Workplace Deviance

Abstract

The history of workplace deviance research has evolved from a focus on singular behaviors, such as theft or withdrawal in the 1970s and 1980s, to the broader focus on a range of behaviors in the 21st century. This more inclusive cluster of related “dark side” behaviors is made up of voluntary behaviors that violate significant organizational norms and in so doing threaten the well-being of an organization, its members, or both. Examples of behaviors that fall in this domain are employee theft and sabotage of organizational goods, services, data, customer lists, materials, working slow, calling in sick when you are not, bullying, harassment, discrimination, and gossip. Workplace deviance can be targeted at other individuals in the organization (coworkers, supervisors, subordinates) or at the organization itself, or both. Typically the actor’s perspective is considered, but other relevant views of the behavior include the supervisor/the organization, peers, customers, or other third parties. Many causes have been studied as sources of deviant workplace behaviors, for example personality characteristics such as neuroticism or low conscientiousness, modeling others’ behavior, experiences of injustice, uncertainty, lack of control or feelings of anger, frustration, and dissatisfaction. Nowadays, some researchers are returning to a focus on individual behaviors, or smaller clusters of behaviors such as sexual misconduct, gossip, and even constructive deviance, and the outcomes of workplace deviance on actors, targets, and observers are being investigated.

Depletion of psychological, financial, and social resources in the hospitality sector during the pandemic

“…Moreover, when someone perceives that free will to engage in behavior is restricted or will be restricted in the future, they will react ( Miron and Brehm, 2006 ). Hence, when employees are depressed due to resource loss (isolation, financial and social support absence, and risk of unemployment), they may feel depressed, which limits their freedom and pushes them to engage in interpersonal deviance as a form of reactance ( Bennett et al, 2018 ).…”

Opportunity, job pressure and deviant workplace behaviour: does neutralisation mediate the relationship? A study of faculty members in public universities in Nigeria

“…Based on the target of the deviant acts, they found that workplace deviance could be grouped into two: organisational deviance and interpersonal deviance. While sabotage, theft of organisational property, coming in to work late and sharing company secrets with outsiders are some of the examples of organisational deviance, gossiping about co-workers or physically or verbally abusing co-workers or customers are examples of interpersonal deviance (Bennett et al, 2018). While the former refers to acts targeted at the organisation, the former targets at members of the organisation.…”

Interactive Effects of Workplace Spirituality and Psychological Capital on Employee Negativity

“…The review of past studies indicated that CWB is associated with numerous employee attitudes and behaviours. It is also a reality that majority of employees in organizations, to a certain extent, engage in CWB, which costs organizations billions of dollars arising from productivity loss and other harmful consequences (Bennett et al, 2019, as cited in Mackey et al, 2019). This indicates a need for scholars and managers to find a means to reduce employees’ CWB in order to prevent organizations from its negative consequences.…”