Abstract

The current study, contextualizes in the higher education context of Pakistan, adopts a gender lens for the relationship of gender similarity with LMX  (Leader Member Exchange) and OCB (Organizational Citizenship Behaviors). Also, the study attempts investigation of the moderating effects of gender similarity in the relationship of LMX with OCB. The study adopts a quantitative approach with a cross-sectional survey design. Multistage proportionate stratified random sampling is employed for the sample of 1008 full-time faculty from 7 Public and 7 Private, HEC recognized universities across Rawalpindi and Islamabad. Standardized 12-item LMX-MDM and 12-item OCB scales are employed. Statistical analysis include descriptive statistics, Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and moderated linear regression. The study ends in equivocal findings regarding the moderating role of gender similarity in a relationship of LMX with OCB across the sample public and private sector universities. The study also yields mixed findings regarding the relationship of gender similarity with LMX. Further the findings of the study do not support the proposition of relationship of gender similarity with OCB. 

Key Words

Gender Similarity, LMX and OCB

Introduction

The forces of globalization, technological revolution, harsh vicissitudes of labor market, unpredictable economic shifts etc. have altered the milieu in which organizations operate. This is particularly true in the context of academia where the thrust of capitalism is altering the nature of knowledge, learning institutions and the teaching learning processes towards commodification (Ouellet & Martin, 2018). In consonance with this shifting reality, the impetus of institutional reforms is geared towards amplification of quality, performance and productivity (Pritchard, 1990; Mok & Lee, 2003) for achieving competitive advantage. The pursuit of this objective, however, necessitates an enactment of extra-role citizenship behaviors by the employees that transcends the formal in-role job descriptions (Bogler & Somech, 2004). Leader member exchange (LMX) has been theorized as a viable mechanism that galvanizes the employees to participate in prosocial activities in their organizations (Hackett, Farh, Song, & Lapierre, 2003) that transcends “the call of duty” (Moorman & Blakely, 1995, p. 130). With reference to the relationship theorized between LMX and Organizational Citizenship behavior (OCB) there exists a gap whereby the social exchange theory falls short in elucidating the “process and boundary conditions” (Avolio et al., 2009, p.429) through which the employees may be galvanized to perform OCB. There exists a meager understanding as to “why and when” (Waismel?Manor et al., 2010, p.168) citizenship behaviors are enacted as a response to high LMX. Researchers have expressed an urge to examine the mechanisms that may elucidate the link between LMX and OCB (Hackett et al., 2003). 

The current study addresses this gap by proposing gender similarity as a ‘boundary condition’ that affects the relationship of LMX with OCB. The current study attempts to explore the effect of gender similarity on a relationship of LMX with OCB in the context of HE sector of Pakistan across the selected public and private universities of Rawalpindi and Islamabad. The current study is significant in the Pakistani context from two perspectives. Considering the fact that universities are grappling with resource constraints (Vigoda-Gadot, 2006), and confronting immense pressure for outperforming in order to receive additional funding; the current study aims at elucidating the mechanism through which leaders can stimulate the subordinates to engage in prosocial tasks exceeding beyond the formal job duties for augmenting the performance of their universities. This aspect in turn would be critical in advancing leadership in our universities amidst the current educational leadership crisis (Zaman, 2014)

The current study adopts a gender focus owing to the fact that in the recent years there has been an accentuation on the significance of incorporating gender focus in the research study designs across the disciplines specifically management as it may have implications in the organizational settings (Tannenbaum et al., 2016). This is specifically critical in the context of research in Pakistan where the studies had primarily adopted a gender neutral approach (Asad & Allana, 2015). The other premise for adopting a gender focus was to empirically validate the theoretical assertions that Gender may be a pertinent demographic variable that has a propensity to render influence on social processes in the organizational contexts (Wayne et al., 1994) such as its proclivity to render effect on the quality of supervisor and subordinate “dyadic relationship” (Tsui, Porter, & Egan, 2002) and its subsequent effect on LMX-OCB relationship (Wang et al., 2017; Lo et al. 2006). Considering the fact that culture renders a profound impact on the expectations pertaining to the gender roles in a society (Hofstede, 2011) which subsequently transpires in the occupational context (Diamond, 2002); it is logical to assume that the findings of organizational studies on gendered relations and it outcomes would vary across cultures. This aspect also served as an impetus for the current study in examining the gendered relations and its effects on social processes like LMX and OCB in the Pakistani organizational context. Further considering the fact that Pakistan is located in the patriarchal belt and is essentially a high power distance society where a distance exists between the seniors and subordinates in the organizational contexts (Islam, 2004); it would be interesting to probe the impact of gender similarity in the supervisor and subordinates’ dyadic association  and its subsequent outcomes.  

Literature Review

Organizational Citizenship Behaviors are described as “individual behavior that is discretionary, not explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, and that in the aggregate promotes the effective functioning of the organization” (Organ, 1988, p.4) including the educational institutes (Oplatka, 2009) by supporting the “the broader organizational, social, and psychological context of the organization within which the technical core functions” (Borman & Motowildo, 1993, p. 95). OCBs have been attributed to the effectiveness of an organizations (Ehrhart, Bliese, & Thomas, 2006) through effective resource efficiencies (Oplatka, 2009) and knowledge management (Evans & Davis, 2005). OCBs have also been linked with enhanced interpersonal productivity (Karadal & Saygin, 2013) that fosters an attractive working milieu (Podsakoff et al., 2000) where employees are well retained (Podsakoff & MacKenzie, 1997). Further as employees perform OCBs out of their good will for concern for the organization, they foster an environment of professional excellence. This voluntarism eliminates the need for deploying additional human resource for routine monitoring activities which could be assigned other important tasks. (Sesen & Basim, 2012). Studies indicate that employees exhibiting OCBs also result in improved personal outcomes such as positive performance appraisals and consequently higher compensations (e.g. Organ et al., 2006).

OCB has been rigorously studied in connection with Dyadic LMX which is characterized as the “quality of exchange relationship between a leader and a subordinate” (Martin et al., 2010) in a dyad. The relationship is not unidirectional but reciprocal in essence. A leader may forge differential relationships with each of the subordinate in different dyads. The high and low quality LMX may be perceived as bipolar extremities in a spectrum of LMX exchange quality (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995). Subordinates in the high quality LMX with their supervisor constitute the in-groups (Northouse, 2018). Members of the in-groups are treated by their supervisors as ‘trusted confidants’. These members are most likely to receive from their leader sponsorship in social networks (Sparrowe & Liden, 2005), mentorship, empowerment (Chen et al., 2007) and support in career advancement (Day, 2014), task performance (Bauer & Erdogan, 2015) and loyalty in reciprocation for higher levels of subordinate organizational citizenship behaviors. High-quality social exchanges are especially advantageous for members, as followers in these relationships have been shown to advance more quickly through the organization (Day, 2014) and wield higher levels of power (Sparrowe & Liden, 2005). However in low quality exchange relationships, there exists mistrust, lack of commitment and support between the leader and the subordinates. The interactions with the leader tend to be formal amidst high power distance (Harris, Kacmar & Witt, 2005) and the relationship is relegated to mere economic exchanges which are transactional in essence (Bauer & Erdogan, 2015).      

It was theorized that the high quality LMX invokes higher occurrences of subordinates OCBs (Hackett, Farh, Song, & Lapierre, 2003). It is theorized that as high quality LMX is forged with the subordinates which entails trust, latitude and provision of tangible and intangible benefits; the subordinates reciprocate by performing OCBs to meet or surpass their supervisor’s expectations (Wayne et al., 2002). The postulation was later validated by the empirical studies (Ilies et al., 2007; Masterson, et al., 2000) which attests to an affirmative relationship of the quality of LMX and the frequency of engagement in OCB (e.g. Ilies, Nahrgang & Morgeson, 2007).

In the same vein it is theorized that LMX strongly predicts citizenship behaviors that are directed towards the individual (OCBI) as compared to citizenship behaviors that are directed towards the organization (OCBO) (Ilies et al., 2007). Walumbwa and colleagues (2011) assert that the relationship of LMX with OCB is manifested through two steps of processes. The social interactions between the supervisor and subordinates evokes “reciprocal interdependency” (Cropanzano & Mitchell, 2005) between both parties in a dyad. Over a period of time as trust and mutual commitment builds this results in elicitation of organizational citizenship behaviors. In the second process the leaders in high quality LMX augment the self-efficacy of the subordinates which in turn prompt OCBs. 

 The current study is grounded in the similarity attraction paradigm. Similarity-attraction theory is premised on the fact “that perceived similarity leads to attraction…individuals will be positively disposed toward others whom they perceive to be more similar” (Osbeck et al., 1997, p.114). While attitudinal similarity formed the basis of early work on similarity-attraction paradigm; the subsequent conceptualization of the paradigm also embedded the notion of demographic similarity. Demographic similarity refers to the extent to which the demographic attributes such as age, gender, race etc. of an individual depicts similarity with the referent (Riordan & Shore, 1997). Number of studies in the organizational settings allude to positive outcomes for demographically similar dyads (e.g. Riordan, 2000; Somech, 2003; Milner et al., 2007) such as interpersonal comfort (Allen et al., 2000), subordinate satisfaction (Liden, Wayne, & Stilwell, 1993), better subordinate performance evaluations (Varama & Stroh, 2001) and mentoring (Turban et al., 2002) .

In the work settings, gender similarity tends to be one of the notable individual characteristics that serves as a lens for the referent to categorize others at the initial stages of interaction which subsequently forms a basis for a particular relationship with them (Turban et al., 2002). Graves and Powell (1995) elucidates this effect in the context of job interviews by contending:

“Demographic similarity between the recruiter and applicant on characteristics such as sex leads to perceived similarity in attitudes and values which in turn leads to interpersonal attraction between the recruiter and the applicant. Interpersonal attraction then leads to positive bias in the recruiter’s interview conduct” (p. 86).

It is theorized that the supervisor and subordinates in gender similar LMX dyads have a common understanding of role expectations (Bakar, Jian & Fairhurst, 2013) and are in a better perspective to anticipate each other’s’ behavior (Meglino, et al., 1991). The predictableness leads to better communication between the two and thus improves the quality of leader-member exchanges (Bauer & Green, 1996). Therefore it is theorized that supervisors in the same sex LMX dyads are in a better perspective to forge high quality LMX.

An equivocal nature of empirical evidence exists in this context. Findings of a stream of studies discounts such a proposition (e.g. Pelled & Xix, 2000, Thomas, 2013; Matkin & Barbuto, 2012; Zhang, Wang & Shi, 2012; Epitropaki & Martin, 1999;  Bauer & Green, 1995).  Other studies (e.g. Somech, 2003; Vecchio & Brazil, 2007) affirm the relationship between gender similarity and LMX whereby the supervisors developed a positive bias for subordinates with similar gender as theirs in a dyad (Goertzen & Fritz, 2004; Green, Anderson, & Shivers, 1996). The positive bias resulted in better performance evaluations for those subordinates by their supervisors (Varama & Stroh, 2001) in comparison to the subordinates with dissimilar gender. A study by Milner et al. (2007) in the South African context also alluded to a high quality LMX in gender similar dyads. A study by Soldner (2009) also demonstrated that among the other demographic variables only gender depicted a relationship with LMX. A study by Bhal, Ansari and Aafaqi (2007) in the Malaysian context with a sample of 201 Malaysian employees indicated a significant influence of gender similarity on LMX quality. In consonance with the studies, it is hypothesized:  




Hypothesis 1a: Subordinates in the gender similar LMX dyads will report a high quality of LMX in comparison to those in gender dissimilar LMX dyads across sample public and private sector universities of Rawalpindi and Islamabad.

It is further theorized that female subordinates in gender similar dyads would report high quality of LMX as compared to the male subordinates. This proposition is premised on the fact that stereotypically female supervisors owing to their communal behaviors (Van Emmerik, 2006) and transformational leadership (Eagly, 2003) more often build affect based trust among their subordinates (Feingold, 1994) in comparison to male counterparts (Chua et al., 2008). The effect of this trust is more robust for female subordinates (Tourigny et al., 2017; Berkovich, 2018) than male subordinates. Further it is popularly theorized (Cohen & Huffman, 2007) that women supervisors’ act as “change agents” for their female subordinates by supporting their careers   It is therefore hypothesized:




Hypothesis 1b: Female subordinates in the gender similar LMX dyads will report a high quality LMX in comparison to male subordinates in gender similar LMX dyads across sample public and private sector universities of Rawalpindi and Islamabad. It is theorized that the affect based trust between a female supervisor and the female subordinate in a dyad would motivate the subordinates to perform OCB (Bolino. et al., 2015; Tourigny et al., 2017) as a ‘pay back’ mechanism to reciprocate the trust of their supervisors. It is therefore hypothesized:     




Hypothesis 2: Female subordinates in the gender similar LMX dyads will report high OCB in comparison to male subordinates in gender similar LMX dyads across public and private sector universities of Rawalpindi and Islamabad

In the same vein it is posited:




Hypothesis 3: The relationship of LMX with OCB would be moderated by gender similarity 

The hypothesis of moderation of gender similarity in a relationship of LMX with OCB is derived from the previous studies (e.g. Soldner, 2009; Estiri at al., 2017; Brownell, 2010; Lo et al. 2006). While the aspect of gender in a relationship between LMX and OCB has critical implications in the organizational contexts yet meager studies have examined such effects. A study by Wang et al. (2017) contextualized in the Hospitality industry in New Zealand  demonstrated a significant moderation of gender in a relationships of LMX with organizational justice and OCB whereby the level of engagement of women in OCB was higher than men. While elucidating their findings, Wang et al. (2017) contended that in the hospitality industry where women experience a ‘glass ceiling effect’ owing to gender discrimination, their high level of engagement in OCB may be an outcome of the organizational justice which they perceived when they experienced high quality of LMX with their supervisors.  As for their male colleagues who did not experience any discrimination per se, the high quality LMX was interpreted by them simply as a positive social que and taken for granted while demonstrating a lower level of OCB in comparison with their female colleagues. 

Recent studies, however, have reported a much stronger effect of dissimilar than similar attitudes, which corresponds to the similarity–dissimilarity asymmetry

hypothesis (Singh & Ho, 2000; Singh & Tan, 1992; Singh & Teoh, 1999; Smeaton et al., 1989; Tan & Singh, 1995).

Method

Sample and data Collection

 

The study adopted a quantitative research method with a cross-sectional survey research design. Multistage proportionate stratified random sampling was employed to draw a sample such that the sample represented 50% of the population. At the initial stage seven public as well as seven private universities of Rawalpindi and Islamabad were selected. At the second stage the proportionate stratification of the full time faculty members at the selected universities was carried out such that the sample represented 50% of the male and female faculty members. This yielded a sample of 666 full time faculty members from the selected HEC recognized public sector universities and a sample of 342 full time faculty members from the selected HEC recognized private sector universities of Rawalpindi and Islamabad. The total sample size was estimated to be 1008. A total of 743 questionnaires were returned with a response rate of 73.7%.

Table 1. Sample of Public Sector Universities

 

Public Universities	F. Total	M. Total	Total
AIR	26	40	66
Bahria	45	61	106
NUML	68	69	137
ARID	35	65	100
FJWU	78	20	98
AIOU	38	51	89
Urdu	26	44	70

 

Table 2. Sample of Private Sector Universities

 

Private Universities	F. Total	M. Total	Total
FAST	22	44	66
IQRA	39	43	82
ZABIST	11	25	36
HAMDARD	15	21	36
FAUJI	26	35	61
Riphah	20	24	44
MY University	5	12	17

 

The sample Public sector universities consisted of 54% males and 46% females. The private sector sample universities consisted of 59% Males and 41% females.   Frequencies of the gender similar and dissimilar dyads are elaborated in Table 3.

Table 3. Frequencies of Gender Similar and Dissimilar Dyads

Dyads	Frequency	Percent
M-MHOD	324	43.6
F-FHOD	116	15.6
M-FHOD	89	12.0
F-MHOD	214	28.8

 

The frequency of dyadic tenure with the current supervisor is more in the sample public sector universities as compared to private sector universities as depicted in Table 4

 

Table 4. Dyadic Tenure with the Current Supervisor

 

Public Universities
GHOD			LHOD		Total
			1-5	6-10
Male	Gender	Male	137	63	200
		Female	104	28	132
	Total		241	91	332
Female	Gender	Male	39	23	62
		Female	64	29	93
	Total		103	52	155
Private Universities
Male	Gender	Male	109	15	124
		Female	78	4	82
	Total		187	19	206
Female	Gender	Male	22	5	27
		Female	19	4	23
	Total		41	9	50

 

Measures

 

The dependent variable of the study is OCB which was measured through a standardized 12-item OCB scale by MacKenzie et al. (1993). This explicit self-report scale gathers information from subordinates (N=743) pertaining to the four dimensions of OCB namely: civic virtue, altruism, sportsmanship, and conscientiousness on a 7-point Likert scale. Out of the 12 items, items 1, 2, 3 measure civic virtue. Items 4, 5, 6 measure Sportsmanship. Items 7, 8, 9 measure Altruism. Items 10, 11, 12 measure Conscientiousness. Sample items include: “I attend functions that are not required but that help the university’s image”, “I help orient new employees even though it is not required”.

The independent variable of the study is LMX which was measured through a 12-Item LMX-MDM (Leader-Member Exchange – Multi Dimensional Measure) developed by Liden and Maslyn (1998). The questionnaire elicited subordinates’ (N=743) self-reports for assessing the quality of their relationship with their supervisor across four facets of LMX-MDM: affect, loyalty, contribution and professional respect using a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Sample items include: “I like my supervisor very much as a person”; “My supervisor would come to my defense if I were criticized by others in the university”.

The study is based on self- reports from the subordinates because they are in a better perspective to evaluate the quality of their association with their supervisor. Further the nature of this study warrants an elicitation of the subjective experiences of subordinates’ engagement in OCB.

 

Reliability and validity assessment

 

The Exploratory Factor Analysis for 12 item LMX-MDM resulted in the loading of all items on to a single factor depicting strong inter item correlation. The Exploratory Factor Analysis for 12 item OCB resulted in loading of all items neatly across four factors: civic virtue, altruism, conscientiousness and sportsmanship.

Table 5. Descriptive and Psychometrics Properties of the Scales Used in the Present Study (N = 743)

Variables	Items No	M	SD	?	Score	Range	Skew	Kurt
					Potential	Actual
OCB	12	64.86	7.76	.70	12-84	36-84	-0.53	0.54
Civic Virtue	3	15.02	3.05	.48	3-21	3-21	-0.75	0.80
Sportsmanship	3	15.87	3.39	.64	3-21	6-21	-0.63	-0.24
Altruism	3	16.91	2.74	.61	3-21	5-21	-1.01	0.89
Conscientiousness	3	17.07	3.20	.84	3-21	4-21	-1.14	0.85
LMX	12	64.87	7.77	.94	12-84	36-84	-0.53	0.54

Note. M= Mean; SD = Standard Deviation; LMX =Leader Member exchange

Table 5 shows descriptive statistics, alpha reliability coefficients, and skewness and kurtosis of OCB, CMS, and LMX along with its subscales. The table also shows the Mean and Standard deviation of the scales. All the scales are adequately reliable indicating that the scale are internally consistent. Table 1 also shows skewness and kurtosis values that shows data are normally distributed. 

Results

Gender Similarity and LMX

 

Hypothesis 1a posited that the subordinates in gender similar LMX dyads would report a high quality of LMX in comparison to those in gender dissimilar LMX dyads. Hypothesis 1b posited that female subordinates in the gender similar LMX dyads will report a high quality of LMX in comparison to male subordinates in gender similar LMX dyads. The result of one way ANOVA for the public and private sector universities is depicted in Table 6 and Table 7 respectively.

Table 6. Mean, Standard deviation, and F-values on LMX, among Similar and Dissimilar Gender Dyads (N =487) for Public Sector Universities.

	1 M-MHOD		2 F-FHOD		3 M-FHOD		4 F-MHOD
	(n = 200)		(n = 93)		(n = 62)		(n = 132)
Scale LMX	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD	F-value B/w gps	p-value B/w gps
	61.38	15.0	66.62	11.59	62.90	14.46	62.87	14.17	2.91	.03

Note: M=Mean; SD=Standard Deviation; LMX=Leader Member Exchange

Table 6 shows the group mean differences on OCB and its subscales among similar and cross-gender dyads for public sector universities. Results show that there are significant differences among four types of dyads on LMX. The results further demonstrate that among the gender similar dyads, female gender similar LMX dyads exhibit significant differences (M=66.62, SD=11.59) with the male gender similar dyads (M=61.38, SD=15.0), as well as with both male gender dissimilar dyads (M=62.90, SD=14.46) and female gender dissimilar dyads (M=62.87, SD=14.14) on LMX quality (F (3, 483) =2.91, p = .03).

Table 7. Mean, Standard deviation, and F-values on LMX, among Similar and Dissimilar Gender Dyads (N =256) for Private Sector Universities.

	1 M-MHOD		2 F-FHOD		3 M-FHOD		4 F-MHOD
	(n = 124)		(n = 23)		(n = 27)		(n = 82)
Scale LMX	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD	F-value B/w gps	p-value B/w gps
	65.56	12.36	57.60	10.04	65.44	10.97	61.69	12.94	3.77	.01

Note: M=Mean; SD=Standard Deviation; LMX=Leader Member Exchange

Table 7 shows the group mean differences on OCB and its subscales among similar and cross-gender dyads for private sector universities. Results show that there are significant differences among four types of dyads on OCB and its subscales. The results further demonstrate that among the gender similar dyads, Male gender similar LMX dyads (M=65.56, SD=12.36) exhibited significant differences not only with the female gender similar dyads (M=57.60, SD=10.04) but also with both male gender dissimilar dyads (M=65.44, SD=10.97) and female gender dissimilar dyads (M=61.69, SD=12.94) on LMX quality (F (3, 252) =3.77, p=.01). The ANOVA results for the public and private sector universities provided partial support for hypotheses 1a and 1b.

 

Gender Similarity and OCB

 

Hypothesis 2 posited that Female subordinates in the gender similar LMX dyads will report high OCB in comparison to male subordinates in gender similar LMX dyads across selected public and private sector universities of Rawalpindi and Islamabad. The results of One Way ANOVA for the public and private sector universities is depicted in Table 8 and Table 9 respectively.

Table 8. Mean, Standard Deviation, and F-values on OCB, and its Subscales among Similar and Dissimilar Gender Dyads (N =487) for Public Sector Universities.

	1 M-MHOD		2 F-FHOD		3 M-FHOD		4 F-MHOD
	(n = 200)		(n = 93)		(n = 62)		(n = 132)
Scale	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD	F-value B/w gps	p-value B/w gps
OCB	65.03	7.61	66.61	6.87	65.66	7.17	65.53	7.74	.95	.41
Civic	14.93	2.95	15.68	2.72	15.25	2.36	15.12	3.14	1.46	.22
Sport	15.89	3.44	15.80	3.57	16.54	3.04	15.53	3.88	1.15	.32
Altr	17.25	2.36	17.35	2.54	16.61	2.77	17.57	2.47	2.15	.09
Con.	16.96	2.99	17.76	2.77	17.24	2.92	17.29	2.76	1.66	.17

Note. OCB= organizational Citizenship Behavior, civic =Civic Virtue, sports=Sportsmanship, Altr=Altruism, con=Conscientiousness

Table 8 shows the group mean differences on OCB and its subscales among similar and cross-gender dyads for public sector universities. Results show that there are non-significant differences among four types of dyads on OCB and its subscales across both public and private sector universities thereby rejecting hypothesis 2.

 

Table 9. Mean, Standard deviation, and F-values on OCB, and its Subscales among Similar and Dissimilar Gender Dyads (N =256) for Private Sector Universities.

	1 M-MHOD		2 F-FHOD		3 M-FHOD		4 F-MHOD
	(n = 124)		(n = 23)		(n = 27)		(n = 82)
Scale	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD	F-value B/w gps	p-value B/w gps
OCB	63.83	8.75	62.73	8.13	64.62	7.17	63.03	7.65	.38	.76
Civic	14.77	3.33	14.86	4.00	15.37	2.55	14.41	3.26	.60	.61
Sport	16.12	2.98	15.08	3.01	16.44	3.12	15.53	3.13	1.44	.23
Altr	16.23	3.12	16.04	3.14	16.48	3.16	16.15	2.95	.10	.95
Con.	16.70	4.04	16.73	3.12	16.33	4.26	16.92	3.14	.18	.91

Note. OCB= organizational Citizenship Behavior, civic =Civic Virtue, sports=Sportsmanship, Altr=Altruism, con=Conscientiousness

Table 9 shows the group mean differences on OCB and its subscales among similar and cross-gender dyads for private sector universities. Results show that there are non-significant differences among four types of dyads on OCB and its subscales

 

Moderating role of Gender Similarity in a relationship of LMX with OCB

 

Hypothesis 3 postulated that the relationship between LMX and OCB would be moderated by Gender similarity. The effect of LMX on OCB would be higher for female gender similar dyads than male gender similar dyads across the public and private sector universities of Rawalpindi and Islamabad.

Simple moderation analysis was used to estimate and test hypotheses about the paths of casual influence from LMX on OCB, through the proposed dichotomous gender dyads variable (0= gender dissimilar dyads, 1=Gender similar dyads). In order to calculate the effect of this simple moderation, the PROCESS macro of Hayes (2013) was used.

Multiple regression analyses were conducted for sample public sector universities to assess each component of the proposed moderation model. The results are presented in Table 10 and figure 1. The results exhibits the association between LMX and OCB (a-path) and the interaction effect of LMX and dichotomous gender dyads on OCB.

Table 10 illustrates that LMX exhibited an insignificant effect on OCB (? = .002, t (483) = -.051, p = .960). Gender similarity exhibited a significant effect on OCB (? = -9.30, t (483) = -3.02, p = .003). The interaction effect of LMX and gender similarity was significant (? = .147, t (483) = 3.08, 2= .003).

 

The overall model was significant F (3,483) = 8.16, p=.00, R² =.22.  Under the condition of the significance of gender similar dyads (t=.00). This model significantly explained 22% of the variance in OCB. The resultant slope of the moderation analysis is exhibited in Fig 1.

Table 10. Moderating role of Gender Dyads on Relationship between LMX and OCB on the Sample of Public University (N=487)

	OCB
Antecedent	B	SE	T	P
constant	65.454	2.381	27.488	.000
Dyads	-9.305	3.074	-3.027	.003
lmx	.002	.037	.051	.960
Dyads x LMX	.147	.048	3.086	.002

Note. OCB= organizational Citizenship Behavior, LMX=Leader Member Exchange, Dyads =dichotomous (1=gender similar, 0=gender dissimilar)

Figure 1

Public Sector Universities



Multiple regression analyses were conducted for sample private sector universities to assess each component of the proposed moderation model. The results are presented in Table 11 and figure 2. The results exhibits the association between LMX and OCB (a-path) and the interaction effect of LMX and dichotomous gender dyads on OCB.

 

The overall model was insignificant F (3,252) = 4.00 p=.008, R² =.21. Under the condition of the significance of gender similar dyads (p=.00) his model significantly explained 21% of the variance in OCB. The resultant slope of the moderation analysis is exhibited in Fig 2

Table 11 illustrates that LMX exhibited an insignificant effect on OCB (? = .084, t (252) = 1.36, p = .174). Gender similarity exhibited an insignificant effect on OCB (? = -5.51, t (252) = -1.04, p = .298). The interaction effect of LMX and gender similarity was insignificant (? = .087, t (252) = 1.06, p= .288).

Table 11. Moderating Role of Gender Dyads on Relationship between LMX and OCB on the Sample of Private UNIVERSITY (N=256)

	OCB
Antecedent	B	SE	T	P
constant	58.171	3.935	14.784	.000
Dyads	-5.515	5.284	1.044	.298
lmx	.084	.062	1.363	.174
Dyads x LMX	.087	.082	1.065	.288

Note. OCB= organizational Citizenship Behavior, LMX=Leader Member Exchange, Dyads =dichotomous (1=gender similar, 0=gender dissimilar)

Figure 2

Private Sector Universities



Discussion

The current study adopted a gender focus in analyzing the relationship between LMX and OCB primarily owing to the fact that gender is a pertinent factor that has the propensity to render influence on social processes within the organizational contexts (Wayne et al., 1994). The current study contextualized in the higher education sector of Pakistan is anchored in the similarity-attraction paradigm which provided a reference for theorizing the relationship of gender similarity in relation to LMX and OCB. Therefore while the study sought to contribute to the knowledge base pertaining to the similarity attraction paradigm, it also aimed at elucidating the mechanism through which LMX predicts OCB.  

Hypothesis 1a posited that the subordinates in gender similar LMX dyads would report a high quality of LMX in comparison to those in gender dissimilar LMX dyads. Hypothesis 1b posited that female subordinates in the gender similar LMX dyads will report a high quality LMX in comparison to male subordinates in gender similar LMX dyads. The results demonstrated that in the sample public sector universities, female gender similar LMX dyads reported a high quality of LMX not only in comparison with their male counterpart but also with both male and female gender dissimilar dyads. Interestingly for the sample private sector universities, contrary to our hypothesis male gender similar LMX dyads reported a high quality of LMX not only in comparison with their counterpart female gender similar dyads but also with both male and female gender dissimilar dyads. 

The equivocal findings yielded by the study with reference to hypothesis 1a, 1b are also supported by the literature (Thomas, 2013; Lo et al., 2009). The findings, equivocal as they may be, yet brings forth a pattern of gender oriented differential treatment by the supervisors towards their subordinates across the selected public and private sector universities of Rawalpindi and Islamabad. While the finding of high quality LMX reported by male subordinates in gender similar dyads in male dominated private universities lend support to hypothesis 1a; it also alludes to a ‘boys club’ with a tendency towards gender differential treatment. In the similar vein while the high quality LMX reported by female subordinates in gender similar dyads in male dominated sample public universities lend support to hypothesis 1a  and 1b, it also alludes to a female support network whereby female supervisors developed an trusting relationship with female subordinates.   More studies are warranted to elucidate the nature of relationships among both the male and female gender similar dyads across the private and public sector sample universities.

In the sample public sector universities within the female gender similar dyads, 68.8% female faculty reported a dyadic tenure that ranged from 1-5 years with the current female supervisor while 31.1% reported a dyadic tenure that ranged from 6-10 years with the current female supervisor. In the sample private sector universities within the female gender similar dyads, 82.6% female faculty reported a dyadic tenure that ranged from 1-5 years with the current female supervisor while 17.3% reported a dyadic tenure that ranged from 6-10 years with the current female supervisor. It may well be possible that female subordinates in gender similar dyads in the sample private universities had a relatively short dyadic tenure with their supervisors in comparison to those in the public sector sample. As a consequence the affect based trust between the female supervisor and female subordinates in LMX dyads at the private sector universities may not have been adequately developed to a point where it manifested as OCB.  Trust develops over a period of time (Harrison et al., 1998) before its effects transpires at the organizational level. The finding that the female subordinates in gender similar dyads in private sector did not report high quality of LMX in sample private sector universities may be explained by the social identity theory (Gaertner & Dovidio, 2008). As per the theory, the female supervisors owing to their numerical minority may have identified themselves with the male majority for maintaining their positive identity. By doing so they may have enacted a leadership role non-stereotypically in an agentic manner like their male colleagues. The female subordinates consequently could not identify themselves with such supervisors and hence the trusting LMX relationship could not have forged which could subsequently motivate them to engage in OCB. 

The current study failed to provide support for hypothesis 2 that female subordinates in gender similar LMX dyads will report high OCB in comparison to their counterparts across the sample public and private universities. This is evident from the fact that no mean differences were found in the OCBs of both the male and female gender similar dyads. Therefore the study rejects the hypothesis 2. While the finding is in conformity with a study by Thomas (2013) in the US context it however contrasted with a s study by Tourigny et al. (2017) in the context of Chinese manufacturing industry where gender similarity in female LMX dyads predicted OCB. Findings of the present study also contrasted with a study by Farrel and Finkelstein (2007).    

The study reported mixed findings for hypothesis 3 which posited a moderation effect of gender similarity in a relationship between LMX and OCB. While the study reported a significant moderation effect of gender similarity in in the sample public sector universities, it however alluded to an insignificant moderation effect of gender similarity for the sample private sector universities thereby discounting the similarity effect of gender of both the supervisor and the subordinates in intervening the effect of LMX on OCB. This finding is consistent with studies conducted elsewhere (e.g. Soldner, 2009; Estiri at al., 2017; Brownell, 2010).

As the study contributed findings to the relevant knowledge base, in due process it also made a practical contribution by validating the psychometric properties of the scales used in the study. While this was warranted to ascertain the relevance of scales in Pakistani context, yet it was also carried out in response to the evoked urge (Liden & Maslyn, 1998) for ascertaining the generalizability of the construct across various contexts. A pertinent finding by the current study in this regard was the validation of unidimensionality of LMX-MDM rather than the multidimensionality as initially conceptualized by Liden and Maslyn (1998). This finding corroborate with that of other studies  (e.g. Joseph, Newman & Sin, 2011; Scherbaum et al. 2006) whereby the factor analysis resulted in the loading of all four facets of LMX-MDM onto a single factor, thereby suggesting strong item correlation.

The findings of the study must be interpreted by taking into consideration the limitations of the research. The current study employs a cross-sectional design and therefore imbibes the limitations that are inherent in cross-sectional designs. It is suggested that for conclusive findings longitudinal study designs must be employed for examining the interactive effect of gender in influencing the quality LMX and its subsequent effect in engagement of OCB. While the subordinate self-reports form the basis of present research; it would be worthwhile to incorporate the perceptions of the immediate supervisors as well for more conclusive findings.

References

• Allen, T. D., Poteet, M. L., & Russell, J. E. A. (2000). Proteg' e selection by mentors: What makes the difference? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 271-282
• Asad, N., & Allana, A. A. (2015). Gender Research in Pakistan: A Scoping Review. European Scientific Journal, ESJ, 11(3).
• Avolio, B. J., Walumbwa, F.O., & Weber. T.J. (2009). Leadership: Current theories, research, and future directions. Annual review of psychology, 60 (2009): 421-449.
• Bakar, H. A., Jian, G., & Fairhurst, G. (2014). Where do I stand? The interaction of leader-member exchange and performance ratings. Asian Business & Management, 13(2), 143-170.
• Bauer, T. N., & Erdogan, B. (Eds.). (2015). The Oxford handbook of leadermember exchange. Oxford University Press
• Bauer, T. N., & Green, S. G. (1996). Development of leader-member exchange: A longitudinal test. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 1538-1567.
• Berkovich, I. (2018). Effects of Principal-Teacher Gender Similarity on Teacher's Trust and Organizational Commitment. Sex Roles, 78(7-8), 561-572.
• Bhal, K. T., Ansari, M. A., & Aafaqi, R. (2007). The role of gender match, LMX tenure, and support in leader-member exchange. International Journal of Business and Society, 8(2), 63-80.
• Bogler, R., & Somech, A. (2004). Influence of teacher empowerment on teachers' organizational commitment, professional commitment and organizational citizenship behavior in schools. Teaching and teacher education, 20(3), 277-289.
• Bolino, M. C., Hsiung, H. H., Harvey, J., & LePine, J. A. (2015).
• Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. M. (1993). Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of contextual performance. Personnel Selection in Organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Brownell, J. (2010). Leadership in the service of hospitality. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 51(3), 363-378
• Chen, Z., Lam, W., & Zhong, J. A. (2007). Leader-member exchange and member performance: a new look at individual-level negative feedback-seeking behavior and team-level empowerment climate. Journal of applied psychology, 92(1), 202.
• Chua, R.Y.J., Ingram, P., & Morris, M.W. (2008). From the head and the heart: Locating cognition- and affect-based trust in managers' professional networks. Academy of Management Journal, 51, 436-452.
• Cohen, P. N., Huffman, M. L. (2007). Working for the woman? Female managers and the Gender Wage Gap. American Sociological Review, 7(72), 681- 704.
• Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of management, 31(6), 874-900.
• Day, D. V. (2014). The Oxford handbook of leadership and organizations. NY: Oxford Library of Psychology
• Eagly, A. H., Johannesen-Schmidt, M.C., & van Engen, M.L. (2003), Transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership styles: A meta-analysis comparing women and men. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 569-591.
• Ehrhart, M. G., Bliese, P. D., & Thomas, J. L. (2006). Unit-level OCB and unit effectiveness: Examining the incremental effect of helping behavior. Human Performance, 19(2), 159-173.
• Epitropaki, O., & Martin, R. (1999). The impact of relational demography on the quality of leader‐ member exchanges and employees' work attitudes and well‐ being. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 72(2), 237-240.
• Estiri, M., Amiri, N. S., Khajeheian, D., & Rayej, H. (2018). Leader-member exchange and organizational citizenship behavior in hospitality industry: a study on effect of gender. Eurasian Business Review, 8(3), 267-284.
• Evans, W. R., & Davis, W. D. (2005). High-performance work systems and organizational performance: The mediating role of internal social structure. Journal of management, 31(5), 758-775.
• Farrell, S. K., & Finkelstein, L. M. (2007). Organizational citizenship behavior and gender: Expectations and attributions for performance. North American Journal of Psychology, 9(1).
• Feingold, A. (1994), Gender differences in personality: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 429-456.
• Gaertner, S. L., Dovidio, J. F., Guerra, R., Rebelo, M., Monteiro, M. B., Riek, B. M., et al. (2008). The common in-group identity model. In S. R. Levy & M. Killen (Eds.), Intergroup attitudes and relations in childhood through adulthood (pp. 204-219). New York: Oxford University Press
• Goertzen, B. J., & Fritz, S. (2004). Does sex of dyad members really matter? A review of leader-member exchange. Faculty Publications: Agricultural Leadership, Education & Communication Department, 26.
• Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. The leadership quarterly, 6(2), 219-247.
• Graves, L. M., & Powell, G. N. (1995). The effect of same sex similarity on recruiters' evaluation of actual applicants: A test of the similarityattraction paradigm. Personnel Psychology, 48(1), 85-98.
• Green, S. G., Anderson, S. E., & Shivers, S. L. (1996). Demographic and organizational influences on leader-member exchange and related work attitudes. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 66(2), 203-214.
• Hackett, R. D., Farh, J. L., Song, J. L., & Lapierre, L. M. (2003). LMX and organizational citizenship behavior: Examining links within and across Western and Chinese samples. In G. B. Graen (Ed.), Dealing with diversity (pp. 219 -264). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
• Harris, K. J., Kacmar, K. M., & Witt, L. A. (2005). An examination of the curvilinear relationship between leader-member exchange and intent to turnover. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(4), 363-378.
• Harrison, D. A., Price, K. H., & Bell, M. P. (1998). Beyond relational demography: Time and the effects of surface- and deep-level Sex Roles diversity on work group cohesion. Academy of Management Journal, 41(1), 96-107
• Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online readings in psychology and culture, 2(1), 8.
• Ilies, R., Nahrgang, J. D., & Morgeson, F. P. (2007). Leader-member exchange and citizenship behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal of applied psychology, 92(1), 269.
• Islam, N. (2004). Sifarish, sycophants, power and collectivism: Administrative culture in Pakistan. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 70(2), 311-330.
• Joseph, D. L., Newman, D. A., & Sin, H. P. (2011). Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) measurement: evidence for consensus, construct breadth, and discriminant validity. In Building methodological bridges (pp. 89-135). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
• Karadal, H. & Saygin, Y. M. (2013). The Relationship between Social Loafing and Organizational Citizenship among School Managers. Paper presented in the 2nd International Conference on the Reform of Curriculum and Teaching and Teacher Development, 22-24 March 2013, Hangzhou Normal University, Zhejiang, China.
• Liden, R. C., & Maslyn, J. M. (1998). Multidimensionality of leader-member exchange: An empirical assessment through scale development. Journal of management, 24(1), 43-72.
• Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., & Stilwell, D. (1993). A longitudinal study of the early development of leader-member exchanges. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 662-674.
• Lo, M. C., Ramayah, T., & de Run, E. C. (2009). Leader-Member Exchange, gender and influence tactic. A test on multinational companies in Malaysia. Problems and perspectives in management, 7(1), 49-56.