Search results

This paper aims to explore why some Chinese subordinates will engage in building guanxi with their supervisor while others will not. The authors conceptualize subordinates’ initiative behaviors which aim at building up or improving guanxi with their supervisors through social interactions as supervisor–subordinate guanxi (SSG)-building behaviors. Guided by the theory of planned behavior (TPB), this study examines how three psychological antecedents (guanxi orientation as attitude, individual perception of group-level guanxi practice as subjective norm and person–supervisor [P-S] fit perception as perceived control) independently and interactively predict subordinates’ SSG-building behaviors.

The authors used a sample of 162 supervisor–subordinate dyads from four enterprises located in Southwest China.

Results indicated that P-S fit perception is most strongly related to subordinates’ SSG-building behaviors, followed by guanxi orientation and individual perception of group-level guanxi practice perception. Guanxi orientation is also found to strengthen the positive effect of P-S fit perception on subordinates’ SSG-building behaviors.

The authors’ findings shed light on the psychological mechanisms of Chinese subordinates’ behaviors to build up or improve guanxi with their supervisors, and advance the current understanding of SSG development from a planned behavioral perspective.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between supervisor‐perceived procedural justice and subordinate‐perceived procedural justice. The moderating roles of the subordinate‐perceived interactional justice and power‐distance value are also to be examined.

Survey data were obtained from 509 supervisor‐subordinate dyads in mainland China. Hierarchical linear modeling was used to test the research hypotheses.

Results revealed that: supervisor‐perceived procedural justice is positively related to subordinate‐perceived procedural justice; the direct relationship is stronger when the subordinate perceives higher rather than lower interactional justice from the supervisor; and the direct relationship is stronger when the subordinate holds a higher rather than lower power‐distance value.

The data collected in the present study reside at two hierarchical levels, namely, the employee level and the supervisor level, and the sample size is relatively large. The results are thus less likely subject to common method bias. However, future longitudinal research will be helpful to lend stronger support for the hypothesized causal relationships.

The paper uses cognitive social learning theory in a social exchange context to explain the cross‐level relationship of procedural justice perceptions in organizations, and to identify its boundary conditions. Results support that fairness perceptions at a higher organizational level can be related to lower‐level perceptions along the organizational hierarchy.

The current study focuses the impact of leadership and teams on employees’ psychological climate for change. Integrating streams of research from the change, organizational climate, leader‐member exchange (LMX), and group dynamics literature, the paper proposes that supervisors and teams will shape employees’ climate perceptions as a function of the relationship quality employees experience with these two social units. The impact of the supervisor’s and team’s personal view of the climate, as well as the dyadic quality‐supervisor climate view interaction, and team relations quality‐team climate view interaction were also examined. Results support a main effect for LMX, team relation quality, and team climate view on employee psychological climate for change. In addition, results revealed a multiplicative effect for LMX and supervisor climate view. Overall, the findings suggest that both types of work relationships employees share may serve as potential mechanisms for transforming employees toward change.

Drawing from social dominance theories and conceptualizations of paternalism, the purpose of this paper is to define and develop a measure of subordinates’ perceptions of supervisor paternalism (SPSP).

The authors assess the validity of the measure using Hinkin’s (1998) scale development steps.

The authors found evidence of the convergent and discriminant validity of the measure of subordinates’ perceptions of supervisor paternalism drawing from three different samples. Participants in the study were also able to differentiate a low from a high paternalism condition using the measure of paternalism. Finally, as expected, the interaction between a supervisor’s benevolence and control was significantly associated with subordinates’ perceptions of supervisor paternalism.

The authors provide evidence for the validity of a measure of subordinates’ perceptions of supervisor paternalism while controlling for various status signals represented by demographic variables. Results may have been influenced by common method variance. However, there is no theoretical reason to expect any such interactions. Additionally, as the authors limited the data collection to the USA, the authors caution against generalizing beyond that context.

The authors provide validity and reliability evidence for a unidimensional measure that is short and easy to administer in future research to further examine the consequences of perceptions of supervisor paternalism.

