Conflicts at work PDF

01 14.10 Introduction & Kick-off 02 24.10 Conflicts at work **1. Explain the difference between task, relationship, process, and status conflict and give a workplace example for each type of conflict.** +-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+ | Type of Conflict...

01 14.10 Introduction & Kick-off 02 24.10 Conflicts at work **1. Explain the difference between task, relationship, process, and status conflict and give a workplace example for each type of conflict.** +-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+ | Type of Conflict | Explanation | Example | +=======================+=======================+=======================+ | **Task** | This type of conflict | In a project team, | | | arises from | two members disagree | | **Conflict** | disagreements about | about the approach to | | | the content of tasks, | a marketing campaign | | | including opinions | -- one favours a | | | about goals, ideas, | digital-first | | | or the direction of | strategy while the | | | work. | other believes | | | | traditional media | | | | should play a larger | | | | role. | +-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+ | **Relationship | This conflict stems | Two colleagues on a | | Conflict** | from interpersonal | team do not get along | | | incompatibilities and | due to personality | | | emotional tensions | clashes, leading to | | | among team members. | an uncomfortable | | | | atmosphere that | | | | affects | | | | collaboration. | +-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+ | **Process Conflict** | This type refers to | During a product | | | disagreements about | development meeting, | | | how tasks should be | team members argue | | | completed, including | over who should | | | logistics, roles, and | manage the project | | | responsibilities. | timeline and the | | | | specific roles each | | | | person should take | | | | on. | +-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+ | **Status Conflict** | This involves | A senior team member | | | disputes over | feels threatened by a | | | members' relative | newer member who is | | | positions in the | gaining recognition | | | social hierarchy of | for their | | | the team, often tied | contributions, | | | to power dynamics and | leading to tension | | | perceived prestige. | and competition for | | | | leadership roles | | | | within the team. | +-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+ **2. What are antecedents of a) task conflict, b) relationship conflict, c) process conflict, d) status conflict?** Antecedents of Team Composition Team Behaviours Team Atmosphere --------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ **Task Conflict** Teams with diverse backgrounds (e.g., national, cultural) tend to experience more task conflict due to differing perspectives. High levels of communication and open discussions can lead to task conflicts as members share differing opinions. A climate that encourages debate and discussion can foster task conflict. **Relationship Conflict** Teams with members who have high levels of negative affectivity or low levels of agreeableness may experience more relationship conflicts. Poor emotional regulation and aggressive conflict management strategies can lead to increased relationship conflict. A competitive or low-trust environment can heighten interpersonal tensions. **Process Conflict** Teams with high power individuals or unclear roles may face more process conflicts due to disagreements about responsibilities. Ineffective communication and unclear decision-making processes can lead to process conflicts. High levels of competition and low cohesion can exacerbate process conflict. **Status Conflict** Teams with many high-power individuals may experience more status conflict due to competition for influence. Behaviours that assert dominance or challenge the status quo can lead to status conflict. An environment where status is highly valued or ambiguous can lead to disputes over hierarchy. **\ ** **3. When are a) task conflicts, b) relationship conflict, c) process conflicts, d) status conflicts beneficial or less harmful for team outcomes?** Conditions Team Composition Team Behaviours Team Atmosphere --------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- **Task Conflict** Beneficial when they occur in a trusting atmosphere and do not escalate into personal or emotional disagreements. Teams with diverse skill sets where members respect each other\'s expertise. When members use effective conflict management strategies that focus on the task. High levels of psychological safety promote beneficial task conflicts. **Relationship Conflict** Less harmful when emotionality is low, and team members have effective emotional regulation. When teams include members with high emotional intelligence. Using avoidance strategies can mitigate negative impacts. A supportive atmosphere that encourages positive interactions can reduce the harmful effects. **Process Conflict** May be beneficial in early stages of team formation where roles are being established. Teams where roles are unclear may benefit from process conflict to clarify responsibilities. When members engage in constructive discussions about processes rather than personal attacks. A collaborative atmosphere can help resolve process conflicts effectively. **Status Conflict** Less harmful when status competition is based on merit and open communication is encouraged. Teams with clear hierarchies and defined roles can manage status conflicts better. Collaborative behaviours that emphasize teamwork over individual prestige can mitigate status conflicts. An environment that values contributions over hierarchy can reduce the detrimental effects of status conflicts. **4. According to the meta-analysis of Wit et al. (2012), a) how are task, relationship, and process conflicts related to satisfaction, trust, and group performance? b) When are task conflicts positively related to group performance?** a. The meta-analysis found that: - Task Conflicts: can have a neutral effect on satisfaction and trust, but may improve group performance under certain conditions, particularly when not accompanied by relationship conflicts. - Relationship Conflicts: generally have a negative impact on satisfaction, trust, and group performance due to emotional tensions and interpersonal issues. - Process Conflicts: consistently harm group performance and satisfaction, as they often lead to issues regarding task coordination and member responsibilities. - Status conflicts b. Task conflicts are positively related to group performance when: - They are managed effectively and do not escalate into personal or emotional disputes. - They occur in teams with high levels of trust and open communication. - They are present in non-routine tasks where diverse perspectives can enhance creativity & problem-solving. 03 31.10 Mistreatment in organizations 1 **1. What are forms of workplace mistreatment? How do these forms of mistreatment differ in terms of intensity, intent and perpetrators?** Forms of Workplace Mistreatment: - Incivility: rude behaviour with ambiguous intent. - Ostracism: explicit exclusion or implicit avoidance. - Abusive Supervision: sustained aggressive behaviour from a supervisor. - Bullying: repeated and enduring hostile acts toward an individual with less power. - Physical Aggression: aggressive physical acts, regardless of injury. - Interpersonal Deviance: aggression enacted toward others. - Sexual/Gender Harassment: gender-specific mistreatment. - Racial/Ethnic Harassment: race-specific mistreatment. Differences: - Intensity: forms like [physical aggression & bullying] are considered more intense compared to [incivility & ostracism]. - Intent: incivility has ambiguous intent, while forms like abusive supervision & bullying typically have clear harmful intent. - Perpetrators: different forms involve different types of perpetrators; for example, abusive supervision is typically enacted by supervisors, whereas bullying can occur from peers or subordinates. **2. What organizational and individual factors contribute to the likelihood of mistreatment occurring?** - Organizational Factors: - Work Environment Characteristics: stressors (e.g., role conflict), lack of work resources (e.g., autonomy), and organizational climate (e.g., norms for respect or mistreatment). - Power Structure: perceived power imbalances can lead to increased mistreatment. - Organizational Justice: lower levels of perceived justice can increase aggression. - Individual Factors: - Target Characteristics: traits such as negative affectivity, personality traits (e.g., agreeableness), demographics (e.g., gender, race), and past experiences of mistreatment. - Perpetrator Characteristics: traits like narcissism, demographics (e.g., job tenure), and individual differences (e.g., emotional intelligence). **3. How does w.pl. mistreatment affect employees' attitudes, job behaviours & performance, health & well-being?** [Effects on Attitudes]: negative relations with job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and increased turnover intentions. [Effects on Job Behaviours & Performance]: decreased task performance, increased withdrawal behaviour, and higher rates of interpersonal deviance. Witnessed mistreatment can also lead to similar negative behaviours. [Effects on Health and Well-Being]: increased negative affect, stress symptoms (e.g., burnout), worsened mental and physical health outcomes. Long-term exposure can lead to conditions such as PTSD. **4. According to Dhanani et al. (2021):** - **Which forms of experienced and witnessed mistreatment have the highest prevalence rates?** - **In how far do study characteristics (labelling, sampling, worker protection rights) influence prevalence rates?** - **What implications can be derived from the meta-analytic results for researchers, practitioners, and policy-makers?** 04 07.11 Mistreatment in organizations 2 **1. According to Hershcovis & Barling (2010)** a. **What are methodological, theoretical and practical reasons for comparing aggression from different perpetrators?** - Methodological Reasons: examining aggression from various perpetrators allows for a comprehensive understanding of the different contexts and forms of aggression, leading to more robust and generalizable findings. - Theoretical Reasons: different perpetrators may invoke different theoretical mechanisms in how aggression impacts targets, which can enrich the theoretical frameworks surrounding workplace aggression. - Practical Reasons: understanding the nuances between aggressions from different sources can inform targeted interventions and organizational policies to mitigate the effects of such behaviours. b. **In how far is aggression from different perpetrators differentially related to attitudinal, behavioural and health outcomes?** Aggression from different perpetrators can lead to varied outcomes on employee attitudes (e.g., job satisfaction), behaviours (e.g., withdrawal or retaliation), and health (e.g., stress-related illnesses). The relationship is influenced by the context of the aggression, the nature of the perpetrator, and the target\'s characteristics. **2. Zhong et al. (2023) describe 5 major perspectives that have been used to explain moderating effects. Explain the core propositions of each perspective and name individual and collective moderators that can be derived from this perspective.** (SARSS) 1. **Self-Regulation** Perspective: looks at how targets regulate their emotional and behavioural responses to aggression. - Moderators include self-control and impulsivity. 2. **Appraisal** Perspective: centres on how the way targets perceive and evaluate aggression influences their responses. - Moderators can include attribution styles and coping capabilities. 3. **Resource-Depletion** Perspective: focuses on how workplace aggression depletes personal and job resources, leading to negative outcomes. - Moderators can include social support and job resources. 4. **Social-Relational** Perspective: examines how workplace aggression affects interpersonal relationships and belongingness. - Moderators include the target\'s inclination for retaliation and the quality of their social connections. 5. **Social-Influence** Perspective: investigates how aggression from higher-status individuals can normalize such behaviour and influence the actions of others. - Moderators can include the perceived credibility of the perpetrator. **3. According to Zhong et al. (2023):** a. **For whom are the harmful effects of workplace aggression lessened or magnified?** b. **What can targets do to lessen the harm of workplace aggression?** c. **What can organizations do to mitigate the adverse effects of workplace aggression?** 05 14.11 Bullying **1. What is bullying and how can it be distinguished from other forms of workplace mistreatment?** Bullying is defined as a situation where an employee is repeatedly and systematically exposed to negative and unwanted social behaviours by one or more colleagues over a prolonged period, where the target is unable to defend themselves against this mistreatment. It is distinguished from other forms of workplace mistreatment by its persistent and systematic nature, as well as the power imbalance between the perpetrator and the victim. In contrast, other forms of mistreatment, such as incivility or social undermining, are typically less intense, more sporadic, and may not involve a clear intent to harm. **2. What is the prevalence of bullying?** The prevalence of workplace bullying is estimated to be around 15% globally, although this figure can vary significantly depending on methodological factors and geographic location. For example, studies utilizing behavioural experience methods report an average bullying rate of 14.8%, while self-labelling studies without definitions yield an average of 18.1%. **3. How can reciprocal effects between bullying and mental health problems be explained?** The reciprocal effects can be explained by 2 main mechanisms: the \"gloomy perception\" mechanism, suggesting that employees with reduced well-being may have a lower threshold for interpreting behaviours as bullying, and the social interactionist perspective, which posits that individuals with impaired health may annoy others or violate social norms, thus triggering aggressive behaviour towards them. **4. Which hypotheses are used to explain the causes of bullying? Have these hypotheses received empirical support?** The 2 dominant hypotheses are: - Work Environment Hypothesis: Suggests that bullying arises from the prevailing job design and social environment. Empirical support includes findings that role conflict, workload, and job insecurity predict bullying. - Individual-Dispositions Hypothesis: Proposes that individual personality traits increase the risk of being bullied or becoming a bully. Some studies have found correlations, particularly with traits like neuroticism and conscientiousness, but the causal relationships are less clear. **5. Which factors act as moderators of the a) antecedents-bullying and b) bullying-outcomes relationships?** - Moderators of the antecedents-bullying relationship: Factors such as personality traits, organizational climate (such as psychosocial safety climate), and individual resilience can influence this relationship. - Moderators of the bullying-outcomes relationship: Individual dispositions such as coping mechanisms, social support, and leadership practices may affect how bullying impacts mental health and well-being. **6. How can primary, secondary, and tertiary interventions to reduce bullying be distinguished?** - Primary Interventions: aim to prevent bullying before it occurs by addressing risk factors and improving organizational culture. - Secondary Interventions: focus on reducing the impact of bullying once it has occurred by detecting it early and helping those affected. - Tertiary Interventions: aim to alleviate the long-term effects of bullying on victims, focusing on rehabilitation and support for those who have experienced bullying. 06 21.11 Mistreatment in organizations 3 **1. Describe and differentiate 4 general intervention approaches to reduce workplace mistreatment (according to Leiter et al., 2017).** The 4 general intervention approaches to reduce workplace mistreatment as described by Leiter et al. are: - **Policy** Interventions: These focus on organizational accountability, establishing clear standards of behaviour, and promoting civil environments. They are typically top-down approaches, where policies are created by management and disseminated to employees. - **Legal** Interventions: These involve laws and regulations designed to combat workplace aggression. They reflect a broader cultural consensus against mistreatment and address legal obligations rather than focusing on workplace culture or individual behaviour. - **Training** Interventions: These aim to educate employees about workplace mistreatment, its impact, and the company's values regarding civility. They can be tailored to either prevent mistreatment before it occurs or respond to incidents after they happen, focusing on either potential perpetrators or victims. - **Workgroup** Interventions: These focus on the dynamics within workgroups, addressing how social interactions can lead to mistreatment. They involve working directly with teams to reflect on behaviours and improve social dynamics, promoting a culture of respect. **2. Policy interventions: a) Which key aspects should an effective policy intervention contain? b) How should a policy be enforced?** a. An effective policy intervention should contain the following key aspects: 1. A clear statement denouncing workplace aggression. 2. The reasoning behind the new policy. 3. A label for the type of workplace aggression being addressed. 4. An objective definition of workplace aggression. 5. Clear examples of behaviours that constitute workplace aggression. 6. Assurance that managers will oversee the policy within their departments. 7. A section addressing retaliation against those who report mistreatment. b. A policy should be enforced through: 8. Employee access to information about the policy. 9. Easy access to complaint forms and procedures. 10. Guaranteed confidentiality for complainants. 11. Penalties for violations of confidentiality or retaliation. 12. Information sharing of decisions made by the policy committee. 13. Appropriate consequences for violating the policy. 14. Support for targets and witnesses of mistreatment. 15. Development of scales to measure mistreatment levels. 16. Training for leaders and management. 17. Integration of the new policy into employee orientation. 18. Ongoing commitment to revising and maintaining the policy. **3. Training interventions: Distinguish four categories of training interventions (based on the timing and the target population) and provide examples.** The 4 categories of training interventions based on timing & target population: - Prevention-focused, perpetrator-targeted: Training aimed at individuals likely to commit acts of workplace aggression before it occurs. - Example: A workshop on recognizing the signs of aggression and employing conflict resolution strategies. - Prevention-focused, subject-targeted: Training aimed at potential victims before incidents occur. - Example: Training sessions aimed at helping employees recognize and respond to early signs of aggression. - Consequence-focused, perpetrator-targeted: Training provided in response to past incidents for those who have committed aggressive acts. - Example: Anger management programs for employees who have previously displayed aggressive behaviour. - Consequence-focused, subject-targeted: Training provided after incidents have occurred for those who have been victims. - Example: Counselling sessions for employees who have experienced workplace aggression. **4. Describe the contents and design of the CREW team intervention.** The CREW (Civility, Respect, and Engagement at Work) team intervention is designed to improve workplace civility and reduce workplace aggression. The intervention consists of: - Duration: It spans over six months, involving regular meetings between a facilitator and work units within an organization. - Facilitator Role: The facilitator guides the work unit in assessing its current climate and identifying issues related to civility and respect. - Group Discussions: Participants engage in discussions to define civility, respect, incivility, and disrespect specific to their work group, allowing for open identification of problematic Behaviours. - Behavioural Interventions: The facilitator leads groups through behavioural exercises, such as role-playing, to practice and foster civil Behaviours and identify unacceptable interactions. - Outcome Focus: The CREW program aims not only to decrease incivility but also to enhance positive exchanges and social relationships within the workplace. Research on CREW has shown statistically significant improvements in workplace civility and related constructs, such as job satisfaction and management trust, demonstrating its effectiveness as an intervention. 07 28.11 Discrimination 1 **1. According to the meta-analytic findings by Dhanani et al. (2018), what are the mediating mechanisms in the relationships between workplace discrimination and work-related and health outcomes?** According to the meta-analytic findings, workplace discrimination is associated with employee outcomes through 2 mediating mechanisms: job stress and justice perceptions. Job stress is conceptualized as the subjective strain associated with one's job, while justice perceptions refer to the perceived fairness in the workplace regarding treatment and outcomes. **2. According to the meta-analytic findings by Dhanani et al. (2018), a) are witnessed and experienced discrimination equally detrimental?, b) are workplace and non-work discrimination equally detrimental, c) are formal and interpersonal discrimination equally detrimental?** Detrimental Effects of Discrimination Types: a. [Witnessed] vs. Experienced Discrimination: The findings indicate that discrimination appears to be more detrimental when it is observed rather than personally experienced. b. [Workplace] vs. Non-Work Discrimination: The study suggests that the effects of discrimination differ across work and non-work contexts; workplace discrimination is generally more detrimental. c. Formal vs. [Interpersonal] Discrimination: The findings indicate that interpersonal discrimination is often more strongly related to negative outcomes than formal discrimination. **3. What is the difference between formal and interpersonal discrimination? What are examples for each form?** Difference Between Formal and Interpersonal Discrimination: - **Formal** Discrimination: This type involves job-related decisions such as hiring, promotion, or compensation. An example would be an employee being passed over for a promotion due to their gender. - **Interpersonal** Discrimination: This refers to negative verbal and nonverbal behaviours occurring in everyday social interactions, not directly tied to job decisions. An example includes an employee being subjected to derogatory comments by coworkers. **4. How can the relative deprivation theory be used to explain the effects of discrimination?** Relative Deprivation Theory and Discrimination Effects: The relative deprivation theory can explain the effects of discrimination by suggesting that individuals perceive themselves as unfairly disadvantaged compared to others, particularly when they witness discrimination. This perceived inequality can lead to feelings of resentment, stress, and negative health outcomes, as individuals feel that their rights or entitlements have been violated. **5. According to the meta-analytic findings by Triana et al. (2018), how do a) national differences in labour policies and practices and b) national differences in cultural practices influence the effects of gender discrimination on health and work-related outcomes?** National Differences Influencing Gender Discrimination Effects: a. National Differences in Labour Policies and Practices: According to findings by Triana et al. (2018), national labour policies can influence the impact of gender discrimination on health and work-related outcomes, with stronger legal protections potentially mitigating negative effects. b. National Differences in Cultural Practices: Cultural practices can also shape the experience of gender discrimination, as societal norms and values about gender roles can either exacerbate or lessen the impact of discrimination on individuals\' mental and physical health. 08 05.12 Discrimination 2 **1. According to Costa (2024), which 4 categories of bias reduction interventions can be distinguished? Describe the key defining characteristics of each category and two sample interventions.** - [Disrupting Stereotype Processing]: - Key Characteristics: This category mainly targets the cognitive dimension of attitudes and aims to interfere with the typical processing of stereotypes. It shifts attention away from stereotypical information or manages how alternatives are presented to decision-makers. - Sample Interventions: - Anonymizing resumes (removing demographic information). - Structured evaluation (standardizing evaluation criteria). - [Updating Affective States]: - Key Characteristics: This category focuses on changing emotions associated with a group or individual, aiming to elicit new affective states that are inconsistent with previous negative categorizations. - Sample Interventions: - Imagining contact with a member of the stigmatized group. - Perspective taking (encouraging evaluators to understand the feelings of the target). - [Inhibiting Bias Manifestation]: - Key Characteristics: This category targets the behavioural dimension of attitudes, motivating individuals not to act on stereotypes or biases by providing strong external motivational cues. - Sample Interventions: - Accountability (requiring evaluators to justify their decisions). - Social norms (informing evaluators of acceptable behaviours). - [Educating About Bias Processes]: - Key Characteristics: This category does not primarily target any specific attitude dimension but aims to raise awareness about bias and its consequences. - Sample Interventions: - Diversity training (educating employees about bias). - Equal opportunity employment messages (reminders of policies against discrimination). **2. Are interventions that target a specific dimension more effective when paired with the corresponding outcome measures?** Effectiveness of Targeted Interventions with Corresponding Outcome Measures: Yes, interventions that target a specific dimension are generally more effective when paired with the corresponding outcome measures. For instance, interventions targeting cognitive aspects (e.g., disrupting stereotype processing) showed stronger results when measured against cognitive outcomes. **3. Are interventions that do not target any specific attitude dimension less effective compared to all other categories?** Effectiveness of Non-Specific Attitude Interventions: Yes, interventions that do not target any specific attitude dimension (i.e., educating about bias processes) are less effective compared to all other categories. These educational interventions tend to produce minimal or null effects on reducing workplace bias measures. **4. Are interventions targeting the behavioural dimension of attitudes more effective in reducing informal as opposed to formal discriminatory outcomes?** Effectiveness of Behavioural Dimension Interventions: Interventions targeting the behavioural dimension of attitudes are more effective in reducing informal discriminatory outcomes compared to formal ones. This is likely due to the legal constraints surrounding formal discrimination, which makes it less observable and harder to change. **5. What intervention types (from each category) are most effective in reducing workplace discrimination?** Most Effective Intervention Types for Reducing Workplace Discrimination: From the respective categories, the most effective intervention types identified include: - Disrupting Stereotype Processing: Structured evaluation and majority signalling (e.g., \"whitening\" resumes). - Updating Affective States: Imagining contact and multicultural experiences. - Inhibiting Bias Manifestation: Accountability interventions, which showed the largest effect in reducing discrimination, followed by social norm interventions. 09 12.12 Trust **1. Which components can be distinguished according to the integrative model of organizational trust by Mayer et al. (1995)?** Components of the Integrative Model of Organizational Trust (Mayer et al., 1995): The integrative model distinguishes between 3 components of trustworthiness: - Ability: The skills and competencies of the trustee. - Benevolence: The extent to which the trustee is believed to want to do good for the trustor. - Integrity: The extent to which the trustee adheres to sound moral and ethical principles. **2.** **How are trustworthiness, trust propensity, trust and risk-taking behaviour empirically related according to the meta-analysis by Colquitt et al. (2007)? Which practical recommendations can be derived from these findings?** Empirical Relationships Among Trust Variables (Colquitt et al., 2007): According to the meta-analysis, trustworthiness and trust propensity explain incremental variance in behavioural outcomes when trust is controlled, supporting a partial mediation model. Trust was found to be positively related to risk-taking and job performance. Practical recommendations include focusing on enhancing trustworthiness dimensions (ability, benevolence, integrity) and fostering trust propensity to improve job performance and encourage risk-taking behaviours. **3.** **When/under which conditions is team trust most more important for team effectiveness according to the meta-analytic findings by de Jong et al. (2016)?** Conditions for Team Trust and Effectiveness (de Jong et al., 2016): Team trust is particularly important for team effectiveness in contexts characterized by high task interdependence and uncertainty. In such situations, trust reduces the need for monitoring and allows team members to focus on collaborative tasks. **4.** **Does trust matter more in virtual teams according to Breuer et al. (2016)? Why (not)?** Trust in Virtual Teams (Breuer et al., 2016): Trust is considered to matter more in virtual teams. This is because virtual teams often lack the face-to-face interactions that help build trust in traditional teams, making trust a more critical component for collaboration and effectiveness in a virtual setting. The absence of physical presence increases uncertainty and the potential for miscommunication, thereby heightening the need for trust to facilitate cooperation. 10 19.12 Positive interactions with supervisors **1.** **What are the characteristics of high-quality vs. low quality relationships between leaders and followers?** Characteristics of High-Quality vs. Low-Quality Relationships: +-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+ | High-Quality Relationships | Low-Quality Relationships | +===================================+===================================+ | - Trust, respect, and affection | - Limited interaction focused | | are present. | primarily on job | | | descriptions. | | - Open communication and mutual | | | influence. | - Lack of trust and emotional | | | connection. | | - Members feel empowered and | | | supported, leading to higher | - Members may feel undervalued | | job satisfaction and | and less motivated, leading | | commitment. | to lower job satisfaction and | | | higher turnover intentions. | | - Members are more likely to go | | | beyond their formal job | | | duties and engage in | | | organizational citizenship | | | behaviours. | | +-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+ **2.** **Which stages of LMX development can be distinguished? What are the characteristics of each stage?** Stages of LMX Development: - Strangers: Initial interactions with no trust or mutual understanding. - Acquaintances: Formation of some trust and respect; initial exchanges based on role expectations. - Mature Relationships: High-quality exchanges characterized by deep trust, mutual support, and a willingness to go beyond formal roles. **3.** **What a) member personality variables, b) member behaviours and c) leader behaviours contribute to LMX development?** Factors Contributing to LMX Development: a. Member Personality Variables: Traits such as conscientiousness, proactive personality, internal locus of control, and emotional intelligence positively influence LMX quality. b. Member Behaviours: Displaying competence, citizenship Behaviours, and efforts towards relationship-building (e.g., feedback seeking) contribute to LMX development. c. Leader Behaviours: Delegation, ethical behaviour, empathy, fairness, and transformational leadership Behaviours enhance LMX quality. **4.** **What are day-to-day implications of LMX quality?** Day-to-Day Implications of LMX Quality: High-quality LMX leads to frequent communication, increased mutual influence, and greater access to resources and support. Members feel more empowered and are more likely to engage in cooperative conflict management, leading to a more positive work environment. **5.** **How is LMX related to job attitudes, workplace behaviours, employees' withdrawal and stress & well-being at work?** Relationship of LMX to Job Attitudes, Workplace Behaviours, Withdrawal, and Stress & Well-Being: - Job Attitudes: High-quality LMX correlates with higher job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and perceived organizational support. - Workplace Behaviours: High-quality LMX is linked to increased job performance, organizational citizenship Behaviours, creativity, and lower rates of organizational deviance. - Withdrawal: Lower-quality LMX is associated with higher turnover intentions and actual turnover, as members are less embedded and satisfied in their roles. - Stress & Well-Being: High-quality LMX is related to lower stress levels, reduced role ambiguity, and burnout, thereby positively impacting overall well-being. 11 09.01 Negative interactions with supervisors **1. What is abusive supervision?** Abusive supervision is defined as subordinates' perceptions of the extent to which supervisors engage in the sustained display of hostile verbal and nonverbal behaviours, excluding physical contact. This includes various aggressive managerial behaviours such as uncontrolled outbursts, inappropriate blaming, and public ridicule. **2. How can abusive supervision be measured? What are the challenges when measuring abusive supervision?** Abusive supervision is typically measured by asking subordinates to report the frequency of hostile acts performed by their supervisors. Challenges in measuring abusive supervision include the subjective nature of the perceptions, potential bias from the employees in interpreting behaviours as abusive or not, and difficulties in distinguishing between actual abusive behaviours and perceptions of those behaviours. **3. What are consequences of destructive leadership according to the meta-analysis by Schyns & Schilling (2007)?** According to this meta-analysis, exposure to abusive supervision is associated with a range of dysfunctional outcomes at individual and team levels, such as lower morale, decreased psychological health, increased counterproductive work behaviour (CWB), and higher quit rates. It indicates that there is little empirical evidence suggesting that abusive supervision leads to positive outcomes. **4. Explain the potential positive and negative pathways of abusive supervision to productivity.** - Positive Pathways: Abusive supervision can potentially motivate employees to increase productivity in an effort to avoid further hostility, draw attention away from the supervisor's negative behaviour, or prove the supervisor wrong. However, such effects tend to be situational and variable. - Negative Pathways: Abusive supervision typically leads to decreased productivity through resource depletion, negative reciprocity, compromised team dynamics, and negative role modelling. The adverse emotional and psychological impact generally outweighs the minor positive effects. **5.** **a) What are antecedent factors leading to abusive supervision?** - Antecedent factors that contribute to abusive supervision include: - Social Learning (e.g., influence from organizational norms, familial upbringing). - Identity Threat (e.g., feeling threatened by subordinates, pressures from above). - Self-Regulation Impairment (e.g., stress, workload, lack of resources). **b) Describe 3 main processes (mechanisms) through which antecedent factors leading to abusive supervision operate.** - Social Learning: Supervisors may model abusive behaviour based on observations of higher management or familial patterns, perpetuating aggression within the organizational culture. - Identity Threat: Threats to a supervisor\'s identity or authority can trigger defensive aggression, leading supervisors to lash out at subordinates as a means of restoring their perceived status. - Self-Regulation Impairment: Factors such as high stress and resource depletion can diminish the supervisors\' ability to self-regulate negative impulses, resulting in abrasive behaviour toward subordinates. **6. How can abusive supervision be prevented based on the three main antecedents of abusive supervision?** Preventing abusive supervision could involve: - Social Learning: creating and promoting a positive organizational culture that actively discourages abusive behaviours and reinforces supportive leadership practices. - Identity Threat: enhancing communication and providing support to supervisors to reduce their feelings of insecurity and promote healthy interactions with subordinates. - Self-Regulation: implementing stress management programs, offering resources for emotional intelligence training, and promoting work-life balance to ensure supervisors retain their self-regulatory capabilities in challenging situations. These approaches aim to address the root causes of abusive supervision to foster a healthier work environment. 12 16.01 Interactions with customers 1 **1. What are three defining characteristics of employee--customer exchanges that explain why these exchanges are more likely to involve negative treatment than exchanges with organizational insiders?** The 3 defining characteristics of employee--customer exchanges that explain why these exchanges are more likely to involve negative treatment than exchanges with organizational insiders are: - Exchange Autonomy: employees in service exchanges are monitored and evaluated by both supervisors & customers, while customers are less constrained by organizational practices & thus freer to misbehave. - Exchange Relationship: employees are less familiar with customers than with people they see every day, such as coworkers or even supervisors, thus reducing trust and rapport. This is particularly likely in jobs where employee--customer exchanges are one-time encounters, often anonymous, with no intention to interact in the future. - Exchange Power: customer--employee exchanges are characterized by a strong power differential, with customers having more choice over whether to continue the relationship and being able to act in negative ways with few consequences. **2. Describe the employee-customer negative exchange cycle.** The employee-customer negative exchange cycle involves the following steps: 1. The customer perceives negative behaviour by the employee (e.g., rudeness, incompetence). This can be a performance-based violation (i.e., inaccuracy, inefficiency, unresponsiveness) or an interpersonal violation (i.e., lack of courtesy, friendliness, authenticity). 2. The customer reacts with dissatisfaction, negative emotions, and possibly a complaint or retaliation. 3. The employee perceives the customer\'s negative behaviour as mistreatment and reacts with negative emotions, job dissatisfaction, and possibly deviant behaviour (e.g., withdrawal, unintentional errors, intentional sabotage). 4. The negative behaviours can spill over to impact the next customer-employee exchange, and may have direct bottom-line costs if the customer chooses to leave the relationship with the organization. 5. The negative exchange cycle can be started by various factors, including endogenous events (e.g., manager mistreating an employee), traits (e.g., negative affectivity), or situational (e.g., busyness) factors. **3. What can organizations do to break the negative exchange cycle?** Organizations can break the negative exchange cycle by taking the following steps: 1. Training employees to manage customer expectations and handle difficult customer interactions. 2. Encouraging a culture of empathy and respect among employees. 3. Implementing policies and procedures to reduce power imbalances between customers and employees. 4. Providing support and resources to employees who are dealing with difficult customers. 5. Fostering a culture of positive customer relationships. **4. Which dimensions of customer-related social stressors (CSS) can be distinguished according to Dormann & Dudenhöffer? How are these CSS associated with employee well-being?** According to them, customer-related social stressors (CSS) can be distinguished into the following dimensions: - Interpersonal Stressors (e.g., verbal abuse, physical threat, sexual harassment) - Role Stressors (e.g., unclear expectations, high workload, time pressure) - Work Environment Stressors (e.g., noise, crowding, physical discomfort) - Organizational Change Stressors (e.g., restructuring, downsizing, layoffs) - Customer-Related Stressors (e.g., customer dissatisfaction, complaints, negative feedback) These stressors can be associated with employee well-being, including burnout, depression, and anxiety. **5. Give an example of emotional contagion within service interactions.** An example of emotional contagion within service interactions is when a customer is frustrated and becomes agitated, and the employee becomes upset and responds with anger or frustration. **6. Which role does customer-related social support play in the emotional contagion process according to Zimmermann et al. (2011)?** According to Zimmerman et al. (2011), customer-related social support plays a role in the emotional contagion process by helping to regulate the employee\'s emotions and reduce the impact of customer negative behaviour on employee well-being. 13 23.01 Interactions with customers 2 **1. Explain the terms emotional display rules, emotional dissonance, deep acting, and surface acting, and provide examples.** - Emotional Display Rules: These are guidelines or expectations set by organizations that dictate how employees should present their emotions to customers. For example, a barista in a coffee shop may be required to smile and greet customers warmly as part of the job\'s expectations. - Emotional Dissonance: This occurs when there is a discrepancy between an employee\'s genuine feelings and the emotions they are required to display according to the display rules. For instance, if a hotel receptionist feels frustrated due to a rude customer but must maintain a friendly demeanor, this incongruence creates emotional dissonance. - Deep Acting: Deep acting involves modifying one\'s internal feelings to align with the expected emotional display, often through cognitive strategies such as perspective-taking or reappraisal. An example would be a nurse making a conscious effort to feel empathy for a patient in pain, thereby expressing genuine concern. - Surface Acting: Surface acting refers to faking the required emotional expressions without changing one\'s actual feelings. For instance, a waiter may force a smile and use a cheerful tone with a demanding customer even though they feel irritated or unhappy inside. **2. How are deep acting and surface acting strategies related to employee well-being and performance according to the meta-analysis by Hülsheger and Schewe (2011)?** According to the meta-analysis by Hülsheger and Schewe (2011): - Deep Acting is generally associated with improved audience reactions, such as customer satisfaction and positive evaluations, while its benefits for the actor\'s well-being are mixed and may result in mild costs, such as exhaustion. - Surface Acting tends to be harmful to the actor's well-being, leading to symptoms like burnout and job dissatisfaction. It can impair cognitive tasks and increase the likelihood of counterproductive work behaviors, ultimately affecting job performance negatively. Additional Notes: - Deep acting often fosters positive employee-audience interactions but has significant personal costs over time, whereas surface acting is linked to emotional exhaustion and decreased job satisfaction due to felt inauthenticity. - The article emphasizes the need for organizations to recognize these dynamics and consider context when evaluating emotional labour strategies.