Abstract
Introduction. Much research is focused on the relationship between employees’ organizational identifications and various forms of their organizational behavior that are not directly related to their work responsibilities. However, previous research efforts have not taken into account certain aspects of employees’ identifications and their behaviour in the context of groups. The present study addresses the relationship between employees’ group, microgroup, and interpersonal identities by three components (cognitive, affective, and behavioral) and their contribution to production group activities depending on their membership/non-membership in informal subgroups.
Methods. The study employed (a) the formalized algorithm for identifying informal subgroups in groups, (b) the interpersonal identity questionnaire, (c) the microgroup and group identity questionnaire, and (d) the contribution to group activities scale. All these techniques were embodied in the Group Profile–Universal computer program. The authors used this computer technique to conduct a survey of study participants and to carry out the primary data processing.
Results. Microgroup affective identities of subgroup members correlate positively with their contribution to group activities. Group cognitive and affective identities and interpersonal affective identities of subgroup non-members are positively related to their contribution to group activities. Additionally, the study demonstrated two nonlinear (quadratic) relationships between interpersonal and group behavioural identities of subgroup members and their contribution to group activities; this relationship was more significant for group identities, than for interpersonal ones.
Discussion. The authors interpret the relationship between employees’ identities and their contribution to group activities depending on their membership/non-membership in informal subgroups.
Conclusion. The authors draw conclusions about the characteristics of the relationship examined in the present study. Further research will be required to investigate intermediate variables in the relationship between the levels and components of identities on the one hand, and the contribution to group/subgroup activities on the other.
References
Borman, W. C., Buck, D. E., Hanson, M. A., Motowidlo, S. J., Stark, S., & Drasgow, F. (2001). An examination of the comparative reliability, validity, and accuracy of performance ratings made using computerized adaptive rating scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(5), 965–973. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.5.965
Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1993). Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of contextual performance. In N. Schmitt & W. C. Borman (Eds.), Personnel selection in organizations (pp. 71–98). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Christ, O., Van Dick, R., Wagner, U., & Stellmacher, J. (2003).When teachers go the extra mile: Foci of organizational identification as determinants of different forms of organisational citizenship behavior among schoolteachers. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 73(3), 329–341. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/000709903322275867
Ellemers, N., De Gilder, T. C., & Haslam, S. A. (2004). Motivating individuals and groups at work: A social identity perspective on leadership and group performance. Academy of Management Review, 29(3), 459–478. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2004.13670967
Farh, J.-L., Zhong, C.-B., & Organ, D. W. (2004). Organizational citizenship behavior in the People’s Republic of China. Organization Science, 15(2), 133–257. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1030.0051
Farmer, S. M., Van Dyne, L., & Kamdar, D. (2015). The contextualized self: How team-member exchange leads to coworker identification and helping OCB. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(2), 583–595. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0037660
George, J. M., & Brief, A. P. (1992). Feeling good-doing good: A conceptual analysis of the mood at work-organizational spontaneity relationship. Psychological Bulletin, 112(2), 310–329. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.112.2.310
Gorbatenko, A. S., & Gorbatenko, T. M. (1984). A method for the determination of the structure of a small group using formalized analysis of interpersonal choices selections. Voprosy psikhologii, 4, 112–118. (in Russ.).
Gulevich, O. A. (2013). Organizational citizenship behavior: Conditions and consequences. Organizatsionnaya psikhologiya (Organizational Psychology), 3(3), 78–96. (in Russ.).
Henry, K. B., Arrow, H., & Carini, B. (1999). A tripartite model of group identification: Theory and measurement. Small Group Research, 30(5), 558–581. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/104649649903000504
Hinkle, S., Taylor, L. A., Fox-Cardamone, D. L., & Crook, K. F. (1989). Intragroup identification and intergroup differentiation: A multicomponent approach. British Journal of Social Psychology, 28(4), 305–317. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1989.tb00874.x
Jackson, J. W. (2002). Intergroup attitudes as a function of different dimensions of group identification and perceived intergroup conflict. Self and Identity, 1(1), 11–33. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/152988602317232777
Jahangir, N., Akbar, M. M., & Haq, M. (2004). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents. BRAC University Journal, 1(2), 75–85. Retrieved from https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/61800621.pdf
Johnson, M. D., Morgeson, F. P., & Hekman, D. R. (2012). Cognitive and affective identification: Exploring the links between different forms of social identification and personality with work attitudes and behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33(8), 1142–1167. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.1787
Klimov, A. A. (2015). Identification with organizations and working groups as a factor for employees’ extra-role behavior (Doctoral dissertation). Moscow. (in Russ.).
Lee, E.-S., Park, T.-Y., & Koo, B. (2015). Identifying organizational identification as a basis for attitudes and behaviors: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 141(5), 1049–1080. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/bul0000012
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(1), 52–65. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0021-9010.87.1.52
LePine, J. A., & Van Dyne, L. (1998). Predicting voice behavior in work groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(6), 853–868. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.83.6.853
Matherne, C. F., Ring, J. K., & Farmer, S. (2018). Organizational moral identity centrality: Relationships with citizenship behaviors and unethical prosocial behaviors. Journal of Business and Psychology, 33(6), 711–726. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10869-017-9519-4
Moorman, R. H. (1991). Relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behaviors: Do fairness perceptions influence employee citizenship? Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(6), 845–855. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0021-9010.76.6.845
Morrison, E. W., & Phelps, C. C. (1999). Taking charge at work: Extrarole efforts to initiate workplace change. Academy of Management Journal, 42(4), 403–419.
Neves, P. C., Paixão, R., Alarcão, M., Gomes, A. D. (2014). Organizational citizenship behavior in schools: Validation of a questionnaire. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 17. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/sjp.2014.20
Nguyen, B., Chang, K., Rowley, C., & Japutra, A. (2016). Organizational citizenship behavior, identification, psychological contract and leadership frames: The example of primary school teachers in Taiwan. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Administration, 8(3), 260–280. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/APJBA-01-2016-0010
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. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 12, pp. 43–72). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Podsakoff, N. P., Whiting, S. W., Podsakoff, P. M., & Blume, B. D. (2009). Individual- and organizational-level consequences of organizational citizenship behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(1), 122–141. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0013079
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B., & Bachrach, 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. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/014920630002600307
Riketta, M., & Van Dick, R. (2005). Foci of attachment in organizations: A meta-analytic comparison of the strength and correlates of workgroup versus organizational identification and commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 67(3), 490–510. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2004.06.001
Sidorenkov, A. V. (2012). Social psychology of small groups. Rostov-on-Don: Feniks. (in Russ.).
Sidorenkov, A. V., & Pavlenko, R. V. (2015). GROUP PROFILE computer technique: A tool for complex study of small groups. SAGE Open, 5(1), 1–13.
Sidorenkov, A. V., Sidorenkova, I. I., & Ul'yanova, N. Yu. (2014). Socio-psychological characteristics of the efficiency of small groups in organizations. Rostov-on-Don: Mini Taip. (in Russ.).
Sidorenkov, A. V., & Trishkina, N. S. (2010). Empirical grounds for the model of individuals’ identity manifestation in small groups. Psikhologicheskii Zhurnal, 31(5), 17–29. (in Russ.).
Turner, J., Hogg, M., Oakes, P., Reicher, S., & Wetherell, M. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Uzun, T. (2018). A study of correlations between perceived supervisor support, organizational identification, organizational citizenship behavior, and burnout at schools. European Journal of Educational Research, 7(3), 501–511. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.7.3.501
Van Dick, R., Wagner, U., Stellmacher, J., & Christ, O. (2004). The utility of a broader conceptualization of organizational identification: Which aspects really matter? Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77(2), 171–191. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/096317904774202135
Van Dyne, L., Cummings, L. L., & Parks, J. M. (1995). Extra-role behaviors: In pursuit of construct and definitional clarity (A bridge over muddied waters). In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 17, pp. 215–285). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Van Knippenberg, D., & Van Schie, E. C. M. (2000). Foci and correlates of organizational identification. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73(2), 137–147. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/096317900166949
Wegge, J., & Haslam, S. A. (2003). Group goal setting, social identity and self-categorization: Engaging the collective self to enhance group performance and organizational outcomes. In S. A. Haslam, D. Van Knippenberg, M. Platow & N. Ellemers (Eds.), Social identity at work: Developing theory for organizational practice (pp. 43–60). New York: Psychology Press.
Wilkins, S., Butt, M. M., & Annabi, C. A. (2018). The influence of organizational identification on employee attitudes and behaviours in multinational higher education institutions. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 40(1), 48–66. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2017.1411060