By Elif Karagoz, Doctorate Student in Bahcesehir University (Istanbul, Turkey).
Completed in June 2022, self-published as non-academic (unpublished) literature review in August 2022.
This short literature review aims to define and argue on -to some extent- some special topics in Organizational Behavior, that the writer finds interesting, the topics being:
- Psychological Capital
- Emotional Labor
- Organizational Citizenship Behavior
- Organizational Trust
- Organizational Justice
- Mobbing or Workplace Mobbing
i. Psychological Capital
Luthans et al. (2004) define Psychological Capital as a kind of resource that goes beyond human and social capital, consisting of who one is, rather than what or who one knows; the term “Capital” referring in particular to the “four positive psychological capacities of confidence, hope, optimism, and resilience” (p. 46). Luthans et al. (2004) also point out that , these four positive psychological capacities are the same as Stajkovic’s (2003) “core confidence factor for work motivation” (p. 46). Psychological Capital is a concept derived from Positive Psychology which is a term emerged from Martin Seligman’s 2002 book called Authentic Happiness (Martin Seligman, 2002; Luthans et al., 2004). The framework of Psychological Capital is referred to a H.E.R.O; Hope, Efficacy -as in Self-Efficacy, Resilience, and Optimism; which actually are the four subdimensions contemplating it (Luthans et al. 2004; Rose, 2014).
Hope means a proactive state of goal oriented determination, along with planning pathways to achieve those goals; Efficacy, which here refers to Self-Efficacy, represents confidence that one has in themselves on achieving a particular goal on a particular situation; Resilience is the will and strength to handle and cope with adverse situations (such as bouncing-back and carrying on) and/or significant stress (such as getting a promotion and/or more responsibility, so the situation does not necessarily have to be negative, but it is stressful); and Optimism is a rational (realistic) and positive perspective on what one can and can not do ((Luthans et al. 2004; Rose, 2014). According to Luthans et al. (2007), Psychological Capital, which is a positive psychological state of development of an individual, is “State-Like” (p. 544); meaning it is relatively workable, and open to development.
Psychological Capital in literature has been positively associated with topics such as; psychological-well-being, job satisfaction, organizational citizenship, organizational commitment, various measures of performance; and negatively associated with job stress, anxiety, cynicism, and turnover intentions (Rose, 2014). Laschinger & Fida (2014) argued that psychological capital and authentic leadership might help new employees avoid burnout. Cheung et al. (2011) have argued psychological capital to be a moderating variable between emotional labor, burnout, and job satisfaction.
ii. Emotional Labor
Emotional Laborin literature is defined as an act of expressing emotions and/or gestures which are (perceivably and explicitly) organizationally desired, during professional transactions between employees and clients (service transactions), which is actually an act because it is a result of the difference between the actual emotional state of employees that they are experiencing and the required emotional expressions which are set by the organization’s norms for service quality and effective job performance (Hochschild, 1983; Lee et al., 2019). Emotional Labor is also defined in literature as an effort in planning and controlling expressive emotions which are demanded by firms (Morris & Feldman, 1996; Lee et al., 2019), and “an effort to comply with organizational or vocational expression rules (Grandey, 2000; Lee et al., 2019, p. 3).
Hochschild, A. R. (1979; 1983) argued emotional labor to have two dimensions, which actually are Emotional Expressions, that are Surface Acting and Deep Acting (Lee et al., 2019). Gayathridevi (2013) points out two major types of Emotional Expression, which are Non-Verbal Expression and Verbal Expression, both influencing not only customer satisfaction, but also job performance in a significant way (Lee et al., 2019). Surface Acting in Hochschild’s (1979; 1983) model refers to an employee depicting both of these emotional expressions (that are verbal and non-verbal)which are perceivably or explicitly required by the organization to be carried out during service transactions, not by genuinely feeling or inheriting them, but simply by acting them out superficially without actually feeling any of it; this creates a gap and dissonance between the employees actual emotional state and their expressions, resulting in many negative outcomes such as decreased levels of motivation and work engagement, emotional exhaustion, increased turnover intentions, and even burnout (Lee et al., 2019). Hochschild (1979; 1983) stated however, Deep Acting refers to an employee, actually inheriting and feeling those required emotions in service transactions, which in turn aligns their actual emotional state with the organization’s required norms; resulting in increased motivation and engagement, as well as possible citizenship behaviors and decreased turnover intentions (Lee et al., 2019).
