The literature on abusive supervision has utilized attribution theory to understand the relationship between other-condemning emotions and supervisor-directed deviance behaviors, as well as the relationship between self-conscious emotions and supervisor-directed organizational citizenship behaviors. However, employees’ reactions to abusive supervision are often varied, less intense, and not exclusively directed at the supervisor, especially among members of Generation Z. That is, instead of confronting the abusive supervisor, Generation Z employees are expected to exhibit passive work behaviors, such as quiet quitting and insubordination. Instead of seeking to please the abusive supervisor, Generation Z employees also may seek to improve their performance through impression management and feedback-seeking behaviors. This study employs a mixed-methods approach, including qualitative (Study 1), experimental (Study 2), and field-based (Study 3) methods, to test these ideas. This innovative research considers the contingent effect of generational differences on the abusive supervision process and empirically examines several unique characteristics of Generation Z.
AshfordS. J.TsuiA. S. (1991). Self-regulation for managerial effectiveness: The role of active feedback seeking. Academy of Management Journal, 34(2), 251–280. https://doi.org/10.5465/256442
2.
BakerM. A.KimK. (2018). Other customer service failures: Emotions, impacts, and attributions. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 42(7), 1067–1085. https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348016671394
3.
BencsikA.Horvath-CsikosG.JuhászT. (2016). Y and Z generations at workplaces. Journal of Competitiveness, 8(3), 90–106. https://doi.org/10.7441/joc.2016.03.06
4.
BozemanD. P.KacmarK. M. (1997). A cybernetic model of impression management processes in organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 69(1), 9–30. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1996.2669
5.
BurtonJ. P.TaylorS. G.BarberL. K. (2014). Understanding internal, external, and relational attributions for abusive supervision. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(6), 871–891. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1939
6.
ChenH.AyounB. (2022). Does national culture matter? Restaurant employees’ workplace humor and job embeddedness. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 46(6), 1096–1121. https://doi.org/10.1177/10963480211027927
7.
ChillakuriB. (2020). Understanding generation Z expectations for effective onboarding. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 33(7), 1277–1296. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-02-2020-0058
8.
ChoiM.ChoiY.LeeH. (2024). Gen Z travelers in the instagram marketplace: Trust, influencer type, post type, and purchase intention. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 48(6), 1020–1034. https://doi.org/10.1177/10963480231180938
9.
De ClercqD.AzeemM. U.HaqI. U. (2023). Supervisor incivility, ruminations and insubordination: Catalytic effects of supervisor task conflict. Management Decision, 61(11), 3385–3407. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-11-2022-1522
10.
EissaG.LesterS. W.GuptaR. (2020). Interpersonal deviance and abusive supervision: The mediating role of supervisor negative emotions and the moderating role of subordinate organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 166(3), 577–594. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04130-x
11.
ElfenbeinH. A. (2007). 7 Emotion in organizations: A review and theoretical integration. Academy of Management Annals, 1(1), 315–386. https://doi.org/10.5465/078559812
12.
FarhC. I. C.ChenZ. (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
GalanisP.KatsiroumpaA.VrakaI.SiskouO.KonstantakopoulouO.MoisoglouI.GallosP.KaitelidouD. (2023). The quiet quitting scale: Development and initial validation. AIMS Public Health, 10(4), 828–848. https://doi.org/10.3934/publichealth.2023055
15.
GaoQ.ZhangK.CaoY.LiJ.BianR.WangX.-H. (2024). The effect of negative workplace gossip about supervisor on workplace deviance and impression management: The mediating roles of anxiety and guilt. Journal of Business and Psychology, 39(2), 435–454. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-023-09888-6
16.
GohE.LeeC. (2018). A workforce to be reckoned with: The emerging pivotal generation Z hospitality workforce. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 73, 20–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2018.01.016
17.
HaidtJ. (2003). The moral emotions. In DavidsonR. J.SchererK. R.GoldsmithH. H. (Eds.), Handbook of affective sciences (pp. 852–870). Oxford University Press. https://bit.ly/3ERhuMB
18.
HamoucheS.KoritosC.PapastathopoulosA. (2023). Quiet quitting: Relationship with other concepts and implications for tourism and hospitality. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 35(12), 4297–4312. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-11-2022-1362
19.
HonA. H. Y.LuL. (2016). When will the trickle-down effect of abusive supervision be alleviated? The moderating roles of power distance and traditional cultures. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 57(4), 421–433. https://doi.org/10.1177/1938965515624013
20.
HuangY.FanD.SuY.WuF. (2018). High-performance work systems, dual stressors and ‘new generation’ employee in china. Asia Pacific Business Review, 24(4), 490–509. https://doi.org/10.1080/13602381.2018.1451127
21.
IliesR.PengA. C.SavaniK.DimotakisN. (2013). Guilty and helpful: An emotion-based reparatory model of voluntary work behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(6), 1051–1059. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034162
22.
IzardC. E.LiberoD. Z.PutnamP.HaynesO. M. (1993). Stability of emotion experiences and their relations to traits of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(5), 847–860. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.64.5.847
23.
KimJ. K.HoltzB. C.HuB. (2020). Rising above: Investigating employee exemplification as a response to the experience of shame induced by abusive supervision. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 93(4), 861–886. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12327
24.
LevyP. E.CoberR. T.MillerT. (2002). The effect of transformational and transactional leadership perceptions on feedback-seeking intentions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(8), 1703–1720. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2002.tb02771.x
25.
LuA. C. C.GursoyD. (2016). Impact of job burnout on satisfaction and turnover intention: Do generational differences matter?Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 40(2), 210–235. https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348013495696
26.
MackeyJ. D.McAllisterC. P.AlexanderK. C. (2021). Insubordination: Validation of a measure and an examination of insubordinate responses to unethical supervisory treatment. Journal of Business Ethics, 168(4), 755–775. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04231-7
27.
MahandT.CaldwellC. (2023). Quiet quitting-causes and opportunities. Business and Management Research, 12(1), 9–19. https://doi.org/10.5430/bmr.v12n1p9
28.
MarschallD.SanftnerJ.TangneyJ. P. (1994). The state shame and guilt scale. George Mason University. https://bit.ly/3EIQmiT
29.
McGahaK. K. (2018). An interpretive phenomenological study of America’s emerging workforce: Exploring generation z’s leadership preferences (Publication No. 10974750) [Doctoral dissertation, University of Phoenix]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. https://bit.ly/4jLroyk
30.
MiaoL.LinM.WeiW.MoonH. (2023). Peer regulation in a peer-to-peer business model. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 47(5), 908–926. https://doi.org/10.1177/10963480211031421
31.
MossS. E.ValenziE. R.TaggartW. (2003). Are you hiding from your boss? The development of a taxonomy and instrument to assess the feedback management behaviors of good and bad performers. Journal of Management, 29(4), 487–510. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-2063_03_00022-9
32.
PanS.-Y.LinK. J.McAllisterD. J.XiaY. (2024). Holding abusive managers in contempt: Why and when experienced abusive supervision motivates enacted interpersonal justice toward subordinates. Journal of Business Ethics, 192(2), 341–361. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-023-05528-4
33.
PrenticeC.Dominique-FerreiraS.WangX.TuominenJ.DuarteM.RochaH. (2025). Work-life imbalance, burning out, feeling down, I will quit, but quietly - the case of hospitality employees. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 34(1), 24–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2024.2389074
34.
QinZ.YanL.LeeT. J. (2025). Surviving in temporary aircrew workplaces: Coping with intermittent abusive supervision in dynamic supervisor–subordinate relationships. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 49(3), 498–512. https://doi.org/10.1177/10963480241237114
35.
RichardsonS. D. (2023). Reimagining quiet quitting. In S. D. Richardson (Ed.), Making the entrepreneurial transition: Understanding the challenges of women entre-employees (pp. 105–117). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-29211-8_8
36.
ShenC.YangJ.HeP.WuY. J. (2019). How does abusive supervision restrict employees’ feedback-seeking behavior?Journal of Managerial Psychology, 34(8), 546–559. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-10-2018-0480
37.
ShenW.EvansR.LiangL. H.BrownD. J. (2023). Bad, mad, or glad? Exploring the relationship between leaders’ appraisals or attributions of their use of abusive supervision and emotional reactions. Applied Psychology, 72(2), 647–673. https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12394
38.
TepperB. J. (2000). Consequences of abusive supervision. Academy of Management Journal, 43(2), 178–190. https://doi.org/10.5465/1556375
39.
TewsM. J.StaffordK. (2020). The impact of abusive supervision and constituent attachment on entry-level employee turnover. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 44(8), 1318–1334. https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348020947139
40.
TrösterC.Van QuaquebekeN. (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
WatsonD.ClarkL. A. (1994). The PANAS-X: Manual for the positive and negative affect schedule - expanded form. The University of Iowa. https://doi.org/10.17077/48vt-m4t2
43.
WayneS. J.FerrisG. R. (1990). Influence tactics, affect, and exchange quality in supervisor-subordinate interactions: A laboratory experiment and field study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(5), 487–499. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.75.5.487
44.
WayneS. J.KacmarK. M. (1991). The effects of impression management on the performance appraisal process. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 48(1), 70–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90006-F
45.
YangW.XuS. (2024). Should we be more mindful? The joint impact of an abusive work environment and mindfulness on employee well-being and turnover intentions. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 48(4), 712–724. https://doi.org/10.1177/10963480231156832
46.
YuL.DuffyM. K. (2021). The whiplash effect: The (moderating) role of attributed motives in emotional and behavioral reactions to abusive supervision. Journal of Applied Psychology, 106(5), 754–773. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000810
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.
