Conforming to career compromise: how a personal orientation can mitigate damages to organizational citizenship behavior
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This investigation aims to unpack the negative connection between employees’ experience of resource-draining career compromise and their organizational citizenship behavior, by theorizing a mediating role of their depersonalization of organizational leaders and a moderating role of their conformity orientation in this connection. Design/methodology/approach The hypotheses were tested with survey data collected among employees who operate in the construction retail industry in Portugal. Findings A critical reason that frustrations about unwanted career adjustments translate into a reluctance to undertake work efforts that exceed formal job descriptions is that employees develop dehumanized perceptions of the people in charge of the company. This explanatory mechanism is less prominent, however, to the extent that employees’ personal orientation favors rule adherence. Practical implications For HR managers, this research identifies a key channel, indifference to organizational leaders, through which disappointments about compromised career developments escalate into rejection of voluntary work activities, which otherwise might leave a positive impression on leaders and enhance employees’ careers. It also reveals that organizations can subdue this detrimental process by leveraging a sense of conformity among their workers. Originality/value This study adds to HR management research by showing how a mismatch between employees’ current career situation and their own meaningful career goals paradoxically might direct them away from extra-role work behavior that otherwise could provide meaningfulness. This harmful dynamic, which can be explained by their propensity to treat organizational leaders as impersonal objects, can be avoided to the extent that employees draw from their conformity orientation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".