(i)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................ i

Table of Figures............................................................................................................................. iii

Chapter 1. Introduction.............................................................................................................. 1.1

1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 1.1

1.2 Gender discrimination in work place .............................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

1.3 Research discussing gender difference in employ affective reactionError! Bookmark not defined.

1.3.1 Attitudinal organizational commitment ......... Error! Bookmark not defined.

1.3.2 Job satisfaction ............................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

1.4 Literature discussing communication related social supportError! Bookmark not defined.

1.5 Methodology .................................................................................................................. 1.3

1.6 Scope of Project ............................................................................................................. 1.4

1.7 Proposed Solution .......................................................................................................... 1.4

Chapter 2. Literature Review .................................................................................................... 2.5

2.1 PERCEIVED ORGANIZATIONAL SUPPORT .......................................................... 2.5

2.2 Counterproductive work behaviour ............................................................................... 2.9

2.3 Creativity:..................................................................................................................... 2.10

2.4 Job performance:.......................................................................................................... 2.12

2.5 ORGANIZATION CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOR: ....................................................... 2.13

Chapter 3. THEORATICAL FRAMEWORK AND HYPOTHESIS

DEVELOPMENT ..................................................................................................................... 3.15

3.1 perceived organization support (POS) and counterproductive wok behaviour. .......... 3.15

3.2 perceived organization support (POS) and creativity .................................................. 3.17

Chapter 4. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ......................................................................... 4.19

4.1 Sample and Data Collection......................................................................................... 4.19

4.2 Design of the Study...................................................................................................... 4.19

4.3 Variables ...................................................................................................................... 4.19

4.3.1 Independent variables: ................................................................................ 4.19

4.3.2 Dependent Variables ................................................................................... 4.19

4.4 Measures ...................................................................................................................... 4.20

4.4.1 Perceived organizational support: ............................................................... 4.20

4.4.2 JOB performance ........................................................................................ 4.20

4.4.3 Counter productive work behaviour ........................................................... 4.20

4.4.4 Creativity..................................................................................................... 4.21

4.4.5 Organization citizenship behaviour ............................................................ 4.21

Chapter 5. RESULTS AND ANAYLSIS ................................................................................ 5.22

5.1 Hypothesis.................................................................................................................... 5.22

5.2 Control Variables ......................................................................................................... 5.22

5.3 Descriptive Statistics.................................................................................................... 5.22

5.4 Correlation Analysis. .................................................................................................. 5.22

5.5 CORELATION TABLE .............................................................................................. 5.23

(ii)

5.6 Regreshion ................................................................................................................... 5.23

5.6.1 Relationship between POS and OCB.......................................................... 5.23

5.6.2 RELATION Ship between POS and CR .................................................... 5.23

5.6.3 RELATION Ship between POS and JP ...................................................... 5.23

Chapter 6. DISCUSSIONS, LIMITAIONS AND CONCLUSION ...................................... 6.24

(iii)

TABLE OF FIGURES

No table of figures entries found.

LIST OF TABLES

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 INTRODUCTION

Any kind of human-resource insurance policy offers a number of features: developing

or enhancing procedures, disseminating sources, as well as controlling actions.

Difficulties regarding justice or justness can be a crucial concern in order to the

majority of individuals. With operate options, staff usually assess whether the benefits

they will be given match up their efforts for the firm or this benefits acquired by their

colleagues. Several reports get researched the theory’s central create, perceived

organizational support (POS), or even their education in order to which in turn staff

think the perform organization valuations the additions along with cares in relation to

the well-being. Since final article on POS literary works in 2000, the work

surroundings provides altered, escalating non-traditional perform human relationships

as well as the fact that coping with an international workforce even though

contemplating affects about employee well-being. Various aspects may possibly

clarify this particular spike in scholarly curiosity about POS, as well as (a) the

associations having organizationally relevant final results these kinds of While

citizenship conduct along with turnover, (b) the relevance over work contexts.

A statistical Research indicated that four major types of treatment is helpful which

received by workers were associated with POS. this treatment may be in the form of

favorable job conditions, fairness, organizational rewards and supervisor support.

POS was associated with Results favorable to workers in job satisfaction and positive

mood and behaviour. POS was also associated with Results favorable to the

organization in the form of emotional commitment, performance, and lessened

withdrawal behaviour). These relationships trusted techniques accepted by

organizational support theory: employees’ belief that the organization’s actions were

optional, feeling of commitment to help the organization, satisfaction of

socioemotional needs, and performance-reward desires.

