Abusive Supervision: A Meta-Analysis and Empirical Review

Mackey, Jeremy D.; Frieder, Rachel E.; Brees, Jeremy R.; Martinko, Mark J.

doi:10.1177/0149206315573997

Cited by 524 publications

(679 citation statements)

References 143 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

617

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This view is supported by meta-analytic findings showing that destructive leadership correlates negatively with outcomes that previously have been established as positive correlates of constructive forms of leadership (Mackey et al, 2015;Schyns & Schilling, 2013). In an extension of the abovementioned theoretical model of Barling and colleagues (2002); Kelloway and colleagues (2006 p. 79-80), argue that passive forms of destructive leadership are a prominent risk factor for safety:…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 84%

The importance of a multidimensional and temporal design in research on leadership and workplace safety

Nielsen

Skogstad

Matthiesen

et al. 2016

The Leadership Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 84%

The importance of a multidimensional and temporal design in research on leadership and workplace safety

Nielsen

Skogstad

Matthiesen

et al. 2016

The Leadership Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In addition, abusive supervision offers rise to authoritative insufficiency, nonpresence and turnover.In this way, abused employees who cannot expect a sufficient level of substantial or elusive assets from their abusive supervisors will likely have low levels of shared knowledge. Mackey, Frieder, Brees, and Martinko (2017) Find out the antecedents and outcomes of abusive supervision by using psychometric correction.…”

Section: / Relationship Of Abusive Supervision and Creativity Of Acadmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relationship of Abusive Supervision and Creativity of Academic Staff in Public Sector Universities: Mediating role of Knowledge Sharing

Asghar

Sultana

2017

SIJMB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The importance of knowledge management enhances the competitive advantage of an organization in today's knowledge-based economy is agreed upon. In this era of globalized economy, knowledge is the main driver for growth. Knowledge promotes creativity is proved in the extant literature which is effected by abusive supervision. In this present study, we examine the process through which abusive supervision affects the creativity of employees. In particular, with the likelihood that abusive supervision is related to creativity of the employees and mediated by knowledge sharing behavior. Thus, the aim of present study is to investigate the effect of abusive supervision on the creativity of academic staff in the public sector universities with the mediating role of knowledge sharing. In order to analyze the relationship among the variables involved in the study, utilized the quantitative research methodology, deductive approach and cross-sectional time horizon .The questionnaire survey technique was adopted to collect the data. A five-point Likert scales with significant measures was used. The targeted population of the present study was the academic staff of three universities (Lahore College for Women University, The University of the Punjab, and Government College University, Lahore). Total 330 employees were selected as a sample through utilizing the proportionate stratified random sampling technique and among them 298 was fit for the analysis. The statistical tool, SPSS and AMOS was utilized to analyze the collected data to obtain the results. The results of the study show that abusive supervision has a negative effect on employee creativity and knowledge sharing of employees whereas; knowledge sharing has significant positive effect on employee creativity. Though, knowledge sharing is partially mediating the relationship between abusive supervision and knowledge sharing.

show abstract

“…The last years have seen a growing interest in the topic of destructive leadership (Schyns and Schilling, 2013; Mackey et al, 2017) with the number of studies investigating the core construct of abusive supervision (Tepper, 2000) having significantly grown over the last decade (Martinko et al, 2013; Tepper et al, 2017). Schyns and Schilling (2013) define destructive leadership as “a process in which over a longer period of time the activities, experiences, and/or relationships of an individual or the members of a group are repeatedly influenced by their supervisor in a way that is perceived as hostile and/or obstructive” (p. 141).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Is It Me or You?—How Reactions to Abusive Supervision Are Shaped by Leader Behavior and Follower Perceptions

Schyns

Felfe

Schilling³

2018

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Abusive Supervision: A Meta-Analysis and Empirical Review

Cited by 524 publications

References 143 publications

The importance of a multidimensional and temporal design in research on leadership and workplace safety

The importance of a multidimensional and temporal design in research on leadership and workplace safety

Relationship of Abusive Supervision and Creativity of Academic Staff in Public Sector Universities: Mediating role of Knowledge Sharing

Is It Me or You?—How Reactions to Abusive Supervision Are Shaped by Leader Behavior and Follower Perceptions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About