Search results

As the literature reveals an ongoing debate on the lack of agreement for a comprehensive conceptualization and definition of destructive leadership, the measurement of the construct is still problematic. Therefore, this chapter aims to review and summarize the current ways of measuring destructive leadership. A systematic review was conducted to examine the destructive leadership instruments. This chapter covers both qualitative and quantitative instruments in assessing destructive leadership and provides a brief overview of the scale development of the instruments. In addition to destructive leadership scales, commonly used harmful leadership scales such as abusive, tyrannical and toxic scales were also included for comparison purposes.

The purpose of this study is to examine potential predictors and moderating relationships involving one type of organizational cynicism – cynicism about organizational transformation (CAOC).

A total of 137 subjects participated in this study. The participants had been in their current positions at work for an average of 4.77 years and had been with their current organization an average of 7.28 years. CAOC was measured using the 12-item scale (α = 0.86) from Wanous et al.’s (2000) study. The response scale had five points ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.”

CAOC and negative affectivity were positively correlated, thus supporting H1. H2 was not supported, i.e. subjective change was not related to CAOC, and objective change was actually correlated negatively with CAOC. H3 was not supported, i.e. individuals with a higher organizational commitment will not have a less positive relationship between CAOC and organizational transformation (subjective and objective) than individuals with lower organizational commitment. H4 was not supported, i.e. individuals who perceive a higher degree of petty tyranny will not have a stronger relationship between CAOC and organizational transformation (subjective and objective) than individuals who perceive a lower degree of petty tyranny. H5 was not supported, i.e. individuals who perceive a higher degree of perceived organizational support (POS) will not have a weaker relationship between CAOC and organizational transformation (subjective and objective) than individuals who perceive a lower degree of POS.

The intent of the present study is to examine potential causes of CAOC and potential moderators of the relationships between those antecedents and CAOC. In particular, two variables are proposed as antecedents (negative affectivity with past organizational transformations) and three as moderators (organizational commitment, petty tyranny by supervisors and POS).

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.

The current chapter is one of the first studies to specifically address the role of civil society organisations (CSOs) for entrepreneurship development in the disadvantaged context of Sierra Leone. It highlights the important role of CSOs in the petty trading (disadvantaged) entrepreneurial ecosystem. Based on qualitative analysis of interviewers undertaken with two CSOs and three entrepreneurial firms from disadvantaged backgrounds, our findings offer interesting insights into this phenomenon. The authors find that in the context of disadvantaged entrepreneurship development, CSOs are seen as more trustworthy by the general population than the government (public bodies). The government, through the national youth commission, also tried to collaborate with CSOs regarding entrepreneurial skills development in disadvantaged entrepreneurs. The findings further reveal that despite the appreciation of the role of CSOs for disadvantaged entrepreneurship development by public authorities in recent years, they still face many bureaucratic hurdles and delays in operations. Finally, our chapter reveals several dynamics associated with skills and competencies development in disadvantaged entrepreneurship in the Sierra Leone-specific context, where skills such as basic business planning, livestock handling, and financial management emerge as being highly useful.

The full-range leadership theory, and the distinction between transformational, transactional and laissez-faire leadership behaviour has strongly influenced leadership theory and research in the last several decades. However, in spite of its impact on theory and practice, it has a few shortcomings, as, in its essence, it disregards several essential aspects of a leader’s behaviour, such as the dark side of leadership behaviour. Therefore, to capture various leader behaviours, we provide a more comprehensive leadership model named the “complete full range of leadership”.

Based on reviewing the relevant theoretical and empirical literature, we propose an extended theoretical model, which addresses the existing shortcomings of the full range leadership model.

First, we added a new active and more destructive facet of leadership style named active, destructive leadership style. Second, based on existing empirical findings, we restructured the transactional facet of full-range leadership by collapsing its components into two new distinct facets representing active constructive leadership style and passive destructive leadership style. Finally, drawing on Hersey and Blanchard’s model, we add a new passive and constructive facet named passive constructive leadership.

Our suggested “complete full range of leadership” contributes to leadership theory by addressing the gap between existing theory and empirical findings, making a clear distinction between lack of leadership and delegation and by comprising the dark side of leadership with its bright side into one comprehensive leadership model.

This article examines relationships between capitalism and democracy as perceived by contending perspectives within the liberal capitalist‐liberal democratic tradition(s). Bentham and the Mills are taken as initiating both this tradition and the core elements of the debate within it. Pre‐Benthamite theories are first reviewed. Then, after discussion of Bentham and James Mill and of John Stuart Mill, Mill's late nineteenth and early twentieth century successors are examined. We then go on to consider hypotheses concerning the “exceptional” quality of relationships between capitalism and democracy in the United States. The penultimate section of the article adumbrates the main contours of mid‐twentieth century pluralist‐elitist theories. We conclude with a summary.

For many years, researchers from management, psychology, sociology, and other disciplines have studied not only the differences that gender makes in the style of managers' leadership but also how the gender of the subordinates affects their perceptions about the different behavior of male and female leaders. Those studies mostly focused on gender and constructive leadership styles, thus neglecting potential destructive aspects of leadership. Therefore, this chapter aims to understand the relationship between men and women and the observations of employees regarding the destructive leadership behaviors of both male and female managers. The results of the study, which was conducted with 130 participants who have been working under different managers, highlight several issues and interpret them in terms of the different psychological and sociological theories and models.

Research has overwhelmingly focused on the positive side of leadership in the past. However, research into negative aspects of leadership is picking up pace. This chapter will provide an overview of two prominent aspects of negative leadership, namely, abusive supervision and laissez-faire leadership. Research has shown that both types of leadership have significant negative consequences both for organisations as a whole as well as individual followers. Examples include lower job satisfaction, stress, as well as lowered performances and a higher likelihood of counter-productive work behaviour. Both abusive supervision and laissez-faire researchers acknowledge that these leadership styles take effect through the perception of followers. That is, they consider that the same behaviour can be interpreted differently by different followers and will, hence, lead to different follower-related outcomes. Abusive supervision and laissez-faire are, however, very different in terms of the actual leader behaviours described. While abusive supervision is a style that is actively destructive, laissez-faire is destructive via lack of support for followers' goal achievement. We end the chapter with an outlook for future research, notably an attempt to systematise future research into destructive leadership with respect to the different forms it can take.

This chapter investigates the relationship between abusive supervision and employee well-being (i.e., job satisfaction, engagement) and ill-being (i.e., burnout, workaholism) and examines whether follower core self-evaluations (CSE) moderate this relationship.

The study uses cross-sectional survey data collected from 111 professional employees across a range of industry sectors.

Results show that abusive supervision is negatively related to employee well-being (i.e., engagement and job satisfaction) and positively related to employee ill-being, namely burnout. In addition, employees low in CSE are less engaged and less satisfied than employees high in CSE.

The study’s cross-sectional design limits the strength of its conclusions.

This chapter notes the ethical and legal obligations of organizations to provide a safe working environment and identifies the policies and procedures that will signal a commitment to employee well-being.

The study contributes to the leadership and well-being literatures by exploring the influence of abusive leaders on follower well-being and engagement. It also goes beyond merely identifying correlations between leadership style and follower well-being outcomes to investigate how leader and follower attributes can combine to influence these outcomes.