A Trickle‐down Model of Abusive Supervision

Abstract

Much of the abusive supervision research has focused on the supervisorsubordinate dyad when examining the effects of abusive supervision on employee outcomes. Using data from a large multisource field study, we extend this research by testing a trickle-down model of abusive supervision across 3 hierarchical levels (i.e., managers, supervisors, and employees). Drawing on social learning theory and social information processing theory, we find general support for the study hypotheses. Specifically, we find that abusive manager behavior is positively related to abusive supervisor behavior, which in turn is positively related to work group interpersonal deviance. In addition, hostile climate moderates the relationship between abusive supervisor behavior and work group interpersonal deviance such that the relationship is stronger when hostile climate is high. The results provide support for our trickle-down model in that abusive manager behavior was not only related to abusive supervisor behavior but was also associated with employees' behavior 2 hierarchical levels below the manager.

A Descriptive Literature Review of Harmful Leadership Styles: Definitions, Commonalities, Measurements, Negative Impacts, and Ways to Improve These Harmful leadership Styles

“…They take credit for the efforts of others, blame subordinates for mistakes, discourage informal interaction among subordinates, and deter initiative and dissent" (p. 374). Mawritz, Mayer, Hoobler, Wayne, and Marinova (2012) found that abusive supervision has effects beyond the supervisor-subordinate dyad, which appears according to numerous research efforts to be a common tell-tale of harmful leadership styles. Tepper (2007) provided antecedents of abusive supervision, including organizational injustice, perceived psychological contract breach, and negative affect (p. 1268).…”

My Boss is Morally Disengaged: The Role of Ethical Leadership in Explaining the Interactive Effect of Supervisor and Employee Moral Disengagement on Employee Behaviors

“…Working professionals filled out a survey and had a supervisor fill out another survey. This data collection approach has been successfully used in past research (Grant and Mayer 2009;Mawritz et al 2012;Mayer et al 2012;Morgeson and Humphrey 2006).…”

Blame the shepherd not the sheep: Imitating higher-ranking transgressors mitigates punishment for unethical behavior

“…2 First, people pay more attention to those in high-than low-ranking positions (Fiske, Morling, & Stevens, 1996;Flynn & Amanatullah, 2012;Giordano, 1983;Goode, 1978;Mawritz et al, 2012;Ridgeway & Correll, 2006), which makes high-ranking individuals' behavior a salient signal of descriptive norms. Second, high rank is an explicit indication of the organization's approval and acceptance of an individual, which contributes to the individual's perceived credibility as a role model (Bandura, 1977(Bandura, , 1986Brown et al, 2005;Mayer et al, 2009).…”

“…This work builds on insights from social learning theory, which emphasizes that people learn how to behave in a given situation by observing others (Bandura, 1977(Bandura, , 1986. Leaders who model bad behavior embolden their subordinates to engage in bad behavior (Brown et al, 2005;Mawritz et al, 2012;Mayer et al, 2010;Mayer et al, 2009). Modeling can also exert an influence up or across the organizational hierarchy as well (e.g., Gino et al, 2009;Robinson & O'Leary-Kelly, 1998;Zey-Ferrell & Ferrell, 1982).…”