Search results

Drawing from moral exclusion theory, this study aims to examine a moderated mediation model for the relationship between perceived overqualification (POQ) and knowledge-hiding behavior directly and via perceived dissimilarity.

Using the convenience-sampling technique, time-lagged (three waves) data were gathered from 595 employees working in different hotels and event management firms. Hayes’ PROCESS macro was used to test the moderated mediation model.

Results showed that perceived dissimilarity among coworkers mediated the result of POQ on knowledge-hiding behavior. In addition, interpersonal disliking moderated the indirect effect in a way that this effect was strong when interpersonal liking was low.

Findings suggest that organizations should make the overqualified realize that they can also learn from their coworkers whom they perceive as less qualified. In this, the feelings of dissimilarity and disliking can be minimized that in turn may decrease the intention to hide knowledge.

The present study offers a new perspective for identifying the nexus between POQ and knowledge-hiding behavior by drawing upon moral exclusion theory and examining the mediating role of perceived deep-level dissimilarity.

This paper aims to highlight the social dynamics associated with the interaction between temporary and permanent organizational members in non-work-related situations. This view contrasts with previous studies which predominantly focus on work-related situations. Inspired by Goffman's dramaturgical metaphor, a perspective which emphasizes the influence of social regions on group membership as well as the ritual foundation of everyday social interactions is developed.

This paper’s methodological foundation is a constructivist grounded theory study of 15 undergraduate nursing students' experiences as temporary members during their clinical placements.

Temporary members arrive at their new organization with an expectation of attending non-work-related situations on similar terms as permanent members. However, they do not expect to be treated as new colleagues. They experience being excluded and ignored, which makes them feel humiliated, denied recognition and deprived of their dignity.

Illuminating social dynamics related to backstage access provides valuable insights to studies of the relationship between temporary and permanent organizational members. Furthermore, redirecting the analytical focus from social dynamics associated with work-related situations to non-work-related ones provides new perspectives on moral exclusion by emphasizing the ritual foundation and its close connection to moral concepts such as dignity and recognition.

After war, societies can undergo change that extends justice to formerly excluded groups. Using theories of moral exclusion and moral inclusion as a lens, this chapter examines societal change in two consecutive periods after the American Civil War (1861–1865): Reconstruction and Jim Crow. Focusing on the well being of black Americans in the American South, this chapter examines Reconstruction's inclusionary gains and setbacks. It then describes challenges faced by black Americans during Jim Crow, a period of white supremacy and violence, and factors associated with Jim Crow's decline. Applying social psychological theory to these historical periods offers insight into the dynamics of inclusionary and exclusionary change.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the link between perceived subordinate performance and abusive supervision. From the perspective of moral exclusion theory, the authors examine cooperative goal interdependence and competitive goal interdependence as key boundary conditions to hypothesize and demonstrate the direct negative relationship between low-performing subordinates and abusive supervision. Within the moral exclusion framework, supervisors may strategically abuse low performers when cooperative goal interdependence is high, or competitive goal interdependence is low. Moreover, this study explores the impact of abusive supervision on subordinate’s objective performance.

This research employs two independent studies to examine the antecedents and consequences of abusive supervision based on respondents from a Fortune 500 company located in Anhui province of People’s Republic of China (PRC). Study 1 uses a time lagged, single source survey while Study 2 employs multi-source, multi-wave data. The results support the integrated model.

Across the two studies, the results showed that the direct negative relationship between perceived subordinate performance and abusive supervision was found to be stronger when cooperative goal interdependence was high and when competitive goal interdependence was low. Study 2 also revealed the negative impact of abusive supervision on subordinate’s objective performance and that the conditional indirect effect of subordinate’s perceived performance on objective performance via abusive supervision was contingent on the extent of cooperative and competitive goal interdependence.

The results clearly demonstrate that supervisors are likely to turn to abusive supervision in response to poor performing subordinates but that the tendency to use abuse as an instrumental strategy for improving subordinate performance is dependent on the nature of goal interdependence between the supervisor and subordinates’ goals. The research also shows that although supervisors may turn to abusive supervision under certain goal interdependence conditions, it is not an effective strategy for actually improving subordinate objective performance. In fact, it has the opposite effect.

The purpose of this study is to contribute to the theoretical groundwork for socio-psychological investigations into the management of socially sustainable supply chains. It proposes an analytical framework for the study of the psychological conflict potential between the fulfillment of core labor standards and cost efficiency requirements.

Theoretical considerations are illustrated using an explorative qualitative-empirical case study.

An activity-theoretical approach makes it possible to combine the subjective experience of tensions between conflicting requirements on sustainability management and the practical imperatives of the capitalist-market economic system in a coherent socio-psychological analytical framework.

The proposed analytical framework serves as a starting point for theoretical considerations on socio-psychological determinants of the sustainability performance of the management of transnational supply chains.

This paper addresses the novel topic of how supply chain sustainability managers give sense to difficulties concerning the fulfillment of core labor standards while being constrained by cost efficiency requirements. To this end, in a hitherto unique way, concepts from activity theory, social cognitive theory of self-regulation and the theory of communicative action are combined into an analytical framework.

The leaders’ perception about self and the opinion of the subordinates about them is crucial to understand why some leaders qualify for hate. Much has been discussed on the positive and ethical side of leadership. However, the research on the darker side of leadership needs more attention. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to explore the factors along with their impact responsible for hate-for-leaders, a relatively scant area of leadership. This study may facilitate understanding why some leaders become subject to hate despite many efforts by the organization.

For exploring the different factors responsible for hate-for-leaders, a survey was conducted by developing a scale using the focus group, Delphi technique, exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis. The results were analysed using structural equation modelling.

The factors responsible for qualifying the leaders for hate were identified. Moreover, the results indicated that the subordinate hate the leaders for his/her unacceptable behaviour/actions which they assume the leader has control over it and exhibited otherwise intentionally on targeted employees. Moreover, some undesirable behaviour of leaders is attributed to fundamental attribution errors i.e. situational factors.

A fully developed scale for assessing the hate-quotient for leaders is proposed. This research will facilitate the managers/leaders as to why some of the followers/employees hate them. This scale provides an opportunity for managers and leaders to introspect themselves for improved workplace relationships and not to encourage sunflower management that seeks to get submissive and aligned-thought employees around the leader.

The fact that the decisions taken by managers/leaders adversely affecting the employees are not always because of malice or wrong intentions but sometimes due to situational factors i.e. fundamental attribution error. Moreover, the scale act as a reference to evaluate the hate-for-leaders in the organizational context.

Based on revenge theory and the three objectives of social interaction theory of aggression, the purpose of this paper is to develop a framework to answer why and when a subordinate’s own behaviour instigates abuse at the workplace. In particular, the authors argue that subordinate gossip behaviour instils in supervisors a thought of revenge towards that subordinate, which, in turn, leads to abusive supervision. Specifically, this hypothesised relationship is augmented when the supervisor feels close to the gossiper (i.e. psychological proximity).

The authors conducted two independent studies to test the moderated mediation model, which collectively investigate why and when subordinate gossip behaviour provokes abusive supervision in the workplace. A lagged study (i.e. Study 1: 422 supervisors and subordinates) in a large retail company and an experience sampling study (i.e. Study 2: 96 supervisors and subordinates with 480 daily surveys) in multiple organisations provide support for the moderated mediation model.

The two-study (i.e. a lagged study and an experience sampling study) findings support the integrated model, which has mainly focussed on instrumental consideration of abusive supervision that influences the supervisor–subordinate relationship.

The two-study investigation has important and meaningful implications for abusive supervision research because it determines that subordinate gossip behaviour is more threating to a supervisor when the subordinate and the supervisor are psychological close to each other than when they are not. That is because when they are close, the supervisor is not expecting gossip behaviour from the subordinate, thus giving rise to an abusive workplace.

Drawing on the perspectives of emotional labor, self-concept and impression management, this study presents two major findings: (1) employees' excessive reliance on impression management can bother supervisors, and (2) the effectiveness of impression management depends on how the management affects targets' attribution of characteristics to actors.

The study uses a cross-sectional design and a sample of 259 employees to investigate the antecedents of abusive supervision and, in this regard, the potential mediating effects of impression management. Through Mplus analysis, the authors specifically show that deep acting and surface acting affect impression management and that impression management activates abusive supervision.

Emotional labor is critical in triggering abusive supervision through impression management. The study specifically shows that impression management mediates two types of relationships: (1) the relationship between deep acting and abusive supervision, and (2) the relationship between surface acting and abusive supervision. The findings contribute to the abusive supervision literature by clarifying how impression management functions.

This study, by addressing how emotional labor is a potential antecedent of abusive supervision, reveals that impression management can be a mixed blessing, insofar as emotional labor can contribute to abusive supervision.

The aim of this paper is to explore the stakeholder exclusion practices of responsible leaders.

An interpretive multiple case analyses of seven responsibly led organisations was employed. Twenty-two qualitative interviews were undertaken to investigate and understand perceptions and practice of responsible leaders and their approach to stakeholder inclusion and exclusion.

The findings revealed new and surprising insights where responsible leaders compromised their espoused values of inclusivity through the application of a personal bias, resulting in the exclusion of certain stakeholders. This exclusivity practice focused on the informal evaluation of potential stakeholders’ values, and where they did not align with those of the responsible leader, these stakeholders were excluded from participation with the organisation. This resulted in the creation and continuity of a culture of shared moral purpose across the organisation.

This study focussed on responsible leader-led organisations, so the next stage of the research will include mainstream organisations (i.e. without explicit responsible leadership) to examine how personal values bias affects stakeholder selection in a wider setting.

The findings suggest that reflexive practice and critically appraising management methods in normative leadership approaches may lead to improvements in diversity management.

This paper presents original empirical data challenging current perceptions of responsible leader inclusivity practices and indicates areas of leadership development that may need to be addressed.