1. 韩天慧 201421030054 2014-10-10 NO PAIN, NO GAIN: AN AFFECT-BASED MODEL OF DEVELOPMENTAL JOB EXPERIENCE AND THE BUFFERING EFFECTS OF EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE YUNTAO DONG School of Management, University of Connecticut MYEONG-GU SEO Robert H. Smith School of Business, University of Maryland KATHRYN M. BARTOL Robert H. Smith School of Business, University of Maryland

2. Abstract Drawing on an overarching framework of transactional stress theory, this study develops and tests an affect-based model of developmental job experience (DJE) that explicates the affective mechanisms through which DJE is associated with both positive and negative individual outcomes—advanced potential and turnover intention—and the buffering role of emotional intelligence (EI) in the affective process.

3. We develop our theoretical model first by defining DJE and conceptualizing it as a stressful situation in organizations that can be appraised as both challenge and threat, based on transactional stress theory (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984, 1987). We then point out employees' affective experience as a central mechanism linking DJE and two opposite work outcomes. Specifically, we discuss how DJE is related to both pleasant and unpleasant feelings in focal employees, which will be differentially associated with their advancement potential and turnover intention. Next, we hypothesize how EI moderates the mediated relationships between DJE and the two work outcomes via unpleasant feelings.

4. Theory and Hypotheses Developmental Job Experience The first dimension, "unfamiliar responsibilities" The second dimension, "creating change" The third dimension, "high levels of responsibilities" The fourth dimension, "working across boundaries" The fifth dimension, "managing diversity" Emotional Intelligence The first dimension, "perceiving emotions" The second dimension, "using emotions to facilitate thinking" The third dimension, "understanding emotions" The fourth dimension, "managing emotions"

5. Developmental Job Experience and Affective Experience at Work Hypothesis 1. DJE is positively related to pleasant feelings. Hypothesis 2. DJE is positively related to unpleasant feelings.

6. Affective Experience and Advancement Potential Hypothesis 3a. Pleasant feelings are positively related to advancement potential. Hypothesis 3b. Pleasant feelings mediate the relationship between DJE and advancement potential, such that DJE is positively and indirectly related to advancement potential through pleasant feelings.

7. Affective Experience and Advancement Potential Hypothesis 4a. Unpleasant feelings are negatively related to advancement potential. Hypothesis 4b. Unpleasant feelings mediate the relationship between DJE and advancement potential, such that DJE is negatively and indirectly related to advancement potential through unpleasant feelings.

8. Affective Experience and Turnover Intention Hypothesis 5a. Pleasant feelings are negatively related to turnover intention. Hypothesis 5b. Pleasant feelings mediate the relationship between DJE and turnover intention, such that DJE is negatively and indirectly related to turnover intention through pleasant feelings.

9. Affective Experience and Turnover Intention Hypothesis 6a. Unpleasant feelings are positively related to turnover intention. Hypothesis 6b. Unpleasant feelings mediate the relationship between DJE and turnover intention, such that DJE is positively and indirectly related to turnover intention through unpleasant feelings.

10. Moderating the relationship between developmental job experience and unpleasant feelings. Hypothesis 7. EI moderates the relationship between DJE and unpleasant feelings, such that the relationship is weaker when an employee has a higher level of EI.

11. Moderating the relationship between unpleasant feelings and outcome. Hypothesis 8. EI moderates the relationship between unpleasant feelings and advancement potential, such that the relationship is weaker when an employee has a higher level of EI. Hypothesis 9. EI moderates the relationship between unpleasant feelings and turnover intention, such that the relationship is weaker when an employee has a higher level of EI.

12. Moderating the relationship between unpleasant feelings and outcome. Hypothesis 10a. EI moderates the relationship between DJE and advancement potential through unpleasant feelings, such that the mediated relationship is weakened when an employee has a higher level of EI. Hypothesis 10b. EI moderates the relationship between DJE and turnover intention through unpleasant feelings, such that the mediated relationship is weakened when an employee has a higher level of EI.

13. Method Sample and Procedure 375 full-time early-career managers. 478 nominated supervisors. online survey once a day to report their affective states, between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., within two-hour, drop those fewer than 5 times. two further online surveys, one is the "work survey" to realize turnover intention, the other is Mayer-Salovey-Caruso to rate EI, supervisors confidentially rate advancement potential. 214 participants. 316 supervisors

14. Measures Developmental job experience: a shortened version of the Developmental Challenge Profile (DCP) (McCauley et al., 1994) Pleasant and unpleasant feelings: six items indicated pleasant feelings, the other six items indicated unpleasant feelings, use a five-point scale. Emotional intelligence: MSCEIT Version 2.0 (Mayer et al., 2002) Advancement potential: a three-item scale adapted from the promotability scale of Thacker and Wayne (1995), use a five-point scale. Turnover intention: a common three-item scale deriving from Cammann, Fichman, Jenkins, and Klesh (1979), use a five-point scale. Control variables: respondents' age, gender, and organizational tenure; trait affectivity; standard deviations of pleasant and unpleasant feelings.

15. Results

16. Structural model analyses Hypothesis 1 Hypothesis 2 Hypothesis 3a Hypothesis 4a Hypothesis 5a Hypothesis 6a Hypothesis 7 Hypothesis 8 Hypothesis 9

19. Structural model analyses Hypothesis 3b Hypothesis 4b Hypothesis 5b Hypothesis 6b Hypothesis 10a Hypothesis 10b

21. Discussion examined the affective mechanisms the buffering role of EI in the affective processes

22. Contributions First, examines the affective processes underlying DJE and thus extends the developmental work experience literature; Second, broadens the existing understanding of both the outcomes of DJE and the DJE outcome relationships; Third, identifies one individual-level affective characteristic that may help to reduce turnover intention—namely, emotional intelligence; Finally, make theoretical contributions to the literatures on workplace affect and stress.

23. Limitations First, sample limited; Second, precluded verification of the causal relationships; Third, inquiry limited; Finally, other moderators.