Zia, Su yan; Ahmed, Kaleem
A icle
Employee c ea i i y de e ence by abusi e supe ision
h ough he lens (media ion) o employee silence
Cogen Business & Managemen
P o ided in Coope a ion wi h:
Taylo & F ancis G oup
Sugges ed Ci a ion: Zia, Su yan; Ahmed, Kaleem (2024) : Employee c ea i i y de e ence by abusi e
supe ision h ough he lens (media ion) o employee silence, Cogen Business & Managemen ,
ISSN 2331-1975, Taylo & F ancis, Abingdon, Vol. 11, Iss. 1, pp. 1-17,
h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/23311975.2024.2350787
This Ve sion is a ailable a :
h ps://hdl.handle.ne /10419/326269
S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen:
Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen
Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den.
Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle
Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich
machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen.
So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen
(insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en,
gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do
genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e.
Te ms o use:
Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you pe sonal
and schola ly pu poses.
You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial pu poses, o
exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem publicly a ailable on he
in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise use he documen s in public.
I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open Con en
Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you may exe cise
u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed licence.
h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/
Cogen Business & Managemen
ISSN: 2331-1975 (Online) Jou nal homepage: www. and online.com/jou nals/oabm20
Employee c ea i i y de e ence by abusi e
supe ision h ough he lens (media ion) o
employee silence
Su yan Zia & Kaleem Ahmed
To ci e his a icle: Su yan Zia & Kaleem Ahmed (2024) Employee c ea i i y de e ence by
abusi e supe ision h ough he lens (media ion) o employee silence, Cogen Business &
Managemen , 11:1, 2350787, DOI: 10.1080/23311975.2024.2350787
To link o his a icle: h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/23311975.2024.2350787
© 2024 The Au ho (s). Published by In o ma
UK Limi ed, ading as Taylo & F ancis
G oup
View supplemen a y ma e ial
Published online: 13 Jun 2024.
Submi you a icle o his jou nal
A icle iews: 1135
View ela ed a icles
View C ossma k da a
Ci ing a icles: 1 View ci ing a icles
Full Te ms & Condi ions o access and use can be ound a
h ps://www. and online.com/ac ion/jou nalIn o ma ion?jou nalCode=oabm20
ManageMen | ReseaRch aR icle
Cogen Business & ManageMen
2024, VoL. 11, no. 1, 2350787
Employee c ea i i y de e ence by abusi e supe ision h ough he
lens (media ion) o employee silence
su yan Ziaa and Kaleem ahmedb
aDepa men o Managemen sciences, uni e si y o Laho e, guj a , Pakis an; bManagemen sciences Depa men , uni e si y
o Laho e, guj a , Pakis an
ABSTRACT
Based on he in e ac ionis pe spec i e o o ganiza ional c ea i i y, conse a ion o
esou ce heo y and social exchange heo y, his s udy inds ou he con ex ual ac o s
om he social con ex o he o ganiza ions ha a ec he c ea i i y o an employee.
Da a om he 443 enginee s o so wa e houses in Pakis an is collec ed h ough
ques ionnai es. sPss e sion 25 is used o demog aphics, in e nal eliabili y and
media ion h ough hayes mac o p ocess. aMOs26 is used o in e nal consis ency,
con e gen alidi y and disc iminan alidi y. hayes mac o p ocess model 4 is used o
media ion analysis. Findings ha e con i med ha abusi e supe ision is one o he majo
easons behind he dec ease in employee c ea i i y. employee silence pa ially media es
hei ela ionship as he ela ionship be ween abusi e supe ision and employee
c ea i i y s ill emains signi ican . he media ing ole o employee silence in he
ela ionship be ween abusi e supe ision and employee c ea i i y is an impo an
no el y o his s udy. se e al u u e di ec ions abou pa ial media ion, measu ing scales
and male olen c ea i i y a e discussed in he u u e di ec ions sec ion o he s udy.
IMPACT STATEMENT
c ea i i y is an impo an ool o o ganiza ions o s ay compe i i e in his globalized
e e changing business en i onmen . i is impo an o igu e ou he ac o s in luencing
i . abusi e supe ision is among one o hose ac o s. his s udy inds ou he
ela ionship be ween abusi e supe ision and employee c ea i i y. ano he impo an
aspec is abou inding he pa h/mechanism h ough which c ea i i y o an employee
is a ec ed.
his s udy is impo an o o ganiza ions di ec ly connec ed wi h c ea i i y. a mo e in
dep h e iew o hei supe ision sys ems can help o inc ease he c ea i i y o hei
employees and hence can imp o e he pe o mance o hose o ganiza ions. app op ia e
measu es o o e come such issues a e also sugges ed in p ac ical implica ions sec ion
o his s udy.
1. In oduc ion
“P e e (1998), a managemen gu u a S an o d, w o e abou Jobs’ managemen s yle: One day, Jobs i ed a pe son
in managemen — his was called “being S e ed” a Apple. As ha manage was cleaning ou his o ice la e ha
day, “Jobs came by and asked him wha he was doing. ‘P epa ing o lea e,’ was he eply. ‘Oh’ said Jobs, ‘I did no
eally mean i , I was jus upse . You’ e ehi ed’”. Did Jobs use sa casm o inc ease c ea i i y o bo h exp esse and
ecipien s (huang e al., 2015)? Was Jobs’ p o oca i e episode (isaacson, 2012) a eal example o abusi e supe i-
sion ( eppe , 2000)? Was i e hical o employees o ha e a cons an ea o losing jobs? Did i hu ic ims and
eamma es’ eelings and c ea i i y?” (Jiang e al., 2019)
inno a ion is he key o success o o ganiza ions in his globalized wo ld (Qin e al., 2020; s amm, 2008).
inno a ion is abou he implemen a ion, and c ea i i y is abou gene a ing hose ideas o be
© 2024 he au ho (s). Published by in o ma uK Limi ed, ading as aylo & F ancis g oup
CONTACT su yan Zia su [email protected] Depa men o Managemen sciences, uni e si y o Laho e, sa godha Road nea
na ional Bank, guj a 50700, Pakis an
P esen a ilia ion o Kaleem ahmed: assis an P o esso , he uni e si y o Chenab, guj a , Pakis an.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/23311975.2024.2350787
his is an open access a icle dis ibu ed unde he e ms o he C ea i e Commons a ibu ion License (h p://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/), which
pe mi s un es ic ed use, dis ibu ion, and ep oduc ion in any medium, p o ided he o iginal wo k is p ope ly ci ed. he e ms on which his a icle has been
published allow he pos ing o he accep ed Manusc ip in a eposi o y by he au ho (s) o wi h hei consen .
ARTICLE HISTORY
Recei ed 22 Ma ch 2022
Re ised 3 Ma ch 2024
accep ed 29 ap il 2024
SUBJECTS
in e pe sonal P ocesses &
communica ion;
Pe cep ion; c ea i i y;
inno a ion Managemen ;
leade ship; employmen
Rela ions; asian Business
KEYWORDS
abusi e supe ision;
employee c ea i i y;
employee silence; social
exchange heo y;
inno a ion; hayes mac o
p ocess; conse a ion o
esou ce heo y
REVIEWING EDITOR
hui en (helen) cai,
Middlesex Uni e si y
Business school, Uni ed
Kingdom
2 s. Zia anD K. ahMeD
implemen ed in he inno a ion phase (s amm, 2008). so, being an in eg al pa o inno a ion (amabile
e al., 1996; Joo e al., 2013; s amm, 2008), employee c ea i i y is conside ed as an essen ial componen
o an o ganiza ion’s su i al and compe i ion (liu e al., 2017; shalley e al., 2004; s amm, 2008). i was
de ined as he ‘p oduc ion o no el and use ul ideas’ (amabile e al., 1996, p. 1155).
he e a e many p ominen models o heo e ical pe spec i es o c ea i i y and inno a ion (ande son
e al., 2014). he in e ac ionis pe spec i e o o ganiza ional c ea i i y (Woodman e al., 1993) is among
hem. acco ding o his model o c ea i i y, an indi idual is no a p edic o o c ea i i y alone (ac o
cen e app oach), no he con ex is a sole p edic o (con ex cen e app oach), bu indeed bo h ac o
and con ex a e impo an o c ea i i y (Zhou & hoe e , 2014). a pe son is an ac o who will loa a new
and use ul idea. Bu he con ex ual ac o s o condi ions whe e ha pe son is wo king also ma e .
