Loyal rebels? A test of the normative conflict model of constructive deviance

Constructive deviance is a voluntary behavior that violates organizational rules but is conducted with honorable intentions to benefit the organization or its stakeholders. Despite emerging interest in this behavior, the antecedents of constructive deviance remain unclear, with particular ambiguity concerning the relationship between organizational identity and constructive deviance. In this article, we address this ambiguity with the normative conflict model, which posits that organizational identity drives constructive deviance in the workplace only when people perceive normative conflict with organizational rules. In Studies 1a and 1b, we develop and validate a measure of normative conflict. In Study 2, we conduct a preliminary test of the model with employed students and find that identity is positively related to constructive deviance only when normative conflict is high. In Study 3, we replicate and extend the model to show that the moderating effect of normative conflict is mediated by experienced psychological discomfort and that organizational identity is positively related to constructive deviance among working adults only when discomfort is high. In total, our findings demonstrate the utility of the normative conflict model for explaining when constructive deviance is mostly likely to occur in the workplace.     

How does it feel and how does it look? The role of employee motivation in organizational learning type

Employees' work outcomes vary as a function of their focus on exploring new possibilities versus exploiting current opportunities. But what determines how employees divide their attention between these contrasting work behaviors? Drawing on studies on work motivation and employees' impression management concerns, we examine how intrinsic work motivation and self‐enhancement motivation relate to the exploration–exploitation balance and how environmental dynamism moderates these relationships. Based on the analyses of a sample of 638 employees in 34 organizations in Finland, we find that intrinsic work motivation is positively associated with employees' focus on exploration relative to exploitation. By contrast, self‐enhancement motivation negatively associates with exploration relative to exploitation, but this relationship is nonlinear, such that as self‐enhancement motivation increases, its positive association with exploitation diminishes. The findings also show that the hypothesized nonlinear relationship between self‐enhancement motivation and exploration is particularly pronounced in stable business environments. Our findings contribute to organizational learning research and provide a new theoretical perspective on pursuing exploration and exploitation in organizations.     

煤炭企业差序格局下员工安全行为路径研究*

为促进煤炭企业员工安全行为,减少生产安全事故,基于差序格局理论、资源保存理论和自我决定理论,构建差序式领导、组织认同、安全动机和员工安全行为的链式中介模型。通过路径检验和Bootstrap方法,对367名煤炭企业基层员工的有效问卷数据进行统计分析,探讨激发员工安全行为的有效路径。研究结果表明:煤炭企业中的差序式领导可正向影响员工安全遵从行为和安全参与行为,且对安全参与行为的促进作用更强;组织认同和安全动机在差序式领导与员工安全遵从行为、安全参与行为的关系中存在独立中介和链式中介作用,且相较于组织认同,安全动机的独立中介作用更强。研究结果可为建立合理的差序标准、采取适度偏私手段提供参考。     

煤制油基地安全激励因素识别及安全动机模型的实证研究

为探求安全是否需要激励以及如果采用激励、从何激励的问题,对848名煤制油基地的员工进行问卷调查,将员工需求分为低层次需求、尊重需求、成就实现需求和超越自我需求4个方面,对每个具体需求构建需求场景。对控制变量进行差异性检验分析和相关性分析,得出文化程度和年龄对不同层次需求的影响,在此基础上进行结构方程模型验证分析。结果表明:安全需要激励,低层需求和成就需求大于尊重需求,超我需求最小,负向激励不受欢迎;受欢迎的因素在不同年龄和文化下略有差异,考核制度、人际关系、物质激励等均排在前列,且安全动机由经济性满足和自我价值实现共同确定,精神激励制度不是安全动机的核心要素。     

公交驾驶员组织认同感对驾驶愤怒的影响:职业倦怠的中介作用

为探究影响公交驾驶员驾驶愤怒的前因变量及影响机制,提出以职业倦怠为中介变量的公交驾驶员组织认同感、职业倦怠与驾驶愤怒模型;选用组织认同感量表、职业倦怠量表和公交驾驶员驾驶愤怒量表,调查西安市的583名公交驾驶员,利用Process宏程序进行模型检验。结果表明:其他交通主体的违规行为与利己主义行为更易诱发公交驾驶员的驾驶愤怒;组织认同感可显著负向预测驾驶愤怒和职业倦怠,职业倦怠在组织认同感和驾驶愤怒之间起中介作用,即组织认同感可通过职业倦怠影响驾驶愤怒。     

Can self‐sacrificial leadership promote subordinate taking charge? The mediating role of organizational identification and the moderating role of risk aversion

The extant literature on the relationship between self‐sacrificial leadership and subordinate behavioral outcomes has primarily focused on the influence of this leadership on subordinate affiliative behaviors. Our research proposed a theoretical model explaining why and when self‐sacrificial leadership might promote taking charge, an exemplar of challenging behaviors. We tested this model across two studies conducted in China. In addition, we also examined the differences in the boundary conditions for self‐sacrificial leadership to influence taking charge and affiliative behaviors (cooperation in Study 1 and helping in Study 2 ). Our results revealed that (i) self‐sacrificial leadership was positively related to subordinate taking charge, with organizational identification acting as a mediator for this relationship, and (ii) risk aversion moderated both the self‐sacrificial leadership–subordinate taking charge relationship and the mediating effect of organizational identification, such that the relationship and its mediating mechanism were weaker for subordinates high rather than low in risk aversion. These moderating effects, however, could not generalize to cooperation and helping. Finally, the theoretical and practical implications of our results and directions for future research were discussed. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.