with their overall OCB
toward their organization. For the both cases, a very weak association has been found
among these variables („age and OCB‟ and „tenure and OCB‟) i.e., r=.08 and r=.124
respectively. Nonetheless, positive correlations exist among these variables. That
represents, as employee‟s age and tenure increase, their level of citizenship behavior will
increase relatively. Hence, hypothesis 2a and 2b are supported.
To test hypotheses 3a, 3b, 3c, 3d, 3e and 3f it was hypothesized that a positive
relationship would exist between affective, continuous and normative commitments and
OCBI and OCBO, continuous commitment and OCBI and OCBO respectively. The result
of the correlation indicates that for the H3a and H3c, a weak positive association exist
among the variables (r=.227 and r=.161). However, there is enough evidence for the
positive linearity between „affective commitment and OCBI‟ and „continuous
commitment and OCBI‟. These indicate as the employee‟s affective and continuous
commitments increase their OCBI also increase. Thus hypotheses 3a and 3c are
supported.
Moreover, the correlation between „affective commitment and OCBO‟,
„continuous commitment and OCBO‟, „normative commitment and OCBI‟ and
„normative commitment and OCBO‟ were positively and significantly correlated and has
the correlation coefficient of 0.392, 0.332, 0.43 and 0.45. These give the rise of the idea
that the more positive the employee‟s attitude in term of affective and continuous
commitment the more positive is his/her behavior towards performs OCBO. Again, the
more positive the employee‟s attitude in term of normative commitment is, the more
positive is his/her behavior towards OCBI and OCBO. Therefore, hypotheses 3b, 3d, 3e
and 3f are supported.
Table 2: Pearson correlation result
AGE
TENURE
OCBIT
OCBOT
ACOT
CCOT
NCOT
OCBT
OCT
AGE
1
TENURE
.876(*)
1
OCBIT
.037
.053
1
OCBOT
.109
.163
.594(*)
1
ACOT
.059
.060
.227
.392(*)
1
CCOT
.051
.063
.161
.332(*)
.191
1
NCOT
.169
.177
.434(*)
.453(*)
.473(*)
.231
1
OCBT
.084
.124
.883(*)
.902(*)
.350(*)
.280(*)
.497(*)
1
OCT
.124
.133
.369(*)
.535(*)
.800(*)
.619(*)
.766(*)
.510(*)
1
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
BMQR Vol.1, No.3, 2010
© University Publication Centre (UPENA) and Institute of Business Excellence 2180-2777
38
Multiple Regression Analysis
Overall Organizational Commitment (OC)
The results of multiple regression analysis (see Table 3) show that independent variables
(age and tenure) explained .018 of the variance in the dependent variable (OC). The
model summary table contains the coefficient of determination (R2), which measures the
independent variables‟ ability in explaining the variance in the dependent variable.
Table 3: Multiple regression analysis
Model
R
R Square
Adjusted R Square
Std. Error of the Estimate
1
.134(a)
.018
-.017
5.77570
a Predictors: (Constant), TENURE, AGE
Beta value (β) indicates the strength of independent variables in explaining the dependent
variable. From Table 4 it can be understood that tenure ranked first with the value
of .424 (β) followed by age with .212 (β). These predictive factors are not significant as p
values are greater than 0.05.
Table 4: Coefficients
Model
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t
Sig.
β
Std. Error
Beta
1
(Constant)
55.308
2.973
-
18.604
.000
AGE
.212
1.678
.034
.126
.900
TENURE
.424
1.127
.102
.376
.708
a Dependent Variable: OCT
Organizational Citizenship Behavior
The result of Table 5 shows that independent variables (age and tenure) were able to
explain very little of the variance in overall OCB (Coefficient of determination R2=.018).
Additionally, the regression coefficients (see Table 6) show weak statistically significant
relationships between the age and OCBT (β = -.1.037, p= .695) and tenure and OCBT (β
= 1.416, p= .427).
Table 5: Model Summary
Model
R
R Square
Adjusted R
Square
Std. Error of the Estimate
1
.134(a)
.018
-.016
9.06285
a Predictors: (Constant), TENURE, AGE
Table 6: Coefficients
Model
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t
Sig.
β
Std. Error
Beta
1
(Constant)
56.821
4.665
-
12.180
.000
AGE
-1.037
2.633
-.107
-.394
.695
TENURE
1.416
1.769
.218
.800
.427
a Dependent Variable: OCBT
BMQR Vol.1, No.3, 2010
© University Publication Centre (UPENA) and Institute of Business Excellence 2180-2777
39
OCBI
Furthermore, to determine the amount of variance explained by organizational
commitment, all of the organizational commitment variables were entered to the model.
Jointly these variables accounted for 19.3% of the variance in OCBI. However, only the
coefficient associated with normative commitment (β =.815, p=.004) was significant (see
table 7 and 8).
Table 7: Model Summary
Model
R
R Square
Adjusted R Square
Std. Error of the
Estimate
1
.439(a)
.192
.149
4.44627
a Predictors: (Constant), NCOT, CCOT, ACOT
Table 8: Coefficients
Model
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t
Sig.
β
Std. Error
Beta
1
(Constant)
11.260
5.980
-
1.883
.065
ACOT
.034
.222
.021
.153
.879
CCOT
.123
.247
.062
.498
.620
NCOT
.815
.275
.410
2.966
.004
a Dependent Variable: OCBIT
OCBO
To determine the amount of variance in OCBO which has been explained by
organizational commitment, all of the organizational commitment variables were entered
to the model. Jointly these variables accounted for 29.2% of the variance in OCBO.
However, only the coefficient associated with normative commitment (β =.659, p=.02)
was significant (see Table 9 and 10).
Table 9: Model Summary
Model
R
R Square
Adjusted R Square
Std. Error of the Estimate
1
.541(a)
.292
.254
4.53074
a Predictors: (Constant), NCOT, CCOT, ACOT
Table 10: Coefficients
Model
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t
Sig.
β
Std. Error
Beta
1
(Constant)
1.449
6.093
-
.238
.813
ACOT
.363
.226
.205
1.603
.115
CCOT
.483
.252
.222
1.915
.061
NCOT
.659
.280
.305
2.355
.022
a Dependent Variable: OCBOT
BMQR Vol.1, No.3, 2010
© University Publication Centre (UPENA) and Institute of Business Excellence 2180-2777
40
Hierarchical Regression Analysis
OCBI
A hierarchical regression analysis was performed using OCBI as dependent variable. In
the first stage, four control variables (age, tenure, gender, and education level) were
entered the model as independent variables. In the next stage, affective commitment was
added to the model. Continuous commitment was entered the model in the third stage. In
the last stage normative commitment was added to the model. Table11 shows the
hierarchical regression analysis result. The Demographical variables were able to explain
12.3% of the variance in OCBI. When affective commitment added to the model in the
second stage, the amount of explained variance increased .185 (p<.05). Change in R2
was significant (.058). Therefore the hypothesis that affective commitment will have
positive association with OCBI was supported. The addition of continuous commitment
in the third stage yielded a positive increase in R2 (R2= .192, p>.05). Although the change
in R2 is not significant but it was positive hence the hypothesis that continuous
commitment will have positive correlation with OCBI was supported. In the last stage
when normative commitment was entered into the model, the amount of explained
variance increased to .281 (p<.05) and change in R2 was significant (.089). Therefore, the
hypothesis that normative commitment will be positively related to OCBI was accepted
as well. All of these results yielded in this stage were in consistent with the correlation
analysis results.
Table 11: Hierarchical regression analysis with OCBI
Model
R
R Square
Change in R
Square
F
Sig.
