Destructive Leadership Behaviors Research Articles

Organizational Commitment, Organizational Citizenship Behavior and Turnover Intention: The Moderating Role of Leadership Behavior

Organizational Commitment, Organizational Citizenship Behavior and Turnover Intention: The Moderating Role of Leadership Behavior

Mediating role of information silence between destructive leadership and counterproductive work behaviour: evidence from the tanners' sector of Pakistan

Mediating role of information silence between destructive leadership and counterproductive work behaviour: evidence from the tanners' sector of Pakistan

Root influence on public sector audit committee effectiveness: revisiting methodological and theoretical research dimensions

IMPACT This article identifies six root influence themes of South African public sector audit committee effectiveness. With members’ independence, competence, internal auditing, and knowledge of the business being well documented, the themes of the committee’s own leadership and external leadership are under-explored. Aspects added to the current body of knowledge include accepting accountability for decisions, the chair’s extent of power and having the ability to take a stand against management malpractices for internal leadership. Political interference, the standing of the management team and the interaction between management and the committee are identified as external leadership influencers. Decision-makers, audit professionals and regulators should take note of these six root influences in general and destructive leadership behaviour in particular, to ensure that it is appropriately managed.

Employees Working Behavior under Different Shades of Destructive Leadership

Still, there is a lack of research on the dark side or destructive leadership. The purpose of this research is to add the literature on the two shades of destructive leadership, that are aversive and exploitative leadership, and their shadow in the form of counterproductive work behavior on the nursing professionals. Using 485 samples collected from the nurses of different hospitals of Pakistan, the model is tested through multiple linear hierarchical regressions, correlation analysis, and confirmatory factor analysis in Smart PLS software. The results reveal that people working under aversive and exploitative leaders are more likely to indulge in counterproductive work behavior. Still, proactive personalities have an essential impact which weakens the relationship between destructive leadership and counterproductive work behavior. Results of this study describe a vital requirement for corporate leaders to strengthen their recruitment process in such a way that people with aversive and exploitative attitudes ought to understand how to treat their subordinates before they enter top roles to discourage their workers from indulging in counterproductive behavior.

The Effects of Destructive Leadership on Organizational Citizenship Behaviour: The Mediating Role of Psychological Capital

The purpose of this study was to test the impact of school principals’ destructive leadership behaviour on teachers’ perceptions of organizational citizenship behaviour (OCB) via psychological capital (PsyCap) within a structural equation model. The study was conducted with causal research design. In this study, destructive leadership was taken as the independent variable, OCB as the dependent variable and PsyCap as the mediator variable. The study participants consisted of 253 high school teachers working in 21 of the schools selected from various school districts in the central districts of a metropolitan using the stratified sampling method. The data were collected with Destructive Leadership Questionnaire, PsyCap Questionnaire and OCB Questionnaire. Path analysis was conducted to enable associating measurement errors in both latent and observed variables. The research findings demonstrated that destructive leadership had negative impact on PsyCap and OCB while PsyCap had positive impact on organizational citizenship behavior. It was concluded that the mediator impact of PsyCap regarding the impact of destructive leadership on OCB was negative. Based on the negative impacts of destructive behaviours on teachers, defining and involving specific characteristics of destructive leaders and their consequences for schools and teachers into educational practices and policies would be helpful to prevent tendencies toward destructive behaviours. In this regard, applying systematic and effective selection process, using effective feedback mechanism and teacher participation in the management process may help eliminate destructive leadership.

On the destructiveness of laissez-faire versus abusive supervision: a comparative, multilevel investigation of destructive forms of leadership

ABSTRACT Different forms of destructive leadership are prevalent in organizations, but rarely studied together. Additionally, most studies take an individual-level view on the consequences of destructive leadership. However, while most supervisors lead teams, it remains unclear how destructive leadership behaviours affect team processes and outcomes from a multilevel perspective. Building on this premise, we analysed the relationship of abusive supervision and laissez-faire leadership with OCB on the individual and team-level. As an important team process, we considered team trust as a mediating mechanism. Further, we investigated whether laissez-faire leadership is more harmful to OCB compared to abusive supervision. We tested our proposed model in a three-wave study with data from 658 team members out of 149 teams. Bayesian multilevel analysis generally supported our assumptions: Abusive supervision lowered team trust and subsequently OCB at the individual and team-level, whereas laissez-faire was not related to team trust on the team-level. Additionally, our results indicated that laissez-faire was more harmful to OCB than abusive supervision on both levels. Finally, implications for theory and practical use in organizations are discussed.

The effect of destructive leadership on self-efficacy and counterproductive work behaviors: A research on service sector employees in Mersin, Turkey

The aim of this study was to find out the effect of destructive leadership on employees’ self-efficacy and counterproductive work behaviors. The data was collected from a convenience sample of 486 service sector employees in Mersin, Turkey. Descriptive statistics, explanatory factor analysis, and regression analysis were conducted to analyze the data. The results showed that lack of competence in leadership, excessive authoritarianism, and favoritism dimensions increased the organization-oriented counterproductive work behaviors while resistance to technology and change dimension decreased these behaviors. In contrast, insensitivity to subordinates had no effect on counterproductive work behaviors. Furthermore, destructive leadership had no effect on employees’ self-efficacy, but self-efficacy affected counterproductive work behaviors. This study provides theoretical and practical implications for understanding the effect of destructive leadership behaviors on the employees’ self-efficacy and counterproductive work behaviors in the context of the service sector.

Appetite for Destruction: A Psychometric Examination and Prevalence Estimation of Destructive Leadership in Sweden.

There is a growing awareness that destructive leadership has a significant negative impact on employe outcomes. However, little is known about the content and dimensionality of this multidimensional concept, and there are few reliable measures available for organizations and researchers to evaluate these behaviors. Based on a representative sample (N = 1132) of the Swedish workforce, the aim of this study is threefold: first, to examine the factor structure and validity of an easy-to-use multidimensional destructive leadership measure (Destrudo-L)in the general Swedish work context; second, to identify destructive leadership profiles using latent profile analysis (LPA), and determine in what way they are related to employe outcomes; third, to examine the prevalence of destructive leadership using population weights to estimate responses of a population total in the Swedish workforce (N = 3100282). Our analysis supported the structural validity of Destrudo-L, reflecting both a global factor and specific subdimensions. We identified seven unique destructive leadership profiles along a passive and active continuum of destructive leadership behaviors, with the active showing a less favorable relation to employe outcomes. Finally, we found that a substantial proportion of the Swedish workforce report being exposed to destructive leadership (36.4–43.5%, depending on method used). Active destructive leadership was more common in the public sector and passive destructive leadership in the private. Given the potentially severe effects and the commonness of these behaviors, we argue that organizations should work actively with strategies to identify and intervene, to prevent and to handle the manifestation of these harmful behaviors.

Superheroes vs. Saints: The A&C Model of Narcissism, Needs, and Leadership Behaviors

Approaching the narcissism-leadership relationship from a multi-faceted perspective has been suggested as a next step in understanding this fascinating relationship. To date, leadership research has primarily focused on agentic narcissism. However, studying leadership and narcissism from an agency-communion perspective allows for a deeper understanding of their relationship and more nuanced inferences surrounding leadership behaviors. To illustrate, agentic narcissism is centered around inflated self-views in agentic domains (e.g., intelligence, competence, and achievement; Gebauer et al. 2012), which mirrors an egoistic bias (Paulhus & John, 1998). On the other hand, communal narcissism centers around inflated self-views in communal domains (e.g., trustworthiness, warmth, benevolence), mirroring a moralistic bias. Where egoistic bias has been associated with power needs (e.g., the need for control and authority over others), moralistic bias has been linked to social desirability needs (e.g., the need for affiliation and social acceptance). Through a dynamic self-regulation process that interacts with one’s social environment (Morf & Rhodewalt, 2001), we predict different leadership behavior outcomes for agentic (i.e., destructive leadership behaviors) and communal (i.e., unauthentic leadership behaviors) narcissism based on regulation of these differing needs. The present paper delineates these predictions, and discusses theoretical and practical implications, as well as limitations and future research.

The Power of Followers That do not Follow: Investigating the Effects of Follower Resistance, Leader Implicit Followership Theories and Leader Negative Affect on the Emergence of Destructive Leader Behavior

This study focuses on follower resistance as a potential antecedent of destructive leader behavior and examines leader-related moderators and mediators to help explain the relationship between follower resistance and destructive leader behavior. Drawing from implicit followership theories, we propose that the relationship between follower resistance and destructive leader behavior is moderated by leaders’ Theory X schema. Furthermore, we build on affective events theory to hypothesize that follower resistance increases destructive leader behavior via leaders’ negative affect. We tested our hypotheses in a within-subjects online field experiment. Our study findings demonstrate that follower resistance increases destructive leader behavior and that this relationship is mediated through leaders’ negative affect and moderated by leaders’ Theory X schema. We discuss theoretical implications regarding the impact of (resistant) follower behavior on destructive leadership and offer methodological advances in terms of research design and analytical approaches to deal with endogeneity issues and derive causal inferences. Lastly, we derive practical implications for utilizing follower resistance.

The Combined Effects of Destructive and Constructive Leadership on Thriving at Work and Behavioral Empowerment

This study investigates the within-domain exacerbation phenomenon in relation to employees’ perception of their supervisors’ leadership behaviors. This phenomenon proposes that exposure to supervisors relying on a combination of destructive leadership behaviors (DLB; operationalized as petty tyranny) and constructive leadership behaviors (CLB; operationalized as transformational leadership) should have more negative consequences on followers’ levels of thriving and behavioral empowerment than exposure to supervisors relying more exclusively on DLB or CLB. This phenomenon was tested using a person-centered mixture regression approach with a sample of 2104 Canadian employees from a police organization. Three profiles of employees were identified, representing those exposed to moderately transformational (mostly CLB), destructive (mostly DLB), and inconsistent (CLB and DLB) supervisors. Members of the inconsistent profile displayed the lowest levels of thriving and behavioral empowerment, followed by members of the destructive profile, and finally by members of the moderately transformational profile. Results also suggest that the inability to determine if a supervisor is more destructive or constructive might explain the within-domain exacerbation phenomenon. Indeed, in the inconsistent profile, leadership clarification seemed beneficial for employees. Increases in DLB resulted in a matching increase in empowered behaviors centered on the group and organization, while increases in CLB resulted in increases in thriving and empowered behaviors centered on individual performance.

Mitigating the psychologically detrimental effects of supervisor undermining: Joint effects of voice and political skill

It is of growing concern that supervisors sometimes engage in destructive leadership behavior to undermine their subordinates, which exacts a psychological toll on these employees. How can employees mitigate and overcome the adverse psychological effects of supervisor undermining? Invoking theories of personal agency and social competencies, this study addresses this important question by examining the effectiveness of employee voice in buffering the adverse effects of supervisor undermining on employee work-related well-being and turnover intention. Through a three-wave field study, we found that voice plays a buffering role in the relationship between supervisor undermining and these outcome variables only when employees possess high levels of political skill (i.e., three-way interactions), and that this buffering effect is realized through mitigating the adverse effects of supervisor undermining on employee psychological empowerment. In contrast, when employees possess low levels of political skill, engaging in high levels of voice exacerbates the detrimental effects of supervisor undermining on employee psychological empowerment, and subsequently decreases employee work-related well-being and heightens employee turnover intention. The theoretical and practical implications of our findings are discussed.

What You Get is What You See: Other-Rated but not Self-Rated Leaders\u2019 Narcissistic Rivalry Affects Followers Negatively

Individuals with high levels of narcissism often ascend to leadership positions. Whereas there is evidence that narcissism is linked to unethical behavior and negative social outcomes, the effects of leader narcissism on an organization’s most important resource—its employees—have not yet been studied thoroughly. Using theoretical assumptions of the Narcissistic Admiration and Rivalry Concept (NARC) and social exchange theories, we examined how leaders’ narcissistic rivalry was related to follower outcomes in a sample of matched leaders and followers. Followers of leaders high in narcissistic rivalry reported less perceived supervisor support, lower quality leader-member relationships, lower performance-based self-esteem, and lower job engagement. These effects were only found when follower-rated leaders’ narcissistic rivalry was used in the model but not when self-rated leaders’ narcissistic rivalry was used as a predictor. This implies that the negative effects of leaders’ narcissistic rivalry on followers are driven by the expression of narcissistic tendencies (i.e., destructive leader behavior). Leader development should thus focus on changing destructive leader behavior. We propose that leaders high in narcissistic rivalry can be motivated to make such changes by showing them that by hurting their followers, they will eventually undermine their own reputation and status. Furthermore, selection and promotion practices should incorporate objective measures to weaken the effects of narcissists’ self-promotional tactics in these contexts and thus prevent people high in narcissistic rivalry from rising to leadership positions.

Role of Authentic Leadership, Servant Leadership and Destructive Leadership Behaviour on Employee Engagement in Malaysian Hospitality Industry

Role of Authentic Leadership, Servant Leadership and Destructive Leadership Behaviour on Employee Engagement in Malaysian Hospitality Industry

Age and leadership: comparisons of age groups in different kinds of work environment

Purpose The purpose of this study is twofold. First, to compare the self-rated leadership behaviors, leadership-related competencies and results of the leadership of younger, mid-aged and older leaders; and second to compare these aspects among younger leaders in different kinds of the work environment and between men and women. Design/methodology/approach Data was collected using the developmental leadership questionnaire from a sample of Swedish leadership course participants (N = 7,743). Findings The results showed that the younger group of leaders (29 years old or younger n = 539), rated themselves more negatively than the mid-aged (30–50 years, n = 5,208) and older (51 years or older, n = 1,996) leaders. Analysis of the group of younger leaders showed that those working in the private sector scored most favorably. The gender comparison revealed that young male leaders scored higher on negative conventional (transactional) and destructive leadership behaviors. A logistic regression analysis of the younger group showed that social competence, developmental leadership and destructive leadership (negative) influenced self-rated results of leadership. Research limitations/implications The study is based on leaders’ self-ratings only. Practical implications The results can be used in leadership development contexts and in individualized coaching or mentoring programs. Originality/value The results have new implications for leadership theory related to self-confidence, stereotypes, selection and organizational culture.

How contextual is destructive leadership? A comparison of how destructive leadership is perceived in usual circumstances versus crisis

PurposeThis study aims to investigate the differences between destructive leadership in two different contexts: crisis management and usual circumstances. The specific research questions are as follows: What is the relationship between destructive leadership behaviours in usual circumstances and destructive leadership behaviours in crisis management? Are destructive leadership behaviours in usual circumstances or in crisis management the best predictors of trust in the leader and subordinate performance?Design/methodology/approachQuestionnaire responses were obtained from 337 individuals who had experience from handling various societal crises, such as terror attacks and forest fires. The respondents represented four different organisations: municipalities, county administrative boards, the police and the emergency service.FindingsThe results from the study reveal that there is a strong association between destructive leadership in usual circumstances and destructive leadership during crisis management. The study indicates that everyday leadership matters the most. It is above all behaviours in usual circumstances that show the strongest associations with trust in the leader and subordinate performance. The results also show that it is especially task-related, passive forms of destructive leadership behaviours that show the strongest association with the studied outcome variables.Research limitations/implicationsLimitations related to measurements and self-reported data are discussed.Practical implicationsThe study emphasises the importance of paying attention to leaders’ task- and strategic-oriented behaviour as well as the importance of building trusting relationships with the subordinates.Originality/valueThe need for industry-specific studies of destructive leadership has been highlighted and this study contributes with knowledge from the crisis management context.

Destructive leadership in crisis management

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to contribute to increased knowledge of destructive leadership in crisis management. The specific research questions are: (1) What types of destructive leadership behaviours can be identified in leaders in crisis management? and (2) Why are these behaviours considered destructive in this context?Design/methodology/approachAbout 21 informants involved in crisis management at regional, local and operational levels in Sweden were interviewed. They were selected since they had recently been involved in severe accidents and/or crises (e.g. terror attacks, forest fires). A grounded theory analysis of interview data yielded two core variables: destructive leadership behaviours, and appraisal: interpretation of leader behaviour.FindingsThe study identified seven different destructive leadership behaviours: four task-related and three relationship-related. Task-related behaviours primarily led to negative consequences for the task/crisis. Relationship-related behaviours have negative consequences for subordinates' job satisfaction, well-being and/or sense of meaningfulness. The paper relates the identified behaviours to existing leadership ideals within crisis management and discusses behaviours that appear to be unique for the crisis management context.Practical implicationsThe paper highlights the fact that great crisis managers are not always good at managing relationships, which may have negative implications for crisis management in the long term.Originality/valueDestructive leadership is a research field that is rapidly expanding. However, there is a lack of knowledge concerning the nature of destructive leadership behaviours and what makes an individual appraise a leader as destructive in crisis management.

Mediating role of Information silence between destructive leadership and counterproductive work behavior: Evidence from Tanner sector of Pakistan

Mediating role of Information silence between destructive leadership and counterproductive work behavior: Evidence from Tanner sector of Pakistan

When Something Is Not Right: The Value of Silence

Employees facing destructive leader behavior or evidence of unethical or illegal action often remain silent, and such silence has been argued to be problematic. We argue that the management literat...

Linguistic Markers of CEO Hubris

This article explores the link between CEOs’ language and hubristic leadership. It is based on the precepts that leaders’ linguistic utterances provide insights into their personality and behaviours; hubris is associated with unethical and potentially destructive leadership behaviours; if it is possible to identify linguistic markers of CEO hubris then these could serve as early warnings sign and help to mitigate the associated risks. Using computational linguistics, we analysed spoken utterances from a sample of hubristic CEOs and compared them with non-hubristic CEOs. We found that hubristic CEOs’ linguistic utterances show systematic and consistent differences from the linguistic utterances of non-hubristic CEOs. Demonstrating how hubristic leadership manifests in CEO language contributes to wider research regarding the diagnosis and prevention of the unethical and potentially destructive effects of hubristic leadership. This research contributes to the wider study of hubris and unethical leadership by applying a novel method for identifying linguistic markers and offers a way of militating against the risk of unethical and destructive CEO behaviours induced or aggravated by hubristic leadership.