Mindfulness and trust: How to prevent the compensatory abusive behaviors of the low-status supervisors?

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2022.00566

Abstract

Abstract:

The parallel system of position and rank enlarges the separation of power and status within the organization. The high position (power) without corresponding prestige (status) will limit leaders’ control in the workplace and potentially lead to adverse consequences. Based on the low-status compensation theory, this paper constructs a two-stage moderated mediation model and designs two studies to explore the negative leadership behavior induced by low-status leaders (i.e. leader with high power but lack of corresponding status) and its intervention mechanism. Study 1 revealed that leaders with inconsistent hierarchies are more inclined to implement abusive supervision than those with consistent hierarchies. Study 2 explored its causes, and found: (1) Leaders' ego-depletion mediates the relationship between low-status leader and abusive supervision; (2) The combination of leader mindfulness and trust from high-level leader can jointly and effectively moderate the mediation effect caused by ego-depletion. The research shows that the ego-depletion generated from low-status leaders to maintain their status is the crucial cause of abusive supervision. At the same time, the intensity of abusive supervision varies from person to person. Mindfulness and trust from high-level leader can help limit its spread as a means of bad compensation. The research extends the application of low-status compensation theory, and provides management implications for preventing the conflicts caused by the separation of power and status.

Key words: low-status leader, ego-depletion, abusive supervision, mindfulness, trust, low-status compensation

MA Jun, ZHANG Rui. (2022). Mindfulness and trust: How to prevent the compensatory abusive behaviors of the low-status supervisors?. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 54(5), 566-581.

