A CORRELATION STUDY OF LEADER-MEMBER EXCHANGE AND

ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOR IN A PUBLIC SECTOR

ORGANIZATION

Perumalu a/l Kandan*

and

Ibrahim Bin Ali**

Abstract

The study examines the correlation effects between leader-member exchange and
organizational citizenship behaviour in a public sector organization in Peninsular Malaysia.
Based on previous studies that leader-member relationships contribute to improved
performance (e.g., Stewart, 2007), this study hypothesizes leader-membership exchange
variable to be significantly correlated to the organizational outcomes—specifically examined
the organizational citizenship behavior. Focussing the employees in the public sector as the
sample in the study, the results of the study show both the variables are significantly
correlated. Results are further discussed.

Field of Research: Human Resource Management, Organizational Behavior

1. Introduction

In a highly competitive world the biggest challenge facing leaders would be

managing and motivating people in an organization. Effective management of human
resources is essential for the organization’s sustained competitive advantages.
People need to be motivated. This becomes more profound as the people have to
be aligned to accomplish the vision, mission and the objectives of the organization.
There are increasing pressures for organizations to be lean, dynamic, proactive,
quick responding, team-based, efficient, empowering and innovative (Lapierre &
Hackett, 2007). For the public service organization, in particular, its ability to respond
effectively to the changing needs of the environment is a key factor in ensuring a
nation’s sustainable development, growth and global competiveness. This invariably
rests on their capability and capacity in aligning the behaviour of their workforce with
that of the organization and, even more so, with the wider public interest (Ismail,
2007). According to McShane and Von Glinow (2008), leaders apply various forms of
influence—from subtle persuasion to direct application of power to ensure that
followers have the motivation and role clarity to achieve specific goals. Most of the
activities are job related, and functioning in this area is often referred to as task
performance.

*Perumalu a/l Kandan, Project Implementation and Maintenance Branch, Ministry of Housing and
Local Government Email: peru@kpkt.gov.my

**Ibrahim Bin Ali, School of Business, City University College of Science & Technology, P.Jaya,
Selangor. Email: Ibrahim.ali@unity.edu.my

1
 Leadership, which emphasizes relationship and focuses explicitly on how one-on-
one reciprocal social exchanges between leader and follower evolve, nurture, and
sustain is the dyadic relationship. This approach is best exemplified by leader-
member exchange (LMX) theory (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995). The LMX theory argues
that because of time pressures, leaders establish a special relationship with a small
group of their subordinates (Robbins, 1993). These individuals who make up the in-
group and are trusted, get a considerable amount of the leader’s attention, and are
more likely to receive special attention and privileges. As a natural consequence,
the other subordinates fall into the out-group. They get less of the leader’s time,
fewer of the preferred rewards under the leader controls, and the superior-
subordinate relations are based on formal authority interactions. The exchange
between the superior-subordinate (dyad), a two-way relationship, is the unique basic
premise and the unit of analysis of LMX (Truckenbrodt, 2000).

In addition, people engage in many types of behavior in organizational setting.

Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) refers to behavior that individuals are not
expected to perform as part of their tasks—i.e., behavior that goes above and
beyond the expected duties. Hence, these behaviors are voluntary and it is essential
for competitive advantages. The current trends, besides global competition include
the emergence of team-based organizations, and the greater emphasis on customer
services and client satisfactions are likely to make OCB increasingly an important
element for the organization to prosper and grow.

The importance of the relationships between LMX and OCB needs due
consideration. Understanding how the quality of interplay in a leader-member dyad
predicts citizenship behavior is an important area of interest for both researchers and
practitioners. This study examines on how leader-member exchange has a
relationship with organization citizenship behavior so that it can be used to close the
performance gap that may exist in the public sector organization specifically in the
Project Implementation and Maintenance Branch (PIMB), Ministry of Housing and
Local Government (MHLG).

2. Leader-Member Exchange

The relationship between supervisors and subordinates has received considerable

attention and has been suggested to be one of the most important relationships for
employees (Manzoni & Barsoux, 2002). This relationship often noted under leader-
member exchange (LMX theory). LMX leadership theory’s main focus is to diagnose
on the degree of emotional support and exchange of valued resources between
leader and members so that a higher quality relationship can be developed, enabling
improved performance (Kang & Stewart, 2007). This is consistent with the definition
of Scandura, Graen, and Novak (1986), which says that leader-member exchange is
a system of components and their relationships, involving both members of a dyad,
involving interdependent patterns of behavior, sharing mutual outcome
instrumentalities, and producing conceptions of environments, cause maps and
value. The higher quality relationship results were when leaders and followers
exchange greater physical resources, information and enjoyable tasks (Liden &
Maslyn, 1998). According to Kang and Stewart (2007), the dyadic relationship
development is theoretically grounded in role theory (Katz and Kahn, 1978) and
social exchange theory (Blau, 1964). These theories explain the formation of LMX.

2
2.1 Role Theory.

Role theory was first identified in the 1930s, but it was not until year’s later (Katz &
Kahn, 1978) that role theory became more widely recognized and readily used in
organizational research (Harris, 2004). This is supported by Biddle (1986, p. 67)
asserting that, “Role theory is a science concerned with the study of behaviors that
are characteristic of persons within contexts and with various processes that
presumably produce, explain, or are affected by those behaviors”. Role theory
explains roles as individuals having social positions and hence having expectations
for the behaviors of themselves and others. In addition, the theory suggests that the
sender’s role will affect the role of a receiver, which will later affect the role of the
sender, and so on (Harris, 2004).

Applying the role theory to LMX relationship quality, supervisors and

subordinates engage in social interactions during which work assignments are made
by the supervisor. In general, more important organizational roles are given to
subordinates whom the supervisors like and view as strong performers, whereas
lesser roles are given to those whom are viewed as less capable or less liked.
Subordinates selected for the more important roles establish close, high quality LMX
relationships with their supervisors, characterized by trust and emotional support
(Dienesch & Liden, 1986). From these high quality relationships, subordinates
receive several advantages including formal and informal rewards, favor doing,
ample access to supervisors, and increased communication (Dienesch & Liden,
1986; Wayne et al., 1997). On the other hand, subordinates in low quality LMX
exchanges have relationships with their supervisors that reflect low levels of trust
and emotional support and few, if any, benefits outside the employment contract
(Dienesch & Liden, 1986).

2.2.Social Exchange Theory

There is increased attention on social exchange theory in organizational research in

recent years (Settoon, Bennet, & Liden, 1996; Wayne et al., 1997). As stated by Blau
(1964), social exchange theory has been applied to a number of different levels of
organizational research, but the focus of this study is on the dyadic relationship
between supervisors and subordinates. In a nutshell, any social exchange between
two people involves obligations, whether they be explicitly stated or just understood.
Therefore, when one person does something (i.e., a favor, completes task) for
another person, there is an expectation of a return. According to Gouldner (1960),
as to what the outcome will be and when it will occur is often not clear, and he
referred to this concept of returning favors as the “norm of reciprocity.”

Hence, employees feel bound to help those who have helped them. In applying to
LMX relationship quality, supervisors give certain advantages or benefits to
individuals with whom they have higher quality LMX relationships. In return for these
advantages, supervisors expect subordinates to help them with work tasks that are
beyond the scope of the formal job description (Liden & Graen, 1980). The rewards
provided by the supervisors often create feelings of obligation on the part of the
subordinates. With these feelings of obligation, the subordinate feels more dedicated
to work better and longer, providing the supervisor with benefits in return. In leader-
member relationships, there are numerous exchanges with high quality LMX

3
relationships being characterized by exchanges that are mutual and balanced
(Liden, Sparrowe & Wayne, 1997). The variables that promote a social exchange
relationship in organizations will also have a positive relationship to OCB
(Unnikammu, Blau, Kumar & Ahamdali, 2006).

3. Organizational Citizenship Behaviour

Supervisors appreciate employees who project “citizenship behavior” as they add

value to the work (Kaur, Raduan, Anantaraman, Murali & Khairudin, 2007) and free
their own time and energy for more substantive tasks. More than two decades ago,
Organ and others (e.g., Bateman & Organ, 1983) coined the expression
“organizational citizenship behavior”. OCB has its roots and inspiration from the work
of Barnard (1938) and Katz (1964). The relationship between supervisor and
subordinates can be viewed from the social exchange and economic exchange
perspective. According to Organ (1990), employees perform OCB when the
relationship with their employer is one of social exchange (outside the formal
contract) as compared with economic exchanges (contractually agreed upon). Organ
(1988, p. 4) proposed the following definition for the OCB construct:

“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. By discretionary, we mean that the behavior is not an enforceable
requirement of the role or the job description, that is, the clearly specifiable terms of
the person’s employment contract with the organization; the behavior is rather a
matter of personal choice, such as its omission is not generally understood as
punishable.”

The idea of separating in-role and extra-role behaviors that is beneficial to the
organization is often linked to OCB. It is important to understand the concepts of in-
role behavior and extra-role behavior in an organization. In-role behaviors are the
required behaviors by the management—i.e., the reasons for one being employed.
On the contrary, extra-role behaviors refer to the quality and the need of the time
behaviours, which is informal and voluntary. Typical examples include offering help
to co-workers to solve unforeseen customer problems, volunteering to stay for extra
duty when needed, accommodating heavy workloads without complaints, not
misusing organization’s resources, upholding the organization’s reputation in the
eyes of the public, willing to mentor junior employees even if it means utilizing their
time and complying with rules and regulations naturally.

In addition, a distinction must be understood between formal and informal

functions of an organization. According to Organ (1988), a formal organization
includes the systems policies, rules and regulations. The informal organizations exist
in any business and can be thought of as a pre-requisite of an effective functioning of
the organization (Organ, 1990). In the informal organizations, extra-role behaviors
are present.

Therefore, there cannot be efficiency in an organization without the cooperation

and teamwork among the employees as frequent spontaneous responses and
actions are needed to face problems and opportunities as they arises. In addition,
rigidity in following prescribed roles without the flexibility to suit to the peculiarity of

4
unexpected problems may be detrimental to the organization. Hence, extra-role
behaviors are essential for the smooth functioning of the organization. Recent
studies illustrated the dramatic growth of OCB researches into some other related
management areas like strategic management, leadership, human resources
management (Lo & Ramayah, 2009).

4. The Relationship Between LMX and OCB

The immediate leader for the subordinate is the representation of the organization,
and plays a key role in influencing citizenship behaviors (Podsakoff et al., 2000).
Lepine, Erez and Johnson (2002) in a literature on meta-analysis study on
citizenship behavior reported leader support as its strongest predictor. OCB refers to
acts that are organizationally favorable and is based on neither in the written
description of job nor in any agreement for compensation. Aquino and Bommer
(2003) stated that the individual who received some benefits from others may
indirectly have the tendency to return or feel obligated to return the favor and this
interaction is known as positive reciprocity. Leaders who exhibit high-quality
exchange will invariably appeal to the higher-order social needs of followers by
getting them to place collective or common interests over short-term personal
gratification. A number of studies have found a positive relationship between LMX
and OCB and are listed in Table 1.

Table 1: Major Outcomes on LMX Quality and OCB

Outcome Investigated Study Findings

Organizational Citizenship
Behavior.
o Deluga (1998)  Positive
o Hofmann et al.,(2003)  Positive
o Rupp & Cropanzano (2002)  Positive
o Settoon et al., (1996)  Positive
o Wayne et al. (1997)  Positive
o Wayne et al., (2002)  Not Significant
o Lo et al., (2006)  Positive
o Ilies et al., (2007)
 Positive
o Ali et al., (2008)
 Positive

According to Wang, Law, Hackett, Wang and Chen (2005), the LMX and OCB
have become the foundation of a new era of managing a diversified workforce in the
advent of a global world. The limited relevant research that has been done in the
Malaysian contexts in public sector organization, these imperatively provide the
basis for the following hypotheses.

Hypothesis 1: There is a significant relationship between LMX and OCB.

Hypothesis 2: There is a significant difference between LMX on OCB

according to age classifications.

5
5. Methodology

5.1 Sample

PIMB headquarter in Kuala Lumpur is selected to be the site for sampling and data
collection. This is by virtue of the fact that the major decisions and policy matters are
approved within the MHLG. The PIMB headquarter will further disseminate the
relevant information according to the hierarchy of the organization to the regional
offices. The respondents for this study are supervisors and subordinates from all the
units under PIMB. The supervisors are generally architects, engineers, quantity
surveyors and land surveyors. The subordinates are technical assistants and senior
technicians for the various professions. This survey does not include the
administrative and management staffs under the umbrella of PIMB.

In the public sector organization, a supervisor is also a subordinate and a

subordinate is also a supervisor taking instructions and reporting accordingly. The
selection of respondents is also made on the basis of this understanding to ensure
that collection of data satisfy the very purpose of the study. Matching responses
between leaders and members is necessary as the level of analysis is the dyad
(Yammarino & Dubinsky, 1992). All responses are treated with confidentiality and
were accessible only to the researcher.

5.2 Procedure

The purpose of the study is to find the relationship of the LMX and OCB in the PIMB.
After further consultation with the management it was felt that stratified random
sampling will be administered to get a fair representation of the population in the
PIMB. Hence, from the population of 240 employees comprising 32 officers and 208
support staffs from the various units it was decided that 20 officers and a minimum of
128 support staffs would be a fair representation with a 95% confidence and 5%
error. This study uses a self-administered questionnaire survey method for data
collection procedure. The consent to distribute the questionnaires to various units
within the PIMB was granted by the management.

Table 2: Sampling Details of the Respondents

Managerial and Professional Staffs Support Staffs Total

(Supervisors) (Subordinates)

Number of Staffs 32 208 240

Number of Sample
20 128 148
(proposal)
Number of Sample
20 145 165
(actual)

6
 A total of 180 questionnaires were distributed to the professionals and support
staffs in the various units in the PIMB headquarters in Kuala Lumpur. The researcher
took the opportunity in explaining the purpose of the questionnaires--the list of
instructions therein and the confidentiality aspect of the responses. The respondents
were given two weeks to complete the questionnaires, after which the questionnaires
were collected manually. The responses from the distribution of the questionnaires
were very encouraging and a total of 165 responded to this study (92% response
rate).

5.3 Instruments

The instrument utilized to measure each of the constructs is detailed questionnaires

which are (e.g. Lo, Ramayah, & Kueh, 2006) very well-tested, validated and reliable
that has been used extensively by researchers. Three sections of self-administered
questionnaires are used for this survey. Section A of the questionnaire obtained the
personal characteristics and demographic profile of the respondent’s gender, work
experiences, race, age, status, basic salary, education and tenure in PIMB. Section
B of the questionnaire consists of the LMX items while section C of the questionnaire
consists of the OCB items. Sections B and Section C of the questionnaire used in
the survey were adapted from a similar project in the private sector setting by Lo,
Ramayah and Kueh (2006) who later went on to publish them in the public domain
under the title “An Investigation of Leader-Member Exchange Effects on
Organizational Citizenship Behavior in Malaysia”. These measurements were based
on the questionnaires LMX-Multidimensional Method developed by Liden and
Maslyn (1998). A seven--point Likert scale was used to measure both LMX and OCB
items, which ranges from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The
questionnaire comprising the twelve questions from LMX perspective, were
categorized into four dimensions of LMX—i.e., affect, contribution, loyalty and
professional respect. The questionnaire with the twenty questions from OCB
perspective, were categorized into five dimensions of OCB proposed by Organ
(1988, ) i.e., altruism, conscientiousness, courtesy, civic virtues and sportsmanship.

Table 3 : The Measures and Layout of the Questionnaires.

Section Variables No of Sources of Questions

Items
A Demographics data and profile of the
respondents 9
B Leader-Member Exchange (B1 – B12) Adapted from LMX-MDM developed by
12 Liden & Maslyn (1998)
C Organizational Citizenship Behaviour Adopted from five dimension of OCB by
20 Organ (1988)
(C1 – C20)

Total 41

7
 5.4 Statistical Analysis

Data gathered from the respondents were analyzed using quantitative methods.
Descriptive and statistical analyses were used and the Statistical Package for the
Social Science (SPSS version 16) was used to analyze the data. All scales used in
the study were tested for reliability using the reliability package in SPSS. Descriptive
statistic used to explain the demographics variables and Cronbach’s alpha was used
as the measure for internal consistency. Application of descriptive statistics allows
for measures, which could compute from the sample of collected data to give an
estimate of responses to unit of analysis in the population. This permits the measure
of central percentage distributions and standard deviation measures to gauge the
variability--i.e., the profile of the respondents. A more detailed analysis was
conducted to examine the set of variables using scale measurement technique. In
order to examine the relationship between the independent variables and dependent
variables, correlation analyses were performed. The Pearson correlations analyze,
examine and determine the significant relationships between LMX and OCB
variables. Correlation analysis shows the correlation coefficient and the degree of
magnitude of the relationship between the two variables.

6. Discussion of Findings

6.1 Demographic Analysis

This study set out to investigate the correlation study of leader-member exchange
effects and organizational citizenship behavior in the public sector organization. It
was examined using 165 respondents from all the units in PIMB headquarters in
Kuala Lumpur (Table 4). Although this is a relatively small number of samples as
compared to the public sector in Malaysia, the findings from this study pointed to
fruitful areas for further investigations and future studies on the supervisor-
subordinates relationship. This study affirms the importance of LMX and OCB
especially in the public sector and should be taken more seriously by the managers
and policy makers. The outcomes of the analysis indicated that LMX has a
significant relationship with OCB. This study particularly emphasizes the dimensions
of LMX (Affect, Contribution, Loyalty, and Professional Respect) and the relationship
with overall OCB.

The respondents comprised 60 per cent males and 40 per cent females. In
addition 80 per cent of the supervisors are males. The highest respondent ethnically
is Malays (91.5 per cent), followed by Indians (3.8 per cent), Chinese (1.8 per cent),
and others (3 percent). “Others” here include notably the ethnic groups from East
Malaysia. Most of the employees are relatively young and are below 35 years of age
(65.4 percent). Interestingly, 27.9 per cent of the employees are over 45 years old
and 6.7 per cent are those whose age ranges from 35 to 44 years. In terms of
educational attainments, 47.3 per cent held the Malaysia Certificate of Education
(MCE) or certificates from local polytechnics, 37 per cent achieved their diploma
certificates and 12.1 per cent with tertiary education namely the basic degree. The
“others” category generally comprises post-graduate studies which in usual cases
are encouraged but otherwise not mandatory in the PIMB. The qualification also

8
depicts the type of employments namely MCE and polytechnic certificates for
technicians, diplomas for semi-professionals and degrees for professionals. This
reflects the job category in this study with technicians and semi-professional as
support staffs and the rest as professional and managerial staffs.

Most of them have less than 1 year (63.6 per cent) working experience under the
current superior with 1 to 2 years (15.2 per cent), 3 to 4 years (4.8 per cent) and
more than 5 years (16.4 per cent). This is typical in the PIMB as most of the
professionals are seconded staffs that are from either the Public Works Department
or the Survey and Mapping Department and the transfer rates are quite high due to
promotions or transfer exercise by the parent departments.

Table 4: Profile of the Respondents

Demographics Details Frequency Percentage

Units under PIMB Project Management 27 16.4

Architectural 30 18.2

Civil Engineering 21 12.7

Structural Engineering 12 7.3

Mechanical Engineering 10 6.1

Electrical Engineering 11 6.7

Contract & Quantity Surveying 26 15.8

Land Surveying 12 7.3

Maintenance Section 16 9.7

Total 165 100

Job Category P&P 20 12.1

Supportive 145 87.9

Subordinate’s Gender Male 99 60

Female 66 40
Superior’s Gender Male 132 80

Female 33 20
Length of Service 1 to 5 years 81 49.1

6 to 10 years 33 20

More than 10 years 51 30.9

9
 Period of working with superior Less 1 year 105 63.6

1 to 2 years 25 15.2

3 to 4 years 8 4.8

More than 5 years 27 16.4

Race Malay 151 91.5

Chinese 3 1.8

Indian 6 3.6

Others 5 3
Age (years) 24 and below 20 12.1

25-35 88 53.3

35-44 11 6.7

45 and above 46 27.9

Education Background SPM / Certificate 78 47.3

Diploma 61 37

Degree 20 12.1

Other 6 3.6
Monthly Gross Salary Less than RM1,500 29 17.6

RM1,501 - RM3,000 111 67.3

RM3,001 - RM4,500 24 14.5

RM4,501 - RM6,000 1 .6

6.2 Descriptive Statistics

Descriptive statistics for all study variables were computed for all data. Mean,
standard deviation, minimum and maximum values were computed followed by inter-
correlation analysis. Table 4 presents the descriptive statistics for all the study
variables. The minimum and maximum values of all studied items were on the Likert
scale of 1-7 as was indicated in the questionnaires. Of all the LMX dimensions, the
highest score is Respect with a mean of 5.68 and the lowest score is Loyalty with a
mean of 4.91. The overall mean of LMX and OCB are 5.44 and 5.51 respectively.
The Loyalty dimension of LMX had the highest standard deviation of .99 and
Contribution had the lowest standard deviation of .87. The overall standard deviation
of LMX and OCB are .78 and .65.

10
Table 5: The Result of Means, Standard Deviation And Correlation of all The
Study Variables.
Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
1. Affect .90
**
2. Loyalty .63 .89
** **
3. Contribution .66 .58 .79
** ** **
4. Respect .68 .56 .72 .93
** ** ** **
5. OCB .44 .46 .56 .45 .94
** ** ** ** **
6. Altruism .55 .44 .66 .57 .74 .90
** ** ** ** ** **
7. Contentiousness .43 .46 .55 .49 .80 .72 .75
** ** ** ** ** ** **
8. Sportsman .25 .33 .25 .23 .74 .33 .49 .67
** ** ** ** ** ** ** **
9. Civic .32 .25 .48 .29 .79 .59 .63 .40 .86
** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **
10. Courtesy .23 .34 .33 .24 .76 .40 .42 .48 .50 .75
** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **
11. LMX .87 .82 .86 .86 .56 .65 .56 .31 .39 .34 .90
Means 5.57 4.91 5.59 5.68 5.51 5.93 5.44 5.24 5.37 5.57 5.44
SD .88 .99 .87 .90 .65 .71 .63 1.07 .84 .99 .78
Number of Items 3 3 3 3 12 4 6 4 4 2 20

6.3 Reliability Analysis

The reliability of the data was verified using Cronbach’s alpha. The Cronbach’s alpha
is reliability coefficient that indicates that with the items in a set are positively
correlated to one another. The closer the Cronbach’s alpha to 1, the higher the
internal consistency reliability. The reliability analysis results on LMX and OCB
indicate that the Cronbach’s alpha for the 12-items of LMX and the 20-items of OCB
are .94 and .90 respectively. The results for these tests are displayed in Table 5. The
above Cronbach’s alpha value for each construct which was above .75 indicates that
the results are very reliable for further analysis. The values denote good internal
consistency estimates of reliability of the grouped items for both factors.

6.4 Inter-Correlation Analysis

The results of the inter-correlation analysis of all the variables are as shown in Table
5. There is a high correlation between OCB and each of the LMX dimension. Each
correlation was significant at the 0.01 level.

Specifically, Hypothesis 1 proposed that there is a positive relationship between

LMX and OCB in the PIMB. The analyses provide significant support to the proposed
hypothesis. Based on the results, it can be concluded that in this study, there are
positive relationship of LMX and OCB in the PIMB. A positive association between
LMX and OCB was expected because OCB helps to fulfil the reciprocity obligations
of followers, and represents an exchange currency that are diffuse, unspecified, and
weakly time-bound (Ali et al., 2008). The current study further support the idea of
Hackett, Farh, Song, and Lapierre (2003) who postulated that a meta-analytic mean
correlation of .32 between LMX and overall OCB, leading them to conclude that OCB

11
plays a prominent role in the reciprocal social exchange process of LMX. These
results are also comparable to the findings of other industry by Lo, Ramayah, and
Kueh (2006). Policy makers and practitioners alike could capitalize from the study
through the understandings of how relationships as portrayed by the superiors can
play a major role in shaping the subordinates behavior to perform works that goes
beyond the job descriptions without expectation of incentives. It summarizes the
results of the relationships between the four dimensions of LMX and each of the five
dimensions of OCB. These results add support to the hypothesis that a statistically
significant relationship exists between OCB and each dimension LMX, as well as
between LMX and overall OCB. LMX is positively correlated to OCB (r=.56, p<.01).

6.5 Regression Analysis

Table 6: The Results of Multiple Regression Regressing Age and LMX against OCB

Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta
1 (Constant) 3.263 1.108 2.946 .009
LMX (24 & below) .408 .202 .430 2.019 .059
2 (Constant) 3.141 .352 8.913 .000
LMX(25 – 35) .447 .065 .597 6.902 .000
3 (Constant) 3.954 1.529 2.586 .029
LMX (35-45) .305 .273 .349 1.117 .293
4 (Constant) 2.031 .484 4.195 .000
LMX (45 & above) .627 .087 .736 7.212 .000

a. Dependent Variable: OCB

Although the overall regression is not significant, the coefficient according to age
categories indicates mixed results for LMX relationship to OCB (p<.001). The results
are displayed in Table 6. The table indicates significant relationship for LMX taken at
the age range between 25-35 and 45 and above. There is no significant relationship
for the age range between 24 and below, and 35-45. The Hypothesis 2 proposed
that there are significant differences between perceived LMX and OCB according to
age. The summary coefficient output according to age category (Table 6) does not
support this hypothesis. Research interest on age and age effects has evolved
over the years (Epitropaki & Martin, 1999, 2005). The general notions are the older a
person the greater the wisdom and leads to better LMX and OCB. Past studies on
the effects of demographics such as age on LMX resulted in mixed outcomes
(Dienesch & Liden, 1986). The essential component of LMX is the social interaction
process between supervisors and subordinates. Obviously, the social interactions
are at a higher quality level when supervisors and subordinates amicably create an
inspiring atmosphere. Another possible explanation is that the different levels of
beliefs, attitudes and behavior caused by different cultural and education level might
lead to different quality levels in LMX to OCB. This has no bearing on age.

12
7. Limitation

The study provided sufficient insights into the relationship of LMX and OCB. While
conducting the study particular attention was paid to some possible shortcoming. In
addition, the results could not be generalized in view of the fact that all the variables
were taken from the same source and there is a possibility of common methods
variance. As in other studies, same source bias remains an issue when interpreting
the data in the study. Here again, considering the nature of the construct, it seems
that the respondents were better able to assess their LMX and OCB as compared to
other who may have sufficient observational opportunities (supervisors, peers).

In addition the respondents may not answer to the questionnaire according to

their conscience for fear of repercussions from their superiors, thus impeding the
accuracy of the study. Hence, avoiding extreme response categories (i.e., points 1
and 7 on the scale) which could lead to ‘central tendency biases.

In addition, a longitudinal study is likely to provide a better insight into the

dimensionality of LMX and OCB over a period of time. The study has relied on the
sampling drawn from the PIMB, thus the findings cannot be generalized to other
public sectors. Comparative studies across professions, cultures, and various
government departments are also needed in order to truly understand many of the
constructs included in this study and the relationship thereafter.

8. Implication For Practice

The implication to the human resource management and organizational behavior is

numerous. The interest in both LMX and OCB at work has increased exponentially in
the past decade (see Podsakoff et al., 2000). Organizations can formulate practices
which enhances LMX and OCB. These may include:

i. Selection procedures that is predictive of LMX and OCB.

ii. Development of an organizational culture that emphasizes dyad
relationship and going the ‘extra mile’.
iii. Use of validated psychological tests to identify personality traits that
indicate LMX and OCB.
iv. Design of a compensation system that encourages group, division or
organizational level outcomes as this tends to increase OCB.
v. Creation of a learning organization with incentive for lifelong learning
and sharing of explicit and tacit knowledge.

The implementation of these ideals will, of course, present the management with
considerable challenges which is however a norm for continuous growth.

9. Conclusion

The outcome of the study implies that supervisor-subordinate relationship at the

workplace leads to employees gaining confidence in their ability, appearance and
power (Buss, 2001). As Truckenbrodt (2000) highlighted “the study suggests that
quality of exchange relationships affect subordinates’ commitment and goodwill”.
Hence, an organizational culture in which an open two-way interaction and learning

13
environment is highly encouraged. Policy-makers and practitioners alike can gain
substantially by understanding the impact good relationship has on the outcome
expected by using LMX and OCB as a management tool.

REFFERENCES

Ali, A., Abu, D. S., Aminah, A., & Bahaman, A. S. (2008). The relationship between
transformational leadership behaviors, organizational justice, leader-member
exchange, perceived organizational support, trust in management and
organizational citizenship behaviors. European Journal of Scientific Research,
23(2), 227-242.

Aquino, K., & Bommer, W. H. (2003). Preferential mistreatment: How victim status
moderates the relationship between organizational citizenship behavior and
workplace victimization. Organizational Science, 14(4), 374-385.

Barnald, C.I. (1938). The function of executives. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.

Bateman, T. S., & Organ, D. W. (1983). Job satisfaction and the good soldier: The
relationship between affect and citizenship. Academy of Management Journal.
26, 4, 587-595.

Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley.

Biddle, B. J. (1986). Recent developments in role theory. Annual Review of

Sociology, 12, 67-92.

Buss, A. (2001). Psychological dimensions of the self. London: Sage Publications.

Deluga, R. J. (1998). Leader-Member exchange quality and effectiveness ratings:

The role of-subordinate-supervisor conscientiousness similarity. Group and
Organizational Management, 23, 189-216.

Dienesch, R. M., & Liden, R. C. (1986). Leader-member exchange model of

leadership: A critique and further development. Academy of Management
Review, 11, 618-634.

Epitropaki, O. & Martin, R. (1999), The impact of relational demography on the

quality of leader-member exchanges and employees’ work attitudes and well-
being, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 72, 237-240.

Epitropaki, O. & Martin, R. (2005), From ideal to real: a longitudinal study of the role
of implicit leadership theories on leader-member exchange and employee
outcomes, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 72, 237-
240.

14
 Gouldner, A.W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: a preliminary statement. American
Sociology Review, 25, 161-178.

Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Development of Leader-Member exchange

(LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: applying a Multi-level Multi domain
perspective. Leadership Quarterly, 6:219-247.

Hackett, R.D., Farh, J.L., Song, L. J., & Lapierre, L. M. (2003). LMX and
organizational citizenship behavior: Examining the links within and across
Western and Earsten samples. In G. B. Graen (Ed.), Dealing with diversity (A
volume in LMX Leadership): The series, 219-264), Greenwich, CT:
Information Age.

Harris, K. J. (2004). An examination on multiple predictors and outcomes from

different dimensions of LMX relationship quality. Unpublished Phd thesis,
College of Business, The Florida State University.

Hofmann, D. A., Morgeson, F. P., & Gerras, S. J. (2003). Climate as a moderator of

the relationship between leader-member exchange and context specific
citizenship: Safety climate as an exemplar. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88,
170-178.

Ilies, R., Nahrgang, J. D., & Morgeson, F. P. (2007). Leader-member exchange and
citizenship behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology. 92(1)
269-277.

Ismail bin Adam, Tan Sri. (2007). Leadership In The Malaysian Public Service: An
Update. Journal of Public Service, Malaysia, 6 (1), 1-22.

Kang, D. S., & Stewart, J. (2007). Leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of

leadership and HRD: Development of units of theory and laws of interaction.
Leadership & Organizational Journal. 28(6) 531-551.

Katz, D., & Kahn, R.L. (1978). The social psychology of organization. (22nd Ed.). New
York: Wiley.

Katz, D. (1964). The motivational basis of organizational behavior. Behavioral

Science, 9, 131-133.

Kaur, S., Raduan, C. S., Anantaraman, V., Murali, S., & Khairudin, I. (2007). The
influence of individual factors on Malaysian managers, participation in
decision making. Proceeding of the 13th Asia Pacific Management
Conference, Melbourne, Australia, 448 – 457.

Lapierre, L. M., & Hackett, R. D. (2007). Trait Conscientiousness, Leader-Member

Exchange, Job Satisfaction and Organizational Citizenship Behaviour: a Test
of a Integrative Model. Journal of Occupational and Organizational
Psychology, 80, 539-554.

15
LePine, J. A., Erez, A., & Johnson, D. E. (2002). The nature and dimensionality of
organizational citizenship behavior: a critical review and meta-analysis.
Journal of Applied Psychology. 87, 52-65.

Liden, R. C., & Graen, G. B. (1980). Generalizability of the vertical dyad linkage model
of leadership. Academy of Management Journal, 23, 451-465.

Liden, R. C., Sparrowe, R. T., & Wayne, S. J. (1997). Leader-member exchange

theory: The past and potential for the future. In. G. R. Ferris (Ed.),
Research in personnel and human resources management (Vol. 15,
pp. 47-120). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Liden, R. C., & Maslyn, J. M. (1998). Multidimensionality of leader-member exchange:

An empirical assessment through scale development. Journal of
Management, 24, 43-72.

Lo, M. C., Ramayah, T., & Kueh, J. S. H. (2006). An Investigation Leader- Member
Exchange effects on Organizational Citizenship Behavior in Malaysia.
Journal of Business and Management, 12, 1, 5-23.

Lo, M. C., & Ramayah, T. (2009). Dimensionality of Citizenship Behaviour Behaviour

(OCB) in a Multicultural Society: The Case of Malaysia. International
Business Research, 2(1), 48-55.

Manzoni, J., & Barsoux, J. (2002). The Set-Up-to-Fail Syndrome. How Good
Managers Cause Great People To Fail. Boston: Harvard Business
School Press.

McShane, S. L., & Von Glinow M. A. ((2008). Organizational Behavior (4th Ed). New
York: McGraw- Hill/Irwin

Ministry of Housing and Local Government (2008): Paper on Human Resource

Strategic Planning for 2008-2012, Human Resource Division, MHLG.

Organ, D. W. (1988), Organizational citizenship behavior: the good soldier syndrome,

Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

Organ, D. W. (1990). The motivational basis of organizational citizenship behavior.

Research in Organizational Behavior, 12, 43-72.

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B., & Bacharach, D. G. (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.

Robbins, S. P. (1993). Organizational Behavior (6th Ed), N.J.: Prentice Hall

International Edition.

16
Rupp, D. E., & Cropanzano, R. (2002). The mediating effects of social exchange
relationships in predicting workplace outcomes from multifoci
organizational justice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 89, 925-946.

Scandura, T. A., Graen, G. B., & Novak, M. A. (1986). When managers decide not to
decide autocratically: An investigation of leader-member exchange and
decision influence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 579-585.

Settoon, R. P., Bennet, N., & Liden, R. C. (1996). Social exchange in organizations:
Perceived organizational support, leader-member exchange, and
employee reciprocity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 219-227.

Truckenbrodt, Y. B. (2000). Leader-member exchange and commitment and

organizational citizenship behavior. Acquisition Review Quarterly-
Summer, 233-244.

Unnikammu, M., Blau, G., Ravi, K., & Ahamdali, N. (2006). Comparing correlates of
Organizational Citizenship Behavior of sales representatives in India.
International Journal of Commerce & Management. 16 (1), 15-28.

Wang, H., Law, K. S., Hackett, R. D., Wang, D., and Chen, Z. X. (2005). Leader-
member exchange as a mediator of the relationship between
transformational leadership and followers’ performance and
organizational citizenship behavior. Academy of Management Journal,
48(3), 420-432.

Wayne, S. J., Shore, L. M., & Liden, R.C. (1997). Perceived organizational support
and leader-member exchange: A social exchange perspective.
Academy of Management Journal, 40(1), 82-111.

Wayne, S. J., Shore, L. M., Bommer, W. H., & Tetrick, L. E. (2002). The role of fair
treatment and rewards in perceptions of organizational support and
leader-member exchange. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 590-598.

Yammarino, F. J., & Dubinsky, A. J. (1992). Superior-subordinate relationships: A

multiple levels of analysis approach. Human Relations, 45, 575-600.

17