Good or Bad? The Ambivalent Leader-Follower Relationships

Ambivalent identification mediates the relationship between organizational justice and stress

The present study aims to examine the relationship between organizational justice and employee stress through the lenses of social identity theory and the ambivalent identification process. The research hypotheses assume that employees working in organizational environments with low levels of justice could experience more stress, and this relationship is also mediated by ambivalent identification. In other words, the mediating mechanism of this relation posited that low levels of organizational justice were associated with high levels of ambivalent identification, which in turn increased levels of work-related stress. Across a field study in several organizations from healthcare sectors, results confirmed that employees treated with less fairness experienced high ambivalence toward their organization, which increased their perception of stress, i.e., work-related burnout, client-related burnout, physical symptoms, and interpersonal strain at work. Furthermore, results supported only a full mediation model, in which the direct relationship between organizational justice and stress was not significant. The present results make an important contribution to the research literature on justice: the inclusion of the mediator variable, namely, ambivalent identification, drops the expected direct effect of organizational justice on stress, suggesting a call for action in adopting the social identity perspective in addition to organizational justice models, and specifically introducing the study of a detrimental form of identification, such as ambivalent identification. Limitations and practical implications of the study were discussed.

The Influence of Authoritarian-Benevolent Leadership on Subordinates' Work Engagement: A Social Information Processing Perspective

Purpose

The dynamic and complex external environment calls for leaders to be both benevolent and authoritarian to cope with the mutually exclusive demands in the management process. But few research paid attention to the dark side of leaders' inconsistent behaviors on employees' work outcomes. Based on social information processing theory, this study investigated the impact of authoritarian-benevolent leadership on subordinates' work engagement and explored the mediating role of leader-member exchange ambivalence and the moderating role of trait mindfulness.

Methods

A two-wave time-lagged survey approach was employed and data from 309 employees from three Chinese companies were collected. R 4.2.1 and SPSS 26.0 were used to test our hypotheses.

Results

The findings demonstrated how subordinates were influenced in their work engagement by authoritarian-benevolent leadership and leader-member exchange ambivalence and emphasized the value of maintaining a high level of trait mindfulness. This study indicated that (1) authoritarian-benevolent leadership was negatively associated with work engagement, which was mediated by leader-member exchange ambivalence; (2) subordinates' trait mindfulness moderated the relationship between leader-member exchange ambivalence and work engagement; (3) the indirect effect of authoritarian-benevolent leadership on subordinates' work engagement through leader-member exchange ambivalence was moderated by subordinates' trait mindfulness.

Conclusion

This study reveals the dark side of authoritarian-benevolent leadership and deepens our understanding of the mechanism underlying the effect of authoritarian-benevolent leadership on subordinates' work engagement from a new theoretical perspective. Practical implications are provided for managers to effectively develop authoritarian-benevolent leadership skills and improve subordinates' work engagement.

The relationship between ambivalence towards supervisor's behavior and employee's mental health

Ambivalence in social interactions has been linked to health-related outcomes in private relationships and recent research has started to expand this evidence to ambivalent leadership at the workplace by showing that ambivalent supervisor-employee relationships are related to higher stress levels in employees. However, the mental health consequences of ambivalent leadership have not been examined yet. Using a multilevel approach, this study estimated associations of ambivalent leadership with mental health indicators (depression, anxiety, vital exhaustion, fatigue) in 993 employees from 27 work groups. A total effect of ambivalent leadership was found for all four mental health measures, as well as within-group and between-group effects. The consistent relationships of ambivalent leadership with higher symptoms of mental ill-health at the individual- (i.e., within-group) and the group-level (i.e., between-group) support the existence of an un-confounded association, as well as group effects of collective ambivalence.