Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 143, Issue 1, pp 99–109 | Cite as

Organizational Citizenship Behaviors of Directors: An Integrated Framework of Director Role-Identity and Boardroom Structure

Article

Abstract

While directors’ task boundaries are usually ambiguous, some of their activities or behaviors clearly constitute their formal duties, whereas others are usually perceived as organizational citizenship behavior (OCB). Applying identity theory, we present a theoretical model that demonstrates one of the key drivers for directors to engage in OCB with a focus on their role identity. We argue that an individual director’s role identity is one of the key factors that motivate directors to engage in OCB. Furthermore, we propose that two board-level contingencies, board capital, and informal board hierarchy order, can moderate the effect of directors’ role-identity salience on their OCB. That is, low levels of board capital and directors’ higher positions in a board’s informal hierarchy enhance directors’ motivation to engage in OCB.

Keywords

Board capital Board informal hierarchy Board of directors Director identity Organization citizenship behavior 

References

  1. AICD. (2011). Position description for a non-executive director. New South Wales, AU: Australian Institute of Company Directors.Google Scholar
  2. Allen, T. D., & Rush, M. C. (1998). The effects of organizational citizenship behavior on performance judgments: A field study and a laboratory experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(2), 247–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ashforth, B. E., Harrison, S. H., & Corley, K. G. (2008). Identification in organizations: An examination of four fundamental questions. Journal of Management, 34(3), 325–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bell, P. D. (1993). Fulfilling the public trust: Ten ways to help nonprofit boards maintain accountability. Washington, DC: National center for Nonprofit Boards.Google Scholar
  5. Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1993). Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of contextual performance. In N. Schmitt & W. C. Borman (Eds.), Personnel selection in organizations (pp. 71–98). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  6. Boyd, B. K., Haynes, K. T., & Zona, F. (2011). Dimensions of CEO-board relations. Journal of Management Studies, 48(8), 1892–1923.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brown, W. O., Helland, E., & Smith, J. K. (2006). Corporate philanthropic practices. Journal of Corporate Finance, 12(5), 855–877.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Capezio, A., Cui, L., Hu, H. W., & Shields, J. (2014). What governs directors’ monitoring behavior in China? The influence of director social identification, learning goal orientation, and avoidance orientation. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 31(4), 899–924.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chatterjee, A., & Hambrick, D. C. (2011). Executive personality, capability cues, and risk taking: How narcissistic CEOs react to their successes and stumbles. Administrative Science Quarterly, 56(2), 202–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Coca-Cola. (2013). Board of directors guidelines on significant corporate governance issues. Atlanta, GA: Coca-Cola Enterprises Inc.Google Scholar
  11. Coffey, B. S., & Wang, J. (1998). Board diversity and managerial control as predictors of corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 17(14), 1595–1603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cole, S. (2012). Mind the expectation gap: The role of a company director. New South Wales, AU: Australian Institute of Company Directors White paper.Google Scholar
  13. Companies Act. (2006). Companies Act 2006. ‘Chapter 46’. www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/pdfs/ukpga_20060046_en.pdf. Accsssed 5 June 2015.
  14. Corporate Governance Code. (2014). The UK corporate governance code. London, UK: Financial Reporting Council.Google Scholar
  15. Dalton, D. R., & Dalton, C. M. (2011). Integration of micro- and macro-studies in governance research: CEO duality, board composition, and financial performance. Journal of Management, 37(2), 404–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Del Brio, E. B., Yoshikawa, T., Connelly, C. E., & Tan, W. L. (2013). The effects of CEO trustworthiness on directors’ monitoring and resource provision. Journal of Business Ethics, 118(1), 155–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Doz, Y. L., & Kosonen, M. (2007). The new deal at the top. Harvard Business Review, 85(6), 98–104.Google Scholar
  18. Finkelstein, S., & Mooney, A. C. (2003). Not the usual suspects: how to use board process to make boards better. Academy of Management Executive, 17(2), 101–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Forbes, D. P., & Milliken, F. J. (1999). Cognition and corporate governance: Understanding boards of directors as strategic decision-making groups. Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 489–505.Google Scholar
  20. George, J. M., & Brief, A. P. (1992). Feeling good-doing good: A conceptual analysis of the mood at work-organizational spontaneity relationship. Psychological Bulletin, 112(2), 310–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Golden-Biddle, K., & Rao, H. (1997). Breaches in the boardroom: Organizational identity and conflicts of commitment in a non-profit organization. Organization Science, 8, 593–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hambrick, D. C., von Werder, A. V., & Zajac, E. J. (2008). New directions in corporate governance research. Organization Science, 19(3), 381–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Haynes, K. T., & Hillman, A. (2010). The effect of board capital and CEO power on strategic change. Strategic Management Journal, 31(11), 1145–1163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. He, J., & Huang, Z. (2011). Board informal hierarchy and firm financial performance: Exploring a tacit structure guiding boardroom interactions. Academy of Management Journal, 54(6), 1119–1139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Higgs, D. (2003). Review of the role and effectiveness of non-executive directors. London, UK: The Department of Trade and Industry.Google Scholar
  26. Hillman, A. J., & Dalziel, T. (2003). Boards of directors and firm performance: Integrating agency and resource dependence perspectives. Academy of Management Review, 28(3), 383–396.Google Scholar
  27. Hillman, A. J., Nicholson, G., & Shropshire, C. (2008). Multiple identities, identification and board monitoring and resource provision. Organization Science, 19(3), 441–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Huse, M. (2005). Accountability and creating accountability: A framework for exploring behavioural perspectives of corporate governance. British Journal of Management, 16(S1), S65–S79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. IWDA. (2015). Position description: Non-executive director. Melbourne, VIC: International Women’s Development Agency.Google Scholar
  30. Johnson, S. G., Schnatterly, K., & Hill, A. D. (2013). Board composition beyond independence: Social capital, human capital, and demographics. Journal of Management, 39(1), 232–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Koys, D. J. (2001). The effects of employee satisfaction, organizational citizenship behavior, and turnover on organizational effectiveness: A unit-level, longitudinal study. Personnel Psychology, 54(1), 101–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kroll, M., Walters, B. A., & Wright, P. (2008). Board vigilance, director experience, and corporate outcomes. Strategic Management Journal, 29(4), 363–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lin, C. (2008). Clarifying the relationship between organizational citizenship behaviors, gender, and knowledge sharing in workplace organizations in Taiwan. Journal of Business and Psychology, 22(3), 241–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lin, C. C., & Peng, T. K. (2010). From organizational citizenship behaviour to team performance: The mediation of group cohesion and collective efficacy. Management and Organization Review, 6(1), 55–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lorsch, J. W., & MacIver, E. (1989). Pawns or potentates: The reality of America’s corporate boards. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  36. Lynch, K. D. (2007). Modeling role enactment: Linking role theory and social cognition. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 37(4), 379–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Magee, J. C., & Galinsky, A. D. (2008). Social hierarchy: The self-reinforcing nature of power and status. Academy of Management Annals, 2(1), 351–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Minichilli, A., Zattoni, A., Nielsen, S., & Huse, M. (2012). Board task performance: An exploration of micro- and macro-level determinants of board effectiveness. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33(2), 193–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Morrison, E. W. (1994). Role definitions and organizational citizenship behavior: The importance of the employee’s perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 37(6), 1543–1567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  41. Organ, D. W. (1990). The subtle significance of job satisfaction. Clinical Laboratory Management Review, 4, 94–98.Google Scholar
  42. Organ, D. W. (1997). Organizational citizenship behavior: It’s construct clean-up time. Human Performance, 10(2), 85–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. (1978). The external control of organizations: A resource-dependence perspective. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  44. Podsakoff, P. M., Ahearne, M., & MacKenzie, S. B. (1997). Organizational citizenship behavior and the quantity and quality of work group performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(2), 262–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Podsakoff, P. M., & MacKenzie, S. B. (1997). Impact of organizational citizenship behavior on organizational performance: A review and suggestions for further research. Human Performance, 10(2), 133–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B., & Bachrach, D. G. (2000). Organizational citizenship behaviors: A critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research. Journal of Management, 26(3), 513–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Preston, J. B., & Brown, W. A. (2004). Commitment and performance of nonprofit board members. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 15(2), 221–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Rego, A., & Cunha, M. P. E. (2008). Organisational citizenship behaviours and effectiveness: An empirical study in two small insurance companies. The Service Industries Journal, 28(4), 541–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Roberts, J., McNulty, T., & Stiles, P. (2005). Beyond agency conceptions of the work of the non-executive director: Creating accountability in the boardroom. British Journal of Management, 16(s1), S5–S26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Ryan, J. J. (2002). Work values and organizational citizenship behavior: Values that work for employees and organizations. Journal of Business and Psychology, 17(1), 123–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Serpe, R. T. (1987). Stability and change in self: A structural symbolic interactionist explanation. Social Psychology Quaterly, 50(1), 44–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Serpe, R. T., & Stryker, S. (1987). The construction of self and the reconstruction of social relationships. In E. J. Lawler & B. Markovsky (Eds.), Advances in group processes (Vol. 4, pp. 41–66). Greenwich, CT: JAI and Publishing House.Google Scholar
  53. Tam, O. K., & Hu, H. W. (2006). Supervisory boards in Chinese corporate governance. In L. S. Ho & R. Ash (Eds.), China, Hong Kong and the world economy: Study on globalization (pp. 327–347). New York, NY: Palgrave-Macmillan.Google Scholar
  54. Tang, Y., Qian, C., Chen, G., & Shen, R. (2015). How CEO hubris affects corporate social (ir)responsibility. Strategic Management Journal, 36, 1338–1357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Thoits, P. A. (1991). On merging identity theory and stress research. Social Psychology Quarterly, 54(2), 101–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Thoits, P. A. (1992). Identity structures and psychological well-being: Gender and marital status comparisons. Social Psychology Quarterly, 55(3), 236–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Van Dyne, L., Cummings, L. L., & Parks, J. M. (1995). Extra role behaviors: In pursuit of construct and definitional clarity (a bridge over muddied waters). In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 17, pp. 215–285). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  58. Wang, J., & Coffey, B. S. (1992). Board composition and corporate philanthropy. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(10), 771–778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Wei, Y. (2014). The benefits of organizational citizenship behavior for job performance and the moderating role of human capital. International Journal of Business and Management, 9(7), 87–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Welbourne, T. M., Johnson, D. E., & Erez, A. (1998). The role-based performance scale: Validity analysis of a theory-based measure. Academy of Management Journal, 41(5), 540–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Williams, R. J. (2003). Women on corporate boards of directors and their influence on corporate philanthropy. Journal of Business Ethics, 42(1), 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Withers, M. C., Corley, K. G., & Hillman, A. J. (2012). Stay or leave: Director identities and voluntary exit from the board during organizational crisis. Organization Science, 23(3), 835–850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Yoshikawa, T., Zhu, H., & Wang, P. (2014). National governance system, corporate ownership, and roles of outside directors: A corporate governance bundle perspective. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 22(3), 252–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Zajac, E. J., & Westphal, J. D. (1996). Director reputation, CEO-board power, and the dynamics of board interlocks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(3), 507–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Zhu, D. H., & Chen, G. (2014). Narcissism, director selection, and risk-taking spending. Strategic Management Journal. doi: 10.1002/smj.2322.Google Scholar
  66. Zhu, H., & Yoshikawa, T. (2015). Contingent value of director identification: The role of government directors in monitoring and resource provision in an emerging economy. Strategic Management Journal. doi: 10.1002/smj.2408.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Lee Kong Chian School of BusinessSingapore Management UniversitySingaporeSingapore
  2. 2.Department of Management & MarketingUniversity of MelbourneMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations