Reference no: EM132866156
Please answer the following questions of this exercise; A title based on the exercise
- Draw a model representing all the variable including independent, dependent and mediator or moderating variable
- what could be the hypothesis based on the model
Exercise:
Worker deviant behavior, and its opposite, organizational citizenship are two key aspects of employee discretionary behavior, and are important in hotel operations. The purpose of this study is to examine the influence of centralization on organizational citizenship behaviors (OCB) and deviant workplace behaviors (DWB). Survey data from 318 employees in Taiwan's hotel industry indicate that centralization is positively related to OCB, and negatively related to DWB. Moreover, procedural justice partially mediated the relationship between centralization and OCB/DWB. These results have importance for management and the paper concludes by discussing the implications of the results.
One of the challenges of hospitality industry management is to achieve a balance between the need for efficiency versus that for customization. Efficiency requires rules, standardization, and often formalized, mechanistic ways of doing work. In contrast, customization requires empowerment, openness, and more organic organizational designs (Øgaard, Marnburg, & Larsen, 2008). Organizational theories generated from Western countries remain a challenge in Oriental countries such as Taiwan, due to the differences in cultures (Shenkar & Von Glinow, 1994). Therefore, it is important to examine the problems of using the same management practices across cultures in the hospitality industry.
In today's struggling global economy, it is not enough for employees to merely do their jobs. Many businesses expect organizational members to not only complete their required duties, but also proactively assist their colleagues. Therefore, many organizational scholars are focusing on employees' positive behaviors such as organizational citizenship behavior (OCB). However, research has shown that deviant workplace behavior (DWB) is fairly prevalent (Harper, 1990; McGurn, 1988). When employees participate in DWB, the behavior can have devastating effects on the organization or its members (Robinson & Bennett, 1997). As a result, researchers have been encouraged to develop a deeper understanding of the variables associated with OCBs (Huang, Iun,
Liu, & Gong, 2010; Kim, O'Neill, & Cho, 2010) and DWBs (Avey, Luthans, & Youssef, 2010; Bowling, 2010). Prior research has indicated that hotel companies have the characteristics of high levels of centralization (Øgaard et al., 2008). Several researchers found that employees' perceptions of a centralized organization are negatively related to OCBs (DeGroot & Brownlee, 2006; Raub, 2008). Moreover, centralization will result in job dissatisfaction and employee DWB may be evoked (Judge, Scott, & Ilies, 2006; Willem, Buelens, & Jonghe, 2007). In addition, a more centralized organization may elicit work disinterest from employees and reduce their work enthusiasm. There may be functional aspects of employee disinterest, however, and they may turn to their coworkers for conversation (Matheson, 2007) and thereby strengthen workplace friendships (Sias & Cahill, 1998). If they have stronger friendships with coworkers, they might be more inclined to help those coworkers (OCB) and less inclined to harm them (DWB).
The above findings indicate that centralization has significant influence on OCB and DWB. However, whether the impact is positive or negative is obviously inconclusive from the above deductions. Therefore, the purpose of this research is to examine the effect of centralization on OCB and DWB. Moreover, based on the social exchange theory (Blau, 1964), previous literature indicated that procedural justice is an important antecedent of OCB (Colquitt, Conlon, Wesson, Porter, & Ng, 2001) and DWB (Dineen, Lewicki, & Tomlinson, 2006; Skarlicki & Folger, 1997). This study also examines the mediating effect of procedural justice on the relationship between centralization and OCB and DWB.
Several researchers considered that hotel managers are influenced by a traditional idea of leadership and management (Pittaway, Carmouche, & Chell, 1998; Tracey & Hinkin, 1996), and that employees follow particular systems and instructions given by their superiors (Øgaard et al., 2008). Hotel companies are characterized by higher centralization. The relative degree of centralization is signified by the hierarchy of authority and by employees' lack of participation in decision-making. Past researchers have described the practices and policies in hotel companies as archaic and inflexible (Tracey & Nathan, 2002), and "accepting the way we do things around here" may be the value that is deeply ingrained in the culture of the hospitality industry (Raub, 2008). Thus, in general, hospitality organizations represent relatively centralized organizations, needing routines and formal systems to coordinate tasks and secure efficient accomplishment of organizational objectives (Øgaard et al., 2008).
However, Pavia and Pilepi_c (2010) indicated that traditional organizational units in hotels are changed into process teams, and tasks become more flexible. The purpose of employees is no longer to carry out the assignments given by supervisors, but rather to fulfill customer needs and enhance customer satisfaction. Empowerment has been described as an organizational change strategy for the hospitality industry (Erstad, 1997). Decision making becomes a part of each process and takes place at the site of each process in hotels, meaning that all employees have the autonomy and responsibility for making decisions (Pavia & Pilepi_c, 2010). Accordingly, both centralized and decentralized structures are prevalent in the hospitality industry.
OCB is defined as individual behaviors that are discretionary and not rewarded directly by the organization (Organ, Podsakoff, & MacKenzie, 2006). Williams and Anderson (1991) created a two dimensional conceptualization of OCB consisting of OCB directed to individuals (OCBI) and OCB directed to the organization (OCBO). OCBI immediately benefits particular individuals within the organization. Such behavior may include helping colleagues who have heavier workloads (Ertürk, 2007). OCBO benefits the organization as a whole, such as punctuality, having a positive attitude, and making suggestions for the organization's improvement (Gilbert, Laschinger, & Leiter, 2010). OCB is important for organizations because it facilitates the accomplishment of organizational goals and enhances organizational performance (Fisher, McPhail, & Menghetti, 2010). Moreover, OCB can enhance customer satisfaction (Podsakoff, Whiting, Podsakoff, & Blume, 2009). Therefore, OCB has become critical in today's corporate world, where organizations have to be increasingly effective to survive.
Robinson and Bennett (1995) defined employee deviance as voluntary behavior that violates important organizational norms and threatens the well-being of organizations, its members, or both. Bennett and Robinson (2000) identified two facets of DWB consisting of DWB directed at individuals (DWBI) and DWB directed at the organization (DWBO). DWBI takes the form of behaviors directed at specific individuals of the organization and can include abuse, rudeness and physical assault (Mulki, Jaramillo, & Locander, 2006; Robinson & Bennett, 1995). DWBO is directed against the organization and includes such actions as stealing and withholding effort (Colbert, Mount, Harter, Witt, & Barrick, 2004). DWB produces organizational losses estimated to reach up to $200 billion annually in the United States (Harris & Ogbonna, 2006). This justifies the importance of studying DWBs in an organization.
Based on Hofstede's (1980) research, the dominant cultural pattern in Western countries is individualism, whereas that in Asian countries such as Taiwan is collectivism. Taiwan holds distinct cultural values that reflect the Confucian ethics. Confucianism places high value on total loyalty to a hierarchical structure of authority: a code of defined conduct between subordinates and managers, and trust among friends (Lee & Liu, 2007). These relationships are based on mutual and complementary obligations (Hofstede, 1991). Individuals with an adherence to Confucianism believe that social harmony and common interests are more important than individual interests and enjoyment. Also, people are more socio-centric and have an interdependent view of the self (Markus & Kitayama, 1991). In addition, guanxi as connections or relationships plays a critical role in the Taiwanese society. Guanxi refers to developing interpersonal relationship through formal or informal exchange and progressing mutual trust network with consensus of benefit and restraint (Lin & Ho, 2010). In business, guanxi generally involves a hierarchical network of interpersonal relationships embedded with mutual obligations to exchange favors or affection (Wong & Tam, 2000). Previous literature found that culture differences have impacts on the OCB (Cohen & Avrahami, 2006) and DWB (Jackson, Colquitt, Wesson, & Zapata-Phelan, 2006). Taormina and Gao (2010) identify three components of guanxi behavior: seeking assistance from family, maintaining friendships by providing help to friends, and doing favors for associates. Lin and Ho (2010) found that people with collectivism inclination engage in the OCB more positively since group harmony and unity are mainly focused in collectivism. On the contrary, people with individualism are more likely to consider themselves as independent members of a group. Jackson et al. (2006) also stated that collectivists performed their group tasks better, contributed more discretionary citizenship, and were less likely to engage in deviant behaviors. Therefore, national culture might encourage or inhibit OCB and DWB.
Centralization refers to the concentration of power or decision making authority in an organization (Schminke, Cropanzano, & Rupp, 2002). High centralization inhibits interactions among organizational members (Gold, Malhotra, & Segars, 2001). Highly centralized organizations prevent communication (Pertusa-Ortega, Zaragoza-Sáez, & Claver-Cortés, 2010) and reduce intrinsic motivation and employee atisfaction (Zheng, Yang, & McLean, 2010), which is negatively related to OCBs (Lapierre & Hackett, 2007; Nadiri & Tanova, 2010). Raub (2008) also indicated that centralized structure which restrict employees' margin of control will have a negative impact on their propensity to display OCB. Therefore, employees' perceptions of a
centralized organization are negatively related to OCB. Conversely, past research indicated that participation in decision-making can lead to engagement in OCBs, such as helping new members of the work group (Porter, Lawler, & Hackman, 1996). Centralization is negatively associated with empowerment. Empowerment enhances feelings of self-efficacy among organizational members, and organizational members may reciprocate by performing OCBs (Wat & Shaffer, 2005). Van Yperen, van den Berg, and Willering (1999) also found that the more employees feel that they participate in decision-making, the more they feel supported by their supervisor, which is accompanied by the display of more OCBs. Moreover, Gilbert et al. (2010) suggested that empowerment is more strongly related to employee discretionary behaviors directed at the organization than toward the individual. OCBO is more likely to be a direct function of what employees think about their work characteristics. OCBI might indeed reflect a natural expression of employees' affect at work rather than their deliberate attempt to restore the balance with the organization. According to the above research, it could be theorized that centralization may be negatively related to OCBI and OCBO.
Alternatively, centralization may indirectly enhance OCB. Matheson (2007) stated that centralized organizations may elicit employees' work disinterest and lower work enthusiasm. Centralization increases employees' alienation by limiting their autonomy and their selection of goals. Hence, centralization contributes to feelings of powerlessness (Conger & Kanungo,1988) and employees would transfer their focus to other activities, such as conversation, which will in turn enhance workplace friendship (Sias & Cahill, 1998). Strong friendship ties lead to reciprocity and employees' social exchange toward their friends. When workplace friendship is increased, employees will be more willing to assist colleagues (Bowler & Brass, 2006). In addition, highly cohesive groups are likely to have a strong sense of social identity and belonging that can increase organizational members' desire to help one another (Van Dyne, Graham, & Dienesch, 1994) and to engage in OCBs. Hence, group cohesiveness is positively related to OCBs (Tan & Tan, 2008). In sum, we can theorize that higher centralization of organizational structure may enhance employee OCBI and OCBO.
Highly centralized organization discourages employees from exerting more efforts in achieving organizational goals (Organ et al., 2006). Past literature found that centralization will result in greater dissatisfaction among employees (Willem et al., 2007). The social exchange theory predicts that individuals who perceive that they are receiving unfavorable treatment are more likely to feel angry, vengeful, and dissatisfied. Employees may retaliate against dissatisfying conditions and unjust workplaces by engaging in behavior that harms the organization or other employees. Research suggested that dissatisfied employees often resort to deviant behaviors as a way of coping with frustration (Judge et al., 2006). Rusbult, Farrell, Rogers, and Mainous (1988) also stated that employees may express their dissatisfaction of work through deviant behaviors. Hence, Mount, Ilies, and Johnson (2006) asserted that those employees who are less satisfied with their jobs are more likely to display both interpersonal and organizational DWB. Accordingly, higher job dissatisfaction could have an impact on increasing the potential for DWB (Bowling, 2010; Dalal, 2005; Judge et al., 2006). Many researchers have emphasized the importance of distinguishing between DWBO and DWBI (Bennett & Robinson, 2000; Robinson & Bennett, 1997). If the organization is the cause of the mistreatment, then deviance will be most likely directed against the organization; if an individual is the cause of the mistreatment, then deviance will most likely be directed against the individual.
On the other hand, Matheson (2007) discovered that centralized organizations will increase work alienation, which will in turn promote employees' workplace friendship (Sias & Cahill, 1998). Higher workplace friendship implies that employees are more willing to assist other colleagues (Bowler & Brass, 2006), which reinforces affective support among employees (Berman, West, & Richter, 2002). Therefore, employees would be less willing to exhibit DWB (Dalal, 2005).Workplace friendship refers to informal and personal-related interactions in a workplace setting (Berman et al., 2002). Workplace friendship increases support and resources that help individuals do their jobs, which will in turn reduce DWB. According to the above, we theorize that higher organizational centralization may be associated with lower employee DWBI and DWBO.
Procedural justice refers to the perceived fairness of the means used to determine the outcomes employees receive (Folger & Konovsky, 1989). Since less participation allows less voice, and more authority hierarchy allows less choice, then procedural justice decreases with each (Schminke et al., 2002). Schminke, Ambrose, and Cropanzano (2000) also indicated that participation in decision- making is positively related to procedural justice and authority hierarchy is negatively related to procedural justice. Therefore, higher centralization is associated with lower procedural justice. Ambrose and Schminke (2003) suggested that under different organizational structures, procedural justice will play differentially key roles in determining the quality of supervisory social exchange and organizational social exchange. Organizational justice facilitates the formation of social exchange relationships and thus fosters OCB (Moorman & Byrne, 2005).
When employees perceive the process by which outcome allocation decisions are made to be fair, they are more likely to display OCBs (Niehoff & Moorman, 1993). Employees who perceive that they are treated fairly by the organization may develop a sense of obligation to reciprocate by performing OCB (Lee & Allen, 2002; Zhang & Agarwal, 2009). Hence, a variety of studies have found a positive relationship between perception of procedural justice and OCB (Nadiri & Tanova, 2010; Zhang & Agarwal, 2009). Previous research also suggested that fairness perceptions play an important role in provoking DWB (Browning, 2008; Robinson & Bennett, 1995). If employees perceive managerial actions and organizational decisions as unfair or unjust, they are apt to experience feelings of resentment, anger, and outrage (Greenberg, 1990; Skarlicki, Folger, & Tesluk, 1999). Moreover, Hollinger and Clark (1983) found that if employees perceive unjust and unfair feelings, they would engage in actions in violation of the organization to restore their unjust perceptions, such as stealing, going slow in work, being late or leaving early, and absence. In addition, when employees perceive their organization as using unfair procedures for resource allocations, they will develop negative attitudes toward the organization (e.g., reduced trust and commitment and increased dissatisfaction) (Zoghbi-Manrique & Verano-Tacoronte, 2007). In turn, these attitudes lead to DWB against the organization (Skarlicki & Folger, 1997).