Note: This is an annotated bibliography assignment, you can only to use four resources that I provided in this assignment. Two pages double spaced. EACH SOURCE: HALF A PAGE ANNOTATION For this assignment, you will need to write annotated bibliographies

20210322020943021.pdf

Home >Architecture and Design homework help >Note: This is an annotated bibliography assignment, you can only to use four resources that I provided in this assignment. Two pages double spaced. EACH SOURCE: HALF A PAGE ANNOTATION For this assignment, you will need to write annotated bibliographies

Social Behavior and Personality , Volume 48, Issue 11, e9120 https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.9120 www.sbp-journal.com

Influence of relationship conflicts with leaders and coworkers on employees’ voice

Siyuan Chen1, Mingyu Zhang1, Yihua Zhang2, Wen Wu1, Zhimin Xiao3, Shaoxue Wu4, Pan Liu1, Yuhuan Xia1

1School of Economics and Management, Beijing Jiaotong University, People’s Republic of China 2Graduate School of Education and Psychology, Pepperdine University, United States 3School of International Trade and Economics, University of International Business and Economics, People’s Republic of China 4Beijing Shiquan Consulting Company, Beijing, People’s Republic of China

How to cite: Chen, S., Zhang, M., Zhang, Y., Wu, W., Xiao, Z., Wu, S., Liu, P., & Xia, Y. (2020). Influence of relationship conflicts with leaders and coworkers on employees’ voice. Social Behavior and Personality: An international journal, 48(11), e9120

Building on self-determination theory and relational attribution theory, in this study we examined how relationship conflicts with leaders and coworkers simultaneously affect employee voice behaviors. We expanded relational attribution theory by developing two new constructs we labeled leader-relational attribution orientation and coworker-relational attribution orientation to describe employees’ different responses to relationship conflicts with leaders and coworkers via psychological needs satisfaction. We surveyed 328 employee–leader dyads who were employed at a semiconductor manufacturer to test our hypotheses. We found that leader-relational attribution orientation can strengthen the influences of relationship conflicts with leaders on psychological needs satisfaction and its indirect effects on employee voice behaviors. Coworker-relational attribution orientation can strengthen the influences of relationship conflicts with coworkers on psychological needs satisfaction and its indirect effects on employee voice behaviors. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Keywords supportive voice; constructive voice; destructive voice; attribution orientation; psychological needs satisfaction; relationship conflicts

Relationship conflict refers to the perception of incompatibilities and disagreements among organizational members regarding issues that are not task-related, for instance, political beliefs, norms and values, or gossip (De Dreu & Van Vianen, 2001). In some studies, findings have shown that relationship conflict can disrupt groups’ effective functioning and employees’ psychological well-being (De Dreu & Weingart, 2003; Jehn, 1995). Researchers have explored some factors leading to relationship conflict and how to prevent it from happening (Edmondson & Smith, 2006). However, no studies have included relationship conflicts with leaders and coworkers in one empirical investigation. Consequently, few empirical studies have been conducted to test whether one type of relationship conflict remains a significant factor when controlling for the other. Organizational researchers have not developed an integrated conceptual framework to explore the influences of relationship conflicts with both leaders and coworkers on focal employee voice behaviors.

Voice behavior, the expression of constructive opinions, concerns, or ideas about work-related issues (Van Dyne et al., 2003) plays a significant role in the running and effectiveness of an organization (Organ et al., 2006). Some researchers have explored the antecedents of employee voice behavior at the individual, supervisory, or organizational levels (Fuller et al., 2007; Liang et al., 2012; W. Liu et al., 2010; Van Dyne et al., 2008). In the current study, we explore the influence of relationship conflict on employees’ voice

CORRESPONDENCE Wen Wu, School of Economics and Management, Beijing Jiaotong University, No. 3 Shangyuancun, Beijing 100044, People’s Republic of China. Email: wuwen@bjtu.edu.cn or Zhimin Xiao, School of International Trade and Economics, University of International Business and Economics, No. 10, Huxin Dongjie, Beijing, 100029, People’s Republic of China. Email: xiaozhm@126.com

Chen, Zhang, Zhang, Wu, Xiao, Wu, Liu, Xia

behavior.

We develop a framework based on self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985) and relational attribution theory (Eberly et al., 2011) to examine how relationship conflicts with leaders and coworkers affect employee voice behaviors, including supportive voice, destructive voice, and constructive voice. We argue that relationship conflicts with leaders and coworkers can hinder the satisfaction of psychological needs, which, in turn, influences employee voice behaviors. For example, relationship conflict can induce a coworker to refuse to provide information. We further propose that such relationships depend on the focal employee’s relational attributions of relationship conflicts with leaders and coworkers. Eberly et al. (2011) proposed a new set of relational attributions, defined as the focal employee’s acknowledgment of an event in a relationship. They suggested that individuals might attribute the causes of events to their relationships with others. Relationship attribution orientation is individuals’ explanations that locate their success in their organization within their relationship with others. We argue that individuals may differ in this tendency, attributing success in their organization to their relationships with leaders or with coworkers, and these attributions may influence their experiences and expectations (Eberly et al., 2011). Specifically, leader- relational attribution orientation describes explanations given by a focal individual that locate the success of that individual in the organization within their relationship with their immediate leader, and coworker- relational attribution orientation describes explanations given by a focal individual that locate the success of that individual in the organization within their relationship with their coworkers.

Theory and Hypotheses Deci and Ryan (2000) posited that three innate basic psychological needs affect individuals’ attitudes, motivation, and behaviors, namely, autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Need for autonomy refers to the desire to be “the perceived origin or source of one’s own behavior” (Deci & Ryan, 2000, p. 8) or to endorse one’s actions as authentic and consistent with how one would act regardless of external influences. Need for competence refers to the desire to feel effective in one’s activities and to interact with an environment that supports the expression of one’s abilities. Need for relatedness refers to the desire to experience a sense of belonging or connectedness, or to be valued by other individuals or collectives (Rosen et al., 2014). Everyone is assumed to have these innate needs (Baard et al., 2004). Psychological needs satisfaction is the basis of linking social context (e.g., relationship building and information seeking) to individual growth and well-being (Deci & Ryan, 2000).

Self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985) is one of the most influential perspectives for explaining employees’ behaviors. It explains how psychological needs satisfaction strengthens and promotes the internalization of external motivation, and ultimately affects people’s attitudes and behaviors (Deci et al., 1989). Factors that can fulfill individual psychological needs promote intrinsic motivation and personal growth, whereas factors that impede an individual’s psychological needs thwart intrinsic motivation (Greguras & Diefendorff, 2009).

We contend that the motivational routes to individual behavior could be explained through social determination theory. We focus on the mediating roles of psychological needs satisfaction between relationship conflicts with leaders and coworkers, and the employee voice behaviors of supportive voice, destructive voice, and constructive voice. Figure 1 illustrates the conceptual model of this study.

Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal

Figure 1. Conceptual Model Note. T1, T2, and T3 refer to the three data collection waves. Sub = subordinate, Sup = supervisor, indicating from whom data were collected.

Relationship Conflicts and Psychological Needs Satisfaction

On the basis of self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985), we established that relationship conflicts with both leaders and coworkers could hinder the focal employees’ three psychological needs. In relationship conflicts with leaders, employees will not be encouraged to take on challenging and meaningful tasks through close communication (Erdogan & Liden, 2002).

Deci and Ryan (2000) suggested that the human need for autonomy could be satisfied by making choices and fulfilling meaningful requests. Thus, high levels of relationship conflict with leaders impede the focal employees’ autonomy need. Moreover, in relationship conflicts of members with their leaders, leaders tend not to offer the members rewards, such as resource allocation and personal development (Bolino & Turnley, 2009), which are instrumental for fulfilling employees’ intrinsic and extrinsic needs. The poor career development and negative evaluation arising from employees’ relationship conflicts with leaders may signal to the employees that they are not valued or respected. This perception impedes their sense of efficacy and self-enhancement. In the case of leader relationship conflicts with employees, the leader might not encourage employees to question the existing ways of solving problems (Hetland et al., 2011). Finally, the poor mutual reciprocation that embodies relationship conflicts with leaders results in weak employee affective attachment to leaders (Ferris et al., 2009), and lack of in-group membership and group interconnectivity (Nifadkar et al., 2012). These outcomes can hinder the satisfying of the need for relatedness. Relationship conflicts with coworkers signify that coworkers do not have strong bonds with one another (Kim et al., 2017). They treat each other with a lack of respect and autonomy (Sherony & Green, 2002; Van den Broeck et al., 2008). Thus, we concluded that if focal employees had relationship conflicts with their coworkers, this could lower the focal employees’ psychological needs satisfaction.

Psychological Needs Satisfaction and Employee Voice Behaviors

Chen, Zhang, Zhang, Wu, Xiao, Wu, Liu, Xia

When employees satisfy their needs for autonomy, relatedness, and competence, they tend to have a favorable job attitude and perform well (Gagné & Deci, 2005). In self-determination theory it is proposed that satisfying these needs can improve employees’ intrinsic motivation, which gives them a sense of satisfaction from performing their work tasks (Gagné & Deci, 2005). Specifically, autonomy means that individuals can make choices freely and based on a full understanding of the relevant information (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Hill et al. (2014) found that employees express their values and interests through their work when they can make decisions. Employee voice is an important proactive behavior that can help leaders make the right decisions and that benefits the organization.

