What Does Leaders’ Abuse Mean to Me? Psychological Empowerment as the Key Mechanism Explaining the Relationship Between Abusive Supervision and Taking Charge

Abstract

We integrate the cognitive theory of empowerment and regulatory focus theory to suggest that abusive supervision, from which employees draw negative achievement and security implications, discourages employees from engaging in taking charge by damaging their psychological empowerment. We propose that this negative influence is more saliently experienced by both promotion-focused and prevention-focused employees, albeit for different reasons. To test our model, we conducted a field study (Study 1) and a scenario-based experiment (Study 2). In Study 1, we found that psychological empowerment stood as a key mechanism linking abusive supervision and taking charge. Further, promotion focus magnified the negative effects of abusive supervision on psychological empowerment, and in turn, taking charge. Yet, prevention focus did not influence these effects. In Study 2, we replicated these findings and revealed that the anticipations of both career success and job insecurity (representing employees’ achievement and security implications) are critical in linking abusive supervision and psychological empowerment. We also found that promotion focus strengthened the negative indirect effect of abusive supervision on psychological empowerment via anticipated career success, ultimately resulting in a greater negative impact on taking charge. As in Study 1, there was limited support for the moderating effects of prevention focus. Our research highlights the importance of adopting a cognitive view in understanding the impact of abusive supervision on employees’ taking charge.

Keywords

abusive supervision psychological empowerment taking charge promotion focus prevention focus

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Aguinis

Bradley

K. J.

(2014). Best practice recommendations for designing and implementing experimental vignette methodology studies. Organizational Research Methods, 17(4), 351–371. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114547952

Aldana

Richards-Schuster

Checkoway

(2016). Dialogic pedagogy for youth participatory action research: Facilitation of an intergroup empowerment program. Social Work with Groups, 39(4), 339–358. https://doi.org/10.1080/01609513.2015.1076370

Black

(1984). Social control as a dependent variable. In Black

(Ed.), Toward a general theory of social control (vol. 1, pp. 1–29). Academic Press.

Bozionelos

Simmering

M. J.

(2022). Methodological threat or myth? Evaluating the current state of evidence on common method variance in human resource management research. Human Resource Management Journal, 32(1), 194–215. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12398

Brislin

R. W.

(1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1(3), 185–216. https://doi.org/10.1177/135910457000100301

Brockner

Higgins

E. T.

(2001). Regulatory focus theory: Implications for the study of emotions at work. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86(1), 35–66. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.2001.2972

Burris

E. R.

Detert

J. R.

Chiaburu

D. S.

(2008). Quitting before leaving: The mediating effects of psychological attachment and detachment on voice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(4), 912–922. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.4.912

Cho

Berry

C. M.

Payne

S. C.

Lee

(2023). Too good to be true? Are supervisor-perspective ratings a valid substitute for actual supervisor ratings? Journal of Applied Psychology, 108(1), 167–178. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001018

de Luque

M. S.

Lelchook

A. M.

Quigley

N. R.

(2015). Project GLOBE: Insights into the study of culture and leadership. In Wiley Encyclopedia of Management (pp. 1–9). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118785317.weom060096

10.

Deng

C.-H.

Leung

Guan

(2016). Depletion from self-regulation: A resource-based account of the effect of value incongruence. Personnel Psychology, 69(2), 431–465. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12107

11.

Eisenberger

Armeli

Rexwinkel

Lynch

P. D.

Rhoades

(2001). Reciprocation of perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 42–51. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.1.42

12.

Elst

T. V.

De Cuyper

De Witte

(2011). The role of perceived control in the relationship between job insecurity and psychosocial outcomes: Moderator or mediator? Stress and Health, 27(3), e215–e227. https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.1371

13.

Farh

C. I. C.

Chen

(2014). Beyond the individual victim: Multilevel consequences of abusive supervision in teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(6), 1074–1095. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037636

14.

Farmer

S. M.

Aguinis

(2005). Accounting for subordinate perceptions of supervisor power: An identity-dependence model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(6), 1069–1083. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1069

15.

Fischer

Tian

A. W.

Lee

Hughes

D. J.

(2021). Abusive supervision: A systematic review and fundamental rethink. The Leadership Quarterly, 32(6), 101540. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2021.101540

16.

Fuller

J. B.

Marler

L. E.

Hester

(2012). Bridge building within the province of proactivity. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33(8), 1053–1070. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1780

17.

Furst

S. A.

Cable

D. M.

(2008). Employee resistance to organizational change: Managerial influence tactics and leader-member exchange. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(2), 453–462. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.2.453

18.

Greenhaus

J. H.

Parasuraman

Wormley

W. M.

(1990). Effects of race on organizational experiences, job performance evaluations, and career outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 33(1), 64–86. https://doi.org/10.5465/256352

19.

Heck

Thomas

(2015). An introduction to multilevel modeling techniques: MLM and SEM approaches using Mplus (3rd ed.). Routledge.

20.

Hewlin

P. F.

Kim

S. S.

Song

Y. H.

(2016). Creating facades of conformity in the face of job insecurity: A study of consequences and conditions. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 89(3), 539–567. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12140

21.

Higgins

E. T.

(1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52(12), 1280–1300. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.52.12.1280

22.

Higgins

E. T.

(1998). Promotion and prevention: Regulatory focus as a motivational principle. In Zanna

M. P.

(Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (vol. 30, pp. 1–46). Academic Press.

23.

Higgins

E. T.

Roney

C. J. R.

Crowe

Hymes

(1994). Ideal versus ought predilections for approach and avoidance: Distinct self-regulatory systems. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(2), 276–286. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.66.2.276

24.

Higgins

Tykocinski

(1992). Seff-discrepancies and biographical memory: Personality and cognition at the level of psychological situation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18(5), 527–535. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167292185002

25.

Huang

Wellman

Ashford

S. J.

Lee

Wang

(2017). Deviance and exit: The organizational costs of job insecurity and moral disengagement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(1), 26–42. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000158

26.

Jick

T. D.

(1979). Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(4), 602. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392366

27.

Johnson

P. D.

Smith

M. B.

Wallace

J. C.

Hill

A. D.

Baron

R. A.

(2015). A review of multilevel regulatory focus in organizations. Journal of Management, 41(5), 1501–1529. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206315575552

28.

Huang

Liu

Qin

Chen

(2019). Supervisory consequences of abusive supervision: An investigation of sense of power, managerial self-efficacy, and task-oriented leadership behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 154, 80–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2019.09.003

29.

Kahneman

Tversky

(1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263–291. https://doi.org/10.2307/1914185

30.

Kernan

M. C.

Watson

Fang Chen

Gyu Kim

(2011). How cultural values affect the impact of abusive supervision on worker attitudes. Cross Cultural Management: International Journal, 18(4), 464–484. https://doi.org/10.1108/13527601111179528

31.

Kim

S. L.

Lee

Yun

(2020). The trickle-down effect of abusive supervision: The moderating effects of supervisors’ task performance and employee promotion focus. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 27(3), 241–255. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051820933321

32.

Kruschke

J. K.

Aguinis

Joo

(2012). The time has come: Bayesian methods for data analysis in the organizational sciences. Organizational Research Methods, 15(4), 722–752. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428112457829

33.

Kurman

Liem

G. A.

Ivancovsky

Morio

Lee

(2015). Regulatory focus as an explanatory variable for cross-cultural differences in achievement-related behavior. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 46(2), 171–190. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022114558090

34.

Lanaj

Chang

C.-H.

Johnson

R. E.

(2012). Regulatory focus and work-related outcomes: A review and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 138(5), 998–1034. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027723

35.

Chen

Zhang

Luo

(2021). How do authoritarian leadership and abusive supervision jointly thwart follower proactivity? A social control perspective. Journal of Management, 47(4), 930–956. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206319878261

36.

Lian

Lance Ferris

Brown

D. J.

(2012). Does taking the good with the bad make things worse? How abusive supervision and leader–member exchange interact to impact need satisfaction and organizational deviance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 117(1), 41–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2011.10.003

37.

Liden

R. C.

Sparrowe

R. T.

Wayne

S. J.

(1997). Leader-member exchange theory: The past and potential for the future. In Ferris

G. R.

(Ed.), Research in personnel and human resources management (vol. 15, pp. 47–119). JAI.

38.

Mackey

J. D.

Frieder

R. E.

Brees

J. R.

Martinko

M. J.

(2017). Abusive supervision: A meta-analysis and empirical review. Journal of Management, 43(6), 1940–1965. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206315573997

39.

Mackey

J. D.

McAllister

C. P.

Maher

L. P.

Wang

(2019). Leaders and followers behaving badly: A meta-analytic examination of curvilinear relationships between destructive leadership and followers’ workplace behaviors. Personnel Psychology, 72(1), 3–47. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12286

40.

Mael

Ashforth

B. E.

(1992). Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13(2), 103–123. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030130202

41.

Mawritz

M. B.

Greenbaum

R. L.

Butts

M. M.

Graham

K. A.

(2017). I just can’t control myself: A self-regulation perspective on the abuse of deviant employees. Academy of Management Journal, 60(4), 1482–1503. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2014.0409

42.

McAllister

D. J.

Kamdar

Morrison

E. W.

Turban

D. B.

(2007). Disentangling role perceptions: How perceived role breadth, discretion, instrumentality, and efficacy relate to helping and taking charge. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(5), 1200–1211. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.5.1200

43.

Meade

A. W.

Craig

S. B.

(2012). Identifying careless responses in survey data. Psychological Methods, 17(3), 437–455. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028085

44.

Mitchell

M. S.

Ambrose

M. L.

(2007). Abusive supervision and workplace deviance and the moderating effects of negative reciprocity beliefs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(4), 1159–1168. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.4.1159

45.

Moon

Kamdar

Mayer

D. M.

Takeuchi

(2008). Me or we? The role of personality and justice as other-centered antecedents to innovative citizenship behaviors within organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(1), 84–94. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.1.84

46.

Morrison

E. W.

Phelps

C. C.

(1999). Taking charge at work: Extrarole efforts to initiate workplace change. Academy of Management Journal, 42(4), 403–419. https://doi.org/10.2307/257011

47.

Muthén

B. O.

Satorra

(1995). Complex sample data in structural equation modeling. Sociological Methodology, 25, 267–316. https://doi.org/10.2307/271070

48.

Muthén

L. K.

Muthén

B. O.

(2017). Mplus user’s guide (8th ed.). Muthén & Muthén.

49.

Neubert

M. J.

Kacmar

K. M.

Carlson

D. S.

Chonko

L. B.

Roberts

J. A.

(2008). Regulatory focus as a mediator of the influence of initiating structure and servant leadership on employee behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(6), 1220–1233. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012695

50.

Nickerson

(2022). Hofstede’s cultural dimensions theory: Power distance & individualism. https://www.simplypsychology.org/hofstedes-cultural-dimensions-theory.html

51.

Niessen

A. S. M.

Meijer

R. R.

Tendeiro

J. N.

(2016). Detecting careless respondents in web-based questionnaires: Which method to use? Journal of Research in Personality, 63, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2016.04.010

52.

O’Neill

Sevastos

(2013). The development and validation of a new multidimensional job insecurity measure (JIM): An inductive methodology. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 18(3), 338–349. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033114

53.

Ouyang

Lam

Wang

(2015). Roles of gender and identification on abusive supervision and proactive behavior. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 32(3), 671–691. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-015-9410-7

54.

Park

Hoobler

J. M.

Liden

R. C.

Wilson

M. S.

(2019). Abusive supervision and employee deviance: A multifoci justice perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 158(4), 1113–1131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3749-2

55.

Parker

S. K.

Collins

C. G.

(2010). Taking stock: Integrating and differentiating multiple proactive behaviors. Journal of Management, 36(3), 633–662. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308321554

56.

Parker

S. K.

Wang

Liao

(2019). When is proactivity wise? A review of factors that influence the individual outcomes of proactive behavior. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 6(1), 221–248. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-012218-015302

57.

Podsakoff

P. M.

MacKenzie

S. B.

Lee

J.-Y.

Podsakoff

N. P.

(2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879

58.

Rhemtulla

Brosseau-Liard

P. É.

Savalei

(2012). When can categorical variables be treated as continuous? A comparison of robust continuous and categorical SEM estimation methods under suboptimal conditions. Psychological Methods, 17(3), 354–373. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029315

59.

Sawyer

K. B.

Thoroughgood

C. N.

Stillwell

E. E.

Duffy

M. K.

Scott

K. L.

Adair

E. A.

(2022). Being present and thankful: A multi-study investigation of mindfulness, gratitude, and employee helping behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 107(2), 240–262. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000903

60.

Schaubroeck

J. M.

Shen

Chong

(2017). A dual-stage moderated mediation model linking authoritarian leadership to follower outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(2), 203–214. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000165

61.

Sears

G. J.

Shen

Zhang

(2018). When and why are proactive employees more creative? Investigations of relational and motivational mechanisms and contextual contingencies in the east and west. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 48(11), 593–607. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12550

62.

Seibert

S. E.

Wang

Courtright

S. H.

(2011). Antecedents and consequences of psychological and team empowerment in organizations: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(5), 981–1003. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022676

63.

Shao

Mawritz

(2018). Self-protective reactions to peer abusive supervision: The moderating role of prevention focus and the mediating role of performance instrumentality. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 39(1), 12–25. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2206

64.

Siemsen

Roth

Oliveira

(2010). Common method bias in regression models with linear, quadratic, and interaction effects. Organizational Research Methods, 13(3), 456–476. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428109351241

65.

Simon

L. S.

Hurst

Kelley

Judge

T. A.

(2015). Understanding cycles of abuse: A multimotive approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(6), 1798–1810. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000031

66.

Spreitzer

G. M.

(1995). Psychological empowerment in the workplace: Dimensions, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 38(5), 1442–1465. https://doi.org/10.2307/256865

67.

Spurk

Hirschi

Dries

(2019). Antecedents and outcomes of objective versus subjective career success: Competing perspectives and future directions. Journal of Management, 45(1), 35–69. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206318786563

68.

Staw

B. M.

Boettger

R. D.

(1990). Task revision: A neglected form of work performance. Academy of Management Journal, 33(3), 534–559. https://doi.org/10.5465/256580

69.

Stone-Romero

E. F.

Rosopa

P. J.

(2011). Experimental tests of mediation models: Prospects, problems, and some solutions. Organizational Research Methods, 14(4), 631–646. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428110372673

70.

Tepper

B. J.

(2000). Consequences of abusive supervision. Academy of Management Journal, 43(2), 178–190. https://doi.org/10.2307/1556375

71.

Tepper

B. J.

(2007). Abusive supervision in work organizations: Review, synthesis, and research agenda. Journal of Management, 33(3), 261–289. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206307300812

72.

Tepper

B. J.

Henle

C. A.

Lambert

L. S.

Giacalone

R. A.

Duffy

M. K.

(2008). Abusive supervision and subordinates’ organization deviance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(4), 721–732. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.4.721

73.

Tepper

B. J.

Simon

Park

H. M.

(2017). Abusive supervision. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 4, 123–152. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-041015-062539

74.

Thomas

K. W.

Velthouse

B. A.

(1990). Cognitive elements of empowerment: An “interpretive” model of intrinsic task motivation. Academy of Management Review, 15(4), 666–681. https://doi.org/10.2307/258687

75.

Thoroughgood

C. N.

Sawyer

K. B.

Webster

J. R.

(2020). Finding calm in the storm: A daily investigation of how trait mindfulness buffers against paranoid cognition and emotional exhaustion following perceived discrimination at work. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 159, 49–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2019.02.004

76.

Tröster

Van Quaquebeke

(2021). When victims help their abusive supervisors: The role of LMX, self-blame, and guilt. Academy of Management Journal, 64(6), 1793–1815. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2019.0559

77.

Turner

S. F.

Cardinal

L. B.

Burton

R. M.

(2017). Research design for mixed methods: A triangulation-based framework and roadmap. Organizational Research Methods, 20(2), 243–267. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428115610808

78.

van den Bos

(2001). Uncertainty management: The influence of uncertainty salience on reactions to perceived procedural fairness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(6), 931–941. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.80.6.931

79.

Vander Elst

Richter

Sverke

Näswall

De Cuyper

De Witte

(2014). Threat of losing valued job features: The role of perceived control in mediating the effect of qualitative job insecurity on job strain and psychological withdrawal. Work & Stress, 28(2), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2014.899651

80.

Vogel

R. M.

Mitchell

M. S.

Tepper

B. J.

Restubog

S. L. D.

Hua

Huang

J.-C.

(2015). A cross-cultural examination of subordinates’ perceptions of and reactions to abusive supervision. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36(5), 720–745. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1984

81.

Walter

Lam

C. K.

van der Vegt

G. S.

Huang

Miao

(2015). Abusive supervision and subordinate performance: Instrumentality considerations in the emergence and consequences of abusive supervision. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(4), 1056–1072. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038513

82.

Wang

Zhou

Maguire

Zong

(2019). Effects of abusive supervision on employees’ innovative behavior: The role of job insecurity and locus of control. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 60(2), 152–159. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12510

83.

A. J.

Loi

Chow

C. W. C.

(2023). Does taking charge help or harm employees’ promotability and visibility? An investigation from supervisors’ status perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 108(1), 53–71. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000752

84.

Zeng

Zhou

Shen

(2018). Dealing with an abusive boss in China: The moderating effect of promotion focus on reward expectancy and organizational citizenship behavior. International Journal of Conflict Management, 29(4), 500–518. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCMA-02-2018-0026

85.

Zhang

M. J.

Law

K. S.

Wang

(2021). The risks and benefits of initiating change at work: Social consequences for proactive employees who take charge. Personnel Psychology, 74(4), 721–750. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12423

86.

Zhang

Liu

Yang

L.-Q.

Bednall

T. C.

(2019). Why abusive supervision impacts employee OCB and CWB: A meta-analytic review of competing mediating mechanisms. Journal of Management, 45(6), 2474–2497. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206318823935

87.

Zyphur

M. J.

Oswald

F. L.

(2015). Bayesian estimation and inference: A user’s guide. Journal of Management, 41(2), 390–420. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206313501200

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.

0.00 MB

0.45 MB