The impact of human capital development on organizational citizenship behavior and organizational culture Open Access

Organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) has gained increasing scholarly attention as an essential dimension of job performance beyond the boundaries of formal job descriptions. Chadha et al. (2025), Hooi et al. (2022) and Jimoh and Kee (2022) affirm that employees who engage in discretionary behaviors contribute substantially to organizational performance. OCB captures voluntary actions such as helping colleagues, supporting institutional initiatives and promoting organizational goals, which, although not formally rewarded, enhance effectiveness (Chang et al., 2021). The university system, particularly private universities, relies heavily on these behaviors given their knowledge-intensive nature and the need for continuous innovation in teaching, research and community engagement. Thus, OCB is widely regarded as a critical factor in ensuring institutional sustainability and competitiveness in the face of increasing global and local challenges.

Equally important is organizational culture, which provides the shared values, beliefs and norms that shape employee attitudes and behaviors. A strong culture is consistently linked to cooperation and motivation within organizations (Lockhart et al., 2020; Yin Yin Lau et al., 2020). In university settings, culture establishes expectations for knowledge sharing, collaboration and professional growth, thereby encouraging proactive behaviors that align with institutional missions. This perspective aligns with the argument that culture influences not only task-related expectation but also extra-role behaviors, which remain critical in ensuring universities meet both academic and administrative performance expectations.

Despite these insights, several gaps remain in the literature. First, much of the prior research has treated OCB as a one-dimensional construct, often neglecting the distinction between OCB directed at the organization (OCB-O) and OCB directed at individuals (OCB-I) (Iqbal and Parray, 2024; Kim et al., 2022; Tran, 2025). This lack of differentiation limits understanding of how particular cultural elements distinctly shape OCB-O and OCB-I. Second, empirical evidence within higher education institutions, particularly in developing countries, is relatively scarce. Universities present a unique environment in which knowledge creation, resource constraints and institutional diversity heighten the role of culture in shaping discretionary behaviors. Thus, a context-specific investigation is warranted to clarify these dynamics.

Another fundamental gap is the limited consideration of human capital development (HCD) in the culture–OCB relationship. HCD, plays a central role in equipping employees to meet strategic objectives. While organizational culture provides the normative framework for behavior, HCD ensures employees possess the competencies and confidence to translate these expectations into practice. Yet, most existing studies have not adequately explored how HCD enhance the effect of culture on OCB, particularly within universities in Nigeria. This omission leaves an incomplete understanding of how universities leverage internal mechanisms to promote employee commitment, engagement and citizenship behaviors.

Filling these gaps is particularly pressing for private universities in Kwara State, Nigeria, where institutions face challenges of resource constraints, employee turnover and growing demands for academic quality. Exploring the interplay between organizational culture, OCB and HCD provides actionable insights for strengthening employee engagement and institutional resilience. By focusing on OCB-O and OCB-I as distinct results, and integrating HCD as a key factor, this study offers exact and contextually relevant contribution to the literature on organizational behavior in higher education.

Theoretically, this study draws on the social exchange theory (SET) and the resource-based view (RBV). SET suggests that when employees perceive fair treatment and developmental opportunities, they reciprocate with discretionary behaviors, thereby reinforcing positive organizational exchanges (Cropanzano et al., 2023). In addition, RBV positions human capital as a strategic resource that is rare, valuable, inimitable and non-substitutable, pinpointing its role in sustaining competitive advantage (Barney, 2021). Together, these theories provide a robust foundation for examining how culture shapes OCB and how HCD strengthens this relationship. Integrating these perspectives allows the study to contribute both theoretically and practically to the discourse on organizational performance and employee development in higher education.

• To examine the effect of organizational culture on organizational citizenship behavior.

• To determine the moderating effect of human capital development on the relationship between organizational culture and organizational citizenship behavior.

Organizational culture is a critical enabler of OCB, shaping how employees interpret roles, responsibilities, and relationships within the workplace. It functions as the underlying framework of values, norms, and beliefs that guide both formal and informal behavior. A culture that fosters shared purpose, trust and psychological safety motivates employees to feel valued and to display discretionary behaviors that extend beyond formal job descriptions. These extra-role actions form the basis of OCB and are essential for sustaining performance in today’s competitive university system (Islam and Amin, 2022). At the individual level, culture strongly influences OCB-I (individual-directed behaviors). Supportive cultures that emphasize communication, empowerment, and professional growth foster loyalty and encourage employees to exceed expectations and assist colleagues, even in the absence of tangible rewards (Jimoh et al., 2024). Conversely, toxic or overly competitive cultures discourage discretionary effort and stifle OCB-I (Konovsky and Pugh, 1994). Thus, culture creates the psychological climate in which OCB-I can either flourish or diminish.

