Dark Triad, Risk Taking and Counterproductive Work Behavior in Different Organizational Contexts

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to analyze the relationship between Dark Triad of Personality, risk-taking and counterproductive work behaviort. The study involved 200 people aged between 18 and 51 years, M = 27.69, SD = 9.83, of which 35 are males (17.5%) and 165 are females (82.5%). The instruments used were The Dirty Dozen: A Concise Measure of the Dark Triad (Jonason & Webster, 2010), Counterproductive Work Behavior Checklist - CWBC (Spector, Bauer & Fox, 2010) and RISK-TAKING [JPI: Risk Taking [Rkt] (Goldberg et. al, 2006). The results showed that people who work in non-profit organizations (volunteers), those who have a low seniority in work or who hold a leadership position tend to take more risks than others. Low seniority at work also correlates with counterproductive behaviors. In contrast, no significant difference was observed as far as the other two demographic characteristics are concerned. Moreover, the results show that Machiavellianism is responsible for 16% of the variation of counterproductive work behavior, and risk-taking mediates this relatonship. Narcissism and psychopathy are responsible for 10% and 13% respectively of the variation of this behavior, the mediation percentage of risk taking being 19.2% concerning the first one and 22.4% concerning psychopathy. Given these results, the study can be useful in the organizational field, providing employers with more data that they can take into account when recruiting staff. It can also be helpful when it comes to better employee management, as well as a deeper understanding behind counterproductive behaviors, thus leading more easily to diminishing them.

Related collections

Most cited references 92

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

The Dark Triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy

Delroy Paulhus, Kevin M Williams (2002)

0 comments Cited 1043 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

The age of adolescence

Susan Sawyer, Peter S Azzopardi, Dakshitha Wickremarathne … (2018)

Adolescence is the phase of life stretching between childhood and adulthood, and its definition has long posed a conundrum. Adolescence encompasses elements of biological growth and major social role transitions, both of which have changed in the past century. Earlier puberty has accelerated the onset of adolescence in nearly all populations, while understanding of continued growth has lifted its endpoint age well into the 20s. In parallel, delayed timing of role transitions, including completion of education, marriage, and parenthood, continue to shift popular perceptions of when adulthood begins. Arguably, the transition period from childhood to adulthood now occupies a greater portion of the life course than ever before at a time when unprecedented social forces, including marketing and digital media, are affecting health and wellbeing across these years. An expanded and more inclusive definition of adolescence is essential for developmentally appropriate framing of laws, social policies, and service systems. Rather than age 10-19 years, a definition of 10-24 years corresponds more closely to adolescent growth and popular understandings of this life phase and would facilitate extended investments across a broader range of settings.