X hits on this document





12 / 185

support the technical core itself as much as they support the broader organizational,

social, and psychological environment, in which the technical core must function”

(Motowidlo & Van Scotter, 1994, p.476). Terms such as organizational citizenship

behavior (Smith, Organ, & Near, 1983), organizational spontaneity (George & Brief,

  • 1992)

    , contextual performance (Borman & Motowidlo, 1993; Motowidlo & Van Scotter,

  • 1994)

    and prosocial behavior (Brief & Motowidlo, 1986) have been used as labels for

these valuable non-task employee behaviors.

The proliferation of terms to describe the broad domain of employee behaviors

has been accompanied by a sustained interest in identifying the antecedents and

performance implications of these behaviors. Some studies have examined individual

differences such as personality in relation to citizenship behaviors, but the predictive

validity of personality has been found to be limited for the most part to the trait of

conscientiousness (Organ & Ryan, 1995). Considerable research has been conducted on

the premises of the social exchange perspective (Blau, 1964), according to which

employees engage in beneficial behaviors to reciprocate favorable treatment by the

organization (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine, & Bachrach, 2000; Zellars & Tepper, 2003).

Antecedents such as perceived organizational support (Eisenberger, Armeli, Rexwinkel,

Lynch, & Rhoades, 2001; Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002), fairness (Ball, Trevino, &

Sims, 1984; Konovsky & Pugh, 1994; Masterson, Lewis, Goldman, & Taylor, 2000), and

leader-member exchange (Settoon, Bennett, & Liden, 1996) have been explored from a

social exchange theoretical perspective.

As critical as a social exchange framework might be, factors at the organizational

level, notably organizational culture, may also serve as a fundamental mechanism for


Document info
Document views769
Page views769
Page last viewedTue Jan 24 17:52:53 UTC 2017