Workaholism and incivility: stress and psychological capital’s role

• Pages: 165-183
• Date: 13 June 2016
• Published date: 13 June 2016
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJWHM-08-2015-0051
• Author: Lauren Lanzo,Shahnaz Aziz,Karl Wuensch
• Subject Matter: Health & social care,Healthcare management

Workaholism and incivility:

stress and psychological

capital’s role

Lauren Lanzo

East Carolina University, Greenville, North Carolina, USA, and

Shahnaz Aziz and Karl Wuensch

Department of Psychology,

East Carolina University, Greenville, North Carolina, USA

Abstract

Purpose –The purpose of this paper is to investigate the relationships among incivility, stress,

workaholism, and psychological capital (PsyCap).

Design/methodology/approach –Data on incivility, stress, workaholism, and PsyCap were

collected, through administration of an online survey, from 168 employees.

Findings –Workaholism and stress were positively related to uncivil behaviors, while PsyCap

was negatively linked to incivility. Additionally, workaholism was positively associated with stress

and negatively related to PsyCap. Finally, PsyCap acted as a mediator between workaholism and

uncivil behaviors.

Research limitations/implications –Future researchers should obtain a larger number of minority

participants, assess the instigators of incivility, and implement a longitudinal model.

Practical implications –Managers should focus on reducing stress and uncivil behaviors, and

implement interventions to reduce workaholism and stress and increase PsyCap.

Originality/value –It is the first study to examine measurable traits that are likely to lead to negative

behaviors, and includes an emotional tool, PsyCap, that can be developed to limit the negative influence

of incivility on the organization.

Keywords Stress, Workplace health, Psychological capital, Workaholism,

Occupational health and safety, Workplace incivility, Organizational behaviour

Paper type Research paper

There are many interpersonal factors within an organization that can contribute to

negative outcomes such as job dissatisfaction, turnover, counterproductive work

behaviors (CWBs), and low productivity. Researchers and managers tend to focus on

severe and tangible components such as violence and aggression, instead of milder,

but equally destructive behaviors, such as incivility (Pearson et al., 2000). Overt

violence and aggression can be dangerous and should be monitored, but incivility

occurs daily and at a much higher rate (Pearson et al., 2000). Pearson et al. (2000) cite a

national poll indicating that 90 percent of respondents felt incivility was a serious

problem in the workplace. Furthermore, regular incivility can lead to the more severe

violent and aggressive behaviors that seem to receive the most attention.

Now that incivility research is gaining popularity, studies have centered around

the negative influence it has on the targets of incivility. Some researchers have looked

at the instigators of incivility, but there are still large gaps in terms of why

certain people are more prone to engage in uncivil behaviors. In the current study,

we first review the existing literature on the antecedents of incivility and the gaps in

the literature, then we propose a new model in which workaholism is the main

International Journal of Workplace

Health Management

Vol. 9 No. 2, 2016

pp. 165-183

©Emerald Group Publis hing Limited

1753-8351

DOI 10.1108/IJWHM-08-2015-0051

Received 17 August 2015

Revised 13 October 2015

10 November 2015

Accepted 16 November 2015

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

www.emeraldinsight.com/1753-8351.htm

165

Workaholism

and incivility

predictor of incivility while stress and psychological capital (PsyCap) act as

potential mediators.

A study conducted by Roberts et al. (2011) found that individuals with higher work

stress were more likely to engage in uncivil behaviors. Furthermore, individuals with

high levels of PsyCapwere less stressed and not as likely to engage in uncivil behaviors.

Although these findings provide a foundation for future research on the instigators of

incivility, they do not answer the more specific question of what dispositional factors

cause stress to lead to incivility. Stress is a response to the work environment, and

PsyCap is a state-like variable; therefore, these factors do not provide a comprehensive

view of the types of people who are more likely to engage in uncivil behaviors. Previous

research has linkedworkaholism to greater stress levels(Spence and Robbins, 1992) and

an increased likelihood to engage in CWBs (Clark et al., 2014; Porter, 1996). Some recent

studies have exploredthe connection between passion for work and incivility (Birkeland

and Nerstad, 2016), as well as workaholism and PsyCap (Pedreira and Mónico, 2013);

however, in the current study we address workaholism differently from how it was

operationalized inthese studies. There are clear operational differences between passion

for work and Pedreiraand Mónico’s definition of workaholism (as discussedlater) that do

not allow us to generalize their findings to our investigation.

Roberts et al. (2011) proposed that PsyCap acts as a moderator between stress and

incivility. However, Luthans et al. (2008b), who have published extensively on PsyCap,

found that PsyCap acts as a mediator between perceived organizational climate and

performance. Although the current study does not focus on climate or performance,

Luthans et al. (2008b) argue that psychological states can play important mediator roles

between predictors and outcomes in the workplace. Based on this information, it is

possible that rather than simply acting as a moderator, PsyCap can actually serve as a

mediator linking certain predictors to incivility.

In the currentstudy, we first replicated previousfindings by linking stressto incivility

and workaholismto stress to in order to confirm the foundation we builtour model upon.

Then, we added to the literature by exploring a model (see Figure 1) combining

workaholism, incivility, stress, and PsyCap, as well as proposingthat PsyCap and stress

act as mediators.Therefore, in the present study, we fill a gap in the incivility research by

focussing on who is moreprone to be uncivil (workaholics) and why (job stress and low

PsyCap). An overview of each construct is discussed in the following sections.

Stress

0.30** 0.08

0.15

–0.34**–0.18*

Incivility

Workaholism

PsyCap

Notes: *p<0.05; **p<0.01

Figure 1.

Workaholism,

psychological capital,

stress, and incivility:

path model with

standardized

coefficients

166

IJWHM

9,2