The Effect of Transformational Leadership and Perceived Organizational Support on Organizational Citizenship Behavior

｢지방정부연구｣ 제15권 제2호(2011 여름) : 187～210

□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□

: Focused on Public Employees in Kyungnam Province

변혁적 리더십과 조직지원인식이 조직시민행동에 미치는 영향분석

: 경상남도지역 공무원의 인식을 중심으로

Park, Cheol-Min

조직의 성과를 높이기 위한 노력은 전방위적으로 이루어지고 있지만 과연 이러한 노력이 행정 서비스의 질적 수준 향상으로 이어지고 있는가에 대해서는 의문의 여지가 많다. 공급자와 소비자간 균형적인 힘의 논리에 의해 지배되고 있는 시장 경제체제와는 달리 행정 조직은 서비스의 독점적 공급 주체로서의 불균형적 힘의 우월적 지위에 있기 때문에 사회적 요구에 상응하는 서비스 수준의 제공을 기대하는 것은 거의 불가능하다. 본 연구는 조직의 효과성을 높이기 위해서는 조직 구성원들의 조직시민행동이 선행되어야 한다는 전제하에 이를 높이기 위한 기제의 하나로 변혁적 리더십(TFL) 및 조직지원인식(POS)이 조직시민행동(OCB)에 미치는 영향 관계를 분석하는 데 목적을 둔다. 이를 위해 경상남도 지역에 근무하는 공무원 300명을 대상으로 경험적 자료를 수집한 뒤 Regression Analysis와 Barron and Kenny(1986)가 제시한 Three Step Regression Models 등을 이용하여 분석이 이루어 졌다. 연구목적을 달성하기 위해 먼저, 이론적 논의를 통해 사회교환론적 시각에서 변혁적 리더십과 조직지원인식 그리고 조직시민행동에 대한 경로변인들의 이론적 근거를 제시하고, 둘째, 변인들간의 영향경로를 분석할 수 있는 연구가설과 연구모형을 설정한다. 셋째, 연구가설을 검증하기 위해 설문조사 등을 통해 자료를 수집하고 분석한다. 마지막으로 분석 결과를 근거로 변혁적 리더십 및 조직지원인식을 통해 조직시민행동을 높이기 위한 시사점을 제시한다. 분석 결과, 변혁적 리더십과 조직지원인식은 각각 조직시민행동에 유의한 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났으며, 특히 조직지원인식은 변혁적 리더십이 조직시민행동에 미치는 영향을 매개하는 것으로 나타났다. 이를 통해, 변혁적 리더십과 조직지원인식은 정부조직의 효과성과 발전은 물론 조직 구성원의 자발적 행동인 조직시민행동을 위한 중요한 영향요인이 될 수 있다는 것을 확인하였다.

주제어 : 변혁적 리더십, 조직지원인식, 조직시민행동, 경상남도

I. Introduction

Given that modern organizations are severely being challenged for increasing organization effectiveness, it is very important to seek out avenues for contributing to the overall efficacy of organization. Of many variables it is widely believed that organizational citizenship behaviors(OCB) has an important impact on the effectiveness and efficiency of organizations. Because OCB describes actions for which organization members are willing to go above and beyond their prescribed role requirements. Prior theory suggests the belief that these behaviors are correlated with indicators of organization effectiveness. As per Organ, et al.(2005), OCB can improve organizational performance and adaptability in environments demanding complex, ambiguous, and team-oriented work.

Since Organ's original definition(1988) which focuses on the discretionary behavior, not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, that tends to enhance the functioning and performance of the organization, there have been many definitions on OCB.

The Effect of Transformational Leadership and Perceived Organizational Support on Organizational Citizenship Behavior

｢지방정부연구｣ 제15권 제2호(2011 여름)

Until now there may be many factors affecting employees' OCBs such as trust, commitment, emotional intelligence, job satisfaction, organizational justice etc. With these factors, of course, transformational leadership and organizational support(Shapiro et al., 2004) are also expected to be important for enhancing employees' OCB. Because the effectiveness of an organization is closely connected with the quality of leader's ability of managing followers as well as the good relationship between leader and his/her followers.

The requirement of leadership for the effectiveness of organization has for long raised theoretical and empirical questions on what motivate the employees to positively work.

Considering that leadership and motivation were inextricably linked, it is natural to find out effective leadership styles for enhancing employees' commitment to improve their citizenship behavior. Specially, transformational leadership(TFL) is considered to motivate the followers to go beyond their own self interests and give effort on behalf of the organization by appealing to the higher order needs of followers. There are a growing number of researchers who believe transformational leadership plays an equally significant role in building a effective organization(Humphreys and Einstein, 2003; Shin and Zhou, 2003).

Leadership, a crucial managerial activity, is the most important pith for motivating people to make the best effort for organization productivity and development.

And perceived organizational support(POS) has been also considered to be a matter of importance in terms of success and commitment of employees. Because POS is expected to be related to a great variety of work-related attitudes and outcomes such as job satisfaction(Eisenberger et al. 1997), individual performance(Rhoades and Eisenberger 2002), and affective commitment to the organization(Masterson and Stamper 2003). Additionally, it appears that POS can inspire employees to improve their productivity by enhancing both role and extra-role behaviors such as helping other employees(Eisenberger, et al. 2001).

Literature has suggested that POS is positively correlated with OCB. Eisenberger et al.(1997) proved that perceived organization support was correlated with increased employee efforts to attain organizational goals. Cardona(2000) are also reported that higher POS had stronger social attachment to the organization, which then led to increased OCB.

Then is the relationship among TFL, POS, and OCB practically effective for all public employees? There have been very few studies which analyzed empirically the effectiveness of public workers. Just a few studies in the field of business administration show that the mechanism is some effective as we have expected.

More detailed explanation on these studies will be presented in the next chapter.

Consequently, the study aims to analyze the effect of TFL and POS on OCB in local government. For the purpose, the study is first, through literature review, to examine the relationship between the three concepts after reviewing the overall general characteristics of each one, followed by design of the research which outlines the approach taken in this study, providing research design such as data collection and measuring tools. Next, structural equation modelling was used to examine the direct effects of TFL and POS on OCB, and three regression equations to test the hypothesized role of POS as a mediator between TFL and OCB of followers, followed by ending with some brief concluding suggestions providing an overview of the study and discussing the key findings.

II. Literature Review and Hypotheses

1. Literature Review

1) Transformational Leadership(TFL)

TFL is based on transformational leaders originated by Burns (1978) who states that transformational leaders motivate their followers to go beyond their own self interests and give effort on behalf of the organization by appealing to the higher order needs of followers.

The leadership domain has recently focused on the so-called “new leadership paradigm”

(Yukl, 2002) such as transformational leadership(Trautmann, Maher & Motley, 2007). Transformational leaders are said to appeal to higher ideals and moral values of followers, heighten their expectations, and spur them to greater effort and performance on behalf of the organization(Bass & Avolio, 1990). In addition, transformational leaders have the ability to motivate their subordinates to commit themselves to performance beyond expectations

(Bryman, 1992).

According to Burns(1978), transformational leaders motivate their followers to go beyond their own self interests and give effort on behalf of the organization by appealing to the higher order needs of followers. Bass and Avolio(1990) are also in the same position saying that transformational leaders inspire followers with a vision of what can be accomplished through extra personal effort, thus motivating followers to achieve more than they thought they would achieve.

Accordingly, TFL as a new leadership paradigm in the leadership domain(Yukl, 2002; Trautmann, Maher & Motley, 2007) has been considered as a new genre of leadership which overcomes resistance to change for organization effectiveness by expressing an optimistic vision of the future and using inspirational communication for positive and encouraging messages(Rafferty & Griffin, 2004). Because TFL boosts intrinsic motivation and provides intellectual stimulation; the followers are encouraged to challenge the status quo and the old ways of doing things(Shin et al., 2003).

And the behavioral components of TFL can be categorized into four dimensions(Bass and Avolio, 1993): participation, respect, relationship, support. Those factors are known to play an important role in encouraging employees to put the organization’ objective above their own personal interests and stimulating followers' higher order needs(Bass & Avolio, 1990). Based on organizational objectives and organizational change by disseminating new values and seeking alternatives to existing arrangements, transformational leadership is focused on not only inspiring people to have vision and passion, but encouraging them to get things done by injecting enthusiasm and energy. According to Gellis(2001), transformational leadership emphases on new values and alternative visions of the future that surpass the status quo, resulting in constructive organizational change. There are also researchers emphasizing the effective role of transformational leadership by asserting that leadership characterized by heightened levels of inspiration, interdependence, and integration is much more effective than any other leadership styles in current organizational contexts(Feinberg, Ostroff & Burke, 2005; Spreitzer et. al, 2005). In this leadership, leaders and followers raise one another to higher levels of motivation and morality. In other words, transformational leadership attempts to raise follower needs to higher levels(self-esteem, encouragement, support) and to develop followers into ownership(such as participation, respect, and good relationship among members), emphasizing trust and commitment much more than contractual agreements(Jung & Avolio, 1999). Of these variables, Hirsch et. al(2006) emphasized that administrative support had an impact on the overall organization culture and job attitude, resulting in reducing high turnover rates and creating professional learning communities within organization. Consequently, whereas leader's authority and power are minimal, follower response based on commitment is augmented.

Considering transformational leadership attempting to raise follower needs to higher levels of self-initiatives through inspiring and participation, we can deduce variables concerning transformational leadership for followers' motivation as follows: self-esteem(respect), support based on inspiration, and participation and good relationship(between colleagues as well as between leader and subordinates) based on ownership. Consequently, those forms of TFL are expected to positively associated with employees' POS as well as their OCB.

The study will focus on participation, respect, relationship, support, which have primarily been thought of as the key factors of TFL.

2) Perceived Organizational Support(POS)

Referring to employees’ perceptions about the degree to which employees believe that their organization values their contributions and cares about their well-being, POS is “an experience-based attribution concerning the benevolent or malevolent intent of the organization’s policies, norms, procedures, and action as they affect employees” by the leader(Eisenberber et al., 2001). Because POS is considered to represent an indispensable part of the social exchange relationship between employees and the employer, viewed also as a measure of an organization's commitment to its employees. Therefore, POS is presumed to be a global faith that employees have with respect to their appraisal by the organization.

Since Eisenberger and colleagues' seminal work on POS(Eisenberger et al., 1997), researchers have examined the effects of POS on various work outcomes(Settoon et al, 1996; Masterson and Stamper, 2003).

As per Rhoades & Eisenberger(2002), POS is generally thought to be the organization’s contribution to a positive reciprocity dynamic with employees who tend to perform better. Consequently, employees being valued by the organization are expected to yield benefits such as approval, respect, and other forms of aid needed to better carry out their job.

Organizational support theory originated from Gouldner(1960) is based on the norm of reciprocity in social exchange, presuming that employees with higher levels of POS would feel an positive obligation for the achievement of organizational goals as well as the organization’s benefits by repaying the organization with positive attitudes and favorable work behaviors(Eisenberger, Cummings, Armeli, & Lynch, 1997). This faith is supported by Levinson(1965) who suggested that employees tend to attribute the actions of organizational representatives to the intent of the organization rather than solely to the personal motives of its representatives. Because employees regard their relationship with the organization as a relationship between themselves and a more powerful individual, or their supervisor.

And POS is expected to result in positive attitudinal and behavioral outcomes that repay favors, namely, in outcomes that benefit the organization.

In other words, employees with being favorably treated by the organization intend to enhance positive work attitudes and behaviors by creating obligations within individuals to repay the organization with continued stay, higher commitment, and better performance of job responsibilities and citizenship behaviors(Settoon et al., 1996).

According to Eisenberger, Armeli, Rexwinkel, Lynch, & Rhoades(2001), employer and employee exchange not only impersonal resources such as money, services, and information, but also socioemotional resources such as approval, respect, and support.

As a result, POS can have a positive impact on employee attitudes and behaviors mainly because it creates a sense of obligation within the individuals to repay the organization

(Eisenberger et al., 1997; Eisenberger et al., 2001).

Considering that employees intend to develop higher levels of POS when the organization cares about their endeavor and values their contributions, POS is expected to correlated with OCB based on the employees' extra-role behavior which goes beyond existing role expectations for the benefit of their organization.

3) Organizational Citizenship Behavior(OCB)

According to Organ (1988), the definition of OCB is "individual behavior that is discretionary, not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, and that in the aggregate promotes the effective functioning of the organization". Proposing the broader construct of "extra-role behavior," Brief & Weiss(2002) defined the concept as "behavior which benefits the organization and/or is intended to benefit the organization, which is discretionary and which goes beyond existing role expectations". More recently, however, Organ(2005) refined this definition, conceptualizing organizational citizenship behavior as any form of performance that supports the social or psychological environment in which the work tasks are embedded.

And there are as many dimensions of OCB as scholars have developed a variety of taxonomies to classify these citizenship behaviors(Williams & Anderson, 1991). According to a meta-analytic study examined by Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine, and Bachrach(2000), the examination of the literature indicates that almost 30 potentially different forms of citizenship behaviors have been identified by many researchers.

Organ(1988) identified five dimensions of OCBs, which has been known as one of the most prevalent taxonomies: altruism, courtesy, sportsmanship, conscientiousness, and civic virtue. Subsequently, Organ(2005) also included two additional factors: peacekeeping and cheerleading. Schnake and Dumler(2003) also highlighted that the same five OCB dimensions that have been most frequently examined by researchers.

Meanwhile, a different taxonomy was proposed by Williams and Anderson(1991), which differentiated behaviors directed towards individuals, called OCB-I, and behaviors directed towards the organization, called OCB-O. OCB-I, for example, might include altruism(Williams &Anderson, 1991), as well as the other helping behaviors such as courtesy, peacekeeping, and cheerleading. OCB-O might entail conscientiousness(Williams & Anderson, 1991), as well as perhaps civic virtue and sportsmanship(Hoffman, Blair, Meriac, & Woehr, 2007).

The study will be focused on two type of dimensions suggested by Williams & Anderson(1991) - OCB-I and OCB-O.

2. Hypotheses

1) Relationship between TFL and OCB

Leadership is originally a process by which a person(leader) influences others(followers) to accomplish an objective and directs the organization in a way that makes it more effective. As per Nicholls(1994), TFL is the activity which stimulates purposeful activity in others by changing the way they look at the world around them and relate to one another. Therefore, TFL may well affect positively followers' OCB which is the result enhanced by the reciprocal process. The positive association between TFL and OCB has been supported empirically(Podsakoff et al., 1990; Bolino and Turnley, 2003; Wang, Law and Hackett, 2005). According to Podsakoff et al. (1990) who reviewed previous theoretical and empirical research, transformational leader behaviors is expected to influence extra-role(OCB) by articulating a vision, providing individualized support and intellectual stimulation etc. And Bolino and Turnley(2003) also suggested that TFL is positively related to enhancing OCB by saying that organizations may be able to elicit more citizenship by establishing trust with their followers and providing them with individual consideration and inspirational stimulation etc. Moreover, Wang, Law and Hackett(2005) also emphasized the positive role of OCB for the effective accomplishment of task performance by arguing that OCB, largely discretionary and seldom included in formal job descriptions, enhance a social and psychological work environment.

Thus, the following hypotheses will be established:

Hypothesis 1a: Employees' perception of leader's TFL is positively related to the level of OCB-I displayed by them.

Hypothesis 1b: Employees' perception of leader's TFL is positively related to the level of OCB-O displayed by them.

2) Relationship between TFL and POS

As discussed above, POS is generally thought to be the organization’s contribution to a positive reciprocity dynamic with employees, as employees tend to perform better to pay back POS(Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002).

Given, accordingly, that POS is based on the assumption that employees intend to identify the treatment that they receive from organizational agents with a general perception of support, TFL affecting employees' treatment is expected to be a significant factor for increasing employees' POS. Because supervisors tend to allocate more rewards to employees with whom they have high-quality exchange relationships, thus reinforcing such employees’ beliefs that the organization cares for them and values their contributions. In addition, employees consider often treatment that employees receive from supervisors as one coming directly from the organization itself. Eemployees regard the actions of their supervisors as the organization’s positive or negative orientation which may well have an effect on employee’s POS. Therefore, a supervisor with high formal status should have a stronger impact on an employee’s POS than should a manager with lower formal status(Eisenberger, Jones, Aselage, & Sucharski, 2004). This fact is supported by Babin & Boles's study(1996) proving that “the degree of supervisory support may influence the subordinate’s motivation, job satisfaction, and performance." According to them, employees feel more positive towards their work when employees notice supervisor's concern for them as well as providing their adequate support for getting the job well done(Babin & Boles, 1996), consequently pulling out employees' extra work effort which may enhance the service quality of the employees. In addition, Frone et al.(1997) has proved that employees with a positive support from their supervisor are intend to increase both extra work effort and job satisfaction.

Therefore, from the above discussion, the following hypothesis can be established:

Hypothesis 2: TFL will positively affect employees' POS.

3) Relationship between POS and OCB

POS and OCB have been known to be in common in that both of them focused on employee-employer relationship for organization effectiveness. POS should produce a felt obligation to help supervisors reach their goals (Eisenberger et al., 2001).

As discussed above, employees feel obliged to repay organization with extra effort and loyalty when such favorable supportive treatments are discretionary-based(Eisenberger, Cummings, Armeli, & Lynch, 1997; Eisenberger, Armeli, Rexwinkel, Lynch, & Rhoades, 2001). Accordingly, the organizational support and social support research literature reports positive relationships among supportive supervision and employee in-role and extra-role performance(Bhanthumnavin, 2003; Malatesta, 1995).

This belief is supported by many empirical researches. As per the study of Settoon et al.(1996), individuals with higher POS were likely to repay the organization with citizenship behaviors as well as higher commitment. Similarly Becker & Kernan(2003) are also asserting that POS helps employees' behaviors that go beyond assigned responsibilities(Bhanthumnavin, 2003; Malatesta, 1995).

Thus, subordinates’ POS should enhance subordinates’ extra-role as well as in-role performance.

Based on the discussion, the following hypothesis will be established:

Hypothesis 3: POS will be positively related to subordinates’ OCB-I and OCB-O.

4) Mediation Role of POS on TFL and OCB

Based on the above discussion, the study can set up the mediation role of POS on TFL and OCB.

According to Hypothesis 2, based on employees’ beliefs regarding the extent to which they are supported by supervisors are positively related to POS(Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002), TFL is supposed to have positive effect on employees’ perceptions of organizational support. Because the supervisor, as an agent of the organization, not only discharges the organization’s legal, moral, and financial responsibilities, but upholds significantly the psychological employee-employer contract. Considering that the significant competencies of competent leadership are the ability to monitor emotions in one’s self and in others, TFL is expected to affect employee’s personal beliefs by touching their hearts and minds(Nicholls, 1994). Brief and Weiss(2002) are also in line with this belief by saying that transformational leaders with the feeling of excited, enthusiastic, and energetic can energize their followers. Therefore, TFL is conclusively considered to contribute to employees' perceptions of organizational support, which was discussed for establishing hypothesis about the relationship between TFL and POS.

Furthermore, the study also hypothesized that employees’ perceptions of organizational support would be positively related to their OCB(Hypothesis 3). Considering that POS can enhance a high quality of leader-member exchange(LMX), which can help stimulate “extra effort” on the part of subordinates inspired by the qualitative LMX, it is plausible that POS enhance the OCB of followers through LMX. Because employees feel obliged to repay organization with extra effort and loyalty when they perceive favorable supportive treatments from their organization(Eisenberger, Armeli, Rexwinkel, Lynch, & Rhoades, 2001).

Therefore, taking the two hypotheses together, POS is expected to significantly mediate the relationships between leader's TFL and followers' OCB. The followers inspired by their leaders with TFL may consider it as a sign of organizational support which they reciprocate by enhancing their OCB. Thus, the author can build up the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 4: POS will mediate the effect of TFL on OCB-I and OCB-O

Based on previous studies as mentioned above, we hypothesized an analysis model as shown in Figure 1.

O C B

T F L

P O S

Figure 1. Hypothesized analysis model

III. Data Sampling and Methodology

This chapter addresses the approach to the study. It provides an explanation of the research design, details regarding the sample, the variables to be examined, chosen measurement instruments, means of data collection, and data analysis.

1. Data Sampling

For the test of the hypotheses concerning the relationship between dependable and independable variables, the study used non-probability convenience sampling technique and decided to gather data by distributing questionnaires over 200 employees working in local government in Kyungnam Province of Korea. The targeted population's number is over Krejcie and Morgan’s(1970) recommendation for reasonable sample size.

Prior to the actual collection of data, the requirements prompting the need to collect data have to be fully understood, as well as how and how much survey groups are selected must be identified, which will show the verification of the study. Data was collected through use of a written questionnaire hand-delivered to participants. Questionnaires were filled out by participants and returned to an intra-departmental mailbox.

The demographic information collected from public employees included gender, length of career, age, education. But the last one variable(education) highly skewed was excluded in the current study. Gender was dummy-coded, and age was marked as follows: 1 = below 25, 2 = 26 to 35, 3 = 36 to 45, 4= 46 to 55, and 5= over 56, and length of career was marked as follows: 1 = below 5 years, 2 = 6 to 10, 3 = 11 to 15, 4= 16 to 20, and 5= 21 to 25, and 6= over 26. Except for the demographic questions(age, gender, and education level), research participants were asked to respond to survey questions using a 7-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 = "strongly disagree" to 7 = "strongly agree" depending on the question.

Because age seems to be highly correlated with length of career experience, the result may also be almost same. But considering all employees can not be same in starting their public jobs, it is meaningful to analyze them separately.

A total of 312 of the 400 questionnaires sent to the randomly selected sample were returned, which represented a response rate of 78.0%. Out of these 312 questionnaires, about 300 were significantly selected for the analysis after discarding the questionnaires to which respondents did not reply faithfully, including 251 male and 49 female respondents with their average age being 43.5 and their average tenure being 13.6 years. Further information on the demographic characteristics is as displayed in Table 1.

Table 1. Participants' Demographic Characteristics

Variables		Frequency	%
Gender	Male	251	83.6
	Female	49	16.4
Age	25 Year Old or Fewer	33	11.0
	26-35	56	18.7
	36-45	78	26.0
	46-55	85	28.3
	56 and Above years	48	16.0
Years of Career Experience	Five Years or Fewer	21	7.0
	6 to 10 Years	63	21.0
	11 to 15 Years	71	23.3
	16 to 20 Years	74	24.8
	21 to 25 Years	38	12.8
	26 Years or More	33	11.1

Note: Total figures in this table do not sum to the total n of the sample(300) because of non-response to questions of gender, age, length of service, and job grade.

2. Instrumentations

1) TFL

In this study, Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman, and Fetter’(1990) transformational leadership behavior inventory was used to assess the employees' perception on their leader's TFL behaviors. This scale is designed to measure key dimensions of transformational leadership identified in the research literature. The questions are included as follows: ⅰ) Participation -"My leader shares ownership in the decision-making about important issues", "My leader permits various perspectives about problem solving process", "My leader shares his/her times in discussing and instructing with subordinates" ⅱ) Respect - "My leader behaves in receiving respect from his/her subordinates", "My leader treats his/her subordinates not a group member but a character", "My leader advises being recognized and respected as administrative experts" ⅲ) Relationship - "My leader prefers improving good relationship with his/her subordinates", "My leader says his/her administrative philosophy to subordinates frequently", "My leader emphasizes the importance of common goal consciousness to his /her subordinates", ⅳ) Support - "My leader prefers consistent support for doing jobs to his/her subordinates", "My leader suggests a powerful vision to subordinates", "My leader inspires a sense of duty and confidence".

Survey items were completed on 7-point frequency scales ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree).

2) POS

POS is typically measured with the eight-item perceived organizational support scale used by Hekman et al.(2009). Respondents are asked to indicate the extent to which they agree with the following statements on a seven-point scale. The questions are included as follows.

ⅰ) My organization cares about my opinions. ⅱ) My organization really cares about my well-being. ⅲ) My organization strongly considers my goals and values. ⅳ) Help is available from my organization when I have a problem. ⅴ) My organization would forgive an honest mistake on my part. ⅵ) If given the opportunity, my organization would take advantage of me(reverse-coded). ⅶ) My organization shows very little concern for me(reverse-coded). ⅷ) My organization is willing to help me, if I need a special favor.

Survey items were completed on 7-point frequency scales ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree).

3) OCBs

A variety of measures and scales have been developed to assess organizational citizenship behavior. To illustrate, Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman, and Fetter(1990) developed a single measure of organizational citizenship behavior.

This measure, according to confirmatory factor analysis, encompasses five facets of organizational citizenship behavior: conscientiousness(e.g., "I obey company rules and regulations even when nobody is watching"), sportsmanship (e.g., "I consume considerable time complaining about trivial matters(R)"), civic virtue(e.g., "Keeps abreast of changes in the organization"), courtesy (e.g., "I take steps to prevent problems with other workers"), and altruism(e.g., "Helps orient new people even though it is not required"). The Tucker-Lewis goodness of fit index associated with this five factor model was .941(see MacKenzie, Podsakoff, & Fetter, 1991).

OCB was assessed using Williams & Anderson's 15-item scale. In the present study, two classes of employee behavior were measured. The performance of OCBs covered both OCB-I and OCB-O. OCB-I areas as follows : ⅰ) Altruism - "Helps others who have been absent", "Helps others who have heavy workloads", "Assists colleagues with his/her work when not asked", ⅱ) Courtesy -"Consult matters with will-be influenced persons in that matters", "Take preventive actions against foreseeing problems", "Notice before doing". On the other hand OCB-O includes the following : ⅰ) Sportsmanship - "Complaining of trivial problem he/she had received", "Exaggeration of trivial problem", "Attach weight to negative aspects", ⅱ) Conscientiousness -"Attendance at work is above the norm", "Conserves and protects organizational property", "Adheres to informal rules devised to maintain order", ⅲ) Civic virtue - "Boast of merits in his/her organization", "Attending important meeting actively", "Understanding visions and policies of organization".

