Exploring the Impact of Organizational Citizenship Behaviour on Workplace Performance: A Literature Review

Exploring the Impact of Organizational Citizenship Behaviour on Workplace Performance: A Literature Review

Abidah Saad^1*, Nor Asiah Mahmood^2*, Suhaida Ishak³, Rafiza Ramli⁴

¹ Fakulti Pengurusan Perniagaan, Universiti Teknologi MARA Cawangan Kedah, Kampus Sungai Petani, 08400 Merbok, Kedah, Malaysia

²College of Business Administration, Prince Sultan University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

³Faculty of Business, Information & Human Sciences, Infrastructure University Kuala Lumpur, Selangor, Malaysia.

⁴R&D Department, Lumileds Malaysia Sdn Bhd, Penang, Malaysia

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.8090301

Received: 04 October 2024; Accepted: 07 October 2024; Published: 25 October 2024

ABSTRACT

The present study explores the growing need for a deeper understanding of organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) and its impact on workplace performance, particularly in the context of evolving work environments such as remote work and digitalization. While previous research has identified OCB as a critical factor in organizational success, there is a gap in addressing its future-oriented aspects and long-term implications for both individuals and organizations. This study aims to examine how shifts in modern workplaces influence OCB, with a focus on how leadership styles and employee expectations shape these behaviors. A comprehensive literature review reveals that while OCB has been extensively studied, there is limited research on its role in hybrid workplaces. Findings suggest that digital transformation and flexible work environments enhance certain OCB dimensions, like helping behaviors and innovation, but may reduce traditional face-to-face cooperation. The study highlights the need for organizations to adapt their leadership approaches to foster OCB in these new contexts, emphasizing the importance of rethinking strategies such as leadership development, employee engagement, and performance management systems to sustain the positive benefits of OCB in modern workplaces.

Keywords: Remote Work, Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB), Teleworking, Job Satisfaction, Work-life Balance

INTRODUCTION

Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) is a critical aspect of workplace dynamics, characterized by voluntary actions that extend beyond formal job requirements, thereby enhancing organizational effectiveness and cohesion. OCB encompasses behaviors such as altruism, cooperation, and proactive engagement, which are not formally rewarded but significantly contribute to the overall functioning of an organization (Nadira, 2023; Gayatri & Emilisa, 2023). The importance of OCB is underscored by its positive correlation with productivity, teamwork, and resource optimization, which are essential for achieving superior organizational outcomes (Uma & Radhamani, 2022; Hossain, 2020; Zainuddin & Asaari, 2020). By fostering a culture that encourages such behaviors, organizations can create a more supportive and high-performing work environment, ultimately leading to enhanced success (Grego-Planer, 2019; Chiaburu et al., 2011; Vargas-Hernández & Vargas-González, 2022).

A comprehensive review of the literature reveals various conceptualizations of OCB, highlighting its significance across different organizational contexts. For instance, studies have identified job satisfaction and organizational commitment as key antecedents of OCB, suggesting that employees who are satisfied and committed are more likely to engage in extra-role behaviors (Zeinabadi, 2010; Fatoni et al., 2018). Furthermore, the role of leadership styles, such as servant leadership, has been shown to positively influence OCB, indicating that effective leadership can cultivate an environment conducive to voluntary employee engagement (Nurbianta et al., 2022; Vargas-Hernández & Vargas-González, 2022). Additionally, the psychological contract between employees and employers plays a crucial role in shaping OCB, as fulfilling intrinsic needs can motivate staff to exhibit citizenship behaviors (Dwiyanti et al., 2021; Dwiyanti et al., 2022).

In the context of contemporary work environments, where adaptability and collaboration are paramount, the relevance of OCB has been amplified. The rapid pace of technological advancements and changing workforce expectations necessitate strong interpersonal relationships and effective team dynamics, both of which are bolstered by OCB (Yoon et al., 2016; Goudarzvandchegini et al., 2011). Research indicates that OCB not only enhances morale but also instills a sense of purpose among employees, which is vital for maintaining high levels of engagement and productivity (Ahmadi et al., 2016; Yang et al., 2023). Moreover, by encouraging a culture of cooperation and proactive problem-solving, organizations can better navigate challenges and improve their overall resilience (Dhammika, 2014; Fatoni et al., 2018).

This study identifies a critical gap in the literature on OCB. While previous research has covered various aspects of OCB, there is still a need for a more comprehensive understanding. This gap underscores the importance of further research to refine theoretical frameworks and improve practical applications.

