RUNNING HEAD: ATTACHMENT THEORY AT WORK

Attachment Theory at Work: A Review and Directions for Future Research

Jeffrey Yip

Claremont Graduate University

Kyle Ehrhardt

University of Colorado Denver

Hunter Black

Claremont Graduate University

Corresponding author: Jeffrey Yip, Division of Behavioral and Organizational Sciences,

Claremont Graduate University, 150 E. 10th St., Claremont, CA 91711, USA.

Email: jeffrey.yip@cgu.edu

ABSTRACT

Attachment theory is a central psychological theory in understanding human relationships. The

contributions of attachment theory to management scholarship is particularly substantial in

research on leadership, work relationships, and human resource management. In particular,

attachment theory provides a unique relational perspective to research on individual outcomes

such as work motivation, performance, and ethical behavior. This review will provide a

synthesis of the theory, its contributions to management scholarship, an integrative summary of

current findings, and directions for future research. In addition, we will discuss how attachment

theory research in management has focused narrowly on attachment as a personality variable and

could be expanded with research on attachment as a variable state and interpersonal process –

research that is current in social and cognitive psychology. We offer specific suggestions for

future research, as well as discuss how these directions will require new methodological

approaches, such as experimental studies on attachment states and the use of network analysis to

study attachment dynamics across multiple organizational relationships.

ATTACHMENT THEORY AT WORK: A REVIEW AND DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE

RESEARCH

The concept of attachment is central to organizational life. Attachment is defined, quite

simply, as an enduring emotional bond between people (Bowlby, 1969). It is driven by the

fundamental human need for belonging (Baumeister & Leary, 1995) and the motivation to seek

proximity to attachment figures in times of need (Bowlby, 1979). The nature, development,

maintenance, and dissolution of this emotional bond has been studied through the lens of

attachment theory (Bowlby, 1979; Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters & Wall, 1978) - a leading

perspective in the understanding of human relationships (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007).

Our review reveals a steep increase in the use of attachment theory in management

research over the last three decades (See Figure 1). More recently, in the last five years,

advances have been made in the understanding of attachment dynamics in leadership (Wu &

Parker, in press), trust (Frazier, Gooty, Little, & Nelson, 2014), emotion regulation (Kafetsios,

Athanasiadou, & Dimou, 2014), mentoring (Allen, Shockley, & Poteat, 2010; Mitchell, Eby, &

Ragins, 2015), and employment relationships (Albert, Allen, Briggane, & Ma, 2015; Crawshaw

& Game, 2015). In particular, attachment theory provides a unique relational perspective to

research on individual outcomes such as ethical behavior (Chugh, Kern, Zhu, & Lee, 2014),

burnout (Leiter, Day, & Price, 2015), and employee proactivity (Wu & Parker, 2012).

------------------------------------------------------------

Insert Figure 1 about here

------------------------------------------------------------

Despite the extensive influence of attachment theory on management research, there has

been no systematic review to date. Existing reviews have focused exclusively on individual

attachment styles as a personality trait. This includes reviews on the effects of attachment styles

on workplace behavior (Harms, 2011), career orientations (Wright & Perrone, 2008), and

mentoring outcomes (Germaine, 2011). While informative, this prior work has limited its focus

on attachment styles as an individual difference variable. We propose a more inclusive and

integrative review. Our review will extend beyond research on attachment styles and include

research on attachment perspectives such as secure base support (Wu & Parker, in press),

relationship-specific attachment processes (Thomas et al., 2013), attachment dynamics in groups

(Lee & Ling, 2007), and attachment dynamics in employment relationships (Albert et al,, 2015).

In addition, our review will discuss methodological advances in attachment research, including

the priming of attachment states (Chugh et al., 2014) and the analysis of relational congruence in

attachment (Mitchell et al., 2015).

ATTACHMENT THEORY AND MANAGEMENT SCHOLARSHIP

Attachment theory was first developed by Bowlby (1969, 1979) in the study of early

childhood relationships, and later extended by Hazan and Shaver (1990) to the study of adult and

working relationships. The theory is fundamentally concerned with the quality of the emotional

bond in relationships and its lasting influence on the individuals involved. While Bowlby (1969)

was concerned with parent-child relationships, research on attachment processes in organizations

has established that working relationships in adulthood can be explained by fundamental

attachment processes. This includes relationships with co-workers, superiors, and the

organization as sources for social support and membership (Hazan & Shaver, 1990, 1994).

Management scholars have extended attachment theory in research on leadership, work

relationships, mentoring, workplace well-being, and human resource management, among others.

The outcomes of attachment in these studies include trust (Frazier et al., 2014), helping behavior

(Geller & Bamberger. 2009), feedback seeking (Allen et al., 2010), leader-member relationship

quality (Richards & Hackett, 2012), interpersonal-directed citizenship behaviors (Richards &

Schat, 2011), and cohesion in dyads and groups (Rom & Mikulincer, 2003). Attachment theory

has also informed research on the relationship between employees and their organization (Krausz

et al, 2001), as well as organizationally relevant outcomes such as employees’ proactive work

behavior (Wu & Parker, 2012) and job performance (Neustadt et al., 2011).

Considering the broad influence of attachment theory, this review will seek to provide an

integrated perspective across these diverse areas of management scholarship. We will also offer

suggestions for future research, as well as discuss how these new directions will require new

methodological approaches. These include experimental methods and the use of social network

analysis – methods that can generate new insights in organizational attachment research.

SCOPE AND ORGANIZATION OF THE REVIEW

Review Scope

Our review will address the various ways in which employee attachment has been studied

in work-related contexts. To this end, we focus on applications of attachment theory as a key

inclusion criterion, thereby excluding studies that use the term “attachment” but do not discuss or

reference attachment theory. We furthermore aim to build a comprehensive review by

incorporating articles that appear in management journals (e.g., Journal of Management,

Academy of Management Review, etc.), as well as articles from psychology journals (e.g.,

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology)

where attachment theory has been researched in organizational contexts. This approach allows

for an inclusive lens on the various means by which attachment processes have been studied in

the workplace, offering a thorough foundation for identifying important new directions for

attachment research in the organizational sciences. Such an inclusive lens moreover sets this

review apart from previous examinations of attachment theory, which generally have taken a

more narrow focus on individual attachment styles relative to certain trait-oriented constructs

(e.g., personality; Harms, 2011). A description of our specific search criteria for article inclusion

is provided in Appendix A. Table 1 also summarizes the articles identified to date that will be

included in our review.

------------------------------------------------------------

Insert Table 1 about here

------------------------------------------------------------

Organization of the Review

This review will be organized into six sections. In the first section, we provide an

overview of attachment theory, its key constructs, and its influence on management research.

We will explain “what” attachment is, the relevance of attachment to management research,

“how” attachment manifests itself in organizational contexts, and “why” the study of attachment

is prevalent and important for understanding employees’ work behaviors. This section will also

include an overview of attachment theory constructs to inform and guide future research.

The second section will outline the methodology of the review and include details

regarding the search criteria, similar to those presented in Appendix A of this proposal. We will

also include a table containing all studies incorporated in the review. This table will be of a

similar nature to Table 1 in this proposal with additional specifics on each study.

The next three sections present the core of our review, and will be organized around the

contributions of attachment theory to management research on 1) individual differences in

attachment styles, 2) attachment processes in interpersonal relationships, and 3) attachment

processes in employment relationships. In section three, we examine how individual differences

in attachment style may influence employee well-being, stress, and coping processes in the

workplace (Joplin, Nelson, & Quick, 1999; Simmons, Gooty, Nelson & Little, 2009); as well as

how attachment styles relate to individuals’ career decision-making and outlook, topics that have

received considerable attention in the careers literature (Braunstein-Bercovitz, et al., 2012).

In section four, we will examine attachment processes in interpersonal relationships. This

includes attachment dynamics in interpersonal relationships, such as the attachment processes in

supportive supervision (Wu & Parker, in press), group trust (Frazier et al, 2014; Simmons et al,

2009), work-family spillover (Sumer & Knight, 2001), leader-follower relationships (Mayseless,

2010; Popper et al., 2000), negotiations (Lee & Thompson, 2011), mentoring (Allen, Shockley,

& Poteat, 2010), and group dynamics (Smith, Murphy, & Coats, 1999), among others.

In section five, we will examine attachment processes in employment relationships. More

specifically, we focus on how attachment theory has informed research on person-organizational

relationships in areas such as employment dissolution (Albert et al., 2015), attitudes towards

employment contracts (Krausz et al., 2001), and career management (Crawshaw & Game, 2015).

Each of sections three, four, and five will furthermore highlight the conceptual underpinnings

used by researchers in linking employee attachment to various outcomes and the methodological

procedures and scales commonly applied. Drawing on these sections, we will also include a table

describing the nomological network of attachment implications for employees.

INSIGHTS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

Finally, in the sixth section we recommend directions for future research on attachment

dynamics in work-related contexts. We anticipate that this section will receive a considerable

degree of attention in our review. In particular, we make the following recommendations:

Activation and Regulation of the Attachment System at Work. Attachment theory

provides detailed propositions about the attachment system and how it is activated and regulated,

particularly in response to stress (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2003). This is relevant for

understanding concerns such as workplace stress, burnout, and emotion regulation. It also

relevant in considering organizational triggers of attachment behavior, such as abusive

supervision and distressing organizational events. For example, Albert et al. (2015) extend

insights from attachment theory to theorize how employees respond to the loss of an employment

relationship. We build on this example to discuss research directions where an attachment

perspective might question fundamental assumptions of social exchange and further theorize the

role of emotions in work and employment relationships.

Attachment in Groups and Teams. We suggest a need to extend attachment research

beyond the individual-level, which constitutes the overwhelming majority of organizational

attachment research to date. Group-level research on attachment offers a particularly rich area

for future research given the increasing use of team-based structures in organizations (Lee &

Ling, 2007). Promising research in this direction includes research by Lavy, Bareli, and Tsachi

Ein-Dor (2014) on the effects of team-level attachment heterogeneity on team functioning.

Attachment in Employment Relationships. Our review uncovers a number of

promising studies on attachment dynamics in employment relationships. For example, shifting

focus on attachment as an independent variable, which represents the majority of organizational

research, to a contextual variable that may shape the relationship between other work-related

constructs and employee and organizational outcomes, may be worthwhile. In addition, we will

describe advances in psychological research on place attachment (being emotionally attached

and feeling secure in a particular location or physical space) (Brocato, Baker, & Voorhees, 2015)

and how it could inform and generate new research on the intersection between materiality and

the emotional bond between employees and their organization.

Network studies of attachment. Current studies of attachment theory in the workplace

have limited themselves to dyadic relationships. Among other contributions, a network

perspective on attachment theory could inform how attachment process come to shape the

dynamics of developmental networks (Dobrow, Chandler, Murphy, Kram, 2012), trust across

multiple relationships (Fulmer & Gelfand, 2012), and network perspectives on leader

effectiveness (Cullen, Gerbasi, & Chrobot-Mason, in press).

Situational approaches to attachment. Current perspectives in developmental

psychology acknowledge that people are shaped by multiple attachment relationships in

adulthood, as well as recognize that relationships often change as a consequence of important life

events (Doherty & Feeney, 2004). This work highlights that attachment states can be situational

and relationship specific (Baldwin et al., 1996; Cozzarelli et al, 2000), a view that has not been

extended to the organizational sciences. Incorporating these perspectives from other disciplines

can contribute to our understanding of a broad array of organizational relationships, including

both interpersonal relationships at work and employment relationships more generally.

SUMMARY

Our review highlights the contributions of attachment theory across a variety of work

domains. It also reveals the limited application of attachment perspectives in management

research, with a focus primarily on attachment as a dispositional variable. We contrast this with

advances in attachment research in others fields and recommend new directions for the study of

attachment in organizations – research that would strengthen the understanding of high quality

connections in organizations (Duttons & Ragins, 2007; Heaphy & Dutton, 2008) and further an

understanding of relational processes across levels of analysis – from interpersonal relationships

between co-workers to employment relationships with the organization.

References

Ainsworth, M. D. S., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E., & Wall, 1978. Patterns of attachment: A

psychological study of the strange situation. Lawrence Erlbaum: Oxford, England.

Albert, L. S., Allen, D. G., Biggane, J. E., & Ma, Q. K. 2015. Attachment and responses to

employment dissolution. Human Resource Management Review, 25(1), 94-106.

Allen, T. D., Shockley, K. M., & Poteat, L. 2010. Protégé anxiety attachment and feedback in

mentoring relationships. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 77(1), 73-80.

Baldwin, M. W., Keelan, J. P. R., Fehr, B., Enns, V., & Koh-Rangarajoo, E. 1996. Social

cognitive conceptualization of attachment working models: Availability and accessibility

effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 94-104.

Bowlby, J. 1969. Attachment and Loss: Vol 1. Attachment (2nd ed.). NY: Basic Books.

Bowlby, J. 1979. The making and breaking of affectional bonds. London: Tavistock.

Braunstein-Bercovitz, H., Benjamin, B. A., Asor, S., & Lev, M. 2012. Insecure attachment and

career indecision: Mediating effects of anxiety and pessimism. Journal of Vocational

Behavior, 81(2), 236-244.

