faculty of adminstrative sciences and economics …

The relationship between Leader Member Exchange & Organizational

Citizenship Behavior

FACULTY OF ADMINSTRATIVE SCIENCES AND ECONOMICS

Business & Management Department

ISHIK UNIVERSITY

Research done by: Lobna Ali Akram

Ali Abdul Kareem Humadi

Ali Netheer Muslim

Supervised by: Mr.Karwan Sherwani

Abstract

In this research, the aims is to discuss about two concepts, first concept will be about Leader

Member Exchange (LMX), the second concept is Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB),

and then we will discuss about the relationship between the two concepts and the benefit of both

of them in order to achieve the aims. Quantitative research methodology is adopted for this

research, which has 6 personal questions and 10 questions about the concepts, we shared the

questionnaire at PAR hospital and Zheen hospital in order to obtain and gather further

information about how the employees thinks about their managers and if they do some extra

work toward their organization. Also we have published 45 questionnaires for both hospitals

(divided 25 for par hospital and 20 for zheen hospital). In this research paper the quantitative

method is used due to availability of the statistical date. The main aim of visiting those hospitals

was to collect the relevant and reliable data from those hospitals and it was published to the

managers and to their employees as well.

Key words: LMX, OCB, Leader, and Follower

1. Introduction

First concept (Leader member exchange) also known as LMX or Vertical Dyad Linkage

Theory, found in the 1970s. This concept focus on the relationship between the managers

and their employees or team members, the advantage of this concept is showing how to

be aware and perceive members also how to treat your team as a leader or manager.

Second concept Organizational Citizenship Behavior which is about how the employees

can do extra activities such as charity, volunteer work at organizations which they are not

responsible to do, but some of them do it in order to prove themselves and to increase

their efficiency at work or they do it from the moral side; for example many employees

work in charity club as a volunteer at the same time. On the other hand, some people do

that just for sake of God or humanity, because many believes that is this part of their

religious performances. Understanding the relationship between leader member exchange

and organizational citizenship behavior will provide awareness that lead to high-quality

relationship and also will increase the efficiency. According to Davoudi (2012), it is

essentially the activities employees take that are above and beyond what is expected of

them, and which do not give them any explicit reward. It is acknowledged that effective

organizations have employees who go beyond their formal job responsibilities and freely

give of their time and energy to succeed at the assigned job. There is consensus in this

particular field that organizational citizenship behavior addresses silent behaviors for

organizational enterprises. According to Podsakoff (2000), organizational citizenship

behavior helps maximize the organizational performance of firms and today's

organizations could not survive or prosper in such competitive environment without their

personnel behaving as good citizens by engaging in all sorts of positive behaviors.

Further, Organ (1988) claimed that organizational citizenship behavior can maximize the

efficiency and productivity of both the employee and the organization that ultimately

contribute to the effective functioning of an organization. Since this is the main goal of

all organizations, it benefits managers to understand how various variables influence

organizational citizenship behavior.

2. Literature review:

Seyed Mehdi Mousavi Davoud who has analyze the relationship between Leader-Member

Exchange and Organizational Citizenship Behavior of Golfreez food Production Company.

The statistical population of the present study includes all employees of the mentioned

company. The factors analysis and the findings show that Leader Member Exchange has a

significant positive influence on Organizational Citizenship Behavior of employees. The

results of the present study provide further insight for managers of organizations on

improving the quality of their relationships with employees to achieve competitive

advantages. Furthermore, other researchers have imagined that the effectiveness of

organizations is likely to be increased when employees go above and beyond the call of duty

to aid fellow workers in order to achieve organizational goals. Further, according to Organ

(1988), organizational citizenship behavior is work behavior that is discretionary and not

directly or explicitly recognized or expected of the employee. Leader-Member Exchange

Theory: Leader Member Exchange Theory (LMX) is a leadership theory that focuses on the

two-way relationship between a supervisor (manager) and each of their subordinates

(employees) and contributes to increasing organizational success by creating positive

relations between the leader and subordinate. According to Truckenbrodt (2000), the main

concept of LMX theory is that a manager inevitably forms a separate two-way relationship

with each of their employees. This relationship between manager and each employee will

emerge in the form of either a high quality or low quality LMX relationship. Employees in a

high quality LMX relationship are referred to as in-group members, whereas, employees in

low quality LMX relationships are considered out-group members. For managers of any

organizations is to establish as many high quality LMX relationships with their employees as

possible to help increase overall organizational productivity.

