DeGarmo Group announced today that Anthony Adorno will be facilitating  an HR.com webcast titled “More Than a Mission Statement: The Importance of Corporate Work Values“. The session will be held on August 10, 2010 at 11am ET.  Provided below is a description of the session, as well as registration information.

Session Overview

Just about every organization has a mission statement that includes some reference to a set of work values, but how many organizations really believe in their values and use them to drive organizational success?

During this session, we’ll talk about the importance of core work values, how to measure them, and how to improve alignment between the organization and its employees through talent acquisition and development.

Specifically, this session will focus on the results of research conducted with more than 1,200 people in the United States, U.K., and Philippines on work value alignment and important outcomes such as organizational commitment, job satisfaction, job performance, and employee turnover.

What will participants learn?

1.  How work value alignment impacts corporate profitability.

2.  Metrics used for determining whether an organization’s leaders agree on the importance of work values.

3.  An approach for improving alignment in work values through both staffing and development models.

4.  How the impact of value alignment varies based on job level, job category or work experience.

Who should attend?

1.  Executives who determine and drive the values of their organizations.

2.  Recruiters, Managers, Directors, VPs, etc., responsible for HR, Staffing, Talent Acquisition and/or Organizational Development.

3.  Those interested in understanding how alignment with corporate values drives organizational success.

Registration Information

If you are already a member of HR.com, please login to register for the webcast.  If you are not a member of HR.com, you will need to sign up for a FREE HR.com membership, this will only take you a moment to fill in the required information. Once you have confirmation of your membership, you will be able to register for this complimentary webcast.

Tuesday, August, 10th, 11:00AM – 12:00 PM ET

Register Here!

The following article is a summary of the research and practice implications from:

Many organizations across the globe are seeing continuous changes.  Change can range from leadership changes, new technology implementation, or extensive mergers and acquisitions.

With change, employees are impacted throughout the process by the leadership they experience.  Without proper leadership, employees will not follow their leader and the leader will not establish “buy-in.”

The leadership role in managing employees’ responses to organizational change is critical for establishing successful change.  Generally, two leadership styles can be used to manage organizational change: transformational and change leadership.

Transformational v. Change Leadership

Transformational Leadership refers to a long-term relationship established between the leader and the employee through many interactions.  Transformational leaders have a more organizational or strategic orientation and tend to engage in transformational behaviors that paint a vivid, positive picture of the future that typically focuses more on change in the “big picture” sense, which can have an impact on attitudes about specific changes at work.  Transformational leaders also tend to encourage employee empowerment in general.

Change Leadership refers to the “here-and-now”, with a focus primarily on enacting the specific change at hand and how the leader is handling it from a tactical point of view.

Change leadership involves the engagement of behaviors where the goal is to efficiently implement change. However, some change leadership behaviors that can be linked to the transformational processes include: communicating the plan for change, building rapport, and providing support and developing a rationale for change.  This does not imply that this is the core of change leadership, but merely different tactics to implement change.

Therefore, transformational leaders manage by establishing a relationship with employees and building a common “vision” for change.  Change leaders, on the other hand, focus on the specific change occurring and how to effectively implement the change.

Overall, although each style shares some commonalities, the differences of each style have a differential impact on establishing employee commitment to change; specifically, transformational leadership yields the best outcomes in establishing commitment to a change.

Developing Commitment to Change

Employees want to feel confident in their leader’s commitment to change and rely on the views of their leader.  They want solid answers to their questions:

• Do I buy into the leader’s vision?
• Is the leader credible?
• Do I share values with the leader?
• Is this the kind of leader who can help me navigate the turbulent waters of change?

Through the ability to engage employees and motivate support for the leader’s decision, transformational leaders build the confidence of followers, thereby establishing more “buy-in” in times of change.

Implications for Practice

Organizations implementing change should consider the following:

• Ensure the proper leadership in times of change.   Generally, transformational leadership will establish more “buy-in” and increase the effective implementation of change.
• Establish the ability within leaders to display the characteristics of a transformational leader.  This can be done through training that educates managers on their current styles and enables them to alter their behavior to fit transformational leadership behaviors.
• Evaluate employees’ commitment to change in times of change.  This can be done by simple paper and pencil evaluations which establish employees’ feelings toward the change in process.

Although transformational and change leadership styles share some similarity with regards to establishing employee commitment to change, transformational leadership is more effective.    Transformational leadership may not be as focused specifically on a given change at hand, but through the ability to engage and motivate employees transformational leaders build the confidence of and rapport with those around them. The result is increased employee “buy-in” to effectively implement the change.

Interpretation by:

Adam Bradshaw

The DeGarmo Group

The following is a summary of the research and practice implications from: Marler, J. H., Fisher, S. L., & Ke, W. (2009). Employee self-service technology acceptance: A comparison of pre-implementation and post-implementation relationships. Personnel Psychology, 62, 327-358.

Employee self-service (ESS) technology is a term used to describe a group of emerging web-based technologies that are quickly gaining popularity. These technologies empower employees to perform a variety of data management and transaction processing functions that once required the use of separate personnel resources, such as HR or administrative staff.

Examples of ESS include technologies that allow employees to manage benefits, register for trainings, update personal information, or report on hours worked. The benefits of these technologies can add up quickly in the form of cost savings and efficiency gains for an organization.

Challenges

Though advantageous to the organization, ESS technologies are usually less directly beneficial to employees, particularly because the ESS technology is rarely related to employees’ essential job functions. This can result in reduced motivation by some employees to fully learn and adopt the technology. In order to maximize cost and efficiency gains, organizations need as many employees as possible to utilize the full functionality of ESS technologies.

There are two broad factors that influence employees’ acceptance of, and intent to use, new ESS technologies: attitudes toward the technology and managerial influence.

Attitudes

Employee attitudes are extremely predictive of intentions to learn and adopt a new technology. Attitudes towards a new technology are influenced by how useful the technology is perceived to be and how easy the technology is to use.

• Perceived Usefulness – If employees believe that the use of a new technology will enhance their job performance, they will be more likely to hold positive attitudes toward that technology.
• Ease of Use – The easier a new technology is to use, the more likely employees will hold positive attitudes toward that technology.

Managerial Influence

Managers play an important role in setting expectations for the use of a new technology. In addition, employees who perceive that they are supported and valued by their organization are more likely to be influenced by managerial pressure to adopt new technologies.

Practical Applications

As ESS technologies become more prevalent in the workplace, managers should be aware of several strategies they can use to increase employee adoption of these technologies.

• Because perceived usefulness plays such an important role in employees’ attitudes about new technologies, organizations should focus on providing their employees with information about how the new technologies can benefit them.
• Provide adequate training to employees about how to utilize new technologies. This will increase perceptions of ease of use and increase adoption of the new technology. After initial implementation of the technology, provide periodic training updates or refreshers.
• Managers should use their influence to encourage organizational norms about the adoption of new technologies.
• Increase perceptions of organizational support in order to increase the level of influence that managers have over adoption of new technologies.
• Organizational norms and perceived support remain relevant after the introduction phase of the new technology. In fact, managerial influence may be more important during this time. Managers should continue to support organizational norms about the use of ESS technologies.

Employee self-service technologies are great ways to increase efficiency and cut down on administrative costs. By adequately preparing and supporting employees during the implementation of these new technologies, organizations can ensure a successful adoption.

Interpretation by:

Michelle Toelle

DeGarmo Group

The following is a summary of the research and practice implications from: Brown, M. E., & Trevino, L. K. (2009). Leader-follower values congruence: Are socialized charismatic leaders better able to achieve it? Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 478-490.

Person-organization fit focusing on values has become a hot topic recently. Values are personal beliefs about what is important and what actions ought to be done (or not done). These beliefs help shape personal goals and the behaviors directed towards achieving those goals. Value fit occurs when organizations and their employees share similar values and is associated with several important work outcomes, such that greater fit is related to higher performance and less turnover.

However, because basic values are deeply rooted and difficult to transform, leaders can have an arduous time trying to align employee values to be consistent with organizational change initiatives. Recent research indicates that a particular type of leadership, called socialized charismatic leadership, can affect the success leaders will achieve in developing new values in their subordinates.

What is “Socialized Charismatic Leadership”?

Socialized charismatic leadership (SCL) is a type of leadership characterized by a leader’s altruistic intent and helping others internalize his or her values. SCL is part of the broader concept of transformational leadership, which involves leaders inspiring their followers and acting as ideal figures after which others can model themselves.

