DOCSLIB.ORG

Abusive Supervision and Workplace Deviance and the Moderating Effects of Negative Reciprocity Beliefs

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Abusive Supervision and Workplace Deviance and the Moderating Effects of Negative Reciprocity Beliefs Journal of Applied Psychology Copyright 2007 by the American Psychological Association 2007, Vol. 92, No. 4, 1159–1168 0021-9010/07/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/0021-9010.92.4.1159 Abusive Supervision and Workplace Deviance and the Moderating Effects of Negative Reciprocity Beliefs Marie S. Mitchell and Maureen L. Ambrose University of Central Florida In this study, the authors examine the relationship between abusive supervision and employee workplace deviance. The authors conceptualize abusive supervision as a type of aggression. They use work on retaliation and direct and displaced aggression as a foundation for examining employees’ reactions to abusive supervision. The authors predict abusive supervision will be related to supervisor-directed deviance, organizational deviance, and interpersonal deviance. Additionally, the authors examine the moderating effects of negative reciprocity beliefs. They hypothesized that the relationship between abusive supervision and supervisor-directed deviance would be stronger when individuals hold higher negative reciprocity beliefs. The results support this hypotheses. The implications of the results for understanding destructive behaviors in the workplace are examined. Keywords: abusive supervision, workplace deviance, reciprocity In the last decade, there has been increased interest in harmful standing employee reactions. From a justice perspective, employ- or destructive behaviors in organizations. Much of this research ees react to the perceived unfairness of the abusive supervisor’s focuses on deviant behaviors of employees. (See Bennett & Rob- behavior. When employees feel they are treated unfairly, positive inson, 2003, for a review.) However, recently, research has exam- attitudes and behavior suffer (Tepper, 2000; Tepper et al., 1998). ined destructive behaviors managers commit—specifically, abu- Researchers also have used reactance theory as a foundation for sive supervision (e.g. Tepper, 2000; Tepper, Duffy, Hoobler, & understanding employee reactions to abusive supervision (Zellars Ensley, 2004; Tepper, Duffy, & Shaw, 2001). In this article, we et al., 2002). Reactance theory suggests that individuals strive to consider the relationship between these two types of destructive maintain personal control (Brehm & Brehm, 1981; Wright & behavior. Brehm, 1982). Researchers suggest that employees dealing with an Recent research by Tepper and his colleagues (Tepper, 2000; abusive supervisor usually feel little or no control. As a result, Tepper et al., 2001, 2004; Zellars, Tepper, & Duffy, 2002) has individuals engage in behavior to restore personal autonomy (e.g., focused attention on abusive supervision. Tepper (2000) defined decrease organizational citizenship behaviors; Zellars et al., 2002). abusive supervision as the “subordinates’ perceptions of the extent Both of these approaches are useful for understanding individ- to which their supervisors engage in the sustained display of uals’ reactions to abusive supervision. However, they do not hostile verbal and nonverbal behaviors, excluding physical con- 1 capture the uniquely aggressive and hostile behavior that defines tact” (p. 178). Ashforth (1997) described abusive managers as abusive supervision. In this article, we conceptualize abusive su- those who callously and arbitrarily use their power and authority to pervision as a type of aggression (behaviors perceived by the mistreat employees. Abusive supervisors are known to use derog- employee as intentionally harmful; Baron, 2005). We use work on atory names, yell and scream, intimidate, withhold needed infor- retaliation and direct and displaced aggression as a foundation for mation, and humiliate and ridicule their employees (Keashly, examining employees’ reactions to abusive supervision. We inves- 1998). Empirical research usually examines abuse from the sub- tigate the relationship between abusive supervision and employee ordinate’s perspective (Ashforth, 1997; Tepper, 2000; Tepper, deviance directed at the supervisor, the organization, and other Eisenbach, Kirby, & Potter, 1998; Zellars et al., 2002), and we take individuals. that perspective in this research. Further, we consider the moderating effects of negative reci- Research on abusive supervision has generally taken either an procity beliefs. A negative reciprocity orientation is the tendency organizational justice or a reactance theory approach to under- for an individual to return negative treatment for negative treat- ment (Cropanzano & Mitchell, 2005). We suggest individuals with Marie S. Mitchell and Maureen L. Ambrose, Department of Manage- ment, University of Central Florida. We thank Ben Tepper for his generous contributions, specifically data 1 Tepper (2000) also suggests abusive supervision involves indifference, for reducing the Abusive Supervision measure. We also thank Becky for example, speaking rudely to subordinates in order to elicit desired task Bennett, Russell Cropanzano, and Marshall Schminke for their feedback on performance (p. 179). However, most research focuses on the more pro- earlier versions of this article. active, willfully hostile behavior (e.g., Ashforth, 1994, 1997; Bies & Tripp, Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Marie S. 1998a, 1998c; Namie & Namie, 2000). Indeed, researchers often refer to Mitchell, who is now at the Department of Management, University of abusive supervisors as “managerial bullies” (Ashforth, 1994, 1997; Namie Nebraska–Lincoln, P.O. Box 880491, Lincoln, NE 68588-0491. E-mail: & Namie, 2000; Salin, 2001). We focus explicitly on the active hostile [email protected] behavior in this study. 1159 1160 RESEARCH REPORTS stronger negative reciprocity beliefs are more likely to direct deviance and (nonsupervisory) interpersonal deviance as well as deviant behavior toward the perceived source of harm. Thus, in the organizational deviance when considering employee reactions to case of abusive supervision, stronger negative reciprocity beliefs abusive supervision. should be associated with increased deviant behavior directed at the supervisor. In the following sections, we review relevant Abusive Supervision and Employee Deviance literature on abusive supervision, employee deviance, and negative reciprocity beliefs. Interpersonal treatment is a driving factor in deviant behavior (Robinson & Greenberg, 1998). Workplace experiences such as Abusive Supervision frustration, injustices, and threats to self are primary antecedents to employee deviance (Bennett & Robinson, 2003). Ashforth (1997) Although abusive supervision is a low base-rate phenomenon, it suggested that abusive supervision promotes feelings of frustra- has notable effects on employee attitudes (Tepper, 2000). Research tion, helplessness, and alienation. Tepper (2000) found that abu- shows that abusive supervision is related to lower levels of satis- sive supervision negatively influences perceptions of justice. Thus, faction, commitment, and justice perceptions, and higher levels of abusive supervision is a likely antecedent of employee deviance. turnover, role conflict, and psychological distress (Ashforth, 1997; As we noted above, we expect abusive supervision will be Duffy, Ganster, & Pagon, 2002; Tepper, 2000). related to employee workplace deviance in two ways. First, em- Fewer research studies have investigated the effects of abusive ployees may respond by directly retaliating against their supervi- supervision on employee behaviors. Two studies by Tepper and sor. Second, employees may engage in “displaced” deviance by colleagues (Tepper et al., 2004; Zellars et al., 2002) suggested that targeting the organization or other individuals. We discuss each of abusive supervision negatively affects organizational citizenship these below. behaviors. Employees subjected to an abusive supervisor engage in fewer organizational citizenship behaviors (Zellars et al., 2002). Supervisor-Directed Deviance Further, abusive supervision also negatively affects how employ- ees perceive the genuineness of their peers’ organizational citizen- Retaliation plays an important role in research on aggression as ship behaviors (Tepper et al., 2004). In addition to decreased well as research on workplace deviance. Retaliation involves the positive behavior, we suggest abusive supervision will increase desire to punish an offender for unwarranted and malicious acts negative behavior, specifically, employee workplace deviance. (Averill, 1982). Retaliation refers to behavior that seeks to “make In considering the relationship between abusive supervision and the wrongdoer pay” for a transgression or event that harms or employee deviance, we found research on aggression and retalia- jeopardizes the victim in some meaningful way (Skarlicki & tion to be useful. This research suggests that interpersonal mis- Folger, 2004, p. 374).2 treatment (like abusive supervision) promotes retaliation and ag- Research on aggression demonstrates individuals may respond gression displaced on other targets. For example, in their study on to the aggressive behavior of others by choosing to retaliate. For injustice and retaliation, Skarlicki and Folger (1997) found that example, Brown (1968) found severe offensive behavior (social conditions of multiple unfairness (distributive, procedural, and humiliation) resulted in strong retaliatory reactions, even at a interactional) were associated with higher levels of organizational personal cost to the retaliator. Bies and Tripp (1996) found that retaliatory behavior. Notably, these
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Cross Disciplinary Issues in Workplace Bullying
    Answering workplace bullying’s key questions 1 Answering Five Key Questions about Workplace Bullying: How Communication Scholarship Provides Thought Leadership for Transforming Abuse at Work Pamela Lutgen-Sandvik (Ph.D., Arizona State University) is an Associate Professor in the Department of Communication & Journalism at the University of New Mexico, USA. She researches destructive communication in organizations and the communicative processes associated with positive organizing. Email: [email protected] Telephone: 505-331-4724 Fax: 505-277-2068 Mailing: Department of Communication & Journalism University of New Mexico MSC03 2240; 1 University of New Mexico Albuquerque, NM 87131-0001 Sarah H. Tracy (Ph.D., University of Colorado, Boulder) is an Associate Professor and Director of The Project for Wellness and Work-Life in the Hugh Downs School of Human Communication at Arizona State University, USA. She studies emotion and work-life wellness. Email: [email protected] Telephone: 480-965-7709 FAX: 480-965-4291 Mailing: Hugh Downs School of Human Communication Arizona State University PO Box 871205 Tempe, AZ 87287-1205 Management Communication Quarterly Answering workplace bullying’s key questions 2 Abstract: Organizational communication research is vital for understanding and addressing workplace bullying, a problem that affects nearly half of working adults and has devastating results on employee well-being and organizational productivity. A communication approach illustrates the toxic complexity of workplace bullying, as it is condoned through societal discourses, sustained by receptive workplace cultures, and perpetuated through local interactions. Examining these (macro, meso, and micro) communicative elements addresses the most pressing questions about workplace bullying including: 1) how abuse manifests, 2) how employees respond, 3) why it is so harmful, 4) why resolution is so difficult, and 5) how it might be resolved.
    [Show full text]
  • A Theory of Biobehavioral Response to Workplace Incivility
    BIOBEHAVIORAL RESPONSE TO INCIVILITY THE EMBODIMENT OF INSULT: A THEORY OF BIOBEHAVIORAL RESPONSE TO WORKPLACE INCIVILITY Lilia M. Cortina University of Michigan 530 Church Street Ann Arbor, MI 48104 [email protected] M. Sandy Hershcovis University of Calgary 2500 University Drive NW Calgary, AB T2N 1N4 [email protected] Kathryn B.H. Clancy University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 607 S. Mathews Ave. Urbana, IL 61801 [email protected] (in press, Journal of Management) ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors are grateful to Christine Porath, who provided feedback on an earlier draft of this article. Hershcovis acknowledges support from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Clancy acknowledges support from NSF grant #1916599, the Illinois Leadership Center, and the Beckman Institute for Advanced Science & Technology, and thanks her trainees as well as the attendees of the 2019 Transdisciplinary Research on Incivility in STEM Contexts Workshop for their brilliant thinking and important provocations. BIOBEHAVIORAL RESPONSE TO INCIVILITY 1 Abstract This article builds a broad theory to explain how people respond, both biologically and behaviorally, when targeted with incivility in organizations. Central to our theorizing is a multifaceted framework that yields four quadrants of target response: reciprocation, retreat, relationship repair, and recruitment of support. We advance the novel argument that these behaviors not only stem from biological change within the body, but also stimulate such change. Behavioral responses that revolve around affiliation, and produce positive social connections, are most likely to bring biological benefits. However, social and cultural features of an organization can stand in the way of affiliation, especially for employees holding marginalized identities.
    [Show full text]
  • Blaming the Organization for Abusive Supervision: the Roles of Perceived Organizational Support and Supervisor’S Organizational Embodiment
    Journal of Applied Psychology © 2012 American Psychological Association 2013, Vol. 98, No. 1, 158–168 0021-9010/13/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0030687 RESEARCH REPORT Blaming the Organization for Abusive Supervision: The Roles of Perceived Organizational Support and Supervisor’s Organizational Embodiment Mindy K. Shoss Robert Eisenberger Saint Louis University University of Houston Simon Lloyd D. Restubog Thomas J. Zagenczyk Australian National University Clemson University Why do employees who experience abusive supervision retaliate against the organization? We apply organizational support theory to propose that employees hold the organization partly responsible for abusive supervision. Depending on the extent to which employees identify the supervisor with the organization (i.e., supervisor’s organizational embodiment), we expected abusive supervision to be associated with low perceived organizational support (POS) and consequently with retribution against the organization. Across 3 samples, we found that abusive supervision was associated with decreased POS as moderated by supervisor’s organizational embodiment. In turn, reduced POS was related to heightened counterproductive work behavior directed against the organization and lowered in-role and extra-role performance. These findings suggest that employees partly attribute abusive supervision to negative valuation by the organization and, consequently, behave negatively toward and withhold positive contributions to it. Keywords: abusive supervision, perceived organizational support, workplace victimization Supervisors play an important role in the direction, evaluation, carried out on behalf of the organization (Aquino & Bommer, and coaching of employees. Some supervisors are supportive, 2003; Tepper, 2007). fostering subordinates’ abilities and empowering them to achieve Prior research has largely viewed the organization as an “inno- their goals (House, 1996).
    [Show full text]
  • Employees' Reactions to Their Own Gossip About Highly
    BITING THE HAND THAT FEEDS YOU: EMPLOYEES’ REACTIONS TO THEIR OWN GOSSIP ABOUT HIGHLY (UN)SUPPORTIVE SUPERVISORS By JULENA MARIE BONNER Bachelor of Arts in Business Management and Leadership Southern Virginia University Buena Vista, VA 2007 Master of Business Administration Oklahoma State University Stillwater, Oklahoma 2012 Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate College of the Oklahoma State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY July, 2016 BITING THE HAND THAT FEEDS YOU: EMPLOYEES’ REACTIONS TO THEIR OWN GOSSIP ABOUT HIGHLY (UN)SUPPORTIVE SUPERVISORS Dissertation Approved: Dr. Rebecca L. Greenbaum Dissertation Adviser Dr. Debra L. Nelson Dr. Cynthia S. Wang Dr. Isaac J. Washburn ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The road to completing this degree and dissertation has been a long, bumpy one, with plenty of ups and downs. I wish to express my gratitude to those who have helped me along the way. Those who provided me with words of encouragement and support, those who talked me down from the ledge when the bumps seemed too daunting, and those who helped smooth the path by taking time to teach and guide me. I will forever be grateful for my family, friends, and the OSU faculty and doctoral students who provided me with endless amounts of support and guidance. I would like to especially acknowledge my dissertation chair, Rebecca Greenbaum, who has been a wonderful mentor and friend. I look up to her in so many ways, and am grateful for the time she has taken to help me grow and develop. I want to thank her for her patience, expertise, guidance, support, feedback, and encouragement over the years.
    [Show full text]
  • Incivility, Bullying, and Workplace Violence
    AMERICAN NURSES ASSOCIATION POSITION STATEMENT ON INCIVILITY, BULLYING, AND WORKPLACE VIOLENCE Effective Date: July 22, 2015 Status: New Position Statement Written By: Professional Issues Panel on Incivility, Bullying and Workplace Violence Adopted By: ANA Board of Directors I. PURPOSE This statement articulates the American Nurses Association (ANA) position with regard to individual and shared roles and responsibilities of registered nurses (RNs) and employers to create and sustain a culture of respect, which is free of incivility, bullying, and workplace violence. RNs and employers across the health care continuum, including academia, have an ethical, moral, and legal responsibility to create a healthy and safe work environment for RNs and all members of the health care team, health care consumers, families, and communities. II. STATEMENT OF ANA POSITION ANA’s Code of Ethics for Nurses with Interpretive Statements states that nurses are required to “create an ethical environment and culture of civility and kindness, treating colleagues, coworkers, employees, students, and others with dignity and respect” (ANA, 2015a, p. 4). Similarly, nurses must be afforded the same level of respect and dignity as others. Thus, the nursing profession will no longer tolerate violence of any kind from any source. All RNs and employers in all settings, including practice, academia, and research, must collaborate to create a culture of respect that is free of incivility, bullying, and workplace violence. Evidence-based best practices must be implemented to prevent and mitigate incivility, bullying, and workplace violence; to promote the health, safety, and wellness of RNs; and to ensure optimal outcomes across the health care continuum.
    [Show full text]
  • Journal of the International Ombudsman Association
    Journal of the International Ombudsman Association Journal of the International Ombudsman Association V O L U M E 3 , N U M B E R 2 , 2 0 1 0 volume 3, number 2, 2010 1 Journal of the International Ombudsman Association TABLE OF CONTENTS Editorial Staff ......................................................................................................5 I ntroduction ........................................................................................................6 JENN IFER L. MOUMNEH, PRESIDENT, IOA Editorial: Bullying — What Can Ombudsmen Do? ...........................................7 DAV ID MILLER Some Things You Need to Know but may have been Afraid to Ask: A Researcher Speaks to Ombudsmen about Workplace Bullying ................10 LORALE IGH KEASHLY Abstract: Workplace bullying is repeated and prolonged hostile mistreatment of one or more people at work. It has tremendous potential to escalate, drawing in others beyond the initial actor-target relationship. Its effects can be devastating and widespread individually, organizationally and beyond. It is fundamentally a systemic phenomenon grounded in the organization’s culture. In this article, I identify from my perspective as a researcher and professional in this area current thinking and research findings that may be useful for ombudsmen in their deliberations and investigations as well as in their intervention and management of these hostile behaviors and relationships. Key Words: Ombudsmen, workplace bullying, workplace aggression Cases Involving Allegations of Workplace Bullying: Threats to Ombuds Neutrality and Other Challenges ..................................24 TOM SEBOK AND MARY CHAVEZ RUDOLPH Abstract: Organizational ombuds who assist constituents in cases involving allegations of workplace bullying face a number of challenges. Some of the most significant challenges involve potential threats to ombuds neu- trality. This article will briefly review ombuds neutrality and then explore many factors which can promote bias, and threaten ombuds neutrality.
    [Show full text]
  • Supervisors' Toxicity As Predictor of Subordinates' Counter-Productive
    The Journal of Applied Business Research – September/October 2016 Volume 32, Number 5 Supervisors’ Toxicity As Predictor Of Subordinates’ Counter-Productive Work Behavior In Nigerian Public Hospitals Justin Mgbechi Odinioha Gabriel, Ph.D., Rivers State University of Science and Technology, Nigeria ABSTRACT The purpose of this study is to empirically examine the association of Supervisors’ Toxicity and Subordinates’ Counter-productive Work-behaviour in the Nigerian Public Hospitals. Counter-productive Work -behaviour (criterion variable) is further operationalized using five measures – abuse, production deviation, sabotage, theft, and withdrawal. The cross-sectional survey design is adopted and data is generated using the structured questionnaire. 197 respondents comprising doctors, nursing staff, lab technicians and other administrative staff selected from an accessible population of 402 staff provided responses to the questions. A total of five hypotheses are proposed and tested using descriptive and inferential statistical tools. Results indicate significant relationships in all hypothetical instances, thereby implying an association between Supervisors’ Toxicity and Subordinates’ Counter-productive Work- behavior. The study therefore concludes that Subordinates are quick to reciprocate Supervisors’ Toxicity through Counter-productive Work- behavior of transferring aggression to either peers or other identifiable assets of the organization. The study further recommends a more emotionally oriented approach to the management of superior-subordinate relationships with emphasis on the training and retraining of supervisors regarding emotional intelligence as well as conflict and human relations issues. Keywords: Supervisors’ Toxicity; Subordinates; Counterproductive behaviour; Nigeria INTRODUCTION Army leaders must set high standards, lead by example, do what is legally and morally right, and influence other people to do the same.
    [Show full text]
  • A Researcher Speaks to Ombudsmen About Workplace Bullying LORALE IGH KEASHLY
    Journal of the International Ombudsman Association Keashly Some Things You Need to Know but may have been Afraid to Ask: A Researcher Speaks to Ombudsmen about Workplace Bullying LORALE IGH KEASHLY ABSTRACT In the early 1990’s, I became interested in understand- ing persistent and enduring hostility at work. That Workplace bullying is repeated and prolonged hostile interest was spurred by a colleague’s experience at mistreatment of one or more people at work. It has the hands of her director. He yelled and screamed tremendous potential to escalate, drawing in others at her (and others), accusing her of not completing beyond the initial actor-target relationship. Its effects assignments, which she actually had. He lied about can be devastating and widespread individually, her and other subordinates. He would deliberately organizationally and beyond. It is fundamentally a avoid when staff needed his input and then berate systemic phenomenon grounded in the organization’s them for not consulting with him. At other times, he culture. In this article, I identify from my perspective was thoughtful, apologetic, and even constructive. My as a researcher and professional in this area current colleague felt like she was walking on eggshells, never thinking and research findings that may be useful for sure how he would be. Her coworkers had similar ombudsmen in their deliberations and investigations experiences and the group developed ways of coping as well as in their intervention and management of and handling it. For example, his secretary would these hostile behaviors and relationships. warn staff when it was not a good idea to speak with him.
    [Show full text]
  • Impact of Workplace Bullying on Workplace Deviant Behaviors
    CAPITAL UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, ISLAMABAD Impact of Workplace Bullying on Workplace Deviant Behaviors: The Mediating Role of Negative Affectivity and Moderating Role of Internal Locus of Control by Samiullah A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment for the degree of Master of Science in the Faculty of Management & Social Sciences Department of Management Sciences 2019 i Copyright c 2019 by Samiullah All rights reserved. No part of this thesis may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, by any information storage and retrieval system without the prior written permission of the author. ii Dedicated to my Mother, whose prayers enabled me to have success in all spheres of life CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL Impact of Workplace Bullying on Workplace Deviant Behaviors: The Mediating Role of Negative Affectivity and Moderating Role of Internal Locus of Control by Samiullah (MMS163033) THESIS EXAMINING COMMITTEE S. No. Examiner Name Organization (a) External Examiner Dr. Nadeem Talib NUML, Islamabad (b) Internal Examiner Dr. Sajid Bashir CUST, Islamabad (c) Supervisor Dr. Mueen Aizaz Zafar CUST, Islamabad Dr. Mueen Aizaz Zafar Thesis Supervisor May, 2019 Dr. Sajid Bashir Dr. Arshad Hassan Head Dean Dept. of Management Sciences Faculty of Management & Social Sciences May, 2019 May, 2019 iv Author's Declaration I, Samiullah hereby state that my MS thesis titled \Impact of Workplace Bul- lying on Workplace Deviant Behaviors: The Mediating Role of Negative Affectivity and Moderating Role of Internal Locus of Control" is my own work and has not been submitted previously by me for taking any degree from Capital University of Science and Technology, Islamabad or anywhere else in the country/abroad.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Mobbing in the Workplace and an Overview of Adult Bullying
    1: Introduction to Mobbing in the Workplace and an Overview of Adult Bullying Workplace Bullying Clinical and Organizational Perspectives In the early 1980s, German industrial psychologist Heinz Leymann began work in Sweden, conducting studies of workers who had experienced violence on the job. Leymann’s research originally consisted of longitudinal studies of subway drivers who had accidentally run over people with their trains and of banking employees who had been robbed on the job. In the course of his research, Leymann discovered a surprising syndrome in a group that had the most severe symptoms of acute stress disorder (ASD), workers whose colleagues had ganged up on them in the workplace (Gravois, 2006). Investigating this further, Leymann studied workers in one of the major Swedish iron and steel plants. From this early work, Leymann used the term “mobbing” to refer to emotional abuse at work by one or more others. Earlier theorists such as Austrian ethnologist Konrad Lorenz and Swedish physician Peter-Paul Heinemann used the term before Leymann, but Leymann received the most recognition for it. Lorenz used “mobbing” to describe animal group behavior, such as attacks by a group of smaller animals on a single larger animal (Lorenz, 1991, in Zapf & Leymann, 1996). Heinemann borrowed this term and used it to describe the destructive behavior of children, often in a group, against a single child. This text uses the terms “mobbing” and “bullying” interchangeably; however, mobbing more often refers to bullying by more than one person and can be more subtle. Bullying more often focuses on the actions of a single person.
    [Show full text]
  • Abusive Supervision and Deviant Workplace Behavior: the Mediating Role of Work–Family Conflict
    Abusive Supervision and Deviant Workplace Behavior: The Mediating Role of Work–Family Conflict Aminah Ahmad, Institute of Social Science Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Malaysia Zoharah Omar, Department of Professional Development and Continuing Education, Faculty of Educational Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Malaysia ABSTRACT The role of work–family conflict as a mechanism through which abusive supervision can trigger deviant workplace behavior has not been given much attention. Based on conservation of resources theory, reactance theory and previous research findings, a model has been developed to demonstrate that abusive supervision could increase the intensity of work–family conflict experienced by employees, which in turn could translate into deviant behaviors which are harmful to organizations. This model demonstrates how the integration of abusive supervision, work–family interface and deviant behavior literatures could provide a better understanding of employee engagement in deviant workplace behavior. Keywords: abusive supervision, work–family conflict, deviant workplace behavior INTRODUCTION Deviant workplace behavior continues to be a problem in organizations and has been reported to have a damaging impact on organizations (Appelbaum, Deguire, & Lay, 2005; Mawritz et al., 2012). There is a growing interest in this topic among researchers (Bennett & Robinson, 2000, 2003; Colbert, Mount, & Dalal, 2005; Dunlop & Lee, 2004; Harter, Witt, & Barrick, 2004; Marwitz et al., 2012) and evidence has shown that managers’ perceptions of employees’ overall performance are strongly affected by deviant behavior (Rotundo & Sackett, 2002). Deviant workplace behavior has been defined as an intentional behavior that violates organizational norms and poses a threat to the well-being of an organization or its members, or both (Robinson & Bennett, 1995).
    [Show full text]
  • When Leadership Fails – a View from the Lens of Four Employees Laurie L
    American Journal of Business Education – Third Quarter 2018 Volume 11, Number 3 When Leadership Fails – A View From The Lens Of Four Employees Laurie L. Barnes, Liberty University, USA Janice M. Spangenburg, Liberty University, USA ABSTRACT Leadership is a concept that has been used for decades and despite what we know about it there are many things left to the unknown. We must keep moving forward to search for answers as we seek to explain the many failures that exist today. For centuries, reports of lackluster and even abusive leadership in organizations have continued to be a negative force in organizations, adversely impacting culture and overall performance. Amid the challenges facing leaders as well as the necessity for rapid and continuous change in the organization, we see the development of many problems and consequent ails that need to be addressed. We are often left with supervisors that abuse without regard for the breakdown of loyalty, job satisfaction and the development of a solid and rich culture that can support thriving and positive organizational outcomes. This has been captured in the voices and experiences of individuals interviewed for this qualitative case study analysis, demonstrating the continued impact of leadership in modern day organizations and well as addressing the perplexing question of how to distinguish who would or would not be a best fit for leadership positions in today’s organizations. Despite years of research, theory and analysis, perhaps the greatest insight is gained through the lens of the employee. Keywords: Organizational Conflict; Leadership Styles; Leadership Behavior; Abusive Leadership; Abusive Supervision OVERVIEW eadership has been the foundation for many concepts, both positive and negative, that have surfaced in organizations.
    [Show full text]