Thesis Proposal

Organizational Citizenship behavior in Pakistan Telecommunication Company Limited

By

Allah Rakha Sandhu

(arsandhu100@yahoo.com)

MS (HRM)

Riphah International University Islamabad

Supervised By

Dr. Moeen Aizaz Zafar

1

Document Information

Document Name Version Number State Date Submission Date

Thesis Proposal 1.0

Domain: Human Resource management

Area: Organizational citizenship behavior in Pakistan Telecommunication Company

Limited.

Result: In final the Independent variables have positive result on the Organizational

citizenship behavior.

2

1. Introduction.

The proposal is related to the topic “Organizational citizenship behavior in Pakistan

telecommunication limited”. Pakistan Telecommunication Company Limited (PTCL) is

the largest telecommunication company in Pakistan. The company provides telephony

services nation-wide and is the backbone for country's telecommunication infrastructure

despite arrival of a dozen other telecommunication companies, including giants like

Telenor and China Mobile. The company operates around 2000 telephone exchanges

across the country, providing the largest fixed line network. Data and backbone services

such as GSM, CDMA, Broadband Internet, and IPTV, wholesale are an increasing part of

its business. Originally fully owned by the Government of Pakistan, this holding has

since 2006 been reduced to 62%, when 26% of shares and control was sold to Etisalat -

and the remaining 12% to the general public.

For a country that is very strategically placed on the world map and which is trying to

break the chains of third world, has great importance of economic growth. In the complex

and ever growing world of communication, cellular technology is of great importance. It

surely shrinks the world as it is in true sense “global”. And PTCL is fulfilling this need of

our country. PTCL provide its users with worldwide access. Its subscribers make up a

very large and a mix as they belong to all the classes of society. Telecom Company’s

main aim is to provide grade “A” quality to all its users belonging to different social

classes. PTCL often provide new schemes and packages to its customers who all have

different need. Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) Chairman Dr Mohammad

Yasin has said that Pakistan telecommunication limited has been growing faster than that

of India with over 62 percent teledensity, encouraging the foreign direct investment

(FDI), during an interview with Business Recorder. Dr. Yasin said that India lagged far

behind Pakistan with 37 percent teledensity as compared to 62 percent in Pakistan.

The current study is based on the research on OCB and its antecedents in PTCL

sector of Rawalpindi/Islamabad. OCB is defined as the type of behavior by

employees that support the interests of their organization even though they may

3

not directly lead to individual benefits. This job behavior is considered of crucial

importance to employers. Managers often find it difficult to reward good

citizenship directly, just as it is difficult to punish the absence of such behavior

directly. (Chen, 2009). As telecom industry is a service industry and OCB is an

extremely important issue within the service and hospitality industry, Morrison's

(1996) research showed that OCB is an indication of high service quality. Recent

studies have shown abundant proof that OCB is positively related to service

quality. Conscientious employees would go beyond customer expectations.

Altruistic workers would help internal and external customers. Those exhibiting

civic virtue would make suggestions to improve quality and customer satisfaction.

Sportsmanship and courtesy would create a positive climate among employees that

spills over to customers. In another cross-sectional study, civic virtue,

sportsmanship, and altruism were positively correlated with financial results and

customer satisfaction (Walz & Niehoff, 1996).

2. Thesis Motivation

The study focuses on the following topics

2.1 Job commitment and OCB

Job satisfaction correlated positively with OCB. This supports previous findings

suggesting Organ and Ryan (1995) found in their meta-analytic review of 55 studies that

job satisfaction and organizational commitment were the two robust correlates of OCBs.

2.2 Job satisfaction with OCB

Results yielded a significant and very strong positive relationship between Job

satisfaction and OCB in the present study. It supported previous findings that says a

meta-analysis showed that citizenship behaviors correlated with job satisfaction,

perceived fairness, organizational commitment, and leader supportiveness (Organ &

Ryan, 1995).

4

2.3 Work place value with OCB

This significant value of this independent variable means that if employees believe that

their organization values quality products or services, they will be more likely to become

attached to it and engage in behaviors that will contribute to high quality.

2.4 Job Characteristics with OCB

To the extent that a job is structured to provide regular feedback and autonomy as well as

a sense of task completion, employees can monitor their own behavior and gain an

increased sense of personal control.

2.5 Job level with OCB

Studies of civic citizenship have consistently found socioeconomic status to be the single

strongest predictor of the active citizenship syndrome because high status tends to in-

crease both the motivation and the ability to be actively involved (Campbell, Converse,

Miller, & Stokes, 1966; Milbrath & Goel, 1977.).

3. Research Questions.

More recently, Podsakoff, Blume, Whiting, and Podsakoff (2009) found that OCBs were

positively related to unit-level performance and customer satisfaction. Nielsen, Hrivnak,

and Shaw (2009), in their meta-analytic review of the existing group literature, examined

the relationship between OCBs and performance at the group level. These researchers

found a positive and significant relationship between overall OCB and performance at the

group level. In addition, Nielsen et al (2009) found that similar patterns of relationships

existed for each dimension of OCB: civic virtue, sportsmanship, altruism,

conscientiousness and courtesy. There are some research questions on which the research

work is based:

1. How much organizational citizenship behavior is fruitful in the Pakistan

telecommunication limited?

2. How much resistance rate is there to follow the organizational citizenship

behavior with respect to internal and external factors?

5

3. What is the effect of organizational citizenship behavior on the development of

the ptcl sector?

4. How scholars define the concept of organizational citizenship behavior and

recommend implementing it on any organization.

5. What is the total percentage of OCB in PTCL?

4. Thesis Objectives.

This thesis aims to discuss on the following issues and aim to achieve objectives by OCB

implementation in PTCL.

1. What is the future road map after adopting organizational citizenship behavior in

PTCL sector?

2. What should be the top management strategy for the motivation and creating a

positive perception of the working employees in PTCL?

3. Hoe the Government policies are implemented on OCB and their effect on the

Organization?

4. Hoe much OCB helps the PTCL decision makers to make the organizational

decisions?

5. To study the relationship of OCB with the factors that are job attitudes, job

characteristics, tenure, work place values, and job level of PTCL sector.

6. Examine other antecedents of OCB such as cynicism, rewards, trust, TQM,

leadership as well as economic conditions, to determine the extra role behavior.

7. Examine other demographic factors such as salary range, educational

qualifications, and job performance ratings.

5. Literature Review

As a result of literature review it has been reveal that Organizational citizenship behavior

is being studied since 1970’s. “Individual behavior that is discretionary, not directly or

explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, and that in the aggregate promotes the

6

effective functioning of the organization” (Organ,1988). More recently, however, Organ

(1997) refined this definition, conceptualizing organizational citizenship behavior as any

form of performance that supports the social or psychological environment in which the

work tasks are embedded-a definition that more closely corresponds to contextual

performance, as defined by Borman and Motowidlo (1993, 1997). Since this time, many

related concepts have emerged, such as extra-role behavior (Van Dyne, Cummings, &

Parks, 1995), organizational citizenship performance (Borman, 2004), organizational

spontaneity (George & Brief, 1992; George & Jones, 1997). These terms are related, but

often emphasize different features. . In several studies the relationship between

satisfaction, commitment, and OCBs has been found to create underlying positive

attitudes about the job and the organization that encourage people to exhibit citizenship

behaviors (Allen & Meyer, 1996). Nevertheless, as job satisfaction and organizational

commitment have been found to be strongly related to each other,some scholars indicate

that they should be examined together to determine their influence on OCBs (Alotaibi,

2001). Organizational commitment (OC) has for many years been identified as a central

construct in understanding the relationship between the employee and the employer (cf.

Allen & Meyer, 1996). Definitions of the construct indicate its significance in binding the

individual both to the organization and to courses of action which are relevant to the

target of the commitment (Meyer & Herscovitch, 2001). With regard to the former,

analyses consistently indicate significant correlations between OC and turnover intention

(cf. Randall, 1990). Organizational citizenship behavior is positively related to job

satisfaction. Nevertheless, the precise relationship differs between affective and cognitive

job satisfaction. In particular, researchers sometimes distinguish affective and cognitive

job satisfaction. Questions about the feelings their job evokes, such as "I enjoy my work",

represent affective job satisfaction. Questions that invite more deliberate appraisals, such

as "My job fulfills my expectations", represent cognitive job satisfaction. In the study

conducted by Moorman and Blakely (1995), participants completed a series of scales,

some of which assessed affective job satisfaction, cognitive job satisfaction, and

organizational citizenship behavior. Their analyses showed that organizational citizenship

behavior was more strongly related to cognitive, rather than affective, job satisfaction. In

general, organizational citizenship behavior is indeed related to measures of workplace

7

effectiveness (Dunlop & Lee, 2004; Koys, 2001; Podsakoff & MacKenzie, 1994; Walz &

Niehoff, 2000). That is, these behaviors coincide with reductions in costs but

improvements in efficiency, profitability, and production quantity. Several mechanisms

might underpin the associations between organizational citizenship behavior and

workplace effectiveness (see Borman & Motowidlo, 1993; Organ, 1988; Podsakoff &

MacKenzie, 1997). First, when experienced employees exhibit organizational citizenship

behavior, they might impart their knowledge and skills to novice employees-whose

productivity might thus improve exponentially. Second, some facets of exhibit

organizational citizenship behavior, particularly civic virtue and voice behavior, might

facilitate the identification of insightful and innovative solutions to improve the

organization. Third, organizational citizenship behaviors might promote positive

emotions and feelings, including morale and cohesion. The job characteristic model helps

to explain why employees may respond some what differently to an increase in some of

the core characteristics of their jobs. The model identifies three types of individual

difference that affect the relationship between the core dimensions and the psychological

states and the relationship between the psychological states and outcomes. (McShane and

Glinow, 2000). A job that allows a high degree of autonomy and the absence of close

supervision or supervisory monitoring suggests a situation characterized by trust. Recent

results of a study by Niehoff and Moorman (1993) support this view and demonstrate that

monitoring negatively influences citizenship. Thus, the freedom associated with

autonomy and low monitoring is balanced by the reciprocal response of responsibility

and constructive behavior. Studies of civic citizenship have consistently found

socioeconomic status to be the single strongest predictor of the active citizenship

syndrome because high status tends to in- crease both the motivation and the ability to be

actively involved (Campbell, Converse, Miller, & Stokes, 1966;). Those in high-level

jobs may feel social pressure to report attachment to their organizations and may feel

subject to expectations from both peers and subordinates that they will "go the extra

mile."

8

6. Research Model

Job commitment

Job satisfaction

Work place value

Job Characteristics

Job level

7. Hypothesis

H1: Employees Job commitment will positively affect the Organizational citizenship

behavior.

H2: Employees job satisfaction positively affects on Organizational citizenship

behavior.

H3: Employees Perceptions of socially desirable work place values will positively

affects Organizational citizenship behavior.

H4: Highly motivating job characteristics will positively affect the Organizational

citizenship behavior.

H5: High employee’s job level positively affects Organizational citizenship

behavior.

Organizational citizenship behavior

9

8. Research Methodology

As there is selected some independent variable with organizational citizenship behavior

as dependent one. The variables are fully supported by the theories in the research work.

There is used both the primary and secondary data to support the research questions. For

first hand data there is used samples of 100 questionnaires. The Likert scale range from

1 – 5 will be used indicating 1 for completely disagree, to 5 completely agree.

9. Time Frame

S/NO Activity Time Required Running Time

1 Search and collection of

research material

Mostly Already done

Later

2 Literature Review Two weeks -do-

3 Data Collection 1 Months -do-

4 Data analysis 1 Weeks -do-

5 Compilation, review and

Finalization of Thesis

2 Weeks -do-

6 Final Presentation 1 Week notice -do-

10

10. References

1. Allen, and Meyer (1996), Ratings of organizational citizenship behavior: Does the

source make a difference? Human Resource Management Review, 10, 97-114.

2. Alotaibi, A. G., (2001). Antecedents of Organizational Citizenship Behavior: A Study

of Public Personnel in Kuwait. Public Personnel Management. Retrieved from

www.entrepreneur.com/tradejournals. And Applications. Sage Publications.

3. Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1993). Expanding the criterion domain to include

elements of contextual performance. In N. Schmitt, W. C. Borman, & Associates (Eds.),

Personnel selection in organizations (pp. 71–98). San-Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Brief, A.

P., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1986). Prosocial organizational behaviors. Academy of

Management Review, 11, 710-725.

4. Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1993). Expanding the criterion domain to include

elements of contextual performance. In N. Schmitt, W. C. Borman, & Associates (Eds.),

Personnel selection in organizations (pp. 71-98). San Francisco Jossey-Bass.

5. Borman, (2004). Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of contextual

performance. In N. Schmitt & W. C. Borman (Eds.), Personality selection (pp. 71-98).

San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

6. Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., Miller, W. E., & Stokes, D. E. (1966). The American

voter. New york : Wiley

7. Cf. Randall (1990). Relationship between job characteristics and organizational

citizenship behavior: the Mediational role of Job satisfaction. Social Behavior and

Personality: an international journal, Vol. 33, No. 6, p. 523-540.

11

8. Chen, Niu. L., Wang. H., Yang. Y., & Hshiung. S. (2009). Does job standardization

increase organizational citizenship behavior? Public personnel management.

9. Dunlop, P.D., & Lee, K. (2003). Workplace deviance, organizational citizenship

behavior, and business unit performance: the bad apples do spoil the whole barrel Journal

of organizational behavior. Vol. 25, No. 1, p. 67 – 80.

10. George and brief (1992), the new work order: behind the language of the new

capitalism, Allen & Unwin, Sydney.

11. Greorge and jones. (1997). An essay on organizational citizenship behavior.

Employee Rights and Responsibilities Journal, 4, 249–270.

12. Koys, D.J. (2001). The effects of employee satisfaction, organizational citizenship

behavior, and turnover on organizational effectiveness: A unit-level, longitudinal study.

Personnel Psychology, 54,101–114.

13. McShane & Glinow, (2000). Organizational Behavior. Irwin and Mc Graw Hill,

New York.

14. Meyer, J.P. and Herscovitch. (2001) Commitment in the Work place: Theory, Re

search Milbrath, L. W., & Goel, M. L. (1977). Political participation: How and why do

people get involved in politics? (2d ed.). Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

15. Milbrath, L. W., & Goel, M. L. (1977). Political participation: How and why do

people get involved in politics? (2d ed.). Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

16. Moorman, R. H., & Blakely, G. L. (1995). Individualism-collectivism as an

individual difference predictor of organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of

Organizational Behavior, 16, 127 -142.

12

17. Nielsen, T. M., Hrivnak, G. A., & Shaw, M. (2009). Organizational citizenship

behavior and performance: A meta-analysis of group-level research. Small Group

Research, 40(5), 555-577

18. Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational Citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

19. Organ, D. W. (1997). Organizational citizenship behavior: It’s construct cleanup

time. Human Performance, 10(2), 85-97.

20. Organ, D. W. & Ryan, K. (1995). A meta-analytic review of attitudinal and

dispositional predictors of organizational citizenship.

21. Podsakoff, N. P., Blume, B. D., Whiting, S. W., & Podsakoff, P. M. (2009).

Individual- and organizational-level consequences of organizational citizenship

behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(1), 122-141.

22. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B, Moorman, R. H., & Fetter, R (1994).

Transformational leader behaviors and their effects on followers' trust in leader,

satisfaction, and orga nizational citizenship behaviors. Leadership Quarterly, 1, 107-142.

23. Van Dyne L, Cummings LL, McLean Parks J. (1995). Extra-role behaviors: in

pursuit of construct and definitional clarity (A bridge over muddied waters). Research in

Organizational Behavior. Cummings LL, Staw BM (eds) 17: 215-285.

24. Walz, S. M., & Niehoff, B. P. (2000). Organizational citizenship behaviors: Their

relationship to organizational effectiveness. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research,

24, 301-319.

13