THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ETHICAL LEADERSHIP AND INDIVIDUAL-DIRECTED ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOUR:

Transcription

1 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ETHICAL LEADERSHIP AND INDIVIDUAL-DIRECTED ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOUR: THE MODERATING EFFECT OF LEADER-MEMBER-EXCHANGE By Yeung Quenson Human Resources Management Concentration An Honors Degree Project Submitted to the School of Business in Partial Fulfillment of the Graduation Requirement for the Degree of Bachelor Business Administration (Honors) Hong Kong Baptist University Hong Kong April

2 Acknowledgement I would like to show my deepest gratitude to Dr. Alicia Leung for her kind support and invaluable guidance provided in the past 1 year. As a student without any previous experience in conducting research, it would not be possible to complete a research in such a short period of time without her support and advice. I am also thankful to all those corporations and their respective employees for showing their willingness and spending their time to complete the surveys. 2

3 Abstract This study attempts to explore how ethical leadership may affect subordinates performance of Individual-Directed Organization Citizenship Behaviour (OCBI) and the moderating role played by Leader-Member Exchange (LMX). 118 valid data were used to analyze and interpret the result. A positive relationship between ethical leadership and OCBI was found. LMX was also found to be a significant moderator: ethical leadership was a stronger predictor of OCBI when the quality of relationship between direct supervisor and subordinates are higher. 3

4 INTRODUCTION In today s business world, apart from task performance, contextual performance, is also gaining increasing importance in organizations. Contextual performance refers to performance not formally required but performed by employees voluntarily. Organizational Citizenship Behaviour is one of the contextual performances. Both scholars and management are interested in how to induce the performance of OCBs. As leaders provide cues for what behavior is appropriate and make salient the situational needs for prosocial gestures. (Smith, C.A., Organ, D.W., & Near, J.P. 1983), leadership, as described as the process of social influence in which one person can enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task. ( Chemers M.,1997), is known to have much influence on employees behavior which could be explained through social exchange(blau, P. 1964) and social learning theory (Bandura, A, 1977). Among all the leadership styles being recognized and studied, ethical leadership has been the most popular studied in recent years due to the limited research done on it and the increasing concern and emphasis of the public have put on business ethics especially after the financial crisis in 2008, people are becoming increasingly concern about the ethical standards of the leaders in the organizations. It would not be surprised that ethical leadership could also influence the employees behaviour especially of ethical conducts. However, much of the research done on ethical leadership has been on its descriptive aspect rather than on its effects. Hence, this study attempted to explore how ethical leadership of which I refer to the top management of the organization may affect Organizational Citizenship Behaviour (OCB) especially Individual-Directed Organizational Citizenship Behaviour (OCBI) performed by their employees. Also, seldom do leaders treat their subordinates as the same and the quality of their relationship would affect the trust the followers have on their leaders which would indeed affect the way they model and learn from their leaders. As a result, Leader Member Exchange (LMX) has been included in the model so as to explore under what conditions OCB would be more prominent under the influence of ethical leadership. The purpose of the study is to examine the relationship between ethical leadership and OCBIs performed by their employees and how LMX would moderate their relationship. 4

5 OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY To examine whether ethical leadership would have an impact on employee s performance of OCBI To examine how may LMX, the quality of relationship formed between leaders and subordinates, moderate their relationship. To provide practical implications on the importance of ethical leadership training as it would contribute to prosocial organizational behaviors. LITERATURE REVIEW Ethical leadership Ethical Leadership is defined as the demonstration of normatively appropriate conduct through personal actions and interpersonal relationships, and the promotion of such conduct to followers through two-way communication, reinforcement, and decision making (Brown, Trevin o, and Harrison, 2005). It captures how the employees perceive the ethical behaviours inferred from the leaders acts. Ethical leaders are characterized in several ways. Firstly, according to the definition proposed by Brown, Trevin~o and Harrison, ethical leaders influence their subordinate behaviour in mainly two ways. First of all, they would act as the role-model by making the ethical standards explicit and act in alignment with them. Also, they would make ethical standards (required) explicit to the subordinates and would reinforce their subordinates behaviour meeting the predetermined ethical standard by rewarding them and to punish those who failed to do so. Research has showed that reinforcement plays a critical role in role modeling effectiveness as the followers usually play special attention to those controlling key resources, making rewards and punishment decisions. Power sharing is another dimension of ethical leaders. De Hoogh and Den Hartog (2008) claimed that ethical leaders involve subordinates in decision making process and listen to their ideas and concerns. They have also found a high correlation between employees sense of autonomy and ethical leadership using the Brown et al. (2005) measurement scale. Some scholars have once regarded ethical leadership as indifferent with other leadership styles like transformational leadership and charismatic leadership. Michael E. Brown a, Linda K. Treviño b, David. Harrison (2006) argued that it s not untrue that some aspects of ethical leadership are related to other 5

6 leadership styles and characteristics, but none of those leaderships is broad enough to cover all aspects of ethical leadership. Their differences mainly lie on three areas. Firstly, ethical standard and moral management are the primary concerns for ethical leaders. Though transformational and spiritual leaders still consider about ethics, creating shared vision and values are still their primary concerns and emphasis. Secondly, ethical leaders are themselves ethical while for transformational and charismatic leaders, whether they are ethical are not depend on themselves (Bass, 1998). Not every transformational and charismatic leader is ethical in nature and it is not guaranteed that they would use their personal influence to foster an ethical working environment. Thirdly, ethical leaders are distinct from other leaders through their transactional styles when reinforcing follower s ethical behavior ( M.E. Brown, L.K. Treviño,2006). Organizational Citizenship Behaviour (OCB) Decades before Organ gave a formal definition to Organizational Citizenship Behavior, Katz (1964) had already identified the spontaneous activity that goes beyond role definitions as one of the indispensable elements for a functional body. He further pointed out that any organizations rely solely on prescribed or predetermined roles would simply be a fragile social system. Organizational Citizenship behavior is defined as individual behavior that is discretionary, not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, and that in the aggregate promotes the effective functioning of the organization (Organ 1988). There are 7 dimensions of OCB which are altruism, courtesy, conscientiousness, civic virtue, sportsmanship (Organ 1988), peacekeeping and cheerleading (Organ 1990). In short, OCB refers to some spontaneous behavior performed by employees which are not formally required. Research on OCB further divides it into OCBO and OCBI. OCBO refers to OCB targeted at organization which includes conscientiousness, civic virtue, and sportsmanship. OCBI refer to OCB targeted at individuals which include altruism, courtesy, peacekeeping and cheerleading. A study done by Larry J. Williams and Stella E. Anderson in 1991 has showed that OCBI and OCBO are two distinct types of performance. Williams and Anderson s (1991) categorization of OCB has incorporated most of the OCB constructs available. For OCBI, apart from the 4 dimensions proposed by Organ, it also covers Graham s(1989) interpersonal helping, Van Scotter and Motowidlo s(1996) interpersonal facilitation, and Farh, Earley, and Lin s (1997) helping coworkers and 6

7 interpersonal harmony construct. According to Organ, altruism refers to voluntary behavior aimed at helping colleagues in dealing with tasks which are germane to organizations. Courtesy refers to voluntary behaviours aiming at preventing work-conflict behaviours with colleagues. Peacekeeping refers to acts devoted at mediating or preventing conflicts with coworkers. Cheerleading refers to verbal encouragements given to colleagues. Interpersonal helping focuses on helping co-workers. Interpersonal facilitation refers to interpersonal behaviors aiming at maintaining the organization s interpersonal environment. Farh, Earley, and Lin s constructs are basically similar to those defined above. When deciding which construct to adopt, we should bear in mind the target similarity effect (Lavelle, Rupp, & Brockner, 2007) and the claims made by Organ in 1994 about the predictor tend to predict aggregations of thematically related behaviours. For this study, I would focus on investigating the effect of ethical leadership on OCBI and Williams and Anderson s (1991) OCBI scale would be used to evaluate OCBI. Ethical leadership and OCBI Ethical leaders, as they would perform and demonstrate some normatively appropriate conduct, they would serve as the role model to the employees and provide cues for what behavior is appropriate and make salient the situational needs for prosocial gestures. (Smith, C.A., Organ, D.W., & Near, J.P. 1983). From the social learning perspective, modeling would influence the followers behavior as they are seen as credible which may induce them to perform more OCBs. Berkowitz (1970) also strongly suggest that many forms of prosocial behavior are influenced by models. The reinforcement nature of ethical leaders would also induce the employees to perform OCBs more frequently and ethical leaders would promote certain ethical behaviours by using rewards and punishment to reinforce them and according to research, reinforcement plays critical role in determining modeling effectiveness. This is somewhat similar to the Kelman's (1958) typology of social influence processes of which the employees would internalize their leader s conduct and belief and behave consistently with them. I believe that ethical leaders, as a role model perceived by employees through demonstrating appropriate and ethical conducts, could exert certain influence on their employees acts and their reinforcement nature would simply strengthen their influence which could affect them to perform more OCBs. 7

