"Is This My Job at All?" the Impact of Flexible Role Orientation in Predicting Extra-Role Behavior

As modern day organizations are becoming more competitive, a greater need exists to focus on employee expectations beyond the boundaries of the job (Katz and Kahn, 1966). Determinants of workplace performance are an area of interest for both individuals and the organization. Individual performance can be conceived either as in-role behavior or extra-role behavior (Katz 8 Kahn, 1966). Subsequently, interest in discretionary prosocial behavior increased leading to conceptualization of different concepts ranging from organization citizenship behavior (Organ, 1988) to proactive behavior (Bateman 8 Grant, 1993). Katz and Kahn (1966) point out that, in several situations, the functioning of an organization depends on supra-role behavior; i.e., those behaviors that cannot be conceived in advance or articulated in advance for a given job. These behaviors "lubricate" the social milieu of the organization but do not necessarily pertain to actual task performance (Bateman 8 Organ, 1983). Though such behaviors are critical for effective performance of the job, they cannot be anticipated in advance as they are beyond the expectation of formal role deliverables.As organizations are characterized by rapid change, competition, and downsizing, employees are expected to move beyond the confines of their job descriptions to engage in broader work roles (Parker, 2000). Despite the importance of performing wider scope of responsibilities, the antecedents of extra-role behaviors have not been well understood (Parker, Williams, 8 Turner, 2006). Previous research has examined motivation to engage in proactive behavior (Axtell, Holman, Unsworth, Wall, 8 Waterson, 2000; Parker, Williams, 8 Turner, 2006; Morrison 8 Phelps, 1999) mostly using self-ratings of respondents. This article attempts to examine pro-social motivational predictors of proactive behaviors to replicate and extend previous studies using a different rating source; i.e., supervisors. The authors choose to focus on extra-role behavior because it emphasizes proactive as well as pro-social behaviors (Pearce 8 Gregersen, 1991). The literature review did not reveal any studies that have been made in the Indian information technology (IT) sector relating to extra-role behavior. More specifically, the objectives of the study are(1) To learn the impact of flexible role orientation on extra-role behavior and(2) To examine the effect of role breadth self-efficacy in mediating the relationship between flexible role orientation and extra role-behaviorLiterature ReviewFlexible Role OrientationBorrowing from the concept of role orientation (Parker, Wall, & Jackson, 1997) that is concerned with meanings given by people about their specific roles in the work environment, role orientation refers to the activities, events, and competencies relevant for successful performance in a given role. In other words, role orientation represents the psychological boundary for a role. The concept of role orientation is similar to Davis and Wacker's (1987: 433) description of roles compared to jobs, which they define as,[i]n a narrow 'job description sense,' one's job is a particular task assignment that may change daily; in a broad 'role' sense, one's job is to help carry out the responsibilities assigned to the team, to participate in team decisions, to crosstrain, and to use one's judgment to contribute to the team's productivity, maintenance, and development.Individuals with flexible role orientation define their roles broadly and take ownership of goals beyond their immediate responsibilities viewing them as "my job" rather than "not my job" (Parker et al., 1997). Role orientation focuses on the tasks, activities, problems, and competencies that are relevant to one's role that one should consider for effective performance in the role. Flexible role orientation (FRO) has been operationalized as having concern for production ownership and importance of production ownership (Parker et al. …