The Mediating Role of the Crab Barrel Syndrome in the Effect of Workplace Incivility on Organizational Cynicism

Abstract

The modern work environment represents a highly intense setting characterized by numerous rules, individuals, and tasks. In this modern work process, individuals are constantly interacting with one another, making it commonplace for them to experience both positive and negative emotions. Additionally, incidents occurring in the workplace may have various consequences for organizations. Negative events in organizations affect employees and, indirectly, the organization itself. Although we live in the age of technology, the significance of human presence, particularly in labor-intensive organizations, cannot be overlooked. This study investigates certain negative events in organizations based on employees’ perceptions. The research problem is shaped around negative events in organizations, their antecedents and consequences, and their impacts on organizations and employees. Specifically, the study examines whether incivility in the workplace influences employees' negative behaviors and whether the crab barrel plays a mediating role in this relationship. The aim of this study is to determine the mediating role of the crab barrel in the effect of workplace incivility on organizational cynicism. To this end, a quantitative research design was adopted, and a survey was conducted. The study population consists of administrative personnel working at Yozgat Bozok University. Convenience sampling was employed as the sampling method, and data were collected via an online survey from 438 participants. The collected data were analyzed using the Smart-PLS (PLS-SEM) statistical program, where the partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) approach was utilized. According to the findings of the study, the crab barrel mediates the effect of workplace incivility on organizational cynicism. Workplace incivility has a positive and significant effect on both organizational cynicism and the crab barrel. The results reveal that workplace incivility leads to an increase in organizational cynicism, and this effect is mediated by the crab barrel. As in every sector, the prevalence of this issue in public organizations can be considered an indicator of the presence of negative organizational behavior. Based on the study's findings, fostering an organizational culture grounded in justice is essential for reducing negative behaviors in organizations, and efforts should be made to ensure this in every aspect.

Keywords

• Workplace Incivility
• Organizational Cynicism
• Crab Barrel Syndrome
• Public Employees
• Smart-PLS

İşyeri Nezaketsizliğinin Örgütsel Sinizm Üzerindeki Etkisinde Yengeç Sepeti Sendromunun Aracılık Rolü

Abstract

Modern iş yaşamı kuralların, insanların ve görevlerin fazlaca olduğu yoğun bir ortamı ifade etmektedir. Bu modern iş yaşamı sürecinde bireyler birbirleriyle sürekli etkileşim halinde olup olumlu ve olumsuz duygular hissetmesi olağan bir durumdur. Bunun yanı sıra iş yaşamında yaşanan olayların örgütlere karşı bazı sonuçlarının olması da mümkündür. Örgütlerde yaşanan negatif olaylar, çalışanları ve dolaylı yönden örgütü etkilemektedir. Her ne kadar teknoloji çağında yaşıyor olsak da özellikle emek yoğun örgütlerde insanın varlığın göz ardı edilemeyecek kadar önemlidir. Bu araştırmada örgütlerde meydana gelen bazı negatif olaylar, çalışanların düşüncelerine göre araştırılmıştır. Araştırmanın problemini örgütlerde meydana gelen negatif olaylar, bunların öncülleri ve ardılları, örgüte ve çalışanlara etkileri çerçevesinde şekillenmektedir. Dolayısıyla örgütlerde var olan nezaketsizliklerin çalışanların negatif davranışlarını etki edip etmediği ve buna aracılık eden yengeç zihniyetinin var olup olmadığıdır. Bu araştırmanın amacı işyeri nezaketsizliğinin örgütsel sinizm üzerindeki etkisinde yengeç sepeti sendromunun aracılık rolünün belirlenmesidir. Bu amaçla çalışmada nicel araştırma deseni benimsenmiş ve anket uygulaması yapılmıştır. Araştırmanın evrenini Yozgat Bozok Üniversitesinde görev yapan idari personel oluşturmaktadır. Veri toplama tekniğinde örnekleme olarak kolayda örnekleme yöntemi belirlenen araştırmada 438 kişiden anket toplanmış olup bu anketler çevrimiçi bir şekilde elde edilmiştir. Elde edile verilerin analizi Smart-PLS (PLS-SEM) istatistik programında analiz edilmiş olup kısmi en küçük kareler yapısal eşitlik modeli kurulmuştur. Araştırma verilerinden elde edilen bulgulara göre işyeri nezaketsizliğinin örgütsel sinizm üzerindeki etkisinde yengeç sepeti sendromunun aracılık rolünün olduğu tespit edilmiştir. İşyeri nezaketsizliği hem örgütsel sinizm hem de yengeç sepeti sendromu üzerinde pozitif ve anlamlı bir etkiye sahiptir. Araştırmadan elde edilen sonuçlara göre işyeri nezaketsizliği örgütsel sinizmin artmasına yol açmakta ve bu etkiye yengeç sepeti sendromu aracılık etmektedir. Her sektörde olabileceği gibi kamu örgütlerinde de bu durumun yaygın olarak yer alması, negatif örgütsel davranışın var olduğunun göstergesi olarak kabul edilebilir. Araştırma sonuçlarına göre örgütlerde var olan negatif davranışların azaltılması açısından örgüt kültürünün adalet temelinde oluşturulması, her yönden bunun sağlanması gerekmektedir.

