Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Assessing Workgroup Norms for Civility: The Development of the Civility Norms Questionnaire-Brief

  • Published:
Journal of Business and Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

This research describes the development and validation of the Civility Norms Questionnaire-Brief (CNQ-B), a 4-item measure designed to assess workgroup climate for civility. Climate for civility is defined as employee perceptions of norms supporting respectful treatment among workgroup members.

Design/Methodology/Approach

Five samples (N = 2,711) of adult employees, including two from distinct organizations and three from multiple organizations, responded to the CNQ-B and additional measures.

Findings

Evidence for the internal consistency, and convergent and discriminant validity of the CNQ-B was observed. Additionally, evidence for the criterion-related and incremental validity of the CNQ-B was demonstrated as it was a significant predictor of later-assessed incivility experiences and accounted for significant variability in work attitudes beyond incivility experiences and related measures.

Implications

The CNQ-B is a psychometrically sound instrument despite being composed of only four items. The CNQ-B can be used by researchers and practitioners alike to assess climate for civility, to study climate for civility as a precursor to incivility experiences, and to target workgroups that could benefit from interventions (e.g., training) to enhance civility and reduce incivility.

Originality/Value

This is one of the first studies to conduct a rigorous psychometric assessment of a measure of workgroup climate for civility that is grounded in theory and research on workplace civility and incivility. At four items, the CNQ-B is the shortest assessment tool currently available that is designed for this purpose.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. We thank Christine Porath for sharing four possible items in this item development phase (Porath et al. 2004). None of these remained, however, in the final CNQ-B.

References

  • Andersson, L. M., & Pearson, C. M. (1999). Tit for tat? The spiraling effect of incivility in the workplace. Academy of Management Review, 24, 452–471.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balfour, D. L., & Wechsler, B. (1996). Organizational commitment: Antecedents and outcomes in public organizations. Public Productivity & Management Review, 19, 256–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, R. J., Aquino, K., Reed, A., & Thau, S. (2005). The normative nature of employee deviance and the impact of moral identity. In S. Fox & P. E. Spector (Eds.), Counterproductive work behavior: Investigations of actors and targets (pp. 107–125). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246.

    Article  PubMed  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 in organizations (Vol. 1, pp. 43–55). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cammann, C., Fichman, M., Jenkins, D., & Klesh, J. R. (1983). The Michigan organizational assessment questionnaire: Assessing the attitudes and perceptions of organizational members. In S. E. Seashore, E. E. Lawler, P. H. Mervis, & C. Cammann (Eds.), Assessing organizational change: A guide to methods, measures, and practices (pp. 71–138). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cattell, R. B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1, 245–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caza, B. B., & Cortina, L. M. (2007). From insult to injury: Explaining the impact of incivility. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 29, 335–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, F., Curran, P. J., Bollen, K. A., Kirby, J., & Paxton, P. (2008). An empirical evaluation of the use of fixed cutoff points in RMSEA test statistic in structural equation models. Sociological Methods & Research, 36, 462–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J. A. (2001). On the dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation of a measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 386–400.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cortina, L. M., & Magley, V. J. (2009). Patterns and profiles of response to incivility in the workplace. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 14, 272–288.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cortina, L. M., Magley, V. J., Williams, J. H., & Langhout, R. D. (2001). Incivility in the workplace: Incidence and impact. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6, 64–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dion, K. L. (2000). Group cohesion: From “field of forces” to multidimensional construct. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 4, 7–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donovan, M. A., Drasgow, F., & Munson, L. J. (1998). The Perceptions of Fair Interpersonal Treatment scale: Development and validation of a measure of interpersonal treatment in the workplace. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 683–692.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, D. C. (1984). The development and enforcement of group norms. Academy of Management Review, 9, 47–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiske, S. T. (2004). Social beings: A core motives approach to social psychology. New Brunswick, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gill, M. J., & Sypher, B. D. (2009). Workplace incivility and organizational trust. In P. Lutgen-Sandvik & B. D. Sypher (Eds.), Destructive organizational communication: Processes, consequences, and constructive ways of organizing (pp. 53–73). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glomb, T. M., & Liao, H. (2003). Interpersonal aggression in work groups: Social influence, reciprocal, and individual effects. Academy of Management Journal, 46, 486–496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25, 161–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, B. (2010). Multilevel relationships between organizational-level incivility, justice and intention to stay. Work & Stress, 24, 309–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hackman, J. R. (1992). Group influences on individuals in organizations. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Haugh (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 3, pp. 199–267). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hershcovis, M. S., & Barling, J. (2010). Towards a multi-foci approach to workplace aggression: A meta-analytic review of outcomes from different perpetrators. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31, 24–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hicks-Clarke, D., & Iles, P. (2000). Climate for diversity and its effects on career and organizational attitudes and perceptions. Personnel Review, 29, 324–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hinkin, T. R. (1998). A brief tutorial on the development of measures for use in survey questionnaires. Organizational Research Methods, 1, 104–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, D. L., Gillaspy, J. A., & Purc-Stephenson, R. (2009). Reporting practices in confirmatory factor analysis: An overview and some recommendations. Psychological Methods, 14, 6–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jex, S. M., Geimer, J. L. B., Clark, O., Guidroz, A. M., & Yugo, J. E. (2010). Challenges and recommendations in the measurement of workplace incivility. In J. Greenberg (Ed.), Insidious workplace behavior (pp. 239–271). New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, P. R., & Indvik, J. (2001). Slings and arrows of rudeness: Incivility in the workplace. Journal of Management Development, 20, 705–714.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jöreskob, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1996). LISREL 8.5: User’s reference guide. Chicago: Scientific Software International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser, H. F. (1960). The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 141–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kessler, S. R., Spector, P. E., Chang, C., & Parr, A. D. (2008). Organizational violence and aggression: Development of the three-factor violence climate survey. Work & Stress, 22, 108–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, J., & Mueller, C. W. (1978). Introduction to factor analysis: What it is and how to do it. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kline, R. B. (1998). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kossek, E. E., & Zonia, S. C. (1993). Assessing diversity climate: A field study of reactions to employer efforts to promote diversity. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 14, 61–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Klein, K. J. (2000). A multilevel approach to theory and research in organizations: Contextual, temporal, and emergent processes. In K. Klein & S. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions (pp. 3–90). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lim, S., & Cortina, L. M. (2005). Interpersonal mistreatment in the workplace: The interface and impact of general incivility and sexual harassment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 483–496.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lim, S., Cortina, L. M., & Magley, V. J. (2008). Personal and workgroup incivility: Impact on work and health outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 95–107.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lim, S., & Lee, A. (2011). Work and nonwork outcomes of workplace incivility: Does family support help? Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 16, 95–111.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, H. W., Hau, K., & Wen, Z. (2004). In search of golden rules: Comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler’s (1999) findings. Structural Equation Modeling, 11, 320–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, R. J., & Hine, D. W. (2005). Development and Validation of the Uncivil Workplace Behavior Questionnaire. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 10, 477–490.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Meng, X., Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D. B. (1992). Comparing correlated correlation coefficients. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 172–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meterko, M., Osatuke, K., Mohr, D., Warren, N., & Dyrenforth, S. (2007, August). Civility: The development and psychometric assessment of a survey measure. In M. Nagy (Moderator), Measuring and assessing workplace civility: Do “nice” organizations finish first? Symposium presented at the 67th annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Philadelphia.

  • Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1997). Commitment in the workplace. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miner-Rubino, K., & Cortina, L. M. (2007). Beyond targets: Consequences of vicarious exposure to misogyny at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1254–1269.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Miner-Rubino, K., & Reed, W. D. (2010). Testing a moderated mediational model of workgroup incivility: The roles of organizational trust and group regard. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 40, 3148–3168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, E. W. (2006). Doing the job well: An investigation of pro-social rule breaking. Journal of Management, 32, 5–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naylor, J. C., Pritchard, R. D., & Ilgen, D. R. (1980). A theory of behavior in organizations. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niehoff, B. P., & Moorman, R. H. (1993). Justice as a mediator of the relationship between methods of monitoring and organizational citizenship behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 527–556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osatuke, K., Moore, S. C., Ward, C., Dyrenforth, S. R., & Belton, L. (2009). Civility, respect, engagement in the workforce (CREW): Nationwide organization development intervention at Veterans Health Administration. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 45, 384–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ostroff, C., Kinicki, A. J., & Clark, M. A. (2002). Substantive and operational issues of response bias across levels of analysis: An example of climate-satisfaction relationships. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 355–368.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Parker, C. P., Baltes, B. B., Young, S. A., Huff, J. W., Altmann, R. A., LaCost, H. A., et al. (2003). Relationships between psychological climate perceptions and work outcomes: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 389–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, C. M., Andersson, L. M., & Porath, C. L. (2000). Assessing and attacking workplace incivility. Organizational Dynamics, 29, 123–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, C. M., Andersson, L. M., & Porath, C. L. (2005). Workplace Incivility. In S. Fox & P. E. Spector (Eds.), Counterproductive work behavior: Investigations of actors and targets (pp. 177–200). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, C. M., Andersson, L. M., & Wegner, J. W. (2001). When workers flout convention: A study of workplace incivility. Human Relations, 54, 1387–1419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, C. M., & Porath, C. L. (2005). On the nature, consequences and remedies of workplace incivility: Not time for “nice”? Think again. Academy of Management Executive, 19, 7–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peck, D. L. (2002). Civility: A contemporary context for a meaningful historical concept. Sociological Inquiry, 72, 358–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penney, L., & Spector, P. E. (2005). Job stress, incivility, and counterproductive work behavior: The moderating role of negative affectivity. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 777–796.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porath, C. L., & Erez, A. (2007). Does rudeness really matter? The effects of rudeness on task performance and helpfulness. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 1181–1197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porath, C. L., & Erez, A. (2009). Overlooked but not untouched: How rudeness reduces onlookers’ performance on routine and creative tasks. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 109, 29–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porath, C. L., & Pearson, C. M. (2010). The cost of bad behavior. Organizational Dynamics, 39, 64–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porath, C. L., Shapiro, D. L., & Duffy, M. K. (2004, August). When does perceived incivility lead to production deviance? A test of a systemwide perspective. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Management, New Orleans, LA.

  • Robinson, S. L., & Bennett, R. J. (1995). A typology of deviant workplace behaviors: A multidimensional scaling study. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 555–572.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, S. L., & Bennett, R. J. (1997). Workplace deviance: Its definition, its manifestations, and its causes. Research on Negotiation in Organizations, 6, 3–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, B., & Reichers, A. E. (1983). On the etiology of climates. Personnel Psychology, 36, 19–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sliter, M., Jex, S., Wolford, K., & McInnerney, J. (2010). How rude! Emotional labor as a mediator between customer incivility and employee outcomes. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 15, 468–481.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, P. C., Kendall, L., & Hulin, C. L. (1969). The measurement of satisfaction in work and retirement. Chicago: Rand McNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanton, J. M., & Weiss, E. M. (2002). Online panels for social science research: An introduction to the Study Response project (Technical report no. 13001; www.studyresponse.com). Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University School of Information Studies.

  • Strahan, R., & Gerbasi, K. C. (1972). Short, homogeneous versions of the Marlowe–Crowne Social Desirability Scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 28, 191–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sypher, B. D. (2004). Reclaiming civil discourse in the workplace. Southern Communication Journal, 69, 257–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1989). Using multivariate statistics (2nd ed.). New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported in part by Grant Number 5T01OH008610-07 awarded to Vicki Magley from CDC-NIOSH. Its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of NIOSH.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT, USA

    Benjamin M. Walsh, Vicki J. Magley, David W. Reeves, Kimberly A. Davies-Schrils, Matthew D. Marmet & Jessica A. Gallus

  2. Department of Management, University of Illinois Springfield, One University Plaza, MS UHB 4060, Springfield, IL, 62703-5407, USA

    Benjamin M. Walsh

Authors
  1. Benjamin M. Walsh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Vicki J. Magley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David W. Reeves
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kimberly A. Davies-Schrils
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Matthew D. Marmet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jessica A. Gallus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Benjamin M. Walsh.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Walsh, B.M., Magley, V.J., Reeves, D.W. et al. Assessing Workgroup Norms for Civility: The Development of the Civility Norms Questionnaire-Brief. J Bus Psychol 27, 407–420 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-011-9251-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-011-9251-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation