Ostracism or being ignored or excluded by others is a pervasive phenomenon that surveys show a large majority experience at work and among loved ones. It has many undesirable consequences, such as aggressive intentions and actions against those who are doing the ostracising. People who are ostracised are also more likely to experience distress and an impaired ability to self-regulate their impulses.
An important mediating mechanism for why ostracism has these effects is lowered self-esteem. The research to support this has drawn from self-verification theory in which individuals strive to verify their positive self-views with positive actions, or negative self-views with negative actions. Negative behaviour in the wake of ostracism would seem to be an attempt to verify a negative self-view. Yet the findings on this connection in the broader literature have been mixed, calling into question whether self-verification even exists.
D. Lance Ferris, Huiwen Lian, Douglas J. Brown and Rachel Morrison tackle this question by arguing for a more nuanced view on when individuals self-verify. They suggest it depends on contingent self-esteem – the extent to which an individual bases his or her self-worth on outcomes in a given domain, whether it is to look attractive, do better than others in the workplace, or have approval of family members. In this domain, negative self-perceptions would not lead negative behaviours but instead to self-enhancement, where the individual seeks to demonstrate to themselves and others that they excel in this domain regardless of self-esteem levels. This model also speaks to when one can expect to see behavioural effects from ostracism.
“Ostracism decreases self-esteem levels which should induce individuals to engage in poorer job performance, consistent with their negative self-perceptions. But one problem with this explanation is that the effects of self-esteem levels on performance are typically variable,” they said.
“The relation of ostracism to performance outcomes has similarly evinced conflicting conclusions. This would seem to suggest that sometimes individuals self-verify and sometimes they do not. We argue the key determinant in self-verification lies in contingent self-esteem.”
The focus on contingent self-esteem provides a more accurate way for showing how ostracism relates to behavioural outcomes in the workplace, and also a point of convergence for looking at negative interpersonal behaviours in general, such as bullying or abuse. It can also generalise to how these behaviours influence organisational behaviours.
A key question in their research is to determine when people self-verify and when they self-enhance. They may not self-enhance even in an important domain like the workplace if that domain is not important in terms of contingent self-esteem. In such a case, they would self-verify – giving rise to the negative actions reported in previous research.
The authors demonstrated this by investigating at workplace ostracism in two field samples – one of 158 individuals matched with workplace peers, the other of 278 matched pairs. The individuals provided information about themselves and their experiences of workplace ostracism while their peers reported on their co-workers’ “Importance of Performance to Self-Esteem” (IPSE), which reflected contingent self-esteem, and in-role behaviours (IRBs) and organisational citizenship behaviours (OCBs), which reflected job performance.
The results showed that while workplace ostracism had a negative impact on general self-esteem levels, the subsequent impact on workplace behaviours was stronger among those with lower IPSE. Contingent self-esteem therefore was found to modify the effects of ostracism.
“Our model and findings have several implications for organisations. First, by outlining a mechanism that mediates ostracism’s effects, we offer a better understanding about why ostracism relates to job performance through self-esteem levels. This suggests the potential for organisational interventions to bolster an individual’s self-esteem level to potentially counteract ostracism’s negative effects.
“And second, we offer a better understanding about who will likely see their job performance affected by ostracism. Only those whose self-esteem was not contingent upon the workplace evinced performance decrements in the face of workplace ostracism. Organisations may wish to implement programmes designed to select or develop employees with high IPSE, although caution should be exercised. Previous studies have shown contingent self-esteem can lead to negative consequences, such as feeling depressed, following feedback in the contingent domain,” they said.