Leadership behavior has a significant impact on employee behavior, performance and well-being. Extant theory and research on leadership behavior, however, has predominantly focused on employee performance, treating employee well-being (typically measured as job satisfaction) as a secondary outcome variable related to performance, rather than as an important outcome in and of itself. This qualitative state of the science review examines the process by which leadership behavior (i.e., change, relational, task, passive) affects employee well-being. We identify five mediator groupings (social-cognitive, motivational, affective, relational, identification), extend the criterion space for conceptualizing employee well-being (i.e., psychological: hedonic, eudaimonic, negative; and physical), examine the limited evidence for differential processes that underlie the leader behavior-employee well-being relationship and discuss theoretical and methodological problems inherent to the literature.We conclude by proposing a theoretical framework to guide a future research agenda on how, why and when leadership behavior impacts employee well-being.

In this paper, we establish the relationship between de-energizing relationships and individual performance in organizations. To date, the emphasis in social network research has largely been on positive dimensions of relationships despite literature from social psychology revealing the prevalence and detrimental impact of de-energizing relationships. In two field studies, we show that de-energizing relationships in organizations are associated with decreased performance. In Study 1, we investigate how de-energizing relationships are related to lower performance using data from 161 people in the information technology (IT) department of an engineering firm. In Study 2, in a sample of 439 management consultants, we consider whether the effects of deenergizing relationships on performance may be moderated by the extent to which an individual has the psychological resource of thriving at work. We find that individuals who are thriving at work are less susceptible to the effects of de-energizing relationships on job performance. We close by discussing implications of this research.

Workplace incivility is rampant and on the rise-with costs to individuals and organizations. Despite the increased need for civility, little is known about potential individual benefits of civility, defined as behavior involving politeness and regard for others in the workplace, within workplace norms for respect (Andersson & Pearson, 1999). Recent research has suggested that being civil may be hazardous to influence, power, and income (see Forni, 2002; Judge et al., 2012).Yet, throughout history, civil behavior has been extolled because it paid dividends to the person who behaved well. The focus of this research is whether that holds true in organizations. Using social exchange theory, we developed hypotheses about how civility benefits people, and investigated this in 2 studies. First, in a 2-wave social network study of a research and development department (n = 31) of a biotechnology firm, we found that people who perceived a colleague as civil would be more likely to seek that person out for work advice and to see that person as a leader. The more the individual was perceived as civil by others in his or her network, the better his or her performance. Being sought out for work advice and being viewed as a leader mediated this effect. In the second experiment (n = 162), we extended our understanding of what drove these benefits. We found that people who are civil were perceived as warm and competent, and these positive perceptions, in turn, helped to explain the benefits garnered. We discuss theoretical and practical implications.

Theory suggests that thriving, the feeling of vitality and experience of learning, is in large part determined by the social environment of employees’ workplace. One important aspect of this social environment is the position of an individual in the communication network. Individuals who are sources of communication for many colleagues often receive benefits because other employees depend heavily on these individuals for information; however, there may also be drawbacks to this dependence. In particular, employees who are central in the communication network may experience more role overload and role ambiguity and, in turn, lower levels of workplace thriving. Individual differences are also likely to explain why some individuals are more likely to thrive. Relying on research that views organizations as political arenas, we identify political skill as an individual difference that is likely to enhance workplace thriving. Using a moderated-mediation analysis, we find support for the indirect cost of communication centrality on workplace thriving through role overload and role ambiguity. Furthermore, we identify both direct and moderating effects of political skill. Specifically, political skill mitigates the extent to which employees experience role ambiguity, but not role overload, associated with their position in the communication network, and these effects carry through to affect thriving. Star employees are often central in communication networks; with this in mind, we discuss the implications of our findings for employees and organizations

No abstract