ArticlePDF Available

Workplace Deviant Behavior: Does Employee Psychological Job Demand and Lack of Job Resources Influence Employee Workplace Deviant Behavior?

Authors:

Abstract

ABSTRAK Employee deviance has received increasing attention in the past decade. Past research have reported that work environment related factors such as organizational support, supervisory support, role conflict, and job demand were associated with deviant behavior The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between job demand (psychological job demand), and job resources (social support), and employee workplace deviant behavior. This study adopts a cross-sectional correlation study design. A total of 315 employees were selected using cluster sampling technique participated in this study. Data were collected using a self-administered questionnaire using the drop and collect method. Data were analyzed using descriptive analysis (mean, standard deviation, frequency distribution) to describe the demographic profile and study variables. Correlation and regression analysis was performed to test the relationship between psychological job demand, and social support, and employee workplace deviant
Jurnal Psikologi Malaysia 28 (2) (2014): 39-62
Workplace Deviant Behavior: Does Employee
Psychological Job Demand and Lack of Job Resources
Influence Employee Workplace Deviant Behavior?
Ili Nabila Norsilan1
Zoharah Omar1
Aminah Ahmad2
1 Jabatan Pemajuan Profesional dan Pendidikan
Lanjutan
Fakulti Pengajian Pendidikan
Universiti Putra Malaysia
43400 Serdang, Selangor.
2 Institut Pengajian Sains Sosial
Universiti Putra Malaysia
Putra InfoPort
43400 UPM Serdang, Selangor.
ABSTRAK
Employee deviance has received increasing attention in the
past decade. Past research have reported that work environment
related factors such as organizational support, supervisory
support, role conflict, and job demand were associated with
deviant behavior The purpose of this paper is to examine the
relationship between job demand (psychological job demand),
and job resources (social support), and employee workplace
deviant behavior. This study adopts a cross-sectional
correlation study design. A total of 315 employees were
selected using cluster sampling technique participated in this
study. Data were collected using a self-administered
questionnaire using the drop and collect method. Data were
analyzed using descriptive analysis (mean, standard deviation,
frequency distribution) to describe the demographic profile and
study variables. Correlation and regression analysis was
performed to test the relationship between psychological job
demand, and social support, and employee workplace deviant
40 Jurnal Psikologi Malaysia 28 (2) (2014)
behaviors. The result revealed that lack of social support has
significant positive influence on employee workplace deviant
behavior. The findings suggest that lack of job resources such
as social support may drive employees to engage in deviant
work behavior. However, high job demand experienced by
employees does not drive them towards engaging in deviant
work behavior.
Keywords: psychological job demand, job resources, social
support, Job Demand Resources model, workplace deviant
behavior.
INTRODUCTION
Employee deviance has received increasing attention in the
past decade (Fagbohungbe, Akinbode, & Ayodeji, 2012).
Different names were given to describe employee workplace
deviant behavior such as counterproductive behavior (Bennet
& Robinson, 2000), workplace aggression (Neuman & Baron,
1998), antisocial behavior (Robinson & Kelly, 1998),
organization misbehavior (Thompson & Ackroyd, 1999), and
organizational incivility (Miner, Settles, Pratt-Hyatt, & Brady,
2012). Employee workplace deviant behaviors can include
behaviors such as absenteeism, withdrawal, withholding effort
at work, sexual harassment, unethical decision making, not
following manager’s instructions, intentionally slowing down
the work cycle, arriving late to work, vandalism, rumor
spreading and corporate sabotage (Bennet & Robinson, 2000).
Employee workplace deviant behavior has far reaching effects
on organizations and its members. Such behaviors will not only
affect organizational productivity and may lead to financial
loss, but may also have negative social and psychological
impact on employees (McCardle, 2007). In the U.S., it was
estimated that approximately $6 to $200 billion loss annually
due to employee workplace deviant behavior (Brown &
Mitchell, 2010). Besides financial loss, KPMG Malaysia
Fraud, Bribery, and Corruption Survey 2013 reported almost
Workplace Deviant Behavior: Does Employee Psychological Job Demand 41
and Lack of Job Resources Influence Employee Workplace Deviant
Behavior
70% of employee lost their morale and productivity due to
unethical behavior that occur at their workplace.
Many antecedents, internal and external factors, were
found to have influence on employee workplace deviant
behaviors. One such external factors reported was work
environment such as organizational support, supervisory
support, role conflict, and job demand were reported to be
associated with deviant behavior (Balducci, Schaufeli, &
Fraccaroli, 2011). In this study, we focused on job demand and
job resources which have been suggested as work environment
factors that contribute to employee workplace deviant behavior
(Tuckey, Chrisopoulos & Dollard, 2012). Past researcher has
found that job demand can increase employees’ strain that will
eventually cause stress and depression (Xanthopoulou et al.,
2007). An increase in job demand often contributes to major
effect on employee well-being. This is because; high job
demand may exert employee pressure as they are faced with
excessive work overloads, time pressure and emotional
demands. Employees will feel tired and faced with emotional
depletion, which may lead them to act contrary to
organizational norms (Deery, Iverson, and Walsh, 2002).
Past study has shown that pressure from job demand
can increase employees’ burnout which may result in many
forms of employee workplace deviant behavior (Schaufeli &
Bakker, 2004). This is due to the high effort needed by
employees to accomplish the demands that they are not able to
cope with, thus eliciting negative responses such as depression
and stress; which finally leads them to negative behaviors.
However, there are little empirical studies conducted on work-
related stressors such as job demand and its influence on
employee negative behavior (Fransson et al., 2012). Many
studies on job demand have focused on its influence on work
engagement (Clark & Loxton, 2012; Kumar & Sia, 2012;
Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004). Moreover, most studies using the
Job Demand, Job Resources Model (JD-R) have rarely used the
42 Jurnal Psikologi Malaysia 28 (2) (2014)
model to explain the behavioral correlates of job stress
(Balducci, Schaufelli & Fraccaroli, 2011).
In terms of job resources, the JD-R model argues that
job resources such as social support, organizational justice and
career opportunities are regarded as motivational processes
which may lead to positive outcomes (Balducci et al., 2011). In
the JD-R model, job resources are treated as independent
process from job demand, i.e. job demand may engender
negative outcomes meanwhile job resources promote positive
outcomes such as directly assist an employee to perform their
job and to be psychologically engaged with their work (Brough
et al., 2013). From the model, it was not clear whether lack of
job resources may directly lead to negative outcomes. The JD-
R model tend to focus on the buffering role of job resources
that might off-set the effect of job demand (Balducci et al.,
2011; Xanthopoulou et al., 2007). Several scholars (Cohen &
Wills, 1985; Thoits, 1985) have previously argued that lack of
social support, which is considered as part of job resources
(Balducci et al., 2011), or changes in support over time are
stressors in themselves which may lead to negative outcomes
whether or not other stressful circumstances occur. Schaufeli,
Bakker and Rhenen (2009) have also reported that decrease in
job resources such as social support predicted psychological
burnout over time suggesting a direct link between social
support and negative outcomes. Moreover, past studies have
also reported that lack of organizational justice, which is also a
component of job resources, may lead to counterproductive
work behavior (Aquino, Lewis, & Bradfield, 1999; Fox,
Spector, & Miles, 2001). In this study, therefore, we seek to
examine the negative outcomes of lack of job resources.
Hence, the objective of this study is to describe the
prevalence of employee workplace deviance and to determine
the influence of job demand (i.e. psychological job demand)
and lack of job resources (i.e. lack of social support) on
employee workplace deviant behavior.
Workplace Deviant Behavior: Does Employee Psychological Job Demand 43
and Lack of Job Resources Influence Employee Workplace Deviant
Behavior
Job Demand and Job Resources
Demand is the “degree to which the environment contains
stimuli that require effort, attention, and response” (Jones &
Fletcher, 1996 p.34). It refers to the things that need to be done.
In terms of working environment, job demand specifically
refers to physical, psychological, social, or organizational
aspects of the job that require sustained physical and
psychological effort and associated with certain costs and
which in the long run may potentially give rise to health
problem (Balducci et al., 2011; Xanthopoulou et al., 2007). Job
demand is an important element in shaping employee behavior
(Jong & Hartog, 2007). High job demand may increase
employees’ physiological and psychological effects including
employees’ burnout (Demerouti, Bekker, Nacheiner, &
Schaufeli, 2001). Employees will experience stress when they
are faced with excessive job demand because excessive job
demand beyond skills and resources of the employees will
increase employee job stress and burnout which eventually
enhance their negative behavior (Tepper et al., 2009) In this
study, we focused on psychological job demand which refers to
employees being required to perform their task rapidly by
working hard and fast that may result in work conflict
Job resources refer to those physical, physiological,
social, or organizational aspects of the job such as social
support, organizational justice and career opportunities
(Balducci et al., 2011) that may facilitate in achieving work
goals, attenuate job demands and/or stimulate personal growth
and development (Balducci et al., 2011). From this definition,
social support is regarded as one form of job resources. Social
support refers to the belief that one is valued, cared for, and
loved by others in a social network such as family members,
friends, co-workers, relatives, and neighbours (Ruiz, Prather, &
Kauffman, 2013; Thoits, 1985). In the context of work
environment, social support refers to the social environment of
employee workplace environment such as good relationship
with supervisor and co-workers, and conducive workplace
44 Jurnal Psikologi Malaysia 28 (2) (2014)
environment (Sanne, Torp, Mykletun, & Dahl, 2005). It refers
to the overall levels of helpful social interaction available on
the job from both co-workers and supervisors (Sundin,
Hochwälder, Bildt, & Lisspers, 2007). In this study we focus
on lack of social support which means lack of good
relationship and helpful social interactions with superiors and
co-workers, and a non-conducive work environment. Social
support may take a negative form when there is no support or
lack of support given (Antonucci, 1985).
Workplace Deviant Behavior
Workplace deviant behavior refers to any behaviors that are
contrary from organizational norms and harms organizational
productivity (Bennett & Robinson, 2000). Even the smallest
form of negative behavior such as taking longer breaks during
lunchtime can be considered as workplace deviant behavior
because it deviates from organizational norms and affects
productivity. Norms refer to employee expected behavior,
language and action that are allowed in their working
organization.
Many researchers have defined workplace deviant
behavior in different terms. However, these terms may be used
to represent workplace deviant behavior because these terms
describe the behavior by means of similar definition and
characteristics. Other terms such as workplace incivility (Estes,
2008), counterproductive behavior (Bennett & Robinson,
2000), organizational misbehavior (Thompson & Ackroyd,
1999), dysfunctional behavior (Jaworski & Young, 1992), and
cyber loafing (Lim, 2002) have been used in studies describing
employee workplace deviant behavior. Workplace incivility for
instance, has been defined as improper manners that is contrary
to organizational norms with unclear intention to harm the
target such as calling someone with improper names or insult
others (Miner et al., 2012). The other term of workplace
deviant behavior for instance counterproductive behavior,
refers to negative behavior exerted intentionally by individuals
Workplace Deviant Behavior: Does Employee Psychological Job Demand 45
and Lack of Job Resources Influence Employee Workplace Deviant
Behavior
to harm the target and include behaviors such as theft and
sabotage (Penney & Spector, 2005). In general, these terms
have similar definitions and characteristics with workplace
deviant behavior which emphasize on negative behaviors that
deviate from organizational norms and harms organizational
productivity.
In the typology of workplace deviant behavior by
Robinson and Bennet (1995), it is suggested that deviant
behavior can be divided into two major dimensions which are
1) interpersonal vs. organizational deviant and 2) minor vs.
serious deviant. The first dimension represents the target of the
deviant behavior which can be categorized into interpersonal
deviance and organizational deviance. Interpersonal deviance
is deviant behavior that has been committed directly towards
individual employee such as abuse and rudeness (Bennet and
Robinson, 2000). Organizational deviance on the other hand
refers to deviant behavior that violate from organizational
norms which can bring harm to organization such as stealing
from organization, leave work early, and wasting resources
(Berry, Ones, and Sackett, 2007). The second dimension
describes the severity of the deviant behavior based on the
seriousness of the deviant behavior. Minor deviant behavior
refers to less serious deviant behavior such as showing
favoritism, gossiping others, and intentionally works slower,
whereas serious deviant behavior refers to more serious and
severe behavior such as such as sabotaging equipments, sexual
harassment, and endangering other employees (Robinson and
Bennet, 1995). By combining these two dimensions, deviant
behavior can be categorized into four quadrants which are
political deviant, personal aggression, production deviant, and
property deviant. Each of the quadrants is unrelated to another
quadrant.
The first quadrant is a production deviant which refers
to minor organizational deviant behavior that affects the quality
and quantity of employees’ work for instance, behavior that
wasting time and organizational resources such as leaving work
46 Jurnal Psikologi Malaysia 28 (2) (2014)
early, late to work, or work for personal matters (Hollinger and
Clark, 1982). The second quadrant is a property deviant which
refers to any serious deviant behavior that damaging
organizational assets or property without permission such as
theft, sabotage company equipment, and fraud (Peterson,
2002). On the third quadrant is a political deviant which has
been defined by Robinson and Bennet (1995) as a minor
interpersonal deviant behavior that involve of social interaction
that puts others at political or personal disadvantages such as
gossiping others, and showing favoritism. The forth quadrant is
a personal aggression which refers to serious form of
interpersonal deviant behavior that involve of behaviors that
are violent and aggressive such as sexual harassment, rape, and
physical contact harms (Litzky, Eddleston, & Kidder, 2006) .
In this study, we included cyber loafing as part of
production deviant because the consequences from this activity
that may lead to decrease employee and organizational
productivity (Blanchard & Henle, 2008). Moreover, cyber
loafing was added to measure employee workplace deviant
behavior because it was recently identified as a new form of
workplace deviant behavior that arises along with
technological advancement in workplace (Blanchard and
Henle, 2008). Cyber loafing refers to any non-work related
internet usage activities by employees during working hours
for their personal purpose (Lim, 2002). Cyber loafing activities
such as play online games, read non-work related email, write
or read non-work related blog were considered as employee
workplace deviant behavior because these activities were
deviate from organizational norms and wasting time which will
eventually affects organizational productivity. Past research
also found that cyber loafing resulted in unproductive
employees because employees tend ignore their tasks and
responsibilities when they are involved in cyber loafing
(Askew, 2012).
Workplace Deviant Behavior: Does Employee Psychological Job Demand 47
and Lack of Job Resources Influence Employee Workplace Deviant
Behavior
Theoretical Framework
This study utilizes the Job Demand-resources model (JD-R
model) by Demerouti, Bekker, Nacheiner, & Schaufeli (2001)
and further extended by (Balducci et al., 2011) to explain the
direct linkages between job demand, job resources and
workplace deviant behavior and used the direct hypothesis
(Cohen & Wills, 1985; Thoits, 1985) to explain the direct
linkages between social support and employee deviant work
behavior.
The JD-Rs model identifies job demand as potentially
damaging job characteristics, and job resources as protective
factors, that can be used to promote employee well-being.
Balducci, Schaufeli and Fraccaroli (2011) have extended the
JD-R model by including counterproductive work behavior as a
behavioral manifestation of stress. They assert that
counterproductive work behavior is an outcome of health
impairment process that leads to negative outcomes. The main
proposition of this model is the risk of employee stress
increasing as a result of high job demand. Increase in job
demand may elicit negative employee behavior such as
depression and anxiety because high effort is needed in order to
cope with the job demand. Moreover, employees with high job
demand may have not enough time, skills or resources to
complete their task. All of these will result in employees
experiencing stress and burnout; which in turn may lead to
various types of negative outcomes including workplace
deviant behavior. Stress, depression, and burnout may result in
incompetency to complete the task; which will subsequently
lead to engagement in workplace deviant behavior. In sum, the
JD-R model explained that an increase in job demand will
result in employee stress which in turn, influences employee to
engage in negative behavior.
Consistent with the JD-R model, past research has
found that job demand may contribute to workplace deviant
behavior. For example, Fox & Spector (2006) found that job
48 Jurnal Psikologi Malaysia 28 (2) (2014)
related factors such as role conflict and job demand influence
workplace deviant behavior. This is due to the feeling of being
threatened by excessive job demand experienced by employees
(Rodell & Judge, 2009). Furthermore, frustration at work and
organizational factors such as work overload, role conflict, and
role ambiguity has been identified as work stressors that lead to
employee workplace deviant behavior (Fox & Spector, 2006).
In conclusion, job demand is an organizational factor that can
arouse employee stress which is manifested by employees
engaging in workplace deviant behavior.
In addition, past research have also reported that
employees will experience stress when they are faced with
excessive job demand which eventually reduces their emotion
and feeling to perform their job (Edmondson, 2008). Other
research has also found that work overload, job demand and
work conflict that goes beyond skills and resources of
employees will increase employee job stress; hence resulting in
them engaging in deviant workplace behavior (Tepper et al.,
2009). Past research have also revealed that increase in job
demand and work overload can lead employee to feeling
exhausted and stressed, hence causing them to be involved in
deviant behavior (Sanne et al., 2005). Balducci et al. (2011)
found that job demand to be associated with deviant workplace
behavior. This is because employees who are under stress will
eventually have difficulty in social interaction. Besides, high
workloads are also found to have a relationship with negative
emotion and behaviors (Grandey, Tam, & Brauburger, 2002).
When job demand is high, employees will face difficulty to
complete their task. This difficulty will contribute to negative
feelings and emotions, which finally triggers their negative
behavior. Golparvar et al., (2012) described that increases in
job demand may lead to employee negative emotion and
eventually result in them engaging in negative behavior.
Besides, other recent researcher also found that work overload
and job demand that go beyond the skills and resources
available will increase job stress and lead to workplace deviant
Workplace Deviant Behavior: Does Employee Psychological Job Demand 49
and Lack of Job Resources Influence Employee Workplace Deviant
Behavior
behavior (Jaarsveld, Walker, & Skarlicki, 2010). Based on
these considerations, we hypothesized that:
Hypothesis: Job demand will be positively related to workplace
deviant behavior.
The JD-R model suggest that job resources such as social
support play an extrinsic motivational role, because work
environments that offer many resources foster the willingness
to dedicate one’s efforts and abilities to the work task (Bakker,
Demerouti, & Schaufeli, 2005; Bakker, van Veldhoven, &
Xanthopoulou, 2010). In such environments it is likely that the
task will be completed successfully and that the work goal will
be attained (Bakker et al., 2010). On the other hand, when
resources are limited, for instance when there is little work-
related social support, employee may experience greater stress
and frustrations at work. As a result employee may not be
willing or dedicated to put much effort and abilities to the work
task. According to Tuckey, Chrisopoulos, and Dollard (2012),
stress and frustration that arises from working under stressful
conditions may be projected down the line in the form of
negative interpersonal behaviors directed at other employees.
In support for the direct effect hypothesis between
social support and employee deviance, Thoits (1985) argued
that emotional support which originates from interpersonal
relationship helps sustain well-being. Since most interpersonal
relationships can be characterized as role relationships, Thoits
(1985) suggest that emotional support is obtained from ongoing
role relations. Role relationships provide security, sense of
belonging, self-esteem, and a sense of comparative mastery,
and each of these self-referent factors has positive affective
consequences. Conversely, when a person possessed few roles
or loses roles, perceives or receives negative evaluations from
role partners or observes his/her relative inadequacy in role
performance (each types of stressful circumstances), or in other
words perceives lack of emotional support, their senses of
security, belonging, and comparative will decrease and
50 Jurnal Psikologi Malaysia 28 (2) (2014)
negative feeling states will result. Thiots (1985) argues that if
these conditions and responses persist it will produce
disturbances which may have subsequent influences on role
behaviours. Based on these considerations, we hypothesized
that:
Hypothesis: Lack of social support will be positively related to
workplace deviant behavior.
METHOD
Research design, sampling, and data collection
This study adopted a descriptive correlational research design.
The participants in this study were 315 employees from 11
private organizations in Klang Valley. The selections of the
respondents were based on cluster random sampling by job
category. Respondents were chosen by their job categories
which comprises of four job categories namely, managerial,
supervisor, professional and supporting staff group.
The study sample comprises of 42% males and 58%
females. About 76.3% of the respondents were Islam, 12.8%
Buddha, 4.5 % Hindu, and only 0.6% of the respondents were
Atheist. In terms of education level, almost half of the
respondents (49.5%) held a bachelor degree, followed by SPM
holder (22.4%), certificate holder (10.2%), and only (4.2%) of
the respondents have masters degree. Most of the respondents
were executive (40.3%), followed by support staff group
(35.7%), supervisor (12.8%), and manager (11.2%).
Self-administered questionnaires were distributed to
respondents as a medium of the data collection. The
questionnaire consists of two languages which are English and
Malay languages. The questionnaires were handed over to the
representative of human resources officer who was responsible
to distribute the questionnaires to the study respondent selected
according to their job category. A total of 390 questionnaires
Workplace Deviant Behavior: Does Employee Psychological Job Demand 51
and Lack of Job Resources Influence Employee Workplace Deviant
Behavior
were distributed by using a drop-and-collect method. However,
only 78.5% (315) of the respondents completed the
questionnaires.
Instrument
Job demand. Job demand was measured using the Job
Demand-Control Support Questionnaire (DCSQ) developed by
Sanne et al. (2005). A total of 5-items comprising of
psychological job demand was assessed using a 7-point scale
ranging from 1 (never) to 7 (very often). Items that measure
psychological job demand assess employee psychological
demands requirement in performing their tasks such as “does
your job require you to work very fast?”, “does your job
require you to work very hard?”, and “do you have sufficient
time for all your work tasks?”. The reliability for job demand
instruments in the present study was 0.751 which is considered
as reliable
Social support. Social support was assessed using the
DSCQ instrument (6 items) developed by Sanne et al. (2005)
using a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (never) to 7 (very often).
We reversed the items into negative statements to signify lack
of social support. For example respondents were asked to
assess their working environment in social context such as
“There is lack of good collegiality at work”, “I don’t get along
well with my supervisors”, and “I don’t get along well with my
co-workers”. Cronbach alpha was .868.
Workplace Deviant Behavior. Employee workplace
deviant behavior was assessed using 24 items developed by
past researchers. These items were combined from 15 items of
the classical measurement of workplace deviant behavior by
Bennett and Robinson (2000), and 9 items measuring cyber
loafing developed by Blanchard and Henle (2008). Workplace
deviant behavior items measurement by Bennett and Robinson
(2000) were originally consist of 23 items. Using face validity
by asking the employees from the private sector, 15 items out
52 Jurnal Psikologi Malaysia 28 (2) (2014)
of 23 items were considered as relevant in Malaysian setting.
From a total 15 items, 3 items measure interpersonal deviant,
and 12 of the items measure organizational deviant such as
“come late to work without permission”, “made fun someone at
work”, “dragged out work in order to get overtime”, “neglected
to follow my boss's instructions”, “worked on a personal matter
during working hours”, and “taken property from work without
permission”. Examples of the items that were considered as not
relevant in Malaysia context which have been excluded in this
study were “drink alcohols or taking drugs”. Respondents were
asked to answer on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (never) to 7
(very often) to indicate the frequency in which they engage in
each behavior.
For cyber loafing, a total of 9 items adapted from
Blanchard & Henle (2008) and Lim (2002) was used in this
study. Examples of the items were “received, send, and check
non-work-related email”,” browsing non-work related website”
,“shop online for personal goods”, “download movies and
music”, and “writing and reading blogs”. These items were
measured by 7-point scale ranging from 1 (never) to 7 (very
often). Reliability for employee workplace deviant behavior
was 0.957 which shows high reliability.
Data analysis
Descriptive analysis such as mean, standard deviation, and
percentage were used to determine the level of job demand,
social support and workplace deviant behavior. Besides,
Pearson Product-Moment Correlation analysis was conducted
to determine whether there is a significant relationship between
job demand and workplace deviant behavior. This study also
used Multiple Linear Regression analysis to predict the
influence of job demand on employee deviant behavior.
Workplace Deviant Behavior: Does Employee Psychological Job Demand 53
and Lack of Job Resources Influence Employee Workplace Deviant
Behavior
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Descriptive analysis of psychological job demand, social job
demand, and workplace deviant behavior
Table 1 indicates the level of psychological job demand, social
job demand, and workplace deviant behavior. Data
transformation has been made from mean of psychological job
demand, mean of social job demand, and mean of workplace
deviant behavior into three level which are low level, moderate
level, and high level. For level of psychological job demand,
result shows that most of the respondents recorded 67.3% to
have moderate level of psychological job demand. On the other
hand, lack of social support shows that most of the respondents
recorded 66.0% to have low level of social job demand. It can
be conclude that, most of the respondents are in low level of
social job demand. Workplace deviant behavior indicates the
high percentage of 85.1% in low level of WDB.
Table 1: level of job demand psychological, job demand
social, workplace deviant behavior.
Variables
f
%
Mean
Sd
Level of job demand
1.00 (low job demand)
2.2
4.55
.77
2.00 (moderate job
demand)
67.3
3.00 (high job
demand)
30.5
Level of lack of social support
1.00 (high social
support)
208
66.0
2.60
.96
2.00 (moderate social
support)
99
31.5
3.00 (low social
support)
8
2.5
54 Jurnal Psikologi Malaysia 28 (2) (2014)
Level of workplace deviant behavior (WDB)
1.00 (low WDB)
268
85.1
2.12
.99
2.00 (moderate
WDB)
40
12.7
3.00 (high WDB)
7
2.2
Total
315
100.0
Relationships between psychological job demand, lack of
social support, and workplace deviant behavior
A correlational analysis was performed to test the relationship
between job demand (M=4.56, SD=0.77) and lack of social
support (M=2.60, SD=0.96) with workplace deviant behavior
(M=2.12, SD=0.1) as shown in Table 2. For an alpha level of
.05, results of the correlation show that there is a low positive
significant relationship between lack of social support and
workplace deviant behavior r(315) = 0.164, p = 0.002. This
indicates that when lack of social support increases, employee
workplace deviant behavior also will increase. However, the
result shows no significant relationship between job demand
and workplace deviant behavior r(315) =.103, p = .069.
