Testing the Process of Coworker Incivility to Work Withdrawal Behavior: The Moderated Mediation Effects of Employee Resilience in Achieving Organizational Sustainability

Abstract

Drawing on the implantation of organizational sustainable strategies, enterprises can effectively manage and recycle resources, reduce resource waste, improve market competitiveness, better respond to changes in the market and environment, and create long-term economic benefits. Although a large number of prior studies have emphasized the importance of improving sustainability and proposed various strategies and practical approaches, relatively few studies have explored the inhibitors of sustainability. Against such a research background, this study differs from previous research that has simply focused on ways to increase sustainability; we instead explore negative variables that reduce sustainability. We assess the variable that reduces organizational sustainability, that is, work withdrawal behavior that reduces employees’ enthusiasm for their jobs, hinders employee performance, causes financial losses, and limits organizational growth and sustainability. This directly affects the organization’s long-term growth and sustainability goals and damages the organization’s overall sustainability image. Therefore, understanding the reasons behind this behavior is important. This study examines how coworker incivility leads to work withdrawal behavior and validates relevant research models. Data from 294 Chinese SME employees show that coworker incivility positively affects workplace loneliness and work withdrawal behavior. Workplace loneliness mediates the impact of coworker incivility on work withdrawal behavior, while resilience negatively moderates these relationships. Based on these findings, this study offers recommendations for reducing work withdrawal behavior and improving workplace environments and employee mental health.

1. Introduction

Organizations must continually improve their competitiveness to achieve the goal of organizational sustainability [1]. Sustainable development requires organizations to innovate continuously [2]. Chinese small and medium enterprises (SMEs) need to focus on sustainability, which is directly related to the survival of these organizations [3]. Reducing employee stress and work withdrawal behavior was also highlighted in Choi’s [4] study as essential for organizations aiming to achieve long-term stability and sustainability. However, employees, who are the subjects of innovation, are gradually losing enthusiasm for their work. Work withdrawal behavior is becoming increasingly prevalent among young Chinese employees, and related topics are attracting considerable public attention [5]. For example, “lying flat”—that is, resisting work with a negative attitude—is becoming increasingly common among young employees who aim to escape social pressures, in addition to work withdrawal behaviors such as tardiness, absenteeism, daydreaming, and reduced work engagement [6]. Work withdrawal behavior is an attempt to escape certain work situations rather than causing direct harm [7]. However, as employees engaging in work withdrawal do not derive satisfaction from their jobs, this negative attitude may deteriorate the quality of their work and their creativity [8,9]. Moreover, work withdrawal behavior is not only detrimental to employees’ career development, it also impacts organizational performance [10,11]. This makes it difficult to achieve organizational goals and affects the sustainability of the organization. Although previous research has examined the drivers of withdrawal behavior through the lens of leadership and unreasonable tasks, the impact of coworker on employees has been overlooked [5,12]. Therefore, this study aims to explore the causes of employee work withdrawal behavior in terms of coworker incivility and to propose effective strategies to mitigate it.

Work withdrawal behavior is initiated by employees to avoid work or attenuate their social connection with the organization [13]. The process may begin with just dawdling at work, degenerate into tardiness and absenteeism, and culminate in not wanting to go to work or resignation. Therefore, it is imperative that we investigate the reasons behind employees’ work withdrawal behavior to alleviate its adverse impacts on organizations as well as employees. For working professionals, colleagues are the most frequently contacted people in their daily lives after family members. Colleagues’ behavior has a direct bearing on the employees. Additionally, coworker incivility impacts employees’ attitudes toward the organization. This, in turn, influences the employee–organization relationship and, ultimately, impacts the workplace performance of individuals [14]. This study predicts that a sizeable proportion of employees’ behavior is influenced by the behavior of their colleagues.

Coworker incivility is defined as behavior characterized by rudeness and impoliteness, which demonstrates disrespect for others, violates workplace norms of mutual respect, and harbors an ambiguous intent to harm the organizational target [15]. It is characterized by simplicity of implementation and low input costs [16] as well as by rude treatment, harshness, neglect, gossip, or rejection from coworkers. Coworker incivility could create a discordant organizational environment, inducing the employees—directly or indirectly—to distance themselves or become alienated from the organization, leading to work withdrawal behaviors [14]. Specifically, encountering coworker incivility could have a direct adverse impact on the physical and mental well-being of the recipient, necessitating the expenditure of time and energy to deal with unpleasantness. This may lead to work withdrawal behaviors. Moreover, coworker incivility is low in intensity, brief in duration, and ambiguous in intent, making the behavior difficult to detect or prohibit by the organization. Therefore, this study emphasizes the role of coworker incivility as a key factor influencing work withdrawal behavior.

This study aims to validate whether coworker incivility affects work withdrawal behavior and identify the factors that mediate the process between coworker incivility and work withdrawal behavior. Workplace loneliness refers to the experience of solitude due to a gap between the expected and actual intensity or quality of workplace relationships and an individual’s inability to bridge this gap independently [17]. Employees with greater workplace loneliness are less likely to have an emotional commitment to the organization [18]. Moreover, workplace loneliness is intimately associated with work, affecting work status and causing considerable damage to organizational effectiveness [19]. Consequently, employees’ behavior at work is significantly influenced by the emotional changes they experience in the workplace. When subjected to coworker incivility, employees not only find it difficult to maintain good social interactions with their coworkers but also develop negative sentiments toward their jobs. This diminishes job satisfaction and creates a sense of disconnection or loneliness, inducing the desire to avoid work [20]. Thus, coworker incivility could stimulate workplace loneliness in employees, leading to work withdrawal behavior. We predict that workplace loneliness mediates the association between coworker incivility and withdrawal behavior.

Additionally, this research posits that an employee’s level of resilience could impact their response to coworker incivility, resulting in differentiated attitudes and behaviors. Resilience refers to the ability of an individual to robustly cope and recover in the contexts of significant change, adversity, or risk of failure [21]. Employees with high levels of resilience have better emotional control and adaptability. Conversely, employees with lower resilience struggle to manage and adjust their emotions and behaviors. When subjected to coworker incivility, employees with lower resilience experience a more significant decline in performance [22]. Therefore, it is necessary to explore the moderating role of resilience between coworker incivility and workplace loneliness and coworker incivility and work withdrawal behavior and to identify points of difference between high and low resilience.

The objectives of this study are discussed below. First, studies abound on leadership-centered work withdrawal behavior [11,23,24]. However, little research has been conducted on coworker incivility affecting employees’ work withdrawal behavior. Moreover, when employees show work withdrawal behavior, their productivity and innovation are impaired, and coworker incivility further deteriorates the work environment, affects employees’ mood and work enthusiasm, and leads to high employee turnover and low productivity, thus becoming an obstacle to the sustainable development of the company. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the relationship between coworker incivility and work withdrawal behavior.

Second, based on the Affective Events Theory (AET), this study introduces workplace loneliness as a mediating variable. The AET states that work experiences generate emotional reactions, and emotional reactions affect individual work attitudes and behaviors [25]. Experiencing coworker incivility triggers loneliness, which tarnishes the overall perception of the organization and engenders frustration with the overall organizational climate. To cope with these negative emotional impacts, employees adopt withdrawal behaviors. This study investigates mediating and moderated mediating effects, thus expanding the scope of research on work withdrawal behavior.

Additionally, resilience—a key variable related to employees—significantly impacts employee behavior. Many studies have explored the effects of resilience on positive employee behavior [26,27]. This research examines the effects of resilience on employees’ negative behaviors and attempts to test its moderating effect.

Overall, work withdrawal behavior emphasizes self-protective strategies [28], and its presence can diminish employees’ sense of control over their work, consequently reducing enthusiasm for their work [29]. The foremost contribution of this study is the proposition of a new perspective on the factors that result in employees’ work withdrawal behavior based on Affective Event Theory (AET), highlighting the mediating role of workplace loneliness in coworker incivility and work withdrawal behavior. This study proposes a research model that examines how negative behaviors in the organizational environment lead to employee withdrawal behavior, thereby inhibiting the organization’s long-term growth and sustainability. Furthermore, it focuses on expanding the extent of research on withdrawal behavior and offers a theoretical basis for related studies. Additionally, this study validates the moderating effect of resilience, expanding the study of resilience into the domain of workplace loneliness and withdrawal behavior. Work withdrawal behavior diminishes organizational effectiveness, culture, and competitiveness and is a potential threat to organizational sustainability. Employees’ resilience moderates the relationship between coworker incivility and workplace loneliness and that between coworker incivility and work withdrawal behavior. Resilience not only reduces workplace loneliness when employees experience coworker incivility but also reduces the likelihood that employees will engage in withdrawal behavior. As such, this study makes a valuable contribution to the study of resilience and organizational sustainability. Organizations should actively manage and reduce work withdrawal behavior while promoting resilience in employees if they are to achieve sustainability.

Finally, this study aims to determine the relationship between coworker incivility and work withdrawal behavior and to evaluate whether workplace loneliness has a mediating effect in this relationship. Next, by demonstrating the moderating effect of resilience, we determine how resilience affects workplace loneliness and work withdrawal behavior. In addition, the moderated mediation research model is presented and verified.

2. Theoretical Background and Hypotheses

2.1. Coworker Incivility and Workplace Loneliness

Coworker incivility is defined as behavior that has a low-intensity intent to harm the organizational target and violates the norms of mutual respect in the workplace [30]. Reio Jr [31] considers coworker incivility as behavior initiated by a coworker that violates the norms of interpersonal interaction and is hurtful in nature, such as rude and hurtful words.

Additionally, coworker incivility could significantly impact an individual’s psychological state and work attitude [32,33]. Coworker incivility causes employees to be emotionally drained, reduces employee job satisfaction, and affects job performance [34]. Reducing the incidence of coworker incivility may increase work engagement and well-being for all employees [35]. According to Kuriakose, Wilson, and Anusree [36], employees experience workplace loneliness as a result of unfavorable work events, such as conflict.

Experiencing coworker incivility induces a feeling of social exclusion, which leads to workplace loneliness [37]. This promotes employees’ negative self-evaluation and distrust of colleagues [38]. After experiencing coworker incivility, employees actively engage in emotional distancing from colleagues, begin to lose trust in coworkers, underperform, actively avoid the organization, and feel a sense of loneliness [39]. Such employees feel self-pity upon encountering difficulties, and increasing negative interactions increasingly deplete their psychological resources, which results in workplace loneliness [40]. Specifically, experiencing incivility from coworkers can cause employees to become more stressed, less professionally engaged, and less happy and to feel rejected and lonely [35]. Exclusion, taunting, and other uncivil behaviors induce disconnection and avoidance of social interactions at the workplace, exacerbating workplace loneliness felt by employees [20]. Coworker incivility increases the negative work experience of employees and makes them feel rejected, which engenders mistrust and dissatisfaction among employees, thus triggering workplace loneliness [41]. By presenting prior research, this study illustrates that coworker incivility affects workplace loneliness by decreasing employees’ trust in their coworkers, increasing psychological stress, and triggering self-pity. The most fundamental reason for this is that coworker incivility reduces positive interactions between employees and coworkers and impairs the quality of relationships between coworkers, which increases workplace loneliness [37]. Wright and Silard [42] also emphasized that employees feel workplace loneliness when they experience coworker incivility in the workplace. Based on the above summary, we propose the following hypothesis.

Hypothesis 1. 

Coworker incivility has a positive influence on workplace loneliness.

2.2. Workplace Loneliness and Work Withdrawal Behavior

Workplace loneliness refers to employees’ subjective emotional evaluations and feelings about whether their coworkers and work environment are meeting their needs [18]. In other words, workplace loneliness is a negative emotion caused by the gradual decrease in the frequency of social communication [43].

Negative emotions produced by workplace loneliness could exacerbate employees’ stress, consuming more time and energy than required [44]. Employees with a strong sense of workplace loneliness tend to be less confident at work [38]. Perlman and Joshi [45] identify that lonely employees exert a significant amount of energy in adapting to the organization, which adversely impacts their workplace performance.

When employees feel that their sense of belonging is not valued by the organization, their effort and dedication diminish, and they practice more work withdrawal behaviors [38]. On the one hand, lonely employees have little interaction with colleagues or even deliberately avoid coworkers, which causes an identity deficit (a diminished sense of identity with the organization) and produces work withdrawal behaviors [46]. On the other hand, workplace loneliness not only causes employees to disengage from the organizational relationship network and feel alienated from coworkers, but it also makes them emotionally apathetic and numb [47]. When employees perceive that they do not belong to the organization, they feel negative toward their work and lose interest in it. Moreover, workplace loneliness leads to anxiety, tension, and dissatisfaction among employees, diminishing their enthusiasm and motivation for their work [48]. Employees are highly susceptible to work withdrawal behavior in the contexts of emotional aloofness and multiple pressures at work. Workplace loneliness implies that employees are defensive and distrustful of their coworkers and, therefore, adopt avoidant work withdrawal behaviors to cope with potential harm [49]. Simply put, workplace loneliness makes employees feel indifferent toward the organization and coworkers. Although employees may remain in the organization, they will exhibit negative work withdrawal behaviors, which may manifest in an indifferent work attitude. Therefore, this study predicts that workplace loneliness affects employees’ work mindset and prompts them to engage in work withdrawal behaviors. Based on the above summary, we propose the following hypothesis.

Hypothesis 2. 

Workplace loneliness has a positive influence on work withdrawal behavior.

2.3. Coworker Incivility and Work Withdrawal Behavior

Work withdrawal behavior is a negative behavior that employees practice to avoid and resist the work environment [50]. Yang, Ye, and Chen [51] consider employees’ work withdrawal behavior to be attitudes or behaviors intentionally implemented by employees who intend to avoid the organization.

Employees who engage in work withdrawal behavior tend to lack loyalty to the organization and treat their work negatively [52]. Such behavior not only affects their personal performance but also causes financial loss to the organization and hinders organizational development [53].

Coworker incivility results in fraught relationships among employees. To avoid further deterioration of the relationship or experience of coworker incivility, employees tend to engage in work withdrawal behaviors [14]. Experience of hurtful remarks, uncivil behavior, and negative interactions in the workplace cause stress to employees, stimulating work withdrawal behavior [52]. Coworker incivility is perceived by employees as a significant workplace stressor that drains their energy. Therefore, employees experiencing incivility could develop work withdrawal behaviors, which may involve disengagement or withdrawal from their jobs to protect themselves and restore their enthusiasm [54]. Additionally, coworker incivility could impede one’s career advancement and adversely impact one’s psychological well-being [55]. Coworker incivility generates negative psychological feelings and diminishes workplace enthusiasm. To cope with such dissatisfaction, employees are prompted to intentionally implement negative behaviors [56]. Specifically, the perception of unfair treatment prompts employees to adopt work withdrawal behaviors, such as reticence and reduced involvement, to balance their internal emotions [53]. Therefore, this study predicts that coworker incivility makes employees feel ostracized and ignored, resulting in immense psychological pressure. This deteriorates their mental health, induces fear of their work, and makes them avoid their depressing work environment. Consequently, employees adopt work withdrawal behavior. In accordance with the above, we make the following assumption.

Hypothesis 3. 

Coworker incivility has a positive influence on work withdrawal behavior.

2.4. Mediating Effect of Workplace Loneliness

Uslu [41] believes workplace loneliness manifests as an emotional state that occurs when the quality of interaction and communication in the organizational environment is below expectations. Evidently, a major cause of workplace loneliness is the lack of satisfying and high-quality workplace relationships [57], while coworker incivility tends to make a person feel excluded or unwelcome. This sense of social rejection can make people feel that they are not accepted or recognized by their coworkers; thus, employees are more likely to feel workplace loneliness rather than outright anger or fear when experiencing coworker incivility. Secondly, in a work environment, people usually expect to be treated with respect and friendliness [58]. When coworkers exhibit incivility behavior, this expectation is shattered, and emotional loss and workplace loneliness are therefore more likely to occur. Previous research has shown a significant relationship between coworker incivility and loneliness because coworker incivility leads to social exclusion at work, which ultimately leads to employees feeling lonely at work [37]. However, this relationship is particularly important in the context of Chinese SMEs, where tight-knit work environments can exacerbate feelings of exclusion, leading to increased loneliness. Both coworker incivility and workplace loneliness can have a significant negative impact on organizational sustainability. Employees who experience incivility are more likely to engage in work withdrawal behaviors including lateness, absenteeism, and leaving early [14]. Moreover, employees who feel lonely are more likely to develop intent to leave due to a lack of belonging [59], thereby threatening organizational stability and sustainability.

When employees experience discrimination or incivility in an organization, they develop perceptions of disadvantage as well as negative feelings of dissatisfaction and loneliness. This could impact their mindset and induce work withdrawal behaviors such as avoiding going to work and intentionally arriving late to avoid the organization [60]. Moreover, the experience of coworker incivility makes employees feel offended. Consequently, they may experience workplace loneliness and reduce their involvement at work, believing this is a justified behavioral response [40]. Therefore, negative events in the interpersonal environment, such as discrimination and harassment, can make employees feel marginalized in interpersonal interactions, leading to feelings of exclusion, alienation, and a sense of loneliness. Lonely employees are highly sensitive to signals of social threat, and to avoid deeper psychological harm in social interactions, they adopt defensive work withdrawal behaviors as a coping strategy [49]. Moreover, employees subjected to coworker incivility have no place to vent their psychological stress, which can produce negative emotions. Thus, such employees tend to reduce their input of other resources to compensate for the loss of their own resources, which may mean taking more breaks, decreasing their work involvement, tardiness, absenteeism, and other work withdrawal behaviors [61].

The AET suggests that employees’ experiences of work events induce affective reactions, which further influence their attitudes and behaviors [25]. Therefore, this study predicts that when employees experience coworker incivility, they feel isolated, which makes it difficult to establish healthy connections with colleagues. This, in turn, produces workplace loneliness. To prevent this emotional pain and escape the depressing work environment, such employees adopt the work withdrawal behavior of distancing themselves from the organization. In accordance with the preceding summary, we propose the following hypothesis.

Hypothesis 4. 

Workplace loneliness mediates the relationship between coworker incivility and work withdrawal behavior.

2.5. Moderated Mediation Effects of Resilience

Resilience refers to the ability of an individual to positively adapt during or after experiencing adverse events [62]. Resilience impacts employees’ perceptions of and responses to coworker incivility. Employees with different levels of resilience respond differently to coworker incivility. Resilience enhances employees’ confidence, making them realize they can manage and control frustrations at work. Therefore, employees with high levels of resilience can better cope with the negative behaviors of their coworkers [26]. However, coworker incivility makes employees with low levels of resilience feel rejected or ignored. This causes the depletion of resources such as cognition, generating psychological pressure and triggering negative emotions such as depression and loneliness [63]. Employees with low resilience have more severe negative reactions to coworker incivility than those with high resilience and are more likely to experience workplace loneliness. Specifically, employees with high resilience are good at building strong social networks in their organization, which can provide emotional support to employees, meet their social relationship needs, and reduce their perceived loneliness within the organization [64]. Overall, the level of employees’ resilience determines whether they can positively self-regulate in the context of coworker incivility. Quickly adapting to coworker incivility and a lonely work environment can be especially challenging for employees with low levels of resilience. Therefore, resilience can help employees reduce workplace loneliness when experiencing coworker incivility.

Additionally, employees with high levels of resilience can positively adapt to the organization’s work environment by practicing favorable work behaviors [26]. This not only helps to alleviate negative emotions but also inhibits negative behaviors [65]. When employees encounter negative situations, those with high levels of resilience are able to positively regulate their psychological state, resulting in fewer negative behaviors toward themselves or the organization compared to employees with low levels of resilience [22]. Conversely, employees with low levels of resilience are unable to effectively cope with coworker incivility. They struggle to withstand the pressure and experience difficulty in recovering from the negative event, choosing to adopt work withdrawal behaviors [65]. This implies that employees with higher levels of resilience are able to self-regulate their negative emotions to effectively avoid work withdrawal behavior even when they are in a negative environment [66]. Moreover, a high level of resilience enables employees to possess strong adaptability, helping them face negative events with composure, reduce negative emotions, approach work with positivity, and exhibit minimal tendencies towards work withdrawal behavior [67]. Employees with a high level of resilience are more likely to stay in their positions and complete tasks assigned by the company, even when they experience negative events at work [68]. Simply put, employees with higher resilience maintain a positive and optimistic attitude despite coworker incivility and actively adapt to negative events to regulate negative emotions. Employees with low levels of resilience exhibit more work withdrawal behaviors than those with high levels of resilience. Thus, resilience reverse moderates the relationship between coworker incivility and work withdrawal behavior.

Employees who develop workplace loneliness become emotionally withdrawn from their work. They develop apathy toward their professional duties and colleagues, feel that their work is meaningless, reduce their work commitment, and avoid work [69]. Highly resilient employees possess substantial positive psychological resources to adjust their negative emotions in time and can regulate their perceptions of loneliness. However, their counterparts with low levels of resilience do not have this ability, and their experience of conflict in the context of negative events in the organization is much more powerful. This makes it difficult for them to regulate their negative emotions and ameliorate the negative impact of workplace loneliness [64]. Simply put, highly resilient employees manage workplace loneliness by psychologically regulating their attention to reduce the negative perception of the event; this might occur, for example, through remembering something pleasant outside of work. Such mechanisms help to swiftly regulate negative emotions to a relatively safe level. Thus, the mediating effect of workplace loneliness is also moderated by resilience. Overall, resilience enables employees to better cope with challenges and regulate their emotions when facing workplace stress, conflict, or unfavorable environments, thereby reducing the negative impacts of workplace loneliness. At the same time, resilience strengthens employees’ adaptability, making them more inclined to actively engage in their work, thus decreasing tendencies toward withdrawal behavior and improving both job performance and organizational sustainability. Based on the above summary, we propose the following hypotheses.

Hypothesis 5. 

Resilience negatively moderates the relationship between coworker incivility and workplace loneliness.

Hypothesis 6. 

Resilience negatively moderates the relationship between coworker incivility and work withdrawal behavior.

Hypothesis 7. 

The mediating influence of workplace loneliness in the relationship between coworker incivility and work withdrawal behavior is moderated by resilience.

3. Methods

3.1. Collection Procedure

In this study, data were collected by means of an online questionnaire; this data collection process began on May 2023 and lasted four days. The questionnaire consisted of five sections targeting coworker incivility, employees’ workplace loneliness, resilience, work withdrawal behavior, and demographic questions. Participants were recruited through a social media platform (WeChat) upon which invitations were sent to employees of small and medium-sized enterprises to voluntarily participate in the survey. The data collection procedure was divided into three steps: first, questionnaire invitations were sent; second, participants filled out the questionnaire online; and finally, the collected questionnaire data were imported into the analysis system.

3.2. Sample Characteristics

Chinese small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) face challenging business conditions due to their lack of resources and the volatility of the external business environment [70]. Consequently, managers have higher expectations of employees’ work capabilities and efficiency, resulting in increased work pressure and more tense and sensitive interpersonal relationships [14]. In this context, employees are more likely to perceive coworker incivility in their colleagues. This study surveyed members of Chinese SMEs. The participants were informed that their responses would remain confidential. The participants of this study were 294 employees from different industries, and 294 questionnaires were collected for experimental analysis.

The demographic details of the participants are as follows: 152 men (51.7%) and 142 women (48.3%). In terms of age, 4 participants (1.4%) were below 20 years of age; 121 (41.2%) were 20–30 years old; 60 (20.4%) were 31–40 years old; 72 (24.5%) were 41–50 years old; 30 (10.2%) were 51–60 years old; and 7 (2.3%) were 60 years old or above.

In terms of educational background, 125 participants (42.5%) had completed junior college or below; 127 (43.2%) held a bachelor’s degree; 34 (11.6%) held a master’s degree; and 8 (2.7%) had obtained a doctoral degree.

Regarding length of employment, 40 participants (13.6%) had been employed for less than 1 year; 39 (13.3%) for 1–3 years; 44 (15.0%) for 3–5 years; 22 (7.5%) for 5–7 years; and 149 (50.6%) had been employed for more than 7 years.

In terms of employment type, 220 participants (74.8%) were formal employees, and 74 (25.2%) were non-formal employees.

Regarding company type, 47 participants (16%) worked in the construction industry; 58 (19.7%) in the service industry; 11 (3.7%) in the sales industry; 37 (12.6%) in the education industry; 14 (4.8%) in the medical field; 10 (3.4%) in the information technology industry; and 117 (39.8%) in other industries.

Table 1. Data attributes.

		Number of Respondents	Percentage of Respondents
Total respondents		294	100%
Gender	male	152	51.7%
	female	142	48.3%
Age	19–20	4	1.4%
	20–30	121	41.2%
	31–40	60	20.4%
	41–50	72	24.5%
	51–60	30	10.2%
	60 or more	7	2.3%
Education	junior college or below	125	42.5%
	bachelor’s degree	127	43.2%
	master’s degree	34	11.6%
	doctoral degree	8	2.7%
Service Year	less than one year	40	13.6%
	1–3 years	39	13.3%
	3–5 years	44	15%
	5–7 years	22	7.5%
	7 years or more	149	50.6%
Employment Type	formal employees	220	74.8%
	non-formal employees	74	25.2%
Company Type	construction industry	47	16%
	service industry	58	19.7%
	sales industry	11	3.7%
	education industry	37	12.6%
	medical field	14	4.8%
	information technology industry	10	3.4%
	other industries	117	39.8%

presents the results.

3.3. Analysis Procedure

The data analysis for this study was conducted using SPSS 26.0. First, reliability and correlation tests were performed on the questionnaire data. Then, multiple regression analysis and Model 4 of Macro Process 3.4 were used to examine the relationships among incivility, psychological resilience, workplace loneliness, and work withdrawal behaviors. Additionally, Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was conducted using AMOS24.

3.4. Measurement

Coworker incivility refers to negative or passive interpersonal interactions with coworkers in the workplace, such as feelings of being subjected to rude remarks from coworkers and being ignored by coworkers [71]. To measure coworker incivility, this study used a tool from Cortina, Magley, Williams, and Langhout [32], which comprises a total of seven items. Sample items include “My colleagues tend to display a sense of superiority towards me” and “My colleagues tend to belittle me”. The Cronbach’s alpha score for coworker incivility was 0.943.

Workplace loneliness is due to the adverse psychological feelings that arise when employees are unable to fulfill their desired relationships in the workplace [72]. To measure employees’ workplace loneliness in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in China, this study used the measurement scale from the work of Hays and DiMatteo [73], which consists a total of eight items. However, two items had to be deleted because their factor weights were below 0.50. Sample items include “I lack companionship in the company” and “There is no one I can turn to for help in the company”. The Cronbach’s alpha score for workplace loneliness was 0.936.

Work withdrawal behavior is the intentional avoidance or disengagement of an employee from work and the workplace [74]. To measure the work withdrawal behavior of employees in SMEs in China, this research utilized the tool from the work of Lehman and Simpson [74], which consists a total of 12 items. Sample items include “I have thoughts of not wanting to go to work” and “I engage in non-work-related conversations with my colleagues”. The Cronbach’s alpha score for work withdrawal behavior was 0.961.

Resilience is the ability to recover quickly from negative emotions and adapt to changing circumstances [75]. To measure the resilience of employees in SMEs in China, this study applied the tool from the work of Luthans, Youssef, and Avolio [76], which includes a total of six items. However, one item had to be deleted because its factor weight was below 0.50. Sample items include “I typically handle work-related stress with composure” and “Due to the numerous challenges I’ve faced in the past, I can now withstand difficult periods at work”. The Cronbach’s alpha score for resilience was 0.966.

All items were assessed on a seven-point Likert scale, with responses ranging from “1 (strongly disagree)” to “7 (strongly agree)” (see

Table 2. Measurement scale.

Variables	Item
Coworker Incivility	1. Put you down or was condescending to you.
	2. Paid little attention to your statement or showed little interest in your opinion.
	3. Made demeaning or derogatory remarks about you.
	4. Addressed you in unprofessional terms, either publicly or privately.
	5. Ignored or excluded you from professional camaraderie.
	6. Doubted your judgment on a matter over which you have responsibility.
	7. Made unwanted attempts to draw you into a discussion of personal matters.
Workplace Loneliness	1. I lack companionship.
	2. There is no one I can turn to.
	3. I am an outgoing person.
	4. I feel left out.
	5. I feel isolated from others.
	6. I can find companionship when I want it.
	7. I am unhappy being so withdrawn.
	8. People are around me but not with me.
Work Withdrawal Behavior	1. Thoughts of being absent.
	2. Chat with coworkers about nonwork topics.
	3. Left work station for unnecessary reasons.
	4. Daydreaming.
	5. Spent work time on personal matters.
	6. Put less effort into job than should have.
	7. Thoughts of leaving current job.
	8. Let others do your work.
	9. Left work early without permission.
	10. Taken longer lunch or rest break than allowed.
	11. Taken supplies or equipment without permission.
	12. Fallen asleep at work.
Resilience	1. When I have a setback at work, I have trouble recovering from it, moving on.
	2. I usually manage difficulties one way or another at work.
	3. I can be “on my own”, so to speak, at work if I have to.
	4. I usually take stressful things at work in stride.
	5. I can get through difficult times at work because I’ve experienced difficulty before.
	6. I feel I can handle many things at a time at this job.

for details). A higher score indicates a stronger intent. The research model is illustrated in Figure 1.

4. Results

4.1. Confirmatory Factor Analysis

The confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of Model 1 (four-factor model) demonstrated that the scale had a good fit and sufficient construct validity. We then assessed convergent validity, and the results are outlined below.

The standardized regression weights of coworker incivility spanned from 0.690 to 0.855, workplace loneliness from 0.599 to 0.874, work withdrawal behavior from 0.507 to 0.867, and resilience from 0.787 to 0.941. Additionally, the average variance extracted (AVE) for coworker incivility was recorded as 0.626; workplace loneliness was recorded as 0.625; work withdrawal behavior was recorded as 0.586; and resilience was recorded as 0.747, with all values exceeding 0.5. The value of the composite reliability (CR) of coworker incivility was recorded as 0.852; workplace loneliness was recorded as 0.837; work withdrawal behavior was recorded as 0.869; and resilience was recorded as 0.878, with all values surpassing 0.7. A measurement is deemed to possess significant validity if the average variance extracted (AVE) of the variables exceeds 0.5 and the composite reliability (CR) surpasses 0.7 [77].

Additionally, we assessed three types of model fit indices: the absolute fit index, incremental fit index, and parsimonious adjusted index. First, the absolute fit index was recorded as χ²(p) = 1318.310 (0.000); χ²/df = 3.304; and RMSEA = 0.089. The RMSEA is indeed a “badness of fit” index, with values close to 0 indicating almost perfect fit and greater values indicating worse fit. For the RMSEA, values less than 0.05 reflect a minor approximation error, values between 0.05 and 0.08 reflect an acceptable error of approximation, and those greater than 0.10 constitute poor model fit [78]. Second, the incremental fit index was IFI = 0.906 and CFI = 0.906. Third, the parsimonious adjusted index was PNFI = 0.799 and PGFI = 0.645. GFI = 0.751 and SRMR = 0.1180.

Table 3. The outcome of confirmatory factor analysis.

Variables		Effect	S.E.	C.R.	p	Standardized Regression Weights	AVE	C.R	Cronbach’s Alpha
Coworker Incivility	A1	1				0.69	0.626	0.852	0.943
	A2	1.152	0.06	19.152	***	0.827
	A3	1.124	0.058	19.51	***	0.835
	A4	1.143	0.066	17.269	***	0.782
	A5	1.092	0.058	18.974	***	0.823
	A6	1.124	0.055	20.493	***	0.855
	A7	1.098	0.074	14.879	***	0.715
Workplace Loneliness	B1	1				0.78	0.625	0.837	0.936
	B2	1.118	0.059	18.838	***	0.813
	B4	1.131	0.052	21.919	***	0.874
	B5	1.121	0.053	21.043	***	0.858
	B7	0.897	0.078	11.552	***	0.599
	B8	1.122	0.063	17.873	***	0.791
Work Withdrawal Behavior	C1	1				0.587	0.586	0.869	0.961
	C2	0.852	0.081	10.525	***	0.507
	C3	1.298	0.074	17.583	***	0.802
	C4	1.344	0.075	17.87	***	0.81
	C5	1.306	0.067	19.546	***	0.851
	C6	1.27	0.063	20.246	***	0.867
	C7	1.323	0.078	16.926	***	0.784
	C8	1.16	0.07	16.605	***	0.775
	C9	1.215	0.068	17.867	***	0.81
	C10	1.237	0.072	17.093	***	0.789
	C11	0.939	0.066	14.127	***	0.699
	C12	1.254	0.068	18.43	***	0.824
Resilience	D2	1				0.787	0.747	0.878	0.966
	D3	1.326	0.051	26.02	***	0.941
	D4	1.279	0.059	21.517	***	0.868
	D5	1.318	0.054	24.393	***	0.917
	D6	1.228	0.067	18.206	***	0.799
Model Fit Index		χ2 (p) = 1318.31(0.000), χ2/df = 3.304, RMSEA = 0.089, IFI = 0.906, CFI = 0.906, PGFI = 0.645, PNFI = 0.799, GFI = 0.751, SRMR = 0.1180

***: p < 0.001.

presents the results.

4.2. Descriptive Statistics and Correlation Examination

The descriptive statistical analyses encompassed means and standard deviations. The average values of coworker incivility, workplace loneliness, resilience, and work withdrawal behavior were 2.976, 2.956, 4.712, and 3.088, respectively. The standard deviations of coworker incivility, workplace loneliness, resilience, and work withdrawal behavior were 1.373, 1.379, 1.701, and 1.485, in that order. The findings from the correlation analysis showed that coworker incivility was linked to workplace loneliness (r = 0.830, p < 0.001), while resilience (r = 0.265, p < 0.001) and work withdrawal behavior (r = 0.736, p < 0.001) both demonstrated a positive correlation. Furthermore, workplace loneliness exhibited a positive associated with resilience (r = 0.256, p < 0.001) as well as work withdrawal behavior (r = 0.720, p < 0.001). A positive correlation was found between resilience and work withdrawal behavior (r = 0.264, p < 0.001).

Table 4. The findings from the descriptive statistics and correlation analysis.

	Mean	SD	Coworker Incivility	Workplace Loneliness	Resilience	Work Withdrawal Behavior
Coworker Incivility	2.976	1.373	-
Workplace Loneliness	2.956	1.379	0.830 ***	-
Resilience	4.712	1.701	0.265 ***	0.256 ***	-
Work Withdrawal Behavior	3.088	1.485	0.736 ***	0.720 ***	0.264 ***	-

***: p < 0.001.

displays the findings of the descriptive statistics and correlation assessment.

To assess potential issues with multicollinearity, a linear regression analysis was conducted using SPSS software. The variance inflation factor (VIF) of coworker incivility was 3.238, workplace loneliness was 3.221, and resilience was 1.081. Furthermore, when workplace loneliness was adopted as a mediating variable, the VIF value was determined to be 3.207. These values are below 5, which indicates that a serious multicollinearity problem does not exist.

4.3. Hypotheses Tests

Model 4 of Macro Process 3.4, created by Hayes [79], was utilized to examine the mediating effect of workplace loneliness. The findings indicated that coworker incivility positively influences perceptions of workplace loneliness (Estimate = 0.833, p < 0.001) and work withdrawal behavior (Estimate = 0.481, p < 0.001). Furthermore, perceptions of workplace loneliness significantly affect work withdrawal behavior (Estimate = 0.377, p < 0.001). As a result, Hypotheses 1, 2, and 3 were supported.

Hypothesis 4 posited that workplace loneliness acted as a mediator in the relationship between coworker incivility and work withdrawal behavior. The indirect effect was measured at 0.314. The bootstrapped confidence intervals were Boot LLCI = 0.145 and Boot ULCI = 0.496, as 0 was not included between Boot LLCI and Boot ULCI. These findings demonstrate that the mediation effect of workplace loneliness is significant. Therefore, Hypothesis 4 is affirmed.

Table 5. The findings of Process Model 4.

Path			Estimate	S.E.	t	p	LLCI	ULCI
Coworker Incivility	→	Workplace Loneliness	0.833	0.032	25.385	<0.001	0.7684	0.8976
Coworker Incivility	→	Work Withdrawal Behavior	0.481	0.073	6.531	<0.001	0.3361	0.6260
Workplace Loneliness	→	Work Withdrawal Behavior	0.377	0.073	5.150	<0.001	0.2334	0.5222
Indirect effect(s) of X on Y
Indirect Effect			Effect	Boot SE	Boot LLCI		Boot ULCI
Coworker Incivility → Workplace Loneliness → Work Withdrawal Behavior			0.314	0.091	0.145		0.496

presents the outcomes of the hypothesis tests.

4.4. Descriptive Moderating Effect of Resilience

Fourth, this research examined the moderating effect of resilience on the relationship between coworker incivility and workplace loneliness and on the relationship between coworker incivility and work withdrawal behavior. A multiple regression analysis was carried out using SPSS 23.0 to validate the hypothesis.

Table 6. The outcome of moderation analysis.

Dependent Variable: Workplace Loneliness
	Model 1			Model 2			Model 3
	β	t	VIF	β	t	VIF	β	t	VIF
Coworker Incivility	0.830 ***	25.385	1.000	0.819 ***	24.183	1.076	0.836 ***	24.247	1.131
Resilience				0.039	1.149	1.076	−0.011	−0.263	1.534
A*B							−0.087 *	−2.254	1.429
R2(Adj-R2)	0.688(0.687)			0.690(0.687) *			0.695(0.692) *
ΔR2(Adj-R2)				0.002(0)			0.005(0.005)
F	644.402 ***			323.216 ***			220.195 ***

***: p < 0.001, *: p < 0.05.

and

Table 7. The outcomes of moderation analysis.

Dependent Variable: Work Withdrawal Behavior
	Model 1			Model 2			Model 3
	β	t	VIF	β	t	VIF	β	t	VIF
Coworker Incivility	0.736 ***	18.553	1.000	0.716 ***	17.476	1.076	0.737 ***	17.658	1.131
Resilience				0.074	1.801	1.076	0.014	0.293	1.534
A*B							−0.105 *	−2.241	1.429
R2(Adj-R2)	0.541(0.539)			0.546(0.543) *			0.554(0.549) *
ΔR2(Adj-R2)				0.005(0.004)			0.008(0.006)
F	344.231 ***			175.058 ***			119.993 ***

***: p < 0.001, *: p < 0.05.

present the results of the analysis for Hypotheses 5 and 6. The findings indicated that resilience negatively moderated the impact of coworker incivility on workplace loneliness (β = −0.087, p < 0.05). Additionally, resilience negatively moderated the effect of coworker incivility on work withdrawal behavior (β = −0.105, p < 0.05). Please refer to Figure 2 and Figure 3 for the moderation effect. Therefore, Hypotheses 5 and 6 were supported. These results confirm that the interaction between coworker incivility and resilience results in lower levels of workplace loneliness and work withdrawal behavior.

4.5. Moderated Mediation Effect of Resilience

Finally, this study tested whether resilience moderated the mediating influence of workplace loneliness on the relationship between coworker incivility and work withdrawal behavior. The moderated mediation model was employed using Model 8 of Macro Process 3.4, developed by Hayes [77], and was tested with a 95% confidence interval and 5000 bootstrapping resamples. When the significance of the mediating influence was confirmed, the conditional indirect impact was assessed to determine if the mediation effect depended on the moderating variable. The conditional indirect influence of resilience on work withdrawal behavior was assessed by examining the index of the moderated relationship across three distinct levels of the moderator: −1 SD, mean (M), and +1 SD. Regarding the −1 SD level, the conditional indirect impact was 0.3238, Boot SE = 0.0975, Boot LLCI = 0.1248, and Boot ULCI = 0.5107. Regarding the level of M, the conditional indirect impact was 0.2974, Boot SE = 0.0956, Boot LLCI = 0.1104, and Boot ULCI = 0.4865. In terms of the +1 SD level, the conditional indirect influence was 0.2709, Boot SE = 0.0973, Boot LLCI = 0.0940, and Boot ULCI = 0.4734. As 0 was not included between Boot LLCI and Boot ULCI at the level of −1 SD (standard deviation), mean level (M), and mean +1 SD (standard deviation) confidence intervals, statistical significance was confirmed. Furthermore, the index of moderated mediation was −0.0155, Boot SE = 0.0111, Boot LLCI = −0.0377, and Boot ULCI = 0.0062. As 0 was included between Boot LLCI and Boot ULCI, the bootstrapped confidence interval was confirmed to be non-significant. Therefore, Hypothesis 7 was not supported.

Table 8. The moderated mediation effect of resilience.

Dependent Variable: Work Withdrawal Behavior
Moderator	Level	Conditional Indirect Effect	Boot SE	Boot LLCI	Boot ULCI
Resilience	−1 SD (−1.7011)	0.3238	0.0975	0.1248	0.5107
	M	0.2974	0.0956	0.1104	0.4865
	+1 SD (1.7011)	0.2709	0.0973	0.0940	0.4734
Index of moderated mediation
	Index		Boot SE	Boot LLCI	Boot ULCI
	−0.0155		0.0111	−0.0377	0.0062

shows the moderated mediation impact of resilience.

The figures obtained through empirical analysis in this study are presented in Figure 4 below.

5. Discussion

This study aimed to explore the triggering mechanisms of work withdrawal behavior among employees in Chinese SMEs. Since Affective Event Theory (AET) is effective in illustrating the subsequent reactions that occur when an employee encounters incivility from a coworker, this study used AET as a theoretical framework to illustrate the logical chain of ‘work event–employee emotion–work attitude and behavioral response,’ confirming the impact of coworker incivility and the mediating role of workplace loneliness in the relationship between coworker incivility and withdrawal behavior. This represents a valuable contribution to the study of work withdrawal behavior. Most previous studies have confirmed that the main variables that trigger withdrawal are related to the organization or leadership. However, this study emphasizes that coworker incivility triggers employee work withdrawal behavior. Therefore, this study contributes to filling a research gap. In fact, it is positive or negative workplace events that influence employees’ emotional and behavioral responses. Coworker incivility could intensify conflicts among colleagues, reinforcing employees’ negative emotions [80]. Negative events will influence employees to develop negative affective states, which in turn lead to negative attitudes and behavioral responses [81]. Lonely employees are unable to establish good collaborative and trusting relationships with their colleagues [82]. As a result, workplace loneliness leads employees to reduce their active participation in the workplace, decrease their interaction with the team, and gradually lose enthusiasm for their work, thereafter displaying work withdrawal behaviors such as avoidance, reduced work engagement, or negative work. Additionally, this study demonstrates an important conclusion, based on the AET: workplace events that lead to changes in employees’ moods are not to be ignored, and they can be very disruptive, resulting in a significant negative impact on the organization.

Second, this study verified the regulatory role of resilience in conjunction with Emotion Regulation Theory (ERT). Emotion Regulation Theory refers to how individuals control their emotional responses when facing different situations in order to achieve a better psychological state [83]. Emotion regulation can be achieved through a variety of strategies, including cognitive and behavioral strategies. Among them, situation modification and cognitive reappraisal are useful in illustrating the inhibitory effect of employees’ resilience on workplace loneliness and work withdrawal behavior. Simply put, resilience can help employees persevere and adapt in the face of difficulties and setbacks [84]. Employees with high resilience are more willing to make proactive changes in situations and reduce the negative emotions associated with conflict by solving problems or negotiating with others. Moreover, resilience—as a positive personality trait—helps to inhibit the development of negative emotions in employees and mitigates the negative effects of incivility [65]. It may lead to more positive perceptions of negative episodes (e.g., coworker incivility) and the perception of coworker incivility as an opportunity for growth rather than a disaster. The results of this study also suggest that resilience not only alleviates employees’ workplace loneliness but also reduces work withdrawal behavior. Based on affective event theory and emotion regulation theory, this study illustrates the emotional changes and behavioral responses that arise after employees’ experience coworker incivility and, through emotion regulation theory, emphasizes the inhibitory effect of resilience on negative factors. Specifically, resilience not only manifests itself at the individual level (e.g., through helping employees manage work stress, maintain a positive mindset, etc.), but it can also spread throughout the team. When organizations encourage employees to develop resilience, the entire team is better able to support each other and work together to overcome challenges, creating a positive and supportive work atmosphere that contributes to long-term organizational stability and sustainability. This study not only contributes to the understanding of the behavioral pathways through which employees engage in work avoidance behaviors, but also helps to demonstrate the importance of resilience and to expand the scope of resilience research. Therefore, the theoretical and practical implications are presented as follows.

5.1. Theoretical Implications

First, the effects of coworker incivility on workplace loneliness and work withdrawal behavior were investigated. The results of the study showed that coworker incivility has a positive effect on workplace loneliness and work withdrawal behavior. Coworker incivility not only induces a significant amount of work stress but also increasingly drains employees’ energy [85]. Consequently, employees feel lonely and isolated and struggle to integrate into teams and establish intimate working relationships. Additionally, owing to the stress created by coworker incivility, employees tend to avoid work and the workplace environment, which is a work withdrawal behavior [14]. Thus, coworker incivility has a positive effect on work withdrawal behavior.

Second, we clarified the relationship between workplace loneliness and work withdrawal behavior and verified the effect of workplace loneliness on work withdrawal behavior. A significant positive impact of workplace loneliness on work withdrawal behavior was revealed by this study; workers may experience a lower quality of inter-organizational communication, which hampers their work performance. Moreover, they are more likely to underperform in the pursuit of organizational goals [86]. Thus, employees’ workplace loneliness adversely impacts their quality of work, may cause them to lose their sense of identity as members of the organization, and may diminish their sense of belonging to the organization. Consequently, employees may actively reduce their attention and effort at work, becoming more likely to practice work withdrawal behaviors.

Third, this study verified the mediating role of workplace loneliness in the relationship between coworker incivility and work withdrawal behavior. The findings suggest that workplace loneliness significantly impacts coworker incivility and work withdrawal behavior. Additionally, coworker incivility positively influences work withdrawal behavior through workplace loneliness. Negative experiences in the organization tend to further trigger negative emotions in employees [87]. Additionally, negative emotions motivate employees to engage in negative behaviors [88]. Overall, coworker incivility can make employees feel excluded and negatively treated. They may feel relegated to the organization’s margins, which may induce workplace loneliness. This may, in turn, reduce their attention toward work, precipitating the adoption of work withdrawal behaviors.

Fourth, the moderating effect of resilience on the relationship between coworker incivility and workplace loneliness and the moderating effect of resilience on the relationship between coworker incivility and work withdrawal behavior were verified. The results of the study indicated that resilience had a significant negative effect in moderating the relationship between coworker incivility and workplace loneliness as well as in moderating the relationship between coworker incivility and work withdrawal behavior. Employees with low levels of resilience tend to experience difficulty in effectively dealing with emotional stress. They are unable to enhance their psychological resources at work, and therefore, their workplace performance tends to be unsatisfactory [89]. This implies that when confronted with coworker incivility, employees with low levels of resilience may suppress their emotions and feel ostracized. In this situation, employees are more prone to experiencing workplace loneliness and engaging in work withdrawal behaviors. Conversely, highly resilient employees effectively mitigate negative emotions, regulate the impact of negative events on them, and swiftly recover with a positive attitude to fully engage in their work [90]. Overall, employees’ responses to coworker incivility vary depending on their level of resilience. Employees with lower levels of resilience are more likely to be negatively affected by coworker incivility, exhibit greater workplace loneliness, and are more likely to engage in work withdrawal behaviors.

Finally, to demonstrate whether psychological resilience moderated the mediating impact of workplace loneliness, this study validated the moderating mediating impact of resilience. The results indicated that the moderating mediating effect of resilience was not significant. Employees with high levels of resilience can regulate their emotions [91]. Therefore, this study concludes that employees with high levels of resilience—although they may feel frustrated and lonely when encountering coworker incivility—can positively regulate their emotions so as not to engage in work withdrawal behaviors. This implies that highly resilient employees are less likely to actively disengage from their jobs and organizations even if they feel lonely. Thus, resilience does not alter the mediating impact of workplace loneliness between coworker incivility and work withdrawal behavior. Although the mediator being moderated did not hold, this study concluded that a moderating effect of resilience existed.

5.2. Practical Implications

Based on our research findings, we suggest the following practical implications. Coworker incivility has become more prevalent and frequent in organizations owing to increased social competition and growing interpersonal sensitivity [14]. Moreover, more coworker incivility leads to a greater decline in the incivility receiving employee’s job performance [85]. Leaders should be aware that incivility could have a significantly negative impact on employees’ psychological state and behavior. Therefore, developing an explicit code of conduct for the workplace is a critical first step to ensure that employees have a firm understanding of acceptable workplace behavior. For example, there could be a policy of intolerance toward abusive, discriminatory, harassing, or otherwise uncivil behavior. Additionally, procedures for dealing with complaints of incivility should be explicitly stated to encourage employees to report issues and to ensure their timely resolution.

Second, workplace loneliness could alienate and isolate employees from their environment and induce frustration [92]. Leaders should not view loneliness as a personal problem for employees but as a critical issue that impacts organizational interests [18]. First, leaders must pay close attention to emotional changes in their employees. This could facilitate the timely identification and pre-emptive resolution of potential problems. For this, regular one-on-one meetings, team discussions, or emotional intelligence training could be utilized. Second, leaders could develop employee care programs and provide a variety of resources and support to help employees deal with challenges in their personal and professional lives. This could help them cope better with stress, mitigate their sense of workplace loneliness, and prevent the adoption of work withdrawal behaviors.

Third, business leaders should enhance communication with employees to acquire a deeper understanding of their daily work and life to reduce work stress [77]. It is crucial to address the emotional needs of employees to reduce the occurrence of workplace loneliness, which is among the most important factors affecting work withdrawal behavior [93]. Work withdrawal behavior leads to a steady depletion of resources required to accomplish professional tasks, which deteriorates job performance [94]. Therefore, leaders should implement proactive interventions when employees exhibit loneliness or work withdrawal behaviors. They should listen to their perspectives and difficulties and identify solutions to their problems. Conflict resolution techniques and emotional management support could also be provided to help employees better regulate negative sentiments.

Fourth, resilience may determine whether individuals can swiftly self-recover in response to negative events [95]. Negative events could have a greater impact on employees with reduced levels of resilience, which in turn could significantly hamper their work attitude and performance [96]. This is akin to the results of this study, which showed that employees with low resilience were more sensitive to coworker incivility than their counterparts with high resilience. Therefore, leaders should recognize the significance of employees’ resilience and help employees better cope with negative events by providing necessary resources and support. Rewards and incentives could also be offered to encourage positive work performance by recognizing employees’ achievements and contributions. These could help enhance employees’ self-confidence and resilience.

Finally, leaders should establish specific and measurable goals to achieve member and organizational performance to facilitate organizational sustainability. Through reducing work withdrawal behaviors and strengthening employee resilience, organizations create a healthier and more effective work environment that supports their sustainability goals. By fostering collaboration and mutual support between leaders and employees, the organization not only enhances its cohesion but also boosts its social and environmental impact, allowing the company to truly achieve its sustainability objectives in practice.

5.3. Limitations and Future Research

This research confirmed the association between coworker incivility and withdrawal behavior. However, it has several limitations, which are discussed below. Additionally, this study presents directions for future research.

First, this study focuses on the impact of coworker incivility on employees’ work withdrawal behavior. However, the role of leadership cannot be ignored. Examples include ethical leadership or exploitative leadership. Ethical leaders may mitigate the effects of coworker incivility on work withdrawal behavior. Conversely, exploitative leadership employees may reinforce the effects of coworker incivility on work withdrawal behavior. Therefore, future research should explore the role of leadership in situations involving coworker incivility and investigate its moderating effects to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the field.

Second, this study selected only resilience as a moderating variable for the relationships between coworker incivility and workplace loneliness and coworker incivility and work withdrawal behavior. Future studies should include additional moderating variables related to the leadership and organizational aspects—for example, supervisor trust, feelings of organizational support, and so on. We recommend that future research ought to clarify the function of these variables and validate their moderating impacts in this relationship.

Third, the respondents of this study were employees of Chinese SMEs. Future research could investigate whether similar results exist for employees of SMEs in other countries. Such comparative studies could enhance our understanding of the relationship between coworker incivility and work withdrawal behavior.

Fourth, this study was cross-sectional. To improve the accuracy and depth of the study, we have to adopt a longitudinal design, taking multiple measurements at multiple points in time. This would provide a more nuanced picture of changes and trends over time, facilitating more reliable conclusions. Additionally, it could reveal underlying causal relationships, thereby increasing the credibility of the study results.

Fifth, the sample size of 294 in this study was relatively small, so we will consider increasing the sample size in future studies. Additionally, this study predicts that formal and informal employees may differ in the intensity of their reactions when experiencing coworker incivility; therefore, the variable of employee status (formal and informal) may be included in future studies and attempt to explore the results of the differentiation.

Sixth, although the hypothesis regarding the moderating role of employees’ resilience in this study showed significance in the analysis results, the R-squared value only increased slightly. This suggests that the inhibiting effect of resilience may not be particularly strong. Therefore, future research will conduct a more detailed exploration to ensure the study’s validity and rigor.

Seventh, the inclusion of multiple industries in the sample complicates the alignment of each item with workers from diverse sectors. Consequently, future research will concentrate on a specific industry to investigate whether differentiated results can be observed.

Eighth, in order to measure workplace loneliness and resilience among employees of Chinese SMEs, this study used the measurement scales of Hays, and DiMatteo [73] and Luthans, Youssef, and Avolio [76]. In this study, three low-factor loadings were removed. Due to the differences between Chinese and Western cultures, future research will create workplace loneliness and resilience scales suitable for Chinese SME employees.

Finally, we applied the self-report survey method. This may have led to common method bias (CMB) because employees may be subjective in reporting their own behavior and that of their coworkers. Future research could apply the detached method, wherein coworkers report on employee behavior. This approach could help reduce the potential impact of the CMB on the results, thereby enhancing the accuracy and credibility of the study.

6. Conclusions

This study analyzed the relationship between coworker incivility, workplace loneliness, resilience and work withdrawal behavior. The study showed that coworker incivility increases employees’ workplace loneliness and further leads to work withdrawal behavior. In addition, resilience plays a moderating role in this process, not only mitigating the negative effects of coworker incivility on employees’ work withdrawal behavior but also helping to regulate one’s own emotions, thereby reducing workplace loneliness. These results not only provide a new perspective for a deeper understanding of work withdrawal behavior but also demonstrate the important role of resilience. Therefore, organizations should take steps to reduce work withdrawal behaviors and work on enhancing employees’ resilience in order to achieve the goal of sustainability.