Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 118, Issue 3, pp 623–634 | Cite as

Standing by Your Organization: The Impact of Organizational Identification and Abusive Supervision on Followers’ Perceived Cohesion and Tendency to Gossip

  • Stijn Decoster
  • Jeroen Camps
  • Jeroen Stouten
  • Lore Vandevyvere
  • Thomas M. Tripp


Abusive supervision has been shown to have significant negative consequences for employees’ well-being, attitudes, and behavior. However, despite the devastating impact, it might well be that employees do not always react negatively toward a leader’s abusive behavior. In the present study, we show that employees’ organizational identification and abusive supervision interact for employees’ perceived cohesion with their work group and their tendency to gossip about their leader. Employees confronted with a highly abusive supervisor had a stronger perceived cohesion and engaged in less gossiping behavior when they identified more strongly with their organization. Our findings illustrate that organizational identification functions as a buffer for those confronted with an abusive supervisor.


Abusive supervision Organizational identification Cohesion Gossip Rumor 


  1. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. New York, NY: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  2. Aquino, K., & Douglas, S. (2003). Identity threat and antisocial behavior in organizations: The moderating effects of individual differences, aggressive modeling, and hierarchical status. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 90, 195–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aquino, K., Tripp, T. M., & Bies, R. J. (2001). How employees respond to personal offense: The effects of blame attribution, victim status, and offender status on revenge and reconciliation in the workplace. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 52–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Archer, J., & Coyne, S. M. (2005). An integrated review of indirect, relational, and social aggression. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 9, 212–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Aryee, S., Chen, Z. X., Sun, L., & Debrah, Y. A. (2007). Antecedents and outcomes of abusive supervision: Test of a trickle-down model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 191–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ashforth, B. E. & Mael, F. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization. The Academy of Management Review, 14, 20–39.Google Scholar
  7. Baker, J. S., & Jones, M. A. (1996). The poison grapevine: How destructive are gossip and rumor in the workplace? Human Resource Development Quarterly, 7, 75–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bamberger, P. A., & Bacharach, S. B. (2006) Abusive supervision and subordinate problem drinking: Taking resistance, stress and subordinate personality into account. Human Relations, 59, 723–752.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bass, B. M. (1960). Leadership, psychology, and organizational behavior. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
  10. Beersma, B., & Van Kleef, G. A. (2011). How the grapevine keeps you in line: Gossip increases contributions to the group. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2, 642–649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bennett, R. J., & Robinson, S. L. (2003). The past, present, and future of workplace deviance research. In J. Greenberg (Ed.), Organizational behavior: The state of science (2nd ed., pp. 247–281). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  12. Bies, R. J., & Tripp, T. M. (1996). Beyond distrust: Getting even and the need for revenge. In R. M. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations (pp. 246–260). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  13. Bies, R. J., & Tripp, T. M. (1998). Two faces of the powerless: Coping with tyranny in organizations. In R. M. Kramer & M. A. Neale (Eds.), Power and influence in organizations (pp. 203–219). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  14. Biron, M. (2010). Negative reciprocity and the association between perceived organizational ethical values and organizational deviance. Human Relations, 63, 875–897.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  16. Bollen, K. A., & Hoyle, R. H. (1990). Perceived cohesion: A conceptual and empirical examination. Social Forces, 69, 479–504.Google Scholar
  17. Camps, J., Decoster, S., & Stouten, J. (2012). My share is fair, so I don’t care the moderating role of distributive justice in the perception of leaders’ self-serving behavior. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 11, 49–59.Google Scholar
  18. Chin, W. W., Salisbury, W. M. D., Pearson, A. W., & Stollak, M. J. (1999). Perceived cohesion in small groups: Adapting and testing the perceived cohesion scale in a small-group setting. Small Group Research, 30, 751–766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31, 874–900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. De Cremer, D. (2003). How self-conception may lead to inequality: Effect of hierarchical roles on the equality rule in organizational resource-sharing tasks. Group and Organization Management, 28, 282–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. DiFonzo, N., & Bordia, P. (2000). How top PR professionals handle hearsay: Corporate rumors, their effects, and strategies to manage them. Public Relations Review, 26, 173–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. DiFonzo, N., Bordia, P., & Rosnow, R. L. (1994). Reining in rumors. Organizational Dynamics, 23, 47–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Duffy, M. K., Ganster, D. C., & Pagon, M. (2002). Social undermining in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 331–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Dukerich, J. M., Golden, B. R., & Shortell, S. M. (2002). Beauty is in the eye of the beholder: The impact of organizational identification, identity, and image on the cooperative behaviors of physicians. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47, 507–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Dunbar, R. I. M. (2004). Gossip in evolutionary perspective. Review of General Psychology, 8,100–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Dupre, K. E., Inness, M., Connelly, C. E., Barling, J., & Hoption, C. (2006). Workplace aggression in teenage parttime employees. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 987–997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Dutton, J. E., Dukerich, J. M., & Harquail, C. V. (1994). Organizational images and member identification. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39, 239–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Elias, N., & Scotson, J. (1994). The established and the outsiders: A sociological inquiry into community problems (Rev. ed.). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  29. Evans, M. G. (1985). A Monte Carlo study of the effects of correlated method variance in moderated regression analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 36, 305–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Feinberg, M., Willer, R., Stellar, J., & Keltner, D. (2012). The Virtues of Gossip: Reputational information sharing as prosocial behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 1015–1030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Frost, P. J. (2004). Handling toxic emotions: New challenges for leaders and their organizations. Organizational Dynamics, 33, 111–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gilbert, J. A., & Tang, T. L. (1998). An examination of organizational trust antecedents. Public Personnel Management, 27, 321–338.Google Scholar
