Organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) refers to employees' discretionary behaviors that, while not always rewarded, effectively promote the functions of organizations (Organ, Reference Organ1988). To succeed in business, companies have placed greater emphasis on the voluntary behaviors of employees who ‘go the extra mile’ and adhere proactively to an organization's procedures to increase its effectiveness (Ziegler, Schlett, Casel, & Diehl, Reference Ziegler, Schlett, Casel and Diehl2012; Kim, Kim, Han, Jackson, & Polyhart, Reference Kim, Kim, Han, Jackson and Polyhart2017). Scholars in this area also acknowledge the importance of OCBs and have evidenced positive relationships between OCBs and important outcomes for individuals and organizations (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine, & Bachrach, Reference Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine and Bachrach2000; Nielsen, Hrivnak, & Shaw, Reference Nielsen, Hrivnak and Shaw2009; Podsakoff, Whiting, Podsakoff, & Blume, Reference Podsakoff, Whiting, Podsakoff and Blume2009; Halbesleben & Wheeler, Reference Halbesleben and Wheeler2012; Rubin, Dierdorff, & Bachrach, Reference Rubin, Dierdorff and Bachrach2013; Rose, Reference Rose2016).
Prior studies have examined the effects of OCBs on individual-level outcomes (e.g., work attitudes, morale, and motivation) from the perspective of individuals who actually engage in OCBs (e.g., Podsakoff et al., Reference Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine and Bachrach2000; Organ, Podsakoff, & MacKenzie, Reference Organ, Podsakoff and MacKenzie2005; Bolino, Hsiung, Harvey, & LePine, Reference Bolino, Hsiung, Harvey and LePine2015). However, some studies have raised the possibility that OCBs may not operate to the benefit of other employees who observe OCBs in the workplace. For instance, coworkers' OCBs were found to be unrelated to the work attitudes of fellow employees where those employees' supervisors engaged in abusive behaviors (Tepper, Duffy, Hoobler, & Ensley, Reference Tepper, Duffy, Hoobler and Ensley2004). When coworkers were rewarded for their OCBs, some employees would feel a sense unfairness from this organizational decision (Farrell & Finkelstein, Reference Farrell and Finkelstein2011). These findings serve as the underpinnings of the current research, which investigates OCBs from the observers' perspective (i.e., what do employees think about coworkers' OCBs) and examines the boundary conditions that influence the relationship between OCBs and better employee outcomes.
The current study investigated coworkers' OCBs by examining two-situational factors: organizational politics and task interdependence. First, we draw on the literature on impression management and organizational politics to theorize that organizational politics influences how employees interpret coworkers' OCBs in either a self-serving or altruistic way (Bolino, Reference Bolino1999). Studies on impression management have found that employees respond negatively to others' OCB when they attribute others' OCB to self-serving motives (e.g., Tepper et al., Reference Tepper, Duffy, Hoobler and Ensley2004; Farrell & Finkelstein, Reference Farrell and Finkelstein2011). In a similar vein, studies on organizational politics showed that, in highly political organizations, self-serving behaviors are widespread (Parker, Dipboye, & Jackson, Reference Parker, Dipboye and Jackson1995), and individuals are more likely to attribute others' behaviors to self-serving motives (Zhou & Ferris, Reference Zhou and Ferris1995). Second, we also rely on social exchange theory to describe how task interdependence heightens the importance of OCBs in relationships among employees. According to social exchange theory (Blau, Reference Blau1964), when social exchange partners provide them with what they value, individuals would exhibit more positive attitudes toward them. When employees work interdependently, they value coworkers' support and efforts to facilitate the work processes (Ozer, Chang, & Schaubroeck, Reference Ozer, Chang and Schaubroeck2014). Ultimately, we argue that these situational factors would moderate the relationships between coworkers' OCB and focal employees' job satisfaction and turnover intention.
Our study contributes to OCB literature by investigating under which conditions coworkers' OCBs are positively associated with employee job satisfaction and negatively related to turnover intention. First, we investigate OCBs from the observers' perspective and examine the relationships between coworkers' OCBs and work attitudes. With the exception of a few studies (e.g., Bommer, Miles, & Grover, Reference Bommer, Miles and Grover2003; Tepper et al., Reference Tepper, Duffy, Hoobler and Ensley2004), relatively little attention has been paid to the effects of OCBs from the perspective of the focal employee who observes others' OCBs. Regardless of coworkers' true intentions, OCBs may have a detrimental effect on employees who observe them (Tepper et al., Reference Tepper, Duffy, Hoobler and Ensley2004; Bowler, Paul, & Halbesleben, Reference Bowler, Paul and Halbesleben2019). Thus, investigating coworkers' OCBs may bring meaningful insights to the theory of OCBs.
Second, we adopt two distinctive types of OCBs. OCB beneficial to individuals (OCBI) immediately benefits specific organizational members, whereas OCB beneficial to organizations (OCBO) benefits the organization in general (Williams & Anderson, Reference Williams and Anderson1991). Each type of OCB represents a different social exchange relationship: OCBI relates more to social exchanges among employees, while OCBO is associated with social exchanges between an employee and the organization (Ozer, Chang, & Schaubroeck, Reference Ozer, Chang and Schaubroeck2014). Accordingly, because of the different psychological and social implications on employees' attitudes, previous studies have recommended researchers to differentiate the types of OCBs (Podsakoff et al., Reference Podsakoff, Whiting, Podsakoff and Blume2009). Therefore, it may be interesting to investigate how employees think about these social exchange relationships while considering the two different types of OCBs.
Third, we examine whether the relationships between coworkers' OCBs and employees' work attitudes were moderated by situational factors which add more implications to the studies of moderators of the relationships between OCBs and their outcomes. Ultimately, we argue that organizations should promote OCBs to foster positive employee attitudes and to minimize desires by employees to leave the organization. Accordingly, we emphasize the criticality of the organizational environment in facilitating positive relationships between coworker OCBs and better outcomes for fellow employees.
Theoretical Development and Hypotheses
Figure 1 depicts our proposed theoretical model. First, coworkers' OCBs are proposed to have a positive relationship with job satisfaction and a negative relationship with turnover intention. Second, we propose that two-situational factors, organizational politics and task interdependence, moderate the relationships between coworkers' OCBs and employee attitudes. More specifically, we theorize that, whereas perceptions of organizational politics attenuate the positive relationship between coworkers' OCBs and employees' attitudes, task interdependence strengthens the relationship between coworkers' OCBs and employees' attitudes.
The hypothesized model.
Organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs)
Previous studies have shown that OCBs lead to better employee attitudes and heightened organizational efficiency and effectiveness (e.g., Podsakoff & MacKenzie, Reference Podsakoff and MacKenzie1997; Podsakoff et al., Reference Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine and Bachrach2000, Reference Podsakoff, Whiting, Podsakoff and Blume2009; Hoffman, Blair, Meriac, & Woehr, Reference Hoffman, Blair, Meriac and Woehr2007; Jain, Giga, & Cooper, Reference Jain, Giga and Cooper2011). The central premise as to the relationship between OCB and better outcomes is that OCB may serve to maintain social exchange relationships within an organization (Podsakoff et al., Reference Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine and Bachrach2000; Organ, Podsakoff, & MacKenzie, Reference Organ, Podsakoff and MacKenzie2005; Matta, Scott, Koopman, & Conlon, Reference Matta, Scott, Koopman and Conlon2015). Social exchange relationship refers to a long-term exchange relationship that builds upon mutual trust, loyalty, and obligation among individuals or between individual and an organization (Blau, Reference Blau1964). This long-term relationship can be maintained by providing valuable gifts to fellow participants in the relationship. From this perspective, OCBs can be regarded as valuable gifts for both individuals and organizations because OCBs help other individuals or dedicate their time and effort to the organization above the norm. When employees engage in OCBs, coworkers and supervisors who observe others' OCBs may also feel some personal indebtedness to the organization and will reciprocate with other gifts, including positive attitudes, higher motivation, and commitment to the organization (Organ, Podsakoff, & MacKenzie, Reference Organ, Podsakoff and MacKenzie2005).
Employees also construct causal explanations for others' OCBs in an effort to predict and understand their environment (Heider, Reference Heider1958; Allen & Rush, Reference Allen and Rush1998). Eastman (Reference Eastman1994) suggests that OCB may stem from one of two causes: altruistic motives (e.g., personal values, loyalty to the organization, and a sense of moral standards) and instrumental motives (e.g., a desire to impress the boss, to obtain recognition, or to seek other organizational rewards). Behaviors associated with altruistic motives positively influence performance judgments, whereas those associated with instrumental motives are devalued or discounted (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, & Hui, Reference Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Hui, Ferris and Rowland1993; Allen & Rush, Reference Allen and Rush1998).
Further, researchers have suggested two primary second-order dimensions of OCBs (Podsakoff, Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Maynes, & Spoelma, Reference Podsakoff, Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Maynes and Spoelma2014). For example, Williams and Anderson (Reference Williams and Anderson1991) have argued that OCBs may be distinguished on the basis of who might benefit from them. OCBI immediately benefits specific individuals, while OCBO benefits the organization generally. Examples of OCBI are helping others and showing courtesy toward other employees; OCBO includes behaviors such as displaying loyalty to the organization and attending meetings beyond those required (Lee & Allen, Reference Lee and Allen2002). In our study, we adopt Willams and Anderson's (Reference Williams and Anderson1991) approach to OCB, since both OCBI and OCBO include most of the behaviors that are theoretically categorized as OCB. Furthermore, OCBI and OCBO may have different implications on the different types of social exchange relationships (Podsakoff et al., Reference Podsakoff, Whiting, Podsakoff and Blume2009; Ozer, Reference Ozer2011; Ozer, Chang, & Schaubroeck, Reference Ozer, Chang and Schaubroeck2014). For instance, employees performing OCBI help and support other organizational members and perhaps enhance the quality of social exchange relationships with them (Deckop, Cirka, & Andersson, Reference Deckop, Cirka and Andersson2003). Employees performing OCBO keep organizational norms and volunteer the projects beyond their duties: these behaviors can be regarded as inputs to social exchange relationships with the organization (Ozer, Chang, & Schaubroeck, Reference Ozer, Chang and Schaubroeck2014). Indeed, OCBO can make the organization a better place to work and indirectly increase other employees' positive attitudes toward the organization (Tepper et al., Reference Tepper, Duffy, Hoobler and Ensley2004; Organ, Podsakoff, & MacKenzie, Reference Organ, Podsakoff and MacKenzie2005). Accordingly, it is important to distinguish types of OCBs to examine the relationships between OCBs and their outcomes (Podsakoff et al., Reference Podsakoff, Whiting, Podsakoff and Blume2009).
It is important to note that, following Tepper et al. (Reference Tepper, Duffy, Hoobler and Ensley2004), we operationalized the coworkers' OCBs as employees' subjective perceptions regarding the extent to which their coworkers within the same team engage in OCBs. Because coworkers within the same team may exhibit various levels of OCBs, employees are likely to have different perceptions about their coworkers' OCBs. For example, employees who interact frequently with other employees may have more opportunities to observe their coworkers' helping behaviors (Venkataramani & Dalal, Reference Venkataramani and Dalal2007). However, when employees dislike working with another individual, they may not be as perceptive that their coworkers are helping one another regardless of the actual frequency of helping behaviors in their team (Venkataramani & Dalal, Reference Venkataramani and Dalal2007). As we have mentioned earlier, our study investigates OCB from the observers' perspective, and the subjective evaluation of coworkers' OCB is adequate to examine the relationships between coworkers' OCB and individual level outcomes.
Coworkers’ OCBs, job satisfaction, and turnover intention
Podsakoff and his colleagues (Podsakoff and MacKenzie, Reference Podsakoff and MacKenzie1997, Podsakoff et al., Reference Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine and Bachrach2000) theorized as to the potential mechanisms underlying why OCBs lead to individual-level positive consequences. They suggest that OCBs can foster an employee's morale and sense of belonging to a team, thereby rendering organizations more attractive places to work. Further, Tepper et al. (Reference Tepper, Duffy, Hoobler and Ensley2004) found that coworkers' OCBs increase fellow employees' job satisfaction and organizational commitment by making the workplace more inviting. Building upon these studies, we suggest that coworkers' OCBI and OCBO are positively related to one's job satisfaction but negatively related to turnover intention. First, coworkers' OCBI could influence a focal employee's perceptions of the relationships with his or her coworkers whether the relationships are positive or supportive (Young & Parker, Reference Young and Parker1999; Podsakoff et al., Reference Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine and Bachrach2000). These positive feelings toward coworkers then lead to the perceptions of the organization as being a better place to work and, in turn, encourage favorable attitudes toward one's job and organization (Mathieu & Zajac, Reference Mathieu and Zajac1990; Edwards & Peccei, Reference Edwards and Peccei2010). Specifically, studies have evidenced that employees are more satisfied with their jobs when their perceptions of coworker support toward them are high, because they feel more valued and socially integrated at work (Beehr & Drexler, Reference Beehr and Drexler1986; Ducharme & Martin, Reference Ducharme and Martin2000; Pollock, Whitbred, & Contractor, Reference Pollock, Whitbred and Contractor2000; Chou & Robert, Reference Chou and Robert2008). Moreover, coworkers' OCBI, as exhibited in the form of care and consideration, induces liking emotions for their coworkers (Allen & Rush, Reference Allen and Rush1998) and reduces employee withdrawal behaviors such as the intention to leave an organization (Price & Mueller, Reference Price and Mueller1986). Empirical studies also provide support that employees who perceive high coworker support are less likely to leave their organizations because it increases their attachment to their organization (Mossholder, Settoon, & Henagan, Reference Mossholder, Settoon and Henagan2005) as well as reduces work-related strains (Viswesvaran, Sanchez, & Fisher, Reference Viswesvaran, Sanchez and Fisher1999; Tews, Michel, & Ellingson, Reference Tews, Michel and Ellingson2013).
Second, coworkers' OCBO could increase job satisfaction and discourage turnover intention by inducing positive evaluation of their workplace (Organ, Podsakoff, & MacKenzie, Reference Organ, Podsakoff and MacKenzie2005). Coworkers' OCBO represents coworkers' willingness to actively participate in the governance of their organization (e.g., attend meetings, engage in policy debates, express one's opinion about what strategy the organization ought to follow; Organ, Reference Organ1997). It is very likely that employees interpret coworker’ OCBO as one's extra effort for increasing the effectiveness of their organization as a whole. Therefore, employees will positively evaluate their workplace and perceive coworkers exhibiting OCBO as ‘good soldiers,’ which triggers liking emotions toward them (Allen & Rush, Reference Allen and Rush1998). Positive emotions toward coworkers are related to increasing job satisfaction (Locke, Reference Locke and Dunnett1976) and lowering turnover intention. As a result, coworkers' OCBs will increase the focal employee's job satisfaction and reduce his or her turnover intention.
Hypothesis 1a
Coworkers' OCBI is positively related to employee job satisfaction.
Hypothesis 1b
Coworkers' OCBO is positively related to employee job satisfaction.
Hypothesis 2a
Coworkers' OCBI is negatively related to employee turnover intention.
Hypothesis 2b
Coworkers' OCBO is negatively related to employee turnover intention.
Moderating effects of perceptions of organizational politics and task interdependence
The prevailing OCB literature (e.g., Podsakoff et al., Reference Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine and Bachrach2000; Organ, Podsakoff, & MacKenzie, Reference Organ, Podsakoff and MacKenzie2005) suggests potential moderators of the relationship between OCBs and their outcomes, such as individual differences (e.g., ability, experience, training, and knowledge) and organizational contexts (e.g., the level of turnover). The moderating effects underlying these situational factors may influence (a) the attribution of OCB's motives (e.g., Tepper et al., Reference Tepper, Duffy, Hoobler and Ensley2004) and (b) the relative importance of OCBs to employee work accomplishments (Organ, Podsakoff, & MacKenzie, Reference Organ, Podsakoff and MacKenzie2005). For instance, when employees believe that their coworkers engage in OCBs not for others (i.e., altruistic motive) but for their own benefit (i.e., self-serving motive), employees will negatively respond to coworkers' OCBs by lowering their commitment to organizations (Tepper et al., Reference Tepper, Duffy, Hoobler and Ensley2004). Also, when jobs require collaboration among team members, OCBs may become more critical to complete employee tasks (Thompson, Reference Thompson1967). In this situation, employees would respond more strongly to coworkers' OCBs. Conversely, when OCBs are not critical for work accomplishment, employees may be less influenced by coworkers' OCBs, and additional benefits from coworkers' OCBs may not be critical to employees' work attitudes (Organ, Podsakoff, & MacKenzie, Reference Organ, Podsakoff and MacKenzie2005).
In this study, we propose two boundary conditions which may affect the relationships between coworker OCBs and employee job satisfaction and turnover intention. Specifically, we examine the moderating roles of perceptions of organizational politics and task interdependence. Organizational politics captures the degree to which employees pursue their self-interest without consideration of organizational outcomes. We believe the perception of organizational politics may influence employees' understanding of coworker intentions to engage in OCBs. Task interdependence captures the degree which employee task accomplishments depend on coworkers' information, resources, and materials. It is related to the relative importance of collaboration among team members, which is nested in OCBs. Consequently, we argue that these situational moderators may influence how individuals think about coworker behaviors that maintain the social exchange relationship with other employees (i.e., OCBI) and with the organization itself (i.e., OCBO).
Perceptions of organizational politics
Organizational politics refers to intentional behaviors or actions that promote or protect one's self-interest at the expense of others or of organizational goals in the workplace (Mintzberg, Reference Mintzberg1983; Randall, Cropanzano, Bormann, & Birjulin, Reference Randall, Cropanzano, Bormann and Birjulin1999). These political behaviors can be widespread in the workplace when organizations do not have the norms and clear guidelines for decision processes, resource distributions, and interpersonal relationships. In this situation, employees are more likely to engage in self-serving behaviors to promote themselves and to seek out resources for their tasks.
Scholars have studied organizational politics as a subjective experience (Ferris & Kacmar, Reference Ferris and Kacmar1992), and previous studies have found that subjective perceptions of organizational politics, not objective behaviors, are critical for employee outcomes. With some exceptions, organizational politics has been found to negatively affect employee attitudes and behaviors (Ferris, Frink, Galang, Zhou, Kacmar, & Howard, Reference Ferris, Frink, Galang, Zhou, Kacmar and Howard1996; Cropanzano, Howes, Grandey, & Toth, Reference Cropanzano, Howes, Grandey and Toth1997; Vigoda-Gadot & Talmud, Reference Vigoda-Gadot and Talmud2010; Abbas, Raja, Darr, & Bouckenooghe, Reference Abbas, Raja, Darr and Bouckenooghe2014; Yen, Reference Yen2015).
Political perceptions influence how individuals interpret both events and the behaviors of others (Byrne, Reference Byrne2005). Normative guidelines for behaviors and decisions are unclear in highly political organizations, and this uncertainly may motivate employees to engage in sensemaking to interpret others' behaviors (Bai, Han, & Harms, Reference Bai, Han and Harms2016). Organizational politics may actually trigger counterproductive sensemaking such that the organization is filled with agentic employees who are very likely to interpret coworkers as exhibiting self-serving behaviors with agentic goals, such as impression management (Ferris, Bhawuk, Fedor, & Judge, Reference Ferris, Bhawuk, Fedor, Judge and Martinko1995; Zivnuska, Kacmar, Witt, Carlson, & Bratton, Reference Zivnuska, Kacmar, Witt, Carlson and Bratton2004; De Clercq & Belausteguigoitia, Reference De Clercq and Belausteguigoitia2017), rather than purely altruistic behaviors with communal goals.
We theorize that employees will regard coworkers' OCBs as self-serving in a highly political organizational environment even when coworkers engage in OCBs that can contribute to the high quality of social exchange relationships. For example, frequently helping others above and beyond the norm (i.e., OCBI) may be perceived as ‘overhelping,’ which enhances the helpers' image but impairs the image of helpees (Gilbert & Silvera, Reference Gilbert and Silvera1996). When coworkers frequently attend meetings, including those that are not of an obligatory nature, employees with high-political perception may feel that coworkers are making a pretense to supervisors of dedicated to the organization (Bolino, Reference Bolino1999). Finally, coworkers' OCBO in the form of volunteering may be interpreted as impression management, because volunteering is highly visible in a meeting and positively evaluated by their immediate supervisor (Halbesleben, Bowler, Bolino, & Turnley, Reference Halbesleben, Bowler, Bolino and Turnley2010).
