RUNNING HEAD: ATTACHMENT THEORY AT WORK
Attachment Theory at Work: A Review and Directions for Future Research
Jeffrey Yip
Claremont Graduate University
Kyle Ehrhardt
University of Colorado Denver
Hunter Black
Claremont Graduate University
Corresponding author: Jeffrey Yip, Division of Behavioral and Organizational Sciences,
Claremont Graduate University, 150 E. 10th St., Claremont, CA 91711, USA.
Email: [email protected]
ABSTRACT
Attachment theory is a central psychological theory in understanding human relationships. The
contributions of attachment theory to management scholarship is particularly substantial in
research on leadership, work relationships, and human resource management. In particular,
attachment theory provides a unique relational perspective to research on individual outcomes
such as work motivation, performance, and ethical behavior. This review will provide a
synthesis of the theory, its contributions to management scholarship, an integrative summary of
current findings, and directions for future research. In addition, we will discuss how attachment
theory research in management has focused narrowly on attachment as a personality variable and
could be expanded with research on attachment as a variable state and interpersonal process –
research that is current in social and cognitive psychology. We offer specific suggestions for
future research, as well as discuss how these directions will require new methodological
approaches, such as experimental studies on attachment states and the use of network analysis to
study attachment dynamics across multiple organizational relationships.
ATTACHMENT THEORY AT WORK: A REVIEW AND DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE
RESEARCH
The concept of attachment is central to organizational life. Attachment is defined, quite
simply, as an enduring emotional bond between people (Bowlby, 1969). It is driven by the
fundamental human need for belonging (Baumeister & Leary, 1995) and the motivation to seek
proximity to attachment figures in times of need (Bowlby, 1979). The nature, development,
maintenance, and dissolution of this emotional bond has been studied through the lens of
attachment theory (Bowlby, 1979; Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters & Wall, 1978) - a leading
perspective in the understanding of human relationships (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007).
Our review reveals a steep increase in the use of attachment theory in management
research over the last three decades (See Figure 1). More recently, in the last five years,
advances have been made in the understanding of attachment dynamics in leadership (Wu &
Parker, in press), trust (Frazier, Gooty, Little, & Nelson, 2014), emotion regulation (Kafetsios,
Athanasiadou, & Dimou, 2014), mentoring (Allen, Shockley, & Poteat, 2010; Mitchell, Eby, &
Ragins, 2015), and employment relationships (Albert, Allen, Briggane, & Ma, 2015; Crawshaw
& Game, 2015). In particular, attachment theory provides a unique relational perspective to
research on individual outcomes such as ethical behavior (Chugh, Kern, Zhu, & Lee, 2014),
burnout (Leiter, Day, & Price, 2015), and employee proactivity (Wu & Parker, 2012).
-----------------------------------------------------------Insert Figure 1 about here
-----------------------------------------------------------Despite the extensive influence of attachment theory on management research, there has
been no systematic review to date. Existing reviews have focused exclusively on individual
attachment styles as a personality trait. This includes reviews on the effects of attachment styles
on workplace behavior (Harms, 2011), career orientations (Wright & Perrone, 2008), and
mentoring outcomes (Germaine, 2011). While informative, this prior work has limited its focus
on attachment styles as an individual difference variable. We propose a more inclusive and
integrative review. Our review will extend beyond research on attachment styles and include
research on attachment perspectives such as secure base support (Wu & Parker, in press),
relationship-specific attachment processes (Thomas et al., 2013), attachment dynamics in groups
(Lee & Ling, 2007), and attachment dynamics in employment relationships (Albert et al,, 2015).
In addition, our review will discuss methodological advances in attachment research, including
the priming of attachment states (Chugh et al., 2014) and the analysis of relational congruence in
attachment (Mitchell et al., 2015).
ATTACHMENT THEORY AND MANAGEMENT SCHOLARSHIP
Attachment theory was first developed by Bowlby (1969, 1979) in the study of early
childhood relationships, and later extended by Hazan and Shaver (1990) to the study of adult and
working relationships. The theory is fundamentally concerned with the quality of the emotional
bond in relationships and its lasting influence on the individuals involved. While Bowlby (1969)
was concerned with parent-child relationships, research on attachment processes in organizations
has established that working relationships in adulthood can be explained by fundamental
attachment processes. This includes relationships with co-workers, superiors, and the
organization as sources for social support and membership (Hazan & Shaver, 1990, 1994).
Management scholars have extended attachment theory in research on leadership, work
relationships, mentoring, workplace well-being, and human resource management, among others.
