Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Materialism and Workplace Behaviors: Does Wanting More Result in Less?

  • Published:
Social Indicators Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Research indicates that a heightened value of materialism has negative outcomes for subjective well-being. But organizations may see materialism in employees as an important antecedent of productivity and utilize this value to achieve organizational goals. At issue is whether materialism results in negative effects on employee behavior at work, which in turn implies negative effects on fellow employees and the organization. This study investigates the relationship between materialism and two indicators of behavior at work: organizational citizenship behavior and workplace deviance. Results show a significant negative materialism-organizational citizenship behavior relationship and a positive materialism-interpersonal deviance relationship. Materialism was not significantly related to organizational deviance. These results support the concern that materialistic values lead to negative behavioral consequences, which in turn affect fellow employees and the organization. In supplementary analyses we failed to find evidence that materialism is significantly related to task performance, further questioning organizational attempts to create or utilize this value.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abramson, P. R., & Inglehart, R. (1995). Value change in global perspective. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 267–299). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bates, S. (2003). Top pay for best performance. HR Magazine, 48(1), 30–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beer, M., & Cannon, M. D. (2004). Promise and peril in implementing pay-for-performance. Human Resource Management, 43, 3–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, R. J., & Robinson, S. L. (2000). Development of a measure of workplace deviance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(3), 349–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bergeron, D. M. (2007). The potential paradox of organizational citizenship behavior: Good citizens at what cost? Academy of Management Review, 32, 1078–1095.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berry, C., Ones, D. S., & Sackett, P. R. (2007). Interpersonal deviance, organizational deviance, and their common correlates: A review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(2), 410–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolino, M. C., Varela, J. A., Bande, B., & Turnley, W. H. (2006). The impact of impression-management tactics on supervisor ratings of organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27, 281–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowler, W. M., & Brass, D. J. (2006). Relational correlates of interpersonal citizenship behavior: A social network perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(1), 70–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christie, R., & Geis, F. L. (1970). Studies in Machiavellianism. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, P., & Cohen, J. (1996). Life values and adolescent mental health. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahling, J. J., Whitaker, B. G., & Levy, P. E. (2009). The development and validation of a new Machiavellian scale. Journal of Management, 35, 219–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Deckop, J. R., Cirka, C. C., & Andersson, L. M. (2003). Doing unto others: The reciprocity of helping behavior in organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 47, 101–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deckop, J. R., Jurkiewicz, C. L., & Giacalone, R. A. (2010). Effects of materialism on work-related personal well-being. Human Relations, 63(7), 1007–1030.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deckop, J. R., Mangel, R., & Cirka, C. C. (1999). Getting more than you pay for: Organizational citizenship behavior and pay for performance plans. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 420–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Beyond money: Toward an economy of well-being. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 5, 1–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dineen, B. R., Lewicki, R. J., & Tomlinson, E. C. (2006). Supervisory guidance and behavioral integrity: Relationships with employee citizenship and deviant behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(3), 622–635.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunlop, P. D., & Lee, K. (2004). Workplace deviance, organizational citizenship behavior, and business unit performance: The bad apples do spoil the whole barrel. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 67–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duriez, B., Vansteenkiste, M., Soenens, B., & De Witte, H. (2007). The social costs of extrinsic relative to intrinsic goal pursuits: Their relation with social dominance and racial and ethnic prejudice. Journal of Personality, 75(4), 757–782.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehrhart, M. G., Bliese, P. D., & Thomas, J. L. (2006). Unit-level OCB and unit effectiveness: Examining the incremental effect of helping behavior. Human Performance, 19, 159–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gagné, M., & Deci, E. L. (2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 331–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghosn, C. (2002). Saving the business without losing the company. Harvard Business Review, 80(1), 37–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giacalone, R. A., & Jurkiewicz, C. L. (2004). The interaction of materialist and postmaterialist values in predicting dimensions of personal and social identity. Human Relations, 57, 1379–1405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giacalone, R. A., Jurkiewicz, C. L., & Deckop, J. R. (2008). On ethics and social responsibility: The impact of materialism, postmaterialism, and hope. Human Relations, 61, 483–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giacalone, R. A., & Promislo, M. D. (2010). Unethical and unwell: Decrements in well-being and unethical activity at work. Journal of Business Ethics, 91, 275–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldsmith, R. E., & Clark, R. A. (2012). Materialism, status consumption, and consumer independence. The Journal of Social Psychology, 152(1), 43–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1995). Multivariate data analysis with readings. New York: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J. F., Babin, B., Money, A. H., & Samouel, P. (2003). Essentials of business research methods. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hennessey, B. A., & Amabile, T. M. (1988). The conditions of creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The nature of creativity: Contemporary psychological perspectives (pp. 11–38). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, B. J., Blair, C. A., Meriac, J. P., & Woehr, D. J. (2007). Expanding the criterion domain? A quantitative review of the OCB literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 555–566.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inglehart, R. F. (1997). Modernization and postmodernization. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jurkiewicz, C. L. (2002). The phantom code of ethics and public sector reform. Journal of Public Affairs and Issues, 6(3), 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamdar, D., & Van Dyne, L. (2007). The joint effects of personality and workplace social exchange relationships in predicting task performance and citizenship performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(5), 1286–1298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kashdan, T. B., & Breen, W. E. (2007). Materialism and diminished well-being: Experiential avoidance as a mediating mechanism. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 26(5), 521–539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kasser, T. (2002). The high price of materialism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasser, T., & Ryan, R. M. (1993). A dark side of the American dream: Correlates of financial success as a central life aspiration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 410–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kasser, T., Ryan, R. M., Couchman, C. E., & Sheldon, K. M. (2004). Materialistic values: Their causes and consequences. In T. Kasser & A. D. Kanner (Eds.), Psychology and consumer culture: The struggle for a good life in a materialistic world. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kasser, T., Vansteenkiste, M., & Deckop, J. R. (2006). The ethical problems of a materialistic value orientation for businesses (and some suggestions for alternatives). In J. R. Deckop (Ed.), Human resource management ethics. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Komaki, J. L., Coombs, T., & Schepman, S. (1996). Motivational implications of reinforcement theory. In R. M. Steers, L. W. Porter, & G. A. Bigley (Eds.), Motivation and leadership at work (pp. 34–52). New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lutz, M. A. (2008). The ‘Dismal science’—Still? Economics and human flourishing. Review of Political Economy, 20, 163–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McHoskey, J. W. (1999). Machiavellianism, intrinsic versus extrinsic goals, and social interest: A self-determination theory analysis. Motivation and Emotion, 23, 267–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milkovich, G. T., Newman, J. M., & Gerhart, B. (2014). Compensation. Boston: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, N. E., & Dollard, J. (1941). Social learning and imitation. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, T. R., & Mickel, A. E. (1999). The meaning of money: An individual-difference perspective. Academy of Management Review, 24, 568–578.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moorman, R. H., & Blakely, G. L. (1992). A preliminary report on a new measure of organizational citizenship behavior. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Southern Management Association, New Orleans, LA.

  • Moorman, R. H., & Blakely, G. L. (1995). Individualism—Collectivism as an individual difference predictor of organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 16, 127–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, E. W. (1996). Organizational citizenship behavior as a critical link between HRM practices and service quality. Human Resource Management, 35(4), 493–512.

  • Motowidlo, S. J., & Van Scotter, J. R. (1994). Evidence that task performance should be distinguished from contextual performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 475–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mount, M. K., Judge, T. A., Scullen, S. E., Stysma, M. R., & Hezlett, S. A. (1998). Trait, rater, and level effects in 360-degree performance ratings. Personnel Psychology, 51, 557–576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Organ, D. W. (1988). A restatement of the satisfaction–performance hypothesis. Journal of Management, 14, 547–557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, D. K. (2002). Deviant workplace behavior and the organization’s ethical climate. Journal of Business and Psychology, 17, 47–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., Ahearne, M., & MacKenzie, S. B. (1997). Organizational citizenship behavior and the quantity and quality of work group performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 262–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., & MacKenzie, S. B. (1997). The impact of organizational citizenship behaviors on organizational performance: A review and suggestions for future research. Human Performance, 10, 133–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Promislo, M. D., Deckop, J. R., Giacalone, R. A., & Jurkiewicz, C. L. (2010). Valuing money more than people: The effects of materialism on work-family conflict. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 84(4), 935–953.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ray, P. H. (1996). The integral culture survey: A study of transformational values in America. Sausalito, CA: Institute of Noetic Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ray, P. H., & Anderson, S. R. (2000). Cultural creatives. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rindfleisch, A., Burroughs, J. E., & Denton, F. (1997). Family structure, materialism, and compulsive consumption. Journal of Consumer Research, 23, 312–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, B. W., & Robins, R. W. (2000). Broad dispositions, broad aspirations: The intersection of personality traits and major life goals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1284–1296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, S. L., & Bennett, R. J. (1995). A typology of deviant workplace behaviors: A multidimensional scaling study. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 555–572.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, S., & Bennett, R. (1997). Workplace deviance: Its definition, its manifestations, and its causes. Research on Negotiations in Organizations, 6, 3–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roets, A., Van Heil, A., & Cornelis, I. (2006). Does materialism predict racism? Materialism as adistinctive social attitude and a predictor of prejudice. European Journal of Personality, 20, 155–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sackett, P. R., Berry, C. M., Wiemann, S. A., & Laczo, R. M. (2006). Citizenship and counterproductive behavior: Clarifying relations between the two domains. Human Performance, 19, 441–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharpe, J. P., & Ramanaiah, N. (1999). Materialism and the five-factor model of personality. Psychological Reports, 85(1), 327–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheldon, K. M., & Kasser, T. (1995). Coherence and congruence: Two aspects of personality integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 531–543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheldon, K. M., & Kasser, T. (2001). “Getting older, getting better”: Personal strivings and psychological maturity across the life span. Developmental Psychology, 37, 491–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tepper, B. J., Lockhart, D. L., & Hoobler, J. (2001). Justice, citizenship, and role definition effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 789–796.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turnipseed, D. L., & Rassuli, A. (2005). Performance perceptions of organizational citizenship behaviors at work: A bi-level study among managers and employees. British Journal of Management, 16, 231–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vansteenkiste, M., Duriez, B., Simons, J., & Soenens, B. (2006). Materialistic values and well-being among business students: Further evidence for their detrimental effect. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36, 2892–2908.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vansteenkiste, M., Neyrinck, B., Niemiec, C. P., De Witte, H., Soenens, B., & Van den Broeck, A. V. (2007). Examining the relations among extrinsic versus intrinsic work value orientations, basic need satisfaction, and job experience: A self-determination theory approach. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 80(2), 251–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vansteenkiste, M., Simons, J., Lens, W., Sheldon, K. M., & Deci, E. L. (2004). Motivating learning, performance, and persistence: The synergistic role of intrinsic goals and autonomy-support. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 246–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Viswesvaran, C., Schmidt, F. L., & Ones, D. S. (2002). The moderating influence of job performance dimensions on convergence of supervisory and peer ratings of job performance: Unconfounding construct-level convergence and rating difficulty. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(2), 345–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Werner, J. M. (1994). Dimensions that make a difference: Examining the impact of job and extrarole behaviors on supervisory ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 98–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whiting, S. W., Podsakoff, P. M., & Pierce, J. R. (2008). Effects of task performance, helping, voice, and organizational loyalty on performance appraisal ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(1), 125–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Human Resource Management, Fox School of Business, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, 19122, USA

    John R. Deckop

  2. Department of Business Ethics and Legal Studies, Daniels College of Business, University of Denver, Denver, CO, USA

    Robert A. Giacalone

  3. Public Administration Institute, E.J. Ourso College of Business, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA

    Carole L. Jurkiewicz

Authors
  1. John R. Deckop
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Robert A. Giacalone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Carole L. Jurkiewicz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to John R. Deckop.

Appendix: Scale Items

Appendix: Scale Items

1.1 Organizational Citizenship Behavior

  1. 1.

    This employee goes out of their way to help other employees.

  2. 2.

    This employee tells others about new ideas in order to improve the effectiveness of the workgroup.

  3. 3.

    This employee performs job duties with unusually few errors.

  4. 4.

    This employee defends the organization when others criticize it.

  5. 5.

    This employee goes out of their way to make new employees feel welcome.

  6. 6.

    This employee encourages others to try new and more effective ways of doing things.

  7. 7.

    This employee finds things to do during slow periods.

  8. 8.

    This employee doesn’t complain about changes in the organization.

  9. 9.

    This employee treats others courteously, even under trying conditions.

  10. 10.

    This employee expresses opinions honestly even when others may disagree.

  11. 11.

    This employee meets or beats work deadlines.

  12. 12.

    This employee shows pride when representing the organization in public.

  13. 13.

    This employee adjusts work schedules to accommodate other employees’ requests for time off.

  14. 14.

    This employee motivates others to express their ideas and opinions.

  15. 15.

    This employee performs job duties with extra-special care.

  16. 16.

    This employee emphasizes the organization’s positive aspects to those outside it.

  17. 17.

    This employee is willing to listen to others’ problems and worries.

  18. 18.

    This employee gives useful suggestions to others on how they can improve.

  19. 19.

    This employee rarely returns late from breaks or lunch.

  20. 20.

    This employee defends the organization when outsiders criticize it.

1.2 Individual Deviance

  1. 1.

    Making fun of someone at work.

  2. 2.

    Saying something hurtful to someone at work.

  3. 3.

    Making an ethnic, religious, or racial remark at work.

  4. 4.

    Cursing at someone at work.

  5. 5.

    Playing a mean prank on someone at work.

  6. 6.

    Acting rudely toward someone at work.

  7. 7.

    Publicly embarrassing someone at work.

1.3 Organizational Deviance

  1. 1.

    Taking property from work without permission.

  2. 2.

    Spending too much time fantasizing or daydreaming instead of working.

  3. 3.

    Falsifying a receipt to get reimbursed for more money than was spent on business expenses.

  4. 4.

    Taking an additional or longer break than is acceptable at the workplace.

  5. 5.

    Coming in late to work without permission.

  6. 6.

    Littering in the work environment.

  7. 7.

    Neglecting to follow his/her instructions.

  8. 8.

    Intentionally working slower than he/she could have worked.

  9. 9.

    Discussing confidential company information with an unauthorized person.

  10. 10.

    Using an illegal drug or consuming alcohol on the job.

  11. 11.

    Putting little effort into work.

  12. 12.

    Dragging out work in order to get overtime.

1.4 Task Performance

  1. 1.

    Compared to other colleagues, I think the amount of work this person does is ______.

  2. 2.

    Compared to other colleagues, I think the quality of this person’s performance is ______.

  3. 3.

    Compared to other colleagues, I think this person’s overall performance is _______.

  4. 4.

    Compared to other colleagues, I think that if this person decided to leave the organization it would hurt his/her department _____ than the loss of other employees doing a similar job.

1.5 Materialism

  1. 1.

    It is important to own expensive homes, cars, and clothes.

  2. 2.

    The things people own say a lot about how well they are doing in life.

  3. 3.

    I like to own things that impress people.

  4. 4.

    Having luxurious things is an important part of life.

  5. 5.

    I am more influenced by the amount of money people have than the deeds they do.

  6. 6.

    Status and high income are the defining characteristics of a successful business person.

  7. 7.

    Strictly economic motives and material values must drive businesses.

  8. 8.

    I spend more to get the very best.

  9. 9.

    I use money to influence other people to do things for me.

  10. 10.

    Money is the ultimate symbol of success.

  11. 11.

    I purchase things because I know they will impress others.

  12. 12.

    I place emphasis on the amount of money a person has as a sign of his success.

  13. 13.

    The most important concern for a firm is making a profit, even if it means bending or breaking the rules.

  14. 14.

    Getting a high income is a primary factor in deciding whether to accept another job.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Deckop, J.R., Giacalone, R.A. & Jurkiewicz, C.L. Materialism and Workplace Behaviors: Does Wanting More Result in Less?. Soc Indic Res 121, 787–803 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-014-0661-3

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-014-0661-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation