the role of other orientation in organizational citizenship behavior
TRANSCRIPT
The role of other orientation inorganizational citizenship behavior
SCOTT W. LESTER1*, BRUCE M. MEGLINO2
AND M. AUDREY KORSGAARD2
1Department of Management and Marketing, University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire, Eau Claire,Wisconsin, U.S.A.2Moore School of Business, University of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina, U.S.A.
Summary This article draws on social exchange theory and the theory of other orientation to examinehow job satisfaction and individual differences are related to organizational citizenshipbehavior (OCB). Previous research specifying a direct effect for individual differences onOCB has yielded disappointing results. In contrast, this study examines the moderating role ofindividual differences in the relationship between job satisfaction and OCB. As hypothesized,results show a weaker relationship between job satisfaction and OCB for persons who arehigher in other orientation. We discuss the theoretical implications of this finding anddirections for future research. Copyright # 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Introduction
The origin of organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) can be traced to classical management
theorists and practitioners (e.g., Barnard, 1938; Katz & Kahn, 1966; Roethlisberger & Dickson, 1939)
who observed that constructive, cooperative behaviors extending beyond an employee’s job
requirements are necessary for the successful functioning of an organization. Constructs such as
organizational spontaneity (George & Brief, 1992), prosocial organizational behavior (Brief &
Motowidlo, 1986), and contextual performance (Borman & Motowidlo, 1993) are similar to OCB in
that they often share the common characteristics of being important to the organization yet are
unspecified by employees’ formal job requirements. The fact that labor unions are able to use
employees’ perfect adherence to formal rules and job requirements as a tactic to degrade productivity
(Fossum, 1992) attests to the importance of these forms of cooperative behaviors. The value of OCB is
particularly noteworthy in the context of teams in that research shows that OCB directed at the team is
related to objective indicators of team effectiveness (Podsakoff, Aherne, & MacKenzie, 1997).
Empirical investigations of OCB have primarily focused on identifying predictors of this behavior.
Indeed, meta-analyses (Organ & Ryan, 1995; Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine, & Bachrach, 2000)
describe a wide array of such predictors. These predictors fall into two broad classes, job attitudes such
Journal of Organizational Behavior
J. Organiz. Behav. 29, 829–841 (2008)
Published online 15 November 2007 in Wiley InterScience
(www.interscience.wiley.com) DOI: 10.1002/job.504
*Correspondence to: Scott W. Lester, Department of Management and Marketing, University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire, EauClaire, WI 54702-4004, U.S.A. E-mail: [email protected]
Copyright # 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Received 17 May 2006Revised 26 January 2007Accepted 2 October 2007
as job satisfaction, and individual differences. Studies have found substantial support for a positive
relationship between job satisfaction and various forms of OCB. Evidence for the relationship between
individual differences and OCB, however, has been less forthright.
Avariety of individual differences have been investigated, most notably characteristics such as other
orientation that involve a predisposition to act in a prosocial way. Evidence for such individual
differences is weak and inconsistent, leading some (e.g., Organ & Ryan, 1995) to posit that individual
differences do not have a direct impact on OCB. Additionally, while social exchange theory provides a
framework for understanding the relationship between job satisfaction and OCB (see e.g., Cropanzano,
Rupp, & Byrne, 2003; Konovsky & Pugh, 1994; Organ, 1990), there is no corresponding theoretical
linkage between individual differences and OCB. Consequently, it is not clear how individual
differences and job satisfaction might collectively influence OCB.
In this investigation, we maintain that individual differences are more properly viewed as a
moderator of the relationship between job satisfaction and OCB. In adopting this approach, we
integrate theory on the job satisfaction–OCB link with theory on individual differences in prosocial
behavior. Specifically, we employ social exchange theory (Blau, 1964) to argue that the relationship
between job satisfaction and OCB can reflect different degrees of self-interested and rational
processing. We next draw on the theory of other orientation (Meglino & Korsgaard, 2004), which states
that individual differences in other orientation are associated with less self-interested and rational
processing. We then integrate these two theoretical approaches to examine how other orientation
moderates the relationship between job satisfaction and OCB.We test this relationship in a longitudinal
field study using multi-source data.
Social exchange theory and OCB
As noted earlier, social exchange theory is perhaps the most often cited theoretical basis for OCB (see
e.g., Cropanzano et al., 2003; Konovsky& Pugh, 1994; Organ, 1990). Social exchange theory describes
the voluntary exchange of benefits that occur between two parties. Within this framework, OCB is a
form of benefit provided by individuals within the social exchange relationship. According to social
exchange theory, norms or rules of reciprocity play a central role in governing and motivating the
exchange of benefits between these parties. Generally speaking, the principle of reciprocity dictates
that an individual who is the recipient of a benefit from another party should provide a benefit
in kind.
The influence of reciprocity in motivating exchanges is manifested in at least two distinct ways (see
Cropanzano &Mitchell, 2005). First, reciprocity functions as a moral norm, which motivates behavior,
such as helping, and creates a moral obligation to return that behavior in kind. Second, because it is a
widely shared societal norm, the norm of reciprocity creates an expectation that benefits will be
reciprocated. Within this more instrumental framework, persons are motivated to provide benefits such
as helpful behaviors because they ‘are motivated by the returns they [their actions] are expected to
bring. . . from others’ (Blau, 1964, p. 91). Thus, in contrast to reciprocity as an internalized moral norm
(i.e., motivation based on what is right or correct), the mechanism of expected reciprocity represents a
strategic and self-interested motivation for engaging in social exchanges (Perugini, Gallucci, Presaghi,
& Ercolani, 2003). It is this latter mechanism of expected reciprocity that is relevant to the job
satisfaction–OCB relationship.
The role of expected reciprocity in OCB can be seen in a study by Hui, Lam, and Law (2000), which
found higher OCB among bank tellers who believed that such behavior was instrumental to their future
promotion. Thus, when expectations for reciprocity are higher, such as when there is a history of
favorable exchanges, individuals should be motivated to engage in such behavior. Because high job
Copyright # 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 29, 829–841 (2008)
DOI: 10.1002/job
830 S. W. LESTER ET AL.
satisfaction is indicative of a favorable exchange history, highly satisfied employees are more
motivated to engage in OCB as a means of obtaining future benefits. Thus, social exchange theory
posits an explanation for the job satisfaction–OCB relationship that involves a judgment process that is
rational and self-interested in that it is based on an individual’s consideration of his or her future
personal outcomes.
Theory of other orientation
In the theory of other orientation, other orientation is defined as the extent to which individuals
are concerned with the welfare of others. The core premise of the theory is that, in pursuit of
other-oriented goals, individuals higher in other orientation will rely less on rational and
self-interested processing (Korsgaard &Meglino, in press; Meglino &Korsgaard, 2004). Drawing on
research on behavioral decision making (Bazerman, 1993) and self-interest (Cropanzano, Stein, &
Goldman, in press), the theory of other orientation (Meglino & Korsgaard, 2004) specifies that
rational and self-interested choices involve the conscious pursuit of personal goals, which involves
weighing the consequences of one’s actions. That is, such choice is preceded and determined by a
consideration of costs and benefits to the self. The theory of other orientation posits that individuals
higher in other orientation are less apt to consider potential consequences to the self when making
choices and acting.
This core premise of the theory of other orientation is based on evolutionary perspectives on
altruism (Brewer, 2004; Simon, 1990). These perspectives posit that, given the limitations of
bounded rationality, expending scarce cognitive resources in an exclusive reliance on rational
judgment processes (i.e., weighing personal consequences before acting) and on direct personal
experience (e.g., extensive trial and error) can ultimately be harmful to the organism’s survival. On
the other hand, individuals who rely on social information provided by others (i.e., via mimicry,
vicarious learning, and normative influence) can acquire information more quickly and with fewer
risks and costs. Thus, openness to social influence can be adaptive. Such openness to social influence
involves adopting and acting on cues about modes of behavior, such as rules, norms, and standards, in
lieu of assessing courses of actions based on a weighting of anticipated consequences. That is,
openness to social influence involves a less rational process of matching behavior to norms and social
expectations. This mode of reasoning is referred to as heuristic processing (Korsgaard & Meglino,
in press).
The evolutionary perspective outlined above suggests that openness to social influence is
inextricably tied to other orientation. Brewer (2004), for example, argued that openness to social cues is
motivated by the fundamental human drive of belongingness. Thus, factors that stimulate the
belongingness motive also lead to conformity and cooperation. In addition, since societies attempt to
instill other-oriented values in their members, openness to social influence should ultimately reinforce
other-interest by leading to the acquisition of other-oriented values (Simon, 1990). Thus, individuals
who have internalized strong other-oriented values are less apt to engage in rational processing and
more likely to rely on norms and social cues that promote collective interests, albeit occasionally at the
expense of individuals’ self-interest (Fehr & Fischbacher, 2003; Simon, 1990, 1993). This premise was
supported in a study by Korsgaard, Meglino and Lester (1996), who found that the choice behavior of
persons whowere higher in other-oriented values was less likely to be based on a systematic integration
of their existing beliefs and valences.
The theory of other orientation has implications for social exchange theory because it suggests
possible differences in the extent to which behavior in an exchange relationship is governed by
expected reciprocity. That is, given that they are prone to rely on norms and heuristics to their guide
Copyright # 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 29, 829–841 (2008)
DOI: 10.1002/job
ROLE OF OTHER ORIENTATION 831
actions, individuals who are higher in other orientation may be less attuned to the personal
consequences of expected reciprocity. This is not to say that persons higher in other orientation are
insensitive to the norm of reciprocity; indeed, research suggests that such individuals are more apt to
adhere to the norm of reciprocity even when it does not promote their self-interests (Perugini et al.,
2003). Rather, we propose that the behavior of individuals higher in other orientation should be less
influenced by expectations of reciprocity. Thus, cues regarding the expectations of reciprocation, such
as a history of favorable exchanges, should have a weaker impact on persons higher in other orientation.
As noted in the previous section, given that job satisfaction reflects a history of favorable exchanges
between the parties to an exchange, the job satisfaction–OCB relationship is thought to be motivated by
expected reciprocity. Thus, the relationship between job satisfaction and OCB should be weaker for
individuals higher in other orientation. In summary, based on an integration of the theory of other
orientation and social exchange theory, we propose that other orientation will moderate the relationship
between job satisfaction and OCB. First, consistent with previous research on the predictors of OCB,
we propose that job satisfaction will be positively related to OCB. By way of replication, this
relationship is specified in Hypothesis 1. Second, we propose that the relationship between job
satisfaction and OCB should be weaker among persons who are higher in other orientation. This form
of the relationship is specified in Hypothesis 2.
Hypothesis 1: Job satisfaction will be positively related to OCB.
Hypothesis 2: Other orientation will moderate the relationship between job satisfaction and OCB
such that the positive relationship between job satisfaction and OCB will be weaker among persons
who are higher in other orientation.
Method
In the following study we examine the moderating effect of other orientation in the relationship
between job satisfaction and OCB. Because this study was set in a newly established organization that
had adopted a team-based structure among its employees, we explicitly examined OCB directed at the
team. Consistent with the team as the target of employees’ OCB, our measure of job satisfaction
consisted of employees’ satisfaction with their team.
Participants
The data reported in this study are part of a larger study of teams and performance. Our sample
consisted of 127 newly hired employees at a recently opened healthcare claims center in the Midwest.
The average age of the respondents was 36 years, and the sample was predominantly female (90 per
cent). Employees worked in one of 33 teams that were responsible for processing health care claims.
The average team size was 14 and ranged from 3 to 38 which is similar to ranges observed in other
organizational studies (e.g., Campion, Medsker, & Higgs, 1993; Magjuka & Baldwin, 1991).
Teams serviced different health care plans but their responsibilities were essentially the same and
they operated in the same center and work environment. Although teamwork was encouraged,
team-directed OCB was not formally monitored, evaluated, or compensated by the organization.
Copyright # 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 29, 829–841 (2008)
DOI: 10.1002/job
832 S. W. LESTER ET AL.
Research design and procedures
A common weakness in studies of OCB is the reliance on single source data, which is likely to result in
artifactual or inflated relationships (Podsakoff et al., 2000). To counter this, we employed a longitudinal
methodology incorporating data from multiple sources. We collected our data throughout the first
18 months of operations at the claims center. During the study, the center hired a number of new
employees each month. Data collection was ongoing throughout the 18 months such that new
employees completed their surveys at specified points in their tenure at the center. The first author
administered all of the surveys on-site, and employees completed their surveys on company time and
returned them directly to him.
Employees responded to the first survey after they were employed at the center for approximately
1 month (Time 1). At this point employees had completed a 3-week training program and had just
begun working in their designated teams. This survey included a measure of other orientation and
demographic questions. Although participation in the study was voluntary, all 210 newly hired claims
processors at the center agreed to participate at Time 1. Employees responded to a second survey after
they had worked in their teams for approximately 9 months (Time 2), which was roughly 10 months
after they were hired. This second survey, which assessed job satisfaction, was completed by 168 of the
employees, yielding a response rate of 80 per cent. Also at Time 2, supervisors rated employees’
team-directed OCB. We obtained these supervisor ratings for 145 employees, yielding a combined
response rate for all three surveys of 69 per cent. Given listwise deletion of missing data across our
three data sources, our overall analyses were therefore based on the 127 employees for whom we
obtained complete data on all measures. There were no significant differences in gender, age or other
orientation between the participants in our final sample (n¼ 127) and either the total 210 newly hired
employees or the 168 employees for whom we had incomplete data.
Measures
Other orientation
Accurately assessing other orientation is problematic because other orientation describes a mode of
behavior (i.e., helping other persons) that is socially desirable. Thus, measures of other orientation are
vulnerable to social desirability bias (Crowne &Marlowe, 1964), which can seriously compromise the
validity of the measure. This bias is present in normative (Likert-type) measures of other orientation
(Ravlin & Meglino, 1987a). We addressed this issue by employing a forced-choice measure of other
orientation. As described by Hicks (1970), forced-choice measures can be either normative or ipsative
(Cattell, 1944). When the items that comprise the measure are matched in attractiveness and the
irrelevant items are unscored, the procedure yields a normative measure with important properties that
enhance its validity. Specifically, this procedure reduces leniency, severity, halo error, faking and
response acquiescence (Hicks, 1970).
We assessed other orientation using the Concern for Others subscale of the Comparative Emphasis
Scale (CES, Ravlin & Meglino, 1987a, 1987b). The CES is a 24-item forced-choice scale that requires
respondents to choose between pairs of statements representing four different values (concern for
others, fairness, achievement, and honesty-integrity) that have been determined to be important in the
workplace (Cornelius, Ullman, Meglino, Czajka, & McNeely, 1985). In keeping with the previously
described normative procedure (Hicks, 1970), the pairs of statements in the CES are matched for social
desirability. Moreover, we only scored the 12 statements that assessed other orientation (e.g., ‘Trying to
help a fellow worker through a difficult time.’). Statements that assessed the other values were
Copyright # 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 29, 829–841 (2008)
DOI: 10.1002/job
ROLE OF OTHER ORIENTATION 833
unscored. Scores ranged from 0 to 12 depending upon the number of times the respondent selected one
of 12 statements representing the value of concern for others.
The Concern for Others subscale has demonstrated convergence with constructs that are related to
other orientation, such as empathy (Davis, 1980) and social interest (Crandall, 1975), and divergence
with measures of self-orientation, such as narcissism and self-enhancement (Korsgaard et al., 1996;
McNeely, 1992; McNeely & Meglino, 1994). Test–retest reliability of the subscale estimated on a
separate study of 358 job applicants over a 4-week period was acceptable (r¼ .70). Because internal
consistency procedures can yield erroneous estimates of reliability for forced-choice scales (Baron,
1996; Tenopyr, 1988), Tenopyr (1988) recommended reporting the internal consistencies of such scales
using the items in normative format. This procedure yielded an internal consistency of .95 for the
Concern for Others subscale (Ravlin & Meglino, 1987a).
Job satisfaction
We assessed employees’ job satisfaction using six items adapted from the Job Diagnostic Survey
(Hackman & Oldham, 1980). Employees provided their responses to these items using a 7-point
response format (1¼ extremely dissatisfied; 7¼ extremely satisfied). Because each teamwas composed
of a team leader and teammembers, our measure consisted of three items that assessed attitudes toward
the team leader (e.g., ‘The amount of support and guidance that I receive from our team leader.’), and
three items that assessed attitudes toward team members (e.g., ‘The people I talk to and work with as a
team member.’).
Organizational citizenship behavior
We examined OCB that employees directed at their teams using a measure adapted from Podsakoff
et al. (1997). This measure encompassed three-dimensions of OCB, specifically, helping,
sportsmanship, and civic virtue. Seven items assessed helping (e.g., ‘This employee always helps
out a co-worker who has fallen behind in his/her work.’), three items assessed sportsmanship (e.g.,
‘This employee finds fault with what other team members are doing.’ reverse scored), and five items
assessed civic virtue (e.g., ‘This employee frequently provides constructive suggestions about how the
team can improve its effectiveness.’). Supervisors (team leaders) rated each team member at Time 2 on
each item using a 5-point scale (1¼ to no extent) to (5¼ to a great extent). Research indicates that
dimensions of OCB are indicators of a latent variable (LePine, Erez, & Johnson, 2002). Therefore, we
composed a single index for each dimension by averaging the items for that dimension and used three
measures to estimate the latent variable of OCB.
Means, standard deviations and correlations for the previously described variables are listed in
Table 1.
Table 1. Means, standard deviations, and correlations for all measured variablesa
Variable Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6
1 Other orientation 7.16 1.942 Job satisfaction 5.11 1.13 .04 (.86)3 Helping 3.79 0.66 .00 .23� (.89)4 Civic virtue 3.47 0.69 .05 .14 .64� (.85)5 Sportsmanship 4.15 0.80 �.11 .04 .50� .10 (.85)6 OCB composite 3.76 0.56 .91 .19� .90� .78� .59� (.91)
�p< .05.an¼ 127.
Copyright # 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 29, 829–841 (2008)
DOI: 10.1002/job
834 S. W. LESTER ET AL.
Analyses
The hypotheses were tested employing structural equation modeling. Because we tested a hypothesis
involving a moderator, we followed the procedure recommended by Cortina, Chen and Dunlap (2001);
(see also Mathieu, Tannenbaum, & Salas, 1992) for testing interactions in SEM. This procedure
involves using a manifest variable for each predictor (job satisfaction and other orientation) and
the interaction (the product of job satisfaction and other orientation). For each of these measures, we
used the scale reliability to fix the relationship between the manifest variable and latent construct and to
fix their error variances. For OCB, we estimated the latent variable from the three-dimensions of
helping, civic virtue, and sportsmanship. Consistent with prior research involving OCB (Alge,
Ballinger, Tangirala, & Oakley, 2006; Colquitt, Scott, & LePine, 2007), we allowed the error terms
between helping and civic virtue to covary to account for high correlation between these two
dimensions.
Results
The results of the SEM analyses are reported in Table 2. Model 1 is the model containing only main
effects andModel 2 includes the interaction. As indicated in this table, the main effects model provided
a good fit of the data. In support of Hypothesis 1, the path from job satisfaction to OCB was significant
and positive (B¼ 0.11, t¼ 2.25). Adding the interaction path in Model 2 provided a significantly
superior fit, as indicated by the change in Chi-square between Model 1 and Model 2 (Dx21¼ 5.33,
p< .05). This model is depicted in Figure 1 and indicates that the path from the interaction of job
satisfaction and other orientation to OCB was significant (B¼�0.26, t¼�2.93).
To interpret the interaction, we plotted simple slopes for participants 1 SD above and below the mean
on other orientation (Cohen, Cohen, West, & Aiken, 2003). Because this procedure requires a single
manifest variable for the dependent variable, we re-estimated the model described above using a
manifest variable instead of a latent dependent variable for OCB (Cortina et al., 2001). Specifically, we
used a composite measure of OCB (i.e., the mean of all OCB items, a¼ .91) as the dependent variable.
The results of this model are listed in Table 2 under Model 3 and indicated a good fit of the data (note
that this model is not directly comparable to Models 1 and 2 because it involves a different composition
of OCB). As hypothesized, the main effect of job satisfaction (B¼ 0.24, t¼ 2.58) and interaction
(B¼�0.19, t¼�2.07) were both significant. We used the path estimates from this model to plot the
interaction, which is depicted in Figure 2. As expected, there was a stronger, more positive relationship
between job satisfaction and OCB among persons who were relatively low in other orientation, as
compared to those who were relatively high in other orientation. These findings support Hypothesis 2.
Table 2. Summary of SEM model fit resultsa
Model x2 df NFI AGFI RMSEA SRMR
1 Main Effect Model 15.88 9 .94 .91 .078 .0792 Main Effect and Interaction 10.55 8 .98 .93 .050 .0613 Main effect and interaction with composite OCB 3.80 3 .86 .95 .046 .057
an¼ 127.
Copyright # 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 29, 829–841 (2008)
DOI: 10.1002/job
ROLE OF OTHER ORIENTATION 835
-2.00
-1.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.002.001.000.00-1.00-2.00-3.00
Job Satisfaction
Org
aniz
atio
nal C
itiz
ensh
ip B
ehav
ior
Low Other Orientation
High Other Orientation
Low other orientation: Y = 0.40 * Job Satisfaction + 0.03
High other orientation: Y = 0.08 * Job Satisfaction - 0.03
Figure 2. The moderating role of other orientation in the relationship between job satisfaction and organizationalcitizenship behavior.
Satisfaction
Other Orientation
Satisfaction
Other Orientation
Satisfaction x Other Orientation
Satisfaction x Other
Orientation
OCB Civic Duty
Helping
Sportsmanship
.76
.16
.67
.26
-.09
-26
.93
.97
.90
Figure 1. SEM results for the hypothesized model
Copyright # 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 29, 829–841 (2008)
DOI: 10.1002/job
836 S. W. LESTER ET AL.
Discussion
The theory of social exchange (Blau, 1964) suggests that the job satisfaction–OCB relationship is based
on a relatively rational and self-interested process wherein individuals choose to engage in OCB to
garner future benefits. The theory of other orientation posits that choices and actions of persons higher
in other orientation are less likely to be governed by rational and self-interested judgments. Integrating
these perspectives led us to propose (Hypothesis 2) that the positive relationship between job
satisfaction and OCB (replicated in support for Hypothesis 1) will be weaker among persons who are
higher in other orientation. The findings for this study supported this hypothesis. That is, the job
satisfaction–OCB link was less evident among persons higher in other orientation. In contrast, the
job satisfaction–OCB relationship was significant among persons lower in other orientation. This
pattern of results is consistent with expectations drawn from the social exchange explanation for the job
satisfaction–OCB link.
Implications
Because our moderation hypothesis is grounded in two theories, social exchange theory and the theory
of other orientation, our findings have implications for how both theories operate in the workplace.
First, our findings inform on social exchange theory because they provide insight into when individuals
are likely to be more sensitive to the norm of reciprocity. Specifically, social exchange involves
expectations of reciprocity, which motivates self-interested and strategic exchanges (Perugini et al.,
2003). Therefore, persons are more likely to exhibit OCB to the extent that they rely on self-interested
and rational thinking. By extension, cues that raise expectations of reciprocity, such as those that signal
the behavior will be recognized, should often lead individuals to exhibit more OCB. For example,
employees are more likely to engage in OCB when it can be observed by persons who are capable of
reciprocating such behavior or when it is evident to those who are responsible for awarding future
desired outcomes (Bolino, 1999). Thus, the relationship between job satisfaction and OCB is likely to
be stronger for OCB that is highly visible and weaker for OCB that is less obtrusive.
Second, the findings have implications for the theory of other orientation in that they suggest that the
influence of other orientation on prosocial behavior is shaped by job attitudes such as job satisfaction.
This is an important conclusion because it potentially clarifies inconsistent and weak findings regarding
the relationship between individual differences (e.g., conscientiousness, positive affectivity,
neuroticism, and agreeableness) and OCB (Organ & Ryan, 1995). One reason for these weak
findings is that, by focusing on the direct effects of dispositional factors, scholars may have incorrectly
specified the effect of personality on OCB. As an alternative to a direct effect, Organ and Ryan (1995)
suggest that dispositional factors may actually play an indirect or moderator role. However, these
authors caution that any consideration of moderators should have a strong theoretical basis. Consistent
with Organ and Ryan’s (1995) admonition, the theory of other orientation considered in light of social
exchange (Meglino & Korsgaard, 2004), provides a strong theoretical rationale for examining the joint
effects of other orientation and job satisfaction on OCB.
