The antecedents and outcomes of workplace ostracism: A meta-analysis.

Abstract

Researchers have shown great interest in the antecedents and outcomes of workplace ostracism, which has led to an expansive body of research. In light of this work, the current article fulfills the need for a comprehensive review and meta-analysis of the antecedents and outcomes associated with workplace ostracism. We begin our review by adapting a victimization perspective to understand ostracism as a triadic social process between the victim, perpetrator, and the environment. The meta-analytic results then support that leadership characteristics are the strongest related antecedents of workplace ostracism, followed by certain aspects of personality (e.g., Big Five) and contextual characteristics (e.g., social support). The results also show that workplace ostracism very strongly relates to deviance, and it strongly relates to other performance outcomes (e.g., core-performance, helping, voice), well-being outcomes (e.g., psychological well-being, emotions, self-perceptions), and organizational perceptions (e.g., job satisfaction, commitment, justice). We also show that the relationship of performance, well-being, emotions, and self-perceptions when measured after ostracism was comparable to their relationship when measured before ostracism. These results suggest that the outcomes of ostracism are less certain than previously thought, as they may instead be antecedents of ostracism. Finally, we call for future research to investigate this notion, along with further integration of the victimization perspective as well as the study of contextual predictors and moderators.

When and how favour rendering ameliorates workplace ostracism over time: Moderating effect of self‐monitoring and mediating effect of popularity enhancement

“…Employees, especially high self‐monitors, can take actions to alter their social acceptance among others and thus break the negative spiral of workplace ostracism. For research into workplace ostracism specifically, our findings highlight that employees can take actions to influence others and reshape the social environment to reduce their ostracism experiences; a conventional approach instead conceptualizes workplace ostracism as a static, negative condition and mainly investigates ways to manage its impact (Howard et al ., 2020). More broadly, being ostracized evokes behaviours designed to regain social acceptance, but our study adds new insights to prior research by empirically demonstrating that favour rendering can help ostracized people, if they are high self‐monitors, regain social acceptance (i.e., enhanced popularity) and reduce their ostracism.…”

“…Previous experimental studies already have established that people with less fear of negative evaluations (Maner et al ., 2007) or higher rejection sensitivity (Romero‐Canyas et al ., 2010) are more likely to use impression management tactics. Yet the results of a meta‐analytic review of workplace ostracism research (Howard et al, 2020) indicate a negative association between workplace ostracism and helping behaviours, suggesting that people tend not to help others after being ostracized. Balliet and Ferris (2013) argue that whether ostracized employees help others reflect a social dilemma; they cannot distance themselves from others if they realize helping others might enhance their social acceptance in the long run.…”

“…We included employees’ age, gender, and education as control variables. A meta‐analysis has shown that women are less likely than men to experience workplace ostracism and that those with higher education report higher workplace ostracism than their lower education counterparts, with a small effect (Howard et al ., 2020). Age appears positively related to ingratiation, an impression management tactic similar to favour rendering (Wu et al ., 2012).…”

“…Workplace ostracism is ‘the extent to which an individual perceives that he or she is ignored or excluded by others’ in the workplace (Ferris, Brown, Berry, & Lian, 2008, p. 1348), often manifested as the silent treatment or giving the cold shoulder (Fox & Stallworth, 2005; Williams, 2007). Its detrimental effects for employees, such as lower job satisfaction, reduced job performance, higher turnover intentions, and psychological distress (e.g., Ferris et al ., 2008; Ferris, Lian, Brown, & Morrison, 2015; Wu, Yim, Kwan, & Zhang, 2012), have been widely reported (see Howard, Cogswell, & Smith, 2020, a meta‐analytic review) and prompted efforts to identify factors that might help employees cope. Individual characteristics, such as a proactive personality, strong political skills (Zhao, Peng, & Sheard, 2013), low intrinsic work motivation (Lyu & Zhu, 2019), or stronger group identification (Xu, Huang, & Robinson, 2017), may help alleviate the destructive effects of workplace ostracism.…”

Is conflict adaptivity better than cooperation? The effects of adaptive conflict behaviors on job‐related well‐being in South Korea

“…Studies have found that psychological well-being is associated with higher employee satisfaction, better performance, better relationships with teammates, less stress and more personal development (Lomas et al, 2017). Moreover, well-being (or lack thereof) have been studied in relation to workplace ostracism (Howard, Cogswell, & Smith, 2020), work stress (Bliese, Edwards, & Sonnentag, 2017), organizational citizenship behavior (Davila & Finkelstein, 2013), and interpersonal conflict (Wickham, Williamson, Beard, Kobayshi, & Hirst, 2016).…”