ijcrb.webs.com may 2013 i j o c r i b ol o is social ... · this study sets out to explore the...

ijcrb.webs.com

INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS

COPY RIGHT © 2013 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research

816

MAY 2013

VOL 5, NO 1

Is Social Networking Detrimental to Individual Performance and

Organizational Citizenship Behavior?

Prof. Dr. Appalayya Meesala Professor & Director, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Institute of Management &

Technology, Baghlingampally, Hyderabad-500044.

Vani. H. Assistant Manager, National Small Industries Corporation, ECIL, Hyderabad.

Prof. Dr. R. Nageswara Rao

Professor and Director ( Infrastructure), Osmania University, Hyderabad.

Abstract

Purpose The relationship of Social Networking Behavior and Organizational

Citizenship Behavior with individual employee Performance should be found out so

that social networking can be encouraged in the organizational setting if there is a

positive relationship.

Design/Methodology On a sample of 191 employees working in various

organizations, a survey was done with published scales on OCB, Social Networking

and Performance. Correlations among the constructs were found out; to cross-check

the reliability of the correlation, hierarchical regression was made; in the case of

understanding the relationship between the number of FaceBook friends and Social

Networking Behavior, Chi-square based correspondence analysis was made.

Original contribution A study on understanding the relationship among the OCB,

Social Networking, and Performance was not yet done in the Indian context. Further,

no study was made to check whether Facebook use is a good measure of Social

Networking.

Findings There is a relationship between Performance and Organizational Citizenship

Behavior. But, there is no relationship between Performance and Social Networking;

in fact, conversely, there is a negative relation between OCB and Social Networking.

Importantly, there is a positive association between the number of Facebook friends

one has and Social Networking.

Originality A fresh study was made with a survey on 191 employees about social

networking, OCB, and performance, whose equivalent is rarely seen in the extant

research.

Practical Implications These findings are useful to organization in deciding on

whether social networking should be encouraged or not as done in the other parts of

the world. The findings don‟t encourage social networking in the Indian context.

Key Words Organizational Citizenship Behavior, Social Networking, Performance,

Facebook, Hours Worked Daily

ijcrb.webs.com



817

MAY 2013

VOL 5, NO 1

Introduction

Two organizational phenomena which are outside the formal role descriptions but

believed to positively influence the individual employee performance are

Organizational Citizenship Behavior ( OCB) and Social Networking ( Brass, 2006; Ariani,2012). Organizations are hell bent on improving their performance in the

context of current unprecedented level of competition; so they are exploring every

phenomenon like OCB and Social Networking that have some promise for operational

improvement. These phenomena have received the rapt attention of the managers

relatively recently. Both have caught on well with employees what with the advent of

internet and the growing awareness about the importance of these behaviors in their

career advancement. These two undercurrents are undeniable realities, but unpaid for

by the employer despite their positive impact being noted in the relevant literature.

This study sets out to explore the relationship of OCB and Social Networking with

each other and importantly with the individual performance. First, we present a

discussion on the meaning, dimensions, antecedents and consequences as established

by recent research studies, of OCB, Social Networking, and Performance.

Meaning of Organizational Citizenship Behavior

Organizational citizenship behavior refers to individual discretionary behaviors that

are beneficial to the organization but not directly recognized by the formal reward

system; it involves doing those things that aren‟t in any job description ( Organ,1988);

OCBs are simply activities that are extra to the employees‟ role. The driving factors

of OCB include role clarity, leadership, organizational commitment, organizational

justice and individual traits; the positive outcomes of it include reduced turnover,

reduced absenteeism, employee satisfaction and loyalty, consumer satisfaction and

consumer loyalty (Alizadeh, Darvish, Kamran, & Emami, January 2012).

It encompasses behaviors that do not directly relate to task performance but are

important to the overall performance of the organization (Bateman and Organ, 1983).

Stated differently, OCBs are extra-role behaviors (i.e. not part of one‟s job

requirements), which makes them conceptually distinct from task performance.

Some examples of OCBs include (a) helping a coworker with a job-related problem,

(b) respecting organizational resources, (c) keeping the physical work environment

clean and orderly, and ( d) completing tasks in a timely manner. In the words of

Bateman and Organ, OCBs lubricate the social machinery of organizations.

OCBs include those actions of employees that surpass the minimum role requirements

expected by an organization and promote the welfare of co-workers, work groups,

and/or the organization

Dimensions of OCB

OCBs consist of two kinds of action: (a) general compliance- doing what an employee

should do, and (b) altruism- helping others (Smith, Organ, & Near, 1983).

ijcrb.webs.com



818

MAY 2013

VOL 5, NO 1

Organ (1988) identified five distinct dimensions of OCB: Altruism (helping specific

others); civic virtue (keeping up with important matters within the organization);

conscientiousness (compliance with norms); courtesy (consulting others before taking

action); and sportsmanship (not complaining about trivial matters).

A different view on the components of OCB was expressed by Williams and

Anderson (1991), who divided OCBs into two types: (1) behaviors directed at specific

individuals in the organization, such as courtesy and altruism (OCBI); and (2)

behaviors concerned with benefiting the organization as a whole, such as

conscientiousness, sportsmanship and civic virtue (OCBO).

OCBI refers to the behaviors that immediately benefit specific individuals within an

organization and, thereby, contribute indirectly to organizational effectiveness. A

person displaying an impressive OCBI makes the following statements.

I help others who have been absent.

I help others who have heavy work load.

I help orient new people even though it is not required.

I assist my supervisor with his/her work (when not asked).

I take a personal interest in other employees.

I pass along information to co-workers.

Similarly, the person who shows good OCBs towards organization (OCBO) makes

the following statements about his behavior.

I give advance notice when I am unable to come to work.

I don‟t complain about insignificant things at work.

I conserve and protect organizational property.

I adhere to informal rules devised to maintain order.

The statements reproduced above from research measures give a fair idea about the

dimensions of OCB and its two categories as identified by Williams and Anderson.

Antecedents

A meta-analysis by Organ and Ryan identified several drivers and antecedents of

OCB, the important among which are job satisfaction and organizational

commitment, whereas other studies identified personality variables and leadership.

OCB as suggested by different theories is a personality trait, a social response to

supervisors‟ and/or peers‟ behavior, as well as a possible reaction of the individual to

the behavior of his or her superiors or to other motivation based -mechanisms in the

workplace. Affective commitment of an employee in conjunction with perceived

rating-reward linkage causes direct association between performance appraisal

process and organization citizenship behavior (Zheng, Zhang, & Li, October 2011).

OCB is a function of the employee‟s ability, motivation, and opportunity (Organ et

al., 2006).

ijcrb.webs.com



819

MAY 2013

VOL 5, NO 1

Early OCB studies assumed that OCB is linked with pro-social motives, or a desire to

benefit other people (Organ, 1988). This view is built on social exchange theory that

attributes employees‟ decisions about the amount of effort they are willing to expend

for their organizations to how much the organizations contribute to their well-being

(Eisenberger et al., 1986). It follows that employees are believed to show OCBs due

to their perception of organizational fairness, which leads to their willingness to

reciprocate the favors from their organizations or their supervisors (Organ, 1988,

Rioux and Penner, 2001).

The study of Patrick J. Rosopa, Amber N & Anna L. ( 2013) found that altruistic

employees were perceived as having more favorable personality characteristics and

received higher advancement potential ratings and greater reward recommendations

than their less altruistic counterparts. Altruism is a component of OCB.

When employees perceive that their organization is fair they may experience an

increase in job satisfaction and affective commitment. This, in turn, increases the

likelihood that employees will reciprocate in kind with behaviors desired by the

organization (Shore et al., 2004).

Outcomes

OCBs were found to be related to a number of organizational-level outcomes (e.g.,

productivity, efficiency, reduced costs, customer satisfaction, and unit-level turnover)

based on meta-analytic study on 3611 units (Podsakoff, 2009). It improves

organizational effectiveness without a cent spent on it.

OCBs influence manager‟s perceptions about subordinates. Research results based on

168 independent samples (N= 51,235 individuals), showed ( Podsakoff, 2009) that

OCBs are positively related to a number of individual-level outcomes, including

managerial ratings of employee performance, reward allocation decisions, and a

variety of withdrawal-related criteria (e.g., employee turnover intentions, actual

turnover, and absenteeism). Interestingly, meta-analytic studies have not touched on

the relationship of OCB with individual performance.

Further, the research and the resulting literature on positive outcomes of OCB in the

Indian context is scant. There was a strong need to validate in the Indian context the

findings of the research on OCB outcomes outside India. That apart, the question that

pops up in a researcher‟s mind: Is an employee who is high on OCB is high on his job

performance too?

H1: OCB is positively related to individual level outcomes; more specifically OCB

and individual job performance correlate positively in the Indian context.

Social Network and Online Social Network (OSN)

SNS ( Social Networking Sites) are considered to be of great importance for both

individuals and businesses, since they support the maintenance of existing social

relations and making of new connections between users through the internet (Boyd

and Ellison, 2007). Businesses increasingly acknowledge the potential role of the

ijcrb.webs.com



820

MAY 2013

VOL 5, NO 1

online social networks as marketing instruments (Hogg, 2010; Spaulding, 2010). SNS

can be especially useful for connecting and communication with customers,

contributing to customer learning and getting customer feedback (Tikkanen et al.,

2009). SNSs are used as a tool to develop relationships with new contacts, to continue

to nurture those relationships with more intimate ties, and to keep in touch with

people from prior ties (Subrahmanyam et al., 2008).

Further, the control over the contents on network site has shifted from site owner to

site user.

Global corporations like FedEx, Shell Oil, Motorola, General Electric, Kodak, British

Telecom, Kraft Foods, McDonald‟s and Lockheed Martin have integrated social

networking into their organizational strategies (Fraser and Dutta, 2008). Interestingly,

Serena, a California software company give one free hour on every Friday to all

employees to update their Facebook profiles and keep in touch with their colleagues.

Social Networking 2.0 has had a huge impact on organizations during the last five

years, and it is now estimated in the UK that 42 per cent of office staff discuss work-

related issues through social media applications.( Sophia van Zyl, 2009).

Positive Side

“Social networking sites however, provide opportunities for both formal and informal

interaction and collaboration with fellow employees and clients/customers which aids

knowledge transfer and communication; the sites also have various informal

applications and games that members of the same organization can engage in across

geographical boundaries and time zones so that team spirit and organizational culture

can be maintained.” (Bennet, Owerr, Pitt, & Tucker, 2010).

According Sophia van Zyl (2009) “an individual‟s success in society depends on the

shape and size of his/her social network and ability to network and form connections

with other social groups. Organizations which can harness this innate human ability to

manage knowledge will be able to lower transactions costs and become more

profitable.”

The study of Akkirman and Harris (2005) found that companies can reap benefits

beyond increased productivity and cost shifting through online networking. They

found that employee satisfaction and related variables such as turnover and

motivation can improve as well.

Graham et al. (2009) in a study involving students and teachers on social networking

in libraries found that “common interests were discovered which helped build better

professional relationships. They also found that faculty and administrators who had

once seemed distant were humanized in a way that may not have been possible

through more traditional means”.

ijcrb.webs.com



821

MAY 2013

VOL 5, NO 1

Definition

A social network is a social structure made of individuals who are connected by one

or more affinities or similarities on attributes such as values, religion, friendship, or

any other shared characteristics.

Boyd and Ellison (2007) define OSN ( Online Social Network) as “web-based

services that allow individuals to (1) construct a public or semi-public profile within a

bounded system, (2) form a joint list of other users with whom they share a

connection, and (3) view and traverse their list of connections and those made by

others within the system.

The term online social networking (OSN) or social networking sites (SNS) is used to

refer to a full range of products and services across platforms, which include content

creation, networking, sharing and collaboration and which support existing offline

networks or the creation of new ones (Dawley, 2009; Lai and Turban, 2008).

Downside

An individual‟s fascination with SNSs may be counterproductive (Utz and Kramer,

2009). It means, SNSs may help active users maintain and/or nurture their relationship

with others, but excessive and mad involvement with the SNSs may unexpectedly be

counterproductive and harmful due to abusive texting or addiction.

Intensive engagement with SNSs might possibly hurt the job performance in two

ways: (a) interference with job tasks and (2) interference with workplace.

Interference with job tasks included drawbacks such as receiving information from

OSN sites which cannot handle by individuals while at work, receiving information

that are not useful for work and getting distracted from work. Interference with

workplace come in the form of slowdown of office network, invasion of malware and

spyware or spam attacks.

SNS and Job Performance and OCB

The critical literature review of Bennet, Owerr, Pitt, & Tucker, (2010) shows that

“social networking technology can facilitate improved workplace productivity by

enhancing the communication and collaboration of employees; this facilitates

knowledge transfer and consequently makes organizations more agile. Moreover,

social networking can provide enhanced levels of employee satisfaction by reducing

the social isolation of tele-workers and making them feel part of organizational

culture during long absences from the physical office.”

The study of Wikramasinghe & Nisaf, (2013) done on 215 IT professionals in Sri

Lanka found that online social networking has significant effects on individual job

performance; organizational policy moderates the relationship between online social

networking and job performance.

ijcrb.webs.com



822

MAY 2013

VOL 5, NO 1

This link between social networking and individual job performance, which was

established in the studies conducted outside India, should be validated in the Indian

context too, since the research on this in India is scant.

Similarly, a social networker grows conscious of importance of supporting

organizational environment through positive roles that are not in the job description.

In a field study of Bowler and Brass (2006) involving 141 employees of a manufacturing firm provided evidence that social network ties are related to the performance and Interpersonal Citizenship Behavior( ICB, one form of OCB. Similarly, the study of Tsang SS, et al (2012) involving nurses working in a

medical center in Taiwan showed that social network behavior induces OCB which in

turn makes for less stress, job satisfaction and good individual performance. In a

study of Ariani,( 2012) on 636 tellers of banking industry in Indonesia, it was shown

that the relationship between OCB and individual performance are partially mediated

by three dimensions of social capital- structural, relational and cognitive ones; social

capital is in a way built by social networking behavior.

But, studies on understanding this link of Social networking with OCB and individual

employee performance are scant in India; hence, the link of social networking with

OCB and performance has to be revalidated for the Indian context. Another question

that deserves to be resolved is: Is the number of FaceBook friends indicative of

Social Networking behavior of persons?

Hypotheses

H2: Social networking improves individual performance.

H3: Social networking is associated with OCB.

H4: Facebook connections and Social Networking reflect each other.

Job Performance

Business Dictonary.Com, (2013) defines „Performance‟ as “the accomplishment of a

given task measured against preset known standards of accuracy, completeness, cost,

and speed. In a contract, performance is deemed to be the fulfillment of an obligation,

in a manner that releases the performer from all liabilities under the contract.”

Campbell (1990) defines individual work performance as “behaviors or actions of a

staff member that are relevant to the goals of the organization.” In simple terms, it is

what the organization hires one to do, and do well. What is commonly accepted is that

organizations need and value staff members who perform well, and these high

performers are considered a valuable asset and a cutting edge for the organization

(Yang, 2010; Aghdasi et al., 2011; Yucle and Bektas, 2012).

An individual employee‟s performance consists of four dimensions - task

performance, contextual performance, absence of counterproductive work behavior,

and adoptive behavior. (Koopmans, Bernaads, Hildebrandt, van Buuren, van der

Beek, & de Vet, 2013); task performance refers to actual quantity of work assigned,

while contextual performance involves behaviors that support organizational, social

and psychological environment. Adoptive behaviour is about continuous learning to

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=Tsang%20SS%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=22333962

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/task.html

http://www.investorwords.com/8787/against.html

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/cost.html

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/contract.html

http://www.investorguide.com/definition/performance.html

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/deemed.html

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/fulfillment.html

http://www.investorguide.com/definition/obligation.html

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/release.html

http://www.investorwords.com/6221/all.html

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/liability.html

ijcrb.webs.com



823

MAY 2013

VOL 5, NO 1

keep up with the changes, and counterproductive behavior is intentional or

unintentional behavior that have the potential to work against the objectives of the

organization.

High performance of an individual employee is a pointer to the success of the human

resources function, and the most important index that determines the success of an

organization; it is obvious that all efforts of the organization are aimed at raising this.

Further, such high performance gives the employee the job satisfaction, and multiple

rewards too. Hence, performance is one metric which every party monitors, and

whose ascent is a cause of joy for all and sundry.

Research Methodology

Sample Description

The sample consists of 191 individuals working in different capacities in different

organizations in the Andhra Pradesh state of India in different sectors like public and

private ones. The copies of the instrument containing the questions on (a)

demographic aspects like gender, age, length of service, number of friends on

Facebook, hours worked daily on an average and suchlike in the first part, and (b)

research question-related items with 5-1 Likert scale in the second part were

distributed to 400 working persons; the response rate is 48%.

The sample consists of 71% men and 29% women; age-based distribution of the same

comprises 51% percent of persons in 20-30 years of age, 37% in 31-50 years, and

13% in 51-68 years of age. Income-based distribution of the sample consists of 30%

of the persons in the monthly income of less than Rs.20,000 (Rs= Indian Rupees ;

Rupees 54 = 1 US$), 41% in Rs.20500-Rs.50,000, 15% in the bracket of Rs. 50,500-

Rs.78,000, and 14% of persons who have „not revealed income information‟. When

the length of service was the basis of grouping, 48% have put in less than 5 years of

service, 31% in 6-20 years, 21 % in 21- 40 years of service, and 1% in „information

not given‟ category. The sample represents a true microcosm of working persons‟

community in the state.

