바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

E-ISSN : 2288-2766

Article Contents

Prev Next
e-Submission

Vol.9 No.2
Citation Share

Abusive Supervision and Coworkers’ Organizational Citizenship Behavior: The Moderating Role of Perceived LMX Differentiation

East Asian Journal of Business Economics / East Asian Journal of Business Economics, (E)2288-2766
2021, v.9 no.2, pp.11-19
https://doi.org/10.20498/eajbe.2021.9.2.11
Sungheun Lee
HWANG HEE JOONG
Sungheun, L. , & HWANG, H. J. (2021). Abusive Supervision and Coworkers’ Organizational Citizenship Behavior: The Moderating Role of Perceived LMX Differentiation. East Asian Journal of Business Economics, 9(2), 11-19, https://doi.org/10.20498/eajbe.2021.9.2.11
  • Downloaded
  • Viewed
PDF Download

Abstract

Purpose: This study examines the main effects of the supervisor's abusive supervision on the organizational citizenship behavior of subordinates toward colleagues, and then attempts to clarify that the perceived LMX variability of team members plays a moderating role in the meantime. Research design, data and methodology: First, we examine the effects of the supervisor's abusive supervision on the organizational citizenship behavior of subordinates in the team toward colleagues. Second, the degree of perceived LMX variability is measured to verify the moderating effect of abusive supervision on OCB toward coworkers. Results: By looking at abusive supervision through the LMX differentiation lens, the multilateral interaction between the leader and members will have a significant influence on the individual's behavior in the team. Conclusions: It is significant in that the scope of abusive supervision research has been expanded through the team level moderator of perceived LMX variability, away from the research on abusive supervision that was mainly discussed at the level of bilateral relations.

keywords
Abusive Supervision, Organizational Citizenship Behavior, Perceived LMX Variablity

Reference

1.

Aryee, S., Chen, Z. X., Sun, L. Y., & Debrah, Y. A. (2007). Antecedents and outcomes of abusive supervision: test of a trickle-down model. Journal of applied psychology, 92(1), 191.

2.

Ashforth, B. E. (1997). Petty tyranny in organizations: A preliminary examination of antecedents and consequences. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences/Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l'Administration, 14(2), 126-140.

3.

Bamberger, P. A., & Bacharach, S. B. (2006). Abusive supervision and subordinate problem drinking: Taking resistance, stress and subordinate personality into account. Human Relations, 59(6), 723-752.

4.

Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C., & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of general psychology, 5(4), 323-370.

5.

Bies, R. J., & Tripp, T. M. 1998. Revenge in organizations: The good, the bad, and the ugly. Monographs in Organizational Behavior and Industrial Relations, 23, 49-67.

6.

Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and Power in Social Life, New York: John Wiley & Sons.

7.

Boies, K., & Howell, J. M. (2006). Leader–member exchange in teams: An examination of the interaction between relationship differentiation and mean LMX in explaining team-level outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(3), 246-257.

8.

Bolino, M. C. (1999). Citizenship and impression management: Good soldiers or good actors?. Academy of Management Review, 24(1), 82-98.

9.

Bolon, D. S. (1997). Organizational citizenship behavior among hospital employees: A multidimensional analysis involving job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Hospital and Health Services Administration, 42(2), 221-242.

10.

Chen, G., Kirkman, B. L., Kanfer, R., Allen, D., & Rosen, B. (2007). A multilevel study of leadership, empowerment, and performance in teams. Journal of applied psychology, 92(2), 331.

11.

Dansereau Jr, F., Graen, G., & Haga, W. J. (1975). A vertical dyad linkage approach to leadership within formal organizations: A longitudinal investigation of the role making process. Organizational behavior and human performance, 13(1), 46-78.

12.

Duchon, D., Green, S. G., & Taber, T. D. (1986). Vertical dyad linkage: A longitudinal assessment of antecedents, measures, and consequences. Journal of applied psychology, 71(1), 56.

13.

Duffy, M. K., Ganster, D. C., & Pagon, M. (2002). Social undermining in the workplace. Academy of management Journal, 45(2), 331-351.

14.

Ferris, G. R., Judge, T. A., Rowland, K. M., & Fitzgibbons, D. E. (1994). Subordinate influence and the performance evaluation process: Test of a model. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 58(1), 101-135.

15.

George, J. M., & Bettenhausen, K. (1990). Understanding prosocial behavior, sales performance, and turnover: a group-level analysis in a service context. Journal of applied psychology, 75(6), 698.

16.

Graen, G. B., & Cashman, J. (1975). A vertical dyad linkage approach to leadership within formal organizations: A longitudinal investigation of the role making process. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 38, 46-78.

17.

Harris, K. J., Kacmar, K. M., & Zivnuska, S. (2007). An investigation of abusive supervision as a predictor of performance and the meaning of work as a moderator of the relationship. The leadership quarterly, 18(3), 252-263.

18.

Heider, F. (1958). The Psychology of Interpersonal Relationships, New York.

19.

Henderson, D. J., Liden, R. C., Glibkowski, B. C., & Chaudhry, A. (2009). LMX differentiation: A multilevel review and examination of its antecedents and outcomes. The leadership quarterly, 20(4), 517-534.

20.

Henderson, D. J., Wayne, S. J., Shore, L. M., Bommer, W. H., & Tetrick, L. E. (2008). Leader--member exchange, differentiation, and psychological contract fulfillment: A multilevel examination. Journal of applied psychology, 93(6), 1208.

21.

Hoobler, J. M., & Brass, D. J. (2006). Abusive supervision and family undermining as displaced aggression. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(5), 1125.

22.

Hooper, D. T., & Martin, R. (2008). Beyond personal leader–member exchange (LMX) quality: The effects of perceived LMX variability on employee reactions. The Leadership Quarterly, 19(1), 20-30.

23.

Inness, M., Barling, J., & Turner, N. (2005). Understanding supervisor-targeted aggression: A within-person, betweenjobs design. Journal of applied Psychology, 90(4), 731.

24.

Lian, H., Ferris, D. L., & Brown, D. J. (2012). Does taking the good with the bad make things worse? How abusive supervision and leader–member exchange interact to impact need satisfaction and organizational deviance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 117(1), 41-52.

25.

Liden, R. C., & Graen, G. (1980). Generalizability of the vertical dyad linkage model of leadership. Academy of Management journal, 23(3), 451-465.

26.

Liden, R. C., Erdogan, B., Wayne, S. J., & Sparrowe, R. T. (2006). Leader‐member exchange, differentiation, and task interdependence: implications for individual and group performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior:The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 27(6), 723-746.

27.

Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., & Sparrowe, R. T. (2000). An examination of the mediating role of psychological empowerment on the relations between the job, interpersonal relationships, and work outcomes. Journal of applied psychology, 85(3), 407.

28.

Mayer, D. M., Thau, S., Workman, K. M., Van Dijke, M., & De Cremer, D. (2012). Leader mistreatment, employee hostility, and deviant behaviors: Integrating self-uncertainty and thwarted needs perspectives on deviance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 117(1), 24-40.

29.

Mitchell, M. S., & Ambrose, M. L. (2007). Abusive supervision and workplace deviance and the moderating effects of negative reciprocity beliefs. Journal of applied psychology, 92(4), 1159.

30.

Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome. Lexington Books/DC Heath and Com.

31.

Podsakoff, P. M., Ahearne, M., & MacKenzie, S. B. (1997). Organizational citizenship behavior and the quantity and quality of work group performance. Journal of applied psychology, 82(2), 262.

32.

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Bommer, W. H. (1996). Transformational leader behaviors and substitutes for leadership as determinants of employee satisfaction, commitment, trust, and organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of management, 22(2), 259-298.

33.

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Moorman, R. H., & Fetter, R. (1990). Transformational leader behaviors and their effects on followers' trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviors. The leadership quarterly, 1(2), 107-142.

34.

Priesemuth, M., Schminke, M., Ambrose, M. L., & Folger, R. (2014). Abusive supervision climate: A multiplemediation model of its impact on group outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 57(5), 1513-1534.

35.

Scandura, T. A., & Schriesheim, C. A. (1994). Leader-member exchange and supervisor career mentoring as complementary constructs in leadership research. Academy of management Journal, 37(6), 1588-1602.

36.

Schriesheim, C. A., Castro, S. L., & Yammarino, F. J. (2000). Investigating contingencies: An examination of the impact of span of supervision and upward controllingness on leader–member exchange using traditional and multivariate within-and between-entities analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(5), 659.

37.

Schriesheim, C. A., Castro, S. L., Zhou, X. T., & Yammarino, F. J. (2001). The folly of theorizing “A” but testing “B”: A selective level-of-analysis review of the field and a detailed leader–member exchange illustration. The Leadership Quarterly, 12(4), 515-551.

38.

Schriesheim, C. A., Neider, L. L., & Scandura, T. A. (1998). Delegation and leader-member exchange: Main effects, moderators, and measurement issues. Academy of Management Journal, 41(3), 298-318.

39.

Schyns, B. (2006). Are group consensus in leader-member exchange (LMX) and shared work values related to organizational outcomes?. Small Group Research, 37(1), 20-35.

40.

Schyns, B., & Schilling, J. (2013). How bad are the effects of bad leaders? A meta-analysis of destructive leadership and its outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 24(1), 138-158.

41.

Shoss, M. K., Eisenberger, R., Restubog, S. L. D., & Zagenczyk, T. J. (2013). Blaming the organization for abusive supervision: The roles of perceived organizational support and supervisor's organizational embodiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(1), 158.

42.

Sias, P. M. (1996). Constructing perceptions of differential treatment: An analysis of coworker discourse. Communications Monographs, 63(2), 171-187.

43.

Sias, P. M., & Jablin, F. M. (1995). Differential superior-subordinate relations, perceptions of fairness, and coworker communication. Human Communication Research, 22(1), 5-38.

44.

Smith, C. A. O. D. W. N. J. P., Organ, D. W., & Near, J. P. (1983). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents. Journal of applied psychology, 68(4), 653.

45.

Sparrowe, R. T., & Liden, R. C. (2005). Two routes to influence: Integrating leader-member exchange and social network perspectives. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50(4), 505-535.

46.

Tepper, B. J. (2000). Consequences of abusive supervision. Academy of management journal, 43(2), 178-190.

47.

Tepper, B. J. (2007). Abusive supervision in work organizations: Review, synthesis, and research agenda. Journal of management, 33(3), 261-289.

48.

Tepper, B. J., Carr, J. C., Breaux, D. M., Geider, S., Hu, C., & Hua, W. (2009). Abusive supervision, intentions to quit, and employees’ workplace deviance: A power/dependence analysis. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 109(2), 156-167.

49.

Tepper, B. J., Duffy, M. K., Hoobler, J., & Ensley, M. D. (2004). Moderators of the relationships between coworkers'organizational citizenship behavior and fellow employees' attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(3), 455.

50.

Tepper, B. J., Henle, C. A., Lambert, L. S., Giacalone, R. A., & Duffy, M. K. (2008). Abusive supervision and subordinates' organization deviance. Journal of applied psychology, 93(4), 721.

51.

Thau, S., & Mitchell, M. S. (2010). Self-gain or self-regulation impairment? Tests of competing explanations of the supervisor abuse and employee deviance relationship through perceptions of distributive justice. Journal of applied psychology, 95(6), 1009.

52.

Van Dyne, L., Graham, J. W., & Dienesch, R. M. (1994). Organizational citizenship behavior: Construct redefinition, measurement, and validation. Academy of management Journal, 37(4), 765-802.

53.

Wang, W., Mao, J., Wu, W., & Liu, J. (2012). Abusive supervision and workplace deviance: The mediating role of interactional justice and the moderating role of power distance. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 50(1), 43-60.

54.

Wheeler, A. R., Halbesleben, J. R., & Whitman, M. V. (2013). The interactive effects of abusive supervision and entitlement on emotional exhaustion and co‐worker abuse. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 86(4), 477-496.

55.

Wu, T. Y., & Hu, C. (2009). Abusive supervision and employee emotional exhaustion: Dispositional antecedents and boundaries. Group & Organization Management, 34(2), 143-169.

56.

Zellars, K. L., Tepper, B. J., & Duffy, M. K. (2002). Abusive supervision and subordinates' organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of applied psychology, 87(6), 1068-1076.

East Asian Journal of Business Economics

e-Submission OA Policy