CHAPTER I

THE PROBLEM AND ITS SCOPE

INTRODUCTION

Rationale of the Study

The world is becoming a global village; it is looking forward

to high performance organizations, which would provide high job

satisfaction to their employees and would also cherish excellence

and effectiveness.

Hence, organizations are in need of employees who will do

more than their usual job duties and provide performance that is

beyond expectations. Research has indicated that those

organizations that have such employees outperform those that

don’t. These challenges highlight the importance of such concepts

as innovation and flexibility. Human resources are the most crucial

factor to create advantage that cannot be easily duplicated by

rivals and specific for each organization. Work behaviours like

organizational citizenship behaviour, workplace spirituality,

organizational cynicism, and work locus of control are receiving

more attention as they contribute to the performance of the

employees and in totality, the effective functioning of organization.

Such behaviours are important to private organizations since they

affect their competitiveness and profitability. Organizations must

 2

be committed to increasing organizational citizenship behaviour,

workplace spirituality, and organizational cynicism among their

paid employees as these have a bearing on their performance.

For a small college located in a small city with at par

academic competitors positioned nearby, the competition lies in

what school gets the most number of enrolees for the different

programs offered. However, competition does not end there. It can

be found within the academic institution itself: who among the

faculty members gets the coveted number of loads and adequate

teaching exposure vis-a-vis management position, in the hopes of

an augmented salary. This and a widely diverse faculty also

threaten the organization as conflict among faculty members is

inevitable.

The above mentioned scenarios are just a few of various

problems that arise in the workplace which has in a way affected

employees’ attitudes. Attitudes are good predictors of behaviours.

They provide clues to an employee’s behavioural intentions or

inclinations to act in a certain way (Newstrom, 2011).

Findings of a study conducted among faculty members of

Cebu Sacred Heart College implied that managers should know and

understand the needs and interest of his subordinates. To motivate

 3

them to reach peak performance is to satisfy first their needs and

interests. A high salary is not only the motivating factor. There are

other factors which people want to satisfy like recognition,

belongingness and honor. Employees who are satisfied are happy.

This makes them efficient. And the job of the manager is to lead

them to greater efficiency (Magdadaro, 2009).

The purpose of this paper is to unfold organizational

citizenship behaviours which are exhibited by college professors at

Western Leyte College of Ormoc, Inc. as well as its correlates

which are: workplace spirituality, organizational citizenship, and

work locus of control.

The researcher, being a professor and whose parent is

greatly connected with the research locale, is a firsthand witness as

to how various scenarios, problems and issues have affected the

college professors’ attitudes which also have placed a greater

impact as well on their behaviours. As a registered nurse,

entrepreneur, and professor equipped with knowledge and learning

on leadership and management principles, these observations had

given her the driving force to pursue the study.

 4

Theoretical Background

The study is anchored on Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA)

by Martin Fishbein and Icek Ajzen. TRA postulates that if a person

intends to do behaviour then it is likely that the person will do it

(www.fhi.org). Learning theories which this study is anchored on

are the following: Albert Bandura’s theory of self-efficacy; Barbara

Resnick’s theory of self-efficacy; and Daryl Bem’s self-perception

theory.

The components of TRA are three general constructs:

behavioural intention (BI), attitude (A), and subjective norm (SN).

TRA postulates that a person's behavioural intention depends on

the person's attitude about the behaviour and subjective norms

(BI = A + SN). The TRA began with looking at behavioural

intentions as being the immediate antecedents to behaviour. It is

believed that the stronger a person’s intention to perform a

particular behaviour, the more successful they are expected to be.

Intentions are a function of salient beliefs and/or information about

the likelihood that performing a particular behaviour will lead to a

specific outcome. Intentions can also change over time. The longer

the time period between intention and behaviour, the greater the

likelihood that unforeseen events will produce changes in

 5

intentions. Because Ajzen and Fishbein were not only interested in

predicting behaviour but understanding it, they began trying to

identify the determinants of behavioural intentions. They theorized

that intentions are a function of two basic determinants: a) attitude

toward behaviour and b) subjective norms of behaviour.

Attitude is populated to be the first antecedent of behavioural

intention. It is an individual’s positive or negative belief about

performing a specific behaviour. These beliefs are called

behavioural beliefs. An individual will intend to perform a certain

behaviour when he or she evaluates it positively. Attitudes are

determined by the individual’s beliefs about the consequences of

performing the behaviour (behavioural beliefs), weighted by his or

her evaluation of those consequences (outcome evaluations).

Those attitudes are believed to have a direct effect on behavioural

intention and are linked with subjective norm and perceived

behavioural control (www.istheory.yorku.ca).

Subjective norms are also assumed to be a function of beliefs

that specific individuals approve or disapprove of performing the

behaviour. It looks at the influence of people in one's social

environment on his/her behavioural intentions; the beliefs of

people, weighted by the importance one attributes to each of their

 6

opinions, will influence one's behavioural intention. For example,

you might have some friends who are avid exercisers and

constantly encourage you to join them. However, your spouse

might prefer a more sedentary lifestyle and scoff at those who

work out. The beliefs of these people, weighted by the importance

you attribute to each of their opinions, will influence your

behavioural intention to exercise, which will lead to your behaviour

to exercise or not exercise (www.utwente.nl).

According to Barbara Resnick’s theory of self-efficacy, self-

efficacy expectations and outcome expectations are not only

influenced by behaviour but also by verbal encouragements,

physiological sensations and exposure to role models or self-

modeling. Moreoever, the more likely is the activity to be done the

more motivated is the person to perform that activity (Bautista,

2009).

A strong sense of self-efficacy enhances human

accomplishment and personal well-being in many ways. People

with high assurance in their capabilities approach difficult tasks as

challenges to be mastered rather than as threats to be avoided.

Such an efficacious outlook fosters intrinsic interest and deep

engrossment in activities. They set themselves challenging goals

 7

and maintain strong commitment to them. They heighten and

sustain their efforts in the face of failure. They quickly recover their

sense of efficacy after failures or setbacks. They attribute failure to

insufficient effort or deficient knowledge and skills which are

acquirable. They approach threatening situations with assurance

that they can exercise control over them. Such an efficacious

outlook produces personal accomplishments, reduces stress and

lowers vulnerability to depression (Lent and Hackett, 2000).

It is in this context that gives an individual the inner feeling

to keep himself motivated in their field of expertise; the

perseverance to continually excel and give the best of their ability.

Consequently, accepting all the threats or weaknesses and

eventually serve as their guiding force to move on or make a turn-

around effect in making it to the top.

In contrast, people who doubt their capabilities shy away

from difficult tasks which they view as personal threats. They have

low aspirations and weak commitment to the goals they choose to

pursue. When faced with difficult tasks, they dwell on their

personal deficiencies, on the obstacles they will encounter, and all

kinds of adverse outcomes rather than concentrate on how to

perform successfully. They slacken their efforts and give up quickly

 8

in the face of difficulties. They are slow to recover their sense of

efficacy following failure or setbacks. Because they view insufficient

performance as deficient aptitude it does not require much failure

for them to lose faith in their capabilities. They fall easy victim to

stress and depression (Lent and Hackett, 2000).

Self-efficacy affects human function through choices

regarding human behaviour. People will be more inclined to take on

a task if they believe they can succeed. People generally avoid

tasks where their self-efficacy is low, but will engage in tasks

where their self-efficacy is high. Research shows that the optimum

level of self-efficacy is a little above ability, which encourages

people to tackle challenging tasks and gain valuable experiences

(www.serc.carleton.edu).

Albert Bandura’s theory of self-efficacy expounded that when

teachers have high self-efficacy about their effectiveness in the

classroom, they influence students’ achievement in several ways.

These teachers are more willing to experiment with new teaching

strategies that can better students learn. These teachers have

higher expectations regarding, and set higher goals for, students’

performance. These teachers put more effort into their teaching

and more persistent in helping students learn (Woolfolk, 2004).

 9

Self-perception theory (SPT), an account of attitude change

developed by psychologist Daryl Bem, is another theory that is

connected to this study. It asserts that people develop their

attitudes by observing their behaviour and concluding what

attitudes must have caused them. Furthermore, the theory

suggests that a person induces attitudes without accessing internal

cognition and mood states. The person reasons their own overt

behaviours rationally in the same way they attempt to explain

others’ behaviours (www.changingminds.org).

Aside from the aforementioned theories, this study also

utilized related literatures which delved into the different aspects of

organizational citizenship behaviour, its correlates and how it

affects the performance of professionals in their workplace.

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.

Organizational citizenship behaviour includes not only enactment of

positive gestures and contributions, but also the quality of

 10

forbearance- the willingness -to endure the occasional costs,

inconveniences and minor frustrations attendant to collective

endeavours (Harmer, 2007).

Dennis Organ, generally considered the father of

Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB), identified five

categories: (1) altruism -- the helping of an individual co-worker

on a task, (2) courtesy -- alerting others in the organization about

changes that may affect their work, (3) conscientiousness --

carrying out one’s duties beyond the minimum requirements, (4)

sportsmanship -- refraining from complaining about trivial matters,

and (5) civic virtue -- participating in the governance of the

organization. Acts of civic virtue may include offering suggestions

for cost improvement or other resource saving ideas, which may

directly influencing efficiency. To a lesser extent, conscientiousness

employees, as well as those who avoid personal gain or other

negative behaviors, demonstrate compliance with company policies

and maintain predictable, consistent work schedules, increasing the

reliability of the service. As reliability increases, the costs of rework

are reduced, making the unit more efficient (Yen and Niehoff,

2002).
 11

Rioux and Penner (2001) argued that to understand the

determinants of organizational citizenship behaviours, scholars

should examine the motives underlying the behaviour. They

suggested that organizational members may perform these

behaviours to satisfy needs and achieve goals. They identified

three distinct motives for organizational citizenship behaviour:

organizational concern, pro-social values, and impression

management. Organizational concern motives are undergirded by

the need to help the organization because of pride in the

organization and the organization is seen as central to one’s

welfare. Pro-social values motives involve the need to be valued

and to have smooth social interactions. Impression management

motives pertain to the need to hold a positive image and avoid a

negative image. Motives underlying organizational members’

citizenship behaviours are thought to influence the nature and

extent of organizational outcomes. Performing these behaviours for

self-directed reasons have also been associated with reduced

organizational functioning (Bolino et al, 2004).

Jahangir et al (2004) explored various existing definitions of

organizational citizenship behaviours and examined its different

dimensions. Based on their discussion, they were able to identify

 12

antecedents of organizational citizenship behaviour. They believe

that when these antecedents are known and identified, managers

may be able to promote these behaviours among their employees

for better performance.

Age is one of the identified antecedents. The proposition that

younger and older workers may view work and self in

fundamentally different ways is not new. Wagner and Rush (2000)

pointed out that early years (20-34) are the years of establishment

and settling down; later years (35- 55) are strong sense of self and

location vis-a-vis life and work. The authors argued that younger

employees coordinate their needs with organizational needs more

flexibly; by contrast, older employees tend to be more rigid in

adjusting their needs with the organization. Therefore, younger

and older workers may differ in their orientations toward self,

others, and work. These differences may lead to different salient

motives for organizational citizenship behaviours among younger

and older employees.

Altuntas and Baykal (2010) investigated relationships

between the levels of organizational trust and organizational

citizenship behaviors. Findings of the study revealed that nurses

who trust in their managers, institutions, and co-workers

 13

demonstrated the organizational citizenship behaviors of

conscientiousness, civic virtue, courtesy, and altruism more

frequently.

In another study conducted by Chu et al (2005) among non-

supervisory nurses in a regional hospital in Taiwan, results showed

that job satisfaction, supervisor support, job involvement, and

procedural justices had significant effects on the nurses' citizenship

behaviours. Organizational citizenship behaviours are deemed

indispensable due to their importance in promoting positive

relationships among employees and involving employees in the

organization's activities. Organizational citizenship behaviour is

believed to facilitate attainment of a hospital's goals and enhance a

hospital's performance.

One factor that is present in the organization which actually

influences organizational citizenship behaviours is organizational

politics. Politics is present in all organizations. It comprises those

activities used to acquire, develop and use power and other

resources to obtain one’s preferred outcome when there is

uncertainty or disagreement about choices (Gibson, et al, 2006).

Individuals inside the organization may not have confidence

that their behaviours will be recognized, and assume their efforts

 14

are rewarded in a highly political environment. In addition,

individuals’ perception of political behaviour may induce

antagonism toward colleagues or even the organization.

According to Harris and Kacmar, politics has been

conceptualized as a stressor in the workplace because it leads to

increased stress and/or strain reactions. Members of organization

react physically and psychologically to perceptions of organizational

politics, physical reactions including fatigue and somatic tension,

and psychological reactions include reduced commitment and

reduced satisfaction (www.entrepreneur.com).

Over the past decade, studies have shown that organizational

politics was a commonplace in office and that employee perceived

organizational politics. These researches also have found perceived

politics was predictive of negative organization outcomes including:

individual psychological states such as job stress, and burnout; job

attitudes such as satisfaction and organizational commitment and

individual performance such as self-reported performance and

supervisor-rated performance.

A study conducted by Vigoda (2000) which promoted

understanding of employees’ reactions to organizational politics

showed that women, highly educated employees, and those with

 15

higher incomes showed fewer intentions of neglect than other

employees. A possible explanation is that such employees are more

vulnerable and sensitive to their achievements in the organization;

they are more careful and less willing to perform negligent

behaviours that may risk their position and job security. Another

explanation may be the level of acceptance of organizational

politics among these employees. When organizational politics is

accepted as an integral part of daily life in the workplace

employees feel less worried and less capable of doing something

about it. They thus treat organizational politics as something you

have to put up with if you wish to stay with the organization.

Age was identified as an antecedent to perceptions of

organizational politics in Ferris et al.’s (1989) model, but

subsequent work reported inconsistent findings where results

suggest an inverse relationship assuming that older workers will

perceive their work situation as less politicized given the greater

potential understanding and acceptance of work dynamics that

comes with age. Recent work has examined age as a moderator of

the relationship between politics perceptions and work outcomes

assuming that older workers—in comparison with younger workers

—find organizational politics less salient in their life or have

 16

developed the political skill to deal with the politics should they be

deemed salient (Treadway et al, 2005).

Cropanzano and his colleagues (1997) as cited by Cheng-Wei

and Yu-Chen (2009) suggested that perceptions of politics were

always related to ambiguous reward structures. Therefore, when

employees work in a highly political environment, they may not

have confidence that their behaviours will be recognized, or

valuable to organizational reward systems. Based on this reason,

we can discover that the negative influences associated with high

perceptions of politics may result from the uncertainty of a political

environment.

In a highly political environment, it is harder for individual to

predict behaviours of his/her colleagues, supervisors and

subordinates. Because of this reason, employees may be anxious

of the expectation and even start to suspect whether the truth with

peers is true. So when employees perceive more organizational

politics, their exchange and emotion relationship will be destroyed

and prompting their intention to leave. Therefore, it is expected

that as perception of organizational politics is high, there will be a

moderating effect to make the negative relationship between

 17

organizational citizenship behaviours and turnover intention weaker

(Cheng-Wei and Yu-Chen, 2009).

As such, organizational policies and practices that are viewed

as highly political can provide situations of potential gain (i.e.,

opportunity) as well as potential loss (i.e., threats). For example,

research suggests that for many individuals, organizational politics

are perceived as a threat to their wellbeing (Cropanzano et al,

1997 as cited by Ford, 2002) and result in a variety of negative

affective reactions (e.g., increased job anxiety, reduced job

satisfaction) (Kacmar & Baron, 1999). However, some individuals

may perceive organizational politics as an opportunity to advance

their self-interests, which may result in positive affective reactions

(Ferris et al., 1989). Thus, organizational politics perceptions are

likely to result in differing responses to organizational policies and

practices depending on whether politics are viewed as an

opportunity or a threat.

As discussed earlier, employees may be willing to help co-

workers because they expect to gain valuable rewards or feedback

for their behaviours. It is difficult, however, for employees to

predict behaviour of colleagues, managers, or the executive teams

in a highly political environment There is no specific rule what an

 18

individual gains from organizational citizenship behaviours. Thus,

when perceiving political behaviour, an individual tends to think

that not only expectations cannot be fulfilled but unsolicited

outcomes are unavoidable.

Conducting organizational citizenship behaviours also

facilitates interpersonal connections (Bergeron, 2007) and induces

positive reactions from co-workers. Nevertheless, the relationship

based on trust from colleagues may deteriorate when employees

are aware of political behaviors in workplace (Witt et al, 2002).

Workers may suspect peers’ motivation behind feedback and even

unilaterally destroy friendly relationship with co-workers.

DuBrin’s study as cited by Rayburn et al (2004), mentioned

that the scarcity of powerful positions leads to politicking among

mid or lower management levels to obtain more powerful positions

and control resources. In an organizational hierarchy, employees

tend to rise to their level of incompetence. Most promotions are

based on present performance, conformity, likeability, and the

approval of key people rather than on their potential.

We define "Spirituality in the Workplace" using Seven

Principles: Creativity, Communication, Respect, Vision, Partnership,

Energy and Flexibility. All seven principles are related; all are
 19

important. We recognize that each person has their own beliefs.

We respect each individual's belief and their right to hold their

beliefs sacred and private. Spirituality - as we define it - has no

religious component or preference; it is a way of expressing more

humanity (---).

Creativity includes the use of color, laughter and freedom to

enhance productivity. Creativity is fun. When people enjoy what

they do, they work much harder. Creativity includes conscious

efforts to see things differently, to break out of habits and out-

dated beliefs to find new ways of thinking, doing and being.

Creativity is a natural, normal aspect of healthy human beings.

Suppression of creativity leads to violence - people are naturally

creative. When they are forced to crush their creativity, its energy

force turns to destructive release - their inherent humanity must

express itself (---).

Communication is the vehicle that allows people to work

together. In our society, our learning process is based on learning

to communicate with teachers and parents (usually, by learning

how not to get punished). When we go out into the world, most of

us have not learned how to communicate with our peers for the

purpose of achieving something beneficial for all of us. We

 20

constantly try to win the favor of the "parent" or "teacher" or

"adult" - usually a management figure. We try not to get

punished. This behavior leads to subterfuge among employees -

trying to figure out how to beat the system, gain extra favors, say

the "popular" thing or to keep our views to ourselves rather than

"rock the boat." How many companies are working to overcome

these learned patterns of behavior taught to us, by replacing them

with truly effective communication and teamwork programs?

Learning to listen to others and really hear them, speak the truth -

your own truth, and come together in a human understanding

leads to powerful productivity for all involved. Whether a personal

relationship or a work relationship, one of the most important skills

anyone can learn are good communication skills. Lack of

Communication leads to isolation, confusion, conflict, unnecessary

anxiety, mistrust, suspicion and much more (---).

Respect of self and of others; includes: respect for the

environment; other people's personal privacy, their physical space

and belongings; different viewpoints, philosophies, religion,

gender, lifestyle, ethnic origin, physical ability, beliefs and

personality. In school, we learn "team" work by competing with

each other and competing with other teams. We aren't usually

 21

taught "team work" in how to work with other students as equals.

When we go out into the world, most of us have not learned how to

work together as equals. The old patterns and training come forth

through lack of respect for our peers, our management, our

employees, and our customers. We try to compete with them, and

we try not to get punished. When we learn respect for our peers,

we can come to acceptance of their differences. We can learn to

use those differences for our mutual benefit. For example, the

person who can sit all day in front of a computer and be productive

can help the person who works best by talking and moving around.

Both functions are important. Rather than criticizing the other for

being different, we can learn how different people see the world.

Lack of respect and acceptance lead to conflict and hostility (---).

Vision means seeing beyond the obvious - seeing the unseen.

It is a trait used to describe leaders and entrepreneurs. Where

does vision come from? For some people, it is an inborn trait. They

have always seen things that others cannot see. Others learn to

broaden their perspective, to question the obvious, to reach

beyond where they are, to follow a dream. They see a vision of

what can be, of possibilities beyond the status quo. And, having

seen the vision, they head straight for it! They follow their vision in
 22

spite of obstacles or non-believers. Vision can be learned. The only

requirement is a strong desire to want to learn, coupled with a

strong desire to grow and expand beyond where you are (---).

Partnership encompasses individual responsibility and trust

that other people will perform according to their commitments for

the good of the team and partners. Partnership accepts that

different people have different viewpoints and beliefs; those

differences are used as positive aspects for broadening the team

experience. Partnership encourages a balanced and fair way of

being and working together, as well as honest disagreement

without hostility or warfare. Partnership encourages the female and

male aspects of ourselves to work together, without either one

over-ruling or dominating the other. Lack of partnership leads to

isolation and unhealthy competition (---).

Very positive energy forces are released when people feel

creative, have the freedom to express their opinions, and feel

respect from their management and their peers. The opposite

energy force creates Hostile Workplace situations - including:

Violence, Sexual Harassment, Discrimination, Verbal Abuse, Lack of

Respect, Loss of Productivity, as well as all dysfunctional or

addictive work situations. Your contribution to the collective

 23

positive energy is using your own creativity, communicating well,

having respect for others, adapting to changing situations, working

well with others and enjoying what you do. Your contribution to the

collective negative energy is withholding your talents,

communicating without respect, fighting and arguing with others,

resisting changes, creating tension with others and hating what

you do (---).

Flexibility includes the ability to adapt to changing situations

and allowing one's own beliefs and habits to change as needed. As

our world changes at an ever-rapid pace, we need to find ways to

adapt and change ourselves with it. Learning to see trends and

prepare for them is one way of learning flexibility. Another is to

learn about ourselves, our own strengths and our weaknesses.

Then, work to operate from our strength, allowing others to help us

with our weaknesses (---).

People who enjoy their life work harder, make more money,

have more confidence in themselves, have more friends and are far

healthier than people who worry constantly, fight with others, feel

frightened all the time, abuse their health and have low self-

respect. Reducing stress requires a willingness to appreciate

 24

nature, to see what others are too busy to see - the peaceful way

that nature changes and grows all around us (---)

Interest in workplace spirituality has spurred curiosity

beyond the capacity of scholars to keep pace either theoretically or

methodologically. Elementary attempts at a noetic understanding

of workplace spirituality began in the early 1990s as evidenced in

books, articles, and special journal issues or sections.

Organizational consultants have also embraced the value of

workplace spirituality for their clients, with some taking a more

pragmatic, data-based approach, and others providing training

seminars and coaching on the topic. In the Academy of

Management, the professional organization for scholars in business

management, a formal interest group has emerged whose primary

focus is in the intersection of management, spirituality, and

religion. Most recently, a 32 chapter volume, The Handbook of

Workplace Spirituality and Organizational Performance (Giacalone

& Jurkiewicz, 2003) established a new paradigm for this field of

inquiry in the social sciences (Giacalone, n.d).

The emergence of workplace spirituality in the organizational

sciences emerged from a very different mindset than one would

expect from a sub-area in an organizational science. Organizational

 25

behavior, for example, borrowed heavily from psychology and

sociology in its early development. Similarly conjoined, the field of

human resource management developed a symbiotic relationship

with industrial psychology. While many may have expected

workplace spirituality to emerge from research on the psychology

of religion, given the connotations suggested by the title, that is

not at all the case. While the research may sometimes parallel or

intersect now, the field of workplace spirituality was born of

organizational and social psychology, ethics, and management

(Giacalone, n.d.).

"Spirituality in the Workplace” is a concept that evolved over

my many years of experience managing a thriving corporation. I

believe the intentions and motives behind every decision made on

behalf of a business, its leadership, and its employees manifest

into positive or adverse consequences based on the purity of the

original intentions and motivations with which such decisions are

made. In short, ill intentions result in negative consequences. Pure

intentions result in positive consequences or success, even if the

only positive is a successful learning experience (Rahmani, n.d.).

Employee morale has a direct influence on productivity,

which is why organizations spend large sums of money trying to

 26

make working environments comfortable, pleasant, and even

luxurious. When sincerity and pure motives are combined with

highly developed business leadership and consistent decision

making skills, the outcome is a powerful and highly motivated

organization. In searching for business solutions, one must be

innovative in developing ways to positively impact not only the

client but also co-workers and peers. “Spirituality in the Workplace”

is more than just a concept; it is a practical method for attaining

business success (Rahmani, n.d.).

Nowadays, it is a proven fact that a strong connection exists

between mind and body. Studies reveal how many people who

have illnesses, like heart disease or cancer, also suffer from

depression as part of a vicious cycle. Physical ailments create

emotional depression, which in turn produces stress that worsens

the underlying physical condition. Fascinatingly, modern science

shows conversely that a positive attitude can improve health which

in turn can increase longevity. What a powerful panacea. Extended

scientific observations and experiments have also shown that

alternative medicine techniques such as meditation, guided

imagery, and, even more effectively, prayer can also alter the

course of terminal illness, reduce medical treatments, and even

 27

minimize hospital stays. Indeed, spirituality and all that it

encompasses is critical to good health (Rahmani, n.d.).

If we subscribe to the theory that “all created matter has a

Creator” and “The source of all creation is a higher power which

exudes positive energy,” rather than a negative force, we will

develop ways to attract the higher energy to fuel our positive mind,

soul, and spirit (Rahmani, n.d.).

As business people seeking success, we should consider new

methods and techniques which connect with a Higher Power.

Organizations which practice positive psychology and invest in

employee motivational programs have been shown

to reap rewards in the form of improved employee performance

and self-reported employee satisfaction. These results generally

translate into increased sales and ROI (Return on Investment).

This is the philosophy that has become a part of my corporate

culture at MMC. We have seen the positive results demonstrated

through measurable benchmarks for managers and staff alike as

“Spirituality in the Workplace” exudes strong work values and

moral ethics. When their best intentions direct their efforts,

employees do not have to engage in conduct that repents for

errors in their work performance (Rahmani, n.d.).

 28

Practicing “Spirituality in the Workplace” creates win/win

results for everyone involved. Employers, employees, and even

customers no longer have the need to question the motives of

service providers. This brief evaluation of a strategy that has

evolved over the past 25 years in my organization is proof that a

simple, inexpensive management tool has helped MMC to gain

tremendous financial rewards and to train highly motivated

employees who genuinely exhibit great respect for one another

(Rahmani, n.d.).

Many organizations spend millions of dollars to develop a

work environment purportedly designed to nurture the minds of

employees for the benefit of maximizing productivity. The claim, of

course, is that the millions invested will lead to higher profitability

and an edge over competitors (Rahmani, n.d.)

Human beings want to be treated fairly, equitably, and

respectfully. We are quick to demand respect when we believe the

treatment we receive runs contrary to that paradigm. However, our

attitudes and entitlement take on a different shape only when we

are on the receiving end of the treatment we wish all would aspire

to (Rahmani, n.d.).
 29

A supervisor’s ego should never become an obstacle to

developing mutually respectful employee/employer relationships.

And managers should never lose sight of the fairness of demands

imposed on employees who are being driven to maximize

profitability. If managers or business owners considered

subordinates’ positions before making decisions that would impact

them, decisions might be made differently. Decisions might be

made to guarantee fairness and equity that would increase levels

of trust and improve interactions between manager and

employees. The two would work more like partners focused on the

business of producing results (Rahmani, n.d.)

Now, if the level of mutual respect and love were enhanced,

interactions between managers and employees could only result in

successful collaboration. Under these conditions, it becomes

unnecessary for management to spend valuable time evaluating

the sincerity of subordinates, or for employees to question the

sincerity of their supervisors’ motives. The time saved from

practicing “Spirituality in the Workplace” can assure time for

creativity, innovation, and higher productivity with great success.

Work places are socio-economic chambers and silos. The

environment that an employee arrives to on a daily basis in order

 30

to perform and create output for monetary gain can be seen as a

vacuum. If an individual arrives at work with the thought that she

or he is there to be treated and used as a tool rather than as a

contributor to the advancement of the greater community, the

results are unpredictable. An employee who feels their

performance has an impact on shaping the organization and the

larger community, by contrast, exudes confidence and pride that

makes his or her contributions to the organization invaluable. The

organization that empowers the employee to be a source for

delivering fairness, equity, and respect has a major advantage over

the organization that limits the employee to merely waiting to

receive fairness, equity, or respect from others (Rahmani, n.d.).

Leaders in corporate America, from the budding business to

the most complex, well-established enterprise, need to take a fresh

look at organizational goals. Put plain and simply: happier

employees perform better. It behooves managers and business

owners then to recognize how spirituality affects the workplace. If

we tie personal attributes and abilities to our spirit, which is a

driving force for emotions and personal interactions, managers and

business owners can begin to open new channels for greater

positive energy from an inexhaustible source (Rahmani, n.d.).

 31

One spiritual commentator describes prayers and mediation

as remedies for clearing the clogged arteries of our soul. Because

individual needs differ, just as our appetite for food and its

consumption varies, I will leave you with this proverbial food for

thought. At the end of the day, we are all human beings with

hearts and souls. Everyone has different lives and different issues;

however the one thing that unites us – especially in the workplace

—is that we are all trying to do our best and to have our work

appreciated, for the benefit of making the world a better place to

live. Contentment in the workplace, bred by a sense of spiritual

fulfillment, is every bit a valuable commodity. Our attitudes and

entitlement take on a different shape only when we are on the

receiving end of the treatment we wish all would aspire to

(Rahmani, n.d.).

Workplace spirituality has continued to gain acceptance as a

topic of study in business schools across the country, presumably

with application to practice within organizations. Though initially

the topic of spirituality in the workplace may have been viewed as

a passing fad, it now seems to have reached trend status.

Management textbooks routinely include sections about “workplace

spirituality,” and professional organizations such as the Academy of

 32

Management offer membership in special interest groups

emphasizing spirituality (Rhodes, 2006).

A systemic view of work and contribution in the world

promotes links between sustainability and an awareness of limited

resources. This approach to design, production, and commerce is

being increasingly associated with spirituality because it seeks to

contribute to the greater good in the world. It also has the

potential to actually increase market value and attract investors

(Rhodes, 2006).

An understanding of sustainable growth and development

includes a well-thought-out strategy that identifies potential long-

term impacts or implications of actions that could have an eventual

negative impact on business. This systemic view of global business

means that a company will constantly reassess the long view of

risks and rewards associated with doing business in the long run,

including a careful ongoing review of potentially negative and

unintended consequences of business decisions on individuals,

societies, or the environment (Rhodes, 2006).

More than providing excellent service for customers, global

service indicates a larger sense of responsibility to contribute to

the betterment of the world. While the local family business may
 33

not provide products and services that will improve the quality of

life in third world countries, American companies historically have

fundamentally understood that part of their role is to make the

world a better place through the products or services that they sell.

Today’s spiritual organization is deliberate in implementing a vision

that is built around contributions to the betterment of mankind. It

promotes work outside of the organization that contributes to and

“gives back” to society through community and volunteer service.

Spiritually aware managers and businesses consider themselves

servants of employees, customers, and the community (Rhodes,

2006).

Creativity is a necessary part of the business cycle. When

technology, markets shifts, and demographic changes force

organizations to rethink products and services, creativity is the key

to successfully navigating those changes. The artistic industries

have long recognized the spiritual nature of individual and group

creative processes, and many educators understand the

importance of seamless, daily incorporation of creativity in helping

their students learn. The spiritual workplace recognizes that being

creative is not necessarily reserved for a special few, but that all

people have creative capacities. A spiritual workplace provides

 34

resources to help people to uncover their creative potential and to

practice creativity within the organization (Rhodes, 2006).

Businesses are increasingly becoming core sources of

community for people in societies. The spiritual organization

respects and values individuals’ life experiences and the lessons

learned from them. Such an organization is intentional in its efforts

to include individuals who bring appropriate skill sets to a particular

job, but who may have been excluded historically from

participating in a professional community of practice due to

circumstances they did not choose. Such historic exclusion from

the workplace has included people with physical disabilities, people

whose skin color or ethnic origin differs from those of the majority

population, and those who have been discriminated against due to

gender or sexual orientation. Increasingly, corporations are seeing

the value of their employees working together in community

toward a commonly held vision. They have a sense that the

concepts of love and acceptance within a cultural context of care

builds a sense of community that supports the work of the

company and that has a direct impact on the bottom line (Rhodes,

2006).
 35

Organizations have begun to realize the benefits of treating

the whole person by actively supporting the formulation of ethical

principles that promote personal growth, long-term character

development, and personal connections of faith and work

development. Assisting employees in integrating personal growth,

learning, and faith with job performance benefits the organization.

This type of principled emphasis includes providing resources that

help employees better understand themselves, develop successful

professional and personal relationships, and enhance personal

management skills. Employees are encouraged to develop an

accurate and realistic sense of the impact that other people have

on them and the impact that they have on others (Rhodes, 2006).

Organizations have long been aware of the benefits of shared

ownership of corporate values by every member of the

organization. By acknowledging that one’s general search for

spiritual growth and fulfillment need not be separate from one’s

work, organizations lay the groundwork for spiritual development

to assist in engendering understanding among employees.

Companies that understand workplace spirituality go beyond being

supportive of learning and development by helping employees

develop a sense of “calling” or identification of passion about their

 36

lives and their work. Such companies emphasize the discovery and

appropriate utilization of individual giftedness and encourage

employees to use their unique skills within the organization.

Grounded religious faith development is recognized as an

important and deeply personal part of growth for many people, one

that can help them more easily recognize their vocations (Rhodes,

2006).

One personality factor that does seem to predispose

individuals to see their work situation as politicized is

Machiavellianism. Machiavellianism is defined as the use of your

power in order to make other people act or believe for your own

behalf; it is a set of cynical beliefs about human nature, morality,

and the permissibility of using various tactics to achieve one's

ends. Machiavellianism has long been thought to be related to

perceptions of organizational politics because high Machs tend to

be cynical about human nature and are willing to do virtually

anything to enhance their self-interests.

In a study of organizational politics, Appelbaum and Hughes

(1998) reported that Machiavellians use ingratiation tactics such as

self-presentation to increase their attractiveness and upward

influence in the eyes of the management. The act of ingratiation is

 37

relationally focused, requiring some minimal level of good

interaction with one’s supervisor. Sporting this, ingratiators

received higher performance evaluations from their supervisors

compared to other influencers.

According to the way of thinking of a Machiavellian, he or she

would probably agree with the following statements: (1) The best

way to handle people is to tell them what they want to hear, (2)

anyone who completely trusts anyone else is asking for trouble, (3)

Never tell anyone the real reason you did something unless it is

useful to do so, and (4) It is wise to flatter important people.

Machiavellians are good at manipulating other people. They often

effectively influence others and tend to initiate and control social

interactions.

Machiavellians are characterized into two groups, "low

Machs" and "high Machs." The contrast between low Machs and

high Machs is that high Machs are able to accurately identify

situations in which their favored tactics will work. They are

excellent at playing around with words, literally speaking. They

may use power particularly effectively in face-to-face contacts.

One of the tactics used by high Machs is that they remain calm and
 38

rational and create a social structure that facilitates their personal

goals at the expense of others (www.concernedhumanity.net).

High Machiavellians tend to regard the workplace as more

political compared to Low Machiavellians (O’Connor and Morrison,

2001). These results make sense when we consider that people

who score high on negative affectivity or Machiavellianism are

predisposed to look critically and suspiciously at life generally and

not just at work. More often than not, subordinates who possess

the high Machiavellian trait are able to manipulate encounters with

superiors, resulting in having sufficient influence and greater

control over the work situations for their own benefits. For

instance, in a group discussion, high Machiavellians tend to

participate more and give extra task information, in which such

contributions normally influence the group at critical phases of

discussion.

High Machs tend to take a more detached, calculating

approach in their interaction with other people. They tend to

believe most people are concerned only with their own well-being

and to depend too much on anyone else is foolish. They believe the

best way to get by is to use deception, rewards, promises, flattery,

and even punishments to manipulate others into doing their

 39

bidding. To them, power may be more important than love

(www.politicaltypes.com).

High Machiavellians tend to win in situations involving

emotional involvement more often than low Machiavellians because

they have the ability to ignore irrelevant aspects in situations and

concentrate on winning, whereas low Machiavellians are easily

distracted by such matters (McIlwain, 2003).

Reimers and Barbuto (2002) argue that Machiavellian

personalities begin by using charm, friendliness, and tact to

influence others and exhibit influence behaviours that are more

consistent with the previous definitions of the term (namely, that

they are unethical, forceful and antagonistic), if the initial influence

attempts fail.

Furthermore, Machiavellians have engaged in perfectionistic

self-promotion, nondisclosure and non-display of imperfection that

indicate one aspect of the Machiavellian individuals’ chameleon-like

repertoire of self-presentational behaviours. Machiavellians tend to

concentrate on appearing as perfect as ever to others rather than

actually striving to be perfect. Machiavellian individuals may utilize

perfectionist self-presentation in an effort to gain a competitive

advantage over others. Such presentation may function as an

 40

interpersonal influence tactic through which Machiavellians project

their preferred image of dominance and strength to others

(Reimers and Barbuto, 2002).

Given their disinterest in others’ prosperity, Machs may be

selective in engaging in organizational citizenship behaviours.

When they do engage in these behaviours, they may be more likely

to perform organizational citizenship behaviours that target specific

individuals and groups (who may return the favour), as opposed to

organizational citizenship behaviours that benefit the organization

in general (Reimers and Barbuto, 2002).

Organizational cynicism arises when the employees believe

that organizations lacking honesty. This perception is that there is

no honesty, more particularly; morality, justice and honesty about

the fundamental perception may be caused by a violation of

expectations. Organizational cynicism is conceptualized as a quality

for the future and proposed to represent the learned idea which is

a result of the experiences (Johnson and M. O'leary-Kelly, 2003).

Again, according to a similar definition of organizational cynicism

that associated with many objects and an attitude that can be

generalization from one destination to another and lastly

represents a growing learned belief as a result of the experience.

 41

James (2005) described the concept of organizational cynicism as a

response to his history of personal and social experiences that

were open to change with environmental factors. Also

organizational cynicism was related to the attitudes towards the

employer organization shaped by the individual’s associated

behaviours, negative beliefs and emotions.

Organizational cynicism is defined as general or specific

attitudes symbolized by the disappointment, insecurity,

hopelessness, anger and gravitating to the mistrust of institutions

or person, group, ideology and social skills. According to another

definition of organizational cynicism, it is the beliefs that spent in

accordance with the principles of organizational interests such as

sincerity, honesty, fairness and lack of the moral integrity in

organizations (Bernerth et al, 2007). According to a very general

definition, organizational cynicism is a negative attitude including

the three dimensions developed by a person to his organization.

The first dimension of organizational cynicism is the belief that is

devoid of honesty in organization resulting negative emotions such

as anger, scorn and condemnation. In this respect, cynicism is a

tendency towards the disbelief related to the actions, goodness of

human instinct and sincerity. Therefore cynics believe that

 42

organizations’ applications betray to them because of the lack of

such principles, justice, honesty and sincerity. Showing the

emotional reactions to a situation is the second dimension of

organizational cynicism. Cynicism includes strong emotional

reactions like anger and scorn that does not contain an objective

judgement towards organization as well as thoughts and beliefs. It

is stated that even individuals have high levels of organizational

cynicism trouble when they think their organizations, feel disgust

and even shame. The final dimension of organizational cynicism is

the tendency of gravitating to the negative behaviours. Many of

these behaviours are the expressions of devoid of organization’s

sincerity and honesty. This dimension covers elements like a strong

criticism, pessimistic predictions, ironic humor and disdain and

critical statements about the organization (Kutanis and Çetinel,

2010).

To sum up organizational cynicism is defined as an attitude

formed by faith, feelings and behavioural tendencies. Therefore,

organizational cynicism seems to be a multi-dimensional structure

that a set of beliefs about people's lack of integrity of the

organization, the various emotions towards the organization, a set

of behavioural trends towards the organization show that the rate

 43

of acceptance of the cynics. Because of cynicism in organizations,

personal and organizational point of view considering the many

negative results caused it is becoming a priority to implement

effective strategies to manage and prevent the emergence of

cynicism in workplaces or in such a situation does occur. Of course

practicing such strategies is the role of managers and leaders of

the apex of the organization with the greatest responsibility in the

organization. Cynicism is an attitude that occurs as a result of

criticism of organization's values, actions and instinct. Of course,

the negative attitude against the organization becomes behaviour

within the organization after a period of time may create

unintended consequences (Abraham, 2000).

The concept of organizational cynicism includes negative

feelings about the organization, and beliefs and feelings that tend

to make disparaging and critical behaviour. Organizational cynicism

is defined as a strict criticism of the open or hidden, negative

beliefs and negative emotions towards the organization. According

to this definition, the concept of organizational cynicism has been

observed that it is an attitudinal phenomenon. According to yet

another definition of organizational cynicism, it is defined as the

belief that an organization lacks honesty. And this belief is

 44

expressed that it causes hard-hitting reputation and critical

behaviours when it is combined with a strong negative emotional

reaction (Abraham, 2000). The main principle in the concept of

organizational cynicism is the lack of accuracy, integrity, fairness,

trust, sincerity, and faithfulness. Leaders in organization are

deprived of the basic principles of organizational cynicism to

protect their personal interests. In addition leaders cause

behaviours based on the hidden instincts and tricks within the

organization (Abraham, 2000).

The concept of studying the correlates of organizational

behaviour among college professors has provided the researcher

with the basis to conduct the study. The abovementioned theories,

related literatures and studies serve as backbone of this study and

will prove or disprove the findings of this study.

 45

THE PROBLEM

Statement of the Problem

This study will determine the profile, performance,

Organizational Citizenship Behaviour, Workplace Spirituality and

performance of teachers in Dauin District, Division of Negros

Oriental. Based on the findings of the study, a development plan

will be proposed.

Specifically, this study will seek to answer the following

queries:

1) What is the level of Organizational Citizenship Behavior

(OCB) among the teachers in terms of:

1.1 Altruism;

1.2 Courtesy;

1.3 Sportsmanship;

1.4 Conscientiousness; and

1.5 Civic Virtue?

2) What is the level of Workplace Spirituality in terms of:

2.1 Organization;

2.2 Spirituality;

2.3 People;
 46

2.4 Service;

2.5 Organizational Self-Awareness;

2.6 Wisdom; and

2.7 Leadership?

3) What is the performance of teachers based on PAST

evaluation with reference to:

3.1 Instructional Competence;

3.2 Personal and Professional Characteristics

3.3 Punctuality and Attendance

4) Is there a significant relationship between the performance of

teachers and their:

4.1 Organizational Citizenship Behavior

4.2 Workplace Spirituality?

5) How do the respondents perceive the organizational culture

shared by the personnel in their respective schools?

6) What development plan can be proposed based on the

findings of the study?

 47

Statement of the Null Hypothesis

Ho: There is no significant relationship between the

performance of teachers and their:

1.1 Organizational Citizenship Behavior

1.2 Workplace Spirituality?

 48

Significance of the Study

This study will determine the organizational citizenship

behaviour, workplace spirituality, organizational cynicism, and

work locus of control among college professors --- all of which will

identify behaviours that individuals exert beyond their duties in the

organization. The said correlates of organization behaviour which

will be established will be of significance to the following:

College Professors. They will discover more about

themselves; how they behave within the bounds of their work and

the workplace, and those actions outside their job description to

which they extend. A heightened level of self-awareness will be

recognized.

Department Heads and Deans. As the heads of the

departments and colleges to which the respondents belong to, they

will gain insight on how their subordinates conduct themselves

inside the workplace. This insight will allow them to get to know

the professors more. And because the workplace also takes two to

tango, they will appreciate the components that will enhance the

attitude and performance of the college professors.

School Administration. The findings of this study will

provide the school administration facts on the different aspects of

 49

organizational behaviour that is happening within the institution

and amongst the college professors. Such knowledge will be

reflected in the proposed output of the study, which will aid in the

further improvement of the management of the entire institution.

The Researcher will gain knowledge on some of the several

facets of organizational behaviour. She will be able to understand

further the manners and deeds of college professors in the locale.

In the greater scheme, a peek into the manners and deeds of

employees in an organization; such knowledge will serve as a

springboard for more academic inquiries and discussion on the

variables used in the study.

Future Researchers. The recommendations that will be

drafted based on the findings of this study will assist the future

researchers in formulating topics to be further researched on.

Suggested titles for research will help them delve into further study

with regards human behaviour in organizations.

 50

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Research Design

This study will utilize the quantitative and qualitative

methods of research employing the descriptive (correlational)

approach. The profile of the college professors as well as their

levels of performance, organizational citizenship behaviour,

workplace spirituality, organizational cynicism, and work locus of

control will be quantified and described. Further, the relationship

and difference between the variables will be statistically

established. A qualitative data on the perceived organizational

culture shared by the respondents.

The level of performance of the college professors will be a

secondary data. This will be determined by the recent results of the

performance evaluation of the college professors using the

appraisal tool that the research locale is using.

Research Environment

This study will be conducted at Western Leyte College of

Ormoc, Inc. It is a college located in Ormoc City, Leyte. The locale

offers different baccalaureate and post-baccalaureate programs:

Nursing, Midwifery, Elementary and High School Education, Law,

 51

Accountancy, Hotel and Restaurant Management, Graduate

Studies, among others.

Research Respondents

The study will employ the universal method in getting the

college professors employed in Western Leyte College, Inc. A total

of eighty-three (83) college professors from the various

departments excluding the elementary and high school

departments will serve as the respondents of this study. The

identified 83 are all full-time employees. Part-time professors will

be excluded as their lack of contact with the institution and its

members might affect the data to be gathered.

Research Instrument

To get the appropriate data needed, the researcher will have

one questionnaire with four (4) parts. Part I will ask for the profile

of the respondents. The tool for profile was made by the

researcher; it will determine the age, gender, civil status, highest

educational attainment, average monthly income, and years of

service.

Part II is the tool to determine the level of performance of

the college professors. This will be the performance evaluation tool

 52

that Western Leyte College of Ormoc, Inc. is using to appraise their

college professors.

Part III is the tool that will be used to get the level of OCB is

a standardized questionnaire. The five-factor, Organizational

Citizenship Behaviour scale developed by Podsakoff and Mackenzie

will be utilized in the study. The five organizational citizenship

behaviour factors include altruism, courtesy, sportsmanship,

conscientiousness and civic virtue.

Part IV will determine the level of Workplace Spirituality. This

standardized tool will measure the following factors: organization,

spirituality, people, service, organizational self-awareness, wisdom,

and leadership.

Part V will determine the level of Organizational Cynicism.

Organizational Cynicism Scale (OCS) which was developed by

Brandes, Dharwadkar and Dean (1999) and modified by Erdost et

al (2007) will be used.

Part VI will determine the level of Work Locus of Control

among the respondents. The 16-item questionnaire was developed

by Paul E. Spector in 1988.

The researcher has modified the tools that will be used to

determine the levels of performance, Organizational Citizenship

 53

Behaviour, Workplace Spirituality, Organizational Cynicism, and

Work Locus of Control and made it into a 4-point Likert scale so as

to eliminate the bias and for convenience in the statistical analysis

of the data.

Research Procedure

Gathering of Data

After acquiring all the formal permission that the researcher

must acquire from the Graduate School and the locale where the

data will be collected, she will then delve into the gathering of the

data needed on the profile, performance, organizational citizenship

behaviour, workplace spirituality, organizational cynicism, and

work locus of control of the respondents. For this, the researcher is

allotting one (1) month to gather and compile all the data needed.

The researcher will self-administer the questionnaire.

Although the research instrument is quantitative in nature, the

researcher deemed it a need to give twenty (20) per respondent

per interview. This is done so that each question can be explained

in layman’s terms by the researcher in case some respondents

might have difficulty understanding. This is also done to ensure

that all items are answered and answered correctly. For the level of
 54

performance, the researcher will retrieve the performance

evaluation results of the professors after permission has been

given. The interpretation of the institutional tool will used to

correlate with the other variables.

Statistical Treatment of Data

The data gathered will be submitted to the following

statistical treatments:

Simple percentage will determine the frequency of the

responses.

Weighted mean will determine the entire response

distribution of the respondents. The following are the parameter

limits:

Parameters of Limit for Level of Organizational Citizenship

Behaviour (OCB)
Parameters of
Response Category Interpretation
Limit
3.26-4.00 Almost Always Excellent
2.51-3.25 Often Good
1.76-2.50 Seldom Fair
1.00-1.75 Almost Never Poor

Parameters of Limit for Level of Workplace Spirituality

Parameters of
Response Category Interpretation
Limit
3.26-4.00 Strongly agree Very High
2.51-3.25 Agree High
 55

1.76-2.50 Disagree Low

1.00-1.75 Strongly disagree Very Low

Parameters of Limit for Level of Organizational Cynicism

Parameters of
Response Category Interpretation
Limit
3.26-4.00 Strongly agree Very High
2.51-3.25 Agree High
1.76-2.50 Disagree Low
1.00-1.75 Strongly disagree Very Low

Parameters of Limit for Level of Work Locus of Control

Parameters of
Response Category Interpretation
Limit
3.26-4.00 Strongly agree Very High
2.51-3.25 Agree High
1.76-2.50 Disagree Low
1.00-1.75 Strongly disagree Very Low

Chi-square will determine the relationships between the

profile and the levels of workplace spirituality, organizational

cynicism, and work locus of control.

Pearson r will determine the relationships between the

independent variables namely: workplace spirituality,

organizational cynicism, and work locus of control.

t-test will determine the difference in the levels of workplace

spirituality, organizational cynicism, and work locus of control of

between the college professors.

 56

Definition of Terms

In deciphering the terminologies used in this study, the

following are defined operationally:

College Professors – are professors employed at Western

Leyte College of Ormoc, Inc. who are teaching in the various

paramedical and non-paramedical colleges in the said academic

institution.

Level of Organizational Citizenship Behaviour (OCB) –

the extent to which the extra-role behaviours of college professors

are manifested.

Altruism- refers to behaviours that have the effect of

helping another person perform an organizationally relevant

task or problem.

Civic virtue- are behaviours that revolved around the

responsible participation of an employee in the organization’s

political life.

Courtesy- behaviours designed to prevent a problem

from occurring.

Conscientiousness- refers to behaviours that allow

one to carry out their role requirements to levels beyond

what is expected.
 57

Sportsmanship- refers to behaviours that entail

avoiding excessive complaining on trivial matters.

Level of Organizational Cynicism – the degree to which

there is a manifestation of the general or specific attitudes

symbolized by the disappointment, insecurity, hopelessness, and

anger gravitating to the mistrust of institutions or person, group,

ideology and social skills among the college professors.

