Antecedents and outcomes of abusive supervision: Test of a trickle-down model.

TLDR

The authors examined antecedents of abusive supervision and the relative importance of interactional and procedural justice as mediators of the relationship between abusive supervision and affective organizational commitment and citizenship behaviors. Data were obtained from subordinate‑supervisor dyads in a southeastern Chinese telecommunications company. Moderated regression and structural equation modeling revealed that authoritarian leadership strengthened the link between supervisors’ perceptions of interactional justice and abusive supervision, and that interactional justice—but not procedural justice—fully mediated the relationship between abusive supervision and affective organizational commitment and citizenship behaviors, highlighting the need for future research on these mechanisms.

Abstract

The authors examined antecedents of abusive supervision and the relative importance of interactional and procedural justice as mediators of the relationship between abusive supervision and the work outcomes of affective organizational commitment and individual- and organization-directed citizenship behaviors. Data were obtained from subordinate-supervisor dyads from a telecommunication company located in southeastern China. Results of moderated regression analysis revealed that authoritarian leadership style moderated the relationship between supervisors' perceptions of interactional justice and abusive supervision such that the relationship was stronger for supervisors high rather than low in authoritarian leadership style. In addition, results of structural equation modeling analysis revealed that subordinates' perceptions of interactional but not procedural justice fully mediated the relationship between abusive supervision and the work outcomes. Implications for future investigations of abusive supervision are discussed.