Social identification, personal needs and organizational citizenship behavior in universities. Frank H.M. Govers

Transcription

1 Social identification, personal needs and organizational citizenship behavior in universities Frank H.M. Govers

2 Master Thesis Organisation Studies Social identification, personal needs and organizational citizenship behavior in universities Frank H.M. Govers Tilburg University August 2005 Title of the Master Thesis circle MSOS-11: From functional requirements to identity expectations: New demands on co-workers in contemporary organizations Details of student Frank H.M. Govers Student number: Phone number: / Mail: fgovers@hotmail.com Name of the supervisors Supervisor MTO*: dr. Liesbet A. van Dijk Supervisor 1: dr. Hans G. Siebers Supervisor 2: dr. Petru L. Curseu * Methodology and Statistics; concerning the individual research proposal

3 Preface This thesis is written to complete the Master Organisation Studies. Concepts in the field of organizational psychology and their relationships were explored with the use of literature and empirical data. When I was writing my research proposal, I wanted to do something new. That is, I did not like to replicate previous research. During literature study I discovered that this could not completely be avoided, because some of my ideas were written down already. However, I enjoyed having my own research project. I also enjoyed the thesis circle meetings with co-students. Thank you all. Also a word of gratitude to my first supervisor, Hans Siebers: Your dedication and enthusiasm are praiseworthy and your advice helped to improve the quality of my thesis. And to my other supervisors, Petru Curseu and Liesbet van Dijk: You reviewed my research proposal or an earlier version of the thesis and came up with really solid advice! I am also grateful to Ruud Govers, Luc van Baest, Rene Schalk, Peter van den Berg, Angelique Arnold and Daan van Knippenberg for their advice. Lastly, a word of gratitude to the teachers of Zuyd University, Fontys University and Avans University who filled out my questionnaire and to the people behind who facilitated the use of an electronic questionnaire. Frank Govers Tilburg University, August 2005 ii

4 Abstract This study was carried out to get a better understanding of the relationships between social identification, personal needs and organizational citizenship behavior. Social identification is about the perception of oneness with or belonginess to a group. Identification with the workgroup, with the organization and with the occupational group were used as variables. Personal needs are about human desires. McClellands need for achievement and need for affiliation were used. Organizational citizenship behavior is about particular behavior that goes beyond existing role expectations. Helping behavior towards the work group, loyalty towards the organization and individual initiative towards students were used. For this study, the key aspects of these variables were described, together with accompanying theories. Moreover, hypotheses about correlations were formulated. To obtain empirical evidence paper and electronic questionnaires were distributed among teachers at Dutch universities to collect cross-sectional data. This resulted in 122 participants. Explorative factor analyses and partial correlation analyses were carried out. Social identification was related to OCB in universities, but only to the extent that identification with the organization was associated with organizational loyalty. Personal needs were related to OCB in universities, but only to the extent that the need for achievement was associated with individual initiative towards students. Other relationships were not statistical significant or could not explain 10 percent of the shared variance or more. iii

5 Contents Preface Abstract List of figures and tables ii iii v 1 Introduction Background and relevance of the research Research goal and questions 2 2 Theories Social identification Personal needs Organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) 8 3 Hypotheses Social identification versus OCB Personal needs versus OCB Personal needs versus social identification 12 4 Method Research sample Data collection Measures Control variables Response 19 5 Results Preliminary Analyses Explorative factor and reliability analyses Correlation analyses 25 6 Conclusions and discussion Conclusions Limitations Future research 31 Epilogue 33 References 34 Appendices 38 iv

6 List of figures and tables Figure 3.1 Conceptual model (simplified) 10 Table 5.1 Descriptive statistics 25 Table 5.2 Partial correlations between social identification and OCB 26 Table 5.3 Partial correlations between personal needs and OCB 26 Table 5.4 Partial correlations between personal needs and social identification 27 Figure A-1 Components with eigenvalues of social identification 50 Figure A-2 Components with eigenvalues of personal needs 54 Figure A-3 Components with eigenvalues of OCB 58 Table A-1 Levels of self-categorization vs. categories of needs 40 Table A-2 Factor loadings social identification 51 Table A-3 Reliability Identification workgroup 52 Table A-4 Reliability Identification organization 53 Table A-5 Factor loadings personal needs 55 Table A-6 Reliability Need for achievement 56 Table A-7 Reliability Need for affiliation 57 Table A-8 Factor loadings OCB 59 Table A-9 Reliability Loyalty organization 60 Table A-10 Reliability Initiative students 61 Table A-11 Bivariate and partial correlations between identification and OCB 62 Table A-12 Bivariate and partial correlations between needs and OCB 62 Table A-13 Bivariate and partial correlations between needs and identification 63 Table A-14 Bivariate correlations between scales and categorical control variables 64 Table A-15 Bivariate correlations between scales and continuous control variables 65 v

