Psychological Researches in Management

Psychological Researches in Management

Designing a model of management workplace incivility

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
1 Ph.D Student, Management Department, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran.
2 Assistant Professor, Management Department, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran.
3 Associate Professor, Management Department, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran.
4 Ph.D, Management Department, Lecturer at the Comprehensive Scientific and Applied University, Cultural and Art Center of Drijeno, Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari, Iran.
Abstract
Purpose: Impoliteness in the workplace can result in effectiveness, productivity, efficiency, performance and development, unproductive behaviors, anti-citizenship behaviors and forced citizenship behaviors, daily troubles, distance from organizational values ​​and norms, creating an unfriendly and harsh atmosphere, and creating a pessimistic atmosphere in the organizational culture. And the breakdown of human and organizational communication in the universities of Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari province has a role as a negative factor. According to the research literature, it is very important to identify the reasons for incivility in the University of Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari province and its consequences and find its management strategies. In addition to providing information about the nature of incivility in the workplace, the present research tries to express its roots and factors, as well as its consequences and strategies. In this research, a model has been designed based on the database approach to investigate the causes, consequences, background factors, and interventions of incivility in the workplace. It should also be determined what strategies have an effect on the management of incivility in the workplace. In this way, the main question of the research is raised as follows: What is the model of incivility management in the workplace in the universities of Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari provinces?
 
Design/Methodology/Approach: The current research is qualitative research based on the approach of database theorizing. This approach is one of the inductive research methods that is rooted in reality and explains the events as they happened. The current research has a qualitative approach and uses Strauss and Corbin's database theory method as a research method. Data-based theory is one of the research strategies with an interpretation paradigm through which the theory is formed based on the main concepts obtained from the data. The participants of this research were faculty members and experts of the universities of Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari provinces who have worked in the fields of human resources and have experience and expertise in the scientific and research fields. The sampling of this research is based on the theoretical sampling method. The sample volume was continued until saturation was reached. Based on this, theoretical saturation was achieved after interviewing 15 people; But to ensure data saturation, five more interviews were also conducted.
 
Findings: Using the Strauss and Corbin method, during open coding, a set of primary themes was collected and categories were extracted from them. Then, in the central coding stage, the link between these categories was obtained under the headings of causal conditions, central phenomenon, strategies, background conditions, intervening conditions, and consequences. To check the validity of qualitative data, reliability, transferability, reliability, verifiability, truthfulness, and criteria of database theory, including compatibility, comprehensibility, and generality were used. The findings showed that in the first stage, 427 primary codes were obtained. In selective coding, these concepts were classified into 113 classes and finally, 22 main categories were extracted, each of which was placed under the subcategories of the systematic model (causal conditions, strategies, contextual conditions, intervening conditions, and consequences).
 
Discussion and Conclusion: This research confirms the previous findings about the strong negative relationship between the trait of agreeableness and the levels of incivility experienced in the workplace and shows the importance of personality traits as antecedents of uncivil behavior. Hierarchical regression analysis showed strong support for the role of organizational culture in the individual's perception and experience of incivility in the workplace. The results of the analysis of the joint effects of personality traits and culture in previous research show how to explain a larger part of the variance of rudeness at work. In this sense, this research confirmed that incivility in the workplace, which is both an individual phenomenon and a part of the values ​​and behaviors promoted through the organizational culture, can be violated. Organizational culture should be more the focus of attention in the field of organizational factors effective in incivility in the workplace. Impoliteness in the workplace has many negative consequences for the employees of Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari universities; Therefore, it is in the management's interest to minimize its occurrence. Managers should be aware of these consequences and know that if this type of behavior is not properly addressed in the organization, rudeness can threaten long-term organizational stability.
Keywords

Subjects


  1. قائدامینی ‏هارونی، عباس، صادقی ده‌چشمه، مهرداد، بابایی فارسانی، میثم، و مالکی فارسانی، غلامرضا (1401). بررسی رابطۀ سرمایۀ اجتماعی با رفتارهای انحرافی در محیط کار با توجه به نقش رهبری زهرآگین در استانداری اصفهان.فصلنامۀ پژوهش‌های روان‏شناختی در مدیریت، 8(1)، 9-40.  org/20.1001.1.24764833.1401.8.1.6.4
  2. همتی، راضیه، فرهادی‏نژاد، محسن، و رستگار، عباسعلی (1400). بررسی فراوانی و میزان اهمیت رفتارهای نامطلوب کارکنان در سازمان‌های دولتی )مورد مطالعه: کارکنان سازمان‌های دولتی شهرستان سمنان(. فصلنامۀ پژوهش‌های روان‏شناختی در مدیریت، 7(1)،239-268. org/20.1001.1.24764833.1400.7.1.6.7

References

  1. Agarwal, Sh., Pandey, R., Kumar, S., Lim, W.M., Agarwal, P.K., & Malik, A. (2024). Workplace Incivility: A Retrospective Review and Future Research Agenda. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4047657.  doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4047657
  2. Bakare, M., Salisu, U., Bugaje, I., & Abubakar, H. (2022). Workplace ostracism and counterproductive work behaviour among employees of Federal University of Gusau, Zamfara state: The mediating role of emotional exhaustion. Sokoto Journal of Management Studies, 32(3), 65–84.  doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.761560
  3. Berry, P.A., Gillespie, G.L., Fisher, B.S., Gormley, D., & Haynes, J.T. (2016). Psychological distress and workplace bullying among registered nurses. Online Journal of Issues in Nursing, 21(3), 1-25. doi.org/10.3912/OJIN.Vol21No03PPT41
  4. Butt, S., & Yazdani, N. (2021). Influence of workplace incivility on counterproductive work behavior: Mediating role of emotional exhaustion, organizational cynicism and the moderating role of psychological capital. Pakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Sciences (PJCSS), 15(2), 378-404.‏ hdl.handle.net/10419/237082
  5. Cortina, L.M., Magley, V.J., Williams, J.H., & Langhout, R.D. (2001). Incivility in the workplace: Incidence and impact. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6, 64-80. doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.6.1.64
  6. Cortina, L.M., Sandy Hershcovis, M., & Clancy, K.B. (2022). The embodiment of insult: A theory of biobehavioral response to workplace incivility. Journal of Management, 48(3), 738-763. doi.org/10.1177/0149206321989798
  7. De Clercq, D., Haq, I.U., & Azeem, M.U. (2019). Time-related work stress and counterproductive work behavior: Invigorating roles of deviant personality traits. Personnel Review, 48(7), 1756-1781. doi.org/10.1108/PR-07-2018-0241
  8. Demsky, C.A., Fritz, C., Hammer, L.B., & Black, A.E. (2020). Workplace incivility and employee sleep: The role of rumination and recovery experiences. Journal of occupational health psychology, 24(2), 228. doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000116
  9. Ghaedamini Harouni, A., Sadeghi Dehcheshmeh, M., Babaeefarsani, M., & Maleki Farsani, G.R. (2022). Investigating the Relationship between Social Capital and Deviant Behaviors in the Workplace According to the toxic leadership in Isfahan Province. Psychological Researches in Management, 8(1), 9-40. doi.org/20.1001.1.24764833.1401.8.1.6.4 (In Persian)
  10. Hamati, R., Farhadinejad, M., & Rastgar, A. (2021). Identify and Prioritize the Undesirable Behaviors of Employees in public Organizations. Psychological Researches in Management, 7(1), 239-268. doi.org/20.1001.1.24764833.1400.7.1.6.7 (In Persian)
  11. Han, S., Harold, C.M., Oh, I.S., Kim, J.K., & Agolli, A. (2022). A meta‐analysis integrating 20 years of workplace incivility research: Antecedents, consequences, and boundary conditions. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 43(3), 497-523. doi.org/10.1002/job.2568
  12. Johnson, P.R., & Indvik, J. (2001). Rudeness at work: Impulse over restraint. Public Personnel Management, 30, 457-465. doi.org/10.1177/009102600103000403
  13. Kareem, R.F., Ojeleye, C.I., & Sodamade, I.O. (2023). Work Engagement as the Mediator of the Relationship between Workplace Civility and Workplace Deviant Behaviour among Employees of Tertiary Institutions in Zamfara State. Lapai Journal of Economics, 7(1), 70–87. doi.org/10.4314/lje.v7i1.5
  14. Kim, Y., Kim, S.Y., Hong, E., & Brandt, C.A. (2023). Clinical Incivility Management Module for Nursing Students: A Quasi-Experimental Study. Healthcare (Basel), 11(19), 2680. doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11192680
  15. Lim, S., Cortina, L.M., & Magley, V.J. (2008). Personal and workgroup incivility: Impact on work and health outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 9, 95-107. doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.1.95
  16. Lim, S., & Lee, A. (2011). Work and non-work outcomes of workplace incivility: Does family support help? Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 16(1), 95–111. doi.org/10.1037/a0021726
  17. Loh, J.M.I., Khan, M.I., & Talukder, M.J.H. (2023). To complain or not to complain: Management responses as a moderator in the relationship between workplace incivility and workplace outcomes among Australia and singaporean targets. Heliyon, 9(11). doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e21363
  18. Mohsin, M., Jamil, K., Naseem, S., Sarfraz, M., & Ivascu, L. )2022). Elongating Nexus between Workplace Factors and Knowledge Hiding Behavior: Mediating Role of Job Anxiety. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 25)15), 441-457. doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S348467
  19. Moon, C., & Morais, C. (2022). Understanding the consequences of workplace incivility: the roles of emotional exhaustion, acceptability and political skill. International Journal of Conflict Management, 33(3), 425-447. doi.org/10.1108/IJCMA-09-2021-0147
  20. Pearson, C.M., Andersson, L.M., & Porath, C.L. (2005). Workplace incivility. In S. Fox & P. E. Spector (Eds.), Counterproductive work behaviour: Investigations of actors and targets (pp.177–200). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi.org/10.1037/10893-008
  21. Reio, T.G., & Ghosh, R. (2009). Antecedents and outcomes of workplace incivility: Implications for human resource development research and practice. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 20(3), 237–264. doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.20020.
  22. Samma, M., Zhao, Y., Rasool, S.F., Han, X., & Ali, S. (2020). Exploring the relationship between innovative work behavior, job anxiety, workplace ostracism, and workplace incivility: Empirical evidence from small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs). In Healthcare, 8(4), 508-528.  doi.org/10.3390/healthcare8040508.
  23. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (2008). Basic of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for developing Grounded Theory (Third Edition). Los Angeles: stage publication, p. 153-156. doi.org/10.1177/109442810832451
  24. Sharma, D., & Mishra, M. (2021). Family incivility and instigated workplace incivility: How and when does rudeness spill over from family to work? Asia Pacific journal of management, 10(1), 1-29. doi.org/10.1007/s10490-021-09764-y
  25. Sliter, M., Sliter, K., & Jex, S. (2012). The employee as a punching bag: The effect of multiple sources of incivility on employee withdrawal behavior and sales performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33, 121-139. doi.org/10.1002/job.767
  26. Tarraf, R.C. (2012). Workplace incivility: Dimensionality and source effects. (Unpublished M.Sc. Research Report). The School of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies. The University of Western Ontario, Canada. ir.lib.uwo.ca/etd/642
  27. Taylor, S.G. (2010). Cold looks and hot tempers: Individual-level effects of incivility in the workplace. [Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation]. Rucks Department of Management, College of Business Administration, Louisiana State University, USA. doi.org/10.31390/gradschool_dissertations.2529
  28. Wang, C.H., & Chen, H.T. (2020). Relationships among workplace incivility, work engagement and job performance. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Insights, 3(4), 415-429. doi.org/10.1108/JHTI-09-2019-0105
  29. Wu, Q., Saqib, S., Sun, J., Xiao, Y., & Ma, W. (2022). Incivility and Knowledge Hiding in Academia: Mediating Role of Interpersonal Distrust and Rumination. Frontiers in Psychology, 3(12), 1-11. doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.769282
  30. Yao, J., Lim, S., Guo, C.Y., Ou, A.Y., & Ng, J.W.X. (2021). Experienced incivility in the workplace: A meta-analytical review of its construct validity and nomological network. Journal of Applied Psychology, 105(4), 100-120. doi.org/10.1037/apl0000870
  31. Zaheer, H., Karim, J., & Bibi, Z. (2022). Actions Dictate the Consequences: Workplace Incivility, Knowledge Hiding, and sychological Entitlement. Journal of Business and Social Review in Emerging Economies, 8(1), 25-38. doi.org/10.26710/jbsee.v8i1.2114