European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 14, Number 3 (2010)

HR Practices and Leadership Styles as Predictors of Employee

Attitude and Behavior: Evidence from Pakistan

Khurram Shahzad
Assistant Professor, Faculty of Management Sciences
Riphah International University, Islamabad, Pakistan
E-mail: kshahzad78@yahoo.com

Kashif-Ur-Rehman
Associate Professor, Faculty of Management Sciences
Iqra University, Islamabad, Pakistan

Muhammad Abbas
Lecturer, Faculty of Management Sciences
Riphah International University, Islamabad, Pakistan

Abstract
The current study provides an insight account into the phenomenon of human resource
management practices and leadership styles carried out in public and private sector
universities. These practices are considered very effective in retaining the valuable human
capital. The study investigates the effects of human resource management practices (also
termed as HR practices) and leadership styles on organizational commitment and
citizenship behaviors (critical determinants of organizational effectiveness by Katz, 1964)
among university teachers. The results reveal that both human resource practices and
leadership styles positively predicted organizational commitment of faculty members
however they did not predict citizenship behaviors. Regression results further revealed that
HR practices were more important than leadership styles in predicting organizational
commitment of valued human capital. Strategies for university managers have also been
discussed.

Keywords: Human resource management practices, leadership styles, organizational

commitment, organizational citizenship behavior, university teachers,
Pakistan.

Introduction
Human resource management practices are viewed as investments in human capital management (Snell
& Dean, 1992) that becomes a valuable resource for any institution. All effective organizations usually
look for three things: (a) they want their employees to carry out the assigned role requirements, (b)
they want to retain employees within their system, and (c) they want their employees to exhibit
innovative and spontaneous activities that are beyond their role requirements (Katz, 1964). Barnard
(1934) and Katz and Kahn (1978) advocate the need for organizations to have employees who are
wiling to exceed their formal job requirements. No doubt, every department, unit, organization, and
industry operates on multitude of such acts of cooperation, helpfulness, suggestions, and other
behaviors that researchers refer to as “organizational citizenship behavior” (OCB; Bateman and Organ,
1983; Organ, 1988; Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine, & Bachrach, 2000).
417
 European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 14, Number 3 (2010)

Another important element that Katz (1964) has identified for effective organizations that is to
retain employees within their systems can be best achieved through another organizational factor called
“organizational commitment” defined by Allen & Meyer (1990) as “psychological state that binds the
individual to the organization” (i.e. makes turnover less likely). Studies have found positive
associations between facets of organizational commitment and different discretionary and extra-role
behavior (Meyer & Herscovitch, 2001) including organizational citizenship behavior (Organ & Ryan,
1995).
Human resource practices and transformational and transactional leadership styles have
remained a key focus in the main stream research in organizational behavior. Human resource
management practices and leadership style are associated with organizational citizenship behavior and
organizational commitment. Arnett and Obert (1995), Pfeffer and Veiga (1999) and Dessler (1999)
proposed set of human resource management practices to increase organizational effectiveness and to
retain talented employees. Work-family policies as a human resource management practice have been
identified having a positive association with organizational citizenship behavior (Cappelli &
Rogovsky, 1998; Allen & Rush 1998; Tremblay et al. 1998). Leadership behavior has been found
positively correlated with organizational citizenship behavior by Ehrhart (2004). Also leader-member-
exchange (LMX) has been found significantly correlated with organizational commitment (Brouer,
2007).
Although relationships among human resource management practices, leadership styles,
organizational citizenship behavior, and organization commitment have been found by different
researchers but theses variables have not been modeled together particularly in the context of Pakistan.
The current study takes an opportunity to test these theories in Pakistan that have been developed and
tested in Western societies. This would definitely help to examine the generalizability of these theories
and identify their boundary conditions.
Pakistan is a developing country and the important of higher education for the development of a
country needs no reference. In an emerging “knowledge economy” higher education serves as an
imperative for economic and social development of a state. Pakistan’s higher education sector is facing
many problems as per Peril and Promise, (2000) World Bank Task Force on Higher Education
(TFHE). Amongst other highlighted problems top most cited problem in this report is quality of
teachers.
This study is aimed at finding how HR practices and leadership styles can contribute to predict
the organization commitment and citizenship behavior of university teachers in Pakistan to improve the
performance of higher education institutions. Interviews with managers and teachers of universities
were conducted to find out that how effectively these universities are operating as per the Katz (1964)
framework. The findings of the interviews are summed up in table 1.1 given below:

Table 1.1: Responses of the university employees as per Katz Framework

Situation of Public Sector Situation of Private Sector

Katz (1964) Frame Work for Effective Organizations
Universities Universities
Emphasis on employees on carry out their assigned roles Emphasized Emphasized
Emphasis on retaining employees Not emphasized Emphasized to some extent
Emphasis on employees to exhibit extra-role behavior Not emphasized Not emphasized

The above results clearly reveal that the important aspect of organizational effectiveness that is
extra-role behavior (organizational citizenship behavior) is clearly not emphasized in both public and
private sector universities. It is also found that employee retention (through organizational
commitment) is not at all emphasized in public sector universities and partially emphasized in private
sector universities.
Most managers of the universities were found totally unaware of the fact that organizational
citizenship behavior and organizational commitment are related to organizational outcomes can be

418
 European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 14, Number 3 (2010)

consciously managed through organizational factors like human resource management practices and
leadership style. Although these mangers are somewhat informed about these concepts but application
of these concepts in the area of their responsibility is not taken care of. These managers expect
employees to exhibit these behaviors as norms of culture of the country as Pakistan’s culture is based
on collectivism, maintaining relationships and helping others.
To the best of search efforts no study has been found which have linearly modeled the
relationship of human resource management practices, leadership styles, organizational commitment
and organizational citizenship behavior. Most of the research evidence regarding associations between
these variables is from the developed countries and little evidence available from developing countries
especially from socio-cultural context of Pakistan. Moreover, organizational commitment and
citizenship behaviors have been studied in different professional groups but the evidence from
university teachers is rare. Hence, there is need to know the associations of these variables to help
managers of developing countries in improving the effectiveness of their organizations and add
evidence to the body of knowledge from developing countries.
The proposed relationship between the independent and dependant variables is shown in figure
1.1 as the research model of the study.

Figure 1: Theoretical Model linking HR Practices and Leadership styles to Organizational Commitment and
Citizenship behavior

Human Resource
Practices
(HRP)
Organizational
Commitment

Organizational
Citizenship
Leadership Styles Behavior

Literature Review
Organizational Citizenship Behavior
Bateman and Organ (1983) first conceived the concept of organizational citizenship behavior. Organ
(1988) defined organizational citizenship behavior as “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”
Smith et al. (1983) first gave a measure of citizenship behavior. Their first factor was altruism
(behavior directly intended to help a specific coworker) and second factor was Generalized
Compliance (behavior that is more impersonal and representative of compliance with norms defining a
good worker)
The most used and widely accepted dimensions of organizational citizenship behavior are
suggested by Organ (1988). He expanded the concept of Smith et al. (1983) into five dimensions:
altruism, conscientiousness, sportsmanship, courtesy, and civic virtue.
Williams and Anderson (1991) proposed two constructs of organizational citizenship behavior:
(1) OCBO (carrying out role requirements well beyond minimum required levels and helping
organization in achieving goals), (2) OCBI (helping a specific other person with a relevant task). But
OCB is mostly treated as a one-dimensional construct (Bateman & Organ, 1983; George, 1991).

419
 European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 14, Number 3 (2010)

Organizational citizenship behavior is associated with different organizational and individual

outcomes. According to Podsakoff et al. (2000) in-role behavior caused 9.3% in performance
evaluation while OCB caused 12% variation.
It is also found in literature (MacKenzie, Podsakoff, & Paine, 1999; Podsakoff & MacKenzie,
1994; Avila, Fern, & Mann, 1988) that managers either consciously or unconsciously value citizenship
behavior in employees while evaluating their performance.

Organizational Commitment
There are number of ways in which organizational commitment can be defined and there is no
consensus amongst the researchers on it (Scholl, 1981; Benkhoff, 1997; Mowday, 1998) but the most
popular definition of organizational commitment is multi-dimensional approach of Meyer and Allen
(1984). They defined OC as having three facets: (1) affective commitment as “an employee's emotional
attachment to, identification with, and involvement in the organization,” (2) continuance commitment
as “commitment based on the costs that employees associate with leaving the organization”, and (3)
normative commitment as “an employee's feelings of obligation to remain with the organization”.
Inverson and Buttibieg (1999) found that four dimensions that are affective, normative, low
perceived alternatives, and high personal sacrifice, best describe organizational commitment. There are
many other descriptions of OC as well. However in this study, Meyer and Allen (1984)
conceptualization is used.

