Abusive supervision and workplace deviance: the mediating role of interactional justice and the moderating role of power distance

Abstract

This study replicates previous studies by examining the effects of abusive supervision on employee deviant behaviours in the Chinese organisational context. It extends the existing research of abusive supervision by investigating the mediating role of the perception of interactional justice and the moderating role of individual‐level power distance in the link between abusive supervision and workplace deviance. Regression analyses on data of 283 employee–supervisor dyads revealed that the perception of interactional justice mediates the link between abusive supervision and workplace deviance. We also found that abusive supervision has a stronger negative relationship with the perception of interactional justice for employees low in power distance than for employees high in power distance. These findings provide both replications of and extensions to western theories of abusive supervision and workplace deviance. Practical implications of this study include hints for reducing both financial and psychological costs of deviant behaviour.

Impact of Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions on Subordinate’s Perception of Abusive Supervision

“…Similarly, Lin, Wang, and Chen (2013) reported that subordinates in high power distance culture respond less negatively to supervisory abuse. In a similar vein, Wang, Mao, Wu, and Liu (2012) reported less interactional injustice of abused employees in a high power distance culture.…”

“…As these both countries are totally different from each other on the basis of their economic situation, religion and especially on their cultural grounds. Aryee, Chen, Sun, & Debrah, 2007;Jian et al, 2011;Wang et al, 2012;Wei & Si, 2013;Xiaqi, Kun, Chongsen, & Sufang, 2012;Xu, Huang, Lam, & Miao, 2012) 2 North America (Tepper, 2000;Tepper 2007;Tepper et al, 2009;Tepper et al, 2006;Tepper, Duffy, Hoobler, & Ensley, 2004;Tepper, Duffy, et al, 2001;Tepper et al, 2008;Tepper, Lockhart, & Hoobler, 2001;Tepper et al, 2011;Tepper et al, 2007;Ashforth, 1994Ashforth, , 1997Bowling & Michel, 2011;Carpenter, Geletkanycz, & Sanders, 2004;Christmas, 2007;DelBel, 2003;Dupré, Inness, Connelly, Barling, & Hoption, 2006;Namie & Namie, 2009;Tsapatsis, 2012) 3 Australia (Grice et al, 2003 ;Ng, 2010 ;Kiazad et al, 2010) 4 United Kingdom (Turnbull, 1995;Deborah, 2000;McMillan, 1995) 5 Pakistan , Khan, 2010Khan, 2014aKhan, , 2014bKhan, , 2014cImran, 2010;Mukhtar et al, 2010;Bashir & Hanif, 2011;Gadit & Mugford, 2008) 6 Israel (Dana Yagil, 2006) 7 Turkey …”

An Examination of Workplace Aggression, Job Performance, and Flow-States

“…This research has also supported the conceptualization of workplace aggression as a job demand in the COR theory and the JDR model, as workplace aggression depletes an individual's mental resources through taxing their self-regulatory strength (Wang, Mao, Wu & Liu, 2012). Research specific to how abusive supervision impacts an employee's enjoyment towards their work tasks is limited.…”

“…Second, workplace aggression research has shown that as the levels of power distance between the perpetrator and victim grows the impact of workplace aggression also increases (e.g., Tepper et al, 2009;Thau et al, 2009;Wang, Mao, Wu & Liu, 2012). This occurs as workplace aggression and the power distance impact the victim's sense of justice (both distributive and interactional; Thau & Mitchell, 2010;Wang, Mao, Wu & Liu, 2012).…”

“…The first is that a supervisor may be seen as an extension or representation of the organization, and responses to workplace aggression involving a supervisor would result in outcomes focused toward the organization, such as lower levels of satisfaction and commitment (Frone, 2000). Second, workplace aggression research has shown that as the levels of power distance between the perpetrator and victim grows the impact of workplace aggression also increases (e.g., Tepper et al, 2009;Thau et al, 2009;Wang, Mao, Wu & Liu, 2012). This occurs as workplace aggression and the power distance impact the victim's sense of justice (both distributive and interactional; Thau & Mitchell, 2010;Wang, Mao, Wu & Liu, 2012).…”