As organizational scholars have become critically attuned to human flourishing in the workplace, interest in workplace dignity has grown rapidly. Yet, a valid scale to measure employees’ perceptions of dignity in the workplace has yet to be developed, thereby limiting potential empirical insights. To fill this need, we conducted a systematic, multi-study scale development project. Using data generated from focus groups ( N = 62), an expert panel ( N = 11), and two surveys ( N = 401 and N = 542), we developed and validated an 18-item Workplace Dignity Scale (WDS). Our studies reveal evidence in support of the WDS’ psychometric properties, as well as its content, construct, and criterion-related validity. Our structural models support predictive relationships between workplace characteristics (e.g., dirty work, income insufficiency) and dignity. Moreover, we observed the incremental validity of workplace dignity to account for variance in employee engagement, burnout, and turnover intentions above and beyond the explanatory effects of organizational respect and meaningful work. These results demonstrate the promise of the WDS for organizational research.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to test the explanatory effects of the system justification theory on reactions to new employee hazing. Design/methodology/approach Three studies (N = 107, 121 and 128), all using experimental assignment, vignettes of workplace hazing and two-level repeated measures ANCOVA designs, with dispositional variables included as covariates and justification of workplace hazing processes as dependent variables, were conducted. Findings Onlookers are more likely to justify long-standing (cf. recently adopted) hazing systems and hazing systems used by highly cohesive (cf. loosely cohesive) teams, supporting the application of the system justification theory to workplace hazing reactions. Research limitations/implications The use of vignette research and onlookers (cf. hazed employees) may limit inferences drawn about employee reactions in workplaces that use hazing. Practical implications Despite its negative associations, hazing at work persists, with 25 percent of current sample reported being hazed at work. The system justification theory, which the authors applied to hazing, offers an explanation for stakeholders’ willingness to sustain and perpetuate hazing, and onlookers’ seeming blind-spot regarding outrage over workplace hazing. This theory holds promise for combatting passive responses to workplace hazing. Originality/value This is the first paper to empirically test explanations for workplace hazing’s perpetuation, by applying the system justification theory to the social system of workplace hazing. Moreover, it is the first paper to offer empirical evidence of hazing’s prevalence across at least 25 percent of sampled industries and organizational rank.

Background The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic is characterized by different morbidity and mortality rates across different states, cities, rural areas, and diverse neighborhoods. The absence of a national strategy for battling the pandemic also leaves state and local governments responsible for creating their own response strategies and policies. Objective This study examines the content of COVID-19–related tweets posted by public health agencies in Texas and how content characteristics can predict the level of public engagement. Methods All COVID-19–related tweets (N=7269) posted by Texas public agencies during the first 6 months of 2020 were classified in terms of each tweet’s functions (whether the tweet provides information, promotes action, or builds community), the preventative measures mentioned, and the health beliefs discussed, by using natural language processing. Hierarchical linear regressions were conducted to explore how tweet content predicted public engagement. Results The information function was the most prominent function, followed by the action or community functions. Beliefs regarding susceptibility, severity, and benefits were the most frequently covered health beliefs. Tweets that served the information or action functions were more likely to be retweeted, while tweets that served the action and community functions were more likely to be liked. Tweets that provided susceptibility information resulted in the most public engagement in terms of the number of retweets and likes. Conclusions Public health agencies should continue to use Twitter to disseminate information, promote action, and build communities. They need to improve their strategies for designing social media messages about the benefits of disease prevention behaviors and audiences’ self-efficacy.

The purpose of this paper is to establish a foundation for studying and managing new employee hazing in workgroups. Available empirical evidence indicates 25–75% of American employees encounter workplace hazing, but very little empirical research exists on this phenomenon. Workers are changing jobs more frequently than ever, which increases the cumulative impact and importance of new employee experiences, including hazing, a complex group-based phenomenon. Because hazing is a relatively universal social practice without a strongly established literature in the organizational sciences, we draw from multiple disciplines in reviewing and modeling the practice. The current research offers three major contributions: (a) a relatively exhaustive review of relevant empirical and theoretical work on hazing, (b) an initial, testable model for understanding workplace hazing as a multi-level phenomenon, including individual and group-level antecedents and outcomes, and (c) an outline of the need and support for considering both the dysfunctional and functional consequences of hazing, given the variety of forms it takes and reactions it evokes. Finally, we present actionable guidance for researchers seeking to study workplace hazing and discuss the organizational implications of our work for practitioners.

No abstract