Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-45l2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T18:22:28.471Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

From Organizational Citizenship Behaviour to Team Performance: The Mediation of Group Cohesion and Collective Efficacy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 February 2015

Cheng-Chen (Timothy) Lin  and
Tai-Kuang (T. K.) Peng
Cheng-Chen (Timothy) Lin
Affiliation:
National Pingtung University of Science and Technology, Taiwan
Tai-Kuang (T. K.) Peng
Affiliation:
I-Shou University, Taiwan
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

What is the relationship between individual members' organizational citizenship behaviours (OCB) and team-level performance? Using a social cognitive perspective, the current study proposes that the relationship is mediated by a team's cohesion and collective efficacy. We collected data at two points in time from three sources with a sample of 462 salespersons representing 62 teams (62 branches) of a financial institute in Taiwan. The results support the theoretical argument that OCB positively influences organizational performance. Furthermore, group cohesion and collective efficacy fully mediated the direct effects of OCB towards individuals and the organization on team performance. Theoretical and practical implications of the results are discussed.

Keywords

collective efficacygroup cohesionorganizational citizenship behaviourteam performance集体效能、团队内聚力、组织公民行为、团队绩效
Type
Articles
Information
Management and Organization Review , Volume 6 , Issue 1 , March 2010 , pp. 55 - 75
Copyright
Copyright © International Association for Chinese Management Research 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bachrach, D. G., Powell, B. C., Collins, B. J., & Richey, R. G. 2006. Effects of task interdependence on the relationship between helping behavior and group performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(6): 1396–1405.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bandura, A. 1977. Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Bandura, A. 1986. Social foundations of thought and action: A social-cognitive view. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Bandura, A. 1997. Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.Google Scholar
Bandura, A. 2000. Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(3): 75–78.Google Scholar
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. 1986. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6): 1173–1182.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bateman, T. S., & Organ, D. W. 1983. Job satisfaction and the good soldier: The relationship between affect and employee ‘citizenship’. Academy of Management Journal, 26(4): 587–595.Google Scholar
Belsley, D., Kuh, E., & Welsch, R. 1980. Regression diagnostics: Identifying influential data and sources of collinearity. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Blau, P. M. 1977. Inequality and heterogeneity. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Bliese, P. D. 2000. Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. In Klein, K. J. & Kozlowski, S. W. J. (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions: 349–381. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Bolino, M. C., Turnley, W. H., & Bloodgood, J. M. 2002. Citizenship behavior and the creation of social capital in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 27(4): 505–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S.J. 1993. Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of contextual performance. In Schmitt, N. & Borman, W. C. (Eds.), Personnel selection in organizations: 71–98. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Cartwright, D., & Zander, A. 1960. Group cohesiveness: Introduction. In Cartwright, D. & Zander, A. (Eds.), Group dynamics: Research and theory (2nd ed.): 69–94. New York: Harper Row.Google Scholar
Chan, D. 1998. Functional relations among constructs in the same content domain at different levels of analysis: A typology of composition models. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(2): 234–246.Google Scholar
Chen, X.-P., Lam, S. S. K., Naumann, S. E., & Schraubroeck, J. 2005. Group citizenship behavior: Conceptualization and preliminary tests of its antecedents and consequences. Management and Organization Review, 1(2): 273–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, S. G., & Bailey, D. E. 1997. What makes teams work: Group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite. Journal of Management, 23(3): 239–290.Google Scholar
Dobbins, G. H., & Zaccaro, S. J. 1986. The effects of group cohesion and leader behavior on subordinate satisfaction. Group and Organization Studies, 11(3): 203–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunlop, P. D., & Lee, L. 2004. Workplace deviance, organizational citizenship behavior, and business unit performance: The bad apples do spoil the whole barrel. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(1): 67–80.Google Scholar
Earley, P. C. 1994. Self or group? Cultural effects of training on self-efficacy and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(1): 89–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Efron, B., & Tibshirani, R. J. 1993. An introduction to the bootstrap. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
Ehrhard, M. G., & Naumann, S. E. 2004. Organizational citizenship behavior in work groups: A group norm approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(6): 960–974.Google Scholar
Ehrhart, M. G., Bliese, P. D., & Thomas, J. L. 2006. Unit-level OCB and unit effectiveness: Examining the incremental effect of helping behavior. Human Performance, 19(2): 159–173.Google Scholar
Farh, J. L., Earley, P. C., & Lin, S. C. 1997. Impetus for action: A cultural analysis of justice and organizational citizenship behavior in Chinese society. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(3): 421–444.Google Scholar
Farh, J. L., Zhong, C. B., & Organ, D. W. 2004. Organizational citizenship behavior in the People's Republic of China. Organization Science, 15(2): 241–253.Google Scholar
Festinger, L. 1968. Informal social communication. In Cartwright, D. & Zander, A. (Eds.), Group dynamics: Research and theory (3rd ed.): 182–191. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
George, J. M., & Bettenhausen, K. 1990. Understanding prosocial behavior, sales performance, and turnover: A group-level analysis in a service context. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(6): 698–709.Google Scholar
Glick, W. H. 1985. Conceptualizing and measuring organizational and psychological climate: Pitfalls in multilevel research. Academy of Management Review, 10(3): 601–616.Google Scholar
Gully, S. M., Devine, D. S., & Whitney, D. J. 1995. A meta-analysis of cohesion and performance: Effects of level of analysis and task interdependence. Small Group Research, 26(4): 497–520.Google Scholar
Gully, S. M., Incalcaterra, K. A., Joshi, A., & Beaubien, J. M. 2002. A meta-analysis of team-efficacy, potency, and performance: Interdependence and level of analysis as moderators of observed relationships. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(5): 819–832.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hui, C., Law, K. S., & Chen, Z. X. 1999. A structural equation model of the effects of negative affectivity, leader-member exchange, and perceived job mobility on in-role and extra-role performance: A Chinese case. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 77(1): 3–21.Google Scholar
Hui, C., Lee, C., & Rousseau, D. M. 2004. Psychological contract and organizational citizenship behavior in China: Investigating generalizability and instrumentality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(2): 311–321.Google Scholar
Jackson, S. E., & Joshi, A. 2004. Diversity in social context: A multi-attribute, multilevel analysis of team diversity and sales performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(6): 675–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
James, L. R., Demaree, R. G., & Wolf, G. 1984. Estimating within-group interrater reliability with and without response bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69(1): 85–98.Google Scholar
Janis, I. L. 1982. Groupthink: Psychological studies of policy decisions and fiascoes. Boston, MA: Houghton-Mifflin.Google Scholar
Jex, S. M., & Bliese, P. D. 1999. Efficacy beliefs as a moderator of the impact of work-related stressors: A multilevel study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(3): 349–361.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jung, D. I., & Sosik, J. J. 2002. Transformational leadership in work groups: The role of empowerment, cohesiveness, and collective-efficacy on perceived group performance. Small Group Research, 33(3): 313–336.Google Scholar
Karambayya, R. 1989. Contexts for organizational citizenship behavior: Do high performing and satisfying units have better ‘citizens’. York University Working Paper, North York, Ontario, Canada.Google Scholar
Kidwell, R. E. Jr, Mossholder, K. W., & Bennett, N. 1997. Cohesiveness and organizational citizenship behavior: A multilevel analysis using work groups and individuals. Journal of Management, 23(6): 775–793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koys, D. J. 2001. The effects of employee satisfaction, organizational citizenship behavior, and turnover on organizational effectiveness: A unit-level, longitudinal study. Personnel Psychology, 54(1): 101–114.Google Scholar
Lawler, E. J., Thye, S. R., & Yoon, J. 2000. Emotion and group cohesion in productive exchange. American Journal of Sociology, 16(3): 616–657.Google Scholar
Lee, C., & Farh, J. L. 2004. Joint effects of group efficacy and gender diversity on group cohesion and performance. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 53(1): 136–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., Hoffman, J. M., West, S. G., & Sheets, V. 2002. A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, 7(1): 83–104.Google Scholar
MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., & Williams, J. 2004. Confidence limits for the indirect effect: Distribution of the product and resampling methods. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39(1): 99–128.Google Scholar
Maddux, J. E. 2002. Self-efficacy. In Snyder, C. R. & Lopez, S.J. (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology: 277–287. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mathieu, J. E., DeShon, R. P., & Bergh, D. D. 2008. Mediational inferences in organizational research: Then, now, and beyond. Organizational Research Methods, 11(2): 203–223.Google Scholar
Mossholder, K. W., Settoon, R. P., & Henagan, S. C. 2005. A relational perspective on turnover: Examining structural, attitudinal, and behavioral predictors. Academy of Management Journal, 48(4): 607–618.Google Scholar
Mullen, B., & Cooper, C. 1994. The relation between group cohesiveness and performance: An integration. Psychological Bulletin, 115(2): 210–227.Google Scholar
Organ, D. W. 1988. Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Organ, D. W. 1997. Organizational citizenship behavior: It's construct clean-up time. Human Performance, 10(2): 85–98.Google Scholar
Organ, D. W., & Ryan, K. 1995. A meta-analytic review of attitudinal and dispositional predictors of organizational citizenship behavior. Personnel Psychology, 48(4): 775–802.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Organ, D. W., Podsakoff, P. M., & MacKenzie, S. B. 2006. Organizational citizenship behavior: It nature, antecedents, and consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Podsakoff, P. M., & MacKenzie, S. B. 1994. Organizational citizenship behavior and sales unit effectiveness. Journal of Marketing Research, 31(3): 351–363.Google Scholar
Podsakoff, P. M., & MacKenzie, S. B. 1997. Impact of organizational citizenship behavior on performance: A review and suggestions for further research. Human Performance, 10(2): 133–151.Google Scholar
Podsakoff, P. M., Ahearne, M., & MacKenzie, S. B. 1997. Organizational citizenship behavior and the quantity and quality of work group performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(2): 262–270.Google Scholar
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B., & Bachrach, D. G. 2000. Organizational citizenship behaviors: A critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future study. Journal of Management, 26(3): 513–563.Google Scholar
Podsakoff, N. P., Whiting, S. W., Podsakoff, P. M., & Blume, B. D. 2009. Individual level- and organization level-consequences of organizational citizenship behavior: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(1): 122–141.Google Scholar
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. 2008. Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3): 879–891.Google Scholar
Rousseau, D. M. 1985. Issues of level in organizational research: Multi-level and cross-level perspectives. In Cummings, L. L. & Staw, B. M. (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior, vol. 7: 1–38. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
Schnake, M. E., & Dumler, M. P. 2003. Levels of measurement and analysis issues in organizational citizenship behavior rescarch.Journal of Organizational and Occupational Psychology, 76(3): 283–301.Google Scholar
Smith, C. A., Organ, D. W., & Near, J. P. 1983. Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(4): 653–663.Google Scholar
Stajkovic, A. D., & Lee, D. 2001. A meta-analysis of the relationship between collective efficacy and group performance. Paper presented at the meeting of the Academy of Management, Washington, DC, August, 2001.Google Scholar
Staw, B. M. 1975. Attribution of the ‘causes’ of performance: A general alternative interpretation of cross-sectional research on organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 13(3): 414–432.Google Scholar
Sun, L. Y., Aryee, S., & Law, K. S. 2007. High-performance human resource practices, citizenship behavior, and organizational performance: A relational perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 50(3): 558–577.Google Scholar
Tasa, K., Taggar, S., & Seijts, G. H. 2007. The development of collective efficacy in teams: A multilevel and longitudinal perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(1): 17–27.Google Scholar
Taylor, A. B., MacKinnon, D. P., & Tein, J.-Y. 2008. Tests of three-path mediated effect. Organizational Research Methods, 11(2): 241–269.Google Scholar
Tsui, A. 2009. Editor's introduction – Autonomy of inquiry: Shaping the future of emerging scientific communities. Management and Organization Review, 5(1): 1–14.Google Scholar
Tsui, A., & Gutek, B. 1999. Demographic differences in organizations. New York: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
van Knippenberg, D., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Honian, A. C. 2004. Work group diversity and group performance: An integrative model and research agenda. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(6): 1008–1022.Google Scholar
Walz, S. M., & Niehoff, B. P. 2000. Organizational citizenship behaviors: Their relationship to organizational effectiveness. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 24(3): 301–319.Google Scholar
Williams, L. J., & Anderson, S. E. 1991. Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behavior. Journal of Management, 17(3): 601–617.Google Scholar
Yen, H. R., & Niehoff, B. P. 2004. Organizational citizenship behavior and organizational effectiveness: Examining relationships in Taiwanese banks. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34(8): 1617–1637.Google Scholar