annotatedbib

Psychological Reports, 2012, 110, 3, 719-730. © Psychological Reports 2012

DOI 10.2466/01.07.21.PR0.110.3.719-730 ISSN 0033-2941

Role ambiguity, employee gendeR, and woRkplace fRiendship1

chien-yu chen

Department of Marketing and Logistics Management

Chihlee Institute of Technology

hsiao-yen mao

Department of International Trade College of Business

Chinese Culture University

an-tien hsieh

College of Management Da Yeh University, Taiwan

Summary.—the importance of workplace friendship is recognized by research- ers and practitioners, but its antecedents with respect to work roles are not well understood. employees’ gender might moderate a relationship between work roles and friendships. data from a survey of 221 international tourist hotel employees showed that a key aspect of job support, role ambiguity, was negatively related to having workplace friendships. however, employees’ gender did not moderate this relationship. Role clarity (the opposite of role ambiguity) may facilitate workplace friendships.

workplace friendship is voluntary, informal, and person-related in- teractions among employees in the workplace setting (berman, west, & Richter, 2002). the importance of workplace friendship for job and orga- nizational effectiveness has been recognized by researchers and practitio- ners (Riordan & Griffeth, 1995; Mao, 2006). Workplace friendship provides employees with support and information exchange, elevating their job performance (berman, et al., 2002), and thus promotes organizational pro- ductivity (Ross, 1997; Song & Olshfski, 2008). Although previous studies have indentified factors influencing workplace friendship (e.g., similarity, proximity, organizational culture; Riordan & Griffeth, 1995; Sias, Smith, & avdeyeva, 2003), more research is needed to examine the antecedents of workplace friendship (Tse, Dasborough, & Ashkanasy, 2008).

workplace friendships evolve from work relationships (sias & cahill, 1998). The jobs in organizations have connections from which relation- ships among employees develop. for example, collaboration and sharing resources, and supporting work goals may promote friendship, while con- flicting expectations and perceptions of unfair resource allocations may hinder friendship (Sias & Cahill, 1998; Sias, Heath, Perry, Silva, & Fix, 2004). such interactions focus on the issues related to the connections be-

1address correspondence to chien-yu chen, department of marketing and logistics man- agement, chihlee institute of technology, no. 313, section 1, wunhua Road, banciao district, new taipei city 220, taiwan or e-mail ([email protected]).

C-Y. Chen, et al.720

tween jobs, other workers, supervisors/managers, or organizational con- texts. since resource sharing and knowledge about shared work goals is based on roles, it is logical that one major source of problems with interac- tions and development of friendships might be role ambiguity. the goal of the current study is to examine how employees’ role ambiguity is related to their friendships at work.

if an employee lacks or does not understand his/her job responsibili- ties, obligations, performance expectations and/or objectives, role ambi- guity exists (Breaugh & Colihan, 1994; Yun, Takeuchi, & Liu, 2007). To re- duce role ambiguity, the employee may engage coworkers to obtain more information about shared work roles and to collaborate on those goals, potentially enhancing workplace friendships. on the other hand, role am- biguity may reduce an employee’s effectiveness, thereby burdening co- workers or causing resentment and inhibiting the development of work- place friendships. previous studies have demonstrated that role ambiguity causes a host of dysfunctional job-related problems (see Jackson & schul- er, 1985, for a review). Bedeian, Armenakis, and Curran (1981) also found a significant correlation of −.28 between role ambiguity and relations among work group members. However, the finding may not manifest the association between role ambiguity and workplace friendship because re- lations among work group members, similar to work relationships, are compulsory and sanctioned by work roles, while workplace friendships are voluntary and unrestricted by work roles (sias, et al., 2003). whether role ambiguity affects workplace friendships is not known.

Bridge and Baxter (1992) stated that when employees blend their work role and friend role, their inability to handle the dual-role tension might lead to deterioration of workplace friendship. Role ambiguity and role conflict are different constructs (Jackson & Schuler, 1985) and “are not always associated with the same variables” (michaels, day, & Joachimst- haler, 1987, p. 30). Role conflict is defined as the employee’s inability to simultaneously satisfy the expectations of different roles, so role ambigu- ity is not necessarily implied. So, although role conflict is related to work- place friendship, role ambiguity and workplace friendship may not be re- lated in the same way.

previous studies have indicated that employee gender moderates the relationships between role ambiguity and its consequences (bettencourt & Brown, 2003). Babin and Boles (1998) also found that role ambiguity had a more negative effect on job performance for female employees (path coef- ficient = −.46) than for male employees (path coefficient = −.19). Generally speaking, men and women have different communication styles (Leap- er, 1987). Specifically, men possess an agentic orientation, discussing top- ics regarding their work more than women, while women demonstrate

Role Ambiguity And WoRkplAce FRiendship 721

a more communal orientation, discussing topics concerned with people more than men (Leaper, 1987). Female employees exchange more person- centered information and help (Burleson, Liu, Liu, & Mortenson, 2006), which may reduce the effect of decreased job information exchange. The negative effect of role ambiguity (i.e., limited job information) on work- place friendship may be stronger in male employees than in female em- ployees. accordingly, the other purpose of this study was to examine the moderating effect of gender on such a relationship to address the assertion of bettencourt and brown (2003). Hypotheses

based on the above literature and logical analysis, two hypotheses were posited. Hypothesis 1: role ambiguity will be negatively related to workplace friendship. Hypothesis 2: employees’ gender will moderate the hypothesized negative relationship between role ambiguity and work- place friendship, that is, the negative relationship will be stronger in male employees than in female employees.

Method Participants

international hotel industry employees were selected as a relevant population for several reasons. firstly, they perform boundary-spanning jobs. prior research has indicated that boundary-spanning employees (i.e., those who interact with different groups such as customers and cowork- ers; Bartel, 2001; Johlke, Stamper, & Shoemaker, 2002) exhibit greater role ambiguity than non-boundary employees (who are situated internally) (Babin & Boles, 1996; Kim, Murrmann, & Lee, 2009). Accordingly, inter- national hotel industry employees will experience higher role ambiguity because of the frequent customer-contact nature of their jobs. secondly, teamwork is important in the hotel industry. workplace friendship has positive functions such as cooperation and support which may provide hotel employees with assistance to accomplish their jobs more effective- ly. not much research on role ambiguity has focused on hotel employ- ees (kim, et al., 2009). Here, employees in the international hotel industry were recruited.

the authors contacted the personnel managers of 10 international tourist hotels in taiwan (three in the north, four in the middle, and three in the south), who agreed to participate in the survey. each unit was sent 20 to 35 questionnaires, depending on the number of eligible employees. Ev- ery employee received a questionnaire, a cover letter promising confiden- tiality, a gift, and postage-paid return envelop. the data were collected be- tween March 2009 and April 2009. Of the 300 questionnaires distributed, 225 questionnaires were returned. Omitting four invalid questionnaires,

C-Y. Chen, et al.722

with incomplete or conflicting answers, there were 221 valid question- naires (74% response rate). Sample characteristics are shown in Table 1: 62.4% were female employees, 29.9% were 26-30 years old, 52.9% were single, 42.5% were college graduates, 61.5% earned between NT$20,001 and NT$30,000 per month, and nearly half (45.2%) of respondents’ ten- ures were 2–5 years.

table 1 CharaCteristiCs of the saMple (N = 221)

Variable n % M SD

gender a 0.62 0.49 male 83 37.6 female 138 62.4

ageb 3.39 1.17 less than 20 5 2.3 21–25 54 24.4 26–30 66 29.9 31–35 42 19.0 36 and over 54 24.4

marital statusc 0.53 0.50 married 104 47.1 single 117 52.9

educationd 3.14 0.97 Junior school 10 4.5 high school 54 24.4 Junior college 57 25.8 college degree 94 42.5 graduate degree 6 2.8

incomee 2.24 0.97 NT$0–NT$20,000 32 14.5 NT$20,001–NT$30,000 136 61.5 NT$30,001–NT$40,000 35 15.8 NT$40,001–NT$50,000 9 4.1 NT$50,001–NT$60,000 4 1.8 NT$60,001 and over 5 2.3

tenuref 2.56 1.15 less than 1 yr. 31 14.0 2–5 yr. 100 45.2 6–10 yr. 48 21.7 11–15 yr. 19 8.6 16 yr. and over 23 10.5

Note.—a0 = male, 1 = female; b1 = less than 20, 2 = 21–25, 3 = 26–30, 4 = 31–35, 5 = 36 and over; c0 = married, 1 = single; d1 = junior school, 2 = high school, 3 = junior college, 4 = college de- gree, 5 = graduate degree; e1 = NT$0–NT$20,000, 2 = NT$20,001–NT$30,000, 3 = NT$30,001– NT$40,000, 4 = NT$40,001–NT$50,000, 5 = NT$50,001–NT$60,000, 6 = NT$60,001 and over; f1 = less than 1, 2 = 2–5, 3 = 6–10, 4 = 11–15, 5 = 16 and over.

Role Ambiguity And WoRkplAce FRiendship 723

Measures the questionnaire was pre-tested in a sample of hotel employees in

Taichung, Taiwan. Based on the opinions of 38 respondents in the pretest, some questions were reworded for ease of understanding.

Role ambiguity.—To measure role ambiguity, 15 items relevant to the hotel industry were selected from the scales developed by hartline and Ferrell (1996). The measurement dimensions included “performance cri- teria ambiguity” and “behavioral responsibility ambiguity” suggested by Breaugh and Colihan (1994) and Eys and Carron (2001). A sample item for the former was, “I understand how my supervisor evaluates my perfor- mance” and for the latter, “I know how to provide customers with good service.” Responses were made on a 5-point scale ranging from 1: Not at all certain to 5: Completely certain. After reversing the scale responses, higher scores indicated more perceived role ambiguity. The 15 items of the role ambiguity scale are listed in the Appendix (p. 730).

Workplace friendship.—workplace friendship was measured using six items developed from nielsen, Jex, and adams (2000). the sample item was “I have formed strong friendships at work.” Responses were made on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1: Strongly disagree to 5: Strongly agree. higher scores indicated more friends at work. the six items of the role ambiguity scale are listed in the Appendix (p. 730).

Demographic variables.—for gender, male was coded 0 and female was coded 1. previous studies suggested that age, marital status, education, and job tenure affected role ambiguity as well as workplace friendship (Karatepe & Sokman, 2006; Mao, 2006). Therefore, to clarify the relation- ship between role ambiguity and workplace friendship, these variables were controlled. descriptive statistics are shown in table 1. Data Analysis

data were analyzed via correlation and hierarchical regression analy- sis. Steps in a moderation analysis suggested by Cohen and Cohen (1975) and aguinis (2004) were to enter control variables (including gender) in the first step, followed by role ambiguity, followed by the interaction term of role ambiguity and gender.

results Measures

the internal consistency reliabilities of the role ambiguity scale (α = .96) and the workplace friendship scale (α = .85) were acceptable. AMOS software was used to conduct confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of role ambiguity and workplace friendship questionnaires to assess the scales’ validity. in the initial stage of the analysis, two items were delet- ed from the scales because of non-significant t values. for the remaining

C-Y. Chen, et al.724

items, the two-factor model showed that the ratio of chi square over de- grees of freedom was 3.08 (458.76/149), which was below five to indicate good fit (Hair, Anderson, Tatham, & Black, 1998). Root mean square resid- ual (RMR) was .05 and standardized root-mean-square residual (SRMR) was .06, better than the recommended standard (Hu & Bentler, 1999). Ad- ditionally, the comparative fit index (CFI) was .91, which exceeded the recommended standard (Hu & Bentler, 1999). Therefore, the model had an acceptable fit to the data. Standardized loadings of all items were sig- nificant on their respective latent variables ( p < .05). The average vari- ance explained for role ambiguity and workplace friendship exceeded the squared correlations with other variables in this study (see table 2), an in- dicator of discriminant validity (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Therefore, the constructs have basic convergent and discriminant validity.

Common method variance may affect the empirical results because all the data were collected using self-report questionnaires. The fit indices of the one-factor model (where all items were loaded on a single factor) were much worse (χ2 = 1,290.22, df = 152, χ2/df = 8.45, RMR = .09, CFI = .68, SRMR = .14), so common methods variance was not a serious problem in this study (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff, 2003). Correlation and Hierarchical Regression Analysis

Zero-order correlations among variables in this study are presented in Table 2. Role ambiguity was statistically significantly associated with younger age, single status, having higher education, and shorter job ten- ure. Besides, workplace friendship was statistically significantly associat- ed with being older, married, and higher role ambiguity.

as shown in table 3, model 2, the explanatory power of role ambiguity on workplace friendship was significant (increment in R2 = .06, F6,214 = 3.56,

table 2 Zero-order Correlations aMong study Variables

Variable M SD pearson correlation

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1. agea 3.39 1.17 2. marital statusb 0.53 0.50 −.55† 3. educationc 3.14 0.97 −.40† .30† 4. tenured 2.56 1.15 .50† −.31† −.26† 5. Gendere 0.62 0.49 −.24† .17* .13 −.14* 6. Role ambiguity 2.46 0.77 −.38† .14* .25† −.24† .00 .72 7. Workplace friendship 3.73 0.59 .16* −.14* −.07 .09 −.09 −.27† .54 Note.—the boldface values on the diagonal are average variance explained (aVe). a1 = less than 20, 2 = 21–25, 3 = 26–30, 4 = 31–35, 5 = 36 and over; b0 = married, 1 = single; c1 = junior school, 2 = high school, 3 = junior college, 4 = college degree, 5 = graduate degree; d1 = less than 1, 2 = 2–5, 3 = 6–10, 4 = 11–15, 5 = 16 and over; e0 = male, 1 = female. *p < .05. †p < .01.

Role Ambiguity And WoRkplAce FRiendship 725

p < .01; F change1,214 = 13.70, p < .01). The standardized regression coefficient for workplace friendship was β = −.27 ( p < .01). as a result, hypothesis 1 was supported. employees who perceived role ambiguity reported less workplace friendship.

as shown in table 3, model 3, the increment of R2 was small (incre- ment of R2 = .00, F7,213 = 3.12, p < .01; F change1,213 = 0.54, p > .05). The regres- sion coefficient for the interaction term of role ambiguity and gender was not significant. Therefore, Hypothesis 2 was not supported.

disCussion the literature on role ambiguity has mostly focused on the associa-

tion between role ambiguity and job-related factors, such as job satisfac- tion and job performance (Li & Bagger, 2008; Tunc & Kutanis, 2009). How- ever, little research has examined the associations between role ambiguity and interpersonal variables. the contribution of this study was in show- ing role ambiguity was significantly associated with reduced workplace friendship. employee’s gender did not moderate the negative relation- ship between role ambiguity and workplace friendship. bridge and bax- ter (1992) stressed that role conflict was related negatively with workplace friendship, but role ambiguity was not addressed. Lowering role conflict, or enhancing role clarity may help facilitate employees’ workplace friend- ships as well as having other desirable outcomes. Role ambiguity is a ma- jor factor in role conflict (Weatherly & Tansik, 1993; Grant, Cravens, Low, & moncrief, 2001). if employees’ roles are clear, this will improve their un- derstanding of coworkers’ role expectations, perhaps reducing role con- flict.

The hypothesized moderating effect of gender on the negative rela-

table 3 results of hierarChiCal regression analysis for WorkplaCe friendship

model 1 model 2 model 3 age .11 .01 .01 marital status –.07 –.10 –.11 education .01 .04 .04 tenure .01 –.01 –.02 gender –.05 –.08 –.23 Role ambiguity –.27* –.32* Role ambiguity * Gender .17

R2 .03 .09 .09 R2 change .06 .00 F 1.45 3.56* 3.12* df 5,215 6,214 7,213 F change 13.70* 0.54 df change 5,215 1,214 1,213

*p < .01.

C-Y. Chen, et al.726

tionship between role ambiguity and workplace friendship predicted in hypothesis 2 was not supported. this could be explained by employees having assigned role expectations and responsibilities (dobreva-martino- va, Villeneuve, strickland, & matheson, 2002). in that context, women em- ployees were expected to receive more information and help concerning people and thereby would also be more aware of the effects of role ambi- guity on their workplace friendships. Apparently this sex difference was at most a very small effect and was not significant.

to achieve role clarity, managers need to provide employees with adequate job-related information, which usually appears in job descrip- tions and includes stated job responsibilities, actions required to complete these job responsibilities, performance appraisals, and the consequences of not fulfilling job responsibilities (Cunningham & Eys, 2007). These con- sequences are typically less noted in job descriptions. they can be a rea- sonable tactic for reducing employee’s job ambiguity, particularly in the hotel industry, where employees frequently contact customers and the de- mands and expectations of customers are not predictable. this character- istic of the hotel industry will increase the influence of an employee’s role ambiguity (i.e., not knowing what to do with a customer demand) on the workload of his/her coworkers because they may have to deal with his/ her unfulfilled customer demand.

Cunningham and Eys (2007) found that greater communication among group members was associated with a drop in members’ role ambiguity. workplace friendship may be negatively related to employees’ role ambi- guity since workplace friends can provide them with job-related informa- tion. similar studies have noted the negative relationship between work re- lations and role ambiguity (Ross & Boles, 1994; Brunetto, Farr-Wharton, & shacklock, 2011), which may be reciprocal. this is a noteworthy topic for future study.

Research has shown that the relationship between role ambiguity and its outcome variables is affected by other factors (Bettencourt & Brown, 2003; Karatepe, Yavas, Babakus, & Avci, 2006). In a dependent work en- vironment, information exchange/assistance is required among employ- ees to promote the achievement of job objectives (saavedra, early, & Van Dyne, 1993). The negative relationship between role ambiguity and work- place friendship will be stronger in dependent than in independent set- tings. for the same reasons, competition is unfavorable toward develop- ing workplace friendship (berman, et al., 2002). in a highly competitive setting, an employee with role ambiguity may perceive a lack of mutu- al assistance and job information sharing among employees because co- workers would like to maintain their individual advantages. competition

Role Ambiguity And WoRkplAce FRiendship 727

among employees would moderate the relationship between job ambigui- ty and workplace friendship. future study should address this possibility.

a limitation of this study is that samples for the main survey were drawn from employees of international hotels, which limits the general- izability of the results to other populations. in addition, the design of this study could not rule out the effects of common methods variance since all the data used in the study were acquired using the same questionnaire.

RefeRences

aguinis, h. (2004) Regression analysis for categorical moderators. new york: guilford. babin, b. J., & boles, J. s. (1996) The effects of perceived co-worker involvement and

supervisor support on service provider role stress, performance and job satisfac- tion. Journal of Retailing, 72, 55-75.

babin, b. J., & boles, J. s. (1998) employee behavior in a service environment: a model and test of potential differences between men and women. Journal of Marketing, 62(2), 77-91.

bartel, C. a. (2001) Social comparison in boundary-spanning work: effects of com- munity outreach on members’ organizational identity and identification. Admin- istrative Science Quarterly, 46, 379-413.

bedeian, a. g., arMenakis, a. a., & Curran, s. M. (1981) the relationship between role stress and job-related, interpersonal, and organizational climate factors. The Journal of Social Psychology, 113, 247-260.

