Organizational citizenship behavior for the environment: a management perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This study aims to investigate the relationship between organizational citizenship behavior for the environment (OCBE) of managers and the constructs of the theory of planned behavior: perceived behavioral control (PBC) and attitude toward the environment. The current study also aims to explore the magnitude of this relationship with subjective norms as a moderating variable. Design/methodology/approach Data were sourced from a total number of 140 respondents (managers) from different firms in The Netherlands through an online questionnaire by using a mixture of structured, semi-structured and open-ended questions. Having used the correlation test, the study first conducts the exploratory factor analysis and then the reliability test. Finally, it estimates the coefficients by applying the hierarchical regression model to find the relationship between dependent and explanatory variables. Findings Diagnostic test results revealed that data are highly reliable. The coefficient results indicate that PBC and environmental attitude have positive and significant relationships with OCBE. Additionally, subjective norms have a significant and positive effect on strengthening the relationship between PBC and OCBE; however, it has no impact on the relationship between environmental attitude and OCBE. Research limitations/implications This study has some caveats. First, the results presented in the research are derived from a single moment in time. The second limitation has to do with the insignificant results for the construct of environmental attitude. Third, this study comprises a data set obtained from different companies in The Netherlands. Practical implications Organizations that want to increase their environmental performance could look at the PBC, environmental attitude and subjective norms of the managers in regard to OCBE. Originality/value The results of the study contribute to the understanding of the way PBC, environmental attitude and subjective norms positively affect OCBE. Future research should investigate organizational citizenship within business firms by considering corporate social responsibility as a key variable.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".