Organizational culture and organizational citizenship behavior in the service industry

Confirmatory factor analysis CFA was used to validate the measurement scale of organizational culture and organizational citizenship behavior.. Therefore, this study investigates the rel

International School of Business

-

Nguyen Hoang Van

ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE AND ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP

BEHAVIOR IN THE SERVICE INDUSTRY

MASTER OF BUSINESS (Honours)

Ho Chi Minh City – Year 2012

International School of Business

-

Nguyen Hoang Van

ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE AND ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP

BEHAVIOR IN THE SERVICE INDUSTRY

ID: 60340102

MASTER OF BUSINESS (Honours)

SUPERVISOR: Dr Nguyen Huu Lam

Ho Chi Minh City – Year 2012

me in the long journey of my graduate study

Lastly, I owe a great gratitude to my family I could not have completed this achievement without their continued support and encouragement

Ho Chi Minh City, December 31st, 2012

Nguyen Hoang Van

ABSTRACT

Research on organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) has received considerable attention over the past several decades OCB is defined as the discretionary contributions of employees that beyond a job description and do not formally result

in reward Previous research have identified a wide range of antecedents of OCB, including attitudinal variables (e.g., satisfaction, perceptions of justice, organizational commitment), individual characteristics (e.g., conscientiousness, agreeableness, positive affectivity) and elements within the organization (e.g., leadership, organizational supportiveness, task characteristics) The purpose of current study is finding out the correlation between organizational culture and OCB The research was done by quantitative approach Data was collected from 342 respondents who are employees from service companies in Ho Chi Minh City A two-step approach in SEM was employed to analyze the data Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to validate the measurement scale of organizational culture and organizational citizenship behavior And structural equation model (SEM) was used to measure the influence of organizational culture on OCB as well

as measure the impact of each dimensions of organizational culture on OCB

The statistical result identified that organizational culture has a positive impact on OCB Among seven dimensions of organizational culture, three dimensions affected positively on OCB: Competitiveness, Performance Orientation and Stability; four remain dimensions Social Responsibility, Innovation, Supportiveness and Emphasis

on Reward did not impact on OCB

Based on result of data analysis, managerial implications have been discussed; limitations and further research directions have also been indicated

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

ABSTRACT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES

LIST OF FIGURES

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION 1

I.1 BACKGROUND 1

I.2 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE 3

I.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS 5

I.4 SCOPE OF THE STUDY 5

I.5 THESIS STRUCTURE 5

CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW 7

II.1 ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOR (OCB) 7

II.1.1 Definition of Organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) 7

II.1.2 The roots of OCB within organizational theory 8

II.1.3 The development of the concept of OCB 10

II.1.4 OCB Dimensions: 12

II.1.5 Antecedents and Consequences of OCB 15

II.2 ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE 16

II.2.1 Definition and the importance of organizational culture 16

II.2.2 Levels of organizational culture 18

II.2.3 Dimensions and types of organizational culture 19

II.3 RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS: 23

II.4 MODEL 25

CHAPTER III: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 26

III.1 CONSTRUCT MEASUREMENT AND QUESTIONNAIRE 26

III.1.1 Questionnaire 26

III.1.2 Construct measurement 26

III.2 DATA COLLECTION AND SAMPLING 29

III.3 DATA ANALYSIS 30

CHAPTER IV: DATA ANALYSIS 32

IV.1 ANALYSIS RESULTS 32

IV.2 DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS 32

IV.3 CHECK THE RELIABILITY OF MEASUREMENT SCALE BY CRONBACH’S ALPHA 33

IV.4 CONFIRMATORY FACTOR ANALYSIS (CFA) 35

IV.5 STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODEL ANALYSIS 45

IV.4.1 Estimate the casual relationship between OC and OCB …………46

IV.4.2 Measure the impact of each dimension of OC on OCB 47

CHAPTER V: DISCUSSION, IMPLICATION, LIMITATION AND SUGGESTION FOR FUTURE RESEARCH 52

V.1 DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATION 52

V.1.1 Discussion 52

V.1.2 Implication 53

V.2 CONTRIBUTION, LIMITATION AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH 55

V.2.1 Contribution of the study 55

V.2.2 Limitations and further research directions 56

REFERENCES

APPENDICES

Appendix A: Questionnaire i Appendix B: Regression Weights and Standardized Regression Weights of Model (Standardized Estimates) ix

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1: Organizational Culture measurement scale 27

Table 3.2: Organizational Citizenship Behavior measurement scale 28

Table 3.3: Key goodness-of-fit indices (Byrne, 2001 and Kline, 2005) 31

Table 4.1: Descriptive Analysis of respondents 33

Table 4.2: Cronbach’s alpha of measurement scale 35

Table 4.3: Goodness-of-fit Indices of CFA with Organizational Culture construct 38 Table 4.4: Standardized Confirmatory Factor Analysis Coefficients, Construct

Reliability and Average Variance Extracted (Organizational Culture) 40

Table 4.5: Regression Weight and Standardized Regression Weight – CFA with OCB construct 42

Table 4.6: Goodness-of-fit Indices of CFA with OCB construct 43

Table 4.7: Standardized Confirmatory Factor Analysis Coefficients, Construct Reliability and Average Variance Extracted (Organizational Citizenship Behavior) 44

Table 4.8: OC and OCB scale 45

Table 4.9: Regression Weight and Standardized Regression Weight – SEM 1 47

Table 4.10: Regression Weight and Standardized Regression Weight – SEM 2 49

Table 4.11: Regression Weight and Standardized Regression Weight – SEM 3 50

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1: There levels of organizational culture Adapted from Organizational

