Conscientiousness and perceived ethicality: Examining why hierarchy of authority diminishes this positive relationship

Human resource (HR) managers hire conscientious employees because they are both productive and are viewed as upholding high ethical standards due to their propensity to engage in voice. Organizations may strive to create a work context conducive to all employees acting ethically, not just conscientious ones, by centralizing decision-making authority and promoting formalization through a higher hierarchy of authority. Yet, we propose that from the social information processing perspective, in higher hierarchy of authority contexts, peers may view their highly conscientious colleagues as less ethical. We hypothesize these effects through the lens of trait activation theory, according to which in a higher hierarchy of authority context, others are less likely to notice the voice behaviors of conscientious employees. Problematically, when others fail to notice conscientious employees' voice, they may perceive these workers as being less ethical. We tested our hypothesized moderated mediation model in a matched sample of employees (N = 820), their supervisors (N = 445), and peers (N = 529). As predicted, hierarchy of authority moderated the positive relationship between conscientiousness and voice, which in turn explained others' perceptions of their ethicality. Conscientiousness was positively related to peer assessments of ethicality via promotive (not prohibitive) voice when hierarchy of authority was lower (but not higher), partially supporting our hypotheses. These results suggest HR practitioners should be cognizant of the differential evaluations of highly conscientious employees in contexts with different levels of hierarchy of authority, and continuing challenges associated with balancing flexibility and formalization

Perceived Overqualification and Collectivism Orientation: Implications for Work and Nonwork Outcomes

This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Sage Publications via the DOI in this record.In this research, we simultaneously examined the relative applicability of person-environment fit and relative deprivation theories in explaining the interactive effects of perceived overqualification and collectivism cultural orientations on positive outcomes. We hypothesized that the negative (positive) influence of perceived overqualification on person-environment fit (relative deprivation) will be weaker among employees with high collectivism cultural orientation. We also examined which of these two different mechanisms would explain the hypothesized interactive effects in predicting these workers’ citizenship behavior, personal initiative, work engagement, and life satisfaction. We tested our hypotheses in two studies. In Study 1, we recruited professional staff (n = 852) and their coworkers (n = 301) from 95 universities and tested our hypotheses in a matched sample of 190 employees and their peers. The moderated mediation results supported the idea of person-environment fit (but not relative deprivation) as the mechanism explaining why collectivism orientations assuaged the negative effects of perceived overqualification on these outcomes. We constructively replicated these results in Study 2, which was a time-lagged design with full-time employees (n = 224). Study 2’s results further supported the robustness of our model by testing alternative moderators, mediators, and outcomes.Society of Industrial-Organizational PsychologyUniversity of Western AustraliaAustralian Research Counci

The challenges of volunteering during the COVID-19 pandemic

COMMENTAR

A relational model of perceived overqualification : the moderating role of interpersonal influence on social acceptance.

Theories of perceived overqualification have tended to focus on employees’ job-related responses to account for effects on performance. We offer an alternative perspective and theorize that perceived overqualification could influence work performance through a relational mechanism. We propose that relational skills, in the form of interpersonal influence of overqualified employees, determine their tendency to experience social acceptance and, thus, engage in positive work-related behaviors. We tested this relational model across two studies using time-lagged, multisource data. In Study 1, the results indicated that for employees high on interpersonal influence, perceived overqualification was positively related to self-reported social acceptance, whereas for employees low on interpersonal influence, the relationship was negative. Social acceptance, in turn, was positively related to in-role job performance, interpersonal altruism, and team member proactivity evaluated by supervisors. In Study 2, we focused on peer-reported social acceptance and found that the indirect relationships between perceived overqualification and supervisor-reported behavioral outcomes via social acceptance were negative when interpersonal influence was low and nonsignificant when interpersonal influence was high. The implications of the general findings are discussed

Respectful leadership:Reducing performance challenges posed by leader role incongruence and gender dissimilarity

We investigate how respectful leadership can help overcome the challenges for follower performance that female leaders face when working (especially with male) followers. First, based on role congruity theory, we illustrate the biases faced by female leaders. Second, based on research on gender (dis-)similarity, we propose that these biases should be particularly pronounced when working with a male follower. Finally, we propose that respectful leadership is most conducive to performance in female leader–male follower dyads compared with all other gender configurations. A multi-source field study (N = 214) provides partial support for our hypothesis. While our hypothesized effect was confirmed, respectful leadership seems to be generally effective for female leaders irrespective of follower gender, thus lending greater support in this context to the arguments of role congruity rather than gender dissimilarity

Making sense of organisational change failure: An identity lens

© The Author(s) 2020. This study investigates how employees craft narratives of organisational change failure through the lens of their work identity. We analysed change recipients’ retrospective sensemaking accounts of an organisational re-structuring in a university, finding these accounts to be filled with widely varying descriptions of failure – of errors, dysfunction, and loss. We explored how employees’ organisational, professional, and work-group identities were intertwined with, and fundamentally challenged by, their sensemaking about the change and its failure. Our inductive analysis revealed four distinct narrative trajectories – Identity Loss, Identity Revision, Identity Affirmation, and Identity Resilience – each characterised by distinct cognitive, affective, and behavioural patterns. We discuss the unique contributions that this study makes to the literatures on organisational change failure, sensemaking, and identity

Gender Differences in the Relationship between Presenteeism and Extra‐Role Behaviors

The relationship between presenteeism, or working despite ill-health, and extra-role behavior can be negative, positive, or null. Our research examines the role of gender in influencing this relationship. We build on the self-regulatory perspective on resource allocation in the context of presenteeism, which emphasizes the role of internal and external pressure on resources. We hypothesize that sick men will direct their resources toward protecting their performance rather than their health, thereby demonstrating citizenship. In contrast, sick women focus their resources on protecting their health, thereby not engaging in extra-role behaviors. We tested our hypotheses in three studies. The results of Study 1, based on employees’ (N = 78) and their supervisors’ (N = 17) data, showed that sick men appeared to protect their performance by engaging in extra-role behaviors. The findings of Study 2 (N = 280) demonstrated that citizenship pressure was not related to the extra-role behaviors of sick men. Yet, it was associated with the performance of sick women, who, unlike men, appeared to preserve health and engaged in extra-role behaviors only when they felt pressured to do so. The results of the experimental Study 3 (N = 195) showed that, as predicted, women tended to protect health more than men and that when health protection motive was high (low), presenteeism was negatively (positively) related to extra-role behavior

Age diversity in teams: Examining the impact of the least agreeable member

Our research examined how team age diversity can be either detrimental or beneficial for team performance depending on team agreeableness minimum. In age diverse teams, a disagreeable teammate may trigger age-based stereotypes about his/her social group, thereby activating social categorization. This would result in decreased relational team functioning and worsened team performance. When the least agreeable member scores high on agreeableness, negative social categorization processes may not be triggered in age diverse teams. They may focus on informational diversity with beneficial effects for team relational processes and team performance. We tested our model in three samples (Study 1: k = 81, N = 254; Study 2: k = 109, N = 434; Study 3: k = 195, N = 1784) wherein performance was measured both objectively (Studies 1 and 2) and subjectively (Study 3). In both Studies 1 and 2, team age diversity was positively related to team performance when team agreeableness minimum was high. In Study 2, when the least agreeable person scored low on agreeableness, greater age diversity resulted in lower performance, and this relationship was mediated by higher interpersonal conflict. In Study 3, these interactive effects transpire via reduced team cohesion—another aspect of relational team functioning