UNIVERSITY OF GHANA LEADERSHIP STYLES AND VOLUNTARY WORK BEHAVIORS: MEDIATING ROLE OF LEADERS’ EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE BY BENJAMIN MEKPOR (10271302) THIS THESIS IS SUBMITTED TO THE UNIVERSITY OF GHANA, LEGON IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE AWARD OF AN M.PHIL IN HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT DEGREE JUNE 2015 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh i DECLARATION I do hereby declare that this work is the result of my own research and has not been presented by anyone for any academic award in this or any other university. All references used in the work have been fully acknowledged. I bear sole responsibility for any shortcomings. ………………………. ………………… BENJAMIN MEKPOR DATE (10271302) University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh ii CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that this thesis was supervised in accordance with the procedures laid down by the University. ……………………………………… …...…………………… SAMUEL KWASI DARTEY-BAAH (PhD) DATE (SUPERVISOR) University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh iii DEDICATION I dedicate this work to the Almighty God, my parents who have been of great support throughout my schooling. Also to my siblings and friends (Emmanuel Ampofo, Jonathan Tetteh, Believe Dedzo) for their support, especially Emefa Agordoh who helped to edit this research work. God bless you all. University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENT First, I would like to thank my supervisor Dr. Kwasi Dartey-Baah for his dedication, commitment, guidance and constructive criticisms throughout the research work. Also to Dr. Kwesi Amponsah-Tawiah for his valuable contributions to the success of this work. I express my heartfelt gratitude to all lecturers of the Organization and Human Resource Management Department. Finally, my sincere appreciation goes to the management and employees of the selected banks used in the study for their co-operation and permission. God bless you all. University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh v TABLE OF CONTENT DECLARATION ........................................................................................................................ i CERTIFICATION ..................................................................................................................... ii DEDICATION ..........................................................................................................................iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ........................................................................................................ iv TABLE OF CONTENT ............................................................................................................. v LIST OF TABLES ..................................................................................................................... x LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................................. xi LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS .................................................................................................. xii ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................xiii CHAPTER ONE ........................................................................................................................ 1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background .......................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Problem Statement ............................................................................................................... 6 1.3 Research Objectives ............................................................................................................. 9 1.4 Research Questions ............................................................................................................ 10 1.5 Research Hypotheses ......................................................................................................... 10 1.6 Significance of the Study ................................................................................................... 11 1.7 Scope of Work ................................................................................................................... 12 1.8 Definition of Operational Terms ........................................................................................ 12 1.9 Chapter Disposition ........................................................................................................... 14 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh vi LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................................ 15 2.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 15 2.2 Theoretical Review ............................................................................................................ 15 2.2.1 Leadership ....................................................................................................................... 15 2.2.1.1 Leadership Styles ......................................................................................................... 18 2.2.1.2 Transformational Leadership Theory .......................................................................... 19 2.2.1.3 Transactional Leadership Theory ................................................................................ 22 2.2.2 Voluntary Work Behaviors ............................................................................................. 24 2.2.2.1 Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) ............................................................... 25 2.2.2.2 Counterproductive Work Behaviors (CWB) ............................................................... 30 2.2.3 Emotional Intelligence .................................................................................................... 33 2.3 Theoretical Framework ...................................................................................................... 37 2.3.1 Leader-Member Exchange Theory ................................................................................. 37 2.3.2 Emotion-Centered Model................................................................................................ 39 2.4 EMPIRICAL REVIEW ..................................................................................................... 40 2.4.1 Leadership Styles and Voluntary Work Behaviors ......................................................... 40 2.4.1.1 Transformational and Transactional Leadership‟s Relationship with OCB ................ 41 2.4.1.2 Transformational and Transactional Leadership‟s Relationship with CWB ............... 45 2.4.2 Transformational and Transactional Leadership‟s Relationship with EI ....................... 48 2.4.3 Leaders‟ EI Relationship with OCB and CWB .............................................................. 51 2.4.4 The Leaders‟ EI as a Mediator ........................................................................................ 54 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh vii 2.4.5 Conceptual Framework ................................................................................................... 57 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY............................................................................................. 58 3.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 58 3.2 Research Paradigm............................................................................................................. 58 3.3 Research Design................................................................................................................. 59 3.4 Population .......................................................................................................................... 60 3.5 Eligibility Criteria .............................................................................................................. 61 3.6 Sample Size ........................................................................................................................ 62 3.7 Sample Technique .............................................................................................................. 64 3.8 Data Collection Instruments .............................................................................................. 65 3.8.1 Leadership Styles ............................................................................................................ 65 3.8.2 Emotional Intelligence .................................................................................................... 66 3.8.3 Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) .................................................................. 67 3.8.4 Counterproductive Workplace Behavior (CWB) ............................................................ 67 3.9 Pre-Test of Instruments ...................................................................................................... 68 3.10 Data Analysis ................................................................................................................... 69 3.11 Ethical Consideration ....................................................................................................... 70 CHAPTER FOUR .................................................................................................................... 72 PRESENTATION OF RESULTS ........................................................................................... 72 4.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 72 4.2 Demographic Characteristics of Respondents ................................................................... 72 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh viii 4.3 Descriptive Statistics .......................................................................................................... 79 4.4 Reliability Analysis ............................................................................................................ 80 4.5 Testing of Research Hypotheses ........................................................................................ 80 4.5.1 Checking the Assumptions ............................................................................................. 81 4.5.2 Assumption of Multicollinearity ..................................................................................... 81 4.5.3 Assumption of Linearity ................................................................................................. 81 4.5.4 Assumption of Homoscedasticity ................................................................................... 82 4.5.5 Independence of Residuals ............................................................................................. 82 4.5.6 Hypotheses One .............................................................................................................. 83 4.5.7 Hypothesis Two .............................................................................................................. 84 4.5.8 Hypothesis Three ............................................................................................................ 85 4.5.9 Hypothesis Four .............................................................................................................. 86 4.5.10 Hypotheses Five and Six ............................................................................................... 88 4.6.11 Additional Analysis: Type of Bank- OCB and CWB ................................................... 90 CHAPTER FIVE ..................................................................................................................... 92 DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS ................................................................................................ 92 5.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 92 5.2 Research Objective One ..................................................................................................... 92 5.2.1 Transformational and Transactional Leadership‟s Relationship with OCB ................... 92 5.2.2 Transformational and Transactional Leadership‟s Relationship with CWB .................. 95 5.3 Research Objective Two .................................................................................................... 97 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh ix 5.3.1 Transformational and Transactional Leadership‟s Relationship with EI ....................... 98 5.3.2 Leaders‟ EI Relationship with OCB and CWB .............................................................. 99 5.3.3 The Leaders‟ EI as a Mediator ...................................................................................... 101 5.4 Research Objective Three ................................................................................................ 103 5.4.1 Varied levels of OCB and CWB in High Performing and Low Performing Banks ..... 103 CHAPTER SIX ...................................................................................................................... 106 SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................ 106 6.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 106 6.2 Summary of Key Findings ............................................................................................... 106 6.3 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 108 6.4 Recommendations ............................................................................................................ 109 6.4.1 Organizations/ Managers .............................................................................................. 109 6.5 Limitations of the Study.............................................................................................. 109 6.6 Directions for Future Research ................................................................................... 110 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................... 112 Appendix A: Questionnaire ................................................................................................... 141 Appendix B: Formula for Sample Size Computation ............................................................ 145 Appendix C: Assumptions ..................................................................................................... 146 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh x LIST OF TABLES Page Table 2.1 Summary: Transformational and Transactional Leadership Styles ......................... 24 Table 3.1: List of the 13 Sampled Banks and their Rankings .................................................. 63 Table 3.2: List of Accessible Banks and Number of Respondents .......................................... 64 Table 3.3: Reliability Values .................................................................................................. 68 Table 3.4: Test for Normality .................................................................................................. 70 Table 4.1: Gender..................................................................................................................... 72 Table 4.2: Age .......................................................................................................................... 73 Table 4.3: Marital Status .......................................................................................................... 74 Table 4.4: Level of Formal Education ..................................................................................... 75 Table 4.5: Length of Service .................................................................................................... 76 Table 4.6: Job Position ............................................................................................................. 77 Table 4.7: Type of Bank and Number of Respondents ............................................................ 78 Table 4.8: Descriptive Statistics of each Variable ................................................................... 79 Table 4.9: Reliability Analysis ................................................................................................ 80 Table 4.10: Coefficients ........................................................................................................... 83 Table 4.12: Coefficients ........................................................................................................... 86 Table 4.13: Results of Simple Linear Regression for EI on OCB of Employees. ................... 87 Table 4.14: Results for Simple Linear Regression for EI on CWB of Employees .................. 87 Table 4.15: Mediation Results ................................................................................................. 89 Table 4.16: Independent t test Results for OCB and CWB Categorized by Type of Bank ..... 91 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh xi LIST OF FIGURES Page Fig. 2.1 Leadership styles as a predictor of voluntary work behaviors of employees with the leaders‟ emotional intelligence playing a mediating role………………….57 Fig 4.7: Paths Coefficients………………………………………………………………….90 Fig. 5.1: Conceptual framework after analysis……………………………………………..105 Figure 4.1: Linear Relationship between Leadership Styles and OCB…………………....146 Figure 4.2: Scatterplots Showing Constant Variance of Error Terms……………………...146 Figure 4.3: Linear Relationship between Leadership Styles and CWB……………………147 Figure 4.4: Scatterplots Showing Constant Variance of Error Terms……………………....147 Figure 4.5: Linear Relationship between Leadership Styles and EI………………………..148 Figure 4.6: Scatterplots Showing Constant Variance of Error Terms………………………148 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh xii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS CWB Counterproductive Work Behavior EI Emotional Intelligence GIPC Ghana Investment Promotion Council HRM Human Resource Management LMX Leader-Member Exchange MLQ Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire OCB Organizational Citizenship Behavior ROE Return on Equity SPSS Statistical Package for the Social Sciences VIF Variance Inflation Factor University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh xiii ABSTRACT The primary aim of this study was to examine the relationships between leadership styles and voluntary work behaviors of employees among selected banks in Ghana. Specifically, the objectives was to determine the extent to which leadership styles (transformational and transactional) predict employees‟ voluntary work behaviors (OCB and CWB); to examine the mediating effect of leaders‟ emotional intelligence on the leadership styles and voluntary work behaviors relationships; and to investigate whether the exhibition of voluntary work behaviors varies among employees of high performing and low performing banks. The quantitative approach to research was adopted to collect data from 234 respondents. Both purposive and simple random sampling techniques were used for the selection of respondents for the study. The findings of the study revealed that even though both the transformational and transactional leadership styles significantly positively predicted the OCB of employees, transformational leadership was more significant. Also, transformational leadership was found to have a significant negative relationship with the CWB of employees whereas transactional leadership had an insignificant relationship with CWB. Additionally, both leadership styles were found to be significantly related to EI. Furthermore, only the relationship between transformational leadership and OCB was mediated by the leaders‟ EI. It was also found that employees of high performing banks did not score higher in the exhibition of OCB compared to low performing banks and employees of low performing banks were not found to score higher with respect to CWB as compared to those of high performing banks. It was however suggested that both leadership styles and more especially transformational leadership should be used in the quest to encourage employees‟ OCB. Also, the transformational leadership style is recommended when leaders want to mitigate the CWB of their employees. University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 1 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background In recent organizational research, there has been a shift from what is commonly known as task-related activities of employees to include voluntary work behaviors of employees that go beyond just task performance. This is because employees‟ voluntary work behaviors have been recognized to play a pivotal role when it comes to the success or failure of organizations (Lee, Kim & Kim, 2013). Employees voluntary work behaviors have been researched from two distinct points of view based on their impact on organizational performance. On the positive side, they are seen as helpful behaviors by employees to boost the performance of organizations- popularly known as Organizational Citizenship Behaviors (OCB) (Organ, 1988). OCB is defined 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” (Organ, 1988, p. 4). This behavior can be expressed in different forms: helping others who have heavy workloads, focusing on the positive side of issues rather than the negative, trying to avoid creating problems for co-workers, keeping abreast with changes in the organization and attendance at work above the norm (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman, & Fetter, 1990). According to Organ (1988), such employees are referred to as “good soldiers” and are aspired for by most organizations (Krishnan & Arora, 2008; Vaijayanthi, Shreenivasan & Roy, 2014). On the flip side are behaviors that are perceived as destructive and detrimental to both co- workers and the organization as a whole which are referred to as Counterproductive University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 2 Workplace Behaviors (CWB) (Fox, Spector & Miles, 2001). According to Spector and Fox (2005), CWB refers to “the volitional acts that harm or intend to harm organizations and their stakeholders including clients, co-workers, customers and supervisors” (p. 151) and is adverse to OCB. CWB ranges from insignificant acts such as five minutes late arrival to work, five minutes early departure from work, taking extended breaks, browsing the internet during working hours, to more serious ones like lack of co-operation, verbal abuse, theft, physical assaults, and sabotage (Brimecombe, Magnusenb & Bunds, 2014; Robinson & Bennette, 1995). More so, research shows that organizations suffer the loss of billions of dollars in revenue attributed to harmful acts undertaken by employees each year (U.S. Chamber of Commerce, 2002). For instance, employee theft is identified to cost organizations approximately 35% of their inventory, 1.4 % of total revenue and 38 billion dollars for annual damages (Center for Retail Research, 2010). More so, workplace violence, an example of CWB, is reported to cost companies about 500,000 employees per year to both voluntary and involuntary turnover (Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 1996). It is also alarming to learn from research that about 75% of all employees engage in deviant behaviors (cited in Casebier, 2014). Thus both OCB and CWB refer to voluntary acts that employees engage in at one point in time or the other (Baker, 2005; Luthans & Youssef, 2007) and employees can be categorized based on them. In view of