How high involvement work systems reduce employee time theft: the role of psychological empowerment and organizational identification
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose Time theft is a widespread and costly workplace deviant behavior. Based on social information processing theory, the authors build a multilevel model to explore when and how team-level high involvement work systems (HIWSs) could effectively reduce time theft behavior. Specifically, this study aims to propose that HIWSs relate to employee time theft through the mediating effect of psychological empowerment and the moderating role of team-level organizational identification. Design/methodology/approach Through a three-wave field survey, this study successfully collected data from 396 employees and their 87 direct supervisors working in different industries in an eastern province of China. Findings The results suggest that HIWSs reduce employee time theft via psychological empowerment, and team-level organizational identification strengthens the indirect effect. Originality/value This study contributes to the literature by introducing HIWSs as a human resource management-related antecedent of time theft. It also identifies psychological empowerment as a key mediator that links HIWSs to employee time theft and reveals the moderating role of organizational identification in the relationship.
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.
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 it