The Combined Effects of Destructive and Constructive Leadership on Thriving at Work and Behavioral Empowerment

Abstract

This study investigates the within-domain exacerbation phenomenon in relation to employees' perception of their supervisors' leadership behaviors. This phenomenon proposes that exposure to supervisors relying on a combination of destructive leadership behaviors (DLB; operationalized as petty tyranny) and constructive leadership behaviors (CLB; operationalized as transformational leadership) should have more negative consequences on followers' levels of thriving and behavioral empowerment than exposure to supervisors relying more exclusively on DLB or CLB. This phenomenon was tested using a person-centered mixture regression approach with a sample of 2104 Canadian employees from a police organization. Three profiles of employees were identified, representing those exposed to Moderately Transformational (mostly CLB), Destructive (mostly DLB) and Inconsistent (CLB and DLB) supervisors. Members of the Inconsistent profile displayed the lowest levels of thriving and behavioral empowerment, followed by members of the Destructive profile, and finally by members of the Moderately Transformational profile. Results also suggest that the inability to determine if a supervisor is more destructive or constructive might explain the within-domain exacerbation phenomenon. Indeed, in the Inconsistent profile, leadership clarification seemed beneficial for employees. Increases in DLB resulted in a matching increase in empowered behaviors centered on the group and organization, while increases in CLB resulted in increases in thriving and empowered behaviors centered on individual performance.

Comparing models of follower outcomes: destructive and constructive leader behavior

“…We contribute to the sparse empirical research (e.g. Ch enard-Poirier et al, 2022;Fors Brandebo et al, 2016) investigating the joint effects of destructive and constructive leader behaviors on follower attitudes and performance. By simultaneously examining a broader array of destructive and constructive leader behaviors, we find support for the extant theory.…”

“…(2016), this research was conducted in a strict hierarchal setting unique to military and paramilitary organizations. Also, Chénard-Poirier et al. (2022) focused on petty tyranny and transformational leader behaviors that best characterize destructive and constructive actions in organizations with high-power assymetry.…”

“…With few exceptions (e.g. Ch enard-Poirier et al, 2022), researchers have primarily taken a dichotomized approach to studying leader behavior, characterizing it as either good or bad (Hershcovis, 2011).While this may advance knowledge on each dimension, this binary approach ignores the complexities and inconsistencies of leader behavior. We argue that the efficacy of leader behavior may be better understood by simultaneously examining its bad (destructive) and good (constructive) effects on followers (Einarsen et al, 2007).…”

How Does Dualistic Passion Fuel Academic Thriving? A Joint Moderated–Mediating Model

“…Thriving itself involves a strong inclination toward autonomous motivation, while harmonious passion, as an autonomous internalized passion, also involves a strong intention to act autonomously, which increases individuals' likelihood to invest time and energy in academic activities (Nix et al, 1999 ; Zigarmi et al, 2011 ; Dubreuil et al, 2014 ). In addition, obsessive passion, as a controlled internalized passion, will lead individuals to pursue high rankings, reputation, awards, and other external drives (Chénard-Poirier et al, 2021 ), and, in turn, will also increase time and energy investment (Yang et al, 2018 ). Therefore, the two types of passion involve behavioral motivation and will increase individuals' investment of time and energy in academic activities, thus igniting academic thriving.…”

“…Academic personal best goal, a cognitive construct reflecting individuals' goals or standards of excellence that match or exceed one's previous best in the academic context, was significantly influenced by passion (Martin and Elliot, 2016a ; Burns et al, 2018a , b ) in academic activities and positively predicted engagement and achievement over time (Martin, 2011 ). For those harmoniously passionate students, they will set an academic personal best goal under strong autonomous motivation and positive emotion for self-growth; whereas for those obsessively passionate students, they will set an academic personal best goal under the psychological needs (Chénard-Poirier et al, 2021 ) of strong self-esteem and social acceptance for external rewards (Burns et al, 2018a ). Thus, academic personal best goal may be a facilitator in the relationship between dualistic passion and academic thriving.…”