Euthanasia: Kantianism vs Utilitarianism Essay

The deliberate act of ending another’s life, given his or her consent, is formally referred to as euthanasia. At present, euthanasia is one of the most controversial social-ethical issues that we face, in that it deals with a sensitive subject matter where there is much uncertainty as to what position one ought to take. Deliberately killing another person is presumed by most rational people as a fundamental evil act. However, when that person gives his or her consent to do so, this seems to give rise to an exceptional case. This can be illustrated in the most common case of euthanasia, where the person who is willing to die suffers from an illness that causes great pain, and will result in his or her demise in the not-so-distant future. In this case, killing the person would seem to be the most humane and reasonable thing to do, whereas keeping the person alive would be akin to torture; which is also presumed to be a fundamental evil act. But euthanasia, in essence, is murder, and this might lead one to ask whether there can ever be an exception to murder? And if one were to make an exception in this case, what would then prevent us from making exceptions in other cases? In the worst case scenario, would this not leave an opening for cold-blooded murders to kill people without their consent, and make false claims that they did have their consent? There are a variety of positions, based on the numerous ethical theories that have been developed, that one can take in order to resolve the issue of euthanasia; but the positions I will be looking at in particular, are the positions based on John Stuart Mill’s ‘Utilitarianism’ ethical theory, and Immanuel Kant’s ‘Categorical Imperative’ ethical theory. According to Utilitarianism, euthanasia can be morally justified, whereas according to Kantianism, euthanasia is not morally justifiable; but I will argue that neither position provides an adequate resolution to the issue, due to the significant flaws that are inherent in the reasoning that led to their particular positions. According to Utilitarianism, ethics is primarily an empirical science; essentially implying that the moral standard must be based on human experiences, and not abstract principles that are largely impractical. Hence, based on an understanding of human experience Utilitarianism proposes that the ultimate end of every human action is simply pleasure, and the absence of pain. This fundamental idea then forms the basis for Utilitarianism’s Greatest Happiness Principle which states, â€Å"actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. By happiness is intended pleasure, and the absence of pain; by unhappiness, pain, and the privation of pleasure† (Mill, 7). Also, Utilitarianism asserts that actions are judged as moral solely based on their consequences, and not on their motives. So, if a person acts out of good intentions, but does not produce beneficial results, then his action does not qualify as a moral action. Finally, Utilitarianism asserts that an action is good only if it promotes the greatest happiness for the greatest amount of people. Therefore, an action that slightly increases your own pleasure, but in turn, dramatically decreases the pleasure of other, according to Utilitarianism is not moral action. Thus, in the context of the case mentioned in the introduction, the Utilitarian position on euthanasia would go something as follows: With respect to the individual who is willing to die, he/she would simply be happiest dead, and unhappiest alive. With respect to the people who care for the individual, they would be happy that he/she is alive, but unhappy at the same time because he/she is in great pain; or if the individual underwent euthanasia, happy because he/she is no longer in pain, but unhappy because he/she is dead. So, in applying the Utilitarian principle to this case, the greatest happiness for the greatest amount of people occurs when the person is dead. The reason being that the people who care for the person are both happy and unhappy regardless of whether the person is dead or alive, but the person will only be happy if he/she is dead. Therefore, since euthanasia meets the moral standards set by Utilitarianism, it would support the act of euthanasia as a morally sound action. Unlike Utilitarianism however, Kantianism states that ethics is a purely a priori discipline, thus, independent of experience, and that ethical rules can only be found through pure reason. Also contrary to Utilitarianism, Kantianism asserts that the moral worth of an action should be judged on its motive and the action itself, and not on its consequences. Based on these ideas, Kantianism propose that an action is good only if it performed out a ‘good will’; which is the only thing that is good, in and of itself. To act out of a ‘good will’, one must act in accordance with a categorical imperative. According to Kant there is only one categorical imperative, which is to â€Å"act only on that maxim in which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law† (Kant, 528); and can also be formulated as â€Å"act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never simply as means, but always at the same time as an end† (Kant, 532). Essentially, the categorical imperative states that your actions must not result in a practical contradiction, which can be determined by conceptualizing all other people performing the same act. To illustrate, if I were to make a promise with no intentions of keeping it, and I imagine all other people doing the same, then very idea of a promise would cease to have meaning, and thus, my action would give rise to a practical contradiction, and consequently, be immoral. Finally, the categorical imperative is an unconditional ought, which means that an action must be performed solely out of duty to the categorical imperative, without any ulterior motive, in order for it to be a moral action. Thus, with regard to euthanasia, Kantians would reject the act of euthanasia as a morally good action based on their reasoning that an action is good only if it acts in accordance with a categorical imperative. Taking the categorical imperative in terms of being able to act in ways that can, without contradiction, become a universal law, if one were to universalize killing another person – which is the fundamental act in euthanasia – this would result in a practical contradiction. That practical contradiction being if everyone were to kill one another, then there would be no people left in this world, and as a consequence, the very idea of murder would lose its meaning. Also, if one were to formulate the categorical imperative in terms of treating others (including oneself) as ends rather than means, euthanasia would violate the categorical imperative, in that the person is treated as a means by killing himself, to reach the end goal of eliminating the pain. Therefore, since euthanasia does not meet the moral standards set out by Kantianism, it would not support the act of euthanasia as a morally sound action. However, as I stated in my thesis, I believe that Utilitarianism, and Kantianism do not provide an adequate resolution to the issue of euthanasia, because of the significant flaws in their reasoning. With Utilitarianism, the significant flaw in their position lies in the fact that it is built on the false assumption that the consequences of actions can be predicted, when in actuality they cannot. For example, it is possible that the person, who underwent euthanasia because of the pain he/she suffered, could’ve been misdiagnosed and fully recovered shortly after. Also, inspired by his/her new life, the individual went on to form a charity that raised money for research in pain treatment, thereby increasing the happiness for a great many. Thus, under the utilitarian system, keeping the person alive in this scenario would have been the morally justified act, whereas killing the person would not have been. With Kantianism, the significant flaw in their position lies in the fact that they make an absolute, immutable statement – do not murder – without any consideration for the context in which murder takes place. It is unreasonable, and bordering on foolish, to claim to adequately resolve special cases of murder such as euthanasia through a simple, general statement without taking into consideration its context. Though it is indeed reasonable that deliberately killing another for the sake of harming them is an immoral act, in euthanasia, a person is killed by another only by their own consent, and for the most part, with a good motive. When a person is suffering tremendously and is most likely going to die anyways, it does not at all seem unreasonable to kill him. In fact, killing the person would seem to be the most humane act one can perform, and in not killing the person, and keeping him/her alive in such a state of pain and agony, would be like an indirect form of torture; which in Kantianism is not a moral act. Thus, for these reasons, the positions of Utilitarianism and Kantianism on euthanasia are inadequate in resolving the issue of euthanasia, and euthanasia still remains as a significant social-ethical problem in our contemporary society. Works Cited Mill, J. S. (1984). Excerpts from Utilitarianism, On Liberty and Considerations on Representative Government, 1, 4-42. London: Dent. Kant, I. (1956). Excerpts from Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals, trans. H. J. Paton, 61-62, 64-67, 74, 80-92, 95-107. London: Unwin Hyman. Reprinted in E. Sober, Core Question in Philosophy: A Text with Readings, 520-540. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 2001.

