Antecedents of interpersonally directed forms of citizenship and counterproductive behaviors (i.e., interpersonal helping and harming, respectively) have been studied most often under the broad categories of individual differences and job attitudes. Although these behaviors often are exhibited within the confines of interpersonal relationships, the impact of relationship quality and context on such behaviors has been understudied. The present study uses a social networks framework to examine the relational antecedents of interpersonal helping and harming in a sample of 62 members of a college sorority house. Results indicate that relational variables--direct, third-party, and structural or positional characteristics of positive and negative affective networks, and the frequency of voluntary interaction--explain substantial incremental variance (beyond traditional predictors) in helping and harming. Moreover, helping and harming were themselves weakly positively interrelated. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.

Using role theory as the overarching framework, we propose that employees' voice has contrasting relationships with the traits of duty orientation, or employees' dispositional sense of moral and ethical obligation at the workplace, and achievement orientation, or the extent of their ingrained personal ambition to get ahead professionally. Using data from 262 employees and their managers, we demonstrate that duty and achievement orientations are, respectively, positively and negatively related to voice through their impact on voice role conceptualization or the extent to which employees consider voice as part of their personal responsibility at work. Further, we delineate how employees' beliefs about their efficacy to engage in voice and judgments about psychological safety in the organization can moderate these relationships. We discuss the implications of these findings for theory and practice.

We examined the proposition that leaders' social network ties in the larger organization influence the quality of their leader-member exchange (LMX) with their employees, which, in turn, impacts these employees' job satisfaction and turnover intentions. Using multilevel, multisource data from a field study of 184 bank employees nested within 42 branch managers, we found that leaders who had higher quality relationships with their bosses and who were more central in their peer networks were perceived by their subordinates as having greater status in the organization and, therefore, were able to form higher quality relationships with them. Further, the effects of the leaders' perceived status on LMX were stronger when subordinates were less central in their own peer network. Finally, LMX mediated the impact of leaders' perceived status in the organization on subordinates' job satisfaction and turnover intentions. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.

We examine how employees' centrality in the networks of positively valenced ties (e.g., friendship, advice) and negatively valenced ties (e.g., avoidance) at work interact to affect these employees' organizational attachment. Using 2 different samples (154 employees in a division of a food and animal science organization and 144 employees in a product development firm), we found that employees' centrality in positive and negative tie networks at work were related to their organizational attachment indirectly via their impact on employees' satisfaction with their workplace relationships. Further, interaction results in both studies suggest that the effect of employees' centrality in positive tie networks on their satisfaction with workplace social relationships was stronger when employees had more negative relationships but was irrelevant when employees had fewer negative ties. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.

We examined the proposition that employees' work-flow centrality (i.e., the extent to which they are critical to the task-related interaction networks of their work groups) enhances their personal influence within their work groups and, therefore, motivates them to engage in voice behaviors. In support of this proposition, in a study of 184 bank employees nested within 42 work groups, we found that employees' work-flow centrality was positively related to voice behaviors, with their personal influence mediating this relationship. Further, work-flow centrality was more strongly related to personal influence when employees had higher task performance, and personal influence was more strongly related to voice behaviors when employees had higher levels of work-group identification. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.