| 英文摘要 |
Based on the importance to the effectiveness of organizations, in recent three decades, organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs) and related constructs have received much attention from organizational behavior and human resource management researchers. Traditional OCBs scholars took the research design at the individual level to investigate the antecedents of OCBs, however, the effects of group level constructs on outcome variables were neglected by researchers. In order to connect the gap between theoretical claims and empirical strategies, the purpose of present study is to investigate the relationships among organizational justice, group cohesiveness, and organizational citizenship behaviors. There were three ways to examine the above relationships. Firstly, the main effects of distributive justice, formal procedural justice, and interactional justice on OCBs, citizenship behaviors toward individuals (OCBI) and an organization (OCBO), were investigated both at the individual level. Secondly, the main effects of group cohesiveness at group level on OCBs at the individual level also observed in this study. At last, the moderating effects of group cohesiveness on the relationship between perception of organizational justice and OCBs were analyzed under cross-level framework. Through reviewing the related literatures, three hypotheses were developed by the present study. There were the main effects of organizational justice on OCBs both at the individual level, the main effect of group cohesiveness at the group level on OCBs at the individual level, and the moderating effect of group cohesiveness at the group level on OCBs at the individual level. In the part of research design, to avoiding the problems of common method variances, the present study collected data from supervisors, coworkers, and employees of administration departments in the setting of small-median business. Total 507 employees within 51 work units participated this investigation. Employees rated the perception of organizational justice and group cohesiveness. The coworker evaluated OCBI of the focal employee, and OCBO rated by immediate supervisor. After the coding process, we aggregated the evaluation of group cohesiveness from the individual level into the climate of group cohesiveness under the criterion of inter-rater agreement (rwg > .70). Using HLM software, for hypothesis 1, the results indicated there were significant and positive main effects of formal procedural justice and interactional justice on OCBO and OCBI, and not significant effects of distributive justice on two dimensions of OCBs was found. Beside, the influence of interactional justice on OCBs is the highest among three dimensions of organizational justice. What is surprise to me is hypothesis 2 was not supported based on my empirical result. There was not cross-level directed effect of group cohesiveness upon OCBs. However, regarding to hypothesis 3, the cross-level moderating effects of cohesion on the relationship between organizational justice and OCBs were supported. In details, I found the moderating effects of group cohesiveness existed within the relationships between distributive justice and OCBI, interactional justice and OCBI, and interactional justice and OCBO. Based on the empirical results of the present study, I discussed some implications and suggestions generated from the present investigation. Firstly, compared to the results of the present study to the conclusion of Kidwell et al. (1997), the present study extended the academic viewpoint beyond the concern by Kidwell and his colleagues. I discussed the implications generated from these two similar studies. Secondly, for the contribution of the present study to OCBs theory, the present effort extended the research scope at different analysis levels. In theoretic thinking, the formation process of work behaviors of employees in an organization is a multilevel-oriented in nature. However, the empirical strategy was not matched with the essence of this claim in the past academic efforts. The present study may be one of the attempts to bridge with theoretic claims and empirical design. Following the conclusions of this study, the moderating effect of different group level variables should be taken into consideration in the research design, such as organizational climate and culture, for example. For the sampling strategy is concerned, the traditional OCBs studies usually take the supervisor-rating method as the main source of data-collection. However, based on the possible problems inhere in supervisor-rating method, the present study used coworker as the alternative of OCBs rating besides the traditional collecting strategy in order to understand the mechanism of OCBs formation process. The results under this measurement consider would have more confidence before we accept any empirical conclusion. Thirdly, respected to managerial practices, I suggest the managers may take more attention on the group level variables. If the managers put their emphasis on individual causes and neglect the importance of other level constructs, the expected effectiveness would not ensure. At last, some limitation should be noticed. The generalization of the present conclusion ought to be confirmed because of single setting in the present study. I suggest future study may take other group level constructs and different research setting in order to understand the formation of OCBs more deeply and clearly. |
本站僅提供期刊文獻檢索。
