Work 1.jpegWork 2.jpegWork 3.jpegWork 4.jpegWork.docx

Work 1.jpeg
Work 2.jpeg
Work 3.jpeg
Work 4.jpeg
Work 5.jpeg
work 6.jpeg
work 7.jpeg
Work Grading.jpeg
Managing Conflict: Audio Interviews
Healthy Conflict in Public Administration
Interviewer: Workplace conflict is a natural and healthy aspect
of organizational success, but in some
instances, it can also be detrimental. From your perspective, sho
uld the public administrator promote a
culture where health conflict is expressed and utilized toward ac
hieving organizational goals, and if so,
how should he or she do achieve this organizational culture?
Representative Keith Ellison
United States Congressman, 5th District of Minnesota
Washington, D.C.
Well, the public administrator has to understand that conflict is

like gravity, it is there, it will be there,
there is no such thing as conflict-
free environment, nor should there be.
The sales force wants to sell as many products as they can. The
accounting group wants to make sure
that the organization is safe and sound and solvent. Sometimes t
hese two goals are at cross purposes,
and they should be—
what the administrator and the leader needs to do is to create an
environment
where mistakes are OK, where conflict is OK, where people can
disagree, where somebody can say that I
think that so-and-so is wrong and that so-and-
so will have enough trust to know that it is, one, not
personal. Two, not designed to thwart their progress in the orga
nization. Three, that it is sincerely
meant.
I mean, the leader needs to set that tone, and sometimes that me
ans the leader needs to let people
critique them, and that sends a message that, critique and differ
ence of opinion is OK here.
Now, of course at some point we need to get it together and mak
e a decision, but you have got to make
a deliberate and conscious effort to make sure that you have an
environment in which people can give
criticism and people can take it.
This is learned behavior. This does not just spring up overnight,
this is learned behavior, and you have to
practice it and you have to deliberately implement a process for
conflict resolution, honesty, and trust. In
that way you are always going to be able to anticipate problems
as they arise. Conflict should be looked

at as early warning system.
State Senator Katie Sieben
Minnesota State Senator, District 57
St. Paul, MN
There is certainly no lack of conflict in the Minnesota Senate an
d it is not, as most people would think, it
is not along partisan lines always or has been usually. So I do n
ot have any real good advice to how to
promote it because it just comes so naturally to us in the legislat
ive setting.
Ms. Deborah Chase
City Council Member 1998 - 2003, Mayor 2002 - 2003
City of Kennmore
Conflict ignored always grows, so you absolutely have to addres
s that. And providing a healthy
environment where it is okay to disagree or at least discuss the
disagreement, so that everyone
understands where each other is coming from is critically impor
tant in order to keep in your organization
in a healthy place. So what does that mean? It means that you br
ing out, and make safe having those
disagreements, that as a leader you encourage people to talk abo
ut it, that you keep your ear to the
ground to hear when it is happening, so you can address it.
Then you make sure that people are expressing their disagreeme
nts in healthy ways. If you have conflict
that is arising from combative, aggressive, harassing or rude be
havior, well, you cannot tolerate that. But
you can encourage people to talk about why they are coming at
an issue from their perspective, that

gains understanding, and often sometimes allows brainstorming,
and a new solution that neither would
have thought of, had they not have had the discussion.
Conflict and Workplace Relationships Flashcards
1. Emotional intelligence is involved with feelings, expression
of feelings, and the management of one’s
personal feelings. This form of intelligence is often associated
with leaders at high levels in an
organization.
2. Promoting conflict in the workplace may cause discomfort.
Anger is sometimes associated with this
healthy and difficult to manage concept.
3. Negative workplace relationships can become personal and
destructive and can have a negative
effect on both job satisfaction and organizational outcomes.
An exploration of emotional
intelligence across career arenas
Michelle M. Morehouse
Amherst H. Wilder Foundation, Saint Paul, Minnesota, USA
Abstract
Purpose – This quantitative study seeks to examine the
relationship between emotional intelligence

scores of leaders in non-profit health and human service
agencies and profit businesses.
Design/methodology/approach – Director-level leaders in the
non-profit (n ¼ 32) and profit
(n ¼ 32) business arenas completed an online emotional
intelligence self assessment (Bar-On EQ-i).
Descriptive statistics were gathered and comparative analyses
explored the differences between
leaders in the two groups.
Findings – Results revealed significant differences between
leaders in non-profit and profit
businesses in overall emotional intelligence, and in the
particular competency areas of stress
management and adaptability.
Originality/value – This paper identifies a difference in
emotional intelligence levels of leaders
based on career field.
Keywords Leadership, Non-profit organizations, Profit,
Emotional intelligence, Careers
Paper type Literature review
Introduction
With the growing recognition of emotional intelligence (EI) as
an essential element of
leadership, interest is stirring regarding the demonstration of EI
by people at different
levels of leadership and in diverse career arenas. Little, if any,
research exists which
investigates the EI levels of leaders in dissimilar career fields.
Researchers suggest that
there may be disciplinary differences in those for which the

construct of EI has an
appeal. Specifically, “teachers, social workers, and parents” as
opposed to “business
people and tough-minded social scientists” (Gardner, 1999, p.
10) may be more likely to
gravitate toward the idea of EI. Perhaps the reverse is true as
well, that people with
enhanced EI are attracted to particular types of careers.
Alternatively, certain organizational cultures themselves may
enhance and in fact
promote based in part on employee EI. In such a workplace
culture, one may assume
that people in top leadership positions will have the highest EI
levels. Indeed, initial
research (Dulewicz and Higgs, 2003; Goleman et al., 2002)
suggests that EI levels are
higher among workplace leaders, and are even further elevated
as leadership levels rise
in an organization. Organizational norms described by Kouzes
and Posner (1995) that
enable people to achieve corporate goals reflect a climate that
embraces, supports, and
rewards EI. Managers who choose not to follow organizational
practices defined by
corporate values are less likely to rise to top leadership
positions (Langley, 2000). An
organization that supports and promotes EI in its corporate
values may see more
people following established ground rules, and more
emotionally intelligent managers
rising to top leadership positions.
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is
available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0143-7739.htm
LODJ
28,4
296
Received April 2006
Revised July 2006
Accepted August 2006
Leadership & Organization
Development Journal
Vol. 28 No. 4, 2007
pp. 296-307
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0143-7739
DOI 10.1108/01437730710752184
This study involves a unique look at diverse career climates in
relation to EI and
compares the EI of leaders in the non-profit and profit business
arenas. It stands to
reason that emotionally intelligent people may be inherently
more drawn to a
particular type of career, that certain career fields may more
actively recruit and
promote with EI in mind, or that certain organizational climates
may cultivate EI. The
research that follows begins to investigate some of these
questions. This author’s
professional experience generated curiosity and led to the
hypothesis that if EI scores
of leaders in non-profit health and human service mission-

driven agencies were
compared with the scores of leaders in profit-driven businesses,
there would be a
difference. Specifically, it was hypothesized that non-profit
leaders would demonstrate
higher EI levels than their profit-driven counterparts. In
reviewing the groundwork
that leads to the research and discussion regarding EI across
career arenas, it is
important to first look at the construct of EI itself, its link to
performance in the
workplace, and its link to quality workplace leaders.
Construct of emotional intelligence
Hypotheses on intelligence emerging as early as 1920 (Mandell
and Pherwani, 2003)
suggest that real intelligence is made up of emotional and social
elements, in addition
to an intellectual element. In academia and in measurement
efforts, however, the
construct of intelligence has historically remained closely
attached to cognitive
descriptors. When Mayer and Salovey (1993) put forth their
innovative theory of EI,
they specifically chose the term emotional intelligence in order
to link the construct to
historical literature. They proposed that in contrast to mere
attitudes and sentiments,
EI is actually comprised of distinct skills, and further offered
that individuals less
adept at interpersonal relations may experience a lack of ability
that could be
improved. Their later definition describes EI as “the ability to
perceive accurately,
appraise, and express emotion; the ability to access and or
generate feelings when they

facilitate thought; the ability to understand emotion and
emotional knowledge; and the
ability to reflectively regulate emotions in ways that promote
emotional and
intellectual growth” (Mayer and Salovey, 1997, p. 23).
Today, though there is general agreement that EI encapsulates
personal qualities
commonly held as positive tools toward effective interactions
and in conducting daily
life events, discussion continues around its actual definition and
measurement. Two
models of EI have emerged. The ability model describes EI as
“abilities that involve
perceiving and reasoning abstractly with information that
emerges from feelings”, and
the mixed model defines EI as “an ability with social behaviors,
traits and
competencies” (Mandell and Pherwani, 2003, p. 389). The
ability model is largely
upheld by Mayer and Salovey (1993, 1997). This study utilizes
the mixed model, which
is espoused by Goleman (1995, 1998) and Bar-On (1997). Slight
differences in the
models aside, EI remains a fashionable current topic of research
and debate, with most
researchers at least intrigued with the notion of intelligences
beyond intellect and
cognition.
Emotional intelligence in the workplace
In the ever more competitive world of today’s workforce, there
is increasing focus on
effective practices for staff recruitment and hiring, for training
and promotion from
within, and for retention of outstanding performers. The

importance of conducting
Emotional
intelligence
297
these practices effectively is underscored by the growing costs
related to sophisticated
recruitment techniques, not to mention the substantial cost of
promoting someone with
inadequate skills (Langley, 2000). This is particularly crucial
for organizations such as
not-for-profit agencies where there is no guarantee of fiscal
stability. A considerable
amount of literature advocates for EI as a key ingredient on
which human resource
professionals and organizations must focus. Research indicates
a correlation between
EI and top performers and performance climates in the
workplace.
According to such research, EI is supported as a vital element in
excellent job
performance profiles, in employee behavior and organizational
practices leading to an
outstanding climate for service delivery, and in employee
concern for quality and
ability to deal with workplace conflict. Goleman’s (1998)
analysis of performance
profiles from various positions in 121 companies around the
world revealed that EI
abilities rank as more than twice as crucial for excellence than
technical and cognitive

abilities. In their tools used to measure performance
competencies, worldwide
professionals deemed critical excellence skills to be 23 percent
based on intellect and
technical expertise, and 67 percent clearly centered on EI
capacities. Research also
links EI with customer satisfaction, quality assurance, and
problem solving ability.
Organizational policies and procedures that reward employee
behavior based on EI
and treat employees as internal customers result in a climate for
services regarded as
excellent by customers (Bardzil and Slaski, 2003). Further, a
study of 222 participants
resulted in positive correlations between the EI competencies of
self-regulation and
empathy and manager’s concern for product and service quality;
and between the
self-awareness and self-regulation competencies and effective
problem-solving skills
during subordinate conflict (Rahim and Minors, 2003).
Research also demonstrates a relationship between EI and
individual and team
performance. Perhaps due to an enhanced ability to recognize
and manage emotions
and brace against distracting emotions, EI skills connect both to
individual
cognitive-based performance and team task performance skills.
A study (Lam and
Kirby, 2002) of 304 undergraduate students demonstrated a
positive influence of EI
and the EI competency areas of emotional awareness and
management on individual
cognitive-based performance. Additional research (Jordan and
Troth, 2004) found that

teams comprised of members with high EI displayed better task
performance skills
when compared with teams made up of less emotionally
intelligent members. Goleman
(1998) suggests that for technical and complex positions in
particular, a lack of EI may
lead to diminished cognitive performance and an inability to
accomplish tasks,
especially with others.
Emotional intelligence and leadership
Much research is available which investigates top performing
leaders and leadership
traits in relation to EI. Many authors (Gardner, 1999; Goleman
et al., 2002; Kouzes and
Posner, 1995; Wheatley, 1999) recognize the necessary shift
from old-school
management to true leadership. They describe traditional
management as
promoting methodical, detached, micro-managing supervisors
who have extreme
control over an employees’ every step and actively separate any
emotion from the
workplace, similar to the transactional style of leadership.
When these same authors
turn to describe successful leadership traits, their descriptions
portray leaders who are
aware and have an understanding of their own and other’s
emotions, and are able to
LODJ
28,4
298

use that understanding to effectively motivate, inspire,
challenge, and connect with
others, an approach aligned with the transformational style of
leadership. In Kouzes
and Posner’s (1995) qualitative illustration of leader’s proudest
moments, leader
reflections were described in terms of feelings, emotions, and
challenges. These authors
offer that transformational leadership traits and experiences
such as these are more
highly correlated with employee satisfaction and performance
effectiveness than are
transactional traits.
Studies (Gardner and Stough, 2002; Kobe et al., 2001; Palmer et
al., 2001) show a
correlation between EI and leadership experiences as well as
between EI and aspects of
transformational leadership, the style promoted as most
effective and successful. For
example, Gardner and Stough (2002) analyzed 110 senior-level
managers and found
those who were aligned with the transformational leadership
style also indicated an
ability to identify and apply knowledge of their own and others’
emotions when
interacting and addressing problems, and an ability to control
their emotional states.
Emotional intelligence with rising leadership levels. Knowing
that EI is tied to
successful leadership, it follows that skills of emotionally
intelligent people, like
flexibility, conflict management, persuasion and social
reasoning, become increasingly

important with advancing levels in leadership hierarchy
(Mandell and Pherwani, 2003).
Initial research in this area compared EI scores of middle and
senior level managers to
determine promotion readiness, explored EI as an explanation
for the advancement of
managers, and weighed EI against intellect and managerial
skills in assessing
outstanding versus average senior level leaders. Specifically, a
comparison of senior
managers with middle managers targeted for promotion resulted
in significantly
higher scores among senior managers in EI and the competency
areas of innovation,
commitment, political awareness, leadership, change catalyst,
and team capabilities,
supporting EI as a measurement tool for promotion readiness
(Langley, 2000). Also, a
seven-year longitudinal study (Dulewicz and Higgs, 2003)
revealed EI as more
important than intellect and other management competencies in
the advancement of
managers. Results indicated that intellect accounted for 27
percent and management
competencies for 16 percent, while EI explained 36 percent of
the variances in
advancement. The same study further analyzed the skills of
senior directors and
managers. The director group presented significantly higher
scores on overall EI and
on interpersonal sensitivity and emotional resilience. The
authors found no difference
amongst the directors and managers at all, however, in intellect
or other managerial
competencies. Finally, not only is EI an increasingly indicative
reason for stellar

performance as rank rises in an organization, but as opposed to
cognitive or technical
abilities, it explains 85 percent of the variance between
outstanding and average senior
leaders (Goleman et al., 2002).
These initial studies yield telling results that offer support for
the relationship
between effective leaders and EI, as well as for the theory that
with increasing
leadership levels in an organization, one will find increasing
levels of EI. Further,
particular EI competencies appear as especially crucial for
directors of organizations;
“motivation, interpersonal sensitivity, intuitiveness,
conscientiousness and integrity”
are undoubtedly relevant for a director’s role in “determining
the company’s vision,
mission and values” (Dulewicz and Higgs, 2003, p. 206).
Emotional intelligence across career arenas. Theoretical
speculations on EI research
of leaders in divergent career fields consider the leader’s role in
driving the
Emotional
intelligence
299
organizational culture, the workplace culture’s role in
developing emotionally
intelligent leaders, and initial career interest by people with
high EI. It is estimated that

50 to 70 percent of employees trace the organizational climate
specifically to the actions
of the leader (Goleman et al., 2002), this demonstrating a direct
effect of the leader on
workplace culture. Alternatively, the organizational culture may
have an effect on the
EI levels of employees. Organizational values define ground
rules that must be
followed in order to anticipate promotion (Langley, 2000), thus,
rules based on EI
competencies will lead employees to embrace EI if their goal is
to attain a leadership
position. Leaders in different career arenas may have a greater
or lesser amount of EI
nurturing by their various organizational missions, visions,
values, and cultures.
Lastly, people with high EI may be drawn to particular types of
professions. Recall the
contention that those who are interested in the construct of EI
may be defined along
disciplinary lines (Gardner, 1999). Some assertions have been
made that people who are
high in EI may be more likely participants in leadership
experiences, and also may be
more effective leaders (Kobe et al., 2001). Perhaps just as
highly emotionally intelligent
people are interested in and more likely to participate in
leadership, they may also be
more likely to participate in particular types of career fields and
professions. This
study seeks to begin to infuse initial empirical research into this
burgeoning theoretical
discussion.
Methodology
This study explores the relationship between EI scores of

Director-level leaders in
divergent fields, specifically, in non-profit health and human
service mission-driven
agencies and profit-driven businesses in the State of Alaska.
Comparisons were made
between the two groups of leaders on their scores of overall EI,
as well as on five
subscale EI competency areas.
Subjects
A total of 64 participants were involved, representing people in
top leadership
positions in non-profit and profit business arenas in the State of
Alaska. The non-profit
leaders (n ¼ 32) were 26 Executive Directors and six Senior
Managers working in
health and social services agencies. These participants were 87
percent female and 53
percent had completed Masters level of education. The profit
business leaders (n ¼ 32)
were 21 Executive Directors and ten Senior Managers working
in varying types of
profit businesses. This group was 72 percent male and 41
percent had completed
Masters level of education.
Instruments
Data were gathered for the study using two tools. A short
demographic survey sought
responses regarding level of education, position title, number of
years in current
position, number of supervisees, total number of employees in
the organization, and
company status (non-profit or profit). The second component
was an online
self-assessment, the Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-

i), published by
Multi-Health Systems Inc (Bar-On, 1997). The EQ-i has 133
questions; each posed using
a five-point frequency scale. The EQ-i measures 15 conceptual
components of EI, which
are grouped into five subscale categories. The subscale
categories are:
LODJ
28,4
300
(1) Intrapersonal, including the competencies of self-regard,
emotional
self-awareness, assertiveness, independence, and self
actualization.
(2) Interpersonal, including empathy, social responsibility, and
interpersonal
relationship.
(3) Adaptability, including reality testing, flexibility and
problem solving.
(4) Stress management including stress tolerance and impulse
control.
(5) General mood which includes happiness and optimism.
The scores produced from the instrument include scores for
overall emotional quotient
(EQ), for each of the five subscales, and for each of the 15
conceptual components

(Bar-On, 1997).
Bar-On (1997) reported internal reliability averaging a ¼ 0.76,
and retest reliability
between a ¼ 0.75 and a ¼ 0.85. Validity findings clearly
differentiate between the two
constructs of EI and IQ, and show a strong relationship with
tests designed to measure
work performance and satisfaction, demonstrating the validity
of the EQ-i to this study
comparing leaders in different work arenas.
Procedures
Participants were initially invited to participate via an e-mail
message which gave a
brief overview of the purpose of the study, outlined
confidentiality information, and
also contained the short demographic survey and instructions
for the online EI
assessment. Follow-up invitations to participate were also
mailed via postcard and
communicated via telephone. The number of total respondents
was 82, a 37 percent
response rate of the 222 leaders who received the first e-mail
invitation message. Of
total responders, 18 were not included in the final calculation of
data. Ten responders
were not included because the demographic data they submitted
did not match the
sample group criteria. Specifically, these ten responders were
employed by (non-profit)
municipal, borough and state government entities as opposed to
non-profit health and
human service organizations. The remaining eight people who
had responded but were
not used were removed because their scores indicated overly

positive or negative
response patterns. The EQ-i (Bar-On, 1997) generates
individual validity scores that
indicate whether a person is responding to the online assessment
in an exaggeratedly
positive or negative way. To avoid a positive or negative
individual score effect, three
non-profit and five profit leaders were omitted using this score
validity criteria.
Participants were offered their overall EI score, once tabulated.
Analysis
Descriptive statistics were used to analyze data from the
demographic survey. In testing
for significant difference between the two groups’ overall and
subscale EI scores,
two-tailed tests of independent means were conducted. A total
of six t-tests were
conducted, one each for the overall score and five EI subscale
scores. Raw data were
entered and independent group t-tests were calculated using the
SPSS Student Version
(George and Mallery, 2005). Considering the chosen calculation
method of multiple t-tests,
a modified Bonferroni correction factor was implemented to
guard against the risk of
incorrectly declaring a difference. With this applied correction
factor, significance levels
were a ¼ 0.05 (2.29) to a ¼ 0.01 (2.91) with 62 degrees of
freedom.
Emotional
intelligence
301

Hypotheses. The same hypothesis approach was used to compare
for differences in
each of the six test areas. Thus, the following research
hypothesis was applied to the
comparisons of overall EI scores and the intrapersonal,
interpersonal, stress
management, adaptability, and general mood subscale
categories:
If the EI scores for leaders in non-profit health and human
service agencies and
leaders in profit business are compared, there will be a
difference.
Levels of significance: a ¼ 0.05 to a ¼ 0.01. Following the
initial analyses and given
the dramatic difference in gender make-up of the two groups,
subsequent two-way
analyses of variance (ANOVA) were also conducted for each of
the six score results to
test for gender effect and for career arena by gender interaction.
For these tests, with 60
degrees of freedom, the levels of significance were: a ¼ 0.05 to
a ¼ 0.01
Findings
For this study, the 15 conceptual component scores produced by
the EI assessment
were not individually compared across the two groups of
business leaders. Rather, the
overall EI and five subscale scores were used for comparison
purposes. These scores
were linked to individual leaders using e-mailed responses from
each participant to the

researcher, which indicated the participants’ career arena as
non-profit or profit.
Research results
Comparative calculation resulted in a higher mean score for
non-profit leaders than for
profit leaders in all six test areas. Mean scores for the non-
profit leader group ranged
from 103.06 to 107.59 with the highest standard deviation of
11.33. Raw individual
non-profit leader scores on the six tests ranged from a low of 77
to a high of 130. Profit
leaders displayed mean scores ranging from 97.28 to 102.84 on
the six tests and a high
standard deviation of 13.71. Raw individual profit leader scores
on the six tests ranged
from a low of 67 to a high of 122. Bar-On (1997) designed the
analysis of the EQ-i to
result in scores based on a mean of 100, and offered interpretive
guidelines suggesting
that scores between 90 and 109 be considered average. All of
the mean scores for both
groups fell within the range of scores described as average.
Table I depicts the mean
scores and standard deviations for each of the calculations
between the groups.
Mean totals of the overall EI score and each of the subscale EI
scores of the two
groups were calculated using independent group t-tests. Using
the modified Bonferroni
correction factor, three significant differences were found
among the compared scores.
Non-profit leaders Profit leaders
Variable M SD M SD

Total EI 106.72 10.38 100.25 10.10
INTRA 107.59 10.46 102.84 8.43
INTER 103.06 11.33 98.72 13.71
STRESS M 106.32 10.80 99.34 12.71
ADAPT 104.28 10.88 97.28 13.49
G MOOD 105.13 8.26 101.66 12.37
Notes: TOTAL EI ¼ Overall emotional intelligence; INTRA ¼
Intrapersonal;
INTER ¼ Interpersonal; STRESS M= Stress management;
ADAPT ¼ Adaptability;
G MOOD ¼ General mood; M= Mean; SD ¼ Standard deviation
Table I.
Descriptive statistics for
emotional intelligence
scores
LODJ
28,4
302
A significant difference ( p $ 0.03) was found in the overall EI
scores, and significant
differences ( p $ 0.05) were found in the stress management and
adaptability subscale
scores of the two groups. No significant difference was found
between the two groups
on the intrapersonal, interpersonal, or general mood subscale
category comparisons.
The results of each of these tests are presented in Table II.

In the subsequent two-way ANOVA, no findings of significance
were found for either
gender effect or for career arena by gender interaction. Lack of
significant findings in
these analyses may be due to the very small sample size when
further sorted by gender. In
these tests, the calculated observed power indicated no more
than a 25 percent chance of
finding a significant difference in any of the six tests, given the
sample size.
Summary of findings
The investigation and comparison conducted in this study found
several interesting
results. Demographic findings revealed a gender disparity
between the non-profit and
profit career fields, with a higher percentage of female non-
profit leaders and an
alternatively higher percentage of male profit leaders, each
when compared with their
profit and non-profit counterparts. Disparity was also
discovered in the area of
education, finding more non-profit leaders with higher levels of
education.
Comparisons of EI, using a correction factor, discovered non-
profit health and
human service leaders to be significantly higher than their profit
business colleagues in
overall EI, and in the stress management and adaptability
subscale components.
Conclusions
The apparent overall trend in this research was that leaders in
the non-profit health
and human service arena scored as more emotionally intelligent
than their

counterparts in the business for profit arena. The following
discussion considers the
relationship between EI and career choice and career alignment
with EI strength areas,
and also organizational cultures in relation to the EI of leaders.
Potential implications
are outlined for human resource professionals, trainers, and
leaders themselves.
Insight to limitations of this study and ideas for continued
research on the topic of EI
are also offered.
Variable Non-profit M Profit M t-value p-value
Total EI 106.72 100.25 2.53 0.03 *
Intrapersonal 107.59 102.84 2.00 0.10
Interpersonal 103.06 98.72 1.38 0.35
Stress management 106.32 99.34 2.36 0.05 *
Adaptability 104.28 97.28 2.29 0.05 *
General mood 105.13 101.66 1.32 0.39
Notes: With 62 degrees of freedom, significance levels with
modified Bonferroni correction factor
were a=0.05 (2.29) to a=0.01 (2.91). Abbreviations for this
table are as follows: TOTAL EI ¼ Overall
EI; INTRA ¼ Intrapersonal; INTER ¼ Interpersonal; STRESS
M = Stress management;
ADAPT ¼ Adaptability; G MOOD ¼ General mood; M = Mean;
SD ¼ Standard deviation;
n = sample size; *Significant at least at 0.05
Table II.
Comparison of mean

emotional intelligence
scores
Emotional
intelligence
303
Discussion
One consideration stemming from these study results is the
relationship between EI
and career choice. Mayer and Geher (1996, p. 110) speculated
that people who are very
emotionally intelligent may choose occupations accordingly.
They suggested
occupations of choice would be ones that seem reliant on EI,
such as
“psycho-therapy, social work, and teaching, or business careers
including sales,
academic or military recruiting, and personnel”. It is interesting
to consider whether
the highly EI non-profit leaders in this study, in heath and
human service agencies
aligned with “social work”, were predisposed to their ultimate
career choice.
After overall EI, the stress management subscale revealed the
highest level of
significance when comparing for difference between the two
leader groups. People who
score well on this subscale, according to Bar-On (1997), have
the ability to handle
stressful and nerve-racking tasks without losing control and

falling apart. They are not
impulsive, and are able to maintain a calm composure even
while working in front-line
type jobs. Interestingly, the types of front-line positions
described as good matches for
people with strengths in this area are “police officers,
firefighters, emergency medical
staff, social workers, and combat soldiers” (Bar-On, 1997, p.
44). Although non-profit
“social worker” leaders may recognize a level of stress related
to their line of work, they
certainly may find it enlightening that this is considered as
categorically similar to the
stress experienced by a combat soldier. Day-to-day tasks of a
non-profit health and
human service leader often include the oversight and
responsibility for care delivered
to hundreds of people, usually in vulnerable life situations, as
well as the constant and
ongoing uncertainty of fiscal stability, which is usually linked
to availability of cyclical
grant funding, and service reimbursements through government-
regulated programs
wrapped in unending bureaucracy. Such are certainly the
makings of a position which
requires a high capacity for stress management.
The competency area of adaptability was found to be
significantly different in the
two groups, with non-profit leaders again displaying greater
strengths. Bar-On (1997,
p. 44) described those who score well in this area as people who
“are generally flexible,
realistic, effective in understanding problematic situations, and
competent at arriving
at adequate solutions” and “who can generally find good ways

of dealing with
everyday difficulties”. The non-profit leader, who may oversee
service delivery to
countless people with life situations repeatedly in turmoil, must
be adept at addressing
everyday crises. They must have the ability to quickly and
realistically grasp problems
and issues, often with significant consequences, and address
them in a way that is
satisfactory and solution-oriented. These are the very makings
of an adaptable leader.
Now we return to the question of origination: do the leaders in
fact choose their EI
strength-based careers, or are particular occupations and
workplace cultures more
inclined than others to recruit, select, and nurture leaders based
on EI? Researchers
suggest that emotionally intelligent organizational cultures can
act as a training
ground, or an incubator, for leaders, such that their EI levels are
enhanced (Goleman
et al., 2002). Conceivably, this may occur in non-profit
agencies. In a recent article,
Moore (2004) described some assets of non-profit organizations,
many of which directly
reflect an agency climate with high EI. According to the author,
non-profit strengths
include a culture where work and accomplishments are
appreciated and celebrated,
opinions are respected and communication is open. Moore
further described a climate
free of micromanagement, where people are given autonomy and
responsibility for
LODJ

28,4
304
their tasks and in their roles. These types of descriptors,
particularly when woven
throughout organizational policies and procedures, including
hiring, evaluation and
promotion processes, will surely establish ground rules based on
EI and result not only
in a more emotionally intelligent culture, but in leadership
higher in EI as well.
Implications
A number of implications can be drawn from the research and
conclusions of this study.
Human resource professionals and trainers might consider
implementing policies and
procedures that recognize EI as a key ingredient in
organizational success. Some
researchers (Bardzil and Slaski, 2003; Rahim and Minors, 2003)
suggest infusing EI into
workplace policies and procedures and conducting EI training
for staff will improve
organizational service climate, quality assurance of products
and services across the
board, and enhance manager’s problem solving capacity.
Studies (Ashkanasy and
Dasborough, 2003; Bardzil and Slaski, 2003; Sala, 2004) have
shown success in training
efforts to increase EI levels, also resulting in enhanced team
performance. Mayer and
Geher (1996) advised that such training may raise the ability
levels of workers low in EI

skills, resulting in improved work in their individual
occupations. Langley (2000) also
noted that focusing on the development of EI and emotional
competencies could increase
promotion readiness in employees. In terms of cost savings in
recruitment and training,
and institutional memory, businesses of all types would benefit
from enhancing the
capacity for promotion of their own employees.
For leaders themselves, consideration should be given to one’s
individual EI level
and the related ramifications on the organizational culture.
Leaders who aim for a
transformational leadership style rich in EI, one which
“generates an awareness of the
mission or vision of the organization, and develops colleagues
and followers to higher
levels of ability and potential” (Mandell and Pherwani, 2003, p.
390) may require some
critical reflection. What is it about the leader’s organization or
the leader himself or
herself that may enhance or diminish the culture of EI in the
workplace? Leaders may
find professional advantage in reflecting on the organizational
policies and practices
that they oversee, and making a conscious effort to instill EI in
those practices.
Limitations and direction for future research
This particular research study has a number of limitations which
will restrict the
generalizability of the results. The sample size, 32 participants
in each leader group,
was relatively small. Also, the career field subgroups were
somewhat broadly defined.

Subsequent research may benefit from using sample groups that
are larger and more
equitable in homogeneity, such as profit businesses with greater
similar
characteristics. Additionally, the mixed model of EI used in this
study, the
self-report method of assessing emotional intelligence, has
received some criticism
regarding reliability. Further EI research with this focus will be
enhanced with the use
of skill-based and 360 degree appraisal data, providing
information from the
participant, and the participant’s peers, subordinates, and
supervisors. Further
considerations on the results of this study and for future
research also include the role
of gender and education. Mandell and Pherwani (2003)
discovered EI levels to be
higher in women than in men. Although in this study follow-up
ANOVA found no
significance in results based on gender, this bears further
investigation with larger
sample groups. Additionally, advanced education, particularly
greater exposure to
Emotional
intelligence
305
theoretical speculation and research, may increase one’s
appreciation and eventual
nurturing of the idea and competencies in the construct of EI.
Further empirical

research will also be enhanced with the inclusion of a
qualitative look into the
leadership experiences of people in different career arenas and
with differing levels of
emotional intelligence. Additionally, research should be
conducted to collect data
regarding EI competency areas most critical to particular types
of positions and
particular types of career arenas. Information gleaned from this
type of data will be
useful not only in selection of employees, but also in
forecasting satisfaction in an
occupation.
Unanswered questions remain regarding individual EI as a
predictor of career
choice and success, and emotionally intelligent workplace
culture as a predictor of
variance in skills displayed by leaders in divergent fields.
Further EI research should
be conducted in comparing leaders within and the organizational
cultures of diverse
career fields. Researchers (Bardzil and Slaski, 2003; Dulewicz
and Higgs, 2003) have
commented on the need for more research into how the leader
drives the culture of the
organization and the impact of the organizational culture on
their leaders. They
suggest that such research would be useful to determine if
organizations with very
emotionally intelligent senior managers indeed have an
influence on the overall
organizational culture, and to help define how EI is manifested
in effective behaviors of
top leaders, and in offering support, direction, and promotion of
future leaders. To be

sure, research is warranted in the ongoing investigation of EI
levels of leaders across
career fields. If we are able to identify career climates in which
the best and most
emotionally intelligent leaders are indeed set apart from the
rest, imagine what we can
learn and share with other business arenas.
References
Ashkanasy, N.M. and Dasborough, M.T. (2003), “A study of
emotional awareness and emotional
intelligence in leadership teaching”, Journal of Education for
Business, Vol. 79 No. 1,
pp. 19-22.
Bar-On, R. (1997), BarOn Emotional Quotient Inventory: EQ-i
Technical Manual, Multi-Health
Systems, Inc, Toronto.
Bardzil, P. and Slaski, M. (2003), “Emotional intelligence:
fundamental competencies for
enhanced service provision”, Managing Service Quality, Vol. 13
No. 2, pp. 97-104.
Dulewicz, V. and Higgs, M. (2003), “Leadership at the top: the
need for emotional intelligence in
organizations”, International Journal of Organizational
Analysis, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 193-210.
Gardner, H. (1999), Intelligenc Reframed: Multiple
Intelligences for the 21st Century, Basic Books,
New York, NY.
Gardner, L. and Stough, C. (2002), “Examining the relationship
between leadership and emotional

intelligence in senior level managers”, Leadership &
Organization Development, Vol. 23,
pp. 68-79.
George, D. and Mallery, P. (2005), SPSS for Windows Step by
Step: A Simple Guide and Reference
12.0 Update, 5th ed., Pearson Education, Boston, MA.
Goleman, D. (1995), Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter
More Than IQ, Bantam Books,
New York, NY.
Goleman, D. (1998), Working With Emotional Intelligence,
Bantam Books, New York, NY.
LODJ
28,4
306
Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R. and McKee, A. (2002), Primal
Leadership: Realizing The Power of
Emotional Intelligence, Harvard Business School Press, Boston,
MA.
Jordan, P.J. and Troth, A.C. (2004), “Managing emotions during
team problem solving: emotional
intelligence and conflict resolution”, Human Performance, Vol.
17 No. 2, pp. 195-218.
Kobe, L.M., Reiter-Palmon, R. and Rickers, J.D. (2001), “Self-
reported leadership experiences in
relation to inventoried social and emotional intelligence”,
Current Psychology, Vol. 20 No. 2,

pp. 154-63.
Kouzes, J. and Posner, B. (1995), The Leadership Challenge,
Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Lam, L.T. and Kirby, S.L. (2002), “Is emotional intelligence an
advantage? An exploration of the
impact of emotional and general intelligence on individual
performance”, The Journal of
Social Psychology, Vol. 142 No. 1, pp. 133-43.
Langley, A. (2000), “Emotional intelligence – a new evaluation
tool for management
development?”, Career Development International, Vol. 5 No. 3,
pp. 177-83.
Mandell, B. and Pherwani, S. (2003), “Relationship between
emotional intelligence and
transformational leadership style: a gender comparison”,
Journal of Business and
Psychology, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 387-404.
Mayer, J.D. and Geher, G. (1996), “Emotional intelligence and
the identification of emotion”,
Intelligence, Vol. 22, pp. 89-113.
Mayer, J.D. and Salovey, P. (1993), “The intelligence of
emotional intelligence”, Intelligence,
Vol. 17, pp. 433-42.
Mayer, J.D. and Salovey, P. (1997), “What is emotional
intelligence?”, in Salovey, P. and
Sluyter, D.J. (Eds), Emotional Development and Emotional
Intelligence, Basic Books,
New York, NY, pp. 3-31.

Moore, C.J. (2004), “Non-profit staying power”, The Chronicle
of Philanthropy, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 27-9.
Palmer, B., Walls, M., Burgess, Z. and Stough, C. (2001),
“Emotional intelligence and effective
leadership”, Leadership & Organization Development, Vol. 22,
pp. 5-10.
Rahim, M.A. and Minors, P. (2003), “Effects of emotional
intelligence on concern for quality and
problem solving”, Managerial Auditing Journal, Vol. 18 No. 2,
pp. 150-5.
Sala, F. (2004), “Do programs designed to increase emotional
intelligence at work – work?”,
The Consortium for Research on Emotional Intelligence in
Organization, available at:
www.eiconsortium.org/research/do_ei_programs_work.htm
(accessed November 152004).
Wheatley, M. (1999), Leadership and the New Science:
Discovering Order in a Chaotic World,
2nd ed., Berrett-Koehler Publishers, San Francisco, CA.
About the author
Michelle M. Morehouse is the Program Developer at the
Amherst H. Wilder Foundation in Saint
Paul, Minnesota. She has held for-profit health care and state
government positions, with the
majority of her career in non-profit health and human service
organizations. As Regional
Director of a Center for Independent Living in Anchorage,
Alaska, she completed the Foraker
Group and University of Alaska Certificate in Non-profit
Management program. Morehouse
received her undergraduate degree in Communication, with a

minor in Psychology, at the
University of Minnesota in Minneapolis. Her Masters in
Education at the University of Alaska
Anchorage focused on Adult Education with an emphasis on
Human Resource Development and
Leadership. Michelle can be contacted at: [email protected]
Emotional
intelligence
307
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail:
[email protected]
Or visit our web site for further details:
www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further
reproduction prohibited without permission.
333300 JJOOUURRNNAALL OOFF
MMAANNAAGGEEMMEENNTT &&
OORRGGAANNIIZZAATTIIOONN Volume 14, Issue 4,
September 2008
R ecent research has suggested that relation-ships characterised
by rude and uncivil
behaviour may be becoming increasingly com-
mon in the workplace (Pearson & Porath 2003).
According to Cortina, Magley, Williams and
Langhout (2001) 71 percent of workers have
been insulted, demeaned, ignored, or otherwise

mistreated by their co-workers and superiors.
Much of the research in this area has examined
direct aggression with a clear intent to physically
harm (for reviews of workplace violence see Grif-
fin, O’Leary-Kelly & Collins 1998; Leather,
Brady, Lawrence, Beale & Cox 1999). There has
also been some work with a focus on psychologi-
cal aggression, or behaviours that inflict psycho-
logical, rather that physical harm (Campion et al
1993; Mobley 1977; Mowday et al 1979;
Nielsen, Jex & Adams 2000; Warr et al 1979).
Other research has examined an even milder (but
possibly far more prevalent) form of negative
behaviour, focusing on rudeness and incivility at
work (Campion et al 1993; Mobley 1977;
Nielsen, Jex & Adams 2000; Warr et al 1979).
Regardless of the intensity of the behaviour, rela-
tionships characterised by violence, rudeness,
aggression and/or incivility are very likely nega-
tive relationships.
The impact of social relationships on employ-
ee well-being has long been of interest to
researchers, often in the form of research with a
focus on the positive impact of social support
(Campion et al 1993; Mobley 1977; Mowday
Copyright © eContent Management Pty Ltd. Journal of
Management & Organization (2008) 14: 330–344.
Negative relationships in the
workplace: Associations with
organisational commitment,
cohesion, job satisfaction and

intention to turnover
RRAACCHHEELL LL MMOORRRRIISSOONN
School of Business, AUT University, Auckland, New Zealand
AA BB SS TT RR AA CC TT
This study investigates the link between perceptions of negative
workplace relationships and organ-
isational outcomes. Respondents (n = 412) spanned a wide range
of occupations, industries and
nationalities. Data were collected using an Internet-based
questionnaire. Results indicated that
those with at least one negative relationship at work were
significantly less satisfied, reported less
organisational commitment, were part of less cohesive
workgroups and were significantly more like-
ly to be planning to leave their job.
Keywords: workplace relationships; organisational commitment;
cohesion; job satisfaction; turnover
etal 1979; Nielsen, Jex & Adams 2000; Warr et al
1979). The impact of negative social relations, or
enmities, is a topic that has received less atten-
tion, particularly in the work environment. This
impact of negative relationships on organisational
outcomes has seldom been examined previously
and is the focus of the current study. In addition,
the question of which organisational variables are
most strongly associated with the presence of
negative relationships is addressed. Thus, the cur-
rent study seeks to explore the extent to which
negative relationships in the workplace are related
to job satisfaction, organisational commitment,

workgroup cohesion and intention to turnover.
While there is little empirical research docu-
menting the effects of negative relationships at
work, the literature on negative workplace behav-
iours such as aggression, injustice, unfairness bul-
lying and incivility will be briefly reviewed here.
Although these constructs do not completely
overlap with that of the negative workplace rela-
tionship, they are sufficiently related to inform
hypotheses on these relationships.
CCoonncceeppttuuaalliissiinngg nneeggaattiivvee
rreellaattiioonnsshhiippss
Although no standard definition of negative rela-
tionships yet exists they can be defined in terms
of the verbal interaction within a dyad; with
communication ranging from ‘……passive to
active dislike, animosity, disrespect, or destructive
mutual interaction’ (Dillard & Fritz 1995: 12).
Andersson and Pearson (1999) define incivility as
low intensity deviant behaviour which violates
organisational norms for mutual respect. A nega-
tive relationship is one where interactions such as
concealment, manipulation, conflict, disrespect,
disagreement, incivility and/or animosity are fre-
quent. These relationships have been shown to
affect both individuals (Moerbeek & Need 2003;
Rook 1984) and organisations (Dillard & Fritz
1995) adversely, causing stress and turnover
(Leather, Beale, Lawrence & Dickson 1997;
Miner-Rubino 2004). The lack of respect and
courtesy which exemplifies negative relationships
often results in conflict and incivility which can
be both time consuming and stressful to resolve.

Dealing with conflict between workers may
account for as much as 13 percent of a managers’
time, or nearly seven weeks per year, per manager
(Johnson & Indvik 2001).
As well as unpleasant verbal communication,
negative relationships may also be characterised
by poor behaviour (Johnson & Indvik 2001).
Workplace behaviour within negative relation-
ships can include sending a nasty note, under-
mining credibility, sabotaging another’s work,
unfairly withholding or distributing valued
resources or giving ‘dirty looks’. Einarsen (2000)
adds to this list, describing a hostile work envi-
ronment as one where behaviours such as insult-
ing, teasing, offensive remarks or silence and
hostility when entering a conversation take place.
Einarsen describes workers being socially exclud-
ed from their work group and having their work
and efforts devalued. Some individuals are even
subjected to physical abuse, or threats of such
abuse, from co-workers or supervisors (Einarsen
2000). Some behaviour may be interpreted dif-
ferently by different individuals or by those from
other cultural backgrounds (for example, behav-
iour interpreted by one individual as rude or
brusque may be viewed by another as efficient or
no-nonsense) (Johnson & Indvik 2001). Thus, as
workplaces become more diverse, the potential
for misunderstandings and hostility increases
along with the number of negative relationships.
Moerbeek and Need (2003) have published
one of the few studies specifically looking at the
effects of negative relationships in work environ-
ments, providing an alternate conceptualisation

of negative workplace relationships. Rather than
focusing on interactions between individuals,
Moerbeek and Need define negative relationships
in the context of social capital. The people a per-
son knows, their social network, can be either
helpful or harmful to their future career. Moer-
beek and Need term relationships which have a
negative effect ‘sour social capital’, and they use
the term foes to refer to a person’s sour social capi-
333311
Negative relationships in the workplace
Volume 14, Issue 4, September 2008 JJOOUURRNNAALL
OOFF MMAANNAAGGEEMMEENNTT &&
OORRGGAANNIIZZAATTIIOONN
tal, stating that almost anyone in a person’s social
network can become a foe.
Moerbeek and Need (2003) state that the one
major difference between friends and enemies is
that people do not choose to have foes in their
social network; relationships with foes will be
involuntary relationships. When a relationship
degrades or turns sour in a workplace the individ-
uals concerned often have to continue to interact.
The workplace is one of the few environments
where people are ‘forced’ into relationships with
others and, as a result, it is an ideal environment
to examine these negative relationships. Negative
interactions, along with the involuntariness of the
relationship comprise the two aspects of the defi-

nition of negative relationships used in this study.
TThhee ccaauusseess ooff nneeggaattiivvee
Although it is the outcomes, rather than the caus-
es, of negative relationships that are the focus the
current study, some antecedents of these relation-
ships are worth noting. An important study was
conducted by Sias, Heath, Perry, Silva and Fix
(2004). These authors outline five specific causes
of deteriorating relationships; personality, dis-
tracting life events, conflicting expectations, pro-
motion and betrayal. The sheer proximity of
work colleagues is probably the most common
antecedent of negative relationships. People are
seldom in a position to choose who they work
with so, if an individual continually has to inter-
act and work with a person with whom they do
not get along, the potential for increasingly
antagonistic behaviour exists (Dillard & Fritz
1995).
Organisational environments may provide
other elements conducive to the development of
negative relationships. Work demands, particular-
ly in situations where workers are in direct com-
petition with one another, can create situations
where negative relationships are likely to form. In
addition, the demands of electronic communica-
tion, to which many feel obliged to respond
immediately, creates pressures that encourage
workers to behave rudely (Johnson & Indvik
2001). Thus, aspects of work (such as overload
and stress) can cause people to behave in ways
likely to create negative relationships. Downsizing

and rapid organisational growth create situations
where fewer people are doing more work. If
employees are unable to handle the increasing
pressure and are under stress they are less likely to
exercise good judgement in terms of their interac-
tions with colleagues and more likely to view oth-
ers as enemies (Johnson & Indvik 2001).
Combined with other factors, such as personality
or an unhealthy organisational climate, the work-
place can cause a previously benign relationship
to escalate into a hostile one.
Additionally people may obstruct each other
for reasons of jealousy or envy (Cohen-Charash
2001). Envy is common in businesses and organ-
isations, and may be defined as an emotion
occurring when a person begrudges another for
having something that he or she does not have, or
seeing another individual gain advantage and
viewing it with displeasure (Bedeian 1995). The
way that limited resources are distributed creates
an environment where envy is not only possible
but almost inevitable. For example, people may
have to compete for resources or individuals
might have incompatible goals. Envious people
are likely react with hostility and violence towards
the other (Cohen-Charash 2001).
TThhee eeffffeeccttss ooff nneeggaattiivvee
wwoorrkkppllaaccee
It is reasonable to expect that the presence of a
negative relationship will adversely affect an indi-
vidual’s experience of work. If someone is experi-
encing rudeness, undermining and/or incivility in
the workplace, they are likely to be less satisfied,

committed or happy in their job than someone
not having to deal with interpersonal negativity.
JJoobb ssaattiissffaaccttiioonn
Job satisfaction may be defined as a pleasurable,
positive emotional state resulting from the
appraisal of one’s job or job experiences (Levy
2003). Levy states that consequences of satisfac-
333322
Rachel L Morrison
JJOOUURRNNAALL OOFF MMAANNAAGGEEMMEENNTT
&& OORRGGAANNIIZZAATTIIOONN Volume 14, Issue 4,
September 2008
tion include better performance and a reduction
in withdrawal and counterproductive behaviours.
Previous research with a focus on negative behav-
iours including unjust treatment (Donovan,
Drasgow & Munson 1998; Moorman 1991), ver-
bal abuse and bullying (Einarsen 2000), and psy-
chological aggression and harassing (Einarsen &
Raknes 1997) has linked these behaviours with
lowered satisfaction with work, supervision
and/or co-workers. Although it has not been
examined previously, negative relationships are
likely to be differently related to the extrinsic and
intrinsic aspects of job satisfaction. It is probable
that intrinsic satisfaction (satisfaction with
aspects of the job itself, that is positive evalua-
tions of the variety in one’s job or the opportuni-
ty to use one’s abilities) will be less affected by

negative relationships than satisfaction with the
more extrinsic factors, such as ‘immediate boss’ or
‘fellow workers’. That is, people may be able to
separate their satisfaction with the actual activi-
ties, achievements or recognition in their jobs
(intrinsic satisfaction) from their satisfaction with
other aspects of their day to day work life (extrin-
sic satisfaction). Hypotheses a and b focus on the
link between negative relationships and job satis-
faction.
Hypothesis a: The presence of negative relation-
ships within the workplace will be associated
with reduced job satisfaction.
Hypothesis b: The presence of negative relation-
ships within the workplace will be more
strongly associated with extrinsic job satisfac-
tion than intrinsic job satisfaction.
TTuurrnnoovveerr iinntteennttiioonnss
Turnover represents one of the most important
issues for any organisation. The money and time
invested in hiring and training an individual who
leaves the organisation is lost forever. These costs
are considerable, recent research by Waldman,
Kelly, Arora and Smith (2004) within the medical
industry, revealed that the minimum cost of
turnover represented a loss of more than five per-
cent of the total annual operating budget. In addi-
tion, the costs of turnover increase further up the
organisational hierarchy, ie replacing a senior
manager or a surgeon represents a more significant
cost than replacing a secretary or a nurse (Richer,
Blanchard & Vallerand 2002). An American study

by Lozada (1996) found that 90 percent of dis-
missals are the result of poor attitudes, inappropri-
ate behaviour and difficulties with interpersonal
relationships rather than deficient technical skills.
The finding that people are so often dismissed for
reasons other than being unable to do their jobs
highlights the importance of informal interperson-
al relationships at work; being good at your job is
not sufficient if you cannot with people. Thus,
the informal relationships employees have at work
are likely to have a significant effect on turnover;
both on whether employees choose to stay in their
jobs (Campion et al 1993; Mobley 1997; Mowday
et al 1979; Nielsen, Jex & Adams 2000; Warr et al
1979), and on whether organisations want them
to remain or decide to end their employment
(Lozada 1996).
Donovan, Drasgow and Munson (1998)
report that turnover intentions would be
increased with the presence of negative workplace
behaviours. This finding was supported by Moer-
beek and Need (2003), who found that people
who experience a bad atmosphere at work leave
more quickly than people who experience a good
atmosphere. Hypothesis c focuses on the link
between negative relationships and intention to
turnover.
Hypothesis c: The presence of negative relation-
with increased intention to turnover.
OOrrggaanniissaattiioonnaall ccoommmmiittmmeenntt
Porter, Steers, Mowday and Boulian (1974) define
organisational commitment as a strong belief in,

and acceptance of, the organisational goals and
values, a willingness to exert effort on behalf of the
organisation and a desire to remain in the organi-
sation. Consequences of organisational commit-
ment include a reduction in withdrawal
333333
behaviours such as absenteeism (Levy 2003;
Mathieu & Zajac 1990) and intention to leave. In
addition Levy suggests that commitment will
result in a reduction in counterproductive behav-
iours such as theft and sabotage. Another conse-
quence of commitment is improved performance,
although, because of the complexity of perform-
ance, the relationship between performance and
commitment is not strong (Levy 2003). Both
intention to turnover and job satisfaction are
strongly related to organisational commitment
(Campion et al 1993; Mobley 1977; Nielsen, Jex
& Adams 2000; Warr et al 1979). If negative rela-
tionships are associated with lower satisfaction and
increased intention to turnover it is also reason-
able to assume that organisational commitment
will be reduced. Barling and Phillips (1993) found
a link between perceptions unfair treatment and
decreased organisational commitment, and
Leather et al (1997) examined violence at work,

also finding (perhaps unsurprisingly) that those on
the receiving end of these behaviours experienced
lowered commitment to the organisation.
Hypothesis d focuses on the link between negative
relationships and organisational commitment.
Hypothesis d: The presence of negative relation-
with lowered organisational commitment.
CCoohheessiioonn
Odden and Sias (1997) found that climates per-
ceived as being highly cohesive were associated
with larger proportions of collegial and special
peer relationships, ie more friends. The cohesion
dimension in the workplace reflects a general lik-
ing of one’s co-workers, as well as perceptions
that an employee shares a great deal of common
ground with his/her colleagues. Although Odden
and Sias (1997) did not examine a link between
negative relationships and cohesion, the fact that
cohesion reflects friendly relations and liking as
well as cooperation and positive communication,
suggests that the presence of negative relation-
ships would mitigate perceptions of a cohesive
workgroup. Hypothesis e focuses on the link
between negative relationships and cohesion.
Hypothesis e: The presence of negative relation-
with less workgroup cohesion.
In sum, the overall research question posed in
the current study is; to what extent are negative
relationships in the workplace related to job satis-

faction, intention to turnover, organisational
commitment and workgroup cohesion?
MMEETTHHOODDSS
PPaarrttiicciippaannttss
Data were collected from 412 individuals; the
demographic data indicated that the respondents
were very diverse, there was a wide range of ages
and industries and 31% were male. Most respon-
dents were from New Zealand (68%) with 13%
being from the United States. Respondents
ranged in age from 19 years to 64 years, with a
mean age of 35 years. There was a great deal of
variety in the industries/sectors respondents
reported working in. The largest reported sector
was tertiary education (universities and polytech-
nics, n = 92) followed by health care (including
psychology, psychiatry and physiotherapy n = 53)
(refer Table 1). As there were no exclusion criteria
(other than having a job) the variety in responses
to the question asking what job type individuals
had, was almost as varied as the number of
respondents. Respondents were from a wide
range of professions, from medical doctors, to
secretaries, to academics, to police officers.
MMaatteerriiaallss
NNeeggaattiivvee rreellaattiioonnsshhiipp
qquueessttiioonnnnaaiirree
To establish if respondents had negative rela-
tionships in the workplace they were given the
definition below. Respondents were then asked

if there were any people who they work with,
with whom they had a negative relationship
and, if so, how many.
333344
Rachel L Morrison
September 2008
This person is not one of your friends. You do
interact with this person on a fairly regular
basis but you would definitely not continue
the relationship if you did not work here. Your
interactions with this person are characterised
by disrespect, disagreement, dislike, conflict
and/or animosity. You would rather not have
to interact with this person.
As discussed earlier, negative interactions and the
involuntariness of the relationships comprise the
two aspects of the definition of negative relation-
ships. The definition was written by the researcher
to include these two characteristics of negative rela-
tionships, and was based on Kram and Isabella’s
(1985) definitions of organisational peer types.
WWoorrkkggrroouupp ccoohheessiioonn ssccaallee
Cohesion was measured using a nine-item work-
group cohesion scale rated on a 5-point Likert
type scale from strongly disagree to strongly agree
(eg Members of my team are very willing to share

information with other team members about our
work). Items measuring cohesion were selected
from a 54-item Work Group Characteristics
Measure developed by Campion et al (1993).
Only those items from the Work Group Charac-
teristics Measure relating to cohesion were used
in the current study. The items used are termed
process characteristics by Campion et al and are
those relating to (1) social support, (2) workload
sharing and (3) communication/co-operation
within the work group. Campion et al provided
evidence that a composite of these items reliably
predicted effectiveness criteria (productivity and
manager judgements of effectiveness (P < 0.05).
In addition Campion et al found the sub scales
had adequate internal consistency reliability
(� = 0.78, 0.84 and 0.81 respectively).
OOrrggaanniissaattiioonnaall CCoommmmiittmmeenntt
QQuueessttiioonnnnaaiirree ((OOCCQQ))
Originally designed by Mowday, Steers and
Porter (1979), this is a commonly used measure
333355
TTAABBLLEE 11:: DDEEMMOOGGRRAAPPHHIICC
DDAATTAA
VVaarriiaabbllee FFrreeqquueennccyy ((nn)) VVaalliidd

ppeerrcceenntt
SSeexx (6 missing)
Males 127 31.3
Females 279 67.7
AAggee (mean 35.23, SD 11.07) (6 missing)
>20 years 8 2.0
20–29 years 150 37.0
30–39 years 116 28.6
40–49 years 70 17.2
50–59 years 57 14.0
Over 60 years 5 1.2
CCoouunnttrryy ooff oorriiggiinn (5 missing)
New Zealand 277 68.1
USA 52 12.8
United Kingdom 33 8.1
Australia 20 4.9
Canada 5 1.2
Other 20 4.9
Note: Values are presented in percentages excluding
respondents who declined to answer
of employee’s affective attachment to an organisa-
tion (Meyer & Allen 1991). The OCQ is a 15-
item scale, designed to assess acceptance of
organisational values, desire to remain with the
organisation and willingness to exert effort (eg I
am proud to tell others I am part of this organisa-

tion). Items are rated on a 7-point Likert scale
from strongly disagree to strongly agree. Mowday,
Steers and Porter (1979) have provided strong
evidence for the test–retest reliability, convergent
validity, internal consistency, and predictive valid-
ity of the OCQ, finding the overall measure of
organisational commitment to be relatively stable
over time (r = 0.53, 0.63 and 0.75 over two-,
three- and four-month periods), demonstrating
test–retest reliability. Mowday et al calculated
internal consistency using coefficient alpha, item
analysis and factor analysis, finding coefficient
alpha to be consistently high, ranging from 0.82
to 0.93 with a median of 0.90. Item analysis indi-
cated that each item had a positive correlation
with the total score for the OCQ, with the range
being from 0.32 to 0.72. In addition, factor
analysis resulted in a single factor solution. Inter-
nal consistency results suggest the 15 items of the
OCQ are relatively homogeneous with respect to
the underlying attitude construct they measure.
Significant correlations were found between the
OCQ scores and ‘intention to remain with the
organisation’ across several studies, illustrating
convergent validity. In addition, Mowday et al
found the OCQ to correlate significantly with
scores from the Organisational Attachment
Questionnaire (convergent validities across six
diverse samples ranged from 0.63 to 0.74).
JJoobb SSaattiissffaaccttiioonn SSccaallee ((JJSSSS))
The JSS used was one part of a larger battery of
eight scales devised by Warr, Cook and Wall
(1979). Only the 15-item scale relating to job
satisfaction was used for this study. Respondents

indicate how satisfied or dissatisfied they feel with
each of 15 aspects of their job (eg The recognition
you get for good work). Items are rated on a 7-
point Likert type scale from very dissatisfied to
very satisfied. The JSS has been found to be reli-
able, Warr, Cook and Wall (1979) reported that
the test–retest correlation co-efficient of the JSS
was 0.63. Warr et al found, using cluster analysis,
that items clustered together into intrinsic and
extrinsic satisfaction subscales.
MMeeaassuurree ooff iinntteennttiioonn ttoo
ttuurrnnoovveerr
Intention to turnover was measured with three
items theorised to be important precursors to
turnover; thinking of quitting, intention to
search for alternative employment, and intention
to quit (Chang 1999; Mobley 1977; Mobley,
Horner & Hollingsworth 1978) (eg I will proba-
bly quit my job in the next year). Answers to each
item were recorded on a seven-point Likert scale
from strongly disagree to strongly agree.
Table 2 presents the descriptive statistics for
the variables in the current study.
To further test the validity of the measures
and to illustrate the relationships between them,
333366
Rachel L Morrison
September 2008

TTAABBLLEE 22:: DDEESSCCRRIIPPTTIIVVEE
SSTTAATTIISSTTIICCSS
SSccaallee//SSuubb--ssccaallee MMiinniimmuumm
MMaaxxiimmuumm MMeeaann SSttaannddaarrdd
ddeevviiaattiioonn ��
Friendship opportunities 1 5 4.20 0.61 0.82
Friendship prevalence 1 5 3.52 0.89 0.71
Job satisfaction (extrinsic) 1 7 5.29 1.12 0.73
Job satisfaction (intrinsic) 1 7 5.09 1.35 0.80
Cohesion (social support/cooperation) 1 5 3.98 0.63 0.83
Cohesion (workload sharing) 1 5 3.36 0.88 0.81
Organisational Commitment 1 7 4.50 1.21 0.91
Intention to leave scale 1 7 3.81 2.06 0.87
Table 3 shows the correlations between the com-
posite scores of the items remaining in each
measure after confirmatory factor analysis
(CFA), all correlations are significant and in the
expected direction.
PPrroocceedduurree
Ethics approval to conduct the research was
obtained from MUHEC (Massey University
Human Ethics committee). Initially two email
lists, EmoNet (an international interest group of
academics and practitioners working in the field
of emotions in organisations) and IOnet (an
interest group of industrial/organisational psy-
chologists) as well as 60 people employed in pro-
fessional roles in New Zealand and Australia,
were sent an email inviting them to complete an

online questionnaire which included a link to a
data collection site. These groups were selected
for their interest in this research and for their
opportunities to forward information about the
research to other professionals and employees.
The snowball technique was used with all recipi-
ents being encouraged to pass it on to friends and
colleagues. Once at least 400 people had respond-
ed to the questionnaire the data were down-
loaded. As with most online data collection there
is no way of knowing the total number of people
to whom the survey links were sent, so it is not
possible to calculate a response rate.
RREESSUULLTTSS
MMeeaassuurreemmeenntt mmooddeellss ooff tthhee
ssccaalleess
Prior to beginning the factor analysis and subse-
quent partial correlations and SEM, the data
were cleaned; the inversely worded items from
the various scales were reversed, the scales were
saved as separate files in SPSS and missing items
were imputed, using the ‘missing value analysis’
feature of the programme. The percentages of
missing values from each scale are as follows:
Cohesion Scale (4.4%), Intention to Leave ques-
tions (1.2%), Needs Scale (1.3%), Organisational
Commitment Questionnaire (1.3%), Job Satis-
faction Scale (1.4%). Finally the scales were
recombined into a master document and, using
the data from the newly formed master docu-
ment (n = 412), each of the scales was factor
analysed.

Although the scales used were previously vali-
dated (Campion et al 1993; Mobley 1977; Mow-
day et al 1979; Nielsen, Jex & Adams 2000; Warr
et al 1979), the samples used by the original
authors are likely to be somewhat different from
the group of individuals who responded in the
current study. Thus, it is necessary to validate
these original scales for use with this new sample.
This procedure described by Anderson and Gerb-
ing (1988) who recommend the estimation and
respecification of measurement models prior to
333377
TTAABBLLEE 33:: BBIIVVAARRIIAATTEE
CCOORRRREELLAATTIIOONNSS
11 22 33 44 55 66 77
1. Friendship prevalence 0.464**
2. Satisfaction with relationships 0.417** 0.293**
and workplace (extrinsic)
3. Satisfaction with actual job 0.334** 0.161** 0.515**
performed (intrinsic)
4. Organisational commitment 0.376** 0.301** 0.636**
0.596**
5. Social support and cooperation 0.500** 0.302** 0.505**
0.374** 0.394**

(cohesion)
6. Workload sharing (cohesion) 0.153** 0.097* 0.404**
0.222** 0.301** 0.497**
7. Intention to leave -0.217** -0.101* -0.393** -0.467* -
0.545** -0.184** -0.148**
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)
using them in later analyses. Thus, confirmatory
factor analysis was carried in AMOS (Arbuckle
1999) in order to confirm the factor structure of
the measurement models used.
A two stage approach was adopted to model
the data (Anderson & Gerbing 1988). First,
measurement models were constructed using
confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to obtain the
best fitting set of items to represent each measure.
The second stage involved the specification of the
full baseline structural models.
Assessment of model fit was based on multiple
criteria, reflecting statistical, theoretical and prac-
tical considerations (Byrne 2001). Pedhazur
(1982) states that there have been numerous arti-
cles, both criticising existing indices and propos-
ing new ones. Although there is little agreement
about the value of various fit indices, Pedhazur
claims that there does seem to be unanimity that
no single fit index should be relied upon. The
indices used in the current study were (a) the Chi
squared (�2) likelihood ratio statistic, (b) the

Comparative Fit Index (CFI) (Bentler 1990) (c)
the Parsimonious Comparative Fit Index (PCFI)
(Mulaik et al 1989), and (d) the Root Mean
Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA)
(Browne & Cudeck 1993). Each is described
below.
The �2 value divided by the degrees of free-
dom should be below five to indicate good fit
(Hair, Anderson, Tatham & Black 1998). The
CFI is a revised version of the Bentler-Bonnet
(bentler & Bonett 1980) normed fit index that
adjusts for degrees of freedom. It ranges from
zero to 1.00 and provides a measure of complete
covariation in the data; a value > 0.90 indicates a
good fit to the data (Byrne 1994, 2001). The
PCFI is calibrated from the CFI; it weighs the
parsimony of the model against its use of the data
in achieving goodness of fit. Mulaik et al (199)
state that PCFI values are often lower than what
is generally considered acceptable on the basis of
normed indices of fit; goodness of fit indices in
the 0.90s accompanied by PCFI indices in the
0.50s are considered adequate. Byrne (2001)
maintains that the RMSEA is one of the most
informative indices in SEM. The RMSEA is sen-
sitive to the complexity of the model; values less
than 0.05 indicate excellent fit, and values less
than 0.08 represent a good fit.
Where the fit indices did not indicate a good
fit to the model, the modification indices and
expected change statistics related to the covari-
ances for each model were inspected for evidence
of misspecification. Large modification indices

represent misspecified error covariances, which
indicate systematic rather than random measure-
ment error in item responses. A high degree of
overlap in item content can trigger correlated
errors, which occur when two items, although
worded differently, ask the same question (Byrne
2001). Thus, if there was evidence that the model
was misspecified, the ‘problem’ items (ie those
that had overlapping content with other items)
were first examined to ascertain if there was a
substantive justification for respecification and, if
there was, the items were either removed in a post
hoc analysis, or respecified with the overlapping
parameter being freely estimated. For example,
the parameter in the Organisational Commit-
ment Questionnaire exhibiting the highest degree
of misfit represented correlated error between
items 10 (I am extremely glad that I chose this
organisation to work for over others I was consider-
ing at the time) and 15 (Deciding to work for this
organisation was a definite mistake on my part (R)).
Clearly there is a substantive rationale for allow-
ing relationship between these two items to be
freely estimated. The alpha levels and indices of
fit for the measurement models used in the cur-
rent study are presented in Table 4. All indices
indicate good fit of the data to the models. The
consistency reliability (coefficient a) of all the
scales was acceptable, ranging from 0.73 (job sat-
isfaction subscale) to 0.91 (organisational com-
mitment questionnaire) (refer Table 4).
The OCQ had only one factor, supporting
Mowday et al’s (1979) original factor analysis
(rotated to Kaiser varimax solution) which also
resulted in a single factor solution and suggested

333388
Rachel L Morrison
September 2008
the 15 items of the Organisational Commitment
Questionnaire are relatively homogeneous with
respect to the underlying attitude construct they
measure. Both the cohesion scale and the satisfac-
tion scale were found to have two distinct factors.
two factors in the satisfaction scale were, (1) satis-
faction with interpersonal interactions and work-
place, and (2) satisfaction with aspects of actual
job performed; variety/fulfilment. The two satis-
faction factors relate closely to the ‘extrinsic satis-
faction’ and ‘intrinsic satisfaction’ clusters of
items, identified by Warr et al (1979). The two
cohesion factors were, (1) social support and
cooperation and (2) workload sharing. The work-
load sharing factor is identical to that described
by Campion et al (1993), while the remaining
items loaded together as a single factor, combin-
ing Campion’s ‘social support’ and ‘communica-
tion/co-operation’ factors.
PPrreevvaalleennccee ooff nneeggaattiivvee
The number of negative relationships respon-
dents reported having is presented below in Table
5. Fifty-six percent of respondents reported hav-

ing at least one negative relationship.
RReellaattiioonnsshhiipp wwiitthh
oorrggaanniissaattiioonnaall
vvaarriiaabblleess
To assess whether there were mean differences in
the variables of interest in terms of the presence
of negative workplace relationships, a MANOVA
was conducted using negative relationships as the
independent variable and all the organisational
outcome variables as dependent variables. The
data were divided into those who had no negative
relationships (n = 181) and those who had at least
one (n = 231) to perform the MANOVA. Justifi-
cation for grouping the data in this way is that (a)
it is the presence of negative relationships, rather
than the number of ‘enemies’ an individual has,
that is the variable of interest in this study and
(b) there are some groups with very few cases
(70% of respondents have either one negative
relationship or none).
The results of the MANOVA showed a statis-
tically significant difference in terms of the pres-
ence of negative relationships on the combined
dependent variables: F (6, 405) = 10.56, P <
0.001; Wilk’s Lambda = 0.865; partial Eta
squared = 0.135. To control for the increase in
the family-wise Type I error, a Bonferroni correc-
tion was used, and the significance level was
adjusted to P = 0.008.
Table 6 shows the F values, the significance
levels and partial Eta squared values (a measure of
effect size). There was support for hypothesis a; a

significant difference was found between those
who did and did not have at least one negative
relationship at work in terms of their extrinsic F
(1, 410) = 55.42, P < 0.008 and intrinsic F (1,
410) = 7.97, P < 0.008 job satisfaction scores.
The partial Eta squared values indicate that the
333399
TTAABBLLEE 44:: FFIITT IINNDDIICCEESS FFOORR
TTHHEE MMEEAASSUURREEMMEENNTT
MMOODDEELLSS ((NN == 441122))
SSccaallee NNuummbbeerr ooff ffaaccttoorrss ��22//ddff
CCFFII PPCCFFII RRMMSSEEAA
Job satisfaction scale 2 2.53 0.97 0.66 0.06
Cohesion Scale 2 3.15 0.97 0.66 0.07
Organisational Commitment Questionnaire 1 2.53 0.96 0.79
0.06
Intention to Turnover 1
Note: The measurement model for Intention to Turnover was not
tested here as it has only three items and therefore zero
degrees of freedom
TTAABBLLEE 55:: PPRREEVVAALLEENNCCEE OOFF
NNEEGGAATTIIVVEE RREELLAATTIIOONNSSHHIIPPSS
NNeeggaattiivvee rreellaattiioonnsshhiippss 00 11 22 33 44 55

66 77 88++
NNuummbbeerr ooff rreessppoonnddeennttss 181 106 54 34 10
11 3 2 11
relationship between having negative relation-
ships is weaker for intrinsic satisfaction than
extrinsic satisfaction (0.120 and 0.017 respective-
ly), strongly supporting hypothesis b. It is worth
noting that intrinsic job satisfaction had the
weakest relationship with negative relationships,
only barely achieving significance at the 0.008
level. As expected, the relationship between nega-
tive relationships and the remaining dependent
variables were significant, P < 0.008, supporting
hypotheses c–e (see Table 6). These findings indi-
cate that those with at least one negative relation-
ship at work are significantly less satisfied, report
less organisational commitment, are part of less
cohesive workgroups and are significantly more
likely to be planning to leave their job. Of the
variables measured, negative relationships are
most strongly associated with lowered satisfaction
with the work environment (extrinsic job satisfac-
tion), and reduced organisational commitment.
DDIISSCCUUSSSSIIOONN
The research question asked: to what extent are
negative relationships in the workplace related to
job satisfaction, intention to turnover, organisa-
tional commitment and workgroup cohesion?
The results supported hypotheses a–e and indi-
cated that those with at least one negative rela-
tionship at work were significantly less satisfied,

reported less organisational commitment, were
part of less cohesive workgroups and were signifi-
cantly more likely to be planning to leave their
job. Further, extrinsic job satisfaction is more
closely related to the presence of negative rela-
tionships than intrinsic job satisfaction. The
results also lend support to the construct validity
of the measure of negative relationships created
for, and used in, this study. The frequency of neg-
ative relationships (over half of the respondents in
this study had at least one, and many had several)
means that examining how negative relationships
form, looking at the impact of negative relation-
ships and determining how they might be man-
aged are certainly areas that warrant attention
within workplaces.
Stress is another likely outcome of negative
workplace relationships. Although not directly
measured in the current study this outcome bears
some discussion as, in both New Zealand and
Australia, there is legislation around stress in the
workplace. In New Zealand the Health and Safe-
ty in Employment Amendment Act 2002 came
into force on the 5 May 2003 (Amendment to
the Health and Safety in Employment Act 2002).
In Australia the government authorities hold that
that stress is caused by work and, as such, is a
management responsibility and is part of the duty
of care which is fundamental to every OHS regu-
lation. Thus, employers have a duty of care to
provide a healthy and safe work environment
where employees are free from harm. One pur-
pose of the HASE Act includes confirming that
harm can be caused by work-related stress. Where

an employee alleges workplace bullying (an
extreme form of negative workplace relationship)
there may be a claim that the resulting stress is
334400
Rachel L Morrison
September 2008
TTAABBLLEE 66:: UUNNIIVVAARRIIAATTEE FF
TTEESSTTSS CCOOMMPPAARRIINNGG
RREESSPPOONNDDEENNTTSS WWIITTHH AANNDD
WWIITTHHOOUUTT NNEEGGAATTIIVVEE
RREELLAATTIIOONNSSHHIIPPSS AATT
WWOORRKK
DDeeppeennddeenntt VVaarriiaabbllee ddff FF SSiigg..
PPaarrttiiaall EEttaa SSqquuaarreedd
Extrinsic job satisfaction 1 55.792 0.0000 0.120
Intrinsic job Satisfaction 1 7.278 0.0070 0.017
Organisational commitment 1 32.739 0.0000 0.074
Cohesion (social support) 1 10.633 0.0010 0.025
Cohesion (workload sharing) 1 14.416 0.0000 0.034
Intention to leave 1 8.328 0.0040 0.020
The F tests the effect of the presence of negative relationships
at work. This test is based on the linearly independent
pairwise comparisons among the estimated marginal means.
workplace stress and is therefore actionable under

the amended HASE Act (although in the legisla-
tion there is no recognition of ‘workplace bully-
ing’ per se). In spite of legislation such as this,
which is aimed at protecting employees, it is per-
haps unrealistic to think that the day to day inter-
actions between co-workers would be impacted
by government legislation. Negative relationships
will still occur; however the Act may encourage
employers to take an active role in intervening or
managing these relationships.
Although every situation will be different, in
Western cultures accepted strategies used to min-
imise the impact of negative relationships include
engaging in open discussion of the parties’ inter-
ests and synthesising multiple issues (whatever
they may be) with the aim of achieving an inte-
grative outcome (Tinsleya & Brett 2001). Inter-
estingly these authors found that managers from
a collectivist culture (Hong Kong) were more
likely to rely on traditionally Chinese norms of
concern for collective interests and concern for
authority and to involve higher management in
conflict resolution. Whatever the strategy, given
the current legislative framework within Australa-
sia, the onus is on managers to engage in conflict
resolution where appropriate.
As discussed previously, turnover is a particu-
larly important area of organisational functioning
that can be affected by workplace relationships. If
negative relationships cause people to leave, and
over half of the respondents had at least one neg-
ative relationship, the importance of these rela-
tionships should not be underestimated.
Targeting interventions or resolution strategies

towards workgroups or dyads where negative
interactions such as concealment, manipulation,
conflict, disrespect, disagreement and/or animosi-
ty are frequent may be a way to improve job satis-
faction and commitment.
The findings in the current study suggest that
the effect of enemies on an individual’s experi-
ence of work can be profound; both in terms of
their subjective sense of well-being and in terms
of measurable organisational outcomes. The
results also indicated that some organisational
outcomes are more strongly related to negative
relationships at work than others. It is perhaps
not surprising that ‘extrinsic satisfaction’
(employees’ satisfaction with their work environ-
ment and colleagues) is more profoundly affected
by enemies than satisfaction with the work itself
(intrinsic satisfaction). It makes intuitive sense
that the intrinsic rewards individuals get from the
work they do will be relatively less impacted by
poor collegial relationships, and this notion has
been confirmed by the current study. Organisa-
tional commitment is variable that has a strong
affective or emotional component, and commit-
ment too, is strongly related to the presence of
negative relationships at work.
LLiimmiittaattiioonnss ooff tthhee ssttuuddyy aanndd
ddiirreeccttiioonnss ffoorr ffuuttuurree rreesseeaarrcchh
The nature of the data analysis in the current
study means that causality not clear, ie are dissat-
isfied individuals more likely to engage in nega-
tive behaviours towards others, creating negative
relationships or do negative relationships reduce

job satisfaction? Perhaps many of the respondents
in the current study were, themselves, engaging
in negative behaviours against their colleagues!
Although this question can not be answered with
certainty, it seems reasonable to propose that fre-
quently it is the negative relationship (however it
has arisen) that causes dissatisfaction and inten-
tion to turnover and not the other way around.
This may be a worthwhile direction for future
research in this area.
The presence of negative relationships in the
current study was assessed by giving respondents
a definition of these relationships and asking that
respondents indicate how many (if any) they had
at work. To better tap into the ‘negative work-
place relationship’ construct it would be worth-
while to develop and test a more complex scale,
composed of several items based on existing defi-
nitions of negative relationships (ie concealment,
manipulation, conflict, disrespect, disagreement,
incivility and/or animosity).
334411
It is worth noting that eleven respondents
reported having eight or more negative relation-
ships in the workplace. If an individual has a

poor relationship with this many people at work
it may indicate something about them rather than
their colleagues or their workplace. For this rea-
son the MANOVA described in this study was
run again, removing those who reported more
than seven negative relationships. The effect sizes
were largely unchanged. In spite of this, it may be
interesting in the future to focus on individuals
who report engaging in large numbers of negative
relationships with their colleagues with a view to
perhaps identifying characteristics or perceptions
of these individuals. In addition, the possible
organisational outcomes of having these people in
a workplace could be examined.
This study suggests that negative relationships
in the workplace are very common, and their
impact profound. Delving more deeply into how
to avert the formation of negative relationships
and, failing that, how to address issues arising
from them would be an area which might pro-
vide strategies and interventions to reduce both
their impact and frequency. The finding that
intrinsic and extrinsic satisfaction are differently
related to negative relationships also bears further
research. Although outside the scope of the cur-
rent study, it may be worth investigating whether
those who are very satisfied with the intrinsic
aspects of their jobs (eg the ‘work itself ’) are
somewhat ‘buffered’ and therefore less impacted
by the presence of a negative relationship or nega-
tive interactions in the workplace.
The impact of negative relationships on per-
formance or productivity was not directly
addressed. Although there is little research to date

looking at the effects of negative relationships on
productivity or performance it seems likely that
they would interfere with co-operation and com-
munication in work groups, and direct attention
and energy away from the task at hand. The fact
that Campion et al (1993) found that a compos-
ite of the cohesion items used in the current
study predicted both productivity and manager
judgements of effectiveness, and that negative
relationships are associated with lower cohesion
scores, does suggest that negative relationships
will indeed have a negative impact on perform-
ance at work. This is also an area that warrants
further investigation.
AACCKKNNOOWWLLEEDDGGEEMMEENNTTSS
The author appreciates and acknowledges the
assistance of Professor Stuart Carr (Massey Uni-
versity), Dr Terry Nolan (AUT University), Dr
Richard Fletcher (Massey University) and Profes-
sor Michael O’Driscoll (Waikato University) who
provided important insights, suggestions and
assistance. Thanks also to the reviewers, the paper
was much improved by the review process.
An early version of part of this paper was pre-
sented at the joint APS and NZPS Psychological
Society conference, September 2006.
RReeffeerreenncceess
Allen NJ and Meyer JP (1990) The measurement
and antecedents of affective, continuance and
normative commitment to the organization.
Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63(1): 1–19.

Allen TD, McManus SE and Russell JEA (1999)
Newcomer socialization and stress: Formal peer
relationships as a source of support. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 54(3): 453–470.
Amendment to the Health and Safety in
Employment Act (2002) Department of Labour,
New Zealand.
Anderson JC and Gerbing DW (1988) Structural
equation modelling in practice: A review and
recommended two-step approach. Psychological
Bulletin, 103: 411–423.
Andersson LM and Pearson CM (1999) Tit-for-tat?
The spiraling effect of incivility in the workplace.
Academy of Management Review, 24(3): 452–471.
Arbuckle JL (1999) Amos 4.0 [Computer software].
Chicago: Smallwaters.
Barling J and Phillips M (1993) Interactional,
formal, and distributive justice in the workplace:
An exploratory study. Journal of Psychology, 127:
649–656.
Baron RA (1989) Personality and organizational
conflict: Effects of the Type A behavior pattern
and self monitoring. Organizational Behavior and
Human Decision Processes, 44: 281–296.
334422
Rachel L Morrison

September 2008
Baron RA and Neuman JH (1996) Workplace
violence and workplace aggression: Evidence on
their relative frequency and potential causes.
Aggressive Behavior, 22: 161–173.
Bedeian AG (1995) Workplace envy. Organizational
Dynamics, 23(4).
Bentler PM (1990) Comparative fit indices in
structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107:
238–246.
Bentler PM and Bonett DG (1980) Significance
tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of
covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88:
588–606.
Blau G and Boal K (1989) Using job involvement
and organizational commitment interactively to
predict turnover. Journal of Management, 15(1):
115–127.
Bluedorn AC (1982) A unified model of turnover
from organizations. Human Relations, 35:
135–153.
Bowling NA., Beehr TA, Johnson AL, Semmer NK,
Hendricks EA and Webster HA (2004) Explaining
potential antecedents of workplace social support:
Reciprocity or attractiveness? Journal of

Occupational Health Psychology, 9(4): 339–350.
Browne MW and Cudeck R (1993) Alternative
ways of assessing model fit. In Bollen KA and
Long JS (Eds) Testing Structural Equation Models
(pp. 445–455) Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Buunk BP, Doosje BJ, Liesbeth G, Jans JM and
Hopstaken LEM (1993) Perceived reciprocity,
social support, and stress at work: The role of
exchange and communal orientation. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, (65): 801–811.
Byrne BM (1994) Burnout: Testing for the validity,
replication, and invariance of causal structure
across elementary, intermediate and secondary
teachers. American Educational Research Journal,
31(3): 645–673.
Byrne B M (2001) Structural equation modeling
with AMOS. Basic concepts, applications and
programming. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Inc.
Campion MA, Medsker GJ and Higgs AC (1993)
Relations between work group characteristics and
effectiveness: Implications for designing effective
work groups. Personnel Psychology, 46(4): 823–850.
Chang E (1999) Career commitment as a complex
moderator of organizational commitment and
turnover intention. Human Relations, 52(10):
1257–1277.
Cohen-Charash Y (2001) Envy at work: An
exploratory examination of antecedents and

outcomes. University of California Press,
Berkeley CA.
Cohen A (1993) Organizational commitment and
turnover: A metaanalysis. Academy of
Management Journal, 36(5): 1140–1157.
Cortina LM, Magley VJ, Williams JH and
Langhout RD (2001) Incivility in the
Workplace: Incidence and Impact. Journal of
Occupational Health Psychology, 6(1): 64–80.
Dillard JP and Fritz J (1995) Interpersonal
relationships and organizational performance.
Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the
Western Speech Communication Association,
Portland OR.
Donovan MA, Drasgow F and Munson LJ (1998)
The Perceptions of Fair Interpersonal Treatment
Scale: Development and validation of a measure
of interpersonal treatment in the workplace.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 83: 683–692.
Einarsen S (2000) Harassment and bullying at
work. A review of the scandinavian approach
Aggression and Violent Behavior, 5(4): 379–401.
Einarsen S and Raknes BI (1997) Harassment in
the workplace and the victimization of men.
Violence and Victims, 12: 247–263.
Folger R and Baron RA (1996) Violence and
Hostility at Work: A Model of Reactions to
Perceived Injustice. In VanderBos GR and Bulatao

Work 1.jpegWork 2.jpegWork 3.jpegWork 4.jpegWork.docx

Work 1.jpegWork 2.jpegWork 3.jpegWork 4.jpegWork.docx

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Ähnlich wie Work 1.jpegWork 2.jpegWork 3.jpegWork 4.jpegWork.docx

Ähnlich wie Work 1.jpegWork 2.jpegWork 3.jpegWork 4.jpegWork.docx (9)

Mehr von ambersalomon88660

Mehr von ambersalomon88660 (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Work 1.jpegWork 2.jpegWork 3.jpegWork 4.jpegWork.docx