‘Who am I?’...‘I am my Organization!’-The The Mediating Role of Organizational Identification on the Relationship between Age Climate and Constructive Deviance
Master thesis, M.Sc. Human Resource Management University of Groningen, Faculty of Economics and Business
June 30th 2014 LENA KRISTIN KUNZ
ABSTRACT
The present study investigates the impact a positive age climate has on constructive deviance. The mediating role of organizational identivication is expected. It is is therefore assumed that a positive age climate leads to higher organizational identification and that
organizational identification leads to a higher level of constructive deviance. A survey has been distributed among the employees at a municipality in the north of The Netherlands. Regression analyses and a mediation analysis have been conducted to investigate the data. Results indicate that age climate was evaluated as rather neutral and no effect was found on organizational identification. Nevertheless, a high level of job autonomy was found to positively contribute to organizational identification. A high level of identification with the organization also contributed to higher level of constructive deviance. Literature on the topic is discussed and future research ideas are outlined.
‘Who am I?’...‘I am my Organization!’-The Mediating Role of Organizational Identification on the Relationship between Age Climate and Constructive Deviance
The working population is ageing. This development of increased life expectancies and lower fertility rates can be seen across all European countries (Commission Communication, 2006). The effects of this demographic change can be found on a societal level as well as on an organizational level. On a societal level, retaining older workers in the company keeps the balance of working and non-working people, which is essential for the social security system (Standing, 2000). Member states of the European Union have acknowledged the demographic change and therefore proclaim to increase job tenure. Several European countries have therefore raised their legal retirement age (Commission of the EC, 2010). On an organizational level, older employees are highly valuable; as job tenure increases, they acquire a high amount of expertise, experience as well as organizational memory (Joe, Yoong & Patel, 2013), which they
irretrievably take along once they retire (Dalkir, 2013).
There are other resources older employees can offer to help the company stay
competitive: Older workers are less likely to be absent from work due to factors they can control (avoidable absence: Panek, 1997; Thompson, Griffiths, & Davison, 2000). A study by Ekerdt (1986) found that older employees show a great amount of emotional investment in their work as well as a higher level of commitment to the job. Research suggests that although older workers finish their work in a less efficient manner, they work in a more conservative way and are therefore more accuracy driven (Strayer, Wickens & Braune, 1987).
As previously stated, research indicates that older employees can positively contribute to the performance of the company. However, a great amount of individuals, especially
are for example often perceived as “poor performers who are resistant to change, unable to learn, shorter to remain with the company, and simply more costly’’ (Posthuma & Campion, 2009). Studies show that those kind of negative beliefs tremendously impact the self-esteem of older workers (Hassell & Perrewé, 1993). Stereotypes based on age might act as a self-fulfilling prophecy (Maurer, Wrenn & Weiss, 2003) which additionally influences job performance negatively (Bourne, 1982). Therefore, older employees might not be able to perform as well as they would in an adequate environment, in which a positive age climate is predominant, age discrimination and negative stereotypes are absent.
Age climate, age stereotypes and age discrimination are different concepts which show overlap in their definitions. Age climate considers that the “[…] climate in an organization […] as age-friendly will depend in large part on the images of older workers that are endorsed by its members. […] it is the degree to which these attributes are associated with older workers” (Noack, 2009, p.14). The author distinguished between two different kinds of age climate, namely psychological age climate and organizational age climate. Psychological age climate is the individual perception of an employee about the organizational processes with regard to age, whereas organizational age climate is defined as “employees’ shared perceptions of how favorable older workers are perceived within their organization” (p.72).
fear in the stigmatized individual of reinforcing those stereotypes, resulting in a decrease in performance (Steele & Aronson, 1995). A recent study found a reduced performance in older individuals who experienced negative age stereotypes in addition to a high level of control of others. In this study the negative effect was not only found for older individuals but also for younger (Hehman & Bugental, 2013). These findings indicate the severe effect negative age stereotypes can have on individuals of all age groups.
Age discrimination is the behavioral result of stereotypes based on age (Finkelstein, Burk and Raju, 1995). Age climate, age stereotypes and age discrimination together cover two
dimensions of the ABC triad in social psychology (Baumeister & Bushman, 2010), which addresses Affect, Behavior and Cognition. Age discrimination is the behavior of people who treat (older) employees differently based on their age. Psychological age climate addresses the cognition of an individual who thinks about the organizational effort to implement an age-friendly climate (Finkelstein & Farrell, 2007). Lastely, age stereotypes cover the cognition of an individual about attributes of specific age groups.
organizational climate in which employees feel no discrimination based on age, nor prevailing age stereotypes or prejudices.
This paper will focus on the psychological age climate towards older people, since the focus is on the perceptions of individuals. In general, little research has been conducted using the concept of age climate in organizations. An integration of the positive images of older workers in the policies, procedures and practices of an organization is important to make it possible for employees to attribute a positive age climate to their organization (Brooke & Taylor, 2005).
A positive age climate contributes to the well-being of older employees (Hedge et al., 2006). Discriminatory behavior has among others been found to have a negative effect on the well-being of employees in general (Schneider, Hitlan, & Radhakrishnan, 2000). Nevertheless, the influence on older adults is more severe compared to younger individuals (Garstka et al., 2004). Additionally, employees who perceive age discrimination in their company are more likely to quit their job earlier (Johnson & Neumark, 1996). A high level of perceived age discrimination in a company has therefore a negative effect on its employees.
One of the most used explanations for the positive effects of organizational identification can be derived from the social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979), which provides a linkage between group and individual values and proposes that the individual identity is defined by the group membership. Ashforth and Mael (1989) applied this theory to organizations. According to their conceptualization, the membership to an organization defines the identity of an individual as an overlap of organizational and individual values. Further, goals of the group turn into goals of individuals who are identified with the group. These goals act as relevant guidelines for individuals. Sassenberg and Woltin (2009) called this social self-regulation.
Organizational identification influences the attitudes and behavior of the individual and results in actions that benefit the company (Dutton et al., 1994). Those actions address behaviors that are based on the organization’s standards, but individuals with a high level of organizational identification do not only comply with organizational rules and norms, they additionally exceed those to contribute to the organizations success referred to as pro-norm deviance (Abrams, Marques, Bown & Henson, 2000).
One approach that explains divergent behavior of individuals in relation to group norms has been proposed by Packer (2008). The normative conflict model argues that if high identified group members do not comply with the group norms they do it on behalf of the group, because their identity is based on the group (Packer, 2008). In this case, the divergent behavior has been labeled constructive deviance and is related to a high level of organizational identification (Gutworth, 2013).
conform to hypernorms” (p.1223). An employee’s reference group can be a task group, department or the organization as a whole. The term hypernorms refers to a set of global applicable beliefs and values (Donaldson & Dunfee, 1999). Several constructs have been identified to capture the broad term of constructive deviance. These have been summarized in a meta-analysis by Vadera et al. (2013) and are: taking charge, extra-role behavior, creative performance, expressing voice, issue selling, whistle-blowing, pro-social behavior, counter-role behaviors. All of these behaviors serve the organization to stay competitive on the market.
Summarizing the above, it can be said that the recognition of resources of older employees is important for the competitiveness of a company. A positive age climate in an organization has a positive effect on the performance level of its employees as well as on the level of identification. Organizational identification then contributes to the engagement in constructive deviance. The following hypothesis and conceptual model (see figure 1) have been derived based on the above review of the literature.
Hypothesis 1: A positive relationship between age climate and organizational identification will be evident.
Hypothesis 2: A positive relationship between organizational identification and constructive deviance will be evident.
Hypothesis 3: The relationship between age climate and constructive deviance is mediated by organizational identification, in such a way that there is an indirect effect. FIGURE 1
The conceptual model of this paper
H1 +
H3
Age Climate Constructive Deviance
Methodology Participants
Eighty individuals began to fill in the questionnaire. Seventy of them finished until the last question. Participants’ (57% female, 43% male) age is on average 48.52 years (SD = 10.56) ranging from 18 to 65 years of age. Work experience ranges from less than one year to 45 years (M = 26.71, SD = 10.99) and the organizational tenure from less than one year to 39 (M = 16.70, SD = 11.70). The majority of the participants are no supervisor (5 supervisor, 65 no supervisor). Participants work on average 32.14 hours a week (SD = 7.03) and indicate a positive level of job satisfaction (M = 3.99, SD = 0.79, see details on anchors in section on measures). The
descriptives indicate that 72.9% of the participants did not think about quiting their job, 12.9% considered leaving their job and 14.3% indicated neither. Given that the average turnover rate is approximately 16% in Dutch companies (Glebbeek & Bax, 2004) the organization of this study does not face severe problems (high or low) with turnover rates.
Procedure
Participants were recruited from a Dutch municipal organization in the Netherlands. The project was introduced to the leader of the human resource department. The link of the
questionnaire was sent to the contact person and distributed via the intraorganizational email system. After ten days a reminder was sent. A correlational study design is used to test the conceptual model and measure the variables of this research.
Measures
all items were measured on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = “strongly disagree” to 5 = “strongly agree”.
Identification. Organizational identification has been measured with four items adapted from Leach et al. (2008). Participants were asked to indicate e.g. “I feel a bond with my
organization” or “I feel committed to my organization”. A mean score of the items has been calculated. A higher score indicates a higher indentification with the organization.
Constructive Deviance. Individual’s perception of their own level of constructive deviance has been measured on 5 items constructed by Galperin (2002). Individuals were asked to indicate for example how often they: “Decided for unconventional ways to achieve work goals.” or “Departed from the accepted tradition to solve problems”. The mean score of all constructive deviance items has been calculated, indicating a more frequent engagement in constructively deviant behavior as the mean score increases.
Age Climate. Age climate has been measured using the Psychological Age Climate Scale (Noack, 2009) containing 12 items. Participants were asked to rate how older co-workers are perceived within the company e.g. on “open-mindedness”, “competence”, “effectiveness” and “motivation”. The mean score was calculated. As the mean score increases a more positive age climate in the organization is indicated.
previously reported, high levels of control of others, hence low job autonomy influences especially older individuals negatively (Hehman & Bugental, 2013).
Data analysis. Qualtrics data was transformed into a SPSS file and analyzed. As no reversed items were presented recoding was not necessary. The reliability for each scale was calculated using Cronbach’s alpha (see table 2). As previously described, the mean scores of each scale were computed and saved for the analyses.
RESULTS Preliminary Analyses
Assumptions for linear and hierarchical regression analyses were checked. No violations of independence, linearity, homoscedasticity and multicollinearity are evident and the analysis were therefore conducted without a transformation of the data.
Age Climate and Organizational Identification
It was assumed that a positive age climate contributes positively to organizational identification in individuals.
The correlation statistic suggested that no significant relation exists between the two variables (r = .19, p = .109). Further, a hierarchical regression analysis has been performed to investigate the predictive value of age climate (independent variable) on organizational
identification (dependent variable), controlling for age and job autonomy. The results indicate no significant predictive value of age climate on organizational identification (B = .23, p = .107). This result is robust when controlling for age. Additionally controlling for job autonomy changes the results. Once job autonomy is added the model explains 14.6% of the variance in
Based on these results it can be concluded that age climate does not predict
organizational identification. Although the relationship seems to be positive no significant results were found. Job autonomy on the other hand explains a significant amount of variance in
organizational identification. It can therefore be assumed that an increase in perceived job autonomy is associated with a higher identification with the organization.
Organizational Identification and Constructive Deviance
Secondly, a positive impact of organizational identification on constructive deviance was expected. The two variables were expected to be positively correlated and that constructive deviance was predicted from organizational identification.
The correlation of organization identification and constructive deviance was positive (r = .29, p = .012). A hierarchical regression analysis has been performed to investigate the effect of organizational identification on constructive deviance. The independent variable organizational identification significantly predicts the dependent variable constructive deviance (B = .26, p = .012). 8.5% (R2 = .085) of the variance in constructive deviance is explained by the individual’s identification with the organization. As organizational identification increases the level of constructive deviance also increases. This finding is robust when controlling for age but not when additionally controlling for job autonomy. Therefore organizational identification is a significant predictor for constructive deviance also when controlling for age but not when the level of autonomy is approximately the same among participants. Job autonomy might therefore mediate or moderate the relationship between organizational identification and constructive deviance. Table 4 displays the results in detail.
