Revisiting the Dichotomy between Abusive Supervision and Work Performance of Subordinates in Private Organizations in Kenya: An Empirical Search for Correspondence between Theory and Practice

Main Article Content

Ssemugenyi Fred
Amboka Asumwa Agustine
Kazibwe Sophia

Abstract

This systematic and empirical review attempted to expand the frontiers of knowledge on abusive supervision against employee performance using private sector as a case sample. Using no mediating model between X and Y, the study focused on the assumed and observable linearity between the two variables under investigation whilst using available quantitative and qualitative data as point of reference. Hypothetically, it is assumed that, abusive supervision has a negative correlation with employee performance across organization. This kind of reasoning is guided by observable longitudinal data, feelings and opinions drawn from various categories of individuals over time. Important to note, is the fact that, these observations are in conflict with many research works and reports whose conclusions seem to suggest that abusive supervision has a direct positive causal impact on employee performance. This empirical review is borne out of this contradiction as an attempt to contribute to the ongoing debate and systematically direct reasoning to the desired end. A statistically selected sample of 80 respondents from 101 total population was drawn from 10 private organizations across Kenya for quantitative data and a team of key informants (10) one from each organization was selected for interviews. A mixed method approach was adopted which gave birth to descriptive statistics and thematic approach for analysis. A casual path linking the supervisor mindfulness, supervisor hostility, supervisor attitudes and organizational leadership structures was established. Supervisor hostility and attitudes negatively affected employee performance in the private sector organizations whilst supervisor mindfulness and organizational leadership structures positively affected employee performance in the same context. Important to note is that, although the associations between perceptions of abusive supervision and employee performance appear to be universally negative, the magnitude of the relationship between perceptions of abusive supervision and employee performance varies according to the study design, context, culture and timing.  Great need is sought to continuously harmonize the synergy between theory and practice for the future of the practitioners rests entirely on this evaluation.

Keywords:
Abusive supervision, cyber-loafing, hedonic adaptation, work performance, supervisor mindfulness, supervisor hostility, supervisor attitudes and organizational leadership structures.

Article Details

How to Cite
Fred, S., Asumwa Agustine, A., & Sophia, K. (2019). Revisiting the Dichotomy between Abusive Supervision and Work Performance of Subordinates in Private Organizations in Kenya: An Empirical Search for Correspondence between Theory and Practice. Journal of Education, Society and Behavioural Science, 32(4), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.9734/jesbs/2019/v32i430180
Section
Original Research Article

References

Loh MI, Restubog SLD, Zagenczyk TJ. Consequences of workplace bullying on employee identification and satisfaction among Australians and Singaporeans. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. 2010;41:236–252.

Restubog SLD, Scott KL, Zagenczyk TJ. When distress hits home: The role of contextual factors and psychological distress in predicting employees’ responses to abusive supervision. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2011;96:713– 729.

Gonzalez-Morales G, Kernan M, Becker TE, Eisenberger R. Supervisory training to increase employee perceptions of support. Poster presented at the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology annual conference, San Diego, California; 2012.

Lopes B, Kamau C, Jaspal R. Coping with perceived abusive supervision in the workplace: The role of paranoia. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies. In Press; 2018.

Thau S, Mitchell MS. Self-gain or self-regulation impairment? Tests of competing explanations of the supervisor abuse and employee deviance relationship through perceptions of distributive justice. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2010;95:1009–1031.

Bowling NA, Michel JS. Why do you treat me badly? The role of attributions regarding the cause of abuse in subordinates’ responses to abusive supervision. Work & Stress. 2011;25:309–320.

Carlson D, Ferguson M, Hunter E, Whitten D. Abusive supervision and work-family conflict: The path through emotional labor and burnout. The Leadership Quarterly. 2012;23:849-859.

Wu SQ, Cao K. Abusive supervision and work-family conflict: The mediating role of emotional exhaustion. Journal of Human Resource and Sustainability Studies. 2015; 3:171-178.

Ezeh LN, Etodike CE, Chukwura EN. Abusive Supervision and Organizational Cynicism as Predictors of Cyber-Loafing among Federal Civil Service Employees in Anambra State, Nigeria; 2018.

Chan ME, McAllister DJ. Abusive supervision through the lens of employee state paranoia. Academy of Management Review. 2014;39(1):44-66.

Shoss MK, Eisenberger R, Restubog SLD, Zagenczyk TJ. Blaming the organization for abusive supervision: The roles of perceived organizational support and supervisor's organizational embodiment. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2013; 98(1):158-168.

Lyu Y, Zhou X, Li W, Wan J, Zhang J, Qiu C. The impact of abusive supervision on service employees’ proactive customer service performance in the hotel industry. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management. 2016;28(9):1992-2012.

Gonzalez-Morales G, Kernan M, Becker TE, Eisenberger R. Supervisory training to increase employee perceptions of support. Poster presented at the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology annual conference, San Diego, California; 2012.

Zhao H, Guo L. Abusive supervision and hospitality employees’ helping behaviors, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management. 2019;31(4):1977-1994.

Han GH, Harms PD, Bai Y. Nightmare bosses: The impact of abusive supervision on employees’ sleep, emotions, and creativity. Journal of Business Ethics. 2017;145:21–31.

Liang Y, Yan M, Chu X. Advances of abusive supervision research: A literature review based on theoretical perspectives. Foreign Econ. Manage. 2015;37:59– 72.

Fagbohungbe BO, Akinbode GA, Ayodeji F. Organizational determinants of workplace deviant behaviours: An empirical analysis in Nigeria. International Journal of Business and Management. 2012;7(5):207.

Mathieu C, Babiak P. Corporate psychopathy and abusive supervision: Their influence on employees' job satisfaction and turnover intentions in non-profit organizations. Personality and Individual Differences. 2016;91(3):102-106.

Aluvisia HK. Factors influencing employee performance in the Kenyan private sector: A case of the Kenya National Highways Authority. Masters Project, University of Nairobi, Kenya; 2013.

Creswell JW. Research design: Qualitative quantitative and mixed methods approaches. (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, London: Sage; 2003.

Amin Martin. Social science research: Conception, methodology and analysis. Makerere University, Kampala Uganda; 2005.

Valle M, Kacmar M, Zivnuska S, Harting T. Abusive supervision, leader-member exchange, and moral disengagement: A moderated-mediation model of organizational deviance. The Journal of Social Psychology. 2018;159(3):299- 312.

Meglich P, Valentine S, Eesley D. Perceptions of supervisor competence, perceived employee mobility and abusive supervision. Personnel Review. 2019; 10(3):691-706.

Wang W, Mao J, Wu W, Liu J. Abusive supervision and workplace deviance: The mediating role of interactional justice and the moderating role of power distance. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources. 2012;50(1):43-60.