1 job embeddedness and organizational

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENT RESEARCH

1

JOB EMBEDDEDNESS AND ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOUR

IN SELECTED COMMERCIAL BANKS IN ANAMBRA STATE: A

LEADERSHIP APPROACH

1Hope N. Nzewi,

2Ebele M. Onwuka,

3Nkiru P. Nwakoby &

4Blessing O.Essell

Email:1 [email protected];

2 [email protected];

3 [email protected] &

[email protected] 1,2,&4

Department of Business Administration,

Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka, Nigeria 3

Department of Entrepreneurship Studies,

Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka, Nigeria

Abstract:

This study was necessitated by the seeming little embeddedness of the employees in the

studied banks occasioned by low incentives, fringe benefit and the employment status of

most of the employees which happens to be on a contract basis. Thus, the objective of the

study was to examine the relationship that exists between Job Embeddedness (JE) and

Organizational Citizenship Behaviour(OCB)in the selected commercial banks in

Anambra State. The work was anchored on Social Exchange Theory propounded by

George Homans in 1958. The population of the study comprised197 employees of the 10

selected banks in the State. Data were analysed using regression analysis at 5% (0.05)

significant level. The finding showed that there is a positive relationship existing between

sportsmanship and sacrifice in the studied banks with a correlation coefficient of .974. It

indicated that 95% changes in the dependent variable (sacrifice) were accounted for by

changes in the independent variable (sportsmanship) as shown by the Adjusted R2. It was

therefore concluded that as the JE level of employees increases, the OCB level increases.

Hence, it was recommended that the studied firms using appropriate leadership approach

need to motivate their employees adequately so as to elicit embeddedness and make them

go beyond the formally recognized job description for increased organizational

performance.

Key Words: Job Embeddedness, Sacrifice, Organizational Citizenship Behaviour,

Leadership Approach, Sportsmanship.

1. Introduction Organizations of various classifications have different forms of resources at their disposal

and these resources play varying roles in their goal attainment processes. However,

mailto:[email protected]




2

researchers, scholars and management experts seem to have come to an agreement that

the most apt and crucial form of resources is the Human Resource (HR/s)or the

employees. Oginyi, Ofoke and Chia (2016) opine that employee is an important

component in the process of achieving the aims and objectives of organizations.

Similarly, Yasir (2011) states that in today’s business world, the HR at the disposal of

organizations are truly a sustainable competitive advantage component. However,

attracting and retaining quality HR have constituted a major problem for organizations in

the past and even at present as many organizations still battle with this challenge. Arthur,

Opoku and Osei (2016) aver that HR problem faced by many organizations is that of

understanding and managing labour turnover which is a major issue for many companies

in the world. The increasingly volatile economy, persistent employee movement to other

organisations and the cost involved in voluntary turnover are important concerns for

managers (Heymann 2010; Holtom & Inderrieden, 2006; Mitchell, Holtom & Lee

2001b; Pillay ,2009; Weibo, Kaur & Zhi, 2010).

Given the problem of employee turnover, some bodies and researchers have tried to

quantify the cost associated with it. Mercer Human Resource Consulting (2004) as cited

by Rehman (2012), posits that separation costs range anywhere from 50 to 150 percent of

annual salary, compounded by the skills shortage and the ageing workforce. This cost

was due to termination, advertising, recruitment, selection and hiring. Turnover disrupts

teams, raises costs, reduces productivity, and results in lost knowledge (Rehman, 2012).

As a result of these cost implications of turnover, so much attentions have previously

been given to turnover and the reasons employees choose to leave an organization.

However, Mitchel and colleagues in 2001 creatively thought that instead of focusing so

much energy on unravelling why people leave, why not channel such energies in looking

at the reasons people stay, thus, giving birth to the concept of Job Embeddeness (JE).

Job embeddedness reflects in ways people look at the dynamics and intricacies of

employee retention. It has opened up a new and promising perspective for understanding

employee retention (Mitchell, et al., 2001; Zhang, Fried & Griffeth, 2012). It represents

one of these new perspectives focusing on factors that encourage an employee to remain

with an organization (Holtom, Mitchell, Lee, & Eberly, 2008). It reflects employees’

decisions to participate broadly and directly, and it moves scholarly attention beyond

dissatisfaction-induced leaving. It captured more aptly as a retention or anti-withdrawal

construct (Dong-Hwan & Jung-Min, 2012).

Job embeddedness (JE) involves all the things that keep an employee in the organization.

