Effects of Workplace Envy on Task Performance in a Banking Sector: Mediating Role of Counterproductive Work Behavior

Amir Khushk^*, Liu Zhiying, Xu Yi, Zhang Zengtian and Yang Hui
^*Correspondence: Amir Khushk, Department of Science and Technology, University of Science and Technology, Anhui, China, Tel: 923312993336, Email:

Keywords

Workplace envy • Counterproductive work behavior • Self-efficacy • Employee performance • SET

Introduction

In recent years, there has been growing interest in workplace envy in organizational scientific studies. Envy and jealousy are often used interchangeably, even though they refer to different emotions [1]. When a person is jealous of another for possessing or receiving whatever he or she does not have, and sees the other's wealth or benefit with distaste as the preceding tales show, they are experiencing envy. Unlike envy, jealousy arises from a fear of being rejected or losing one’s position in life. Jealousy and envy haarerequent in organizations over the years [2]. Negative feelings and emotions are caused by coworkers interfering in an important relationship. For example, somebody might believe that their boss pays more attention to the new coworker than to him or her, and this could cause them to feel jealous. As a result, envy in the workplace is triadic because it affects three people: The focal person, the competitor, and the valued targeted individual [3]. Envy is an emotion that emerged to alert humans to the knowledge that rivals are experiencing various advantages and to push others to obtain those very same rewards [4]. In defining workplace envy, argued that individuals in work settings recognize differences in social standing, achievement, and treatment with several benchmarks simultaneously. From its most basic definition, "envy" is the misery felt at another person's success [5]. Envy and jealousy both can cause a worker to perceive being unfairly treated, leading to sentiments of hatred. This can disrupt beneficial organizational behaviors such as aiding a coworker creating intentional decreases in efficiency and results, and encouraging unethical work practices [6]. Furthermore, it was proposed that CPWBs are designed to minimize or lessen the possible embarrassment of comparisons caused by envy. To comprehend how and why envy is a harmful emotion, we must first understand the relationship between envy and CPWB. In past literature the intent to breach proper workplace rules and norms, which could have a negative imphurte o the organization. However, There has been a considerable increase in studies indicating a significant increase in CPWB such as dishonesty, bullying, and harassment [7]. CPWB hurts the overall performance of the organization, such as decreasing productivity, rising job discontent, high staff turnover, and stress can in turn adversely affect the organization's overall performance. A lack of productivity at work may adversely affect employees' emotional and professional well-being in addition to costing organizations considerable resources [8,9]. Consequently, such behavior at work is seen as a critical issue that requires effective management along with appropriate strategies for solving such problems; as it would severely impact overall organizational performance [10]. Efficacy and envy are both critical determinants of employee task performance, but no research has examined the impact of envy and counterproductive behavior together on task performance. We predict envy to be associated with undermining actions for individuals to lower others' sense of superiority and increase their relative status while simultaneously releasing their displeasure and resentment. Hence, the purpose is to fill the gap by investigating the relationship between envy and task performance. Following is the structure of the research: In this paper, the first section introduces the research; the second section discusses the theoretical basis and hypothesis development. In the third section, we discussed methodology and measurement scales, followed by a discussion of theoretical and practical implications.

Theory and hypothetical development

Social Exchange (SET) provides a comprehensive overview of relations and behaviors, considering connections as typically described by the exchange of physical items such as time in the office or intangible items such as gossiping [11]. The presumption that interactions between two entities are defined by the mutual sharing of assets describes fairness perceptions, such that in reasonable circumstances, employees contribute assets to the organization, and the organization returns the favor by employee recognition based on their ability to contribute [12]. In the setting of unfair conditions, social exchanges often happen between workers and their supervisors; however, when an unfair circumstance is coupled with envy, another participant in the relationship would be the envied person. For instance, if employees notice that coworkers achieved greater benefits for equal performance, they will consider the condition as unjust and may damage the cause of the perceived injustice, which can lead to theft, tardiness, and overall harmful work behaviors in the organization, spreading gossip amongst coworkers; interpersonally harmful behavior within the employer [13,14]. This detrimental conduct will not only meet the goals of regulating emotions, disparity elimination, and self-identity; but will also serve as a social exchange interaction to return harm to the envied, who is regarded as bringing pain to the envious person. Envy, in particular, focuses on the injustice and damage to interpersonal relations. It is because the jealous individual is accused for his or her benefit in the envious person's perspective, even though the benefit or injustice was produced by the organization or the manager [15]. When an unfair circumstance is combined with envy, another person in the social exchange is the envied individual. In these circumstances, the jealous individual may aim harmful actions not just toward the apparent source of the injustice, such as the organization, employer, or another coworker, but also towards the envied person's sources of claimed inferiority [16]. Such harmful action would not only fulfill the aim of gap elimination, and consciousness; it will also function as an interpersonal exchange system to repay damage to the envied, who is viewed as inflicting pain to the envious individual. According to social cognitive theory, individuals have a self-system that helps them to control their feelings, thoughts, and behaviors. Symbols, alternative solutions, learning from others, and a sense of selfreflection are integral to this self-system [17]. In the past, the social cognitive theory was used to analyze motivation, career choice, and educational performance. If goal-setting and development are crucial to job and work satisfaction, then it is evident that the factors that promote them must be considered [18]. Therefore, it is critical to consider the factors that promote them. Furthermore, social cognition theory focuses on how people learn from witnessing one another [19]. Contextual factors influence behavior, but cognitive abilities such as anticipation about events in the future have a significant effect as well. Within the context of social cognitive theory, self-efficacy was deemed an essential social cognitive component in this study.

Literature Review

Workplace envy and task performance

According to psychology research, when people are unsuccessful and feelings of jealousy endure, envy can result in multiple negative consequences, such as aggressiveness, and even violence [20]. In the work, there is a lot of room for competitiveness and social comparisons to take place. Envy is more likely to develop when people compete and unfavorable evaluate themselves. It is natural for humans to compare themselves to others. Earlier studies suggested coworker envy can be triggered by social comparison among high performers with desirable qualities. A person is envied when they perceive that the envied person is similar to them. Coworker envy moderates the relationship between a focal employee's creative process engagement and his/her ability to help coworkers. A culture of rivalry among employees could lead to workplace ostracism and incivility toward colleagues. Mao and colleagues found that participating in creative processes might lead coworkers to create upward social comparisons with the focal employee, resulting in coworker envy when the focal employee is not helpful. When people compare themselves to others who have greater qualities and advantages they wish they had, they are prone to feel envious. Performance evaluation achievement based bonuses and interpersonal relationships are just a few of the many workplace triggers that can lead to envy. In both formal and informal settings, there are many chances for social comparisons that could lead to feelings of jealousy. According to research on envy's influence on workplace can be, schadenfreude dislike, social rejection in different forms, jeopardies of work peers immoral practices and social loafing in teamwork are among the repercussions of workplace envy.

The effects of envy on workplace behavior range from aggressive behavior to incivility. Behavioral responses to envy involve harming others, as has been demonstrated in most research. As a result of workplace envy, identified major behavioral outcomes which include sabotage, pro-social, and performance outcomes. Given envy's dual behavioral patterns of challenge and worry, we can see both favorable and unfavorable patterns of correlation between envy and its repercussions. An individual who is filled with envy feels ill will towards another person as well as wanting what that person has. Envious individuals may also consider using counterproductive work behaviors to get rid of or destroy the target of their envy. These are typical problems faced by companies that have grown beyond a certain size and continue to expand internationally and internationally, if these problems are not addressed, these issues will begin to cause significant impediments to organizational performance in the future and will result in a significant brain drain on the organization due to higher turnover rates and a lack of employee loyalty. Envious employees are not affected by how many friends they had at work or how many friends they had at home. Despite experiencing pain when they see others possessing what they desire, employees can react to negative social comparisons either positively or negatively: they can do their best to enhance their social position or try to damage the desired target. According to, counterfactual theory suggests people can learn from successful envied targets to deal with envy constructively. Hence, we propose the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 1: Workplace envy has a negative relationship with task performance

Mediating role of CPWB

Counterproductive Work Behaviors (CPWB) have a detrimental impact on an organization's well-being and/or employees’ performance. Follwing are the three key characteristics of CPWB. First, CPWBs are voluntary behaviors that damage or attempt to hurt companies and/or their stakeholders, such as customers, colleagues, and superiors. In most cases, a worker does the action with the intent of causing harm to the individual or company. For instance, he or she may ignore tasks by answering the phone or taking an unusually extended break. Second, CPWBs play a purposeful role. This is the defining feature of counterproductive action. Third, CPWBs attack the organization (sabotaging) or its stakeholders (violence toward coworkers). A study found that workplace malicious envy negatively affected counterproductive behavior at work. The result is employees exhibit more counterproductive work behavior if they are feeling more malicious envy toward other employees within the organization. These findings were consistent with the literature review, which validated the influence of workplace malevolent envy on the study's unproductive work conduct. Malicious envy is recognized as a phenomenon of bad feelings that lead to increasing undesired actions. Furthermore, it was proposed that CPWBs are designed to minimize or lessen the possible embarrassment of comparisons caused by envy. To comprehend how and why envy is a harmful emotion, we must first understand the relationship between CPWB and envy. Recommended that CPWB be formed in order to restore fairness. Participating in unproductive work practices directed at the envied individual may assist the jealous person in achieving three aims. Firstly, hurting the envied other might diminish another party's envy causing benefit, therefore assisting to equalize the lot of the one suffering envy and the envied individual. Secondly, counter productive work behaviors may function as an emotion control method in which the envious individual expresses indignation or fury to relieve his or her aggravation. Thirdly, anger is powerful and can help recompense the individual who is envious for a feeling of powerlessness. A similar set of behaviors has been studied many times over the years by scholars; though they used different terms based on their conceptual emphasis, such as workplace deviance, workplace aggression, antisocial behavior in organizations, and revenge. In 2006, Spector constructed a categorization of CWBs into five components: Detrimental and nasty behaviors that harm people; purposefully doing one's employment wrongfully or letting mistakes; ruining an organization's assets; unjustly trying to take personal goods or assets of someone else; and procrastinating by being absent or late. It includes damage, lying, and delaying information that threatens a company or its stakeholders, such as clients, coworkers, etc.

In a previous study, the gap was demonstrated not only by showing employees engage in CWBs that go beyond person focused behaviors to include behaviors targeted toward colleagues' performance, but also by showing that relational stressors and trait competitiveness differentially predict these two types of CWBs. States that competitiveness generates a differentiation mindset that pits one against the other, causing people to become more likely to engage in CWBs as their envy increases and their stress increases. Competitive individuals tend to be more likely to participate in antagonistic, person oriented CWBs against those they dislike because they possess a contentious, argumentative nature. Reveals that CPWB may go beyond typical person focused behaviors that concentrate on other employees' success but also influence actions that have a direct impact on the employee’s performance. Several workplace behaviors are influenced by emotions in organizations. Various negative behaviors are believed to be caused by emotions. In this context, counterproductive work behavior is the result of negative emotions triggered by the experience of a particular and meaningful unfair or unfavorable event that affects other employees in an organization or the organization itself. Employees who experience distress when faced with a negative or unexpected result might engage in cognitive processes to determine an integrated justice judgment about the event. Even though respondents were more likely to report comparing themselves often to those envied. Several studies have examined the role of procedural justice perceptions on counterproductive work behaviors. The attribution model of justice was used to make predictions that organizational justice interacts with envy to influence internal attributions, thereby altering counterproductive work behaviors or aggressive or hostile responses to situations in which others obtain what one desires. A variety of workplace stresses, such as role conflict, role ambiguity, work pressure, organizational limitations, and relationship conflict, have been associated with CPWB and performance. Therefore, we propose our hypothesis based on the above theoretical explanations:

Hypothesis 2: CPWB mediates the relationship between Workplace and Task Performance

Self-efficacy as a moderator

Self-efficacy refers to the belief in one's own ability to mobilize the mental abilities, desire, and planning processes required to accomplish a certain task in a particular situation. It involves people's assessment of one’s ability to plan and execute the steps necessary to attain the required level of effectiveness. Beliefs of self-efficacy serve as a basis for human drive and individual success. Employees are more likely to be content with their occupations if they believe they are capable to complete their job duties or achieve their tasks. Efficacy is associated with goal directed behavior dedication, performance, contentment, and well-being, which turns into both extrinsic and intrinsic work pleasure. It enhances the intrinsic aspect by boosting tenacity and resolving problems, both are crucial for performing the job effectively. When self-efficacy is high it results in a higher level of confidence in employees in their ability to do tasks successfully, set greater ambitious objectives for themselves, contribute more, perseveres longer, and cope better with failure than those with low self-efficacy employees. If an individual's pride is undermined, they often take part in unrelated tasks at work. As a result, a lack of self-control intensifies counterproductive work behaviors. Expression of honesty and avoidance of CWB, on the other hand, characterize personnel as an equipped high level of self-control such as self-efficacy which is crucial. In the relationship between envy and CWB, LMX has been found to function as a moderator.

Self-efficacy and CPWB were explored by using other psychological empowerment aspects, such as optimism, confidence, and perseverance which is also supported by other researchers. When confronted with unfavorable criticism that undermines their positive self-image, high performers tend to react aggressively. Individual self-control depletion, for example, it has an impact on the link between honesty and off-task conduct, particularly CPWB. Reduction in personal accomplishment and depersonalization are significant predictors of withdrawal. Emotionally exhausted individuals and depersonalized individuals were associated with abuse, and low personal accomplishment and depersonalization were associated with sabotage. In light of this, it comes as no surprise that employees who are less successful at work and who cope with stress by treating others as inanimate objects are more likely to leave their workplace because they are absenteeism or turnover intentions are higher. According to, job burnout can lead to counterproductive behaviors such as sabotage, withdrawal, and abuse. Several factors such as depersonalization, emotional exhaustion, and reduced personal accomplishment contributed to withdrawals and sabotage, while depersonalization significantly predicted abuse.

Additionally, a large body of research has focused on the work ethic, which indicates that some employees possess high levels of self-control and are hard wired to be conscientious and hard-working. This prevents them from engaging in acts of property and production deviance, e.g. Deviant behavior is more likely to occur among employees low in this trait. A strong body of evidence supports the proposition that "good" employees, such as those who adhere to high protestant work ethics, are deviant at work. Salespeople may hurt the organization by tarnishing customers' perceptions of the organization, as opposed to assembly line workers destroying equipment or causing defects in products. Knowledge workers are no longer influenced by counterproductive behaviors that are prevalent among traditional workers. Hence, in the light of literature we propose the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 3: Self-efficacy moderates the relationship between workplace envy and task performance (Figure 1).

Methodology

Measures: The purpose of the research was to empirically examine the impact of workplace envy on task performance. An online survey was conducted in the financial sector of Pakistan in Karachi city. An online survey was sent to bank employees to participate in this research. Participants were questioned on envy and task performance. In the first phase, we delivered 330 online forms to employees in various departments such as finance, marketing, human resources, and administration, and 278 were returned with an 84% response rate. Due to inadequate information, the authors deleted 9 questionnaires. As a result, a total of 269 survey questionnaires were employed to evaluate hypotheses. Smart PLS software for PLS-SEM path model estimation was used to evaluate the conceptual model. To measure the present study variables, the validated and verified scales were adapted. Respondents were requested to rate on a 5-point Likert scale with 1 being strongly disagreed and 5 strongly agreed. To verify the reliability and validity of all variables, the authors used Cronbach beta (α) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA).

Workplace Envy (WE): Workplace envy scale was used to assess envy. If the score is high it indicates increased degrees of jealousy, implying respondents believe their contributions are unappreciated, and someone else has better job responsibilities. An example of an item is: "It is rather irritating to watch that others have all the success in receiving the best tasks." Cronbach Alpha is (0.81).

Counterproductive Work Behavior (CPWB): On a 12 items scale participants assessed the extent to which individuals participated in unproductive work behaviors. High scores showed that they obstructed or interfered with the employment of others, harmed others' reputations, withheld information regarding work, or spoke negatively about someone to defeat them, and so on. Using a rating scale, users were requested to assess each item based on how closely it matched acts they took toward others. Cronbach alpha value is higher than (0.86) which is higher than the threshold value of 0.70.

Self-Efficacy (SE): The 12 items scale established by, includes three components, namely confidence, concentrated effort, and active participation, to assess self-efficacy. Three items were used in this study to assess self-efficacy. An example item is "If I can't do a job the first time. I keep trying until I can." Another item is "When I'm trying to become friends with someone who seems uninterested at first, I don't give up easily". Cronbach’s Alpha value is (0.82) which is higher than accepted value of 0.70

Task Performance (TP): The tasks were rated using the German version of Ferris, Witt, and Hochwarter's (2001) work performance rating scale. Four items were evaluated on a 5 points scale where 1 represented strongly disagrees and 5 represented strongly agree. An example of items is “Do you think employees adjust to changes at work”. Cronbach alpha indicates (0.84) which is higher than the acceptable value.

Results

Demographics

We gathered information on participants' gender, education, and age. According to the findings, more than 53.8% of respondents were male, and 53.90% of participants held a Master/M.Phil, degree. Table 1 summarizes the demographic analysis in detail.

Table 1. Demographic information.

Measurement model reliability and validity: Our model includes 15 indicators; no indicators were excluded from the final model because all indicators had outer loading values greater than 0.70 (Table 2). If the outer loading is less than 0.708 the (AVE) values must be more than (AVE>0.50) to retain the indicator showing less outer loading. As a result of the path model, the following variables are identified. There are specific constructs whose composite reliability is above threshold: Workplace Envy=0.895, CPWB=0.933, self-efficacy=0.901, and task performance=0.929. As a result, the indicators of each construct showed a sufficient degree of internal consistency.

Table 2. Reliability and validity of measurement model

Construct validity

As a measure of convergent validity, the average variance extracted (AVE) was used. This value represents the total variation of indicators in a variable. To confirm the construct validity in the conceptual framework, the AVE values of 0.736 for 0.741 for workplace envy, counterproductive work behavior, 0.751 for selfefficacy, and 0.766 for task performance were obtained.

On average,each concept explained more than half of the variance in its indicators. The constructs' discriminant validity was demonstrated using the criterion, which stated that the square root of AVE for workplace envy, counterproductive work behavior, self-efficacy, and task performance seemed higher than the correlations of related latent variables.

Collinearity evaluation

Multicollinearity exists if independent factors are significantly intercorrelated, leading standard errors to inflate, casting considerable doubt on the validity and reliability of the factors' correlations (Tables 3 and 4). The (VIF) was also used to analyze the likely existence of multicollinearity in the research framework. The values for all indicators are substantially below the cut-off value of 3, indicating that the variables are not multicollinear (Figure 2).

Table 3. Discriminant validity.

Path coefficient

In the structural model of the study (Figure 2), the hypothesized relationships are both significant and positive. The findings show that workplace envy has significant impact on task performance (H1) (β=0.284, P=0.000) and envy has impact on counterproductive work behavior (H₂) (β=0.169, P=0.000). PLS-SEM paths revealed counter productive work behavior as a mediating variable between workplace envy and task performance (H₃) (β=0.147, P=0.021) for mediation. As demonstrated in Figure 2 and Table 4, self-efficacy has a significant impact on task performance for moderators (H4)(β=0.183, P=0.000). According to the results of the regression analysis, the statistics of adjusted R² (0.545) showed that 54.5% of the change in counterproductive work behavior is due to employees' involvement in workplace envy. This is further supported by the F-test (model fitness statistic F=44.65, p-value 0.05). Moreover, data of adjusted R² (0.745) in the second regression revealed that workplace envy and counterproductive work behavior account for 74.5 percent of the change in task performance. The F-test (F=83.10, p-value 0.001) revealed that the model is likewise the best fit. To determine the significant impact of each exogenous variable on the indigenous variable, the effect size of the research model of this study was determined. A moderate effect size is identified for workplace envy on counterproductive work behavior at f²=0.197, as is the effect size of CPWB on task performance at f²=0.165, which is also a moderate effect size. Likewise, the effect size of workplace envy on task performance is f²=0.253, which is high, while the effect of selfefficacy is identified as f²=0.178, which is moderate.

Table 4. Structural path significance.

Discussion

Today's commercial world has merged into a single market. Organizational competitiveness has intensified, which has exacerbated challenges in professional relationships, workplace conditions, and entire organizational life. Therefore, the purpose of this research is to empirically evaluate the impact of workplace envy on task performance with the mediating role of counterproductive work behavior and moderating role of self-efficacy. Workplace envy has become a popular concept in the last few years due to its influence on individual and organizational performance. The current study identifies the conceptual and practical limitations of envy concept and proposes the model of workplace envy as an enhancement to counterproductive work behavior. Further, the study provides empirical evidence of antecedents to workplace envy to see how counterproductive work behavior mediates the relationship with task performance. The literature has provided a more fine-grained view of psychopathy by combining different streams of research and emphasizing the importance of distinguishing between various causes of psychopatto to better understand the effects of trait psychopathy in the workplace. When participants demonstrate high levels of fearless dominance but low levels of education and low levels of interpersonal influence, organizations should be cautious. This is because fearless dominance can become toxic under certain circumstances; high levels of CWB could result. Workers may enhance their conditions more productively if they become more conscious of their feelings and focused on how they can better their conditions. This is accomplished through the use of emotion and envy study. Observe that, being a less-studied construct, perceptions of being envied occur less often in the research than other envy constructs; the most commonly used measure is a three-item scale designed to investigate employees' feelings of being envied by colleagues. Public organizations are affected by this, but private organizations are not. According to the literature, public organizations experience more CWB when their relationships with leaders are poor, but less CWB when they have good relationships with their leaders. In this case, the more envious employee may perceive that there is more support and resources available when the leader's relationship is perceived to be of higher quality, and as a result, CWB and envy can be positive but weak associations. CPWB is not a label that measures a single construct; rather, it is a collection of workplace deviant behaviors that have been categorized using various classification methods, including one that was provided by. This method divides CPWB into five categories: Withdrawal, sabotage, fraud, abuse, and production deviance. Workplace incivility and CPWBs are similar in that they both hurt citizenship behavior, organizational trust, and Job performance, and both concepts raise employee turnover, frustration and anger, and decline perception of self-identity and pro-social behavior at work. Knowledge withholding and unethical behavior are two new dimensions introduced to the literature compared to previous studies. The study also provides the first assessment of knowledge workers' CWB. A significant portion of the participants in this study also exhibited CWB based on their personality characteristics rather than other variables. A scale for measuring CWB for knowledge workers was developed, which included six dimensions: Unethical behavior, resistant behavior, loophole seeking, passive obedience, knowledge withholding, and storytelling.

According to the hypothesis of the study, workplace envy negatively influence the task performance of the employee. Based on the results, the mean score amounted to 4.33, which indicated that envy is perceived by employees to be high (β=0.284, p=.000). Furthermore, Envy showed a substantial impact on CPWB (β=0.169, p=.000). Hence, the findings confirm our first hypothesis (H1). This finding was consistent with a review of the literature conducted by who validated the influence of workplace envy on performance. Likewise, in their study, showed the relationship between envy and counterproductive work behavior in public enterprises. Employees should respect and strive for others' achievements without undermining envious coworkers. Indeed, one would anticipate them to act in ways that foster stronger interpersonal ties and boost their image with coveted targets. On the other hand, some workers target their dissatisfaction onto jealous coworkers and seek ways to sabotage their quality and effectiveness because envy includes displeasure at another's excellence. Interpersonal assistance is related with a decent image, prestige, and, eventually, performance. However, employees with low self-efficacy, on the other hand, are more inclined to regard envy as a danger. When emotions of worry and danger take hold, these people may be reluctant to help and may be more prone to deliberately sabotage envied individuals. The primary finding that scholars have conveyed to practitioners is that the effects of envy are mainly negative. We argue that the social dynamics linked with jealousy are present all the time, and that management emphasis must be focused on building a healthy environment in which the strong benefits of envy may be achieved. The ability to appreciate the other's accomplishments is critical in maintaining and extending overall performance. Workers who are unable to recognize and acknowledge their teammates' achievements and traits are deprived of a vital primary motivator and reinforcement. Managers are encouraged to be cautious and to aim to develop and maintain settings that promote the good outcomes of envy. Moreover, studies show that fairness and justice are important in organizational contexts. Our study implies that organizations may suffer if employees perceive organizations to be accountable for the factors that create envy. Therefore, we suggest that, beyond fairness treatment, management plays a critical role in establishing guidelines for improved core self-evaluation as well as developing an environment where employees perceive the organization to be helpful. Based on the hypothesis of the study CPWB mediates the relationship between workplace envy and task performance with mean score of 4.12 with (β=0.147, p=0.021). This finding is also consistent with the literature validated the impact of envy on performance that confirms our (H₂). As work systems have grown more unpredictable, complicated, and interconnected, important changes have happened quietly. Many firms are embracing fairness and teamwork as their significant functional area to improve flexibility in such a complicated and evolving context, which has questioned the conventional notion of performance and has made team member work role performance, which might fully account for worker team oriented behavioral patterns with aptitude, flexibility, and proactive behavior as a team member. The role of self-efficacy as a moderator was found to be significant between Envy and CPWB. According to the research findings, selfefficacy had a moderating impact on workplace envy and counterproductive work behavior. As the mean score of self-efficacy is 4.12, which indicates that employee self-efficacy plays an essential role in coping with workplace envy and CPWB as shown in finding (β=0.183, p=.000), which supports our (H₃). These findings are also consistent with who also discovered that self-efficacy moderates the relationship between envy and counterproductive work behaviors.

Theoretical and practical implications

This study has various theoretical and practical implications. From a theoretical perspective, the study found that counterproductive work behavior had considerable effects on various contexts of work performance, supporting theories of job performance which contend that a variety of work environment factors affect performance in an organization such as organizational justice, job pressures, work limitations, and so on, can influence organizational effectiveness. Moreover, this research also identified the situations under which envy expresses negative feelings which can be destructive; nevertheless, employees can be defensive by concentrating their attention on potential risks and prompting us to take action to combat them. Although workers may experience pain when they sense that others have what they desire, individuals may deal with unfavorable social comparison in two ways: They can strive to change their social status or they might try to harm the envied target's status. Jealousy has been often regarded as a damaging emotion due to its ability to elicit unpleasant emotions. Based on social cognition theory, this study proposes that employees can deal with workplace envy and counterproductive work behavior productively if they utilize it as an opportunity to boost their self-esteem. Previous research has shown that envy can lead to favorable workplace outcomes in terms of job performance. When employees feel respected and treated fairly in the workplace, they are more likely to demonstrate positive work behaviors that benefit the company and less likely to engage in negative behaviors that harm the company. Managers must be watchful and responsible for guaranteeing the fairness which is expected from all in all processes of organization to ensure overall effectiveness and efficiency at work. This study also has some significant managerial implications. According to the research, behaviors, and attitudes in the organization can have a significant effect in employees’ engagement in unproductive job behavior. As a result, when dealing with challenges, the top management should concentrate on management issues, responsibilities, functions, and policy and guidelines. Furthermore, democratic principles in companies can aid in the relation to organizational hierarchy. As a result, detrimental behavior can be prevented. Moreover, the current findings when supplemented with empirical information imply that self-efficacy reflects a vital competency for employment and career achievement in the short and long term. According to scholars, selfefficacy is a critical skill for getting employed, achieving high performance ratings and pay raises, and also being promoted. Given such acknowledgments from researchers and practitioners, it seems reasonable to investigate the implications of this psychological skill to ensure that we have a workforce with strong, usable competency portfolios. Hopefully, our analysis will stimulate researchers to conduct additional research in this area, as well as to investigate these variables in conjunction with other significant work outputs to truly comprehend their individual and dynamic synergistic implications.

Conclusion

Future studies could also look into the dynamic links between selfefficacy, personality, and job results that have been highlighted in theoretical articles. As we learn more about the dimensions of self-efficacy, researchers must explore how the proven determinants of efficacy related to the many aspects of performance. Scholars could also study how these variables related to emotional aspects of employee performance when these dimensions acquire further empirical and theoretical support. Further future research may investigate the consequence of envy within multiple timeframes. For instance, scholars should look into how people manage the unpleasant feeling of envy over time and who is more inclined to retain envy. In addition to that researchers should look into functional aspects of envy that we did not look into in this study because our research aim was to how dysfunctional envy influences task performance.

Funding

No funding

Declaration of Competing Interests

The authors affirm that they have no known financial or interpersonal conflicts that may have considered influencing the research presented in this study.

References

1. Ali A. “Impact of Training, Mood And Motivation on Employee Performance in Universities of Sindh, Pakistan”. J Manage Inf 7 (2020): 219–231.[Google Scholar]
2. O’Neill TA, Lee NM, Radan J and Law SJ, et al. “The Impact of “Non-Targeted Traits” on Personality Test Faking, Hiring, and Workplace Deviance”. Pers Individ Differ 55 (2013): 162–168. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
3. O’Neill TA, Lewis RJ and Carswell JJ. “Employee Personality, Justice Perceptions, and The Prediction of Workplace Deviance”. Pers Individ Differ 51 (2011): 595–600. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
4. Odom-Forren J. “Workplace Aggression and Violence”. J Perianesth Nurs 24 (2009): 69–70. [Crossref]
5. Oh IS, Lee K, Ashton MC and de Vries RE, et al. “Are Dishonest Extraverts More Harmful Than Dishonest Introverts? The Interaction Effects of Honesty-Humility and Extraversion in Predicting Workplace Deviance”. Appl Psychol 60 (2011): 496–516. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
6. Peng H. “Counterproductive Work Behavior Among Chinese Knowledge Workers”. Int J Sel Assess 20 (2012): 119–138. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
7. Quigley E, Schwoebel A, Ruggiero J and Inacker P, et al. “Addressing Workplace Violence and Aggression in Health Care Settings: One Unit’s Journey.” Nurse Lead 19 (2020): 70–75. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
8. Ramzy O, Bedawy REl and Maher A. “Dysfunctional Behavior at the Workplace and Its Impact on Employees’ Job Performance.” Int J Bus Adm 9 (2018): 224. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
9. Salin D. “Risk Factors of Workplace Bullying for Men and Women: The Role of the Psychosocial and Physical Work Environment.” Scand J Psychol 56 (2015): 69–77. [Crossref] [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
10. Spector PE, Bauer JA and Fox S. “Measurement artifacts in the assessment of counterproductive work behavior and organizational citizenship behavior: Do we know what we think we know?’’ J Appl Psychol 95 (2010): 781–790. [Crossref] [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
11. Sterling CM and Labianca GJ. “Costly Comparisons: Managing Envy in The Workplace.” Organ Dyn 44 (2015): 296–305. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
12. Tai K, Narayanan J and McAllister DJ. “Envy As Pain: Rethinking the Nature of Envy and Its Implications for Employees and Organizations.” Acad Manage Rev 37 (2012): 107–129. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
13. Taştan SB. “Workplace Anger as a Personal and Behavioral Response to Psychosocial and Situational Characteristics of Work Environment: An Appraisal of Social Cognitive Theory.” Int J Econ Admin Stud (2014): 161 - 190. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
14. Van Fleet DD and Van Fleet EW. “Towards a Behavioral Description of Managerial Bullying.” Empl Responsib Rights J 24 (2012): 197–215. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
15. Wahyu Ariani D. “The Relationship between Employee Engagement, Organizational Citizenship Behavior, and Counterproductive Work Behavior.” Int J Bus Adm 4 (2013): 46–56. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
16. Wang W, Mao J, Wu W and Liu J, et al. “Abusive Supervision and Workplace Deviance: The Mediating Role of Interactional Justice and the Moderating Role of Power Distance.” Asia Pac J Hum Resour 50 (2012): 43–60. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
17. Wang X and Lian X. “Psychological Capital, Emotional Labor and Counterproductive Work Behavior of Service Employees: The Moderating Role of Leaders’ Emotional Intelligence.” Am J Ind Bus Manag 5 (2015): 388–395. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
18. Wobker I. “The Price of Envy-An Experimental Investigation of Spiteful Behavior.” Manag Decis Econ 36 (2014): 326–335. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
19. Wong KK. “Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) Techniques Using SmartPLS.” Mark Bull 24 (2013): 1–32.[Google Scholar]
20. Yakın M and Erdil O. “Relationships between Self-Efficacy and Work Engagement and the Effects on Job Satisfaction: A Survey on Certified Public Accountants.” Procedia Soc Behav Sci 58 (2012): 370–378. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]