Figures/Tables 16

References 75

[1]	Anderson C. A., & Bushman B. J.(2002). Human aggression. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 27-51.
[2]	Anicich E. M., Fast N. J., Halevy N., & Galinsky A. D.(2016). When the bases of social hierarchy collide: Power without status drives interpersonal conflict. Organization Science, 27(1), 123-140.
[3]	Aryee S., Sun L. Y., Chen Z. X. G., & Debrah Y. A.(2008). Abusive supervision and contextual performance: The mediating role of emotional exhaustion and the moderating role of work unit structure. Management and Organization Review, 4(3), 393-411.
[4]	Bacharach S. B., Bamberger P., & Mundell B.(1993). Status inconsistency in organizations: From social hierarchy to stress. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 14(1), 21-36.
[5]	Bäckman L., & Dixon R. A.(1992). Psychological compensation: A theoretical framework. Psychological Bulletin, 112(2), 259-283.
[6]	Bai S. J., Jing R. T., Li P., Chen L., & Li G. Q.(2018). Using response surface analysis in P-E fit researches. Management Review, 30(3), 161-170.
[7]	Baumeister R. F., Vohs K. D., & Tice D. M.(2007). The strength model of self-control. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16(6), 351-355.
[8]	Bendersky C., & Shah N. P.(2012). The cost of status enhancement: Performance effects of individuals' status mobility in task groups. Organization Science, 23(2), 308-322.
[9]	Blader S. L., & Chen Y. R.(2014). What’s in a name? Status, power, and other forms of social hierarchy. In J. T.Cheng, J. L.Tracy & C. Anderson(Eds.), The psychology of social status (pp.71-95). New York: Springer.
[10]	Blader S. L., & Chen Y. R.(2012). Differentiating the effects of status and power: A justice perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(5), 994-1014.
[11]	Blader S. L., Shirako A., & Chen Y. R.(2016). Looking out from the top: Differential effects of status and power on perspective taking. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42(6), 723-737.
[12]	Blau P. M.(1964). Exchange and power in social life. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
[13]	Blumer H.(1969). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. Berkeley: University of California Press.
[14]	Brown K. W., & Ryan R. M.(2003). The benefits of being present: Mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(4), 822-848.
[15]	Brown K. W., Ryan R. M., & Creswell J. D.(2007). Mindfulness: Theoretical foundations and evidence for its salutary effects. Psychological Inquiry, 18(4), 211-237.
[16]	Burton J. P., & Hoobler J. M.(2006). Subordinate self-esteem and abusive supervision. Journal of Managerial Issues, 18(3), 340-355.
[17]	Burton J. P., Hoobler J. M., & Scheuer M. L.(2012). Supervisor workplace stress and abusive supervision: The buffering effect of exercise. Journal of Business and Psychology, 27(3), 271-279.
[18]	Clarysse B., & Moray N.(2004). A process study of entrepreneurial team formation: The case of a research-based spin-off. Journal of Business Venturing, 19(1), 55-79.
[19]	Cooley C. H.(1902). Human nature and the social order. New York: Scribner.
[20]	de Cremer D., van Dijke M., Schminke M., de Schutter L., & Stouten J.(2018). The trickle-down effects of perceived trustworthiness on subordinate performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103(12), 1335-1357.
[21]	Deci E. L., & Ryan R. M.(1980). Self-determination theory: When mind mediates behavior. The Journal of Mind and Behavior, 1(1), 33-43.
[22]	Duan W. J.(2014). Disagreements of studies on mindfulness: Conceptualization and measurements. Advances in Psychological Science, 22(10), 1616-1627.
[23]	Edwards J. R.(2002). Alternatives to difference scores:Polynomial regression analysis and response surface methodology. In F. Drasgow & N. W. Schmitt(Eds.), Measuring and analyzing behavior in organizations: Advances in measurement and data analysis (pp.350-400). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[24]	Edwards J. R., & Cable D. A.(2009). The value of value congruence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(3), 654-677.
[25]	Etzioni A.(1968). The active society. New York: The Free Press.
[26]	Fast N. J., Halevy N., & Galinsky A. D.(2012). The destructive nature of power without status. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(1), 391-394.
[27]	Felson R. B.(2006). Violence as instrumental behavior. In E. K. Kelloway, J. Barling, & J. J. Hurrell, Jr.(Eds.), Handbook of workplace violence (pp.7-28). London, UK: Sage.
[28]	Ferrin D. L., & Dirks K. T.(2003). The use of rewards to increase and decrease trust: Mediating processes and differential effects. Organization Science, 14(1), 18-31.
[29]	Fischer P., Greitemeyer T., & Frey D.(2008). Self-regulation and selective exposure: The impact of depleted self-regulation resources on confirmatory information processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(3), 382-395.
[30]	Fiske S. T.(2010). Interpersonal stratification:Status, power, and subordination. In S. T. Fiske, D. T.Gilbert & L.G(Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (pp.941-982). New York, NY: Wiley.
[31]	Foa U. G.(1971). Interpersonal and economic resources. Science, 171(3969), 345-351.
[32]	Fulmer C. A., & Gelfand M. J.(2012). At what level (and in whom) we trust: Trust across multiple organizational levels. Journal of Management, 38(4), 1167-1230.
[33]	Glomb T. M., Duffy M. K., Bono J. E., & Yang T.(2011). Mindfulness at work.In Research in personnel and human resources management(pp.115-157). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
[34]	Guo P. Y., & Li B.(2017). What is mindfulness: A reflection on the concept development of mindfulness. Journal of Psychological Science, 40(3), 243-249.
[35]	Hagger M. S., Wood C., Stiff C., & Chatzisarantis N. L.(2010). Ego depletion and the strength model of self-control: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 136(4), 495-525.
[36]	Halevy N., Chou Y. E., & Galinsky D. A.(2011). A functional model of hierarchy: Why, how, and when vertical differentiation enhances group performance. Organizational Psychology Review, 1(1), 32-52.
[37]	Hays N. A., & Bendersky C.(2015). Not all inequality is created equal: Effects of status versus power hierarchies on competition for upward mobility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108(6), 867-882.
[38]	Hays N. A., & Goldstein N. J.(2015). Power and legitimacy influence conformity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 60, 17-26.
[39]	Henry P. J.(2008, (September). Low-status compensation: A theory for understanding the roots and trajectory of violence. Paper Presented at the Final Conference:Control of Violence, Center for Interdisciplinary Research, Bielefeld, Germany.
[40]	Henry P. J.(2009). Low-status compensation: A theory for understanding the role of status in cultures of honor. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(3), 451-466.
[41]	Hülsheger U. R., Alberts H. J., Feinholdt A., & Lang J. W.(2013). Benefits of mindfulness at work: The role of mindfulness in emotion regulation, emotional exhaustion, and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(2), 310-325.
[42]	Inzlicht M., McKay L., & Aronson J.(2006). Stigma as ego depletion: How being the target of prejudice affects self-control. Psychological Science, 17(3), 262-269.
[43]	James L. R.(1982). Aggregation bias in estimates of perceptual agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67(2), 219-229.
[44]	Ji H., Xie X. Y., Xiao Y. P., Gan X. L., & Feng W.(2019). Does power hierarchy benefit or hurt team performance? The roles of hierarchical consistency and power struggle. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 51(3), 366-382.
[45]	Jones S. L., & Shah P. P.(2016). Diagnosing the locus of trust: A temporal perspective for trustor, trustee, and dyadic influences on perceived trustworthiness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(3), 392-414.
[46]	Kabat‐Zinn J.(2003). Mindfulness-based interventions in context: Past, present, and future. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 10(2), 144-156.
[47]	Kavanagh D. J., Andrade J., & May J.(2005). Imaginary relish and exquisite torture: The elaborated intrusion theory of desire. Psychological Review, 112(2), 446-467.
[48]	Kay A. C., & Jost J. T.(2003). Complementary justice: Effects of "poor but happy" and "poor but honest" stereotype exemplars on system justification and implicit activation of the justice motive. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(5), 823-837.
[49]	Korsgaard M. A., Brodt S. E., & Whitener E. M.(2002). Trust in the face of conflict: The role of managerial trustworthy behavior and organizational context. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(2), 312-319.
[50]	Kunze F., & Menges J. I.(2017). Younger supervisors, older subordinates: An organizational-level study of age differences, emotions, and performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 38(4), 461-486.
[51]	Lammers J., Galinsky A. D., Gordijn E. H., & Otten S.(2008). Illegitimacy moderates the effects of power on approach. Psychological Science, 19(6), 558-564.
[52]	Lange S., & Rowold J.(2019). Mindful leadership: Evaluation of a mindfulness-based leader intervention. Gruppe. Interaktion. Organisation. Zeitschrift für Angewandte Organisationspsychologie (GIO), 50(3), 319-335.
[53]	Liang L. H., Lian H., Brown D. J., Ferris D. L., Hanig S., & Keeping L. M.(2016). Why are abusive supervisors abusive? A dual-system self-control model. Academy of Management Journal, 59(4), 1385-1406.
[54]	Liu C., Liu J., Zhu L., & Wu S. Q.(2017). The causes of abusive supervision from the perspective of rule-adaptation. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 49(7), 966-979.
[55]	Liu Z. Q., Deng C. J., Liao J. Q., & Long L. R.(2013). Status-striving motivation, criteria for status promotion and employees’ innovative behavior choice. China Industrial Economics, (10), 83-95.
[56]	Magee J. C., & Galinsky A. D.(2008). Social hierarchy: The self-reinforcing nature of power and status. Academy of Management Annals, 2(1), 351-398.
[57]	Mayer R. C., & Gavin M. B.(2005). Trust in management and performance: Who minds the shop while the employees watch the boss? Academy of Management Journal, 48(5), 874-888.
[58]	Mcallister D. J.(1995). Affect- and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 38(1), 24-59.
[59]	Mead G. H.(1932). Mind, self, and society from the standpoint of a social behaviorist. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
[60]	Miller J. W., Stromeyer W. R., & Schwieterman M. A.(2013). Extensions of the Johnson-Neyman technique to linear models with curvilinear effects: Derivations and analytical tools. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 48(2), 267-300.
[61]	Muraven M., & Baumeister R. F.(2000). Self-regulation and depletion of limited resources: Does self-control resemble a muscle? Psychological Bulletin, 126(2), 247-259.
[62]	Podolny J. M.(1932). A status-based model of market competition. American Journal of Sociology, 98(4), 829-872.
[63]	Rousseau D. M., Sitkin S. B., Burt R. S., & Camerer C.(1998). Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 393-404.
[64]	Shaw J. D., & Gupta N.(2004). Job complexity, performance, and well-being: When does supplies-values fit matter? Personnel Psychology, 57(4), 847-879.
[65]	Simon L. S., Hurst C., Kelley K., & Judge T. A.(2015). Understanding cycles of abuse: A multimotive approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(6), 1798-1810.
[66]	Tan S. H., Xu Y., Wang F., & Song J.(2012). Ego depletion: Theory, influencing factors and research trend. Advances in Psychological Science, 20(5), 715-725.
[67]	Tepper B. J.(2000). Consequences of abusive supervision. Academy of Management Journal, 43(2), 178-190.
[68]	Tepper B. J.(2007). Abusive supervision in work organizations: Review, synthesis, and research agenda. Journal of Management, 33(3), 261-289.
[69]	Twenge J. M., Muraven M., & Tice D. M.(2004). Measuring state self-control: Reliability, validity, and correlations with physical and psychological stress. Unpublished manuscript, San Diego State University.
[70]	Tyler T. R.(2006). Psychological perspectives on legitimacy and legitimation. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 375-400.
[71]	Wang Z. J., Yuan D. Y., & Long L. R.(2013). A review of researches on sources, effects and countermeasures of ego-depletion at work. Foreign Economics & Management, 35(2), 71-80.
[72]	Wegner D. M., & Zanakos S.(1994). Chronic thought suppression. Journal of Personality, 62(4), 615-640.
[73]	Willis G. B., Guinote A., & Rodríguez-Bailón R.(2010). Illegitimacy improves goal pursuit in powerless individuals. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(2), 416-419.
[74]	Yu L., Duffy M. K., & Tepper B. J.(2018). Consequences of downward envy: A model of self-esteem threat, abusive supervision, and supervisory leader self-improvement. Academy of Management Journal, 61(6), 2296-2318.
[75]	Zhang S. S., Zhang J. X., & Zhou M. J.(2012). The quadratic polynomial regression with response surface analysis and its use in person-environment fit research. Advances in Psychological Science, 20(6), 825-833.

Variable	Model 1		Model 2
Variable	Estimated value	Standard deviation	Estimated value	Standard deviation
Intercept term	2.68^***	0.15	2.91^***	0.13
Gender	0.02	0.07	-0.003	0.06
Education	-0.06	0.04	-0.03	0.04
Age	0.03	0.04	0.05	0.04
Working age	-0.001	0.04	-0.03	0.03
Power (b₁)	-0.46^***	0.03	-0.30^***	0.04
Status (b₂)	0.27^***	0.03	0.17^***	0.04
Power × Power (b₃)			-0.20^***	0.03
Power × Status (b₄)			0.29^***	0.04
Status × Status (b₅)			-0.22^***	0.03
R²	0.36		0.52
ΔR²	0.36		0.16
F	33.84^***		40.93^***

Variable	Model 1		Model 2
Variable	Estimated value	Standard deviation	Estimated value	Standard deviation
Intercept term	2.68^***	0.15	2.91^***	0.13
Gender	0.02	0.07	-0.003	0.06
Education	-0.06	0.04	-0.03	0.04
Age	0.03	0.04	0.05	0.04
Working age	-0.001	0.04	-0.03	0.03
Power (b₁)	-0.46^***	0.03	-0.30^***	0.04
Status (b₂)	0.27^***	0.03	0.17^***	0.04
Power × Power (b₃)			-0.20^***	0.03
Power × Status (b₄)			0.29^***	0.04
Status × Status (b₅)			-0.22^***	0.03
R²	0.36		0.52
ΔR²	0.36		0.16
F	33.84^***		40.93^***

Dependent variable	Stationary point		First principle axes			Second principle axes
Dependent variable	X₀	Y₀	P₁₀	P₁₁	-P₁₀/(P₁₁+1)	P₂₀	P₂₁	-P₂₀/(P₂₁+1)
Degree of non-abusive	-0.91	-0.22	0.64 [0.31, 0.96]	0.94 [0.52, 1.36]	-0.33 [-0.54, -0.12]	-1.19 [-161.23, 158.85]	-1.07 [-1.68, -0.45]	-18.28 [-1857.02, 1820.46]

Dependent variable	Stationary point		First principle axes			Second principle axes
Dependent variable	X₀	Y₀	P₁₀	P₁₁	-P₁₀/(P₁₁+1)	P₂₀	P₂₁	-P₂₀/(P₂₁+1)
Degree of non-abusive	-0.91	-0.22	0.64 [0.31, 0.96]	0.94 [0.52, 1.36]	-0.33 [-0.54, -0.12]	-1.19 [-161.23, 158.85]	-1.07 [-1.68, -0.45]	-18.28 [-1857.02, 1820.46]

Response surface test		Estimated value	Standard deviation
Congruence line	Slope (b₁+b₂)	-0.14^***	0.03
Congruence line	Curvature (b₃+b₄+b₅)	-0.13^***	0.03
Incongruence line	Slope (b₁-b₂)	-0.47^***	0.07
Incongruence line	Curvature (b₃-b₄+b₅)	-0.70^***	0.07
First principles axes	Slope (b₁+b₂P₁₁+b₄P₁₀+2b₅P₁₁P₁₀)	-0.22^***	0.06
First principles axes	Curvature (b₃+b₄P₁₁+b₅P²₁₁)	-0.12^*	0.06
Second principles axes	Slope (b₁+b₂P₂₁+b₄P₂₀+2b₅P₂₁P₂₀)	-1.37	89.41
Second principles axes	Curvature (b₃+b₄P₂₁+b₅P²₂₁)	-0.75^*	0.32