INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND
Utilizing current resources is one of the factors for the success in any organization
In order to achieve the highest utilization, managers should understand the different types of individual behavior inside the organization McShane and Von Glinow
(2008) discussed types of work-related behaviors They are:
- Joining and Staying in the Organization
Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) refers to voluntary activities that employees engage in beyond their formal job responsibilities, which contribute positively to their coworkers and the organization Defined by Organ, Podsakoff, and MacKenzie (2006), OCB encompasses constructive behaviors that, while not always linked to top performance, exemplify employees who "go the extra mile." Since the term was coined in the 1980s, interest in OCB has grown, with various terms such as citizenship performance and prosocial organizational behavior used to describe similar actions OCB is characterized by two dimensions based on the intended target of the behavior, highlighting its significance in enhancing workplace dynamics.
Organizational citizenship behavior aimed at individuals (OCBI) refers to actions that provide direct benefits to specific colleagues while also contributing to the overall success of the organization These behaviors can include assisting coworkers with work-related tasks or offering support for personal challenges, fostering a collaborative and supportive workplace environment.
Organizational citizenship behavior aimed at the organization (OCBO) encompasses actions that enhance the overall functioning of the organization This includes proposing innovative ideas for improvement, proactively addressing potential issues to safeguard the organization, and showing a commitment to maintaining a positive company image.
Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) is vital for an organization's success, as it encourages employees to align their efforts with organizational goals rather than just completing their tasks Promoting OCB can lead to increased productivity, enhanced employee and customer satisfaction, and reduced costs, turnover, and absenteeism The benefits of OCB extend to individual and organizational performance, providing a competitive edge and ensuring the organization's survival (Podsakoff et al., 2009).
In today's rapidly evolving economic landscape, organizations face challenges such as globalization, market deregulation, and heightened competition, necessitating continuous performance improvements To stay competitive, companies must focus on cost reduction, product and process innovation, and enhancing quality and speed to market Acknowledging that employees, particularly those exhibiting Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB), are invaluable assets, organizations can leverage unique human resource capabilities to gain a competitive edge OCB distinguishes employees and can significantly impact organizational performance, especially in an environment of decreasing revenues and intensified competition Therefore, it is crucial for companies to explore the factors influencing OCB to foster its development, ultimately enhancing overall performance without incurring additional financial costs.
RESEARCH OBJECTIVE
Organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) is gaining attention from scholars and managers alike due to its relevance in today's dynamic market Research on OCB can be categorized into two main areas: one explores the factors influencing OCB, while the other assesses the impact of OCB on organizational performance.
Research has identified various factors influencing Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB), with Podsakoff et al (2000) categorizing them into four main groups: employee characteristics, task characteristics, organizational characteristics, and leadership behaviors Employee characteristics encompass attitudes such as job satisfaction, organizational commitment, perceptions of fairness, and leader support, alongside dispositional traits like conscientiousness and agreeableness Task characteristics involve elements like task feedback and intrinsic satisfaction, while organizational characteristics include formalization and support structures Leadership behaviors, which significantly impact OCB, include transformational practices, vision articulation, and supportive interactions Notably, these factors are influenced by organizational culture, prompting this study to explore the relationship between organizational culture and OCB, specifically within the service industry, to assess how cultural differences shape citizenship behaviors.
Since their emergence in the 1980s, organizational culture and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) have remained significant topics of interest for both scholars and managers While extensive research on OCB has been conducted globally, the concept is relatively unfamiliar in Vietnam, where studies on this behavior are scarce and the relationship between organizational culture and OCB has not been explored Existing international studies have established that organizational culture influences OCB, prompting the need to investigate this relationship within the Vietnamese context This research aims to assess the significance of the connection between organizational culture and OCB in Vietnam, utilizing the Organizational Culture Profile (OCP) developed by O'Reilly et al., to provide a more standardized measurement approach that addresses the varying perspectives of previous studies.
(1991), modified by Sarros et al (2005) as a measurement scale of organizational culture.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
The purpose of the present research is to answer two following questions:
1 Is there a relationship between organizational culture and organizational citizenship behavior?
2 How does each dimension of organizational culture effect to organizational citizenship behavior?
SCOPE OF THE STUDY
This research specifically examines the impact of organizational culture on organizational citizenship behavior within the service industry, recognizing that cultural dynamics differ significantly between service-oriented and manufacturing organizations.
The research gathered empirical data from service companies in Ho Chi Minh City, recognized as Vietnam's most dynamic city, due to constraints in resources and time.
THESIS STRUCTURE
This research is organized in five chapters with details as below:
Chapter 1: Introduction It provides information about the main construct, research objective, research questions, scope of the study and research structure
Chapter 2: Literature review This chapter reviews related literature to the research questions of the study The literature mentions about organizational culture and organizational citizenship behavior as well as the relationship between them Hypothesis and model are also described in this chapter
Chapter 3: Research methodology This part includes topics: construct measurement and questionnaire, data collection and sampling and method to analyze the data
Chapter 4: Data Analysis This chapter translates the data collected from survey to answer research questions
Chapter 5: Discussion, Managerial Implication, Limitation and Suggestion for future research The final part of the thesis give discussion about the research finding, the implication for management as well as describing limitations and suggestions for future research.
LITERATURE REVIEW
ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOR (OCB)
II.1.1 Definition of Organizational citizenship behavior (OCB)
Dennis Organ is widely recognized as the father of Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB), which he defined in 1988 as discretionary individual behavior that is not formally rewarded but enhances organizational effectiveness This definition highlights three key aspects of OCB: first, it consists of voluntary actions taken by employees based on personal choice, rather than mandated by job requirements Second, while some behaviors, such as punctuality and maintaining a clean workspace, are expected, OCB encompasses actions that exceed these basic requirements and are not formally acknowledged by reward systems Importantly, although OCB may not guarantee rewards, it does not exclude the possibility of recognition Finally, OCB plays a vital role in fostering a positive workplace environment and contributes to overall organizational success, as noted in Organ's later work in 1997, where he emphasized its impact on spiritual, psychological, and social aspects of performance.
II.1.2 The roots of OCB within organizational theory
Prior to the introduction of Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) in scientific literature, several researchers identified behaviors akin to OCB, including Barnard's (1938) concept of "willingness to cooperate," Roethlisberger and Dickson's (1939) notion of "informal collaboration," and Katz and Kahn's (1967) discussion on "patterns of individual behavior."
Barnard's theory of the "cooperative system" redefines organizational dynamics by emphasizing the essential role of individual willingness to contribute, rather than focusing solely on formal structures and control He argues that this willingness transcends mere task execution for compensation; it requires commitment and specific behaviors from all participants Such voluntary contributions foster a shared understanding among members, ultimately benefiting the entire organization Barnard posits that the foundation of this cooperative willingness lies in a combination of employee satisfaction and compatibility, highlighting that participation is driven by intrinsic motivation rather than external enforcement.
2006) The nature of term “willingness” enclosed with its determinants is similar to the concept of OCB and its determinants The voluntariness which Barnard called
“willingness to cooperate” was what Organ called “discretionary behavior”
Another concept of organization theory similar to OCB is “informal cooperation”
In a book named Management and Worker published in 1939, Roethlisberger and
Dickson distinguished between formal and informal organizations, noting that the former is governed by rules and policies related to workers' tasks, while the latter involves informal differentiation and integration among individuals Importantly, the informal system is not an opposing construct but a vital component that enhances the effectiveness of the formal organization (Organ et al., 2006) Both Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) and informal cooperation share a commitment that extends beyond formal job requirements, positively impacting organizational performance Additionally, job satisfaction influences both behaviors, suggesting that Roethlisberger and Dickson's concept of informal collaboration may be a foundational element of OCB.
Katz and Kahn (1967) identified three essential patterns of individual behavior crucial for organizational effectiveness The first pattern involves joining and remaining within the organization, while the second emphasizes dependable behavior necessary for fulfilling job requirements The third pattern is characterized by innovative and spontaneous behavior, which exceeds role expectations and contributes to organizational success These behaviors, similar to Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB), are discretionary, unpredictable, and cannot be mandated by superiors Ultimately, they play a vital role in enhancing overall organizational performance by fostering a proactive and engaged workforce.
II.1.3 The development of the concept of OCB
In 1977, Organ published a paper supporting the idea that satisfaction influences productivity, distinguishing between quantitative output measures and subtler forms of worker contributions often overlooked in individual output assessments (Organ et al., 2006, p.15) These contributions can include assisting coworkers, enhancing organizational culture, and adapting to managerial changes While Organ did not aim to introduce the concept of Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB), his research inspired his students, Bateman and Smith, to explore and validate or challenge his findings.
In 1983, Bateman and Organ explored the relationship between job satisfaction and performance, highlighting the importance of supra-role behaviors such as assisting colleagues, managing work overload, and fostering a positive organizational image Their findings revealed a significantly positive correlation between earlier job satisfaction and subsequent citizenship behavior, as well as between earlier citizenship behavior and later job satisfaction Notably, the link between qualitative (citizenship) and quantitative performance was stronger than initially hypothesized Continuing this research, Anna Smith surveyed supervisors in manufacturing plants to identify desired employee behaviors that are difficult to enforce and for which no tangible rewards can be guaranteed, aside from appreciation.
- Helps other employees with their work when they have been absent
- Exhibits punctuality in arriving at work on time in the morning and after lunch and breaks
- Volunteers to do things not formally required by the job
- Takes initiative to orient new employee to the department even though it is not part of his/her job description
- Exhibits attendance at work beyond the norm (for example, takes fewer days off than most individuals or fewer than allowed)
- Helps others when their workload increases (assists others until they get over the hurdles)
- Coasts toward the end of the day*
- Gives advance notice if unable to come to work
- Spends great deal of time in personal telephone conversation*
- Does not take unnecessary time off work
- Assists me with my duties
- Makes innovative suggestions to improve overall quality of the department
- Does not take extra-breaks
- Willingly attends functions not required by the organization but that help its overall image
- Does not spend a great deal of time in idle conversation
Smith's research on citizenship behaviors among MBA students identified two primary factors of Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB): Altruism and Generalized Compliance, later termed Helping and Conscientiousness, respectively Altruism involves supporting new employees and assisting colleagues with heavy workloads, while Conscientiousness encompasses punctuality, minimizing breaks, and maintaining focus during work hours Additional OCB dimensions include Sportsmanship, which involves refraining from complaints; Courtesy, aimed at preventing conflicts with coworkers; and Civic Virtue, reflecting active participation in organizational governance Organ later introduced Cheerleading, where employees acknowledge and celebrate the achievements of their peers, and Peacemaking, which involves mediating conflicts among colleagues.
Podsakoff et al (2000) identified two additional dimensions of Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB): Organizational Loyalty and Self-Development Organizational Loyalty involves advocating for the organization to outsiders, defending it against external challenges, and maintaining commitment during difficult times Self-Development refers to the voluntary actions employees take to enhance their knowledge, skills, and abilities.
There are different opinions about the dimensions of OCB Different researchers have considered different dimensions for OCB
Initially termed Altruism, this dimension was renamed Helping due to critiques that suggested it implied selflessness as the sole motive behind the behavior, thus limiting its scope Regardless of its label, Helping or Altruism, this type of Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) is directed towards a specific individual, typically a coworker, but may also involve supervisors or customers The essence of this behavior focuses on assisting others, such as aiding a new employee in learning their role or supporting an overburdened colleague in managing their workload or resolving issues.
Podsakoff at al (2000) included two dimensions Cheerleading and Peacemaking of Organ and some of behaviors of Courtesy intended to avoid problems in this dimension
Organ (1988) considered Courtesy as one dimension of OCB while Podsakoff et al
In the Helping dimension, it is essential to understand the distinction between helping and courtesy As noted by Organ et al (2006), helping involves actively addressing and resolving a colleague's challenges, while courtesy focuses on preventing potential issues before they arise The core principle is to minimize practices that complicate others' tasks and, when additional responsibilities are unavoidable, to provide ample notice to ensure they are adequately prepared to manage the increased workload.
Item to measure Courtesy are
- Tries to avoid creating problems for others
- Considers the effects of his/her actions
- Consults with me or other people who might be affected by his/her actions or decisions
- Informed me before taking any important actions
Sportsmanship is the ability to demonstrate tolerance and forgiveness in challenging situations without expressing dissatisfaction Employees who embody sportsmanship refrain from complaining when faced with inconveniences caused by others and uphold a positive attitude, even in the face of adversity (Podsakoff et al., 2000).
Items to measure Sportsmanship (Konovky & Organ, 1996)
- Complains a lot about trivial matters*
- Always find fault with what the organization is doing*
- Expresses resentment with any change introduced by management*
- Thinks only about his/her work problems, not others’*
- Tries to make the best of situation, even when there are problems
- Is able to tolerate occasional inconveniences when they arise
- Does not complain about work assignments
The Compliance dimension, formerly known as Conscientiousness, refers to behaviors that enhance the overall functioning of a group, department, or organization rather than providing immediate assistance to individuals Examples of such behaviors include punctuality, excellent attendance, and minimizing idle conversation, which, while not directly benefiting any one person, contribute to a cooperative environment According to Organ et al (2006), these actions demonstrate a high level of adherence to necessary constraints within a collaborative system Podsakoff et al (2000) further define compliance as the behavior of an employee who consistently follows rules and regulations, even in the absence of supervision.
Employees hold a significant responsibility as members of an organization, contributing to its positive image among outsiders This includes recognizing environmental opportunities and threats, often at their own personal expense, which ultimately enhances the organization's reputation and effectiveness.
Items to measure Civic Virtue are
- Stays informed about developments in the company
- Attends and participates in meetings regarding the company
- Offers suggestions for ways to improve operations
This dimension consist behaviors which protect and defend the image and good reputation of the organization towards the external environment
It is voluntary behaviors employees engage in to improve their knowledge, skills and abilities (Podsakoff et al., 2000)
In conclusion, Organ and Podsakoff et al identified seven dimensions of Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB), with researchers primarily focusing on five key dimensions: Altruism (Helping), Conscientiousness (Compliance), Courtesy, Sportsmanship, and Civic Virtue.
II.1.5 Antecedents and Consequences of OCB
ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE
II.2.1 Definition and the importance of organizational culture
Organizational culture significantly influences the performance and long-term success of companies, impacting business outcomes both positively and negatively Misaligned cultures can result in diminished employee loyalty, low motivation, and high turnover rates, while healthy cultures foster pride and purpose, enhancing productivity and alignment with corporate goals This area of study has offered valuable insights for managers seeking to boost organizational effectiveness.
Organizational culture emerged in the early 1960s as a synonym for organizational climate and gained prominence in the 1980s with Peters and Waterman's influential book, *In Search of Excellence*, which highlighted the importance of a decisive, customer-oriented, empowering, and people-focused culture for company success Since then, it has become a rapidly growing field of study within management, attracting numerous research studies, books, and articles While defining organizational culture can be challenging, various general definitions have been proposed by scholars in the field.
- The shared philosophies, ideologies, values, assumptions, beliefs, expectations, attitudes and norm” that knit an organization together (Kilmann et al., 1985)
- The human invention that creates solidarity and meaning and inspires commitment and productivity (Deal, as cited in Ivy, 2010)
A system of shared values and beliefs significantly influences a company's culture by interacting with its employees, organizational structure, and control systems, ultimately shaping behavioral norms within the organization (Uttal, as cited in Ivy, 2010).
