Deviant Behavior in the Workplace
Counterproductive and Deviant Behavior in the Workplace
Deviant behavior in the workplace may seem like somewhat of a rarity, but it is actually relatively common. Part of the reason behind that is that there is a broad definition of what is deviant or counterproductive, and part of the reason is that many organizations either ignore the behavior or take care of it internally, so it doesn't make the news or come to light. It is possible for organizations to minimize deviant and counterproductive behavior in the workplace, but they cannot completely stop it from happening (Jones, 2009; Smithikrai, 2008; Wilkerson, Evans, & Davis, 2008). The reason behind this is that human nature cannot be curbed just because there are rules at a particular company or organization. It may not be in a particular person's nature to be deviant, but that may not be the case for the person sitting next to him or her. With that in mind, many companies put rules and regulations into a handbook, and they make employees sign a form saying they know and understand these rules. This is to protect the company from a lawsuit in the event of deviant behavior by an employee, but that does not stop the deviant behavior from taking place.
Counterproductive behavior is somewhat different, because it does not have to be deviant or even something that directly violates the rules and regulations of the company. It could be as simple as wasting a lot of time during the workday and not ensuring that work is getting done properly. It could also involve personal phone calls, telling jokes, making fun of other workers, or doing anything that is not focused on the task at hand. Some of that may be against the rules, but it would be hard to call that behavior deviant. Most employees (and employers) see deviant behavior as illegal or immoral behavior, not something that is just slowing down the productivity of the employee and/or those around him or her. But, is counterproductive behavior also deviant behavior simply because it is counterproductive? Most researchers do not think so (Robinson & O'Leary-Kelly, 1998; Tepper, et al., 2008; Wilkerson, Evans, & Davis, 2008). Instead, they believe that counterproductive behavior and deviant behavior are two different things, but that there can certainly be an overlap of those areas when counterproductive behavior goes too far or when deviant behavior is also counterproductive to what the company and/or a particular employee is attempting to accomplish.
It is not actually that hard to be counterproductive as an employee. Something so simple as badmouthing other employees or supervisors can be enough to cause problems in the workplace (Wilkerson, Evans, & Davis, 2008). Studies have shown that there is a correlation between how much badmouthing is done and the level of cynicism shown by other employees (Wilkerson, Evans, & Davis, 2008). This was based on social information processing theory, and was used to see whether coworkers who badmouthed other employees or supervisors could have an influence on employees who heard them speaking that way. Would these employees who heard the coworkers badmouthing others start to think less highly of the workers being badmouthed? It turns out that yes, they would think less highly of those people and become more cynical about them (Wilkerson, Evans, & Davis, 2008). Then the workers who became more cynical could also start badmouthing those workers or other workers, and the behavior would spread (Wilkerson, Evans, & Davis, 2008).
Antisocial behaviors at work are easily shaped by the behaviors of the other workers (Robinson & O'Leary-Kelly, 1998). When one coworker was deviant or otherwise counterproductive, the majority of his or her coworkers developed the same traits. These coworkers also got along with one another quite well, because they all shared the same feelings and opinions. For those who were less antisocial or counterproductive than their coworkers, there were problems (Robinson & O'Leary-Kelly, 1998). It was harder for a less deviant person to like his or her more deviant coworkers. While this makes sense, it also shows how hard it can be for some people to work together because they do not have anything in common, including behaviors that are not appropriate in their workplace (Robinson & O'Leary-Kelly, 1998). When all employees are on the "same page" in relation to their deviance, they work better together than would employees that do not share both negative and...
Responsibility Project For the completion of the task pertaining to the organizational ethics, the responsibility project website is nominated and short film selected is "Hot Seat." The following paper caters to the specification of the movie in full details. The Responsibility Project The Situation Highlighted in the Short Film The short film presents the scenario of a workplace. It is an animated movie that sheds light on the deviant workplace behaviors. With the lack
Unethical Leadership Leadership is not an inherited gift or a family heritage. Becoming a leader is a deliberate and planned process of personal and professional development that must be carried out experientially. It requires one to have the courage to say both "yes" and "no' to an everlasting chain of large and small tests. In order to become a true leader, one must be prepared to define his/her values, character, and
future research agenda that Judge, et al. (2008) present addresses their critique of personality research in organizational behavior. According to Judge, Klinger, Simon and Yang (2008), the various criticisms directed at early organizational behavioral theories have been countered by a growing body of evidence that supports these fundamental precepts. In this regard Judge et al. report that there have been three main pieces of evidence to date that have been
It seems as if personally asking individuals to participate increased the likelihood of responses -- following up with non-respondents, approaching members of the survey group personally beforehand, or even including incentives to participate like a free drawing of all respondents for a prize would ensure greater compliance in a wide range of industries, rather than a concentrated response. Only personally requesting individuals from several industry sectors decreases the reliability of
Presumably, the reliability of the responses between a monitored study and an unmonitored study could be validated by consistent reportage from the peer and the incumbent. This method was also used to control for the study's overall validity: the study would be a more valid measure of counterproductive work actions and their relationship to work stressors if an outside source validated the incumbent's responses. The study's authors still acknowledge a
Miller & Lemons (1998) had identified other problems, one of which was, in fact, exclusion from the old boy networks. They noted the fact that women also often are in a pioneering role as problematical." And they had a very sympathetic viewpoint of the 'differences' in family responsibilities obliquely identified by the GAO report: "Also, after spending a long day at work, most of these women still have to go
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now