In-role and Extra-role Behaviour
Much importance had been attributed to the distinction between in-role and extra-role behaviour. For many years, the methods and tools used to evaluate the performance of an employee were focused more on the formal aspect of job requirements, but to a large extent ignored the informal aspect expressed by the voluntary contribution of the employee towards other employees in the organisation and towards the organisation itself. In daily reality, it is possible to discern that the organisational behaviours that are usually awarded attention are 'in-role behaviours' that are formally required, and this is in contrast to 'extra-role behaviours' that are informal (Smith et al., 1983; Bateman and Organ, 1983; Eilani, 1998). Extra-role behaviour is characterised by volunteerism, and although it is not defined formally within the framework of the employee's 'job description', it has much importance and influence for the organisation's effectiveness. It is this behaviour that is 'the very core' of the present thesis, known as 'OCB' (Organ, 1988; Williams and Anderson, 1991; Schnake, 1991; George and Brief, 1992; Borman and Motowidlo, 1993; Motowidlo and Van Scotter, 1994; Eilani, 1998). The basis for extra-role behaviour may be found in the analysis of Barnard (1938), who emphasised people's aspiration to contribute their efforts to a cooperative system. He explained that when people are willing to make such a contribution the organisation is able to operate more effectively, but without such a contribution it may fail. In their own analysis, Katz and Kahn (1966) also relate to 'extra-role behaviour' as collective, protective and spontaneous actions, and behaviours by organisation members for the good of the organisation, and also to actions that improve the organisation's image. (A detailed consideration of sources on which the term 'extra-role' behaviour relies will be discussed later). The existence of factors that explain extra-role behaviours that influence productivity was recognised by managers and union leaders (Katzell and Yankelovich, 1975). These unique behaviours are reflected in performance evaluations (Mackenzie, Podsakoff and Fetter, 1991), they influence the participation of the employee in programmes (Graham and Verma, 1991), they may constitute a factor for job involvement and they build organisational commitment and self-esteem (Schnake, 1991). The Literature Review shows that many studies that have considered extra-role behaviour examined antecedents that influence this behaviour, such as, job satisfaction, organisational commitment or organisational justice (Bateman and Organ, 1983; Smith et al., 1983; Organ and Konovsky, 1989; Moorman, 1991; Williams and Anderson, 1991), perceived organisational support (Eisenberger, Huntington, Hutchinson and Sowa, 1986) and participation in decision making (Folger and Konovsky, 1989; Tyler and Lind,1992; Konovsky and Pugh, 1994; Vigoda, 1999a). Therefore, in order to analyse the connections that exist between these antecedents and extra-role behaviour, it is necessary to examine each and every antecedent in depth, to interpret them and learn something from them with regard to the studied issue, even if this is of little additional value. Consequently, the Literature Review that will guide me through this long journey will be extensive and wide-branching, but eventually the principle points will be assessed, and their essence will enable me to create the conceptual framework for this thesis. With regard to the variance of organisational outcomes, Van Dyne and LePine (1998) note that most of the studies that they reviewed failed to evaluate the extent to which extra-role behaviour is able to explain the variance in the relevant organisational outcomes. According to Van Dyne and LePine (1998) there was therefore no evidence for their own conception and expressions of other theoreticians who determined that these extra-role behaviours are positive behaviours necessary for the survival of organisations (Barnard, 1938; Katz, 1964; Katz and Kahn, 1966). In contrast to the above-mentioned trend which at this stage seems to be rather vague, Mackenzie et al. (1991) published a cross-sectional study, conducted in the insurance field, presenting a relationship between positive altruistic connections and civic virtue (dimensions of OCB detailed below) and levels of employee performance. It may be possible to settle this contradiction since theoreticians such as Katz and Kahn (1978) note that often people in different functions perceive the same behaviour in different ways, because of different expectations or perceptions or because of their selective view (Lawler, 1967).d let your users know a little more about you.
ערך ד"ר יצחק חודורי - מתוך עבודת הדוקטורט שלו
כל הזכויות שמורות לד"ר יצחק חודורי ©
