Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T04:57:13.090Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The impact of abusive supervision on employees’ feedback avoidance and subsequent help-seeking behaviour: A moderated mediation model

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 September 2018

Ghulam Ali Arain Open the ORCID record for Ghulam Ali Arain [Opens in a new window] ,
Sehrish Bukhari ,
Abdul Karim Khan  and
Imran Hameed
Ghulam Ali Arain*
Affiliation:
School of Business, American University of Ras Al Khaimah, Ras Al Khaimah, United Arab Emirates
Sehrish Bukhari
Affiliation:
Department of Business Administration, Sukkur Institute of Business Administration, Sukkur, Pakistan
Abdul Karim Khan
Affiliation:
College of Business and Economics, United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain, United Arab Emirates
Imran Hameed
Affiliation:
Department of Business Administration, Lahore School of Economics, Lahore, Pakistan
*
* Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Based on the conservation of resource theory, this study investigated a moderated mediation model in which perceived co-worker support moderated the mediation of supervisory feedback avoidance between abusive supervision and help-seeking behaviour. Data from matching dyads of 220 house officers and 86 postgraduate medical staff were collected from several hospitals in Pakistan. Results of hierarchical multiple regression analyses supported the hypothesized model that abusive supervision first positively led to supervisory feedback avoidance, which in turn positively led to help-seeking from co-workers. Moreover, the mediating effect of supervisory feedback avoidance was stronger at the high value of co-worker support than that at the low value of co-worker support. This study contributes to the recently emerged notion in abusive supervision research that supervisees’ perception of abusive supervision may not always lead to abundantly reported negative work behaviours; instead, it may also lead to positive work behaviours, such as help-seeking behaviour that is highly beneficial for both supervisees and the organization.

Keywords

abusive supervisionhelp-seekingfeedback avoidanceconservation of resource theory
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Management & Organization , Volume 26 , Issue 5 , September 2020 , pp. 850 - 865
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press and Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management 2018

