Microsoft Word ji job Pres Preprint docx

WORKING HARD OR HARDLY WORKING? AN EXAMINATION OF JOB 
PRESERVATION RESPONSES TO JOB INSECURITY 
Job insecurity (JI) concerns a perceived threat to the continuity of employment as it is 
currently experienced (Shoss, 2017). The number of people worried about their jobs has risen 
steadily since the 1970s, especially in the private sector (Hollister, 2011). There are concerns that 
JI has become a ubiquitous feature of the modern world of work, brought on by trends towards 
globalization and technological advancement as well as diminished labor power and weakened 
bonds between employer and employee (Hoffman, Shoss, & Wegman, 2020).
Although research has been fairly consistent in establishing JI as a harmful threat to 
worker well-being (De Witte, Pienaar, & De Cuyper, 2016), one of the field’s largest 
unanswered questions concerns how JI impacts behavior on the job. Early explorations into JI 
portrayed employees as agentic actors who endeavor to avoid job loss by “working harder,” 
striving to “prove one’s indispensability to the organization,” “trying to improve one’s 
relationship with one’s superior,” or even competing with one’s colleagues (Klandermans, Van 
Vuuren, & Jacobson, 1991). Indeed, using an experimental manipulation, Probst, Stewart, Gruys, 
and Tierney (2007) demonstrated that JI led to greater effort and performance (see also Probst, 
2002). Job insecure employees also report efforts to portray themselves as the ideal employee 
and avoid absence (Hewlin, Kim, & Song, 2016; Miraglia & Johns, 2016). This evidence would 
seem to suggest that JI may motivate employees to take action in an effort to secure their jobs 
(i.e., the job preservation perspective on JI, Shoss, 2017). 
Yet, other studies reveal opposite patterns of results. For example, some report negative 
or non-significant relationships between JI and job performance (e.g., Huang, Niu, Lee, & 
Ashford, 2012; Selenko, Mäkikangas, & Stride, 2017). Research on the relationships between JI 

---

JOB INSECURITY AND JOB PRESERVATION 2
and other behavioral outcomes, such as counterproductive work behavior and impression 
management, have likewise yielded conflicting results (e.g., Huang, Wellman, Ashford, Lee, & 
Wang, 2016; Shoss, Brummel, Probst, & Jiang, 2019).
Several challenges contribute to this inconsistency. First, much of the research on JI and 
workplace behavior is cross-sectional. Therefore, the findings might reflect that one’s behavior is 
the reason for JI rather than the result of JI. Second, little is known about what types of strategies 
employees might pursue to try to secure their jobs. Third, the variability of findings may reflect 
variability in salient threat characteristics that serve to enhance or diminish motivation to enact 
behaviors to secure one’s job (i.e., job preservation motivation, Shoss, 2017).
The current research aims to address these challenges and, in doing so, provide rich 
theoretical and empirical insights into job preservation efforts as a potential response to JI. From 
a theoretical perspective, we leverage and extend Conservation of Resource (COR) theory’s 
(Hobfoll, Halbesleben, Neveu, Paustian-Underdahl, & Westman, 2018) ideas about resource 
investment when facing threat in order to advance theory on job preservation. We build from 
Hobfoll et al. (2018) and Alicke and Sedikides (2009) to develop a 2x2 typology of job 
preservation behaviors that captures (a) promotive or protective strategies directed towards (b) 
task-elements or social-elements of the job. This typology suggests several potential job 
preservation behaviors, including four that we examine in the current research: job performance, 
refraining from counterproductive work behaviors, self-presentation ingratiatory behaviors, and 
evasive knowledge hiding. Together, these behaviors reflect ways that individuals could invest 
their energy/effort by promoting their value and contributions to the organization or by 
protecting themselves from inviting additional threats.
From an empirical standpoint, we present two studies. Our first study utilizes three-wave 

---

JOB INSECURITY AND JOB PRESERVATION 3
longitudinal data to clarify the directionality of the relationships between JI and work behaviors, 
which is critical for understanding workplace behaviors as a response to JI. This first study sets 
the foundation for our second study, which further develops and tests theory about job 
preservation. Using lagged, multi-wave data, our second study examines (a) job preservation 
motivation as an explanation for the indirect effects of JI on behavior and (b) perceptions of 
threat controllability and threat proximity as potential moderators of the JI-job preservation 
motivation relationship. Together, these studies advance JI research by providing insights 
regarding (a) the directionality of JI-workplace behavior relationships, (b) the behaviors 
associated with job preservation motivation, and (c) the conditions under which individuals are 
more likely to be motivated to enact behaviors aimed at securing their jobs.