Relationship of Abusive Supervision and Team Performance: The Mediating Role of Individual Efficacy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.62843/jssr.v5i2.532Keywords:
Abusive Supervision, Team Performance, Individual Efficacy, Individual PerformanceAbstract
There is emergent concern about the association of abusive supervision and team performance in recent years, but very few researchers have focused on the intervening mechanism between them. By eroding workplace productivity, efficiency, and general morale, an abusive relationship between a boss and an employee can have a detrimental effect on economic growth. In Pakistan, research on such mediating mechanism between abusive supervision and team performance is approximately blank. In this research paper, we focus on finding the relationship between abusive supervision and team performance, the mediating role of individual efficacy between abusive supervision and team performance by analyzing the sample of 154 teams working in different banks of different areas of Punjab using the partial least square structural equation modeling (PLS SEM), and we draw two conclusion from our study that abusive supervision influence the team performance and individual efficacy mediate the relationship between abusive supervision and team performance. Due to individual efficacy, team performance can be increased despite of presence of abusive supervision in organization. In this paper we show relationship of abusive supervisor indirectly effect the team performance through individual efficacy. The data collection through questioner with use of Likert scale and for statistical testing use Smart PLS for testing Construct validity and Reliability and Structured Equation Modeling. Study indicated that individual efficacy shows the relationship between abusive supervision and team performance. Structural equation modeling result also show that individual efficacy mediate the relationship between abusive supervision and team performance.
References
Andersson, L. M., & Pearson, C. M. (1999). Tit for tat? The spiraling effect of incivility in the workplace. Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 452. https://doi.org/10.2307/259136
Aryee, S., Chen, Z. X., Sun, L.-Y., & Debrah, Y. A. (2007). Antecedents and outcomes of abusive supervision: test of a trickle-down model. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(1), 191–201. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.1.191
Bandura, A. (1986). The explanatory and predictive scope of self-efficacy theory. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 4(3), 359–373. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.1986.4.3.359
Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 117–148. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2802_3
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Macmillan.
Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(3), 75–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00064
Baron, R. A., & Richardson, D. R. (1994). Human aggression. Springer Science & Business Media.
Bass, B. M. (1990). From transactional to transformational leadership: Learning to share the vision. Organizational Dynamics, 18(3), 19–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-2616(90)90061-s
Boddy, C. R. (2011). Corporate psychopaths, bullying and unfair supervision in the workplace. Journal of Business Ethics, 100(3), 367–379. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0689-5
Carlson, D., Ferguson, M., Hunter, E., & Whitten, D. (2012). Abusive supervision and work–family conflict: The path through emotional labor and burnout. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(5), 849–859. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2012.05.003
Chen, G., & Bliese, P. D. (2002). The role of different levels of leadership in predicting self-and collective efficacy: evidence for discontinuity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 549.
Cropanzano, Russell, Mitchell, & S. Marie. (2005). Social Exchange Theory: An Interdisciplinary Review. Journal of Management, 31(6), 874–900. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206305279602
De Dreu, C. K. W., & Weingart, L. R. (2003). Task versus relationship conflict, team performance, and team member satisfaction: a meta-analysis. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(4), 741–749. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.4.741
Detert, J. R., & Burris, E. R. (2007). Leadership behavior and employee voice: Is the door really open? Academy of Management Journal, 50(4), 869–884. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2007.26279183
Earley, P. C. (1994). Self or group? Cultural effects of training on self-efficacy and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(1), 89. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393495
Fox, S., Spector, P. E., & Miles, D. (2001). Counterproductive work behavior (CWB) in response to job stressors and organizational justice: Some mediator and moderator tests for autonomy and emotions. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 59(3), 291–309. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.2001.1803
Gibson, C. B. (2001). Me and us: differential relationships among goal‐setting training, efficacy and effectiveness at the individual and team level. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(7), 789–808. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.114
Gibson, C. B., Randel, A. E., & Earley, P. C. (2000). Understanding group efficacy: An empirical test of multiple assessment methods. Group & Organization Management, 25(1), 67–97.
Hao, Q., Wei, K., & Zhang, B. (2022). How to attenuate the effects of abusive supervision on knowledge hiding: the neutralizing roles of coworker support and individual characteristics. Journal of Knowledge Management, 26(7), 1807–1825. https://doi.org/10.1108/jkm-02-2021-0167
Harris, K. J., Kacmar, K. M., & Zivnuska, S. (2007). An investigation of abusive supervision as a predictor of performance and the meaning of work as a moderator of the relationship. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(3), 252–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2007.03.007
Hattab, S., Wirawan, H., Salam, R., Daswati, D., & Niswaty, R. (2022). The effect of toxic leadership on turnover intention and counterproductive work behaviour in Indonesia public organisations. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 35(3), 317–333. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijpsm-06-2021-0142
Hershcovis, M.S., T.C. Reich, & Niven, K. (2015). Workplace bullying: causes, consequences, and intervention strategies. https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/66031/
Hershcovis, Sandy, M., Reich, T. C., Parker, K., S., Bozeman, & Jennifer. (2012). The relationship between workplace aggression and target deviant behaviour: The moderating roles of power and task interdependence. Work & Stress, 26(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2012.660770
Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. The American Psychologist, 44(3), 513–524. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.44.3.513
Indradevi, & R., T. (2016). Toxic Leadership over the Years–A Review. Purushartha: A Journal of Management Ethics and Spirituality, 9(1).
Keashly, L., & Harvey, S. (2005). Emotional Abuse in the Workplace. In S. Fox & P. E. Spector (Eds.), Counterproductive work behavior: Investigations of actors and targets (pp. 201–235). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10893-009
Kiazad, K., Restubog, S. L. D., Zagenczyk, T. J., Kiewitz, C., & Tang, R. L. (2010). In pursuit of power: The role of authoritarian leadership in the relationship between supervisors’ Machiavellianism and subordinates’ perceptions of abusive supervisory behavior. Journal of Research in Personality, 44(4), 512–519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2010.06.004
Knight Don, Durham, C., C., Locke, & A., E. (2001). The Relationship of Team Goals, Incentives, and Efficacy to Strategic Risk, Tactical Implementation, and Performance. Academy of Management Journal, 44(2), 326–338. https://doi.org/10.5465/3069459
Leonelli, S., Jalal, R. N. U. D., & Fayyaz, U. E. R. (2022). The impact of personal factors and firm dynamics on knowledge workers’ counterproductive work behaviour. International Journal of Management in Education, 16(2), 131. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijmie.2022.121167
Manojlovich, M. (2005). Promoting nurses’ self-efficacy: a leadership strategy to improve practice. The Journal of Nursing Administration, 35(5), 271–278. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005110-200505000-00011
Martinko, M. J., Harvey, P., Brees, J. R., & Mackey, J. (2013). A review of abusive supervision research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(S1). https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1888
Mitchell, M. S., & Ambrose, M. L. (2007). Abusive supervision and workplace deviance and the moderating effects of negative reciprocity beliefs. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(4), 1159–1168. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.4.1159
Restubog, S. L. D., Scott, K. L., & Zagenczyk, T. J. (2011). When distress hits home: the role of contextual factors and psychological distress in predicting employees’ responses to abusive supervision. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(4), 713–729. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021593
Samreen, F., Amir Rashid, M., & Hussain, G. (2022). Effect of abusive supervision on subordinates’ discretionary behaviors. Journal of Management & Organization, 28(1), 149–164. https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2019.57
Schat, A. C. H., Kelloway, E. K., & Desmarais, S. (2005). The physical health questionnaire (PHQ): Construct validation of a self-report scale of somatic symptoms. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 10(4), 363–381. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.10.4.363
Schaufeli, W. B. (2007). Work engagement: An emerging psychological concept and its implications for organizations. Managing social and ethical issues in organizations. https://cir.nii.ac.jp/crid/1570009750851468800
Shea M., C., Howell, & M., J. (1999). Charismatic leadership and task feedback. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(3), 375–396. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(99)00020-X
Sulea, C., Filipescu, R., Horga, A., Ortan, C., & Fischmann, G. (2012). Interpersonal mistreatment at work and burnout among teachers. An Interdisciplinary Journal, 16(4), 553–570.
Tepper, & J., B. (2007). Abusive Supervision in Work Organizations: Review, Synthesis, and Research Agenda. Journal of Management, 33(3), 261–289. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206307300812
Tepper, B. J. (2000). Consequences of abusive supervision. Academy of Management Journal, 43(2), 178–190. https://doi.org/10.5465/1556375
Wallace, J. C., Edwards, B. D., Arnold, T., Frazier, M. L., & Finch, D. M. (2009). Work stressors, role-based performance, and the moderating influence of organizational support. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(1), 254–262. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013090
Walumbwa, F. O., Avolio, B. J., & Zhu, W. (2008). How transformational leadership weaves its influence on individual job performance: The role of identification and efficacy beliefs. Personnel Psychology, 61(4), 793–825. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2008.00131.x
Wang, C.-J., Tsai, H.-T., & Tsai, M.-T. (2014). Linking transformational leadership and employee creativity in the hospitality industry: The influences of creative role identity, creative self-efficacy, and job complexity. Tourism Management, 40, 79–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2013.05.008
Wang, S., Yi, X., Lawler, John Zhang, & Mingrui. (2011). Efficacy of high-performance work practices in Chinese companies. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 22(11), 2419–2441. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2011.584406
Wilson-Starks, K. Y. (2003). Toxic leadership. Transleadership, Inc, 1, 2016.
Zellars, K. L., Tepper, B. J., & Duffy, M. K. (2002). Abusive supervision and subordinates’ organizational citizenship behavior. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(6), 1068–1076. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.6.1068
Zhang, A. Y., Tsui, A. S., & Wang, D. X. (2011). Leadership behaviors and group creativity in Chinese organizations: The role of group processes. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(5), 851–862. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.07.007
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Copyright in the Journal of Social Sciences Review is retained by the author(s). Authors also grant any third party the right to use the article freely as long as its integrity is maintained and its original authors, citation details and publisher are identified.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
SSR's Editorial Board shares the vision of providing free access to information, education, and science for everyone, thus promoting its content through an OPEN ACCESS POLICY, fulfilling the DOAJ definition of open access. The JSSR adheres to an Open Access and Copyright Licensing Policy based on the belief that making research freely accessible to the public promotes greater global knowledge sharing.
The JSSR uses the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. The authors who apply and publish in JSSR consent to abide by the copyright policy set out in the Creative Commons 4.0 license (Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International license).
- Copyright in the Journal of Social Sciences Review is retained by the author(s).
- Authors also grant any third party the right to use the article freely as long as its integrity is maintained and its original authors, citation details and publisher are identified.
While "By 'open access' to this literature, we mean its free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself."