3. Leader Member Exchange (LMX)

Leadership-Member Exchange Theory

Is a theory of the relationship between the managers and members of their teams, this

relationship (between the managers and their member’s teams) go through three stages:

Stage one (Role-taking): Occurs when the member’s team has just joined the group, managers

on this time will evaluate their skills and abilities during their work.

Stage two (Role-making): In this stage the manager expect their member to be loyal, honest and

work hard as possible as they can to improve themselves and to improve their skills to their

managers, the theory says this stage has two groups:

(In-group) occurs when the members approved their loyalties and the skills they have to their

managers, in this case they are put into in-group and the managers should be more attention to

their members also give them the opportunity for additional training to make them more

challenge. Second group is (Out-group) it happens when the members became dishonest or

lazy at their work, they are put into this group and the managers will not provide them with the

opportunity of growth.

Follower Leader

Dyadic

Relationship

Stage three (Reutilization): routines between the managers and their team members are

established. In-group the employees are trying to the best to show their loyalty and improve

themselves to their managers. Out-group members they may dislike like or distrust their

managers.

Qualities /strength

1) A descriptive theory, it proposes that it is critical to perceive the presence of in-group and

out-group inside a group or association

2) The LMX theory is one of a kind since it's the main initiative approach that makes the idea of

the dyadic relationship the centerpiece of the authority procedure

3) The LMX theory is significant, on the grounds that it guides our consideration regarding the

significance of correspondence in administration

4) There is an extensive assortment of research that substantiates how the act of the

LMX theory is identified with positive authoritative results

Weakness/Criticisms

1) The LMX theory runs counter to essential human estimations of reasonableness

- It gives appearance and oppression bunches that don't get the exceptional consideration it’s

extremely out of line

2) The essential thoughts and theory are not completely created - Formal on the grounds that a

pioneer found certain subordinates more perfect to identity, relational aptitudes, yet never

expressed how these were critical

3) Questions with respect to the estimation of initiative part trades in LMX theory - No exact

reviews have utilized dyadic measures to examine the LMX handle - The estimation scales need

content legitimacy, which implies the scales may not really be measuring what they were

proposed to gauge –

4) Questions with respect to whether the standard scale used to gauge trades is unidimensional or

multidimensional

The Impact of Leader-Member Exchange Theory

It could be said, Leader-member exchange theory (LMX) signifies a departure from common

leadership theories. Majority of the theories emphasis on the characteristics of effective leaders.

In contrast, LMX focuses on the relationships, which may be affected by personal characteristics,

between leaders and followers, Truckenbrodt, 2000). Moreover, Uhl-Bien (1996) stated impart a

sense of urgency to look beyond the traits of effective leaders by describing a taxonomy of

leadership with multiple domains including the leader, the follower, and the dyadic relationship.

They warn that focusing on only one domain could result in flawed research designs and

understandings of effective leadership. LMX brings the follower and relationship domains into

the foreground of research together with the study of such leadership styles as transformational

leadership. The vital concept of LMX is that leadership is more effective when “leaders and

followers are able to develop mature [partnerships] and thus gain access to the many benefits

these relationships bring” (Graen 1996). LMX focuses on the dyadic relationship between

leaders and individual followers, as opposed to the organizational group. Relationships are

different with each follower, with some being of higher quality than others. Followers in high-

quality relationships are part of an in-group, while those experiencing lower quality relationships

are “out-group” members. In-group followers enjoy increased job latitude, more open

Communications and greater confidence from leaders.

4. Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB)

What is OCB?

One could say that a category of performance called citizenship behavior is important in

organizations and not easily explained by the same incentives that induce entry, conformity to

contractual role prescriptions, or high production. Therefore, need to be understanding what

establishes a good employee in a modern century workplace? In the Hospital of PAR and

ZHEEN where organizational hierarchical structures may be compliment, or less emphasized,

especially in smaller medium-sized businesses, it is important to have good relationships among

co-workers since they are private hospitals.

