Exploring the Relationships Between Perceived Coworker Loafing and Counterproductive Work Behaviors: The Mediating Role of a Revenge Motive
- First Online:
The purpose of this study is to explore the relationships between perceived coworker loafing and counterproductive work behaviors toward the organization (CWB-O) and toward the coworkers (CWB-I).
Data were collected from 184 supervisor–employee pairs from multiple sources (i.e., self-rated and supervisor-rated). Structural equation modeling (SEM) analyses were conducted to test our hypotheses.
The results of SEM showed that perceived loafing was positively related to CWB-O (self-rated) and CWB-I (self-rated and supervisor-rated). Moreover, a revenge motive toward the organization fully mediated the relationship between perceived loafing and CWB-O, whereas a revenge motive toward coworkers fully mediated the relationship between perceived loafing and CWB-I.
This study advances our understanding as to how and why perceived coworker loafing increases employees’ CWB-I and CWB-O. Our investigation also highlights the important cognitive mediator: revenge motive in the perceived loafing–CWB linkage.
This is one of the first studies which examines the relationships between perceived coworker loafing and two facets of CWB, and investigates a cognitive mediator (i.e., a revenge motive) that underlines the perceived loafing–CWB linkage. In addition, we respond to Bennett and Robinson’s (J Appl Psychol 85:349–360, 2003) call to test the nomological network of CWB in a collectivist culture (i.e., Taiwan).
KeywordsCounterproductive work behavior Perceived loafing Revenge Collectivist culture Taiwan
- Aquino, K., Tripp, T. M., & Bies, R. J. (2001). How employees respond to personal offense: The effects of blame attribution, victim status, and offender status on revenge and reconciliation in the workplace. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 52–59. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.86.1.52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Baron, R. A., & Neuman, J. H. (1996). Workplace violence and workplace aggression: Evidence on their relative frequency and potential causes. Aggressive Behavior, 22, 161–173. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-2337(1996)22:3<161::AID-AB1>3.0.CO;2-Q.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Bass, B. M. (1998). Transformational leadership. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Bennett, R. J., & Robinson, S. L. (2003). The past, present, and future of workplace deviance research. In J. Greenberg (Ed.), Organizational behavior: The state of the science (pp. 247–281). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Bentler, P. M. (1995). EQS: Structural equations program manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.Google Scholar
- Bies, R. J., & Moag, J. F. (1986). Interactional justice: Communication criteria of fairness. In R. J. Lewicki, B. H. Sheppard, & M. H. Bazerman (Eds.), Research on negotiations (Vol. 1, pp. 43–55). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
- Bies, R. J., & Tripp, T. M. (1996). Beyond distrust: Getting even and the need for revenge. In R. M. Kramer & T. Tyler (Eds.), Trust and organizations (pp. 246–260). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Bies, R. J., & Tripp, T. M. (2001). A passion for justice: The rationality and mortality of revenge. In R. Cropanzano (Ed.), Justice in the work place: From theory to practice (Vol. 2, pp. 197–208). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Bies, R. J., Tripp, T. M., & Kramer, R. M. (1997). At the breaking point: Cognitive and social dynamics of revenge in organizations. In R. A. Giacalone & J. Greenberg (Eds.), Antisocial behavior in organizations (pp. 18–36). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Fox, S., & Spector, P. E. (1999). A model of work frustration–aggression. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 915–931. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(199911)20:6<915::AID-JOB918>3.0.CO;2-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hofmann, D. A., & Gavin, M. B. (1998). Centering decisions in hierarchical linear models: Implications for research in organizations. Journal of Management, 24, 623–641.Google Scholar
- Hofstede, G. (1997). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
- Jones, D. A. (2004). Toward a better understanding of fairness in the workplace: Attitude strength, predictive asymmetry, and the revenge motive. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Calgary, Canada.Google Scholar
- Jones, D. A. (2009). Getting even with one’s supervisor and one’s organization: Relationships among types of injustice, desires for revenge, and counterproductive work behaviors. Journal of Organizational Behavior, (in press). doi:10.1002/job.563.
- Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1999). LISREL: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
- Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 717–731.Google Scholar
- Schmitt, N., Cortina, J. M., Ingerick, M. J., & Wiechmann, D. (2003). Personnel selection and employee performance. In W. C. Borman, D. R. Ilgen, & R. J. Klimoski (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 77–105). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Schwab, D. P. (2005). Research methods for organizational studies (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
- Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models. In S. Leinhardt (Ed.), Sociological methodology (pp. 290–312). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
- Thau, S., Aquino, K., & Wittek, R. (2007). An extension of uncertainty management theory to the self: The relationship between justice, social comparison orientation, and antisocial work behaviors. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 250–258. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.92.1.250.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar