The Journal of applied psychology
-
Meta Analysis
Relationships of role stressors with organizational citizenship behavior: a meta-analysis.
Several quantitative reviews have documented the negative relationships that role stressors have with task performance. Surprisingly, much less attention has been directed at the impact of role stressors on other aspects of job performance, such as organizational citizenship behavior (OCB). ⋯ As expected, role conflict had a stronger negative relationship with OCB than it did with task performance. Finally, we found support for a path model in which job satisfaction mediated relationships of role stressors with OCB and for a positive direct relationship between role overload and OCB.
-
Considering the implications of social exchange theory as a context for social role behavior, we tested relations between ethical leadership and both person- and task-focused organizational citizenship behavior and examined the roles played by employee gender and politics perceptions. Although social exchange theory predicts that ethical leadership is positively associated with citizenship, social role theory predicts that the nature of this relationship may vary on the basis of gender and politics perceptions. Results from data collected from 288 supervisor-subordinate dyads indicate that the pattern of male versus female employees' citizenship associated with ethical leadership depends significantly on their perceptions of politics. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.
-
New leaders face a challenging task when they take charge of their teams. They have to determine how best to guide the work process, and they must understand how their behaviors will affect the members of their team. This research examines how a newly assigned team leader's status moderates subordinates' reactions to different leadership styles to affect assessments of the leader's self-confidence and effectiveness, and how this impacts team performance. ⋯ In addition, teams whose leaders are viewed more favorably perform better on a complex group task. These findings imply that low-status individuals are able to enhance their level of personal power by drawing on whatever positional power they hold, whereas high-status individuals are better off relying solely on their personal power to influence others. This research also provides a clear demonstration that assessments of new leaders' behaviors are subject to an appraisal that is clouded by observers' status perceptions and attributions.
-
This study developed a multilevel model of the interpersonal harming behavior associated with social comparison processes in work teams. We tested this model using temporally lagged data from a sample of student teams (Study 1) and cross-sectional data from a sample of work teams in a telecommunication services company (Study 2). In both studies, social relations analyses revealed that in teams with less cooperative goals, comparison to a higher performing team member was positively associated with interpersonal harming behavior, but only when expectations of future performance similarity to that member were low. The interactive relationship of social comparison and expected future performance similarity with interpersonal harming was buffered, however, in teams with more cooperative goals.
-
The authors argue that over time the difference between team members' perception of the organizational support received by the team (or team climate for organizational support) and their manager's perception of the organizational support received by the team has an effect on important outcomes and emergent states, such as team performance and team positive and negative affect above and beyond the main effects of climate perceptions themselves. With a longitudinal sample of 179 teams at Time 1 and 154 teams at Time 2, the authors tested their predictions using a combined polynomial regression and response surface analyses approach. ⋯ When team managers and team members disagreed, team negative affect increased and team performance and team positive affect decreased. The negative effects of disagreement were most amplified when managers perceived that the team received higher levels of support than did the team itself.