Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Team–Member Exchange and Work Engagement: Does Personality Make a Difference?

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

    We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

    Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Abstract

Purpose

Adopting a person–situation interactionist framework, this study examined the joint effects of employee personality (i.e., extraversion, neuroticism, and conscientiousness) and social exchange relationships with peers (i.e., team–member exchange; TMX) in predicting work engagement.

Methodology

This study is based on survey responses from 235 Chinese employees collected at two time points with 3 months in between. We conducted moderated regression analyses to test the hypotheses that employees higher in extraversion or conscientiousness or lower in neuroticism would demonstrate a stronger TMX–work engagement relation.

Findings

Results from this study showed that the three focal personality traits moderated the TMX–engagement relation simultaneously. Specifically, the positive TMX–engagement relation was stronger for employees with higher extraversion or lower neuroticism than that for their counterparts. Interestingly, the TMX–engagement relation was positive for employees lower in conscientiousness but negative for those higher in conscientiousness.

Implications

These findings support the notion that lateral social exchange relationships in the workplace (i.e., TMX) are an important antecedent of work engagement and, more importantly, their beneficial effects on work engagement are contingent on certain types and/or levels of personality traits.

Originality/Value

This study not only advances our understanding of presumed antecedents of work engagement but also opens a new door for future research on work engagement by highlighting the importance of a person–situation interactionist framework.

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.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anand, S., Vidyarthi, P., Liden, R., & Rousseau, (2010). Good citizens in poor-quality relationships: Idiosyncratic deals as a substitute for relationship quality. Academy of Management Journal, 53, 970–988.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., & Paunonen, S. V. (2002). What is the central feature of extraversion? Social attention versus reward sensitivity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 245–252.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bakker, A. B., Albrecht, S. L., & Leiter, M. P. (2011). Key questions regarding work engagement. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 20, 4–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bakker, A. B., Schaufeli, W. B., Leiter, M. P., & Taris, T. W. (2008). Employee engagement: An emerging concept in occupational health psychology. Work and Stress, 22, 187–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 1–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big-Five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Behson, S., Eddy, E., & Lorenzet, S. (2000). The importance of the critical psychological states in the job characteristics model: A meta-analytic and structural equations modeling examination. Current Research in Social Psychology, 5, 170–189.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Bliese, P. D. (2000). Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. In K. J. Klein & S. W. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions and new directions (pp. 349–381). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolino, M. C., & Turnley, W. H. (2005). The personal costs of citizenship behavior: The relationship between individual initiative and role overload, job stress, and work-family conflict. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 740–748.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cartwright, S., & Holmes, N. (2006). The meaning of work: The challenge of regaining employee engagement and reducing cynicism. Human Resource Management Review, 16, 199–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiaburu, D. S., & Harrison, D. A. (2008). Do peers make the place? Conceptual synthesis and meta-analysis of coworker effects on perceptions, attitudes, OCBs, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 1082–1103.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Christian, M. S., Garza, A. S., & Slaughter, J. E. (2011). Work engagement: A quantitative review and test of its relations with task and contextual performance. Personnel Psychology, 64, 89–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cole, M. S., Schaninger, W. S., & Harris, S. G. (2002). The workplace social exchange network: A multilevel, conceptual examination. Group and Organization Management, 27, 142–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J., & Gleser, G. C. (1957). Psychological tests and personnel decisions. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31, 874–900.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2003). Good business: Leadership, flow and the making of meaning. London: Hodder and Stoughton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Demerouti, E. (2006). Job characteristics, flow, and performance: The moderating role of conscientiousness. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 11, 266–280.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dollard, M., & Bakker, A. (2010). Psychosocial safety climate as a precursor to conducive work environments, psychological health problems, and employee engagement. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 83, 579–599.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edmondson, A. (1996). Learning from mistakes is easier said than done: Group and organizational influences on the detection and correction of human error. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 32, 5–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 350–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchinson, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 500–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erdogan, B., Kraimer, M. L., & Liden, R. C. (2004). Work value congruence and intrinsic career success: The compensatory roles of leader–member exchange and perceived organizational support. Personnel Psychology, 57, 305–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erdogan, B., & Liden, R. C. (2006). Collectivism as a moderator of responses to organizational justice: Implications for leader–member exchange and ingratiation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27, 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans, M. G. (1985). A Monte Carlo study of the effects of correlated method variance in moderated multiple regression analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 36, 305–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gagne′, M., & Deci, E. (2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 331–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallup. (2010). Employee engagement. Retrieved October 28, 2010 from http://www.gallup.com/consulting/52/employee-engagement.aspx

