Search results

While much research shows that abusive supervision reduces employee performance, the purpose of this study is to reverse the lens to question how and under what circumstances abusive supervision leads to enhanced employee performance. The authors argue that the linkages between abusive supervision and employee performance occurs via performance-promotion attributions and that employee levels of dispositional forgiveness alter the relationship between abusive supervision and employee interpretations of abuse, such that more forgiving individuals interpret abuse as more benign behavior designed to help them perform better (i.e. are performance promoting).

In a three-wave field survey of 318 employees matched with 89 supervisors, employees completed measures of dispositional forgiveness (Time 1) abusive supervision (Time 1), and performance-promotion attributions of abusive supervision's motives (Time 2). Supervisors rated the job performance of their employees (Time 3). Multilevel structural equation modeling was employed to test a multilevel moderated mediation model.

The findings indicate abusive supervision predicts diminished employee performance only when employees are low in dispositional forgiveness, explained by lowered performance-promotion attributions for abusive supervision.

This study is the first to explore the mechanism (i.e. attribution of abusive supervision's motives to be performance-promoting) and the condition (i.e. employee's high forgiveness) under which abusive supervision may be performance enhancing. It extends the research of abusive supervision on employees' constructive reactions, as well as the effect of dispositional forgiveness on how it reframes employees' attributions of workplace mistreatment.

Although stress has become a prominent research theme in consumer behavior and occupational health, to the authors knowledge there is only one review on the relationship between consumer behavior and stress (i.e., when internal and external factors exceed an individual’s resources and endangering the individual’s well-being) and this was published 10 years ago. Further, research on occupational stress has yet to be fully integrated into the consumer stress literature. In this chapter, the authors attempt to advance research on consumer stress by a drawing on a satisfaction mirror framework which outlines that consumers and employees influence each other through a “mirror” where they positively and cyclically influence each other in a service environment. The authors argue that consumers and employees may likewise mirror each other in a negative cycle of stress and well-being depletion. First, the authors describe how stress is viewed in consumer behavior and marketing. Second, the authors review evidence that consumption serves as a form of coping with stress. Third, the authors discuss the role of consumption as a stressor that may drive consumer stress. Finally, the authors introduce the satisfaction mirror model and outline the bi-directional influence on increased stress and well-being depletion at the consumer–employee interface in service encounters. The model introduced in this chapter serves as a framework for organizing findings related to stress and well-being in the fields of consumer behavior and occupational health. In addition, the model serves as a springboard for developing propositions for future research. Ultimately, the authors hope this chapter both updates and builds upon previous findings on stress and consumer behavior, as well as grounds future research on stress and well-being at the intersection of consumers and employees.

The field of global leadership has flourished and advanced in the preceding decade. However, in contrast to the term global leadership, which enjoys conceptual clarity enabling accumulative progress, the construct of global leadership effectiveness is comparatively undertheorized, with instances of definitional ambiguity and disjointed methodological operationalizations across studies. The purpose of this chapter is, thus, to provide a systematic review of the global leadership effectiveness literature. In doing so, our contributions are fourfold. First, we offer an inclusive, comprehensive definition of global leadership effectiveness. Second, we map its construct domain. Third, we review research findings at the individual, group, and organizational levels. Finally, we integrate extant insights and offer suggestions for future research, organized within the typology of the content domain along the identified dimensions of global leadership effectiveness. Together, our goal is to build a foundation for future research examining the roles of leadership and the global context as antecedents of global leadership effectiveness.

In this concluding chapter, the editors reflect on the value-added contributions of the papers in this volume toward a better understanding of global leadership effectiveness. After highlighting some of those contributions, the editors then discuss relevant directions for future research in global leadership effectiveness and organize their discussion around (1) antecedents, (2) conditions, and (3) dimensions of global leadership effectiveness. They conclude by listing some of the paramount research questions they believe should be addressed for the field to move forward in mapping the dimensions and dynamics of global leadership effectiveness.