Durham Research Online Deposited in DRO: 02 June 2016 Version of attached le: Published Version Peer-review status of attached le: Peer-reviewed Citation for published item: Braun, B. and Aydin, N. and Frey, D. and Peus, C. (2018) 'Leader narcissism predicts malicious envy and supervisor-targeted counterproductive work behavior - evidence from eld and experimental research.', Journal of business ethics., 151 (3). pp. 725-741. Further information on publisher's website: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3224-5 Publisher's copyright statement: c The Author(s) 2016. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://crea tivecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. Additional information: Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full DRO policy for further details. Durham University Library, Stockton Road, Durham DH1 3LY, United Kingdom Tel : +44 (0)191 334 3042 | Fax : +44 (0)191 334 2971 https://dro.dur.ac.uk J Bus Ethics DOI 10.1007/s10551-016-3224-5 Leader Narcissism Predicts Malicious Envy and Supervisor- Targeted Counterproductive Work Behavior: Evidence from Field and Experimental Research 1,2 3 2 4 Susanne Braun • Nilu¨fer Aydin • Dieter Frey • Claudia Peus Received: 17 July 2015 / Accepted: 22 May 2016 Ó The Author(s) 2016. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com Abstract Building on the emotion-centered model of scholarly perspective, counterproductive work behavior voluntary work behavior, this research tests the relations (CWB) represents ‘‘voluntary, potentially destructive or between leader narcissism, followers’ malicious and detrimental acts that hurt colleagues or organizations’’ benign envy, and supervisor-targeted counterproductive (Spector and Fox 2002, p. 270). Meta-analytical results work behavior (CWB). Results across five studies (i.e., one indicate that poor leadership predicts inclinations toward pilot study (N = 50), two experimental studies (N = 74 supervisor-targeted counterproductivity (Hershcovis et al. and 50), and two field surveys (N = 365 and 100) indicate 2007) and impairs organizational functioning (Schyns and that leader narcissism relates positively to followers’ neg- Schilling 2013). ative emotions (i.e., malicious envy), which in turn medi- Scholars in the field of business ethics have been par- ates the positive relation between leader narcissism and ticularly concerned with unethical behavior that arises supervisor-targeted CWB. Proposed negative relations when ‘‘destructive narcissists attain positions of power’’ between leader narcissism and positive emotions (i.e., (Godkin and Allcorn 2011, p. 559) such as at the executive benign envy) were only partly supported. Our findings level (Craig and Amernic 2011). While narcissistic leaders advance the understanding of envy and the detrimental may help organizations to thrive, they lack empathy for impact of leader narcissism on organizational functioning. others, promote ‘‘questionable behavior’’ (Giampetro- Meyer et al. 1998, p. 1730), are prone to engage in Keywords Benign envy Á Counterproductive work unjustified credit-taking (Graham and Cooper 2013), and behavior Á Leadership Á Malicious envy Á Narcissism contribute to the emergence of corporate scandals (Zona et al. 2013). In a disposition-based fraud model, Raval Employee counterproductivity causes large shares of (2016) ascertained that narcissistic leaders harm organiza- organizational losses. For example, retail business in the tions because they are ‘‘ostentatious, focused on self-glory United States have inventory losses of about $42 billion per and final outcomes, and vulnerable to breakdowns in their year with employee theft accounting for 43 % of lost moral resolve’’ (p. 13). revenue (Global Retail Theft Barometer 2014). From a Narcissistic individuals, characterized by ‘‘an exagger- ated sense of self-importance, fantasies of unlimited suc- cess or power’’ (Blair et al. 2008, p. 255), often aspire to & Susanne Braun and emerge in leadership positions (Brunell et al. 2008; [email protected] Nevicka et al. 2011). They see themselves as capable 1 Durham University Business School, University of Durham, leaders (Judge et al. 2006). Uncertain contexts increase Mill Hill Lane, Durham DH1 3LB, UK followers’ preferences for narcissistic leaders (Nevicka 2 LMU Center for Leadership and People Management, et al. 2013). At the same time, narcissistic leaders are Ludwig Maximilian University Munich, Munich, Germany driven by self-centeredness (Van Dijk and De Cremer 3 Alpen-Adria University of Klagenfurt, Klagenfurt, Austria 2006) as well as feelings of grandiosity and entitlement, 4 TUM School of Management, Technical University of which lead them to exploit others (Brunell et al. 2008; Munich, Munich, Germany Campbell et al. 2011; Rauthmann 2012). 123 S. Braun et al. Building on the emotion-centered model of voluntary et al. 2011, p. 269). Narcissistic leadership occurs ‘‘when work behavior (Spector and Fox 2002), we examine how leaders’ actions are principally motivated by their own leader narcissism spurs employees’ inclinations toward egomaniacal needs and beliefs, superseding the needs and supervisor-targeted CWB. In line with frustration–aggres- interests of the constituents and institutions they lead’’ sion hypothesis (Dollard et al. 1939), we assume that (Rosenthal and Pittinsky 2006, p. 629). Hogan and Kaiser narcissistic leaders frustrate fundamental needs of goal (2005) describe a dualism of leader narcissism. Its bright attainment and recognition (Spector 1978). Furthermore, side reflects spontaneous impression formation of social Berkowitz’s (1989) reformulation of frustration–aggression performance, while the dark side reflects the actual person hypothesis suggests that ‘‘aversive events, evoke negative in job-relevant situations. Accordingly, the chocolate cake affect […], and it is this negative feeling that generates the model of narcissism (Campbell 2005; cited from Campbell aggressive inclinations’’ (p. 68). While narcissists’ emo- et al. 2011) compares deteriorating relationships between tions have been analyzed (Twenge and Campbell 2003; narcissistic leaders and their followers to the experience of Penney and Spector 2002), empirical insights into others’ eating chocolate cake, ‘‘appealing and exciting’’ (p. 271) at emotions in response to narcissism are missing. We ana- first, but making one feel ‘‘sluggish, depressed’’ (p. 271) lyze followers’ envy as a mediator between leader narcis- later on. sism and supervisor-targeted CWB. Narcissistic individuals hold advantages over others Duffy et al. (2012) highlight that ‘‘work environments with regard to leadership emergence. First, narcissists see include a surfeit of potential envy-inducing situations’’ (p. themselves more positively than others do. Narcissism is 643f.). Envy has detrimental consequences for interper- related to an enhanced self-view of leadership, deviance, sonal relations and organizational functioning (Duffy et al. and performance (Judge et al. 2006). Second, narcissists 2012; Cohen-Charash and Mueller 2007). Hierarchical are more likely to emerge as leaders and have a stronger differences are thought to spur invidious reactions (Stein desire to lead (Brunell et al. 2008). Third, narcissism is 1997). We argue that narcissistic leaders’ blend of ‘shine’ positively related to popularity at first sight (Back et al. (i.e., charisma; Khoo and Burch 2008; Nevicka et al. 2011) 2010), but others’ perceptions of narcissists’ leadership and exploitation (i.e., bragging, taking credit, shifting qualities decrease over time (Ong et al. 2016). blame; Campbell et al. 2011) causes followers’ malicious Narcissism also bolsters leaders’ benefits. In a study of 32 envy (i.e., resentment of the envied person, desire to hurt U.S.-based technology firms, CEOs’ narcissism and tenure the other) rather than benign envy (i.e., admiration for the predicted compensation (salary, bonus, and stock options) envied person, desire to improve oneself; van de Ven et al. such that narcissistic CEOs with long tenure received more 2009). In turn, we infer how maliciously envious followers compensation than their less narcissistic colleagues will engage in supervisor-targeted CWB. (O’Reilly et al. 2014). Yet, followers are likely to suffer from To summarize, we set out to advance literature in the fields the downsides of leader narcissism. Narcissistic individuals of business ethics, leadership, and emotions in organizations. primarily strive for leadership to fulfill their own needs for First, linking leader narcissism and CWB is an important power and superiority rather than for purposes of developing undertaking because of organizational losses caused by and supporting others. This