GIbney, Raymond Francis
(2007)
Cognitive organizational obstruction: Its nature, antecedents and consequences.
Doctoral Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh.
(Unpublished)
Abstract
The concept of cognitive organizational obstruction is developed in this dissertation. Cognitive organizational obstruction is defined as an employee's global belief that the organization obstructs, hinders or interferes with the accomplishment of his or her goals and objectives and is a detriment to his or her well-being. In addition to developing the COO construct, COO is theoretically differentiated from the related constructs of psychological contract breach, perceived organizational support, organizational politics and organizational frustration. In addition to being theoretically distinct, a new concept should be empirically differentiated from existing related constructs. The development of the COO scale is described. One major implicit assumption running throughout the theoretical development of the cognitive organizational obstruction construct is that employees distinguish between the treatment received from the organization and from agents of the organization. Employees' ability to differentiate between similarly conceptualized constructs of cognitive organizational obstruction, cognitive supervisor obstruction (CSO) and organizational frustration is assessed. A cognitive supervisor obstruction scale is created by changing the referent of the COO scale from organization to supervisor. Results suggest that employees are able to distinguish between these sources of obstruction and frustration.The results from a validation study are presented next. The main objective of this study is to validate the COO scale and empirically distinguish COO from the related constructs of organizational frustration, perceived organizational support (POS), psychological contract breach (PCB), and perceived organizational politics (POP). Results suggest that employees are able to distinguish between these concepts. Additional analysis evaluates whether COO explains additional variance beyond POS, PCB, POP and frustration is described next. The overarching hypothesis of this study is: COO explains additional variance in the exit, voice, loyalty and neglect outcome framework beyond the existing constructs of psychological contract breach, perceived organizational support, organizational politics and organizational frustration. More specific hypotheses are developed and tested using hierarchical multiple linear regression. Results suggest that COO explains additional variance for exit, voice and neglect, but not loyalty.
Share
| Citation/Export: |
|
| Social Networking: |
|
Details
| Item Type: |
University of Pittsburgh ETD
|
| Status: |
Unpublished |
| Creators/Authors: |
|
| ETD Committee: |
|
| Date: |
7 September 2007 |
| Date Type: |
Completion |
| Defense Date: |
7 June 2007 |
| Approval Date: |
7 September 2007 |
| Submission Date: |
30 April 2007 |
| Access Restriction: |
No restriction; Release the ETD for access worldwide immediately. |
| Institution: |
University of Pittsburgh |
| Schools and Programs: |
Joseph M. Katz Graduate School of Business > Business Administration |
| Degree: |
PhD - Doctor of Philosophy |
| Thesis Type: |
Doctoral Dissertation |
| Refereed: |
Yes |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: |
POS; cognitive organizational obstruction; organizational politics; psychological contract breach |
| Other ID: |
http://etd.library.pitt.edu/ETD/available/etd-04302007-162754/, etd-04302007-162754 |
| Date Deposited: |
10 Nov 2011 19:43 |
| Last Modified: |
15 Nov 2016 13:43 |
| URI: |
http://d-scholarship.pitt.edu/id/eprint/7739 |
Metrics
Monthly Views for the past 3 years
Plum Analytics
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |
![[feed]](/images/feed-icon-32x32.png){kind=icon}