Schyns Birgit, Felfe Jörg, Schilling Jan
Department People and Organisations, Center for Leadership and Effective Organizations, Neoma Business School, Reims, France.
Department of Psychology, Helmut-Schmidt University, Hamburg, Germany.
Front Psychol. 2018 Jul 27;9:1309. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01309. eCollection 2018.
There is a growing interest in understanding how follower reactions toward abusive leadership are shaped by followers' perceptions and attributions. Our studies add to the understanding of the process happening between different levels of leaders' abusive behavior (from constructive leadership as control, laissez-faire, mild to strong abusive) and follower reactions. Specifically, we focus on the role of perception of abusive supervision as a mediator and attribution as a moderator of the relationship between leader abusive behavior and follower reactions. Follower reactions are defined in terms of exit, voice, loyalty, and neglect. Two studies using a two point experimental design and vignettes and a cross-sectional field study were conducted. Perception partly mediates the relationship between leader behavior and reactions (Study 1 and 2). Different attributions (intention, control) moderate the relationship between the perception of abusive supervision and reactions in Study 2 and 3. In Study 2, attribution of intentionality of the leader behavior served as a moderator of the relationship between abusive supervision and loyalty, turnover, and voice. Attribution of intentionality reduced the relationship between perception of abusive supervision and reactions. Attribution of intentionality only strengthened negative reactions when milder abusive leadership was perceived. These results were not supported in Study 3. However, in Study 3, attribution to the supervisor' control served as moderator for loyalty and voice. A stronger relationship between the perception of abusive supervision and reactions emerged for high vs. for low attribution to the supervisor. The differences in results between the studies reflect that in Study 1 and 2 abusive behavior was manipulated and in Study 3 the perception of abusive supervision of actual leaders was assessed. Our findings show that avoidance of abusive supervision should be taken seriously and followers' perception and suffering is not only due to subjective judgment but reflects actual differences in behavior. The relationships are stronger in the field study, because, in practice, abusive behaviors might be more ambiguous. The research presented here can help leaders to better understand their own and the followers' role in the perception of and reaction to abusive supervision.
对于理解下属对滥用职权型领导的反应如何受到下属认知和归因的影响,人们的兴趣日益浓厚。我们的研究有助于增进对不同程度领导滥用行为(从建设性领导如控制型、放任型、轻度到重度滥用)与下属反应之间所发生过程的理解。具体而言,我们关注将滥用监督认知作为中介变量以及将归因作为领导滥用行为与下属反应之间关系的调节变量的作用。下属反应从离职、建言、忠诚和怠工等方面来界定。我们进行了两项采用两点实验设计和情景描述的研究以及一项横断面实地研究。认知在一定程度上中介了领导行为与反应之间的关系(研究1和研究2)。不同的归因(意图、可控性)在研究2和研究3中调节了滥用监督认知与反应之间的关系。在研究2中,领导行为的意图归因在滥用监督与忠诚、离职和建言之间的关系中起到调节作用。意图归因减弱了滥用监督认知与反应之间的关系。只有当感知到的是较为温和的滥用职权型领导时,意图归因才会强化负面反应。这些结果在研究3中未得到支持。然而,在研究3中,对上级可控性的归因在忠诚和建言方面起到调节作用。对于上级的高归因与低归因情况,滥用监督认知与反应之间出现了更强的关系。各项研究结果的差异反映出,在研究1和研究2中滥用行为是被操纵的,而在研究3中评估的是实际领导的滥用监督认知。我们的研究结果表明,应认真对待避免滥用监督的问题,下属的认知和痛苦不仅源于主观判断,还反映了实际行为差异。实地研究中的关系更强,因为在实际中,滥用行为可能更具模糊性。这里呈现的研究能够帮助领导者更好地理解他们自身以及下属在对滥用监督的认知和反应中所扮演的角色。