Level of Performance – refers to the degree of teaching

performance that the college professors are exhibiting. This data

will be determined using the performance evaluation tool that the

Western Leyte College of Ormoc, Inc. is using.

Level of Work Locus of Control – is the intensity to which

the authority the college professors have over their work and their

professional lives are exhibited.

Level of Workplace Spirituality – the degree to which the

spiritual culture in the workplace is manifested in Western Leyte

College of Ormoc, Inc.

Organizational Citizenship Behaviour (OCB) - extra-role

behaviours of college professors that are not directly recognized

but can affect the institution’s performance.

 58

Organizational Cynicism - defined as general or specific

attitudes symbolized by the disappointment, insecurity,

hopelessness, and anger gravitating to the mistrust of institutions

or person, group, ideology and social skills that the college

professors are feeling.

Performance – it is the teaching performance of the college

professors as measured by the performance evaluation tool that

Western Leyte College of Ormoc, Inc. is using.

Proposed Development Plan – is the product of the study

aimed to improve the work-related attitudes and conditions of the

college professors.

Work Locus of Control – the dominance and authority that

the college professors have over their work and their professional

lives.

Workplace Spirituality – is the spiritual culture at Western

Leyte College of Ormoc, Inc. that recognizes that employees have

both a mind and a spirit seeking to find meaning and purposes in

their work, and desire to connect with other employees and be part

of a community.
 59

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books

Cummings, Thomas G. and Christopher G. Worley (2001).

Organization Development and Change. 7th edition. USA: South-
Western College Publishing.

Ferris, G. R. et al (1989). Politics in organizations. Hillsdale, NJ:

Lawrence Erlbaum.

Gibson, James L. and John M. Ivancevich (2006). Organizations,

Behavior, Structure, Processes. New York: McGraw Hill
Education.

McIlwain, D. (2003). Bypassing Empathy: A Machiavellian Theory

of Mind and Sneaky Power. New York: Psychology Press.

Newstrom, John W. (2011). Organizational Behavior: Human

Behavior at Work. 13th edition. USA: McGraw-Hill Companies
Inc.

Pierce, Jon L. And John W. Newstrom (2006). Leaders and the

Leadership Process: Readings, Self-Assessments and
Applications. 4th edition. USA: McGraw-Hill.

Woolfolk, Anita (2004). Educational Psychology. 9th edition. New

York: Pearson Education Inc.

Journals

Altuntas, S. and U. Baykal(2010). “Relationship Between Nurses'

Organizational Trust Levels and their Organizational
Citizenship Behaviors.” Journal of Nursing Scholarship,
42(2):186-94.

Appelbaum, S. H., and B. Hughes (1998). “Ingratiation as a

Political Tactic: Effects Within the Organization.”
Management Decision, 36, 85-95.
 60

Bergeron, D. (2007). “The Potential Paradox of Organizational

Citizenship Behavior: Good Ctizens At What Cost?”. Academy
of Management Review, 32(4), 1078-1095.

Bolino, M. C. et al (2004). “The other side of the story:

Reexamining prevailing assumptions about Organizational
Citizenship Behaviour.” Human Resource Management
Review, 14, 229-246.

Chang, Ching Sheng and Hae Ching Chang (2010). “Motivating

Nurses' Organizational Citizenship Behaviors by Customer-
Oriented Perception for Evidence-Based Practice”. Worldviews
on Evidence-Based Nursing, 7(4), 214–225.

Chu, C.I. et al (2005). “Clarification of the Antecedents of Hospital

Nurse Organizational Citizenship Behavior -- an example
from a Taiwan Regional Hospital”. Journal of Nursing
Research, 13(4):313-24.

Ferris, G. R., et al (1996). “Perceptions of organizational politics:

Prediction, stress-related implications, and outcomes”.
Human Relations, 49, 233-266.

Jahangir, Nadim and Mohammad Muzahid Akbar (2004).

“Organizational Citizenship Behaviour: Its Nature and
Antecedents”. BRAC University Journal, vol.I, no. 2, pp. 75-
85.

Kacmar, K. M. and R. A. Baron (1999). “Organizational politics: The

state of the field, links to related processes, and an agenda
for future research”. Research in Personnel and Human
Resources Management, vol. 10, pp. 1-39.

Lent, R. W., and Hackett, G. (2000). “Career Self Efficacy:

Empirical Status and Future Directions”. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 30, 347-382

Mudrak, E.P. (1989). Age-related differences in Machiavellianism in

an adult sample. Psychological Reports, 64, 1047-1050.
 61

O’Connor, W. E., & Morrison, T. G. (2001). A Comparison of

Situational and Dispositional Predictors of Perceptions of
Organization Politics. Journal of Psychology, 135, 301-312.

Pratt, M. et al (1983). Aging as ripening: Character and

consistency of moral judgment in young, mature, and older
adults. Human Development, 26, 277-288.

Rayburn, J. M. et al (2004). “An empirical study of the indicators

of the need for power, achievement and affiliation, and the
ethical, machiavellian and political orientation of marketing
majors.” Academy of Marketing Studies Journal.

Reimers, J.M. and J.E. Jr. Barbuto(2002). “A Frame Exploring the

Effects of Machiavallian Disposition on the Relationship
between Motivation and Influence Tactics”. Journal of
Leadership & Organizational Studies, 9(2), 29-41.

Rioux, S. M., and L. A. Penner (2001). “The Causes of

Organizational Citizenship Behavior: A motivational
analysis”. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 1306-1314.

Treadway, D. C. et al (2005). “The role of age in the perceptions of

politics – job performance relationship: A three-study
constructive replication”. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90,
872-881.

Tuner, F. C. & D.C. Martinez (1977). “Socio-economic achievement

and the Machiavellian personality”. Sociometry, 40(4), 325-
336.

Wagner, S. and M. Rush (2000). “Altruistic organizational

citizenship behavior: context, disposition and age”. The
Journal of Social Psychology, 140, 379-91.

Witt, L.A. et al (2002). “Interactive Effects of Personality and

Organizational Politics on Contextual Performance”. Journal
of Organizational Behavior, 23, 911-26.
 62

Unpublished Work

Cheng-Wei, Chen and Yu-Chen Wei (2009). “Perception of

Organizational Politics Moderates the Relationship between
OCB and Turnover Intention”. Institute of Human Resource
Management, National Changhua University of Education,
Changhua City,Taiwan.

Harmer, Richard (2007). “Organisational Citizenship Behaviour,

Emotional Intelligence and Spirituality: What’s the
relationship?”. School of Psychology, Australian Catholic
University, St Patrick’s Campus, Victoria, Australia.

Magdadaro, Maria Darling Dee T. (2009). “Motivational Factors and

Organizational Commitment of Faculty Members”.
Unpublished Master of Arts in Nursing, Southwestern
University, Cebu City, Philippines.

Internet Sources

http://www.politicaltypes.com/content/view/19/51/,
retrieved January 21, 2011

http://www.entrepreneur.com/tradejournals/article/2020729
71.html, retrieved February 2, 2011

http://www.fhi.org/nr/rdonlyres/ei26vbslpsidmahhxc332vwo
3g233xsqw22er3vofqvrfjvubwyzclvqjcbdgexyzl3msu4m
n6xv5j/bccsummaryfourmajortheories.pdf
retrieved February 3, 2011

http://www.concernedhumanity.net/CONCERNEDHUMANITY
MACHIAVELLIANISM.htm, retrieved February 11, 2011

http://www.utwente.nl/cw/theorieenoverzicht/Theory%20clu
sters/Health
%20Communication/theory_planned_behavior.doc,
retrieved February 11, 2011

http://changingminds.org/explanations/theories/self-
 63

perception.htm, retrieved February 14, 2011

https://www.serc.carleton.edu, retrieved March 2, 2011

http://www.istheory.yorku.ca/theoryofreasonedaction.htm
retrieved March 11, 2011

http://free-books-online.org/psychology/developmental-
psychology-psychology/early-adulthood
retrieved May 7, 2011

http://www.learning-theories.com/eriksons-stages-of-
development.html, retrieved May 7, 2011
 64

APPENDIX A
TRANSMITTAL LETTERS

Appendix A1
TO THE VICE-PRESIDENT of WESTERN LEYTE COLLEGE OF ORMOC,
INC.

Emmanuel A. Fiel, RN
Vice-President
Western Leyte College of Ormoc, Inc.
Ormoc City, Leyte

Dear MR. FIEL:

Greetings!

The undersigned is a post-graduate student of Southwestern

University enrolled in Doctor of Education major in Educational
Leadership and Management. I am currently undertaking a dissertation
entitled Human Behaviour at Work: Workplace Spirituality,
Organizational Cynicism, and Work Locus of Control among
College Professors.

In line with this, I ask permission from your good office to allow
me to conduct this study in the different colleges of the institutions with
your professors as the respondents.

May this letter merit your kind approval.

Thank you very much.

Respectfully yours,

Ma. Concepcion A. Maico, RN, MAN (SGD)

Researcher

Noted:

Bryant C. Acar, Ed.D.

Research Adviser

Albim Y. Cabatingan, DBA

 65

Dean, Graduate School

Appendix A2
TO THE COLLEGE PROFESSORS

Dear Sir/Madame:

Greetings!

The undersigned is a post-graduate student of Southwestern

University enrolled in Doctor of Education major in Educational
Leadership and Management. I am currently undertaking a dissertation
entitled Human Behaviour at Work: Workplace Spirituality,
Organizational Cynicism, and Work Locus of Control among
College Professors.

To complete my thesis, I ask for your cooperation by answering

the necessary data found in the accompanying questionnaire.

Please be assured of the confidentiality I give to your response.

Thank you very much.

Respectfully yours,

Ma. Concepcion A. Maico, RN, MAN (SGD)

Researcher
 66

APPENDIX B
RESEARCH INSTRUMENT

I. PROFILE. Please provide the necessary information asked.

Age :

Gender : ___ Male ___ Female

Civil Status : ___ Single ___ Married

___ Widowed

Highest Educational Attainment :

College Graduate ___

Graduate student (with MA units) ___

Graduate degree holder ___

(Masters degree holder)

Post-graduate student ___

(with Doctorate units)

Post-graduate degree holder ___

(Doctorate degree holder)

Average Monthly Income :

___ 10,000 – 15,000 ___ 16,000 – 25,000

___ 26,000 – 30,000 ___ above 30,000

Department :

Years of Service :
 67

II. LEVEL OF ORGANIZATINAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOUR

(OCB). Please put a check mark under the column that
corresponds to your answer wherein:

4- Almost Always, 3- Often, 2- Seldom, 1- Almost

Never
STATEMENTS 4 3 2 1
AA O S AN
Altruism
1. Helps others who have heavy work loads
2. Helps others who have been absent
3. Willingly gives of his/her time to help others who
have work related problems
4. Helps orient new people even though it is not
required.
Courtesy
5. Consults with me or other individuals who might be
affected by his/her actions or decisions.
6. Does not abuse the rights of others
7. Takes steps to prevent problems with other workers
8. Informs me before taking any important actions.
Sportsmanship
9. Consumes a lot of time complaining about trivial
matters
10. Tends to make "mountains out of molehills"
(makes problems bigger than they are)
11. Constantly talks about wanting to quit his/her job
12. Always focuses on what's wrong with his/her
situation, rather than the positive side of it.
Conscientiousness
13. Is always punctual
14. Never takes long lunches or breaks
15. Does not take extra breaks
16. Obeys company rules, regulations and procedures
even when no one is watching
Civic virtue
17. Keeps abreast of changes in the organization
18. Attends functions that are not required, but that
help the company image
19. Attends and participates in meetings regarding the
organization.
 68

20. "keeps up" with developments in the company

III. LEVEL OF WORKPLACE SPIRITUALITY. Please put a
check mark under the column that corresponds to your
answer wherein:

4 – Strongly Agree, 3 – Agree, 2 – Disagree, 1 – Strongly Disagree

Statements 4 3 2 1
SA A D SD
ORGANIZATION
1) My organization is committed to creating a culture
where everyone has an opportunity for success.
2) My organization adapts to change in a way that
supports the well being of its employees.
3) My organization values people and profits equally.
4) When downsizing occurs, the well being and future
success of employees are considered.
5) My organization supports the personal and
professional development of its employees.
6) My organization's core values are consistent with
respect and compassion for people.
SPIRITUALITY
7) My organization values cooperation and competition
equally.
8) In my opinion, spirituality and religion are different.
9) My organization encourages its employees to
behave consistent with its core values.
10) I am passionate about my work most of the
time.
11) I am open to personal growth where cultural
change is necessary.
12) I presently use spirituality as a means of coping
in my organization.
13) In general, my organization's core values are
consistent with my personal values.
PEOPLE
14) My organization shows, by action, that its people
are its most important resource.
15) I believe I am 100% responsible for my
performance in my organization.
16) In my opinion, empowerment is earned on the
basis on my demonstrated performance.
17) In my opinion, integrating spirituality into the
workplace is a necessity for high performance.
 69

18) The people in my organization are committed to

the organization's success.
SERVICE
19) In my opinion, my organization is unconditionally
committed to the success and well being of its
customers.
20) My organization encourages its employees to
contribute to improving the community.
21) My organization acknowledges the efforts of
employees when we perform in an outstanding
manner.
22) My organization values its internal diversity as a
basis for serving diverse customers.
23) My organization values its customers.
24) My organization contributes to the well being of
the community.
25) My organization values people more than profit.
26) My organization values fair pricing more than
unethical excessive profit.
ORGANIZATIONAL SELF-AWARENESS
27) My organization encourages personal
development.
28) In my organization, the willingness to confront
and resolve interpersonal conflict is a necessity for
self-directed teams.
29) The people in my organization are receptive to
personal transformation as a necessity for achieving
an inclusive culture.
30) In my organization, personal growth skills such
as coaching and mentoring are equally valued as
are technical and sales skills.
WISDOM
31) In my organization, people who are considered
to have exceptional wisdom are valued the same as
those with exceptional business knowledge.
32) In my opinion, employees are encouraged to
learn from their conflicts or mistakes, rather than
reprimanded or punished.
33) My organization attempts to integrate widely
differing viewpoints when they all appear to have
merit.
34) In my opinion, those in leadership roles in my
organization are able to distinguish between the
inherent value of all people and their behavior as a
 70

basis for managing.

35) In my opinion, my organization values
employees who proactively challenge "conventional
wisdom" in the way things are done.
LEADERSHIP
36) The leadership in my organization takes into
account the human element in its business
practices.
37) The leadership in my organization not only
preaches its core values but also practices them.
38) The leadership in my organization shows
empathy and compassion for its employees.
39) The leadership in my organization can be
trusted.
40) The leadership in my organization has high
ethical and moral standards.
41) The leadership in my organization clearly
articulates our business objectives.
42) The leadership in my organization is visionary.
43) The leadership in my organization is an
inspirational example of values-based leadership.
44) The practice of our ethics and values in
leadership is a requirement for advancement in my
organization.
 71

IV. LEVEL OF ORGANIZATIONAL CYNICISM. Please put a

check mark under the column that corresponds to your
answer wherein:

4 – Strongly Agree, 3 – Agree, 2 – Disagree, 1 – Strongly Disagree

STATEMENTS 4 3 2 1
SA A D SD
1) I believe that my company (my organization)
says one thing and does another.
2) My company’s (my organization’s) policies,
goals, and practices seem to have little in
common.
3) My company (my organization) expects one
thing of its employees, but rewards another.
4) When I think about my organization, I
experience aggravation.
5) When I think about my organization I get
angry.
6) When I think about my organization, I get
tension.
7) When I think about my organization, I feel a
sense of anxiety.
8) I complain about what is happening in the work
to my friends beyond my institution.
9) We look at each other in a meaningful way with
my colloquies when my institution and its
employees are mentioned.
10) I criticize the institution’s practices and
policies with others.
 72

V. LEVEL OF WORK LOCUS OF CONTROL. Please put a check

mark under the column that corresponds to your answer
wherein:

4 – Strongly Agree, 3 – Agree, 2 – Disagree, 1 – Strongly Disagree

STATEMENTS 4 3 2 1
SA A D SD
1) A job is what you make of it.
2) On most jobs, people can pretty much accomplish
whatever they set out to accomplish.
3) If you know what you want out of a job, you can
find a job that gives it to you.
4) If employees are unhappy with a decision made by
their boss, they should do something about it.
5) Getting the job you want is mostly a matter of luck.
6) Making money is primarily a matter of good
fortune.
7) Most people are capable of doing their jobs well if
they make the effort.
8) In order to get a really good job, you need to have
family members or friends in high places.
9) Promotions are usually a matter of good fortune.
10) When it comes to landing a really good job, who
you know is more important than what you know.
11) Promotions are given to employees who perform
well on the job.
12) To make a lot of money you have to know the
right people.
13) It takes a lot of luck to be an outstanding
employee on most jobs.
14) People who perform their jobs well generally get
rewarded.
15) Most employees have more influence on their
supervisors than they think they do.
16) The main difference between people who make
a lot of money and people who make a little money
is luck.