Grounded in the stressor-emotion model, this study reports an empirical examination of the relationships between exploitative leadership on employees' cognition and work behavior, incorporating the mediating role of organizational frustration and the moderating effect of stressor appraisals. Since ambiguity surrounds these processes, this perspective offers clarity on the negative chain reactions triggered by supervisors' exploitative leadership of employees. Data were collected from 298 full-time front-line employees and their direct supervisors. The findings reveal: (1) exploitative leadership positively affects employees' organizational frustration; (2) organizational frustration mediates the relationship between exploitative leadership and both contextual performance and silence behavior; (3) hindrance stressors amplify the positive relationship between exploitative leadership and organizational frustration; and (4) challenge stressors mitigate the positive relationship between exploitative leadership and organizational frustration. These findings extend the understanding of exploitative leadership by distinguishing employees' active and passive behavioral responses and revealing organizational frustration as an important mediating process. By including stressor appraisals as a boundary condition, we clarify when exploitative leadership worsens or attenuates frustration and associating employee behaviors
Whereas previous studies have identified the adverse effects of technology-assisted supplemental work on employees, coworkers' role in this form of work remains largely unexplored. Based on the conservation of resources theory and social learning theory, we propose that a coworker's off-the-job responsiveness can influence an employee's off-the-job responsiveness, thereby affecting the employee's on-the-job vigor and thus their creativity. In Study 1, we collected data from 235 employee - coworker dyads over 10 workdays and found that (a) coworkers' off-the-job responsiveness (and on-the-job vigor) was positively related to employees' off-the-job responsiveness (and on-the-job vigor), while (b) employees' off-the-job responsiveness was negatively related to their own on-the-job vigor, which in turn was positively related to their creativity. Moreover, compared with introverts, extraverts were more likely to experience these relationships. In Study 2, we used experimental vignettes to replicate some of the proposed relationships and crossover effects. Overall, this research contributes to the organizational science literature by demonstrating that coworkers' off-the-job responsiveness and on-the-job vigor can be contagious and can shape employee creativity, especially for extraverts.
Substantial research has examined work-related correlates of the Big Five, but few studies have investigated these traits in combination. This research addressed this issue by focusing on profiles, examining (a) the types of personality profiles found in a large working sample and their similarity to previous profiles found in samples outside of organizational contexts; (b) the relationship between personality profiles and job performance, including incremental validity in predicting job performance beyond personality traits; and (c) other characteristics associated with these personality profiles relevant to organizational settings. To examine these issues, we used an archival dataset (N = 4,103) from a concurrent criterion-related validation study conducted in a Fortune 100 company involving measures of personality, job performance, proactive personality, learning goal orientation, and creativity. Results from latent profile and regression analyses indicated (a) the presence of four personality profiles with some overlap with profiles found in other contexts, (b) limited evidence of incremental validity for personality profiles beyond personality traits, and (c) some relationships between profiles and proactive personality, learning goal orientation, and creativity. These findings suggest that additional research on personality profiles at work may be worthwhile, but these profiles may have limited value in terms of criterion-related validity.
Organizations have implemented flexible work arrangements (FWAs) as an intervention to improve employees' task motivation, organizational attitudes, and proactive behaviors. The present study investigates the distinct effects of two prevailing dimensions of FWAs (flextime and flexplace) on employee creativity with varying levels of proactivity (radical versus incremental creativity). Drawing on job characteristics theory, we identify employees' sense of responsibility as the mediator and their FWA-targeted attributions as the moderating contingency. These hypotheses were tested using data collected from 170 leader-member dyads. Our analysis revealed that flextime is significantly related to radical and incremental creativity through the sense of responsibility, whereas flexplace shows no significant effects. In addition, the indirect effect of flextime on employee creativity through the sense of responsibility is greater for radical creativity than for incremental creativity. The results also demonstrated that the indirect effects of FWAs on the two creativity types are positive and significant when constructive FWA attribution is high and when exploitative attribution is low. The current analysis clarifies and offers meaningful insights into the differential functions, intervening mechanisms, and conditions for the effects of distinct FWA dimensions on employee creativity in the workplace.
This research seeks to better understand how perceptions of abusive supervision develop. Recent theoretical and empirical work highlights limited research on how these perceptions form. We apply a broad social-psychological perspective to explain how subordinate characteristics, supervisor characteristics, and context contribute to perceptions of abuse. Drawing on conditional reasoning theory, we argue that the implicit motive to aggress of both supervisors and subordinates is central to predicting perceptions of abuse. Context, specifically group justice climate, may also limit such perceptions. We develop and test this theory using a multilevel, group-based framework to better explain how supervisor motive to aggress, subordinate motive to aggress, and group justice climate contribute to variance in perceptions of abuse. We test our theory using two samples. The first, with 274 employed students, examined how the motive to aggress shapes individual perceptions of abuse. The second included 245 employees nested in workgroups under 70 supervisors, allowing us to test the full multilevel model. In Study 2, 31% of the within-group variance in abuse perceptions was attributed to subordinates' motive to aggress relative to the null model. In contrast, supervisors' motive to aggress explained 43% of the between-group variance in abusive supervision perceptions, and group justice climate explained approximately 7% of the variance beyond subordinate motive to aggress relative to the null model. These substantial effect sizes underscore the importance of motive to aggress in understanding abusive supervision.
When administering measures, researchers are often concerned about the psychological burden of measure length (i.e., the number of items) on participants and its potential effect on test scores and resulting psychometric properties. The present work experimentally examined this issue in two studies using two independent samples of undergraduate students and a between-subjects design whereby participants of each sample were randomly assigned to complete either a short or long measure. Study 1 (N = 398) examined the effect of measure length on careless responding on a non-cognitive measure and the resulting psychometric properties (i.e., internal consistency and construct validity). Study 2 (N = 426) examined the effect of measure length on performance scores on a cognitive measure and the same resulting psychometric properties. Measure length had no effect on performance on the cognitive measure, and for the non-cognitive measure had an inconsistent effect on careless responding. Pertaining to psychometric properties, measure length had no meaningful effect on the internal consistency of both measures. The effect on construct validity depended on the criterion, but on average, was small to negligible. Overall, the results provide little evidence to support researchers' concerns about the potential adverse psychological effects associated with using longer measures.
Teams are driven by their strategic core - members who encounter more team problems, are more exposed to team tasks, and are more central to team workflow. Although research indicates that committing more financial resources to the strategic core is connected with team success, doing so imposes greater pay dispersion and research is inconclusive regarding its effects. This may be because team pay dispersion is applied too broadly - mistakenly considering all team members as coequals - and due to unexamined mechanisms that might clarify the connection between pay dispersion and team performance. Using a team-centered view of equity theory, we elucidate the effects of team pay inequity by focusing on pay inequity in the strategic core and by testing its indirect association with team performance via the theorized mechanisms of collective effort and team coordination. We tested our hypotheses in a sample of professional basketball teams and find a negative connection between pay inequity and team performance, but only when the inequity exists within the strategic core (as opposed to the entire team) and only via the mechanism of team coordination (not collective effort). These findings clarify the effects of pay inequity in teams and underscore the importance of the strategic core.
An implicit trait policy (ITP) on intercultural competence reflects a worker’s self-beliefs regarding effectiveness of behavior in intercultural work situations. An ITP thus integrates the worker’s competence on selection of effective behavior like intensifying intercultural contacts and rejection of ineffective behavior like discrimination. The present study researches to which extent selection and rejection relate to different origins by mapping worker data from a public employment service (N = 3,310) onto the present study’s ITP framework of intercultural competence. Results show that a worker’s competence to avoid ineffective behavior is unrelated to the worker’s ability to endorse effective behavior, with both competences showing relations to (partly) different origins. These results also trend further towards two actual behavioral outcomes. Both processes of effective selection and rejection of behavior are relevant for the worker’s intensity of intercultural contacts. However, only rejection remains relevant for avoiding the display of discriminatory behavior in the future. Indeed, an organizational development intervention to promote intercultural contacts needs a different approach than preventing discrimination, as both outcomes are related to different origins. The key to a successful intervention therefore resides in addressing the appropriate ITP origins in order to evoke selection or rejection of the targeted behavior.
Past-behavior questions are valid predictors of job performance in face-to-face (FTF) interviews. However, their criterion validity in asynchronous video interviews (AVIs) is under-researched. Our experiment investigated the effect of interview medium (FTF versus AVI) on participants' responses to past-behavior questions, interview performance, and the criterion validity of past-behavior questions. Participants (n = 229) completed a standardized work sample as a measure of work sample performance followed by a mock interview in an AVI or FTF setting, in which one past-behavior question targeted that work sample. Participants' responses and interview performance were similar across interview media, but they described more values and opinions in AVIs. Participants' overall interview performance in AVIs and FTF settings were valid predictors of work sample performance, as was their performance at the past-behavior question targeting the work sample. These findings suggest that AVIs are a valid method to assess applicants that is comparable to FTF interviews.
In this study, we examined the relationships between self-focused vs. task-focused feedback and feedback reactions, as well as the mediating role of perceived threat to self-worth and the moderating roles of guilt-proneness and shame-proneness. Our theoretical model was tested using 779 daily surveys collected from 212 full-time employees. Consistent with our theoretical arguments, results indicated that task-focused feedback leads to more positive feedback reactions because it poses less threat to self-worth, while self-focused feedback leads to more negative feedback reactions because feedback recipients perceive high levels of threat to self-worth. Furthermore, in an exploratory analysis, we found cross-level moderating effects of guilt-proneness and shame-proneness on the direct effect of self-focused vs. task-focused feedback on feedback reactions, such that guilt-proneness weakens the relationship between self-focused vs. task-focused feedback and feedback reactions, and shame-proneness strengthens the relationship between self-focused vs. task-focused feedback and feedback reactions. We discuss the theoretical implications of our findings as well as future research directions.
Careless responding may constitute a threat to research validity. To understand who careless responders are, previous research has primarily focused on the relationship between careless responding and personality namely the Big Five traits. In addition to replicating this relationship, the present work aimed to contribute to the limited literature on task performance and counterproductive behaviors as criteria of careless responding and expand on its nomological network by examining cognitive ability and test-taking states (i.e. motivation and fatigue) as antecedents. Using multiple careless responding indices and undergraduate student samples, both Studies 1 (N = 150) and 2 (N = 150) replicated the relationship between agreeableness, conscientiousness, and openness and careless responding. Cognitive ability and test-taking motivation also emerged as significant albeit inconsistent predictors. Pertaining to the criteria, support was found for the negative relationship between careless responding and task performance (in Study 2) and for the positive association with counterproductive behaviors (in both studies). The results provide additional evidence consonant with the view that careless responding is nonrandom and encourage further explorations of correlates beyond personality traits. They also highlight concerns about the potential bias introduced by the common removal of careless responders from study samples.
The multiple-choice test format is arguably the primary method in assessments of knowledge and other cognitively loaded constructs associated with subgroup differences. Although widely accepted item writing guidelines exist, seemingly no empirical studies have examined the extent to which violations of these guidelines result in differential test scores particularly as a function of race/ethnicity - despite assertions to that effect. This gap is addressed by (a) examining the extent to which poor item writing practices affect test scores, and (b) whether said effect is moderated by test taker race/ethnicity, using a correlational study with operational police selection data (N = 60,936), and an experimental study with undergraduate students (N = 612). Although the effects were generally small, test takers consistently performed worse on "bad"/poor quality-item exams. However, although generally in the expected direction, the results failed to support a statistically significant case that bad items' deleterious effect varied by race/ethnicity. Nevertheless, because the results likely represent a lower bound of the potential impact of item quality due to an imperative methodological design decision that precluded the inclusion of common egregious rule violations (e.g., direct clue errors, double negations), they highlight the importance of adherence to scientific and professionally recognized item writing guidelines.
As role models and salient sources of social information, forgiving leaders are prosocial facilitators of team interactions, with consequences for team performance. Through a multi-source field study (227 teams/leaders) and a vignette-based experiment (101 teams), we show that (a) leader-expressed forgiveness predicts team performance through, serially, team forgiveness climate and team helping behavior, and (b) this indirect effect is stronger when the strength (i.e. the consistency of expressed forgiveness across team members) of leader-expressed forgiveness and team forgiveness climate are high. Findings also show that (a) leader-expressed forgiveness predicts team performance through, serially, team psychological safety and team creativity, and (b) this indirect effect is stronger when the strength of leader-expressed forgiveness is high. Our findings suggest that forgiving leaders may play an important role as enactors of several team processes and emergent states that make teams more effective.
This paper reports on three studies to test authentic leadership theory. For Study 1, 40 hospital supervisors were randomly assigned to authentic leadership behavior training or a waiting list control group. Pretest (n = 256) and posttest (n = 167) surveys from direct reports failed to find significant differences between the two groups. Study 2 was a quasi-experimental single group four-wave study on the same supervisors. Data from direct reports (n = 190for Time 3 and n = 182 for Time 4) showed that for those new to the supervisor, there was a significant increase in authentic leadership behavior and trust in the supervisor, but not in job satisfaction or organizational commitment. Study 3 was a nonequivalent group pretest/posttest design using data from the hospital's annual engagement survey. Analyses found that direct report ratings of their supervisor's leadership quality increased significantly more for the intervention supervisors (n = 38) than a nonequivalent control group (n = 59). These findings show that the authentic leadership training was effective in changing supervisor leadership behavior and trust in the supervisor but contrary to survey studies, not job satisfaction or organizational commitment, at least for new employees.
COVID-19 was an unprecedented shock to the world, disrupting the routines and daily lives of millions of people worldwide. Organizations have invested many resources to manage the pandemic with the dual goals of ensuring business continuity and protecting the health and lives of employees. However, not all organizational decisions may have been perceived as fair. Building upon the literature on workplace justice, we propose and test a model within the stressor-emotion framework of counterproductive work behaviors. In trying to better understand why and when incivility arises at work, we examine the indirect effect of employees' overall justice perceptions regarding the treatment they receive from the organization on the incivility these employees show toward others, via a discrete emotion, anger toward the organization. We further consider two individual characteristics, employee's coronavirus anxiety and employee's moral obligation, as potential boundary conditions. Using a three-wave design, we observed that overall justice is negatively related to anger toward the organization, and in turn, to incivility behaviors. Furthermore, the association between overall justice perceptions and anger is heightened by higher levels of coronavirus anxiety, while the association between anger and incivility becomes weaker in the presence of higher levels of moral obligation.
Measuring job performance is fundamental to validating selection procedures. However, job performance is multi-dimensional, and common measurement practices vary across its dimensions. While task performance is typically measured by supervisor ratings, counterproductive work behaviors are often measured by employee self-ratings, and there is no standard measurement practice for measuring organizational citizenship behaviors. Drawing from research on multi-rater models, this study proposes that the unique perspectives of supervisors and employees can both provide insights into employees' job performance and sets out to understand for which performance dimensions their combination is most valuable when validating selection procedures. Using latent models, it examines the extent to which supervisor and self-ratings contain shared and unique information about job performance dimensions, and how two common selection predictors (conscientiousness and general mental ability) predict this shared and unique information. Results show that consensus between supervisor ratings and employee self-ratings is modest across performance dimensions and that conscientiousness shows stronger relations with unique employee perspectives, whereas general mental ability is more strongly related to unique supervisor perspectives. The present findings have implications for the measurement of performance and the interpretation of criterion-related validities of selection procedures.
Rather than a generalized appreciation of leader humor, we argue that leader humor may not always be effective, even when it is positive in nature. Drawing on theories of meta-accuracy, self-other rating agreement, and social identification, we explore how leaders' lack of meta-accuracy regarding their own humor is associated with subordinates' negative affect toward the leader and their sense of group identification. We operationalize a lack of meta-accuracy as a misalignment between leaders' and subordinates' perceptions of leader positive humor. Our study found that when leaders lacked meta-accuracy in assessing their own humor, subordinates experienced increased negative affect, which in turn negatively influenced group identification. Our research highlights the importance of leaders' meta-accuracy in their use of humor. Deficiencies in this area can lead to either excessive or insufficient instances of leader humor, which become negative events for subordinates. Furthermore, our findings suggest that, from the subordinates' perspective, it is not the content of leader humor that holds importance, but rather its quantity relative to the expectations of the subordinates.
Despite emerging scholarly work about work passion and its reverence in the popular press, we know little about how organizations can cultivate passionate employees. In this study, we utilized cognitive evaluation theory and the dualistic model of passion to explain the different ways in which harmonious and obsessive work passion can be nurtured, further affecting employee outcomes. Accordingly, we expect that work contexts that provide employees with perceived organizational support (POS) would be conducive for harmonious passion, while contexts with organizational time demands (OTD) rather encourage obsessive passion. We also expect that the two types of passion will mediate the relationships between these work contexts and employee outcomes, including job satisfaction, psychological wellbeing, and helping behaviors. Utilizing a time-lag survey study consisting of 194 matched employee-coworker dyads in the Philippines, we found empirical support for the following proposed relationships: (a) POS predicts harmonious passion; (b) OTD predicts obsessive passion; (c) harmonious passion mediates the relationship between POS and outcomes, such as job satisfaction, psychological wellbeing and helping behaviors; and (d) obsessive passion mediates the relationship between OTD and psychological wellbeing. Our findings provide important theoretical implications for research on work passion as well as practical recommendations for managers.
This study examines why and when perceived abusive supervision can impair employees' service performance. Drawing on attachment theory, we propose that perceptions of abusive supervision can induce employees' attachment insecurity at work (attachment avoidance and attachment anxiety) and thus undermine employees' service performance. We also propose that trust in coworkers helps mitigate the link between perceptions of abusive supervision and employees' attachment insecurity at work. The hypothesized relationships are examined in two studies. The first study consists of a sample of 176 healthcare professionals recruited from Prolific for a three-wave survey. The second study consisted of a sample of 255 nurses and 35 supervisors from 33 Romanian hospitals for a multisource three-wave survey. Results consistently reveal that abusive supervision is positively related to attachment avoidance, which in turn is negatively related to service performance. Moreover, coworker trust moderates the association between abusive supervision and attachment avoidance and thus mitigates the mediation chain from abusive supervision, via attachment avoidance, to service performance. This research offers a new perspective to understanding the consequences of abusive supervision for service performance and underscores the importance of trusting relations among coworkers for coping with abusive supervision.
Skill decay is the decrement in performance on acquired knowledge and skills after a period of nonuse. Although there is a fair amount of work on individual skill decay, the literature on team-level skill decay is very limited. Thus, using a synthetic task environment, the objective of this study was to compare individual and team performance in terms of skill acquisition, retention (decay), and reacquisition. Eighty-one individuals in 27 three-person teams were trained to perform a complex computer-based simulation. The initial acquisition phase comprised a 2-day, 5-hour training protocol. After an average 73.33-day nonuse interval (SD = 30.18), participants returned for a 2-hour reacquisition session. Participants completed the performance task as both individuals and teams. The results indicated that, compared to individual performance, team performance improved faster during the skill acquisition phase. However, unlike individual performance, the amount of decay for team performance was dependent on whether the first retention performance session for team members was performed as individuals-where trainees had the opportunity to perform all components of the task-or as a team, with the latter resulting in the most decay. By extension, these results highlight the impact of a relatively brief individual post-retention (nonuse) interval training to mitigate team skill decay. In short, our results indicate that a little individual practice can go a long way toward maintaining team retention performance, but in contrast, a little team practice does not do the same for individual retention performance.
