Abusive Supervision from an Integrated Self-Control Perspective

An identity threat perspective on why and when employee voice brings abusive supervision

Purpose

Drawing from identity threat theory, this study aims to understand how and when employee voice can lead to abusive supervision. It proposes and examines a theoretical model in which employee voice is linked to abusive supervision through the mediating effect of leader identity threat.

Methods

We conducted a field study by collecting data from 93 supervisors and 533 subordinates in China at two different points in time. A structural equation model and Mplus software were used to examine the direct relationship between employee voice and abusive supervision, as well as the mediating effect of leader identity threat and the moderating effect of supervisor traditionality.

Results

Our results showed that employee voice was positively related to leader identity threat and had an indirect effect on abusive supervision via leader identity threat. In addition, we found that supervisor traditionality moderated the relationship between employee voice and leader identity threat. Subordinates' voice increased perceptions of leader identity threat among supervisors with high traditionality, whereas supervisors with low traditionality did not make this association. Finally, the indirect effect of employee voice on abusive supervision via leader identity threat was moderated by supervisor traditionality.

Discussion

First, this study broadens our understanding of the antecedents of abusive supervision by proposing that employee voice may induce abusive supervision. Second, it develops an identity threat perspective to explain why employee voice is positively related to abusive supervision. Finally, it enriches the research on implicit leadership theories by proposing that supervisors' cultural values can also influence supervisors' sense-making of subordinates' behaviors.

The hot and the cold in destructive leadership: Modeling the role of arousal in explaining leader antecedents and follower consequences of abusive supervision versus exploitative leadership

Due to its devastating consequences, research needs to theoretically and empirically disentangle different sub-types of destructive leadership. Based on concepts derived from aggression research distinguishing re- and proactive aggression, we provide a process model differentiating abusive supervision and exploitative leadership. High versus low arousal negative affect is installed as the central mediating factor determining (1) whether perceived goal-blockage (leadership antecedents) leads to abusive supervision versus exploitative leadership and (2) whether a specific leadership behavior leads to active versus passive follower behavior (leadership consequence). Further, theoretical anchoring of individual and contextual moderators onto the model's process paths is provided and exemplary hypotheses for concrete moderation effects are deduced. Based on the provided process model, we highlight four recommendations to facilitate process-based construct differentiation in future research on destructive leadership. To precisely understand the differences and commonalities in different forms of destructive leadership will ultimately enable custom-tailored inter- and prevention.

Plain Language Summary

Negative leadership—also named “destructive” leadership—has very bad effects on followers and organizations. There are not just one, but many forms of destructive leadership and it is important to understand where different sub-types come from (i.e., to understand their antecedents) and which specific effect they have (i.e., to understand their consequences). In this paper, we focus on better understanding two forms of destructive leadership, namely abusive supervision and exploitative leadership. These two forms are similar to the two main forms of aggression. Abusive supervision is similar to reactive aggression, an impulsive “hot blooded” form of aggression. Exploitative leadership is similar to proactive aggression, a premeditated “cold blooded” form of aggression. We explain the parallels between the two forms of aggression and the two forms of leadership and provide a model which allows to predict when one versus the other form of leadership occurs and to which follower behavior they lead. An important factor in this model is the physiological characteristic of the emotional reaction to an event (i.e., arousal). An emotional reaction can be high in arousal; for instance, anger is a high arousal negative emotional reaction. On the contrary, boredom, for instance, is a low arousal negative emotional reaction. Dependent on whether both a leader and a follower react to a negative event (e.g., not getting what they want, being treated badly by others) with high or low arousal, their behavior will be different. We explain how this mechanism works and how it can help us to better predict leaders' and followers' behavior. We also outline how individual characteristics of the leader and follower and characteristics of their environment and context interact with arousal and their behavior.

Abusive supervision: a systematic literature review

The interest generated by abusive supervision among researchers can be gauged from the fact that more than 140 articles on abusive supervision have been published by leading journals in the last five years alone. However, a comprehensive understanding of the same is lacking. As a result, we systematically reviewed 273 articles on abusive supervision published between 2000 and 2022. This enabled us to present five interrelated aspects of abusive supervision literature. First, we focus on the definitional issues associated with abusive supervision. Second, we examine two widely used abusive supervision scales. Third, we review and critique different research designs utilized in abusive supervision studies. Fourth, we look at the key theories underpinning abusive supervision research and map the nomological network of abusive supervision. Fifth, we suggest novel avenues for theoretical advancement. In sum, we endeavored to portray a detailed picture of research on abusive supervision.

Pathway to professionalizing health leadership in Canada: The two faces of Janus

This article looks at the current state of health leadership in terms of expectations for professionalism: controlled entry, exit, and licensure/certification; a social contract to provide public services for the good of Canadians; and a unique body of knowledge and practice generally accepted. Looking to the future, and using the same three criteria, a compelling case for pursuing the professionalization of health leadership is made using LEADS as a roadmap. The article also outlines how to realize the professionalization of health leadership in Canada and why it is important to do so.

Mindfulness as a Buffer of Leaders' Self-Rated Behavioral Responses to Emotional Exhaustion: A Dual Process Model of Self-Regulation

In this study, we investigate the self-regulatory role of mindfulness in buffering the relationship between leaders' emotional exhaustion and self-rated leadership behavior (transformational leadership and abusive supervision). Specifically, we propose that leader mindfulness buffers the relationship between emotional exhaustion and both negative affect and impaired perspective taking, which link leader emotional exhaustion and leadership behavior (i.e., moderated mediation). Using a time-lagged survey of leaders (N = 505) we found that leader perspective taking and negative affect mediated the relationships between emotional exhaustion and self-reported leadership behavior. Furthermore, we found that leader mindfulness buffers the relationship between emotional exhaustion and negative affect, which weakened the mediated relationship between emotional exhaustion and both transformational leadership and abusive supervision. However, leader mindfulness did not moderate the relationship between emotional exhaustion and perspective taking. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.