Leadership and Organizational Citizenship Behavior

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Problem
Hypothesis
Need for Study
Methodology
Literature Review
Assumptions, Limitations, and Future Research
Conclusion
Individual Critique

Problem

The article written by Jiao, Richards, and Zhang is focused on the organizational citizenship behavior (OCB), its importance for the employees, and connection with transformational and contingent-reward leadership. The authors resorted to a range of authoritative literature sources to find out whether OCB is able to provide enormous advances for a company because a lot of scientists believe this fact to be true to life.

However, regardless of the fact that such evidence was found, they wanted to deepen into the issue and find out whether professionals perceive these advantages, as this side of the problem was not properly studied. They focused on the way organizational and individual instrumentalities are perceived by the employees to define if they recognize OCB as one of the main elements that affect the effectiveness of the work unit and even the whole organization, as well as to define the extent to which they believe OCB has an influence on their personal interests. In addition to that, the researchers tried to find out how these perceptions affect employee engagement in OCB and mediate the effects of leadership.

Hypothesis

The authors of the article developed several hypotheses, with the help of which they wanted to answer their main question and fulfill the purpose of this research study. In particular, they resorted to the previous investigations in order to develop and discuss them. All in all, the article focuses on the following hypotheses:

An organizational instrumentality that is perceived by employees has a positive connection with the performance of OCB.
An individual instrumentality that is perceived by employees has a positive connection with the performance of OCB.
An organizational instrumentality that is perceived by employees has a positive connection with the performance of OCB, controlling for the individual instrumentality that is perceived by employees has a positive connection with the performance of OCB.
The way workers understand and treat organizational and individual instrumentalities is rather critical. It defines the association between OCB and transformational leadership.
The way workers understand and treat organizational and individual instrumentalities is rather critical. It defines the association between OCB and contingent-reward leadership.

Need for Study

The researchers emphasize that a single occurrence of OCB is not likely to affect an organization critically while cumulative OCB provides sustainable advantages. Thus, it is vital for employees to realize the benefits of OCB for them to understand the necessity to resort to it. As the real attitudes and perceptions of OCB lack substantial evidence, this very study is important for the field. It can let the professionals consider interventions needed to improve the situation and enhance organizational performance. Investigation of meanings that workers align with OCB is also vital because it allows the professionals to understand why employees perform particular behaviors and influence them.

The authors presupposed that organizational and individual instrumentalities were an additional force that makes workers resort to OCB and discussed its mediation role, as a result. Previously, these topics were basically ignored. They also paid attention to the leaders’ ability to infuse meanings into actions of employees, which is important in the framework of this study but had not been decently investigated previously.

Methodology

To conduct this study, the researchers resorted to authoritative literature sources and maintained several surveys. A literature review was used to discuss background information, prove the necessity of current research, and provide evidence for particular claims. Matched surveys from supervisor–subordinate dyads were conducted. The sample included 161 dyads. A mid-sized financial organization located in China was approached. In the framework of this research, supervisors rated OCB of their employees while employees completed various measures. They were focused on perceived organizational and individual instrumentalities. Transformational and contingent-reward leadership styles were also approached.

Literature Review

According to the literature used in the article, OCB has a positive influence on the organizational sustainability even though it can be trivial when singly occurred. Many employees believe OCB to be an essential element of their job that contributes to compensation decisions. OCB is believed to provide systematic rewards and satisfy self-interests. The mechanisms of different leadership styles are seen as the main predictors of OCB, which means that they need to be thoroughly discussed.

It is also stated that task significant is critical for the eventual performance and employee behavior because it affects their lives and work. Here, organizational instrumentality is also discussed along with job characteristics, such as involved collectives that affect the effective functioning of the organization. Organizational and individual instrumentalities affect job outcomes, satisfaction, motivation, and performance. If workers realize this fact, they tend to have a stronger belief in the OCB’s positive influence on the effectiveness and functionality of the work unit and organization and are more likely to perform it.

Professionals also claim that transformational leadership ensures decent exchange process between leaders and their followers, which allows to affect the way employees perceive job and task importance, making them more motivated and willing to resort to OCB. Contingent-reward leadership is also vital in this perspective because it involves a better understanding of performance expectations that affect final results and make employees willing to enhance their performance level.

Assumptions, Limitations, and Future Research

In their study, the authors assumed that the organizational instrumentality is an extra insight to the individual one, which reveals why people perform OCB. They suggested that perceived instrumentalities mediate the link between leadership and OCB. Still, there were some limitations in the study. A final cause-and-effect relationship between the variables was not possible because it was a cross-sectional study.

In addition to that, assumptions were based on existing theories that were based on the fact that employees’ perceptions depend on their individual behavior only. The authors state that further research is needed to gather more clear information about the causal direction. It will also be beneficial to add new variables that can reveal the relation between OCB and organizational instrumentality, as well as its validity over an individual one. Attention can also be paid to the elements that affect the perception of instrumentalities except for leadership. Finally, influences on leadership and its interpretation and other sample characteristics can be considered.

Conclusion

According to the research findings, not only individual instrumentality but also organizational one was related to OCB. In fact, results revealed that it explained variance in OCB. Considering the focus on the role of mediator, it was concluded that both organizational and individual instrumentalities have some connection with transformational and contingent-reward leadership and OCB. The study showed that they increased and strengthened the association between them.

The authors managed to come to the conclusion that it was advantageous for the leaders to educate their employees regarding the significance of OCB and its role in the increased functionality and effectiveness of the work of their unit and the whole organization. Thus, employers are recommended to assess the OCB-specific instrumentality beliefs of their followers. What is more, the necessity to promote OCB was emphasized. The authors also found evidence to prove that perceptions of organizational and individual instrumentalities can be improved due to the effective leadership. As a result, greater OCB can be observed.

Individual Critique

The article under discussion is focused on the association between leadership and OCB. Personally, I believe that this topic is worth discussing because it is important for any organization that is willing to improve its performance. In this framework, it is critical for professionals to understand how these elements are connected and what mediates and influences them. This research is likely to provide the readers with the required answers, allowing them to enhance their knowledge and use obtained information in practice to get real effects.

The sample approached in the article included employees and their leaders from a mid-sized financial company, which is quite an ordinary organization so the results can be generalized and applied to other firms. This claim can also be supported by the fact that the number of participants was more than 200. However, it is critical to remember that the company is located in South China. This country is known for a wide range of cultural differences in comparison to the USA or Europe, which means that employees’ perceptions may not be the same.

The way the procedure was conducted seems to be appropriate. It is possible that some errors occurred, but they are not likely to be critical and have an influence on the overall results. The answers were based on self-assessment and personal beliefs, which means that they are rather biased. However, it cannot be considered as a problem because the aim of the research was to get to know employees’ perceptions. In addition to that, the authors analyzed results in different ways, using confirmatory factor analysis, descriptive statistics, hierarchical linear models, and path analyses. As a result, the researchers obtained an opportunity to discuss all the variables in details and prove their assumptions.

I find it advantageous that the authors included thorough descriptions of the results they obtained, but I believe that they remained rather complicated for the representatives of the general public who are occasionally interested in the topic.

However, it does not seem to be a problem, because the article is published in a peer-reviewed journal that is targeted at professionals in the sphere. I was positively surprised by the epigraph used in the beginning, as the authors artistically connected it with the topic and grabbed my attention immediately. Even though it is generally believed that outdated sources are not appropriate for such works, I believe that the authors did a great job combining literature sources from the 20th and 21st centuries. In this way, they allowed the readers to see how the way this topic was addressed altered with the course of time and proved that claims were relevant even in the past.

Even though I am totally satisfied with the way this article is presented, I believe that is would be advantageous to consider some minor improvements. For instance, it might be better to add some conclusion paragraphs in the section with results. It shows different analyses separately, so a brief summarized information is likely to increase the understanding and make it easier to navigate and look through the article. It might also be advantageous to approach the participants from different companies. Even if the size of the sample remains the same, increased diversity can give an opportunity to generalize results and apply them to a wider population.

Click Here To Order Now!