Tag Archives: J.M. Diefendorff

The Golden Rule: Be Sweet and No One Gets Hurt

1

Topic: Counterproductive Work Behavior
Publication: Personnel Psychology (SUMMER 2009)
Article: The Relations of Daily Counterproductive Workplace Behavior with Emotions, Situational Antecedents, and Personality Moderators: A Diary Study in Hong Kong
Authors: J. Yang, J.M. Diefendorff
Reviewed By: Katie Bachman

When workers are unhappy with their treatment at work, they tend to lash out. Surprising, I know. In my latest foray into the world of Counterproductive Work Behavior (CWB) research, I encountered an article looking at interpersonal justice and its relation to all things CWB. In this case, the researchers found that when employees feel mistreated by their supervisors, they are likely to engage in interpersonal CWBs (e.g. being mean to coworkers). Think of this as a kick-the-dog phenomenon. On the other hand, when employees feel that their job roles are ambiguous or they feel mistreated by customers, they are more likely to engage in organizational CWBs (e.g. taking extra-long breaks). This is more of a d*nm-the-man approach.

These reactions are partially or fully due to negative feelings that those people or experiences invoke. A personal tendency toward negative emotions (i.e. high negative affect) exacerbates the relationship; however, high levels of conscientiousness and agreeableness mitigate the connection. So, you know, hire a happy and smart worker with an attitudinal bent toward enthusiasm and you’ve got yourself a winner.

As with any research that studies Counterproductive Work Behaviors with a self-report survey measure, these results should be taken with at least one full tablespoon of salt. The thing is, of the 23 counterproductive work behaviors (13 organizational CWBs and 10 interpersonal CWBs) that employees could report each day, the average worker only reported engaging in an average of .55 organizational CWBs and .36 interpersonal CWBs each day. That’s awfully low, but not unexpected. From a more practical standpoint, knowing that the connection exists when the reported outcomes are so low means that this is really something that merits attention. Make sure that your workers feel that they are being treated justly—it could be a little thing that pays off big.

Yang, J., & Diefendorff, J. M. (2009). The relations of daily counterproductive  workplace behavior with emotions, situational antecedents, and personality moderators: A diary study in Hong Kong. Personnel Psychology, 62, 259-295.

Emotional Labor & Turnover…Fake It ‘Til You Make It?

Reply

Topic: Turnover
Publication: Journal of Organizational Behavior (NOV 2009)
Article: A predictive study of emotional labor and turnover
Authors: S.L. Chau, J.J. Dahling, P.E. Levy, J.M. Diefendorff
Reviewed By: Katie Bachman

Good customer service may be causing workers to consider leaving their organization. Putting on a smile through a difficult interaction can deplete emotional resources—referred to as emotional labor —particularly when the employee does not fully subscribe to making the interaction positive.

There are two types of acting that employees engage in during these interactions: deep acting and surface acting. Deep acting occurs when employees attempt to change their feelings toward a situation so that their emotions match their behavior. Surface acting, on the other hand, occurs when employees merely mask their feelings and present an outward appearance that does not match their feelings. It is this second form of acting, surface acting, which causes emotional depletion. In this study, emotional depletion was positively related to turnover intentions (i.e. people who are “burnt out” think about leaving). Turnover intentions were then linked to actual turnover rates 6 months later. Deep acting had the opposite effect. Employees who engaged in deep acting actually had lower levels of turnover intentions. Employees who fully take on their roles when interacting with others expend fewer emotional resources.

For business scenarios, this has some pretty obvious implications. Managers can go beyond encouraging employees to maintain that sunny disposition, and instead promote deep acting over surface acting. By doing so, they may keep those employees happier and with the organization longer – and that’s something to truly be happy about (I mean it!).

Chau, S. L., Dahling, J. J., Levy, P. E., & Diefendorff, J. M. (2009). A predictive  study of emotional labor and turnover. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30, 1151-1163.