Being helpful and supportive of colleagues in a way that benefits the organization, working

towards the organization’s goals – this is embodied in the definition of citizenship behavior.

Organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) has garnered much academic attention since its

conception. It is perceived to be something intangible; OCB is not always formally recognized or

rewarded, and concepts like ‘helpfulness’ or ‘friendliness’ are also difficult to quantify. Yet OCB

has been shown to have a considerable positive impact at the organizational level, enhancing

organizational effectiveness.

Furthermore, Organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) has undergone subtle definitional

revisions since the term was coined in the late 1980s, but the construct remains the same at its

core. OCB refers to anything that employees choose to do, spontaneously and of their own

accord, which often lies outside of their specified contractual obligations. In other words, it is

discretionary. OCB may not always be directly and formally recognized or rewarded by the

company, through salary increments or promotions for example, though of course OCB may be

reflected in favorable supervisor and co-worker ratings, or better performance appraisals. In this

way it can facilitate future reward gain indirectly. Finally, and critically, OCB must ‘promote the

effective functioning of the organization’ (Organ, 1988).

The Benefits of OCB

OCB has been shown to have a positive impact on employee performance and wellbeing, and

this in turn has noticeable flow-on effects on the organization. The correlations between OCB

and job satisfaction is approximately (Organ, 1988). There is empirical evidence for the widely-

held belief that satisfied workers perform better, but this is correlational, not causal. However,

certain types of performance – primarily those related to citizenship behavior – will be affected

by job satisfaction. Think of workers who are cooperative with their superiors and colleagues,

willing to make compromises and sacrifices and are ‘easier to work with’, workers who ‘help out

with the extra little things’ without complaining (or even offering to do so without being asked) –

these behaviors are all encompassed within OCB.

Five common type of OCB:

The main study of Denise Organs 1988 on the behavior of organizational citizenship was defined

as five common behaviors. When these common behaviors appear in a group, they will lead to

effectiveness. In the business context, this means that the five most common regulatory

behaviors will result in greater productivity and more effective work. Although today's

psychologists recognize dozens of other positive organizational and regulatory behaviors, the

five identified by the body in 1988 are still considered the most important. The five most

common behaviors, as defined by the Denis apparatus, are: altruism, courtesy, sports,

conscience, and civic virtue.

ALTRUSIM:

Defined as the desire to assist or otherwise assist another person, while compensation is not

expected to compensate for that assistance.

Example: A common example is an employee who pays his colleague to work when his car

collapses, while no money is expected or preferred in compensation.

A person who appears to be engaging in provocative behavior in a particular group may

volunteer to work on specific projects, volunteer assistance or assist other employees in their

work or other tasks, and volunteer to do additional work to help other staff reduce their

workload.

Courtesy:

Courtesy is defined as polite and considerate behavior. In the course of a business, courtesy is

usually displayed through behaviors such as inquiring about personal topics previously submitted

by a coworker and asking whether a coworker has any problem with a particular business related

project, informing coworkers about past commitments or any other problems which may lead to

reduced workload or absenteeism.

Sportsmanship:

Sportsmanship knows that he does not show any negative behavior when nothing goes as

planned - or when something is seen as annoying, difficult, frustrating, or otherwise

negative.

For example, an employee who submits a proposal to his or her chair may be expected to

be well accepted and acceptable; rather, he is rejected instead. The employee is spiritually

presented by not questioning the situation to other colleagues or individuals who may

report their behavior to others who working for the company.

Conscientiousness:

Conscience is defined as behavior that refers to a reasonable level of restraint and discipline,

which exceeds the minimum requirements expected in that situation in the context of the

business environment, and the conscience is when it satisfies not only the employer's

requirements such as com and work on time and complete tasks in time Specified but exceeds

them.

Civil virtue:

Civil virtue is defined as behavior that shows the extent to which a person is represented by an

institution and the extent to which that person supports their organization outside of official

capacity.

For example, the extent to which someone is represented for their business and how they support

business are examples of a person's civic virtue.

Examples of civil virtue in the business framework include

Talking positively about business to friends and family:

Signing up for business events, such as charity walking events.

5. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LMX AND OCB

LMX-OCB Relationship

LMX theory focuses on the unofficial exchange that evolve between a

leader and his or her follower (Wang et al., 2005, as cited in Bendvold, 2012). LMX

relationships include swaps of favors and ethereal rewards between the leader and the follower.

(Bendvold, 2012)

Mutual arrangement of support, aid and accolades, going hand in hand with mutual trust and felt

accountability is what distinguish a high quality LMX relationship (Wang et al., 2005, as cited in

Bendvold, 2012).

According to LMX theory, members of manager’s in-group do more than they are asked to, get

more tasks done, and have more responsibilities, basically, they are proactive and initiative, so

they are more reliable than the members of the out-group (the rest of employees), and that is

based on a high-quality relationship between manager and his in-group.

(OCB) In spite of that researchers have an extensive understanding of how OCB relates to

various types of results, including unit-level performance, indices of sales performance, product

quality and percent of team quota sales, operating efficiency, customer satisfaction, quality of

performance, civic virtue, sportsmanship, altruism, conscientiousness and courtesy, it is

interesting that they have less understanding of how OCB is related to LMX.

(Ilies, Nahrgang, & Frederick, 2007)

OCB becomes a natural mean for the employee to repay the aid and support they had from their

manager. Some rewards provided by the manager are ethereal, they can be intel, resources,

freedom of decision making and the overall support, in that case, in order for the employee to

reciprocate the manager, they can show higher level of responsibility for the organization, get

assigned to do more tasks, and give a hand to their colleagues. (Settoon et al. 1996, as cited in

Bendvold, 2012)

How LMX affects OCB:

In spite of the mechanisms by which LMX has its effect on OCB are less clear, research has

shown some mediation effects in this relationship. (Bendvold, 2012)

Earlier studies review the composition of citizenship behavior depending on leaders’ statements.

Wayne and Green (1993) (as cited in Truckenbrodt, 2000) examine the impact of LMX on

employee citizenship behavior from member point of view rather than the leader. (Truckenbrodt,

2000)

Citizenship behavior, being unrestricted and spontaneous in nature, becomes a common mean for

the employee build up the social relationship with his or her leader (Settoon, Bennett, & Liden,

1996, as cited in Bendvold, 2012).

In spite of the theoretical structure that connects leaders to performance may differ, leadership

theories are established on broad assumption that leaders influence performance at some

macrolevel over their impact on members and groups who contribute to the achievement of

wider organizational goals. The leader commonly supplies the follower with helpful work-related

information and expanded decision liberty, in which the follower repays by showing expanded

effort and engagement towards the organization.

It is typically suggested that OCB represents a mean for the follower to repay the aid and favors

supplied by the leader (e.g., Wang et al., 2005; Bahl, 2005; Wayne, Shore, Bommer, & Tetrick,

2002; Lapierre & Hackett, 2007, as cited in Bendvold, 2012).

So, LMX has a significant effect on Organizational citizenship behavior, because it encourages

employees to do more than their prescribed tasks so they become members of manager’s in-

group. (Wayne et al., 2002, as cited in Ilies, Nahrgang, & Frederick, 2007).

LMX supply organizational effectiveness through the impact that strong relationships have on

the amount to which members employ in behaviors beyond their contractual tasks. The value of

such behaviors for organizational effectiveness was recognized by Katz (1964) (as cited in

Remus Ilies, Jennifer D. Nahrgang, and Frederick P. Morgeson, 2012) , who highlighted the

urgency for employees’ innovative and offhand activity out of their stated roles.

(Ilies, Nahrgang, & Frederick, 2007)

The

study suggests that enhancing the quality of LMX will increase followers’ sense of engagement

and citizenship behavior; improvement and conservation of a sophisticated binary relationship

will aid not only the leaders and the followers, but also the organization in general in the

accomplishment of organizational rise and success. (Truckenbrodt, 2000)

Statistical processing

For the purpose of data processing and statistical analysis, the Microsoft Excel 2013 was used,

and some indicators used such as:

- Frequency

- Percentage

- Arithmetic mean

- Standard deviation

- Bar charts

Methodology

This chapter deals with the presentation and analysis of the data obtained from the research tool

and produced by using a scale from 5 scores to weigh each question, the higher score 5 had been

given to the answer (strongly agree) and the lowest score 1 had been given to the answer

(strongly disagree)

Strongly

agree

Agree Uncertain Disagree Disagree

strongly

5 4 3 2 1

Table 1: The questionnaire scale

This study was based on (analytical approach) in order to analyze the relationship between

Motivation and employee Job Satisfaction

Community and sample survey

Due to the time constraints and the size of the studies society, the survey chose a sample from both

genders, and 50 questionnaires were distributed to the sample of both genders in a proportional

manner.

And in the following table are the characteristics of the chosen sample:

frequency percentage

Gender Male 31 31%

Female 69 59%

Total 100 100%

Age 18-25 13 13%

26-35 31 31%

36-45 51 51%

46-55 4 5%

Total 100 100%

Education High school 4 4%

Bachelor degree 89 89%

Master degree 7 7%

Total 100 100%

Marital Status Single 49 49%

Married 51 51%

Total 100 100%

Job

Experience

1-10 64 65%

11-20 24 24%

21-30 9 9%

+31 2 2%

Total 100 100%

Monthly

income

0 - $300 2 1%

$300 - $600 62 19%

$600- $900 73 22%

$900 - $1200 89 27%

+ $1200 100 31%

Total 100 100%

Table 2: The characteristics of the chosen sample

Survey Tools

In order to answer the study questions, a questionnaire had been prepared for this purpose based

on the theoretical literature on the on relationship between Motivation and employee Job

Satisfaction.

The questionnaire included two parts, , the first part dealt with the demographic characteristics of

the survey sample which represented by (gender, age, education, Marital Status, job experience,

monthly income) while the second part dealt with the questions.

Items

1 I willingly help others who have work related problems.

2 I help others who have heavy work load.

3 I help others who have been absent.

4 I attend meetings that are not mandatory. But important.

5 I guide new people even though it is not required.

6 I do not take extra breaks.

7 I do my job without constant requires from my boss.

8 I respect company rules and policies even when no one is watching me.

9 I keep abreast of changes in the organization.

10 I believe in giving an honest day’s work for an honest day’s pay

11 I like my supervisor very much as a person.

12 I admire my supervisor’s professional skills.

13 I respect my supervisor’s knowledge of and competence on the job.

Table 3: The Questionnaires

The findings

RESULTS OF THE Q1: I willingly help others who have work related problems

To answer the first question of the survey questioner, the arithmetic mean and standard

deviations were calculated to estimate the individual’s response of the survey sample, Figure 1

shows the data results for the survey sample opinion about relationship between Motivation and

employee Job Satisfaction and includes the arithmetic mean in descending order for all the

questions of this variable in order to determine the level of severity of the response for each

question, and the standard deviations in order to determine to which the responses differ from.

Row Labels Sum of Q1

Strongly

disagree 1

Disagree 28

Uncertain 33

Agree 40

Strongly Agree 45

Grand Total 147

Strongly

disagree 2%

Disagree 62%

Uncertain 73%

Agree 89%

100% 100%

14 My supervisor is a lot of fun to work with.

15 My supervisor is the kind of person one would like to have as a friend.

16 I am impressed with my supervisor’s knowledge of his/her job

17 My supervisor would come to my defense if I were attacked by others.

18 My supervisor would defend me to others in the organization if I made an honest mistake.

19 I am willing to apply extra efforts, beyond those normally required, to further the interest of

my work group.

20 I do work for my supervisor that goes beyond what’s specified in my job description

FIG

1: Arithmetic mean and Standard deviation for Q1 in in descending order

1%19%

22%

27%

31%

Chart Title

Strongly disagree

Disagree

Uncertain

Agree

Strongly Agree

1

2833

4045

STRONGLY DISAGREE

DISAGREE UNCERTAIN AGREE STRONGLY AGREE

Total

Total

RESULTS OF THE Q2: I help others who have heavy work load.

To answer the second question of the survey questioner, the arithmetic mean and standard

deviations were calculated to estimate the individual’s response of the survey sample, Figure 2


employee Job Satisfaction and includes the arithmetic mean in descending order for all the

questions of this variable in order to determine the level of severity of the response for each

question, and the standard deviations in order to determine to which the responses differ from

their arithmetic mean.