A 7-point Likert scale ranging from "strongly disagree" (1) to "strongly agree" (7) was also used by respondents when they completed the questionnaire. Higher scores reflected higher levels of OCB.

Table 2. List of Variables

Variables	Items	Description of Variables
TFL	Participation	1-1. My leader shares ownership in the decision-making about important issues. 1-2. My leader permits various perspectives about problem solving process. 1-3. My leader shares his/her times in discussing and instructing with subordinates.
	Respect	2-1. My leader behaves in receiving respect from his/her subordinates. 2-2. My leader treats his/her subordinates not a group member but a character. 2-3. My leader advises being recognized and respected as administrative experts.
	Relationship	3-1. My leader prefers improving good relationship with his/her subordinates. 3-2. My leader says his/her administrative philosophy to subordinates frequently. 3-3. My leader emphasizes the importance of common goal consciousness to his /her subordinates..
	Support	4-1. My leader prefers consistent support for doing jobs to his/her subordinates. 4-2. My leader suggests a powerful vision to subordinates. 4-3. My leader inspires a sense of duty and confidence.
POS	Pos	5-1. My organization cares about my opinions. 5-2. My organization really cares about my well-being. 5-3. My organization strongly considers my goals and values. 5-4. Help is available from my organization when I have a problem. 5-5. My organization would forgive an honest mistake on my part. 5-6. If given the opportunity, my organization would take advantage of me(reverse-coded). 5-7. My organization shows very little concern for me(reverse-coded). 5-8. My organization is willing to help me, if I need a special favor.
OCB-I	Altruism	6-1. Helps others who have been absent. 6-2. Helps others who have heavy workloads. 6-3. Assists colleagues with his/her work when not asked.
	Courtesy	7-1. Consult matters with will-be influenced persons in that matters. 7-2. Take preventive actions against foreseeing problems. 7-3. Notice before doing.
OCB-O	Sportsmanship	8-1. Complaining of trivial problem he/she had received. 8-2. Exaggeration of trivial problem. 8-3. Attach weight to negative aspects.
	Conscientiousness	9-1. Attendance at work is above the norm. 9-2. Conserves and protects organizational property. 9-3. Adheres to informal rules devised to maintain order.
	Civic virtue	10-1. Boast of merits in his/her organization. 10-2. Attending important meeting actively. 10-3. Understanding visions and policies of organization.

3. Analysis Methods

The study has used the Cronbach alpha test to assess the reliability and internal consistency of the data. And the data collected were analyzed by two approaches. First, descriptive statistics were used for each of the question on the Likert Scale. Second, for the purpose of finding out how much each factor contributes to dependable variables, the study used regression analysis whose general purpose is to learn more about the relationship between several independent or predictor variables and a dependent or criterion variable. Additionally, three regression models suggested by Baron and Kenny(1986) were tested for mediation analysis of POS on the relationship between TFL and OCB. A series of three-step hierarchical regression analyses were conducted by first entering independent variables, which consist of TFL in the regression equation. The moderator variables were entered individually into the equation in the second step. Lastly, the interaction terms of the independent and moderator variables were entered.

The earliest form of regression was the method of least squares, which was published by Legendre in 1805, and by Gauss in 1809. In recent decades, new methods have been developed for robust regression, regression involving correlated responses such as time series and growth curves, regression in which the predictor or response variables are curves, images, graphs(Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994).

And some variables such as gender, age, and tenure should be controlled or removed for the benefit of simple analysis if possible. In this study, those variables are proved not to have an effect on the analysis of the relationship between independent variables(TFL and POS) and dependent variable(OCB). Therefore, the current study is conducted without analysis of these demographic factors and personal questions.

Ⅳ. Statistical Results

1. Reliability

1) Internal Consistency Reliability

To test internal consistency, coefficient α or Cronbach’s alpha is widely used, providing a good reliability estimate in most situations. Cronbach’s alpha varies from 0 to 1, and the reliability would be greater as the value closes to 1. On the contrary, if the value is low or tends to close to 0, there would be unsatisfactory internal consistency reliability, which signifies that the study variables have little commonality among the items(Churchill, G.A. JR., 1979). The coefficient alphas for the different constructs computed by SPSS. 17 are on the diagonal parenthesized in the following table.

Coefficient alpha is a kind of average of all possible split-half coefficients which is resulted from different ways of splitting the item of the scale.

According to Nunnally(1978) the reliability is acceptable if it lies between 0.50-0.60. However, according to Hair(1998) a coefficient of 0.70 is enviable.

Table 3.  Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations for Research Variables

Variables	M	SD	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8
TFL	4.31	.73	(.88)
POS	4.47	.82	.49**	(.85)
OCB	4.23	.39	.45**	.43**	(.87)
OCB-I	4.36	.45	.44**	.44**	.78**	(.85)
OCB-O	4.29	.62	.46**	.41**	.79**	.59**	(.86)
Gender	1.38	.21	-.05	.12*	.02	-.04	.05	(.77)
Age	43.52	.31	-.04	.07	.03	-.02	.03	.01	(.71)
Tenure	13.63	.28	.03	.06	.05	.04	.03	.02	.45**	(.72)

* p < .05, ** p < .001

Note: 1. Cronbach’ alpha of each scale are on the diagonal parenthesized.

2. TFL=transformational leadership, POS=Perceived Organization Support, OCB=Organizational Citizenship Behavior

As shown in the above Table 3, the reliabilities of most constructs in this study lies within the acceptable range(0.70-0.80). All scales were found to be highly reliable: .88(TFL scale) .85(POS scale), and .87(OCB scale).

After the reliabilities were confirmed, the correlation between the dimensions of OCB and the complete scale of POS and TFL were calculated in order to understand the correlation between the TFL, POS, and OCBs in this study. These data were collected in order to analyze the corollary relationship between these variables by means of the Pearson coefficient. The mean represents the averaged responses from the employees being surveyed. The matrix of correlation coefficients were shown in Table 2, presenting the means, standard deviations, and intercorrelations among the study variables. As shown in Table 3, a higher coefficient indicates a stronger correlation between variables. Significant positive relationships are obtained between TFL and OCB(r=.45, P < .001), OCB-I(r=.44, P <. 001), OCB-O(r=.46, P < .001), and POS(r=.49, P < .001). In light of the guidelines(a r value of ≥ .20) offered by Kerlinger and Lee(2000), the significant relationship between the variables was definitely accepted. More specifically, TFL is positively correlated with POS as well as OCBs of the followers, which suggests a convergent validity. Also, TFL is significantly and positively correlated with OCB and both of its components, OCB-I and OCB-O. And POS is also correlated significantly with OCB and its components as well as TFL suggesting a possible interaction effects.

2. Hypotheses Testing

To prove the hypotheses established through reviewing the relationship between research variables, two types of analysis methods - regression analyses(Cohen and Cohen, 1983) and three regression models(Baron and Kenny, 1986) - were employed using TFL and POS as independents and OCB as dependent variable.

1) Regression Analysis for the Effect of TFL on OCBs

The current study has examined the hypotheses related to the effect of the employees’ perception of their supervisor's TFL on their OCBs(OCB-I and OCB-O). As discussed above, the Pearson correlation between research variables has supported the basic premise that TFL is related to OCBs(OCB-I and OCB-O). Regression analysis was used to determine the magnitude of the relationship between variables. And the study supposing that TFL may have a different effect on according to the dimension of OCB respectively, took apart OCB - OCB-I and OCB-O. The results of regression analyses between TFL and OCBs variables are summarized in Table 4.

Table 4. Results of Regression Analysis for the Effect of TFL on OCBs

Sources Types	β	t	Sig.	R2	Adjusted R2	F
OCB	.283	2.76**	.001	.608	.676	6.02
OCB-I	.294	2.81**	.001	.624	.692	6.08
OCB-O	.271	1.63*	.001	.587	.659	5.94

* p < .10, ** p < .05, *** p < .001

As shown above table, TFL is proved to significantly affect on OCB(β = .283, R2 = .608, p < .001), TFL and OCB-I(β = .294, R2 = .624, p < .001), TFL and OCB-O(β = .271, R2 = .587, p < .001). Therefore, it was found that supervisor with TFL would induce a significant and positive effect on employees' OCBs, verifying that H1a and H1b concerning the effect of the employees’ perception of their supervisor as transformational leader on their OCBs are positively supported.

2) Regression Analysis for the Effect of TFL on POS

Similarly, the current study has examined the hypotheses related to the effect of the employees’ perception of TFL on POS. The analysis method is the same as the way mentioned above. The results of regression analyses between TFL and POS is summarized in Table 5.

Table 5. Results of Regression Analysis for the Effect of TFL on POS

Sources Types	β	t	Sig.
POS	.348	2.28**	.000
R2	.631**
Adjusted R2	.694**
F	6.35**

* p < .10, ** p < .05, *** p < .001

According to Table 5, TFL is also proved to significantly affect on POS(β = .348, R2 = .631, p < .001). Therefore, it was found that employees with supervisor with TFL would enhance a good perception of POS by employees, proving that H2 regarding the effect of TFL on POS is affirmatively upheld.

3) Regression Analysis for the Effect of POS on OCBs

Similarly, the current study has examined the hypotheses related to the effect of the employees’ perception of POS on their OCBs(OCB-I and OCB-O). The analysis method is the same as the way mentioned above. The results of regression analyses between POS and OCBs variables are summarized in Table 6.

Table 6. Results of Regression Analysis for the Effect of POS on OCBs

Sources Types	β	t	Sig.	R2	Adjusted R2	F
OCB	.384	2.27**	.001	.601	.675	6.12
OCB-I	.391	2.53**	.001	.611	.681	6.27
OCB-O	.373	1.98*	.001	.585	.664	5.95

* p < .10, ** p < .05, *** p < .001

According to Table 6, POS is proved to significantly affect on OCB(β = .384, R2 = .601, p < .001), POS and OCB-I(β = .391, R2 = .611, p < .001), POS and OCB-O(β = .373, R2 = .585, p < .001). Therefore, it was found that employees with POS would enhance a significant their OCBs, proving that H3 with respect to the effect of POS on OCBs are definitely supported.

4) Hierarchical Regression Analysis for the Mediating Effects of POS

between TFL and OCBs

To test the hypothesized role of POS as mediators between TFL and employees' OCBs, the current study employed Baron and Kenny’s(1986) three step regression models based on three conditions which must be required for demonstrating mediation. According to their theory, any mediating study is advised to examine the following regression equations: (a) regress the mediator on the independent variable, (b) regress the dependent variable on the independent variable, and (c) regress the dependent variable on both the independent variable and the mediator.

First, the independent variable(TFL) must be significantly related to the proposed mediator(POS). Second, the independent variable(TFL) and the proposed mediator(POS) must each be significantly related to the dependent variable(OCB). Third, the relationship between the independent variable and the dependent variable should be significantly weaker(partial mediation) or non-significant(full mediation) when the proposed mediator is included in the regression equation.

POS was first regressed on TFL and then OCBs were regressed on TFL, followed by OCBs regressed on both TFL and POS. The following table presents the regression coefficients of effect of POS on perceived leaders' TFL and both employee's OCB-I and OCB-O.

Table 7. Results of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for the Mediating Effects   of POS between TFL and OCBs

Sources	OCB-I			OCB-O
	POS	OCB-I		POS	OCB-O
	1st equation	2nd equation	3rd equation	1st equation	2nd equation	3rd equation
	β	β	β	β	β	β
TFL	.35 (.33)**	.29 (.24)**		.34 (.32)**	.27 (.25)**
TFL			.14 (.12)*			.13 (.12)*
POS			.39 (.34)**			.37 (.35)**
△R2			.328			.392
R2	.24	.27	.35	.18	.17	.24
F	5.27	7.26	11.41	5.15	6.38	10.37

Note: Unstandardized coefficients with SE are in parentheses.

* p < .05, ** p < .001

As shown in the above table, POS was found to significantly moderate the relationship between TFL and OCB-I. Not only was OCB-I which was regressed on TFL effective(β = .29, p < .001), but POS regressed on TFL was significant(β = .35, p < .001) and OCB-I regressed on both TFL(β = .14, p < .001) and POS(β = .39, p < .001) was significant as well. Therefore, POS fully mediated the effects of TFL on OCB-I(the β reduces from .29, p < .05 to .14, p < .05).

In addition, POS related to OCB-O was also proved to significantly moderate the relationship between TFL and OCB-O. POS regressed on TFL was significant(β = .34, p < .001) and OCB-O regressed on TFL was effective(β = .27, p < .001). OCB-O regressed on both TFL(β = .13 p < .05) and POS(β = .37, p < .001) was also significant. Thus, by reducing the value of β from .27, p < .05 to .13, p < .05, the hypothesis 4b is accepted, signifying that POS has some evidence meditating the relationship between perceived supervisor's TFL and employee's OCB-O. As a result, hypothesis 4 was also proved.

V. Discussions

According to the finding of the current study, POS is an effect factor for enhancing employees' OCB as well mediating role between TFL and OCB.

Consistent with the results of a few previous studies(Bass et al., 1990; Bryman, 1992), TFL is proved to have a positive correlation with both OCB-I and OCB-O of public employees. This results may be caused by the attribute of TFL. Because TFL treats the followers as individuals and not just members of a group help leaders not only to be compassionate, appreciative, and responsive to the employees’ needs, but also to recognize and celebrate their achievements, which can motivate the followers to exhibit OCBs. Also, TFL is expected to incite the follower to be proud of identifying themselves with the leader and developing a strong sense of loyalty to them. According to Bass & Avolio(1990), the relationship between transformational leaders and their followers is enhanced by pride and respect.

The results are supported by literature in which TFL was found to be affect the OCBs of the followers. Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine, & Bachrach(2000) asserted that TFL is directly correlated with OCBs. And indirect relationship between TFL behavior and OCBs has been proved by previous study(Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman, & Fetter, 1990). This signifies that when understood and appreciated emotionally and psychologically by their leaders, the employees may feel motivated and encouraged for their work to organization effectiveness and may reciprocate by being organization-oriented. Therefore, perceived leader's TFL is likely to play a significant role in determining the followers' two specific OCBs: OCB-I and OCB-O. That is due to the fact that : a high quality of relationship between leaders and the followers enhanced by the emotionally intelligent leader help to understand behavior of the followers, thus increase the followers' extra role behavior.

Additionally, consistent with the prediction, POS had a significant direct effect on employees’ OCB. As per Eisenberger et al.(1997), employees who believe they have received high levels of support from the organization tend to reciprocate with positive work attitudes and behaviors that benefit the organization. This means that TFL can play an key role in enhancing employees' perception of POS, which has been referred to be determinant in enhancing the followers' OCBs. Accordingly, referring to employees’ perceptions about the degree to which employees’ believe that their organization values their contributions and cares about their well-being, POS is expected to be an important factor for explaining the variances in OCBs. Therefore, POS is presumed to be a global faith that employees have with respect to their appraisal by the organization. Given that POS comes from the perception of the value of material being exchanged between leaders and members(Kleinman, 2003), POS seems to inspire followers to go beyond required in-role behavior and engage in citizenship behaviors in order to maintain a balanced or equitable social exchange(Wayne et al., 2002). Because POS can boost intrinsic motivation and provide intellectual stimulation by challenging the status quo and the old ways of doing things. Moreover, POS is also proved to be able to mediate between perceived leadership style(TFL) and OCBs of followers. The findings are consistent with the previous studies in some ways, which found that POS directly or indirectly affects the followers' OCBs through their altruistic attitudes and behaviors.

Empirically analyzing the relationship between employees' perception on TFL and their OCBs such as OCB-I(altruism, courtesy) and OCB-O(sportsmanship, conscientiousness, civic virtue) with POS as moderator, the current study focuses on the role of TFL as well as POS in public agency.

The most important one of the findings yielded in the study is that public employees' perception of TFL behaviors from their leader(or supervisor) is a highly significant predictor for enhancing their OCBs, signifying that public employees would be more likely to enhance their OCBs as well as the commitment to their organization in proportion to the degree of leader's service and consideration on them.

And POS has proved to be able to mediate between perceived TFL and OCBs of followers. This means that POS mediates the effects of TFL on variables such as performance and OCBs. It appears that POS plays a practically more important role in moderating the effects of TFL on OCBs. More specifically, a good perception on POS is expected to be a significant moderator in affecting the relationships between the two constructs. Because POS induces positive work attitudes and behaviors based on the norm of reciprocity, which, in turn, contributes to employee attitudes and behaviors beneficial for the organization by motivating them to repay for reciprocity.

Of course, the current study has several limitations concerning the research method such as all the variables measured by survey instruments, the cross-sectional data collection, and the only use of questionnaires for collecting data. Those limitations are, however, universally in common in any empirical study, which is not expected to distort the practical results of the study.

Despite some limitations on research method, not only does the study expose how important TFL is in enhancing public employees' OCBs, but it also shows that POS perceived by them is also significant in encouraging their OCBs. In addtion, the study is likely to encourage researchers to analyze the variables which are not explained here for more valuable study. Therefore, the study is expected to contribute to seeking an avenue for encouraging leader(supervisor) to make an effort for specific behaviors that are linked to public employees’ perceptions of trustworthiness and considerate goodwill on their leadership. Repeatedly, the study might render useful services to the more elaborate and clear perception about the relationship between TFL and public employees' OCBs with POS as moderator.

References

Avolio, B. J., Zhu, W., Koh, W. L., & Bhatia, P. (2004). Transformational leadership and organizational commitment: Mediating role of psychological empowerment and moderating role of structural distance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25: 951-968.

Babin, B. J. & Boles, J. S. (1996). The effects of perceived co-worker involvement and supervisor support on service provider role stress, performance and job satisfaction. Journal of Retailing, 72(1): 57-75.

Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51: 1173-1182.

Bass, B. M., & Avolio B. J. (1990). The implications of transactional and transformational leadership for individual, team, and organizational development. Research in Organizational Change and Development, 4: 231-272.

Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88: 588-606.

Becker, T. E., & Kernan, M. C. (2003). Matching commitment to supervisors and organizations to in-role and extra-role performance. Human Performance, 16: 327-348.

Bhanthumnavin, D. (2003). Perceived social support from supervisor and group members' psychological and situational characteristics as predictors of subordinate performance in Thai work units. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 14: 79-97.

Bolino, M., & Turnley, W. (2003). Going the extra mile: Cultivating and managing employee citizenship behavior. Academy of Management Executive, 17(3): 60-71.

Brief, A., & Weiss, H. (2002). Organizational behavior: Affect in the workplace. Annual Review Psychology, 53: 279-307.

Bryman, A. (1992). Charisma and leadership in organizations. London: Sage.

Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models(136–162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Burns, James MacGregor (1978) Leadership. NY: Harper & Row, Publishers.

Cardona, F. (2000). Scope of Civil Services in European Countries: Trends and Developments, paper presented at Seminar at the European Institute of Public Administration, Maastricht, 13-14 November 2000, published by SIGMA.

Churchill, G. A., Jr. (1979). A paradigm for developing better measures for marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing Research, 16: 64-73.

Eisenberger, R., Jones, J. R., Aselage, J., & Sucharski, I. L. (2004). Perceived organizational support. In J. A-M. Coyle-Shapiro, L. M. Shore, M. S. Taylor, & L. E. Tetrick (Eds.), The employment relationship: Psychological and contextual perspectives (pp. 206–225). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

Eisenberger, R., Armeli, S., Rexwinkel, B., Lynch, P. D., & Rhoades, L. (2001). Reciprocation of perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86: 42-51.

Eisenberger, R., Cummings, J., Armeli, S., & Lynch, P. (1997). Perceived organizational support, discretionary treatment, and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82: 812-820.

Feinberg, B. J., Ostroff, C., and Burke, W. W. (2005). The role of within-group agreement in understanding transformational leadership. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 78: 471-488.

Frone, M., Yardley, J. K. & Markel, K. S. (1997). Developing and testing an integrative model of the work-family interface. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 50(2): 145-67.

Gellis, Z. D. (2001). Social work perceptions of transformational and transactional leadership in health care. Social Work Research, 25 (1): 17-25.

Gouldner, Alvin W. (1960). The Norm of Reciprocity: A Preliminary Statement. American Sociological Review, 25: 161-178.

Hirsch, E and Emerick, S. et al. (2006). Teaching and Learning Conditions are Critical to the Success of Students and the Retention of Teachers, Final Report on the 2006 Teaching and Learning Conditions Survey to the Clark County School District and Clark County Education Association. Center for Teaching Quality.

Hekman, D. R., Steensma, H. K., Bigley, G. A., Hereford, J. F., (2009). Combined Effects of Organizational and Professional Identification on the Reciprocity Dynamic for Professional Employees. Academy of Management Journal, 52(3): 506-526.

Hoffman, B. J., Blair, C. A., Meriac, J. P., & Woehr, D. J. (2007). Expanding the criterion domain? A quantitative review of the OCB literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92: 555-566.

Humphreys, J., & Einstein, W. (2003). Nothing new under the sun: Transformational leadership from a historical perspective. Management Decision, 41(1), 85-95.

Jöreskog, K. G. (1993). Testing structural equation models. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models(pp. 294−.316). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Jung, D. I and Avolio, B. J. (1999). Effects of leadership style and followers’ cultural orientation on performance in group and individual task conditions. Academy of Management Journal, 41 (2): 208-219.

Kerlinger, F. N., & Lee, H. B. (2000). Foundations of behavioral research (4th ed.). Holt, NY: Harcourt College Publishers.

Kleinman, C. S. (2003). Leadership roles, competencies, and education: how prepared are our nurse managers. Journal of Nursing Administration, 33(9), 451-455.

Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30: 607-610.

Levinson, H. (1965). Reciprocation: The relationship between man and organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 9: 370-390

Malatesta, R. M. (1995). Understanding the dynamics of organizational and supervisory commitment using a social exchange framework. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Wayne State University.

Masterson, S. S. and Stamper, C. L. (2003). Perceived organizational membership: An aggregate framework representing the employee organization relationship. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24: 473-490.

Nicholls, J. (1994). The heart, head and hands of transforming leadership. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 15(6): 8-15.

Nunnally, J. C and Bernstein, I. H. (1994), Psychometric Theory, Third Edition, New York: McGraw-Hill Companies.

Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

Organ, D. W., Podsakoff, P. M., & MacKenzie, S. B. (2005). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature, antecedents and consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Moorman, R. H., & Fetter, R. (1990). Transformational leader behaviors and their effects on followers' trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviors. Leadership Quarterly, 1: 107-142.

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B., & Bachrach, D. G. (2000). Organizational citizenship behaviors: A critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research. Journal of Management, 26: 513-563.

Rafferty, A. E., & Griffin, M. A. (2004). Dimensions of transformational leadership: Conceptual and empirical extensions. Leadership Quarterly, 15: 329-354.

Rhoades, L. & Eisenberger, R. (2002). Perceived organizational support: A review of the literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87: 698-714.

Roth, P. L., & BeVier, C. A. (1998). Response rates in HRM/OB survey research: Norms and correlates, 1990-1994. Journal of Management, 24: 97-117.

Schnake, M., & Dumler, M. P. (2003). Levels of measurement and analysis issues in organizational citizenship behavior research. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 76: 283-301.

Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (1996). A beginner's guide to structural equation modeling. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Settoon, R. P., Bennett, N., & Liden, R. C. (1996). Social exchange in organizations: Perceived organizational support, leader-member exchange, and employee reciprocity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81: 219–227.

Shapiro, C. J., Kessler, I., & Purcell, J. (2004). Exploring organizationally directed citizenship behavior: reciprocity or ‘it’s my job’? Journal of Management Studies, 41(1): 85-106.

Shin, S. J. and Zhou, J. (2003). Transformational leadership, conservation, and creativity: evidence from Korea. Academy of Management Journal, 46(6): 703-714.

Spreitzer, G. M., Perttula, K. H., and Xin, K. (2005). Traditionality matters: an examination of the effectiveness of transformational leadership in the United States and Taiwan. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26: 205-227.

Trautmann, K., Maher, J. K., & Motley, D. G. (2007). Learning strategies as predictors of transformational leadership: the case of nonprofit managers Learning & Organization Development Journal, 28(3): 269-287.

Vera, D., & Crossan, M. (2004). Strategic leadership and organizational learning. Academy of Management Review, 29(2): 222-240.

Wang, H., Law, K. S., Hackett, R. D., Wang, D., & Chen, Z. X. (2005). Leader-member exchange as a mediator of the relationship between transformational leadership and followers' performance and organizational citizenship behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 48(3): 420-432.

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: 601-617.

Yukl, G. A. (2002). Leadership in organizations(6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

박철민(朴喆敏): 경북대학교에서 행정학 박사학위(논문: 공․사조직의 조직몰입 영향변인 및 결과변인 비교, 2002)를 취득하고, (재)부산인적자원개발원 연구위원을 거쳐, 현재 제주산업정보대학 복지행정과 조교수로 재직하고 있다. 주요 관심분야는 조직관리, 인적자원개발, 복지행정 등이며, 주요 논문으로는 "Preferences on the Merit Pay System in the Public Agency"(2010), “The Impact of Eustress and Distress Predictors on the Health of Leaders in Local Government”(2009), “The Effect of Customer Satisfaction on Public Medical Service"(2009) 등이 있다.

<E-mail: cmpark@jeju.ac.kr / 논문접수일: 2011. 07. 14 / 심사개시일: 2011. 07. 25 / 심사완료일: 2011. 08. 17>