This
study was conducted by: Acido, P., Ganglani, N., Paz, J. and Uy, B.
INTRODUCTION
AND REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
According to The LaSallian, many students join
student organizations during the Annual Recruitment Week, with organization
presidents implying most Lasallians’ participation in organizational activities
(Ng & Tolentino, 2012). Lasallian student organizations, other than serving
as avenues for students to be part of groups, also serve to provide students
opportunities to apply what they learn in classrooms to settings involving more
than academic knowledge. Given the hierarchical organizational structures in
these organizations, such as the student government or the executive boards of
the professional organizations (groups directly relating or exclusively
catering to the student’s degree program), and the exercise of management,
human relations, finance, documentations, and external alliances, among other
things, student organizations can be considered a fairly accurate simulation of
industrial or corporate settings (Ng & Tolentino, 2012). With this
consideration in mind, we decided to study how the concept of contextual behaviors
operates in Lasallian student organizations. Contextual behaviors are
characterized by activities that contribute to the culture and the climate of
the organization, which in turn comprise the context or environment within
which behaviors that are directly related and contribute to the core
transformation and maintenance activities of an organization (ex. item
production, sales and marketing, inventory acquisition and monitoring, human
resource management, or delivery of products and services (Motowidlo &
Schmit, 1999) occur. Examples of contextual behaviors include volunteering for
extra work, persisting with enthusiasm, following rules and procedures,
supporting and defending the organization, and helping and cooperating with
others (Motowidlo & Schmit, 1999). It is evident that contextual behaviors
are characterized as those not necessarily connected or related to core-job
demands; however, they still contribute to group effectiveness by maintaining
or improving the quality of the psychological and social atmosphere in which
the task behaviors occur (Motowidlo & Van Scotter, 1994). The researchers
chose to focus on contextual behaviors because it is overlooked in research
literature concerning performance. According to Befort and Hattrup (2003), there
is relatively more importance given to task behaviors versus contextual
behaviors despite both of them being prominent dimensions of performance
(Motowidlo & Schmit, 1999), and both of them being contributory in
achieving organizational goals and long-term success (Allen & Rush, 1998;
Ostroff, 1992). Another practical aspect of this study is that it aims to get a
detailed grasp of something that is beyond the groups’ constitutions,
operational manuals, by-laws, and the like. Given this, This main question
further serves as an umbrella for the following sub-research questions:
1.
How do the members normally behave in the student organizations?
2. Which behaviors are characteristically
contextual behaviors?
3.
What influences their use of contextual behavior?
4.
In what context do they use contextual behaviors?
5.
What are the outcomes of these behaviors?
METHODS
Phenomenology approach was used to capture the essence
of how student organizations experience contextual behaviors. The participants
who were of position of any organization in the university which had office
were interviewed both individually and in a focus group discussion. There were
5 interviewees and 8 who participated in the focus group discussion. Candidates
for the study’s subjects were invited and dates were set. In the interviews and
focus group discussion, all gave their consent, they were then interviewed and
debriefed afterwards. All interviews were recorded and transcribed for data
analysis. Each transcript undergone coding as significant extracts were
highlighted which were then summarized. To ensure validity, triangulation and
disconfirming evidence methods were conducted. Soon after data was validated,
the themes were reviewed, revised and finalized. The themes identified were
named appropriately to answer the sub-research questions and were defined along
with its extracts.
RESULTS
The
following set of themes are the normal behaviors and activities that members of
the group perform when in a student organization, answering the first sub
question “How do these members normally behave in student organizations?”
Themes
|
Definition
|
Extracts
|
Engaging
in task behaviors
|
These
are behaviors by members of the group when they engage in tasks related to
the processes and services of the organization’s core goal.
|
P:
“Uhm for example printing. Printing kasi diba normally mga tao di pa
nagpi-print yung iba nag ru-rush ng homework, iba nagca-cram so lahat sila
nag pi-print eh diba mas convenient pag inside school tapos we’re not that
expensive."
|
Engaging
in recreational activities
|
These
are behaviors by members of the group when they engage in tasks and actions
that are non-task and non-academic related.
|
IP3:
“Syempre as a student, di ko naman gugustuhin na umakyat sa office na
volunteer ka na nga lang tapos yung work place mo pa sobrang seryoso, diba?
Syempre kailangan mo din magloosen up, parang ganun.”
|
The
major behaviors and activities that members of group organizations engage in
are divided into two different parts. The first is about the tasks that are
required to be completed with regards to requirements from the organization’s
core setting to fulfill the responsibilities to the organization. The other type
of behavior is about the actions that members engage in not related to their
obligations but more on recreational activities such as leisure and other
methods of.
The
following set of themes talks about different types of behaviors that are
characterized as contextual behaviors. It answers the second sub-research
question.
Themes
|
Definition
|
Extracts
|
Bonding
|
The
process wherein members interact with each other that eventually leads to a
higher form of interpersonal relationship.
|
P:
"Actually, there’s this one member, sobrang ingay nya, sobrang random,
sobrang kulit...So parang in a way lalong nakakapag-bond yung scoopers with
each other dahil din sa kanya."
|
Helping
each other
|
These
are actions that members do unto their co-members to provide assistance and
aid.
|
IP2:
“Then eventually, sa FB group kahit simpleng comment mo lang dun sa post ng
ibang staff or members, like kung may favor din sila kunyari pa-survey.”
|
In
an organizational and group setting, there are different behaviors that are
characterized as contextual. The first of which is bonding, which is a very
common aspect in the organization setting. Bonding is the stepping stone
towards developing a more interpersonal relationship between members. The
second behavior is helping each other out which mainly focuses on members
giving aid and help to co-members in order to further develop their
relationship in the organization.
The
following set of themes are the factors that influence the members of student
organizations to engage in contextual behaviors. These themes answer the third
sub-research question: What influences their use of contextual behavior?
Themes:
of the self
|
Definition
|
Extracts
|
The need
to belong
|
The innate
urge in an individual to desire acceptance and to feel that he or she is a
part of something, in this case, his/her organization.
|
IP2:
“Oo siyempre kailangan yung sense of belongingness kasi parang may kasama.
Parang, ano yun eh, motivation din yun na kailangan. Kasi nasa isang org ka
tapos di mo naman feel yung mga kasama mo. Parang di ka na mamo-motivate
gumawa.”
|
The
inevitability of socializing
|
Contextual
behaviors occur to form a foundation to prevent anticipated hostile working
environment and enable task delegation to be unconstrained.
|
IP3:
”Parang may part din talaga na on the way, mag-uusap at mag-uusap din kayo.
At hindi naman pwedeng palaging snub lang kayo nang snub.”
|
Themes:
of the group
|
Definition
|
Extracts
|
Desire
for the group to succeed: Familiarity breeds success
|
A
belief that for success to foster, co-members working together to accomplish
a common goal must be or are encouraged to be accustomed to one another.
|
FGDP6:
“Importante na makilala mo yung mga kasama mo kasi dun mo makikita kung ano
yung mga capabilities, at kung alam mo na na hindi siya magaling sa certain
area, makakapag-adjust ka.”
|
To
promote a healthy group atmosphere
|
There
is a need to work in an environment where there are good relations to be able
to work effectively
|
IP3:
“Syempre as a student, hindi ko naman gugustuhin na umakyat sa office na
volunteer ka na nga lang, tapos yung workplace mo sobrang seryoso pa diba.”
|
There
are 4 themes which falls under 2 categories (self and group) in this
sub-research question. They are basically influenced to use contextual
behaviors to fulfill their self’s needs: (1) the need to belong, (2) the
inevitability of socializing. And also their group’s needs: (3) the desire for
the group to succeed and (4) the want to have a healthy group atmosphere.
These
two themes explain to us in what context are contextual behaviors used. It
answers the fourth sub-research question: In what context do they use
contextual behaviors?
Themes
|
Definition
|
Extracts
|
In their
workplace
|
These
behaviors are mostly used in their workplace, since this is where they spend
most of their time doing their tasks
|
IP2:
“Ang usual na bonding is yun kapag nagkikita dito usually lunch, yun, sabay
sabay nag-lulunch, tapos kapag walang ginagawa kanya-kanyang kwentuhan lang.
Yung mga usual na small groups”.
|
Outside
the workplace
|
These
behaviors are seen when the members are outside their workplace as
interactions which occur in these settings are less likely to be task-related
behaviors.
|
IP4:
"Then sometimes, we go outside school, like kung sa mall, and especially
yung mga teambuilding activities, so yun.”
|
Members
of student organizations most frequently use contextual behaviors in their
workplace, whenever they are idle during their residency times. And also when
they’re outside the workplace, specifically when they go to malls and engage in
team building activities.
The
following set of themes are the advantages and disadvantages when members
engage in contextual behaviors; these answer the fifth sub-research question
what outcomes do contextual behaviors result to?
Themes:
Outcomes of the self
|
Definition
|
Extracts
|
Sense of
belongingness
|
Members
feel a sense of belongingness which helps them grow and develop as a person.
