Pub Date : 2023-11-05DOI: 10.1080/1359432x.2023.2276533
Sergey Gorbatov, Janneke K. Oostrom, Svetlana N. Khapova
The changing context of contemporary knowledge work, including the massive adoption of home office work arrangements and a great resignation, calls for new research on the employability of knowledge workers. In this paper, we suggest that knowledge workers can no longer rely on developing their human capital and being intrapreneurial at work to secure their employability. With the aim to offer a new perspective, we test the incremental validity of personal branding in predicting employability over and above established predictors (i.e., human capital and intrapreneurship behaviours) and test the relationships in three studies (total N = 883), consisting of a supervisor sample (Study 1), a student sample (Study 2), and a time-lagged employee sample (Study 3). Results show that personal branding explains variance in employability over and above human capital and intrapreneurship behaviours. The results also show that the relationship between personal branding and employability is fully mediated by personal brand equity. The paper concludes with a discussion of the opportunities the concept of personal branding offers for employability research in the context of the contemporary world of work.
{"title":"Work does not speak for itself: examining the incremental validity of personal branding in predicting knowledge workers’ employability","authors":"Sergey Gorbatov, Janneke K. Oostrom, Svetlana N. Khapova","doi":"10.1080/1359432x.2023.2276533","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432x.2023.2276533","url":null,"abstract":"The changing context of contemporary knowledge work, including the massive adoption of home office work arrangements and a great resignation, calls for new research on the employability of knowledge workers. In this paper, we suggest that knowledge workers can no longer rely on developing their human capital and being intrapreneurial at work to secure their employability. With the aim to offer a new perspective, we test the incremental validity of personal branding in predicting employability over and above established predictors (i.e., human capital and intrapreneurship behaviours) and test the relationships in three studies (total N = 883), consisting of a supervisor sample (Study 1), a student sample (Study 2), and a time-lagged employee sample (Study 3). Results show that personal branding explains variance in employability over and above human capital and intrapreneurship behaviours. The results also show that the relationship between personal branding and employability is fully mediated by personal brand equity. The paper concludes with a discussion of the opportunities the concept of personal branding offers for employability research in the context of the contemporary world of work.","PeriodicalId":48240,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology","volume":"64 9","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135726655","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-13DOI: 10.1080/1359432x.2023.2266874
Sophia Frick, Leander van der Meij, Karin Smolders, Evangelia Demerouti, Yvonne de Kort
Burnout has traditionally been characterized as a relatively stable construct, leaving the question of whether and how burnout-related experiences fluctuate within and between days unaddressed. In the current study, we assess the effect of time of day (expressed as external time, internal time, or time awake) and day of the week on momentary experiences of the two core components of burnout, i.e., exhaustion and disengagement. We employed a 7-day experience sampling method in the field among 65 working employees, with seven momentary assessments per day. Results indicated that a large proportion of variance in burnout-related experiences occurred between moments (46%-68%), with only minor variance occurring between days within participants (2%-6%). Notably, experiences related to the disengagement component showed no clear pattern over the day, while exhaustion remained relatively stable throughout the morning and then increased moderately towards the end of the day. We conclude that burnout-related experiences typically fluctuate between moments, supporting the view of burnout as a dynamic rather than a purely static state. Furthermore, much of the variance in momentary burnout-related experiences remains to be explained in absence of a structural temporal pattern.
{"title":"The effect of time and day of the week on burnout-related experiences: an experience sampling study","authors":"Sophia Frick, Leander van der Meij, Karin Smolders, Evangelia Demerouti, Yvonne de Kort","doi":"10.1080/1359432x.2023.2266874","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432x.2023.2266874","url":null,"abstract":"Burnout has traditionally been characterized as a relatively stable construct, leaving the question of whether and how burnout-related experiences fluctuate within and between days unaddressed. In the current study, we assess the effect of time of day (expressed as external time, internal time, or time awake) and day of the week on momentary experiences of the two core components of burnout, i.e., exhaustion and disengagement. We employed a 7-day experience sampling method in the field among 65 working employees, with seven momentary assessments per day. Results indicated that a large proportion of variance in burnout-related experiences occurred between moments (46%-68%), with only minor variance occurring between days within participants (2%-6%). Notably, experiences related to the disengagement component showed no clear pattern over the day, while exhaustion remained relatively stable throughout the morning and then increased moderately towards the end of the day. We conclude that burnout-related experiences typically fluctuate between moments, supporting the view of burnout as a dynamic rather than a purely static state. Furthermore, much of the variance in momentary burnout-related experiences remains to be explained in absence of a structural temporal pattern.","PeriodicalId":48240,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology","volume":"158 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135857991","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-08DOI: 10.1080/1359432x.2023.2263201
Wiebke Doden, Ilke Grosemans, Nele De Cuyper, Cécile Tschopp, Gudela Grote
Perceived job insecurity and perceived employability are often mentioned in one breath with employability typically referred to as the “modern response to job insecurity”. Yet our understanding of how individuals’ perceptions of employability may change over time in response to job insecurity is limited. Both positive and negative changes seem plausible: Job insecurity may trigger employees to invest in employability, making them feel more employable. However, job insecurity may also elicit a defensive response in employees that undermines their perceived employability. We tested these two competing hypotheses against the background of conservation of resources theory in a sample of 358 employees surveyed on three occasions across 3.5 years. Using latent change score modelling, our findings suggest that job insecurity increases perceived employability. That is, the state-level of perceived job insecurity predicts a positive subsequent change in perceived employability. These findings highlight the importance of considering the dynamic within-person perspective to understand the relationship between job insecurity and perceived employability, and illustrate that results observed in prior static research may lead to different conclusions in within-person longitudinal studies. Implications of our findings for theory and practice are discussed.
{"title":"Employability in the post-job security era: testing competing effects of perceived job insecurity on perceived employability change","authors":"Wiebke Doden, Ilke Grosemans, Nele De Cuyper, Cécile Tschopp, Gudela Grote","doi":"10.1080/1359432x.2023.2263201","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432x.2023.2263201","url":null,"abstract":"Perceived job insecurity and perceived employability are often mentioned in one breath with employability typically referred to as the “modern response to job insecurity”. Yet our understanding of how individuals’ perceptions of employability may change over time in response to job insecurity is limited. Both positive and negative changes seem plausible: Job insecurity may trigger employees to invest in employability, making them feel more employable. However, job insecurity may also elicit a defensive response in employees that undermines their perceived employability. We tested these two competing hypotheses against the background of conservation of resources theory in a sample of 358 employees surveyed on three occasions across 3.5 years. Using latent change score modelling, our findings suggest that job insecurity increases perceived employability. That is, the state-level of perceived job insecurity predicts a positive subsequent change in perceived employability. These findings highlight the importance of considering the dynamic within-person perspective to understand the relationship between job insecurity and perceived employability, and illustrate that results observed in prior static research may lead to different conclusions in within-person longitudinal studies. Implications of our findings for theory and practice are discussed.","PeriodicalId":48240,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology","volume":"68 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135198085","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-08DOI: 10.1080/1359432x.2023.2261661
Martin Zeschke, Hannes Zacher
ABSTRACTIdle time is a period during which employees cannot complete their work tasks for reasons beyond their control. It has previously been shown to have negative consequences for employees’ performance and well-being. To shed light on the mechanisms underlying these effects, we argue based on affective events theory and action regulation theory that idle time is an event that leads to boredom. Since boredom is a negative affective experience that motivates employees to do something about their situation, it may reduce job satisfaction and increase extra-role behaviour (i.e., prosocial and counterproductive) and turnover intentions. We tested our hypotheses using a sample of 1,036 employees who participated in a five-wave longitudinal study across 12 months. Results showed that, at both the within-person and between-person levels, idle time was positively associated with boredom, which, in turn, was associated with lower job satisfaction, higher counterproductive work behaviour, and higher turnover intentions, but not with prosocial work behaviour. These associations were robust when additionally controlling for work environment features (e.g., working from home), dispositions (e.g., personality), and demographic characteristics. Thus, idle time seems to be a boring and mostly negative experience for employees. Employees and managers should organize work to avoid boredom whenever possible.KEYWORDS: Idle timeboredomjob satisfactionaffective events theoryemployee outcomes Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.Supplementary materialSupplemental data for this article can be accessed online at https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2023.2261661Additional informationFundingThis study was conducted as part of the research project “Idle Time at Work” funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation, #437707385).
抽象时间是指员工由于无法控制的原因而无法完成工作任务的一段时间。之前有研究表明，它会对员工的表现和幸福感产生负面影响。为了阐明这些影响背后的机制，我们基于情感事件理论和行为调节理论认为，空闲时间是导致无聊的事件。由于无聊是一种消极的情感体验，它会激励员工对自己的处境做些什么，它可能会降低工作满意度，增加角色外行为(即亲社会和反生产)和离职意图。我们对1036名参与了一项为期12个月的五波纵向研究的员工进行了样本检验。结果显示，在个人内部和个人之间的水平上，空闲时间与无聊呈正相关，而无聊又与较低的工作满意度、较高的反生产工作行为和较高的离职意图相关，但与亲社会工作行为无关。当额外控制工作环境特征(例如，在家工作)、性格(例如，个性)和人口特征时，这些关联是强大的。因此，空闲时间对员工来说似乎是一种无聊和消极的经历。员工和管理者应该尽可能地组织工作以避免无聊。关键词:空闲时间无聊工作满意度情感事件理论员工结果披露声明作者未报告潜在利益冲突本研究是由德国研究基金会(DFG, German research Foundation， #437707385)资助的“工作中的空闲时间”研究项目的一部分。
{"title":"Is it bad because it is boring? Effects of idle time on employee outcomes","authors":"Martin Zeschke, Hannes Zacher","doi":"10.1080/1359432x.2023.2261661","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432x.2023.2261661","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACTIdle time is a period during which employees cannot complete their work tasks for reasons beyond their control. It has previously been shown to have negative consequences for employees’ performance and well-being. To shed light on the mechanisms underlying these effects, we argue based on affective events theory and action regulation theory that idle time is an event that leads to boredom. Since boredom is a negative affective experience that motivates employees to do something about their situation, it may reduce job satisfaction and increase extra-role behaviour (i.e., prosocial and counterproductive) and turnover intentions. We tested our hypotheses using a sample of 1,036 employees who participated in a five-wave longitudinal study across 12 months. Results showed that, at both the within-person and between-person levels, idle time was positively associated with boredom, which, in turn, was associated with lower job satisfaction, higher counterproductive work behaviour, and higher turnover intentions, but not with prosocial work behaviour. These associations were robust when additionally controlling for work environment features (e.g., working from home), dispositions (e.g., personality), and demographic characteristics. Thus, idle time seems to be a boring and mostly negative experience for employees. Employees and managers should organize work to avoid boredom whenever possible.KEYWORDS: Idle timeboredomjob satisfactionaffective events theoryemployee outcomes Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.Supplementary materialSupplemental data for this article can be accessed online at https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2023.2261661Additional informationFundingThis study was conducted as part of the research project “Idle Time at Work” funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation, #437707385).","PeriodicalId":48240,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology","volume":"40 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135198078","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-06DOI: 10.1080/1359432x.2023.2266173
Anneleen Forrier, Nele De Cuyper, Jasper Delva
ABSTRACTThis study aims to understand how individuals give meaning to and enact their employability in a changing context. Our study draws on insights from the Social Chronology Framework. In doing so, it involves the interplay of three perspectives: individual, context and time. We used a narrative approach based on life story data from 24 theatre actors in Flanders (Belgium). We identified five narratives based on three building blocks: employability scripts, career imagination and action. Employability scripts encrypt what is contextually required to be employable. The narratives differ in how individuals interpret those scripts, make meaning of their position in the field (career imagination) and act. The narratives express variations in fit with the field. Three narratives express fit: Individuals blend in with the context and endorse the current employability script. A fourth narrative expresses being out-of-fit: Individuals identify with older scripts. A fifth narrative expresses misfit: Individuals fail to act according to the current script and disengage. Our main contributions are theoretical. First, we conceptualize employability “in the fit” and not in the individual. Second, we advance the notion of employability script. Both these contributions serve to understand employability at the interplay of agency and structure.KEYWORDS: Employabilitysocial chronology frameworkemployability scriptcareer imaginationfit Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1. All names are pseudonyms.2. We do not include data on the particular networks of the interviewees, because this could disclose their identity.3. In our explanation, we do not describe time in a separate paragraph, because time is embedded within all others aspects of the narratives.Additional informationFundingThis study was supported by Interne Fondsen KU Leuven/Internal Funds KU Leuven (project C24M/19/012).
