The Impact of “Temporal Personality” on Individuals’ Organizational Citizenship Behaviors

Yıl 2016, Cilt: 4 Sayı: 2, 79 - 86, 31.03.2016

Alper Kayaalp

https://doi.org/10.17858/jmisci.05093

Cited By: 6

Öz

The contemporary work environments increasingly promote polychronic behavior, which requires employees to deal with two or more activities in the same time block. Integrating research on polychronicity and organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs), it was hypothesized that polychronicity would be significantly and positively related to OCBs in a polychronic work context and perceived time pressure would moderate this relationship. Results from an academic context indicated that polychronicity was related to OCBs. However, perceived time pressure was not found to moderate this relationship. The findings indicate that polychronicity as a temporal personality is an important construct that deserves attention in organizational settings. With this study, the nomological net surrounding the construct of polychronicity was further developed by examining previously unresearched relationships.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Polychronicity, organizational citizenship behaviours, time pressure

Kaynakça

• REFERENCES
• Ancona, D. G., Goodman, P. S., Lawrence, B. S., & Tushman, M. L. (2001). Time: A new research lens. Academy of Management Review, 26, 645-663.
• Arndt, A., Arnold, T. J., & Landry, T. D. (2006). The effects of polychronic-orientation upon retail employee satisfaction and turnover. Journal of Retailing, 82(4), 319-330.
• Bassett, G. A. (1979). A study of the effects of task goal and schedule choice on work performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 24: 202-227.
• Bluedorn, A. C. (2002). The human organization of time: Temporal realities and experience. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
• Bluedorn, A. C., Kalliath T. J., Strube M. J., & Martin G. D. (1999). Polychronicity and the Inventory of Polychronic Values (IPV) the Development of an Instrument to Measure a Fundamental Dimension of Organizational Culture. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 14 (3/4), 205-230.
• Carlson, M., Charlin, V., & Miller, N. (1988). Positive mood and helping behavior A test of six hypotheses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 211-229.
• Conte, J. M., & Gintoft, J. N. (2005). Polychronicity, Big Five personality dimensions, and sales performance. Human Performance, 18, 427-444.
• Conte, J. M., & Jacobs, R. R. (2003). Validity evidence linking polychronicity and Big Five personality dimensions to absence, lateness, and supervisory performance ratings. Human Performance, 16, 107-129.
• Conte, J. M., Rizzuto, T. E., & Steiner, D. D. (1999). A construct-oriented analysis of individual level polychronicity. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 14, 269-288.
• De Cremer, D., & Blader, S. L. (2006). Why do people care about procedural fairness? The importance of belongingness in responding and attending to procedures. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36, 211–228.
• Eatough, E., Chang, C., Miloslavic, S., & Johnson, R. (2011). Relationships of role stressors with organizational citizenship behavior: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(3), 619-632.
• Frei, R. L., Racicot, B., & Travagline, A. (1999). The impact of monochronic and Type A behavior patterns on research productivity and stress. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 14, 374-387.
• Hall, E. T. (1983). The Dance of Life: The Other Dimension of Time. Anchor Press/Doubleday, Garden City, NY.
• Hecht, T. D., & Allen, N. J. (2005). Exploring links between polychronicity and well-being from the perspective of person-job fit: Does it matter if you prefer to do only one thing at a time? Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 98, 155-178.
• Kantrowitz, T. M., Grelle, D. M., Beaty, J. C., & Wolf, M. B. (2012). Time is Money: Polychronicity as a predictor of performance across job levels. Human Performance, 25, 1 – 24.
• Kayaalp, A. (2014). The octopus approach in time management: Polychronicity and creativity. Military Psychology, 26(2).67.
• Kelly, J. R., & McGrath, J. E. (1985). Effects of time limits and task types on task performance and interaction of four-person groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49: 395-407.
• Kelly, J. R., & Karau, S. J. (1999). Group decision making: The effects of initial preferences and time pressure. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25: 1342-1354.
• König, C. J., & Waller, M. J. (2010). Time for reflection: A critical examination of polychronicity. Human Performance, 23(2), 173-190.
• Kristof, A. L. (1996). Person-Organization Fit : An integrative review of its conceptualizations, measurement and implications. Journal of Personnel Psychology, Vol. 49, p. 1-49.
• Landy, F. J. (1989). Psychology of work behavior. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
• Madjar, N., & Oldham, G. R. (2006). Task rotation and polychronicity: Effects on individuals’ creativity. Human Performance, 19, 117-131.
• Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
• Organ, D. W. (1990). The motivational basis of organizational citizenship behavior. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.). Research in organizational behavior, Vol. 12: 43–72. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
• Robinson, J. P. (1990). ``Time squeeze'', American Demographics, Vol. 12, February, pp. 30-3.
• Schein, E. H. (1992). Organizational culture and leadership (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
• Slocombe, T. E., & Bluedorn, A. C. (1999). Organizational behavior implications of the congruence between preferred polychronic and experienced work-unit polychronicity. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 75 – 99.
• Smith, C. A., Organ, D. W., & Near, J. P. 1983. Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68: 655–663.
• Taylor, M. S., Locke, E. A., Lee, C., & Gist, M. E. (1984). Type A behavior and faculty research productivity: What are the mechanisms? Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 34, 402-418.
• Tepper, B. J., & Taylor, E. C. (2003). Relationships among supervisors’ and subordinates’ procedural justice perceptions and organizational citizenship behaviors. Academy of Management Journal, 46, 97–105.
• Wayne, S. J., Shore, L. M., & Liden, R. C. (1997). Perceived organizational support and leader-member exchange: A social exchange perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 82–111.