- A set of shared values and beliefs understood and shared by members of an organization (Recardo & Jolly, 1997)
- A complex of values, beliefs, and behaviors that become part of the social fabric of organizations (Davis & Landa, 2000)
- Something to do with the people and unique quality and style of the organization (Lee & Yu, 2004)
- The underlying values, beliefs, and principles that serve as a foundation for the organization’s management practices and behaviors that both exemplify and reinforce those basic principles (Carmeli & Tishler, 2004)
- Composite of values, beliefs and norm expressed in an organization’s actual practices and behaviors (Atkins & Turner, 2006)
- The glue that holds the organization together (Balthazard et al., 2006)
Organizational culture, though defined differently across various organizations, commonly encompasses values and beliefs According to Dickson, Aditya, and Chhokar (2000), the origins of organizational culture can be traced to the values and beliefs of founding leaders, the characteristics of the industry, and the broader societal context Schein (1999) argued that organizational culture is established at the inception of the organization, rooted in its initial successes and the influence of its founders.
In 2004, it was identified that the cultural foundation of an organization stems from three key sources: first, the beliefs, values, and assumptions held by its founders; second, the collective learning experiences of group members as the organization evolves; and third, the fresh beliefs, values, and assumptions introduced by new employees.
II.2.2 Levels of organizational culture
Schein (2004) defined organizational culture as
A culture consists of fundamental assumptions developed by a group as they addressed challenges of adapting to external conditions and achieving internal cohesion These assumptions prove effective and are deemed valid, leading to their transmission to new members as the appropriate way to understand, interpret, and respond to similar issues.
Schein also viewed organizational culture as comprising three levels:
Figure 2.1: There levels of organizational culture Adapted from Organizational Culture and Leadership by Schein, E.H (3 rd ed.), 2004, San Francisco, CA: Jossey- Bass, Inc
Artifacts: this is the most manifest level of culture It is all the phenomena that one sees, hears, and feels when one encounters a new group with an unfamiliar culture
It includes visible products; language; technology and products; creations; style; observed rituals and ceremonies, visible organizational structures and processes
Espoused beliefs and values, while less visible than behaviors and artifacts, form the foundational meanings and relationships that help interpret these observable elements of culture Examples of this concept include strategies, goals, and philosophies that guide organizational behavior and decision-making.
Basic underlying assumptions are the unconscious elements of culture that shape an organization's perception of the world Over time, these values become ingrained and are accepted as the norm within the organization Due to their deep-rooted nature, basic assumptions are often the most challenging to alter or redefine.
II.2.3 Dimensions and types of organizational culture
Hofstede (1984) identified key national and regional cultural groupings that influence organizational behavior, outlining four dimensions of organizational culture: power distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism versus collectivism, and masculinity versus femininity Expanding on this, Harrison (1991) defined culture through four additional dimensions: power culture, role culture, task culture, and person culture.
Cameron and Quinn (1999) describe organizational culture as a reflection of values, leadership styles, language, symbols, procedures, and definitions of success that differentiate organizations Their Competing Values Framework identifies six dimensions—Dominant Organizational Characteristics, Leadership Style, Management of Employees, Organizational Glue, Strategic Emphasis, and Criteria for Success—arranged along two axes that create four quadrants The vertical axis indicates an organization's flexibility versus control, with highly controlled organizations at the bottom, characterized by strict procedures, while those higher on the axis are less regimented The horizontal axis distinguishes between internal and external focus, where externally focused firms prioritize market concerns and competition, while internally focused organizations emphasize employee morale and process efficiency The four distinct cultures identified by the Competing Values Framework—Clan, Adhocracy, Hierarchy, and Market—capture the essence of these organizational dynamics.
Figure 2.2: The Competing Values Framework Quadrant Adapted from
Diagnosing and changing organizational culture by Cameron, K.S., & Quinn, R.E., 1999 Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley
Chehade, Mendes and Mitchell (2006) define seven types of culture: passive- aggressive, over managed, outgrown, fits and starts, just in time, military precision and resilient
O’Reilly, Chatman and Cadwell (1991) in People and organizational culture: A profile comparison approach to assessing person-organization fit identified organizational culture is represented by seven distinct values
Innovative Culture: companies with innovative culture are adaptable, flexible and experiment with new ideas Risk taking is also encouraged by accepting the failures
Aggressive Culture: companies belong to this culture value competitiveness and outperforming competitors and these companies often fall short in corporate social responsibility
An outcome-oriented culture in companies prioritizes achievement, results, and action, linking rewards directly to performance indicators rather than seniority or loyalty This approach can foster unethical behaviors, leading employees to view their colleagues as rivals, ultimately creating an unhealthy work environment.
People-Oriented Culture: people-oriented culture value fairness, supportiveness and respecting individual rights Companies may benefits from a low turnover rate compare with average industry rate as a result
Team-Oriented Culture: companies have team-oriented culture are collaborative and emphasis on cooperation among employees Employees tent to have positive relationships with their colleagues and their managers
Details-Oriented Culture: this kind of culture emphasize precision and paying attention to details
Stable Culture: Stable culture is predictable, rule-oriented and bureaucratic This kind of culture prevents quick action and may be unsuitable in changing and dynamic environment
Figure 2.3: Dimensions of Organizational Culture Profile (OCP) Adapted from
People and Organizational Culture: A Profile Comparison Approach to Assessing Person-Organization Fit by O’Reilly, Charles A.III, Chatman, J., & Cadlwell,
The Organizational Culture Profile (OCP) serves as a key metric for assessing organizational culture and values, as highlighted by Agle & Caldwell (cited in Sarros, Gray & Densten, 2005) Originally designed to analyze the alignment between individual and organizational values (O’Reilly et al., 1991), the OCP was later adapted by Cable and Parson (2001) to evaluate person-organization fit during the hiring process Since its inception in 1991, the OCP has undergone two revisions to enhance its effectiveness.
The original version of the organizational culture assessment comprises 54 value statements, identified through exploratory factor analysis, which delineates eight key dimensions: Innovation, Attention to Detail, Outcome Orientation, Aggressiveness, Supportiveness, Emphasis on Rewards, Team Orientation, and Decisiveness Utilizing the Q-sort method, respondents categorize these items into nine groups based on desirability or characteristic relevance To create an organizational culture profile, individuals familiar with the organization sort the statements according to how representative they are, while personal preferences are assessed by sorting the items based on their ideal values for an organization O'Reilly et al (1991) reported an impressive average reliability coefficient of 0.88 for this assessment.
The initial revision of the Organizational Culture Profile (OCP) was conducted by Cable and Judge (as cited in Sarros et al., 2005), who streamlined the instrument from 54 to 40 items and replaced the Q-sort method with a Likert scale for easier respondent completion Subsequently, Sarros et al (2005) further refined the OCP, modernizing its factor names and structure to better align with the competitive and socially-aware nature of today's business environment The updated version now features a concise 28-item format organized into seven key factors: Competitiveness, Social Responsibility, Supportiveness, Innovation, Emphasis on Reward, Performance Orientation, and Stability.
RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS
Organizational culture plays a crucial role in assessing a company's competitiveness, as it embodies the unique personality traits of the enterprise Huang (as cited by Lee, 2011) emphasizes that this culture is intricately linked to the core competitiveness of businesses Often discussed in the context of organizational behavior, understanding organizational culture is essential for evaluating how companies can thrive in a competitive landscape.
Organizational culture, as defined by 2011 research, emerges from the long-term interaction between internal operations and the external environment, encompassing a complex mix of values, beliefs, thoughts, and actions that shape member behavior within the organization Though often invisible, it significantly influences daily interactions and expressions among members Daft (2009) emphasized that this culture comprises the essential values, beliefs, and codes of conduct shared by all members, while Liu (as cited by Lee, 2011) highlighted that a strong organizational culture can enhance efficiency and productivity Furthermore, organizational culture informs the thinking styles of members, affecting their value judgments and behaviors Organ (1988) noted a close relationship between organizational culture and organizational citizenship behavior, underscoring its importance in fostering a cohesive work environment.
Organizational culture significantly influences employee emotions and behaviors, as highlighted by Schein (2004), who noted that individuals from different cultures may interpret Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) in varied ways Briebef and Motowidlo (as cited in Podsakoff, 2000) emphasized that OCB is inherently social and incorporates cultural elements Schein’s (1990) model describes organizational culture as a normative system of shared values and beliefs that shapes how members feel, think, and act This culture establishes the expectations and requirements of organizational life, promoting behaviors deemed important, such as collaboration and teamwork in organizations that prioritize these values Based on these foundational assumptions, a hypothesis has been formulated.
H: There is a positive impact of organizational culture on organizational citizenship behavior
Organizational culture significantly influences Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB), with its impact varying across different dimensions According to the Organizational Culture Profile (OCP), organizational culture is evaluated through seven key dimensions: Competitiveness, Social Responsibility, Supportiveness, Innovation, Emphasis on Reward, Performance Orientation, and Stability Each of these dimensions can positively or negatively affect OCB, with some dimensions exerting a stronger influence than others.
Supportiveness and stability in the workplace can enhance organizational citizenship behavior (OCB), while competitiveness, a focus on rewards, and performance orientation may negatively impact OCB When employees operate under pressure and face competition among themselves, it becomes challenging for them to engage in positive organizational behaviors.
MODEL
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
CONSTRUCT MEASUREMENT AND QUESTIONNAIRE
This study utilized a personally administered questionnaire divided into two sections The first section focused on organizational culture and organizational citizenship behavior, where respondents indicated their level of agreement with various statements using a seven-point Likert scale ranging from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree." The second section collected general demographic information, including age, gender, and work experience.
Independent Variable: Organizational culture (OC)
The Organizational Culture Profile (OCP), originally developed by O'Reilly et al and later modified by Sarros et al in 2005, was utilized to assess organizational culture This profile encompasses seven dimensions and consists of 28 items, as detailed in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1 Organizational Culture measurement scale
2 An emphasis on quality 2 Opportunities for professional growth
3 Being distinctive 3 High pay for good performance
4 Being competitive 4 Praise for good performance
1 Being reflective 1 Having high expectations for performance
2 Having a good reputation 2 Enthusiasm for the job
3 Being socially responsible 3 Being results oriented
4 Having a clear guiding philosophy 4 Being highly organized
2 Sharing information freely 2 Being calm
3 Being people oriented 3 Security of employment
2 Quick to take advantage of opportunities
Dependent Variable - Organizational citizenship behavior (OCB)
Various measures of Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) have been documented in the literature, including those by Podsakoff et al (1990), Van Dyne et al (1994), and Konovsky & Organ (1996) This study specifically utilizes the OCB measure developed by Konovsky and Organ.
(1996) The questionnaire consists of 20 items designed to measure five aspects of OCB: Altruism, Conscientiousness, Courtesy, Sportsmanship and Civic Virtue as present in Table 3.2
Table 3.2 Organizational Citizenship Behavior measurement scale
1 I am willing to assist my colleagues who have heavy work loads
2 I am willing to support my colleagues who have been absent
3 I am willing to help other colleagues work productively
4 I am willing to help orient new employees even though it is not required
1 I am always on time Attendance at work is above average
3 I obey company rules and regulations even when no one is watching
4 I take the initiative to troubleshoot and solve problems before requesting help from my manager/ supervisor
1 I try to avoid creating problems for my colleagues
2 I consult with related people who might be affected by my actions or decisions
3 I respect the rights and privileges of my colleagues
4 I show genuine concern and courtesy toward my colleagues, even under the most tiring business or personal situations
1 I stay informed about developments in the company
2 I attend training that I am encouraged to, but not required to attend
3 I offer suggestions for ways to improve operations in my company
4 I demonstrate concern about the image of the company
1 I consume a lot of time complaining about trivial matters*
2 I express resentment with any changes introduced by management*
3 I think only about my work problem not others’*
4 I pay no attention to announcements, messages, or printed materials that provide information about the company*
DATA COLLECTION AND SAMPLING
The study focused on employees of service companies in Ho Chi Minh City, utilizing a convenience sampling method due to limitations in time and budget Data was collected through a two-step process.
The research employed a qualitative method through in-depth interviews with twelve employees, six from banks and six from logistics providers, to gather rich qualitative data This data informed the design of a subsequent quantitative questionnaire, which included structured questions aimed at measuring constructs within the model and testing the hypotheses The questionnaire was distributed in both paper and online formats, resulting in 167 online responses and 272 returned from 350 hand-distributed copies After a thorough data cleaning process, 97 cases were removed due to incomplete responses or ineligibility, leaving a total of 342 effective questionnaires for analysis in the study.
DATA ANALYSIS
The data analysis was conducted using the Statistical Package for Social Science version 16.0 (SPSS 16.0) and the Analysis of Moments Structure (AMOS 16.0), employing Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) SEM is a comprehensive statistical technique that combines path analysis and factor analysis to assess complex relationships among observed (measured) and unobserved (latent) variables The SEM process involves two key steps: validating the measurement model and fitting the structural model This method enables simultaneous testing of all relationships in the model, effectively accounting for random measurement error and providing a more accurate representation of the relationships involved.
To assess model fit, the Chi-square (CMIN) statistic is widely recognized among researchers as a reliable fitting index A model is deemed a good fit when the significance level exceeds 0.05 However, the Chi-square value is influenced by the magnitude of correlations within the model; larger correlations typically lead to a poorer fit For datasets ranging from 75 to 200 cases, Chi-square serves as an adequate measure, but with larger samples, it often yields statistically significant results Therefore, this study recommends additional indices for evaluating model fit, including Chi-square/df (CMIN/df), Comparative Fit Index (CFI), Tucker & Lewis Index (TLI), Goodness-Of-Fit Index (GFI), and Root Mean Square Error Approximation (RMSEA) A model is considered to have a good fit when CMIN/df is less than 3, and GFI, CFI, and TLI range from 0.9 to 1, while RMSEA is below 0.08.
Table 3.3 Key goodness-of-fit indices (Byrne, 2001 and Kline, 2005)
Key Indices Level of acceptable fit CMIN/df 1
This research utilized a two-step approach in Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) to analyze data, beginning with Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) to validate the measurement scales for organizational culture and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) Following this, SEM was employed to assess the influence of organizational culture on OCB and to evaluate the impact of each dimension of organizational culture on OCB.
DATA ANALYSIS
ANALYSIS RESULTS
This chapter outlines the results of the hypothesis test and interpretations of the proposed theoretical model, structured into four sections The first section provides a descriptive analysis of respondent characteristics using frequency and percentage The second section presents Cronbach’s alpha results to assess the reliability of the measurement scales The third section discusses scale reliability and validity through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) results Finally, the fourth section employs structural equation modeling (SEM) to examine the relationship between organizational culture and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB).
DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS
In a survey of 342 full-time employees in service companies in Ho Chi Minh City, the gender distribution revealed that 33.63% were male and 66.37% were female The majority, comprising 66.08%, were aged between 25 to 35 years, while 25.15% were under 25, 7.60% fell within the 36 to 45 age range, and only 1.17% were over 45 Regarding educational qualifications, 86.26% held a bachelor's degree, and 6.43% possessed an MBA In terms of job positions, 73.39% were staff members, 9.36% were supervisors, and 17.25% were managers.
Table 4.1 Descriptive Analysis of respondents
CHECK THE RELIABILITY OF MEASUREMENT SCALE BY CRONBACH’S ALPHA
The validity and reliability of each scale were thoroughly assessed to ensure the development of an effective measurement tool (Bourque & Fielder, 2003) Confirmatory factor analysis was utilized to evaluate the construct validity of the survey, while Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were calculated to assess the reliability of both the subscales and the overall instrument McMillan and Schumacher (1997) indicated that a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.90 reflects a highly reliable instrument, whereas an alpha between 0.70 and 0.90 is generally acceptable (Nunnally, 1978) Additionally, Hair, Anderson, Tatham, and Black (1998) noted that a reliability coefficient of 0.6 is adequate for research purposes.
Organizational culture was assessed through seven dimensions: Competitiveness, Emphasis on Reward, Supportiveness, Performance Orientation, Innovation, Social Responsibility, and Stability, based on the Organizational Culture Profile (OCP) Each dimension consisted of four items, and as shown in Table 4.1, the Cronbach's alpha values for these dimensions ranged from 0.87 to 0.91, indicating strong internal consistency Specifically, the values were Competitiveness (0.89), Emphasis on Reward (0.90), Supportiveness (0.91), Performance Orientation (0.89), Innovation (0.87), Social Responsibility (0.89), and Stability (0.89) All values exceeded the recommended threshold of 0.7, with Corrected Item-Total Correlation scores greater than 0.3, confirming the reliability of the measurement.
Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) was evaluated across five dimensions, each consisting of four items The reliability of these dimensions was confirmed with Cronbach’s alpha scores: Altruism (0.90), Conscientiousness (0.87), Courtesy (0.83), Civic Virtue (0.85), and Sportsmanship (0.70) Additionally, all Corrected Item-Total Correlations exceeded 0.3, indicating strong item validity.
In conclusion, the reliability of the scales was confirmed using Cronbach’s alpha, resulting in no items being removed from the assessments of organizational culture and organizational citizenship behavior A total of 28 items representing seven dimensions of organizational culture and 20 items reflecting five dimensions of organizational citizenship behavior were included in the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to evaluate the validity of the measurement scales.
Table 4.2 Cronbach’s alpha of measurement scale
CONFIRMATORY FACTOR ANALYSIS (CFA)
Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed using Amos 16.0 to evaluate the measurement instrument Ensuring that the measurement model accurately represents the sample data enhances confidence in the findings associated with the hypothesized structural model (Byrne, 2001).
The results of the Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) demonstrated that the reliability and validity of the measurement instrument were effectively assessed The CFA model is a robust approach for evaluating construct validity, requiring fewer assumptions while offering comprehensive diagnostic insights into both reliability and validity Additionally, the CFA model presents several key advantages that enhance the overall assessment process.
(1) Measures of the overall degree of fit are provided in any particular application (e.g., the Chi-square goodness-of-fit test)
The article provides valuable insights into the assessment of convergent and discriminant validity, highlighting the use of Chi-square difference tests, the magnitude of factor loadings for traits, and the estimation of trait correlations to evaluate their effectiveness.
The current research focuses on two second-order constructs: Organizational Culture and Organizational Citizenship Behavior, with Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) performed for each To ensure the reliability and validity of the measurement scale, three types of tests were conducted The first test assessed the overall fit index, including CMIN/df, GFI, CFI, TLI, and RMSEA The second test evaluated item reliability through factor loadings, where values of 0.30 are deemed significant, 0.40 more important, and 0.50 or higher very important, according to Hair et al (1998) The final test measured construct reliability (CR) and average variance extracted (AVE), with AVE needing to be at least 0.5 and CR exceeding 0.6, as per Bagozzi et al (1988) Hair et al (1998) further suggested that construct reliability should be at least 0.7.
IV.2.1 Confirmatory factor analysis with Organizational Culture Construct
According to the fit levels proposed by Byrne (2001) and Kline (2005), the confirmatory factor analysis results for the organizational culture construct indicate an acceptable measurement model fit The analysis revealed a Chi-square/df ratio of less than 3, with TLI and CFI values exceeding 0.9 Additionally, the GFI was recorded at 0.814, and the RMSEA was less than 0.08, confirming the model's adequacy.
Chi-square= 987.466 ; df= 343 ; P= 000 ; Chi-square/df = 2.879 ;
Figure 4.1 : CFA with Organizational Culture construct
However, continue to check the Modification Indices in Amos output, the residual of observed variables: Competitiveness 3, Emphasis on Reward 1, Supportiveness
3, Performance Orientation 2 and Stability 2 had high correlation with residual of others
The removal of certain observed variables from the organizational culture scale led to improved goodness-of-fit indices in the revised Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) Specifically, the CMIN/df value decreased from 2.879 to 2.108, and the RMSEA dropped from 0.074 to 0.057 Additionally, the GFI, TLI, and CFI values saw significant increases, rising from 0.814, 0.913, and 0.921 to 0.882, 0.954, and 0.959, respectively, as detailed in Table 4.3.
Table 4.3 Goodness-of-fit Indices of CFA with Organizational Culture construct
Indices CMIN/df GFI TLI CFI RMSEA
Chi-square= 470.099 ; df= 223 ; P= 000 ; Chi-square/df = 2.108 ;
Figure 4.2 : Revised CFA – CFA with organizational culture construct
The evaluation of the reliability and validity of organizational culture dimensions, as shown in Table 4.4, indicates that all constructs exhibit construct reliability (CR) values between 0.84 and 0.90, surpassing the recommended threshold of 0.7 (Hair et al., 1998), confirming their reliability Additionally, all factor loadings exceed 0.5, with p-values below 0.01, and the average variances extracted (AVE) range from 0.63 to 0.69, which is above the minimum criterion of 0.5 These findings collectively demonstrate that the scales employed have achieved a satisfactory level of validity.
Standardized Confirmatory Factor Analysis Coefficients, Construct Reliability and
Average Variance Extracted (Organizational Culture)
Emphasis on Reward 2 0.85 Emphasis on Reward 3 0.74 Emphasis on Reward 4 0.79
IV.2.2 Confirmatory factor analysis with OCB Construct
Chi-square/df = 2.105 ; GFI = 909 ; TLI = 947 ; CFI = 954 ;
Figure 4.3 : CFA with Organizational Culture construct
Table 4.5 Regression Weight and Standardized Regression Weight
Altruism < - OCB 1.00 Conscientiousness < - OCB 970 062 15.668 000 Courtesy < - OCB 998 065 15.275 000 Civic Virtue < - OCB 892 064 13.854 000 Sportsmanship < - OCB 078 083 946 344
Civic Virtue < - OCB 837 Sportsmanship < - OCB 064
In the initial Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), the indices demonstrated favorable results, with Chi-square/df values below 3 and GFI, TLI, and CFI exceeding 0.9; specifically, GFI was recorded at 0.822 and RMSEA was below 0.08 However, the data in Table 4.5 indicated that Sportsmanship did not adequately measure the organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) construct, as its standardized regression weight was a mere 0.064, significantly below the required threshold of 0.5 Consequently, it is recommended that Sportsmanship be excluded from the OCB construct.
Chi-square/df = 2.309 ; GFI = 923 ; TLI = 957 ; CFI = 964 ;
Figure 4.4: Revised CFA – CFA with OCB construct
Table 4.6 Goodness-of-fit Indices of CFA with OCB construct
Indices CMIN/df GFI TLI CFI RMSEA
After the removal of four items from the Sportsmanship dimension, the model indices presented in Table 4.6 indicate a good fit Although the CMIN/df rose from 2.105 to 2.309 and the RMSEA increased from 0.057 to 0.062, both values remain within acceptable limits (CMIN/df < 3, RMSEA < 0.08) Additionally, the GFI, TLI, and CFI improved to 0.923, 0.957, and 0.964, respectively, all exceeding the threshold of 0.9 These results collectively suggest that the model demonstrates a strong fit.
Standardized Confirmatory Factor Analysis Coefficients, Construct Reliability and
Average Variance Extracted (Organizational Citizenship Behavior)
Evaluate the reliability and validity, as shown in Table 4.7, all constructs have construct reliability (CR) in the range from 0.84 to 0.90; Altruism (0.90),
The scales for Conscientiousness (0.87), Courtesy (0.83), and Civic Virtue (0.85) exceed the recommended reliability threshold of 0.7, indicating strong reliability (Hair et al., 1998) Additionally, all factor loadings are above 0.5, with p-values less than 0.01, and average variances extracted (AVE) ranging from 0.55 to 0.69, surpassing the acceptable criterion of 0.5 This confirms the validity of the scales.
In conclusion, after conducting CFA, the scale to measure organizational culture and organizational citizenship behavior are as below in Table 4.8
OC and OCB measurement scale
Construct Sub-constructs No of items
STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODEL ANALYSIS
In the second step of the analysis process, a structural equation model (SEM) was employed to evaluate the causal relationship between organizational culture and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) This analysis also assessed the influence of each dimension of organizational culture on OCB, providing valuable insights into their interconnections.
IV.4.1 Estimate the casual relationship between organizational culture and OCB
Chi-square= 1303.157 ; df= 690 ; P= 000 ; Chi-square/df = 1.889 ;
Figure 4.5: Structural Equation Model (SEM 1)
The SEM analysis demonstrates a strong fit to the data, evidenced by a Chi-square value of 1303.157 with 690 degrees of freedom, yielding a significant p-value of 0.000 The Chi-square to degrees of freedom ratio is 1.889, while the TLI and CFI values are 0.935 and 0.939, respectively Although the GFI is slightly below the acceptable threshold at 0.822, the RMSEA value of 0.051 further supports that the model is a good fit overall.
Organizational culture significantly influences organizational citizenship behavior (OCB), with a structural path estimate of 0.645, which is statistically significant at a p-value of less than 0.01 This supports the hypothesis that a positive relationship exists between organizational culture and OCB, highlighting the strong impact that organizational culture has on fostering citizenship behaviors within the organization.
Table 4.9 Regression Weight and Standardized Regression Weight – SEM 1
IV.4.2 Measure the impact of each dimension of organizational culture on OCB
The analysis reveals that the model's fit is inadequate, with an RMSEA value of 0.104 and GFI, TFI, and CFI values of 0.579, 0.729, and 0.7470, respectively, all falling below the acceptable threshold of 0.9 Furthermore, the Regression Weight Table (Table 4.10) indicates that four dimensions of organizational culture—Emphasis on Reward (p = 0.326), Supportiveness (p = 0.249), Innovation (p = 0.068), and Social Responsibility (p = 0.628)—do not significantly impact Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB), as all p-values exceed 0.05 In contrast, only the dimensions of Competitiveness, Performance Orientation, and Stability demonstrate a significant influence on OCB.
Chi-square= 3157.147 ; df= 691 ; P= 000 ; Chi-square/df = 4.569 ;
Figure 4.6: Structural Equation Model (SEM 2)
Table 4.10 Regression Weight and Standardized Regression Weight – SEM 2
After removing four sub-constructs—Emphasis on Reward, Supportiveness, Innovation, and Social Responsibility—that did not influence Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB), the model fit indices improved significantly The chi-square/df ratio decreased from 4.569 to 3.709, while the RMSEA reduced from 0.102 to 0.089 Additionally, the GFI, TLI, and CFI values increased from 0.587, 0.739, and 0.756 to 0.816, 0.864, and 0.878, respectively Although the revised model does not fully meet the criteria for a good fit, with GFI, TLI, and CFI below 0.9 and RMSEA above 0.08, it remains an acceptable model that effectively explains the relationship between the three dimensions—Competitiveness, Performance Orientation, Stability—and OCB.
Table 4.11 indicates that Performance Orientation has impacted on OCB in the first ranking (0.479), next is Stability (0.228) and the last is Competitiveness (0.222)
Chi-square= 994.058 ; df= 268 ; P= 000 ; Chi-square/df = 3.709 ;
Figure 4.7: Structural Equation Model (SEM 3)
Table 4.11 Regression Weight and Standardized Regression Weight – SEM 3
OCB < - Performance Orientation 324 039 8.322 000 OCB < - Competitiveness 162 039 4.145 000 OCB < - Stability 163 038 4.308 000
OCB < - Performance Orientation 479 OCB < - Competitiveness 222
In summary, the SEM analysis confirms a positive correlation between organizational culture and Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) Organizational culture significantly influences OCB, with three dimensions—Competitiveness, Performance Orientation, and Stability—showing a notable impact Among these, Performance Orientation has the strongest effect on OCB, followed by Stability and then Competitiveness.
DISCUSSION, IMPLICATION, LIMITATION AND
DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATION
This study aimed to explore the relationship between organizational culture and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB), specifically examining the impact of seven dimensions of organizational culture: Competitiveness, Social Responsibility, Supportiveness, Innovation, Emphasis on Reward, Performance Orientation, and Stability Using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and structural equation modeling (SEM), the research revealed a significant positive impact of organizational culture on OCB, with a structural path estimate of 0.645 (p < 0.01) Among the dimensions studied, Performance Orientation (r = 0.479) had the strongest effect on OCB, followed by Stability (r = 0.228) and Competitiveness (r = 0.222), while the remaining four dimensions showed no significant impact.
Social Responsibility, Supportiveness, Innovation, Emphasis on Reward did not effect to OCB
Organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) is essential for the growth and success of any organization, significantly influencing its effectiveness, efficiency, and productivity Although not mandatory, OCB fosters a supportive work environment where employees engage in altruism, conscientiousness, courtesy, sportsmanship, and civic virtue These behaviors enhance collaboration, compliance with rules, proactive problem-solving, tolerance of workplace inconveniences, and active participation in the organization’s political processes To cultivate OCB and gain a competitive advantage, organizations must focus on developing a positive organizational culture, as it strongly impacts OCB Key dimensions to prioritize include Performance Orientation, Stability, and Competitiveness, which collectively enhance employees' inclination to exhibit OCB.
Performance Orientation is a strategic approach utilized by organizations to enhance overall performance through the establishment of clear objectives, ongoing performance assessment, and the analysis of performance data to inform development initiatives Notably, research highlights that Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB)—which refers to voluntary actions not formally recognized by the organizational system—can be significantly influenced by Performance Orientation While OCB arises from personal choice and falls outside standard job descriptions, statistical findings indicate a strong correlation between OCB and the Performance Orientation defined by the Organizational Culture Profile (OCP).
- Having high expectations for performance
By focusing on three key factors, managers can foster a performance-oriented culture that enhances Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) levels When a company establishes high performance expectations and emphasizes results, employees are driven to exert greater effort to meet these standards To achieve their goals, employees demonstrate traits such as Conscientiousness and Courtesy, while also feeling motivated to exhibit Altruism by assisting overloaded colleagues and sharing valuable experiences to improve overall team performance.
The second issue manager should pay attention is Competitiveness Competitiveness in OCP involve
To effectively motivate employees to engage in Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB), stability within the organization is crucial When an organization maintains a stable environment, employees gain confidence and are more inclined to contribute positively, believing in the company's future This sense of stability assures them that their careers and lives are secure as long as they put in the effort, ultimately fostering a culture of commitment and performance.
The organization need to create a working environment in which the employment is secured and no more conflict between employees to improve OCB level
To enhance Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB), organizations should prioritize three key factors: Performance Orientation, Competitiveness, and Stability However, these elements often stand in opposition to one another; an emphasis on performance and competitiveness can undermine the ability to maintain stability within the organization.
To foster a competitive edge in today's dynamic work environment, organizations must strike a balance between stability, performance orientation, and competitiveness Managers should design their organizational structure to harmonize these three dimensions, enabling the development of Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) that enhances overall performance and adaptability.
CONTRIBUTION, LIMITATION AND SUGGESTIONS FOR
This research contributes to both theoretical and empirical understanding of Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) by confirming that organizational culture significantly influences OCB While previous studies have explored the antecedents of OCB, this study uniquely employs the Organizational Culture Profile (OCP) developed by O’Reilly et al (1991) and modified by Sarros et al (2005) as a measurement scale for organizational culture, filling a gap in the existing literature.
Since its introduction in the 1980s, Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) has gained significant global attention, yet it remains a relatively unfamiliar concept among managers and researchers in Vietnam This research aims to provide valuable insights that can help managers implement OCB strategies within their organizations, ultimately enhancing employee performance and boosting overall organizational effectiveness.
This research utilized two measurement scales: the Organizational Culture Profile (OCP) developed by O’Reilly et al (1991) and modified by Sarros et al (2005) for assessing organizational culture, and the scale created by Knonoky and Organ (1996) for measuring Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) Both scales have been extensively tested in various countries and have now been validated in the context of Vietnam.
V.2.2 Limitations and further research directions
There are several limitations that should be taken into account when interpreting the result in this research
One significant limitation is the accuracy of measurement, particularly regarding potential cross-cultural bias in translating the questionnaire from English to Vietnamese Respondents may experience reactivity effects due to poor translation, which can distort their answers This issue is particularly evident in the translation of the seven dimensions of organizational culture, where respondents may struggle to differentiate between certain dimensions, leading to inaccuracies in their responses compared to the English version.
The survey conducted in service companies in Ho Chi Minh City presents a limitation due to the use of convenience sampling, which may not accurately represent all employees in Vietnam's service sector This raises concerns about the generalizability of the study's findings For future research, it is recommended to employ probability sampling methods to enhance the reliability of results and to expand the sample beyond Ho Chi Minh City for a more comprehensive analysis.
The study's third limitation is its focus solely on the influence of organizational culture on organizational citizenship behavior (OCB), without considering demographic factors like age, gender, and work experience Future research should incorporate these variables to provide a comprehensive understanding of the relationship between organizational culture and OCB.
Atkins, J.R., & Turner, D.S (2006) Upgrade stakeholder service by changing your agency’s organizational culture ITE Journal, 76(120), 30-32 Balthazard, P.A., Cooke, R.A., & Potter, R.E (2006) Dysfunctional culture, dysfunctional organization Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21(8), 709-
732 Barnard, C.I (2002) The functions of the executive (39 th ed.) Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press Bernard, L (1995) Examining the organizational culture and organizational performance link Leadership & Organization Development Journal 16(5), 16-21
Bourque, L.B., & Fielder, E.P (2003) How to conduct seft-administered and mail surveys (2 nd ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Byrne, B.M (2001) Structural equation modeling with AMOS Lawrence Erlbaum
Cable, D.M & Parson C.K (2001) Socialization tactics and person-organization fit, Personnel Psychology 54(1), 1-23 Cameron, K.S., & Quinn, R.E (1999) Diagnosing and changing organizational culture Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley
Cameron, K.S., & Quinn, R.E (2006) Diagnosing and changing organizational culture (2 nd ed.) San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Carmeli, A., & Tishler, A (2004) The relationship between intangible organizational elements and organizational performance Strategic Management Journal, 25, 1257-1278
Chehade, G., Mendes, D., & Mitchell, D (2006) Culture change for the analytical mind Strategic Finance, 87(12), 11-14 Daulatram, B L (2003) Organizational culture and job satisfaction, Jour of
Davis, T., & Landa, M (2000) Changing dynamics: How workforce culture can boost corporate performance CMA Management, 74(10), 26 Daft, R.L (2009) Organization theory and design Mason (10 th ed.) Ohio: Cengage
Dickson, M W., Aditya, R.N., & Chhokar, J.S (2000) Handbook of organizational culture and climate Thousanf Oaks, CA: Sage
Eisenberger R.R., Hutchison, H.S., Sowa, D (1986) Preceived organizational support Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 500-507 Greenberg, J (2005) Managing behavior in organizations Upper Saddle River,
Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.R., Tatham, R.L., & Black, W.C (1998) Multivariate Data
Analysis (5 th ed.) Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall
Harrison, J.R & Carrol, G.R (1991) Keeping the faith: A model of cultural transmission in formal organization, Administrative Science Quaterly, 36(4), 552-582
Hofstede, G (1984) Culture’s consequences: International differences in work- related values Newbury Park, CA: Sage
Ivy, N A (2010) Examining the relationship between Organizational Culture and
Performance: Moderators of Culture Gap Retrieved from http://udini.proquest.com/view/examining-the-relationship-between- goid:749945161/
Katz, D & Kahn, R L (1967) The social psychology of organizations New York:
Wiley Kilmann, R., Saxton, M.J & Serpa, R (1985) Gaining control of the corporate culture Ossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA
Kline, R.B (2005) Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2 nd ed.) The Guiford Press, New York
Konovsky, M A., & Organ, D W (1996) Dispositional and contextual determinants of organizational citizenship behavior Journal of Organizational Behavior, 17, 253-266
Lee, S.W., & Yu, K (2004) Corporate culture and organizational performance
Lee, Y.L (2011) Research on school organizational change and its impact on organizational effectiveness with organizational citizenship behavior and organizational culure as mediators, African Journal of Business Management, 5(30), 12086-12098; DOI: 10.5897/AJBM11.1344
Martin C.L & Bies R (1991) Just laid off, but still a good citizen? Only if the process is fair Annual Meeting Academic Management, 6(3), 227-238 McMillan, J H., & Schumacher, S S (1997) Research in Education: A Conceptual
McShane, S.L & Von Glinow, M.A (2008) Organizational Behavior (4th ed.)
Boston: McGraw-Hill Mohanty, J & Rath, B (2012) Influence of organizational culture on organizational citizenship behavior: A three-sector study Global Journal of business research, 6(1), 65-76
Moorman, R (1991) Relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behavior: Do fairness perceptions influence employee citizenship Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(6), 845-855
Mowday R.T., Poter, L.M., Steers, R.M (1982) Employee-Organization Linkages:
The Psychology of Commitment, Absenteeism and Turnover Academic
Press, New York, NY Munro, D., Schumaker, & Carr, S (1997) Motivation and Culture, New York, NY:
Routledge Netemeyer, R., Boles, J., McKee, D & & McMurrian, R (1997) A investigation into the antecedents of organizational citizenship behaviors in the personal selling context Journal of Marketing, 61(3), 85-98
Nunnally, J.C (1978) Psychometric theory (2 nd ed.) New York: McGraw-Hill O’Reilly, Charles A.III, Chatman, J., & Cadlwell, D.F (1991) People and
Organizational Culture: A Profile Comparison Approach to Assessing Person-Organization Fit Academy of Management Journal 34(3), 487-516 Organ, D.W (1988) Organizational Citizenship Behavior: The good soldier syndrome Lexington, MA: Lexington
Organ, D.W & Ryan, K (1995) A meta-analytic review of attitudinal and dispositional predictors of organizational citizenship behavior Performance psychology, 48(4),775-802
Organ, D W (1997) Organizational citizenships behavior: It's construct cleanup time Human Performance, 10, 85-97
Citizenship Behavior It’s nature, antecedents and consequences Thousand
Oaks, California: Sage Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S B., Paine, J B & Bachrach, D G (2000)
Organizational Citizenship Behavior: A Critical Review of the Theoretical and Empirical Literature and Suggestions for Future Research Journal of Management 26(3), 513-563
Podsakoff, N.P., Whiting, S.W., Podsakoff, P.M., & Blume, B.D (2009) Individual and organizational level consequences of organizational citizenship behavior: A meta-analysis Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(1), 122-141 Recardo, R., & Jolly, J (1997) Organizational culture and teams SAM Advanced
In their seminal work, Roethlisberger and Dickson (1964) explore the dynamics between management and employees, emphasizing the importance of understanding worker needs for effective management practices Additionally, Sarros, Gray, and Densten (2005) revisit and revise the organizational culture profile, providing valuable insights from an Australian perspective that highlight the critical role of organizational culture in business and economics management.
Schappe, S.P (1998) The influence of job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and fairness perceptions on organizational citizenship behavior Journal of Psychology, 132(3), 277-290
Schein, E H (1990) Organizational culture American Psychologist, 45(2), 109-
119 Schein, E H (2004) Organizational Culture and Leadership (3rd ed.) San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, Inc
Smith C.A, Organ, D.W., & Near, J.P (1983) Organizational citizenship behavior:
Its nature and antecedents Journal of Applied psychology, 68, 655-663 Tepper, B.J., & Taylor, E.C (2003) Relationship among supervisors’ and subordinates’ procedural justice perceptions and organizational citizenship behavior Academic Management Journal, 46(1), 97-105
Van Dyne, L., Graham, J.W & Dienesch, R.M (1994) Organizational citizenship behavior; construct redefinition, measurement and validation Academic Management Journal, 37(4), 765-802
Williams, L.J., & Anderson, S.E (1991) Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors, Journal of Management, 17, 601-617
Emotional labor significantly influences job satisfaction and organizational commitment among clinical nurses, as highlighted in a questionnaire survey conducted by Yang and Chang (2007) Additionally, Zabihi et al (2012) propose a comprehensive model aimed at fostering the development of organizational citizenship behavior, emphasizing its importance within the workplace.
I am currently pursuing a Master's degree in Business Administration (MBUS) at the University of Ho Chi Minh City I invite you to take part in my research study titled "Analyzing the Influence of Organizational Culture on Organizational Citizenship Behavior in the Service Industry." Your participation would be greatly appreciated.
In today's business landscape, employees are recognized as the most valuable asset, particularly those who exhibit discretionary behaviors that extend beyond their job descriptions These individuals contribute significantly by assisting colleagues and enhancing the company's image and development Consequently, understanding the factors that influence organizational citizenship behavior is essential, with organizational culture identified as a key antecedent This study aims to explore the relationship between organizational culture and organizational citizenship behavior Your honest and candid responses to the following statements and questions are greatly appreciated, as there are no right or wrong answers—only your truthful insights.
Your response will be kept completely confidential Only the aggregate data will be reported If you are interested in, the result of research will be sent for your reference
This survey aims to assess your organization's characteristics, as well as your attitudes and behaviors related to your current job Please indicate your level of agreement or disagreement with each statement by marking the corresponding number on the scale provided.
Being distinctive-being different from others 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Quick to take advantage of opportunities 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
High pay for good performance 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Having high expectations for performance 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1 I am willing to assist my colleagues who have heavy work loads 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
2 I am willing to support my colleagues who have been absent 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
3 I am willing to help other colleagues work productively 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
4 I am willing to help orient new employees even though it is not required 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1 I am always on time Attendance at work is above average 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
3 I obey company rules and regulations even when no one is watching and no evidence can be traced 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
4 I take the initiative to troubleshoot and solve problems before requesting help from my manager/ supervisor 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1 I try to avoid creating problems for my colleagues 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
2 I consult with related people who might be affected by my actions or decisions 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
3 I respect the rights and privileges of my colleagues 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
4 I show genuine concern and courtesy toward my colleagues, even under the most tiring business or personal situations 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1 I stay informed about developments in the company 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 2.I attend training/information sessions that I am encouraged to, but not required to attend 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
3 I offer suggestions for ways to improve operations in my company 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
4 I demonstrate concern about the image of the company 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1 I consume a lot of time complaining about trivial matters* 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
2 I express resentment with any changes introduced by management* 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
3 I think only about my work problem not others’* 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
4 I pay no attention to announcements, messages, or printed materials that provide information about the company* 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Please select the appropriate answer for each question
2 45 year old
5 How many years of full-time work experience do you have?
6 What is your position? Manager Supervisor Staff
THANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION
Xin chào, tôi là sinh viên chương trình thạc sĩ tại trường đại học kinh tế Tp Hồ Chí Minh, đang nghiên cứu ảnh hưởng của văn hóa doanh nghiệp đến thái độ làm việc tự giác và tích cực của nhân viên Nguồn nhân lực hiện nay được coi là tài sản vô giá của doanh nghiệp, và để cạnh tranh hiệu quả, các công ty cần đội ngũ nhân viên sẵn sàng vượt qua yêu cầu công việc, tuân thủ quy định, hỗ trợ đồng nghiệp và quan tâm đến hình ảnh cũng như sự phát triển của công ty Nghiên cứu của tôi nhằm xác định mối liên hệ và đo lường mức độ ảnh hưởng của văn hóa doanh nghiệp đến thái độ và hành vi làm việc tích cực của nhân viên.
Chúng tôi rất mong quý vị dành thời gian tham gia bảng khảo sát dưới đây Mọi thông tin trả lời sẽ được bảo mật, chỉ công bố kết quả tổng hợp Nếu quý vị quan tâm đến chủ đề này, bản báo cáo hoàn chỉnh sẽ được gửi đến để tham khảo.
Dựa trên kinh nghiệm làm việc tại công ty hiện tại, xin vui lòng cho biết mức độ đồng ý của bạn đối với các phát biểu dưới đây bằng cách khoanh tròn vào ô lựa chọn tương ứng.
Công ty tôi đặt chất lượng dịch vụ cung cấp lên hàng đầu 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Công ty tôi khuyến khích sự hợp tác giữa các thành viên để nâng cao hiệu quả công việc Chúng tôi luôn chấp nhận rủi ro trong kinh doanh nhằm tìm kiếm cơ hội phát triển Đặc biệt, công ty tôi tập trung vào việc đạt được kết quả công việc rõ ràng và những thành tựu đáng kể, từ đó xây dựng một môi trường làm việc năng động và sáng tạo.
Công ty tôi có một danh tiếng tốt 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Công ty tôi có sự đảm bảo ổn định về nghề nghiệp cho người lao động 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Công ty tôi có triết lý hoạt động kinh doanh rõ ràng 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Công ty tôi đề cao, khen thưởng cho những người lao động có thành tích tốt 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Công ty tôi định hướng làm việc đồng đội 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Công ty tôi đối xử với mọi người công bằng 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Công ty tôi được tổ chức tốt 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Công ty tôi duy trì được sự ổn định 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Công ty tôi khuyến khích việc chiụ trách nhiệm cá nhân 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Công ty tôi kì vọng cao về kết quả làm việc của người lao động 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Công ty tôi luôn học tập, rút kinh nghiệm từ thực tế 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Công ty tôi luôn sáng tạo, đổi mới 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Công ty tôi luôn tạo sự khác biệt với các công ty, tổ chức khác 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