Further, job autonomy might function as a moderator or mediator on the relationship between organizational identification and constructive deviance.
Organizational Identification as a Mediator
Third, a mediation analysis of organizational identification on the relationship between age climate and constructive deviance was performed. The relationship was predicted to be indirect through organizational identification rather than direct.
A hierarchical regression analysis was performed with age climate as independent variable and constructive deviance as a dependent variable. The mediator was organizational identification. Model 1 contains organizational identification and age climate followed by Model 2, which includes the control variables age and job autonomy. Organizational identification and age climate together explained 8.3% of the variance in constructive deviance F(2,63) = 2.74, p = .072, η2 = .083. For details see table 5. When controlling for age and job autonomy the regression model was not significant F(4,63) = 1.91, p = .121, η2 = .12. The Sobel test showed that the indirect effect of age climate on constructive deviance was not significant (p = 0.11).
These findings indicate that age climate does not indirectly impact constructive deviance. Hypothesis 3 is therefore rejected. Results nevertheless showed again that organizational identification is associated with higher scores on constructive deviance.
DISCUSSION
Previous research found that discriminatory behavior based on age contributes to a decrease in employee’s identification with the organization (Johnson & Neumark, 1996; Kunze, Böhm & Bruch, 2011; Snape, 2009). Organizational identification is essential for constructive deviant behavior (Gutworth, 2013), which in turn allows companies to stay competative (Abrams et al., 2000; Chen et al, 2013; Dutton et al., 1994; Knight & Haslam, 2010). The aim of this study was to identify the positive effect an age-friendly environment can have on employees’
organizational identification and in turn the positive impact on constructive deviance. The assumed mediating effect of organizational identification between age climate and constructive deviance was not found. Nevertheless, the positive impact of organizational identification on constructive deviance was identified. Although a positive age climate did not have an impact on organizational identification, a high level of autonomy has been found to lead to higher
organizational identification and potentially mediate or moderate the relationship between organizational identification and constructive deviance.
Age Climate and Organizational Identification
study focused on the facilitating effect of a positive age climate. The results indicate no enhanced organizational identification as age climate is more positive. A reason why the positive effect of age climate might not have been found, is the fact that the sample indicated a rather neutral rating of the age climate and high levels of identification with the organization (see table 1 and 2). In case of a more positively perceived age climate the effect might be evident and might lead to a higher level of identification with the organization. Alternatively, it also might be possible that a negative age climate has a negative impact on organizational identification but that a positive age climate is perceived as a necessity to function within an organization rather than a facilitative factor for organizational identification.
Additionally, job autonomy was found to positively relate to organizational identification. As proposed by Hehman and Bugental (2013) older individuals show higher levels of
performance when negative stereotypes towards older individuals are absent and additionlly a high perceived level of autonomy is experienced. The importance of autonomy for older
individuals is supported by the present study. In line with other research findings, autonomy has been identified as an antecedent for organizational commitment (De Cuyper & De Witte, 2006; Kinicki et al., 2002). Derived from these results high levels of autonomy are particular important for older individuals and their identification with the organization.
Organizational Identification and Constructive Deviance
team sports. Individuals weakly identified with the group adhered to group norms whereas highly identified group members disenchanted themselves from team goals that were perceived as contraproductive to the success of the team (Täuber & Sassenberg, 2012). This study adds to previous research on the topic and extends it to a new group of individuals, namely employees at a municipal organization.
The present study further indicated the importance of job autonomy in connection to organizational identification. The results also suggest that job autonomy might function as a moderator or mediator in the relation of organizational identification and constructive deviance. The importance of high control of others on organizational identification has previously been discussed. Literature on the relation of job autonomy and constructive deviance was not found. It is nevertheless expected that individuals with a high level of organizational identification and high autonomy might show more constructive deviant behavior in comparison to individuals with low organizational identification and low job autonomy.
