... Even though research on DWB has widened because of its direct relationship with employee performance and organisation performance (Jacobs et al., 2014), theoretical development in this phenomenon is impeded partly because of inconsistency in its conceptualisation. Several interrelated terminologies have been used to refer to the said phenomenon, for example antisocial behaviour (Giacalone and Greenberg, 1997), delinquency (Hogan and Hogan, 1989), employee theft (Greenberg, 1990;Hollinger and Clark, 1982), workplace sabotage (Analoui, 1995), organisational revenge (Bies et al., 1997), workplace incivility (Jin et al., 2020), workplace aggression (Baron and Neuman, 1996), worker resistance (Thompson and Ackroyd, 1995), cyberloafing (Lim, 2002), cyber deviancy (Weatherbee, 2010), workplace mobbing and bad behaviour in organisations (Griffin and Lopez, 2005), organisational misbehaviour (Vardi and Wiener, 1996), negative mentoring (Kumar and Budhwar, 2020;Robinson and Bennett, 1995) and counterproductive behaviour (Specter and Fox, 2005). Irrespective of the different terminologies used and different conceptualisations proposed, deviant workplace behaviour and its variant forms are simply referred to as the negative behaviours employees engage in (Nair and Bhatnagar, 2011), which needs to be managed effectively not to hurt organisational effectiveness and efficiency of those who are at the receiving end of the DWB. ...