Can Job Insecurity Predict Deviant Behaviours? Social Exchange Model of Justice and Identification Processes as Mediating Mechanisms

Purpose: Very few studies has been conducted about the influence of job insecurity on deviant behaviours (i.e., behaviours that violate organizational rules), a performance “domain” of central importance for organisational effectiveness. Research suggests that stressful working conditions may contribute to employees engaging in counterproductive work behaviours in an attempt to regain control over their environment. Alternatively, the fear for uncertainty may lead to avoid any behaviour increasing the likelihood of job loss. We propose two different mediating mechanisms to investigate JI-DB relationship. Specifically, procedural justice focuses on the resources exchange-based concerns that employees have in their organizational relationships (instrumental approach). Affective commitment is an indicator of identification with organization and refers to social-based identity explanation. Design/Methodology: The sample was composed of 570 Italian blue collar workers. Using SPSS-macro of Preacher and Hayes (2008), we tested specific indirect effects (multiple mediator model) and compared the two competing theories (contrasts). Results: Results showed that both procedural justice and affective commitment mediate the relationship JI-DB. Social exchange model and identification processes have the same “power” of explanation. Limitations: Cross-sectional data, limit for causal interpretation. Self-report measures, potential source of common method variance. Research/Practical Implications: Managers may focus on reducing level of procedural unfairness and enhancing commitment with organizational goals as a way of preventing deviant behaviours particularly in insecure workers. Originality/Value: We provide two different explanations to understand the processes underlying the development of DB in insecure working conditions.