Limitations and Future Research
As previously stated, the level of positive age climate was rather neutral. A different organization with a greater emphasis on an age-friendly organizational environment might have elevated levels of organizational identification. Future research should investigate this. Further, the average age of the participants from this study was 48 years of age. An organization with greater variation in age and younger employees could also yield different results.
behaviors in an organization rather than measuring those seperately. A differentiation of these concepts might yield different results. According to the previously introduced ABC triad in social psychology (Baumeister & Bushman, 2010) affect, behavior and cognition are different processes. Nevertheless, stereotypes (cognition) can lead to prejudice (affect), the emotion towards individuals, which in turn lead to discriminatory behavior toward group members (Fiske, 2010). A differentiation of conepts was therefore not expected to lead to divergent results.
Moreover, the findings of the present study are based on self-reported data about individuals’ perceptions of organizational mechanisms rather than more objective measures of organizational mechanisms. Future research could therefore apply a multi-method design to test the conceptual model of the present study. Age climate could therefore be assessed based on the number of promotions and recruitment of older employees or other actions (e.g. mentorship programs) taken to promote an age-friendly environment could be possible indicators.
The generalizability of this study is restricted to municipal organizations. All participants were from the same Dutch municipality and although the results are prepresentative for this organizations a generalizability across industries cannot be made. These results apply to all organizations with the same characteristics of employees. Future research should therefore investigate the effect of organizational identification on age climate and constructive deviance in organizations from different industries, with a greater variety of age and with different
organizational cultures (e.g. a mission to assure an age-friendly organizational culture). In
The current study investigated the mediating role of organizational identification on the relationship between age climate and constructive deviance. A positive age climate indicates an age-friendly organizational environment without age discrimination and negative stereotypes based on age. Past studies found that a negative age climate is associated with lower
organizational identification (Kunze, Böhm & Bruch, 2011; Snape, 2009). This study investigated the facilitating effect of a positive age climate. Age climate was expected to be positively associated with organizational identification. No statistical significant support was found for this association. A rather neutral evaluation of age climate in the organization of this study might be an explanaition for this finding. The same model should be tested in an
organization that emphasizes a positive age climate and actively approaches the ageing of our workforce. In the present study one of the control variables, namely job autonomy was
nevertheless found to positively relate to organizational identification. High levels of perceived autonomy at the job were found to be positively associated with organizational identification.
The second hypothesis predicted that organizational identification is positively associated with constructive deviance, the employees’ divergence from group norms to benefit the group after all. The findings of the current study found the expected result and therewith add to existing literature on the topic (Täuber & Sassenberg, 2012) in such a way that this finding can be
extended to municipal organizations. The control variable job autonomy eliminated the
References
Abrams, D., Marques, J. M., Bown, N., & Henson, M. (2000). Pro-norm and anti-norm deviance within and between groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(5), 906. Baumeister, R. F., & Bushman, B. J. (2010). Social psychology & human nature. CengageBrain.
com.
Bennett, R. J., & Robinson, S. L. (2000). Development of a measure of workplace deviance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(3), 349.
Bourne, B. (1982), Effects of aging on work satisfaction, performance and motivation, Aging and work, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 37 - 47.
Butler, R. (1969). Ageism: Another form of bigotry. The Gerontologist, 9, 243–246.
Chen, Y., Chi, S., & Friedman, R. (2013). Do more hats bring more benefits? Exploring the impact of dual organizational identification on work-‐‑related attitudes and performance. Journal Of Occupational And Organizational Psychology, 86(3), 417-434
Commission Communication. 2006. EUR-Lex. [Online article; retrieved 23/9/2013.] http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:52006DC0571:en:HTML Commission of the EC, 2010, Green Paper towards adequate, sustainable and safe European
pension systems. Brussels, COM(2010) 365 final, p. 1-35
Dalkir, K. (2013). Knowledge management in theory and practice. Routledge.
Donaldson, T., & Dunfee, T. W. (1999). Ties that bind: A social contracts approach to business ethics. Harvard Business Press.