  • Goffman, E. (1961). Encounters: Two studies in the sociology of interaction. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers of the Big-Five factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4, 26–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grace, J. B., & Bollen, K. A. (2005). Interpreting the results from multiple regression and structural equation models. Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America, 86, 283–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of leader–member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. Leadership Quarterly, 6, 219–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, M., Parker, S., & Neal, A. (2008). Is behavioral engagement a distinct and useful construct? Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1, 48–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halbesleben, J. R. B. (2010). A meta-analysis of work engagement: Relationships with burnout, demands, resources, and consequences. In A. B. Bakker & M. P. Leiter (Eds.), Work engagement: A handbook of essential theory and practice (pp. 102–117). London: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halbesleben, J. R. B., Harvey, J., & Bolino, M. (2009). Too engaged? A conservation of resources view of the relationship between work engagement and work interference with family. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 1452–1465.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, D. A., Johns, G., & Martocchio, J. J. (2000). Changes in technology, teamwork, diversity: New directions for a new century of absenteeism research. In G. Ferris (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resources management (Vol. 18, pp. 43–91). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52, 1280–1300.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, E. T. (2000). Making a good decision: Value from fit. American Psychologist, 55, 1217–1230.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ickes, W., Snyder, M., & Garcia, S. (1997). Personality influences on the choice of situations. In R. Hogan, J. A. Johnson, & S. R. Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 165–195). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Inceoglu, I., & Warr, P. (2011). Personality and job engagement. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 10, 177–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iverson, R. D., Olekalns, M., & Erwin, P. J. (1998). Affectivity, organizational stressors, and absenteeism: A causal model of burnout and its consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 52, 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Judge, T. A., & Ilies, R. (2002). Relationship of personality to performance motivation: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 797–807.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 692–724.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahn, W. A. (1992). To be full there: Psychological presence at work. Human Relations, 45, 321–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamdar, D., & Van Dyne, L. (2007). The joint effects of personality and workplace social exchange relationships in predicting task performance and citizenship performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1286–1298.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kanfer, R., & Heggestad, E. D. (1997). Motivation traits and skills: A person-centered approach to work motivation. Research in Organizational Behavior, 19, 1–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanungo, R. N. (1982). Measurement of job and work involvement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 341–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1978). The social psychology of organizations. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, H., Shin, K., & Swanger, N. (2009). Burnout and engagement: A comparative analysis using the Big Five personality dimensions. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 28, 96–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kinnunen, U., Feldt, T., & Mäkikangas, A. (2008). Testing the effort-reward imbalance model among Finnish managers: The role of perceived organizational support. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 13, 114–127.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Klein, K., Lim, B.-C., Saltz, J., & Mayer, D. (2004). How do they get there? An examination of the antecedents of centrality in team networks. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 952–963.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langelaan, S., Bakker, A. B., van Doornen, L., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2006). Burnout and employee engagement: Do individual differences make a difference? Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 521–532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lapierre, L. M., & Hackett, R. D. (2007). Trait conscientiousness, leader–member exchange, job satisfaction and organizational citizenship behavior: A test of an integrative model. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 80, 539–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larsen, R. J., & Ketelaar, T. (1991). Personality and susceptibility to positive and negative emotional states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 132–140.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Latham, G. P., & Pinder, C. C. (2005). Work motivation theory and research at the dawn of the twenty-first century. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 485–516.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Law, K. S., Wong, C., & Mobley, W. H. (1998). Toward a taxonomy of multidimensional constructs. Academy of Management Review, 23, 741–755.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin, K. (1935). A dynamic theory of personality. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liden, R. C., & Maslyn, J. M. (1998). Multidimensionality of leader–member exchange: An empirical assessment through scale development. Journal of Management, 24, 43–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., & Sparrowe, R. T. (2000). An examination of the mediating role of psychological empowerment on the relations between the job, interpersonal relationships, and work outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 407–416.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, Y., Keller, R. T., & Shih, H.-A. (2011). The impact of team–member exchange, differentiation, team commitment, and knowledge sharing on R&D project team performance. R&D Management, 41, 274–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, D., Zhang, Z., & Wang, M. (2012). Mono-level and multilevel mediated moderation and moderated mediation: Theorization and test. In X. Chen, A. Tsui, and L. Farh (Eds.), Management research methods (2nd edn, in Chinese; pp. 545–579). Beijing, China: Peking University Press.

