Academic highlights 'situational or contextual factors' that can lead to acts of vengeance by employees
The recent case of a London Drugs employee who stole $2 million worth of merchandise over five years underscores the importance of robust HR systems and the role of organizational justice in preventing employee misconduct.
The motivations behind employee misconduct are varied and complex, but they often boil down to a perceived injustice or inequity within the organization that result in “counterproductive” actions, says Lucas Monzani, professor of organizational behaviour at the Ivey Business School at the University of Western Ontario.
“The main idea of understanding these counterproductive behaviours, it's a way of restoring a perceived injustice,” he says, so when employees feel they are not being treated fairly — whether in terms of compensation, recognition, or workload — they may engage in misconduct as a way to "balance the scales."
This perceived injustice might be real or imagined, says Monzani, but the impact on the employee's behaviour can be significant.
London Drugs employee stole as counterproductive act
In the case of the London Drugs thefts, the employee admitted to the court he’d stolen around 245 items by sneaking them out in his bag and then selling them on Craigslist.
He used the money to fund his lifestyle, including paying bills and buying medicine for his family, but he also said he was “unhappy with the company and its wages and pace, and he started to steal in a bit of an act of vengeance against his employer,” the judge said in her decision.
Such actions often stem from a perceived breach in the ‘psychological contract’ between the employee and the organization, Monzani says, explaining that justice is one of the “core motives” of employees who commit acts of vengeance against their employers.
“We have a sense that we need justice—in the workplace, we exchange our effort and our time for our salary… Time and effort against our hourly wage or a monthly wage, etc.,” he says.
When employees feel that this contract has been violated — whether through unfair pay, biased promotion practices, or lack of respect — they may seek to restore the perceived imbalance through misconduct, says Monzani. This sense of injustice can manifest in various forms, including:
- distributive justice (fairness of outcomes)
- procedural justice (fairness of processes)
- interpersonal justice (fairness in treatment).
What type of employee engages in counterproductive acts?
Research has shown that employee counterproductive behaviours are not tied to any particular personality traits, meaning there is no “employee type” to be aware of or screened for; even top performers will resort to counterproductive behaviours if they feel they have been treated unfairly, Monzani says.
“These types of behaviours cannot be attributed to inherited traits or being born less agreeable, or anything like that,” he says. “It's actually the work conditions that really drives this. It's more situational or contextual factors than individual personality traits.”
Employees may engage in a variety of counterproductive behaviors which can be broadly categorized into active and passive forms, Monzani says.
Passive behaviours, also known as withdrawal behaviours, include actions such as social loafing or free riding (contributing minimally to group projects). In contrast, active counterproductive behaviours involve more direct actions such as theft, sabotage, or harassment.
Moreover, unclear job roles and expectations can exacerbate feelings of frustration and unfairness. When employees are unsure of their responsibilities or feel that they are being unfairly burdened with additional tasks, they are more likely to engage in counterproductive behaviours, he says.
This highlights the importance of clear communication, regular updates to job descriptions, and ensuring that employees feel recognized and valued for their contributions.
Avoid employee misconduct by listening
Monzani stresses the importance of clear job descriptions and roles as a preventive measure against such destructive behaviours. When employees are unclear about their responsibilities or feel they are being asked to do more than what was initially agreed upon, it can lead to frustration and, ultimately, counterproductive behaviours.
“Overload and high stress tend to facilitate the emergence of these behaviours,” says Monzani. “You may have a job description that was never updated in 10 years … it turns out that now they're giving you more responsibilities without enough recognition."
Another critical aspect is the need for employers to genuinely listen to their employees, not only providing channels for communication but also acting on the feedback received, he says.
When employees feel their voices are heard and their concerns addressed, they are less likely to resort to destructive actions as a means of protest.
“There’s been communication attempts, but nothing changes. That happens a lot in organizations,” he says.
This lack of response to employee concerns can foster a sense of hopelessness and resentment, leading to behaviours aimed at restoring what the employee perceives as a balance of power.
Don’t overpromise in hiring process
Monzani also warns against the common pitfall of overpromising during the hiring process; when employees are hired under one set of expectations but find themselves faced with a different reality, it can lead to feelings of betrayal.
This is particularly true for younger employees, he says, as they may be more sensitive to perceived injustices.
“A lot of that response is precisely because younger employees feel that they’re being cheated,” Monzani says. “They sign a contract for A and then they get A plus B plus C plus D, with no additional remuneration or recognition.”
This disconnect between expectation and reality can drive employees to engage in behaviours that they feel will restore a sense of fairness, even if those actions are detrimental to the organization.
Mitigating risks of employee vengeance
To mitigate these risks, Monzani suggests organizations invest in thoughtful organizational design practices.
“HR managers can engage in organizational design practices, which means making sure that employees have a career trajectory,” he says.
When employees feel they have a future within the organization and a clear path for growth, they are more likely to remain engaged and committed to their roles.
Providing opportunities for advancement, even if financial rewards are not immediately available, can also play a significant role in maintaining employee morale, he says.
“If you are just in a dead-end job, you don't care so much about not being a good citizen in the organization,” says Monzani. “Sometimes, companies do not have the resources to reward you with money for everything you do, but they can reward you with know-how and learning opportunities.”