Di e en s udies ha e epo ed ha in e ac ion in hese wo esul s in an inc ease o dec ease in c ea i -
i y (shalley e al., 2009; Yuan & Woodman, 2010; Zhou & shalley, 2010).
c ea i i y’s con ex ual ac o s a he indi idual le el include ask con ex s and social con ex s (ande son
e al., 2014). in a social con ex , leade ship and supe ision a e conside ed as mos in luen ial con ex ual
ac o s o c ea i i y ( ie ney, 2008). in li e a u e, mixed e ec s o hem ha e been epo ed. Fo example,
he impac o ans o ma ional leade ship on he c ea i i y o an employee was posi i e (Bono & Judge,
2003; gong e al., 2009; shin & Zhou, 2003), bu on he o he hand, he e is a s udy in which i is
epo ed ha impac o ans o ma ional leade ship is posi i e i he e is high psychological empowe -
men o he ollowe does exis (Pie e se e al., 2010).
he same is he case wi h supe ision. Many beha io s o he supe iso a e epo ed o be ha ing a
posi i e impac on he c ea i i y o hei employees including empowe men beha io o he supe iso
(Zhang & Ba ol, 2010), suppo o he supe iso (Madja e al., 2002), he bene olence o he supe iso
(Wang & cheng, 2010). Bu o abusi e supe ision, he e a e mixed esul s. Fo example (liu e al., 2012)
had epo ed a ickle-down e ec and (lee e al., 2013) had epo ed a cu ilinea ela ionship be ween
abusi eness o supe iso and employee c ea i i y. Va ia ions in he esul s o hese wo s udies had
s a ed a discussion abou he na u e o he ela ionship be ween he abusi eness o he supe iso and
he c ea i i y o an employee. o add ess his issue mo i a ion was in oduced as a media o by Zhang
e al. (2014), o ind ou he ue mechanism by applying he componen ial heo y o c ea i i y. he
esea ch indings e ealed he nega i e ela ionship be ween he abusi eness o he supe iso and he
c ea i i y o an employee. in a ecen s udy by shen e al. (2020), eedback-seeking beha io was in o-
duced as a media o . he explana o y ac o s in his s udy a e he pa ial media ion o eedback-seeking
beha io and a small po ion o a iance explained by he p edic o s (shen e al., 2020). he e a e he-
o e ical a gumen s in he li e a u e ha sugges ha i is o immense impo ance o unde s and he
ela ionship be ween abusi e supe ision and he c ea i i y o an employee (gu e al., 2016; liu e al.,
2012; shen e al., 2020). so ha mo e abou he black box o his ela ionship could be ound ou .
so, his is he ime o ein es iga e he na u e o ela ionship among hese wo a iables. On he basis
o social exchange heo y, i is assumed ha he ela ionship be ween an employee and his/he supe -
iso is an exchangeable ela ionship (c opanzano e al., 2017). acco ding o g eco e al. (2019), jus like
posi i e ecip oci y, nega i e ecip oci y is also exchanged be ween he supe iso and employee.
c ea i i y is a psychological phenomenon. he co e o a i ude is e alua ion (eagly & chaiken, 1993).
abusi e supe ision hinde s he a o able cogni i e de elopmen o employees owa d he o ganiza ion
( eppe , 2000). Response o he employee owa d he abusi e supe ision is no alike. so, i is necessa y o
enhance he unde s anding abou des uc i e beha io s and hei esponses (Mi chell & amb ose, 2012;
eppe , 2007). Due o us a ion, disillusionmen , disappoin men , lack o us and con emp owa d o ga-
niza ion, employees will no beha e app op ia ely hey can become silen (Kiewi z e al., 2016; Xu e al., 2015).
hence, his is he ime o ein es iga e he ela ionship be ween hese wo a iables and ind ou he
mechanism h ough which employee’s c ea i i y is in luenced by abusi e supe ision.
2. Li e a u e e iew
2.1. Employee c ea i i y
he noun c ea i i y is de i ed om la in wo d ‘c ea us’ meaning ‘ o make, p oduce’ and i is ela ed o
‘c esce e’ which means ‘a ise, g ow’ (Kampylis & Val anen, 2010). as a scien i ic e m, he oo s o his
cOgen BUsiness & ManageMen 3
wo d a e in psychology (guil o d, 1950; Pii o, 2004; s ein, 1953). he p ominen p esiden ial add ess o
guil o d in 1950 a ame ican Psychological associa ion become a plin h o a eaching esea ch wo k in
he ield o c ea i i y, whe e he highligh ed ha he e a e me ely 186 om 121,000 en ies in di e en
Psychological abs ac s ha deal wi h c ea i e imagina ion (Ba on & ha ing on, 1981).
acco ding o him ‘… e e s o he abili ies ha a e mos cha ac e is ic o c ea i e people. c ea i e
abili ies de e mine whe he he indi idual has he powe o exhibi c ea i e beha io o a no ewo hy
deg ee’ (guil o d, 1950, p. 444).
his de ini ion o c ea i i y was highligh ing i as a concep simila like in elligence (i.e. i is some hing
wha in elligence es s measu e). Bu i di e s om i , because i is no me ely bounded o ai s o a
pe son and cogni i e hinking o in ellec ual unc ioning (B own, 1989). in ac , i is complex mix o
pe sonali y ac o s, mo i a ional condi ions, en i onmen al ac o s and e en p oduc s (Feldhusen & goh,
1995). F om 1950 o 1961 mo e han a dozens o books and almos 300 a icles we e published on his
subjec which nulli ies he pas no ions ha ‘c ea i i y is some hing mys e ious’, ‘people o bo n o be
c ea i e o no ’ and ‘c ea i i y is mo e a way o eeling han a way o hinking’. Rhodes (1961) analyzed
di e en de ini ions o c ea i i y om hese e e ences and came o know ha , hey a e no mu ually
exclusi e and hence, a ange hem in ou s ands, named as 4 p’s o c ea i i y comp ising pe son, p o-
cess, p oduc and p ess (Rhodes, 1961). he e m ‘Pe son’ (pe son as human being) included in o ma ion
o pe sonali y, empe amen , in ellec , ai s, a i udes, habi s, alue sys ems, sel -concep , de ense mech-
anism and beha io . he e m ‘P ocess’ (men al p ocesses) applied o pe cep ion, mo i a ion, hinking,
lea ning and communica ion. he e m ‘P ess’ was e e ed abou he ela ionship o humans wi h hei
en i onmen , i.e. (en i onmen al p ess on he pe son and he /his men al p ocesses). he e m ‘P oduc ’
(exp ession o ideas in he o m o language o c a ) deno es he communica ion o hough s o o he
people h ough wo ds, s one, clay, pain o any ma e ial. acco ding o him hese s ands a e in e wo en
which is indica ing ha how much complex he c ea i i y is and his is he ime o de ine i wi h p eci-
sion and iden i y he ac o s associa ed wi h c ea i e p ocess (Rhodes, 1961).
F om his concep ion o c ea i i y one hing become clea o he esea che s ha i is no me ely a
cogni i e unc ioning o p ocessing (Feldhusen & goh, 1995). la e on i h p ‘Pe suasion’ (encou age
o he s o he alue o one’s wo k) was p oposed by simon on (simon on, 1990).
as i is a complex phenomenon (Feldhusen & goh, 1995; gowan, 1972), di e en models we e p oposed
by esea che s o concep ualize c ea i i y. six guiding ideas o c ea i i y (albe , 1990), heo e ical concep-
ion o c ea i i y by amabile (1990), in e ac ionis model o c ea i e beha io (Woodman & schoen eld ,
1989), (B own, 1989)’s model and model o p oduc i e hinking by e inge e al. (1990). Bu 4 Ps model
o Rhodes (1961) seems like o be emained as mos sui able amewo k (Feldhusen & goh, 1995).
P ominen de ini ions o c ea i i y emphasized he inal esponse o end p oduc and s a ed c ea i i y
is abou gene a ing no el and use ul ideas (amabile, 1988; s ein, 1974). he eason behind using he
p oduc -o ien ed de ini ion o c ea i i y is ha i s measu es a e mo e s aigh o wa d (amabile, 1982). i
an indi idual’s ideas conside ed o be eliably iden i ied, hen hough p ocesses, en i onmen al ac o s
and a pe son’s quali ies can be looked a co esponding o he p oduc ion o hose p oduc s o ideas
(amabile, 1988). hence, his widely accep ed concep ion o c ea i i y will be used in his s udy. i is
de ined as he ‘p oduc ion o no el and use ul ideas’ (amabile e al., 1996, p. 1155).
F om his de ini ion he concep o c ea i i y becomes clea ha wha i is by concep ion. i is an
impo an ool o o ganiza ions o su i e and s ay compe i i e. Due o i s immense impo ance o
o ganiza ions in he globalized and e e -changing business en i onmen , esea ch ad ances on his con-
cep om he cla i ica ion o i s concep ions o di e en ac o s ha can in luence c ea i i y in ei he
inc easing o dec easing i .
he e a e many p ominen models o heo ies o c ea i i y (ande son e al., 2014). he in e ac ionis
pe spec i e o o ganiza ional c ea i i y (Woodman e al., 1993) is among hem. acco ding o his model
o c ea i i y, an indi idual is no a p edic o o c ea i i y alone (ac o cen e app oach), no he con ex
alone is a sole p edic o (con ex cen e app oach), bu indeed, bo h ac o and con ex a e impo an o
c ea i i y. a pe son is an ac o who will loa a new and use ul idea, bu he con ex ual ac o s o con-
di ions whe e ha pe son is wo king also ma e . Di e en s udies ha e epo ed ha in e ac ion in
hese wo esul s in inc easing o dec easing c ea i i y (shalley e al., 2009; Yuan & Woodman, 2010;
Zhou & shalley, 2010).
4 s. Zia anD K. ahMeD
leade ship and supe ision a e impo an , in luen ial con ex ual ac o s o c ea i i y (ande son e al.,
2014; liu e al., 2016; ie ney, 2008).
2.2. Abusi e supe ision (as)
he abusi eness o a supe iso o en damages he o ganiza ions in e ms o he ou pu o hei employ-
ees. supe iso s migh be sel -con iden o ha e manage ial skills, bu hey a e mis aken abou he needs
and wan s o he o ganiza ion and employees (Bassman & london, 1993). ash o h (1994) e e ed o i as
a y annical boss who unde mines and idicules hose epo ing o hem. Bassman and london (1993)
sugges ed a ious easons and consequences o being abusi e, bu hei s udy lacks empi ical suppo . in
ano he s udy, abusi e beha io in he wo kplace (Keashly e al., 1994) is explained as hos ile beha io s
ha could be e bal and non- e bal and a e aimed a deg ading o he s o ensu e compliance. acco ding
o hem, in abusi e beha io , physical con ac is excluded and om e bal wi h non- e bal, hey mean
wo ds wi h annoying exp essions, one o he sound, sc eaming, de oga o y names and explosi e ou bu s s.
Keashly e al. (1994) s udy esul s, supe iso s we e mos ce ainly he ac o s o such beha io s wi h
57.8% and cowo ke s wi h 34.8% we e a second. hence, con i ming ha he subo dina es we e he
mo e p edic i e a ge s o abusi e beha io s, bu subjec i i y, sub le y and na u alness we e poin ed as
an issue o empi ical documen a ion o such beha io s, which can be el and cos ly (Keashly e al., 1994).
P io o eppe ’s (2000) wo k, i was conside ed as a simila amewo k like pe y y anny (ash o h,
1994), wo kplace ic imiza ion (aquino & B ad ield, 2000), wo kplace bullying (hoel & coope , 2001),
supe iso agg ession (scha e al., 2006), supe iso unde mining (Du y e al., 2002) and nega i e men-
o ing expe iences (eby e al., 2000). he di e en ia ed his cons uc om o he s based on i s di ec ions,
physical hos ili y, con en o he han hos ili y and de ini ion con aining e e ence o in ended ou comes
and s a ed i as a will ul beha io ( eppe , 2007). a e eppe ’s (2000) wo k, many s udies we e con-
duc ed o explo e he consequences o he abusi eness o a supe iso and he p eceden s o i .
Disc epancies in i s de ining, heo e ical g ounds o subo dina es’ pe o mance, a i ude and
measu emen o abusi e supe ision we e ul illed ( eppe , 2000). he explained i as he ‘subo dina es’
pe cep ions o he ex en o which supe iso s engage in he sus ained display o hos ile e bal and
non e bal beha io s, excluding physical con ac ’ ( eppe , 2000, p. 178).
2.3. Employee silence (ES)
Many de ini ions and concep ualiza ions e e o i as he delibe a e wi hholding o impo an in o ma-
ion by an employee, like conce ns, ques ions and e en sugges ions (B ins ield, 2013; angi ala &
Ramanujam, 2008). so, om he e, one hing becomes clea i is no abou he ailu e o communica ion
esul ing om ha ing no hing o say o mindlessness (Van Dyne e al., 2003). De eloping a alid con-
s uc om such concep ualiza ion o silence was a di icul ask. Di e en a emp s we e made based
on clima e ac o s such as supe iso ’s a i ude owa d silence and employee’s pe cep ion o manage-
men , he ex en o exp essions o managemen and communica ion oppo uni ies (Vakola & Bou adas,
2005), employee’s in en ion o wi hhold in o ma ion ( angi ala & Ramanujam, 2008; Van Dyne e al.,
2003), employee’s assumed belie s abou he isk o speaking a wo k (De e & edmondson, 2011) and
g oup oice clima e (Mo ison e al., 2011). hese e o s we e use ul in ad ancing he unde s anding
abou he silence o an employee bu lacked quan i a i e in es iga ion o employee silence such as i s
na u e, pe asi eness and implica ions o i s di e en ypes.
P e ious esea ch ocused on he isks associa ed wi h speaking o oice (De e & edmondson, 2011).
hence, psychological sa e y has equen ly been used o media e be ween an eceden s and silence beha -
io (De e & edmondson, 2011). Bu e idences in li e a u e con i ms he p esence o o he mo i es oo,
a he han isk a oidance only (Mo ison e al., 2011; Van Dyne e al., 2003). Many s udies ha e conside ed
i a delibe a e supp ession o meaning ul in o ma ion, ques ions, ideas and conce ns ( angi ala &
Ramanujam, 2008). holding o such in o ma ion is based on di e en mo i es. Resea che s ha e e e ed o
cOgen BUsiness & ManageMen 5
i as a mul idimensional concep (Pinde & ha los, 2001; Van Dyne e al., 2003). acco ding o hem, hese
mo i es p o ide meaning o he beha io o silence and di e en ia e i om a me e conside a ion as he
nonexis ence o oice. hence, a numbe o silence beha io s we e p oposed in he li e a u e on he basis
o hese mo i es like de ensi e, acquiescence and p osocial (Pinde & ha los, 2001; Van Dyne e al., 2003).
Many esea che s (Knoll & Dick, 2013; Mo ison & Milliken, 2000; Pinde & ha los, 2001; Van Dyne
e al., 2003) e e ed o i as a mul idimensional cons uc and classi ied i in ou ypes: (1) quiescen
silence ‘disengagemen s imula ed om ea ’; (2) acquiescen silence ‘i is a disengaged beha io o an
employee oused om he sense o eeling o esigna ion’; (3) p o-social silence ‘i is an o he s o ien ed
beha io ac i a ed by he coope a i e mo i e’ and (4) oppo unis ic silence ‘supp ession o in o ma ion
o own ad an age by an employee. la e on, B ins ield (2013) in oduced a new classi ica ion based
on supe iso -subo dina e ela ionships. acco ding o his s udy, he e a e six ypes o silence, including
de ian silence ‘hiding o impo an in o ma ion’; de ensi e silence ‘i is simila o quiescen silence’;
ela ional silence ‘in en ions o sa e he ela ionship’; ine ec ual silence ‘simila o acquiescen silence’;
disengaged silence ‘a lack o conce n’ and di iden silence ‘due o lack o con idence o sel -doub ’.
acco ding o Mo ison (2011, 2014), employee silence is e y common in o ganiza ions a he
wo kplace and e y highly dys unc ional.
2.4. Abusi e supe ision and employee c ea i i y
he e a e six p ominen models o heo ies o c ea i i y (ande son e al., 2014). he in e ac ionis pe -
spec i e o o ganiza ional c ea i i y (Woodman e al., 1993) is among hem. acco ding o his model o
c ea i i y, an indi idual is no a p edic o o c ea i i y alone (ac o cen e app oach), no he con ex
alone is a sole p edic o (con ex cen e app oach), bu indeed, bo h ac o and con ex a e impo an o
c ea i i y. a pe son is an ac o who will loa a new and use ul idea. Bu he con ex ual ac o s o con-
di ions whe e ha pe son is wo king also ma e . Di e en s udies ha e epo ed ha in e ac ion in
hese wo esul s in inc easing o dec easing c ea i i y (shalley e al., 2009; Yuan & Woodman, 2010;
Zhou & shalley, 2010). Because i is he p econdi ion o inno a ion (Joo e al., 2013), i is o immense
impo ance o explo e o in es iga e he e ec s o nega i e con ex ual ac o s on he a i udes and
beha io s o he employees (Baumeis e e al., 2001).
a supe iso ’s abusi eness is one o hose con ex ual ac o s (liu e al., 2016). Due o i s a - eaching
impac and p e alence ( eppe e al., 2017), in es iga ion o he impac o abusi eness o a supe i-
so on he c ea i i y o an employee is impo an o bo h easons, i.e. heo e ical and empi ical
impo ance (shen e al., 2020). i is s a ed as ‘subo dina es’ pe cep ions o he ex en o which supe -
iso s engage in he sus ained display o hos ile e bal and non e bal beha io s, excluding physical
con ac ’ ( eppe , 2000, p. 178).
P io esea ch on ou comes o abusi e supe ision om an employee’s pe spec i e is wo old (liu e al.,
2016). (1) i is abou being he cause o nega i e psychological s a es and beha io s in employees like anx-
ie y, s ess, emo ional exhaus ion, esis ance, de iance and u no e (Ma inko e al., 2013; eppe , 2000,
2007; eppe e al., 2017) and (2) is ela ed o employee pe o mance (ou comes o hese s a es and beha -
io s) like c ea i i y (lee e al., 2013; liu e al., 2012; Zhang e al., 2014). Resul s o he di e en s udies in he
li e a u e indica e he con lic in na u e o he ela ionship be ween hese wo a iables (gu e al., 2016; liu
e al., 2016). some s udies indica e ha he ela ionship be ween hem is nega i e (liu e al., 2012; Zhang
e al., 2014), while o he s indica e ha he ela ionship be ween hese a iables is cu ilinea (lee e al.,
2013). so, his is he ime o ein es iga e he na u e o he ela ionship be ween hese wo a iables. Based
on he social exchange heo y, i is pos ula ed ha he ela ionship be ween an employee and hei supe -
iso is exchangeable (c opanzano e al., 2017). acco ding o g eco e al. (2019), nega i e ecip oci y is also
exchanged be ween he supe iso and employee, jus like posi i e ecip oci y. hence, because o he abu-
si eness o he supe iso , employees will exhibi low c ea i i y pe o mance in exchange (shen e al., 2020).
H1: he e is a nega i e ela ionship be ween he abusi eness o a supe iso and he c ea i i y o an employee.
6 s. Zia anD K. ahMeD
2.5. Abusi e supe ision and employee silence
c ea i i y is a psychological phenomenon (s amm, 2008). he co e o a i ude is e alua ion (eagly &
chaiken, 1993). abusi e supe ision hinde s he a o able cogni i e de elopmen o employees owa d
he o ganiza ion ( eppe , 2000). he esponse o he employee owa d he abusi e supe ision is no alike.
so, i is c ucial o enhance he unde s anding o des uc i e beha io s and hei esponses (Mi chell &
amb ose, 2012; eppe , 2007). Due o us a ion, disillusionmen , disappoin men , lack o us and con-
emp owa d he o ganiza ion, employees will no beha e app op ia ely, i.e. hey may eac o ha abu-
si eness in e ms o oice o emain silen (Mo ison, 2014; Pinde & ha los, 2001; Van Dyne e al., 2003).
li e a u e p o ides e idences ha employees may emain silen o e such beha io , i.e. abusi eness. he
esul s o many s udies ha e epo ed a posi i e ela ionship be ween he abusi eness o supe iso s and
employee silence (guo e al., 2018; Kiewi z e al., 2016; Xu e al., 2015). i is he e o e hypo hesized ha :
H2: he e is a posi i e ela ionship be ween he abusi eness o a supe iso and employee silence.
2.6. Employee silence and employee c ea i i y
employee silence is engende ed o di e en easons, including abusi e supe ision among one o hem.
an employee will emain silen depending on he mo i es behind i , as discussed ea lie . his silence will
become he eason o he dec ease in an employee’s c ea i i y. li e a u e p o ides e idence ha c ea i -
i y is la gely in luenced by employees’ silence (De e & e iño, 2010; Mo ison, 2014; Van Dyne &
lePine, 1998).
he e a e e idences in he li e a u e ha he ela ionship be ween employee silence and c ea i i y is
nega i e (Milliken e al., 2003; Mo ison & Milliken, 2000). hence, i is hypo hesized ha
H3: he e is a nega i e ela ionship be ween employee silence and employee c ea i i y.
2.7. Role o employee silence as a media o
ini ial s udies on abusi e supe ision highligh ed i as a p ecu so o he nega i e ou comes ( eppe ,
2000), bu la e on, mo e e ined models we e p oposed (Wayne e al., 2008). abusi e supe ision is
conside ed he single yoke o a chain in an agonis ic wo kplace e en s (hooble & B ass, 2006). he e is
s ill much mo e o ind ou ha how employee c ea i i y is a ec ed by abusi e supe ision (chan &
Mcallis e , 2014), as he indings o he p e ious s udies indica e ha he ela ionship among hese wo
a iables is no as simple as i seems o be (liu e al., 2012; Zhang e al., 2014). so, di e en media o s
ha e been in oduced in he li e a u e o in es iga e i (gu e al., 2016; han e al., 2017; Jahanzeb e al.,
2019; liu e al., 2016; Meng e al., 2017; shen e al., 2020; Zhang e al., 2014). he exis ence o pa ial
media ion in hei esul s (liu e al., 2016; shen e al., 2020) indica es some o he a iables media ing
his ela ionship. he e a e heo e ical a gumen s in he li e a u e ha sugges ha i is necessa y o
unde s and he ela ionship be ween he abusi eness o he supe iso and he c ea i i y o an employee
(gu e al., 2016; liu e al., 2012; shen e al., 2020).
so, o unde s and his ela ionship, employee silence is in oduced as a media o . Due o abusi e
supe ision, an employee will become silen . his silence will be in en ional as in es iga ed by he many
esea che s ha due silence is no jus an absence o oice o lack o con idence. he na a i e adop ed
in his s udy is based on he conse a ion o esou ce heo y ha due o he abusi eness o he supe -
iso , an employee will become silen and will no deli e o loa new ideas. as a esul , c ea i i y will
dec ease.
he e o e, i is hypo hesized ha
H4: employee silence media es he ela ionship be ween he abusi eness o he supe iso and he c ea i i y o
an employee.
cOgen BUsiness & ManageMen 7
3. Me hodology
so wa e enginee s o p i a e companies in Pakis an we e he a ge popula ion o his s udy. a sample
o so wa e enginee s was selec ed by using con enien sampling echnique as hey a e ulne able o
abusi eness o supe iso and c ea i i y is he essen ial pa o hei wo k as well. Ques ionnai es we e
used o collec he da a om he so wa e enginee s o he so wa e houses. Fo his pu pose, ques ion-
nai es we e c ea ed on google o ms and dis ibu ed h ough emails. sample size la ge han 30 and less
han 500 is app op ia e o mos o he esea ch (Roscoe, 1975). abou 467 esponses we e ecei ed in
o al om so wa e enginee s in a mon h and among hose 443 we e comple ely illed. he e we e he
ques ionnai es ha we e no illed comple ely. Few o hem we e me ely illed up o demog aphic a i-
ables. such esponses we e dele ed and da a collec ed om 443 employees was used o analysis. as pe
sample size o mula men ioned abo e, esponses collec ed agains he a iables o he s udy we e su i-
cien . he e o e, such esponses we e dele ed. Ques ionnai e included i e i ems o abusi e supe ision
(Mi chell & amb ose, 2007), sample i em is ‘My supe iso idicules me’, i e i ems o employee silence
( angi ala & Ramanujam, 2008), he sample i em is ‘You choose o emain silen when you had conce ns
abou wo k’ and h ee i ems o employee c ea i i y (Dul e al., 2011), he sample i em is ‘in my wo k, i
o en ha e new and inno a i e ideas’. all scales a e measu ed on a se en-poin like scale om s ongly
ag ee o s ongly disag ee. Fou demog aphic ques ions we e also he pa o he ques ionnai e, includ-
ing age, gende , educa ion and expe ience.
as he ques ionnai es we e sel - epo ing so he e we e he chances o common me hod bias. i was
ensu ed o pa icipan s ha hei esponses will be anonymous and con iden ial. o es i s a is ically
ha man’s single ac o es was pe o med. Fi s ac o a iance explained should be less han 50% and
in his case, i s alue is 45.158% (hsiung, 2012). so, his bias is no a majo issue o his s udy. sPss
e sion 25 (sPss, chicago, il) and amos 26 a e used o pe o m he analysis.
4. Resul s
i includes cha ac e is ics o esponden s, desc ip i e s a is ics, co ela ion analysis, in e nal eliabili y,
con i ma o y ac o analysis and media ion analysis by P eache and hayes mac o p ocess (hayes, 2018).
Fac o loading, disc iminan alidi y, con e gen alidi y, in e nal eliabili y and model i indices a e he
pa o he esul s. Fo media ion analysis, hayes mac o p ocess is applied. o be mo e speci ic model 4
is applied.
4.1. Responden s cha ac e is ics
con ol a iables ha e been in oduced in li e a u e while in es iga ing he ela ionship among abusi e-
ness o supe iso and c ea i i y o an employee. so, in his s udy oo da a o hese a iables ha e been
collec ed. i includes esponden ’s age, gende , educa ion and expe ience. so, he e in able 1 de ailed
cha ac e is ics o he esponden s o a iables o be con olled a e being p esen ed.
he demog aphic cha ac e is ics o he esponden s a e gi en in able 1. Mos candida es we e males;
hei age was be ween 20 and 30 yea s, ha ing mas e ’s educa ion and 2–5 yea s o expe ience.
14 s. Zia anD K. ahMeD
Bassman, e., & london, M. (1993). abusi e manage ial beha iou . Leade ship & O ganiza ion De elopmen Jou nal,
14(2), 18–24. h ps://doi.o g/10.1108/01437739310032683
Baumeis e , R. F., B a sla sky, e., Finkenaue , c., & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Bad is s onge han good. Re iew o Gene al
Psychology, 5(4), 323–370. h ps://doi.o g/10.1037/1089-2680.5.4.323
Bono, J. e., & Judge, . a. (2003). sel -conco dance a wo k: owa d unde s anding he mo i a ional e ec s o ans-
o ma ional leade s. Academy o Managemen Jou nal, 46(5), 554–571. h ps://doi.o g/10.5465/30040649
B ins ield, c. . (2013). employee silence mo i es: in es iga ion o dimensionali y and de elopmen o measu es.
Jou nal o O ganiza ional Beha io , 34(5), 671–697. h ps://doi.o g/10.1002/job.1829
B own, R. . (1989). c ea i i y. Handbook o c ea i i y (pp. 3–32). sp inge . h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/978-1-4757-5356-1_1
chan, M. e., & Mcallis e , D. J. (2014). abusi e supe ision h ough he lens o employee s a e pa anoia. Academy o
Managemen Re iew, 39(1), 44–66. h ps://doi.o g/10.5465/am .2011.0419
cohen, P., cohen, P., Wes , s. g., & aiken, l. s. (2014). Applied mul iple eg ession/co ela ion analysis o he beha io al
sciences. aylo & F ancis g oup. h ps://doi.o g/10.4324/9781410606266
co ina, J. M. (1993). Wha is coe icien alpha? an examina ion o heo y and applica ions. Jou nal o Applied
Psychology, 78(1), 98–104. h ps://doi.o g/10.1037/0021-9010.78.1.98
c opanzano, R., an hony, e. l., Daniels, s. R., & hall, a. V. (2017). social exchange heo y: a c i ical e iew wi h he-
o e ical emedies. Academy o Managemen Annals, 11(1), 479–516. h ps://doi.o g/10.5465/annals.2015.0099
De e , J. R., & edmondson, a. c. (2011). implici oice heo ies: aken- o -g an ed ules o sel -censo ship a wo k.
Academy o Managemen Jou nal, 54(3), 461–488. h ps://doi.o g/10.5465/amj.2011.61967925
De e , J. R., & e iño, l. K. (2010). speaking up o highe -ups: how supe iso s and skip-le el leade s in luence
employee oice. O ganiza ion Science, 21(1), 249–270. h ps://doi.o g/10.1287/o sc.1080.0405
Du y, M. K., gans e , D. c., & Pagon, M. (2002). social unde mining in he wo kplace. Academy o Managemen
Jou nal, 45(2), 331–351. h ps://doi.o g/10.5465/3069350
Dul, J., ceylan, c., & Jaspe s, F. (2011). Knowledge wo ke s’ c ea i i y and he ole o he physical wo k en i onmen .
Human Resou ce Managemen , 50(6), 715–734. h ps://doi.o g/10.1002/h m.20454
eagly, a., & chaiken, s. (1993). The psychology o a i udes. h ps://psycne .apa.o g/ eco d/1992-98849-000
eby, l. ., Mcmanus, s. e., simon, s. a., & Russell, J. e. a. (2000). he p o ege’s pe spec i e ega ding nega i e men-
o ing expe iences: he de elopmen o a axonomy. Jou nal o Voca ional Beha io , 57(1), 1–21. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1006/j be.1999.1726
edmans, a. (2011). Does he s ock ma ke ully alue in angibles? employee sa is ac ion and equi y p ices. Jou nal o
Financial Economics, 101(3), 621–640. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.j ineco.2011.03.021
Feldhusen, J. F., & goh, B. e. (1995). assessing and accessing c ea i i y: an in eg a i e e iew o heo y, esea ch, and
de elopmen . C ea i i y Resea ch Jou nal, 8(3), 231–247. h ps://doi.o g/10.1207/s15326934c j0803_3
Fo nell, c., & la cke , D. F. (1981). e alua ing s uc u al equa ion models wi h unobse able a iables and measu e-
men e o . Jou nal o Ma ke ing Resea ch, 18(1), 39–50. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/002224378101800104
gong, Y., huang, J. c., & Fa h, J. l. (2009). employee lea ning o ien a ion, ans o ma ional leade ship, and employee
c ea i i y: he media ing ole o employee c ea i e sel -e icacy. Academy o Managemen Jou nal, 52(4), 765–778.
h ps://doi.o g/10.5465/amj.2009.43670890
gowan, J. c. (1972). De elopmen o he c ea i e indi idual. Knapp. h ps://schola .google.com/schola ?hl=en&as_sd =
0%2c5&q=gowan%2c+J.+c.+%281972%29.+De elopmen +o + he+c ea i e+indi idual.+san+Diego%2c+ca%3a+
Knapp.&b ng=
g eco, l. M., Whi son, J. a., O’boyle, e. h., Wang, c. s., & Kim, J. (2019). An eye o an eye? A me a-analysis o nega i e
ecip oci y in o ganiza ions. aPa Psycne - ame ican Psychological associa ion. h ps://doi.o g/10.1037/apl0000396.supp
gu, J., song, J., & Wu, J. (2016). abusi e supe ision and employee c ea i i y in china: Depa men al iden i ica ion as
media o and ace as mode a o . Leade ship & O ganiza ion De elopmen Jou nal, 37(8), 1187–1204. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1108/lODJ-02-2015-0021
guil o d, J. P. (1950). c ea i i y. The Ame ican Psychologis , 5(9), 444–454. h ps://doi.o g/10.1037/h0063487
guo, l., Decos e , s., Babalola, M. ., De schu e , l., ga ba, O. a., & Riisla, K. (2018). au ho i a ian leade ship and
employee c ea i i y: he mode a ing ole o psychological capi al and he media ing ole o ea and de ensi e
silence. Jou nal o Business Resea ch, 92, 219–230. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.jbus es.2018.07.034
hai , J. F., hul , g., Ringle, c., & sa s ed , M. (2017). A p ime on pa ial leas squa es s uc u al equa ion modeling
(PLS-SEM) (2nd ed.). sage.
hai , J. F., Ringle, c. M., & sa s ed , M. (2013). Pa ial leas squa es s uc u al equa ion modeling: Rigo ous applica ions,
be e esul s and highe accep ance. in long Range Planning (Vol. 46, issues 1–2, pp. 1–12). h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.
l p.2013.01.001
han, g. h., ha ms, P. D., & Bai, Y. (2017). nigh ma e bosses: he impac o abusi e supe ision on employees’ sleep,
emo ions, and c ea i i y. Jou nal o Business E hics, 145(1), 21–31. h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s10551-015-2859-y
hayes, a. F. (2018). In oduc ion o media ion, mode a ion, and condi ional p ocess analysis, second edi ion: A
eg ession-based app oach (Vol. 46, pp. 1–692). he guil o d P ess. www.guil o d.com/Mss
hoel, h., & coope , c. l. (2001). O igins o bullying: heo e ical amewo ks o explaining wo kplace bullying. in n.
eh ani (ed.), Building a cul u e o espec : Managing bullying a wo k (pp. 3–19). aylo & F ancis. h ps://schola .
cOgen BUsiness & ManageMen 15
google.com/schola ?hl=en&as_sd =0%2c5&q=O igins+o +bullying%3a+ heo e ical+ amewo ks+ o +explaining+w
o kplace+bullying&b ng=
hooble , J. M., & B ass, D. J. (2006). abusi e supe ision and amily unde mining as displaced agg ession. The Jou nal
o Applied Psychology, 91(5), 1125–1133. h ps://doi.o g/10.1037/0021-9010.91.5.1125
hsiung, h. h. (2012). au hen ic leade ship and employee Voice Beha io : a Mul i-le el Psychological P ocess. Jou nal
o Business E hics, 107(3), 349–361. h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s10551-011-1043-2
huang, l., gino, F., & galinsky, a. D. (2015). he highes o m o in elligence: sa casm inc eases c ea i i y o bo h
exp esse s and ecipien s. O ganiza ional Beha io and Human Decision P ocesses, 131, 162–177. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1016/j.obhdp.2015.07.001
isaacson, W. (2012). he eal leade ship lessons o s e e jobs. Ha a d Business Re iew, 90(4), 92–102. h p:// ash een.
pbwo ks.com/ /leade ship.pd
Jahanzeb, s., Fa ima, ., Bouckenooghe, D., & Bashi , F. (2019). he knowledge hiding link: a mode a ed media ion
model o how abusi e supe ision a ec s employee c ea i i y. Eu opean Jou nal o Wo k and O ganiza ional
Psychology, 28(6), 810–819. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/1359432X.2019.1659245
Jiang, W., gu, Q., & ang, . l. P. (2019). Do ic ims o supe iso bullying su e om poo c ea i i y? social cogni i e
and social compa ison pe spec i es. Jou nal o Business E hics, 157(3), 865–884. h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/
s10551-017-3660-x
Joo, B. K., Mclean, g. n., & Yang, B. (2013). c ea i i y and human esou ce de elopmen : an in eg a i e li e a u e
e iew and a concep ual amewo k o u u e esea ch. Human Resou ce De elopmen Re iew, 12(4), 390–421.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/1534484313481462
Keashly, l., o , V., & Maclean, l. M. (1994). abusi e beha io in he wo kplace: a p elimina y in es iga ion. Violence
and Vic ims, 9(4), 341–357. h ps://doi.o g/10.1891/0886-6708.9.4.341
Kiewi z, c., Res ubog, s. l. D., shoss, M. K., ga cia, P. R. J. M., & ang, R. l. (2016). su e ing in silence: in es iga ing
he ole o ea in he ela ionship be ween abusi e supe ision and de ensi e silence. The Jou nal o Applied
Psychology, 101(5), 731–742. h ps://doi.o g/10.1037/apl0000074
Knoll, M., & Dick, R. V. (2013). au hen ici y, employee silence, p ohibi i e oice, and he mode a ing e ec o o ganiza-
ional iden i ica ion. The Jou nal o Posi i e Psychology, 8(4), 346–360. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/17439760.2013.804113
Kampylis, P. g., & Val anen, J. U. R. i. (2010). Rede ining c ea i i y -analyzing de ini ions, colloca ions, and conse-
quences. The Jou nal o C ea i e Beha io , 44(3), 191–214. h ps://doi.o g/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2010. b01333.x
lam, l. W. (2012). impac o compe i i eness on salespeople’s commi men and pe o mance. Jou nal o Business
Resea ch, 65(9), 1328–1334. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.jbus es.2011.10.026
lee, s., Yun, s., & s i as a a, a. (2013). e idence o a cu ilinea ela ionship be ween abusi e supe ision and c e-
a i i y in sou h Ko ea. The Leade ship Qua e ly, 24(5), 724–731. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.07.002
liu, D., gong, Y., Zhou, J., & huang, J. c. (2017). human esou ce sys ems, employee c ea i i y, and i m inno a ion:
he mode a ing ole o i m owne ship. Academy o Managemen Jou nal, 60(3), 1164–1188. h ps://doi.o g/10.5465/
amj.2015.0230
liu, D., liao, h., & loi, R. (2012). he da k side o leade ship: a h ee-le el in es iga ion o he cascading e ec o
abusi e supe ision on employee c ea i i y. Academy o Managemen Jou nal, 55(5), 1187–1212. h ps://doi.
o g/10.5465/amj.2010.0400
liu, W., Zhang, P., liao, J., hao, P., & Mao, J. (2016). abusi e supe ision and employee c ea i i y: he media ing ole
o psychological sa e y and o ganiza ional iden i ica ion. Managemen Decision, 54(1), 130–147. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1108/MD-09-2013-0443
Madja , n., Oldham, g. R., & P a , M. g. (2002). he e’s no place like home? he con ibu ions o wo k and nonwo k
c ea i i y suppo o employees’ c ea i e pe o mance. Academy o Managemen Jou nal, 45(4), 757–767. h ps://
doi.o g/10.5465/3069309
Ma inko, M. J., ha ey, P., B ees, J. R., & Mackey, J. (2013). a e iew o abusi e supe ision esea ch. Jou nal o
O ganiza ional Beha io , 34(s1), s120–s137. h ps://doi.o g/10.1002/job.1888
Meng, Y., an, J., & li, J. (2017). abusi e supe ision by academic supe iso s and pos g adua e esea ch s uden s’
c ea i i y: he media ing ole o leade –membe exchange and in insic mo i a ion. In e na ional Jou nal o
Leade ship in Educa ion, 20(5), 605–617. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/13603124.2017.1304576
Milliken, F. J., Mo ison, e. W., & hewlin, P. F. (2003). an explo a o y s udy o employee silence: issues ha employees
don’ communica e upwa d and why. Jou nal o Managemen S udies, 40(6), 1453–1476. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1111/1467-6486.00387
Mi chell, M. s., & amb ose, M. l. (2007). abusi e supe ision and wo kplace de iance and he mode a ing e ec s o
nega i e ecip oci y belie s. The Jou nal o Applied Psychology, 92(4), 1159–1168. h ps://doi.o g/10.1037/
0021-9010.92.4.1159
Mi chell, M. s., & amb ose, M. l. (2012). employees’ beha io al eac ions o supe iso agg ession: an examina ion o
indi idual and si ua ional ac o s. The Jou nal o Applied Psychology, 97(6), 1148–1170. h ps://doi.o g/10.1037/a0029452
Mo ison, e. W. (2011). employee oice beha io : in eg a ion and di ec ions o u u e esea ch. Academy o
Managemen Annals, 5(1), 373–412. h ps://doi.o g/10.5465/19416520.2011.574506
Mo ison, e. W. (2014). employee oice and silence. Annual Re iew o O ganiza ional Psychology and O ganiza ional
Beha io , 1(1), 173–197. h ps://doi.o g/10.1146/annu e -o gpsych-031413-091328
16 s. Zia anD K. ahMeD
Mo ison, e. W., & Milliken, F. J. (2000). O ganiza ional silence: a ba ie o change and de elopmen in a plu alis ic
wo ld. The Academy o Managemen Re iew, 25(4), 706–725. h ps://doi.o g/10.5465/am .2000.3707697
Mo ison, e. W., Wheele -smi h, s. l., & Kamda , D. (2011). speaking up in g oups: a c oss-le el s udy o g oup oice
clima e and oice. The Jou nal o Applied Psychology, 96(1), 183–191. h ps://doi.o g/10.1037/a0020744
P e e , J. (1998). The human equa ion: Building p o i s by pu ing people i s . ha a d Business school P ess. h ps://
hbsp.ha a d.edu/p oduc /8419-hBK-eng
Pie e se, a. n., an Knippenbe g, D., schippe s, M., & s am, D. (2010). ans o ma ional and ansac ional leade ship
and inno a i e beha io : he mode a ing ole o psychological empowe men . Jou nal o O ganiza ional Beha io ,
31(4), 609–623. h ps://doi.o g/10.1002/job.650
Pii o, J. (2004). unde s anding c ea i i y. g ea Po en ial P ess inc. h ps://schola .google.com/schola ?hl=en&as_sd =0
%2c5&q=unde s anding+c ea i i y+pii o+2004&b ng=
Pinde , c. c., & ha los, K. P. (2001). employee silence: Quiescence and acquiescence as esponses o pe cei ed injus ice.
Resea ch in Pe sonnel and Human Resou ces Managemen ., 20, 331–369. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/s0742-7301(01)20007-3
Qin, X., Dus , s. B., DiRenzo, M. s., & Wang, s. (2020). nega i e c ea i i y in leade - ollowe ela ions: a daily in es i-
ga ion o leade s’ c ea i e mindse , mo al disengagemen , and abusi e supe ision. Jou nal o Business and
Psychology, 35(5), 665–682. h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s10869-019-09646-7
Ra ne , B. (2009). he co ela ion coe icien : i s alues ange be ween +1/−1, o do hey? Jou nal o Ta ge ing,
Measu emen and Analysis o Ma ke ing, 17(2), 139–142. h ps://doi.o g/10.1057/j .2009.5
Rhodes, M. (1961). an analysis o c ea i i y. The Phi Del a Kappan, 42(7), 305–310. h ps://www.js o .o g/s able/20342603
Roscoe, J. (1975). John T. Roscoe. h ps://ag is. ao.o g/ag is-sea ch/sea ch.do? eco diD=Us201300527436
scha , a. c. h., Desma ais, s., & Kelloway, e. K. (2006). Exposu e o wo kplace agg ession om mul iple sou ces: Valida ion
o a measu e and es o a model. Unpublished Manusc ip , McMas e Uni e si y, hamil on, canada (pp. 331–351).
h ps://schola .google.com/schola ?hl=en&as_sd =0%2c5&q=exposu e+ o+wo kplace+agg ession+ om+mul iple+s
ou ces%3a+Valida ion+o +a+measu e+and+ es +o +a+model&b ng=
shalley, c. e., gilson, l., & Blum, . (2009). in e ac i e e ec s o g ow h need s eng h, wo k con ex , and job com-
plexi y on sel - epo ed c ea i e pe o mance. Academy o Managemen Jou nal, 52(3), 489–505. h ps://doi.o g/
10.5465/amj.2009.41330806
shalley, c. e., Zhou, J., & Oldham, g. R. (2004). he e ec s o pe sonal and con ex ual cha ac e is ics on c ea i i y:
Whe e should we go om he e? Jou nal o Managemen , 30(6), 933–958. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.jm.2004.06.007
shen, c., Zhang, Y., Yang, J., & liu, s. (2020). abusi e supe ision and employee c ea i i y: a mode a ed media ion
model. Leade ship & O ganiza ion De elopmen Jou nal, 41(2), 193–207. h ps://doi.o g/10.1108/lODJ-03-2019-0146
shin, s. J., & Zhou, J. (2003). ans o ma ional leade ship, conse a ion, and c ea i i y: e idence om Ko ea. Academy
o Managemen Jou nal, 46(6), 703–714. h ps://doi.o g/10.5465/30040662
simon on, D. (1990). His o y, chemis y, psychology, and genius: An in ellec ual au obiog aphy o his o iome y. h ps://
psycne .apa.o g/ eco d/1990-97842-005
s amm, B. V. (2008). Managing inno a ion, design and c ea i i y. John Wiley & sons. h ps://books.google.com.pk/boo
ks?hl=en&l =&id=ilc7bn94zWgc&oi= nd&pg=PR11&dq=managing+c ea i i y+and+inno a ion+and+design+be in
a&o s=MRJ5VW hjQ&sig=d buMyW08h hPib gQp9BZcej4o& edi _esc=y# =onepage&q=managing c ea i i y and
inno a ion and design be in
s ein, M. i. (1953). c ea i i y and cul u e. The Jou nal o Psychology, 36(2), 311–322. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/00223980
.1953.9712897
s ein, M. i. (1974). S imula ing c ea i i y (Vol. 1). academic P ess. h ps://doi.o g/10.1097/00006223-198111000-00008
angi ala, s., & Ramanujam, R. (2008). employee silence on c i ical wo k issues: he c oss le el e ec s o p ocedu al
jus ice clima e. Pe sonnel Psychology, 61(1), 37–68. h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2008.00105.x
eppe , B. J. (2000). consequences o abusi e supe ision. Academy o Managemen Jou nal, 43(2), 178–190. h ps://
doi.o g/10.5465/1556375
eppe , B. J. (2007). abusi e supe ision in wo k o ganiza ions: Re iew, syn hesis, and esea ch agenda. Jou nal o
Managemen , 33(3), 261–289. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/0149206307300812
eppe , B. J., simon, l., & Pa k, h. M. (2017). abusi e supe ision. Annual Re iew o O ganiza ional Psychology and
O ganiza ional Beha io , 4(1), 123–152. h ps://doi.o g/10.1146/annu e -o gpsych-041015-062539
ie ney, P. (2008). leade ship and c ea i i y. in J. Zhou & c. e. shalley (eds.), Hand book o o ganiza ional c ea i i y
(pp. 95–124). e lbaum. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/03004270485200131
e inge , D. J., Feldhusen, J. F., & isaksen, s. g. (1990). O ganiza ion and s uc u e o p oduc i e hinking. C ea i e
Lea ning Today, 4(2), 6–8. h ps://schola .google.com/schola ?hl=en&as_sd =0%2c5&q= e inge %2c+D.+J.%2c+Fe
ldhusen%2c+J.+F.%2c+%26+isaksen%2c+s.+g.+%281990%29.+O ganiza ion+and+s uc u e+o +p oduc i e+ hinki
ng.+c ea i e+lea ning+ oday%2c+4%282%29%2c+6-8&b ng=
Vakola, M., & Bou adas, D. (2005). an eceden s and consequences o o ganisa ional silence: an empi ical in es iga-
ion. Employee Rela ions, 27(5), 441–458. h ps://doi.o g/10.1108/01425450510611997
Van Dyne, l., ang, s., & Bo e o, i. g. (2003). concep ualizing employee silence and employee oice as mul idimen-
sional cons uc s. Jou nal o Managemen S udies, 40(6), 1359–1392. h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/1467-6486.00384
Van Dyne, l., & lePine, J. a. (1998). helping and oice ex a- ole beha io s: e idence o cons uc and p edic i e
alidi y. Academy o Managemen Jou nal, 41(1), 108–119. h ps://doi.o g/10.5465/256902
cOgen BUsiness & ManageMen 17
Wang, a. c., & cheng, B. s. (2010). When does bene olen leade ship lead o c ea i i y? he mode a ing ole o c ea i e
ole iden i y and job au onomy. Jou nal o O ganiza ional Beha io , 31(1), 106–121. h ps://doi.o g/10.1002/job.634
Wayne, s. J., hooble , J., Ma ino a, s. V., & Johnson, M. M. (2008). abusi e beha io : ickle-down e ec s beyond he
dyad. Academy o Managemen P oceedings, 2008(1), 1–6. h ps://doi.o g/10.5465/ambpp.2008.33622318
Woodman, R. W., sawye , J. e., & g i in, R. W. (1993). owa d a heo y o o ganiza ional c ea i i y. The Academy o
Managemen Re iew, 18(2), 293–321. h ps://doi.o g/10.5465/am .1993.3997517
Woodman, R. W., & schoen eld , l. F. (1989). indi idual di e ences in c ea i i y: an in e ac ionis pe spec i e.
Handbook o c ea i i y (pp. 71–91). camb idge Uni e si y P ess. h ps://schola .google.com/schola ?hl=en&as_sd =0
%2c5&q=Woodman%2c+R.+W.%2c+%26+schoen eld %2c+l.+F.+%281989%29.+indi idual+di e ences+in+c ea i i
y%3a+an+in e ac ionis +pe spec i e.&b ng=
Xu, a. J., loi, R., & lam, l. W. (2015). he bad boss akes i all: how abusi e supe ision and leade -membe exchange
in e ac o in luence employee silence. The Leade ship Qua e ly, 26(5), 763–774. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.leaqua.
2015.03.002
Yuan, F., & Woodman, R. W. (2010). inno a i e beha io in he wo kplace: he ole o pe o mance and image ou -
come expec a ions. Academy o Managemen Jou nal, 53(2), 323–342. h ps://doi.o g/10.5465/amj.2010.49388995
Zhang, h., Kwan, h. K., Zhang, X., & Wu, l. Z. (2014). high co e sel -e alua o s main ain c ea i i y: a mo i a ional
model o abusi e supe ision. Jou nal o Managemen , 40(4), 1151–1174. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/0149206312460681
Zhang, X., & Ba ol, K. M. (2010). linking empowe ing leade ship and employee c ea i i y: he in luence o psycho-
logical empowe men , in insic mo i a ion, and c ea i e p ocess engagemen . Academy o Managemen Jou nal,
53(1), 107–128. h ps://doi.o g/10.5465/amj.2010.48037118
Zhou, J., & hoe e , i. J. (2014). Resea ch on wo kplace c ea i i y: a e iew and edi ec ion. Annual Re iew o
O ganiza ional Psychology and O ganiza ional Beha io , 1(1), 333–359. h ps://doi.o g/10.1146/annu e -o gpsych-
031413-091226
Zhou, J., & shalley, c. e. (2010). Deepening ou unde s anding o c ea i i y in he wo kplace: a e iew o di e en
app oaches o c ea i i y esea ch. APA handbook o indus ial and o ganiza ional psychology, Vol 1: Building and
de eloping he o ganiza ion (pp. 275–302). ame ican Psychological associa ion. h ps://doi.o g/10.1037/12169-009