It is innate in everyone to desire acceptance and be apart of something.
|
IP2:
“So kapag nakita mo na yung place na
yun, tinatanggap ka, parang woooow ano, okay tong org na to. Napapahalagahan
ako dito, nakikita ko yung mga friends ko.”
|
Active
participation
|
Members
are motivated to attend and participate more in org work and activities,
hence, fulfilling their responsibilities and obligations to the organization.
|
IP2:
“Nafefeel nila na parang nagbebelong na sila dun sa org and uhmmm mas may
tendency na mas maging active sila dun sa org. At gawin talaga nila yung
responsibilities nila”
|
Themes:
Outcomes of the group
|
||
Positive
group atmosphere
|
An
environment where there are good relations within members and a pleasant
ambience that is inviting.
|
P5:
Pag masaya sila mas energized sila di sila inaantok di sila parang bad mood
pag masaya ang tao mas gumagalaw sila pag mas gumagalaw sila uh mas may gana
silang gumawa ng service.
|
Learning
to distinguish professional and personal aspect
|
They are
able to distinguish which is personal from what is professional where
work-related issues does not carry over to personal relation and vice versa.
|
P7:
Walang personalan at hindi ko naman siya inattack directly, I just did what I
had to do so ganoon lang yun.
P2:
Unlike kapag boss mo is friend mo din, alam mo na kapag may nagawa kang
masama at pinagsabihan ka, alam mong hindi niya minemean yun. Ang parang
tinutukoy niya lang is yung sa work mo.
|
Easy Task
Dissemination
|
Knowing
co-members' personalities allows unrestricted and appropriate distribution of
tasks
|
IP3:
Kapag mas kilala mo na yung mga tao, parang mas alam mo na yung strengths and
weaknesses nila. So mas alam mo kung sino yung bibigyan mo ng ganitong task,
sino dapat yung hindi.
|
Task
Improvement
|
Contextual
behaviors make way for members to compromise and give constructive criticisms
which allows improvement whenever there is task related conflicts.
|
I1
May mutual understanding kayo sa organization, and parang open din kayo for
like, both positive and negative comments man or feedbacks from each other.
|
Emotional
Conflicts
|
Emotional
conflicts which results from personal relations weaken effectiveness of both
member and group.
|
IP3
Friends kayo tapos at some point nagkaroon kayo ng problem, ang work niyo
affected. Parang nadadamay ang work sa relationship niyo.
|
For
the outcomes of the self, themes are sense of belongingness which is the
feeling of being a part of something, and active participation which is when
members are motivated more to participate in the activities of the
organization, thus, fulfilling their responsibilities to the organization. For
the outcomes for the group, contextual behaviors help create an inviting
atmosphere where members learn to understand each other’s personalities and
work ethics better and fosters easy task dissemination. However, emotional
conflicts are inevitable as are task-related conflicts the role of contextual
behaviors here is to guide the members to help improve the tasks as it’s their
common goal to put out exceptional work .
CONCLUSION,
DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Based
on the data that had been collected, the researchers conclude that students of
De La Salle University who are members of student organizations experience
contextual behaviors in scenarios which vary that also plays a role in the
improvement of both the self and the organization. The researchers got the
information needed for our conclusion from the handful of interviewees that we
talked to and our focus group discussion. All of those involved in the
interviews were part of student organizations who, based on the data collected,
experience contextual behaviors in the group setting. For future research
regarding the topic, the researchers recommend that future researchers use more
validation procedures, include organizations in De La Salle University that
don’t have an office, get the opinions of lower ranking officials in the
organization and to use a higher volume of respondents for better quality of
data.
REFERENCES
Allen,
T. D., & Rush, M. C. (1998). The effects of organizational citizenship
behavior on performance judgments: a field study and a laboratory experiment. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 83, 247-260.
Befort,
K., & Hattrup, K. (2003). Valuing task and contextual performance:
Experience, job roles, and ratings of the importance of job behavior. Applied
H.R.M. Research, 8, 17-32.
Motowidlo,
S. J., & Schmit, M. J. (1999). Performance assessment in unique jobs. In D.
R. Ilgen & E. D. Pulakos (Eds.), The changing nature of performance
(pp. 56-86). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Motowidlo,
S. J., & Van Scotter, J. R. (1994). Evidence that task performance should be
distinguished from contextual performance. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 79, 475–480.
Ng,
C., & Tolentino, M. (2012 March 28). Beyond academics: Membership in
organizations. The LaSallian. Retrieved from
http://thelasallian.com/2012/03/28/beyond-academicss-membership-in-organizations/
Ostroff,
C. (1992). The relationship between satisfaction, attitudes, and performance:
An organizational level analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77,
963-974.
Van
Scotter, J., & Motowidlo, S. (1996). Interpersonal facilitation and job
dedication as separate facets of contextual performance. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 81, 525-531.
