Machine Translated by Google

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect

Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 224 ( 2016 ) 562 – 570

6th International Research Symposium in Service Management, IRSSM-6 2015, August 11-15
2015, UiTM Sarawak, Kuching, Malaysia

Factors Affecting Organizational Citizenship Behavior among

Malaysian Bank Employees: The Moderating Role of Islamic Work
Ethics

Jihad Mohammad , Farzana Quoquabb,*, Rosmini Omarc

a, b, c
International Business School, UTM, Jalan Semarak, 54100, KL, Malaysia

Abstract

The inconsistent relationships between distributive justice, procedural justice and organizational citizenship behavior have
inspired this research to introduce a new moderator variable. This study includes Islamic work ethic as a third variable that
has the potential to resolve conflict in the existing literature. To achieve the objectives of this study, data was collected
through a survey of 192 employees at Islamic banks in Malaysia. The partial least square technique was used to analyze the
data. The results of this study revealed that distributive justice and procedural justice predict organizational citizenship
behavior. The findings also suggested that Islamic work ethic predicts organizational citizenship behavior. However, contrary
to expectation, Islamic work ethic does not moderate the relationships between distributive justice, procedural justice and
organizational citizenship behavior. The limitations and suggestions for future research are discussed here.

© 2016 ©
4.0/).
license The Authors.
2016 Published
The Authors. by Elsevier
Published Ltd. ThisLtd.
by Elsevier is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/
Peer-review
Peer-review
Sarawak under the
under responsibility of Universiti
responsibility Teknologi
of the Universiti MARA Sarawak.
Teknologi MARA

Keywords: organizational citizenship behavior; Islamic work ethic; organizational justice; bank employees

1. Introduction

Organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) and organizational justice (OJ) are important topics in organizational

* Corresponding author. Phone: +6-032-180-5049.

E-mail address: fqbhabib@ibs.utm.my

1877-0428 © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the Universiti Teknologi MARA Sarawak
doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.05.440
Machine Translated by Google

Jihad Mohammad et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 224 ( 2016 ) 562 – 570 563

sciences which have received extensive attention from researchers for the last four decades (Carpenter et al., 2014;
Podaskoff et al., 2009). This concern can be ascribed to the significant contribution of OCB and OJ to organizational
success, progress and prosperity (Podaskoaf et al., 2014). Nevertheless, concepts and definitions of OCB and OJ
are varied, and hence, have yet to attain theoretical solidity. To illustrate, Mohammad, Quoquab, Nik Abd Rahman,
and Idris (2015, p.1), defined OCB as "helping the organization to sustain in the future effectively, efficiently, and
competitively by adopting a set of moral, constructive, and positive behaviors that transcend employees' formal job
requirements". On the other hand, Greenberg and Colquite (2005) refer to OJ as the employees' perception of
fairness with respect to distribution of organizational resources and procedures that are used to distribute these resources.
Streams of research (see Organ, 1988, Podaskoff et al., 2000; Chen & Jin, 2014) found a positive and significant
relationship between employees' perception of justice and their citizenship behavior. Nevertheless, other researchers
like Schappe (1998), Tansky (1993), and Hassan and Mohd Noor (2008) found that fairness has no direct effect on
OCB. Thus, it is essential to consider a third variable that could help resolve this inconsistency in the current
literature. This study suggested Islamic Work Ethic (IWE) to reconcile this contradiction.
IWE is defined as a set of moral principles prescribed in the Quran and Sunnah that guides employees' attitude
and behaviors at their workplace (Quoquab & Mohammad, 2013). At the workplace, it emphasizes and advocates
the noble and sublime values like honesty, flexibility, fairness, generosity, and responsibility (Yousef, 2001).
Moreover, Islamic work ethic is a crucial factor that can boost the effectiveness, efficiency, and capability of all types
of organizations (Al-Modaf, 2005). Additionally, Abeng (1997) indicated that organizations could work at high levels
of productivity and competence by adopting an Islamic ethical framework that guides and helps to organize their
work.
Despite the development of IW E, the majority of studies related to work ethic which encapsulates its relationship
with individual and organizational variables still focus on Western context, with Protestant work ethic (PW E) taking
center stage. Undoubtedly, these consistent empirical works are valuable to the growth in understanding issues of
work ethics. However, such concentrations of thoughts may neglect the gaps in understanding other contexts,
dissimilar and non-linear with western perspectives. The scanty attention towards IW E leads to existing debates
(Ahmad, 2011; Ali & Al-Owaihan, 2008). As such, the current study aims to address the important role of IW E and
its effect on individual's behavior at the workplace. More specifically, this study aims to achieve two objectives: (i) to
predict the effect of distributive justice and procedural justice on OCB, (ii) and to examine the moderating role of
IWE on the relationship between two types of justice (distributive justice; procedural justice) and OCB.
The rest of the paper is fivefold. First, hypotheses are developed based on a brief literature review. Next, the
methodology used in this study is discussed followed by findings and discussion. Finally, a conclusion is reached
and limitations and future research directions are highlighted at the end of the paper.

