On the destructiveness of laissez-faire versus abusive supervision: a comparative, multilevel investigation of destructive forms of leadership

Klasmeier, Kai N.; Schleu, Joyce Elena; Millhoff, Catrin; Poethke, Ute; Bormann, K.

doi:10.1080/1359432x.2021.1968375

Cited by 21 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 95 publications

(197 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Active and passive destructive behaviours are often studied in isolation and in separate studies. By contrasting the antecedents to active and passive destructive behaviours we answer the calls in the literature to compare and differentiate different forms of destructive leadership (Klasmeier et al, 2021; Schyns & Schilling, 2013), which is important to accumulate knowledge of their unique causes and effects (Klasmeier et al, 2021). It also aligns well with the resource perspective (Wang et al, 2010) and COR theory (Hobfoll, 1989; Hobfoll et al, 2018), which suggest that when resources are outstretched or exhausted, individuals enter a defensive mode that may be either aggressive or passive to preserve the self.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why do leaders engage in destructive behaviours? The role of leaders’ working environment and stress

Tafvelin

Lundmark

Schwarz

et al. 2022

J Occupat & Organ Psyc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Complementing previous research on antecedents of destructive leadership, we examined the role of work stressors in the emergence of active and passive destructive leadership behaviours. Building on conservation of resources theory, we examined direct and indirect relations between leaders' perceptions of workload, role ambiguity and intragroup conflict on ratings of their own destructive leadership, as well as mediating paths through perceived stress. We used a two-wave survey design consisting of a random sample of 1311 managers. Structural equation modelling revealed that work stressors were only related to passive forms of destructive leadership, whereas personality was related to both active and passive forms of destructive leadership. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why do leaders engage in destructive behaviours? The role of leaders’ working environment and stress

Tafvelin

Lundmark

Schwarz

et al. 2022

J Occupat & Organ Psyc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Leaders being absent, inactive, and avoidant when their active involvement is needed (laissez-faire leadership) [37,38] is commonly treated as a passive form of destructive leadership [37,39]. Research has shown that both active and passive forms of destructive leadership are detrimental to both organisational effectiveness and employees' wellbeing [26,27,34,[39][40][41][42][43].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Managers’ and employees’ experiences of how managers’ wellbeing impacts their leadership behaviours in Swedish small businesses

Ahamdi

Lundqvist

Bergström

et al. 2023

WOR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: There is a growing interest in managers’ wellbeing due to the observed associations between their wellbeing and leadership behaviours, and between leadership behaviours and employees’ wellbeing. However, it is still unclear how managers’ wellbeing influences their practiced leadership across different workplace contexts, which specific behaviours are affected, and how this varies across time. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was therefore to explore managers’ and employees’ experiences and perceptions regarding the consequences of managers’ wellbeing for their leadership behaviours in small businesses. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 37 participants (19 managers and 18 employees) working at 12 Swedish small firms, and analysed using content analysis. RESULTS: The findings show that managers were more constructive when they felt well, and more passively destructive when unwell. Variations in managers’ wellbeing influenced their mood, energy level, and performance, as well as the company’s working climate. However, these destructive leadership variations did not have a substantial impact, because several protective factors were present. CONCLUSION: This study shows that the wellbeing of managers in small businesses has perceptible consequences for their leadership behaviours. The study also shows that sustained leadership behaviours may coexist with temporary variations of these behaviours on a constructive-destructive continuum depending on the leader’s wellbeing. Overall, the findings contribute to a more nuanced and dynamic understanding of how the interaction between managers’ wellbeing and their behaviours unfolds in the particular context of small companies.

show abstract

“…Thus, when we refer to high abusive supervision in this paper, it is high in relative terms. In absolute terms, the level of reported abuse in both studies was low-medium at best, not unlike levels that are typically reported in the literature (Klasmeier et al, 2021;Mawritz et al, 2014;Mitchell & Ambrose, 2007;Tepper, 2000). We suspect that response-style biases such as impression management or social desirable responding patterns might contribute to an under-reporting of leader abuse.…”

Section: Limitations and Avenues For Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 59%

It's Only Abusive If I Care

Bormann

Gellatly

2022

Journal of Personnel Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Drawing on conservation of resources (COR) theory, we propose that abusive supervision increases stress responses in targets, which, in turn, diminishes their ability to perform extra- and in-role work behaviors. However, based on COR theory, we argue that followers who are driven by low rather than high organizational concern motives place less value on their work and the social context in which technical activities occur. As such, feeling low organizational concern should make people less susceptible to abusive supervision rather than more so. Thus, organizational concern was proposed to moderate the abuse–stress relationship. Across two multisource studies, we found support for most of our hypotheses. Abusive supervision negatively affected organizational citizenship behaviors via increased stress, and low organizational concern was found to attenuate the detrimental effects of abusive supervision. Implications for leadership literature and future research are discussed.

show abstract

On the destructiveness of laissez-faire versus abusive supervision: a comparative, multilevel investigation of destructive forms of leadership

Cited by 21 publications

References 95 publications

Why do leaders engage in destructive behaviours? The role of leaders’ working environment and stress

Why do leaders engage in destructive behaviours? The role of leaders’ working environment and stress

Managers’ and employees’ experiences of how managers’ wellbeing impacts their leadership behaviours in Swedish small businesses

It's Only Abusive If I Care

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About