this, organizations generally have the responsibility to discourage CWB and rather encourage OCB by appropriately influencing employees‟ behaviors. Extant research however advances that employee behaviors towards their organization and their jobs in particular are influenced by numerous variables. In relation to the two voluntary work behaviors (OCB and CWB), variables such as job satisfaction (Fatima, Atif, Saqib & University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 3 Haider, 2012; Shapiro, Kessler & Purcell, 2004), organizational commitment (Liao & Chuang, 2007), negative emotions (Krischer, Penney & Hunter, 2010), employee characteristics, tasks characteristics (Aftab & Javed, 2012), organizational characteristics (Shamsudin, Subramaniam & Ibrahim, 2011) and leadership behaviors (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine & Bachrach, 2000; Williams & Anderson, 1991; Shoss, Eisenberger & Zagenczyk, 2013) have been revealed as antecedents. More specifically, the leaders‟ behavior or style has been opined as one key influence on the voluntary work behaviors of employees and this has been established in empirical research as a universal principle (Boerner, Eisenbeiss, & Griesser, 2007; Treviño, Brown & Hartman, 2003; Lo & Ramayah, 2009; Organ, Podsakoff & MacKenzie, 2006; Ilies, Nahrgang & Morgeson, 2007; Rajnandini, Schrisheim & Williams, 1999). This makes it paramount for leaders to recognize the need of not only understanding the concept of voluntary work behaviors of employees, but to also know how to either motivate or mitigate them respectively. (Ali & Waqar, 2013; Burns & Carpenter, 2008; Organ, Podsakoff, & MacKenzie, 2006; Podsakoff & MacKenzie, 1994; Paalanen & Hyypiä, 2008; Podsakoff, Ahearne, & MacKenzie, 1997; Podsakoff et al., 2000). Whereas leadership is defined as “a stream of evolving interrelationships in which leaders are continuously evoking motivational responses from followers and modifying their behavior as they meet responsiveness or resistance, in a ceaseless process of flow and counter flow” (Burns, 1978). According Yukl (2002), it is also the ability to influence subordinates to get things done when they should be done. More importantly, research advances that the leadership style practiced in an organization can serve as a motivational gem which either positively or negatively influences employees‟ outcome (Lian & Tui, 2012). Leadership University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 4 further determines whether or not employees exhibit selfless behaviors leading to OCB (Barbuto & Scholl, 1999; Bass & Steidlemeier, 1999; Ilies et al., 2007; Podsakoff, MacKenzie & Bommer, 1996; Twigg, Fuller, & Hester, 2008; Vondey, 2008) or selfish and harmful behaviors leading to CWB (Newton, 2007; Kessler, Bruursema, Rodopman & Spector, 2013). For instance, Kessler, Bruursema, Rodopman & Spector (2013) advanced that when it comes to discouraging CWB the style of leadership in operation plays a determining role. Over the years, various styles of leadership (e.g. charismatic, ethical, servant, adaptive, dispersed, authentic, spiritual, transcendent, transformational, transactional, laissez-faire leadership styles among others) have emerged but the two that have been mostly identified to influence employees‟ voluntary work behaviors are the transformational leadership style (Bambale, Shamsudin & Subramaniam, 2011; Brown & Treviño, 2003; Kessler et al., 2013; Lowe, Kroeck, & Sivasubramaniam, 1996; Podsakoff, MacKenzie, & Bommer, 1996; Rajnandini, Schrisheim & Williams, 1999; Zabihi, Hashemzehi & Tabrizi, 2012) and transactional styles of leadership (Kessler et al., 2013; Lowe, Kroeck, & Sivasubramaniam, 1996; Mackenzie, Podsakoff, & Rich, 2001; Rajnandini, Schrisheim & Williams, 1999; Rubin, Bommer, & Bachrach, 2010; Walumbwa, Wu, & Orwa, 2008). This study therefore construed leadership styles as transformational and transactional leadership. Whereas transformational leaders are geared towards motivating their subordinates to perform beyond set targets and goals, transactional leaders exhibit leader-member exchange relationship by fulfilling the employees‟ needs in an exchange for them meeting set organizational targets and goals (Bass & Avolio, 1994). There is however the possibility of leaders to possess the qualities of both the transformational and transactional styles of University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 5 leadership (Lowe, Kroeck, & Sivasubramaniam, 1996). This has recently been referred to as „Transfor-sactional‟ Leadership– the transformational-transactional leadership mix by Dartey-Baah (2015). According to Bar-on (1996), one important characteristic that is common in the operation of all leadership styles is their emotional component– measured as Emotional Intelligence (EI). EI is the leaders‟ ability to “….perceive accurately, appraise, and express emotion; the ability to access and/or generate feelings when they facilitate thought; the ability to understand emotion and emotional knowledge; and the ability to regulate emotions to promote emotional and intellectual growth” (Salovey & Mayer, 1990, p. 10). The concept of EI is important because the expression of emotions in the workplace, either negative or positive cannot be done away with but can rather be managed (Ashforth & Humphrey, 1995). Additionally, EI is the skill that determines whether or not the leader will become successful in dealing with the followers (Goleman, 1998; Sosik & Megerian, 1999). It has also been further proven that EI contributes about 80 to 90 % and sometimes more of the qualities that separate outstanding leaders from average ones (Goleman, 1998). Extant research also revealed that EI influences various employee outcomes: employee commitment (Tung, Khuong, & Phuong, 2014), employee performance (Jorfi, Jorfi & Moghadam, 2010), occupational stress (Gardner & Stough, 2003), employee turnover (Siddiqui & Hassan, 2013) among others. Furthermore, research advances that in order for leaders to encourage OCB and minimize CWB among employees, their emotions, for that matter EI, serve as a stimulus on the employees (Ayoko, Callan & Härtel, 2003; Modassir & Singh, 2008). Thus, when employees perceive that leaders understand their needs, they tend to give off the best of their skills to the execution of organizational goals (Korkmaz & Arpaci, 2009) and the opposite is true when University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 6 they perceive they are not handled in an emotionally intelligent manner (Ayoko, Callan & Härtel, 2003). Similarly, managers who have good socials skills and even-temperedness (traits central to exhibiting EI) are able to positively influence their employees to exhibit behaviors beyond their formal job descriptions (i.e. OCB) (Krishnan & Arora, 2008). This relationship can be explained by the fact that leaders with high EI tend to be more excited and committed to their respective organizations (Abraham, 2000); build a connection between employees (Batool, 2013) and consequently attain success in the workplace (Ruderman, Hannum, Leslie & Steed, 2001). On the other hand, leaders with low EI produce negative emotions (e.g. fear, anger, and hostility) leading to CWB such as absenteeism, lack of co- operation, apathy among others (Bagshaw, 2000). 1.2 Problem Statement In recent times, the Ghanaian banking sector has witnessed tremendous growth that has largely been attributed to the creation of a favorable business climate through the enactment of relevant laws by the Central Bank (e.g. Bank of Ghana Act, 2002; the Payment System Bill, 2003; Banking Law 2004- Act 673) in a bid to liberalize the sector. Since then, there has been an increase in the number of commercial banks from 7 to 27 from the year 1989 to 2014 and the generation of keen competition among the various banks including those from foreign countries especially Nigeria (PricewaterhouseCoopers, 2014). However, according to Yunus, Ishak, Mustapha and Othman (2010), competition within organizations especially in the banking field is a key challenge that needs to be strategically addressed. They further posited that in order to do that, banks need not only to recruit but also train employees who can give them a sustained competitive edge. One important quality of such employees is their willingness to engage in positive voluntary work behaviors beyond University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 7 their formal job requirements (see: Ali & Waqar, 2013; Yunus, AmirIshak, Mustapha & Othman, 2010) which are contrary to CWB. Additionally, Bolino and Turnley (2003) agreed that employees who exhibit OCB are unique assets of an organization which are not easily imitated by competitors thereby giving them that sustained competitive advantage. More so, since the banking sector is proven to play a critical role in the development of the Ghanaian economy (Bawumia et at., 2008) and the employees‟ voluntary behaviors for that matter can determine its success or failure, it is relevant to empirically investigate the factors that induce such employee outcomes so as to appropriately encourage the positive ones and mitigate the negative ones respectively (Lee, Kim & Kim, 2013). With respect to CWB, Newton (2010) in enumerating its negative effects on the performance of organizations advanced that it is relevant to identify its antecedents so as to minimize its occurrence in organizations (Kessler et al., 2013). There is however an urgent need in empirical literature to investigate the factors that evoke both OCB and CWB of employees especially in banks where employees are very busy and work in an emotionally laborious environment (Kessler et al., 2013; Yunus, AmirIshak, Mustapha & Othman, 2010). According to Kessler et al., (2013) leadership is the best place to begin. Even though there is a plethora of studies on the effect of leadership on the employees‟ behaviors in the workplace, it appears that only a few have empirically studied the concept in relation to the voluntary work behaviors (i.e. OCB and CWB) (Bruursema, 2004; Spector & Fox, 2002). More so, majority of the studies on the leadership styles and voluntary work behaviors relationship especially with OCB have only largely been carried out in the Western context: University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 8 OCB - (Bass, 1985; Boerner, Eisenbeiss & Griesser, 2007; Geyer & Steyrer, 1998; Howell & Avolio, 1993; Lowe, Kroeck & Sivasubramaniam, 1996; MacKenzie, Podsakoff & Rich, 2001; Organ, 1988; Podsakoff, MacKenzie & Bommer, 1996; Schlechter & Engelbrecht, 2006; Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Morrman & Fetter, 1990), CWB- (Newton, 2007; Rajnandini, Schrisheim & Williams,1999; Kessler et al., 2013; Bruursema, 2004). In investigating the relationship between transformational leadership and leader-member exchange in five distinct cultures, Pillai, Rajnandini, Williams, and Ethlyn (1999) pointed out that the same style of leadership in another culture does not have the same influence on employees‟ behaviors and therefore makes it incorrect to transfer the same results into another context or culture. Likewise, the cultural context of employees‟ voluntary work behaviors is perceived as being vastly significant in organizations yet there remains a dearth of empirical work done in relation to it (Euwema, Wendt & Emmerik, 2007; Yen & Niehoff, 2004; Cem-Ersoy, 2010). This makes the study of both OCB and CWB relatively inadequate and more skewed towards foreign perspectives thus lacking the African angle (Turnipseed & Murkison, 2000; Ersoy, 2010). Hence, a call in extant literature to empirically establish the relationship between leadership styles and voluntary work behaviors in the West African context specifically the Ghanaian setting. Additionally, it appears not many studies have looked into the indirect relationships between leadership styles and voluntary work behaviors of employees. For instance, Piccolo and Colquitt (2006) and Lin, Li and Hsiao (2012) advanced that though numerous literatures establish the fact that leadership has an influence on task performance and OCB of employees, the variables that explain or indirectly cause the outcome remain uncertain and unclear. Also, Kessler et al. (2013) asserted that it is not only important to identify the antecedents of CWB but also the factors that exacerbate their effect on such behaviors. University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 9 Even though researchers have tried to bridge this gap, their works have focused on the indirect effects of variables such as culture (Shukui & Xiaomin, 2009), work experience (Saeed & Ahmad, 2012), subordinates‟ trust and satisfaction (Podsakoff et al., 1990), stressors (Boerner, Dutschke & Wied, 2008), perception of politics (Vigoda-Gadot, 2006), downward influence (Lian & Tui, 2012), subordinates‟ competence (Lian & Tui, 2012), core job characteristics (Piccolo & Colquitt, 2006), public service motives and goal clarity (Khan, Ghouri & Awang, 2013) on leadership styles and OCB. Also, relatively few studies have been done in relation to the leadership styles and CWB relationship including negative emotion and justice (Bruursema, 2004). Furthermore, as would be seen from the literature review that significant amount of work has been done on the influence of leadership styles on OCB and leadership styles on CWB. However, it appears literature is silent on investigating leadership styles on both OCB and CWB with the leaders‟ EI playing a mediating role. Following from these, this study sought to investigate the relationship between leadership styles and both voluntary work behaviors (i.e. OCB and CWB) with a focus on the leaders‟ EI as a mediator in the Ghanaian banking industry. 1.3 Research Objectives This study generally sought to investigate the relationship between leadership styles (transformational and transactional) and voluntary work behavior (OCB and CWB) and the mediating role of the leaders‟ EI among selected banks in Ghana. Specifically to: 1. Determine the extent to which leadership styles (transformational and transactional) predict employees‟ voluntary work behaviors (OCB and CWB). University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 10 2. Examine the mediating effect of leaders‟ EI on the leadership styles (transformational and transactional) and voluntary work behavior relationships (OCB and CWB). 3. To investigate whether the exhibition of voluntary work behaviors (OCB and CWB) varies among employees of high performing and low performing banks. 1.4 Research Questions In view of the research objectives, the following are the research questions: 1. To what extent do leadership styles (transformational and transactional) predict employees‟ engagement in voluntary work behaviors (OCB and CWB)? 2. Will leaders‟ EI mediate the relationships between leadership styles (transformational and transactional) and voluntary work behaviors (OCB and CWB)? 3. Does the exhibition of voluntary work behaviors (OCB and CWB) vary among employees of high performing and low performing banks? 1.5 Research Hypotheses The study proposed the research hypotheses as follows: H1: Transformational leadership style will have a more significant positive relationship with OCB than transactional leadership. H2a: Transformational leadership style will have a significant negative relationship with CWB. H2b: Transactional leadership style will have a significant positive relationship with CWB. H3a: Transformational leadership will have a significant positive relationship with EI. H3b: Transactional leadership will have a significant negative relationship with EI. H4a: Leaders‟ EI will have a significant positive relationship with OCB. H4b: Leaders‟ EI will have a significant negative relationship with CWB. University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 11 H5a: Leaders‟ EI will mediate the transformational leadership styles and OCB relationship. H5b: Leaders‟ EI will not mediate the transactional leadership styles and OCB relationship. H6a: Leaders‟ EI will not mediate the transformational leadership styles and CWB relationship. H6b: Leaders‟ EI will not mediate the transactional leadership styles and CWB relationship. H7a: Employees in high performing banks will score higher on OCB than those in the low performing banks. H7b: Employees in low performing banks will score higher on CWB than those in the high performing banks. 1.6 Significance of the Study The study is relevant for both theoretical and practical reasons. Theoretically, the study contributes to existing literature on the importance of the leaders‟ EI and the role it plays in enhancing the leaders‟ effectiveness in the workplace. Specifically, the study investigates whether the leaders‟ EI influences the tendency of employees to either engage in OCB or CWB. The findings from this study therefore serve as a platform for other researchers to build on. Furthermore, this study contributes to the limited Ghanaian research on leadership styles and voluntary work behaviors of employees hence adding a context-specific value to the research field under study. Additionally, most previous studies have had leaders rate their own leadership style and EI as well as the voluntary work behaviors of their employees which may not be an absolute reflection of the findings arrived at. This study however provided a unique dimension where the rating of the employees‟ voluntary work behaviors, the leaders‟ style and EI is undertaken solely by the employees. Thus, the study used a follower-centric University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 12 approach to studying leadership as suggested by Meindl (1995) and also because it presents a more objective view to the study. Practically, this study provides guidelines to help organizations understand the effect of the leaders‟ EI on employee performance so as to provide training for their leadership in that direction. The study also helps leaders to identify whether the transformational or transactional style of leadership or a combination of both is more effective when managing employees‟ voluntary work behaviors. 1.7 Scope of Work The study focused on the employees of the commercial banks that were consistently listed on the Ghana Club 100 rankings from 2010 to 2012. The Ghana Club 100, launched in 1998 is an annual compilation of the 100 top companies in Ghana to recognize them for successful enterprise building. The 100 companies which get enlisted in the club serve as role models for the private sector and provide a forum for corporate Ghana to interact with the government at a higher level. The core objective of the Ghana Club 100 is to:  Develop an open information culture within the Ghanaian corporate sector;  Provide incentives for improved corporate performance;  Develop a uniform criteria for evaluating corporate performance; and  Establish an annual and current analysis of Ghana‟s corporate sector. 1.8 Definition of Operational Terms  Leadership: The ability of an individual to motivate others to forego self-interest in the interest of a collective vision, and to contribute to the attainment of that vision by University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 13 making significant personal self-sacrifices over and above the call of duty, willingly (House & Shamir, 1993).  Leadership Styles: Bass (1985) advanced that the transformational and transactional leadership styles are most prominent among all leadership styles. Therefore, this study interpreted leadership styles as transformational and transactional leadership styles.  Transformational Leadership: Leaders motivate followers to look beyond their self- interest to seek the success of their organization to work beyond initial expectation by altering their morale, interests, and values (Bass, 1985; Burns, 1978).  Transactional Leadership: This is focused on leader-follower exchanges. Thus, it is an exchange relationship between a leader and his or her followers where clear objectives are expected to be met in return for rewards (financial and/or non-financial) (Bass, 1999; Yukl, 1999).  Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Employees‟ discretionary role that transcends the organization‟s formal job description and exhibits actions such as supporting the welfare of co-workers, work groups and the organization at large (Katz, 1964).  Counterproductive Work Behavior: They are actions by employees that have detrimental effect or cause harm to the organization and its workers in one way or the other (Fox, Spector & Miles, 2001).  Emotional Intelligence: The ability of managers to perceive accurately, appraise, express and understand and regulate their own emotions and that of their subordinates so as to stimulate emotional and intellectual growth (Salovey & Mayer, 1990). University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 14 1.9 Chapter Disposition Chapter one contains the introductory aspects of the work and further elaborates on the background to the study, problem statement, objective of the study, research questions, hypotheses proposed to be tested, the scope and significance of the research. The chapter two discusses extant literature in relation to the variables of the study (transformational leadership, transactional leadership, organizational citizenship behavior, counterproductive work behavior and emotional intelligence) which led to the development of a conceptual framework to summarize the hypothesized relationship. The methodology adopted by the study to collect and analyze the data was discussed in chapter three. Chapter four presents the various results derived from the analysis as compared to the various hypotheses. More so, chapter five expounds on the results of the analyzed data in relation to the variables under study. Finally, chapter six presents the summary, conclusion, limitations and recommendations of the study. University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 15 CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Introduction This section of the study presents a critical analysis of extant literature relevant to the phenomenon under study. The variables elaborated on include transformational ad transactional leadership styles, emotional intelligence, organizational citizenship behavior and counterproductive workplace behavior. This section further examines the various relationships existing between the variables and how they contribute to the study. More so, the section is discussed under various headings: theoretical review, empirical review and consequently developing a fitting conceptual framework. 2.2 Theoretical Review 2.2.1 Leadership Leadership as a concept has been widely explored when it comes to the field of human resource management. This is due to the fact that leadership is deemed as essential at every level of an organization and its quality determines the success or failure of organizations (Chandan & Devi, 2014; Dartey-Baah, Amponsah-Tawiah, & Sekyere-Abankwa, 2011). Riaz and Haider (2010) also posited that organizations seek to understand and remain abreast with current developments in leadership because leadership is seen to play an important role in achieving high performance irrespective of the type of organization. Additionally, research makes it clear that mastering the art of leadership enables organizations to perform highly because it helps to mobilize their workforce (Yukl, 1998), facilitates team work (Yukl, 2006), ensures employee commitment and job satisfaction (Griffin, Patterson & West, 2001; Pieterse-Landman, 2012). University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 16 However, leadership as a theory still remains unclear both to academics and the general public because of the different meanings it has to different sects of people (Hartog & Koopman, 2001). According to Hartog and Koopman (2001), this happens because the various definitions evolving over the years are diverse. Leadership has thus been defined in terms of the leader‟s abilities, personality traits, influence relationships, individual versus group orientation, and appeal to self-versus collective interests. Although efforts have been made to further broaden the understanding of the concept of leadership, there is still no consensus on its definition. However, various researchers have tried to bridge this gap in the leadership literature. For instance, Burns (1978) in his research on the definition of the word „leadership‟ reveals 130 definitions from various leadership scholars which he summarized into five (5) characteristics. That is leadership is collective (both leaders and followers must exist), dissenting (it coexists with disagreement), causative (causes positive change), morally purposeful (leadership is goal oriented) and is elevating (both leaders and followers rise to live a more principled life). Burns additionally defined leadership as “a stream of evolving interrelationships in which leaders are continuously evoking motivational responses from followers and modifying their behavior as they meet responsiveness or resistance, in a ceaseless process of flow and counter flow” (p. 440). Leadership from the view of House and Shamir (1993), is the ability to motivate one‟s followers to sacrifice their own interest for that of their organizations‟ vision and willingly contribute to its attainment. Additionally, Long and Thean (2012) explains leadership as the ability of an individual to set a particular direction with the intention of achieving a desired outcome. Finally, Northhouse (2010) in an extensive review of various definitions of leadership in literature concluded that: University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 17  Leadership is a process that involves influence; and  Leadership occurs in groups and involves common goals and purpose. Northhouse (2010) further advanced that the concept of leadership has undergone various trends and development in research. It has evolved from various traditional theories such as the great man theory, the trait theory to the behavioral theory. The great man theory was primarily founded on the notion that „great men‟ were born with special leadership abilities and also asserts that leadership is based on heredity. This assumption was championed by Galton in 1870 when he purported that leadership qualities are passed on from one generation to the other through genes. Moving on, was the development of the trait theory of leadership. The trait theory of leadership believed that people are born with leadership qualities such as “intelligence, alertness, scholastic achievement, dependability, persistence, adaptability, relational competence and higher socio-economic status” (Chandan & Devi, 2014; p. 3). Therefore anyone who was identified as having some of these traits was tagged as a natural leader. However one limitation of the trait theory of leadership is the fact that it advances that it is impossible to train individuals born without traits to become leaders. However, after identifying the limitations of the theory, the behavioral leadership theory also known as the apparent leadership theory was introduced. The behavioral leadership theory introduced a study of leadership based on the behavior of the leaders themselves, examples being the leaders‟ ability to build good relationship and sensitivity towards followers‟ needs (Hartog & Koopman, 2001). The theory further suggests that individuals can be trained and educated to become leaders. After several years, researchers noticed that situational factors in an environment also play an important role in University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 18 defining the concept of leadership- hence the introduction of the situational or contingency theory of leadership. Models such as Fiedlers Contingency Model, Hersey and Blanchards Situational Leadership Model and Path-Goal Model by House (1971) have all supported this concept of leadership. Thus the contingency theorists believe that a single style of leadership is not suitable for all workplace environments (Chandan & Devi, 2014). Yukl (2010) termed this as leadership being context-specific. Additionally, Lam and O‟Higgins (2012) in their study on „enhancing employee outcomes: the interrelated influences of managers‟ EI and leadership style‟ analyzed the contingency theory from the view of Maslow‟s five level hierarchy of needs. The Maslow‟s theory of needs reveals five needs that employees might have at a point in time: physiological, safety, love/belonging, self-esteem and self-actualization. In linking these employees needs to leadership, Lam and O‟Higgins (2012) opined that whereas the physiological and safety needs can be met by transactional leadership, the transformational leadership style becomes more needed after the basic needs of the employees are met. Hence, managers must adjust their styles to suit different employees at different times based on needs identified to be met. 2.2.1.1 Leadership Styles In recent leadership research, Bass and Avolio (2004) developed what is popularly referred to as the “full range leadership theory”. This conceptualizes leadership as a composite made up of the transformational, transactional and laissez-faire styles of leadership. Bass and Avolio (2004) defined the laissez-faire style of leadership as one that gives subordinates the freedom to direct themselves. However, they made it clear that the laissez-faire leadership style is embedded in the transactional style of leadership, specifically management-by-exception University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 19 (passive) component. Research has advanced that the two most used styles of leadership are the transformational and transactional styles of leadership. The two leadership styles are identified as having their core elements to be providing clear goals and objectives, measuring outcomes and rewarding performance (McColl-Kennedy & Anderson, 2002). In spite of their similarities, research reveals that there still exist clear differences between them and the way they operate. 2.2.1.2 Transformational Leadership Theory Transformational leadership as a concept was first propounded by Burns (1978) when he sought to study „world class leaders‟ and was further propagated by Bass (1985a, 1985b, 1990, 1997, 1998). He defined transformational leadership as the leaders‟ ability to inspire their followers to meet organizational goals rather than concentrating on self-interests. Burns further described the theory as being a relationship between leaders and their followers where both help to increase their motivation and morale in the organization. In addition to Burns‟ work, Bass (1985) describes the transformational style of leadership in relation to its effect on the followers: how they express trust, admiration and loyalty to the leader who challenges and inspires them to perform above expectations. More so, Yukl and Fleet (1992, p. 174) defines transformational leadership as “the process of influencing major changes in the attitudes and assumptions of organizational members and building commitment for the major changes in the organization‟s objectives and strategies”. Furthermore, transformational leaders help to evoke subordinates‟ extra effort coupled with qualities such as employee commitment, job satisfaction and job involvement (Avolio, 2004; Jha, 2014; Krishnan & Arora, 2008). Since the role of transformational leadership has been empirically proven to be key to the success of organizations, it becomes clearly imperative University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 20 that organizations both select and develop the leadership qualities required to be transformational in leading their employees‟ (McColl-Kennedy & Anderson, 2002). In response to this, a study by Bass and Avolio (2004) proposed that transformational leaders exhibit four main qualities: intellectual stimulation, idealized influence, individualized consideration and inspirational motivation usually referred to as the dimensions of transformational leadership. Inspirational motivation: Exceptional and outstanding leaders have been described by various researchers as being inspirational (Bass, 1985, 1990; House, 1977). This refers to the leaders‟ ability to formulate and articulate a vision and setting of challenging goals for the employees (Shin & Zhou, 2003). Bruch and Walter (2007) added that the leaders‟ inspirational motivational quality is the display of optimism and enthusiasm in creating innovative goals for the future of the organization. Thus leaders who “behave in ways that motivate those around them by providing meaning and challenge to their followers‟ work” are seen to be displaying inspirational motivation (Bass, Avolio, Jung, Berson, 2003; p. 208). Idealized influence: This is often referred to as „charisma influence’ and depicts a setting where subordinates admire, respect, and trust their leaders (Bass et al., 2003, p. 208). Such leaders share their achievements as well as failures with their followers and further consider the followers‟ needs above theirs. The leader is however seen by the followers as a role model and behaves in admirable ways by displaying strong convictions in decisions and operating by clearly defined set of values (Warrilow, 2012). Humphreys and Einstein (2003) have found that transformational leaders operate out of deeply held personal value systems such as justice and integrity. By expressing these personal standards, transformational leaders unite their followers. More importantly, transformational leaders can change their followers‟ University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 21 goals and beliefs for the better and further motivate them to buy into the vision of the leader and be ready to sacrifice to see it come into reality (Bass, 1985). Individual consideration: This is where the leader is concerned with relating to employees individually and not just as a group. Transformational leaders achieve this by displaying compassion, appreciation, and responding to the individual needs of the followers as well as rewarding their achievements (Modassir & Singh, 2008). According to Bass et al, (2003), it is the leaders‟ ability to pay particular attention to the individuals‟ needs for achievement and development whiles relating to them as their coach or mentor. Dionne, Yammarino, Atwater and Spangler (2004) in their study on individualized consideration opined that leaders use it to deal with issues of competence and meaningfulness whiles helping their followers to develop themselves. Intellectual stimulation: This quality of transformational leaders tends to question existing assumptions, traditions and beliefs in an organization in order to further suggest new ideas and ways of doing things (Bass, 1997). Warrilow (2012) explained that leaders with intellectual stimulation help by giving the followers a clear picture of how they are connected to the leader, other employees and to the organization as a whole. In doing this, employees are able to find innovative ways to overcome the challenges and obstacles in fulfilling the mission of the organization. This dimension of transformational leadership is however seen as the most undeveloped (Lowe et. al., 1996) because it has not received much attention in research compared to the other dimensions of transformational leadership. University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 