본 논문은 조직의 생존과 성장에 긍정적인 영향을 미치는 것으로 알려진 조직구성원의 맥락성과행위 (Contextual Performance)를 단순한 구성원의 자발적인 참여에 의존하기보다는 보다 적극적인 관리적 경 영활동을 통해 유인할 수 있기 위해 관리자 혹은 경영자가 무엇을 할 수 있을 것인지에 대한 시사점을 도출 하기 위해 준비되었다. 이러한 시사점 도출을 위해 본 논문은 관리자가 구성원들의 물리적, 심리적 및 사회/ 조직적 직무환경들을 적절히 조정/관리함으로써 맥락성과행위에 대해 구성원들이 느끼는 해명의무감을 제고 할 수 있으며, 이렇게 제고된 해명의무감은 궁극적으로 구성원들의 실제 맥락행위를 수반할 것이라는 기본 가설을 설정하였다. 이러한 기본 가설은 과업중요도(task significance), 과업피드백(task feedback), 기능의 다양성(skill variety), 과업정체성(task identity), 과업자율성(autonomy), 그리고 직무규범 (behavioral norms)와 같은 직무환경변수들과 맥락성과(contextual performance)간에 해명의무감 (perceived accountability)을 매개변수로 설정한 연구모형으로 구체화되었다. 344개 상사-부하 매칭 데 이터에 대한 일련의 다중회귀분석 결과는 상기한 기본가설을 전체적으로 지지하는 것으로 나타났다. 즉, 대 부분의 직무관련 요인들은 구성원들의 해명의무감에 긍정적 영향을 미쳤으며, 해명의무감은 직무헌신(job dedication)으로 측정된 맥락성과에 긍정적인 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 이 과정에서 자율성과 과업 피드백이 맥락성과에 미치는 영향은 해명의무감에 의해 각각 전체 및 부분 매개되는 것으로 나타났다. 이러 한 결과는 조사대상자의 성격요인과 직무경험을 통제한 상태에서 얻어진 결과로서, 맥락성과행위는 기본적 으로 구성원의 개인의 성격이나 가치에 의해서 도출된다는 그 동안의 연구결과에 더하여 관리자가 맥락성과 행위를 추동하기 위해 어떠한 추가적인 관리활동 해야 할 것인지에 대한 시사점을 제시하고 있다.
This study was prepared to test a premise that job characteristics and managerial actions encourage employees to feel accountable for contextual performance (CP) behaviors and the perceived accountability for CP behaviors leads to the actual behaviors. Contextual performance (CP) refers to activities that differ from job-specific task performance but are still important for achieving organizational goals. Despite its importance, CP is not as clearly listed in a formal job description or explicitly included in promotion criteria as is task performance (Lepine & Dyne, 2001; Organ, 1988). And, it has been assumed to be exhibited as a matter of individual discretion (Motowidlo, Borman, & Schmit, 1997). However, organizations cannot afford to depend on chance or employees’ goodwill to provide the innovative and spontaneous activities they need (Kerr, 1975). So, the question that this study will address is, “What can managers do to encourage their subordinates to engage in CP?” This study argues that physical, psychological, and social environments created by managers can make employees feel accountable for performing CP. Specifically, five job characteristics, including task significance, task identity, autonomy, supervisor feedback, and behavioral norms, were hypothesized to have indirect positive effects on CP behaviors through perceived accountability. Those hypothetic relationships were distilled from relevant literature. In their accountability model, Dose and Klimoski (1995) suggested that when individuals perceive their jobs or actions as important and have enough control over the situation to achieve tasks, they are likely to feel accountable for their behaviors. The job characteristics literature identified task autonomy (Hackman & Oldham, 1976) as the sources of felt responsibility, which is suggested as a core component of perceived accountability (Cummings & Anton, 1990; Daft, 2002; Schlenker, Britt, Pennington, Murphy, & Doherty, 1994; Schlenker & Weigold, 1989). Frink and Klimoski (1998b) suggested that accountability is subject not only to structural contingencies, such as evaluation systems, reward systems, and disciplinary procedures, but also to social contingencies, including organizational culture and behavioral norms. Finally, while both goal setting theory (Locke & Latham, 1990) and control theory (Taylor, Fisher, & Ilgen, 1984) emphasize that performance improvement requires specific goals and feedback, some characteristics of the feedback process are determinants of perceived accountability for using the information obtained from feedback sources (London et al., 1997). A data were collected from 344 supervisor-subordinate dyadic samples. A dyadic sample design was employed to minimize the effects of common method variance issue and social desirability. Since job characteristics,