).:

r:i:ii;: .ii,i i

i:

i) tu11,Ii :r pjli | trln(li,r'i .l. ii:r: l: L! r., t'gr 11i?,r,! liort ri i i,iii::,:rtri:]i1 i.i'.1'.; ! i{.li;r cnl Suir-Dbiiiet n{ilsinis{rati ! e *rgai:izaii0rr iri i'iian:la ,ll:iilau:

llistrict. 5ti3(or) l{akhos Prorinte

.!i1ti l(itlilcrlpaisFner, aharl"it Ci, u!'r hip r.chn:. ( hainarorg Phn0ni.rrctrl. l: ar.I\laneclihiari', Sxpitch:)a \iliind?'.1\rsro$ l(haosriia.t', !4'alchara 4lir.'"r'r,

Nuuthara lhrttarrites and Paniiee Ka$rsomdce'Lectlller, Adrrinish'alicrL Developr!1enr Prograur, Saki Nxk]lor R.ajablnt ihi\ersill,, fh.,il.rraE-rna ii: iitli!99!@!o!rra i Lco

'?Lecturer, Prlbiic Adminisi.ation Progurn, Sakorl Nakhoir Rajabhat tlniversity, ThailandE-majl: glrakitf()hotnBi l.comrl-ccturer.

Business EconolDics Ptogiai!, Sal(orr Nakhon Rajabbal Univ€rsity, Thailan.iE-mai1: (obcluna 1@.ho tmaii. cglllalectu€r, Business Adfiinislration ProgBm, Sakon Nakhoo RaJabhat Universiry- Thaiiand

P-ftai1: jjllu4l!.@halllalLeau'Lecturer, Business Conputer Progranr, Sakon Nakhon Ritjabhar Uuiversity, ThailandE-mail Su p ilcha va. r r@su!.4!.(I61-ectrrrel, Blrsiness Economics Prograr , Sakou Nakhon Rajabhat University, ThailaudE-mail: kasom.khfa)email-com'Lecturer, Retail Business L,lanAgemcrt PrcgraDl Sakon Nakhon Rajabhat University, ThailandE-mail: akkara2525@gurail.comslecturer, CommuDication Arts Program, Sakon Nakhon Rajabha! Universily, ThailardE-fl ai1: n.lirularate@yahoo.col1l'Lectuer, Public AdmiDistmlion Progiinl, Kaseisalt Unive$ily Chalemrphrakiat SakonNal*loq ThaiiandE-uraji: famp&fgcsc-ku.ac.th

Kqwods: orgaizatio.ral citizemhip laluriol subdisrict adminigoti\r orgrxization

AbstractThis study sought to assess demographic factols afiicting organizational

citizenship behavior. A samfle was laken fiom one sub-district administrativeorganizatiou in Phanna Nikhom district, Sakon Nakhon province. Further, to establish a

possible relationship between organizatiooal citizenship behavior and importantdemogmphic variables (e.g gender, marital stahrs, education, position and experience), a

survey was conducted usitg a total of 56 respondcnts. It is believed that this study canadd a new understanding that can be used to imprcvc the olganizational citizenshipbehavior.

1. IntroductionThe concept oforyaiizalional citizenship behavior (OCB) was introduced by

Batemar and Organ in 1983. The coflcept lvas refined and strengthencd by a number ofresearche$ (Yaghoubi, Salehi and Moloudi, 201 I ) in differcnt sectoru. Io anyorganizational scttirg, Organ and Ryan (1995) asserted that organizational citizenshipbehavior was a special type ofrvork behaviors, and rvas defmed as individual behaviorthat was beleficial to the organizatiol1 and discretionary, not direcily or explicitlyrecognizecl by the formal reward system, Organizational citizenship behavior was a partofan informal psychological contract in which the employee hoped that such cxtra

ar'i'ni1 ifligiif ir! fi ,Li.:.,r'.d ;, i!i .tir ft, riii.rai ir,. rl:; rrrrr,ri:h:rio: an.1 lhe oig:irrl th-,1ll Llhiir{roii aLrL[ :]r.'iliitJ., ,l)C-i).

