Integral Review- A Journal of Management

p-ISSN : 0974-8032, e- ISSN : 2278-6120, Vol. 6 No. 1, June 2013, pp 34 - 46

http://intergraluniversity.ac.in/net/journals Andpublications.aspx

A STUDY ON THE EFFECT OF QUALITY OF WORK LIFE (QWL)

ON ORGANISATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOUR (OCB) - With
Special reference to College Teachers is Thrissur District, Kerala
G.S. Sandhya Nair
Assistant Professor, P.G. Department of Commerce,
Sree Vivekananda College Kunnamkualm, Kerala, India

Abstract
The present study was undertaken to explore the relationship between the Quality of Work Life
(QWL) and its effect on Organisational Citizenship Behaviour. The report findings are based on the
review of literature on the relationship between the QWL & OCB combined with a survey among
College Teachers in and around Thrissur Dist. Based on the findings, the report also offers an insight
and advice on the ways to enhance the QWL among College Teachers. According to Ray Kroc “The
Quality of an Individual is reflected in the standards they set for themself”, it is also a realised fact that
the quality of human inputs are the greatest asset to any organisation. Thus this paper aims to contribute
to the academic community and add on to the existing body of literature relating to the effect of QWL on
OCB.
Key Words: Quality of Work Life, Organisational Citizenship Behaviour, College Teachers perception
on QWL,

1. Introduction
In this era of globalization, maintaining the quality of human inputs rises from maintaining the
quality of work life perfectly. Rise in the quality of work life would help employees' well being there by
the well being of the whole organization. Quality of Work Life (QWL) has been defined as “The quality
of relationship between the employees and the total working environment”. QWL is concerned with the
overall climate of work and the impact on work and people as well as on organization effectiveness. The
performance evaluation of the human assets in a non-traditional way demands that the employees show a
voluntary behaviour, which is popularly referred to in the literature as extra role behavior and more
specifically as organizational citizenship behaviour (Organ & Konovsky, 1989; Schnake, 1991; Smith,
Organ, & Near, 1983), Prosocial behaviour ( Brief & Motowidlo, 1986). An attempt is made to discuss
the perception of QWL and its effect on OCB among college teachers.
2. Expression of the Problem
The quality of Work Life as a Predictor of Organisational Citizenship Behaviour is very

Integral Review- A Journal of Management, Vol. 6 No. 1, June 2013 34

 A Study on the Effect of Quality of Work Life (QWL)on Organisatioal Citizenship Behaviour (OCB)

significant in the present world, as much studies are undertaken to explore the relationship between
QWL and OCB. Employees enjoy both financial and non-financial rewards and in return an individual
and voluntary behaviour in the form of employee commitment and loyalty is expected by the
organisation. The present study focuses on the QWL as a predictor of OCB.
3. Literature Review
Quality of Work Life incorporates a hierarchy of perspectives that not only include work-based
factors such as job satisfaction, satisfaction with pay and relationship with work colleagues, but also
factors that broadly reflects life situation and general feelings of well being.
The term “quality of work life” (QWL) was first introduced in 1972 during an international
labour relations conference. QWL received more attention after United Auto Workers and General
Motors initiated a QWL program for work reforms. According to Goodman QWL is “an attempt to
restructure multiple dimensions of the organisation and to institute a mechanism which introduces and
sustains changes overtime”.
According to Glacer, QWL requires an Organisational climate and structure that really
encourages, facilitates, rewards, questions, challenges or suggest ways to improve the existing modes
operating anyway. Acording to Luthans (1973) QWL is more concerned with overall climate of work. It
is a concern about the impact of work on people as organisational effectiveness and an idea of
participation in organisational problem solving and decision making.
Robbins (1989) defined QWL as “a process by which an organization responds to employees
needs by developing mechanisms to allow them to share fully in making the decisions their design their
lives at work”. QWL has been well recognized as a multi-dimensional construct and it may not be
universal or eternal. The key concepts captured and discussed in the existing literature include job
security, better reward system, higher pay and opportunity for growth, participate groups, and increased
organizational productivity among others.
According to J. LIoyd Suttle, “Quality of work life is the degree to which members of a work
organization are able to satisfy important personal needs through their experiences in the organization.”
More specifically, QWL may be set into operation in terms of employees perceptions of their physical
and psychological well-being at work. It includes virtually every major issue that labor has fought for
during the last two decades. Quality of Working Life is a term that had been used to describe the broader
job-related experience an individual has. Whilst there has, for many years, been much research into job
satisfaction, and, more recently, an interest has arisen into the broader concepts of stress and subjective
Integral Review- A Journal of Management, Vol. 6 No. 1, June 2013 35
G.S. Sandhya Nair

well-being, the precise nature of the relationship between these concepts has still been little explored.
Stress at work is often considered in isolation, wherein it is assessed on the basis that attention to
an individual's stress management skills or the sources of stress will prove to provide a good enough
basis for effective intervention. Alternatively, job satisfaction may be assessed, so that action can be
taken which will enhance an individual's performance. Somewhere in all this, there is often an awareness
of the greater context, whereupon the home-work context is considered, for example, and other factors,
such as an individual's personal characteristics, and the broader economic or cultural climate, might be
seen as relevant. In this context, subjective well-being is seen as drawing upon both work and non-work
aspects of life.
Hackman and Oldham (1976) drew attention to what they described as psychological growth
needs as relevant to the consideration of Quality of working life. Several such needs were identified-
Skill variety, Task Identity, Task significance, Autonomy and Feedback. They suggested that such needs
have to be addressed if employees are to experience high quality of working life. In contrast to such
theory based models, Taylor (1979) more pragmatically identified the essential components of quality of
working life as basic extrinsic job factors of wages, hours and working conditions, and the intrinsic job
notions of the nature of the work itself. He suggested that a number of other aspects could be added,
including- Individual power, Employee participation in the management, Fairness and equity, Social
support, Use of one's present skills, Self development, A meaningful future at work, Social relevance of
the work or product, Effect on extra work activities. Taylor suggested that relevant quality of working
life concepts may vary according to organization and employee group.
Warr and colleagues (1979), in an investigation of quality of working life, considered a range of
apparently relevant factors, including- Work involvement, Intrinsic job motivation, Higher order needs
strength, Perceived intrinsic job characteristics, Job satisfaction, Life satisfaction, Happiness, and Self-
rated anxiety. They discussed a range of correlations derived from their work, such as those between
work involvement and job satisfaction, intrinsic job motivation and job Satisfaction, and perceived
intrinsic job characteristics and job satisfaction. In particular, Warr et al. found evidence for a moderate
association between total job satisfaction and total life satisfaction and happiness, with a less strong, but
significant association with self-rated anxiety.
Mirvis and Lawler (1984) suggested that quality of working life was associated with
satisfaction with wages, hours and working conditions, describing the “basic elements of a good quality
of work life” as - Safe work environment, Equitable wages, Equal employment opportunities and,
Integral Review- A Journal of Management, Vol. 6 No. 1, June 2013 36
 A Study on the Effect of Quality of Work Life (QWL)on Organisatioal Citizenship Behaviour (OCB)

