Upload
shilpajainusms
View
231
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/3/2019 Negativity Paper_dubai Conference
1/27
DETERMINING NEGATIVITY TRIGGERS AT THE WORKPLACE: A
STUDY OF WORKING PROFESSIONALS IN CAPITAL REGION OF
INDIA
ABSTRACT
This paper attempts to find out the major factors which contribute to workplace negativity and
thereby leading to a negative work environment in the long run. The negativity is reflected in the
form of increased customer complaints, high turnover ratio, lack of creativity and innovation
amongst the workers, loss of motivation and morale, increased absenteeism and ultimately loss
of loyalty to the organisation. An attempt has been made by the authors through this paper, to
identify the key reasons for negative behaviour amongst employees working in various sectors
like Academics, Corporate and Government Employees of capital region of India. It was found
that communication, equitable treatment, ethical robustness and work life balance are the major
workplace negativity triggers in all the groups. Among academicians equitable treatment was
found to be the most significant factor leading to negativity, whereas among corporate none of
the factors showed major inclination towards negativity. On the contrary among government
employees all the factors led to negativity if they were not handled properly.
1
Prof. Anu Singh Lather
Dean, University School of Management Studies, Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha
University, Kashmere Gate, Delhi 110 413
Dr. Shilpa Jain
Assistant Professor, University School of Management Studies, Guru Gobind Singh
Indraprastha University, Kashmere Gate, Delhi 110 413
Ms. Anju Dwivedi Shukla
Research Associate, University School of Management Studies, Guru Gobind Singh
Indraprastha University, Kashmere Gate, Delhi 110 413
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]8/3/2019 Negativity Paper_dubai Conference
2/27
Key Words: Workplace Negativity, Communication, Equitable treatment, Ethical
robustness, Work life balance.
2
8/3/2019 Negativity Paper_dubai Conference
3/27
1. Introduction
Do you face a feeling of anger, fear, nervousness, depression, anxiety, complaining attitude,
pessimism, selfishness, arrogance, jealousy, vindictiveness at times......YES....then you are
facing negativity.. But, nothing to bother about as writer Christopher says, Just like there is a
place for pain as a reminder to our body something is wrong. Negativity is a brain reminder to let
us know something is wrong fix it fast. Just as there can be no light without dark there can be no
positivity without negativity. But yes this should be short lived and temporary, if not it becomes
a problem for oneself, for our team and ultimately for our organisation.
2. Definition of Negativity
A commonly agreed definition of Negativity is difficult to pen down, but a number of definitions
exist of negativity like - it is believed to be a trance, often accompanied by a state of agitation or
depression a predictable reaction to adversity or change.....in the workplace, as in life. It can
also be called a habitual attitude of scepticism or resistance to the suggestion, orders or
instructions of others. It can also be defined as a behaviour defined by persistent refusal, without
apparent or logical reasons, to act or carry out suggestions, or orders or instructions of others.
And ultimately the definition of Negative behavior which was the outcome of much
consideration of the literature review and the research findings is any behaviour that is
disrespectful and undermines or violates the value and/or dignity of an individual. It is behaviour
that harms individuals and organizations
The negativity has become so prevalent in our environment that a lot of new terms and
conception related to negativity has come up like:
Clique Negativity Effect (coined by Dale King) which is the tendency of a small
exclusive group of friends or associates, whom when evaluating the causes of thebehaviors of a person or persons they dislike, attribute positive behaviors to the situations
surrounding the behaviors and negative behaviors to the person's inherent disposition.
Negative Thinking spin (Debbie "Takara" Shelor) - which begins with a simple
thought. But soon there are more thoughts. And then you find other people talking about
3
8/3/2019 Negativity Paper_dubai Conference
4/27
the same thing - the same fear, the same circumstance, that "wrong thing" that is going on
in the world. Suddenly its like a tornado and you are being sucked down inside the cone.
The walls are so steep and the energy pouring in is so powerful that you have no way of
climbing back out. You are stuck at the bottom of a negative energy vortex - that you
created by your own thoughts.
3. Sources of negativity
According to Change Dynamics ,there are certain basic needs that can lead to negative
behaviour, and these are :Control, Boundaries, Abandonment, Denial, Independence/
Dependence, Responsibility/Irresponsibility, Need to Be Liked, Authority, Need for Excitement
and Chaos and Loyalties.
Apart from this there are few distorted thinking styles that can lead to negativity , such as
a) Magnifying: Turns the consequences of an event into a catastrophe such as, Im
going to be fired.
b) Destructive Labeling: Form of over-generalization, making someone or a particular
situation totally negative.
c) Imperative Thinking: Inflexible rules about how you and others should act usuallybased on negative past experiences.
d) Mind Reading: Attributes motives that explain other peoples actions toward a
person or event.
e) Divide and Conquer: Over-magnification and wanting others to support a particular
position. Tend to get support creating division within groups.
4
8/3/2019 Negativity Paper_dubai Conference
5/27
3.1 Communication of Negativity
Negativity is communicated by three ways :
a) Verbally :By saying things such as This is the worst company to work for, I am
working with useless people
b) Vocally : We can scream, , howl, be ironic, or speak indistinctly.
c) Visually : mode. We can scowl, keep away from people, or use unsuitable signals.
The above mentioned modes are the common ones, but there are many other variety of
negative people, such as :
a) The Steamrollers: When they become negative, they get angry and hostile, taking out
their frustrations on others. They come across as being tyrannical, autocratic, and
dictatorial.
b) The Ice People: These are the resisters of change. They like things the way they are or
were and become negative when you try to get them to do something differently. They
usually do not openly express their resistance. They may even say the change is good and
then not implement it or, worse, sabotage the change.
c) The Rumourmongers: They take out their negativity toward work or other people by
spreading rumours. They sense a loss of control regarding their environments, and
passing along or creating rumours helps them regain a sense of control.
d) The Scapegoaters: They cannot take responsibility for their own mistakes or for the
negative situations that they find themselves in. They shift the blame to others.
e) The Eggshells: They are our very sensitive people. The slightest thing said to them, if
misconstrued, causes them to crack. Once they crack, they become negative.
f) The Micros: When they are in their negative moods, they focus on the smallest, most
unimportant details. If they are managers, they drive their people crazy.
g) The Pessimists: When they are negative, they believe the world is an unpleasant place,
and they do everything possible to make it so for themselves and for others.
3.2 How to spot negative thinking5
8/3/2019 Negativity Paper_dubai Conference
6/27
The negative behaviour can be spotted by the following signs of negativity :
A lack of trust is keeping morale low.
Employees make preventable mistakes because they dont seem to care.
No one seems to have fun at work anymore.
Employees spend too much time complaining and griping.
The rumour mill is out of control.
Employees talk badly about management, other departments, customers, or each other.
Department negativity is causing employees to request transfers, or even quit.
Workplace absenteeism is increasing.
Back-stabbing and back-biting are creating an adversarial environment.
People stop talking when the manager comes in. Employees just don't seem to care about doing a good job.
4. LITERATURE REVIEW
4.1 A quantitative and qualitative study of negative behaviour was undertaken in 2005
within two Primary Care Trusts. The results showed that 63% and 52.8% of the random
group had experienced and/or witnessed negative behaviours in the previous 12 months. The
most commonly indicated negative effect was decreased job satisfaction followed by
decreased motivation. There was also evidence of physical avoidance, avoidance of
communication, decreased cooperation, commitment and a negative stressful effect. Some
people retaliated and some people had changed jobs within the organisation (17.2% and
10.7% respectively). Managers/team leaders were affected at higher prevalence (70.6%) and
witnesses were affected, but to a lesser degree. The conclusion was that negative behaviours,
irrespective of the individual perception regarding bullying and irrespective of frequency, is
of great detriment and cost to the individual and the organisation. To focus on 'bullying'
alone is to be sidetracked and organisations need to take steps to prevent all negative
behaviour. To ignore any negative behaviour is to pay the cost.
6
8/3/2019 Negativity Paper_dubai Conference
7/27
4.2A study from the University of Washington Business School published in Research in
Organizational Behavior in 2007 examined how negative behavior by one person in an
organization can impact on teams and groups. The study concluded that negative
behavior has a greater impact than positive behavior.
4.3Seligman (1998) found a highly significant linkage between measured optimism and
performance in the insurance industry. In this extensive study at Metropolitan Life,
Seligman found that high optimism insurance agents sold 37 percent more insurance their
first two years on the job and had less turnover. The linkage between optimism and
employee performance has also been demonstrated in the health care and banking
industries (Luthans et al., 2007b).
4.4Considerable theory and research by Snyder (2000, 2002) posits that individuals with
high hope not only have the willpower to accomplish a goal, but also consider multiple
pathways to reach it if one is blocked. High hopers have an uncanny ability to forecast
obstacles to challenges. Emerging research has also indicated that firms with higher hope
employees are more profitable, and managers with higher hope levels have
correspondingly higher performing work units (Peterson and Luthans, 2003).
4.5Cynicism and intention to quit may be considered components of employee negativity.
Initial research of cynicism in organizational behavior considered it as a generalized trait
( Kanter and Mirvis, 1989), but more recent work has considered cynicism as a specific
construct (Andersson and Bateman, 1997). The definition of state cynicism, or cynicism
about organizational change (CAOC), as used in this study, is defined as pessimistic
viewpoint about change efforts being unsuccessful because those responsible for making
change are blamed for being unmotivated, incompetent, or both (Wanous et al., 2000, p.
133). Wanous and colleagues found no support for CAOC as dispositional to negative
affect. They also found that cynicism is spawned in an environment of ineffective
leadership and lack of involvement or participation in decision making.4.6 HR publisher B21 conducted a poll of the effect of negativity on 150 employers. Nearly
half called it a significant problem. And 1 in 20 called it downright poisonous.
4.7 A survey by the Employment Law Alliance found that 5 per cent of American workers
maintain a blog - and 16 per cent of bloggers admitted to having posted something
7
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet?contentType=Article&Filename=Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Articles/0220290201.html#idb47http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet?contentType=Article&Filename=Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Articles/0220290201.html#idb36http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet?contentType=Article&Filename=Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Articles/0220290201.html#idb36http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet?contentType=Article&Filename=Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Articles/0220290201.html#idb36http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet?contentType=Article&Filename=Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Articles/0220290201.html#idb50%20b51http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet?contentType=Article&Filename=Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Articles/0220290201.html#idb42http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet?contentType=Article&Filename=Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Articles/0220290201.html#idb24http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet?contentType=Article&Filename=Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Articles/0220290201.html#idb1http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet?contentType=Article&Filename=Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Articles/0220290201.html#idb60http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet?contentType=Article&Filename=Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Articles/0220290201.html#idb60http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet?contentType=Article&Filename=Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Articles/0220290201.html#idb60http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet?contentType=Article&Filename=Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Articles/0220290201.html#idb47http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet?contentType=Article&Filename=Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Articles/0220290201.html#idb36http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet?contentType=Article&Filename=Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Articles/0220290201.html#idb50%20b51http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet?contentType=Article&Filename=Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Articles/0220290201.html#idb42http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet?contentType=Article&Filename=Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Articles/0220290201.html#idb24http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet?contentType=Article&Filename=Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Articles/0220290201.html#idb1http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet?contentType=Article&Filename=Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Articles/0220290201.html#idb608/3/2019 Negativity Paper_dubai Conference
8/27
negative about an employer, supervisor or colleague. The Employment Law Alliance
calculated that in a company with 120 employees, there is likely to be at least one
employee making negative blog comments about the organization or its employees.
4.8 Barsade says research suggests that positive people tend to do better in the workplace,
and it isn't just because people like them more than naysayers. "Positive people cognitively
process more efficiently and more appropriately. If you're in a negative mood, a fair amount of
processing is going to that mood. When you're in a positive mood, you're more open to taking
in information and handling it effectively. Barsade's research has taken her into a variety of
workplaces, most recently long-term care facilities. Her research found that in facilities where
the employees report having a positive workplace culture -- she calls it a "culture of love" -- the
residents end up faring better than residents in facilities with a less compassionate and caring
work culture. The residents reported experiencing less pain, made fewer trips to the emergency
room, and were more likely to report being satisfied and in a positive mood.
4.9 John Cacioppo, Ph.D. conducted studies at Ohio State University in which he showed
people pictures of subjects that were known to evoke positive, negative, or neutral
feelings. As the participants viewed the pictures, he recorded electrical activity in the
brains cerebral cortex that reflects the magnitude of information processing taking place.
Cacioppo found that the brain reacts more strongly to stimuli it finds negative. He
concluded that our attitudes are influenced more by gloomy news than good news.
4.10 In his article Our Brains Negative Bias that appeared in the June 20, 2003 issue of
Psychology Today, Hara Marano wrote, Our capacity to weigh negative input so heavily
most likely evolved for a good reasonto keep us out of harms way. From the dawn of
human history, our very survival depended on our skill at dodging danger. The brain
developed systems that would make it unavoidable for us not to notice danger and thus,
hopefully, respond to it.
4.11 It Has been found that elements of change can have significant negative effect on
performance and can cause long-term damage to work relations, if little thought is given
to the ways such changes may be viewed by the employees, and the consequences of
such changes (Mazumdar, 1992).
8
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet?contentType=Article&Filename=Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Articles/3120110102.html#b28http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet?contentType=Article&Filename=Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Articles/3120110102.html#b288/3/2019 Negativity Paper_dubai Conference
9/27
4.12 The Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that US companies lose $3 billion a year to the
effects of negative attitudes and behaviours (Topchik, 2001).
4.13 Studies show a direct correlation between optimistic managers and improved
productivity in those that work for them , and optimism is an essential trait for us to be a
good leader . If we're in any type of manager or supervisor role, it's essential that we be
optimists because others will get their cues for acceptable behavior by watching us.
4.14 Negativity also stems from organizational factors. A 2002 study of 1,400 employees and human
resource executives found workplace negativity to be caused by five major situations :
Excessive workload
Lack of recognition
Lack of challenging opportunities
Anxiety over financial security
Concern over the company's future
5. OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY
The main objective of the study is to find out the major factors contributing to workplace
negativity and thereby leading to a negative work environment in the long run amongst the
working professional in Capital Region of India. An attempt has been made to identify the keyreasons for negative behaviour amongst employees working in various sectors like Academics,
Corporates and Government sector of capital region of India. The paper also aims to identify
whether the negativity causing elements are same for different sectors or there exist some
differences in the negativity elements for employees in both the sectors. The paper also briefs the
measures to deal with the negativity at the workplace.
6. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The total sample consisted of 200 employees, out of which 70 were from Public Sector, working
in Armed Forces and Government Departments,65 were from Corporates and 70 were from
academics located in Capital Region of India .This sample was selected through convenience
sampling. Out of 200, a total of 105 usable responses were obtained, with return rate of 52.5%.
9
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet?contentType=Article&Filename=Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Articles/3120110102.html#b42http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet?contentType=Article&Filename=Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Articles/3120110102.html#b428/3/2019 Negativity Paper_dubai Conference
10/27
6.1 The Research Design is given below:
Sectors
Ac (36) Co (34) Go (35)
Here,
Ac = Academics
Co = Corporates
Go = Government
6.2 Tools -Negativity Triggers and Negativity Scoring Scale and (Costructed by Autors)
a) Negativity Trigger scale was designed to measure the negativity triggers at the
workplace. The scale consisted of 12 items measuring various dimensions like
communication, equitable treatment, ethical robustness, work life balance etc.
b)Negativity Scoring Scale was designed to measure the negativity caused by the negativity
triggers at the workplace. The scale consists of 13 items.
In addition to the above instruments, study participants were asked to respond to a number of
items related to their personal characteristics (age, gender,occupation etc.) and work experiences.
Once collected, the data were subjected to a thorough statistical analysis using correlation and
regression analysis to find out the negativity triggers at workplace causing negativity amongst
the employees of academics, corporate and government sectors.
6.3 CONDUCTING RESEARCH
10
8/3/2019 Negativity Paper_dubai Conference
11/27
Participation in the study was voluntary. The purpose of the study was clearly communicated to
all the subjects and they were assured that all data would be treated as confidential and only the
researchers would have access to the data collected. The instructions to complete the
questionnaires were provided one to one and the completed forms were then collected.
7. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The mean values for employees in different sectors i.e. Academicians, Corporates and
Government employees was calculated (Table 1), this shows that the working professional in
India (Capital Region) was around average on negativity in the workplace. No mean significant
difference was found between and within the three groups under study (Table 2).This means all
the three experience fell same on negativity.
Table 1: Showing the Mean Values for Different Sector of Professionals
Negativity score
N Mean Std. Deviation
Academicians 36 2.7133 .51096
Corporates 34 2.9785 .52788
Government Employees 35 2.9766 .61578
Total 105 2.8870 .56225
Table 2: Showing the Mean Significant Difference Amongst Academicians, Corporates and
Government Employees
11
8/3/2019 Negativity Paper_dubai Conference
12/27
ANOVA
Negativity Score
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups 1.651 2 .826 2.697 .072
Within Groups 31.226 102 .306
Total 32.877 104
Pearson Correlation was employed to see the interrelationship between negativity triggers and
negativity scores (Table 3) for all the three groups and the scores were average (Table 4).
Regression was applied to find the effect of Negativity triggers on Negativity Scores (Table 5).
Significant positive correlation was found between Negativity triggers and Insufficient
recognition, lack of challenge, understaffing, lack of empowerment, skill improvement,
Communication, lack of direction from management, equitable treatment, career advancement
opportunities, individual- organisational match up, ethical robustness and work life balance.
Significant negative correlation was found between Negativity triggers and skilled workforce,
performance appraisal, creativity and innovation, performance feedback, participation in decision
making, grievance handling, transparency, positive work environment, competent top
management, social security benefits, welfare activities and workplace maintenance (Table 3). It
means that if the factors like Insufficient recognition, lack of challenge, understaffing, lack of
empowerment, skill improvement, Communication, lack of direction from management,
equitable treatment, career advancement opportunities, individual- organisational match up,
ethical robustness and work life balance are not taken care of they can lead to significant
negativity at workplace. And factors like skilled workforce, performance appraisal, creativity andinnovation, performance feedback, participation in decision making, grievance handling,
transparency, positive work environment, competent top management, social security benefits,
welfare activities and workplace maintenance help in reducing the workplace negativity.
12
8/3/2019 Negativity Paper_dubai Conference
13/27
The result show that the 77.5 % of the variance created in the negativity score is due to the
workplace negativity triggers. This means that the 77.5% of the variation in the negativity score
can be explained by workplace negativity triggers. Table 5 shows that the communication,
equitable treatment, ethical robustness and work life balance are the major workplace negativity
triggers in all the groups and if these factors are not in place, the workplace is bound to face
negativity amongst its employees. It becomes clear from the result that irrespective of three
different groups understudy, the main factors causing negativity are communication, equitable
treatment, ethical robustness and work life balance, and if these are not taken care of they can
lead to major workplace negativity.
Table 3: Showing the Correlations of Negativity Triggers with Negativity Score.
Negativity
Score
Sig. (2-tailed)
Insufficient Recognition .547** .000
Lack of Challenge .367** .000
Understaffing .193* .049
Skilled Workforce -.371** .000
Performance Appraisal -.435** .000
Lack of Empowerment .424** .000
Skill Improvement .400** .000
Creativity and Innovation -.530** .000
Performance Feedback -.442**
.000
Participation in Decision Making -.362** .000
Communication .519** .000
Lack of Direction from Management .480** .000
13
8/3/2019 Negativity Paper_dubai Conference
14/27
Negativity
Score
Sig. (2-tailed)
Grievance Handling -.481** .000
Transparency -.553** .000
Positive Work Environment -.483** .000
Competent Top Management -.577** .000
Social Security Benefits -.469** .000
Equitable Treatment .569** .000
Welfare Activities -.410** .000
Workplace Maintainance -.316** .001
Career Advancement Opportunities .427** .000
Individual-Organizational Values
Match up.527**
.000
Ethical Robustness .527** .000
Work life Balance .550** .000
Table 4 : Showing Variance created by Workplace Negativity Triggers in Negativity Score for all
the Sectors.
Table 5: Showing Regression of the Workplace Negativity Triggers on Negativity Score
14
Model Summary
Model R R Square Adjusted R SquareStd. Error ofthe Estimate
1 .881a .775 .704 .30573
8/3/2019 Negativity Paper_dubai Conference
15/27
Model
Unstandardized Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t Sig.B Std. Error Beta
(Constant) 2.068 .545 3.793 .000
Communication .117 .041 .213 2.862 .005
Equitable Treatment .183 .047 .400 3.893 .000
Ethical Robustness .105 .053 .176 1.979 .05
Work life Balance .096 .046 .188 2.087 .040
Note: Only Significant Regressions are reported.
Fig 1 : Model showing Negativity triggers that can lead to signs of negativity .
Negativity among Academicians : Significant positive correlation was found between
Negativity triggers and Insufficient recognition, lack of challenge, lack of empowerment,
Communication, lack of direction from management, equitable treatment, career advancement
opportunities, individual organisational value match up , ethical robustness and work life
balance among academicians. Significant negative correlation was found between negativity15
Negativity triggers
Lack of Communication, lack of equitable
treatment, Ethical robustness and Work life
Signs of Negativity
Lack of enthusiasm and enjoyment in work, back
stabbing, rumour mongering, nepotism, favouritism,
attrition, questioning agendas and distrust.
8/3/2019 Negativity Paper_dubai Conference
16/27
triggers and performance appraisal, creativity and innovation, participation in decision making,
grievance handling, transparency, positive work environment, competent top management, social
security benefit and welfare activities (Table 6). It means that if the factors like Insufficient
recognition, lack of challenge, lack of empowerment, Communication, lack of direction from
management, equitable treatment, career advancement opportunities, individual organisational
value match up , ethical robustness and work life balance are not taken care of they can lead to
negativity among academicians. And factors like performance appraisal, creativity and
innovation, participation in decision making, grievance handling, transparency, positive work
environment, competent top management, social security benefit and welfare activities needs to
be encouraged so as to reduce negativity.The results shows that 93.8% of the variance created in
the negativity score is due to the workplace negativity triggers. This means that the 93.8% of the
variation in the negativity score can be explained by workplace negativity triggers (Table 7 ).
It was found that one single dimension was considered to be the most important amongst
academicians and that was equitable treatment and if this is not taken care of it can lead to
significant negativity at the workplace (table 8).
Table : 6
N= 36 Negativityscore Sig. (2-tailed)
Insufficient Recognition .576** .000
Lack of Challenge .480** .003
Performance Appraisal -.384* .021
Lack of Empoewerment .490** .002
creativity and innovation -.608** .000
participation in Decision Making -.361 * .031
Communication .432** .009
Lack of Direction from Management .441** .007
16
8/3/2019 Negativity Paper_dubai Conference
17/27
N= 36 Negativityscore Sig. (2-tailed)
grievance handling -.556** .000
transparency -.608** .000
positive Work Environment -.594 ** .000
competent top management -.553** .000
social security benefits -.477** .003
equitable treatment .523** .001
Welfare Activities -.406* .014
career adavncement opportunities .342* .041
Individual-Organizational Values matchup .501** .002
Ethical Robustness .620** .000
Worklife Balance .553** .000
Table 7: Showing Variance created by Workplace Negativity Triggers in Negativity Score for
Academicians.
Model R R Square
Adjusted R
Square
Std. Error of the
Estimate
1 .968a .938 .782 .23835
Table : 8
17
8/3/2019 Negativity Paper_dubai Conference
18/27
Model
Unstandardized Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t Sig.B Std. Error Beta
equitable treatment .256 .113 .583 2.273 .046
Fig 2 : Model showing Negativity triggers that can lead to signs of negativity among
Academicians.
Negativity amongst Corporates : Significant positive correlation was found between Negativity
triggers and Insufficient recognition, lack of empowerment, skill improvement, Communication,
lack of direction from management, equitable treatment, ethical robustness and work life
balance. Significant negative correlation was found between Negativity triggers and creativity
and innovation, performance feedback, grievance handling, transparency, competent top
management and social security benefits (table 9). It means that factors like Insufficient
recognition, lack of empowerment, skill improvement, Communication, lack of direction from
management, equitable treatment, ethical robustness and work life balance can lead to negativity
if they are not taken care of. And factors like and creativity and innovation, performance
feedback, grievance handling, transparency, competent top management and social security
benefits should be encouraged to reduce negativity. The result shows no variance is created in
18
Negativity triggers
Lack of equitable treatment
Signs of Negativity
Lack of enthusiasm and enjoyment in work, back
stabbing, rumour mongering, nepotism, favouritism,
attrition, questioning agendas and distrust.
8/3/2019 Negativity Paper_dubai Conference
19/27
the negativity score due to negativity triggers. This means that none of the variations in the
negativity score can be explained by workplace negativity triggers .Hence, none of the factors
significantly lead to negativity at the workplace among corporate.
Table 9:
Correlations
N= 34 Negativityscore Sig. (2-tailed)
Insufficient Recognition .378* .028
Lack of Empowerment .560** .001
skill improvement .445** .008
creativity and innovation -.354* .040
Performance feedback -.358* .038
Communication .706** .000
Lack of Direction from
Management.652**
.000
grievance handling -.470**
.005
transparency -.479** .004
competent top management -.610** .000
social security benefits -.381* .026
equitable treatment .454** .007
Ethical Robustness .361* .036
Work life Balance .585** .000
Negativity amongst Government Employees: Significant positive correlation was found
between Negativity triggers and Insufficient recognition, Communication, lack of direction from
19
8/3/2019 Negativity Paper_dubai Conference
20/27
management, equitable treatment, career advancement opportunities, individual- organisational
match up, ethical robustness and work life balance. Significant negative correlation was found
between Negativity triggers and skilled workforce, performance appraisal, creativity and
innovation, performance feedback, grievance handling, transparency, positive work environment,
competent top management, social security benefits and welfare activities (Table 10).It means
that factors like Insufficient recognition, Communication, lack of direction from management,
equitable treatment, career advancement opportunities, individual- organisational match up,
ethical robustness and work life balance should be taken care of to avoid negativity at workplace.
And the factors like skilled workforce, performance appraisal, creativity and innovation,
performance feedback, grievance handling, transparency, positive work environment, competent
top management, social security benefits and welfare activities should be encourage to avoid
negativity at workplace. The result shows that 100% of the variation created in the negativity
score is due to workplace negativity triggers. This means that the 100% of the variation in the
negativity score can be explained by workplace negativity triggers (table 11). The result makes
it clear that so as to avoid negativity at the workplace all the factors i.e. excessive workload, lack
of challenge, understaffing, skilled workforce, empowerment, skill improvement, performance
feedback, participation in decision making, direction from management, competent top
management, social security benefits, welfare activities, workplace maintenance, career
advancement, ethical robustness, work life balance have to be taken care of (Table 12).
Table 10:
Correlations
Negativity score Sig. (2-tailed)
Insufficient Recognition .741** .001
Skilled Workforce -.702** .002
Performance Appraisal -.716** .001
creativity and innovation -.636** .006
Performace feedback -.646** .005
20
8/3/2019 Negativity Paper_dubai Conference
21/27
Negativity score Sig. (2-tailed)
Communication .518* .033
Lack of Direction from Management .554* .021
grievance handling -.640** .006
transparency -.741** .001
positive Work Environment -.710 ** .001
competent top management -.731** .001
social security benefits -.635** .006
equitable treatment .694** .002
Welfare Activities -.621** .008
career advancement opportunities .745** .001
Individual-Organizational Values matchup .768** .000
Ethical Robustness .745** .001
Work life Balance .599* .011
Table 11:
Model
R R Square
Adjusted R
Square
Std. Error of the
Estimate
1 1.000a 1.000 . .
Table 12:
21
8/3/2019 Negativity Paper_dubai Conference
22/27
Model
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t Sig.B Std. Error Beta
1 (Constant) 9.998 .000 2.601E7 .000
Excessive Workload -.241 .000 -.358 -1.467E7 .000
Lack of Challenge -.432 .000 -.795 -1.686E7 .000
Understaffing .008 .000 .018 6.294E5 .000
Skilled Workforce -.849 .000 -1.873 -1.656E7 .000
Lack of Empoewerment -.243 .000 -.368 -6.084E6 .000
skill improvement -.565 .000 -1.007 -1.780E7 .000
Performace feedback -.273 .000 -.499 -2.159E7 .000
participation in Decision Making .155 .000 .258 4.119E6 .000
Lack of Direction from Management -.357 .000 -.533 -1.301E7 .000
competent top management .279 .000 .278 9.290E6 .000
social security benefits -.940 .000 -1.403 -1.640E7 .000
Welfare Activities -.211 .000 -.260 -9.680E6 .000
Workplace maintainance 1.280 .000 1.211 1.745E7 .000
career adavncement opportunities .494 .000 .956 2.993E7 .000
Ethical Robustness .023 .000 .025 9.972E5 .000
Worklife Balance -.601 .000 -.856 -2.094E7 .000
Fig 3 : Model showing Negativity triggers that can lead to signs of negativity amongst
Government employees.
22
8/3/2019 Negativity Paper_dubai Conference
23/27
8. SUMMARY
It becomes clear that overall there exist four negativity triggers - communication, equitable
treatment, ethical robustness and work life balance in the three areas of study which has to be
taken care of , if the negativity of the workplace has to be avoided. In particular it was found that
for Academicians equitable treatment emerged as the single most important factor which if not
taken care of can prove as a major source of negativity at workplace. This can be attributed to the
fact that academicians value the respectable and equal position among their workgroups and for
them inequality cannot be taken positively at any cost. Hence, academicians value this factor the
most so as to enjoy the positive work environment. For Corporate sector employees none of the
factor emerged as the key to reduce negativity, hence it is believed that the Human Resource
personnal value their employees and know that they are the key to success in this competitiveworld and hence the employer is taking good care of all the factors that can trigger the negativity
at the workplace. As far as the government sector is concerned it becomes quite clear that the
sector need to take care of all the negativity triggers so as to avoid the negativity to get
inculcated amongst their employees. It is clear for the study that the government sector is yet to
learn the lesson of keeping the employees and hence the workplace free of negativity, it has to
23
Negativity triggers
Insufficient recognition, Lack of performance
appraisal and feedback, Lack of skilled workforce,
transparency, positive work environment,
competent top management social security
benefits ,Communication, equitable treatment,
career advancement ,Ethical robustness and Work
Signs of Negativity
Lack of enthusiasm and enjoyment in work, back
stabbing, rumour mongering, nepotism, favouritism,attrition, questioning agendas and distrust.
8/3/2019 Negativity Paper_dubai Conference
24/27
move forward and learn the lessons from their corporate sector so as to how they can best help
the employees to move in the positive direction and hence deliver efficiency and effectiveness.
9. LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
1. Because of time constraint and lack of support from employees. So the researchers had to
confine to the voluntary participation within the limits of the study.
2. The size of sample was a constraint as it could have been bigger if support was received
from employees.
3. Loss of sample also took place because of the incomplete questionnaires.
10.CONCLUSION
Combating negativity is very important from the point of view of employee and the organization.
There should be a step wise methodology to doing the same negativity should be eliminated
first at the one selves level, then at the level of coworker , then at the level of a ones team and
ultimately at the level of organization as a whole.
Negativity should be eliminated at our own level first and the importance of it is highlighted in
the saying of , Author Chuck Gallozzi:
The negative world of our imagination creates a negative world that is real and one that we are
forced to live in.
The popular methods which can be followed at the individual level are first of all becoming self
aware of our negative behavior and then reducing negative phasing and eliminating negative self
talk. We need to change our input of information if they give negative vibes. We should start
appreciating everything around ous , starting from people their views and stop being judgmental
about them.
After this we can look at our negative coworker and try and address his negativity but care
should be taken that, it is his negativity you are addressing and should not get personally
involved with his issues. The best way to fight with the negative behavior of your co-worker is to
24
8/3/2019 Negativity Paper_dubai Conference
25/27
fight with the root cause and try and eliminate it, which will lead to his ultimate satisfaction.
At the organizational front, a lot of measures can be taken to eliminate the negativity which may
include
a) If a change is to be implemented- communicate it in advance, train the target
employees in the requisitive skill, try and make them a part of the change process
from the beginning.
b) The organization needs to take care of the fact that the performing employees
should not be overburdened with more work. The phase the reward for good
work is more work, should be restrained.
c) Employees individual needs should be recognized and they should be motivated
accordingly.
d) A learning environment should be developed.
e) The employees should feel secure as far as their jobs are concerned.
f) The employees should be motivated to have positive, creative and energetic
attitude and should enjoy their work as play.
25
8/3/2019 Negativity Paper_dubai Conference
26/27
11.REFERENCES
Avey, B.J., Hughes, W.L., Norman, M.S. & Luthans, (2008). Using positivity,
transformational leadership and empowerment to combat employee negativity. Leadership
& Organization Development Journal, Vol. 29 Iss: 2, pp.110 126.
Barsade and Gibson (2007) Managing Emotions in the Workplace: Do Positive and Negative
Attitudes Drive Performance? Retrieved from
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/mobile/article.cfm?articleid=1708
Burnes B. & Pope R. (2007) Negative behaviours in the workplace: A study of two Primary
Care Trusts in the NHS.International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol.20,No.
4,2007,pp.285-303.
Davis,P.(2007) Negativity in the Workplace .At KASFAA Conference,October 25, 2007.
Greenberg, Margaret H. and Arakawa, Dana. (2006). Optimistic Managers & Their
Influence on Productivity & Employee Engagement in a Technology Organization.
Retrieved fromhttp://repository.upenn.edu/mapp_capstone/3.
Mazumdar, S. (1992), "Sir please do not take away my cubicle: the phenomenon of
environmental deprivation",Environment and Behaviour, Vol. 24 No.6, pp.691-722.
Popper, Micha, Amit, Karin, Gal, Reuvan, Mishkal-Sinai, Moran, & Lisak, Alton. (2004).
The Capacity to Lead: Major Psychological Differences Between Leaders and Nonleaders.
Military Psychology, October 2004, (16)4, pps 245 263. Retrieved from
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~content=a785378355&db=all.
Raynor, C (2002) 'Round Two: Redefining Bullying at Work, paper as part of a joint
session - Workplace Abuse, Aggression, Bullying and Incivility: Conceptual Integration
and Empirical Insights - American Academy of Management Meeting, Denver, August
2002.
Topchik, G.S. (2001), Managing Workplace Negativity, AMACOM, New York, NY, .
26
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/mobile/article.cfm?articleid=1708http://repository.upenn.edu/mapp_capstone/3http://repository.upenn.edu/mapp_capstone/3http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~content=a785378355&db=allhttp://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/mobile/article.cfm?articleid=1708http://repository.upenn.edu/mapp_capstone/3http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~content=a785378355&db=all8/3/2019 Negativity Paper_dubai Conference
27/27
Towers Perrin and Gang & Gang. (2003). Working Today: Exploring Employees'
Emotional Connections to Their Jobs. Towers Perrin/Gang & Gang Research, 2003
Topchik, S.G. Confronting Negativity in the Workplace. Retrieved from
http://www.ccfbest.org/worklife/confronting neg ative.htm.
27
http://www.ccfbest.org/worklife/confrontingnegative.htmhttp://www.ccfbest.org/worklife/confrontingnegative.htmhttp://www.ccfbest.org/worklife/confrontingnegative.htmhttp://www.ccfbest.org/worklife/confrontingnegative.htm