Stumbling out of the gate: The energy‐based implications of morning routine disruption

Abstract

Despite academic and practical advice regarding the virtues of daily routines for effective work performance, such routines are vulnerable to disruption from any number of sources. To understand whether and how routine disruptions affect employees at work, we draw on cognitive energetics theory (CET) and explore the potential negative consequences of morning routine disruptions on employees’ energy allocations at work. Moreover, given that CET is fundamentally a theory of goal attainment, we examine the downstream impact of routine disruptions on employees’ work goal progress. Results from two daily experience‐sampling studies show that when employees’ morning routines were disrupted, employees experienced higher levels of depletion and reduced calmness. In turn, depletion was associated negatively, and calmness was associated positively, with daily work engagement. Finally, daily work engagement was positively related to subsequent daily goal progress. These findings have important implications for our understanding of employees’ morning routines and the ways that disruptions to those routines ripple through employees’ workdays.

Making nice or faking nice? Exploring supervisors’ two‐faced response to their past abusive behavior

“…Specifically, we calculated the value of each path at high (+1 SD) and low (-1 SD) levels of our moderator (Aiken & West, 1991), and used a Monte Carlo simulation with 20,000 replications to construct 95% bias-corrected confidence intervals (CI) around these conditional indirect effects. Similar methods have been used in prior studies (e.g., Foulk et al, 2018;Matta, Scott, Colquitt, Koopman, & Passantino, 2017;McClean et al, 2020;Rosen et al, 2016). Preacher, Rucker, and Hayes (2007) have suggested that moderation, using this method, is supported when the CI for the difference between the two indirect effects (i.e., high and low levels of the moderator) excludes zero.…”

“…However, and in order to reduce model complexity and maximize sample size, within-person control variables (i.e., cyclical and lagged variables, daily supervisor positive and negative affect) were modeled with fixed slopes, in line with prior research (e.g., Gabriel et al, 2018;Koopman, Lanaj, & Scott, 2016;McClean, Koopman, Yim, & Klotz, 2020;Rosen et al, 2016). The between-person moderators were modeled at Level 2.…”

Excuse me, do you have a minute? An exploration of the dark- and bright-side effects of daily work interruptions for employee well-being.

“…Depletion of this pool of self-regulatory resources generally leaves people with a reduced ability to regulate subsequent thoughts, actions and emotions, as they become unwilling to expend further self-regulatory resources (Muraven et al, 2006; Rosen et al, 2016). Thus, initial activities needing self-control tend to leave employees depleted and less able to regulate later activities requiring self-control (McClean et al, in press).…”

Transformed by the family: An episodic, attachment theory perspective on family–work enrichment and transformational leadership.

“…We utilized multilevel path analysis using Mplus 8 (Muthén & Muthén, 2017) to account for the nested nature of our data. Daily FWE, promotion focus, and transformational leadership were modeled at Level 1 with random slopes, while lagged, within-person control variables were modeled with fixed slopes (Koopman et al, 2016; McClean et al, in press; Wang et al, 2013). Our between-person moderators were modeled at Level 2.…”