Healthcare organizations are driven by mission-driven values, yet these values can be compromised in employee-organization relationships. Hospitals present psychologically challenging environments for their nurses, potentially causing breaches of psychological contracts. Despite extensive research on ethical climates, their impact on mitigating interpersonal deviance in healthcare remains understudied. This warrants investigation into how ethical workplace climates and breaches of psychological contracts affect interpersonal deviance in nurses.
Research Objective/Purpose/Aim
This study investigates how psychological contract breaches mediate the relationship between ethical climates and interpersonal deviance.
Research Design/Method
The study employs a cross-sectional design, collecting data from 230 nurses across five hospitals in India. Standard scales are used to measure the constructs in the study, with established reliability and validity. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was utilized to examine the hypotheses outlined in the study. We also tested the moderating effect of work experience in the moderated mediation model.
Ethical considerations
This study received ethical approval (#ERB-ASBC-2024-027) from the University Ethical Review Board, constituted at Amrita School of Business, Coimbatore.
Participants and procedures
Permission to conduct the study was obtained from the hospital administration. Nursing staff participated voluntarily. They were informed about the survey’s purpose and their right to withdraw at any time. Consent was obtained on the survey form before recording their responses, and no personal identifiers were collected.
Findings
An ethical workplace climate reduces nurses’ interpersonal deviance, mediated by psychological contract breach. This mediation is moderated by work experience, with a stronger effect on less-experienced nurses.
Conclusion
The study suggests that regular assessments of ethical workplace climate can aid in planning effective reinforcements at individual, leadership, or organizational level to reduce interpersonal deviance and perceptions of psychological contract breach.
ChouL-PLiC-YHuSC. Job stress and burnout in hospital employees: comparisons of different medical professions in a regional hospital in Taiwan. BMJ Open2014; 4: e004185.
2.
FürederNFörsterC. In the eye of the storm: hospital leaders’ resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic. Health Care Manag Rev2024; 49: 139–147.
3.
WilsonJKirshbaumM. Effects of patient death on nursing staff: a literature review. Br J Nurs2011; 20: 559–563.
4.
ChangHShyuYILWongM, et al.Which aspects of professional commitment can effectively retain nurses in the nursing profession?J Nurs Scholarsh2015; 47: 468–476.
5.
RathertCVogusTHearldLR. Psychological work climates and health care worker well-being. Health Care Manag Rev2024; 49: 85.
6.
De HooghAHBDen HartogDNBelschakFD. Showing one’s true colors: leader Machiavellianism, rules and instrumental climate, and abusive supervision. J Organ Behav2021; 42: 851–866.
7.
MitchellRGuJBoyleB. The impact of leader member exchange quality and differentiation on counterproductive and citizenship behavior in health care teams. Health Care Manag Rev2024; 49: 86–93.
8.
PaloSChawlaA. Incidences of workplace deviance behavior among nurses. Indian J Ind Relat2015; 8: 150–161.
9.
AppelbaumSHIaconiGDMatousekA. Positive and negative deviant workplace behaviors: causes, impacts, and solutions. Corp Gov: The international journal of business in society2007; 7: 586–598.
10.
MurphyKR. Honesty in the workplace. Monterey, CA: Thomson Brooks/Cole Publishing Co, 1993.
11.
LitzkyBEEddlestonKAKidderDL. The good, the bad, and the misguided: how managers inadvertently encourage deviant behaviors. Acad Manag Perspect2006; 20: 91–103.
12.
RathertCFlemingDA. Hospital ethical climate and teamwork in acute care: the moderating role of leaders. Health Care Manag Rev2008; 33: 323–331.
13.
RathertCIshqaidefGPorterTH. Caring work environments and clinician emotional exhaustion: empirical test of an exploratory model. Health Care Manag Rev2022; 47: 58–65.
14.
SimhaACullenJB. Ethical climates and their effects on organizational outcomes: implications from the past and prophecies for the future. Acad Manag Perspect2012; 26: 20–34.
15.
SimhaAStachowicz-StanuschA. The link between ethical climates and managerial success: a study in a polish context. J Bus Ethics2013; 114: 55–59.
16.
BennettRJRobinsonSL. Development of a measure of workplace deviance. J Appl Psychol2000; 85: 349–360.
17.
RobinsonSLMorrisonEW. The development of psychological contract breach and violation: a longitudinal study. J Organ Behav2000; 21: 525–546.
18.
RenDMaB. Effectiveness of interactive tools in online health care communities: social exchange theory perspective. J Med Internet Res2021; 23: e21892.
19.
CropanzanoRMitchellMS. Social exchange theory: an interdisciplinary review. J Manag2005; 31: 874–900.
20.
BlauPM. Justice in social exchange. Sociol Inq1964; 34: 193–206.
21.
HomansGC. Social behavior as exchange. Am J Sociol1958; 63: 597–606.
22.
GouldnerAW. The norm of reciprocity: a preliminary statement. Am Sociol Rev1960; 25: 161–178.
23.
VictorBCullenJB. The organizational bases of ethical work climates. Adm Sci Q1988; 33: 101.
24.
VermaGGBiswasSN. Ethical workplace climate in nonprofit organizations: conceptualization and measurement. Bus Ethics Eur Rev2023; 32: 1217–1232. DOI: 10.1111/beer.12568.
25.
LeeDBegleyCE. Physician report of industry gifts and quality of care. Health Care Manage Rev. 2016; 41: 275–283.
26.
RobinsonSLBennettRJ. A typology of deviant workplace behaviors: a multidimensional scaling study. Acad Manag J1995; 38: 555–572.
27.
HaroldJLorenzoniIShipleyTF, et al.Cognitive and psychological science insights to improve climate change data visualization. Nat Clim Change2016; 6: 1080–1089.
28.
HunterEMPenneyLM. The waiter spit in my soup! Antecedents of customer-directed counterproductive work behavior. Hum Perform2014; 27: 262–281.
29.
AnderssonLMPearsonCM. Tit for tat? The spiraling effect of incivility in the workplace. Acad Manag Rev1999; 24: 452–471.
30.
RousseauDM. Psychological and implied contracts in organizations. Empl Responsib Rights J1989; 2: 121–139.
31.
Abou HashishEAAlsayedSAlnajjarHA, et al. The relationship between organizational justice and bullying behaviors among nurses: the role of nurse managers’ caring behaviors. BMC Nurs. 2024; 23: 503.
32.
EmiralioğluRSönmezB. The relationship of nursing work environment and innovation support with nurses’ innovative behaviours and outputs. J Nurs Manag. 2021; 29: 2132–2141.
33.
MorrisonEWRobinsonSL. When employees feel betrayed: a model of how psychological contract violation develops. Acad Manag Rev1997; 22: 226–256.
34.
RobinsonSL. Trust and breach of the psychological contract. Adm Sci Q1996; 41: 574–599.
35.
AndreoliNLefkowitzJ. Individual and organizational antecedents of misconduct in organizations. J Bus Ethics2009; 85: 309–332.
36.
BulutlarFÖzEÜ. The effects of ethical climates on bullying behaviour in the workplace. J Bus Ethics2009; 86: 273–295.
37.
TreviñoLKButterfieldKDMcCabeDL. The ethical context in organizations: influences on employee attitudes and behaviors. Bus Ethics Q1998; 8: 447–476.
38.
SuazoMMStone‐RomeroEF. Implications of psychological contract breach: a perceived organizational support perspective. J Manag Psychol2011; 26: 366–382.
39.
SuazoMMTurnleyWH. Perceived organizational support as a mediator of the relations between individual differences and psychological contract breach. J Manag Psychol2010; 25: 620–648.
40.
EisenbergerRLynchPAselageJ, et al.Who takes the most revenge? Individual differences in negative reciprocity norm endorsement. Pers Soc Psychol Bull2004; 30: 787–799.
41.
BordiaPRestubogSLDTangRL. When employees strike back: investigating mediating mechanisms between psychological contract breach and workplace deviance. J Appl Psychol2008; 93: 1104–1117.
42.
ChiuS-FPengJ-C. The relationship between psychological contract breach and employee deviance: the moderating role of hostile attributional style. J Vocat Behav2008; 73: 426–433.
43.
HuckmanRSPisanoGP. The firm specificity of individual performance: evidence from cardiac surgery. Manag Sci2006; 52: 473–488.
44.
SinghS. Organizational career management practices, career satisfaction, and intention to quit among Indian employee: examining the moderating effect of ‘four types of work experience. Aust J Career Dev2018; 27: 150–159.
45.
EarleyPCLeeCHansonLA. Joint moderating effects of job experience and task component complexity: relations among goal setting, task strategies, and performance. J Organ Behav1990; 11: 3–15.
46.
QuińonesMAFordJKTeachoutMS. The relationship between work experience and job performance: a conceptual and meta‐analytic review. Pers Psychol1995; 48: 887–910.
47.
DeVellisRFThorpeCT. Scale development: theory and applications. Thousand Oaks: Sage publications, 2021.
ByrneBM. Testing for multigroup invariance using AMOS graphics: a road less traveled. Struct Equ Model2004; 11: 272–300.
50.
HayesAF. Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: a regression-based approach. Midtown Manhatta: Guilford Publications, 2022.
51.
HuLTBentlerPM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model1999; 6: 1–55.
52.
ByrneBM. Structural equation modeling with AMOS, EQS, and LISREL: comparative approaches to testing for the factorial validity of a measuring instrument. Int J Test2001; 1: 55–86.
53.
HairJFBlackWCBabinBJ, et al.Multivariate data analysis always learning. Hoboken: Prentice Hall, 2013, vol 734.
54.
FornellCLarckerDF. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J Mark Res1981; 18: 39.
55.
HenselerJRingleCMSarstedtM. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. J Acad Market Sci2015; 43: 115–135.
BozionelosNSimmeringMJ. Methodological threat or myth? Evaluating the current state of evidence on common method variance in human resource management research. Human Res Mgmt Journal2022; 32: 194–215.
58.
SimhaA. Noblesse OBlige—an entreaty to stop using common-method bias as a carnwennan of carnage. Group Organ Manag2024; 49: 784–791.
59.
PodsakoffPMMacKenzieSBLeeJY, et al.Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J Appl Psychol2003; 88: 879–903.
60.
WilliamsLJCoteJABuckleyMR. Lack of method variance in self-reported affect and perceptions at work: reality or artifact?J Appl Psychol1989; 74: 462–468.
61.
DoniaMBLTetrault SirslyCARonenS. Employee attributions of corporate social responsibility as substantive or symbolic: validation of a measure. Appl Psychol2017; 66: 103–142.
62.
FullerCMSimmeringMJAtincG, et al.Common methods variance detection in business research. J Bus Res2016; 69: 3192–3198.
PreacherKJHayesAF. SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput2004; 36: 717–731.
65.
BaronRMKennyDA. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J Pers Soc Psychol1986; 51: 1173–1182.
66.
HayesAF. Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: a regression-based approach. Midtown Manhattan: Guilford publications, 2017.
JonesABlakeJAdamsM, et al.Interventions promoting employee “speaking-up” within healthcare workplaces: a systematic narrative review of the international literature. Health Policy2021; 125: 375–384.
69.
GuestDEConwayN. Communicating the psychological contract: an employer perspective. Human Res Mgmt Journal2002; 12: 22–38.
70.
O’NeillM. Administrative ethics in nonprofit organizations. In: Handbook of administrative ethics. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2001, pp. 623–628.
