Pageof 2ZOOMPADM 600 Page 1 of 2 RESEARCH PAPER: FEDERALISM RESEARCH PAPER OR PRESENTATION ASSIGNMENT INSTRUCTIONS OVERVIEW Public budgeting takes place at the national, state, and local levels. As y

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at https://about.jstor.org/terms and Oxford University Press are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory: J-PART This content downloaded from 162.237.206.47 on Fri, 18 Nov 2022 00:29:48 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms JPART 22:573-596 Change-Oriented Organizational Citizenship Behavior in Public Administration: The Power of Leadership and the Cost of Organizational Politics Eran Vigoda-Cadot, Itai Been University of Haifa ABSTRACT Using a well-grounded theory of organizational citizenship behavior, this study attempts to extend the meaning of the good soldier syndrome beyond its common boundaries of the business sector. We follow Bettencourt's (2004yf F R Q F H S W X D O L ] D W L R Q D Q G P R G H O R I F K D Q J e oriented organizational citizenship behavior (OCByf W R H [ S O D L Q Z K \ D Q G K R Z S X E O L c employees engage in activities targeted at changing and improving the public work environment and its job processes even when no formal rewards are offered in return. We extend Bettencourt's model and demonstrate its usefulness and contribution to public administration organizations, focusing especially on leadership behavior, leader-member exchange relations, and perceptions of organizational politics in public agencies. A field study of 217 public personnel in a large public health care organization yields interesting findings, demonstrating the uniqueness of change-oriented OCB over classical OCB measures (individual and organizationalyf W K H J H Q H U D O S R V L W L Y H H I I H F W R I O H D G H U V K L S R Q 2 & % D Q G W K e moderating effect of perceptions of politics in this relationship. Implications of the findings are developed and discussed in the context of modern public administration. INTRODUCTION A growing challenge facing most public services in modern democracies is the quest for creativity, innovation, and change-oriented behaviors among employees. Doctrines of mar ket-driven management developed in recent decades have placed this challenge at the fore front of the discipline's theoretical and empirical efforts. It has become clear that global governmental reforms (Terry 1998yf F D Q E H V X F F H V V I X O R Q O \ Z L W K L Q D G \ Q D P L F Z R U N S O D F H D Q d a proactive public sector. Studies on reforms in public administration stress this need even further (e.g., Pollitt and Bouckaert 2000yf 6 X F K D Q R U J D Q L ] D W L R Q D O D W P R V S K H U H W K D W H Q F R X r ages public servants to go the extra mile in daily job routines may compensate for bureau cratic red tape, slow and unbendable procedures, and insensitivity and inflexibility in the Both authors contributed equally to this article. The authors wish to thank Shelly Trifon who assisted in data collection and four anonymous reviewers whose comments contributed significantly to the improvement of this article. Address correspondence to the author at [email protected]. doi: 10.1093/jopart/mur036 Advance Access publication on September 2, 2011 © The Author 2011. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Inc. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: [email protected] This content downloaded from 162.237.206.47 on Fri, 18 Nov 2022 00:29:48 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 574 Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory provision of services (Vigoda-Gadot 2007byf + H Q F H L P S U R Y L Q J W K H S H U I R U P D Q F H D Q d achievements of governmental agencies depends upon reinventing old procedures and rocking the boat of conservative paradigms and conventional work practices. These new managerial dynamics are strongly influenced by the New Public Management (NPMyf V F K R R O R I W K R X J K W W K D W H P S K D V L ] H V W K H U D S L G O \ F K D Q J L Q J Q D W X U H R I W K H P D U N H W s and the need for public administration to emulate the models of the business world. For a number of years already, NPM has called for the transformation of the bureaucratic structures of public organizations into a more vibrant type of activity and creative config uration (Bernier and Hafsi 2007yf . Hence, infusing new and creative managerial practices into public systems and in ser vice of very demanding citizens must involve a comprehensive set of change-oriented behaviors among public personnel, across organizations and in various work environments (Saner 2001yf 7 K H V H F K D Q J H V L Q F O X G H D G Y D Q F H V L Q L Q I R U P D W L R Q W H F K Q R O R J \ F K D Q J H V L Q W K e nature and preferences of the workplace, dealing with more critical citizens-as-clients and facing increased global competition (Borins 2001yf 2 Q H R I W K H P R V W V L J Q L I L F D Q W H O H P H Q W s that these changes entail is employing an increasingly large percentage of highly skilled and knowledge-based employees who are committed to disseminating change. These profes sional public servants are expected to have a greater say in how to organize and perform their tasks and to formulate new ideas (Saner 2001yf W K D W D I I H F W W K H D F W X D O V H U Y L F H V S U R Y L G H d to citizens. The public managers are similarly expected to mobilize their workers to in novate and to make constructive changes at all levels of the organization (Chiun et al. 2006; Davis 2004yf . In view of the strong dynamics pushing for change and reforms in public sector organ izations, this study offers change-oriented organizational citizenship behavior (OCByf D s a useful terminology for our discipline. Our major goals are two-fold: (1yf W R L Q W U R G X F e the relatively new terminology of change-oriented OCB to scholars and professionals in public administration and (2yf W R H [ D P L Q H W K H P H D Q L Q J R I F K D Q J H R U L H Q W H G 2 & % D Q d its relationship with several potential variables such as leadership style, leader-member exchange (LMXyf D Q G S H U F H S W L R Q V R I R U J D Q L ] D W L R Q D O S R O L W L F V 3 2 3 6 \f. Our model draws on Bettencourt's (2004yf S D W K P R G H O D Q G L V I L U P O \ D Q F K R U H G L Q S X E O L F V H F W R U P D Q D J H P H Q t theory and the literature of organizational politics. OCB AND CHANGE-ORIENTED OCB: ITS MEANING FOR PUBLIC AGENCIES The change-oriented activities of public employees are a promising field of study. As these orientations are largely voluntary and spontaneous, they have much in common with the concepts of bureaucratic values, public service ethos, and motivation in public service (e.g., Pollit 1993; Bereton and Temple 1999; Perry et al. 2008yf 3 X E O L F R I I L F H U V Z K R D U H D F X W H O y aware of their duties contribute to a stronger relationship between policy makers and the citizenry. The major role of public servants is to translate governmental policies into prac tical actions and services to citizens. By so doing, they also reinforce the old social contract between rulers and the people. The roots of change-oriented OCB are in the classical concept of OCB. A seminal work by Organ (1988yf V X J J H V W H G W K D W W K L V E H K D Y L R U P D \ E H G H V F U L E H G D V W K H J R R G V R O G L H r syndrome in which employees perform over and above their formal work duties. During recent decades, OCB has become one of the most studied topics in management literature, incorporating an entire set of spontaneous activities that go beyond prescribed role This content downloaded from 162.237.206.47 on Fri, 18 Nov 2022 00:29:48 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms Vigoda-Gadot and Beeri Change-Oriented OCB in Public Administration 575 requirements (Katz and Kahn 1966yf 2 & % K D V E H H Q G H I L Q H G D V L Q G L Y L G X D O E H K D Y L R U W K D t promotes the goals of the organization by contributing to its social and psychological en vironment (Smith, Organ, and Near 1983; Organ 1988yf % H W W H Q F R X U W \f further defined a unique domain of OCB activities as change-oriented OCB, describing innovative and creative actions by employees that are aimed at bringing about constructive change in the organization (Bettencourt 2004; Choi 2007; Morrison and Phelps 1999yf . OCB expresses a form of extra-role behavior exhibited by employees in which they perform beyond their formal job requirements without expecting recognition in terms of either explicit or implicit rewards from supervisors. The presence of OCB is likely to pro mote a more positive social and working environment, enhancing the performance of a work unit and the core products of the organization (Chiun et al. 2006yf 0 R V W V W X G L H V R Q 2 & B describe it as a positive and constructive behavior worthy of encouragement by supervisors (Podsakoff and Mackenzie 1997; Smith et al. 1983yf D Q G Y H U \ L P S R U W D Q W I R U F O L H Q W V R I W K e organization. Therefore, OCB may be extremely useful in the public sector because it con tributes to improving public service, overcoming bureaucracy's ills and encouraging the performance of various work units and agencies. OCB is thus expected to contribute to the improved performance of service-oriented systems. OCB benefits public service by rein forcing the bureaucratic values of the good soldier syndrome, the willingness to serve other citizens, and strengthening the overall ethos of public service. Studies on OCB have frequently distinguished between various internal dimensions of this phenomenon. For example, Organ (1988yf V X J J H V W H G D W D [ R Q R P \ R I I L Y H G L P H Q V L R Q s (altruism, courtesy, conscientiousness, civic virtue, and sportsmanshipyf Z K H U H D V : L O O L D P s and Anderson (1991yf G L V W L Q J X L V K H G E H W Z H H Q W Z R D V S H F W V R I F L W L ] H Q V K L S E H K D Y L R U V G L U H F W H d toward individuals and those directed toward the organization in general. Later studies argued that although OCB activities are important, they are not sufficient for ensuring the continued viability of an organization. Therefore, an organization also needs employees who are willing