Mitchell et al., (2001) construe JE as the totality of forces that solidify staying in an

organization. It represents rich social ties, job fit, and personal investment in a job or

organization and the community that in turn create opportunities for the employee to

extend and develop new skills and social ties with others (Holtom, Mitchell & Lee,


3

2006). When ties are created with others, when an employee has a lot to lose when he

leaves the organization and when the employee likes what he is doing in the organization

and sees himself growing in the organization, such an employee would not want to leave

and the performance of such an employee would be positively affected and he may even

engage in discretional activities just to ensure that the organization does not go into

extinction.

In organizations, there are jobs that are spelt out for employees in their job description or

inferred while there are others that are entirely up to the employees to carry out or not as

this set of duties or behaviours are not officially recognized and not punishable or

rewarded. All these discretional behaviours of employees that try to put the organization

in a competitive vantage position are summed up as Organizational Citizenship

Behaviour (OCB). León and Finkelstein (2011) aver that OCBs are workplace activities

that exceed an employee’s formal job requirements and contribute to the effective

functioning of the organization. Some of the examples of OCB as captured by Borman

(2004) include putting in extra effort, cooperating, helping others, showing initiatives,

loyalty and compliance with organizational rules. Others are helping co-workers who

have heavy workload, helping new employees in their work to acclimatize, promoting the

organization in the community and offering constructive suggestions for organizational

development.

Leadership is considered as a way a person uses to lead the other people and leaders are

claimed to have a positive impact on the efficiency of the organization by influencing the

team members( Al-Malki & Juan, 2018) . Some leadership types are transactional,

transformational and laissez-faire. Transactional leadership system is based on rewards

that motivate the followers. Transformational leadership style improves the collaboration

among organization members (Keegan et al., 2004). Transformational leaders encourage

followers to feel that they are part of the organization. Such leaders have a strong

inspirational vision to encourage the employees of the organization care about the

company goals than their own goals and interests. Laissez-faire leaders permit

subordinates to take decisions on their own without any control. It is one of the ineffective

and destructive leadership styles assumed to erode supervisors and organizational

trust(Tosunoglu & Ekmekci, 2016).

The business environment and more so the banking industry in Nigeria generally and

Anambra state in particular is very competitive and volatile. Any lost customer in any

bank would probably become a gained customer in another bank. As a result of this, the

banks work very hard to retain their customer base and stay ahead of competition. Under

this dynamic business environment, organizations may require employees that would go

the extra mile even when formal job description does not specify it. Joo and Park (2010)

explicate that under competitive business environment, organizations need a high level of


4

employees' commitment in order to be able to maintain its competitive advantage in their

products, services and the labour market. Simialrly, Judipat and Tarela (2014) state that

organizations would not be in existence, if their members do not behave as good citizens

by engaging in all sorts of positive organizational relevant behaviour. It is against this

backdrop that this study was necessitated to look at the place of JE in ensuring that

employees engage in OCB in the banks of focus.

Statement of the Problem

Service firms like the banks studied depend heavily on their human resources for

competitive edge over their rivals as competition in the banking industry in Anambra

State is rife. Commercial banks in the State appear to be stretching their workers to

braking point. Employees leave their home very early only to come back very late and

exhausted as a result of putting in extra shift at work and sometimes without extra pay.

Even with pay, some of the employees based on the conversation the researchers had

with them would prefer to go home early enough so as to spend more time with friends

and family and to socialize more than spending greater part of their day at work. This

situation was observed to make the employees dissatisfied with their work and

organization. The situation could be mitigated by the embeddedness level of the

employees through appropriate reward system and leadership approach. However, it was

observed that the employees have nothing significant to lose as most of them are contract

staff with little benefits and incentives, a situation which seems to make them willing to

leave their organization for other organizations that will offer better conditions of service

and more balanced work-life. Consequently, there are always official and unofficial

grievances and complaints by the employees about the volume of work done, time spent

at work, employment contract status and sometimes, job descriptions and design. This

situation appears to be affecting the overall output of the employees and the organizations

seem to be underperforming due to this. The employees appear not willing to go the extra

mile for the organization, they seem willing to just carry out the roles in their job

description and go home. It is against this backdrop that this study was necessitated to

assess JE as measured by sacrifice , and relate it to OCB as measured by sportsmanship

in the selected banks.

Objective of the Study

The broad objective of this study is to examine the relationship that exists between Job

Embeddedness and Organizational Citizenship Behaviour. Specifically, the study seeks

to ascertain the nature of relationship existing between Sacrifice and Sportsmanship in

the selected banks in Anambra State.

Research Hypothesis

Ha1: There is a significant relationship existing between Sacrifice and Sportsmanship in

the selected commercial banks in Anambra State.


5

2. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Job Embeddedness

The concept of Job Embeddedness is a relatively new concept as captured by Karatepe

and Ngeche(2011). It was introduced by Michell as a broad array of influences on

employee retention that help to explain why people choose to stay in their current

employment (Mitchell et al 2001a; Mitchell et al 2001b). It focuses on factors that make

people to stay in an organization as against factors that make people want to leave. Thus,

it is an employee retention construct. Liu (2010) avers that it represents a series of

general factors which affect retention decision making of an employee. It represents a

broad collection of factors that influence an employee’s decision to remain in or leave an

organization (Takawira, 2012).

It represents all that attaches, entangles and holds or enmeshes an employee to an

organization. It is the combined forces that keep a person from leaving the firm (Yao,

Lee, Mitchell, Burton, & Sablynski, 2004). Yasir (2011) opines that it is the rate at which

employees or people are entangled in an organization’s social network. It embodies

elements of attachment to an organization; those factors that make a person very attached

to a firm that such a person would not want to lose such attachments (Onyeizugbe &

Asiegbu, 2017).

It is a combination of physical, social and financial factors that employees perceive as

appealing and makes them think twice before leaving the organization. Laying credence

to this, Yao et al., (2004) assert that it is a broad constellation of psychological, social,

and financial influences on employee retention. It is an assemblage of psychological,

social, and financial influences that determine employee retention (Wageeh, 2015).These

array of factors or influences could be domiciled within the organisation or outside the

organization. Mitchell et al., (2001) posit that these influences are present on the job, as

well as outside the employee's immediate work environment. It suggests that there are

numerous strands that link an employee and his or her family in a social, psychological,

and financial web that includes work and non-work friends, groups, then on-work, and

the physical environment in which he or she lives. The off and on-work factors capture

the dimensions of JE.

JE has been conceptualized to consist of two dimensions: on-the-job (organizational)

embeddedness and off-the-job (community) embeddedness. On-the-JE has to do with the

extent to which employees are entangled in their firms, while off-the-JE deals with the

extent to which employees are engrossed in their communities(Allen, 2006). Within these

dimensions, researchers have sieved out three components namely: link, fit and sacrifice.

Links deals with relationships one has with others, fit relates with the agreement or

congruence between the employees and organization expectation while sacrifice


6

represents what the employee will lose when he moves from his present job

(Lee,Mitchell, Sablynski, Burton & Holtom, 2004; Holtom & Inderrieden, 2006).

Sacrifice

Sacrifice is one of the three core dimensions of JE. This dimension deals with what the

employees stand to lose at the event that the employee decides to sever ties with the

organization. It is the cost associated with leaving a firm; that is, what they would be

sacrificing when they quit their job. This cost could be physical or psychological cost

(Mitchell et al., 2001). They posit that it is the perceived cost of physical or

psychological convenience sacrificed when leaving a current job. It is the psychological

or physical sacrifices that would be made if the employee were to leave the organization

(Ivancevich, Konopaske & Matteson, 2011).

It is measured with the ease with which ties can be cut, benefits can be given up and

congruences can be balanced. Ng and Feldman (2009) state that it refers to the ease with

which the links can be broken upon quitting work or moving to another home or

community. Leaving may mean giving up the advantages associated with tenure in the

organization (pay, corner office), as well as the personal losses such as close friendships

with co-workers or benefits unique to the organization (Felbs, Hekman, Mitchell, Lee,

Harman & Holtom2009). Mitchell et al (2001b) state that on-the-job losses would include

losing contact with colleagues, interesting projects or pleasant benefits. There are less

visible, but still important potential sacrifices suffered by leaving an organization (e.g

opportunities for advancement, flexible work hours and job stability). In addition, various

advantages accrue to individuals who stay long enough in an organization (Takawira,

2012).

Organizational Citizenship Behaviour (OCB)

Long before the reconceptualization of OCB by Bateman and Organ in 1983, interest of

researchers have been on employee work attitude and behaviour that are discretional in

nature as can be seen in early research by Barnard (1938) and Katz (1964). However, not

until Bateman and Organ reconceptualized it that enormous attention was given to the

construct. Originally, Organ (1988) refers to it as “individual behaviour 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).