Employers normally value worker dedication and loyalty. Employees who are

emotionally committed to the organization show heightened performance, reduced

absence, and a lessened likelihood of quitting their job. By distinction, workers are

typically additional involved with the organization’s commitment to them. Being

valued by the organization will yield such advantages as approval and respect, pay

and promotion, and access to info and alternative types of aid required to raised do

one’s job. The norm of reciprocity permits workers and employers to reconcile these

distinctive orientations.

Social exchange theorists have alluded to employment because the trade of effort and

loyalty for tangible advantages and social rewards. once one person treats another

well, the reciprocity norm obliges the return of favorable treatment. To the extent that

each the worker and the leader apply the reciprocity norm to their relationship,

favorable treatment received by either party is reciprocated, resulting in useful

outcomes for each.

More than seventy empirical studies have centered on POS; but, the literature has not

been consistently reviewed. during this article we tend to examine the theoretical

framework guiding analysis on POS, contemplate studies of POS’s hypothesized

antecedents and consequences, and value proof on the processes assumed to underlie

these associations.

The changing world of do the job, as well as how much research focus POS receives,

creates an account provider of the way current POS research contributes to

Organizational Support Theory (OST) needed to guide progress the theory as well as

information upcoming research. While research care about POS has greatly greater

since the 2002 meta-analysis, no scientific studies possess attempted to incorporate

current books in to OST.

1.2 METHODOLOGY

A number of crucial theoretical themes or templates allow us given that which

improves organizational support theory: criteria of member of staff well-being, non-

traditional personnel, worldwide and cross-cultural problems and this specific study

will examined perceived organizational support (POS) with counter productive work

behaviour, JOB performance, Creativity, and citizenship by using following steps

Sample and Procedure

Finding facts

Implications

Measure JOB performance, Creativity and Counterproductive work behavior.

1.3 SCOPE OF PROJECT

In particular, while preceding socialization models emphasis largely about

undertaking competence, purpose properties, as well as information about

environmental surroundings to describe interactions having effects,

We provide a few research offering a higher knowledge of this interdependence

involving perceived organizational support (POS) with Counter productive work

behaviour, JOB performance, Creativity, and citizenship,

1.4 PROPOSED SOLUTION

CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 PERCEIVED ORGANIZATIONAL SUPPORT

Perceived organizational Support (POS) refers to employees’ perception regarding the

extent to that the organization values their contribution and cares concerning their

well-being. POS has been found to possess necessary consequences worker

performance and well-being.

Perceived organizational Support (POS) refers to employees’ perception regarding the

Extent to that the organization values their contribution and cares concerning their

Well-being. POS has been found to possess necessary consequences Performance and

well-being. (For example, an employee believes his organization would accommodate

him if he had a child-care problem or would forgive an honest mistake on his part)

and fulfils socio-emotional needs. Research shows that people perceive their

organization as supportive when rewards are deemed fair, when employees has a

voice in decisions, and when their managers are seen as supportive. Some findings

suggest that employees with strong POS perceptions are more likely to have higher

levels of organizational citizenship behaviour and job performance.

Staffs are thought to use comparable attribution procedures as those used in the

expansion of interpersonal relationships to infer their valuation by the organization.

The results most frequently linked with POS comprise increased job satisfaction,

enlarged organizational citizenship behaviour, increased organizational commitment,

higher levels of job performance and reduced withdrawal performances, such as

turnover, tardiness and intentions to leave. Prior study suggests that POS corresponds

to the grade to which employees perceive that their employer is "willing to equitably

compensate them for their efforts, help them in case of need, make their work

interesting and stimulating, and provide them with adequate working conditions.

Given that these beliefs often run counter to the way boredom-prone individuals

frame their work environments, it is likely that high boredom-prone workers would

perceive less support from their organization. Such a conclusion is warranted given

that the boredom proneness literature clearly indicates that high boredom-prone

individuals form less positive work perceptions and attitudes compared to those with

lower levels of boredom proneness.

