Microsoft Word - 67-506-1-CE-2--complete-upload-for-publication.docx http://journals.sfu.ca/abr ADVANCES IN BUSINESS RESEARCH 2015, Volume 6, pages 32-45 32 The Contribution of Workplace Spirituality to Organizational Citizenship Behavior Peerayuth Charoensukmongkol National Institute of Development Administration, Thailand Jose-Luis Daniel Saint Xavier University Ruth Chatelain-Jardon Texas A&M University - Kingsville This study explores the role of workplace spirituality on organizational citizenship behaviors. All three aspects of workplace spirituality (sense of community, meaningful work, and inner life) were expected to positively associate with organizational citizenship behaviors towards individual and organization. Undergraduate and graduate students from two public universities in south Texas (n=179) were surveyed using a self-administered questionnaire survey. The results from partial least square regression analysis revealed that all three aspects of workplace spirituality positively and significantly associate with organizational citizenship behavior towards individual and organizational citizenship behavior towards organization. Keywords: Workplace spirituality, organizational citizenship behaviors, motivation, work climate, partial least square regression Introduction In today’s business environment characterized by fierce competition, a strong commitment from employees is a critical factor that can significantly help an organization compete effectively vis- à-vis its competitors, as well as to achieve superior performance in the marketplace (Meyer et al, 2004). Among the various factors that motivate employees to make contributions to the organization, organizational citizenship behavior [OCB] is a concept that has been studied extensively in research. Studies have found that OCB is linked positively to a variety of organizational outcomes (Ozer, 2011; Podsakoff et al, 2009). In particular, scholars have argued that OCB is a crucial factor during organizational change and uncertainty because when effectively planning organizational resource allocation in advance is very difficult (Organ, 1988, 1990). Taking into consideration the benefits that OCB could provide to the organization, this study proposes some workplace conditions (or a workplace condition) that lead to the development of OCB. In particular, the role of workplace spirituality is the focus of this research. In the literature, numerous scholars have written about the contributions and implications of workplace spirituality on individual outcomes (Giacalone & Jurkiewicz, 2003; Sheep, 2006). Although the relationship of workplace spirituality and OCB has been studied previously (Kazemipour et al, 2012; Tepper, 2003), the literature is incomplete. For example, Tepper (2003) presented a model in which individual spirituality indirectly affects OCB through three psychological states: gratefulness, sensitivity to the needs, and tolerance for inequity. However, Tepper (2003) focused mainly on how individual spirituality is related to OCB. Charoensukmongkol et al. 33 This article describes an empirical research focusing on workplace spirituality [WS] as an element of the organizational culture. More specifically, we propose that inner life, sense of community, and meaningful work are elements presented in the organizational culture and may have an effect on OCB. Therefore, this article aims to make a contribution to the research in workplace spirituality by providing some empirical evidence that would strengthen its importance. Given the benefits that workplace spirituality could provide to a community at work, it is possible that the organization would significantly encourage the establishment of the former for the employees to perform OCB to their organization and other coworkers. The paper is organized as follows: First, the theoretical foundation, definitions, and linkage of both constructs are explained. The next section focused on this issue. Then, information about the methodology, including the samples, measures, and estimation technique used for the analysis. Then the results are presented. Finally, results are discussed, and implications of the study are suggested. Literature Review This section reviews and synthesizes the literature and presents the numerous hypotheses for study. Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) Organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) can be described as the employee behaviors that serve to promote the efficient and effective functioning of the organization, and these behaviors are not directly or explicitly stimulated by the formal organizational reward system (Graham, 1991; Organ & Ryan, 1995). Theoretically, the concept of OCB is based on the social exchange theory (Blau, 1964). According to Lavelle et al. (2009, p. 340), social exchange relationship can be described as “subjective, relationship-oriented contracts between employers and employees characterized by a mutual exchange of socio-emotional benefits.” In general, OCB reflects the willingness of the employees to devote themselves to the organization beyond their in-role duty (Moorman & Harland, 2002). Unlike economic exchange, which is bounded by tangible and short-term rewards, social exchange is initiated based on the quality of trust and goodwill that two parties have toward each other (Kacmar et al, 2012). Research also shows that attitudinal factors such as affective commitment, perceived support, and fairness are key factors that would motivate employees to exert extra contribution (or effort) to the organization (Restubog et al, 2008). In this regard, the positive relationship that the employees develop with their organization over a period of time is one of the main conditions for OCB (Organ & Ryan, 1995), and this relationship appears to be significant regardless of the length of time they have worked for the organization, as stated in the study of Moorman and Harland (2002), which found that the relationship is significant even for temporary employees who do not have a long working history with an organization. OCB has two main conceptualizations. The original conceptualization of OCB was proposed by Organ (1988), who defined OCB as a five-factor model consisting of altruism, courtesy, conscientiousness, civic virtue, and sportsmanship. The model was later expanded by incorporating two additional dimensions: peacekeeping and cheerleading (Organ, 1990). The second conceptualization, which is the model employed in this study, was proposed by Williams and Anderson (1991). This concept categorizes OCB based on the target of the behavior; in particular, behaviors aimed for the benefit of the organization are termed OCBO, whereas behaviors aimed for the benefit of other individuals are termed OCBI. Williams and Anderson’s (1991) conceptualization of OCB is also found to cover Organ’s (1988) seven dimensions; specifically, whereas OCBI WORKPLACE SPIRITUALITY & ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOR 34 captures the altruism, courtesy, peacekeeping, and cheerleading aspects of Organ’s (1988) dimensions, OCBO captures the compliance, civic virtue, and sportsmanship dimensions. Workplace Spirituality The workplace spirituality movement can be understood as the result of a humanistic approach that was initiated many years ago (Harrington et al, 2001; Steele & Bullock, 2009). Motivation theories based on this humanistic approach have gained resonance in organizational behavioral research, starting with the Hawthorne studies of Mayo (1933) and Maslow (1954), which gave importance to the needs and motivations of employees, up to the studies of Melé (2003) and Daniel (2010), who pointed out the incorporation of humanistic elements in the organizational theory field, as well as in the culture of the organization. Workplace spirituality can be defined as “the recognition that employees have an inner life that nourishes and is nourished by meaningful work that takes place in the context of community” (Ashmos & Duchon, 2000, p. 137). Ashmos and Duchon (2000) highlighted that workplace spirituality encompasses three dimensions: sense of community, meaningful work, and inner life. They noted that the first dimension is as regards the connection that the employee has with other human beings in the workplace, the second dimension is about conducting activities at work that give meaning to the person’s life, and the third one is concerning the understanding of one’s power and its use in the workplace (Ashmos & Duchon, 2000). Before proceeding, workplace spirituality and religion must be differentiated. In particular, Duchon and Plowman (2005) noted that religion is about an organized belief system, whereas workplace spirituality is more about finding meaning and community in the workplace. Marques (2007) compared the characteristics of workplace spirituality with religion. One important aspect that was mentioned is that workplace spirituality is about having an experience of connectedness and being part of a work environment that promotes satisfaction and meaning. In addition, religion is more about established beliefs. Following Marques (2007), this article views workplace spirituality as an element of the organizational culture that affects employees and their behaviors. In research, workplace spirituality has been found to contribute positively to some individual outcomes. Kolodinsky et al. (2003) noted that this contribution can be understood as a person- organization fit (P-O fit), which is defined as “judgments of congruence between an employee’s personal values and an organizational culture” (Cable & DuRue, 2002, p. 875). Kolodinsky et al. (2008) stated that when a strong fit exists between the employee’s values and the organization’s values, a positive relationship with individual outcomes will be seen. For instance, Milliman et al. (2003) reported that workplace spirituality dimensions are not only positively related to organizational commitment but also negatively related to the intension to quit. In addition, Robert et al. (2006) found a positive and significant relationship between workplace spirituality and job satisfaction. Workplace Spirituality and Organizational Citizenship Behavior The first dimension of workplace spirituality, sense of community, could be considered a key factor that encourages employees to perform both OCBI and OCBO. As mentioned earlier, sense of community is about working in a place where employees can feel that there is a strong connection among the coworkers (Ashmos & Duchon, 2000). From this definition, employees with a high sense of community are more likely to demonstrate prosocial behavior, which is the willingness to help, protect, or promote the welfare of others (Schwartz & Bilsky, 1990). Therefore, this prosocial behavior that employees have in their workplace can motivate them to make discretionary contributions to help their coworker and the organization beyond their regular responsibilities (Li et al., 2010). Also, Manion and Bartholomew (2004) noted that when a sense of community exists in a Charoensukmongkol et al. 35 workplace, individuals and groups will be characterized by inclusivity, commitment of the members, the ability to form consensus, a sense of realism, a contemplative nature, and a sense of safety. According to them, these characteristics will help create the environment of mutual trust that encourages employees to devote themselves to help other employees and the organization. Therefore: Hypothesis 1a: Sense of community will positively lead to higher OCBI. Hypothesis 1b: Sense of community will positively lead to higher OCBO. Meaningful work, the second dimension of workplace spirituality, is a condition that motivates employees to perform both types of OCB. First, since OCB is driven by positive attitude that employees develop about their job (Moorman & Harland, 2002), employees who perceive that their job is meaningful to them are likely to be more willing to devote themselves to their work and organization. In particular, the meaning that people perceive about their job makes them feel connected to their work environment. When employees feel connected to their work, they will contribute more to their jobs because they tend to develop emotional attachment to them (Van Dyne & Pierce, 2004). This view can be explained by the psychological ownership theory, which suggests that people tend to attach to any target when they identify strongly with it (Pierce et al, 2003); the target, according to the theory, can be an object, an individual, a group, or an entire organization (Avey et al, 2009). The more people invest in a relationship with a target, the stronger is the sense of obligation that they feel to protect and promote their welfare (Weinstein & Ryan, 2010). Accordingly, employees who perceive their job as meaningful are more willing to devote themselves to help other people in their workplace organization. Therefore: Hypothesis 2a: Meaningful work will positively lead to higher OCBI. Hypothesis 2b: Meaningful work will positively lead to higher OCBO. Finally, the inner life aspect of workplace spirituality could also be considered a predictor of both OCBI and OCBO. Inner life can be defined as “the feeling that individuals have about who they are, what they are doing, and what contributions they make (Vaill, 1998, p.218). Ashmos and Duchon (2000) noted that when an employee has the opportunity to express his/her inner life, this could bring beneficial consequences to the workgroup and the organization. From a theoretical standpoint, the link between inner life and OCB can be supported by the self-concept theory (Shamir, 1991), which suggests that a job tends to become a motivation for the employee when there is a congruence between the employee’s inner life and the work itself. Specifically, Shamir (1991) stated that when this match exists, employees will be more attached to the organization; the attachment that employees develop toward their workplace is, in turn, congruent with the psychological ownership theory. Thus, employees who perceive a strong connection between their inner life and their workplace are possibly more likely to perform OCB. Lastly, a study by Konovsky and Organ (1996) on the role of personality traits and the propensity for OBC found that conscientiousness, one of the big five personality traits, appeared to be a good predictor of OCB. Conscientiousness is a dispositional feature that reflects the level of self-discipline, thoroughness, vigilance, and deliberation. This dispositional characteristic is strongly related to the inner life aspect of workplace spirituality (Vaill, 1998). Therefore: Hypothesis 3a: Inner life will positively lead to higher OCBI. Hypothesis 3b: Inner life will positively lead to higher OCBO. WORKPLACE SPIRITUALITY & ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOR 36 Methodology This section describes the samples, measures, and estimating technique used in the study. Samples The subjects of this study are undergraduate and graduate students from two public universities in South Texas who have been working for an organization. Participation in the study was optional; however, the students who agreed to participate were given extra class credit. In total, there were 178 students who agreed to participate. Data were collected using a self-administered questionnaire. The sample’s statistics are as follows: Regarding gender, there were 89 males and 89 females. The mean age was 27 years old (s.d.=9.81). On the subject of education, 71 of the participants had high school diploma (40%), 44 held an associate degree (25%), 45 held a bachelor’s degree (25%), and 18 held a graduate degree (10%). Concerning marital status, 140 were single (79%) and 38 reported to be married (21%). On the topic of race, the majority of the participants were Hispanic (76%), followed by Caucasian/white (16.9%), black/African American (3.9%), and Asian (2.8%). About job experience, the average job tenure was 3 years (s.d.=2.1), and the average duration that participants have worked for their current supervisor was 4 years (s.d.=2.62). Measures This study employs the measure of workplace spirituality developed by Ashmos and Duchon (2000). This measure comprises three subscales corresponding to the three workplace spirituality dimensions: sense of community (9 items), meaningful work (7 items), and inner life (5 items). Examples of the items for sense of community are “I feel part of a community in my immediate workplace” and “At work, we work together to resolve conflict in a positive way.” Examples of the items for meaningful work are “My spirit is energized by my work” and “The work I do is connected to what I think is important in life.” Examples of the items for inner life are “My spiritual values influence the choices I make” and “I consider myself a spiritual person.” The subscales use a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). For the measure of OCB, the authors utilize the scale developed by Williams and Anderson (1991). The scale comprises 10 items: 7 items belong to OCBI, and 7 items belong to OCBO (either they are 14 items or which one has 3). These items use