Thus, in the presence of a high level of organizational politics, coworkers' OCBO is very likely to be interpreted by fellow employees as self-serving (Tepper et al., Reference Tepper, Duffy, Hoobler and Ensley2004). Perceptions of disdain on the part of the focal employee may then lead to negative reactions in the form of lower job satisfaction and higher turnover intention. On the other hand, when organizational politics is low, there are certain normative guidelines for behaviors, and employees may engage in less counterproductive sensemaking. Rather, employees are likely to regard coworkers' OCBO as altruistic and will perceive it positively as individuals who demonstrate kindness and consideration. This will then lead to increasing job satisfaction and reducing the intention to leave.
Hypothesis 3a
Perceptions of organizational politics moderate the relationship between coworkers' OCBI and job satisfaction; the relationship is weaker when perceptions of organizational politics are high than when they are low.
Hypothesis 3b
Perceptions of organizational politics moderate the relationship between coworkers' OCBO and job satisfaction; the relationship is weaker when perceptions of organizational politics are high than when they are low.
Hypothesis 4a
Perceptions of organizational politics moderate the relationship between coworkers' OCBI and turnover intention; the relationship is weaker when perceptions of organizational politics are high than when they are low.
Hypothesis 4b
Perceptions of organizational politics moderate the relationship between coworkers' OCBO and turnover intention; the relationship is weaker when perceptions of organizational politics are high than when they are low.
Task interdependence
Task interdependence refers to ‘the extent to which an individual team member needs information, materials, and support from other team members to be able to carry out his or her job’ (Van der Vegt, Van de Vliert, & Oosterhof, Reference Van der Vegt, Van de Vliert and Oosterhof2003: 717), and may vary from person to person (Pearce & Gregersen, Reference Pearce and Gregersen1991; Van der Vegt & Van de Vliert, Reference Van der Vegt and Van de Vliert2000; Van der Vegt, Emans, & Van de Vliert, Reference Van der Vegt, Emans and Van de Vliert2001). From a social exchange perspective, task interdependence may influence the role of social exchange relationships in individual performance. First, task interdependence increases the importance of information and materials from other employees for the completion of one's own performance (Ozer, Chang, & Schaubroeck, Reference Ozer, Chang and Schaubroeck2014). As a result, employees with high-task interdependence expect help and coordination from their team members. Second, providing support and transferring information can generate the norm of reciprocity among employees. Employees who receive these valuable gifts will return the favor by exhibiting positive attitudes toward other employees as well as the organization.
We submit that employees' responses to coworkers' OCBs may vary depending on the degree of task interdependence. A high level of task interdependence can be characterized as a work environment that encourages the need for coordination on an ongoing basis to carry out one's job (e.g., Anderson & Williams, Reference Anderson and Williams1996; Small & Rentsch, Reference Small and Rentsch2010). In this situation, OCBI such as providing help and support to other employees is valuable, as these behaviors can facilitate the exchange of information necessary for the completion of tasks, projects, and goal accomplishment. Indeed, voluntary attendance of meetings and active participation in work activities (coworkers' OCBO) may help employees to coordinate activities in teams (Organ, Podsakoff, & MacKenzie, Reference Organ, Podsakoff and MacKenzie2005). Hence, employees with high-task interdependence may increase the expectation of coworkers' OCBs (Lam, Hui, & Law, Reference Lam, Hui and Law1999; Settoon & Mossholder, Reference Settoon and Mossholder2002). As coworkers engage in OCBs, employees have more opportunities to speed up their work processes and to accomplish task-related goals. Thus, employees with high-task interdependence will be more satisfied with their jobs. Also, the norm of reciprocity induced by coworkers' OCBs may enable employees to curtail negative attitudes (e.g., turnover intention). In contrast, when employees' task interdependence is low, performance is independent from that of their peers, which may result in a low level of expectation of coworkers' OCBs. From a social exchange perspective, information transferred from coworkers and coordination among employees may not be regarded as valuable enough input to develop and maintain a social relationship with coworkers. Employees with low-task interdependence may be less motivated to ‘pay back’ for coworkers' OCBs. Thus, coworkers' OCBs may be less critical in determining employee attitudes toward their jobs and reducing the intention to leave.
Therefore, we hypothesize the following:
Hypothesis 5a
Task interdependence moderates the relationship between coworkers' OCBI and job satisfaction; the relationship is stronger when task interdependence is high than when it is low.
Hypothesis 5b
Task interdependence moderates the relationship between coworkers' OCBO and job satisfaction; the relationship is stronger when task interdependence is high than when it is low.
Hypothesis 6a
Task interdependence moderates the relationship between coworkers' OCBI and turnover intention; the relationship is stronger when task interdependence is high than when it is low.
Hypothesis 6b
Task interdependence moderates the relationship between coworkers' OCBO and turnover intention; the relationship is stronger when task interdependence is high than when it is low.
Method
Participants and procedures
We surveyed employees of four advertising agencies and a construction company in South Korea by contacting senior managing directors of each company and asking them to distribute survey packets to their employees. Each survey packet included the survey, instructions, and a preaddressed, stamped reply envelope. Surveyed individuals were informed that their participation was voluntary and that they would send their completed surveys directly to the first author. Participants received a five-dollar gift card in return for their participation.
Five hundred fifty employees received the surveys; 439 were completed and returned. Aggregate return rates from the involved companies varied from 63 to 100%. Unanswered or incomplete surveys were dropped, resulting in 411 usable surveys (response rate = 74.72%). The average age of the respondents was 32.43 years (SD = 5.69); almost one-third (32.4%) were female. Eighty-six percent were employed in advertising and 14% in construction, with an average organizational tenure of 61.34 months (SD = 56.95). Respondents' jobs were as follows: 45.6% administrative office work, 19.7% sales, 13.5% creative director, and 21.2% miscellaneous. All participants were Korean, so the survey items were back-translated into Korean (Brislin, Reference Brislin1980). After the back-translation, both a professional and the first author reviewed all data and confirmed the comparability of survey items.
Measures
All items were measured on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree).
Coworkers' OCBs
Coworkers' OCBs were measured using 14 items from a scale developed by Williams and Anderson (Reference Williams and Anderson1991). Although the measure was not originally developed with an East Asian sample, it has been applied successfully in several studies using Korean sampling (e.g., Kim, Aryee, Loi, & Kim, Reference Kim, Aryee, Loi and Kim2013; Gonzalez-Mule, DeGeest, McCormick, Seong, & Brown, Reference Gonzalez-Mule, DeGeest, McCormick, Seong and Brown2014). Williams and Anderson (Reference Williams and Anderson1991)'s OCBs are divided into OCBI and OCBO. Therefore, we labeled the subject of items as ‘my coworkers’ to capture coworkers' OCBs and measured coworkers' OCBI and coworkers' OCBO. Our use of participants' self-evaluation of others rather than the coworker reports is consistent with the goals of our study, which are to understand how employees perceive their coworkers' OCBs and how this perception is associated with employee work attitudes (e.g., Tepper et al., Reference Tepper, Duffy, Hoobler and Ensley2004). Moreover, the meta-analysis of Carpenter, Berry, and Houston (Reference Carpenter, Berry and Houston2014) evidenced that the difference between self-rating OCBs and other-rating OCBs was quite small. Notably, perhaps self-rating OCBs could also yield meaningful results in OCB studies. Moreover, Tepper et al. (Reference Tepper, Duffy, Hoobler and Ensley2004) found that (1) the correlation between the group-directed OCB measure and individual-directed OCB was significantly high, and (2) and the correlations between group-directed OCB measure and outcomes did not significantly differ from the correlation between individual-directed OCB measures and outcomes. Thus, we employed employees' subjective perceptions of their coworkers' OCBs. Sample items included ‘My coworkers help others who have been absent’ for coworkers' OCBI, and ‘My coworkers conserve and protect organizational property’ for coworkers' OCBO. Cronbach's αs for coworkers' OCBI and coworkers' OCBO were .90 and .81, respectively.
Dependent variables
Job satisfaction and turnover intentions were measured using items from the Michigan Organizational Assessment Questionnaire (Cammann, Fichman, Jenkins, & Klesh, Reference Cammann, Fichman, Jenkins and Klesh1979). Each variable is measured with three items. Sample items included ‘All in all, I am satisfied with my job’ for job satisfaction, and ‘I often think about quitting’ for turnover intention. Cronbach's αs for job satisfaction and turnover intention were .83 and .73, respectively.
Moderators
Perceptions of organizational politics were measured using the Going Along to Get Ahead subscale of the Perceptions of Organizational Politics Scale (7 items, Kacmar & Carlson, Reference Kacmar and Carlson1997). Sample items included ‘Sometimes, it is easier to remain quiet than to fight the system’ (α = .82). Task interdependence was measured using Campion, Medsker, and Higgs's (Reference Campion, Medsker and Higgs1993) scale (3 items). Sample items included ‘Within my team, jobs performed by team members are related to one another’ (α = .67).
Control variable
Three variables (organization, age, and gender) were controlled. Organization was controlled because each organization may have unique organizational cultures and climates that influence employee attitudes and perceptions of organizational politics (e.g., Parker, Dipboye, and Jackson, Reference Parker, Dipboye and Jackson1995). We created four dummy variables and included them in the regression models. Second, age was controlled because turnover intention can vary depending on age (Mobley, Horner, & Hollingsworth, Reference Mobley, Horner and Hollingsworth1986). Last, we controlled gender due to its relationship with job satisfaction (Scandura & Lankau, Reference Scandura and Lankau1997).
Analytic strategies
Sample size was determined by considering the adequate power (.84) and small effect size (f 2 = .02) for moderation (Aguinis, Beaty, Boik, & Pierce, Reference Aguinis, Beaty, Boik and Pierce2005; Aguinis & Pierce, Reference Aguinis and Pierce2006). We desired small effect size because even a small effect size can have substantial importance and implications for moderation analyses in social research (Cohen, Reference Cohen1988). From their reviews of 261 papers published in three major journals, Aguinis et al. (Reference Aguinis, Beaty, Boik and Pierce2005) found that the mean power of the moderated multiple regression for detecting small effect size was .84. Given power, effect size, and α error probability (.05), the estimated sample size is 439. Our final sample size was 411, so it may be less sufficient to detect small effect size, but enough to have .8 or above power to detect the small effect size. Post-hoc analysis will be conducted to calculate the achieved power for each moderator with the α error probability, sample size, and effect size (Cohen, Cohen, West, & Aiken, Reference Cohen, Cohen, West and Aiken2003).
To test our hypotheses, we performed hierarchal regression analyses. The independent variables (coworkers' OCBI and OCBO) and two moderators (perceptions of organizational politics and task interdependence) were centered at the mean of each variable. We created four interaction terms by calculating the product terms of the mean-centered independent variables and the mean-centered moderators and included them in the regression model. To test the moderating hypotheses, we plotted the interaction effects and tested the significance of the slopes of the effect at ±1 standard deviation of the moderators (Aiken & West, Reference Aiken and West1991).
Next, we checked the multicollinearity of the independent variables, moderators, and interaction terms. The values of the variance inflation factor of coefficients in our regression models ranged from 1.13 to 2.19, and the conditional index score was 23.26. These two index scores are lower than the cutoff values (Cohen et al., Reference Cohen, Cohen, West and Aiken2003). Thus, we concluded that multicollinearity would not be an issue with respect to our results.
Results
Table 1 exhibits the means, standard deviations, correlations, and coefficient αs.
Descriptive statistics of the variables
Note. N = 411. Reliabilities are on the diagonal in parentheses.
a Dummy variables for five organizations.
b Female = 0; male = 1.
Coworkers' OCBI = coworkers' organizational citizenship behaviors beneficial to the individuals; Coworkers' OCBO = coworkers' organizational citizenship behaviors beneficial to the organization; POP = perceptions of organizational politics.
*p ≤ .05; **p ≤ .01 (two-tailed).
Confirmative factor analysis
To evaluate the dimensionality of our measures, we conducted a confirmative factor analysis (CFA). Because the ratio of our sample size (N) to the number of parameters (q) did not meet the recommended minimum ratio for CFA (N/q ≥ 20), we parceled items within coworkers' OCB variables and within perceptions of organizational politics. Following the recommendations for item parceling (Little, Cunningham, Shahar, & Widaman, Reference Little, Cunningham, Shahar and Widaman2002), we created parceled items and made each of three variables, as reflected by three parceled items. The alternative fit indices indicated that the six-factor model was acceptable (CFI = .95, and SRMR = .06, RMSEA = .05) and better than alternative models. The difference of χ2 between the six-factor model and the five-factor model (combining two independent variables) was significant [Δχ2 = (5, N = 411) = 329.67, p < .001]. The difference of χ2 between the six-factor model and the one general factor model also was significant [Δχ2 = (15, N = 411) = 1,569.57, p < .001]. Therefore, we used all six measures to test our hypotheses.
Effect size
We calculated the effect size for each moderation hypothesis. Effect size varied from 0 to .011, and achieved power for moderation ranged from .05 to .58.