Human Resource Management Practices

Ahmed, (1999) defined HRM as a strategic approach to acquiring, developing, managing, motivating
and gaining the commitment of an organization’s key resources, its employees.
Human resource management emerged as a distinct school of thought in 1970s with the
development of human resource accounting theory (Storey, 1995a). There are many ways in which
human resource management is defined in literature (Guest, 1989; Storey, 1995a). Some call human
resource management the same as personnel management or industrial relations while others consider
it as different approach for integration of people management with business strategy (Storey, 1995b).
Organizations where human resource practices are implemented, employees feel more
committed to these organizations and they want to exhibit extra role behavior for the benefit of
organization. Researchers have found a positive association of human resource management practices
with organizational commitment (Arnett & Obert, 1995; Pfeffer & Veiga, 1999; Dessler, 1999) and
organizational citizenship behavior (Cappelli & Rogovsky, 1998; Allen & Rush, 1998; Tremblay et al.
1998).
On the basis of above arguments H1 and H2 of this study have been developed.

Leadership Styles
There are as many definitions of leadership as there are number of authors. Leadership styles have been
divided into (1) transformational leadership style enhanced by Avolio, Bass, and Jung (1999) (to
include articulating a vision, providing an appropriate model, fostering the acceptance of group goals,
high performance expectations, and intellectual stimulation), (2) transactional leadership style (to
include contingent reward behavior, contingent punishment behavior, non-contingent reward behavior,
non-contingent punishment behavior), (3) Path-goal theory leadership (to include role clarification
behavior and the specification of procedures, supportive leadership behavior) (House, 1971), and
finally, (4) Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) theory of leadership (Gerstner & Day, 1997).
Transformational and transactional leadership styles may help to develop trust, loyalty, and
commitment among the employees. These leadership styles may also help to boost up the employees
and provide an environment where all the employees may exhibit extra role behaviors. In general, all
of these leadership behaviors have been found to be positively and significantly correlating with
organizational citizenship behavior (Podsakoff et al., 2000). Researchers also associate the

420
 European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 14, Number 3 (2010)

characteristics of leaders with the development of organizational commitment (Bennis & Goldsmith,
1994; Bennis & Townsend, 1995).
On the basis of above arguments H3 and H4 of this study have been developed.
Hence, on the basis of this literature, we developed the following hypotheses:
H1: Human resource management practices are positively associated with organizational
commitment of university teachers in Pakistan.
H2: Human resource management practices are positively associated with organizational
citizenship behavior of university teachers in Pakistan.
H3: Transformational leadership style is positively associated with organizational
commitment and organizational citizenship behaviors.
H4: Transactional leadership style is positively associated with organizational commitment
and organizational citizenship behavior.
Since, both human resource practices and leadership styles have a strong effect on the
organizational commitment and organizational citizenship behaviors. We believe that human resource
practices may be more important determinants of commitment and extra role behaviors than leadership
styles. As the organizations that promote HR practices, for their valued human capital, may help to
develop an environment that is more supportive to enhance employees’ affiliation with their
organizations. Effective HR practices may go above and beyond leadership styles to flourish extra role
behaviors among the organizational members. Hence following can be hypothesized:
H5: Human resource management practices will predict the organizational commitment and
organizational citizenship behavior, over and above the leadership styles.

Methodology
Sample
Universities were selected on the basis of convenience sampling because of geographical dispersion
and large population it is not possible to study all the universities. So a representative sample was
selected. Among those, there were three public sector and three private sector universities located in
Islamabad.
Individual participant i.e. teachers were selected on the basis of quota sampling. A sample of
200 teachers from different universities was selected. It was ensured that lecturers, assistant professors,
associate professors and professors have appropriate participation in the survey in proportion to the
percentage of each group in total population. Out of these 200 questionnaires, a total of 122 useable
responses were received yielding a response rate of 61%.

