determinants of deviant workplace behavior

DETERMINANTS OF DEVIANT WORKPLACE BEHAVIOR 1

Summary

This report examined the individual and organizational determinants of workplace

deviant behaviors in the organizational workgroup setting. It also focused on Organizational

citizenship (OCB) and the role of OCB to define the job responsibilities of an employee. The

nature of the report is descriptive and this report is evaluated through Bi-variate analysis. The

cross tabulation table is for identifying which category (01 and 02) practice work place

deviant behaviors more than other category of a single variable and the chi-square table

signifies whether a particular variable has a direct relationship with work place deviant

behaviors or not. This report is also analyzed how to reduce or eliminate workplace deviance

to enhance the organizational security and also shows the relationship between OCB and

other variables.

Importance

The Organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) is a discretionary behavior that is not

a part of an employee's formal job requirements but that nonetheless supports the effective

functioning of the organization. This discretionary effort could include, volunteering for extra

work or directly helping others or the team with their assigned job duties. OCB is an

important factor that can contribute to the survival of an organization. Within an

organization, employee satisfaction depends on organizational commitment, organizational

justice, career development, personality, motivation and leadership which ultimately made

impact and affect on the OCB. Through OCB, we can identify employee behavior in terms of

in-role and extra-role behavior. OCB is the function of how broadly employees define their

job responsibilities (Morrion and Zaleth, 1994). OCB is important in employees contribution

because OCB may improve organizational effectiveness (Padsakoff and Mackenzie, 1997).

These behaviors normally exceed the minimum requirements of the job, they are not easily


enforceable and performing them is usually at the discretion of the individual (Organ, 1997).

Therefore, when an individual spends time on these voluntary and support activities, they are

considered as "good citizens" (Bateman and Organ, 1983). OCB have not included in

advanced for a given job, so OCB are regarded as an extra role. While employees get proper

motivation and job satisfaction, it leads them to participate in OCB more than the employees

who are dissatisfied.

In the workplace, many people come together and express different behaviors. Each of these

behaviors has different consequences to the individual working in the whole organization.

The consequences of deviant workplace behavior are critical because they can affect all

levels of the organization including decision making, productivity and financial costs.

Nonetheless, OCB makes huge contribution to the working environment of an organization.

Literature Review

Organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) is behavior that extends beyond that

required by an organization in a formal job description. Some of the researchers emphasized

on the classification of context relevant attitudes motives or characteristics. The context

relevant attitudes include job satisfaction, organizational commitment and job characteristics.

The researchers have also said that the performance of organizational citizenship behavior is

reactive (Organ and Ryan, 1995) and also examined the motives of an individual for

performing organizational citizenship behavior. While performing the research work, the

researchers took some factors under considerations. Those factors are given below:

1. Self monitoring and organizational citizenship behavior:

Self monitoring is a personality trait and it is the ability of an individual to

adjust his or her behavior to external situational factors. Self monitoring does have a

strong relationship with organizational citizenship behavior. If we look specifically


then we can say that self monitoring is more strongly related with the interpersonal

dimensions of organizational citizenship behavior. If a person is highly self-

monitored, then he or she will be skilled in communication and for this specific

reason they can interact with others in a clear way and this quality help an individual

to engage him or herself in voluntary behavior. High self monitoring can engage

themselves in pre-social values like being friendly, polite, being concerned about

others feeling etc.

2. Employees mood and organizational citizenship behavior:

Mood within organizational structure influence both what and how an

employee think (Forgos and George,). Mood is really important because it affects how

an employee deal with his or her task, it influence information recall and thereby

influence organizational judgment and behavior. It means that when an employee is in

a good mood then he or she will perform his or her task properly and on the other

hand they will be much more willing to help their subordinates.

3. Perceived fairness and organizational citizenship behavior:

Moorman (1991) and researchers have emphasized on fairness and found out a

correlation between fairness and organizational citizenship behavior. If an employee

is fairly treated, then they will hold positive attitudes towards their work, outcomes

and supervisors. Organs and Konovsky (1989) reported that organizational citizenship

behavior is related with the perception of fairness and the subjective appraisal of job

outcomes, rather than on their mood. According to Slot (1999), employees attempt to

maintain a balance between their effort and expected return. Slot (1999) has also said

that if any employee feels that they are unfairly treated, then they will reduce their

organizational citizenship behavior otherwise vice versa.


4. Gender and organizational citizenship behavior:

There is a evidence that men has always performed higher in their

performance whereas women are highly involved in organizational citizenship

behavior. Women are good in organizational citizenship behavior because they are

sensitive, loving, helpful and kind. So it proves that a female employee is highly

involved in organizational citizenship behavior.

OCB and Deviant workplace behavior:

Organizational citizenship behavior is a voluntary behavior done by an employee for

the benefit of an organization whereas deviant workplace behavior hampers the working

environment of an organization as the employees who practice deviant behaviors violates the

norms and rules of a particular organization. This clearly shows that OCB do have an inverse

relationship with deviant workplace behavior. In the above discussion self monitoring was

compared with organizational citizenship behavior where we found that if an employee has

self monitoring power, then he or she can avoid external situational factors and can perform

his or her task well. Now if we compare the organizational citizenship behavior with deviant

workplace behavior then we can see that if an employee does not have the self monitoring

power, then he or she may face frustration or dissatisfaction towards his or her workplace

which will eventually lead that employee to deviant behaviors. If we compare with

employees mood and perceived fairness with deviant workplace behavior, then we will also

see that this also have inverse relationship with each other. If an employee is in a good mood

then he or she will be willing to help other within the organization otherwise an employee

may engage him or herself in deviant workplace behavior.


Methodology

1. Nature of the Study:

Our nature of the study was descriptive study which means a statistical study

to identify patterns or trends in a situation but not the causal linkages among its

different elements. Descriptive studies (such as a cross-sectional study) help in

generating hypothesis on which further research may be based.

2. Questionnaire Design:

In total, there were 71 variables and we designed a close questionnaire which

means there were some fixed questions and the respondent had to answer form those

questions rather than adding any other ideas from him or herself. There was a scale of

1 to 5 which is called the likert scale to answer the question of our questionnaire.

There were some categorical information such as level of study, current CGPA etc.

and there were some negative questions to test the validity of a particular

questionnaire which was removed from the questionnaire while creating the final

analysis.

3. Sample:

We have collected 732 samples and for collecting these samples we have

applied convenience sampling method which means a sampling method (a way of

gathering participants for a study) used where you select a naturally-occurring group

of people within the population you want to study.

4. Analysis:

Basically we have done a Bi-variate analysis which means a simultaneous

analysis of two variables or attributes. We have done a cluster analysis and by doing it

we have combined all the work place deviant behaviors into a new variable and these

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/pattern.html

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/research.html

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/hypothesis.html

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/cross-sectional-study.html

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/study.html

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/element.html

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/linkages.html

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/causal.html

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/trend.html


variable has two categories, category one (01) which signifies the lower practice of

deviant behaviors and category two (02) which signifies the higher practice of deviant

behaviors. In the analysis, we have tried to test the relationship between these two

categories (01 and 02) and with the demographic variables (such as age, public

university, private university etc.).

Analysis

In our analysis, there are two tables in our analysis; first table is the cross tabulation

table from which we can identify which category practice work place deviant behaviors more

than other category of a single variable. The second table is the chi-square table from which

we can identify whether a particular variable has a direct relationship with work place deviant

behaviors or not. So, in the Chi-square test, the variables that contain the value of .000 can be

called as highly correlated, variables that have the value of less than .05 but greater than .000 (such

as .097) can be called as marginally correlated and the variables that contain the value of more

than .05 (such as .590) have no correlation.

Crosstab

Count

Cluster Number of

Case

Total1 2pub_private public 231 141 372

private 188 172 360

Total 419 313 732

level 1st year 64 41 105

2nd year 172 124 296

3rd year 90 89 179

4th year 72 52 124

masters 21 7 28

Total 419 313 732

gender female 139 82 221

male 280 231 511

Total 419 313 732

medium bangla 327 239 566


english 92 74 166

Total 419 313 732

fin_Support no 326 245 571

yes 93 68 161

Total 419 313 732

Research_Part no 306 236 542

yes 113 77 190

Total 419 313 732

Promotion_Seen

no 210 142 352

tv 53 43 96

Newspaper 129 110 239

magazine 8 8 16

radio 0 3 3

billboard 9 3 12

leaflet 7 2 9

others 3 1 4

Total 419 312 731

ExtraCurricular no 145 121 266

yes 274 192 466

Total 419 313 732

Table: Cross tabulation

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Exact Sig. (2-sided)

Exact Sig. (1-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square

7.288a 1 .007

Pearson Chi-Square

7.869a 4 .097

Pearson Chi-Square

4.137a 1 .042

Pearson Chi-Square

.290a 1 .590

Pearson Chi-Square

.023a 1 .879

Pearson Chi-Square

.523a 1 .470

Pearson Chi-Square

10.019a 7 .188


Pearson Chi-Square

3.962a 5 .555

Table: Chi-Square tests

Here, we have divided our analysis into eight parts as our variables are eight. The

discussion of this parts and their relationship rate with deviant workplace behaviors is given

below with logics:

Part: 01

In the first row of our cross tabulation table, we can see the number of students

involved in deviant workplace behavior in public and private universities. Here, we can see

that the private university students practice work place deviant behavior more than the public

university students as 172 out of 360 people practice work place deviant behaviors in private

universities where 141 out of 372 people practice work place deviant behaviors in the public

universities. We can also see in the Chi-square test that more or less there is a high

relationship (.007) between these demographic variable with the work place deviant

behaviors. The reason of this relationship could be administrative and educational

pressure. In the daily life of the university students, they face a lot of educational pressure

such as assignments, quizzes, presentations etc. as well as follow many administrative rules

and regulations to stay in the university campus which makes the students frustrated and they

fell encouraged to practice work place deviant behaviors.

Part: 02

In the second row of the cross tabulation signifies the level of studies and also shows

the number of students practice deviant behaviors in a particular study level. The numerical

figure shows us that the deviant workplace behavior increases with the increase in level of

study. The significant value of the chi square test is .097 which shows that this variable do


have a marginal relationship with the variables of deviant workplace behavior. The reason

behind this raise of deviant behavior could be friendly environment. When students enter in

a university as fresher’s, they do not have the nerve to get involved in deviant behaviors but

after passing a certain level when those students get used to with the environment, they

usually begin by ignoring some rules and regulations in the university and afterwards involve

themselves into some serious deviant behaviors.

Part: 03

The third row in cross tabulation shows the number of male and female students

involved in deviant workplace behavior. If we see the numerical figures, 82 out 221 female

students practice deviant behaviors and 231 out of 511 male students practice a deviant

behavior which clearly shows that male students practice deviant behaviors more than female

students. In the Chi-square test we can also see that there is a marginal relationship of .042

between this variable and the workplace deviant behavior. The reason of this relationship

could be variation of personality. Male are usually forceful and tough in nature which

makes their odds easier to involve in deviant behaviors where female students are usually

obedient, sensitive, peace loving and studious which makes their probability low in involving

themselves in deviant behaviors.

Part: 04

The next row in the cross tabulation table shows us the number of Bangla and English

medium students involved in deviant behaviors. We can see that 239 out of 566 Bangla

medium students are involved in deviant behaviors whereas 74 out of 166 English medium

students are involved in deviant behaviors. So, it shows that the Bangla medium students are

involved more in deviant behaviors than English medium students. According to the Chi-

square test, there is no significant relationship between these variable and deviant workplace


behavior as the significant value is .590 which greater than .05. The reason behind their lack

of relationship can be personal or family preference. When a student goes for primary or

secondary education, it is their or their family’s choice whether they will go for Bangla

medium or English medium. Even if that student remains dissatisfied afterwards, there is less

possibility to be involved in deviant behaviors.

Part: 05

In the following row, we can see in the cross tabulation table about the number of

students who are receiving or not receiving any financial support, getting involved in the

deviant workplace behaviors. According to our survey, 245 out of 571 students are involved

in the deviant behaviors who are not receiving any financial support and on the other hand,

68 out of 161 students are involved in the deviant behaviors who are receiving financial

supports form their institution which shows that students who are not receiving any financial

support are getting involved more than the students who are getting financial support. In the

Chi-square test, the significant value of this variable and the deviant workplace behavior

is .879 which means there is no relationship among them. The reason can be the quality of

the student. If a particular student has the capability or grades to receive any financial

support, he or she knows that he or she will automatically get the support but the student who

does not have the grades will not even think for any financial support. So in both scenarios, a

student can judge their qualities and there is no space for any deviant behavior.

Part: 06

In the sixth row of the cross tabulation, it shows the number of students who

participates or avoids research activities perform deviant behaviors. If we see the numerical

figures, 236 out of 532 students are involved in deviant behaviors who avoids the research

activities and on the other hand, 77 out of 190 students take part in deviant behaviors who


participates in the research activities which clearly shows that the students who are not

participating in the research activities are involved more in the deviant activities. In the Chi-

square test, the significant value is .470 which means there is no relationship between these

variable and deviant workplace behavior. One of the reasons of this lack of relation can be

lack of scope and interest. If a particular educational institution does not offer any research

work or if a particular student does not have the interest in research works, he or she will not

pay any attention to it and as a result there will not be any deviant behaviors.

Part: 07

In the next part of the cross tabulation shows the number of students who sees or not

sees the promotion of their university involved in the workplace deviant behaviors. So from

our survey, we can see that the students who have not seen any promotion of their university

(142 out of 352 students) are mostly involved in the workplace deviant behaviors. We can

also see from the Chi-square test that this variable does not have any significant relationship

(.188) with workplace deviant behaviors. The reason of this lack of relationship could be no

personal benefit. The deviant workplace behaviors are those behaviors that violate the rules

and regulations of a particular institution and without any dissatisfaction or personal benefit.

In this case, the students do not have any significant benefit as the promotion of their

institution does not satisfy or dissatisfy them. So, there is no reason to be involved in deviant

behaviors.

Part: 08

The last part of our cross tabulation table shows the number of students who are

involved or not involved with extracurricular activities perform deviant behaviors. We can

see in the cross tabulation that 121 out of 266 students who are not involve with

extracurricular activities and 192 out of 466 students who are involved with extracurricular


activities perform deviant workplace behaviors. So, it clearly shows that the students who are

involved with extracurricular activities perform deviant behaviors more than others but in the

Chi-square test, there is no significant relationship (.555) between extracurricular activities

and deviant workplace behaviors. The reason behind this need of relationship could be no

academic benefit. As we do extracurricular activities for our personal learning's and

relaxation, there is not academic benefit involved where a student can fell satisfied or

dissatisfied. So, there is no room for any deviant behaviors.


Conclusion

This study examined the individual and organizational determinants of workplace

deviant behaviors in the organizational workgroup setting. In order to prevent deviant

workplace behavior we have to consider both individual characteristics and workplace

situations. Through our survey and analysis we found out that there are different categories of

students as most of the students responded differently by agreeing or disagreeing or by being

neutral. As we have seen that most of the students who are getting involved in deviant

behaviors, they practice it because of administrative or educational pressure or new entrance

or variation of personality. Now in order to reduce or eliminate workplace deviance to

enhance organization security, administrators need to consider the students reactions to

organizational policies and practice, as well as their views and what attract them most to the

organization. If it is necessary to reduce the administrative pressure towards the students for

the betterment of the organization, then administrators should consider this because if the

student’s reaction to organizational practices is positive, they will be likely attracted by the

pleasant relationships maintained in the workgroup. Therefore, students may engage in

deviant behavior as a way to air out their dissatisfaction with the organization or simply to

react upon their peers. In order to avoid this situation, administrators need to build a trusting

environment. When students show high positive reactions to their organizations they tend to

perform their studies better with little or no supervision.


References

Blakely G. L.; Andrews M. C. & Fuller J. (2003). ARE CHAMELEONS GOOD

CITIZENS? A LONGITUDINAL STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN

SELFMONITORING AND ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOR. Journal

of Business and Psychology , 18.

Lovell S. E. et al. (1999). Does gender affect the link between organizational citizenship

behavior and performance evaluation. Sex Roles , 41.

Zhang Y.; Liao J. & Zhao J. (n.d.). Research on the organizational citizenship behavior

continuum and its consequences. 364-379.

Muafi. (2011). Causes and Consequences Deviant Workplace Behavior. International

Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology , 2.

Bivariate Analysis. (n.d.). Retrieved August 9, 2012, from utoronto: http://chem-

eng.utoronto.ca/~datamining/dmc/bivariate_analysis.htm