Attributions for abusive supervision: Who do subordinates blame and does it matter?

Drawing on attribution theory, we propose in Study 1 that subordinates' supervisor-directed responses to abusive supervision depend upon their causal attributions for the abuse. Using a scenario-based study (N = 183), we test a moderated mediation model in which the entity blamed for abusive supervision (supervisor, organization, self) is expected to predict subordinates' behavioral intentions toward their supervisor via affective responses (supervisor disliking). This relationship will be exacerbated when subordinates perceive the cause of abusive supervision as stable. We found that subordinates who blamed themselves or the organization for the abuse disliked their supervisor less and had higher OCB-supervisor intentions, and this relationship was stronger when subordinates perceived the cause of abuse as stable. Disliking mediated the relationship between supervisor attributions and OCB-supervisor, but this relationship is not moderated by perceived stability. In Study 2, we explore whether there are additional entities that are blamed for abusive supervision and the reasons they are held accountable. We examined qualitative responses (N = 107) from abused subordinates to find that they most commonly blame their supervisor, themselves, and the organization for abusive supervision. However, subordinates occasionally blame their relationship with their supervisor and their work group.

Mines in the End Zone: Are there Downsides to Team Performance?

Research on teams in organizations tends to focus on understanding the causes of team performance with a focus on how to enjoy the benefits of team success and avoid the negative consequences of team failure. This paper instead asks the question, 'what are some of the negative consequences of team success?' A review of the literature on teams is augmented with research from cognitive science, sociology, occupational psychology, and psychology to explore the potential negative long-term consequences of teamwork success. The general topics of groupthink, overconfidence bias, regression to the mean, role overload, and strategy calcification are reviewed while discussing the implications for future research streams and practical team management.

Mines in the end zone: are there downsides to team performance?

Research on teams in organizations tends to focus on understanding the causes of team performance with a focus on how to enjoy the benefits of team success and avoid the negative consequences of team failure. This paper instead asks the question, 'what are some of the negative consequences of team success?' A review of the literature on teams is augmented with research from cognitive science, sociology, occupational psychology, and psychology to explore the potential negative long-term consequences of teamwork success. The general topics of groupthink, overconfidence bias, regression to the mean, role overload, and strategy calcification are reviewed while discussing the implications for future research streams and practical team management

No disponible

The team role test: development and validation of a team role knowledge situational judgment test.

The main objectives in this research were to introduce the concept of team role knowledge and to investigate its potential usefulness for team member selection. In Study 1, the authors developed a situational judgment test, called the Team Role Test, to measure knowledge of 10 roles relevant to the team context. The criterion-related validity of this measure was examined in 2 additional studies. In a sample of academic project teams (N = 93), team role knowledge predicted team member role performance (r = .34). Role knowledge also provided incremental validity beyond mental ability and the Big Five personality factors in the prediction of role performance. The results of Study 2 revealed that the predictive validity of role knowledge generalizes to team members in a work setting (N = 82, r = .30). The implications of the results for selection in team environments are discussed.