22 2.2.1.3 Transactional Leadership Theory In addition to the transformational style of leadership, Bass and Avolio (1997) introduced the transactional style of leadership. This theory is basically based on the exchange of rewards for services rendered based on an agreement that exists between the leader and his/her subordinates. However, transactional leadership uses extrinsic rewards as their method of motivating employees and has its grounding in both social learning and exchange theories (Chandan & Devi, 2014). Furthermore, transactional leadership is posited to be characterized by bureaucratic authority, strict compliance by employees, legitimate working methods as well as the use of organizational rewards and punishments to influence the performance and behavior of employees (Burns, 1978). In a study by Odumeru and Ifeanyi (2013) on transformational versus transactional leadership theories, the researchers portrayed that unlike transformational leadership that looks at changing the future of the organization, the transactional style of leadership is content with maintaining the state of affairs in the organization. Transactional leaders watch out for the deviations in the works of their followers in order to administer corrections. They are more used to processes and systems of doing things rather than seeking innovative ways. Bass (1990a) defines transactional leadership in three dimensions: contingent reward, management-by-exception (active) and management-by-exception (passive). Contingent reward: This dimension of transactional leadership refers to the leader‟s ability and consistency in clearly stipulating to the followers what his or her expectations are from them as well as the results that are linked to meeting them (Kessler et al., 2013; Bass & Bass, 2008). It is often an exchange relationship that exists between the leader and the follower (Masi & Cooke, 2000). According to Bass (1985), this quality of transactional leaders University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 23 demands that the leader evoke a level of involvement, loyalty, commitment, and performance from the followers. Management-by-exception (active): In general, the quality of managing by exception seeks to maintain the status quo of the organization (Odumeru & Ifeanyi, 2013); but specifically, management-by-exception (active) adopts an active approach to detecting and appropriately dealing with lapses in the performance of the organization (Lai, 2011; Antonakis, Ashkanasy & Dasborough, 2003). Furthermore, it is characterized by an active monitoring of the behavior of followers in order to ensure compliance to organizational expectations (Bass & Avolio, 1990). Management-by-exception (passive): Unlike the management-by-exception (active), management-by-exception (passive) is characterized by taking action only when problems arise (Bass et al. 2003). It also reflects a leadership attitude that is reactive in its nature (Lai, 2011; Bass & Avolio, 1990). University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 24 Table 2.1 Summary: Transformational and Transactional Leadership Styles Transformational Transactional Leadership is proactive. Leadership is responsive. Works to change the organizational culture by implementing new ideas. Works within the organizational culture. Employees achieve objectives through higher ideals and moral values. Employees achieve objectives through rewards and punishments set by leader. Motivates followers by encouraging them to put group interests first. Motivates followers by appealing to their own self-interest. Individualized consideration: Each behavior is directed to each individual to express consideration and support. Management-by-exception (active): acts proactively to problems before they occur. Intellectual stimulation: Promote creative and innovative ideas to solve problems. Management-by-exception (passive): takes action only when problems arise. Idealized influence: leaders become role models by being examples of what they demand. Contingent reward: followers work strictly in exchange for rewards for meeting goals set. Inspirational motivation: leaders challenge followers to go beyond expectations. Adapted from: Odumeru and Ifeanyi (2013, p.359) 2.2.2 Voluntary Work Behaviors In recent times, research on the behaviors of employees in organizations has expanded to include their voluntary work behaviors. It is however important to clearly comprehend the disparity between in-role and extra-role behavior of employees in the workplace. When management clearly makes known to employees what is formally required of them, they are regarded as in-role behaviors. On the other hand, extra- role behaviors are informal and voluntary acts by employees that employees display out of their own free will and not under duress (Kandan & Ali, 2010). One aspect of voluntary work behaviors generally referred to as OCB are seen to enhance the performance of the organization. On the other hand University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 25 „opposite‟ to OCB is Counterproductive Work Behavior (CWB) which tends to rather impede the performance of organizations (Spector & Fox, 2002). The concept of voluntary work behaviors has however been conceptualized in this study as OCB and CWB. As to whether the two voluntary work behaviors (OCB and CWB) are opposites or contrary, various researchers have expressed varied opinions. For instance Dalal (2005) in a comparative study considered them as opposites: in the sense that whereas OCB helps to improve the organization, employees‟ CWB tends to rather make it worse. This assertion was however supported by Kelloway, Loughlin, Barling and Nault (2002) in their work which revealed the two constructs as being separate yet related and further concluded that there exists a negative relationship between OCB and CWB. More so, Bukhari and Ali (2009) evinced that OCB and CWB relate negatively with each other- thus both cannot be displayed by employees at a given point in time. Even though their findings showed that employees who rated high on OCB rated low when it comes to CWB, it does not mean the latter is a permanent behavior exhibited by employees. In this regard, Spector, Bauer, Fox (2010) advanced that the two constructs are not opposites as opined but that employees should rather be assessed on how often they engage in either of them. 2.2.2.1 Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) OCB as a term was proposed by Organ (1988) over two decades ago but had its roots from the works of scholars such as Barnard (1938) and Katz (1964). Organ (1988) defined the concept to mean an “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” (p.4). The use of the term discretionary in relation to OCB first of all means it is a matter of the individual‟s choice without a form of University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 26 punishment even when such behavior is not displayed. Secondly, such behaviors exceed the formally defined job description given to the individual by the organization. Lastly, OCB‟s are not recognized as part of the formal reward system of the organization therefore employees indulge in it without the expectation of being rewarded for their efforts (Organ, 1988). According to Katz (1964), every organization needs employees to exhibit three behaviors to ensure that they continue to run effectively and achieve high organizational performance. That is employees must be induced to enter and decide to remain committed, perform the specific duties assigned to them (in-role performance) and must adopt innovative ways of accomplishing organizational goals outside their job description (OCB). OCB however becomes very important because employees exhibition of such behaviors shows a level of interdependence among them, thus making the two (i.e. both employees and OCB) directly related to the life and survival of the organization (Karambayya, 1989). The concept of OCB is also akin to concepts such as pro-social organizational behaviors (George, 1990), extra-role behavior (Van Dyne, Cummings & Parks, 1995), organizational spontaneity (George & Brief, 1992) and contextual performance (Borman, White & Dorsey, 1995). Generally, employees‟ acts of OCB towards their organization includes being punctual, helping co-workers, volunteering, keeping abreast with development of one‟s profession, adhering to company rules, protecting company‟s resources, staying out of conflicts among others (Podsakoff et al., 2000). Employees‟ citizenship behaviors can further be classified as ones directed towards co- workers (OCB-I) and the ones towards the organization in general (OCB-O) (William & University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 27 Anderson, 1991). OCB-I are referred to as behaviors that provide immediate support to the individuals but indirectly benefit the organization as a whole. Examples of OCB-I include: helping others who are absent and taking personal interest in them (William & Anderson, 1991); helping co-workers with heavy workloads, sharing resources, calling attention to errors (George & Brief, 1992). On the other hand, OCB-O are characterized by behaviors engaged in by employees that bring benefit to the organization in general (William & Anderson, 1991). It is characterized by employees giving advance notice when they are to be absent and complying with the informal rules of the organization to maintain order. Additionally, George and Brief (1992) termed OCB-O as „spreading goodwill‟- meaning the members of the organization tend to voluntarily contribute to the advancement of the organization. This can be done through personal advertisement of the organization in a beneficial light such as being supportive and describing the goods and services as being of good quality. Empirical studies done in relation to the essence of OCB in the workplace have revealed that remarkable benefits accrue to co-workers, managers and the organization at large when individuals display OCB (Ackefeidt & Coote, 2005; Podsakoff et al., 2000). For instance, a study by Yen and Niehoff (2004) conducted to test the theory of OCB and how it affects organizational effectiveness indicated that the more employees of the organization engage in OCB, the more the organization becomes successful. In the study, the managers of the various branches sampled which were identified as being more successful revealed that their employees often displayed behaviors such as being conscientious, altruistic, harmonious, and more willing to participate and protect the resources of the organization. Additionally, an empirical study by Podsakoff and MacKenzie (1994) on the impact of organizational University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 28 citizenship behavior on organizations evinced that OCB of employees contributes up to 17% of the performance of organizations. In summary, Podsakoff et al. (2000) exposes the reasons why encouraging OCB in organizations positively impacts on the success of every organization. They include the fact that OCB:  leads to enhanced co-worker and managerial productivity;  frees up resources that can be used for more productive purposes;  helps to coordinate activities within and across groups;  strengthens the organization‟s ability to attract and retain the best employees;  increases the stability of the organization‟s performance; and  allows the organization to adapt more effectively to organizational changes. Gleaning from many years of research works on OCB, these prominent authors: Podsakoff et al. (2000) and Organ (1988) proposed various dimensions of OCB. According to Podsakoff et al. (2000), the dimensions include a helping behavior, sportsmanship, organizational loyalty, organizational compliance, individual