Culture and Leadership by Schein, E.H (3rd ed.), 2004, San Francisco, CA:

Josses-Bass, Inc 18

Figure 2.2: The Competing Values Framework Quadrant Adapted from Diagnosing and changing organizational culture by Cameron, K.S., & Quinn, R.E., 1999 Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley 20

Figure 2.3: Dimensions of Organizational Culture Profile (OCP) Adapted from People and Organizational Culture: A Profile Comparison Approach to Assessing Person-Organization Fit by O’Reilly, Charles A.III, Chatman, J., & Caldwell, D.F.,1991 Academy of Management Journal 34, 487-516 22

Figure 2.4: A conceptual model 25

Figure 4.1: CFA with Organizational Culture construct 37

Figure 4.2: Revised CFA – CFA with organizational culture construct 39

Figure 4.3: CFA with Organizational Culture construct 41

Figure 4.4: Revised CFA – CFA with OCB construct 43

Figure 4.5: Structural Equation Model (SEM 1) 46

Figure 4.6: Structural Equation Model (SEM 2) 48

Figure 4.7: Structural Equation Model (SEM 3) 50

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

This chapter presents general information about organizational citizenship behavior and the importance of developing organizational citizenship behavior in the organization The research objective, research questions and scope of the study are also discussed in this chapter

I.1 BACKGROUND

Utilizing current resources is one of the factors for the success in any organization

In order to achieve the highest utilization, managers should understand the different types of individual behavior inside the organization McShane and Von Glinow (2008) discussed types of work-related behaviors They are:

- Task performance

- Exhibiting Organizational Citizenship

- Counterproductive Work Behavior

- Joining and Staying in the Organization

- Maintaining Work Attendance

While other positive behaviors are related directly to the employee’s productivity within his role, organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) focuses on extra activities performed by the employee beyond his formal duties OCB as definition is

a type of organizational behavior that goes beyond existing role expectations (Organ, Podsakoff & MacKenzie, 2006) OCB includes positive and constructive behaviors that employees do by their own volition, which supports co-workers and benefits the company Typically, employees who frequently engage in OCB may not always be the top performers but they are the ones who are known to “go the extra mile” or “go above and beyond” the minimum efforts required to do a merely satisfactory job The study of OCB dates back several decades Since 1980s, with the introduction of the term Organizational Citizenship Behavior by Organ and his

colleagues, interest in this type of activity has increased There are a variety of labels have been used to describe behaviors that in general fit the definition of OCB such as: citizenship performance, citizenship behavior, contextual performance, prosocial organizational behavior, organizational spontaneity and extra role behavior, etc Most of OCB concepts suggest two dimensions distinguished by the intended target of the behavior:

Organizational citizenship behavior aimed at individuals (OCBI): These are

behaviors that immediately benefit specific individuals and indirectly contribute to the organization The help can be work-related, for example assisting a workmate with a specific task or help them with a personal problem

Organizational citizenship behavior aimed at the organization (OCBO): These

are behaviors that benefit the organization in general; for example offering ideas to improve the functioning of the organization, take action to protect the organization from potential problems or demonstrate concern about the image of the company, etc

OCB is important for effective functioning of an organization because its ultimate goal is to make all employees work toward achieving the organization goals rather than accomplishing their duties The organization will benefit from encouraging employees to engage in OCB, because it has been shown to increase productivity, efficiency, employee satisfaction and customer satisfaction, reduce cost, rate of turnover and absenteeism OCB can be extremely valuable to the organization; it can contribute to individual performance, organization performance and competitive advantage OCB is crucial to the survivor of an organization (Podsakoff, Whiting, Podsakoff & Blume, 2009)

A rapidly changing economic environment, characterized by such phenomena as globalization and deregulation of markets, changing customer, investor’s demand and ever-increasing product-market competition, has become the norm for most

organizations To compete, organizations must continually improve their performance by reducing costs, innovating products and processes, improving quality, productivity and speed to market Almost organizations evaluate human as the most important and valuable asset, especially employee who have OCB According to Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine & Bachrach (2000), employees provide organizations with unique human resource capabilities that can create a competitive advantage, and OCB is one type of behavior that may contribute to that advantage Organizations have to find ways to benefit from human resources and subsequently have to make sure their employees contribute to their competitive advantage OCB can be an important factor that might distinguish the employees from one organization and those of another one Nowadays, many organizations have to cope with a decrease in revenues and the competition among similar organizations is growing harsher Wouldn’t it be desirable to find a competitive advantage that contributes to an increase in performance without requiring any financial investment? The answer for this question is OCB Obviously, in order to get the high performance, organizational citizenship behavior is one of the important issues the organization should pay attention to In other words, companies need to research factors which may impact on OCB so that they can apply them to develop OCB in their organization

I.2 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE

Organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) has been of increasing interest to both scholars and managers, because it suits the changing competitive environment of the market There are two directions in research about OCB The first direction focuses to identify factors affect to OCB and the second direction measures the impact of OCB on performance

Ancetedents OCB Performance

In the first direction, there are a lot of researches define factors influence on OCB Podsakoff et al (2000) has focused on four major categories of antecedents: employee characteristics, task characteristics, organizational characteristics and leadership behaviors Employee characteristics include Employee Attitudes (employee satisfaction, organization commitment, perception of fairness and perceptions of leader supportiveness), Dispositional Variables (conscientiousness, agreeableness, positive affectivity and negative affectivity); Role Perception and Demographic Variables The second category, task characteristics include task feedback, task routinization and intrinsically satisfying task The category of organization characteristics mentioned organizational formalization, organizational support and inflexibility The last category is leadership behaviors (“core” transformational behaviors, articulating a vision, providing an appropriate model, fostering the acceptance of group goals, high performance expectations, and intellectual stimulation, contingent reward behavior, supportive leader behavior and Leader-Member Exchange) These characteristics especially task characteristic, organizational characteristics and leadership behavior are somehow affected by organizational culture Therefore, this study investigates the relationship between organizational culture and organizational citizenship behavior as well as measure the impact of organizational culture on organizational citizenship behavior Because organizational culture will be different among kinds of organizations, this research focuses to find the relationship between organizational culture and organizational citizenship behavior in the service industry

Although organizational culture and organizational citizenship behavior have developed since 1980, they are still popular and attract a lot of attention by both scholars and managers up to now A numbers of researches about OCB have been done in many countries but the concept organizational citizenship behavior is unfamiliar one in Vietnam There is a little researches about this behavior and has

no research about the relationship between organizational culture and organizational citizenship behavior In over the world, there are some studies found out this

relationship Previous studies indicated that organizational culture has an impact on organizational citizenship behavior And now the relationship between organizational culture and organizational citizenship behavior is tested in Vietnam context to check if it is significant or not In addition, although previous studies measured the impact of organizational culture on OCB; however, each research considered organizational culture as different perspective and they used organizational culture measurement scales differently This research modifies to the present researches by using Organizational Culture Profile (OCP) of O’Reilly et al (1991), modified by Sarros et al (2005) as a measurement scale of organizational culture

I.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The purpose of the present research is to answer two following questions:

1 Is there a relationship between organizational culture and organizational citizenship behavior?

2 How does each dimension of organizational culture effect to organizational citizenship behavior?

I.4 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

As mentioned, because organizational culture is not the same among kinds of organization; for example, culture of service companies is quite different with culture of manufacturer companies Therefore, this research just only focuses to measure the impact of organizational culture on organizational citizenship behavior

in the service industry

In addition, due to the limited resources and time, the empirical data for the research was collected from service companies in Ho Chi Minh City, which is considered as the most dynamic city in Vietnam

I.5 THESIS STRUCTURE

This research is organized in five chapters with details as below:

Chapter 1: Introduction It provides information about the main construct, research objective, research questions, scope of the study and research structure

Chapter 2: Literature review This chapter reviews related literature to the research questions of the study The literature mentions about organizational culture and organizational citizenship behavior as well as the relationship between them Hypothesis and model are also described in this chapter

Chapter 3: Research methodology This part includes topics: construct measurement and questionnaire, data collection and sampling and method to analyze the data Chapter 4: Data Analysis This chapter translates the data collected from survey to answer research questions

Chapter 5: Discussion, Managerial Implication, Limitation and Suggestion for future research The final part of the thesis give discussion about the research finding, the implication for management as well as describing limitations and suggestions for future research

CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter reviews related literature to the research questions of the study The literature concerning organizational culture and organizational citizenship behavior

as well as the relationship between them is examined The hypothesis to be tested in this study and the model are provided along with the literature support to hypothesis

II.1.1 Definition of Organizational citizenship behavior (OCB)

Dennis Organ is generally considered as the father of OCB Organ (1988) defined OCB as “individual behavior that is discretionary, not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, and that in the aggregate promotes the effective functioning of the organization” (p.4) Organ’s definition includes three critical aspects that are central to this construct First, OCB is thought of as discretionary behaviors, which are not part of the job description, and are performed

by the employee as a result of personal choice In other words, OCB is always a type of voluntary behavior that could not be enforced by superiors Second, OCB go above and beyond that which is an enforceable requirement of the job description Although some components of OCB are in-role behaviors, for example, be on time, maintain a clean work place, give advance notice when unable to come to work, etc are required but everything that goes beyond this level is voluntary and therefore not directly recognized by the formal reward system Even though per definition, OCB is “not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system” it does not means that OCB is limited to those gestures remaining unrewarded OCB does not require remaining unrewarded, but a reward for OCB could not be contractually guaranteed Finally, OCB contribute positively to overall organizational

effectiveness Later, Organ defined OCB as a factor helping to maintain and increase a spiritual, psychological and social concept which enhances performance (Organ, 1997)

II.1.2 The roots of OCB within organizational theory

Before OCB is first mentioned in scientific articles, some researchers describes types of behavior which similar to OCB such as “willingness to cooperate” of Barnard (1938), “informal collaboration” of Roethilisberger and Dickson (1939), and “patterns of individual behavior” of Katz and Kahn (1967)

The first concept is Barnard’s theory of the “cooperative system” While other researchers at that time emphasized on the formal structure and control of organization, Barnard defined the nature of organization differently He insisted that willingness of persons to contribute efforts to the cooperative system is indispensable (Barnard, as cited in Organ et al., 2006) Accordingly to Barnard, willingness to contribute went beyond the execution of specific tasks in exchange of contractual compensation In order to make the organization work, every participant

is required to behave some certain way and some commitment As a result, they share understanding and the spontaneous contributions of every single member contribute benefit for the whole organization The term “willingness” indicates that these behaviors are voluntary and no one could not enforce, it is up to the participants to eager to contribute to the organization or not Barnard believed that the roots of the willingness to cooperate are the combination between general satisfaction and compatibility of employees (Barnard, as cited in Organ et al., 2006) The nature of term “willingness” enclosed with its determinants is similar to the concept of OCB and its determinants The voluntariness which Barnard called