Indeed, the pattern of correlations observed between boredom proneness and such

variables as depression, anxiety, anger, hostility, hopelessness, alienation, low sense

of purpose in life, and life and job dissatisfaction can broadly be viewed as reflecting

an overall negative orientation. Consequently, it may be that high boredom-prone

individuals perceive their world in rather negative terms,

Perceived organizational support (POS) is an employee belief that the organization

cares for and values his or her contribution to the success of the organization.

Antecedents of POS include procedural justice, supportive and respectful acts by

supervisors, recognition, fair pay and rewards, promotions, job security, autonomy,

and training Perceived organizational support (POS) encompasses strategies

promoting employee wellbeing and feelings of achievement, a sense of positive

impact to the organization, and personal and organizational goal attainment.

Wiesenberger in two studies connected perceived organization care with enlarged

employee efforts to attain organizational goals. Findings by Cardona et al (2004)

established that workers reporting higher POS had stronger social attachment to the

organization, which then run to enlarged OCB. in contrast, Settoon, Bennett, and

Linden (1999) unsuccessful to correlate POS with OCB. However, Moorman claimed

that Settoonet unsuccessful to measure OCB directed at the organization. According

to another study confirmed that POS connected with OCB directed at the organization

but not with OCB directed at peers.

Research on perceived organizational support (POS) began with the observation that

If managers area unit involved with their employees’ commitment to the organization,

Staff area unit targeted on the organization’s commitment to them (Wiesenberger,

Huntington, Hutchinson, & Sowa, 1986). For workers, the organization is a vital

Supply of socioemotional resources, like respect and caring, and tangible edges, like

Wages and medical edges. Being regarded extremely by the organization helps to

Satisfy employees’ desires for approval, esteem, and affiliation. Employers normally

price worker dedication and loyalty.

Organizational support theory (OST: Eiesenberger, Huntington, Hutchinson, &

Sowa, 1986; Rhoades & Eiesenberger, 2002; Shore & Shore, 1995) holds

that the organization values their contributions and cares concerning their well-being.

Such perceived organizational support (POS) would increase employees’ felt

Obligation to assist the organization reaches its objectives, their affection

commitment to the organization, and their expectation that improved performance

would be rewarded. Behavioural outcomes of POS would come with will increase in

role and Extra-role performance and reduces in withdrawal behaviours like absence

and Turnover.

Although there have been comparatively few studies of POS till the middle 1990’s,

Analysis on the subject has burgeoned within the previous couple of years. Rhoades

and Wiesenberger’s (2002) meta-analysis coated some seventy POS studies applied

through 1999, and over 250 studies are performed since. The meta-analysis found

clear and consistent relationships of POS with its foreseen antecedents and

Consequences.

On the premise of organizational support theory (Wiesenberger et al., 1986), 3 general

Styles of perceived favourable treatment received from the organization (i.e., fairness,

Supervisor support, and structure rewards and job conditions) ought to increase POS.

To avoid repetitiousness, we regularly omit use of the term perceived once discussing

the perceptions of favourable treatment that contribute to POS. Just as workers type

world perceptions regarding their valuation by the organization, they develop general

views regarding the degree to those supervisors worth their contributions and care

concerning their well-being (i.e., perceived supervisor support; Kottke &Sharafinski,

1988). Because of supervisors act as agents of the organization, having responsibility

for evaluating subordinates’ performance, workers read their supervisor’s favourable

or unfavourable orientation toward them as indicative of the organization’s support

(Eisenberger et al., 1986)

Since scholarly Attention to perceived organizational support has dramatically

increased. Several factors may explain the relationship with organizationally relevant

outcomes such as citizenship behaviour

Organizational support theory (ost) specifies three processes under the relationship

between POS and its consequenes.first based on the employee behaviour and job

performance. Employee who perceive organizational support feel obligated to

reciprocate toward the organization.Second POS help fullfill Socioeconomically

needs such as needs for esteem, approval and leading to organizational membership

and enhance employee well being(Rhoades and Eisenberger 2002).Pos help to

determine organizations readiness efforts made on its behalf (Rhoades and

Eisenberger 2002).employee receiving favourable treatment from their organization

and its agent respond with high commitment and b performance and effort. Leader–

member exchange (LMX) theory (Dulebohn, Bommer, Liden, Brouer, & Ferris, 2012;

Graen & Scandura, 1987) focuses on the exchange relationship between the

subordinate and the supervisor. Subordinates who are treated favourably by their

supervisors respond by working harder and providing more help to supervisors,

leading to high-quality LMX relationships. By comparison, organizational support

theory (Eisenberger & Stinglhamber, 2011; Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002; Shore &

Shore, 1995) considers subordinates’ and supervisors’ favourable relationships with

the organization. Organizational support theory holds that, in order to meet socio-

emotional needs and to determine the organization’s readiness to reward increased

efforts, employees develop a general perception concerning the extent to which the

organization values their contributions and cares about their well-being (perceived

organizational support or POS; Eisenberger, Huntington, Hutchison, & Sowa, 1986).

Perceived organization support involves a chain that leading from perception of

support by the organization (supervisor support) to the formation of high quality LMX

relationship wih their subordinates.who integrate high quality form the organization

ultimately repay the organization wich increased the dedication and effort and reduce

withdrawl behaviour .

Supervisor feel an obligation to repay the organization for their perceived

organization support believe that they will be rewarded for doing so.Superisors with

High POS may be motivated to develop High quality LMX relationships with their

subordinates in order to reciprocate their own supportive treatment from the

organization (Wayne et al., 2012).futher supervisors report high POS may have access

to greater resources to provide to subordinates. Thus supervisors with High POS are

likely motivated to establish High-Quality relationships with their subordinates

(Tangirala, Green, & Ramanujam, 2007).

POS does not always positively relate with performance or job satisfaction. POS

probably does have negative effect on most employees ‘performance. The way

employees are treated by the organization is likely to have a significant effect on

employee attitudes and behaviours, A low perception of organizational support can

result in employees being aware (and a little nervous) of reciprocation. Reciprocation

awareness (and nervousness) can be caused by events that are seen as not being

helpful to the employee, for example, not receiving payment seemed necessary, or not

receiving a good payment for the appropriate length of time.

2.2 COUNTERPRODUCTIVE WORK BEHAVIOUR

For almost 20 years there has been a growing interest for research on workplace

behaviours that harm employees or the organization, especially because of the

harmful consequences and associated costs. These include costs at economical (loss of

productivity due to delay at the workplace, theft or sabotage) or psychological level

(withdrawal or low job satisfaction- for those who are targets of counterproductive

interpersonal behaviours or high stress and uncertainty for those who perceive such

behaviours.(Varda and Weitz 2004). Counterproductive behaviours include: abusive

behaviour, physical and verbal aggression, making intention ate improper work,

sabotage, theft, absenteeism, delays etc.. These behaviours are a set of distinct acts

that have common characteristics: are intentional (not accidental) and intend to harm

or harm the organization and / or their stakeholders- customers, colleagues and

supervisors (Fox and Spector 2005).

Counter productive work behaviour is a vast term which includes such behaviours

that are against the apporopriate interest of the organization(gruys & sackett

2003).counter productive work behaviour is also referred to as deviance .different

authors describe cwb in different models consisting of multiple dimensions. For

example a five dimension model of cwb suggests that cwb includes abuse ,theft

,sabotage production deviance and withdrawal

(spector,fox,penney,bruusema,goh,&Kessler,2006 )

When employees are treated favourably by the organization they feel obligated to

respond n kind through positive behaviour and attitude towards the source of the

treatment. When treated poorly employees by the organization will reduce or

withdraw their positive attitude and behaviour and produce negative behaviour once

in their place.

One of the most prominent social exchange theories is Adams (1965) equity theory

which says that employees feel uncertainty treated will seek restitution. This theory

suggest that employees who are dissatisfied with the fairness of their employers

produce negative behaviour such as arriving late for work, reducing effort or may

engaged in interpersonally oriented CWB such as making badly remarks about their

managers acting rudely with colleagues .another frame work is used to understand

CWB derives from the work stress literature spactor(1998)model. When individual

perceives environmental stress (e.g. unfair provision of cwb. They experience

negative emotions such as anxiety & anger.

2.3 CREATIVITY:

Perceived organizational support the level to which employee perceives that

organization encourages their ideas and respect give them rewards and recognize

employees who demonstrate creativity. Employees are creative when they perceive

that creativity supported and valued by the organization (scot & Bruce, 1994).

Employees creative when they perceive that creativity has the potential to b valuable

(Hirschman, 1970) when employees perceive that organization management system

policies and practices support creative activities. Management accepted new ideas,

suggestions and admire that employees input and efforts are meaningful and

influential (e.g., Amiable & Gryskiewicz, 1987; Scott & Bruce, 1994; Siegel &

Kemmerer, 1978).It is said that efficiency of the organization is dependent on various

factors on which creativity is most important. .one work in the literature provides that

there are three factor required to enhance creativity in organizations i.e. technical and

procedural expertise, creative thinking skills and intrinsic motivation (amable, 1998).

.Employee exchange belief systems refers to employees' belief that it is appropriate

and useful to base their concern with the organization's welfare and their work effort

on how positively/well they have been treated by the organization (Wiesenberger et

al., 1986). Employees with high exchange belief systems showed stronger relationship

of POS with felt responsibility to the organization (Wiesenberger et al., 2001).

Personnel's perception of their organizational support has the possible ability to

change reasons for doing things, attitudes and help not only their abilities but also

their mental (getting or giving power). In a study the relationship between mental

(getting or giving power) and farming-based personnel's creative performance was

related much more than that of POS , but it can be recommended in that study that

farming-based organizations should provide an internal organizational community in

order to their personnel perceive entrepreneurial and creative behaviours more

desirable and (able to be done).

Wiesenberger et al., 2001), the two-way relationship between a supportive

organizational (surrounding conditions) and mentally given power to/permitted

personnel should be supported to secure/make sure of farming-based personnel's

creative behaviours in long run. According to Katz (1964) and Smith et al. (1983) to

(accomplish or gain with effort) effective and (able to last/helping the planet)

organizational operation, the following three kinds of behaviours is needed:

Personnel's motivation to stay with the organization (organizational

commitment),

Personnel's dealings that go past their job description (challengeable activities

),

Personnel's (acting to prevent problems before they happen) behaviors beyond

job responsibilities (such as, creative behaviors).

The first two kinds of behaviours are within personnel roles, whereas the third goes

beyond, to include cooperation among fellow workers, self-improvement, and

creating a positive organizational image.

For an organization to function effectively, new, interesting, and creative behaviours

are extremely important. These behaviours, though mainly not considered for job

development and performance, but they can greatly add/give to the operation and

performance of an organization in long run.

Organizational support perceptions have significant effects on personnel's mental

(getting or giving power) and their creative behaviours.

2.4 JOB PERFORMANCE:

The work-linked actions expected of workers and how well those actions were

executed. Many business staffs directors evaluate the job performance of all workers

on yearly or quarterly basis in order to benefit them classify suggested areas for

improvement.

Job performance is a vital construct in organizational. In fact, most of what industrial

organizational psychologists do is geared to have a positive influence on job

performance. The importance of calculation of individual job performance is maybe

reflected in the capacity of literature devoted to it, and many important researchers in

our field have written on the subject of individual job performance. Individual job

performance plays a vital part in

What we do as researchers and practitioners. Organizations need that the expenditure

related with training agendas (e.g., socialization or orientation programs, skills

training) be justified with evidence that such exercise progresses individual job

performance. In short, individual job performance is a dominant construct in our field.

For over a century, researchers have contended with the matters involved in

assessment of individual job performance. It is no wonder that numerous researchers

have innovative standards for assessing these assessments.

Freyd (1926) claimed that measures of individual job performance valuations

should be authorized.

While Freyd argued for the importance of establishing the construct rationality

of standards, Farmer (1933) stressed the necessity for evaluating the

dependability of measures.

Burtt (1926) providing a list of variables (e.g., opportunity bias) that could

disturb

Organizational records or objective performance.

Perceived organizational support and Performance Given social exchange

influences and past empirical indication, we be- live that POS will be connected

to both task and contextual performance. So- cial exchange (Blau, 1964) proposes

that positive observations about the employment connection will lead to beneficial

work activities through the procedure of compulsory reciprocation. Specifically, we

posit that staffs will observe development in both types of performance as an

suitable way to respond for social "gifts” granted by the corporation.

2.5 ORGANIZATION CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOR:

Organizational Citizenship Behaviour (OCB) has been deliberate since the late

1970s. Over the past three decades, awareness in these behaviours has increased

significantly. Organizational performance has been connected to overall

organizational success, thus these types of employee behaviours have central

consequences in the workstation.

“Organizational citizenship behaviour (OCB) defined as performance that goes

outside the basic necessities of the job, is to a great extent optional, and is of benefit

to the

“OCBs are employee behaviours that, although not serious to the task or job, help to

facilitate organizational operational”

Organizational citizenship behaviour (OCB) is optional employee activity that is not

openly part of the job explanation and which tends to promote the organization. This

behaviour is also not a portion of the official system of rewards and compensation.

The term was first defined by Dennis Organ in 1988. It is not a carefully-defined

concept by nature, though an operative who embodies the potentials of OCB is often

easy to identify.

While a worker who involves in OCB may not be specifically recognized for those

activities, such performance will often be rewarded indirectly. This is partly because

employees who exercise OCB tend to be dedicated to their jobs and the overall health

of the organization. They are also often adept at the core functions of their jobs, which

can lead to formal recognition that comprises unspoken appreciation for OCB.

Organizational citizenship behaviours (OCB) can advance organizational performance

and Adaptableness in surroundings demanding complex, ambiguous, and team

oriented work Organizational citizenship behaviours (OCB), well-defined as

volitional extra role behaviours not directly related to a specific task or job

description, lead to enhanced customer and peer relationships, improve teamwork,

operational flexibility, and competitiveness.

CHAPTER 3. THEORATICAL FRAMEWORK AND

HYPOTHESIS DEVELOPMENT

3.2 perceived organization support (POS) and counterproductive wok behaviour.

3.3 perceived organization support (POS) and creativity:

3.4 perceived organization support (POS) and job performance:

3.5 perceived organization support (POS) and Organization citizenship behaviour:

The relationship of counter productive work behaviour, job performance, creativity

and organization citizenship behaviour.

3.1 PERCEIVED ORGANIZATION SUPPORT (POS) AND

COUNTERPRODUCTIVE WOK BEHAVIOUR.

Counterproductive work behaviour refers to an intentional behaviour that act against

the organization interest .such behaviour which effects both the organization and their

employees .there is no doubt CWB violate organization norms and hinder the overall

perceived organization

support

creativity

job performance

counterproductive work behaviour

organization citizen ship behaviour

Organizational goal .We assumes that when leader member exchanges important

element of exchange relationship in the work place. Perception of the degree to which

organization provides its employees with appropriate fair and respectful treatment to

all the employee of the organization.

CWB relationship with organization climate part of an active psychological process

that helps employees recognize what behaviours are expected and rewarded

(Armstrong, 2003; Zohar & Luria, 2005.previous research predict various factors that

predict counterproductive workplace behaviour. these includes individual differences

such as employees personal abilities and traits and work stressors such as difficult

work conditions ,harsh supervision ,role ambiguity (Bruk-Lee & Spector, 2006)

.dissatisfied employees are more likely to involved in theft behaviours(Kolas et al.,

2007);

Leader –member exchange (LMX). Important aspect of employee’s workplace

perceptions is known as “perceived leader –member exchange).which relates to the

quality of relationship between leaders and group members.

High quality LMX indicates high levels of relationship between leader and members

which includes interaction with leader, trust, respect, support and rewards from the

organization

While low quality LMX points the low level of interaction. Formal relationships, trust

,limited support and few rewards (Bauer & Green, 1996).LMX effects employee

motivation in different areas of the organizational functioning sense of empowerment

,emotional support and cooperative interactions as well as respect,loyality and

obligation( Tziner, Fein, & Oren, 2012).

Past research has indicated that high LMX related to positive citizen ship behaviour.

(e.g., Chernyak-Hai & Tziner, 2012; ) while low LMX related to counterproductive

work behaviour.LMX reflects exchange relationship among employees and their

supervisors(Settoon et al., 1996) and one of the basic elements in the workplace social

exchange network (Cole, Schaninger, & Harris, 2007).

when the employee reported high quality LMX relationships (Piccolo, Bardes, Mayer,

& Judge, 2008); subordinates who experienced low-quality LMX perceived less

distributive and procedural fairness than those who experienced high-quality LMX

(Lee, 2001); and LMX was found to moderate the relationship between both

distributive and procedural justice and organizational citizenship behaviours (OCBs)

(Burton, Sablynski, & Sekiguchi, 2008).

The social exchange theory (SET) framework counterproductive work behaviour may

be understood within the framework of social exchange theory (SET).

Social exchange variables such as organizational commitment, perceived

organizational support, trust and leader member exchange ,were found to be important

relationship between justice, task performance and citizen ship behaviour (Colquitt et

al., 2013)..in the past social exchange in an organizational context was proposed to be

conceptualized at two levels

Global exchange between employees and the organization and relationship between

employees and their supervisors (Settoon, Bennett,& Linden, 1996).

Organizational support employees who perceive that the employees who perceive that

their organization does not meet the expected obligations would be less satisfied with

their job may produce counterproductive work behaviour.

3.2 PERCEIVED ORGANIZATION SUPPORT (POS) AND

CREATIVITY

In the organization literature many empirical studied have been directly related to

several organizational climate such organizational desirable outcome includes as

creativity and innovation (Amiable, Conti, Coon, Lazenby, & Herron, 1996). Many

studies have suggested variety of different characteristics. Most important factor

included is organizational encouragement organization encourages creativity and

innovation supporting new ideas and setting reward system and recognize employee’s

creativity.

The relevant literature has pointed the important role between organization and

employees attitude (Oldham and Cummings, 1996; Amiable, et al., 1996).

Organization encourages risk-taking ideas generation provide freedom and autonomy

to employees and positively elated with innovation and creativity

Organizational climate has significant effect on the creativity, performance of an

individual. Such as team cooperation, leadership support, organizational

encouragement freedom and autonomy that influence of employee creativity.(

Cummings, Oldham, 1997).

Organization polices& practices can enhance creative behaviours of an employees by

influencing employee attitude and behaviour .when organization wants to increase

their level of innovation they should recognise the value of their employees as

generators of creative ideas. Organization discourage employee risk taking is always a

serious barrier to innovation because employees are demotivated by the fear of failure

when organization did not support new ideas.

CHAPTER 4. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

4.1 SAMPLE AND DATA COLLECTION

This research has been conducted on a cross –Sectional research design. The research

data was collected from different sectors of Islamabad. Such as telecom sector and

banks. The questionnaire as filled by diverse job level employees and mostly by

middle managers, lower manager en

4.2 DESIGN OF THE STUDY

Current study has cross-sectional design as data is gathered in two and a half week

duration at single time. Involvement in the survey was deliberate and strict

confidentiality of the data, scope and purpose of the study was provided to the

respondents. 250 surveys were given out in different banks, of which 200 were

recovered which were sufficient to analyse and appraise the collected data; statistical

package for the social science (Spss) software package was used. The sample

contained respondents ranging from top management to first line managers from

different departments of the banking sector. Educational qualifications ranged from

bachelors 32% and masters above degree 67%. Male were 62% and female were 38%.

The respondents mean age was 28.1.

4.3 VARIABLES

4.3.1 Independent variables:

Perceived organizational support (POS) is an independent variable in our research

4.3.2 Dependent Variables

Counter productive work behaviour (CWB), Creativity, job performance &

Organization citizenship behaviour (OCB).is dependent variable of this study.

4.4 MEASURES

4.4.1 Perceived organizational support:

We evaluate perceived organizational support with the 8 item scale developed by

Eiesenberger et al., (1986). The sample items of include

My organization cares about my opinions.

May organization cares about my well being.

My organization considers my goals and values.

Respondents were asked (1=strongly disagree, to 7= strongly agree) to point out how

much their organization support them. The reliability of POS is found is .86 which is

acceptable range.

4.4.2 JOB performance

Job performance was calculated by 7 point liker scale contain of 7 items and was

recognized by “Bennett and Robinson” (2000). The sample items of include.

Adequately complete assigned duties.

Performs tasks that are expected of him/her.

Fullfills responsibilities specified in job description

It was starting from 1=Never to 7=Daily. The scale consisted of 7 items whose

reliability is .825 which is satisfactory.

4.4.3 Counter productive work behaviour

CWB Was calculated by 7 point liker scale containing of 9 items and was established

by “Bennett and Robinson”(2000). The sample items of include.

Damaged property belonging to my employer.

Said or did something to purposely hurt someone at work.

Deliberately bent or broke a rule.

It was starting from 1= never to 7= Always. Reliability is .882 which is satisfactory.

4.4.4 Creativity

Creativity was measured by 7- point liker scale containing of 3 items and was

established by Oldham and Cummings, (1996) the sample items of include.

How ORIGINAL and PATICAL is this person’s work? Original and practical

work refers to developing ideas, methods, or products that are both totally

unique and especially useful to the organization.

How Adaptive and practical is this person’s work.

How CREATIVE is this person’s work.

It was starting from 1= not at all to 7= extremely. Reliability is .832 which is

acceptable.

4.4.5 Organization citizenship behaviour

OCB was calculated by 7 –point licker Scale containing of 14 items and was

established by “Bennett and Robinson” (2000). The sample items of include.

Helps others who have been absent.

Helps others who have heavy workloads.

Take time to listen to co-workers problems and worries.

It was starting from 1= never to 7= Always. Whose reliability is .871 which is

acceptable.

CHAPTER 5. RESULTS AND ANAYLSIS

5.1 HYPOTHESIS

Hypothesis 1: Pos is positively related to jp

Hypothesis 2:POS is positively relaed to OCB

Hypothesis 3: POS is positively relaed to CR

5.2 CONTROL VARIABLES

We used one-way ANOVA study to verify for the control of the demographics on

dependant variables .ORG ,Peresent Experience,Total experience,Designation, are

measured as control variables in our research .these control manners contain direct

impact on the independent variables(IV) which is perceived organizational

support(pos) and these are being studied in contradiction of dependant variables (DV)

that are CWB, JP, OCB, & CREATIVITY. When one-way ANOVA analysisis

runthe ORG ,Peresent Experience,Total experience,Designation are being directly

limited as continuous variables.

Tabels…:

5.3 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS.

In our study we recognized the Mean and standard deviations as for POS: mean = .01

And SD = 1.19 for, jp: mean = 5,27 and SD =1.39 , For CWB: mean = 2.39,

and SD =1.19 For OCB: mean =4.84 And SD=1.12,For creativity: mean =5.08, And

SD =1.30.

5.4 CORRELATION ANALYSIS.

To determine and know the connection between the variables and the associate of the

variables with the demographics the bivrate correlation is nearly useful on the data of the present research. The table 2 Shows the value of correlation that area establish.

Values of correlation are significant at the value of 0.01 level (2- tailed).And insignificant at the value of 0.05(2-tailed).

The study f the correlation table shows that POS is negatively related with CWB.(r=…………….,p….),and positively related with

CR(…………),JP(………),OCB.(……..).

5.5 CORELATION TABLE

5.6 REGRESHION

We finalized step vice linear regreshion inspection through SPSS.in the first step we

added the control and dependent variables and in step two weadded independent variables to perceived the influence of independent variable on dependent variable.the

outcomes are given below

5.6.1 Relationship between POS and OCB

In the first step we arrive dependent variable which is OCB and we have control the variables that are ………………………in second step we have occupied independent

varible which is POS. Table 3a: regreshion analysis for the key belongingness of POS and OCB:

TABLE: From the above table regreshion analysis results explained that POS consumes significant relationship with OCB.(beta =….. R SQURE= ….and delta r sq….) at p

……………

5.6.2 RELATION Ship between POS and CR

In the first step we arrive dependent variable which is CR and we have control the

variables that are ………………………in second step we have occupied independent varible which is POS. TABLE 3B:

regreshion analysis for the key belongingness of POS and CR: TABLE:

From the above table regreshion analysis results explained that POS consumes significant relationship with OCB.(beta =….. R SQURE= ….and delta r sq….) at p ……………

5.6.3 RELATION Ship between POS and JP

In the first step we arrive dependent variable which is JP and we have control the variables that are ………………………in second step we have occupied independent

varible which is POS. TABLE 3c: regreshion analysis for the key belongingness of POS and JP:

TABLE: From the above table regreshion analysis results explained that POS consumes

significant relationship with JP.(beta =….. R SQURE= ….and delta r sq….) at p ……………

CHAPTER 6. DISCUSSIONS, LIMITAIONS AND

CONCLUSION

References

1. CONFLICT, W.-F., Family friendly policies: Organizational justice perceptions of need-based allocations. Justice in the workplace: From theory to practice, 2001. 2: p. 145.

2. Judge, T.A. and J.A. Colquitt, Organizational justice and stress: the mediating role of work-family conflict. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2004. 89(3): p. 395.

3. Podsakoff, N.P., et al., Individual-and organizational-level consequences of organizational citizenship behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2009. 94(1): p. 122.