{"title":"Employee perceptions of responses to toxic leadership in the modern workplace: a Q methodological study","authors":"Emily Bublitz-Berg, Carrie Anne Platt, Brent Hill","doi":"10.1108/lodj-09-2023-0512","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>The purpose of this study is to explain why people respond to toxic leadership in different ways. The toxic triangle was applied as a lens and extended followership by investigating unsusceptible followers and susceptible followers.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>This study employed Q methodology to illustrate the subjective viewpoints of 31 employees. Participants sorted 41 statements ranging from “most uncharacteristic” to “most characteristic” according to their beliefs using a forced distribution. We used qualitative data from the survey and follow-up interviews to document participant motivations.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>Findings from this Q study demonstrated three distinct perceptions of responses to toxic leadership: Suffer in Silence (Perspective 1), Confront and Advocate (Perspective 2) and Quiet yet Concerned (Perspective 3). This study found that Perspectives 1 and 3 helped to explain differences in susceptible followership, whereas Perspective 2 helped to explain unsusceptible followership. Our research supports the need for organizations to provide safe whistleblowing channels for reporting unethical behavior by adopting clear policies for handling unethical behaviors and sharing those policies with all constituents within the organization.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Practical implications</h3>\n<p>Our research supports the need for organizations to provide safe whistleblowing channels for reporting unethical behavior by adopting clear policies for handling unethical behaviors and sharing those policies with all constituents within the organization.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>Our study adds to the developing literature on followership by building a conceptual framework for response types that better explains the motivation and subsequent actions of susceptible and unsusceptible followers. This framework helps us identify new ways to combat toxic leadership by providing a more nuanced view of how employees perceive and respond to toxic leadership.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":48033,"journal":{"name":"Leadership & Organization Development Journal","volume":"41 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Leadership & Organization Development Journal","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/lodj-09-2023-0512","RegionNum":3,"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
Purpose
The purpose of this study is to explain why people respond to toxic leadership in different ways. The toxic triangle was applied as a lens and extended followership by investigating unsusceptible followers and susceptible followers.
Design/methodology/approach
This study employed Q methodology to illustrate the subjective viewpoints of 31 employees. Participants sorted 41 statements ranging from “most uncharacteristic” to “most characteristic” according to their beliefs using a forced distribution. We used qualitative data from the survey and follow-up interviews to document participant motivations.
Findings
Findings from this Q study demonstrated three distinct perceptions of responses to toxic leadership: Suffer in Silence (Perspective 1), Confront and Advocate (Perspective 2) and Quiet yet Concerned (Perspective 3). This study found that Perspectives 1 and 3 helped to explain differences in susceptible followership, whereas Perspective 2 helped to explain unsusceptible followership. Our research supports the need for organizations to provide safe whistleblowing channels for reporting unethical behavior by adopting clear policies for handling unethical behaviors and sharing those policies with all constituents within the organization.
Practical implications
Our research supports the need for organizations to provide safe whistleblowing channels for reporting unethical behavior by adopting clear policies for handling unethical behaviors and sharing those policies with all constituents within the organization.
Originality/value
Our study adds to the developing literature on followership by building a conceptual framework for response types that better explains the motivation and subsequent actions of susceptible and unsusceptible followers. This framework helps us identify new ways to combat toxic leadership by providing a more nuanced view of how employees perceive and respond to toxic leadership.
期刊介绍:
The journal addresses a broad range of topics which are relevant to organizations and reflective of societal developments. Public and private sector organizations alike face ongoing pressure to streamline activities, improve efficiency and achieve demanding organizational objectives. In this context, the ability of senior managers to understand the culture and dynamics of organizations and to deliver strong leadership during periods of change, could be the difference between organizational failure and success.