تهدید جدی برای هویت و رفتار ضد اجتماعی در سازمان: اثرات تعدیل تفاوت های فردی، مدل تهاجمی، و وضعیت سلسله مراتبی
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|28656||2003||14 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||محاسبه نشده|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Volume 90, Issue 1, January 2003, Pages 195–208
This study examines whether the experience of identity threat predicts antisocial behavior directed towards other employees. A social interactionist model is used as a theoretical framework for predicting that employees who are frequent recipients of actions that challenge or diminish their sense of competence, dignity, or self-worth will engage in higher levels of antisocial behavior. However, it is predicted that the strength of this relation will be moderated by individual (gender, age, and attitudes toward revenge) and situational (aggressive modeling, hierarchical status) factors. Data from 308 employees from three organizations supported moderating effects of age, revenge attitudes, and hierarchical status. A three-way interaction was also found showing that identity threat was more strongly related to antisocial behavior for low as compared to high status employees, but only when they were exposed to low levels of aggressive modeling.
Harmful, injurious, and destructive behaviors directed by one employee against another are common occurrences in today’s workplace. One study of Finnish workers found that 32% had observed one or more coworkers being exposed to verbally harassing behavior at work (Björkqvist, Österman, & Hjelt-Bäck, 1994). In another study, a survey of American human resource managers found that 20% reported that their organizations had experienced workplace violence since 1990 (Romano, 1994). As a final example, a survey of 327 first-line American workers showed that half reported acts of mistreatment at work within a three-year time frame (Ehrlich & Larcom, 1994). Some writers refer to these acts, and others like them, as antisocial workplace behavior (e.g., Andersson & Pearson, 1999; Robinson & O’Leary-Kelly, 1998). Antisocial workplace behavior has been defined as actions directed towards other employees or the organization that have the potential for producing physical, economic, psychological, or emotional harm (Robinson & O’Leary-Kelly, 1998). The study of these behaviors has attracted considerable interest in recent years and several theoretical models have been advanced to explain their occurrence. One model proposed by O’Leary-Kelly and her colleagues (O’Leary-Kelly, Griffin, & Glew, 1996) emphasizes situational determinants like decisions that affect valued outcomes, incentive inducements that reward aggressive behavior, and aversive physical environments. Other models focus on individual-level variables like perceptions of injustice (Aquino, Lewis, & Bradfield, 1999; Greenberg & Alge, 1998; Skarlicki & Folger, 1997), cognitive appraisal processes (Martinko & Zellars, 1998), emotional reactivity (Berkowitz, 1993), and negative affectivity (Skarlicki, Folger, & Tesluk, 1999). Finally, more dynamic models describe how antisocial behavior results from an ongoing process of repeated interpersonal exchanges where one party perceives a threat to his or her self-identity and retaliates against the perceived source of threat. This explanation underlies social interactionist theories of aggression (e.g., Felson, 1992; Felson & Steadman, 1983; Tedeschi & Felson, 1994) and models of conflict escalation (e.g., Andersson & Pearson, 1999; Folger & Skarlicki, 1998) and revenge in organizations (e.g., Bies, Tripp, & Kramer, 1997). This study draws from each of the theoretical perspectives cited above to test a model in which identity-threatening events experienced by an employee are hypothesized to predict antisocial behaviors performed by that employee. We view identity-threatening events as a subclass of the broader category of antisocial behavior. However, in contrast to most studies of antisocial behavior, we conceptualize and measure identity threats as actions directed against an employee by one or more co-workers. We then assume that these experiences can provoke the threat-recipient to respond by engaging in other forms of antisocial behavior. The proposed relationship between identity threat and an aggressive counter-response follows directly from dynamic models of conflict escalation and revenge (e,g., Andersson & Pearson, 1999; Bies et al., 1997; Felson & Steadman, 1983; Folger & Skarlicki, 1998) and is empirically well established (e.g., Felson, 1992; Felson & Steadman, 1983; Tedeschi & Felson, 1994). Hence, we treat it as a building block for more complex hypotheses. Rather than simply replicating previous work, our study makes several unique contributions to the literature. First, this is the only study to our knowledge that directly tests the relationship between identity threatening events and antisocial behavior. Second, we go beyond looking at the main effect of identity threat by examining individual-level and contextual variables as moderators of this relationship. Finally, we combine the individual and contextual variables into a higher-order interaction that adds new theoretical complexity to existing models of antisocial behavior. We investigate two categories of individual-level variables as possible moderators: demographic characteristics and attitudes toward revenge (Stuckless & Goranson, 1992). Guided by O’Leary-Kelly et al.’s (1996) model of organization-motivated aggression, we examine whether the presence of aggressive role models in the workplace strengthens the relation between identity threat and antisocial behavior. Lastly, we investigate the relatively understudied question of whether this relation is moderated by the threat-recipient’s hierarchical status.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
This study is the first to directly link identity threat to antisocial behavior in organizations. There is ample evidence that people are strongly motivated to maintain positive self and social identities and that identity-threatening events can provoke an aggressive behavioral response. This relationship was the basis for our theoretical model and was supported by our data. However, the unique contribution of this study was to show that the relationship is more complex because it is moderated by individual-level and contextual variables.