The sample also was tabulated on the basis of number of friends on Facebook; it

shows that 41% have less than 10 friends, 28% between 11-100 friends, another 28%

between 108-500, and 3% more than 560 friends. Apparently, the sample is skewed

towards persons with very few FaceBook friends.

To find out the correspondence between Social Networking, and the number of

friends on FaceBook, chi-square-based correspondence analysis as described by Hair,

Anderson, Tatham, & Black, (1998) has been employed.

Measures Used

OCB

We have used the OCB-Consciousness Sub-scale of Staufenbiel and Hartz (alfa:

0.76); it consists of four items. The sample items, for example, are: (1)“ I am always

punctual” and (2) I never take long lunches or breaks.

ijcrb.webs.com



824

MAY 2013

VOL 5, NO 1

Social Networking

The scale of Social Networking Behavior ( Curran and Lennon, 2011) was used to

measure the phenomenon of social networking behavior; it consists of items like: (a) I

enjoy keeping up with people using social networks; (b) It‟s fun to be involved with

social networks.

Job performance The 6-item scale of Babin and Boles, 1998; Cronbach‟s alfa: 0.76) was used; the

sample items are: (1) I am a top performer; (2) I get along with customers better than

others.

Statistical Analysis and Findings

Inter-correlations were calculated ( Table No.1) on SPSS for five variables namely,

Social Networking Behavior, OCB, Performance, Hours Worked, Facebook friends;

their significant levels were worked out. (a) A significant correlation is found

between OCB and Performance ; (2) a significant correlation is found between

Number of Facebook friends and Social Networking Behavior. (3) Surprisingly, the

correlation between Social Networking Behavior and Performance is poor and non-

significant.

To cross-check whether correlations are dependable, other tools are used.

To establish that FaceBook friends are a reliable measure of Social Networking

behavior, Chi-Square based correspondence analysis between Facebook friends and

Social Networking Behavior was made as described by Hair, Anderson, Tatham, &

Black, (1998). See the Table Nos. 2 to 6. Table No.6 shows that high Networking

Behavior and high number of Facebook connections are positively associated; high

Networking Behavior and fewer Facebook connections are negativley associated.

Further, hierarchical regression analysis was done with Performance as dependent

variable: and (a) Social Networking Behavior as independent variable in block 1, (b)

with Social Networking Behavior and OCB as IVs in block 2, and (3) OCB as IV in

block 3. Please see the Table Nos. 7 to 11. Table No. 10 shows the beta coefficients;

OCB with a high beta value is a clear determiner of Performance. But, Social

Networking Behavior with a poor and negative beta and non-significant p-value is

poor determinant of Performance.

Model Summary in Table No.8 shows that Social Networking as the lone IV for

Performance is a poor model; with OCB as a lone IV, the model fit is good; R-Square

change with introduction of OCB is substantial but the same with Social Networking

is very negligible. Anova summary in Table No.9 confirms this; F-value for the

regression model consisting of Social Networking alone is non-significant; but when

OCB as a lone predictor or in conjunction with Social Networking is included, the F-

value becomes significant. Table No. 11 shows the partial correlation of OCB and

Social Networking. Partial correlation of OCB is significant and that of Socian

Networking is non-significant

ijcrb.webs.com



825

MAY 2013

VOL 5, NO 1

Discussion

H1: Our hypothesis was that OCB is positively related to individual level outcomes;

more specifically OCB and individual job performance correlate positively in the

Indian context. The correlation analysis shows a clear positive relation between them;

regression analysis too confirms it. The findings of the studies done elsewhere outside

India are validated in this study too.

H2: Out hypothesis was that social networking improves individual performance. But

this study did not show any relation between them. Such a finding is quite

unexpected at a time when the multinationals across the globe are pulling all the stops

out in integrating social networking into their organizational strategies. As shown by

this study, in this neck of woods ( Indian context), social networking is not used for

performance improvement. Three reasons that might lie behind this situation are: (1)

employees don‟t use the networking for promoting the cause of the organization or

their learning; (2) they use social networking as a personal entertainer or a personal

time for relaxation; and (3) they spend a lot of time on networking at the cost of

individual learning and organizational productivity.

H3: Social networking is associated with OCB. The correlation analysis shows that

there is negative between them. Social networking instead of contributing to

productivity is proving slightly detrimental to it. Thus, this hypothesis proves wrong.

H4: Facebook connections and Social Networking reflect each other. The correlation

analysis and Chi-Square -based correspondence analysis confirm that Facebook

connections are a good measure of social networking.

Limitations

The questionnaire administrators are MBA students who may not have properly

explained the meaning of each construct, and thus response errors may have found

their way into the data while giving scores on each construct.

Further, the sample choice is convenience-driven but not randomized, and so sample

representativeness may be slightly flawed.

Most of the respondents don‟t have friends on FaceBook and those who have a

Facebook account have less than 20. The sample is skewed towards to zero-FaceBook

users. This puts a serious a limitation on the validity of what they say about their

social networking behavior.

Scope for further research

Similar studies have to be undertaken on pan-India samples. The perceptions of

working people in Andhra Pradesh may not reflect those of the entire India.

Further, this self-funded study has included only OCB-Conscientiousness but not all

other components like Sportiveness, Altruism etc. in the study; future studies should

use the full OCB scale.

ijcrb.webs.com



826

MAY 2013

VOL 5, NO 1

The impact of social networking on other organizational constructs like commitment,

engagement etc. should be explored.

Conclusion

Two organizational phenomena which are outside the formal role descriptions but

believed to positively influence the individual employee performance are

Organizational Citizenship Behavior ( OCB) and Social Networking. But the

organizations have to understand if they are correlated on the Indian turf. But this

study shows that Organizational Citizenship Behavior and Social Networking are

positively and significantly correlated. This finding is in line with the theory and the

findings of various studies made across the world. But most surprisingly, social

networking and performance are not at at all correlated as found in ths study;

moreover, OCB and Social Networking are negatively correlated. It has to be inferred

that India is no good soil for combinging social networking with organizational

strategies. Probably, the culture that prevails here does not allow employees to see

social networking as a career advancement tool. Further, as expected, the number of

Facebook connections is a good measure of social networking behavior.

ijcrb.webs.com



827

MAY 2013

VOL 5, NO 1

References

Aghadasi, S., Kiamanesh, A., & Ebrahim, A. (2011). Emotional Intelligence and

organizational commitment: testing the mediatory role of occupaitonal stress and job

satisfaction. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences , 29, 1965-1976.

Akkirman, A., & Harris, D. (2005). Organizational communication satisfaction in the virtual

workplace. Journal of Management Development , 24 (5), 397-409.

Alizadeh, Z., Darvish, S., Kamran, N., & Emami, M. (January 2012). Antecedents and

Consequences of Ogranizational Citizenship behavior. Interdisciplinary Journal of

Contemporary Research in Business , 3 (9), 494-505.

Ariani, D.W. (2012). The Relationship between Social Capital,Organizational

Citizenship Behaviors, and Individual Performance: An Empirical Study from

Banking Industry in Indonesia. Journal of Management Research, 4( 2), 226-241.

Bateman, T., & Organ, D. (1983). Job satisfaction and the good soldier: the relationship

between affect and employee'citizenship'. Academy of Management Journal , 26 (4), 587-95.

Bennet, J., Owerr, M., Pitt, M., & Tucker, M. (2010). Workplace Impact of Social

Networking. Property Manageent , 28 (3), 138-148.

Bowler & Brass ( 2006)Relational Correlates of Interpersonal Citizenship Behavior:

A Social Network Perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(1), 70-82.

Boyd, D., & Ellison, N. (2007). Social Network sites: Defintion, history, and scholarship.

Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication , 13 (1), 210-30.

Campbell, J. (1990). Modeling the performance prediction problem in industrial and

organizational psychology. In M. Dunnette, & L. Hough, Handbook of organizational and

industrial psychology (pp. 687-732). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Dawley, L. (2009). Social network knowledge construction: emerging virtual world

pedagogy. On the Horizon , 17 (2), 109-121.

Eisenberger, R. H. (1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology ,

71 (3), 500-7.

Fraser, M., & Dutta, S. (2008). Throwing Sheep in the Boardroom: How Online Social

Networking Will Transform Your Life, Work and World. Chisester: John Wiley.

Graham, J., Faix, A., & Hartman, L. (2009). Crashing the facebook party: one library's

experience i nthe students' domain. Library Review , 58 (3), 228-36.

Hair, J., Anderson, R., Tatham, R., & Black, W. (1998). Multivarate Data Analysis (Fifth

ed.). New Delhi: Pearson Education.

ijcrb.webs.com



828

MAY 2013

VOL 5, NO 1

Hogg, T. (2010). Inferring preference correlations from social networks. Electronic

Commerce and Research Applications , 9, 29-37.

Koopmans, L., Bernaads, C., Hildebrandt, V., van Buuren, S., van der Beek, A., & de Vet, H.

(2013). Development of an individual work performance questionnaire. International Journal

of Productivity and Performance Management , 62 (1), 6-26.

Lai, L., & Turban, E. (2008). Groups formation and operations in the Web 2.0 environment

and social networks. Group Decision and Negotiation , 17 (5), 387-402.

Organ, D. (1988). Organizational Citizenship Behavrior: The Good Soldier Syndrome.

Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

Organ, D., Podsakoff, P., & MacKenzie, S. (2006). Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Its

Nature, Antecedents, and Consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Patrick J. Rosopa: Amber N, S., & Anna L, H. (2013). Helping yourself by helping others:

examining personality perceptions. Journal of Managerial Psychology , 28 (2), 147-163.

Podsakoff, N.P., Whiting, S.W. & Podsakaff, P.M. (2009). Individual and

organizational-level consequences of organizational citizenship behavior: a meta-

analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 9(1), 122-141. Rioux, S. a. (2001). The causes of organizational citizenship behavior: a motivational

analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology (86), 1306-14.

Shore, L., Tetrick, L., Taylor, M., Shapiro., C., Liden, R., Parks, J., et al. (2004). The

employee-organization relationship: a timely concept in a period of transition. In J.

Martochchio, Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management (pp. 291-370).

Oxford: Elsevier.

Smith, C., Organ, D., & Near, J. (1983). Organizational citizenship behavior: its nature and

antecedents. Journal Applied Psychology (68), 653-663.

Sophia van Zyl, A. (2009). The impact of social networking 2.0 on organizations. Electronic

Library , 27 (6), 906-918.

Spaulding, T. (2010). How can virtual communities create value for business. Electronic

Commerce Research and Applications , 9, 38-49.

Subrahmanyam, K., Reich, S., Waechter, N., & Espinoza, G. (2008). Online and offline social

networks: use of social networking sites bye emerging adults. Journal of Applied

Developmental Psychology , 29 (6), 420-33.

Tikkanen, H., Hietanen, J., Henttonen, T., & Rokka, J. (2009). Exploring virtual worlds:

success factors in virtual world marketing. Management Decision , 47 (8), 1357-81.

Tsang, S.S., Chen T.Y., Wang, S.F., & Tai, H.L. (2012) Nursing work stress: the

impacts of social network structure and organizational citizenship behavior. J. Nurs.

Res. 20 (1), 9-18.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=Tsang%20SS%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=22333962

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=Chen%20TY%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=22333962

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=Wang%20SF%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=22333962

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=Tai%20HL%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=22333962

ijcrb.webs.com



829

MAY 2013

VOL 5, NO 1

Utz, S., & Kramer, N. (2009). The privacy paradox on social network sites revisited:

the role of individual characteristics and group norms. Journal of Psychological

Research on Cyberspace , 3 (2), Article 2

Wikramasinghe, V., & Nisaf, M. (2013). Organizatioanal policy as a moderator between

online social networking and job performance. The Journal of Information and Knowledge

Management Systems , 43 (2), 161-184.

Williams, L., & Anderson, S. (1991). Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment as

Predictors of Organizational Citizenship and In-Role Behaviors. Journal of Management , 17

(3), 601.

Yang, J. (2010). Antecedents and consequences of job satisfaction in the hotel industry.

International Journal of Hospitality Management , 29, 609-619.

Yucel, I., & Bektas, C. (2012). Job satisfaction, organizational commitment and

demographic characteristics among teachers in Turkey: Younger is better? Procedia-

Social and Behavioral Sciences , 46, 1598-1608.

Zheng, W., Zhang, M., & Li, H. (October 2011). Performance appraisal process and

organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Managerial Psychology , 27 (7), 732-

752.