The Role of Occupations in Value Fit

As mentioned above, values are deeply rooted and have a strong influence on behavior. An example of the influence of values on behavior is occupation or career choice. People are attracted to and stay in occupations that are driven by values that are similar to their personal values. For example, people who strongly believe in helping others are more likely to become therapists, social workers, nurses, or doctors. People who strongly value competition are likely to seek out jobs in industries where those values can be pursued, such as sales or marketing.

SCL and Organizational Change

The key to understanding how successful changes in organizational values will be transmitted to employees is knowing that failure will result if the new values are in conflict with deeply held employee values. Leaders high in socialized charisma are better able to align new values with employee-held values than are leaders low in SCL.  Socialized charismatic leaders may be good at achieving this alignment because they frame the organization’s values in such a way that they are consistent with or complement employee values. Framing values in this way can help followers be more accepting of change than they otherwise might be.

Implications for Practice

Some suggestions for how to utilize the concepts of SCL and value fit for organizational change include:

• Consider value fit in recruitment and selection. Employees are attracted to jobs and organizations that match their values and withdraw from those that don’t. Be upfront about your organization’s values in order to attract those with the greatest likelihood of staying and thriving in their jobs. Also, consider using validated selection measures to hire those applicants who best fit with the organization’s core values.
• Understand the values underlying each position. In order to successfully screen based on values, it is first necessary to understand what values are associated with the work in question. Determine if the work is associated with helping others, getting ahead of others, accumulating wealth, creating new innovations, etc.
• Don’t promote values that contradict commonly held employee values. Understanding employees’ underlying values is also important when organizational change initiatives are being developed. Conflict may be reduced or preempted by framing company values in such a way that they are likely to be regarded as complementing those held by employees.
• Identify organization change leaders. In times of change, it is important for the organization to have champions that can build support for the needed transformations (i.e., leaders high in SCL). Have systems in place for identifying, mentoring, and grooming such champions so that they can be in positions of leadership to best move the company forward through transition periods.

Achieving value alignment between leadership and employees can be difficult in times of change. An organization can help maximize its success by having policies in place that bring the best fitting employees on board and develop internal charismatic leaders to make current and future changes to the status quo go as smoothly as possible.

Interpretation by:

Don Johnson

DeGarmo Group

The following is a summary of the research and practice implications from: Fugate, M., Kinicki, A. J., and Prussia, G. E. (2008). Employee coping with organizational change: An examination of alternative theoretical perspectives and models. Personnel Psychology, 61(1), 1-36.

Employees are key players in executing organizational change initiatives. However, employees often feel great stress during these changes which may result in withdrawal from the organization through absenteeism and turnover. These actions can hinder change effectiveness and prove to be very costly to an organization, as the knowledge, skills, and abilities of their employees are lost, possibly to a competing organization. For these reasons it is important to evaluate the process by which employees appraise and handle organizational change so that steps can be taken to increase the likelihood that employees will remain committed to the organization throughout the change initiative.

How Employees Appraise Change

Often, employees will negatively appraise change, seeing it as a harm or threat to some aspect of their job. The harm is that the change has negatively affected an aspect of their work life (e.g., additional workload), and the threat is of something in their future being negatively affected (e.g., loss of job security). Many would describe feeling a sense of helplessness during these times.

Coping with Negative Appraisals?

Employees use control coping and escape coping as means of alleviating the stress related to their negative appraisal of the organizational change. Control coping occurs when an employee actively engages in the organizational change. For example, an employee who tries to see the change as a time to grow and develop is using a control coping strategy.

Escape coping is avoiding or withdrawing from the change process and taking no action to influence it. For example, an employee is escape coping when he retreats from discussing the change and believes he is powerless in it.

Both control and escape coping have important relationships with emotions in the workplace, in that control coping more often results in positive emotions whereas escape coping often results in negative emotions.

It must be noted that both coping strategies can function to produce positive emotions. For example, an employee can be hopeful in the sense that she sees the change as a time to grow (control), or she can be hopeful in the sense that, in time, things will work themselves out (escape).

Most detrimental to an organization is when employees use escape coping strategies that lead to negative emotions and associated work outcomes such as work withdrawal, abusing sick leave, and turnover.

What Can Managers Do?

The relationship between employees’ negative appraisals of organizational change and workplace outcomes is fully mediated by coping and emotions. This means negative appraisals lead to employee coping and emotions, which in turn cause either positive or negative work outcomes. Therefore, managing employees’ appraisals, coping strategies, and emotions is essential to reduce the negative workplace outcomes such as employee withdrawal, absenteeism, and turnover.

Managers can impact employees’ appraisal of organizational change by:

• Communicating organizational change information in a way that will reduce employee concerns about important job aspects (e.g., job security, job changes, reduced possibility for advancement)
• Articulating a clear vision for the changes and delineating employee roles in the new changed environment allowing employees to clearly understand their new function
• Giving employees a sense of influence and control by involving them in the change process

Managers should attempt to lessen withdrawal by acting as a role model and directly influencing employees’ likelihood to engage in escape coping and associated negative emotions. Managers may do this by:

• Demonstrating more productive nonescape-oriented coping strategies (i.e., viewing the change as an opportunity for growth)
• Answering questions and initiating discussions about the change initiative
• Sharing their own concerns and experiences

In addition, managers should celebrate small victories throughout the change process. By building in these small victories, managers will yield more positive emotions in their employees, therefore reducing withdrawal, and possibly even increasing employee commitment.

Interpretation by:

Lexy Adkins

DeGarmo Group

The following article is a summary of the research and practice implications from: Bond, F., Flaxman, P., Bunce, D. (2008). The Influence of Psychological Flexibility on Work Redesign: Mediated Moderation of a Work Reorganization Intervention. Journal of Applied Psychology. 93(3), 645-654

Organizations are constantly changing. Whether it is a change in systems, positions or employees, these changes can affect the success of the organization if they are not executed properly. When a change, like work redesign, is taking place the amount job control and psychological flexibility an employee possesses can affect the overall success of the project.

What is Job Control?

“Job Control is one’s perceived ability to exert some influence over their work environment, in order to make it more rewarding and less threatening”.

There are various negative outcomes associated with a decrease in job control, such as:

• Mental and physical health problems
• Job dissatisfaction
• Sickness
• Absence
• Poor job performance

Work redesign is the process of determining what is currently happening within the position, determining what should happen in the future, and implementing any necessary changes to bridge the gap. Work redesign is assumed to improve these variables (mental and physical health problems, job dissatisfaction, etc.)  if there is an increase the amount of control that employees have over their work environments.

What is Psychological Flexibility?

“Psychological Flexibility is the ability to focus on the present moment and depending upon what the situation affords, persist with or change one’s behavior in pursuit of goals and values”

People who are psychologically flexible attend to what is occurring right now. How psychologically flexible an employee is can aid in determining their mental health and how effective the employee will be when faced with change because people who are psychologically flexible are:

• Less emotionally disturbed
• Have more attentional resources for observing and reacting to opportunities that relate to company goals

For example, when two positions or jobs are being combined into one; a type of work redesign is taking place. If the employee is not psychologically flexible, they may be hesitant to accept the change because they may be fearful that they will lose their job in the future. If the employee is psychologically flexible, they will be better able to see the goal at hand and not be as focused and apprehensive of what may happen in the future.

How Does Job Control Relate to Psychological Flexibility?

Employees who are psychologically flexible are thought to be more cognizant of the present situation and the goal at hand. If employees with greater flexibility are given more job control they could possess the ability to recognize where, when and the degree to which they are flexible. Consequently, they will be able to recognize more opportunities to pursue behaviors that are goal-oriented. This will, in turn, make their work more rewarding or at the least, less aversive because they are directing both their attention and behavior towards the goal at hand. The more psychological flexibility an employee possesses, the more they will benefit from increased job control.

Implications for Practice

Below are some steps an individual can take to improve employees’ mental health and decrease absence rates within their organization:

1. Increase job control. This can be particularly beneficial when employees are psychologically flexible. This can be done through an intervention that allows employees to participate directly in the work redesign.

2. Improve psychological flexibility. This can be done (preferably before the work redesign) through an intervention, such as ACT – Assessment, Crisis Intervention, and Trauma Treatment. This intervention involves allowing employees to asses their internal processes and experiences at the present moment, in a non-judgmental, non-controlling manner, and focus on the present goal or situation, therefore, increasing their psychological flexibility.

Interpretation by:

Elizabeth Allen

The DeGarmo Group

The following article is a summary of the research and practice implications from: Mayer, D.M., Kuenzi, M., Greenbaum, R., Bardes, M. & Salvador, R.(2009). How low does ethical leadership flow? Test of a trickle-down model. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108(1). 1-13.

Ethical behavior of organizational leaders has increasingly been in the spotlight.  Cases of corporate scandal underscore the importance of understanding the role of ethical (and unethical) behaviors.  By focusing on the ethical leadership within, organizations can better understand their leaders’ role and impact on subordinates’ behavior.

Ethical leadership is defined as the modeling of socially acceptable behavior (e.g., integrity, concern for others) through individual actions and interpersonal relationships, and the reinforcement of such by rewarding and emphasizing ethical behavior through the use of two-way communication and decision-making with subordinates.

Why Ethical Leadership Works

Ethical leadership highlights that behavior displayed through role models (i.e., management, supervisors, co-workers) in the work environment develops the propensity for others to emulate these individuals, and leads to desired and effective organizational behavior.  Furthermore, as individuals in a work group are exposed to sanctions for inappropriate behavior – and rewards for positive behavior – they tend to model the behaviors of those who are in line with accepted behavioral norms (e.g., helping behaviors).

Thus, ethical leaders influence their subordinates specifically by:

• Serving as a model of behavior to subordinates.  Leaders who demonstrate ethical behaviors/decision-making serve as examples for others to emulate.
• Rewarding helpful behaviors and/or punishing unethical behaviors. When leaders establish that positive behaviors are valued and unethical behaviors are not, subordinates are more likely to exhibit, or withhold, such behaviors.
• Creating a propensity for the exchange of good behaviors. Individuals who exhibit beneficial behaviors (e.g., helping) for fellow colleagues pave the way for positive exchanges.

Thus, ethical leaders influence their subordinates’ exchange of behaviors by creating an environment where employees trust that leaders will act in ethical ways and treat them fairly.

The Trickle-down Effect

The influence of ethical leadership is indirect. It trickles down through top management and flows through supervisory leaders who influence the behavior of employees by way of direct, day-to-day interaction.

Although executive leadership has a broad influence on the organization as a whole, they can also influence immediate supervisors and lower-level employees at a more personal level.  Because front-line managers generally have more immediate and close relationships with lower-level employees, the effects that executives have on lower level employees are highlighted through the impact they have on front-line managers. Therefore, supervisors can be viewed as an instrument by which the ethical leadership of upper management relates to the behaviors of employees.

Implications for Practice

Organizations can use this understanding of ethical leadership to improve the behaviors of members by:

• Hiring leaders with strong ethical values.

Including pre-employment selection practices which foster the employment of ethical leaders by assessing integrity, moral standards, and concern for others by using integrity tests, structured interviews, or in-basket exercises with an emphasis on ethics can increase the likelihood of hiring ethical leaders.

• Offer training to current management, supervisors, and employees.

Ethical training has tended to focus on employees, but not management. By training management on communicating the importance of ethics, reinforcing ethical behavior, and modeling ethical behavior there is a greater likelihood the effects on ethical leadership will trickle down.

Interpretation by:

Adam Bradshaw

The DeGarmo Group

The following article is a summary of the research and practice implications from: Maslach, C. & Leiter, M. (2008). Early Predictors of Job Burnout and Engagement.  Journal of Applied Psychology. Vol. 93 (3), 498 – 512.

Occupational stress is becoming somewhat of an epidemic in today’s organizations. Not only does stress impair employee performance, it is also linked to negative effects on employees’ health and well-being. These negative outcomes result from workers being faced with job demands they perceive as beyond their control. Although the relationship may seem simple (stress at work à adverse consequences), this may not always be the case. Mediating factors may be playing a significant role in this relationship. Identifying these factors can be critical in recognizing and minimizing burnout, while increasing engagement.

Burnout and its Facets

“Burnout is a psychological syndrome that is a response to interpersonal stressors that are encountered on the job over a prolonged period of time.”

Two primary facets of burnout are exhaustion and cynicism. When one of the two facets is present, it can be an early warning sign for burnout, however, does not ensure that burnout will occur. For example, if one is experiencing unfair treatment in the workplace, he or she may begin to become cynical. This does not necessarily lead to exhaustion, and there is a low likelihood that burnout will occur, however, organizations should take cautionary measures to ensure this does not happen.

On the other hand, if one is experiencing unfair treatment (leading to cynicism), and the work demands are high (leading to exhaustion),

burnout is much more likely. The two facets seem to work with one another and in many cases actually reinforce one another.

What is the “Tipping Point”?

If employees are experiencing one of the two facets of burnout (exhaustion or cynicism) AND the position or job does not match their knowledge or skills, they will ultimately reach a “tipping point” and burnout will ensue. This could be because they are experiencing additional stress because they are unable to handle the position successfully.

What Does Engagement have to do with Stress?

“Engagement is the energetic state of involvement with personally fulfilling activities that enhance one’s sense of personal efficacy.”

Engagement is the converse of burnout. Many employers strive to “engage” their employees so they are satisfied with their position. To determine if employees are engaged, we must look at the facets of burnout. If BOTH cynicism and exhaustion are present then burnout is likely to occur, however, if BOTH are absent then engagement is likely to occur.

Implications for Practice

Several important implications come from this research.

First, if the warning signs of burnout are indentified early on, they can be prevented and even transformed into engagement. Using burnout measures, such as the Maslach Burnout Inventory –General Survey, can identify these early indicators.

• If scores reveal EITHER exhaustion or cynicism, then changing the employee’s situation should be considered, while the change is still relatively easy to implement.
• If scores reveal a “tipping point” pattern (the person’s knowledge and skills do not match the demands of the position and a facet, either cynicism or exhaustion, is present) then immediate action should be taken because employees in this state are extremely susceptible to burnout.
• If scores reveal BOTH exhaustion and cynicism, then the intervention will have to be more intensive and extensive – the change will be more difficult.

It is important to not only look at individual employees, but also groups or units of employees to identify if a team or work-group is experiencing burnout. This may require the implementation of a broader, organizational intervention rather than the individual intervention discussed previously.

Finally, increased burnout will result in a more negative evaluation of the workplace, whereas increased engagement will not change the evaluation of the organization. Therefore, it is imperative that organizations intervene prior to burnout as an employee’s negative view of their workplace can adversely affect both their production and performance.

Final Thoughts

As is the case with many interventions, early detection of burnout is crucial. This will aid in prevention of problems before they become too serious. Repeated burnout assessments on a regular basis can ensure that this detection occurs. If an employee possesses the potential for burnout, then individual corrective action can be taken. The good news is that burnout is detectable and if interventions are correctly implemented, preventable.

Interpretation by:

Elizabeth Allen

The DeGarmo Group

The following article is a summary of the research and practice implications from: Durks, K.T., Lewicki, R.J., Zaheer, A. (2009). Repairing Relationships Within and Between Organizations: Building a Conceptual Foundation. Academy of Management Review, 34(1), 68-84. (2008).

Relationships are contingent on different levels of trust, affect (a.k.a. emotions), and varying degrees of exchange between those involved.  This social and/or economic exchange at the organizational level is a sensitive bond and should be examined carefully.  Differing “breaks” in a relational bond bring about differing outcomes (e.g., loss of trust); thereby constituting an examination of what form of relationship repair is appropriate.

Relationship repair involves actions by one or both parties to return the relationship to a positive state after disruption causes an influx of negativity.

Defining Relational Breaks

The result of a relationship break brings about differing outcomes (e.g., negative emotions), which require different actions to repair the relationship.  Although there is overlap in outcomes with each type of disruption (i.e., lack of trust may lead to negative affect), it is important to examine each break individually.

• Break in trust: relational disruption leads to one or more parties perceiving the other as untrustworthy creating skepticism of integrity.
• Break in positive affect: negative emotions (e.g., anger, frustration) surface and inhibit smooth business and social interactions.
• Break in exchange: cooperation ceases, slows, or becomes destructive, thereby inhibiting productive exchange.

Repairing the Relationship

Through careful examination of the break in organizational bonds it is possible for damaged relationships to move forward by reestablishing trust, affect, and exchange.  Varying tactics to effectively repair each process include:

• Responsible party offers a sincere apology for the untrustworthy actions, clearly displaying penance, and makes plan to restore the trust between them.
• The guilty party displays appropriate actions (e.g., fines), exhibiting penance, and giving open apologies in an attempt to restore social equilibrium within the relationship thereby attempting to restore positive emotions.
• Counterbalance any mistakes through legalistic remedies.  That is, implement “controls” (e.g., policies, procedures, contracts, monitoring) that inhibit future negative behavior and ensure positive, productive exchange.

Examining Repair Temporally

Understanding the dynamics of the disruption in times of the relational repair is important, but an overall examination at every stage is crucial to preventing disruptions from happening in the first place, repairing disruptions while occurring, and preventing those disruptions from happening again. Aspects to evaluate at each stage of disruption are:

• Pre-disruption: what was the original state of trust, affect, and exchange?
• Disruption: what factors contribute to the disruption?
• Repair: what tactics are used to repair the disruption?
• Post-repair: what is the new state of trust, affect, and exchange?

Take Away Points

Organizations repairing a problematic relationship with another party should:

1. Ensure an understanding of where the problem has arisen.  That is, which areas of the relationship (e.g., trust, affect, or exchange) are causing a lack of cooperation?
2. Take appropriate actions in order to repair the specified problem areas.  Ensure all domains are properly repaired, to prevent relationship relapses.
3. Evaluate the process as a whole to ensure a complete understanding of the relationship before, during, and after the repair process.

Interpretation by:

Adam Bradshaw

The DeGarmo Group

The following article is a summary of the research and practice implications from: Bordia, P., Restubog, S., Tang, R. (2008). When Employees Strike Back: Investigating Mediating Mechanisms Between Psychological Contract Breach and Workplace Deviance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93 (5). 1104-1117.

Employee perceptions largely govern the workplace – if an employee perceives they are being treated unfairly in the workplace their first reaction may be to retaliate.  These reactions can be manifested in workplace deviance, which negatively impacts other individuals in the organization, as well as the organization as a whole.

What Is Workplace Deviance?

Workplace deviance behaviors are acts based on intentions to cause damage, discomfort, or punishment to the organization or other individuals within the organization. Deviant behaviors can include smaller offenses like intentionally working slower or could be as drastic as sabotage of work.

Why Does Deviant Behavior Occur?

Workplace deviance will often occur when employees feel a psychological contract has been violated. A psychological contract is a set of beliefs or unstated agreement between the employee and the organization (or individuals within the organization) of their obligations to one another. A common psychological contract many employees possess is: If they complete their tasks on time and work hard, they will receive a paycheck and remain an employee of the organization.

Because the psychological contract is often vague and based on the perceptions/beliefs of the individual, it is often hard to determine or control exactly what the employee will perceive as fair. Deviance may occur when the employee perceives they are maintaining their part of the agreement, while the organization or other individuals within the organization are not.

Over time, perceptions of unfairness and inequitable treatment trigger deviant behaviors. Perceiving a breach in the psychological contract, the employee sets out to reestablish equity within the workplace. As a result, disengagement, anger, revenge and other negative behaviors may transpire, bringing full attention to the employee and situation at hand. The outcome and severity of the deviant behaviors are dependent upon a variety of factors, including individual differences (some individuals may be more disposed to engage in deviant behaviors) and the severity of the situation.

Practical Implications

Employees engaging in deviant work behaviors can have detrimental consequences to both the organization and other workers. The good news is that there are ways to minimize or even prevent these deviant behaviors.

• Communication. The first, and perhaps most obvious solution, is for the employer to attempt to fulfill the psychological contract. Since the employer may not always know what the employee perceives or believes, this may not always be possible. Therefore, it may be useful for employers to reduce negative feelings when they know a psychological contract has been violated by explaining to the employee why it occurred and attempting to “make up” for this breach. Finally, employers can strive to create an environment where employees are able to express their concerns, anger or frustrations to a trusted supervisor. This can be done through various means, such as employee attitude surveys or anonymous comment boxes.

• Selection.  Hiring employees that have self-control is important because these individuals will be more likely to self-regulate their negative emotional reactions in less than ideal situations.

• Training. Providing training to current employees in emotional regulation when there is a perceived violation of the psychological contract can be useful.  Additionally, training supervisors to listen and respond to employee concerns or perceived violations can allow them to monitor for any indication of a perceived contract breach and to intervene when the situation arises, perhaps preventing the deviant behavior from occurring entirely.

When attempting to prevent these behaviors it is most important to remember that the psychological contract is based on beliefs and perceptions of the employee. Therefore, the organization should do their best to not only monitor these feelings, but also be explicit with their policies and attempt to mold these perceptions into realistic beliefs and expectations.

Interpretation by:

Elizabeth Allen

The DeGarmo Group