Public Management Review

ISSN: 1471-9037 (Print) 1471-9045 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rpxm20

Does Public Service Motivation Mediate the

Relationship between Goal Clarity and both
Organizational Commitment and Extra-Role
Behaviours?

James Gerard Caillier

To cite this article: James Gerard Caillier (2016) Does Public Service Motivation Mediate the
Relationship between Goal Clarity and both Organizational Commitment and Extra-Role
Behaviours?, Public Management Review, 18:2, 300-318, DOI: 10.1080/14719037.2014.984625

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2014.984625

Published online: 26 Nov 2014.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 132

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rpxm20

Download by: [University of York] Date: 19 January 2016, At: 00:48

 Public Management Review, 2016
Vol. 18, No. 2, 300318, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2014.984625

Abstract
DOES PUBLIC
Research has not considered how goal
clarity can affect work attitudes through pub- SERVICE
lic service motivation (PSM). As a result, a
model was developed to examine the rela- MOTIVATION
tionship between goal clarity, PSM, and two
employee work attitudes and behaviours MEDIATE THE
(i.e., organizational commitment and extra-
role behaviours). Several important findings RELATIONSHIP
Downloaded by [University of York] at 00:48 19 January 2016

BETWEEN GOAL
emerged from the model. First, goal clarity
was positively associated with PSM. Second,

CLARITY AND BOTH

goal clarity was positively associated with
both organizational commitment and extra-

ORGANIZATIONAL
role behaviours. Finally, PSM was found to
partially mediate the relationship between
goal clarity and both organizational commit-
ment and extra-role behaviours. The implica-
tions these findings have for theory and
COMMITMENT AND
practice are discussed.
EXTRA-ROLE
BEHAVIOURS?
Key words
Goal clarity, PSM James Gerard Caillier

James Gerard Caillier

Department of Political Science
University of Alabama
Tuscaloosa, AL
USA
E-mail: jgcaillier@ua.edu

2014 Taylor & Francis

 Caillier: Goal clarity and PSM 301

INTRODUCTION

Management theorists and agencies, alike, have devoted an enormous amount of

attention to finding out which factors motivate public employees. With a lack of
financial incentives in the public sector and the fact that public employees value
meaningful service (Houston 2000; Rainey 1982; Witmer 1991), the focus of research
in the public sector has increasingly been on non-financial factors. Two such factors that
have been often studied empirically in agencies are goal clarity (e.g., Moynihan and
Pandey 2007b) and public service motivation (hereafter PSM; e.g., Kim 2012b). This is
because they have been linked to desirable work attitudes and behaviours. Despite this,
Downloaded by [University of York] at 00:48 19 January 2016

only one article was found to examine the connection between role ambiguity (the
inverse of goal clarity) and PSM (Camilleri 2007). Furthermore, no article was found to
investigate how these two factors might work together to influence the attitudes and
behaviours of employees. This is surprising, given that goal clarity and PSM are very
relevant in explaining motivation in public organizations (Rainey 2009).
This article aims to fill the aforementioned void in the literature. It is argued here
that PSM mediates the relationship between goal clarity and both organizational
commitment (i.e., an attachment to, identification with, and willingness to partici-
pate in the organization) and extra-role behaviours (i.e., alacrity to do more than
what is required in job descriptions). In so doing, agency theory and PSM theory are
used to support this relationship. Since organizational commitment and extra-role
behaviours represent two behaviours and attitudes that organizations most desire
from employees, they were chosen as outcome variables. Moreover, organizational
commitment and extra-role behaviours are linked to performance (e.g., Meyer,
Allen, and Smith 1993; Organ, Podsakoff, and MacKenzie 2006), which is critical
to meeting the demands of citizens.
The article is structured as follows. First, hypotheses are developed from the extant
literature. Second, the survey dissemination and variables are explained in the methods
section. Third, the results from the model are explained. Last is the discussion and
conclusion.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Figure 1 shows the expected relationships between goal clarity, PSM, organizational
commitment, and extra-role behaviours, which are discussed in turn later. Before doing
so, it is important to note that reverse causation cannot be completely ruled out.
However, the model involves mediation, and mediation requires an in-depth explana-
tion of just how factors affect each other. Moreover, the causal inferences in this article
are mainly based on established theories.
 302 Public Management Review
Downloaded by [University of York] at 00:48 19 January 2016

Figure 1: Theoretical model of expected associations

Goal clarity

Principalagent theory has often been utilized to explain problems that arise between
politicians and bureaucracies (e.g., Waterman and Meier 1998). It has also been used at
a more micro level to explain outcomes of the dyadic exchange relationships of
managers and workers in organizations (Eisenhardt 1989). Concerning the latter, this
theory posits that managers (i.e., principals) contract with subordinates (i.e., agents) to
perform work negotiated in the contract. It follows that subordinates are then
responsible to managers specifically because they agreed to the terms of the contract,
where explicit actions are exchanged for rewards (Kettl 2014). While control is the
underlying factor in this theory, the value of it is based on whether or not managers
adequately communicate to subordinates exactly how their activities or roles are to be
performed (Pandey and Wright 2006). For instance, when expectations are not
communicated clearly, subordinates may have a difficult time fulfilling the terms of
the contract, as their role-related information is insufficient. However, when their
expectations are communicated effectively, subordinates ostensibly understand exactly
what is needed to fulfil the terms of the contract. This ultimately means subordinates
know how their tasks relate to the purpose of the organization (Bosselut et al. 2012;
Kahn et al. 1964). Such goal clarity is critically important in organizations because it
allows employees to devote more time to perform their expectations (Sawyer 1992).
Although goal clarity is examined extensively, most research tends to focus more on
the absence of goal clarity, that is, role ambiguity. More specifically, role ambiguity
refers to the lack of necessary information at a given organizational position (Rainey
2009, 302). Research examining role ambiguity has found that it negatively impacts
workers. The reason why role ambiguity negatively affects subordinates in this manner
is because it is a role stressor (Kahn et al. 1964). Role stressors impede an individuals
ability to work effectively (Eatough et al. 2011), thus creating work-related tension and
 Caillier: Goal clarity and PSM 303

stress in the dyadic relationship between managers and subordinates, as it results in

workers spending more time trying to figure out what is expected of them than actually
performing their tasks (Onyemah 2008). Furthermore, job satisfaction (e.g., Anton
2009) and performance (e.g., Tubre and Collins 2000) are just two of the many work-
related behaviours and attitudes negatively affected by role ambiguity. Given that goal
clarity is the inverse of role ambiguity, its presence is essential in alleviating the
negative consequences of ambiguity (Kahn et al. 1964).
Downloaded by [University of York] at 00:48 19 January 2016

Goal clarity and PSM

PSM was originally defined as an individuals predisposition to respond to motives

grounded primarily or uniquely in public institutions and organizations (Perry and
Wise 1990, 368). It is currently viewed as an individuals orientation to delivering
services to people with a purpose to do good for others and society (Perry and
Hondeghem 2008, vii). Perry and Wise (1990) identified three PSM motives: rational,
norm-based, and affective. Perry (1996) later developed a scale, which consisted of four
dimensions, to measure these PSM motives. The dimensions included attraction to
public policy making, commitment to the public interest, self-sacrifice, and compassion.
Although PSM was developed two decades ago, its relevance as a research topic has
continued to grow in the United States, as well as internationally (e.g., Kim et al.
2013). This is due to the fact that surveys have demonstrated its significance in
explaining the attitudes of workers, especially those in the public sector (e.g., Perry,
Hondeghem, and Wise 2010). For instance, Lewis and Frank (2002) found individuals
who placed a high value on job security and high income (it is important to note that
this particular finding diminished after other variables were controlled) as well as those
with high PSM preferred to work for government than the private sector.1 It suggests
that individuals with PSM or who are altruistic are drawn to government. Even though
PSM now refers broadly to a type of service that benefits society and is thus present in
each sector (Anderson and Kjeldsen 2013), the latter finding from Lewis and Franks
(2002) study further suggests that individuals with PSM tend to self-select government
employment. This is because such individuals place a high value on service that benefits
society (Crewson 1997; Houston 2000) and public organizations actively afford employ-
ees the ability to perform that very type of service as a part of their work (Kim and
Vandenabeele 2010). Hence the work performed in public organizations is aligned with
the motives of individuals with PSM (Wright, Moynihan, and Pandey 2012), making
government organizations an ideal setting in which to study PSM.
While there are several organizational factors that can encourage PSM, goal clarity is
one of them. For instance, when employees have clear goals, they know what is
expected of them and how their work relates to the organization. In the context of
public organizations, goal clarity means employees know exactly how their work
 304 Public Management Review

contributes to the betterment of society. Given that individuals with PSM desire to
perform work that has a social impact and that such work is a core function of public
organizations, it follows that public servants levels of PSM should be enhanced as they
are better able to see just how their work fulfils this role (i.e., goal clarity). Put another
way, when the roles of public employees are clear, they understand how they contribute
to the public service mission of the agency, thus reinforcing their PSM. In this sense,
clearer roles help fulfil the prosocial needs and expectations of public employees.
The positive relationship between goal clarity and PSM is backed by empirical
research. Camilleri (2007) found that role ambiguity (the absence of goal clarity) was
negatively related to the components of PSM (i.e., public policy, public interest,
Downloaded by [University of York] at 00:48 19 January 2016

compassion, and self-sacrifice). Although red tape is a distinct construct from goal
clarity, Moynihan and Pandey (2007a) also found that bureaucratic red tape had a
negative effect on PSM. Indeed, red tape was one of the most important predictors in
the model, second only to professional identification. The suggestion is that organiza-
tional obstacles, like role ambiguity and red tape, can hinder public employees from
performing their social-oriented duties and can discourage PSM motives. That also
means the opposite is true: organizational factors that can assist employees in perform-
ing social-oriented duties could trigger PSM. As a result, as goal clarity increases, PSM
levels should also increase. The following hypothesis is proposed:

Hypothesis 1: Goal clarity will be positively associated with PSM.

Goal clarity, PSM, and organizational commitment

Organizational commitment refers broadly to a psychological state that (a) characterizes

the employees relationship with the organization and (b) has implications for the decision
to continue or discontinue membership in the organization (Meyer, Allen, and Smith
1993, 539). Thus, commitment is highly sought after in public organizations. While
organizational commitment has several antecedents, research has consistently demon-
strated that role ambiguity has a negative impact on organizational commitment (Adae,
Parboteeah, and Velinor 2008; Caillier 2012; Chenevert et al. 2013). The rationale is that
clarity of expectations derives from the principals communication of contractual work
agreements made with the agent. Consequently, employees (i.e., agents) should be less
attached to an organization when its managers (i.e., principals) put an unnecessary strain
on them for trying to figure out what their expectations are in the contract (Adae,
Parboteeah, and Velinor 2008). This line of reasoning is also consistent with Kahn et al.s
(1964) model, which illustrates communication of roles in organizations. Therefore, role
ambiguity has a negative effect on commitment, while goal clarity has a positive one.
PSM can also enhance commitment to public agencies. The underlying rationale is
that [a]s the levels of PSM in public employees increase, their loyalty and emotional
identification with the organization that seeks public interests will also increase
 Caillier: Goal clarity and PSM 305

(Kim 2012b, 832). In other words, PSM positively impacts commitment, because the
agents see the alignment between their personal values and those of the organization.
Research has confirmed this association. Crewson (1997) demonstrated that PSM is
positively related to organizational commitment in the federal government. Camilleri
(2006) found a positive association between PSM and commitment in Maltese govern-
ment; though he reasoned that commitment had an effect on PSM. Castaing (2006)
found a positive relationship between PSM and commitment among civil servants in
France. Taylor (2008) found a direct, positive association between PSM and commit-
ment in an Australian Survey. Kim (2011) demonstrated that PSM had a positive effect
on the commitment of Korean firefighters. Kim (2012b) found a direct, positive
Downloaded by [University of York] at 00:48 19 January 2016

connection between PSM and commitment among Korean public servants.

Additionally, PSM may mediate the relationship between goal clarity and organiza-
tional commitment. In terms of the principalagent relationship in public agencies,
when the roles of agents are clarified, agents should become more committed to the
organization because they are better able to determine just how their work contributes
to the social-oriented mission of the agency. That proposition is consistent with
longstanding leadership theories, which suggest that effective leaders enhance the
commitment of their followers by clarifying organizational goals and by demonstrating
the alignment between these goals and the values of followers (e.g., Bass and Riggio
2006). The notion is that goal clarity and value congruence are underlying mechanisms
that result in agents wanting to help the organization achieve its mission (i.e., a desire
to remain with the organization). Despite the plausibility of the associations between
goal clarity, PSM, and commitment, no article was found to empirically examine them.
The following hypotheses are then proposed.

Hypothesis 2: Goal clarity will be positively associated with organizational

commitment.
Hypothesis 3: PSM will be positively associated with organizational commitment.
Hypothesis 4: PSM will partially mediate the relationship between goal clarity and
organizational commitment.

Goal clarity, PSM, and extra-role behaviours

Employee performance was once assumed to only consist of formal duties written in job
descriptions. While such in-role performance is critical to individual performance and
organizational productivity, it does not adequately reflect all the ways in which
employees contribute to work units and organizations. As a result, organizations and
theorists have come up with the notion of extra-role behaviours. Extra-role behaviours
are defined as actions not articulated in job descriptions that have an impact on the
overall well-being and functioning of the organization (Bowling 2010). Furthermore,
in-role performance refers to actions that are expected, evaluated, and rewarded,
 306 Public Management Review

whereas extra-role behaviours are actions that are discretionary in nature (Leung
2007, 45). Extra-role behaviours can therefore be distinguished from in-role perfor-
mance; but, extra-role behaviours are also strongly associated with in-role performance
(Hoffman et al. 2007). As such, extra-role behaviours are increasingly the focus of
scholars (LePine, Erez, and Johnson 2002). Regarding the public sector, research
demonstrates the utility of examining extra-role behaviours in government agencies
(Balfour and Wechsler 1996; Caillier, 2014a, 2014b; Pandey, Wright, and Moynihan
2008), ostensibly because in-role performance is not easily measured and because
workers are increasingly being afforded more autonomy and responsibility (Rainey
2009).
Downloaded by [University of York] at 00:48 19 January 2016

Since extra-role behaviours are critical in agencies, scholars have explored the
relationship between these behaviours and PSM. Kim (2006) found that PSM had a
positive effect on a specific dimension of extra-role behaviours, one that is directed
towards individuals. Pandey, Wright, and Moynihan (2008) also found that PSM had a
positive effect on a specific component of extra-role behaviours; in this case, it was
actions used to assist co-workers. The suggestion is that high PSM individuals have
higher extra-role behaviours in public agencies than individuals with low PSM, for the
reason that the former employees are more motivated to perform work in agencies,
given that these agencies allow them to contribute to the betterment of society
(Caillier, 2014c).
Goal clarity was also found to have an effect on extra-role behaviours. From a
principalagent perspective, employees are able to concentrate more on their work
after their expectations have been clarified by their managers (Kahn et al. 1964). This
suggests goal clarity will enable employees to put more effort in to their work, thus
positively impacting extra-role behaviours. Chu, Lee, and Hsu (2006) provide support
for this proposition by finding that unclear roles had a negative effect on the extent to
which employees exhibited extra-role behaviours.
Given that goal clarity had a positive effect on PSM (Camilleri 2007) and PSM had a
positive effect on extra-role behaviours (Kim 2006; Pandey, Wright, and Moynihan
2008), it is possible that PSM may intervene between goal clarity and extra-role
behaviours. That is, as employees better understand their roles, the social-oriented
duties they perform in public agencies are more likely to trigger their altruistic motives,
causing them to put more effort into their work. Moreover, no article was found that
empirically examined that association. The following hypotheses are tested in this
article.

Hypothesis 5: Goal clarity will be positively associated with extra-role behaviours.

Hypothesis 6: PSM will be positively associated with extra-role behaviours.
Hypothesis 7: PSM will partially mediate the relationship between goal clarity and
extra-role behaviours.
 Caillier: Goal clarity and PSM 307

METHOD

Survey administration

US local, state, and federal government employees were recruited using

SurveyMonkey, a Web-based survey vendor. To conduct the survey, SurveyMonkey
identified government employees who had previously volunteered to take part in
surveys from their database. Such a recruitment method is referred to as a survey
panel or Web panel (see Silber, Lischewski, and Leibold 2013 for differences in types of
survey methods). It is worth noting that utilizing a survey panel is common in
Downloaded by [University of York] at 00:48 19 January 2016

organizational research (Anderson and Kjeldsen 2013; Byrne et al. 2014; Piccolo and
Colquitt 2006; Resick et al. 2013; Zhu et al. 2011). These individuals were then sent
an email asking them to participate in this survey. The email also contained a direct link
to the authors survey. In exchange for participation, each individual received a nominal
benefit. That is, $0.50 was donated to a charity of their choice, and their names were
entered in a drawing for a prize. A total of 3,500 emails were sent, resulting in 913
usable surveys. The response rate was therefore 26.09 per cent, which is in line with
previous Web-based surveys (Hoonakker and Carayon 2009; Shih and Fan 2008).

Study measures

Four multi-item measures were used in the model. Each of the items were scored on a
Likert-type scale anchored from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The actual
items are in the Appendix. First, goal clarity comprised five items developed by Sawyer
(1992). The Cronbachs alpha was .74.
Second, PSM comprised five items that were developed by Perry (1996). While
these items are an abbreviated version of Perrys (1996) original scale, they are often
used by scholars to measure PSM (Alonso and Lewis 2001; Brewer and Selden 2000;
Christensen et al. 2013; Kim 2005; Pandey, Wright, and Moynihan 2008; Wright,
Moynihan, and Pandey 2012; Wright and Pandey 2008). This is because these items
represent the normative and affective motives that make up altruism in the public
sector (Wright and Pandey 2008). Furthermore, Wright and Pandey (2008) recently
found that it was a global measure of PSM. The Cronbachs alpha was .84.
Third, affective commitment was used as a proxy for organizational commitment.
Affective commitment was utilized because it is vital in public agencies (Kim 2012a)
and because it is more strongly correlated with employee attitudes and outcomes than
the other types of commitment (Meyer et al. 2002). The affective commitment
measure comprised three items from Meyer et al.s (1993) scale. The Cronbachs
alpha was .90. Since affective commitment is used as a proxy for organizational
commitment, the construct is referred to as organizational commitment throughout
the article.
 308 Public Management Review

Fourth, extra-role behaviours comprised three items from Balfour and Wechslers
(1996) scale. Similar to PSM, there are several dimensions of extra-role behaviours.
However, this article focuses on those that are related to their roles and responsibilities.
As such, these behaviours are most likely impacted by goal clarity or the extent to
which their roles are clear. The Cronbachs alpha was .78.
In addition to the four multi-item measures, several employee characteristic variables
were included in the model. This was done to see if the hypothesized relationships
would hold when these variables were included. The inclusion of such variables is also
consistent with previous PSM research (e.g., Bright 2008; Kim 2012b).
The following employee characteristics were in the model: gender (male = 1;
Downloaded by [University of York] at 00:48 19 January 2016

female = 0), minority (minority = 1; non-minority = 0), tenure (actual years with
current agency), and managerial status (supervisor, manager, or senior official = 1;
employee = 0). Similar to others, here the focus is on the relationships between the
main and hypothesized factors, without discussing the effects of employee character-
istics. However, the coefficients for these variables will be shown.

Survey characteristics

Mean characteristics were obtained for the sample. Men represented 60.0 per cent of the
sample, while minorities represented 19.1 per cent. The typical respondent was 49.2 years
old and had been in the current agency for 13.9 years. Respondents were very educated,
overall. For instance, 64.9 per cent had completed at least a bachelors degree. Finally, 43.8
per cent of respondents were a supervisor, manager, or senior-level employee.
The fact that 60.0 per cent of respondents were men and that 64.9 per cent attained
a bachelors degree indicates that women and employees without a bachelors degree
were underrepresented in the sample. For instance, 47.3 per cent of federal govern-
ment employees were women (U.S. Office of Personnel Management n.d), whereas
59.2 and 57.8 per cent were women in state and local governments, respectively,
around the time of the survey (Congressional Research Service 2011). Furthermore,
57, 52, and 46 per cent of state, local, and federal government employees held a
bachelors degree (Congressional Research Services 2011). Therefore, caution should
be used when generalizing the results. Even though the sample does not perfectly match
the characteristics of US government employees, the underrepresentation is not
expected to be a major concern, as this research is more interested in associations
between factors (Andersen and Kjeldsen 2013).

RESULTS

Since multiple mediations were examined in a single model, structural equation

modelling (SEM) was utilized. SEM is deemed appropriate when performing such
 Caillier: Goal clarity and PSM 309

Table 1: Means, standard deviations, bivariate correlations, and Cronbachs alphas

Mean Standard deviation 1 2 3 4

Goal clarity 5.445 1.209 (.74)

PSM 5.767 0.915 .183* (.84)
Organizational commitment 5.056 1.438 .550* .354* (.90)
Extra-role behaviours 5.891 0.878 .318* .565* .458* (.78)

Notes: Cronbachs alphas are in parentheses.

*Correlation is significant at the 0.01.
Downloaded by [University of York] at 00:48 19 January 2016

tests (Baron and Kenny 1986). However, before SEM can be conducted, several
conditions must be met. First, Table 1 shows that none of the multi-item measures
were highly correlated. Second, variance inflation factors (VIFs) were obtained, and
they were all below 2. Since 10 or higher is problematic (Neter, Wasserman, and
Kuter 1990), the VIFs obtained here demonstrate that multicollinearity was not a
concern. Skewness and Kurtosis univariate values were also well below 2.0 and 7.0,
respectively, which is what Curran, West, and Finch (1996) recommended. Next, a
confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted on the measures. The fit indices from
the CFA indicated that they were ideal, thus suggesting convergent and discriminate
validity. For instance, Chi-square was 485.935 with 98 degrees of freedom (p = .00),
comparative fit index (CFI) .956, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA)
.066, and standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) .044. Moreover, all items
had statistically significant (p = .00) and acceptable loadings on their respective latent
variables (.633.904). In addition, a factor analysis with Varimax rotation method was
conducted on the items. It revealed that four components were extracted and that each
item loaded on their respective measure. Hence, these tests suggest that SEM is an
appropriate estimator.
The fit indices for the SEM model suggest that it fit the data well. For instance, CFI
(.959), RMSEA (.053), and SRMR (.041) achieved better than ideal results (Hu and
Bentler 1999). However, the chi square was significant (28.665, df = 8; p = .00),
which could indicate a poor fit. This is not problematic, as this test is too sensitive to
sample sizes as large as this one (Cohen et al. 2003). It is also too sensitive to model
complexity. Moreover, Williams, Vandenberg, and Edwards (2009) suggest that fit
quality should be determined only by CFI, RMSEA, and SRMR.
The results for the SEM analysis are shown in Table 2. Consistent with Hypothesis
1, goal clarity was positively associated with PSM (B = .163; p < .001). Goal clarity
was also found to have a direct, positive relationship with organizational commitment
( = .499; p < .001) and extra-role behaviours (B = .115; p < .001). This supports
Hypotheses 2 and 5, respectively. PSM was hypothesized to have a positive relationship
with both organizational commitment (Hypothesis 3) and extra-role behaviours
(Hypothesis 6). Since PSM was robustly associated with organizational commitment
 310 Public Management Review

Table 2: Estimates for model

Model paths Standard error B p

Goal clarity fi PSM 0.122 0.025 0.163 ***

PSM fi organizational commitment 0.376 0.043 0.238 ***
Male fi organizational commitment 0.020 0.078 0.007 0.800
Manager fi organizational commitment 0.405 0.080 0.140 ***
Minority fi organizational commitment 0.050 0.095 0.014 0.600
Goal clarity fi organizational commitment 0.588 0.032 0.499 ***
Tenure fi organizational commitment 0.012 0.004 0.085 0.002
Downloaded by [University of York] at 00:48 19 January 2016

PSM fi extra-role behaviours 0.436 0.027 0.454 ***

Goal clarity fi extra-role behaviours 0.083 0.022 0.115 ***
Minority fi Extra-role behaviours 0.009 0.057 0.004 0.876
Manager fi Extra-role behaviours 0.273 0.049 0.155 ***
Male fi Extra-role behaviours 0.051 0.046 0.029 0.270
Tenure fi Extra-role behaviours 0.006 0.002 0.069 0.009
Organizational commitment fi extra-role behaviours 0.130 0.020 0.213 ***

Note: ***p < .001.

(B = .238; p < .001) and extra-role behaviours (B = .454; p < .001), the findings lend
support to both those hypotheses.
To determine if PSM mediated the relationship between goal clarity and both
organizational commitment and extra-role behaviours, a bootstrap test was conducted.
Bootstrapping is a technique that estimates the amount of impact a predictor has on an
outcome variable through a mediating variable. In other words, it estimates the indirect
effects in mediation. The bootstrapping test found that goal clarity had an effect on the
outcome variables (i.e., organizational commitment and extra-role behaviours) through
PSM, with both effects being significant at the .001 level. Thus, Hypotheses 4 and 7 were
confirmed. The amount of the standardized mediated effect was .039 for organizational
commitment and .074 for extra-role behaviours. Hence goal clarity had a stronger
mediated effect on extra-role behaviours than it did on organizational commitment.

DISCUSSION

What do these results mean? First, similar to Camilleri (2007), goal clarity was
positively associated with PSM. This finding suggests that when employee expectations
are understood, they have higher levels of PSM than when their expectations are not
clear. A possible reason for this finding could be that the presence of clear goals affords
public servants the ability to see just how their work contributes to the betterment of
society, thus increasing their PSM levels. In this view, goal clarity can trigger the
 Caillier: Goal clarity and PSM 311

altruistic motives government employees have. This is important because public sector
employees place a high value on service that benefits society (Crewson 1997; Houston
2000). It could also be that high to average goal clarity does not enhance PSM, but rather
that role ambiguity, or low goal clarity, reduces employee desires to serve society. Goal
clarity would therefore have diminishing returns. This would mean that the relationship
between goal clarity and PSM is curvilinear. That is, it is not linear or does not depict a
straight line. To further clarify this relationship, research should examine goal clarity and
PSM to determine at which levels clear goals impact altruistic motives.
Second, goal clarity was found to be positively associated with both organizational
commitment and extra-role behaviours. Goal clarity has a positive effect on commit-
Downloaded by [University of York] at 00:48 19 January 2016

ment, for the possible reason that role clarity removes stress that employees have in
completing their tasks. As a result, their level of attachment to the organization
increases (Adae, Parboteeah, and Velinor 2008). This connection is also consistent
with the findings of previous research (Adae, Parboteeah, and Velinor 2008; Caillier,
2012; Chenevert et al. 2013) and with the model developed by Kahn et al. (1964).
Furthermore, goal clarity was found to have an effect on extra-role behaviours, because
employees are able to devote more time to their work when their expectations are
clear. This is also consistent with role episode model (Kahn et al. 1964). Given the
connection between extra-role behaviours and in-role performance, goal clarity may
also increase the performance of workers because clarity gives them the ability to
concentrate more on their tasks (Hoffman et al. 2007).
Third, PSM was found to mediate the relationship between goal clarity and both
organizational commitment and extra-role behaviours. For instance, when the roles of
employees are clear in public agencies, they are able to contribute to the societal-
oriented missions of agencies. Since such missions are consistent with the values of
individuals working in public agencies, their attachment to the organization is likely to
be enhanced. In other words, goal clarity enhances the altruism derived from helping
fulfil the purpose of public organizations, which in turn increases their commitment to
the agency. Goal clarity is also likely to impact extra-role behaviours in a similar way.
That is, as employee roles are made clear, they are able to devote more time to work
that is consistent with their values. The result is that their altruistic motives are
triggered, causing them to put more effort into their work.
These findings highlight the importance of goal clarity in organizations. To improve
goal clarity, and thus eliminate role ambiguity, Bauer and Simmon (n.d.) put forth
three recommendations. Organizations can first communicate roles beginning with the
mission and then work downwards to each employee. This would include a clearly
defined job description based on the tasks the organization actually wants, needs, and
values (12). The next step organizations can take is to provide employees with periodic
training. The last step organizations can undertake to ensure roles are clear is to
recognize employees when they are performing their duties correctly and correct them
when they are not. Doing so will inevitably result in more communication of expecta-
tions between supervisors and employees.
 312 Public Management Review

In the light of these findings, there are several limitations to consider. Since the
data were cross-sectional in nature, causation cannot be determined. For instance, it
is quite possible that PSM has an effect on goal clarity. Even though reverse
causation cannot be ruled out, it is reasonable to believe that goal clarity enhances
organizational commitment and extra-role behaviours, by first increasing the altruis-
tic motives of employees. Next, the data were derived from one source, meaning
single-source bias was possible. While single-source bias is a concern and cannot be
fully eliminated in cross-sectional surveys, the factor analysis suggests that it is not
serious. It is also possible that workers answered questions in a way that they felt
the author wanted them to (social desirability). That occurrence was mitigated by
Downloaded by [University of York] at 00:48 19 January 2016

the fact that the survey was anonymous and that it was conducted electronically.
For instance, respondents tend to be detached from the survey administrator in
electronic surveys, leading to a more truthful response (e.g., Silber, Lischewski,
and Leibold 2013). In the future, research can reduce the occurrence of these
limitations by employing an experimental design and obtaining data from multiple
sources. The sample also did not match the characteristics of public employees. As
mentioned, women and employees without a bachelors degree were underrepre-
sented in the sample. Nevertheless, there is no indication that the findings would be
any different if the study was completely representative (Anderson and Kjeldsen
2013). Since the data set was derived from public sector employees in the United
States, the findings may not necessarily generalize to other cultures. For instance,
Kim (2012b) examined PSM and personorganization fit in Korea and found results
that were different than similar research in the United States (Bright 2008). The
authors reasoning was that unlike the United States, PSM does not function as an
effective sorting mechanism in Korea (8367). That is, employees with high PSM
do not self-select. Caution should therefore be used when generalizing the results of
this study to other cultures. Another limitation was that a short measure of PSM
was utilized, which meant PSM was treated as a uni-dimensional construct as
opposed to the multi-dimensional one developed by Perry (1996). Although
Camilleri (2007) demonstrated that role ambiguity was inversely related to the
PSM dimensions public policy, public interest, compassion, and self-sacrifice, it
would be interesting and worthwhile to replicate that study. It would also be
beneficial to see if the impact between goal clarity and each dimension of PSM
accrues to the attitudes of workers in the public sector. Finally, information
regarding the organization (e.g., purpose) and employees (e.g., types of jobs and
tasks) were not included in the questionnaire. Thus, the results represent all
organizations and employee duties, generally. This should be noted because such
factors may have affected PSM and the dependent variables in the model, thus
possibly diminishing or alleviating the impact of goal clarity and PSM on commit-
ment and extra-role behaviours.
 Caillier: Goal clarity and PSM 313

CONCLUSION

In accordance with principalagent theory, managers develop contracts and then hire
workers to fulfil the contract. If the expectations in the contract are communicated
clearly, employee attitudes should be positively affected (Kahn et al. 1964). Despite the
utility of this proposition in agencies (Rainey 2009), few have examined the ways in
which such clear expectations can be channelled to employees. This article therefore
investigated the relationship between goal clarity and PSM. In so doing, seven hypoth-
eses were developed and each one was confirmed by the SEM model. Though each
finding was important, the main one was that in addition to having a direct effect on
Downloaded by [University of York] at 00:48 19 January 2016

work attitudes, goal clarity was also found to have an indirect effect. More specifically,
this article extends principalagent theory, as well as PSM theories, by suggesting that
goal clarity can have a positive effect on employee attitudes and behaviours (i.e.,
organizational commitment and extra-role behaviours) through PSM. Thus, it explains
an additional way goal clarity can affect work attitudes.

NOTE
1 It is worth noting that government workers do not necessarily earn less than private sector employees. The
Congressional Budget Office (2012) conducted a study on total compensation (i.e., wages and benefits) of
workers in the private and public sector. They found that workers with a high school diploma and workers
with a bachelors degree earned more than their private sector counterparts. On the other hand, workers with
a professional degree or doctorate earned less in the federal government.

REFERENCES
Adae, H. M., K. P. Parboteeah, and N. Velinor. 2008. Role Stressors and Organizational Commitment: Public
Sector Employment in St. Lucia. International Journal of Manpower 29 (6): 567582.
Alonso, P., and G. B. Lewis. 2001. Public Service Motivation and Job Performance: Evidence from the Federal
Sector. The American Review of Public Administration 31 (4): 363380. doi:10.1177/02750740122064992.
Anderson, L. B., and A. M. Kjeldsen. 2013. Public Service Motivation, User Orientation, and Job Satisfaction:
A Question of Employment Sector. International Public Management Journal 16 (2): 252274.
Antn, C. 2009. The Impact of Role Stress on Workers Behavior through Job Satisfaction and Organizational
Commitment. International Journal of Psychology 44 (3): 187194. doi:10.1080/00207590701700511.
Balfour, D., and B. Wechsler. 1996. Organizational Commitment: Antecedents and Outcomes in Public
Organizations. Public Productivity and Management Review 19 (3): 256277. doi:10.2307/3380574.
Baron, R. M., and D. A. Kenny. 1986. The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological
Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
51: 11731182. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173.
Bass, B. M., and R. E. Riggio. 2006. Transformational Leadership. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bauer, J. C., and P. R. Simmon. n.d. Role Ambiguity: A Review and Integration of the Literature. Accessed
May 12, 2014. http://www.docstoc.com/docs/74932720/Role-Ambiguity-A-review-and-Intergration-
Of-The-Literature
 314 Public Management Review

Bosselut, G., J. Heuz, M. A. Eys, P. Fontayne, and P. Sarrazin. 2012. Athletes Perceptions of Role Ambiguity
and Coaching Competency in Sport Teams: A Multilevel Analysis. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology
34: 345364.
Bowling, N. 2010. Effects of Job Satisfaction and Conscientiousness on Extra-Role Behaviors. Journal of Business
and Psychology 25 (1): 119130. doi:10.1007/s10869-009-9134-0.
Brewer, G. A., and S. C. Selden. 2000. Why Elephants Gallop: Assessing and Predicting Organizational
Performance in Federal Agencies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 10 (4): 685712.
doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a024287.
Bright, L. 2008. Does Public Service Motivation Really Make a Difference on the Job Satisfaction and Turnover
Intentions of Public Employees? The American Review of Public Administration 38 (2): 149166.
doi:10.1177/0275074008317248.
Byrne, A., A. M. Dionisi, J. Barling, A. Akers, J. Robertson, R. Lys, J. Wylie, and K. Dupr. 2014. The
Downloaded by [University of York] at 00:48 19 January 2016

Depleted Leader: The Influence of Leaders Diminished Psychological Resources on Leadership

Behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly 25 (2): 344357. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.09.003.
Caillier, J. G. 2014a. Do Transformational Leaders Affect Turnover Intentions and Extra-Role Behaviors
through Mission Valence? American Review of Public Administration. doi:10.1177/0275074014551751.
Caillier, J. G. 2014b. Linking Transformational Leadership to Self-Efficacy, Extra-Role Behaviors, and Turnover
Intentions in Public Agencies: The Mediating Role of Goal Clarity. Administration & Society. doi:10.1177/
0095399713519093.
Caillier, J. G. 2014c. Towards a Better Understanding of Public Service Motivation and Mission Valence in
Public Agencies. Public Management Review. doi:10.1080/14719037.2014.895033.
Caillier, J. G. 2012. The Impact of Teleworking on Work Motivation in a U.S. Federal Government Agency.
The American Review of Public Administration 42 (4): 461480. doi:10.1177/0275074011409394.
Camilleri, E. 2006. Towards Developing an Organisational Commitment Public Service Motivation Model for
the Maltese Public Service Employees. Public Policy and Administration 21 (1): 6383. doi:10.1177/
095207670602100105.
Camilleri, E. 2007. Antecedents Affecting Public Service Motivation. Personnel Review 36 (3): 356377.
doi:10.1108/00483480710731329.
Castaing, S. 2006. The Effects of Psychological Contract Fulfilment and Public Service Motivation on
Organizational Commitment in the French Civil Service. Public Policy and Administration 21 (1): 84
98. doi:10.1177/095207670602100106.
Chenevert, D. V., C. Doucet, B. A. Ayed, and A. Khalil. 2013. Passive Leadership, Role Stressors, and
Affective Organizational Commitment: A Time-Lagged Study among Health Care Employees. European
Review of Applied Psychology 63 (5): 277286. doi:10.1016/j.erap.2013.07.002.
Christensen, R. K., S. W. Whiting, T. Im, E. Rho, J. M. Stritch, and J. Park. 2013. Public Service Motivation,
Task, and Non-Task Behavior: A Performance Appraisal Experiment with Korean MPA and MBA
Students. International Public Management Journal 16 (1): 2852. doi:10.1080/10967494.2013.796257.
Chu, C., M. Lee, and H. Hsu. 2006. The Impact of Social Support and Job Stress on Public Health Nurses
Organizational Citizenship Behaviors in Rural Taiwan. Public Health Nursing 23: 496505. doi:10.1111/
j.1525-1446.2006.00599.x.
Cohen, J., P. Cohen, S. G. West, and L. S. Aiden. 2003. Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the
Behavioral Sciences. 3rd ed. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Congressional Budget Office. 2012. Comparing the Compensation of Federal and Private-Sector Employees.
Accessed September 16, 2014. http://www.cbo.gov/publication/42921
Congressional Research Services. 2011. Selected Characteristics of Private and Public Sector Workers.
Accessed March 5, 2014. http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41897.pdf
 Caillier: Goal clarity and PSM 315

Crewson, P. E. 1997. Public Service Motivation: Building Empirical Evidence of Incidence and Effect. Journal of
Public Administration Research and Theory 7 (4): 499518. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a024363.
Curran, P. J., S. G. West, and J. F. Finch. 1996. The Robustness of Test Statistics to Nonnormality and
Specification Error in Confirmatory Factor Analysis. Psychological Methods 1 (1): 1629. doi:10.1037/
1082-989X.1.1.16.
Eatough, E. M., C. Chang, S. A. Miloslavic, and R. E. Johnson. 2011. Relationships of Role Stressors with
Organizational Citizenship Behavior: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology 96 (3): 619632.
doi:10.1037/a0021887.
Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Agency Theory: An Assessment and Review. Academy of Management Review 14 (1):
5774.
Hoffman, B. J., C. A. Blair, J. P. Meriac, and D. J. Woehr. 2007. Expanding the Criterion Domain? A
Quantitative Review of the OCB Literature. Journal of Applied Psychology 92: 555566. doi:10.1037/
Downloaded by [University of York] at 00:48 19 January 2016

0021-9010.92.2.555.
Hoonakker, P., and P. Carayon. 2009. Questionnaire Survey Nonresponse: A Comparison of Postal Mail and
Internet Surveys. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 25 (5): 348373. doi:10.1080/
10447310902864951.
Houston, D. J. 2000. Public Service Motivation: A Multivariate Test. Journal of Public Administration Research and
Theory 10 (4): 713728. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a024288.
Hu, L., and P. M. Bentler. 1999. Cutoff Criteria for Fit Indexes in Covariance Structure Analysis: Conventional
Criteria versus New Alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 6: 155.
doi:10.1080/10705519909540118.
Kahn, R. L., D. M. Wolfe, R. P. Quinn, D. J. Snoek, and R. A. Rosenthal. 1964. Organizational Stress: Studies in
Role Conflict and Ambiguity. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.
Kettl, D. F. 2014. Politics of the Administrative Process. 6th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: CQ Press.
Kim, H. 2012a. Transformational Leadership and Organisational Citizenship Behavior in the Public Sector in
South Korea: The Mediating Role of Affective Commitment. Local Government Studies 38: 867892.
doi:10.1080/03003930.2012.707617.
Kim, S. 2005. Individual-Level Factors and Organizational Performance in Government Organizations. Journal
of Public Administration Research and Theory 15: 245262.
Kim, S. 2006. Public Service Motivation and Organizational Citizenship Behavior in Korea. International Journal
of Manpower 27 (8): 722740. doi:10.1108/01437720610713521.
Kim, S. 2011. Testing a Revised Measure of Public Service Motivation: Reflective versus Formative Specification.
Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 21 (3): 521546. doi:10.1093/jopart/muq048.
Kim, S. 2012b. Does Person-Organization Fit Matter in the Public Sector? Testing the Mediating Effect of
Person-Organization Fit in the Relationship between Public Service Motivation and Work Attitudes.
Public Administration Review 72 (6): 830840.
Kim, S., and W. Vandenabeele. 2010. A Strategy for Building Public Service Motivation Research
Internationally. Public Administration Review 70 (5): 701709. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2010.02198.x.
Kim, S., W. Vandenabeele, B. E. Wright, L. B. Anderson, F. P. Cerase, R. K. Christensen, C. Desmarais, et al.
2013. Investigating the Structure and Meaning of Public Service Motivation across Populations:
Developing an International Instrument and Addressing Issues of Measurement Invariance. Journal of
Public Administration Research and Theory 23 (1): 79102. doi:10.1093/jopart/mus027.
LePine, J. A., A. Erez, and D. E. Johnson. 2002. The Nature and Dimensionality of Organizational Citizenship
Behavior: A Critical Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology 87 (1): 5265.
doi:10.1037/0021-9010.87.1.52.
Leung, A. 2007. Matching Ethical Work Climate to In-Role and Extra-Role Behaviors in a Collectivist Work
Setting. Journal of Business Ethics 79 (1/2): 4355.
 316 Public Management Review

Lewis, G. B., and S. A. Frank. 2002. Who Wants to Work for the Government? Public Administration Review 62
(4): 395404. doi:10.1111/0033-3352.00193.
Meyer, J. P., N. J. Allen, and C. Smith. 1993. Commitment to Organizations and Occupations: Extension and
Test of a Three-Component Conceptualization. Journal of Applied Psychology 78 (4): 538551.
doi:10.1037/0021-9010.78.4.538.
Meyer, J. P., D. J. Stanley, L. Herscovitch, and L. Topolnytsky. 2002. Affective, Continuance, and Normative
Commitment to the Organization: A Meta-Analysis of Antecedents, Correlates, and Consequences.
Journal of Vocational Behavior 61 (1): 2052. doi:10.1006/jvbe.2001.1842.
Moynihan, D. P., and S. K. Pandey. 2007a. The Role of Organizations in Fostering Public Service Motivation.
Public Administration Review 67 (1): 4053. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00695.x.
Moynihan, D. P., and S. K. Pandey. 2007b. Finding Workable Levers over Work Motivation: Comparing Job
Satisfaction, Job Involvement, and Organizational Commitment. Administration & Society 39 (7): 803
Downloaded by [University of York] at 00:48 19 January 2016

832. doi:10.1177/0095399707305546.
Neter, J., W. Wasserman, and M. H. Kuter. 1990. Applied Linear Statistical Models: Regression, Analysis of Variance,
and Experimental Designs. 3rd ed. Burr Ridge, IL: Irwin.
Onyemah, V. 2008. Role Ambiguity, Role Conflict, and Performance: Empirical Evidence of an Inverted-U
Relationship. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management 28: 299314. doi:10.2753/PSS0885-
3134280306.
Organ, D. W., P. M. Podsakoff, and S. P. MacKenzie. 2006. Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Its Nature,
Antecedents, and Consequences. London: Sage.
Pandey, S. K., and B. E. Wright. 2006. Connecting the Dots in Public Management: Political Environment,
Organizational Goal Ambiguity, and the Public Managers Role Ambiguity. Journal of Public Administration
Research and Theory 16 (4): 511532. doi:10.1093/jopart/muj006.
Pandey, S. K., B. E. Wright, and D. P. Moynihan. 2008. Public Service Motivation and Interpersonal
Citizenship Behavior in Public Organizations: Testing a Preliminary Model. International Public
Management Journal 11 (1): 89108. doi:10.1080/10967490801887947.
Perry, J. L. 1996. Measuring Public Service Motivation: An Assessment of Construct Reliability and Validity.
Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 6 (1): 522. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a024303.
Perry, J. L., and A. Hondeghem. 2008. Motivation in Public Management: The Call of Public Service. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Perry, J. L., A. Hondeghem, and L. R. Wise. 2010. Revisiting the Motivational Bases of Public Service: Twenty
Years of Research and an Agenda for the Future. Public Administration Review 70 (5): 681690.
doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2010.02196.x.
Perry, J. L., and L. R. Wise. 1990. The Motivational Bases of Public Service. Public Administration Review 50
(3): 367373. doi:10.2307/976618.
Piccolo, R. F., and J. A. Colquitt. 2006. Transformational Leadership and Job Behaviors: The Mediating Role of
Core Job Characteristics. Academy of Management Journal 49 (2): 327340. doi:10.5465/
AMJ.2006.20786079.
Rainey, H. G. 1982. Reward Preferences among Public and Private Managers: In Search of the Service Ethic.
The American Review of Public Administration 16 (4): 288302. doi:10.1177/027507408201600402.
Rainey, H. G. 2009. Understanding and Managing Public Organizations. 4th ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Resick, C. J., M. B. Hargis, P. Shao, and S. B. Dust. 2013. Ethical Leadership, Moral Equity Judgments, and
Discretionary Workplace Behavior. Human Relations 66 (7): 951972. doi:10.1177/0018726713481633.
Sawyer, J. E. 1992. Goal and Process Clarity: Specification of Multiple Constructs of Role Ambiguity and a
Structural Equation Model of Their Antecedents and Consequences. Journal of Psychology 77: 130142.
Shih, T., and X. F. Fan. 2008. Comparing Response Rates from Web and Mail Surveys: A Meta-Analysis. Field
Methods 20 (3): 249271. doi:10.1177/1525822X08317085.
 Caillier: Goal clarity and PSM 317

Silber, H., J. Lischewski, and J. Leibold. 2013. Comparing Different Types of Web Surveys: Examining Drop-
Outs, Non-Response and Social Desirability. Advances in Methodology and Statistics 10 (2): 121143.
Taylor, J. 2008. Organizational Influences, Public Service Motivation and Work Outcomes: An Australian
Study. International Public Management Journal 11 (1): 6788. doi:10.1080/10967490801887921.
Tubre, T. C., and J. M. Collins. 2000. Jackson and Schuler (1985) Revisited: A Meta-Analysis of the
Relationships between Role Ambiguity, Role Conflict, and Job Performance. Journal of Management 26
(1): 155169. doi:10.1016/S0149-2063(99)00035-5.
U.S. Office of Personnel Management. n.d. Fedscope: Federal Human Resources Data. Accessed March 7,
2014. http://www.fedscope.opm.gov/
Waterman, R. W., and K. J. Meier. 1998. Principal-Agent Models: An Expansion? Journal of Public
Administration Research and Theory 8 (2): 173202. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a024377.
Williams, L. J., R. J. Vandenberg, and J. R. Edwards. 2009. Structural Equation Modeling in Management
Downloaded by [University of York] at 00:48 19 January 2016

Research: A Guide for Improved Analysis. The Academy of Management Annals 3 (1): 543604.
doi:10.1080/19416520903065683.
Witmer, D. 1991. Serving the People or Serving for Pay: A Comparative Study of Values and Reward
Preferences among Managers in Government, Business and Hybrid Organizations. Public Productivity
and Management Review 14: 369383.
Wright, B. E., D. P. Moynihan, and S. K. Pandey. 2012. Pulling the Levers: Transformational Leadership,
Public Service Motivation, and Mission Valence. Public Administration Review 72 (2): 206215.
doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02496.x.
Wright, B. E., and S. K. Pandey. 2008. Public Service Motivation and the Assumption of Person-Organization
Fit: Testing the Mediating Effect of Value Congruence. Administration and Society 40 (5): 502521.
doi:10.1177/0095399708320187.
Zhu, W., R. E. Riggio, B. J. Avolio, and J. J. Sosik. 2011. The Effect of Leadership on Follower Moral
Identity: Does Transformational/Transactional Style Make a Difference? Journal of Leadership and
Organizational Studies 18 (2): 150163.

Appendix

Goal Clarity (Sawyer 1992)

My duties and responsibilities are clear.

The goals and objectives for my job are clear.
It is clear how my work relates to the overall objectives of my work unit.
The expected results of my work are clear.
It is clear what aspects of my work will lead to positive evaluations.

PSM (Perry 1996)

Meaningful public service is important to me.
I am often reminded by daily events how dependent we are on one another.
Making a difference in society means more to me than personal achievements.
I am prepared to make enormous sacrifices for the good of society.
I am not afraid to go to bat for the rights of others even if it means I will be
ridiculed.
 318 Public Management Review

Affective Commitment (Meyer, Allen, and Smith 1993)

I feel a strong sense of belonging to my organization.

My organization has a great deal of personal meaning for me.
I feel like part of the family in my organization.

Extra-Role Behaviours (Balfour and Wechsler 1996)

I volunteer for tasks that are not required.
I make suggestions to improve the organization.
I am willing to put in a great deal of effort beyond what is normally expected in
Downloaded by [University of York] at 00:48 19 January 2016

order to help the organization be successful.