Supportive voice is employees’ voluntary expression of support for worthwhile work-related policies, programs, objectives, procedures, or speaking out in defense of these behaviors when they are being unfairly criticized (Maynes & Podsakoff, 2013). According to the self-determination perspective, employees whose psychological needs for competence are satisfied are likely to be intrinsically motivated. Such intrinsic motivation may promote extrarole behaviors, such as supportive voice (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Hence, psychological needs satisfaction is likely to predict supportive voice.

Constructive voice refers to the voluntary expression of ideas, information, or opinions focused on effecting organizationally functional change to the work context. (Maynes & Podsakoff, 2013). Satisfying the psychological needs for competence, autonomy, and relatedness denotes that employees can strive to meet challenges, and to achieve success and satisfactory results (Baard et al., 2004; Deci & Ryan, 2000). As such, employees whose psychological needs are satisfied are likely to suggest improvements to enhance organizational performance.

Destructive voice is the voluntary expression of hurtful, critical, or debasing opinions regarding work policies, practices, and procedures (Maynes & Podsakoff, 2013). According to self-determination theory, if employees’ basic psychological needs are not satisfied, they may lack intrinsic motivation to control their negative attitudes and behaviors that may harm the organization (Gagné & Deci, 2005). Thus, psychological needs satisfaction may be negatively related to destructive voice.

Satisfying the three basic psychological needs for autonomy, relatedness, and competence can promote employees’ intrinsic motivation and facilitate positive work attitudes and voice behaviors (Gagné & Deci, 2005). Accordingly, based on self-determination theory, we proposed that relationship conflicts with leaders and coworkers would hinder individual employees’ satisfying their psychological needs and, in turn, would increase their destructive voice, and would reduce their constructive voice and supportive voice. Specifically, we predicted the following: Hypothesis 1a: Relationship conflicts with leaders have a significant negative effect on employee constructive voice through psychological needs satisfaction. Hypothesis 1b: Relationship conflicts with leaders have a positive influence on destructive voice through psychological needs satisfaction. Hypothesis 1c: Relationship conflicts with leaders will have a significant negative effect on employee supportive voice through psychological needs satisfaction. Hypothesis 2a: Relationship conflicts with coworkers will exert a significant negative influence on employee constructive voice through psychological needs satisfaction. Hypothesis 2b: Relationship conflicts with coworkers will exert a positive influence on employee destructive voice through psychological needs satisfaction. Hypothesis 2c: Relationship conflicts with coworkers will exert a significant negative influence on employee supportive voice through psychological needs satisfaction.

Relational Attribution Theory

Both relational attribution theory (Eberly et al., 2011) and self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985), emphasize individual differences in work outcomes, depending on social context. Individual attributions

Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal

about the causes of events affect one’s feelings and expectations (Tomlinson & Mayer, 2009). We further maintained that employees’ attribution orientation of workplace life may moderate the influence of relationship conflicts on their psychological needs satisfaction. In Hypothesis 1 we predicted that relationship conflicts with leaders would hinder employees’ psychological needs for competency, relatedness, and autonomy. When employees interpret conflicts with leaders as hindering workplace success, they may believe that bad relationships will provide poor benefits, resources, and support.

In contrast, when employees believe that relationship conflicts with leaders are not important in the workplace, they may also believe that relationship conflicts with leaders cannot bring about a critical lack of resources (e.g., promotion, competence, relatedness) to hinder their psychological needs. Satisfaction of psychological needs is then less contingent on the presence or absence of relationship conflict with leaders. Therefore, we contended that the relationship between relationship conflicts with leaders and psychological needs satisfaction can be accentuated by employees’ leader-relational attributions: Hypothesis3a: The relationship between relationship conflicts with leaders and employees’ psychological needs satisfaction will be strengthened by the employees’ leader-relational attribution orientations: The relationship will be stronger when employees’ leader-relational attribution orientation is higher rather than lower.

Likewise, when employees attribute work-related success to their relationships with coworkers, they may believe that relationship conflicts with coworkers will hinder them in satisfying competence, relatedness, and autonomy needs. In other words, with other conditions being equal, the influence of relationship conflicts with coworkers on employees’ psychological needs can be strengthened when the employees have high coworker-relational attribution orientation: Hypothesis 3b: The relationship between relationship conflicts with coworkers and employees’ psychological needs satisfaction will be strengthened by the employees’ coworker-relational attribution orientations: The relationship will be stronger when employees’ coworker-relational attribution orientations are higher rather than lower.

An Integrative Moderated Mediation Model

As previously discussed, relationship conflicts with leaders and with coworkers both influence employee voice behaviors through the mediating role of psychological needs satisfaction. When employees have strong leader-relational attribution orientation (LRAO), they may believe that their career will be improved via relationship conflicts with their leader. In the previous hypotheses we suggested that by augmenting relationship conflicts with leaders and psychological needs satisfaction, employees’ LRAO affect the degree to which relationship conflicts with the leader influence employee voice behaviors. Similarly, employees’ coworker-relational attribution orientations (CRAO) may moderate the influence of relationship conflicts with coworkers on employee voice behaviors and thus may change the indirect effect of relationship conflicts with coworkers on employee voice behaviors via psychological needs satisfaction. We therefore made two moderated mediation predictions: Hypothesis 3c: Employees’ leader-relational attribution orientations will moderate the indirect effect of relationship conflicts with leaders and employee voice behaviors via psychological needs satisfaction: The indirect effect will be stronger when employees’ leader-relational attribution orientations are higher rather than lower. Hypothesis 3d: Employees’ coworker-relational attribution orientations will moderate the indirect effect of relationship conflicts with coworkers and employee voice behaviors via psychological needs satisfaction: The indirect effect will be stronger when employees’ coworker-relational attribution orientations are higher rather than lower.

Pilot Study In differentiating and validating items of LRAO and CRAO, we used theoretical evidence as our deductive

Chen, Zhang, Zhang, Wu, Xiao, Wu, Liu, Xia

item-generation approach (Hinkin, 1998). Based on the definition of relational attribution, we generated items using two sources. First, we directly generated items in line with this definition, using concise sentences to describe employee behaviors that fell into our two categories of relational attributions. Second, we referred to measures used in existing studies on relational attribution for our item pool (Tomlinson & Mayer, 2009). Thus, we identified 16 items for LRAO and CRAO. After removing redundant items, three subject-matter experts matched the items to the definitions of LRAO and CRAO. From carrying out this procedure, we identified five representative items for LRAO and five for CRAO, which we used for pilot testing.

To test our items of LRAO and CRAO, we distributed a survey form including potential items of relational attribution orientation, to 322 employees of a large bank in China via WeChat, a popular social media platform in China. Participation was voluntary, and 236 respondents completed the survey. In the final sample, 53.8% of respondents were men and 46.2% were women (Mage = 38.39 years, SD = 8.72, ranging from 26 to 53 years; 84.75% had a bachelor’s degree or above, and 15.25% had a college education). Items are set out in Table 1 and were rated by employees on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (completely disagree) and 5 (completely agree).

Then, we conducted a factor analysis with the Oblimin method. We performed principal component analysis. The rotation method was Oblimin with Kaiser normalization, and the rotation converged in four iterations. The results showed a distinction between LRAO and CRAO. No item had heavy cross-loadings, so that the LRAO factor consisted of five items, and all five emphasized relationship quality with leaders. The CRAO factor also consisted of five items, and all five emphasized relationship quality with coworkers. Table 1 shows the pattern matrix using the oblimin method.

Table 1. Pattern Matrix of the Factor Analysis by the Oblimin Method

Main Study Sample and Procedure

We recruited participants for the main study from one private semiconductor manufacturer whose research and development center is in China, and whose products are sold locally and abroad. We used a three-wave, two-source survey method. The general managers notified potential respondents that the academic survey was voluntary. We randomly selected one employee from each work team. We received emails from 745

Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal

employees, giving consent to participate together with their employee identification number.

Among the group of employees 58.53% were men, and 41.47% were women. The average age of the employees was 35.46 years (ranging from 24 to 47, SD = 4.76). In terms of position held, 93% were workers at grass-roots level, 7% were in low management positions. As regards education level, 68.79% had a bachelor degree or higher qualification, the rest had a college education. Among the group, 63.57% had worked for the company for more than 7 years, and the remaining 36.43% had less than 7 years’ tenure. At Time 1, we asked the employees to report on relationship conflicts with leaders and coworkers, and control variables. We distributed pencils and survey forms, along with a cover letter assuring confidentiality, to the participants. After finishing the survey the respondents gave them directly to the research team. At Time 2, which was four weeks later, we asked employees to rate their psychological needs satisfaction and their LRAO and CRAO. At Time 3, which was four weeks after Time 2, we distributed a survey to the participants’ supervisors of participants at Times 1 and 2, using a list provided by the company’s human resources department, asking the supervisors to rate the participants’ employee voice behaviors.

At Time 1, we gave survey forms to 745 employees, and 601 were completed (80.67%). At Time 2, we gave survey forms to 601 employees, and 482 were completed (80.20%). At Time 3, we distributed 481 supervisor survey forms, and 371 were completed (77.13%). In the end, we had 328 matched supervisor- subordinate dyads for analysis.

Measures

Relationship Conflict We asked employees to evaluate their relationship conflicts with their immediate supervisor and coworkers using four items adapted from the scale developed by Jehn (1995). The sample items include “How much friction is there between you and your immediate supervisor?” Employees rated the items on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all), to 5 (very frequently).

Psychological Needs Satisfaction We used the 21-item scale developed by Kasser et al. (1992) to measure psychological needs satisfaction. Employees rated the items on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree). Sample items include “Most days I feel a sense of accomplishment from working,” and “I feel like I can pretty much be myself at work.” In accordance with previous research (Rosen et al., 2014) and from the theoretical perspective, we viewed need satisfaction as an overall index rather than as separate need satisfaction categories. We did not expect relationship conflicts with leaders and coworkers to differ in terms of their relationship to autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Similarly, we did not expect every need to relate differentially to employee outcomes.

Constructive Voice Constructive voice was measured using Maynes and Podsakoff’s (2013) five-item instrument. Leaders rated the items for each type of voice on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree). Sample items for constructive voice are “This employee frequently makes suggestions about how to do things in new or more effective ways at work,” and “This employee often suggests changes to work projects in order to make them better.”

Destructive Voice The five-item scale from Maynes and Podsakoff (2013) was employed to measure employee destructive voice behavior. A sample item is “This employee often bad-mouths the organization’s policies or objectives.”

Supportive Voice The five-item scale developed by Maynes and Podsakoff (2013) was used to measure employee supportive voice. The sample items include “This employee defends organizational programs that are worthwhile when

Chen, Zhang, Zhang, Wu, Xiao, Wu, Liu, Xia

others unfairly criticize the programs.”

Leader-Relational Attribution Orientation and Coworker-Relational Attribution Orientation Employees’ LRAO and CRAO were measured with the items developed in the pilot study.

Results Table 2 shows the descriptive statistics, reliabilities, and correlations for the study variables.

Table 2. Descriptive Statistics and Correlations of Study Variables

Note. N = 328; reliabilities are in italics on the diagonal. Gender was measured using two categories: 1 = male, and 2 = female. Level of education was measured using four categories: 1 = below college, 2 = college, 3 = postgraduate, and 4 = doctorate. Position in the organization was measured using four categories: 1 = employee, 2 = supervisor, 3 = middle manager, and 4 = senior manager. Organizational tenure was measured with four categories: 1 = less than 5 years, 2 = 5–10 years, 3 = 11–15 years, and 4 = more than 15 years. LRAO = leader-relational attribution orientation, CRAO = coworker-relational attribution orientation. * p < .05. ** p < .01 (two-tailed).

Mediation Effects of Psychological Needs Satisfaction

We conducted hierarchical multiple regression analyses to test Hypotheses 1a, 1b, 1c and 2a, 2b, 2c by separately entering the control variables, independent variables (relationship conflicts with leaders and coworkers), and the mediator (psychological needs satisfaction). Model 1 in Table 3 indicates that relationship conflicts with leaders and with coworkers were both significantly related to psychological needs satisfaction. As shown by the results of Model 4, Model 7, and Model 10, relationship conflicts with leaders and with coworkers were both significantly related to supportive voice, destructive voice, and constructive voice. Model 5, Model 8, and Model 11 further revealed that psychological needs satisfaction was significantly related to supportive, destructive, and constructive voice, and that the effects of relationship conflicts with leaders and with coworkers on supportive, destructive, and constructive voice were weaker than the effects when constructive voice was excluded.

Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal

Table 3. Main and Interactive Effects Results

Note. N = 328. PNS = psychological needs satisfaction, RCL = relational conflict with leaders, RCC = relational conflict with coworkers, LRAO = leader-relational attribution orientation, CRAO = coworker- relational attribution orientation. * p < .05. ** p < .01 (two-tailed).

We also examined those effects using the bootstrap approach (MacKinnon et al., 2007). The results indicated that all the mediation effects of psychological needs satisfaction were significant. Bootstrap results are reported in Table 4. Particularly for relationship conflicts with leaders, the 95% confidence interval (CI) for indirect effects did not include zero; for relationship conflicts with coworkers, the 95% CI of the indirect effects also excluded zero. Thus, Hypotheses 1a, 1b, 1c and 2a, 2b, 2c were all supported.

Table 4. Results of Bootstrap Analyses for the Mediating Role of Psychological Needs Satisfaction

Note. N = 328. Bootstrap sample size = 5,000. CI = confidence interval, LL = lower limit, UL = upper limit.

Moderating Effects of Employees’ Leader-Relational Attribution Orientation and Employees’ Coworker-Relational Attribution Orientation

In Hypothesis 3a we predicted that employees’ LRAO would strengthen the influence of relationship conflicts with leaders on their psychological needs satisfaction. Model 2 in Table 3 shows that the

Chen, Zhang, Zhang, Wu, Xiao, Wu, Liu, Xia

interaction of relationship conflicts with leaders and employees’ LRAO was positively related to psychological needs satisfaction, thus supporting Hypothesis 3a. In Figure 2 the positive moderating effect is plotted and the plot shows that with low employees’ LRAO (one standard deviation below the mean), relationship conflicts with leaders influence psychological needs satisfaction (γ = 0.32, p < .01), whereas when employees’ LRAO is high (one standard deviation above the mean), the relationship between them was not significant (γ = −0.14, ns).

Figure 2. Interaction Effect of Relationship Conflicts with Leaders and Leader-Relational Attribution Orientation on Employees’ Psychological Needs Satisfaction Note. LRAO = leader-relational attribution orientation.

In Hypothesis 3b we proposed that employees’ CRAO would strengthen the relationship between relationship conflicts with coworkers and their psychological needs satisfaction. As predicted, Model 2 in Table 3 shows that employees’ CRAO had a moderating effect. Figure 3 shows this moderating influence. Relationship conflicts with coworkers have an effect on employees’ psychological needs satisfaction (γ = 0.48, p < .01) when employees’ CRAO is high (one standard deviation above the mean), whereas when employees’ CRAO was low (one standard deviation below the mean), the relationship became nonsignificant (γ = 0.13, ns).

Moderated Indirect Effects of Employees’ Leader-Relational Attribution Orientation and Employees’ Coworker-Relational Attribution Orientation

In Hypotheses 3a, 3b, 3c, and 3d we predicted that employees’ LRAO and CRAO would moderate the indirect effect of relationship conflicts with leaders on supportive, destructive, and constructive voice, respectively, via psychological needs satisfaction. We tested these hypotheses according to the moderated path analysis approach (Edwards & Lambert, 2007), bootstrapping 5,000 samples to compute bias- corrected CIs. The results are reported in Table 5, which support the first-stage moderation effects and reveal significant moderating effects of LRAO and CRAO, because the paths from LRAO and CRAO to psychological needs satisfaction differed significantly across different levels of LRAO (Δγ = 0.45, p < .01) and CRAO (Δγ = 0.38, p < .01). These results lend additional support to Hypotheses 3a and 3b, as shown in Table 3.

Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal

Figure 3. Interaction Effect of Relationship Conflicts with Coworkers and Coworker-Relational Attribution Orientation on Employees’ Psychological Needs Satisfaction Note. CRAO = coworker-relational attribution orientation.

Table 5. Results of the Moderated Path Analysis

Note. N = 328. LRAO = leader-relational attribution orientation, CRAO = coworker-relational attribution orientation. * p < .05. ** p < .01 (two-tailed).

For LRAO, the indirect effects of relationship conflicts with leaders via psychological needs satisfaction on all three independent variables differed significantly when LRAO was at high versus low levels. As such, Hypothesis 3c was fully supported. For CRAO, the indirect effects of relationship conflicts with coworkers

Chen, Zhang, Zhang, Wu, Xiao, Wu, Liu, Xia

via psychological needs satisfaction on all three independent variables differed significantly when CRAO was at high versus low levels. Thus, Hypothesis 3d was fully supported.

Discussion In this study, as we had hypothesized, we found that relationship conflicts with both leaders and coworkers could affect focal employees’ psychological needs satisfaction, which in turn predicted individual supportive voice, destructive voice, and constructive voice. More importantly, our findings in this study also indicated that individual employees had different tendencies in explaining relationship conflicts with their leaders and coworkers. In other words, employees had different relationship attribution orientations. We also found that employees’ LRAO strengthened the influence of relationship conflicts with leaders on the employees’ psychological needs satisfaction. LRAO strengthened the indirect influence of relationship conflicts with leaders on employee voice behaviors through the mediation of psychological needs satisfaction, and CRAO strengthened the influence of relationship conflicts with coworkers on employees’ psychological needs satisfaction. CRAO also strengthened the indirect influence of relationship conflicts with coworkers on employee voice behaviors through the mediating role of psychological needs satisfaction.

Research and Practical Implications

We have contributed to the literature in several ways. Traditionally, conflicts with leaders and coworkers have been examined from the social exchange or role identity perspective (Tomlinson & Mayer, 2009). We attempted to expand the current understanding of relationship conflicts by viewing individual basic needs as internal motivation. First, from a self-determination theoretical perspective, we elucidated the underlying psychological process of satisfying one’s needs, whereby relationship conflicts with leaders and coworkers simultaneously influenced employee voice behaviors. Self-determination theory is a new perspective from which to examine how relationship conflicts with leaders and coworkers influence employee voice behaviors. Second, we expanded and enriched relational attribution theory (Eberly et al., 2011; Kelley, 1967; Martinko & Thomson, 1998) and developed two new constructs: LRAO and CRAO. Classical attribution theorists have found that employees may make external and internal attributions for events in the workplace (e.g., Kelley, 1967). Eberly et al. (2011) found that employees might use relational attributions within their organization. In previous attribution studies scholars have focused on how individuals assess events by locating the cause of an event internally and externally (Eberly et al., 2011). Employees often interpret important meaning from their relationships with leaders and coworkers. Moreover, such relationships are likely to shape their cognitions, attributions, and performance (Brewer & Gardner, 1996). Because it is unlikely that individuals locate the causes of events either internally or externally, scholars should include the context of dyadic relationships when studying the locus of causality for an event (Eberly et al., 2011). Finally, we contributed to the study of voice by specifying how relationship conflicts affect employee voice. Although recently Maynes and Podsakoff (2013) have categorized voice into different types, to our knowledge, no studies have been conducted in which their different antecedents have been explored.