“willingness to cooperate” was what Organ called “discretionary behavior”

Another concept of organization theory similar to OCB is “informal cooperation”

In a book named Management and Worker published in 1939, Roethlisberger and

Dickson made a distinction between formal organization and informal organization The formal organization was characterized by the system of rules and policies related the worker’s task, and the informal organization was marked by the informal differentiation and integration of the individuals They also emphasis that the informal system should not be considered as opposite construct of the system Instead of, it should be viewed as a necessary condition for collaboration that makes the formal organization work better (Organ et al., 2006) A similarity between two concept, OCB and “informal cooperation” is the commitment beyond formal job requirement and it positively contributes to the organization’s performance Another similarity of two these concepts is the effect of job satisfaction on both types of behavior Therefore, “informal collaboration” of Roethlisberger and Dickson is also considered as one possible root of OCB

Another concept is “patterns of individual behavior” of Katz and Kahn (1967) Two these authors identified that there were three types of patterns of individual behavior required for the function and effectiveness of organization The first type of behavior is to join and stay within the system The second type is dependable behavior This describes behavior employee have to do to fulfill their job requirement And the last type of behavior is innovative and spontaneous behavior, describes employee’s behavior that beyond role requirement for accomplishments

of organization functions (Katz & Kahn, 1967) A similarity of this concept to OCB

is they are discretionary behaviors which are done by employee volition, unpredictable and uncontrollable and could be forced by any person include superior In addition, these concepts describe behaviors that go beyond the job requirement, being essential for the functioning of the organization and contribute

to the overall performance of organization

II.1.3 The development of the concept of OCB

In 1977, Organ published a paper to support the popular opinion that satisfaction had an effect on productivity He distinguished between “quantitative measures of output or productivity and other, more subtle, forms of worker contribution that often are not reflected in measures of individual output” (Organ et al., 2006, p.15) These contributions might manifest themselves by helping coworkers, contributing

to the organization’s rule and its culture as well as adapting to changes made by managers The purpose of Organ was not introducing the new concept OCB However, two of his students Bateman and Smith were interested in doing some research to justify or to disprove Organ’s ideas

In 1983, Bateman and Organ conducted a study to find out the relationship between job satisfaction and performance They took into account not only the quantity of output but also those gestures of supra-role behavior which are necessary to make

an organization well functioning Examples of such behavior are helping colleagues with job-related problems, accepting a temporary overload of work without complaint, avoiding interpersonal conflicts, protecting organizational resources and communicating a positive image of the organizations to outsiders The result of this research indicated that not only was the correlation between earlier job satisfaction and later citizenship behavior significantly positive, but also the correlation between earlier citizenship behavior and later job satisfaction Furthermore, the significance between qualitative (citizenship) and quantitative performance was higher than hypothesis (Bateman & Organ, 1983) Anna Smith was continuing with this research by asking supervisors in manufacturing plants “What are the things you would like your employees to do more of, but really can’t make them do, and for which you can’t guarantee any definite rewards, other than your appreciation?” (Smith, Organ & Near, as cited in Organ et al., 2006) Here are the answers to this question that have been given most frequently

- Helps other employees with their work when they have been absent

- Exhibits punctuality in arriving at work on time in the morning and after lunch and breaks

- Volunteers to do things not formally required by the job

- Takes undeserved work breaks

- Takes initiative to orient new employee to the department even though it is not part of his/her job description

- Exhibits attendance at work beyond the norm (for example, takes fewer days off than most individuals or fewer than allowed)

- Helps others when their workload increases (assists others until they get over the hurdles)

- Coasts toward the end of the day*

- Gives advance notice if unable to come to work

- Spends great deal of time in personal telephone conversation*

- Does not take unnecessary time off work

- Assists me with my duties

- Makes innovative suggestions to improve overall quality of the department

- Does not take extra-breaks

- Willingly attends functions not required by the organization but that help its overall image

- Does not spend a great deal of time in idle conversation

Then, Smith continued to define forms of the citizenship behaviors by asking a group of her MBA students who were as working managers to think of a specific coworker and to rate the frequency with which the coworker engages in such behaviors She found that there were at least two factors of OCB The first one is Altruism Altruism describes behaviors of employee to support new employees to get acquainted with their job or to help colleagues who have work load This dimension was later called Helping The remained factor was called Generalized Compliance and later Conscientiousness Example of this dimension are being

punctual, not taking unnecessary breaks, avoiding absence and private conversations during working time Other dimensions of OCB which have been added later are Sportsmanship, Courtesy and Civic Virtue An example of Sportsmanship is not to complain, Courtesy is avoid creating problem with colleagues and Civic Virtue “describes a posture of responsible, constructive involvement in the political or governance process of the organization” (Organ et al., 2006, p 18-24) Later, Organ added two other types of OCB Cheerleading and Peacemaking Employees do Cheerleading when they show respect and recognition

of good work for workmate And employees express Peacemaking behavior when they recognize the conflict between their colleagues and intervene as moderator

Podsakoff et al (2000) added two more dimensions of OCB Organizational Loyalty and Self-Development Organizational Loyalty means promoting the organization to outsiders, protecting and defending it against external threats, and remaining committed to it even under adverse conditions Self-Development includes voluntary behaviors employees engage in to improve their knowledge, skills and abilities

II.1.4 OCB Dimensions

There are different opinions about the dimensions of OCB Different researchers have considered different dimensions for OCB