Bus 520 Assignment 1

Consensual Relationship Agreements By: Vickie Gonzalez Bus 520 – Leadership and Organizational Behavior Professor: Dr. Marilyn Carroll October 24th, 2012 Workplace romances are now one of the challenges that organizations of all sizes have to address. How they address them varies from organization to organization. Some businesses and organizations strictly prohibit them in any form or fashion, while others prohibit them when the participants are in certain roles within the organization.Some companies have chosen not to address the issue at all and others are using a more formal method of documenting and mitigating the risk they feel these relationships pose. One of the methods of documenting, and potentially mitigating, this risk is known as a consensual relationship agreement or CRA. In the text that follows I will argue for the use of CRA’s in the workplace. Secondly, I will present a counter argument for the use of CRA’s. Then we will then look at the ethical principles involved in the use of CRA’s. Lastly I will present another option that may be available for addresses these consensual relationships.First, let’s look at what brought about the need for CRA’s. On June 28th, 1914 Gavrilo Princip, of Sarajevo, assassinated the Archduke and heir to the throne of Austria, Franz Ferdinand (Collins, 2008, p. 9). Thirty-seven days later World War I began, and with it, so did what some see as the beginnings of women entering the workplace. The Munitions of War Act of 1915 moved twenty-one percent of Britain’s wives, sisters, mothers and daughters into the workforce (Woolacott, 1994, p. 17). Factory workers became soldiers and the women in their lives became factory workers.By 1941, and the United States’ entrance into World War II, 18. 9 million American women had entered the workforce as well (Weak-Baxter, 2010, p. 14). Japan had attacked Pearl Harbor and patriotism was welling just as strong in American women as it was in American men. Now, according to the US Department of Labor, there are 72 million women in the civilian labor force alone (2012). The years following World War II were a time of challenge, adaptation and diversification for business, and revolution and exploration for women. Harassment, specifically sexual harassment, is one of those hallenges faced by businesses and employers as of a result of workplace diversification. Inappropriate conversations, unwanted advances and uncomfortable physical contact are some of the ways sexual harassment can occur. According to Hellriegel and Slocum, â€Å"Sexual harassment refers to unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature. † (p. 52). To be clear, sexual harassment can, and has, affected both women and men over the years however up to half of all working women have reported experiencing some form of sexual harassment in the career (Vijayasiri, 2008, p. ). It wasn’t until 1986 though that the Supreme Court recognized sexual harassment as a violation of Title VII in the case of Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson (O’Brien, 1994, p. 1). Before the high court’s ruling, however, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission had begun to address the issue by drafting hostile work environment guidelines that included sexual harassment (O’Brien, 1994, p. 4). These guidelines would serve later to guide the high court’s decision. There are many more cases like this one we could look at.In 1991, sexual harassment became a household term as Anita Hill testified before congress stating she was sexually harassed by a current nominee for the Supreme Court. In her statement to the Senate Judiciary Committee Ms. Hill stated, â€Å"It is only after a great deal of agonizing consideration, and sleepless, number of , great number of sleepless night, that I am able to talk of these unpleasant matters to anyone but my close frie nds† ( Black Scholar, 1991, p 1). For many American this was the first time they had really thought about or discussed sexually harassment.It was on our televisions, out in the open, for the whole world to see. As a result of brave employees like Ms. Hill and many others sexual harassment is no less tolerated in the workplace and employers are required to have specific policies addressing it. Now what happens when the relationship between two employees is consensual? No harassment has occurred. Romance is in the air. Some organizations have policies that prohibit workplace relationships of any kind and participating in one is grounds for termination. Other businesses only prohibit these relationships in the event that one party reports to or manages the other.More and more firms are using consensual relationship agreements or CRAs. A CRA is a written agreement or contract in which the involved parties agree to specific guidelines in the workplace (Hellriegel/Slocum, 2011, p. 6 5). This is one of the practices or policies an organization can use to mitigate the risks associated with workplace relationships. In this agreement the parties involved state that the relationship is voluntary. They agree to abide by any and all anti-harassment or anti-discrimination policies the business has in place, including reporting any violation of these policies that may occur.They also agree to behave professionally at all times which includes avoiding even the appearance of favoritism. There are proponents and opponents of the use of these agreements in the workplace. I agree with the proponents of the use of CRAs in the workplace. Hellriegel and Solcum mention several arguments in favor in CRAs in the workplace in our text. I would like to look at three of these. The first argument that Hellriegel and Solcum mention is that CRAs help mitigate the risk of any sexual harassment litigation (p. 65). I have to agree with this argument. Office relationships can be wonderful.I know several happy couples who met at the office. They manage their personal and professional lives well. However this is not always the case, and when the relationship fails, things may change. This can be especially true if this relationship involved one part that directly, or even indirectly reports to the other. The employee may suggest they were pressured into the relationship by their manager. The manager may resent the employee and treat them unfairly. Both of these scenarios, and many others, open the doors to litigation. The employer in both of these cases could be found liable in a sexual harassment suit.Damages awarded in these cases can be punitive and compensatory. In 1997 large corporations spent more than 6 million for each sexual harassment suit they defended themselves against and/or settled (Vijayasiri, 2008, p. 2) Employers can protect themselves from this risk by ensuring they have a very clearly stated workplace relationship policy that, in my opinion, should i nvolve the use of CRAs. The second argument is favor of the use of CRAs is that they help to reduce the appearance of favoritism in the workplace (Hellriegel/Slocum, 2011, p. 65).Ensuring that there is not even the appearance of favoritism in the workplace is not just a matter of fair policy. In many cases a third party can sue their employer for sexual harassment if they feel they are being discriminated against as the result of a workplace relationship. Employees are human and emotions and perception are part of being human. No employer can predict what behavior will be acceptable to one employee and offensive to another, A CRA requiring both participants in the relationship to behave in a professional manner can help minimize this risk of offending a third party.In 2001, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upheld a verdict in favor of Diane Leibovitz for $60,000 against the New York City Transit Authority or NYCTA for what the court determined to be a hostil e work environment (Leibovitz v. NYCTA, 2001). Ms. Leibovitz sued the NYCTA for sexual harassment and emotional distress after confronting her employer regarding the sexual harassment of 3 other female co-workers. Ms. Leibovitz’s job was threatened if she did not remain silent.As a result of these threats she suffered from depression and sleep deprivation. Ms. Leibovitz was not the victim of any sexual advances or misconduct, however, witnessing it and her employer’s inaction created a hostile work environment and a $60,000 judgment on her behalf. The third agreement presented in the text in favor of the use of CRA’s is that they create a forum where human resources can talk openly with employees about the responsibilities and ramification that come with an office romance (Hellriegel/Slocum, 2011, p. 5). This is simply an opportunity for the employer to remind the employee what behavior is and is not appropriate in the workplace. The employer can also restate th e company’s commitment to preventing sexual harassment. This is the time for open and honest discussion in the hopes that awareness and understanding may prevent litigation. Those who argue against the use of CRA’s in the workplace argue that they are a violation of the employee’s privacy and in-effective.

In Search of Your Own Identity Essay

After various writings by Richard Rodriguez and Octavio Paz, I have come across several realizations. Who am I? Should I be a part of a nation and a â€Å"system† that does not value me, or should I be a part of a nation that does not acknowledge my existence? The United States as a nation does not value me, and Mexico does not even know that I exist. These are difficult matters to discuss. We are all in search of our own identity. However, some of us are placed in a situation that makes it very difficult and confusing to know or understand. I have always asked myself, â€Å"Who am I? † I should put it in more crude words, â€Å"Where do I belong? † After this specific question is asked, I begin to realize that I have problems coming up with a response. My parents were born in Mexico, and thus, they are Mexican. Sometimes I feel I belong here in the United States, but other times I feel more attached to Mexico. I am a Mexican-American. However, I feel that I am denying in some way my heritage and my culture by saying that I am. I am denying my parents. I say that I’m Mexican because in a sense I am. I am also an American. I am a Mexican-American. What do these terms put together imply? They should imply that the person is Mexican and American. The term â€Å"Mexican-American† is the very reason why I find myself confused about who I really am. I need to search for my own identity, which leads me to the purpose of this essay. Rodriguez and Paz have discussed this particular problem of identity. All three have different viewpoints. Some of their ideas are similar but mostly contradictory, especially in the case of Rodriguez and Paz. As I was reading, I was able to relate to what they had to say, and in a much bigger sense, I was able to understand and know who I am. I was able to find my self. According to Paz, self-discovery is most than anything realizing that we are alone. Paz argues that our being or our identity becomes a problem and a question. It becomes a problem because of several reasons. We just don’t simply wake up one day and realize that we don’t know who we are. There are individuals who are placed in difficult situations that allow for these questions to arise. For example, the migration of Mexicans to the United States is a situation that will definitely cause many to question their identity. I agree because if we had not moved to the United States, I would simply consider myself a Mexican without a doubt. Paz strongly argues that different circumstances are likely to produce different reactions. This migration is a circumstance that will bring about confusion among the Mexicans about who they really are. It is ironic how a few miles can bring about such a change in you. Personally, I have experiences such a confusion by simply moving twenty miles North of where I lived. I lived in Reynosa since I was eight. Then, my family and I moved here to McAllen. At the beginning, you don’t feel quite like you fit. It makes it very difficult because it is a completely different world. Even though the majority of the people are of Mexican origin, it still makes it very hard. After the years, I became somewhat used to the life here and began to feel comfortable. However, I also began to question my identity. It is the moment we cross that border that we lose our identity. Paz argues that instead of asking ourselves questions, we should do something about it. We cannot go on contemplating who we are, rather, we should work with our situation and do something. Our questions are only an excuse for not facing reality. I agree with Paz because sometimes, we continue to complain and complain and simply think about our present situation. However, we do nothing to change it. I believe that Mexican-Americans need to stop talking about our injustices and discrimination and do something. However, Paz does mention that Mexicans have an inferiority complex. We begin to doubt our own abilities. This happens because of our culture. We are taught to listen and stay quiet. On the other hand, Anglo-Americans are taught to voice their opinions. There are many differences in both the Anglo-American culture and Mexican culture. These differences are the reason why it is impossible to blend or mix. We are brought into a culture that is the complete opposite of ours. This is the reason why Paz says that our â€Å"Mexicanism† simply floats. It never exists, and it never goes away. One of the ways we react to this situation is by flaunting our differences. Paz talks about pachucos. They are a group of people of Mexican origin that are known for their language, behavior, and clothing. I remember when I went to high school and we had a pep rally, which landed right on September 16, which is Mexico’s independence. A group of friends and I decided to wear red, white, and green to celebrate Mexico’s independence. We were simply proud of being Mexicans and wanted to show our pride. However, there were problems with several of the administrators because it wasn’t just my friends and I doing it, but other people as well. The pep rally was canceled because they felt that our clothing would distract and cause conflict with the other â€Å"American† students in school. As I was reading Paz, he mentioned that Mexicans dress a certain way to stand out. They know they are rejected by the â€Å"American† society. They do this to be different and stand out. The disguise is a protection because it hides and points them out. Somehow, they are doing this to â€Å"belong† in some way. They are able to catch the attention of the Anglo-Americans. I don’t agree with Paz. I believe that sometimes people dress a certain way to show their pride. I do not dress a certain way to be different and so people can notice me. I am proud to be Mexican and want to show it off. When fourth of July comes, I also like to dress in red, white and blue to celebrate America’s independence. Is this possible or am I being a hypocrite? This question leads me to Richard Rodriguez. Richard Rodriguez’ Hunger of memory is an autobiography. I was able to read only part of his book. I found it quite fascinating. Rodriguez goes through many problems of identity. He has mixed feelings about his own self. He mainly talks about affirmative action. What does the term â€Å"minority student† mean? Is it something we want to be classified as? I had an experience in high school in which a student denied a part of himself. His mother is Anglo and his father is Mexican. However, throughout school, when it was time to check on the ethnicity, he would check out Anglo. He did this throughout his years in school, but when it was his senior year something happened. He decided to go talk to his counselor and tell her to change all his paperwork. He no longer wanted to be classified as Anglo, but Hispanic. When I heard this, it was very surprising. I cannot understand how this particular person decided to simply become Hispanic just so he could get the benefits of affirmative action. He was applying to scholarships and various universities, and he knew that if he was classified as a minority student, he would receive better benefits. This is not right. You cannot simply choose to be Hispanic for your convenience. You should not reject a part of yourself simply for your own benefits. Rodriguez faced this dilemma. He knew that he did not want to be labeled a minority student, but if this is what was going to get him in society, then he simply had to accept. Throughout life, Rodriguez wondered about his identity. He was criticized by many because he was a well-known writer who was invited as a guest speaker. He would be around Anglo-Americans, and many criticized him because they felt he had become a part of them. Is this really true? Isn’t your identity how â€Å"you† see yourself? Just because other people see you being around another class or race of people, doesn’t mean that you have become a part of them. You simply know that you are Mexican, American, or Mexican-American, and blending with other cultures doesn’t necessarily mean you lose your true self. Because of affirmative action, Rodriguez was able to be a guest speaker, and a professor at a university. He felt threatened at times because the felt somewhat alienated by the â€Å"other† society. Rodriguez did not have a good relationship with the Chicano students. He felt threatened by them. These students were still attached to their parents’ culture. These students knew how to speak Spanish very well. They were proud of their past. Rodriguez on the other hand, spoke in English. His Spanish was not that well. He did not want to associate himself to a past that meant â€Å"poor†. There was one specific time when Rodriguez’ parents saw a Hispanic student wearing a sarape. They were very surprised. Rodriguez said that these students were foolish to think themselves unchanged by their schooling. I disagree with Rodriguez because I believe that just because you are getting a higher education and have a good job, you forget that you are Hispanic or Mexican-American. Rodriguez simply wanted to justify his own change. He did not want to belong or keep a bond between a past that did not bring fond memories. He was not as disadvantaged as other Hispanics. However, he felt very strongly about not going to Chicano student meetings or social events sponsored by â€Å"La Raza. † I don’t agree with him. After reading this, I realized that he is wrong. I am proud to be Mexican-American. I am proud to carry the term â€Å"Mexican† and â€Å"American. † I am proud of my Mexican culture, customs, and beliefs. I don’t need to change in order to succeed or attain a higher education. Rodriguez suddenly came to this realization. He could not simply cast out his culture and simply erase it. At some point, he had a discussion with his several Hispanic students in which he did not agree with them. Soon, he was known to others as being a â€Å"coconut,† brown on the outside, white on the inside. I have learned many things this semester. I had not really given much thought Mexican-American history. I never realized about the various things that were discussed. It was an eye opener. I was also able to realize of the many problems and injustices that Hispanics face here in the United States. However, just like Paz said, we cannot simply contemplate these issues. We need to do something about them. I am attending college to receive a higher education. I know that education is extremely important. However, I am not losing my identity by coming to college. Getting an education does not necessarily make you a different person. I don’t agree with Rodriguez’s viewpoint. After reading Paz and Rodriguez, I began to see myself in some of what they had to say. I realized that I have gone through a confusion stage. I sometimes don’t know where I belong or who I am. I have come to the conclusion that I am simply American. America is a nation filled with various ethnic groups. Hispanics include people from Mexico, Honduras, Puerto Rico, Nicaragua, etc. There are also many Asians. I often ask myself why people from Ireland living here in America aren’t labeled Irish-American. They are simply American. Why then should we be labeled Mexican-American? Cant’ we simply be called American? I have come to the conclusion that I am American. American can mean different things to different people. To me American means being a part of Mexico as well as the United States. I consider myself a lucky person. I am able to be have the best of both worlds: Mexico and the United States. Tomorrow, I will celebrate Mother’s Day here in the United States and Monday it will be 10 de mayo, Dia de las Madres in Mexico. My mom is very lucky. She gets two gifts. I don’t believe that I am being a hypocrite by doing this. These are some of the advantages of being American.