{"title":"How theatre actors in Flanders make sense of and enact their employability in a context in motion: a matter of fit","authors":"Anneleen Forrier, Nele De Cuyper, Jasper Delva","doi":"10.1080/1359432x.2023.2266173","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432x.2023.2266173","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACTThis study aims to understand how individuals give meaning to and enact their employability in a changing context. Our study draws on insights from the Social Chronology Framework. In doing so, it involves the interplay of three perspectives: individual, context and time. We used a narrative approach based on life story data from 24 theatre actors in Flanders (Belgium). We identified five narratives based on three building blocks: employability scripts, career imagination and action. Employability scripts encrypt what is contextually required to be employable. The narratives differ in how individuals interpret those scripts, make meaning of their position in the field (career imagination) and act. The narratives express variations in fit with the field. Three narratives express fit: Individuals blend in with the context and endorse the current employability script. A fourth narrative expresses being out-of-fit: Individuals identify with older scripts. A fifth narrative expresses misfit: Individuals fail to act according to the current script and disengage. Our main contributions are theoretical. First, we conceptualize employability “in the fit” and not in the individual. Second, we advance the notion of employability script. Both these contributions serve to understand employability at the interplay of agency and structure.KEYWORDS: Employabilitysocial chronology frameworkemployability scriptcareer imaginationfit Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1. All names are pseudonyms.2. We do not include data on the particular networks of the interviewees, because this could disclose their identity.3. In our explanation, we do not describe time in a separate paragraph, because time is embedded within all others aspects of the narratives.Additional informationFundingThis study was supported by Interne Fondsen KU Leuven/Internal Funds KU Leuven (project C24M/19/012).","PeriodicalId":48240,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology","volume":"51 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135350973","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-27DOI: 10.1080/1359432x.2023.2263200
Kai N. Klasmeier, Nale Lehmann-Willenbrock
In this diary study, we consider shared leadership and team workload as antecedents of team mental health. We draw on conservation of resources theory to theorize how linear change trajectories of shared leadership are related to change trajectories in team members’ shared well-being and emotional exhaustion. Furthermore, we investigate the interaction between change trajectories of shared leadership and team workload, predicting that change in shared leadership will be more strongly related to change in team mental health when team workload increases. 265 team members nested in 77 teams completed a daily diary survey over five consecutive workdays. As hypothesized, an increase in shared leadership was associated with an increase in team well-being and a decrease in emotional exhaustion over time. Further, shared leadership interacted with team workload, such that an increase in shared leadership was more strongly associated with a decrease in shared emotional exhaustion when team workload increased. However, team member well-being was not affected by such an interaction. These findings address the missing link between shared leadership and team well-being and exhaustion, establish shared leadership as an important team resource, and contribute a temporal perspective on shared leadership as a dynamic team phenomenon.
{"title":"Temporal dynamics of shared leadership, team workload, and collective team member well-being: a daily diary study","authors":"Kai N. Klasmeier, Nale Lehmann-Willenbrock","doi":"10.1080/1359432x.2023.2263200","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432x.2023.2263200","url":null,"abstract":"In this diary study, we consider shared leadership and team workload as antecedents of team mental health. We draw on conservation of resources theory to theorize how linear change trajectories of shared leadership are related to change trajectories in team members’ shared well-being and emotional exhaustion. Furthermore, we investigate the interaction between change trajectories of shared leadership and team workload, predicting that change in shared leadership will be more strongly related to change in team mental health when team workload increases. 265 team members nested in 77 teams completed a daily diary survey over five consecutive workdays. As hypothesized, an increase in shared leadership was associated with an increase in team well-being and a decrease in emotional exhaustion over time. Further, shared leadership interacted with team workload, such that an increase in shared leadership was more strongly associated with a decrease in shared emotional exhaustion when team workload increased. However, team member well-being was not affected by such an interaction. These findings address the missing link between shared leadership and team well-being and exhaustion, establish shared leadership as an important team resource, and contribute a temporal perspective on shared leadership as a dynamic team phenomenon.","PeriodicalId":48240,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology","volume":"101 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135536528","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-26DOI: 10.1080/1359432x.2023.2260540
Marvin Neumann, A. Susan M. Niessen, Maximilian Linde, Jorge N. Tendeiro, Rob R. Meijer
Decision makers often combine multiple pieces of information to make performance predictions and hiring decisions. More valid predictions are made when information is combined algorithmically (mechanical prediction) rather than in the decision-maker’s mind (holistic prediction). Yet, decision makers rarely use algorithms in practice. One reason is that decision makers are worried about negative evaluations from other stakeholders such as colleagues when using algorithms. We hypothesized that such stakeholders evaluate decision makers more positively when they use autonomy-enhancing algorithmic procedures (AEAPs, holistically adjust predictions from a prescribed algorithm or self-design an algorithm), than when they use a prescribed algorithm. Relatedly, we hypothesized that decision makers who use AEAPs are less worried about negative stakeholder evaluations, and more likely to use algorithms in performance predictions. In Study 1 (N = 582), stakeholders evaluated decision makers more positively when they used AEAPs rather than a prescribed algorithm. In Study 2 (N = 269), decision makers were less worried about negative stakeholder evaluations and more likely to use AEAPs compared to a prescribed algorithm. Importantly, using AEAPs also resulted in substantially higher predictive validity than holistic prediction. We recommend the use of self-designed algorithms to improve perceptions and validity.
{"title":"“Adding an egg” in algorithmic decision making: improving stakeholder and user perceptions, and predictive validity by enhancing autonomy","authors":"Marvin Neumann, A. Susan M. Niessen, Maximilian Linde, Jorge N. Tendeiro, Rob R. Meijer","doi":"10.1080/1359432x.2023.2260540","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432x.2023.2260540","url":null,"abstract":"Decision makers often combine multiple pieces of information to make performance predictions and hiring decisions. More valid predictions are made when information is combined algorithmically (mechanical prediction) rather than in the decision-maker’s mind (holistic prediction). Yet, decision makers rarely use algorithms in practice. One reason is that decision makers are worried about negative evaluations from other stakeholders such as colleagues when using algorithms. We hypothesized that such stakeholders evaluate decision makers more positively when they use autonomy-enhancing algorithmic procedures (AEAPs, holistically adjust predictions from a prescribed algorithm or self-design an algorithm), than when they use a prescribed algorithm. Relatedly, we hypothesized that decision makers who use AEAPs are less worried about negative stakeholder evaluations, and more likely to use algorithms in performance predictions. In Study 1 (N = 582), stakeholders evaluated decision makers more positively when they used AEAPs rather than a prescribed algorithm. In Study 2 (N = 269), decision makers were less worried about negative stakeholder evaluations and more likely to use AEAPs compared to a prescribed algorithm. Importantly, using AEAPs also resulted in substantially higher predictive validity than holistic prediction. We recommend the use of self-designed algorithms to improve perceptions and validity.","PeriodicalId":48240,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology","volume":"35 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134886516","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
ABSTRACTWork-related perfectionism is widespread among employees. Nevertheless, it is largely unclear how perfectionism might impact employees in their daily work. In line with whole trait theory, we took a dynamic perspective to investigate how daily fluctuations in both dimensions of work-related perfectionism (i.e., perfectionistic strivings and concerns) relate to an employee’s daily planning, procrastination, and self-blaming at work. We also examined relationships between these cognitions and behaviours and employees’ work-related self-efficacy and feelings of shame and guilt. During two workweeks, 78 employees completed daily surveys that assessed perfectionistic strivings and concerns as well as planning, procrastination, and self-blaming during work, and work-related self-efficacy, shame, and guilt at the end of the workday. Multilevel path modelling of data from 514 workdays showed that daily work-related perfectionistic strivings related positively to planning and daily work-related perfectionistic concerns related positively to self-blaming. Self-blaming served as a mechanism linking perfectionistic concerns with shame and guilt. Our findings show that both perfectionism dimensions relate differently to employees’ cognitions, behaviours, and emotions in their daily work. Thereby, our study helps to better understand why perfectionism can be both beneficial and detrimental for employees.KEYWORDS: perfectionismplanningprocrastinationself-blamingshameguilt Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Data Availability StatementStudy participants did not provide consent that their data will be available publicly. Data are available for interested researchers upon reasonable request from the corresponding author.Notes1. We added the paths from perfectionistic strivings to procrastination and self-blaming and from perfectionistic concerns to planning to our model to examine the unique relationships of perfectionistic strivings and concerns, respectively (see Stoeber & Gaudreau, Citation2017). This approach is in line with previous research proposing and finding support for different processes and outcomes associated with perfectionistic strivings and concerns (see Flaxman et al., Citation2018; Mohr et al., Citation2022).2. Data used in this study has been collected within a larger research project. Within this broader data collection, we aimed at investigating several separate research questions. The morning survey assessed constructs that are not relevant for examining this study’s research question. Therefore, we only used daily data from the noon and end-of-workday surveys and did not include data from the morning surveys.3. As the comparatively high value for the SRMRbetween indicates, the measurement model does not fit the data well at the between-person level. When specifying the measurement model only at the within-person level using person-mean centred items, it shows a reasonable fit to the da
{"title":"Perfectionism and cognitive-behavioural processes in daily work: Implications for self-related perceptions and emotions","authors":"Monique Mohr, Hadar Nesher Shoshan, Sabine Sonnentag","doi":"10.1080/1359432x.2023.2256499","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432x.2023.2256499","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACTWork-related perfectionism is widespread among employees. Nevertheless, it is largely unclear how perfectionism might impact employees in their daily work. In line with whole trait theory, we took a dynamic perspective to investigate how daily fluctuations in both dimensions of work-related perfectionism (i.e., perfectionistic strivings and concerns) relate to an employee’s daily planning, procrastination, and self-blaming at work. We also examined relationships between these cognitions and behaviours and employees’ work-related self-efficacy and feelings of shame and guilt. During two workweeks, 78 employees completed daily surveys that assessed perfectionistic strivings and concerns as well as planning, procrastination, and self-blaming during work, and work-related self-efficacy, shame, and guilt at the end of the workday. Multilevel path modelling of data from 514 workdays showed that daily work-related perfectionistic strivings related positively to planning and daily work-related perfectionistic concerns related positively to self-blaming. Self-blaming served as a mechanism linking perfectionistic concerns with shame and guilt. Our findings show that both perfectionism dimensions relate differently to employees’ cognitions, behaviours, and emotions in their daily work. Thereby, our study helps to better understand why perfectionism can be both beneficial and detrimental for employees.KEYWORDS: perfectionismplanningprocrastinationself-blamingshameguilt Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Data Availability StatementStudy participants did not provide consent that their data will be available publicly. Data are available for interested researchers upon reasonable request from the corresponding author.Notes1. We added the paths from perfectionistic strivings to procrastination and self-blaming and from perfectionistic concerns to planning to our model to examine the unique relationships of perfectionistic strivings and concerns, respectively (see Stoeber & Gaudreau, Citation2017). This approach is in line with previous research proposing and finding support for different processes and outcomes associated with perfectionistic strivings and concerns (see Flaxman et al., Citation2018; Mohr et al., Citation2022).2. Data used in this study has been collected within a larger research project. Within this broader data collection, we aimed at investigating several separate research questions. The morning survey assessed constructs that are not relevant for examining this study’s research question. Therefore, we only used daily data from the noon and end-of-workday surveys and did not include data from the morning surveys.3. As the comparatively high value for the SRMRbetween indicates, the measurement model does not fit the data well at the between-person level. When specifying the measurement model only at the within-person level using person-mean centred items, it shows a reasonable fit to the da","PeriodicalId":48240,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology","volume":"47 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134960608","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-20DOI: 10.1080/1359432x.2023.2259545
Kaili Zhang, Chiyin Chen, Ningyu Tang
ABSTRACTTreating relative leader-member exchange (i.e., RLMX) as the objective and leader-member exchange social comparison (i.e., LMXSC) as the subjective operation of LMX comparison (i.e., LMXC) within a team, we integrate the RLMX and LMXSC literature and examine when higher LMXC is not always effective in employees’ workplace outcomes (namely, self-efficacy, task performance, and creativity). Revisiting social comparison theory, we propose that LMXC has positive relationships with team members’ task performance and creativity via the role of self-efficacy. Furthermore, team-level LMX disparity and team members’ neuroticism affect the above direct and indirect relationships. Specifically, we hypothesize that amid low LMX disparity, members are more likely to perform assimilation rather than comparison that weakens the positive impacts of LMXC. Team members with high neuroticism are prone to make upward rather than downward social comparisons, which also mitigates the positive impacts of LMXC. We test our hypotheses in a field (using RLMX as the objective LMXC measure; n = 559, N = 71) and an experimental study (using LMXSC as the subjective LMXC measure; n = 176). Generally, we find support for our hypotheses. Our study thus deepens the understanding of the effectiveness of LMXC within team contexts.KEYWORDS: RLMXLMXSCLMX disparityneuroticismsocial comparison Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author.Ethical approvalAll participants were fully informed that this study was anonymized. This study was organized in non-interventional way and the data were only used for a study focusing on leadership effectiveness. There were no risks during completing the survey.Informed Consent StatementWe have got consent from all participants during the survey. All participants were informed that they could skip any question he or she wished or quit the survey at any time. All participants were informed that this study was anonymized and the conclusions were only used for scientific studies.Notes1. Although LMXSC studies have demonstrated that LMXSC captures one focal employee’s subjective comparison of LMX with that of other team co-workers rather than average team LMX level (Vidyarthi et al., Citation2010), we suggest that the reference in LMXSC can be shifted based on the research question. For instance, Pan et al. (Citation2021) have shifted the reference of LMXSC to one particular co-worker. Hence, the reference in LMXSC can be shifted to team average LMX level, rendering LMXSC, basically, the subjective measure of LMXC.2. Although Vidyarthi et al. (Citation2010) have proposed that RLMX is the antecedent of LMXSC, they have found that LMXSC has a relatively high and positive relationship with RLMX (.79, p < .01). In this sense, we consider these two concepts compatible.3. We also applied LMX separation to test ou
摘要本文以相对领导-成员交换(RLMX)为客观，以领导-成员交换社会比较(LMXSC)为团队内部LMX比较(LMXC)的主观操作，整合RLMX和LMXSC的文献，考察高LMXC在员工的工作场所结果(即自我效能感、任务绩效和创造力)中是否总是有效。重新审视社会比较理论，我们提出LMXC通过自我效能感的作用与团队成员的任务绩效和创造力存在正相关关系。团队层面的LMX差异和团队成员的神经质对上述关系有直接和间接的影响。具体而言，我们假设在低LMX差异下，成员更倾向于同化而不是比较，从而削弱了LMXC的积极影响。高神经质的团队成员更倾向于进行向上而非向下的社会比较，这也减弱了LMXC的正向影响。我们在一个领域中检验了我们的假设(使用RLMX作为客观LMXC测量;n = 559, n = 71)和一项实验研究(使用LMXSC作为主观LMXC测量;N = 176)。一般来说，我们会找到支持我们假设的证据。因此，我们的研究加深了对团队背景下LMXC有效性的理解。关键词:RLMXLMXSCLMX差异神经症社会比较披露声明作者未报告潜在的利益冲突。支持本研究结果的数据可向通讯作者索取。伦理批准所有参与者都被充分告知本研究是匿名的。本研究采用非介入的方式组织，数据仅用于关注领导力有效性的研究。在完成调查过程中没有风险。知情同意书我们在调查过程中已经获得了所有参与者的同意。所有参与者都被告知，他们可以跳过他或她想要的任何问题，也可以随时退出调查。所有参与者被告知本研究是匿名的，结论仅用于科学研究。虽然LMXSC研究表明，LMXSC捕获的是一个焦点员工与其他团队同事的主观LMX比较，而不是团队平均LMX水平(Vidyarthi et al.， Citation2010)，但我们建议LMXSC中的参考可以根据研究问题进行转移。例如，Pan等人(Citation2021)已经将LMXSC的引用转移到一个特定的同事身上。因此，LMXSC中的参考可以转移到团队平均LMX水平，使LMXSC基本上成为LMXSC的主观测量。虽然Vidyarthi等人(Citation2010)提出RLMX是LMXSC的前项，但他们发现LMXSC与RLMX有较高的正相关关系(79, p < 0.01)。在这个意义上，我们认为这两个概念是相容的。我们还应用LMX分离来检验我们的假设模型。根据Harrison和Klein (Citation2007)， LMX分离是使用每个团队内LMX的标准差来计算的(Tremblay et al.， Citation2021也可以看到)。结果几乎是一样的。这些结果可向第一作者索取。因为RLMX是通过群均值中心方法计算的，所以我们没有再次计算它的群均值中心。然而，我们将其定义为组内水平变量，以减少模型的错误计算。对LMX进行了类似的处理，仅将其定义为组内水平变量，不进行组均值中心化(因为RLMX本质上是通过LMX的组均值中心化来计算的)。由于创造力和任务绩效都是从主管那里获得的，我们添加了一个共同方法因素，其中包括任务绩效和创造力的项目，将其加载到控制任何潜在的共同方法效果。虽然LMX和神经质是同时从同一来源收集的，但我们关注的是RLMX的作用(LMX减去团队LMX的平均值);因此，我们没有执行这个常见的方法测试。共同方法因素和其他潜在因素之间的协方差固定为零，因为方法效应只涉及测量，而不是由此表明的结构。在我们的回归分析中，我们添加了一个由五个因素组成的共同方法因素，并指定该共同方法因素与焦点变量的相关性为零(Podsakoff et al.， Citation2003)。这种方法通过考虑巨细胞病毒促进了我们对研究结果的解释。我们进一步检验了RLMX、LMX差异和神经质对自我效能的三向交互作用。RLMX、LMX差异和神经质对自我效能感的交互作用显著(估计值= 1.19,SE = 0.58, p = 0.038)。我们遵循Walker et al. (Citation2014)来检验三方相互作用。 低神经质状态下，RLMX具有较强的主效应，而LMX差异的调节作用不显著(斜率差= 0.05,t = 2.50, p < 0.05)。因此，高神经质的个体更有可能在RLMX和LMX差异的基础上进行比较，因为他们的不安全特征。因此，RLMX与LMX差异的双向交互作用显著，斜率差为0.68 (t = 48.57, p < .001)。这些发现证实了我们的说法，即高度神经质的群体成员倾向于进行向上比较。本研究由中国国家自然科学基金资助，资助项目[71902061]，资助项目[71902023]和资助项目[72072116]。
{"title":"When is higher LMX comparison not always effective? The role of team-level LMX disparity and neuroticism","authors":"Kaili Zhang, Chiyin Chen, Ningyu Tang","doi":"10.1080/1359432x.2023.2259545","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432x.2023.2259545","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACTTreating relative leader-member exchange (i.e., RLMX) as the objective and leader-member exchange social comparison (i.e., LMXSC) as the subjective operation of LMX comparison (i.e., LMXC) within a team, we integrate the RLMX and LMXSC literature and examine when higher LMXC is not always effective in employees’ workplace outcomes (namely, self-efficacy, task performance, and creativity). Revisiting social comparison theory, we propose that LMXC has positive relationships with team members’ task performance and creativity via the role of self-efficacy. Furthermore, team-level LMX disparity and team members’ neuroticism affect the above direct and indirect relationships. Specifically, we hypothesize that amid low LMX disparity, members are more likely to perform assimilation rather than comparison that weakens the positive impacts of LMXC. Team members with high neuroticism are prone to make upward rather than downward social comparisons, which also mitigates the positive impacts of LMXC. We test our hypotheses in a field (using RLMX as the objective LMXC measure; n = 559, N = 71) and an experimental study (using LMXSC as the subjective LMXC measure; n = 176). Generally, we find support for our hypotheses. Our study thus deepens the understanding of the effectiveness of LMXC within team contexts.KEYWORDS: RLMXLMXSCLMX disparityneuroticismsocial comparison Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author.Ethical approvalAll participants were fully informed that this study was anonymized. This study was organized in non-interventional way and the data were only used for a study focusing on leadership effectiveness. There were no risks during completing the survey.Informed Consent StatementWe have got consent from all participants during the survey. All participants were informed that they could skip any question he or she wished or quit the survey at any time. All participants were informed that this study was anonymized and the conclusions were only used for scientific studies.Notes1. Although LMXSC studies have demonstrated that LMXSC captures one focal employee’s subjective comparison of LMX with that of other team co-workers rather than average team LMX level (Vidyarthi et al., Citation2010), we suggest that the reference in LMXSC can be shifted based on the research question. For instance, Pan et al. (Citation2021) have shifted the reference of LMXSC to one particular co-worker. Hence, the reference in LMXSC can be shifted to team average LMX level, rendering LMXSC, basically, the subjective measure of LMXC.2. Although Vidyarthi et al. (Citation2010) have proposed that RLMX is the antecedent of LMXSC, they have found that LMXSC has a relatively high and positive relationship with RLMX (.79, p < .01). In this sense, we consider these two concepts compatible.3. We also applied LMX separation to test ou","PeriodicalId":48240,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136308287","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-05DOI: 10.1080/1359432x.2023.2255318
Keri A. Pekaar, Evangelia Demerouti
{"title":"Crafting for sustainability: a daily diary study and self-training intervention on proactive employee engagement in sustainability","authors":"Keri A. Pekaar, Evangelia Demerouti","doi":"10.1080/1359432x.2023.2255318","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432x.2023.2255318","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48240,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.3,"publicationDate":"2023-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43444325","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：