Kosharnaya Galina Borisovna, Doctor of sociological sciences, professor, head of the sub-department of sociology and personnel management, Penza State University (40 Krasnaya street, Penza, Russia), E-mail: email@example.com
Mordisheva Lyudmila Nikolaevna, Candidate of sociological sciences, associate professor, sub-department of sociology and personnel management, Penza State University (40 Krasnaya street, Penza, Russia), E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Background. The current ambiguous interpretation of labor behavior dictates the need to structure this term, which determines the relevance of the issue under study. Despite the fact that labor behavior is subject to an objective assessment by the organization, it is largely formed due to the subjective components of the perception of the subject’s labor activity. The purpose of the work is to present the author’s model of the system of elements that underlie labor behavior, as well as to describe the main manifestations of deviant behavior in each considered structural element.
Materials and methods. The methodological basis of the study is based on a set of theoretical provisions set forth in the works of domestic and foreign sociologists. The theoretical basis of the research is made up of fundamental works reflecting the conceptual foundations of the theory and methodology of deviant behavior (E. Durkheim). The research base for the study of behavior in the labor sphere was the work of scientists in the field of economic sociology (R. N. Abramov, V. I. Verkhovin, A. L. Temnitsky). In the course of the study, the general scientific principles of cognition of social phenomena, systemic and structural and functional approaches were applied.
Results. The formation of labor behavior in an organization under the influence of the informal and formal sector is investigated. The informal sector is represented by the labor morality provided to the subject by society, and the attitude towards work, reflecting individual work attitudes and the degree of job satisfaction. The formal sector is represented by an ethical body of professional principles that originate from labor morality, and normative legal regulation, enshrined mainly in labor laws and internal acts of organizations.
Conclusions. The model of the main factors in the formation of labor behavior allows us to trace the sources of manifestation of various forms of deviant behavior in labor activity. Variants of deviation in the informal sphere can be the imposition of the idea of workaholism, “double standards”, consumer orientation towards work, negative group effects, alienation of labor, and etc. In the formal sector, deviations will be considered the translation of bureaucratic relations, the opposition of work ethics and labor behavior, abuse of law, inconsistency and gap (lack of legislative regulation of certain areas of activity) norms, precarization (an extremely unstable type of employee’s labor behavior), etc. Note that the level of manifested deviant behavior in working life directly determines the quality of work, involvement in labor activity and, as a result, the success of the organization and the prosperity of the economy.
1. Verkhovin V. I. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological researches]. 1991, no. 11, pp. 25–36. [In Russian]
2. Sotsiologiya truda [Labor sociology]. Eds. N. I. Dryakhlov, A. I. Kravchenko, V. V. Shcherbiny. Moscow: Izd-vo MGU, 1993, 368 p. [In Russian]
3. Dyurkgeym E. Sotsiologicheskoe obozrenie [Sociological review]. 2013, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 133–144. [In Russian]
4. Féaux de la Croix Jeanne. Laboratorium [Laboratorium journal]. 2014, no. 2, pp. 77–100.
5. Il'in E. P. Rabota i lichnost'. Trudogolizm, perfektsionizm, len' [Work and personality. Workaholism, perfectionism, laziness]. Saint-Petersburg: Piter, 2011, 224 p. [In Russian]
6. Abramov R. N. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological researches]. 2018, no. 7, pp. 87–94. [In Russian]
7. Spivak V. A. Organizatsionnoe povedenie [Organizational behavior]. Moscow: Eksmo, 2007, 640 p. [In Russian]
8. Kosharnaya G. B., Mordisheva L. N. Izvestiya vysshikh uchebnykh zavedeniy. Povolzhskiy region. Obshchestvennye nauki [University proceedings. Volga region. Social sciences]. 2010, no. 1 (13), pp. 70–81. [In Russian]
9. Temnitskiy A. L. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological researches]. 2007, no. 6 (278), pp. 60–71. [In Russian]
10. Abramov R. N., Bykov A. V. Vestnik RUDN. Ser.: Sotsiologiya [Bulletin of RUDN University. Series: Sociology]. 2018, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 747–764. [In Russian]
11. Kolennikova O. A., Toksanbaeva M. S. II Rimashevskie chteniya. Sberezhenie naseleniya Rossii: zdorov'e, zanyatost', uroven' i kachestvo zhizni: sb. materialov Mezhdunar. nauch.-prakt. konf. [The 2nd Rimashev’s readings. Saving the population of Russia: health, employment, standard and quality of life: proceedings of International scientific and practical conference]. Moscow, 2019, pp. 158–161. [In Russian]
12. Pochebut L. G., Meyzhis I. A. Sotsial'naya psikhologiya [Social psychology]. Saint-Petersburg: Piter, 2010, 672 p. [In Russian]
13. Kosharnaya G. B., Mordisheva L. N. Izvestiya vysshikh uchebnykh zavedeniy. Povolzhskiy region. Obshchestvennye nauki [University proceedings. Volga region. Social sciences]. 2012, no. 1 (21), pp. 78–86. [In Russian]
14. Sarros James C. British Journal of Management. 2002, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 285–304.
15. Sorokin P. A. Nasledie [Heritage journal]. 2017, no. 2 (11), pp. 158–162. [In Russian]
16. Standing G. The Precariat: the New Dangerous Class. London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2011.
17. Shkaratan O. I., Karacharovskiy V. V., Gasyukova E. N. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological researches]. 2015, no. 12, pp. 99–110. [In Russian]
18. Kosharnaya G. B. Vlast' [Power]. 2015, no. 9, pp. 125–129. [In Russian]
19. Rimskiy V. L. Vlast' i elity [Power and elites]. 2019, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 156–175. [In Russian]