Keywords

• İşyeri Nezaketsizliği
• Örgütsel Sinizm
• Yengeç Sepeti Sendromu
• Kamu Çalışanları
• Smart-PLS

Ethical Statement

Bu çalışma için etik onay, 16.02.2022 tarihli ve 30/02 sayılı karar ile Yozgat Bozok Üniversitesi Sosyal ve Beşeri Bilimler Etik Kurulu’ndan alınmıştır.

References

1. Akiş, E., & Çetin, M. (2016). Comparison of Turkish chemical industry with BRIC countries on the basis of revealed comparative advantages. Istanbul University Econometrics and Statistics e-Journal, (24), 40-59.
2. Abubakar, A. M., Megeirhi, H. A., & Shneikat, B. (2018). Tolerance for workplace incivility, employee cynicism and job search behavior. The Service Industries Journal, 38(9–10), 629–643. https://doi.org/10.1080/02642069.2017.1420171
3. Ağralı Ermiş, S., & Akyol, G. (2023). The relationship of academicians’ levels of crabs in a barrel syndrome and their organizational justice. Akdeniz Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 6(2), 476–496. https://doi.org/10.38021/asbid.1253699
4. Alhas, F., & Seçkin, Ş. N. (2023). İş yeri nezaketsizliği ve sanal kaytarma arasındaki ilişkide örgütsel sinizmin aracılık rolü. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 58, 123–143. https://doi.org/10.30794/pausbed.1259840
5. Alola, U. V., Asongu, S., & Alola, A. A. (2019). Linking supervisor incivility with job embeddedness and cynicism: The mediating role of employee self-efficacy. Gadjah Mada International Journal of Business, 2(3), 330–352. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3509787
6. Andersson, L. M., & Pearson, C. M. (1999). Tit for tat? The spiraling effect of incivility in the workplace. Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 452–471. https://doi.org/10.2307/259136
7. Anjum, M. A., Anjum, P., & Ahmed, A. (2017). Relationship dynamics of burnout, turnover intentions and workplace incivility perceptions. Business & Economic Review, 9(3), 155–172. https://doi.org/10.22547/BER/9.3.6
8. Aydın, G. Z., & Oğuzhan, G. (2019). The “crabs in a barrel” mentality in healthcare personnel: A phenomenological study. Hitit University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 12(2), 618–630. https://doi.org/10.17218/hititsosbil.628375

9. Bernerth, J. B., Armenakis, A. A., Field, H. S., & Walker, H. (2007). Justice, cynicism, and commitment: A study of important organizational change variables. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 43(3), 303–326. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886306296602
10. Brandes, P., Dharwadkar, R., & Dean, J. W. (1999). Does organizational cynicism matter? Employee and supervisor perspectives on work outcomes. Eastern Academy of Management Proceedings, 150–153.
11. Brandes, P., & Das, D. (2006). Locating behavior cynicism at work: Construct issues and performance implications. In P. L. Perrewe & D. C. Ganster (Eds.), Employee health, coping and methodologies (pp. 233–266). JAI Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1479-3555(05)05007-9
12. Brandes, P. M. (1997). Organizational cynicism: Its nature, antecedents, and consequences (Doctoral dissertation, The University of Cincinnati). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. https://www.proquest.com/docview/304333103
13. Bulloch, H. C. M. (2013). Concerning constructions of self and other: Auto-racism and imagining Amerika in the Christian Philippines. Anthropological Forum, 23(3), 221–241. https://doi.org/10.1080/00664677.2013.804400 Byrne, B. M. (2016). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (3rd ed.). Routledge.
14. Caples, C. (2016). Does the “Crabs in barrel syndrome” still exist? Medium. Erişim adresi: https://medium.com/@CEOCaples/does-the-crabs-in-a-barrel-syndrome-still-exist-written-by-derrick-ceo-caples-4b823b2297ff
15. Chen, P. (1997). Relation between negative affectivity and positive affectivity: Effects of judged desirability of scale items and respondents’ social desirability. Journal of Personality Assessment, 69(1), 183–199. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa6901_10
16. Clark, D. O., Stump, T. E., Miller, D. K., & Long, J. S. (2007). Educational disparities in the prevalence and consequence of physical vulnerability. Journal of Gerontology: Social Science, 62(3), 193–197. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/62.3.s193
17. Cortina, L. M., Magley, V. J., Williams, J. H., & Langhout, R. D. (2001). Incivility in the workplace: Incidence and impact. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6(1), 64–80. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.6.1.64
18. Coşkun, R., Altunışık, R., & Yıldırım, E. (2019). Sosyal bilimlerde araştırma yöntemleri. Sakarya: Sakarya Yayıncılık
19. Crampton, S. M., & Hodge, J. W. (2008). Rudeness and incivility in the workplace. Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics, 8(1), 41-48. Erişim adresi: http://www.na-businesspress.com/JLAE/crampton.pdf
20. Çavuş, B., & Sarpkaya, R. (2021). Measuring “crabs in a barrel” phenomenon at schools: A scale development study. Psycho-Educational Research Reviews, 10(2), 314-327. https://doi.org/10.52963/PERR_Biruni_V10.N2.22
21. Çini, M. A. (2022). İş yeri nezaketsizliği, tükenmişlik ve örgütsel sinizm arasındaki ilişki: Akademisyenlere yönelik bir araştırma. Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 10(2), 644-663. https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v10i2.2000
22. Çoban, R., & Deniz, M. (2021). İşyeri nezaketsizliğinin işten ayrılma niyetine etkisinde örgütsel sinizmin aracılık rolü üzerine bir araştırma. OPUS Uluslararası Toplum Araştırmaları Dergisi, 17(34), 1224-1259. https://doi.org/10.26466/opus.787756
23. Dean, J. W., Brandes, P., & Dharwadkar, R. (1998). Organizational cynicism. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 341-352. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1998.533230
24. Dikmenli, E., & Yıldırım, E. (2022). Yengeç sendromu. In E. Kaygın, E. Topçuoğlu, & B. Turan Tosun (Eds.), Yönetim ve Organizasyon Sendromları-1 (pp. 101-110). Eğitim Yayınevi
25. Dion, M. J. (2006). The impact of workplace incivility and occupational stress on the job satisfaction and turnover intention of acute care nurses [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Connecticut
26. Durmuş, Ş., & Özyılmaz, A. F. (2024). Çalışanların A tipi kişilik özelliklerinin yengeç sendromu üzerine etkisi: Hizmet sektörü çalışanları üzerine bir araştırma. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Vizyoner Dergisi, 15(41), 121-136. https://doi.org/10.21076/vizyoner.1293513
27. Eaton, J. A. (2000). A social motivation approach to organizational cynicism [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. York University
28. Einarsen, S., Hoel, H., Zapf, D., & Cooper, C. L. (2011). The concept of bullying and harassment at work: The European tradition. In S. Einarsen, H. Hoel, D. Zapf, & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), Bullying and Harassment in the Workplace: Developments in Theory, Research, and Practice (2nd ed., pp. 3-39). CRC Press
29. Ewis, M. Z. (2014). Workplace perceptions and workplace incivility in Egypt: The mediating role of organizational cynicism. International Journal of Customer Relationship Marketing and Management, 5(4), 58-82. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijcrmm.2014100104
30. Fettahlıoğlu, Ö. O., & Alkış Dedeoğlu, A. (2021). Yengeç sepeti sendromu ve ölçek geliştirme çalışması. Journal of International Social Research, 14(77), 1224-1236. Erişim adresi: https://tr-scales.arabpsychology.com/wp-content/uploads/pdf/yengec-sepeti-sendromu-ve-olcek-gelistirme-calismasi-toad.pdf
31. Fitzgerald, M. R. (2002). Organizational cynicism: Its relationship to perceived organizational injustice and explanatory style [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Cincinnati
32. Gök, S., Karatuna, İ., & Başol, O. (2019). İşyeri Nezaketsizliği Ölçeği’nin Türkçe’ye uyarlanması. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 22(44), 106-115. https://doi.org/10.31828/tpy1301996120181128m000009
33. Griffin, B. (2010). Multilevel relationships between organizational-level incivility, justice, and intention to stay. Work and Stress, 24(4), 309-323
34. Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2014). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (1st ed.). Sage
35. Hair, J. F., Matthews, L. M., Matthews, R. L., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). PLS-SEM or CB-SEM: Updated guidelines on which method to use. International Journal of Multivariate Data Analysis, 1(2), 107-123. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMDA.2017.087624
36. Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1037/10628-000
37. Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115-135
38. Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. The American Psychologist, 44(3), 513-524. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.44.3.513
39. İlgin, C. (2019). İşyeri nezaketsizliği ile sinizm arasındaki ilişkide öznel iyi oluş halinin rolü [Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi]. Marmara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Istanbul
40. James, M. S. L. (2005). Antecedents and consequences of cynicism in organizations: An examination of the potential positive and negative effects on school systems [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Florida State University
41. Jelavic, S. R., Aleksic, A., & Braje, I. N. (2021). Behind the curtain: Workplace incivility-individual actors in cultural settings. Sustainability, 13(3), 1249. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13031249
42. Jiménez, P., Dunkl, A., & Peissl, S. (2015). Workplace incivility and its effects on value congruence, recovery-stress-state and the intention to quit. Psychology, 6, 1930–1939. https://doi.org/10.4236/psych.2015.614190
43. Karacaoğlu, K., & İnce, F. (2012). Brandes, Dharwadkar ve Dean’in (1999) örgütsel sinizm ölçeği Türkçe formunun geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması: Kayseri organize sanayi bölgesi örneği. Business and Economics Research Journal, 3(3), 77–92. Erişim adresi:https://www.berjournal.com/wp-content/plugins/downloads-manager/upload/BERJ%203(3)12%20Article%205%20pp.77-92.pdf
44. Laursen, J. C. (2009). Cynism then and now. Iris: European Journal of Philosophy and Public Debate, 1(2), 469–482. Erişim adresi: https://www.torrossa.com/en/resources/an/2489468
45. Linvill, J. S. (2008). Surviving workplace incivility: The use of supportive networks as a coping strategy (Master's thesis, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana).
46. Marques, J. (2009). Sisterhood in short supply in the workplace: It's often the women who hold back their female colleagues. Human Resource Management International Digest, 17(5), 28–31. https://doi.org/10.1108/09670730910974341
47. Martinez, J. O., & Eisenberg, J. (2019). Incivility and beyond at the top management team level. Organizational Management Journal, 16(2), 98–110. Erişim adresi: https://scholarship.shu.edu/omj/vol16/iss2/5
48. Martinko, M. J., & Mackey, J. D. (2019). Attribution theory: An introduction to the special issue. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 40(5), 523–527. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2397
49. Martinko, M. J., Gundlach, M. J., & Douglas, S. C. (2002). Toward an integrative theory of counterproductive workplace behavior: A causal reasoning perspective. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 10(1–2), 36–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2389.00192
50. Milam, A. C., Spitzmueller, C., & Penney, L. M. (2009). Investigating individual differences among targets of workplace incivility. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 14(1), 58–69. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012683
51. Miller, C. D. (2019). Exploring the crabs in the barrel syndrome in organizations. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 26(3), 352–371. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051819849009
52. Miller, C. D. (2016). Interpersonal competitive dynamics in the workplace: The dark side of demographic similarity (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University of Texas, Dallas
53. Miner, K. N., & Cortina, L. M. (2016). Observed workplace incivility toward women, perceptions of interpersonal injustice, and observer occupational well-being: Differential effects for gender of the observer. Frontiers in Psychology, 7(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00482
54. Mirvis, P., & Kanter, D. (1991). Beyond demography: A psychographic profile of the workforce. Human Resource Management, 30, 45–68. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.3930300104
55. Nazir, T., Norulkamar, B. U., & Ahmed, U. (2016). Interrelationship of incivility, cynicism and turnover intention. International Review of Management and Marketing, 6(1), 146–154. Erişim adresi: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/367609
56. Oruç, S. (2019). Örgütsel sinizm ve örgütsel vatandaşlık davranışı arasındaki ilişki: İstanbul Emniyet Müdürlüğü’nde bir araştırma (Unpublished master's thesis). Kütahya Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Kütahya
57. Özcan, G. (2022). İşyeri nezaketsizliği: Kavramsal bir inceleme. Bucak İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi, 5(2), 341–367. https://doi.org/10.38057/bifd.1183503
58. Özdemir, Y., & Üzüm, B. (2019). Yengeç sendromu. In E. Kaygın & G. Kosa (Eds.), Olumsuz boyutlarıyla örgütsel davranış (pp. 125–138). Konya: Eğitim Yayınevi
59. Pearson, C. M., & Porath, C. L. (2005). On the nature, consequences and remedies of workplace incivility: No time for ‘Nice’? Think again. Academy of Management Executive, 19(1), 7–18. https://doi.org/10.5465/ame.2005.15841946
60. Pearson, C. M., Andersson, L. M., & Porath, C. L. (2000). Assessing and attacking workplace incivility. Organizational Dynamics, 29(2), 123–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0090-2616(00)00019-X
61. Pearson, C. M., Andersson, L. M., & Wegner, J. W. (2001). When workers flout convention: A study of workplace incivility. Human Relations, 54(11), 1387–1419. https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267015411001
62. Porath, C., & Pearson, C. (2013). The price of incivility. Harvard Business Review, 91(1–2), 114–121. Erişim adresi: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23390745/
63. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 36, 717–731. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206553
64. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879-891. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.879
65. Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., Henseler, J., & Hair, J. F. (2014). On the emancipation of PLS-SEM: A commentary on Rigdon (2012). Long Range Planning, 47(3), 154-160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2014.02.007
66. Selamat, R. S., Hendryadi, H., & Irsan, T. (2019). Workplace incivility, self-efficacy, and turnover intention relationship model: A multi-group analysis. RJOAS, 1(85), 358-368. https://doi.org/10.18551/rjoas.2019-01.44
67. Singhapakdi, A., Vitell, S. J., Rallapalli, K. C., & Kraft, K. L. (1996). The perceived role of ethics and social responsibility: A scale development. Journal of Business Ethics, 15(11), 1131-1140. Erişim adresi: https://www.jstor.org/stable/25074034
68. Soubhari, T., & Kumar, T. (2014). The crab-barrel effect and its impact on job stress-an exploratory study with reference to autonomous colleges. International Journal on Recent and Innovation Trends in Computing and Communication, 2(10), 3022-3027. https://doi.org/10.17762/ijritcc.v2i10.3342
69. Stanley, D. J. (2005). Employee cynicism and resistance to organizational change. Journal of Business and Psychology, 19(4), 429-458. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-005-4518-2
70. Taylor, S. G., & Kluemper, D. H. (2012). Linking perceptions of role stress and incivility to workplace aggression: The moderating role of personality. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 17(3), 316-329. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028211
71. Tokgöz, N., & Yılmaz, H. (2008). Örgütsel sinizm: Eskişehir ve Alanya’daki otel işletmelerinde bir uygulama. Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 8(2), 238-305. Erişim adresi: https://earsiv.anadolu.edu.tr/xmlui/bitstream/handle/11421/331/544382.pdf?sequence=1
72. Üzüm, B., Özkan, O. S., & Köse, S. (2022). Yaşam doyumu yengeç sendromunun frenine basabilir mi? 8. Örgütsel Davranış Kongresi (ss. 13-24). Muğla, Türkiye
73. Weiner, B. (2010). Attribution theory. International Encyclopedia of Education, 6, 558-563. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470479216.corpsy0098
74. Weiss, H. M., & Cropanzano, R. (1996). Affective events theory: A theoretical discussion of the structure, causes and consequences of affective experiences at work. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior: An annual series of analytical essays and critical reviews, Vol. 18 (pp.1-74). Elsevier Science/JAI Press
75. Yıldız, E. (2021). SmartPLS ile yapısal eşitlik modellemesi reflektif ve formatif yapılar. (2. Baskı). Ankara: Seçkin Yayınları
76. Yozgat Bozok Üniversitesi (2023). Erişim adresi: https://bozok.edu.tr/
77. Zauderer, D. G. (2002). Workplace incivility and the management of human capital. The Public Manager, 31(1), 36-42.