  33. Grosser, T. J., Lopez-Kidwell, V., & Labianca, G. (2010). A social network analysis of gossip in organizational life. Group and Organization Management, 35, 177–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hall, D. T., Schneider, B., & Nygren, H. T. (1970). Personal factors in organizational identification. Administrative Science Quarterly, 15, 176–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Harris, K. J., Kacmar, K. M., & Zivnuska, S. (2007). An investigation of abusive supervision as a predictor of performance and the meaning of work as a moderator of the relationship. Leadership Quarterly, 18, 252–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Harvey, P., Stoner, J., Hochwarter, W., & Kacmar, C. (2007). Coping with abusive supervision: The neutralizing effects of ingratiation and positive affect on negative employee outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 18, 264–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Henle, C. A., Giacalone, R. A., & Jurkiewicz, C. L. (2005). The role of ethical ideology in workplace deviance. Journal of Business Ethics, 56, 219–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hogan, R., Curphy, G. J., & Hogan, J. (1994). What we know about leadership—Effectiveness and personality. American Psychologist, 49, 493–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Hornstein, H. A. (1996). Brutal bosses and their prey. New York, NY: Riverhead Books.Google Scholar
  40. Inness, M., Barling, J., & Turner, N. (2005). Understanding supervisor-targeted aggression: A within-person, between-jobs design. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 731–739.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lewin, K. (1951). In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Field theory in social science: Selected theoretical papers. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  42. Lipponen, J., Wisse, B., & Perälä, J. (2011). Perceived justice and group identification: The moderating role of previous identification. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 10, 13–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lord, V. B. (1998). Characteristics of violence in state government. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 13, 489–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Mael, F., & Ashforth, B. E. (1992). Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13, 103–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Mayer, D. M., Kuenzi, M., Greenbaum, R., Bardes, M., & Salvador, R. (2009). How low does ethical leadership flow? Test of a trickle-down model. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Mayer, D. M., Thau, S., Workman, K. M., Van Dijke, M., & De Cremer, D. (2012). Leader mistreatment, employee hostility, and deviant behaviors: Integrating self-uncertainty and thwarted needs perspectives on deviance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 117, 24–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Mitchell, M. S., & Ambrose, M. L. (2007). Abusive supervision and workplace deviance and the moderating effects of negative reciprocity beliefs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1159–1168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Morgeson, F. P., & Humphrey, S. E. (2006). The work design questionnaire (WDQ): Developing and validating a comprehensive measure for assessing job design and the nature of work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 1321–1339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Mullen, B., & Copper, C. (1994). The relation between group cohesiveness and performance: An integration. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 210–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Nevo, O., Nevo, B., & Derech-Zehavi, A. (1993). The development of the tendency to gossip questionnaire: Construct and concurrent validation for a sample of Israeli college students. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 973–981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Noon, M., & Delbridge, R. (1993). News from behind my hand: Gossip in organizations. Organization Studies, 14, 23–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. M., Lee, J., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method variance in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903.Google Scholar
  53. Price, S. L., & Mueller, C. W. (1981). Handbook of organizational measurement. Marshfield, MA: Pitman.Google Scholar
  54. Riketta, M. (2005). Organizational identification: A meta-analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 66, 358–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Robinson, S. L., & Greenberg, J. (1998). Employees behaving badly: Dimensions, determinants, and dilemmas in the study of workplace deviance. In C. L. Cooper & D. M. Rousseau (Eds.), Trends in organizational behavior (Vol. 5, pp. 1–30). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  56. Rosnow, R. L. (1977). Gossip and marketplace psychology. Journal of Communication, 27, 158–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Samuelson, C. D., & Messick, D. M. (1995). When do people want to change the rules for allocating shared resources? In D. A. Schroeder (Ed.), Social dilemmas: Perspectives on individuals and groups (pp. 143–162). Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.Google Scholar
  58. Schat, A., Frone, M., & Kelloway, E. (2006). Prevalence of workplace aggression in the U.S. workforce: Findings from a national research. In E. Kelloway, J. Barling, & J. Hurrell (Eds.), Handbook of workplace violence (pp. 47–89). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  59. Shader K., Broome, M. E., West, M. E., & Nash, M. (2001). Factors influencing satisfaction and anticipated turnover for nurses in an academic medical center. Journal of Nursing Administration, 31, 210–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Soeters, J., & Van Iterson, A. (2002). Blame and praise gossip in organizations: Established, outsiders, and the civilizing process. In A. van Iterson, W. Mastenbroek, T. Newton & D. Smith (Eds.), The civilized organization: Norbert Elias and the future of organization studies (pp. 25–40). Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  61. Stellmacher, J., Van Dick, R., Wagner, U., & Lemmer, G. (2003). Gruppenidentifikation und gruppenleistung [Group identification and group performance]. Paper presented at Tagung experimentell arbeitender Psychologen, TeaP, Kiel, Germany.Google Scholar
