Search results

Drawing on conservation of resources theory, this study aims to examine how employees’ experiences of excessive workloads may direct them away from efforts to share knowledge with other organizational members, as well as the circumstances in which this process is more or less likely. To untangle the process, the authors predict a mediating role of job dissatisfaction and moderating roles of two complementary resources that help employees cope with failure: resilience as a personal resource and organizational forgiveness as an organizational resource.

Survey data were gathered from employees of an organization that operates in the construction retail sector. The Process macro provides an empirical test of the moderated mediation dynamic that underpins the proposed conceptual framework.

The statistical findings affirm that an important channel through which employees’ perceptions that their work demands are unreasonable escalate into a diminished propensity to share knowledge is their lack of enthusiasm about their jobs. Their ability to recover from challenging work situations and their beliefs that the organization does not hold grudges against people who commit mistakes both mitigate this harmful effect.

For organizational practitioners, this research shows that when employees feel frustrated about extreme work pressures, the resource-draining situation may escalate into diminished knowledge sharing, which might inadvertently undermine their ability to receive valuable feedback for dealing with the challenges. From a positive perspective, individual resilience and organizational forgiveness represent resources that can protect employees against this negative spiral.

This study explicates an unexplored harmful effect of strenuous workloads on knowledge sharing, which is explained by employees’ beliefs that their organization fails to provide satisfactory job experiences. This effect also is mitigated to the extent that employees can draw from valuable personal and organizational resources.

This investigation aims to unpack the negative connection between employees’ experience of resource-draining career compromise and their organizational citizenship behavior, by theorizing a mediating role of their depersonalization of organizational leaders and a moderating role of their conformity orientation in this connection.

The hypotheses were tested with survey data collected among employees who operate in the construction retail industry in Portugal.

A critical reason that frustrations about unwanted career adjustments translate into a reluctance to undertake work efforts that exceed formal job descriptions is that employees develop dehumanized perceptions of the people in charge of the company. This explanatory mechanism is less prominent, however, to the extent that employees’ personal orientation favors rule adherence.

For HR managers, this research identifies a key channel, indifference to organizational leaders, through which disappointments about compromised career developments escalate into rejection of voluntary work activities, which otherwise might leave a positive impression on leaders and enhance employees’ careers. It also reveals that organizations can subdue this detrimental process by leveraging a sense of conformity among their workers.

This study adds to HR management research by showing how a mismatch between employees’ current career situation and their own meaningful career goals paradoxically might direct them away from extra-role work behavior that otherwise could provide meaningfulness. This harmful dynamic, which can be explained by their propensity to treat organizational leaders as impersonal objects, can be avoided to the extent that employees draw from their conformity orientation.

The purpose of this study is to unpack the relationship between employees’ perceptions of organizational politics and their counterproductive work behaviour, by postulating a mediating role of organizational disidentification and a moderating role of perceived external crisis threats to work.

The empirical assessment of the hypotheses relies on survey data collected among employees who work in a large banking organization.

Perceptions that organizational decision-making is marked by self-serving behaviour increase the probability that employees seek to cause harm to their employer, because they feel embarrassed by their organizational membership. This mediating role of organizational disidentification is especially prominent when they ruminate about the negative impact of external crises on their work.

This study details an important danger for employees who feel upset with dysfunctional politics: They psychologically distance themselves from their employer, which then prompts them to formulate counterproductive responses that likely make it more difficult to take on the problem in a credible manner. This detrimental dynamic is particularly risky if an external crisis negatively interferes with their work functioning.

This study adds to prior research by detailing an unexplored but relevant mechanism (organizational disidentification) and moderator (external crisis threats) by which perceived organizational politics translates into enhanced counterproductive work behaviour.

This study aims to detail how employees’ experience of distributive injustice may compromise their job performance, with specific attention to how this detrimental process may be explained in part by their beliefs about organization-level underperformance and moderated by their own psychological entitlement.

The research hypotheses were tested with three-round, time-lagged data collected among employees and their supervisors.

A critical channel through which employees’ perceptions that their organization’s reward system is unfair translates into thwarted job performance is a conviction that their organization does not meet its own performance targets. As a mediator, such organizational underperformance beliefs have particularly salient effects on employees who believe they are more deserving than others.

This study gives HR managers insights into how they can reduce the danger that unfair reward practices escalate into a reduced propensity by employees to complete their job tasks diligently. HR managers should make employees aware of their possible entitlement and discourage them from expecting that things always must go their way.

This research unpacks the connection between distributive injustice and job performance, by delineating the unique roles of two pertinent factors (organizational underperformance beliefs and psychological entitlement) in this connection.

This study investigates how employees' experience of resource-depleting workplace loneliness may steer them away from performance-enhancing work efforts as informed by their propensity to engage in negative work rumination. It also addresses whether and how religiosity might serve as a buffer of this harmful dynamic.

The hypotheses tests rely on three-round survey data collected among employees who work in various organizations in Pakistan – a relevant country context, considering the importance of people's religious faith for their professional functioning and its high-uncertainty avoidance and collectivism, which likely make workplace loneliness a particularly upsetting experience.

An important channel through which a sense of being abandoned at work compromises job performance is that employees cannot “switch off” and stop thinking about work, even after hours. The role of this explanatory mechanism is mitigated, however, when employees can draw from their religious beliefs.

For human resource (HR) managers, this study pinpoints a notable intrusion into the personal realm, namely, repetitive thinking about work-related issues, through which perceptions of work-related loneliness translate into a reluctance to contribute to organizational effectiveness with productive work activities. It also showcases how this translation can be subdued with personal resources that enable employees to contain the hardships they have experienced.

This study helps unpack the connection between workplace loneliness and job performance by detailing the unexplored roles of two important factors (negative work rumination and religiosity) in this connection.

This study investigates the mediating role of personal initiative taking in the link between employees' exposure to transformational leadership and their engagement in creative behavior, as well as a potential catalytic role of perceived work overload in this process.

The research hypotheses were tested with survey data collected among employees of a large organization that operates in the telecommunications sector.

Transformational leadership translates into enhanced creative work efforts among employees, because these employees adopt an action-based approach toward work. This mediating role of personal initiative taking is particularly prominent among employees who encounter excessive workloads in their daily jobs, because their initiative and creativity promise solutions to this resource-draining work situation.

For human resource managers, this study reveals that employees who go out of their way to address problem situations offer an important means by which a leadership style that inspires and challenges followers can be leveraged to produce enhanced creative outcomes. It also pinpoints how this process can be triggered by employees' beliefs that work demands are excessive.

This study adds to prior research by detailing a hitherto overlooked factor (personal initiative) and catalyst (perceived work overload), related to the translation of transformational leadership into increased creative behavior.

The purpose of this study is to examine how employees’ deference to leader authority may induce their unethical pro-organizational behavior (UPB) and whether this translation is more likely to materialize in the presence of two personal factors (dispositional greed and proactive personality) and two organizational factors (workplace status and job rotation).

The empirical assessment of the research hypotheses relies on quantitative survey data collected among 350 Canadian-based employees who work in the healthcare sector. The statistical analyses include hierarchical moderated regression.

The role of deference to leader authority in stimulating UPB is greater when employees (1) have a natural disposition to always want more, (2) enjoy initiative taking, (3) believe that they have a great deal of prestige in the organization and (4) operate in an organizational environment in which job rotation across different departments is encouraged.

The results inform managers about the risk that employees’ willingness to obey organizational authorities unconditionally might escalate into negative behaviors that can cause harm to both the organization and employees in the long run, as well as the personal and organizational circumstances in which this escalation is more likely to occur.

This study extends extant research by investigating the conditional effects of an unexplored determinant of UPB, namely, a personal desire to defer to organizational leaders.

This study aims to investigate the relationship between employees' exposure to supervisor incivility and their engagement in insubordinate behavior, by detailing a mediating role of ruminations about interpersonal offenses and a moderating role of supervisor task conflict.

The research hypotheses were assessed with three rounds of data, obtained from employees and their peers, working for firms in various industries.

An important reason that employees' sense that their supervisor treats them disrespectfully escalates into defiance of supervisor authority is that the employees cannot stop thinking about how they have been wronged. The mediating role of such ruminations is particularly prominent when employees' viewpoints clash with those of their supervisor.

A critical danger exists for employees who are annoyed with a rude supervisor: They ponder their negative treatment, which prompts them to disobey, a response that likely diminishes the chances that supervisors might change their behaviors. This detrimental process is particularly salient when employee–supervisor interactions are marked by unpleasant task-related fights.

This study unpacks an unexplored link between supervisor incivility and supervisor-directed insubordination by explicating the pertinent roles of two critical factors (rumination and task conflict) in this link.

The purpose of this study is to draw from conservation of resources theory to examine how employees’ experience of resource-draining interpersonal conflict might diminish the likelihood that they engage in championing behaviour. Its specific focus is on the mediating effect of their motivation to leave the organization and the moderating effect of their peer-oriented social interaction in this connection.

The research hypotheses are empirically assessed with quantitative survey data gathered from 632 employees who work in a large Mexican-based pharmacy chain. The statistical analyses involved an application of the Process macro, which enabled concurrent estimations of the direct, mediating and moderating effects predicted by the proposed conceptual framework.

Emotion-based tensions in co-worker relationships decrease employees’ propensity to mobilize support for innovative ideas, because employees make plans to abandon their jobs. This mediating role of turnover intentions is mitigated when employees maintain close social relationships with their co-workers.

For organizational practitioners, this study identifies a core explanation (i.e. employees want to quit the company) for why frustrations with emotion-based quarrels can lead to a reluctance to promote novel ideas – ideas that otherwise could add to organizational effectiveness. It also highlights how this harmful process can be avoided if employees maintain good, informal relationships with their colleagues.

For organizational scholars, this study explicates why and when employees’ experience of interpersonal conflict translates into complacent work behaviours, in the form of tarnished idea championing. It also identifies informal peer relationships as critical contingency factors that disrupt this negative dynamic.

This study examines how employees’ exposure to coworker undermining may lead them to miss work deadlines. It offers a particular focus on the mediating role of diminished organization-based self-esteem and the moderating role of justice sensitivity in this connection.

The research hypotheses are tested with data collected among employees and supervisors who work in various industries.

Purposeful efforts by coworkers to cause harm translate into an increased propensity to fail to complete work on time, because the focal employees consider themselves unworthy organizational members. The extent to which employees feel upset with unfair treatments invigorates this process.

For employees who are frustrated with coworkers who deliberately compromise their professional functioning, diminished self-worth in relation to work and the subsequent reduced willingness to exhibit timely work efforts might make it more difficult to convince organizational leaders to do something about the negative coworker treatment. Pertinent personal characteristics can serve as a catalyst of this dynamic.

This study contributes to extant human resource management research by detailing the link between coworker undermining and a reduced propensity to finish work on time, pinpointing the roles of two hitherto overlooked factors (organization-based self-esteem and justice sensitivity) in this link.