The article is structured as follows: it begins with an introduction outlining the study’s background and importance, followed by an in-depth literature review that situates the research. Next, the research gap is discussed in detail. The article concludes by outlining implications for future research and practice, summarizing the key contributions of the study.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Theoretical Foundations of OCB

Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) has evolved significantly since its introduction by Bateman and Organ in 1983, where it was defined as voluntary actions that contribute to organizational success (Naghdi & Shatalebi, 2013). Over time, the definition and scope of OCB have expanded, emphasizing its vital role in enhancing workplace dynamics and performance. Organ’s framework, developed in 1990, outlines five key dimensions of OCB: altruism, courtesy, sportsmanship, conscientiousness, and civic virtue (Podsakoff et al., 2000). Recent studies have explored links between OCB and factors such as psychological empowerment and employee well-being, reinforcing its importance in modern organizational settings (Nurbianta et al., 2022; Hossain, 2020). This reflects the growing recognition of how behaviors beyond formal duties foster positive organizational culture and productivity (Yang et al., 2023).

Each dimension of OCB plays a crucial role in improving organizational effectiveness. Altruism involves voluntarily helping colleagues, which nurtures stronger interpersonal relationships and a supportive work environment (Podsakoff et al., 2000). Conscientiousness emphasizes adherence to rules and procedures, ensuring responsible task execution. Civic virtue, on the other hand, reflects active participation in organizational activities and broader organizational issues (Goudarzvandchegini et al., 2011). Together, these dimensions strengthen organizational culture, improve team dynamics, and enhance overall performance (Nurbianta et al., 2022; Hossain, 2020). Such behaviors make employees feel valued and motivated, leading to improved organizational outcomes (Kelloway et al., 2002).

OCB is essential for driving organizational success by fostering a positive work atmosphere and improving performance. It encompasses behaviors that go beyond formal job expectations, such as altruism, conscientiousness, and civic virtue, all of which align with organizational goals (Hossain, 2020). Employees who engage in OCB tend to have higher levels of commitment and morale, translating into increased productivity and teamwork (Dwiyanti et al., 2021). Additionally, organizational environments that encourage OCB promote open communication and collaboration, enhancing overall effectiveness (Podsakoff et al., 2000; Yang et al., 2023). Thus, cultivating OCB is critical for organizations seeking to enhance operational efficiency and workplace culture (Hossain, 2020).

Antecedents of OCB

Internal factors such as job satisfaction and organizational commitment play crucial roles in shaping Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB). Job satisfaction, which refers to the positive feelings employees have towards their jobs, significantly drives OCB. When employees are content in their roles, they are more likely to engage in voluntary behaviors that benefit the organization. As Devece (2024) emphasizes, the correlation between job satisfaction and OCB is evident in higher education settings, where satisfied employees often go beyond their prescribed duties to support organizational success (Jufrizen et al., 2024). Similarly, organizational commitment, characterized by an emotional attachment to the organization, fosters OCB by instilling a sense of belonging and accountability (Grego-Planer, 2019). This attachment encourages employees to contribute to the organization’s objectives beyond their formal job descriptions (Uma & Radhamani, 2022; Dai et al., 2018).

External influences, particularly leadership styles and organizational culture, also significantly impact OCB. Leadership styles whether coercive, authoritative, or pacesetting affect how leaders inspire and engage their teams, shaping the overall climate of the organization (Grego-Planer, 2019). For example, ethical leadership has been shown to foster OCB by creating a supportive and encouraging environment for positive employee behavior (Nemr & Liu, 2021). Similarly, organizational culture, defined by shared values and practices, plays a crucial role in influencing employee behavior. A positive culture fosters collaboration and innovation, while a negative culture can lead to disengagement and increased turnover (Freire & Gonçalves, 2021). Recognizing the importance of these external factors is essential for organizations striving to build a work environment that supports long-term success and adaptability (Freire & Gonçalves, 2021).

Recent meta-analyses have further illuminated the intricate relationships between various antecedents and OCB outcomes. These studies demonstrate that factors such as psychological empowerment, job satisfaction, and organizational culture strongly influence OCB (Michel, 2016). For instance, Hartnell et al. (2019) found that empowered employees are more likely to engage in OCB, underscoring the role of empowering leadership in fostering supportive environments for discretionary behaviors (Zhang et al., 2020). The well-established link between job satisfaction and OCB also suggests that satisfied employees are more inclined to assist colleagues and contribute positively to the workplace atmosphere (Bakhri, 2024). Organizational culture further shapes these behaviors, motivating employees to engage in OCB when the culture is positive (Musringudin et al., 2021). These findings underscore the significance of internal and external factors and provide direction for future research on enhancing OCB within organizational settings.

