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

IF 4 2区 管理学 Q2 MANAGEMENT
Ui Young Sun, Haoying Xu, Donald H. Kluemper, Xinxin Lu, Seokhwa Yun
{"title":"What Does Leaders’ Abuse Mean to Me? Psychological Empowerment as the Key Mechanism Explaining the Relationship Between Abusive Supervision and Taking Charge","authors":"Ui Young Sun, Haoying Xu, Donald H. Kluemper, Xinxin Lu, Seokhwa Yun","doi":"10.1177/10596011231204387","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"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.","PeriodicalId":48143,"journal":{"name":"Group & Organization Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Group & Organization Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10596011231204387","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

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.
领导的辱骂对我意味着什么?心理授权是解释虐待监督与负责关系的关键机制
我们将授权的认知理论和监管焦点理论结合起来,认为滥用监管会损害员工的心理授权,从而阻碍员工参与管理,员工从中获得消极的成就和安全暗示。我们认为,尽管原因不同,但以晋升为重点的员工和以预防为重点的员工都更明显地感受到这种负面影响。为了验证我们的模型,我们进行了实地研究(研究1)和基于场景的实验(研究2)。在研究1中,我们发现心理授权是连接虐待监督和负责的关键机制。此外,晋升焦点放大了虐待监管对心理赋权的负面影响,进而放大了负责的负面影响。然而,预防重点并没有影响这些效果。在研究2中,我们重复了这些发现,并揭示了职业成功和工作不安全感的预期(代表员工的成就和安全暗示)在将虐待性监督与心理授权联系起来方面至关重要。我们还发现,晋升焦点强化了虐待监管通过预期职业成功对心理授权的负向间接影响,最终导致对负责的负向影响更大。与研究1一样,对预防焦点的调节作用的支持有限。我们的研究强调了采用认知观点来理解滥用监督对员工负责的影响的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.40
自引率
12.50%
发文量
71
期刊介绍: Group & Organization Management (GOM) publishes the work of scholars and professionals who extend management and organization theory and address the implications of this for practitioners. Innovation, conceptual sophistication, methodological rigor, and cutting-edge scholarship are the driving principles. Topics include teams, group processes, leadership, organizational behavior, organizational theory, strategic management, organizational communication, gender and diversity, cross-cultural analysis, and organizational development and change, but all articles dealing with individual, group, organizational and/or environmental dimensions are appropriate.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信