Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment of Teacher-Researchers through Organizational Citizenship Behavior: A Literature Review ()
1. Introduction
The success of an organization depends on people giving freely of their time and energy to achieve the work they are given. This behavior is neither prescribed nor required, but it contributes to the smooth functioning of the organization (DiPaola & Tschannen-Moran, 2001) . As educational organizations, higher education institutions have come to believe that their staff, especially their teachers, are the most important base for determining teaching development and academic excellence (Oplatka, 2009; Saleem et al., 2017) . They have also realized that one of the most practical and effective solutions to the problems that the academic world faces, is citizenship behavior, which is a key factor in the survival and performance of the organization (Bogler & Somech, 2004) .
In Morocco and since the 2000s, the university landscape has been transformed by a vast movement of reforms coupled with new rules being enforced on institutions, and therefore on teacher-researchers, in terms of recruitment, promotion, mobility or even the valorization of activities. These evolutions could disrupt the way organizations should manage the careers of individuals and also the way individuals themselves perceive the management of their careers (Cuisinier et al., 2006; Drucker-Godard et al., 2013; Gatignol, 2014, 2015) .
In an uncertain environment, marked by a general trend toward resource restrictions, and where there are many concerns about the opportunities available to higher education faculty, how can universities bring out the best in their teachers? How can their potential be enhanced in a demotivating environment? How do teachers react and cope with this changing and recomposed representation that is offered to them? And to what extent can these teachers engage in discretionary extra-role behavior and go beyond the minimum in order to overcome an unfavorable environment and contribute to the improvement and development of their performance as well as that of the organization? Such purposeful questions, whose answers are the subject of considerable research, fall within the field of positive organizational learning (positive organizational behavior).
Firstly, the aim of this study is to gain a better understanding of organizational citizenship behavior in order to contribute to an updated review of the existing literature on this phenomenon and its conceptualization, and to better frame the subject for further in-depth research. Secondly, based on what was found in a review of the available literature, both the concept and theory of OCB were developed from a considered theoretical framework. The basis for this theoretical examination will be social exchange theory, a sociological perspective, as a lens to view the subject. Thirdly, this paper will highlight the main advances concerning the conceptual framework of the phenomenon, the research objects, the methodologies used, the main results encountered, and the main paths for future research. Lastly, the fundamental objective of this study is to raise awareness of OCB as a significant solution to the problems faced by Moroccan universities today. Universities are also organizations that need adequate processes and performance from their teachers to achieve their goals.
In the upcoming sections, the first one will be devoted to an analysis of the daily experience of the Moroccan teacher-researcher and the evolution of his career path in a changing academic environment. The second section will be dedicated to the examination of organizational citizenship behavior in higher education, its historical conceptualization and antecedents within the framework of social exchange theory. Subsequently, the relationship between job satisfaction and organizational commitment with OCB in academia will be examined through a review of the literature. Finally, a discussion of all the synopses from the literature review and future research directions will be included at the end of the paper.
2. The Career of the Moroccan Teacher-Researcher in a Changing Academic Environment
The Moroccan university proceeded in 20031, through the adoption of the Bachelor-Master-Doctorate (LMD) system within the Bologna process2, to a new pedagogical architecture of higher education that is more readable and meets international standards while harmonizing it with the European system. This adoption, despite some significant achievements, has been handicapped by a triptych of constraints represented essentially by an unanticipated and poorly managed massification, a demobilization or even demotivation of the actors who are in a situation of radical change resulting from a global reform, and the lack of awareness of teachers towards this change (National Instance for the Evaluation of the Education, Training and Scientific Research System (INE, 2018) ). In addition to formal teaching activities, the LMD reform has contributed to the emergence of new modes of tutoring, supervision and work, to which administrative tasks are added3. The division of the teacher-researcher’s job between teaching, administration and research has led to a redefinition of his job with the emergence of new criteria for evaluating their professional career (Ghouati, 2012; Ungar, 2016) .
It is important to note that the management of human resources, through all aspects of the professional life of teacher-researchers (career, training, working conditions, recruitment, etc.), must imperatively be in line with the overall strategy of the educational entity. In Morocco, the career path of teacher-researchers has never been so restrictive. Starting with their recruitment, it is a long process weighed down mainly by paperwork, which takes an average of two years and penalizes institutions that must respond quickly to the needs of the teaching staff (Bourqia, 2009; Na, 2021) . As for the career advancement procedure, it assumes that the activities of teacher-researchers are of great importance. However, the promotion criteria4 are poorly defined, lack precision and do not really encourage clarity in the evaluation of teachers (Cherkaoui, 2015) . A quantitative survey of university teachers revealed that their level of dissatisfaction is so high that it reaches 75% of them (Cherkaoui, 2011) . Such an alarming result leaves no doubt about the deep malaise of academics (Cherkaoui & Bourqia, 2008; Bourqia, 2009; Cherkaoui, 2015) . Moreover, their social status does not give them much prestige5. The massification of higher education in the 1990s, combined with the employment crisis, has led to a deterioration of the teacher’s place in society (Bourqia, 2009) .
Despite two decades of reforms combined with various salutary efforts by the Ministry, the Moroccan university has not managed yet to take its place in the big league. Apart from their presence in certain regional competitions, which has enabled some Moroccan higher education institutions to obtain honorable positions, they still struggle to make their mark in prestigious rankings (Bouhalba et al., 2019; Ibrahimi, 2021; Barki, 2021) . This leads us to question a key point when examining higher education and research in Morocco: how is it that one reform after another fails to make the university truly evolve?
3. Organizational Citizenship Behavior in Higher Education
It appears that higher education budgets and various educational reforms do not stand out as the most important determinants of university effectiveness. Today, organizations truly need employees who work voluntarily, tolerate limited resources and unfavorable situations, avoid negativity, share their expertise, and explore unprecedented developments to improve organizational efficiency (Ghouati, 2012) . This has been referred to as organizational citizenship behavior.
3.1. Historical Conceptualization
The relationship between job satisfaction and organizational performance was re-examined by Organ (1977) about 30 years ago, in an effort to differentiate quantitative measures of performance from the more refined qualitative aspects of work. A long tradition of research had not, until then, reached a consensus on the nature of the relationship between job satisfaction and performance, despite its practical relevance and apparent validity. Subsequently, Organ (1988) expanded a commonly accepted definition of job performance that focused on behaviors that have positive effects on the psychological, social, and organizational context of work, commonly referred to as organizational citizenship behaviors.
Since 1983, the first empirical studies on citizenship behavior have been published successively to extend Organ’s (1977) conceptualization. The relationship between job satisfaction and qualitative performance (later OCB) was first supported by Bateman & Organ (1983) . Then, an initial measure of citizenship behavior was developed by Smith et al. (1983) , including subscales of helping and compliance. The concept was later deepened by Organ in 1988, who defined OCB as “discretionary individual behavior, not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, which generally promotes the effective and efficient functioning of the organization” (Organ, 1988: p. 4) . Afterwards, he also updated this definition to “contributions to maintaining and enhancing the social and psychological context that supports task performance” (Organ, 1997: p. 91) . With the identification of the discretionary nature of OCB in 2006, Organ et al (2006: p. 34) defined it as “discretionary contributions that go beyond strict description and do not claim a contractual reward from the formal gratification system”.
Starting with Chester Barnard’s first mention of the OCB phenomenon in 1938 as “willingness to cooperate,” a notion that was later developed by Katz and Kahn (1966) to include a distinction between formal in-role behavior and discretionary extra-role behavior that is essential to the proper functioning of the organization, the review of its conceptualization by researchers has allowed us to finally highlight its benefits to organizational functioning and effectiveness according to Table 1.
Thereafter, Podsakoff and colleagues (2000) conducted their study on the reasons why citizenship behaviors can influence organizational effectiveness. These authors summarize that organizational citizenship behaviors would contribute to organizational success by 1) improving the productivity of colleagues and managers, 2) liberating resources that can be used for more productive purposes 3) reducing the need to devote scarce resources to exclusively maintenance functions, 4) helping to coordinate activities within and between work groups, 5) improving the organization’s ability to attract and retain the best employees, 6 increasing the stability of the organization’s performance, and by 7) enabling the organization to adapt more effectively to environmental changes (Podsakoff et al., 2000) .
Among all the proposed conceptualizations of OCB over the years (Bateman & Organ, 1983; Organ, 1988, 1990; Smith et al., 1983; Van Dyne et al., 1994; Williams & Anderson, 1991) , the two conceptualizations developed by Organ (1988, 1990) and Williams and Anderson (1991) are the most popular. Organ (1988) proposed a five-factor model of OCB, namely altruism, courtesy, conscientiousness, civic virtue, and sportsmanship. He later enlarged this model (Organ, 1990) to include two additional dimensions (peacekeeping and cheerleading).
![]()
Table 1. Definitions of organizational citizenship behavior.
In an educational context, another broad conceptualization of OCB was proposed by Williams and Anderson (1991) . They described OCB as a two-dimensional construct, with OCB-I referring to OCB toward individuals and OCB-O referring to OCB toward organizations. Later on, much research has promoted this two-dimensional construct (Jimmieson et al., 2010; Karriker & Williams, 2009) . Indeed, Williams and Anderson’s (1991) categorization incorporates most other OCB-related constructs (Organ, 1990; Borman & Motowidlo, 1997; Graham, 1991; LePine & Van Dyne, 1998; Van Scotter & Motowidlo, 1996; Farh et al., 2004) . Therefore, and because Organ (1997: pp. 94-95) himself seems to be favorably disposed toward this approach, the present study uses Williams and Anderson’s (1991) conceptualization.
3.2. The Antecedents of OCB from the Perspective of Social Exchange Theory
Regardless of the type of organization, there are always members who go the extra mile, act like good soldiers, and quietly engage in positive behaviors. As there are also minimalists who do as little as possible in order to remain a member of the organization. This subsection reviews research on the antecedents of citizenship behavior. Initially, this research focused primarily on dispositional and attitudinal predictors, while recently it has deepened its perspective by considering, at the meso level, social ties and networks as antecedents and, at the macro level, contextual and organizational antecedents. Below, we highlight the most recent advances in the literature, as the previous reviews provide excellent summaries (Organ, 1997; Organ & Ryan, 1995; Podsakoff et al., 2000) .
Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine, and Bacharach (2000) identified several antecedents, including individual characteristics which involve employee attitudes (satisfaction, fairness, organizational commitment, trust in leader), dispositional variables (conscientiousness, agreeableness, positive and negative affectivity), perception of employee role (role ambiguity, role conflict), demographic variables (seniority, gender) and employee capabilities and individual differences (ability/experience/training knowledge, career orientation, need for independence, indifference to rewards); there are again the task characteristics: task feedback, task routinization, and intrinsically satisfying task; there are also organizational characteristics: organizational formalization, organizational inflexibility, advisor and staff support, team cohesiveness, rewards beyond the leader’s control, leader spatial distance, perceived organizational support; and finally the leadership behaviors: “basic” transformational leadership, vision formulation, providing an appropriate model, encouraging acceptance of group goals, high performance expectations, intellectual stimulation, contingent reward behavior, contingent punishment behavior, leader role clarification, leader specification of procedures, leader support behaviors, and leader-member exchange. Previous studies have generally focused on the former four categories. However, Podsakoff and colleagues (2000) reported two main categories of individual characteristics, including employee attitudes and dispositional variables. In light of these findings, some studies investigated the antecedents of OCB through the lens of social exchange theory. Researchers have begun to question the reliance on social exchange as the primary and explanatory framework for OCB.
According to OCB theorists, social exchange has been conceptualized as a type of exchange relationship (Organ, 1988) . Based on this perspective, the employee’s behavior is the result of an exchange relationship. In line with (Deluga, 1994) , exchange relationships can be classified into two broad categories: economic and social. In economic exchanges, the relationship between the employee and the organization/leader tends to be defined by the employment contract. Whereas, in social exchanges, the relationship goes beyond the employment contract to the extent that the employee and the organization/leader are loyal to each other and share mutual feelings of sympathy and respect. By being in a social exchange relationship, the employee is required to reciprocate by demonstrating OCB (Pillai et al., 1999) .
The use of social exchange as an explanatory mechanism has led to the discovery of several important antecedents of OCB. Consistent with previous studies, OCB is the result of employees’ perception of justice, particularly the perception of procedural justice (Deluga, 1994; Pillai et al., 1999) . Although considered a facet of organizational justice, procedural justice reflects an employee’s judgments about the fairness of the decision-making process regarding the attribution of outcomes (Moorman et al., 1993) . Coyle-Shapiro (2002) noted that the central element of social exchange theory is the norm of reciprocity whereby people feel obligated to respond positively to the favorable treatment of others. Employee trust, along with procedural justice, has often been considered an antecedent of OCB. As such, some studies (Pillai et al., 1999; Ertürk, 2007) have found that in a context where the quality of relationships is characterized by social exchange, trust is an important mediator of the relationship between procedural justice and OCB. As defined by Rotter (1967) , trust is the expectation of an individual or group that the word, promise, verbal or written statement of another individual or group can be relied upon.
In their meta-analysis of 55 studies, Organ and Ryan (1995) demonstrated that employee work attitudes predict OCB better than dispositional factors. They stated that OCB is “less constrained by the capabilities and technology of the work process” than by task performance (Organ & Ryan, 1995: p. 775) . They found that job satisfaction and organizational commitment had the strongest relationship with OCB, as did procedural justice and trust. According to Moorman and colleagues (1993) , job satisfaction and organizational commitment are both significant components of the social exchange relationship in the organization, along with procedural justice and trust. This finding was later confirmed by Pillai and colleagues (1999) who also specified that these are possible consequences of procedural justice and trust. Organizational citizenship behavior, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment can all be derived, according to Moorman et al. (1993) , from the positive impressions of fair procedures.
In general, the social exchange relationship in organizations, as previous studies have shown, has some important indicators including procedural justice, trust, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and OCB (Nguyen & Tran, 2022) . However, studies that have used these indicators in different contexts have provided both similar and different results. In an educational context, Somech and Oplatka (2014: p. 45) identify three groups of antecedents that encourage teachers’ willingness to practice OCB in schools. These include individual-level factors, dyadic-level factors, and organizational-level factors. They also recognize two established levels of consequences, namely, individual-level factors and organizational-level factors. These are detailed in Figure 1.
Given the nature and specificity of the context of our study and what has been argued previously, we propose to review some variables within individual characteristics, particularly job satisfaction and organizational commitment, which have been identified as the most frequently studied antecedents and most significantly related to organizational citizenship behavior (Organ & Ryan, 1995) .
3.3. Job Satisfaction and OCB in the University Environment
In every organization, organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) and job satisfaction (JS) are two major factors that contribute to its productivity. For several decades, studies have been conducted to measure the level of job satisfaction (JS) of teachers around the world. As defined by Locke (1976) , job satisfaction is “a pleasant or positive emotional state resulting from the evaluation of one’s work and professional experience” (p. 1304). Intrinsic job satisfaction is related to the work task/activity itself, while extrinsic job satisfaction is the rewards associated with the work activity/task. Most often, teachers who show satisfaction in their work continue to stay and work at the same institution. As a result, the productivity and quality of their work often increases. Conversely, with unsatisfied teachers, a high turnover rate occurs, which affects organizational performance and effectiveness (Abdullah & Akhar, 2016) .
![]()
Figure 1. Antecedents and consequences of organizational citizenship behavior.
Based on Bateman and Organ (1983) and Smith, Organ, and Near (1983) , job satisfaction represents a positive state of mind, and when employees are satisfied with their jobs, they generally engage in positive behavior, including OCB. In their study of two samples from a university, they found that the relationship between job satisfaction and OCB was significantly stronger than the results suggested by research that has examined the relationship between performance and job satisfaction. Since the literature has extensively analyzed the relationship between job satisfaction and OCB and suggested that it is a strong predictor of OCB (Bateman & Organ, 1983; Moorman et al., 1993) , interest in this topic has accelerated dramatically, particularly in the educational context.
In accordance with studies conducted on university teachers in Pakistan, it was found that the relationship between OCB and JS factors is moderately positive and significant, especially towards altruism, courtesy, conscientiousness and civil virtue (Noor, 2009; Ahmad & Shahid, 2020; Shabbir et al., 2021) . A comparison between private and public sector teachers was conducted, and it was found that private sector university teachers display more sportsmanship than their public sector homologues. As far as the satisfaction of public sector university teachers, it was overall higher than that of private sector university teachers. Probably because of several factors, such as job security, benefits, privileges and other facilities offered to public sector teachers (Abdullah & Akhar, 2016) .
Following a study carried out at Hawassa University, Ethiopia, it has been reported that the OCB of university teachers increases when they are provided with job satisfaction mechanisms (Soudikar, 2018) . Hence, to motivate teachers, universities invest in employees’ job satisfaction to achieve their goals and objectives. A study done in an Indian context (Swaminathan & Jawahar, 2013) , clarified that there is a significant relationship between JS and OCB and indicated that many factors influence JS taking in consideration that OCB may not be the only factor. Similarly, Zeinabadi (2010) initiated a study on the relationship between JS, OC, and OCB among 652 teachers and 131 school directors in Iran. This study not only expanded the knowledge on the explanatory power of intrinsic job satisfaction, but also confirmed the important mediating role of value commitment on the construction of OCB of university teachers (Zeinabadi, 2010) .
The literature supports massively the causal presence of satisfaction on engagement and most researchers have studied and found OCB to be an outcome of job satisfaction (Van Scotter et al., 2000; Nguni et al., 2006) , but the causal direction of these variables remains debatable to date. The issue of studying OCB among teachers is more important than surveys conducted in non-educational settings. One study indicated that job satisfaction had a strong impact on OCB-I and OCB-O of Turkish teachers, whereas organizational commitment mediated its effect partially on OCB-I and fully on OCB-O. A result that strongly supports the theory in which organizational commitment is an inclusive construct of job satisfaction (Özaslan, 2019; Sesen & Basim, 2012) .
Zeinabadi and Salehi (2011) proposed a model in which they introduced trust mediation, showing that procedural justice can influence teacher engagement and OCB only through teachers’ job satisfaction. Implementing procedural justice in educational institutions promotes teachers’ job satisfaction. When they are satisfied with their jobs, they are more committed to the institution and, therefore, more engaged in citizenship behaviors. This finding is also consistent with previous studies (Moorman et al., 1993; Clay-Warner et al., 2005) that have added procedural justice as an important antecedent of job satisfaction.
Results from a study of academics working in private arts and sciences universities in India (Uma & Radhamani, 2022) , confirmed the pioneering work in which researchers (Smith et al., 1983; Organ & Ryan, 1995; Organ, 1997) concluded that job satisfaction is the strongest attitudinal component in promoting organizational citizenship behaviors. Indeed, the salary dimension of job satisfaction has been found to predict the behavioral dimensions of OCB. Workload predicts all behavioral dimensions of OCB; as does the physical work environment, which in turn predicts altruism, sportsmanship, and civic virtue; interpersonal relationships also predict conscientiousness and civic virtue; and leadership style predicts altruism and sportsmanship.
3.4. Organizational Commitment and OCB in the University Environment
It is widely recognized that individual professional attitudes play a role in explaining OCB (Organ & Ryan, 1995) and specifically positive organizational behaviors, as they are paramount in creating an environment focused on organizational sustainability and improvement. Teachers’ organizational behavior has different dimensions, including professional commitment (Pfeffer, 1994) , organizational commitment (Bogler & Somdincech, 2004; Fu & Deshpande, 2014) , hierarchical support (Ellen III, Ferris, & Buckley, 2013) , professional involvement (Hallberg & Schaufell, 2006) and organizational citizenship behavior (Taylor & Bogotch, 1994) .
Over the past decade, the concept of organizational commitment has gained popularity in the organizational behavior literature. Studies show that organizational commitment is one of the most frequently examined correlates. It is a determinant of OCB, as it describes behaviors that occur with little expectation of formal organizational rewards for performing (Williams & Anderson, 1991) . Work commitment involves a high level of identification with the organization’s goals and values, a willingness to go the extra mile for the benefit of the organization, and a strong desire to remain a member of it (Mowday et al., 1979) . Numerous research studies have shown that organizational commitment (OC) represents a psychological mechanism that motivates teachers to perform OCB (Meyer et al., 1993; Cohen & Liu, 2011; Cohen, 2006; Ahmad et al., 2014) .
A study of Thai universities shows that teachers experience low affective commitment, medium continuity commitment, and also low normative commitment towards the university. This finding can be justified by the fact that the retention rate of university employees seems to be poor. In addition, the university requires a lot of extra administrative work as it follows the Thai Quality Framework (TQF) for quality control. Teachers sometimes have to fulfill their family responsibilities and it is difficult for them to have a positive attitude towards the tiring and routine paperwork and documentation (Amin et al., 2020; Cheasakul & Varma, 2016) .
Again in the same vein and within the universities in Bangladesh, the results also assured that OC positively anticipates OCB which promotes positive outcomes for teachers, students, and the image of the institution as suggested by Oplatka (2009) . Chughtai and Zafar (2006) emphasized the importance of fostering positive organizational commitment among academic staff as there is a significant correlation between commitment and citizenship behavior. These findings are consistent with previous research (Cohen, 2006; Cohen & Liu, 2011; Ahmad et al., 2014) that reported a positive association between OC and OCB. Within a Romanian university context (Magdalena, 2014) , there are significant relationships between affective commitment and continuity commitment towards OCB. The relationship demonstrated by scholarly studies (Organ & Ryan, 1995) appears to be validated in this study.
By establishing an overall relationship between organizational citizenship behavior and organizational commitment in higher education institutions in Vietnam. A recent study (Nguyen et al., 2022) indicated that the OCB components strongly affect the organizational commitment ones. Although there was a positive effect of the components of OCB on organizational commitment, it was stated that the strongest influence was the helping factor, followed by the organizational compliance factor.
O’Reilly and Chatman (1986) argued for significant relationships between organizational commitment and OCB. These authors found that organizational commitment dimensions, such as identification and internalization, were positively related to OCB. Given that the relationship between job satisfaction and organizational commitment is reciprocal and that with the presence of one, the effect of the other diminishes, organizational commitment can be considered as a mediating variable in the relationship between job satisfaction and OCB (Moorman et al., 1993; Clay-Warner et al., 2005) .
In this regard, some studies have examined the association between organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and OCB in an analytic mediated path model (Nguni et al., 2006; Zeinabadi, 2010) . Meanwhile, one study contributed to the literature by showing that job satisfaction and organizational commitment had a significant impact on OCB and that organizational commitment mediated the relationship between job satisfaction and OCB (Sesen & Basim, 2012) . Job satisfaction and organizational commitment have a positive and significant effect on OCB, which confirms the results of previous studies (Nguni, Sleegers, & Denessen, 2006; Testa, 2001) .
A study conducted among teachers in the Netherlands also made a distinction between OCBI, which focuses on individual benefits, and OCBO, which focuses on organizational benefits. The results showed that the more committed teachers are, the more they show helping behavior towards their individual colleagues (OCBI) and this is only under conditions of low autonomy. The study confirmed the compensatory role of individual characteristics and work context in predicting OCB. The work context, used as an external motivator, can improve the OCBs of teachers with low intrinsic (i.e., committed) motivation to engage in organizational citizenship behaviors (Runhaar et al., 2013) .
4. Discussion
Through our review and examination regarding the daily life of the Moroccan teacher-researcher, we were able to identify several factors of dissatisfaction and lack of commitment among university teachers, such as the higher workload, low motivation, value dissonance, lack of support, scarcity of learning and development opportunities, discouraging process of career advancement, poor salary and working conditions, and the unhealthy relationships with colleagues... (See Figure 2) (Bourqia, 2009; Cherkaoui, 2011; Cherkaoui & Bourqia, 2008; Cherkaoui et al., 2012; Talbi, 2013; Bouhafs, 2021) . Although there have been ongoing attempts to improve the performance of Moroccan teachers and the university as a whole, the results have not met the expectations of the academic system (INE, 2018) . In order to survive, universities cannot rely on teachers who are only good at teaching. The paperwork and research activities involved require a considerable effort beyond their traditional teaching role. They also need to adopt more of a positive attitude and commitment, while tolerating unfavorable and complex situations (DiPaola & Tschannen-Moran, 2001; DiPaola & Hoy, 2005; Organ, 1997; Podsakoff et al., 2000; Zeinabadi, 2010; Zeinabadi & Salehi, 2011) . The literature review allowed us to highlight the scope of organizational citizenship behavior in understanding and overcoming the constraints and demands imposed on Moroccan teacher-researchers by their academic environment (Ahmad & Shahid, 2020; Nugroho et al., 2020; Özaslan, 2019; Sajid & Akhtar, 2020; Shabbir et al., 2021; Soudikar, 2018) .
![]()
Figure 2. The teacher-researcher’s perception of the work environment.
However, analysis of the literature reviews also revealed scattered results at several levels. First, it appears that analysis of the specificity of structural relationships by gender is important, though not considered by the majority of studies, to gain insight into the invariance of outcomes between the two sexes (Zeinabadi, 2010) . Other comparisons can be made between faculty members by discipline, such as economics or management, humanities or law… And can also be based on other demographic details such as age, rank in the institution, departments, teaching experience, seniority in the position, and qualification, as the literature has shown discrepancies in the results regarding the association between demographic variables and OCB (Abdullah & Akhar, 2016; Magdalena, 2014; Posadas et al., 2020; Saleem et al., 2017) . In addition, it is also important to compare the public and private sectors, since previous studies have shown some dispersion in results (Abdullah & Akhar, 2016; Dinc, 2017; DiPaola & Hoy, 2005) . The OCB and job satisfaction levels of public university faculty differ significantly from those of private university faculty.
The research on OCB in higher education is limited to correlational studies that have established the relationship between OCB and other variables (Oplatka, 2009) , specifically job satisfaction and organizational commitment, without explaining the perceived conceptualization of OCB in the university context (Podsakoff et al., 2000) . This requires investigation of the processes by which the construction and comprehension of OCB in its natural setting is put into practice. The lack of knowledge about OCB in higher education will be addressed through understanding faculty members’ conceptualization and perception of OCB, as well as the components and determinants of the phenomenon. In general, academics are involved in the teaching and learning process, conduct scientific research, and provide social services to the public.
In the face of this multifaceted framework, it is crucial to mention the uniqueness of the job itself. Indeed, the performance of university faculty members is based more on discretionary behaviors than on formal, straightforward job descriptions provided by their institutions, and since the description of the teaching profession cannot be formally established, the organizational citizenship behavior of teachers must be studied using a variety of research methodologies (DiPaola & Tschannen-Moran, 2001; Özaslan, 2019) . Furthermore, some studies have considered OCB as a single factor, however, minimal efforts have been made to validate unifactorial measures of citizenship behavior (DiPaola & Tschannen-Moran, 2001; Zeinabadi, 2010) . The multidimensional approach applied in higher education may provide a better understanding of teachers’ OCB and their behaviors.
Although the literature on OCB in non-educational settings is extensive, there are few documented accounts of a casual relationship between teachers’ job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and OCB. The literature suggests that OCB is context specific, which means that it varies from one type of organization to another (Organ, 1988) . In universities, the behavior is different from that found in non-educational settings. In fact, academic institutions are service organizations composed of professional faculty who are generally committed to doing what is best for their students (DiPaola & Hoy, 2005) . Therefore, the nature of the influence of job attitudes on teachers’ OCB may differ from that obtained in other organizations. Previous studies on OCB suggest that job satisfaction and organizational commitment have significant positive influence on OCB. However, there is very limited research regarding the effects of specific facets of job satisfaction and organizational commitment on OCB, particularly on teachers’ OCB. In this case, specific measures of job satisfaction and organizational commitment should be used to measure specific behaviors.
5. Future Research Directions
The study aims through future research to examine organizational citizenship behavior among Moroccan teacher-researchers. First, it is important to know whether OCBs are targeted towards the individual or the organization and that, depending on the behavior being examined (OCBI or OCBO), different contextual characteristics need to be taken into account (Williams & Anderson, 1991) . Not enough studies have examined the concept of organizational citizenship behavior in its two-dimensional form, so we want to revisit it while relating each of the two conceptions to job satisfaction and organizational commitment. A distinction between the two conceptions is strongly desired (Lavy, 2019; Nugroho et al., 2020; Sesen & Basim, 2012; Shabbir et al., 2021; Williams & Anderson, 1991; Zeinabadi, 2010; Zeinabadi & Salehi, 2011) .
Job satisfaction has most often been discussed as an overall variable without separating it into its two dimensions (Zeinabadi, 2010) . The literature review highlighted the importance of teachers’ intrinsic job satisfaction in promoting their commitment to values and to their OCB. Therefore, stimulating the means of intrinsic rewards, such as meaning at work, increases teachers’ sense of intrinsic satisfaction, rather than offering extrinsic rewards (Selamat et al., 2017) . An interesting new path for future research related to teachers’ sense of meaning in their work as a mechanism that may trigger high levels of persistence and motivation, which translates into high levels of organizational citizenship behaviors. In addition, we also support, from previous research, the importance of the mediating role of organizational commitment in explaining the influence of job satisfaction on organizational citizenship behaviors (Nguni et al., 2006; Zeinabadi, 2010; Sesen & Basim, 2012; Nguyen & Tran, 2022) .
The literature done on non-educational organizations is vast, but there are few studies on the social exchange predictors of teacher’s OCB. There has been little empirical support for the collectively casual relationship between teacher’s OCB, trust, procedural justice, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment. The evidence to date indicates that social exchange variables, particularly OCB, are context specific and may change from one type of organization to another. Hence, the need to know the social exchange predictors of OCB among teachers. For modeling the antecedents of OCB, a review of the literature on OCB in universities suggests a growing interest. Indeed, with the mediation of trust, procedural justice may influence faculty engagement and OCB solely through their job satisfaction (Abbasi & Wan Ismail, 2023; Yılmaz & Altınkurt, 2012) . Implementing procedural fairness in universities promotes faculty job satisfaction. When teachers are satisfied with their jobs, they are more engaged with the university and, therefore, more engaged in citizenship behaviors.
6. Conclusion
This paper consisted of reviewing the literature on organizational citizenship behavior in higher education. Although this concept has been widely studied in different academic contexts, no study has been established to date in the Moroccan academic context. The idea of considering organizational citizenship behavior, along with increasing institutional and individual performance and enhancing the strengths of the institution and its teachers, suggests that higher education institutions should make organizational citizenship behavior a part of their culture and social climate. As such, it is essential to approach events and university teachers in a positive manner through the implementation of several motivational strategies in terms of intrinsic rewards, career path, social status, scientific research, etc. Therefore, this study will be a valuable contribution to the literature on organizational citizenship behavior in the Moroccan university context. It will not only aim to expand the knowledge of citizenship behavior among the Moroccan teaching population, but will also contribute, through its results, to the resolution of the issues confronting the Moroccan university environment. Furthermore, practical behavioral, managerial, and strategic implications will be drawn from the study through upcoming studies.
NOTES
1The implementation in 2004.
2This system was initiated by the Bologna process in 1999.
3The mission of the chief of bachelor’s and master’s departments, the head and coordinator of modules, the head of the research team or the head of the Center for Doctoral Studies (Cedoc).
4The criteria mentioned in the order of June 4, 2012 (Decree No. 3521-17 of 20 rebia II 1441 (December 17, 2019) defining the elements of the activities related to the criteria for career advancement.
5Independent Coordination of Teacher-Researchers’ Dignity.