The outcomes of attachment in these studies include trust (Frazier et al., 2014), helping behavior
(Geller & Bamberger. 2009), feedback seeking (Allen et al., 2010), leader-member relationship
quality (Richards & Hackett, 2012), interpersonal-directed citizenship behaviors (Richards &
Schat, 2011), and cohesion in dyads and groups (Rom & Mikulincer, 2003). Attachment theory
has also informed research on the relationship between employees and their organization (Krausz
et al, 2001), as well as organizationally relevant outcomes such as employees’ proactive work
behavior (Wu & Parker, 2012) and job performance (Neustadt et al., 2011).
Considering the broad influence of attachment theory, this review will seek to provide an
integrated perspective across these diverse areas of management scholarship. We will also offer
suggestions for future research, as well as discuss how these new directions will require new
methodological approaches. These include experimental methods and the use of social network
analysis – methods that can generate new insights in organizational attachment research.
SCOPE AND ORGANIZATION OF THE REVIEW
Review Scope
Our review will address the various ways in which employee attachment has been studied
in work-related contexts. To this end, we focus on applications of attachment theory as a key
inclusion criterion, thereby excluding studies that use the term “attachment” but do not discuss or
reference attachment theory. We furthermore aim to build a comprehensive review by
incorporating articles that appear in management journals (e.g., Journal of Management,
Academy of Management Review, etc.), as well as articles from psychology journals (e.g.,
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology)
where attachment theory has been researched in organizational contexts. This approach allows
for an inclusive lens on the various means by which attachment processes have been studied in
the workplace, offering a thorough foundation for identifying important new directions for
attachment research in the organizational sciences. Such an inclusive lens moreover sets this
review apart from previous examinations of attachment theory, which generally have taken a
more narrow focus on individual attachment styles relative to certain trait-oriented constructs
(e.g., personality; Harms, 2011). A description of our specific search criteria for article inclusion
is provided in Appendix A. Table 1 also summarizes the articles identified to date that will be
included in our review.
-----------------------------------------------------------Insert Table 1 about here
-----------------------------------------------------------Organization of the Review
This review will be organized into six sections. In the first section, we provide an
overview of attachment theory, its key constructs, and its influence on management research.
We will explain “what” attachment is, the relevance of attachment to management research,
“how” attachment manifests itself in organizational contexts, and “why” the study of attachment
is prevalent and important for understanding employees’ work behaviors. This section will also
include an overview of attachment theory constructs to inform and guide future research.
The second section will outline the methodology of the review and include details
regarding the search criteria, similar to those presented in Appendix A of this proposal. We will
also include a table containing all studies incorporated in the review. This table will be of a
similar nature to Table 1 in this proposal with additional specifics on each study.
The next three sections present the core of our review, and will be organized around the
contributions of attachment theory to management research on 1) individual differences in
attachment styles, 2) attachment processes in interpersonal relationships, and 3) attachment
processes in employment relationships. In section three, we examine how individual differences
in attachment style may influence employee well-being, stress, and coping processes in the
workplace (Joplin, Nelson, & Quick, 1999; Simmons, Gooty, Nelson & Little, 2009); as well as
how attachment styles relate to individuals’ career decision-making and outlook, topics that have
received considerable attention in the careers literature (Braunstein-Bercovitz, et al., 2012).
In section four, we will examine attachment processes in interpersonal relationships. This
includes attachment dynamics in interpersonal relationships, such as the attachment processes in
supportive supervision (Wu & Parker, in press), group trust (Frazier et al, 2014; Simmons et al,
2009), work-family spillover (Sumer & Knight, 2001), leader-follower relationships (Mayseless,
2010; Popper et al., 2000), negotiations (Lee & Thompson, 2011), mentoring (Allen, Shockley,
& Poteat, 2010), and group dynamics (Smith, Murphy, & Coats, 1999), among others.
In section five, we will examine attachment processes in employment relationships. More
specifically, we focus on how attachment theory has informed research on person-organizational
relationships in areas such as employment dissolution (Albert et al., 2015), attitudes towards
employment contracts (Krausz et al., 2001), and career management (Crawshaw & Game, 2015).
Each of sections three, four, and five will furthermore highlight the conceptual underpinnings
used by researchers in linking employee attachment to various outcomes and the methodological
procedures and scales commonly applied. Drawing on these sections, we will also include a table
describing the nomological network of attachment implications for employees.
INSIGHTS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
Finally, in the sixth section we recommend directions for future research on attachment
dynamics in work-related contexts. We anticipate that this section will receive a considerable
degree of attention in our review. In particular, we make the following recommendations:
Activation and Regulation of the Attachment System at Work. Attachment theory
provides detailed propositions about the attachment system and how it is activated and regulated,
particularly in response to stress (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2003). This is relevant for
understanding concerns such as workplace stress, burnout, and emotion regulation. It also
relevant in considering organizational triggers of attachment behavior, such as abusive
supervision and distressing organizational events. For example, Albert et al. (2015) extend
insights from attachment theory to theorize how employees respond to the loss of an employment
relationship. We build on this example to discuss research directions where an attachment
perspective might question fundamental assumptions of social exchange and further theorize the
role of emotions in work and employment relationships.
Attachment in Groups and Teams. We suggest a need to extend attachment research
beyond the individual-level, which constitutes the overwhelming majority of organizational
attachment research to date. Group-level research on attachment offers a particularly rich area
for future research given the increasing use of team-based structures in organizations (Lee &
Ling, 2007). Promising research in this direction includes research by Lavy, Bareli, and Tsachi
Ein-Dor (2014) on the effects of team-level attachment heterogeneity on team functioning.
Attachment in Employment Relationships. Our review uncovers a number of
promising studies on attachment dynamics in employment relationships. For example, shifting
focus on attachment as an independent variable, which represents the majority of organizational
research, to a contextual variable that may shape the relationship between other work-related
constructs and employee and organizational outcomes, may be worthwhile. In addition, we will
describe advances in psychological research on place attachment (being emotionally attached
and feeling secure in a particular location or physical space) (Brocato, Baker, & Voorhees, 2015)
and how it could inform and generate new research on the intersection between materiality and
the emotional bond between employees and their organization.
Network studies of attachment. Current studies of attachment theory in the workplace
have limited themselves to dyadic relationships. Among other contributions, a network
perspective on attachment theory could inform how attachment process come to shape the
dynamics of developmental networks (Dobrow, Chandler, Murphy, Kram, 2012), trust across
multiple relationships (Fulmer & Gelfand, 2012), and network perspectives on leader
effectiveness (Cullen, Gerbasi, & Chrobot-Mason, in press).
Situational approaches to attachment. Current perspectives in developmental
psychology acknowledge that people are shaped by multiple attachment relationships in
adulthood, as well as recognize that relationships often change as a consequence of important life
events (Doherty & Feeney, 2004). This work highlights that attachment states can be situational
and relationship specific (Baldwin et al., 1996; Cozzarelli et al, 2000), a view that has not been
extended to the organizational sciences. Incorporating these perspectives from other disciplines
can contribute to our understanding of a broad array of organizational relationships, including
both interpersonal relationships at work and employment relationships more generally.
SUMMARY
Our review highlights the contributions of attachment theory across a variety of work
domains. It also reveals the limited application of attachment perspectives in management
research, with a focus primarily on attachment as a dispositional variable. We contrast this with
advances in attachment research in others fields and recommend new directions for the study of
attachment in organizations – research that would strengthen the understanding of high quality
connections in organizations (Duttons & Ragins, 2007; Heaphy & Dutton, 2008) and further an
understanding of relational processes across levels of analysis – from interpersonal relationships
between co-workers to employment relationships with the organization.
References
Ainsworth, M. D. S., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E., & Wall, 1978. Patterns of attachment: A
psychological study of the strange situation. Lawrence Erlbaum: Oxford, England.
Albert, L. S., Allen, D. G., Biggane, J. E., & Ma, Q. K. 2015. Attachment and responses to
employment dissolution. Human Resource Management Review, 25(1), 94-106.
Allen, T. D., Shockley, K. M., & Poteat, L. 2010. Protégé anxiety attachment and feedback in
mentoring relationships. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 77(1), 73-80.
Baldwin, M. W., Keelan, J. P. R., Fehr, B., Enns, V., & Koh-Rangarajoo, E. 1996. Social
cognitive conceptualization of attachment working models: Availability and accessibility
effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 94-104.
Bowlby, J. 1969. Attachment and Loss: Vol 1. Attachment (2nd ed.). NY: Basic Books.
Bowlby, J. 1979. The making and breaking of affectional bonds. London: Tavistock.
Braunstein-Bercovitz, H., Benjamin, B. A., Asor, S., & Lev, M. 2012. Insecure attachment and
career indecision: Mediating effects of anxiety and pessimism. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 81(2), 236-244.
Brocato, E. D., Baker, J., & Voorhees, C. M. 2015. Creating consumer attachment to retail
service firms through sense of place. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
43(2), 200-220.
Chopik, W. J., Edelstein, R. S., & Fraley, R. C. 2013. From the cradle to the grave: Age
differences in attachment from early adulthood to old age. Journal of Personality, 81(2),
171-183.
Chugh, D., Kern, M. C., Zhu, Z., & Lee, S. 2014. Withstanding moral disengagement:
Attachment security as an ethical intervention. Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology, 51, 88-93.
Cozzarelli, C., Hoekstra, S. J., & Bylsma, W. H. 2000. General versus specific mental models of
attachment: Are they associated with different outcomes? Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 26(5), 605-618.
Crawshaw, J. R., & Game, A. 2015. The role of line managers in employee career management:
an attachment theory perspective. The International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 26(9), 1182-1203.
Cullen, K. L., Gerbasi, A., & Chrobot-Mason, D. in press. Thriving in central network positions:
The role of political skill. Journal of Management, doi:10.1177/0149206315571154.
Dobrow, S. R., Chandler, D. E., Murphy, W. M., & Kram, K. E. 2012. A review of
developmental networks incorporating a mutuality perspective. Journal of Management,
38(1), 210-242.
Dutton, J. E., & Ragins, B. R. E. 2007. Exploring positive relationships at work: Building a
theoretical and research foundation. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Frazier, M. L., Gooty, J., Little, L. M., & Nelson, D. L. 2014. Employee attachment:
Implications for supervisor trustworthiness and trust. Journal of Business and
Psychology, 1-14.
Geller, D., & Bamberger, P. 2009. Bringing avoidance and anxiety to the job: Attachment style
and instrumental helping behavior among co-workers. Human Relations, 62(12), 18031827.
Harms, P. D. 2011. Adult attachment styles in the workplace. Human Resource Management
Review, 21(4), 285-296.
Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. R. 1990. Love and work: An attachment-theoretical perspective. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(2), 270.
Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. R. 1994. Attachment as an organizational framework for research on
close relationships. Psychological Inquiry, 5(1), 1-22.
Heaphy, E. D., & Dutton, J. E. 2008. Positive social interactions and the human body at work:
Linking organizations and physiology. Academy of Management Review, 33(1), 137-162.
Joplin, J. R. W., Nelson, D. L., & Quick, J. C. 1999. Attachment behavior and health:
relationships at work and home. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 783-796.
Kahn, W. A. 1995. Organizational change and the provision of a secure base: Lessons from the
field. Human Relations, 48(5), 489-514.
Krausz, M., Bizman, A., & Braslavsky, D. 2001. Effects of attachment style on preferences for
and satisfaction with different employment contracts: An exploratory study. Journal of
Business and Psychology, 16(2), 299-316.
Lee, S., & Ling, L. 2007. Understanding Affectional Ties to Groups from the Perspective of
Attachment Theory. Research on Managing Groups and Teams, 10(07), 217-248.
Mayseless, O. 2010. Attachment and the leader—follower relationship. Journal of Social and
Personal Relationships, 27(2), 271-280.
Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. 2015. The psychological effects of the contextual activation of
security-enhancing mental representations in adulthood. Current Opinion in Psychology,
1, 18-21.
Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. 2003. The attachment behavioral system in adulthood:
Activation, psycho-dynamics, and interpersonal processes. Advances in Experimental
Social Psychology, 35, 53 – 152.
Mitchell, M. E., Eby, L. T., & Ragins, B. R. 2015. My Mentor, My Self: Antecedents and
Outcomes of Perceived Similarity in Mentoring Relationships. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 89, 1-9.
Neustadt, E. A., Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. 2011. Attachment at work and
performance. Attachment & Human Development, 13(5), 471-488.
Popper, M., Mayseless, O., & Castelnovo, O. 2000. Transformational leadership and attachment.
The Leadership Quarterly, 11(2), 267-289.
Popper, M., & Amit, K. 2009. Attachment and leader's development via experiences. The
Leadership Quarterly, 20(5), 749-763.
Richards, D. A., & Hackett, R. D. 2012. Attachment and emotion regulation: Compensatory
interactions and leader–member exchange. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(4), 686-701.
Ronen, S., & Mikulincer, M. 2009. Attachment orientations and job burnout: The mediating
roles of team cohesion and organizational fairness. Journal of Social and Personal
Relationships, 26(4), 549-567.
Rom, E., & Mikulincer, M. 2003. Attachment theory and group processes: the association
between attachment style and group-related representations, goals, memories, and
functioning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(6), 1220.
Simmons, B. L., Gooty, J., Nelson, D. L., & Little, L. M. 2009. Secure Attachment: implications
for hope, trust, burnout, and performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30, 839–
862.
Smith, E. R., Murphy, J., & Coats, S. 1999. Attachment to groups: Theory and management.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(1), 94.
Sumer, H. C., & Knight, P. A. 2001. How do people with different attachment styles balance
work and family? A personality perspective on work–family linkage. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 86(4), 653.
Thomas, G., Martin, R., Epitropaki, O., Guillaume, Y., & Lee, A. 2013. Social cognition in
leader–follower relationships: Applying insights from relationship science to
understanding relationship‐based approaches to leadership. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 34(S1), S63-S81.
Wright, S. L., & Perrone, K. M. 2008. The Impact of Attachment on Career-Related Variables A
Review of the Literature and Proposed Theoretical Framework to Guide Future Research.
Journal of Career Development, 35(2), 87-106.
Wu, C. H., & Parker, S. K. in press. The Role of Leader Support in Facilitating Proactive Work
Behavior A Perspective From Attachment Theory. Journal of Management. doi:
10.1177/0149206314544745
Wu, C. H., & Parker, S. K. 2012. The role of attachment styles in shaping proactive behaviour:
An intra‐individual analysis. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology,
85(3), 523-530.
Table 1
Peer-Reviewed Articles on Attachment Theory in Management Research
Author(s)
Year
Relationship Context1
Paper Type
Albert, Allen, Briggane, & Ma
2015
Employment
Theoretical
Chopik
2015
Employment
Empirical
Crawshaw & Game
2015
Employment
Empirical
Dahling & Librizzi
2015
Employment
Empirical
Johnstone & Feeney
2015
Employment
Empirical
Leiter, Day, & Price
2015
Employment
Empirical
Poteat, Shockley, & Allen
2015
Mentoring
Empirical
Reizer
2015
Employment
Empirical
Robinson, Joel, & Plaks
2015
Group
Empirical
Wu & Parker
2015
Leadership
Empirical
Bahling & Librizzi
2014
Employment
Empirical
Chugh, Kern, Zhu, & Lee
2014
Employment
Empirical
Crawshaw & Game
2014
Leadership
Empirical
Frazier, Gooty, Little, & Nelson
2014
Leadership
Empirical
Hinojosa, McCauley, Randolph-Seng, &
Gardner
2014
Leadership
Theoretical
Kafetsios, Athanasiadou, & Dimou
2014
Leadership
Empirical
Lavy, Bareli, & Ein-Dor
2014
Group
Empirical
Rahimnia & Sharifrad
2014
Leadership
Empirical
Tziner, Ben-David, Oren, & Sharoni
2014
Employment
Empirical
Wright, Perrone-Mcgovern, Boo, & White 2014
Employment
Empirical
“Relationship Context” refers to the focal relationship examined in the paper. For example,
“employment” refers to papers that examine attachment theory in the context of personorganization employment relationships.
1
Table 1 (continued)
Wu, Parker, & de Jong
2014
Group
Empirical
Braunstein-Bercovitz
2013
Employment
Empirical
Grady & Grady
2013
Employment
Theoretical
Hudson
2013
Leadership
Theoretical
Koleva, Selterman, Ilyer, Ditto, &
Graham
2013
Employment
Empirical
Littman-Ovadia, Oren, & Lavy
2013
Employment
Empirical
Thomas, Martin, Epitropaki, Guillaume,
& Lee
2013
Leadership
Review
Towler & Stuhlmacher
2013
Employment
Empirical
Tziner & Tanami
2013
Employment
Empirical
Almakias & Weiss
2012
Negotiations
Empirical
Braunstein-Bercovitz, Benjamin, Asor, &
Lev
2012
Employment
Empirical
Hansbrough
2012
Leadership
Empirical
Richards & Hackett
2012
Leadership
Empirical
Wu & Parker
2012
Peer
Empirical
Germain
2011
Mentoring
Review
Gianakos
2011
Intrapersonal
Exploratory
Harms
2011
Review
Review
Lee & Thompson
2011
Negotiations
Empirical
Murphy & Johnson
2011
Leadership
Theoretical
Neustadt, Chamorro-Premuzic, &
Furnham
2011
Leadership
Empirical
Richards & Schat
2011
Performance
Empirical
Allen, Shockley, & Poteat
2010
Mentoring
Empirical
Table 1 (continued)
Boatwright, Lopez, Sauer, VanDerWege,
& Huber
2010
Leadership
Empirical
Downing & Nauta
2010
Employment
Empirical
Lin
2010
Employment
Empirical
Mayseless
2010
Leadership
Theoretical
Shalit, Popper, & Zakay
2010
Leadership
Empirical
Shondrick, Dinh, & Lord
2010
Leadership
Theoretical
Albert & Horowitz
2009
Leadership
Empirical
Crisp, Farrow, Rosenthal, Walsh, Blissett,
& Penn
2009
Group
Empirical
Geller & Bamberger
2009
Peer
Empirical
Little, Nelson, Wallace, & Johnson
2009
Employment
Empirical
Moss
2009
Leadership
Empirical
Popper & Amit
2009a
Leadership
Empirical
Popper & Amit
2009b
Leadership
Empirical
Ronen & Mikulincer
2009
Employment
Empirical
Simmons, Gooty, Nelson, & Little
2009
Employment
Empirical
Wang, Noe, Want, & Greenberger
2009
Mentoring
Empirical
Game
2008
Leadership
Empirical
Rom
2008
Groups
Empirical
Wright & Perrone
2008
Employment
Review
Bresnahan & Mitroff
2007
Leadership
Commentary
Davidovitz, Mikulincer, Shaver, Izsak, &
Popper
2007
Leadership
Empirical
Table 1 (continued)
Hobdy, Hayslip, Kaminski, Crowley,
Riggs & York
2007
Employment
Empirical
Lee & Ling
2007
Groups
Review
Mayseless & Popper
2007
Leadership
Theoretical
Mikulincer & Shaver
2007
Employment
Theoretical
Perrone, Webb, & Jackson
2007
Employment
Empirical
Berson, Carmel, & Yammarino
2006
Leadership
Empirical
Pines
2004
Employment
Empirical
Keller
2003
Leadership
Theoretical
Popper & Mayseless
2003
Leadership
Theoretical
Rom & Mikulincer
2003
Group
Empirical
Popper
2002
Leadership
Empirical
Vasquez, Durik, & Hyde
2002
Employment
Empirical
Krausz, Bizman, & Braslavsky
2001
Employment
Empirical
Schirmer & Lopez
2001
Coworker
Empirical
Scott & Church
2001
Employment
Empirical
Sumer & Knight
2001
Employment
Empirical
Keller, Caciope, & Keller
2000
Leadership
Theoretical
Popper, Mayseless, & Castelnovo
2000
Leadership
Empirical
Joplin, Nelson, & Quick
1999
Peer
Empirical
Smith, Murphy, & Coats
1999
Groups
Empirical
Kahn
1995
Employment
Empirical
Hardy & Barkham
1994
Employment
Empirical
Kahn & Kram
1994
Leadership
Theoretical
Table 1 (continued)
Vrombrock
1993
Employment
Theoretical
Nelson & Quick
1991
Employment
Empirical
Hazan & Shaver
1990
Employment
Empirical
Quick, Nelson, & Quick
1987
Leadership
Theoretical
FIGURE 1
Peer-Reviewed Articles on Attachment Theory in Management Research
45
Number of Articles
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1986 to 1990 1996 to 2000 1991 to 1995 2001 to 2005 2006 to 2010 2011 to 2015
Year
APPENDIX: METHODOLOGY
In order to arrive at a comprehensive sample of research articles in the organizational
literature related to attachment theory, keyword searches were performed in EBSCO’s Academic
Search Premier, Business Source Premier, PsycArticles, and PsycInfo databases, as well as
SAGE’s Premier 2011 database. Searches were limited to peer-reviewed academic journals. The
article search was performed by limiting results to articles that contain both the word
“attachment” and keywords such as “job”, “work”, “organization”, “leadership”, “leader”,
“manager”, “management”, “coaching”, “mentoring”, “negotiation”, “negotiate”, “employment”,
“employee”, “career”, “follower”, “teams”, “groups”, and “performance” in any document text.
From these results, articles related to the workplace context were then identified and those
unrelated to attachment theory, such as those that use the term attachment but did not discuss or
reference attachment theory were removed. This process resulted in a final pool of 90 articles
(see Table 1) from journals including Academy of Management Review, Academy of
Management Executive, Journal of Management, Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of
Organizational Behavior, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Journal of Vocational
Behavior, and Leadership Quarterly, among others.