l'!r.e cir;IL:rrsi,::r:r liltrnljij llrgilrt'! ii rr,ii i-rt)o i tsi-n aatsh iP, cir,.il ! irrurui,colscientious. alit'Lrisrlr- a-lrd couiiisy) i!ei-e be uscci in ihis sruClv. OCB was tak.r, !rlicconsidclation liom the poini oipc)tonnel \,oliiirg irt one sub distlicl adnrinist!aii,/eoigaiiziitior'r i!i PL^nira Nikirunr disirict, SaLoi) l'lrkhon proyince. All dill'eleatdemog.apiric aspects ofpersorl1el rvorting in one sLrb-district admirristrativeorgtrnizati.)r ir Phanna NiL(horr district, Salror Nakl\on l)rov:nce lvcl'e asslrssed ivith thtl'ive dimensiolrs olOaE.

'2. CbjectivesThese objectivcs irere:2. I To assess tilc levei oforganizationai citizensirip bchavior in one sub-district

administrative olganization in Phanna Nikhom dislrict, Sakor Nakhon proyince.2.2 To a$sess demogrzrphic facto.s alfeclillg olgonizatioral citizelrship behavlor in

one sub-district administr:ltive orgarization in Phanna Niklrom district, Sakon Nakhcnpro\.incc.

3. Literature Relie$Organizational Citiz€nship Behavioxr (OCB)The first conqept of organ izat ional citizellship behavior rvas introduced in the mid

1980s by Dcnnis Organ. OCB Icfcrrcd to those olganizalionally beieficial behaviorsaod gestures thal can neither be enlorced oo the basis of fonral role obligations norelicited by contrachral guarantec olreconpense. Organ (1997) concludcd tlrat OCts had1'l-re critical elements r,,,hich lrere (l) AIL-risnr is a type ofdiscietionary behaviorccnsisting ofbehavioIs that irelp 1l specific other pe6on a.d notivatcs €mployees rr)

assist other cmployees to deal with their problems o1 \vorks (Pcdsakoffet al. (2000). (2)CotlscienlioLlsness incli.ates tlre aliscretionary oxtra-lole behal iouls that exceed ther€cluirements ofthe task, job, as lvell as rvork ethics (Mccrac anci Cosla, 1987). (l)Sportsmanship can be defined as any behavior demonstrating tolerance of Iess thaoideal circumstances lyithort cornplaining. (4) Civic vifiue is one kind ofbehavior oftheemployecs to participate in organizational practices with the concem ofthe life offtecompany (Deluga, 1998). Civic virtue concentBtes on a [racro-level interest orcornmitment to the whole organizatiol. (5) Courtesy means behaviors ofpreventionint€rpersonal problems aild lcsscns thg effects ofthe problen in the future (Podsakoffeta1.,2000).

i

I

I

ir,r I

Derncgraphjc

ORr.i- If{nslit iATt<-r:'i.': tl1jtsl :.: i; :l:5 r:ij ';DalAL SCIXNaEt

OrEanizatirrr.riCirlze:rshio ]

Behavior _]

Figure l. Concepluai frdne*ork ol this s;itdy

Pigulc I prese ts the influence ofdemoglaphic lactors on organizationalcitizcrship behavior (sportsmanship, civic vi.tue, conscicniious, couttcsy and altruisnl)in ol1e sub-dislrict adnrinistrativc olganization in Plranrra Nithotn disiilct, SilkonNakhon ptovince. The deniographic fe,ctors rvert iadepen(ent valiable (ciernographic

f'actors) and organizatioral citizcnship behalior (sporlsmanship, civil vinuous,conscientious, aitruism, and couFesy) $'ele dependent variable.

4, Rescarch DesignThis research is a dgscriptive study and non-experimental research. A self-

developed questionnaire was used to obtain deruogephic data rclevant to this study.The palticipants wcre asked to providc infonnation rcgarding their gender, ma.italstatus, educalion, positioD and experience.

The study used the questionnaire as a slilvcy instmment for collection of data.The survey aimed at one sub-district admitistrative olganization in Phanna Nik-homdist ct, Sakon Nakhon province. The sample was 56 personiel rvorking in otre sub-district admiflistmtive organizalion in Phanna Nikhom dis:rict, Sakon Nakhon provrnce.

This shrdy used five dimensions of OCIS propose<l by Organ (1997) as mostresearchers had accepted the dimensioas as the most vtidely used ir organizalionalrelated studies (Kitiilenpaisan aod et al.20l4). T\reoty-five items rvere used todeterminc the levei of citizenship behaviors among sLrbordinates based on five maiudin]ensions Podsakoffet a1. (1990: 1-40)- A likerlscale was uscd to measure the OCBelements, which Lrsed the anchors of I (Not absolutely reai) to 5 (Mostly rcal). The firstsection asked the respondents' demographic data. 'Ihe next scction asked thercspondeots' views on orgaoizational citizenship behavio. (sportsmanship, civilvirtuous, conscientious, altruism, aod courtes)).

Descriptive and inferential statistics were used 10 anallze the da1a. As B

preliminary step to data anallses, descriptivc statistics such as the meaD scores, standarddgviation and other informatiofi about the OCB scale were examined. Furthetadditional analyses 10 determine if tlrere were ary statistically signilicant differences inthe mean scores for OCB based on demographics \,r,ere determined. These aflalyscsinclude Mann Whitney-U test and Kruskal Wallis test for gendeq marital status,education, position and experielce.

Reliability anall,sis was conducted to check stability and consistency ofneasu(ement and the Cronbach's alpha wer-e calculated and etceedpd 0.70 (Malhotm,2004). Prom the reliability anaiysis sirown in tablc I the reliability analysis oforganizatjonal citizeflship behavior' (spoftsmanship. civic virtue, conscientious, ccurtesyand alhuisn) was be[veen .80 - .90, rvhich \\ as acceptable as ths minimuD level of 0.6for further analysis.

i.:i, l

5- IlesultsAccordirlS to Jale l, iiosl. respondeilis rrere maie; balf of the respondents

llnished a ba.heioj degr".e ailrl setvaiis an.l general empioyrflent emp]oyees werc th9greatest number of.espondents ci thls siudy; wlrile respondents' cxperiences wele iessihan 3 year and belwecn 4 and S year'.

I'able Il)emographic chtractelistics of the poptl atio

Table 2Summery afDesciptive Dota oJ Citizenship Behavior

*5-pcinL Likcri scalc; I : Not absolutely [eal, 5 - Mostly rcalTable 2 sho$ed the arithmetic neans for lhe flve OCB variables- Civic vfiuc

(Mean-4.21, S.D..44) had the highcsl mean followcd by Altruism (Mean=4.17, S.D..47). Sporrsmanship (Mean= 4.11, S.l) : .49), (lourtesy (Mean=4.02, S.D= .39), andconscicntious (Meiin=3 83, S.D: .48).

Table 3 showed the rcsult of Mann Whitrey-U test for OCB al:ld gender. Thcrc$,erc not significaul bet$.een each dimcDsion ofOCB and gender ofrcspondcnts.

