Upload
others
View
4
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
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
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
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
shows the data results for the survey sample opinion about relationship between Motivation and
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.
Row Labels Count of Q3
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
FIG 3: Arithmetic mean and Standard deviation for Q3 in in descending order
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
deviations were calculated to estimate the individual’s response of the survey sample. Figure 4
shows the data results for the survey sample opinion about relationship between Motivation and
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.
Row Labels Count of Q4
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
DISAGREE UNCERTAIN AGREE STRONGLY AGREE
Total
Total
FIG 4: Arithmetic mean and Standard deviation for Q4 in in descending order
RESULTS OF THE Q5: I guide new people even though it is not required.
9%
16%
53%
22%
DISAGREE UNCERTAIN AGREE STRONGLY AGREE
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
deviations were calculated to estimate the individual’s response of the survey sample. Figure 5
shows the data results for the survey sample opinion about relationship between Motivation and
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.
Row Labels Count of Q5
Strongly Disagree 1
Disagree 3
Uncertain 10
Agree 18
Strongly Agree 13
Grand Total 45
Strongly Disagree 2%
Disagree
7%
Uncertain
22%
Agree
40%
Strongly Agree 29%
2% 7%
22%
40%
29%
STRONGLY DISAGREE
DISAGREE UNCERTAIN AGREE STRONGLY AGREE
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
deviations were calculated to estimate the individual’s response of the survey sample. Figure 6
shows the data results for the survey sample opinion about relationship between Motivation and
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.
Row Labels Count of Q6
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
FIG 6: Arithmetic mean and Standard deviation for Q6 in in descending order
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
deviations were calculated to estimate the individual’s response of the survey sample. Figure 7
shows the data results for the survey sample opinion about relationship between Motivation and
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.
Row Labels Count of Q7
Disagree 2
Uncertain 6
Agree 24
Strongly Agree 13
Grand Total 45
4%13%
53%
29%
DISAGREE UNCERTAIN AGREE STRONGLY AGREE
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%
DISAGREE UNCERTAIN AGREE STRONGLY AGREE
Chart Title
FIG 7: Arithmetic mean and Standard deviation for Q7 in in descending order
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
deviations were calculated to estimate the individual’s response of the survey sample. Figure 8
shows the data results for the survey sample opinion about relationship between Motivation and
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.
Row Labels Count of Q8
Disagree 1
Uncertain 5
Agree 12
Strongly
Agree 27
Grand Total 45
Disagree 2%
Uncertain 11%
Agree 27%
Strongly
Agree 60%
FIG 8: Arithmetic mean and Standard deviation for Q8 in in descending order
2% 11%
27%
60%
DISAGREE UNCERTAIN AGREE STRONGLY AGREE
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
deviations were calculated to estimate the individual’s response of the survey sample. Figure 9
shows the data results for the survey sample opinion about relationship between Motivation and
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.
Row Labels Count of Q9
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%
DISAGREE UNCERTAIN AGREE STRONGLY AGREE
Chart Title
FIG 9: Arithmetic mean and Standard deviation for Q9 in in descending order
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
deviations were calculated to estimate the individual’s response of the survey sample. Figure 10
shows the data results for the survey sample opinion about relationship between Motivation and
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.
Row Labels Count of Q16
Strongly
Disagree 1
Uncertain 7
Agree 11
Strongly Agree 26
Grand Total 45
Strongly Disagree 2%
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
deviations were calculated to estimate the individual’s response of the survey sample. Figure 11
shows the data results for the survey sample opinion about relationship between Motivation and
employee Job Satisfaction, includes the arithmetic mean in descending order for all the questions
2%16%
24%
58%
STRONGLY DISAGREE UNCERTAIN AGREE STRONGLY AGREE
Chart Title
Series1 Series2
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 Q11
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%
FIG 11: Arithmetic mean and Standard deviation for Q11 in in descending order
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
deviations were calculated to estimate the individual’s response of the survey sample. Figure 11
shows the data results for the survey sample opinion about relationship between Motivation and
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.
Row Labels Count of Q18
Strongly
Disagree 1
disagree 2
Uncertain 7
Agree 20
Strongly Agree 15
Grand Total 45
FIG 12: Arithmetic mean and Standard deviation for Q12 in in descending order
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
deviations were calculated to estimate the individual’s response of the survey sample. Figure 13
shows the data results for the survey sample opinion about relationship between Motivation and
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.
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
deviations were calculated to estimate the individual’s response of the survey sample. Figure 14
shows the data results for the survey sample opinion about relationship between Motivation and
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 3
Disagree 4
Uncertain 8
Agree 19
Strongly
Agree 11
Grand Total 45
FIG 14: Arithmetic mean and Standard deviation for Q14 in in descending order
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
deviations were calculated to estimate the individual’s response of the survey sample. Figure 15
shows the data results for the survey sample opinion about relationship between Motivation and
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 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
deviations were calculated to estimate the individual’s response of the survey sample. Figure 17
shows the data results for the survey sample opinion about relationship between Motivation and
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.
Row Labels
Count of
Q23
Disagree 3
Uncertain 8
Agree 18
Strongly Agree 16
Grand Total 45
FIG 17: Arithmetic mean and Standard deviation for Q17 in in descending order
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
deviations were calculated to estimate the individual’s response of the survey sample. Figure 18
shows the data results for the survey sample opinion about relationship between Motivation and
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.
Row Labels
Count of
Q24
Disagree 1
Uncertain 7
Agree 20
Strongly
Agree 17
Grand Total 45
FIG 18: Arithmetic mean and Standard deviation for Q18 in in descending order
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
deviations were calculated to estimate the individual’s response of the survey sample. Figure 19
shows the data results for the survey sample opinion about relationship between Motivation and
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.
Row Labels
Count of
Q25
Disagree 4
Uncertain 9
Agree 17
Strongly
Agree 15
Grand Total 45
FIG 19: Arithmetic mean and Standard deviation for Q19 in in descending order
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
deviations were calculated to estimate the individual’s response of the survey sample. Figure 20
shows the data results for the survey sample opinion about relationship between Motivation and
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.
Row Labels
Count of
Q26
Disagree 1
Uncertain 11
Agree 12
Strongly
Agree 21
Grand Total 45
FIG 20: Arithmetic mean and Standard deviation for Q20 in in descending order
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.”