1. Introduction
Positive emotions in the workplace have received more attention with the advent of the positive psychology movement [1]. Emotions are an integral part of employees’ everyday jobs in the organizational behavioral space and have a significant impact on how they behave and respond at work. Some academics view workplaces as settings where emotions may be controlled, created, or eliminated [2,3]. Organizations need to consider both positive and negative emotions if they want to prosper in both the short- and long-term. According to [4], researching positive emotions is standard practice since they have higher functional value in relation to the achievement of organizational and personnel goals. However, a study of the pertinent literature reveals that, in contrast to research on negative emotions, more positive emotions are the subject of current studies [5]. It is equally crucial to acknowledge the unfavorable feelings that exist in the workplace. No organization is safe from negative emotional effects, whether they result from poor managerial choices or the personal issues of employees. In a survey of 136 managers and executives, [6] discovered that around 24% never had, in their entire working lives, had a manager who properly addressed their negative emotions. The risks associated with avoiding negative emotions are potentially more dangerous than reacting improperly to positive emotions in the workplace. This is because unpleasant feelings are linked to organizational failures and circumstances that make goals more difficult to achieve, which might make workplace deviation more predictable. According to the research by [7], negative emotions hamper organizational development since they have a detrimental impact on employees’ behavior (low performance, low commitment, and low effort). In order to deal with negative emotions, organizations must consider these organizational losses as a motivator. Until recently, workplace jealousy was reluctantly overlooked and not fully acknowledged as a negative feeling that is thought to be ubiquitous in the workplace (i.e., as pain at another person’s good fortune) [8]. In the workplace, envy is typically seen as a “nasty feeling” that leads to animosity, aggressiveness, inferiority, and other unpleasant behaviors in coworker relationships. Whether or not companies want to admit it, all employees, regardless of level, are susceptible to jealousy [9,10]. These emotions are thought to be widespread in professional environments, particularly in quickly changing environments where firms are compelled to develop competitive teams to pursue competitive advantages, where team members are rewarded for the best performance. However, managers may overlook the reality that rewarding employees based on best practices enhances the environment for feelings of envy [11]. This phenomenon has received little attention from the management community, and organizational behavioral research is surprisingly scarce [12]. This lack of research could be a result of the difficulties in identifying jealous coworkers.
Employees frequently attempt to suppress and conceal their envious feelings [13]. According to [14], jealousy is less obvious than other emotions on a personal level because it is considered rude and socially inappropriate to harbor resentment toward others. On an organizational level, the significance of team members’ accomplishments in overall company performance encourages envious impulses to be suppressed. A person who has envy for their coworkers will not admit it. Employees are prone to demonstrating this indirectly through negative behaviors such as gossiping, antagonism, or anger in order to preserve their self-image in front of others. In general, it is frowned upon to express jealousy at work. In an effort to curb or stop jealousy at work, researchers have recently looked into the topic. This is because jealousy has a negative impact on both individuals and the organizations for which they work. Envious feelings are known to hinder organizational effectiveness in the workplace by causing disputes amongst coworkers, destroying relationships, tearing teams apart, and sabotaging teamwork [15]. These envious feelings have a negative personal effect on the person who is experiencing them. When a person envies other coworkers, they will feel less fulfilled, less confident, depressed, and stressed. They may also neglect or even interfere with their own performance, which is likely to affect their future professional career [16]. These emotions can be signs of health problems and could make the person experiencing them ill.
In this study, we investigate the moderating role of envious managers on the association between perceived overqualification and job-related outcomes (employee turnover, job satisfaction, and performance evaluation). Both internal and external dimensions of job success are captured by these terms. Employees who believe they are overqualified believe they are capable of performing a job with higher expectations. Organizational success, however, is not only a result of one’s skills and abilities. Managers play a critical role in setting the atmosphere in which career advancement occurs [10]. As a result, we anticipate that the nature of the association between perceived overqualification and intrinsic and extrinsic career success will differ by management and will be impacted by envious managers. Many employees deal with negative emotions on a regular basis. Much of the antagonism and many of the unpleasant feelings related to employee envy and jealousy stem from competition for rewards, promotions, opportunities, and recognition [5,9,17]. As a result, we estimate that when superiors encounter high emotions of envy and jealousy, employees who may threaten their position due to superior talents relative to their occupations will be less likely to find a workplace that supports their career development and advancement. As a result, we hypothesize that the association between overqualification and job outcomes will be modified by the level of envy and jealousy felt by their bosses. Our research adds to the body of knowledge in different ways. To begin, we add to the overqualification literature by looking at managers’ jealousy as a cross-level moderator of overqualification in connection with professional success metrics. Based on the belief that social interactions are significant sources of career progression assistance in businesses, we extend the literature on overqualification by moving the focus from individual-level moderators to manager-level moderators [8]. Furthermore, we add to the literature on overqualification by examining performance evaluation as a result of overqualification. Job satisfaction [18] and turnover [2] have been studied in the past, but the extent to which overqualification is linked to performance evaluation has yet to be investigated. Performance evaluation is a key determinant of professional advancement and a prerequisite for receiving career-related assistance [3,19,20]. Finally, our research adds to the body of knowledge on workplace jealousy. Despite the fact that much has been written about the effects of workplace jealousy on one’s own wellbeing and emotions [7], less has been written about how managers’ envy impacts their subordinates.
2. Theoretical Background
2.1. Overqualification and Job Outcomes
A growing body of evidence suggests that employment attitudes, wellbeing, and employee attitudes are all influenced by overqualification [21]. Overqualification is seen as a form of mismatch between people and jobs [22]. Relative deprivation is a feeling of injustice experienced by employees who believe they are overqualified for their work [23]. According to the theory of relative deprivation, when people believe they are entitled to something, they see it as desirable, but when they do not obtain it, they feel deprived. Employees who feel overqualified have frustrated expectations and believe they are entitled to a better career than the one they have, resulting in lower motivation and engagement [19,24]. According to researchers, it is vital to explore the relationship between overqualification and career success in addition to understanding the attitudinal and behavioral implications of overqualification [25]. Early academics looking into the consequences of overqualification on career outcomes had a more positive approach, suggesting that working in an overqualified position could be a stepping stone to a higher position within the same business [26]. Overqualified employees were less likely to believe that they had good career prospects within their organizations [27] and were less likely to believe that they were learning skills that would be useful for future promotions [28], according to additional research testing this prediction. As a result, there is an increasing requirement to examine the career advancement and sustainability of overqualified personnel.
In our research, we focus on three metrics of job success as possible outcomes of overqualification. The degree to which people believe they are effective in accomplishing their objectives is referred to as job satisfaction. This is recognized as the most important indicator of long-term career success [29]. Employees’ future upward progress is influenced by their performance evaluation [30]. This is a biased estimate of an employee’s success in the workplace, but it is based on the ratings of organizational decision-makers [15]. Finally, job turnover—or the possibility that an individual will leave a company—is an important career consequence because individuals who have their professional ambitions denied are more willing to quit [31]. Indeed, in studies of professional success, inter-organizational progression is viewed as a significant result [32]. As a result, past research has found that overqualification is negatively associated with job satisfaction and the chance of staying in the company [33], but no previous findings have looked at performance appraisal as a result. Scholars have hypothesized that the relationship between overqualification and organizational performance is dependent on factors such as executive support and an organizational context that encourages upward career opportunities [34]. Furthermore, Ref. [35] stressed the necessity of meeting overqualified individuals’ career-related demands as a key to their progression and stability. While leaders are not the only ones who can help, they have a special role to play in setting the working circumstances and support that lead to better career outcomes. Leaders can help their subordinates achieve better job outcomes by engaging in social interaction with them and providing them with professional development experiences [36]. As a result, we propose that managers’ desire to offer help to their subordinates will determine the job-related outcomes and success of their subordinates. To this end, we include manager envy as a significant variable in our analysis of the impacts of overqualification on job-related metrics.
2.2. Perceived Overqualification and Expectancy Theory
Differences in task scope may be associated with each of the motivational components in the expectancy model: expectancy, instrumentality, and valence. Employee expectations may affect performance and may reveal a person’s ability to complete a task [22]. At least initially, increasing a task’s scope will lower expectations. An exception would be when a greater job scope allowed for effort to be more successfully directed toward performance, such as when an employee ritualistically adheres to ineffective or incorrect “red tape” established by others [37].
If an employee has mastered the current task, reducing the job’s scope is unlikely to improve task performance. For an overqualified person, reducing a task’s scope will not raise expectations. Specificity of task performance and ability to govern one’s own performance may also affect expectation perceptions. Ref. [38] found that piece-rate workers’ expectations were higher than group incentive workers’, indicating high-performance control and performance depending in part on the efforts of others. Any modification of scope (lower or greater) that diminishes performance clarity or control is likely to lower expectations.
Before discussing the effect of task scope on instrumentality perceptions, we distinguish between two second-level outcomes. One consequence depends on the person’s conduct or success. To avoid the idea that these results are task-related, they shall be called task-administered (as generally suggested in discussions of intrinsic outcomes). It is more helpful to think of these outcomes as a result of the interaction between the job and the person than to assert that all task workers will experience them. Examples include loving one’s assignment or feeling a sense of accomplishment after completing a task [39]. The second sort of result is handled by unrelated elements. In this study, we refer to extrinsic results as externally administered. How these outcomes connect to performance depends on the organization’s ability to assess and reward performance. Task outcomes and externally administered outcomes are fundamentally different [40]. Ref. [41] found that task-administered (internally mediated) and externally mediated results depend on distinct components. It is unclear how these two outcomes affect attitudes and behavior. According to [42], task outcomes and externally administered outcomes interact with dependent variables. Ref. [43] reported similar results using an attributional framework. Although conceptually and possibly experimentally different, the impacts on behavior and attitude may not be cumulative. Due to the intimate connection between job performance and task-administered results, successful performance only has a high instrumentality for intrinsic outcomes if the task is personally relevant to the performer. Intrinsic motivation demands interesting work that offers employee involvement in hiring and firing. Ref. [44] suggested that a job needs three factors to help achieve task-administered goals. First, the job must provide feedback on the employee’s performance. Second, the position must require the employee’s valued skills to encourage accomplishment. In order to feel successful if they perform well, employees must be involved in setting work goals. Ref. [45] juxtaposed high- versus low-stakes jobs. When a task’s scope grows, so do its repercussions. Companies often combine job scope changes with personnel policy improvements such as management by objectives. Concomitant modifications may affect the perceptions of externally administered outcomes’ instrumentality. Changing the job scope should not influence how people view externally administered instruments [46]. Changing the task scope will not affect how externally administered results are perceived. As labor expands, successful performance may become uncertain. This may happen if the increase includes activities that reduce task closure (e.g., being responsible for the entire product). Due to increased performance uncertainty, an employee’s task-administered instrumentalities may drop since they are less confident in their abilities. Greater ambiguity in respect of performance will likely affect impressions of externally administered instruments since the organization will have more trouble measuring and rewarding achievement [9,33,47].
There is little indication that changes in task scope will impact how appealing these results are, even though increasing task scope is expected to be necessary for task-administered results. Task scope may alter valence indirectly by affecting work reinforcement patterns (e.g., resulting in the worker earning more pay). The study is ambiguous on whether reinforcements increase or decrease outcome valence [48]. Task scope changes will not affect valence perception much, if at all. According to expectancy theory, second-level (task and externally administered) outcomes are a positive function of the instrumentality time performance. As the job scope grows, performance valence increases. This task scope impact affects how people perceive task-administered outcomes. A large majority of employees do not consider their important employment outside of outputs susceptible to external administration [49]. These workers may not care much about working properly or acting professionally. According to this evidence, expanding a task’s breadth may not always enhance workers’ performance motivation. Ref. [50] found a stronger relationship between task scope and performance quality among workers who valued task-administered outcomes (although the valence of task-administered outcomes was not found to moderate the relationship between task scope and quantity of performance or an overall rating of performance effectiveness). Individual motivational responses to employment changes should be expected. As an employee changes life stages, responses to different duties may shift. Absolute and relative deprivation of specific needs changes with age (e.g., single, married, children, middle years with a spouse working, retirement). Such differences exist across and within persons over time.
2.3. The Moderating Role of Manager Envy
In the workplace, envy is a common occurrence. Envy is an uncomfortable, painful, and negative emotion that results from unfavorable social comparisons [51]. When peers believe that they lack another person’s superior quality, achievement, or possession, they either covet those qualities or wish the other person to lose them [52]. Prior workplace envy research (e.g., [1,6,53]) has primarily concentrated on the perspective of enviers, ignoring the perspective of envied targets [54]. Envious people are more prone to perceive insecurity and the prospect of job loss [55]. According to [56], any manager in any organization at any time is at risk of losing his or her job. As a result, many definitions of the construct include the subjective feeling of jealousy as a key component [57]. Job envy, according to research, is a major challenge that irritates, needs fulfillment, and puts one’s identity, position, and livelihood in jeopardy [58]. It appears to be negatively associated with job views, organizational trust, and emotional wellbeing, according to conceptual research [59]. Job preservation motives have been discovered as crucial predictors of how people act when faced with instability in the workplace, according to research [60]. Individuals who are envious will be encouraged to act in ways that will keep them from losing their jobs, such as establishing their self-worth and refraining from activities that may imperil their position, according to this theory. Depending on the behavior’s aim, the job preservation motive presents itself in various ways. Envious employees, for instance, may use techniques to show their value to the company by making efforts (i.e., task performance) that will be easily seen by higher levels of management [61]. To conclude, we assume that when employees report to a manager with high levels of workplace envy, the impacts of overqualification on their attitudes toward their own professional achievement will be more unfavorable.
According to research, there is a negative association between overqualification and employment career development [62], as the sense that one is overqualified for their job is likely to link to the sense that one is deprived of the career to which they are entitled [63]. We believe that managers can alleviate these feelings by fostering an environment that encourages people to pursue their career aspirations. The experienced context, however, is less likely to provide these possibilities and encourage overqualified personnel, especially if these workers report to managers who are anxious about their own positions. Consequently, we assume the following:
Envious managers will moderate the association between an employee’s overqualification and job satisfaction, such that the association will be negative when envy is high.
Furthermore, envious managers should determine the nature of the relationship between overqualification and performance appraisal. An evaluation of a person’s development potential is reflected in a performance appraisal [64]. The performance appraisal is mainly implemented by line managers [53,65], and their evaluations are regarded to be particularly important to an employee’s progression within a company [45]. Performance appraisal is a subjective way of examining both an employee’s task and more social influences, such as influence tactics employed by employees [41], as well as stereotypes and cognitive biases held by managers [29]. In other words, performance appraisal is a perceptual and political process rather than an objective assessment of an employee’s suitability for a higher position.
We expect that the relationship between overqualification and performance appraisal will be positive when managers perceive low levels of envy. Managers are positioned to conduct performance appraisals that are linked with the employee’s credentials and preparation for a higher-level role or to improve their performance in the absence of a job preservation incentive. Perceived overqualification should be positively related to performance appraisal because individuals who feel overqualified for their current positions can be more suited to higher-level positions with extra duties. We anticipate a negative relationship between overqualification and performance appraisal in the case of envious superiors. Ref. [66] relates performance appraisal to actual raises and provides advice for professional development. We predict envious managers to be less willing to encourage, advance, and endorse the careers of people who could be potential competitors. As a result, for envious managers, we expect a negative relationship between overqualification and performance appraisal.
Envious managers will moderate the association between performance appraisal and overqualification, such that the association will be positive when the envy level is low, and negative when the level of envy is high.
Finally, we believe that the association between overqualification and employee turnover will be moderated by envious superiors (see Figure 1). Indeed, increased turnover intentions and actual voluntary turnover have been linked to overqualification [67]. The favorable connections between overqualification, disengagement, and job-seeking behaviors were supported by [68]. A typical reaction to feelings of overqualification is the desire to change one’s employment, as overqualification causes feelings of inequity. Ref. [69], however, emphasized the necessity of identifying boundary conditions and establishing psychological empowerment as a moderator at the individual level. We claim that an envious manager is a key manager-level contextual variable impacting the link between overqualification and turnover based on a position survival drive. Supportive and good managers may provide overqualified employees with career support that extends beyond the employment agreement, enabling their access to job- and organizational-related resources, and contributing to their professional success, reducing exit behaviors [70]. However, reporting to a superior who is envious may result in a lack of development prospects, career assistance, and sponsorship for the employee. According to the employment survival incentive, envious superiors are more likely to avoid assisting overqualified subordinates who could jeopardize their positions. As a result, when the level of envy is high, overqualification will be more favorably associated with turnover.
Envious superiors will moderate the association between turnover and overqualification, such that the association will be positive when the level of envy is high.
3. Methodology
We gathered information from staff and management at five-star hotels in the UAE. We enlisted the help of a market research firm to compile the data, resulting in a population of 450 employees with multiple roles and 185 managers. Web-based surveys were used to gather information due to the COVID-19 pandemic and in order to obtain results more quickly. We collected data from June 2021 to February 2022 from managers at T1 and T4, as well as workers at T2 and T3, throughout the course of five periods. Each phase was separated by two weeks, and the same participants were used in each of the different periods. Finally, we received voluntary turnover statistics from firm data at T5, five months after T4. Our evaluation strategy was designed to reduce the influence of common method bias [71], as well as to be consistent with the sequencing of the links within our approach, with analyses performed at later time-frames. The level of envy, as seen by managers, was measured in T1 because we assumed it to be the setting in which workers encounter and respond to their perceptions of overqualification. We picked an 8-month gap for analyzing voluntary turnover because we considered that it was long enough to provide employees with enough time to leave the hotel while still being short enough to assess the effects of the research hypotheses. We collected 68 surveys at the managerial level in T1, 174 from workers in T2, and 179 from workers in T3; 65 supervisors and managers completed performance appraisals for 291 employees in T4, and voluntary turnover statistics for all individuals were supplied in T5. A total of 211 employees and 111 managers were included in the sample utilized to validate our hypothesis. The employee sample was 48% female, with an average age of 38 years (SD = 9.31) and 12 years of work experience (SD = 9.17). Employees possessed undergraduate degrees in 72% of cases, post-graduate degrees in 18% of cases, and associate or high-school diplomas in 10% of cases.
3.1. Measures
Questionnaires were administered in English, and we utilized response options ranging between 1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree.
3.1.1. Envious Superiors
In Phase 1, superiors described their level of envy by means of a five-item scale developed by [72]. We utilized a Likert scale as opposed to an agree/disagree scale to test the degree to which a person felt jealous toward overqualified staff, as opposed to disagreeing with job envy. This strategy is based on workplace-envy researchers’ recommendations to take a cognitive rather than an emotive approach [73]. “I am jealous of an overqualified subordinate” (reverse coded = 0.87) was one example among another nine items.
3.1.2. Overqualification
In Phase 2, workers provided scores for their particular overqualification by means of the nine-item scale developed by Idowu (2017). A sample item was “My position needs less qualification than I possess” (α = 0.88).
3.1.3. Job Satisfaction
In Phase 3, workers provided scores for their level of job satisfaction by means of five-item measures developed by [55]. A sample item was “I am satisfied with my current job” (α = 0.86).
3.1.4. Performance Appraisal
In Phase 4, superiors provided scores for their performance appraisal for their subordinates by means of the three-item measure developed by [74]. A sample item was “I think that this worker has great potential” (α = 0.91).
3.1.5. Employee Turnover
In Phase 4, eight months after finishing the study, we gathered statistical data from the hotels regarding whether each employee had left their job selectively or not (1 = Selectively left the job, 0 = retained in the job). Based on the statistical data, we found that 9% left the jobs of their own volition. We excluded workers whose positions were terminated or who had retired from the data.
3.2. Control Variables
We used the levels of education and experience as possible controls due to their association with overqualification and consequences. Since using them did not add any changes, we decided to report the findings with no controls.
3.3. Data Analyses
Given our interest in inter-level correlations, we used Mplus Version 8.3 and linear regression to test our hypotheses. We evaluated a multilevel logit model for Hypothesis 3 because employee turnover was observed as numeric (0 = retain vs. 1 = quit).
We calculated the influence of group-level envious managers on the random slope for overqualification in respect of the primary result to investigate the hypothesized cross-level relations involving manager level of envy as the between-level moderator (i.e., employee turnover, job satisfaction, and performance appraisal).
When a substantial between-group relationship exists but is not stated in the model, a considerable yet misleading cross-level association may develop [75]. In other words, if the former is not stated in the model, a substantial relationship between average overqualification and degree of envy (i.e., between-group relationship) could result in a significant cross-level interaction. We group-mean-centered employee-level overqualification and added the relationship between the management level of envy and average overqualification into the model to avoid confusing the cross-level and between-group causal relationships [76]. This method yields an unbiased cross-level correlation estimate. Moreover, in the presence of the group-level correlation analysis, grand-mean-centering group-level predictors aid in the interpretation of the group-level main effects, and grand-mean-centering group-level factors allow one to interpret the effect of a group-level determinant when all other group-level determinants are at their means. We calculated simple slopes at 1 SD above and below the mean of the manager level of envy for significant cross-level and group-level interactions. We also used Hayes’s online tool to assess the significance of substantial relations. Finally, intra-class correlations (ICCs) were calculated using random-intercept null models with only the outcomes as input. Job satisfaction, performance appraisal, and staff turnover had ICCs of 0.01, 0.06, and 0.43, respectively. Because the variable is numeric and cannot be easily converted to a proportional scale, the ICC for employee turnover is on the operational scale; however, results from the simulation in [77] indicate that a numeric ICC of 0.43 is roughly equivalent to a linear ICC of 0.10.
4. Results
Table 1 shows the means, SDs, and correlations among the variables. Overqualification was found to be negatively associated with job satisfaction (r = −0.19, p < 0.05) and positively associated with employee turnover (r = 0.17, p < 0.05), the latter of which should be interpreted cautiously given the low turnover rate (10%) and the fact that a point-biserial correlation is not estimated using a significant change [78].
No significant associations were detected between performance appraisal and overqualification. For Hypothesis 1, we anticipated that the manager level of envy would moderate the relationship between job satisfaction and overqualification, such that the relationship would be negative when the manager level of envy was high.
This hypothesis was not supported because the cross-level relationship was not significant (γ = −0.27, p > 0.05) (Table 2). Nevertheless, the group-level relationship between group-mean overqualification and manager level of envy with regard to group-level job satisfaction was significant (γ = −0.48, p < 0.01). As a verification, we expected that the group-level relationship in a model deprived of the cross-level relationship, random slope, or group-mean-centered overqualification would be identified, as group-mean aligning the predictor variable and presenting its group mean at the concerning level could bias between-level factor assessments [79]. The group-level relations continued to be significant and reserved the unchanged form. As shown in Figure 2, a simple slope analysis of the group-level interaction revealed that when a group’s manager has a high envy level, there is a negative association between the group’s average level of overqualification and its average level of career satisfaction (simple slope = 1.06, p > 0.01), whereas there is no association when the group’s manager has a low envy level (simple slope = 0.21, p > 0.05). A follow-up region of significance analysis revealed that when the manager envy level is larger than 1.83 on the 1–5 agreement scale, which is equal to 0.76 points below the sample mean, simple slopes are statistically significant and negative. In other words, groups of employees with higher collective degrees of overqualification tend to be less satisfied with their professions when their common manager feels uncomfortable, despite Hypothesis 1.
A simple slope examination of the group-level relations showed that the relationship between the average degree of job satisfaction and the group average degree of overqualification is negative when the group’s manager has a high level of envy (simple slope = −1.09, p < 0.01), while the relationship is insignificant when the group’s manager has a low level of envy (simple slope = −0.25, p > 0.05).
Investigations of significance showed that simple slopes are significant and negative when the manager level of envy is higher than 1.76 on the 1–5 agreement measure, which is comparable to 0.78 points under the sample mean. Particularly, when a shared manager feels a higher level of envy, groups of workers with greater levels of overqualification tend to feel less satisfied with their jobs. To summarize, even though Hypothesis 1 was not supported, we found a relation of the estimated form at the group level of investigation, indicating that overqualification at the collective stage could be significant.
For Hypothesis 2, we estimated that the manager level of envy would moderate the relationship between performance appraisal and overqualification, such that the suggestion would be negative when the manager degree of envy was high. We could not find support for this hypothesis because the cross-level relation was not significant (γ = −0.18, p > 0.05).
For Hypothesis 3, we assumed that the manager level of envy would moderate the connection between employee turnover and overqualification, such that the relationship could be positive when the manager degree of envy was high. This hypothesis was supported because the cross-level relation was significant (γ = 4.73, p < 0.05) (see Table 2), and a simple-slope examination showed that the link between employee turnover and overqualification was significant and positive when the manager level of envy was high (simple slope = 5.46, p < 0.05); however, it was insignificant when the manager level of envy was low (simple slope = −1.46, p > 0.05). A follow-up examination showed that simple slopes are significant (p < 0.05) and positive when the manager level of envy is more than 2.14 on the 1–5 measure, which is comparable to 0.39 points under the sample mean. Consequently, Hypothesis 3 was supported. The simple slopes in Figure 3 are based on a logit transformation of employee turnover translated to the likelihood of voluntary turnover, and the envy level exceeds 2.14 on a scale of 1 to 5, which is equal to 0.39 points below the sample mean. Simple slopes are significant (p > 0.05) and positive, according to a follow-up region of significance analysis. As a result, Hypothesis 3 was confirmed.
5. Discussion
In our study, we created and tested a model that included manager envy as a mediator of the association between employee overqualification and job-related variables. Despite the likelihood that these individuals may provide benefits to firms in the form of greater job performance or citizenship activities, overqualification has been linked to a range of undesirable behavioral and attitudinal effects for individuals [79]. To date, researchers have identified several moderators of the association between overqualification and consequences, with a focus on work values such as growth orientation [4,66,70,80] and aspects of the workplace environment that superiors can directly impact, such as empowerment [81]. We argued that managers’ own sense of envy within the company can play a key role in how subordinates reporting to them respond to their perception of overqualification, stimulating the assumption that managers are always encouraged to provide a work environment that will support employees to cope with or leverage their extra skills. We hypothesized that superiors with a high level of envy would produce a less desirable atmosphere for employees who feel overqualified based on the job protection incentive [82]. These managers are supposed to behave in ways that will help them keep their jobs; thus, they may reject helping people who could pose a threat or be a substitute for them. Previous research has linked job instability to a reluctance to share experiences with others [83], and it has been used to predict a reluctance to mentor others [84]. Based on this logic, we hypothesized the association between overqualification and job results to be influenced by the degree to which managers are envious of their employment. Our findings, which are based on data obtained in five phases from various sources, provide only partial support for our ideas, and the nature of relationships varies depending on the outcome of focus.
In terms of turnover, as a result, the most distinct pattern of findings appeared. Only when managers felt envious were employee impressions of overqualification positively connected to turnover, whereas the association was minor for superiors who felt less jealous in their positions. Workers who believe they are overqualified tend to leave their employment when working with envious superiors. We did not explore a cross-level relation for job satisfaction as a consequence. This might not be surprising because the ICC for job satisfaction was 3%, which suggests that only 3% of the difference in employee job satisfaction was at the superior/group level. It appears that employee job satisfaction could be mainly specified by individual-level aspects such as behavior [85]. However, we discovered a between-group relation that was in the estimated route. Particularly, the group-level overqualification average was negatively linked to the job satisfaction average of group members when the manager level of envy was high. These surprising findings suggest the significance of investigating overqualification at several levels of examination because the predicted correlation appeared at the group level.
The existing study has mostly focused on the individual-level consequences of overqualification perception. Our findings show that the group average of overqualification may have ramifications for group outcomes when utilizing an additive technique for aggregation [86]. Even though higher overqualification did not always result in lower job satisfaction for employees reporting to envious managers at the individual level, working in a group with a higher average level of overqualification resulted in overall lower satisfaction with one’s job when supervised by an envious manager, according to our findings. This result shows that some of the consequences of overqualification on employment behavior may manifest at the group level, with groups with higher levels of overqualification being more likely to be dissatisfied with their jobs. Through methods proposed via social information processing theory, the availability of a larger number of overqualified personnel in a group may impair everyone’s sense of achievement in their professions due to exposure to a significant amount of staff who feel neglected and undervalued [87].
The social environment may shape individual attitudes and behaviors, such as perceived overqualification and job satisfaction. Emotional contagion, through its effect on worker and workgroup feelings, decisions, and performances, has been shown in both organizational and psychological research to have substantial ripple effects in groups [76], and groups are more likely to experience uncomfortable moods than comfortable ones [50]. Therefore, it is possible that the negative perceptions encountered by overqualified individuals, particularly those working under a superior with a high level of envy, are amplified as they discuss their worries with their coworkers, resulting in poorer group job satisfaction.
One surprising finding of our investigation was the absence of any influences for superior performance appraisal. We noticed that staff with high levels of education received good performance appraisals, while staff with long experience received lower scores in their performance appraisal. Therefore, the association between overqualification and performance appraisal was negative but insignificant. These findings suggest that the association between performance appraisal and overqualification could benefit from more investigation.
It is reasonable that other variances of individual levels define the associations between performance appraisal and overqualification. Personnel with political knowledge, for instance, may assuage superiors’ concerns about workers who think they are overqualified [25,69,80]. However, envious superiors may evaluate overqualified workers unfairly.
5.1. Theoretical Contributions
Our findings have implications for the prior work on overqualification and workplace envy. Employee overqualification studies have tended to place emphasis on individual characteristics or workplace environment perceptions as likely influences that impact the extent to which feelings of overqualification affect results. We believe that no previous research has investigated the managerial-level effect. By focusing on moderators at the superiors’ level, we detected the probability of how superiors’ feelings could affect subordinates’ reactions to overqualification and why they could not be successful and satisfied at work. In addition, our findings contribute to overqualification research by examining the different ranges of analysis where the influences of overqualification could arise. Job satisfaction had a larger link with overqualification at the collective level than at the individual level, and the moderating influence of the superior’s degree of envy was only visible at the collective level. Individuals who believed that they were overqualified were less pleased with their jobs, and these adverse effects only appeared when their superiors were envious. Our findings correspond to [88] findings that employee behaviors in response to sentiments of overqualification were dependent on the level of overqualification among peers. According to our results, when a group of overqualified employees reports to an envious superior, the whole group’s job happiness suffers. Some of the impacts of overqualification may manifest at the group level. We have further contributed to the existing literature on workplace envy by examining the cross-level impacts of envious superiors on subordinates. Despite the fact that the crossover impacts of workplace envy have been studied in connection with family-member consequences such as emotional relationships [79], we are unaware of previous studies evaluating how envious superiors impact their subordinates.
Using a job preservation approach to envy at work, we hypothesized that superiors with a higher level of envy would act in ways that maximize their job security, resulting in less support for workers, especially those who believe they are overqualified for their employment. The study of how envious superiors handle their subordinates is a significant addition to the literature on envy in the workplace. Envy’s negative impacts in the workplace are not always restricted to employees’ behavior on the job. In the case of superiors who act as a connecting pin, the negative impacts of envy may manifest in the type of work environment in which their direct subordinates operate.
5.2. Practical Implications
The result that superiors’ envy moderates the association between overqualification, job satisfaction, and performance appraisal has ramifications for managers in the field. These data show that the widely held belief that manager envy acts as a hiring barrier for overqualified individuals may be correct. To clarify, most popular researchers discuss jealousy as a hiring obstacle, whereas our study focused on individuals who felt overqualified after joining a firm. Nonetheless, our findings are instructive in that personnel overqualification has a more detrimental impact on employee job performance when reporting to superiors with high levels of envy. Organizations must guarantee that supervisors are not envious of these personnel in order to maintain a welcoming environment and profit from their credentials and knowledge. Managers who are less confident of their own credentials and talents are less likely to act in ways that will help their employees advance in their careers, which will impact overqualified employees the most, given their own belief that they are entitled to a better job. Good management of personnel with surplus talents and qualifications may be contingent on managers’ ability and desire to invest energy and resources in supporting, assisting, and growing these employees, which is unlikely to happen when superiors are fearful of losing their jobs.
5.3. Strengths, Limitations, and Future Research Directions
Our research has a variety of advantages. We used a time-lag and multiple-source study design, which allowed us to reduce the impact of several prevalent hazards. Our inquiry was multi-leveled, and this assisted in identifying the many levels of studies in which the linkages occurred. We were able to maintain consistency in HR practices and corporate culture by focusing on a single company that operated in different industries while maintaining diversity in views of overqualification and jealous superiors.
The small sample size of our research is one of its major flaws. Subject erosion occurred as a result of the frameworks, resulting in a small sample size. While the findings supported some predictions, the generalizability of the outcomes may be improved with a larger sample size. Exploring the mediators of the associations we discovered would be beneficial in future research. Examining why jealous superiors serve as a moderator would be a natural continuation of this research. Employees who think that they are overqualified, for example, may have less career success while reporting to envious superiors because they have less access to support and information [82]. Employee job performance is predicted by the type and level of support received [10], which may help to elucidate the characteristics of the link between perceived overqualification and job-related results. More research into the association between overqualification and performance appraisal is needed. The association between these two variables was found to be insignificant in our research. We did not account for employee jealousy at work, which could have influenced our findings. In particular, because workplace envy is a joint perspective among staff and management, and superiors’ estimates of the level of envy serve as a benchmark for employee perceptions, employee perceptions of envy may be a more important moderator.
6. Conclusions
Our study confirmed that the relationships between overqualification and job-related outcomes, as well as performance evaluation, depend on the level of jealousy from superiors. The results suggest there should be more research into the group-level effects of overqualification on employee behavior. The perceptions of performance and accomplishment of those who were overqualified suffered as a result of reporting to jealous managers. The results also highlight the importance of investigating overqualification at various stages of analysis and the requirement to investigate manager-level moderators. The previous research on overqualification and workplace envy is influenced by our findings. Studies on employee overqualification tend to focus on personal traits or views of the work environment as probable determinants of how much overqualification affects outcomes. We believe that no prior studies have looked into the impact of the managerial level. By concentrating on the moderators at the superior level, we were able to identify the likelihood that the feelings of the superiors will influence how the subordinates will respond to overqualification and the reasons they will not be successful and happy at work. By looking at the various analytical domains where the effects of overqualification could manifest, our findings also advance the field of overqualification research. The moderating effect of a higher degree of envy was only discernible at the collective level, where job satisfaction showed a stronger correlation with overqualification than it did at the individual level. People who felt overqualified were less satisfied with their occupations, and these negative impacts only materialized when their superiors harbored envy.
Conceptualization, O.K. and T.M.; methodology, O.K. and T.M.; software, O.K. and T.M.; validation, O.K. and T.M.; formal analysis, O.K. and T.M.; investigation, O.K. and T.M.; resources, O.K. and T.M.; data curation, O.K. and T.M.; writing—original draft preparation, O.K. and T.M.; writing—review and editing, O.K., T.M. and M.T.M.; visualization, O.K., T.M. and M.T.M.; supervision, O.K.; project administration, O.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Footnotes
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Enlarge this image.Figure 1. Proposed Theoretical Model.
Enlarge this image.Figure 2. Envious managers moderating the association between the group means of employee overqualification and group means of employee job satisfaction.
Enlarge this image.Figure 3. Envious managers moderating the association between employee perceived overqualification and employee turnover.
Correlations among variables.
| Variables. | Means | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overqualification (T2) | 3.08 | 0.79 | |||||||
| Employee turnover (T3) | 2.98 | 0.78 | −0.19 * | ||||||
| Job satisfaction (T4) | 3.73 | 1.04 | −0.16 | 0.13 | |||||
| Performance appraisal (T5) | 0.06 | 0.28 | 0.17 * | −0.02 | 0.03 | ||||
| Education (T2) | 2.88 | 0.92 | 0.22 * | 0.18 | 0.21 * | −0.09 | |||
| Organizational tenure (T2) | 108.24 | 89.57 | 0.02 | 0.01 | −0.42 ** | 0.07 | −0.12 | ||
| Manager level of envy (T1) | 3.06 | 0.91 | 0.12 | −0.09 | 0.09 | −0.12 | −0.14 | ||
| Group-level overqualification (T2) | 2.9 | 0.69 | −0.67 ** | 0.11 | −0.01 | 0.12 | −0.44 * | −0.19 |
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01. Note: Alphas are shown on the diagonal. T1 = Time 1; T2 = Time 2; T3 = Time 3, T4 = Time 4, T5 = Time 5.
Results of hypothesis testing.
| H1 | H2 | H3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variable | Estimate | SE | Estimate | SE | Estimate | SE |
| Threshold | 3.08 ** | 0.09 | 3.88 ** | 0.14 | −3.98 ** | 1.24 |
| Manager level of envy | 0.03 | 0.14 | −0.07 | 0.13 | 0.49 | 0.88 |
| Group-level overqualification | −0.73 ** | 0.09 | 0.12 | 0.17 | −0.07 | 1.14 |
| Manager level of envy X Group-level overqualification | −0.48 ** | 0.17 | 0.04 | 0.23 | 1.68 | 1.17 |
| Overqualification | −0.44 | 0.18 | −0.42 | 0.59 | 2.63 ** | 0.72 |
| Manager level of envy X Overqualification | −0.27 | 0.27 | −0.18 | 0.67 | 4.73 * | 2.32 |
| Residual variance | 0.58 ** | 0.17 | 0.88 ** | 0.27 | 0.10 | 0.10 |
| Intercept variance | 0.03 | 0.04 | 0.08 | 0.17 | 5.33 | 4.12 |
| Slope variance | 0.29 | 0.28 | 0.04 | 0.31 | 0.05 | 0.04 |
| Pseudo-R2 | 0.41 | 0.04 | ||||
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01.
References
1. Wu, C.-H.; Luksyte, A.; Parker, S.K. Overqualification and Subjective Well-Being at Work: The Moderating Role of Job Autonomy and Culture. Soc. Indic. Res.; 2015; 121, pp. 917-937. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11205-014-0662-2]
2. Maynard, D.C.; Parfyonova, N.M. Perceived overqualification and withdrawal behaviours: Examining the roles of job attitudes and work values. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol.; 2013; 86, pp. 435-455. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/joop.12006]
3. Okoth, V.A.; Oluoch, M.F. Motivation and employee performance at avenue hospital kisumu county-kenya. Bus. Manag. Dyn.; 2019; 9, 20.
4. Liu, Y.; Zhu, J.N.; Lam, L.W. Obligations and feeling envied: A study of workplace status and knowledge hiding. J. Manag. Psychol.; 2020; 35, pp. 347-359. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JMP-05-2019-0276]
5. Al-Hawari, M.A.; Bani-Melhem, S.; Quratulain, S. Abusive supervision and frontline employees’ attitudinal outcomes: The multilevel effects of customer orientation. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag.; 2020; 32, pp. 1109-1129. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-06-2019-0510]
6. Alam, G.M. Clustering Education Policy in Secondary Provision: Impact on Higher Education and Job Market. Int. J. Educ. Reform; 2021; 30, pp. 56-76. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1056787920958409]
7. Andiappan, M.; Dufour, L. Jealousy at Work: A Tripartite Model. Acad. Manag. Rev.; 2020; 45, pp. 205-229. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amr.2016.0299]
8. Arli, N.B.; Aydemir, M.İ.N.E.; Celik, E. The relationship between employee jealousy, job satisfaction, burnout and vigor: A study of white-collar employees. J. Econ. Cult. Soc.; 2019; pp. 31-43. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.26650/JECS429088]
9. Arshadi, N.; Eslami, A.; Neisi, A.K. Designing and testing a model of some antecedents and outcomes of workplace envy. Organ. Cult. Manag.; 2019; 17, pp. 337-358.
10. Arvan, M.L.; Pindek, S.; Andel, S.; Spector, P.E. Too good for your job? Disentangling the relationships between objective overqualification, perceived overqualification, and job dissatisfaction. J. Vocat. Behav.; 2019; 115, 103323. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2019.103323]
11. Bagdadli, S.; Gianecchini, M. Organizational career management practices and objective career success: A systematic review and framework. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev.; 2019; 29, pp. 353-370. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2018.08.001]
12. Leiva, F.E.B.; St-Onge, S.; Arcand, S. Overqualification and turnover intention: Do life-domain balance and developmental climate matter?. Acad. Manag. Proc.; 2021; 2021, 16264. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2021.16264abstract]
13. Bani-Melhem, S.; Abukhait, R.M.; Shamsudin, F.M. Does job stress affect innovative behaviors? Evidence from dubai five-star hotels. J. Hum. Resour. Hosp. Tour.; 2020; 19, pp. 344-367. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15332845.2020.1737769]
14. Bani-Melhem, S.; Zeffane, R.; Albaity, M. Determinants of employees’ innovative behavior. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag.; 2018; 30, pp. 1601-1620. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-02-2017-0079]
15. Baumann, M.R.; Bonner, B.L. An Expectancy Theory Approach to Group Coordination: Expertise, Task Features, and Member Behavior. J. Behav. Decis. Mak.; 2017; 30, pp. 407-419. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bdm.1954]
16. Biaobin, Y.; Lin, Q.; Yi, L.; Qian, L.; Dan, H.; Yiwei, C. The Effect of Overqualification on Employees’ Turnover Intention: The Role of Organization Identity and Goal Orientation. J. Adv. Manag. Sci. Vol.; 2021; 9, [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18178/joams.9.1.17-21]
17. Chambel, M.J.; Carvalho, V.S.; Lopes, S.; Cesário, F. Perceived overqualification and contact center workers’ burnout: Are motivations mediators?. Int. J. Organ. Anal.; 2021; 29, pp. 1337-1349. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-08-2020-2372]
18. Chen, C.; Feng, J.; Liu, X. How Perceived Overqualification and Leader Humility Interact to Influence Turnover Intention. Acad. Manag. Proc.; 2020; 2020, 20534. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2020.85]
19. Khassawneh, O.; Mohammad, T. The Impact of Humor on Work Efficiency at Workplace: An Empirical Examination in Tourism and Hospitality Sector in The United Arab Emirates. J. Bus. Strat. Financ. Manag.; 2022; 4, pp. 91-110. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.12944/JBSFM.04.01.08]
20. Chen, Y.; Zou, Z.; Pan, J. Effects of overqualification on employees’ organizational citizenship behavior: From the perspective of emotion. Acta Psychol. Sin.; 2017; 49, 72. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1041.2017.00072]
21. Craig, C.; Allen, M.W.; Reid, M.F.; Riemenschneider, C.; Armstrong, D.J. The Impact of Career Mentoring and Psychosocial Mentoring on Affective Organizational Commitment, Job Involvement, and Turnover Intention. Adm. Soc.; 2013; 45, pp. 949-973. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0095399712451885]
22. Salanova, M.; Rodríguez-Sánchez, A.M.; Schaufeli, W.; Cifre, E. Flowing Together: A Longitudinal Study of Collective Efficacy and Collective Flow Among Workgroups. J. Psychol.; 2014; 148, pp. 435-455. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2013.806290]
23. Dahling, J.J.; Librizzi, U.A. Integrating the Theory of Work Adjustment and Attachment Theory to Predict Job Turnover Intentions. J. Career Dev.; 2015; 42, pp. 215-228. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0894845314545169]
24. Demir, M.; Dalgıç, A.; Yaşar, E. How Perceived Overqualification Affects Task Performance and Proactive Behavior: The Role of Digital Competencies and Job Crafting. Int. J. Hosp. Tour. Adm.; 2022; pp. 1-23. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15256480.2022.2135665]
25. Erdogan, B.; Bauer, T.N. Overqualification at work: A review and synthesis of the literature. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psychol. Organ. Behav.; 2021; 8, pp. 259-283. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-012420-055831]
26. Erdogan, B.; Bauer, T.N.; Karaeminogullari, A. Overqualification in the workplace. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Psychology; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2017.
27. Bani-Melhem, S.; Quratulain, S.; Al-Hawari, M.A. Does employee resilience exacerbate the effects of abusive supervision? A study of frontline employees’ self-esteem, turnover intention, and innovative behaviors. J. Hosp. Mark. Manag.; 2021; 30, pp. 611-629. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2021.1860850]
28. Erdogan, B.; Karaeminogullari, A.; Bauer, T.N.; Ellis, A.M. Perceived Overqualification at Work: Implications for Extra-Role Behaviors and Advice Network Centrality. J. Manag.; 2020; 46, pp. 583-606. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0149206318804331]
29. Foy, T.; Dwyer, R.J.; Nafarrete, R.; Hammoud, M.S.; Rockett, P. Managing job performance, social support and work-life conflict to reduce workplace stress. Int. J. Prod. Perform. Manag.; 2019; 68, pp. 1018-1041. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-03-2017-0061]
30. Ghadi, M.Y. Empirical examination of theoretical model of workplace envy: Evidences from Jordan. Manag. Res. Rev.; 2018; 41, pp. 1438-1459. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/MRR-06-2017-0185]
31. Gkorezis, P.; Erdogan, B.; Xanthopoulou, D.; Bellou, V. Implications of perceived overqualification for employee’s close social ties: The moderating role of external organizational prestige. J. Vocat. Behav.; 2019; 115, 103335. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2019.103335]
32. Gopalan, V.; Bakar JA, A.; Zulkifli, A.N.; Alwi, A.; Mat, R.C. A review of the motivation theories in learning. AIP Conf. Proc.; 2017; 1891, 020043.
33. Hayes, A.F. PROCESS: A Versatile Computational Tool for Observed Variable Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Modeling. 2012; Available online: http://www.afhayes.com/public/process2012.pdf (accessed on 7 August 2022).
34. Aguirre-Urreta, M.I.; Hu, J. Detecting common method bias: Performance of the Harman’s single-factor test. ACM SIGMIS Database DATABASE Adv. Inf. Syst.; 2019; 50, pp. 45-70. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3330472.3330477]
35. Hilal, O.A. The Role of Organizational Stress in the Relationship Between Leader–Member Exchange and Workplace Envy. Bus. Perspect. Res.; 2022; [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/22785337211070371]
36. Khassawneh, O.; Mohammad, T.; Ben-Abdallah, R. The Impact of Leadership on Boosting Employee Creativity: The Role of Knowledge Sharing as a Mediator. Adm. Sci.; 2022; 12, 175. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/admsci12040175]
37. Howard, E.; Luksyte, A.; Amarnani, R.K.; Spitzmueller, C. Perceived overqualification and experiences of incivility: Can task i-deals help or hurt?. J. Occup. Health Psychol.; 2022; 27, pp. 89-103. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000304] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34735215]
38. Hussein, I.A.; Simba, F. Effect of employee motivation on organizational performance of Mogadishu al port in Somalia. Strateg. J. Bus. Change Manag.; 2017; 4, pp. 89-97.
39. Idowu, A. Effectiveness of Performance Appraisal System and its Effect on Employee Motivation. Nile J. Bus. Econ.; 2017; 3, pp. 15-39. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.20321/nilejbe.v3i5.88]
40. Abukhait, R.M.; Bani-Melhem, S.; Zeffane, R. Empowerment, knowledge sharing and innovative behaviours: Exploring gender differences. Int. J. Innov. Manag.; 2019; 23, 1950006. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1142/S1363919619500063]
41. Iqbal, M.Z.; Akbar, S.; Budhwar, P. Effectiveness of Performance Appraisal: An Integrated Framework. Int. J. Manag. Rev.; 2015; 17, pp. 510-533. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12050]
42. Jenkins, E.W. Untangling Motivation and Performance: Examining the Impact of Feedback, Expectancy, and Resilience on Performance. Master’ Thesis; University of Tennessee: Knoxville, TN, USA, 2019.
43. Judge, T.A.; Weiss, H.M.; Kammeyer-Mueller, J.D.; Hulin, C.L. Job attitudes, job satisfaction, and job affect: A century of continuity and of change. J. Appl. Psychol.; 2017; 102, pp. 356-374. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/apl0000181]
44. Khakwani, M.F. Impact of over qualification on turnover intention. Pollster J. Res.; 2016; 3, pp. 19-31.
45. Khan, M.H.; Noor, A. Does employee envy trigger the positive outcomes at workplace? A study of upward social comparison, envy and employee performance. J. Glob. Bus. Insights; 2020; 5, pp. 169-188. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5038/2640-6489.5.2.1130]
46. Abukhait, R.; Shamsudin, F.M.; Bani-Melhem, S.; Al-Hawari, M.A. Obsessive–compulsive personality and creative performance: The moderating effect of manager coaching behavior. Rev. Manag. Sci.; 2022; pp. 1-22. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11846-022-00528-6]
47. Khassawneh, O. An Evaluation of the Relationship between Human Resource Practices and Service Quality: An Empirical Investigation in the Canadian Hotel Industry. Ph.D. Thesis; University of Gloucestershire: Cheltenham, UK, 2018.
48. Kopelman, R.E.; Prottas, D.J.; Falk, D.W. Construct validation of a Theory X/Y behavior scale. Leadersh. Organ. Dev. J.; 2010; 31, pp. 120-135. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01437731011024385]
49. Kracke, N.; Reichelt, M.; Vicari, B. Wage Losses Due to Overqualification: The Role of Formal Degrees and Occupational Skills. Soc. Indic. Res.; 2018; 139, pp. 1085-1108. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11205-017-1744-8]
50. Kunst, J.R.; Obaidi, M. Understanding violent extremism in the 21st century: The (re)emerging role of relative deprivation. Curr. Opin. Psychol.; 2020; 35, pp. 55-59. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2020.03.010]
51. Khassawneh, O.; Abaker, M.O.S.M. Human Resource Management in the United Arab Emirates: Towards a Better Understanding. HRM in the Global South; Palgrave Macmillan: Cham, Switzerland, 2022; pp. 103-128.
52. Skowronski, M. Overqualified Employees: A Review, A Research Agenda, and Recommendations for Practice. J. Appl. Bus. Econ.; 2019; 21, pp. 105-116.
53. Lee, A.; Erdogan, B.; Tian, A.; Willis, S.; Cao, J. Perceived overqualification and task performance: Reconciling two opposing pathways. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol.; 2021; 94, pp. 80-106. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/joop.12323]
54. Lee, H.-W. Moderators of the Motivational Effects of Performance Management: A Comprehensive Exploration Based on Expectancy Theory. Public Pers. Manag.; 2019; 48, pp. 27-55. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0091026018783003]
55. Lee, K.; Duffy, M.K. A Functional Model of Workplace Envy and Job Performance: When do Employees Capitalize on Envy by Learning from Envied Targets?. Acad. Manag. J.; 2019; 62, pp. 1085-1110. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amj.2016.1202]
56. Liu, H.; Geng, J.; Yao, P. Relationship of Leadership and Envy: How to Resolve Workplace Envy with Leadership—A Bibliometric Review Study. J. Intell.; 2021; 9, 44. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence9030044]
57. Lloyd, R.; Mertens, D. Expecting more out of expectancy theory: History urges inclusion of the social context. Int. Manag. Rev.; 2018; 14, pp. 28-43.
58. Bani-Melhem, S.; Shamsudin, F.M.; Abukhait, R.; Al-Hawari, M.A. Competitive psychological climate as a double-edged sword: A moderated mediation model of organization-based self-esteem, jealousy, and o ganizational citizenship behaviors. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag.; 2023; 54, pp. 139-151. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2022.12.011]
59. Luksyte, A.; Bauer, T.N.; Debus, M.E.; Erdogan, B.; Wu, C.-H. Perceived Overqualification and Collectivism Orientation: Implications for Work and Nonwork Outcomes. J. Manag.; 2022; 48, pp. 319-349. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0149206320948602]
60. Maher, A.; Youssef, P. Role of leaders in managing employees’ dysfunctional behavior at workplace. World Acad. Sci. Eng. Technol. Int. J. Soc. Behav. Educ. Econ. Bus. Ind. Eng.; 2016; 10, pp. 992-997.
61. Martin, J.; Girling, A.; Nirantharakumar, K.; Ryan, R.; Marshall, T.; Hemming, K. Intra-cluster and inter-period correlation coefficients for cross-sectional cluster randomised controlled trials for type-2 diabetes in UK primary care. Trials; 2016; 17, 402. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-016-1532-9]
62. Maynard, D.C.; Brondolo, E.M.; Connelly, C.E.; Sauer, C.E. I’m too good for this job: Narcissism’s role in the experience of overqualification. Appl. Psychol.; 2015; 64, pp. 208-232. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/apps.12031]
63. Middeldorp, M.M. Job Accessibility, Workplace Mobility and Early Career Success: Analysing the Effect of Job Accessibility on Career Starts of School-Leavers. Master’s Thesis; Utrecht University: Utrecht, The Netherlands, 2014.
64. Mohammad, T.F. Human Resource Management Practices and Organisational Performance of the Healthcare Sector: An Empirical Study in Jordan. Ph.D. Thesis; University of Gloucestershire: Cheltenham, UK, 2019.
65. Mosteanu, N.R. Intelligent Foreign Direct Investments to boost economic development–UAE case study. Bus. Manag. Rev.; 2019; 10, pp. 1-9.
66. Nezlek, J.B. Multilevel modeling analyses of diary-style data. Handb. Res. Methods Stud. Dly. Life; 2012; 676, pp. 357-383.
67. Al-Hawari, M.A.; Quratulain, S.; Melhem, S.B. How and when frontline employees’ environmental values influence their green creativity? Examining the role of perceived work meaningfulness and green HRM practices. J. Clean. Prod.; 2021; 310, 127598. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127598]
68. Eltweri, A.; Faccia, A.; Khassawneh, O. Applications of Big Data within Finance: Fraud Detection and Risk Management within the Real Estate Industry. Proceedings of the 2021 3rd International Conference on E-Business and E-commerce Engineering; Sanya, China, 17–19 December 2021; pp. 67-73.
69. Wang, Z.; Lu, H.; Wang, X. Psychological resilience and work alienation affect perceived overqualification and job crafting. Soc. Behav. Pers. Int. J.; 2019; 47, pp. 1-10. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2224/sbp.7552]
70. Khassawneh, O.; Mohammad, T.; Ben-Abdallah, R.; Alabidi, S. The Relationship between Emotional Intelligence and Educators’ Performance in Higher Education Sector. Behav. Sci.; 2022; 12, 511. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/bs12120511]
71. Quintanilla, K.M.; Wahl, S.T. Business and Professional Communication: Keys for Workplace Excellence; Sage Publications: Southend Oaks, CA, USA, 2018.
72. Zheng, B.; Wang, Z. Perceived overqualification and its outcomes: The moderating role of organizational learning. Soc. Behav. Pers. Int. J.; 2017; 45, pp. 1675-1690. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2224/sbp.6349]
73. Recchia, A. R-Squared Measures for Two-Level Hierarchical Linear Models Using SAS. J. Stat. Softw.; 2010; 32, pp. 1-9. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18637/jss.v032.c02]
74. Ricci, F.; Scafarto, V. Malicious Envy in the Workplace and Intangible Capital: An Interpretation from the Perspective of Management. Int. J. Manag. Sci. Bus. Res.; 2015; Available online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2740974 (accessed on 4 August 2022).
75. Mohammad, T.; Darwish, T.K.; Singh, S.; Khassawneh, O. Human Resource Management and Organisational Performance: The Mediating Role of Social Exchange. Eur. Manag. Rev.; 2021; 18, pp. 125-136. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/emre.12421]
76. Russell, Z.A.; Ferris, G.R.; Thompson, K.W.; Sikora, D.M. Overqualified human resources, career development experiences, and work outcomes: Leveraging an underutilized resource with political skill. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev.; 2016; 26, pp. 125-135. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2015.09.008]
77. Rusu, G.; Avasilcăi, S.; Huţu, C.A. Organizational context factors influencing employee performance appraisal: A research framework. Procedia-Soc. Behav. Sci.; 2016; 221, pp. 57-65. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.05.090]
78. Schreurs, B.; Hamstra, M.R.; Jawahar, I.; Akkermans, J. Perceived overqualification and counterproductive work behavior: Testing the mediating role of relative deprivation and the moderating role of ambition. Pers. Rev.; 2020; 50, pp. 1038-1055. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/PR-05-2019-0237]
79. Sikora, D.M.; Thompson, K.W.; Russell, Z.A.; Ferris, G.R. Reimagining overqualified human resources to promote organizational effectiveness and competitive advantage. J. Organ. Eff. People Perform.; 2016; 3, pp. 23-42. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JOEPP-03-2015-0012]
80. Sterling, C.M.; van de Ven, N.; Smith, R.H. The two faces of envy: Studying benign and malicious envy in the workplace. Envy at Work and in Organizations: Research, Theory, and Applications; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2016; pp. 57-84.
81. Khassawneh, O.; Mohammad, T. The Influence of Work Diversity on Organizational Performance in the Hospitality Sector in the UAE: The Moderating Role of HR Practices. 2022; [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.31124/advance.20330850.v1]
82. Supatn, N.; Puapradit, T. Roles of expectancy on employee engagement and job performance. J. Adm. Bus. Stud. JABS; 2019; 5, pp. 88-98.
83. Khassawneh, O.; Elrehail, H. The Effect of Participative Leadership Style on Employees’ Performance: The Contingent Role of Institutional Theory. Adm. Sci.; 2022; 12, 195. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/admsci12040195]
84. Vijayalakshmi, V.; Bhattacharyya, S. Emotional Contagion and its Relevance to Individual Behavior and Organizational Processes: A Position Paper. J. Bus. Psychol.; 2012; 27, pp. 363-374. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10869-011-9243-4]
85. Wang, Y.-D.; Sung, W.-C. Predictors of Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Ethical Leadership and Workplace Jealousy. J. Bus. Ethic; 2016; 135, pp. 117-128. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2480-5]
86. Ye, X.; Li, L.; Tan, X. Organizational support: Mechanisms to affect perceived overqualification on turnover intentions: A study of Chinese repatriates in multinational enterprises. Empl. Relat.; 2017; 39, pp. 918-934. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ER-11-2016-0213]
87. Zhang, M.; Wang, F.; Li, N. The Effect of Perceived Overqualification on Creative Performance: P-O Fit Perspective. Front. Psychol.; 2021; 12, 1524.
88. Abukhait, R.; Bani-Melhem, S.; Mohd Shamsudin, F. Do employee resilience, focus on opportunity, and work-related curiosity predict innovative work behaviour? The mediating role of career adaptability. Managing Knowledge, Absorptive Capacity and Innovation; World Scientific: Singapore, 2020; pp. 31-60.
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
Details
; Mohammad, Tamara 2
; Momany, Munther Talal 2 1 Lazaridis School of Business and Economics, Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, ON N2L 3C5, Canada
2 College of Business Administration, American University in the Emirates, Dubai P.O. Box 503000, United Arab Emirates;