BOOK REVIEWS 807

There are still too many students and practitioners whose thumbnailof this topic is limited to this: Conscientiousness always predicts perfor-mance. An intense day spent reading and considering Personality andWork will add levels of subtlety and detail to this simplistic understand-ing of the personality-work behavior relationship. For those committedto the science of 1-0 psychology or just plain curious about the role ofpersonality in organizations, this book is a must read.

REFERENCES

Barrick MR, Mount MR. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance.PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY, 44,1-26.

Weiss HM, Adler S. (1984). Personality and organizational behavior. In Staw BM,Cummings LL (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, (Vol. 6, pp. 1-50).Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Yoav Vardi and Ely Weitz. Misbehavior in Organizations: Theory, Re-search, and Management. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,2004, 337 pages, $34.50 softcover

Reviewed by Wayne Harrison, Associate Professor of Psychology,University of Nebraska at Omaha, Omaha, NE.

Julie Andrews on management:

Production slowdowns and absenteeism.Pilfering supplies and favoritism.Sexual harassment—th' lawsuits it brings;These are a few of my least fav'rite things.

In addition to these examples of organizational misbehavior (OMB),Vardi and Weitz consider over 100 more forms of employee misconductin this book. The authors' stated purposes for the text are "constructing anintegrative model of misbehavior, measuring the variables, and derivingrelevant predictions as well as implications for management in dealingwith OMB." In the first two chapters, they offer a working definition ofmisbehavior, consider its prevalence both in the workplace and as a topicof the OB literature, and conclude with an orienting framework or modelof organizational misbehavior (OMB), which is subsequently modifiedand elaborated upon.

The proposed framework offers a taxonomy of five types ("manifes-tations") of OMB, which are considered in detail in the next three chap-ters. These forms of OMB are intrapersonal misbehavior (e.g., substanceabuse), interpersonal misbehavior (e.g., sexual harassment), productionmisbehavior (e.g., absenteeism), property misbehavior (e.g., theft), and

808 PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY

political misbehavior (e.g., favoritism). The next section of three chaptersaddresses the four proposed general antecedents of OMB: individual levelfactors (e.g., attitudes), position/task level factors (e.g., job characteris-tics such as autonomy), group level factors (e.g., norms), and organiza-tional and professional level factors (e.g., culture). Both the discussionsof manifestations and of antecedents include detailed reviews of empiricalfindings, many from their own lab.

The final section of the book comprises three chapters: a timely con-sideration of managerial ethics viewed from an OMB perspective, mea-surement issues, and, lastly, a comprehensive, integrative model of OMBthat includes implications for management.

One of the strengths of the authors' writing is their clarity. Whetheror not one agrees with their assumptions, definitions, and conclusions, thereader is not left uncertain about what is claimed or proposed. For example,Vardi and Weitz characterize organizational misbehavior as "acts in theworkplace that are done intentionally and constitute a violation of rulespertaining to such behaviors." In developing this definition of OMB, theyspecifically exclude the consequences or costs to the organization of suchconduct: Misbehavior is not defined with reference to its impact. Instead,consequences are treated as a dependent variable in their model.

The contributions of this work are numerous. The heuristic value ofa taxonomy of misbehavior is substantial. The authors classify manifes-tations of OMB both by the five-fold scheme described above and by athree-category typology of intended targets (benefit the self, benefit theorganization, and damage the organization, respectively), which is actu-ally more tightly tied to the theory of reasoned action variables comprisingthe mediator section of their model. They allude to both representationsin their discussions of research findings.

The final version of the model is eminently testable. It is a systematicintegration of what is known about the causes, processes, manifestations,and costs (both social and financial) of OMB. Researchers will benefitgreatly by referencing this model in their theory development and testing.The proposed mediation process between antecedents and manifestationsis wholly cognitive, grounded in the reasoned action concepts of attitude,subjective norm, and behavioral intention. Four action points are identi-fied in the model, corresponding to the transitions between antecedents,mediators, manifestations, and costs. The authors importantly note thatfailure to intervene (and poorly designed interventions) will not dampenwhat is otherwise an amplifying loop; that is, greater levels of OMB arepredicted to result if unchecked. The diagnostic utility of the model liesin its explicit statement of antecedents and manifestations, for example,possible manifestations of high levels of stress or possible antecedents ofworkplace violence.

BOOK REVIEWS 809

The shortcomings of this text become apparent only when one backsoff their intense focus on misbehaviors and considers the "bigger picture."I offer three comments in this regard. First, the authors claim that OMB hasbeen historically understudied. Some of the evidence the authors presentin support of this claim is a literature search for words associated withmisbehavior (e.g., misconduct, violence, job dissatisfaction, insensitiv-ity). This examination reveals less research on such issues than on more"positive" topics. This analysis seems to misunderstand the common useof "marked" and "unmarked" words. For example, if a researcher has stud-ied affect about one's job, the report is likely to include "job satisfaction"in the title even if dissatisfaction is evident in the data or is the focus ofthe discussion. As even the authors admit at one point, equity research hasfocused largely on inequity, but is not so-named.

Their point is better made with regard to behaviors for which the posi-tive and negative forms do not constitute poles of a single dimension. Forexample, an employee who fails to help another employee is not actingcounterproductively (Sackett, 2004). Recent empirical studies show thatorganizational citizenship and organizational misbehavior are not oppo-site ends of a single continuum (Dunlop & Lee, 2004; Rotundo & Sackett,2002; Wiemann, Berry, Laczo, & Sackett, 2004). Thus, it seems morereasonable to conclude that while some forms of misconduct are likelyunderrepresented in the research literature, not all are. Interestingly, theconverse claim is made by proponents of the "positive psychology" move-ment (i.e., that insufficient attention has been paid to positive behavior inthe workplace; Cameron, Dutton, & Quinn, 2003). Both schools of thoughtwere represented by symposia at the 2004 SIOP Conference in Chicago,regrettably, in separate rooms. Do we need a model devoted solely tomisbehavior? The jury is still out on this question.

A second concern is the conceptualization of employee misconduct asintentional behavior resulting from a cognitive appraisal. Although thisperspective perhaps properly emphasizes individual choice (and account-ability), a less restrictive process model may ultimately prove worthwhile.In particular, Spector and Fox (2002) propose an affect-centered model.One might also consider less conscious processes such as modeling effectsor automaticity (Dijksterhuis & Bargh, 2001). The history of the develop-ment of models of turnover is suggestive: an evolution from intentional,rational, and linear models to theories accounting for impulsive, reactive,and nonlinear decision making. It should be noted, however, that the au-thors' emphasis on intentional action is shared by Sackett and DeVore's(2001) characterization of counterproductive work behavior.

A third issue is the underlying model of management as controllingemployee behavior. This perspective may be contrasted with that of lead-ership as the ability to motivate and inspire employees (Kotter, 1990).

810 PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY

Although dealing with misconduct is undoubtedly a critical issue to man-agers, the leadership and motivation literature suggests the potential of amore positive, transcendent approach. To the extent that employees buyinto a vision of where their organization is going and are inspired to aidin the accomplishment of this goal, their behavior may be self-directedin ways antithetical to OMB. Transformational leadership theories arguethat individual level concerns (e.g., "what's in it for me" and "you can't dothat to me") become less salient in a purposeful organization. Higgins's(1997) regulatory focus model, which distinguishes playing to win versusplaying not to lose, is also suggestive of the limits of focusing on the darkside only.

Overall, the authors have accomplished their stated objectives. Theprovision of a taxonomy of the many ways in which employees behavebadly merits considerable appreciation. Advances in understanding andmanaging OMB are facilitated by this organization of the phenomenon.Similarly, the detailed, integrative model proposed in the final chapter isan excellent starting point for research initiatives and discussions regard-ing OMB. This is a material contribution to the study of behaviors thatmay be on the rise (Callahan, 2004). I consider this text a must-read forresearchers concerned with these behaviors. This is perhaps less true forpractitioners, although numerous management implications are evident inthe model. Understanding antecedent conditions surely informs preven-tion of and response to misbehavior, yet, the authors emphasize that thereare no panaceas implied by the model. Instead, a case-by-case analysisis recommended. Although I personally recommend a "bigger picture"approach for both researchers and practitioners, this text is a significantcontribution to our understanding not only of OMB but also of OB.

REFERENCES

Callahan D. (2004). The cheating culture: Why more Americans are doing wrong to getahead. Orland, FL: Harcourt.

Cameron KS, Dutton JE, Quinn RE. (Eds.). (2003). Positive organizational scholarship:Foundations of a new discipline. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.

Dijksterhuis A, Bargh JA. (2001). The perception-behavior expressway: Automatic effectsof social perception on social behavior. In Zanna MP (Ed.), Advances in experimentalsocial psychology (Vol. 33, pp. 1-40). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Dunlop PD, Lee K. (2004, April). Organizational citizenship and workplace deviant behav-ior: Are they distinct? Paper presented at the 19th Annual Conference of the Societyfor Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Chicago, IL.

Higgins ET. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52, 1280-1300.Kotter JP. (1990). What leaders really do. Harvard Business Review, 68(3), 103-111.Rotundo M, Sackett PR. (2002). The relative importance of task, citizenship, and coun-

terproductive performance to global ratings of job performance: A policy-capturingapproach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 66-80.

BOOK REVIEWS 811

Sackett PR. (2004, April). Measuring and modeling counterproductive work behavior.Distinguished scientific contributions award address at the 19"' Annual Conferenceof the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Chicago, IL.

Sackett PR, DeVore CJ. (2001). Counterproductive behaviors at work. In Anderson N,Ones DS, Sinangil HK, Viswesvaran C (Eds.), Handbook of industrial, work andorganizational psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 145-164). London: Sage.

Spector PE, Fox S. (2002). An emotion-centered model of voluntary work behavior: Someparallels between counterproductive work behavior and organizational citizenshipbehavior. Human Resource Management Review, 12, 269-292.

Wiemann SA, Berry CM, Laczo RM, Sackett PR. (2004, April). Citizenship and coun-terproductive work behavior: Single continuum or distinct constructs? Paper pre-sented at the 19"' Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and OrganizationalPsychology, Chicago, IL.

Stephen Fineman. Understanding Emotion at Work. Thousand Oaks,CA: Sage, 2003, 203 pages, $84.95 hardcover, $32.95 softcover.Reviewed by Celeste M. Brotheridge, Assistant Professor, Faculty of Ad-ministration, University of Regina, Regina, SK, Canada.

Having read and thoroughly enjoyed Fineman's (1993, 2000) earlierbooks on the topic of emotions in the workplace, I was quite delighted tobe offered the opportunity to review his latest offering. Whereas his earlierbooks were edited collections of research papers addressed to emotionsresearchers, this book is written entirely by Fineman himself for the pur-pose of introducing students to the study of emotions in organizations.Consequently, each chapter starts with learning objectives, continues withan overview of a topical area that is peppered with anecdotes and writtenin an exceedingly accessible manner, and concludes with suggestions forfurther reading. The chapters deal with a variety of topics that are per-tinent to today's organizations such as emotional intelligence, emotionallabor, leadership, bullying, and organizational change. The treatment ofeach topic is best described as introductory rather than comprehensive,as it should be, given the audience for which the book is intended. Inwriting this book, Fineman drew from diverse sources including scholarlywriting and nonscholarly resources such as Web sites and popular pressand practitioner-oriented books. For the most part, the discussions arereasonably up-to-date but not complete. This is to be expected given thatthe book addresses numerous topics, which are themselves the subject ofentire books.

Undergraduate students would likely find that this book offers a goodoverview of the various topics. Graduate students in business or indus-trial/occupational psychology would also benefit from reading this bookbut would require supplemental reading that incorporates recent research.Given this book's focus on introducing and applying the topic of emo-tions in the workplace, it is not geared toward researchers who are looking