Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB): A Paradox

This assignment analyzes the concept of Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB), highlighting its positive contributions to organizational goals like job satisfaction and productivity. However, it also acknowledges the paradox that OCB can negatively impact team performance through factors like conflicts, favoritism, and dependency syndrome. The research aims to identify strategies for managing these negative effects and maximizing the benefits of OCB within organizations.

Running Head: Research methodology 1
ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOUR (OCB): A BUSINESS MANAGERIAL
PARADOX
Presented by
Student affiliation
Supervisor
4th, April 2018

Running Head: Research methodology 2
1.1. Problem statement
Organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) is a discretionary behavior exhibited by employee
that is not part of their formal job requirement but contributes positive to organization goals
(Cole, 2015). It represents any positive voluntary contribution of an employee to support work
mates or organization goals (Bourne, 2015). A managerial paradox emerges when occupational
citizenship behavior is to be employed in an organization. OCB contributes significantly to
organization performance but its pitfall leads to negative group employee performance (Cole,
2015).
Organizations that use OCB benefit because it contributes to employee job satisfactions, reduces
absentees, less employee job turnover, and leading to increased productivity (Felix, 2013).
Organizations that employ it benefit substantially as more productivity levels are encouraged.
But it is known that organizational citizenship behavior contributes negatively on employee team
performance. It can lead to work related conflicts, unhealthy competitions among workers, lead
to employee favoritism, and can create dependency syndrome (Hurwitz & Hurwitz, 2013). If
OCB is encouraged in organization it can directly influence group performance in the
organizations.
Managerial scholars and researchers advocate that OCB should be used in organizations
(Armstrong, 2010). It requires managers to employ strategies to manage the pitfall created by it.
The manager decision role is incapacitated because there are few strategies to use to mitigate
them. The current issues of work specialization discourage the use of OCB in organizations. The
concept of ICB still remains a managerial paradox to be researched upon whereas it gives
managers discretional decision on whether to encourage or discourage it. It becomes an uphill
managerial task to weigh the strength and weakness of OCB in organizations.
1.2. Aim and objectives of the study
The aim of the study will be to establish the strategies that can be employed to enhance
organizational citizenship behavior in organizations.
In order to achieve the aim the study will be guided by the following research objectives:

Running Head: Research methodology 3
i. To establish how organization citizenship behavior affects organization team
performance.
ii. To identify strategies that can be used to manage negative organizational citizenship
behavior in the work place.
1.3. Methodology
1.3.1. Literature synopsis
The literature section of the study will entail a review of secondary information related to the
theme of the study. Secondary data will be reviewed on organizational citizenship behavior its
employability and contributions. The sources of secondary data will be from: peer reviewed
journals, books, magazines and websites. The data will be sourced from CQU (online &
campus), and others from Google scholars websites. To ensure ethical considerations are met
during its review other writer or author’s works will be acknowledged and cited well.
1.3.2. Research design & sampling frame
The research design presents the guide in which the study will be anchored upon (Neuman &
Robson, 2012). Mixed method will be applied entailing use of qualitative and quantitative
approaches. The adoption of mixed approach is useful in obtaining detailed information of the
goal of the study. The mixed research design approach will entail using both close ended
questionnaire and open ended interviews. The two instruments will be structured to address the
research objectives. The sampling frame defines the key informants of the study (target
population and sample size (Neuman & Robson, 2012). The study will employ non probability
sampling technique (purposive) to find responses from the key informants of the study. The key
informants are top multinational managers within the study area. The number of the key
informants will be obtain through a pre-survey to be conducted. The two research instruments
(close ended questionnaire and open ended interviews) will be administered to top multinational
managers and assistants in the region respectively.
1.3.3. Data series and analysis
The data collected from the interviews and questionnaire will be edited, arranged, organized and
stored safely for analysis (Neuman & Robson, 2012). The close ended questionnaire
(quantitative data) will be analyzed using descriptive statistics for quantitative data (mean,

Running Head: Research methodology 4
frequency, standard deviation) with the aid of statistical software’s of analysis. For open ended
interviews (qualitative data) will be analyzed qualitatively. A ‘jig saw’ puzzle method will be
employed. The process will involve coding and patching together related responses. A final
report from the analysis will be documented presented in form of frequency distribution tables,
and charts.

Running Head: Research methodology 5
References
Armstrong, M. (2010). Human resource management. London, England: Mc Graw Hill.
Bourne, L. (2015). Making projects work:effective stakeholder and communication management.
New Delhi: CRC press.
Cole, G. (2015). Management principles and techniques. New York: Mc Graw hill.
Felix, D. (2013). Composition of a Successful Management Team: How Much and What Kind of
Experience Makes a Difference? The Journal of Private Equity,, 1(1), 33-36.
Hurwitz & Hurwitz. (2013). Personal, Team, and Organizational Development. In Leadership is
Half the Story: A Fresh Look at Followership, Leadership, and Collaboration. University
of Toronto Press, 10(4), 23-78.
Neuman, W & Robson, K. (2012). Basic of social research: qualitative and quantative
approaches. London, Unted Kingdom: Sage.