CHAPTER 10:

Productive Behaviors and Employee Relations

By Amanda Luz B. Angeles, Gail Michelle N. Llanto, and Vanessa V. Villaluz

Productivity
● Observable employee behavior that contributes positively to the goals and objectives of
the organization (Jex, 2000).

Productive Attitudes
● Attitudes
○ Evaluative judgments, either favorable or unfavorable, that cause individuals to
think, feel, or behave in a particular way toward other people, things, events, or
situations (Myers, 2008).
○ Good treatment = Positive attitudes : Bad treatment = Negative attitudes (Katz,
1964).
Job Attitudes
● Job Satisfaction
○ Positive emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job (Locke, 1976).
○ Three categories of job satisfaction theories (Judge et al., 2001):
■ Situational theories
● Job satisfaction stems from the nature of the job or other facets in
the work environment.
○ Facets (Locke, 1976):
i. Extrinsic:
● Pay
● Promotions
ii. Intrinsic:
● Co-workers
● Supervision
● Work itself
iii. Recognition
iv. Working conditions
v. Company
vi. Management
● Work itself oftentimes appears most strongly correlated to job
satisfaction (Rentsch and Steel, 1992).
○ Therefore, an effective way to generally increase job
satisfaction is to enhance intrinsic job characteristics
(Judge et al., 2001).
● Job Characteristics Model (Hackman & Oldham, 1980)
○ Five job characteristics that yield higher job satisfaction
and job performance while reducing withdrawal (Judge,
Locke, & Durham, 1997):
 i. Task identity - employee sees work from start to
end
ii. Task significance - employee sees work as
significant
iii. Skill variety - employee perform various tasks
iv. Autonomy - amount of discretion employee has
v. Feedback - feedback to job performance
*ALL FIVE (except task identity) job characteristics found
significantly related to job satisfaction in Israeli workers
(Fox & Feldman, 1998).

*ALL FIVE (except task significance) job characteristics

found not significantly related to job satisfaction in
Malaysian workers (Pearson & Chong, 1992).

Therefore, increasing intrinsic JCs may not necessarily

lead to an increase in job satisfaction for certain cultures.

■ Dispositional theories
● Job satisfaction is rooted in personality
● Positive affectivity = Positive outcomes : Negative affectivity =
Negative outcomes (Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988).
● Core self-evaluation (Judge, Locke, & Durham, 1997)
○ Primary assertions about self and self’s role in the
environment
○ Positive CS-E = Higher Probability of Job Satisfaction :
Negative CS-E = Lower Probability of Job Satisfaction
■ Interactive theories
● Job Satisfaction = Personality x Situation
● Value-precept theory
○ Employee’s values influence level of job satisfaction
○ Gap between what employee wants and what employee
obtains is dissatisfactory if job facet is significant to him or
her (Judge et al, 2001).
■ Measures of Job Satisfaction
● Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ)
○ 6 of 20 facets
i. Supervisor’s competence
ii. Working conditions
iii. Compensation
iv. Task variety
v. Level of job responsibility
vi. Chances for advancement
● Job Descriptive Index (JDI)
 ○ 5 facets ~ overlapping with Locke (1976)’s extrinsic and
intrinsic facets
i. Job itself
ii. Supervision
iii. Pay
iv. Promotions
v. Coworkers
Organization Commitment
● Higher organization commitment = Higher job performance, responsiveness to
organizational change, and employee turnover : Lower organization commitment =
Lower job performance, responsiveness to organizational change, and employee
turnover
● Employee’s relationship with company (Meyer & Allen, 1997)
● Three dimensions (Meyer & Allen, 1997; Dunn, Dastoor, & Sims, 2012)
○ Affective - emotional attachment
○ Normative - sense of obligation
○ Continuance - awareness of costs
Job Satisfaction and Commitment of Filipino Employees
● Kasiyahan sa trabaho stems from (Hechanova, Uy, & Presbitero, 2005):
○ Economic and job security
○ Ability to maximize abilities
○ Having a position of responsibility
○ Gaining respect from others
○ Opportunities for achievement
○ Social mobility
● Pananagutan / organizational commitment is employee’s commitment to (Cantiller,
2012):
○ Accountability
○ Reciprocity
○ Fairness
○ Integrity
○ Command responsibility
○ Shared responsibility
● Pakikisama - highly effective intrinsic motivator for Filipino employees (Yao, Franco, &
Hechanova, 2005).
○ Supported by Carbonell (2008)’s Employee Retention Factors1:
■ Level of cooperation
■ Opportunities for growth
■ Advancement
■ Quality of relationship with supervisor and manager
■ Quality of compensation and package
■ Trust among employees
Productive Behaviors (Dunn et al., 2012; Neal & Hesketh, 2001; Judge et al., 2001)

1
Intrinsic and relational
 ● Job satisfaction and organization commitment -> enhanced performance -> contribution
to productivity of organization
Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB)
● beyond the employees’ formal job requirements that foster favorable organizational
performance (Jex, 2002)
● OCB Model (Organ, 1988) has five dimensions:
1. Altruism - help colleagues; prosocial behavior
2. Conscientiousness - complying to norms and regulations; good citizen
3. Sportsmanship - tolerating difficulties
4. Courtesy - consulting before decision and sharing information
5. Civic virtue - concern for the life of the company
● OCB’s positive impact
○ Organ, Podsakoff, & MacKenzie, 2006
○ Related to high performing teams (Podsakoff et al., 1997; Mohanty & Rath,
2012).
○ Organizations with weak structures learn to rely on employees who exhibit OCBs
despite the absence of formal recognition and rewards (Griffin, Neal, & Parker,
2007; Bowler, Halbesleben, & Paul, 2010; Bambale, Shamsudin, &
Subramaniam, 2011).
○ Who exhibits OCBs?
■ Organ (1988)
● High intrinsic motivation
● Positive emotional state
● Aspire for sense of achievement (~nAch)
■ Mohanty & Rath (2012)
● High need to build social relationships (~nAff)
○ OCBs are reinforced when there is a positive and supportive work environment
● Employee engagement
○ Disagreement in definition
■ Institute of Employment Studies defines it as:
● Belief in the organization
● Desire to improve the company
● Understanding the business context
● Respect and helpfulness to colleagues
● Willingness to go the extra mile
● Keeping up to date with developments in the field
■ Rothbard (2001) defines it as involving the amount of:
● Cognitive attention
● Temporal attention
● Absorption of role
● Focus to role
■ Kahn (1990) defines it as completely employing and expressing one’s self
during role performance.
 Variety in the definitions lead to differences in understanding the relations
between OCB, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and
employee engagement (i.e. overlaps and similarities).
○ Say, stay, and strive (Baumruk & Gorman, 2006)
■ Say - promote company
■ Stay - loyalty
■ Strive - extra mile with no expectation in return
○ Employee engagement improves sales, productivity, profitability, and customer
satisfaction (Bakker, Schaufeli, Leiter, & Taris, 2008; Markos & Sridevi, 2010;
Towers Perrin, 2003).
○ Penna (2007)’s Hierarchy of Engagement

● OCB and Engagement in Philippine Organizations

○ Bayanihan involves helping each other achieve a goal, or make work easier
(Lagbao-Bolante, 2012).
○ Malasakit ascertains fair treatment, selfless acts, and sacrifice (Mattison, 2012).
○ Pagkukusa refers to sincerely helping others in need (Jocano, 2000).
○ Delicadeza and hiya ~ conscientiousness; adherence and sensitivity to norms
(Jocano, 2001)
○ Local organizations capitalize on the value of pakikisama to create a family-like
atmosphere to engage employees. Accountability in the organization becomes
collective; but family-like cultures are sometimes confused with nepotism or
unprofessionalism (Jocano, 1999; Yacat, 2012).
○ Ateneo CORD (2016)
■ Organization pride was the strongest predictor of Filipino employee
engagement.
● Reflects collectivist nature
● Filipinos have the tendency to belong to in-groups that take care
of them in exchange for loyalty.
● People’s self-image is defined in terms of “We”.
● Feeling of pride translates to behaviors that reflect malasakit
towards the organization
■ Filipinos engage in organizations whose values are like their own.
Shaping Productive Work Attitudes and Behaviors
● Cabochan (2012)
○ Use Filipino cultural strengths in organizations
● Yacat (2012) - begin with the value of kapwa
 ○ Pananagutan
○ Malasakit
○ Bayanihan
● Cantiller (2012)
○ Pananagutan through role modeling
● Pananagutan through commitment to employee welfare
● Malasakit may be sustained if reciprocated and regulated by organizations.2
● Systems and Structures can support productive behaviors
● Employee Relationships
○ Organizational celebrations (e.g. Christmas parties)
■ Malasakit for employees
■ Opportunity for interaction beyond teams
● Leadership
○ Paternalistic leadership is expected.
■ Results in tiwala and malasakit.
■ Tiwala (~trust, ~confidence) -> work motivation (Jocano, 2001)
■ Malasakit -> Employee engagement & OCB -> Productive behaviors
○ Must not be driven by feelings and partisan objectives (Franco, 1987; Yacat,
2012). Leaders must be wary of losing professionalism and practicing favoritism.

2
Should be controlled to avoid abuse of either organization or employee (Mattison, 2012)