Using resilience and passion to overcome bullying and lack of meaning at work: a pathway to change-oriented citizenship
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This study adds to human resource management research by addressing relevant questions about how and when employees' suffering from workplace bullying may direct them away from voluntary efforts to improve the organizational status quo. It postulates a mediating role of beliefs about work meaningfulness deprivation, as well as beneficial, moderating roles of two personal resources (resilience and passion for work) in this link. Design/methodology/approach The research hypotheses were tested with survey data collected among employees who work in the construction retail sector. Findings A critical reason that bullying victims refuse to exhibit change-oriented voluntarism is that they develop beliefs that their organization deprives them of meaningful work, which, as the authors theorize, enables them to protect their self-esteem resources. The extent to which employees can bounce back from challenging situations or feel passionate about work subdues this detrimental effect. Practical implications When employees feel upset about being bullied at work, their adverse work conditions may translate into work-related indifference (tarnished change-oriented citizenship), which then compromises employees' and the organization's ability to overcome the difficult situation. Managers should recognize how employees' personal resources can serve as protective shields against this risk. Originality/value This study details the detrimental role of demeaning workplace treatment in relation to employees' change-oriented organizational citizenship, as explained by their convictions that their organization operates in ways that make their work unimportant. It is mitigated by energy-enhancing personal resources.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".