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arain, G. A., Sheikh, A., Hameed, I., & Asadullah, M. A. (2017). Do as I do: The effect of teachers’ ethical leadership on business students’ academic citizenship behaviors. Ethics & Behavior, 27(8), 665–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aryee, S., Sun, L. Y., Chen, Z. X. G., & Debrah, Y. A. (2008). Abusive supervision and contextual performance: The mediating role of emotional exhaustion and the moderating role of work unit structure. Management and Organization Review, 4(3), 393–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bamberger, P. (2009). Employee help-seeking: Antecedents, consequences and new insights for future research. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 24, 49–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Decoster, S., Camps, J., Stouten, J., Vandevyvere, L., & Tripp, T. M. (2013). Standing by your organization: The impact of organizational identification and abusive supervision on followers’ perceived cohesion and tendency to gossip. Journal of Business Ethics, 118(3), 623–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duffy, M. K., Ganster, D. C., & Pagon, M. (2002). Social undermining in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 45(2), 331–351.Google Scholar
Epitropaki, O. (2013). A multi-level investigation of psychological contract breach and organizational identification through the lens of perceived organizational membership: Testing a moderated–mediated model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(1), 65–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Estes, B. C. (2013). Abusive supervision and nursing performance. Nursing Forum, 48(1), 3–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greenglass, E., Schwarzer, R., Jakubiec, D., Fiksenbaum, L., & Taubert, S. (1999). The proactive coping inventory (PCI): A multidimensional research instrument. Paper presented at the 20th International Conference of the Stress and Anxiety Research Society (STAR), Cracow, Poland.Google Scholar
Grodal, S., Nelson, A. J., & Siino, R. M. (2015). Help-seeking and help-giving as an organizational routine: Continual engagement in innovative work. Academy of Management Journal, 58(1), 136–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haar, J. M., de Fluiter, A., & Brougham, D. (2016). Abusive supervision and turnover intentions: The mediating role of perceived organisational support. Journal of Management & Organization, 22(2), 139–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Halbesleben, J. R. (2010). The role of exhaustion and workarounds in predicting occupational injuries: A cross-lagged panel study of health care professionals. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 15(1), 1.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Halbesleben, J. R., Neveu, J.-P., Paustian-Underdahl, S. C., & Westman, M. (2014). Getting to the ‘COR’ understanding the role of resources in Conservation of Resources theory. Journal of Management, 40(5), 1334–1364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harvey, P., Stoner, J., Hochwarter, W., & Kacmar, C. (2007). Coping with abusive supervision: The neutralizing effects of ingratiation and positive affect on negative employee outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(3), 264–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayes, A. F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling [White Paper]. Retrieved from http://www.afhayes.com/public/process2012.pdf Google Scholar
Hess, A. (2000). Maintaining nonvoluntary relationships with disliked partners: An investigation into the use of distancing behaviors. Human Communication Research, 26(3), 458–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44(3), 513.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hobfoll, S. E. (2001). The influence of culture, community, and the nested-self in the stress process: Advancing conservation of resources theory. Applied Psychology, 50(3), 337–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hobfoll, S. E., & Shirom, A. (1993). Stress and burnout in the workplace: Conservation of resources. In T. Golombiewski (Ed.), Handbook of organizational behavior (pp. 41–61). New York: Marcel Dekker.Google Scholar
Hobman, E. V., Restubog, S. L. D., Bordia, P., & Tang, R. L. (2009). Abusive supervision in advising relationships: Investigating the role of social support. Applied Psychology, 58(2), 233–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofstede, G. (1984). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work related values. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Hofstede, G. (2011). Insights on Hofstede’s research into national and organisational culture. Retrieved December 15, 2016, from https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison/pakistan/.Google Scholar
Imran, N., Jawaid, M., Haider, I., & Masood, Z. (2010). Bullying of junior doctors in Pakistan: A cross-sectional survey. Singapore Medical Journal, 51(7), 592–595.Google ScholarPubMed
Khan, A. K., Quratulain, S., & Crawshaw, J. R. (2017). Double jeopardy: Subordinates’ worldviews and poor performance as predictors of abusive supervision. Journal of Business and Psychology, 32(2), 165–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumar, A., & Arain, G. A. (2014). Testing main and interactive effect of personal coping and social support on work family conflict. Sukkur IBA Journal of Management and Business, 1(1), 87–107.10.30537/sijmb.v1i1.81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, F. (1997). When the going gets tough, do the tough ask for help? Help seeking and power motivation in organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 72(3), 336–363.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, F. (2002). The social costs of seeking help. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 38(1), 17–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lepore, S. J. (1992). Social conflict, social support, and psychological distress: evidence of cross-domain buffering effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(5), 857–867.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liao, Z., Peng, A. C., Li, W.-D., & Schaubroeck, J. (2016). Is abuse always bad? A latent change score approach to examine consequences of abusive supervision. Paper presented at the Academy of Management Proceedings. Briarcliff Manor, NY: Academy of Management.Google Scholar
Mackey, J. D., Frieder, R. E., Brees, J. R., & Martinko, M. J. (2017). Abusive supervision: A meta-analysis and empirical review. Journal of Management, 43(6), 1940–1965.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Memon, S. B., Syed, S., & Arain, G. A. (2017). Employee involvement and the knowledge creation process: An empirical study of Pakistani banks. Global Business and Organizational Excellence, 36(3), 53–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moss, S. E., Sanchez, J. I., Brumbaugh, A. M., & Borkowski, N. (2009). The mediating role of feedback avoidance behavior in the LMX-performance relationship. Group & Organization Management, 34(6), 645–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moss, S. E., Valenzi, E. R., & Taggart, W. (2003). Are you hiding from your boss? The development of a taxonomy and instrument to assess the feedback management behaviors of good and bad performers. Journal of Management, 29(4), 487–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nadler, A. (1991). Help seeking behavior: Psychological cost and instrumental benefits. InM. S. Clark (Ed.), Review of Personality and Social Psychology (Vol. 12, pp. 290–312). New York, NY: Sage.Google Scholar
Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good Soldier syndrome. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Perlow, L., & Weeks, J. (2002). Who’s helping whom? Layers of culture and workplace behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(4), 345–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Preacher, K. J., Rucker, D. D., & Hayes, A. F. (2007). Assessing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 42, 185–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schat, A. C. H., Frone, M. R., & Kelloway, E. K. (2006). Prevalence of workplace aggression in the US workforce: Findings from a national study. InE. K. Kelloway, J. Barling & J. J. Hurrell(Eds.), Handbook of Workplace Violence (pp. 47–89). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schreiber, J. B., Stage, F. K., King, J., Nora, A., & Barlow, E. A. (2006). Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis results: A review. The Journal of Educational Research, 99(6), 323–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaikh, B. T., & Hatcher, J. (2004). Health seeking behaviour and health service utilization in Pakistan: Challenging the policy makers. Journal of Public Health, 27(1), 49–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shellenbarger, S. (2000). An overlooked toll of job upheavals. Wall Street Journal, B1.Google Scholar
Syed, S., Arain, G. A., Schalk, R., & Freese, C. (2015). Balancing work and family obligations in Pakistan and the Netherlands: A comparative study. Global Business and Organizational Excellence, 34(5), 39–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tepper, B. J. (2000). Consequences of abusive supervision. Academy of Management Journal, 43(2), 178–190.Google Scholar
Tepper, B. J. (2007). Abusive supervision in work organizations: Review, synthesis, and research agenda. Journal of Management, 33(3), 261–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tepper, B. J., Carr, J. C., Breaux, D. M., Geider, S., Hu, C., & Hua, W. (2009). Abusive supervision, intentions to quit, and employees’ workplace deviance: A power/dependence analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 109(2), 156–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tepper, B. J., Duffy, M. K., & Breaux-Soignet, D. M. (2011). Abusive supervision as political activity: Distinguishing impulsive and strategic expressions of downward hostility. InG. R. Ferris & D. C. Treadway(Eds.), Politics in Organizations: Theory and Research Considerations (pp. 191–212). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Tepper, B. J., Simon, L., & Park, H. M. (2017). Abusive supervision. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 4, 123–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thau, S., Bennett, R. J., Mitchell, M. S., & Marrs, M. B. (2009). How management style moderates the relationship between abusive supervision and workplace deviance: An uncertainty management theory perspective. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108(1), 79–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitman, M. V., Halbesleben, J. R., & Holmes, O. (2014). Abusive supervision and feedback avoidance: The mediating role of emotional exhaustion. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(1), 38–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiedemann, A. U., Schüz, B., Sniehotta, F., Scholz, U., & Schwarzer, R. (2009). Disentangling the relation between intentions, planning, and behaviour: A moderated mediation analysis. Psychology and Health, 24(1), 67–79.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Williams, L. J., & Anderson, S. E. (1991). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. Journal of Management, 17, 601–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zimet, G. D., Dahlem, N. W., Zimet, S. G., & Farley, G. K. (1988). The multidimensional scale of perceived social support. Journal of Personality Assessment, 52(1), 30–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar