Abusive Supervision and Counterproductive Work Behaviors
The Moderating Effects of Personality
Abstract
While counterproductive work behaviors (CWB) are considered to be associated with both personal and situational antecedents, the relationship between these two factors is not entirely understood. Toward a better understanding of this issue, the present study examined the moderating effects of personality traits on the relationship between a specific situational stressor, abusive supervision, and organization-targeted counterproductive behaviors (CWB-O). The results found significant main effects for both abusive supervision and personality, as expected, as well as a significant interaction between them, whereby employees with low scores in conscientiousness, agreeableness, and/or emotional stability were more likely to engage in CWB-O in response to abusive behaviors from their supervisors.
References
(1994). Petty tyranny in organizations. Human Relations, 47, 755–778.
(2012). Do other-reports of counterproductive work behavior provide an incremental contribution over self-reports? A meta-analytic comparison. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 613–636.
(2007). Interpersonal deviance, organizational deviance and their common correlates: A review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 410–424.
(2006). The social-stressors-counterproductive work behaviors link: Are conflict with supervisors and coworkers the same? Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 11, 145–156.
(2004). Interactive effects of personality and perceptions of the work situation on workplace deviance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 599–609.
(2010). What reviewers should expect from authors regarding common method bias in organizational research. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25, 325–334.
(2003). Personality and counterproductive workplace behavior. In , Personality and work (pp. 150–182). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
(2010). Is good character enough? The effects of situational variables on the relationship between integrity and counterproductive work behaviors. Human Resource Management Review, 20, 73–84.
(2002). Counterproductive work behavior checklist. Retrieved from chuma.usf.edu/spector/scales
(1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25, 161–178.
(1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44, 513–524.
(2012). Does taking the good with the bad make things worse? How abusive supervision and leader-member exchange interact to impact need satisfaction and organizational deviance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 117, 41–52.
(2004). Antecedents of counterproductive behavior at work: A general perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 647–660.
(2003). Personality in adulthood: A Five-Factor Theory perspective (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford.
(2007). Abusive supervision and workplace deviance and the moderating effects of negative reciprocity beliefs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1159–1168.
(2011). Personality and counterproductive work behaviour: Using conservation of resources theory to narrow the profile of deviant employees. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 84, 58–77.
(2008). Inventarul de personalitate DECAS
[DECAS Personality Inventory] Timisoara, Romania: Artpress.(2011). Personality types based on the Big Five model. A cluster analysis over the Romanian Population. Cognition, Brain, Behavior. An Interdisciplinary Journal, 15, 359–384.
(2013). Blaming the organization for abusive supervision: The roles of perceived organizational support and supervisor’s organizational embodiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98, 158–168.
(2013). How bad are the effects of bad leaders? A meta-analysis of destructive leadership and its outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 24, 138–158.
(2011). The relationship of personality to counterproductive work behavior (CWB): An integration of perspectives. Human Resource Management Review, 21, 342–352.
(2000). Consequences of abusive supervision. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 178–190.
(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, 79–92.
