The Prevalence of Destructive Leadership Behaviour

This study investigates the prevalence of the four types of destructive leadership behaviour in the destructive and constructive leadership behaviour model, in a representative sample of the Norwegian workforce. The study employs two estimation methods: the operational classification method (OCM) and latent class cluster (LCC) analysis. The total prevalence of destructive leadership behaviour varied from 33.5% (OCM) to 61% (LCC), indicating that destructive leadership is not an anomaly. Destructive leadership comes in many shapes and forms, with passive forms prevailing over more active ones. The results showed that laissez‐faire leadership behaviour was the most prevalent destructive leadership behaviour, followed by supportive–disloyal leadership and derailed leadership, while tyrannical leadership behaviour was the least prevalent destructive leadership behaviour. Furthermore, many leaders display constructive as well as destructive behaviours, indicating that leadership is not either constructive or destructive. The study contributes to a broader theoretical perspective on what must be seen as typical behaviour among leaders.     

Relationships between stressful work environments and bullying: Results of a large representative study

Abstract

This paper contributes to the relatively sparse knowledge about relationships between stressful work environments and bullying. Relationships between job stressors and leadership behaviour were analysed as possible predictors of bullying at work on the basis of the work environment hypothesis, which states that stressful and poorly organized work environments may give rise to conditions resulting in bullying. Analyses of a representative sample (n=2539) of the Norwegian workforce showed role conflict, interpersonal conflicts, and tyrannical and laissez-faire leadership behaviour to be strongly related to bullying, and that the strength of associations to a high degree differed for various measures of bullying. Support was found for an interactive relationship between decision authority and role conflict at different levels of laissez-faire leadership. Not only targets and bully/targets but also bystanders assessed their work environment more negatively than did non-involved employees, while perpetrators of bullying did not differ significantly from non-involved employees as regards their perception of the work environment. Hence, bullying is likely to prevail in stressful working environments characterized by high levels of interpersonal friction and destructive leadership styles. In addition, bullying is particularly prevalent in situations where the immediate supervisor avoids intervening in and managing such stressful situations.     

Beware the angry leader: Trait anger and trait anxiety as predictors of petty tyranny

Drawing on the general aggression model and theories of victimization and temperamental goodness-of-fit, we investigated trait anger and trait anxiety as antecedents of petty tyranny: employing a multilevel design with data from 84 sea captains and 177 crew members. Leader trait anger predicted subordinate-reported petty tyranny. Subordinate trait anxiety was associated with subordinate-reported petty tyranny. The association between leader trait anger and subordinate-reported petty tyranny was strongest among low trait anger subordinates supporting the theory of temperamental goodness-of-fit—or rather misfit—in dyads. Hence, leader anger-generated petty tyranny seems to constitute itself both as an average leadership style and as behavior targeting specific subordinates, in this case low trait anger subordinates. In addition, anxious subordinates report more exposure to such abusive leadership behaviors irrespective of levels of trait anger in the captain. The practical implications are above all the needs for organizational and individual management of leader trait anger.     

Leadership Styles as Predictors of Self‐reported and Observed Workplace Bullying

The connection between leadership or management style, on the one hand, and perceptions of bullying, on the other, has received little attention within bullying research. Hence, the aim of this study is to examine the relationship between subordinates' ratings of their immediate superiors' behaviours, and both perceived exposure and claims of observations of bullying at work. Based on a sampling process which emphasized randomness and representativeness, the responses from 5288 respondents in Great Britain taking part in a nationwide study on psychosocial issues at work were included in the analysis. Bullying correlated with all four leadership styles measured. Yet, ‘non‐contingent punishment’ emerged as the strongest predictor of self‐perceived exposure to bullying, while autocratic leadership was the strongest predictor of observed bullying. Hence, while observers particularly associate bullying with autocratic or tyrannical leader behaviour, targets relate bullying more to non‐contingent punishment, i.e. an unpredictable style of leadership, where punishment is meted out or delivered on leaders' own terms, independent of the behaviour of subordinates. In addition, laissez‐faire leadership emerged as a predictor of self‐reported as well as observed bullying. Thus, leadership styles seem to play an important but complex role in the bullying process.     

Workplace bullying as predicted by non-prototypicality,group identification and norms: a self-categorisation perspective

ABSTRACT

Research and theory on deviance in work groups suggest that non-prototypical members risk devaluation and mistreatment by their peers. Drawing on the self-categorisation theory, we propose and test a contextual model to explain workplace bullying from a target perspective, using non-prototypicality as a predictor and social identification and anti-bullying norms at the work group level as two- and three-way cross-level moderators. Multilevel modelling and a sample of employees from the university sector in the Low Lands (n?=?572) was employed. In line with our first hypothesis, we found that risk of exposure to workplace bullying is particularly high for non-prototypical work group members. We also hypothesised that work group social identification would facilitate bullying of non-prototypical members, while anti-bullying norms would buffer it. Results showed, however, that both conditions acted as buffering moderators on the main association. Lastly, the combination of the two also entailed a cross-level three-way interaction effect, showing that non-prototypicality is associated with bullying only in work groups characterised by low levels on both moderators. These novel and partly unexpected results demonstrate the relevance and significance of group level explanations for workplace bullying, holding significant implications for scholars and practitioners.     

Are national levels of employee harassment cultural covariations of climato-economic conditions?

Conflict in a workgroup turns into harassment if a group member is persistently confronted with negative acts with few possibilities to retaliate. Cross-national differences in such intragroup harassment are considerable but wait to be understood. In this study, survey data from 44,836 employees in 44 countries revealed that a cultural in-group orientation was associated with lower employee harassment. In addition, and in agreement with Van de Vliert's climato-economic theory of culture, workforces reported more harassment in poorer countries with more demanding climates of colder-than-temperate winters, hotter-than-temperate summers, or both. Finally, it was found that the impact of climato-economic hardships on harassment suppressed the impact of cultural in-group orientation on harassment. Using the regression equation obtained for the sample of 44 countries, national levels of employee harassment for a broader pool of 103 countries were estimated and scrutinized for their validity for future research. Data from the World Values Surveys were used to validate the estimations. The results provide the basis for a further hypothesis, that employee harassment is more prevalent in countries with either survival or self-expression cultures than in countries with cultures that are intermediate between those two extremes. The results have implications for prevention and remedial measures.     

News: University prizes

Abstract

Stressful working environments are often assumed to create conditions that may lead to bullying. However, few studies have investigated how factors experienced in the work environment may trigger perpetrators to engage in bullying of others. Drawing on Spector and Fox's (2005) stressor–emotion model of counterproductive work behaviour, the present study investigated the predictive effects of both individual and situational factors as predictors of being a perpetrator of workplace bullying, as applied to a representative sample of the Norwegian workforce (N=2359). Results from logistic regression analysis show that being oneself a target of bullying, regardless of the frequency, and being male strongly predicted involvement in bullying of others. Among the situational factors, only role conflict and interpersonal conflicts significantly predicted being a perpetrator of bullying. The present findings support the notion that bullying will thrive in stressful working environments and thus yield an important contribution in identifying antecedent conditions to counteract the development of bullying at workplaces.     

Are transformational and laissez-faire leadership related to state anxiety among subordinates? A two-wave prospective study of forward and reverse associations

ABSTRACT

The aim of this study was to determine the direction of associations between perceived leadership styles of an immediate leader and state anxiety among subordinates using time-lagged data from a large and heterogeneous probability sample of Norwegian employees. It was hypothesised that high levels of transformational leadership would be associated with a decrease, whereas high levels of laissez-faire leadership would be associated with an increase, in subsequent levels of anxiety. Reciprocal associations were also expected in that higher levels of anxiety were hypothesised to be related to subsequent increase in reports of laissez-faire, and decrease in reported exposure to transformational leadership. The sample comprised 1149 Norwegian employees. The design was a two-wave full panel study with a six-month time interval between the baseline and follow-up assessments. Contrary to hypotheses, neither transformational nor laissez-faire leadership were significantly related to subsequent levels of state anxiety. In support of hypotheses, baseline low levels of state anxiety were associated with reporting the immediate leader as less transformational and more laissez-faire six months later. In conclusion, the findings challenge theoretical models that explain leadership as a one-way superior–subordinate influence process.     

Workplace bullying,the development of job insecurity and the role of laissez-faire leadership: A two-wave moderated mediation study

Workplace bullying is increasingly recognised as a risk factor for job loss and exclusion from working life. Consequently, bullying may represent an antecedent of job insecurity, but this notion has not been sufficiently tested using prospective, representative data. In the present study, the association between workplace bullying and job insecurity was therefore investigated using a two-year time lag and a representative sample of Norwegian employees (N?=?1775). Employing regression analysis, support for a cross-lagged effect of bullying on stability adjusted job insecurity was found. With respect to explanatory mechanisms, a moderated mediation analysis also revealed that this relationship is mediated by continued exposure to bullying behaviours at T2, and, that the relationship between baseline bullying and continued victimisation at T2 is moderated by laissez-faire leadership (i.e. the enactment of passive-avoidant and non-responsive leadership behaviour). Thus, laissez-faire leadership appears to represent a condition under which the bullying process can endure and progress, and the bullying behaviours associated with such sustained and escalated scenarios seem to be particularly relevant antecedents of job insecurity. These results represent novel contributions to our understanding of workplace bullying and job insecurity, holding important implications for prevention of workplace bullying and alleviation of its negative consequences.     

Measuring exposure to bullying at work: The validity and advantages of the latent class cluster approach

Abstract

This paper addresses the construct and predictive validity of two methods for classifying respondents as victims of workplace bullying. Although bullying is conceived as a complex phenomenon, the dominant method used in bullying surveys, the operational classification method, only distinguishes two groups: victims versus non-victims. Hence, the complex nature of workplace bullying may not be accounted for. Therefore a latent class cluster approach is suggested to model the data, which was obtained by using the Negative Acts Questionnaire (NAQ) administered to employees in Belgium (n=6,175). Latent class modelling is a method of analysis that does not appear to have been used in occupational health psychology before. In this study, six latent classes emerged: “not bullied,” “limited work criticism,” “limited negative encounters,” “sometimes bullied,” “work related bullied,” and “victims.” The results show that compared to the traditional operational classification method, the latent class cluster approach shows higher construct and higher predictive validity with respect to self-assessments and indicators of strain and well-being at work. The consequences of these results for theory, future research, and practice are discussed.