THE SOUTH AFRICAN EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS ENVIRONMENT

Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »

CHAPTER 3: RELATIONAL ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIOUR IN THE WORKPLACE

Keywords: affective commitment (AC), continuance commitment (CC), counterproductive work behaviour (CWB), normative commitment (NC), organisational citizenship behaviour (OCB), organisational commitment, psychological contract, social exchange theory, union commitment The aim of this chapter is to conceptualise relational attitudes (organisational commitment and union commitment) and behaviour (OCB and CWB) as a set of relational outcomes or consequences of employees’ work-related perceptions and work experiences in a South African employment relations context. The focus is thus on the dependent variables reflected in Figure 3.1.
Figure 3.1. An Overview of the Relationships between the Control, Independent, Mediating, Moderating and Dependent Variables
As point of departure, the core theoretical framework (social exchange theory) (Blau, 1964) that is relied upon to examine relational attitudes and behaviour in this study is described. The prominence of the psychological contract (Rousseau, 1989, 1995) within this framework is accentuated. It is suggested that a better understanding of employees’ unspecified and unvoiced work-related expectations and their reactions to workplace events (reflecting the extent to which these expectations are met) may be gleaned by focusing on the psychological contract (Alcover et al., 2017a).
This is followed by the conceptualisation of organisational citizenship behaviour (OCB) and counterproductive work behaviour (CWB) as opposing forms of discretionary employee behaviour, either in support of or detrimental to their employing organisations and/or individuals in them (Organ, 1997; Robinson & Bennett, 1995). The relevant theoretical models are discussed, the relationship between OCB and CWB is investigated, person-centred variables that have been shown to impact on these forms of behaviour are considered and the relevance of employee discretionary behaviour in a South African employment relations context is critically evaluated. The behavioural outcomes serve as the point of departure for the discussion of the constructs of relevance to this study as it is envisaged that these behaviours will not only be affected by the independent, mediating, moderating and control variables (see Figure 3.1 above), but also by employees’ relational attitudes (organisational commitment and union commitment).
Organisational commitment is thus presented as a relational outcome as well as a significant predictor of both positive (OCB) (Cetin et al., 2015; Chinomona & Dhurup, 2016) and negative (CWB) discretionary employee behaviour in the workplace (Demir, 2011; Wang, 2015). It is anticipated that employees’ discretionary behaviour is not influenced by their affective attachment (affective commitment) to the organisation only, but that this attachment is interrelated with employees’ acknowledgement of the potential consequences of leaving the organisation (continuance commitment) and a perceived moral responsibility to remain with the organisation (normative commitment) (Meyer & Herscovitch, 2001). It is furthermore shown that, in unionised employment relations environments – especially those in which adversarial employer-trade union relationships prevail – trade union members’ commitment to their employing organisations and their subsequent behaviour in the workplace may be adversely affected by their commitment to their unions (Angle & Perry, 1986). The constructs of organisational commitment and union commitment are consequently conceptualised in terms of extant literature, relevant theoretical models are investigated and the possibility of achieving dual commitment to the organisation and trade union is explored. Those person-centred variables that have been shown to influence how organisational and union commitment are developed and experienced by individual employees are reported. Finally, the implications of employees’ commitment towards their employing organisations and/or trade unions for employment relations in South African organisations are critically evaluated.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK FOR UNDERSTANDING ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIOUR IN THE WORKPLACE

