摘要
IntroductionOrganizational citizenship behavior is a form of job performance. Orthodox definitions of job performance have restricted the construct to the simple coverage of task-related behaviors (Devonish & Greenidge, 2010). Broadly speaking, three categories of employee job performance have been identified: task performance, extra-role performance, and counterproductive work behavior (Rotundo & Sackett, 2002; Viswesvaran & Ones, 2000). Task performance is concerned with the effectiveness with which job incumbents perform activities that contribute to the organization's technical core (Borman & Motowidlo, 1997). Task performance usually refers to behavior, which is defined as fulfillment of tasks that are required by the formal job description (Borman & Motowidlo, 1997). Extra-role performance, often referred to as organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) or contextual performance is defined as behavior that is beneficial to the and goes beyond formal job requirements such as helping colleagues at work, working extra hours, making suggestions for improvement(Organ, 1988). OCB is traditionally defined as individual behavior that is discretionary, not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, and in the aggregate promotes the efficient and effective functioning of the organization (Organ, 1988, p. 4). Finally, counterproductive work behavior (CWB) is defined as intentional employee behavior that is harmful to the legitimate interests of an (Gruys & Sackett, 2003). Based on the definitions, therefore, OCB and CWB are opposites as the former benefits the while the latter harms it (Riketta, 2008).Explicit in the definition of OCB is the notion of discretion, which means that engagement in OCB is completely voluntary since a person cannot be punished for failing to engage in it (Organ, Podsakoff, & Mackenzie, 2006). In other words, OCB is a voluntary behavior that cannot be enforced by supervisors, or superiors. However, it does not mean that it is altruistically driven. Although OCB is expressed in the form of altruism, the two concepts cannot be considered the same. This is because the motives are quite different. Altruism is about selflessness while OCB is performed due to several motives. Performance of OCB is sometimes believed to be driven by ego-centric motives, which may be often unconscious. Hence, to decide whether OCB is altruistic or not, determining the motive is important (Organ, et al., 2006). Secondly, individuals who perform OCB will not be formally rewarded. Behavior that goes beyond in-role is voluntary and, therefore, not directly recognized by the organizational formal reward system. Even though, theoretically speaking, formal reward for OCB is not formally recognized, in some situations sophisticated modern evaluation and reward systems may take into consideration some kinds of OCB (Zheng, Zhang, & Li, 2012). Depending on the context, some OCB might provide some future reward promises. However, the fact remains that benefits for performing OCB are not contractually guaranteed in advance (Organ, et al., 2006). Thirdly, OCB should be able to produce positive outcomes in the context they are performed. The performance of OCB must have direct or indirect effects on improving the organization's efficiency and effectiveness.Having understood the concept of OCB, understanding the other underlining variable of this study (i.e. servant leadership) becomes important. The servant leadership concept is rooted on the belief that to motivate followers to perform at the fullest potential, leaders must rely on one- on-one communication to understand their needs, desires, abilities, goals and potentials. Then the knowledge about the follower is used by the leader to assist them toward achieving their potential. Servant leaders also help the followers to achieve their potential through building their self-confidence, inspiring trusts, providing information, feedback and resources. …