No abstract

Research suggests that employee status, and various status proxies, relate to a number of meaningful outcomes in the workplace. The advancement of the study of status in organizational settings has, however, been stymied by the lack of a validated workplace status measure. The purpose of this manuscript, therefore, is to develop and validate a measure of workplace status based on a theoretically grounded definition of status in organizations. Subject-matter experts were used to examine the content validity of the measure. Then, 2 separate samples were employed to assess the psychometric properties (i.e., factor structure, reliability, convergent and discriminant validity) and nomological network of a 5-item, self-report Workplace Status Scale (WSS). To allow for methodological flexibility, an additional 3 samples were used to extend the WSS to coworker reports of a focal employee's status, provide additional evidence for the validity and reliability of the WSS, and to demonstrate consensus among coworker ratings. Together, these studies provide evidence of the psychometric soundness of the WSS for assessing employee status using either self-reports or other-source reports. The implications of the development of the WSS for the study of status in organizations are discussed, and suggestions for future research using the new measure are offered. (PsycINFO Database Record

In employment interviews, individuals use impression management tactics to present themselves as suitable candidates to interviewers. However, not all impression management tactics, or the interviewees who employ them, are effective at positively influencing interview scores. Results of this study indicate that the relationship between impression management tactic usage and interview success is contingent on the type of tactic employed. Specifically, self-promotion was found to have a positive relationship (r = .20) and slight (r = -.11) and extensive (r = -.19) image creation were found to have negative relationships with end-of-interview scores. Further, the relationships between these 3 impression management tactics were moderated by interviewees' initial impressions of the interview (ΔR² ranged from .04 to .10). Interviewees who perceived they were seen as less suitable during rapport building were more effective when using any of the 3 impression management tactics.

What are the effects of perceiving peers’ higher performance? Social–cognitive theory emphasizes the positive influence that perceiving higher performers can have on observer task and job performance (because observational learning from role models enhances self-efficacy). Social comparison theory emphasizes the negative self-evaluations that accompany perceiving higher performers, which should under many circumstances reduce self-efficacy and subsequent task and job performance. To more fully understand the effects of perceiving higher performance, we argue the effects of perceived higher performers on observer task and job performance depend on individuals’ disposition in how they cognitively process coworkers’ performance. Drawing on goal orientation theory, we suggest individuals with higher levels of performance prove goal orientation (PPGO) primarily interpret perceived higher performers as comparative referents rather than as instructive role models, inhibiting social learning and reducing self-efficacy. Results from a 2 studies (a field study of 110 corporate employees as well as an experimental study with 107 undergraduate students) support these ideas: Individuals with higher levels of PPGO have decreased self-efficacy and performance when observing higher performing coworkers, and individuals with lower levels of PPGO have increased self-efficacy and performance when observing higher performing coworkers.

Using a conservation of resources theoretical framework, we connect within‐team social resources with team‐level citizenship behaviours. In a sample of 385 employees situated in 70 teams from China, we confirm that team social support and team psychological safety interact to influence both affiliation‐oriented (AOCB) and challenge‐oriented (COCB) citizenship. Specifically, the two social resources substitute for one another, such that “either” team social support “or” psychological safety may be sufficient to increase AOCB. We find a consistent yet more complex pattern for COCB. Furthermore, drawing on the team prosocial motivation literature, we uncover team effort as a mediator to the effects of both social resources on AOCB. Our findings suggest that managers may enhance team citizenship by promoting team‐level social resources (social support and psychological safety), and they may only need to focus their energies on one of these resources, as exerting effort towards both may be redundant and inefficient.