Mirror, mirror on my boss's wall: Engaged enactment's moderating role on the relationship between perceived narcissistic supervision and work outcomes

Addressing both practical and scholarly considerations, we investigated the interactive effects of perceived supervisor narcissism and individual enactment behavior on four relevant self-report work outcomes (i.e. frustration, tension, resource availability, and job performance). We hypothesized that employees with limited enactment behavior would be adversely affected in high supervisor narcissism settings. Conversely, we expected that perceived narcissistic supervision would have little effect on those with active enactment strategies. Across three samples, hypotheses were strongly supported as work frustration (Studies 1 and 3) and tension increased (Studies 1 and 2), and resource availability (Studies 1–3) and job performance (Studies 1–3) decreased for low enactment behavior–high perceived supervisor narcissism employees. Conversely, perceived supervisor narcissism had no significant effect for high enactment employees on any outcome across samples. These findings, when viewed in their entirety, confirmed the influential role of enactment behavior on perceived supervisor narcissism–work outcome relationships

Are coworkers getting into the act? An examination of emotion regulation in coworker exchanges

Research on emotional labor—the process through which employees enact emotion regulation (i.e., surface and deep acting) to alter their emotional displays—has predominately focused on service-based exchanges between employees and customers where emotions are commoditized for wage. Yet, recent research has begun to focus on the outcomes of employees engaging in emotion regulation, and surface acting in particular, with coworkers. Given that coworker interactions are qualitatively distinct from those with customers, we build on the emotional labor and emotion regulation literatures to understand why such acts of emotion regulation occur in coworker-based exchanges, and whether there are well-being and social capital costs and/or benefits for doing so. Across 3 complementary studies spanning over 2,500 full-time employees, we adopt a person-centered approach and demonstrate that four distinct profiles of emotion regulation emerge in coworker exchanges: deep actors, nonactors, low actors, and regulators. Further, our results suggest that certain employees are driven to regulate their emotions with coworkers for prosocial reasons (deep actors), whereas others are more driven by impression management motives (regulators). Our results also suggest that while nonactors and deep actors similarly incur well-being benefits (i.e., lower emotional exhaustion and felt inauthenticity), deep actors alone experience social capital gains in the form of higher receipt of help from coworkers, as well as increased goal progress and trust in their coworkers. Combined, our research delineates the motives that drive emotion regulation with coworkers and identifies when such regulatory efforts yield social capital gains for employees. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved

Creating One’s Reality: The Interaction of Politics Perceptions and Enactment Behavior

The current study investigated the previously unexamined relationship between politics perceptions and employee enactment behavior. Consistent with previous job stress and sense-making research, we hypothesized that individuals reporting low levels of enactment behaviors would be more adversely affected by politics perceptions than those who engaged in high levels of enactment behavior. Results across two samples provided strong support for the hypothesized relationships. Specifically, employees who reported low levels of enactment behavior experienced less satisfaction, less person–environment fit, and reported lower levels of effort when faced with highly political environments. Conversely, levels of satisfaction and person–environment fit perceptions of individuals reporting high levels of enactment behaviors were largely unaffected by highly political contexts. Implications of these findings, strengths and limitations, and avenues for future research are provided

How and When Perceptions of Top Management Bottom-Line Mentality Inhibit Supervisors’ Servant Leadership Behavior

Extending existing bottom-line mentality (BLM) perspectives, we provide a new theoretical account of how supervisors’ perceptions of top management BLM influence supervisors’ servant leadership (SL) behavior. Using role theory, we propose that these perceptions inhibit supervisors’ SL behavior by reducing their SL role conceptualization or the extent to which supervisors consider SL part of their work responsibility. Further, given that the process underlying the relationship between perceived top management BLM and supervisor SL behavior may be explained by social learning theory and human adaptive capacity perspectives, we examine the incremental validity of supervisor SL role conceptualization versus supervisor BLM and empathy as mediating mechanisms. We also propose low perspective-taking among supervisors as a boundary condition that exacerbates the negative effect of perceived top management BLM on SL role conceptualization, which then results in less servant leader behavior. Data from two multiwave field studies in China and the United Kingdom provided some support for our hypotheses. Across unique cultural contexts, our findings highlight the value of a role theory perspective in understanding perceptions of top management BLM. We discuss critical theoretical and practical implications of these findings and avenues for subsequent research