Building organizational citizenship behavior through procedural justice, trust, and work engagement

This study aimed at exploring the impact of procedural justice on work engagement, trust on the leader and Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB). Data were collected from 100 employees working in manufacturing and analyzed by using Partial Least Square. The results of this study suggested that procedural justice is positively related to work engagement, trust in leader and work engagement is positively related to OCB. Trust on leadership doesn’t mediating the relationship procedural justice to OCB, but work engagement is partially mediating the relationship procedural justice to OCB. This study resulted that work engagement has a contribution to building OCB. © 2019 Bussecon International Academy. Hosting by Bussecon International. All rights reserved. Peer review under responsibility of Bussecon International Academy.


Introduction
Energy Currently with business development which is full of uncertainty is not enough for employees if only oriented on task performances. The organization expects its employees not only do their tasks but also have positive behavior. Positive behavior is reflected in Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB). OCB pertains to discretionary behavioral contributions that members (e.g., employees) render to their organizations. The qualifier discretionary' conveys the notion that such behavior is either not part of the job description. Discretionary' implies the absence of any guaranteed or contractual reward for such behaviors, as well as the absence of any expected sanction for not displaying those behaviors. Some examples of specific OCB are helping a new hire 'learn the ropes', exemplary attendance, making timely suggestions to the appropriate parties and in an appropriate forum for more efficient operations, acting to prevent or resolve conflicts between or among colleagues, or spontaneously helping a coworker with some problem or urgent task (Organ, Podsakoff, & MacKenzie, 2006).
OCB is important for employees in the production sectors because the production sectors have an important role in the manufacturing industry. Employees are objected to always improving their OCB so that they can reduce defect or damage products that are produced. The amount of workforce in Indonesia on February 2018 increases by 2 million people compared to conditions in August 2017, meanwhile in the employment till February 2017 has not have any changes, while partially the agriculture, trading, industry business sectors are still the biggest absorption for workers in Indonesia (Central of Statistics, 2018). Besides, The worker's readiness for the manufacturing industry has becoming overload because they are unskilled labors. This condition causes injustice, difficulty in development in trust and employee engagement on organizations.

11
The organization justice can conduct OCB (Weick, 2006). Organizational justice is justice in performance and treatment from organizations (Colquitt, 2001). The employee is treated with justice will commit OCB (Motowildo, Borman, & Schmit, 2006). (Coyle-Shapiro, Kessler, & Purcell, 2004) found that one of the OCB frameworks is a social exchange, OCB is a response to organizational justice. Organizational Justice can be influenced to trust in a leader (Konovsky & Pugh, 1994;Mayer, Davis, & Schoorman, 1995). Organizational Justice can be also influenced by employee engagement (Chughtai & Buckley, 2009;Macey, Schneider, Barbera, & Young, 2009). Empirically, Trust is a precondition contribute to OCB and outcomes from a social exchange (Aryee, Budhwar, & Chen, 2002). The employee will OCB if they believe their organizations have to treat them well in the long run (Konovsky & Pugh, 1994).
Employee engagement would be a predictor of OCB (Author, Bhatnagar, & Biswas, 2010). Employee engagement is positively related to employee performance (Author et al., 2010). Employee performance is aggregated value to an organization of the set of behaviors that an employee contributes both directly and indirectly to organization goals (Motowildo et al., 2006). Job performance consists of task performance and contextual performance or OCB (Aguinis, 2009). OCB is voluntarily innovative behavior (Yulianti, P., 2014).
Oversupply workforce in the manufacturing industry causes many companies to don't treat them as human capital but as a cost that affects injustice treatment on the employee (Yulianti, P., 2015). This may cause difficulty in the trust development of leaders and work engagement employees to OCB. So, the objective of this study is to prove procedural justice influences organizational citizenship behavior, procedural justice influences employee work engagement and trust on the leader, and employee work engagement and trust on leaders influence organizational citizenship behavior in an employee in manufacturing industries.

Procedural Justice
Procedural Justice related to procedure which is used by an organization to distribute their result and resources to its members. (Thibaut & Walker, 1975) stated that decision-making processes can have an initial influence on achievement. (Colquitt, 2001) explains procedural justice is a process that related to the policies in the organizations, such as consistent, unbias, accurate and as a part of whole policies in organizations, can be used as a tool to solve the problems that occurred in organizations. (Randall, Cropanzano, Bormann, & Birjulin, 1999) gives an argument about justice given by organizations. Procedural Justice is defined as the same formal procedure which as a foundation of decision making to the employee (Tekleab, Takeuchi, & Taylor, 2005). Procedural justice refers to the perceived fairness of the procedures used in decision making and treatment and focuses on the exchange or relationship between employees and their organization. In spite of procedural justice, distributive justice related to the result of organizations. Procedural justice has a structural component and interactional. Organizations which is doing procedural justice based on the structural component so that decision making will be accurate, and consistent. Procedural justice is based on interactional components on the quality of justice received by its members. Justice in giving tasks, self developments also in making policies. Besides, (Randall et al., 1999) advise that procedural justice related to daily cases in organizations. (McFarlin & Sweeney, 2018) procedural justice is related to subordinate perception to evaluate their performances as tools to communicate their performances and to define their rewards such as a promotion or salary increases. Justice or injustice processes and procedures which is received show high/low quality of procedural justice by a subordinate.

Work Engagement
Work Engagement Concepts is introduced by (Kahn, 2018). Work Engagement is defined by (Kahn, 2018) as "the benefit of organizational members to their important role in the work. Work Engagement is working continuity and express from self preference by someone in the work behavior that supports the relationship to work and another (Kahn, 1990). (Maslach & Leiter, 1997) define work engagement as the opposite of three-dimension burnout, emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accomplishment. (Schaufeli, Salanova, Gon Alez-ro, & Bakker, 2002) adding the (Maslach & Leiter, 1997) that work engagement is a kind of positive motivational condition from employee sense of efficacy characterized by the effort, dedication, and absorption. "Psycho power" is characterized through a higher level of energy and mental power when workings, such as keep continue workings even faced the problems. "Dedication" is a strong value in working, such as experience to solve the challenges. "Absorption" is characterized by the interests that keep them feel happy in the work so that they love to work (Saks, 2019).

Trust
The Trust definition according to (Mayer et al., 1995) is: "The overall desire of a person who is vulnerable to the actions of the other (trustee) with the expectation that the party will act certain actions that are important to the trustor ". An empirical study by (Mayer et al., 1995) supports that trusts will be able to improve cooperation, specifically, through cooperation individuals with trust will more expand their role in work with the spirit of cooperation and collaboration.
According to the theory of social exchange, people will support a social exchange as long as they benefit from their partners (Blau, 1965). People will give them what they expect to receive and tend to get what they want when there is trust. Individual expectations about trust will change in the way of experience to a certain degree, proportionate to the difference between initial expectations and experience. (Mayer et al., 1995) state that trust in others is based on the expectation that others will take actions deemed important 12 by the trustor, without the need to be monitored or controlled by the trustor (Brockner, Siegel, Daly, Tyler, & Martin, 2006). Trust in a relationship develops (or fails to grow) depending on several factors or bases of trust. (Mayer et al., 1995) argue that the extent to which a party is deemed trustworthy depends on the ability, virtue, and integrity of the individual. Integrity, demonstrated by one's honesty in a relationship, is often cited as a basis of trust and maybe constituted by procedural justice (Brockner et al., 2006). If the procedure used by the trustee is deemed by the trustor to be procedurally fair, the trustor may not monitor the trustee. (Mayer et al., 1995) explained that the components of trust are kindness, integrity, and ability. Benevolence means that someone cares about the welfare of others and is motivated to act for the benefit of others, and will not take the opportunity for himself on others. Competent means that a person can do the work required by others. The essence of competence is the success of "The capacity to produce the desired outcome." Predictability means a fairly consistent action and can predict what to do in a particular situation The relationship between four important and willing beliefs is a definition of worth believing Benevolence is the essence from the willingness to serve the interests of others, competence is the essence of the ability to serve the interests of others, whereas honesty proves one's ability to make and fulfill a promise to do so ( Yulianti, P., 2016).

Organizational Citizenship Behavior
Organ and his colleagues define OCB as "individual behavior that is discretionary, not direct or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, and in the aggregate promotes the effectiveness and effective functioning of the organization." The OCB is deep, at the workplace (Organ et al., 2006). In-role behaviors are usually associated with rewards and penalties, whereas in extra-role behaviors are free of rewards and behaviors performed by someone who is not organized by the rewards they will receive (Moon, Dyne, & Wrobel, 2004). In-role behavior is a necessary or expected behavior and is based on the performance task. Employees who fail to perform the expected behavior will not receive rewards from the organization or get negative consequences from the reward side. In contrast, the Extra-role behavior is positive and there is freedom to act. Specifically, the Extra-role behavior is not described in the job descriptions, is not associated with formal reward systems and there is no penalty sanction if employees do not exercise their effectiveness (Motowildo et al., 2006;Podsakoff & MacKenzie, 1997). (Organ et al., 2006) state OCB have five dimensions of altruism, conscientiousness, civic virtue, courtesy, and sportsmanship. Altruism is a behavior that helps others in dealing with problems in their work. Conscientiousness is a person's timely behavior, high attendance, and above expected normal requirements. Civic virtue shows the behavior of civic virtue is a behavior that indicates a sense of responsibility to always participate and engage in organizational life and pay attention to organizational life. This behavior reflects a sense of caring, not apathetic or ignorant to keep up with the latest information, changes, or situations that develop within the organization. Courtesy shows the courtesy and respect shown in each behavior. Sportsmanship shows someone who does not like to protest or propose dissatisfaction with minor issues.

Hypothesis Development
The relationship of procedural justice on employee work engagement Procedural justice relationships with employee work engagement can be viewed from the perspective of the social exchange theory. Employees who are treated fairly will then exchange with the individuals my organization expects. Employees can assess how fair they are treated by the organization through procedural justice. Procedural justice is defined as the formal procedural equivalence underlying organizational decision-making for employees (Tekleab et al., 2005), procedural justice is based on an interactional component that is on the quality of fair treatment received by the organization's members. Procedural justice is justice perceived by employees in daily work. The relationship between procedural fairness and engagement can be explained by the theory of justice if an organization expects employees to perform well then treat them fairly.

H1: Procedural justice has a significant effect on employee work engagement
The relationship of procedural justice on trust in supervisors (Stinglhamber, De Cremer, & Mercken, 2006) states "There is a procedural justice relationship with the trust. Today, the theory of social exchange (Blau, 1965)is a dominant theoretical framework used to examine employee relations in the organizational psychology literature (Settoon, Bennett, & Liden, 1996;Wayne, Shore, & Liden, 1997). More precisely, exchange-based social transactions are used to investigate and explain a distinction of organizational desired attitudes and behaviors. Social exchanges may be initiated by how fair (fair) organizations treat their employees; many studies have focused on the relationship between employees' perceptions of fairness in the workplace and potential consequences in the form of work attitudes and behaviors. According to (Blau, 1965), trust should play an important role in these relationships by acting as a mechanism by which justice affects the results of employees. (Aryee et al., 2002) examined the relationship between procedural justice and trust in the workplace focused only on trust in the leadership. The treatment of justice should lead to a social exchange relationship, and, therefore, a mutual trust between the source of this fair treatment (organization vs. supervisor) and its targets (eg employees). The definition of trust, (Mayer et al., 1995) suggests that fair treatment allows the emergence of trusts. Fair treatment results in employees' expectations that the future and long-term relationships will be fair as well.

H2 Procedural justice has a significant effect on trust in the leader
The relationship between procedural justice and organizational citizenship behavior (Zhang, Lee, & Zou, 2010) which explains that the perception of procedural justice will have a positive effect on organizational citizenship behavior. This argument suggests that giving individuals multiple opportunities in deciding and making decisions will improve the perception of procedural justice, not only because individual opinions can affect the fairness of reward distribution, but also because they have the opportunity to express their opinions and feelings that indicate that the organization considers Individual opinions are valuable so that individuals contribute best to the organization. Perception of justice is an instrument in developing the level of beliefs and beliefs that individuals need to be willing to perform useful actions that are done without any forced called organizational citizenship behavior (Organ et al., 2006). Individuals who feel that the organization shows justice in the process of allocation of resources then the individual will reply through the social reward organizational citizenship behavior (Deluga, 1994).

The relationship of trust in the leader and organizational citizenship behavior
According to the theory of social exchange, people will support a social exchange as long as they get the benefits they feel given by their partner (Blau, 1965). In the case of trust, people will give according to what they expect to receive and tend to get what they want. Individual expectations of the trust will change in the direction of a certain degree of experience, proportional to the difference between initial expectations and experience. Empirically, trust in the organization has been a psychological precondition for the contribution of OCB as well as the result of the perception of social exchange (Aryee et al., 2002;Konovsky & Pugh, 1994;Organ et al., 2006). Workers are more likely to display OCBs if they believe the organization to treat them fairly in the long term (Konovsky & Pugh, 1994). In the social exchange of relationships, however, trust develops based on repeated interactions through positive experiences of justice and recompense by others. Trust is not only a prerequisite but also the result of a successful social exchange.

Work engagement and organizational citizenship behavior
The concept of work commitment was introduced by (Kahn, 2018). Commitment is defined by (Kahn, 2018) as "the use of members of the organization itself to their role in work". Personal incompetence is described as separating itself from its role in work. People can use different levels in themselves, psychologically, cognitively, and emotionally in their work performance, even as they set the boundaries between who they are and their role in the job. This shows that more people are attracting their attention to show performance in their role, the better is their performance. Furthermore, commitment to work is the continuation of work and expression of one's "self-preference" in work behaviors that support relationships to work and to others (Kahn, 2018). When employees have a working commitment, they will behave more OCB (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007).

Research and Methodology
Procedural Justice is the respondent's perception of fair treatment received from the organization, both justice in treatment and equity in policies made for employees. Dimensional measurements are based on (Randall et al., 1999). Employee Engagement is the attitude of respondents about the high level of energy level, the strong involvement in work and the concentration and interest Trust on Leader Procedural Justice Organizational Citizenship Behavior Work Engagement 14 that make happy at work. (Schaufeli et al., 2002) using the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES) in measuring Work Engagement of employees with dimensions of Vigor, Dedication, and Absorption. Trust in organizations is measured by 3 Dimensions of (Mayer et al., 1995) ability, benevolence, and integrity. OCB is an extra role behavior measured by five dimensions (Organ et al., 2006) namely, altruism, conscientiousness, civic virtue, courtesy, and sportsmanship. Altruism is a behavior that helps people Conscientiousness is a timely person's behavior. Civic virtue shows the behavior of civic virtue is a behavior that indicates Courtesy's sense of responsibility shows the attitude of courtesy and respect shown in each behavior. Sportsmanship shows someone who does not like to protest or propose dissatisfaction with minor issues.

Sample and Analysis Technique
Samples are workers in industrial companies in Surabaya. In this study, the criteria of the selected respondents are the workers in the production department, because the production section is a major part of the industrial company. Selection of respondents based on purposive sampling based on the criteria that the industry has a huge amount of labor and does not require specific expertise. The number of samples is 100 respondents. Hypothesis testing of the research is done with the approach of the Structural Equation Model (SEM) based on Partial Least Square (PLS). Measurement Model performs Test of Validity and Reliability of Construction and Structural Model. The first sections are the Outer Model test to test the validity and reliability construct of this study. A validity test will be done includes convergent, Construct, discriminant validity. The second sections are an inner model test to see the coefficient determinant, predictive relevance, path coefficient estimation, and coefficient parameter.

Discussion
The results of this study have proved that the effect of procedural justice on both the Trust on the leadership and the work engagement is significant. Procedural Justice has a greater influence on trust to leaders than on work engagement. When employees experience fair organization policies and procedures, they perceive a trustworthy organization commensurate to the norm of reciprocity, they reciprocate to the organization. Organization fairness is confirmed to be a significant predictor of trust (Aryee et al., 2002;Konovsky & Pugh, 1994). Psychological safety stems from experiences of social situations that are predictable and consistent (Kahn, 2018). Organizational Justice is considered as an important source of psychological safety (Macey et al., 2009). The relationships between justice dimensions and work engagement can be viewed from the social exchange theory perspective. Social exchange in an employment relationship may be initiated by an organization's fair treatment of its employees. Employees care about being treated fairly because justice serves psychological needs. The results of further studies are the Trust on the leadership does not significantly affect the OCB. The results of this study are interesting because the direction of the relationship between Trust in leadership with OCB is negative. Excessive trust in the leader will decrease OCB. The influence of work engagement on OCB is significant. Work engagement can fully be mediated by the effect of procedural justice on OCB. The Effect of Procedural Justice on OCB isn't significant and the influence of trust on the leadership on OCB isn't significant. These results suggest that the Trust to the leadership does not mediate the relationship between procedural justice and OCB.

Implications
The practical implication is that employees who strongly trust in their leaders will not cause OCB. The high level of trust on their leaders' ability, integrity, and benevolence makes the employees not creative because they will rely on their leaders. Employees in the manufacturing industry consider that what can cause OCB is when there is procedural justice especially when they are treated fairly in both treatment and policy in the decision. Justice both in the treatment and the policy in decision making that can make employees engagement on the job so they are willing to voluntarily innovative behavior or OCB.

Conclusions
This study aimed at exploring the impact of procedural justice on work engagement, trust on the leader and Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB). Data were collected from 100 employees working in manufacturing and analyzed by using Partial Least Square. The results of this study suggested that procedural justice is positively related to work engagement, trust in leader and work engagement is positively related to OCB. Trust on leadership doesn't mediating the relationship procedural justice to OCB, but work engagement is partially mediating the relationship procedural justice to OCB. The employees in manufacturing industries are very vulnerable to procedural justice policy. Human resource management in the making procedure and attitude policy shall be fair, so the employee will be more engagement at works and trust on the leader. The procedural justice policy can influence trust on the leader, but the over trust on the leader can not influence employee OCB. The procedural justice policy can influence employee work engagement and give more contribution to OCB.