Based on relational attribution theory (Eberly et al., 2011), we found that individuals differed when it came to attributing their success within their organization to their relationships with leaders and coworkers. As employee voice behaviors are bound to the team or organizational context, it is critical to examine how an employee’s relationship conflicts with leaders and coworkers simultaneously influence the employee voice behaviors.

In addition to the research implications, our study also benefits managerial practice. Our study findings highlight the role of relationship conflicts with leaders and coworkers. Executives should coach supervisors on how to develop relationships with employees to improve mutual respect and obligation. Managers should also foster good team relationships. Human resources managers should take individual differences into consideration in explaining the roles of leader and coworker conflicts, and should understand employee leader-relationship and coworker-relationship attribution tendencies during interviews and talent selection.

Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal

For example, employees with leader-relational attribution tendencies should be allocated to teams with good leadership (e.g., transformational or servant leadership), and employees with coworker-relational attribution tendencies should be allocated to cooperative teams.

Limitations

Our study has several limitations. First, although we argued that relationship conflicts with both leaders and coworkers could influence the three psychological needs, and that whether these needs were satisfied could predict voice behaviors, we did not examine the mediating role of each of these three needs separately. In future studies, researchers should examine their influences on employee voice behaviors. Additionally, we did not control for employees’ personalities and traits, which should be included in studying individual attributions about workplace life. Finally, the sample in this study comprised supervisors and employees in China. Cultural factors and social context may decrease the generalization of our findings. For example, compared to workplaces in the Western countries, personal relationships between supervisors and subordinates may have different influences on workplace communication and exchange in China because of the cultural value of guanxi. Specifically, personal relationships between supervisors and subordinates can influence supervisors’ decisions on resource allocation, bonuses, and training opportunities (Law et al., 2000; J. Liu et al., 2013). These influences can affect employees’ organization-based self-esteem and performance. Thus, future studies should exclude such influence from these cultural factors or collect data from samples in a Western context.

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (2018YJS055).

References Baard, P. P., Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2004). Intrinsic need satisfaction: A motivational basis of performance and well-being in two work settings. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34(10), 2045–2068. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2004.tb02690.x

Bolino, M. C., & Turnley, W. H. (2009). Relative deprivation among employees in lower-quality leader- member exchange relationships. The Leadership Quarterly, 20(3), 276–286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.03.001

Brewer, M. B., & Gardner, W. (1996). Who is this “We”? Levels of collective identity and self- representations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(1), 83–93. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.1.83

De Dreu, C. K., & Van Vianen, A. E. (2001). Managing relationship conflict and the effectiveness of organizational teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(3), 309–328. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.71

De Dreu, C. K., & Weingart, L. R. (2003). Task versus relationship conflict, team performance, and team member satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(4), 741–749. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.4.741

Deci, E. L., Connell, J. P., & Ryan, R. M. (1989). Self-determination in a work organization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(4), 580–590. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.74.4.580

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Plenum. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7

Chen, Zhang, Zhang, Wu, Xiao, Wu, Liu, Xia

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “What” and “Why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self- determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01

Eberly, M. B., Holley, E. C., Johnson, M. D., & Mitchell, T. R. (2011). Beyond internal and external: A dyadic theory of relational attributions. Academy of Management Review, 36(4), 731–753. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2009.0371

Edmondson, A. C., & Smith, M. L. (2006). Too hot to handle? How to manage relationship conflict. California Management Review, 49(1), 6–31. https://doi.org/10.2307/41166369

Edwards, J. R., & Lambert, L. S. (2007). Methods for integrating moderation and mediation: A general analytical framework using moderated path analysis. Psychological Methods, 12(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.12.1.1

Erdogan, B., & Liden, R. C. (2002). Social exchanges in the workplace: A review of recent developments and future research directions in leader-member exchange theory. In L. L. Neider & C. A. Schriesheim (Eds.), Leadership (pp. 65–114). Information Age Publishing.

Ferris, D. L., Brown, D. J., Lian, H., & Keeping, L. M. (2009). When does self-esteem relate to deviant behavior? The role of contingencies of self-worth. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(5), 1345–1353. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016115

Fuller, J. B., Barnett, T., Hester, K., Relyea, C., & Frey, L. (2007). An exploratory examination of voice behavior from an impression management perspective. Journal of Managerial Issues, 19(1), 134–151.