to challenge the present state of operations to bring about construc tive change (Bettencourt 2004; Morrison and Phelps 1999yf 7 K L V I R U P R I Z R U N S H U I R U P D Q F e is referred today as change-oriented OCB. Some early notions of change-oriented OCB can be traced back to a study by Van Dyne and Lepine (1998yf Z K R S U H V H Q W H G H P S L U L F D O V X S S R U t for an expanded, multidimensional conceptualization of extra-role behavior (helping and voiceyf 7 K H \ D U J X H G W K D W K H O S L Q J L V D Q D I I L O L D W L Y H S U R P R W L Y H E H K D Y L R U Z K H U H D V Y R L F H L V D n example of challenging promotive behavior that emphasizes the expression of constructive challenge intended to improve rather than merely criticize. Voice is making innovative suggestions for change and recommending modifications to standard procedures even when others disagree. Given that OCBs are generally regarded as extra-role behaviors, voice, a change-oriented form of extra-role behavior, can be related to change-oriented OCB. Change-oriented OCB also means "taking charge" of one's environment, which en tails voluntary and constructive efforts by individual employees to effect organizationally functional change with respect to how work is executed within the contexts of their jobs, work units, or organizations (Morrison and Phelps 1999yf , W K D V D O V R E H H Q U H I H U U H G W R D s task revision in which individuals take action to correct a faulty procedure, inaccurate job description, or unrealistic role expectation (Staw and Boettger 1990yf ) L Q D O O \ D V F K D Q J e oriented OCB is targeted at and intended to benefit the organization in general, some studies suggested that it should be considered a specific dimension of OCB directed toward the organization (Choi 2007yf . This content downloaded from 162.237.206.47 on Fri, 18 Nov 2022 00:29:48 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 576 Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory Behaviors such as change-oriented OCB play a major role in public organizations. Recently, a growing number of studies have pointed to the importance of organizational commitment, public sector motivation (PSMyf D Q G S V \ F K R O R J L F D O F R Q W U D F W V W R S X E O L F R U J D n izations (e.g., Coggburn et al. 2010; Coyle-Shapiro and Kessler 2003yf + R Z H Y H U 2 & % D Q d change-oriented OCB are hardly mentioned in public administration research and theory. A search of the literature revealed that with the exception of only a few studies (i.e., Koberg et al. 2005; Vigoda 2000yf W K L V S K H Q R P H Q R Q K D V Q R W \ H W O H I W D Q L P S U L Q W R Q R X U G L V F L S O L Q H . This omission is extremely interesting as citizenship is a core terminology in political sci ence and makes an original addition to the NPM jargon by emphasizing the role of the people in building effective governance. Citizenship is therefore a fundamental concept strongly related to modern public administration's goals and vision. We believe that change-oriented OCB is a useful concept for public organizations and that it is clearly distinct from PSM. In fact, the two concepts are complementary rather than contradictory. In our view, change-oriented OCB deals with the innovative, informal aspect of behavior (Organ 1988, among othersyf Z K H U H D V 3 6 0 3 H U U \ 3 H U U \ H W D O . 2008yf L V D P R U H I R U P D O D Q G Q R W Q H F H V V D U L O \ L Q Q R Y D W L Y H G L P H Q V L R Q R I F R Q W U L E X W L R Q W R R Q H s work. Therefore, it is possible that change-oriented OCB may serve as an extension of the concept of motivation in public administration. Thus, change-oriented OCB seems worthy of exploration especially for its voice-related context and proactive and "out of the box" thinking that can promote healthy contacts between public officials and citizens (Perry et al. 2008yf : H E H O L H Y H W K D W W K L V S R V V L E L O L W \ L Q D Q G R I L W V H O I L V D Z H O O J U R X Q G H G D Q G V X I I L F L H Q t justification for the encouragement of change-oriented OCB studies in public administration. More specifically, the added value of good citizenship behavior and exceptional proso cial activities can result in greater efficiency, increased productivity, improved human re lations in the work unit, lower levels of stress and burnout among public servants, and increased inclination toward team work and learning (Battaglio and Condrey 2009; Coggburn 2006; Coggburn et al. 2010yf 7 K H V H S R V L W L Y H H I I H F W V F D Q D O V R V S L O O R Y H U R Q W R V H r vice recipients, increasing and improving the services offered to them, thereby leading to healthier relationships between the government and its citizens and ameliorating the image of state agencies in the eyes of citizens. The lack of extra-role activities, such as OCB and especially change-oriented OCB, in public organizations also has many negative implica tions that reach far beyond the immediate customer-provider contract. These negative at titudes may overflow into citizens' dissatisfaction with government, mistrust in public servants, and lead to misgivings about the legitimacy of government and the ability of the democratic-bureaucratic machinery to function for the public as it should (Chen and Brudney 2009yf . CHANGE-ORIENTED OCB, THE POWER OF LEADERSHIP, AND THE COST OF POLITICS: MODEL AND HYPOTHESES Following Bettencourt's (2004yf P R G H O Z H V X J J H V W D Q H [ W H Q G H G F R Q F H S W X D O L ] D W L R Q R I W K e antecedents to and characteristics of change-oriented OCB in the public sector. We focus on the relationships between change-oriented OCB and four major variables: transforma tional leadership, transactional leadership, LMX, and POPS. This content downloaded from 162.237.206.47 on Fri, 18 Nov 2022 00:29:48 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms Vigoda-Gadot and Beeri Change-Oriented OCB in Public Administration 577 Leadership and Change in the Public Sector A growing debate about reforms in the public sector has simultaneously highlighted the role of leadership and its contribution to planned change. Public managers as professional lead ers of governmental institutions are increasingly called on to engage in activities that re build organizational structures, improve processes, and create constructive cultures for both public servants and citizens. They are expected to create robust institutional capacity through the strategic management of people, programs, and partnerships (Van Slyke and Alexander 2006yf , Q I D F W R Q H R I W K H P D M R U F R Q F H U Q V D Q G F K D O O H Q J H V R I S X E O L F R U J D n izations today is to establish effective management leadership, one that can maximize the public interest, and to do it on a very tight budget. Managers use various leadership behaviors to influence the situational goals and behaviors of their followers (Bettencourt 2004yf 7 K H O L W H U D W X U H X V X D O O \ G L V W L Q J X L V K H V E e tween two major leadership styles: transformational and transactional leadership. Both types focus on the relationship between leaders and subordinates (Bass 1985yf E X W H D F h in a different way. The key assumption of transactional leadership is that leader-follower alignment occurs through the strategic use of relatively narrowly defined activities and the completion of task-focused actions that usually relate to in-role expectations (e.g., recog nition and/or approval are offered in return for performance and/or pecuniary incentivesyf . This kind of leadership may work because followers and leaders have to achieve conver gence. According to this view, transactional leaders give things of value to followers in return for things of value to the leader. Conversely, transformational leaders seek to replace the values of their followers. The key assumption of transformational leadership is that leaders can motivate followers by using nonmaterial incentives such as appeals to morality and ethics, suasion, and inspiration and by using the organizational culture to align the interests and preferences of subordinates with the vision and goals of leaders (Kotter 1999yf . Previous studies (i.e., Deluga 1992; Howell and Hall-Merenda 1999yf K D Y H D O V R G H m onstrated that both transformational and transactional leadership are strongly associated with LMX. The roots of the studies on LMX can be traced back to the early 1970s. LMX was defined as the quality of the exchange relationships between leaders and employ ees in organizations (Graen, Dansereau, and Minami 1972yf 2 Y H U W K H S D V W I R X U G H F D G H V , studies in this field have expanded rapidly (e.g., Schriesheim, Castro, and Cogliser 1999, 67yf 6 W X G L H V L Q S X E O L F P D Q D J H P H Q W D O V R X V H G W K L V F R Q F H S W W R H [ S O D L Q F R P S O H [ L Q W H r actions inside public agencies, those that consider public managerial leadership as essential for renewing and improving service to citizens (e.g., Song 2006; Song and Olshfsky 2008yf . The core argument is that LMX must be considered a powerful tool in reforming public managerial structures and processes. The reasoning behind this argument gains support from the more generic idea that improvement of the internal relationships between man agers and subordinates is important for the enhancement of organizational outcomes in any organization (Bettencourt 2004; Chiun et al. 2006; Wayne et al. 1997yf . Using LMX as a link between leadership style and employees' behavior, we can argue that mutual, positive transactions may lead over time to the development of exchange relationships between employees and managers. The reason for such an exchange is that during the trans action process leaders receive approval in the form of status, esteem, loyalty, and influence, whereas followers receive rewards such as authority, promotion, and favorable job assign ments (Basu and Green 1997yf + R Z H Y H U H [ F K D Q J H U H O D W L R Q V K L S V D U H Q R W O L P L W H G W R P D W H U L D l transactions. They may also include social exchanges of psychological benefits such as This content downloaded from 162.237.206.47 on Fri, 18 Nov 2022 00:29:48 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 