From an organizational perspective, cultures that prioritize collaboration, fairness and integrity enhance OCB-O (organization-directed behaviors). Such environments improve teamwork, adaptability and resilience, while reinforcing innovation and sustainable performance. Importantly, OCB and culture are mutually reinforcing: supportive cultures promote OCB, and sustained OCB, in turn, strengthens organizational culture (Kusumaningsih et al., 2020). Empirical evidence further validates this linkage. Studies by Hooi et al. (2022), Alex Praveen Raj et al. (2024) and Chadha et al. (2025) consistently demonstrate that organizational culture significantly predicts OCB across different contexts. The present study advances this discourse by distinguishing between OCB-I and OCB-O while introducing HCD as a moderating factor. By situating the analysis within private universities, the study offers context-specific insights and contributes theoretically by showing how investment in HCD strengthens the culture–OCB relationship:

A supportive culture that fosters trust and shared values is often linked to higher levels of OCB, defined as voluntary behaviors extending beyond formal job requirements to benefit both the organization and colleagues. However, the strength of this culture–OCB relationship is not consistent across organizations, indicating the influence of additional factors such as HCD (Jimoh and Kee, 2022). Where HCD is strong, employees are not only aware of organizational expectations but are also better equipped to exceed them (Lussier and Hendon, 2019). HCD operationalizes cultural values by providing employees with the competencies, confidence and motivation to engage in OCB. Thus, culture becomes actionable through continuous learning and skill-building initiatives, resulting in higher discretionary behaviors (Cropanzano et al., 2023). Conversely, in organizations with weak HCD, even a positive culture may fail to generate OCB because employees lack the capacity to act on shared values.

Empirical evidence supports this moderating role. Abed and Elewa (2016) and Krajcsák and Kozák (2022) reveal that training, knowledge-sharing and developmental practices enhance employees’ ability to internalize cultural values, thereby increasing their willingness to demonstrate OCB. In contrast, limited HCD weakens this linkage, as employees may not possess the required skills to engage in extra-role activities (Nahapiet, 2011). This study contributes by empirically examining the moderating effect of HCD in an academic context, drawing on quantitative evidence from universities. Unlike earlier works, it integrates contemporary HCD dimensions, ensuring both relevance and theoretical advancement. Ultimately, HCD acts as a bridge between organizational culture and OCB (Cockburn and Cockburn-Wootten, 2022). By aligning developmental initiatives with cultural values, organizations foster employee engagement, strengthen commitment and sustain higher levels of OCB, thereby advancing long-term effectiveness:

SET explains the relationship between organizational culture, HCD and OCB through reciprocity. When employees perceive fairness, trust and support within a supportive culture, they feel obligated to reciprocate with discretionary behaviors that enhance organizational performance (Molm, 1997; Settoon et al., 1996). HCD amplifies this process by providing employees with skills, confidence, and opportunities for growth. Training, development and empowerment signal organizational commitment, strengthening employees’ willingness to exceed formal expectations (Lynch et al., 1999). Thus, SET clarifies how culture fosters OCB and why HCD intensifies this link by enabling employees to reciprocate effectively.

RBV frames organizational culture and HCD as strategic resources that generate sustained advantage when they are valuable, rare, inimitable and non-substitutable (Crook et al., 2008). Culture functions as a soft asset shaping trust, collaboration and commitment, thereby fostering OCB. Similarly, HCD represents a strategic investment that equips employees to enact cultural norms through consistent discretionary behavior. Embedded in routines and learning systems, both culture and HCD are difficult to imitate (Nahapiet, 2011). Their alignment provides a foundation for OCB at individual (OCB-I) and organizational (OCB-O) levels, reinforcing long-term organizational effectiveness and competitive advantage.

This study is anchored in a positivist research philosophy, which is appropriate because the aim is to objectively measure and analyze the relationships among the constructs under investigation using observable and quantifiable data. Positivism emphasizes empirical evidence and hypothesis testing, making it suitable for studies that seek to establish causal links between HCD, organizational culture, and OCB (Dudovskiy, 2016). A descriptive research design was employed. This design was considered appropriate because it provides a systematic approach to describing, explaining and validating relationships among study variables while ensuring that the findings address the research questions comprehensively (Sekaran & Bougie, 2016). The descriptive design also allowed the researcher to capture both demographic attributes and perceptual variables from participants in a structured and replicable manner.

The population of the study consisted of 6,055 academic employees across seven private universities in Kwara State, namely, Al-Hikmah University, Landmark University, Summit University, Thomas Adewumi University, Ahman Pategi University and Ojaja University. These universities were selected to provide a holistic perspective of the private higher education sector in the state, ensuring that findings could be generalized within this academic environment. A probability sampling method, specifically simple random sampling, was adopted. This method was deemed suitable because it offers every academic employee member an equal chance of inclusion, thereby minimizing sampling bias and enhancing the representativeness of the data. To determine the required sample size, the Krejcie and Morgan (1970) formula was applied, yielding a scientifically adequate sample of 361 respondents. This approach ensured that the sample size was large enough to provide statistical power for hypothesis testing while remaining feasible for administration.

Data collection relied on an online self-administered questionnaire, which is cost-effective, ensures wider reach and minimizes researcher bias in administration. Online administration also reduces missing data issues since the system automatically prompts participants to complete unanswered questions (Hair et al., 2016). To further improve response rates, a two-step contact strategy was employed:

1. an initial email outlining the purpose, importance and ethical considerations of the study; and

2. follow-up phone calls to encourage participation and reassure respondents of confidentiality.

Respondents were provided with a Google Form link and an alternative QR code option for convenient access.

The questionnaire design was structured into five sections for clarity and alignment with the research objectives. Section A captured demographic characteristics, including gender, educational qualification, age, academic position and work experience. Sections B, C, D and E contained validated measurement items for the key variables. Specifically, organizational culture was measured using five items adapted from Mazur and Zaborek (2016), OCB-O and OCB-I were measured with seven items each adapted from Williams and Anderson (1991), and HCD was assessed using items from Noe (2017). All items were measured on a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (“strongly disagree”) to 5 (“strongly agree”). The use of established scales enhances content validity and allows for comparability with prior studies.

For data analysis, both descriptive and inferential techniques were applied. Descriptive statistics, conducted using SPSS version 28, provided insights into respondents’ demographic characteristics and summarized the distribution of responses. To test the proposed hypotheses, partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) was used. PLS-SEM was selected because it is well-suited for predictive and exploratory research, accommodates complex models with multiple constructs and indicators, and does not require strict assumptions about data distribution (Hair et al., 2016). This makes it particularly appropriate for social science research involving latent constructs such as organizational behavior and culture. The University of Ilorin granted ethical approval prior to the questionnaire used to collect data from the respondents, and all participants gave their informed consent after being fully informed about the study’s goals, methods, possible risks and confidentiality. Respondents were guaranteed the freedom to discontinue participation at any time without facing any repercussions, and participation was entirely voluntary.

Table 1 illustrates demographic profile of the respondents (n = 361) which shows that most participants were male (64.3%), with females comprising 35.7%. The largest age group was 30–39 years (38.2%), followed by 40–49 years (27.1%), 20–29 years (19.9%), 50–59 years (10.2%), and 60 years and above (4.7%). In terms of education, 69.8% were graduates, while 30.2% held postgraduate degrees. Regarding work experience, 38.8% had 6–9 years, 33.2% had 2–5 years, 21.0% had 10 years or more, and 7.2% had less than 1 year. The sample is academically qualified and fairly experienced, providing a solid foundation for examining the influence of organizational culture on OCB.

Table 2 presents the results of the measurement model, assessing the validity and reliability of the four key constructs: OCB-O, OCB-I, HCD and organizational culture. The item loadings, ranging from 0.617 to 0.828, indicate acceptable indicator reliability across all constructs. Composite Reliability (CR) values between 0.809 and 0.893 surpass the recommended 0.70 threshold, confirming strong internal consistency. Additionally, the average variance extracted (AVE) values, ranging from 0.678 to 0.784 and exceeding the 0.50 benchmark, demonstrate adequate convergent validity. Together, these results confirm that the constructs are both valid and reliable, supporting their suitability for further structural model analysis.

The model presented in Figure 1 is a SEM examining the relationships between organizational culture, HCD, and OCB-O and OCB-I. The model includes standardized path coefficients and t-values, allowing for the assessment of both the strength and statistical significance of the relationships.

