Counterproductive work behavior(CWB) is employee behavior that goes against the goals of an organization.[1]These behaviors can be intentional or unintentional and result from a wide range of underlying causes and motivations. It has been proposed that a person-by-environment interaction can be utilized to explain a variety of counterproductive behaviors.[2]For instance, an employee who steals from the company may do so because of lax supervision (environment) and underlyingpsychopathology(person) that work in concert to result in the counterproductive behavior.Counterproductive work behavior is a topic of research inindustrial and organizational psychology.

Dimensional Models of Counterproductive Work BehaviorsEditThe variety of acts that are considered CWBs has led to attempts by researchers to create a coherent typology of CWBs. Onefour-class typologyof CWBs divided the CWBs into the following categories: (1) production deviance, involving behaviors like leaving early, intentionally working slow, or taking long breaks; (2) property deviance, involving sabotage of equipment, theft of property, and taking kickbacks; (3) political deviance, involving showing favoritism, gossiping, or blaming others; and, (4) personal aggression, involving harassment, verbal abuse, and endangerment.[3] Another typologyproposed the followingfive factors: (1) abuse against others; (2) production deviance; (3) sabotage; (4) theft; and (5) withdrawal.[4] One of thelarger typologiesincluded a total ofeleven categoriesof CWBs: (1) theft of property; (2) destruction of property; (3) misuse of information; (4) misuse of time and resources; (5) unsafe behavior; (6) poor attendance; (7) poor quality of work; (8) alcohol use; (9) drug use; (10) inappropriate verbal action; and (11) inappropriate physical action.[5]

In this study, we developed a typology of deviant workplace behaviors using multidimensional scaling techniques. Results suggest that deviant workplace behaviors vary along two dimensions: minor versus serious, and interpersonal versus organizational. On the basis of these two dimensions, employee deviance appears to fall into four distinct categories: production deviance, property deviance, political deviance, and personal aggression. Theoretical and empirical implications are discussed.

1. Robinson, S. L., & Bennett, R. J. (1995). A typology of deviant workplace behaviors: A multidimensional scaling study.Academy of Management Journal, 38(2), 555-572. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2566932. Bennett, R. J.; Robinson, S. L. (2000). "Development of a measure of workplace deviance".Journal of Applied Psychology85(3): 349360.doi:10.1037/0021-9010.85.3.349.PMID10900810.3. Jump up^Bowling, N. A.; Gruys, M. L. (2010). "New perspectives in the study of counterproductive behavior in organizations".Human Resource Management20(1): 5461.doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2009.03.0084. Robinson, S. L.; Bennett, R. J. (1995). "A typology of deviant workplace behaviors: A multidimensional scaling study".Academy of Management Journal38(2): 555572.doi:10.2307/256693.5. Jump up^Spector, P. E., Fox, S., Penney, L. M., Bruursema, K., Goh, A., & Kessler, S. (2006). The dimensionality of counterproductivity: Are all counterproductive behaviors created equal?Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68(3), 446-460. doi: