Search results

Integrating person-job fit theory with the stressor-emotion model of counterproductive work behavior (CWB), the current study aims to examine which behavioral pattern (fight: CWB vs flight: withdrawal) employees are more likely to adopt when they experience perceived overqualification (POQ). We further investigate anger as the underlying emotional mechanism for these relations because anger can be expressed and thus reflected in CWB, or constrained and thus reflected in withdrawal behavior. Furthermore, different stressor-attenuating strategies including relaxation during work breaks and mastery experiences at work are examined as mitigating factors of these relations.

Time-lagged data were collected from 176 full-time employees in China using a field survey research design.

We found that employees who experience POQ are more likely to engage in withdrawal than in CWB. Anger mediated the relations of POQ with both CWB and withdrawal. Relaxation moderated the relation between POQ and anger, as well as the indirect relations of POQ with CWB and withdrawal through anger.

This study enhances understanding of employees’ affective and behavioral reactions to POQ. However, the survey design was not longitudinal and causality cannot be established.

POQ is associated with undesirable employee behaviors and should therefore be avoided by organizations. If POQ is unavoidable, organizations can use job design and offer training to foster relaxation in between tasks among employees.

In the framework of person-job fit theory, our study provides insight about employees’ “fight” or “flight” responses to POQ, and further illustrates the mechanism and the attenuating factors in this processes.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the weekly effects of job insecurity on employee voice and silence. Specifically, the authors argue that because employment fulfils important needs, employees’ needs are less fulfilled when they feel that their job is at risk (i.e. high job insecurity). Consequently, the authors argue that employees engage in less voice and more silence because when employees’ needs are not fulfilled, they are less committed to the organization and/or protect their personal resources.

The authors tested their hypotheses in a five-week long diary study among 97 employees.

The authors found that employees reported lower need fulfilment in those weeks and the week after job insecurity was higher, which, in turn, decreased employee voice and increased employee silence in those weeks and the week after.

The study shows that feelings about one’s job insecurity fluctuate from week to week and that the weekly negative effects associated with increased job insecurity can be explained from a needs fulfilment perspective. The study also highlights the importance of studying voice and silence simultaneously.

Managers could indirectly increase employees’ voice and decrease employees’ silence by reducing feelings of job insecurity to increase employees’ feelings of predictability of and control over their future.

The authors studied short-term effects of job insecurity on both employee voice and silence, and examined need fulfilment as an underlying mechanism to explain the effects of job insecurity.