European Management Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

European Management Journal

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/emj

Organizational disidentification and change-oriented citizenship

behavior
Dirk De Clercq
Goodman School of Business, Brock University, St. Catharines, Ontario, L2S 3A1, Canada

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This study proposes that the extent to which employees have disidentified with their organization might
Received 16 June 2020 reduce the likelihood that they undertake change-oriented citizenship behavior, though this negative
Received in revised form link might be buffered by employees’ access to two personal resources (self-enhancement motive and
14 January 2021
benevolence) and two contextual resources (citizenship climate and job involvement). To test these
Accepted 5 February 2021
theoretical predictions, the study gathers survey data from employees in the telecommunications sector
Available online xxx
in Canada. The results show that prior organizational disidentification curtails voluntary efforts to
improve current organizational practices, but this effect is weaker when employees (1) find it important
Keywords:
Change-oriented citizenship behavior
to make a good impression on others, (2) are benevolent toward others, (3) perceive that their organi-
Organizational disidentification zation encourages voluntary efforts, and (4) are highly involved with their jobs. These four factors
Self-enhancement motive accordingly diminish the risk that the extent to which employees have cognitively separated from their
Benevolence employer escalates into a reluctance to add to organizational effectiveness on a voluntary basis.
Citizenship climate © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Job involvement

1. Introduction
Employees’ negative beliefs about their employment situation
can be harmful for both themselves and their organizations, in that
they tend to spur unproductive, negative behaviors that undermine
both individual and organizational effectiveness (Bal, De Lange,
Jansen, & Van der Velde, 2013; Potipiroon & Ford, 2019). For
example, resource-draining work conditions, such as workplace
bullying (Devonish, 2013) or dysfunctional organizational politics
(Chang, Rosen, Siemieniec, & Johnson, 2012), make employees
reluctant to go the extra mile in helping other organizational
members perform their job tasks, particularly if these helping be-
haviors are not formally requested by their job descriptions.
Another notable but understudied manifestation of the frustrations
that employees may experience with respect to their organizational
membership is their organizational disidentification, or the degree
to which they have cognitively separated themselves from their
employer (Elsbach & Bhattacharya, 2001; Oliveira & Cabral
Cardoso, 2018). Organizational disidentification is not a binary,
yes-or-no concept; it refers to the extent to which an employee has
exhibited some “repulsion of the organization’s mission, culture, or
centrally defining aspects to the point that a person consciously or
E-mail address: ddeclercq@brocku.ca.
actively separates his or her identity and reputation from those of
the organization” (Kreiner & Ashforth, 2004, p. 3). Organizational
disidentification thus is a fluid concept, involving a distancing of
the self (Willmott, 1993, p. 538), such that employees may separate
themselves to varying extents, as well as from different aspects of
their organization’s functioning.
Furthermore, organizational disidentification is not a polar
opposite of organizational identification on a single spectrum,
because “whereas identification consists of connecting (typically
positive) aspects of the organization (whether at the molar or facet
level) to oneself, disidentification consists of disconnecting (typi-
cally negative) aspects of the organization (whether at the molar or
facet level) from oneself” (Kreiner & Ashforth, 2004, p. 3, italics in
the original).1 To the extent that employees exhibit organizational
disidentification, they want other people to know that they
disagree with some decisions or stances of the organization; if their
disidentification reaches a high enough level, they even may try to
keep their employment by the organization a secret (Kreiner &
Ashforth, 2004). When more employees hold such views and to a
1
Kreiner and Ashforth (2004) also distinguish disidentification from ambivalent
identification, defined as simultaneous identification and disidentification with
similar or different organizational aspects, as well as from neutral identification,
which is the absence of either identification or disidentification with an
organization.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2021.02.002
0263-2373/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article as: D. De Clercq, Organizational disidentification and change-oriented citizenship behavior, European Management
Journal, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2021.02.002
D. De Clercq
greater extent, organizations might struggle to meet their perfor-
mance goals, suggesting the need to investigate the likely outcomes
of organizational disidentification and the options for constraining
its negative effects (Jahanzeb, De Clercq, & Fatima, 2020; Lai, Chan,
& Lam, 2013).
Employees may cognitively distance themselves from their or-
ganization for various reasons, including psychological contract
breaches (Rani, Arain, Kumar, & Shaikh, 2018; Zagenczyk et al.,
2013), a perception of having to do morally dirty work (Lai et al.,
2013), or exposure to negative stereotypes (Oliveira & Cabral
Cardoso, 2018). Regardless of the cause though, enhanced organi-
zational disidentification can lead to several negative conse-
quences, such as knowledge hiding (Jahanzeb et al., 2020), a
tendency to take actions that reinforce a self-perceived organiza-
tional separation (Elsbach & Bhattacharya, 2001), and a desire to
quit (Lai et al., 2013). This study examines another unexplored
behavioral outcome: the extent to which employees are reluctant
to engage in change-oriented citizenship behaviors. Consistent
with Choi (2007: p. 469), such behaviors refer to “constructive ef-
forts by individuals to identify and implement changes with respect
to work methods, policies, and procedures to improve the situation
and performance.” These behaviors accordingly do not reflect
rejecting specific policies that employees believe conflict with their
own value systems, but they encompass activities designed to
change or improve the current situation by influencing a broad
range of practices and processes associated with organizational
decision making (Choi, 2007; Seppa €la
€, Lipponen, Bardi, & Pirttil€
a-
Backman, 2012). Further, such change-oriented citizenship behav-
iors are voluntary in nature, such that by definition, they go beyond
formal job expectations (Bettencourt, 2004; Chiaburu, Lorinkova, &
Van Dyne, 2013).
Along with the beneficial outcomes that such productive work
activities can have for both organizational and employee suc-
cessdsuch as by generating a sense of personal accomplishment
(Campbell & Im, 2016)dthey create challenges. Other organiza-
tional members may resist change efforts that appear disruptive or
threaten to undermine their privileges (Choi, 2007; Maynes &
Podsakoff, 2014). In response, employees who already have devel-
oped negative beliefs about their employment situation, or dis-
identified with it, might be unwilling to go out of their way to
address these challenges in an effort to contribute to the organi-
zation’s well-being (Bettencourt, 2004; Simo, Sallan, Fernandez, &
Enache, 2016). The central premise of this study then is that em-
ployees’ degree of organizational disidentification critically informs
their reduced propensity to dedicate personal energy to change-
oriented voluntarism. The extent to which they have cognitively
separated from their employer may undermine their positive en-
ergy reservoirs so much that they no longer have any desire to
benefit the organization by undertaking voluntary efforts to
improve suboptimal organizational practices and processes (Lai
et al., 2013; Quinn, Spreitzer, & Lam, 2012).
Furthermore, two personal factors (self-enhancement motive
and benevolence) and two contextual factors (citizenship climate
and job involvement) arguably might function as buffers against
this harmful translation of organizational disidentification into
reduced change-oriented citizenship behavior. The translation may
be less prominent to the extent that employees (1) find it important
to enhance themselves in the eyes of others (Yun, Takeuchi, & Liu,
2007), (2) have a general tendency to be benevolent and contribute
to organizational well-being (Colquitt, 2004), (3) experience orga-
nizational encouragement to be a good corporate citizen (Bolino,
Turnley, Gilstrap, & Suazo, 2010), and (4) are highly involved in
their jobs (Chen, Goddard, & Casper, 2004). Critically, the focus
herein is on the concurrent interplay of employees’ organizational
disidentification with these four factors. That is, even if these
2
European Management Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx
factors could diminish the likelihood that they cognitively distance
themselves from their employer, a relevant theoretical and prac-
tical issue involves how the harmful effects of their current level of
organizational disidentification, irrespective of what the source of
this negative experience might be, could be subdued by their access
to available personal or contextual resources.
1.1. Conservation of resources theory
These conceptual arguments about the simultaneous interplay
of employees’ sense of organizational disidentification with several
factors, which have an impact on change-oriented citizenship
behavior, are grounded in conservation of resources (COR) theory
(Hobfoll, 1989; Hobfoll, Halbesleben, Neveu, & Westman, 2018). A
central tenet of this theory is that employees’ resource-draining
negative beliefs about their organizational membership tend to
diminish their interest in extra-role work activities, because they
want to preserve their individual energy bases for activities that are
formally required (Montani & Dagenais-Desmarais, 2018; Naseer,
Raja, Syed, & Bouckenooghe, 2018). Similarly, the extent to which
employees have cognitively separated themselves from their
employer, and the associated sense that the firm is not worthy of
their diligent efforts (Elsbach & Bhattacharya, 2001), could escalate
into a reduced propensity to help the organization with discre-
tionary behaviors that otherwise could improve organizational
practices and processes. These employees want to conserve their
personal energy resources, instead of “wasting” them on potentially
disruptive ideas that might be received with great skepticism
anyway (Bettencourt, 2004; Quinn et al., 2012).
The premises underpinning the COR theory also suggest that
employees’ negative behavioral responses to energy-draining
employment conditions depend on their access to resources that
inform the severity of the experienced energy drainage (Parker,
Kiewitz, Garcia, & Hochwarter, 2019). In particular, these re-
sponses are subdued to the extent that employees can draw on
pertinent resources that make the conditions less upsetting
(Hobfoll & Shirom, 2000). Employees’ access to valuable resources,
whether personally held or contextually embedded, accordingly
may allow them to experience their organizational disidentification
as less intrusive with regard to their work functioning, such that
they can reserve some of their energy for suggesting organizational
improvements. Conversely, when employees cannot rely on such
pertinent resources, the energy depletion that arises from their
current level of cognitive distancing from the organization should
be experienced as especially threatening, with negative outcomes
for their voluntary change-oriented work efforts.
The research focus on these four resources is not random but
guided by their similarity and complementarity. First, a common
theme that binds each of the four resourcesdself-enhancement
motive, benevolence, citizenship climate, and job involvementdis
that they generate positive energy in employees, which they can
leverage to maintain a certain degree of voluntarism, even if they
hold negative beliefs about their organizational membership
(Hobfoll & Shirom, 2000; Quinn et al., 2012). Second, these re-
sources have complementary roles along two important di-
mensions. On the one hand, employees’ self-enhancement motive
and benevolence capture their personal preferences and pro-
pensities (Choi, Kim, & Yun, 2019; Han, Sears, & Zhang, 2018),
whereas their perceptions of a citizenship climate and job
involvement relate to the organizational context in which they
operate (Lin, Savani, & Ilies, 2019; Zhang, Zheng, & Wei, 2009). On
the other hand, different mechanisms underlie the mitigating roles
of the four resources. The beneficial roles of a self-enhancement
motive and citizenship climate derive mostly from the extrinsic
gains associated with continuing to exhibit change-oriented
D. De Clercq
citizenship, even in the presence of a certain level of organizational
disidentification, because it can enhance their organizational
standing or help them avoid organizational repercussions for failing
to exhibit such efforts (De Clercq, Fatima, & Jahanzeb, 2019). Their
benevolence and job involvement instead provide intrinsic fulfill-
ment or satisfaction, which they sense when they can add to the
effectiveness of their employing organization (Ryan & Deci, 2000),
even if they disagree with its past actions or decisions. Thus, the
four contingent factors provide a consistent and diverse perspective
on how employees’ access to different resources may reduce the
risk that they stay away from discretionary change-oriented be-
haviors, as a reaction to the level of organizational disidentification
they have developed (Hobfoll & Shirom, 2000).
1.2. Contributions
To contribute to extant research, this article presents an inves-
tigation of a hitherto unexplored outcome of resource-draining
organizational disidentification, that is, a reluctance to engage in
voluntary efforts that change and enhance the current organiza-
tional situation (Bettencourt, 2004; Campbell & Im, 2016). The
study of this negative connection also adds to prior research on the
determinants of change-oriented citizenship behaviors, which
tends to focus on the enabling effects of positive work conditions,
such as supportive leadership (e.g., Alavi & Gill, 2017; Lo pez-
Domínguez, Enache, Sallan, & Simo, 2013), an innovative climate
(Choi, 2007), or knowledge-oriented work characteristics (Kao,
2017). The focus of this study instead is on the energy depletion
that employees experience, as informed by the extent to which they
purposefully do not want to be associated with their employing
organization. That is, it examines situations that might be perceived
as particularly resource-draining for employees, in that “social
disidentification [is] a more extreme self-perception than is low
identification” (Elsbach & Bhattacharya, 2001, p. 399). The extent to
which this extreme source of resource depletion is prevalent likely
curtails change-oriented behaviors that are not formally required,
such that performing them could compromise employees’ ability to
meet their formal job duties (Bolino, Turnley, & Niehoff, 2004), or
that threaten other organizational members (subordinates, peers,
or managers) who fear that the organizational disruptions will
undermine their current ways of doing things (Milliken, Morrison,
& Hewlin, 2003). Such change-oriented citizenship behaviors
include voluntary efforts to alter the order that activities get per-
formed or to eliminate seemingly redundant procedures, for
example (Morrison & Phelps, 1999). By adopting this focus, this
study can reveal how employees who have distanced themselves
from their organization may end up suffering doubly: they feel
some level of shame about their organizational membership, and
their complacent behavioral response to this negative situation, or
diminished change-oriented voluntarism, undermines their ability
to reverse the negative situation through their own actions.
Moreover, particular attention centers on the circumstances in
which employees’ degree of organizational disidentification is less
likely to produce negative behavioral outcomes. Previous studies of
the conditional nature of the harmful effect of organizational dis-
identification are rare, with the notable example of Lai et al. (2013),
who find an effect on employees’ turnover intentions that is sub-
dued by perceptions of organizational support. Building on these
insights, this study pinpoints four additional, overlooked resour-
cesdself-enhancement motive, benevolence, citizenship climate,
and job involvementdthat each provide a distinct path through
which organizational decision makers can avert the risk that em-
ployees, who exhibit a certain level of cognitive distance from their
employer, give up on performing extra-role activities to address
organizational problems (Hobfoll & Shirom, 2000). By stimulating
3
European Management Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx
or honing these resource factors, organizational decision makers
can avoid a scenario in which one type of negative situationdthe
extent to which employees want nothing to do with them
(Zagenczyk et al., 2013)dsets the stage for another problem, in that
nobody is willing to tackle the issue by searching for or proposing
improvements (Morrison, 2011). The proposed conceptual frame-
work is summarized in Fig. 1
Its constitutive hypotheses are detailed next.
2. Hypotheses
2.1. Organizational disidentification and change-oriented
citizenship behavior
This study predicts a negative relationship between employees’
degree of organizational disidentification and their change-
oriented citizenship behavior. To the extent that employees hold
negative thoughts about their organizational membership, their
positive work-related energy resources become depleted, and they
see less value in going out of their way to engage in productive
activities from which their organization could benefit, particularly
if these activities are not formally required (Hobfoll, 2001; Naseer
et al., 2018). Employees who exhibit low levels of organizational
identification similarly engage in less organizational citizenship
behavior (van Dick, Crawshaw, Karpf, Schuh, & Zhang, 2019) and
creativity (Wang, Tang, Naumann, & Wang, 2019). If these negative
beliefs manifest in a certain level of cognitive separation from the
employer, the propensity to conserve their energy resources and
respond with diminished change-oriented citizenship behaviors
appears even more likely (Hobfoll & Shirom, 2000). That is, the
frustrations and disillusions associated with an increasing desire
not to be associated with the employing organization may reduce
employees’ interest in advancing its success with their extra-role
activities (Shen et al., 2014; Vigoda-Gadot & Beeri, 2012). More-
over, the extent to which employees ruminate about their organi-
zational membership may be so distracting that they experience
reduced abilities to contribute to their organization’s success with
discretionary, change-oriented activities (Elsbach & Bhattacharya,
2001), especially in the face of a risk of resistance from other
members who prefer the continuation of existing organizational
practices and processes (Morrison & Phelps, 1999). In these ways,
the energy-draining effect that comes with increasing levels of
organizational disidentification may curtail employees’ change-
oriented citizenship behavior, because they lack the desire or sta-
mina to voice and defend their potentially disruptive ideas (Quinn
et al., 2012). These arguments suggest the following Hypothesis:
Hypothesis 1. There is a negative relationship between em-
ployees’ degree of organizational disidentification and their
change-oriented citizenship behavior.
2.2. Moderating role of self-enhancement motive
The negative relationship between employees’ degree of orga-
nizational disidentification and change-oriented behavior might be
mitigated by their personal self-enhancement motive (Yun et al.,
2007). According to the COR theory, the resource-draining effect
of adverse employment situations is diminished to the extent that
employees can counter the resource drainage with pertinent per-
sonal resources that help them avoid further resource losses and
turn the situations to their advantage (Hobfoll & Shirom, 2000). The
buffering effect of a self-enhancement motive similarly might stem
from the personal advantages that employees may anticipate if they
can make a good impression on organizational leaders by preser-
ving some of their energy for the undertaking of discretionary,
D. De Clercq
Fig. 1. Conceptual model.
change-oriented work efforts (Choi et al., 2019). That is, they may
hope to generate resource gains in the form of an improved orga-
nizational standing, even if they hold some negative feelings about
their organizational membership (De Clercq, Fatima, & Jahanzeb,
2019). Furthermore, if employees embody high levels of organiza-
tional disidentification together with self-enhancement motives,
they might want to steer their organization in a better direction to
eliminate the source of their negative feelings about their organi-
zational membership (Carter et al., 2014). Without a self-
enhancement motive though, the energy drainage due to their
cognitive distancing from their employer is more likely to escalate
into a diminished propensity to change and improve current
organizational practices and processes, because employees are
unconvinced they have anything to gain from their efforts (De
Clercq, Fatima, & Jahanzeb, 2019; Hobfoll, 2001).
Hypothesis 2a. The negative relationship between employees’
degree of organizational disidentification and their change-
oriented citizenship behavior is moderated by their self-
enhancement motive, such that the relationship is weaker at
higher levels of self-enhancement motive.
2.3. Moderating role of benevolence
A similar buffering role of employees’ benevolence levels could
arise too. The likelihood that their degree of organizational dis-
identification escalates into reduced change-oriented voluntarism
is lower if employees tend to focus on “giving” instead of
“receiving” acts (Han et al., 2018). In this scenario, the buffering
effect may stem from employees’ willingness to forgive their
employing organization for prompting their negative beliefs about
organizational membership (Huseman, Hatfield, & Miles, 1987;
Jahanzeb et al., 2020). Unlike a self-enhancement motive, this
personal resource does not reflect a self-centered motivation to
engage in change-oriented citizenship behavior but rather a
genuine desire to improve organizational practices and processes
with which the employee currently disagrees (Huseman et al.,
1987; Ross & Sommer, 2018). Employees marked by high levels of
benevolence tend to experience intrinsic resource gains, in the
form of personal satisfaction, when they can do more for others,
including their employer, than they are formally required to do
4
European Management Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx
(Hartman, Villere, & Fok, 1995; Ryan & Deci, 2000). The promise of
such intrinsic gains counters their tendency to conserve personal
energy resources by staying away from change-oriented volunta-
rism, even if the employees exhibit a certain level of organizational
disidentification (Hobfoll & Shirom, 2000). In essence, benevolence
shifts employees’ focus from their own individual concerns and
sentiments (e.g., extent to which they have cognitively distanced
from their employing organization) toward their duty to add to the
organization’s well-being with their voluntary, change-related ef-
forts (Ross & Sommer, 2018).
Hypothesis 2b. The negative relationship between employees’
degree of organizational disidentification and their change-
oriented citizenship behavior is moderated by their benevolence,
such that the relationship is weaker at higher levels of benevolence.
2.4. Moderating role of citizenship climate
The extent to which employees perceive that citizenship be-
haviors are encouraged in their organization constitutes a contex-
tual resource, in that these perceptions imply that their voluntary
work effortsdeven if they may disrupt the completion of formal
job duties (Bergeron, 2007)dare acceptable and even recom-
mended by organizational decision makers (Bolino et al., 2010). In
such a setting, the likelihood that increasing levels of resource-
draining organizational disidentification translate into diminished
change-oriented citizenship behaviors is lower, because employees
can gain resources by devoting themselves to activities that are
voluntary but still encouraged by their employer (Cates, Mathis, &
Randle, 2010; Hobfoll, 2001). The extrinsic advantages resulting
from these activitiesdsuch as an enhanced reputation for going the
extra mile or advanced career progress (Bolino et al., 2010)dshould
diminish the likelihood that they turn away from such discre-
tionary efforts, even if they exhibit a certain level of cognitive
separation from their employer (Hobfoll & Shirom, 2000). More-
over, employees who know that their voluntary but potentially
disruptive activities have the seal of organizational approval may
believe that the enhanced organizational standing they might gain
will give them the power to address or reverse certain decisions
that generated their negative feelings about their organizational
membership (Liang, Farh, & Farh, 2012; Morrison, 2011). In
D. De Clercq
contrast, if they perceive that investing in activities outside regular
job duties is not something encouraged by the firm, the negative
energy associated with their current level of organizational dis-
identification should have a particularly strong effect in enhancing
employees’ reluctance to undertake disruptive behaviors that could
evoke resistance among other members and are not even consid-
ered necessary by their employer (Cates et al., 2010).
Hypothesis 3a. The negative relationship between employees’
degree of organizational disidentification and their change-
oriented citizenship behavior is moderated by their perceptions
of citizenship climate, such that the relationship is weaker at higher
levels of citizenship climate.
2.5. Moderating role of job involvement
Finally, the extent to which employees are strongly involved
with their jobs should decrease their propensity to turn away from
change-oriented citizenship behaviors in response to higher levels
of organizational disidentification. This contingent factor speaks to
the nature of employees’ daily work functioning and the personal
satisfaction resulting from dedicated, job-related efforts
(Jayawardana, O’Donnell, & Jayakody, 2013; Kanungo, 1982).
Strongly involved employees tend to put less weight on the per-
sonal challenges that they might encounter and instead are more
concerned with how the diligent execution of their job tasks can
contribute to organizational effectiveness (Chen & Chiu, 2009;
Zhang, 2014). They accordingly should have a greater motivation to
conserve some of their energy resources to devote to extra-role,
change-oriented activities, even if they exhibit a certain level of
cognitive distance from their employer (Quinn et al., 2012).
Furthermore, employees who have separated themselves from
their organization to a certain degree but perceive their jobs as
important to their personal happiness may seek to go out of their
way to improve existing organizational practices and processes, in
efforts that may seem somewhat counterintuitive, to gain a sense of
personal accomplishment (Orpen, 1997; Ryan & Deci, 2000). That
is, job involvement may reduce the potency with which increasing
levels of organizational disidentification thwart change-oriented
citizenship behavior, because employees experience the com-
bined challenge of addressing frustrations about their organiza-
tional membership with efforts to go the extra mile and to increase
organizational effectiveness as stimulating and fulfilling (De Clercq,
Haq, & Azeem, 2019). Consistent with the COR logic, their job
involvement thus should buffer against the likelihood that elevated
levels of resource-draining organizational disidentification curtail
employees’ discretionary change-oriented efforts, by producing
resource gains in the form of personal satisfaction (Hobfoll &
Shirom, 2000).
Hypothesis 3b. The negative relationship between employees’
degree of organizational disidentification and their change-
oriented citizenship behavior is moderated by their job involve-
ment, such that the relationship is weaker at higher levels of job
involvement.
3. Method
3.1. Sample and data collection
The hypotheses are tested with a sample that comprises 350
respondents (38% women, average tenure with the employer ¼ 8
years), employed by firms in the Canadian telecommunications
sector (i.e., equipment and service firms). The theoretical argu-
ments that underpin the research hypotheses are industry-neutral
and should be applicable to many sectors of the economy.
5
European Management Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx
Nonetheless, the Canadian telecommunications sector is particu-
larly relevant for the purposes of this study, because of its strict
regulations and high levels of competition, with associated external
pressures on organizations to improve their internal functioning
and generate solutions for organizational shortcomings (BMI
Research, 2019; Cherry, 2015). This investigation of how em-
ployees’ negative feelings about their organizational membership
might escalate into reduced change-oriented citizenship behavior,
and how this process may be mitigated by employees’ access to
valuable resources, therefore has significant value in this industry
setting. Moreover, investigating a single industry sector can avoid
empirical concerns about unobserved differences at the industry
level that might influence employees’ propensities to engage in
changing-invoking behaviors on a voluntary basis (Bettencourt,
2004; Lahiri, Perez-Nordtvedt, & Renn, 2008).
Participants read explicit assurances that all their responses
would be totally confidential. The professional survey administra-
tion was performed by the Qualtrics companydwhich was
instructed to collect data from at least 300 Canadian-based em-
ployees employed full-time in telecommunicationsdto leverage its
extensive data collection expertise (e.g., Harnish & Roster, 2019;
Nesheim & Smith, 2015), as well as its access to various websites,
membership referrals, and targeted email lists as sources of po-
tential professional participants. Beyond ensuring confidentiality
and providing modest compensation, in the form of a gift card,
Qualtrics applied several well-established practices to protect the
participants and simultaneously diminish the risk of social desir-
ability biases. In particular, the solicitation explained that partici-
pation was completely voluntary, and it detailed how any data
would be used (i.e., accessible only to the researchers, aggregated to
reveal data patterns, and no release of personal data). The Qualtrics
survey administration also affirmed that there were no correct or
incorrect answers and explicitly asked the respondents to answer
the questions as honestly as possible and confirm that they would
do so in an effort to reduce social desirability bias possibilities even
further (Spector, 2006).
3.2. Measures
The six central constructs were assessed with validated scales
drawn from previous research. Each of the scales applied seven-
point Likert anchors that ranged from 1 (“strongly disagree”) to 7
(“strongly agree”).
Change-oriented citizenship behavior. Employees’ voluntary ef-
forts to improve organizational practices and processes were
measured with a nine-item scale of change-oriented citizenship
behavior. Consistent with Morrison and Phelps (1999), the items
were preceded with a sentence that asked participants to reflect on
the possibility that they would perform different work activities
that go beyond their formal job obligations. Three example items
are “I try to bring about improved procedures for the organization,”
“I try to change the job process in order to be more effective,” and “I
try to correct faulty procedures or practices” (Cronbach’s
alpha ¼ .92). This reliance on a self-rated measure of change-
oriented citizenship behavior aligns with prior studies (e.g.,
Campbell, 2015; Kao, 2017; Lo  pez-Domínguez et al., 2013) and with
the argument that employees may be selective in terms of whom
they want to be aware of their potentially disruptive work behav-
iors; other raters (e.g., supervisors, peers) thus may have only a
partial view of the total range of these behaviors (Perry-Smith &
Mannucci, 2017; Zhou, Shin, & Cannella, 2008).
Organizational disidentification. To assess the extent to which
employees have cognitively separated from their employer, a six-
item scale of organizational disidentification was applied (Kreiner
& Ashforth, 2004). The respondents rated statements such as, “I
D. De Clercq
have been ashamed of what goes on in this organization,” “I have
tried to keep the organization I work for a secret from people I
meet,” and “I want people to know that I disagree with how this
organization behaves” (Cronbach’s alpha ¼ .96).
Self-enhancement motive. This study measured the extent to
which employees feel motivated to make a positive impression on
others with a six-item scale of their self-enhancement motive (Yun
et al., 2007). The participants indicated, for example, whether “It is
important to me to give a good impression to others,” “I try to
modify my behaviors to give good images to others,” and “I am
sensitive to the impression about me that others have” (Cronbach’s
alpha ¼ .82).
Benevolence. To assess the extent to which employees tend to
focus on acts of giving instead of receiving, an eight-item subscale
of the equity sensitivity index captured benevolence (Huseman
et al., 1987). For example, the respondents indicated their agree-
ment with the statements: “All other things being equal, it is better
to have a job with a lot of duties and responsibilities than one with
few duties and responsibilities,” “A job that requires me to be busy
during the day is better than a job that allows me a lot of loafing,”
and “At work, I feel uneasy when there is little work for me to do”
(Cronbach’s alpha ¼ .87).
Citizenship climate. Employees’ perceptions of the extent to
which their organization encourages work activities that go beyond
formal job duties were measured with an eight-item scale drawn
from Bolino et al. (2010). Three example statements are “Manage-
ment expects employees to voluntarily take on extra duties and
responsibilities that aren’t technically required as a part of their
job,” “In this organization, the people who are seen as team players
are the ones who do significantly more than what is technically
required of them,” and “Simply doing your formally-prescribed job
duties is not enough to be seen as a good employee in this orga-
nization” (Cronbach’s alpha ¼ .93).
Job involvement. The measure of the extent to which employees
feel involved with their work tasks featured an eight-item scale of
job involvement (Kanungo, 1982). For example, they assessed
whether “I am very much personally involved in my job,” “Most of
my interests are centered around my job,” and “I consider my job to
be very important to my existence” (Cronbach’s alpha ¼ .92).
Control variables. Two control variables were included in the
statistical analyses: gender (1 ¼ female) and organizational tenure
(in years). Male employees may be less reluctant to undertake
disruptive activities that upset current organizational practices and
processes (Choi, 2007), and employees with more years on their
organizational record may be more confident that their change-
oriented citizenship behaviors will be well received by other
members (Sepp€ al€
a et al., 2012).2
Construct validity. A confirmatory factor analysis of a six-factor
model provided an assessment of the validity of the six focal con-
structs (Anderson & Gerbing, 1988). This model generated a good
fit: c2(284) ¼ 1960.95, confirmatory fit index (CFI) ¼ 0.90, incre-
mental fit index (IFI) ¼ 0.90, TuckereLewis index (TLI) ¼ 0.90, and
root mean squared error of approximation (RMSEA) ¼ 0.06. As
further evidence of the presence of convergent validity, each item
had very strong factor loadings (p < .001) on its corresponding
construct (Gerbing & Anderson, 1988). In addition, for each of the
15 construct pairs, the fit of constrained models, in which the
correlation of two constructs was fixed to 1, was significantly worse
than the fit of unconstrained models in which the correlation was
2
These control variables were not significant in the focal analyses, so the
robustness of the results was checked after removing them from the statistical
models (Becker, 2005); the results were entirely consistent with those found when
the variables were included.
6
European Management Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx
free to vary (Anderson & Gerbing, 1988), in support of discriminant
validity.
Common source bias. The evaluation of whether common
method bias was a concern involved two statistical analyses. First,
Harman’s one-factor test (Podsakoff & Organ, 1986) indicated that
the six central constructsdchange-oriented citizenship behavior,
organizational disidentification, self-enhancement motive, benev-
olence, citizenship climate, and job involvementdexplained only
23% of the total data variance, which diminished worries about the
use of a common respondent. Second, the statistical fit of the
aforementioned six-factor model was significantly better than the
fit of its one-factor equivalent, in which all measurement items
were forced to load on one and the same factor (c2(15) ¼ 6612.75,
p < .001), which provides additional evidence contesting the
presence of common source bias (Lattin, Carroll, & Green, 2003).
Theoretically, the likelihood of common method bias is also dras-
tically reduced for tests of a conceptual framework that entails
various moderating effects, because these effects are more difficult
to discern by research participants; thus, it is less likely that they
respond according to some theoretical predictions (Simons &
Peterson, 2000).
4. Results
4.1. Main analyses
The zero-order correlations between the study variables and the
descriptive statistics are shown in Table 1. The results of the hier-
archical moderated regression are presented in Table 2. Model 1
included the control variables; Model 2 added organizational dis-
identification, together with the direct effects of the resources; and
Models 3e6 added the organizational disidentification  self-
enhancement motive, organizational
disidentification  benevolence, organizational
disidentification  citizenship climate, and organizational
disidentification  job involvement interaction terms, respectively.
Following previous recommendations, the individual interaction
terms were estimated in different equations, because their simul-
taneous estimation might hide or mask true moderating effects
(e.g., De Clercq & Belausteguigoitia, 2017; Zahra & Hayton, 2008).
The constructs were mean-centered before calculating the
respective product terms, consistent with Aiken and West (1991).3
In line with the baseline argument that the depletion in positive
work energy that comes with employees’ increasing cognitive
distancing from their employer might curtail their voluntary efforts
to change and improve current organizational practices and pro-
cesses, Model 2 revealed a negative relationship between organi-
zational disidentification and change-oriented citizenship behavior
(b ¼ .100, p < .001), as predicted by Hypothesis 1. Even if these
relationships extend beyond the theoretical realm of this study, the
results in Model 2 also indicated direct, positive relationships of
self-enhancement motive (b ¼ 0.379, p < .001), benevolence
(b ¼ 0.102, p < .05), and job involvement (b ¼ 0.209, p < .001) with
change-oriented citizenship behavior, but no such significant
relationship existed for citizenship climate (b ¼ .034, ns).
Models 4e5 affirmed the hypothesized mitigating effects of the
two personal resources: self-enhancement motive (b ¼ 0.100,
3
For comprehensiveness, Model 7 included the four interaction terms, entered
simultaneously, as detailed in the “Post hoc analyses” section. For each model, the
parametric assumptions for a regression analysis could be confirmed: there were no
outliers, the residuals followed the normal distribution, the independence of error
condition was met, and the effects of the focal constructs were linear and not
curvilinear (Warner, 2013).
D. De Clercq European Management Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx

Table 1
Correlations and descriptive statistics.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1. Change-oriented citizenship behavior

2. Organizational disidentification -.123a
3. Self-enhancement motive .505** 089
4. Benevolence .320** 057 .325**
5. Citizenship climate 073 .434** .115a .177**
6. Job involvement .417** .178** .381** .336** 077
7. Gender (1 ¼ female) 048 073 017 .183** 081 075
8. Organizational tenure 066 022 091 065 .208** 043 083
Mean 5.338 3.022 5.384 5.110 4.555 4.909 .380 8.323
Standard deviation 1.032 1.718 .959 1.093 1.481 1.336 .486 5.844

Note: N ¼ 350.
a
p < .05; **p < .01.

Table 2
Regression results (dependent variable: change-oriented citizenship behavior).

Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 5 Model 6 Model 7

Gender (1 ¼ female) .091 .044 .013 .015 .005 .020 -.012

Organizational tenure .011 .013 .013þ .013þ .014þ .014þ .015þ
H1: Organizational disidentification -.100*** -.096*** -.113*** -.170*** -.114*** -.150***
Self-enhancement motive .379*** .414*** .343*** .341*** .377*** .364***
Benevolence .102* .082þ .160*** .086þ .097þ .094þ
Citizenship climate .034 .022 .027 .117** .024 .077þ
Job involvement .209*** .215*** .209*** .204*** .243*** .216***
H2a: Organizational disidentification  Self-enhancement motive .100*** .056þ
H2b: Organizational disidentification  Benevolence .091** .024
H3a: Organizational disidentification  Citizenship climate .100*** .065*
H3b: Organizational disidentification  Job involvement .063** .015
R2 .006 .355 .384 .373 .387 .369 .400
Change in R2 .349*** .029*** .018** .032*** .014** .045***

Note: N ¼ 350; unstandardized coefficients.

þ
p < .10; *p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001 (two-tailed).

p < .001) and benevolence (b ¼ 0.091, p < .01) served as buffers of (b ¼ .270, p < .001) and job involvement (b ¼ 0.177, p < .001) but
the negative relationship between organizational disidentification not significant at high levels of these contextual resources
and change-oriented citizenship behavior. The likelihood that (b ¼ 0.070, b ¼ 0.051, both ns).
employees’ current level of cognitive distance from their employer
would escalate into a lower propensity to improve current orga-
4.2. Post hoc analyses
nizational practices and practices on a voluntary basis was lower
among employees who found it important to impress others (Hy-
As mentioned previously, the concurrent assessment of multiple
pothesis 2a) and who were benevolent in their work-related efforts
interaction terms in one equation may mask true moderating ef-
(Hypothesis 2 b). These significant mitigating effects are depicted in
fects, due to multicollinearity or the complex conglomeration of
Fig. 2, Panels A and B. The associated simple slope analysis (Aiken &
multiple influences that operate simultaneously (Aiken & West,
West, 1991) indicated that the relationship between organizational
1991; Warner, 2013). Nonetheless, estimating a model that in-
disidentification and change-oriented citizenship behavior was
cludes all product terms together can confirm the robustness of the
negative and significant at low levels of self-enhancement motive
focal findings (Arnold, 1982; Covin, Green, & Slevin, 2006), espe-
(b ¼ .196, p < .001) and benevolence (b ¼ 0.204, p < .001), but it
cially if the signs of its product terms are consistent with those that
became nonsignificant when these two personal resources were
appear in the models that estimate the product terms separately. In
high (b ¼ 0.004; b ¼ 0.022, respectively, both ns).
Model 7 (Table 2), one moderator (self-enhancement motive) was
Models 5e6 similarly provided evidence for the mitigating roles
significant at p < .10, and another (citizenship climate) was signif-
of the two contextual resources. The negative relationship between
icant at p < .05; the other two were not significant. Yet the signs of
organizational disidentification and change-oriented citizenship
all four interaction terms were positive, in line with Models 3e6.
behavior was weaker at higher levels of citizenship climate
Moreover, separate moderation analyses of the same bivariate
(b ¼ .100, p < .001) and job involvement (b ¼ 0.063, p < .01). The
relationship could inflate Type I error; therefore, an applied Bon-
risk that increased levels of organizational disidentification would
ferroni correction multiplied the p-values of the four product
turn employees away from discretionary change-oriented activities
terms, found in Models 3e6, by a factor of 4 (Warner, 2013). The
was lower when they perceived that citizenship behaviors were
resulting p-values were still lower than 0.05 (i.e., p ¼ .000, p ¼ .007,
encouraged in their organization (Hypothesis 3a) and when they
p ¼ .000, and p ¼ .024, respectively), which corroborates the sup-
were strongly involved with their jobs (Hypothesis 3 b).Fig. 3
port for Hypotheses 2e5.
Panels AeB, shows the corresponding interaction plots. Similar to
The significance of the product terms in Models 3e6, but not
that for the two personal resources, the simple slope analysis
necessarily in Model 7, reflects the unique interpretation of each
revealed that the relationship between organizational dis-
product term (mean-centered) when the three other interactions
identification and change-oriented citizenship behavior was
are accounted for in Model 7 (Aiken & West, 1991). That is, models
negative and significant at low levels of citizenship climate
that include only one product term (Models 3e6) reveal the
7
D. De Clercq
Fig. 2. A: Moderating effect of self-enhancement motive on the relationship between organizational disidentification and change-oriented citizenship behavior.
B: Moderating effect of benevolence on the relationship between organizational disidentification and change-oriented citizenship behavior.
relationship between organizational disidentification and change-
oriented citizenship behavior at nonaverage values of a specific
moderator (self-enhancement motive, benevolence, citizenship
climate, or job involvement). Their concurrent estimation in Model
7 instead indicates the effect of each moderator in a multidimen-
sional space, confined to the mean values of the other moderators.
For example, the moderating effect of benevolence in Model 7 re-
flects a scenario in which self-enhancement motives, citizenship
climate, and job involvement (mean-centered in their respective
product terms) are at their mean values. But in Model 4, the
moderating effect of benevolence covers the complete range of
values for self-enhancement motive, citizenship climate, and job
involvement. The nonsignificance of some product terms in Model
7 thus indicates, reasonably, that the corresponding moderating
8
European Management Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx
effects are sensitive to the influences of the other moderators (De
Clercq, Dimov, & Thongpapanl, 2010).4
Although the conceptual focus of this study is on the concurrent
interplay of organizational disidentification with the four central
resources, a further empirical test addresses the possibility that
these resources might make it less likely that employees cognitively
distance themselves from their employing organization, which
could enhance their change-oriented voluntary efforts. In a post-
4
Continued research could use configurational approaches to assess the degree
to which employees’ access to an “ideal” configurationdhigh levels of all four re-
sources simultaneouslydmay subdue the process by which organizational dis-
identification escalates into reduced change-oriented citizenship behavior (Vorhies
& Morgan, 2003).
D. De Clercq European Management Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fig. 3. A Moderating effect of citizenship climate on the relationship between organizational disidentification and change-oriented citizenship behavior.
B: Moderating effect of job involvement on the relationship between organizational disidentification and change-oriented citizenship behavior.

hoc path model, organizational disidentification accordingly serves
as a mediator between the four resources and change-oriented
citizenship behavior, but the fit of this model is very poor
(CFI ¼ .28; IFI ¼ 0.29, TLI ¼ 0.06; RMSEA ¼ 0.21). Moreover, four
additional path models were estimated, each of which included one
of the four interaction terms and the covariances of organizational
disidentification with self-enhancement motives, benevolence,
citizenship climate, or job involvement, respectively. These models
thus can account for possible interdependencies between organi-
zational disidentification and the four resources, including sce-
narios in which, for example, benevolence and job involvement
might diminish organizational disidentification or organizational
disidentification might diminish benevolence and job involvement.
The signs and significance levels of all four interaction terms mimic
9
the regression results in Table 2, which confirms the critical role of
the four focal resources in influencing the extent to which
increasing levels of currently experienced organizational dis-
identification translate into diminished change-oriented citizen-
ship behavior, beyond any causal connections that might be present
between organizational disidentification and the resources. This
post hoc analysis offers additional confirmation of the robustness of
the proposed conceptual framework.
5. Discussion
This study explicates a negative connection between organiza-
tional disidentification and change-oriented citizenship behavior,
as well as how employees’ access to pertinent resources subdues
D. De Clercq
this connection. The lack of attention to this issue in prior research
is somewhat surprising, in light of the argument that the extent to
which employees have cognitively distanced themselves from their
employing organization tends to steer them away from discre-
tionary work activities that add to organizational effectiveness
(Chou, Fang, & Yeh, 2019; Montani & Dagenais-Desmarais, 2018).
Drawing on the COR theory (Hobfoll & Shirom, 2000), the study
predicted buffering roles of four specific resources in the link be-
tween the degree of organizational disidentification and likelihood
of change-oriented citizenship behavior: two held personally (self-
enhancement motive and benevolence) and two that capture the
work context (citizenship climate and job involvement). The
empirical results provide support for the theoretical predictions.
The direct negative link between organizational dis-
identification and change-oriented citizenship behavior comple-
ments prior research that pinpoints resource-enhancing factors as
positive determinants of employees’ propensity to suggest organi-
zational improvements voluntarily, such as their openness to
experience (Miao & Qian, 2016) or exposure to transformational
leadership (Carter et al., 2014). Employees who feel upset about
their organizational membership, as manifest in their level of
cognitive separation from their employer, instead tend to experi-
ence strongly negative emotions with respect to their daily work
functioning (Elsbach & Bhattacharya, 2001; Lai et al., 2013); thus,
they have very little motivation to extend themselves by recom-
mending beneficial changes, particularly if these behaviors are not
part of their formal job descriptions. Thus, even if an alternative
argument could be that employees’ negative feelings about their
organizational membership might spur change-invoking behavior,
to undo the source of their frustration (Ashforth & Mael, 1998), the
empirical findings follow the COR-based argument that these em-
ployees seek to conserve their valuable energy resources by not
“wasting” them on efforts from which their organization could
benefit.5 In addition, the distress that arises when employees have
cognitively distanced themselves from their organization may
deplete their energy bases to such an extent that they feel incapable
of performing discretionary, energy-consuming activities such as
change-oriented citizenship behaviors (Campbell & Im, 2016).
When employees lack positive work energy, they limit their
voluntary efforts, because they have insufficient resources to
generate and defend new ideas (Bettencourt, 2004; Quinn et al.,
2012).
As an additional contribution, this study offers a formal inves-
tigation of how organizational decision makers might diminish the
harmful role of employees’ existing level of organizational dis-
identification in reducing change-oriented citizenship behavior.
This role is conditional on the degree to which employees can draw
from distinct, complementary resources (Hobfoll & Shirom, 2000),
whether derived from their own individual features (self-
enhancement motive, benevolence) or the organizational context
(citizenship climate, job involvement). As explicated in the argu-
ments underpinning the research hypotheses, these four specific
resources are critical buffers that mitigate frustrations associated
with employees’ experienced degree of cognitive separation from
their organization (Kreiner & Ashforth, 2004; Lai et al., 2013) and
thus have positive consequences for their willingness to maintain
some level of change-oriented citizenship. Moreover, the four re-
sources speak to the performance gains that employees can achieve
if they commit to change-related activities to improve current
5
A post hoc analysis checked for the presence of a curvilinear relationship be-
tween organizational disidentification and change-oriented citizenship behavior,
which would imply this stimulating effect, but no evidence supported this positive
dynamic.
10
European Management Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx
organizational practices and processes, even in the presence of a
certain level of organizational disidentificationdeither as extrinsic
benefits (self-enhancement motive, citizenship climate) or intrinsic
benefits (benevolence, job involvement) (Carter et al., 2014).
Notably, the theoretical focus of this study on the mitigating
roles of the four focal resources refers to the incremental role of
increasing levels of organizational disidentification in discouraging
change-oriented citizenship behavior. It demonstrates that the
degree to which employees have cognitively separated themselves
from their employer implies the possibility of thwarted change-
oriented voluntarism, but the extent to which it is the case de-
pends on their access to available complementary resources
(Hobfoll, 2001). This incremental role is manifest in the patterns of
the interaction plots in Figs. 2 and 3. Increasing levels of organi-
zational disidentification undermine change-oriented citizenship
behavior when employees (1) have little interest in making positive
impression on others, (2) are not motivated by the possibility to
give more or add to their organization’s success, (3) feel limited
organizational encouragement to go the extra mile, and (4) do not
consider their jobs very important for their personal happiness.
However, this propensity to forgo change-oriented citizenship
voluntarism vanishes if employees can turn to valuable resources
that mitigate the hardships that arise with their current frustra-
tions. This study thus offers pertinent insights into the personal and
contextual conditions in which organizations can avoid a negative
spiral, in which employees are unhappy with their employment
situation and have cognitively separated themselves from it, such
that they respond in ways that lower the overall organizational
capacity to resolve the underlying causes because they avoid
discretionary behaviors that otherwise could offer relevant
solutions.
5.1. Limitations and future research
Some limitations mark this research, which indicate fruitful
paths for additional studies. First, the cross-sectional research
design is consistent with the research focus on the concurrent
interplay of employees’ degree of organizational disidentification
and the selected contingent resources. Yet the possibility of reverse
causality between the independent and dependent variables re-
mains. Even if the theoretical arguments are grounded in the well-
established COR frameworkdaccording to which resource-
depleting frustrations about their current organizational member-
ship should spur employees’ desire to conserve their personal en-
ergy resources instead of allocating them to discretionary work
activities (Hobfoll et al., 2018)da sense of personal accomplish-
ment due to successful voluntary change-oriented activities could
generate positive feelings about their work functioning in general,
which may decrease the degree to which they exhibit organiza-
tional disidentification. It would be valuable to undertake longi-
tudinal studies and measure the focal constructs at distinct points
in time.
Second, the four considered contingency factors, two personal
and two contextual, offer an encompassing view of various re-
sources that buffer the translation of organizational dis-
identification into reduced voluntary change-oriented efforts, but
further research could examine additional factors that may have
similar buffering roles. At the individual level, relevant factors
could include employees’ proactive personality (Jiang & Gu, 2015),
resilience (Al-Hawari, Bani-Melhem, & Quratulain, 2019), passion
for work (De Clercq & Belausteguigoitia, 2017), or optimism (Li, Li,
Fay, & Frese, 2019). At the firm level, the escalation of employees’
degree of cognitive distancing from their organization into dimin-
ished change-oriented voluntarism could be subdued to the extent
that employees believe that organizational decision-making
D. De Clercq
procedures are fair (Xiang, Li, Wu, & Long, 2019), enjoy high levels
of job autonomy (Zhang, Jex, Peng, & Wang, 2017), are exposed to
transformational leaders (Carter et al., 2014), or believe in the
trustworthiness of top management (Mahajan, Bishop, & Scott,
2012).
Third, an empirical shortcoming of this research relates to its
focus on one industry (telecommunication). As mentioned, the
single-industry design diminishes worries about possible unob-
served industry differences that might occur with respect to the
perceived need for employees to go out of their way to introduce
organizational changes and improve current practices and pro-
cesses (Lahiri et al., 2008). The conceptual arguments that underpin
this study’s focal relationships are not tied to a specific industry
though; thus, even if the strength of the hypothesized relationships
might vary across industries, their very nature should not. It would
be useful to explicate how specific industry characteristics may
interfere though. For example, more external market competition
and dynamism (Bustinza, Vendrell-Herrero, Perez-Arostegui, &
Parry, 2019) could motivate employees to try to safeguard their
organization, even if their efforts are not formally expected and
they feel a certain level of disappointment with their organizational
membership. Another relevant factor could be the extent to which
(new) industry sectors rely on potentially controversial technolo-
gies or applications (e.g., artificial intelligence, driverless cars),
which could increase the chances that employees would cogni-
tively distance themselves from their employing organization.
From this perspective, the focus on the well-established telecom-
munications sector provided a conservative test of the research
hypotheses. Finding empirical support for the hypotheses in a
setting in which employees, on average, have little reason to feel
ashamed about their company’s product offerings helps underscore
the broad applicability of the proposed theoretical framework.
5.2. Practical implications
This examination of the interactive effects of employees’ degree
of organizational disidentification and access to various resources
provides valuable insights for management practitioners. The
extent to which employees have distanced themselves from their
employer reflects an important source of frustration and energy
drainage. Organizational leaders must do their utmost to reduce
such beliefs within their ranks. A pertinent challenge, though, is
that some employees may be reluctant to express their frustrations,
for fear of being seen as unreasonable or ungrateful; even worse,
they might worry about negative consequences of their complaints,
even to the extent of organizational dismissal (Barry & Wilkinson,
2016). Organizations therefore should determine why employees
might develop strongly negative beliefs about their organizational
membershipdsuch as a conviction that previously made organi-
zational promises have not been honored (Zagenczyk et al., 2013)d
and then eliminate these causes. Moreover, they should foster an
internal environment in which employees feel comfortable dis-
cussing their concerns about how the organization operates or their
alienation from the organization because of these concerns, to
prevent an escalation of their negative energy into efforts to
withhold extraordinary work efforts that otherwise could help
improve various organizational practices and processes (Lai et al.,
2013). In this regard, open knowledge-exchange forums might
give members from different functional departments and hierar-
chical levels a space to vent their disappointments and suggest
areas for improvement (Wang & NOE, 2010).
The results with respect to the buffering roles of the focal re-
sources should be particularly relevant for organizations that
cannot eliminate organizational disidentification completely from
among their employee bases, whether due to the employees’ own
11
European Management Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx
personality characteristics (e.g., negative affectivity) or to necessary
but controversial organizational decisions. If organizations want to
maintain productive voluntary efforts within their ranks, despite
employees’ organizational disidentification, they can do so by
leveraging pertinent resources (Hobfoll & Shirom, 2000). In
particular, they can benefit from recruiting and retaining em-
ployees who (1) have a general interest in enhancing their orga-
nizational standing through productive work efforts and (2) tend to
focus on how they can contribute to their organization’s success,
instead of worrying about their own personal disappointments. In
addition, organizations can reduce the risk that employees’ degree
of cognitive separation from their employer compromises change-
oriented voluntarism to the extent that they (1) underscore the
value of going the extra mile in addressing organizational problem
situations and (2) design jobs from which employees can derive
more personal satisfaction. By developing and leveraging these
valuable personal and contextual resources, organizational decision
makers can avoid a negative spiral in which employees, upset with
their organizational membership, become complacent and un-
willing to take initiatives to address their personal disappointment
and the organizational failures that cause it.
6. Conclusion
With a theoretical basis in the COR theory, this study extends
extant research by detailing the combined roles of employees’
existing organizational disidentification and simultaneous access to
a diverse set of resources for explaining their change-oriented
citizenship. The findings affirm the theoretical argument that the
extent to which employees have cognitively distanced themselves
from their organization steers them away from voluntary work
activities that improve current organizational practices and pro-
cesses. This harmful dynamic can be subdued though, to the extent
that employees have access to complementary resources that help
them cope with this resource-draining situation and improve it,
which motivate them not to be “stingy” with their productive work
efforts. Perhaps then this study can serve as a helpful platform for
additional studies of how organizations might contain the risk that
employees’ negative beliefs about their organizational membership
escalate and lead to negative behavioral reactions that make the
negative situation even worse.
Funding
This research was funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities
Research Council (SSHRC) of Canada (File: 435-2016-0127).
References
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting in-
teractions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Al-Hawari, M. A., Bani-Melhem, S., & Quratulain, S. (2019). Do frontline employees
cope effectively with abusive supervision and customer incivility? Testing the
effect of employee resilience. Journal of Business and Psychology. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s10869-019-09621-2
Alavi, S. B., & Gill, C. (2017). Leading change authentically: How authentic leaders
influence follower responses to complex change. Journal of Leadership &
Organizational Studies, 24, 157e171.
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A
review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 1033,
411e423.
Arnold, H. J. (1982). Moderator variables: A clarification of conceptual, analytic, and
psychometric issues. Organizational Behavior & Human Performance, 29,
143e174.
Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. A. (1998). The power of resistance: Sustaining valued
identities. In R. M. Kramer, & M. A. Neale (Eds.), Power and influence in orga-
nizations (pp. 89e119). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Bal, P. M., De Lange, A. H., Jansen, P. G. W., & Van der Velde, M. E. G. (2013).
A longitudinal study of age-related differences in reactions to psychological
contract breach. Applied Psychology: International Review, 62, 157e181.
D. De Clercq
Becker, T. E. (2005). Potential problems in the statistical control of variables in
organizational research: A qualitative analysis with recommendations. Orga-
nizational Research Methods, 8, 274e289.
Bergeron, D. M. (2007). The potential paradox of organizational citizen-ship
behavior: Good citizens at what cost? Academy of Management Review, 32,
1078e1095.
Bettencourt, L. A. (2004). Change-oriented organizational citizenship behaviors:
The direct and moderating influence of goal orientation. Journal of Retailing, 80,
165e180.
BMI Research. (2019). Canada Telecommunications Report, 1, 1e42.
Bolino, M. C., Turnley, W. H., Gilstrap, J. B., & Suazo, M. M. (2010). Citizenship under
pressure: What’s a “good soldier” to do? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31,
835e855.
Bolino, M. C., Turnley, W. H., & Niehoff, B. P. (2004). The other side of the story:
Reexamining prevailing assumptions about organizational citizenship behav-
iour. Human Resource Management Review, 14, 229e246.
Bustinza, O. F., Vendrell-Herrero, F., Perez-Arostegui, M., & Parry, G. (2019). Tech-
nological capabilities, resilience capabilities and organizational effectiveness.
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 30, 1370e1392.
Campbell, J. W. (2015). Identification and performance management: An assess-
ment of change-oriented behavior in public organizations. Public Personnel
Management, 44, 46e69.
Campbell, J. W., & Im, T. (2016). PSM and turnover intention in public organizations:
Does change-oriented organizational citizenship behavior play a role? Review of
Public Personnel Administration, 36, 323e346.
Carter, M. Z., Self, D. R., Bandow, D. F., Wheatley, R. L., Thompson, W. F., Wright, D. N.,
et al. (2014). Unit-focused and individual-focused transformational leadership:
The role of middle leaders in the midst of incremental organizational change.
Journal of Management Policy and Practice, 15, 44e53.
Cates, D. A., Mathis, C. J., & Randle, N. W. (2010). A positive perspective of citizenship
pressure among working adults. Journal of Managerial Issues, 22, 330e344.
Chang, C., Rosen, C. C., Siemieniec, G. M., & Johnson, R. E. (2012). Perceptions of
organizational politics and employee citizenship behaviors: Conscientiousness
and self-monitoring as moderators. Journal of Business and Psychology, 27,
395e406.
Chen, C., & Chiu, S. (2009). The mediating role of job involvement in the relationship
between job characteristics and organizational citizenship behavior. The Journal
of Social Psychology, 149, 474e494.
Chen, G., Goddard, T. G., & Casper, W. J. (2004). Examination of the relationships
among general and work-specific self-evaluations, work-related control beliefs,
and job attitudes. Applied Psychology: International Review, 53, 349e370.
Cherry, B. A. (2015). Technology transitions within telecommunications networks:
Lessons from U.S. vs. Canadian policy experimentation under federalism. Tele-
communications Policy, 39, 463e485.
Chiaburu, D. S., Lorinkova, N. M., & Van Dyne, L. (2013). Employees’ social context
and change-oriented citizenship a meta-analysis of leader, coworker, and
organizational influences. Group & Organization Management, 38, 291e333.
Choi, J. N. (2007). Change-oriented organizational citizenship behavior: Effects of
work environment characteristics and intervening psychological processes.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28, 467e484.
Choi, W., Kim, S. L., & Yun, S. (2019). A social exchange perspective of abusive su-
pervision and knowledge sharing: Investigating the moderating effects of
psychological contract fulfillment and self-enhancement motive. Journal of
Business and Psychology, 34, 305e319.
Chou, H.-H., Fang, S.-C., & Yeh, T.-K. (2019). The effects of facades of conformity on
employee voice and job satisfaction. Management Decision, 58, 495e509.
Colquitt, J. A. (2004). Does the justice of the one interact with the justice of the
many? Reactions to procedural justice in teams. Journal of Applied Psychology,
89, 633e646.
Covin, J. G., Green, K. M., & Slevin, D. P. (2006). Strategic process effects on the
entrepreneurial orientation-sales growth rate relationship. Entrepreneurship:
Theory and Practice, 30, 57e81.
De Clercq, D., & Belausteguigoitia, I. (2017). Overcoming the dark side of task
conflict: Buffering roles of transformational leadership, tenacity, and passion for
work. European Management Journal, 35, 78e90.
De Clercq, D., Dimov, D., & Thongpapanl, N. (2010). The moderating impact of in-
ternal social Exchange processes on the entrepreneurial orientation-
performance relationship. Journal of Business Venturing, 25, 87e103.
De Clercq, D., Fatima, T., & Jahanzeb, S. (2019). Ingratiating with despotic leaders to
gain status: The role of power distance orientation and self-enhancement
motive. Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04368-5
De Clercq, D., Haq, I. U., & Azeem, M. U. (2019). Threatened but involved: Key
conditions for stimulating employee helping behavior. Journal of Leadership &
Organizational Studies. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051819857741
Devonish, D. (2013). Workplace bullying, employee performance and behaviors:
The mediating role of psychological well-being. Employee Relations, 35,
630e647.
van Dick, R., Crawshaw, J. R., Karpf, S., Schuh, S. C., & Zhang, X. (2019). Identity,
importance, and their roles in how corporate social responsibility affects
workplace attitudes and behavior. Journal of Business and Psychology. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s10869-019-09619-w
Elsbach, K. D., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001). Defining who you are by what you’re
not: Organizational disidentification and the National Rifle Association. Orga-
nization Science, 12, 393e413.
Gerbing, D. W., & Anderson, J. C. (1988). An updated paradigm for scale
12
European Management Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx
development incorporating unidimensionality and its assessment. Journal of
Marketing Research, 25, 186e192.
Han, Y., Sears, G., & Zhang, H. (2018). Revisiting the "give and take" in LMX:
Exploring equity sensitivity as a moderator of the influence of LMX on affiliative
and change-oriented OCB. Personnel Review, 47, 555e571.
Harnish, R. J., & Roster, C. A. (2019). The tripartite model of aberrant purchasing: A
theory to explain the maladaptive pursuit of consumption. Psychology and
Marketing, 36, 417e430.
Hartman, S. J., Villere, M. F., & Fok, L. Y. (1995). An investigation of the Huseman
et al. proposals for three equity types. International Journal of Management, 12,
137e147.
Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources. A new attempt at conceptualizing
stress. American Psychologist, 44, 513e524.
Hobfoll, S. E. (2001). The influence of culture, community, and the nested-self in the
stress process: Advancing conservation of resource theory. Applied Psychology:
International Review, 50, 337e369.
Hobfoll, S. E., Halbesleben, J., Neveu, J.-P., & Westman, M. (2018). Conservation of
resources in the organizational context: The reality of resources and their
consequences. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational
Behavior, 5, 103e128.
Hobfoll, S. E., & Shirom, A. (2000). Conservation of resources theory: Applications to
stress and management in the workplace. In R. T. Golembiewski (Ed.), Handbook
of organization behavior (2nd ed., pp. 57e81). New York: Dekker.
Huseman, R. C., Hatfield, J. D., & Miles, E. W. (1987). A new perspective on equity
theory: The equity sensitivity construct. Academy of Management Review, 12,
222e234.
Jahanzeb, S., De Clercq, D., & Fatima, T. (2020). Organizational injustice and knowl-
edge hiding: The roles of organizational dis-identification and benevolence.
forthcoming: Management Decision.
Jayawardana, A. K. L., O’Donnell, M., & Jayakody, J. A. S. K. (2013). Job involvement
and performance among middle managers in Sri Lanka. International Journal of
Human Resource Management, 24, 4008e4025.
Jiang, W., & Gu, Q. (2015). A moderated mediation examination of proactive per-
sonality on employee creativity. Journal of Organizational Change Management,
28, 393e410.
Kanungo, R. N. (1982). Measurement of job and work involvement. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 67, 341e349.
Kao, R.-H. (2017). The relationship between work characteristics and change-
oriented organizational citizenship behavior: A multi-level study on trans-
formational leadership and organizational climate in immigration workers.
Personnel Review, 46, 1890e1914.
Kreiner, G. E., & Ashforth, B. E. (2004). Evidence toward an expanded model of
organizational identification. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 1e27.
Lahiri, S., Pe rez-Nordtvedt, L., & Renn, R. W. (2008). Will the new competitive
landscape cause your firm’s decline? It depends on your mindset. Business
Horizons, 51, 311e320.
Lai, J. Y. M., Chan, K. W., & Lam, L. W. (2013). Defining who you are not: The roles of
moral dirtiness and occupational and organizational disidentification in
affecting casino employee turnover intention. Journal of Business Research, 66,
1659e1666.
Lattin, J. M., Carroll, J. D., & Green, P. E. (2003). Analyzing multivariate data. Belmont,
CA: Thomson Brooks/Cole.
Liang, J., Farh, C. I. C., & Farh, J. (2012). Psychological antecedents of promotive and
prohibitive voice: A two-wave examination. Academy of Management Journal,
55, 71e92.
Li, W., Li, S., Fay, D., & Frese, M. (2019). Reciprocal relationships between disposi-
tional optimism and work experiences: A five-wave longitudinal investigation.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 104, 1471e1486.
Lin, K. J., Savani, K., & Ilies, R. (2019). Doing good, feeling good? The roles of helping
motivation and citizenship pressure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 104,
1020e1035.
Lopez-Domínguez, M., Enache, M., Sallan, J. M., & Simo, P. (2013). Transformational
leadership as an antecedent of change-oriented organizational citizenship
behavior. Journal of Business Research, 66, 2147e2152.
Mahajan, A., Bishop, J. W., & Scott, D. (2012). Does trust in top management mediate
top management communication, employee involvement and organizational
commitment relationships? Journal of Managerial Issues, 24, 173e190.
Maynes, T. D., & Podsakoff, P. M. (2014). Speaking more broadly: An examination of
the nature, antecedents, and consequences of an expanded set of employee
voice behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99, 87e112.
Miao, C., & Qian, S. (2016). Does leadership matter? A multilevel investigation of the
moderators for the relationship between openness and change-oriented
behavior. Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics, 13, 77e89.
Milliken, F. J., Morrison, E. W., & Hewlin, P. (2003). An exploratory study of
employee silence: Issues that employees don’t communicate upward and why.
Journal of Management Studies, 40, 1453e1476.
Montani, F., & Dagenais-Desmarais, V. (2018). Unravelling the relationship between
role overload and organizational citizenship behaviour: A test of mediating and
moderating effects. European Management Journal, 36, 757e768.
Morrison, E. W. (2011). Employee voice behavior: Integration and directions for
future research. The Academy of Management Annals, 5, 373e412.
Morrison, E. W., & Phelps, C. C. (1999). Taking charge at work: Extrarole efforts to
initiate workplace change. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 403e419.
Naseer, S., Raja, U., Syed, F., & Bouckenooghe, D. (2018). Combined effects of
workplace bullying and perceived organizational support on employee
D. De Clercq
behaviors: Does resource availability help? Anxiety, Stress & Coping, 31,
654e668.
Nesheim, T., & Smith, J. (2015). Knowledge sharing in projects: Does employment
arrangement matter? Personnel Review, 44, 255e269.
Oliveira, E., & Cabral Cardoso, C. (2018). Stereotype threat and older worker’s atti-
tudes: A mediation model. Personnel Review, 47, 187e205.
Orpen, C. (1997). The interactive effects of communication quality and job
involvement on managerial job satisfaction and work motivation. Journal of
Psychology, 131, 519e522.
Parker, E. B., Kiewitz, C., Garcia, P. R. J. M., & Hochwarter, W. A. (2019). Dealing with
the full-of-self-boss: Interactive effects of supervisor narcissism and subordi-
nate resource management ability on work outcomes. Journal of Business Ethics,
157, 847e864.
Perry-Smith, J. E., & Mannucci, P. V. (2017). From creativity to innovation: The social
network drivers of the four phases of the idea journey. Academy of Management
Review, 42, 53e79.
Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in organization research:
Problems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12, 532e544.
Potipiroon, W., & Ford, M. T. (2019). Relational costs of status: Can the relationship
between supervisor incivility, perceived support, and follower outcomes be
exacerbated? Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 92,
873e896.
Quinn, R. W., Spreitzer, G. M., & Lam, C. F. (2012). Building a sustainable model of
human energy in organizations: Exploring the critical role of resources. The
Academy of Management Annals, 6, 337e396.
Rani, H., Arain, G. A., Kumar, A., & Shaikh, I. R. (2018). Interplay between trust and
distrust in the workplace: Examining the effect of psychological contract breach
on organizational disidentification. Journal of Asia Business Studies, 12, 1e16.
Ross, S. M., & Sommer, K. (2018). Balancing self/collective-interest: Equity theory for
prosocial consumption. European Journal of Marketing, 52, 528e549.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of
intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist,
55(1), 68e78.
Seppa€l€
a, T., Lipponen, J., Bardi, A., & Pirttil€
a-Backman, A.-M. (2012). Change-oriented
organizational citizenship behaviour: An interactive product of openness to
change values, work unit identification, and sense of power. Journal of Occu-
pational and Organizational Psychology, 85, 136e155.
Shen, Y., Jackson, T., Ding, C., Yuan, D., Zhao, L., Dou, Y., et al. (2014). Linking
perceived organizational support with employee work outcomes in a Chinese
context: Organizational identification as a mediator. European Management
Journal, 32, 406e412.
Simons, T., & Peterson, R. S. (2000). Task conflict and relationship conflict in top
management teams: The pivotal role of intragroup trust. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 83, 102e111.
Simo, P., Sallan, J. M., Fernandez, V., & Enache, M. (2016). Change-oriented organi-
zational citizenship behavior: Analysis of antecedents centered on regulatory
13
European Management Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx
theory focus at the workplace. International Journal of Organizational Analysis,
24, 261e273.
Spector, P. E. (2006). Method variance in organizational research: Truth or urban
legend? Organizational Research Methods, 9, 221e232.
Vigoda-Gadot, E., & Beeri, I. (2012). Change-oriented organizational citizenship
behavior in public administration: The power of leadership and the cost of
organizational politics. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22,
573e596.
Vorhies, D. W., & Morgan, N. A. (2003). A configuration theory assessment of
marketing organization fit with business strategy and its relationship with
marketing performance. Journal of Marketing, 67, 100e115.
Wang, S., & Noe, R. A. (2010). Knowledge sharing: A review and directions for future
research. Human Resource Management Review, 20, 115e131.
Wang, Y., Tang, C., Naumann, S. E., & Wang, Y. (2019). Paternalistic leadership and
employee creativity: A mediated moderation model. Journal of Management and
Organization, 25, 137e156.
Warner, R. M. (2013). Applied statistics: From bivariate through multivariate tech-
niques (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Willmott, H. (1993). Strength is ignorance; slavery is freedom: Managing culture in
modern organizations. Journal of Management Studies, 30, 515e552.
Xiang, C., Li, C., Wu, K., & Long, L. (2019). Procedural justice and voice: A group
engagement model. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 34, 491e503.
Yun, S., Takeuchi, R., & Liu, W. (2007). Employee self-enhancement motives and job
performance behaviors: Investigating the moderating effects of employee role
ambiguity and managerial perceptions of employee commitment. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 92, 745e756.
Zagenczyk, T. J., Cruz, K. S., Woodard, A. M., Walker, J. C., Few, W. T., Kiazad, K., et al.
(2013). The moderating effect of Machiavellianism on the psychological con-
tract breach-organizational identification/disidentification relationships. Jour-
nal of Business and Psychology, 28, 287e299.
Zahra, S., & Hayton, J. C. (2008). The effect of international venturing on firm per-
formance: The moderating influence of absorptive capacity. Journal of Business
Venturing, 23, 195e220.
Zhang, S. (2014). Impact of job involvement on organizational citizenship behaviors
in China. Journal of Business Ethics, 120, 165e174.
Zhang, W., Jex, S. M., Peng, Y., & Wang, D. (2017). Exploring the effects of job au-
tonomy on engagement and creativity: The moderating role of performance
pressure and learning goal orientation. Journal of Business and Psychology, 32,
235e251.
Zhang, M., Zheng, W., & Wei, J. (2009). Sources of social capital: Effects of altruistic
citizenship behavior and job involvement on advice network centrality. Human
Resource Development Quarterly, 20, 195e217.
Zhou, J., Shin, S. J., & Canella, A. A., Jr. (2008). Employee self-perceived creativity
after mergers and acquisitions: Interactive effects of threateopportunity
perception, access to resources, and support for creativity. The Journal of
Applied Behavioral Science, 44, 397e421.