Counter Productive Work Behavior

by Psychology Roots
7 views
A+A-
Reset

Counter Productive Work Behavior Scale

Here in this post, we are sharing the “Counter Productive Work Behavior”. You can read psychometric and Author information.  We have thousands of Scales and questionnaires in our collection (See Scales and Questionnaires). You can demand us any scale and questionnaires related to psychology through our community, and we will provide you with a short time. Keep visiting Psychology Roots.

About Scale Name

Scale Name

Counter Productive Work Behavior

Author Details

Stephen L. Robinson and Robert J. Bennett

Translation Availability

Not Sure

Counter Productive Work Behavior
Counter Productive Work Behavior

Background/Description

Counterproductive work behavior (CWB) is any behavior that is intended to harm the organization or its members. It can be directed at the organization itself, such as sabotage or theft, or at other individuals, such as bullying or harassment.

CWB can have a significant negative impact on organizational performance. It can lead to reduced productivity, increased costs, and decreased employee morale. It can also damage the organization’s reputation and make it difficult to attract and retain top talent.

In their 2002 paper, “A Typology of Deviant Workplace Behaviors: A Multidimensional Scaling Study”, Stephen L. Robinson and Robert J. Bennett developed a typology of CWBs based on a multidimensional scaling study. They identified four dimensions of CWBs:

  • Production deviance: Behaviors that reduce the quantity or quality of work output, such as absenteeism, tardiness, early departure, taking long breaks, and producing poor quality work.
  • Property deviance: Behaviors that damage or destroy organizational property, such as theft, sabotage, and vandalism.
  • Political deviance: Behaviors that are intended to harm or damage the reputations of others, such as gossiping, backstabbing, and spreading rumors.
  • Personal aggression: Behaviors that are intended to physically or emotionally harm others, such as verbal abuse, threats, and violence.

Robinson and Bennett’s typology has been widely adopted by researchers and practitioners to understand and manage CWBs. It has been shown that CWBs can be caused by a variety of factors, including individual differences (e.g., personality traits, values, and attitudes), situational factors (e.g., job stress, job dissatisfaction, and perceived injustice), and organizational factors (e.g., poor leadership and management practices, and a lack of clear expectations and consequences).

Organizations can take a number of steps to reduce CWBs, including:

  • Creating a positive work environment where employees feel valued and respected.
  • Setting clear expectations and consequences for behavior.
  • Providing employees with the training and resources they need to do their jobs effectively.
  • Monitoring employee behavior and taking corrective action when necessary.
  • Promoting a culture of integrity and ethical behavior.

By taking these steps, organizations can minimize the negative impact of CWBs on their performance and employees.

In their introduction to their 2002 paper, Robinson and Bennett discuss the importance of understanding CWBs. They note that CWBs are a common problem in organizations, and that they can have a significant negative impact on performance. They argue that their typology of CWBs can help researchers and practitioners to better understand the causes and consequences of CWBs, and to develop more effective strategies for managing them.

Robinson and Bennett’s work has been highly influential in the field of organizational behavior. Their typology of CWBs is widely used by researchers and practitioners, and their findings have helped to improve our understanding of this important problem.

Administration, Scoring and Interpretation

To administer the CWB scale, participants should be instructed to read each item carefully and to rate how often they have engaged in the behavior described in the item over the past year. Participants should be assured that their responses are confidential.

Once the scale has been administered, the scores for each dimension can be calculated by summing the scores for the four items in that dimension. Higher scores indicate a higher level of CWB.

The CWB scale is a well-validated measure of CWB, and it has been used in a variety of research studies. It is a relatively short and easy-to-administer scale, making it suitable for use in both research and practice settings.

Here are some additional tips for administering the CWB scale:

  • Provide participants with clear instructions about how to complete the scale. This includes explaining the rating scale and what each response option means.
  • Assure participants that their responses are confidential. This will encourage them to be honest and accurate in their ratings.
  • Administer the scale in a quiet and distraction-free environment. This will help participants to focus on the scale items and to provide accurate responses.
  • If you are administering the scale to a large group of participants, you may want to consider using a computerized version of the scale. This can help to reduce the time and effort required to administer and score the scale.

Reliability and Validity

The Counterproductive Work Behavior (CWB) scale by Bennett and Robinson (2002) has been shown to be a reliable and valid measure of CWB.

The reliability of a measure refers to its consistency in measuring what it is intended to measure. There are a number of different ways to assess the reliability of a measure, including internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and inter-rater reliability.

The CWB scale has been shown to have good internal consistency, with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients ranging from .82 to .89 for the four dimensions of CWB. Test-retest reliability has also been shown to be good, with Pearson correlation coefficients ranging from .65 to .80 for the four dimensions of CWB.

The validity of a measure refers to its accuracy in measuring what it is intended to measure. There are a number of different types of validity, including content validity, face validity, criterion-related validity, and construct validity.

The CWB scale has been shown to have good content validity, as the items on the scale cover a wide range of CWBs. The scale also has good face validity, as the items are clear and easy to understand.

Criterion-related validity refers to the extent to which a measure is correlated with other measures of the same construct. The CWB scale has been shown to be correlated with other measures of CWB, such as supervisor ratings of CWB and self-reports of CWB from other scales.

Construct validity refers to the extent to which a measure is related to other measures that are theoretically related to the construct being measured. The CWB scale has been shown to be related to other measures that are theoretically related to CWB, such as job dissatisfaction, organizational injustice, and personality traits.

Available Versions

11-Items

Reference

Robinson, S. L., & Bennett, R. J. (1995). A typology of deviant workplace behaviors: A multidimensional scaling study. Academy of management journal, 38(2), 555-572.

Important Link

Scale File:

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: What is the CWB scale?
A: The CWB scale is a self-report measure of counterproductive work behavior (CWB). CWB is any behavior that is intended to harm the organization or its members.

Q: What dimensions of CWB does the CWB scale measure?
A: The CWB scale measures four dimensions of CWB: production deviance, property deviance, political deviance, and personal aggression.

Q: How is the CWB scale administered?
A: Participants are instructed to read each item carefully and to rate how often they have engaged in the behavior described in the item over the past year. Items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale, from 1 (never) to 5 (very often).

Q: How are the scores for the CWB scale calculated?
A: The scores for each dimension are calculated by summing the scores for the four items in that dimension. Higher scores indicate a higher level of CWB.

Q: How reliable and valid is the CWB scale?
A: The CWB scale has been shown to be a reliable and valid measure of CWB. It has good internal consistency, test-retest reliability, inter-rater reliability, content validity, face validity, criterion-related validity, and construct validity.

Q: How can the CWB scale be used?
A: The CWB scale can be used to assess the prevalence of CWB in an organization, to identify employees who may be at risk of engaging in CWB, and to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions designed to reduce CWB.

Disclaimer

Please note that Psychology Roots does not have the right to grant permission for the use of any psychological scales or assessments listed on its website. To use any scale or assessment, you must obtain permission directly from the author or translator of the tool. Psychology Roots provides information about various tools and their administration procedures, but it is your responsibility to obtain proper permissions before using any scale or assessment. If you need further information about an author’s contact details, please submit a query to the Psychology Roots team.

Help Us Improve This Article

Have you discovered an inaccuracy? We put out great effort to give accurate and scientifically trustworthy information to our readers. Please notify us if you discover any typographical or grammatical errors.
Make a comment. We acknowledge and appreciate your efforts.

Share With Us

If you have any scale or any material related to psychology kindly share it with us at psychologyroots@gmail.com. We help others on behalf of you.

Follow

Related Posts

Leave a Comment

Adblock Detected

Please support us by disabling your AdBlocker extension from your browsers for our website.