Liu, X; Wang, X; Zhao, Y; Xia, N and Guo, S (2020) Solving workplace deviant behavior in construction by leader-member exchange and leader-member Guanxi. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 146(6): 04020061, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
The success of construction projects is largely influenced by the significant costs incurred by workplace deviant behavior (WDB). It is useful to better understand how WDB occurs among workers for its preventive management. By invoking social exchange theory, this paper clarifies how WDB among construction workers can be predicted by leader-member exchange (LMX) and leader-member guanxi (LMG). Data were gathered from 153 workers and 17 supervisors in 17 construction projects. The results show that LMX and LMG are negatively related to WDB. LMG moderates the relationship between LMX and WDB: The negative relationship between LMX and WDB is stronger when LMG has higher quality. The findings contribute to research on WDB, especially from the aspect of leader-member relationship in the construction industry, and shed light on the theory of social exchange by capturing the role of its nonwork part, LMG, in predicting WDB. Managers of construction projects can benefit from the novel explanation offered here of the occurrence of WDB among workers and suggestions on controlling it in advance.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | leader-member exchange; leader-member Guanxi; leader-member relationship; workplace deviant behavior |
| Index terms: | construction project, manager, supervisor, construction worker, social exchange theory, Guanxi, construction industry |
| Subjects: | industry analysis, sociology, production management, social theory, practitioner |
| Topics: | Urban Studies, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Project Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here