2. Theoretical background and hypotheses development

2.1. Distributive justice, procedural justice, and organizational citizenship behavior

In general, employees evaluate an organization's fairness based on the fair ratio of outcome they receive from
the organization (eg, salary, promotion, bonus, recognition, and job status) compared to their input (eg, intelligence,
experience, training, skill, education) (Adams, 1965). Other studies found that employees are also concerned about
the fairness of the organization regarding procedures, methods, and policies that determine organizational outcomes
(Folger & Cropanzano, 1998; Lind & Tyler, 1988). The first example is considered as distributive justice whereas;
the latter is ascribed as procedural justice. Past studies that connect organizational justice to OCB found inconsistent
results. For example, Farh, Early, and Lin (1997) and George (1991) found that distributive justice (DJ) is positively
correlated with OCB, whereas, others found no relationship between the two constructs (Moorman, 1999; Niehoff &
Moorman, 1993 ). Moreover, Brockner and Adist (1986) and Konovsky and Pugh (1994) found that employees'
perception of procedural justice (PJ) is significantly related to an increase in their citizenship behavior. Additionally,
Schappe (1998) alleged that PJ is not able to predict OCB.
In general, organizational variables may hold different meanings in different cultures, hence, exhibit differences
in terms of their relationships (Nik Abd Rahman, 2001). Therefore, Korsgaard, Meglino, and Lester, (2010) stressed
the importance of studying OCB in different contexts, since this behavior is rooted in the culture of the country.
Machine Translated by Google

564 Jihad Mohammad et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 224 ( 2016 ) 562 – 570

Furthermore, Morrison (1994) argued that the relationships between justice and OCB vary on the basis of individuals
and research contexts. Therefore, this study aims to examine the relationship between distributive justice, procedural
justice, and OCB in the Malaysian Islamic banking context. We posit that when employees perceive their
organizations as fair in terms of distributing organizational resources namely salaries, rewards, fringe benefit, while
applying consistent procedures in determining the organizational outcomes across people, free from bias, correctable,
ethical, representative, they are more likely to go the extra mile in contributing to their organizations. They would go
beyond their basic job responsibilities by demonstrating behaviors to help coworkers, supervisors to achieve
organizational performance. Based on this assumption, it is hypothesized that:

H1: Distributive justice will be positively associated with OCB.

H2: Procedural justice will be positively associated with OCB.

2.2. Moderating role of Islamic work ethic

Early evidence revealed contradictory results with respect to the relationships between distributional justice,
procedural justice, and OCB (see Brockner & Adist, 1986; Farh et al., 1997; George, 1991; Konovsky & Pugh, 1994;
Moorman, 1999; Niehoff & Moorman, 1993; Schappe, 1998). This situation can be attributed to the variables that
are grounded in the sample (Podaskoff, MacKenzie & Hui, 1993). Therefore, to resolve the conflict of past study
findings, it is necessary to consider the effect of a third variable as a moderator that can strengthen this relationship.
In such a situation, Organ (1990) suggested that dispositional variables may play a vital role as a moderator on the
link between work context variables and OCB. Therefore, following Organ's (1990) suggestion, this study proposes
to consider a dispositional variable (ie, IWE) as a moderator in this link.
In this study, it is expected that incorporating IWE as a moderator in the relationships between distributional
justice, procedural justice, and OCB will strengthen these relationships positively which may contribute in solving the
discrepancies in the existing literature. Moreover, it is assumed that the employees who possess high IWE may
continue to work beyond their work requirement to assist newcomers, administrators, and/or the whole organization
even in a situation where the organization will not follow justice all the time. On the other hand, employees with low
IWE will perform only the basic job requirements without considering OCB. In light of the preceding discussion it is
hypothesized that:

H3: Islamic work ethic will moderate the relationship between DJ and OCB.
H4: Islamic work ethic will moderate the relationship between PJ and OCB.

3. Research methodology

The population of this study consisted of employees of Islamic banks in Malaysia. A non-probability sampling
technique, specifically convenience sampling was used to accomplish the objectives of this research. According to
Sekaran (2003), this type of sampling method can assist researchers to collect data quickly and efficiently.
Furthermore, for theoretical generalizability, use of non-probability sampling is advisable (Calder et al., 1981). The
minimum sample size required in this study was decided based on Hair, Tatham, Anderson, and Black's (1998)
suggestion ie to have five times observation as the number of variables to be analyzed. Following this rule of thumb,
185 (37 x 5) valid questionnaires were collected and analyzed in this study.
The survey instrument used in this study comprised 37 questions relating to four constructs, namely: DJ, PJ,
OCB, and IW E, and eight questions pertaining to respondents' demographic variables. DJ was measured by using
six items adopted from Price and Mullers (1986) (eg "I have been fairly rewarded considering my responsibility"); PJ
was measured by six items adopted from Niehoff and Moorman (1993) (eg "The company makes sure that all
employee concerns are heard before job decisions are made"); OCB was measured by eight items that were
adopted from Lee and Allen (2002) (eg "I help others who have been absent", "I attend functions that are not required
but that help the organizational image"). In addition to this, IWE was measured by using 17 items adopted from Ali
Machine Translated by Google

Jihad Mohammad et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 224 ( 2016 ) 562 – 570 565

(1992) (eg, Dedication to work is a virtue"). Respondents were asked to indicate their response on a 7-point Likert
scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree).
The researchers contacted the human resource departments of 16 Islamic banks and requested their permission
to survey their employees. Upon receiving the approval from top management, 320 questionnaires were distributed
to those organizations who agreed to take part in this survey (eight Islamic banks). In return, 203 employees
responded to the questionnaires, and 192 were found usable for analysis.

4. Analysis and findings

4.1. Evaluation model

The research hypotheses were tested based on structural equation modeling using Partial Least Squares (PLS).
This study adopted this statistical technique to achieve its research objectives ie, to test the predictive ability of overall
organizational justice and to maximize the explained variance in OCB and PSY. The software Smart PLS M2 version
2.0 (Ringle, Wende & Will 2005) was used to analyze the data with the application of bootstrapping procedures to
determine the significant level of factor loading and path coefficient. Following Anderson and Gerbing's (1988) two
stages procedures to assess the model, this study evaluated the measurement model followed by testing the structural
model.

4.2. Outer model

An outer model identified the relationships between unobserved construct and its underlying items (Henseler,
Christain, Ringle, & Sinkovics, 2009). First, the reliability of the scale was tested based on the factor loading of items,
composite reliability, and Cronbach's alpha (Henseler et al., 2009). Next, we assessed the convergent validity which
was decided based on the values of Average Variance Extracted (AVE) (Hair, Ringle & Sarstedt, 2011). Finally, this
study evaluated the discriminant validity by comparing the square root of AVE of constructs with correlations between
other constructs (Fornell & Larcker, 1981).
Based on results from Tables 1 and 2, the measurement model is satisfactory. First, all items loaded highly on its
relevant constructs and their loadings exceeded the cut-off value of 0.50 (Table 1) (Anderson & Gerbring, 1988).
Thus, the reliability of individual items is sufficient. Moreover, the values of composite reliability and Cronbach's alpha
for IW E, DJ, PJ, and OCB surpassed the minimum cut–off point of 0.70 as recommended by Chin (2010) and
Nunnally (1978) (Table 1). Consequently, the four constructs meet the requirement of construct reliability.
To establish convergent validity, the values of AVE must exceed the recommended value of 0.50 (Hair et al.,
2013). As shown in Table 1, the values of AVE for all constructs exceeded 0.50. This indicates that each construct
was able to explain more than 50% of variance in its respective indicators. Therefore, convergent validity was
established. Finally, Table 2 showed that the square root of AVE (diagonal values) is greater than correlations
between constructs in rows and columns (off-diagonal values) which provide adequate support for discriminate validity
(Fornell & Larcker, 1981).

