Abstract
Taking support from ego-depletion theory, this study examines ego depletion as a mechanism that explains how employees’ organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) leads to antagonistic consequences, i.e., service sabotage. Employees’ positive psychological capital (PsyCap) is considered a moderator. PROCESS macro was used to test all the hypotheses using time-lagged, dyadic data collected from 420 employees and their 112 their supervisors associated with the service industry in China. This study finds that employees’ exhibition of OCB is positively linked to ego depletion, which in turn drives service sabotage behavior. Furthermore, employees’ PsyCap weakens the effect of OCB on employees’ ego depletion. This study highlights the dark side of OCB, the mechanism through which it causes adverse effects, and the moderating effect of PsyCap. It also provides insights to the organizations for managing service sector employees to effectively interact with customers.
Highlights
Employees’ behavior is crucial for organizational success
psychological capital (PsyCap) is positively related to organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) (r = 0.39, p < 0.01) but negatively related to ego depletion (r = −0.31, p < 0.01) and service sabotage (r = −0.32, p < 0.01)
N = 420 responses; Significant at: *p < 0.05; ***p < 0.001; LLCI, Lower level of the 95% confidence interval; ULCI, Upper level of 95% confidence interval; OCB, Organizational citizenship behavior; PsyCap, Positive psychological capital
Summary
Employees’ behavior is crucial for organizational success. This phenomenon is more essential in the service sector where frontline employees’ behavior is considered a key to achieving customers’ satisfaction and even organizational survival in the long run (Harris and Ogbonna, 2012). Despite the well-accepted importance of employees’ behavior for organizational success, it is quite astonishing that many employees exhibit such dysfunctional behavior that is detrimental to organizations. There are some studies (Skarlicki et al, 2008; Yeh, 2015) of service sabotage, these have been plagued by some limitations (Harris and Ogbonna, 2012). The limited studies on sabotage have tended to be externally driven, while reasons to sabotage the service do not need to be always an external factor. We argue that systematic empirical research to highlight organizational internal factors that cause
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
