The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0142-5455.htm

ER
29,6 Psychological climate and
individual performance in India:
test of a mediated model
664
Soumendu Biswas
Department of Personnel Management, Xavier Institute of Social Service,
Ranchi, India, and
Arup Varma
Institute of Human Resources & Employee Relations, Loyola University Chicago,
Chicago, Illinois, USA

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this study is to investigate the relationship between psychological climate
and employee performance, in the Indian environment, in order to understand better the conditions
that foster high levels of in-role and extra-role performance.
Design/methodology/approach – Based on a literature review, the paper includes organizational
citizenship behaviour (OCB) and job satisfaction as mediating variables. Further, it uses data obtained
from 357 managerial employees in the manufacturing and service sectors in India to analyze the
relationships.
Findings – The results support the hypotheses that an individual’s perception of the psychological
climate in the organization has a significant positive impact on his/her willingness to engage in OCBs,
as well as on his/her job satisfaction levels. Further, OCB and job satisfaction levels have a significant
impact on individuals’ performance.
Research limitations/implications – The present study relies exclusively on cross-sectional data,
limiting the ability to generalize beyond a point. Further, a significant majority of the respondents
were male, again limiting generalizability.
Practical implications – The findings suggest that Indian organizations need to pay attention to
employee perceptions of the work environment, and that human resource strategies should go beyond
establishing policies and procedures to fostering a employee-friendly work environment that promotes
both in-role and extra-role performance.
Originality/value – This study emphasizes the importance of both in-role and extra-role
performance in the Indian context. Further, given India’s rise on the world economic scene, the
findings suggest that organizations wishing to sustain their competitiveness and growth levels need to
pay attention to their employees’ perceptions and beliefs.
Keywords Organizational culture, Employee behaviour, Job satisfaction
Paper type Research paper

Employee Relations
Vol. 29 No. 6, 2007
pp. 664-676
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0142-5455
DOI 10.1108/01425450710826131
Introduction
Over the last few years, several authors have noted the increasing importance of India
on the world economic front (e.g. Kapur and Ramamurti, 2001). Indeed, the economic
reforms in India, started in the early 1990s, have resulted in numerous changes in the
way Indian businesses operate. Further, economic liberalization has seen a substantial
increase in foreign direct investment, and an influx of multinational corporations
(MNCs) setting up operations in India (Budhwar and Debrah, 2004). This has posed
some interesting challenges to domestic Indian companies that were hitherto used to
doing business in the traditional manner, given that they were operating in a “closed Psychological
economy”. The competition presented by MNCs (for market share and both qualified climate in India
employees), has resulted in a gradual but definite move from a rigid and bureaucratic
model to one that is more flexible and adaptive.
In this connection, it should be noted that India is a large country comprising
numerous cultural norms and beliefs. Consequently, there are strong influences of
national and socio-cultural norms and beliefs on organizational policies, practices, and 665
design (Budhwar and Sparrow, 1997). Further, managers in India believe that like other
upcoming economies, such as China, the Indian economy should also be marked with
an “image” that is considered unique and different from traditional ways of performing
business (Varma et al., 2006). In many ways, this feeling of uniqueness arises from the
fact that managerial philosophies have always represented the national diversity and
cultural norms of India (Chatterjee and Hueur, 2006). Organizational structures and
designs, for example, have always reflected the power-distance and collectivistic
nature of the Indian national culture (Hofstede, 2001).
However, the thriving economy and the arrival of the MNCs have begun to change
the Indian workplace dramatically. For example, the availability of new jobs and the
stress introduced by the competitive environment are resulting in a higher turnover
and absenteeism rates in many organizations (Budhwar et al., 2006).
Clearly, it is critical that Indian organizations review their HR policies and practices
and go beyond simply establishing rules and regulations to create a positive
psychological climate where employees feel that they are valued and treated with
respect. In this connection, in a study of the relationship between fairness and
performance in the Indian context, Aryee et al. (2004) reported that procedural justice
was significantly related to individual performance.
In this study, we investigate the relationship between psychological climate and
employee performance through an examination of two critical mediating variables:
(1) job satisfaction; and
(2) organizational citizenship behaviour (OCB).

As the Indian economy continues to grow, it is critical that employers make efforts to
better understand the attitudes and behaviours of individuals in order to help improve
employee performance. Further, as Aryee et al. (2002) note, examining “social exchange
processes” in collectivist cultures such as India will help us better understand the
factors that motivate and drive individuals in cultures that are different from the West,
since individuals in such cultures hold different values. We now turn our attention to a
discussion of the key variables in our study.

Psychological climate (PC)

In the pre-liberalization era, the Indian economy was marked mainly by manufacturing
sector firms, both public and private, that were typically large organizations with
bureaucratic governance and inflexible procedures. Indeed, most of the service sector
organizations, such as schools, hospitals, media and communication, were state-owned.
The sociopolitical ethos encouraged Nehruvian socialism, whereby the state was to
look after the welfare of its citizens. By extension, management philosophies were such
that it was deemed that what the company thought best for the employees was
translated into policies and procedures, and individual needs and aspirations were not
ER given much credence (see Varma et al., 2005). Until the liberalization of the economy in
29,6 the early 1990s, Indian organizations were highly structured and followed bureaucratic
policies and practices. Indeed, these organizations were characterized by top-down
decision making, with very high levels of formalization and centralization. As Hofstede
(2001) notes, such organizations tend to exist within cultures that are characterised by
high power distance (e.g. India). However, in the wake of economic liberalization and
666 consequent changes in the Indian business scenario, organizations have witnessed
quite a few changes, especially with regard to the human resource (HR) function.
The HR function in contemporary Indian business settings is more integrated with
the strategic objectives of the firm (Budhwar and Khatri, 2001; Budhwar and Sparrow,
1997), and HR policies and procedures are derived from the business strategy.
Furthermore, the HR function itself is undergoing major changes, and HR departments
all over are trying to integrate themselves with the strategic goals of the business by
participating in the strategic decision-making of the firm. This has also led to the
redesign of HR strategy, which now concentrates on individual-oriented policies and
practices, such as increasing employees’ involvement, intrinsic motivation, job
satisfaction, and an emphasis on extra-role activities (Montes et al., 2003). As
Pattanayak (2002, p. 73) notes, “any organization that would like to be dynamic and
growth oriented, has to pay attention to the development of its human resources.” In
this connection, HR practices in Indian firms are also following global trends in that
they attempt to provide a congenial and favourable climate where employees can
identify with the organization and feel more satisfied on the job (Biswas, 2006; Pattnaik
and Biswas, 2005). In other words, HR practices in India are increasingly geared
towards improving the way individual employees perceive their day-to-day working
environment, or the way they perceive the psychological climate in the workplace.
In order to understand the cluster of activities related to employee management, the
relevant literature suggests that we examine those constructs which represent
individual perceptions regarding organizational environment based on their
day-to-day experiences (e.g. Schneider, 1975; Strutton et al., 1993). While the
construct of organizational culture, emanating primarily from the field of anthropology
and sociology, has traditionally dominated such sense-making of organizational
environment by organizational members, James et al. (1990) suggest that psychological
evaluation of the workplace environment by individuals is gaining increasing
importance in the contemporary business scenario. It is in this context that the
construct of psychological climate assumes the position of an important explanatory
variable for individual in-role and extra-role behaviour, which in turn explains
individual needs and requirements in the workplace (Schneider, 1975).
Furthermore, climate, whether organizational or psychological, has been
conventionally operationalized in terms of individuals’ reactions to the assessment
of their day-to-day work environment (Dieterly and Schneider, 1974; Glick, 1985; Jones
and James, 1979; Joyce and Slocum, 1984; Kozlowski and Doherty, 1989; Litwin and
Stringer, 1968; Pritchard and Karasick, 1973). In this connection, it should be noted that
since the frame of reference in the case of psychological climate is the individual, it is
therefore a distinct construct from organizational climate (Swift and Campbell, 1998).
Thus, for our study, we conceptualized psychological climate as an individual’s
experiential abstraction of his/her routine experiences at the workplace, and the
consequent sense-making of the same (James et al., 1990; 1977).
 While early research (cf. Johannesson, 1973) considered psychological climate as the Psychological
operational equivalent of the job satisfaction construct, subsequent research (Glick, climate in India
1985; James and Jones, 1974; James et al., 1988; Reichers and Schneider, 1990; Rousseau,
1988) established psychological climate as a distinct construct. In this connection, the
literature pertaining to psychological climate indicates that individual attitudes and
behaviours are its important consequences (James and Jones, 1974; James et al., 1978;
Leigh et al., 1988). In fact, it is often observed that given a favourable psychological 667
climate, individuals are more likely to engage in activities that go beyond the call of
their formal duties. Thus, as the literature suggests, there appears to be a strong
association between favourable psychological climate and individuals’ displayed
extra-role motivation and activities or, in other words, organizational citizenship
behaviour (OCB) (see, for example, James et al., 1979; Woodard et al., 1994). Similarly,
other studies have found a strong linkage between psychological climate and job
satisfaction (Parker et al., 2003). To understand if these relationships also hold true in
the Indian environment, the present study was designed to examine the impact of
psychological climate on OCB and job satisfaction.