Instruments
We took three of human resource management practices including compensation practices, promotion
practices, and performance evaluation practices. The reason was that these practices reflect the
financial aspects of the overall HR practices which serve more relevance in the context of a developing
country like Pakistan. Similarly, the leadership styles included transformational and transactional
leadership styles because these two leadership styles are considered more important for the growth and
effectiveness of organizational members. Organizational commitment and citizenship behavior were
measured as one dimensional construct. Following scales were used and were tested for their
reliabilities which are reported in Table 1.
• Organizational citizenship behavior: 12 item measure by Podsakoff et al. (1990) and Williams
and Anderson (1991).
• Organizational commitment: 24 item measure by Allen and Meyer’s (1990) OCQ
• Leadership style: 33 items measure by Bass and Avolio’s (1995) MLQ
• Human resource management practices: 15 item measure by Teseema and Soeters (2006)
questionnaire.
421
 European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 14, Number 3 (2010)

Data Collection and Analysis

Data was collected through a self administered questionnaire. In addition to that postal mail or/and
email was also used for the universities which were geographically dispersed. Filled questionnaires
were sorted out to separate incomplete or inappropriate questionnaires. Correlation analysis was used
to find out the associations between all study variables. Multiple regression analysis was used to find
out the predictions of organizational citizenship behavior and organizational commitment by hr
practices and leadership styles and the unique variances explained by them.

Results and Discussion

Table 1 shows the mean, standard deviations, and correlations of the study variables. Organizational
commitment has a mean of 3.16 with standard deviation .319. Human resource pratices has a mean of
3.27 and standard deviation .489. Organizational citizenship behavior has a mean of 3.35 and standard
deviation .447. Transformational leadership has a mean of 2.88 and standard deviation .465. Finally
transactional leadership style has a mean of 3.69 and standard deviation .642. The correlation analysis
reveals that the human resource practices were positively related to organizational commitment (r =
.38; p < 0.01) but they were unrelated to organizational citizenship behavior (r = .13; n.s). Similarly
transformational leadership had a positive relationship with organizational commitment (r = .23; p <
0.01), but it was unrelated to organizational citizenship behavior (.08; n.s). The results also showed that
transactional leadership was unrelated to either organizational commitment (-.04; n.s) or organizational
citizenship behavior (.04; n.s)

Table 1: Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations a, b

Mean S.D 1 2 3 4 5
1. Organizational Commitment 3.16 .319 (.86)
2. Human Resource Practices 3.27 .485 .38** (.73)
3. Organizational Citizenship Behavior 3.35 .447 .34** .13 (.78)
4. Transformational Leadership Style 2.88 .465 .23** .06 .087 (.87)
5. Transactional Leadership Style 3.69 .642 -.042 -.09 -.06 .04 (.85)
a:
n = 122
b:
** p < 0.01 (2-tailed)
Alpha reliabilities presented in parenthesis

Table 2: Regression Results of HR Practices, Transformational Leadership, and Transactional leadership on

Job Outcomes

Organizational Commitment Organizational Citizenship Behavior

Variable Β R² ∆R² Β R² ∆R²
Human Resource Practices .36*** .12
Transformational Leadership Style .21** .08
Transactional Leadership Style -.02 .188*** .188*** -.14 .03 .03
***: p < 0.001,** p < 0.01,*p < .05

Table 2 shows the results of regression analysis. Hypothesis 1 suggested that human resource
practices will positively predict organizational commitment The results supported the hypothesis
showing that human resource practices strongly predicted organizational commitment (Β = .36; p <
0.001). Hypothesis 2 suggested that human resource practices will predict organizational citizenship
behaviors. The results did not support this hypothesis and human resource practices did not predict
organizational citizenship behavior (Β = .12; n.s). Hypothesis 3 suggested that transformational
leadership styles will positively predict organizational commitment and organizational citizenship
behaviors. The results provided support for this hypothesis in case of organizational commitment only.

422
 European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 14, Number 3 (2010)

Specifically, results revealed that transformational leadership styles strongly predicted organizational
commitment (Β = .21; p < 0.01), but did not predict organizational citizenship behaviors (Β = .08; n.s).
Similarly, hypothesis 4 tested the effects of transactional leadership styles on organizational
commitment and organizational citizenship behaviors. Our results showed that transactional leadership
style did not predict any of the both outcomes. Hence, hypothesis 4 was not supported. Hypothesis 5
predicted that human resource practices will predict the organizational commitment and organizational
citizenship behaviors over and above the leadership styles. We investigated this hypothesis by testing
the incremental amount of variance (∆R²) explained by human resource practices over and above the
leadership styles. To find the incremental effects of human resource practices on organizational
commitment we entered the transformational and transactional leadership styles in the first step,
followed by the human resource practices in the second step. The results revealed that, controlling for
leadership styles, human resource practices showed an incremental amount of variance in predicting
organizational commitment (∆R² = .13; p < 0.001). Human resource practices explained 13% variance
over and above leadership styles. Although not hypothesized we also tested for the incremental amount
of variance explained by the leadership styles over and above human resource practices. Results in
Table 4 reveals that the unique variance explained by the leadership styles was lesser (4%) than the
variance explained by the human resource practices (∆R² = .04; p < 0.01).

Table 3: Multiple Regression Results showing incremental effects of HR Practices above Leadership Styles

Organizational Commitment
Variable Β R² ∆R²
Step 1
Transformational Leadership Style .24***
Transactional Leadership Style -.05 .06*
Step 2
Human Resource Practices .36*** .19*** .13***
*** p < 0.001 ,** p < 0.01 ,*p < .05

Table 4: Multiple Regression Results showing incremental effects of Leadership styles above HR Practices

Organizational Commitment
Variable Β R² ∆R²
Step 1
Human Resource Practices .36*** .14***
Step 2
Transformational Leadership Style .21*
Transactional Leadership Style -.02 .19* .04*
*** p < 0.001 ** p < 0.01 ,*p < .05

Conclusion
The current study provides an insight account into the phenomenon of human resource management
practices carried out in public and private sector universities. These practices are considered to be very
effective in retaining the valuable human capital. Along with these human resource practices,
transformational and transactional leadership styles are also important to trigger the organizational
commitment of faculty members. Our results were quite promising in a sense that both human resource
practices and leadership styles predicted organizational commitment of faculty members. It is
important to note that the human resource practices were stronger predictors of organizational
commitment than the leadership styles. Specifically, human resource management practices accounted
for more variance in the organizational commitment than the variance caused by leadership styles. In
contrast to our hypothesis, both hr practices and leadership styles were found not related citizenship
behaviors of university teachers. These results compel us to investigate this in more detail and provide

423
 European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 14, Number 3 (2010)

a direction for future research. Hence, we argue that improvements in the financial aspects of human
capital management practices may be more important than focusing on the leadership styles alone.
Particularly, in developing countries, where money and other financial privileges act as basic
motivators, transformational leaders may be a second option in retaining valuable human capital
resources. This is in-line with the findings of Peril and Promise, (2000) World Bank Task Force on
Higher Education (TFHE).

Limitations of the Study

There are few limitations to the current study. First, current study was a cross sectional field survey
and the possibility of self-report bias cannot be eliminated. Second, non financial aspects of human
resource management practices may also contribute in retaining the employees.
Future research should attempt to replicate this study with a longitudinal design. Future
research can also include other important human resource practices that contribute to the well-being
and growth of human capital.

References
[1] Ahmed, S. (1999). The emerging measure of effectiveness for human resource management.
Journal of Management Development, 18(5/6), 543-556.
[2] Avolio B. J.; Bass B. M.; Jung D. I. (1999). Re-examining the components of transformational
and transactional leadership using the Multifactor Leadership. Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, 72(4), 441-462.
[3] Allen, N.J. & Meyer, J.P. (1990).The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance
and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, 1-18.
[4] Allen T.D., Rush M.C., (1998). The Effects of Organizational Citizenship Behavior on
Performance Judgments: A Field Study and a Laboratory Experiment. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 83(2), 247-260.
[5] Arnett, K.P., and Obert, T.L. (1995). What IS Employees Really Want. Datamation, 41(5), 84.
[6] Avila, R. A., Fern, E. F., & Mann, O. K. (1988). Unraveling criteria for assessing the
performance of sales people: A causal analysis. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales
Management, 8, 45-54.
[7] Barnard, C.I. 1938. The functions of the executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
[8] Bass, B.M. & Avolio, B.J. (1995). MLQ multifactor leadership questionnaire. Second Edition,
Sampler Set: Technical Report, Leader Form, Rater Form, And Scoring Key for MLQ Form
5x-Short.
[9] 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, 587-595.
[10] Benkhoff, B. (1997). Disentangling organizational commitment. Personnel Review, 26, 114-
131.
[11] Bennis, W. & Goldsmith, J. (1994). Learning to lead: A workbook on Becoming a Leader.
Addison Wesley,. Reading.
[12] Bennis, W. & Townsend, R. (1995). Reinventing leadership. New York: William Morrow and
Company.
[13] Brouer, R. L. (2007). The role of political skill in the leadership process-work outcomes
relationships. Ph.D dissertation, Department of Management, College of Business, The Florida
State University
[14] Capelli P, Rogovsky N., (1998). Employee Involvement and Organizational Citizenship:
Implication for Labor Law Reform and Lean Production. Industrial & Labor Relations Review,
51(4), 633-653.
424
 European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 14, Number 3 (2010)

[15] Dessler, G., (1999). How to Earn Your Employees’ Commitment. Academy of Management
Executive, 13(2), 58-66.
[16] Ehrhart, M. G. (2004). Leadership and procedural justice climate citizenship behavior as
antecedents of unit-level organizational. Personnel Psychology, 57, 61-94.
[17] Gautam, T. et al. (2005). Organizational citizenship behavior and organizational commitment
in Nepal. Asian Journal of Social Psychology 8: 305–314
[18] George, J. M. (1991). State or trait: Effects of positive mood on prosocial behaviors at work.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(2), 299-307.
[19] Gerstner, C. R. & Day, D. V. (1997). Meta-Analytic review of leader–member exchange
theory: Correlates and construct issues. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(6), 827-844.
[20] Guest, D. (1989). Personnel and HRM: Can you tell the difference? Personnel Management,
48-51.
[21] House, R. J. (1971). A path goal theory of leader effectiveness. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 16(3), 321-339.
[22] Iverson, R.D. & Buttigieg, D.M. (1999). Affective, normative and continuance commitment:
can the “right kind” of commitment be managed? Journal of Management Studies, 36(3), 307-
350.
[23] Katz, D. (1964). The motivational basis of organizational behavior. Behavioral Science, 9, 131-
133.
[24] Katz, D. and Kahan, R.L. 1978. The social psychology of organizations. New York: Wiley.
[25] Kerlinger, F.N., & Lee, H. B. (2000). Foundations of Behavioural Research. 4th Ed. New York:
Harcourt Publishers.
[26] Lagomarsino, R. and Cardona, P. (2003). Relationships among leadership, organizational
commitment and OCB in Uruguayan health institutions, WP No 494, IESE Business School,
Universidad de Navarra
[27] MacKenzie, S. B., Podsakoff, P. M., & Paine, J. B. (1999). Do citizenship behaviors matter
more for managers than for salespeople? Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27(4),
396-410.
[28] Meyer, J.P & Allen, N.J. (1984). Testing the “side-bet theory” of organizational commitment:
Some methodological considerations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 372-378.
[29] Meyer, J.P. & Herscovitch, L. (2001). Commitment in the workplace: Toward a general model.
Human Resources Management Review, 11, 299-326.
[30] Mowday, R.T. (1998). Reflections on the study and relevance of organizational commitment.
Human Resource Management Review, 8(4), 387-401.
[31] Organ, D. W. & Ryan, K. (1995). A meta-analytic review of attitudinal and dispositional
predictors of organizational citizenship behavior. Personnel Psychology, 48, 775–802.
[32] Organ, D.W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome.
Lexington, MA: Lexington Books / D. C. Heath and Company.
[33] Peril and Promise: Higher Education in Developing Countries, World Bank, 2000, available at
www.tfhe.net.
[34] Pfeffer, J., Veiga, F., (1999). Putting People First for Organizational Success. Academy of
Management Executive, 13(2), 37-48.
[35] 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. Leadership Quarterly, 107-142.
[36] Podsakoff, P. M., & MacKenzie, S. B. (1994). Organizational citizenship behavior and sales
unit effectiveness. Journal of Marketing Research, 31, 351-363.
[37] 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.

425
 European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 14, Number 3 (2010)

[38] Scholl, R.W. (1981). Differentiating commitment from expectancy as a motivational force.
Academy of Management Review, 6,589-599.
[39] Snell, S. A. and Dean, J. W. Jr (1992). Integrated Manufacturing and Human Resource
Management: A Human Capital Perspective. The Academy of Management Journal, 35(3), 467-
504.
[40] Storey, J. (1995a). Is HRM catching on? International Journal of Manpower, 16(4), 3-12.
Storey, J. (1995b). Human resource management: Still marching on, or marching out?
[41] Storey, J, In: Human Resource Management: A Critical Text, Routledge, London.
[42] Tessema, M. and Soeters, J. (2006). Challenges and prospects of HRM in developing countries:
testing the HRM-performance link in Eritrean civil service, International Journal of Human
Resource Management, 17(1), 86-105.
[43] Tremablay, M., Rondeau, A. and Lemelin, M. (1998). Influence of Human Resource Practices
on the Mobilization of Blue-Collar Workers (in french). Proceedings of Meetings of
Association Internationale de Psychologie de Langue Française, 97-110.
[44] 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.

426