Hypotheses testing
Model 6 of Table 2 shows that coworkers' OCBI had a non-significant relationship with job satisfaction (b = .08, p = .23) and that coworkers' OCBO was positively related to job satisfaction (b = .43, p < .001). These results did not support Hypothesis 1a but supported Hypothesis 1b. Model 6 of Table 3 shows that coworkers' OCBI had a non-significant relationship with turnover intention (b = −.14, p = .07). Thus, Hypothesis 2a was not supported. However, coworkers' OCBO was negatively related to turnover intention (b = −.49, p < .001), supporting Hypothesis 2b.
Results of hierarchical regression analysis for the effects of coworkers' OCB, perceptions of organizational politics, and task interdependence on job satisfaction
Note. N = 411. Entries are unstandardized regression coefficients.
95% confidence intervals are reported with brackets under unstandardized coefficient values.
Coworkers' OCBI = coworkers' organizational citizenship behaviors beneficial to the individuals; Coworkers' OCBO = coworkers' organizational citizenship behaviors beneficial to the organization; POP = perceptions of organizational politics.
Hypotheses 3 and 4 proposed that perceptions of organizational politics moderated relationships between coworkers’ OCB and an employee's attitudes. For job satisfaction, model 6 in Table 2 indicates that the interaction term of coworkers' OCBI and perceptions of organizational politics was not significant (b = −.01, p = .87), thus Hypothesis 3a was not supported. However, the interaction between coworkers' OCBO and politics perceptions was significant (b = −.17, p = .047). The simple-slope test revealed that the relationship between coworkers' OCBO and job satisfaction was stronger when perceptions of organizational politics were low (b = .48, p < .001) than when they were high (b = .14, p = .13). Hence, Hypothesis 3b was supported (Figure 2). For turnover intention, however, Table 3 suggests that interaction terms between coworkers' OCBI and perceptions of organizational politics (b = 0, p = .87) and between coworkers' OCBO and perceptions of organizational politics (b = −.04, p = .29) were not significant. Thus, Hypotheses 4a and 4b were not supported.
Interaction of perceptions of organizational politics and coworkers' OCBO on job satisfaction.
Results of hierarchical regression analysis for the effects of coworkers' OCB, perceptions of organizational politics, and task interdependence on turnover intention
Note. N = 411. Entries are unstandardized regression coefficients (b).
95% confidence intervals are reported with brackets under unstandardized coefficient values.
Coworkers OCBI = coworkers' organizational citizenship behaviors beneficial to the individuals; Coworkers' OCBO = coworkers' organizational citizenship behaviors beneficial to the organization; POP = perceptions of organizational politics.
Hypotheses 5 and 6 suggested there was a moderating effect of task interdependence on the relationships between coworkers' OCB and an employee's attitudes. For job satisfaction, in model 6 of Table 2, the interaction term between coworkers' OCBI and task interdependence was significant (b = .13, p = .049). However, the simple-slope test revealed that the interaction effects were not significant when task interdependence was either high or low. The interaction term between coworkers' OCBO and task interdependence was also significant (b = −.17, p = .03), but the direction of the moderating effect was in contravention of our hypothesis (see Figure 3). Therefore, Hypotheses 5a and 5b was not supported. For turnover intention, the result in model 6 of Table 3 demonstrates a significant interaction effect between coworkers' OCBI and task interdependence (b = −.18, p = .02). The simple slope test revealed that the relationship between coworkers' OCBI and turnover intention was stronger when task interdependence was high (b = −.32, p < .001) than when it was low (b = .02, p = .82). Therefore, Hypothesis 6a was supported (see Figure 4). However, the interaction term between coworkers' OCBO and task interdependence was not significant (b = .09, p = .29). Therefore, Hypothesis 6b was not supported.
Interaction of task interdependence and coworkers' OCBO on job satisfaction.
Interaction of task interdependence and coworkers' OCBI on turnover intention.
Discussion
While it has long been acknowledged that OCBs promote the effective functioning of an organization (Podsakoff et al., Reference Podsakoff, Whiting, Podsakoff and Blume2009), it remains to be determined how organizational context influences the relationship between OCBs and their outcomes. The current study investigates organizational politics and task interdependence as important contexts that affect the relationship between coworkers' OCBs and employee job satisfaction and turnover intention.
Our results suggest that coworkers' OCBO was positively related to job satisfaction but negatively related to turnover intention, implying that coworkers' behaviors are critically related to fellow employees' work attitudes. This finding is consistent with the theories posited in prior studies on job satisfaction and turnover intention. According to the value-percept theory of job satisfaction (Locke, Reference Locke and Dunnett1976), coworkers' characteristics (e.g., positive attitudes toward organization) are vital for determining employee job satisfaction. Our findings imply that employees are more satisfied with their jobs when they perceive they have ‘good citizens’ in their organization. The literature on job turnover posits that employees determine their intention to leave based on a subjective evaluation of the costs and benefits of doing so. From this perspective, coworkers' OCBO may increase the costs of turnover such that employees will lose valuable human assets (i.e., coworkers who engage in OCBO) if they leave the current organization. Our finding is also consistent with the social exchange perspective of OCBs such that OCBs may also indirectly contribute to establishing social exchange relationships for other employees by increasing the norm of reciprocity within the organization. When employees observe that their coworkers frequently engage in OCBO and contribute to organizational functions, employees who are not direct beneficiaries of such behaviors may also feel they have to reciprocate coworkers' activities with favorable attitudes toward organizations.
Surprisingly, in our sample, coworkers' OCBI was not related to job satisfaction and turnover intention. One possible explanation is that some employees may desire less help from their coworkers. Studies on help seeking have proposed that some employees may negatively respond to unwanted helping because coworkers' helping may undermine their self-efficacy belief and because other observers in organizations perceive employees who receive help as inferior (e.g., Nadler, Reference Nadler1987). Also, receiving support may include social costs whereby employees may feel obligated to share their resources in return for the unwanted helping. Thus, it is plausible that coworker support as a form of OCBI may not unwanted by some employees. Therefore, further investigation is required to examine the context(s) in which coworkers' OCBI is desired by the focal employees.
The moderating effects of perceptions of organizational politics and task interdependence were somewhat mixed. First, perceptions of organizational politics moderated the relationships between coworkers' OCBO and job satisfaction, implying that organizational politics would increase the attribution of coworkers' behaviors to self-serving motives. Our findings indicate that when perceptions of organizational politics were high, the relationship between coworkers' OCBO and job satisfaction became insignificant. This finding is consistent with previous studies evidencing that self-serving OCBs are not associated with positive outcomes (Bolino, Long, & Turnley, Reference Bolino, Long and Turnley2016). Moreover, it is consistent with the logic of counterproductive sensemaking such that organizational politics would distort the meaning of coworkers' OCBO and thus neutralize its positive effects on employee attitudes.
Our results indicate that political perceptions did not moderate the relationships between coworkers' OCBI and job satisfaction. As discussed earlier, employees who receive help have been shown to be perceived as helpless and ineffective. However, self-serving behaviors may be valued if they can assist an employee in solving his or her work-related problems. Farrell and Finkelstein (Reference Farrell and Finkelstein2011) found that experiment participants did not regard rewards for self-serving helping as more or less fair than those for altruistic helping. Both this finding and those gleaned from our results may imply that coworkers' OCBI can help employees accomplish their jobs, and the positive outcomes of coworkers' OCBI may offset the negative evaluation toward coworkers' self-serving behaviors.
Contrary to our prediction, perceptions of organizational politics did not moderate the relationships with coworkers' OCBI, coworkers' OCBO, and turnover intention. It is plausible that our sampled employees may have strong political skills and thus mitigate the effects of coworkers' OCBO on turnover intention. Colleagues working with self-serving employees may experience stress because they perceive the self-serving employees as having maneuvered themselves into unfairly receiving positive evaluations and rewards from the organization. Employees generally cope with this situation by avoiding working with them and perhaps increasing the intent to leave (Chang, Rosen, & Levy, Reference Chang, Rosen and Levy2009). However, employees with high-political skills are tolerable to selfish coworkers because they can show favorable attitudes toward powerful individuals and acquire essential resources in the organization (Ferris, Treadway, Perrewé, & Brouer, Reference Ferris, Treadway, Perrewé and Brouer2007). The ability to utilize coworkers' self-serving behaviors will then render them less likely to leave the organization. Thus, perceptions of organizational politics may not moderate the relationships between coworkers' OCBs and turnover intention.
Task interdependence moderated the relationships between coworkers' OCBI and employees' turnover intention. This is consistent with our reasoning that employees with high-task interdependence are likely to want support from their coworkers. As coworkers engage in OCBI, employees will have more opportunities to receive direct support, materials for their tasks, and/or information for the job requirements. Stated differently, coworkers meet the employees' expectations and can be perceived to work for the employees (Locke, Reference Locke and Dunnett1976). Hence, they would respond to coworkers' OCBI more positively than those who have a low level of task interdependence.
However, task interdependence did not moderate the relationship between coworkers' OCBO and turnover intention. We believe that this unsupportive result may be due to the nature of task interdependence and OCBO. The former defines the relationship among employees, whereas the latter involves the observation of the relationship between coworkers and the organization. Employees with high-task interdependence will expect direct help from coworkers for their performance (Lam, Hui, & Law, Reference Lam, Hui and Law1999). However, coworkers' OCBO cannot meet this expectation directly, but instead indirectly contribute to employees' performance by lubricating organizational functions. Thus, task interdependence may not be sufficient to trigger the importance of coworkers' OCBO in the cost-benefit calculations for turnover intention.
The moderating effect of task interdependence was also found in the relationship between coworkers' OCBO and employee job satisfaction. However, in contrast to our expectation, when task interdependence was low, coworkers' OCBO was more positively related to job satisfaction. One possible explanation is that in the presence of high-task interdependence, coworkers' OCBO could lead to a concern for task completion that relies heavily on the performance of others (Bergeron, Shipp, Rosen, & Furst, Reference Bergeron, Shipp, Rosen and Furst2013) because employees feel that their coworkers engage in OCBO at the expense of their own performance. On the other hand, when task interdependence is low, coworkers' OCBO could simply be perceived as altruistic behavior that does not slow down one's task completion.
While not the subject of our hypotheses, our results showed that two control variables (i.e., gender and a dummy variable for organization) were negatively related to job satisfaction in our model. First, the results demonstrated that female employees were less satisfied with their jobs than were male employees in our sample. It is possible that female employees' job ranks were lower than those of male employees, so this ‘glass ceiling’ effect could operate to decrease job satisfaction of female employees (e.g., satisfaction with promotion; Locke, Reference Locke and Dunnett1976). The glass ceiling effects also select out older female employees from the organization because limited opportunities would push older female employees to leave their organizations (Hoobler, Wayne, & Lemmon, Reference Hoobler, Wayne and Lemmon2009). In our sample, the correlation between age and gender was −47, which means that female employees were significantly younger than male employees, further supporting our belief. Second, there was a significant relationship between dummy variables and job satisfaction: employees in the construction company were less satisfied with their jobs than employees in advertising companies. We investigated the sample and found that the majority of employees in the construction company were ranked at lower level positions (e.g., office administrative work), so we believe their pay and promotion satisfaction (as parts of job satisfaction) could be lower than those of employees in advertising companies.
Theoretical implications
Our study contributes to the OCB literature by enriching the knowledge about OCBs. First, our results confirm the relationship between coworkers' OCBs and employee attitudes and strengthen the importance of the theory that perceptions of OCBs influence employee attitudes. Prior studies of OCBs consider employee attitudes as resulting from coworker engagement in OCBs (e.g., Why do employees engage in OCBs?). However, our study adopts the observers' perspective of OCBs and attempts to understand how coworkers' OCBs can be related to employee attitudes (e.g., What do employees think about others' OCBs; Bolino, Reference Bolino1999). We empirically support the perspective that subjective evaluation of OCBs by employees may be one of the potential mechanisms in which OCBs may facilitate positive attitudes and perhaps contribute to enhancing organizational effectiveness.
Second, this study contributes to the OCB literature by examining two potential moderators for the effects of coworkers' OCBs (organizational politics and task interdependence) and identified when coworkers' OCBs ceased to influence positive outcomes. Our findings indicate that organizational politics influence how employees appraise their coworkers' behaviors. In a highly political mood, employees may attribute their coworkers' OCBs as self-serving. Such attributions are characteristic of cynicism, which leads to greater job dissatisfaction and lack of motivation on the part of employees (Reichers, Wanous, & Austin, Reference Reichers, Wanous and Austin1997). Because the current study found that employees' subjective evaluation of coworkers' OCBs may be influenced by an abusive supervisor (Tepper et al., Reference Tepper, Duffy, Hoobler and Ensley2004) or the nature of the political environment, it is important to gain a more comprehensive understanding about how contextual factors affect employee attribution of coworkers' OCBs.
Third, our findings that task interdependence moderated the OCB–outcome relationship has contributed to the social exchange perspective of OCBs. From the social exchange perspective, coworkers' OCBs are valuable inputs for maintaining and developing social exchange relationships in an organization. To develop a social exchange relationship, each party in the relationship should provide something that the other party expects to receive. Task interdependence emphasizes the exchange of materials, information, and helping among employees. These resources are particularly valuable for employee goal accomplishment. Thus, task interdependence may influence employees' perceptions of what they want from coworkers and strengthen the role of the social exchange relationship in determining their attitudes toward their jobs.
Practical implications
This study provides several practical implications regarding coworker relationships and organizational politics. First, organizations may want to encourage employee OCBs because OCBs enhance the quality of employee relationships, which then facilitates positive outcomes within the workplace. Our findings imply that coworkers' OCBs may contribute to reduced internal tension and positively related to the possibility of organizational collaboration, factors which are critical for optimal organizational performance (e.g., Podsakoff et al., Reference Podsakoff, Whiting, Podsakoff and Blume2009). Thus, managers should encourage their subordinates to help each other and recognize their voluntary behaviors in the workplace.
Second, managers need to monitor and manage the situations in their workplace. For example, a high level of organizational politics is related to employee attribution of coworkers' OCBs as self-serving rather than well-intentioned. As suggested by Wenderoth (Reference Wenderoth2016), if organizational politics should be embraced rather than avoided, managers might need to not only encourage citizenship behavior but also more actively manage organizational politics. Indeed, in cases where employees are engaged in high levels of task interdependence, managers should exercise caution when encouraging coworker OCBs. Our study found that employees' OCBI was associated with lower job satisfaction under highly interdependent task conditions. In this regard, managers may be well advised to encourage reciprocal altruistic behavior only when such behaviors do not slow down employee task completion (e.g., Bergeron et al., Reference Bergeron, Shipp, Rosen and Furst2013).
Limitations and future research
Our study is limited in several ways, and we believe that future research will address our limitations. First, although we found a positive relationship between coworkers' OCBs and work attitudes, we did not examine the potential mechanisms by which coworkers' OCBs affect work attitudes. One promising avenue for further exploration is that of examining whether coworkers' OCBs influence an employee's positive emotions toward coworkers. Also, it is arguable that job satisfaction can be predictive of turnover intention (Cotton & Tuttle, Reference Cotton and Tuttle1986; Podsakoff, LePine, & LePine, Reference Podsakoff, LePine and LePine2007; Nei, Snyder, & Litwiller, Reference Nei, Snyder and Litwiller2015), and thus operate as a mediator between coworkers' OCBs and turnover intention. Future studies should examine potential mediators in the relationship between coworkers' OCBs and employee attitudes.
Second, our central premise about the moderating effects of organizational politics rests on how employees interpret their coworkers' OCBs as either self-serving or altruistic. However, we did not empirically test employee attribution of coworkers' OCBs. Moreover, other potential moderators may influence the attributions of coworkers' OCBs. For instance, supervisors' treatment may affect the interpretation of coworkers' OCBs (e.g., Tepper et al., Reference Tepper, Duffy, Hoobler and Ensley2004). Thus, future research should address more explicitly how employees interpret coworkers' OCBs by examining attribution processes and potential moderators.
Third, our analysis is based on the overall perceptions of coworkers' OCBs, but in certain situations, specific employees' OCBs may be more important than the overall level of coworkers' OCBs in the work group. For example, a particular coworker may have more powerful effects on employee attitudes than any other member of the organization (Sherony & Green, Reference Sherony and Green2002), and the quality of the treatment or frequency of favor exchange may be more critical for employees than the quantity of treatment (Flynn, Reference Flynn2003; Flynn & Brockner, Reference Flynn and Brockner2003). Future research may introduce network analysis to OCBs and identify the relative effects of social networks of employees on the relationship between coworkers' OCBs and outcomes.
Fourth, our sample may be collectivistic, and we could not rule out the effects of cultural values on our results. The meaning and dimensions of OCBs may vary across cultures because employees in a collective culture may regard OCBs as more of a taken-for-granted part of their performance than would an individualistic culture (Farh, Zhong, & Organ, Reference Farh, Zhong and Organ2004). In Western countries, for example, sportsmanship and courtesy are perceived as OCBs. By contrast, in collectivistic countries, sportsmanship and courtesy are not regarded as OCBs, but self-training and protecting organizational resources are (Lam, Hui, & Law, Reference Lam, Hui and Law1999; Farh, Zhong, & Organ, Reference Farh, Zhong and Organ2004). However, helping and take initiative (similar to conscientiousness) were considered as OCBs in both collectivistic and individualistic cultures. Political perceptions may be influenced by cultural values as well. For example, Vigoda-Gadot (Reference Vigoda-Gadot2001) demonstrated that, despite similar levels of employee perceptions of organizational politics, compared with British employees, Israeli employees showed less turnover intention as a response to perceptions of organizational politics. South Korea is known for its high power-distance culture (Hofstede, Reference Hofstede1980; Gudykunst & Ting-Toomey, Reference Gudykunst and Ting-Toomey1988). In such cultures, employees more highly tolerate unfair treatment behaviors and experience such treatment more frequently than others in low power-distance cultures (Ashkanasy, Reference Ashkanasy2002). Future research should conduct cross-cultural research to examine how cultural values mediate relationships between OCBs and outcomes.
Fifth, future research is encouraged to investigate whether, in a given situation, employee responses to coworkers' OCBs may depend on the types of OCBs – coworkers' OCBI and OCBO. Previous studies raised the possibility that two types of coworkers' OCBs can be differentially perceived in the eye of the beholder (e.g., Kim & Lee, Reference Kim and Lee2012; Bonner, Greenbaum, & Mayer, Reference Bonner, Greenbaum and Mayer2014). While we did not hypothesize such responses, our results showed that when organizational politics was high, only coworkers' OCBO was related to job satisfaction. However, when task interdependence was high, coworkers' OCBI was related to turnover intention but not coworkers' OCBO. Accordingly, some moderators may be unique to one of the OCB dimensions, but not to the other. Future research may measure the relative importance of OCB dimensions to test whether the moderating effects of situational factors are contingent on certain OCB dimensions.
Last, the data were collected from a single source, and our research design was cross-sectional. Thus, one may concern that common method variance (CMV) cannot be ruled out as a possible alternative explanation for our findings. Although we compared the hypothesized model with the one-factor model, it cannot completely detect the source and features of CMV in the results (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, & Podsakoff, Reference Podsakoff, MacKenzie and Podsakoff2012). However, one feature of our study reduces concerns about CMV because same-source variance does not inflate the regression estimates of interaction effects (Evans, Reference Evans1985; Siemsen, Roth, & Oliveira, Reference Siemsen, Roth and Oliveira2010). Also, the variables in our model were subjective perceptions of employees' coworkers, organization, and work attitudes, and the focal employee may be adequate to measure their own perceptions. Nevertheless, future research should examine these relationships using multiple sources of information and/or a longitudinal study design for more rigorous findings.
Summary and Conclusion
As earlier studies of OCBs suggest, OCBs may be associated with positive individual outcomes in organizations. This study examined OCBs from the employee perspective and tested their relationships with employee attitudes. Two boundary conditions (organizational politics and task interdependence) were also considered, as these situational factors may influence employees' interpretations toward coworkers' OCBs. Although the results of this study weakly supported our predictions, it was worthwhile to investigate the meaning of coworkers’ OCBs and how coworkers’ OCBs are related to employee work attitudes.
Author ORCIDs
Wongun Goo, 0000-0001-8008-8329
Appendix: Scales and items
