Workplace ostracism and deviant and helping behaviors: The moderating role of 360 degree feedback

• Author: Wei Zeng,Ann Chunyan Peng
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/job.2169
• Date: 01 July 2017
• Published date: 01 July 2017

Workplace ostracism and deviant and helping

behaviors: The moderating role of 360 degree

feedback

ANN CHUNYAN PENG

1

AND WEI ZENG

2

*

1

Ivey Business School, Western University, Canada

2

School of Business Administration, Hunan University, China

Summary Drawing on sociometer theory, we argue that when 360 degree feedback is used in a work setting, being

ostracized by coworkers has a stronger negative influence on employeesˈstate self-esteem, which promotes

interpersonal deviance and demotivates helping directed toward coworkers, as compared to settings in which

360 feedback is not used. We tested our hypotheses using data collected from North American employees

(Study 1) and a two-wave survey of employees in China (Study 2). Results from both studies support the

hypothesized interaction between workplace ostracism and 360 degree feedback on interpersonal deviance

and helping behavior. Results from Study 2 further show that lower state self-esteem accounts for the

stronger negative association of ostracism with helping behavior among employees who are exposed to

360 degree feedback. Ostracism is not related to subsequent state self-esteem or behavior when 360 degree

feedback is absent. We discuss the implications for theory and research concerning employee exclusion.

Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Keywords: workplace ostracism; 360 degree feedback; interpersonal deviance; helping behavior; state self-

esteem; sociometer theory

Ostracism is generally defined as the experience of being deliberately denied social contact by others from whom

one might expect such contact (Blackhart, Knowles, Nelson, & Baumeister, 2009). A rich literature in social psy-

chology has shown that being ostracized by others is one of the most emotionally hurtful human experiences

(e.g., Van Beest & Williams, 2006; MacDonald & Leary, 2005; Nezlek, Kowalski, Leary, Blevins, & Holgate,

1997; Williams, Cheung, & Choi, 2000). The neurophysiologic processes (e.g., increases in blood flow to particular

brain regions) that are triggered by being socially excluded resemble those of experiencing physical pain

(Eisenberger, Lieberman, & Williams, 2003; Eisenberger, 2012; Kross, Berman, Mischel, Smith, & Wager,

2011). This emerging evidence of negative psychological consequences of social exclusion have triggered manage-

ment scholarsˈrecent interest in how working adults may respond to being ostracized by their colleagues in the

workplace (Ferris, Lian, Brown, & Morrison, 2015; OˈReilly, Robinson, Berdahl, & Banki, 2015; Wu, Liu, Kwan,

& Lee, 2016; Xu, Huang, & Robinson, 2015).

Consistent with findings obtained from experimental research (see reviews by Blackhart et al., 2009; Gerber &

Wheeler, 2009), field studies have consistently reported that employees who are ostracized at work engage in both

subtle and overt retaliatory behaviors against their coworkers (Ferris, Brown, Berry, & Lian, 2008; Ferris et al.,

2015; Zhao, Peng, & Sheard, 2013). However, as we will review in the next section, the findings concerning the

relationshipbetween workplace ostracism and employeecitizenship behavior (e.g., helpingcoworkers) are less conclu-

sive. The mixed findings have motivated scholars to test potential boundary conditions of the influence of workplace

ostracism on behavioral outcomes (Ferris et al., 2015; Wu, Yim, Kwan, & Zhang, 2012; Wu et al., 2016; Xu et al.,

2015; Zhao et al., 2013). For example, Wu et al. (2016) found that among individuals who perceived limited

*Correspondence to: Wei Zeng, School of Business Administration, Hunan University, China. E-mail: zengwei_hnu@163.com

Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Received 5 December 2015

Revised 6 November 2016, Accepted 21 November 2016

Journal of Organizational Behavior, J. Organiz. Behav. 38, 833–855 (2017)

Published online 14 December 2016 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/job.2169

Research Article

opportunities to find another job (i.e., low job mobility) ostracism was not related to citizenship behavior. In contrast,

through its relationship with organizationalidentification, workplace ostracism was negatively associated withcitizen-

ship behavior among individuals who perceived high job mobility. In another study, Ferris et al. (2015) showed that a

high tendency to baseself-evaluation on job performance wasassociated with weaker relationshipsbetween ostracism

and citizenship and deviant behavior.

Building on the existing work, we draw from sociometer theory to examine when and how being ostracized by

coworkers may motivate individuals to direct more deviant behavior and less helping toward them. Sociometer

theory states that oneˈs self-esteem serves as an internal gauge that monitors oneˈs inclusionary status in a social

group and motivates behaviors to maintain social acceptance (Leary, Tambor, Terdal, & Downs, 1995b). This

theory suggests that the influence of ostracism on behavior is carried through its impact on self-esteem. In

addition, sociometer theory argues that ostracism threatens self-esteem only when the relationship with the source

of ostracism is instrumental for attaining valuable outcomes (Leary & Baumeister, 2000). This tenet leads us to

examine the moderating role of 360 degree feedback, a commonly used organizational practice that heightens

the instrumental value of having a good relationship with coworkers. Compared to those who are not employed

in a 360 feedback environment, employees whose performance is evaluated by coworkers may therefore respond

to ostracism with lower state self-esteem and, in turn, more interpersonal deviance and less helping behavior.

Figure 1 summarizes our theoretical model.

Our study aims to contribute to the literature on workplace ostracism in two primary ways. First, we introduce

sociometer theory (Leary et al., 1995b; Leary & Baumeister, 2000; Leary, 2005) as a theoretical lens that helps

explain when ostracism may have more negative consequences on employee outcomes. Studies that address this

question have largely relied on reasoning specific to the moderators being examined. While these studies provide

rich empirical evidences on the boundary conditions of the ostracism effect, they do not collectively contribute to

testing and building theories. We suggest that sociometer theory is a useful framework to identifying situational fac-

tors that determine the perceived social and material value of the focal relationship and therefore modify reactions to

being ostracized. In addition, examining the moderating role of 360 degree feedback extends prior work that has ex-

clusively focused on individual differences in experiencing and responding to being ostracized (Ferris et al., 2015;

Wu et al., 2016; Xu et al., 2015). From this perspective, our study addresses calls for more theoretical attention to

how workplace context shapes micro-level processes (Bamberger, 2008; Johns, 2006).

Second, we propose that state self-esteem explains the negative relationship between workplace ostracism and

employee behavior in a 360 feedback environment. Our research contributes to the limited literature examining

the mechanisms that explain the negative influence of ostracism on employee behavior (see exceptions by Ferris

et al., 2015; Wu et al., 2016). Ferris et al. (2015), for example, draw from self-verification and self-enhancement per-

spectives to examine the mediating role of global self-esteem in the relationship between ostracism and employee

performance outcomes. Our work differs from theirs by relating state self-esteem to workplace ostracism through

the lens of sociometer theory. Compared to the global measure of self-esteem, a state measure permits greater

Figure 1. Theoretical model

834 A. C. PENG AND W. ZENG

Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 38, 833–855 (2017)

DOI: 10.1002/job