No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

This study investigated the contributions that cognitive ability, social connectedness, and social exclusion make to employee workplace deviance. Positive correlations were predicted between social exclusion and workplace deviance. Participants with low cognitive ability were expected to respond to social exclusion with higher rates of deviance than persons with higher cognitive functioning. In addition, participants scoring high in social connectedness were expected to engage in less deviant behavior than those who generally feel disconnected from their environment. The measurements employed included the following: the Wonderlic Personnel Test, the Social Connectedness Scale, and the Bennett and Robinson (2000) Workplace Deviance Scale. Undergraduate participants were administered a series of vignettes and measures. Social condition was manipulated according to two levels (inclusion and exclusion). The results demonstrated no significant correlation between intelligence and CWB or social connectedness and CWB. Stronger correlations were observed between the social exclusion and workplace deviance. In addition, a significant interaction was detected in which persons with low cognitive ability who felt social disconnected were more likely to engage in organizational deviance under conditions of social exclusion than their socially connected counterparts with higher cognitive functioning.

To stay competitive, many employers are looking for creative and innovative employees to add value to their organization. However, current models of job performance overlook creative performance as an important criterion to measure in the workplace. The purpose of this dissertation is to conduct two separate but related studies on creative performance that aim to provide support that creative performance should be included in models of job performance, and ultimately included in performance evaluations in organizations. Study 1 is a meta-analysis on the relationship between creative performance and task performance, and the relationship between creative performance and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB). Overall, I found support for a medium to large corrected correlation for both the creative performance-task performance (ρ = .51) and creative performance-OCB (ρ = .49) relationships. Further, I also found that both rating-source and study location were significant moderators. Study 2 is a process model that includes creative performance alongside task performance and OCB as the outcome variables. I test a model in which both individual differences (specifically: conscientiousness, extraversion, proactive personality, and self-efficacy) and job characteristics (autonomy, feedback, and supervisor support) predict creative performance, task performance, and OCB through engagement as a mediator. In a sample of 299 employed individuals, I found that all the individual differences and job characteristics were positively correlated with all three performance criteria. I also looked at these relationships in a multiple regression framework and most of the individual differences and job characteristics still predicted the performance criteria. In the mediation analyses, I found support for engagement as a significant mediator of the individual differences-performance and job characteristics-performance relationships. Taken together, Study 1 and Study 2 support the notion that creative performance should be included in models of job performance. Implications for both researchers and practitioners alike are discussed.

The present study tested a nomological net of work engagement that was derived from its extant research. Two of the main work engagement models that have been presented and empirically tested in the literature, the JD-R model and Kahn’s model, were integrated to test the effects that job features and personal characteristics can have on work engagement through the psychological conditions of meaningfulness, safety, and availability. In this study, safety refers to psychological perceptions of safety and not workplace safety behaviors. The job features that were tested in this model included person-job fit, autonomy, co-worker relations, supervisor support, procedural justice, and interactional justice, while the personal characteristics consisted of self-consciousness, self-efficacy, extraversion, and neuroticism. Thirty-four hypotheses and a conceptual model were tested in order to establish the viability of this nomological net of work engagement in which it was expected that meaningfulness would mediate the relationships between job features and work engagement, safety would mediate the relationships that job features and personal characteristics have with work engagement, and availability (physical, emotional, and cognitive resources) would mediate the relationships that personal characteristics have with work engagement. Furthermore, analyses were run in order to determine the factor structure of work engagement, assess whether or not it exhibits differential validity from organizational commitment and job satisfaction, and confirm that it is positively related to the outcome variable of organizational citizenship behavior (OCB). The final sample consisted of 500 workers from an online labor market who responded to a questionnaire composed of measures of all constructs included in this study. Findings show that work engagement is best represented as a three-factor construct, composed of vigor, dedication and absorption. Furthermore, support was found for the distinction of work engagement from the related constructs of organizational commitment and job satisfaction. With regard to the proposed model, meaningfulness proved to be the strongest predictor of work engagement. Results show that it partially mediates the relationships that all job features have with work engagement. Safety proved to be a partial mediator of the relationships that autonomy, co-worker relations, supervisor support, procedural justice, interactional justice, and self-efficacy have with work engagement, and fully mediate the relationship between neuroticism and work engagement. Findings also show that availability partially mediates the positive relationships that extraversion and self-efficacy have with work engagement, and fully mediates the negative relationship that neuroticism has with work engagement. Finally, a positive relationship was found between work engagement and OCB. Research and organizational implications are discussed.

No description available.

No description available.

<p>Past theory and research have documented several stereotypes that explain why biases against Asian Americans (AAs) in U.S. organizations can occur, such as the Model Minority Stereotype (MMS) and Perpetual Foreigner Syndrome (PFS). The current project expands on past work by proposing a new perspective of stereotypes driving (mis)treatment of AAs: Mechanistic dehumanization. Specifically, I argue that AAs are seen as more robot-like compared to other racial groups in the U.S., which may explain some of the negative workplace treatments they face. To test this phenomenon, I conducted a set of five pre-registered studies to examine the extent to which AAs tend to be more mechanistically dehumanized than other racial groups in the U.S., and its workplace implications. In a pilot study (N = 1,003), the results revealed that East, South, and Southeast AAs tended to be mechanistically dehumanized and internalized this dehumanization more than other groups. In Study 1 (Study 1a, N= 255; Study 1b, N = 427), a survey and experimental study provided support that AA coworkers are more mechanistically dehumanized than White American coworkers, and this mediated the relationship between coworker race and negative work outcomes (e.g., less perceived leadership potential, more exploitative treatment, and less workplace friendship). In another survey study, Study 2 (N = 473) found that mechanistic dehumanization exhibited incremental validity in predicting negative work outcomes for AAs, above and beyond MMS and PFS. Finally, in Study 3 (N = 477), an all-Asian sample found that AAs’ internalization of mechanistic dehumanization predicted more negative work outcomes (e.g., increased burnout, less workplace friendship), above and beyond MMS and PFS. Altogether, the current work supports a mechanistic dehumanization account of bias against AAs, reveals racial subgroup differences, and provides a novel explanation for why AAs experience certain workplace inequities. </p>

Industrial-organizational psychologist Stephen S.W. Gilliland developed a model for studying job-seeker fairness perceptions in 1993 based on existing research in organizational justice. The model includes several rules which will result in job-seeker perceptions of fairness if satisfied and job-seeker perceptions of unfairness if violated. Given the prominence of this model in the literature as well as changes which have occurred in personnel selection (such as human resource information systems, or HRIS, and e-recruitment), scholars have called for a technological re-envisioning of the original model, especially the explanations/descriptions ascribed to each rule. The present study seeks to understand how HRIS e-recruitment technology impacts job-seeker fairness perceptions and in so doing update the Gilliland (1993) model using a qualitative methodology and website success measures from information systems success theory. It contributes to the literature on applicant fairness perceptions by accounting for technological change, and contributes to the field of Public Administration by studying a governmental e-recruitment portal thereby accounting for the particularities of public-sector HRM which is underrepresented in the organizational justice literature. Over the course of one (1) year, twelve (12) job-seekers participated in a series of focus group interviews where they reflected on their experiences applying for jobs in the Canadian federal civil service using the government’s e-recruitment portal. Participants completed profiles, sent applications, communicated with government personnel, and wrote internet tests, among other job-search activities, and reported on their experiences from the perspective of fairness. Results confirm the validity of all original procedural justice rules and offer insight into their application in a recruitment environment where applicants invest considerable time interacting with computerized systems. Two additional rules are also put forth including the ease with which candidates can deceive tests and privacy/trustworthiness using technology. The findings are limited insofar as data gathering took place during a time of reduced hiring activity by the employer and because participation was limited to one (1) specific geographic location.