a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). Examples of the items for OCBI are “I help others who have been absent” and “I willingly give my time to help others who have work-related problems.” Examples of the items for OCBO are “I defend the organization when other employees criticize it” and “I take action to protect the organization from potential problems.” In addition to the key independent variables, a set of control variables that might affect OCB were included. These control variables are age, gender, marital status, education, job tenure, and the duration that participants have worked for their current supervisor. Since the majority of the participants are Hispanic, a dummy variable for Hispanic/non-Hispanic was included to control for race (1=Hispanic; 0=non-Hispanic). Estimating Technique Partial least square (PLS) regression was the statistical technique employed to analyze the data. PLS is a technique that combines principal component analysis, path analysis, and a set of regressions to generate estimates of standardized regression coefficients for the model’s paths and factor loadings for the measurement items (Chin, 1998). PLS offers more flexibility over variance- based structural equation modeling technique since it does not require data to be normally Charoensukmongkol et al. 37 distributed (Chin, 1998). Furthermore, it requires smaller sample size for the analysis (Kline, 2005). PLS analysis was performed using WarpPLS 3.0 (Kock, 2012). Results This section presents the results, including those related to model assessment, and hypothesis tests. Model Assessment Before the PLS model was estimated, the tests for reliability and validity of all latent variables were conducted. First, two types of construct validity were considered: convergent validity and discriminant validity. The objective of convergent validity is to ensure that all indicators belonging to the same construct share high variation with one another (Chin, 1998); this type of validity was checked through factor loadings. Hair et al. (2009) recommended a minimum of .5. As a consequence, indicators with factor loading below that level (1 item from sense of community, 2 items from meaningful work, and 1 item from inner life) were removed from the analysis. The results after the removal of the weak-loading indicators suggested that all the remaining indicators shared a high variation among themselves. Next, discriminant validity test was performed to ensure that all indicators belonging to the same construct did not share high variation with other latent variables (Chin, 1998); this kind of validity was assessed with the average variance extracted (AVE). Fornell and Larcker (1981) suggested that the square root of the AVE must be greater than any of the correlations involving the latent variable. Overall, the AVE for each construct met this requirement for all latent variables. Second, construct reliability test was conducted to ensure that a scale consistently yielded the same response (Nunnally, 1978). Construct reliability was determined by Cronbach’s alpha (α) coefficient and composite reliability coefficient. A minimum recommended value for Cronbach’s alpha coefficient and composite reliability coefficient is .7 (Chin, 1998; Fornell & Larcker, 1981). The results showed that all coefficients were above the recommended value. Construct reliability indicators are reported in Table 1. AVEs are reported in Table 2. Table 1: Construct reliability indicators Sense of community Meaningful work Inner life OCBI OCBO Cronbach’s alpha (α) coefficient .888 .898 .868 .889 .916 composite reliability coefficient .911 .925 .910 .912 .933 Note: OCBI = organizational citizenship behavior toward individual, OCBO = organizational citizenship behavior toward organization Table 2 also reports the correlations among key variables. To ensure that multicollinearity is not a major concern for the analysis, the variance inflation factor (VIF) was calculated. In particular, the full collinearity VIF test, which allows a researcher to assess vertical and lateral collinearity simultaneously, was calculated in WarpPLS 3.0. As suggested by Petter et al. (2007), the full VIF value should be lower than 3.3. In addition, Kock and Lynn (2012) argued that the full collinearity test can serve as a technique that captures the possibility of common method variance (Lindell & WORKPLACE SPIRITUALITY & ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOR 38 Table 2: Correlations among variables and average variance extracted (AVEs) SC MW IL OCBI OCBO AGE GEN MAR EDU HISP TENU SYEAR SC (0.751) MW 0.743** (0.843) IL 0.275** 0.393** (0.847) OCBI 0.493** 0.515** 0.471** (0.752) OCBO 0.642** 0.712** 0.370** 0.686** (0.799) AGE 0.078 0.016 -0.120 -0.026 -0.024 (1.000) GEN -0.054 0.107 0.055 -0.023 0.011 -0.133 (1.000) MAR 0.131 0.136 -0.025 0.039 0.101 -0.112 0.008 (1.000) EDU 0.110 0.048 0.046 0.040 -0.032 -0.069 -0.326** 0.097 (1.000) HISP -0.083 -0.098 0.096 0.020 -0.040 0.074 0.005 -0.736** -0.082 (1.000) TENU -0.101 -0.041 -0.035 0.037 0.003 -0.136 0.246** -0.073 -0.368** 0.061 (1.000) SYEAR -0.010 0.004 -0.040 -0.003 0.027 -0.039 0.141 0.027 -0.025 0.105 0.212** (1.000) Notes: **, * indicates significant at 1% and 5% respectively AVEs are in parentheses SC=sense of community, MW=meaningful work, IL=inner life, OCBI = organizational citizenship behavior toward individual, OCBO = organizational citizenship behavior toward organization, AGE=age, GEN=gender, MAR=married, EDU=education, HISP=Hispanic, TENU=job tenure, SYEAR=number of years with current supervisor 39 Whitney, 2001) in the PLS model. According to them, the full collinearity VIF test may be seen as a variance-based SEM similar to the common method bias test used in covariance-based SEM (Kock & Lynn, 2012). They suggested that common method bias can be a serious issue if the full VIF value is higher than 3.3. In this study, the test result suggested that all of the full VIF values ranged from 1.112 to 3.136, which are considerably lower than the critical value. Test of Hypotheses The results of the PLS analysis are reported in Figure 1. The standardized coefficients were calculated using bootstrapping resampling technique (Efron, 1979). This study used a resampling procedure with 100 subsamples as recommended by Efron et al. (2004). H3b .108* H2a .216** H1a .251** H1b .259*** H3a .320*** H2b .491*** IL SC MW OCBI OCBO Control variables: - Age, - Gender, - Education, - Marital status, - Race (Hispanic), - Job tenure, - Number of years with current supervisor Figure 1: PLS results Notes: ***, **, * indicate significant at 0.1%, 1%, and 5% respectively SC=sense of community, MW=meaningful work, IL=inner life OCBI=organizational citizenship behavior toward individual, OCBO=organizational citizenship behavior toward organization, R 2 = .395 R 2 = .567 MANAGEMENT THEORY’S IMPACT ON EXTERNAL FINANCIAL REPORTING 40 For the contribution of sense of community on OCB, the results show that this aspect of workplace spirituality associates positively and strongly with OCBI (β=.251; p=0.007) and OCBO (β=.259; p<0.001). Therefore, hypothesis 1a is supported at less than the 1% level, and hypothesis 1b is strongly supported at a level lower than 0.1%. For the contribution of meaningful work to OCB, the results indicate that this aspect of workplace spirituality positively and significantly relates to OCBI (β=.216; p=0.018) and OCBO (β=.491; p<0.001). Thus, hypothesis 2a is supported at a level lower than 1%, and hypothesis 2b is strongly supported at less than the 0.1% level. Finally, for the contribution of inner life on OCB, the results also show that this aspect of workplace spirituality associates positively and strongly with OCBI (β=.320; p<0.001) and OCBO (β=.108; p<0.035). Thus, hypothesis 3a is strongly supported at less than the 0.1% level, whereas hypothesis 3b is supported at a level lower than 5%. For control variables, the results only show that gender and education are significantly associated with OCBO. Specifically, male participants tend to develop lower OCBO (β=-.087; p=.05). The level of education was also associated negatively with OCBO (β=-.113; p=.015): the lower the educational level, the lower the likelihood that they would develop OCBO. Discussion and Conclusion This study proposed a contribution of the workplace spirituality dimensions to OCBI and OCBO. The results of the PLS regression analysis revealed a positive effect that each dimension of workplace spirituality (sense of community, meaningful work, and inner life) has on both OCBI and OCBO. Specifically, the authors found that all the three dimensions of workplace spirituality associated positively with both OCBO and OCBI. Overall, these results supported the prior predictions about the linkages. The results of this study offer an extra contribution to the existing literature. First, the findings provide an additional insight about a workplace condition that can enhance employee OCB. Discovering new antecedents of employee OCB is important since it helps researchers and practitioners identify key factors that can stimulate this positive behavior. Previous studies on the determinants of OCB tend to focus on factors such as dispositional traits, job characteristics, and workplace environment (Konovsky & Organ, 1996; Lavelle et al, 2009; Restubog et al, 2008). On the other hand, in this study, workplace spirituality has been proven as another work condition that encourages employees to make extra contributions to the organization beyond their predefined responsibilities. Consistent with research related to psychological ownership (Avey et al, 2009; Pierce et al, 2003), this study has confirmed that employees who are able to align their spiritual self with their work community and organization are more likely to develop emotional attachment to their workplace, thereby motivating them to express OCB to both their coworkers and the organization. Furthermore, since workplace spirituality is a new concept that still needs more empirical support, this study also makes contribution to research in this area. The results of this research can provide guidance for organizations that would like to create or boost employees’ commitment to the firm and their coworkers. Since OCB is considered a crucial behavior that contributes significantly to higher organizational performance (Podsakoff et al, 2009), the ability of the organization to promote OCB can provide tremendous benefit to their performance, especially in today’s business environment characterized by fierce competition and high uncertainty. As a result, the results suggest that the creation or improvement of workplace spirituality within the company can be one solution to achieve this objective. Charoensukmongkol et al. 41 Several authors have suggested that organizational leaders are the key people who can create some workplace policies to enhance the sense of spirituality at work. For instance, Marques (2005) proposed some organizational activities that include (1) helping employees connect with nature by bringing in natural features (such as plants) to the workplace, (2) holding outdoor meetings when possible, (3) allowing staff to take exercise breaks to promote physical and spiritual wellness, (4) holding frequent company celebrations to acknowledge milestones and achievements, (5) honoring creative expression by decorating the workplace with employee-made art, (6) holding meetings in the round, thereby creating feelings of egalitarianism, and (7) encouraging employees to get to know each other better. Another possible way to establish spirituality in the workplace is through the mission statement of the company. The organization can create a mission statement that reflects positive values, that is friendly, and from which individuals can feel pride (Konz & Ryan, 1999; Milliman et al., 1999). Bartkus and Glassman (2008) noted that mission statements can function as guidance to direct behaviors and decisions of employees. Thus, the organizations has the responsibility to ensure that all employees adopt, breathe, and make the mission a daily life experience. Bart (1999) stated that organizations can use several ways of disseminating the mission statement to their employees. He mentioned that annual reports, posters, plaques, employee manuals, newsletter, meetings, and training sessions can be used for this purpose. The other possible ways to create or improve workplace spirituality can be performed by giving more freedom to employees in personalizing their cubicles, painting walls in bright colors, displaying spiritual messages, and providing 30 minutes of meditation (Finlayson, 2001). Milliman et al. (1999) also pointed out that a celebration for new employees and humorous trainings are conducted for building a supportive and positive climate that can promote spirituality. In addition, Caudron (2001) mentioned that flexible working hours and allowing employees to bring pets to work could be some of the other practices that promote this climate. This research has several implications. Generally, as employees are expected by an organization to make extra contribution to their work, the organization should reciprocate by giving proper treatment or motivation. By incorporating or creating workplace spirituality, either by management practices or through their mission statement, employees will have an opportunity to work within an organizational climate characterized by positive values. This type of organizational climate can subsequently enhance the willingness of employees to make a strong commitment to their tasks and responsibilities (Zhang & Jia, 2010). Research has demonstrated that organizations in which workplace spirituality is evident tend to possess high values such as integrity, justice, mutuality, responsibility, and trust (Jurkiewicz & Giacalone, 2004). In fact, promoting a sense of spirituality in the workplace not only benefits an organization but also promotes employees’ well- being. Although the effect of workplace spirituality on employees’ well-being is not tested in this research, several studies have remarked the relationship of both constructs For example, Kolodinsky et al (2008) found that workplace spirituality tends to lower employees’ frustration at work. In addition, if employees experience friendly, supportive, and respectful environment in their workplace, they are more likely to reciprocate by behaving in the same manner toward their colleagues. This will create a cooperative and warm working atmosphere, which is suggested in research as a factor that can lower stress and promote the psychological well-being of employees (Lawrence & Callan, 2011). Despite the significant contributions that the study has provided, there are several limitations that need to be considered. First, the data was collected from participants from two universities in South Texas; also, the majority of the participants are Hispanic. These sampling issues can limit the generalized power of the results. Therefore, future research should explore the benefits of workplace spirituality on OCB using participants from a different context. Second, this study employed the self-reported data collection method, which could make some of the results affected by common MANAGEMENT THEORY’S IMPACT ON EXTERNAL FINANCIAL REPORTING 42 method bias problem. Even though the full collinearly VIF test, a technique recommended by Kock and Lynn (2012) to detect common method bias in PLS analysis, revealed that the results were lower than the critical value, this may not completely rule out the possibility of the common method bias issue. In conclusion, the present study proposed that workplace spirituality could be considered a key antecedent to develop employee OCB. Empirical results also support the positive effect of the three workplace spirituality dimensions on OCBI and OCBO. In general, the results highlight the importance of organizational leaders creating a work climate that enhances employee spirituality at work to encourage employees to perform OCB. References Ashmos, D., & Duchon, D. (2000). Spirituality at work: conceptualization and measure. Journal of Management Inquiry, 9(2), 134-145. Avey, J. B., Avolio, B. J., Crossley, C. D., & Luthans, F. (2009). Psychological ownership: theoretical extensions, measurement and relation to work outcomes. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30(2), 173-191. doi: 10.1002/job.583 Bart, C. K. (1999). Making mission statements counto. CA Magazine, March, 37-47. Bartkus, B. R., & Glassman, M. (2008). Do firms practice what they preach? The relationship between mission statements and stakeholder management. Journal of Business Ethics, 83(2), 207–216. Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and Power in Social Life. New York, NY: Wiley. Cable, D. M., & DuRue, D. S. (2002). The Convergent and Discriminant Validity of Subjective Fit Perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(5), 875–884. Caudron, S. (2001). Meditation and mindfulness at sounds true. Workforce, 80(6), 40-46. Chin, W. W. (1998). The Partial Least Squares Approach to Structural Equation Modeling. In G. A. Marcoulides (Ed.), Modern Methods for Business Research (pp. 295-336). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Daniel, J. L. (2010). The effect of workplace spirituality on team effectiveness. Journal of Management Development, 29(5), 442-456. Duchon, D., & Plowman, D. A. (2005). Nurturing the spirit at work: impact on work unit performance. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(5), 807-833. Efron, B. (1979). Bootstrap Methods: Another Look at the Jackknife. Annals of Statistics, 7(1), 1-26. Efron, B., Rogosa, D., & Tibshirani, R. (2004). Resampling methods of estimation. In N. J. Smelser & P. B. Baltes (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (pp. 13216- 13220). New York, NY: Elsevier. Finlayson, C. (2001). Belief in your business. Oregon Business, 24(8), 36-39. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. Giacalone, R. A., & Jurkiewicz, C. L. (2003). Toward a science of workplace spirituality. In R. A. Giacalone & C. L. Jurkiewicz (Eds.), The Handbook of Workplace Spirituality and Organizational Performance (pp. 3-28). New York, NY: M.E. Sharpe. Graham, J. W. (1991). An Essay on Organizational Citizenship Behavior. Employee Responsibilities & Rights Journal, 4(4), 249-270. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2009). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Charoensukmongkol et al. 43 Harrington, W. J., Preziosi, R. C., & Gooden, D. J. (2001). Perceptions of Workplace Spirituality Among Professionals and Executives. Employee Responsibilities & Rights Journal, 13(3), 155-163. Jurkiewicz, C. L., & Giacalone, R. A. (2004). A Values Framework for Measuring the Impact of Workplace Spirituality on Organizational Performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 49(2), 129- 142. doi: 10.1023/B:BUSI.0000015843.22195.b9 Kacmar, K. M., Bachrach, D. G., Harris, K. J., & Noble, D. (2012). Exploring the role of supervisor trust in the associations between multiple sources of relationship conflict and organizational citizenship behavior. Leadership Quarterly, 23(1), 43-54. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.11.004 Kazemipour, F., Mohamad Amin, S., & Pourseidi, B. (2012). Relationship Between Workplace Spirituality and Organizational Citizenship Behavior Among Nurses Through Mediation of Affective Organizational Commitment. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 44(3), 302-310. doi: 10.1111/j.1547-5069.2012.01456.x Kline, R. B. (2005). Principle and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling (2 ed.). New York, NY: The Guiford Press. Kock, N. (2012). WarpPLS 3.0 User Manual. Laredo, TX: ScriptWarp Systems. Kock, N., & Lynn, G. S. (2012). Lateral collinearity and misleading results in variance-based SEM: An illustration and recommendations. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 13(7), 546-580. Kolodinsky, R., Giacalone, R., & Jurkiewicz, C. (2008). Workplace values and outcomes:Exploring personal, organizational, and interactive workplace spirituality. Journal of Business Ethics, 81(2), 465-480. Kolodinsky, R. W., Bowen, M. G., & Ferris, G. R. (2003). Embracing Workplace Spirituality and Managing Organizational Politics: Servant Leadership and Political Skill for Volatile Times. In R. A. Giacalone & C. L. Jurkiewicz (Eds.), Handbook of Workplace Spirituality and Organizational Performance (pp. 164–180). Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe Publishers. Konovsky, M. A., & Organ, D. W. (1996). Dispositional and contextual determinants of organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 17(3), 253-266. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1099-1379(199605)17:3<253::aid-job747>3.0.co;2-q Konz, N. P. G., & Ryan, F. X. (1999). Maintaining an organizational spirituality: no easy task. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 12(3), 200-210. Lavelle, J. J., Brockner, J., Konovsky, M. A., Price, K. H., Henley, A. B., Taneja, A., & Vinekar, V. (2009). Commitment, procedural fairness, and organizational citizenship behavior: a multifoci analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30(3), 337-357. doi: 10.1002/job.518 Lawrence, S. A., & Callan, V. J. (2011). The Role of Social Support in Coping during the Anticipatory Stage of Organizational Change: A Test of an Integrative Model. British Journal of Management, 22(4), 567-585. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8551.2010.00692.x Li, N., Liang, J., & Crant, J. M. (2010). The role of proactive personality in job satisfaction and organizational citizenship behavior: A relational perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(2), 395–404. Lindell, M., & Whitney, D. (2001). Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 114-121. Manion, J., & Bartholomew, K. (2004). Community in the workplace: A proven retention strategy. The Journal of Nursing Administration, 34(1), 46-53. Marques, J. (2005). HR's crucial role in the establishment of spirituality in the workplace. Journal of the American Academy of Business, 7(2), 27-31. Marques, J. (2007). The reciprocity between spirituality in the workplace and thinking outside the box. The Business Renaissance Quarterly, 2(3), 93-117. Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York, NY: Harper. MANAGEMENT THEORY’S IMPACT ON EXTERNAL FINANCIAL REPORTING 44 Mayo, E. (1933). The human problems of an industrial civilization. New York, NY: The Macmillan company. Melé, D. (2003). Organizational humanizing cultures: Do they generate social capital? Journal of Business Ethics, 45(1), 3-14. Meyer, J. P., Becker, T. E., & Vandenberghe, C. (2004). Employee Commitment and Motivation: A Conceptual Analysis and Integrative Model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(6), 991-1007. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.89.6.991 Milliman, J., Czaplewski, A. J., & Ferguson, J. (2003). Workplace spirituality and employee work attitudes: An exploratory empirical assessment. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 16(4), 426-447. Milliman, J., Ferguson, J., Trickett, D., & Condemi, B. (1999). Spirit and community at southwest airlines: An investigation of a spiritual values-based model. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 12(3), 221-233. Moorman, R. H., & Harland, L. K. (2002). Temporary Employees as Good Citizens: Factors Influencing Their OCB Performance. Journal of Business and Psychology, 17(2), 171-187. doi: 10.2307/25092814 Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2d ed.). New York, N.Y.: McGraw-Hill. Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome. Lexington, M.A.: Lexington Books. Organ, D. W. (1990). The motivational basis of organizational citizenship behavior. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior (Vol. 12, pp. 43–72). Greenwich, C.T.: JAI Press. Organ, D. W., & Ryan, K. (1995). A meta-analytic review of attitudinal and dispositional predictors of organizational citizenship behavior. Personnel Psychology, 48(4), 775-802. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1995.tb01781.x Ozer, M. (2011). A Moderated Mediation Model of the Relationship Between Organizational Citizenship Behaviors and Job Performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(6), 1328-1336. doi: 10.1037/a0023644 Petter, S., Straub, D., & Rai, A. (2007). Specifying Formative Constructs in Information Systems Research. MIS Quarterly, 31(4), 623–656. Pierce, J. L., Kostova, T., & Dirks, K. T. (2003). The state of psychological ownership: Integrating and extending a century of research. Review of General Psychology, 7(1), 84–107. Podsakoff, N. P., Whiting, S. W., & Podsakoff, P. M. (2009). Individual- and Organizational-Level Consequences of Organizational Citizenship Behaviors: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(1), 122–141. Restubog, S. L. D., Hornsey, M. J., Bordia, P., & Esposo, S. R. (2008). Effects of Psychological Contract Breach on Organizational Citizenship Behaviour: Insights from the Group Value Model. Journal of Management Studies, 45(8), 1377-1400. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2008.00792.x Robert, T. E., Young, J. S., & Kelly, V. A. (2006). Relationships Between Adult Workers' Spiritual Well-Being and Job Satisfaction: A Preliminary Study. Counseling and Values, 50(3), 165-175. Schwartz, S. H., & Bilsky, W. (1990). Toward a theory of the universal content and structure of values: Extensions and cross-cultural replications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(5), 878–891. Shamir, B. (1991). Meaning, self and motivation in organizations. Organization Studies, 12(3), 405–424. Sheep, M. (2006). Nurturing the whole person: The ethics of workplace spirituality in a society of organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 66(4), 357-375. Steele, J., & Bullock, E. (2009). A Review of Spirituality in the Workplace. Employee Responsibilities & Rights Journal, 21(3), 273-274. doi: 10.1007/s10672-009-9118-2 Charoensukmongkol et al. 45 Tepper, B. J. (2003). Organizational citizenship behavior and the spiritual employee. In R. A. Giacalone & C. L. Jurkiewicz (Eds.), Handbook of workplace spirituality and organizational performance (pp. 181-190). New York, NY: M.E. Sharpe. Vaill, P. B. (1998). Spirited leading and learning : process wisdom for a new age. San Francisco, CA: Jossey- Bass Publishers. Van Dyne, L., & Pierce, J. L. (2004). Psychological ownership and feelings of possession: three field studies predicting employee attitudes and organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(4), 439-459. doi: 10.1002/job.249 Weinstein, N., & Ryan, R. M. (2010). When helping helps: Autonomous motivation for prosocial behavior and its influence on well-being for the helper and recipient. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(2), 222-244. doi: 10.1037/a0016984 Williams, L. J., & Anderson, S. E. (1991). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. Journal of Management, 17(3), 601–617. Zhang, Z., & Jia, M. (2010). Using social exchange theory to predict the effects of high-performance human resource practices on corporate entrepreneurship: Evidence from China. Human Resource Management, 49(4), 743-765. Peerayuth Charoensukmongkol is an instructor at the International College of National Institute of Development Administration. He received his Ph.D. in international usiness with a concentration in management from Texas A&M International University. His research interests are organizational behaviors, managerial psychology, leadership, and strategic management. Jose-Luis Daniel is an assistant professor of international business at the Graham School of Business, Saint Xavier University in Chicago, IL. He received his Ph.D. in international business with a concentration in management from Texas A&M International University. He has an M.B.A. in international business from Texas A&M International University. He also has a bachelor’s of science in chemical engineering from Monterrey Institute of Technology. His research interests are workplace spirituality, leadership, strategic management, subcultures, and foreign direct investment. Ruth Chatelain-Jardon is an assistant professor in the Department of Management and Marketing at Texas A&M University Kingsville. She holds degrees in international trade (B.B.A. & M.B.A.), international logistic (M.S.), management information systems (M.S.) and international business (Ph.D.). Her research interests include learning improvement, organizational behavior, knowledge transfer, e-collaboration, logistic and culture.