The challenge of global competition highlights the importance of the concepts such as innovation, flexibility responsive to ever-lasting change. Organizations seek new areas for sustainable competitive advantage. Human resources are the most crucial factor to create advantage that can not be easily duplicated by rivals and specific for each organization. Work behaviors like organizational citizenship behaviors are receiving more attention as they contribute to effective functioning of organization.
Organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) is referred to workplace behaviors that exceed one’s basic job requirements. They are often described as behaviors that go beyond the call of duty.
OCB is a Metter of personal choice and failure to exhibit such as meet a sales target or fail to deliver good customer service, the employees resists helping a co-worker to solve a work – related problem, the employee may not get any punishment since helping a co- worker is considered as discretionary in nature and is not an enforceable requirement of the job description.
This special behavior has become a lively research field investigated by organizational sociologists, psychologists, and management researchers. However, whereas most of the studies appear to deal with the phenomenon from a behavioral/functional perspective the natural orientation of citizenship to the political science arena is overlooked.
Organizations citizenship behaviour refers to the ability and self esteem to behave or react to do some responsibilities in more then they order in job specification without aim to get any rewards on that. We are really known that the campaign about the civic awareness among the Malaysian citizenship or in contacts of world wide. In organizational citizenship behavioural aspects, that awareness in little and can say that this is a spirit of hard work in micro level. The workers should have the civic spirit in working situation to the goodness, important and the high productivity of organization.
Mangers often find it difficult to directly reward good citizenship as well as punish directly the absence of such citizenship. a good citizen is an employee who offers support to the organization even then such support is not verbally demanded further redefines OCB as those behaviors’ that contribute to the maintenance .
OCB is considered as a separate contrast from task performers in that it involves those behaviors that are not required of the job, but are performed by the employees in order to enhance the job environment and contribute indirectly to organizational effectiveness.
Organizations have shifted away from the use of strict hierarchical structures and individualized jobs. Instead somewhat autonomous team-based work structures have implemented, and this implementation has increased the importance of individual initiative and cooperation (Organ, 1988).
In this project we will explain about Organization Citizenship Behavior and its effect on turnover and absenteeism within organization and how demographic aspects like age, gender, level of educations and tenure they want to relate these aspects with organizational citizenship behaviour concepts to see the important of these things.
Key words: absenteeism, turnover, organizational citizenship behavior, withdrawal behavior.
1.0 Definitions of OCB

According to Organ (1988) in OCB an individual’s behavior is discretionary. This behavior is not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system and it in the aggregate that promotes the effective functioning of the organization. Katz's (1964) paid heed to the notion of employees’ extra-role behaviors. Katz noted that employees willingly contribute extra efforts for the attainment of the organizational outcomes. Organ relied on both the notions of and Katz (1964) to develop his OCB construct. A second definition of OCB comes from Van Dyne et al. (1995) who proposed the broader construct of "extra-role behavior" (ERB), defined as
"Behavior which benefits the organization and/or is intended to benefit the organization, which is discretionary and which goes beyond existing role expectations" (p. 218). Organ (1997) suggested that this definition did not provide much clarity, noting that one's "job role" is dependent on the expectations of and communication from the role sender. The "sent role" could thus be less than or greater than the actual job requirements. This role theory definition thus places OCB or ERB in the realm of phenomenology, unobservable and completely subjective in nature. Distinctions between antecedents and behaviors become blurred, completely dependent on the "eyes of the beholder." This definition also presumes that the actor's intentions are "to benefit the organization." Once again, the behavior should be defined independent of its presumed antecedents. A recent review of the literature by Podsakoff, Mackenzie, Paine, and Bacharach (2000) identified a major weakness of this stream of research on OCB. The authors argued that the literature has focused more on understanding the relationship between OCB and other constructs, rather than carefully defining the nature (dimensions) of citizenship behavior itself. Podsakoff et al. (2000) warned that unless more attention is paid to the conceptualization of OCB and its measures, we are in danger of developing a stream of literature that may prove of little worth to the field in the long run.