1
.357(a)
.127
-
2.005
.107
2
.430(b)
.185
0.058
2.446
.045
3
.438(c)
.192
0.007
2.096
.069
4
.530(d)
.281
0.089
2.901
.012
OCBO
Again, the hierarchical regression analysis was done using OCBO as the dependent
variable. In the first stage, four control variables (age, tenure, gender, and education level)
were entered the model as independent variables. In the next stage, affective commitment
was added to the model. Continuous commitment was entered the model in the third
stage. In the last stage normative commitment was added to the model. Table 12 shows
the hierarchical regression analysis result. The Demographic variables were able to
explain .098 of the variance in OCBO. When affective commitment added to the model
in the second stage, the amount of explained variance increased to .225. Therefore, the
hypothesis that affective commitment will have positive association with OCBO was
supported. The addition of continuous commitment in the third stage yielded a positive
increase in R2 to reach .307. The change in R2 was significant. Hence the hypothesis that
continuous commitment will have positive correlation with OCBO was supported. In the
last stage when normative commitment was entered into the model, the amount of
explained variance increased to .351. Change in R2 was significant (.044) and thus the
BMQR Vol.1, No.3, 2010
© University Publication Centre (UPENA) and Institute of Business Excellence 2180-2777
41
hypothesis that normative commitment will be positively related to OCBO was accepted
as well. All of these results were in consistent with the correlation analysis results.
Table 12: Hierarchical regression analysis with OCBO
Model
R
R Square
Change in R
Square
F
Sig.
1
.313(a)
.098
-
1.496
.216(a)
2
.505(b)
.255
.157
3.688
.006(b)
3
.554(c)
.307
.052
3.914
.003(c)
4
.592(d)
.351
.044
4.012
.001(d)
Discussion and Conclusion
The findings of this study indicate that the demographic variables in term of age and
tenure positively predicted OC and OCB. A possible explanation for this result is that as
education workers become older or as the longer they stay within the educational
institutions, the more positive attitude and behaviors are expected to be practiced and
adopted by them. Moreover, as the age and tenure increases, education workers‟ feeling
of attachment, belongingness, responsibilities toward their organization increase
positively which is expected to produce favorable attitude and behaviors that help the
organization to survive. Furthermore, in this study the findings indicated that tenure has
more positive effect on both OC and OCB compared to age. Thus, it can be explain in the
way that the more time the education workers spend within the same organization the
more they become familiar with the organization rules, polices, procedures, structure, and
culture; the more they become aware of the organizational goals and how to achieve these
goals; the more they become committed to achieve these organizational goals and exert
extra effort that goes beyond their formal role requirements. In addition, the role of
demographic variables upon OC and OCB was relatively weak. Therefore, it can be said
that age and tenure by themselves are not enough to explain the variance in OC and OCB.
Hence, other variables should be included in the model abreast age and tenure like
psychological factors, situation factors and other related factors that can enhance and
improve the overall model. However, the theoretical relationships among age, tenure and
OC and OCB have been proved.
Besides, the results of this study indicate that the three dimensions of OC:
affective, continuous and normative commitments were positively correlated with OCBI
and OCBO (r=.43, p<.001, r=.45, p<.001), with the strongest correlation associated with
normative commitment. A possible explanation is that normative commitment is a
psychological state where education workers feel obligated to stay with their organization
because of social and cultural norms. It arises from the interaction with the organization
and from the family and culture socialization process whereby individual learns the right
and good values, morals, and beliefs like honesty and loyalty, whereas, affective and
continuous commitment arise from the individual association with the organization
(Thanswor et al., 2004). Thus it can be said that the cultural factors has it is influence on
the development of normative commitment which gives raise to citizenship behaviors.
Therefore, it can be said that the normatively committed employs are more likely to show
higher level of OCBI and OCBO compare to other form of committed workers.
BMQR Vol.1, No.3, 2010
© University Publication Centre (UPENA) and Institute of Business Excellence 2180-2777
42
Furthermore, continuous commitment has showed the lowest correlation with OCBI and
OCBO compare to affective and normative commitment (r=.161, p>.05, r=.332, p<.05).
Therefore, it can be said that continuous commitment ties education workers with their
organization because of their awareness of the cost of leaving. Therefore it is expected
that continuous commitment will not have relationship or will have a weak positive
relationship with OCB. Thus, it is likely to say that, though the education workers are
aware of the cost of leaving their current employer, they show positive behaviors toward
their organization in term of OCBI and OCBO. Again, continuous commitment has
showed the lowest correlation with OCBI and OCBO compare to affective and normative
commitment (r=.161, p>.05, r=.332, p<.05). Hence, it is obvious that continuous
commitment ties education workers with their organization because of their awareness of
the cost of leaving. In this study there is a positive association with both OCBI, and
OCBO. Thus it is likely to say that, though the education workers are aware of the cost of
leaving their current employer, they show positive behaviors toward their organization in
term of OCBI and OCBO. Moreover, Malaysian values are deep-rooted and are quite
different from the Western values (Talib, 2010). Malaysian values involve respecting the
group orientation of „we more than I‟ or emphasis on belonging to an in-group (Jamal,
2006). Last but not the least, the findings of this study shows that the three dimensions of
OC are more strongly associated with OCBO compared to OCBI. Potential explanation
for this finding is that, it is more likely for the individuals who have high level of
commitment toward their organization to perform high level of OCB toward their
organization rather than toward their colleagues. Moreover, Malaysia is collectivist
society and collectivistic culture that tend to be group-oriented rather than individual
oriented (Talib, 2010). Therefore, the members of organization are expected to
demonstrate more loyalty, commitment, and OCB toward organization rather than their
co-worker. Therefore it‟s important for the organization to be aware of these factors that
will enhance and increase the employee loyalty and commitment toward their
organization, which is expected to result in more positive behaviors toward their peers,
supervisors, as well as toward their organization. In nutshell, it can be said that the
theorized pattern of relationship between OC components and OCB dimensions are
supported, specifically the positive and significant linkage of OCB components with
normative commitment. This finding reflects the great effect of the social and cultural
values that dominate the Malaysian society and individual‟s values and beliefs in their
workplace.
Practical Implications
In this study age and tenure are positively correlated with OC and OCB. Therefore,
Human resource departments of the HLIs should give more attention for the employee
retention, which will reduce organization‟s cost in term of searching, hiring and training
new employees. In turn, this will increase and enhance HLI‟s abilities, capabilities, and
experience through the presence of loyal and expert education worker. Although, there is
a positive relationship found among age, tenure and OC and OCB, this relation is not
significant. Therefore, HLIs should not only depend on personal factors in term of age
and tenure to enhance the education worker‟s level of OC and OCB. Moreover, it is also
BMQR Vol.1, No.3, 2010
© University Publication Centre (UPENA) and Institute of Business Excellence 2180-2777
43
needed to focus on other situational and non situational factors that can improve the level
of OC and OCB.
Another important implication is that, as OC dimensions are correlated
significantly with OCB dimensions, HLIs needed to be aware of those factors that will
affect education worker‟s level of commitment toward their organizations as education
institutions are the places where extra role behavior of academic and non academic staff
is required. Extra role behaviors from the employee‟s side in the education organization
will contribute significantly in the development of this sector. Especially when Malaysia
aims to be an international hub for world class education in its bid to be a big player in
the attractive regional education scene and targets about 100,000 foreign students by
2010 (Lew, 2009).
Limitation and Future Research Directions
The current study has a number of limitations that suggest areas for future research
directions. First, this research employed convenience sampling to accomplish the
research objectives. For future research, random sampling is recommended to be used to
increase the generalizability of the finding of the research. Second, cross sectional data
have used in this study. Therefore, the future research employing the longitudinal study
would give deeper insight regarding the issue. Third, in this study age and tenure were
able to explain a little portion of the variance in overall OC and OCB. For future research,
it is being suggested that other variables needed to be included in the model like job
satisfaction, job involvement, task performance, organizational justice, and other relevant
variables in order to improve the model validity and to increase its ability to explain the
variance in both OC and OCB. Moreover, in this study it has been found that the cultural
values, norm, and beliefs have greater effect on the individual development of positive
attitude and behaviors. Based on this fact it is being suggested that future research needs
to find out the mediating effect of cultural factors upon the relationship between OC and
OCB.
References
Allen, N. J. and Meyer, J. P. (1993), “Organizational commitment: Evidence of career
stage effects”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 26, No. 1, pp. 49-61.
Bateman, T. s., and Organ, W. (1983), “Job satisfaction and the good solider: the
relationship between affect and employee citizenship”, Academy of
Management Journal, Vol. 26, pp. 587-595.
Bateman, T. and Strasser, S. (1984). “A longitudinal analysis of the antecedents of
organizational commitment”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 12, pp. 95-
112
Brislin, R. W. (1970), “Back translation for cross-cultural research”, Journal of Cross
Cultural Psychology‟, Vol. 1, pp. 185-216.
Bryman, A., (1989), Research Methods and Organization Studies, London: Unwin
Hyman.
Buchanan, B. (1974), “Building organizational commitment: the socialization of
managers in work organizations”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol.19,
pp. 533-546.
BMQR Vol.1, No.3, 2010
© University Publication Centre (UPENA) and Institute of Business Excellence 2180-2777
44
Calder, B. J., Phillips, L. W. and Tybout, A. M. (1981), “Designing research for
application”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 8, pp. 197-207.
Chow, I. H. (1994), “Organizational commitment and career development of
Chinese managers in Hong Kong and Taiwan”, The International Journal of
Career and Management, Vol. 6, No .4, pp. 3-9.
Chompookum, D. (2003), “The effect of internal career orientation on organizational
citizenship behavior in Thailand”, Career Development International, Vol. 9, No.
4, pp. 406-423.
Cleveland, J.N. and Shore, L. (1992), “Self-and supervisory perspectives in age and work
attitudes and performance”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 77, pp. 469-484.
Cohen, A. (1993), “Age and tenure in relation to organizational commitment: Meta
Analysis”, Basic and Applied Social Psychological, Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 143-159.
DeLange, A.H., Taris, T.W., Jansen, P.G.W., Smulders, P., Houtman, I.L.D., and
Kompier, M. A. J. (2006), “Age as a factor in the relation between work and
mental health: results from the longitudinal TAS study”, In: J. Houdmont, and S.
McIntyre (Eds.). Occupational Health Psychology: European Perspectives on
Research, Education and Practice, Vol. 1, Maia, Portugal: ISMAI Publications.
Doering, M., Rhodes, S. R., and Schuster, M. (1983), “The aging worker”, Beverly Hills,
CA: Sage.
Ertruk, A. (2007), “Increasing Organizational citizenship behaviors of Turkish
academicians: Mediating role of trust in supervisor on the relationship between
organizational justice and citizenship behaviors”, Journal of Managerial
Psychology, 22(3), 257-270.
Field, A. (2000), Discovering Statistics, using SPSS for Windows, London: SAGE
Publications.
Finegan, E. J. (2000), “The impact of person and organizational values on organizational
commitment”, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 73,
No. 2, pp. 149-169.
Greller, M., and Stroh, L. K. (2002), “Variations in Human Capital Investment Activity
by Age”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 61, pp. 109–138.
Hall, D. T. (1976), “Breaking career routines: Midcareer choice and identity
development”, In R. A. Katzell (Series Ed.) and D. T. Hall (Vol. Ed), Career
Development in Organizations (pp. 120- 159). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Bass.
Hall and Doughlas, (1977), “Organizational identification as a function of career pattern
and organizational type”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 17, pp. 469-485.
Irving, P.G., Coleman, D. F., and Cooper, C. L. (1997), “Further assessment of a three
component model of occupational commitment: generalizability and differences
across occupations”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 82, pp. 444-452.
Jamal, M. (2006), “Type-A behaviour in a multinational organization: a study of two
countries”, Stress and Health, Vol. 23, pp. 101-109.
Kanfer, R., and Ackerman, P. L. (2004), “Aging, adult development, and work
motivation”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 29, pp. 440-458.
Karrash, A. (2003), “Antecedents and consequences of organizational commitment”,
Military Psychology, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 225-236
BMQR Vol.1, No.3, 2010
© University Publication Centre (UPENA) and Institute of Business Excellence 2180-2777
45
Katz, D. (1991), “The motivational basis of organizational behavior”, Behavior
Science, Vol. 9, No.2, pp. 131-133.
Katz, D., and Kahn, R.L. (1978), The Social Psychology of Organizational (2nd ed.).
New York: Wiley.
Kegan, R. (1982), The evolving self: problem and process in human development,
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kooij, D, Jansen, p de Lange, A. Dikkers, J. (2006), “Age-related factors in the
motivation to work: What we know and where we need to go", Working paper.
Available at:
http://www.tilburguniversity.nl/faculties/fsw/departments/HRS/SGM/papers
/Kooij.pdf (Access on: 9 April, 2009).
Kuehn, K. W. and Al-Busaid, Y. (2000), “Citizenship behavior in a non- western context:
an examination of the role of satisfaction, commitment and job characteristics
on self- reported OCB”, International Journal of Commerce and Management,
Vol.12, No.2, pp. 107-125.
Lee, K. and Allen, N. J. (2002), “Organizational citizenship behavior and workplace
deviance: The role of affect and cognition”, Journal of Applied Psychology,
Vol. 87, No. 1, pp.131-142.
Levinson, D. J., Darrow, C. N., Klein, E. B., Levinson, M. H., and McKee, B. (1978),
The seasons of a man’s life, New York: Ballantine Books.
Lew, T. Y. (2009), “The Relationships between Perceived Organizational Support, Felt
Obligation, Affective Organizational Commitment and Turnover Intention of
Academics working with Private Higher Educational Institutions in Malaysia”,
European Journal of Social Sciences, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp, 72-87.
Meyer, J. P. and Allen, N. J. (1997), “Commitment in the workplace: Theory, research,
and application”, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, Calif.
Meyer, J.P., Allen, N. J., and Smith, C. A. (1993), “Commitment to organizations and
occupations: Extension and test of a three – component conceptualization”,
Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 78, No.4, pp. 538-552.
Mowday, R. T., Steers. R., and Porter, L. W. (1979), “The measurement of organizational
commitment”, Journal of Vocational Behaviors, Vol.14, pp. 244-247.
Moorman, R. H. (1991), “Relationship between organizational justice and organizational
citizenship behavior: Do fairness perception influence employee citizenship?”
Journal of applied psychology, Vol. 76, pp. 845-855.
Northcraft, T. and Neale, H. (1996), “Organisation Behaviour”, London: Prentice-Hall.
Organ, D. (1988), “Organizational citizenship behavior: the good soldier syndrome”,
Lexington Books, Lexington, MA.
Organ, D. W. (1990), “The motivational basis of organizational citizenship
behavior”, Research of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 12, pp. 43-72.
Organ, D. W. (1994), “Personality and organizational citizenship behavior”, Journal
of Management, Vol. 20, PP. 465-478.
Organ, D. W., and Ryan, K. (1995), “A Meta – analytic review of attitudinal and
dispositional predictors of organizational citizenship behavior”, Personal
Psychology, Vol. 48, pp. 775-802.
BMQR Vol.1, No.3, 2010
© University Publication Centre (UPENA) and Institute of Business Excellence 2180-2777
46
Organ, D. W., and Konovsky, M. (1989), “Cognitive versus affective determinate of
organizational citizenship behavior”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 74,
pp. 157- 164.
