ABSTRACT Whereas previous studies have identified the adverse effects of technology-assisted supplemental work on employees, coworkers’ role in this form of work remains largely unexplored. Based on the conservation of resources theory and social learning theory, we propose that a coworker’s off-the-job responsiveness can influence an employee’s off-the-job responsiveness, thereby affecting the employee’s on-the-job vigor and thus their creativity. In Study 1, we collected data from 235 employee – coworker dyads over 10 workdays and found that (a) coworkers’ off-the-job responsiveness (and on-the-job vigor) was positively related to employees’ off-the-job responsiveness (and on-the-job vigor), while (b) employees’ off-the-job responsiveness was negatively related to their own on-the-job vigor, which in turn was positively related to their creativity. Moreover, compared with introverts, extraverts were more likely to experience these relationships. In Study 2, we used experimental vignettes to replicate some of the proposed relationships and crossover effects. Overall, this research contributes to the organizational science literature by demonstrating that coworkers’ off-the-job responsiveness and on-the-job vigor can be contagious and can shape employee creativity, especially for extraverts.

ABSTRACT COVID-19 was an unprecedented shock to the world, disrupting the routines and daily lives of millions of people worldwide. Organizations have invested many resources to manage the pandemic with the dual goals of ensuring business continuity and protecting the health and lives of employees. However, not all organizational decisions may have been perceived as fair. Building upon the literature on workplace justice, we propose and test a model within the stressor-emotion framework of counterproductive work behaviors. In trying to better understand why and when incivility arises at work, we examine the indirect effect of employees’ overall justice perceptions regarding the treatment they receive from the organization on the incivility these employees show toward others, via a discrete emotion, anger toward the organization. We further consider two individual characteristics, employee’s coronavirus anxiety and employee’s moral obligation, as potential boundary conditions. Using a three-wave design, we observed that overall justice is negatively related to anger toward the organization, and in turn, to incivility behaviors. Furthermore, the association between overall justice perceptions and anger is heightened by higher levels of coronavirus anxiety, while the association between anger and incivility becomes weaker in the presence of higher levels of moral obligation.

ABSTRACT Measuring job performance is fundamental to validating selection procedures. However, job performance is multi-dimensional, and common measurement practices vary across its dimensions. While task performance is typically measured by supervisor ratings, counterproductive work behaviors are often measured by employee self-ratings, and there is no standard measurement practice for measuring organizational citizenship behaviors. Drawing from research on multi-rater models, this study proposes that the unique perspectives of supervisors and employees can both provide insights into employees’ job performance and sets out to understand for which performance dimensions their combination is most valuable when validating selection procedures. Using latent models, it examines the extent to which supervisor and self-ratings contain shared and unique information about job performance dimensions, and how two common selection predictors (conscientiousness and general mental ability) predict this shared and unique information. Results show that consensus between supervisor ratings and employee self-ratings is modest across performance dimensions and that conscientiousness shows stronger relations with unique employee perspectives, whereas general mental ability is more strongly related to unique supervisor perspectives. The present findings have implications for the measurement of performance and the interpretation of criterion-related validities of selection procedures.

ABSTRACT Fit with multiple layers of the organizational environment is essential for the effective functioning of employees. However, our knowledge of complex co-influences of multiple person-environment (p-E) fit types on work outcomes remains mostly theoretical. Drawing on sensemaking theory and collectivistic cultural frameworks, this study develops a configural theory of p-E fit. We then apply a fuzzy set approach to empirically demonstrate that work attitudes (job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and turnover intention) are a function of (a) employees’ holistic perceptions of p-E fit instead of independent fit dimensions; and (b) configurations consisting of multi-fit perceptions are formed in response to a confluence of both in-group and institutional collectivism. We also show that p-E fit perceptions are characterized by equifinality (i.e. multiple solutions exist for each work attitude). Our study not only applies a cultural lens to examine multi-fit models but also highlights the importance of fine-tuning complex collectivistic influences.

ABSTRACT These two studies tested how supervisors’ use of coercive or reward power influences individuals’ creativity and examined whether subordinates’ need for achievement affects this process. Dyad data were collected from two studies at two time points. The studies indicated that supervisors’ use of coercive or reward power affected subordinates’ identification with supervisor and thereby enhanced subordinate creativity. Interestingly, these results suggest that the functional effects of using coercion are positive if punishments are contingent upon performance. The pattern of the results showed that fear of failure moderated the relationship between supervisors’ use of coercive power and subordinates’ identification with supervisor. Subordinates’ hope for success strengthened the positive effects of supervisors’ use of contingent rewards on subordinates’ identification with supervisor, while these positive effects would be attenuated if supervisors used noncontingent rewards. Theoretical and practical implications of the study findings are discussed.

ABSTRACT Although there are numerous benefits associated with organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs), recent research has shown that they can have both benefits and costs for the well-being of employees engaging in these behaviors. Thus, it is crucial to understand how and why OCBs can have positive and negative impacts on well-being in order to mitigate unintended consequences associated with these otherwise positive behaviors. Drawing on social exchange and conservation of resources theories, we argue that change in OCBs that subordinates direct toward their supervisors correspond with changes in supervisor consideration and initiating structure behaviors, as rated by subordinates. In turn, subordinate perceptions of supervisor behaviors have important implications for subordinate well-being (i.e. job satisfaction, life satisfaction, and emotional exhaustion). Using a longitudinal design and a sample of 205 students, we found that supervisor consideration and initiating structure in response to receiving OCBs from subordinates explains the benefits and costs that arise from engaging in OCBs over time.

ABSTRACT Despite the rise in research on leader behaviors and workplace deviance, a comprehensive understanding of the magnitude of associations between the different forms of leader behaviors and workplace deviance is lacking. Drawing on Social Learning Theory and Banks and colleagues’) framework of leader behaviors, our meta-analysis provides a rank ordering of leader behaviors (i.e., moral, inspirational, task-oriented, relational, and passive) based on their importance in predicting workplace deviance using 104 independent samples (N = 42,968). Additionally, we consolidate the literatures on perpetrated and experienced deviance to investigate the association between leader behaviors and deviance from both perspectives. We also assess three boundary conditions that could moderate the leader behavior – workplace deviance relationship. Our findings suggest that passive leader behaviors explain the greatest variance in workplace deviance, followed by moral, relational, inspirational, and task-oriented leader behaviors. We also find support for the moderating effects of deviance target, study design, and rater in(dependence) on the association between leader behaviors and workplace deviance. We highlight that passive leader behaviors exhibit a greater influence on workplace deviance relative to the influence of positive leader behaviors. We discuss the implications of our results for both research and practice.

ABSTRACT Corporate lobbyists play a vital role in the Corporate Political Activity process. They act as a mediator between corporations and politicians when firms engage in lobbying activities. Firms value professional lobbyists for their connections in Washington and their knowledge of the political process. While previous Corporate Political Activity research on lobbying has focused primarily on the amount of money firms spend on lobbying, including antecedents of lobbying and outcomes, very little research has examined lobbyists’ individual differences and how those influence important outcomes. In this paper, we examine how lobbyists’ specialization and experience as both a lobbyist and a former politician can influence the number of bills lobbied on passed into law. Using a sample of corporate lobbyists who were hired by S&P 500 firms, we look at 8,630 lobbyist’s careers from 2005–2016. We find that lobbyists lower in specialization are more likely to lobby on bills which are eventually passed into law than highly specialized lobbyists. We also find that social capital moderates the relationship between specialization and lobbying effectiveness. These results suggest that while corporate political activity spending is important, both scholars and firms should also understand who firms are hiring to lobby for them and how differences in lobbyist specialization might influence firm effectiveness in the nonmarket arena.

ABSTRACT Recent studies have attempted to clarify the detrimental consequences of compulsory citizenship behaviors (CCB; employees are pressured or forced to engage in extra-role activities). Based on the retributive justice and impression management perspectives, we simultaneously examine potentially harmful outcomes (i.e., destructive voice, DSV) and constructive outcomes (organizational citizenship behaviors, OCB) of CCB, and propose justice and impression management mechanisms and boundaries to explain the dark and potential bright sides of CCB. Data was collected from 276 supervisor-subordinate pairs across various industries at different time points. The results show that CCB increases DSV through increased perceived distributive injustice, while employees’ equity sensitivity further enhances such effects. Moreover, the indirect effect of CCB on OCB via increased impression management motive depends on employees’ self-monitoring: it becomes positive when employees rate high in self-monitoring. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

This article introduces and provides validity evidence for the new individual difference construct of tolerance for contradiction, defined as a mode of thinking that accepts and even thrives on apparent bivalent logical contradictions. In Study 1, which used a sample of 198 undergraduates, convergent and discriminant validity evidence for tolerance for contradiction were obtained via associations with a set of established variables. In Study 2, further validity evidence was obtained and the relevance of tolerance for contradiction in the workplace was demonstrated using a sample of 142 prison officers. Tolerance for contradiction was found to interact with situational judgment ability to affect job performance in the manner as hypothesized. The findings on the nature of the interaction supported the argument that tolerance for thinking may be either adaptive or maladaptive. Limitations and implications of the studies as well as future research directions on the construct of tolerance for contradiction were discussed.