The current study aims to examine the relationship between workplace camaraderie, social capital, cognitive diversity and their combined influence on positive deviance in organizational contexts. More specifically, the objective of the current study is to acquire a more profound comprehension of the impact that collegial relationships have on the manifestation of favourable deviant actions. In addition to that, the current study also aimed to test the sequential mediation process by which social capital and cognitive diversity facilitate the emergence of positive deviance. A positivism research philosophy followed by a deductive approach, the sample of 213 employees was collected from the hospitality sector in Pakistan by using time-lagged data collection procedure. Workplace camaraderie data were collected at time 1. Data related to social capital were collected at time 2 after a 3-week interval. At time 3, with the same duration, data related to cognitive diversity were collected. Lastly, following the 3-week time duration, positive deviance responses were obtained. The data were analysed using Mplus research techniques, and results revealed that workplace camaraderie has a significant impact on positive deviance. Moreover, it was found that social capital and cognitive diversity influence employees’ decisions on positive deviance through workplace camaraderie. The current study contributes to the body of knowledge, since the literature is silent about the relationship between workplace camaraderie and positive deviance by developing and testing of an integrated model.
AggarwalI., & WoolleyA. W. (2019). Team creativity, cognition, and cognitive style diversity. Management Science, 65(4), 1586–1599.
2.
AhmadN., UllahZ., AlDhaenE., HanH., Ariza-MontesA., & Vega-MuñozA. (2022). Fostering advocacy behavior of employees: A corporate social responsibility perspective from the hospitality sector. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 865021.
3.
AlomaniA., BaptistaR., & AthreyeS. S. (2022). The interplay between human, social and cognitive resources of nascent entrepreneurs. Small Business Economics, 59, 1301–1326.
4.
AppelbaumS. H., IaconiG. D., & MatousekA. (2007). Positive and negative deviant workplace behaviors: Causes, impacts, and solutions. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 7(5), 586–598.
5.
BakkalbasiogluE. (2020). How to access elites when textbook methods fail: Challenges of purposive sampling and advantages of using interviewees as “fixers”. The Qualitative Report, 25(3), 688–699.
6.
BianchiM., & VietaM. (2020). Co-operatives, territories and social capital: Reconsidering a theoretical framework. International Journal of Social Economics, 47(12), 1599–1617.
7.
BodinÖ., & PrellC. (Eds.). (2011). Social networks and natural resource management: Uncovering the social fabric of environmental governance. Cambridge University Press.
8.
BryneM. (2001). Data analysis strategies for qualitative research (Research Corner). AORN Journal, 74(6), 904–906.
9.
BurhanQ. U. A., KhanM. A., & MalikM. F. (2023). Achieving transparency in business processes by developing and implementing ethical climate: An integrated model of ethical leadership and engagement. Business Process Management Journal, 29(3), 757–776.
10.
ChenL., ZhengW., YangB., & BaiS. (2016). Transformational leadership, social capital and organizational innovation. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 37(7), 843–859.
11.
ChuangS. (2021). The applications of constructivist learning theory and social learning theory on adult continuous development. Performance Improvement, 60(3), 6–14.
12.
ChumnangoonP., ChiralaksanakulA., & ChintakanandaA. (2023). How closeness matters: The role of geographical proximity in social capital development and knowledge sharing in SMEs. Competitiveness Review: An International Business Journal, 33(2), 280–301.
13.
DreerB. (2021). Teachers’ well-being and job satisfaction: The important role of positive emotions in the workplace. Educational Studies, 50(1), 61–77.
14.
GalperinB. L. (2012). Exploring the nomological network of workplace deviance: Developing and validating a measure of constructive deviance. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42(12), 2988–3025
15.
GibbonsD. E. (2004). Friendship and advice networks in the context of changing professional values. Administrative Science Quarterly, 49(2), 238–262.
16.
GonzalezJ. A., & SimpsonJ. (2021). The workplace integration of veterans: Applying diversity and fit perspectives. Human Resource Management Review, 31(2), 100775.
17.
GötzM., BollmannG., & O’BoyleE. H. (2019). Contextual undertow of workplace deviance by and within units: A systematic review. Small Group Research, 50(1), 39–80.
18.
GuohaoL., PervaizS., & QiH. (2021). Workplace friendship is a blessing in the exploration of supervisor behavioral integrity, affective commitment, and employee proactive behavior—An empirical research from service industries of Pakistan. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 14, 1447–1459.
19.
HairJ. F., GabrielM., & PatelV. (2014). AMOS covariance-based structural equation modeling (CB-SEM): Guidelines on its application as a marketing research tool. Brazilian Journal of Marketing, 13(2).
20.
HeringtonM. J., & van de FliertE. (2018). Positive deviance in theory and practice: A conceptual review. Deviant Behavior, 39(5), 664–678.
21.
HoggM. A., & TerryD. J. (2014). Social identity processes in organizational contexts. Psychology Press.
22.
Hong-XoanN. T., & EarlC. (2020). Camaraderie and conflict: Intercultural communication and workplace interactions in South Korean companies in Bình Dương province, Vietnam. Journal of Asian and African Studies, 55(6), 832–847.
23.
JantzenD. (2019). Refining nursing practice through workplace learning: A grounded theory. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 28(13–14), 2565–2576.
24.
JeffersonA., & SifferdK. (2022). Practical wisdom and the value of cognitive diversity. Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplements, 92, 149–166.
25.
KanchanabhaB., & BadirY. F. (2021). Top management Team’s cognitive diversity and the Firm’s ambidextrous innovation capability: The mediating role of ambivalent interpretation. Technology in Society, 64, 101499.
26.
KandampullyJ., ZhangT. C., & JaakkolaE. (2018). Customer experience management in hospitality: A literature synthesis, new understanding and research agenda. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 30(1), 21–56.
27.
KlineR. B. (1998). Software review: Software programs for structural equation modeling: Amos, EQS, and LISREL. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 16(4), 343–364.
28.
KramK. E., & IsabellaL. A. (1985). Mentoring alternatives: The role of peer relationships in career development. Academy of Management Journal, 28(1), 110–132.
29.
KumariG., & EguruzeE. S. (2022). Positive deviance traits and social entrepreneurship for women empowerment amid COVID-19. IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review, 11(1), 109–125.
30.
LaiP. H., ChuangS. T., ZhangM. C., & NepalS. K. (2020). The non-profit sharing economy from a social exchange theory perspective: A case from World Wide Opportunities on Organic Farms in Taiwan. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 28(12), 1970–1987.
31.
LappingK., MarshD. R., RosenbaumJ., SwedbergE., SterninJ., SterninM., & SchroederD. G. (2002). The positive deviance approach: Challenges and opportunities for the future. Food and Nutrition Bulletin, 23 (4_suppl_1), 128–135.
32.
LiaoH., LiuD., & LoiR. (2010). Looking at both sides of the social exchange coin: A social cognitive perspective on the joint effects of relationship quality and differentiation on creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 53(5), 1090–1109.
33.
MalikM. F. (2023). “Perfectionism is a debacle” how a perfectionist leader hinders in business processes? A multiple mediated model. Business Process Management Journal, 29(4), 1184–1203.
34.
MalikM. F., BurhanQ. U. A., & KhanM. A. (2023). The role of HEXACO in the development of authentic leadership and its consequences on task performance. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 44(1), 52–71.
35.
MalikM. F., BurhanQ. U. A., AkhtarS., & ShafiqM. (2022). Human-centric BPM: Employee exploitation effects on knowledge-sharing behavior and CWB: A dual-path model and its consequences. Business Process Management Journal, 28(4), 1207–1226.
36.
MarschlichS., & IngenhoffD. (2021). Stakeholder engagement in a multicultural context: The contribution of (personal) relationship cultivation to social capital. Public Relations Review, 47(4), 102091.
37.
MertensW., ReckerJ., KohlbornT., & KummerT. F. (2016). A framework for the study of positive deviance in organizations. Deviant Behavior, 37(11), 1288–1307.
38.
MeyerJ. P. (2022). Social capital as the main driver of organizationally valuable innovation. European Journal of Innovation Management, 26(5), 1293–1311.
39.
MichelJ. S., NewnessK., & DuniewiczK. (2016). How abusive supervision affects workplace deviance: A moderated-mediation examination of aggressiveness and work-related negative affect. Journal of Business and Psychology, 31, 1–22.
40.
MiddletonN., AndreouP., KaranikolaM., KoutaC., KolokotroniO., & PapastavrouE. (2018). Investigation into the metric properties of the workplace social capital questionnaire and its association with self-rated health and psychological distress amongst Greek-Cypriot registered nurses: Cross-sectional descriptive study. BMC Public Health, 18(1), 1061.
41.
MillerC. C., ChiuS., Wesley IIC. L., VeraD., & AveryD. R. (2022). Cognitive diversity at the strategic apex: Assessing evidence on the value of different perspectives and ideas among senior leaders. Academy of Management Annals, 16(2), 806–852.
42.
MitchellR., & NicholasS. (2006). Knowledge creation in groups: The value of cognitive diversity, transactive memory and open-mindedness norms. Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, 4(1), 67–74.
43.
MitchellM. S., CropanzanoR. S., & QuisenberryD. M. (2012). Social exchange theory, exchange resources, and interpersonal relationships: A modest resolution of theoretical difficulties. InHandbook of social resource theory: Theoretical extensions, empirical insights, and social applications (pp. 99–118). Springer.
44.
NarayananK., & MurphyS. E. (2017). Conceptual framework on workplace deviance behaviour: A review. Journal of Human Values, 23(3), 218–233.
45.
NewtonT. (2016). The power of positive deviance: How unlikely innovators solve the world’s toughest problems. InterAction, 8(1), 98.
46.
PascaleR., & MoniqueS. J. S. (2010). The power of positive deviance. Harvard Business Press.
47.
PutnamR. (2001). Social capital: Measurement and consequences. Canadian Journal of Policy Research, 2(1), 41–51.
48.
PutnamR., LightI., de Souza BriggsX., RoheW. M., VidalA. C., HutchinsonJ., GressJ., & WoolcockM. (2004). Using social capital to help integrate planning theory, research, and practice: Preface. Journal of the American Planning Association, 70(2), 142–192.
49.
SharmaN., & ChillakuriB. K. (2023). Positive deviance at work: A systematic review and directions for future research. Personnel Review, 52(4), 933–954.
50.
Van TeijlingenE., & HundleyV. (2001). The importance of pilot studies. Social Research Update, (35), 1–4.
51.
VasquezD. (2014). Employee retention for economic stabilization: A qualitative phenomenological study in the hospitality sector. International Journal of Management, Economics and Social Sciences, 3(1), 1–17.
52.
WangJ., & KimT. Y. (2013). Proactive socialization behavior in China: The mediating role of perceived insider status and the moderating role of supervisors’ traditionality. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(3), 389–406.
53.
ZhangZ., ShiH., & FengT. (2022). Why good employees do bad things: The link between pro-environmental behavior and workplace deviance. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(22), 15284.
