Does organizational citizenship behavior(OCB) promote organizational performance without fail? Previous researchers on OCB have maintained that such behaviors may stem from other-serving (altruistic) motives, have good influences upon employees, and consequently be critical for organizational efficiency and effectiveness. By and large, prior articles published in recent decades about OCB also have pointed to the merits and advantages of voluntary or extra-role activities extended in the workplace. Therefore, contemporary literature on OCB has been primarily focusing on the functional aspects (i. e. benefit-side) of the ‘good soldier syndrome’. In contrast to this standpoint we suggest a different view by illuminating the latent dysfunctions (i. e. cost-side) of OCB. This paper conceptually criticizes the underlying assumptions of theory on OCB and argues that prior researches have emphasized the partial (positive) features of such behaviors while generally disregarding the potentially negative connotations of them. By so doing, it is proposed here that OCB may not promote or even demote organizational performance if the benefits fail to outweigh the costs. Three overlooked presumptions that alternative causes and effects of OCB may exist in organization are as follows. First, OCB may originate from self-serving motives. Employees who engage in OCB might help coworkers, stay late, and so on, to enhance their rewards and/or self-images rather than only to support the organization itself. Second, OCB may bring about undesirable outcomes for individual workers. Employees who perform considerable OCB might experience role-overload and role-ambiguity, be susceptible to the conflict with their supervisor or resentment among peers, be left with less time to devote to their own tasks or personal lives, and so forth. Third, OCB may not or even negatively influence the major objective indexes of organizational performance as evidenced by few empirical studies. Organizations of which performance appraisal systems are inappropriate, formal functions are substituted (or hindered) by OCB or impression management, and OCBs are abused by employees and/or middle managers may have further difficulties in trying to improve their performances through OCB against all expectations. After giving due considerations to the practical and conceptual issues (e. g. OCB quality, reverse causality of OCB-performance, so-called group think phenomenon, level of analysis of performance, additional debates on behavioral motives, and the like) in the sphere of OCB research, we discussed a number of theoretical and managerial implications of this complementary viewpoint along with some significant agendas for future research in depth as well.