Brocato, E. D., Baker, J., & Voorhees, C. M. 2015. Creating consumer attachment to retail

service firms through sense of place. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,

43(2), 200-220.

Chopik, W. J., Edelstein, R. S., & Fraley, R. C. 2013. From the cradle to the grave: Age

differences in attachment from early adulthood to old age. Journal of Personality, 81(2),

171-183.

Chugh, D., Kern, M. C., Zhu, Z., & Lee, S. 2014. Withstanding moral disengagement:

Attachment security as an ethical intervention. Journal of Experimental Social

Psychology, 51, 88-93.

Cozzarelli, C., Hoekstra, S. J., & Bylsma, W. H. 2000. General versus specific mental models of

attachment: Are they associated with different outcomes? Personality and Social

Psychology Bulletin, 26(5), 605-618.

Crawshaw, J. R., & Game, A. 2015. The role of line managers in employee career management:

an attachment theory perspective. The International Journal of Human Resource

Management, 26(9), 1182-1203.

Cullen, K. L., Gerbasi, A., & Chrobot-Mason, D. in press. Thriving in central network positions:

The role of political skill. Journal of Management, doi:10.1177/0149206315571154.

Dobrow, S. R., Chandler, D. E., Murphy, W. M., & Kram, K. E. 2012. A review of

developmental networks incorporating a mutuality perspective. Journal of Management,

38(1), 210-242.

Dutton, J. E., & Ragins, B. R. E. 2007. Exploring positive relationships at work: Building a

theoretical and research foundation. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Frazier, M. L., Gooty, J., Little, L. M., & Nelson, D. L. 2014. Employee attachment:

Implications for supervisor trustworthiness and trust. Journal of Business and

Psychology, 1-14.

Geller, D., & Bamberger, P. 2009. Bringing avoidance and anxiety to the job: Attachment style

and instrumental helping behavior among co-workers. Human Relations, 62(12), 1803-

1827.

Harms, P. D. 2011. Adult attachment styles in the workplace. Human Resource Management

Review, 21(4), 285-296.

Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. R. 1990. Love and work: An attachment-theoretical perspective. Journal

of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(2), 270.

Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. R. 1994. Attachment as an organizational framework for research on

close relationships. Psychological Inquiry, 5(1), 1-22.

Heaphy, E. D., & Dutton, J. E. 2008. Positive social interactions and the human body at work:

Linking organizations and physiology. Academy of Management Review, 33(1), 137-162.

Joplin, J. R. W., Nelson, D. L., & Quick, J. C. 1999. Attachment behavior and health:

relationships at work and home. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 783-796.

Kahn, W. A. 1995. Organizational change and the provision of a secure base: Lessons from the

field. Human Relations, 48(5), 489-514.

Krausz, M., Bizman, A., & Braslavsky, D. 2001. Effects of attachment style on preferences for

and satisfaction with different employment contracts: An exploratory study. Journal of

Business and Psychology, 16(2), 299-316.

Lee, S., & Ling, L. 2007. Understanding Affectional Ties to Groups from the Perspective of

Attachment Theory. Research on Managing Groups and Teams, 10(07), 217-248.

Mayseless, O. 2010. Attachment and the leader—follower relationship. Journal of Social and

Personal Relationships, 27(2), 271-280.

Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. 2015. The psychological effects of the contextual activation of

security-enhancing mental representations in adulthood. Current Opinion in Psychology,

1, 18-21.

Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. 2003. The attachment behavioral system in adulthood:

Activation, psycho-dynamics, and interpersonal processes. Advances in Experimental

Social Psychology, 35, 53 – 152.

Mitchell, M. E., Eby, L. T., & Ragins, B. R. 2015. My Mentor, My Self: Antecedents and

Outcomes of Perceived Similarity in Mentoring Relationships. Journal of Vocational

Behavior, 89, 1-9.

Neustadt, E. A., Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. 2011. Attachment at work and

performance. Attachment & Human Development, 13(5), 471-488.

Popper, M., Mayseless, O., & Castelnovo, O. 2000. Transformational leadership and attachment.

The Leadership Quarterly, 11(2), 267-289.

Popper, M., & Amit, K. 2009. Attachment and leader's development via experiences. The

Leadership Quarterly, 20(5), 749-763.

Richards, D. A., & Hackett, R. D. 2012. Attachment and emotion regulation: Compensatory

interactions and leader–member exchange. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(4), 686-701.

Ronen, S., & Mikulincer, M. 2009. Attachment orientations and job burnout: The mediating

roles of team cohesion and organizational fairness. Journal of Social and Personal

Relationships, 26(4), 549-567.

Rom, E., & Mikulincer, M. 2003. Attachment theory and group processes: the association

between attachment style and group-related representations, goals, memories, and

functioning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(6), 1220.

Simmons, B. L., Gooty, J., Nelson, D. L., & Little, L. M. 2009. Secure Attachment: implications

for hope, trust, burnout, and performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30, 839–

862.

Smith, E. R., Murphy, J., & Coats, S. 1999. Attachment to groups: Theory and management.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(1), 94.

Sumer, H. C., & Knight, P. A. 2001. How do people with different attachment styles balance

work and family? A personality perspective on work–family linkage. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 86(4), 653.

Thomas, G., Martin, R., Epitropaki, O., Guillaume, Y., & Lee, A. 2013. Social cognition in

leader–follower relationships: Applying insights from relationship science to

understanding relationship‐based approaches to leadership. Journal of Organizational

Behavior, 34(S1), S63-S81.

Wright, S. L., & Perrone, K. M. 2008. The Impact of Attachment on Career-Related Variables A

Review of the Literature and Proposed Theoretical Framework to Guide Future Research.

Journal of Career Development, 35(2), 87-106.

Wu, C. H., & Parker, S. K. in press. The Role of Leader Support in Facilitating Proactive Work

Behavior A Perspective From Attachment Theory. Journal of Management. doi:

10.1177/0149206314544745

Wu, C. H., & Parker, S. K. 2012. The role of attachment styles in shaping proactive behaviour:

An intra‐individual analysis. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology,

85(3), 523-530.

Table 1

Peer-Reviewed Articles on Attachment Theory in Management Research

Author(s) Year Relationship Context1 Paper Type

Albert, Allen, Briggane, & Ma 2015 Employment Theoretical

Chopik 2015 Employment Empirical

Crawshaw & Game 2015 Employment Empirical

Dahling & Librizzi 2015 Employment Empirical

Johnstone & Feeney 2015 Employment Empirical

Leiter, Day, & Price 2015 Employment Empirical

Poteat, Shockley, & Allen 2015 Mentoring Empirical

Reizer 2015 Employment Empirical

Robinson, Joel, & Plaks 2015 Group Empirical

Wu & Parker 2015 Leadership Empirical

Bahling & Librizzi 2014 Employment Empirical

Chugh, Kern, Zhu, & Lee 2014 Employment Empirical

Crawshaw & Game 2014 Leadership Empirical

Frazier, Gooty, Little, & Nelson 2014 Leadership Empirical

Hinojosa, McCauley, Randolph-Seng, &

Gardner 2014 Leadership Theoretical

Kafetsios, Athanasiadou, & Dimou 2014 Leadership Empirical

Lavy, Bareli, & Ein-Dor 2014 Group Empirical

Rahimnia & Sharifrad 2014 Leadership Empirical

Tziner, Ben-David, Oren, & Sharoni 2014 Employment Empirical

Wright, Perrone-Mcgovern, Boo, & White 2014 Employment Empirical

1 “Relationship Context” refers to the focal relationship examined in the paper. For example,

“employment” refers to papers that examine attachment theory in the context of person-

organization employment relationships.

Table 1 (continued)

Wu, Parker, & de Jong 2014 Group Empirical

Braunstein-Bercovitz 2013 Employment Empirical

Grady & Grady 2013 Employment Theoretical

Hudson 2013 Leadership Theoretical

Koleva, Selterman, Ilyer, Ditto, &

Graham 2013 Employment Empirical

Littman-Ovadia, Oren, & Lavy 2013 Employment Empirical

Thomas, Martin, Epitropaki, Guillaume,

& Lee 2013 Leadership Review

Towler & Stuhlmacher 2013 Employment Empirical

Tziner & Tanami 2013 Employment Empirical

Almakias & Weiss 2012 Negotiations Empirical

Braunstein-Bercovitz, Benjamin, Asor, &

Lev 2012 Employment Empirical

Hansbrough 2012 Leadership Empirical

Richards & Hackett 2012 Leadership Empirical

Wu & Parker 2012 Peer Empirical

Germain 2011 Mentoring Review

Gianakos 2011 Intrapersonal Exploratory

Harms 2011 Review Review

Lee & Thompson 2011 Negotiations Empirical

Murphy & Johnson 2011 Leadership Theoretical

Neustadt, Chamorro-Premuzic, &

Furnham 2011 Leadership Empirical

Richards & Schat 2011 Performance Empirical

Allen, Shockley, & Poteat 2010 Mentoring Empirical

Table 1 (continued)

Boatwright, Lopez, Sauer, VanDerWege,

& Huber 2010 Leadership Empirical

Downing & Nauta 2010 Employment Empirical

Lin 2010 Employment Empirical

Mayseless 2010 Leadership Theoretical

Shalit, Popper, & Zakay 2010 Leadership Empirical

Shondrick, Dinh, & Lord 2010 Leadership Theoretical

Albert & Horowitz 2009 Leadership Empirical

Crisp, Farrow, Rosenthal, Walsh, Blissett,

& Penn 2009 Group Empirical

Geller & Bamberger 2009 Peer Empirical

Little, Nelson, Wallace, & Johnson 2009 Employment Empirical

Moss 2009 Leadership Empirical

Popper & Amit 2009a Leadership Empirical

Popper & Amit 2009b Leadership Empirical

Ronen & Mikulincer 2009 Employment Empirical

Simmons, Gooty, Nelson, & Little 2009 Employment Empirical

Wang, Noe, Want, & Greenberger 2009 Mentoring Empirical

Game 2008 Leadership Empirical

Rom 2008 Groups Empirical

Wright & Perrone 2008 Employment Review

Bresnahan & Mitroff 2007 Leadership Commentary

Davidovitz, Mikulincer, Shaver, Izsak, &

Popper 2007 Leadership Empirical

Table 1 (continued)

Hobdy, Hayslip, Kaminski, Crowley,

Riggs & York 2007 Employment Empirical

Lee & Ling 2007 Groups Review

Mayseless & Popper 2007 Leadership Theoretical

Mikulincer & Shaver 2007 Employment Theoretical

Perrone, Webb, & Jackson 2007 Employment Empirical

Berson, Carmel, & Yammarino 2006 Leadership Empirical

Pines 2004 Employment Empirical

Keller 2003 Leadership Theoretical

Popper & Mayseless 2003 Leadership Theoretical

Rom & Mikulincer 2003 Group Empirical

Popper 2002 Leadership Empirical

Vasquez, Durik, & Hyde 2002 Employment Empirical

Krausz, Bizman, & Braslavsky 2001 Employment Empirical

Schirmer & Lopez 2001 Coworker Empirical

Scott & Church 2001 Employment Empirical

Sumer & Knight 2001 Employment Empirical

Keller, Caciope, & Keller 2000 Leadership Theoretical

Popper, Mayseless, & Castelnovo 2000 Leadership Empirical

Joplin, Nelson, & Quick 1999 Peer Empirical

Smith, Murphy, & Coats 1999 Groups Empirical

Kahn 1995 Employment Empirical

Hardy & Barkham 1994 Employment Empirical

Kahn & Kram 1994 Leadership Theoretical

Table 1 (continued)

Vrombrock 1993 Employment Theoretical

Nelson & Quick 1991 Employment Empirical

Hazan & Shaver 1990 Employment Empirical

Quick, Nelson, & Quick 1987 Leadership Theoretical

FIGURE 1

Peer-Reviewed Articles on Attachment Theory in Management Research

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

1986 to 1990 1996 to 2000 1991 to 1995 2001 to 2005 2006 to 2010 2011 to 2015

Nu

mb

er o

f A

rtic

les

Year

APPENDIX: METHODOLOGY

In order to arrive at a comprehensive sample of research articles in the organizational

literature related to attachment theory, keyword searches were performed in EBSCO’s Academic

Search Premier, Business Source Premier, PsycArticles, and PsycInfo databases, as well as

SAGE’s Premier 2011 database. Searches were limited to peer-reviewed academic journals. The

article search was performed by limiting results to articles that contain both the word

“attachment” and keywords such as “job”, “work”, “organization”, “leadership”, “leader”,

“manager”, “management”, “coaching”, “mentoring”, “negotiation”, “negotiate”, “employment”,

“employee”, “career”, “follower”, “teams”, “groups”, and “performance” in any document text.

From these results, articles related to the workplace context were then identified and those

unrelated to attachment theory, such as those that use the term attachment but did not discuss or

reference attachment theory were removed. This process resulted in a final pool of 90 articles

(see Table 1) from journals including Academy of Management Review, Academy of

Management Executive, Journal of Management, Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of

Organizational Behavior, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Journal of Vocational

Behavior, and Leadership Quarterly, among others.