Applying a framework of leadership categorization theory, I examined the leadership perceptions of heterosexual and gay male leaders. A significant interaction was found between participants' homonegativity and the sexual orientation of the target leader (heterosexual male or gay male) for the variable of leadership effectiveness. For participants who were less homonegative, there were no significant differences between evaluations of heterosexual and gay male leaders. However, individuals who were more homonegative evaluated the gay male leader more negatively than they did the heterosexual male leader. Implications of these findings for leaders with a minority sexual orientation and their organizations are discussed.

Workplace ostracism is a prevalent and detrimental type of mistreatment. To curtail this harmful behavior, researchers need to identify who is more likely to intentionally ostracize others at work and the motives that drive them to do so. Past reviews of workplace ostracism focus primarily on the outcomes of ostracism, and the few that address the antecedents often examine a limited set of variables. We examined themes in the ostracism literature and determined that employees intentionally ostracize others due to either punitive or defensive motives. Punitive motives are focused on protecting the interests of the group, whereas defensive motives pertain to defending the interests of the self. We present a model of the ostracizer based on these motives and the associated perceptions of threat and negative emotions that precipitate ostracism. Our model provides an extension of the workplace ostracism literature by presenting a testable theoretical framework, rooted in appraisal theory, to explain why and when employees are likely to ostracize others at work. We also provided suggestions for an expansion of the ostracizer motives literature, with the goal of encouraging research that provides greater understanding of the perspective of the ostracizer.

Purpose The emerging literature on computer-mediated communication at the study lacks depth in terms of elucidating the consequences of the effects of incivility on employees. This study aims to compare face-to-face incivility with incivility encountered via e-mail on both task performance and performance evaluation. Design/methodology/approach In two experimental studies, the authors test whether exposure to incivility via e-mail reduces individual task performance beyond that of face-to-face incivility and weather exposure to that incivility results in lower performance evaluations for third-parties. Findings The authors show that being exposed to cyber incivility does decrease performance on a subsequent task. The authors also find that exposure to rudeness, both face-to-face and via e-mail, is contagious and results in lower performance evaluation scores for an uninvolved third party. Originality/value This research comprises an empirically grounded study of incivility in the context of e-mail at study, highlights distinctions between it and face-to-face rudeness and reveals the potential risks that cyber incivility poses for employees.

No abstract

No abstract