IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jomorg/v28y2022i2p226-243_2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Workplace ostracism and discretionary work effort: A conditional process analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Anjum, Muhammad Adeel
  • Liang, Dapeng
  • Durrani, Dilawar Khan
  • Ahmed, Ammarah

Abstract

Drawing on affective events theory (AET) and workplace incivility spiral, this study tested a conditional process model to explain, when and how, affective workplace events (workplace ostracism and workplace incivility) affect employees’ emotions and work effort. Data for this cross-sectional study were collected via an online survey from 251 employees at three public sector universities in Quetta, Pakistan. Results indicated that both ostracism and incivility encumber work effort, and that one way via which ostracism negatively affects work effort is by provoking targets’ negative affect (NA). Results also revealed that workplace incivility exacerbated positive relationship of ostracism and NA such that this relationship was stronger when incivility was high and weaker when incivility was low. Moreover, the indirect effects of ostracism on work effort were also contingent on workplace incivility. Practical implications are discussed at the end.

Suggested Citation

  • Anjum, Muhammad Adeel & Liang, Dapeng & Durrani, Dilawar Khan & Ahmed, Ammarah, 2022. "Workplace ostracism and discretionary work effort: A conditional process analysis," Journal of Management & Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 28(2), pages 226-243, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jomorg:v:28:y:2022:i:2:p:226-243_2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1833367219000142/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jomorg:v:28:y:2022:i:2:p:226-243_2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jmo .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.