Relationship Quality and Relationship Context as Antecedents of Person-and Task-Focused Interpersonal Citizenship Behavior PDF

Preview

Summary

Journal of Applied Psychology Copyright 2002 by the American Psychological Association, Inc. 2002, Vol. 87, No. 2, 255–267 0021-9010/02/$5.00 DOI: 10.1037//0021-9010.87.2.255 Relationship Quality and Relationship Context as Antecedents of Person- and Task-Focused Interpersonal Citizenship Behavior R...

Description

Accelerat ing t he world's research.

Relationship Quality and Relationship Context as Antecedents of Person-and Task-Focused Interpersonal Citizenshi... Randall Settoon, Kevin Mossholder

Related papers

Download a PDF Pack of t he best relat ed papers 

Linking personalit y t o int erpersonal cit izenship behaviour: T he moderat ing effect of empat hy Kevin Mossholder 0QDyj6Wr Ke Rv XRp5Bn sachin lamba All in a day's work": how follower individual differences and just ice percept ions predict OCB role definit i… Daniel B. Turban

Journal of Applied Psychology 2002, Vol. 87, No. 2, 255–267

Copyright 2002 by the American Psychological Association, Inc. 0021-9010/02/$5.00 DOI: 10.1037//0021-9010.87.2.255

Relationship Quality and Relationship Context as Antecedents of Person- and Task-Focused Interpersonal Citizenship Behavior Randall P. Settoon

Kevin W. Mossholder

Southeastern Louisiana University

Louisiana State University

A model hypothesizing relationship quality and relationship context as antecedents of two complementary forms of interpersonal citizenship behavior (ICB) was tested. Measures with coworkers as the frame of reference were used to collect data from 273 individuals working in 2 service-oriented organizations. As hypothesized, variables reflecting relationship quality were associated with person-focused ICB, as mediated by empathic concern. Also as hypothesized, a relationship context variable, network centrality, exhibited a direct relationship with task-focused ICB. Unexpectedly, network centrality was directly associated with person-focused ICB, and empathic concern was associated with task-focused ICB. The results are discussed, and implications for research and practice are offered.

In a review of the organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) literature, Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine, and Bachrach (2000) suggested that future research and theory development effort should be directed toward identifying unique antecedents of different forms of citizenship behavior. Researchers have noted that organizational citizenship comprises several characteristically different though related types of behaviors and that employees may selectively choose among these rather than engage equally in all (Motowidlo, 2000; Organ, 1997; Van Dyne, Cummings, & McLean-Parks, 1995). Further, it has been suggested that types of OCB can be categorized according to the intended primary beneficiary or target of the behavior (Williams & Anderson, 1991). Of late, construct clarification efforts (Coleman & Borman, 2000) and empirical research (S. E. Anderson & Williams, 1996) have directed attention at citizenship behavior oriented toward coworkers and immediate others, perhaps because of the role of interpersonal responsiveness in management practices such as self-directed work teams, decentralized decision making, and empowerment. Such behavior can contribute to increased productivity (Conway, 1999) and may serve as a viable means of coordinating activities between employees (Podsakoff, Ahearne, & MacKenzie, 1997). It has been suggested that several current psychological models are insufficient for understanding behaviors that are primarily intended to help other individuals (Korsgaard, Meglino, & Lester, 1997). Although it is within the confines of interpersonal relationships that some forms of citizenship behavior most frequently occur, with few exceptions (e.g., McAllister, 1995) researchers

have not considered them within a relational framework. Also, as noted by Podsakoff et al. (2000), research examining citizenship behavior in connection with the task environment has been noticeably absent. To address these research gaps, in the present study we examined two complementary forms of interpersonal citizenship behavior (ICB), person- and task-focused ICB, and propose a model comprising antecedents that are particularly salient in connection with these forms of ICB. In this regard, previous research has suggested two categories of antecedents, which we refer to as relationship quality and relationship context, that may be linked to ICB. More specifically, ICB has been found to be an outcome of high-quality relationships that promote mutual concern and an increased sensitivity to the needs of others (e.g., McAllister, 1995). Alternatively, ICB may be the result of “opportunity structures” created by social and workflow systems in the organization (S. E. Anderson & Williams, 1996; Lamertz, 1999). It has long been recognized that some individuals are more able to provide assistance than others because they are in a better position to do so (Burke, Duncan, & Weir, 1976). Certain individuals help more often because they are integral to the workflow, possess necessary expertise, or are simply more available in a physical or temporal sense. In sum, we propose a model that links relationship quality and relationship context to person- and task-focused ICB.

Person- and Task-Focused ICB ICB has been investigated under various guises including altruism (Organ, 1988; Smith, Organ, & Near, 1983), interpersonal helping (Moorman & Blakely, 1995), OCB-I (Williams & Anderson, 1991), helping coworkers (George & Brief, 1992), helping and cooperating with others (Borman & Motowidlo, 1997), and interpersonal facilitation (Van Scotter & Motowidlo, 1996). From a conceptual viewpoint, these different types of ICB are similar in that they involve cooperative assistance for individuals in need. Underscoring their importance to organizations, these behaviors have been found to be associated with the quantity and quality of

Randall P. Settoon, Department of Management, Southeastern Louisiana University; Kevin W. Mossholder, Department of Management, Louisiana State University. We thank Jeffrey LePine and Marcia Simmering for their comments on an earlier version of this article. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Randall P. Settoon, Department of Management, Southeastern Louisiana University, Hammond, Louisiana 70402. E-mail: [email protected]

255

SETTOON AND MOSSHOLDER

256

work group performance (Podsakoff et al., 1997) and various financial efficiency and customer service indicators of organizational performance (Walz & Niehoff, 1996). In total, empirical evidence suggests that ICBs are more strongly related to group and organizational performance than are other forms of citizenship behavior (Podsakoff et al., 2000). Although distinguishable from other dimensions of positive social behavior, ICBs have not been derived strictly from theory (Van Dyne et al., 1995), and some of their defining characteristics (i.e., being extrarole, beyond the job, unrewarded by the formal system) have been a point of contention (Organ, 1997). Our intent is not to debate the appropriateness of various taxonomies of citizenship behavior (Coleman & Borman, 2000; Motowidlo, 2000) or develop new ones but rather to emphasize the relational dynamics sometimes overlooked in connection with interpersonal forms of citizenship behavior. According to research on help giving in more formally structured settings such as organizations, helping behavior may be generally construed as person or task focused (e.g., Burke et al., 1976; DePaulo, Brown, & Greenberg, 1983). This distinction is also consistent with social network theory, where relational ties among individuals have been differentiated in terms of two basic types of transactional content (Tichy & Fombrun, 1979). In line with this research, our study examined person-focused and task-focused ICB. Person-focused ICB provides for self-esteem maintenance and deals with problems of a more personal nature. Such behavior often has an affiliative–promotive character (Van Dyne & LePine, 1998), being grounded in friendship and social support. Exemplars are listening and being accessible, counseling, and demonstrating a concern for others by reassuring them of their worth. In contrast, task-focused ICB involves the resolution of work-related problems of a less personal nature and deals with organization-based issues. Task-focused ICB transactions are more instrumental, arising in the course of work-role performance and involving the exchange of job-related resources. Exemplars include behaviors such as providing work-related advice, offering new perspectives on work problems, supplying factual information and direct assistance, and assuming responsibility for solving problems.