OCB is a behaviour exhibited by employees which is entirely up to the employees to

decide to engage in or not as it is not enforceable or punishable by the organization. It is

not captured by formal job design or description; it is entirely based on employees’

freewill and volition. The behaviour is rather a matter of personal choice, such that its

omission is not generally understood as punishable (Ishak, 2005). Organ (1988) avers that

it is individual behaviour that is discretionary, not directly or explicitly recognized by the


7

formal reward system, and that in the aggregate promotes the effective functioning of the

organization. Hui, et al., (2004) assert that the behaviour is not an enforceable

requirement of the role or job description.

For a behaviour to be referred to as OCB, it must be discretional and must be beneficial

to the organization and not rewarded by any formal recognition system in the

organization. Lavelle (2010) submits that demonstrating OCB involves personal

inspirations that go beyond the need to offer something in return for being treated

impartially. Vigota-Gadot (2007) explicates that it is organizationally beneficial

behaviours and gestures that can neither be enforced on the basis of formal employee's

role obligations nor elicited by a contractual guarantee of remuneration. Some of the

behaviour that fall into OCB as captured by Paillé (2012) include providing support to a

colleague, helping a recently recruited employee to settle into the organization,

demonstrating a degree of flexibility by tolerating requests deemed to be excessive or

unreasonable, or defending the image of the organization in a discussion.

Five dimensions of OCB were identified by Organ (1988). These are altruism (helping

behaviours directed at specific individuals), courtesy (informing others to prevent the

occurrence of work-related problems), sportsmanship (tolerating the inevitable

inconveniences of work without complaining), conscientiousness (going beyond

minimally required levels of attendance), and civic virtue (participating in and being

concerned about the life of the company) (Judipat &Tarela, 2014).The interest of this

study is however on one of the dimensions which is sportsmanship.

Sportsmanship

OCB as has been pointed out earlier has five dimensions as posited by Organ (1988) and

sportsmanship is one of them. Basically, sportsmanship is a tolerating dimensions; not

taking things too personal even when they are irritating just for the sake of the growth

and survival of the organization. Organ (1988) defines sportsmanship as the behaviour of

warmly tolerating the irritations that are an unavoidable part of nearly every firm setting.

It is displaying no negative behaviour when something goes unplanned or when

something is being perceived as annoying, difficult, and even frustrating (Tabassum,

2016). It deals with avoiding complaining unnecessarily about the difficulties faced in the

workplace, being positive and tolerant towards problems experienced in the workplace

(Tambe & Shanker, 2014).

With sportsmanship, instead of employees complaining of a bad situation or condition,

they find a way to adjust and make the seeming unpleasant situation to be tolerable. In

this case, when employees face challenges in their work, they would not complain about

it, but instead they will find ways to face the challenges and give their best towards

solving it. It can be more elaborated as willingness of the employees to tolerate or accept


8

less than ideal organizational situations without complaining and sacrificing own

personal interest (Tabassum, 2016). It is demonstrations of willingness to tolerate minor

and temporary personnel awkwardness and burdens of work without grievances,

complaints, accusations, or protest, thus safeguarding organizational energies for task

achievement and lessening the loads of the organizational leaders (Organ & Ryan, 1995;

Organ, 1990).

Leadership Approach

Leadership approach is assumed to be leadership style. It is a unique and specific method

peculiar to a leader that enhances his performance. Boyett(2006) states that the role of

leaders is crucial in gaining the trust of their subordinates and stimulate their

commitment towards the successful fulfilment of the undertaken project. Leadership

entails that by the conduct of the super ordinates the employees would willing accept and

execute their responsibilities in the work environment.

Theoretical Framework

Social Exchange Theory (SET) as propounded by George Homans in 1958 was used in

anchoring this work. The theory’s main tenet is giving back in equal measures as

received; it is a reciprocal theory. In organizations, it relates with employees exhibiting

good behaviours when they are treated well by the organization. Hopkins (2002) states

that the theory is often used to examine various aspects of employee reciprocity. It

proposes that "gestures of goodwill" are exchanged between employees and the

organisation as well as between subordinates and their supervisors when particular action

warrants mutuality (Hopkins, 2002). According to this theory, employees will behave in a

positive way when organizations and their leaders encourage it by rewarding and

recognizing them properly. Once employees receive favours from the organization, they

usually feel obligated to reciprocate, and consequently engage in good organizational

behaviour which could tantamount to OCB.

Employees become loyal to the organization and willingly express their commitment and

willingness to remain in the organization when treated fairly and justly as posited by the

SET. This will make leaving the organization costly; what they will sacrifice will be

huge. As a result of this, they may become good organization citizens by exhibiting good

citizenship behaviour such as sportsmanship. This is the link between the tenet of the

SET and this study.

Empirical Review

Shehab (2013) did a study that examined job embeddedness as a full mediator of the

effects of polychronicity and self-efficacy on service-oriented organizational citizenship

behaviours. Data were collected from full-time frontline hotel employees in Israel for

testing these relationships. The results demonstrated that high level of polychronicity and


9

self-efficacy for frontline employees enhanced their job embeddedness in the workplace.

Also, the result revealed that self-efficacy and job embeddedness encourage service-

oriented organizational citizenship behaviours for frontline employees.

Young-bohk & Jeong-ra (2009) undertook a study to determine the association between

OCB and JE, organizational identification, job performance, voluntary turnover intention

in Korea. Data were collected using 300 structured questionnaires distributed to Korean

employees in Seoul, Busan, and Gyeongnam. Correlation and regression analysis were

employed for data analysis. The results indicated that individuals' fit, links to the

organization and organization-related sacrifice significantly had negative effects on

voluntary turnover intention and positive effects on job performance, organizational

identification and that OCB mediated the relationship between on-the-job embeddedness

and job performance, voluntary turnover intention, organizational identification.

Cebile and Melinde(2014) determined empirically whether job embeddedness and

organisational commitment significantly predict voluntary turnover and whether people

from different gender, race and age groups differ significantly in terms of these three

variables. The measuring instruments used were the JE Scale (JES), the Organisational

Commitment Scale (OCS) and the Voluntary Turnover Scale (VTS). A cross-sectional

quantitative survey design was used to collect data from a random sample of 102 full-

time academic staff at a South African higher education institution in Gauteng. The

findings showed that organisational fit, community links and normative commitment

significantly and positively predicted the participants’ intention to stay at the institution.

Female participants showed higher levels of organisational fit and sacrifice, hence a

stronger intention to stay. White participants had stronger community links and fit, and

the African participants had higher levels of normative commitment than the other race

groups.

Oginyi, Ofoke and Chia (2016) analysed occupational stress, work environment and job

embeddededness as predictors of job satisfaction. The study employed a cross sectional

survey design. Data were collected through occupational stress scale, work environment

scale, job embeddededness scale and job satisfaction scale. The target population

consisted of female teaching staff of Ebonyi State University, Abakaliki, South- Eastern

Nigeria. Simple random sampling technique was used for data collection from 300

female teaching employees. The result revealed a positive prediction between

occupational stress, work environment and job embeddedness on employee’s job

satisfaction.

Onyeizugbe and Asiegbu (2017) carried out a study to identify how job embeddedness

affects employee performance in selected commercial banks in Anambra State.

Correlation Survey Research Design was employed for the study. The population of the


10

study was 404 and sample size was 197 determined using Krejcie and Morgan formula.

Multiple Regression analysis was adopted in analyzing the data. The findings of the study

revealed that a 94% variation in employee satisfaction was explained by changes in job

fit. The study concluded that job embeddedness plays a crucial role in determining the

performance of employees in the organization which will also have an impact on the

organizations in general.

Judipat and Tarela(2014) investigated the impact of OCB (OCB) on the Learning

Organization (LO) in hotels situate in the South-South region of Nigeria and also to

ascertain which dimension of OCB influence LO most. A cross sectional survey was

conducted with a total sample size of 1450 workers. Questionnaire instrument was

deployed in gathering data for the study. Pearson Correlation Coefficient and multiple

regressions were used in the analysis of the obtained data. The results showed that only

four dimensions of OCB which are altruism, sportsmanship, courtesy and

conscientiousness accounted for any variation in the learning organization, with courtesy

contributing most.

3. METHODOLOGY

The study adopted survey research design due to the nature of the study. The population

of the study is made up of 197 employees of 10 selected commercial banks operating

within Anambra State. The banks were selected using probability sampling technique

where each commercial bank operating within the state had equal chance of being

selected. To get the complete view of the employees about the variables of the study, a

complete enumeration procedure was adopted and so, there was no need to reduce the

number of the population using sample size. Questionnaire was the instrument for data

collection. It was structured using 5-point Likert scale where 5 is strongly agree, 4 is

Agree, 3 is undecided, 3 is Disagree while 1 is Strongly Disagree. The questionnaire was

subjected to validity and reliability test. Content validity was applied for validation of the

instrument while split-half reliability technique was used for reliability test. The

coefficient for the reliability was .880 showing that the instrument was 88% reliable and

fit for the study. The data were analysed using regression analysis through Ordinary Least

Square Method using 5% (0.05) significant level. A total of 147 copies of questionnaire

were analysed because 50 copies of questionnaire distributed were either not returned or

wrongly or incompletely checked.

\


11

Data Analysis

Descriptive Statistics

Table 1: Questionnaire on Job Embeddeness and Organizational Citizenship

Behaviour

S/N Questionnaire Items SA

(5)

A

(4)

UD

(3)

D

(2)

SD

(1)

Total X

Job Embeddeness (Sacrifice)

1 I will not leave my organization because I

have many things to lose if I do.

14 31 - 62 40 358 2.44

2 The things I will leave behind in my

organization is what is still keeping me in

it.

17 22 - 48 60 329 2.24

3 My organization makes me to have a sense

of pride, so I will stay longer in it.

20 40 - 38 49 385 2.62

4 If I find another job, I will go because

there is nothing significant that I am

gaining from my present organization.

37 42 6 31 31 464 3.16

5 Apart from my basic salary, the fringe

benefit in my organization is not much,

hence I will leave if I get the opportunity.

20 69 12 46 - 504 3.43

Organizational Citizenship

Behaviour (Sportsmanship)

6 I accept extra duties in my organization

because I may be sanctioned if I do not.

47 39 - 28 33 480 3.27

7 I do not complain when asked to stay back

after work to make sure all is going on

well in my organization.

29 33 - 40 45 402 2.73

8 I accept unplanned tasks if it will make my

organization to be more competitive.

12 49 4 32 50 382 2.60

9 I cannot tolerate tasks that are not in my

job description except with additional pay.

40 47 3 20 37 475 3.23

10 I do not appreciate it when asked to help

others with their jobs if they are not around

or overworked in the organization.

30 57 2 36 22 478 3.25

Source: Field Survey, 2020


12

Table 2: Regression Output Model Summary

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square

Std. Error of the Estimate

1 .974a .949 .949 1.662

a. Predictors: (Constant), SACRIFICE

Table 3: ANOVA Output ANOVA

a

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

1

Regression 7504.610 1 7504.610 2717.630 .000b

Residual 400.411 145 2.761

Total 7905.020 146 a. Dependent Variable: SPORTSMANSHIP b. Predictors: (Constant), SACRIFICE

4. Findings

The Regression Output as shown in Table 2 reveals that there is a positive relationship

existing between sportsmanship and sacrifice in the studied banks. This is so because

the correlation coefficient (R) observed is .974. Furthermore, the Adjusted R2

shows that

95% changes in the dependent variable (sacrifice) are explained by changes in the

independent variable (sportsmanship). From the ANOVA Output in Table 3, it shows

that the relationship observed is statistically significant judging from the F and the Sig

(P-value) value. The F is 2717.630 while the Sig is .000. This shows that the model is

statistically significant as it is less that 0.05 level of significance adopted by the study.

Hence, the alternate hypothesis is accepted and it is stated there is a significant

relationship existing between Sacrifice and Sportsmanship in the selected banks in

Anambra State

Conclusion

Sequel to the findings of the study, it is concluded that as the number of things an

employee stands to lose in the organization increases, so also will the employee’s

willingness to go beyond the formally required duties and responsibilities to make sure

that the existence of the organization is sustained. Therefore, as job embeddedness of

employees increases, so also will their level of organizational citizenship behaviour.

Recommendation

The study recommends that:

a) The studied firms need to use appropriate leadership approach to entice their

employees by giving them deserving fringe benefits and incentives that will

dissuade them from leaving. They can do this by converting hard working


13

employees to permanent staff before the contractually agreed time as this will

make the employees to go out of their way to help the organization.

b) The firms need to give the employees a sense of being cherished and grant them

more autonomy in discharging some of their duties as this will make the

employees feel at home in the work place and make leaving the organization

more difficult for them.

REFERENCES Allen, D. G. (2006). Do organisational socialisation tactics influence newcomer

embeddedness and turnover? Journal of Management 32(2), 237-256.

Al-Malki,M. & Wang, J.(2018). “Leadership Styles and Job Performance: a Literature

Review”.Journal of International Business Research and Marketing.Volume 3,

Issue 3, March 2018, Pages 40-49 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.18775/jibrm.1849-

8558.2015.33.3004

Arthur, N., Opoku, M., & Osei, O. (2016). Stay or leave? Using job embeddedness to

explain turn over intention among hotel staff in Ghana. Journal of Management

Research, 8(3), 123-139.

Barnard, C. (1938). The Functions of the executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University

Press.