Defining and measuring subordinates’ perceptions of supervisor paternalism is important to society given the potential adverse consequences of these perceptions. Because paternalistic relationships pervade many supervisor-subordinate interactions, both subordinates and supervisors can become more sensitive to the consequences of such interactions by understanding the conditions under which supervisor paternalism manifests itself.

Conceptually, in this study, the authors build on prior research and define supervisor paternalism from a social dominance perspective. Empirically, the authors contribute a statistically valid and reliable unidimensional measure.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the role of subordinates' perceived supervisor political support (SPS) as a boundary condition capable of attenuating individuals' negative reactions to politics perceptions.

Data for this three-sample investigation were obtained from employees of a package distribution firm (n=144), employees of an engineering firm (n=187), and individuals attending a manufacturing-related professional conference (n=174). Data were analyzed using hierarchical moderated regression analyses.

Consistent with prior research, individuals' politics perceptions were directly associated with less than desirable workplace outcomes. However, individuals' who perceived their supervisors to provide them with SPS were less negatively affected by politics perceptions than their peers who perceived low levels of SPS.

SPS appears to provide information to subordinates to aid in sensemaking such that they are better able to deal with requisite uncertainty associated with their political settings, and in doing so, SPS shifts their perceptions of the political environment from that of threat to potential benefit.

This investigation in one of a handful of studies to examine the other-benefitting role of political behavior as well as the conditions under which politics perceptions result in auspicious outcomes. Additionally, the manuscript is unique in that it introduces, conceptually delineates, and empirically evaluates a more active, behavioral form of supervisory support (i.e. SPS).

To examine the relationship between self‐esteem and job performance using others' perceptions of self‐esteem and to examine agreement in ratings of self‐esteem across sources.

A sample of 143 sales representatives, 113 supervisors, 420 peers, 435 customers, and 510 family and friends completed Rosenberg's measure of self‐esteem and a measure of acquaintanceship. Peers and supervisors rated the subjects' job performance. Correlations and hierarchical regression were used to explore the relationships.

Customer, peer, and supervisor perceptions of subjects' self‐esteem related significantly to peer and supervisor performance ratings, whereas self and family/friends perceptions did not. There was limited support for the acquaintanceship effect (greater agreement across sources when familiarity is greater), while context affected agreement (same context sources had greater agreement).

The study highlights the importance of looking at an employee from a variety of perspectives. Also, training employees to develop self‐enhancing behaviors may enhance their outcomes. Finally, training raters that their perceptions of co‐workers' self‐esteem may influence evaluations of performance could reduce unconscious errors.

If this had been a traditional study measuring self‐esteem's impact on performance ratings, no significant relationships could have been reported since individuals' perceptions of their own self‐esteem were not valid predictors of performance ratings. It may be the individual's public self‐esteem (e.g. impression management skills) that influences performance ratings. In particular, workplace sources perceived high self‐esteem as being important to job performance. The validity of self‐esteem may be understated through reliance on the self‐report method alone.

Despite past studies revealed the positive effect of corporate social responsibility (CSR) on consumer advocacy behavior, little research has paid attention to employee advocacy behavior. This research aims to examine the relationship between CSR and employee advocacy behavior, the mediating role of meaningful work as well as the moderating effect of person–supervisor fit on CSR perception – meaningful work relationship.

This study used 263 employee samples to examine the relationship between CSR and employee advocacy behavior and its influence mechanism. Hierarchical regression analyses and bootstrap approach were applied to analyze the data.

The results show that CSR perception is positively related to employee advocacy behavior, meaningful work mediates the link between CSR perception and employee advocacy behavior, and the strength of the relationship between CSR perception and meaningful work depends on person–supervisor fit.

This study only investigated the effect of perceived CSR on employee advocacy behavior, future studies should explore the alternative mediation mechanism through which external/internal CSR perception or different CSR dimensions influence employee advocacy behavior.

This study has practical implications for organizational managers. First, firms should undertake CSR practices and make employee interpret them in a right way. Second, meaningful work is of significance for employees and training and development, challenging jobs and job rotation are conducive to create a sense of meaning in employees’ work.

This study discussed how and when CSR influences employee advocacy in the Chinese context.

In response to the call for deeper investigation of abusive supervision (Martinko et al., 2013), the purpose of this paper is to examine perceived supervisor competence and perceived employee mobility (an individual’s perception of his/her ability to obtain new employment) to better understand contextual and individual factors that potentially influence the degree of harmful supervisory behaviors experienced by employees.

Responses from 749 survey participants were analyzed to determine the impact of perceived supervisor competence and perceived employee mobility on perceptions of abusive supervisory conduct. A bootstrapping-based mediation analysis (Hayes, 2012) was used to test for mediation by the variables of interest.

The authors found that perceived supervisor competence is associated with weakened perceptions of abusive supervision, and that this relationship is partially mediated by respondents’ perceived occupational mobility.

The data are cross-sectional and were collected with a self-report questionnaire and compiled utilizing student-enumerators. The sample was also regional in scope and lacked information that would indicate if respondents were also supervisors.

These results imply that perceptions of abusive supervision can be mitigated by building stronger competencies in supervisors, which translates into greater individual employee perceived mobility. Human resource (HR) professionals can implement practices to decrease the likelihood of abusive supervisory conduct by ensuring that supervisors are competent in their jobs, facilitating a coaching/mentoring process between supervisors and subordinates and establishing/maintaining an effective developmental performance feedback process for supervisors.

Since perceived supervisor competence is one element of reducing abusive conduct, while also enhancing subordinate perceived mobility, selection and training efforts should focus on hiring and preparing individuals to be effective work supervisors. Enhancing worker capabilities and marketability may result in greater perceived occupational mobility and reduced perceptions of abuse by supervisors.

These results lend support to the argument that perceptions of abusive supervision can be mitigated by building stronger competencies in supervisors, which translates into greater perceived mobility among employees. Organizations may benefit through lowered employee turnover, employees may enjoy more harmonious, supportive relationships with their supervisors and HR staff may benefit by having competent supervisors who do not generate employee complaints and intentions to quit.

Despite a burgeoning literature on family-supportive supervisor behaviors (FSSB), it is unclear whether supervisors view these behaviors as in-role or discretionary. We proposed a new cognitive motivational construct, FSSB role perceptions (FSSB-RP; that is the extent to which supervisors perceive FSSB as an expected part of their job) and evaluated it as a mediator of the relationship between supervisors' own work–family experiences and FSSB.

We used an online survey of 245 US based supervisors.

We find that FSSB role perceptions is a unique but related construct to FSSB, and that approximately half of our sample of 245 supervisors either do not believe that FSSB is a part of their job or are unsure as to whether it is. Path analyses revealed that supervisors' own experiences of work–family conflict and enrichment are related to engaging in FSSB through role perceptions, especially when a reward system is in place that values FSSB.

These results may influence the design, implementation and dissemination of leader family-supportive training programs.

The factors that drive supervisors to engage in FSSB are relatively unknown, yet this study suggests the novel construct of FSSB role perceptions and supervisors' own work–family experiences are important factors.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the underlying structure of employees' justice perceptions in the context of their organizations' performance appraisal practices.

Ten multi‐item scales were designed to measure the perceived fairness of performance appraisal practices. A nested confirmatory factor analysis of employee responses (n=188) compared the four justice dimensions (i.e. procedural, distributive, interpersonal, informational) to five plausible alternatives. Construct validity was demonstrated through a structural equation model of matched employee and supervisor responses (n=117).

The confirmatory factor analysis showed evidence of four distinct but highly correlated justice constructs. Results supported hypothesized relationships between procedural justice and helpful behaviors toward the organization via appraisal system satisfaction; distributive justice with appraisal satisfaction; and interpersonal and informational justice and helpful behaviors toward the supervisor via supervisor satisfaction.

This study underscores the importance of fostering perceptions of justice in the context of performance appraisal. The scales developed in this study could be used to isolate potential problems with an organization's performance appraisal practices. Originality/value – The paper integrates prior research concerning the positive effects of procedural, distributive, interpersonal, and informational justice on affective and behavioral responses towards performance appraisals.