needing assistance is paramount in these relationships, and they provide for each other’s welfare even at the expense of personal goals (Clark & Mills, 1979; Clark, Mills, & Powell, 1986). The research literature pertaining to relational exchanges suggests that relationship quality is marked by support (e.g., Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995), trust (e.g., McAllister, 1995), perspective taking (e.g., Davis, 1994), and empathic concern (Sheppard & Sherman, 1998). Research has treated these variables as having direct effects on citizenship behaviors. However, these variables are interrelated, and it is likely that some may exert more of an indirect influence (Podsakoff et al., 2000). Hypotheses 1–5 specify both direct and mediated links between these four variables and person-focused ICB. Coworker support. Various studies have demonstrated that employee perceptions of organizational support are linked to employee attendance, commitment, performance, and citizenship behavior directed at the organization (Eisenberger, Fasolo, & DavisLaMastro, 1990; Eisenberger, Huntington, Hutchison, & Sowa, 1986; Settoon, Bennett, & Liden, 1996). The theoretical underpinnings of the relationship between perceived support and employee behavior is based on the concepts of social exchange (Blau, 1964) and reciprocity (Gouldner, 1960). For example, expressions of positive regard in the form of support create a feeling of indebtedness and a corresponding obligation to reciprocate. Because of its volitional nature, citizenship behavior provides a means of fulfilling this obligation and reinforcing a general belief in the intrinsic value of the exchange relationship. Extending this research to exchange relationships among coworkers, it is reasonable to assume that individuals will reciprocate support from coworkers with helping in the form of personfocused ICB. Actions that express concern about well-being, solidarity, and respect are of value during interpersonal exchanges, as they underscore the permanence of the relationship (Burleson, 1990). Consistent with this, research examining leader–member exchange has found citizenship behavior to be present in supportive interpersonal relationships (e.g., Wayne, Shore, & Liden, 1997). Thus, we expect person-focused ICB to result because individuals desire to respond to positive feelings and actions directed toward them. We hypothesized the following:

Relationship Quality and Relationship Context On the basis of the results of previous research, we expected relationship quality and relationship context variables to be associated with ICB. Our theoretical model is presented in Figure 1. Although person- and task-focused ICB can be thought of as complementary, conceptual distinctions between them led us to posit that characteristically different antecedents would be associated with each ICB form. As seen in the model, relationship quality variables have hypothesized links to person-focused ICB, and relationship context variables have hypothesized links to taskfocused ICB. Linkages portrayed in the theoretical model are discussed below.

Relationship Quality and Person-Focused ICB Person-focused ICB is prevalent in work relationships characterized by strong emotional ties and serves to reinforce the intrinsic value of such relationships. The interpersonal value of individuals

Hypothesis 1: Coworker support will be associated with personfocused ICB.

Trust. Generally, interpersonal trust refers to a willingness of parties to be vulnerable to others’ actions on the basis of shared expectations that each will perform particular actions important to the other (cf. Mayer, Davis, & Schoorman, 1995). Beliefs about caring (Dirks, 1999), dependability (Zucker, 1986), and integrity (Robinson, 1996) underpin the trust construct, which has drawn renewed research interest in recent years, especially as an antecedent of cooperative and benevolent behaviors (e.g., Konovsky & Pugh, 1994; McAllister, 1995; Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman, & Fetter, 1990). Van Dyne, Vandewalle, Kostova, Latham, and Cummings (2000) recently suggested that trust should be especially salient where interactions are framed in terms of social exchange. Similarly, Sheppard and Sherman (1998) noted that interpersonal trust is likely to be found within “deep” relational forms wherein

INTERPERSONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOR

257

Figure 1. Hypothesized model. Error variances for observed variables and correlations among exogenous latent variables are omitted for clarity. ICB ⫽ interpersonal citizenship behavior.

interactions between relational partners typically carry emotional or motivational import. They proposed that within high-quality relationships, an identity-based trust often exists whereby both parties become confident that their interests are fully protected by the other. This encourages a sense of congruence and comfort during interactions, making it easier for individuals to help others because they perceive less risk that help will not be extended when needed in the future. Not surprisingly then, McAllister (1995) found that affect-based trust exhibited a strong positive relationship with affiliative citizenship behavior, which very much resembles person-focused ICB. We hypothesized the following: Hypothesis 2: Trust will be associated with person-focused ICB.

Perspective taking. Perspective taking is the cognitive act of adopting the perspective of another and is a process that may produce feelings of concern and helping behavior (Davis, 1994; Eisenberg & Miller, 1987). Perspective taking has long been treated as an antecedent of helping behavior in the social psychological arena. Commenting on this research stream, Davis (1994) noted that asking individuals to put themselves in the place of

others in need may stimulate a process that ends in the offering of help to those in need. Unfortunately, perspective taking has been considered infrequently in this capacity by organizational researchers. It does exhibit a pattern of association with social competence and acts to negate self-interested behavior and interpersonal conflict that might impede the development of high-quality interpersonal relationships (Davis, 1994). Perspective taking is also associated with better interpersonal communication (Davis & Kraus, 1991). Research on interpersonal perception (e.g., Kenny, 1994) suggests that over time, shared experiences among individuals in highquality relationships and discussions of these experiences create knowledge structures that facilitate perspective taking. As needed, these shared knowledge structures are used to infer others’ thoughts and feelings, making it more likely that individuals will fully understand others’ needs when determining the nature of help required and the proper balance in their exchanges. We hypothesized the following: Hypothesis 3: Perspective taking will be associated with personfocused ICB.

SETTOON AND MOSSHOLDER

258

Empathic concern. Research in both the social psychological (see Eisenberg & Miller, 1987, for a review) and organizational literatures (e.g., McNeely & Meglino, 1994) has found associations between empathy and forms of helping behavior. Empathic concern represents the emotional experience of compassion and feeling for another in need and is directly associated with empathetic responding outcomes, like ICB. It may stimulate ICB for egoistic reasons (e.g., help givers reduce their discomfort from seeing others in need) as well as altruistic reasons (e.g., true desire to increase the welfare of help recipients). Empathic concern is a characteristic of high-quality relationships (Granovetter, 1973; Sheppard & Sherman, 1998), and some have argued that it can function as a trigger for action (Vetlesen, 1994). Relational ties in high-quality work relationships often result in an increased sensitivity to others’ experiences and an emotional arousal, both of which, by definition, characterize empathic concern (Batson, 1991; Davis, 1994). We hypothesized the following: Hypothesis 4: Empathic concern will be associated with personfocused ICB.

Mediational role of empathic concern. Although support, trust, and perspective taking may be directly associated with person-focused ICB, they may also be indirectly associated through empathic concern. As described above, support, trust, and perspective taking create high-quality interpersonal relationships that establish the potential for person-focused ICB among coworkers. However, at a more basic level, a mechanism may be needed for this potential to be realized. Ideally, such a mechanism would possess an affective element of emotional arousal for energizing and initiating person-focused ICB. Empathic concern incorporates these elements, and because of its emotional essence and psychological immediacy to individuals’ actions, it may act as a more immediate precursor of person-focused ICB than the other relationship quality antecedents (Davis, 1994). In quality relationships characterized by support, trust, and perspective taking, the welfare of the other is significant to both parties (Eisenberg & Strayer, 1987; Eisenberger et al., 1990; McAllister, 1995). Individuals strongly identify with each other and are likely to incorporate parts of others’ psyche into their own identity, creating strong emotional ties, a precondition for empathic concern for others to occur (Levinger, 1980). In short, empathic concern keys an emotional arousal, which then facilitates acts of person-focused ICB. We hypothesized the following: Hypothesis 5: Empathic concern will mediate the relationships of coworker support, trust, and perspective taking with person-focused ICB.

Relationship Context and Task-Focused ICB Whereas the aim of person-focused ICB is the preservation of socioemotional elements of work relationships, task-focused ICB is more aligned with specific roles and tasks that define employee work relationships. Although there are still positive interpersonal connections involved, with task-focused ICB the intent of help giving is to solve a problem or matter arising as part of the work at hand. This form of ICB is more likely to reflect the requirements or properties of social and work interaction patterns than to hinge

on particular attributes of any specific person. In other words, the social and workflow systems connecting workers in organizations influence the context that determines from whom task-focused ICB is sought and to whom it is given (e.g., S. E. Anderson & Williams, 1996; Pearce & Gregersen, 1991). Network centrality. With regard to potential social system interdependencies underpinning the task environment, recent attention has been focused on the influence of relational networks on employees’ citizenship behavior (e.g., Lamertz, 1999). Given that relational networks represent institutionalized patterns of recurring interactions and socially shared regularities within the organization, it is logical to assume that opportunities for ICB would arise within them, especially for those holding positions that render them more available for help requests and more capable of providing assistance. In broad terms, network centrality refers to individuals’ degree of access to others within emergent intraorganizational networks. Those with higher comparative access have greater centrality. Network centrality features certain characteristics that could lead it to be associated with task-focused ICB. First, it is widely recognized that individuals in central network positions have greater potential control over task-relevant res...