578 Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory trust, esteem, support, consideration, and friendship (Song 2006; Song and Olshfsky 2008yf . Moreover, LMX may be first stimulated by conventional, market-based, transactional so cial exchanges, a kind of "testing process," that then evolve into a transformational social exchange in the form of a partnership dyad (Graen and Uhl-Bien 1995yf + H Q F H W K H I L U V t hypothesis suggests that: Hi In the public sector, perceptions of transformational and transactional leadership styles will be positively related to the quality of LMX relationships. LMX and change-oriented OCB LMX relationships are rooted in social exchange theory (Graen and Scandura 1987yf $ V V X g gested by Deluga (1992yf W K H W K U H D G X Q L W L Q J V R F L D O H [ F K D Q J H W K H R U \ D Q G 2 & % L V V X S H U Y L V R r trust-building behavior and in particular, perceptions of fairness which lead to satisfying and rewarding relationships. These healthy relationships should be based on mutually beneficial transactions. A high-quality LMX consists of a relationship that goes beyond the contract and is likely to lead to extra-role or citizenship behavior (Wayne et al. 1997yf $ F F R U G L Q J W o Liden and Graen (1980yf H P S O R \ H H V U H S R U W L Q J K L J K T X D O L W \ / 0 ; U H O D W L R Q V K L S V P D N H F R n tributions that go beyond their formal job duties. On the other hand, those employees re porting lower quality LMX relationships perform the more routine tasks of the work group. Hence, the underlying principles that forge the linkage between LMX, OCB, and change-oriented OCB are justice, fairness, and honesty (Scandura 1999yf ( D F K S D U W \ P X V t offer something the other party sees as valuable and each party must see the exchange as reasonably equitable and fair (Graen and Scandura 1987yf : K H Q D O H D G H U W U X V W V D S D U W L F X O D r subordinate and provides certain advantages to him/her in terms of greater authority, more support, or greater recognition, the subordinate may reciprocate with equivalent rewards. Moreover, when such relationships take place in a public sector organization, those who benefit immediately are the citizens. For example, performing extra-role behaviors and OCBs may increase the level of public service, help overcome red tape and bureaucracy, and improve the public's perceptions about government. Therefore, LMX may have a sig nificant relationship with OCB types of reactions (Chiun et al. 2006yf . Various other studies also support the logic behind this argument. LMX has been men tioned as related to various types of OCB such as helping, altruism, and j ob dedication (Ilies et al. 2007yf + R Z H Y H U Z L W K W K H H [ F H S W L R Q R I % H W W H Q F R X U W \f, no study has examined the rela tionship between LMX and change-oriented OCB, so no evidence exists about these potential relationships in the public sector, despite the clear recognition that out-of-the-box thinking and spontaneous change-oriented behaviors are extremely important to the public service. Bettencourt (2004yf H O D E R U D W H G R Q W K L V U H O D W L R Q V K L S D Q G K H U H P S L U L F D O H [ D P L Q D W L R Q L Q D U H W D L l setting found that LMX had a direct positive effect on change-oriented OCB. Extending the arguments of Bettencourt's study, we suggest that LMX in public sector organizations im proves the quality of work life in general and builds the healthy professional atmosphere so needed to give citizens better quality services. Improvement in such services happens when public servants are willing to voice the need for reforms and are willing to change the work environment to achieve these goals. Therefore, we suggest another hypothesis: H2 Perceptions of transactional and transformational leadership and the quality of LMX relationships will be positively related with the change-oriented OCB of public employees. This content downloaded from 162.237.206.47 on Fri, 18 Nov 2022 00:29:48 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms Vigoda-Cadot and Beeri Change-Oriented OCB in Public Administration 579 What's Politics Got to Do with All This? Internal politics in organizations has long been recognized as meaningful for individuals and organizations. Although organizational politics is evident in any type of organization, it is consistently much higher in the public sector than in the private sector (Vigoda-Gadot and Kapun 2005yf 3 R O L W L F V L Q R U J D Q L ] D W L R Q V D Q G H V S H F L D O O \ L Q S X E O L F D J H Q F L H V L V D F R Q W U o versial phenomenon. Many studies mention its objective nature, having both constructive and destructive effects on employees and citizens as clients (e.g., Ferris et al. 1989; Vigoda Gadot and Kapun 2005yf $ F F R U G L Q J W R % R O P D Q D Q G ' H D O \f, organizational political leadership may be viewed as a positive and pragmatic style of leadership for dealing with continuing conflicts and competition and for achieving organizational compromises. However, this study followed the conventional approach in the literature that views organizational politics as workplace activities that can result in negative or destructive work outcomes (Vigoda 2000yf $ P D M R U L W \ R I W K H H P S L U L F D O V W X G L H V L Q W K L V I L H O G K D Y H X V H d a perceptual approach and focused on judgments about workplace politics by individuals. Employees were usually asked to report whether a specific action or decision was within the parameters of sanctioned behavior (Randall et al. 1999yf 5 D Q G D O O H W D O \f defined or ganizational politics as unsanctioned influence attempts that seek to promote self-interests at the expense of organizational goals. POPS are most commonly measured using the scale developed by Kacmar and Ferris (1991yf . In accordance with the definition by Randall et al. (1999yf V W U R Q J S H U F H S W L R Q V D E R X W W K e presence of organizational politics are related to weaker job involvement (Cropanzano et al. 1997yf U H G X F H G M R E V D W L V I D F W L R Q ) H U U L V D Q G . D F P D U * D Q G ] D Q G 0 X U U D \ \f, with drawal from the organization (Gilmore et al. 1996yf L Q F U H D V H G M R E D Q [ L H W \ D Q G V W U H V s (Ferris et al. 1994; Vigoda 2002yf D Q G S R R U H U S H U I R U P D Q F H R I W K H R U J D Q L ] D W L R Q D Q G W K H L Q G i vidual (Vigoda 2000; Witt 1998yf 7 K H Q H J D W L Y H L P S D F W R I S R O L W L F V V W H P V I U R P W K H I D F W W K D t politics affects both the economic and social aspects of the employer-employee exchange (Witt 1998yf . Organizational politics has also been associated with perceptions of fairness and jus tice (Cropanzano et al. 1997; Ferris et al. 1989; Ferris and Kacmar 1992yf $ F F R U G L Q J W o Ferris and Kacmar (1992yf H P S O R \ H H V Z K R V F R U H K L J K R Q W K H 3 2 3 6 V F D O H I H H O W K H U H L V O H V s procedural justice, fairness, and equity in their work environment. Employees who feel they have been treated unfairly for political reasons are inclined to react by reducing the voluntary contributions they make to the organization and weakening their ties with it. Such a reaction is especially evident in public sector organizations where tenure in a job is important and employees are less inclined to leave even if they feel they have been mistreated (Vigoda-Gadot 2007ayf , Q V W H D G W K H \ W X U Q W R O H V V U L V N \ U H V S R Q V H V V X F K D V U H I U D L n ing from volunteering their services or engaging in extra-role activities. Hence, the psy chological "escape route" from a highly political atmosphere can become reduced engagement in OCB, especially in change-oriented OCB. However, a more thorough examination of the literature suggests that this relationship between perceptions of politics and work outcomes such as OCBs may not be direct. For example, according to Kacmar et al. (2007yf 3 2 3 6 P R G H U D W H W K H U H O D W L R Q V K L S E H W Z H H Q / 0 X and employees' work effort. If the work environment is perceived as political (a situation that is particularly relevant for public sector organizationsyf W K H Z R U N H I I R U W R I W K R V H Z L W h high-quality LMX relationships may be greater than those with low-quality LMX relation ships. In addition, the quality of the LMX relationship with the supervisor affects POPS. This content downloaded from 162.237.206.47 on Fri, 18 Nov 2022 00:29:48 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 580 Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory Employees who enjoy a high-quality LMX relationship with their supervisor may feel pro tected from a lack of clear rules, ambiguity, and unfairness. Put differently, they perceive the work environment as less threatening and less (negativelyyf S R O L W L F D O + R Z H Y H U W K R V e with poor relationships with their supervisor may feel much less protected and therefore view the work environment as more (negativelyyf S R O L W L F D O . D F P D U H W D O \f. Similarly, poorer LMX was positively associated with perceptions about the supervisor's political behavior (Ferris and Kacmar 1992yf 7 K H U H I R U H D Q G D F F R U G L Q J W R 6 F D Q G X U D \f, LMX may be viewed through the lens of organizational justice as well. Any leadership actions that reduce perceptions of politics (or justiceyf L Q W K H Z R U N J U R X S Z L O O D O V R F R Q W U L E X W e to the improvement of work outcomes such as change-oriented OCB. Vigoda-Gadot (2007ayf H [ D P L Q H G W K H U H O D W L R Q V K L S E H W Z H H Q O H D G H U V K L S V W \ O H R U J D Q L ] D W L R Q D O S R O L W L F V D Q d employee's performance (in a public sector settingyf D Q G I R X Q G W K D W Z K H U H D V 3 2 3 6 K D d a negative relationship with transformational leadership, it simultaneously had a positive relationship with transactional leadership. Similarly, and in line with Pillai et al. (1999yf D Q d Ehrhart (2004yf L W Z D V D U J X H G W K D W D W U D Q V I R U P D W L R Q D O O H D G H U Z K R V H L Q I O X H Q F H G H U L Y H V I U R m his or her high levels of professionalism and personal integrity can create an environment of creativity, trust, commitment, involvement, satisfaction, and excellence in the organiza tion. Therefore, transformational leadership has characteristics that can reduce POPS among public employees and indirectly enhance change-oriented OCB. In contrast, a trans actional leadership style is characterized by negotiation about interests, the reward system, interest-based relationships, and struggles over limited resources. All these issues are ev ident in a political environment (Vigoda-Gadot 2007ayf 2 Q W K H R W K H U K D Q G D W U D Q V D F W L R Q D l leader may enhance a rational and transparent give-and-take system, while maintaining a fair environment that can reduce POPS among public employees. All things considered, a transactional leader whose influence derives from his or her position of authority has the ability to reduce POPS and motivate public employees to engage in change-oriented OCB. In contrast, the ability of a transformational leader to achieve this goal is more limited. Aggregating all these arguments that are based on past knowledge, we may conclude that previous studies point to (1yf D G L U H F W U H O D W L R Q V K L S E H W Z H H Q O H D G H U V K L S V W \ O H D Q G / 0 ; R Q R Q e hand and POPS on the other and (2yf D Q L Q G L U H F W U H O D W L R Q V K L S E H W Z H H Q / 0 ; D Q G F K D Q J H R U i ented OCB, where POPS plays a moderating role. When POPS is high, the relationship be tween the quality of the LMX and change-oriented OCB will be stronger and more positive than when POPS is low. In addition, when POPS is low, change-oriented OCB resulting from LMX will be higher than when POPS is high. Thus, we suggest H3 and H4 as follows: H3 In the public sector, perceptions of transformational leadership, transactional leadership, and the quality of LMX relationships will be negatively related to POPS. H4 POPS moderate the relationship between the quality of LMX and change-oriented OCB in the public sector. Figures la-lc summarize the hypotheses tested in this study. The first model (figure layf H [ S O D L Q V W K H U H O D W L R Q V K L S E H W Z H H Q O H D G H U V K L S V W \ O H D Q G / 0 ; D V V X J J H V W H G L n HI. The second model (figure lbyf S U H V H Q W V W K H U H O D W L R Q V K L S E H W Z H H Q O H D G H U V K L S V W \ O H , LMX and perceptions of politics as suggested in H3. The third model (figure lcyf S U H V H Q W s the direct relationship between leadership style and LMX and change-oriented OCB (H2yf and the moderating effect of perceptions of politics on the relationship between LMX and change-oriented OCB (H4yf . This content downloaded from 162.237.206.47 on Fri, 18 Nov 2022 00:29:48 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms Vigoda-Gadot and Beeri Change-Oriented OCB in Public Administration 581 Figure 1 (ayf 7 K H 5 H O D W L R Q V K L S E H W Z H H Q / H D G H U V K L S 6 W \ O H V D Q G / 0 ; L Q W K H 3 X E O L F 6 H F W R U E \f The Relationship between Leadership Styles, LMX, and Perceptions of Politics in the Public Sector, (cyf 7 K H U H O D W L R Q V K L p between leadership, Change-Oriented OCB, and Perceptions of Politics METHODS Sample and Procedure Employees from a large public medical center located in the north of Israel participated in the study. This public medical center provides a wide range of health services such as This content downloaded from 162.237.206.47 on Fri, 18 Nov 2022 00:29:48 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 582 Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory administrative, informational, diagnostic, and therapeutic services. These services are pro vided through various medical departments (e.g., internal medicine, cardiology, neurologyyf headed by professional medical managers. The employees and their direct supervisors par ticipated in the study. They all hold a variety of para-professional and administrative posi tions (e.g., human resources, purchase and supply, maintenance, social assistance, medical secretarial, etc.yf 7 K H S D U W L F L S D Q W V S U R Y L G H V H U Y L F H V D F U R V V P H G L F D O G H S D U W P H Q W V W R P H G L F D l staff and consumers. After formal approval from the institution's authorities, each em ployee received a questionnaire that was based on the independent and control variables. A direct return method was used to increase response rate and to ensure that all data col lected were viewed by the researchers only. This method assured participants that no personal information would be shared with the institution's management. Our contacts with employees were independent and were backed by the full anonymity assured to all who agreed to take part in the study. No data were transferred to us via the formal organizational channels and no records were taken by the organization about those who agreed (or refusedyf W R W D N H S D U W L n the study. All data were collected by the researchers and kept with them throughout the study. Using this strategy, we had a high return rate of 90yb Z K H U H R X W R I H P S O R \ H H V F R m pleted the questionnaires. The high response rate strengthens the representativeness of the sample. It is important to note that throughout the study participation was voluntary. Employ ees who felt uncomfortable with the process had a simple option of outing at any stage. After data collection from employees was completed, 17 direct supervisors were asked to complete individual evaluations for their employees. Supervisors' evaluations were based on a short report of change-oriented OCB for each of the employees under the direct supervision of the reporting manager. Thus, although the respondents work for the same organization and share a common work environment, the measurement of the dependent variable was based on independent observations. Matching supervisors' personal evaluations for each employee and the self-report data by employees was done based on the last four digits of the ID number that each employee was asked to write on his/her questionnaire. A breakdown of the sample demonstrates a fair amount of heterogeneity among the respondents. Seventy-five percent of the respondents were female. The average age was 43.23 (standard deviation [SD] = 10.49yf P H D Q L Q J W K D W D E R X W W Z R W K L U G V R I S D U W L F L S D Q W s were ages 33 to 54. The average tenure was 15.72 years (SD = 10.09yf D Q G W Z R W K L U G s of the participants had held their positions for up to 19 years. The average number of years of education was 14.66 (SD = 2.44yf . Measures Change-Oriented OCB Change-oriented OCB was measured by a nine-item scale developed through a multistage process by Morrison and Phelps (1999yf D Q G X V H G V X E V H T X H Q W O \ L Q D V W X G \ E \ % H W W H Q F R X U t (2004yf 6 X S H U Y L V R U V F R P S O H W H G D T X H V W L R Q Q D L U H L Q Z K L F K W K H \ Z H U H D V N H G W R H Y D O X D W H W K e recent behavior of each employee. Items are as follows: The specific employee: (1yf W U L H V W o adopt improved procedures for doing the job, (2yf W U L H V W R F K D Q J H W K H M R E S U R F H V V L Q R U G H U W o be more effective, (3yf W U L H V W R E U L Q J D E R X W L P S U R Y H G S U R F H G X U H V I R U W K H R U J D Q L ] D W L R Q \f tries to institute new work methods that are more effective for the organization, (5yf P D N H s constructive suggestions for improving how things operate within the organization, (6yf W U L H s to correct faulty procedures or practices, (7yf W U L H V W R H O L P L Q D W H U H G X Q G D Q W R U X Q Q H F H V V D U y procedures, (8yf W U L H V W R L P S O H P H Q W V R O X W L R Q V W R S U H V V L Q J R U J D Q L ] D W L R Q D O S U R E O H P V D Q G \f This content downloaded from 162.237.206.47 on Fri, 18 Nov 2022 00:29:48 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms Vigoda-Cadot and Beeri Change-Oriented OCB in Public Administration 583 tries to introduce new work approaches to improve efficiency. The scale for these questions ranged from 1 (neveryf W R D O Z D \ V \f. Reliability of this scale was .97. Organizational Citizenship Behavior The scale was primarily based on the scale used by Williams and Anderson (1991yf D Q d Organ and Konovsky (1989yf D V Z H O O D V V X J J H V W L R Q V P D G H E \ 0 R U U L V R Q \f. We utilized a 10-item scale. Supervisors completed a questionnaire in which they were asked to eval uate the recent behavior of each employee. We tested two aspects of this variable: (1yf 2 & B directed toward Individuals and (2yf 2 & % G L U H F W H G W R Z D U G W K H 2 U J D Q L ] D W L R Q ) L Y H L W H P V Z H U e used to test each dimension. The OCB directed toward Individuals scale concerned helping a specific person, be it the supervisor, a coworker, or a client. The OCB directed toward the Organization scale represented a more impersonal sort of conscientiousness in attendance, use of work time, and adherence to various rules but a conscientiousness that far surpasses any enforceable minimum standards (Smith et al. 1983yf 2 & % G L U H F W H G W R Z D U G W K H 2 U J a nization is different from OCB directed toward Individuals because it implies a "good soldier" approach to doing things that are "right and proper," but doing them for the sake of the system rather than for specific people (Smith et al. 1983yf 6 D P S O H L W H P V L Q F O X G H \f helps other employees who have been absent (OCB directed toward Individualsyf \f helps other em ployees who have heavy workloads (OCB directed toward Individualsyf \f attendance at work is above the norm (OCB directed toward the Organizationyf D Q G \f gives advanced notice when unable to come to work (OCB directed toward the Organizationyf ( D F K L W H P Z D s measured on a scale ranging from 1 (neveryf W R D O Z D \ V \f. Reliability of this scale was .89. Transformational and Transactional Leadership Core transformational leadership behaviors were measured using five items adapted from Podsakoff, Mackenzie, Moorman, and Fetter (1990yf D Q G 3 R G V D N R I I H W D O \f and used subsequently in a study on change-oriented OCB by Bettencourt (2004yf 6 D P S O H L W H P V D U H : (1yf 0 \ V X S H U Y L V R U D U W L F X O D W H V D Q G J H Q H U D W H V H Q W K X V L D V P I R U D V K D U H G Y L V L R Q D Q G P L V V L R Q D Q d (2yf 0 \ V X S H U Y L V R U S U R Y L G H V D F R P S H O O L Q J Y L V L R Q R I W K H R U J D Q L ] D W L R Q V I L L W X U H 7 U D Q V D F W L R Q D l leadership behavior was measured with four items from Podsakoff et al. (1984yf 0 D F N H Q ] L e et al. (2001yf D Q G % H W W H Q F R X U W \f. Sample items are (1yf 0 \ V X S H U Y L V R U D O Z D \ V J L Y H s positive feedback when I perform well and (2yf 0 \ V X S H U Y L V R U J L Y H V P H V S H F L D O U H F R J Q L W L R n when my work is very good. The scale ranged from 1 (not true at allyf W R Y H U \ W U X H \f. Reliability of this scale was .94 for transformational leadership and .97 for transactional leadership. Leader-Member Exchange LMX was measured by a five-item scale of Graen, Liden, and Hoel (1982yf 7 K H V H L W H P s were subsequently used by Bettencourt (2004yf 6 D P S O H L W H P V D U H \f I can count on my supervisor to "bail me out" at his/her expense when I really need him/her and (2yf , Z R X O d characterize my relationship with my manager as above average. Respondents were asked to report how much they agreed with the items on a scale from 1 (strongly disagreeyf W R 5 (strongly agreeyf 5 H O L D E L O L W \ R I W K L V V F D O H Z D V . Perceptions of Organizational Politics POPS was measured by a six-item scale taken from Ferris et al. (1989yf D Q G X V H G H [ W H Q V L Y H O y elsewhere in various versions (i.e., Kacmar and Carlson 1994; Kacmar and Ferris 1991; This content downloaded from 162.237.206.47 on Fri, 18 Nov 2022 00:29:48 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 584 Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory Vigoda 2000, 2002yf 6 D P S O H L W H P V D U H \f Favoritism rather than merit determines who gets ahead around here and (2yf , K D Y H V H H Q F K D Q J H V P D G H L Q S R O L F L H V K H U H W K D W R Q O \ V H U Y H W K e purposes of a few individuals, not the work unit of the organization. Respondents were asked to report how much they agreed with the items on a scale from 1 (strongly disagreeyf to 5 (strongly agreeyf 5 H O L D E L O L W \ R I W K L V V F D O H Z D V . Control Variables We controlled for age, years of tenure in the organization, and years of education. Data Analysis We applied exploratory factor analysis to ensure the validity of the change-oriented OCB scale and its uniqueness compared with the conservative scale of OCB (directed toward Individuals and the organizationyf ) R O O R Z L Q J W K L V S U R F H G X U H Z H X V H G D Q R U G L Q D U \ P X O W L S O e regression analysis and additional regressions with interaction effect to test the moderating relationship of POPS (all p values are for two-tailed testsyf . FINDINGS Exploratory factor analysis with varimax rotation was first applied and is presented in table 1. As expected, the analysis demonstrated quite a clear-cut distinction among three sub fac tors: 9 items for change-oriented OCB, 5 items for OCB directed toward Individuals, and an additional 5 items for OCB directed toward the Organization (including three reversed scored itemsyf 7 K H V H I L Q G L Q J V V W U R Q J O \ V X S S R U W W K H V R O L G L W \ D Q G X Q L T X H Q H V V R I W K e change-oriented OCB items that we used in further analysis. Table 2 presents the zero-order correlation among the research variables. The normal ity of distribution of the research variables was tested using Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z-tests, skewness and kurtosis, which revealed that transactional leadership, transformational lead ership, LMX, and POPS are slightly, but not significantly, skewed to the left. This evidence should be taken into account when interpreting the results. Also evident from table 2 is the strong positive relationship between transformational leadership and transactional leader ship and LMX (r = .76; p < .001, r = .79; p < .001, respectivelyyf 7 K H V H L Q W H U F R U U H O D W L R Q s are not unusual (e.g., Basu and Green 1997; Bettencourt 2004yf D Q G L Q Q R F D V H H [ F H H G W K e level of 0.8 that was suggested by Field (2005, 175yf D V W K H E R U G H U R I P X O W L F R O O L Q H D U L W \ . However, to make sure that our study does not suffer from a problem of multicollinearity, we also applied (1yf V H Y H U D O F R Q I L U P D W R U \ I D F W R U D Q D O \ V H V W R H Q V X U H W K H Y D O L G L W \ R I R X U V F D O H s and (2yf D W H V W R I W R O H U D Q F H D Q G 9 D U L D Q F H , Q I O D W L R Q ) D F W R U 9 , ) \f.2 ] Exploratory factor analyses with varimax rotation were first applied for transactional and transformational leadership and LMX. The analysis demonstrated a clear-cut distinction among three factors: five items for each of the variables. The total variance explained was 83.4yb 7 K H V H F R Q G H [ S O R U D W R U \ I D F W R U D Q D O \ V L V Z D V H [ S D Q G H G W R L Q F O X G e change-oriented OCB as well. The analysis demonstrated a clear-cut distinction among four factors: nine items for change-oriented OCB and five items for each of the other research variables. The total variance explained was 80.6yb . These findings strongly support the solidity and uniqueness of the change-oriented OCB and LMX scales that we used in further analysis. 2 The tolerance and VIF tests revealed encouraging results as well. The Tolerance values ranged between .30 and .69, and the VIF values ranged between 1.46 and 3.34—far above .10 and far below 5.0/10.0, respectively, which would indicate a possible problem (Field 2005yf . This content downloaded from 162.237.206.47 on Fri, 18 Nov 2022 00:29:48 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms Vigoda-Gadot and Beeri Change-Oriented OCB in Public Administration 585 Table 1 Exploratory Factor Analysis for Change-Oriented OCB and OCB (individual and organizationalyf , W H P s i* t3 2 s 1 * £ 2 t3 € on (n m o o ifyf fs co on co o no no CN 00 *o *n " 2 o o ' (2 3 o p tf m tt rfr co On no (n (n cn (n 00 h o vyf A L d (N cn (N o n x h m h H o « 9\ t m oe oo v© no co © r- no o X io O --i (S (s h o ' co no >—< m u o i "<3 _i. u u ® o » i< 0yf 60 no 00 co on n -t co 00 00 00 00 00 x o tf oooo-^otrontncnfnvooo fyf I \f tftfoov^'-htoooon—ifnonf^onos oooooo xnfsinfntffno'-j^rhn^io h oo oo co co u r-n o (d o '5 cfl d> £ 03 -G ■a s 2 2.83yf V F R U H Z K H U H D V D O R Z O H Y H O R I 3 2 3 6 L s defined as a below average (<2.83yf V F R U H 7 K H H T X D W L R Q X Q G H U W K H [ D [ L V H [ S U H V V H V W K e interaction model that was tested, whereas X represents LMX, Y is for CO-OCB, and Z stands for POPS. According to this figure, for the whole sample, change-oriented OCB improves with an increase in the quality of LMX. However, POPS is a moderator in this relationship, making it stronger within those who have strong perceptions about the level of organizational politics. When the quality of LMX is poor, strong perceptions about orga nizational politics result in a reduced inclination toward change-oriented OCB, compared to situations in which employees sense that organizational politics is not a major factor in their work environment. However, when the quality of LMX is high, stronger feelings of inequity and unfairness in the public organization lead to more change-oriented OCB com pared to situations in which employees sense that organizational politics is not a major factor in their work environment. Put differently, the highest level of change-oriented OCB was found among employees who reported high levels of LMX and low levels of POPS; the lowest level of change-oriented OCB was found among employees who reported low levels of LMX and high levels of POPS. The overall explained variance of the model was 25yb . This content downloaded from 162.237.206.47 on Fri, 18 Nov 2022 00:29:48 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms Vigoda-Gadot and Beeri Change-Oriented OCB in Public Administration 589 Although not specifically designed to test the hypotheses, similar models were em ployed to predict the two other types of OCB. In comparison to the change-oriented OCB model, different patterns emerged between managerial styles and OCB directed toward individuals and toward the organization in general. LMX was the only significant positive predictor related to OCB directed toward individuals with no interaction effect; no signif icant predictor was found related to OCB toward the organization with no interaction effect.3 These interesting findings deserve further explanation and will be elaborated on in the Discussion section. CHANGE-ORIENTED OCB IN THE SERVICE OF PUBLIC ORGANIZATIONS AND CITIZENS: DISCUSSION AND SUMMARY Modern public administration is struggling in a world of rapid changes and developments. Breakthroughs in technology, stronger calls for governments to plan and shape modern societies, and increased expectations from governmental and administrative agencies are occurring in a globalizing and innovative environment. From a public managerial per spective, these changes lead to a culture of open decision making that encourages public employees to undertake innovative and out-of-the-box missions and generate creative ideas. Many times, these tasks and behaviors must go beyond the formal requirements of the traditional bureaucratic machinery. Change-oriented OCB is one such behavior that managers in the public sector must learn to recognize and apply to support work processes and improve services to the public. This study borrowed the idea of OCB as a well-studied phenomenon from the generic managerial and organizational behavior literature and used it to propose a concept that will advance our knowledge in public management. We focused on public sector employees' willingness to engage in voice activities, above and beyond the formal requirements of the organization. Although change-oriented OCB is prevalent in public organizations, as much as it is in other organizations, its meaning and implications for this sector in particular are far reaching. In addition, the study examined the mutual effects between change-oriented OCB, leadership, and politics and found meaningful interrelationships. The findings of the study should be discussed particularly with regard to several major points: (1yf W K H V W D Q G D O R Q H U R O H R I F K D Q J H R U L H Q W H G 2 & % L Q W K H S X E O L F V H F W R U D V D X Q L T X e aspect of good citizenship behavior, one with added value over OCBs (i.e., directed toward Individuals and toward the Organizationyf \f the reconfirmation of several relationships, especially between leadership style and leader-member-exchange (LMXyf D Q G E H W Z H H n these variables and POPS; (3yf W K H V R O L G G L U H F W U H O D W L R Q V K L S E H W Z H H Q F K D Q J H R U L H Q W H d OCB, leadership styles, and LMX; and (4yf W K H P R G H V W E X W L Q W H U H V W L Q J L Q G L U H F W U H O D W L R Q V K L p between POPS, LMX, and change-oriented OCB. First, the fact that our factor analysis revealed three clear-cut factors of change-oriented OCB, OCB directed toward Individuals, and OCB directed toward the Organization is en couraging. Note that different patterns were found in our attempts to relate leadership styles, LMX, and POPS with the three dimensions of OCB (change-oriented OCB, IND-OCB, ORG-OCByf 7 K H V H I L Q G L Q J V V X S S R U W F K D Q J H R U L H Q W H G 2 & % D V D E H K D Y L R U W K D W L V E R W K U H O D W H d 3 For more detailed results, please contact the first author. This content downloaded from 162.237.206.47 on Fri, 18 Nov 2022 00:29:48 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 590 Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory to classical OCB factors (IND-OCB and ORG-OCByf E X W D W W K H V D P H W L P H D O V R V H S D U D W H D Q d distinct from them in several ways. Although classic OCB factors reflect good citizenship in that employees invest extra-role efforts in others, change-oriented OCB is unique in adding the extra dimensions of innovation, creativity, and voice into the complex meaning of good citizenship. Organ's (1988yf W K H R U \ R I W K H J R R G V R O G L H U V \ Q G U R P H P D \ W K H U H I R U H E H H x panded to encompass other behaviors as well, those that go beyond doing extra and extend to creativity and innovation. This idea strongly supports Bettencourt's (2004yf P R G H O L W s emphasis on change-oriented OCB and its major role in making some organizations better than others. Moreover, we believe that our study is perhaps the first to test the theoretical and empirical meaning of change-oriented OCB in public administration systems. Our focus on public organizations explores another aspect of this concept and its implications. We suggest that when change-oriented OCB takes place in a governmental agency, its impli cations go far beyond the added value to a specific organization, change-oriented OCB may have a positive spillover onto people's experiences with governmental services and affect the perceptions of the government as a legitimate political entity. Thus, one may argue that change-oriented OCB can help loosen some of bureaucracy's stiffness and make it more flexible and sensitive to citizens' needs. Our model yielded some additional findings that deserve attention. The first and most basic one is the relationship between transactional leadership, transformational leadership, and LMX. This relationship is well established and widely documented in the literature (i.e., Basu and Green 1997; Graen and Uhl-Bien 1995; Howell and Hall-Merenda 1999yf 7 K H V H V W X G L H V D Q d others like them suggest that LMX is strongly and positively affected by both styles of leadership, transformational and transactional. Our findings support both the findings of these studies and the emphasis placed on the quality of the relationship between supervisors and subordinates and its impact on a variety of work outcomes. Another finding that deserves added discussion is the negative relationship between perceptions of politics and transformational leadership and LMX. This finding is in line with several other studies that promoted the idea that leadership plays a role in deter mining employees' views about fairness, equity, the professional handling of conflicts and dilemmas, and decision-making processes that involve a struggle over resources or benefits. For example, Pillai et al. (1999yf V X S S R U W H G W K H L Q G L U H F W H I I H F W R I W U D Q V I R U P D W L R Q D l leadership on OCBs through procedural justice and trust. In a later study, Andrews and Kacmar (2001yf V X S S R U W H G D Q H J D W L Y H U H O D W L R Q V K L S E H W Z H H Q / 0 ; D Q G R U J D Q L ] D W L R Q D O S R O i tics. These findings may imply that public sector managers who use a transformational leadership style and build high-quality LMX relationships directly reduce perceptions of politics among employees through the support and identity mechanisms that they pro vide to subordinates. However, this rationale does not work for transactional leadership, which is based more on reciprocity and exchange between employees and their supervisors. Although we expected that transactional leadership would have some negative effect on POPS, the findings revealed no such relationship. A possible explanation for this lack of association may be the difference between transactional leadership and transformational leadership and their relationship with organizational politics. Our findings indicate that among public employees, transformational leadership negatively affects POPS. Further more, this relationship is much more imminent and stable than the one between transac tional leadership and POPS. This content downloaded from 162.237.206.47 on Fri, 18 Nov 2022 00:29:48 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms Vigoda-Gadot and Beeri Change-Oriented OCB in Public Administration 591 However, perhaps, the most interesting finding of this study lies in the relationships found between leadership, POPS, and change-oriented OCB. First, and most notable, is the strong, direct relationship between leadership and change-oriented OCB, which accorded with our original expectations and with the literature (Podsakoff et al. 1990, 1996yf : e found that LMX is strongly and positively related with change-oriented OCB. In addition, LMX is strongly and positively related with OCB directed toward Individuals. Hence, it may be argued that the quality of the relationships between public employees and their supervisors contributes strongly to individuals' willingness to engage in innovative and creative behaviors and behaviors toward other individuals that support the organization. Whereas Choi (2007yf V X J J H V W H G W K D W F K D Q J H R U L H Q W H G 2 & % V K R X O G E H F R Q V L G H U H G D V S H F L I L c dimension of OCB directed toward the organization, our study found reason to assume that change-oriented OCB has a stand-alone context, quite separate from the other classical aspects of OCB. The quality of LMX has no effect on behaviors toward the organization in general. In addition, however, we also found that the direct relationship is accompanied by an indirect moderating effect of perceptions of politics. In other words, although the relation ship between LMX and Change-oriented OCB was positive, it was different for high and low levels of POPS. The relationship was stronger when employees sensed that organiza tional politics was a major factor in their workplace than when they did not. In other words, LMX is more important in highly political environments. A possible explanation for this relationship is a compensation type of effect. In a highly political atmosphere, the quality of LMX can encourage employees to overcome difficulties and their frustrations and still en gage in active voice behaviors such as change-oriented OCB. However, when the work place is less politically charged, the need for LMX is reduced. The public manager, as a leader, may thus serve as a buffer that promotes employees' willingness to engage in innovative change-oriented OCB in spite of negative feelings and perceptions such as POPS. Another interesting interpretation of the moderation effect assumes public managers directly affect both LMX (Graen and Uhl-Bien 1995yf D Q G 3 2 3 6 3 L O O D L H W D O \f because organizational politics is not a given element in the workplace environment. Since public managers are not perfect, they may enable or not necessarily prevent high levels of POPS. However, to maintain high levels of change-oriented OCB in the employees, the self awareness of a public manager of his/her own limited qualifications may push him/her to compensate the employees with very positive LMX relationships. This possibility ex plains why the highest change-oriented OCB was found among employees who reported that their manager successfully created positive LMX relationships, yet failed to create low levels of POPS. Nonetheless, this finding should be interpreted with caution because the interaction effect is rather modest and the direct relationship is more pronounced than the indirect effect. Quite surprisingly, we also found a direct positive relationship between transactional leadership and change-oriented OCB, but a negative relationship between transformational leadership and change-oriented OCB. These findings were counterintuitive because we would have expected the opposite direction of relationship between the variables. In other words, we would have predicted a weaker and perhaps more negative relationship between transactional leadership and change-oriented OCB compared with a stronger and more pos itive relationship between transformational leadership and change-oriented OCB. This content downloaded from 162.237.206.47 on Fri, 18 Nov 2022 00:29:48 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 592 Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory Although these findings are difficult to explain and interpret, an interesting study by Basu and Green (1997yf P D \ K H O S X V X Q G H U V W D Q G W K H V H U H V X O W V , Q W K H L U V W X G \ W K H D X W K R U s found quite a similar relationship between charismatic transformational leadership4 and innovative behavior (which is close in nature to change-oriented OCByf 7 K H \ R I I H U H G W K U H e possible explanations for these findings (pp.492—3yf \f "Perhaps followers are intimidated by a charismatic leader, and this intimidation manifests itself in lower incidence of inno vation." They mention previous studies claiming that, "charismatic leaders may be dam aging because of their continual need for approval from others." According to Harrison (1987yf F K D U L V P D W L F O H D G H U V K L S O H D G V W R W K H F U H D W L R Q R I D F K L H Y H P H Q W R U L H Q W H G F X O W X U H s which for the most part are advantageous, but can create excessive stress for members who are unable to handle the pressure to perform beyond expectations." (2yf $ F F R U G L Q g to Howell and Avolio (1992yf F H U W D L Q N L Q G V R I F K D U L V P D W L F W U D Q V I R U P D W L R Q D O O H D G H U V W H U P H d unethical charismaticsyf G H P D Q G W K D W G H F L V L R Q V E H D F F H S W H G Z L W K R X W T X H V W L R Q F H Q V X U H F U L t ical and opposing views, and encourage dependent followers, thus squashing any oppor tunity for individual initiative, thought, or innovative activities. (3yf 6 L Q F H W U D Q V I R U P D W L R Q D l leaders by definition participate in innovation processes (Burns 1978; Bass 1985; Tichy and Devanna 1986; Tichy and Ulrich 1984yf W K H \ P D \ Y L H Z I R O O R Z H U V Z K R D U H Q R W X S W R W K H L r standards as less innovative. Consequently, the more charismatic transformational leaders are, the less likely they may be to view followers as engaged in innovative activities such as change-oriented OCB. Hence, Basu and Green (1997yf V X P P D U L ] H W R W K H H [ W H Q W W K D W V X F h perceptions cloud judgment, transformational leadership can be negatively related to in novative behavior." In view of these possibilities, we feel that one explanation for this finding may be that change-oriented OCB is encouraged by feasible exchange relationships and actions that support them, specifically in the public sector. At the same time, change-oriented OCB may be discouraged by the more abstract transformative actions of leaders that call for the fulfillment of formal job duties. Although being engaged in change-oriented OCB is positively related with good LMX qualities, the specific transactional contingent-reward aspect of this relationship is more effective than abstract transformational types of relation ships in supporting innovation and creativity, especially among public employees. Another possible explanation is that charismatic transformational leadership in the public sector has specific characteristics that negatively affect change-oriented OCB in the way suggested by Basu and Green (1997yf 6 X F K F K D U D F W H U L V W L F V P D \ S X W P R U H H P S K D V L V R Q I R O O R Z L Q J W K H I R r mal procedures of complying with regulations and order and less on behaviors involving creativity and innovation. Hence, it is possible that leadership among public managers is different than that among other managers and its impact on change-oriented OCB may also be different. Finally, the limitations of this study should also be mentioned so they can guide future attempts to study OCB and change-oriented OCB in public sector environments. First, our sample is of modest size and quite homogeneous. It presumably shares common features of the work environment in that it comes from one public health organization. This fact limits the ability to generalize our findings to other public services that may differ substantially from ours. Future studies would therefore benefit from testing our model on larger and more 4 Note that although "charisma" and "transformational leadership" are not necessarily synonymous, Basu and Green (1997yf D Q G 7 L F K \ D Q G 8 O U L F K \f refer to "charismatic transformational leadership" and to "charismatic leadership" as to "transformational leadership." This content downloaded from 162.237.206.47 on Fri, 18 Nov 2022 00:29:48 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms Vigoda-Cadot and Beeri Change-Oriented OCB in Public Administration 593 heterogeneous samples of public employees and organizations. Second, our data were col lected in Israel and generalization to other cultures should be done with caution considering the uniqueness of the Israeli public sector and its health system. Other studies should con sider the different meanings of change-oriented behaviors typical of other nations and cul tures, with their typical public organizations. Third, our data may be biased by some skewed distributions of variables. However, such skewing not uncommon in many studies of the social sciences and should not be considered a major limitation (Stevens 2009yf . Finally, we have not used a causal research design, so any conclusions regarding causality should be treated with caution. In view of the above issues, future research would benefit from: (1yf E H W W H U F R Q W U R O R Y H r other possible factors such as organizational type, types of tasks, or type of work environ ment; (2yf D S S O \ L Q J P R U H D G Y D Q F H G V W D W L V W L F D O D Q D O \ V H V W K D W D U H X V H I X O L Q W H V W L Q J F D X V D O L W y (i.e., Structural Equation Modelingyf R U W K R V H W K D W D U H X V H I X O L Q W H V W L Q J P X O W L O H Y H O P R G H O s (i.e., Hierarchical Linear Modelingyf \f replicating our study in other organizational set tings and cultures; and (4yf L Q F O X G L Q J D G G L W L R Q D O Y D U L D E O H V L H V H U Y L F H F O L P D W H S H U V R Q D O L W y typesyf W K D W K D Y H E H H Q I R X Q G V L J Q L I L F D Q W L Q S U H Y L R X V V W X G L H V R Q O H D G H U V K L S S R O L W L F V D Q G 2 & % . All in all, and despite its limitations, we believe that this study offers a different look at the informal aspect of innovation and creativity in public administration. It calls for more integra tion of knowledge from the generic managerial and organizational behavior theories into public management and exemplifies how this should be done to overcome some of bureaucracies' traditional ills of red tape, stagnation, inflexibility, and resistance to change and renewal. REFERENCES Andrews, Martha C., and Michele K. Kacmar. 2001. Discriminating among organizational politics, justice and support. Journal of Organizational Behavior 22:347-66. Bass, Bernard M. 1985. Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press. Basu, Raja, and Stephen G. Green. 1997. Leader-member exchange and transformational leadership: An empirical examination of innovative behavior in leader-member dyads. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 27:477—99. Battaglio, Paul R. Jr, and Stephen E. Condrey. 2009. Reforming public management: Analyzing the impact of public service reform on organizational and managerial trust. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 19:689—707. Bereton, Michael, and Michael Temple. 1999. The new public service ethos: An ethical environment for government. Public Administration 77:455—74. Bernier, Luc, and Tai'eb Hafsi. 2007. The changing nature of public entrepreneurship. Public Adminis tration Review 67:488—503. Bettencourt, Lance A. 2004. Change-oriented organizational citizenship behaviors: The direct and moderating influence of goal orientation. Journal of Retailing 80:165-80. Bolman, Lee G., and Terrence E. Deal. 1991. Leadership and management effectiveness: A multi-frame, multi-sector analysis. Human Resource Management 30:509-34. Borins, Sandford. 2001. Public management innovation: Toward a global perspective. American Review of Public Administration 31:5-21. Burns, James MacGregor. 1978. Leadership. New York: Harper & Row. Chen, Chung-An A., and Jeffrey L. Brudney. 2009. A cross-sector comparison of using nonstandard workers: Explaining use and impacts on the employment relationship. Administration and Society 41:313-39. Chiun, L. May, Thurasamy Ramayah, and Jerome Kueh Swee Hui. 2006. An investigation of leader member exchange effects on organizational citizenship behavior in Malaysia. Journal of Business and Management 12:5—23. This content downloaded from 162.237.206.47 on Fri, 18 Nov 2022 00:29:48 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 594 Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory Choi, Jin Nam. 2007. Change-oriented organizational citizenship behavior: Effects of work environment characteristics and intervening processes. Journal of Organizational Behavior 28:467—84. Coggburn, Jerrell D. 2006. At-will employment in government: Insights from the State of Texas. Review of Public Personnel Administration 26:158—77. Coggburn, Jerrell D., R. Paul Battaglio, Jr., James S. Bowman, Stephen E. Condrey, Doug Goodman, and Jonathan P. West. 2010. State government human resource professionals' commitment to em ployment at will. American Review of Public Administration 40:189-208. Coyle-Shapiro, Jacqueline A. M., and Ian Kessler. 2003. The employment relationship in the U.K. public sector: A psychological contract perspective. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 13:213-30. Cropanzano, Russell, John C. Howes, Alicia A. Grandey, and Paul Toth. 1997. The relationship of or ganizational politics and support to work behaviors, attitudes, and stress. Journal of Organizational Behavior 18:159-80. Davis, Mike. 2004. Building innovative bureaucracies: Change, structure and the science of ideas. The Public Manager 32:3. Deluga, Ronald J. 1992. The relationship of leader-member exchanges with laissez-faire, transactional, and transformational leadership. In Impact of leadership, ed. Kenneth E. Clark, Miriam B. Clark, David R. Campbell, pp. 237-47. Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership. Ehrhart, Mark G. 2004. Leadership and procedural justice climate as antecedents of unit-level organi zational citizenship behavior. Personnel Psychology 57:61-94. Ferris, Gerald R., Dwight D. Frink, David C. Gilmore, and K. Michelle Kacmar. 1994. Understanding as an antidote for the dysfunctional consequences of organizational politics as a stressor. Journal of Applied Psychology 24:1204—20. Ferris, Gerald R., and K. Michelle K acmar. 1992. Perceptions of organizational politics. Journal of Management 18:93—116. Ferris, Gerald R., Gail S. Russ, and Patricia M. Fundt. 1989. Politics in organizations. In Impression management in the organization, ed. Robert A. Giacalone and Paul Roenfield, 143-70. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Field, Andy. 2005. Discovering statistics using SPSS, 2nd ed London: Sage. Gandz, Jeffrey, and Victor V. Murray. 1980. The experience of workplace politics. Academy of Man agement Journal 23:237—51. Gilmore, David C., Gerald R. Ferris, James H. Dulebohn, and Gloria Harrell-Cook. 1996. Organizational politics and employee attendance. Group and Organizational Management 21:481—94. Graen, Georg, Fred Dansereau, Jr. and Takao Minami. 1972. Dysfunctional leadership styles. Organi zational Behavior and Human Performance 7:216-36. Graen, George B., Robert C. Liden, and William Hoel. 1982. The role of leadership in the employee withdrawal process. Journal of Applied Psychology 67:868-72. Graen, George B., and T. A. Scandura. 1987. Toward a psychological of dyadic organizing. In Research in organizational behavior, ed. Larry L. Cummings and Barry M. Staw, 175—208. Greenwich, CT: JAI press. Graen, George B., and Mary Uhl-Bien. 1995. Relationship based approach to leadership: Development of leader-member exchange (LMXyf W K H R U \ R I O H D G H U V K L S R Y H U \ H D U V $ S S O \ L Q J D P X O W L O H Y H O P X O W i domain perspective. The Leadership Quarterly 6:219-47. Harrison, Roger. 1987. Harnessing personal energy: How companies can inspire employees. Organi zational Dynamics. Autumn:4—21. Howell, Jane M., and Bruce J. Avolio. 1992. The ethics of charismatic leadership: Submission or lib eration. Academy of Management Executive 6:43—54. Howell, Jane M., and Kathryn E. Hall-Merenda. 1999. The ties that bind: The impact of leader-member exchange, transformational and transactional leadership and distance on predicting follower per formance. Journal of Applied Psychology 84:680-94. Ilies, Remus, Jennifer D. Nahrgang, and Frederick P. Morgeson. 2007. Leader-member exchange and citizenship behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology 92:269-77. This content downloaded from 162.237.206.47 on Fri, 18 Nov 2022 00:29:48 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms Vigoda-Gadot and Beeri Change-Oriented OCB in Public Administration 595 Kacmar, K. Michele, and Dawn S. Carlson. 1994. Further validation of the perceptions of the political scale (POPSyf $ P X O W L S O H V D P S O H L Q Y H V W L J D W L R Q 3 D S H U S U H V H Q W H G D W W K H $ F D G H P \ R I 0 D Q D J H P H Q W 0 H H W L Q J , Dallas, TX (August 14-17yf . Kacmar, K. Michele, and Gerald R. Ferris. 1991. Perceptions of organizational politics scale (POPSyf : Development and construct validation. Educational and Psychological Measurement 51:191—205. Kacmar, Michele K, Suzanne Zivnuska, and Charles D. White. 2007. Control and exchange: The impact of work environment on the work effort of low relationship quality employees. The Leadership Quarterly 18:69-84. Katz, Daniel, and Robert Louis Kahn. 1966. The social psychology of organizations. New York: Wiley. Koberg, C. S., R. W. Boss, E. A. Goodman, A. D. Boss, and E. W. Monsen. 2005. Empirical evidence of organizational citizenship behavior from the health care industry. International Journal of Public Administration 28:417—36. Kotter, John P. 1999. John P. Kotter on what leaders really do: A Harvard business review book. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School. Liden, Robert C., and George Graen. 1980. Generalizability of the vertical dyad linkage model of leadership. Academy of Management Journal 23:451—65. Mackenzie, Scot B., Philip M. Podsakoff, and Gregory A. Rich. 2001. Transformational and transactional leadership and salesperson performance. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 29:115—34. Morrison, Elizabeth Wolfe. 1994. Role definitions and organizational citizenship behavior: The impor tance of the employee's perspective. Academy of Management Journal 37:1543-67. Morrison, Elizabeth Wolfe., and C. Corey C. Phelps. 1999. Taking charge at work: Extra-role efforts to initiate workplace change. Academy of Management Journal 42:403-19. Organ, Dennis W. 1988. Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. Organ, Dennis W., and Mary Konovsky. 1989. Cognitive versus affective determinants of organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology 74:157-64. Perry, James. 1996. Measuring public service motivation: An assessment of construct reliability and validity. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 6:5—22. Perry, James. 2000. Bringing society in: Toward a theory of public-service motivation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 10:471—88. Perry, James, Jeffrey Brudney, David Coursey, and Laura Littlepage. 2008. What drives morally com mitted citizens? A study of the antecedents of public service motivation. Public Administration Review 68:445-58. Pillai, Rajnandini, Chester A. Schriesheim, and Eric S. Williams. 1999. Fairness perceptions and trust as mediators for transformational and transactional leadership: A two-sample study. Journal of Management 25:897—933. Podsakoff, Philip M., and Scot B. Mackenzie. 1997. Impact of organizational citizenship behavior on organizational performance: A review and suggestions for future research. Human Performance 10:133-51. Podsakoff, Philip M., Scot B. Mackenzie, and W. H. Bommer. 1996. Transformational leader behaviors and substitutes for leadership as determinants of employee satisfaction, commitment, trust and organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of Management 22:259-98. Podsakoff, Philip M., Scot B. Mackenzie, S. H. Moorman, and R. Fetter. 1990. Transformational leader behaviors and their effects on followers' trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly 1:107—42. Podsakoff, Philip M., William D. Todor, Richard A. Grover, and Vandra Huber. 1984. Situational moderators of leader reward and punishment behaviors: Fact or fiction? Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 34:21-63. Pollitt, Christopher. 1993. Managerialism and the public services. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press. Pollitt, Christopher, and Geert Bouckaert. 2000. Public management reform. A comparative analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press. This content downloaded from 162.237.206.47 on Fri, 18 Nov 2022 00:29:48 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 596 Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory Randall, L. Maijorie, Russell Cropanzano, Carol A. Borman, and Andrej Biijulin. 1999. Organizational politics and organizational support as predictors of work attitudes, job performance, and organi zational citizenship behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior 20:159-74. Saner, Raymond. 2001. Globalization and its impact on leadership qualification in public administration. International Review of Administrative Sciences 67:649-61. Scandura, Terri. 1999. Rethinking leader-member exchange: An organizational justice perspective. The Leadership Quarterly 10:25—41. Schriesheim, Chester A., Stephanie L. Castro, and Claudia C. Cogliser. 1999. Leader-member exchange (LMXyf U H V H D U F K $ F R P S U H K H Q V L Y H U H Y L H Z R I W K H R U \ P H D V X U H P H Q W D Q G G D W D D Q D O \ W L F S U D F W L F H V 7 K e Leadership Quarterly 10:63—113. Smith, C. Ann, Dennis W. Organ, and Janet P. Near. 1983. Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology 68:653-63. Song, Seok Hwi. 2006. Workplace friendship and employees productivity: LMX theory and the case of the Seoul city government. International Review of Public Administration 11:47—58. Song, Seok Hwi., and Dorothy Olshfsky. 2008. Friends at work: A comparative study of work attitudes in Seoul city government and New Jersey state government. Administration & Society 40:147-69. Staw, Barry M., and Richard D. Boettger. 1990. Task revision: A neglected form of work performance. Academy of Management Journal 33:534—59. Stevens, James. 2009. Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences, 5th ed. London: Routledge. Terry, Larry D. 1998. Administrative leadership, neo-managerialism, and the public management movement. Public Administration Review 53:194—200. Tichy, Noel M., and Mary Anne Devanna. 1986. The transformational leader. New York, NY: John Wiley. Tichy, Noel M., and David O. Ulrich. 1984. The leadership challenge—a call for the transformational leader. Sloan Management Review 26:59-68. Van Dyne, Linn, and Jeffrey A. LePine. 1998. Helping and voice extra-role behavior: Evidence of construct and predictive validity. Academy of Management Journal 41:108-19. Van Slyke, David M., and Robert W. Alexander. 2006. Public service leadership: Opportunities for clarity and coherence. American Review of Public Administration 36:362—74. Vigoda, Eran. 2000. Internal politics in public administration systems: An empirical examination of its relationship with job congruence, organizational citizenship behavior and in-role performances. Public Personnel Management 26:185—210. Vigoda, Eran. 2002. Stress-related aftermaths to workplace politics: The relationship among politics, job distress and aggressive behavior in organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior 23:571—91. Vigoda-Gadot, Eran. 2007a. Leadership style, organizational politics, and employees' performance: An empirical examination of two competing models. Personnel Review 36:661—83. . 2007b. Citizens' perceptions of organizational politics and ethics in public administration: A five-year study of their relationship to satisfaction with services, trust in governance, and voice orientations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 17:285-305. Vigoda-Gadot, Eran, and Danit Kapun. 2005. Perceptions of politics and perceived performance in public and private organizations: A test of one model across two sectors. Policy & Politics 33:251-76. Wayne, Sandy J., Lynn M. Shore, and Robert C. Liden. 1997. Perceived organizational support and leader member exchange: A social exchange perspective. Academy of Management Journal 40:82—111. Williams, Larry J., and Stella E. Anderson. 1991. Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. Journal of Management 17:601—17. Witt, Angela L. 1998. Enhancing organizational goal congruence: A solution to organizational politics. Journal of Applied Psychology 83:666-74. This content downloaded from 162.237.206.47 on Fri, 18 Nov 2022 00:29:48 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms