Journal of Applied Psychology

Transcription

1 Journal of Applied Psychology Positive and Negative Workplace Relationships, Social, and Vijaya Venkataramani, Giuseppe (Joe) Labianca, and Travis Grosser Online First Publication, August 5, doi: /a CITATION Venkataramani, V., Labianca, G. (J.), & Grosser, T. (2013, August 5). Positive and Negative Workplace Relationships, Social, and. Journal of Applied Psychology. Advance online publication. doi: /a

2 Journal of Applied Psychology 2013 American Psychological Association 2013, Vol. 98, No. 6, /13/$12.00 DOI: /a Positive and Negative Workplace Relationships, Social, and Vijaya Venkataramani University of Maryland Giuseppe (Joe) Labianca and Travis Grosser University of Kentucky We examine how employees centrality in the networks of positively valenced ties (e.g., friendship, advice) and negatively valenced ties (e.g., avoidance) at work interact to affect these employees organizational attachment. Using 2 different samples (154 employees in a division of a food and animal science organization and 144 employees in a product development firm), we found that employees centrality in positive and negative tie networks at work were related to their organizational attachment indirectly via their impact on employees satisfaction with their workplace relationships. Further, interaction results in both studies suggest that the effect of employees centrality in positive tie networks on their satisfaction with workplace social relationships was stronger when employees had more negative relationships but was irrelevant when employees had fewer negative ties. Implications for theory and practice are discussed. Keywords: negative relationships, network centrality, work attitudes, organizational attachment Informal workplace social networks influence a broad range of important outcomes for employees, including their performance and career progression (e.g., Brass, 1984; Seibert, Kraimer, & Liden, 2001). However, the effect of such networks on employees organizational attachment and withdrawal is still an understudied area. Given that employee attachment/withdrawal has enormous cost and performance implications for organizations (Hom & Xiao, 2011) it is important to understand how employees social networks may affect these outcomes. We adopt a social ledger approach (Labianca & Brass, 2006) to examine this relationship and to shed light on its intervening processes and boundary conditions. This approach suggests that each employee s network of personal relationships should be viewed as being similar to a financial ledger that documents financial assets and liabilities. An individual s social ledger comprises both their positive and negative social ties (recurring social ties accompanied by positive or negative affect and an intention to help or harm the other), which provide not only social capital but also social liabilities (Labianca & Brass, 2006). This approach further suggests that because these positive and negative ties may clash with or serve to offset the effects of each other in influencing employee outcomes, they must be studied together. However, most network research has almost exclusively focused on the social Vijaya Venkataramani, Robert H. Smith School of Business, University of Maryland; Giuseppe (Joe) Labianca, LINKS Center for Social Network Analysis, Gatton College of Business and Economics, University of Kentucky; Travis Grosser, Gatton College of Business and Economics, University of Kentucky. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Vijaya Venkataramani, Robert H. Smith School of Business, University of Maryland, 4544, Van Munching Hall, College Park, MD vvenkata@rhsmith.umd.edu capital benefits associated with positive social ties, largely ignoring individuals negative ties (e.g., Adler & Kwon, 2002; Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998; Payne, Moore, Griffis, & Autry, 2011). We argue that understanding employees organizational attachment or withdrawal solely based on the benefits offered by their embeddedness in positive interaction networks (e.g., Mossholder, Settoon, & Henagan, 2005), without also examining the social liabilities associated with having negative ties, will only provide an incomplete (and possibly inaccurate) picture of the social reality of their workplaces. For example, as research on the positivity bias (e.g., Markus & Zajonc, 1985; Matlin & Stang, 1978) has suggested, people generally expect their interactions and relationships with coworkers to be polite, friendly, or neutral and not to be negative or antagonistic; as a result, positive interactions simply confirm such expectations and thus might not always be very salient by themselves in strongly affecting work attitudes. However, when individuals also experience expectation-disconfirming information in the form of negative interactions (such as being excluded or avoided by others in the workplace; Labianca, Brass, & Gray, 1998), the diagnosticity of positive ties in providing cues regarding their overall social standing may be higher. Along these lines, we examine how employees centrality in positive networks (i.e., the extent to which they are sought after by others for ties such as advice and friendship; Kilduff & Krackhardt, 1994) and their negative interactions at work may impact their organizational attachment, indicated by their job satisfaction, affective commitment, and turnover intentions. Specifically, we propose that employees positive and negative ties indirectly impact these outcomes via a more proximal mechanism employees satisfaction with their workplace relationships. We also propose that individuals centrality in positive and negative networks combine interactively such that positive network centrality is more salient in affecting attitudes especially when these individuals have more negative ties. Figure 1 illustrates our model. 1

3 2 VENKATARAMANI, LABIANCA, AND GROSSER Centrality in Negative Tie Network Centrality in Voluntary Positive Tie Networks + with Workplace + Relationships + Job Affective Commitment Turnover Intentions Theory and Hypotheses Figure 1. The nature of employees social environments at work has been shown to significantly affect their organizational attachment and withdrawal (e.g., Beehr, 1986; Chiaburu & Harrison, 2008; Pollock, Whitbred, & Contractor, 2000). As such, central positions held by individuals in positive interaction networks such as friendship or advice giving, which indicate the extent to which they are valued and respected by coworkers, should be especially important in affecting their attachment-related attitudes (e.g., Kahn, 1998). However, the limited empirical evidence linking employees network positions to these attitudes has been equivocal at best (see Brass, 2012, for a review). For example, Mossholder et al. (2005) found that employees centrality in communication networks was negatively related to turnover but was unrelated to job satisfaction. Although early lab studies of small groups of people (e.g., Shaw, 1964) found that central actors were more satisfied, Brass (1981) found no relationship between employee centrality and job satisfaction. One important reason for these inconsistent results could be the sole focus of these past studies on positively valenced relationships without examining them in the context of negative ties that individuals might also have. As the social ledger argument suggests, in the absence of many negative ties in one s network, a person s positive ties are not as diagnostic and useful as cues around which to form judgments about others and about one s status within the group (Fiske, 1980; Reeder & Spores, 1983; Skowronski & Carlston, 1989). Thus, it might be more accurate to study the impact of such positive ties in the context of one s negative relationships. Relatedly, the types of networks (e.g., required task ties, friendship, advice ties, communication ties) that these studies examined, might also explain these inconsistent findings. For example, communication networks might confound task-related interactions with more discretionary social interactions like friendship or advice seeking, which could have different effects on work attitudes. Unlike work-related interactions that are mandated by workflow requirements, voluntary ties such as friendship or advice are based on genuine liking and/or respect for the other person, and might provide a more accurate indicator of one s value to the organization, and hence better predict work attitudes related to attachment and withdrawal. A final reason for the mixed findings in prior research could also be that network positions are distal predictors of broad work attitudes and may be strongly related to them only via intervening processes. This in turn indicates the need for Conceptual model. examining more proximal intervening mechanisms related to social ties at work that may link network positions with work attitudes. In addressing all these issues together, we examine how employees centrality in the networks of positively valenced voluntary interactions at work (such as friendship and advice), along with their negative interactions (characterized by interpersonal avoidance or exclusion) might impact their organizational attachment related work attitudes through their effects on a proximal intervening mechanism, employees general satisfaction with workplace relationships. Positive and Negative Network Ties at Work Employees are involved in various types of informal dyadic relationships with others at work (e.g., friend, advisor, adversary). Whereas negatively valenced ties between two individuals at work are characterized by animosity, exclusion or avoidance of the other party, positive ties are characterized by liking and respect, where one individual is motivated to seek out the other for resources including friendship and general advice (Krackhardt, 1992). Although prior network research has tended to focus predominantly on the benefits of having positive ties for the concerned individuals, recent research has begun to rectify this serious omission by also examining negative ties (e.g., Baldwin, Bedell, & Johnson, 1997; Casciaro & Lobo, 2008; Chua, Ingram, & Morris, 2008; Sparrowe, Liden, Wayne, & Kraimer, 2001; Venkataramani & Dalal, 2007) from a social ledger perspective. The social ledger model (Labianca & Brass, 2006) argues that individuals generally have both types of ties in the workplace, which may serve to highlight or contrast the effects of each other in influencing their attitudes and behaviors, and that they must be studied in combination in order to accurately reflect the social reality of their workplace. We extend this argument to suggest that when employees experience negative ties, they are motivated to more comprehensively evaluate their social environment and assess their overall social standing (Peeters & Czapinski, 1990) by more carefully considering their positive ties, in turn also increasing the salience of these positive ties in affecting their attitudes and outcomes. To study this, we examine employees positions (i.e., centrality) in positive and negative social networks together to understand how they may impact their organizational attachment. Further, we examine the intervening mechanism through which such network positions impact attachment. Specifically, we argue

4 POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE WORKPLACE TIES 3 that the effects of individuals positions in positive and negative networks may be transmitted to broad outcomes such as attachment via more proximal, but less narrow mechanisms such as their general satisfaction with social relationships, an important factor affecting their experience at work (Ones & Viswesvaran, 1996). With Social Relationships Social exchange theory (Blau, 1964) and the relational systems perspective (e.g., Kahn, 1998) suggest that employees satisfaction with the relational systems in which they are embedded acts as a strong buffer against shocks and forces that may erode organizational attachment (Burt, 2001) and motivate employees to withdraw (Mitchell & Lee, 2001). with social relationships indicates the extent to which employees perceive that they are treated with liking, friendliness, and warmth by their coworkers (Cammann, Fichman, Jenkins, & Klesh, 1983) and are accorded due respect and regard in their professional and social interactions with each other. Thus, it captures individuals overall feelings of contentment with both the positive affective and instrumental aspects of workplace relationships (Cammann, Fichman, Jenkins, & Klesh, 1979; Seashore, Lawler, Mirvis, & Cammann, 1982). An employee s positions in the network of informal interactions at work, such as friendship, advice, or animosity, can be important determinants of his or her social satisfaction because they provide strong cues of one s overall value and importance to the organization and to other organizational members. In the following sections, we describe how individuals positions in networks of positive and negative interactions are related to their social satisfaction. Centrality in positive tie networks. An individual s indegree centrality in positive networks captures the extent to which others in the network seek out this person for voluntary positive ties such as friendship and advice (Freeman, 1979). Occupying a central network position in the workgroup means the person is bestowed greater attention and recognition by other workgroup members and is valued and respected for their expertise and/or personal characteristics. Due to being the object (or target) of network ties from several other members, central positions are also associated with greater social prestige (Anderson, John, Keltner, & Kring, 2001; Wasserman & Faust, 1994) and voice in workgroup decisions (e.g., Venkataramani & Tangirala, 2010). Employees occupying such central positions are also more likely to receive task and socioemotional support, as well as discretionary help from others (Venkataramani & Dalal, 2007). Such interactions are likely to make these individuals feel that their coworkers are friendly and supportive, and in turn feel valued, respected, and included in important workgroup activities. All this makes them more likely to evaluate their workplace social relationships as being of higher quality, and to be more satisfied with them. Thus, Hypothesis 1. Employees centrality in the positive ties network will be positively related to their satisfaction with their workplace relationships. Centrality in negative networks. Negative ties are characterized by animosity and/or avoidance of at least one of the individuals in the dyad by another (Labianca & Brass, 2006; Venkataramani & Dalal, 2007). In-degree centrality in the negative network indicates the extent to which an individual is the target of negative ties from several other workgroup members. In such situations, the individual is likely to perceive being socially excluded and ostracized (e.g., Grosser, Sterling, Scott, & Labianca, 2010). Prior research suggests that these negative ties often lead to personalizing conflict and subsequent attempts to harm the other party both overtly and surreptitiously (e.g., Pondy, 1967; Pruitt & Rubin, 1986). Coworkers dislike for and/or preference to avoid a focal employee may be manifested in their behaving rudely toward them, engaging in negative gossip about the person, deliberately hindering or interfering in their work, and refusing to help them. This is because, negative relationships lack the empathy and psychological proximity found in positive ties, and thus remove any social constraints on engaging in such behaviors (Brass, Butterfield, & Skaggs, 1998). Having many incoming negative ties is also likely to cut off individuals access to important information that is making its way around the workgroup (Ellwardt, Labianca, & Wittek, 2012), as well as potentially necessary social support. Working with people that prefer to avoid them might be annoying and burdensome to employees, leading to frustration with these coworkers (Labianca & Brass, 2006). Such experiences have also been shown to have a disproportionately large negative effect on one s mood and stress levels (Rook, 1984; Skowronski & Carlston, 1989; Taylor, 1991), which affect one s attitudes about work and coworkers. In all, these arguments suggest that an employee experiencing incoming negative ties is likely to feel disrespected and undervalued by his or her coworkers. In turn, Hypothesis 2. Employees in-degree centrality in negative networks will be negatively related to their satisfaction with their workplace relationships. Interactive Effects of Positive and Negative Relationships In the previous sections, we discussed how being central in positive or negative networks might, separately, influence employees satisfaction with their relationships at work. We now turn to discussing how they may combine interactively in predicting social satisfaction. We propose that centrality in positive networks, though important, may not be as salient in predicting social satisfaction when one has few or no negative relationships. However, when employees have more incoming negative ties, the extent to which these individuals are also sought after as friends and advisors may be more salient as a determinant of their social satisfaction. Prior research suggests that there tends to be a general positivity bias in people s expectations regarding their social relationships, often referred to as the Pollyanna principle (e.g., Markus & Zajonc, 1985; Matlin & Stang, 1978). People generally expect their interactions and relationships with coworkers to be polite, friendly or neutral and not to be negative or antagonistic. In situations where individuals have few or no incoming negative ties from coworkers, their positive interactions with workgroup members (as indicated by their positive network centrality) may not be very salient in predicting their social satisfaction, because such interactions would simply confirm their prior positive expectations (e.g., Fiske, 1980). That is, if everyone seems to be friendly toward employees in the workplace, then employees don t necessarily interpret this as a very positive environment or that the relation-

5 4 VENKATARAMANI, LABIANCA, AND GROSSER ships are particularly strong because it is what is generally expected. Their normally positive interactions would not provide enough unambiguous or diagnostic information to be able to strongly influence their social satisfaction (e.g., Reeder & Spores, 1983). However, this positivity bias might weaken in the presence of more negative relationships. When individuals have more negative relationships with coworkers, they might experience negative moods, emotions and other adverse outcomes such as social ostracism, hindrance, and undermining (e.g., Aquino & Lamertz, 2004; Venkataramani & Dalal, 2007). Such negative experiences are not common, and therefore, are expectation-disconfirming (Taylor, 1991). As a result, individuals engage in sense-making to try and better understand their social environment as well as to comprehensively process available cues regarding their overall social standing in the group (Peeters & Czapinski, 1990; Pickett & Gardner, 2005). Further, individuals have a strong need to feel included and respected by others around them (e.g., Baumeister & Leary, 1995). If employees perceive that, irrespective of their negative interactions, they are still valued as friends and respected as advisors by other colleagues as indicated by their centrality in positive networks, such positive ties can be very diagnostic in providing information regarding their overall social status in the group and thus reduce any frustration or dissatisfaction they may experience. In other words, the impact of holding central positions in positive tie networks on employees satisfaction with social relationships will be stronger when they also have more incoming negative relationships at work. Thus: Hypothesis 3. Employees centrality in positive networks will interact with in-degree centrality in negative networks such that positive centrality will be more strongly related to their satisfaction with workplace relationships as their negative centrality increases. With Workplace Relationships and An important goal for organizations is to enhance their employees overall job experience that helps maintain their psychological attachment with the organization. In this section, we extend our previous arguments by investigating whether the benefits and liabilities of centrality in positive networks and negative networks, respectively, can extend to their organizational attachment indicated by their job satisfaction, affective commitment and turnover intentions through their effects on employees satisfaction with their workplace relationships. Job satisfaction has been defined as a psychological state represented by cognitive and affective indicators resulting from the evaluation of one s job experiences (Brief & Weiss, 2002). Affective commitment indicates the extent to which employees value, feel attached to, and included in the organization (Meyer & Allen, 1991). Intentions to turnover indicate employees evaluation regarding whether to stay with the organization. Thus, these three constructs are fundamental evaluations of one s job experiences and attachment with one s organization and share strong conceptual and empirical commonalities (e.g., Hulin, 1991; Mathieu & Zajac, 1990). In line with these overlaps, some scholars (e.g., Harrison, Newman, & Roth, 2006; Rosen, Levy, & Hall, 2006) have suggested combining satisfaction and affective commitment into an overall job attitude measure. Similarly, others have conceptualized affective commitment and turnover intentions together as a measure of attachment (e.g., Gonzalez & DeNisi, 2009). Lee and Mitchell (1994) have also conceptualized these constructs together in their view of organizational attachment. The quality of interpersonal relationships experienced by employees is an important determinant of their overall attachment with their organizations (e.g., Crosby, 1982). People have an inherent need to form satisfying social relationships with others around them (Baumeister & Leary, 1995). When employees are satisfied with the quality of their relationships with coworkers, prior research suggests that they are also more satisfied with their overall job experience (e.g., Camman et al., 1983; Ng & Sorensen, 2008) and reciprocate by being more affectively attached to the organization (Mathieu & Zajac, 1990). In addition, the respect and feeling of inclusion generated as a result of such satisfaction are likely to make them less likely to think of leaving the organization (Winstead, Derlega, Montgomery, & Pilkington, 1995). Given the similarity of the conceptual arguments relating social satisfaction with these three constructs and the strong overlaps among them as suggested by other scholars, in the interest of theoretical parsimony, we conceptualize satisfaction, affective commitment, and turnover intentions together as indicators of broader organizational attachment and propose that: Hypothesis 4. Employees satisfaction with their workplace relationships will be positively related to their overall attachment with their organization, indicated by their job satisfaction, affective commitment, and intentions to remain with the organization. Hypotheses were tested using two field studies, a primary study and a replication study. Primary Study Method For the main study, surveys were administered to 183 employees working in a division of a midsize company involved in the manufacture and sales of food and animal safety products in the Midwestern United States. Of the 183 employees in this division, 154 employees returned usable responses (84% rate). Fifty percent of the respondents were female, and 87% were Caucasian. The average age of these respondents was 38.7 years (SD 11.4), and their average tenure was 4.1 years (SD 4.2); 52.9% of these employees had a bachelor s degree or higher. Measures. Unless otherwise specified, all constructs were measured using a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (Strongly disagree) to5(strongly agree). attachment. This was measured as the mean of 12 items capturing job satisfaction, affective commitment and turnover intentions (reverse coded). Job satisfaction was measured using the three-item Michigan Assessment Questionnaire job satisfaction subscale (MOAQ; Cammann et al., 1983). A sample item is All in all, I am satisfied with my job. Affective commitment was measured using six items from Meyer, Allen, and Smith s (1993) scale. A sample

6 POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE WORKPLACE TIES 5 item is, I would be very happy to spend the rest of my career in this organization. Turnover intention was measured using the three-item Intention to Turnover subscale from the MOAQ (Cammann et al., 1983). A sample item is, I often think about quitting my job. with workplace relationships. The three-item Social Relationships Scale from the MOAQ (Cammann et al., 1983) was used. A sample question is, How satisfied are you with the way you are treated by the people you work with? Respondents used a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (Very Dissatisfied) to5(very Satisfied). Centrality in positive tie networks. This was measured by combining the in-degree centrality scores of respondents in the friendship and advice networks (i.e., the extent to which a focal individual is sought after by other members for friendship and for advice; Bell, 2005). A roster of all division members was provided, and participants were asked to respond to specific questions about each person (e.g., Marsden, 1990). Friendship networks were measured by asking them Do you consider this person to be a close friend (e.g., confide in this person)? (Brass, 1985). Advice ties were measured by asking, Do you go to this person for work-related advice and knowledge? (e.g., Krackhardt, 1990). These data were assembled into two cell matrixes (one for each type of relationship) and the in-degree measure of centrality in each network was calculated in UCINET (Borgatti, Everett, & Freeman, 2002) and summed up. Centrality in the negative tie network. Following past research (e.g., Labianca et al., 1998), we measured negative ties by asking respondents to answer the following question for each of their fellow division members: Sometimes people at work make us feel uncomfortable or uneasy and, therefore, we try to avoid interacting with them. Do you avoid interacting with this person? yes/no We then calculated the in-degree centrality measure in UCINET (i.e., the number of division members who indicated that they avoid the focal individual). Interaction terms. Interaction terms were formed by meancentering the respective independent variables and then taking their product terms. Control variables. We controlled for several variables that have been shown to influence employees organizational attachment, such as the respondents age, gender, job status (i.e., part-time or full-time), grade (managerial or nonmanagerial), education, ethnicity as well as organizational tenure (cf. Brush, Moch, & Pooyan, 1987). In addition, we controlled for respondents general trait positive and negative affectivity (Cropanzano, James, & Konovsky, 1993). These were each measured using seven-item scales from Watson, Clark, and Tellegen s (1988) Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS). Respondents indicated, on a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (Not at all or very slightly) to5(extremely), the extent to which they generally experienced different emotional descriptors (e.g., enthusiastic, irritable ). Employees were physically located in six buildings, so we controlled for their location. Finally, given our focus on voluntary positive ties, we controlled for the required work ties between individuals ( Are you required to work directly with this person in order to get your work done [e.g., receiving inputs or providing outputs?] yes/no ; Umphress, Labianca, Brass, Kass, & Scholten, 2003). We also controlled for their number of outgoing positive and negative ties the extent to which they sought out other coworkers for friendship or advice and the number of coworkers that the focal individual avoids at work, respectively. Table 1 Means, Standard Deviations, and Bivariate Correlations Among Study Variables (Primary Study) Variable M SD Age Gender a Tenure Positive Affect (.82) 5. Negative Affect (.80) 6. Education b Ethnicity c Job Status d Grade e Outgoing Positive ties Centrality in Positive Network Centrality in Negative Network Outgoing Negative Ties Social (.84) 15. Turnover Intentions (.79) 16. Job (.90) 17. Affective Commitment (.85) 18. Overall Organization (.92) 19. Required Work Ties Note. N 154. Internal consistency reliabilities appear in parentheses along the diagonal. Dummy coded: a b 0 female, 1 male. 1 bachelor s degree and higher, 0 other. c 1 White, 0 other. d 0 full time, 1 part time. e 0 Nonmanagerial, 1 Managerial. p.05. p.01.

7 6 VENKATARAMANI, LABIANCA, AND GROSSER Table 2 Results of the OLS-Based Regression Analyses (Primary Study) Results Predictor variables with Social Relations (Model 1) with Social Relations (Model 2) Table 1 provides the means, standard deviations, reliabilities, and bivariate correlations among the study variables. Table 2 provides the results of our stepwise ordinary least squares (OLS) multiple regression analyses. Confirmatory factor analysis indicated discriminant validity of the following: centrality in positive and negative networks, social satisfaction, and organizational attachment (as a higher order factor representing job satisfaction, affective commitment, and turnover intentions). 1 Hypothesis 1 stated that employees centrality in positive networks would be positively related to their social satisfaction. As Model 2 (Table 2) indicates, this was supported (b.04, p.01). Hypothesis 2, that employees centrality in negative tie networks would be negatively related to their social satisfaction, was also supported (b.11, p.01). Hypotheses 3 proposed that centrality in positive networks would interact with in-degree centrality in negative networks to predict satisfaction with workplace relationships such that the relationship between centrality and social satisfaction would be stronger when centrality in the negative network is higher. As Model 3 indicates, this interaction term was significant (b.03, p.01). This interaction is plotted in Figure 2. Further, a simple slopes test (Aiken & West, 1991) indicated that the relationship between centrality in positive networks and satisfaction was stronger for individuals who had greater (b.06, p.01; t 3.80) compared to fewer (b.02, p.05; t 0.24) numbers of incoming negative ties, thus confirming our predicted pattern. Hypothesis 4 predicted that employees social satisfaction would be positively related to their organizational attachment. As our results with Social Relations (Model 3) Criterion variables (Model 4) (Model 5) (Model 6) Intercept Control variables Age Gender Tenure Positive Affectivity Negative Affectivity Education Ethnicity Job Status Grade Outgoing Positive Ties Required Work Ties Outgoing Negative Ties Independent variables Centrality in Positive Tie Networks Centrality in Negative Tie Network Interaction terms Centrality in Positive Network Centrality in Negative Network Intervening mechanism with Social Relationships R R Note. OLS ordinary least squares. Table entries are unstandardized regression coefficients. We also controlled for the six different buildings in which respondents were located. To simplify the Table, these coefficients are not reported. p.05. p.01. indicate, this was supported (b.25, p.01; Model 6), controlling for the effects of all network-related independent variables. We also ran our analyses separately for job satisfaction, affective commitment, and turnover intentions. The pattern of results in all three cases was identical to the overall attachment measure. Estimation of indirect effects. Our hypotheses (H1 H4), taken together, suggest that centrality in positive networks influenced employees organizational attachment through its effects on their satisfaction with workplace relationships and that this is moderated by centrality in negative networks, thus suggesting a moderated mediation model (Edwards & Lambert, 2007). As the results in Table 2 suggest, centrality in positive networks was not significantly related to attachment directly (b.02, p.05; Model 4), potentially due to lower power in our sample to detect it (MacKinnon, Lockwood, Hoffman, West, & Sheets, 2002) but was related to it indirectly via its effects on social satisfaction (e.g., Mathieu & Taylor, 2006). We tested this indirect effect and estimated the confidence intervals using bootstrapping procedures (e.g., Preacher & Hayes, 2008; Shrout & Bolger, 2002). There were significant unconditional indirect effects of centrality in positive networks on attachment (.03; 95% confidence interval [CI] [.01,.03]; effect size.08) via social satisfaction. 2 We used a bootstrapping-based approach (e.g., Edwards & Lambert, 2007) to also examine whether the sequence of processes linking centrality in positive networks to outcomes was different at high or 1 The results of the comparative factor analysis are available on request from the first author. 2 Completely standardized indirect effect size; see MacKinnon (2008); Preacher and Kelley (2011).

8 POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE WORKPLACE TIES 7 Figure 2. Interaction plot of Centrality in Positive Networks (N/W) and Centrality in Negative Networks predicting with Workplace Social Relationships (primary study). low levels of the moderator (see Table 3). This analysis indicated that the indirect effect of positive network centrality on attachment via social satisfaction was significantly stronger at higher levels of incoming negative ties (effect size of indirect effect.15) than at lower levels (effect size.01). Thus, this integrative analysis provided additional support for our model. Replication Study Method This second sample comprises employees of a product development firm headquartered in the Southeastern United States. Of the 185 surveys distributed, 144 usable surveys were returned (78% rate). The average tenure of respondents was 63.2 months (SD 50.3), and the average age was 43.5 years (SD 8.8 years). Table 3 Summary of Total and Indirect Effects of Centrality in Positive Networks on (Primary Study) Variable (Job and Affective Commitment and Turnover Intentions [reverse coded]) Effects Indirect Total Unconditional Moderator variable: Centrality in Negative Network High Low Difference Note. N 154. Table entries were computed using the constrained nonlinear regression (CNLR) procedure using 1,000 data draws (cf. Edwards & Lambert, 2007). p.05. p.01. Table 4 Means, Standard Deviations, and Bivariate Correlations Among Replication Study Variables Variable M SD Grade (Junior Manager) a Grade (Senior Manager) b Age Gender c Tenure Education d Ethnicity e Outgoing Positive Ties Centrality in Positive Ties Network Centrality in Negative Ties Outgoing Negative Ties Social (.91) 13. Turnover Intentions (.62) 14. Job (.82) 15. Affective Commitment (.80) 16. Overall (.87) 17. Required Work Ties Note. n 144. Internal consistency reliabilities appear in parentheses along the diagonal. Dummy coded: a 1 junior manager, 0 other. b 1 senior manager and above, 0 other. c 0 female, 1 male. d 1 bachelor s degree and higher, 0 other. e 1 White/Caucasian, 0 other. p.05. p.01.

9 8 VENKATARAMANI, LABIANCA, AND GROSSER Table 5 Results of the OLS-Based Regression Analyses (Replication Study) Variable with Social Relations (Model 1) with Social Relations (Model 2) with Social Relations (Model 3) (Model4) (Model 5) (Model 6) Intercept Control variables Grade (Junior Manager) Grade (Senior Manager) Age Gender Tenure Education Ethnicity Outgoing Positive Ties Required Work Ties Outgoing Negative Ties Independent variables Centrality in Positive Tie Networks Centrality in Negative Tie Network Interaction term Centrality in Positive Tie Network Centrality in Negative Tie Network Mediator with Social Relationships R R Note. OLS ordinary least squares. Table entries are unstandardized regression coefficients. We also controlled for the four geographic locations in which respondents were located. To simplify the table, these coefficients are not reported. n 143. p.05. p.01. Seventy-one percent were male, 87% were Caucasian, and 80% of them had completed at least a bachelor s degree. Measures. All constructs in this study, except the ones described below, were measured using the same measures as in the main study. In the case of affective commitment, three items from the Meyer et al. (1993) affective commitment subscale were used. All attitudinal variables were measured using a 7-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to7(strongly agree). Advice ties were measured by asking Whom do you typically turn to when you need help thinking through a new or challenging problem at work? Respondents used a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (I never turn to this person) to5(i constantly turn to this person). Because weak ties lack interpersonal closeness (Granovetter, 1973), network data pertaining to this question were dichotomized such that ties of strength 4 (I usually turn to this person) and above were retained in our analyses. As in the main study, we combined the in-degree centrality scores in the friendship and advice networks. Control variables. Similar to the main study, we controlled for the following demographic variables: tenure (in months), gender, age (in years), race, and education. We also controlled for grade and geographic location since employees in this organization came from multiple locations. We controlled for outgoing positive and negative ties as well as required work ties. Results The results found in this replication study are consistent with those in the main study. Table 4 provides the means, standard deviations, reliabilities and bivariate correlations among the replication study variables. Table 5 contains the results of the stepwise OLS regression analyses. As seen in Model 2 of Table 5, centrality in the positive tie network is positively related to social satisfaction (b.31, p.01), thus supporting Hypothesis 1. There is also a significant negative relationship between centrality in the negative tie network and satisfaction (b.18, p.05), supporting Hypothesis 2. Further, in support of Hypothesis 3, the interaction between centrality in the positive tie network and centrality in the negative tie network is positive and significant (Model 3; b.21, p.01; see Figure 3). A simple slopes test indicated that the relationship with Social Relationships Low Centrality in Positive Networks High Centrality in Positive Networks Low Centrality in Negative N/W High Centrality in Negative N/W Figure 3. Interaction plot of Centrality in Positive Networks (N/W) and Centrality in Negative Networks predicting with Workplace Social Relationships (replication study).

10 POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE WORKPLACE TIES 9 between centrality in positive networks and satisfaction was stronger for individuals who had greater (b.54, p.01; t 3.74) compared to fewer (b.12, p.05; t 0.95) numbers of incoming negative ties. As seen in Model 6 of Table 5, satisfaction with social relations is positively related to organizational attachment (b.39, p.01) while controlling for network centrality, providing support for Hypothesis 4. Analyses of the indirect effects in this replication sample were identical to that of the main study. General Discussion Supporting our overall model, we found, across two field studies, that employees centrality in positive networks had beneficial effects and centrality in negative networks had deleterious effects on their social satisfaction, and in turn on their organizational attachment. Further, the indirect effect of positive centrality on organizational attachment was stronger in the presence of more negative ties. Taken together, these findings make a number of contributions. First, the current article extends research on the social ledger model (Labianca & Brass, 2006) by investigating the interactive effects of positive and negative ties in impacting various outcomes. The social ledger model (Labianca & Brass, 2006) was advanced to encourage researchers not to consider each type of workplace social relationship in isolation, but rather to consider them as inextricably linked. Yet the original theory itself did not adequately predict whether the effects of positive and negative ties would be entirely independent or will interact in determining outcomes. The social ledger model is based on psychological principles involving negative asymmetry (Skowronski & Carlston, 1989), which argue that individuals positive relationships are not as diagnostic in determining their judgments and attitudes, such as their social satisfaction, in the absence of negative relationships (e.g., Wyer, 1974). It is precisely because negative ties are rare and counternormative that they draw an inordinate amount of individuals attention, and cause them to more carefully weigh their social situation (Fiske, 1980; Skowronski & Carlston, 1989; Wyer, 1973). Indeed, our results suggest that the more that an individual confronts negative ties at work, the more important that employee s positive ties become in affecting their social satisfaction and attachment. This suggests that it is important to study these ties together in order to get an accurate picture of the social reality of workplaces. Second, we elucidate the intervening mechanisms through which employees network positions affect their work attitudes. We argued that some of the inconsistent results of past research could be potentially addressed by studying broader, but more proximal linking mechanisms such as social satisfaction that capture employees evaluation of their workplace relationships, an important determinant of their attachment. For example, as our results also indicate, although centrality in positive networks was not significantly related to organizational attachment directly, it was indirectly linked to attachment through its effects on social satisfaction. In doing so, we address calls from job attitude researchers to study the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction with workplace relationships that have largely been ignored by past research (Judge & Kammeyer-Mueller, 2012). We also contribute to the network literature wherein the underlying processes through which network variables impact various outcomes have been seldom examined (cf. Brass, 1981; Venkataramani & Tangirala, 2010). Our study s implications for future network research in organizational behavior are clear we need to consider the positive and negative side of individuals social ledger together. We also need to consider that these differently valenced ties might not always operate separately but do so in combination with each other in a number of ways. One way, as we have shown is that individuals centrality in positive and negative tie networks can interact to predict employees outcomes. Another way is to take a network approach to consider how these positive and negative ties are structurally embedded. For example, understanding whether a negative tie with someone who, in turn, has a lot of negative ties affects the focal individual s outcomes as much as having a negative tie with someone who is popular seems a promising avenue for future research. Current research on indirect positive and negative ties has been limited to the triad (e.g., Oldroyd, Hendron, & Labianca, 2008), but ties beyond the triad might also be important and warrant further research (e.g., Smith et al., in press). Limitations Due to our study s cross-sectional nature, we cannot rule out reverse causality. For example, individuals who are committed to the organization might begin feeling satisfied with their social relationships at work. This in turn might help them develop more positive (and fewer negative) ties. However reverse causality cannot adequately explain the interaction patterns found in this study. If social satisfaction increases, it isn t clear why individuals might increase both their positive and negative ties in reaction. It would be productive to employ longitudinal network research in disentangling this (cf. Huitsing et al., in press). Further, the effect sizes of our indirect effects were low. It is important for future studies to examine employees from a diverse set of organizations to help establish more generalizable estimates of these effects and confirm the utility of satisfaction with social relationships as a mediator. Practical Implications These findings suggest that employees who are satisfied with the overall quality of their workplace relationships are more attached to the organization. Managers who encourage informal interactions among their employees (e.g., via social gatherings or get-togethers) can foster the development of more positive ties and thereby influence employees satisfaction. Managers should also try to minimize the number of negative interactions occurring in their workgroups by proactively mediating to resolve differences early on and building a culture of open communication that fosters trust and relationship building. Whenever possible, managers can even consider revising the required workflow and communication patterns in the workgroup such that two individuals who have negative ties do not interact with each other. As our interaction findings indicate, individuals with fewer incoming negative ties are generally satisfied with their workplace relationships irrespective of their centrality in positive networks. The importance of being central in positive networks is more evident in situations where one has more incoming negative ties. This suggests that employees involved in many negative ties may

11 10 VENKATARAMANI, LABIANCA, AND GROSSER need to work hard at developing other valued positive relationships rather than retreat into a defensive cocoon. For example, employees could not only maintain warm and positive interactions with many coworkers such that they will be motivated to seek out the focal employee for friendship but also develop expertise in specific areas so that they become the point person for other coworkers to seek advice from on work matters. Employees may also need to proactively minimize their negative ties because being disliked by several coworkers has reputational consequences that may adversely affect their promotion and other developmental prospects in the organization. Employees may also use negative ties as an opportunity to become aware of the need for personal change because these ties may provide feedback regarding how others view them (Labianca & Brass, 2006). Conclusion Our study moves research on employee personal networks forward by emphasizing the need to capture both the positive and negative relational affect and behavioral intentions flowing through the individual s network ties. Only by moving beyond the dominant social capital metaphor, which views networks as assets and overemphasizes positive ties in individuals personal networks, to a more balanced view of both social assets and liabilities can we begin to understand the subtle complexities associated with social ledgers in the workplace. References Adler, P. S., & Kwon, S. (2002). Social capital: Prospects for a new concept. Academy of Management Review, 27, Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Anderson, C., John, O. P., Keltner, D. K., & Kring, A. M. (2001). Who attains social status? Effects of personality and physical attractiveness in social groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, doi: / Aquino, K., & Lamertz, K. (2004). A relational model of workplace victimization: Social roles and patterns of victimization in dyadic relationships. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, doi: / Baldwin, T., Bedell, M., & Johnson, J. (1997). The social fabric of a team-based MBA program: Network effects on student satisfaction and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 40, doi: / Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, doi: / Beehr, T. A. (1986). The process of retirement: A review and recommendations for future investigation. Personnel Psychology, 39, doi: /j tb00573.x Bell, G. G. (2005). Clusters, networks, and firm innovativeness. Strategic Management Journal, 26, doi: /smj.448 Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York, NY: Wiley. Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., & Freeman, L. C. (2002). Ucinet for Windows: Software for social network analysis. Harvard, MA: Analytic Technologies. Brass, D. J. (1981). Structural relationships, job characteristics, and worker satisfaction and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26, doi: / Brass, D. J. (1984). Being in the right place: A structural analysis of individual influence in an organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, doi: / Brass, D. J. (1985). Men s and women s networks: A study of interaction patterns and influence in an organization. Academy of Management Journal, 28, doi: / Brass, D. J. (2012). A social network perspective on organizational psychology. In S. W. J. Kozlowski (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of organizational psychology (Vol. 1; pp ). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. doi: /oxfordhb/ Brass, D. J., Butterfield, K. D., & Skaggs, B. C. (1998). Relationships and unethical behavior: A social network perspective. The Academy of Management Review, 23, Brief, A. P., & Weiss, H. H. (2002). behavior: Affect in the workplace. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, doi: / annurev.psych Brush, D. H., Moch, M. K., & Pooyan, A. (1987). Individual demographic differences and job satisfaction. Journal of Occupational Behaviour, 8, doi: /job Burt, R. S. (2001)., decay, and social network. Journal of Behavior, 22, doi: /job.106 Cammann, C., Fichman, M., Jenkins, G. D., & Klesh, J. R. (1979). The Michigan Assessment Questionnaire. Unpublished manuscript, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. Cammann, C., Fichman, M., Jenkins, G. D., & Klesh, J. R. (1983). Assessing the attitudes and perceptions of organizational members. In S. E. Seashore, E. E. Lawler, P. H. Mirvis, & C. C. Cammann (Eds.), Assessing organizational change (pp ). New York, NY: Wiley. Casciaro, T., & Lobo, M. (2008). When competence is irrelevant: The role of interpersonal affect in task-related ties. Administrative Science Quarterly, 53, doi: /asqu Chiaburu, D. S., & Harrison, D. A. (2008). Do peers make the place? Conceptual synthesis and meta-analysis of coworker effects on perceptions, attitudes, OCBs, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, doi: / Chua, R., Ingram, P., & Morris, M. (2008). From the head and the heart: Locating cognition-and affect-based trust in managers professional networks. Academy of Management Journal, 51, doi: / AMJ Cropanzano, R., James, K., & Konovsky, M. A. (1993). Dispositional affectivity as a predictor of work attitudes and job performance. Journal of Behavior, 14, doi: /job Crosby, F Relative deprivation and working women. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Edwards, J. R., & Lambert, L. S. (2007). Methods for integrating moderation and mediation: A general analytical framework using moderated path analysis. Psychological Methods, 12, doi: / x Ellwardt, L., Labianca, G., & Wittek, R. (2012). Who are the objects of positive and negative gossip at work? A social network perspective on workplace gossip. Social Networks,. doi: /j.socnet Fiske, S. T. (1980). Attention and weight in person perception: The impact of negative and extreme behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, doi: / Freeman, L. C. (1979). Centrality in social networks: Conceptual clarification. Social Networks, 1, doi: / (78) Gonzalez, J. A., & DeNisi, A. S. (2009). Cross-level effects of demography and diversity climate on organizational attachment and firm effectiveness. Journal of Behavior, 30, doi: /job.498 Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78, doi: / Grosser, T. J., Sterling, C. M., Scott, K. D., & Labianca, G. (2010). Social networks, groups, and social exclusion: Combining sociometric and psychometric approaches to understanding social exclusion in organiza-