The world is more concerned about organizations with high rate in their performance, effectiveness, employee satisfaction, organizational commitment, career development and etc. Thus, organizations want employees to go behind their day-to-day job duties and exceed expectations. Literatures suggest that these extra-voluntary behaviors, called organizational citizenship behaviors, are positively related to the indicators of organizational effectiveness. Katz and Kahn (1978) mentioned that organizational citizenship behaviors can be extremely valuable to organizations and can contribute to enhance better performance as well as competitive advantage (Jahangir & Akbar ...view middle of the document...
By discretionary, we mean that the behavior is not an enforceable requirement of the role or the job description, that is, the clearly specifiable terms of the person’s employment contract with the organization; the behavior is rather a matter of personal choice, such that its omission is not generally understood as punishable.” Chien (2001) stated that effective planed OCBs describes how the organizations can improve employees’ willingness to go behind the expectations and their job description. In simple words, OCBs is similar to the old concept of voluntary actions regardless of formal rewards in return.
Dyne (1990) proposed a broader definition for OCBs as “extra-role behaviors (ERB)”; "behavior is intended to benefit the organization, which is discretionary and goes beyond existing role expectations." Organizational citizenship, thus, is functional, extra-role, pro-social organizational behaviors directed at individual, groups as well as organization. These behaviors are not prescribed by the organization and there is neither reward nor punishment in return.” OCBs do not provide activity clarification as much as one’s “job role” does. All the proposed concepts of OCBs agree that these behaviors can be distinguished from defined tasks; they are more voluntary and spontaneous compare to any core job; and they have more effect on organizational, social, and psychological environment (Farh LJ, Zhong BC, Organ WD 2004).
To describe OCBs, Katz and Kahn (1966) argued that organizational functioning highly depends on employee’s “supra- role” citizenship behaviors; extra- voluntary behaviors that are under employees’ control and cannot be prescribed or predetermined in advance; for example helping colleagues with their jobs, accepting temporary changes without complaining, or caring to keep the workplace clean. Supervisors value such behaviors because they cannot ask or require for that; instead employee, itself, chooses to behave in that way. (Podsakoff PM et al. 2000).
Why so much focus on going beyond the call of duty, you may ask. According to Cilla (2011) there have been over 650 studies on the subject since it was defined by Organ (1988) which raises the question; why? As the time passed, managers got more concern of the impact of citizenship behaviors on different dimensions, including human recourse management and leadership management, to create organizational effectiveness. Managers also value OCB because it creates cooperation in a work environment that helps to reduce the amount of time a manager spends on an issue and enables focusing on other opportunities for improving organizational Performances.
The definitions did not end there; sometime in 1997, Organ had dropped another definition; “performance that supports the social and psychological environment in which task performance takes place.” He waited till 2006 to explain why it had become a psychological issue with a reminder to heed the original definition which made it...