Planned organizational level misbehavior Contagion to Planned individual level misbehavior among state run school teachers

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

• Ali Yasini
• Z Tulayee

Assistant prof in educational administration

Abstract

This paper examines the transmission or contagion of organizational misbehavior (OMB) among school’s members. Research method was descriptive – correlation and all of high school teachers were made the population of study which 220 of them were selected via clustering sampling method. To collect the data, standardizes scales was used and data analyzed through hierarchical linear modeling (HLM).Results shows that organizationally directed misbehavior is partially spread through social information in that the relationship between the work group’s ODM and the focal individual’s ODM was partially mediated by all three forms of social information. The work group’s ODM creates social information (direct observation, indirect knowledge and prevalence of these behaviors) that is perceived by other members of the work group. That social information is positively related to the ODM of a focal group member. Interpersonally directed misbehavior is spread through direct observation and prevalence of IDM as the IDM of the work group and the focal individual was fully mediated by these two types of social information but not by the indirect knowledge of IDM. Taken together, these findings indicate that the work group’s misbehavior creates social information (direct observation, indirect knowledge and prevalence of these behaviors) that is perceived by other members of the work group. That social information is positively related to the misbehavior of a focal group member.

Keywords

• organizational misbehavior
• social contagion
• social information
• group cohensive

20.1001.1.20086369.1397.9.33.3.2

---

References

-                      Ambrose, M. L., Seabright, M. A., & Schminke, M. (2002). Sabotage in the workplace: The role of organizational injustice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 89: 947-965.

-                      Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., & Son, C. (2000). Honesty as the sixth factor of personality: Correlations with Machiavellianism, primary psychopathy, and social adroitness. European Journal of Personality, 14: 359-368.

-                      Bandura, A. (1973). Aggression: A social learning analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

-                      Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

-                      Bies, R. J. & Tripp, T. M. (1998). Revenge in organizations: The good, the bad and the ugly. In R. W. Griffin & A. O'Leary-Kelly & J. Collins (Eds.), Dysfunctional Behavior in Organizations: Violent and Deviant Behavior: 49-67. Stamford, CT: JAI Press.

-                      Boye, M. W. & Slora, K. B. (1993). The severity and prevalence of deviant employee activity within supermarkets. Journal of Business and Psychology, 8: 245-253.

-                      Brett, J. M. & Stroh, L. K. (2003). Working 61 plus hours a week: Why do managers do it? Journal of Applied Psychology, 88: 67-78.

-                      Dabney, D. 1995. Workplace deviance among nurses: The influence of work group norms on drug diversion and or use. Journal of Nursing Administration, 25: 48-55.

-                      Douglas, S. C. & Martinko, M. J. (2001). Exploring the role of individual differences in the prediction of workplace aggression. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86: 547-559.

-                      Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7: 117-140.

-                      Fisher, J. D. & Baron, R. A. (1982). An equity-based model of vandalism. Population and Environment Journal, 5: 182-200.

-                      Friedman, R., Simons, T., & Liu, L. (2003). Behavior integrity as a driver of cross-race differences in employee attitudes. Paper presented at the Academy of Management Annual Meetings, Seattle.

-                      Gharib, A. (2015). Presenting a group level misbehavior model among employees' of stat - run university of Mazandaran. Thsis submitted for M.A degree in Human resource management, Ilam University. (In Persian))

-                      Gholipour, A., Pourezat, A.A., Saeidinejad, M. (2006). Effecting factors on anti- citizenship bahaviors in organizations. Iraninan Journal of Management Science. 2 (8): 1-29. (In Persian)

-                      Hollinger, R. C. (1991). Neutralizing in the workplace: An empirical analysis of property theft and production deviance. Deviant Behaviour: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 12: 169-202.

-                      Kidwell, R. E. & Bennett, N. (1993). Employee propensity to withhold effort: A conceptual model to intersect three avenues of research. Academy of Management Review, 18: 429-456.

-                      Latane, B. (2000). Pressures to uniformity and the evolution of cultural norms: Modeling dynamic social impact. In D. R. Ilgen & C. L. Hulin (Eds.), Computational modeling of behavior in organizations. Washington, D.C.: The American Psychological Association.

-                      Lee, K. & Allen, N. J. (2002). Organizational citizenship behavior and workplace deviance: The role of affect and cognitions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87: 131-142.

-                      Lewicki, R. J., Poland, T., Minton, J. W., & Sheppard, B. (1997). Dishonesty as deviance: A typology of workplace dishonesty and contributing factors. In R. Lewicki & B. Sheppard & M. Bazerman (Eds.), Research on Negotiation in Organizations, 6: 53-86. Greenwich, Ct: JAI Press, Inc.

-                      Milgram, S., Bickman, L., & Berkowitz, L. (1969). Note on the drawing power of crowds of different size. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 13: 79-82.

-                      Pearson, C. M., Andersson, L. M., & Wegner, J. W. (2001). When workers flout convention: A study of workplace incivility. Human Relations Journal, 54: 1387-1419.

-                      Rayner, C. & Keashly, L. (2005). Bullying at work: A perspective from Britain and North America. In S. Fox & P. E. Spector (Eds.), Counterproductive Work Behavior: Investigations of Actors and Targets: 271-296. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

-                      Redl, F. (1949). The phenomenon of contagion and "shock effect" in group therapy. In K. F. Eissler (Ed.), Searchlights on delinquency. New York: International Universities Press.

-                      Salancik, G. & Pfeffer, J. (1978). A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23: 224-253.

-                      Slora, K. B. (1989). An empirical approach to determining employee deviance base rates. Journal of Business and Psychology, 4 (1): 199-219.

-                      Tepper, B. J. (2000). Consequences of abusive supervision. Academy of Management Journal, 43: 178-190.

-                      Wheeler, L. (1966). Toward a theory of behavioral contagion. Psychological Review, 73:179-192.

-                      Yasini, A. (2016). Presenting a model of organizational misbehavior among secondary school teachers, Journal of management and Planing in education systems. 4 (6): 23-42. (In Persian)