Organ, D. W., and Lingl, A. (1995), “Personality, satisfaction, and organizational
citizenship behavior”, The Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 135, No. 3, pp.
339-350.
O‟Reilly, C. A., and Chatman, J. (1986), “Organizational commitment and
psychological attachment: The effects of compliance, identification and
internalization on pro-social behavior”, Journal Applied Psychology, Vol. 71,
No. 3, pp. 492-499.
Penner, L.A., Midili, A.R., and Kegelmeyer, J. (1997), “Beyond job attitudes: a
personality and social psychology perspective on the causes of organizational
citizenship behavior, Human Performance, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 111-131.
Podsakoff, P. M., Mackenzie, S. M., and Hommer, W. H. (1996), “Transformational
Leader behaviors and substitutes for leadership as determinates of employee
satisfaction, commitment, trust and organizational citizenship behaviors”, Journal
of Management, Vol. 22, No. 2, pp. 259-298.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B., and Bachrach, D. G. (2000),
“Organizational citizenship behaviors: A critical review of the theoretical and
empirical literature and suggestions for future research”, Journal of Management,
Vol. 26, pp. 513-563.
Porter, L. W., Streers, R. M., Mowday, R. T., and Boulian, P. V, (1974),
“Organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and turnover among
psychiatric technicians”, Journal of Applied Psychological, Vol. 59, No. 5, pp.
603-609.
Randall, M. L., Cropanzano, R., Bormann, C. A., and Birjulin, A. (1999). Organizational
politics and organizational support as predictor of work attitudes, job performance,
and organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol.
20, 159–174.
Salami, S. O. (2008), “Demographic and Psychological Factors Predicting
Organizational Commitment among Industrial Workers” Anthropologist, Vol. 10,
No. 1, PP. 31-38.
Schappe, S. P. (1998), “The influence of job satisfaction, organizational commitment,
and fairness perception on organizational citizenship behavior”, The Journal of
Psychological, Vol. 132, No. 3, pp. 277- 290.
Schnake, M. (1991), “Organizational citizenship: A review, proposed model, and
research agenda”, Human Relations, Vol. 44, pp. 735-759.
School, R. W., (1981) “Differentiating organizational commitment from expectancy as
motivating force”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 6, pp. 589-599.
Shore, L., and Wayne, S. L. (1993), “Commitment and employee behavior:
comparison of affective commitment and continuous commitment with
perceived organizational support”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 76,
No. 5, pp. 774-780.
Smith, A. Organ, D. W., and Near, J. P. (1983), “Organizational citizenship
behavior: its nature and antecedents”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol.
68, pp. 653-663.
BMQR Vol.1, No.3, 2010
© University Publication Centre (UPENA) and Institute of Business Excellence 2180-2777
47
Sterns, H. L., and Doverspike, D. (1989), “Aging and the retraining and learning process
in organizations” In I. Goldstein & R. Katzel (Eds.), Training and development
in work organizations, pp. 299 – 332. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Sterns, H.L. and Miklos, S.M. (1995), “The Aging Worker in a Changing Environment:
Organizational and Individual Issues” Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 47,
pp. 248 – 268.
Talib, M. A. (2010), “Cultural Influences and Mandated Counseling in Malaysia”, Asian
culture and History, Vol. 2, No.1, pp. 28-33.
Tang, T.L.P. and Ibrahim, A.H.S. (1998), “Antecedents of organizational citizenship
behavior: public personnel in the United States and in the Middle East”, Public
Personnel Management, Vol. 27, pp. 529-548.
Tella, A., Ayeni, C.O., and Popoola, S. O. (2007), “Work motivation, job satisfaction,
and organizational commitment of library personnel in academic and
research libraries in Oyo state, Nigeria”, Library Philosophy and Practice,
No. April.
Thanswor, G., Rolf, V. D., Ulrich, W., Narottam, U., and Ann. J. D. (2004),
“Organizational citizenship behavior and organizational commitment in Nepal”,
Asian Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 8, No. 3, pp. 305- 314.
Wagner, S, L., and Rush, M. C. (2000), “Altruistic organizational citizenship
behavior context: age and disposition”, The Journal of Social Psychology, Vol.
140, No.3, pp. 379-391.
Wiedmer, S.M. (2006), “An Examination of Factors Affecting Employee Satisfaction.
Available at: http://clearinghouse.missouriwestern.edu/manuscripts/51.asp.
[Accessed on 9 April, 2009].
Williams, L. J. (1988), “Affective and non affective components of job satisfaction
and organizational citizenship and–role behaviors”, PHD Thesis, Indiana
University, Bloomington, IN.
Williams, L. J., and Anderson, S. E. (1991), “Job satisfaction and organizational
Commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors”,
Journal of Management, Vol.17, No.3, pp. 601-617.
Williams, S., Pitre, R., and Zainuba, M. (2002), “Justice and organizational
citizenship behavior intentions: Fair reward versus treatment”, The
Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 142, No. 1, pp. 33-44.
Yilmaz, K. and Bokeoglu, O. C. (2008), “Organizational citizenship behaviors and
organizational commitment in Turkish primary schools”, World Applied Science
Journal, Vol. 3, No. 5, pp. 775-780.
BMQR Vol.1, No.3, 2010
© University Publication Centre (UPENA) and Institute of Business Excellence 2180-2777
48
Appendix: A
Scale for Measuring Organizational Citizenship Behavior Dimensions (OCBO and
OCBI)
Instruction: Read each item carefully. Then rate how often you engage in each behavior,
using five-point scale below, record your rating in the space provided to the left of the
item
1 2 3 4 5
Never Rarely sometimes often always
A. Organizational citizenship behavior items (OCBI)
1. I help others who have been absent
2. I willingly give my time to help others who have work-related problems.
3. I adjust my work schedule to accommodate other employee‟s request for time off
4. I go out of my way to make newer employees feel welcome in the work group
5. I show genuine concern and courtesy toward coworkers, even under the most
trying business or personal situations.
6. I give up time to help others who have work or non-work problems.
7. I assist others with their duties.
8. I share personal; properties with other to help their work
B. Organizational citizenship behavior items (OCBO)
1. I attend functions that are not required but that help the organization image
2. I keep up with developments in the organization
3. I defend the organization when other employee criticize it
4. I show pride when representing the organization in public
5. I offer ideas to improves the functioning of the organization
6. I express loyalty toward the organization
7. I take action to protect the organization from potential problems
8. I demonstrate concern about the image of the organizati
Scale for Measuring the Organizational Commitment
Using the following scale, please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with
each statement by writing appropriate number in the blank beside the statement
Affective organizational commitment
I would be very happy to spend the rest of my career with the organization
I really feel as if this organization‟s problems are my own
I do not feel strong sence of belonging to my organization
I do not feel emotionally attached to this organization
BMQR Vol.1, No.3, 2010
© University Publication Centre (UPENA) and Institute of Business Excellence 2180-2777
49
I do not feel like part of the family at my organization
My organization has a great deal of personal meaning for me
Continuance organizational commitment
Right now, staying with my organization is a matter of necessity as much as desire
It would be very hard for me to leave my organization right now, even If I wanted
to
Too much of my life would be disrupted if I decided I wanted to leave my
organization now
I feel that I have not already put so much of myself into this organization, I might
consider working else where
One of the few negative consequences of leaving this organization would be the
scarcity of available alternatives
Normative organizational commitment
I do not feel obligation to remain with my current employer
Even if it were to my advantage, I do not feel it would be right to leave my
organization now
This organization deserves my obligation
I would not leave organization right now because I have a sense of obligation to the
people in it
I owe a great deal to my organization
