Perceived abusive supervision implies detrimental human consequences and negative performance effects. However, paradoxically, there are numerous anecdotal reports on managers who appear to deliberately mistreat most of their subordinates in an effort to enhance work group performance, preferring abusive methods of influence over more constructive motivational approaches. Because destructive leadership theory does not provide a compelling explanation for this perplexing phenomenon, I conducted an inductive, longitudinal case study at the executive level of a large corporation to explore antecedents of performance-oriented abusive supervisory behavior. The analysis of rich, contextualized data reveals that empathic incompetence of superiors to consider the emotions, goals, and limitations of inferiors can imply a belief in the efficacy of harsh management tactics, resulting in abrasive supervisory conduct and an abusive supervision climate collectively perceived by subalterns. The findings suggest social dominance orientation (SDO) of upper-level managers to moderate these relationships through cognitive activation of abusive supervisory values.
AdornoT.Frenkel-BrunswickE.LevinsonD.SanfordN. (1950). The authoritarian personality. NY: Harper.
2.
AielloA.PrattoF.PierroA. (2013). Framing social dominance orientation and power in organizational context. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 35, 487–495.
3.
AryeeS.ChenZ. X.SunL. Y.DebrahY. (2007). Antecedents and outcomes of abusive supervision: Test of a trickle-down model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 191–201.
4.
BanduraA. (1990). Selective activation and disengagement of moral control. Journal of Social Issues, 46, 27–46.
5.
BartlettC. A.WoznyM. (2001). Microsoft: Competing on talent (A) (Harvard Business School Case No. 300-001). Boston, MA: Harvard Business Publishing.
6.
BediA.AlpaslanC. M.GreenS. (2016). A meta-analytic review of ethical leadership outcomes and moderators. Journal of Business Ethics, 139, 517–536.
7.
BerkowitzL. (1993). Aggression: Its causes, consequences, and control. NY: McGraw-Hill.
8.
BowlingN. A.BeehrT. A. (2006). Workplace harassment from the victim’s perspective: A theoretical model and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 998–1012.
9.
BreevaartK.VriesR. E. de (2017). Supervisor’s HEXACO personality traits and subordinate perceptions of abusive supervision. The Leadership Quarterly, 28, 691–700.
10.
BrownM. E.TreviñoL. K.HarrisonD. A. (2005). Ethical leadership: A social learning perspective for construct development and testing. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 97, 117–134.
11.
BurtonJ.HooblerJ.ScheuerM. (2012). Supervisor workplace stress and abusive super-vision: The buffering effect of exercise. Journal of Business & Psychology, 27, 271–279.
12.
ByrneA.DionisiA. M.BarlingJ.AkersA.RobertsonJ.LysR.WylieJ.DupréK. (2014). The depleted leader: The influence of leaders’ diminished psychological resources on leadership behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly, 25, 344–357.
13.
ChanM. E.McAllisterD. J. (2014). Abusive supervision through the lens of employee state paranoia. Academy of Management Review, 39, 44–66.
14.
ChatterjeeA.HambrickD. C. (2007). It’s all about me: Narcissistic chief executive officers and their effects on company strategy and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52, 351–386.
15.
ChengB. S.ChouL. F.WuT. Y.HuangM. P.FarhJ. L. (2004). Paternalistic leadership and subordinate responses: Establishing a leadership model in Chinese organizations. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 7, 89–117.
16.
ClugstonM.HowellJ. P.DorfmanP. W. (2000). Does cultural socialization predict multiple bases and foci of commitment?Journal of Management, 26, 5–30.
17.
CollinsM. D.JacksonC. J. (2015). A process model of self-regulation and leadership: How attentional resource capacity and negative emotions influence constructive and destructive leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 26, 386–401.
18.
CollinsonD. (2014). Dichotomies, dialectics and dilemmas: New directions for critical leadership studies?Leadership, 10, 36–55.
19.
CourtrightS. H.GardnerR. G.SmithT. A.McCormickB. W.ColbertA. E. (2016). My family made me do it: A cross-domain, self-regulatory perspective on antecedents to abusive supervision. Academy of Management Journal, 59, 1630–1652.
20.
DenzinN. K. (1970). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. New Brunswick, NJ: AldineTransaction.
21.
DuckittJ. (2015). Authoritarian personality. In: WrightJ. D. (Ed.), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed., Vol. 2, Oxford: Elsevier, 255–261.