Borman W. C (2004) The concept of organisational citizenship. Current Directions in

Psychological Science, 13, 38-241.

Boyett, J.H.(2006). “Transformational Leadership: The highly effective leader/follower

relationship. The Science of Leadership, 1-9 Cebile, M.,&Melinde, C.(2014).Job embeddedness, organisational commitment and

voluntary turnover of academic staff at a higher education institution in South

Africa, 38(1), 9-30.

Dong-Hwan, C., & Jung-Minson. (2012). Job embeddedness and turnover intentions: An

empirical investigation of construction IT industries.International Journal of

Advanced Science and Technology, 40.

Felbs, W., Hekman, D. R., Mitchell, T. R., Lee, T. W., Harman, W. S., &Holtom, B. C.

(2009). Turnover contagion: How Co-workers‟Job Embeddedness and Co-

workers” Job Search Behaviours Influence Quitting. Academy of Management

Journal, 52, 545- 561.

Heymann, M. (2010). The impact of demographics on voluntary labour turnover in South

Africa. MBA dissertation, University of Pretoria.

Holtom, B.C., Mitchell, T.R., & Lee, T.W. (2006). Increasing human capital and social

capital by applying job embeddeness theory. Organizational Dynamics, 35(4),

316-331.

http://dx.doi.org/10.18775/jibrm.1849-8558.2015.33.3004

http://dx.doi.org/10.18775/jibrm.1849-8558.2015.33.3004


14

Holtom, B. C.,&Inderrieden, E. J. (2006). Integrating the unfolding model and job

embeddedness model to better understand voluntary turnover. Journal of

Managerial Issues 18(4), 435-452.

Holtom, B. C, Mitchell, T. R, Lee, T. W.,& Eberly, M. B. (2008). Turnover and retention

research: A glance at the past, a closer review of the present, and a venture into

the future. The Academy of Management Annuals 2(1), 231-274.

Hui, C., Lee, C., & Rousseau, D. M. (2004). Psychological contract and organizational

citizenship behaviour in China: Investigating generalizability and instrumentality.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(2), 311-321.

Ishak, N. A. (2005): Promoting Employees Innovation and Organizational Citizenship

Behaviour through Superior-subordinate Relationship in the Workplace.Research

and Practice in Human Resource Management, 13(2), 16 – 30

Ivancevich, J. M., Matteson, M. T., & Konopaske, R. (2011). Organizational behaviour

and management (9th ed.). Boston MA: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.

Judipat, N. O., &Tarela, O. (2014). Organizational citizenship behaviour and learning

organization in the hospitality industry: A lesson for Nigeria's sustainable

development. International Journal of Advanced Research in Statistics,

Management and Finance, 2(1), 90-101.

Karatepe, O.M., &Ngeche, R.N. (2011). Does Job Embeddedness Mediate the Effect of

Work Engagement on Job Outcomes? A Study of Hotel Employees in Cameroon.

Journal of Hospitality Marketing and Management.

Katz, D. (1964). The motivational basis of organizational behaviour. Behavioural Science

9(2): 131–146.

Keegan, A. E., and Den Hartog, D. N. (2004). Transformational leadership in a project-

based environment: a comparative study of the leadership styles of project

managers and line managers. International journal of project management, 22(8),

609-617.

Lavelle, J.J. (2010). ‘What Motivates OCB? Insights from the volunteerism literature,’

Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 31, 918–923.

Lee, T. W., Mitchell, T. R., Sablynski, C. J., Burton, J. P., &Holtom, B. C.(2004). The

effects of job embeddedness on organizational citizenship, job performance,

volitional absences, and voluntary turnover.Academy of Management Journal, 47,

711−722. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/20159613

León, M. C.,& Finkelstein, M. A. (2011). Individualism/collectivism and organizational

citizenship behaviour. Psicothema, 23(3), 401-406

Mitchell, T. R., Holtom, B. C., & Lee, T. W. (2001a). How to keep your best employees:

Developing an effective retention policy. Academy of Management Executive,

15(4), 91-109.

Mitchell, T. R., Holtom, B. C., Lee, T. W., Sablynski, C. J., &Erez, M. (2001b). Why

people stay: Using job embeddedness to predict voluntary turnover. Academy of

Management Journal, 44(6), 1102-1121.

http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/20159613


15

Ng T. W. H., & Feldman, D. C. (2010). The impact of job embeddedness on innovation-

related behaviours. Human Resource Management, 49(6), 1067-1087.

Ng, T. W., & Feldman, D. C. (2009). Occupational Embeddedness and Job Performance.

Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 30, 863–891.

Oginyi, R. C. N.,Ofoke S.M., &Chia, F. J. (2016). Occupational Stress, Work

Environment and Job Embeddededness as Predictors of Job Satisfaction Among

Female Teaching Staff of Ebonyi State University, Abakaliki.American

International Journal of Research in Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences, 15(2),

161-170.

Onyeizugbe, C.,&Asiegbu, O. B. (2017). Job Embeddedness and Employee Performance

of Selected Commercial Banks in Anambra State. Pyrex Journal of Business and

Finance Management Research,3(1), 8-16.

Organ D. W.,& Ryan, K. (1995). A meta-analytic review of attitudinal and dispositional

predictors of organizational citizenship behaviour. Personnel Psychology, 48(4),

775-803.

Organ, D.W. (1988). Organizational Citizenship Behavior: The Good Soldier Syndrome.

Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

Organ, D.W. (1990) The motivational basis of organizational citizenship behaviour. In:

B.M. Staw and L.L. Cummings (eds.) Research in Organizational Behaviour, 12,

Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, pp. 43–72.

Paillé, P. (2012). Organizational citizenship behaviour and employee retention: how

important are turnover cognitions? The International Journal of Human Resource

Management, 1-23.DOI:10.1080/09585192.2012.697477.

Pillay, D. L. (2009). Mission attachment as a component of organizational job

embeddedness in the trade union sector of South Africa. MBA dissertation,

University of Pretoria.

Rehman, M. S. (2012). Employee Turnover and Retention Strategies: An Empirical

Study of Public Sector Organizations of Pakistan. Global Journal of Management

and Business Research, 12(1), 83-89.

Shehab, N. E.(2013). Personality Variables, Job Embeddedness and Job Outcome: A

study inJerusalem, Israel. A Thesis Submitted to the Institute of Graduate Studies

and Research in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master

of Science in Tourism Management,Eastern Mediterranean

UniversityGazimağusa, North Cyprus.

Tabassum, R. (2016).The study of relationship between dimensions of organizational

citizenship behaviour and gender difference: a literature review. International

Journal of Science Technology and Management, 5(2), 300-308.

Takawira, N. (2012). Job embeddedness, work engagement and turnover intention of

staff in ahigher education institution. Unpublished thesis of University of South

Africa.


16

Tambe, S., & Shanker, M. (2014). A Study of Organizational Citizenship Behaviour

(OCB) and Its Dimensions: A Literature Review. International Research Journal

of Business and Management, 1, 67-73.

Tosunoglu, H. & Ekmekci, O.Z.(2016). “Laissez-Faire Leaders and Organizations: How

Does Laissez Leader Erode the Trust in Organizations?” Journal of Economics,

Finance and Accounting, 3(1), 89 – 99.

Vigota-Gadot, E.(2007). Redrawing the boundaries of Organizational Citizenship

Behaviour? An examination of compulsory extra role behaviour in the

workplace., Journal of Business and Psychology, 21(3), 377-405. Wageeh, N. (2015). The Effects of Job Embeddedness on Organizational Cynicism and

Employee Performance: A Study on Sadat City University. International Journal

of Business Administration, 6(1), 8-25.

WeiBo, Z, Kaur, S &Zhi, T. (2010). A critical review of employee turnover model (1938-

2009) and development in perspective of performance. African Journal of

Business Management 4(19), 4146-4158.

Yao, X, Lee, T.W., Michell, T.R., Burton, J.P., &Sablynski, C.J. (2004). Job

embeddedness: Current research and future directions. In R. Griffeth& P. Hom

(Eds). Innovative Theory and Empirical Research on Employee Turnover (pp.

153-187). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

Yasir, S. (2011). Government Employees Turnover Related to Job Embeddedness.

Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business 3(8), 226-234

Young-bohk, C. &Jeong-ran, R. (2009). Organizational Citizenship Behaviorsin Relation

to Job Embeddedness, Organizational Identification, Job Performance, Voluntary

Turnover Intention In Korea.International Business & Economics Research

Journal, 8(7), 51-68.

Zaccaro, S. J., Kemp, C. & Bader, P. (2004). Leader traits and attributes. In J. Antonakis,

A.T. Cianciolo and R.J. Sternberg (Eds.). The Nature of Leadership. (pp. 101–

124). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Zhang, M., Fried, D. D.,&Griffeth, R. W. (2012). A review of job embeddedness:

Conceptual, measurement issues, and directions for future research. Human

Resource management review 22(3), 220-31.

1 job embeddedness and organizational

Documents