Organizational citizenship behaviour (OCB)

A review of the literature suggests that, in addition to extrinsic compensation, intrinsic
rewards motivate employees to improve their performance to a great extent (Deckop
et al., 1999). However, performance is not always limited to in-role performance, as
specified in the job description. Indeed, organizations often require employees to
shoulder responsibilities over and above their in-role activities, in an effort to improve
overall efficiency and effectiveness (Smith et al., 1983). For example, a software
engineer can be asked to spend time with a new hire, helping him/her understand the
departmental structure and practices. Clearly, this is not part of a typical software
engineer’s job. On the other hand, there are numerous such activities that organizations
need their employees to do in order for the business to run smoothly and effectively.
These extra-role activities may be termed “citizenship behaviour” (Netemeyer et al.,
1997).
Normally, such behaviours are not specifically rewarded by organizations, yet
individuals who demonstrate such behaviours are often seen as having a favourable
attitude towards overall business efficacy (Deckop et al., 1999; Smith et al., 1983). In
this connection, Pattnaik and Biswas (2005) found that OCB had a positive impact on
individual performance, and in turn, upon organizational effectiveness. Overall, OCB
refers to informal responsibilities undertaken by individuals, from which they can
derive intrinsic motivation, though often there may be no additional compensation.
However, individual OCB can have a significant positive impact on overall
organizational performance. As such, organizations looking to improve overall
efficiency would do well to create a climate wherein employees are motivated to go
over and above their in-role responsibilities and duties.
With reference to Indian organizations, a review of the literature suggests that
several dimensions of OCB, such as altruism, conscientiousness, and civic virtue,
match the norms of a collectivistic society such as India, and would thus have a
positive impact on individual performance (Hofstede, 2001; MacKenzie et al., 1993).
ER Job satisfaction
29,6 As we noted earlier, job satisfaction is often a direct consequence of a positive
psychological climate. In this connection, Locke (1976, p. 1300) has defined job
satisfaction as “a pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting from the appraisal of
one’s job or job experience”. Furthermore, job satisfaction can be operationalized in
various manners, which represent its different dimensions (e.g. Wanous and Lawler,
668 1972), that is, extrinsic satisfaction, social satisfaction, and intrinsic satisfaction
(Schnake, 1983). In effect, Schnake’s (1983) dimensions of job satisfaction cover the
cognitive and affective responses of individuals to their workplace needs and
necessities. Indeed, the literature suggests that job satisfaction is an attitudinal
variable, and so, like other attitudinal variables, such as job involvement and
organizational commitment, it can also be hypothesized as a consequence of PC (Brown
and Leigh, 1996; Parker et al., 2003). In this connection, Montes et al. (2003) have argued
that climate, which is the manner in which individuals perceive their workplace
practices and procedures, has an important bearing on the level of satisfaction derived
from the work.
It is important to note that there is a clear distinction in the way that organizational
culture, which is the long-term shared beliefs of a majority of the organizational
members, and PC, which is the interpretation of day-to-day work environment by
individual employees, affect employees’ performance (Schneider et al., 1992). While
culture may affect individual behaviour through macro-level mediating variables,
constructs like PC affect individual performance through individual attitudinal
variables (cf. Brown and Leigh, 1996), such as job satisfaction and OCB. Clearly, in the
Indian environment, where intrinsic returns are valued more than extrinsic rewards
(Hofstede, 2001); job satisfaction is very likely to enhance the linkage between PC and
individual employee performance.

Employee performance
According to the literature, there are two dimensions of employees performance at the
workplace – in-role and extra-role (Brief and Motowidlo, 1986; Williams and
Anderson, 1991; Wolfe Morrison, 1994). While in-role performance is defined as an
employee’s action to fulfil the formal requirements of his/her job, extra-role
performances refers to those activities performed by an employee that are outside the
boundaries of formal job descriptions and are performed by employees under their own
discretion (Williams and Anderson, 1991). Historically, in-role performance has been
paid the most attention, as is evident from the substantial literature on performance
appraisal (see Murphy and Cleveland, 1995). Not surprisingly, extra-role performance
is rarely rewarded, and almost never included in evaluations. We believe this is a
rather narrow view of performance, as the impact of extra-role performance on
organizational efficiency is well documented, as we note above. Accordingly, for
purposes of this study, we operationalized performance as being made up of two
distinct constructs – in-role and extra-role performance.
Based on the above discussion, we tested the following hypotheses (Figure 1
presents the hypothesized model):
H1. An individual’s perception of the PC will have a significant and positive
influence on his/her displayed OCB.
 H2. An individual’s perceived PC will significantly and positively affect his/her Psychological
level of job satisfaction. climate in India
H3. The level of an individual’s OCB will have a significant positive impact on
his/her performance.
H4. The level of job satisfaction of an employee will have a significant and
positive impact on his/her performance. 669

Method
Sample
The respondents in our study were executives/managerial cadre employees from
public as well as private sector manufacturing and service organizations in India. Data
were collected from 357 participants, through contacts in the HR departments of these
organizations. A cover note describing the purpose of the study was attached to each
survey, and it also explained the voluntary and anonymous nature of the study.
Further, participants were assured that the responses would be aggregated for
purposes of analysis. Completed survey instruments were returned to the researcher(s)
via mail, in pre-stamped envelopes provided along with the surveys.
Of the 357 participants, 180 (i.e. 50.42 percent) belonged to the manufacturing sector
companies, while 177 (i.e. 49.58 percent) belonged to service sector organizations.
Further, 83.9 percent were males, while 16.1 percent were females, and the average age
of participants was 36.9 years. The average weekly hours spent at work was 52.4, and
the average years of work experience of the respondents was 10.7. Finally, 7.3 percent
belonged to senior management, 35.6 percent were from middle management, and 57.1
percent reported working at junior management levels.

Measures
PC. PC was measured using the Psychological Climate Measure (Brown and Leigh,
1996). This scale comprises six factors, namely supportive management, role clarity,
contribution, recognition, self-expression, and challenge and includes 21 items (e.g. my
boss is flexible about how I accomplish my job objectives; management makes it
perfectly clear how my job is to be done; and I feel very useful in my job). The
reliability measure of this scale was 0.90.
OCB. OCB (a ¼ 0:81) was measured using 16 items from the OCB scale reported by
Moorman (1993). Out of these 16 items, four items measured conscientiousness, four
items measured courtesy, three items measured altruism, and five items measured civic
virtue. Some of the items included: I do not abuse the rights of others, I am mindful of

Figure 1.
The path model associated
with the latent constructs
ER how my behaviour affects other people’s jobs, and I obey company rules and
29,6 regulations, even when no one is watching.
Job satisfaction. To measure job satisfaction (a ¼ 0:89) we used the 11-item Job
Satisfaction Instrument (Schnake, 1983), including items such as satisfaction with the
amount of freedom on the job, the chance to learn new things, and job security. Three
items on the scale measure extrinsic satisfaction, four items measure intrinsic
670 motivation, and four items measure social satisfaction.
Employee performance. We measured employee performance (a ¼ 0:90) using
Lynch et al.’s (1999) scale comprising 16 items, of which ten measure in-role
performance (e.g. employees adequately complete assigned duties) and six measure
extra-role performance (e.g. employees continue to look for new opportunities to
improve effectiveness of their work).

Results
Table I presents the means, standard deviations, inter-item correlations, and reliability
indices for the key variables of our study. As can be seen in the table, the key variables
were significantly correlated: PC and OCB (r ¼ 0:44, p , 0:01); PC and job satisfaction
(r ¼ 0:63, p , 0:01); OCB and employee performance (r ¼ 0:63, p , 0:01); and job
satisfaction and employee performance (r ¼ 0:66, p , 0:01).
In order to examine the linkages, we conducted multiple regression analyses on the
variables included in our study. Table II shows the standardized regression estimates
between the key constructs. As shown in Table II, PC significantly influences OCB
(standardized b ¼ 0:65, CR ¼ 8:03), as well as, job satisfaction (standardized b ¼ 0:78,
CR ¼ 9:78). In turn, OCB significantly predicts employee performance (standardized
b ¼ 0:57, CR ¼ 9:20). Finally, job satisfaction was found to have a significant positive
impact upon employee performance (standardized b ¼ 0:43, CR ¼ 8:05).
Next, in order to calculate the fit indices that explain the relationships between the
hypothesized paths among the latent constructs, we used the AMOS 4.0 SEM
procedures (Arbuckle and Wothke, 1999). SEM procedures suggest that the level of
significance is based on the critical ratio (CR) of the regression estimate (Byrne, 2001).

Mean SD 1 2 3 4

1. PC 3.65 0.53 (0.90)

2. OCB 3.45 0.49 0.44 * (0.81)
Table I. 3. Job satisfaction 3.40 0.65 0.63 * 0.46 * (0.89)
Descriptive statistics, 4. Employee performance 3.56 0.55 0.55 * 0.63 * 0.66 * (0.90)
correlations, and
reliability indices Notes: *p # 0:01. Values in parentheses represent Cronbach’s a; (n ¼ 357)

Standardized b CR

PC ! OCB 0.65 8.03

PC ! job satisfaction 0.78 9.78
Table II. OCB ! employee performance 0.57 9.20
Regression estimates Job satisfaction ! employee performance 0.43 8.05
Thus, CR values greater than or equal to 2.58 indicate a 99 percent level of significance. Psychological
However, when CR values are greater than or equal to 1.96 but less than 2.58, this climate in India
indicates a 95 percent level of significance.
We utilized the maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) algorithm in order to
determine the fit indices. Accordingly, we report the goodness-of-fit index (GFI) and the
root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) as the absolute fit measures.
According to Byrne (2001), absolute fit measures should be used for comparison 671
between the hypothesized model and an absence of any other model. We also report the
Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) and the comparative fit index (CFI). These indices indicate a
comparison between the hypothesized model and the model with maximum
constraints. Lastly, we used the normed x 2 value as an acceptable measure of fit.
According to Hair et al. (1998), the recommended fit values for GFI, TLI, NFI, and
CFI are . 0.90. Likewise, while an RMSEA of 0.0 indicates perfect fit, values that are
less than 0.07 are considered as good fits. The range of the normed x 2 is generally
accepted as 1:00 , normed x 2 , 3:00 (Hair et al., 1998). Finally, we report the adjusted
goodness-of-fit (AGFI) as well as the parsimony-adjusted goodness-of-fit (PGFI)
measures.
Table III shows the fit measures of the proposed model. For the model as depicted in
Figure 1, the normed x 2 value is 1.38. The GFI is 0.97, which is above the
recommended value. The TLI is equal to 0.99, the NFI value is 0.97, and the CFI value is
0.99. These values are also much above the recommended values for the respective
indices. With the threshold value of RMSEA being 0.07, the value of RMSEA for the
proposed model is 0.03. Finally, the AGFI and the PGFI values are equal to 0.94 and
0.56, respectively, thus confirming a good fit. As such, all hypotheses were supported
in the predicted direction.

Discussion
This study was designed to examine the relationship between psychological climate
and employee performance in Indian organization.
The first hypothesis stated that an individual’s perception of the PC will have a
significant and positive impact on his/her displayed OCB. The support for this
hypothesis, in our study, points to the changing nature of the Indian work
environment. As discussed in the initial section of our paper, the opening up of the
Indian economy has ushered in considerable reorganization and restructuring of
policies and procedures within Indian firms. At the same time, there has been a growth
in demand for knowledge workers. Consequently, we observe that the present-day
Indian workforce is more diverse. Additionally, today’s employees are willing to
display behaviour not necessarily described by their job, provided they perceive a
favourable day-to-day work environment.

Fit Indices GFI AGFI PGFI TLI NFI CFI RMSEA Normed x 2

Proposed model 0.97 0.94 0.56 0.99 0.97 0.99 0.03 1.38 Table III.
Independence model 0.27 0.16 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.27 27.65 Fit indices
ER In the second hypothesis we had postulated that PC would significantly and
29,6 positively impact an individual’s level of job satisfaction. The support for this
hypothesis suggests that employees in Indian organizations are increasingly satisfied
with their jobs in cases where they perceive a favourable psychological climate. A
supportive management team that understands the needs and requirements of the
employees is clearly critical in order to provide employees with the elements needed to
672 help them enjoy their work. In addition, it is clear that when employees feel that they
are valued members of the organization, their level of job satisfaction is significantly
affected in the desired direction.
In our third hypothesis, we stated that the level of an individual’s OCB will have a
significant and positive impact on his/her performance. This hypothesis also received
strong support. A display of high levels of OCB indicates that individuals identify
themselves with their organization (Pattnaik and Biswas, 2005) and hold favourable
affective commitment towards their organization (Biswas, 2006). Thus, manifestation
of OCB by individuals indicates their affective attachment to their work and their
workplace. This, in turn, leads to enhanced performance level by individual employees.
In fact, psychological attachment of an employee to his/her job would make him/her
contribute more and more towards his/her in-role requirements. At the same time, the
escalation of involvement with the organization would make the individual employee
exhibit higher levels of extra-role performance.
In the fourth and final hypothesis, we stated that the job satisfaction of an employee
will have a significant and a positive impact on the employee’s performance level.
Earlier, we had operationalized job satisfaction on the basis of extrinsic, intrinsic, and
social satisfaction as proposed by Schnake (1983). Indeed, extrinsic factors such as
level of pay and job security are fundamentally critical for an employee to perform well
on the job. However, given the transitional nature of the Indian workforce in the
contemporary business scenario, it is clear that if organizations are to extract optimal
performance from their employees, they must create an environment whereby
employees derive intrinsic and social satisfaction.
Contemporary human resource strategies in India are geared towards fostering
development and team-building by espousing a spirit of mutual belief and functional
interdependence (Krishna, 1990). In this connection, Krishna (1990) further suggests
that HR departments can play a critical role in the improvement of the motivation and
commitment levels of individual employees. Our results support this assertion, by
confirming the significant positive impact of perceived psychological climate on
individuals’ job satisfaction and OCB.
Our findings offer both theoretical and practical implications. Theoretically, we
have reinforced the distinction between in-role and extra-role performance. Future
research, including investigations in the area of performance appraisal, would do well
to include extra-role performance as a distinct construct in the study of individual
performance. Next, we have demonstrated the generalisability of the construct of
psychological climate, which has hitherto been studied only in a Western context.
Thus, it appears that psychological climate, as a construct, transcends the
individualistic/collectivistic distinction of national cultures.
From a practical perspective, our findings offer several important pointers. First, it
is clear that individuals in the Indian workplace are concerned about the way they are
treated in the workplace, and that their perception of the work environment can
significantly impact their levels of satisfaction. Further, the perceived lack of a suitable Psychological
psychological climate may also lead individuals in Indian organizations to limit any climate in India
extra-role performance. In other words, individuals may do just what the job requires
of them, and withhold OCB, such as helping newcomers to the organization. Given the
speed at which the Indian economy is growing, and the concomitant influx of
expatriates to India, this could spell trouble for global-minded organizations, as local
employees can play a critical role in the success/failure of expatriates (see, for example, 673
Varma et al., 2006).
Overall, our study has pointed to some very important findings, and the
contribution is timely as we extend the investigation of psychological climate to India,
one of the fastest growing economies in the world. However, we would be remiss if we
did not note the limitations of our study. First, our study is based on cross-sectional
data, so our causal findings are constrained by the nature of our design. We hope
future investigations will incorporate longitudinal and other designs. Next, the
respondents in our study were overwhelmingly male (84 percent). This might limit the
generalisability of our findings to other workplaces in India, such as BPOs, where
females are increasingly assuming managerial roles.

References
Aryee, S., Budhwar, P. and Chen, Z.X. (2002), “Trust as a mediator of the relationship between
organizational justice and work outcomes: test of a social exchange model”, Journal of
Organizational Behaviour, Vol. 23, pp. 267-85.
Aryee, S., Chen, Z.X. and Budhwar, P. (2004), “Exchange fairness and employee performance: an
examination of the relationship between organizational politics and procedural justice”,
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 94 No. 1, pp. 1-14.
Arbuckle, J.L. and Wothke, W. (1999), AMOS 4.0 User’s Guide, Smallwaters Corporation,
Chicago, IL.
Biswas, S. (2006), “Organizational culture and psychological climate as predictors of employee
performance and job satisfaction”, PhD thesis, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur,
submitted.
Brief, A.P. and Motowidlo, S.J. (1986), “Prosocial organizational behaviours”, Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 11, pp. 710-25.
Brown, S.P. and Leigh, T.W. (1996), “A new look at psychological climate and its relationship to
job involvement, effort, and performance”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 81,
pp. 358-68.
Budhwar, P. and Debrah, Y. (2004), “Introduction: HRM in developing countries”, in Budhwar, P.
and Debrah, Y. (Eds), HRM in Developing Countries, Routledge, London, pp. 1-15.
Budhwar, P.S. and Khatri, N. (2001), “A comparative study of HR practices in Britain and India”,
International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 12 No. 5, pp. 800-26.
Budhwar, P.S. and Sparrow, P.R. (1997), “Evaluating levels of strategic integration and levels of
human resource management in India”, International Journal of Human Resource
Management, Vol. 8, pp. 476-94.
Budhwar, P., Varma, A., Singh, V. and Dhar, R. (2006), “HRM systems of Indian call centers in
India: an exploratory study”, International Journal of Human Resource Management,
Vol. 17 No. 5, pp. 881-97.
Byrne, B.M. (2001), Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and
Programming, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
ER Chatterjee, S.R. and Hueur, M. (2006), “Understanding Indian management in a time of
transition”, in Davis, H.J., Chatterjee, S.R. and Hueur, M. (Eds), Management in India:
29,6 Trends and Transitions, Response Books, New Delhi, pp. 11-27.
Deckop, J.R., Mangel, R. and Cirka, C.C. (1999), “Getting more than you pay for: organizational
citizenship behavior and pay for performance plans”, Academy of Management Journal,
Vol. 42 No. 4, pp. 420-8.
674 Dieterly, D. and Schneider, B. (1974), “The effect of organizational environment on perceived
power and climate: a laboratory study”, Organizational Behavior and Human
Performance, Vol. 11, pp. 316-37.
Glick, W.H. (1985), “Conceptualizing and measuring organizational and psychological climate:
pitfalls in multilevel research”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 10, pp. 601-16.
Hair, J.F.H., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. and Black, W.C. (1998), Multivariate Data Analysis, 5th
ed., Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Hofstede, G. (2001), Culture’s Consequences, 2nd ed., Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
James, L.R. and Jones, A.P. (1974), “Organizational climate: a review of theory and research”,
Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 81, pp. 1096-112.
James, L.R., James, L.A. and Ashe, D.K. (1990), “The meaning of organizations: the role of
cognition and values”, in Schneider, B. (Ed.), Organizational Culture and Climate,
Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, pp. 40-84.
James, L.R., Joyce, W.F. and Slocum, J.W. Jr (1988), “Organizations do not cognize”, Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 129-32.
James, L.R., Gent, M.J., Hater, J.J. and Coray, K.E. (1979), “Correlates of psychological influence:
an illustration of the psychological climate approach to work environment perceptions”,
Personnel Psychology, Vol. 32, pp. 563-88.
James, L.R., Hartman, A., Stebbins, M.W. and Jones, A.P. (1977), “Relationships between
psychological climate and a VIE model for work motivation”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 30,
pp. 229-54.
James, L.R., Hater, J.J., Gent, M.J. and Bruni, J.R. (1978), “Psychological climate: implications from
cognitive social learning theory and interactional psychology”, Personnel Psychology,
Vol. 31, pp. 783-813.
Johannesson, R.E. (1973), “Some problems in the measurement of organizational climate”,
Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, Vol. 10, pp. 118-44.
Jones, A.P. and James, L.R. (1979), “Psychological climate: dimensions and relationships of
individual and aggregate work environment perceptions”, Organizational Behavior and
Human Performance, Vol. 23, pp. 201-50.
Joyce, W.F. and Slocum, J.W. Jr (1984), “Collective climates: agreement as a basis for defining
aggregate climates in organizations”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 27 No. 4,
pp. 721-42.
Kapur, D. and Ramamurti, R. (2001), “India’s emerging competitive advantage in services”,
Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 20-33.
Krishna, S. (1990), “HRD issues/opportunities – top management’s views”, in Nair, M.R.R. and
Rao, T.V. (Eds), Excellence Through Human Resource Development: Improving
Productivity and Competence, New Delhi, Tata McGraw-Hill, pp. 16-24.
Kozlowski, S.W. and Doherty, M.L. (1989), “Integration of climate and leadership: examination of
a neglected issue”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 74 No. 4, pp. 546-53.
Leigh, J.H., Lucas, G.H. Jr and Woodman, R.W. (1988), “Effects of perceived organizational Psychological
factors on role stress-job attitude relationships”, Journal of Management, Vol. 14 No. 1,
pp. 41-58. climate in India
Litwin, G.H. and Stringer, R.A. Jr (1968), Motivation and Organizational Climate, Harvard
University Press, Boston, MA.
Locke, E.A. (1976), “The nature and causes of job satisfaction”, in Dunnette, M.D. (Ed.),
Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Rand McNally, Chicago, IL, 675
pp. 1297-349.
Lynch, P.D., Eisenberger, R. and Armelli, S. (1999), “Perceived organizational support: inferior
versus superior performance by wary employees”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 44
No. 4, pp. 467-83.
MacKenzie, S.B., Podsakoff, P.M. and Fetter, R. (1993), “The impact of organizational citizenship
behavior on evaluation of salesperson performance”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 57,
pp. 70-80.
Montes, F.J.L., Fuentes, M.D.M.F. and Fernandez, L.M.M. (2003), “Quality management in
banking services: an approach to employee and customer perceptions”, Total Quality
Management, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 305-23.
Moorman, R.H. (1993), “The influence of cognitive and affective based job satisfaction on
relationship between satisfaction and organizational citizenship behavior”, Human
Relations, Vol. 46, pp. 759-76.
Murphy, K.R. and Cleveland, J.N. (1995), Understanding Performance Appraisal: Social,
Organizational, and Goal-Based Perspectives, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Netemeyer, R.G., Boles, J.S., McKee, D.O. and McMurrian, R. (1997), “An investigation into the
antecedents of organizational citizenship behaviors in a personal selling context”, Journal
of Marketing, Vol. 61, pp. 85-98.
Parker, C.P., Baltes, B.B., Young, S.A., Huff, J.W., Altmann, R.A., Lacost, H.A. and Roberts, J.E.
(2003), “Relationship between psychological climate perceptions and work outcomes: a
meta-analytic review”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 24, pp. 389-416.
Pattnaik, S. and Biswas, S. (2005), “The mediating role of organizational citizenship behavior
between organizational identification and its consequences”, paper presented at the
International Research Conference of the Academy of Human Resource Development
(AHRD), February 24-27, 2005, Estes Park, CO.
Pattanayak, B. (2002), “Effects of shiftwork and hierarchical position in the organization on
psychological correlates: a study on an integrated steel plant”, Organization Development
Journal, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 71-83.
Pritchard, R.D. and Karasick, B.W. (1973), “The effects of organizational climate on managerial
job performance and job satisfaction”, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance,
Vol. 9, pp. 126-46.
Reichers, A.E. and Schneider, B. (1990), “Climate and culture: an evolution of constructs”, in
Schneider, B. (Ed.), Organizational Climate and Culture, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA,
pp. 5-39.
Rousseau, D.M. (1988), “The construction of climate in organizational research”, in Cooper, C.L.
and Robertson, I.T. (Eds), International Review of Industrial and Organizational
Psychology, Wiley, Chichester.
Schnake, M.E. (1983), “An empirical assessment of the effects of affective response in the
measurement of organizational climate”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 791-807.
ER Schneider, B. (1975), “Organizational climates: an essay”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 28,
pp. 447-79.
29,6 Schneider, B., Wheeler, J.K. and Cox, J.F. (1992), “A passion for service: using content analysis to
explicate service climate themes”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 77 No. 5, pp. 705-16.
Smith, C.A., Organ, D.W. and Near, J.P. (1983), “Organizational citizenship behavior: its nature
and antecedents”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 68, pp. 653-63.
676 Strutton, D., Pelton, L.E. and Lumpkin, J.R. (1993), “The relationship between psychological
climate and salesperson-sales manager trust in sales organization”, Journal of Personal
Selling and Sales Management, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 1-14.
Swift, C.O. and Campbell, C. (1998), “Psychological climate: relevance for sales managers and
impact on consequent job satisfaction”, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice,
pp. 27-37.
Varma, A., Budhwar, P.K., Biswas, S. and Toh, S.M. (2006), “A quasi-experimental field study of
Chinese HCNs’ willingness to help expatriates”, paper presented at the Academy of
Management Annual Conference, Atlanta, GA.
Varma, A., Pichler, S. and Srinivas, E.S. (2005), “The role of interpersonal affect in performance
appraisal: evidence from two samples – US and India”, International Journal of Human
Resource Management, Vol. 16 No. 11, pp. 2029-44.
Wanous, J.P. and Lawler, E.E. III (1972), “Measurement and meaning of job satisfaction”, Journal
of Applied Psychology, Vol. 56, pp. 95-105.
Williams, L.J. and Anderson, S.E. (1991), “Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as
predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors”, Journal of Management,
Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 601-17.
Wolfe Morrison, E. (1994), “Role definitions and organizational citizenship behaviour: the
importance of the employee’s perspective”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 37,
pp. 1543-67.
Woodard, G., Cassill, N. and Herr, D. (1994), The Relationship between Psychological Climate and
Work Motivation in a Retail Environment, Routledge, New York, NY, pp. 297-314.

Further reading
Montes, F.J.L., Fuentes, M.D.M. and Fernández, L.M.M. (2003), “Quality management in banking
services: an approach to employee and customer perceptions”, Total Quality Management,
Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 305-23.
Rao, T.V. (1990), Excellence through Human Resource Development: Improving Productivity and
Competence, Tata McGraw-Hill, New Delhi.
Varma, A., Toh, S.M. and Budhwar, P. (2006), “A new perspective on the female expatriate
experience: the role of host country nationals”, Journal of World Business, Vol. 41,
pp. 112-20.

Corresponding author
Arup Varma can be contacted at: avarma@luc.edu

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints