Normally when discussing counterproductive work behaviors, researchers and scholars do not think of the beneficial aspects. However, Mindy Krischer, Lisa Penney, and Emily Hunter (2010) conducted a study using 295employed adults randomly selected through the 2004 StudyResponse Project to explore the possible beneficial properties of production deviance and withdrawal, two forms of CWBs (p. 154). As it relates to the subsequent reviewed article Krischer et al. (2010) states, “We investigated whether two forms of CWB…serve as a means of coping to mitigate the impact of low distributive and procedural justice on emotional exhaustion” (p. 154). Krischer et al. (2010) used Price and Mueller’s (1986) six-item scale to measure distributive justice, Moorman’s (1991) 12-item scale to measure procedural justice (p. 158). Krischer et al. (2010) also applied the Counterproductive Work Behavior Checklist (as cited in Spector et al., 2006) to measure production deviance and withdrawal, and the Job –Related Affective Well-Being Scale (as cited in Van Katwyk, Fox, Spector, & Kelloway, 2000) to assess emotional exhaustion (p.158). Krischer et al. (2010) results suggest that CWBs, like withdrawal, are effective coping mechanisms for perceived low distributive justice and will result in less emotional exhaustion. However, the results displayed production deviance not being a suitable CWB for coping with procedural justice (Krischer et al., 2010). Procedural justice is quite exhausting because it involves both active and passive behaviors, and the emotional cost of this CWB is a leading drawback.
One theory the article presents is how CWBs could be beneficial to the organization and the employee. If the employees perceive the rewards or process of decisions as unfair, otherwise known as low distributive and procedural justice, they will develop CWBs as a coping strategy (Krischer et al., 2010). If the organization cannot manage their pay and decision making progress but require their employees to continue working, the use of CWBs can be viewed as beneficial as long as the use of CWBs do not result in negative turnover and are viewed as covert behaviors (Krischer et al., 2010,p. 156-157). For example Krischer et al. (2010) notes (as cited in Spector et al., 2006; Westmen & Etzion, 2001):
When employees feel angry about a lack of distributive or procedural justice, leaving work early or taking longer breaks enables them to temporarily escape a situation that induces negative emotion. While away, feelings of anger may dissipate and emotional homeostasis can be restored. (p. 157)
LaMarcus Bolton, Richard Harvey, Matthew Gawitch, and Larissa Barber (2011) conducted a research study to discover if emotional exhaustion might have correlative factors towards counterproductive work behaviors (CWB). While creating this study, Bolton et al. (2011) also included how depersonalization and disidentification could mediate between emotional exhaustion’s causation of...