Search results

Research on self-regulation has tended to focus on goal-related performance, with limited attention paid to individuals’ affect and the role it plays during the goal-striving process. In this chapter we discuss three mechanisms to integrate affect within a control theory-based self-regulation framework, and how such integrations inform future research concerning employee stress and well-being. Specifically, affect can be viewed as a result of velocity made toward one’s desired states at work. Fast progress results in positive affect, which enhances employee well-being and reduces the detrimental effects associated with exposure to occupational stressors. On the other hand, slow or no progress elicits negative affect, which induces employee distress. Second, affect can also be considered an input of self-regulation, such that employees are required to regulate their emotional displays at work. Employees who perform emotional labor compare their actual emotional display against the desired display prescribed by display rules. Third, affect can function as a situational disturbance, altering employees’ perceptions or assessments of the input, comparator, and output for other self-regulatory processes.

The process of occupational stress is dynamic, and thus must be conceptualized through an intraindividual perspective. Theories of self-regulation model feedback loops in goal pursuit and have meaningful implications for occupational well-being, from the task-level to years across the career span. In particular, discrepancy (the distance between one’s actual and desired states) and velocity (the speed at which one is moving towards a desired state) influence reactions in goal-striving. We extend theory bridging the self-regulation, occupational health, and career literatures by outlining the effects of discrepancy and velocity feedback for well-being, which we ground in cybernetic theories of stress, coping, and well-being. Further, we consider change at the macro scale by delimiting the impact of velocity, experienced in the pursuit of goals across Super’s (1980) career stages, on worker health. We conclude with a discussion of the theoretical and practical implications of velocity and health over the career stages.

The purpose of this paper is to examine employee perceptions of fairness and work morale as mediators of the relationship between leader reward behavior and employee behavior.

A matrix of meta‐analytic estimates containing the focal variables (leader reward behavior, fairness, morale, and employee behavior) was constructed following a literature review of published studies. This matrix was then analyzed using structural equation modeling to test a series of nested models.

Leader reward behavior is positively related to higher task performance and organizational citizenship behavior, and fewer intentions to turnover. These relationships are mediated by employees’ perceptions of fairness and work morale.

The paper extends the leadership literature by identifying two mechanisms (viz., fairness and morale) through which leader reward behavior relates to employee behavior. Possible limitations are the drawbacks associated with meta‐analysis (e.g. inability to make causal inferences).

Rewarding subordinate performance alone is not sufficient to increase task performance and organizational citizenship behavior and decrease turnover intentions. Instead, managers must ensure that their contingent reward behaviors are seen as fair by employees in order to have favorable effects.

To date, research on possible mediators of the effects of leader reward behavior has been scarce.

A number of theoretical frameworks exist to explain perpetrators’ motivation for workplace aggression. Most of them consider these behaviors as retaliatory actions from individuals who experience triggering events in their workplaces. The current chapter describes a model that focuses on the motivations underlying proactive workplace aggression, and identifies situations where perpetrators consider their aggressive behaviors as morally justifiable. In particular, we argue that depending on the targets’ in- versus out-group membership and higher- versus lower-status in the hierarchy, aggressive behaviors may be viewed as acceptable to achieve perpetrators’ goals of forcing compliance or managing identity. The model extends the current literature by considering non-retaliatory workplace aggression, and by identifying potential avenues for future research and intervention to reduce proactive workplace aggression.

The authors examine how different exchange patterns affect structurally disadvantaged actors' interactional justice evaluations and group identification in situations characterized by reciprocal and negotiated exchange.

Laboratory experiment.

Although results replicate prior work finding that disadvantaged individuals view their exchange partners as less fair when exchanging via negotiation rather than reciprocation, they also show the value of considering the pattern of exchange. Indeed, both the form of exchange and the pattern of exchange prompt exchange behaviors that shape how disadvantaged actors view the exchange experience, such that much of the direct effect of the form of exchange is offset by indirect paths, especially when the disadvantaged actor remains committed to their more advantaged partner. These fairness evaluations matter because as the authors show, they affect perceptions of group identification.

Future work should more explicitly consider how emotions as well as different levels of inequality might modify the processes described.

This chapter highlights the need to consider both the form of exchange and the relative stability of exchange when considering the fairness perceptions and group identification of disadvantaged individuals.