Table 2: Mean, standard deviation, and inter-correlations
for study variables
M
SD
1
2
3
Job
demand
4.55
.77
1
Lack of
social
support
2.60
.96
-.084
1
Workplace
deviance
2.12
.99
.103
.164**
1
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Workplace Deviant Behavior: Does Employee Psychological Job Demand 55
and Lack of Job Resources Influence Employee Workplace Deviant
Behavior
We proceed with multiple linear regression analysis to
examine the influence between the variables. Since only lack of
social support was found to be significantly correlated with
workplace deviance, we only tested the influence of this
relationship. Table 3 indicates that lack of social support
significantly predicts workplace deviant behavior (β=0.17, t =
2.94; p < 0.05). The result revealed lack of social support
explained 4.0% of the variance in employee workplace deviant
behavior.
Table 3: Regression analysis on job demand and workplace
deviant behavior
Variable
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
B
SE
B
t
(Constant)
1.67
.16
10.34
Lack of social
support
.17
.06
.16
2.94
NOTE: R=.201; R2= .040; F= 6.584; P=.002.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
The above analysis shows that only lack of social support has
relationship with employee workplace deviant behavior.
Besides, it was found that lack of social support not only has a
relationship with employee workplace deviant behavior, but it
also can predict employee workplace deviant behavior.
Employees who experience lower social support will commit
more workplace deviant behavior but not employees who have
high psychological job demand. Lack of social support is an
important element that can influence employee behavior. Lack
of social support will lead to employee stress and finally effect
their occupational health and well-being. A stressful working
environment with less social support can arouse employee
stress which may develops a negative pattern in employee
56 Jurnal Psikologi Malaysia 28 (2) (2014)
behavior (Bowling & Beehr, 2006). Literature argued that
social support is important for employees in order for them to
cope with their work task and environment (Ven, Tooren, &
Vlerick, 2013). Support from colleagues, supervisors and good
workplace surroundings are crucial in order to provide
employees with conducive workplace environment to perform
their task. Past research have reported that lack social support
can lead to negative outcomes because; lower social support
from workplace environment will increase employee high
strain which eventually enhance employee stress (Pelfrene,
Vlerick, Kittel, Mak, Kornitzer, & Backer, 2002). In this study,
psychological job demand was found to be not important in
determining employee workplace deviant behavior. Hence, the
JD-R hypothesis on the linkages between job demand and
negative outcomes was not supported in this study.
There were some limitations in this study. Firstly, this
study tested the main effect of job demand and job resources
and did not test the buffering effect of job resources on job
demand. Secondly, this study was conducted involving
employees in selected private companies. Hence, we are not
able to conclude that we will have the same result for
employees in the public sectors. This is because the difference
in culture and norms in every sector may affect different result
from this study. Thirdly, we only studied job demand as a
factor in predicting workplace deviant behavior. However,
many other factors in literature are found to be the predictor of
workplace deviant behavior.
Since this study showed that lack of social support
plays an important role as a predictor of workplace deviant
behavior, initial concern should be taken by organization to
provide work related support at work place. Organizations
should be able to provide employees with a conducive and
supportive work environment to enhance employees feeling of
security, sense of belonging, self-esteem, and a sense of
comparative master, which in turn avoids employee negative
behavior. Besides, organizations can also show their support by
Workplace Deviant Behavior: Does Employee Psychological Job Demand 57
and Lack of Job Resources Influence Employee Workplace Deviant
Behavior
providing employees with training in order to help them
complete their tasks.
REFERENCE
Thompson, P. & Ackyord, S.(1999). Organizational misbehaviour.
Sage.
Andersson, L. M., & Pearson, C. M. (1999). Tit for tat? The
spiraling effect of incivility in the workplace. Academy of
management review, 24(3), 452-471.
Antonucci, T. (1985). Social Support: Theritical Advances, Recent
Findings and Pressing Issues. In I. G. Sarason & B. R. Saraon
(Eds.), Social Support: Theory, Research and Applications (pp.
21–38). Dordrecht, Netherland: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
Aquino, K., Lewis, M. U., & Bradfield, M. (1999). Justice
constructs, negative affectivity, and employee deviance: a
proposed model and empirical test. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 20(7), 1073–1091.
Askew, K. L. (2012). The Relationship Between Cyberloafing and
Task Performance and an Examination of the Theory of
Planned Behavior as a Model of Cyberloafing. Doctoral
dissertation, University of South Florida.
Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2001). The
crossover of burnout and work engagement among working
couples. Human Relations, 58(5), 661–689.
Bakker, A. B., van Veldhoven, M., & Xanthopoulou, D. (2010).
Beyond the Demand-Control Model. Journal of Personnel
Psychology, 9(1), 3–16.
Balducci, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Fraccaroli, F. (2011). The job
demands resources model and counterproductive work
behaviour": The role of job- related affect. European Journal of
Work and Organizational Psychology, 20(4), 467–496.
Bennett, R. J., & Robinson, S. L. (2000). Development of a measure
of workplace deviance. The Journal of Applied Psychology,
85(3), 349–360.
Berry, C. M., Ones, D. S., & Sackett, P. R. (2007). Interpersonal
deviance, organizational deviance, and their common
58 Jurnal Psikologi Malaysia 28 (2) (2014)
correlates: a review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 92(2), 410.
Blanchard, A. L., & Henle, C. A. (2008). Correlates of different
forms of cyberloafing: The role of norms and external locus of
control. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(3), 1067–1084.
Brough, P., Timms, C., Siu, O., Kalliath, T., O’Driscoll, M. P., Sit,
C. H., Lu, C. (2013). Validation of the Job Demands-Resources
model in cross-national samples: Cross-sectional and
longitudinal predictions of psychological strain and work
engagement. Human Relations, 66(10), 1311–1335.
Brown, M. E., & Mitchell, M. S. (2010). Ethical and unethical
leadership. Business Ethics Quarterly, 20(4), 583-616.
Clark, D. M. T., & Loxton, N. J. (2012). Fear, psychological
acceptance, job demands and employee work engagement: An
integrative moderated meditation model. Personality and
Individual Differences, 52(8), 893–897.
Cohen, S., & Wills, T. A. (1985). Stress, Social Support and the
Buffering Hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 94(2), 330–357.
Deery, S., Iverson, R., & Walsh, J. (2002). Work relationships in
telephone call centres: understanding emotional exhaustion and
employee withdrawal. Journal of Management studies, 39(4),
471-496.
De Jong, J. P., & Den Hartog, D. N. (2007). How leaders influence
employees' innovative behaviour. European Journal of
innovation management, 10(1), 41-64.
Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., Nachreiner, F., & Schaufeli, W. B.
(2001). The job demands-resources model of burnout. Journal
of Applied psychology, 86(3), 499.
Edmondson, D. R. (2008). Emotional exhaustion and its role in
service sabotage among boundary spanners. Doctoral
dissertation, University of South Florida.
Estes, B. (2008). Integrative literature review: workplace incivility:
impacts on individual and organizational performance. Human
Resource Development Review, 7(2), 218–240.
Fagbohungbe, B. O., Akinbode, G. a., & Ayodeji, F. (2012).
Organizational determinants of workplace deviant behaviours:
an empirical analysis in Nigeria. International Journal of
Business and Management, 7(5), 207–221.
Workplace Deviant Behavior: Does Employee Psychological Job Demand 59
and Lack of Job Resources Influence Employee Workplace Deviant
Behavior
Fox, S., Spector, P. E., & Miles, D. (2001). Counterproductive work
behavior in response to job stressors and organizational justice:
some mediator and moderator tests for autonomy and
emotions. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 59(3), 291–309.
Fransson, E. I., Nyberg, S. T., Heikkilä, K., Alfredsson, L., Bacquer,
D. D., Batty, G. D., Kivimäki, M. (2012). Comparison of
alternative versions of the job demand-control scales in 17
European cohort studies: the IPD-Work consortium. BMC
Public Health, 12(1), 62.
Golparvar, M., Kamkar, M., & Javadian, Z. (2012). Moderating
effects of job stress in emotional exhaustion and feeling of
energy relationships with positive and negative behaviors: job
stress multiple functions approach. International Journal of
Psychological Studies, 4(4), 99–112.
Grandey, A. A., Tam, A. P., & Brauburger, A. L. (2002). Affective
States and Traits in the Workplace": Diary and Survey Data
From Young Workers. Motivation and Emotion, 26(1), 31–55.
Hollinger, R. C., & Clark, J. P. (1982). Formal and Informal Social
Controls of Employee Deviance*. The Sociological
Quarterly, 23(3), 333-343.
Jaworski, B. J., & Young, S. M. (1992). Dysfunctional behavior and
management control": an empirical study of marketing
managers. Accounting Organizations and Society, 17(1), 17–
35.
Jones, F., & Fletcher, B. C. (1996). Taking work home: A study of
daily fluctuations in work stressors, effects on moods and
impacts on marital partners. Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, 69(1), 89-106.
Kumar, R., & Sia, S. K. (2012). Employee engagement: explicating
the contribution of work environment. Management and
Labour Studies, 37(1), 31–43.
Lim, V. K. (2002). The IT way of loafing on the job: cyberloafing,
neutralizing and organizational justice. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 23(5), 675-694.
Litzky, B. E., Eddleston, K. A., & Kidder, D. L. (2006). The good,
the bad, and the misguided: How managers inadvertently
encourage deviant behaviors. The Academy of Management
Perspectives, 20(1), 91-103.
60 Jurnal Psikologi Malaysia 28 (2) (2014)
McCardle, J. G. (2007). Organizational justice and workplace
deviance: The role of organizational structure, powerlessness,
and information salience. Doctoral dissertation, University of
Central Florida Orlando, Florida.
Miner, K. N., Settles, I. H., Pratt-Hyatt, J. S., & Brady, C. C. (2012).
Experiencing incivility in organizations: the buffering effects
of emotional and organizational support. Journal of Applied
Social Psychology, 42(2), 340–372.
Neuman, J. H., & Baron, R. A. (1998). Workplace violence and
workplace aggression": evidence concerning specific forms ,
potential causes , and preferred targets. Journal of
Management, 24(3), 391–419.
Pelfrene, E., Vlerick, P., Kittel, F., Mak, R. P., Kornitzer, M., &
Backer, G. D. (2002). Psychosocial work environment and
psychological wellbeing: assessment of the buffering effects in
the job demand–control (–support) model in
BELSTRESS. Stress and Health, 18(1), 43-56.
Penney, L. M., & Spector, P. E. (2005). Job stress, incivility, and
counterproductive work behavior (CWB): the moderating role
of negative affectivity. Journal of Organizational Behavior,
26(7), 777–796.
Peterson, D. K. (2002). Deviant workplace behavior and the
organization's ethical climate. Journal of Business and
Psychology, 17(1), 47-61.
Robinson, S. L., & Bennett, R. J. (1995). A typology of deviant
workplace behaviors: A multidimensional scaling
study. Academy of management journal,38(2), 555-572.
Robinson, S. L., & O'Leary-Kelly, A. M. (1998). Monkey see,
monkey do: The influence of work groups on the antisocial
behavior of employees. Academy of Management
Journal, 41(6), 658-672.
Rodell, J. B., & Judge, T. A. (2009). Can “good” stressors spark
“bad” behaviors? The mediating role of emotions in links of
challenge and hindrance stressors with citizenship and
counterproductive behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology,
94(6), 1438–1451.
Ruiz, J., Prather, C. C., & Kauffman, E. E. (2013). Social Support.
In M. D. Gellman & J. R. Turner (Eds.), Encyclopedia of
Workplace Deviant Behavior: Does Employee Psychological Job Demand 61
and Lack of Job Resources Influence Employee Workplace Deviant
Behavior
Behavioral Medicine (p. 1844). New York, NY: Springer New
York.
Sanne, B., Torp, S., Mykletun, A., & Dahl, A. A. (2005). The
swedish demand-control-support questionnaire (DCSQ): Factor
structure, item analyses, and internal consistency in a large
population. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 33(3),
166–74.
Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2004). Job demands, job
resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement:
A multi-sample study. Journal of Organizational Behavior,
25(3), 293–315.
Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Rhenen, W. V. A. N. (2009).
How changes in job demands and resources predict burnout ,
work engagement , and sickness absenteeism. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 893–917.
Spector, P. E., Fox, S., Penney, L. M., Bruursema, K., Goh, A., &
Kessler, S. (2006). The dimensionality of counterproductivity:
Are all counterproductive behaviors created equal?. Journal of
vocational behavior, 68(3), 446-460.
Sundin, L., Hochwälder, J., Bildt, C., & Lisspers, J. (2007). The
relationship between different work-related sources of social
support and burnout among registered and assistant nurses in
Sweden: a questionnaire survey. International Journal of
Nursing Studies, 44(5), 758–69.
Tepper, B. J., Carr, J. C., Breaux, D. M., Geider, S., Hu, C., & Hua,
W. (2009). Abusive supervision, intentions to quit, and
employees’ workplace deviance: A power/dependence
analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 109(2), 156–167.
Tepper, B. J. (2007). Abusive supervision in work organizations:
Review, synthesis, and research agenda. Journal of
Management, 33(3), 261-289.
Thoits, P. A. (1985). Social support and psychological well-being:
Theoretical possibilities. In Social support: Theory, research
and applications (pp. 51-72). Springer Netherlands.
Tuckey, M. R., Chrisopoulos, S., & Dollard, M. F. (2012). Job
demands, resource deficiencies, and workplace harassment:
62 Jurnal Psikologi Malaysia 28 (2) (2014)
Evidence for micro-level effects. International Journal of
Stress Management, 19(4), 292–310.
Van de Ven, B., van den Tooren, M., & Vlerick, P. (2013).
Emotional job resources and emotional support seeking as
moderators of the relation between emotional job demands and
emotional exhaustion: a two-wave panel study. Journal of
Occupational Health Psychology, 18(1), 1–8.
Van Jaarsveld, D. D., Walker, D. D., & Skarlicki, D. P. (2010). The
Role of Job Demands and Emotional Exhaustion in the
Relationship Between Customer and Employee Incivility.
Journal of Management, 36(6), 1486–1504.
Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A. B., Dollard, M. F., Demerouti, E.,
Schaufeli, W. B., Taris, T. W., & Schreurs, P. J. G. (2007).
When do job demands particularly predict burnout?: The
moderating role of job resources. Journal of Managerial
Psychology, 22(8), 766–786.
Workplace Deviant Behavior: Does Employee Psychological Job Demand 63
and Lack of Job Resources Influence Employee Workplace Deviant
Behavior
Haikal Anuar Adnan, Asmawati Desa, Wan Shahrazad Wan Sulaiman,
Mohamad Irwan Ahmad & Daniella Maryam Mokhtar
Emotional Intelligence and Religious orientation among Secondary School
Students
Nasrudin Subhi, Mohd Radzi Tarmizi A Halim, Ezarina Zakaria &
Salinan Nen
Pengaruh Homofobia Dalaman terhadap Perkahwinan Lelaki Gay
Ili Nabila Norsilan, Zoharah Omar & Aminah Ahmad
Workplace Deviant Behavior: Does Employee Psychological Job Demand
and Lack of Job Resources Influence Employee Workplace Deviant
Behavior?
Jurnal Psikologi Malaysia
(Journal of Malaysian Psychology)
Bilangan/Number 28 (2) ISSN 0127-8029 2014
MALAYSIA
PSIKOLOGI
Ψ
JURNAL
... What may not be well-known is the threat to the success of the organization, posed by the behavior and attitude of the very people who make up the organization. Workplace deviant behavior is a common problem in today"s organizations (Olabimitan & Alausa, 2014;Norsilan, Omar & Ahmad, 2014). Hussain (2015) has observed that organizations bring together different employees, who aspire for a common goal, as they work in a group. ...
... According to Hussain (2015), "sometimes the impact of these behaviors leaves positive effect on others" wellbeing and sometimes they do harm in a manner that lives employees to become surrounded by negativity and other harmful consequences". Employee workplace deviant behavior has been described differently as anti-social behavior, counter-productive behavior, workplace aggression, organizational incivility and workplace misbehavior (Appelbaum, Iaconi & Matousek, 2007; Fagbohungbe, Akinbode & Ayodeji, 2012; Norsilan et al., 2014). Whatever name it is called, "if the behavior is not mentioned in the formal job definition, it is beyond the existing role expectations and it violates organizational norms, then such behavior is regarded as deviant" (Yildiz, Alpkan, Sezen & Yildiz, 2015). ...
Article
Full-text available
This study examined the extent to which workplace deviant behaviour relates to performance in tertiary institutions in Edo State. The objective of this study is to examine the extent of relationship that exists between workplace deviant behaviour and performance in tertiary institutions in Edo State. A total number of 386 copies of structured questionnaire were administered to the respondents domicile in the selected tertiary institutions under study using purposive sampling technique and 300 copies of questionnaire were retrieved from the respondents. This study was guided by one research question and one hypothesis, and the descriptive research design was adopted. The data used was primary data collected through a structured questionnaire. The data collected was prepared using descriptive statistics and the hypothesis was tested using spearman Ranking Correlation with the aid of SPSS version 21. The findings revealed that political deviance has a negative but significant relationship with job satisfaction. The researcher recommends that organizational leaders should ensure that negative political deviant behaviours are reduced to the barest minimum for better performance because political deviance hampers efficient performance, and need to be discouraged in order to ensure job satisfaction in tertiary institutions because negative political deviant behaviours has an inverse relationship with performance.
... It might be the sabotage of equipment, stealing organizational property, and so on. These acts bring direct costs to the organization since work cannot continue until the damaged equipment are replaced (Norsilan et al., 2014). ...
Article
Full-text available
This paper investigates the influence of emotional labour on deviant workplace behaviour (DWB) among health workers in teaching hospitals. The data used have been collected from health workers in two government-owned teaching hospitals through a survey research design and have been analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics. The paper finds that superficial acting and deep acting are positively related to deviant workplace behaviour among health workers in teaching hospitals, and honest acting has negative but significant contributions to deviant workplace behaviour. The paper concludes that in order for teaching hospitals to achieve person–job fit, health workers in training should be exposed to the reality that they would be required to master their emotions to succeed in their practice. It is therefore recommended that the management of teaching hospitals as well as government organizations should ensure that rules and policies are enforced to curb certain deviant behaviours, which could otherwise easily become norms if taken for granted.
... Due to this unpleasant behavior in the workplace, the health of Pakistan's public sector is harshly fading. Blau (1986) developed the Social exchange theory, and it is as cited in Omar et al. (2014) in his study, which discussed that social behavior is the outcome of an exchange process. Social exchange theory explains the reciprocity that happens between the context and the individual. ...
Article
Full-text available
Workplace deviant behavior (WDB) and workplace ostracism (WO) have emerged as one of the most toxic behaviors that breed self-protection and self-interest in today’s organizations. However, limited evidence is available on the underlying factors, such as organizational conflict (OC), knowledge-sharing behavior (KSB) and emotional intelligence (EI), in explaining the WO-WDB relationship. Hence, the present study aims to introduce and empirically validate a moderated mediation model of workplace deviant behavior, involving WO, OC, KSB and EI, respectively. Drawing on study data from 250 officials in the higher education public sector institutions in Pakistan, and employing structural equation modeling with partial least squares, the findings revealed a significant positive effect of WO on WDB. Besides the validation of the mediating roles of OC and KSB, the findings also confirmed a significant moderating influence of EI. The study implications provide theoretical and practical insights to better interpret KSB, OI and EI in organizations that can generate effective deterrence towards WO and WDB.
Article
Full-text available
Kepemimpinan telah menjadi topik utama ilmu organisasi sejak lahirnya bidang ini. Sebelumnya, para peneliti fokus pada bagaimana para pemimpin sukses meningkatkan kinerja organisasi dan meningkatkan efektivitas pengikut mereka. Banyak teori kepemimpinan positif tampaknya menganggap bahwa kepemimpinan disfungsional hanyalah ketiadaan atau kebalikan dari kepemimpinan yang efektif. Belakangan ini, gelombang skandal korporasi dan kegagalan spektakuler organisasi telah memaksa peneliti manajemen dan organisasi untuk berpikir ulang terkait dengan pendekatan tersebut. Para peneliti mulai mengeksplorasi gaya kepemimpinan negatif (dark side of leadership) secara langsung karena para peneliti berhipotesis bahwa gaya leadership ini memiliki konsekuensi negatif pada subordinat dan organisasi. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menguji pengaruh toxic leadership (TL) terhadap kinerja organisasi yang dimediasi oleh workplace deviant behavior (WDB) pegawai dengan sampel sebanyak 100 responden. Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini ialah metode kuantitatif, berupa kuesioner. Hasil dari penelitian ini menunjukan bahwa: Toxic leadership berpengaruh signifikan terhadap kinerja organisasi yaitu dengan signifikansi lebih kecil dari 0,05. Toxic leadership berpengaruh signifikan terhadap workplace deviant behavior karyawan ditunjukkan dengan nilai signifikansi lebih kecil dari 0,05. Workplace deviant behavior berpengaruh tidak signifikan terhadap kinerja organisasi dengan signifikansi lebih kecil dari atau sama dengan 0,05. Workplace deviant behavior memediasi toxic leadership dengan kinerja organisasi dengan nilai pengaruh langsung sebesar 0,734 dan pengaruh tidak langsung sebesar 0,901, sehingga semua hipotesis diterima, akan menjadi catatan penting untuk peneliti selanjutnya untuk lebih menggali secara lebih lanjut dan menelaah kembali penyebab bahwa workplace deviant behavior berpengaruh tidak signifikan terhadap kinerja organisasi dan workplace deviant behavior memediasi toxic leadership dengan kinerja organisasi.
Article
Full-text available
The purpose of this article is to review literature that is relevant to the social scientific study of ethics and leadership, as well as outline areas for future study. We first discuss ethical leadership and then draw from emerging research on "dark side" organizational behavior to widen the boundaries of the review to include unethical leadership. Next, three emerging trends within the organizational behavior literature are proposed for a leadership and ethics research agenda: 1) emotions, 2) fit/congruence, and 3) identity/identification. We believe each shows promise in extending current thinking. The review closes with discussion of important issues that are relevant to the advancement of research on leadership and ethics.
Article
Full-text available
The aim of the present study was to investigate the relationships between emotional exhaustion and feeling of energy with positive and negative behavioral outcomes at workplaces with consider moderating effects of job stress among employees of an industrial organization in Esfahan, Iran. Using a simple random sampling method, a sample of 275 employees completed the job stress, emotional exhaustion, feeling of energy, deviant behaviors, organizational citizenship behavior and creativity questionnaires. The results revealed that: 1) Job stress moderates the relationship between emotional exhaustion and deviant behaviors. That is, in low job stress, emotional exhaustion negatively and significantly related to deviant behaviors, while in high job stress, emotional exhaustion positively and significantly related to deviant behaviors. 2) Job stress also moderates the relationship between emotional exhaustion and organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs). That is, in low job stress, emotional exhaustion positively and significantly related to organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs).
Article
Full-text available
Executive Overview Recent estimates of the costs associated with deviant behavior in the workplace are staggering. While part of the managerial function requires the establishment of rules and policies that promote good customer service and product consistency, managers who lead with a firm hand or place too much pressure on sales quotas, may be unknowingly contributing to their employees' deviant behaviors. Managers must learn to identify the role that they play in triggering employee deviance. Once recognized, there is much that managers can do to ameliorate the triggers that encourage otherwise honest employees to engage in deviant behavior.
Article
Full-text available
Research shows that being a target of organizational incivility is associated with negative outcomes, including declines in job satisfaction, physical health, and psychological well-being. Two studies (90 property management company employees; 210 undergraduate students) were conducted to examine whether 2 types of social support—emotional and organizational—act as buffers of the relationship between incivility and outcomes in workplace and academic contexts. Two types of incivility were also examined: general workplace incivility and gendered incivility. Consistent with the hypotheses, the results of both studies indicated that employees and students who experienced higher levels of incivility reported better outcomes when they felt organizationally and emotionally supported. Implications for organizations are discussed.
Chapter
The topic of social support has received increased attention over the last several years. At this point in time, with the benefit of much preliminary research, it is possible to move forward considering, and frequently correcting, limitations of the past and delineating the issues which are in most need of attention in the future. With this in mind, the purpose of this chapter is threefold: To outline the convoy model of social support which has benefited from previous theoretical approaches to social support but represents a life span extension of the concept. Second, to present a unique national study of the suppports of older adults which has recently been conducted and which represents the source of much of the data reported in the present chapter. And, finally, to delineate several issues and provide relevant information under a general rubric which can best be summarized as present knowledge/pressing issues. By this is implied some of the intriguing, interesting, puzzling, and/or contradictory findings in the literature. Where possible, relevant data from our national study will be provided which address these issues.
Article
This cross-level field study, involving 187 employees from 35 groups in 20 organizations, examined how individuals' antisocial behaviors at work are shaped by the antisocial behavior of their coworkers. We found a positive relationship between the level of antisocial behavior exhibited by an individual and that exhibited by his or her coworkers. We also found that a number of factors moderated this relationship. Finally, we found that dissatisfaction with coworkers was higher when individuals engaged in less antisocial behavior than their coworkers.