Organisational citizenship behaviour, emotional intelligence and spirituality:
What’s the relationship?
Richard Harmer (rjharm001@student.acu.edu.au)
School of Psychology
Australian Catholic University, St Patrick’s Campus, Victoria, Fitzroy VICTORIA 3065 Australia
Abstract
Research into the role of Organisational Citizenship
Behaviour (OCB) and Emotional Intelligence (EI) in the
workplace is increasingly commonplace. And research is
beginning to explore the relationship between these two
constructs. However, how an employee’s spiritual
experiences affect these two constructs remains
unknown. In a small pilot study, the relationship between
the dependent variable of OCB (van Dyne, et al., 1994)
and an employee’s level of overall EI (Total EI) and
Depth of Spirituality Experience (DSE) was explored.
Using the Schutte Emotional Intelligence Scale (Schutte,
et al., 1998) and the Spiritual Assessment Scale
(Howden, 1993), the present researcher proposed and
tested a hierarchical relationship between these two
constructs and OCB. The initial study consisted of sixty
Australian workers, 38 females (Mean age 42.2 years,
SD = 13.5) and 20 males (Mean age 46.0 years, SD =
11.5). Two participants did not specify their gender. All
participants completed an Internet-based questionnaire.
Significant and positive correlations were found between
all variables. Results were further analysed using
hierarchical regression analysis with the model
accounting for 28% of the variance in Total OCB using
the variable of Total EI at Step 1 (F (1, 47) = 18.14, p <
.001), and a further 11% of the variance in Total OCB
once the DSE variable was entered (F (1, 46) = 8.44, p <
0.01) at Step 2. Although only a preliminary finding, the
model suggests that an employee’s Depth of Spiritual
Experience; defined as the extent to which an individual
experiences purpose and meaning in life, an innerness or
a striving for discovering personal wholeness, a feeling
of relatedness or attachment to others, and a capacity to
go beyond the limits of common experience; may
mediate the effect of that employee’s emotional
intelligence when predicting the variability in
demonstrated organisational citizenship behaviours at
work. Future directions in workplace EI and spirituality
research are suggested.
Introduction
A growing body of research into Organisational
Citizenship Behaviour (OCB) suggests that employees
demonstrate greater role performance when they
experience a strong connection to their organisation,
have a sense of ownership over to its continued success,
are loyal to their role and work colleagues and, have
found a sense of meaning and purpose in their daily
work (Van Dyne, Graham, & Dienesch, 1994). Similar
results have been found for intact work teams (Ehrhart
& Naumann, 2004).
Research exploring OCB and an organisation’s
overall performance has also found significant
relationship. Organisations whose employees
demonstrate OCBs enjoy higher managerial
productivity; the efficient ‘on-boarding’ of new hires;
improved strategic planning, business processes and the
allocation of key organisational resources; and the
frequency of communication between and across work
groups (Podsakoff & MacKenzie, 1997).
There is even research into the relationship between
OCB and its antecedents; those factors that determine
an individual or work team’s propensity to demonstrate
OCBs when at work (Ehrhart & Naumann, 2004). In
one such study, Van Dyne, Graham and Dienesch
(1994) identified six key characteristics underpinning
employee’s willingness to display OCBs: positive job
attitudes, shared workplace values, the amount of
motivating job characteristics, length of tenure, job
level and, a low incident of employee cynicism.
However, it remains why unclear what the mediating
factors of OCB are. Most research to date has focusing
on exploring the mediating relationship of employee job
satisfaction to OCB (Chiu & Chen, 2005).
Formal research is yet to determine a comprehensive
account of the ‘characteristics’ shown to mediate an
individual employee’s choice to go beyond just that
required to perform immediate job role (Podsakoff,
MacKenzie, Paine, & Bachrach, 2000). Studies
exploring the specific factors contributing to employee
discretionary effort remains of significant interest to
organisational behaviour research (Morrison & Phelps,
1999; Podsakoff & MacKenzie, 1997).
OCB has often been referred to in academic literature
as a construct focused on ‘helping’ (Ehrhart &
Naumann, 2004). Those employees that demonstrate
OCBs are more likely to provide others with assistance
in completing work tasks and demonstrate loyalty to
work colleagues and the organisation; foster
connectedness with other individuals and work teams;
and promote the goals of the organization whilst also
contributing to its social and psychological environment
(Lievens & Ansell, 2004). Variance in each of these
important organisational outcomes has also been
predicted using various measures of employee
Emotional Intelligence (EI) (Bar-On, 1997).
Therefore it was hypothesized that OCBs would
enjoy a positive relationship with the demonstration of
employee EI in the workplace. Recent research
completed by Sitter (2005) supports – although only
partially - this hypothesized relationship. In the study,
Sitter measured a leader’s trait-based EI using the
Wong and Law EI Scale (Law, Wong, & Song, 2004)
as well as the leader’s subordinate’s demonstration of
OCBs. Sitter found that a leader’s use of EI accounted
for 2.9% of the variance in subordinate’s demonstration
of OCBs. This result suggests that there is a
relationship between OCB and EI; however, the result
also suggests that an individual’s choice to demonstrate
OCB more likely to be intrinsically motivated (Chiu &
Chen, 2005).
Although academic research demonstrates the
important role of EI in facilitating high employee
performance (Dulewicz & Higgs, 2003) and OCBs
(Jain & Sinha, 2003; Sitter, 2005), less is known about
why an employee demonstrates OCBs. What
intrinsically motivates an individual employee to utilise
discretionary effort independent of any explicit
recognition by the organisation’s formal reward
system? The present research aims to explore one
possible motivating factor that encourages employees to
undertake extra-role behaviours when at work:
Spirituality.
Spirituality is a universally experienced phenomenon
(Miovic, 2004) and is theorised to be a higher order
construct than EI (Wilbur, 2006). Further, an
employee’s pursuit of his or spiritual experience has
also been shown to be intrinsically motivated (Fry,
2003). Further, research suggests that the role of
spirituality in organisations is significant (Zohar &
Marshall, 2004). Spirituality provides organisations and
employees with an entirely different way of knowing
and experiencing work (Flier, 1995). A way of
experiencing work that does result in measurable
market advantage (Aburdene, 2005).
The ‘deeper’ an individual employee’s spiritual
experience the greater the benefits to them – in
managing their career – and the organisations in which
they work (Aburdene, 2005). In combination, EI and
spirituality provide employees with the inner awareness
to better identify and pursue the in-and-extra role
aspects of their daily work. Activities that in the
aggregate promote the effective functioning of the
organisation (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine, &
Bachrach, 2000).
The Present Study
The present pilot study aims to examine the relationship
between EI, spirituality and OCB. The specific
hypotheses for the present study are as follows: first,
there will be a significant and positive relationship
between EI and OCB; second, there will be significant
positive relationship between spirituality and OCB, and;
third, an employee’s depth of spiritual experience will
be associated with their demonstration of OCBs beyond
that predicted by EI.
Method
Participants
The participants for the present pilot study consisted of
60 employees; 20 males (Age: M=46.0 years,
SD=11.5), 38 females (Age: M=42.2 years, SD=13.5)
and two participants that did not indicate their gender.
Participants came from a diverse range of occupational
backgrounds, including Administration and Support
Services (6.7%), Human Resources (6.7%),
Management and Operations (17.8%), Sales and
Marketing (3.3%) and Other (65.5); an equally diverse
range of industries; a range of employee levels,
including CEO (17.7%), Divisional Leader (11.7%),
Manager of Others (13.4%) and Employee/Other
(57.2%); with 78.3% having a Bachelor degree or
higher; and 60% having an annual income in excess of
$60,000. Finally, participants came from a range of
formal spiritual practices: Organised (41.7%), Eastern
(8.3%), New Age (15%) and no formal spiritual
practice (20%).
Participants were drawn from a large range of
contexts within Australia and they took part in the pilot
study on a voluntary basis.
Measures
The following measures were used in the present pilot
study:
Schutte Emotional Intelligence Scale (SEIS). The
SEIS, developed by Schutte and her colleagues (1998),
is a trait-based measure of emotional intelligence
consisting of 33 positive and negatively keyed items
measuring four dimensions: Appraisal Of Emotions In
Self, Appraisal Of Emotions In Others, Emotional
Regulation In Self and, Using Emotions In Problem
Solving. The instrument utilises a five-point Lickert
scale, where 1 = ‘never’ and 5 = ‘always’. Sample items
in the SEIS include: “I expect that I will do well on
most things I try” and “Other people find it easy to
confide in me”. Scale items can be summed to provide a
Total Emotional Intelligence (Total EI) score, with a
reported reliability coefficient (α) for Total EI of 0.90
(Schutte et al., 1998).
Spiritual Experiences Scale (SAS) (SEIS). The SAS, Table 1: Descriptive statistics, reliability coefficients
developed by Howden (1993), is a 28-item measure of (α) and between-scale correlations (r) for each measure.
spirituality consisting of four facets of individual
spirituality: Purpose and Meaning in Life, Innerness or Theoretical
M SD α SEIS DSE
Inner Resources, Unifying Connectedness, and Range
Transcendence. Items are responded to using a six-point OCBS 34-238 172.25 21.32 .92 .53*** .52***
Lickert scale, where 1= ‘strongly disagree’ and 6 = SEIS 33-165 82.88 9.42 .94 .63***
‘strongly agree’. A sample item for the SAS is, “My DSE 28-168 131.96 18.81 .95
inner strength is related to a belief in a Higher Power or * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001, ns = not significant
Supreme Being. All 28-items can be summed to provide
a Depth of Spiritual Experience (DSE) score, with a The Relationship Between Total OCB And Total EI
reported reliability coefficient (α) of 0.92 (Howden, As shown in Table 1, participants in the present pilot
1993). study demonstrate a level OCBs higher than the
theoretical mid-point for the OCBS. This result
Organisational Citizenship Behaviour Scale (OCBS). suggests a higher degree of discretionary effort is being
The OCBS, developed by Van Dyne, Graham and used by those who participated in the present study.
Dienesch (1994), is a 34-item instrument measuring However, participants demonstrate a level of overall EI
five factors of OCB: Loyalty, Obedience, Social (Total EI) slightly below the midpoint score for the
Participation, Advocacy Participation and Functional SEIS.
Participation. Items are responded to using a seven- Further, the results presented in Table 1 also show
point Lickert scale, where 1 = ‘does not apply to me’ that employees’ Total OCB is significantly and
and 7 = ‘applies very well to me’. Items in the scale positively correlated with their overall level of EI.
include, “I share ideas for new projects or
improvements widely” and “I volunteer for overtime The Relationship Between Total OCB And DFE
Participants in the present pilot study demonstrate
work as required”. All items can be summed to produce
Depth of Spiritual Experience (DSE) higher than the
a Total OCB score. According to the scale authors,
theoretical mid-point for the SAS. As presented in
Total OCB has a reported reliability coefficient (α) of Table 1, participants’ DSE was significantly and
0.95 (Van Dyne, Graham, & Dienesch, 1994). moderately correlated with OCB (r = .52, p < .001).
Further, participants’ DFE was significantly positively
Procedure correlated with their Total EI score (r = .63, p < .001).
Participants were recruited using a range of approaches,
including: word of mouth of the researcher, letter-box Predicting The Role Total EI And DFE Has On
drop, articles in industry magazines, and participant Total OCB
referral. Data was collected using an Internet-based As presented in Table 2, a two-step hierarchical
questionnaire. The measures used in the present study regression was conducted to predict Total OCB. Total
were part of a larger questionnaire battery that also EI was entered at Step 1 and DFE was entered at Step 2.
included a series of demographic questions. The At Step 1, the hierarchical regression model was
significant with Total EI accounting for 28% of the
questionnaire battery took participants approximately
variance in Total OCB (F (1, 47) = 18.14, p < .001). At
45-minutes to complete. Participants were encouraged
Step 2, the model then accounted for a further 11% of
to complete the test battery in one sitting; however, they the variance in Total OCB once the variable of DSE
were able to “Pause” at any time. Participants were not was added (F (1, 46) = 8.44, p < .01). At Step 2, DSE
paid for their participation. was the only significant predictor of Total OCB (t =
2.90, p < .01).
Results
The data collected was analysed using SPSS Version Table 2: Hierarchical regression analysis predicting
11.5.0. Collected data was normally distributed. There Total OCB using variables Total EI and DFE (N = 48)
were no gender differences in results; so combined
responses for males and females are used in the data Predictor Beta (β) t R R2 ΔR2
analysis of this study. STEP 1 .53 .28 .26***
The theoretical range, means (M), standard deviations Total EI .53 4.26***
(SD), reliability coefficient (α) and Pearson’s STEP 2 .63 .39 .36***
correlation coefficients (r) for each measure used in the Total EI .26 1.74
present study are presented in Table 1. In general, the
DSE .43 2.91**
means, standard deviations and alpha coefficients were
similar to those reported by the scale authors. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001, ns = not significant
 Discussion taboo (Milliman, Czaplewski, & Ferguson, 2003) and,
therefore, adequate data collection is an endemic
Key Findings problem. Future research should attempt to generate a
The present pilot study aims to examine the relationship larger participant sample.
between EI, spirituality and OCB. Three hypotheses
were tested. First, there will be a significant and Implications And Further Research
positive relationship between EI and OCB. Second,
OCB provides the opportunity to examine employee
there will be significant positive relationship between
and workplace behaviours in a more sophisticated way
OCB and spirituality. Finally, an employee’s depth of
than traditional measures, such as job satisfaction or
spiritual experience will be associated with their
organisational affective commitment (Van Dyne,
demonstration of OCBs beyond that predicted by EI.
Graham, & Dienesch, 1994).
All three hypotheses were supported in the present
Developing a comprehensive account of the
study.
antecedent and mediating variables influencing an
The pilot study’s first hypothesis that there would be
employee’s choice to undertake extra-role activities at
a significant and positive relationship between EI and
work is important research. The present pilot examined
OCB was supported. Research exploring the
two possible variables: EI and spirituality. However,
relationship between these two constructs in only just
OCB is both workplace and behaviour focused.
emerging with results to date being mixed (Schmidt,
Previous research into the various EI scales show only a
2006; Sitter, 2005). The present study aimed to
low to moderate relationship between ability, trait and
replicate the findings of previous research (Schmidt,
behaviour-based measures of the construct (Palmer,
2006; Sitter, 2005), which utilised trait-based measures
2003). Therefore, future studies could utilise a
of workplace EI. The results provide further support for
behaviourally-based measure of EI to better determine
the positive role eof EI in employee demonstration of
if the theorized relationship between OCB and EI is
OCBs (Jain & Sinha, 2003).
empirically justified. Doing so has an added benefit,
The study’s second hypothesis was also supported.
research is increasingly showing that workplace EI can
Results suggest that here is a significant and positive
be developed (Caruso & Salovey, 2004).
relationship between an employee’s demonstration of
Of equal importance is ongoing research exploring
OCBs and his or her depth of spiritual experience. With
the role of employee spirituality in the workplace.
tightening labour markets in Australia and abroad,
Spirituality has been characterised as a core
fostering an individual employee’s responsibility to
characteristic of healthy people and, more recently, high
mould a personally meaningful career is critical
performing employees and organisations (Aburdene,
(Garcia-Zamor, 2003). Although preliminary, this
2005; Garcia-Zamor, 2003). With the majority of one’s
finding will be of genuine interest to organisational
life spent at work, it is somewhat surprising that
behaviour research (Morrison & Phelps, 1999;
spirituality in the workplace has (until recently) been
Podsakoff & MacKenzie, 1997).
ignored by academic research (Lund Dean, 2004).
The present study’s third and final hypothesis was
also supported. An employee’s overall level of EI was a
significant predictor of an employees’ demonstration of Conclusion
OCBs, accounting for 28% of the variance. However, The present pilot study failed to find a significant
an employee’s depth of spiritual experience accounted positive relationship between OCB and EI, but found a
for an additional 11% of the variance in employee significant relationship between OCB and spirituality.
OCBs and mediated the relationship between an The results generated, although preliminary, suggest
employee’s overall EI and OCB. Spirituality has been that the depth of an employee’s spiritual experience
described as an individual pursuit, multidimensional does account for a meaningful proportion of the
and subjective in nature, that is personal in outcome variance in employee OCBs. When exploring human
(Adams & Bezner, 2000; Hill et al., 2000). Like the potential within an organisational context, explicitly
choice to demonstrate OCBs, an employee’s pursuit of placing spirituality and the pursuit of spiritual
spiritual growth is considered to be intrinsic in origin experiences at work on the larger research agenda
(Chiu & Chen, 2005; Hill et al., 2000). appears to be a natural progression.

Limitations
Caution should be exercised when interpreting the
findings presented for this study due the small sample
size. A number of researchers in the spirituality field
note that academic and mainstream literature still
consider the exploration of spirituality in work to be
References
Aburdene, P. (2005). Megatrends 2010: The rise of
conscious capitalism. Charlottesville: Hampton
Roads Publishing Company.
Adams, & Bezner, J. (2000). Conceptualization and
measurement of the spiritual and psychological
dimension of wellness in a college population.
Journal of American College Health, 48(4), 165-174.
Bar-On, R. (1997). BarOn Emotional Quotient
Inventory (EQ-i): Technical manual. Toronto: Multi-
Health Sytems Inc.
Caruso, D., & Salovey, D. (2004). The emotionally
intelligent manager: How to develop and use the four
key emotional skills of leadership. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Chiu, S. S.-F., & Chen, H. H.-L. (2005). Relationship
between job characteristics and Organizational
Citizenship Behavior: The mediational role of job
satisfaction. Social Behavior and Personality, 33(6),
523-540.
Dulewicz, V. V., & Higgs, M. M. (2003). Leadership at
the top: The need for emotional intleligence in
organsiations. International Journal of
Organizational Analysis, 11(3), 193-210.
Ehrhart, M. G. M., & Naumann, S. E. S. (2004).
Organizational Citizenship Behavior in work groups:
A group norms approach. Journal of applied
psychology, 89(6), 960-974.
Flier, L. L. (1995). Demystifying mysticism: Finding a
developmental relationship between different ways of
knowing. The Journal of transpersonal psychology,
27(2), 131-152.
Fry, W. L. (2003). Toward a theory of spiritual
leadership. The Leadership quarterly, 14(6), 693-728.
Garcia-Zamor, J. (2003). Workplace spirituality and
organisational performance. Public Administration
Review, 63(3), 355-363.
Hill, P., Pargament, K. I., Hood, R., McCullough, J.,
Michael, Swyers, J., Larson, D., et al. (2000).
Conceptualizing religion and spirituality: Points of
commonality, points of departure. Journal for the
Theory of Social Behaviour, 30(1), 51-78.
Howden, W. J. (1993). Development and psychometric
characteristics of the Spirituality Assessment Scale.
Dissertation Abstracts International, 54(1), 166.
Jain, A., & Sinha, A. (2003). Organizational
Citizenship Behavior versus Emotional Intelligence:
A study of the relative relevance for organizations.
Paper presented at the 13th National Conference of
the National Academy of Psychology, entre of
Advanced Study in Psychology, Department of
Psychology, Vanivihar, Utkal University.
Law, K. S. K., Wong, C. C.-S., & Song, L. J. L. (2004).
The construct and criterion validity of emotional
intelligence and Its potential utility for management
studies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(3), 483-
496.
Lievens, F., & Ansell, F. (2004). Confirmatory factor
analysis and invariance of an organisational
citizenship behaviour measure across samples in a
Dutch-speaking context. Journal of Organisational
Psychology, 77, 299-306.
Lund Dean, K. (2004). Systems thinking's challenge to
research in spirituality and religion at work: An
interview with Ian Mitroff. Journal of Organisational
Change Management, 17(1), 11-25.
Milliman, J., Czaplewski, J. A., & Ferguson, J. J.
(2003). Workplace spirituality and employee work
attitudes: An exploratory empirical assessment.
Journal of Organizational Change Management,
16(4), 426-447.
Miovic, M. (2004). An introduction to spiritual
psychology: Overview of the literature, east and west.
Harvard Review of Psychiatry, 12(2), 1-5-115.
Morrison, E. E. W., & Phelps, C. C. C. (1999). Taking
charge at work: Extrarole efforts to initiate workplace
change. Academy of Management Journal, 42(4),
403-419.
Palmer, B. (2003). An analysis of the relationship
between various models and measures of Emotional
Intelligence. Swinburne Univcersity of Technology,
Melbourne.
Podsakoff, P. M. P., & MacKenzie, S. B. S. (1997).
Impact of Organizational Citizenship Behavior on
organizational performance: A review and suggestion
for future research. Human Performance, 10(2), 133-
152.
Podsakoff, P. M. P., MacKenzie, S. B. S., Paine, J. J.
B., & Bachrach, D. G. D. (2000). Organizational
citizenship behaviors: A critical review of the
theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions
for future research. Journal of management, 26(3),
513-563.
Schmidt, L. L. L. (2006). Self-reported emotional
intelligence as an indicator of social exchange quality
at work. Dissertation Abstracts International. B, The
sciences and engineering, 67(6), 3496.
Schutte, N., Malouff, J., Hall, L., Haggerty, D., Cooper,
D., Godlen, C., et al. (1998). Development and
validation of a measure of emotional intelligence.
Personality and Individual Differences, 25, 167-177.
Sitter, V. L. V. (2005). The effects of a leader's
emotional intelligence on employees' trust in their
leader and employee organizational citizenship
behaviors. Dissertation Abstracts International. A,
The humanities and social sciences, 65(9), 3467.
Van Dyne, L., Graham, J., & Dienesch, R. (1994).
Organisational citizenship behavior: Construct
redefinition, measurement, and validation. Academy
of Management Journal, 37(4), 765-802.
Wilbur, K. (2006). Integral spirituality. Boston:
Shambhala Publications.
Zohar, D., & Marshall, I. (2004). Spiritual capital:
Wealth we can live by. London: Bloomsbury
Publishing.