This study sought to examine the relationship between employee deviance within restaurants and the components of social learning theory. The behaviors examined in this research were based on the research of Robinson and Bennett (1995, 2000) who defined employee deviance as two different categories of behavior – one directed against the organization (organizational deviance, production deviance, and property deviance), and the other directed against coworkers (interpersonal deviance). While the literature on employee deviance in restaurants is limited, very few studies take into account more than one type of deviant behavior. In addition, some studies suggest that social learning theory may play a role, but few, if any, studies have examined the relationship between this theory and the types of deviance that are prevalent in the restaurant industry. Therefore, the current study was one of the first examinations of the process of social learning within the restaurant industry, making a contribution to the literature on social learning theory and employee deviance in restaurants. This dissertation used a survey methodology to understand the extent of involvement in deviant behavior by restaurant employees, their coworkers’ involvement in a number of deviant behaviors, the perceived reaction of managers and coworkers to these behaviors, and individual attitudes and perceived attitudes of coworkers of deviance in the restaurant. The survey was administered via the Internet to a random sample of college students. Only those with experience in the restaurant industry were able to participate in the study. The results from this study suggest that while employee deviance occurs in the restaurant industry, it is not prevalent. Although restaurant employees may be involved in certain types of deviance more than others, they are not deviant often. In addition, only two of the measures of social learning, “imitation” and “definitions”, were significant in explaining increased involvement in employee deviance. This indicated that these two components help to understand employee deviance in restaurants more than the other social learning components. / Dr. Jamie Martin Dr. Jennifer Roberts Dr. Erika Frenzel Dr. Timothy Austin

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Joint Doctoral Program in Educational Leadership (California State University, Fresno and University of California, Davis). / Typescript. Includes bibliographical references. Also available via the World Wide Web. (Restricted to UC campuses).

Thesis--PlanB (M.S.)--University of Wisconsin--Stout, 2004. / Field problem. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M.A.)--California State University, Chico. / Includes abstract. "Located in the Chico Digital Repository." Includes bibliographical references (p. 61 -66. ).

Thesis--PlanB (M.S.)--University of Wisconsin--Stout, 2001. / Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M.A. (S.W.))--University of Pretoria, 2003.

Thesis (M.S.W.)--University of Hong Kong, 1988.

This study attempts to examine the extent to which an advice network of housing professionals working for different organizational groups, from both structural and behavioural perspectives, varies with the motivation for public service delivery in different publicness settings. Over the last two decades, public service motivation has attracted considerable research attention with a wide-ranging discussion in the realm of construct, incidence, antecedent, outcome and organizational system. However, there has been far less research on its variations in different settings, and integrations with other disciplines. In the face of the growing complexity of sector blurring heightened by the new public management’s principles, the traditional organization theories are inadequate to give explanations for organizations which are neither public nor private. In this study, the concept of dimensional publicness has been employed to classify organizations into different levels of publicness along a continuum rather than a rigid dichotomous categorization for studying the variations of public service motivation in different publicness settings. Research on networks has been growing apace recently by reason of its importance to knowledge transfer and management. Employees are eager to turn to others and maintain network relationships within and between organizations for advice favourable to work-related benefits. Through network activities, they may seek advice from others and realize afterwards that they may improve the quality of service delivery if they exhibit public service motivation related behaviour. While there is an assumption of a link between networks and public service motivation, it is an unexplored research area and therefore has no empirical evidence to support it. To shed light on the link, this study has examined the effects of networks from both behavioural and structural perspectives on public service motivation when publicness is taken into account. A survey study was used to collect data from all Corporate Members of the Hong Kong Institute of Housing. In total, 357 out of 1,649 questionnaires were returned, fully completed and usable. The findings are summarized as follows: First, publicness has a positive and significant effect on public service motivation. Second, network behaviour is found significantly varying with public service motivation when publicness applies. Third, network structure has a strong and significant effect on public service motivation. No matter which of the perspective of networks is examined, public service motivation always varies positively with the degree of network activities. Last, there is an interaction effect of publicness and network characteristics on public service motivation, but the significance focuses on the structurally equivalent classes, no matter which network behaviour they exhibit, in the low publicness setting. The discussion gives implications of these findings for the study of public service motivation from the perspectives of networks and publicness in the context of Hong Kong. / published_or_final_version / Kadoorie Institute / Doctoral / Doctor of Philosophy

Not available / text

Formal controls are essential for well-functioning organizations, but research finds that they can negatively impact controlled individuals’ (agents) behavior. Specifically, controls can reduce agents’ intrinsic motivation to exert effort for employers (principals). In this dissertation, I investigate how agents’ beliefs about the intentionality of control influence their response to it. Further, I examine whether principals anticipate agents’ responses and adjust their risk-taking behavior accordingly. Using three interactive experiments, I examine the effects of control intentionality on agents’ effort and principals’ risk-taking. In the first experiment, I focus on the effects of intentions and control, without permitting principals to transfer resources to agents. In the second and third experiments, principals take risk by entrusting resources to agents. Further, in the third experiment, I investigate the beliefs that influence participants’ actions. In each experiment, I manipulate agents’ beliefs about control intentionality by varying the control source across three conditions. In the first condition, principals endogenously impose control, which can clearly be perceived as a distrusting signal. In the second condition, control is imposed exogenously by a computer and therefore cannot be interpreted negatively. In the third condition, the control source is unclear to the agent, such that it may be imposed by the principal or computer. I find that intentionality influences agents’ response to control. Specifically, in the first experiment, when control is imposed exogenously, agents exert high effort. However, agents’ effort diminishes when control can be interpreted as a negative signal, even if the source is ambiguous. Moreover, when the principal unambiguously imposes control, agents exert less effort than if no control is imposed. The second experiment reveals that this dysfunctional effect of intentional control persists when principals entrust resources to agents. Despite these negative effects, principals prefer to impose control. However, principals appear to accurately predict how control intentionality affects agents and take more risk when they have chosen not to impose control or when it is imposed by an exogenous or ambiguous source than when they have intentionally imposed it. Results from the second and third experiments indicate that principals’ risk-taking is influenced by their beliefs about agent opportunism. / text