7 1 Introduction This chapter first clarifies the background and relevance of the research. Then research goal and questions are discussed. 1.1 Background and relevance of the research Each individual has particular ideas about how he or she can be described. These ideas are stored in his or her self-concept. This self-concept consists of a personal identity and a social identity. Especially the social identity is of interest in this study. This identity is based on particular group memberships that are important to one s self-definition. It is likely that this identity partly determines how an individual behaves oneself. To what extent depends on how much an individual perceives to be one with particular groups. In other words, it depends on how strong social identification with these groups is. When applied to organizations: If employees identify strongly with a particular work group, they are likely to be motivated to display behavior that serves this group (Van Dick, Wagner, Stellmacher, & Christ, 2004: 174). Besides social identification there are other psychological aspects that influence employees behavior, like personal needs. For example: People can differ in how persistent they are to reach objectives at work, in how much they prefer to have social contact with colleagues, or in how much they prefer to be in charge (McClelland, 1987). These illustrations refer to the need for achievement, the need for affiliation and the need for dominance, respectively, and are important in determining behavior at work (Stahl: 1986: 3; Steers & Braunstein, 1976: 252). Thus social identification and personal needs both influence behavior or are at least related to it. It was wondered to what extent social identification and personal needs are related to behavior that is in some way beyond the reach of traditional measures of job performance (Van Dyne, Graham & Dienesch, 1994: 765). For example: Making extra effort at work and being helpful to colleagues. Different concepts have been used to refer to such behavior. A literature study revealed two concepts that were most popular in the past decade: Extra-role behavior (e.g., Van Dyne, Cummings & McLean Parks, 1995; Somech & Drach-Zahavy, 2000) and organizational citizenship behavior (e.g., Organ, 1997; Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine & Bachrach, 2000; Christ, Van Dick, Wagner & Stellmacher, 2003). 1

8 It appeared that these concepts were used in different ways. Sometimes they were regarded as being equal and at other times as being different but related to each other. See Van Dyne et al. (1995) and Organ (1997) for discussions about the subject. In this study the concerned behavior is called organizational citizenship behavior and this behavior is regarded as a form of extra-role behavior. Extra-role behavior is about behavior that goes beyond existing role expectations. The relationships between the personal needs, social identification and organizational citizenship behavior were unclear. That is: The concepts were not studied jointly in previous research. Therefore, this study had a clear scientific relevance. 1.2 Research goal and questions The goal of this study was to get a better understanding of the relationships between social identification, personal needs and organizational citizenship behavior. With regard to social identification, identification with the workgroup, identification with the organization and identification with the occupational group were included. With regard to personal needs, the need for achievement and the need for affiliation were included. With regard to organizational citizenship behavior, individual initiative towards students, loyalty towards the organization and helping behavior towards colleagues were included. To reach the goal, cross-sectional data were obtained in universities, using a questionnaire. The research question of this study was: To what extent are social identification, personal needs and organizational citizenship behavior in universities related to each other? The subquestions that were derived: 1. What are the key aspects of social identification and accompanying theories? 2. What are the key aspects of personal needs and accompanying theories? 3. What are the key aspects of organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) and how can it be conceptualized? 4. Is social identification related to OCB in universities? 5. Are personal needs related to OCB in universities? 6. Are personal needs related to social identification in universities? 2

9 2 Theories The variables used in this study were derived from existing theories and previous research. To deal with the subquestions 1, 2 and 3, these theories, previous research and variables are discussed in this chapter. The concepts of social identification, personal needs and organizational citizenship behavior are presented here. 2.1 Social identification The concept of social identification as used in this study was derived from the social identity approach. The term social identity approach is used to refer to two related theories: the social identity theory and the self-categorization theory. Individuals have particular ideas about how they can be described, which are stored in their self-concept. According to the social identity theory, a self-concept is constituted of a personal identity and a social identity. Personal identity is defined as an individual s knowledge that he or she is different from other people (group members), together with some emotional and value significance to him or her of this sense of individuality (Haslam, 2004: 281). Social identity is defined as the individual s knowledge that he or she belongs to certain groups together with some emotional and value significance to him or her of the group membership (Haslam: 281). As cited by Mael and Ashforth (1992): (...) he or she perceives him or herself as psychologically intertwined with the fate of the group, as sharing a common destiny and experiencing its successes and failures (p. 104). When this happens, social identification takes place, which is defined as the perception of oneness with or belonginess to a group (Ashforth & Mael, 1989: 21). The process that leads from a personal identity to a social identity and behavior that is in line with this latter identity is called depersonalization. The extent to which depersonalization takes place can differ and is elaborated in the self-categorization theory. Main assumptions of this theory as formulated in previous research and publications (Haslam, 2004; Reynolds, Turner & Haslam, 2003; Ellemers, De Gilder & Haslam, 2004; Haslam, Powell, and Turner, 2000; Reid & Hogg, 2005) are explained below. Basic concepts of the theory are accentuated. 3

10 I. There are various categories at various levels available for identification. According to the process of social categorization, people organize social information in many situations by categorizing individuals into groups. This categorization is based on particular attributes of these groups. These attributes can be particular behavior or attitudes of group members, which make groups distinctive from each other. Social categorization enables individuals to focus on collective properties that are relevant to the situation at hand (e.g., students versus teachers), while neglecting the noise of other variations (e.g., differences in age or clothing style) that occur among individuals within the same group. (Ellemers et al., 2004: 462). Each individual can be categorized into multiple groups. To illustrate: An individual can be a football player or a scientist, each referring to another category. The categories themselves can be classified according to the level of abstraction. To illustrate: An individual can identify oneself with scientists who form an occupational group (in contrast to other occupational groups), with a particular university (in contrast to other universities), and with a particular faculty of that university (in contrast to other faculties). Each higher-level category contains the lower-level ones. So, the category scientists includes the category scientists of university X. The category scientists of university X includes the category scientists of faculty α of university X. All these categories used for illustration are social categories. Therefore identification with these categories can be classified as identification at a social level of abstraction. Identification can also take place at a personal level of abstraction. In that case an individual sees oneself not as a group member, but just as an individual who differs from other individuals. II. Each category has its own representatives. Each category is based on particular attributes that makes groups being distinctive from each other. To what extent members of a category possess these attributes will differ. In other words: Members will differ in the extent in which they are perceived to be representatives of a particular category. They differ in the degree of prototypicality. Which of the attributes are the most decisive in defining a category depends on the process of social comparison. To illustrate: In a comparison with economists, a relatively non-scientific psychologist may be quite prototypical of the category psychologists. But in comparison with artists, that person s prototypicality is likely to decrease relative to a psychologist who is more scientific. 4

11 III. Whether a category is used to identify with depends on individual factors and situational factors. Only one category can be psychologically at the fore in a particular situation. To illustrate: Depending on the time and place being, an individual can define oneself as being either a football player or a scientist. If a particular category is used to define oneself, or in other words if it is cognitively activated, it is said that a particular identity is salient. It is assumed that if a particular identity is salient, others are not or at least to a lesser extent. Salience of an identity depends on individual factors and situational factors. The term perceiver readiness is about individual factors and the term fit is about situational factors. Firstly, perceiver readiness is explained. The fact that organization members are not cognitive stick figures whose behavior is unaffected by emotions or interactions (Mowday & Sutton, 1993: 197) is taken into account. The importance of a category membership in self-definition plays a role. It is more likely that a category will be used as a basis for perception or action if the individual is psychologically predisposed to use it. The terms accessibility and perceiver readiness refer to this psychological predisposition. Perceiver readiness is influenced by individual s motives, needs, past experience and one s desire to maintain or improve one s self-esteem. The readiness to use a category is mainly based on previous contexts. Secondly, fit is explained. In contrast to perceiver readiness, fit is mainly based on the current context. Fit can be divided in normative fit and comparative fit. According to the principle of normative fit, perceptible attributes of people in a particular situation must be in line with expectations. If these expectations are not met, the categorization will not be evoked to make sense of events. To illustrate: A psychologist has particular expectations about how psychologists can be characterized and in what ways they differ from, for instance, economists. The categories psychologists and economists will only be used to define people who are present in a particular situation if these expectations are met. According to the principle of comparative fit, the level of abstraction at which self-categorization takes place must be in line with the point of reference in a particular context. People compare themselves with others, which is called social comparison. They try to maximize intracategory similarities and intercategory differences simultaneously. The term meta-contrast is used in this respect. To illustrate: If a psychologist is surrounded by other psychologists and economists and no others are present, 5