Consequences of OCB

The connection between job satisfaction and individual performance is crucial for an organization’s success. Employees who are satisfied with their jobs tend to exhibit higher performance levels due to increased engagement, motivation, and commitment to their tasks (Saad et al., 2022). Bakotić (2016) emphasizes that job satisfaction is a significant predictor of employee performance, as satisfied employees are more likely to contribute positively to team dynamics and overall organizational performance Heriyadi et al., (2020). Furthermore, studies indicate that satisfied employees are less likely to engage in counterproductive behaviors, which can detract from organizational effectiveness (Muchtadin, 2023). Ziegler et al., (2012) also highlight that higher job satisfaction correlates with lower turnover rates, allowing organizations to save on recruitment and training costs while maintaining a stable and experienced workforce. Thus, enhancing job satisfaction should be a primary focus for employers aiming to improve individual performance and achieve stronger organizational outcomes (Juari, 2023).

Team dynamics are another critical factor influencing organizational performance. Positive interactions among team members foster collaboration, engagement, and motivation, making employees feel valued, which in turn leads to higher productivity and job satisfaction (Ziegler et al., 2012). A healthy team atmosphere can stimulate creativity and enhance problem-solving abilities, directly contributing to the organization’s overall success (Wang & Rong, 2015). Conversely, poor team dynamics characterized by conflict and ineffective communication can lower morale and productivity, ultimately hindering the achievement of organizational goals (Senen & Az-Zahra, 2021). Effective management of team dynamics is essential for creating cohesive teams capable of overcoming challenges and driving the organization forward (Chuang et al., 2019; Paillé, 2010).

While Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) can enhance workplace dynamics, it also presents potential downsides. Employees who frequently engage in OCB may experience burnout due to the emotional and physical demands of consistently exceeding their job responsibilities, particularly if their efforts go unrecognized or unrewarded (Walheiser et al., 2021). Johansson (2023) notes that this exhaustion can lead to decreased productivity and job satisfaction, potentially increasing turnover rates (Gonzalez, 2021). Furthermore, proactive employees may feel exploited when their willingness to assist and take initiative is taken for granted, fostering resentment and disengagement (Mikkelsen & Olsen, 2019). If organizations fail to acknowledge and support the extra efforts of these employees, they risk creating a culture of entitlement and unfairness, undermining the positive effects of OCB (Kolbe & Boos, 2019).

OCB in Various Contexts

Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) manifests differently in public and private sectors due to their distinct goals and operational contexts. In the public sector, OCB is often driven by a sense of civic duty and a commitment to public service, resulting in generally higher levels of OCB compared to the private sector, where behaviors are frequently motivated by profit and individual recognition (Ingrams, 2018; Geus et al., 2020). Public sector employees tend to engage in OCB as part of their dedication to community welfare, while private sector employees may exhibit OCB primarily to enhance personal career advancement or improve team performance (Sharma et al., 2010; Kim, 2006). Additionally, factors like job stability and organizational culture in the public sector foster a more collaborative and stable environment that encourages altruistic behaviors (Yeo et al., 2013; Glińska-Neweś & Szostek, 2018). These distinctions highlight the need for sector-specific strategies to effectively promote OCB.

Cultural factors also play a crucial role in shaping how OCB is perceived and enacted across different environments. Cultural dimensions such as collectivism and individualism significantly influence employee engagement in OCB. In collectivist cultures, where teamwork and group harmony are emphasized, employees are more likely to engage in behaviors that support the collective good (Ghaus et al., 2018). In contrast, in individualistic cultures, personal achievements and self-advocacy may take precedence, thereby shaping OCB differently (Kim, 2006). Moreover, the cultural context affects how organizations recognize and reward OCB, which in turn influences its expression. Attitudes toward authority and hierarchy further impact OCB, as demonstrated by cross-cultural studies showing variations in OCB across different societies (K’osuri, 2020; Bolino et al., 2015). For organizations aiming to foster OCB, understanding these cultural dynamics is crucial for creating a supportive and inclusive environment.

The relevance of OCB has also expanded in virtual teams and digital work environments, especially as remote and hybrid work models become more prevalent. In these settings, OCB is exhibited through behaviors like proactive communication, assisting colleagues, and collaborative problem-solving, all of which contribute to team effectiveness (Ajlouni et al., 2020). Strong virtual leadership is critical for fostering OCB in digital environments, as it helps build a culture of trust and support, enhancing team cohesion and motivation (Glińska-Neweś & Szostek, 2018). However, challenges like ambiguity and reduced accountability in virtual work can negatively impact employees’ psychological states, potentially diminishing their engagement in OCB (Finkelstein & Penner, 2004). Navigating cultural differences within virtual teams is also essential for improving satisfaction and performance (LePine et al., 2002). To foster OCB effectively in digital environments, organizations must develop thoughtful strategies to address these unique challenges.

Research Gap in Ocb Literature

Current research on Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) faces notable limitations, particularly regarding its scope and contextual understanding. One key issue is the lack of cross-disciplinary studies, which restricts a broader comprehension of OCB beyond the fields of management and organizational psychology. This narrow focus may prevent researchers from exploring OCB’s potential implications in other areas such as sociology, education, or public health, where its impact could be equally significant (Kerse, 2023). Additionally, much of the existing research is centered on Western contexts, potentially introducing cultural biases. OCB manifests differently across cultures, and an over-reliance on Western-based models may limit the relevance and applicability of findings in non-Western environments (Podsakoff et al., 2009). As cultural factors play a crucial role in shaping OCB, this limitation highlights the need for developing universally applicable theories and practices (Wijaya & Purba, 2020).

Furthermore, longitudinal studies are essential for advancing the understanding of OCB’s long-term effects. Such research allows scholars to observe how OCB behaviors and outcomes evolve over time, offering a more dynamic perspective on its impact. Longitudinal studies can reveal reciprocal relationships between OCB and key outcomes, such as employee well-being and job performance. For example, Reizer et al. (2021) found that OCB not only enhances happiness but also initiates a cycle where increased happiness encourages more OCB. Additionally, Eatough et al. (2011) emphasize the value of longitudinal designs in tracking how OCB’s effects develop and influence management practices. By adopting this approach, researchers can generate more accurate insights into the sustainability of OCB’s positive effects and uncover potential negative outcomes, such as burnout or fatigue (Lin & Peng, 2010), leading to more balanced and effective organizational strategies (Kerse, 2023).

Future Research Directions

The exploration of Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) in the context of Industry 4.0 and increasingly automated workplaces reveals significant changes in the dynamics between employees and advanced technologies. As organizations integrate automation and artificial intelligence, understanding how OCB evolves in these environments is crucial for fostering a collaborative culture that enhances both individual and organizational performance. Research suggests that OCB can serve as a stabilizing force amid the uncertainties introduced by technological advancements, helping employees adapt and encouraging innovation (Senen & Az-Zahra, 2021). Furthermore, promoting OCB in these settings can strengthen workplace relationships, leading to higher job satisfaction and commitment, even in the face of automation challenges (Chung, 2015). As organizations navigate these technological shifts, emphasizing OCB will likely be essential for maintaining employee engagement and ensuring effective teamwork in automated environments (Alhashedi et al., 2021).

The role of gender and diversity in shaping OCB has gained increasing attention, as these factors influence how employees engage in extra-role activities. Studies suggest that gender can affect the types of OCB exhibited; for instance, women often engage in more communal and helping behaviors, while men may display more assertive forms of citizenship (Ameer, 2017). Additionally, diversity whether racial, cultural, or generational affects OCB by influencing interpersonal relationships and perceptions of fairness within organizations. As workplace diversity increases, it becomes imperative for organizations to create inclusive environments where individuals from all backgrounds feel valued and encouraged to contribute through citizenship behaviors. The interaction between diversity and leadership styles, particularly transformational leadership, can enhance OCB by fostering inclusivity and engagement across different groups (Klotz et al., 2017).

The study of OCB in hybrid and remote work environments is increasingly relevant as the modern workplace continues to evolve. Research highlights that employees in remote or hybrid settings face unique challenges and opportunities in exhibiting OCB compared to those in traditional, office-based roles. Remote workers often demonstrate OCB through virtual collaboration and by assisting colleagues on digital platforms, while hybrid workers must navigate their behaviors across both in-person and virtual settings (Bhatti et al., 2019). However, the absence of physical supervision and reduced visibility in remote work can lead to a lack of recognition for OCB, potentially affecting how supervisors and peers perceive these contributions (Chen et al., 2022). Furthermore, the flexibility and autonomy associated with remote work can either encourage or hinder OCB, depending on how individuals experience these conditions (Chen, 2024). These findings suggest that while OCB can thrive in remote and hybrid environments, the nature of these settings reshapes how and where these behaviors occur, emphasizing the need for adaptive management strategies.

CONCLUSION

Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) plays a critical role in enhancing organizational effectiveness through voluntary, extra-role actions that are not formally rewarded but significantly boost group dynamics, collaboration, and employee morale (Podsakoff et al., 1997). By fostering a positive work environment, OCB motivates employees to go beyond their job requirements, promoting cooperation and improving social interactions among employees. This, in turn, can help mitigate workplace conflicts and enhance organizational performance (Goudarzvandchegini et al., 2011). The importance of OCB is underscored by its ability to support both organizational adaptability and growth, making it a vital tool for strengthening team cohesion and overall productivity.

However, there is a growing need for research to focus on the long-term role of OCB in modern workplaces, particularly as organizations face evolving trends like technological advancements and shifting workforce expectations. Current literature largely examines the immediate outcomes of OCB but lacks insight into how it can be developed to align with future organizational goals. Studies indicate that forward-looking strategies can enhance key components of OCB, such as altruism and civic virtue, to ensure sustainable organizational benefits (Dwiyanti et al., 2021). Furthermore, the role of psychological contracts in shaping OCB, particularly the relational and transactional agreements between employees and employers, highlights an area ripe for exploration. By integrating OCB into high-performance human resource practices, organizations can amplify its positive impact on long-term effectiveness and employee motivation (Sun et al., 2007).

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors would like to express their sincere gratitude to the Kedah State Research Committee, UiTM Kedah Branch, for the generous funding provided under the Tabung Penyelidikan Am. This support was crucial in facilitating the research and ensuring the successful publication of this article.

REFERENCES

1. Ahmadi, S., Bagheri, M., & Peymanfard, M. (2016). Relation between organizational citizenship behavior and human resources response: case study: 6th district of iran gas transmission operations. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences. https://doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2016.v7n3s2p140
2. Ajlouni, W., Kaur, G., & Alomari, S. (2020). The impact of employees’ gender and age on organizational citizenship behavior using a fuzzy approach. Social Science Computer Review, 39(6), 1237-1252. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439320971234
3. Alhashedi, A., Bardai, B., Al-Dubai, M., & Alaghbari, M. (2021). Organizational citizenship behavior role in mediating the effect of transformational leadership on organizational performance in gold industry of saudi arabia. Verslas Teorija Ir Praktika, 22(1), 39-54. https://doi.org/10.3846/btp.2021.12774
4. Ameer, N. (2017). Impact of organizational culture on employee performance and organizational citizenship behavior (ocb). International Journal of Business and Administrative Studies, 3(5). https://doi.org/10.20469/ijbas.3.10004-5
5. Aqli, Z. and Syafi’i, A. (2019). Public employees’ risk aversion and organizational citizenship behavior: the effects of ethical leadership, work culture and public service motivation. Public Administration Issues, (6), 7-22. https://doi.org/10.17323/1999-5431-2019-0-6-7-22
6. Bakhri, S. (2024). Antecedent of organizational citizenship behavior (ocb): leadership, organizational commitment and organizational culture. JuBIR, 2(2), 141. https://doi.org/10.31315/jubir.v2i2.9942
7. Bhatti, M., Ju, Y., Akram, U., Bhatti, M., Akram, Z., & Bilal, M. (2019). Impact of participative leadership on organizational citizenship behavior: mediating role of trust and moderating role of continuance commitment: evidence from the pakistan hotel industry. Sustainability, 11(4), 1170. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11041170
8. Bolino, M., Hsiung, H., Harvey, J., & LePine, J. (2015). “Well, i’m tired of tryin’!” organizational citizenship behavior and citizenship fatigue. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(1), 56-74. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037583
9. Chang, C., Tsai, M., & Tsai, M. (2011). The organizational citizenship behaviors and organizational commitments of organizational members influences the effects of organizational learning. International Journal of Trade Economics and Finance, 61-66. https://doi.org/10.7763/ijtef.2011.v2.79
10. Chen, X. (2024). Is it influence or pressure? a study on the dual path impact of self-sacrificial leadership on employee organizational citizenship behavior. Open Journal of Business and Management, 12(01), 339-349. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojbm.2024.121022
11. Chiaburu, D., Oh, I., Berry, C., Li, N., & Gardner, R. (2011). The five-factor model of personality traits and organizational citizenship behaviors: a meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(6), 1140-1166. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024004
12. Chuang, Y., Chiang, H., & Lin, A. (2019). Helping behaviors convert negative affect into job satisfaction and creative performance. Personnel Review, 48(6), 1530-1547. https://doi.org/10.1108/pr-01-2018-0038
13. Chung, Y. (2015). The role of person–organization fit and perceived organizational support in the relationship between workplace ostracism and behavioral outcomes. Australian Journal of Management, 42(2), 328-349. https://doi.org/10.1177/0312896215611190
14. Dai, Y., Hou, Y., Chen, K., & Zhuang, W. (2018). To help or not to help: antecedents of hotel employees’ organizational citizenship behavior. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 30(3), 1293-1313. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijchm-03-2016-0160
15. Dhammika, K. (2014). Organizational and union citizenship behavior: are they unilateral or multilateral in sri lankan public sector context. Kelaniya Journal of Management, 2(2), 23-31. https://doi.org/10.4038/kjm.v2i2.6548
16. Dwiyanti, R., Rahardjo, P., Hamzah, I. F., & Panatik, S. A. B. (2022). Moderating effect of organizational culture in the relationship between psychological contracts and organizational citizenship behavior among university staffs in Indonesian and Malaysian universities. QAS, 23(188). https://doi.org/10.47750/qas/23.188.28
17. Dwiyanti, R., Rahardjo, P., Hamzah, I., & Panatik, S. (2021). The effect of psychological contracts: transactional, relational, balance on organizational citizenship behaviors university staff in indonesia and malaysia. International Journal of Scientific Research and Management, 9(02), 550-554. https://doi.org/10.18535/ijsrm/v9i2.sh01
18. Eatough, E., Chang, C., Miloslavic, S., & Johnson, R. (2011). Relationships of role stressors with organizational citizenship behavior: a meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(3), 619-632. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021887
19. Fatoni, M., Prihatini, D., & Suryaningsih, I. (2018). The role of ocb in mediating the effect of employee engagement and organizational commitment on employee performance: contract vs permanent employees. International Journal of Scientific Research and Management, 6(08). https://doi.org/10.18535/ijsrm/v6i8.el03
20. Finkelstein, M. and Penner, L. (2004). Predicting organizational citizenship behavior: integrating the functional and role identity approaches. Social Behavior and Personality an International Journal, 32(4), 383-398. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2004.32.4.383
21. Freire, C. and Gonçalves, J. (2021). The relationship between responsible leadership and organizational citizenship behavior in the hospitality industry. Sustainability, 13(9), 4705. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13094705
22. Gayatri, A. and Emilisa, N. (2023). Factors affecting organizational effectiveness at employees of pt. cimb merchant bank. International Journal of Social Health, 2(2), 45-55. https://doi.org/10.58860/ijsh.v2i2.21
23. Geus, C., Ingrams, A., Tummers, L., & Pandey, S. (2020). Organizational citizenship behavior in the public sector: a systematic literature review and future research agenda. Public Administration Review, 80(2), 259-270. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13141
24. Ghaus, B., Lodhi, I., & Shakir, M. (2018). Much of a muchness? the role of gender similarity in a relationship between lmx and ocb. Global Social Sciences Review, III(IV), 284-308. https://doi.org/10.31703/gssr.2018(iii-iv).19
25. Glińska-Neweś, A. and Szostek, D. (2018). Organizational citizenship behaviors in public and private sector. International Journal of Contemporary Management, 17(1). https://doi.org/10.4467/24498939ijcm.18.003.8382
26. Gonzalez, R. (2021). Innovative performance of project teams: the role of organizational structure and knowledge-based dynamic capability. Journal of Knowledge Management, 26(5), 1164-1186. https://doi.org/10.1108/jkm-03-2021-0259
27. Goudarzvandchegini, M., Gilaninia, S., & Abdesonboli, R. (2011). Organizational justice and organizational citizenship behavior case study: rasht public hospitals. International Journal of Business Administration, 2(4). https://doi.org/10.5430/ijba.v2n4p42
28. Grego-Planer, D. (2019). The relationship between organizational commitment and organizational citizenship behaviors in the public and private sectors. Sustainability, 11(22), 6395. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11226395
29. Hannani, S., Majidian, F., Amiri, F., & Azadi, N. (2022). The relationship between perceived organizational justice with organizational-citizenship behavior and organizational trust among iranian surgical technologists in iran university of medical sciences in 2021. Shiraz E-Medical Journal, 23(10). https://doi.org/10.5812/semj-122993
30. Heriyadi, H., Tjahjono, H., & Rahayu, M. (2020). Improving organizational citizenship behavior through job satisfaction, leader-member exchange, and work-life balance. Binus Business Review, 11(2), 97-104. https://doi.org/10.21512/bbr.v11i2.6193
31. Hossain, M. (2020). Organizational citizenship behavior and organizational commitment among clinical nurses in bangladesh. Open Journal of Nursing, 10(07), 693-704. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojn.2020.107049
32. Ingrams, A. (2018). Organizational citizenship behavior in the public and private sectors: a multilevel test of public service motivation and traditional antecedents. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 40(2), 222-244. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371×18800372
33. Islam, T. and Tariq, J. (2018). Learning organizational environment and extra-role behaviors. The Journal of Management Development, 37(3), 258-270. https://doi.org/10.1108/jmd-01-2017-0039
34. Juari, S. (2023). The influence of talent management and job engagement on job satisfaction and organization citizenship behaviour with person-organization fit as a mediation variable at perumda tirta sakti., 403-411. https://doi.org/10.2991/978-94-6463-158-6_37
35. Jufrizen, Muslih, Gultom, D. K., & Sari, M. (2024). Antecedent organizational citizenship behavior and service quality for private higher education administrative personnel in Indonesia. QAS, 25(201). https://doi.org/10.47750/qas/25.201.29
36. K’osuri, M. A., & Otuya, W. (2020). Organizational citizenship behaviour, psychological empowerment and competitive advantage of the public health sector in Kenya: A review. The Strategic Journal of Business & Change Management, 7(1), 601–614. https://doi.org/10.61426/sjbcm.v7i1.1554
37. Kelloway, E., Loughlin, C., Barling, J., & Nault, A. (2002). Self‐reported counterproductive behaviors and organizational citizenship behaviors: separate but related constructs. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 10(1-2), 143-151. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2389.00201
38. Kerse, Y. (2023). The effect of the internal customer (employee) on the external customer in citizenship behavior: a mediated model through customer support perception. Marketing and Management of Innovations, 14(3), 9-16. https://doi.org/10.21272/mmi.2023.3-02
39. Kim, S. (2006). Public service motivation and organizational citizenship behavior in korea. International Journal of Manpower, 27(8), 722-740. https://doi.org/10.1108/01437720610713521
40. Kılınç, A. (2014). A quantitative study of the relationship between distributed leadership and organizational citizenship behavior: perceptions of turkish primary school teachers. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching, 3(2). https://doi.org/10.5430/jct.v3n2p69
41. Klotz, A., Bolino, M., Song, H., & Stornelli, J. (2017). Examining the nature, causes, and consequences of profiles of organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 39(5), 629-647. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2259
42. Kolbe, M. and Boos, M. (2019). Laborious but elaborate: the benefits of really studying team dynamics. Frontiers in Psychology, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01478
43. LePine, J., Erez, A., & Johnson, D. (2002). The nature and dimensionality of organizational citizenship behavior: a critical review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(1), 52-65. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.1.52
44. Lin, C. and Peng, T. (2010). From organizational citizenship behaviour to team performance: the mediation of group cohesion and collective efficacy. Management and Organization Review, 6(1), 55-75. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-8784.2009.00172.x
45. Megasari, I., Wahyu, W., & Saleh, M. (2022). The effect of principal academic supervision and job satisfaction on organizational citizenship behavior (ocb) through teacher work motivation. International Journal of Social Science and Human Research, 05(12). https://doi.org/10.47191/ijsshr/v5-i12-83
46. Michel, J. (2016). Antecedents of organizational citizenship behaviors: examining the incremental validity of self-interest and prosocial motives. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 24(3), 385-400. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051816683895
47. Mikkelsen, A. and Olsen, E. (2019). The influence of change-oriented leadership on work performance and job satisfaction in hospitals – the mediating roles of learning demands and job involvement. Leadership in Health Services, 32(1), 37-53. https://doi.org/10.1108/lhs-12-2016-0063
48. Muchtadin, M. (2023). The influence of job satisfaction on organizational citizenship behavior through mediating resilience in millennial workers. SSIJ, 1(3), 23-31. https://doi.org/10.60036/ssijvol1iss3art3
49. Musringudin, M., Dinihari, Y., & Afriantoni, A. (2021). Job satisfaction, organizational commitment and organizational citizenship behavior of high school principals. Al-Ishlah Jurnal Pendidikan, 13(3), 3030-3039. https://doi.org/10.35445/alishlah.v13i3.1371
50. Nadira, W. (2023). The effect of organizational culture and organizational commitment on organizational citizenship behavior of employees in pegadaian regional office 1 medan. International Journal of Progressive Sciences and Technologies, 38(2), 302. https://doi.org/10.52155/ijpsat.v38.2.5324
51. Naghdi, M. and Shatalebi, B. (2013). The predictability of the organizational citizenship behavior through emotional intelligence dimensions in personnel of isfahan municipality. Kuwait Chapter of Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review, 2(5), 36-44. https://doi.org/10.12816/0001186
52. Nemr, M. and Liu, Y. (2021). The impact of ethical leadership on organizational citizenship behaviors: moderating role of organizational cynicism. Cogent Business & Management, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2020.1865860
53. Nurbianta, N., Consuelo, J., Ahmadong, A., & Muslicha, A. (2022). Assessment study of adversity quotient and servant leadership to improve organizational citizenship behavior: strengthening managerial competencies of education leader. International Journal of Educational Management and Innovation, 3(2), 124-137. https://doi.org/10.12928/ijemi.v3i2.5241
54. Paillé, P. (2010). Perceived stressful work, citizenship behaviour and intention to leave the organization in a high turnover environment: examining the mediating role of job satisfaction. Journal of Management Research, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.5296/jmr.v3i1.487
55. Podsakoff, N., Whiting, S., Podsakoff, P., & Blume, B. (2009). Individual- and organizational-level consequences of organizational citizenship behaviors: a meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(1), 122-141. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013079
56. Podsakoff, P., Ahearne, M., & MacKenzie, S. (1997). Organizational citizenship behavior and the quantity and quality of work group performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(2), 262-270. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.82.2.262
57. Podsakoff, P., MacKenzie, S., Paine, J., & Bachrach, D. (2000). Organizational citizenship behaviors: a critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research. Journal of Management, 26(3), 513-563. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920630002600307
58. Purwantoro, H. and Bagyo, Y. (2019). Citizenship organizational behavior ability to increase the effect of organizational climate, work motivation, and organizational justice on employee performance. Mec-J (Management and Economics Journal), 3(2), 195. https://doi.org/10.18860/mec-j.v3i2.7455
59. Reizer, A., Oren, L., & Hornik, Y. (2021). The moderating role of attachment in the associations between group variables and ocb. Sage Open, 11(4), 215824402110672. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211067246
60. Saad, A., Ishak, S., Syed Abu Bakar, S. M., Singh, H., Sandhu, S. K., & Mahmood, N. A. (2022). Mediating role of work engagement between positive emotions and individual work performance in the banking industry in Peninsular Malaysia. Malaysian Journal of Consumer and Family Economics, 29, 251-277.
61. Senen, S. and Az-Zahra, V. (2021). The effect of organizational culture on motivation and job satisfaction and its impact on organizational citizenship behavior (ocb) at the office of pt. permodalan nasional madani (pt. pnm) garut branch. https://doi.org/10.2991/aebmr.k.210831.045
62. Sharma, J., Bajpai, N., & Holani, U. (2010). Organizational citizenship behavior in public and private sector and its impact on job satisfaction: a comparative study in indian perspective. International Journal of Business and Management, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.5539/ijbm.v6n1p67
63. Sun, L., Aryee, S., & Law, K. (2007). High-performance human resource practices, citizenship behavior, and organizational performance: a relational perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 50(3), 558-577. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2007.25525821
64. Uma, R. and Radhamani, R. (2022). Job satisfaction as antecedent of organizational citizenship behavior: an empirical study among academicians. Nmims Management Review, 30(04), 42-63. https://doi.org/10.53908/nmmr.300403
65. Vargas-Hernández, J. and Vargas-González, O. (2022). The implications of managerial and leadership styles, and organizational innovation on organizational citizenship behavior. Acta Scientiarum Polonorum – Oeconomia, 21(1), 5-13. https://doi.org/10.22630/aspe.2022.21.1.1
66. Walheiser, D., Schwens, C., Steinberg, P., & Cadogan, J. (2021). Greasing the wheels or blocking the path? organizational structure, product innovativeness, and new product success☆. Journal of Business Research, 126, 489-503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.12.021
67. Wang, S. and Rong, L. (2015). The organizational design method for scientific research team based on computational organization theory. https://doi.org/10.2991/jimet-15.2015.102
68. Wijaya, F. and Purba, D. (2020). Perceived workload and organizational citizenship behavior (ocb): the role of psychological empowerment. Psikohumaniora Jurnal Penelitian Psikologi, 5(2), 219-230. https://doi.org/10.21580/pjpp.v5i2.3694
69. Yang, S., Zhang, L., & Wang, L. (2023). Key factors of sustainable development of organization: bibliometric analysis of organizational citizenship behavior. Sustainability, 15(10), 8261. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15108261
70. Yeo, M., Ananthram, S., Teo, S., & Pearson, C. (2013). Leader–member exchange and relational quality in a singapore public sector organization. Public Management Review, 17(10), 1379-1402. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2013.806573
71. Yoon, D., Jang, J., & Lee, J. (2016). Environmental management strategy and organizational citizenship behaviors in the hotel industry. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 28(8), 1577-1597. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijchm-10-2014-0498
72. Zainuddin, M. and Asaari, M. (2020). Leadership styles and organizational commitment with mediation of organizational citizenship behavior among bahraini managers. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 11(12). https://doi.org/10.30845/ijbss.v11n12p18
73. Zeinabadi, H. (2010). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as antecedents of organizational citizenship behavior (ocb) of teachers. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 5, 998-1003. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.07.225
74. Zhang, Y., Liu, G., Zhang, L., Xu, S., & Cheung, M. (2020). Psychological ownership: a meta-analysis and comparison of multiple forms of attachment in the workplace. Journal of Management, 47(3), 745-770. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206320917195
75. Ziegler, R., Hagen, B., & Diehl, M. (2012). Relationship between job satisfaction and job performance: job ambivalence as a moderator. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42(8), 2019-2040. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2012.00929.x
76. Ziegler, R., Schlett, C., Casel, K., & Diehl, M. (2012). The role of job satisfaction, job ambivalence, and emotions at work in predicting organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 11(4), 176-190. https://doi.org/10.1027/1866-5888/a000071