How and When Generalized Reciprocity and Negative Reciprocity Influence Employees’ Well-Being: The Moderating Role of Strength Use and the Mediating Roles of Intrinsic Motivation and Organizational Obstruction

4Citations
Citations of this article
64Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Although the literature has shown that generalized reciprocity and negative reciprocity as exchange norms can significantly influence employees’ outcomes, knowledge about how and when the two types of norms influence employees’ well-being is limited. Based on social exchange theory and self-determination theory, we built and investigated a model by conducting a large questionnaire survey with 551 employees and managers. The results of the structural equation model supported our hypotheses. First, generalized reciprocity is positively related to well-being, and negative reciprocity is negatively related to well-being. Both intrinsic motivation and perceived organizational obstruction can meditate roles in the above relationships. Moreover, strength use can enhance the relationship between generalized reciprocity and intrinsic motivation, and it can also weaken the relationship between negative reciprocity and perceived organizational obstruction. Our research represents a significant step towards better understanding the work-related implications of imbalanced reciprocity, highlighting the destructive influence of negative reciprocity on employees’ well-being.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Zhu, N., Liu, Y., & Zhang, J. (2023). How and When Generalized Reciprocity and Negative Reciprocity Influence Employees’ Well-Being: The Moderating Role of Strength Use and the Mediating Roles of Intrinsic Motivation and Organizational Obstruction. Behavioral Sciences, 13(6). https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13060465

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free