Mediating roles of employee cynicism and workplace ostracism on the relationship between perceived organizational politics and counterproductive work behavior

Abstract

PurposeThis study investigated employee cynicism and workplace ostracism as pathways through which perceived organizational politics (POPs) is related to counterproductive work behavior (CWB) targeted at individual coworkers (CWB-I) and the organization (CWB-O).Design/methodology/approachData were collected from 794 university employees in Southeastern, Nigeria at three-point of measurements.FindingsResults of the Structural Equation Modelling showed that POPs positively predicted CWB-I but did not predict CWB-O directly. POPs positively predicted both employee cynicism and workplace ostracism. Employee cynicism did not predict CWB-I and CWB-O, but workplace ostracism positively predicted both CWB-I and CWB-O. Moreover, whilst POPs did not predict both CWB-I and CWB-O through employee cynicism; workplace ostracism partially mediated the relationship between POPs and the two dimensions of CWB.Originality/valueThe relationship between POPs and CWB has been documented in the literature, but whether affect-laden processes (employee cynicism and workplace ostracism) explain this relationship is new. Conducting the study in a context previously neglected extended our understanding of the indirect relationship between POPs and CWB.

Does Servant Leadership Decrease Bad Behaviors? The Mediating Role of Psychological Safety and the Moderating Effect of Corporate Social Responsibility

“…When employees feel they can voice concerns without facing retaliation, they are less likely to resort to covert actions that harm the organization or its stakeholders. A climate of psychological safety provides avenues for employees to constructively address grievances, express frustrations, and seek resolutions [8,38,41]. Research supports this theory, showing that psychologically safe environments correlate with reduced instances of CWB [8,41].…”

“…A climate of psychological safety provides avenues for employees to constructively address grievances, express frustrations, and seek resolutions [8,38,41]. Research supports this theory, showing that psychologically safe environments correlate with reduced instances of CWB [8,41]. Such environments diminish the perceived need for retaliatory or defensive behaviors by providing legitimate channels for issue resolution and ensuring that employee voices are both heard and valued.…”

“…Various antecedents have been identified for CWB, including organizational injustice, job dissatisfaction, role ambiguity, and perceived violation of the psychological contract. Additionally, individual factors such as personality traits, especially traits from the dark triad (narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy), have been linked to higher propensities for CWB [8,9,[37][38][39][40][41].…”

“…One straightforward resolution would be to refrain from engaging in CWB, thereby realigning actions with the prevailing positive work environment [42]. In an environment of high psychological safety where employees feel respected and accepted, engaging in CWB would create a cognitive dissonance that would need to be resolved, which argues against such behavior [8,38,41,42]. Numerous empirical studies, such as those cited [8,38,41,42], have highlighted the behavioral adjustments individuals make in response to cognitive dissonance, further validating this rationale.…”

“…Empirical research supports this theory-based argument. Studies [9,41] indicate that positive behavioral norms set by leaders and coworkers significantly deter counterproductive behaviors. Instead, they encourage behaviors that bolster collaboration and constructive conflict resolution.…”