What Does Leaders’ Abuse Mean to Me? Psychological Empowerment as the Key Mechanism Explaining the Relationship Between Abusive Supervision and Taking Charge
Ui Young Sun, Haoying Xu, Donald H. Kluemper, Xinxin Lu, Seokhwa Yun
{"title":"What Does Leaders’ Abuse Mean to Me? Psychological Empowerment as the Key Mechanism Explaining the Relationship Between Abusive Supervision and Taking Charge","authors":"Ui Young Sun, Haoying Xu, Donald H. Kluemper, Xinxin Lu, Seokhwa Yun","doi":"10.1177/10596011231204387","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We integrate the cognitive theory of empowerment and regulatory focus theory to suggest that abusive supervision, from which employees draw negative achievement and security implications, discourages employees from engaging in taking charge by damaging their psychological empowerment. We propose that this negative influence is more saliently experienced by both promotion-focused and prevention-focused employees, albeit for different reasons. To test our model, we conducted a field study (Study 1) and a scenario-based experiment (Study 2). In Study 1, we found that psychological empowerment stood as a key mechanism linking abusive supervision and taking charge. Further, promotion focus magnified the negative effects of abusive supervision on psychological empowerment, and in turn, taking charge. Yet, prevention focus did not influence these effects. In Study 2, we replicated these findings and revealed that the anticipations of both career success and job insecurity (representing employees’ achievement and security implications) are critical in linking abusive supervision and psychological empowerment. We also found that promotion focus strengthened the negative indirect effect of abusive supervision on psychological empowerment via anticipated career success, ultimately resulting in a greater negative impact on taking charge. As in Study 1, there was limited support for the moderating effects of prevention focus. Our research highlights the importance of adopting a cognitive view in understanding the impact of abusive supervision on employees’ taking charge.","PeriodicalId":48143,"journal":{"name":"Group & Organization Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Group & Organization Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10596011231204387","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
We integrate the cognitive theory of empowerment and regulatory focus theory to suggest that abusive supervision, from which employees draw negative achievement and security implications, discourages employees from engaging in taking charge by damaging their psychological empowerment. We propose that this negative influence is more saliently experienced by both promotion-focused and prevention-focused employees, albeit for different reasons. To test our model, we conducted a field study (Study 1) and a scenario-based experiment (Study 2). In Study 1, we found that psychological empowerment stood as a key mechanism linking abusive supervision and taking charge. Further, promotion focus magnified the negative effects of abusive supervision on psychological empowerment, and in turn, taking charge. Yet, prevention focus did not influence these effects. In Study 2, we replicated these findings and revealed that the anticipations of both career success and job insecurity (representing employees’ achievement and security implications) are critical in linking abusive supervision and psychological empowerment. We also found that promotion focus strengthened the negative indirect effect of abusive supervision on psychological empowerment via anticipated career success, ultimately resulting in a greater negative impact on taking charge. As in Study 1, there was limited support for the moderating effects of prevention focus. Our research highlights the importance of adopting a cognitive view in understanding the impact of abusive supervision on employees’ taking charge.
期刊介绍:
Group & Organization Management (GOM) publishes the work of scholars and professionals who extend management and organization theory and address the implications of this for practitioners. Innovation, conceptual sophistication, methodological rigor, and cutting-edge scholarship are the driving principles. Topics include teams, group processes, leadership, organizational behavior, organizational theory, strategic management, organizational communication, gender and diversity, cross-cultural analysis, and organizational development and change, but all articles dealing with individual, group, organizational and/or environmental dimensions are appropriate.