A Model of Injustice, Abusive Supervision, and Negative Affect

In this study we test a model of workplace interactional injustice, abusive supervision, and subordinate outcomes (work-family conflict and job performance) using affect to explain behavior. In a sample of 200 full-time workers from various industries, their supervisors, and workers’ family members, for a total sample of 600 respondents, we position state negative affect as the explanatory mechanism for both how supervisors’ perceptions of injustice are associated with subordinates’ perceptions of abusive supervision, and also how abusive supervision, in turn, may be associated with subordinates’ job performance and their family members’ perceptions of work-family conflict. Organizational justice theory underpins our model

Do workers who experience conflict between the work and family domains hit a "glass ceiling?": A meta-analytic examination

Based in Conservation of Resources (COR; Hobfoll, 1989) and self-verification (Swann, 1987) theories, we argue that when workers experience conflict between the work and family domains this should have implications for evaluations of their work performance, and ultimately affect more “objective” career outcomes such as salary and hierarchical level attained, as well as the attitudinal outcome of career satisfaction. Our meta-analysis of 96 studies, for a combined sample size of 32,783, found that both work to family conflict (WFC) as well as family to work conflict (FWC) negatively impacted self-rated as well as manager-rated work performance. And our structural equation model found that WFC and FWC were negatively related to career satisfaction and hierarchical level attained. But while WFC was negatively related to salary, FWC was positively related to salary

Do "protean" employees make better leaders? The answer is in the eye of the beholder

While the protean career (Hall 1976; 2002) has been lauded for its advantages in helping individuals adapt to changing career contexts, it is not clear how this career orientation may impact how others perceive a person’s leadership ability. In this study we hypothesized that those with a protean career orientation would receive higher leadership ratings from subordinates and superiors, but lower leadership ratings from peers, in part based upon social comparison theory. Using structural equation modeling, our hypotheses regarding subordinates and peers were supported, but not with respect to superiors, who along with peers rated those with a protean career orientation lower in terms of transformational leadership as measured by the MLQ. We discuss potential reasons for these findings and the consequences for research and theory. Also, we examine the implications of this research for leadership development, workforce recruitment and retention, and possible generational significance