High Educ (2019) 77:19–36

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-018-0252-3

The direct and indirect impacts of job characteristics

on faculty organizational citizenship behavior in the United
Arab Emirates (UAE)

Khaldoun I. Ababneh 1 & Rick D. Hackett 2

Published online: 22 March 2018

# Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Abstract We examine the relationships between job characteristics (job autonomy, skill
variety, role conflict), work-related attitudes (job satisfaction, organizational commitment, trust
in the employer), and organizational citizenship behaviors (civic virtue and altruism) among
faculty at UAE-based universities. Data were obtained from 249 participants at 26 universities.
Path analysis revealed, as predicted, that job autonomy, skill variety, and role conflict impact
faculty job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and trust. Also, when job satisfaction,
organizational commitment, and trust were examined simultaneously as mediators of the job
characteristics-citizenship relationship, only organizational commitment was significant. Job
autonomy had both direct and indirect effects on civic virtue, but only an indirect effect on
altruism. Skill variety had direct and indirect effects on both civic virtue and altruism; whereas,
role conflict had only indirect effects on these outcomes. The practical and theoretical
implications of these findings are discussed and directions for future research are offered.

Keywords Faculty organizational citizenship behavior . Higher education . Job autonomy . Skill
variety . Role conflict . Trust . Job satisfaction . Organizational commitment . UAE

Introduction

Today’s organizations need employees who willingly and frequently engage in organizational
citizenship behaviors (OCBs; Organ 1988; Organ and Ryan 1995; Podsakoff et al. 2000,
2009). Organizational citizenship consists of “performance that supports the social and
psychological environment in which task performance takes place” (Organ 1997, p. 95).

* Khaldoun I. Ababneh
kababneh@aud.edu

1
School of Business Administration, American University In Dubai, P.O. Box 28282, Dubai, United
Arab Emirates
2
DeGroote School of Business, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
20 High Educ (2019) 77:19–36

Numerous studies have demonstrated that when employees engage in organizational citizen-
ship behaviors (e.g., volunteering for extra job-related tasks, helping co-workers handle a
heavy work load, participating in activities that are not required but considered important to the
organization), they enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of their organizations (Organ et al.
2006; Organ and Ryan 1995; Podsakoff et al. 2000, 2009).
There is a great deal of research concerning organizational citizenship (Organ and Ryan
1995; Podsakoff et al. 1990, 2000, 2009). However, most of this research has been conducted
in North American contexts (Bolino et al. 2015), and examinations of organizational citizen-
ship among university faculty members are rare (Ertürk 2007; Lawrence et al. 2012). More-
over, although researchers have called for more studies that examine the effect of job
characteristics on organizational citizenship (Organ et al. 2006; Podsakoff et al. 2000), we
are unaware of any study that examined the impact of job characteristics (e.g., job autonomy,
skill variety, role conflict) on faculty organizational citizenship. Furthermore, several studies
have established that job characteristics impact employees’ job satisfaction (Daly and Dee
2006; Loher et al. 1985), organizational commitment (Daly and Dee 2006; Tompson and
Werner 1997), and trust in the employer (Jillapalli and Wilcox 2010; Moye et al. 2005). Other
studies have also demonstrated that employees’ job satisfaction, commitment, and trust
influence organizational citizenship (Konovsky and Pugh 1994; Podsakoff et al. 2000);
nevertheless, we are unaware of any study that simultaneously examined the mediating role
of job satisfaction, commitment, and trust in the relationship between job characteristics and
organizational citizenship. Specifically, prior research that examined the mechanism through
which job characteristics influence organizational citizenship focused only on one mediator
(e.g., job satisfaction; Chiu and Chen 2005; Todd and Kent 2006) or used a statistical approach
that examines the mediators separately. However, by focusing only on one potential mediator
or by examining the potential mediators separately, a researcher may conclude that a variable is
a significant mediator when in fact it is not. To remedy this, the present paper simultaneously
examines the role of three potential mediators (job satisfaction, commitment, and trust) and
uses a statistical approach for testing mediation that examines the effect of each mediator while
controlling for the effect of the other mediators (Preacher and Hayes 2008).

Purpose of study

The purpose of this study is to integrate theoretical and empirical research to better understand
the relationships between job characteristics, employee attitudes, and organizational citizen-
ship using faculty members at institutions in a non-Western country, namely the UAE.
Foremost, this study seeks to examine the direct and the indirect effects of job characteristics,
via job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and trust, on faculty organizational citizenship
(Organ et al. 2006; Podsakoff et al. 2000). The results of our research offer theoretical and
practical implications for many stakeholders including researchers, academic administrators,
and faculty. For example, the findings can provide useful information to those considering a
faculty position in the UAE. The findings can also help academic administrators design faculty
positions in ways that enhance incumbents’ work-related attitudes and behavior. Theoretically,
our research can help identify the unique contributions of three potential mediators (job
satisfaction, commitment, trust) in the job characteristics-citizenship relationship.
This paper focuses on the UAE for a number of reasons. First, the UAE presents a very dynamic
environment to study the functioning of higher educational institutions. The country has seen a
High Educ (2019) 77:19–36 21

dramatic increase in the number of universities over the last two decades, making it the largest hub
of international campuses worldwide (Alajoutsijärvi et al. 2013; Wilkins and Huisman 2012).
However, parallel with this increase is a corresponding increase in the level of competition among
universities in the UAE. The increase in competition, combined with a period of weak economic
conditions, has resulted in the demise of some universities, while others have been severely
adversely impacted, and yet others have thrived (Alajoutsijärvi et al. 2013; Lewin 2009). These
days, most universities, including not-for-profit, are operating on very limited budgets and
searching for strategies to enhance their effectiveness and efficiency. Faculty organizational
citizenship is likely to contribute uniquely in this regard (Bynum et al. 2012; Podsakoff et al.
2009). For example, organizational citizenship can improve productivity by boosting coordination
and cooperation within and across work groups and by attracting and retaining the best employees,
thereby enhancing the level of responsiveness to competitive challenges (Podsakoff et al. 2000).
Second, the academic environments of universities in the Middle East are somewhat
different from those in a Western country (Romanowski and Nasser 2015). For example,
researchers note that relative to faculty members in Western countries, those in the Middle East
have less job autonomy and fewer opportunities to participate in academic governance (Austin
et al. 2014; Mazawi 2003; Romanowski and Nasser 2015; Schoepp and Forstenlechner 2012).
Additionally, most universities in the UAE are intensely teaching oriented and this orientation
does not offer the faculty sufficient opportunities to utilize the various skills (e.g., academic
research skills) and talents that they developed over the years. Indeed, most faculty in the UAE
are educated in Western universities (Center for Higher Education Data and Statistics 2012)
where they were trained to be both researchers and educators.
Third, very little research has been written on the topic of organizational citizenship in the UAE
and we are unaware of any research that focused on faculty organizational citizenship in this unique
country. Below, we provide additional context concerning the UAE and its higher education.

The UAE: higher education context

The UAE was established in 1971 as a federation of seven Emirates: Abu Dhabi, Dubai,
Sharjah, Ajman, Um Al Qwain, Ras AI Khaimah, and Fujairah. It is a member of the Gulf
Cooperation Council (GCC), which includes Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, and Saudi
Arabia. Similar to the other GCC countries, the UAE suffers from a substantial shortage of
qualified local workers and relies heavily on foreigners to fill the gap. More than 80% of the
UAE labor workforce are expatriates of more than 100 nationalities, reflective of many races,
cultures, ethnicities, and languages (Ababneh and Al-Waqfi 2016; Baruch and Forstenlechner
2017). This dominance of expatriates is a consequence of vast economic growth, fueled by oil
revenues, combined with the UAE’s aspirations to be a regional and global economic power
(Schoepp and Forstenlechner 2010).
Likewise, the UAE academic institutions rely heavily on expatriates. More than 90% of
faculty members in the UAE are employed on 1- to 4-year renewable contracts (Center for
Higher Education Data and Statistics 2012; Schoepp and Forstenlechner 2012). In a recent
qualitative study, Austin et al. (2014) identified several factors that attract expatriate faculty to
the UAE. These include a tax-free salary, a wide range of employee benefits (e.g., educational
allowance for children, specific health care or cafeteria-style benefits, on-campus housing, one
trip home each year), safe environment, good weather, attractive university facilities, and the
opportunity to travel and experience different cultures, including interactions with colleagues
22 High Educ (2019) 77:19–36

and students from all over the world. Austin et al. (2014) also identified factors that make it
unattractive to be a faculty member in the UAE. These include a lack of job security due to the
relatively short-term nature of most employment contracts, heavy teaching loads, low levels of
support for academic research and professional development, low job autonomy, and limited
faculty involvement in academic and institutional governance.
As noted earlier, the UAE higher education system has expanded rapidly in the last
few decades. For example, in 1990, there were only five higher academic institutions,
compared to more than 70 in recent years (Center for Higher Education Data and
Statistics 2012). According to Austin et al. (2014), almost all of the higher academic
institutions in the UAE fall into three categories. The first category consists of federal-
level academic institutions owned and operated by the UAE government. These institu-
tions enroll mostly Emirati students, whose tuition is covered by the government. The
main goal of these institutions is to prepare Emiratis for work in the UAE public and
private sectors. The second category is comprised of state-level semi-public for-profit
institutions owned by private and state shareholders. These institutions enroll mainly
expatriate students. The third category consists of international branch campuses and free
zone academic institutions, which reflect cross-border collaborations between Emirati
and international higher education providers. Most of the institutions in this category are
for-profit and depend largely on student tuition.
With respect to academic quality assurance and program accreditation, the federal-level
academic institutions are subject to review by the UAE Higher Education Council. Institutions
in the second and the third categories discussed above must be licensed by the Commission for
Academic Accreditation (CAA), which has standards similar to those used in the United States
(US). Private institutions located in the UAE free zones are required only to fulfill the
requirements of the accreditation body of the emirate in which the zone is located. For
example, higher institutions that operate in Dubai free zones are required to fulfill the licensing
requirements of the Knowledge and Human Development Authority (KHDA).

Organizational citizenship behaviors

There are several alternative conceptualizations of organizational citizenship (e.g., Organ

1988; Podsakoff et al. 2000, 2009; Williams and Anderson 1991) but two of them dominate
the literature. One view is that citizenship is comprised of five dimensions: altruism, courtesy,
conscientiousness, civic virtue, and sportsmanship (Organ 1988). The second view conceives
of organizational citizenship behavior as predominantly benefiting individuals (e.g., co-
workers, supervisors) or the organization as a whole (Williams and Anderson 1991).
The current study focuses on the altruism and civic virtue components of the Organ (1988)
model, for two main reasons. First, the positive effects of altruism and civic virtue on valued
individual and organizational outcomes are well established (Podsakoff et al. 2009). Second,
these components together reflect well the Williams and Anderson (1991) conceptualization,
as altruism is typically directed toward individuals, whereas civic virtue is more organization-
focused (Harper 2015; Podsakoff et al. 2009). Specifically, Podsakoff et al. (1990; p. 115)
defined altruism as “discretionary behaviors that have the effect of helping a specific other
person with an organizationally relevant task or problem” and defined civic virtue as “behavior
on the part of an individual that indicates that he/she responsibly participates in, is involved in,
or is concerned about the life of the company.”
High Educ (2019) 77:19–36 23

Job characteristics

Job characteristics refer to a series of dimensions that characterize the nature and content of a
job (Chiu and Chen 2005; Daly and Dee 2006; Hackman and Oldham 1976). The Hackman
and Oldham (1976, 1980) job characteristics model dominates the literature. It focuses on job
autonomy, job/skill variety, task significance, task identity, and feedback. The model proposes
that these characteristics influence employees’ psychological states (e.g., experienced mean-
ingfulness of the work and sense of responsibility), which in turn influence a range of
individual (e.g., motivation, satisfaction) and organizational outcomes (e.g., productivity,
turnover). Other job characteristics that have been studied in relation to faculty members
include role conflict and workload (Barnes et al. 1998; Daly and Dee 2006).
Our paper focuses on three job characteristics: (a) job autonomy, “the degree to which the
job provides substantial freedom, independence, and discretion to the employee in scheduling
the work and in determining the procedures to be used in carrying it out” (Oldham and
Hackman 1981, p. 72); (b) job/skill variety, “the degree to which a job requires a variety of
different activities in carrying out the work, which involve the use of a number of different
skills and talents of the employee” (Oldham and Hackman 1981, p. 71); and (c) job role
conflict, defined as the extent to which there is inconsistency or incompatibility among the
expectations and obligations communicated to an employee by his/her supervisor and/or other
administrators who set organizational policies and rules (Daly and Dee 2006; Podsakoff et al.
1993). We focus on these characteristics because prior research identifies them as important
aspects of faculty work that influence attitudes (e.g., job satisfaction, commitment) and
behavior (e.g., productivity and turnover) (Ababneh 2016; Austin et al. 2014; Barnes et al.
1998; Daly and Dee 2006; Dee et al. 2000; Gormley 2003; Johnsrud and Rosser 2002;
Schoepp and Forstenlechner 2012).

Theoretical foundation

Our study draws on findings from the job characteristics literature (Hackman and Oldham
1980; Oldham and Hackman 2010), social exchange theory (Blau 1964; Cropanzano and
Mitchell 2005), and organizational citizenship research (Organ et al. 2006; Podsakoff et al.
2009; Podsakoff et al. 2000). The job characteristics literature exemplified by the Hackman
and Oldham (1980) model proposes that jobs enriched with motivating job characteristics,
such as autonomy and skill variety, are associated with favorable employee perceptions,
attitudes, and behaviors. The positive perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors reflect the positive
psychological states (e.g., experienced meaningfulness of the work and sense of responsibility)
that are associated with enriched jobs (Hackman and Oldham 1976; Hackman and Oldham
1980). Indeed, meta-analytic evidence supports many aspects of this job characteristics
framework (e.g., Loher et al. 1985; Oldham and Hackman 2010).
From the literature concerning social exchange theory, the importance of the construct of
reciprocity in the workplace has been demonstrated; that is, when employees perceive that
individuals and organizations behave in ways that reflect concern for them, they tend to
reciprocate by way of favorable attitudes and behaviors (Bateman and Organ 1983; Blau
1964; Cropanzano et al. 2016; Cropanzano and Mitchell 2005). For example, one way in
which a university could demonstrate caring and fairness in regard to their faculty would be to
design jobs to include motivating job characteristics and to provide an overall positive work
24 High Educ (2019) 77:19–36

environment. In turn, faculty may experience higher levels of job satisfaction and organiza-
tional commitment which in turn, are associated with increases in organizational citizenship
and other positive behaviors that benefit the institution. It is also true that treatment perceived
by employees as unfair, or reflective of a lack of caring, can be reciprocated with negative
work-related attitudes and behaviors (Cropanzano et al. 2016; Cropanzano and Mitchell 2005).
For example, employees encountering high levels of job role conflict and/or low levels of job
autonomy are likely to form unfavorable perceptions and attitudes toward their employer,
which can be expressed in lower organizational citizenship (e.g., Bateman and Organ 1983;
Cropanzano and Mitchell 2005; Konovsky and Pugh 1994).

Research hypotheses

The effects of job characteristics on job satisfaction, commitment, and trust

Research concerning job characteristics in teaching jobs highlights the importance of auton-
omy (Ababneh 2016; Austin et al. 2014; Daly and Dee 2006; Moye et al. 2005; Schoepp and
Forstenlechner 2012). Autonomy is thought to help fulfill instructors’ higher order needs for
sense of responsibility, self-esteem, growth, and achievement, resulting in increased job
satisfaction, organizational commitment, and trust (Daly and Dee 2006; Deci et al. 1989;
Moye et al. 2005; Spector 1986). For example, Daly and Dee (2006) investigated the
antecedents of faculty turnover intentions at 15 public universities in the US and demonstrated
that job autonomy has a significant impact on faculty job satisfaction, organizational commit-
ment, and turnover intentions. They also found that some job characteristics have indirect
effects (via job satisfaction and commitment) on faculty turnover intentions. Based on Deci
et al. (1989), Moye et al. (2005) argued and empirically demonstrated that high job autonomy
positively influences teachers’ trust in their principals. Empowering teachers positively con-
tributes to the overall work environment in that it signals trust, which teachers reciprocate by
trusting their principals.
Prior research has also highlighted the importance of job/skill variety in that high skill
utilization associates positively with employees’ perceptions of the importance of their jobs
and the value of their contributions. Job variety, in contrast to routine narrow tasks, is likely to
increase employee motivation and satisfaction (Drago and Garvey 1998; Hackman and
Oldham 1980). Thus, faculty who have jobs that offer the opportunity to use various skills
and talents are likely to perceive that they are valued, appreciated, and trusted by their
employer, leading to enhanced job satisfaction, trust, and organizational commitment.
With respect to job role conflict, Daly and Dee (2006) contended that faculty are likely to
experience conflicts related to the work, due to the range of roles they are required to fulfill
(e.g., teaching, research, service), and because of potentially inconsistent expectations and
requirements conveyed by people holding various leadership roles (e.g., department head,
dean, and other university administrators) (Tompson and Werner 1997). Role conflict is
problematic because of the difficulties faculty members face in trying to fulfill and balance
multiple, inconsistent demands. For example, heavy, inconsistent, and unclear teaching re-
quirements are likely to conflict with research expectations, as is committee service and
student advising (Daly and Dee 2006). Indeed, role conflict is associated with job stress, job
dissatisfaction, low organizational commitment, and lack of confidence in one’s employer
(Daly and Dee 2006; Tompson and Werner 1997). In light of the above, we hypothesize:
High Educ (2019) 77:19–36 25

Hypothesis 1: Job autonomy and skill variety will have positive effects, and role conflict
will have negative effects, on job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and trust.

The impact of job characteristics on organizational citizenship

It has been proposed that the components of the Hackman and Oldham (1976, 1980) job
characteristics model can directly impact employees’ organizational citizenship (Chen
and Chiu 2009; Farh et al. 1990; Todd and Kent 2006). Specifically, the enhanced levels
of responsibility and meaningfulness associated with jobs enriched with motivating
characteristics (e.g., autonomy, skill variety) are likely to enhance awareness of one’s
role among co-workers and within the organization more broadly. This, in turn, is likely
to enhance the likelihood of citizenship behaviors directed toward the individual and the
organization (Drago and Garvey 1998; Farh et al. 1990; Podsakoff et al. 1996a).
Consistent with this expectation, Farh et al. (1990) found that job characteristics directly
influenced altruism and compliance. Podsakoff et al. (1993) also reported a negative
relationship between routine tasks (the opposite of job variety) and altruism. Moreover,
data from 1539 employees across a wide variety of different industries, organizational
settings, and job levels revealed that routine tasks have negative associations with
altruism and civic virtue (Podsakoff et al. 1996b), a finding also supported by meta-
analysis (Podsakoff et al. 1996a). Finally, role conflict is also negatively associated with
organizational citizenship (Podsakoff et al. 1996a; Tompson and Werner 1997), including
altruism, courtesy, and sportsmanship. Accordingly:

Hypothesis 2: Job autonomy and skill variety will have positive direct impacts on altruism and
civic virtue behaviors, while job conflict will have negative direct impacts on these behaviors.

Job satisfaction, commitment, and trust as mediators of the effect of job

characteristics on organizational citizenship

As noted earlier, several studies have demonstrated that job characteristics influence em-
ployees’ job satisfaction (Daly and Dee 2006; Loher et al. 1985), organizational commitment
(Daly and Dee 2006; Tompson and Werner 1997), and trust in the employer (Jillapalli and
Wilcox 2010; Moye et al. 2005). Other studies have established that job satisfaction (Bateman
and Organ 1983; Organ and Ryan 1995; Podsakoff et al. 2000; Williams and Anderson 1991),
organizational commitment (Organ and Ryan 1995; Podsakoff et al. 2000; Tompson and
Werner 1997), and trust (Konovsky and Pugh 1994; Podsakoff et al. 1990) are positively
associated with organizational citizenship. Combined with studies linking enhanced job
characteristics to citizenship (e.g., Cappelli and Rogovsky 1998; Podsakoff et al. 1996a),
these findings collectively suggest that job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and trust
in the employer mediate the relationship between job characteristics and organizational
citizenship. Nonetheless, much of the early research examining job characteristics and orga-
nizational citizenship did not test for mediating variables (Podsakoff et al. 2000).
Building on their comprehensive review of organizational citizenship research, Podsakoff
et al. (2000) along with Organ et al. (2006) postulated that job characteristics (e.g., role
conflict, task routinization) are most likely to influence organizational citizenship through
26 High Educ (2019) 77:19–36

job attitudes (e.g., job satisfaction). In some support of these predictions, Chiu and Chen
(2005) found job satisfaction mediated the relationships between job variety and job
significance, and organizational citizenship, among employees of electronics companies.
Similarly, Chen and Chiu (2009) demonstrated that job involvement mediates the relationships
between job autonomy, task identity, task significance, and citizenship. Todd and Kent (2006)
examined job satisfaction as a mediator of associations between job characteristics and
organizational citizenship among manufacturing employees, finding support for mediation
for some job characteristics and direct associations for others.
Notably, each of the three studies referenced above examined only one mediator (i.e., either
job satisfaction or job involvement) and did not include other potentially important attitudes
(e.g., organizational commitment, trust in the employer) likely to mediate the job
characteristics-citizenship relationship. Accordingly, there is a need to simultaneously examine
multiple potential mediators to determine their relative importance.
A synthesis of the above research suggests that job satisfaction, organizational commit-
ment, and trust are likely to mediate the effect of job characteristics on organizational
citizenship. When employees are offered jobs that are perceived as high in job autonomy
and skill variety, and low in role conflict, they are likely to feel valued and respected (Jillapalli
and Wilcox 2010), resulting in heightened levels of job satisfaction, organizational commit-
ment, and trust, thereby leading to a sense of obligation reflected in heightened levels of
organizational citizenship (Blau 1964; Cropanzano et al. 2016). Accordingly:

Hypothesis 3: Job satisfaction will mediate the effect of job characteristics on altruism
and civic virtue.
Hypothesis 4: Organizational commitment will mediate the effect of job characteristics on
altruism and civic virtue.
Hypothesis 5: Employees’ trust in their employer will mediate the effect of job charac-
teristics on altruism and civic virtue.

Figure 1 reflects our proposed model. As shown, the model predicts that job characteristics
(i.e., job autonomy, skill variety, and role conflict) impact job satisfaction, trust, and organi-
zational commitment. Our model also predicts that job characteristics directly impact altruism
and civic virtue. Furthermore, the model predicts that job satisfaction, trust, and organizational
commitment mediate the effect of job characteristics on altruism and civic virtue.

Job Characteristics
Attitudes
Civic Virtue
Job Autonomy Trust

Commitment Altruism
Skill Variety

Role Conflict Job Satisfaction

Fig. 1 The direct and indirect effects of job characteristics on civic virtue and altruism through trust, commit-
ment, and job satisfaction
High Educ (2019) 77:19–36 27

Method

Participants

Faculty from 26 universities located in the UAE participated in this study. The data
were collected as part of a large survey concerning faculty attitudes and behaviors. E-
mail lists of potential participants were compiled based on information from the
UAE’s National Research Foundation (http://srd.mohesr.gov.ae/ResearcherProfile.aspx)
and on the websites of 26 UAE universities offering 4-year undergraduate programs.
Three e-mails (an invitation and two reminders) were sent via Survey Monkey to the
resulting 1736 potential participants, soliciting their responses to our voluntary, con-
fidential online survey. Usable data was obtained from 335 faculty members, a
response rate of 19.43%. After removing respondents who were not assistant, associ-
ate, or full professors, 249 remained for the analysis.
The sample characteristics were as follows: gender (69.9% male, 30.1% female),
academic rank (52.6% assistant professors, 33.7% associate professors, 13.7% full
professors), participants’ region of origin (42.2% Middle East, 23.3% North America,
14.1% South Asia, 12.0% Europe, 8.4% others), marital status (81.1% married, 17.7%
single, 1.2% other), and 67.9% with children. The average length of time of partic-
ipants at their current university was 4.04 years. They averaged 8.12 years of work
experience.

Measures

For each of the measures described below, a 5-point Likert-type response scale was used
(1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). The following is a brief description of the
measures.

Job autonomy. Four items from Daly and Dee (2006) were used (e.g., “I am allowed to
decide how to go about getting my job done”).
Role conflict. Two items from Daly and Dee (2006) were used (e.g., “I get conflicting job
requests from my department chair”).
Skill variety. Two items from Price (2001) were used (e.g., “I have the opportunity to do a
number of different things in my job”).
Trust in the employer. Five items from Robinson and Rousseau (1994) were used (e.g., “I
fully trust my employer”).
Organizational commitment. Six items from Daly and Dee (2006) were used (e.g., “I am
proud to tell others I am part of this university”).
Job satisfaction. Four items from Daly and Dee (2006) were used (e.g., “Most days I am
enthusiastic about my job”).
Altruism. Three items from Podsakoff et al. (1990) were used (e.g., “I am always ready to
lend a helping hand to those around me”).
Civic virtue. Three items from Podsakoff et al. (1990) were used (e.g., “I attend functions
that are not required, but are considered important to improve my institution’s image”).
28 High Educ (2019) 77:19–36

Results

Preliminary analysis and measurement model

Table 1 reports the means, standard deviations, and scale reliabilities, as well as the correlations
among the study variables. All the measures (see Table 1 diagonal) had acceptable alpha
reliabilities (i.e., higher than .70). Moreover, multicollinearity was not an issue (Tabachnick
and Fidell 2001).
Seniority was significantly and positively related to altruism (see Table 1), as in prior
research (Chen and Chiu 2009; Morrison 1994). Accordingly, seniority was controlled in all of
the path analysis models we tested. Finally, participants’ demographic characteristics were
unrelated to the main study variables and were dropped from the final analysis.
Prior to hypothesis testing, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to assess the
adequacy of our overall measurement model, including the distinctiveness of the variables
involved. Specifically, we compared an eight-factor oblique baseline model consisting of a
factor for each of our targeted constructs (i.e., job autonomy, skill variety, role conflict, trust,
job satisfaction, organizational commitment, civic virtue, and altruism) against three alterna-
tives (see Table 2). As Table 2 shows, the results demonstrate that the baseline model produced
better fit indices [χ2 (335) = 664.08, p < .01; root mean square error of approximation
(RMSEA) = .06, standardized root mean squared residual (SRMR) = .06, comparative fit index
(CFI) = .92, Tucker–Lewis index (TLI) = .91] than the alternatives.

Hypothesis testing using path analyses to compare proposed and alternative models

To test the hypotheses, AMOS 20 was used to conduct path analysis, combined with
bootstrapping. As presented in Table 3, the proposed model exhibits an excellent degree of
fit to the data [χ2 (6) = 3.76, p = .71; RMSEA = .00, SRMR = .01, CFI = 1.00, TLI = 1.00]; it
accounts for 28 and 27% of the variance in civic virtue and altruism, respectively. Figure 2 also
shows statistically significant paths from job autonomy to job satisfaction (β = .41, p < .01),
trust (β = .34, p < .01), and organizational commitment (β = .24, p < .01). All the paths from
skill variety to job satisfaction (β = .29, p < .01), trust (β = .16, p < .01), and organizational
commitment (β = .28, p < .01) were also significant. The paths from job conflict to job

Table 1 Means, standard deviations, reliabilities, and correlations

Variables Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1. Autonomy 3.33 0.74 (.71)

2. Task variety 3.90 0.72 .42** (.83)
3. Conflict 2.55 0.96 − .35** − .17** (.88)
4. Trust 3.02 0.97 .49** .35** − .39** (.94)
5. Commitment 3.43 0.74 .43** .42** − .34** .71** (.81)
6. Job satisfaction 3.46 0.81 .57** .48** − .31** .67** .72** (.87)
7. Civic virtue 3.75 0.73 .34** .43** − .09 .29** .41** .34** (.77)
8. Altruism 4.03 0.59 .28** .48** − .10 .24** .35** .35** .63** (.78)
9. Senioritya 4.04 1.30 .04 .03 − .01 .00 .05 − .02 .05 .13* –

n = 249; reliabilities are in parentheses along the diagonal

a
Seniority measures the number of years that the respondent has worked with his or her current employer
*p < .05; **p < .01
High Educ (2019) 77:19–36 29

Table 2 Comparison of measurement models for variables in the study

Model Factor χ2 Δχ2a Df Δdfa RMSEA SRMR CFI TLI

Baseline Eight-factor model: (a) autonomy, 664.08** – 335 – 0.06 0.06 0.92 0.91
model (b) task variety, (c) conflict, (d)
trust, (e) organizational commitment,
(f) job satisfaction, (g) civic virtue,
and (h) altruism
Model 1 One-factor model: all items grouped 1557.39** 893.31** 363 28 0.12 0.10 0.72 0.69
under a single factor
Model 2 Two-factor model: (a) combination of 1321.07** 656.99** 362 27 0.10 0.09 0.78 0.75
civic virtue and altruism, and (b)
combination of autonomy, skill variety,
conflict, trust, organizational
commitment, and job satisfaction
Model 3 Three-factor model: (a) combination 1181.70** 517.62** 360 25 0.10 0.08 0.8 0.77
of civic virtue and altruism, and (b)
combination of autonomy, skill variety,
and conflict, and (c) combination of
trust, organizational commitment, and
job satisfaction

A significant Δχ2 indicates that the baseline model provides better fit than the alternative models
a
These values represent the difference in χ2 and df between the nested model and the eight-factor model
**p < .01

satisfaction (β = −.13, p < .01), trust (β = −.25, p < .01), and organizational commitment (β =
−.21, p < .01) were also significant. These results provide support for hypothesis 1.
With regard to the second hypothesis, job autonomy had a significant direct effect on civic
virtue (β = .21, p < .01), but not on altruism (β = .04, p = .47). Skill variety had significant
direct effects on both altruism (β = .38, p < .01) and civic virtue (β = .28, p < .01), while role
conflict did not directly affect either altruism (β = .04, p = .56) or civic virtue (β = .08, p = .18).
These findings partially support hypothesis 2.
Hypotheses 3 through 5 which predict the indirect effects of job characteristics (via job
satisfaction, commitment, and trust) on citizenship were tested simultaneously. However,
because AMOS does not produce the specific indirect effects for multiple mediators, we used
special AMOS syntax (see details by Ababneh et al. 2014) to generate the indirect effect
associated with each mediator as well as the associated 90% bias-corrected bootstrap confi-
dence intervals (Preacher and Hayes 2008). Table 4 presents these findings.
As shown in Table 4, the confidence intervals reveal that when all three mediators are
examined simultaneously, only organizational commitment emerges as significant. Thus,
job autonomy, skill variety, and role conflict all have significant indirect effects, via

Table 3 Results of path analyses for the hypothesized and alternative models

χ2 Df RMSEA SRMR CFI TLI

Proposed model (partial mediation model) 3.762 6 0.000 0.01 1.00 1.00
Alternative model (full mediation model) 54.38** 12 0.12 0.07 0.95 0.85

The alternative model (full mediation model) is the same as the proposed model except for the deletion of the
direct paths from job autonomy, skill variety, and job conflict to civic virtue and altruism. Because of the
moderate correlation between organizational commitment job satisfaction and trust (r > .50), the residual errors of
these constructs were allowed to correlate in all the tested models. The exogenous variables were allowed to
correlate with each other in all the tested models. The residual errors of civic virtue and altruism were allowed to
correlate in all the tested models
**p < .01
30 High Educ (2019) 77:19–36

Fig. 2 The direct and indirect effects of job characteristics on civic virtue and altruism through trust, commit-
ment, and job satisfaction. **p < .01; *p < .05; significant paths are indicated with a solid line; non-significant
(ns) paths are indicated with a dashed line

organizational commitment, on both civic virtue and altruism. These findings support
hypothesis 4, but not hypotheses 3 and 5. In terms of the control variable, seniority had a
significant effect on altruism but not civic virtue.
Finally, we assessed whether our hypothesized mediators partially or fully account for the
relationship between our studied job characteristics and citizenship. Specifically, we compared
our hypothesized partial mediation model to one in which the direct paths from job autonomy,
skill variety, and job conflict to civic virtue and altruism were deleted. Table 3 shows that the

Table 4 Unstandardized point estimates for the specific indirect effects and their 90% bias-corrected confidence
interval using 5000 bootstrap samples

The indirect effect path Estimate Lower Upper p

Autonomy ➔ commitment ➔ civic virtue 0.09 0.04 0.15 0.000

Autonomy ➔ commitment ➔ altruism 0.03 0.01 0.06 0.036
Skill variety ➔ commitment ➔ civic virtue 0.10 0.06 0.17 0.000
Skill variety ➔ commitment ➔ altruism 0.04 0.01 0.08 0.038
Role conflict ➔ commitment ➔ civic virtue − 0.06 − 0.10 − 0.03 0.000
Role conflict ➔ commitment ➔ altruism − 0.03 − 0.05 − 0.01 0.035
Autonomy ➔ job satisfaction ➔ civic virtue − 0.04 − 0.11 0.02 0.255
Autonomy ➔ job satisfaction ➔ altruism 0.03 − 0.02 0.07 0.347
Skill variety ➔ job satisfaction ➔ civic virtue − 0.03 − 0.08 0.01 0.228
Skill variety ➔ job satisfaction ➔ altruism 0.02 − 0.01 0.06 0.333
Role conflict ➔ job satisfaction ➔ civic virtue 0.01 − 0.00 0.03 0.165
Role conflict ➔ job satisfaction ➔ altruism − 0.01 − 0.03 0.00 0.252
Autonomy ➔ trust ➔ civic virtue − 0.04 − 0.11 0.02 0.233
Autonomy ➔ trust ➔ altruism 0.03 − 0.02 0.08 0.330
Skill variety ➔ trust ➔ civic virtue − 0.02 − 0.06 0.01 0.184
Skill variety ➔ trust ➔ altruism 0.01 − 0.01 0.05 0.268
Role conflict ➔ trust ➔ civic virtue 0.02 − 0.01 0.06 0.227
Role conflict ➔ trust ➔ altruism − 0.02 − 0.05 0.01 0.326

Unstandardized values are reported because AMOS syntax does not produce standardized point indirect effect values
P values below 0.05 indicate that the indirect effect is significant
High Educ (2019) 77:19–36 31

model fits worsen when the direct paths are deleted, implying that the job characteristics are best
regarded as having both direct and indirect influences on citizenship (i.e., partial mediation).

Discussion

We examined the relationship between job characteristics, work-related attitudes, and organi-
zational citizenship behavior using faculty members working in a non-Western country, the
UAE. This study contributes to the literature in a number of ways. First, we responded to calls
for additional research concerning the relationship between job characteristics and organiza-
tional citizenship (Chen and Chiu 2009; Chiu and Chen 2005; Podsakoff et al. 2000; Todd and
Kent 2006). Second, we are the first to investigate these relationships among university faculty
members. Third, the setting for our study provided a unique context in which to study higher
education, given the nature of the competitive environment and the mix of advantages and
disadvantages associated with being a faculty member in the UAE.
We demonstrated that job autonomy, skill variety, and role conflict are predictors of job
satisfaction, which supports Hackman and Oldham’s (1976, 1980) model and corroborates
prior findings (Chen and Chiu 2009; Chiu and Chen 2005; Todd and Kent 2006). In showing
that job characteristics positively associate also with organizational commitment and trust in
the employer, we expand on prior findings that focused on job satisfaction or job involvement
only (Chen and Chiu 2009; Chiu and Chen 2005; Todd and Kent 2006). The three job
characteristics we examined (job autonomy, skill variety, role conflict) accounted for 41, 32,
and 28% of the variance in job satisfaction, trust, and organizational commitment, respectively.
We also advanced the literature by examining whether employee attitudes mediate the job
characteristics-citizenship relationship (Podsakoff et al. 2000; Organ et al. 2006). Specifically,
we simultaneously examined job satisfaction, commitment, and trust as mediators, finding that
in this context, organizational commitment was the only significant mediator. Consistent with
social exchange theory (Blau 1964; Cropanzano et al. 2016), we also showed that when
employers provide their employees with jobs that are high in job autonomy, job/skill variety,
and low in role conflict, they reciprocate with higher levels of organizational commitment,
thereby increasing their likelihood of expressing civic virtue and altruism.
Perhaps organizational commitment was the only mediator to emerge from our analyses
because it has the most in common with organizational citizenship. Specifically, an important
component of commitment involves employees’ psychological and emotional attachment to the
organization. As such, organizational citizenship is a direct way of expressing this attachment,
especially when the behavior is targeted toward the organization, as is the case with civic virtue. In
line with this view, the path between organizational commitment and civic virtue was stronger
(β = .36, p < .01) than the path between organizational commitment and altruism (β = .17, p < .01)
(see Fig. 2). In all, our findings are consistent with the view that citizenship among faculty is a
behavioral manifestation of the attitude of organizational commitment.
Although we did not find significant mediating effects for trust and job satisfaction when
simultaneously considering organizational commitment, the two variables are nonetheless
likely to be important predictors of other valued outcomes. For example, job satisfaction,
commitment, and trust mediate the relationship between faculty perceptions of met expecta-
tions and turnover intentions (Ababneh 2016). Moreover, since we are the first to examine
simultaneously the role of job satisfaction, commitment, and trust as mediators of the job
characteristics-citizenship relationship, our findings are in need of replication. As part of this
32 High Educ (2019) 77:19–36

effort, other important outcomes, besides organizational citizenship, such as absenteeism,

turnover, and job performance, could be included as well (Bycio 1992).
Although job autonomy, skill variety, and role conflict all influence citizenship, each has
somewhat different effects. Skill variety, for example, had both direct and indirect effects (via
organizational commitment) on both civic virtue and altruism. Job autonomy has both direct
and indirect effects (via organizational commitment) on civic virtue, but only an indirect effect
on altruism, while role conflict had only indirect effects (via organizational commitment) on
civic virtue and altruism. Given the small number of studies involving job characteristics and
citizenship, these findings require replication. Moreover, there is need for theory development
concerning when (in)direct effects are most likely.

Practical implications

Our findings are consistent with the view that university administrators can enhance
faculty job satisfaction, commitment, and trust, and ultimately foster organizational
citizenship, through purposeful job design. To this end, they should look for opportunities
to offer faculty job autonomy and job variety, while looking for ways to reduce role
conflict. These steps are likely to be especially important in our specific research context,
as research has found that faculty members in the UAE have lower job autonomy and
lower participation in institutional governance relative to their counterparts in Western
countries (Austin et al. 2014; Schoepp and Forstenlechner 2012). In the current study, it is
notable that faculty reported a low job autonomy score (M = 3.33/5) relative to their US
counterparts (M = 3.93/5; Daly and Dee 2006).
UAE-based research has also reported that the opportunities for faculty to use their
research-related skills and talents are limited, given the teaching-oriented missions of most
of the UAE university-level institutions (Ababneh 2016; Austin et al. 2014). Our findings
suggest that providing faculty with more time and financial support to conduct research will
lead to more favorable work-related attitudes, and ultimately increase organizational citizen-
ship, and reduce turnover (Ababneh 2016). Moreover, an increased emphasis on research also
has the potential to help universities secure additional internationally recognized accredita-
tions, which would help attract larger numbers of qualified students and faculty.
Faculty members in our study also reported a relatively low mean level (3.02/5) of trust in
their employer. This is a substantial negative for their institutions as trust impacts a wide range
of valued outcomes, including goal commitment, job performance, and turnover (Ababneh
2016; Dirks and Ferrin 2002). As we showed, university administrators can improve faculty
trust by increasing job autonomy and job/skill variety, and by minimizing job role conflict.
Importantly, while the UAE macro-policies, the national culture, and the overall
environment play a role in changing/enhancing faculty attitudes/perceptions, we believe
that university administrators have the opportunity to be the most immediate change
agents with regard to their capability to impact job design. Specifically, while higher-
education researchers in Western countries are discussing “the shift in power and
authority from the professoriate to professional managers and external governing bodies”
(Altbach 2001, p. 216), the power at universities in the Middle East has always largely been
in the hands of the top- and middle-level administrators. Indeed, in their qualitative study,
Austin et al. (2014) reported that both academic administrators and faculty members
acknowledged that faculty participation in institutional governance is lacking at higher
High Educ (2019) 77:19–36 33

academic institutions in the UAE, “with cultural traditions typically favoring ‘top-down,’
non-transparent decision making by leaders rather than more democratic or inclusive pro-
cesses.” …“There’s a sense that things just come down.” (Austin et al. 2014, p. 551).

Limitations and future research directions

Since all data were self-reports collected from faculty members, our findings may be influ-
enced by common method variance (CMV). Nonetheless, our confirmatory factor analyses
provided evidence of distinctiveness among the measured constructs, which mitigates common
method variance concerns (Conway and Lance 2010). Moreover, faculty members are the
single most appropriate source of data, given the aims of our study. Specifically, our interest
was in the perceptions faculty had of their jobs. Also, with regard to organizational citizenship,
co-workers and/or supervisors may not have been fully aware of employees’ civic virtue and
altruism. Nonetheless, in terms of future research, multisourced data should be considered,
including, for example, co-workers and mid-/high-level administrators. Also, we see value in
supplementing our purely quantitative approach with qualitative studies (e.g., Austin et al.
2014) where, for example, it would potentially be informative to learn of the specific
experiences that UAE faculty have had that contributed to their relatively low levels of
perceived job autonomy and employer trust. Information of this kind would also be useful
to administrators in helping them develop specific action plans to improve the situation. As
noted earlier, administrators likely have the most immediate opportunity to influence matters
such as job design. Nonetheless, in the context of higher education, there are other stake-
holders (e.g., government, accreditation bodies, and businesses) that ultimately have at least
some influence over the resources that are available and their allocation.
Despite the above noted limitations, our findings are informative not only to the UAE but also
to the other five Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) members, because these countries share similar
cultural, business, and political environments (Schoepp and Forstenlechner 2010). Importantly, our
findings are also of interest from a global perspective as, for example, more universities are
adopting temporary and short-term contract-based appointments (Austin et al. 2014).

Acknowledgement We thank Dr. Peter Bycio for his editorial assistance, independent review and feedback
concerning an earlier draft of this manuscript.

References

Ababneh, K. I. (2016). Effects of met expectations, trust, job satisfaction, and commitment on faculty turnover
intentions in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The International Journal of Human Resource Management,
1–32.
Ababneh, K. I., & Al-Waqfi, M. A. (2016). The role of privacy invasion and fairness in understanding job
applicant reactions to potentially inappropriate/discriminatory interview questions. Personnel Review, 45(2),
392–418.
Ababneh, K. I., Hackett, R. D., & Schat, A. C. (2014). The role of attributions and fairness in understanding job
applicant reactions to selection procedures and decisions. Journal of Business and Psychology, 29(1), 111–
129.
Alajoutsijärvi, K., Juusola, K., & Lamberg, J. (2013). Institutional logic of business bubbles: lessons from the
Dubai business school mania. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 13(1), 5–25.
34 High Educ (2019) 77:19–36

Altbach, P. G. (2001). Academic freedom: international realities and challenges. Higher Education, 41(1–2),
205–219.
Austin, A. E., Chapman, D. W., Farah, S., Wilson, E., & Ridge, N. (2014). Expatriate academic staff in the
United Arab Emirates: the nature of their work experiences in higher education institutions. Higher
Education, 68(4), 541–557.
Barnes, L. L., Agago, M. O., & Coombs, W. T. (1998). Effects of job-related stress on faculty intention to leave
academia. Research in Higher Education, 39(4), 457–469.
Baruch, Y., & Forstenlechner, I. (2017). Global careers in the Arabian Gulf: understanding motives for self-
initiated expatriation of the highly skilled, globally mobile professionals. Career Development International,
22(1), 3–22.
Bateman, T. S., & Organ, D. W. (1983). Job satisfaction and the good soldier: the relationship between affect and
employee “citizenship”. Academy of Management Journal, 26(4), 587–595.
Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley.
Bolino, M. C., Hsiung, H.-H., Harvey, J., & LePine, J. A. (2015). “Well, I’m tired of tryin’!” Organizational
citizenship behavior and citizenship fatigue. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(1), 56–74.
Bycio, P. (1992). Job performance and absenteeism: a review and meta-analysis. Human Relations, 45, 193–220.
Bynum, L. A., Bentley, J. P., Holmes, E. R., & Bouldin, A. S. (2012). Organizational citizenship behaviors of
pharmacy faculty: modeling influences of equity sensitivity, psychological contract breach, and professional
identity. Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics, 9(5), 99–111.
Cappelli, P., & Rogovsky, N. (1998). Employee involvement and organizational citizenship: implications for
labor law reform and “Lean Production”. ILR Review, 51(4), 633–653.
Center for Higher Education Data and Statistics (CHEDS) (2012). Indicators of the UAE higher education sector
report. http://www.cheds.ae. Accessed January 18, 2018.
Chen, C.-C., & Chiu, S.-F. (2009). The mediating role of job involvement in the relationship between job
characteristics and organizational citizenship behavior. The Journal of Social Psychology, 149(4), 474–494.
Chiu, S.-F., & Chen, H.-L. (2005). Relationship between job characteristics and organizational citizenship
behavior: the mediational role of job satisfaction. Social Behavior and Personality: An International
Journal, 33(6), 523–540.
Conway, J. M., & Lance, C. E. (2010). What reviewers should expect from author regarding common method
bias in organizational research. Journal of Business Psychology, 25, 325–334.
Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: an interdisciplinary review. Journal of
Management, 31(6), 874–900.
Cropanzano, R., Anthony, E., Daniels, S., & Hall, A. (2016). Social exchange theory: a critical review with
theoretical remedies. Academy of Management Annals, 11(1), 1–38.
Daly, C. J., & Dee, J. R. (2006). Greener pastures: faculty turnover intent in urban public universities. The
Journal of Higher Education, 77(5), 776–803.
Deci, E. L., Connell, J. P., & Ryan, R. M. (1989). Self-determination in a work organization. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 74(4), 580–590.
Dee, J. R., Henkin, A. B., & Chen, J. H.-H. (2000). Faculty autonomy: perspectives from Taiwan. Higher
Education, 40(2), 203–216.
Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2002). Trust in leadership: meta-analytic findings and implications for research and
practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 611–628.
Drago, R., & Garvey, G. T. (1998). Incentives for helping on the job: theory and evidence. Journal of Labor
Economics, 16(1), 1–25.
Ertürk, A. (2007). Increasing organizational citizenship behaviors of Turkish academicians: mediating role of
trust in supervisor on the relationship between organizational justice and citizenship behaviors. Journal of
Managerial Psychology, 22(3), 257–270.
Farh, J.-L., Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1990). Accounting for organizational citizenship behavior: leader
fairness and task scope versus satisfaction. Journal of Management, 16(4), 705–721.
Gormley, D. K. (2003). Factors affecting job satisfaction in nurse faculty: a meta-analysis. Journal of Nursing
Education, 42(4), 174–178.
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: test of a theory. Organizational
Behavior and Human Performance, 16(2), 250–279.
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1980). Work redesign. Reading: Addison-Wesley.
Harper, P. J. (2015). Exploring forms of organizational citizenship behaviors (OCB): antecedents and outcomes.
Journal of Management and Marketing Research, 18, 1–16.
Jillapalli, R. K., & Wilcox, J. B. (2010). Professor brand advocacy: do brand relationships matter? Journal of
Marketing Education, 32(3), 328–340.
Johnsrud, L. K., & Rosser, V. J. (2002). Faculty members’ morale and their intention to leave: a multilevel
explanation. The Journal of Higher Education, 73(4), 518–542.
High Educ (2019) 77:19–36 35

Konovsky, M. A., & Pugh, S. D. (1994). Citizenship behavior and social exchange. Academy of Management
Journal, 37(3), 656–669.
Lawrence, J., Ott, M., & Bell, A. (2012). Faculty organizational commitment and citizenship. Research in Higher
Education, 53(3), 325–352.
Lewin, T. (2009). University branches in Dubai are struggling. The New York Times—December, 27.
Loher, B. T., Noe, R. A., Moeller, N. L., & Fitzgerald, M. P. (1985). A meta-analysis of the relation of job
characteristics to job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70(2), 280–289.
Mazawi, A. E. (2003). Divisions of academic labor: national and non-national faculty members in Arab Gulf
universities. International Journal of Contemporary Sociology, 40(1), 91–110.
Morrison, E. W. (1994). Role definitions and organizational citizenship behavior: the importance of the
employee’s perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 37(6), 1543–1567.
Moye, M. J., Henkin, A. B., & Egley, R. J. (2005). Teacher-principal relationships: exploring linkages between
empowerment and interpersonal trust. Journal of Educational Administration, 43(3), 260–277.
Oldham, G. R., & Hackman, J. R. (1981). Relationships between organizational structure and employee
reactions: comparing alternative frameworks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 66–83.
Oldham, G. R., & Hackman, J. R. (2010). Not what it was and not what it will be: the future of job design
research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(2–3), 463–479.
Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome. Lexington: Lexington
Books.
Organ, D. W. (1997). Organizational citizenship behavior: it’s construct clean-up time. Human Performance,
10(2), 85–97.
Organ, D. W., & Ryan, K. (1995). A meta analytic review of attitudinal and dispositional predictors of
organizational citizenship behavior. Personnel Psychology, 48(4), 775–802.
Organ, D. W., Podsakoff, P. M., & MacKenzie, S. B. (2006). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature,
antecedents, and consequences. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Moorman, R. H., & Fetter, R. (1990). Transformational leader behaviors and
their effects on followers’ trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviors. The
Leadership Quarterly, 1(2), 107–142.
Podsakoff, P. M., Niehoff, B. P., MacKenzie, S. B., & Williams, M. L. (1993). Do substitutes for leadership really
substitute for leadership? An empirical examination of Kerr and Jermier’s situational leadership model.
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 54(1), 1–44.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Bommer, W. H. (1996a). Meta-analysis of the relationships between Kerr
and Jermier’s substitutes for leadership and employee job attitudes, role perceptions, and performance. City:
American Psychological Association.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Bommer, W. H. (1996b). Transformational leader behaviors and
substitutes for leadership as determinants of employee satisfaction, commitment, trust, and organizational
citize. Journal of Management, 22(2), 259–298.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B., & Bachrach, D. G. (2000). Organizational citizenship
behaviors: a critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research.
Journal of Management, 26(3), 513–563.
Podsakoff, N. P., Whiting, S. W., Podsakoff, P. M., & Blume, B. D. (2009). Individual-and organizational-level
consequences of organizational citizenship behaviors: a meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology,
94(1), 122–141.
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing
indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879–891.
Price, J. L. (2001). Reflections on the determinants of voluntary turnover. International Journal of Manpower,
22(7), 600–624.
Robinson, S. L., & Rousseau, D. M. (1994). Violating the psychological contract: not the exception but the norm.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15(3), 245–259.
Romanowski, M. H., & Nasser, R. (2015). Identity issues: expatriate professors teaching and researching in
Qatar. Higher Education, 69(4), 653–671.
Schoepp, K., & Forstenlechner, I. (2010). The role of family considerations in an expatriate majority environ-
ment. Team Performance Management, 16(5/6), 309–323.
Schoepp, K., & Forstenlechner, I. (2012). Self-initiated expatriate faculty in the UAE: balancing the profession
and financial rewards. International Journal of Business and Globalisation, 8(4), 454–470.
Spector, P. E. (1986). Perceived control by employees: a meta-analysis of studies concerning autonomy and
participation at work. Human Relations, 39(11), 1005–1016.
Tabachnick, B., & Fidell, L. (2001). Using multivariate statistics (Vol. 4). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Todd, S. Y., & Kent, A. (2006). Direct and indirect effects of task characteristics on organizational citizenship
behavior. North American Journal of Psychology, 8(2), 253–268.
36 High Educ (2019) 77:19–36

Tompson, H. B., & Werner, J. M. (1997). The impact of role conflict/facilitation on core and discretionary
behaviors: testing a mediated model. Journal of Management, 23(4), 583–601.
Wilkins, S., & Huisman, J. (2012). The international branch campus as transnational strategy in higher education.
Higher Education, 64(5), 627–645.
Williams, L. J., & Anderson, S. E. (1991). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of
organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. Journal of Management, 17(3), 601–617.