Application of the Right Motivational Practices at Nordstrom Case Study

Application of the Right Motivational Practices at Nordstrom - Case Study Example To motivate employees to such an extent, Nordstrom’s managers hire the right salespeople; employ various motivational programs and contests, and employees are highly paid compared to other competitors. In spite, Nordstrom did face employee rebels because of workload, leadership and other issues, which affected Nordstrom business to some extent. A few proposals and their implications have been suggested in the present context. Employee motivation has certainly been one of the crucial reasons for the success of most of the contemporary businesses that flourished during the last century (Walker, Churchill & Ford, 1977). However, businesses have trembled because of changing circumstances and increasing competition. A similar issue gripped the upscale business giant, Nordstrom Inc for some time despite its huge success and immense growth beyond one’s imagination. Business at Nordstrom, which was started as a shoe retailer, grew at an unimaginable pace and started making profits and revenues of multiple times. All growth and expansion are attributed to the ‘Nordstrom Way’ that sets apart their unmatchable customer service, productivity, and teamwork, the three performance drivers. Apart from these, Nordstrom boasts of its practices such as thank you cards for its customer's post-sales, employee motivation and customer entertainment programs, sales contests, and other customer-oriented activi ties that contributed towards its growth and sales (Freedman & Vohr, 1996). Overall, top management at Nordstrom set goals and objectives for employee performance and provide resources for employee motivation. Although the company does not follow too many formal policies and procedures, Nordstrom levies complete responsibility of achieving these goals on individual outlets and empowers its store managers to make decisions that can help in achieving their goals. In turn, their frontline employees are empowered to achieve their individual and team goals.

Econ Project Statistics Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Econ - Statistics Project Example imilarly, the variable with a positive coefficient such as demo which is 118.3667 implies that an increase of 1 on the x-axis causes the value on the y-axis change by 118.3667. T-statistics aim at determining whether the mean of one set of data differs from the average of another set. According to the T-statistic output, the variable price, end cap and natural have a negative value of T-statistics and therefore they are not statistically significant to the model and this makes the value of R- squared to be 0.416237. Since the three variable with a negative value are not important in the model we remove them and the adjusted value of R-squared reduces to 0.397912, this implies that the variables of the model are more accurate and less correlated. F-statistic is a test of the relationship of different variables that differs in variability. The F-statistic of 22.71486 is the significant difference between the variables that remained after removing the ones with a negative

How does Fitzgerald demonstrate the ideas of the modernist period in Essay

How does Fitzgerald demonstrate the ideas of the modernist period in his story Who is the protagonist and what is the conflict - Essay Example The story is biographical in nature as it includes experiences of Fitzgerald’s own life. The conflict in the story of â€Å"Babylon Revisited† is about the attempt a father makes to gain custody of his daughter Honoria, while fighting a battle against alcoholism. The protagonist in the story is Charlie Wales who amassed a fortune by investing in stocks during the 1920’s great bull market occasion. Charlie was a 35 year old American businessman who quit his job to settle down with his wife Helen in Paris to enjoy his wealth. Unfortunately, due to his weakness for alcohol, and the family’s reckless lifestyle, there was great friction in the family which finally led to his wife’s Helen’s death. Charlie becomes a victim to alcohol abuse and is soon admitted into a sanitarium. His daughter is sent to live with his wife Helen’s sister while he strives to get over his bad habit of drinking. We can definitely sympathize with Charlie because he makes a great attempt to do away with his drinking and after his release from the sanitarium, he once again establishes himself as a businessman after he moved to Prague. References Babylon Revisited www.gutenberg.net.au/fsf/BABYLON-REVISITED.html Babylon Revisited www.enotes.com

Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words - 9

Research Paper Example Yet, regardless of the motivation that exists for encouraging individuals to join street gangs, the fact of the matter is that participation and juvenile membership in street gangs has noticed a marked increase in the past several years time. Whereas other types of crime have slowly been decreasing, crimes associated with gain participation, membership, initiation rites, and all of the other aspects that go alongside this have statistically increased at an alarming rate. Gang crime also provides an additional headache for law enforcement as well as the justice system due to the fact that locating and prosecuting juvenile gang members for crimes committed on behest of the gang is oftentimes difficult if not impossible due to the completely unknown structure of the game that exists as well as the near impossibility of penetrating these criminal organizations to gain valuable intelligence. As such, seeking to understanding causal relationships and criminal theory that ultimately explain such behavior has been a fundamental research goal of criminologists and social scientists of late. Accordingly, the following analysis will review the â€Å"strain theory† as it relates to juvenile gang membership. Bureaucratic organized crime exhibits a number of tell-tale marks that help to differentiate it from the more commonly known and recognized patron-client networks of organized crime. One analyst noted the following: â€Å"Juvenile crime is unique in that it oftentimes exhibits a level of organization that is clearly not seen with respect to other types of crime throughout the system† (Goddard et al., 2000). However, just because bureaucratic organized crime may be less recognizable, it does not mean in any way that it exists to a lesser degree in our society. A few of the most recognizable aspects of bureaucratic organized crime is

Tesla Analysis Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Tesla Analysis - Essay Example Tesla continues to decrease limitations and make them better with each new model as envisaged in the Tesla Model S. There has been low allocation of research and development funds by established automobile companies to electric vehicles allowing Tesla a competitive advantage and the success in the market (Hartung, Par. 14). Tesla has the iconic CEO and founder Elon Musk to thank for access to best engineers and access funds easily beating the established brands on this front especially access to talent. Tesla chose a market demographic consisting of wealthy, environmentally conscious, and educated people providing it with reputational advantage over established companies like Ford. The demographic also offers Tesla access to high margins on each car sale owing to the ability of the market segment to pay for high-performance car that sacrifices very little to efficiency. Innovation also allowed Tesla to overcome the above barriers in the market including the introduction of direct sales to the consumers cutting expenses on dealers and the need to have networks. The other benefit of innovation is that the company was in a position to produce high performing electric car and with innovation it is currently continuing the provision of charging stations to meet client needs and concerns as well as develop the electric market

How to Write the Outcomes Evaluation Section of a Grant Proposal Essay

How to Write the Outcomes Evaluation Section of a Grant Proposal - Essay Example The grantmaker gives your organization money based on how well your goals and objectives match their own goals and objectives. They are investing money in your organization and programs, much like you would do if you bought a stock or bond. The grantmaker wants to see a â€Å"return on investment† in the form of outcomes. Not just feel-good outcomes, but evidence that something has changed or improved because of their investment with you. By the time you get to write the Outcomes Evaluation section of the proposal, you should already have: Now you are ready to write the Outcomes Evaluation and Dissemination Plan. The outcomes evaluation section of a grant proposal is the most difficult to write and usually ends up being the shortest section. This is too bad, because here is where a non-profit can show itself to be organized and professional. Designing instruments, gathering data, and crunching numbers seems to be a frustrating waste of time for the people on the ground. You or your staff might think: There are so many constituents who could use our help; why do we waste our time proving we are helping? Just look around! It’s not quite that simple, however. Grantmakers are not punishing you by asking for outcomes evaluation. This data, properly gathered and evaluated, and properly applied, strengthens your organization (Foundation Center 2009). It is like a pat on the back you give yourselves, or constructive criticism you create from within your organization. It should go without saying, but a reminder is always nice: read the request for proposal carefully. Some grantmakers want to see actual prototypes of information-gathering instruments; others just want to know what you will develop and who will develop it. Data collection doesn’t happen in isolation; it is part of the process of delivering a service. If your staff is busy working with clients, they don’t have much time to gather 10,000 bits of data. However, data collection

Questionary Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Questionary - Essay Example The distinction is typically limited between human nouns and non human nouns that refer to inanimate objects. Noun classes refer to an extension of the grammatical gender concept such that nouns are classed on a number of distinctions other than human and non human. These classes could be composed of any number and styles of distinctions from one language to another. Numeral classifiers tend to count objects by placing them in specific classes while counting them at the same time. This tradition is more common in East Asian languages. 4. The best method to test for a noun is to allow the informant to construct as many morphological forms as possible for each word. It is advisable to allow the informant to use gender classifications as well as other grammatical devices to discover as many variations as possible. In contrast, to test for pronouns, it is relevant to see if adjectives or certain other grammatical forms are able to modify the word. If modification with this method is possible, then the word is a pronoun and vice versa. 5. Phonological differences as in the Polish case mean that the field worker may assume that the few tried phonological variations are all that is required for classification. However, this may not be true at all and further classification may be required depending on the language’s peculiarities. 6. Suppletion refers to the use of a particular word in the inflected form of another particular word when both words are not cognate in any manner. Suppletive forms tend to be highly irregular as the gap in the paradigm is provided by an unrelated paradigm. For example the plural of girl is girls in English but the plural of man is not mans. Instead, it is men. 8. When carrying out elicitation, it is impractical to go through each and every single word being related by the informant since it would affect the efficiency. However, if too much

Business Strategy Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words - 5

Business Strategy - Essay Example Offering customers guaranteed settlement of prices , reduction in cost for home buyers and sellers. The operations of First American Title are limited to United States. The main operations of First American title include provision of quality service to the customers, top class products of title insurance and title insurance rates lower than many others. First American Title reached heights of success throughout America. Every third transaction of real estate in America is closed by First American Title. The services are so widespread throughout the country that the usage of First American Title services and products have become necessary so much that out of every ten transactions the ninth one involve First American title. As the guidelines mentioned in cooperate governance effect how the board of directors act and make decision regarding the overseas operation of American First hence it is quite clear that cooperate governance plays a vital role in Strategic decision making. All decisions even strategic shall be made under the guidelines of cooperate governance. Formation of committees, expansions etc. all are governed by a framework of principles and the cooperation is bound to follow it. In any case if these are violated then serious action will be taken which can include firing and in extreme case legal action against the employee aswell. Employee are bound by code of ethics formed by the American First and they are bound to follows the codes mentioned. After spreading operations to over 70 countries across the globe First American has maintained a reputable name in providing Title insurances. Realizing that opinions and attitude towards insurance services differ in every country a unique strategy was adapted by First American cooperation. A customer centric approach was given preference while conducting business activities. Through this approach a partnership with customer is formed and the customer values our company with his

Co-education Female Essay Example for Free

Co-education Female Essay The debatable issue on Co-education is continually progressing through the State and convincing parents and teachers that sex-separation will reveal a sign of improvement in student’s lives. In the United States, teamwork is a massive aspect in people’s lives where both girls and boys work together in order to achieve their goal , however, both articles provide informative proves that co-education could result in failure because of the different stereotypes in society. The debate mainly focuses on the separation of both sexes in school since â€Å"there is no extra cost. The debate also catches the reader’s attention by the different research that many scientists did in order to prove a fair result that will satisfy the parents and teachers. The separation of sexes in school could result in improvement of education and behavior with boys and girls. Based on Jennifer Medina’s article, teachers will face less problems if both sexes are separated since the boys will tend to focus more on learning than on girls, in addition, girls will tend to feel more comfortable participating in class. Co-education will also result in good teamwork especially in the outside community because both girls and boys will learn to communicate. However, from the boy’s point of view, they will tend to be more comfortable in expressing themselves and learn about â€Å"being a man† in their own bodies. In addition to those articles, the media will affect the parents and the teachers around the state because of highly known and educative people in society. For example, Leonard Sax who is a best seller author of Why Gender Matters and Michael Sax argues about single sex with a huge audience in order to prove their facts about the separation and the importance of it. In contrast, both sex educations could also result in improvement around the state and in schools because boys and girls will learn to communicate together and work hard as one community. In addition, many authors and scientist were seeking for evidence in order to prove that Co-education could be for the good of their community. For example, a research on Bronx’s Eagle school stated that both sexes’ classes tend to have higher test scores around the state and tend to receive high percentages in their community. Both sexes will also learn and appreciate that both sexes are important in everyone’s lives since they communicate and work together outside of the learning community. Researchers also proved that working together as both sexes will also result a sign improvement in teamwork because many girls tend to be left out in single-sex schools in teamwork projects. Comparatively, Co-Education and single education also have their problems in society because of their lack of certain teachings in schools. For example , a study showed that girls tend to be smarter than boys and tend to solve math and science faster and more accurate since there are different brains and each person have a different sign of knowledge and personality. However, since girls are smarter, they tend to ask for more detailed teachings and writing scripts since they will have more things to explain in their writing assignment. When in contrast, boys have to write about a simple sport or a job they seek for in order to prepare them for the future. Although, teachers who support single education tend to have other opinions toward their ways of teaching. For example, Mr. Napolitano claims that he is more comfortable in expressing his feelings and thoughts while teaching to single sex classrooms because the boys will tend to have the same situation. In addition he also shows a book called Patrol Boy in order to show boys that having a tattoo is not a material they should use in co-ed class. In conclusion, this debate tends to prove that single education will show more improvements since the media tend to support it and also the teachers. The reasons that parents should choose single education is because they will improve economically and also their students will face less behavior problems and more school focused. However, co-ed schools tend to have higher scores and will teach the students to work together in order to improve their speech especially outside in society since they will be working together as one team. Both articles prove that both educations will result in bonding together as students and as teachers in this society because at the end of this debate both classrooms will be teaching and learning in the states.

Effect of Different Leadership Styles on Organisation

Effect of Different Leadership Styles on Organisation Management summary In this thesis the relationship between the predominant leadership styles in the academic literature, transformational and transactional leadership, and organization citizenship behaviour will be discussed and analyzed. In the transformational leadership   style the leader motivates and inspires followers by gaining their trust and respect. The leader communicates the goals, visions and missions in a clear way and stimulates his followers to go beyond the call of duty. Transactional leadership is based on an exchange relationship between the leader and followers. Followers receive rewards when they perform according to the standards and requirements set by their leader. Organizational citizenship behaviour concerns those voluntary acts performed by   individual employees that are of a discretionary and voluntary nature and contribute to the effectiveness of the organization. However, when organizations exert citizenship pressures on their employees this might have some serious consequences on their workforce. These high levels of pressure to be a good citizen can result in job stress, work-family conflicts, work-leisure conflicts and might even result in quitting intensions among employees. This thesis will also focus on the desirability of OCBs within the organization and the dangers of citizenship pressures. Chapter 1.Introduction to the thesis 1.1 Problem Indication Organizational Citizenship Behaviour (OCB) has been a popular subject among several fields of study for the past couple of decades. OCBs are positive, individual and voluntary acts performed by employees which go beyond their job descriptions and are not directly rewarded or monitored (Organ, 1988). According to Katz Kahn (1966) these kinds of behaviour are important to organizations because organizations depend on behaviour of their employees that go further than their job description even though these behaviours are not actively monitored and enforced. Because of the voluntary nature of the positive acts the theory of OCBs seems to be very positive for both the individuals within an organization and the effectiveness of the organization as whole. OCB has been linked with loyalty, obedience, voluntarism, helping behaviours, altruism and other positive traits in many previous studies throughout the years (Bolino, Turnley, Niehoff, 2004; Organ, Podsakoff, MacKenzie, 2006). But recent studies have also investigated the â€Å"darker side† of OCB. The problem lies with the discretionary and voluntary nature of OCB. There are situations in which employees feel like OCB is expected of them, this citizenship pressure can lead to job stress, work conflicts and even quitting intensions (Bolino,Turnley, Gilstrap, Suazo, 2010). The first part of this thesis will go further into the dynamics of OCB and will look at both the positive and negative side of OCB. The second part of this thesis will address the relation between leadership st yles and OCB. Leadership styles are of great influence on the OCBs of employees (Bass, 1985; Burns, 1978). In the studies of Bass (1985) and Burns (1978)   a distinction has been made between transformational and transactional leadership. These different styles of leadership have different implications on the degree of OCB among the employees (Bass, 1985; Burns, 1978). 1.2 Problem statement The problem statement of this thesis is formulated in one single question: How do the different styles of leadership influence organizational citizenship behaviour ? 1.3 Research Questions The research questions that are derived from the problem indication are: To what degree is OCB desired within an organization? What is the influence of transactional leadership on OCB? What is the influence of transformational leadership on OCB? 1.4 Methodology The type of research that will be conducted for this thesis is a descriptive research. The thesis will be a literature study which means secondary sources will be gathered and researched (Sekaran, 2008). An analysis of the different variables will be made in order to find the answers to the formulated research questions. The links between the different variables researched in this thesis can be the basis for further empirical research. The main concepts of the research are organizational citizenship behaviour and the transformational (or charismatic) (Yukl, 1999) and transactional leadership types. 1.5 Structure In this thesis the relationship between the two predominant leadership styles and OCB within an organization will be analyzed. The first chapter will get into the dynamics of OCB in order to determine whether or not and to what degree OCB is desirable. This means that both the positive and negative sides of OCB within an organization will be balanced in this chapter. At the end of chapter one the first research question of this thesis will be answered. Chapter two and three will link transformational and transactional leadership with OCB. In these chapters it will become clear how the different styles of leadership stimulate OCB and which leadership style results in the largest amount of OCBs. After these chapters the answer to the problem statement is given in the conclusion. Furthermore, limitations of this research and managerial and academic implications will be discussed. Chapter 2. Organizational Citizenship Behaviour 2.1 Introduction Organizational citizenship behaviour is a topic that has fascinated many researchers and managers for the last couple of decades since Bateman and Organ (1983) were the first to address this topic in 1983. Nowadays in times of economical crises OCB remains an interesting subject, because in a race of the survival of the fittest organizations rely on good citizens to survive. However, recent studies of the past couple of years have reported some negative implications of OCB and have questioned the desirability of OCB (Bolino, Gilstrap, Turnley Suazo, 2010; Korgaard, Meglino, Lester Jeong, 2010; Van Dyne Ellis, 2004). Vardi and Weitz (2003) have reported on the concept of organizational misbehaviour (OMB) as a counterpart to OCB in their studies. In this chapter both the positive and negative implications of OCB and citizenship pressures exerted by the organizations will be discussed.   In order to answer the question whether or not OCB is desirable within an organization the concept of organizational citizenship behaviour has to be explained.. OCB can be defined as â€Å"individual behaviour that is discretionary, not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, and that in the aggregate promotes the effective functioning of an organization†, according to the study of Organ (1988, p. 4). OCB is behaviour of a constructive nature by the employee, which is not a part of the formal job description (Organ, 1988). According to Moorman, Blakely and Niehoff (1988) employees will engage in OCBs when they feel that that behaviour is justified by the positive actions of the organization and are consistent with the treatment and commitment of the organization. Employees feel the need to repay the organization for the positive treatment and commitment they receive throughout the relationship (Moorman et al., 1988). Research of Kidder (1998) and Stamper and Van Dyne (2001) argues that employees that have a long-term relationship with a firm perform more OCBs than temporary or part-time workers. 2.2 The sunny side of OCB Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine and Bachrach (2000) distinguished thirty forms of citizenship behaviours from the literature on OCB and grouped them in seven dimensions; helping behaviour, sportsmanship, organizational compliance, organizational loyalty, self development, civic virtue and individual initiative. Helping behaviours are voluntary behaviours that help fellow colleagues prevent or solve work related problems. This kind of behaviour includes supporting and cheering for fellow employees and also peacemaking activities when there are times of conflict and struggles between employees (Organ, 1988). Organizational compliance is a form of OCB which regards the following and obeying of organizational procedures and rules by the employees (Borman Motowidlo, 1993). Organizational compliance argues that good citizens follow the rules and procedures of the organization instinctively and precisely, even when they know that they are not being supervised or monitored (Podsakoff et al., 2000).  Ã‚   Podsakoff et al. (2000) state that organizational compliance is a form of OCB even though it is expected from subordinates to act according the rules and regulations of the company, because in many cases employees do not act according these rules and regulations when they know that they are not being observed or monitored. Thus, according to Podsakoff et al. (2000) employees that follow up the rules and regulations very precisely even when they know that they are not being supervised can be viewed as very good organizational citizens. Sportmanship is a type of OCB which describes the process of coping with all the inevitable problems and inconveniences that are bound to happen at work without complaining (Organ, 1990). According to Podsakoff, et al., (2000) good sportsmanship occurs when employees refrain from complaining when other colleagues cause inconveniences for them. ‘Good sports are willing to make personal sacrifices in the interest of the group and do not showcase a negative attitude when things are not going their way. Furthermore, ‘good sports do not get offended when their suggestions and ideas are not followed up by the rest of the employees in their working environment. Individual initiative is regarded as OCB when a person goes that far beyond the expected level of task-related behaviours that these behaviours can be viewed as voluntary (Podsakoff et al., 2000).   When employees engage in individual initiative they showcase extra effort and enthusiasm in order to increase their task performance or the performance of the organization as a whole. They voluntarily come up with new ideas and innovations in order to increase organizational effectiveness and encourage fellow colleagues to act in the same way (Podsakoff, et al., 2000). Organizational loyalty refers to the strong commitment of employees to the organization throughout the good and the bad times (Graham, 1991), defending the organization against threats from the outside and promoting the organization to people outside the organization (Borman Motowidlo, 1997; George Jones 1997). According to the research of Podsakoff et al. (2000) civic virtue(Organ, 1988)means that employees recognize that they are part of a larger whole and they acknowledge and accept the responsibilities for the effective functioning of their organization. The employees actively look out for opportunities and threats in the environment of their organization. They participate actively in the decision making process of the organization and are constantly acting out of the interest of the company while putting their personal interests aside (Podsakoff et al., 2000).   Self development is citizenship behaviour that occurs when employees voluntarily undertake actions in order to learn and improve their skills, knowledge and capabilities (Podsakoff et al., 2000). The study of George and Brief (1992) states that self development might consist of employees participating in advanced training course, employees undertaking actions in order to keep up with the latest developments in their field; or employees might even learn an entirely new set of skills. Self development behaviour is good citizenship behaviour because employees try to improve and increase their personal contributions to the performance and effectiveness of the organization (George Brief, 1992). These seven dimensions of OCB all describe positive acts and contributions from the employees which benefit the organization. According to Organ Konovsky (1989) these combined contributions of individual employees increase organization effectiveness significantly over time. Because of the positive nature of these citizenship behaviours organizations try to stimulate OCBs among their employees. These citizenship pressures lead to higher levels of OCB within the organization, which is essentially favourable for the company (Bolino,Turnley, Gilstrap Suazo, 2010). However, the stimulation of citizenship behaviours can have a negative effect on the employees because the citizenship pressure to please the organization can result in job stress, quitting intensions and work-family and work-leisure conflicts (Bolino et al., 2010; Greenhaus Beutell, 1985; Reich, 2001; Sauter Murphy, 1995). 2.3 The dark side of OCB One could argue that OCB has a lot of positive implications for an organization based on the dimensions described by Podsakoff et al.(2000). Recent studies however have also shed light on the darker side of OCB (Bolino et al.,2010; Korsgaard Meglino, Lester, Jeong,2010; Van Dyne Ellis, 2004; Vigoda-Gadot, 2006). Organ (1988) implies that OCB is solely a positive phenomenon within an organization, because of the discretionary and voluntary nature of OCB. Furthermore, Organ (1988, p. 4) argues that â€Å"OCB promotes the effective functioning of an organization†. Vigoda-Gadot (2006, p. 79) concludes from the definition of OCB by Organ (1988) that it implies that â€Å"OCB consists of informal contributions that a participant can choose to make or withhold, without the regard to considerations of sanctions or formal incentives†. However, recent studies have countered the discretionary nature of OCB. Korsgaard et al. (2010, p. 277), argue that OCB is â€Å"based on the norm of reciprocity: the obligation to reciprocate the benefits already received from another (â€Å"paying you back†) and the expected reciprocity that ones actions will stimulate future benefits from another (â€Å"paying me forward†).† Vardi and Weitz (2003) have mentioned the concept of organizational misbehaviour (OMB) in their studies as a counterpart to OCB. Organizational misbehaviour is behaviour of a social nature   that harms the interest of the organization.   According to Vardi and Weitz (2003) there are five types of organizational misbehaviour; intra-personal misbehaviour, inter-personal misbehaviour, property misbehaviour, production misbehaviour and political misbehaviour.   OMB can be viewed as the real dark side of employee behaviours. 2.3.1 Citizenship pressure Citizenship pressure occurs when employees feel the pressure to engage in OCBs because their employer tries to stimulate that behaviour by informal compensation (Bolino,Turnley, Girlstrap Suazo, 2010).Citizenship pressure is a phenomenon that differs from individual to individual and it is of a subjective nature (Bolino, et al.,2010). Employees that are regarded as high-self monitors are more likely to give in to citizenship pressures and engage more in citizenship behaviours, because those employees value their image and the way they are perceived by their co-workers and supervisors (Blakely, Andrews, Fuller, 2003). The study of Bolino et al. (2010) has shown that citizenship pressure leads to higher levels of OCB of employees within an organization. Hence, the studies of Korsgaard, et al.(2010) and Bolino, et al.(2010) question both the discretionary and voluntary nature of OCB. Research has shown that managers do take OCBs into account when evaluating their employees and making other decisions (Podsakoff, et al.,2000) Van Dyne and Ellis (2004) state that with citizenship pressure, behaviour that was once voluntary and discretionary can become an obligation. Van Dyne and Ellis (2004) mention the phenomenon of job creep, this situation occurs when employees constantly feel the pressure to do more than their job actually requires of them. The duties of the employees are slowly increased without official recognition of the organization and in time are expected of the employees (Van Dyne Ellis, 2004). Although citizenship pressure may be a positive phenomenon from an organizations point of view because it leads to more OCB, it also is associated with negative consequences for the employees and their organization (Bolino, et al.,2010). The amounts of job stress experienced by the employees are likely to increase in the case of high levels of citizenship pressures (Bolinio, et al.,2010).   Job stress occurs when employees do not have the capabilities and resources that are needed to fulfil their job requirements. The incapability to fulfil these job demands will lead to negative consequences for the emotional and physical state of the employees who experience high levels of job stress (Sauter Murphy, 1995). According to Bolino, Turnley, Gilstrap, Suazo (2010) employees who experience citizenship pressures to behave as a good citizen of the organization may also feel the pressures at home to be a good partner and parent. This work-family conflict is a role conflict that occurs when the work role demands that are required from an employee are not compatible with the demands of the family (Greenhaus Beutell, 1985).   Work-family conflicts may arise when the partners of the employees have difficulties in understanding why their partner chooses to engage in OCBs that are technically not required of them and are not formally rewarded rather than to spend time with their family (Edwards Rothbard, 2000). Research of Flynn (1996) shows that in a situation of high citizenship pressures employees with less demanding family situations engage in more citizenship behaviours than married employees with more responsibilities towards their families. Another conflict related to citizenship pressure is the work-leisure conflict. This conflict arises when employees experience difficulties in balancing their work demands with their personal life and leisure time (Bolino, et al.,2010). The study of Reich (2001) states that employees who are physically away from their working environment, may still be mentally connected to their job. According to Bolino, et al.(2010) these employees experience a conflict between their desires for free time in their personal lives and the desire to be a good organizational citizen in order to receive the benefits that come with that kind of status. The employees who feel citizenship pressures may not enjoy their free time because they are worrying about the situation and problems at work. Furthermore, they may be troubled by the fact that their co-workers might surpass them in terms of productivity and value for the organization when they enjoy their personal time or they may be experiencing feelings o f guilt because they are not working (Reich, 2001). This may lead to an increasing tendency among employees to keep in contact with their work office, by means of mobile phones, pagers or email, in order to remain available for their colleagues and superiors (Reich, 2001). These types of conflict caused by citizenship pressure, like the work-leisure conflict and the work-family conflict and the phenomenon of job stress, contribute to the job quitting intensions among the employees (Bolino et al.,2010). The dark side of OCB can be accounted to the citizenship pressures exerted by the organization. When an organization pressures   employees to perform citizenship behaviours this can result in negative consequences for the state of mind of the employees (Bolino et al., 2010; Edwards Rothbard, 2000; Greenhaus Beutell, 1985; Reich, 2001). This in turn can lead to decreases in productivity and effectiveness for the organization, because employees in a bad state of mind are more likely to leave the organization or work inefficiently (Bolino et al., 2010). 2.4 Desirability of OCB within the organization OCB in its core essence is desirable for organizations because those citizenship behaviours are linked with helping behaviours, loyalty and commitment to the organization, the following of rules and regulations, creativity and innovation and going the extra mile (Podsakoff, et al.,2000) .   These citizenship behaviours are characterized as positive contributions to an organization and its productivity, effectiveness and social climate (Moorman et al., 1988; Organ, 1988; Podsakoff, et al.,2000). This makes it difficult for one to argue that citizenship behaviours are not desirable within an organization. However, there is also a darker side to OCB. These negative side effects of OCB occur when the voluntary and discretionary nature of citizenship behaviours is removed because of citizenship pressures exerted by the organization on their employees (Bolino et al.,2010; Korsgaard et al.2010) . Citizenship pressures can result in job stress, work-family conflicts, work-leisure conflicts and eventually in quitting intensions among employees (Bolino et al., 2010; Edwards Rothbard, 2000; Greenhaus Beutell, 1985; Reich, 2001).   Effectiveness and productivity of employees decrease when they experience job stress or work-family or work leisure conflicts, which in turn also has a negative influence on the company as a whole (Bolino, et al.,2010). In conclusion, one could argue that citizenship behaviours are a positive and desired phenomenon for an organization when the negative consequences of citizenship pressures exerted by the organization are not taken into account. However, citizenship pressures result in more OCBs among employees and thus organizations are inclined to exert those pressures on their employees (Bolino et al.,2010). Thus, organizations have to balance the positive and negative consequences of citizenship pressures and OCBs in order to maximize   the value of the employees for the company. Because citizenship pressures has different outcomes for each individual employee, the organization and group leaders could benefit from a thorough analysis of their workforce (Bolino et al., 2010). For instance, employees who are considered to be high self-monitors are more likely to engage in citizenship behaviours when they feel citizenship pressure, because they care about how they are being perceived by their co-w orkers and leaders (Blakely et al., 2003) Chapter 3.The transformational and transactional leadership styles 3.1 Introduction Leadership has always been an interesting topic for researchers from different fields. According to Tannenbaum, Weschler and Masarik (1961, p. 24) leadership is: â€Å"interpersonal influence exercised in situations and directed, through the communication process, toward the attainment of a specified goal or goals†. According to Wayne, Shore Liden (1997) leadership is important because the exchange between a manager and his follower   is the most important factor in determining employee behaviour. In the literature a distinction has been made by Burns (1978) and Bass (1985) between transactional leadership and transformational leadership. Burns (1978) reports that transactional and transformation leadership are complete opposites. Bass (1985), however, argues that transformational leaders may also use transactional leadership behaviours in certain situations. The concepts of transactional and transformational leadership will be explained in this chapter. 3.2 Transactional leadership The study of Bass (1985) shows that transactional leaders make the tasks and responsibilities of the followers clear and also promise the followers compensation for when their tasks are performed according to the standards. According to Deluga (1990) transactional leadership is an exchange process in which rewards and punishments are administered. Transactional leaders exchange financial rewards for productivity or deny rewards when the productivity of the followers is lacking (Bass Riggio, 2006). The relationship between the leader and his followers in a system of transactional leadership is focused on self interest and based on mutual dependency (Lagamarsino Cardona, 2003). Bass (1990) concludes in his research that there are four different types of transactional leadership. Contingent reward: The leader sets up a contract based on performance and rewards, solid performance is compensated with rewards. When goals are met the employees will get recognition for their accomplishments. Contingent reward leader behaviours have shown to have a positive relation with performance and follower attitudes (Avolio, Waldman Einstein, 1988; Waldman, Bass Yammarino, 1990). Laissez-Faire: In this particular form of transactional leadership the leader avoids making decisions and steps away from any responsibilities. The subordinates have to fulfil their tasks on their own. According to Dubinsky, Yammarino, Jolson, Spangler (1995) this type of leader is indifferent, frequently absent,   inattentive and does not influence the workforce. Management by exception (active): The leader actively looks for errors and mistakes in the work process. When the tasks performance of the employees is not on the required level the leader will intervene and he will try to put the employees back on the right track. Management by exception (passive): The leader only undertakes actions when the level of output and requirements and standards are not met by his subordinates. All these types of transactional leadership lack leadership behaviours that motivate employees to be the best they can be for the organization and to go the extra mile for colleagues and superiors. 3.3 Transformational leadership The transformational leadership theory of Bass (1985) states that transformational leadership creates a bond of trust between the leader and followers, motivating employees to achieve beyond expectations. According to Bass (1985) transformational leadership activates employees higher-order needs and lets them act out of the interest of the company. Transformational leaders are able to motivate their followers to the degree that they not only increase their task performance but also engage in OCBs that help the organization to function in an effective way (Smith, Organ, Near, 1983). Transformational leaders motivate their subordinates to come up with creative and innovative for difficult issues within the organization (Bass, 1985). Furthermore, in the transformational leadership style the leaders encourage their followers to go the extra mile for the organization and they reach out to their employees with constructive feedback (Bass, 1985).   Transformational leaders make their mis sions and goals clear to their followers and they convince the followers to act out of interest of the company (Piccolo Colquitt, 2006). Employees who are able to link their own success with that of the company and can identify with the values and goals of the organization are more likely to add value to the organization (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman, Fetter, 1990). Bass (1985) states in his research that when a manager acts like a transformational leader he will be perceived as a more satisfying and effective leader than a transactional leader. Furthermore, according to the studies of Bass (1985), employees report that they are more willing to put in extra effort and time for managers who behave as transformational leaders. Bass Avolio (1993) and Pillai (1995) have reported in their studies that there is a positive relationship between transformational leadership and employee satisfaction, and between transformational leadership and in-role behaviours that lead to job performan ce. According to Yukl (1999) transformational leadership can be viewed as the equivalent of charismatic leadership. In their research, Avolio Bass (2002) distinguished four different components of transformational leadership. Idealized influence: The leaders are admired, respected and trusted by their followers. The leaders are seen as examples/ role-models by the followers and the followers are inspired to emulate their actions. The leaders also put their followers interests above their own interest which earns them trust and respect. Idealized influence, or the charismatic dimension of transformational leadership (Bass, 1985), is often described as the most important component of transformational leadership (Waldman, Bass, Yammarino, 1990). Charismatic leaders receive respect and trust from their followers, because they create a sense of pride among their followers and communicate clear visions and missions (Bass, 1985).   Inspirational motivation: The leaders motivate their followers by attaching meaning and challenge to their work. The leader shows optimism and enthusiasm which stimulates individual and team spirit among the followers. Individualized consideration: The leaders take the needs and desires of the individual followers into account. The followers receive individual support from their leader in order to grow and develop and achieve higher goals. Intellectual stimulation: The followers are encouraged to be creative and innovative by their leaders. New approaches and new ideas are stimulated in order to get creative solutions to existing problems. Out of the box thinking is rewarded and it is not a shame to make errors. Chapter 4. The influence of transactional and transformational leadership on OCB 4.1 Introduction The predominant style of leadership in an organization has a great influence on the amount and types of OCBs performed by the employees within the organization. Bass (1990) described an experiment in a working area for convicted inmates. In this workplace the inmates had to produce several different types of products for in and outside the prison walls. One group of their supervisors received training in order to become transformational leaders, and the other group received a transactional leadership training. The inmates that were supervised by groups of transformational leaders performed better than those that were supervised by the transactional leaders. Not only did they perform better in the areas of productivity, absence and behaviour, the inmates also engaged in more citizenship behaviours. Furthermore, Bass (1990) states in his research that managers who are viewed as the high performers by their supervisors, also were viewed to be of a more transformational than transactional nature by their followers in a separate survey. In this chapter the relationship between transactional leadership, transformational leadership and organizational citizenship behaviour will be discussed. 