Measures Matter: Good Soldiers Versus Organizational Wives

By Diane Bergeron

Left. Left. Left, right, left. See those men? They’re the organization’s “good soldiers.” The ones who are credited with dutifully participating in organizational citizenship behavior (OCB). But, as my colleague Kylie Rochford and I realized, academic research paints a drastically skewed and imperfect picture regarding gender and OCB. The measurement scales used in the majority of previous OCB studies do not accurately represent the full population under evaluation. Similar to how academic medicine marginalized women for decades, women have also been ‘left out’ of OCB. It’s true that, in these studies, men and women get equal credit for performing OCB. However, we take issue with this finding because these ‘good soldiers’ are the minority of employees who engage in OCB.

In reality, women are disproportionately more likely to exhibit helpful OCB and are frequently relegated to being “organizational wives.” That’s because women are relied on for all the “office housework” with little to no recognition or additional compensation. In fact, rather than being rewarded, they are often punished for not helping. From planning activities to serving on committees, women excessively participate in organizational citizenship behavior compared to their male counterparts. Grinning and bearing it is the status quo for women in the workplace.

So, why does the academic literature suggest otherwise? We set out to discover just that and, despite several eye rolls as we sifted through existing studies, our review confirmed that the way OCB scales were developed perpetuates systemic gender bias. That is, OCB scales were developed predominantly with men in mind, which is bound to skew the data. Scales that are created to measure something should represent the population they will assess. That makes sense, right? But, as we show in our paper, most of the commonly-used OCB scales were developed on largely male samples (by largely male authors) – in several instances with percentages as high as 94-96% men. Meaning that OCB scales fail to consider women’s specific types of OCB. And despite these underwhelming research standards, the studies conclude that women contribute no more than men to companies, academia, and nonprofit organizations through OCB. Now, let’s imagine what the results would be if all their efforts had actually been measured.

Kylie and I muse that there are several theoretical reasons why women engage in more OCB than men – which simply underscores what we see all around us. Social role theory highlights the gendered division of labor and the predominance of women as expected caretakers as one possibility. Another is the empathy-altruism hypothesis, in which the more empathetic a person is, the more likely they are to engage in OCB. According to societal constructs, women are the predisposed nurturers and thus are considered the more empathetic gender.

Despite the reasons, women are undervalued – and it is high time that we start “counting the cost” where OCB is concerned. Not only that, as scholars, we have a responsibility to rectify the methodological problems of flawed scales that continue to ‘disappear’ the contributions of women in the workplace. Over the course of 40 years, thousands of studies have spread inaccurate information, making it even more difficult for women to get the long overdue respect, upward mobility, and financial gain they are due.

Women should no longer be expected to take on a “wifely” role – handling the bulk of invisible and uncompensated organizational maintenance. Organizational cultures need to change, OCB must become gender-neutral, and organizational contributions need to be equally rewarded. Additionally, research into such phenomena need to follow the high scientific rigor we’ve come to expect from reputable academic journals. Without a realistic view of the research landscape, there can be no collective introspection or progress. As academics, we should bristle at the wag-the-dog scenario in which we currently find ourselves. Using scales that do not represent half of the population for 4 years, let alone 40, just isn’t good research practice.

read the article

Article Details
Good Soldiers versus Organizational Wives: Does Anyone (Besides Us) Care that Organizational Citizenship Behavior Scales Are Gendered and Mostly Measure Men’s—but Not Women’s—Citizenship Behavior?
Diane Bergeron and Kylie Rochford
First published online May 4, 2022
DOI: 10.1177/10596011221094421
Group & Organization Management

About the Author

Featured

Diane Bergeron, PhD, is a senior research scientist at the Center for Creative Leadership (Greensboro, NC). A former professor, she also worked at a small consulting firm in New York City and volunteered for two years in the Dominican Republic. Her research interests include women’s leadership and career advancement, leader listening and employee voice, and grief and loss in the workplace. She was denied tenure because she took two years off to go on a sailing trip with her family. It was the best decision she ever made.