ارائه الگویی از پیشایندهای رفتارهای انحرافی کارکنان با استفاده از روش فراترکیب

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری، دانشکده اقتصاد، مدیریت و علوم اداری، دانشگاه سمنان، سمنان، ایران

2 دانشیار دانشکده اقتصاد، مدیریت و علوم اداری، دانشگاه سمنان، سمنان، ایران

3 استاد دانشکده مدیریت و اقتصاد، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران

10.22111/jmr.2019.27715.4305

چکیده

      پژوهش حاضر باهدف ارائه الگوی پیشایندهای رفتارهای انحرافی کارکنان در سازمان‌ها با رویکرد فراترکیب انجام ‌شده است. این پژوهش از نظر هدف کاربردی و روش آمیخته (کیفی- کمی) است. محققین در قسمت کیفی با استفاده از روش فراترکیب، بازنگری دقیق و عمیق در موضوع انجام داده و یافته‌های پژوهش‌های مرتبط را ترکیب کرده‌اند. 275 مقاله در حوزه انحرافات سازمانی مورد ارزیابی قرار گرفت و درنهایت 74 مقاله انتخاب و با تحلیل محتوای آن‌ها ابعاد و کدهای مربوطه استخراج و میزان اهمیت و اولویت هر یک به روش کمی آنتروپی شانون تعیین گردید. بر اساس یافته‌های پژوهش، کدهای بی‌عدالتی در حوزه توزیع حقوق، پاداش، مزایا و برنامه کاری؛ حقوق و مزایای ناکافی؛ نبود وجدان کاری؛ کاهش سطح اعتماد بین همکاران؛ رفتار ناعادلانه مدیر با کارمند؛ تناسب ضعیف کارکنان با مشاغل خود؛ نیاز به قدرت؛ بی­تعهدی کارکنان؛ خستگی از کار و فقدان نظارت صحیح در سازمان، دارای بیشترین ضریب اهمیت در بین ابعاد رفتارهای انحرافی می‌باشند. در نهایت پس از طی گام‌های پژوهش، الگویی از پیشایندهای رفتارهای انحرافی ارائه شد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Provide Pattern for Antecedents of Employees Deviant Behaviors in Organizations by Using Meta-Synthesis Method

نویسندگان [English]

  • Hossein Shool 1
  • Hossein Damghanian 2
  • Abbas Ali Rastgar 2
  • Hasan Danaee fard 3
  • Adel Azar 3
1 Ph.D Student, , Faculty of Economic, Management and administrative sciences, Semnan University, Iran
2 Associate Professor, Faculty of Economic, Management and administrative sciences, Semnan University, Iran
3 Professor , Faculty of Management and Economics, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

Abstract
The purpose of this study was to present an antecedent pattern of employees' deviant behaviors in organizations with a meta-synthesis approach. This study is applied in terms of purpose and in terms of mixed method (qualitative-quantitative). In the qualitative part, researchers using a meta-synthesis method, have conducted an detailed and in-depth review in the subject and combined the findings of relevant researches. 275 articles were evaluated in the field of organizational deviation and finally, 74 articles were selected and their codes and dimensions were extracted by their content analyzing and their importance and priority were determined by Shannon entropy quantitative method. According to the findings of the study, this codes have the most important coefficient among the dimensions of deviant behaviors: inequality in the distribution of salaries, bonuses, benefits and work plans; inadequate salaries and benefits; lack of conscience; reduced levels of trust among co-workers; unfair behavior of manager with employee; poor proportion of employees with their jobs; need for power; Lack of employee commitment; fatigue at work and lack of proper supervision in the organization. Finally, after the research steps, a pattern of antecedents of deviant behaviors was presented.
Introduction
Deviant behaviors are deliberate and voluntary behaviors that violate and distort the laws, norms of the organization, and accepted ethics tenet and threaten the health of the organization or its members. Literature has shown that approximately 95% of organizations engage in deviant behaviors (Rana and Punia, 2016). Given these enormous statistics, it is important for researchers to identify the factors affecting on formation of workplace deviation. If proper research is done, organizations can take the necessary actions to prevent workplace diversions and save billions dollars annually (Tuzun and Kalemci, 2017). In addition, the pervasive of deviant behaviors in organizations in our country (Rastgar et al, 2017; Danaeefard et al, 2016) causes us to have to do more analysis of the determinants factors of deviant behavior. Therefore, in this study, is taken into consideration propose a conceptual framework of antecedents of workplace deviance and rank the antecedents in terms of their impact on organizational deviance.
Case Study
The statistical population of the study consisted of all scientific documents, research reports, databases, internal and external journals on deviant behaviors published between 2007 and 2017.
Materials and Methods
This research is applied in terms of purpose and in terms method is mixed (qualitative-quantitative) and in particular the meta-synthesis method. In this study, a meta-synthesis seven-step method (Sandelowski and Barros, 2003) was used which includes the following steps: 1. Setting Research Questions, 2. Systematic review of texts, 3. Searching and selecting appropriate articles, 4. Extracting results, 5. analysis and integration of Quantitative findings, 6. Extractive code control, 7. Results presentation.
Discussion and Results
In the present study 183 codes, 44 main criteria and 5 categories were identified. this codes have the highest ratings: inequality in the distribution of salaries, bonuses, benefits and work plans; inadequate salaries and benefits; lack of conscience; reduced levels of trust among colleagues; unfair behavior of manager with employee; poor proportion of employees with their jobs; need for power; Lack of employee commitment; fatigue at work and lack of proper supervision.
 Conclusion
By reviewing the subject literature, we find that previous studies have not reached a consensus on the determining indicators and dimensions of antecedents of deviant behaviors and each article has identified a limited number of indicators and dimensions. This study, using qualitative meta-synthesis and content analysis based on Shannon entropy, presented a comprehensive conceptual model that is unique in the field of deviant behaviors inside and outside Iran. Also, the application of a new methodology in the phenomenon of deviant behaviors that has received less attention in Iran is another innovation of this study. The proposed conceptual framework is partly in line with the theoretical model proposed by Elias et al. (2013) in Malaysia, which classifies the determinants of workplace deviation into individual, organizational, and occupational factors. Likewise, Abville et al. (2011) presented a multi-level model of workplace deviation antecedents that included individual, group, and organizational antecedents.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Deviant Behaviors
  • Meta- Synthesis
  • Shannon entropy
1-Alias, M. Mohd Rasdi, R. Ismail, M. & Abu Samah, B. (2013). Predictors of workplace deviant behaviour: HRD agenda for Malaysian support personnel. European Journal of Training and Development, 37(2), 161–182.

2-Appelbaum, S. H. Iaconi, G. D. & Matousek, A. ( 2007). Positive and negative deviant workplace behaviors: causes, impacts, and solutions. Corporate Governance, 7, 586 – 598.

3-Arshadi, N. Piriaei, S. (2012( . Employee Reliability, Supervisor Reliability, and Interpersonal Trust as Antecedents of Deviant Workplace Behaviors, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Counseling, 4(13), 83-100. (In Persina)

4-Azar, A. MirfakhraDini, S.H & Anvari Rostami, A. (2008), Comparative Analysis of Data Analysis in Six Sigma, Using Statistical Tools and Multi-Index Decision Making Techniques. Journal of Teacher of Humanities. No. 59. pp. 1-36. (In Persina).

5-Barati, H. Arizi, H. Barati, A. Saranghi, K. Ranjbar, H (2013). The impact of organizational justice and organizational climate on counterproductive behaviors, Organizational Culture Management, 11(4), 181-197. (In Persina)

6-Beck, C. (2002). Mothering multiples: a Meta synthesis of Qualitative research”, MCN, the American journal of maternal/child Nursing, 28(2): 93-99.

7-Berry, C.M. Ones, D.S. & Sackett, P.R. (2007), “Interpersonal deviance, organizational deviance, andtheir common correlates: a review and Meta-analysis”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 92 (2), 410-424.

8-Bodankin, M. & Tziner, A. (2009). Constructive deviance, destructive deviance and personality: howdo they interrelate? Economic Interferences, 11, 549-564.

9-Chirasha, V. Mahapa, M. (2012). An Analysis of the Causes and Impact of Deviant Behaviour in the Workplace. The Case of Secretaries in State Universities, Journal of Emerging Trends in Economics and Management Sciences (JETEMS) 3(5): 415-421.

10-Cohen-Charash, Y. & Mueller, J.S. (2007). Does perceived unfairness exacerbate or mitigateinterpersonal counterproductive work behaviors, Journal of Applied Psychology,  92( 3),  666-680.

11-Chernyak-Hai, L. & Tziner, A. (2014). Relationships between counterproductive work behavior, perceived justice and climate, occupational status, and leader-member exchange. Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 30, 1-12.

12-Christian, M. S., & Ellis, A. P. (2011). Examining the effects of sleep deprivation on workplace deviance: A self-regulatory perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 54, 913-934.

13-Danaeefard, H.  Fani, A.  Shool, H. &  Shool, S. (2016). The antecedents of employees soldiering in the public sector: Mixed method, Journal of Organizational Behavior Studies,  4,  1-20. (In Persina)

14-Demir, M. (2011). Effects of organizational justice, trust and commitment on employees' deviant behavior, An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research, 22:2, 204-221.

15-Desrumaux, P. Machado, T. Przygodzki-Lionet, N. & Lourel, M. (2015). Workplace Bullying and Victims’ Prosocial or Antisocial Behaviors: What Are the Effects on Equity, Responsibility Judgments, and Help Giving? Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 25(6), 509–521.

16-Everton, W.J. Jolton, J.A. and Mastrangelo, P.M. (2007), “Be nice and fair or else: understandingreasons for employees’ deviant behaviors”, Journal of Management Development,  26( 2),  117-131.

17-Feiz, D. Sharafi, V. Shool, H (2016).The Relationship between Job Dignity and Subordinate Perspective: Investigating the Role of Organizational Indifference, Organizational Resource Management Research, 6(3), 128-128. (In Persina)

18-Gholipour, A. Bayat, S. Bad, M (2016) .Investigating the Causes and Consequences of Anger in Organizations and Presenting Management Strategies, Journal of Organizational Behavior Studies, 5(4), 123-1149. (In Persina)

19-Ghorbani, I. Feizabadi, H (2014). Investigating the Sociological Perspectives of Social Deviations, North Khorasan Police Knowledge Quarterly, 1(3), 120-97. (In Persina)

20-Ghosh, R. (2017) Workplace Incivility in Asia- How do we take a Socio- Cultural Perspective? Human Resource Development International, 20:4, 263-267.

21-Griffin, R.W. O’Leary-Kelly, A. & Collins, J. (1998). Dysfunctional work behaviors in organizations. In C. L. Cooper&D.M. Rousseau (Eds.), Trends in organizational behavior (pp. 65–82). New York: Wiley.

22-Griffin, R. W. & Lopez, Y. P. (2005). Bad Behavior in Organizations: A Review and Typology for Future Research. Journal of Management, 31(6), 988–1005.

23-Hadavi Nejad, M. Baharloui, G. (2015) .Hypocritical Behaviors in Interpersonal Communication in the Organization: Organizational Antecedents and Implications, Public Management, 7(2), 393-412. (In Persina)

24-Hastings, S.E. and Finegan, J.E. (2011), The role of ethical ideology in reactions to injustice, Journal of Business Ethics, 100( 4), 689-743.

25-Henle, C.A. (2005). Predicting workplace deviance from the interaction between organizational justice and personality. Journal of Managerial Issues, 17(2), 247-263.

26-Jason, W. (2015). Effects of Gender and Aggression Type on Perceptions of Aggressive Behavior at Work, A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Psychology College of Arts and Sciences University of South Florida.

27-Kazemi, S. H. Danaee Fard, H. Rezaeian, A. Azar, A (2013). Making to stay in office: Understanding the dynamics of social construction of reality in the light of organizational ethnography, Organizational Resource Management Research, 3(3), 88-71. (In Persina)

28-Lefkowitz, J. (2009). Individual and organizational antecedents of misconduct in organizations: What do we (believe that we) know, and on what bases do we (believe that we) know it? Research Companion to Corruption in Organizations,

29-Marcus, B., & Schuler, H. (2004). Antecedents of counterproductive behavior at work: A general perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 647-660.

30-Mohaghar, A. Jafarnejad, A. ModarresYazdi, M. & SadeghiMoghadam, M. (2013). Providing a Comprehensive Model of Automated Supply Network Information Coordination Using the meta-synthesis. Journal of Information Technology Management. No. 4. pp. 161-194. (In Persina)

31-Nasir, M. & Bashir, A. (2012). Examining workplace deviance in public sector organizations of Pakistan. International Journal of Social Economics, 39, 240-253.

32-O’Boyle, E.H. Forsyth, D.R. & O’Boyle, A.S. (2011). Bad apples or bad barrels: an examination of group and organizational-level effects in the study of counterproductive work behavior, Group & Organization Management,  36(1), 39-69.

33-Omar,F. Halim, F.W. Zainah.AZ. Farhadi,H. Nasir, R & Khairudin,R(2011). Sttess and Job satisfaction as antecedents of workplace deviant behavior, world applied sciences journal 12,46-51.

34-Piquero, N  & Moffitt, T. ( 2014). Can Childhood Factors Predict Workplace Deviance, Justice ouarterly, 31 (4), 664–692.

35-Ponomariov, B & Kisunko,G. (2017). Overcoming the Impact of Corruption through Diligence: the Experience of Russian Female Managers, International Journal of Public Administration, 41(12), 971-985.

36-Rana, H. and Punia, B.K. (2016). Deviant workplace behavior and organizational role stress in thecorporate sector, Unpublished Manuscript, Guru Jambheshwar University of Science and Technology, Hisar.

37-Rastegar, A. Shool, H. Sharafi, V. (2017). The Role of Performance Assessment System in the Occurrence of Organizational Hypocrisy: The Modifying Effect of Organizational Atmosphere, Journal of Organizational Behavior Studies, 6 (2), 27-50. (In Persina).

38-Robinson, S.L. and Bennett, R.J. (1995). A typology of deviant workplace behaviors: a multidimensional scaling study, Academy of Management Journal, 38(2), 555-572.

39-Sandelowski M, Barros J)2007) Handbook for synthesizing qualitative research, Springer publishing company Inc.

40-Shaheen, S. Bashir, S & Khan, A. (2017). Examining Organizational Cronyism as an Antecedent of Workplace Deviance in Public Sector Organizations, Public Personnel Management, 1-16.

41-Stefano, G. Scrima, F  & Parry, E. (2017). The effect of organizational culture on deviant behaviors in the workplace, The International Journal of Human Resource Management,7(1) 1-23.

42-Tuna, M. Ghazzawi, I. Yesiltas, M. Tuna, A & Arslan, S. (2016). The effects of the perceived external prestige of the organization on employee deviant workplace behavior, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management,  28(2), 366 – 396.

43-Tuzun, I. K. & Kalemci, R. A. (2017). Workplace deviance and human resource management relations: A case study of Turkish hotel employees. Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality & Tourism, 17(2), 137–153

44-Vardi, Y. & Weitz, E. (2004). Misbehavior in Organizations: Theory, Research and Management. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

45-Yaghoubi, N. (2015). Predicting the Components of Employees 'Organizational Citizenship Behavior in the Light of Managers' Spiritual Leadership, Public Management Research, 8, 30, 75-98. (In Persina)

46-Yıldız, B. Alpkan, L. Ateş, H. & Sezen, B. (2015). Determinants of Constructive Deviance: The Mediator Role of Psychological Ownership. International Business Research. 8(4), 107-121.

47-Zheng, W. Wu, Y.C. J. Chen, X. & Lin, S.J. (2017). Why do employees have counterproductive work behavior? The role of founder’s Machiavellianism and the corporate culture in China. Management Decision, 55(3), 563–578.

48-Zimmer L (2006) Qualitative meta-synthesis: a question ofdialoguing with texts. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 53: 311–318.

49-Zoghbi Manrique de Lara, P. Verano Tacoronte, D. & MingTing-Ding, J (2012). Procedural justice and workplace deviance: the mediating role of perceived normative conflict in work groups. Decisiones Organizativas, 381-393.