Ekerdt, D. J. 1986. The busy ethic: Moral continuity between work and retirement. The Gerontologist, 26(3), 239-244.
Their Effects on Job Satisfaction, Organizational Commitment, Life Satisfaction, and Self-Rated Performance. International Journal of Stress Management, 13, (4), 441–459.
Dutton, J. E., Dukerich, J. M., & Harquail, C. V. (1994). Organizational images and member identification. Administrative science quarterly, 239-263.
Finkelstein, L. M., & Farrell, S. K. (2007). An expanded view of age bias in the workplace. Aging and work in the 21st century, 73-108.
Finkelstein, L. M., Burke, M. J., & Raju, M. S. (1995). Age discrimination in simulated employment contexts: An integrative analysis. Journal Of Applied Psychology, 80(6), 652-663.
Fiske, S. T., Gilbert, D. T., & Lindzey, G. (2010). Handbook of social psychology, Vol 2 (5th
ed.). Hoboken, NJ, US: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
Galperin, B.L. (2002) ‘Determinants of Deviance in the Workplace: An Empirical Examination of Canada and Mexico’. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Concordia
University,Montreal, Canada.
Garstka, T. A., Schmitt, M. T., Branscombe, N. R., & Hummert, M. L. (2004). How young and older adults differ in their responses to perceived age discrimination. Psychology and aging, 19(2), 326.
Glebbeek, A. C., & Bax, E. H. (2004). Is high employee turnover really harmful? An empirical test using company records. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2), 277-286.
Gutworth, M., & Dahling, J. J.(2013) Applying the normative conflict model to organizational deviance. Tcnj journal of student scholarship, 4, 1-9.
states. Journal of Managerial Issues.
Hehman, J. A., & Bugental, D. (2013). “Life stage-specific” variations in performance in response to age stereotypes. Developmental Psychology, 49(7), 1396-1406.
Joe, C., Yoong, P., & Patel, K. (2013). Knowledge loss when older experts leave knowledge- intensive organisations. Journal of Knowledge Management,17(6), 913-927.
Johnson, R. W., & Neumark, D. (1996). Age discrimination, job separation, and employment status of older workers: Evidence from self-reports (No. w5619). National Bureau of Economic Research.
Kinicki, A.J., Schriesheim, C.A., McKee-Ryan, F.M., Carson, K.P. (2002). Assessing the Construct Validity of the Job Descriptive Index: A Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87 (1), 14-32.
Knight, C., & Haslam, S. A. (2010). Your Place or Mine? Organizational Identification and Comfort as Mediators of Relationships Between the Managerial Control of Workspace and Employees' Satisfaction and Well-being. British Journal of Management, 21(3), 717-735.
Kunze, F., Böhm, S. A., & Bruch, H. (2011). Age diversity, age discrimination climate and performance consequences—a cross organizational study. Journal of organizational
behavior, 32(2), 264-290.
Leach, C. W., van Zomeren, M., Zebel, S., Vliek, M. L., Pennekamp, S. F., Doosje, B, and Spears, R. (2008). Group-level self-definition and self-investment: a hierarchical (multicomponent) model of in-group identification. Journal of personality and social psychology, 95(1), 144.
reformulated model of organizational identification. Journal of organizational Behavior, 13(2), 103-123.
Maurer, T. J., Wrenn, K. A., & Weiss, E. M. (2003). Toward understanding and managing stereotypical beliefs about older worker’s ability and desire for learning and development. Research in personnel and human resources
management, 22, 253-285.
Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1997). Commitment in the workplace: Theory, research, and application. Sage.
Noack, C. M. G. (2009). AGE CLIMATE.
Packer, D. J. (2008). On being both with us and against us: A normative conflict model of dissent in social groups. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12(1), 50-72. Palmore, E. B. (1999). Ageism: Negative and positive (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Springer. Panek, P. E. 1997. The older worker. In A.D. Fisk & W.A. Rogers (Eds.), The handbook of
human factors and the older adult (pp. 363-394). San Diego: Academic Press
Rosen, B., & Jerdee, T. H. (1976). The nature of job-related age stereotypes. Journal Of Applied
Psychology, 61(2), 180-183.