Further, our findings may also have implications for behaviors other than OCB. For example,
Cropanzano and Mitchell (2005) note that social exchange relationships extend beyond one’s
coworkers and organization, which are the typical targets of OCB. Thus, the observed relationships
observed in this investigation may pertain to exchange relationships with customers, suppliers, as well
as one’s immediate supervisor. That is, the findings of this study may apply to a broad range of
interactions that occur in organizations.
Copyright # 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 29, 829–841 (2008)
DOI: 10.1002/job
ROLE OF OTHER ORIENTATION 837
The observed moderating role of individual differences also has practical implications for promoting
OCB among employees. Because the appropriateness of certain strategies depends on characteristics of
the employee, our findings argue for the use of multiple strategies for stimulating OCB. Specifically,
promoting OCB may not be best achieved through hiring based on individual differences, but by
creating environments that are conducive to OCB. However, the moderating role of other orientation
suggests that there is not one specific set of strategies for encouraging OCB. Specifically, promoting the
perception of satisfactory, mutually beneficial exchanges is likely to motivate OCB among employees
who are lower in other orientation. Therefore, managers could foster the perception of fair and
advantageous social exchanges by aligning expectations regarding the transactional elements of the
psychological contract (Coyle-Shapiro, 2002).
An alternative strategy may be more appropriate among persons who are higher in other orientation.
Specifically, management could encourage OCB by investing effort and resources in employees, thus
creating a psychological obligation (see Schein, 1968) that is repaid through employees performing
prosocial behavior. Coyle-Shapiro (2002) found that such efforts (e.g., involvement in decision
making, support for learning new skills) prompted greater OCB among employees who were more
accepting of the norm of reciprocity. Thus, given that theory suggests that other orientation is
associated with greater susceptibility to normative influence (Meglino & Korsgaard, 2004), this
technique may be more effective among employees who are higher in other orientation. In summary,
both of the aforementioned routes warrant attention when seeking to encourage OCB in a workforce
that is diverse in other orientation.
Limitations and directions for future research
The findings of this study are subject to certain limitations. Team members had only been together for
an average of 9 months. Since reciprocal helping requires some time to develop (Blau, 1964), the
effects of the rational social exchange mechanism may have been understated. A more complete
appraisal of this mechanism may require assessing OCB over a longer period of time or over various
time intervals during a team’s development.
Another limitation is that we did not directly measure differences in the rational self-interested
process that is theorized to underlie the relationship between job satisfaction and OCB. However, we did
test this process indirectly. Specifically, we employed a methodology, referred to as moderation-
as-process (Spencer, Zanna, & Fong, 2005), wherein the moderator represents conditions under which
the process is present versus absent. This process is hypothesized to explain the independent
variable–dependent variable relationship. If this assumed process is correct, then the IV–DV relationship
should not be present (or be substantially weaker) when the conditions for the process are not present.
This design is appropriate if the mediating process is difficult to measure and there is an established link
between the process and the moderator.
In the present investigation, the relationship between job satisfaction (IV) and OCB (DV) is
theorized to be explained by a rational and self-interested process of expected reciprocity. Directly
measuring this process would be quite difficult because individuals are disposed to provide rational and
self-interested explanations for their prosocial acts, even when independent evidence does not support
such explanations (Miller, 1999). Moreover, the link between the moderator (other orientation) and the
process (self-interested and rational judgment) believed to be operating in this study has been
empirically established (e.g., Korsgaard et al., 1996). Thus, the finding that other orientation moderates
the job satisfaction–OCB relationship provides evidence that the process underlying our findings is a
rational and self-interested one. Nevertheless, more detailed investigations into these underlying
motives offer a promising direction for future research.
Copyright # 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 29, 829–841 (2008)
DOI: 10.1002/job
838 S. W. LESTER ET AL.
In this study, we examined job satisfaction as an indicator of the favorableness of social exchange.
One should note, however, that job satisfaction is but one indicator of the history of social exchanges.
For example, perceived fairness and trust are other indicators of a favorable social exchange. Moreover
these factors have also been linked to OCB. Therefore, future research should examine whether the
processes detailed in the present study play a role in the impact of these other antecedents of OCB.
Further, it is also possible that factors other than social exchange influence OCB. For example, group
identity may motivate prosocial acts directed at the group as a means of enhancing the group’s status.
Indeed, the amount of unexplained variance in our findings strongly suggests the presence of multiple
motives for OCB, and encourages further exploration into the nature of these motivations.
Further research is also needed on the relationship between the norm of reciprocity and other
orientation. In this study, we focused on expectations of reciprocity. However, reciprocity can also
function as an internalized moral norm, which represents a mechanism that is distinct from the effect of
expected reciprocity that is proposed to underlie the job satisfaction–OCB relationship (Cropanzano &
Mitchell, 2005; Gouldner, 1960). Persons adhere to internalized norms because these norms dictate the
correct or morally right behavior (Gouldner, 1960; Kelman, 2006). That is, individuals who have
internalized a norm do not comply with norms in order to gain rewards or avoid sanctions; rather,
adhering to the norm is a goal in itself (Perugini et al., 2003). In support of this claim, research suggests
that individuals will grant favors in response to favors and will punish in response to violations of
reciprocity even when there is no expectation of future exchanges and it is personally costly to do so
(Perugini et al., 2003; Turillo, Folger, Lavelle, Umphress, & Gee, 2002). We speculate that, because
other orientation is associated with internalizing prosocial norms, it may be positively related to
reciprocity in such situations.
In summary, the present study contributes to the research on OCB by testing a theory-driven
hypothesis that examined the indirect effects of individual differences on OCB. Previous research has
concentrated almost exclusively on testing the direct effects of individual differences on OCB. The
study further contributes to the literature by adopting a rigorous research design that includes
longitudinal, multi-source data and the appropriate use of the moderation-as-process methodology to
explore a process that is difficult to measure directly and heretofore has not been investigated. We hope
that the current findings will spark further investigations into the mechanisms that influence individuals
to engage (or not engage) in prosocial behavior.
Author biographies
Scott W. Lester is an Associate Professor of Management and the Director of the Center for
Leadership at the University of Wisconsin—Eau Claire. He received his Ph.D. in organizational
behavior from the University of South Carolina. His current research interests include dyadic trust,
prosocial orientation, psychological contracts, and service learning. He is currently in his second term
on the executive board of the Midwest Academy of Management.
Bruce M. Meglino is Business Partnership Foundation Professor at the Moore School of Business of
the University of South Carolina. He received a Ph.D. in Business Administration from the University
of Massachusetts. Dr Meglino conducts research on work values, helping behavior, and rationality. He
has been elected a Fellow of the American Psychological Association, the Society for Industrial and
Organizational Psychology, and the American Psychological Society.
M. Audrey Korsgaard received a Ph.D. from the New York University and is currently professor of
management and organizational behavior at the University of South Carolina. Her research addresses
Copyright # 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 29, 829–841 (2008)
DOI: 10.1002/job
ROLE OF OTHER ORIENTATION 839
the topics of prosocial orientation, trust and organizational justice, and their relationship to inter-
personal and intragroup cooperation. She has studied these issues in a variety of work settings,
including supervisor–subordinate relationships, investor–entrepreneur relations, work teams, and joint
ventures.
References
Alge, B. J., Ballinger, G. A., Tangirala, S., & Oakley, J. L. (2006). Information privacy in organizations:Empowering creative and extrarole performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 221–232.
Barnard, C. I. (1938). The functions of the executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Baron, H. (1996). Strengths and limitations of ipsative measurement. Journal of Occupational and OrganizationalPsychology, 69, 49–56.
Bazerman, M. H. (1993). Fairness, social comparison and irrationality. In J. K. Murnighan (Ed.), Social psychologyin organizations (pp. 184–203). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Bolino, M. C. (1999). Citizenship and impression management: Good soldiers or good actors. Academy ofManagement Review, 24, 82–98.
Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1993). Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of contextualperformance. In N. Schmitt, & W. C. Borman (Eds.), Personnel selection in organizations (pp. 71–98). SanFrancisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Brewer, M. B. (2004). Taking the social origins of human nature seriously: Toward a more imperialist socialpsychology. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8, 107–113.
Brief, A. P., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1986). Prosocial organizational behavior. Academy of Management Review, 11,710–725.
Campion, M. A., Medsker, G. J., & Higgs, A. C. (1993). Relations between work group characteristics andeffectiveness: Implications for designing effective work groups. Personnel Psychology, 46, 823–850.
Cattell, R. B. (1944). Psychological measurement: Normative, ipsative, and interactive. Psychological Review, 51,292–303.
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for thebehavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., & LePine, J. A. (2007). Trust, trustworthiness, and trust propensity: A meta-analytictest of their unique relationships with risk taking and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92,909–927.
Cornelius, E. T., Ullman, J. C., Meglino, B. M., Czajka, J., & McNeely, B. L. (1985). A new approach to the study ofworker values and some preliminary results. Orlando, FL: Paper presented at the SouthernManagement Association.
Cortina, J. M., Chen, G., & Dunlap, W. P. (2001). Testing interaction effects in LISREL: Examination andillustration of available procedures. Organizational Research Methods, 4, 324–360.
Coyle-Shapiro, J. A.-M. (2002). A psychological contract perspective on organizational citizenship behavior.Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 927–946.
Crandall, J. E. (1975). A scale of social interest. Journal of Individual Psychology, 31, 187–195.Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal ofManagement, 31, 874–900.
Cropanzano, R., Rupp, D. E., & Byrne, Z. S. (2003). The relationship of emotional exhaustion to work attitudes,job performance, and organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 160–169.
Cropanzano, R. Stein, J. & Goldman B. (Eds.). (in press). Self-interest. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Crowne, J. E., &Marlowe, D. (1964). The approval motive: Studies in evaluative dependence. New York, NY: Wiley.Davis, M. H. (1980). A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy. JSAS Catalog of SelectedDocuments in Psychology, 10, 85.
Fehr, E., & Fischbacher, U. (2003). The nature of human altruism. Nature, 425, 785–791.Fossum, J. A. (1992). Labor relations: Development, structure, process. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin.George, J. M., & Brief, A. P. (1992). Feeling good-doing good: A conceptual analysis of the mood at work-organizational spontaneity relationship. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 310–327.
Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity. American Sociological Review, 25, 161–178.
Copyright # 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 29, 829–841 (2008)
DOI: 10.1002/job
840 S. W. LESTER ET AL.
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1980). Work redesign. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.Hicks, L. E. (1970). Some properties of ipsative, normative, and forced-choice normative measures. PsychologicalBulletin, 74, 167–184.
Hui, C., Lam, S. S. K., & Law, K. K. S. (2000). Instrumental values of organizational citizenship behavior forpromotion: A field quasi-experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 822–828.
Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1966). The social psychology of organizations. New York, NY: Wiley.Kelman, H. C. (2006). Interests, relationships, identities: Three central issues for individuals and groups innegotiating their social environment. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 1–26.
Konovsky, M. A., & Pugh, S. D. (1994). Citizenship behavior and social exchange. Academy of ManagementJournal, 37, 656–669.
Korsgaard, M. A., & Meglino, B. M. (in press). Beyond the calculating self: The role of other orientation inorganizational behavior. In H.Wayment, & J. Bauer (Eds.), The quiet ego: Research and theory on the benefits oftranscending egoistic self-interest. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Korsgaard, M. A., Meglino, B. M., & Lester, S. W. (1996). The effect of other-oriented values on decision making:A test of propositions of a theory of concern for others in organizations. Organizational Behavior and HumanDecision Processes, 68, 234–245.
LePine, J. A., Erez, A., & Johnson, D. E. (2002). The nature and dimensionality of organizational citizenshipbehavior: A critical review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 52–65.
Magjuka, R. J., & Baldwin, T. T. (1991). Team-based employee involvement programs: Effects of design andadministration. Personnel Psychology, 44, 793–812.
Mathieu, J. E., Tannenbaum, S. I., & Salas, E. (1992). Influences of individual and situational characteristics onmeasures of training effectiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 35, 828–847.
McNeely, B. L. (1992). An investigation of prosocial organizational behavior: A field study. Columbia, SC:University of South Carolina.
McNeely, B. L., & Meglino, B. M. (1994). The role of dispositional and situational antecedents in prosocialbehavior: An examination of the intended beneficiaries of prosocial behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology,79, 836–844.
Meglino, B. M., & Korsgaard, M. A. (2004). Considering rational self-interest as a disposition: Organizationalimplications of other orientation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 946–959.
Miller, D. T. (1999). The norm of self-interest. American Psychologist, 54, 1053–1060.Organ, D. W. (1990). The motivational basis of organizational citizenship behavior. In B. M. Staw, & L. L.Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 12, pp. 43–72). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press Inc.
Organ, D. W., & Ryan, K. (1995). A meta-analytic review of attitudinal and dispositional predictors oforganizational citizenship behavior. Personnel Psychology, 48, 775–802.
Perugini, M., Gallucci, M., Presaghi, F., & Ercolani, A. P. (2003). The personal norm of reciprocity. EuropeanJournal of Personality, 17, 251–283.
Podsakoff, P. M., Aherne, M., & MacKenzie, S. B. (1997). Organizational citizenship behavior and the quantityand quality of work group performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 262–270.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B., & Bachrach, D. G. (2000). Organizational citizenship behaviors:A critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research. Journal ofManagement, 26, 513–563.
Ravlin, E. C., &Meglino, B.M. (1987a). Effect of values on perception and decision making: A study of alternativework values measures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 666–673.
Ravlin, E. C., &Meglino, B. M. (1987b). Issues in work values measurement. InW. C. Frederick (Ed.), Research incorporate social performance and policy (Vol. 9, pp. 153–183). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Roethlisberger, F. J., &Dickson,W. J. (1939).Management and theworker. Cambridge,MA:Harvard University Press.Schein, E. H. (1968). Organizational socialization and the profession of management. Industrial ManagementReview, 9, 1.
Simon, H. A. (1990). A mechanism for social selection and successful altruism. Science, 250, 1665–1668.Simon, H. A. (1993). Altruism and economics. American Economic Review, 83, 156–161.Spencer, S. J., Zanna, M. P., & Fong, G. T. (2005). Establishing a causal chain: Why experiments are often moreeffective than mediational analyses in examining psychological processes. Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology, 89, 845–851.
Tenopyr, M. L. (1988). Artifactual reliability of forced-choice scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 749–751.Turillo, C. J., Folger, R., Lavelle, J. J., Umphress, E. E., & Gee, J. O. (2002). Is virtue its own reward?Self-sacrificial decisions for the sake of fairness. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 89,839–865.
Copyright # 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 29, 829–841 (2008)
DOI: 10.1002/job
ROLE OF OTHER ORIENTATION 841