Mediation Role of Organizational Citizenship

｢지방정부연구｣ 제16권 제2호(2012 여름) : 269～297

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

Behaviors between Transformational Leadership

and Job Satisfaction of the Follower

* First author

** Corresponding author

변혁적 리더십과 직무만족도간 조직시민행동의 매개효과 분석

Kim, Dae-Won*

Park, Cheol-Min**

조직의 유형에 관계없이 그 발전은 조직 구성원 개인 수준의 성과와 노력에 의존한다는 것은 재론의 여지가 없다. 그 동안 이러한 개인 수준의 성과와 노력에 영향을 미치는 수많은 변인들이 연구되고 검증되어 왔다. 그 중 직무만족은 진부하지만 배제될 수 없는 중요한 영향요인이라는 데에 대해서는 조직 연구자들간에 인식을 공유하고 있다. 따라서 본 연구는 조직의 효과성을 높이기 위해서는 조직 구성원들의 직무만족이 선행되어야 한다는 전제 하에, 이에 영향을 미치는 요인으로 최근 강조되고 있는 변혁적 리더십(transformational leadership)과 구성원들의 조직시민행동(organizational citizenship behaviors)을 선정하여 양자의 영향을 분석하고, 동시에 조직시민행동이 변혁적 리더십과 직무만족(job satisfaction) 사이에서 작용하는 매개역할을 분석하는 데 목적을 둔다. 이를 위해 경상남도 지역에 근무하는 공무원 238명을 대상으로 경험적 자료를 수집하였다. 연구 목적을 달성하기 위해, 먼저, 변혁적 리더십과 이에 의해 영향을 받는 조직구성원의 조직시민행동, 그리고 구성원들의 직무만족에 대한 이론적 논의를 통해 분석의 이론적 근거를 제시하고, 변인들간의 영향관계를 분석할 수 있는 연구가설을 설정한다. 둘째, 실증분석을 위한 자료를 수집하고 경험적으로 검증한다. 검증을 위해서는 Regression Analysis와 Baron and Kenny(1986)가 제시한 Hierarchical regression models 등을 이용하였다. 마지막으로 분석 결과에 근거하여, 효율적인 조직관리를 위한 함의를 제시한다. 분석 결과, 변혁적 리더십과 이의 영향을 받는 구성원들의 조직시민행동은 직무만족에 직접적인 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났으며, 동시에 조직시민행동은 두 변인 사이에서 매개기능을 수행하는 것으로 나타났다. 따라서 이러한 분석결과를 통해, 조직구성원들의 직무만족도를 높이기 위한 방안의 하나로 변혁적 리더십과 조직시민행동의 중요성을 확인하였다.

주제어 : 변혁적 리더십, 직무만족, 조직시민행동, 매개효과

Ⅰ. Introduction

With the competitive perspective of today’s global organizations increasing the complexity and dynamism of competition, organizations seek new ways to gain advantage by promoting a more positive workplace(Rousseau & Batt, 2007; Youssef & Luthans, 2007). This movement suggests that organizations may benefit competitively by helping employees maximize their individual potential and value, as well as maximizing service and performance(Luthans, 2007). One effect of this trend toward workplace positivity has been the identification of personal traits that increase job satisfaction by accentuating well-being and promoting emotional mood. Referring to a “positive(or negative) evaluative judgment one makes about one's job or job situation”(Weiss, 2002: 176), job satisfaction has a rather tenuous correlation to productivity on the job, suggesting then a vital piece of information to researchers and businesses and stimulating them to increase employees' job satisfaction. These trends have increased the importance of Organizational Citizenship Behaviors(OCBs), which is one of the most studied topics in the field of organization, as well as perennial interest to organization researchers and managers alike. Because citizenship behavior is correlated with job satisfaction as a type of performance and a predictor of work behaviors(Borman & Motowidlo, 2005; Organ, 1997; Organ & Ryan, 2004), which is congruent with the notion of Organ's OCBs definition referring to “performance that supports the social and psychological environment in which task performance takes place”(Organ, 1997: 87). Previous studies also suggest that performing OCBs can influence employee attitudes, including job satisfaction(Bolino et al., 2004; Podsakoff et al., 2009; Tepper et al., 2004). As per Organ(1988), team members’ OCBs(leader and followers alike) can directly and positively improve team performance through promoting the effective functioning of the team. Consistent with empirical and theoretical evidence on the reciprocal nature of the job satisfaction–performance relationship(Judge et al., 2007), Bateman and Organ(1993) found evidence of a positive link between job satisfaction and citizenship behavior. Supposed, consequently, that organization members(leader and followers) with the high level of OCBs may be beneficial for an organization through job satisfaction, it is natural for many studies to focus on enhancing higher levels of citizenship behaviors at work(Fassina, Jones, & Uggerslev, 2008; Hoffman, Blair, Meriac, & Woehr, 2007; Podsakoff, Whiting, Podsakoff, & Blume, 2009). Despite, however, a voluminous body of work demonstrating the positive benefits of OCBs on job performance, few studies contribute to understanding the influence of citizenship behavior on employee job satisfaction(Judge et al., 2007) as well as the relationship between OCBs and job satisfaction, which is important because of job satisfaction’s economic implications.

Mediation Role of Organizational Citizenship Behaviors between Transformational Leadership and Job Satisfaction of the Follower

｢지방정부연구｣ 제16권 제2호(2012 여름)

And the current study suggests perceived transformational leadership(TL) as an important factor having a significant influence on the relationship between OCBs and job satisfaction. Affecting expectancies of goal attainment by establishing connections with employees, understanding employees' needs, and helping employees reach their potential, TL is likely expected to play a vital role in enhancing follower's OCBs and job satisfaction relationship. Congruent with Bass(1998), moreover, TL motivates and inspires their followers to go beyond the call of duty so that they are willing to put in extra effort on the job, help their co-workers, and engage in other organizationally beneficial activities, thereby leading to team effectiveness.

Consequently, the purpose of this study is to evaluate the interactive role of follower's OCBs in perceived TL–job satisfaction relationship, focusing on exploring how follower's OCBs relates TL and job satisfaction. More specifically, the current study is going to investigate whether TL affects employees' job satisfaction directly and/or indirectly through follower's OCBs. Because TL may interact with OCBs in bringing about positive job satisfaction, which lead significantly to organization effectiveness and outcomes.

Even though many studies on OCBs have been conducted at the individual level(LePine et al., 2006; Rotundo & Sackett, 2008), there has been less research of follower's citizenship behavior on employees' personal trait such as job satisfaction and organizational commitment(Borman et al., 2005; Organ & Ryan, 2004).

To accomplish this purpose, the study first begins by discussing theory applicable to this relationship through a review of relevant literature on leadership and citizenship behavior and suggests the application of additional theory to inform the relationship between the three concepts. The study then outlines the approach taken in this study, providing research design such as data collection and measuring tools. And presenting the results of the study and discussing the key findings, the study ends with some brief concluding suggestions providing the future study as well as an overview of the study.

Additionally, This study examined previous studies on the job satisfaction published in Korea(see Table 1). These studies are focusing on the relationship between job satisfaction and organizational outcomes such as job stress and organizational commitment. In this respect, this study analyzes the relationship between employees' perception on TL and job satisfaction with OCBs as mediator. This is the difference between our study and various previous studies.

Table 1. Previous Studies and its Variables on Job Satisfaction In Korea

Researchers	Variables Studied and Focused on	Research Objects
Yoon, Ji-Woong․ Kim, Ju-Kyong․ Lee, Jung-Guen(2012)	Rewards, Promotion, Fairness, Workload, Job Difficulty, Age, Grade, Education	Central Public Agency Employees in Technical Posts
Kim, Young-Ho․Ryu, En-Young et al. (2010)	Formalization, Concentration, Complexity	Central Public Agency Employees
Kim, Ju-won․ Ham, Su-Gun.(2008)	Organization Merit Rating, Overwork, Job Culture, Human Relations, Job Difficulty, Job Discretion, Job Anxiety	Local Government Employees
Jang, Chul-Young․Keun, Young-Ju(2006)	Psychological Needs, Safety Needs, Social Needs, Esteem Needs, Self-Actualization Needs	Teachers
Ko, Jong-Wook(2006)	Role Ambiguity, Role Conflict, Organizational Commitment, Job Satisfaction, Organizational Citizenship Behaviors	Local Government Employees
Kim, Gu(2005)	Role Ambiguity, Role Conflict, Role Overload	Policemen
Ock, Won-Ho․ Kim, Seog-Yong(2001)	Role Ambiguity, Role Overload, Human Relations, Job Satisfaction, Organizational Commitment	Local Government Employees

Ⅱ. Theory and Hypotheses

1. Transformational Leadership(TL)

Originally coined by Downton(1973), transformational leadership(TL) was developed as an important approach to leadership by Burns'(1978) work in which leader and followers raise one another to higher levels of morality and motivation. More significantly, TL is based on the connections between leaders and other employees; an effective transformational leader understands the needs and motivations of others and tries to help them reach their full potential(Bass & Avolio, 1994). Consistent with Burns' definition, Dvir et al.(2002: 738) defined it as “influencing followers by broadening and elevating followers' goals and providing them with confidence to perform beyond the expectations specified in the implicit or explicit exchange agreement.” Furthermore, TL is also known to contribute to higher ideals and moral values of followers, as well as motivating their followers to go beyond their own self interests and giving effort on behalf of the organization by appealing to the higher needs of followers(Burns, 1978).

These notions lead easily to our understanding about TL's role in the organization, which confirmed that TL can motivate followers to do more than what is initially expected of them(Conger, Kanungo, & Menon, 2000; Kark, Shamir, & Chen, 2003; Vigoda-Gadot, 2006). Therefore, TL may be particularly important for leading organizations through expressing an optimistic vision of the future and using inspirational communication for positive and encouraging messages. Recently, TL has been intensively studied in the context of extra-role behaviors which are likely to be promoted by transformational leaders who can motivate their followers to perform above and beyond their role description(Rafferty & Griffin, 2004).

These significant role of TL will take concrete shape by four dimensions characterized by Bass and Avolio(1994) : idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual simulation, and individualized consideration, which are usually employed in most studies of TL. These dimensions are considered to affect positively job satisfaction as well as OCBs.

2. Organizational Citizenship Behaviors(OCBs)

Referring to a construct focused on helping in academic literature(Ehrhart & Naumann, 2004), OCBs are often described as individual behavior that lead to improved customer and peer relationships, enhanced teamwork, operational flexibility, and competitiveness(Borman et al., 2005). It is widely believed that OCBs have an important impact on the effectiveness and efficiency of organizations, which are markedly considered as an important avenue for organization people to be willing to go above and beyond their prescribed role requirements. Those employees that demonstrate OCBs are more likely to provide others with assistance in completing work tasks and demonstrate loyalty to work with colleagues. Repeatedly, OCBs represent the willingness of employees to exceed their formal job requirements in order to help each other, to subordinate their individual interests for the good of the organization, and to take a genuine interest in the organization’s activities and overall mission(Bolino, Turnley, & Bloodgood, 2002). More specifically, most OCBs would not make a dent in the overall performance of the organization(Organ, 1988). And the effect will be seen with the aggregate summation of OCBs performed across time and across persons in the group whilst also contributing to its social and psychological environment(Lievens & Ansell, 2004). Empirical and theoretical research demonstrates that OCBs correlate with improvements in organizational performance(Organ et al., 2006; Podsakoff et al., 2000). According to Organ(1988), OCBs support the social or psychological environment in which the work tasks are embedded. And Allen, Barnard, Rush, and Russell(2000) confirmed that OCBs embody the cooperative and constructive gestures that are neither mandated by formal job role prescriptions nor directly or contractually compensated for by the formal organizational reward system. Similarly, Bolino and Turnley(2003) identified it as an organization’s ability to elicit employee behavior that goes beyond the call of duty. Appelbaum et al.(2004) also support those belief by saying that OCBs promote the effective functioning of the organization through discretionary behavior that is not part of an employee’s formal job requirement. As a result, OCBs are expected to support task performance by enhancing a social and psychological work environment by behaviors that go beyond the call of duty and the formal reward system.

And there are as many dimensions of OCBs as scholars have developed a variety of taxonomies to classify these citizenship behaviors(Williams & Anderson, 2001). Although there are a number of ways in which OCBs have been conceptualized over the years( Bateman & Organ, 1993; Organ et al., 2006; Williams & Anderson, 2001), the two most popular conceptualizations are those developed by Organ(1988, 1997) and Williams and Anderson(2001). Organ(1988) firstly identified five dimensions of OCBs considered as the most prevalent taxonomies: altruism, courtesy, sportsmanship, conscientiousness, and civic virtue, who subsequently added two additional factors: peacekeeping and cheerleading(Organ, 1997). The five OCBs dimensions examined by Organ, as per Schnake & Dumler(2003), have been most frequently used in the field of OCBs, which get this study to use Organ's original five dimensions of OCBs. Because Organ's two additional factors - peacekeeping and cheerleading - can be viewed as part of an overall helping dimension, or altruism(Bergeron, 2007; MacKenzie et al., 1991; Podsakoff er al., 1996).

Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine, and Bachrach(2000) identified almost 30 potentially different forms of citizenship behaviors through a meta-analytic study.

3. Job Satisfaction(JS)

Job satisfaction which plays a very important role in enhancing employees' emotional effort for organization performance is the most important and frequently studied attitude in the organizational behaviour field. Because it is a pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job or job experiences(Locke, 1976), as well as a result of employee's perception of how well their job provides those things that are viewed as important. This means that lack of job satisfaction may often lead to lethargy and reduced organizational commitment(Moser, 1997). Of course, there are several related attitudes which are most important characteristics of a job about which people have effective response: the work itself, pay, promotion opportunities, supervision and coworkers. Some researchers tend to agree that satisfaction on a job might be motivated by the nature of the job, its pervasive social climate and extent to which worker's peculiar needs are met(Armentor, Forsyth, 1995, Flanegan, Johnson and Berret, 1996; Kadushin, and Kulys, 1995).

But recently, there is growing tendency that job satisfaction encompasses the importance of affect, feeling, cognition, and thinking. More specifically, mood and emotions originated from psychological needs of people are positively forming the affective element of job satisfaction. As per Weiss (2002) who defined it as “positive(or negative) evaluative judgment one makes about one’s job or job situation”, job satisfaction encompass the objects of cognitive evaluation which are affect(emotion), beliefs and behaviors. This belief leads to taking into account employees' feelings, beliefs, and behaviors when leader develops their attitudes towards jobs. There is some evidence in the literature that moods are related to overall job satisfaction(Brief & Roberson, 1989; Weiss, Nicholas, & Daus, 1999). According to Cote and Morgan's view(2002) taking the social interaction perspective, pleasant emotions engendered from others during interpersonal encounters might positively affect job satisfaction. Fisher(2000) is also in line with the belief by asserting that positive and negative emotions were also found to be significantly related to overall job satisfaction.

4. Hypotheses

1) Transformational Leadership(TL) and Organizational Citizenship Behaviors(OCBs)

Organizations with transformational leadership cultures being better able to adapt to change(Bass and Riggio, 2005), inspire followers to exhibit OCBs. As per Organ(1988), leader can enhance OCBs through a social exchange relationship developed between employees and their supervisors. There has been a growing number of studies that supported empirically positive association between TL and OCBs(Podsakoff et al., 2000; Bolino and Turnley, 2003; Wang, Law and Hackett, 2005). Existing literature suggests that TL is likely to enhance OCBs in followers by spurring team members' extra-role behaviors(Humphreys and Einstein, 2003). According to Avolio(2004), TL positively predicts subordinate extra effort and performance beyond expectations, along with higher levels of commitment, cohesion, potency, identification, trust, and satisfaction.

Furthermore, TL being role models for their followers would themselves exhibit OCBs. Leaders who display TL are likely to be admired and respected because they are likely to be seen as more transformational by their followers. If one assumes that follower's OCBs have an effect on job satisfaction and organizational performance, it makes sense to identify factors that increase these behaviors in organizational settings. Empirically positive association between TL and follower's OCBs - these behaviors are supported by previous literature(Piccolo & Colquitt, 2006; Podsakoff et al., 2009). As per Krishnan(2001), transformational leaders might give greater importance to values pertaining to others than to values concerning only themselves. Similarly, Sosik, Avolio, and Jung(2002) proved that pro-social impression management behavior was positively related to charismatic leadership. Van Knippenberg and Van Knippenberg(2005) also demonstrated that perceived leader charisma was positively affected by leader's self-sacrifice, another pattern of OCBs.

Since TL with the inspirational motivation and individualized consideration etc. is significantly correlated with the ability to monitor and manage emotions in oneself and others, therefore, one can hypothesize the following:

H1a: TL would be positively related to follower's OCB-altruism.

H1b: TL would be positively related to follower's OCB-conscientiousness.

H1c: TL would be positively related to follower's OCB-sportsmanship.

H1d: TL would be positively related tofollower's OCB-courtesy.

H1e: TL would be positively related to follower's OCB-civic virtue.

2) Transformational Leadership(TL) and Job Satisfaction(JS)

Being better able to adapt to change(Bass and Riggio, 2005), TL is needed and it leads to better job performance and greater job satisfaction(Bryman, 1992; Howell and Frost, 1989; Lowe et al., 1996). As previous studies have found(Hater & Bass, 1988; Howell & Frost, 1989; Koh, Steers, & Terborg, 1995; Ross & Offermann, 1997), TL is positively related to job satisfaction due to employees' perceptions of effectiveness of a leader. There is, accordingly, a growing body of literature regarding the potential functional consequences of TL, including increased levels of employees' role in better and more ethical performance(Loke, 2001; McNeese-Smith, 1995; Krairiksh and Anthony, 2001; Wynd, 2003). According to Lowe et al., (1996), components of transformational leadership - vision implementation and communication style - play a significant role in followers' attitudes and performance. Many studies including Fletcher's(2001) are remarking that the opinions of the leader's immediate supervision had more impact on the employee's job satisfaction than overall organization policies or procedures(Friedrich, 2001; Janney, Horstman, & Bane, 2001; Kleinman, 2003). And Everett(1987) also proved the positive role of TL on followers' job satisfaction through an empirical study on the relationship between teacher and their principal in school organizations, concluding that teachers with principals who demonstrated high levels on TL rather than transactional leadership and initiating structure had high job satisfaction scores.

With TL being instrumental for job satisfaction, thus, the following hypotheses will be established:

H2: Employees' perception of leader's TL is positively related to the level of job satisfaction displayed by them.

3) Organizational Citizenship Behaviors(OCBs) and Job Satisfaction(JS)

OCBs, a type of performance, are expected to be related to job satisfaction(Podsakoff et al., 2009; Tepper et al., 2004), leading to organization effectiveness. As per Bergeron(2007), OCBs may contribute to maximizing both job satisfaction and employee effectiveness. Hochwarter et al. (2005) have also noted that because citizenship behaviors have a positive function in terms of goal discrepancy reduction and prosocial success, followers' OCBs may be an indicators of how motivated and satisfied employees are to make the organization effective. In addition, because OCBs are somewhat more volitional than task performance, OCBs are expected to enhance mutual support by helping them and giving psychological trust as well as confidence in their work job, thereby leading them to finally job satisfaction. Therefore, given that job satisfaction is positively affected by organization members(leader and followers) with the high level of OCBs, job satisfaction, an important indicator of how employees feel about their jobs, is likely to be forced to correlate with follower's organizational citizenship(Organ & Ryan, 2004).

Taken together, the above arguments suggest that follower who exhibits higher levels of OCBs may well deservedly play an important role in increasing his/her job satisfaction more than those who exhibit lower levels of OCBs. This inference is congruent with empirical and theoretical evidence on the reciprocal nature of OCBs and job satisfaction. Bateman and Organ(1993) confirmed empirically that there was a positive evidence of relationship between citizenship behavior and job satisfaction. Similarly, Bolino & Turnley(2003) confirmed the correlation between citizenship and job satisfaction by suggesting empirical evidence that citizenship behavior contributes to stress, work-family conflict, work-leisure conflict, and intentions to quit.

In view of the expectation of, consequently, that follower's OCBs would have a positive relationship with the demonstration of job satisfaction in the workplace, it will be logical to anticipate the acceptance of the following hypotheses:

H3a: There will be a statistically significant and positive correlation between OCB-altruism and job satisfaction of the follower.

H3b: There will be a statistically significant and positive correlation between OCB-conscientiousness and job satisfaction of the follower.

H3c: There will be a statistically significant and positive correlation between OCB-sportsmanship and job satisfaction of the follower.

H3d: There will be a statistically significant and positive correlation between OCB-courtesy and job satisfaction of the follower.

H3e: There will be a statistically significant and positive correlation between OCB-civic virtue and job satisfaction of the follower.

4) Mediation Role of OCBs on TL and Job Satisfaction

Based on the above discussion, the study can set up the mediation role of follower's OCBs on TL and job satisfaction. While OCBs are correlated with TL(Hypothesis 1), it is affecting job satisfaction(Hypothesis 3). Taking the two hypotheses together, thus, OCBs are expected to significantly mediate the relationships between perceived TL and followers' job satisfaction, leading to establishing the following hypotheses:

H4a: OCB-altruism is likely to mediate the relationship between TL and followers' job satisfaction.

H4b: OCB-conscientiousness is likely to mediate the relationship between TL and followers' job satisfaction.

H4c: OCB-sportsmanship is likely to mediate the relationship between TL and followers' job satisfaction.

H4d: OCB-courtesy is likely to mediate the relationship between TL and followers' job satisfaction.

H4e: OCB-civic virtue is likely to mediate the relationship between TL and followers' job satisfaction.

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

TL

JS

OCB

Figure 1. Hypothesized Analysis Model

III. Methodology

1. Participants and Procedures

Participants in the study were 238 employees working in local government in Kyungnam Province of Korea, who received a single survey containing questions concerning perceived TL, OCBs and job satisfaction. Because the sample size is over Krejcie & Morgan’s(1970) recommendation for reasonable, the targeted population's number is considered to be logical for appraising the results of the study. A total of 65% response were received. Finally, 63% of the response were found to be useable.

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, for which the study employed self-reports known to get accurate information about internal states such as attitudes or emotions than any other method(Spector, 2006). Of course, self-reported responses tools are likely to be fallen into common method variance(Podsakoff et al., 2003). Therefore, the studies should try to reduce common method effects for collecting the correct data. The current study employed a few respondents to review and recommend changes to the questionnaire prior to issuance to reduce ambiguity of the question phrasing. Also, the questionnaire included a few reversed scored items to hinder rater tendencies from falling into patterned responses which are strongly regarded as an provoker of common method effects.

According to Podsakoff et al.(2003), the arrangement and format of questions on a questionnaire might induce common method effects when questionnaires include ambiguous questions requiring appraiser interpretations or use similar scaling anchors.

There were questions about the participants' socio-demographic characteristics(e.g., gender, age, and years of career experience). The respondents were predominately male(88.2%) with an average age of 38.5 years and an average work experience of 14.8 years, holding their current position for 3.7 years on an average. 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(gender, age, and years of career experience), 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. Further information on the demographic characteristics is as displayed in Table 2.

Table 2. Participants' Demographic Characteristics

Items		Frequency	Percentage
Gender	Male	210	88.2
	Female	28	11.8
Age	25 Year Old or Fewer	17	7.0
	26-35	37	15.5
	36-45	44	18.6
	46-55	78	32.7
	56 and Above years	62	26.2
Years of Career Experience	Five Years or Fewer	13	5.6
	6 to 10 Years	43	17.9
	11 to 15 Years	59	24.9
	16 to 20 Years	65	27.5
	21 to 25 Years	32	13.1
	26 Years or More	26	11.0
Total		238	100

2. Measures

1) Transformational Leadership(TL)

To assess the employees' perception on TL behaviors, the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire's(MLQ; Bass & Avolio, 1995) TL components was used. This scale was designed to measure six key dimensions of TL identified in the research literature. Participants rated to what extent they performed the behaviors described by the scale items during the past three weeks. Higher scores indicate more transformational leadership behavior. The questions are included as follows; ⅰ) “My leader provides a good model for follow(TL1),” ⅱ) “My leader paints an interesting picture of the future for our practice area(TL2),” ⅲ) “My leader shows us that he/she expects a lot from us(TL3),” ⅳ) “My leader fosters collaboration among work groups(TL4),” ⅴ) “My leader shows respect from my personal feelings(TL5),” ⅵ) “My leader has provided me with new ways of looking at problems which used to puzzle me(TL6).” The questionnaire uses a seven point Likert-type scale with two differently phrased anchors. Never (1) and always (7) anchored the TL scales. Strongly disagree (1) and strongly agree (7) anchored the other scales. Each scale used a numeric value of four as the neutral rating. The scales have evidence of convergent and discriminant validity and had internal reliability, as assessed by Cronbach's alpha, of 0.89.

2) Organizational Citizenship Behaviors(OCBs)

Of a variety of measures and scales developed since Organ'(1988) definition, the current study used Mackenzie et al.,(1991) scale for measuring the OCBs exhibited by the follower(alpha = .84). The item scales refer to five types of OCBs: altruism, conscientiousness. sportsmanship, courtesy, and civic virtue. The scales are as follows;  Altruism - ⅰ) “Helps others who have been absent(OCB-alt1)” ⅱ) “Helps others who have heavy workloads(OCB-alt2)” ⅲ) “Assists colleagues with his/her work when not asked(OCB-alt3)”, Conscientiousness - ⅰ) “Attendance at work is above the norm(OCB-con1)” ⅱ) “Conserves and protects organizational property(OCB-con2)” ⅲ) “Adheres to informal rules devised to maintain order(OCB-con3)”, Sportsmanship - ⅰ) “Complaining of trivial problem he/she had received(R, OCB-spt1)” ⅱ) “Exaggeration of trivial problem(R, OCB-spt2)” ⅲ) “Attach weight to negative aspects(R, OCB-spt3)”, Courtesy - ⅰ) “Consult matters with will-be influenced persons in that matters(OCB-cot1)” ⅱ) “Take preventive actions against foreseeing problems(OCB-cot2)” ⅲ) “Notice before doing(OCB-cot3)”, Civic virtue - ⅰ) “Boast of merits in his/her organization(OCB-civ1)” ⅱ) “Attending important meeting actively(OCB-civ2)” ⅲ) “Understanding visions and policies of organization(OCB-civ3)”.

Items were rated on a seven-point Likert-type scale from 1=strongly agree, to 7= strongly disagree. Higher scores reflected higher levels of OCBs. The Cronbach's alpha estimates for these measures were moderate(α=from 0.82 to 0.92 except for civic virtue).

3) Job Satisfaction(JS)

The job satisfaction was measured with 5 items which were adapted from Brayfield and Rothe’s(1951) index. Items are: ⅰ) “Each day of work seems like it will never end”(R, JS-1), “Most days I am enthusiastic about my work(JS-2),” “I feel real enjoyment in my work(JS-3),” “I consider my job to be rather unpleasant”(R, JS-4), and “I feel fairly satisfied with my job(JS-5).” Participants responded to each item using a five-point scale (1= very dissatisfied, 2= slightly dissatisfied, 3= neutral, 4= slightly satisfied, and 5= very satisfied). Cronbach’s alpha was used to assess internal consistency and was found to be in the acceptable range(.90).

3. Analysis Methods

The study uses the Cronbach alpha test to assess the reliability and internal consistency of the data, and three regression models suggested by Baron and Kenny(1986) for mediation analysis of OCBs on the relationship between perceived TL and followers' job satisfaction.

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(perceived TL and OCBs) and dependent variable(job satisfaction). Therefore, the current study is expected to be of any practical use without analysis of these demographic factors and personal questions.

Ⅳ. Findings

1. Reliability

1) Internal Consistency Reliability

Coefficient α or Cronbach’s alpha is widely used because of providing a good reliability estimate in most situations, which inspired this study to use the method for testing internal consistency. The coefficient alphas for the different constructs computed by statistical software 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.

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

Variables	M	SD	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
Gender	1.26	.73
Age	38.5	.82	.19
Tenure	14.8	.45	.14	.14
TL	4.54	.39	.15	.13	.21	(.89)
OCB-alt	5.32	1.13	.16	.11	.20	.54**	(.92)
OCB-con	5.26	1.01	.18	.19	.24*	.51**	.63**	(.86)
OCB-spt	5.18	.81	.20	.16	.21	.59**	.74**	.66**	(.82)
OCB-cot	5.29	1.12	.16	.11	.20	.58**	.76**	.71**	.68**	(.83)
OCB-civ	5.12	.98	.23	.16	.15	.19	.29*	.25*	.29**	.24**	(.34)
JS	3.67	.85	.16	.13	.20	.63**	.76**	.71**	.71**	.72**	.21	(.90)

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

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

2. TL=transformational leadership, OCB-alt=altruism, OCB-con=conscientiousness,

OCB-spt=sportsmanship, OCB-cot=courtesy, OCB-civ=civic virtue, and JS=job satisfaction

As shown above, all three scales were found to be highly reliable: .93(TL scale), over .82(OCBs scale excluding civic virtue), and .90(JS scale). After the reliabilities were confirmed, the correlation between job satisfaction and the complete scale of OCBs and TL were calculated. In light of the guidelines(r value of ≥ .20) offered by Kerlinger and Lee(2000), the significant relationship between the variables was definitely accepted. More specifically, TL is positively correlated with OCBs as well as job satisfaction of the followers, which suggests a convergent validity. Also, TL is significantly and positively correlated with OCBs and both of its components(altruism, conscientiousness, sportsmanship, and courtesy). And OCBs are also correlated significantly with job satisfaction, suggesting a possible interaction effects. But OCB-civ was not found to be significantly correlated with TL and JS, thereby not supporting hypothesis 1e and 3e concerned with the positive relationship on OCB-civ on TL and job satisfaction.

2) Factor Analysis

Factor analysis was also employed for the purpose of estimating construct validity(Kline, 2005) considered as an avenue to figure out whether the results of the study is reliable and predictable. Usually principal component analysis(PCA) is used for the elimination of the overlapping items. The following Table 3 represents the reliabilities of the items for the analyses of the relationship between TL, OCBs, and job satisfaction. Except for OCB-civ(AVE is under .55), AVEs of other variables are all in excess of .55(considered good by Tabachnick and Fidell, 2001), signifying that these factors are reliable for the empirical analysis of the relationship between study variables.

Table 4. SMC and AVE of Variables

Variables			SMC (Square Multiple Correlation)	Items	AVE (Average Variance Extracted )
TL	Transformational Leadership	TL1 TL2 TL3 TL4 TL5 TL6	.744 .761 .749 .725 .738 .733	6	.574
OCBs	Altruism Conscientiousness Sportsmanship Courtesy Civic Virtue	OCB-alt1 OCB-alt2 OCB-alt3	.717 .743 .728	3	.598
		OCB-con1 OCB-con2 OCB-con3	.733 .763 .741	3	.622
		OCB-spt1 OCB-spt2 OCB-spt3	.725 .738 .733	3	.673
		OCB-cot1 OCB-cot2 OCB-cot3	.726 .745 .779	3	.615
		OCB-civ1 OCB-civ2 OCB-civ3	.535 .437 .446	3	.484
JS	Job Satisfaction	JS-1 JS-2 JS-3 JS-4 JS-5	.742 .763 .712 .759 .773	5	.647

Note: TL=transformational leadership, OCB-alt=altruism, OCB-con=conscientiousness,

OCB-spt=sportsmanship, OCB-cot=courtesy, OCB-civ=civic virtue, JS=job satisfaction

3) Overall Model Fit Analysis

Additionally, consistent with Kline(2005), the study assessed model fit to conform whether the model proposed is a good fit, using the model chi square, RMSEA, the Bentler comparative fit index(CFI), GFI, and NFI etc. It has been known that the more indices the study use, the better reliability the study will have. Applying commonly used threshold values (RMSEA ≥ .08, GFI, NFI and CFI ≤ .90) as indicative of poor fit, the tests was proved to conform to the criterion suggested by researchers(Schumacker & Lomax, 1996; Joreskog & Sorbom, 1996; Bentler, 1995) as follows: GFI= .914, NFI= .932, CFI= .975, and RMSEA= .02. Therefore, the model proposed in this study must be expected to moderate for testing the hypotheses suggested in the literature review.

The Comparative Fit Index is a recommended index of overall fit, Goodness of Fit Index measures the fitness of a model compare to another model(Bentler, 1995), Normed Fit Index measures the proportion by which a model improves fit compared to null model(Bentler, 1995), and the latter provides  information in terms of discrepancy per degree of freedom for a model(Kline, 2005).

2. Hypotheses Testing

As seen in Table 3 presenting the correlation matrix of the measures, followers's job satisfaction is related positively to transformational behaviors(correlation was 0.63) and  OCBs(correlation was 0.71-.76 excepting OCB-civ).

These intercorrelation among study variables reveals a properly strong correlation between TL and OCBs(r > .50, excepting OCB-civ), as well as showing the significantly moderate relationship between TL and followers' job satisfaction. This findings signifies that high levels of TL would be associated with greater increases in OCBs and greater increases in followers' job satisfaction, thereby supporting the hypotheses established above are reasonable and expected to contribute to significant conclusions. More detailed reports will be presented below.

1) Regression Analysis for the Effect of TL and OCBs on JS

As discussed above, the Pearson correlation between research variables has supported the basic premise that both TL & OCBs are related to followers' job satisfaction. Multiple regression analysis was employed to test the hypotheses regarding the relationship between TL, OCBs, and followers' job satisfaction.

Four out of five OCBs as dependent variables were firstly regressed on TL as independent variables, followed then by the regression of followers' job satisfaction on four OCBs as independent variables. Civic virtue is not taken into consideration as the reliability of the scale was found to be very low. Table 5 shows the results of regression analysis, reporting that TL & OCBs are all significant predictors of followers' job satisfaction.

Table 5. Results of Regression Analysis

Sources	TL					O-Alt	O-con	O-spt	O-cot
	O-Alt	O-con	O-spt	O-cot	JS	JS
β	.261	.232	.228	.213	.315	.298	.265	.236	.238
t	2.79**	2.48**	2.36**	2.28*	2.91**	3.14**	2.84***	2.57**	2.80**
R2	.549	.533	.516	.511	.617	.794	.765	.743	.745
Adjusted R2	.584	.572	.548	.539	.647	.873	.891	.847	.891
Model F	7.79***	7.35***	7.17***	7.29***	8.69***	8.28***	7.76***	7.37***	7.46***

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

Note: TL=transformational leadership, O-alt=altruism, O-con=conscientiousness,

O-spt=sportsmanship, O-cot=courtesy, JS=job satisfaction

TL is proved to significantly affect four OCBs(excluding civic virtue) which are closely related to job satisfaction, which means that TL is significant predictors of OCBs when five OCBs(altruism, conscientiousness, sportsmanship, and courtesy) was regressed on TL. Therefore, the study confirms that TL perceived by followers would induce a significant and positive effect on OCBs, verifying that Hypotheses(H1a to H1d) concerning the effect of the employees’ perception of their supervisor as transformational leader on OCBs are positively supported separately.

And TL is also certified to pivotally affect on job satisfaction(β = .315, R2 = .617, p < .001). Therefore, it was found that employees motivated by leader or manager with TL would increase their job satisfaction which must be known to lead to organization effectiveness, testing that H2 regarding the effect of TL on job satisfaction is significantly supported.

Besides, OCBs(excepting OCB-civic virtue) are similarly demonstrated to influentially affect followers' job satisfaction. Altruism, conscientiousness, sportsmanship and courtesy of four OCBs are significant predictors of followers' job satisfaction, when follwers' job satisfaction was regressed on OCBs(altruism, conscientiousness, sportsmanship, and courtesy). The result certifies that OCBs would improve followers' job satisfaction, proving that Hypotheses(H3a to H3d) with respect to the effect of OCBs on followers' job satisfaction are explicitly supported each.

2) Mediating Effects of OCBs between TL and Job Satisfaction

The hypothesized role of OCBs as mediators between TL and job satisfaction was tested by Baron and Kenny’s(1986) three 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. Three regression equations were used to test the hypothesized role of OCBs as a mediator between perceived TL and followers's job satisfaction. OCBs were firstly regressed on TL, followed by job satisfaction regressed on TL. And job satisfaction was finally regressed on both TL and OCBs. The following table presents the regression coefficients of effect of four OCBs on perceived leaders' TL and employee's job satisfaction. Applying the methodology outlined by Baron and Kenny(1986), coefficients between job satisfaction, OCB, and TL satisfied the first two of Baron and Kenny's requirements.

First, the independent variable(TL) must be significantly related to the proposed mediator(OCB). Second, the independent variable(TL) and the proposed mediator(OCB) must each be significantly related to the dependent variable(JS). 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.

Multiple regression analysis confirmed the third Baron and Kenny requirement for mediation, as the standardized beta weight of TL(β = .25, p < .001) reduced to significant(β = .12, p < .05) when OCB-alt was entered into the regression equation with JS as the dependent variable. Therefore, OCB-alt partially mediated the effects of TL on job satisfaction(the β reduces from .25, p < .001 to .12, p < .05), proving Hypothesis 4a.

In addition, mediation, as the standardized beta weight of TL(β = .28, p < .001) reduced to significant(β = .11, p < .05) when OCB-con was entered into the regression equation with JS as the dependent variable. Therefore, OCB-con partially mediated the effects of TL on job satisfaction(the β reduces from .28, p < .001 to .11, p < .05), proving Hypothesis 4b.

The same procedures on the other components of OCBs indicate as follows: mediation, as the standardized beta weight of TL(β = .27, p < .001) reduced to significant(β = .11, p < .05) when OCB-spt was entered into the regression equation with JS as the dependent variable. Therefore, OCB-spt partially mediated the effects of TL on job satisfaction(the β reduces from .27, p < .001 to .11, p < .05), proving Hypothesis 4c.

Lastly, mediation, as the standardized beta weight of TL(β = .25, p < .001) reduced to significant(β = .10, p < .05) when OCB-cot was entered into the regression equation with JS as the dependent variable. Therefore, OCB-cot partially mediated the effects of TL on job satisfaction(the β reduces from .25, p < .001 to .10, p < .05), proving Hypothesis 4d.

As a results, these results certifies that four components of OCBs partially mediated the relationships between TL and followers' JS respectively, verifying Hypotheses 4a, 4b, 4c, and 4d.

In the pre-test analysis, control variables(gender, age, and tenure with the organization) were not found to make significant contribution to the variance in job satisfaction as well as both TL and OCBs(R2=.07, F=1.28, P>.05). The current study excluded the effects of control variables.

Table 6. Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Mediation of OCBs as Mediator

Sources	O-alt	JS		O-con	JS		O-spt	JS		O-cot	JS
	1st equation	2nd equation	3rd equation	1st equation	2nd equation	3rd equation	1st equation	2nd equation	3rd equation	1st equation	2nd equation	3rd equation
	β	β	β	β	β	β	β	β	β	β	β	β
TL	.35(.33)**	.25(.24)**		.33(.31)**	.28(.29)**		.33(.31)**	.27(.29)**		.32(.30)**	.25(.23)**
TL			.12(.10)*			.11(.08)*			.11(.09)*			.10(.08)*
OCBs			.38(.37)**			.36(.34)**			.35(.34)**			.33(.31)**
△R2			.398			.379			.362			.359
R2	.24	.27	.35	.18	.19	.27	.19	.21	.36	.18	.17	.32
F	5.23	7.26	11.41	5.23	6.75	9.37	5.36	8.37	9.33	5.17	6.21	9.24

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

Note: 1. Unstandardized coefficients with SE are in parentheses.

2. TL=transformational leadership, O-alt=altruism, O-con=conscientiousness,

O-spt=sportsmanship,  O-cot=courtesy, JS=job satisfaction

Ⅴ. Discussion

Exploring the relationship between transformational leadership and followers' job satisfaction with OCBs as a moderator, the current study's results lead to many implications. The findings certifies that both perceived TL and the OCBs were directly and positively related to the followers' job satisfaction, insinuating that true transformational leaders are expected to get followers inspired through understanding followers' physical and emotional needs and then lead to enhancing job satisfaction, thereby elevating performance to higher levels of accomplishment. Because transformational leadership, as per Bass et al.(2003), is essentially leadership that sets high expectations, focuses on higher order of follower's needs, and generates a greater willingness to adopt challenging goals, thereby increasing follower's motivation.

Second, more importantly, OCBs were related closely to followers' job satisfaction, as well as mediated the relationships between TL and followers' job satisfaction. The results indicate that OCBs are important components for establishing a satisfactory workplace. Because OCBs inculcated by TL may be expected to induce desirable responses in others by using effective skill to persuade, communicate, and nurture instrumental relationships, leading to work with others toward a shared goal(Bliss, 2004). It is also because that OCBs are more likely to inspire followers to exhibit courteous and sporting behaviors like respecting other people's rights to shared resources. Thus, OCBs would be crucial in convincing, communicating, encouraging, and raising job satisfaction of the follower, leading them to the more effectiveness of organization, inculcating OCBs in the followers. This signifies that team members’ OCBs perceptions may be an important variable in understanding the influence of leadership within teams and how it relates to job-relevant outcomes(Feinberg et al., 2005; Hooper & Martin, 2008; Liden, Erdogan, Wayne, & Sparrowe, 2006). These findings are congruent with the results of previous studies(Piccolo & Colquitt, 2006; Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine, & Bachrach, 2000; Bliese & Britt, 2001; Boies & Howell, 2006; Cole & Bedeian, 2007; Hooper & Martin, 2008). As per Newman et al.(2008), high levels of sharing in members’ leadership perceptions contribute to a shared reality and an increased likelihood of understandings among and between team members. Considering the impact of one's actions on others, not complaining about trivial matters, OCBs enhanced by TL are able to monitor his or her own behavior and understand those of the followers, thus enhancing followers' job satisfaction as well as the extra role behavior of the members of the organization.

Congruent with the results of other studies(Liden, Erdogan, Wayne, & Sparrowe, 2006; Piccolo & Colquitt, 2006; Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine, & Bachrach, 2000), the current study have examined whether targeting the sources of TL and OCBs proposed by Bass and Avolio(2004) and Organ(1988) induces significantly positive change in followers' job satisfaction. As well as having implications for transformational leadership development, the findings suggest a promising avenue of research exploring OCBs to enhance other organizational outcomes through increasing followers' job satisfaction.

Furthermore, the results of this study appear to contribute to the practical management. The obvious implication of this study is that managers should try to exhibit their OCBs for followers' job satisfaction, which then motivates employees to enhance OCBs at individual level and contribute to team outcomes. This would suggest that OCBs create a work environment that encourages employees to exhibit employee attitudes such as job satisfaction and organizational commitment, inducing a desirable and meaningful way to team effectiveness(Podsakoff et al., 2009).

Ⅵ. Conclusions

The results of the current study confirm that the joint effects of transformational leadership and OCBs have significant relationships with followers' job satisfaction. The results are also expected to contribute to transformational leadership theory by illustrating how and under what conditions transformational leadership has an impact on job satisfaction, suggesting that future research should be aimed at increasing our understanding of the theoretical mechanisms that explain these relationships.

There are several avenues that should be addressed in afterward research. First of all, it is necessary to develop a much better understanding of the mechanisms that OCBs are closely related to followers' job satisfaction as well as individual-level outcomes, such as employee turnover and absenteeism. Although there have been a fair number of studies that have examined the relationships between OCBs and followers' job satisfaction, little research has been conducted to identify the potential role of OCBs and its mediation between transformational leadership and followers' job satisfaction. Congruent with the tenets of social exchange theory(Blau, 1964) which explains social change and stability as a process of negotiated exchanges between parties such as leader and followers, the results demonstrate that OCBs, a dispositional personality trait affecting positively emotional influence to members, moderates the TL–job satisfaction relationship. These findings also support the role of leadership and OCBs for the positive organizational effectiveness in shaping employee attitudes such as job satisfaction, reporting that leadership and OCBs play an important role shaping employee attitudes such as job satisfaction.

Most importantly, this investigation is the first to highlight the contextual OCBs–job satisfaction relationship. The current study has found a significantly positive relationship between OCBs and job satisfaction for optimistic individuals, confirming that followers' job satisfaction continued to increase at consistent levels as long as they feel the additional performance of OCBs perception, as well as leading to the conclusion that further increases in OCBs were associated with increases in followers' job satisfaction.

Empirically confirming how members who are high on conscientious, sporting, and emotionally helpful to their colleges are likely to be beneficial to increasing followers' job satisfaction affecting directly team performance, the current study suggests that TL and OCBs are very important components for enhancing followers' job satisfaction, as well as being expected to extend a recent dialogue concerning the role of member's citizenship behavior on employee outcomes.

Despite contributing to the quality of this study, the present investigation design has some limitations, like any other study, that should be noted. One limitation is that in spite of including demographic characters such as gender, age, and organizational tenure, the nature of the work itself(job characteristics like autonomy, feedback, and task significance) and pay were not included. The further research thus should also include those factors which tend to be important predictors of job satisfaction. Second, this cross-sectional design does not allow drawing any conclusions about the causality of the discovered relations. Given that a longitudinal design for measuring variables at different times over an extended period of time would have been more revealing than a cross-sectional study, it is worthwhile to apply this method to the future study. Another limitation concerns the reliance on self-report data, which is related to common method bias which may lead to percept-percept inflation. However, supposing that self-report OCBs data is preferable to other-report OCBs data when dealing with individual perceptions, dispositions, and cognitions(Pond, Nacoste, Mohr, & Rodriguez, 1997), the problem on self-report data is not longer expect to deteriorate the results of the current study. Because self-report data lessens the effects of social desirability bias by and toward other raters. The expectation is additionally supported by recent study arguing that individuals are able to provide reasonable self-ratings of OCBs(Ilies, Fulmer, Spitzmuller, & Johnson, 2009).

But much work remains, however, in identifying other important outcomes that may be impacted by transformational behavior and OCBs. It is thus hoped that future research focus more attention on the reasons why followers' job satisfaction is associated with teams’ perceptions of transformational leadership behavior and OCBs, as well as focusing on exploring the antecedents and outcomes of OCBs.

Empirically analyzing the relationship between employees' perception on TL and job satisfaction with OCBs as mediator, the current study focuses on the role of TL as well as OCBs in public agency of Korea.

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

And OCBs has proved to be able to mediate between perceived TL and job satisfaction of followers. It appears that OCBs plays a practically more important role in mediating the effects of TL on job satisfaction. More specifically, a good perception on OCBs is expected to be a significant mediator in affecting the relationships between the two constructs. Because OCBs 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.

Futhermore, TL as well as OCBS such as altruism, conscientiousness, sportsmanship, courtesy, civic virtue had significant effects on job satisfaction of public employees. These results suggest that public agency should develop work environments that foster mutually trustworthy relationships with supervisors, perhaps through better communications and employee empowerment.

From above results, we can presume that for promoting public employees' job satisfaction, the rigid bureaucratic rules and procedures have to be simplified, their job have to be redesigned to have more autonomy, mutually trustworthy relationships and communication between supervisors and employees are strongly recommended in public agency of Korea.

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 mediator.

References

Allen, T. D., Barnard, S. M., Rush, M. C., & Russell, J. E. A. (2000). Ratings of organizational citizenship behavior: Does the source make a difference? Human Resource Management Review, 10(1): 97-114.

Appelbaum, S., Bartolomucci, N., Beaumier, E., Boulanger, J., Corrigan, R., Dore, I., Girard, C., & Serroni, C. (2004). Organizational citizenship behavior: A case study of culture, leadership and trust. Management Decision, 42(1): 13-40.

Armentor, J., & Forsyth, C. J. (1995). Determinants of job satisfaction among social workers. International Review of Modern Sociology, 25(20): 51- 63.

Avolio, B. J. (2004). Transformational and transactional leadership. In G. R. Goethals, G. J. Sorenson, & J. M. Burns (Eds.). Encyclopedia of leadership(pp.1558-1566). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychology research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical consideration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6): 1173-1182.

Bass, B. M. (1998). Transformational leadership: Industry, military and educational impact. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.

Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1994). Improving organizational effectiveness through transformational leadership. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, .

Bass, B. M., & Riggio, R. E. (2005). Transformational leadership. Lawrence Erlbaum, New York, NY.

Bass, B. M., Avolio, B. J., Jung, D. I., & Berson, Y. (2003). Predicting unit performance by assessing transformational and transactional leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88: 207–218.

Bateman, T. S., & Organ, D. W. (1993). Job satisfaction and the good soldier: the relationship between affect and employee "citizenship". Academy of Management Journal, 26: 587-595.

Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1995). Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Redwood City, CA: Mind Garden. Bass, B. M. (1998). Transformational leadership: Industry, military, and educational Impact. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Bentler, P. M. (1995). EQS structural equations program manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.

Bergeron, D. (2007). The potential paradox of organizational citizenship behavior: Good citizens at what cost? Academy of Management Review, 32: 1078-1095.

Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: John Wiley.

Bliss, E. (2004). The affect of emotional intelligence on a modern organizational leader's ability to make effective decisions. Unpublished manuscript.

Bliese, P. D., & Britt, T. W. (2001). Social support, group consensus and stressor-strain relationships: Social context matters. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22: 425–436.

Boies, K., & Howell, J. M. (2006). Leader-member exchange in teams: An examination of the interaction between relationship differentiation and mean LMX in explaining team-level outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 17: 246–257.

Bolino, M. C., Turnley, W. H., & Niehoff, B. P. (2004). The other side of the story: Reexamining prevailing assumptions about organizational citizenship behavior. Human Resource Management Review, 14: 229-246.

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

Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. J. (2005). Task performance and contextual performance: The meaning for personnel selection research. Human Performance, 10: 99-109.

Brayfield, A., & Rothe, H. (1951). An index of job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 35: 307-311.

Brief, A, P., & Roberson, L. (1989). Job attitude organization: an exploratory study. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 19: 717-727.

Bryman, A. (1992). Charisma and Leadership in Organizations. Sage, London.

Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.

Cole, M. S., & Bedeian, A. G. (2007). Leadership consensus as a cross-level contextual moderator of the emotional exhaustion–work commitment relationship. The Leadership Quarterly, 18: 447–462.

Conger, J. A., Kanungo, R. N., & Menon, S. T. (2000). Charismatic leadership and follower effects. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21: 747–767.

Cote S., & Morgan, L. M. (2002). A longitudinal analysis of the association between emotion regulation, job satisfaction, and intentions to quit. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23: 947–962.

Downton, J. V. (1973). Rebel leadership: Commitment and charisma in a revolutionary process. New York: Free Press.

Dvir, T., Eden, D., Avolio, B. J., & Shamir, B. (2002). Impact of transformational leadership on follower development and performance: A field experiment. Academy of Management Journal, 45: 735–744.

Ehrhart, M. G., & Naumann, S. E. (2004). Organizational citizenship behavior in work groups: A group norms approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89: 960-974.

Everett, G. (1987). A study of the relationship between principal's leadership style and the level of motivation of the teaching staff. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Tennessee State University.

Fassina, N. E., Jones, D. A., & Uggerslev, K. L. (2008). Relationship clean-up time: Using meta-analysis and path analysis to clarify relationships among job satisfaction, perceived fairness, and citizenship behaviors. Journal of Management, 34: 161-188.

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

Fisher, D. (2000). Mood and emotions while working: missing pieces of job satisfaction? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21: 185-202.

Flanegan, T. J., Johnson, W. W. & Berret, K. (1996). Job satisfaction among correction executives: A contemporary portrait of warders of state prisons of adults. Prison Journal, 76(4): 385-397.

Fletcher, C. E. (2001). Hospital RNs’ job satisfactions and dissatisfactions. Journal of Nursing Administration, 31(6): 324-331.

Friedrich, B. (2001). Staying power: first-line mangers keep nurses satisfied with their job. Nursing Management, 32(7): 26-28.

Hater, J. J., & Bass, B. M. (1988). Superiors' evaluations and subordinates' perceptions of transformational and transactional leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73: 692-702.

Hochwarter, W. A., Perrewé, P. L., Hall, A. T., & Ferris, G. R. (2005). Negative affectivity as a moderator of the form and magnitude of the relationship between felt accountability and job tension. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26: 517-534.

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.

Howell, J. M., & Frost, P. J. (1989). A laboratory study of charismatic leadership. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 43: 243-69.

Hooper, D. & Martin, R. (2008). Beyond personal Leader-Member Exchange(LMX) quality: The effects of perceived LMX variability on employee reactions. The Leadership Quarterly, 19: 20–30.

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

Ilies, R., Fulmer, I. S., Spitzmuller, M., & Johnson, M. D. (2009). Personality and citizenship behavior: The mediating role of job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94: 945-959.

Jang, Chul-Young․Keun, Young-Ju. (2006). The moderating effect of social support on job stress. Korean Society and Public Administration, 17(3), 157-180.

Janney, M., Horstman, P., & Bane, D. (2001). Promotion registered nurse retention through shared decision making. Journal of Nursing Administration, 31(10): 483-488.

Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1996). LISREL 8 user's reference guide. Chicago: Scientific Software.

Judge, T. A., & Bono, J. E. (2007). Relationship of core self-evaluation traits – self-esteem, generalized self-efficacy, locus of control, and emotional stability – with job satisfaction and job performance: a meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86: 80-92.

Kadushin, G., & Kullys, R. (1995). Job satisfaction among social work discharge planners. Health and Social Work, 20(3): 174-186.

Kark, R., Shamir, B., & Chen, G. (2003). The two faces of transformational leadership: Empowerment and dependency. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88: 246–255.

Kerlinger, F. N. & Lee, H. B. (2000). Foundations of behavioral research(4th ed.). Stamford, CT: Wadsworth-Thomson.

Kim, Gu. (2005). The effect of job stress factors on job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Korean Society and Public Administration, 16(3), 59-87.

Kim, Ju-Won․Ham, Su-Won. (2008). An analysis on the job stress factor and method for its release. Korean Public Personnel Administration Review, 6(1), 131-61.

Ko, Jong-Wook. (2006). The moderating role of organizational commitment in job stress-outcome relationship among local public officials. Korean Public Administration Review, 40(2), 147-66.

Kim, Young-Ho et al. (2010). The relationship among organizational structure, organizational commitment and job satisfaction of central public agency of Korea. Journal of Korean Association for Policy Sciences. 14(4): 75-98.

Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practices of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Press.

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

Krishnan, V. R. (2001). Value systems of transformational leaders. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 22: 126-132.

Koh, W. L., Steers, R. M., & Terborg, J. R. (1995). The effects of transformational leadership on teacher attitudes and student performance in Singapore. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 16: 319-333.

Krairiksh, M., & Anthony, M. (2001). Benefits and outcomes of staff nurses’ perception in decision making. Journal of Nursing Administration, 31(1): 16-23.

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

LePine, J. A., Erez, A., & Johnson, D. E. (2006). The nature and dimensionality of organizational citizenship behavior: A critical review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87: 52-65.

Liden, R. C., Erdogan, B., Wayne, S. J., Sparrowe, R. T. (2006). Leader-member exchange, differentiation, and task interdependence: Implications for individual and group performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27: 1–24.

Lievens, F., & Ansell, F. (2004). Confirmatory factor analysis and invariance of an organisational citizenship behaviour measure across samples in a Dutch-speaking context. Journal of Organisational Psychology, 77: 299-306.

Locke, E. A. (1976). Job satisfaction and job performance: A theoretical analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 5: 484-500.

Loke, J. C. (2001). Leadership behaviors: effects on job satisfaction, productivity and organizational commitment. Journal of Nursing Management, 9(4): 191-204.

Lowe, K. B., Kroeck, K. G., & Sivasubramaniam, N. (1996). Effectiveness correlates of transformational and transactional leadership: a meta-analytic review of the MLQ literature. Leadership Quarterly, 7: 385-425.

Luthans, F. (2007). The need for and meaning of positive organizational behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23: 695-706.

Mackenzie, S. B., Podsakoff, P. M., & Fetter R. (1991). Organizational citizenship behavior and objective productivity as determinants of managerial evaluations of salesperson's performance. Organization Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50: 123-150.

McNeese-Smith, D. K. (1995). Job satisfaction, productivity, and organizational commitment: the result of leadership. Journal of Nursing Administration, 25(9): 17-26.

Moser, K. (1997). Commitment in organizations. Psychologies, 41(4): 160-170.

Newman, D. A., Hanges, P. J., Duan, L., & Ramesh, A. (2008). A network model of organizational climate: Friendship, clusters, subgroup agreement, and climate schemas. In: D. B. Smith. The people make the place: Dynamic linkages between individuals and organizations. Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ: 101–126.

Ock, Won-Ho․Kim, Seog-Yong. (2001). A study on job stress and job satisfaction, and organization commitment of local public service. Korean Public Administration Review, 35(4), 355-73.

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

Organ, D. W. (1994). Personality and organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Management, 20: 465-278.

Organ, D. W. (1997). Organizational citizenship behavior: It’s construct clean-up time. Human Performance, 10: 85-97.

Organ, D. W., & Ryan, K. (2004). A meta-analytic review of attitudinal and dispositional predictors of organizational citizenship behavior. Personnel Psychology, 48: 775-802.

Organ, D. W., Podsakoff, P. M., & MacKenzie, S. B. (2006). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature, antecedents, and consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Piccolo, R. E., & Colquitt, R. J. (2006). Transformational leadership and job behaviors: The mediating role of core job characteristics. Academy of Management Journal, 49(2): 327-340.

Podsakoff,
N.
P.,
Whiting,
S.
W.,
Podsakoff,
P.
M.,
&
Blume,
B.
D.
(2009). Individual‐and
organizational‐level
consequences
of
organizational citizenship behaviors:
A
meta‐analysis.
Journal
of
Applied
Psychology,
94(1):
122-141.

Podsakoff, N. P., Whiting, S. W., Podsakoff, P. M., & Mishra, P. (2010). Effects of organizational citizenship behaviors on selection decisions in employment interviews. Journal of Applied Psychology. Advance online publication.

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88: 879-903.

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

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Bommer, W. H. (1996). A meta-analysis of the relationships between Kerr and Jermier’s substitutes for leadership and employee job attitudes, role perceptions, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81: 380-399.

Pond, S. B., Nacoste, R. W., Mohr, M. F., & Rodriguez, C. (1997). The measurement of organizational citizenship behavior: Are we assuming too much? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 27: 1527-1544.

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

Rousseau, D. M., & Batt, R. (2007). Global competition’s perfect storm: Why business and labor cannot solve their problems alone. Academy of Management Perspectives, 23: 16-23.

Reuvers, M., van Engen, M .L., Vinkenburg, C., & Wilson-Evered, E. (2008). Transformational leadership and innovative work behaviour: exploring the relevance of gender differences. Creativity and Innovation Management, 17: 227-44.

Ross, S. M., & Offermann, L. R. (1997). Transformational leaders: Measurement of personality attributes and work group performance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23: 1078-1086.

Rotundo, M., & Sackett, P. R. (2008). The relative importance of task, citizenship, and counterproductive performance to global ratings of job performance: A policy-capturing approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87: 66-80.

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.

Sosik, J. J., Avolio, B. J., & Jung, D. I. (2002). Beneath the mask: Examining the relationship of self-presentation attributes and impression management to charismatic leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 13: 217-242.

Spector, P. E. (2006). Method variance in organizational research: Truth or urban legend? Organizational Research Methods, 9(2): 221-232.

Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics(4th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Tepper, B. J., Duffy, M. K., Hoobler, J., & Ensley, M. D. (2004). Moderators of the relationships between coworkers’ organizational citizenship behavior and fellow employees’ attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89: 455-465.

Van Knippenberg, B., & Van Knippenberg, D. (2005). Leader self-sacrifice and leadership effectiveness: The moderating role of leader prototypicality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90: 25-37.

Vigoda-Gadot, E. (2006). Compulsory citizenship behavior in organizations: Theorizing some dark sides of the good soldier syndrome. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 36(1): 77–93.

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.

Weiss, H. M., Nicholas, J. P., & Daus, C. S. (1999). An examination of the joint effects of affective experiences and job beliefs on job satisfaction and variations in affective experiences over time. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 78: 1-24.

Weiss, H. M. (2002). Deconstructing job satisfaction: Separating evaluations, beliefs, and affective experiences. Human Resource Management Review, 12: 173-194.

Williams, L. J., & Anderson, S. E. (2001). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. Journal of Management, 17: 601-617.

Wynd, C. A. (2003). Current factors contributing to professionalism in nursing. Journal of Professional Nursing, 19(5): 251-261.

Yoon, Ji-Woong․Kim, Ju-Kyong․Lee, Jung-Guen. (2012). An analysis on job satisfaction factors of government officers in technical posts. Journal of Social Science in Kyung-Hee Univ. 38(1): 71-98.

Youssef, C. M., & Luthans, F. (2007). Positive organizational behavior in the workplace: The impact of hope, optimism, and resilience. Journal of Management, 33: 774-800.

김대원(金大源): 경북대학교에서 행정학 박사학위(논문: 지방세 수입예측 모형, 1991)를 취득하고, 현재 신라대학교 보건행정학과 교수로 재직하고 있다. 주요 관심분야는 조직관리론, 지방재정론, 재무행정론 등이며, 주요 논문으로는 “The Mediating Role of Trust on the Relationship between Justice and Performance in Organization”(2012), “The Influence of Leader-Member Exchange on Organizational Citizenship Behaviors in Public Sector”(2011), “An Empirical Analysis on the Relationship Between Leadership Styles and Motivation in School Organization”(2010) 등이 있다. 주요 저서로는 ｢지방재정제도의 이론과 실제｣(공저, 2002), ｢행정학원론｣(공저, 2004) 등이 있다.

<E-mail: dwkim@silla.ac.kr / 논문접수일: 2012. 07. 17 / 심사개시일: 2012. 07. 24 / 심사완료일: 2012. 08. 17>

박철민(朴喆敏): 경북대학교에서 행정학 박사학위(논문: 공․사조직의 조직몰입 영향변인 및 결과변인 비교, 2002)를 취득하고, (재)부산인적자원개발원 연구위원을 거쳐, 현재 제주국제대학교 사회복지학과 조교수로 재직하고 있다. 주요 관심분야는 조직관리, 인적자원개발, 복지행정 등이며, 주요 논문으로는 “Exploring Service Quality Measuring Model of Public Transportation”(2012), “The Effect of Transformational Leadership and Perceived Organizational Support on Organizational Citizenship Behavior”(2011), “Preferences on the Merit Pay System in the Public Agency”(2010) 등이 있다.

<E-mail: cmpark@jeju.ac.kr>