No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

We proposed that effects of illegitimate tasks, which comprise unreasonable and unnecessary tasks, on self-esteem and counterproductive work behavior (CWB) are enhanced among employees who are highly sensitive to injustice. CWB was further proposed to be a moderating coping strategy, which restores justice and buffers the detrimental effects of illegitimate tasks on self-esteem. In this study, 241 employees participated in a diary study over five workdays and a follow-up questionnaire one week later. Daily effects were determined in multilevel analyses: Unreasonable tasks decreased self-esteem and increased CWB the same day, especially among employees high in trait justice sensitivity. Unnecessary tasks only related to more CWB the same day, regardless of one's justice sensitivity. Weekly effects were determined in cross-lagged panel analyses: Unreasonable and unnecessary tasks increased CWB, and justice sensitivity moderated the effect of unreasonable tasks on CWB and of unnecessary tasks on self-esteem. Moderating effects of CWB were split: In daily analyses, CWB buffered the negative effects of illegitimate tasks. In weekly analyses, CWB enhanced the negative effects of illegitimate tasks. Overall, illegitimate tasks rather affected CWB than self-esteem, with more consistent effects for unreasonable than for unnecessary tasks. Thus, we confirm illegitimate tasks as a relevant work stressor with issues of injustice being central to this concept and personality having an influence on what is perceived as (il)legitimate. (PsycINFO Database Record

Within the workplace, time constraints that create deadline pressure may jeopardize employees' goal attainment. In an attempt to overcome this stressful situation, employees may increase their efforts. We examine two strategies that are assumed to be stress reactions (coping) under conditions of high time pressure: working faster and working longer. We propose that these strategies moderate the relationship between time pressure and adverse health effects, as well as work engagement. In our daily diary study, 122 public service employees provided ratings over five consecutive working days. Multilevel analyses revealed that time pressure relates positively to irritation only in conditions of working faster and is unrelated to irritation in the absence of this strategy. It relates positively to engagement only when employees do not work longer, whereas it is unrelated to work engagement in conditions of working longer. We conclude that using the strategies of working faster or working longer is not recommended to overcome daily time pressure. This study contributes to the refinement of the challenge-hindrance framework by identifying boundary conditions of challenge and hindrance effects of time pressure. In addition, this study provides the first empirical evidence about the daily role of "working faster" and "working longer," conceptualized as a maladaptive coping mechanism. (PsycINFO Database Record