 Helping

This dimension was called Altruism at the beginning, and then it was changed into Helping because Altruism was criticized to imply selflessness as a motive behind the behavior and limited the dimension thereby to those gestures which were driven

by selfless motivators (Organ et al., 2006) Regardless of its denomination (Helping or Altruism), the nature of this type of OCB is

direct at a specific individual-usually a coworker, but sometimes the supervisor or customer In other words, the target of the behavior, the

immediate beneficiary, is a person This factor includes items such as helping

a new worker learn the job or helping an overloaded worker catch up with the workflow or solve a problem (Organ et al., 2006, p.18)

Podsakoff at al (2000) included two dimensions Cheerleading and Peacemaking of Organ and some of behaviors of Courtesy intended to avoid problems in this dimension

 Courtesy

Organ (1988) considered Courtesy as one dimension of OCB while Podsakoff et al (2000) mentioned it should be included in Helping dimension According to Organ

et al (2006) whereas helping pertains to mitigating or solving problem confronted

by a colleague, Courtesy consists of actions that help prevent problems from occurring The basic idea is to avoid practices that make other people’s work harder and when you have to add to their load, to give them enough notice that they’ll be prepared to deal with it

Item to measure Courtesy are

- Tries to avoid creating problems for others

- Considers the effects of his/her actions

- Consults with me or other people who might be affected by his/her actions or decisions

- Informed me before taking any important actions

(Konovsky and Organ, 1996)

 Sportsmanship

Showing tolerance and forgiveness in difficult and critical conditions without complaint is referred to as Sportsmanship Employees engage Sportsmanship not only do not complain when they are inconvenienced by others, but also maintain a positive attitude even when things do not go their way (Podsakoff et al., 2000)

Items to measure Sportsmanship (Konovky & Organ, 1996)

- Complains a lot about trivial matters*

- Always find fault with what the organization is doing*

- Expresses resentment with any change introduced by management*

- Thinks only about his/her work problems, not others’*

- Tries to make the best of situation, even when there are problems

- Is able to tolerate occasional inconveniences when they arise

- Does not complain about work assignments

 Compliance

Like Helping dimension, Compliance dimension was initially labeled Conscientiousness, and then it was renamed Compliance to avoid confusions with the personality factor labeled Conscientiousness It describes items that did not have the immediate effect of helping a specific person but rather contributed in a more impersonal and generalized fashion to the group, department, or organization For example, punctuality in arriving at work or at meetings, exemplary attendance, and refraining from unnecessary breaks and idle conversation do not appear to help any specific individual (although one could make the case that such behavior does, at least indirectly, help the supervisor or manager) What these behaviors exemplify is

a particularly high order of compliance with constraints upon individuals necessary

to make a cooperative system (Organ et al., 2006) Podsakoff et al (2000) described

an employee engage Compliance is an employee who obeys all rules and regulations even when no one is watching

 Civic Virtue

It refers to the responsibility which employees undertake as a member of organization It’s also providing a favorable image of the organization for the outsiders, such as recognition of environmental opportunities and threats even at their personal expense

Items to measure Civic Virtue are

- Stays informed about developments in the company

- Attends and participates in meetings regarding the company

- Offers suggestions for ways to improve operations

(Konovsky & Organ, 1996)

II.1.5 Antecedents and Consequences of OCB

Determining why individuals engage in OCB has occupied a substantial amount of research attention in both organization behavior and social psychology A number

of predictors of OCB has been identified including job attitudes (Organ, 1988), interpersonal trust or loyalty to the leader (Podsakoff et al., 1990), transformational leadership behavior (Eisanberger, Hutchison, & Sowa, 1986; Greenberg, 2005), task characteristics (Podsakoff et al., 1990), organizational justice (Moorman, 1991), cultural influence (Farh, Earley & Lin, 1997), civic citizenship and covenantal relationship (Van Dyne et al., 1994; Graham, 1991), dispositional influences (Van

Dyne, Graham & Dienesch, 1994; Moorman & Blakely, 1995) and contextual influences (Niemeyer, Boles, McKee & McMurrian, 1997)

Beside focus on the antecedents of organizational citizenship behavior, there are a lot of researches have attention to the consequence of OCB These studies concentrated on two key issues: the first issue is the effects of OCB on managerial evaluation of performance and judgments and the second issue is the effects of OCB

on organizational performance and success (Podsakoff et al., 2000)

II.2.1 Definition and the importance of organizational culture

Most organization scholars and observers recognize that organizational culture has a powerful effect on the performance and long-term effectiveness of organizations Indeed, culture can affect business performance in a number of ways, both positive and negative For example, cultures that are not aligned with corporate strategy can lead to decreased loyalty, a lack of motivation and high employee turnover In contrast, healthy cultures deliver pride and sense of purpose to employees, leading

to increased productivity and a greater understanding of corporate goals Organizational culture has been an area in which conceptual work and scholarship have provided guidance for managers as they have research for ways to improve the effectiveness of their organizations

Organizational culture first appeared in the early 1960s as a synonym for organizational climate (Munro, Schumaker & Carr, 1997) The term organizational culture became popular in the 1980s when Peters and Waterman introduced the book In Search of Excellence argued that the success of company could be attributed to an organizational culture that was decisive, customer-oriented, empowering, and people-oriented Since then, organizational culture is a subject which attracts a number of research studies, books and articles Organizational culture is considered a young but fast-growing area in management Although

organizational culture is very difficult to define, general definitions of most of scholars are available

- The shared philosophies, ideologies, values, assumptions, beliefs, expectations, attitudes and norm” that knit an organization together (Kilmann et al., 1985)

- The human invention that creates solidarity and meaning and inspires commitment and productivity (Deal, as cited in Ivy, 2010)

- System of shared value (what is important) and beliefs (how things work) that interact with a company’s people, organizational structure and control systems to produce behavioral norms (Uttal, as cited in Ivy, 2010)

- A set of shared values and beliefs understood and shared by members of an organization (Recardo & Jolly, 1997)

- A complex of values, beliefs, and behaviors that become part of the social fabric

of organizations (Davis & Landa, 2000)

- Something to do with the people and unique quality and style of the organization (Lee & Yu, 2004)

- The underlying values, beliefs, and principles that serve as a foundation for the organization’s management practices and behaviors that both exemplify and reinforce those basic principles (Carmeli & Tishler, 2004)

- Composite of values, beliefs and norm expressed in an organization’s actual practices and behaviors (Atkins & Turner, 2006)

- The glue that holds the organization together (Balthazard et al., 2006)

Although the definitions of organizational culture are varied depend on the organizations they represented, values and beliefs are two common components Dickson, Aditya and Chhokar (2000) traced the source of organizational culture to (a) values and beliefs held by founding leaders (b) the characteristics of the industry (c) the broader society in which the organization was located Schein (1999) posited the organizational culture began with the creation of the organization, and was based on the initial successes of the company and the impact of its founders Schein

(2004) indicated three sources of cultural beginning as (a) the belief values and assumptions of the founders (b) the learning experiences of group members as the organization grew (c) new beliefs, values and assumptions brought in by new employees

II.2.2 Levels of organizational culture

Schein (2004) defined organizational culture as

A pattern of shared basic assumptions that was learned by a group as it solved its problems of external adaptation and internal integration that have worked well enough to be considered valid, and therefore, to be taught to new members as the correct way to perceive, think, and feel in relation to those problems (p.17)

Schein also viewed organizational culture as comprising three levels:

Figure 2.1 : There levels of organizational culture Adapted from Organizational Culture and Leadership by Schein, E.H (3rd ed.), 2004, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, Inc

Artifacts: this is the most manifest level of culture It is all the phenomena that one sees, hears, and feels when one encounters a new group with an unfamiliar culture

It includes visible products; language; technology and products; creations; style; observed rituals and ceremonies, visible organizational structures and processes

Espoused Beliefs and Values: being less visible than behaviors and artifacts, the constituents of this level of culture provide the underlying meanings and interrelations by which the patterns of behaviors and artifact may be deciphered Strategies, goals, philosophies are example of this concept

Basic Underlying Assumptions: these represent an unconscious level of culture, at which the underlying values have, over a period of time, been transformed and are taken for granted as an organizationally acceptable way of perceiving the world By this definition, basic assumptions are also the most difficult to relearn and change

II.2.3 Dimensions and types of organizational culture

Hofstede (1984) indicated that there are national and regional cultural groupings that affect the behavior of the organization He identified four dimensions of the organization culture: power distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism vs collectivism, masculinity vs femininity Harrison (1991) further to define culture with four dimensions includes power culture, role culture, task culture and person culture

Cameron and Quinn in Diagnosing and Changing Organizational Culture (1999) stated that organizational culture is reflected by what is valued, the dominant leadership styles, the language and symbols, the procedures and routines, and the definition of success that makes an organizational unique They developed the Competing Values Framework includes six dimensions: Dominant Organizational Characteristics, Leadership Style, Management Of Employees, Organizational Glue, Strategic Emphasis, Criteria For Success which describes differing organizational cultures based on two axes forming four quadrants The vertical axis represents the organization’s flexibility or central control in dealing with issues Organizations scoring high on control are at the bottom of the axis and tend to have many documented procedures and processes which must be followed Less regimented organizations are located higher on the vertical axis of control The horizontal axis describes the focus of the organization and whether this focus is internal or external

to the organization Firms focus externally tends to be concerned with the market, new customers and competitors Organizations that focus on internally are concerned with the moral of employees and how work is accomplished Existing customer are important as the firm focuses on processes rather than new business The four discrete cultures defined and measured by the Competing Value Framework are Clan, Adhocracy, Hierarchy and Market and are illustrated in Figure 2.2: The Competing Values Framework Quadrant

Figure 2.2: The Competing Values Framework Quadrant Adapted from

Diagnosing and changing organizational culture by Cameron, K.S., &

Quinn, R.E., 1999 Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley

Chehade, Mendes and Mitchell (2006) define seven types of culture: aggressive, over managed, outgrown, fits and starts, just in time, military precision and resilient

passive-O’Reilly, Chatman and Cadwell (1991) in People and organizational culture: A profile comparison approach to assessing person-organization fit identified organizational culture is represented by seven distinct values

FLEXIBILITY & DISCRETION

External Focus

& Differentiation Internal Focus &

Integration

Market Culture Hierarchy Culture

STABILITY & CONTROL

Innovative Culture: companies with innovative culture are adaptable, flexible and

experiment with new ideas Risk taking is also encouraged by accepting the failures

Aggressive Culture: companies belong to this culture value competitiveness and

outperforming competitors and these companies often fall short in corporate social responsibility

Outcome-Oriented Culture: companies with outcome-oriented culture emphasize

achievement, result and action Rewards are tied to performance indicator and opposite with seniority and loyalty, unethical behaviors become the norm and employees see their colleagues as rivals and unhealthy working environment is created as a result

People-Oriented Culture: people-oriented culture value fairness, supportiveness

and respecting individual rights Companies may benefits from a low turnover rate compare with average industry rate as a result

Team-Oriented Culture: companies have team-oriented culture are collaborative

and emphasis on cooperation among employees Employees tent to have positive relationships with their colleagues and their managers

Details-Oriented Culture: this kind of culture emphasize precision and paying

attention to details

Stable Culture: Stable culture is predictable, rule-oriented and bureaucratic This

kind of culture prevents quick action and may be unsuitable in changing and dynamic environment

Figure 2.3: Dimensions of Organizational Culture Profile (OCP) Adapted from People and Organizational Culture: A Profile Comparison Approach to Assessing Person-Organization Fit by O’Reilly, Charles A.III, Chatman, J., & Cadlwell,

D.F.,1991 Academy of Management Journal 34, 487-516

 Organizational Culture Profile (OCP)

The Organizational Culture Profile (OCP) has identified as a measure of culture and values as one facet of culture at the organizational level (Agle & Caldwell, as cited

in Sarros, Gray & Densten, 2005) Initially, OCP was developed to examine the congruence between individual and organizational values (O’Reilly et al., 1991) then Cable and Parson (2001) use it to measure the person-organizational fit to evaluate and hire job applicants Since 1991, OCP had been revised twice times

The original version

The original version consisted 54 value statements was developed by using exploratory factor analysis to establish eight dimensions of organizational culture: Innovation, Attention to Details, Outcome Orientation, Aggressiveness, Supportiveness, Emphasis on Rewards, Team Orientation and Decisiveness This version was based on Q-sort method of data collection Respondents are asked to

sort 54 items into nine categories ranging for example from most to least desirable

or from most to least characteristics, and to put a specific numbers of the statements

in each category To develop a profile of organizational culture, respondents familiar with the organization are asked to sort the 54 value statements according to the extent to which the items are characteristic of the organization For individual preference, individuals are asked to sort the same items to the extent to which these values would exist in their ideal organization An average reliability coefficient of

0.88 was reported by O’Reilly et al (1991)

Revised Versions

The first revision had been done by Cable and Judge (as cited in Sarros et al., 2005) They reduced the items from 54 items to 40 items In addition, instead of using Q-sort method, this version used Likert scale which is considered is easier for respondents to complete the instrument The second revision was conducted by Sarros et al (2005) They developed a more user-friendly version of OCP by modernizing the factor name and structure to reflect more competitive and social-aware nature of business world The new, shortened version of the OCP now consists of 28-items, seven factor structures: Competitiveness, Social Responsibility, Supportiveness, Innovation, Emphasis on Reward, Performance Orientation and Stability

As mentioned, organizational culture is an important factor in evaluating an enterprise’s competitiveness According to Huang (as cited by Lee, 2011), organizational culture reflects the personality characteristics of the enterprise, and is closely related to the core competitiveness of enterprises Organizational culture is a term often referred to when studying organizational behavior Lee (as cited by Lee, 2011) defined organizational culture is a product of long-term interaction between internal system operations and external enviroment It’s a complex regarding values, beliefs, consciousness, thoughts and actions within organization Its

existence is invisible but it regulates the action and expression of members and organization tangibly It forms a phenomenon of an organization shown in daily life Daft (2009) felt an organizational culture is the important values, faith, way of thinking and code of conduct shared by all members of the organization Liu (as cited by Lee, 2011) research mentioned excellent organizational culture enhances efficiency, increase productivity And organizational culture provides the thinking style for members of an organization It affects the value judgment and behavior expression within members of an organization Organ (1988) felt organizational culture and organizational citizenship behavior are closely related

Schein (2004) revealed that organizational culture had impact on how employees feel Individual in different culture may interpret and conform to OCB differently Briebef and Motowidlo (as cited in Podsakoff, 2000) argued that OCB is socially based and its behavior include cultural component According to Schein’s model of culture (1990), organizational culture is a normative system of shared values and beliefs that regular how organization members feel, think, and behave The organizational culture sketches the requirement and expectation of organizational life by outlining behavior that are important in the organization For example, organization that values collaboration may encourage helping behavior and teamwork among members Base on the basic assumptions, the following hypothesis has been developed

H: There is a positive impact of organizational culture on organizational citizenship behavior

Organizational culture is comprised of many components and each component may affect to OCB in both positive and negative side For example, organizational culture per Organizational Culture Profile (OCP) is measured by seven dimensions: Competitiveness, Social Responsibility, Supportiveness, Innovation, Emphasis on Reward, Performance Orientation and Stability These seven dimensions can affect

to OCB with different level or just some of them have an influence on OCB

Supportiveness and Stability may have positive impact on OCB while Competitiveness, Emphasis on Reward and Performance Orientation may affect to OCB at negative side because once employee are working under pressure and have

to compete with each other, they hard to perform OCB well

Sportsmanship Civic Virtue

Performance Orientation

Stability

Emphasis on Reward

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The methodology for this research study is outlined in this chapter This includes the following topics: (a) construct measurement and questionnaire; (b) data collection and sampling; (c) data analysis

III.1 CONSTRUCT MEASUREMENT AND QUESTIONNAIRE

III.1.1 Questionnaire

This study was conducted through personally administrative questionnaire The questionnaire comprised 2 parts: the first part mentioned about organization culture and organizational citizenship behavior Respondents were asked to express their agreement or disagreement to statements by seven-point Likert scale 1 - strongly disagree, 2 – somewhat disagree, 3 – disagree, 4 neutral, 5 – somewhat agree, 6 – agree 7 – strongly agree And the second part was general information about demographic such as age, gender, working experience

III.1.2 Construct measurement

 Independent Variable: Organizational culture (OC)

To measure organizational culture, the Organizational Culture Profile (OCP) of O’Reilly et al., modified by Sarros et al (2005) was used It included seven dimensions with 28 items as shown in Table 3.1

Table 3.1

Organizational Culture measurement scale

1 Achievement orientation 1 Fairness

2 An emphasis on quality 2 Opportunities for professional

growth

3 Being distinctive 3 High pay for good performance

4 Being competitive 4 Praise for good performance

1 Being reflective 1 Having high expectations for

performance

2 Having a good reputation 2 Enthusiasm for the job

3 Being socially responsible 3 Being results oriented

4 Having a clear guiding philosophy 4 Being highly organized

1 Being team oriented 1 Stability

2 Sharing information freely 2 Being calm

3 Being people oriented 3 Security of employment

 Dependent Variable - Organizational citizenship behavior (OCB)

There exit various measures of OCB in the literature (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman, & Fetter, 1990; Van Dyne, Graham, & Dienesch, 1994, Konovsky & Organ, 1996) In this study, we used the OCB measure of Konovsky and Organ (1996) The questionnaire consists of 20 items designed to measure five aspects of OCB: Altruism, Conscientiousness, Courtesy, Sportsmanship and Civic Virtue as present in Table 3.2

Table 3.2

Organizational Citizenship Behavior measurement scale

Altruism

1 I am willing to assist my colleagues who have heavy work loads

2 I am willing to support my colleagues who have been absent

3 I am willing to help other colleagues work productively

4 I am willing to help orient new employees even though it is not required

Conscientiousness

1 I am always on time Attendance at work is above average

2 I maintain a clean work place

3 I obey company rules and regulations even when no one is watching

4 I take the initiative to troubleshoot and solve problems before requesting help from my manager/ supervisor

Courtesy

1 I try to avoid creating problems for my colleagues

2 I consult with related people who might be affected by my actions or decisions

3 I respect the rights and privileges of my colleagues

4 I show genuine concern and courtesy toward my colleagues, even under the most tiring business or personal situations

Civic Virtue

1 I stay informed about developments in the company

2 I attend training that I am encouraged to, but not required to attend

3 I offer suggestions for ways to improve operations in my company

4 I demonstrate concern about the image of the company

Sportsmanship

1 I consume a lot of time complaining about trivial matters*

2 I express resentment with any changes introduced by management*

3 I think only about my work problem not others’*

4 I pay no attention to announcements, messages, or printed materials that provide information about the company*

III.2 DATA COLLECTION AND SAMPLING

The target respondents are employees working at service companies in Ho Chi Minh City Owing to time and cost constraints, a convenience sample of employees was selected Data collection was performed via two steps

The first step by qualitative method: in-depth interview was used to get rich/qualitative data from employees, six employees from banks and six employees from logistics providers were interviewed by face to face The results were used as additional inputs into the process of questionnaire design The second step by quantitative research: using quantitative/ structured questions to measure constructs

in the model in order to test the hypotheses The questionnaire was available both in paper format and in online version on the internet 167 questionnaires were received

by online 350 self-administered questionnaires were distributed by hand and 272 questionnaires were received return After data cleaning process, 97 cases were deleted because respondents had not completed the questionnaire properly or respondents were not belonging to target objects Finally, 342 effective questionnaires were analyzed in this study

III.3 DATA ANALYSIS

The Statistical Package for Social Science version 16.0 (SPSS 16.0) and the Analysis of Moments Structure (AMOS 16.0) were used to analyze the data The statistical analysis applied Structural Equation Model (SEM) SEM is a family of statistical techniques that incorporate and integrate path analysis and factor analysis SEM process two steps: validating the measurement model and fitting the structure model SEM is used to test “complex” relationships between observed (measured) and unobserved (latent) variables and also relationships between two or more latent variables SEM allows for all the relationships in the model to be tested simultaneously, accounts for random measurement error and more accurately reflects the relationships

To evaluate the fit of a model to data, Chi-square (CMIN) is considered as one of the most valid and public fitting indexes which are used by researchers If the level

of meaningfulness is greater (sig>0.05), model is considered as good-fitting model However, Chi-square is also affected by the size of the correlations in the model: the larger the correlations, the poorer the fit For models with about 75 to 200 cases, this is a reasonable measure of fit But for models with more cases, the Chi-square

is almost always statistically significant For this reason, as suggestion, this study used indices such as Chi-square/df (CMIN/df), Comparative Fit Index (CFI), Tucker & Lewis index (TLI), Goodness-Of-Fit index (GFI) and Root Mean Square Error Approximation (RMSEA) to measure the fit of model to data Model has CMIN/df <3; GFI, CFI, TLI from 0.9 to 1 and RMSEA <0.08 is considered good fit

to the data

Table 3.3 Key goodness-of-fit indices (Byrne, 2001 and Kline, 2005)

Key Indices Level of acceptable fit CMIN/df <5 and >1

0.05 < RMSEA < 0.08 reasonable RMSEA ≥ 0.1: tolerable

CFI >0.90: good fit

GFI >0.90: good fit

TLI >0.90: good fit

In this research, a two-step approach in SEM was employed to analyze the data Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to validate the measurement scale of organizational culture and organizational citizenship behavior And then structural equation model (SEM) was used to measure the influence of organizational culture

on OCB as well as measure the impact of each dimension of organizational culture

on OCB