Job insecurity reflects a threat to the continuity and stability of employment as it is currently experienced. Job insecurity has been the focus of increasing scholarly and popular attention in light of technological, economic, and political changes over the past few decades that have left many insecure about the future of their jobs. Yet, conceptual ambiguities exist; the literature remains fragmented; and there lacks an overarching framework through which to organize and reconcile findings. The goal of this article is to offer an integrative review and conceptual framework that addresses these challenges and provides the groundwork for future research. To that end, it proposes a definition of job insecurity that differentiates it from potential antecedents, moderators, and outcomes. The article addresses antecedents and introduces a typology of mechanisms and threat foci that links antecedents to job insecurity and suggests yet unexplored predictors. Furthermore, the framework developed here considers four overarching mechanisms—stress, social exchange, job preservation motivation, and proactive coping—through which job insecurity leads to various outcomes, and it highlights potential competing tensions inherent in individuals’ responses. Finally, the framework introduces threat features, economic vulnerabilities, and psychological vulnerabilities as three overarching categories of variables that moderate reactions to job insecurity, and it identifies factors that contribute to each. In doing so, it suggests important levers through which to influence reactions to job insecurity; it helps explain variability in past research; and it provides a foundation for future work.

we use coping theory to explore an underlying relationship between employee stress caused by burdensome, complex, and ambiguous information security requirements (termed "security-related stress" or SrS) and deliberate information security policy (ISP) violations. results from a survey of 539 employee users suggest that SrS engenders an emotion-focused coping response in the form of moral disengagement from ISP violations, which in turn increases one's susceptibility to this behavior. Our multidimensional view of SrS-comprised of security-related overload, complexity, and uncertainty-offers a new perspective on the workplace environment factors that foster noncompliant user behavior and inspire cognitive rationalizations of such behavior. The study extends technostress research to the information systems security domain and provides a theoretical framework for the influence of SrS on user behavior. For practitioners, the results highlight the incidence of SrS in organizations and suggest potential mechanisms to counter the stressful effects of information security requirements. Downloaded by [Northeastern University]AcADeMics AnD prAcTiTioners AliKe recognize eMployees as a major threat to organizational information security efforts [14,69]. To address this "insider" threat, organizations have devoted significant resources into behavioral security measures, such as policy development and education and training, in addition to continually updating their security technologies [54]. U.S. federal and state governments and certain industries have also introduced regulations and standards that mandate organizations' internal security measures [14]. Despite these initiatives, a class of employee security-related behaviors known as volitional (but not malicious) information security policy (ISP) violations [27, 71] (e.g., password sharing, failing to log off when leaving workstation) continue to plague organizations. At least some explanation for this predicament is that employees face a surfeit of rapidly expanding security requirements (i.e., policies, procedures, and technical controls), which they find to be constraining, inconvenient, and difficult to understand [51,53,69]. Evidence of this comes from a recent survey of over 2,800 employees [16] in which "too busy to think about policies" and "policies are inconvenient to follow" were reported as chief reasons for ISP violations. Some authors have suggested that security requirements can backfire and bring about security-diminishing behavior due to the demands (e.g., time, effort, frustration) they impose on employees [51,60,64]. Although there is preliminary evidence to support this notion [51], the information systems (IS) literature lacks a systematic, theorydriven investigation of the potential adverse effects of organizational information security requirements (hereafter security requirements) on user behavior. A goal of this paper is to address this gap.Against this backdrop, we offer a new avenue for understanding employees' ISP violations-namely, workplace ...

SummaryModern work is frequently characterized by jobs where adaptive performance (AP) is crucial for employees to succeed in light of new or altered task demands. This recognition has fueled growing interest in AP as a dimension of workplace performance. To this point, however, research on AP has evolved from disparate perspectives and methods, resulting in fragmentation and a less than coherent knowledge base. This paper presents a comprehensive review of research studies regarding the nomological network of individual AP.In doing so, we synthesize the current knowledge base surrounding correlates of AP, elucidate current ambiguities, and suggest directions for future research efforts. We conclude that although the extant AP literature has amassed a critical body of studies linking various predictors to successful AP outcomes, much remains unknown, most critically regarding the implications of different methods of assessing AP, the effects of different types of changes in the task environment, the process of AP, and the steps organizations can take to foster AP among their employees. We hope that our synthesis and analysis paves the way for efforts to address these important questions. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Keywords: adaptive performance; job performance; adaptive transfer Numerous organizational scholars have recognized that traditional models of performance are static and need to be augmented to include "responsiveness to changing job requirements"-labeled adaptive performance (AP; Allworth & Hesketh, 1999, p. 98;Griffin, Neal, & Parker, 2007;Pulakos, Arad, Donovan, & Plamondon, 2000). As a consequence, researchers anticipated that the study of AP would yield a richer understanding of the dynamic nature of employee performance under conditions of change and ambiguity. Researchers also anticipated that the study of AP would offer practical guidance to organizations regarding how to best handle the "continual obsolescence and displacement" of employees' skills and abilities (LePine, Colquitt, & Erez, 2000, p. 564). It has been nearly 15 years since research began on individual AP, and findings have emerged in many domains. For example, empirical research has focused on identifying individual difference factors that predict successful AP (e.g., Griffin & Hesketh, 2003;LePine et al., 2000;Stewart & Nandkeolyar, 2006), the AP requirements of jobs (Pulakos et al., 2000), training techniques that can enhance AP (e.g., Bell & Kozlowski, 2002;, and contextual factors that promote AP (Griffin, Parker, & Mason, 2010;Stewart & Nandkeolyar, 2006). Research has also conceptually and empirically distinguished AP from other performance dimensions (Allworth & Hesketh, 1999;Griffin et al., 2007;Johnson, 2001;Shoss, Witt, & Vera, 2012).With a diverse body of empirical studies on AP, it is a good time to take stock of how far organizational scholars have come in understanding AP and the conditions that foster it. Such a review is particularly valuable given that the AP literature has evolved from disparate res...

Pandemics have historically shaped the world of work in various ways. With COVID-19 presenting as a global pandemic, there is much speculation about the impact that this crisis will have for the future of work and for people working in organizations. In this article, we discuss 10 of the most relevant research and practice topics in the field of industrial and organizational (IO) psychology that will likely be impacted by COVID-19. For each of these topics, the pandemic crisis is creating new work-related challenges, but also presenting various opportunities. The topics discussed herein include occupational health and safety, work-family issues, telecommuting, virtual teamwork, job insecurity, precarious work, leadership, human resources policy, the aging workforce, and careers. This article sets the stage for further discussion of various ways in which IO psychology research and practice can address the impacts of COVID- 19 for work and organizational processes that are affecting workers now and will shape the future of work and organizations in both the short and long term. This article concludes by inviting IO psychology researchers and practitioners to address the challenges and opportunities of COVID-19 head-on by proactively innovating the work that we do in support of workers, organizations, and society as a whole.

Why do employees who experience abusive supervision retaliate against the organization? We apply organizational support theory to propose that employees hold the organization partly responsible for abusive supervision. Depending on the extent to which employees identify the supervisor with the organization (i.e., supervisor's organizational embodiment), we expected abusive supervision to be associated with low perceived organizational support (POS) and consequently with retribution against the organization. Across 3 samples, we found that abusive supervision was associated with decreased POS as moderated by supervisor's organizational embodiment. In turn, reduced POS was related to heightened counterproductive work behavior directed against the organization and lowered in-role and extra-role performance. These findings suggest that employees partly attribute abusive supervision to negative valuation by the organization and, consequently, behave negatively toward and withhold positive contributions to it.