Abusive supervision is most commonly studied in the context of the workplace, although it can arise in other areas such as in the household and at school. "Abusive supervision has been investigated as an antecedent to negative subordinate workplace outcome." "Workplace violence has combination of situational and personal factors". The study that was conducted looked at the link between abusive supervision and different workplace events.
Researchers have previously argued that abusive supervision is a one-dimensional construct, however, recently it is found to be a four-dimensional construct. The study of Ghayas and Jabeen is a paramount study that suggests abusive supervision to be a four-dimensional construct where yelling, belittling behavior, scapegoating and credit stealing are described as the dimensions of abusive supervision. Researchers such as Tepper and Martinko had previously asserted that there was a need to study dimensions of abusive supervision.
Workplace bullying
Abusive supervision overlaps with workplace bullying in the workplace context. Research suggests that 75% of workplace bullying incidents are perpetrated by hierarchically superior agents. Abusive supervision differs from related constructs such as supervisor bullying and undermining in that it does not describe the intentions or objectives of the supervisor.
Workplace deviance
Workplace deviance is closely related to abusive supervision. Abusive supervision is defined as the "subordinates' perceptions of the extent to which their supervisors engage in the sustained display of hostile verbal and nonverbal behaviors". This could be when supervisors ridicule their employees, give them the silent treatment, remind them of past failures, fail to give proper credit, wrongfully assign blame or blow up in fits of temper. It may seem like employees who are abused by their supervisor will either directly retaliate or withdraw by quitting the job but in reality many strike out against their employer by engaging in organizational deviant behaviors.
This page is automatically generated and may contain information that is not correct, complete, up-to-date, or relevant to your search query. The same applies to every other page on this website. Please make sure to verify the information with EPFL's official sources.
A “toxic workplace” is a colloquial term used to describe a place of work, usually an office environment, that is marked by significant personal conflicts between those who work there. Such infighting can often harm productivity. Toxic workplaces are often considered the result of toxic employers and/or toxic employees who are motivated by personal gain (power, money, fame or special status), use unethical means to psychologically manipulate and annoy those around them; and whose motives are to maintain or increase power, money or special status or divert attention away from their performance shortfalls and misdeeds.
Narcissism in the workplace involves the impact of narcissistic employees and managers in workplace settings. Job interviews Narcissists typically perform well at job interviews; they receive more favorable hiring ratings from interviewers than individuals who are not narcissists. Typically, because they can make favorable first impressions, though that may not translate to better job performance once hired. Occupational stressAbsenteeism and Turnover (employment) There tends to be a higher level of stress with people who work with or interact with a narcissist.
While psychopaths typically represent a very small percentage of workplace staff, the presence of psychopathy in the workplace, especially within senior management, can do enormous damage. Indeed, psychopaths are usually most present at higher levels of corporate structure, and their actions often cause a ripple effect throughout an organization, setting the tone for an entire corporate culture. Examples of detrimental effects include increased bullying, conflict, stress, staff turnover, absenteeism, and reduction in both productivity and social responsibility.