ijcrb.webs.com



830

MAY 2013

VOL 5, NO 1

Tables

Table No. 1

Correlations

FaceBook

friends

Work

hours OCB

Performanc

e

Social

Networking

Behavior

Face Book

Friends

Pearson Correlation 1 -.020 .011 .166* .317

**

Sig. (2-tailed) .785 .877 .022 .000

N 191 191 191 191 191

Hours Worked Pearson Correlation -.020 1 .075 .172* -.053

Sig. (2-tailed) .785 .305 .018 .468

N 191 191 191 191 191

OCB Pearson Correlation .011 .075 1 .518** -.156

*

Sig. (2-tailed) .877 .305 .000 .031

N 191 191 191 191 191

Performance Pearson Correlation .166* .172

* .518

** 1 -.065

Sig. (2-tailed) .022 .018 .000 .373

N 191 191 191 191 191

Social Networking

Behavior

Pearson Correlation .317** -.053 -.156

* -.065 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .468 .031 .373

N 191 191 191 191 191

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table No. 2

Social Networking = FaceBook Connections

FacebookCons2 LowSoci MediuSocia HighSociNet

Grand

Total

LowFBConn 15 46 18 79

MedFBConn 7 35 11 53

HighFBConn 4 31 24 59

Grand Total 26 112 53 191

ijcrb.webs.com



831

MAY 2013

VOL 5, NO 1

Table No.3 Expected Values

LowSoci MediuSocia HighSociNet

LowFBConn 10.75 46.32 21.92 79

MedFBConn 7.21 31.08 14.71 53

HighFBConn 8.03 34.60 16.37 59

26 112 53 191

Table No.4 Difference Between Observed and Expected Values Observed- Expected


LowFBConn 4.25 -0.32 -3.92

MedFBConn -0.21 3.92 -3.71

HighFBConn -4.03 -3.60 7.63

Table No.5 Cell-wise Chi-Square

Cell-wise Chi-Square


LowFBConn 18.02852 0.10537 15.3779

MedFBConn 0.046079 15.3779 13.74041

HighFBConn 16.2523 12.93739 58.19054

Table No.6

Cell-wise Chi-Square with original signs


LowFBConn 18.03 0.11 -15.38*

MedFBConn -0.05 15.38 -13.74

HighFBConn -16.25 -12.94 58.19*

They show that high social networking

ijcrb.webs.com



832

MAY 2013

VOL 5, NO 1

Table No.7

Variables Entered/Removedb

Model Variables Entered Variables Removed Method

1 SocNtWrkBeha . Enter

2 OCBa . Enter

3

. SocNtWrkBeh

Stepwise (Criteria: Probability-of-F-to-

enter <= .050, Probability-of-F-to-

remove >= .100).

a. All requested variables entered.

b. Dependent Variable: Perform ( Performance)

SocNtWrkBeh = Social Network Behavior

Table No.8

Model Summary

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square

Std. Error of the Estimate

Change Statistics

R Square Change F Change df1 df2 Sig. F Change

1 .065a .004 -.001 3.824 .004 .796 1 189 .373

2 .518b .269 .261 3.285 .265 68.027 1 188 .000

3 .518c .269 .265 3.277 .000 .068 1 188 .795

a. Predictors: (Constant), Social Network

Behavior

b. Predictors: (Constant), Social Network Behavior, OCB

c. Predictors: (Constant), OCB

Criterion Variable: Performance

Table No.9

ANOVAd

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

a. Regression 11.638 1 11.638 .796 .373a

Residual 2763.294 189 14.621

Total 2774.932 190

b. Regression 745.852 2 372.926 34.553 .000b

Residual 2029.080 188 10.793

Total 2774.932 190

c. Regression 745.122 1 745.122 69.380 .000c

Residual 2029.810 189 10.740

Total 2774.932 190

a. Predictors: (Constant), SocNtWrkBeh

b. Predictors: (Constant), SocNtWrkBeh, OCB

c. Predictors: (Constant), OCB

ijcrb.webs.com



833

MAY 2013

VOL 5, NO 1

Model Summary

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square

Std. Error of the Estimate

Change Statistics

R Square Change F Change df1 df2 Sig. F Change

1 .065a .004 -.001 3.824 .004 .796 1 189 .373

2 .518b .269 .261 3.285 .265 68.027 1 188 .000

3 .518c .269 .265 3.277 .000 .068 1 188 .795

a. Predictors: (Constant), Social Network

Behavior

d. Dependent Variable: Perform

Table No.10

Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig. B Std. Error Beta

1 (Constant) 24.271 .838 28.957 .000

SocNtWrkBeh -.050 .056 -.065 -.892 .373

2 (Constant) 8.854 2.003 4.420 .000

SocNtWrkBeh .013 .049 .016 .260 .795

OCB .876 .106 .521 8.248 .000

3 (Constant) 9.105 1.752 5.196 .000

OCB .872 .105 .518 8.329 .000

a. Dependent Variable: Perform

Table No.11

Model Beta In t Sig.

Partial

Correlation

1 OCB .521a 8.248 .000 .515

3 SocNtWrkBeh .016b .260 .795 .019

a. Predictors in the Model: (Constant), SocNtWrkBeh

b. Predictors in the Model: (Constant), OCB

c. Dependent Variable: Perform.

ijcrb.webs.com may 2013 i j o c r i b ol o is social ... · this study sets out to explore the...

Documents