|
Article Excerpt
The authors investigate how perceptions of the exchange relationships among coworkers in traditional work group settings are related to supervisor evaluations of organizational citizenship behavior (OCB). Perceptions of coworker relationships were collected from employees at six companies representing a range of industries, with the employee's supervisor completing a measure of OCB for each employee. Using matched data for 235 respondents, the regression analyses showed that team-member exchange (TMX) was related to supervisor ratings of an aggregate measure of OCB. In addition, TMX was related to four of the five subdimensions of OCB: altruism, conscientiousness, civic virtue, and courtesy. The results indicate the strong influence of social exchange and the norm of reciprocity for engaging in OCB.
Keywords: organizational justice; team member exchange; organizational citizenship behavior
**********
Our coworkers are a critical component to both our job success and our satisfaction in the workplace (Bommer, Miles, & Grover, 2003; Burroughs & Eby, 1998). Research on coworker relationships has found that our coworkers can provide us with a sense of identity, support, and friendship (Bowler & Brass, 2006; Feldman, 1981; Jablin & Krone, 1994; Kram & Isabella, 1985). We interact with our peers on a daily basis, sometimes spending more hours of the day with our coworkers than our families. Like our families, the relations between coworkers influence how well they function. Organizations can operate smoothly as a result of the numerous acts of helping behavior between employees (Katz, 1964). Although such helping behavior is vital for organizational effectiveness, the importance of coworker relationships for organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) has not been studied (Organ, Podsakoff, & MacKenzie, 2006). Given the increasing utilization and collaboration of work groups for accomplishing organizational objectives, the examination of coworker relationships has substantial implications for organizational performance (Organ et al., 2006).
We examine how perceptions of the exchange relationships among coworkers are related to OCB. That OCB is essential for organizational success is becoming clearer (Organ et al., 2006; Podsakoff, Ahearne, & MacKenzie, 1997; Thompson & Werner, 1997), especially as individual jobs become less well defined (Bridges, 1994; Hall, 1996; Ilgen & Pulakos, 1999). Evidence supports the proposition that these extrarole behaviors do impact organizational performance and are important to understand, predict, and encourage in the organization (Organ et al., 2006; Podsakoff et al., 1997; Podsakoff & MacKenzie, 1997).
In response to recent calls for more research on coworker relations (Organ et al., 2006), this study examines the relationship of an individual's perception of exchange relationships between the members of one's work group (i.e., team-member exchange, or TMX) and supervisor ratings of that individual's OCB. To accomplish our purpose, we will briefly review the literature on OCB, then discuss social exchange theory as the theoretical underpinning for our study, and subsequently move to an examination of TMX and the hypotheses to be tested.
Organizational Citizenship Behavior
OCB has been defined as "individual behavior that is discretionary, not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, and that in the aggregate promotes the effective functioning of the organization" (Organ, 1988a, p. 4). Organ's (1988a) definition of OCB focuses on two important aspects of the concept--that behaviors are beneficial to the organization and that they are beyond the prescribed role of the individual. Role taking is the process of learning and accepting the expectations of others and fulfilling them (Katz & Kahn, 1966). Whereas there are many prescribed role behaviors, there is room within a role for variation. By defining OCB as extrarole, these behaviors expand one's concept of role (Katz & Kahn, 1978; Organ, 1988a, 1988b). Because citizenship behaviors are discretionary, these behaviors are often subtle, difficult to measure, and problematic to include in formal organizational appraisal systems (Schnake, 1991).
OCB has been operationalized as a multifaceted construct including altruism, conscientiousness, civic virtue, courtesy, and sportsmanship (Organ, 1990). Substantial research evidence supports these five subdimensions of OCB (e.g., Moorman, 1991; Niehoff & Moorman, 1993; Organ et al., 2006; Podsakoff, MacKenzie, & Bommer, 1996). Altruism represents voluntary actions by an individual to help others with work-related problems (e.g., helping a coworker finish his or her project on schedule); conscientiousness pertains to working hard and complying with organizational rules (e.g., attendance policies); civic virtue reflects an individual's constructive involvement in the organization (e.g., attending company functions); courtesy refers to proactive attempts to avoid the creation of problems (e.g., alerting others about a significant issue that will need to be addressed); and sportsmanship involves maintaining a positive attitude (e.g., refraining from complaining) in negative circumstances (Organ, 1990). These behaviors aggregated over time and persons enhance organizational effectiveness (Organ et al., 2006; Organ & Konovsky, 1989).
Although the initial consideration of citizenship behavior stemmed from ideas of altruism and conscientious performance (Smith, Organ, & Near, 1983), the concept of OCB also derives from social exchange theory (Blau, 1964) and Katz and Kahn's (1966) concept of suprarole behavior that "lubricates the social machinery." Next, we will examine social exchange as it pertains to relationships among coworkers.
Social Exchange
Blau's (1964, 1986) concept of social exchange is critical for understanding OCB. Social exchange has a diffuse, unspecified nature that allows for a broad range of helping behaviors not ruled by a strict quid pro quo sense of reciprocity. Although fairness perceptions underlie social exchanges, the social exchanges are open-ended (Organ, 1990). Organ (1990) asserted that social exchange leads to the performance of OCB.
Individuals engage in social exchanges for the receipt of both intrinsic benefits (e.g., acceptance, prestige) as well as extrinsic benefits (e.g., advice, assistance) (Blau, 1964, 1986; Homans, 1958). As discussed by both Gouldner (1960) and Blau (1964, 1986), reciprocating a favor received from another person functions as the "starting mechanism" of the exchange relationship. If indeed reciprocity takes place, individuals will continue to engage in low-risk exchanges with one another. Favorable results of initial exchange transactions result in the development of trust, which is an integral aspect of the social exchange relationship. Trust in coworkers has been defined as holding confident positive expectations in situations involving risk with coworkers (Boon & Holmes, 1991). The risk in the context of exchange is that the coworker will not reciprocate efforts made on the other's behalf. For although the norm of reciprocity is considered universal (Gouldner, 1960), individuals can vary in how much they value reciprocity and apply it in their interactions with others (Cropanzano & Mitchell, 2005). Assuming that one's favors are reciprocated, the number and range of social exchanges increases as the trust continues to grow, and results in a self-reinforcing cycle (Cropanzano & Mitchell, 2005). According to Blau (1986, p. 107), "The expanding exchange of benefits of various sorts between individuals makes them increasingly interdependent, establishes mutual trust, and fortifies their social bond."
As mentioned above, individuals engage in social exchanges not only for instrumental benefits but also for intrinsic benefits as well. Individuals look to their work group for social approval and a sense of belonging (Ashforth & Mael, 1989; Blau, 1964, 1986) that they may no longer find in their neighborhoods or family relationships (Burroughs & Eby, 1998). Coworkers help bring meaning and structure through offering bonds of support. For individuals whose sense...
|
