An eye for an eye: does subordinates’ negative workplace gossip lead to supervisor abuse?
| Date | 31 October 2019 |
| Pages | 284-302 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-05-2018-0174 |
| Published date | 31 October 2019 |
| Author | Muhammad Naeem,Qingxiong (Derek) Weng,Ahmed Ali,Zahid Hameed |
| Subject Matter | Hr & organizational behaviour,Global hrm |
An eye for an eye: does
subordinates’negative workplace
gossip lead to supervisor abuse?
Muhammad Naeem
School of Management, University of Science and Technology, Hefei, China
Qingxiong (Derek) Weng
Department of Business Administration,
University of Science and Technology, Hefei, China
Ahmed Ali
School of Management, University of Science and Technology, Hefei, China, and
Zahid Hameed
School of Management Sciences,
Khwaja Fareed University of Engineering and Information Technology,
Rahim Yar Khan, Pakistan
Abstract
Purpose –Drawing upon affective events theory,the authors propose that the subordinates’negativegossip
acts as a targetingaffective event which leadsto supervisor negative emotions.In turn, such negative emotions
provoke supervisors to exhibit abusivebehavior toward their subordinates. Additionally,the authors propose
that an affective dispositional factor, namely, supervisor emotional regulation, moderates the hypothesized
relationships.Using multisource data and a moderated-mediationmodel, the authors find that the supervisor’s
perception of the subordinates’negativeworkplace gossip is associated with abusive supervision throughthe
supervisor’s negative emotions. Moreover, the supervisor’s emotional regulation mitigates the relationship
between such negative gossip and the supervisor’s negative emotions. The paper aimsto discuss this issue.
Design/methodology/approach –Data were collected from employees (e.g. subordinates) and their
immediate supervisors in organizations representing a variety of industries (e.g. finance, health care,
information technology, public safetyand human services) located in three cities in China. Respondents were
recruitedfrom different professionalonline forums with theoffer of free movie tickets in returnfor participation.
Findings –Using multisource data and a moderated-mediation model, the authors find that the supervisor’s
perception of the subordinates’negative workplace gossip is associated with abusive supervision through the
supervisor’s negative emotions. Moreover, the supervisor’s emotional regulation mitigates the relationship
between such negative gossip and the supervisor’s negative emotions, but not the relationship between the
supervisor’s negative emotions and abusive supervision.
Research limitations/implications –Like all studies,the current one is not without limitations. First, the
data were collectedusing a cross-sectionalresearch design, whichlimits the interference of causalityamong the
hypothesizedrelationships in the model. Future researchwork should apply alternative researchdesigns such
as a daily diaryor longitudinal data collection(Shadish et al., 2002), in order to supportthe validity of the study.
Practical implications –In practical terms, abusive supervision is recognized as a destructive workplace
behavior that is costly to organizations (Mackey et al., 2017; Martinko et al., 2013). Thus, it is important for
organizational management and practitioners to understand the reasons why supervisors exhibit abusive
behavior toward subordinates.
Social implications –Through this study, higher management must understand harmful effects of
subordinates’workplace negative gossip, it must be recognized as other types of workplace mistreatment
(rudenessand incivility), establishmentand enforcement of thecode of conduct can prevent negativeworkplace
gossip prevalencein the workplace.
Personnel Review
Vol. 49 No. 1, 2020
pp. 284-302
© Emerald PublishingLimited
0048-3486
DOI 10.1108/PR-05-2018-0174
Received 15 May 2018
Revised 10 January 2019
23 April 2019
Accepted 8 June 2019
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0048-3486.htm
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical
standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki
declaration and its later amendments and comparable ethical standards. Informed consent was
obtained from all individual participants included in the study. This study is funded by National
Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos 71373251, 71910107003, 71871209 and 71422014).
284
PR
49,1
Originality/value –This study has contributed to the organizational behavior literature in several aspects.
First, moststudies have examined the consequencesof abusive supervisorthrough subordinates victimization,
current study contributes in the ongoingstream of research by examining antecedents of abusivesupervision
through subordina tes’socialvictimization (e.g. negative workplace gossip) of supervisors.
Keywords Quantitative, Negative emotions, Emotional regulation, Abusive supervisor,
Negative workplace gossip
Paper type Research paper
The term abusive supervision refers to “subordinates’perceptions of the extent to which
supervisors engage in the sustained display of hostile verbal and nonverbal behaviors,
excluding physical content”(Tepper, 2000, p. 178). This abusive behavior includes passing
negative remarks and expressing anger at subordinates (Tepper, 2000, 2007). Past research
found that supervisor abusive behavior leads to numerous unfavorable work outcomes,
including lower job satisfaction (Tepper et al., 2004), withdrawal behavior (Mawritz, Dust
and Resick, 2014; Mawritz, Folger and Latham, 2014), reduced job performance (Harris et al.,
2007) and intentions to quit (Duffy et al., 2006), that cost organizations millions of dollars
annually (Tepper et al., 2006). Given the severe consequences of abusive supervision, it is
essential to understand why supervisors become abusive to subordinates (Aryee et al., 2007;
Mawritz et al., 2012; Tepper et al., 2017). Understanding what triggers supervisor abusive
behavior will help organizations to minimize the cost and prevalence of such destructive
behavior in the workplace.
At this point, only a limited number of studies have explored the predictors of abusive
supervision (Martinko et al., 2013; Mawritz, Dust and Resick, 2014; Mawritz, Folger and
Latham, 2014; Tepper, 2007). These limited studies have mainly focused on contextual
factors such as organizational injustice (Aryee et al., 2007), organizational hostile climate
(Mawritz, Dust and Resick, 2014; Mawritz, Folger and Latham, 2014), psychological contract
violations (Hoobler and Brass, 2006) and organizational aggressive norms (Restubog et al.,
2011), while only a few studies have paid attention to the subordinates’deviant behaviors
(e.g. counter-productive behavior directed at supervisors, avoidance of supervisors and
organizational deviance) as potential predictors of supervisor abuse at work (Lian et al.,
2014; Mawritz et al., 2017; Simon et al., 2015). Recently, Brady et al. (2017) distinguished
between the subordinates’workplace deviance and negative gossip. Unlike workplace
deviance, which is rare and condemned by witnesses, negative gossip is common in the
workplace and does not violate organizational norms. Given the distinct nature of gossiping,
Brady and his colleagues emphasized that research should consider how negative gossip
impacts the supervisor’s work-related behavior (e.g. abusive behavior).
To date, research work has investigated the influence of negative workplace gossip on
the proactive and citizenship behaviors of the target (Wu et al., 2016, 2018). A recent study
suggests that employees tend to take interest in negative gossip about their supervisors
(Brady et al., 2017). However, we have limited knowledge about how negative gossip affects
supervisor work-related behavior. Based on affective events theory (AET) (Weiss and
Cropanzano, 1996), this study extends the literature by arguing that the supervisor’s
perception of the subordinates’negative gossip in workplace settings (affective events) is
likely to induce supervisor negative emotions (affective reactions), which subsequently
trigger supervisor abusive behavior (behavioral reaction).
We do not assume that all supervisors will react to similar affective events in similar
ways. AET posits that individuals’specific abilities can help to explain variations in their
emotions and behaviors (Weiss and Beal, 2005; Weiss and Kurek, 2003). In particular, the
literature on abusive supervision suggests that affective dispositional factors can impact
supervisor behavior at work (Martinko et al., 2013). Accordingly, this study suggests that an
affective dispositional factor, supervisor emotional regulation, offers a potential boundary
285
An eye
for an eye
To continue reading
Request your trial