Rao ps24
-
Upload
ecpp2014 -
Category
Presentations & Public Speaking
-
view
100 -
download
5
description
Transcript of Rao ps24
High-Quality Work Relationships & Employee Vitality:
Does Thinking About Relationships Make a Difference?
Meghana A. Rao, MA, MOD [email protected] 3rd, 2014
Work Relationships
Relationships in the organizational context
• Customer relationships (Kahn, 1998)
• Leader-member exchange relationships (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995)
• Relationship networks (Moch, 1980)
Co-worker Relationships
Hostile, toxic relationships
Workplace Bullying, Incivility, Social
Undermining, Ostracism, Workplace Mistreatment
Positive, energizing relationships
High-Quality Connections & Relationships, Relational Coordination, Synergy
High-quality connections
High-quality connections (Dutton, 2003)
• Short-term positive dyadic interactions
• Dynamic, generative, life-giving “connective tissue” between individuals
• High-quality connections - flexible, strong and resilient; in low-quality connections - more brittle with every interaction
• Unit of analysis is brief encounters and “micro-bits” of interactions
Components of High Quality Connections
Structural Capacities
• Emotion carrying capacity
• Tensility of the connection
• Openness-based connectivity
Emotional Experiences
• Positive regard
• Mutuality
• Vitality
High Quality Relationships
• Psychological Safety (Carmeli, Brueller, & Dutton, 2009)
• Learning (Brueller & Carmeli, 2011)
• Innovation & Creativity (Carmeli & Spreitzer, 2009)
• Thriving (Carmeli & Spreitzer, 2009)
• Vitality and Performance (Carmeli, 2009)
Socio-Cognitive Process: Relational Cognition
• The cognitive attention focused on the relationship and the interactions between partners (Martin, 1991)
• Cognitive attention affects interpersonal judgments (Blanchard-Fields & Cooper, 2004)
• Cognitive appraisal of events rather than the events themselves shape and impact emotions (Siemer, Mauss, & Gross, 2007)
Study
Research question: Exploring the role of relational cognition in high-quality relationships and its impact on vitality
Hypothesis: Relational cognition would moderate the links between
a) emotion-carrying capacity b) tensility c) opennness based connectivity d) positive regard e) mutuality
and Vitality (Dependent Variable)
Method
• Web-based online survey conducted in the U.S.
• Sample: n=401; Female = 49%; Caucasian American = 81%
• Respondents had to meet the following criteria to participate:
• Should have been employed at the current organization for at least 6 months
• Should work for 35 or more hours per week
• Have face-to-face interaction with at least 3 co-workers regularly
• Should be working in an office that has 5 or more employees
• Measures –
• High-Quality Relationships scale (HQR; Carmeli, 2009)
• Relationship Thinking scale (Cate, Koval, Lloyd & Wilson, 1995) adapted for the organizational context
Correlations Table
Positive Affect
Questioning Network Thinking
Emotion Carrying
Tensility Openness Connectivity
Positive Regard
Mutuality Vitality
Positive Affect 1 .132** .403** .489** .465** .042 .576** .571** .586**
Questioning .132** 1 .383** -.154** -.093 .005 -.215** -.206** -.075
Network Thinking .403** .383** 1 .224** .208** .035 .236** .151** .323**
Emotion Carrying Capacity
.489** -.154** .224** 1 .522** .050 .639** .659** .601**
Tensility .465** -.093 .208** .522** 1 .095 .577** .608** .484**
Openness-based Connectivity
.042 .005 .035 .050 .095 1 .057 .072 .102*
Positive Regard .576** -.215** .236** .639** .577** .057 1 .810** .738**
Mutuality .571** -.206** .151** .659** .608** .072 .810** 1 .718**
Vitality .586** -.075 .323** .601** .484** .102* .738** .718** 1
Results
Correlations - MALESPositive Affect
Questioning Network Thinking
Emotion Carrying
Tensility Openness based
Connectivity
Positive Regard
Mutuality Vitality
Positive Affect 1 .140* .392** .543** .388** -.006 .560** .559** .585**
Questioning .140* 1 .435** .007 -.090 .019 -.118 -.125 .035
Network Thinking
.392** .435** 1 .239** .140* .050 .228** .134 .299**
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Correlations - FEMALES
Positive Affect
Questioning Network Thinking
Emotion Carrying
Tensility Openness based
Connectivity
Positive Regard
Mutuality Vitality
Positive Affect 1 .114 .407** .440** .518** .079 .586** .580** .582**
Questioning .114 1 .310** -.307** -.119 -.012 -.315** -.284** -.193**
Network Thinking
.407** .310** 1 .203** .250** .017 .236** .163* .327**
Regression Model with Positive Affect, Co-worker and Network thinking
Note: Unstandardized parameter estimates. N = 401. ***p < .001; **p < .01; *p < .05.
Network
Thoughts
Vitality
a3=.226** b3=.378***
c = .872***
Questioning
Thoughts
Positive
Affect
Thoughts
a1= .324*** b1= 1.265***
b2= .048ns a2= -.106ns
c1’= .673*** c2’= .89*** c3’= .83*** Positive
Regard
Regression Model with Positive Regard and Relationship Thoughts for Males
Regression Model with Positive Affect, Co-worker and Network thinking For Females
Note: Unstandardized parameter estimates. N = 401. ***p < .001; **p < .01; *p < .05.
Network
Thoughts
Vitality
a3=.202** b3=.534***
c = 1.076***
Questioning
Thoughts
Positive
Affect
Thoughts
a1= .337*** b1= 1.413***
b2= -.322** a2= -.263***
c1’= .913*** c2’= 1.100*** c3’= 1.025*** Positive
Regard
Regression Model with Positive Regard and Relationship Thoughts for Females
Regression Model with Mutuality and Relationship Thoughts for Males
d Relationship Thoughts For Males
Note: Unstandardized parameter estimates. N = 401. ***p < .001; **p < .01; *p < .05.
Network
Thoughts
Vitality
a3=.18ns b3=.378***
c = 1.116***
Questioning
Thoughts
Positive
Affect
Thoughts
a1= .439*** b1= 1.265***
b2= .048ns a2= -.152ns
c1’= .816*** c2’= 1.141*** c3’= 1.068*** Mutuality
Regression Model with Mutuality and Relationship Thoughts for Females
hts For Females
Note: Unstandardized parameter estimates. N = 401. ***p < .001; **p < .01; *p < .05.
Network
Thoughts
Vitality
a3=.179* b3=.534***
c = 1.375***
Questioning
Thoughts
Positive
Affect
Thoughts
a1= .428*** b1= 1.413***
b2= -.322** a2= -.304***
c1’= 1.162*** c2’= 1.389*** c3’= 1.315*** Mutuality
Discussion & Conclusion
• Emotional experiences are strongly related to vitality
• Women are more likely than men to have fewer ruminative/questioning thoughts if their work relationships are characterized by positive emotional experiences
• Women are more likely than men to experience a decrease in vitality if they have ruminative/questioning thoughts about their work relationships
• Limitations –
• Mono-method bias
• May vary across cultural contexts
Implications & Future Directions
• Impact of relationship-enhancing thoughts
• Exploration of relationship thoughts in different relationships, e.g. mentoring, supervisory, etc.
• Impact of interdependency, closeness, amount of interaction
References
Blanchard-Fields, F., & Cooper, C. (2004). Social cognition and social relationships. In F. R. Lang, K. L. Fingerman, F. R. Lang, K. L. Fingerman (Eds.) , Growing together: Personal relationships across the lifespan (pp. 268-289). New York, NY US: Cambridge University Press.
Carmeli, A. (2009) Positive work relationships, vitality, and job performance. In C.E.J. Hartel, N. M. Ashkanasy, W. J. Zerbe (Eds.) , Research on emotions Volume 5: Emotions in groups, organizations and cultures (pp. 45-71). Bingley, WA UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Cate, R. M., Koval, J., Lloyd, S. A., & Wilson, G. (1995). Assessment of relationship thinking in dating relationships. Personal Relationships, 2(2), 77-95
Dutton, J. E. (2003). Energize your workplace: How to build and sustain high-quality connections at work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. The Leadership Quarterly, 6(2), 219-247.
Kahn, B. E. (1998). Dynamic relationships with customers: High-variety strategies. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 26(1), 45-53. doi:10.1177/0092070398261005
Martin, R. W. (1991). Examining personal relationship thinking: The Relational Cognition Complexity Instrument. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 8(4), 467-480.
Moch, M. K. (1980). Job involvement, internal motivation, and employees' integration into networks of work relationships. Organizational Behavior & Human Performance, 25(1), 15-31. doi:10.1016/0030-5073(80)90023-9
Siemer, M., Mauss, I., & Gross, J. J. (2007). Same situation--different emotions: How appraisals shape our emotions. Emotion, 7(3), 592-600. doi:10.1037/1528-3542.7.3.592