Adult attachment styles in the workplace

Abstract

Prior research has demonstrated that attachment styles are important antecedents of interpersonal relationship quality and psychological well-being. Despite this, the theory of attachment styles has been largely ignored by researchers interested in workplace phenomena. The present paper aims to explain the theory of attachment styles, why researchers have overlooked attachment styles as an antecedent of organizational behavior, and a possible means of reconciling attachment theory with current models of personality. Moreover, I will review what existing research has actually demonstrated in terms of linking attachment styles to leadership, trust, satisfaction, performance and other outcomes. Finally, I will explore what possible future directions may be taken by researchers in the future in order to broaden and deepen our understanding of the role of attachment styles in the workplace. Although it is generally considered one of the "grand theories" in personality research, attachment theory has received scant attention from researchers investigating the role of individual differences in the workplace. Possible reasons for the failure to address the role of attachment styles in the workplace range from overcoming conceptual boundaries and potential assessment issues to the predominance of trait models and the general disdain for psychodynamic models in the applied literature. Nonetheless, over the last two decades, a small number of studies have attempted to examine the role of attachment styles and a variety of behaviors, attitudes, and experiences in the workplace setting. These studies have focused primarily on issues of leader-follower dynamics and perceptions, job attitudes and stress, and performance outcomes. While these studies represent some progress in the field for integrating attachment theory into standard organizational behavior models, there remains a great deal of research to be done in order to integrate attachment theory into current models of leadership, performance, and job satisfaction. Attachment Theory Attachment theory, based on the work of John Bowlby (1982), postulates that all individuals are born with an innate desire to seek proximity to others in times of need or distress in order to enhance their survival prospects. To the extent to which these efforts to gain proximity are successful, individuals develop a sense of security. This sense of security (or lack thereof) then becomes the basis of their own individual attachment style which then remains relatively fixed over the lifespan of the individual. Bowlby's theory of attachment was originally inspired by his observation that socially maladjusted and delinquent boys were disproportionately likely to have experienced some sort of severe disruption in their early home life (Bowlby, 1944). To explain these findings, Bowlby integrated research from psychodynamic theory, comparative psychology, cognitive developmental psychology, and the principles of control systems (Fraley & Shaver, 2008). In particular, Bowlby focused his attention on...

A Question of Fit: Cultural and Individual Differences in Interpersonal Justice Perceptions

“…In particular, it is the first study to link attachment style differences to ethically relevant work outcomes. Third, our findings answer growing calls for organizational researchers in general (e.g., Gelfand et al, 2007), and justice scholars (e.g., Greenberg, 2001;Primeaux, et al, 2003) and attachment theorists in particular (e.g., Harms, 2011;Keller, 2013), to move away from Western normative conceptualizations of theories and constructs and develop alternative, culturally nuanced understandings.…”

“…Third, we contribute to the still limited body of organizationally focused attachment literature (Richards and Schat, 2011) by linking attachment orientations to interpersonal justice. Finally, we answer calls for much needed investigation of the cultural boundary conditions of attachment theory in organizational settings (Harms, 2011). securely attached, with positive models of both the self and others in relationships (Bartholomew and Horowitz, 1991;Mikulincer and Shaver, 2007).…”

“…In addition, anxiously attached individuals may become over-dependent on leaders' support, tending to 'cling' to them (Harms, 2011). Such a focus on self-interested relationship closeness may not fit well with collectivism.…”

“…In organizational research, a small but consistent body of findings has shown that secure attachment is generally associated with a range of positive individual, team and organizational outcomes (Harms, 2011). In contrast, attachment insecurity (i.e., higher avoidance or anxiety) has been associated with more negative outcomes, including relationship difficulties (Hardy and Barkham, 1994) reduced citizenship/pro-social behavior (Richards and Schat, 2011;Mikulincer and Shaver, 2007), lower organizational commitment (Mikulincer and Shaver, 2007), and higher turnover intentions (Richards and Schat, 2011).…”

How Adult Attachment Styles Relate to Perceived Psychological Contract Breach and Affective Organizational Commitment

“…The impact adult attachment style has on how people perceive and act toward others has led to a developing literature base of empirical and theoretical work examining how adult attachment impacts the workplace domain (Harms 2011). Attachment styles have been seen as impacting leader behaviors and the perceptions of leaders (Berson et al 2006;Davidovitz et al 2007;Hansbrough 2012), extra-role behavior (Geller and Bamberger 2009;Harms 2011;Little et al 2011), burnout (Halpern et al 2012;Simmons et al 2009) and job satisfaction (Hardy and Barkham 1994;Hazan and Shaver 1990;Krausz et al 2001).…”