Various theoretical perspectives have been relied upon in the literature to gain a better understanding of the relationships between individuals and their employing organisations (Shore, Coyle-Shapiro, & Tetrick, 2012b). In support of the rational choice paradigm adopted in this study (see section 1.6.1), social exchange theory (Blau, 1964) is regarded as an appropriate theoretical foundation for gaining a better understanding of employee attitudes and behaviour in the workplace. Social exchange theory can be regarded as a multidisciplinary theoretical perspective that describes how various kinds of resources (both tangible and intangible) can be exchanged among individuals or other social entities (such as organisations) by following certain rules and how such exchanges determine the quality of relationships (Colquitt et al., 2013, 2014; Cropanzano & Mitchell, 2005). According to Blau’s (1964) exchange theory, individuals may engage in economic and social exchanges. Economic exchange is generally short term, and involves the exchange of tangible or economic resources in a quid pro quo fashion. In contrast, social exchange is described as the subjective, relationship-oriented interactions between employees and their employing organisations (Lavelle et al., 2007). It involves the exchange of socioemotional benefits with open-ended obligations and is governed by the norm of reciprocity (Gouldner, 1960; Loi, Lam, Ngo, & Cheong, 2015). The norm of reciprocity creates a sense of obligation to repay beneficial behaviour in kind (Bernerth & Walker, 2009).
Social exchange reflects the continuous subjective cost-benefit analysis by the parties to the employment relationship and their reactions to perceived imbalances in the relationship (Dundon & Rollinson, 2011). It was therefore suggested in Chapter 2 (section 2.1.3) that social exchange theory may be regarded as an appropriate theoretical lens for studying employment relations. It was indicated that employees enter into social exchanges with employers in order to attain tangible and intangible work-related benefits (inducements and resources) in return for particular inputs (work effort and contributions) (Birtch et al., 2016). Hence, both parties to the exchange relationship strive to maintain a balance in terms of the contributions made. Employees do not only consider the costs and benefits of entering into an employment relationship, but also continuously judge whether the balance is maintained, adjusting their contributions accordingly (Tekleab & Chiaburu, 2011).
Social exchange theory therefore posits that employees seek a fair and balanced relationship between themselves and their employing organisations providing a general approach to understanding how employees are likely to respond when they experience particular events in the workplace (Cropanzano & Baron, 1991; Hochwarter, Kacmar, Perrewé, & Johnson, 2003a; Li, Feng, Liu, & Cheng, 2014; Turnley, Bolino, Lester, & Bloodgood, 2003). Employees become sensitive to events that may threaten the balance in the relationship, often attributing an imbalance to injustice and a lack of support from the employer (Collins, 2017; Suazo, Turnley, & Mai, 2005). In order to restore balance to the exchange relationship, employees reciprocate by adjusting their attitudes towards and behaviour in the organisation (Parzefall, 2008).
The reciprocal expectations that employees hold with regard to their relationships with their employing organisations and the extent to which these expectations are perceived as being fulfilled are considered fundamental elements of the social exchange relationship (Collins, 2017). These expectations, which are reflected in the psychological contract, are subjective and individualistic in nature and include not only the benefits to be gained from the relationship, but also the obligations that are expected to be fulfilled (Dundon & Rollinson, 2011; Rousseau, 1995). The psychological contract is thus conceptualised as being central to the social exchange relationship that exists between individuals and their employing organisations (Alcover et al., 2017b; Suazo et al., 2005) and a significant theoretical lens for investigating relationships in the workplace (Jepsen & Rodwell, 2010; Shore et al., 2012a).
The psychological contract, which is discussed in greater detail in Chapter 4 (see section 4.2.1), describes the mutual obligations that employers and employees are committed to in the workplace (Alcover et al., 2017a). The organisation’s fulfilment of its obligations and promises is expected to result in the exchange of positive outcomes between employees and their employing organisations and consequently high-quality exchange relationships (Karagonlar et al., 2016; Lee et al., 2018). Thus, when one party makes great efforts to improve the quality of the exchange relationship, the other party is expected to reciprocate by displaying positive attitudes towards the organisation and engaging in behaviour that is beneficial to the organisation (Lv & Xu, 2018). In contrast, employees who perceive that they have made certain contributions to the organisation that have not been reciprocated by the employer may adapt the level of their contributions to the organisation (e.g. by reducing their efforts and performance) or consider leaving the organisation in order to restore the balance in the social exchange relationship (Arshad, 2016; López Bohle et al., 2017).
From the above it may be deduced that social exchange theory, supported by the notion of the psychological contract, provides a sound theoretical framework for understanding attitudes and behaviour in the workplace (Lv & Xu, 2018; Ng et al., 2014). It is argued that employment relationships are complex and that a variety of factors impact on employees’ attitudes and behaviour in the workplace (Parzefall & Coyle-Shapiro, 2011; Persson & Wasieleski, 2015). In terms of social exchange theory, employees have certain expectations of employers’ obligations in the employment relationship. These obligations are not limited to those specified in the formal contract of employment, but are based on a subjective assessment made by the employee and reflected in the psychological contract (Rousseau, 1995). In terms of the norm of reciprocity (Gouldner, 1960), it is anticipated that an employee who perceives that his or her employer fulfils its obligations in terms of the psychological contract will reciprocate by being loyal and committed towards the organisation (McInnis, Meyer, & Feldman, 2009; Rodwell & Ellershaw, 2015) and engaging in activities that benefit it (Chiang et al., 2013; Coyle-Shapiro, 2002). Conversely, if the employee feels that the employer does not fulfil its obligations, he or she may reciprocate by distancing himself or herself from the organisation and engaging in activities that are detrimental to it (Jensen, Opland, & Ryan, 2010; Jepsen & Rodwell, 2010). Employees’ actions are thus determined by a cognitive evaluation of the costs and benefits associated with the employment relationship (Dundon & Rollinson, 2011). This evaluation is based on their judgements about organisational events and perceived imbalances resulting from this evaluation (Parzefall & Coyle-Shapiro, 2011; Suazo et al., 2005).
It is therefore postulated that, in order to construct an integrated framework reflecting the complexity of employment relations in the workplace, social exchange theory should be regarded as an appropriate theoretical foundation that contributes to a better understanding of employees’ relational attitudes and behaviour and their antecedents in the workplace. It is furthermore suggested that the psychological contract elucidates the expectations held by employees in the workplace, and should therefore be considered a core element of social exchange relationships. This chapter therefore draws on social exchange theory and incorporates the role of the psychological contract in expounding employee expectations in the workplace, in order to conceptualise relational attitudes and behaviour that are deemed essential in establishing positive employment relationships in South African organisations. The remainder of this chapter is dedicated to conceptualising relational attitudes and behaviour that are deemed essential in an employment relations context. First, employees’ discretionary behaviour (both positive and negative) in the workplace is explored. This behaviour is regarded as a reflection of their observations about the quality of the social exchange relationship and fundamental in shaping the organisational, social and psychological context in which all organisational activities take place (Borman & Motowidlo, 1997; Motowidlo & Van Scotter, 1994). This is followed by an analysis of employees’ commitment to two potentially contradictory entities, namely their employing organisations (Meyer & Allen, 1988, 1991, 1997) and trade unions (Gordon et al., 1980a), which are regarded as attitudinal reactions to workplace events and potential predictors of relational behaviour (Meyer & Herscovitch, 2001; Redman & Snape, 2016; Zhao et al., 2007).

DISCRETIONARY EMPLOYEE BEHAVIOUR

Extant literature shows that it is not sufficient to focus on employees’ formal job performance as a means of ensuring organisational effectiveness only, as employees’ discretionary behaviour in the workplace shapes the organisational, social and psychological context that serves as the catalyst for task activities and formal processes (Borman & Motowidlo, 1997; Motowidlo & Van Scotter, 1994). It has been argued that, in the modern workplace, which is characterised by increased competition, nontraditional working conditions, job insecurity and technological advancement, employees’ discretionary behaviour is becoming progressively more important (Weikamp & Göritz, 2016).
Discretionary employee behaviour may be either positive (i.e. aimed at benefiting the organisation or people in it) (Carpenter et al., 2014; Organ, 1997; Wang, 2015) or negative (i.e. behaviour that is detrimental to the organisation or people in it) (Bennett & Robinson, 2000a; Gruys & Sackett, 2003; Robinson & Bennett, 1995; Sackett & DeVore, 2001; Skarlicki Latham, 1997). In this study, these two distinct categories of discretionary behaviour that have been shown to have implications for organisational functioning are referred to as organisational citizenship behaviour (OCB) and counterproductive work behaviour (CWB) (Reynolds et al., 2015).
The extent to which employees engage in both positive (OCB) and negative (CWB) discretionary behaviour in the workplace has gained increasing prominence in organisational research due to its impact on organisational-level outcomes such as productivity and efficiency (Dalal, Lam, Weiss, Welch, & Hulin, 2009; Lee & Allen, 2002; Podsakoff, Whiting, Podsakoff, Blume, 2009). Various studies have shown that, when employees display frequent OCB, this facilitates greater dissemination of knowledge and expertise and thereby enhances productivity and cooperation which, in turn, enhances organisational effectiveness (Chinomona & Dhurup, 2016; Park, 2018). In contrast, CWB has been shown to have serious economic consequences for organisations (Bennett & Robinson, 2000a; Shoss et al., 2016) impacting on sustained survival and success (Dalal, 2005; Fox, Spector, & Miles, 2001; Spector & Fox, 2005). CWB may furthermore have negative consequences at an individual level, resulting in, for instance, decreased job satisfaction and well-being, increased stress and anxiety and intentions to quit by individuals who are the targets of such behaviour (Berry, Carpenter, & Barratt, 2012; Cohen, 2016; Shoss et al., 2016; Whelpley & McDaniel, 2016). CWB therefore affects not only the performance and well-being of the employee engaging in such behaviour but also individuals interacting with this employee as well as the organisation as an entity (Whelpley & McDaniel, 2016). Hence, CWB has a detrimental effect on relations in the workplace.

CHAPTER 1: SCIENTIFIC OVERVIEW OF THE RESEARCH
1.1 BACKGROUND TO AND MOTIVATION FOR THE RESEARCH
1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT
1.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS
1.4 AIMS OF THE RESEARCH
1.6 PARADIGMATIC PERSPECTIVES OF THE RESEARCH
1.7 RESEARCH DESIGN
1.8 RESEARCH METHOD
1.9 CHAPTER DIVISION
1.10 CHAPTER SUMMARY
CHAPTER 2: METATHEORETICAL CONTEXTS OF THE STUDY: THE SOUTH AFRICAN EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS ENVIRONMENT
2.1 EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS AS A FIELD OF STUDY AND PRACTICE
2.2 THE SOUTH AFRICAN EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS ENVIRONMENT
2.3 EVALUATION AND SYNTHESIS
2.4 CHAPTER SUMMARY
CHAPTER 3: RELATIONAL ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIOUR IN THE WORKPLACE
3.1 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK FOR UNDERSTANDING ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIOUR IN THE WORKPLACE
3.2 DISCRETIONARY EMPLOYEE BEHAVIOUR
3.3 ORGANISATIONAL COMMITMENT
3.4 UNION COMMITMENT
3.5 EVALUATION AND SYNTHESIS
3.6 CHAPTER SUMMARY
CHAPTER 4: ANTECEDENTS OF RELATIONAL ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIOUR
4.1 REPORTED ANTECEDENTS OF RELATIONAL ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIOUR IN THE WORKPLACE
4.2 PERCEIVED PSYCHOLOGICAL CONTRACT BREACH AND VIOLATION
4.3 PERCEIVED ORGANISATIONAL JUSTICE (POJ)
4.4 PERCEIVED ORGANISATIONAL SUPPORT (POS)
4.5 EVALUATION AND SYNTHESIS
4.6 CHAPTER SUMMARY
CHAPTER 5: THE MEDIATING EFFECTS OF ORGANISATIONAL CYNICISM AND TRUST
5.1 ORGANISATIONAL TRUST
5.2 ORGANISATIONAL CYNICISM
5.3 THE MEDIATING ROLE OF ORGANISATIONAL CYNICISM AND TRUST
5.4 EVALUATION AND SYNTHESIS
5.5 CHAPTER SUMMARY
CHAPTER 6: CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN THE WORKPLACE: THE MODERATING ROLE OF INDIVIDUALISM/COLLECTIVISM
6.1 CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN THE WORKPLACE
6.2 CONCEPTUALISATION OF INDIVIDUALISM/COLLECTIVISM
6.3 THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE INDIVIDUALISM/COLLECTIVISM CONSTRUCT
6.4 PERSON-CENTRED VARIABLES INFLUENCING INDIVIDUALISM/ COLLECTIVISM
6.5 INDIVIDUALISM/COLLECTIVISM AS A MODERATING VARIABLE
6.6 INDIVIDUALISM/COLLECTIVISM IN A SOUTH AFRICAN EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS CONTEXT
6.7 EVAUATION AND SYNTHESIS
6.8 CHAPTER SUMMARY
CHAPTER 7:THEORETICAL INTEGRATION AND CONSTRUCTION OF A HYPOTHESISED PSYCHOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK FOR ENHANCING RELATIONAL ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIOUR IN A SOUTH AFRICAN EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS CONTEXT
7.1 EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS IN SOUTH AFRICA
7.2 RELATIONAL ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIOUR AS A SET OF RELATIONAL OUTCOMES OR CONSEQUENCES IN EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS
7.3 WORK-RELATED PERCEPTIONS AND WORK EXPERIENCES AS ANTECEDENTS OF RELATIONAL ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIOUR
7.4 ORGANISATIONAL CYNICISM AND TRUST AS MEDIATING VARIABLES
7.5 INDIVIDUALISM/COLLECTIVISM AS A MODERATING CONSTRUCT
7.6 THE POTENTIAL INFLUENCE OF PERSON-CENTRED VARIABLES
7.7 INTEGRATED THEORETICAL PSYCHOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK
7.8 IMPLICATIONS FOR EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS PRACTICES
7.9 CHAPTER SUMMARY
CHAPTER 8: RESEARCH METHOD
8.1 RESEARCH APPROACH
8.2 DETERMINATION AND DESCRIPTION OF THE POPULATION AND SAMPLE
8.3 CHOOSING AND JUSTIFYING THE MEASUREMENT INSTRUMENTS
8.4 DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURE AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE MEASURING INSTRUMENTS
8.5 FORMULATION OF THE RESEARCH HYPOTHESES
8.6 STATISTICAL PROCESSING/ANALYSIS OF THE DATA
8.7 CHAPTER SUMMARY
CHAPTER 9: RESEARCH RESULTS
9.1 PRELIMINARY AND DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
9.2 CORRELATION STATISTICS
9.3 INFERENTIAL AND MULTIVARIATE STATISTICS
9.4 CHAPTER SUMMARY
CHAPTER 10: DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, LIMITATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
10.1 INTEGRATION AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
10.2 CONCLUSIONS
10.3 LIMITATIONS
10.4 RECOMMENDATIONS
10.5 EVALUATION OF THE STUDY
10.6 REFLECTION OF DOCTORATENESS AND CONCLUSION
10.7 CHAPTER SUMMARY
REFERENCES
GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT