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