intuitiveness, civic virtue, and self-development. On the other hand, the model by Organ (1988) which has been adopted by most studies (e.g. Ali & Waqar, 2013; Moghadam, Moosavi & Dousti, 2013) consists of five (5) factors: courtesy, conscientiousness, sportsmanship, altruism, and civic virtue. This study however adopted the dimensions of OCB as explained by Organ (1988) as follows: Courtesy: This component describes the act of helping co-workers to avoid problems from occurring. Specifically, when it comes to acts such as considering the impact of ones‟ actions on co-workers; not abusing the rights of others; preventing problems with other workers and University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 29 being mindful of actions that affect the jobs of others (Organ, 1988, 1990; Podsakoff., 1990, 2000). Conscientiousness: This dimension reflects employees‟ voluntary behavior that is carried out above the minimum requirement expected of them by their respective organizations. It touches on behaviors related to punctual attendance at work, not taking extra breaks, obedience to company‟s rules and giving ones maximum effort relative to the pay received (Organ, 1988, 1990; Podsakoff et al., 1990). Additionally, it refers to the employee‟s effort to complete his/her project using overtime and not requesting overtime payment (Schnake, Dumler & Cochran, 1993). Sportsmanship: To be a good sportsman is to avoid complaining and murmuring when the actions of others inconvenience an individual. Sportsmanship as a dimension of OCB demands that employees still maintain a positive attitude even when things do not go in their favor and not take offense when their suggestions in the form of ideas are not taken into consideration. More so, sportsmen are perceived as being willing to sacrifice their interests in exchange of that of the group‟s interest (Organ, 1988). According to Podsakoff et al., (2000) examples of such voluntary behaviors include: not blaming co-workers; ability to tolerate the organization‟s problems; showing respect to fellow workers and refraining from complaining about work given. Altruism: This is also known as helping behaviors. Altruism reflects discretionary behaviors of employees to help others to complete and solve problems that they face in relation to their jobs (Organ, 1988; 1990; Podsakoff et al., 2000). Specifically, such behaviors include helping others with heavy loads and voluntarily orienting new employees (Podsakoff et al., 1990). University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 30 Civic virtue: This requires showing a level of interest in the organization- referred to as loyalty. Organ (1988) enlisted some of such behaviors as employees‟ active participation in meetings and making innovative contributions on issues concerning the organization. Organ further noted that coping with organizational changes, reporting unusual workplace incidence and helping to avoid organizational hazards are all examples of the civic virtue behavior. Based on the impact of OCB on the performance of organizations, it was speculated that: H7a: Employees in the high performing banks will score higher on OCB than those in the low performing banks 2.2.2.2 Counterproductive Work Behaviors (CWB) CWB is also referred to in literature as Workplace deviance behavior. They refer to actions by employees that have detrimental effects or cause harm to the organization and its workers in one way or the other (Fox, Spector & Miles, 2001). They are usually seen as being contrary to the legitimate interests of the organization (Sackett, 2002). Penney and Spector (2002) further described the concept as employees‟ behaviors that “harm their organization or organization members, such as theft, sabotage, interpersonal aggression, work slowdowns, wasting time and/or materials, and spreading rumors” (p. 126). However in an effort to define such behaviors as voluntary, Mount, Ilies and Johnson (2006) referred to CWB as discretionary acts and this adds to the fact that employees have the choice of whether or not to engage in CWB. Spector and Fox (2005) also added that CWB are voluntary acts by employees which are intended to negatively affect their stakeholders (co-workers, customers, and supervisors). University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 31 Similarly, Robinson and Bennett (1995) define destructive deviance as “voluntary behaviors that violates significant organizational norms, thus threatening the well-being of an organization, its members, or both” (cited in Bodankin & Tziner, 2009, p.550). In a comprehensive study on the concept of CWB, Parvez and Anjum (2013 p. 418) enumerated from various authors that such detrimental behaviors could include: anger (Neuman & Baron, 1997), modding (Zapf & Einarsen, 2005), impoliteness (Andersson & Pearson, 1999), violence in the workplace (Barling, Dupré, & Kelloway, 2009), deviation (Robinson & Bennett, 1995), retaliation (Skarlicki & Folger, 1997) and protest (Kelloway, Lori, Matthew & James, 2010). It is also important to note that even though CWB has generally been portrayed as being harmful to employees and the organization, other researchers believe otherwise. CWB has also been evinced as being helpful to organizations in one way or the other especially when done with good intentions and in the quest to meet organizational goals (see: Umphress & Bingham, 2011). This has been referred to in literature as „constructive deviance‟ (Tziner, Fein, Sharoni, Bar-Hen, & Nord, 2010; Tziner, Goldberg, & Or, 2006). According to Galperin (2003), they are behaviors of employees that defy the norms and rules of the organization to boost the well-being of the organization. An example is a manager‟s decision to violate set procedures in order to help solve a client‟s problem. Since constructive deviance in a way helps in the effective functioning of the organization, it is sometimes seen as employees exhibiting OCB. However, it differs in that OCB does not have to defy the norms and regulations of the organization like compared to constructive deviance. Nonetheless for the purpose of this study, CWB is assessed through the spectacles of being harmful acts to employees and the organization as a whole. University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 32 Just as OCB is two-dimensional (OCB-I and OCB-O), CWB can likewise be directed towards individuals and towards organization in general (Gruys & Sackett, 2003). Gruys & Sackett, (2003) defined CWB as “any intentional behavior on the part of an organizational member viewed by the organization as contrary to its legitimate interests” (p. 30). Therefore, employees who engage in CWB are bound to direct them either towards co-workers (CWB-I) or the organization (CWB-O) (Bennett & Robinson, 2000). CWB-I: Counterproductive work behaviors directed towards workers have also been referred to as interpersonal deviance in literature (Robinson & Bennett, 1995; Sackett, 2002). It can also be towards other stakeholders such as supervisors and customers of the organization (Mount, Illies, Johnson, 2006). Such behaviors are further defined as political deviance and personal aggression. Political deviance includes the acts of blaming others for one‟s mistakes and showing favoritism whereas harassment, gossiping about fellow workers and stealing from them also reveals act of personal aggression. More so, Bennet and Robinson (2000) lists behaviors such as employees making fun of or cursing at other workers; publicly embarrassing and making ethnic or religious comments about others at the workplace as examples CWB-I. CWB-O: CWB directed towards the organization has also been sectioned into production deviance and property deviance. Production deviance refers to actions that are against the norms of the organization as related to the work quality or quantity (Robinson & Bennet, 1995). They can also be referred to as intentional ways by which employees decide to fail on assigned tasks given (Chen & Spector, 1992). On the other hand, deviance in relation to organizational property occurs when employees resort to damaging the assets of the organization (Robinson & Bennett, 1995). Examples of such behaviors include: taking the University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 33 organization‟s property without permission; littering the work environment; putting less effort than required; and intentionally coming late to the workplace (Bennet & Robinson, 2000). In view of the numerous studies reviewed it was hypothesized that: H7b: Employees in the low performing banks will score higher on CWB than those in the high performing banks. 2.2.3 Emotional Intelligence In recent times the impact of emotions in the workplace has been given much attention. This has therefore been championed by works like „The Managed Heart‟ by Hochschild (1983) and „Emotional Intelligence‟ by Goleman (1995). More so, a study conducted on the impact of leadership style and emotions on the subordinates‟ performance stated that both leaders and workers are expected to express themselves by their emotions even in the workplace (McColl-Kennedy & Anderson, 2002). That is, emotions are not excluded from the workplace setting because both leaders and their subordinates are equally exposed to work demands that influence their feelings, attitudes and behaviors. However, it is also important to know that these emotions can either be positive (eg. optimism and joy) or negative (eg. frustration and anger). These emotional expressions necessitated the introduction of the concept of EI both in the organizational and educational settings to help organize day-to-day work effectively (Caruso & Salovey, 2004; Lam & O'Higgins, 2012). EI has been viewed as a major influence on the positive attitudes, behaviors and outcomes of employees in the workplace (Carmeli, 2003). More importantly, organizations require competent leaders whose cardinal quality is being emotionally intelligent (Dulewicz, Young University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 34 & Dulewicz, 2005; Goleman, 1998). EI has also been adjudged as being twice as important when compared to both technical and intellectual intelligence required for jobs on all levels (Dulewicz, Young & Dulewicz, 2005; Goleman, Boyatzis, & McKee, 2002; Druskat & Wolff, 2001). According to Goleman (1996), whereas 20 percent of success in life is perceived to be contributed by intellectual intelligence, 80 percent is attributed to other factors. Neely-Martinez (1997) further commented in his writing on „The smart count‟ in an HR magazine that 80 percent of success can be accounted for by the art of being emotionally intelligent. Numerous scholars in literature have contributed to defining the concept of EI. The common definitions used are by Goleman (1995), Bar-On (1996) and Mayer and Salovey (1997) prominent scholars of EI. It is however important to know that even though these authors have different definitions of the concept of EI they are not contradictory but rather complementary. For instance, Goleman (1995) referred to EI as one‟s ability to be self- motivated, control impulses and delay gratification, regulate moods, empathize, as well as recognize and manage appropriately one‟s feelings and those of others. In addition, he defined EI as “the capacity for recognizing our own feelings and those of others, for motivating ourselves and for managing emotions well in ourselves and in our relationships” (Goleman, 1998a, p. 317). EI according to Bar-On has been criticized as being overly broad as it encapsulates abilities such as emotional self-awareness, independence, empathy, interpersonal relationship, social responsibility, problem solving, stress tolerance, impulse control, happiness and optimism (cited in Zeng & Miller, 2001). However, Salovey and Mayer (1997) being the first to coin the term „Emotional Intelligence‟ treated it as a subset of social intelligence. According to Salovey and Mayer, EI “is the ability to perceive emotions, to access and generate emotions so as to assist thought, to understand emotions and emotional University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 35 knowledge, and to reflectively regulate emotions in order to promote emotional and intellectual growth.” EI has been sub-dimensioned into various components. Goleman (1998a) for instance developed five (5) dimensions of EI made up of self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy and social skills. However to have a more concrete and solid scope of all the emotional competencies, Boyatzis, Goleman and Rhee (2000) further grouped them into four (4): self-awareness, self-management, social awareness and relationship management). In congruence with Goleman, the first three components (i.e. self-awareness, self-regulation and motivation) are all self-management skills whiles the last two (i.e. empathy and social skills) are related to a person‟s ability to manage his/her relationships with others referred to as relationship management by Boyatzis et al. (2000). These are further explained below: Self-awareness: This component asserts that “knowing one‟s emotions, recognizing a feeling as it happens – is identified as the keystone of EI” (Goleman, 1996, p. 43). Goleman further adjudged self-awareness as the most important dimension of EI and associates it with self- control or self-managing. Mayer and Salovey (1997) added that being aware of ones‟ emotions (i.e. self-awareness) is about understanding the moment-to-moment feelings and the channel through which they are expressed- either verbally or non-verbally. Self-awareness is therefore the ability to recognize personal emotions, strengths, weaknesses, needs and their potential effects on others. Self-regulation: Emotions are said to be driven by biological impulses and even though they cannot be done away with, they can be managed via self-management (Goleman, 1998). Self- regulation requires a reflective approach to the feelings before acting them out and this helps University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 36 us to be free from being imprisoned by our feelings. Goleman in 2006 advanced that leaders with the quality of managing their feelings are able to create trust and fairness in the workplace. More so, self- regulation among employees‟ plays a key role in the business setting by giving organizations a competitive edge over their competitors. Interestingly, Fisk and Friesen (2012) presents three (3) identified ways in which emotions can be regulated: natural expression, deep acting and surface acting. Natural expression of emotions is done when the internal emotions of the individual match or are congruent with the expected emotions to be displayed (Ashforth & Humphrey, 1993). On the other hand, deep acting is the method of consciously tuning the internal feelings to rather match with external expressions (Graney, 2000). However, one disadvantage of this approach may be that the person using deep acting may not have the satisfaction of expressing his/her genuine feelings even though they appear genuine to the observers. Lastly, self-regulation could also be done through surface acting- which is a contrast to deep acting in the sense that it is only the individuals‟ bodily gestures that are changed to suit what is actually expected and is often referred to by Rafaeli and Sutton (1987) as “acting in bad faith” (p. 32). Motivation: This trait is deemed as one that is possessed by all effective leaders as it helps to drive employees to perform beyond expectation. Leaders with motivation help to improve work by identifying new avenues. It is summarized as having the drive for achievement; being committed to initiative and being optimistic (Goleman, 1998). Empathy: This component of EI centers on understanding and considering the feelings of employees when it comes to making intelligent decisions in the workplace. In relating it to leadership, Goleman (1998) asserts that empathetic leaders communicate organizational University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 37 change to the employees in a way that is devoid of fear and panic but rather encourages co- operation. Social skills: Leaders with this ability are driven by the assumption that nothing important gets accomplished on its own but must be initiated: therefore relationships have to be consciously built and maintained. Social skills are however an embodiment of the other EI dimensions (i.e. self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, and empathy) (Goleman, 2006). Goleman (1998a) summarizes this component of EI as being associated with influence, communication, conflict management, leadership, change catalyst, building bonds, collaboration, co-operation and team capabilities. 2.3 Theoretical Framework Several explanations are given in literature that account for the inter-relationships existing between the variables (transformational and transactional leadership styles, organizational citizenship behavior, counterproductive work behavior and emotional intelligence) under the study. These include the leader-member exchange theory and emotion-centered Model. 2.3.1 Leader-Member Exchange Theory Until recent times, the leader-member exchange (LMX) theory was originally termed as “Vertical Dyad Linkage” by Dansereau, Graen, and Haga (1975). Leadership literature evinces that compared to other leadership theories the leader-member exchange theory is perhaps the most researched over the past 30 year period (cited in Goertzen & Fritz, 2004). The theory came into existence when leadership research was seen as being incomplete as was only directed towards the leader – looking at their traits or behaviors (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995). Further in their work on the relationship based approach to leadership, Graen and Uhl- University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 38 Bien posited that leadership as a concept is made up of the three domains: the leader, follower and the relationship between them (i.e. leader-member exchange). According to Liden, Sparrowe, and Wayne (1997) “the central premise behind LMX is that within work units, different types of relationships develop between leaders and their subordinates, or members. These relationships are characterized by the physical or mental effort, material resources, information and/ or emotional support exchanges between the two parties” (p. 48). They added that the LMX relationship could either be one of high quality or a low one depending on the kind of social exchange that takes place between both parties. Where high LMX connotes “high levels of information exchange, interaction, trust, respect, support, mutual influence, and rewards whereas the low quality LMX points to a low level of interaction, trust, formal relations, one-directional influence (manager employee), limited support, and few rewards” (Bauer & Green, 1996; cited in Chernyak-Hai & Tziner, 2014). In short, LMX theory is defined as the quality of relationship that is shared between the leader and the subordinates (Krumm, 2001) and also as a dyadic relationship between leaders and their subordinates (Graen & Cashman, 1975). The theory explains that the leader‟s relationship with each subordinate differs compared to others (Liden, Sparrowe & Wanye, 1997) and the leaders‟ behavior towards their subordinates is perceived differently (Graen, Novak & Sommerkamp, 1982; Dansereau, Graen & Haga, 1975). It is important to know that the assumption for the LMX theory is based on the Social Exchange Theory (SET). According to Homans (1958), SET represents “an influential paradigm in examination of any exchange relationship and posits that human relationships are formed by the use of a subjective cost-benefit analysis” (p. 597). The basic proposition is that people tend to repeat actions that were rewarded in the past, and the more often a particular behavior has resulted in a reward the more likely it is that a person will University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 39 implement it (cited in Chernyak-Hai & Tziner, 2014). Therefore when employees perceive that their leaders are treating them well, they are obligated to also reciprocate by engaging in positive behaviors towards the leader (Lavelle et al., 2009) and the organization in general (Organ, 1988). More so, when the emotional expectations of the relationship between both parties are not met, employees tend to be dissatisfied and are likely to rather reciprocate negative behaviors towards the organization (Liden, Sparrowe, & Wayne, 1997). Empirical studies have confirmed that the leader-member relationship ultimately impacts organizational outcomes such as job satisfaction, performance appraisal, employee turnover intentions, organizational commitment (de Jong & Den Hartog, 2007; Gerstner & Day, 1997), and citizenship behaviors (Bauer & Green, 1996). However, when the LMX relationship is perceived to be higher, employees are also likely to reciprocate with positive behaviors often termed as OCB (Cropanzano & Mitchell, 2005; Tierney, Bauer & Potter, 2002) and the opposite is true when the relationship is perceived as being low- employees tend to respond with negative behaviors leading to CWB (Sahlins, 1972; Liden, Sparrowe, & Wayne, 1997). In congruence with this, Townsend, Phillips and Elkins (2000) revealed that supervisors tend to record high displays of CWB by employees when a poor relationship exists between the leader and followers. On the flip side, a mutual relationship positively affects the tendency of the subordinates to engage in OCB (Deluga, 1994). 2.3.2 Emotion-Centered Model This model by Spector and Fox (2002) explains the concept of voluntary employee behaviors (CWB and OCB) from the emotional point of view. The model indicates that the emotional responses of employees at the workplace play a pivotal role when it comes to addressing the voluntary behaviors they exhibit. Thus, emotions influence the choice of voluntary behaviors University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 40 an employee chooses to exhibit and for the purpose of this present study either OCB or CWB. Spector and Fox added that when employees experience negative emotions there is the likelihood of they engaging in CWB whereas positive emotions evoke OCB. Negative emotions include anger, anxiety, boredom, and depression whiles positive emotions range from cheerfulness, contentment, enthusiasm to happiness. These emotions are however evoked by various situations such as the job and organizational conditions. Situations that negatively affect the emotions of employees elicit direct CWB-through intimidation and threats or indirectly -through avoiding work and drinking alcohol. On the flip side, a situation that brings about positive emotions is likely to motivate employees to be engaged in their jobs thereby exhibiting OCB. For example, when an individual feels mistreated by the supervisor they are likely to respond with CWB and the opposite is true when they feel they are treated well. Spector and Fox concluded by commenting that the model is not to posit that emotion is solely responsible for the voluntary behavior of individuals but that it rather influences the tendency of engaging in either OCB or CWB under certain conditions. 2.4 EMPIRICAL REVIEW 2.4.1 Leadership Styles and Voluntary Work Behaviors Literature on leadership is constantly growing to discover more about how the behavior of leaders affects the performance of employees in the workplace. Leadership has also been seen as a core antecedent to various employee behaviors (Bambale, Shamsudin & Subramaniam, 2011; Podsa