Creating facades of conformity in the face of job insecurity: A study of consequences and conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates creating facades of conformity (i.e., suppressing personal values and pretending to embrace organizational values) as a coping strategy associated with perceived job insecurity in workplace. In two survey‐based studies, we examined the conditions under which such a strategy is more likely, and the consequences of its use. The results show in Study 1 ( N = 404) and in Study 2 ( N = 622) that facades of conformity, although employed as an agentic response to protect one's status, is paradoxically associated with negative employee outcomes including increased intention to leave and reduced affective commitment. Furthermore, the results show that age attenuates the relationship between perceived job insecurity and facades of conformity, such that older workers are less likely than younger workers to engage in facades under higher job insecurity. Our research contributes to theory on job insecurity, authenticity, and lifespan development. Managerial implications are discussed. Practitioner points The current study found that employees who feel their job security threatened were more likely to suppress personal values and pretend to embrace organizational values, and such responses were linked to their intention to leave and reduced affective commitment. The results from this study highlight the importance of fostering organizational environments that encourage authenticity such that members are not compelled to suppress personal values and pretend to embrace organizational values in job‐insecure environments. The results also highlight how employees will enact their careers at different stages of their lives. In job‐insecure environments, older workers are more likely than younger workers to express divergent points of view.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".