22.
EisenhardtK. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. The Academy of Management Review, 14, 532–550.
23.
EtzioniA. (1975). A comparative analysis of complex organizations. NY: Free Press.
24.
FerrisG. R.ZinkoR.BrouerR. L.BuckleyM. R.HarveyM. G. (2007). Strategic bullying as a supplementary, balanced perspective on destructive leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 18, 195–206.
25.
FordJ. (2010). Studying leadership critically: A psychosocial lens on leadership identities. Leadership, 6, 47–65.
26.
GioiaD. A.CorleyK. G.HamiltonA. L. (2013). Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology. Organizational research methods, 16, 15–31.
27.
GoffmanE. (1961). Asylums: Essays on the social situation of mental patients and other inmates. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books.
28.
HarmsP. D.WoodD.LandayK.LesterP. B.LesterG. V. (2018). Autocratic leaders and authoritarian followers revisited: A review and agenda for the future. The Leadership Quarterly, 29, 105–122.
29.
HeavenP.BucciS. (2001). Right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation and personality: an analysis using the IPIP measure. European Journal of Personality, 15, 49–56.
30.
HershcovisM. (2011). “Incivility, social undermining, bullying”: A call to reconcile constructs within workplace aggression research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32, 499–519.
31.
HerseyP.BlanchardK. H. (1969). Life cycle theory of leadership. Training & Development Journal, 23, 26–34.
32.
HooblerJ. M.BrassD. J. (2006). Abusive supervision and family undermining as displaced aggression. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 1125–1133.
33.
HowellJ. T. (1973). Hard living on Clay Street: Portraits of blue collar families. Prospect Heights, Illinois: Waveland Press.
34.
IsaacsonW. (2015). Steve Jobs: The exclusive biography. London: Abacus.
35.
JohnsonR. E.VenusM.LanajK.MaoC.ChangC.-H. (2012). Leader identity as an antecedent of the frequency and consistency of transformational, consideration, and abusive leadership behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 1262.
36.
KhanA. K.MossS.QuratulainS.HameedI. (2016). When and how subordinate performance leads to abusive supervision: A social dominance perspective. Journal of Management, 44, 2801–2826.
37.
KiazadK.RestubogSimon LloydD.ZagenczykT. J.KiewitzC.TangR. L. (2010). In pursuit of power: The role of authoritarian leadership in the relationship between supervisors’ Machiavellianism and subordinates’ perceptions of abusive supervisory behavior. Journal of Research in Personality, 44, 512–519.
38.
KrasikovaD. V.GreenS. G.LeBretonJ. M. (2013). Destructive leadership: A theoretical review, integration, and future research agenda. Journal of Management, 39, 1308–1338.
39.
LamC. K.WalterF.HuangX. (2017). Supervisors’ emotional exhaustion and abusive supervision: The moderating roles of perceived subordinate performance and supervisor self-monitoring. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 38, 1151–1166.
40.
LepineJ. A.PodsakoffN. P.LePineM. A. (2005). A meta-analytic test of the challenge stressor–hindrance stressor framework: An explanation for inconsistent relationships among stressors and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 48, 764–775.
41.
LianH.FerrisD. L.MorrisonR.BrownD. J. (2014). Blame it on the supervisor or the subordinate? Reciprocal relations between abusive supervision and organizational deviance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99, 651–664.
42.
LiangL. H.LianH.BrownD. J.FerrisD. L.HanigS.KeepingL. M. (2016). Why are abusive supervisors abusive? A dual-system self-control model. Academy of Management Journal, 59, 1385–1406.
43.
LiuD.LiaoH.LoiR. (2012). The dark side of leadership: A three-level investigation of the cascading effect of abusive supervision on employee creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 55, 1187–1212.
44.
LordR. G.BrownD. J. (2001). Leadership, values, and subordinate self-concepts. The Leadership Quarterly, 12, 133–152.
45.
MackeyJ. D.FriederR. E.BreesJ. R.MartinkoM. J. (2017). Abusive supervision: A meta-analysis and empirical review. Journal of Management, 43, 1940–1965.
46.
MartinkoM. J.HarveyP.BreesJ. R.MackeyJ. (2013). A review of abusive supervision research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34, 120–137.
47.
MawritzM. B.DustS. B.ResickC. J. (2014). Hostile climate, abusive supervision, and employee coping: Does conscientiousness matter?Journal of Applied Psychology, 99, 737.
48.
MawritzM. B.MayerD.HooblerJ.WayneS.MarinovaS. (2012). A trickle-down model of abusive supervision. Personnel Psychology, 65, 325–357.
49.
MayerD. M.KuenziM.GreenbaumR.BardesM.SalvadorR. B. (2009). How low does ethical leadership flow? Test of a trickle-down model. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 108, 1–13.
50.
NagR.CorleyK. G.GioiaD. A. (2007). The intersection of organizational identity, knowledge, and practice: Attempting strategic change via knowledge grafting. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 821–847.
51.
NicolA. A. (2009). Social dominance orientation, Right-wing authoritarianism, and their relation with leadership styles. Personality and Individual Differences, 47, 657–661.
52.
PiccoloR. F.GreenbaumR.HartogD.FolgerR. (2010). The relationship between ethical leadership and core job characteristics. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31, 259–278.
53.
PorathC. L.PearsonC. (2010). The cost of bad behavior. Organizational Dynamics, 39, 64–71.
54.
PrattM. G. (2009). From the editors: For the lack of a boilerplate: Tips on writing up (and reviewing) qualitative research. Academy of Management Journal, 52, 856–862.
55.
PrattoF.SidaniusJ.StallworthL. M.MalleB. F. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 741–763.
56.
PriesemuthM.SchminkeM.AmbroseM. L.FolgerR. (2014). Abusive supervision climate: A multiple-mediation model of its impact on group outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 57, 1513–1534.
57.
RestubogS. L. D.ScottK. L.ZagenczykT. J. (2011). When distress hits home: the role of contextual factors and psychological distress in predicting employees’ responses to abusive supervision. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 713–729.
58.
SchwartzM. S.SchwartzC. G. (1955). Problems in participant observation. American Journal of Sociology, 60, 343–353.
59.
SchynsB.SchillingJ. (2013). How bad are the effects of bad leaders? A meta-analysis of destructive leadership and its outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 24, 138–158.
60.
SidaniusJ.KteilyN.Sheehy-SkeffingtonJ.HoA. K.SibleyC.DuriezB. (2013). You’re inferior and not worth our concern: the interface between empathy and social dominance orientation. Journal of Personality, 81, 313–323.
61.
SiggelkowN. (2007). Persuasion with case studies. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 2–24.
62.
SpradleyJ. P. (1980). Participant observation. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
63.
StinglhamberF.VandenbergheC. (2003). Organizations and supervisors as sources of support and targets of commitment: A longitudinal study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 251–270.
64.
StogdillR. M. (1963). Manual for the leader behavior description questionnaire-Form XII. Columbus, OH: College of Commerce and Administration, Ohio State University.
65.
StraussA. L.CorbinJ. M. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
66.
TedeschiJ. T.FelsonR. B. (1994). Violence, aggression, and coercive actions. American Psychological Association.
67.
TepperB. J. (2000). Consequences of abusive supervision. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 178–190.
68.
TepperB. J.DuffyM.Breaux-SoignetD. M. (2012). Abusive supervision as political activity: Distinguishing impulsive and strategic expressions of downward hostility. Politics in organizations: Theory and research considerations, 191–212.
69.
TepperB. J.SimonL.ParkH. M. (2017). Abusive supervision. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 4, 123–152.
70.
VerplankenB.HollandR. W. (2002). Motivated decision making: effects of activation and self-centrality of values on choices and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 434–447.
71.
WaalF. B. M. de (2008). Putting the altruism back into altruism: the evolution of empathy. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 279–300.
72.
WalterF.LamC. K.van der VegtG. S.HuangX.MiaoQ. (2015). Abusive supervision and subordinate performance: Instrumentality considerations in the emergence and consequences of abusive supervision. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100, 1056–1072.
73.
WhitmanM. V.HalbeslebenJ. R. B.ShanineK. K. (2013). Psychological entitlement and abusive supervision: Political skill as a self-regulatory mechanism. Health Care Management Review, 38, 248–257.
74.
WoD. X.AmbroseM. L.SchminkeM. (2015). What drives trickle-down effects? A test of multiple mediation processes. Academy of Management Journal, 58, 1848–1868.
75.
YinR. K. (2013). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
76.
ZerbeW. J.PaulhusD. L. (1987). Socially desirable responding in organizational behavior: A reconception. Academy of Management Review, 12, 250-264.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