Table 3 presents the results of hypothesis testing on the direct effects of organizational culture on OCB-O and OCB-I. For H1, the path coefficient (β = 0.551), t-value (2.337) and p-value (0.001, <0.01) indicate a strong, significant positive relationship, with organizational culture explaining 47.2% of the variance in OCB-O. This supports H1, showing that a strong organizational culture enhances organizational-level behaviors like loyalty, advocacy and initiative. For H2, the path coefficient (β = 0.167), t-value (2.550) and p-value (0.001, <0.01) also reveal a significant, though weaker, positive relationship, with organizational culture accounting for 61.4% of the variance in OCB-I. This supports H2, suggesting that a positive organizational culture enhances individual-level discretionary behaviors such as helping colleagues, punctuality and exceeding job expectations.

Table 4 presents the results of the indirect effects of HCD on organizational culture and OCB-O/OCB-I. For H3, the indirect effect of HCD on OCB-O through organizational culture shows a strong and significant effect (β = 0.572, SE = 0.058, t = 6.939, p = 0.001), with a 95% confidence interval (0.058–0.257) that excludes zero, confirming the significance. This supports H3, indicating that enhanced HCD positively shapes organizational culture, which in turn boosts organizational-level behaviors (OCB-O). Similarly, H4 tests the indirect effect on OCB-I, with results showing β = 0.512, SE = 0.020, t = 5.566 and p = 0.001, again confirming statistical significance. The confidence interval (0.089–0.871) also excludes zero, supporting H4 and suggesting that HCD positively influences individual discretionary behaviors (OCB-I) through a strengthened organizational culture.

The first hypothesis posited that organizational culture exerts a significant and positive influence on organizational citizenship behavior directed toward the organization (OCB-O). The results strongly support this proposition, indicating that organizational culture serves as a fundamental driver of discretionary behaviors that advance institutional goals. This outcome aligns with the findings of Alex Praveen Raj et al. (2024), Caya and Mosconi (2023), Chang et al. (2021) and Krajcsák and Kozák (2022), who identified organizational culture as a cornerstone of collective behavior that enhances institutional effectiveness. When employees perceive that their values resonate with the organization’s mission and that their contributions are recognized, they tend to engage in behaviors that promote the institution’s broader interests. The findings emphasizes that culture extends beyond formalized structures to encompass shared values, informal norms and expectations, all of which shape everyday behaviors. Within universities, cultivating cultures that emphasize teamwork, collaboration and mutual respect encourages OCB-O, thereby supporting the institution’s long-term sustainability.

The second hypothesis examined the relationship between organizational culture and organizational citizenship behavior directed toward individuals (OCB-I). The analysis confirmed a significant and positive relationship, demonstrating that employees embedded within a supportive and inclusive cultural context are more inclined to engage in prosocial behaviors that benefit both colleagues and the organization. Such behaviors include offering assistance, taking initiative and displaying loyalty. A culture that prioritizes trust, respect and recognition fosters employees’ sense of belonging, which in turn motivates them to transcend formal job roles. These findings are consistent with prior works by Krajcsák and Kozák (2022), Kim et al. (2022), Kontoghiorghes (2015), Kusumaningsih (2020) and Lockhart et al. (2020), which highlight that positive organizational culture encourages individuals to internalize organizational values and align personal aspirations with institutional objectives.

The third hypothesis focused on the moderating effect of human capital development (HCD) on the relationship between organizational culture and OCB-O. The results confirmed that HCD significantly amplifies this relationship, with the strength of the interaction contingent on the level of investment in employee development. This finding is reinforced by prior research by Dixit and Sinha (2020), Islam and Amin (2022) and Ployhart et al. (2014), which emphasizes HCD as a key enabler that enhances the influence of culture on discretionary behaviors. Where organizations invest in HCD, employees acquire enhanced knowledge, skills and motivation to reciprocate through higher engagement in OCB-O. On the contrary, insufficient HCD reduces the potential for culture to drive organizationally beneficial behaviors. This highlights the strategic value of embedding HCD in cultural transformation initiatives, particularly within universities seeking to strengthen organizational citizenship.

The final hypothesis assessed the moderating role of HCD on the relationship between organizational culture and OCB-I. The results provided robust support for this hypothesis, showing that HCD significantly strengthens the positive effect of organizational culture on OCB-I. This resonates with prior scholarship (Dixit and Sinha, 2020; Lussier and Hendon, 2019) that emphasizes the combined importance of cultural context and developmental investment in fostering citizenship behaviors directed toward individuals. When HCD is robust, employees are more confident, proactive and willing to support team objectives, as they possess both the competence and psychological resources to exceed formal job expectations. In contrast, limited HCD undermines the cultural effect on OCB-I, restricting employees’ capacity and willingness to engage in discretionary support for peers. The findings therefore suggest that HCD not only builds competence but also fosters a mindset conducive to collaboration and initiative, reinforcing its critical role in maximizing the benefits of organizational culture.

The findings closely resonate with and extend the trajectory of earlier findings, revealing consistent results with studies that relate supportive cultural environments to stronger expressions of organizational citizenship. Equally to evidence provided by Alex Praveen Raj et al. (2024), Caya and Mosconi (2023), Dunmade et al. (2023) and Krajcsák and Kozák (2022), the results confirm that culture remains a paramount determinant of both OCB-O and OCB-I, underlining the continued relevance of shared norms, values and expectations in shaping discretionary behavior. This study also verifies a view advanced by Kim et al. (2022), Lockhart et al. (2020), Salman et al. (2024) and Yahaya et al. (2022) that employees who receive trust, are included, and realize a confluence to show both organization-focused and individual-focused citizenship. The moderating role of human capital development also fortifies prior arguments made by Dixit and Sinha (2020), Islam and Amin (2022) and Lussier and Hendon (2019), emphasizing that developmental investment strengthens employees’ motivation and capacity to act beyond formal job requirements. Demonstrating that HCD consistently amplifies the cultural influences on OCB-O and OCB-I, the study not only corroborates existing findings but also deepens the understanding of how capability-building initiatives interact with cultural dynamics to sustain citizenship behavior in academic institutions.

This study contributes to organizational behavior literature by advancing the theoretical understanding of how organizational culture influences OCB-O and OCB-I, especially within in the university setting. It adds depth to existing models by introducing HCD as a moderating variable, thus offering a more broad view of how cultural values are translated into discretionary employee behaviors. The findings support and extend SET, suggesting that when organizations invest in employee development, employees are more likely to reciprocate through positive behaviors that exceed formal job expectations. In addition, the study enriches the SET and RBV by positioning HCD as a strategic asset that strengthens the behavioral outcomes of a strong organizational culture in the university setting.

For practitioners, the study highlights the strategic importance of aligning HCD initiatives with organizational culture goals to enhance OCB-O and OCB-I. Management and personnel departments in the universities should not only cultivate a positive and inclusive culture but also implement continuous learning opportunities, mentorship programs and targeted skill development initiatives. Doing so will enhances employees’ ability and willingness to exhibit OCB, leading to improved collaboration, and performance. In addition, regular assessments of cultural values and HCD strategies to ensure coherence and effectiveness in driving employee engagement and citizenship behaviors. This integrated approach is especially critical for sustaining competitive advantage in dynamic and academic environments.

The major limitations of the current studies is the potential bias in self-reported measures of OCB, as employees may overstate their behaviors or feel pressured to conform to perceived organizational expectations. Also the cross-sectional nature of the study limits the ability to draw causal inferences and the industry specific such that the present study focus only on the private universities in Kwara State of which there are many other higher institutions like college of education, polytechnics and federal and state university within the Nigerian education system. Therefore, Future research could explore the specific HCD practices that are most effective in enhancing the relationship between organizational culture and OCB. In addition, future studies could explore how HCD can be tailored to different cultural contexts and organizational structures to assess its impact across industries and geographic regions. Finally, expanding the scope of their studies by including all the higher institutes in the country to increase the number of participants in the study.

This study examined the relationship between organizational culture and OCB in private universities in Kwara State, Nigeria, with emphasis on the moderating role of HCD. Guided by the SET and the RBV, the research assessed the effect of organizational culture on OCB directed toward individuals (OCB-I) and the organization (OCB-O). Data collected from academic staff were analyzed using descriptive statistics and PLS-SEM regression analysis. The results indicate that a supportive and adaptive organizational culture fosters extra-role behaviors such as altruism, conscientiousness, and cooperation, which are vital for organizational resilience and effectiveness. Nonetheless, the findings further reveal that organizational culture alone is not sufficient to fully drive OCB. When complemented with deliberate investment in HCD the influence of culture on OCB is significantly strengthened. HCD enables employees to internalize organizational values and contribute beyond their formal responsibilities. The study concludes that the integration of culture and HCD is essential for enhancing OCB and sustaining performance in a competitive academic environment. Future studies should continue to examine this relationship to provide deeper insights for policy and management practice.