Sign in Register Submit Manuscript

Damray Home

Location: Home >> Detail

  • donwnload article

    Download Article

  • donwnload article

    Share Article

OAJRC Social Science. 2019;1(4). https://doi.org/10.26855/oajrcss.2019.04.001

Article

Personality Traits and their association with Counterproductive Workplace Behavior

Matthew Garrett Pinkerton

School of Business Administration, Zhejiang Gongshang University, Hangzhou, China

Received: 06 November 2019; Accepted: 22 November 2019; Published: 01 December 2019

ABSTRACT

Evaluation and quantification of counterproductive workplace behavior is an art of psychology. A researcher using a function-based method could potentially evaluate and quantify the results of undesirable conduct, or show new, stable tips that serve a comparable potential as the unfortunate conduct. In this paper, I have examined this behavior to evolve the ability to use techniques to not just identify cases of precursors, conduct, and outcomes, but additionally, evaluate whether or not these instances are practically recognized with each other and not sincerely associated with one another. Reviewing the relevant literature, my findings show that in the face of the negative interpersonal experience of workplace exclusion, different individuals will show different attitudes and behaviors.

KEYWORDS: human behavior; society; workplace atmosphere; personality; social well-being

INTRODUCTION

Strategy formulation and strategy utilization are two skills that are mandatory for effective management in businesses. Most contingency management (CM) strategies give effects to the non-appearance of some conduct (i.e., they are the same to the differential fortification of different conduct), and they do not expressly shape or fortify non-compulsory behavior that is incompatible with unlucky habits. A multiplied highlight on a modern appraisal of dynamic circumstance behavior relations will integrate into the motives for wellness habits and thusly increase potential mediations. Then, under what circumstances is the impact of workplace exclusion is positive and negative and under what circumstances it is influenced by personality traits? Individuals with high professional resilience are more likely to show positive emotions, while individuals with lower professional resilience are more likely to show negative emotions.

This paper provides the development conceptual framework of workplace incivility, the Uncivil Workplace Behavior (UWB) for which measures can be instrumented and tested on adult employees to principal axis factoring of the UWB interpretable factors (Exclusionary Behavior, Hostility, Gossiping, and Privacy Invasion), all of which reflect high internal consistency in the human behavior [1].

Islamic working attitude

An Islamic working attitude, for this reason, ought to convert into an upgraded penchant to engage in eccentric work practices that grow the prosperity of colleagues. Previous studies indicate that a stable Islamic working attitude powers a strong intrinsic satisfaction when representatives strive sincerely and are abundant in work endeavors from which others can profit. Individuals with excessive Islamic moral characteristics apparently may also be gradually sensitive to outside risks to their work, considering they feel a strong commitment to satisfy their perfect exercise necessities; wherein obstructive work might also commandingly manipulate them away from deliberate helping conduct. Utilizers with a stable Islamic hard-working mindset try, without a doubt, to distinguish a range of pathways to maintain household commitments from stopping their work exercises, which similarly expands their ability to adapt to the contention. People may appraise the accompanying articulations; for instance: dedication to work is an ideal, human relations in associations ought to be confused and supported, creative work is a wellspring of pleasure and achievement, and justice and liberality in the work environment are necessary stipulations for society's welfare [2].

Operational excellence and workplace deviance behavior

Defining operational excellence is generally separated in literature into components of organizational and individual level, but the fundamental idea of operational excellence is that perfect operations lead to perfect results. The overview of the workplace cultural inhibition techniques brings to the substantive stage of research – aggregation of positives and ostracizing the negatives in behaviors, combining their main fostering factors and ruling out the inhibiting ones.

The combination of all the elements in the theoretical model practically, including the people, who are culturally intelligent and experienced, having potential and desire for cross-cultural interaction and learning, with excellent operations and workflow acceleration techniques, grounded in this research is anticipated to be of use for the companies or entrepreneurs, demanding fresh ideas and viewpoints, willing to use cross-cultural creativity and synergetic diversity potential in elaboration of solutions to the problems and consensus decisions.

In the context of Workplace deviance behavior (WDB), job cognitions played a more important role in prediction in previous research when tested to the effect of job represented by 2 general mood variables (either negative or positive). As soon as the discrete emotions were used to represent job effect, it changed; job affect played as important a role as job cognition variables, highlighting the importance of considering discrete emotions in job affect research in behavioral management [3].

Counterproductive workplace behavior (CWB)

The analysis of the literature on counterproductive workplace behavior provides important findings:

i.

ii.

iii.

Negative emotions may lead to a negative impact on society and social life. On the other hand, it is the corporate social responsibility of the organizations to work on a positive display of their entity and representation of workforce in the environment and society. It differs from culture to culture, however, the importance of this responsibility is not reduced [5].

On this basis of this integrative framework it is proposed that conceptualized self-protective behavior can exist on four stages or phases: (a) decision making, (b) hazard appraisal, (c) initiation, and (d) adherence. Furthermore, five general constructs have been identified in previous research that can have either primary or secondary importance at each step: (a) response efficacy, (b) threat-related beliefs, (c) self-efficacy, (d) facilitating conditions, and (e) safety climate. This framework highlights the need to target interventions and formulate the personality development strategies for all the stages. Particular emphasis is also assigned to environmental or social factors in enabling and reinforcing self-protective behavior at the workplace [6]. In this regard, the most important thing is the assessment of motivation of individually before taking any strategic action like adoption of technological systems [7] or launching a program which can affect the lives of employees or their families.

A check on unethical behavior

Attitudes and behaviors can be positive or negative. Negative behavior is said to be negative when it has some adverse impact on society in general. In the workplace, negative behaviors are allowed or prohibited according to the rules and regulations of that company. Codes of conduct are viewed as a community's attempt to communicate its expectations and standards of ethical behavior. Many corporations are implementing codes, but empirical support for the relationship between such codes and employee conduct is lacking. Hence, it is needful over times to examine the long term effects of a collegiate honor code experience as well as the effects of corporate ethics codes on unethical behavior in the workplace. It is found in a previous study that self-reported unethical behavior was lower for respondents who work in an organization with a corporate code of conduct and was inversely associated with corporate code implementation strength and embeddedness. Self-reported unethical behavior was also influenced by the interaction of a collegiate honor code experience and corporate code implementation strength [8].

It seems that ethical leadership is related to employees' negative moral equity judgments of workplace deviance which is discretionary antisocial behavior. Moreover, positive moral equity judgments of organizational citizenship also relate to discretionary prosocial behavior. Previous literature shows that moral equity judgments are a key type of ethical cognition linking ethical leadership with employee behaviors. The same has already been tested in a cross-organizational sample of 190 supervisor-employee dyads. Results of the previous research show that employees who work for ethical leaders are tended to judge acts of workplace deviance as morally inequitable and acts of organizational citizenship as morally equitable. Retaliating the action, these judgments guided employee regulation of behavior and mediated the relationships between ethical leadership and employee avoidance of antisocial conduct and engagement [9].

Business venturing is not simple if it is planned for the long-run. Investors are required to decide on the options in entrepreneurship or franchising in a community [10]. The personality of workforce entities and that of the society members is of large interest for the entrepreneurs having no myopia. Research in this area finds the moral character traits which are influential in predicting moral and immoral workplace behaviors. Investigations have focused on certain workplace behaviors relevant to organizational citizenship behaviors (OCB) morality and counterproductive work behaviors (CWB), and review research on key personality traits associated with these behaviors. Broad traits are described by the Big Five personality framework and the HEXACO model of personality, as well as narrower traits that predict moral and immoral behaviors, including guilt-proneness, self-control, and moral identity. The literature describes the challenges situationist perspectives in business ethics and psychology that claim that character traits do not significantly and consistently predict behavior across situations. In contrast to situation perspectives, it is argued that moral character exists and predicts consequential work outcomes [11].

There are certain costs associated with counterproductive behavior in workplace settings which illustrate a continually growing issue for organizations worldwide. In order to minimize the costs associated with this type of behavior, it is crucial to understand individual factors associated with CWB. Previous research presented the analysis of sixty-six employed, undergraduate students who completed an online survey assessing job satisfaction, personality, perfectionism and relationship with the supervisor as potential factors to predict counterproductive workplace behavior. Results of their correlational analyses yielded support for the direction of many of these relationships such as the correlation between counterproductive workplace behavior and personality traits as well as counterproductive workplace behavior and job satisfaction. Nevertheless, these associations did not indicate statistical significance nor did they fully support any proposed hypotheses [12].

Another study used social network analysis to examine a theoretical model exploring why, and under what circumstances, the perpetrators’ ostracizing behaviors are accurately perceived by the target employees. In turn, these perceptions of ostracism lead to the target employees’ counterproductive work behaviors. Adopting perspectives from both perpetrators and targets, it directly measured the ostracizing behaviors by all potential perpetrators means, the coworkers, and perceived workplace ostracism by target employees. Social information processing theory has been integrated with the conservation of resource theory to propose a moderated mediation model. It was found that employees who have a high level of need to belong are more likely to capture colleague’s ostracizing behaviors, and those with low political skills are more probable to engage in counterproductive work behavior as the retaliation to perceived workplace ostracism [13].

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

This paper provides a critical review of the applicability of theoretical models of health behavior to workplace self-protective behavior. Value-expectancy, environmental/contextual, and behavior change models are reviewed. Inside the segregation writing, confidence level, and how decidedly or adversely an individual feels about himself or herself, it has been featured as a vital intervening system wherein lowered confidence is in charge of the impact of ostracized employees’ behavior. As shunning speaks to a type of avoidance, ostracism analysts have also anticipated a negative connection between exclusion and confidence levels. Segregation might be especially crushing to a person's confidence level since they may not know why they’re being excluded, and any endeavors to secure a clarification are met with quietness. Subsequently, people are left to rationally accumulate the greater part of their adverse characteristics that may have brought about alienation, which exacerbates the impacts of an absence of social interaction. There should be more noteworthy endeavors to comprehend and help those in need by conveying proof-based medicines, alongside more prominent exertion to routinely assess the treatment results accomplished in these projects. From the start, one may conjure in the pre-preventative rule to understand the nature and degree of conflicts of interest; however, a progressively intricate examination approach is what is required for encouraging the open and basic segments of general wellbeing.

This research has answered several questions. Is workplace exclusion positive or negative for individuals? Can workplace exclusion trigger actual negative anger or positive impression management motivation? This is related to personal perception. Different individuals face the same environment (such as workplace exclusion), and their feelings are very different. This research has reexamined the counterproductive workplace behavior and the various personality and workplace-specific variables that relate to the construct as a whole.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The author declares that there is no conflict of interest.

ETHICAL STATEMENT

The paper includes nothing unethical.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

I am thankful to my teachers and colleagues who supported me in this research.

REFERENCES

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

Copyright © 2019 Damray Co., Ltd. Privacy Policy | Terms and Conditions