Row Labels Count of Q2

Strongly

Disagree 1

Disagree 1

Uncertain 4

Agree 14

Strongly Agree 25

Grand Total 45

Strongly Disagree 2%

Disagree

2%

Uncertain Agree 9%

Agree

31%

Strongly Agree 56%

FIG 2: Arithmetic mean and Standard deviation for Q2 in in descending order

2%2%9%

31%56%

Chart Title

1

2

3

4

5

2% 2% 9%

31%

56%

STRONLY DISAGREE DISAGREE UNCERTAIN AGREE AGREE STRONGLY AGREE

Chart Title

Series1 Series2

RESULTS OF THE Q3: I help others who have been absent.

To answer the third question of the survey questioner, the arithmetic mean and standard

deviations were calculated to estimate the individual’s response of the survey sample. Figure 3


employee Job Satisfaction, includes the arithmetic mean in descending order for all the questions

of this variable in order to determine the level of severity of the response for each question, and

the standard deviations in order to determine to which the responses differ from their arithmetic

mean.


Strongly Disagree 1

Disagree 2

Uncertain 3

Agree 20

Strongly Agree 19

Grand Total 45

Strongly Disagree 0.022222

Disagree

0.044444

Uncertain

0.066667

Agree

0.444444

Strongly Agree 0.422222

2%5%7%

44%

42%

Total

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Uncertain

Agree

Strongly Agree


RESULT OF Q4: I attend meetings that are not mandatory, But important.

To answer the fourth question of the survey questioner, the arithmetic mean and standard






mean.


Disagree 4

Uncertain 7

Agree 24

Strongly

Agree 10

Grand Total 45

Disagree 9%

Uncertain 16%

Agree 53%

Strongly

Agree 22%

1 2 3

2019

STRONGLY DISAGREE


Total

Total


RESULTS OF THE Q5: I guide new people even though it is not required.

9%

16%

53%

22%


Chart Title

9%

16%

53%

22%

Chart Title

Disagree

Uncertain

Agree

Strongly Agree

To answer the fifth question of the survey questioner, the arithmetic mean and standard






mean.


Strongly Disagree 1

Disagree 3

Uncertain 10

Agree 18

Strongly Agree 13

Grand Total 45


Disagree

7%

Uncertain

22%

Agree

40%

Strongly Agree 29%

2% 7%

22%

40%

29%

STRONGLY DISAGREE


Chart Title

Series1 Series2

RESULTS OF THE Q6: I do not take extra breaks.

To answer the sixth question of the survey questioner, the arithmetic mean and standard






mean.


Disagree 2

Uncertain 6

Agree 24

Strongly Agree 13

Grand Total 45

Disagree 4%

Uncertain 13%

Agree 53%

Strongly

Agree 29%

5%13%

53%

29%

Chart Title

Disagree

Uncertain

Agree

Strongly Agree


RESULTS OF THE Q7: I do my job without constant requires from my boss.

To answer the seventh question of the survey questioner, the arithmetic mean and standard






mean.


Disagree 2

Uncertain 6

Agree 24

Strongly Agree 13

Grand Total 45

4%13%

53%

29%


Chart Title

Disagree 4%

Uncertain 18%

Agree 40%

Strongly

Agree 38%

4%18%

40%

38%

Chart Title

Disagree

Uncertain

Agree

Strongly Agree

4%

18%

40%38%


Chart Title


RESULTS OF THE Q8: I respect company rules and policies even when no one is

watching me.

To answer the eighth question of the survey questioner, the arithmetic mean and standard






mean.


Disagree 1

Uncertain 5

Agree 12

Strongly

Agree 27

Grand Total 45

Disagree 2%

Uncertain 11%

Agree 27%

Strongly

Agree 60%


2% 11%

27%

60%


Chart Title

2%11%

27%60%

Chart Title

Disagree

Uncertain

Agree

Strongly Agree

RESULTS OF THE Q9: I keep abreast of changes in the organization.

To answer the ninth question of the survey questioner, the arithmetic mean and standard






mean.


Disagree 1

Uncertain 2

Agree 26

Strongly

Agree 16

Grand Total 45

Disagree 2%

Uncertain 4%

Agree 58%

Strongly

Agree 36%

2% 4%

58%

36%


Chart Title


RESULT OF Q10: I believe in giving an honest day’s work for an honest day’s pay.

To answer the tenth question of the survey questioner, the arithmetic mean and standard






mean.


Strongly

Disagree 1

Uncertain 7

Agree 11

Strongly Agree 26

Grand Total 45


Uncertain

16%

Agree

24%

Strongly Agree 58%

2%4%

58%

36%

Chart Title

Disagree

Uncertain

Agree

Strongly Agree

FIG 10: Arithmetic mean and Standard deviation for Q10 in in descending order.

RESULTS OF THE Q11: I like my supervisor very much as a person

To answer the eleventh question of the survey questioner, the arithmetic mean and standard




2%16%

24%

58%

STRONGLY DISAGREE UNCERTAIN AGREE STRONGLY AGREE

Chart Title

Series1 Series2



mean.


Strongly

Disagree 1

Disagree 2

uncertain 7

Agree 15

strongly Agree 20

Grand Total 45

Strongly

Disagree 2%

disagree 4%

Uncertain 16%

Agree 33%

Strongly

Agree 44%


RESULTS OF QUESTION Q12: I admire my supervisor’s professional skills

To answer the twelve question of the survey questioner, the arithmetic mean and standard






mean.


Strongly

Disagree 1

disagree 2

Uncertain 7

Agree 20

Strongly Agree 15

Grand Total 45

RESULT OF Q13: I respect my supervisor’s knowledge of and competence on the job.

To answer the thirteen question of the survey questioner, the arithmetic mean and standard






mean.

Row Labels

Count of

Q19

Strongly

Disagree 1

Disagree 4

Uncertain 6

Agree 20

strongly Agree 14

Grand Total 45

FIG 13: Arithmetic mean and Standard deviation for Q13 in descending order

RESULT OF Q14: My supervisor is a lot of fun to work with.

To answer the fourteen question of the survey questioner, the arithmetic mean and standard






mean.

Strongly

Disagree 3

Disagree 4

Uncertain 8

Agree 19

Strongly

Agree 11

Grand Total 45


RESULT OF Q15: My supervisor is the kind of person one would like to have as a

friend

To answer the fifteen question of the survey questioner, the arithmetic mean and standard






mean.

Strongly disagree 2%

Disagree

2%

Uncertain

18%

RESULT OF QUESTION Q17: I am impressed with my supervisor’s knowledge of

his/her job

To answer the seventeen question of the survey questioner, the arithmetic mean and standard






mean.

Row Labels

Count of

Q23

Disagree 3

Uncertain 8

Agree 18

Strongly Agree 16

Grand Total 45


RESULT OF QUESTION 18: My supervisor would defend me to others in the

organization if I made an honest mistake

To answer the eighteen question of the survey questioner, the arithmetic mean and standard






mean.

Row Labels

Count of

Q24

Disagree 1

Uncertain 7

Agree 20

Strongly

Agree 17

Grand Total 45


RESULT OF QUESTION Q19: I am willing to apply extra efforts, beyond those normally

required, to further the interest of my work group

To answer the nineteen question of the survey questioner, the arithmetic mean and standard






mean.

Row Labels

Count of

Q25

Disagree 4

Uncertain 9

Agree 17

Strongly

Agree 15

Grand Total 45


RESULT OF QUESTION Q20: I do work for my supervisor that goes beyond what’s

specified in my job description.

To answer the twenty question of the survey questioner, the arithmetic mean and standard






mean.

Row Labels

Count of

Q26

Disagree 1

Uncertain 11

Agree 12

Strongly

Agree 21

Grand Total 45


Conclusion

The study has concluded that Organizational citizenship behavior is critical to organizational

performance. And Citizenship behaviors come in many distinct shapes and forms. Traditionally

thought of as the worker who ‘goes above and beyond’ the minimum requirements, it can also be

the employee who takes the initiative and always offers to lend a hand; the knowledgeable,

helpful and cooperative colleague; the senior staff member who is able to roll with the punches;

or the friendly, approachable manager who shows the new employees around the office and

introduces them to other staff. All of these types of OCB should be actively encouraged –

employees support the organization through enhancing each other’s performance and wellbeing,

and this is reflected in reduced costs and increased profitability at the organizational level But

little work recovers the internal mechanism through which organizational citizenship behavior

facilitates organizational performance and effectiveness. We suggest that the behavior of

organizational citizenship, especially social participation, participation in advocacy, functional

participation, and task focus, contributes to internal learning, exploratory learning, emerging

learning, and interpersonal learning, thus enhancing organizational performance.

Therefore, the positive consequences of organizational citizenship behavior, exited factors which

have positive impact on employees' organizational citizenship behavior is could be seen as an

important issue for managers of organizations which was the main reason this research was

carried out. Factors analyzed and showed that High quality Leader-Member Exchange has a

significant positive influence on employees. Taking into account of the results of the current

study, managers of organizations should pay attention to establish high quality relationship with

their employees to achieve competitive advantages through employees.

References

Aziz Amin (May 2014) “The Link Between Leader-Member Exchange, Organizational

Citizenship Behavior and Job Satisfaction: A Case Study on Local Government.”

Dr. Abbas Ali Rastgar, Nina Pourebrahimi, and Seyed Mehdi Mousavi Davoudi (November

2012) “Leader-Member Exchange and Organizational Citizenship Behavior: A Survey in Iran's

Food Industry.”

Dansereau, Graen, and Haga (1975) “Leader-Member Exchange Theory – LMX.”

Ole Bendvold (2012) “Task Characteristics as a mediator of the LMX-OCB relationship.”

Noormala Amir Ishak (March 2009) “Leader-Member Exchange and Organizational Citizenship

Behavior: the Mediating Impact of Self-Esteem.”

Piergiorgio Argentero, Claudio Giovanni Cortese, and Maria Santa Ferretti (2008) “An

Evaluation Of Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Psychometric Characteristics Of The Italian

Version Of Podsakoff Et Al.’S Scale.”

Remus Ilies, Jennifer D. Nahrgang, and Frederick P. Morgeson (2007) "Leader–Member

Exchange and Citizenship Behaviors: A Meta-Analysis."

Rick D. Hackett and Laurent M. Lapierre (August 2004) “A Meta-Analytical Explanation Of The

Relationship Between Lmx And Ocb.”

Shawn M. Boockoff (2016) “The Relationship Between Leader-Member Exchange and

Organizational Citizenship Behavior in a Federal Government Organization.”

Smith, C. Ann; Organ, Dennis W.; Near, Janet P. (November 1983) “Organizational citizenship

behavior: Its nature and antecedents.”

Yolanda B. Truckenbrodt (2000) “The Relationship Between Leader-Member Exchange and

Commitment and Organizational Citizenship Behavior.”

http://hrmars.com/hrmars_papers/The_Link_Between_Leader-Member_Exchange,_Organizational_Citizenship_Behavior_and_Job_Satisfaction_A_Case_Study_on_Local_Government.pdf

http://hrmars.com/hrmars_papers/The_Link_Between_Leader-Member_Exchange,_Organizational_Citizenship_Behavior_and_Job_Satisfaction_A_Case_Study_on_Local_Government.pdf

http://www.pbr.co.in/Vol-5%20Iss-5/2.pdf

http://www.pbr.co.in/Vol-5%20Iss-5/2.pdf

http://www.leadership-central.com/leader-member-exchange.html#axzz4fxBMSVVN

https://brage.bibsys.no/xmlui/bitstream/handle/11250/94961/MScfinalthesis2012Bendvold.pdf?sequence=1

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.475.2165&rep=rep1&type=pdf


http://www.tpmap.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/15.2.1.pdf





http://proceedings.aom.org/content/2004/1/T1.short

http://proceedings.aom.org/content/2004/1/T1.short

http://search.proquest.com/openview/75e03249420f146c8d47130e9b1db9e2/1?pq-

http://search.proquest.com/openview/75e03249420f146c8d47130e9b1db9e2/1?pq-

http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/apl/68/4/653/

http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/apl/68/4/653/

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/dau/truck.pdf

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/dau/truck.pdf

faculty of adminstrative sciences and economics …

Documents