Attriirutc Dell1ogrEIrhia$ N(ierCer 22 19.3

lcmale l:l 50.7Marital slal!s Srngle 25 44.6

Married 3l 55.:lEducation Lcss than a Bachelor's de$ee 20 35,7

Ba.llclor's dcqrL'c 3t) 53.6IJicher than a Bachelor's dcsrec t0.7

Job level Civilservanl Iti 32.1Pei'manent employee I ],8

Mission employee ti 23.2(isrreral crilDIovmefl 1 cnlploye€ 2,t 42..9

Expeiience Less than 3 years l'/ 30.44-8yearc t6 28.69 13 years N t4 3

Higher than 14 y9q1s 15 16.7

Yariibles No. ofitemri

l\{e.u Mir. Ma{, AlphaCoefficicnt

N

Spor'lsuanship 5 4.11 ' .49 1.80 5.00 .90 5(r

Civic vifiue 5 4.21 .44 3.00 500 ,E6 5(iCorsricntious 5 383 .43 2.60 s.00 ,E7 56Altruism 5 4.17 .47 3.00 5.00 .85 56Courtcsy ) 4.02 .i9 2.80 4.80 .86 56Total OCB 25 4.01 .35 3.20 4.92 .82 5(,

i

1

II

I

.r/ I

Table 3Mon llhiine),-tJ test Jb:, OCB .tnd Eender

iril:;al.ii-al'{Oi{: ii I iliAN1'rl IiS ,!i{, SOCLaL Salg.i..Cts

Table 4 shorvs the elfcct ol'status on organizational citizenship behavior. Thcrewas a significanf associatjon between Spol1sntaNhip and statlrs (P: .03). The meanlank rcvealed that married rvas ltighcr ccmpaJed to single ofrespotdents.

Table 4Mann llhitneyU test lor OCB and status

* Significant at thc 0.05 ievel

Vai ial,le Ge,ri er N iV!eari B-ankSportsmanship i\ I al-- L. 29 l2 .12

FlnlaleClir ic vinue M llc 22 2l(..:lt) .2't

!enrale l.i 2!.63Coascie:rtious iil)c )-) 26.8C 2,1

Fe,iitie j:] 29.6Allr rLisrn i\4irlc 2.1.35

Fenlal€ i1 -10.35Counesy 22 25.23 .21

Fealale 34 30.62

Yaliaille Slt*1u: N l14can Rank PSl)ortsnr.lirsiritl Silgle 2,1. t8 .03*

Married .ji j.'r.9S

Civic vifiue Sing1. 30.46 .41

Marlied :i1 26.92Conscicntiolrs Single t: 29.i 0 11

1\4 alried .11 2'7.85Allruis0r Singlc l5 26.)6 .31

Marriod 3l 30.23Courtesy Single 25 26.36 .95

Mturicd 28.61

l .'r rt

isli.rL SaiEIa:Es

Tabla 5{.rus i;a!- Ir/aI|it' i est .io r Oa:B fil .d\ca|ion

lai,1e 5 shtr$,ecl the cifect ofcducation on organizatioltal citizc[ship bchavtor.As thc dala lder study rvere nol divided nomally ard iheie werc more thal1 twocomparing groups, thc Kruskal-Wallis (a non-parametric test) was used- Howevcr,There \\,as significant correlation between two dimension ofOCB and education at .05significant levcl (lbr sportslDanship P = .04 and mnscientious P =.02).

tr'ai iable f.ijr:!!. i1Spofismanship Less than a Bacheior's

degreel0 28.ris

.0,:|'r'

-B-!9qe.l94ld9sE! -Higher thao a Bachelor's

degr'ee

l96

25.7s42.33

Civic virtue l ess than a Bachelor''sdegree

2A I1.30.62

Bachelor'q @g1ee 3{) 26.',l',7

Highe, than a Bachelo/sdegree

(, 27.83

Conscienaious Less than a Baclrelor'sdeglee

20 36.52.02+

Ilachelor's deglee l0 24.10l{ighel than a Bachelor's

degrce23.15

Allruisnr [-ess ihan a Bachelor'sdegree

2l) 28.02.08

Bachelor's degree 30 26.t2Higher tha. a Bachelor's

degree12.04

Coul'tes\' Less than a Bacheior'sdegtee

2t) 28.62.l t)

Bachelor's degree t0 28.50llighcr than a Bachelo.'s

degree{, 23.0S

I

I r._;r. ",,.,,,r,r,rq<ir,m,imr {)RAL i]]E5,--ri,r J rail .;r'rr ijUr'rr:-ri-l;tats rili, ]}DatAL SCIEaCEStumrirr,\2.. i..r4i''rnNlrn.]lgl_-_-___-/

Tabie 5Ktusk,,tl-rr.tlis test lbr OCB antiitcstion

Yari!ble I,'

SDortsrnanshiil Ci\ il servant ii 19.22

.0 t,'Permanent employee I 10.55

Missior employce i-i 29.13General emploimcni

en'rployee15 12

Ci1,ic viftue Ci\,il serYaDt t-i

.27Perrnanent employee I a12.22

Mission enrployee !,1 26.46General clnploymcnt

emPloyeet4 30. ss

Conscientious Civil senant 11 r 8.12

.42':'Permaneni employee I 20.53

Mission errplovre tl 2i 58

Gel1era] ernploymentemployee

21 I6.76

Allr'riisni Civil selvant t7 r8.21

.37Permanent employee i 21.50

N4ission enrployce I3Geleral emplo),rnent

onlployee24 21.23

Courtes\, Civil servant 1't 16.94

.02'"Permanent emplcyee 1 1c) 43

Mission erirnloyec tl 21.54General emplo),rnent

emDloyce24 3',l.45

Table 6 showed horv position aff-ected different dlmensions ofolganizationxlcitizenship behavior. According to the above result, the position (i.e. civil servant,permanent employee, missiofl employge and general employment employee) has asignificant impact on Sportsmanship (P = .01), collscientious (P :.02) and courtesy (P =0.02). I-lowever, no sigrlificatrt dilference was lorurd in oase ofCivic villue (P = 0.27)and altmism (P = .37).

]

{rR:.l lRlSl',r i.',1iai h rrLui.rrr,liTllS J,l!! 5t{rirl. :ClIi.ii-li5

Krusk.rl tt?llis test_/bt OCB enci expetie ce

R\). Jj].\:rr.nir (orLicrc!{R!i!rtrr.c t!r

I

Table 7 shows the rslationship behl,een experience ard the OCB. According tothe abo\,e result, ihe experience had a sigllificant impacl on spo.tssranship (P: .02),civic \,ifiue (P .=.01) aod courtesy (P : .02). Howevcr, no sigflificanl difference wasfound in case ofconscientions (P: .30) and aitruism (P . .43).

6. Discussion atrd ConclusionThis study showed that demographic characteristics llad an effect on diflerent

dimensions oforganizational citizenship behavior. These results ofthe present studywer-e in earlier findings. Since the data were collected fron ooe sub-distictadminist.ative organization, replicating this study in other types olorganizations wouldhelp in detemrining the validity and generality ofprcsent findings. Duc to thc number ofrespondent was quite small as compaled to their counteryafts; Iact tgat, caulioll lnust beexercised in gefleralizing the findings ofthe present study. Fudhermore, the observedassociations between the variables had been interpreted ralller thalt established-

This study rellecls ho\y orgauizational citizenship bchavior played a cr;tical rolein lhc fi.rnctioning ofan o.g0nization, which adminisuatol.s must be concerned \ithrvays to maximize ancl undcrstand \.vhat crcnles orgirnizalional ciiizenship behsviol ofpersonnel rvorking rvith diffcrent demographic factols.

