ISSN 0439-755X
CN 11-1911/B

心理学报 ›› 2022, Vol. 54 ›› Issue (1): 66-77.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2022.00066

• 研究报告 • 上一篇    下一篇

礼之用, 和为贵?和谐管理理论视角下团队亲社会违规氛围对团队绩效的影响

蔡亚华, 程佳琳, 李劲松()   

  1. 上海财经大学商学院, 上海 200433
  • 收稿日期:2021-02-03 出版日期:2022-01-25 发布日期:2021-11-26
  • 通讯作者: 李劲松
  • 基金资助:

Rules can maintain harmony? The influence of team pro-social rule breaking climate on team performance from the perspective of harmony management

CAI Yahua, CHENG Jialin, LI Jinsong()   

  1. College of Business, Shanghai University of Finance and Economics, Shanghai 200433, China
  • Received:2021-02-03 Online:2022-01-25 Published:2021-11-26
  • Contact: LI Jinsong


当前关于亲社会违规行为的研究主要集中于个体层面, 但实践和理论都表明我们有探究团队亲社会违规氛围的必要性。为此, 本研究聚焦于团队亲社会违规氛围这一概念, 以和谐管理理论为基础, 分别引入团队和谐作为中介变量和团队互依性作为调节变量, 探讨团队亲社会违规氛围对团队绩效的影响机制和作用边界。本文以74个团队和334名团队成员为研究对象, 通过对三阶段所获取的数据进行分析, 结果显示:(1) 团队互依性对团队亲社会违规氛围与团队和谐的关系具有调节作用:当团队互依性高时, 团队亲社会违规氛围对团队和谐的负向影响更强; (2) 团队和谐对团队绩效具有显著的正向影响; (3) 团队互依性调节了团队亲社会违规氛围通过团队和谐对团队绩效的间接效应:当团队互依性水平较高时, 团队亲社会违规氛围通过团队和谐对团队绩效的负向效应会被增强。本研究证实了团队亲社会违规氛围对团队绩效的作用机制与边界条件, 拓宽了亲社会违规行为和团队和谐的相关研究。

关键词: 团队亲社会违规氛围, 团队和谐, 团队互依性, 团队绩效


In Chinese organizations, it is not uncommon that employees deviate from established rules in order to help others or to enhance work efficiency. Accordingly, such pro-social rule breaking (PSRB) has attracted strong and increasing research attention. However, while scholars have studied the antecedents and outcomes of PSRB at the individual level, no relevant research has explored the notion of team PSRB climate and its effects on team outcomes. By building on harmony management theory, our study proposes and tests a mediated moderation model that explored when and why team PSRB climate influences team performance.
To test our hypotheses, we conducted a three-wave field study from three major construction companies in China. All the data were collected on-site through paper and pencil surveys. At each time point, three researchers visited the companies and distributed the questionnaires to the team leaders and their subordinates. The participants completed the surveys and placed them in sealed envelopes, which were then collected by the research team. All participants received a small gift in exchange for their participation. We received complete responses from 74 team leaders and their 334 subordinates.
The results provided support for our theoretical model and showed that (1) the interaction between team PSRB climate and task interdependence significantly predicted team harmony, such that the negative relationship between team PSRB climate and team harmony was stronger when task interdependence was high rather than low; (2) team harmony was significantly positively related to team performance; (3) team harmony mediated the interactive effect of team PSRB climate and task interdependence on team performance, such that the indirect effect was negative when task interdependence was high.
In summary, our study makes three key contributions. First, we extend the literature by conceptualizing PSRB at the team level and by describing the theoretical foundations for the emergence of team PSRB climate. Specifically, we argue that a team’s PSRB climate develops through processes of social interaction as team members observe, communicate, and share their PSRB experiences. Second, we provide novel insights into the mechanisms through which team PSRB climate influences team performance. Our results suggest that team harmony plays an important role for the effects of team PSRB climate. Third, we identify an important boundary condition for the effects of team PSRB climate. Specifically, our results indicate that it is crucial to consider the moderating effect of task interdependence to yield a more complete and accurate understanding of whether and when teams will experience more or less disharmony as a result of their PSRB climate.

Key words: team PSRB climate, team harmony, task interdependence, team performance