8 I propose ethical leadership will have a positive association with OCBI but not OCBO mainly due to two reasons. Firstly according the target similarity effect as proposed by Lavelle, Rupp, & Brockner (2007), constructs will have a stronger association when they refer to the same target. Since leaders and followers relationship is more interpersonal in nature, Ethical leadership and OCBI s association would be stronger than that with OCBO. Also, Organ (1994) also claimed that predictors tend to predict aggregations of thematically related behaviours, as leader s influence process on followers and the Leader Member Exchange of which is included in our study as a moderator are interpersonal in nature, measuring OCBI would be more appropriate. Hypothesis 1: Ethical leadership has a positive relationship with Individual- Directed Organizational Citizenship Behaviour Role of leader-member exchange (LMX) Leader Member Exchange (LMX) (Dansereau, Graen, & Haga, 1975) describes the dynamic relationship between leaders and followers. It recognizes that leaders do not always view or treat their followers in the same way. The high quality exchange relationship between leaders and followers is characterized as social exchange which extends beyond the economic exchange which is specified in contractual agreement. Followers enjoying this kind of relationship with leaders are regarded as in-group members and they often has more personal obligation, higher trust in leaders and more interaction with leaders. They would also receive more promotion opportunities. For low quality exchange relationship, it is characterized as economic exchange of which their relationship remains only in those specified in the contractual agreements. Followers enjoying this kind of relationship with leaders are regarded as out-group members of which fulfilling self-interest is their primary goal and there is little reciprocity with leaders. Blau (1964) also claimed that only social exchange tends to elicit feelings of personal obligation, gratitude, and trust; while purely economic exchange does not. Based on social learning theory, followers tend to learn from and model the leaders who are perceived as credible. As high quality LMX relationship is social exchange in nature which tends to elicit trust between followers and leaders ( Blau, 1964), the followers would learn from their 8

9 leaders and model their behaviours according to social learning theory. Hence, I believe that followers enjoying high quality LMX relationship with ethical leaders would tend to learn and model their leaders to perform OCBI more frequently. Also, according to Kelman's (1958) typology of social influence processes, followers would internalize their leaders belief and act consistently with them. As followers enjoying high quality LMX relationships have more trust on their leaders, they would tend to be more willing to internalize the ethical leaders believe and act consistently with them which may perform OCBI more frequently. On the contrary, as low quality LMX relationship is economic exchange in nature, followers may have less communication and trust on their leaders, they would internalize their leader s value and model their leaders behavior less. Hence, I propose that the association between ethical leadership and OCBI will be stronger when the leaders and followers are enjoying high quality LMX relationship and vice versa. I believe that even for ethical leaders, they would still form different kind of relationship with different followers and hence, the quality of relationship formed would affect their influence on followers behaviours. Hypothesis 2a: The relationship between ethical leadership and OCBI would be stronger when the quality of leader-member relationship is higher. Hypothesis 2b: The relationship between ethical leadership and OCBI would be weaker when the quality of leader-member relationship is lower. 9

10 METHODOLOGY Sample 151 questionnaires were distributed to various organizations located in Hong Kong. Response rate is 78% of which 125 questionnaires were collected back while only 118 of them are valid. Some of the questionnaires are distributed by the supervisors of the respective companies while some are distributed through some colleagues. Among those valid responses, 67 (57%) of them are male while 51 (43%) of them are female. 94% of the valid respondents are full time workers. The age of the respondents ranges from 19 to 56 years old with a mean of 31 years old. The respondents working experience ranges from 1 to 360 months with a mean of 41 months. Procedures Some of the questionnaires are distributed by the supervisors of the respective companies while some are distributed through some colleagues. For both group of respondents, a cover letter explaining about the purpose of the research was attached in order to let them have a thorough understanding of the study as well as to minimize or eliminate their suspicions towards the survey to obtain the most honest response. Verbal explanation regarding the purpose of the study was also delivered by the supervisors or colleagues representatives to the respondents. Survey Measures As required by the respondents organizations, all the survey measures were administered in Chinese. Ethical Leadership (ELS).The Brown et al. s (2005) 10-item ethical leadership scale was employed to ask the respondents to rate their leaders. The scale contains questions like The leader listens to what employees have to say and the respondents were asked to rate from scale 1(Strongly disagree) to 5(Strongly agree). The reliability of ELS scale of the present study was Individual-Directed Organizational Citizenship Behaviour (OCBI) Williams and Anderson s (1991) OCBI scale was used to ask the respondents to evaluate their own 10

11 performance of OCBI from 1(Strongly disagree) to 5(Strongly agree). It contains questions like I take time to listen to co-workers problems and worries. The reliability of the OCBI scale in the present study was Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) To measure the quality of relationship between the respondents and their leaders, the Liden, R. C., & Maslyn, J. M. (1998) Multidimensionality of leader-member exchange scale was used and it contains questions like My supervisor understands my problems and needs well enough. Respondents then rated the quality of their relationships with their leadership from 1(Strongly disagree) to 5(Strongly agree). The reliability of the LMX scale in the present study was

12 Analysis SPSS was used to run and analyze the data. A hierarchical regression analyses was carried out to test the hypotheses as specified of this study. To test the moderating effect of LMX on the effects of ethical leadership on employees performance of OCBIs, the independent variable ( ELS) and moderator (LMX) were standardized to reduce the problem of collinearity. Continuous controlled variables are standardized as well. The standardized ethical leadership and standardized LMX were then multiplied to obtain the interaction term so as to show the synergy between them. A two way interaction model was also plotted by using the procedures of Aiken and West (1991) and Dawson and Richter (2006) to show the two way moderating effect. Results Table 1 Descriptive Statistics and Correlations Variable Mean SD Age Working Status Working Experience ** Gender ELS (0.936) 6. LMX ** (0.814) 7. OCBI **.233 * (0.832) Note:N=118 *p<0.05 ;**p<0.01;***p<0.001 Working Status:(Full-time=1;Part-time=0) Gender:(Male=1, Female=0) Table 1 shows the mean, standard deviation as well as the correlations among the variables. Meanwhile, a reliability test was also carried out to test examine the Cronbach alpha coefficient of the measurement scales. All the measurement scales used have a Cronbach alpha coefficient 12

13 higher than 0.7 which implies that all of them are fully accepted 13

14 Table 2 Results for Hierarchical Regression Analyses for Hypotheses Testing: The Moderation Model DV: Organizational Citizenship Behaviour-Individual Directed M1 M2 M3 Control Variables: Gender Age Working Status Working Experience (in months) IV Ethical Leadership 0.28** 0.30** Moderator LMX IV x Moderator Ethical Leadership x Moderator 0.37*** R² 0.13** 0.25*** d.f. 4,113 6,111 7,110 ΔR² 0.11** 0.11*** Note: N=118(standardized coefficients are reported) *p<0.05 **p<0.01 ***p<0.001 Working Status:(Full-time=1;Part-time=0) 14

15 Gender:(Male=1, Female=0) Table 2 shows the results for hierarchical regression analyses of which our hypotheses were tested. In step 1, I firstly controlled those control variables. TheΔR² was but not significant. In step 2, I entered the standardized independent variable (ELS) and standardized moderator (LMX). The ΔR² was with p<0.01. For the ZELS, the β was 0.28 with p<0.01. This shows the positive association between Ethical Leadership and the performance of subordinates OCBI. Hence, hypothesis 1 was supported. For the ZLMX, the β was 0.07 but this was not significant. In step 3, I further entered the interaction term which is the output of the standardized ELS X standardized LMX. The β was 0.37 with p< It also shows that the interaction between Ethical Leadership and LMX explained for an additional 11% of the variance in OCBI. The interaction effect is significant. This result implies that the positive relationship between Ethical Leadership and subordinates performance of OCBI was stronger when their quality of relationship (Leader-Member Exchange) is better. Hence, hypothesis 2a and 2b were both supported. 0.37*** 0.28* *p<0.05 **p<0.01 ***p<0.001 Figure 1 15

16 OCBI LMX As A Moderator Between Ethical Leadership and Individual-Directed Organizational Citizenship Behaviour Low LMX High LMX Low Ethical Leadership High Ethical Leadership Meanwhile, a two way interaction model was also plotted by using the procedures of Aiken and West (1991) and Dawson and Richter (2006) to show the two way moderating effect. The values plotted represent high (Plus 1 SD above mean) and low (Minus 1 SD from the mean) levels of LMX in terms of Ethical Leadership and OCBI. As shown in Figure 1, the positive association between Ethical Leadership and OCBI was stronger when LMX was higher. The positive association between Ethical Leadership and OCBI was weaker when LMX was weaker. All in all, LMX is a significant moderator for the relationship between Ethical Leadership and OCBI. DISCUSSION The study has made several contributions. Firstly, it demonstrates the effects of ethical leadership. Howell and Hall Merenda in 1999 claimed that in the leadership research field, there is a kind of association between leaders and followers behaviour. Our study shows how ethical leaders affect their followers behavior. A β= 0.28 was reported between ethical leadership and the followers performance of OCBI in our study which shows that ethical leadership is positively related to their followers performance of OCBI. This phenomenon could be attributed to Kelman s (1958) typology of social influence process. Due to ethical leaders ability to form and perform a high ethical standard and to articulate a vision of which are admired 16

17 by their followers, the followers may have a personal identification formed. Then, the followers internalize the beliefs and values of the ethical leaders and behave consistently with them. This kind of association could also be explained by the social learning theory (Bandura, 1986) which suggests that people learn by observing others behaviour. Since ethical leaders set ethical standard explicitly and act according with them (Brown, Trevin~o and Harrison, 2005), their followers would simply learn by observing the ethical conducts performed by their leaders. Apart from that, this study also highlights the role played by LMX in the association between leadership and their followers behaviour. LMX has been found to be positively related to OCBs. Podsakoff et al. (2000) also found that LMX was positively associated with altruism and an overall composite measure of OCB. This study shows that LMX is a significant moderator between ethical leadership and their followers performance of OCBI (β =0.37) of which it strengthens the relationship between ethical leadership and followers OCBI when LMX score is high and vice versa. This could be explained by the fact that those followers enjoying higher quality relationship with their leaders have more trust on their leaders (Blau, 1964) and they model from their leaders based so social learning theory. 17

18 MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS Our study offers several implications for practical managers. Firstly, it demonstrates the importance of leadership behavior. As shown by our present study, there is a positive association between ethical leadership and subordinates performance of OCBI. The ethical leaders induce the performance of subordinates OCBI in two ways which are setting up the role-model and to use transactional styles to reinforce those desirable and ethical behaviors. Previous research has also shown the effects of OCBs to organizations. Research done by Mossholder,Settoon, & Henagan in 2005 have shown that the actual and intended turnover rate are lower when the performance of OCBs are higher or demonstrated more frequently. OCBs were also positively associated with customer satisfaction (Nathan P. Podsakoff, Steven W. Whiting, & Philip M. Podsakoff, 2009). Hence, having ethical leaders would indirectly improve the organization s effectiveness and performance by inducing the performance of OCBs. As corporate social responsibility (CSR) has become an indispensable part of any businesses or organizations, having ethical leaders could help building an ethical culture within the company and capture the CSR opportunities. Besides, this study also highlights the quality of relationship between leaders and subordinates. Leaders who want to elicit more OCBs performed by their subordinates should try to build relationship with better quality which goes beyond the economic exchange. Enjoying a high quality relationship which is characterized as social exchange elicit trust between followers and leaders (Blau, 1964) and the followers would learn from their leaders and model their behaviours according to social learning theory. Hence, once the leaders are ethical themselves who perform ethical conducts and probably OCBs, their subordinates would model their behaviour and perform more OCBs as well. LIMITATIONS There are some limitations regarding this study. Firstly, due to time constraint, only 150 surveys were distributed and 125 were collected. The sample size may not be large or representative enough to show the actual situation in the companies. Meanwhile, the whole questionnaires are for employees self-reported. Leniency effect may occur in the self-evaluated OCBI part. Nevertheless, some of the surveys are distributed to the employees through their direct supervisors, the employees may intend to produce some social desirable responses which may inflate the ratings in the ethical leadership part. Some of them may also tend 18

19 to inflate their supervisors rating in the ethical leadership part being afraid that the survey may be used in their performance evaluation. A better to do this is to distribute the surveys to employees by myself after gaining permission from the company and to set up a survey collection box in the companies to minimize employees suspicion. Also, employees should be responsible for responding to ethical leadership and LMX scale part while their supervisors would be responsible for rating the followers performance of OCBI so as to obtain more honest responses. Besides, this study attempts to explore how the direct supervisors may affect subordinates behaviour, specifically OCBI. However, the organizations leaders like the CEO may also play a part in affecting or influencing the employees behaviour. The influence of the organizations leaders has not been addressed in this study. In addition, we may have neglected other factors like organizational culture and justice which are proved to affect the performance of OCBs. It is possible that factors like organizational culture, instead of ethical leadership accounts for the occurrence of OCBI. If the culture of the companies where we distribute questionnaires is extremely caring, even with the absence of ethical leaders, respondents ratings of OCBI will still be very high, Spurious correlation may be resulted. IMPLICATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH In addition to the points addressed above, there are several avenues that future research could address. Firstly, the effects of ethical leadership on Organization-Directed Organizational Citizenship Behaviour (OCBO) could be studied as well since supervisor may sometimes serve as a proxy of the organization (Joy H. Karriker and Margaret L. Williams, 2009) so that the employees may perform more OCBO in return if the leaders are ethical. Besides, in this study, LMX is studied as a moderator between ethical leadership and OCBI. For future research, LMX could be studied as a mediator between ethical leadership and OCBI. Previous research has already shown a positive relation between LMX and OCBI. This could contribute more to ethical leadership of whether being ethical leaders could enjoy or build a relationship with subordinates of better quality. 19

20 Also, future study could examine whether other senior figures like the CEOs but not the direct supervisors of the employees may have an influence on the employees behaviour or OCBs. 20

21 CONCLUSION This study attempts to examine the relationship between ethical leadership and the performance of their direct subordinates performance of OCBI. It also examines the moderating effect of LMX on the relationship specified above. This study has shown the positive association between ethical leadership and subordinates performance of OCBI. Nevertheless, LMX has also been found to be a significant moderator of their relationship. It gives some clues to leaders and organizations on how to induce their employees to perform more OCBs to ultimately improve the organization performance and effectiveness. 21

22 REFERENCES Bandura, A Social Learning Theory. General Learning Press. Bass, B. M Transformational leadership: Industrial, military and educational impact. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Berkowitz, L The self, selfishness, and altruism In J Macauley & L Berkowitz (Eds), Altruism and helping behavior New York Academic Press. Blau, P Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley. Brown, M. E., Treviño, L. K., & Harrison, D Ethical leadership: A social learning perspective for construct development and testing. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 97, Brown, M. E., & Trevin o, L. K Ethical leadership: A review and future directions. The Leadership Quarterly, 17, Burns, J. M Leadership. New York: Harper and Row Publishers Inc.. Chemers M An integrative theory of leadership. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers Dansereau, F., Graen, G., & Haga, W. J A vertical dyad approach to leadership within formal organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 13, De Hoogh, A. H. B.,&Den Hartog, D. N Ethical and despotic leadership, relationships with leader s social responsibility, top management team effectiveness and subordinates optimism: A multi-method study. The Leadership Quarterly, 19,

23 Farh, J. L., Earley, P. C., & Lin, S. C Impetus for action: A cultural analysis of justice and organizational citizenship behavior in Chinese society. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, Graham, J. W Organizational citizenship behavior: Construct redefinition, operationalization, and validation. Unpublished working paper, Loyola University of Chicago. Joy H. Karriker and Margaret L. Williams Organizational Justice and Organizational Citizenship Behavior: A Mediated Multifoci Model? Journal of Management, 35:112. Katz, D The motivational basis of organizational behavior. Behavioral Science 9, Kelman, H. C Compliance, identification, and in ternalization: Three processes of attitude change. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 2: Lavelle, J. J., Rupp, D. E., & Brockner, J Taking a multifoci approach to the study of justice, social exchange, and organizational citizenship behavior: The target similarity model. Journal of Management, 3, Nathan P. Podsakoff, Steven W. Whiting, & Philip M. Podsakoff Individual- and Organizational-Level Consequences of Organizational Citizenship Behaviors: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, Organ, D. W Organizational citizenship behavior: The "good soldier" syndrome. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. Organ, D. W The motivational basis of organizational citizenship behavior. In B. M. Staw & L. L. 23

24 Cummings (Eds.), motivational basis of organizational citizenship behavior. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior, vol. 12: Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Organ, D. W Personality and organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Management, 20, Smith, C.A., Organ, D.W., & Near, J.P Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents, Journal of Applied Psychology, 68: Williams, L. J., & Anderson, S. E Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. Journal of Management, 17: Van Scotter, J. R., & Motowidlo, S. J Interpersonal facilitation 140 PODSAKOFF, WHITING, PODSAKOFF, AND BLUME and job dedication as separate facets of contextual performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81,

25 Appendix A Questionnaire for ethical leadership, LMX and OCBI 25

26 敬啟者 : 您好, 本人是香港浸會大學工商管理學院人力資源管理學系三年級學生, 現正進行一項學術 研究, 完成這項研究報告是我獲取工商管理學士 ( 榮譽 ) 學位資格的其中一項重要的要求 非常感謝您 能撥冗幫忙填寫本問卷, 不勝感激 此研究報告本問卷有關您對自己以及直屬上司的看法 填寫這問卷大約需要 分鐘 您的回答沒有對錯之分, 請依據實際情況回答 您填寫的資訊是完全保密的, 並僅用於學術研究 所有資料只做總體分析, 不會披露和彙報個人資料, 請您放心填答 完成問卷後, 請於 2013 年 3 月 1 日前電郵至 @life.hkbu.edu.hk 如有任何問題, 可致電 或以電郵與我聯絡 最後, 我在此致上最誠摯的謝意, 並祝您身體健康, 事業成功! 楊觀笙 謹啟 香港浸會大學人力資源管理學系三年級學生 26

27 第一部份 : 評估直屬上司 非 不 不 同 非 ( 一 ) 請判斷您是否同意以下對您現職工作的直屬上司的 常 同 確 意 常 描述, 並在右欄中 (1 至 5) 圈選出代表您意見的數 不 意 定 同 字 同 意 意 1. 聆聽我們的意見 經常顧及我們利益 作出公平決定 是可信的 與我們討論商業道德 示範如何以道德方式完成事情 懲罰違反道德標準的員工 以道德方式生活 以工作成果及其達到的方法去決定工作是否成功 在作出決定時會問 / 考慮什麼才是正確要做的事

28 第二部份 : 自我評估 非 不 不 同 非 ( 一 ) 請判斷您是否同意以下對您的描述, 並在右欄中 (1 至 5) 圈選出代表您意見的數字 常不同 同 意 確 定 意 常同意 意 1. 一般來說, 我很清楚我的上司是否滿意我的工作表現 上司對我工作上的問題和需要有足夠的了解 上司非常清楚我的潛力 上司會運用個人的權力來幫我解決我工作上的問題 我知道當我有需要時, 即使對上司不利, 他 / 她都會保我周 全 我深信任我不在場時, 上司會維護和支持我的決 定.. 7. 我和上司的工作關係非常有效 非 不 不 同 非 ( 二 ) 請判斷您是否同意以下對您的描述, 並在右欄中 (1 至 5) 圈選出代表您意見的數字 常不同 同 意 確 定 意 常同意 意 1. 我會協助缺席的同事 我會協助工作量龐大的同事 我會自發地協助上司完成工作 我會抽出時間聆聽同事所遇到的問題及擔憂 我會竭盡所能地幫助新入職同事

29 6. 我會高度關心其他同事 我會傳遞資訊予同事 個人背景資料 性別 男性 女性 年齡 歲 現任工作狀況 全職 兼職 現任工作年資 年 個月 - 謝謝您熱心的參與 - 29

30 Appendix B SPSS Output 30

31 1. Descriptive Statistics Descriptive Statistics Mean Std. Deviation N Age WorkingStatusF WorkingExp GenderM TotalELS TotalLMX TotalOCBI

32 Correlations Age WorkingStatusF1 WorkingExp GenderM1 TotalELS TotalLMX TotalOCBI Age Pearson Correlation ** Sig. (2-tailed) WorkingStatusF1 Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) WorkingExp Pearson Correlation.605 ** Sig. (2-tailed) GenderM1 Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) TotalELS Pearson Correlation **.313 ** Sig. (2-tailed) TotalLMX Pearson Correlation ** * Sig. (2-tailed) TotalOCBI Pearson Correlation **.233 * 1 Sig. (2-tailed) **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). 32

33 2. Cronbach alpha coefficient table Case Processing Summary (Ethical Leadership) N % Cases Valid Excluded a 0.0 Total a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure. Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha N of Items Case Processing Summary (LMX) N % Cases Valid Excluded a 0.0 Total a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure. Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha N of Items

34 Case Processing Summary (OCBI) N % Cases Valid Excluded a 0.0 Total a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure. Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha N of Items

35 3. Hierarchical Regression Analysis Model Summary Adjusted R Std. Error of the Change Statistics Model R R Square Square Estimate R Square Change F Change df1 df2 Sig. F Change a b c a. Predictors: (Constant), Zscore(WorkingExp), GenderM1, WorkingStatusF1, Zscore(Age) b. Predictors: (Constant), Zscore(WorkingExp), GenderM1, WorkingStatusF1, Zscore(Age), Zscore: TotalELS, Zscore: TotalLMX c. Predictors: (Constant), Zscore(WorkingExp), GenderM1, WorkingStatusF1, Zscore(Age), Zscore: TotalELS, Zscore: TotalLMX, interaction 35

36 ANOVA d Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. 1 Regression a Residual Total Regression b Residual Total Regression c Residual Total a. Predictors: (Constant), Zscore(WorkingExp), GenderM1, WorkingStatusF1, Zscore(Age) b. Predictors: (Constant), Zscore(WorkingExp), GenderM1, WorkingStatusF1, Zscore(Age), Zscore: TotalELS, Zscore: TotalLMX c. Predictors: (Constant), Zscore(WorkingExp), GenderM1, WorkingStatusF1, Zscore(Age), Zscore: TotalELS, Zscore: TotalLMX, interaction d. Dependent Variable: TotalOCBI 36

37 Coefficients a Standardized Unstandardized Coefficients Coefficients Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig. 1 (Constant) GenderM Zscore(Age) WorkingStatusF Zscore(WorkingExp) (Constant) GenderM Zscore(Age) WorkingStatusF Zscore(WorkingExp) Zscore: TotalELS Zscore: TotalLMX (Constant) GenderM Zscore(Age) WorkingStatusF Zscore(WorkingExp) Zscore: TotalELS Zscore: TotalLMX interaction a. Dependent Variable: TotalOCBI 37