Gagné, M., & Deci, E. L. (2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(4), 331–362. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.322

Greguras, G. J., & Diefendorff, J. M. (2009). Different fits satisfy different needs: Linking person- environment fit to employee commitment and performance using self-determination theory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(2), 465–477. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014068

Hetland, H., Hetland, J., Schou Andreassen, C., Pallesen, S., & Notelaers, G. (2011). Leadership and fulfillment of the three basic psychological needs at work. Career Development International, 16(5), 507–523. https://doi.org/10.1108/13620431111168903

Hill, N. S., Kang, J. H., & Seo, M. G. (2014). The interactive effect of leader–member exchange and electronic communication on employee psychological empowerment and work outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(4), 772–783. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2014.04.006

Hinkin, T. R. (1998). A brief tutorial on the development of measures for use in survey questionnaires. Organizational Research Methods, 1(1), 104–121. https://doi.org/10.1177/109442819800100106

Jehn, K. A. (1995). A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(2), 256–282. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393638

Kasser, T., Davey, J., & Ryan, R. M. (1992). Motivation and employee supervisor discrepancies in a psychiatric vocational rehabilitation setting. Rehabilitation Psychology, 37(3), 175–188. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0079104

Kelley, H. H. (1967). Attribution theory in social psychology. In D. Levine (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on

Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal

Motivation (Vol 15, pp. 192–238). University of Nebraska Press.

Kim, A., Kim, Y., Han, K., Jackson, S. E., & Ployhart, R. E. (2017). Multilevel influences on voluntary workplace green behavior: Individual differences, leader behavior, and coworker advocacy. Journal of Management, 43(5), 1335–1358. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314547386

Law, K. S., Wong, C. S., Wang, D., & Wang, L. (2000). Effects of supervisor–subordinate guanxi on supervisory decisions in China: An empirical investigation. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 11(4), 751–765. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585190050075105

Liang, J., Farh, C. I. C., & Farh, J.-L. (2012). Psychological antecedents of promotive and prohibitive voice: A two-wave examination. Academy of Management Journal, 55(1) 71–92. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.0176

Liu, J., Hui, C., Lee, C., & Chen, Z. X. (2013). Why do I feel valued and why do I contribute? A relational approach to employee’s organization-based self-esteem and job performance. Journal of Management Studies, 50(6) 1018–1040. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12037

Liu, W., Zhu, R., & Yang, Y. (2010). I warn you because I like you: Voice behavior, employee identifications, and transformational leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 21(1), 189–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.10.014

MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. (2007). Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 593–614. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085542

Martinko, M. J., & Thomson, N. F. (1998). A synthesis and extension of the Weiner and Kelley attribution models. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 20(4) 271–284. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15324834basp2004_4

Maynes, T. D., & Podsakoff, P. M. (2013). Speaking more broadly: An examination of the nature, antecedents, and consequences of an expanded set of employee voice behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(1), 87–112. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034284

Nifadkar, S., Tsui, A. S., & Ashforth, B. E. (2012). The way you make me feel and behave: Supervisor- triggered newcomer affect and approach-avoidance behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 55(5), 1146–1168. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.0133

Organ, D. W., Podsakoff, P. M., & Mackenzie, S. B. (2006). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature, antecedents, and consequences. Personnel Psychology, 59(2), 484–487. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2006.00043_9.x

Rosen, C. C., Ferris, D. L., Brown, D. J., Chen, Y., & Yan, M. (2014). Perceptions of organizational politics: A need satisfaction paradigm. Organization Science, 25(4), 1026–1055. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2013.0857

Sherony, K. M., & Green, S. G. (2002). Coworker exchange: Relationships between coworkers, leader- member exchange, and work attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 542–548. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.3.542

Tomlinson, E. C., & Mayer, R. C. (2009). The role of causal attribution dimensions in trust repair. Academy of Management Review, 34(1), 85–104. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2009.35713291

Chen, Zhang, Zhang, Wu, Xiao, Wu, Liu, Xia

Van den Broeck, A., Vansteenkiste, M., De Witte, H., & Lens, W. (2008). Explaining the relationships between job characteristics, burnout, and engagement: The role of basic psychological need satisfaction. Work & Stress, 22(3), 277–294. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678370802393672

Van Dyne, L., Ang, S., & Botero, I. C. (2003). Conceptualizing employee silence and employee voice as multidimensional constructs. Journal of Management Studies, 40(6), 1359–1392. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.00384

Van Dyne, L., Kamdar, D., & Joireman, J. (2008). In-role perceptions buffer the negative impact of low LMX on helping and enhance the positive impact of high LMX on voice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(6), 1195–1207. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.6.1195

Copyright of Social Behavior & Personality: an international journal is the property of Society for Personality Research and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.