Posthuma, R. A., & Campion, M. A. (2009). Age Stereotypes in the Workplace: Common Stereotypes, Moderators, and Future Research Directions†. Journal of Management, 35(1), 158-188.
Rousseau, D. M. (1998). Why workers still identify with organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19(3), 217-233.
Communication (includes Communication Reports), 55(3), 275-293.
Sassenberg, K., & Woltin, K. A. (2009). A self-regulation approach to group processes.
Intergroup relations: the role of motivation and emotion, 101-120.
Shamir, B., & Kark, R. (2004). A single item graphic scale for the measurement of
organizational identification. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77(1), 115-123.
Snape, E., & Redman, T. (2003). Too old or too young? The impact of perceived age discrimination. Human Resource Management Journal, 13(1), 78-89.
Standing, G. (2000). Globalization and Flexibility:Dancing around Pensions. International Labour Office, Geneva, p. 1-20
Steele, C. M. (1988). The psychology of self-affirmation: Sustaining the integrity of the self. Advances in experimental social psychology, 21, 261-302.
Steele, C. M., & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans. Journal of personality and social psychology, 69(5), 797.
Strayer, D. L., Wickens, C. D., & Braune, R. (1987). Adult age differences in the speed and capacity of information processing: II. An electrophysiological approach. Psychology and Aging, 2(2), 99.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. The social psychology of intergroup relations, 33, 47.
Täuber, S., & Sassenberg, K. (2012). The Impact of Identification on Adherence to Group Norms in Team Sports: Who Is Going the Extra Mile?. Group Dynamics, 16(4), 231-240.
Vadera, A. K., Pratt, M. G., & Mishra, P. (2013). Constructive Deviance in Organizations Integrating and Moving Forward. Journal of Management, 39(5), 1221-1276.
APPENDIX A: THE QUESTIONNAIRE TABLE 1
Means and Standard Deviantions of the Survey Items of Organizational Identification, Constructive Deviance and Age Climate.
Item M SD
I feel a bond with my organization. 3.97 0.73
I feel solidarity with my organization. 3.90 0.72
I feel solidarity with my organization. 3.97 0.69
I feel committed to my organization. 3.94 0.68
Developed creative solutions to problems. 3.53 0.65
APPENDIX B: RESULTS OF ANALYSES TABLE 2
Means, Standard Deviantions, Intercorrelations and Reliability Scores of all Main Variables and Control Variables.
Variable M SD 1 2 3 4 5 1. AC 3.30 0.55 (.926) 2. OI 3.95 0.64 .186 (.930) 3. CD 3.25 0.57 -.091 .291* (.828) 4. Age 48.52 10.46 .211 .115 .101 (-) 5. Autonomy 3.90 0.64 .270* .299* .221 .188 (.800)
Note. AC = Age Climate, OI = Organizational Identification, CD = Constructive Deviance; Reliability Scores displayed in Parentheses.
TABLE 3
Summary of the Hierarchical Regression Analysis Predicting Organizational Identification from Age Climate and Controlling for Age and Job Autonomy.
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
TABLE 4
Summary of the Hierarchical Regression Analysis Predicting Constructive Deviance from Organizational Identification, Controlling for Age and Job Autonomy.
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
Predictor B SE B β B SE B β B SE B β OI .228 .113 .249** .220 .114 .240* .180 .122 .197 Age .004 .007 .073 .003 .007 .054 Autonomy .117 .125 .126 R2 F for change in R2 .062** 4.094** .067 .344 .081 .881 Note. OI = Organizational Identification
TABLE 5
Summary of the Hierarchical Regression Analysis Predicting Constructive Deviance from Organizational Identification and Age Climate, Controlling for Age and Job Autonomy.
Model 1 Model 2 Predictor B SE B β B SE B β Age Climate -.153 .130 -.147 -.203 .135 -.195 OI .255* .115 .279* .201 .121 .219 Age .005 .007 .086 Job Autonomy .150 .125 .162 R2 F for change in R2 .083* 2.748* .121 1.911 Note. OI = Organizational Identification
