The concept of cognitive organizational obstruction is developed in this dissertation. Cognitive organizational obstruction is defined as an employees global belief that the organization obstructs, hinders or interferes with the accomplishment of his or her goals and objectives and is a detriment to his or her well-being. In addition to developing the COO construct, COO is theoretically differentiated from the related constructs of psychological contract breach, perceived organizational support, organizational politics and organizational frustration.
In addition to being theoretically distinct, a new concept should be empirically differentiated from existing related constructs. The development of the COO scale is described. One major implicit assumption running throughout the theoretical development of the cognitive organizational obstruction construct is that employees distinguish between the treatment received from the organization and from agents of the organization. Employees ability to differentiate between similarly conceptualized constructs of cognitive organizational obstruction, cognitive supervisor obstruction (CSO) and organizational frustration is assessed. A cognitive supervisor obstruction scale is created by changing the referent of the COO scale from organization to supervisor. Results suggest that employees are able to distinguish between these sources of obstruction and frustration.
The results from a validation study are presented next. The main objective of this study is to validate the COO scale and empirically distinguish COO from the related constructs of organizational frustration, perceived organizational support (POS), psychological contract breach (PCB), and perceived organizational politics (POP). Results suggest that employees are able to distinguish between these concepts.
Additional analysis evaluates whether COO explains additional variance beyond POS, PCB, POP and frustration is described next. The overarching hypothesis of this study is: COO explains additional variance in the exit, voice, loyalty and neglect outcome framework beyond the existing constructs of psychological contract breach, perceived organizational support, organizational politics and organizational frustration. More specific hypotheses are developed and tested using hierarchical multiple linear regression. Results suggest that COO explains additional variance for exit, voice and neglect, but not loyalty.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:PITT/oai:PITTETD:etd-04302007-162754 |
| Date | 07 September 2007 |
| Creators | GIbney, Raymond Francis |
| Contributors | Marick F. Masters, Robert R. Albright, Audrey J. Murrell, Frits K. Pil, Carrie R. Leana |
| Publisher | University of Pittsburgh |
| Source Sets | University of Pittsburgh |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Source | http://etd.library.pitt.edu/ETD/available/etd-04302007-162754/ |
| Rights | unrestricted, I hereby certify that, if appropriate, I have obtained and attached hereto a written permission statement from the owner(s) of each third party copyrighted matter to be included in my thesis, dissertation, or project report, allowing distribution as specified below. I certify that the version I submitted is the same as that approved by my advisory committee. I hereby grant to University of Pittsburgh or its agents the non-exclusive license to archive and make accessible, under the conditions specified below, my thesis, dissertation, or project report in whole or in part in all forms of media, now or hereafter known. I retain all other ownership rights to the copyright of the thesis, dissertation or project report. I also retain the right to use in future works (such as articles or books) all or part of this thesis, dissertation, or project report. |
Page generated in 0.0116 seconds