12 he or she is likely to define oneself as a psychologist. However, when also non-scientists are present, he or she is more likely to define oneself as a scientist. IV. Identification with a particular category influences an individual in several ways. Identification with a category gives a description of who someone is and prescriptions of how someone should act. When identification with a group takes place, one is aware of being a member of the group, one feels emotional attached to the group and one will have a positive evaluation of the group. This will result in embodying norms associated with this group. It will also result in having the desire to be perceived by other members of this group as embodying those norms and in promoting or maintaining the interests of this group. To illustrate: If an individual identifies oneself with scientists, then he or she should want to live up to academic ideals (e.g., to be a good teacher and researcher), want to be perceived as a good academic by other academics, and want to do things which increase the status of academics relative to other groups (e.g., to argue for the value of academia relative to other professions). When using the social identity approach in organizational contexts, Van Dick and Wagner (2002: 132) argued that at least four foci of identification can be differentiated: Identification with one s own career, identification with the work group, identification with the organization and identification with the occupational group. Previous research (Van Dick et al.: 2004) provided empirical support for these different groups with which employees can identify themselves. Each focus was used as variable in this study, except identification with one s own career. This is the only focus that belongs to the personal level of abstraction and it is of a different kind. Note that it is contestable to view identification with an occupational group as a social identity. Although an occupational group can be regarded as a broad social aggregate, it is a relatively disembodied group. (Terry, Hogg & White: 1999: 229) Therefore, it is questionable whether identification as defined in the social identity approach can take place in this respect. 6

13 2.2 Personal needs The concept of personal needs as used in this study was derived from Murray s and McClelland s theories. Murray developed a taxonomy of twenty basic human needs. McClelland studies focused on three of these needs, being personal need for achievement, personal need for affiliation and personal need for power. These personal needs can be described as follows: The need for achievement is the desire to excel and involves attempting to improve on past performance. The need for affiliation, also referred to as the need to be with people, is the desire to interact socially and to be accepted by others. The need for dominance, sometimes called the need for power, is the desire to influence and direct others (Heckert, Cuneio, Hannah, Adams, Droste, Mueller, Wallis, Griffin & Roberts, 2000: 122). For reasons of parsimony, only the need for achievement and the need for affiliation are included in this study. Assumptions concerning these needs are discussed next, with reference to McClelland s Human Motivation (1987). People try to satisfy particular needs for particular reasons. People who have a high need to achieve (in McClelland s theory referred to by n Achievement) want to do things better for their own sake. In other words, they are driven by intrinsic incentives. They do not do it for extrinsic incentives, like to please others, to avoid criticism, to gain approval, or to gain time. More strongly, if extrinsic reasons are provided, like offering prices for the best performing individuals, people with a high need for achievement appear to be less motivated to do better. External incentives tend either to distract people with a high need for achievement or to encourage people with a low need for achievement to do better (p. 228). However, people with a high need for achievement have a desire for performance feedback, whether they have succeeded or failed. Task difficulty and the challenge to perform well are seen as important determinants that provide intrinsic incentives to arouse the need for achievement. If the incentive is to do better, neither a very easy task nor a very difficult one provides an opportunity to do better. If the task is easy there is no question of doing it better, since anyone can do it; if it is very difficult there is also no question of doing it better, because everyone is likely to fail in attempting it (p. 231). Research findings indeed indicated that people with a high need for achievement prefer moderate challenges: Working at levels of moderate risk where the probability of success is somewhere in the range of.30 to.50. They do not only prefer these challenges, 7

14 but they perform also better in relation with people with a low need for achievement (p. 239). The level of need for achievement people possess is influenced strongly by one s upbringing and maturation. Moreover, it is assumed that the level of need for achievement rises with one s overall maturity (p. 261). Other main characteristics of people with a high need for achievement are: If the need for achievement is aroused in individuals, they show greater persistence in accomplishing a task. Besides, they prefer being personally responsible for a performance result, because in that way they feel satisfaction from doing something better. Furthermore, for doing something better it is often necessary to do it differently than before. Therefore, people with a high need for achievement often try to do things differently (p. 243). People who have a high need for affiliation (referred to by n Affiliation), one of the other personal needs, are supposed to have other characteristics. These people learn social relationships more quickly compared to people with a low need for affiliation, are more sensitive to faces than to other objects, and engage in more dialogue with others. They prefer to work with others rather than to work alone and they are expected to show signs of maintaining their connections with others. People with a high need for affiliation prefer also challenges that can be described as moderate and they outperform people with a low need for affiliation. However, not because they are motivated to do better, but because they are motivated to gain more social approval or affection (p. 351). Therefore, one can say that they are more driven by extrinsic incentives. The need for achievement and the need for affiliation were used as variables in this study. 2.3 Organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) In contradiction to the concepts of social identification and the personal needs, the concept of organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) as used in this study could not be derived from a particular theory. In this study Organ s definition of OCB was used: Behavior that is discretionary, not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, and that in the aggregate promotes the effective functioning of the organization (Van Dyne et al., 1995: 227). By discretionary it is meant that the behavior is not an enforceable requirement of the role or job description, but it is rather a matter of personal choice. A literature study revealed that OCB can be studied from different perspectives. Each perspective focuses on particular differences: 8

15 I. Different dimensions of OCB (e.g., Podsakoff et al., 2000; Van Dyne et al., 1994); II. Different targets of OCB (Somech et al., 2000; Christ et al., 2003). In this study both perspectives were used. With regard to the first perspective, which focuses on different dimensions of behavior, an extensive metastudy of Podsakoff et al. (2000) was consulted. They gave a clear and complete overview by ordering the almost 30 forms of OCB mentioned in other research, using seven dimensions. See Appendix A for an enumeration and descriptions of these dimensions. Of the seven dimensions, three were included in this study: Helping behavior (being the 1 st dimension in the appendix), Organizational loyalty (the 3 rd dimension), and Individual initiative (the 5 th dimension). Helping behavior was included because it is often regarded as an important form of OCB (Podsakoff et al., 2000: 516). Besides, OCB in schools can often be categorized as helping behavior or individual initiative (Somech et al., 2000: 655). This latter finding provided not only a reason to include helping behavior, but also to include individual initiative. Organizational loyalty was included because it was useful in combination with a particular target of OCB (see 4.3). The other dimensions were not included in this study, because that would be beyond the scope of one paper. With regard to the second perspective, which focuses on different targets of OCB, Somech et al. s research (2000) was consulted. They provided empirical support to differentiate three distinctive targets of OCB in schools, which were included in this study: a) OCB towards the work group, b) OCB towards the organization and c) OCB towards students. The dimensions of OCB that were included in this study were linked to the different targets of OCB, taking the dimension s definitions into account. When selecting the variables about OCB in this study these linkages were used: Helping behavior is about helping others with problems or at least preventing that problems occur. The others are assumed to be mainly individuals with who one has the most contact, being colleagues of the same team or the same work group. Therefore, the first variable with regard to OCB that was included in this study was helping behavior towards the work group. Organizational loyalty is aimed at promoting and protecting the organization, among others. Therefore, the second variable that was included was loyalty towards the organization. Individual initiative has to do with the organization s performance or individual s task and one s job. It is assumed that the main task of teachers is to teach students. Therefore, the third variable that was included was individual initiative towards students. 9

16 3 Hypotheses After the discussion of all the relevant theories and variables in the previous chapter, this chapter presents the hypotheses that were formulated in order to answers the subquestions 4, 5 and 6 (see Figure 3.1). Figure 3.1 Conceptual model (simplified) 3.1 Social identification versus OCB In line with the social identity approach, social identification was supposed to be related to behavior in general. As mentioned also in previous research (Van Dick et al., 2004: 174): When employees identify strongly with their work group, they will be motivated to display behavior that serves the group instead of behavior that serves (only) themselves. In this study it was supposed that social identification is related to OCB in particular. The link between identification and OCB was supported in previous research (Ellemers, Haslam, Platow & Van Knippenberg, 2003: 16), at least with respect to identification with the organization: One of the most significant and robust empirical findings derived from social identity research is the discovery that heightened organizational identification generally leads to ( ) organizational citizenship behavior. 10

17 In this study it was expected that identification with a particular group is related to the corresponding target of OCB. This relation between different foci of identification and different targets of OCB was supported in previous research (Christ et al., 2003: 332). Furthermore, commitment oriented at organizational teams and commitment oriented at one s career was related to particular kinds of OCB, which were: making overtime to serve the team and voluntarily following training courses, respectively (Ellemers, De Gilder & Van den Heuvel, 1998). If commitment is related to particular aspects of OCB, it will be expected that this is also true for identification. If not even to a higher degree, because identification has to do with the internalization of organizational goals and depends on feelings of belonginess to a group, whereas commitment can simply reflect attraction to the resources the organizational offers (Haslam, 2004: 75; Meyer & Allen, 1997). Therefore, one can argue that identification is stronger related to OCB than commitment is. Hypothesis 1 Social identification and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) are related to each other: 1a Higher identification with the work group is associated with displaying more helping behavior towards this work group 1b Higher identification with the organization is associated with displaying more loyalty towards this organization 1c Higher identification with the occupational group is associated with displaying more individual initiative towards students The link between identification with the occupational group and OCB towards students needs some further explanation. For reasons of consistency one would expect that identification with the occupational group is associated with OCB towards this occupational group. One could think of behavior like participating actively in a labor union or organizing meetings for profession related discussions. However, it is assumed that this kind of behavior is uncommon. As alternative, the link between identification with the occupational group and OCB towards students was introduced. This link is based on the assumption that teachers perceive their main role as promoting students learning and well-being, as supported in previous research (Somech et al., 2000: 656). In this study these behaviors were regarded as preconditions for being a good teacher. If one identifies with the occupational group of teachers, 11

18 then it is expected that one will try to be a good teacher. Therefore, it was expected that OCB towards students will be displayed, because this behavior can promote students learning and well-being. 3.2 Personal needs versus OCB It was expected that personal needs were related to OCB. The need for achievement was expected to be related to OCB, because people with a high need for achievement want to do better. It is assumed that it is likely that they are motivated to display behavior that benefits one s work in one way or the other, like OCB. The dimension of OCB that was especially expected to be related to the need for achievement is individual initiative. This dimension is about showing acts of creativity and innovation to improve one s task and persisting with extra effort and volunteering to take on extra responsibilities (see Appendix A). This behavior corresponds with the behavior that could be expected from people with a high need for achievement. These people want to do things better and differently, they are persistent in accomplishing a task and they like to be personal responsible for a performance result. The need for affiliation was expected to be related to helping behavior. People with a high need for affiliation, that is who have the desire to interact socially and who are motivated to gain social approval or affection, are expected to help others. Hypothesis 2: Personal needs are related to organizational citizenship behavior: 2a Higher personal need for achievement is associated with displaying more individual initiative towards students 2b Higher personal need for affiliation is associated with displaying more helping behavior towards the work group 3.3 Personal needs versus social identification It was also expected that personal needs were related to social identification. The need for affiliation, also called the need to be with people, was expected to be related to social identification. People with a high need for affiliation will learn social relationships more quickly and they are supposed to maintain them more easily. Therefore, it was assumed that they can identify more easily with groups. Furthermore, people with a high need for affiliation are motivated to gain social approval or affection. Therefore, it was also assumed that they will be more motivated or ready to identify with groups. Pratt supported this by assuming that identification with social groups satisfies, among others, the need for affiliation (as cited by 12

19 Van Dick et al.: 2004: 173). Therefore, it was expected that the need for affiliation is associated with social identification. The link between the need for affiliation and social identification was also supported in a table of comparison including levels of self categorization and different categories of needs identified by major theorists (Haslam et al., 2000: 328). This table of comparison is included in Appendix B. In this table, the need for affiliation is linked to self categorization at a social level. Besides, the need for achievement is linked to self categorization at a personal level. The clarification that is given for this latter link: When people categorize themselves at a personal level they should be motivated to satisfy personal needs that promote their personal identity as individuals, but when they categorize themselves at a social level, they should be motivated to satisfy social needs that promote their social identity as group members. As further explained: So, when personal identity is salient this should be associated with needs to self-actualize and to enhance personal self-esteem through personal advancement and growth. On the other hand, when social identity is salient this should be associated with the need to enhance group-based self-esteem through a sense of relatedness, respect, peer recognition, and achievement of group goals. (Haslam et al., 2000: 327) Anyway, one can question the assumed relationship, taken into account that in previous research (Baruch, O Creevy, Hind & Vigoda Gadot, 2004) a link between the need for achievement and identification at a social level was found. However, a clear theoretical argumentation was lacking. To further explore the relationship empirically, a hypothesis is formulated. Note that this hypothesis is about social identification, without mentioning which of the work related groups are relevant. Hypothesis 3: Personal needs are related to social identification: 3a Higher personal need for affiliation is associated with higher identification with work related groups 3b Higher personal need for achievement is associated with higher identification with work related groups 13

20 4 Method The formulated hypotheses were tested empirically. This chapter presents the research sample, the process of data collection and the measures of the variables. Furthermore, the control variables (discussed separately) and the response get attention. 4.1 Research sample As research units teachers at two Dutch universities of professional education (hogescholen) were chosen. Previous research indicates that it is appropriate to use teachers when studying OCB in relation with psychological variables, e.g. social identification (Christ et al., 2003: 330): Teachers salary mainly depends on age and teachers rarely get promotion. Therefore, it was expected that there are only a few extrinsic motivators to engage in OCB and that mainly psychological variables play an important role in displaying this behavior. Universities are appropriate for performing this study when taking the foci of social identification into account, because universities have different layers with which teachers can identify themselves. The universities that were selected for this study are: Avans University of Professional Education and Fontys University of Professional Education. Fontys University of Professional Education (Fontys Hogescholen) was established in 1996, when five colleges of higher education merged. Nowadays, Fontys consists of circa 40 different schools that are spread over 22 locations, concentrating primarily in the southern part of The Netherlands. Avans University of Professional Education (Avans Hogeschool) was established in 2004, when two colleges of higher education merged. Avans consists of circa 20 schools that are spread over 3 locations, all in the southern part of The Netherlands. All schools of both universities offer higher professional education programs with regard to one or more disciplines. Besides regular higher education, the universities are also involved in contract activities for the professional market (e.g., applied research, training programs and consultancy). 14

21 4.2 Data collection To collect data a questionnaire was used. Therefore, it was possible to ask many questions to a lot of research units in a short period of time. This was preferable, because a high external validity was aimed at. The questionnaire was first pretested. Teachers of the study Facility Management at Hogeschool Zuyd, situated in a city in the southern part of the Netherlands, were asked to participate in this pretest. Fifteen questionnaires were received (a response rate of ca. 30%; N = 15). The results of the pretest were used to make some changes. The final questionnaire was distributed at Fontys University and Avans University. With regard to Fontys University, principles of the schools were contacted and asked for approval. Principles of six schools gave their approval, which meant that approximately 280 teachers could be reached. The questionnaire was printed and put in teachers mailboxes. Also a cover letter was enclosed. The questionnaire was introduced by via the secretaries. Besides the printed version of the questionnaire, the respondents could also fill out an electronic version on the internet, which was mentioned in the cover letter. A reminder mail was sent one to two weeks after the initial distribution of the questionnaire. See Appendix C for the cover letter and the reminder mail. With regard to Avans University, principles of the schools were also contacted and asked for approval, but indirectly via Avans central unit of communication. Contacting these principles directly was against the policy of the University. Approximately 180 teachers of four schools could be reached. Again, all teachers got a printed and an electronic version of the questionnaire. Also an introduction and later on a reminder mail were sent. 4.3 Measures The questionnaire is included in Appendix D. The items that were used in the questionnaire were derived from previous research. They had to be translated from English into Dutch. Some of the items were converted to contra-indicative ones to reduce the risk of response consistency effects. Results of the pretest indicated that this was appropriate for just a few items; other items that were initially converted were difficult to score. The selection of the items to operationalize the social identification, the personal needs and the OCB variables is discussed next. All items were scored on a five-point Likert scale, what is in line with previous research. 15

22 Social identification For the measurement of the psychological variables about social identification, three scales were created. Each focus of identification as included in this study was measured with one scale. Each scale operationalized to what extent identification with a particular group takes place. Respondents were asked to score three versions of several items. 1) To assess identification with the work group, the items referred to the study (in the meaning of an organizational subunit; universities consist of different studies that students can follow and where teachers can work for). 2) To assess identification with the organization, the items referred to the university. 3) To assess identification with the occupational group, the items referred to the occupational group of teachers. Initially, a scale from Karasawa s questionnaire (1991) was used. The items of this scale were multiplied in a way that all foci of identification were represented. However, results of the pretest revealed that most items were regarded as unclear or difficult to score. On advice of prof. Daan van Knippenberg, an expert in research about social identification, Karasawa s scale was replaced by Mael and Ashforth s scale of organizational identification (1992). Examples of items of this scale are: When someone criticizes [name of organization], it feels like a personal insult and When I talk about this [organization], I usually say we rather than they. One item of this scale was not used: If a story in the media criticized the school, I would feel embarrassed. This item seemed not suitable for all the foci of identification; media critics about a study or teachers in general are supposed to show up only sporadic. Therefore, it can be hard for respondents to score these items. In previous research this item was also left out (Mael et al., 1992: 110). Because Mael and Ashforth s scale could be criticized for focusing on the affective aspects of identification, at the expense of the cognitive (Haslam, 2004: 273), one item of Karasawa s scale (1991) was added: Would you think it was accurate if you were described as a typical [member of group x]?. All items were multiplied to represent all foci of identification. After conducting factor analyses only the scales about identification with the work group and identification with the organization were maintained. The Cronbach s alphas for these scales turned out to be respectively.67 and.80. (see 5.2). 16

23 Personal needs For the measurement of the psychological variables about the personal needs, two scales were used. Each personal need as included in this study was measured with one scale. Each scale operationalized to what extent particular needs were present. Respondents were asked to score several items. 1) To assess the need for achievement, the items were about achievement-related behavior and personal characteristics. 2) To assess the need for affiliation, the items were about affiliation-related behavior and personal characteristics. The use of these items was based on the assumption that it should be possible to measure personal needs based on the manner in which people attempt to satisfy them. To illustrate: Employees with a high need for achievement are supposed to display achievement-oriented behavior to a greater extent compared to employees with a low need for achievement (Steers et al., 1976: 252). The Needs Assessment Questionnaire (NAQ) (Heckert et al., 2000) was used to measure a) the need for achievement and b) the need for affiliation. Each scale consisted of five items. Examples of these items are: a) I try very hard to improve on my past performance at work and It is important to me to do the best job possible, and b) I spend a lot of time talking to other people and When I have a choice, I try to work in a group instead of by myself. Researchers with expertise in job motivation and personality from Tilburg University * confirmed the usability of the scales. The Cronbach s alphas for the need for achievement and need for affiliation scales turned out to be respectively.77 and.59. (see 5.2) Organizational citizenship behavior For the measurement of the variables about organizational citizenship behavior (OCB), three scales were created. Each combination of dimension and target of OCB as included in this study (see 2.3) was measured with one scale. Each scale operationalized to what extent particular OCB is displayed. Respondents were asked to score several items. 1) To assess helping behavior towards the work group, the items were about helping behavior towards colleagues of the study for which the respondents worked. 2) To assess loyalty towards the organization, the items were about loyalty towards the university. 3) To asses individual initiative towards students the items were about individual initiative towards students. * Thanks to prof. dr. R.J.D. Schalk and dr. P.T. van den Berg, who work for the faculty of Social and Behavioral Sciences. 17

24 Scales that represented the different targets of OCB in previous research among teachers at elementary schools in Israel (Somech et al., 2000) were used. Several items that were not suitable with regard to the research units in this study due to differences in context were not used. Items that belonged to the dimensions of OCB that were not included in this study (see 2.3) were also not used. The remaining items appeared to present helping behavior towards the work group, individual initiative towards the organization, and individual initiative towards students. However, the items about individual initiative towards the organization were too vague and could result in unreliable data: I volunteer for roles and tasks that are not required, I assume responsibilities that are not a prescribed part of my job and I attend functions that are not required but which help the school s image. An employee of the central offices of Avans University was asked for advice and job descriptions were studied, but the items could not be optimized. Therefore, they were deleted. Other useful alternative items that could represent individual initiative towards the organization were not found. Because it was preferred to include all targets of OCB in this study, thus also OCB towards the organization, the items were replaced by others that were about loyalty towards the organization. A scale with seven items from Van Dyne et al. (1994) was used. Again, the items that were not suitable with regard to the research units due to differences in context were excluded. Finally, twelve items about OCB were included in the questionnaire. Three items represented helping behavior towards the work group, e.g., I orient new teachers and I help other teachers who have heavy work loads. Five items represented loyalty towards the organization, e.g., I represent organization favorably to outsiders and I would accept job at competing organizations for more money (the latter item was reverse scored). Four items represented individual initiative towards students, e.g., I make innovative suggestions to improve education and I stay in class during breaks in order to listen to my students. After conducting factor analyses only the scales to measure loyalty towards the organization and individual initiative towards students were maintained. The Cronbach s alphas for these scales turned out to be.63 and.60, respectively. (see 5.2) 18

25 4.4 Control variables Also control variables were present in the questionnaire. It was assumed that the overall internal validity would have been affected if these variables had not been taken into account. To avoid this, items that asked for the school and the study for which one worked for were included. The university for which one worked for was not asked for, because this could be determined otherwise. Furthermore, an item was included to find out what occupational functions the respondents fulfilled and how many hours they officially worked for the university (measured in fte s). Also an item was included about how many years the respondents worked as teacher, as were items about how many years they worked for respectively the study, the school and the university. It was assumed that tenure could have a relationship with social identification, as supported in previous research (Bartel, 2001). It was not assumed necessary to include items about demographic characteristics of the respondents, like items about sex, age or level of education. In previous research (Van Dick et al., 2002; Ellemers et al.: 1998) no relation was found between these variables on the one hand and social identification on the other. Also no relation was found between these demographic variables and OCB (Podsakoff et al., 2000). It was also not preferred to ask respondents about their sex, age, or level of former education, because of anonymity and social desirability. It was preferred to give teachers the opportunity to fill out the questionnaire anonymous, without giving demographic information. 4.5 Response In total 122 usable questionnaires were received; 56 per cent consisted of paper questionnaires, 44 per cent of electronic ones. 102 usable questionnaires were received from Fontys University (a response rate of.36) and 20 usable questionnaires from Avans University (a response rate of.11). As mentioned in the Dutch collective labor agreement with the educational trade unions of higher professional education. 19