Search results

Constructive deviance has received increasing attention across the last 20 years. However, because the distinction between constructive and traditional forms of deviance (i.e., destructive) is based on the intent behind the behaviors, it can be difficult to determine which acts are constructive. As an umbrella construct consisting of several forms of deviant acts (e.g., whistle-blowing, employee voice, necessary evils), research into constructive deviance has largely remained focused on the individual behaviors to date. While advancements have been made, this focus has limited the consideration of an overarching understanding of constructive deviance in the workplace. Further, constructs like constructive deviance that straddle the bounds between beneficial and detrimental necessitate the exploration into their antecedents as determined by the employees (i.e., apples), their environments (e.g., barrels), or some combination of the two. The author seeks to advance the research in constructive deviance by proposing a testable model. In which, the author develops an interactionist perspective of the antecedents to reposition constructive deviance as the acts of good employees in restrictive or negative environments. In doing so, the author considers how various aspects of individuals, their organizational environments, and the influence of their leaders interact. The author then develops a multi-stakeholder approach to the outcomes of constructive deviance to consider how the various parties (i.e., organization, coworkers, customers) are expected to respond and how these responses impact the more distal outcomes as well as the likelihood of engaging in future constructive deviance.

The purpose of this study is to examine the mechanism of benevolent leadership on employee cheating behavior through two paths – employee uncertainty and perceived acceptability of norm violation – and also reveal the possible dark side of benevolent leadership. Meanwhile, the moderating effects of leader behavioral integrity in the cognition dual path process are also discussed.

This study invites 383 employees and their superiors in seven Chinese enterprises as the research objects and conducts a paired survey at three time points, and then Mplus 7.4 software is used to analyze the empirical data.

The results are shown as follows. Benevolent leadership plays a positive role on uncertainty and perceived acceptability of norm violation. Uncertainty and perceived acceptability of norm violation mediate the relationship between benevolent leadership and cheating behavior, respectively. Leader behavioral integrity moderates the positive role of benevolent leadership on uncertainty and perceived acceptability of norm violation. Leader behavioral integrity moderates the indirect effect of benevolent leadership on employees' cheating behavior through uncertainty and perceived acceptability of norm violation.

This study reveals the mechanism behind the negative role of benevolent leadership through the cognition reaction of employees to benevolent leadership and broadens the research scope of benevolent leadership. Meanwhile, it provides some practical inspiration for leaders to effectively use the benevolent leadership style and restrain employees' cheating behavior.

Purpose – Trust and justice are generally considered distinct but closely related constructs. Individual perceptions of procedural justice and trustworthiness have been shown to reciprocally influence one another, each independently promoting trust (Colquitt & Mueller, 2007). We consider instances where these may instead diverge: how intentional efforts to build trust may unintentionally erode justice, and how the use of fair procedures may reduce trust.

Approach – We argue that the anomalous divergences between trust and justice are evident only when simultaneously considering judgments at two levels: the interpersonal level (i.e., within dyads inside the team) and the team level (i.e., shared perceptions of all team members).

Implications for research and practice – The unintended effects described in this chapter describe a “dark side” to a number of taken-for-granted practices in organizational life (favor-paying, punishment processes, and approaches to redress). We expect that this chapter should promote new research using the team context to bridge the trust and justice literatures, and provoke a careful reconsideration among practitioners of these approaches.

Originality – We propose three previously overlooked disjunctures between trust and justice. First, we show how procedurally unfair approaches to allocating favors may be beneficial in building dyadic trust between team members. Next, we describe how fair (open and transparent) group processes for punishing perpetrators may erode trust by skewing group members’ perceptions of the prevalence of trust violations. Finally, we describe how the most effective forms of redress at the interpersonal level may provoke perceptions of injustice at the team level.

The employee-organization relationship (EOR) has increasingly become a focal point for researchers in organizational behavior, human resource management, and industrial relations. Literature on the EOR has developed at both the individual – (e.g. psychological contracts) and the group and organizational-levels of analysis (e.g. employment relationships). Both sets of literatures are reviewed, and we argue for the need to integrate these literatures as a means for improving understanding of the EOR. Mechanisms for integrating these literatures are suggested. A subsequent discussion of contextual effects on the EOR follows in which we suggest that researchers develop models that explicitly incorporate context. We then examine a number of theoretical lenses to explain various attributes of the EOR such as the dynamism and fairness of the exchange, and new ways of understanding the exchange including positive functional relationships and integrative negotiations. The article concludes with a discussion of future research needed on the EOR.

Aim of the present monograph is the economic analysis of the role of MNEs regarding globalisation and digital economy and in parallel there is a reference and examination of some legal aspects concerning MNEs, cyberspace and e‐commerce as the means of expression of the digital economy. The whole effort of the author is focused on the examination of various aspects of MNEs and their impact upon globalisation and vice versa and how and if we are moving towards a global digital economy.

This chapter reviews recent theoretical developments and empirical research, to examine the causes and consequences of identity processes in relation to collaboration in work groups and group performance. Our central proposition is that identification in work groups can have beneficial as well as detrimental effects, depending on the nature of the shared identity, and the content of distinctive group norms. First, we examine some of the complications stemming from the fact that identification in work settings typically involves groups that can be defined at different levels of inclusiveness and where people can be seen as having multiple cross-cutting identities. Then, we move on to show that processes of identification affect the way people view their co-workers and supervisors, causing the same objective behavior to be interpreted and responded to in a fundamentally different way. Finally, we examine how normative expectations about prototypical group behavior determine group processes and group outcomes, with the consequence that identification and commitment can affect work motivation and collective performance in different ways, depending on the content of distinctive group norms.

The aim of this article is to examine the relationships between authentic leadership and organizational deviance and to test the moderating effects of trust and psychological contract violation on that relationship.

Data were collected from ten state universities in Turkey. The sample included 848 lecturers and their department chairs chosen randomly. Moderated hierarchical regression was used to examine the moderating roles of trust and psychological contract violation on the authentic leadership and organizational deviance relationship.

The results show that authentic leadership is negatively and significantly correlated with organizational deviance. In addition, the results of the hierarchical multiple regression analyses support the moderating effects of employee trust and psychological contract violation with regard to the relationship between authentic leadership and organizational deviance.

Given that authentic leadership is associated with valued organizational outcomes such as lower workplace deviance, higher followers' commitment, job satisfaction and citizenship behaviors, organizational efforts to foster authentic leadership should prove fruitful. Moreover, focusing on efforts to improve leader‐follower relationship and to create a trust‐based work environment could increase the likelihood that authentic leadership will lower level of workplace deviance.

This study contributes to the research on authentic leadership and workplace deviance by showing that trust and psychological contract are relevant affect‐related variables in determining the importance of authentic leadership perception to subordinate workplace deviance. Furthermore, by incorporating trust and psychological contract (for the first time), it is a response to recent calls for integration of authentic leadership, organizational deviance, trust and psychological contract literatures (Gardner et al.; Ilies et al.). These calls have contended that trust and high quality leader‐follower relations are fundamental to linking authentic leader behavior to follower behaviors, yet to date empirical evidence does not exist.

This chapter focuses on the implications of both the descriptive and prescriptive aspects of gender stereotypes for women in the workplace. Using the Lack of Fit model, we review how performance expectations deriving from descriptive gender stereotypes (i.e., what women are like) can impede women's career progress. We then identify organizational conditions that may weaken the influence of these expectations. In addition, we discuss how prescriptive gender stereotypes (i.e., what women should be like) promote sex bias by creating norms that, when not followed, induce disapproval and social penalties for women. We then review recent research exploring the conditions under which women experience penalties for direct, or inferred, prescriptive norm violations.