berMan, e. M., West, J. p., & riChter, M. n. (2002) workplace relations: friendship patterns and consequences (according to managers). Public Administration Review, 62, 217-230.

bettenCourt, l. a., & broWn, s. W. (2003) Role stressors and customer-oriented boundary-spanning behaviors in service organizations. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 31, 394-408.

breaugh, J. a., & Colihan, J. p. (1994) measuring facets of job ambiguity: construct validity evidence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 191-202.

bridge, k., & baxter, l. a. (1992) blended relationships: friends as work associates. Western Journal of Communication, 56, 200-225.

brunetto, y., farr-Wharton, r., & shaCkloCk, k. (2011) supervisor-nurse relation- ships, teamwork, role ambiguity and well-being: public versus private sector nurses. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 49(2), 143-164.

burleson, b. r., liu, M., liu, t., & Mortenson, s. t. (2006) chinese evaluations of emo- tional support skills, goals, and behaviors: an assessment of gender-related simi- larities and differences. Communication Research, 33(1), 1-26.

Cohen, J., & Cohen, p. (1975) Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behav- ioral science. hillsdale, nJ: erlbaum.

CunninghaM, i. J., & eys, M. a. (2007) Role ambiguity and intra- team communication in interdependent sport teams. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37, 2220-2237.

dobreVa-MartinoVa, t., VilleneuVe, M., striCkland, l., & Matheson, k. (2002) occu- pational role stress in the canadian forces: its association with individual and organizational well-being. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 34, 111-121.

eys, M. a., & Carron, a. V. (2001) Role ambiguity, task cohesion, and task self-efficacy. Small Group Research, 32, 356-373.

C-Y. Chen, et al.728

fornell, C., & larCker, d. f. (1981) evaluating structural equation models with unob- servable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39-50.

grant, k., CraVens, d. W., loW, g. s., & MonCrief, W. C. (2001) the role of satisfaction with territory design on the motivation, attitudes, and work outcomes of sales- people. Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 29(2), 165-178.

hair, J. f., anderson, r. e., tathaM, r. l., & blaCk, W. C. (1998) Multivariate data analy- sis. (5th ed.) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

hartline, M. d., & ferrell, o. C. (1996) the management of customer-contact service employees: an empirical investigation. Journal of Marketing, 60, 52-70.

hu, l., & bentler, p. M. (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Model- ing, 6, 1-55.

JaCkson, s. e., & sChuler, r. s. (1985) a meta-analysis and conceptual critique of re- search on role ambiguity and role conflict in work settings. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 36, 16-78.

Johlke, M. C., staMper, C. l., & shoeMaker, M. e. (2002) antecedents to boundary- spanner perceived organizational support. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 17(2), 116-128.

karatepe, o. M., & sokMan, a. (2006) The effects of work role and family role vari- ables on psychological and behavioral outcomes of frontline employees. Tourism Management, 27, 255-268.

karatepe, o. M., yaVas, u., babakus, e., & aVCi, t. (2006) does gender moderate the effects of role stress in frontline service jobs? Journal of Business Research, 59, 1087- 1093.

kiM, b. p., MurrMann, s. k., & lee, g. (2009) Moderating effects of gender and orga- nizational level between role stress and job satisfaction among hotels employees. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 28, 612-619.

leaper, C. (1987) agency, communion, and gender as predictors of communication style and being liked in adult male-female dyads. Sex Roles, 16(3/4), 137-149.

li, a., & bagger, J. (2008) Role ambiguity and self-efficacy: the moderating effects of goal orientation and procedural justice. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73, 368-375.

Mao, h. y. (2006) the relationship between organizational level and workplace friendship. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 17, 1819-1833.

MiChaels, r. e., day, r. l., & JoaChiMsthaler, e. a. (1987) Role stress among industrial buyers: an integrative model. Journal of Marketing, 51, 28-45.

nielsen, i. k., Jex, s. M., & adaMs, g. a. (2000) development and validation of scores on a two-dimensional workplace friendship scale. Educational and Psychology Mea- surement, 60, 628-643.

podsakoff, p. M., MaCkenZie, s. b., lee, J. y., & podsakoff, n. p. (2003) common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recom- mended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879-903.

riordan, C. M., & griffeth, r. W. (1995) the opportunity for friendship in the work- place: an underexplored construct. Journal of Business and Psychology, 10, 141-154.

ross, J. a. (1997) Does friendship improve job performance? Harvard Business Review, 8-9.

ross, l. e., & boles, J. s. (1994) Exploring the influence of workplace relationships on work-related attitudes and behaviors in the hospitality work environment. Inter- national Journal of Hospitality Management, 13, 155-171.

Role Ambiguity And WoRkplAce FRiendship 729

saaVedra, r., early, p. C., & Van dyne, l. (1993) complex interdependence in task- performing groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 61-72.

sias, p. M., & Cahill, d. J. (1998) from coworkers to friends: the development of peer friendships in the workplace. Western Journal of Communication, 62, 273-299.

sias, p. M., heath, r. g., perry, t., silVa, d., & fix, b. (2004) narratives of workplace friendship deterioration. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 21, 321-340.

sias, p. M., sMith, g., & aVdeyeVa, t. (2003) Sex and sex-composition differences and similarities in peer workplace friendship development. Communication Studies, 54, 322-340.

song, s. h., & olshfski, d. (2008) friends at work: a comparative study of work atti- tudes in seoul city government and new Jersey state government. Administration & Society, 40, 147-169.

tse, h. h. M., dasborough, M. t., & ashkanasy, n. M. (2008) a multi-level analysis of team climate and interpersonal exchange relationships at work. The Leadership Quarterly, 19, 195-211.

tunC, t., & kutanis, r. o. (2009) Role conflict, role ambiguity, and burnout in nurses and physicians at a university hospital in turkey. Nursing and Health Sciences, 11, 410-416.

Weatherly, k. a., & tansik, d. a. (1993) tactics used by customer-contact workers: effect of role stress, boundary spanning, and control. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 4(3), 4-17.

yun, s., takeuChi, r., & liu, W. (2007) employee self-enhancement motives and job performance behaviors: investigating the moderating effects of employee role am- biguity and managerial perceptions of employee commitment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 745-756.

Accepted April 11, 2012.

C-Y. Chen, et al.730

appendiX Means and standard deViations for the Measures

measures and items M SD

Role ambiguity (1) i know how to provide customers with good service. 2.27 0.97 (2) i know how much time i should spend on each task. 2.35 0.93 (3) i know how to solve customers’ complaints. 2.55 0.93 (4) i understand how to complete daily paper work. 2.41 0.99 (5) I understand well how to plan or arrange my daily work. 2.31 0.93 (6) I know how to handle special problems and situations. 2.58 0.90 (7) I understand well where I can get help for handling my work. 2.47 0.93 (8) I understand well my company’s rules and regulations. 2.24 0.99 (9) I know how my supervisor will evaluate my performance. 2.62 0.94 (10) I understand well how my supervisor is satisfied with my

performance. 2.60 0.91 (11) i know which training is related to my work. 2.37 0.95 (12) i understand well which factors determine my promotion. 2.63 1.01 (13) i understand well how my supervisor will expect me to

arrange my time. 2.55 0.96 (14) I understand well how my customers are satisfied with my

performance. 2.44 0.97 (15) I understand well what my customers expect for my work. 2.40 1.02

workplace friendship (1) i have formed strong friendships at work 4.03 0.63 (2) i have social activities with coworkers outside of work 3.83 0.76 (3) i can share my secrets with my coworkers 3.56 0.84 (4) i feel i can trust many of my coworkers 3.62 0.75 (5) Being able to see my coworkers is one reason why I look for-

ward to my job 3.59 0.74 (6) I do not feel that anyone I work with is a true friend (reverse

question) 2.47 1.02

Copyright of Psychological Reports is the property of Ammons Scientific, Ltd. 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.