CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 203Job Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorEmployee Performance and ManagementOccupational Health and Safety Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Perceived organizational support and risk taking

Neves, Pedro, Eisenberger, Robert·2014·Journal of Managerial Psychology
DOI 10.1108/jmp-07-2011-0021
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Purpose: – The aim of this paper was to investigate the role of perceived organizational support (POS) for employee risk-taking through its association with greater trust among supervisors and subordinates that the organization will take into account the individual's intent to be helpful in the case of failure (failure-related trust). Design/methodology/approach: – Data were obtained from 346 employee-supervisor dyads from diverse organizations. Employees and supervisors described their POS and failure-related trust. Supervisors also rated employee's risk-taking behaviors. Findings: – Perceived organizational support (POS) was positively related to failure-related trust among subordinates and supervisors which, in turn, was related to subordinates' risk taking. Additionally, supervisors' failure-related trust moderated the relationship between subordinates' POS and failure-related trust, such that when supervisors strongly believed the organization was trustworthy in risk situations, employees' POS had a stronger relationship with failure-related trust, which in turn, was related to risk-taking. Research limitations/implications: – Understanding employee risk-taking has both theoretical, practical, and social implications. It advances our theoretical understanding of employee risk-taking and it shows the role played by managers in the promotion of subordinates' risk-taking behaviors. Originality/value: – This is one of the first studies to examine the antecedents of employee risk-taking behaviors in the workplace. Additionally, it provides evidence for the key role played by supervisors in modeling subordinate's risk taking through social information processing. Another strength concerns the use of data from dyads (subordinates and supervisors), which helps us to overcome problems related to common method bias.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1108/jmp-07-2011-0021

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Several empirical studies in management have demonstrated that employees who report stronger levels of relatedness with the organization develop greater trusting attitudes toward the organization as well as the corporate management.

    “Moreover, several empirical studies in management have demonstrated that employees who report stronger levels of relatedness with the organization develop greater trusting attitudes toward the organization as well as the corporate management (e.g., Deci et al., 2017; Neves & Eisenberger, 2014).”

    From Fostering Employee Trust via Effective Supervisory Communication during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Through the Lens of Motivating Language Theory (2022) · cites this paper as Neves & Eisenberger, 2014

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 45

  1. Becker, T.E. (2005), “Potential problems in the statistical control of variables in organizational research: a qualitative analysis with recommendations”, Organizational Research Methods, Vol. 8, pp. 274-289. · DOI
  2. Bentler, P.M. and Bonett, D.G. (1980), “Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 88, pp. 588-606. · DOI
  3. Bozeman, B. and Kingsley, G. (1998), “Risk culture in public and private organizations”, Public Administration Review, Vol. 58, pp. 109-118. · DOI · Paper page
  4. Busenitz, L.W. (1999), “Entrepreneurial risk and strategic decision making: it's a matter of perspective”, The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, Vol. 35, pp. 325-340. · DOI
  5. Chiles, T.H. and MacMackin, J.F. (1996), “Integrating variable risk preferences, trust, and transaction cost economics”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 21, pp. 73-99. · DOI
  6. Cox, D.F. (1967), “Risk handling in consumer behavior – an intensive study of two cases”, in Cox, D.F. (Ed.), Risk-taking and Information-Handling in Consumer Behavior, Harvard University Press, Boston, MA, pp. 34-81.
  7. Dineen, B.R. , Lewicki, R.J. and Tomlinson, E.C. (2006), “Supervisory guidance and behavioral integrity: relationships with employee citizenship and deviant behavior”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 91, pp. 622-635. · DOI
  8. Donaldson, L. (2001), The Contingency Theory of Organizations, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. · DOI
  9. Eisenberger, R. and Stinglhamber, F. (2011), Perceived Organizational Support: Fostering Enthusiastic and Productive Employees, APA, Washington, DC. · DOI · Paper page
  10. Eisenberger, R. , Fasolo, P. and Davis-LaMastro, V. (1990), “Perceived organizational support and employee diligence, commitment, and innovation”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 75, pp. 51-59. · DOI
  11. Eisenberger, R. , Armeli, S. , Rexwinkel, B. , Lynch, P.D. and Rhoades, L. (2001), “Reciprocation of perceived organizational support”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 86, pp. 42-51. · DOI · Paper page
  12. Ferrin, D. , Dirks, K.T. and Shah, P.P. (2006), “Direct and indirect effects of third-party relationships on interpersonal trust”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 91, pp. 870-883. · DOI
  13. Kahn, W.A. (1990), “Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 33, pp. 692-724. · DOI · Paper page
  14. Keough, D.R. (2008), The Ten Commandments for Business Failure, Penguin Books, London.
  15. Kirby, D. (2002), “The impact of schools and school programs upon adolescent sexual behavior”, Journal of Sex Research, Vol. 39, pp. 27-33. · DOI
  16. Klein, W.M. and Kunda, Z. (1994), “Exaggerated self-assessments and the preference for controllable risks”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 59, pp. 410-427. · DOI
  17. Kramer, R.M. (1999), “Trust and distrust in organizations: emerging perspectives, enduring questions”, Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 50, pp. 569-598. · DOI
  18. Krueger, N. Jr and Dickson, P.R. (1994), “How believing in ourselves increases risk taking: perceived self-efficacy and opportunity recognition”, Decision Sciences, Vol. 23, pp. 385-401. · DOI
  19. Latham, S.F. and Braun, M. (2009), “Managerial risk, innovation, and organizational decline”, Journal of Management, Vol. 35, pp. 258-281. · DOI
  20. Levinson, H. (1965), “Reciprocation: the relationship between man and organization”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 9, pp. 370-390. · DOI
  21. Liden, R.C. , Bauer, T.N. and Erdogan, B. (2004), “The role of leader-member exchange in the dynamic relationship between employer and employee: implications for employee socialization, leaders, and organizations”, in Coyle-Shapiro, J.A.M. , Shore, L.M. , Taylor, M.S. and Tetrick, L.E. (Eds), The Employment Relationship: Examining Psychological and Contextual Perspectives, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 226-250. · DOI
  22. Madjar, N. , Greenberg, E. and Zheng, C. (2011), “Factors for radical creativity, incremental creativity, and routine, noncreative performance”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 96, pp. 730-743. · DOI
  23. Mano, J. (1994), “Risk-taking, framing effects, and affect”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 57, pp. 38-58. · DOI
  24. Marsh, H.W. , Wen, Z. and Hau, K.T. (2004), “Structural equation models of latent interactions: evaluation of alternative estimation strategies and indicator construction”, Psychological Methods, Vol. 9, pp. 275-300. · DOI · Paper page
  25. Mayer, R.C. , Davis, J.H. and Schoorman, F.D. (1995), “An integrative model of organizational trust”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 20, pp. 709-734. · DOI · Paper page
  26. Molina-Morales, F.X. , Martínez-Fernández, M.T. and Torlò, V.J. (2011), “The dark side of trust: the benefits, costs and optimal levels of trust for innovation performance”, Long Range Planning, Vol. 44, pp. 118-133. · DOI
  27. Morgan-Lopez, A.A. and MacKinnon, D.P. (2006), “Demonstration and evaluation of a method for assessing mediated moderation”, Behavior Research Methods, Vol. 38, pp. 77-87. · DOI
  28. Ng, T.W. and Feldman, D.C. (2010), “Organizational tenure and job performance”, Journal of Management, Vol. 36, pp. 1220-1250. · DOI
  29. Pfeffer, J. and Sutton, R.I. (2000), The Knowing-Doing Gap: How Smart Companies Turn Knowledge into Action, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA. · DOI
  30. Rhoades, L. and Eisenberger, R. (2002), “Perceived organizational support: a review of the literature”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 87, pp. 698-714. · DOI · Paper page
  31. Rousseau, D.M. , Sitkin, S.B. , Burt, R.S. and Camerer, C. (1998), “Not so different after all: a cross-discipline view of trust”, The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 23, pp. 393-404. · DOI · Paper page
  32. Salancik, G.R. and Pfeffer, J. (1977), “An examination of need-satisfaction models of job attitudes”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 22, pp. 427-456. · DOI
  33. Salancik, G.R. and Pfeffer, J. (1978), “A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 23, pp. 224-253. · DOI · Paper page
  34. Shore, L.M. and Shore, T.H. (1995), “Perceived organizational support and organizational justice”, in Cropanzano, R.S. and Kacmar, K.M. (Eds), Organizational Politics, Justice, and Support: Managing the Social Climate of the Workplace, Quorum, Westport, CT, pp. 149-164.
  35. Sitkin, S.B. and Weingart, L.R. (1995), “Determinants of risky decision-making behavior: a test of the mediating role of risk perceptions and propensity”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 38, pp. 1573-1592. · DOI
  36. Stewart, W.H. and Roth, P.L. (2001), “Risk propensity differences between entrepreneurs and managers: a meta-analytic review”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 86, pp. 145-153. · DOI
  37. Tjosvold, D. and Yu, Z. (2007), “Group risk taking: the constructive role of controversy in China”, Group & Organization Management, Vol. 32, pp. 653-674. · DOI
  38. Tversky, A. and Fox, C.R. (1995), “Weighing risk and uncertainty”, Psychological Review, Vol. 102, pp. 269-283. · DOI
  39. Van Maanen, J. and Schein, E.H. (1979), “Toward a theory of organizational socialization”, in Staw, B.M. (Ed.), Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 1, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 209-264.
  40. Wayne, S.J. , Shore, L.M. and Liden, R.C. (1997), “Perceived organizational support and leader-member exchange: a social exchange perspective”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 40, pp. 82-111. · DOI
  41. Wicks, A.C. , Berman, S.L. and Jones, T.M. (1999), “Toward a conception of optimal trust: moral and strategic implications”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 24, pp. 99-116. · DOI · Paper page
  42. Wiseman, R.M. and Gomez-Mejia, L.R. (1998), “A behavioral agency model of managerial risk taking”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 23, pp. 133-153. · DOI
  43. Wu, H. , Su, W. and Lee, C. (2008), “Employee ownership motivation and individual risk-taking behavior: a cross-level analysis of Taiwan's privatized enterprises”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 19, pp. 2311-2331. · DOI
  44. Yates, J.F. (Ed.) (1992), Risk-Taking Behavior, Wiley, Chichester.
  45. Zagenczyk, T.J. , Scott, K.D. , Gibney, R. , Murrell, A.J. and Thatcher, J.B. (2010), “Social influence and perceived organizational support: a social networks approach”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 11, pp. 127-138. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Neves, P., & Eisenberger, R.
Affiliations
  • NOVA School of Business and Economics (PT)
  • University of Houston (US)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Managerial Psychology
Publisher
Emerald
Published
2014-02-04
Volume
29
Issue
2
Pages
187-205
ISSN
0268-3946 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1108/jmp-07-2011-0021
OpenAlex
W2017279002
Cited by
203
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2
FWCI
19.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.emerald.com/insight/site-policies (tdm)
Locations
Journal of Managerial Psychology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Employee Performance and Management
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Occupational Health and Safety Research
Keywords
perceived organizational support, trust in supervisor, supervisor-subordinate dyads, social information processing, risk-taking, organizational trust

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review