Coproducing leadership: a reason to resist destructive leaders

Purpose

Follower's individual differences have been receiving increased attention in studying destructive leadership because followers may enable or disable it. One of these yet under-researched features is the role of followers' leadership coproduction beliefs (a role construal) in explaining their resistance to destructive leaders. Departing from the proactive motivation theory, this paper explores the robustness of coproduction beliefs by testing its ability to predict followers' resistance to destructive leaders across four situations – abusive supervision, exploitative leadership, organization directed behaviors and laissez-faire.

Design/methodology/approach

With a sample of 359 participants that answered a scenario-based survey, the present study tests the relationship between coproduction beliefs and resistance behaviors in the four mentioned groups, while controlling for alternative explanations. A multigroup analysis was conducted with PLS-SEM.

Findings

Constructive resistance is always favored by coproduction beliefs independently of the leader's type of destructive behavior. Dysfunctional resistance, however, is sensitive to the leader's type of destructive behavior.

Originality/value

This paper extends knowledge on the role of coproduction beliefs as an individual-based resource against destructive leaders.

The fish can rot from the heart, not just the head: Exploring the detrimental impact of transgressions by leaders at multiple levels of an organization

In this registered report, we examined the effect of transgressions committed by leaders working at different group levels within an organization on employee outcomes. Based on social identity theorizing, we argued that organizational leader transgressions would affect organizational members' experiences only at the organizational level, but that workgroup leader transgressions would impact organizational members' experiences at both workgroup and organizational levels. To test these ideas, we developed a 2 (leader group affiliation: workgroup vs. organizational) × 2 (leader behaviour: normative vs. transgressive) between-subjects experimental paradigm. As hypothesized, both workgroup and organizational leader transgressions resulted in decreased organizational identification and perceived organizational leader effectiveness. Contrary to our prediction, transgressions of both workgroup and organizational leaders were similarly detrimental to workers' workgroup identification. However, as predicted, a transgressive workgroup leader had a greater negative impact on perceived workgroup leader effectiveness than a transgressive organizational leader. When outliers were excluded, a workgroup leader's transgression was found to be more detrimental to work performance than an organizational leader's transgression. Overall, this study demonstrates that the transgressions of lower-level workgroup leaders can be as detrimental - and in some cases more detrimental - to workers than the transgressions of higher-level organizational leaders.

Does follower role orientation impact leader-directed outcomes? An exploration of the indirect effects of follower role orientation on influence and leader effectiveness

Follower role orientations affect how followers approach the leadership process; however, there has been little insight into how individuals use these role beliefs to influence leader outcomes, particularly through their psychological and social leader-follower relationships. This research examines how co-production, passive, and anti-authoritarian follower role orientations affect a follower's influence on their leader and leader effectiveness indirectly through psychological closeness and relationship quality. The results from two studies suggest co-production role orientation had positive effects on influence on the leader through psychological closeness and on perceived leader effectiveness through closeness and leader-member exchange. Passive role orientation was negatively related to followers' influence on the leader through reduced psychological closeness in study 1, while anti-authoritarian role beliefs were negatively related to closeness in study 2. These findings suggest that when followers believe co-production is critical to the leadership process, closeness with the leader, relationship quality, and perceived leader effectiveness improve.