4.2 Transactional leadership and OCB The transactional leadership style is based on an exchange relation between leaders and their followers. Employees are rewarded or punished based on whether or not their performance is according to the standards that were set by their transactional supervisors (Bass, 1985; Bass Riggio, 2006; Deluga, 1990). Because transactional leadership is a system of mutual dependency between leaders and followers that is based on self interest (Lagamarsino Cordona, 2003) and primarily an exchange process, transactional leadership leads to a low amount of citizenship behaviours performed by employees. The four different types of transactional leadership (Bass, 1990) do not convince employees to perform the seven dimensions of citizenship behaviour (Podsakoff et al.,2000). In the laissez-faire leadership style the leader avoids making decisions and steps away from his responsibilities. The followers have to do their tasks on their own and there is hardly any communication with the leaders. The leader is frequently absent, inattentive and indifferent and does not influence the workforce (Dubinsky et al.,1995). It is obvious that this type of leader will not stimulate citizenship behaviours among his followers. The leaders who act according to the management by exception style (both passive and active) only intervene when their followers do not meet up with the requirements and standards that are set for them. The employees do no Effect of Different Leadership Styles on Organisation Effect of Different Leadership Styles on Organisation Management summary In this thesis the relationship between the predominant leadership styles in the academic literature, transformational and transactional leadership, and organization citizenship behaviour will be discussed and analyzed. In the transformational leadership   style the leader motivates and inspires followers by gaining their trust and respect. The leader communicates the goals, visions and missions in a clear way and stimulates his followers to go beyond the call of duty. Transactional leadership is based on an exchange relationship between the leader and followers. Followers receive rewards when they perform according to the standards and requirements set by their leader. Organizational citizenship behaviour concerns those voluntary acts performed by   individual employees that are of a discretionary and voluntary nature and contribute to the effectiveness of the organization. However, when organizations exert citizenship pressures on their employees this might have some serious consequences on their workforce. These high levels of pressure to be a good citizen can result in job stress, work-family conflicts, work-leisure conflicts and might even result in quitting intensions among employees. This thesis will also focus on the desirability of OCBs within the organization and the dangers of citizenship pressures. Chapter 1.Introduction to the thesis 1.1 Problem Indication Organizational Citizenship Behaviour (OCB) has been a popular subject among several fields of study for the past couple of decades. OCBs are positive, individual and voluntary acts performed by employees which go beyond their job descriptions and are not directly rewarded or monitored (Organ, 1988). According to Katz Kahn (1966) these kinds of behaviour are important to organizations because organizations depend on behaviour of their employees that go further than their job description even though these behaviours are not actively monitored and enforced. Because of the voluntary nature of the positive acts the theory of OCBs seems to be very positive for both the individuals within an organization and the effectiveness of the organization as whole. OCB has been linked with loyalty, obedience, voluntarism, helping behaviours, altruism and other positive traits in many previous studies throughout the years (Bolino, Turnley, Niehoff, 2004; Organ, Podsakoff, MacKenzie, 2006). But recent studies have also investigated the â€Å"darker side† of OCB. The problem lies with the discretionary and voluntary nature of OCB. There are situations in which employees feel like OCB is expected of them, this citizenship pressure can lead to job stress, work conflicts and even quitting intensions (Bolino,Turnley, Gilstrap, Suazo, 2010). The first part of this thesis will go further into the dynamics of OCB and will look at both the positive and negative side of OCB. The second part of this thesis will address the relation between leadership st yles and OCB. Leadership styles are of great influence on the OCBs of employees (Bass, 1985; Burns, 1978). In the studies of Bass (1985) and Burns (1978)   a distinction has been made between transformational and transactional leadership. These different styles of leadership have different implications on the degree of OCB among the employees (Bass, 1985; Burns, 1978). 1.2 Problem statement The problem statement of this thesis is formulated in one single question: How do the different styles of leadership influence organizational citizenship behaviour ? 1.3 Research Questions The research questions that are derived from the problem indication are: To what degree is OCB desired within an organization? What is the influence of transactional leadership on OCB? What is the influence of transformational leadership on OCB? 1.4 Methodology The type of research that will be conducted for this thesis is a descriptive research. The thesis will be a literature study which means secondary sources will be gathered and researched (Sekaran, 2008). An analysis of the different variables will be made in order to find the answers to the formulated research questions. The links between the different variables researched in this thesis can be the basis for further empirical research. The main concepts of the research are organizational citizenship behaviour and the transformational (or charismatic) (Yukl, 1999) and transactional leadership types. 1.5 Structure In this thesis the relationship between the two predominant leadership styles and OCB within an organization will be analyzed. The first chapter will get into the dynamics of OCB in order to determine whether or not and to what degree OCB is desirable. This means that both the positive and negative sides of OCB within an organization will be balanced in this chapter. At the end of chapter one the first research question of this thesis will be answered. Chapter two and three will link transformational and transactional leadership with OCB. In these chapters it will become clear how the different styles of leadership stimulate OCB and which leadership style results in the largest amount of OCBs. After these chapters the answer to the problem statement is given in the conclusion. Furthermore, limitations of this research and managerial and academic implications will be discussed. Chapter 2. Organizational Citizenship Behaviour 2.1 Introduction Organizational citizenship behaviour is a topic that has fascinated many researchers and managers for the last couple of decades since Bateman and Organ (1983) were the first to address this topic in 1983. Nowadays in times of economical crises OCB remains an interesting subject, because in a race of the survival of the fittest organizations rely on good citizens to survive. However, recent studies of the past couple of years have reported some negative implications of OCB and have questioned the desirability of OCB (Bolino, Gilstrap, Turnley Suazo, 2010; Korgaard, Meglino, Lester Jeong, 2010; Van Dyne Ellis, 2004). Vardi and Weitz (2003) have reported on the concept of organizational misbehaviour (OMB) as a counterpart to OCB in their studies. In this chapter both the positive and negative implications of OCB and citizenship pressures exerted by the organizations will be discussed.   In order to answer the question whether or not OCB is desirable within an organization the concept of organizational citizenship behaviour has to be explained.. OCB can be defined as â€Å"individual behaviour that is discretionary, not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, and that in the aggregate promotes the effective functioning of an organization†, according to the study of Organ (1988, p. 4). OCB is behaviour of a constructive nature by the employee, which is not a part of the formal job description (Organ, 1988). According to Moorman, Blakely and Niehoff (1988) employees will engage in OCBs when they feel that that behaviour is justified by the positive actions of the organization and are consistent with the treatment and commitment of the organization. Employees feel the need to repay the organization for the positive treatment and commitment they receive throughout the relationship (Moorman et al., 1988). Research of Kidder (1998) and Stamper and Van Dyne (2001) argues that employees that have a long-term relationship with a firm perform more OCBs than temporary or part-time workers. 2.2 The sunny side of OCB Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine and Bachrach (2000) distinguished thirty forms of citizenship behaviours from the literature on OCB and grouped them in seven dimensions; helping behaviour, sportsmanship, organizational compliance, organizational loyalty, self development, civic virtue and individual initiative. Helping behaviours are voluntary behaviours that help fellow colleagues prevent or solve work related problems. This kind of behaviour includes supporting and cheering for fellow employees and also peacemaking activities when there are times of conflict and struggles between employees (Organ, 1988). Organizational compliance is a form of OCB which regards the following and obeying of organizational procedures and rules by the employees (Borman Motowidlo, 1993). Organizational compliance argues that good citizens follow the rules and procedures of the organization instinctively and precisely, even when they know that they are not being supervised or monitored (Podsakoff et al., 2000).  Ã‚   Podsakoff et al. (2000) state that organizational compliance is a form of OCB even though it is expected from subordinates to act according the rules and regulations of the company, because in many cases employees do not act according these rules and regulations when they know that they are not being observed or monitored. Thus, according to Podsakoff et al. (2000) employees that follow up the rules and regulations very precisely even when they know that they are not being supervised can be viewed as very good organizational citizens. Sportmanship is a type of OCB which describes the process of coping with all the inevitable problems and inconveniences that are bound to happen at work without complaining (Organ, 1990). According to Podsakoff, et al., (2000) good sportsmanship occurs when employees refrain from complaining when other colleagues cause inconveniences for them. ‘Good sports are willing to make personal sacrifices in the interest of the group and do not showcase a negative attitude when things are not going their way. Furthermore, ‘good sports do not get offended when their suggestions and ideas are not followed up by the rest of the employees in their working environment. Individual initiative is regarded as OCB when a person goes that far beyond the expected level of task-related behaviours that these behaviours can be viewed as voluntary (Podsakoff et al., 2000).   When employees engage in individual initiative they showcase extra effort and enthusiasm in order to increase their task performance or the performance of the organization as a whole. They voluntarily come up with new ideas and innovations in order to increase organizational effectiveness and encourage fellow colleagues to act in the same way (Podsakoff, et al., 2000). Organizational loyalty refers to the strong commitment of employees to the organization throughout the good and the bad times (Graham, 1991), defending the organization against threats from the outside and promoting the organization to people outside the organization (Borman Motowidlo, 1997; George Jones 1997). According to the research of Podsakoff et al. (2000) civic virtue(Organ, 1988)means that employees recognize that they are part of a larger whole and they acknowledge and accept the responsibilities for the effective functioning of their organization. The employees actively look out for opportunities and threats in the environment of their organization. They participate actively in the decision making process of the organization and are constantly acting out of the interest of the company while putting their personal interests aside (Podsakoff et al., 2000).   Self development is citizenship behaviour that occurs when employees voluntarily undertake actions in order to learn and improve their skills, knowledge and capabilities (Podsakoff et al., 2000). The study of George and Brief (1992) states that self development might consist of employees participating in advanced training course, employees undertaking actions in order to keep up with the latest developments in their field; or employees might even learn an entirely new set of skills. Self development behaviour is good citizenship behaviour because employees try to improve and increase their personal contributions to the performance and effectiveness of the organization (George Brief, 1992). These seven dimensions of OCB all describe positive acts and contributions from the employees which benefit the organization. According to Organ Konovsky (1989) these combined contributions of individual employees increase organization effectiveness significantly over time. Because of the positive nature of these citizenship behaviours organizations try to stimulate OCBs among their employees. These citizenship pressures lead to higher levels of OCB within the organization, which is essentially favourable for the company (Bolino,Turnley, Gilstrap Suazo, 2010). However, the stimulation of citizenship behaviours can have a negative effect on the employees because the citizenship pressure to please the organization can result in job stress, quitting intensions and work-family and work-leisure conflicts (Bolino et al., 2010; Greenhaus Beutell, 1985; Reich, 2001; Sauter Murphy, 1995). 2.3 The dark side of OCB One could argue that OCB has a lot of positive implications for an organization based on the dimensions described by Podsakoff et al.(2000). Recent studies however have also shed light on the darker side of OCB (Bolino et al.,2010; Korsgaard Meglino, Lester, Jeong,2010; Van Dyne Ellis, 2004; Vigoda-Gadot, 2006). Organ (1988) implies that OCB is solely a positive phenomenon within an organization, because of the discretionary and voluntary nature of OCB. Furthermore, Organ (1988, p. 4) argues that â€Å"OCB promotes the effective functioning of an organization†. Vigoda-Gadot (2006, p. 79) concludes from the definition of OCB by Organ (1988) that it implies that â€Å"OCB consists of informal contributions that a participant can choose to make or withhold, without the regard to considerations of sanctions or formal incentives†. However, recent studies have countered the discretionary nature of OCB. Korsgaard et al. (2010, p. 277), argue that OCB is â€Å"based on the norm of reciprocity: the obligation to reciprocate the benefits already received from another (â€Å"paying you back†) and the expected reciprocity that ones actions will stimulate future benefits from another (â€Å"paying me forward†).† Vardi and Weitz (2003) have mentioned the concept of organizational misbehaviour (OMB) in their studies as a counterpart to OCB. Organizational misbehaviour is behaviour of a social nature   that harms the interest of the organization.   According to Vardi and Weitz (2003) there are five types of organizational misbehaviour; intra-personal misbehaviour, inter-personal misbehaviour, property misbehaviour, production misbehaviour and political misbehaviour.   OMB can be viewed as the real dark side of employee behaviours. 2.3.1 Citizenship pressure Citizenship pressure occurs when employees feel the pressure to engage in OCBs because their employer tries to stimulate that behaviour by informal compensation (Bolino,Turnley, Girlstrap Suazo, 2010).Citizenship pressure is a phenomenon that differs from individual to individual and it is of a subjective nature (Bolino, et al.,2010). Employees that are regarded as high-self monitors are more likely to give in to citizenship pressures and engage more in citizenship behaviours, because those employees value their image and the way they are perceived by their co-workers and supervisors (Blakely, Andrews, Fuller, 2003). The study of Bolino et al. (2010) has shown that citizenship pressure leads to higher levels of OCB of employees within an organization. Hence, the studies of Korsgaard, et al.(2010) and Bolino, et al.(2010) question both the discretionary and voluntary nature of OCB. Research has shown that managers do take OCBs into account when evaluating their employees and making other decisions (Podsakoff, et al.,2000) Van Dyne and Ellis (2004) state that with citizenship pressure, behaviour that was once voluntary and discretionary can become an obligation. Van Dyne and Ellis (2004) mention the phenomenon of job creep, this situation occurs when employees constantly feel the pressure to do more than their job actually requires of them. The duties of the employees are slowly increased without official recognition of the organization and in time are expected of the employees (Van Dyne Ellis, 2004). Although citizenship pressure may be a positive phenomenon from an organizations point of view because it leads to more OCB, it also is associated with negative consequences for the employees and their organization (Bolino, et al.,2010). The amounts of job stress experienced by the employees are likely to increase in the case of high levels of citizenship pressures (Bolinio, et al.,2010).   Job stress occurs when employees do not have the capabilities and resources that are needed to fulfil their job requirements. The incapability to fulfil these job demands will lead to negative consequences for the emotional and physical state of the employees who experience high levels of job stress (Sauter Murphy, 1995). According to Bolino, Turnley, Gilstrap, Suazo (2010) employees who experience citizenship pressures to behave as a good citizen of the organization may also feel the pressures at home to be a good partner and parent. This work-family conflict is a role conflict that occurs when the work role demands that are required from an employee are not compatible with the demands of the family (Greenhaus Beutell, 1985).   Work-family conflicts may arise when the partners of the employees have difficulties in understanding why their partner chooses to engage in OCBs that are technically not required of them and are not formally rewarded rather than to spend time with their family (Edwards Rothbard, 2000). Research of Flynn (1996) shows that in a situation of high citizenship pressures employees with less demanding family situations engage in more citizenship behaviours than married employees with more responsibilities towards their families. Another conflict related to citizenship pressure is the work-leisure conflict. This conflict arises when employees experience difficulties in balancing their work demands with their personal life and leisure time (Bolino, et al.,2010). The study of Reich (2001) states that employees who are physically away from their working environment, may still be mentally connected to their job. According to Bolino, et al.(2010) these employees experience a conflict between their desires for free time in their personal lives and the desire to be a good organizational citizen in order to receive the benefits that come with that kind of status. The employees who feel citizenship pressures may not enjoy their free time because they are worrying about the situation and problems at work. Furthermore, they may be troubled by the fact that their co-workers might surpass them in terms of productivity and value for the organization when they enjoy their personal time or they may be experiencing feelings o f guilt because they are not working (Reich, 2001). This may lead to an increasing tendency among employees to keep in contact with their work office, by means of mobile phones, pagers or email, in order to remain available for their colleagues and superiors (Reich, 2001). These types of conflict caused by citizenship pressure, like the work-leisure conflict and the work-family conflict and the phenomenon of job stress, contribute to the job quitting intensions among the employees (Bolino et al.,2010). The dark side of OCB can be accounted to the citizenship pressures exerted by the organization. When an organization pressures   employees to perform citizenship behaviours this can result in negative consequences for the state of mind of the employees (Bolino et al., 2010; Edwards Rothbard, 2000; Greenhaus Beutell, 1985; Reich, 2001). This in turn can lead to decreases in productivity and effectiveness for the organization, because employees in a bad state of mind are more likely to leave the organization or work inefficiently (Bolino et al., 2010). 2.4 Desirability of OCB within the organization OCB in its core essence is desirable for organizations because those citizenship behaviours are linked with helping behaviours, loyalty and commitment to the organization, the following of rules and regulations, creativity and innovation and going the extra mile (Podsakoff, et al.,2000) .   These citizenship behaviours are characterized as positive contributions to an organization and its productivity, effectiveness and social climate (Moorman et al., 1988; Organ, 1988; Podsakoff, et al.,2000). This makes it difficult for one to argue that citizenship behaviours are not desirable within an organization. However, there is also a darker side to OCB. These negative side effects of OCB occur when the voluntary and discretionary nature of citizenship behaviours is removed because of citizenship pressures exerted by the organization on their employees (Bolino et al.,2010; Korsgaard et al.2010) . Citizenship pressures can result in job stress, work-family conflicts, work-leisure conflicts and eventually in quitting intensions among employees (Bolino et al., 2010; Edwards Rothbard, 2000; Greenhaus Beutell, 1985; Reich, 2001).   Effectiveness and productivity of employees decrease when they experience job stress or work-family or work leisure conflicts, which in turn also has a negative influence on the company as a whole (Bolino, et al.,2010). In conclusion, one could argue that citizenship behaviours are a positive and desired phenomenon for an organization when the negative consequences of citizenship pressures exerted by the organization are not taken into account. However, citizenship pressures result in more OCBs among employees and thus organizations are inclined to exert those pressures on their employees (Bolino et al.,2010). Thus, organizations have to balance the positive and negative consequences of citizenship pressures and OCBs in order to maximize   the value of the employees for the company. Because citizenship pressures has different outcomes for each individual employee, the organization and group leaders could benefit from a thorough analysis of their workforce (Bolino et al., 2010). For instance, employees who are considered to be high self-monitors are more likely to engage in citizenship behaviours when they feel citizenship pressure, because they care about how they are being perceived by their co-w orkers and leaders (Blakely et al., 2003) Chapter 3.The transformational and transactional leadership styles 3.1 Introduction Leadership has always been an interesting topic for researchers from different fields. According to Tannenbaum, Weschler and Masarik (1961, p. 24) leadership is: â€Å"interpersonal influence exercised in situations and directed, through the communication process, toward the attainment of a specified goal or goals†. According to Wayne, Shore Liden (1997) leadership is important because the exchange between a manager and his follower   is the most important factor in determining employee behaviour. In the literature a distinction has been made by Burns (1978) and Bass (1985) between transactional leadership and transformational leadership. Burns (1978) reports that transactional and transformation leadership are complete opposites. Bass (1985), however, argues that transformational leaders may also use transactional leadership behaviours in certain situations. The concepts of transactional and transformational leadership will be explained in this chapter. 3.2 Transactional leadership The study of Bass (1985) shows that transactional leaders make the tasks and responsibilities of the followers clear and also promise the followers compensation for when their tasks are performed according to the standards. According to Deluga (1990) transactional leadership is an exchange process in which rewards and punishments are administered. Transactional leaders exchange financial rewards for productivity or deny rewards when the productivity of the followers is lacking (Bass Riggio, 2006). The relationship between the leader and his followers in a system of transactional leadership is focused on self interest and based on mutual dependency (Lagamarsino Cardona, 2003). Bass (1990) concludes in his research that there are four different types of transactional leadership. Contingent reward: The leader sets up a contract based on performance and rewards, solid performance is compensated with rewards. When goals are met the employees will get recognition for their accomplishments. Contingent reward leader behaviours have shown to have a positive relation with performance and follower attitudes (Avolio, Waldman Einstein, 1988; Waldman, Bass Yammarino, 1990). Laissez-Faire: In this particular form of transactional leadership the leader avoids making decisions and steps away from any responsibilities. The subordinates have to fulfil their tasks on their own. According to Dubinsky, Yammarino, Jolson, Spangler (1995) this type of leader is indifferent, frequently absent,   inattentive and does not influence the workforce. Management by exception (active): The leader actively looks for errors and mistakes in the work process. When the tasks performance of the employees is not on the required level the leader will intervene and he will try to put the employees back on the right track. Management by exception (passive): The leader only undertakes actions when the level of output and requirements and standards are not met by his subordinates. All these types of transactional leadership lack leadership behaviours that motivate employees to be the best they can be for the organization and to go the extra mile for colleagues and superiors. 3.3 Transformational leadership The transformational leadership theory of Bass (1985) states that transformational leadership creates a bond of trust between the leader and followers, motivating employees to achieve beyond expectations. According to Bass (1985) transformational leadership activates employees higher-order needs and lets them act out of the interest of the company. Transformational leaders are able to motivate their followers to the degree that they not only increase their task performance but also engage in OCBs that help the organization to function in an effective way (Smith, Organ, Near, 1983). Transformational leaders motivate their subordinates to come up with creative and innovative for difficult issues within the organization (Bass, 1985). Furthermore, in the transformational leadership style the leaders encourage their followers to go the extra mile for the organization and they reach out to their employees with constructive feedback (Bass, 1985).   Transformational leaders make their mis sions and goals clear to their followers and they convince the followers to act out of interest of the company (Piccolo Colquitt, 2006). Employees who are able to link their own success with that of the company and can identify with the values and goals of the organization are more likely to add value to the organization (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman, Fetter, 1990). Bass (1985) states in his research that when a manager acts like a transformational leader he will be perceived as a more satisfying and effective leader than a transactional leader. Furthermore, according to the studies of Bass (1985), employees report that they are more willing to put in extra effort and time for managers who behave as transformational leaders. Bass Avolio (1993) and Pillai (1995) have reported in their studies that there is a positive relationship between transformational leadership and employee satisfaction, and between transformational leadership and in-role behaviours that lead to job performan ce. According to Yukl (1999) transformational leadership can be viewed as the equivalent of charismatic leadership. In their research, Avolio Bass (2002) distinguished four different components of transformational leadership. Idealized influence: The leaders are admired, respected and trusted by their followers. The leaders are seen as examples/ role-models by the followers and the followers are inspired to emulate their actions. The leaders also put their followers interests above their own interest which earns them trust and respect. Idealized influence, or the charismatic dimension of transformational leadership (Bass, 1985), is often described as the most important component of transformational leadership (Waldman, Bass, Yammarino, 1990). Charismatic leaders receive respect and trust from their followers, because they create a sense of pride among their followers and communicate clear visions and missions (Bass, 1985).   Inspirational motivation: The leaders motivate their followers by attaching meaning and challenge to their work. The leader shows optimism and enthusiasm which stimulates individual and team spirit among the followers. Individualized consideration: The leaders take the needs and desires of the individual followers into account. The followers receive individual support from their leader in order to grow and develop and achieve higher goals. Intellectual stimulation: The followers are encouraged to be creative and innovative by their leaders. New approaches and new ideas are stimulated in order to get creative solutions to existing problems. Out of the box thinking is rewarded and it is not a shame to make errors. Chapter 4. The influence of transactional and transformational leadership on OCB 4.1 Introduction The predominant style of leadership in an organization has a great influence on the amount and types of OCBs performed by the employees within the organization. Bass (1990) described an experiment in a working area for convicted inmates. In this workplace the inmates had to produce several different types of products for in and outside the prison walls. One group of their supervisors received training in order to become transformational leaders, and the other group received a transactional leadership training. The inmates that were supervised by groups of transformational leaders performed better than those that were supervised by the transactional leaders. Not only did they perform better in the areas of productivity, absence and behaviour, the inmates also engaged in more citizenship behaviours. Furthermore, Bass (1990) states in his research that managers who are viewed as the high performers by their supervisors, also were viewed to be of a more transformational than transactional nature by their followers in a separate survey. In this chapter the relationship between transactional leadership, transformational leadership and organizational citizenship behaviour will be discussed. 4.2 Transactional leadership and OCB The transactional leadership style is based on an exchange relation between leaders and their followers. Employees are rewarded or punished based on whether or not their performance is according to the standards that were set by their transactional supervisors (Bass, 1985; Bass Riggio, 2006; Deluga, 1990). Because transactional leadership is a system of mutual dependency between leaders and followers that is based on self interest (Lagamarsino Cordona, 2003) and primarily an exchange process, transactional leadership leads to a low amount of citizenship behaviours performed by employees. The four different types of transactional leadership (Bass, 1990) do not convince employees to perform the seven dimensions of citizenship behaviour (Podsakoff et al.,2000). In the laissez-faire leadership style the leader avoids making decisions and steps away from his responsibilities. The followers have to do their tasks on their own and there is hardly any communication with the leaders. The leader is frequently absent, inattentive and indifferent and does not influence the workforce (Dubinsky et al.,1995). It is obvious that this type of leader will not stimulate citizenship behaviours among his followers. The leaders who act according to the management by exception style (both passive and active) only intervene when their followers do not meet up with the requirements and standards that are set for them. The employees do no