Managcment should also encourage personrlcl to build optirlistic atlitudes intheir persoirality which would automatically increase their organizational citizenshipbehavior.

i:

1*rir!bis i,Spofl5rDansIiD I.ess lhaD 3 yca6 t.'! 2t.t ,-

.02.*

.1 8 years ti9 - 13 years 27 )_r

lligller tharr l4 yeaIs t2 -t 8.55Cirlir vi|tLrc [,ess lhan 3 years ti :a 09

.()l 'i4 - 8 years iit 36.069 - 13 ycatls sr 29.06

Hiqher thall l4 yeaN t2ConscienlioLrs Less than 3 ycars 1',7 25.15

.t04-8yeaN 16 2ii.509 - 13 ycars fi 2(;.50

lLiqher thrn l4 \cais T2 29.96Allruism Less than 3 years t1 3 t.'7 4

.43

4 - 8 years l6 15.i89 - 13 years 3 tl.56

Highe. than l4 years ll 27.01(l()Lrrtesy Less than 3 years 11 23 50

.02*4 -- I years i6 )t.44

9 - 13 years s 15.75i-ligher than 14 years l? :i.1. i.l

i r:i

Thi:, siiidl c,:rn be e.ioard.:o lo lii,,::-!lblic aEil ori!air ciS?i::i1r1.n lr :,rlrliii.,,rio rhis- rnofir Llelall.ri airtrl.,.i,. r,; ltc rn:de ir otir,)r pli'.iie iifgeitizaliori itr ar_d:t toilnaler-siand crgaiiz:itional ailize:lshili b?h11,j!1i's eifecla a,rr Dtllil'oryeirizdiior:1il,arjables (orga izational co,rrititmeni. perilrfi ance, burnoirt. cia.)

Retcrences

Dehrga, R. J. (1998). Leader-Mernbel exchange tluality aud efl'eotiveness latiogs: Th.tole ofsubordinate-supen'isor' conscientiolrsness sinrilrrity. Ci ouo cdc/Org.ln izational llanaile ptt 1, 123)| 189-216.

Dhitipoin, C., & Brooklyn, D. C. (2004). The eflccts of intemai careel orientotions oo

organizational citizenship behavior in Thailand. Cdreer Derelop eilllntenrdtional,9(4), 406-423. hitp://dx.doi.org/ 10.1 108/ I 3 6204304 10i4435 5.

Kittilertpaisan, 1., Chanchiprccha, C. & Phoonkasem, C. (2014). At the First Glance ofOrganizational Citizenship Behaviors and Organizational Effectiveness: A StudyofCity andTown Municipality in Thailand- Anrutal S),mposinnr o Maiage,nentand Social Scietlccs (ASL{SS).

McCrae, R. R. & Costa, P. T. Jr. (1987). Validatior ofthe five-factor model ofpersotality across instruments and obselvers. Joumal ofPersonalily and SocialPsycholog, (52): 8l-90.

Malhotra, N.K. (2004) Marketikg Research: Ah Applied Orie tation. (4th edn). NewJersey: Pearson Education, Inc.

Organ D. W. (1988). Organizational Citizenship tsehavior, its Nature and Antecedents.Journ aI of AppI ied Psyhoktg1,.

Podsakoff, P. M., Mackenzie, S. It., Moorman, R. H., & Fetter, R. (1990).Transfonnaiional leader behaviors and thcir effects on [ollowers lrust in ieadersatisfactioo and organizationai citizetlship beha'riot- Leddership Qllarterlt', ll2):101-142.

Podsakoti P. M., Mackeirzie, S. 8., I'>aine, J. 8., & Bachamch, D. G. (2000).Orgarizatio al citizenship behavior: A critical review ofthe tbeoretical andemp; cal literaiurc arld suggeslions fol ftrtute rcsearch. Joltmdl of Managerlent,26(3)t 513-563.

Organ, Den'lis W-. (1997). "Organizational Citizenship Behavior: It's Construct Clean-tp Trme" , Human Performance, 1 0 (2 ), 85 -9 7.

Yaghoubi, N., Satehi, M., and Moloudi, J. (20 t l). Imploving Servic€ Quality by UsingOryanizatioMl Citizenship Behaviour: Iranian Evidence. Ira;ia Joltrnal ofManagemenr. 4(2\, 79-91.