  62. Stellmachter, J., Van Dick, R., & Wagner, U. (2002). The importance of group identification in task performances in a real-world context. Poster session presented at the 13th General Meeting of the European Association of Experimental Social Psychology, San Sebastian, Spain.Google Scholar
  63. Stogdill, R. M. (1972). Group productivity, drive, and cohesiveness. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 8, 26–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Stouten, J., De Cremer, D., & Van Dijk, E. (2005). I’m doing the best I can (for myself): Leadership and variance of harvesting in resource dilemmas. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 9, 205–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Stouten, J., & Tripp, T. M. (2009). Claiming more than equality: Should leaders ask for forgiveness? The Leadership Quarterly, 20, 287–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Tajfel, H. (1978). Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  67. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In M. J. Hatch & M. Schultz (Eds.), Organizational identity: A reader (pp. 56–65). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  68. Tepper, B. J. (2000). Consequences of abusive supervision. The Academy of Management Journal, 43, 178–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Tepper, B. J. (2007). Abusive supervision in work organizations: Review, synthesis, and research agenda. Journal of Management, 33, 261–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Tepper, B. J., Carr, J. C., Breaux, D. M., Geider, S., Hu, C. Y., & Hua, W. (2009). Abusive supervision, intentions to quit, and employees’ workplace deviance: A power/dependence analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 109, 156–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Tepper, B. J., Duffy, M. K., Henle, C. A., & Lambert, L. S. (2006). Procedural justice, victim precipitation, and abusive supervision. Personnel Psychology, 59, 101–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Tepper, B. J., Duffy, M. K., Hoobler, J., & Ensley, M. D. (2004). Moderators of the relationships between coworkers’ organizational citizenship behavior and fellow employees’ attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 455–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Tepper, B. J., Duffy, M. K., & Shaw, J. D. (2001). Personality moderators of the relationship between abusive supervision and subordinates resistance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 974–983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Thau, S., & Mitchell, M. S. (2010). 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, 95, 1009–1031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Turner, J. C. (1982). Towards a cognitive redefinition of the social group. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Social identity and intergroup relations (pp. 15–40). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  76. Turner, J. C. (1984). Social identification and psychological group formation. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), The social dimension: European developments in social psychology (pp. 518–538). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  77. Turner, J. C. (1985). Social categorization and the self-concept: A social cognitive theory of group behavior. In E. J. Lawler (Ed.), Advances in group processes: Theory and research (pp. 77–122). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  78. Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  79. Uhl-Bien, M., & Carsten, M. K. (2007) Being ethical when the boss is not. Organizational Dynamics, 36, 187–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Van Dick, R., Ullrich, J. & Tissington, P. A. (2006). Working under a black cloud: How to sustain organizational identification after a merger. British Journal of Management, 17, 69–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Van Dick, R., & Wagner, U. (2002). Social identification among school teachers: Dimensions, foci, and correlates. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 11, 129–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Van Knippenberg, D., Van Dick, R. & Tavares, S. (2007). Social identity and social exchange: Identification, support and withdrawal from the job. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37, 457–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Van Knippenberg, D., & Van Schie, E. C. M. (2000). Foci and correlates of organizational identification. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73, 137–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Wang, W., Mao, J., Wu, W. & Liu, J. (2012). Abusive supervision and workplace deviance: The mediating role of interactional justice and the moderating role of power distance. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 50, 43–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Wech, B. A., Mossholder, K. W.,Steel, R. P., & Bennett, N. (1998). Does work group cohesiveness affect individuals’ performance and organizational commitment? A cross-level examination. Small Group Research, 29, 472–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Wu, C., Neubert, M. J., & Yi, X. (2007). Transformational leadership, cohesion perceptions, and employee cynicism about organizational change: The mediating role of justice perceptions. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 43, 327–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Xu, E., Huang, X., Lam, C. K., & Miao, Q. (2012). Abusive supervision and work behaviors: The mediating role of LMX. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33, 531–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Yukl, G. (1998). Leadership in organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  89. Zellars, K. L., Tepper, B. J., & Duffy, M. K. (2002). Abusive supervision and subordinates’ organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 1068–1076.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stijn Decoster
    • 1
  • Jeroen Camps
    • 1
  • Jeroen Stouten
    • 1
  • Lore Vandevyvere
    • 1
  • Thomas M. Tripp
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of LeuvenLeuvenBelgium
  2. 2.Washington State UniversityVancouverUSA

Personalised recommendations