Relational costs of status: Can the relationship between supervisor incivility, perceived support, and follower outcomes be exacerbated?

Abstract

Status has a central role in workplace incivility research. Although status is associated with a variety of benefits at work, we draw upon the relational model of authority and the status maintenance argument to propose that individuals with high status are more strongly affected by the experience of supervisor incivility than those with lower status. We tested this hypothesis by examining the relationships between supervisor incivility and turnover intentions, organizational deviance, and task performance, and proposed that the exacerbating effect of status could be explained by the extent to which employees feel that they are valued, cared for, and supported by their organization and supervisor (i.e., perceived organizational and supervisory support [POS and PSS]). Based on the structural equation modelling (SEM) analyses of supervisor–subordinate dyad data collected from a large organization in Thailand, our findings confirmed that the adverse effects of supervisor incivility on follower outcomes were more pronounced among those with higher status. The results also showed that these effects were differentially mediated by POS and PSS. Whereas POS mediated the effect of supervisor incivility on turnover intentions and organizational deviance, it was found that PSS mediated the effect of supervisor incivility on task performance. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed. Practitioner points Managers should pay particular attention to the type of relationships they develop with their employees. Our work suggests that rude behaviours from authority figures can contribute to employee turnover intentions, deviant behaviours, and poor performance. Despite the benefits associated with having high status in the workplace, our findings suggest that high‐status employees are more strongly affected by the experience of supervisory incivility. To buffer these effects, organizations should create a work environment in which employees feel valued, cared for, and supported. Our findings indicate that the negative aspects of these perceptions are partly responsible for the effects of supervisor incivility.

Reciprocal relationship between workplace incivility and deviant silence—The moderating role of moral attentiveness

“…Although the direct link between incivility and employee silence has been studied before, to the best of our knowledge, prior work has not tested reciprocal relationships between incivility and deviant silence in the workplace setting. Our findings also indicate that the positive relationship between WPI and deviant silence is stable over time (Andersson & Pearson, 1999;Potipiroon & Ford, 2019;Wu et al, 2014). Thus, our research helps us to understand why employees remain silent at the workplace in response to incivility and its negative consequence for organizational members.…”

“…In other words, we find evidence of a downward spiral of negative outcomes at work that is instigated by WPI. Although prior research has examined the link between WPI and deviant behaviors (Potipiroon & Ford, 2019;Wu et al, 2014), ours is the first to confirm that employees' negative responses to WPI lead to further WPI, even for deviant silence which is a less direct response to WPI than more direct forms of deviant or counterproductive work behaviors. In examining these issues our research not only highlights the negative consequences of WPI, but also help us determine that deviant silence, as an employee's response to WPI.…”

“…Previous literature validating the effectiveness of incivility interventions suggests that organizations may consider introducing training for managers and others in the organization about the need to build positive relationships at work and be respectful when communicating with others in the organization (Hodgins et al, 2014;Leiter et al, ,2011Leiter et al, , , 2012. Finally, as managers are a key source of WPI (Duffy et al, 2002;Potipiroon & Ford, 2019), they should regularly reflect on the influence of their own behaviors toward others at work, and alter their behaviors to ensure they are not seen by subordinates as being uncivil.…”

Perceived Organizational Support and Workplace Incivility: The Mediating Role of Psychological Empowerment in Egyptian Organizations

“…At the same time, POS indirectly affected WI through PE (0.38×-0.24 = -0.09). Findings revealing PE has a negative on WI, and this result is compatible with prior studies that investigated POS, PE and WI (Sen et al, 2021;Potipiroon and Ford, 2019;Liu et al, 2018;Chiang and Hsieh, 2012;Naderi and Hoveida, 2013;Spreitzer,2008;Malik et al, 2013;Aksel et al, 2013;Gorji, and Ranjbar, 2013). Hence, POS decreases the level of WI in service directorates through PE.…”

How Rude! Linking supervisor incivility to subordinates’ discretionary work effort

“…Thus, working with an uncivil supervisor can be an extremely stressful experience for subordinates (Cho et al , 2016). Indeed, research has demonstrated that SI is detrimental to such an extent that it can undermine subordinates’ self-efficacy, intrinsic motivation, work engagement, organizational commitment, job satisfaction, work ability and task and contextual performance (Alola et al , 2018; Giumetti et al , 2013; Han et al , 2021; Jawahar and Schreurs, 2018; Kabat-Farr et al , 2019; Lim and Lee, 2011; Liu et al , 2019; Moon et al , 2021; Potipiroon and Ford, 2019; Reio, 2011; Shin et al , 2021; Shin and Hur, 2020) and can also invoke several negative feelings and attitudes in subordinates (e.g. anxiety, emotional exhaustion, psychological distress, rumination, turnover intentions, job insecurity, deviance, cynicism and job stress [Abubakar, 2018; Alola et al , 2018; Demsky et al , 2019; Giumetti et al , 2013; Ghosh et al , 2013; Leiter et al , 2010; Lim and Lee, 2011; Shin et al , 2021; Shin and Hur, 2020]).…”