Search results

This paper aims at examining graduate research supervisors' perceptions of organizational and job supervisors' support and their influence on research completion rate. While research supervision has been mainly examined from pedagogical perspectives, little emphasis has been placed on the human resource management (HRM) activity for academics. This review paper draws from organizational support and social exchange theories (SET) to examine the influence of perceived organizational support (POS) and perceived supervisor support (PSS) in research supervision work.

The paper is a narrative literature review of identified relevant readings on organizational support and social exchange, research supervisors' perceived support and their implications for research.

Research supervisors examine their perceptions of administrative, professional, financial and socio-emotional support from their universities and job supervisors. They in turn feel obligated to reciprocate, for example, through commitment, engagement and performance, towards meeting their goals with the organization, the job supervisor and the student.

The study relied on a literature review; hence, the findings may not reflect actual expressions of research supervisors' perceptions.

The paper shows the application of organizational support and social exchange theories in academic work. It emphasizes the importance of support, perception and reciprocation through an exchange relationship. The research support framework is a guide to managing the relationships among the parties involved in research work.

The paper considers research supervisors as key human resources (HRs) that espouse supportive HRM practices from both the organization and the job supervisor. This is unlike most studies that have employed only pedagogical approaches in explaining research. It further develops a research supervision support framework.

The paper aims to describe the application of two key service quality frameworks for improving the delivery of postgraduate research supervision. The services quality frameworks are used to identify key areas of overlap between services marketing practice and postgraduate supervision that can be used by the supervisor to improve research supervision outcomes for the student.

The paper is a conceptual and theoretical examination of the two streams of literature that proposes a supervision gap model based on the services gap literature, and the application of services delivery frameworks of co‐creation and service quality.

Services marketing literature can inform the process of designing and delivering postgraduate research supervision by clarifying student supervisor roles, setting parameters and using quality assurance frameworks for supervision delivery. The five services quality indicators can be used to examine overlooked areas of supervision delivery, and the co‐creation approach of services marketing can be used to empower student design and engaged in the quality of the supervision experience.

As a conceptual paper based on developing a theoretical structure for applying services marketing theory into the research supervision context, the paper is limited to suggesting potential applications. Further research studies will be necessary to test the field implementation of the approach.

The practical implications of the paper include implementation suggestions for applying the supervisor gaps for assessing areas of potential breakdown in the supervision arrangement.

The paper draws on two diverse areas of theoretical work to integrate the experience, knowledge and frameworks of commercial services marketing into the postgraduate research supervision literature.

In this paper the authors seek to argue that doctoral supervision is one type of human resource development relationship in higher education (HE), and that this relationship may be close or distanced, and involve technical and social support. The paper aims to highlight the seldom‐discussed aspects of power and emotion within doctoral supervision, with specific focus on the feedback process, suggesting that students and supervisors may not be adequately developed for their roles.

The authors conducted two small cumulative studies in the UK, involving a small focus group and a national survey of students and supervisors. The focus of the first study is to elucidate potentially influential variables in the supervisory relationship. The second study builds on emergent themes relating to forms of supervision (dimensions, structure and support) with specific focus on manifestations of power and emotion.

The focus group findings exemplify the power and emotion that pervades doctoral research. Key survey findings relating to power within the doctoral relationship suggest that students perceived their supervisors as having less power than themselves. With respect to emotion, the findings suggest a low level of emotion management on the part of students, who are unaware of displaying or even experiencing their emotions. As the most frequent reason for meeting, students and supervisors need to see feedback as being positive for self‐development, but also need to be aware of the power and emotion dimensions of this sensitive aspect of doctoral supervision.

Although both studies were small, the authors' findings do contribute to developing a more sophisticated understanding of the forms, power and emotion of doctoral supervision. However, further research is required to identify whether these issues are pertinent to UK students and supervisors alone, or whether they transcend national cultures and higher education systems.

The research finds that supervisors appear to learn about supervision through reflecting upon how they were supervised as students. This raises important issues for HRD in higher education for staff development. It also brings into focus how both students and supervisors are developed in recognising and dealing with their emotions, identifying and controlling shifting power dynamics, giving and receiving feedback and managing their evolving relationship.

Few studies have explored the power and emotion of doctoral supervision, yet dealing with these requires academic staff and student development.

While integrating resource drain theory with ego depletion theory, this paper aims to understand the mechanism underlying the relationship between research supervisors’ interrole conflicts and their supervisees’ reactions. Specifically, this paper makes a case for supervisors’ ego depletion and supervisees’ perception of abusive supervision to mediate the relationship between supervisors’ work and family conflicts and supervisees’ satisfaction with research supervision.

The study uses data collected in three waves from 306 research supervisees (Level 1) nested in 100 research supervisors (Level 2), involved in MS/PhD research theses at different Pakistani universities.

Based on multilevel modeling, the study finds that supervisors’ interrole conflicts negatively predict supervisees’ satisfaction with supervision. Moreover, supervisors’ ego depletion and supervisees’ perception of abusive supervision mediate the above relationship, both singly and serially. Notably, supervisors’ family–work conflict predicts supervisees’ satisfaction with supervision more negatively than work–family conflict.

This study is unique in that unlike previous research studies on abusive supervision which used victimization approach the present study uses the perpetration approach.

This paper aims to respond to the need for a model of doctoral supervision that can capture and represent the focus, range and complexity of instructional intentions, practices and possibilities.

The study draws on the substantive literature on supervision and changing doctoral programs in the Fine Arts and relatively new empirical findings about supervision and learning. The authors posit a holistic model of supervision ranging across micro–macro and product–person dimensions. The model is further explained and illustrated using four supervisor cases in Fine Arts.

The model offers a heuristic for supervisors to reflect on and identify existing emphases, alignments and integrative possibilities to better understand the complexities of Fine Arts supervisory practices.

There is a dearth of research that addresses how doctoral supervisors perceive and articulate their roles and breadth of responsibilities in light of new programs and changing sectoral expectations.

Despite recent organizational behavior studies have witnessed considerable progress in abusive supervision research; some demerits for both theory and methodology still remain in the past years. To clarify the current state of knowledge in the field, this study aims to analyze the current state of theories and methods on abusive supervision and provides a detailed future research agenda.

This paper conducted a literature review for both theory and methodology of the abusive supervision research using a content analysis of 134 publications.

For the theory part, this paper summarized the theories that had been applied to explain the relationship between abusive supervision and its consequences as well as antecedents. For the methodology part, this paper outlined some critical issues regarding country of origin, research design, measurement, analysis strategy and also summarized with a discussion of the relationship between methodological issues and article impact. Finally, this paper concluded by presenting an agenda for future abusive supervision research regarding both theory and methodology.

First, this paper summarizes the main theories, antecedents and consequences often used in abusive supervision research to allow scholars to carry out theoretically driven research investigating abusive supervision in the future. Second, through a content analysis of the methods sections of abusive supervision research in the samples (i.e. country of origin, research design, measurement and analytical procedures), this paper identified the potential reasons underlying the inconsistency in the conclusions of abusive supervision research and provide some guidance for future empirical studies. Third, based on the qualitative review, this paper provides an agenda for future research investigating abusive supervision by developing a content-specific theoretical framework to benchmark abusive supervision research against other research related to leadership and offers an accurate response to scholars’ criticisms of abusive supervision research.

This paper aims to provide researchers and practitioners with an understanding of abusive supervision in the context of hospitality. It seeks to conduct a comprehensive review of the area and offer recommendations for future research by exploring the antecedents, consequences, mechanisms and designs of research on abusive supervision.

Content analysis was conducted to review and analyze studies on abusive supervision in the context of hospitality. Previous studies were searched in the EBSCO, Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar electronic databases.

In total, 36 referred articles related to abusive supervision in hospitality were reviewed across four key areas, namely, antecedents, consequences, mechanisms and research design. After reviewing the research on abusive supervision in the context of hospitality, this paper offers future research directions with respect to research focus and research design.

This paper only included English articles from peer-reviewed journals on abusive supervision. The number of reviewed articles was relatively small. This limitation may have arisen because abusive supervision is a new research field and is still a sensitive topic.

The results of this study may encourage managers to minimize or even halt abusive supervision. From an organizational perspective, formal policies may be developed to regularize supervisors’ behavior. In turn, employees could use this paper to learn further about abusive behavior and how to handle it effectively.

The review highlighted the negative consequences of abusive supervision. Managers should urgently realize the seriousness of abusive supervision and develop effective policies to minimize its negative effect.

This paper contributes to the emerging literature on abusive supervision in the context of hospitality by identifying key research trends and framing the outlines of empirical studies. It identifies research gaps, and as the first review of abusive supervision in hospitality, it may encourage researchers to explore the topic on the basis of the characteristics of the sector and offer suggestions for future research.

The purpose of this paper is twofold: first, to examine a customer orientation mechanism through which abusive supervision influences retail salespeople’s job performance; and second, to investigate how abusive supervision’s effects may be moderated by the same leader’s use of contingent punishment and contingent reward.

Two studies provide consistent findings. Study 1 used the field survey data from 129 salespeople in 42 retail stores. The proposed moderated mediation model was estimated using the random coefficient modeling technique. Findings were replicated in Study 2, in which data were collected from a sample of 679 US retail salespeople recruited through M-Turk.

Results from both studies show that abusive supervision reduces salespeople’s job performance through lowering their customer orientation. Furthermore, the use of contingent punishment from the same supervisor buffers abusive supervision’s detrimental effect, whereas the use of contingent reward augments it.

The issues the authors address in this research have significant implications for the literature of abusive supervision and retail selling. First, the authors contribute to the abusive supervision literature by pointing it out that the negative effect of abusive supervision can spill over to organizations’ external stakeholders, namely, customers. Previous research on abusive supervision has mainly focused on how abused subordinates exhibit hostile acts directed against the supervisor, coworkers and the organization (Tepper et al., 2017), with little attention paid to abusive supervision’s impact on organizations’ external stakeholders such as customers. This research fills the void by placing impaired customer-orientation as a critical consequence of abusive supervision. Second, this research tests a contingent self-regulation impairment model of abusive supervision and advances our understanding about how the same supervisor’s functional leadership behaviors (contingent reward/punishment) may set contingencies for the effect of abusive supervision on employee outcomes. This investigation clears the doubts about whether the use of functional leadership behaviors along with abusive supervision buffers or aggravates the detrimental effect of the latter. Finally, this study’s findings shed new insights to marketing practitioners, especially in understanding how salespeople may vent their stress on the customers when being abused by their supervisors. Without this in mind, supervisors may not be aware of the consequences of their abusive behavior and may even develop an illusion that such a practice worked. This research shows that abusive supervision can lower employees’ customer orientation, which will hurt the company in the long run.

The findings intend to provide important guidelines for companies to develop effective workshops and training programs to combat the detrimental effects of abusive supervision in the retailing industry. For example, the findings shed new insights in understanding how employees may vent their stress on the customers when being abused by their supervisors. Without this in mind, supervisors may not be aware of the consequences of their abusive behavior and may even develop an illusion that such a practice worked. Another important managerial implication of this research is that the use of contingent reward after mistreating subordinates can backfire. Supervisor abuses, followed by a contingent reward, send an inconsistent signal to the employee that creates confusion and strain. Inconsistent actions from the supervisor also produce ethical tensions that reduce customer-oriented behaviors and a company’s ability to serve the customer (Friend et al., 2020). These training programs are important methods to combat the detrimental effects of abusive supervision in the workforce.

This research draws on the contingent self-regulation impairment model as an overarching framework to unpack the relationship between abusive supervision and salespeople’s job performance. Integrating three research streams (i.e. abusive supervision, leadership reinforcement and retail selling), this study proposes customer orientation as a novel mechanism and sheds light on how abusive supervision interplays with contingent punishment/reward to impact salespeople’s outcomes.

Purpose – To outline the role of the group supervision model in postgraduate training, especially its advantages in respect of research involving industry sponsors. Design/methodology/approach – The paper considers the various categories of supervision and the pivotal role played by the supervisor. It analyses indicators of supervisor effectiveness in four major categories including supervisory style, the supervisor competence and supervisor characteristics and attitudes. Finally, it discusses how universities have worked on student attitudinal and skill problems through the provision of postgraduate training courses and changes to the supervisory system. A number of group supervisory practice models are described and the role and function of a supervisor are considered. Findings – The quality of postgraduate study is not purely a question of supervision methodology and motivation but hinges also, but not exclusively, on institutional admission procedures and policies, faculty/school administration policies as well as assistance and infra structure that is provided by faculty/school to supervisors and students, including financial assistance, access to child care, pastoral care, computing, library, office space, phone access, access to secretarial support, provision of research seminars and presentations, funding for library searches, conferences, travel, fieldwork, photocopying, and opportunities for casual work within the school. Research limitations/implications – The paper acknowledges that current supervision of postgraduate research students is deficient in many cases, but cannot provide, for ethical reasons, examples of bad practice. It does acknowledge that problems exist manifesting themselves in inadequate supervision, emotional and psychological problems in the student body, communication problems between supervisors and supervisees, knowledge deficiencies in the student body with the ultimate effect of late completions and low retention rates. Practical implications – The paper shows that universities must work towards improved linkages to ensure that they can take advantage of partnership opportunities. Originality/value – The paper has identified approaches to panel supervision and outlines the role of the industry partnership model. It is helpful to both students and supervisors trying should to determine under what research arrangement they conduct their research.

Empirical evidence on how supervisors have perceived the changes and the implications of the COVID-19 pandemic on their supervision is scarce. This paper aims to examine how the changing landscape of doctoral education has affected supervision from the supervisors’ perspective.

This survey addressed change, challenges and impact in supervisory responsibilities due to COVID-19 pandemic. The survey was completed by 561 doctoral supervisors from a large multi-field research-intensive university in Finland.

Results show that supervisors estimated that their supervision had been negatively affected by the pandemic, but to a lesser extent than their doctoral candidates’ progress and well-being. In the changed landscape of supervision, the supervisors grappled with challenges related to recognising doctoral candidates’ need of help. Supervisors’ experiences of the challenges and the impact of changed circumstances varied depending on the field and the position of the supervisor, whether they supervised part- or full-time candidates, and the organisation of supervision.

The slowed-down progression and diminishing well-being of doctoral candidates reported by supervisors is likely to influence supervision in a delayed way. Supervisors may be anticipating some issues with stalled studying and stress, but the question is the extent to which they are prepared to handle these as they emerge in supervision encounters. The fact that the experiences varied across field, position, organisation of supervision and the type of candidates (full or part time) suggests that support provided for supervisors to overcome challenges needs to be tailored and engineered.

This study contributes to the literature on doctoral supervision by exploring the impact of transitioning to online supervision and the rapid changes in doctoral supervision as a consequence of the recent global pandemic.