Counterproductive Work Behavior
counterproductive just as they are viewed in the West. Nevertheless, this research has not
examined the specific boundary or content of the construct of CWB across cultures.
Study 1 aimed at investigating the content of CWB among mainland Chinese. Consistent
with the convergence theorists, we make a general prediction that similarity would exist in some
basic content of CWB among North Americans and Chinese. Given the early stage of the cross-
cultural research on CWB, we do not formulate specific hypotheses about what items or
dimensions might generalize across cultures. Meanwhile, we remain open to the divergence
perspective which would predict that Chinese will describe counterproductive work behaviors
which are divergent from the Western literature, given the significant differences between North
America and China in cultural, economic, social, and political environments. Chinese might
describe incidents (i.e., behaviors) of a given dimension differently from those reported by
Westerners, and they might even report indigenous dimensions of CWB. Thus, we asked the
Chinese respondents to describe incidents of CWB, rather than constraining their thoughts with
the Western instruments. This indigenous approach facilitated a careful exploration of the
convergence and divergence perspectives as well as the Chinese-specific content of CWB.
Study 1 serves two purposes. First, it helps identify the content and dimensions of CWB
in China using two independent samples of Chinese managers from mainland China. Second, it
paves the road for Study 2, as the incidents of CWB reported by the Chinese managers who
participated in Study 1 form the indigenous instrument that was later used in Study 2 the study
of the importance of task, OCB, and CWB to overall performance ratings in China.
Establishing the content and dimensionality of CWB in China was accomplished using
two steps. In the first step a group of Chinese managers was asked to list critical incidents that