Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine the extent to which emotional experiences mediate the relationships between employees’ perception of considerate and/or tyrannical leadership behaviors and their work engagement and intention to leave the organization. The notion of symmetric and asymmetric relationships between specific kinds of leadership behavior, emotional reactions, and followers’ attitudinal outcomes is also examined.

Employing a survey design, the variables were assessed in a cross-sectional sample of 312 employees.

The study confirmed the notion of symmetric relationships between specific kinds of leadership behavior, emotional reactions, and followers’ attitudinal outcomes. Contrary to the general notion that “bad is stronger than good,” the results indicated that positive emotions were equal or stronger mediators than the negative ones regarding the two outcomes measured in the present study.

The paper is, to the authors’ knowledge, the first paper which examines simultaneously how constructive and destructive leadership styles, and positive and negative affects, are related to employee attitudes outcomes, and evokes a discussion when bad is stronger than good or vice versa regarding leadership outcomes.

Drawing on the resource-based view, the purpose of this paper is to examine the extent to which the level of the organization’s human resource management (HRM) practices, perceived financial resources and organizational size predict the existence of a well-developed ethical infrastructure against workplace bullying.

The human resource (HR) managers or the main health and safety representatives (HSRs) in 216 Norwegian municipalities responded to an electronic survey, representing some 50 percent of the municipalities.

The level of high-quality HRM practice predicted the existence of an ethical infrastructure against workplace bullying, particularly informal systems represented by a strong conflict management climate. Perceived financial resources did not predict the existence of such ethical infrastructure. Organizational size predicted the existence of policies and having training against bullying.

This study informs practitioners about organizational resources associated with organization having a well-developed ethical infrastructure against workplace bullying. A high level of high-quality HRM practices seems to be more important for the existence of a well-developed ethical infrastructure against workplace bullying compared to financial resources and organizational size, at least as perceived by HR managers and HSRs.

This study provides empirical evidence for the importance of having a high level of high-quality HRM practices as predictors of the existence of ethical infrastructure to tackle workplace bullying. An essential finding is that the existence of such an infrastructure is not dependent on distal resources, such as organizational size and perceived financial resources.

In the present paper direct as well as indirect relationships between organizational changes and exposure to bullying at work are investigated. Interpersonal conflicts are hypothesized to mediate changes on bullying. Data from a sample of 2408 Norwegian employees confirmed that different organizational changes were moderately associated with task-related bullying at work, and that exposure to more changes increased the likelihood of being bullied. Structural equation modelling supported the assumption that changes were directly related to bullying. However, the hypothesis that changes were mediated on bullying through interpersonal conflicts was not supported. Results indicate that organizational changes and interpersonal conflicts are separate, and mainly independent, precursors of bullying at work.

There are several permutations of destructive leadership types. Most involve active leadership actions, but some involve passive actions (or lack of leadership). A review of the literature reveals a relative dearth of root causes of destructive leadership type, but a reasonable sampling of causal factors and predictors of destructive leadership results. The author focuses on three relevant and representative destructive leadership types: Pseudotransformational, Laissez-Faire, and Unethical, and scoured the literature for root causes, causal factors, and predictors related to each. He further compared and contrasted these leadership types to differentiate their similarities and differences and discussed the causal factors and predictors associated with the operationalization of these leadership styles.

This study aims to explore relationships between exposure to bullying at work and intention to leave the organisation, actual leaving the workplace, and exclusion from working life through sick leave or rehabilitation or disability pension.

A prospective design with two surveys of a national representative sample of the Norwegian work force was used (n=1,775). The response rate at the first data collection in 2005 was 56.4 per cent, and 70 per cent at the second data collection in 2007. Bullying was measured using two measurement methods: self‐labelled victims of bullying and exposure to bullying behaviour, respectively.

This study shows partial support for Leymann's assumption that bullying at work will lead to exclusion from working life. Logistic regressions showed that victims of bullying considered leaving their work more often than did individuals who were not bullied, on both measurement times. The results also showed that victims have changed employer more often than non‐victims. However, most victims are still working full time or part time two years later.

Prevention of workplace bullying must be handled through procedures on an organisational level. Rehabilitation programs and reintegration must be offered for employees unable to stay in their job. Counselling should be available for those who experience bullying or consider leaving their job.

To the authors' knowledge, this is the first study examining bullying, intention to leave, turnover and exclusion from working life with a prospective longitudinal design.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the psychological and motivational processes involved in the relationship between two forms of destructive leadership (tyrannical and laissez-faire) and employee health (burnout, affective commitment and job performance). Drawing on self-determination theory, this paper links tyrannical and laissez-faire leadership to employee health through psychological need frustration and poor-quality (controlled) work motivation.

A total of 399 Canadian nurses took part in this cross-sectional study. Structural equational modelling analyses were conducted.

Results show that tyrannical leadership frustrates nurses’ needs for autonomy, competence and relatedness, whereas laissez-faire leadership frustrates nurses’ need for autonomy only. The frustration of needs for autonomy and competence predicts low-quality (controlled) work motivation, which is consequently associated with impaired health (burnout and lower affective commitment as well as performance).

This study contributes to the scarce knowledge regarding the distinct outcomes of destructive forms of leadership and uncovers the specific psychological and motivational pathways through which these types of leadership influence employees’ health.

***as provided****

The common notion that leaders should be ethical, good, responsible and trustworthy has been strongly challenged in the fields of business and politics worldwide. Due to the high prevalence of unethical leadership by immediate supervisors and decline in trust in leaders (Cowart, Gilley, Avery, Barber, & Gilley, 2014), scholars started to pay closer attention to the dark sides and destructive aspects of leadership. Many different concepts are suggested to define the dark side of leadership, and each of them captures similar but distinct dimensions. In this vein, Einarsen and colleagues' (2007) constructive and destructive leadership model serves as an umbrella concept for different types of dark sides of leadership, covering concepts which have been studied separately such as abusive supervision, tyrannical leadership, petty tyranny, toxic leadership and leader derailment. The present chapter aims to provide a summary of the definitions of these interrelated constructs to acknowledge some other leadership (e.g., paternalistic leadership, pseudo-transformational leadership) and personality styles (e.g., Machiavellianism, narcissism) that have not been considered in this framework and to provide suggestions for future research.