Opportunities for advancement. Baba and Jamal (1991) listed what they described as typical indicators
of quality of working life, including - Job satisfaction, Job involvement, Work role ambiguity, Work role
conflict, Work role overload, Job stress, Organizational commitment and Turnover intentions. They
also explored routinisation of job content, suggesting that this facet should be investigated as part of the
concept of quality of working life. Some have argued that quality of working life might vary between
groups of workers. For example, Ellis and Pompli (2002) identified a number of factors contributing to
job dissatisfaction and quality of working life in nurses, including - Poor working environments,
Resident aggression, Workload, inability to deliver quality of care preferred, Balance of work and
family, shift work, Lack of involvement in decision making, Professional isolation, Lack of recognition,
Poor relationships with supervisor/peers, Role conflict and Lack of opportunity to learn new skills.
Sirgy (2001)suggested that the key factors in quality of working life are - Need satisfaction
based on job requirements, Need satisfaction based on work environment Need satisfaction based on
supervisory behavior, Need satisfaction based on ancillary programmes. Organizational commitment.
They defined quality of working life as satisfaction of these key needs through resources, activities, and
outcomes stemming from participation in the workplace. Needs as defined by the psychologist,
Abraham, were seen as relevant in underpinning this model, covering health & safety, economic and
family, social, esteem, actualization, knowledge and aesthetics, although the relevance of non-work
aspects is play down as attention is focused on quality of work life rather than the broader concept of
quality of life.
Bearfield, (2003) used 16 questions to examine quality of working life, and distinguished
between causes of dissatisfaction in professionals, intermediate clerical, sales and service workers,
indicating that different concerns might have to be addressed for different groups. The distinction made
between job satisfaction and dissatisfaction in quality of working life reflects the influence of job
satisfaction theories.
Herzberg (1959) used “Hygiene factors” and “Motivator factors” to distinguish between the
separate causes of job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction. It has been suggested that Motivator factors
are intrinsic to the job, that is; job content, the work itself, responsibility and advancement. The Hygiene
factors or dissatisfaction-avoidance factors include aspects of the job environment such as interpersonal
relationships, salary, working conditions and security. Of these latter, the most common cause of job
dissatisfaction can be company policy and administration, whilst achievement can be the greatest source
of extreme satisfaction. An individual's experience of satisfaction or dissatisfaction can be substantially
Integral Review- A Journal of Management, Vol. 6 No. 1, June 2013 37
G.S. Sandhya Nair

rooted in their perception, rather than simply reflecting their “real world”. Further, an individual's
perception can be affected by relative comparison am I paid as much as that person - and comparisons of
internalised ideals, aspirations, and expectations, for example, with the individual's current state (Lawler
and Porter, 1966).
In summary, where it has been considered, authors differ in their views on the core constituents
of Quality of Working Life (e.g. Sirgy, Efraty, Siegel & Lee, 2001 and Warr, Cook & Wall, 1979). It has
generally been agreed however that Quality of Working Life is conceptually similar to well-being of
employees but differs from job satisfaction which solely represents the workplace domain (Lawler,
1982).
Quality of Working Life is not a unitary concept, but has been seen as incorporating a hierarchy
of perspectives that not only include work-based factors such as job satisfaction, satisfaction with pay
and relationships with work colleagues, but also factors that broadly reflect life satisfaction and general
feelings of well-being (Danna & Griffin, 1999). More recently, work-related stress and the relationship
between work and non-work life domains (Loscocco & Roschelle, 1991) have also been identified as
factors that should conceptually be included in Quality of Working Life.
The major determinants of QWL include Decision Making, Authority, Growth and
Development, Job Security, Organisational Prestige, Feeling of worthwhile accommodation, Pay and
Allowance, Promotional Avenues, Recognition and Appreciation.
Prof. Richard E. Watson (1975) identifies eight dimensions that make up Quality of Work Life
framework as Adequate and Fair Compensation, Safe ad Healthy Working Conditions, Immediate
Opportunities to use to develop human capacities, future opportunities for continued growth and
security, Social Integration in the work organisation, Constitutionalism and rights for privacy in the work
organisation, work and the total life space refer to the balanced role of work, Social relevance of work.
According to Organ (1988), The definition of organizational citizenship behaviors (OCB) is
"individual behavior that is discretionary, not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward
system, and that in the aggregate promotes the effective functioning of the organization". Organ also
noted that defining OCB as behaviors that are not formally rewarded is equally too broad, as few "in-
role" behaviors actually guarantee a formal reward Dyne (1995) proposed the broader construct of
"extra-role behavior" (ERB), defined as "behavior which benefits the organization and/or is intended to
benefit the organization, which is discretionary and which goes beyond existing role expectations". Thus
organizational citizenship is functional, extra-role, pro-social organizational behaviors directed at
Integral Review- A Journal of Management, Vol. 6 No. 1, June 2013 38
 A Study on the Effect of Quality of Work Life (QWL)on Organisatioal Citizenship Behaviour (OCB)

individual, groups and / or an organization. These are helping behaviors not formally prescribed by the
organization and for which there are no direct rewards or punishments.
Several studies in the field of research has been done, here are some of this research. Mardani
and Heidari (2008), in a study entitled "Relationship between organizational justice and organizational
citizenship behavior” concluded that organizational justice and its components are positive and
significant relation with organizational citizenship behavior of and its components. Ahmadi (2009), in
their research, as” identify the factors affecting the development of organizational citizenship behavior
pattern for the National Iranian Oil Company “states that structural factors, leadership, personality,
values and culture are among the factors that influence the development of organizational citizenship
behavior.
Waitayangkook (2003) in a study as “Quality of work life of International prospects of the Thai”
consider quality of working life as one of the applied techniques used in management training which is
benefit in today complex environment of social, economic and political. Barling (2003), in their
research, as “Relationship between quality of working life and jobs arousal capacity' concluded that
lacking quality of Working Life blow damage into the job and there is there is significant positive
relationship between the quality of working life and increasing the skills, information and motivation.
Donalson (2000) in their research, as” Relationship between quality of work life and
organizational commitment” concluded that there is significant relationship between the quality of
working life to organizational commitment, absenteeism from work and the delay and two components
of the partner's satisfaction and job security have the strongest impact on organizational commitment.
Kim (2006), in a survey on 1584 of state employees in 6 countries conclude that there are significant and
direct relationship between organizational commitment and organizational citizenship behavior, but
there are not found a direct relation between job satisfaction and organizational citizenship behavior.
In the present study, QWL is defined as the favorable conditions and environments of a
workplace that support and promote employees satisfaction by providing them with rewards, job
security and growth opportunities, and OCB is evaluated based on Altruism and Conscientiousness.
Altruism (Pro Social Behaviour) is defined as behavior within an organization that is aimed at
improving the welfare of another person (Organ 2006). Conscientiousness (Extra-role behavior) is
another construct similar to OCB. It is defined as “behavior that attempts to benefit the organization and
that goes beyond existing role expectations” (Organ 2006).
Integral Review- A Journal of Management, Vol. 6 No. 1, June 2013 39
G.S. Sandhya Nair

4. Objectives of the Study

The purpose of this study was to identify the Quality of Work Life (QWL) as a predictor of
Organisational Citizenship Behaviour (OCB). It was also to compare the level of perception of QWL
based on the major demographic profile namely the Gender among college teachers.
5. Research Methodology
The method of this research is a descriptive study. Statistical population includes teachers from
Aided Colleges and Management Institutes in Thrissur District, Kerala. The study used Inventory to
collect required information. The sampling method used in this study is purposive sampling which
means sample were selected by the researcher subjectively, that appeared to be representative of the
population. A standard and tested inventory was administered to a set of 15 Male and 15 Female college
teachers totaling to 30 irrespective of their age and designation. All the inventory were returned and
contained completed information. The study used both Primary and Secondary data. The Primary data
were collected with the help of an Inventory constructed based on 8 QWL and 2 OCB dimensions.
5.1 Quality of Work Life Construct
The QWL Inventory (Vijayalakshmi, 2005) contains 50 questions measured on a 5 point Likert
Scale, namely Strongly Disagree (SDA) to Strongly Agree (SA). All the 50 items measure the 8
dimensions of QWL - Adequate and fair compensation, Safe and healthy work environment, Growth
and safety, Constitutionalism, Social Integration, Social relevance, Total life space and Development of
Human capabilities. Based on the questions the researcher adopted reverse scoring to arrive at the overall
QWL score of individuals. The QWL of respondents were assessed on the overall score obtained by
them. The QWL was assessed based on the following 200-250 - “High QWL” , 100-199 - “Average
QWL”, Less than 100 - “ Low QWL”.
5.2 Organisational Citizenship Behaviour Construct
The Organisational Citizenship Behaviour of a teacher is predicted based on two dimensions namely
the conscientiousness (job dedication) and Altruism (helping co-workers). These two dimension are
constructed based on the model identified by Jiing-Lih Farh, Chen-Bo Zhong, and Dennis W. Organ
(2001). This contained 6 questions (3 for each dimension) measured on a 5 point Likert Scale, namely
Strongly Agree (SDA) to Strongly Disagree (SA).
6. Hypothesis
1. There is no significant relationship between the quality of work life and organizational
citizenship behavior.
Integral Review- A Journal of Management, Vol. 6 No. 1, June 2013 40
 A Study on the Effect of Quality of Work Life (QWL)on Organisatioal Citizenship Behaviour (OCB)

6.1 Specific Hypotheses:

1. There is no significant difference between Gender of the respondents and their perceived levels
of overall quality of work life.
2. There is no significant relationship between the overall QWL and OCB based on Altruism
3. There is no significant relationship between the overall QWL and OCB based on
Conscientiousness.
7. Discussion of the findings:
7.1 Findings derived from statistical testing
Analysis was conducted using the Statistical Package SPSS The significant differences
between men and women in the QWL factors, the mean values reported by women and by men were
compared using t-test. The influence of the QWL factors on the Organisational Citizenship Behaviour
were analysed using regression analysis between the level of QWL (dependent variable) and the OCB
factors such as Job dedication and Altruism (independent variables).

Table 1: Quality of Work Life factors for Women and Men

AFC SHWE GS CON SI SR TLS DHC

Women 2.33 2.2 3.67 1.6 2.27 2.33 2.2 1.67

(-0.976) (-1.014) (-7.603) (-0.737) (-1.1) (-0.976) (-1.014) (-0.816)
[mean(SD)]

Men 1.89 1.87 1.67 1.73 2.13 1.87 1.93 1.87

[mean(SD)] (-0.941) (-0.99) (-0.816) (-0.799) (-1.187) (-0.915) (-0.961) (-0.834)

Total 2.11 2.035 2.67 1.665 2.2 2.1 2.065 1.77

[mean(SD)] (-0.95) (-1.00) (-4.20) (-0.76) (-1.14) (-0.94) (-0.98) (-0.82)

t-test
[p value] -1.524 -0.911 1.013 0.475 -0.319 -1.351 -0.739 0.664

(Adequate and fair compensation AFC, Safe and healthy work environment-SHEW, Growth and safety-GS,
Constitutionalism-CON, Social Integration-SI, Social relevance-SR, Total life space TLS, Development of
Human capabilities- DHC.)

The Analysis based on the Table 1 shows that on an average the Women show better satisfaction
level with regard to the Adequate and fair compensation, Safe and Healthy Environment, Growth and
Safety, Social Integration, Social Relevance and Total Life Span. Men show better satisfaction level in
constitutionalism and Development of Human Capabilities
There was a significant difference in the effect of the QWL on the OCB between Men and
Women. The women reported to show higher level of job dedication when compared to men.
Integral Review- A Journal of Management, Vol. 6 No. 1, June 2013 41
G.S. Sandhya Nair

Table 2: Regression Analysis between Quality of Work Life and Organizational Citizenship
behavior factors

Independent Variable AFC (1) SHWE (2) GS (3) CON (4)

JD W M W M W M W M
(1)

Overtime without extra reward .29 .26 -.78 -.27 -.23 .96 -.21 .51

Arrive and start to work earlier than the 0.29 -.026 0.10 0.02 0.44 0.46 0.39 0.40
official time

Work overtime to complete task if 0.15 0.06 0.17 0.18 0.25 0.17 0.05 0.12
necessary

ALT Initiate help co workers who have 0.41 0.45 0.11 -0.10 -0.06 -0.14
(2) heavy work load

Help new comers adapt to the new -0.03 -0.25 -0.12 0.09 0.03 -0.10
\ environment

Willing to help co workers solve work

related problems

(Adequate and fair compensation AFC, Safe and healthy work environment-SHWE, Growth and safety-GS,
Constitutionalism-CON, Job Dedication JD, Altruism-ALT, Women-W, Men-M)

These are the t-statistics and their associated 2-tailed p-values used in testing whether a
given coefficient is significantly different from zero. Using an alpha of 0.05.The p-value
depends on the significance level chosen (usually 0.05). The p value is computed using the t-stat.
the p-value tells you whether the dependent variable is influenced by all of or some of the
independent variables and whether the variation in the dependent variable explained by the
independent variables is significant or not.
The overall OCB based on Altruism (0.153) is significantly different from 0 because its p-
value is 0.000 which is smaller than 0.05 hence the hypothesis “There is no significant relationship
between the overall QWL and OCB based on Altruism” is rejected and an alternative hypothesis that is
“There is significant relationship between the overall QWL and OCB based on Altruism” is accepted.

Integral Review- A Journal of Management, Vol. 6 No. 1, June 2013 42

 A Study on the Effect of Quality of Work Life (QWL)on Organisatioal Citizenship Behaviour (OCB)

Table 3: Regression Analysis between Quality of Work Life and Organizational Citizenship
behavior factors
Independent Variable SI (5) SR (6) TLS (7) DHC (8)
JD W M W M W M W M
(1)
Overtime without extra reward -1.52 -.52 .19 -.36 -.68 -1.08 -.09 -.30

Arrive and start to work earlier than the

0.50 -0.49 -0.10 -0.21 -0.08 -0.15 0.16 0.05
official time

Work overtime to complete task if 0.02 0.09 0.03 0.09 -0.08 -0.15 -0.09 -0.08
necessary
ALT Initiate help co workers who have
-0.01 -0.02 -0.25 -0.12
(2) heavy work load
Help new comers adapt to the new -0.09 -0.05
environment
Willing to help coworkers
- solve work
related problems

(Social Integration-SI, Social relevance-SR, Total life space TLS, Development of Human capabilities-DHC,
Job Dedication JD, Altruism-ALT, Women-W, Men-M)

The overall OCB based on Conscientiousness (0.232) is significantly different from 0 because its p-
value is 0.000 which is smaller than 0.05, hence the hypothesis “There is no significant relationship
between the overall QWL and OCB based on Conscientiousness.” is rejected and an alternative
hypothesis that is “There is significant relationship between the overall QWL and OCB based on
Conscientiousness.” is accepted
7.2 Findings derived from statistical testing
All the null hypothesis are rejected and the following conclusions are drawn based on the
testing of Hypothesis .
1. The perceived level of overall Quality of Work Life among college teachers differ based on
their gender.
2. There is a significant relationship between the Quality of Work Life and Organisational
Citizenship Behaviour based on Altruism.
3. There is a significant relationship between the Quality of Work Life and Organisational
Citizenship Behaviour based on Conscientiousness.

Integral Review- A Journal of Management, Vol. 6 No. 1, June 2013 43

G.S. Sandhya Nair

7.3 Finding based on Descriptive Statistics

1. The average group (Male & Female) QWL score is 185 which denotes an Average QWL among

the respondents.
2. The average QWL score of Male teachers is 171 which denotes an Average QWL and the

average QWL score of Female teachers is 199 which denotes an Average QWL.
3. The average QWL score of Male teachers (171) is low compared to the Average QWL score of

Female teachers (199).

4. The average QWL score of Male teachers (171) is low compared to the Average QWL group

score of Male & Female (185).

5. The average QWL score of Female teachers (199) is higher than the average group QWL score

of Male & Female (185).

8. Conclusion:
The findings of this study are preliminary and should be considered as preliminary as no much
study is done to establish the role of moderating variable. The study primarily aimed at understanding the
gap between the perceived QWL among college teachers and its effect on OCB. It was well understood
that there exist a wide gap between the socially desirable class of behaviour and the behaviour of
teachers in an observable form with respect to their perception of QWL Colleges.
Thus it can be concluded that the respondents have an average QWL and Female Teachers have
a better QWL compared to Men. The major issues are identified as inter generational communications
and interpersonal trust among teachers, which affects their QWL.
This study also contributes to the existing Literature on establishing a relationship between
QWL and OCB. Several Limitations are to be noted, the same can be considered by future researchers.
OCB is identifies based on 2 dimensions only. The sample size can be enhanced and variables such as
teaching environment quality and the personality factor such as attitude can also be explored.
References
1. Narender Chada, (2007) “Perspectives in organizational Development” First Edition,
Galgotia Publications Pvt. Ltd.,New Delhi Pg. 529

2. Mullins Laurie, (2005) “Management and Organizational Behaviour” Seventh Edition,

Pearsons Educational Ltd, England

Integral Review- A Journal of Management, Vol. 6 No. 1, June 2013 44

 A Study on the Effect of Quality of Work Life (QWL)on Organisatioal Citizenship Behaviour (OCB)

3. Daniel and Steve “Enhancing the effectiveness of Work Groups and Teams” Vol:7 No:3,
Association of Psychological Science Pg.77

4. Robbins, S. P. (1989). Organizational Behavior: Concepts, Controversies, and Applications

(Fourth Edition ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall

5. Griffin and Moorehead, (2008), “Organizational Behaviour-Managing Peopla and

Organisation” Tenth Edition, South Western Cenage Learning, USA, Pg:537

6. Hackman J.R. & Oldham, G.R. (1976). "Motivation through the design of work: Test of a
theory." Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16:250-279.

