IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i2p515-d477843.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Impact of Job Insecurity on Organisational Citizenship Behaviour and Task Performance: Evidence from Robotised Furniture Sector Companies

Author

Listed:
  • Živilė Stankevičiūtė

    (School of Economics and Business, Kaunas University of Technology, Gedimino g. 50, LT-44249 Kaunas, Lithuania)

  • Eglė Staniškienė

    (School of Economics and Business, Kaunas University of Technology, Gedimino g. 50, LT-44249 Kaunas, Lithuania)

  • Joana Ramanauskaitė

    (School of Economics and Business, Kaunas University of Technology, Gedimino g. 50, LT-44249 Kaunas, Lithuania)

Abstract

Over the past decade, in the light of intensive robotisation, job insecurity referring to the employees’ overall concern about the continued availability of their jobs in the future has become a hot topic. A general assumption supported by the findings is that job insecurity causes far-reaching negative consequences for the employee well-being and health, attitudes towards the job and organisation, and behaviours at work. However, the focus on behavioural outcomes, especially on employee performance at work, is still scant. Trying to narrow the gap, the paper aims at revealing the linkage between job insecurity and two dimensions of performance, namely task performance and organisational citizenship behaviour. Building on the hindrance stressor dimension of the stress model, the paper claims that a negative relationship exists between the constructs. Quantitative data were collected in a survey of robotised production lines operators working in the furniture sector in Lithuania. As predicted, the results revealed that job insecurity had a negative impact on both the task performance and organisational citizenship behaviour. These findings affirmed that job insecurity was a hindrance stressor, which needed to be considered when managing human resources in a robotised production environment.

Suggested Citation

  • Živilė Stankevičiūtė & Eglė Staniškienė & Joana Ramanauskaitė, 2021. "The Impact of Job Insecurity on Organisational Citizenship Behaviour and Task Performance: Evidence from Robotised Furniture Sector Companies," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(2), pages 1-17, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:2:p:515-:d:477843
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/2/515/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/2/515/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Georg Graetz & Guy Michaels, 2018. "Robots at Work," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 100(5), pages 753-768, December.
    2. António B. Moniz & Bettina-Johanna Krings, 2016. "Robots Working with Humans or Humans Working with Robots? Searching for Social Dimensions in New Human-Robot Interaction in Industry," Societies, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-21, August.
    3. Duncan Gallie & Alan Felstead & Francis Green & Hande Inanc, 2017. "The hidden face of job insecurity," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 31(1), pages 36-53, February.
    4. Nam, Taewoo, 2019. "Technology usage, expected job sustainability, and perceived job insecurity," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 155-165.
    5. David H. Autor, 2015. "Why Are There Still So Many Jobs? The History and Future of Workplace Automation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 29(3), pages 3-30, Summer.
    6. Magnus Sverke & Lena Låstad & Johnny Hellgren & Anne Richter & Katharina Näswall, 2019. "A Meta-Analysis of Job Insecurity and Employee Performance: Testing Temporal Aspects, Rating Source, Welfare Regime, and Union Density as Moderators," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(14), pages 1-29, July.
    7. Muhammad Rafiq & Tachia Chin, 2019. "Three-Way Interaction Effect of Job Insecurity, Job Embeddedness and Career Stage on Life Satisfaction in A Digital Era," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(9), pages 1-13, May.
    8. Acemoglu, Daron & Autor, David, 2011. "Skills, Tasks and Technologies: Implications for Employment and Earnings," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 12, pages 1043-1171, Elsevier.
    9. Rabindra Kumar Pradhan & Lalatendu Kesari Jena, 2017. "Employee Performance at Workplace: Conceptual Model and Empirical Validation," Business Perspectives and Research, , vol. 5(1), pages 69-85, January.
    10. Dengler, Katharina & Matthes, Britta, 2018. "The impacts of digital transformation on the labour market: Substitution potentials of occupations in Germany," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 304-316.
    11. Zhang, Pengqing, 2019. "Automation, wage inequality and implications of a robot tax," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 500-509.
    12. Yuhyung Shin & Won-Moo Hur & Tae Won Moon & Soomi Lee, 2019. "A Motivational Perspective on Job Insecurity: Relationships Between Job Insecurity, Intrinsic Motivation, and Performance and Behavioral Outcomes," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(10), pages 1-16, May.
    13. Raymond Loi & Long Lam & Ka Chan, 2012. "Coping with Job Insecurity: The Role of Procedural Justice, Ethical Leadership and Power Distance Orientation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 108(3), pages 361-372, July.
    14. Yuhyung Shin & Won-Moo Hur, 2019. "When Do Service Employees Suffer More from Job Insecurity? The Moderating Role of Coworker and Customer Incivility," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-17, April.
    15. Margherita Brondino & Andrea Bazzoli & Tinne Vander Elst & Hans De Witte & Margherita Pasini, 2020. "Validation and measurement invariance of the multidimensional qualitative job insecurity scale," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 54(3), pages 925-942, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yang Yang & Rui Yan & Yuting Gao & Feng Feng & Yan Meng, 2023. "Joint Efforts: Can We Succeed? Stimulating Organizational Citizenship Behaviors Through a Psychosocial Safety Climate," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(3), pages 21582440231, August.
    2. Giulia Casu & Marco Giovanni Mariani & Rita Chiesa & Dina Guglielmi & Paola Gremigni, 2021. "The Role of Organizational Citizenship Behavior and Gender between Job Satisfaction and Task Performance," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(18), pages 1-15, September.
    3. Perihan Tüzün & Ali Şimşek, 2023. "The Mediating Role of Presenteeism in The Effect on of Job Insecurity in The Private Sector on Employee Performance," Journal of Social Policy Conferences, Istanbul University, Faculty of Economics, issue 84, pages 139-158, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Živilė Stankevičiūtė & Eglė Staniškienė & Joana Ramanauskaitė, 2021. "The Impact of Job Insecurity on Employee Happiness at Work: A Case of Robotised Production Line Operators in Furniture Industry in Lithuania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-20, February.
    2. Mauro Caselli & Andrea Fracasso & Arianna Marcolin & Sergio Scicchitano, 2023. "The reassuring effect of firms' technological innovations on workers' job insecurity," International Journal of Manpower, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 45(4), pages 754-778, October.
    3. Lingmont, Derek N.J. & Alexiou, Andreas, 2020. "The contingent effect of job automating technology awareness on perceived job insecurity: Exploring the moderating role of organizational culture," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    4. Consoli, Davide & Marin, Giovanni & Rentocchini, Francesco & Vona, Francesco, 2023. "Routinization, within-occupation task changes and long-run employment dynamics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    5. Caselli, Mauro & Fracasso, Andrea & Scicchitano, Sergio & Traverso, Silvio & Tundis, Enrico, 2021. "Stop worrying and love the robot: An activity-based approach to assess the impact of robotization on employment dynamics," GLO Discussion Paper Series 802, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    6. Mr. Andrew Berg & Lahcen Bounader & Nikolay Gueorguiev & Hiroaki Miyamoto & Mr. Kenji Moriyama & Ryota Nakatani & Luis-Felipe Zanna, 2021. "For the Benefit of All: Fiscal Policies and Equity-Efficiency Trade-offs in the Age of Automation," IMF Working Papers 2021/187, International Monetary Fund.
    7. Fossen, Frank M. & Sorgner, Alina, 2022. "New digital technologies and heterogeneous wage and employment dynamics in the United States: Evidence from individual-level data," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    8. Montobbio, Fabio & Staccioli, Jacopo & Virgillito, Maria Enrica & Vivarelli, Marco, 2022. "Robots and the origin of their labour-saving impact," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    9. Zhihui Dai & Yue Niu & Hongru Zhang & Xiaodi Niu, 2022. "Impact of the Transforming and Upgrading of China’s Labor-Intensive Manufacturing Industry on the Labor Market," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-25, October.
    10. Marcel Steffen Eckardt, 2022. "Minimum wages in an automating economy," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 24(1), pages 58-91, February.
    11. Arntz, Melanie & Gregory, Terry & Zierahn-Weilage, Ulrich, 2019. "Digitalization and the Future of Work: Macroeconomic Consequences," IZA Discussion Papers 12428, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Daron Acemoglu & Pascual Restrepo, 2020. "The wrong kind of AI? Artificial intelligence and the future of labour demand," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 13(1), pages 25-35.
    13. Antón, José-Ignacio & Fernández-Macías, Enrique & Winter-Ebmer, Rudolf, 2020. "Does Robotization Affect Job Quality? Evidence from European Regional Labour Markets," IZA Discussion Papers 13975, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Fossen, Frank M. & Sorgner, Alina, 2019. "New Digital Technologies and Heterogeneous Employment and Wage Dynamics in the United States: Evidence from Individual-Level Data," IZA Discussion Papers 12242, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    15. Davide Dottori, 2021. "Robots and employment: evidence from Italy," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 38(2), pages 739-795, July.
    16. Genz Sabrina & Janser Markus & Lehmer Florian, 2019. "The Impact of Investments in New Digital Technologies on Wages – Worker-Level Evidence from Germany," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 239(3), pages 483-521, June.
    17. Gregory, Terry & Salomons, Anna & Zierahn, Ulrich, 2016. "Racing With or Against the Machine? Evidence from Europe," VfS Annual Conference 2016 (Augsburg): Demographic Change 145843, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    18. Caselli, Mauro & Fracasso, Andrea & Traverso, Silvio, 2021. "Robots and risk of COVID-19 workplace contagion: Evidence from Italy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    19. Domini, Giacomo & Grazzi, Marco & Moschella, Daniele & Treibich, Tania, 2022. "For whom the bell tolls: The firm-level effects of automation on wage and gender inequality," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    20. Cortes, Guido Matias & Salvatori, Andrea, 2019. "Delving into the demand side: Changes in workplace specialization and job polarization," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 164-176.

    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:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:2:p:515-:d:477843. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.