No abstract

This paper aimed at investigating the effects of work-related norm violations (i.e., violations of interpersonal and work regulation norms) and individuals' general beliefs about the world (i.e., social axioms: reward for application, social cynicism) on feelings of shame and guilt in Turkey and in the Netherlands. An experimental study involving 103 Turkish and 111 Dutch participants showed that work norm violations elicited feelings of guilt and shame differently in Turkey and the Netherlands. Specifically, interpersonal norm violation in Turkey elicited feelings of shame and guilt more strongly than did violation of a work regulation norm, whereas no differential effects were found in the Netherlands. As expected, violation of a work regulation norm elicited feelings of shame and guilt more strongly in the Netherlands than in Turkey, whereas violation of an interpersonal norm elicited feelings of shame and guilt more strongly in Turkey than in the Netherlands. The findings provide further evidence for the moderating effects of social axioms: in both countries, participants high in social cynicism felt less ashamed when they violated a work regulation norm than did those low in social cynicism. Our findings are relevant for understanding the underlying mechanisms of norm violations at work, thereby offering a new avenue for investigating cultural differences in the workplace. The latter may be of particular relevance in times of globalization and diversity in the workplace.

The second and third authors contributed equally to the article.

Research suggesting a similar but different relationship between Organisational CitizenshipBehaviour (OCB) and Counterproductive Work Behaviour (CWB) is dominated by North American samples. Little evidence exists on whether these findings are replicated in other countries. To assess if a similar pattern emerged, we used the Social Axioms model (Bond et al, 2004) as a cultural framework and surveyed employees in the UK (105), The Netherlands (203), Turkey (185) and Greece (70) on the relationship between OCB and CWB, and the relationship between these behaviours and personality, justice and commitment. Analysis supported a multidimensional structure to OCB and CWB and indicated a non-bipolar relationship between these behaviours. Culturally, somewhat different to OCB research in general, we find support for a convergence perspective across countries. Conceptually, linguistically and structurally the scale assessing OCB/CWB was shown to be equivalent across countries and a non bi-polar pattern of relationships was consistent across countries. Overall, findings imply a universal nature to the relationship between OCB and CWB across societal cultural groups. Experiences of both productive and counterproductive behaviours may differ across countries as a result of different norms, beliefs and values within the countries. Researchers need to ensure that cultural considerations become inherent within the development of OCB and CWB research and to clarify if meaningful differences emerge across cultures. Therefore, given the scarcity of intercultural research on both OCB and CWB, the current study adopts a cross-cultural approach to examine the relationship between OCB and CWB across four European countries. The Merging of OCB and CWB ResearchAlthough the research on OCB and CWB has increased dramatically in the past 20 years, it is has tended to follow distinct paths, with researchers proposing different definitions and concepts to capture behaviours that are positive or negative to the organization. This is evidenced by the plethora of concepts and conceptual models proposed to capture OCB (e.g. Coleman &The relationship between productive 4

No abstract