4.3. Inner model

An inner model represents the hypothetical relationships between the latent constructs in the inner model. The
efficacy of the inner model is decided on the basis of the explained variance in dependent constructs (R2) and the
significance of all path coefficients (ÿ) (Chin, 2010). Bootstrapping procedures with 1000 resamples as suggested by
Henseler et al. (2009) was employed to produce path coefficients and their corresponding t-values.
Table 3 and Figure 1 show the results of the structural model from PLS output. DJ, PJ, IW E were found to be
significantly associated with OCB (ÿ= 0.128, p < 0.05). (ÿ = 0.221, p < 0.01), (ÿ = 0.462, p < 0.001) respectively, and
explaining 43.7% of the variance in OC. Thus, supporting H1 and H2.
The model's predictive ability was evaluated as well. It was decided based on Stone-Geisser's Q2 value (Geisser,
1975). The blindfolding procedure was used to obtain the values of Q2 (Tenenhaus et al., 2005). Values greater than
zero indicate that the model has predictive ability (Fornell & Cha, 1994). In the current study the values of Q2 of
Machine Translated by Google

566 Jihad Mohammad et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 224 ( 2016 ) 562 – 570

OCB was 0.239 (Figure 1). As this value is greater than zero, it can be concluded that the structural model has
predictive relevance (Fornell & Cha, 1994).

Table 1. Construct reliability and convergent validity.

Const. Items Loadings AVE CR THAT

DJ DJ1 0.821 0.651 0.917 0.891

DJ2 0.819
DJ3 0.778
DJ4 0.860
DJ5 0.857
DJ6 0.693
IWE IWE1 0.694 0.567 0.954 0.949
IWE2 0.771
IWE3 0.794
IWE4 0.826
IWE5 0.758
IWE6 0.795
IWE7 0.729
IWE8 0.766
IWE9 0.667
IWE10 0.692
IWE11 0.670
IWE12 0.752
IWE13 0.730
IWE14 0.791
IWE15 0.827
IWE16 0.765
OCB OCB1 0.680 0.552 0.907 0.884
OCB2 0.658
OCB3 0.749
OCB4 0.738
OCB5 0.757
OCB6 0.761
OCB7 0.796
OCB8 0.791
uL PJ10 0.834 0.601 0.899 0.866
PJ11 0.850
PJ12 0.545
PJ7 0.774
PJ8 0.807
PJ9 0.801
Notes. AVE = Average Variance Extracted, CR = Composite Reliability, CA=
Cronbach's Alpha, IWE17 was deleted due to low factor loading (<0.40)
Machine Translated by Google

Jihad Mohammad et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 224 ( 2016 ) 562 – 570 567

Hypotheses three and four assumed that IWE will moderate the relationship between DJ and OCB, and
between PJ and OCB. The product approach was used to test these hypotheses. DJ and IW E items as well as
PJ and IWE items were multiplied to create an interaction effect to predict OCB (Henseler & Fassott, 2010). To
overcome the problem of multicollinearity, indicators for DJ, PJ and IW E were standardized before multiplication.
The bootstrapping result shows that the paths coefficient that connects the interaction constructs (DJ*OCB) and
(PJ*OCB) with OCB were not significant (Table 3 and Figure 1). This means that IWE was not able to moderate
both relationships. Thus H4 and H5 were not supported.

Table 2. Discriminate validity output.

DJ IWE OCB uL

DJ 0.807

IWE 0.308 0.753

OCB 0.391 0.586 0.743

uL 0.521 0.214 0.377 0.775

Notes: Diagonals represent the square root of AVE while off-diagonals

represent the correlations

Table 3. Summary of the structural model.

Hypotheses Path Std Beta Std Error T. Values Decision

H1 DJÿOCB 0.128 0.064 1,962 Supported

H2 PJÿOCB 0.221 0.056 3,918 Supported
H3 DJÿOCB (Moderated by IWE) 0.047 0.068 0.047 Not Supported
H4 PJÿOCB (Moderated by IWE) 0.101 0.128 0.781 Not Supported

B=0.128
DJ t = 1.962

DJ*IWE
B=0.047
t= 0.685

OCB
IWE R2 =0.437
Q2 =0.239

B=0.101
t = 0.781
PJ*IWE
B=0.221
uL
3.918

Fig. 1. The structural model.

Hypotheses three and four assumed that IWE will moderate the relationship between DJ and OCB, and
between PJ and OCB. The product approach was used to test these hypotheses. DJ and IW E items as well as
PJ and IWE items were multiplied to create an interaction effect to predict OCB (Henseler & Fassott, 2010). To
overcome the problem of multicollinearity, indicators for DJ, PJ and IW E were standardized before multiplication. The
Machine Translated by Google

568 Jihad Mohammad et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 224 ( 2016 ) 562 – 570

bootstrapping result shows that the paths coefficient that connects the interaction constructs (DJ*OCB) and (PJ*OCB)
with OCB were not significant (Table 3 and Figure 1). This means that IWE was not able to moderate both relationships.
Thus H4 and H5 were not supported.

5. Discussion

5.1. Relationships between distributed justice, procedural justice, and OCB

The hypothesized positive and significant relationships between DJ, PJ, and OCB are supported by the findings of
the study (H1 and H2). This result supports the notion of social exchange theory (Blau, 1964), and equity (Adams,
1965). According to these theories, when individuals perceive that their organizations as being fair towards them, they
tend to feel morally obliged to reciprocate the fair treatment by exhibiting behaviors that can help the organization to
flourish and prosper in its environment. Such behavior may include sharing information with their colleagues, reporting
ethical problems, and having a positive image about the organization. On the other hand, when employees felt that
their organizations are not being fair to them, they tend to respond to the unfair treatment by withholding or reducing
their OCB contribution and/or by demonstrating behavior that could hurt the organization, such as withdrawal behavior
or counterproductive behaviors (Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001).

6. Discussion

6.1. Relationships between distributed justice, procedural justice, and OCB

The hypothesized positive and significant relationships between DJ, PJ, and OCB are supported by the findings of
the study (H1 and H2). This result supports the notion of social exchange theory (Blau, 1964), and equity (Adams,
1965). According to these theories, when individuals perceive that their organizations as being fair towards them, they
tend to feel morally obliged to reciprocate the fair treatment by exhibiting behaviors that can help the organization to
flourish and prosper in its environment. Such behavior may include sharing information with their colleagues, reporting
ethical problems, and having a positive image about the organization. On the other hand, when employees felt that
their organizations are not being fair to them, they tend to respond to the unfair treatment by withholding or reducing
their OCB contribution and/or by demonstrating behaviors that could hurt the organization, such as withdrawal behavior
or counterproductive behaviors (Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001).
The findings of this study demonstrate that the employees of Islamic banks in Malaysia are keen to go the extra
mile and show OCB only when they consider their organization as being fair to them. Therefore, managers of these
organizations are advised to distribute organizational resources and outcomes like salaries, rewards, promotions, etc.
fairly among employees. Additionally, these organizations need to be fair in their policies, processes, methods, and
procedures that are used to allocate the organizational resources.

6.2. Moderating role of Islamic work ethic between DJ, PJ, and OCB

The finding of this study does not support the moderating effect of Islamic work ethic on the relationships between
DJ and OCB, and between PJ and OCB. In other words, there was no significant difference between employees who
were strong and those who were weak on Islamic work ethic when testing the relationship between DJ, PJ, and OCB
in the context of Islamic banking. This implies that employees, regardless of whether they are strong or weak on IWE,
exceed their main duties and perform organizational citizenship behavior when they perceive their organization as
being fair to them.
One possible justification for these insignificant relationships for interaction effect is that, in this study, there is a
strong and significant relationship between DJ and OCB, as well as between PJ and OCB. Baron and Kenny (1986)
argued that the moderator variable works better in a weak relationship between the predictor and the criterion.
Therefore, including Islamic work ethic as a moderator does not significantly affect the relationship between
Machine Translated by Google

Jihad Mohammad et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 224 ( 2016 ) 562 – 570 569

organizational justice and organizational citizenship behavior. Specifically, employees with strong or weak Islamic
work ethics perform organizational citizenship behavior when they perceive their organization as being fair.
Another possible explanation for the insignificant effect of moderator variable could be traced to the culture of the
country (ie, Malaysia). According to Hofstede's (1980) categorization, Malaysia is high on power distance, which
implies that individuals accept and tolerate unfair distribution of power in organizations and institutions and take it for
granted. Therefore, the respondents in this study (employees of Islamic banks) are expected to perceive their
organizations as being fair towards them, regardless of whether or not they have strong Islamic work ethics.

7. Limitations and future research directions

This study employed the cross-sectional method to collect data from respondents. This can raise questions about
the direction of causality. Future research can use a longitudinal approach to overcome this issue. In addition, the
sample of this study was confined to Islamic banks organizations that in Malaysia. This can limit the generalizability
of the findings of this study. Future studies can replicate this study in different research contexts and in different
countries to increase the generalizability of the findings.

References

Abeng, T. (1997). Business ethics in Islamic context: Perspective of a Muslim business leader. Business Ethics Quarterly, 7(3), 47-54.
Adams, JS (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.) Advances in experimental psychology (2: 267-299). San Diego, CA:
Academic Press.
Ahmad, MS (2011). Work ethics: An Islamic Prospective. International Journal of Human Sciences, 8(1),850-859.
Ali, AJ (1992). Islamic work ethic in Arabia. Journal of Psychology, 126(5), P. 507-520.
Ali, AJ & Al-Owaihan, A. (2008). Islamic work ethic: A critical review. Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal, 15(1), 5-19.
Al-Modaf, OA (2005). Islamic work ethic code: A conceptual study. Umm Al-Qura University Journal of Education, Social Sciences and Humanities.
Special issue on the occasion of celebrating Makkah Al-Mukarramah as the capital of Islamic cult ure for the year 1426 H., corresponding to
2005.
Anderson, JC & Gerbing, DW (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach.
Psychological Bulletin, 103(3),411-423.
Baron, RM & Kenny, DA (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical
considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182.
Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley. Brayfield, AH & Rothe, HF (1951). An index of job satisfaction.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 35, 307-311.
Brockner, J. & Adsit, L. (1986). The moderating impact of sex on the equity-satisfaction relationship: A field study. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 71, 385-390.
Calder, BJ, Phillips, LW and Tybout, AM (1981). Designing research for application. Journal of Consumer Research, 8, 197-207.
Carpenter, NC, Berry, CM & Houston, L. (2014). A meta-analytic comparison of self-reported and other-reported organizational citizenship
behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35, 547–574.
Chen, H. & Jin, YH (2014). The Effects of Organizational Justice on Organizational Citizenship Behavior in the Chinese Context: The
Mediating Effects of Social Exchange Relationship. Public Personnel Management, 43(3), 301-313.
Chin, W. W. (2010). How to write up and report PLS analyses. In: EspositoVinzi V, Chin WW, Henseler J. Wang H (eds.), Handbook of partial least
squares: concepts, methods and applications (pp 655-690). Springer, Heidelberg.
Cohen-Charash, YC & Spector, PE (2001). The role of justice in organizations: A Meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes, 86(2), 278-321.
Farh, JL Early, PC & Lin, S. (1997). Impetus for action: A cultural analysis of justice and organizational behavior in Chinese society.
Administrative of Science Quarterly, 42, 421-444.
Folger, R. & Cropanzano, R. (1998). Organizational justice and human resource management. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Fornell, C. & Cha, J. (1994). Partial least squares. In RP Bagozzi (Ed.) Advanced Methods of Marketing Research (pp. 52-78). Cambridge, MA:
Blackwell, .
Fornell, C. & Larcker, DF (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing
Research, 48, 39–50.
Geisser, S. (1975). A predictive approach to the random effect model. Biometrika, 61(1), 101-107.
George, JM (1991). State or trait: Effect of positive mood on prosocial behaviors at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 299-307.
Greenberg, J. & Colquitt, JA (2005). Handbook of organizational justice. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. JF Hair, RL Tatham, RE Anderson, W Black.
Hair, JF, Tatham, RL, Anderson, RE & Black, WC (1998). Multivariate Data analysis with readings. (5th Edition). Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Machine Translated by Google

570 Jihad Mohammad et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 224 ( 2016 ) 562 – 570

Hair, JF, Hult, GTM, Ringle, CM & Sarstedt, M. (2013). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM).
Sage: Thousand Oaks, California.
Hair, JF, Ringle, MC & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 9(2),139-151.
Hassan, A. & Moh Noor, K. (2008). Organizational justice and extra-role behavior: Examination of the relationship in the Malaysian culture
context. IIMU Journal of Economics and Management, 16(2), 187-208.
Henseler, J., Christain, M., Ringle, R. & Sinkovics. (2009). The use of partial least square path modeling in international marketing. Advances in
International Marketing, 20, 277-319.
Henseler, J. & Fassott, G. (2010). Testing moderating effects in PLS path models: An illustration of variable procedures. In V. Esposite Vinzi,
WW Chin, J. Henseler, & H. Wang (Eds.), Handbook of partial least squares. Heidelberg: Springer.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture's consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills CA: Sage Publications.
Mohammad, J., Quoquab, F., Nik Abd Rahman, N. K, & Idris, F. (2015). Organizational Citizenship Behavior in the Islamic Financial Sector:
Does Islamic Work Ethic Make A Sense?. International Journal of Business Governance and Ethics, 10(1), 1-27.
Konovsky, MA & Pugh, SD (1994). Citizenship behavior and social exchange. Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), 656-669.
Korsgaard, MA, Meglino, BM, Lester, SW & Jeong, SS (2010). Paying you back or Paying me forward, Understanding rewarded and unrewarded
OCB. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(20), 227-290.
Lee, K. & Allen, NJ (2002). Organizational citizenship behavior and workplace deviance: The role of affect and cognitions. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 87(1), 131-142.
Lind, EA & Taylor, T. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. Plenum, New York: Plenum Press.
Moorman, RH (1999). Perceived organizational support and the meaning of just procedures: Sorting the relative contribution of POS and procedural
justice in predicting organizational citizenship behavior. Presented at the 14th Annual Conference of the Society of Industrial and Organizational
Psychology in Atlanta, GA
Morrison, EW (1994). Role definitions and organizational citizenship behavior: The importance of employees' perspective. Academy of
Management Journal, 37, 1543-1567.
Niehoff, BP & Moorman, WV (1993). Justice as a mediator of the relationship between methods of monitoring and organizational citizenship
behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 36(3), 527-556.
Nik Abd Rahman, NM (2001). Multidimensional approach to the study of organizational commitment: Empirical evidence from Malaysia context.
Unpublished thesis submitted in the fulfillment of the degree of Doctor of philosophy at the University of Strahclyde.
Nunnally, JC (1978). Psychometric Theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Organ, DW (1990). The Motivational basis of Organizational Citizenship Behavior. Research in Organizational Behavior, 12, 43-72.
Organ, DW & Konovsky, M. (1989). Cognitive versus affective determinants of organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 74, 157-164.
Podaskoff, PM, MacKenzie, SB & Hui, C. (1993). Organizational citizenship behaviors as determinants of managerial evaluations of employee
performance: A review and suggestion for future research. In GR Ferris & KM Rowland (EDs), Research in personnel and human resource
management (11: 1-40). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
Podaskoff, PM, MacKenzie, SB, Paine, JB & Bachrach, DG (2000). Organizational citizenship behavior: A critical review of the
theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research. Journal of Management, 26(3), 513-563.
Podaskoff, PN, Whiting, SW, Podaskoff, PM, & Blume, BD (2009). Individual- and organizational-level consequences of organizational
citizenship behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(1),122-141.
Podsakoff, NP, Podsakoff, PM, Mackenzie, SB, Maynes, TD, Trevor M. & Spoelma, T. (2014). Consequences of unit-level organizational citizenship
behaviors: a review and recommendations for future research. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 35, 87-119.
Price, JL & Mueller, CW (1986). Handbook of organizational measurement. Marshfield, MA: Pitman.
Quoquab, F. & Mohammad, J. (2013). Work ethics from the viewpoint of different religious faiths: Do they talk the same?. Journal of Applied
Sciences Research, 9(9), 5436-5452.
Ringle, CM, Wende, S., & Will, A. (2005). Smartpls 2.0.M3.
Schappe, SP (1998). The influence of job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and fairness perceptions on organizational citizenship
behavior. The Journal of Psychology, 132(3), 277-290.
Sekaran, U. (2003). Research methods for business: A skill building approach (4th ed.). US: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Tansky, JW (1993). Justice and Organizational Citizenship Behaviour: What is the Relationship?. Employee Responsibilities and Rights
Journal, 6, 195-207.
Tenenhaus, M., Esposito Vinzi, VE, Chatelin, YM & Lauro, C. (2005). PLS Path Modeling. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, 48(1),
159-205.
Yousef, D. (2000). The Islamic work ethic as a mediator of the relationship between locus of control, role conflict and role ambiguity. Journal of
Managerial Psychology, 15(4),283-302.
Yousef, D. (2001). Islamic work ethic: A moderator between organizational commitment and job satisfaction in a cross-cultural context. Personal
Review, 30, 152-169.