Emotional labor based on deep acting was positively associated with work engagement, whereas emotional labor based on surface acting was associated negatively with the same variable (Yoo & Jeong, 2017). These two different types of emotional labor also have varying relationships with: emotional exhaustion, job satisfaction, and turnover intention (Lee et al., 2019). Erickson & Ritter (2001) argued emotional labor to be associated with increased feelings of burnout and inauthenticity. Jeung & Chang (2018) have also associated emotional labor with burnout.
Just like psychological capital, emotional labor is also studied with organizational citizenship behavior; Cheung & Lun (2015) argued that deep acting and organizational citizenship behavior have a positive association, while work engagement acting as a mediator. Lu et al. (2013) argued that, full-time workers that are engaged in positions requiring high levels of emotional labor are more likely to suffer from emotional exhaustion and to have higher turnover intentions as a result; however, higher job satisfaction levels for these employees might still lead to higher levels of organizational citizenship behavior.
Maslach (2009) defines burnout, specifically occupational burnout as a psychological syndrome including emotional exhaustion, depersonalization and a decreased sense of personal achievement, while Litzke and Schuh (2007) adding that occupational burnout does not happen as a consequence of irregular traumatic occurrences, but rather as a result of slow, mental eradication (Góralewska-Słońska, 2019). Burisch (2009) argues on environmental factors leading to burnout, such as
faulty leadership, role conflict and/or ambiguity, and an absence of gratification (Góralewska-Słońska, 2019).
Burnout in literature is argued to have three dimensions that are; Emotional Exhaustion, Depersonalization, and Personal (or a lack of personal) Accomplishment (Önder & Basim, 2008; Maslach, 2009); which actually are not only dimensions, but also stages od occupational burnout (Góralewska-Słońska, 2019) in which an employee feels as if their emotional resources are weakened and that they are emotionally exploited (stage 1: emotional exhaustion), followed by a non-empathetical and unhelpful, even cynical view to coworkers and the general work environment (stage 2: depersonalization), to be continued with a feeling of devaluation in one’s self, regarding measurable work achievements (stage 3: lack of personal accomplishment).
iv. Organizational Citizenship Behavior
Organizational Citizenship Behaviorin literature is defined as any sort of positive behavior that members of an organization, without being obliged to, choose to perform, discreetly and spontaneously, out of their own sheer will, which are usually not a part of their particular contractual responsibilities (Thiruvenkadam & Durairaj, 2017). In other words, organizational citizenship behavior is any constructive (and/or positive) act that a member of an organization displays; without having any obligations due to their job descriptions or contracts, without expecting a reward or even recognition for their act, without any secondary intentions of self-benefit, with free will and sincere contribution, solely for the sake of the good act itself or the organization or other members of the organization. Two important aspects of this spontaneous and informal (Thiruvenkadam & Durairaj, 2017) behavior are; it is discreet (Organ, 1988), and it is performed willingly with a cooperative attitude (Barnard, 1938). Cooperation is the key word outlining this behavior (Smith et al., 1983). Literature states this cooperative behavior to be presented genuinely and without expecting gratification; for the cooperation itself, for helping coworkers or managers or other members of the organization, or for helping the organization itself to achieve its goals (Barnard, 1938; Smith et al., 1983; Organ, 1988; Lin, 1991; Williams & Anderson, 1991; Van Dyne et al., 1994; Thiruvenkadam & Durairaj, 2017).
Smith et al. (1983) argued organizational citizenship behavior to have two dimensions which are Altruism -as in willingness to help coworkers and other members of the organization-and General Compliance -as in being docile with the general culture of the organization;Organ in 1988 proposed five dimensions to this behavior such as: Altruism, Courtesy -as in discretionary behaviors in favor of avoiding potential problems, Conscientiousness -as in exceeding minimum requirements such as paying attention to being punctual and compliance to rules even when no one is watching, Sportsmanship -as in being tolerant to undesired situations, and Civic Virtue -as in sincere concern in the wellbeing and development of the organization (Thiruvenkadam & Durairaj, 2017). Lin (1991) introduced a six dimensioned scale with the following factors: identification with the organization, assistance to colleagues (altruism), harmony, righteousness, discipline, and self-improvement; while Williams and Anderson (1991) mainly argued about altruism and conscientiousness as dimensions; whereas Van Dyne et al. (1994) introduced; Obedience, Loyalty, and Participation as three distinct dimensions (Thiruvenkadam & Durairaj, 2017).
v. Organizational Trust
Organizational Trust may be defined as a framework that includes both interpersonal trust between organizational members, and trust to the organization itself (Shockley-Zalabak et al., 2000; Vanhala et al., 2016). Interpersonal trust means trust between/in coworkers and/or managers, that is, trust in different leveled members of the organization, lateral trust referring to trust between coworkers and vertical trust referring to trusting managers and /or immediate supervisors; whereas trust in the organization itself means, members trusting the systems, procedures, and operating ways of the company (McCauley & Kuhnert, 1992; Vanhala et al., 2016). Trust in the systems of an organization is also referred to as impersonal trust (Maguire & Phillips, 2008; Vanhala et al., 2016)
vi. Organizational Justice
Organizational Justicecan be stated as organizational members’ perceptions of fairness regarding non-material and material resource allocations within the organization, is argued to have three dimensions: distributive, procedural, and interactional justice (Yean, 2016). Distributive justice refers to the perceived fairness of the decision makers’ (such as managers and/or senior management) evaluations regarding distribution of resources, whether they might be material or not, within the organization; procedural justice refers to protocols and mechanisms within the organization being fair, such as general policies and rules applying to all members without exceptions or special treatments; and interactional justice refers to fair treatments received by employees by their managers in response to their positive or negative actions (Yean, 2016). Organizational Justice is argued to have powerful effects to not only employees but also to organizations themselves, by decreasing conflict and supporting desired behaviors (Cropanzano et al., 2007).
As per how these concepts might be related to one another, one would expect Organizational Trust as well as Organizational Justice to be positively effecting Organizational Citizenship Behavior, meaning as a member of a company feels more secure within the organization in terms of their perceptions of justice within the organization and their feelings of trust towards the organization, they would be more inclined to behave in manners that are consistent with citizenship behavior. Literature supports these expectations of a positive relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behavior as well as organizational trust and citizenship behavior (Altuntas & Baykal, 2010; Tziner & Sharoni, 2014; Singh & Srivastava, 2016). One would also assume a positive relationship between organizational justice and organizational trust; increased perceptions of justice would lead increased levels of trust; which is also supported by the literature (DeConinck, 2010; Bidarian & Jafari, 2012).
As per the organizational outcomes if these concepts are achieved successfully; organizational citizenship behavior, organizational trust, and organizational justice are expected to lead to outcomes such as: increased levels of motivation, work engagement, job satisfaction, job performance, loyalty, organizational commitment, and even innovative behavior, along with decreased levels of turnover intentions, emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and burnout. Literature supports these expectations as each of these variables are positively correlated with topics such as satisfaction, motivation, and commitment (Williams & Anderson, 1991; Laschinger et al., 2002; Cropanzano & Rupp, 2003; Bakhshi et al., 2009; Finkelstein, 2011; Pranitasari, 2020), and negatively associated with turnover intentions and burnout (Chiu & Tsai 2006; Coyne & Ong, 2007; Liljegren & Ekberg 2009; Radzi et al., 2009; Kath et al., 2010).
vii. Mobbing, or workplace mobbing
Mobbing or workplace mobbingis the conduct of bullying behavior to members (coworkers, subordinates, and supervisors) in the workplace, by other members; through continuous negative and/ or offensive actions which tend to intensify as time passes (Ågotnes et al., 2018; Mujtaba & Senathip, 2020). It should not be considered as an isolated incident that was unpleasant, negative or offensive in someway; for an offensive act to be considered as mobbing, it should be deliberate and systematic towards an individual (or a group of individuals) to isolate or discourage them, to decrease their motivation and/or engagement, even to make them leave the company (Ågotnes et al., 2018; Mujtaba & Senathip, 2020). Hence, it is important for managers and human resources departments to identify mobbing behavior properly (and distinguish it from daily or isolated conflicts), and to inform members of the organization to create a clear understanding of what is it and what it is not; and that it is unacceptable. Workplace mobbing might include different bullying behaviors such as; physical bullying (hurting someone physically either explicitly or indirectly), emotional bullying (offending someone emotionally, this might also be referred to as verbal bullying), social bullying (deliberately excluding someone from group events, meetings, texts, emails, and conversations), and cyber bullying (harassing someone through their online presence), gesture bullying (offending someone through non-verbal communications, such as offensive looks, mimics or body language), and organizational / institutional bullying (an organizational culture that is so deeply negative and offensive that a act of bullying is considered a natural part of that culture). Mobbing may occur through peer to peer (between coworkers), supervisor to peer (manager mobs employee), and peer to supervisor (employee mobs the manager). Any degrading, offensive, excluding, and humiliating behavior may and should be considered as mobbing if they are directly and deliberately aimed at someone, systematically executed, and intensifying over time. Workplace mobbing might induce significantly adverse effects to an organizational member’s general well-being, physical well-being, work motivation, engagement, and other desired organizational behavior (Duffy & Sperry, 2007). It is a severe issue that should be addressed, taken seriously, and delt with in a methodological way that is part of an organizational culture.
Whistleblowingrefers toa member or members of an organization revealing (or exposing); professional misconduct, incompetence, negligence, abuse or danger that are existing in the company that they currently are or were employed(Ray, 2006). Although being perceived (and sometimes reacted to) as a severely negative behavior by the general media and public, whistleblowing actually is a crucial component of work ethics, of the highest order, to avoid misconduct and even physical harm to stakeholders of any sort, providing external whistleblowing to be utilized as the absolute last resort after all efforts of internal whistleblowing through organizational hierarchical orders are absolutely exhausted (Ray, 2006; Rothwell & Baldwin, 2007). Whistleblowing might be internal (reporting to a respective authority within the organization such as one’s direct manager, the human resources department, or the legal department), external (reporting to parties outside the organization; such as exposing malpractice online or through any public media), formal (filing a formal complaint or report of the issue, generally internally), informal (such as verbally bringing up an issue to one’s direct supervisor or the company’s respective department, as well as publishing issues online or talking to the media without issuing formal complaints to legal authorities, so this can be internal or external), and also identified (one states their identity while whistleblowing) or anonymous (one does not state their identity), these also may be executed both internally or externally (Wozir & Yurtkoru, 2017). Any of these types of whistleblowing behavior might and should be carried out, preferably internally or if necessary externally, for any issue regarding a criminal offence, risk of or actual danger to health and safety and/or the environment, breach of various legal obligations and non-compliances with the law, data-based beliefs in wrongdoing, and violations of justice. Whistleblowing is also a significantly important act when it comes to job descriptions holding a lot of power and social responsibility, such as the security forces, healthcare, and/or social services (Ray, 2006; Rothwell & Baldwin, 2007).
As per their possible relationships with one another, according to literature; Mobbing has a statistically significant direct relationship with burnout (Góralewska-Słońska, 2019); which is something to be expected since mobbing behavior might very well exhaust a member emotionally, cause them to depersonalize and to feel insufficient. Whistleblowing on the other hand, might be a direct consequence of, or to some extent affected by, occupational burnout (Avtgis et al., 2007); this also makes perfect sense, since burnt out members tend to have very decreased motivation, engagement, citizenship behavior, and/or loyalty, who either have very high turnover intentions or whom have already left. It is rational to expect whistleblowing to also come across as a consequence of workplace mobbing; since workplace mobbing might indicate any deliberate, systematical, and intensifying act of injustice, negligence, and/or malpractice. However, it is also interesting that the relationship might go both ways; as literature also suggests whistleblowers might later face mobbing behavior because of their whistleblowing by coworkers and/or managers, even subordinates (Bjørkelo, 2013).
Ågotnes, K. W., Einarsen, S. V., Hetland, J., & Skogstad, A. (2018). The moderating effect of laissez‐faire leadership on the relationship between co‐worker conflicts and new cases of workplace bullying: A true prospective design. Human Resource Management Journal, 28(4), 555-568. Link: https://doi-org.ezproxylocal.library.nova.edu/10.1111/1748-8583.12200.
Altuntas, S., & Baykal, U. (2010). Relationship between nurses’ organizational trust levels and their organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of nursing scholarship, 42(2), 186-194.
Avtgis, T. A., Thomas-Maddox, C., Taylor, E., & Patterson, B. R. (2007). The influence of employee burnout syndrome on the expression of organizational dissent. Communication Research Reports, 24(2), 97-102. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824090701304725
Arnold, K. A., Connelly, C. E., Walsh, M. M., & Martin Ginis, K. A. (2015). Leadership styles, emotion regulation, and burnout. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 20(4), 481. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2015-14335-001
Bakhshi, A., Kumar, K., & Rani, E. (2009). Organizational justice perceptions as predictor of job satisfaction and organization commitment. International journal of Business and Management, 4(9), 145-154.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of personality and social psychology, 51(6), 1173.
Bidarian, S., & Jafari, P. (2012). The relationship between organizational justice and organizational trust. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 47, 1622-1626.
Bjørkelo, B. (2013). Workplace bullying after whistleblowing: Future research and implications. Journal of Managerial Psychology.
Cheung, F. Y., & Lun, V. M. C. (2015). Relation between emotional labor and organizational citizenship behavior: An investigation among Chinese teaching professionals. The Journal of General Psychology, 142(4), 253-272. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309.2015.1091764
Cheung, F., Tang, C. S. K., & Tang, S. (2011). Psychological capital as a moderator between emotional labor, burnout, and job satisfaction among school teachers in China. International Journal of Stress Management, 18(4), 348. https://psycnet.apa.org/buy/2011-22368-001
Chiu, S. F., & Tsai, M. C. (2006). Relationships among burnout, job involvement, and organizational citizenship behavior. The Journal of psychology, 140(6), 517-530.
Coyne, I., & Ong, T. (2007). Organizational citizenship behaviour and turnover intention: A cross-cultural study. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18(6), 1085-1097.
Cropanzano, R., & Rupp, D. E. (2003). An overview of organizational justice: Implications for work motivation. Motivation and work behavior, 7(1), 82-95.
Cropanzano, R., Bowen, D. E., & Gilliland, S. W. (2007). The management of organizational justice. Academy of management perspectives, 21(4), 34-48.
DeConinck, J. B. (2010). The effect of organizational justice, perceived organizational support, and perceived supervisor support on marketing employees’ level of trust. Journal of business research, 63(12), 1349-1355.
Duffy, M., & Sperry, L. (2007). Workplace mobbing: Individual and family health consequences. The family journal, 15(4), 398-404. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1066480707305069
Erickson, R. J., & Ritter, C. (2001). Emotional labor, burnout, and inauthenticity: Does gender matter?. Social psychology quarterly, 146-163. https://doi.org/10.2307/3090130
Finkelstein, M. A. (2011). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and organizational citizenship behavior: A functional approach to organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Psychological Issues in Organizational Culture, 2(1), 19-34.
Góralewska-Słońska, A. (2019). Experiencing mobbing at workplace facing psychological gender and occupational burnout. Management, 23(1).
Grandey, A. A. (2000). Emotion regulation in the workplace: a new way to conceptualize emotional labor. J. Vocat. Behav. 64, 1–23. doi: 10.1037//1076-89220.127.116.11
Gupta, M., Shaheen, M., & Reddy, P. K. (2017). Impact of psychological capital on organizational citizenship behavior: Mediation by work engagement. Journal of Management Development.https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JMD-06-2016-0084/full/html?casa_token=56UxY9sxcpoAAAAA:CNJsoN8E3iqU6KitaixOZAwDYxgiVq-lj4h0Wde1A7UHkaunlgtcvAH0rbUkLlWnlaCt69TBTuE6XiPseHcbmR15JWurLccooQFgNWAT7EKE8L3zmg
Hochschild, A. R. (1979). Emotion work, feeling rules, and social structure. Am. J.
Sociol. 85, 551–575. doi: 10.1086/227049
Hochschild, A. R. (1983). The Managed Heart: Commercialization of Human Feeling. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Jeung, D. Y., Kim, C., & Chang, S. J. (2018). Emotional labor and burnout: A review of the literature. Yonsei medical journal, 59(2), 187-193. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3349/ymj.2018.59.2.187
Kath, L. M., Magley, V. J., & Marmet, M. (2010). The role of organizational trust in safety climate’s influence on organizational outcomes. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 42(5), 1488-1497.
Laschinger, H. K. S., Finegan, J., & Shamian, J. (2002). The impact of workplace empowerment, organizational trust on staff nurses’ work satisfaction and organizational commitment. In Advances in health care management. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Laschinger, H. K. S., & Fida, R. (2014). New nurses burnout and workplace wellbeing: The influence of authentic leadership and psychological capital. Burnout research, 1(1), 19-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.burn.2014.03.002
Lee, Y. H., Lee, S. H. B., & Chung, J. Y. (2019). Research on how emotional expressions of emotional labor workers and perception of customer feedbacks affect turnover intentions: Emphasis on moderating effects of emotional intelligence. Frontiers in psychology, 9, 2526. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02526
Liljegren, M., & Ekberg, K. (2009). The associations between perceived distributive, procedural, and interactional organizational justice, self-rated health and burnout. Work, 33(1), 43-51.
Lin, S. J. (1991). Relationship between compensation equity, procedural justice, organizational commitment, and organizational citizenship behavior. Doctoral dissertation, National Chengchi University, Taiwan.
Lu, C. J., Shih, Y. Y., & Chen, Y. L. (2013). Effects of emotional labor and job satisfaction on organizational citizenship behaviors: A case study on business hotel chains. International Journal of Organizational Innovation (Online), 5(4), 165. chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.ijoi-online.org/attachments/article/34/FINAL%20ISSUE%20VOL%205%20NUM%204%20APRIL%202013.pdf
Luthans, F., Luthans, K. W., & Luthans, B. C. (2004). Positive psychological capital: Beyond human and social capital. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/managementfacpub/145/
Luthans, F., Vogelgesang, G. R., & Lester, P. B. (2006). Developing the psychological capital of resiliency. Human resource development review, 5(1), 25-44. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1534484305285335
Luthans, F., Avolio, B. J., Avey, J. B., & Norman, S. M. (2007). Positive psychological capital: Measurement and relationship with performance and satisfaction. Personnel psychology, 60(3), 541-572. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2007.00083.x
Maguire S, Phillips N. 2008. Citibankers’ at Citigroup: A study of the loss of institutional
trust after a merger. Journal of Management Studies 45(2): 372–401.
McCauley DP, Kuhnert KW. 1992. A theoretical review and empirical investigation of employee trust in management. Public Administration Quarterly 16(2): 265–284.
Maslach, Ch. (2009). Wypalenie w perspektywie wielowymiarowej. In: H. Sęk (ed.) Wypalenie zawodowe. Przyczyny i zapobieganie (pp. 13-32). Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
Morris, J. A., and Feldman, D. C. (1996). The dimensions, antecedents, and consequences of emotional labor. Acad. Manag. Rev. 21, 986–1010. doi: 10.2307/259161
Mujtaba, B. G., & Senathip, T. (2020). Workplace mobbing and the role of human resources management. Business Ethics and Leadership, 4(1), 17-34. http://doi.org/10.21272/bel.4(1).17-34.2020
Önder, Ç., & Basim, N. (2008). Examination of developmental models of occupational burnout using burnout profiles of nurses. Journal of advanced nursing, 64(5), 514-523. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2008.04818.x
Pranitasari, D. (2020). The influence of effective leadership and organizational trust to teacher’s work motivation and organizational commitment. Media Ekonomi dan Manajemen, 35(1), 75-91.
Radzi, S. M., Ramley, S. Z., Salehuddin, M., Othman, Z., & Jalis, M. H. (2009). An empirical assessment of hotel departmental managers turnover intentions: The impact of organizational justice. International Journal of Business and Management, 4(8), 173-183.
Ray, S. L. (2006). Whistleblowing and organizational ethics. Nursing ethics, 13(4), 438-445.
Rothwell, G. R., & Baldwin, J. N. (2007). Ethical climate theory, whistle-blowing, and the code of silence in police agencies in the state of Georgia. Journal of Business Ethics, 70(4), 341-361. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10551-006-9114-5
Seligman, Martin E.P. 2002. Authentic happiness. New York: Free Press.
Shockley-Zalabak P, Ellis K, Winograd G. 2000. Organizational trust: What it means, why it
matters. Organization Development Journal 18(4), 35–48.
Singh, U., & Srivastava, K. B. (2016). Organizational trust and organizational citizenship behaviour. Global Business Review, 17(3), 594-609.
Smith, C. A. O. D. W. N. J. P., Organ, D. W., & Near, J. P. (1983). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents. Journal of applied psychology, 68(4), 653. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0021-9010.68.4.653
Stajkovic, Alexander D. 2003. Introducing positive psychology to work motivation: Development of a core confidence model. Paper presented at Academy of Management National Meeting, Seattle, Washington (August).
Thiruvenkadam, T., & Durairaj, I. Y. A. (2017). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its definitions and dimensions. GE-International Journal of Management Research, 5(5), 46-55.
Tziner, A., & Sharoni, G. (2014). Organizational citizenship behavior, organizational justice, job stress, and workfamily conflict: Examination of their interrelationships with respondents from a non-Western culture. Revista de Psicología del Trabajo y de las Organizaciones, 30(1), 35-42.
Van Dyne, L., Graham, J. W., & Dienesch, R. M. (1994). Organizational citizenship behavior: Construct redefinition, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 765-802.
Vanhala, M., Heilmann, P., & Salminen, H. (2016). Organizational trust dimensions as antecedents of organizational commitment. Knowledge and Process Management, 23(1), 46-61.
Williams, L. J., & Anderson, S. E. (1991). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. Journal of Management, 17, 601-617.
Wozir, F. M., & Yurtkoru, E. S. (2017). Organizational culture and intentions towards types of whistleblowing: the case of Turkey and Ethiopia. Research Journal of Business and Management, 4(4), 527-539. DOI: 10.17261/Pressacademia.2017.759
Yean, T. F. (2016). Organizational justice: A conceptual discussion. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 219, 798-803.
Yoo, J., & Jeong, J. (2017). The effects of emotional labor on work engagement and boundary spanner creativity. Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship. https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/APJIE-08-2017-028/full/html
Dr. Nico Rose for Mappalicious Online Blog, December 8 2014. https://mappalicious.com/2014/08/12/are-you-a-h-e-r-o-positive-organizational-capital-psycap-explained/ [Accessed June 20, 2022]
https://www.ncab.org.au/bullying-advice/bullying-for-parents/types-of-bullying/ [Accessed June 20, 2022]
https://eddy.com/hr-encyclopedia/workplace-bullying/ [Accessed June 20, 2022]
https://www.thrivelaw.co.uk/2020/03/06/what-are-the-different-types-of-whistleblowing/ [Accessed June 21, 2022]