Exploring the Consequences of Work Engagement: Relations Among OCB-I, LMX and Team Work Performance

Öz

Engaged employees are key human resources that help organizations sustain their competitive positions. The related literature has predominantly treated work engagement as an outcome variable. Going beyond this context, this research explores the consequences of work engagement. By investigating the outcomes, two important relational mechanisms namely LMX, OCB-I and one performance outcome, team work performance are introduced. Using full-time assessors from an HR consultancy company located in Istanbul, this research tests a moderated mediation mechanisms where LMX and OCB-I are relational resources that link work engagement to team work performance. Results revealed that engaged employees who enjoy high quality LMX with their supervisors are more likely to contribute to co-workers (OCB-I) which in turn predicts enhanced team work performance

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Work engagement, LMX, OCB-I, Team work performance,Trait Positive Affectivity

İşe Adanmışlığın Sonuçlarını Keşfetmek: İş Arkadaşlarına Yönelik Örgütsel Vatandaşlık Davranışı, Lider-Üye Etkileşimi ve Takım Performansı İlişkileri

Öz

İşlerine adanmış çalışanlar, kurumların rekabet stratejilerini sürdürebilmeleri ve gelişebilmeleri için çok değerli olan insan kaynağıdır. İlgili literatür incelendiğinde önceki çalışmaların ise adanmışlık kavramını bir çıktı değişkeni olarak inceledikleri gözlemlenmektedir. Bu çalışma ise, adanmışlık kavramının çıktılarını analiz etmeyi hedeflemektedir. Bu anlamda, lider-üye etkileşimi (LMX) ve iş arkadaşlarına yönelik örgütsel vatandaşlık davranışlarının (OCB-I) aracı ve moderator etkileri analiz edilmiştir. İstanbul’da insan kaynakları alanında hizmet veren bir danışmanlık şirketinin çalışanları ile yapılan çalışmanın sonuçları, işe adanmışlığın takım performansı üzerindeki olumlu etkisini doğrulamıştır. Buna ek olarak, örgütsel vatandaşlık davranışlarının işe adanmışlık ve takım performansı ilişkisindeki aracı etkisi belirlenmiştir. Ayrıca, örgütsel vatandaşlık davranışlarının aracı etkisi, lider-üye etkileşimi yüksek olan çalışanlarda daha kuvvetli bulunmuştur

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Lider-Üye Etkileşimi, Örgütsel Vatandaşlık Davranışı, Takım Performansı, İşe Adanmışlık, Olumlu duygulanım özelliği.

Kaynakça

1. Aiken, L. S. Ve West, S. G. (1991) Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
2. Albrecht, S. L. (2010) Handbook of Employee Engage- ment: Perspectives, İssues, Research And Practice. Chelten- ham, UK: Edward Elgar.
3. Anand, S., Vidyarthi, P. R., Liden, R. C. ve Rousseau, D. M. (2010) “Good Citizens in Poor-Quality Relation- ships: Idiosyncratic Deals As A Substitute For Relation- ship Quality” Academy of Management Journal, 53: 970– 988.
4. Bakker, A.B. (2009) “Building Engagement In The Workplace” In R.J. Burke & C.L. Cooper (eds), The Peak Performing Organization, Oxford: Routledge, 50–72.
5. Bakker, A.B. ve Demerouti, E. (2007) “The Job De- mands-Resources Model: State Of The Art” Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22: 309–28.
6. Bakker, A.B. ve Demerouti, E. (2009) “The Cross- over Of Work Engagement Between Working Couples: A Closer Look At The Role Of Empathy” Journal of Mana- gerial Psychology,24: 220–36.
7. Bakker, A. B., Albrecht, S. L. ve Leiter, M. P. (2011) “Work Engagement: Further Reflections On The State Of Play” European Journal of Work and Organizational Psy- chology, 20: 74–88.
8. Bakker, A. B. ve Leiter, M. P. (Eds.). (2010) Work En- gagement: A Handbook Of Essential Theory And Research. New York: Psychology Press.

9. Bakker, A. B., Tims, M. ve Derks, D. (2012) “Proac- tive Personality and Job Performance: The Role Of Job Crafting And Work Engagement” Human Relations, 65: 1359–1378.
10. Baron, R. M. ve Kenny, D. A. (1986) “The Moderator Mediator Variable Distinction In Social Psychological- Research— Conceptual, Strategic, And Statistical Con- siderations” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6): 1173–1182.
11. Blau, P. M. (1964) Exchange and Power In Social Life, New York, John Wiley & Sons.
12. Browne, M. W. ve Cudeck, R. (1993) Alternative Ways Of Assessing Model Fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing Structural Equation Models, 445– 455. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
13. Brunettoa, Y. , Shacklockb, K., Teoc, S., Farr-Whar- tond, R. (2014) “The İmpact Of Management On The Engagement And Well-Being Ofhigh Emotional Labour Employees” The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(17): 2345–2363,
14. Byrne, B. M. (2001) Structural Equation Modeling With Amos: Basic Concepts, Applications, And Program- ming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
15. Chan, D. (1998) “Functional Relations Among Con- structs İn The Same Content Domain At Different Levels Of Analysis: A Typology Of Composition Models” Jour- nal of Applied Psychology, 83: 234-246.
16. Chen, G. ve Bliese, P. D. (2002) “The Role Of Dif- ferent Levels Of Leadership İn Predicting Self And Col- lective Efficacy: Evidence For Discontinuity” Journal of Applied Psychology, 87: 549-556.
17. Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G. ve Aiken, L. S. (2003) Applied Multiple Regression/ Correlation Analysis For The Behavioral Sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erl- baum.
18. Cropanzano, R. ve Mitchell, M. S. (2005) “Social Ex- change Theory: An İnterdisciplinary Review” Journal of Management, 31: 874–900.
19. Demerouti, E. ve Cropanzano, R. (2010) “From thought to action: employee work engagement and job performance” Bakker & Leiter (eds), 147–63.
20. Fredrickson, B. L. (2001) “The Role Of Positive Emo- tions İn Positive Psychology: The Broaden And- Build Theory Of Positive Emotions” The American Psychologist, 56: 218–226.
21. Gerstner, C. R. Ve Day, D. V. (1997) “Meta-Analytic Review of Leader-Member Exchange Theory: Correlates And Construct İssues” Journal of Applied Psychology, 82: 827–844.
22. Gilboa, S., Shirom, A., Fried, Y. ve Cooper, C. (2008) “A Meta-Analysis of Work Demand Stressors and Job Performance: Examining Main and Moderating Effects” Personnel Psychology, 61: 227-271.
23. Griffin, M. A., Neal, A. ve Parker, S. K. (2007) “A new model of work role performance: Positive behavior in uncertain and interdependent contexts” Academy of Man- agement Journal, 50: 327–347.
24. Hakanen, J.J., Perhoniemi, L. ve Toppinen-Tanner, S. (2008) “Positive gain spirals at work: from job resources to work engagement, personal initiative and work-unit innovativeness” Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73: 78–91.
25. Hall, R. J., Snell, A. F. ve Foust, M. S. (1999) “Item Parceling Strategies in SEM: Investigating The Subtle Ef- fects Of Un-Modeled Secondary Constructs” Organiza- tional Research Methods, 2: 233-256.
26. Hobfoll, S.E. (2002) “Social and Psychological Re- sources and Adaptation” Review of General Psychology, 6, 307–24.
27. Hu, L. ve Bentler, P. M. (1995) “Evaluation model fit” R. H. Hoyle (Eds), Structural Equation Modeling: Concepts, İssues and Applications, 1: 76–99. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
28. Hu, L.-T. ve Bentler, P. M. (1999) “Cut Off Criteria for Fit İndices in Covariance Structure Analysis: Conven- tional Criteria Versus New Alternatives” Structural Equa- tion Modeling, 6: 1–55.
29. Hyvonen, K., Feldt, T., Salmela-Aro, K., Kinnunen, U. ve Makikangas, A. (2009) “Young Managers’ Drive To Thrive: A Personal Work Goal Approach To Burnout And Work Engagement” Journal of Vocational Behavior, 75, 183–96.
30. Klein, K. J., Conn, A. B., Smith, D. B. ve Sorra, J. S. (2001) “Is Everyone İn Agreement? An Exploration Of Within-Group Agreement İn Employee Perceptions Of The Work Environment” Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 3-16.
31. Kline, R. B. (2005) Principles And Practice Of Struc- tural Equation Modeling (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guil- ford Press.
32. Liden, R. C. ve Maslyn, J. M. (1998) “Multi-Dimen- sionality of Leader-Member Exchange: An Empirical As- sessment Through Scale Development” Journal of Man- agement, 24: 43–72.
33. Luthans, F., Youssef, C.M. ve Avolio, B.J. (2007) Psy- chological Capital: Developing the
34. Human Competitive Edge, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
35. MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W. ve Sugawara, H. M. (1996) “Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure models” Psychological Meth- ods, 1: 130–149.
36. MacKinnon, D. P. (2008) Introduction To Statistical Mediation Analysis. New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
37. MacKinnon, D. P. ve Fairchild, A. J. (2009) “Current Directions in Mediation Analysis” Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(1): 16–20.
38. MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., Hoffman, J. M., West, S. G. ve Sheets, V. (2002) “A Comparison of Methods To Test Mediation and Other Intervening Vari- able Effects” Psychological Methods, 7: 83–104.
39. Macey, W. H., & Schneider, B. (2008) “Engaged in engagement: We are delighted we did it” Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1: 76–83.
40. Muller, D., Judd, C. M. ve Yzerbyt, V. Y. (2005) “When Moderation Is Mediated and Mediation Is Moderated” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(6): 852–863.
41. Salanova, M., Agut, S. ve Peiro, J.M. (2005) “Link- ing Organizational Resources and Work Engagement to Employee Performance and Customer Loyalty: The Me- diation of Service Climate” Journal of Applied Psychology, 90: 1217–1227.
42. Scandura, T. A. ve Graen, G. B. (1984) “Moderating Effects of Initial Leader-Member Exchange Status on The Effects of A Leadership Intervention” Journal of Applied Psychology, 69: 428–436.
43. Schaufeli, W.B., Bakker, A.B. ve Salanova, M. (2006) “The Measurement of Work Engagement With A Brief Questionnaire: A Cross-National Study” Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66: 701–16.
44. Schaufeli, W. B. ve Bakker, A. B. (2010) “The con- ceptualization and measurement of work engagement: A review” In A. B. Bakker, & M. P. Leiter (Eds.), Work En- gagement: A Handbook Of Essential Theory And Research, 10–24. New York: Psychology Press.
45. Scrima, F., Lorito, L., Parryc, E. ve Falgaresb, G. (2014) “The Mediating Role of Work Engagement on The Relationship Between Job İnvolvement and Affective Commitment” The International Journal of Human Re- source Management, 25 (15), 2159–2173.
46. Sonnentag, S. (2003) “Recovery, work engagement, and proactive behavior: a new look at the interface be- tween non-work and work” Journal of Applied Psychology, 88: 518–28.
47. Tims M., Bakker A.B. ve Derks D. (2012) “Develop- ment And Validation Of The Job Crafting Scale” Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80: 173−186.
48. Tims M., Bakker A.B. ve Derks D. Ve Van Rhenen, W. (2013) “Job Crafting at The team and Individual Lev- el: Implications for Work Engagement and Performance” Group and Organization Management, 38:427-454.
49. Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E. ve Schaufeli, W. B. (2009) “Reciprocal Relationships Be- tween Job Resources, Personal Resources and Work En- gagement” Journal of Vocational Behavior, 74, 235–244.
50. Villiersa, J. R. ve Standera, M. W. (2011) “Psycho- logical Empowerment, Work Engagement andTurnover Intention: The Role of Leader Relations and Role Clarity in a Financial Institution”, Journal of Psychology in Africa, 21(3), 405–412.
51. Watson, D., Clark, L. A. Ve Tellegen, A. (1988) “De- velopment and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales” Journal of Person- ality and Social Psychology, 54: 1063-1070.
52. Williams, L. J., ve Anderson, S. E. (1991) “Job satis- faction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship behavior” Journal of Manage- ment, 17: 601–617.