The Relationships among Servant Leadership , Organizational Citizenship Behavior , Person-Organization Fit and Organizational Identification in Fars Quality Cooperation

This study proposes that there is a relationship between servant leadership and Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) and that person-organization fit and organizational identification moderate that relationship. Eighty participants completed a cross-sectional self-report survey. Hierarchical regression analysis revealed that servant leadership behavior partially predicts organizational citizenship behaviors and that person-organization fit and organizational identification partially moderate the relationship between servant leadership and organizational citizenship behavior. One implication is that leaders who want to encourage citizenship behaviors among employees would do well to model those same behaviors toward others.


INTRODUCTION
There has been a flurry of interest in recent years surrounding a theory of servant leadership and the dimensions that make up the construct.What started out as a 2 fold concern of Greenleaf (1977) that individuals who want to tackle the problems of the world do so only intellectually and that individuals who want to serve often miss the opportunity, servant leadership has become a theory for moral (Graham, 1991) and ethical leadership that focuses on follower development, community building, authentic leadership and shared leadership (Graham, 1991;Laub, 2003;Sendjaya et al., 2008;Sauser, 2005).Stone et al. (2004) proposed thatthe motive of the servant leader's influence is to motivate and facilitate service and stewardship by the followers themselves.Indeed (Greenleaf, 1977) argued that the best indicator of servant leadership is that followers are-more likely themselves to become servants (Stone et al., 2004).But what does service look like for a follower within an organization?Could Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB), which is voluntary behavior that benefits both co-workers and the organization, be considered service and stewardship?This study investigates the relationship between servant leadership and organizational citizenship behavior to determine if servant leader behaviors predict follower OCB.This study focuses on servant leadership theory because of its emphasis on the follower and its de-emphasis on the leader.Also investigated in this study is the role that person-organization fit and organizational identification play in the servant leadership-OCB relationship.Research has suggested an association between personorganization fit and OCB (O'Reilly and Chatman, 1986;Cable and DeRue, 2002;Netemeyer et al., 1997), as well as a correlation between organizational identification and OCB (Riketta, 2005;Ashforth et al., 2008).Although these associations establish more of a direct link than a moderating effect, it is proposed that follower attitudes toward the organization, comprised of fit and identification, influence employee behavior over and above the effect of leader behavior (Fig. 1).In the following sections, a literature review of the constructs and the related hypotheses are given, along with the theoretical framework and implications for the study.The research method and procedures are laid out, followed by the results of a cross-sectional self-report survey.Finally, limitations and recommendations for further research are provided.
In follow figure, show the relationship between these factors.

LITERATURE REVIEW
Organizational citizenship behavior: Organizational citizenship behavior, although that term was not yet used, was suggested in the mid-1970s as a form of worker contribution that had not been measured previously as part of an individual's output (Organ , 2006).Early research revealed there were some employee behaviors that managers wished for but could not necessarily demand or reward.These behaviors were categorized as helping and compliance behaviors (Smith et al., 1983).Helping behaviors were focused on other individuals, such as assisting co-workers with work completion due to absence or overload.
Compliance behaviors consisted of more general behaviors that benefit the organization, such as punctuality, not taking unnecessary time off work, etc.These behaviors were eventually described as discretionary because they are not a formal part of a follower's job description, although they promote the effectiveness of the organization (Moorman and Blakely, 1995).Organ et al. (2006) pointed out that although attendance at work and not engaging in personal matters while at work, for example, could be considered part of the job description, individuals have discretion in the degree to which they comply.Thus, these behaviors can be considered citizenship behaviors.Ehrhart (2004) referred to OCB as behaviors that support the core'task behaviors.Scholars have distinguished anywhere from 2 dimensions (Williams and Anderson, 1991;Podsakoff et al., 1990) to seven dimensions for OCB (Bergeron, 2004;Kernodle, 2007).Moorman and Blakely (1995) created an instrument based on the four dimensions proposed by Graham (1989).These dimensions are interpersonal helping, individual initiative, personal industry and loyal boosterism.Interpersonal helping focuses on helping co-workers.
Individual initiative describes communication to others that improves individual and group performance.Personal industry relates to specific tasks that are not part of the job description, such as not missing work.Loyal boosterism promotes the organization's image to others (Moorman and Blakely, 1995).These dimensions were chosen because of the emphasis on participation in different facets of organizational life.Servant leadership: A central tenet of servant leadership theory is to place followers' interests above one's own (Joseph and Winston, 2005).Several authors suggested servant leadership may be more conducive to organizational citizenship behaviors due to its focus on follower development, community building and authentic leadership and shared leadership (Graham, 1991;Laub, 2003;Sendjaya et al., 2008).Winston (2003) proposed that the leader's service to the follower results in the follower's reciprocal service to the leader.Stone et al. (2004) argued that the motive of the servant leader's influence is not to direct others but rather to motivate and facilitate service and stewardship by the followers themselves.Followers' service to others and stewardship of organizational resources could be construed as organizational citizenship behavior.Several models (Table 1) have been offered in the last 10 to 15 years to describe servant leadership (Spears, 1998;Farling et al., 1999;Page and Wong, 2000;Sendjaya and Sarros, 2002;Russell and Stone, 2002;Patterson, 2003;Barbuto and Wheeler, 2006;Sendjaya et al., 2008;Liden et al., 2008).For this study, Liden et al. (2008) colleagues' recent contribution of a servant leadership instrument was utilized.Their study focused on developing and validating the instrument as well as providing evidence that servant leadership explains community citizenship behaviors, in-role performance and organizational commitment over and above transformational leadership and LMX.Based on their results, four of the 7 dimensions (helping subordinates grow and succeed, putting subordinates first, behaving ethically and creating value for the community) were selected to test the relationship with OCB.
Emotional healing, empowerment and conceptual skills were not shown to be significant in their Hierarchical Linear Model (HLM) and were therefore not included in this study.Liden et al. (2008) showed that helping subordinates grow, behaving ethically and creating value for the community were significantly related to community citizenship behaviors, which include personal and organizational community service.Helping subordinates grow and succeed is supported as a way for servant leaders to influence followers to perform OCB (Ehrhart, 2004).Results from Liden et al. (2008) study showed a significant negative relationship between helping subordinates grow and community citizenship behaviors.Although putting subordinates first was not shown to be significant in their results, it was added to this study because it was inter-correlated with community citizenship behavior and was an effect of the self-sacrificial nature of the leader's behavior toward followers.Ethical leader behavior is suggested as a precursor to followers' civic virtue whereby they engage in citizenship behavior (Graham, 1991).The results showed that behaving ethically had a significant negative relationship with community citizenship behavior and creating value for the community showed a significant positive relationship with those same behaviors.
In addition to Liden et al. (2008) constructs, the ‗ agapao love' dimension from Patterson's seven-virtue servant leadership model was included in this study.The rationale is that love formed the basis for the servant hood of Jesus Christ and Jesus commanded his disciples to love others just as he had loved them (see John 13:34, 15:9).Winston (2002) described this type of love as a moral love displayed by the leader in his or her concern for the human and spiritual needs of followers.Thus, leader love goes beyond liking someone to genuine care and compassion for followers.Dennis and Bocarnea (2005) created an instrument to measure Patterson's model.As the instrument had some issues with validity, only the ‗ agapao love' dimension was selected to test for follower OCB.If love for others is modeled by the leader, it is conjectured that the follower will in turn show love through the performance of citizenship behavior (Dennis and Bocarnea, 2005).
It is suggested that servant leadership predicts follower OCB.The theoretical framework for this argument is derived from Greenleaf (1977), who believed that leaders who serve their followers would produce followers who serve others.Thus, a leader is a role model for followers and OCB is influenced by models (Smith et al., 1983).People learn from observing others and modeling what they see.Therefore, the implication of Greenleaf's thesis for this study is if followers experience and observe a leader serving others, followers themselves will in turn serve others.This service could entail helping co-workers, promoting the organization to outsiders and encouraging others to express their ideas and opinions.Moorman and Blakely (1995) four dimension OCB construct-interpersonal helping, individual initiative, personal industry and loyal boosterism was selected for the study because each dimension focuses on different aspects of organizational life.Thus, it seems likely that servant leader behavior would be an antecedent of follower organizational citizenship behavior, such that: H1a: The servant leadership behaviors of agapao love, helping subordinates grow and succeed; putting subordinates first, behaving ethically and creating value for the community predict the follower organizational citizenship behavior of interpersonal helping.H1b: The servant leadership behaviors of agapao love, helping subordinates grow and succeed; putting subordinates first, behaving ethically and creating value for the community predict the follower organizational citizenship behavior of individual initiative.H1c: The servant leadership behaviors of agapao love, helping subordinates grow and succeed; putting subordinates first, behaving ethically and creating value for the community predict the follower organizational citizenship behavior of personal industry.H1d: The servant leadership behaviors of agapao love, helping subordinates grow and succeed; putting subordinates first, behaving ethically and creating value for the community predict the follower organizational citizenship behavior of loyal boosterism.
Person-organization fit: Scholars who have focused on person-organization fit (Cable and DeRue, 2002;Kristof, 1996;Kristof-Brown et al., 2005;Piasentin and Chapman, 2006) have distinguished the concept in several ways.In a literature review of Person-Organization fit (P-O fit), (Piasentin and Chapman, 2006) noted that values were the most commonly assessed items of fit, followed by personality traits, goals and skills and abilities.For the majority of the person-organization fit studies Piasentin and Chapman (2006) examined, the concept is generally defined as the extent to which a person perceives a fit between his or her values and the values of the organization for which he or she works.Thus, that is the definition adopted for this study.
It is suggested that person-organization fit moderates the servant leadership-OCB relationship.The theoretical framework for this argument is derived from O'Reilly and Chatman (1986), Cable and DeRue, (2002) and Netemeyer et al. (1997), who proposed that strong value congruence between people and their organizations predicted a higher likelihood of citizenship behaviors.Chatman (1991) asserted that P-O fit focuses on how a person's values, when they come in contact with an organization's value system, affect that person's behavior.These scholars offered a main effects explanation for person-organization fit and OCB; however, a moderating effect is proposed for this study as moderation implies that the causal relation between 2 variables changes as a function of the moderator variable‖ (Baron and Kenny, 1986).The implication of a moderating effect for this study is that the servant leadership-OCB relationship will be stronger when the values between the follower and the organization are congruent.Hence, the following is predicted: H2: Person-organization fit moderates the relationship between servant leadership and follower OCB, such that the link between servant leadership and OCB will be stronger for followers whose values fit the organization.

Organizational identification:
Organizational identification is the degree to which a person both cognitively and emotionally identifies with his or her organization and ranges from primarily a cognitive awareness of membership with the organization to a fuller affective connection, including value and goal congruence (Ashforth et al., 2008).Ashforth et al. (2008) suggested that the stronger the identity between the individual and the organization the more identification results in not only cognitive and affective traits, but also in behaviors, such as citizenship behaviors.Martin and Epitropaki (2001) found that employees with high organizational identification not only shared the organization's goals, but they also saw the leader as embodying the same values and goals as the employee.Employees with low organizational identification, they suggested, were motivated to pursue self-interest needs rather than the collective good.Meta-analyzed the research on organizational identification and considered all its correlates, including in-role and extra-role performance, as well as its distinction from organizational commitment.His metaanalysis showed evidence that supported the high correlation between organizational identification and extra-role performance because, he noted, organizational identification measures focus on the causes of extra-role behaviors (Riketta, 2005).One study has thus far supported the moderating effect of organizational identification on work group identification and OCB (Van Dick et al., 2008).
In this study it is suggested that organizational identification moderates the relationship between servant leadership and OCB.The theoretical framework for this argument is derived from social identity theory (Ashforth and Mael, 1989), in which the perception of oneness with or belongingness to an organization defines the individual in terms of the organization.This identification with the organization leads the individual to act in ways that are congruent with that identity (Ashforth and Mael, 1989).The implication of a moderating effect of organizational identification for this study is that the servant leadership-OCB relationship will be stronger when followers identify with the organization.Hence, it is suggested: H3: Organizational identification moderates the relationship between servant leadership and follower OCB, such that the link between servant leadership and OCB will be stronger for followers who identify with the organization.

METHODOLOGY Sample:
The sample was a non-probability sample from the population of working individuals.Eighty people who are employed Fars Quality Cooperation.The majority were female (11%), mail (89%) and their ages range between 25 and 52 years.The majority of participants have worked for their organization between 6 and 10 years (32%).

Measures: Servant leadership:
The servant leadership instrument is comprised of seven constructs (Liden et al., 2008); however, only four of the seven dimensions were chosen for this study.The dimensions were shown by Liden et al. (2008) through a hierarchical linear model to predict community citizenship behaviors.Those dimensions are helping subordinates grow and succeed, putting subordinates first, behaving ethically and creating value for the community.In addition, four items from the Servant Leadership Assessment (Dennis and Bocarnea, 2005), which deal with agapao love, were added to the servant leadership section to determine if the love dimension correlates to the other four dimensions of Liden et al. (2008) instrument and if a leader's love predicts follower OCB.The tests for internal consistency of the constructs in this study were 0.96 for-agapao love', 0.96 for-behaving ethically', 0.91 for ‗ creating value for community' and 0.94 forhelping subordinates' (the 2 dimensions helping subordinates grow and succeed‖ and putting subordinates first‖ factored as one dimension in this sample).Person-organization fit.Perceived person- Organizational identification: The follower's identification with the organization was measured using Mael and Ashforth (1992a) six-item instrument that includes such statements as, When I talk about (organization), I usually say 'we' rather than 'they'‖ and -When someone praises this (organization), it feels like a personal compliment.‖The organizational identification scale represents-the perception that one shares the experiences, successes and failures of the focal organization and that these successes and failures apply to and reflect upon the self just as they reflect upon the organization‖ (Mael and Tetrick, 1992b).The coefficient alpha was 0.85 in the study sample.
Organizational citizenship behavior: Organizational citizenship behaviors were measured using Moorman and Blakely (1995) 19 item instrument that includes the dimensions of individual initiative (communicationoriented), interpersonal helping (other-oriented), loyal boosterism (organization-oriented) and personal industry (task-oriented).The coefficient alphas ranged from 0.76 to 0.85.
The separate measurements were combined into one instrument and respondents were asked to rate their answers on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from, for example, Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree, or Never to Always.The OCB scale was originally used as a 7-point Likert scale.The organizational identification scale was originally measured on a 5-point Likert scale.The authors of the person-organization fit and servant leadership scales did not indicate how the items were measured.Finally, gender (0 = male; 1 = female), ethnicity ) 0 = Caucasian; other = 1), position (0 = supervisory; 1 = non-supervisory), age and organizational tenure (years) were control variables.

Procedure:
The data in this study was collected via an survey study in which people were asked to rate the degree to which their supervisors exhibit certain servant leadership behaviors, the extent to which the respondents identify with their organization, the extent to which the respondents perceive a fit between their values and the values of the organization and to what degree they perform certain extra-role behaviors.

ANALYSES AND RESULTS
Descriptive statistics and correlations: Descriptive statistics were run for the independent, dependent and moderating and control variables (Table 1).Correlation Matrix among Servant Leadership, Person-Organization Fit, Organizational Identification and Organizational Citizenship Behavior is presented in Table 2.
Dependent variables, interpersonal helping (r = 0.29, p<0.01) and loyal boosterism (r = 0.55, p<0.01).Organizational identification was somewhat correlated with love (r = 0.26), helping subordinates (r = 0.31) and 2 of the dependent variables, again interpersonal helping (r = 0.38) and loyal boosterism (r = 0.61) all at the p<0.01 level.Person-organization fit and organizational identification were moderately correlated at r = 0.37, p<0.01.The personal industry OCB was not significantly correlated with most of the variables, whereas the loyal boosterism OCB was significantly and moderately correlated with all the variables.The remaining 2 OCB, interpersonal helping and individual initiative were somewhat significantly correlated with the variables.
Factor analysis: Factor analysis indicated that the five original servant leadership constructs (agapao love, helping subordinates grow and succeed, putting subordinates first, behaving ethically and creating value for the community) loaded on four factors (Table 3).Helping subordinates grow and succeed and putting subordinates first loaded on the same factor.Consequently, although Liden et al. (2008) colleagues defined these dimensions as separate constructs.For this study, the 2 were combined as one variable, called helping subordinates.

Multiple regression analysis:
Regression analysis was conducted for each of the four constructs of OCB.In the first block of the regression, ethnicity, gender, age, organizational tenure and position were entered to  ------------------------------------------------------- control for possible effects of these variables on the dependent variables.In the second block, either P-O fit or organizational identification was entered with the servant leadership variables.Because there are 2 moderating variables, they were regressed separately to increase the likelihood of detecting moderation.In a subsequent third block, individual interactions were tested between each moderating variable and the servant leadership variable and regressed on each OCB variable, making for 24 tests.This procedure was necessary because moderation is difficult to detect with smaller sample sizes.
None of the independent and control variables was significant for personal industry, suggesting that servant leader behaviors do not predict task-oriented behaviors, such as performing tasks with extra care and ahead of schedule.This conclusion is in line with Moorman and Blakely (1995) findings perhaps because, as they suggested, personal industry can be viewed as a normal part of job performance.When organizational identification and the servant leadership variables were regressed on interpersonal helping, helping subordinates grow was a significant and negative (p<0.05, β = -0.36)predictor.Interpersonal helping includes welcoming new employees and helping them get settled into their job.None of the independent variables was significant for interpersonal helping when regressed with person-organization fit.
Creating value for the community (p<0.01,β = 0.40) was a significant and positive predictor of individual initiative when regressed with personorganization fit, organizational identification and the demographic variables.Individual initiative includes communicating with others to increase participation in the group or organization.When person-organization fit and the servant leadership variables were regressed on loyal boosterism, creating value for the community was significant and positive (p<0.10,β = 0.18).Loyal boosterism is promoting the organization to outsiders or defending the organization against criticisms.Creating value for the community (p<0.01,β = 0.28), behaving ethically (p<0.05,β = 0.23) and helping subordinates (p<0.05,β = -0.27)were significant predictors of loyal boosterism when regressed with organizational identification, although helping subordinates had an inverse effect.
Factor Analysis of Servant Leadership Items is available in Table 1.

Testing interactions:
To test for moderation of organizational identification and person-organization fit, interactions were created for both organizational identification and person-organization fit with each of the servant leadership variables: organizational identification X helping subordinates, organizational identification X behaving ethically, organizational identification X creating value for the community, organizational identification X agapao love, personorganization fit X helping subordinates, personorganization fit X behaving ethically, personorganization fit X creating value for the community and person-organization fit X agapao love.Each interaction was then entered in the third step of a regression analysis for each OCB.
Interpersonal helping OCB: When the organizational identification X helping subordinates interaction was regressed with the interpersonal helping OCB, the interaction was significant and positive with an R square of 0.30 (p<0.10,β = 0.94).The interaction of organizational identification X creating value for the community was also significant and positive (R 2 = 0.34, p<0.01, β = 1.63).Finally, organizational identification X agapao love was a significant and positive interaction with an R square of 0.29 (p<0.10,β = 1.06).These results show that organizational identification augments the relationship between some servant leader behaviors and followers helping others.There was no significant interaction between the person-organization fit X servant leader dimensions for interpersonal helping, which suggests that a follower's values congruence does not affect the relationship between the leader's servant behavior and the follower helping others.

Individual initiative OCB:
The interaction between organizational identification X creating value for the community was significant and positive (R 2 = 0.23, p<0.05, β = 1.22) for the individual initiative OCB.Furthermore, organizational identification X helping subordinates was significant and positive with an R 2 of 0.21 (p<0.10,β = 0.91).Finally, organizational dentification X agapao love was significant and positive (R 2 = 0.23, p<0.03, β = 1.35).These results indicate that organizational identification does moderate the relationship between some servant leader behaviors and individual initiative Person-organization fit X helping subordinates was a significant and positive interaction with an R 2 of 0.25 (p<0.01,β = 1.47).Personorganization fit X behaving ethically was also significant and positive (R 2 = 0.24, p<0.01, β = 1.69).Finally, the interaction between person-organization fit X agapao love was significant and positive with an R 2 of 0.24 (p<0.05,β = 1.45).These results show that person-organization fit does moderate the relationship between some servant leader behaviors and individual initiative loyal boosterism OCB.The organizational identification X helping subordinates interaction was significant and positive with an R 2 of 0.55 (p<0.10,β = 0.70).Furthermore, the organizational identification X creating value for the community interaction was significant with an R 2 of 0.55 (p<0.10,β = 0.79).These results indicate an augmenting effect of organizational identification on some servant leader behaviors and loyal boosterism, there was no significant interaction between person-organization fit and any of the servant leadership variables.

DISCUSSION
Overall the results presented offer support for the hypotheses.Hypotheses 1a-1d stated that servant leadership predicts the follower organizational citizenship behaviors of interpersonal helping, individual initiative, personal industry and loyal boosterism.The rationale for these hypotheses was that servant leaders serve not only the organization, but also their followers.Greenleaf (1977) suggested that if leaders serve followers, followers will be inspired to serve others.Organ and colleagues proposed followers who see their leaders help subordinates develop, who provide personal support to followers and who show genuine interest in their followers will be motivated to reciprocate and to give to others (Organ et al., 2006).
Each of the constructs was tested in regression analysis.Although moderately to strongly correlated with the other servant leadership constructs, agapao love did not predict any of the follower OCB dimensions (H1a-d), suggesting that leader behavior that is less tangible, such as showing interest or compassion, is not as easily replicated by followers as more concrete behaviors, such as community activity.A leader's creating value for the community predicted employees' individual initiative (H1b) and loyal boosterism (H1d).This finding is congruent with Liden et al. (2008) who found a positive and significant relationship between creating value for the community and community citizenship behaviors.Although Liden and colleagues found a negative relationship between behaving ethically and citizenship behaviors, the current analysis examined the effects of ethical behavior with organizational identification and found a positive and significant relationship to loyal boosterism (H1d).
Helping subordinates grow predicted both the employee's interpersonal helping (H1a) and loyal boosterism (H1d).Even though it was proposed that followers who experience a leader's help would in turn be inspired to help others, helping subordinates negatively and significantly predicted interpersonal helping and boosterism.A negative but significant relationship was also found by Liden et al. (2008) between helping subordinates and community citizenship behaviors.It appears that the more the leader focuses on helping the follower achieve career goals and skill development and makes the follower's job easier, the less the follower performs citizenship behaviors for others and the organization.One explanation could be that the follower believes that the leader provides the same level of support for other followers, making it unnecessary for the follower to help others.None of the servant leader behaviors correlated with personal industry and subsequent to regression analysis, results showed that task-related behaviors, such as not missing work and doing one's work well, were not predicted by servant leader behaviors (H1c).In sum, although H1c was not supported, H1a, H1b, H1d were all partially supported.
This study provides further evidence that leader behavior does make a difference in follower attitudes.For example, a leader's focus on community service instills follower behaviors that both encourage others to participate in the organization and promote the organization to outsiders.Thus, if it is important to the organization to have members who invest in the organization by performing citizenship behaviors, then leaders would do well to examine their own practices and adjust their behavior where necessary as a means to model the desired behaviors.
It was Hypothesized (H2) that person-organization fit moderates the influence of the servant leader on organizational citizenship behavior, such that the relationship between servant leader behaviors and follower organizational citizenship behaviors would be stronger for followers whose values fit the organization.Based on the data, H2 was only partially supported.According to the regression analysis, personorganization fit moderated the relationship between helping subordinates grow, behaving ethically, agapao love and the individual initiative OCB.This result is interesting for 2 reasons.First, there was no significant moderation of person-organization fit on any of the other citizenship behaviors.Values congruence with the organization does not apparently influence the degree to which leader behaviors predict certain extrarole behaviors, such as helping others and promoting the organization.On the other hand, personorganization fit did moderate the degree to which employees encourage co-workers to voice ideas and opinions.The leader behaviors involved in this interaction are altruistic by nature.Self-sacrifice, concern for others and ethical principles seek the good for others.The individual initiative OCB could also be seen as altruistic, but so too is interpersonal helping.It is unclear why values fit would moderate only the one citizenship behavior.
An implication of this finding is that organizations may want to hire people whose values are similar to the organizations.Instead of focusing on putting a person with the requisite skills in a job, companies should focus more on how well the employee fits with the organization's culture (Bliss, 1999).Skills can be taught, but core beliefs and values are less flexible.An organization that values openness and honesty between itself and the community needs employees who are open and honest with each other and leaders.
Hypothesis 3 suggested that organizational identification moderates the effect of servant leadership on organizational citizenship behaviors, such that the relationship between servant leadership and follower OCB would be stronger for followers who identify with the organization.Regression analysis showed a moderating effect of organizational identification between helping subordinates grow and interpersonal helping, individual initiative and loyal boosterism.Furthermore, organizational identification also moderated the relationship between creating value for community and interpersonal helping, individual initiative and loyal boosterism.
Finally, organizational identification was also a significant moderator of the relationship between gapao love and interpersonal helping and individual initiative.Thus, H3 was partially supported.The findings that organizational identification moderates the servant leadership-OCB relationship are in line with the understanding that OI creates a sense of oneness with the organization whereby individuals are led to internalize the organization's mission as their own (Van Dick et al., 2007).In particular, it can be inferred that an employee who defends the organization against criticisms, above and beyond the impact of the servant leader's own modeled behavior, has a strong identity with the organization.It is also understandable that an employee with a strong identification would be willing to encourage others to participate in the organization and to help co-workers.The implication for organizations then, is that in order to increase behaviors that supervisors wish for but cannot pay for, it is important for leaders to connect followers' self-identity to their social identity with the group and to model the types of behaviors sought (Van Dick et al., 2007).

Fig. 1 :
Fig. 1: Model of relationship between servant leadership behaviors and follower organizational citizenship behavior moderated by person-organization fit and organizational identification et al., 2006).Early research revealed there were some employee behaviors that managers wished for but could not necessarily demand or reward.These behaviors were categorized as helping and compliance behaviors(Smith et al., 1983).Helping behaviors were focused on other individuals, such as assisting co-workers with work completion due to absence or overload.Compliance behaviors consisted of more general behaviors that benefit the organization, such as punctuality, not taking unnecessary time off work, etc.These behaviors were eventually described as discretionary because they are not a formal part of a follower's job description, although they promote the effectiveness of the organization(Moorman and Blakely, 1995).Organ et al. (2006) pointed out that although attendance at work and not engaging in personal matters while at work, for example, could be considered part of the job description, individuals have discretion in the degree to which they comply.Thus, these behaviors can be considered citizenship behaviors.Ehrhart (2004) referred to OCB as behaviors that support the core'task behaviors.Scholars have distinguished anywhere from 2 dimensions(Williams and Anderson, 1991;Podsakoff et al., 1990) to seven dimensions for OCB(Bergeron, 2004;Kernodle, 2007).Moorman and Blakely (1995) created an instrument based on the four dimensions proposed byGraham (1989).These dimensions are interpersonal helping, individual initiative, personal industry and loyal boosterism.Interpersonal helping focuses on helping co-workers.Individual initiative describes communication to others that improves individual and group performance.Personal industry relates to specific tasks that are not part of the job description, such as not missing work.Loyal boosterism promotes the organization's image to others(Moorman and Blakely, 1995).These dimensions were chosen because of the emphasis on participation in different facets of organizational life.

Table 1 :
Means and standard deviations of servant leadership, person- organization fit, organizational identification, OCB and control variables (N = 80) Variable S.D.

Table 2 :
Correlation matrix among servant leadership, person-organization fit, organizational identification and organizational citizenship

Table 3 :
Factor analysis of servant leadership items