  • Locke, E. A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 1293–1349). Chicago: Rand McNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • Love, M. S., & Forret, M. (2008). Exchange relationships at work: An examination of the relationship between team–member exchange and supervisor reports of organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 14, 342–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macey, W. H., & Schneider, B. (2008). The meaning of employee engagement. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1, 3–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Major, D. A., Kozlowski, S. W., Chao, G. T., & Gardner, P. D. (1995). A longitudinal investigation of newcomer expectations, early socialization outcomes, and the moderating effects of role development factors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 418–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 397–422.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mauno, S., Kinnunen, U., & Ruokolainen, M. (2007). Job demands and resources as antecedents of work engagement: A longitudinal study. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 70, 149–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • May, D. R., Gilson, R. L., & Harter, L. M. (2004). The psychological conditions of meaningfulness, safety and availability and the engagement of the human spirit at work. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77, 11–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCrae, R. R., & John, O. (1992). An introduction to the five-factor model and its applications. Journal of Personality, 60, 174–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mendoza-Denton, R., Ayduk, O., Mischel, W., Shoda, Y., & Testa, A. (2001). Person × situation interactionism in self-encoding (I Am… When…): Implications for affect regulation and social information processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 533–544.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnytsky, L. (2002). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 6, 20–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moon, H. (2001). The two faces of conscientiousness: Duty and achievement striving in escalation of commitment dilemmas. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 533–540.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Murray, H. (1938). Explorations in personality. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muthén, L., & Muthén, B. (2002). Mplus user’s guide. Los Angeles: Muthén and Muthén.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newman, D. A., & Harrison, D. A. (2008). Been there, bottled that: Are state and behavioral employee engagement new and useful construct “wine?”. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1, 31–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ng, T. W. H., & Sorensen, K. L. (2008). Toward a further understanding of the relationships between perceptions of support and work attitudes: A meta-analysis. Group Organization Management, 33, 243–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nixon, A., Yang, L. Q., Spector, P. E., & Zhang, X. C. (2011). Emotional labor in China: Examining moderators and consequences of the emotional labor process. Stress and Health, 27, 289–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nosek, B. A. (2005). Moderators of the relationship between implicit and explicit evaluation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 134, 565–584.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oysterman, D., Kemmelmeier, M., & Coon, H. (2002). Cultural psychology, a new look: Reply to Bond (2002), Fiske (2002), Kitayama (2002), and Miller (2002). Psychological Bulletin, 128, 110–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B., & Bachrach, D. G. (2000). Organizational citizenship behaviors: A critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research. Journal of Management, 26, 513–563.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preacher, K. J., Curran, P. J., & Bauer, D. J. (2006). Computational tools for probing interaction effects in multiple linear regression, multilevel modeling, and latent curve analysis. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 31, 437–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ren, F. (2009). Perceived organizational support, work engagement and employee performance: Structural equation modeling analysis. Unpublished master thesis, Macau University of Science and Technology, Macau, China.

  • Rhoades, L., & Eisenberger, R. (2002). Perceived organizational support: A review of the literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 698–714.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rich, B., LePine, J., & Crawford, E. (2010). Job engagement: Antecedents and effects on job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 53, 617–635.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. The American Psychologist, 55, 68–78.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Saks, A. M. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21, 600–619.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saks, A. M. (2008). The meaning and bleeding of employee engagement: How muddy is the water? Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1, 40–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salanova, M., Agut, S., & Peiro, J. M. (2005). Linking organizational resources and work engagement to employee performance and customer loyalty: The mediation of service climate. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 1217–1227.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Saucier, G. (1994). Mini-Markers: A brief version of Goldberg’s unipolar Big-Five markers. Journal of Personality Assessment, 63, 506–516.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2003). UWES-Utrecht Work Engagement Scale: Test manual. Unpublished manuscript. Department of Psychology, Utrecht University, http://www.schaufeli.com

  • Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., Gonza′lez-Roma′, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measurement of engagement and burnout: A confirmative analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3, 71–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, L. L. (2006). Self-reported emotional intelligence as an indicator of social exchange quality at work. Unpublished dissertation, University of Houston, Houston, Texas.

  • Seers, A. (1989). Team-member exchange quality: A new construct for role-making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 43, 118–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seers, A., Petty, M. M., & Cashman, J. F. (1995). Team-member exchange under team and traditional management: A natural occurring quasi-experiment. Group and Organization Management, 20, 18–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seppala, P., Mauno, S., Feldt, T., Hakanen, J., Kinnunen, U., Tolvanen, A., et al. (2009). The construct validity of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale: Multisample and longitudinal evidence. Journal of Happiness Study, 10, 459–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shimazu, A., Schaufeli, W. B., Kosugi, S., Suzuki, A., Nashiwa, H., Kato, A., et al. (2008). Employee engagement in Japan: Development and validation of the Japanese version of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 57, 510–523.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sonnentag, S. (2003). Recovery, employee engagement, and proactive behavior: A new look at the interface between non-work and work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 518–528.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tse, H. H. M., & Dasborough, M. T. (2008). A study of exchange and emotions in team member relationships. Group & Organization Management, 33, 194–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Leung, K. (1997). Methods and data analysis for cross-cultural research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1997). Measurement and mismeasurement of mood: Recurrent and emergent issues. Journal of Personality Assessment, 68, 267–296.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Weigl, M., Hornung, S., Parker, S., Petru, R., Glaser, J., & Angerer, P. (2010). Work engagement accumulation of task, social, personal resources: A three-wave structural equation model. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 77, 140–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Y., & Gan, Y. (2005). The Chinese version of Utrecht Work Engagement Scale An examination of reliability and validity. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 13, 268–270.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Ms. Jessica M. Santoro for proofreading our manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Portland State University, P.O. Box 751, Portland, OR, 97207, USA

    Fang-Yi Liao & Liu-Qin Yang

  2. University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA

    Mo Wang

  3. Portland State University, Portland, OR, USA

    Damon Drown

  4. Peking University, Beijing, China

    Junqi Shi

Authors
  1. Fang-Yi Liao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Liu-Qin Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mo Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Damon Drown
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Junqi Shi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Liu-Qin Yang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Liao, FY., Yang, LQ., Wang, M. et al. Team–Member Exchange and Work Engagement: Does Personality Make a Difference?. J Bus Psychol 28, 63–77 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-012-9266-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-012-9266-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation