2016
DOI: 10.1080/10696679.2016.1236663
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Incorporating a Counterproductive Work Behavior Perspective into the Salesperson Deviance Literature: Intentionally Harmful Acts and Motivations for Sales Deviance

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
1
1

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 55 publications
0
11
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The above studies provide evidence that relationship closeness between salespersons and customers does not always lead to positive outcomes. Furthermore, while there are several studies on salesperson active opportunism (Anderson and Jap, 2005; Miao et al , 2017; Hochstein et al , 2017; Kim and Jung, 2018), we find that there is insubstantial evidence of passive opportunism. Hence, in this study, we attempt to identify a link between relationship closeness and passive opportunistic behaviors of salespersons.…”
Section: Literature Reviewcontrasting
confidence: 74%
“…The above studies provide evidence that relationship closeness between salespersons and customers does not always lead to positive outcomes. Furthermore, while there are several studies on salesperson active opportunism (Anderson and Jap, 2005; Miao et al , 2017; Hochstein et al , 2017; Kim and Jung, 2018), we find that there is insubstantial evidence of passive opportunism. Hence, in this study, we attempt to identify a link between relationship closeness and passive opportunistic behaviors of salespersons.…”
Section: Literature Reviewcontrasting
confidence: 74%
“…Meanwhile, discretionary brand-oriented behaviors performed by internal audiences exist not only in the positive form but also in the negative form. Regarding employees' deviance (or counterproductive workplace behavior), marketing literature has expanded the scope of frontline employees' deviances from those that are executed toward the organization (theft, sabotage and voluntary absenteeism) and coworkers to those that are executed toward the customers in the service or sales context (Darrat et al, 2016;Hochstein et al, 2015;Hochstein et al, 2017;Jelinek and Ahearne, 2010). However, general internal audiences, as well as frontline workers, also engage in brand-oriented deviance toward the organization by spreading negative word-of-mouth (NWOM) to outsiders when they are not on the job (Harris and Ogbonna, 2012).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is important to identify the causes and sources of CWB to maintain the functional effectiveness of the organization and to accelerate productivity among employees (Czarnota-Bojarska, 2015). Counterproductive behaviors can also be expressed as negative job behaviors (Hochstein, Lilly, & Stanley, 2017), behavioral deviation in the workplace (Hollinger & Clark, 1983;Bennett & Robinson, 2000;Mitchell & Ambrose, 2007;Kulas et al, 2007), anti-social behavior (Thau, Crossley, Bennett, & Sczesny, 2007), counter-productive behavior (Hochstein et al, 2017), dysfunctional workplace behavior, organizational misbehavior, rule violation, and anti-citizenship behavior (Hochstein et al, 2017) in different disciplines. CWB is an intentional harmful behavior by employees directed toward their organization, stakeholders and members of the organization (Dalal, 2005;Spector et al, 2006b;Fox et al, 2001;Hochstein et al, 2017).…”
Section: Organizational Citizenship and Counterproductive Work Behaviors As Job Performancementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Interpersonal counterproductive work behaviors are those that harm people (colleagues, managers, subordinates, suppliers, customers) at work, such as stealing a colleague's objects, harassing, physical and verbal intimidation, and delaying work (Hollinger & Clark, 1983;Kulas et al, 2007;Brink et al, 2016). In this sense, it is clear that it is costly for both persons and organizations (Kulas et al, 2007;Hochstein et al, 2017). Spector et al (2006b) have examined five different sub-dimensions of CWB in terms of how employees perceive these behaviors: abuse, production deviation, sabotage, theft and withdrawal.…”
Section: Organizational Citizenship and Counterproductive Work Behaviors As Job Performancementioning
confidence: 99%