7. Taylor, John B. (1979), 'Staggered wage setting in a macro model'. American Economic Review,
Papers and Proceedings 69 (2), pp.10813. Reprinted in N.G. Mankiw and D. Romer, eds.,
(1991), New Keynesian Economics, MIT Press.

8. Warr P.B., Cook J., Wall T.D. (1979). Scales for the measurement of some work attitudes nd
aspects of psychological well-being. Journal of Occupational Psychology, Vol. 52, 129-148.

9. Mirvis and Lawler “Accounting for the Quality of Work-Life”(1984) Journal of Organizational
Behavior Vol:5 No:3 John & Wiley Ltd

10. Baba, VV and Jamal, M (1991) Routinisation of job context and job content as related to
employees quality of working life: a study of psychiatric nurses. Journal of organisational
behaviour. 12. 379-386.

11. Ellis N & Pompli A, (2002), Quality of working life for nurses. Commonwealth Dept of Health
and Ageing. Canberra.

12. Sirgy, M. J., Efraty, D., Siegel, P & Lee, D. (2001). A new measure of quality of work life
(QoWL) based on need satisfaction and spillover theories. Social Indicators Research, 55, 241-
302.

13. Bearfield, S (2003) Quality of Working Life. Aciirt Working paper 86. University of Sydney.
www.acirrt.com

14. Herzberg F, Mausner B, & Snyderman B., (1959) The Motivation to Work. New York:Wiley.

15. Walton, R.E., (1975). Criteria for Quality of Working Life. In Davis, L.E., Cherns, A.B. and
Integral Review- A Journal of Management, Vol. 6 No. 1, June 2013 45
G.S. Sandhya Nair

Associates (Eds.) The Quality of Working Life, The Free Press, New York, NY, 1: 91- 104

16. Van Dyne, L., Cummings, L.L., & McLean Parks, J. (1995). Extra-Role behaviors: In pursuit of
construct and definitional clarity. In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in
Organizational Behavior

17. Mardani Hamoule, Marjan & Haede Haidari,” The Relationship between Quality of Working
Life with Organizational Citizenship Behavior of Office of Education Staff in Rasht City ”,
Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Research , 2012, pp3547-3551.

18. Ahmadi, Feraidoon.(2009). “Identify the factors affecting the development of organizational
citizenship behavior and provide a template for the National Iranian Oil Company”, thesis in
a d m i n i s t r a t i v e m a n a g e m e n t , Te h r a n U n i v e r s i t y , P a r d i s Q u ,
http://www.textroad.com/pdf/JBASR/J.%20Basic.%20Appl.%20Sci.%20Res.,%202%284%2
93547-3551,%202012.pdf

19. Waitayangkook, chalermpol, (2003), “quality of work life: interactional perspective with thai
aspect”, university of North texas: Bangkook, Thailand, pp.8-14.

20. Barling, Julian, (2003), high -Quality work, job satisfication, and oeeu “pational injuties”
journal of Applied psychology, vol 88, No 2, pp.173-177.

21. Donalson, slewat, (2000), “health behavior : quality of work life and organizational
effectiveness in the lunbe industry “published by : sage publication, pp.122-130.

22. Kim, S. (2006), Public Service motivation and organizational citizenship behavior in Korea,
International journal of manpower, 27(8). 714-722.

23. Dennis W. Organ, (2006), Philip M. Podsakoff, and Scott B. MacKenzie “Organizational
Citizenship Behavior: Its Nature, Antecedents, and Consequences” Sage Publications.

Integral Review- A Journal of Management, Vol. 6 No. 1, June 2013 46