OCB Employee Retention

Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance
The relationship between training satisfaction, organisational citizenship

behaviour, and turnover intention: A PLS-SEM approach
Mumtaz Ali Memon, Rohani Sallaeh, Mohamed Noor Rosli Baharom, Shahrina Md Nordin, Hiram
Ting,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Downloaded by University of British Columbia Library At 07:03 01 September 2017 (PT)
Mumtaz Ali Memon, Rohani Sallaeh, Mohamed Noor Rosli Baharom, Shahrina Md Nordin, Hiram
Ting, (2017) "The relationship between training satisfaction, organisational citizenship behaviour,
and turnover intention: A PLS-SEM approach", Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and
Performance, https://doi.org/10.1108/JOEPP-03-2017-0025
Permanent link to this document:
https://doi.org/10.1108/JOEPP-03-2017-0025
Downloaded on: 01 September 2017, At: 07:03 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 142 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-
srm:512739 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/2051-6614.htm
Organisational
The relationship between training citizenship
satisfaction, organisational behaviour
citizenship behaviour, and

turnover intention
A PLS-SEM approach
Mumtaz Ali Memon
Centre of Social Innovation, Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS,

Perak, Malaysia
Rohani Sallaeh, Mohamed Noor Rosli Baharom and
Shahrina Md Nordin
Department of Management and Humanities, Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS,
Perak, Malaysia, and
Hiram Ting
Sarawak Research Society, Sarawak, Malaysia
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore the role of training satisfaction as a predictor of
organisational citizenship behaviour (OCB) and turnover intention. The study further examines the mediating
role of OCB between training satisfaction and turnover intention.
Design/methodology/approach – Data were collected from 409 Malaysian oil and gas (O&G) sector
employees. Partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) was used to test the hypotheses in
the research model using SmartPLS 3.0.
Findings – This study highlights the significant positive impact of training satisfaction on OCB and the
negative effect on turnover intention. Contrary to expectations, OCB proved to be neither a predictor of
turnover intention nor a mediator in the model.
Practical implications – Although the main aim of this study was to test the theoretically driven
hypotheses, the findings have a number of valuable implications for organisations. This study suggests that
O&G organisations should focus on increasing employee satisfaction with training to maximise desired
workplace attitudes and behaviours.
Originality/value – This is the first study to explore the causal links between training satisfaction, OCB and
turnover intention. Although it has been observed in the past that training does not directly influence
turnover intention, the present study indicates that training satisfaction significantly influences turnover
intention. Further, this study unexpectedly found no direct relationship between OCB and turnover intention.
Also, OCB was not a significant mediator in the present study. These unexpected findings open new avenues
for future research, thus representing an important contribution of the present study.
Keywords Training satisfaction, Organization citizenship behaviour, Turnover intention, Oil and gas, Malaysia
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
After almost a century of research and thousands of published studies, employee turnover
remains an important topic of study in the fields of human resource management (HRM) and
organisational behaviour (Hom et al., 2017; Lee et al., 2017; Shaw and Shi, 2017). A high rate of
voluntary turnover is costly for organisations and is negatively related to overall organisational Journal of Organizational
effectiveness and success (Anvari et al., 2014; Han et al., 2016; Holtom et al., 2005; Zheng and Effectiveness: People and
Performance
Lamond, 2010). Moreover, organisations fear losing highly skilled and capable employees, while © Emerald Publishing Limited
2051-6614
employees who remain with a firm might simply be there because they have been unable to DOI 10.1108/JOEPP-03-2017-0025
JOEPP secure work elsewhere ( Juhdi et al., 2013; Nadiri and Tanova, 2010; Tanova and Holtom, 2008).
Losing good employees can result in the loss of an organisation’s competitive advantage since
these losses can lower morale and reduce productivity and quality (Duxbury and Halinski, 2014;
Holtom and Burch, 2016; Juhdi et al., 2013). The retention of talented employees, therefore, is
considered a reliable predictor of organisational excellence.
Despite the negative consequences of a high rate of voluntary turnover, the movement of
highly skilled workers from one organisation and/or country to another remains high.
The US Bureau of Labour Statistics (BLS, 2016) reported approximately 3.1 million
voluntary separations for September 2016, which is a 9.3 per cent increase over the
2.9 million voluntary separations for July that same year. More importantly, a global survey
of 2,500 business leaders from over 90 countries by Deloitte (2014) found that employee
retention was one of the major challenges facing businesses today. Similarly, businesses in
Asia have reported an increasing rate of voluntary turnover (Anvari et al., 2014). According
to the 2017 Hays Asia Salary Guide (Hays, 2017), 34 per cent of Asian employees are actively
looking for a new job. Moreover, 25 per cent of these employees plan to change jobs in the
next six months (Hays, 2017). These statistics allude to a global phenomenon of voluntary
turnover that is quickly becoming a major obstacle keeping businesses from achieving their
strategic objectives.
Training is a key predictor of organisational success (Tharenou et al., 2007), and is
necessary if organisations are to remain adaptive, competitive, innovate, secure and are to
reach their strategic goals (Salas et al., 2012). Workplace training also leads to cross-
functional integration, creates positive employee perceptions and is believed to be a critical
HRM practice intended to foster commitment during organisational change (Maheshwari
and Vohra, 2015). Consequently, firms invest billions of dollars every year in employee
training (Patel, 2010). However, there is a lack of consensus as to the relationship between
training and turnover intentions in the research literature. For example, while previous
studies indicate that training reduces turnover intentions ( Joung et al., 2010; Owens, 2006;
Zhao and Zhou, 2008), more recent studies have reported a positive relationship between
training and the rate of voluntary turnover (Gardner et al., 2011; Zheng and Lamond, 2010).
Such data would suggest that organisations who provide their employees with extensive
training opportunities in the hope of benefiting from their enhanced skills also experience a
higher rate of voluntary turnover. Additionally, numerous studies have reported that there
is no direct relationship between training and an employee’s intentions to leave (Bawa and
Jantan, 2005; Zheng and Wong, 2007). Notwithstanding, there is a paucity of research
investigating the nature of the conflict between training and turnover (Cheng and
Waldenberger, 2013; Sieben, 2007).
HRM theorists argue that HRM practices, including training, do not have a direct effect
on organisational performance, that these practices only indirectly influence the quality and
behaviour of employees (Huselid, 1995; Zheng and Lamond, 2010). Consequently, the HRM
and organisational performance research emphasises the identification of mechanisms by
which HRM practices influence various indicators of performance (Becker and Gerhart,
1996; Jiang et al., 2013). Notwithstanding, there is little in the way of published research to
date that explains the actual process through which HRM practices influence organisational
performance (Savaneviciene and Stankeviciute, 2012; Youndt, 2000).
Organisational citizenship behaviours (OCBs) may help to explain the impact of HRM
practices on performance outcomes (Kizilos et al., 2013; Snape and Redman, 2010; Sun et al.,
2007). Previous research indicates that HRM practices promote a perception among
employees of a “supportive organisational environment that motivates discretionary
behaviours” (Sun et al., 2007, p. 560). It is these discretionary behaviours that constitute
OCBs. OCBs result in positive attitudinal, intentional, behavioural and performance
outcomes (Carpenter et al., 2014; Hoffman et al., 2007; Podsakoff et al., 2014),
thus contributing to “the efficient and effective functioning of the organization” Organisational
(Organ, 1988, p. 5). Notably, OCB reduces the rate of employee turnover (Lam et al., 2009; citizenship
Paille, 2013; Podsakoff et al., 2009). Nonetheless, despite its importance, the causal behaviour
relationship between training, OCB and turnover intention remain understudied.
The present paper suggests that OCB can be a potential mediator through which
training influences employee turnover intentions. Organisations that provide adequate
training and development opportunities are thought to create a positive sense of being
valued, which ultimately generates OCBs, encouraging employees to go beyond their
defined roles and to go the extra mile. Such employees are assumed to be less likely to leave
their organisations.
The main objective of this paper is to examine the causal relationship between training
satisfaction, OCB and turnover intention. In doing so, the present study makes several
contributions to the extant training, OCB and turnover intention literature. First, previous
studies have quantified the training construct in terms of training systems, training size,
amount of money spent on training and length of formal training (Bawa and Jantan, 2005;
Gardner et al., 2011; Zheng and Lamond, 2010; Zheng and Wong, 2007). Few studies to date
have considered employee satisfaction with training in the context of the relationship
between training and turnover. Studies of how employees feel about the training they have
received and its causal relationship with turnover intention are absent conspicuously from
the academic literature. As such, the present study is unique in conceptualising training
satisfaction as an antecedent of OCB and turnover intention, thus filling a gap in the
research literature. Second, although there is a considerable body of research into both
training and turnover intention, scarcely any research has been conducted into the
mediating role of OCB in relation to these constructs. The present study, therefore, extends
the literature by assuming OCB to be an intermediary construct between training and
employee intentions to turnover voluntarily.
Third, although training has previously been discussed in the context of bundled HRM
practices or high performance work systems (Snape and Redman, 2010; Suan and Nasurdin,
2014; Sun et al., 2007), there is little consensus as to what HRM practices are essential for the
effective management of human resources (Boselie et al., 2005; Savaneviciene and Stankeviciute,
2012). Snape and Redman (2010) stress the need to pay attention to “the potentially differential
effects of specific HRM dimensions” (p. 1242). By focusing exclusively on training satisfaction, a
key dimension of HRM, the current study fills this void in the research and investigates the
extent to which training contributes to OCB and turnover intention.
Finally, unlike previous studies which have been conducted in western countries
(Pattie et al., 2006; Sieben, 2007), or in the context of China (Cheng and Waldenberger, 2013),
the present empirical study is set in the Southeast Asian nation of Malaysia. Southeast Asian
organisations face a high rate of employee turnover that continues to climb (Anvari et al., 2014;
Hays, 2017; Hewitt, 2011). Malaysian organisations face a particularly high turnover rate.
As such, the retention of highly skilled workers continued to be a key issue facing Malaysian
businesses (Towers Watson, 2015). The findings of the present study may be of assistance to
Malaysian HRM practitioners, helping them to better appreciate the significance of training
satisfaction in the pursuit of more desirable workplace behaviours.
This paper is structured thusly: key concepts are operationalised in the next section, which
is followed by the development of several research hypotheses. A research model is proposed
based on these hypotheses. Following this, we describe the methods used throughout the
present study, including measurement scales, common method bias (CMB) and sample design.
We then describe both the analysis and results, followed by a detailed explanation of the
findings, including their implications for research and HRM practice. The last section of
this paper summarises the overall outcomes of the study, highlights some of the limitations
of this research and provides a number of recommendations for future studies.
JOEPP Operationalisation of key concepts
The present study explores the causal links between training satisfaction, OCB and
turnover intention. However, before proposing any such relationships, some clarification of
the key concepts involved in this paper is necessary. Therefore, this section undertakes to
explore the previous literature in a bid to explain training satisfaction, OCB and turnover
intention, thus providing a clear understanding of how of these concepts have been
operationalised in this study.
Training Satisfaction
The provision of training is a key HRM function (Sung and Choi, 2014). Landy (1985) defines
job training as a “set of planned activities on the part of an organization to increase the
job knowledge and skills or to modify the attitudes and social behaviour of its members in
ways consistent with the goals of the organization and the requirements of the job” (p. 306).
Patrick (2000), on the other hand, defines training in terms of the systematic development of
the knowledge, skills and expertise required by a person to effectively perform a given task
or job. Spector (1997) defines job satisfaction in terms of “how people feel about their jobs
and different aspects of their jobs. It is the extent to which people like or dislike their jobs”
(Spector, 1997, p. 2). Schmidt (2007) integrated these definitions of job training and job
satisfaction to arrive at a concept of training satisfaction, which he defined as “the extent to
which people like or dislike the set of planned activities organized to develop the knowledge,
skills, and attitudes required to effectively perform a given task or job” (p. 483).
Schmidt (2007) further indicates that the training satisfaction construct measures formal
and planned training activities rather than informal and incidental. As such, training
satisfaction allows for an evaluation of an employee’s perceptions with regard to the totality
of their job training as opposed to a singular training programme. In the context of the
present study, we are primarily concerned with employee satisfaction with on-the-job
training activities.
OCB
Bateman and Organ (1983) first proposed OCB to describe any behaviour that was beneficial
to an organisation, but that was not prescribed or enforced by the organisation itself, thus
suggesting that OCBs are voluntary. Organ (1988) further defined OCB as “individual
behaviour that is discretionary, not directly or explicitly recognised by formal reward system,
and that is in the aggregate promotes effective functioning of the organisation” (p. 4). In other
words, individuals who exhibit OCB go beyond the requirements of their formal roles to
voluntarily offer their support to the organisation, thus making a valuable contribution to the
effective functioning of the organisation. Empirical evidence indicates that OCB plays a
significant role in performance improvement, customer satisfaction, customer loyalty and job
satisfaction (Narimani et al., 2013).
Far from uncommon, Paille (2013) suggests that some forms of OCB are widespread
throughout most workplaces. Chen et al. (1998) describe OCB in terms of the distance
between the employee and organisation, with lower levels of OCB indicating a larger
distance and high levels indicating only a small distance. Employees who exhibit high levels
of OCB support their co-workers, guide the integration of novices into the organisation, are
generally more flexible in their work-life behaviours and will rush to defend the image or
reputation of the organisation (Chen, 2005; Paille, 2013). Employees with a propensity
toward OCB show better work performance and actively participate in organisational
activities (Chen et al., 1998). OCB not only encompasses positive behaviours that enhance
organisational functioning, but also abstinence from negative behaviours that might
potentially damage the functioning of the organisation (Organ, 1990).
Although there is no clear taxonomy of OCB, two dominant conceptualisations have Organisational
emerged from the academic literature. First, Organ (1988) defines five categories of OCB: citizenship
conscientiousness, altruism, civic virtue, sportsmanship and courtesy. Conscientiousness behaviour
refers to employees whose behaviour goes beyond the minimum required criteria, whereas
altruism means to help others ( Jung and Hong, 2008; Nadiri and Tanova, 2010). Civic virtue
is about responsibly participating in the political life of the organisation, while
sportsmanship concerns the presentation of positive behaviours and not complaining.
Finally, courteous employees are those who treat others with respect (Nadiri and
Tanova, 2010; Organ, 1990). Organ (1990) further extended this taxonomy by including two
additional categories: peacekeeping and cheerleading. Peacekeeper employees help to
keep potentially destructive interpersonal conflicts out of the organisation, whereas
cheerleading is a helping behaviour that involves encouraging co-workers who are

feeling discouraged about their lack of achievements (Yan and Yan, 2013).
Another popular conceptualisation, which was coined by Williams and Anderson (1991),
is concerned with the target and direction of employee behaviours (Podsakoff et al., 2009).
Behaviours that are directed toward benefiting individuals within the organisation are
called OCBI, whereas those that benefit the organisation as whole are termed OCBO.
According to Podsakoff et al. (2009), the former includes altruism, courtesy, peacekeeping
and cheerleading; whereas the latter consists of conscientiousness, civic virtue and
sportsmanship (Organ, 1990; Podsakoff et al., 2009). The present study uses the
conceptualisation of Williams and Anderson (1991) for two reasons: first, this model has
greater acceptance in the academic literature (see Podsakoff et al., 2009; Saks, 2006), and
second, because it captures most of the dimensions articulated by Organ (1988, 1990), thus
making it the more comprehensive OCB model.
Turnover intention
In the academic literature, turnover intention has commonly been used as a measure of
anticipated workplace turnover (Bigliardi et al., 2005; Memon et al., 2016). According to
Price (2001), turnover intention describes the individual’s willingness to voluntarily and
permanently withdraw from an organisation. Although turnover intention does not
necessarily translate into actual employee turnover, it remains a major predictor of
voluntary turnover (AlBattat et al., 2013; Bluedorn, 1982; Memon et al., 2014). Carmelia and
Weisberga (2006) define turnover intention as the subjective estimation of an individual’s
likelihood of leaving an organisation, and as the last part of a three-stage cognitive process
of withdrawal. These three stages include “thoughts of quitting job, the intention to search
for a different job, and then intention to quit” (Carmelia and Weisberga, 2006; Rahman and
Nas, 2013, p. 568). Despite the fact that both actual turnover and turnover intention are
two distinct entities, the latter has a direct causal effect on one’s turnover decision. Empirical
evidence also indicates that turnover intentions are the strongest cognitive precursor of
actual turnover (Bluedorn, 1982; Carmelia and Weisberga, 2006; Lucas et al., 1993; Tett and
Meyer, 1993).
Theoretical background and hypotheses development

Social exchange theory (SET)
SET (Blau, 1964; Homans, 1961) is perhaps among the “most influential conceptual
paradigms for understanding workplace behavior” (Cropanzano and Mitchell, 2005, p. 874).
SET is extensively used as a framework to understand several HRM-OCB models
(see Konovsky and Pugh, 1994; Lam et al., 2009; Snape and Redman, 2010). Social exchanges
are a series of interactions between parties that result in the development of obligations.
These interactions depend on the actions of others (Blau, 1964), and is a mutually contingent
and mutually rewarding process of exchange (Emerson, 1976). Social exchanges are
JOEPP regulated by the norms of reciprocity (Evans and Davis, 2005; Sparrowe and Liden, 1997).
Obligations and trust are the key factors in the long-term availability of the exchange
relationship (Snape and Redman, 2010). The use of SET in HRM and organisational
behaviour research is, therefore, framed according to the principles of exchange.
Employment relationships (i.e. employee-employer) have social exchange qualities
(Blau, 1964; Snape and Redman, 2010). When an employing organisation supports its staff
with economic and socioemotional resources, the employee invariably begins to feel
obliged, thus causing them to want to respond in kind by repaying the organisation
(Cropanzano and Mitchell, 2005; Saks, 2006). As such, HRM practices may be seen as a key
input in the exchange process, as they have a positive effect on employee attitudes and
behaviour (Lam et al., 2009; Snape and Redman, 2010).
There is strong evidence to indicate that organisational investments in training and

development are effective in communicating to employees that they are among an
organisation’s most valuable assets (Rhoades and Eisenberger, 2002; Shuck et al., 2014;
Snape and Redman, 2010). To illustrate, organisational efforts to enhance the skillset of
employees clearly demonstrate that the organisation is interested in maintaining a long-
term relationship with the employee. This should, in turn, generate feelings of being valued,
thus causing the employee to reciprocate with positive attitudes and behaviours, such as
higher OCB and reduced turnover intention (Lam et al., 2009; Paille, 2013; Snape and
Redman, 2010).
Hypotheses development
Training satisfaction and turnover intention. Empirical evidence suggests that training has
a significant negative effect on the turnover intentions of employees (Memon et al., 2016;
Shuck et al., 2014). Ensuring that employees are satisfied with their training is key
to achieving positive attitudinal and behavioural outcomes (Huang and Su, 2016;
Joung et al., 2010; Schmidt, 2007). Likewise, Hoon and Ivancevich (2002) suppose that
training alters the behaviour of employees. As such, training is a viable strategy for
organisations looking to reduce the rate of employee turnover and to promote employee
retention (Özbilgin et al., 2014; Qiu et al., 2015). By creating a quality learning environment
for their employees, the organisation makes employees feel valued, which also increases
their commitment to staying (Zheng and Lamond, 2010). March and Simon (1958) suggest
that individuals tend to stay with organisations that provide sufficient inducements to
motivate their employees. As such, training satisfaction may be a function of motivation,
thus reducing the intention to leave.
Several studies have highlighted the role of training in reducing voluntary turnover
(Lee and Bruvold, 2003; Owens, 2006; Rahman and Nas, 2013; Shuck et al., 2014).
Notably, Huang and Su (2016) studied the causal relationship between both constructs
among Taiwanese employees, finding a significant negative relationship between employee
satisfaction with job training and leave intentions. Memon et al. (2016) examined a training
satisfaction-turnover intention model and concluded that training satisfaction was a
significant predictor of employee turnover intention in the Malaysian context. Thus, we
propose to confirm the following research hypotheses:
H1. There is a negative effect of training satisfaction on turnover intention.
Training satisfaction and OCB. Researchers in the field of human resource development
assume that employee satisfaction with training is a significant predictor of OCB.
An organisation’s investment in training and development not only helps to improve
employees’ core skills, but also adds value in terms of the behavioural scripts related
to their role-related activities (Dysvik and Kuvaas, 2008; Sels, 2002), thus influencing their
perception of being valued at work. As such, these positive feelings of being valued Organisational
result in improved citizenship behaviours among employees (Ahmad, 2011). This is citizenship
comparable with the notion of reciprocity in SET, which explains that employee satisfaction behaviour
with organisational initiatives, including investments in training and development, are
linked to the reciprocal relationship, which results in a sense of obligation among
individuals at work (Shore et al., 2006). These obligations cause employees to seek a means
by which to repay the organisation, thus benefiting the organisation through positive
employee behaviours that may far exceed their formal role requirements (Coyle-Shapiro and
Conway, 2004; Shore et al., 2006).
Although the training-OCB relationship has been partially confirmed through several
studies, few have investigated the specific aspects of training in relation to OCB. Skarlicki and
Latham (1997) observed that training union leaders increased citizenship behaviours among
rank and file members of the Canadian Auto Workers Union. Likewise, in a study of
152 respondents from a Sino-Japanese joint venture in China, Lam et al. (2009) found a
significant positive relationship between formalised training and the expression of OCB.
Similarly, Ahmad (2011) examined the causal relationship between employees’ perceptions of
training and OCB, finding that the perception of training was a significant predictor of OCB
among information communication technology workers in Malaysia. We therefore hypothesise:
H2. There is a positive effect of training satisfaction on OCB.
OCB and turnover intention. Previous evidence indicates a negative relationship between
OCB and employees’ intentions to leave. To this end, it is important to understand the nature
of OCB. Good citizens – individuals with OCB – not only fulfil their job requirements but
also take care of those around them, such as assisting their co-workers. In addition, they are
often willing to tolerate inconvenience, tend to be more cooperative in the workplace and are
more active participants within their social groups. These characteristics suggest a more
constructive attitude and strong sense of organisational attachment (Khalid et al., 2009).
According to Lam et al. (2009), OCB signals an employees’ sense of belonging. Consequently,
employees with high OCB tend to remain in the organisation for longer periods.
According to cognitive consistency theory, individuals pursue a state of synchronicity
between their feelings and behaviour, actively avoiding dissonance between their
behaviours, beliefs and attitudes (Khalid et al., 2013). Therefore, if voluntary turnover is
adverse to organisations and OCB is favourable, one would logically expect one to be
negatively associated with the other. In other words, individuals low in OCB may
demonstrate their intention or willingness to sever their relationship with the organisation
(Chen et al., 1998). Podsakoff et al. (2009) demonstrated this correlation in a meta-analysis of
90 studies (n ¼ 26,510), noting that OCB was negatively related to turnover intention
(r corrected –0.22), indicating that the intention to leave decreases as OCB increases.
Other studies also support this negative correlation between OCB and turnover intention
(Chen et al., 1998; Coyne and Ong, 2007; Khalid et al., 2009). Therefore, it is hypothesised:
H3. OCB has a negative effect on turnover intention.
OCB as a mediator. Given that training satisfaction is thought to be a powerful predictor of
OCB and that OCB predicts turnover intention, it is possible that OCB mediates the
relationship between training satisfaction and turnover intention. From the perspective of
SET, training not only enhances employees’ knowledge and skills, but causes them to feel
obligated to the organisation through OCBs – helping their co-workers, treating others with
respect and actively participating in organisational matters. As such, being good
citizens, employees high in OCB are more likely to remain loyal to the organisation for
longer (Coyne and Ong, 2007).
JOEPP In their multilevel analysis, Sun et al. (2007) found that OCB mediated the relationship
between high performance human resource practices (HPHRP) and key performance
indicators (i.e. productivity and turnover) among the employees of several hotels in China.
Zhang et al. (2008) observed that OCB mediated the relationship between HPHRP and
corporate entrepreneurship in 139 small-to-medium sized biotechnology enterprises in
China’s pharmaceutical industry. More recently, Chiang and Hsieh (2012), who investigated
the mediating role of OCB in the hotel industry in Taiwan, also found a significant
mediating effect for OCB between perceived organisational support and job performance,
thus confirming OCB as a potential mediator between HRM practices and outcomes.
Given the importance of training satisfaction for improving employees’ level of OCB, and the
strong connection between OCB and turnover intention, OCB is thought to be a potential
mediator of the relationship between training satisfaction and employee intention to leave.
Consequently, we postulate that:
H4. OCB mediates the relationship between training satisfaction and turnover intention.
As shown in Figure 1, this paper proposes a conceptual framework in which training
satisfaction is conceptualised as a predictor of OCB and turnover intention, while OCB
predicts turnover intention. Also, OCB is hypothesised to mediate the relationship between
training satisfaction and turnover intention.
Methods
Context of the study
Malaysia is the second-largest oil and gas (O&G) producer in the Association of Southeast
Asian Nations (ASEAN) and one of the world’s top liquefied natural gas producers (MPRC,
2015). Malaysia engages in both upstream (i.e. exploration and production) and downstream
(i.e. refining and marketing) O&G activities. As such, the rapidly growing O&G sector
contributes to about 40 per cent of Malaysia’s total revenue (Lintzer and Salomon, 2013;
StarOnline, 2014, September 24). The O&G sector is important in helping Malaysia to
achieve its 2020 goal of becoming a high-income nation. Therefore, it is imperative that
Malaysia’s O&G sector continues to prosper without any interruption and in full compliance
with the country’s strategic objectives.
Notwithstanding, the growth of Malaysia’s O&G sector is not without its challenges, not the
least of which is the shortage of highly skilled workers. Malaysian O&G organisations
experience a high rate of voluntary turnover (TalentCrop, 2012), thus resulting in severe
talent-shortages. Malaysian O&G professionals tend to seek employment in other oil-rich
OCB
------ Indirect Effect
H4
H2 H3
Training Turnover
Satisfaction intention
Figure 1. H1
Conceptual framework
countries, such as Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait (Mansor et al., 2013; Met and Ali, 2014). Organisational
Local organisations suffer as a result of having invest huge amounts in employee citizenship
recruitment, selection and training, while other countries and foreign organisations end up behaviour
benefiting in the process. Consequently, an investigation into the factors that might help the
O&G sector to retain their top-talent is timely.
Measures
A 17-item questionnaire was used to measure the training satisfaction, OCB and turnover
intention constructs. All scales were adapted from existing measures. Training satisfaction
was measured using a four-item Job Training Satisfaction Scale, developed by
Schmidt (2007). Training satisfaction refers to employees’ satisfaction with on-the-job
training activities (Schmidt, 2007). A sample item from this four-item scale includes:
“Overall, the training I receive on-the-job meets my needs”. α reliability for this scale was
0.909. OCB was measured using an eight-item scale adapted from Saks (2006), but originally
developed by Lee and Allen (2002). This scale measures both OCBI and OCBO following the
conceptualisation of Williams and Anderson (1991). To clarify, items inclusive of both
dimensions were integrated into a single construct during the data analysis. Sample items
include: “I willingly give my time to help others who have work-related problems” and
“I offer ideas to improve the functioning of the organisation”. α reliability for this eight-item
scale was 0.817. Turnover intention was measured using a five-item scale that was recently
used by Jung and Yoon (2013). Turnover intention refers to “a conscious and deliberate
wilfulness to leave the organization” (Tett and Meyer, 1993, p. 262). A sample item includes:
“I am currently seriously considering leaving my current job to work in another company”.
α reliability for this turnover intention scale was 0.919, indicating high internal consistency
reliability. Participants responded using a five-point Likert-type scale with anchors ranging
from 1 ¼ strongly disagree to 5 ¼ strongly agree. All items are listed in Appendix.
The content validity of the instrument was confirmed. Content validity assesses whether
the scale adequately measures the constructs that it is thought to measure (Cooper and
Schindler, 2011) and can be confirmed through experts in the similar field (Kumar, 2005).
Consequently, the questionnaire, operational definitions of the constructs and the research
objectives were submitted to two experts in the field of organisational behaviour – one
professor and one senior lecturer – neither of whom indicated having any serious concerns.
Moreover, the online instrument was pre-tested prior to the main data collection phase of
the study. Eight respondents from the target population (i.e. O&G professionals) were asked
to complete the online questionnaire. The purpose of this pre-testing was to identify any
awkward, confusing or offensive questions (Cooper and Schindler, 2011). Respondents were
observed while they completed the questionnaire and were later debriefed by the
researchers. This involved asking the respondents to indicate any issues that they might
have had in relation to the questions (Shelby et al., 1982). Respondents highlighted some
concerns over the size of the onscreen fonts. As a result, the font size of the online version
was increased. Additionally, the online version was shown to work well on all major internet
browsers, including Internet Explorer, Mozilla Firefox, Google Chrome and Opera.
Data collection
The research hypotheses for the present study were tested using data collected from
employees of Malaysia’s O&G sector. An electronic mail survey questionnaire was
developed for the purposes of data collection. Electronic mail surveys facilitate the sampling
of populations dispersed over a wide geographic area and reduces social desirability bias
(Heerwegh, 2009; Saunders et al., 2007). A hyperlink to the online survey was emailed to
1,802 Malaysian O&G professionals in March 2015. In total, 422 responses were received
during a three-month period, indicating a response rate of 23 per cent. Six samples with
JOEPP suspicious response patterns (e.g. straight lining) were excluded (Hair et al., 2014).
Additionally, as the inclusion criteria for the study demanded a focus on permanent
employees, a further seven samples were eliminated because they were either interns (three
respondents) or working on a contract basis ( four respondents). Therefore, the total sample
submitted for data analysis comprised 409 responses, as summarised in Table I.
Results
Partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) was used to test the research
hypotheses. PLS-SEM is a widely used method of analysis because of its robustness
(Penga and Lai, 2012). PLS-SEM was used in this study for two reasons; first, because the
main focus of this study was the prediction of dependent variables (Roldán and
Sánchez-Franco, 2012), and second, because of the incremental character in this study
(i.e. OCB as a mediator between training satisfaction and turnover intention)
(Hair et al., 2014; Nitzl et al., 2016; Richter et al., 2016).
As suggested by Andersen and Gerbing (1988), a two-stage analytical procedure was
adopted. The first stage involves testing the measurement model (i.e. internal consistency
reliability, convergent and discriminant validity (DV )), and the second stage involves
examining the structural model (i.e. hypotheses testing). SmartPLS, version 3.2.6
(Ringle et al., 2015), was used to analyse the data.
Measurement model
The measurement model was tested to assess the internal consistency reliability, convergent
validity (CV ) and DV of the constructs used in this study. Internal consistency reliability
measures the degree to which the items are a measure of the latent constructs (Hair et al., 2014;
Ramayah et al., 2016). Composite reliability was assessed as a measure of internal consistency
(Hair et al., 2017). The measurement model with composite reliability above the threshold
value of 0.7 for each construct is considered satisfactory (Nunnally, 1978; Nunnally and
Bernstein, 1994; Richter et al., 2016). The results indicated that the composite reliability for all
of the constructs exceed the cut-off value (0.7) – training satisfaction (0.936), OCB (0.876) and
turnover intention (0.939) – thereby indicating the high internal consistency of the measures.
Another measure to be mindful of is CV, which assesses “the extent to which a measure
correlates positively with alternative measures of the same construct” (Hair et al., 2017, p. 112).
CV is assessed by checking the outer loading of the items and the average variance extracted
(AVE). As a general rule of thumb, outer loadings should have a value of 0.708 or higher, while
an AVE score of 0.5 is considered satisfactory (Avkiran, 2017). Items with an outer loading of
0.6 might also be considered acceptable (Chin et al., 1997). Hair et al. (2017) recommend
Demographic variables Category Frequency Percentage
Gender Male 229 56.0

Female 178 43.5
Age 18-29 155 37.9
30-39 252 61.6
Tenure 1-2 46 11.2
3-4 59 14.4
5-6 66 16.1
7-8 131 32.0
Table I. 9-10 62 15.1
Demographic profile W 10 years 42 10.2
of the respondents Note: n ¼ 409
retaining indicators with weaker factor loadings if other indicators with high loadings can Organisational
explain at least 50 per cent of the variance (AVE ¼ 0.50). The results indicate that, with the citizenship
exception of OCBO1, all the items had adequate outer loadings. Consequently, OCBO1 – behaviour
“I attend functions that are not required but that help the organisational image” – was
excluded due to a weak loading. Following the removal of OCBO1, all of the constructs
achieved adequate AVE – training satisfaction (0.786), OCB (0.505) and turnover intention
(0.755) – thus confirming the CV of the constructs. Table II presents the results of the internal
consistency reliability and CV.
DV is the degree to which a construct is distinct from other constructs in the model
(Hair et al., 2017). We used two methods to assess DV; first, we used the Fornell and Larcker
(1981) criterion – comparing the correlation between the constructs and the square root of the
AVE for that construct. In order to achieve DV, the square root of the AVE for each latent
variable must exceed the correlation value for the same construct (Fornell and Larcker, 1981).
As shown in Table III, the results indicate adequate DV, with the AVE square root values
being higher than the correlation values in the rows and columns (Fornell and Larcker, 1981).
Additionally, the Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT, Henseler et al., 2015), was used
to confirm DV. An HTMT value above 0.90 suggests a lack of DV (Hair et al., 2017).
A more conservative cut-off value for HTMT is 0.85 (Henseler et al., 2015). The results of the
HTMT criterion were established at HTMT0.85, indicating that the present study did not
violate the assumptions of DV, as illustrated in Table IV. The results of the overall
measurement model demonstrate adequate internal consistency reliability, CV and DV.
Construct Measurement item Loading CR AVE
Training satisfaction TS1 0.905 0.936 0.786

TS2 0.929
TS3 0.837
TS4 0.873
Organisational citizenship behaviour OCBI1 0.725 0.876 0.505
OCBI2 0.673
OCBI3 0.603
OCBI4 0.698
OCBO1 Item deleteda
OCBO2 0.679
OCBO3 0.780
OCBO4 0.799
Turnover intention TI1 0.870 0.939 0.755
TI2 0.861
TI3 0.896 Table II.
TI4 0.861 Internal consistency
TI5 0.857 reliability and
Notes: CR, composite reliability; AVE, variance extracted. aOCBO1 was deleted due to low loading convergent validity
OCB Training satisfaction Turnover intention
OCB 0.711
Training Satisfaction 0.441 0.887 Table III.
Turnover Intention −0.157 −0.307 0.869 Discriminate validity
Note: Italic values on the diagonal represent the square root of AVE, while the other entries represent (Fornell and
the correlations Larcker criterion)
JOEPP Multicollinearity
Before analysing the structural model, in addition to reliability and validity, the variance
inflation factor (VIF) must be assessed to compute multicollinearity. A VIF value greater
than 10.0 is regarded as indication of multicollinearity (Burns and Burns, 2008). However,
Hair et al. (2014) recommend a cut-off value of 5.0 for multicollinearity. The VIF results for
each construct, which were below threshold value of 5.0, indicate that collinearity issues
between the constructs were absent from this study.
Structural model
The structural model examines the causal relationships between the constructs
(Sang et al., 2010). The bootstrapping technique with resampling (5,000 resamples) was
employed to estimate the statistical significance of the hypothesised model (Hair et al., 2017).
The results of the structural model evaluation are described in Figure 2. The results indicate
that training satisfaction (H1: β ¼ −0.295, po0.01, LL: −0.381, UL: −0.205) has a significant
negative association with turnover intention, as was hypothesised. Also, training satisfaction
(H2: β ¼ 0.441, po0.01, LL: 0.360, UL: 0.505) is significantly positively related with OCB.
Surprisingly, the results for the PLS path coefficients revealed that OCB (H3: β ¼ −0.027,
pW0.05, LL: −0.127, UL: 0.094) had no significant direct effect on turnover intention.
The mediating effect of OCB between training satisfaction and turnover intention was
subsequently examined (H4). The Preacher and Hayes (2004, 2008) method of indirect effect
was applied. Surprisingly, the results for indirect effect indicated that OCB (H4: β ¼ −0.012,
p W0.05, LL: −0.066, UL: 0.051) did not mediate the relationship between training
satisfaction and turnover intention.
Latent constructs OCB Training satisfaction Turnover intention
OCB –
Table IV. Training satisfaction 0.480 –
Discriminate validity Turnover intention 0.154 0.330 –
(HTMT Criterion) Note: Criteria: DV is established at HTMT0.85
OCB
R2 = 0.195
------ Indirect Effect
H4
= –0.012ns
t = 0.403
H2 H3
= 0.441** = –0.027ns
t = 10.516 t = 0.407
Turnover
Training Intention
Satisfaction
H1 R2 = 0.095
= –0.295**
Figure 2. t = 5.584
Structural model
Notes: ns, non-significant. **p <0.01
In summary, H1 and H2 were supported, whereas H3 and H4 were not supported. Organisational
The results of the structural model assessment are reported in Table V. citizenship
Hair et al. (2017) suggest that in addition to describing the significance of the behaviour
relationships, researchers should also report the coefficient of determination (R2), effect size
( f 2) and predictive relevance (Q2). Consequently, R2, f 2 and Q2 values were examined, as
illustrated in Table VI. R2 refers to the explanatory power of the independent variable(s)
with respect to their corresponding dependent variables. The value of R2 shows that the
training satisfaction of employees explains 9.5 per cent of their turnover intentions
(R2 ¼ 0.095) and 19.5 per cent of their OCB (R2 ¼ 0.195). Next, f 2 indicates effect size; how
much an independent variable contributes to the dependent variable’s R2. F2 can be
calculated by using the equation: f 2 ¼ (R2 included − R2excluded) ÷ (1 − R2 included). Cohen (1988)
provided cut-off values for measuring effect size: f 2 ¼ 0.02, 0.15 and 0.35, indicative of small,
medium and large effect sizes, respectively. The results of f 2 indicate that training
satisfaction has a medium to large effect on OCB ( f 2 ¼ 0.242) and a small to medium effect
on turnover intention ( f 2 ¼ 0.077).
The Q2 is an indicator of the model’s out-of-sample predictive power or predictive
relevance for the particular construct (Chin et al., 2008; Hair et al., 2014). The construct’s
cross-validated redundancy values, which were obtained through a blindfolding procedure,
were used as a measure of Q2. According to Hair et al. (2014, p. 178), “Q2 values larger than
zero for a certain reflective endogenous latent variable indicate the path model’s predictive
relevance for the particular construct” (p. 178). The results of the assessment of OCB
(Q2 ¼ 0.090) and turnover intention (Q2 ¼ 0.068) indicate an acceptable degree of predictive
ability for training satisfaction on OCB and turnover intention, as shown in Table VI.
CMB
CMB is a major concern in survey-based research (Podsakof et al., 2003; Schwarz et al., 2017).
CMB refers to the degree of covariance among the measured items because the data were
collected using a single source (Hair et al., 2014; Podsakof et al., 2003). To address the issue
of CMB, both procedural and statistical approaches were employed. For example, efforts
were taken to ensure the anonymity and confidentiality of the respondents, items were pilot
tested before the main data collection phase to avoid confusing and difficult questions, and
clear instructions were provided to facilitate their completion of the survey (Podsakof et al.,
Hypotheses Path β t-value CI (LL, UL) Results
H1 Training satisfaction → TI −0.295 5.584** −0.381, −0.205 Supported

H2 Training satisfaction → OCB 0.441 10.516** 0.360, 0.505 Supported
H3 OCB → TI −0.027 0.407ns −0.127, 0.094 Not supported Table V.
H4 Training satisfaction → OCB → TI −0.012 0.403ns −0.066, 0.051 Not supported The result of
Notes: TI, turnover intention; OCB, organisational citizenship behaviour; ns, non-significant; CI, confidence structural model
interval; LL, lower level; UL, upper level. **p o0.01 assessment
Coefficient of determination Predict relevance Effect size

Latent constructs R2 Q2 f2 Effect
Training Satisfaction – – 0.242 Medium to large Table VI.

OCB 0.195 0.090 0.077 Small to medium Results of R2,
Turnover intention 0.095 0.068 – Q2 and f2
JOEPP 2003; Reio, 2010; Schwarz et al., 2017). Additionally, Harman’s (1967) single-factor test was
performed to determine the presence of CMB. All 17 items were included in the exploratory
factor analysis using principal component analysis with varimax rotation. The exploratory
factor analysis extracted three factors and the first factor accounted for 22 per cent of the
variance, which is below the 40 per cent cut-off value (Babin et al., 2016). Therefore, CMB
had no serious impact on the present study.
Discussions and implications

The objective of this study was to examine the causal relationship between training
satisfaction, OCB and turnover intention, and to investigate the mediating role of OCB on
training satisfaction and turnover intention among Malaysian O&G professionals.
The findings of this study indicate that training satisfaction is a significant predictor of
turnover intention, as was hypothesised (H1). This finding has the support of previous
studies with respect to the capacity of training to predict turnover intention ( Joung et al.,
2010; Owens, 2006; Zhao and Zhou, 2008). Training improves the skills and knowledge of
employees, improving their ability to meet the demands of their job and to perform better.
Investing in employee skills sends them a positive signal: that they are among the
organisation’s most important assets. Employees are less inclined to voluntarily quit when
they hear this message. In other words, when employees’ feel positive (i.e. satisfied) with
regard to the organisation’s training and development efforts, they exhibit more desirable
workplace behaviours, in particular, a low rate of voluntary turnover.
These findings, however, conflict with previous studies that have found training to be
positively related to employees’ leave intentions (Gardner et al., 2011; Zheng and
Lamond, 2010), and studies that suggest no relationship between training and turnover
intention (Bawa and Jantan, 2005; Zheng and Wong, 2007). It is believed that the differences in
these findings are a function of how the training construct has been operationalised. Previous
studies have considered training in terms of training systems (Bawa and Jantan, 2005),
training size (Zheng and Lamond, 2010) or the amount of money spent on training activities
(Zheng and Wong, 2007). Gardner et al. (2011) examined training as part a package of HRM
practices aimed at skill enhancement, measuring training through hours of formal training.
However, the present study operationalised training in terms of employee satisfaction with
training, which is a markedly different approach than that taken previously.
As was expected, the results indicate that training satisfaction is a strong predictor of OCB
(H2). Workplace training not only enhances employees’ skills and knowledge, but also alters
their behaviour and leads employees to go the extra mile. Historically, organisational efforts
toward training and developmental activities result in advanced quality-based teamwork,
interpersonal skills and work performance that enhances workplace outcomes (Husin et al.,
2012). In the context of the present study, individuals working in O&G organisations are
involved in highly technical jobs, with many working in the field; workplace training,
therefore, is essential for enhancing their professional skills, thus resulting in greater
satisfaction. The results suggest that training satisfaction creates a reciprocal relationship in
which employees are more likely to help the organisation in return for what the organisation
does for them. Therefore, this finding seems consistent with the theory that O&G
professionals who are satisfied with the organisation’s training initiatives tend to complain
less, defend their organisation when required, help and respect their colleagues and exhibit
positive behaviours without looking for any formal rewards or recognition.
Contrary to our expectations, however, the findings revealed that OCB has no
significant direct effect on turnover intentions (H3). Additionally, the study failed to find a
mediating role for OCB between training satisfaction and turnover intention (H4).
Although previous studies have reported strong ties between OCB and turnover
intention (see Chen et al., 1998; Coyne and Ong, 2007; Khalid et al., 2009), the present study
failed to identify such a relationship. Nevertheless, these findings are congruent Organisational
with the findings of Koys (2001), who found that OCB does not affect turnover intention citizenship
among restaurant workers. Likewise, Paille (2013) investigated OCB-turnover intention behaviour
model among professional social workers in Quebec, Canada, reporting a non-significant
relationship between both constructs. Furthermore, Shapira-Lishchinsky and
Tsemach (2014), who studied a sample of 366 teachers across several Israeli schools,
revealed that both “OCB and withdrawal behaviours can be considered as different
performance points on a single continuum since they may result from different
relationships and antecedents, and in addition, the interrelationships between them is
either insignificant or very low” (p. 701).
Two possible explanations can be offered for these unexpected findings. First, the
context of the present study. Paine and Organ (2000) reported that collectivist societies
demonstrate more OCB than individualist cultures. Importantly, “OCBs would be common,
normal behaviour within collectivist cultures” (Paine and Organ, 2000, p. 1087). Considering
that Malaysia is a highly collectivist society (Coyne and Ong, 2007; Hofstede, 1983),
Malaysian employees exhibit higher levels of workplace OCBs. Employees willingly help
their co-workers and go the extra mile to improve the functioning of their organisations.
Consequently, Malaysian employees may see OCB-related functions as a part of their culture
and a fairly common behaviour. This may explain why OCBs do not have any direct
influence over Malaysian O&G professionals’ intentions to quit or act as a mechanism
connecting training satisfaction indirectly with turnover intention. This study, therefore,
failed to establish statistical significance for H3 or H4. This is not to say that OCBs are
unimportant, simply that there may be some other potential mechanisms (i.e. moderators or
mediators) that are yet to be explored.
Second, the present study did not include any control variables while examining the
hypothesised model. Becker (2005) explains that control variables help researchers to rule
out alternative explanations for their findings. Two common respondent variables that
could have been controlled for include demographic characteristics (e.g. age, gender, tenure,
education) and cultural differences (e.g. individualism vs collectivism). Paille (2013) believes
that OCB differs across cultures. Therefore, the above findings are difficult to conclude
because we did not control for demographic or cultural variables.
Practical implications
Although the major aim of this study was to test the theoretically driven hypotheses, the
findings have a number of significant implications for O&G organisations. The findings of
the present study confirm that training satisfaction is significantly related to O&G
professionals OCBs and turnover intentions. This implies that O&G organisations should
prioritise employee satisfaction with training to achieve desirable workplace attitudes and
behaviours. Therefore, HRM practitioners should revise how they measure the efficacy of
their training activities. Training systems, training length, size of training, dollars invested
in training and other traditional dimensions of training are not effective indicators of the
success of training. Employee feelings and experiences with respect to their organisation’s
training and development efforts should be taken into account. In other words, training
satisfaction should be considered an integral part of organisational surveys in order to
maximise employees’ satisfaction with skill development activities.
Moreover, the findings of the present study highlight the need to go beyond immediate
monetary rewards and to focus on skill development with the intention of keeping
employees attached and committed to the organisation. HRM practitioners should design
relevant training strategies that meet the skill needs of their employees. Schmidt (2007)
suggests that face-to-face training initiatives are more effective as compared to solitary
training approaches. As O&G professionals often work in high-risk field projects, one-to-one
JOEPP coaching and mentoring strategies might be an effective way to enhance employee skills to
cope with their stressful work environments. Moreover, the effective implementation of a
well-designed, relevant and well-delivered training strategy can result in employees who are
more satisfied. Satisfied employees will often go beyond their formal job role and are more
likely to stay with a firm longer.
Conclusion
This study highlights the significant impact of training satisfaction on OCB and turnover
intentions among Malaysian O&G professionals. Our findings indicate that training
satisfaction reduces employees’ intention to leave and can significantly increase their OCBs.
HRM activities that focus on employee satisfaction, coupled with skill and knowledge
enhancement activities, are therefore essential prerequisites in the pursuit of positive

behavioural outcomes in the workplace. OCB, however, proved not to be a predictor of
turnover intention nor a mediator in the model.
The present study contributes to our understanding of the causal links between training,
OCB and turnover intention. Although it has been observed in the past that training does not
directly influence turnover intention, the present study indicates that training satisfaction
significantly influences turnover intention. Moreover, the relationship between training
satisfaction and OCB has rarely been studied before. The results of the current study clearly
indicate strong ties between training satisfaction, OCB and turnover intention, thus marking a
significant theoretical contribution of the present study to the literature. Previous studies of
the training-turnover relationship often report inconclusive results, thus the findings of this
study open new avenues for future HRM research. Moreover, although OCB has previously
been reported as a predictor of turnover intention and a valuable mediator between several
antecedent and outcome constructs, this study found contradictory findings: that OCB does
not affect turnover intention and has no mediating effect between training satisfaction and
turnover intention. These unexpected findings mark another valuable contribution of the
present study to the literature. Additionally, previous studies have used a traditional first
generation statistical approach (e.g. multiple or hierarchical regression analysis) to examine
the causal relationships among the constructs (see Juhdi et al., 2013; Saks, 2006). The present
study, however, employed PLS-SEM – a second generation SEM approach – in order to arrive
at more meaningful results (Richter et al., 2016).
Notwithstanding, the current study also has some limitations. First, given the distinct
context of the present study, the findings might not be generalised to other work settings
due to differences in the working environments, climate and job characteristics. Future
studies may consider validating the present research model in various industries and/or
geographical regions. Second, in the past, the OCB construct has been conceptualised and
investigated in terms of OCBI and OCBO, and subsequently measured separately. In the
present study, however, we incorporated OCBO and OCBI into a single construct.
We encourage future studies to examine the training satisfaction construct in relation to
OCBI and OCBO dimensions independently, while investigating the relationship between
training satisfaction and turnover intention. Furthermore, the findings of the present study
indicate that OCB does not predict turnover intention and that it failed to act as a mediator.
Note, however, that we did not control for culture (i.e. individualism vs collectivism), as the
primary focus of this study was hypothesis testing. We suspect that the lack of controls for
culture might have contributed to these unexpected findings. Therefore, future studies
should consider cultural and demographic variables (e.g. age, education, tenure) as control
variables in order to rule out alternative explanations for findings. Finally, the study was
primarily focused on exploring direct and mediating relationships. We believe that the
integration of individual or organisational factors as moderators can strengthen the
relationship among these constructs.
References Organisational
Ahmad, K.Z. (2011), “The Association between training and organizational citizenship behavior in the citizenship
digital world”, Communications of the IBIMA, Vol. 2011 No. 2011, pp. 1-11. behaviour
AlBattat, A.R., Som, A.P.M. and Helalat, A.S. (2013), “Overcoming staff turnover in the hospitality
industry using Mobley’s model”, International Journal of Learning & Development, Vol. 3 No. 6,
pp. 64-71.
Andersen, J.C. and Gerbing, D.W. (1988), “Structural equation modelling in practice. A review and
recommended two-step approach”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 103 No. 3, pp. 411-423.
Anvari, R., JianFu, Z. and Chermahini, S.H. (2014), “Effective strategy for solving voluntary
turnover problem among employees”, Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 129,
pp. 186-190.
Avkiran, N.K. (2017), “An in-depth discussion and illustration of partial least squares structural
equation modeling in health care”, Health Care Management Science, pp. 1-8, doi: 10.1007/
s10729-017-9393-7.
Babin, B.J., Griffin, M. and Hair, J.F. (2016), “Heresies and sacred cows in scholarly marketing
publications”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 69, pp. 3133-3138.
Bateman, T.S. and Organ, D.W. (1983), “Job satisfaction and the good soldier: the relationship
between affect and employee citizenship”, Academy of management Journal, Vol. 26 No. 4,
pp. 587-595.
Bawa, M.A. and Jantan, M. (2005), “Human resource practices as determinants of employee
turnover: an empirical investigation”, Asian Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 10 No. 2,
pp. 69-80.
Becker, B.E. and Gerhart, B. (1996), “The impact of human resource management on organizational
performance: progress and prospects”, Academy of management Journal, Vol. 39 No. 4,
pp. 779-801.
Becker, T.E. (2005), “Potential problems in the statistical control of variables in organizational
research: a qualitative analysis with recommendations”, Organizational Research Methods,
Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 274-289.
Bigliardi, B., Petroni, A. and Dormio, A.I. (2005), “Organizational socialization career aspirations and
turnover intentions among design engineers”, Leadership & Organization Development Journal,
Vol. 26 No. 6, pp. 424-441.
Blau, P. (1964), Exchange and Power in Social Life, Wiley, New York, NY.
BLS (2016), “Job openings and labor turnover – September 2016”, Bureau of Labor Statistics US
Department of Labor, Washington, DC.
Bluedorn, A.C. (1982), The Theories of Turnover: Causes, Effects, and Meaning, JAI Press, Greenwich.
Boselie, P., Dietz, G. and Boon, C. (2005), “Commonalities and contradictions in research on human
resources”, Human Resource Management Journal, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 67-94.
Burns, R.B. and Burns, R.A. (2008), Business Research Methods and Statistics Using SPSS, SAGE,
Los Angeles, CA.
Carmelia, A. and Weisberga, J. (2006), “Exploring turnover intentions among three professional groups
of employees”, Human Resource Development International, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 191-206.
Carpenter, N.C., Berry, C.M. and Houston, L. (2014), “A meta-analytic comparison of self-reported and
other-reported organizational citizenship behavior”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 35
No. 4, pp. 547-574.
Chen, X.P. (2005), “Organizational citizenship behaviour: a predictor of employee turnover”, in
Trunipseed, D.L. (Ed.), Handbook of Organizational Citizenship Behaviour: A Review of
“Good Solder Activity in Organizations, Nova Science, New York, NY, pp. 435-454.
Chen, X.P., Hui, C. and Sego, D.J. (1998), “The role of organizational citizenship behavior in turnover:
conceptualization and preliminary tests of key hypotheses”, Journal of Applied Psychology,
Vol. 83 No. 6, pp. 922-931.
JOEPP Cheng, Y. and Waldenberger, F. (2013), “Does training affect individuals’ turnover intention?
Evidence from China”, Journal of Chinese Human Resource Management, Vol. 4 No. 1,
pp. 16-38.
Chiang, C.F. and Hsieh, T.S. (2012), “The impacts of perceived organizational support and psychological
empowerment on job performance: The mediating effects of organizational citizenship behavior”,
International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 180-190.
Chin, W.W., Gopal, A. and Salisbury, W.D. (1997), “Advancing the theory of adaptive structuration: the
development of a scale to measure faithfulness of appropriation”, Information Systems Research,
Vol. 8, pp. 342-367.
Chin, W.W., Peterson, R.A. and Brown, P.S. (2008), “Structural equation modelling in marketing:
Some practical reminders”, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, Vol. 16 No. 4,
pp. 287-298.
Cohen, J. (1988), Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed., Lawrence Erlbaum,
Hillsdale, NJ.
Cooper, D.R. and Schindler, P.S. (2011), Business Research Methods, 11th ed., McGraw-Hill,
New York, NY.
Coyle-Shapiro, J.A.M. and Conway, N. (Eds) (2004), The Employment Relationship Through the Lens of
Social Exchange, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Coyne, I. and Ong, T. (2007), “Organizational citizenship behavior and turnover intention:
a cross-cultural study”, International journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 18 No. 6,
pp. 1085-1097.
Cropanzano, R. and Mitchell, M.S. (2005), “Social exchange theory: an interdisciplinary review”,
Journal of Management, Vol. 31 No. 6, pp. 874-900.
Deloitte (2014), Global Human Capital Trends 2014: Engaging the 21st-Century Workforce,
Deloitte University Press, Westlake, TX.
Duxbury, L. and Halinski, M. (2014), “Dealing with the “Grumpy Boomers”: re-engaging the
disengaged and retaining talent”, Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 27 No. 4,
pp. 660-676.
Dysvik, A. and Kuvaas, B. (2008), “The relationship between perceived training opportunities,
work motivation and employee outcomes”, International Journal of Training and Development,
Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 138-157.
Emerson, R.M. (1976), “Social exchange theory”, Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 2, pp. 335-362.
Evans, W.R. and Davis, W.D. (2005), “High-performance work systems and organizational
performance: the mediating role of internal social structure”, Journal of Management, Vol. 31
No. 5, pp. 758-775.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable
variables and measurement errors”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50.
Gardner, T.M., Wright, P.M. and Moynihan, L.M. (2011), “The impact of motivation, empowerment, and
skill-enhancing practices on aggregate voluntary turnover: the mediating effect of collective
affective commitment”, Personal Psychology, Vol. 64 No. 2, pp. 315-350.
Hair, J.F., Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2014), A Primer on Partial Least Squares
Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), SAGE, Los Angeles, CA.
Hair, J.F., Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2017), A Primer on Partial Least Squares
Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), 2nd ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Han, S.J., Bonn, M.A. and Cho, M. (2016), “The relationship between customer incivility, restaurant
frontline service employee burnout and turnover intention”, International Journal of Hospitality
Management, Vol. 52, pp. 97-116.
Harman, H.H. (1967), Modern Factor Analysis, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
Hays (2017), “Asia braces for change: tailoring talent strategies for uncertainty”, in Wright, C. (Ed.),
The 2017 Hays Asia Salary Guide, 10th ed., Hays, Singapore.
Heerwegh, D. (2009), “Mode differences between face-to-face and web surveys: an experimental Organisational
investigation of data quality and social desirability effects”, International Journal of Public citizenship
Opinion Research, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 11-121.
behaviour
Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2015), “A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in
variance-based structural equation modeling”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 115-135.
Hewitt, A. (2011), “Talent challenges and compensation budgets”, available at: http://asli.com.my/
DOCUMENTS/HRSummit2011/21.%20Madvhi%20pande.pdf (accessed 30 July 2013).
Hoffman, B.J., Blair, C.A., Meriac, J.P. and Woehr, D.J. (2007), “Expanding the criterion domain?
A quantitative review of the OCB literature”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 92 No. 2,
pp. 555-566.
Hofstede, G. (1983), “The cultural relativity of organizational practices and theories”, Journal of
International Business Studies, Vol 14 No. 2, pp. 75-89.
Holtom, B.C. and Burch, T.C. (2016), “A model of turnover-based disruption in customer services”,
Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 25-36.
Holtom, B.C., Mitchell, T., Lee, T. and Inderrieden, E. (2005), “Shocks as causes of turnover: why
they are and how organizations can manage them”, Human Resource Management, Vol. 44
No. 3, pp. 337-352.
Hom, P.W., Lee, T., Shaw, J.D. and Hausknecht, J.P. (2017), “One hundred years of employee turnover
theory and research”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 102 No. 3, pp. 1-48.
Homans, G.C. (1961), Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms, Harcourt Brace, New York, NY.
Hoon, L.S. and Ivancevich, J.M. (2002), Human Resource Management in Asia, McGraw-Hill Education,
Singapore.
Huang, W.-R. and Su, C.-H. (2016), “The mediating role of job satisfaction in the relationship between
job training satisfaction and turnover intentions”, Industrial and Commercial Training, Vol. 48
No. 1, pp. 42-52.
Huselid, M.A. (1995), “The impact of human resource management practices on turnover, productivity,
and corporate financial performance”, Academy of management Journal, Vol. 38 No. 3,
pp. 635-672.
Husin, S., Chelladurai, P. and Musa, G. (2012), “HRM practices, organizational citizenship behaviors,
and perceived service quality in golf courses”, Journal of Sport Management, Vol. 26 No. 2,
pp. 143-158.
Jiang, J.Y., Takeuchi, R. and Lepak, D.P. (2013), “Where do we go from here? New perspectives on the
black box in strategic human resource management research”, Journal of Management Studies,
Vol. 50 No. 8, pp. 1448-1480.
Joung, H.-W., Choi, E.-K. and Goh, B.K. (2010), “Training motivational factors as perdictors of
employees’ training satisfaction in foodservice operation”, paper presented at the 2010
International CHRIE Conference-Refereed Track, San Juan.
Juhdi, N., Pa’wan, F. and Hansaram, R.M.K. (2013), “HR Practices and turnover intention: the mediating
roles of organizational commitment and organizational engagement in a selected region
in Malaysia”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 24 No. 15,
pp. 3002-3019.
Jung, H.S. and Yoon, H.H. (2013), “The effects of organizational service orientation on person-
organization fit and turnover intent”, The Service Industries Journal, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 7-29.
Jung, J.Y. and Hong, S. (2008), “Organizational citizenship behaviour (OCB), TQM and performance at
the maquiladora”, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 25 No. 8,
pp. 793-808.
Khalid, S.A., Jusoff, H.K., Ali, H., Ismail, M., Kassim, K.M. and Rahman, N.A. (2009), “Gender as a
moderator of the relationship between OCB and turnover intention”, Asian Social Science, Vol. 5
No. 6, pp. 108-117.
JOEPP Khalid, S.A., Rahman, N.A., Madar, A.R.S. and Ismail, M. (2013), “Undergraduates’ organizational
citizenship behavior: the role of religiosity”, International Journal of Academic Research in
Business and Social Sciences, Vol. 3 No. 7, pp. 573-584.
Kizilos, M.A., Cummings, C. and Cummings, T.G. (2013), “How high-involvement work processes
increase organization performance: the role of organizational citizenship behavior”, The Journal
of Applied Behavioral Science, Vol. 49 No. 4, pp. 413-436.
Konovsky, M.A. and Pugh, S.D. (1994), “Citizenship behavior and social exchange”, The Academy of
Management Journal, Vol. 37 No. 3, pp. 656-669.
Koys, D.J. (2001), “The effects of employee satisfaction, organizational citizenship behavior, and
turnover on organizational effectiveness: a unit-level, longitudinal study”, Personnel Psychology,
Vol. 54 No. 1, pp. 101-114.
Kumar, R. (2005), Research Methodology: A Step by Step Guide for Beginners, 2nd ed., Sage Publication
Inc., London.
Lam, W., Chen, Z. and Takeuchi, N. (2009), “Perceived human resource management practices and
intention to leave of employees: the mediating role of organizational citizenship behaviour in a
Sino-Japanese joint venture”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management,
Vol. 20 No. 11, pp. 2250-2270.
Landy, F.J. (1985), Psychology of Work Behavior, Dorsey Press, Homewood, IL.
Lee, C.H. and Bruvold, N.T. (2003), “Creating value for employees: investment in employee
development”, International Journal Human Resource Management, Vol. 14 No. 6, pp. 981-1000.
Lee, K. and Allen, N. (2002), “Organizational citizenship behavior and workplace deviance: The role of
affect and cognitions”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 87 No. 1, pp. 132-142.
Lee, T., Hom, P., Eberly, M., Li, J. and Mitchell, T. (2017), “On the next decade of research in voluntary
employee turnover”, Academy of Management Perspectives, pp. 1-48, doi: 10.5465/amp.2016.0123.
Lintzer, M. and Salomon, M. (2013), Greater Transparency and Accountability in Managing Malaysia’s
Oil Wealth Urgently Needed, Natural Resource Governance Institute, New York, NY.
Lucas, M.D., Atwood, J.R. and Hagaman, R. (1993), “Replication and validation of anticipated turnover
model for urban registered nurses”, Nursing Research, Vol. 42 No. 1, pp. 29-35.
Maheshwari, S. and Vohra, V. (2015), “Identifying critical HR practices impacting employee perception
and commitment during organizational change”, Journal of Organizational Change
Management, Vol. 28 No. 5, pp. 872-894.
Mansor, N., Ismail, A.H., Alwi, M.A.M. and Anwar, N. (2013), “Relationship between spiritual leadership
and organizational commitment in Malaysians’ Oil & Gas Industry”, Asian Social Science, Vol. 9
No. 7, pp. 179-191.
March, J. and Simon, H. (1958), Organizations, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.
Memon, M.A., Salleh, R. and Baharom, M.N.R. (2016), “The link between training satisfaction, work
engagement and turnover intention”, European Journal of Training and Development, Vol. 40
No. 6, pp. 407-429.
Memon, M.A., Salleh, R., Baharom, M.N.R. and Harun, H. (2014), “Person-organization fit and turnover
intention: the mediating role of employee engagement”, Global Business and Management
Research: An International Journal, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 205-209.
Met, M. and Ali, I. (2014), “Investigating the moderating effect of demographic factors on the
relationship between monetary motivation and employees’ job satisfaction at oil and gas
offshore production facilities in Malaysia”, International Review of Management and Business
Research, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 788-818.
MPRC (2015), The Oil and Gas Year: The who’s who of the Global Energy Industry Malaysia 2015,
Petroleum Resources Corporation, Kuala Lumpur.
Nadiri, H. and Tanova, C. (2010), “An investigation of the role of justice in turnover intentions, job
satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behavior in hospitality industry”, International
Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 33-41.
Narimani, M., Tabaeian, E., Khanjani, M. and Soltani, F. (2013), “The impact of organizational Organisational
citizenship behavior on enterprise resource planning success”, International Journal of Quality & citizenship
Reliability Management, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 53-65.
Nitzl, C., Roldan, J.L. and Carrion, G.C. (2016), “Mediation analysis in partial least squares path
behaviour
modelling: helping researchers discuss more sophisticated models”, Industrial Management &
Data Systems, Vol. 116 No. 9, pp. 1849-1864.
Nunnally, J.C. (1978), Psychometric Theory, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Nunnally, J.C. and Bernstein, I.H. (1994), Psychometric Theory, 3rd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Organ, D.W. (1988), Organizational Citizenship Behaviour, Lexington, Lexington, MA.
Organ, D.W. (Ed.) (1990), The Motivational Basis of Organizational Citizenship Behavior, Vol. 12, JAJ
Press, Greenwich.
Owens, P.L. (2006), “One more reason not to cut your training budget: The relationship between
training and organizational outcomes”, Public Personnel Management, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 163-171.
Özbilgin, M., Groutsis, D. and Harvey, W. (Eds) (2014), International Human Resource Management,
Cambridge University Press, Sydney.
Paille, P. (2013), “Organizational citizenship behaviour and employee retention: How important are
turnover cognitions?”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 24 No. 4,
pp. 768-790.
Paine, J.B. and Organ, D.W. (2000), “The cultural matrix of organizational citizenship behaviour:
Some preliminary conceptual and empirical observations”, Human Resource Management
Review, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 45-59.
Patel, L. (2010), “ASTD State of the industry report 2010”, American Society for Training &
Development, Alexandria.
Patrick, J. (2000), “Training”, in Chmiel, N. (Ed.), Introduction to Work and Organizational Psychology,
Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 100-125.
Pattie, M., Benson, G.S. and Baruch, Y. (2006), “Tuition reimbursement, perceived organizational
support and turnover intention among graduate business school students”, Human Resource
Development Quarterly, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 423-442.
Penga, D.X. and Lai, F. (2012), “Using partial least squares in operations management research: a
practical guideline and summary of past research”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 30
No. 6, pp. 467-480.
Podsakoff, N.P., Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Maynes, T.D. and Spoelma, T.M. (2014), “Consequences
of unit-level organizational citizenship behaviors: a review and recommendations for future
research”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 35 No. S1, pp. S87-S119.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S., Lee, J. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003), “Common method biases in
behavioural research”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 115-141.
Podsakoff, N.P., Whiting, S.W., Podsakoff, P.M. and Blume, B.D. (2009), “Individual and organizational-
level consequences of organizational citizenship behavior: A Meta-analysis.”, Journal of Applied
Behavior, Vol. 94 No. 1, pp. 122-141.
Preacher, K.J. and Hayes, A.F. (2004), “SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in
simple mediation models”, Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, Vol. 36 No. 4,
pp. 717-731.
Preacher, K.J. and Hayes, A.F. (2008), “Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and
comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models”, Behavior Research Methods, Vol. 40
No. 3, pp. 879-891.
Price, J.L. (2001), “Reflection on the determinants of voluntary turnover”, International Journal of
Manpower, Vol. 22 No. 7, pp. 600-624.
Qiu, H., Ye, B.H., Hung, K. and York, Q.Y. (2015), “Exploring antecedents of employee turnover
Intention – evidence of China’s hotel industry”, Journal of China Tourism Research, Vol. 11 No. 1,
pp. 53-66.
JOEPP Rahman, W. and Nas, Z. (2013), “Employee development and turnover intention: theory validation”,
European Journal of Training and Development, Vol. 37 No. 6, pp. 564-579.
Ramayah, T., Cheah, J., Chuah, F., Ting, H. and Memon, M.A. (2016), Partial Least Squares Structural
Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) using SmartPLS 3.0: An Updated Guide and Practical Guide to
Statistical Analysis, Pearson, Kuala Lumpur.
Reio, T.G.J. (2010), “The threat of common method variance bias to theory building”, Human Resource
Development Review, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 405-411.
Rhoades, L. and Eisenberger, R. (2002), “Perceived organizational support: a review of the literature”,
Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 87 No. 4, pp. 698-714.
Richter, N.F., Sinkovics, R.R., Ringle, C.M. and Schlägel, C. (2016), “A critical look at the use of
SEM in international business research”, International Marketing Review, Vol. 33 No. 3,
pp. 376-404.
Ringle, C.M., Wende, S. and Becker, J.-M. (2015), “SmartPLS 3. SmartPLS”, available at: www.smartpls.com
(accessed 6 December 2016).
Roldán, J.L. and Sánchez-Franco, M.J. (2012), “Variance-based structural equation modeling: guidelines
for using partial least squares in information systems research”, in Mora, M., Gelman, O.,
Steenkamp, A. and Raisinghani, M.S. (Eds), Research Methodologies, Innovations and
Philosophies in Software Systems Engineering and Information Systems Information Science
Reference, Hershey, PA, pp. 193-221, doi: 10.4018/978-1-4666-0179-6.
Saks, A.M. (2006), “Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement”, Journal of Managerial
Psychology, Vol. 21 No. 7, pp. 600-619.
Salas, E., Tannenbaum, S.I., Kraiger, K. and Smith-Jentsch, K.A. (2012), “The science of training and
development in organizations: what matters in practice”, Psychological Science in the Public
Interest, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 74-101.
Sang, S., Lee, J.D. and Lee, J. (2010), “E-government adoption in Cambodia. a partial least squares
approach”, Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 138-157.
Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2007), Research Methods for Business Students, 4th ed.,
Prentice Hall, Harlow.
Savaneviciene, A. and Stankeviciute, Z. (2012), “Human resource management and performance:
From practices towards sustainable competitive advantage”, Globalization – Education and
Management Agendas, pp. 179-206, doi: 10.5772/47800.
Schmidt, S.W. (2007), “The relationship between satisfaction with workplace training and overall job
satisfaction”, Human Resource Development Quarterly, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 481-498.
Schwarz, A., Rizzuto, T., Carraher-Wolverton, C., Roldán, J.L. and Barrera-Barrera, R. (2017),
“Examining the Impact and detection of the ‘Urban Legend’ of common method bias”, Data Base
for Advances in Information Systems, Vol. 48 No. 1, pp. 93-119.
Sels, L. (2002), “More is not necessarily better”: the relationship between the quantity and quality
of training efforts”, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 13 No. 8,
pp. 1279-1298.
Shapira-Lishchinsky, O. and Tsemach, S. (2014), “Psychological empowerment as a mediator between
teachers’ perceptions of authentic leadership and their withdrawal and citizenship behaviours”,
Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 50 No. 4, pp. 675-712.
Shaw, J.D. and Shi, S. (2017), “The neglected state of organizational-level turnover studies in the
Chinese context: a call for research”, Frontiers of Business Research in China, Vol. 11 No. 6,
pp. 1-10.
Shelby, D., Hunt, R.D., Sparkman, J. and Wilcox, J.B. (1982), “The pretest in survey research: issues and
preliminary findings”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 269-273.
Shore, L.M., Tetrick, L.E., Lynch, P. and Barksdale, K. (2006), “Social and economic exchange: construct
development and validation”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 837-867.
Shuck, B., Twyford, D., Reio, T.G. and Shuck, A. (2014), “Human resource development practices and Organisational
employee engagement: examining the connection with employee turnover intentions”, Human citizenship
Resource Development Quarterly, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 239-269.
behaviour
Sieben, I. (2007), “Does training trigger turnover-or not? The impact of formal training on graduates’
job search behaviour”, Work, Employment & Society, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 397-416.
Skarlicki, D.P. and Latham, A.P. (1997), “Leadership training in organizational justice to increase citizenship
behaviour within a labour union: a replication”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 50 No. 3, pp. 617-633.
Snape, E. and Redman, T. (2010), “HRM practices, organizational citizenship behavior, and performance:
a multi-level analysis”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 47 No. 7, pp. 1219-1247.
Sparrowe, R.T. and Liden, R. (1997), “Process and structure in leader-member exchange”, Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 522-552.
Spector, P.E. (1997), Job Satisfaction: Application, Assessment, Causes and Consequences, Sage
Publications, London.
StarOnline (2014), “Full rollout of enhanced oil recovery programme by Petronas to boost flagging
production”, 24 September, The Star Online, Kuala Lumpur, available at: www.thestar.com.my/
Business/Business-News/2014/09/24/Full-rollout-of-EOR-programme-Petronas-aims-to-revive-
flagging-production-from-mature-and-depleting/?style=biz (accessed 12 December 2014).
Suan, C.L. and Nasurdin, A.M. (2014), “Do human resource management practices affect employees’
service-oriented organizational citizenship behavior? Evidence from the Malaysian hotel
industry”, World Applied Sciences Journal, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 253-266.
Sun, L.-Y., Aryee, S. and Law, K.S. (2007), “High performance human resource practices, citizenship
behavior and organizational performance: a relational perspective”, Academy of management
Journal, Vol. 50 No. 3, pp. 558-577.
Sung, S.Y. and Choi, J.N. (2014), “Do organizations spend wisely on employees? Effects of training and
development investments on learning and innovation in organizations”, Journal of
Organizational Behavior, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 393-412.
TalentCrop (2012), “Study on talent demand and supply in the oil & gas sector”, available at: https://
goo.gl/E9rdcH (accessed 13 August 2013).
Tanova, C. and Holtom, B. (2008), “Using job embeddedness factors to explain voluntary turnover in
four European countries”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 9
No. 9, pp. 1553-1568.
Tett, R.P. and Meyer, J.P. (1993), “Job satisfaction, organizational commitment, turnover intention, and
turnover: Path analyses based on meta-analytic findings”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 46 No. 2,
pp. 259-293.
Tharenou, P., Saks, A.M. and Moore, C. (2007), “A review and critique of research on training and
organizational-level outcomes”, Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 251-273.
Towers Watson (2015), “Employee retention remains a key challenge in Malaysia”, Kuala Lumpur,
available at: www.towerswatson.com www.towerswatson.com/en/Press/2015/01/Employee-
Retention-Remains-A-Key-Challenge-in-Malaysia (accessed 3 February 2015).
Williams, L.J. and Anderson, S.E. (1991), “Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors
of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors”, Journal of Management, Vol. 17 No. 3,
pp. 601-617.
Yan, L. and Yan, J. (2013), “Leadership, organizational citizenship behavior, and innovation in small
business: an empirical study”, Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship, Vol. 26 No. 2,
pp. 183-199.
Youndt, M.A. (2000), “Human resource configurations and value creation: The mediating role of
intellectual capital”, paper presented at The 2000 Academy of Management Conference, Toronto.
Zhang, Z., Wan, D. and Jia, M. (2008), “Do high-performance human resource practices help corporate
entrepreneurship? The mediating role of organizational citizenship behavior”, The Journal of
High Technology Management Research, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 129-138.
JOEPP Zhao, W. and Zhou, X. (2008), “Interaorganizaional career development and voluntary turnover in a
multinational bank in Taiwan”, Career Development International Journal, Vol. 13 No. 5, pp. 402-424.
Zheng, C. and Lamond, D. (2010), “Organizational determinants of employee turnover for multinational
companies in Asia”, Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 423-443.
Zheng, C. and Wong, H.Y. (2007), “Company training reduces employee turnover, or does it?”,
International Journal of Business Management, Vol. 2 No. 6, pp. 28-35.
Appendix
Training satisfaction
• TS1: Overall, the on-the-job training I receive is applicable to my job.
• TS2: Overall, the training I receive on-the-job meets my needs.

• TS3: Overall, I am satisfied with the amount of training I receive on the job.
• TS4: I am generally able to use what I learn on the job.
OCB
• OCBO1: I attend functions that are not required but that help the organisational image.
• OCBO2: I defend the organisation when other employees criticise it.
• OCBO3: I offer ideas to improve the functioning of the organisation.
• OCBO4: I take actions to protect the organisation from potential problems.
• OCBI1: I willingly give my time to help others who have work-related problems.
• OCBI2: I adjust my work schedule to accommodate other employees’ requests for time off.
• OCBI3: I give up time to help others who have work or non-work problems.
• OCBI4: I assist others with their duties.
Turnover intention
• TI1: I am currently seriously considering leaving my current job to work at another company.
• TI2: I sometimes feel compelled to quit my job in my current workplace.
• TI3: I will probably look for a new job in the next year.
• TI4: Within the next six months, I would rate the likelihood of leaving my present job as high.
• TI5: I will quit this company if the given condition gets even a little worse than now.
Corresponding author
Mumtaz Ali Memon can be contacted at: mumtazutp@gmail.com
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

OCB Employee Retention

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

OCB Employee Retention

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance

The relationship between training satisfaction, organisational citizenship

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

citizenship behaviour, and

Centre of Social Innovation, Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS,

cheerleading is a helping behaviour that involves encouraging co-workers who are

Theoretical background and hypotheses development

There is strong evidence to indicate that organisational investments in training and

Demographic variables Category Frequency Percentage

Gender Male 229 56.0

Construct Measurement item Loading CR AVE

Training satisfaction TS1 0.905 0.936 0.786

OCB Training satisfaction Turnover intention

Latent constructs OCB Training satisfaction Turnover intention

Hypotheses Path β t-value CI (LL, UL) Results

H1 Training satisfaction → TI −0.295 5.584** −0.381, −0.205 Supported

Coefficient of determination Predict relevance Effect size

Training Satisfaction – – 0.242 Medium to large Table VI.

Discussions and implications

enhancement activities, are therefore essential prerequisites in the pursuit of positive

• TS2: Overall, the training I receive on-the-job meets my needs.

You might also like