From Discretionary to Required

The Migration of Organizational Citizenship Behavior

Bibliographic Data

ID12793362
AuthorsDavid L Turnipseed (0000-0002-9949-2134, University of South Alabama, corresponding author), George L Wilson
Year2008
Volume15
Issue3
Pages201-216
Publication date2008-10-30
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Leadership & Organizational Studies (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1548-0518 • E-ISSN: 1939-7089
PublisherSAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1177/1548051808326037
OpenAlexW1992494023
LanguageEN
Citations received3
References cited52

The distinction between organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) and required behavior remains questionable more than two decades after its conceptualization. To examine the conceptual confusion, OCB was assessed for consistency with the traditional definition. OCB perceived as owed to the organization was also identified. Results indicate that many OCBs are perceived as part of the job description, rewarded, and punished. This highlights the definitional problem: What is the theoretical and pragmatic difference between OCB and required behavior, or what does the label OCB mean? Assuming that OCB exists (perhaps at organization entry), it is argued to migrate from discretionary to psychologically required. Results are discussed in terms of role sending, leader—member exchange, and reinforcement by managers. Rather than reduce the worth of the OCB construct, we suggest that it remains valuable: discretionary, extrarole OCB may be a midpoint between a formal job description and expanded work behavior migrating to psychologically required

Conceptualization · Confusion · Consistency (knowledge bases · Construct (python library · Job performance · Job satisfaction · Organizational Behavior · Organizational citizenship behavior · Organizational commitment · Computer Science · Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior · Management and Organizational Studies · Management Theory and Practice · Psychology · Social Psychology