Who withdraws? Psychological individual differences and employee withdrawal behaviors.

Abstract

Psychological individual differences, such as personality, affectivity, and general mental ability, have been shown to predict numerous work-related behaviors. Although there is substantial research demonstrating relationships between psychological individual differences and withdrawal behaviors (i.e., lateness, absenteeism, and turnover), there is no integrative framework providing scholars and practitioners a guide for conceptualizing how, why, and under what circumstances we observe such relationships. In this integrative conceptual review we: (a) utilize the Cognitive-Affective Processing System framework (Mischel & Shoda, 1995) to provide an overarching theoretical basis for how psychological individual differences affect withdrawal behaviors; (b) create a theoretical model of the situated person that summarizes the existing empirical literature examining the effect of psychological differences on withdrawal behavior; and (c) identify future research opportunities based on our review and integrative framework.

Surveying the forest: A meta‐analysis, moderator investigation, and future‐oriented discussion of the antecedents of voluntary employee turnover

“…For instance, core self-evaluations (CSEs) are a recently introduced meta-construct comprising of emotional stability, locus of control, generalized self-efficacy (i.e., an internal motivation construct), and self-esteem (Judge & Bono, 2001). Although we found no primary studies examining if, how, or why CSEs as a whole predict turnover, specific CSE dimensions do independently contribute to exit decisions (see also Zimmerman, Swider, Woo, & Allen, 2016 for an integrative review regarding how distal individual differences manifest into work withdrawal). Theory and testing about combinations of these attributes may be quite fruitful.…”

Synthesizing content models of employee turnover

“…Unfortunately, moral forces scale was dropped from subsequent empirical validation of Maertz et al’s motivational forces due to lack of reliability. Although included in some turnover models (e.g., Mobley et al, ; Steers, ), like the extraorganizational forces previously, the role of individual differences has begun to garner more attention from job search and turnover researchers (e.g., Zimmerman, ; Zimmerman, Boswell, Shipp, Dunford, & Boudreau, ; Zimmerman, Swider, Woo, & Allen, ) with the realization that, ceteris paribus, some individuals will react differently in the same circumstances compared to others. Thus, employees' dispositional sense of obligation to their employer should be accounted for to more accurately predict employee job search and turnover.Hypothesis Contractual forces will load on a higher‐order factor representing an employee's own sense of obligation to the employee's organization. Hypothesis Sense of obligation will negatively relate to an employee's (a) job‐search behavior and (b) turnover.…”

“…family and friends when deciding to leave (or stay at) an organization (Dychtwald, Erickson, & Morison, 2006;Hurst & Good, 2009 to lack of reliability. Although included in some turnover models (e.g., Mobley et al, 1979;Steers, 1977), like the extraorganizational forces previously, the role of individual differences has begun to garner more attention from job search and turnover researchers (e.g., Zimmerman, 2008;Zimmerman, Boswell, Shipp, Dunford, & Boudreau, 2012;Zimmerman, Swider, Woo, & Allen, 2016) with the realization that, ceteris paribus, some individuals will react differently in the same circumstances compared to others. Thus, employees' dispositional sense of obligation to their employer should be accounted for to more accurately predict employee job search and turnover.…”

Identity coactivation: Person and situation influences and the mediating role of experienced conflict

“…The CAPS framework proposes that we can better comprehend individuals' cognitive and affective outcomes by considering the “situated person” (i.e., an individual in a particular context), highlighting the importance of both individual differences and situational features (Mischel & Shoda, , ; Zimmerman, Swider, Woo, & Allen, ). In its original conception, specific situations contain psychological features that are interpreted by individuals and activate relevant cognitive and affective states, which can relate to and interact with one another (Mischel & Shoda, , ).…”

“…The CAPS framework proposes that we can better comprehend individuals' cognitive and affective outcomes by considering the "situated person" (i.e., an individual in a particular context), highlighting the importance of both individual differences and situational features (Mischel & Shoda, 1995Zimmerman, Swider, Woo, & Allen, 2016).…”