Journal of Organization and Human Behaviour

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

Why do Dysfunctional Norms Continue to Exist in the Workplace?


Affiliations
1 AIBHAS, Amity University, Noida, India
2 Department of Psychology, University of Allahabad, Allahabad, India
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


The objective of the present work is to understand the factors influencing internalization of dysfunctional norms amongst the employees of an organization. The factors considered in the present study which could possibly influence the internalization of dysfunctional norms were-cultural values, organizational structure, socialization strategies, and leader integrity. The study was conducted in two manufacturing organization in the industrial zone of district Allahabad in Uttar Pradesh. Total sample of employees was 307. Internalization of dysfunctional organizational norms was predicted by leader integrity, job codification, institutionalized socialization strategies, collaboration, and centralization. It was concluded that the predictor variables had stronger relationship with internalization of dysfunctional organizational norms in terms of pervasiveness as compared to the second dimension i.e. intensity. Among all the predictor variables perceived leader integrity and serial vs. disjunctive socialization tactics were found to be the most important facilitators of internalization of dysfunctional organizational norms. Also socialization strategies of the organization were found to mediate the impact of leader integrity, structural factors, and cultural/values on the internalization of the dysfunctional norms.

Keywords

Dysfunctional, Norms, Internalization, Socialization
Subscription Login to verify subscription
User
Notifications
Font Size

  • Aiken, M., & Hage J. (1968). Organizational interdependence and intra-organizational structure. American Sociological Review, 33, 912-930.

  • Bass, B. M. (1990). Bass and Stogdill’s handbook of leader-ship: Theory research, and managerial applications (3rd. ed.) New York: Free Press.

  • Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.

  • Becker, T. E. (1998). Integrity in organizations: Beyond honesty and conscientiousness. Academy of Management Review, 23(1), 154-161.

  • Bittner, E. (1965). The concept of organization. Social Research, 32, 239 - 255.

  • Bradach, J. L., & Eccles, R. G. (1989). Markets versus hierarchies: from ideal types to plural forms. Annual Review of Sociology, 15, 97-118.

  • Campoux, J. E. (2000). Organizational Behaviour: Essential Tenets for a New Millinium, Boston: South-Western College Publishing.

  • Chatman, J. A., & Cha, S. E. (2003). Leading by leaveraging culture. California Management Review, 45(4), 20-34.

  • Chen, C. C., Chen, Y. R., & Xin, K. (2004). Guanxi practices and trust in management: A procedural justice perspective. Organization Science, 15(2), 200-209.

  • Crozier, M. (1964). The Bureaucratic Phenomenon. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  • Douglas, Jack D., Ed. (1971) Understanding Everyday life. London. Routledge and kegan Paul.

  • Falcione, R. L., Wilson, C. E. (1988). Socialization processes in organizations. In Gerald M. Goldhaber, & George A. Barnett (eds.) Handbook of Organizational Communication. Ablex Publishing.

  • Gino, F., Ayal, S., & Ariely, D. (2009). Contagion and differentiation in unethical behavior. The effect of one bad apple on the barrel. Psychological Science, 20(3), 393-398.

  • Gruenfeld, D. H., & Fan, E. T. (1999). What newcomers see and what old timers say: Discontinuities in knowledge exchange. In L.L. Thompson, J.M. Levine, & D.M. Messick (Eds.). Shared Cognition in Organizations. 245-265. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  • Hage, J., & Aiken, M. (1967). Relationship of centralization to other structural properties. Administrative Science Quarterly, 12, 72-92.

  • Hage, J., & Aiken, M. (1969). Routine technology, social structure, and organizational goals. Administrative Science Quarterly, 14, 366-376.

  • Hewlin, P. F. (2003). And the award for the best actor goes to…Facades of conformity in organizational settings. Academy of Management Review, 28, 633-642.

  • Jones, G. R. (1983). Psychological orientation and the process of organizational socialization: An interactionist perspective. Academy of Management Review, 8, 464-474.

  • Jones, G. R. (1986). Socialization tactics, self efficacy and newcomers adjustment to the organization. Academy of Management Journal, 29(2), 262-179.

  • Kahn, R. L, Wolfe, D. M., Quinn, R. P., Snoek, J. D., & Rasonthal, R. A. (1964). Organizational Stress. New York: Wiley.

  • Kirkpatrick, S. A. & Locke, E. A. (1991). Leadership: Do trails matter? Academy of Management Executive, 5, 48 60.

  • Louis, M. R. (1980). Surprise and sensemaking: What newcomers experience in entering unfamiliar organizational settings. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25, 226-251.

  • Macaulay, S. (1963). Non-Contractual relations in business: A preliminary study. American Sociological Review, 28, 55-67.

  • Mayer, R. C. Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. K. 1995. An interactive model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20, 409-734.

  • Merton, R. K. (1940). Bureaucratic structure and personality. Social Forces, 17, 560-568.

  • Miller, B. (1990). The Icarus Paradox. New York: Harper Business.

  • Nahaphiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23, 242-266.

  • Northouse, P. G. (2003). Leadership: Theory and practice (3rd Ed.) New Delhi: Sage.

  • Oldham, J. (1998). In the office politics game, look out, listen in and join up. Newbies: Get ready to rumble. Los Angeles Times.

  • Ones, D. S., Viswesvaran, C., & Schmidt, F. L. (1993). Comprehensive meta-analysis of integrity test validities: Findings and implications for personnel selection and theories of Job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 18, 679-703.

  • Pareek, U., & Rao, T. V. (1992). Designing and managing human resource systems (2nd Ed.). New Delhi: Oxford & IBM.

  • Perrow, C. (1967). A framework for the comparative analysis of organizations. American Sociological Review, 32, 194-208

  • Roethlisberger, F. J., Dickson, W. J., & Wright, H. A. (1939). Management and the Worker: An Account of a Research Program Conducted by the Western Electric Company, Hawthorne Works, Chicago (Cambridge: MA, Harvard University Press).

  • Selznick. P. (1949). TVA and the grassischolar_mains. Berkeley, C. A.: University of California Press.

  • Starbuck, W. H., Greve, A., & Hedberg, B. L. T. (1978). Responding to crisis. Journal of Business Administration, 9, 121 37.

  • Trice, H. M. (1985). Rites and ceremonials in organizational cultures. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 4, 221-70.

  • Trice, H. M., & Beyer, J. M. (1993). The cultures of work organizations New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

  • Tsai, W., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital and value creation: The role of intrafirm networks. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 765-802.

  • Van Maanen, J. (1978). People processing: Strategies of organizational socialization. Organizational Dynamics, 7, 18-36.

  • Van Maanen, J., & Schein, E. H. (1979). Towards a theory or organizational socialization. In B. M. Staw (Ed.), Research in organizational behaviour, 1, 209-264. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

  • Watson, G.W., Teague, B.T., & Papamarcos, S.D. (2004). Understanding values in Organization. A value dynamics perspective. Journal of Human values, 10(1), 23-39.

  • Yukl, G. A., & Van Flect, D. D. 1992. Theory and research on leadership in organizations. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (2nd. Ed.) 3, 147-197. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

  • Zimmerman, Don (1971). The Practicalities of rule use. In Jack Douglas (ed.). Understanding Everyday Life, 221-238. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.


Abstract Views: 468

PDF Views: 0




  • Why do Dysfunctional Norms Continue to Exist in the Workplace?

Abstract Views: 468  |  PDF Views: 0

Authors

Seema Singh
AIBHAS, Amity University, Noida, India
Rashmi Kumar
Department of Psychology, University of Allahabad, Allahabad, India

Abstract


The objective of the present work is to understand the factors influencing internalization of dysfunctional norms amongst the employees of an organization. The factors considered in the present study which could possibly influence the internalization of dysfunctional norms were-cultural values, organizational structure, socialization strategies, and leader integrity. The study was conducted in two manufacturing organization in the industrial zone of district Allahabad in Uttar Pradesh. Total sample of employees was 307. Internalization of dysfunctional organizational norms was predicted by leader integrity, job codification, institutionalized socialization strategies, collaboration, and centralization. It was concluded that the predictor variables had stronger relationship with internalization of dysfunctional organizational norms in terms of pervasiveness as compared to the second dimension i.e. intensity. Among all the predictor variables perceived leader integrity and serial vs. disjunctive socialization tactics were found to be the most important facilitators of internalization of dysfunctional organizational norms. Also socialization strategies of the organization were found to mediate the impact of leader integrity, structural factors, and cultural/values on the internalization of the dysfunctional norms.

Keywords


Dysfunctional, Norms, Internalization, Socialization

References