Using two criteria, specificity and intensity, to classify seven different constructs is complicated, but it yields interpretable results. Figure 2 displays the Pearson et al. model. The constructs and definitions are paraphrased from their Figure 8.2 (p. 191). Notice that CWB is presented as a broad family of negative work behaviors, which are termed "deviant" when a norm is transgressed. In this model there are three types of deviance-violence, aggression, and incivility. These range from high-intensity (violence) to low-intensity (incivility), with aggression lying in between. Finally, there are two types of chronic aggression, mobbing (highto moderate-intensity) and bullying (moderate-to low-intensity). Aggression. While Pearson et al. (2005) view aggression as narrower than CWB, other researchers treat aggressive behaviors more expansively. Some researchers have considered workplace aggression as a broad concept that subsumes potentially hurtful and harmful constructs (Aquino & Thau, 2009). Particularly, it is inclusive of a range of behaviors that seeks to harm someone physically or psychologically. Perhaps the broadest approach is taken by Hershcovis (2011) and Hershcovis and Barling (2007). They define workplace aggression as "any negative act, which may be committed towards an individual within the workplace, or the workplace itself, in ways that the target is motivated to avoid" (Hershcovis & Barling, 2007, p. 271). Their approach diverges from others as it does not consider intention to harm as part of the definition (Shewach & Sackett, 2016). Taking a similar view, Neuman and Baron (2005) classify the various types of aggressive behaviors along three dimensions: (a) physical or verbal, (b) active or passive, and (c) direct or indirect. For example, a type of aggression that is physical, active, and direct might be homicide, while one that is verbal, passive, and indirect might involve a failure to provide needed feedback. Neuman and Baron's three-dimensional taxonomy could account for many of the different Page 9 of 107 Academy of Management Annals SOCIAL EXCHANGE THEORY 10 constructs that have been mentioned so far. Incivility could be viewed as active and direct. Theft or sabotage, which are types of productive deviance, are classified as physical, active, and indirect. Although there are distinct differences regarding these behaviors, there are some similarities as well. Overlaps may be attributed to varying research goals as scholars seek to untangle the negative actions and interactions within organizations. First, some researchers tend to conceptualize aggressive behaviors as retaliatory, while others view them as voluntarily deviant. Speaking very loosely, retaliatory behaviors are provoked by the wrongdoing of others, whereas voluntary behaviors are chosen by the actor without provocation. As an example of the former, Skarlicki and Folger (1997) conceptualize workplace aggression as organizational retaliatory behavior (ORB). These behaviors are employed to punish the organization and its membe...

No abstract

Purpose Leadership coaching has received increased popularity over the past decade; however, there is a paucity of research that has examined its impact on leader behaviors within organizations. Drawing upon transformational leadership theory, the purpose of this paper is to understand the benefits provided to followers when leaders experience leadership coaching. Design/methodology/approach This cross-sectional study collected data from 75 mid- to senior-level organizational leaders and 188 followers. Findings The results of this study reveal that leadership coaching is positively associated with leaders engaging in individualized consideration toward their followers, and in turn, leaders engage in constructive leadership behaviors (i.e. more delegation and less close supervision). Research limitations/implications While this study contributes to our understanding of leadership coaching for organizational leaders, it, however, focuses on a specific set of leadership behaviors and does not examine the practices embedded in the coaching process. Practical implications Leadership coaching facilitates the leader’s aspiration to provide their followers with more individual support. Organizations, in turn, need to promote more opportunities and practices for this interaction to continue. Originality/value This is the first study to empirically demonstrate the relationship between leadership coaching and constructive leadership behaviors.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

The global pandemic caused by Coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) severely disrupted people’s professional and personal lives making many employees required to work from home. Our study examines family-supportive supervisory behaviors (FSSB) impact on in-role behaviors through satisfaction with work–life balance and psychological availability at work to gain insight into the effects of the pandemic on work and home domains. Based on three waves of data and a sample of 179 full-time employees (32+ hours per week) forced to work 100% at home because of the pandemic, the findings suggest satisfaction with work–life balance and psychological availability at work serially mediated the relationship between FSSBs and in-role behaviors. Also, satisfaction with work–life balance mediated the relationship between FSSB and psychological availability at work, and psychological availability at work mediated the relationship between satisfaction with work–life balance and in-role behaviors. Practical and theoretical implications, along with future research, are discussed.