Perceived Replaceability as a Relational Employment Signal: A Sequential Model of Identity Threat, Work Meaning, Engagement, and Withdrawal
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.65455/pm217j60Keywords:
Perceived Replaceability, Employee–Organization Relationship, Identity Threat, Work Meaning, Work Engagement, Withdrawal BehaviorAbstract
As organizations increasingly structure work in ways that emphasize comparability and interchangeability, employees may come to view their own contributions as readily replaceable. This study examines perceived replaceability as a relational cue within the employee – organization relationship and investigates its implications for withdrawal behavior. We argue that employees who perceive themselves as replaceable are more likely to experience identity threat, which weakens perceived work meaning and, in turn, lowers work engagement, thereby increasing withdrawal behavior. We further propose that perceived organizational appreciation reduces the extent to which replaceability perceptions are experienced as identity threatening. The proposed model was tested with three-wave, multi-source data from 406 employee–supervisor dyads. The results indicate that perceived replaceability is associated with withdrawal behavior both directly and through the sequential pathway involving identity threat, work meaning, and work engagement. In addition, perceived organizational appreciation attenuates the positive relationship between perceived replaceability and identity threat. These findings contribute to the employee withdrawal literature by showing how relational signals of substitutability can erode employees’ psychological attachment to work and by highlighting the protective role of organizational appreciation and meaningful work.
References
[1]BIRON M, FARNDALE E, PAAUWE J. Performance management effectiveness: Lessons from world-leading firms. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 2011, 22(6): 1294-1311.
[2]KINNIE N, HUTCHINSON S, PURCELL J, et al. Satisfaction with HR practices and commitment to the organisation: Why one size does not fit all. Human Resource Management Journal, 2005, 15(4): 9-29.
[3]KELLOGG K C, VALENTINE M A, CHRISTIN A. Algorithms at work: The new contested terrain of control. Academy of Management Annals, 2020, 14(1): 366-410.
[4]FARAJ S, PACHIDI S, SAYEGH K. Working and organizing in the age of the learning algorithm. Information and Organization, 2021, 31(1): 100371.
[5]HANISCH K A, HULIN C L. Job attitudes and organizational withdrawal: An examination of retirement and other voluntary withdrawal behaviors. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 1990, 37(1): 60-78.
[6]HARRISON D A, NEWMAN D A, ROTH P L. How important are job attitudes? Meta-analytic comparisons of integrative behavioral outcomes and time sequences. Academy of Management Journal, 2006, 49(2): 305-325.
[7]RHOADES L, EISENBERGER R. Perceived organizational support: A review of the literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2002, 87(4): 698-714.
[8]BROWN A D. Identities and identity work in organizations. International Journal of Management Reviews, 2015, 17(1): 20-40.
[9]ASHFORTH B E, HARRISON S H, CORLEY K G. Identification in organizations: An examination of four fundamental questions. Journal of Management, 2008, 34(3): 325-374.
[10]PETRIGLIERI G. Identity threats and coping responses in organizations: Threats, values, and identities. Academy of Management Review, 2011, 36(4): 641-662.
[11]ROSSO B D, DEKAS K H, WRZESNIEWSKI A. On the meaning of work: A theoretical integration and review. Research in Organizational Behavior, 2010, 30: 91-127.
[12]STEGER M F, DIK B J, DUFFY R D. Measuring meaningful work: The Work and Meaning Inventory (WAMI). Journal of Career Assessment, 2012, 20(3): 322-337.
[13]LYSOVA E I, ALLAN B A, DIK B J, et al. Fostering meaningful work in organizations: A multi-level review and integration. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 2019, 110: 374-389.
[14]ALLAN B A, BATZ-BARBARICH C, STERLING H M, et al. Outcomes of meaningful work: A meta-analysis. Journal of Management Studies, 2020, 57(4): 789-820.
[15]SCHAUFELI W B, SALANOVA M, GONZÁLEZ-ROMÁ V, et al. The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 2002, 3(1): 71-92.
[16]CHRISTIAN M S, GARZA A S, SLAUGHTER J E. Work engagement: A quantitative review and test of its relations with task and contextual performance. Personnel Psychology, 2011, 64(1): 89-136.
[17]SVERKE M, HELLGREN J, NÄSWALL K. No security: A meta-analysis and review of job insecurity and its consequences. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 2002, 7(3): 242-264.
[18]EISENBERGER R, HUNTINGTON R, HUTCHISON S, et al. Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1986, 71(3): 500-507.
[19]BELMI P, SCHROEDER J. Human “resources”? Objectification at work. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2021, 120(2): 384-417.
[20]WELDON E, MUSTARI E L. Felt dispensability in groups of coactors: The effects of shared responsibility and explicit anonymity on cognitive effort. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1988, 41(3): 330-351.
[21]PRATT M G, ASHFORTH B E. Fostering meaningfulness in working and at work//Cameron K S, Dutton J E, Quinn R E (Eds.), Positive organizational scholarship. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler, 2003: 309-327.
[22]MICHAELSON C, PRATT M G, GRANT A M, et al. Meaningful work: Connecting business ethics and organization studies. Journal of Business Ethics, 2014, 121(1): 77-90.
[23]LEPISTO D A, PRATT M G. Meaningful work as realization and justification: Toward a dual conceptualization. Organizational Psychology Review, 2017, 7(2): 99-121.
[24]BAILEY C, LIPS-WIERSMA M, MADDEN A, et al. A review of the empirical literature on meaningful work: Progress and research agenda. Human Resource Development Review, 2019, 18(1): 83-113.
[25]KAHN W A. Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 1990, 33(4): 692-724.
[26]MAY D R, GILSON R L, HARTER L M. The psychological conditions of meaningfulness, safety and availability and the engagement of the human spirit at work. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 2004, 77(1): 11-37.
[27]EISENBERGER R, HUNTINGTON R, HUTCHISON S, et al. Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1986, 71(3): 500-507.
[28]KURTESSIS J N, EISENBERGER R, FORD M T, et al. Perceived organizational support: A meta-analytic evaluation of organizational support theory. Journal of Management, 2017, 43(6): 1854-1884.
[29]LAVELLE J J, RUPP D E, BROCKNER J. Taking a multifoci approach to the study of justice, social exchange, and citizenship behavior: The target similarity model. Journal of Management, 2007, 33(6): 841-866.
[30]PODSAKOFF P M, MACKENZIE S B, LEE J Y, et al. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2003, 88(5): 879-903.
[31]BRISLIN R W. Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1970, 1(3): 185-216.
[32]GEORGE M M, STRAUSS K, MELL J N, et al. When “who I am” is under threat: Measures of threat to identity value, meanings, and enactment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2023, 108(12): 1952-1978.
[33]PREACHER K J, HAYES A F. Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 2008, 40(3): 879-891.
[34]SAKS A M. Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 2006, 21(7): 600-619.
[35]MACEY W H, SCHNEIDER B. The meaning of employee engagement. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2008, 1(1): 3-30.
[36]MORGESON F P, HUMPHREY S E. The Work Design Questionnaire (WDQ): Developing and validating a comprehensive measure for assessing job design and the nature of work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2006, 91(6): 1321-1339.
[37]COLQUITT J A. On the dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation of a measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2001, 86(3): 386-400.
Downloads
Published
Data Availability Statement
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 The Author(s). Digital Human Resource Management published by CSTDP
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
