Abusive leadership and proactive behaviours: Role of family motivation as a moderator

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Negative impact of abusive leadership has always been the focus of attention for researchers, however, the asymmetrical relationship of abuse with its outcomes has never been studied.

OBJECTIVE:

Drawing on Affective Events Theory (AET), this study investigates the moderating role of family motivation (FM), a prosocial intent, in yielding positive behavioural reactions among individuals facing workplace abuse. Negative emotions (NE) are taken as a unique mediating factor between abusive leadership (AL) and proactive behaviours (PB).

METHODS:

Data were collected from 309 employees of Pakistani manufacturing organizations. SEM is used for studying the proposed relationships and Smart PLS is used for data analysis.

RESULTS:

Results of the study suggest that negative emotions mediate the indirect relationship between abusive leadership and proactive behaviours. Family motivation strongly moderates and strengthens the positive direct relationship of negative emotions and proactive behaviours, concluding that it has a strong influence in altering behavioural reactions in response to negative triggers.

CONCLUSIONS:

This research study adds to the body of knowledge in suggesting FM as a strong intrinsic factor to be considered while creating synergy between organizational and human resource strategies.

Keywords

Abusive leadership negative emotions emotions proactive behaviours family motivation

Saima Aftab is a Lecturer at the University of Wah, Wah Cantt, Pakistan. She is pursuing her PhD in Management Sciences from Foundation University Islamabad, Rawalpindi Campus, Pakistan. Her research interests include organizational development, leadership, and industrial-organizational psychology.

Ajmal Waheed is an HRD consultant specializing in capacity building reforms and modernization. Currently, he is serving as Professor & Dean, Management Sciences Department at Foundation University Islamabad, Rawalpindi Campus, Pakistan. He has vast experience of research in the field of HRM, HRD and OD, specifically focusing on “alternate paradigms in public management and their relevance to developing countries”.

1 Introduction

Proactive Behaviour (PB) studies hold a special place in the strategic management research paradigm. Micro-level individual behaviours can bring about macro-level transformational changes within organizations and may affect industries as well. Abusive leadership (AL) is a chronic problem, organizations faced for decades [1]. This kind of leadership affects individuals as well as organizations at large [2]. Many ground-breaking theories about leaders and their behaviours; like great man theory, situational theory, behavioural theory, participative theory, contingency theory, relationship theory and trait theory; explain the behaviours of leaders within different contexts. Consequently, many other important theories like affective events theory [3] and social learning theory [4] discuss the resultant behaviours of individuals because of any event in their environment, including abuse. However, this has also been observed that organizations with abuse as part of their culture are progressing and are more competitive in certain cases [5, 6]. As suggested by Mackey, Frieder, Brees, and Martinko (2017) [7] in their meta-analytic review of abusive supervision literature, military organizations face high levels of verbal and non-verbal abuse as part of their cultures because of high levels of work demands and goal congruence sensitivity. Similarly, nurses and health care workers are also accustomed to certain levels of abuse because of the environmental contingencies and pressures at the workplace [8]. Studies like [5 , 9–14] suggest that research on abusive leadership lacks consideration of asymmetrical relationship with organizational-level factors, as abuse has always been a part of organizational cultures, still organizations sustain and grow. Research demands explanation and description of certain asymmetrical relationships of abuse with psychological, behavioural, emotional and organizational factors, which has been ignored in previous researches like Liu, Liao, and Loi (2012) [15]. This research is focusing on bridging this gap in empirical research.

Previous research on abusive leadership and proactive behaviours focuses on the negative consequences, abuse has on proactive behaviours, as abusive leadership is most toxic and destructive as compared to any other leadership style. The most common outcome of workplace abuse is the development of Negative Emotions (NE) among individuals. The psycho-social relation of emotions and behaviour of leaders is inevitable [60]. Researchers have profoundly focused on different behavioural pathways generated by varying types of emotions. The more an individual faces abuse at the workplace, the more he develops negative emotions towards his supervisor and the organization at large [16]. These negative emotions may be used by managers for creating pressure upon employees for better performance [60]. Based on the results of previous research studies, proving negative emotions as the most frequent outcome, this study has used negative emotions as a mediator. Divergently, these discrete emotions of anger and fear may be useful as they help individuals survive under certain circumstances for instance they can result in individual Proactive Behaviours (PB). By being proactive, individuals either fight for their rights, try to escape from harm through avoiding future mistakes or may give up and become disengaged from work and its settings [17]. However, researchers suggested that future research should investigate identifying the underlying psychological factors which motivate individuals towards behavioural transformation.

Research suggests that many individual and cultural values are important contextual variables that play a strong role in modifying leader behaviours [18]. Whenever employee motivational factors are considered, family always is the top priority [19]. Previous research focuses mainly on the negative influence of family-related prosocial behaviours [20]. Recent research shows that Family Motivation (FM) plays an important role in keeping the employees motivated at work, even if they face abuse [21]. Family motivation is an employee prosocial behaviour where they feel responsible for economically supporting their families [22]. In the Western context, family is one of the most influential factors having an impact on the agentic properties of an individual. Family size, education level and social class are significant influential family constructs. East Asian cultures are specifically collectivist, in which people are symbiotic and co-dependant, materializing the concept of ‘linked lives’ in life course studies [23 –25]. So, performing under abusive conditions is backed by strong prosocial behaviours towards supporting one’s family [22]. However, little is known about the influence of family motivation, out of the work context, on shaping employee behaviours at the workplace and how individuals survive abusive leadership behaviours. So, the need to explore the role of family motivation in predicting proactive behaviours among individuals is justifiable as extensive organizational behaviour literature suggests organizations focus on employee strengths (e.g., families) rather than weaknesses [19]. Moreover, the moderating role of family motivation would help understand the underlying psychological mechanism of why individuals still exert effort to improve their performance and become proactive while abuse is part and partial of the organizational culture. Thus, this study investigates the missing asymmetric indirect relationship of abusive leadership and proactive behaviours through negative emotions with moderating influence of family motivation.

This study contributes to abusive leadership, organizational development, and work-family literature such that the relationships of abusive leadership, negative emotions and proactive behaviours have been studied extensively with various individual, group and organizational level factors, however, their relationships under the influence of family motivation are yet to be explored. A recent study conducted by Umrani et al. (2019) [19] has highlighted the relationship of family motivation with individual organizational citizenship behaviour (OCBI) with mediating role of self-efficacy. Results support the positive relationship between family motivation and OCBI such that higher levels of family motivation led to higher levels of OCBI given employees self-efficacy resources. Similarly, another research conducted by Tariq and Ding (2018) [21] has recently tested the relationship of abusive supervision with employee job performance and turnover intentions through intrinsic motivation and a moderating role of family motivation. The results of the study suggest a significant moderating role of family motivation. However, researchers have not taken into consideration the impact of family motivation on another important facet of employee behaviours i.e., employee proactivity. Consequently, this research study presents a mediated model of indirect effect of abuse on proactive behaviours through negative emotions with moderating role of family motivation.

To understand the underlying psychological mechanism through which abusive leadership leads to proactive behaviours we base our study on Affective Events Theory (AET). Affective Events Theory (AET) developed by Weiss and Cropanzano (1996) [3] explains that human behaviours are guided by emotions that directly affect job satisfaction and job performance. Events in the workplace create positive and negative reactions among individuals. Personal dispositions influence specific work attitudes and affect driven behaviours. Affect driven behaviours are usually instantaneous reactions to workplace events. On the other hand, judgement driven behaviours are well thought out and influenced by emotion and cognition as well. AET theory supports the concept presented by this study. Abusive events at the workplace generate negative emotional reactions. Individuals, instead of fighting it off right away, choose re-interpretation and consideration of various factors before taking any decision. Depending on their goal congruence and futuristic outlook towards their goal achievement, they manage to enhance their work behaviours. Proactivity would take over negativity to avoid any future mishaps. Since employees are considered as the most valuable for the organization so the expected significant moderating effects of family motivation would help managers and practitioners understand the importance of underlying psychological mechanisms involved in motivating individuals towards behavioural transformations and implement HR interventions complacent to the requirements of boosting proactivity among individuals. The proposed model of the study is presented in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

A proposed model.

2 Literature review and hypotheses development

Workplace abuse is one of the most rapidly growing problems organizations are facing these days [1]. Thousands of studies provide evidence that workplace abuse always leads to negative consequences at the workplace [14]. Abuse with its varied level of definitions and standpoints is a verbal and non-verbal abuse including bullying, public shaming, negative supervisory behaviours, undermining, ridiculing, victimization and punishing employees consistently [6 , 26–29]. Abusive leadership repercussions can affect subordinates, observers, immediate family, and spouses [1]. Individual emotional reactions are the first and foremost reactions to abuse.

Although emotions, emotional intelligence, emotional labour, and emotional exhaustion are some of the most researched topics, yet little is known about the underlying phenomena of emotions, as a unique mediating factor, that influence behaviour of individuals in work-life [16]. Research on emotions has faced impediments because lack of clarity and coherence [59]. Emotions arise because of an interaction between internal and external experiences & are central to all aspects of human behaviours, impacting much of our personal, family, social and work lives. Negative emotional reactions like anger, fear, sadness, and detachment [5 , 31], are the most common outcomes. The anger felt in response to abuse is an emotional reaction to perceived or felt attack where individuals try to remove harm and fight for survival [16, 31]. Moreover, fear arises when victims observe abuse recurrence and think that their weaknesses are not the cause of abuse, leading them to adopt defensive behaviours [32]. In this case, there is an applied tendency among individuals that to develop rapport with their supervisors, individuals may try to modify their behaviours [33]. So, based on the prepositions of Affective Events Theory, the higher the levels of abuse higher will be the negative emotional reactions among individuals.

H1: Abusive leadership is positively related to negative emotions.

H2: Negative emotions mediate the indirect relationship of abusive leadership and proactive behaviours.

Discrete emotions of anger and fear may be useful as they help individuals survive under certain circumstances, for instance, they can result in individual proactive behaviours. By being proactive, individuals either fight for their rights, try to escape from harm through avoiding future mistakes or may give up and become disengaged from work and its settings. Escaping from imminent problems and seizing upcoming opportunities, employees behave proactively to control future job conditions [34]. Employees instead of reacting, act for a constructive change [35]. These dynamic performance behaviours [36] may include behaviours of individuals where they start suggesting and implementing different policies, solutions to problems and adopting unique work practices [37]. Traditional OB research has focused on the non-optimal outcomes of negative emotions [5]. However, recent research in this regard has provided a considerable departure from these traditional views and have proved that negative emotions of individuals can result in positive consequences like proactivity [30 , 59]. A recent study conducted by Oh and Farh (2017) [31] proposed a unique model showing that negative emotions lead to proactive behaviours among individuals. They proposed that this proactivity is a result of three phases. The first phase includes assessment of the situation and negative emotion generation as a response. The second step includes the intensity of employee emotional experience. The third, phase includes the employee behavioural reactions because of negative emotional experiences. These prepositions are also supported by the Affective Events Theory. So, from the above literature, we can say that the higher the levels of negative emotions among individuals, the higher will be the level of employee proactive behaviours.

H3: Negative emotions are positively related to employee proactive behaviours.

Tepper (2000) [14] in his study contends that abusive supervisory behaviours negatively affect work-related employee attitudes. Similarly, a study conducted by Parker et al. (2010) [34] supports the fact that positive supervisory behaviours boost proactivity and negative supervisory behaviours suppress proactivity of employees at the workplace. Similarly, Aquino and Thau (2009) [65] document that workplace victimization leads to employee stress and low-performance levels by affecting psychological, emotional and physiological well-being.

H4: Abusive leadership is negatively associated with employee proactive behaviours

2.1 Role of family motivation as a moderator

Several ground-breaking theories like equity theory [38], expectancy theory [39] and goal-setting theory [40] prove that proactive behaviours of individuals are always backed by some motivational base whether it is career progression, money, or goal achievement motivation. Most of the psychological research on self-determination theory has intrinsic motivation as a major contributor [41]. When work is interesting individual performance is high [42]. However, in developing countries, the job itself lacks authority, autonomy and discretion in scheduling, performing and decision making [43]. So, in this scenario, individuals try to align the work outcomes with some of their values (Menges et al., 2017) and in most cases, it is their family that is highly valued [44].

As suggested by Cohen, Wu, and Miller (2016) [45] Western cultures are individualistic and Eastern cultures are collectivist. So, in cultures like Pakistan, most of the youngsters start their professional careers at an early age to support their families [46]. Researchers have identified that employee willingness to support their families is the strongest of drives to motivate employees to work [21 , 47]. There is very limited literature available on the role of the family as a motivational factor, most of the current research focuses on the family as a major distraction from work (Menges et al., 2017). However, some recent studies like Tariq and Ding (2018) [21] and Umrani et al. (2019) [19] have highlighted the role of family motivation as an independent variable and moderating variable respectively. Both studies show that family motivation is a strong intrinsic motivator that directs the behaviours of employees. This shows that an individual’s emotions can be controlled if individuals have a strong sense of emotional attachment with their families [59]. This emotional attachment may serve as the driving force for individuals who have a high prosocial sense of supporting their families. This may lead individuals to behave proactively.

H5: Family motivation moderates the direct positive relationship of negative emotions and proactive behaviours such that the relationship of negative emotions and proactive behaviours are strengthened with high levels of family motivation.

3. Research methods

3.1 Participants and procedures

A homogenous sample of 400 middle and lower-level managerial employees, both male and female were selected from the 20 manufacturing organizations of Islamabad, Rawalpindi and the KPK region. Out of 100% employed workforce in the manufacturing sector, the highest number of % age belongs to Punjab (17.74%) and Sindh (15.48%). KPK has 12.03% of the employed workforce in the manufacturing sector and Baluchistan has only 5.5%. However, due to ease of access KPK (12.03%) is selected instead of Sindh and Baluchistan. So, a representative sample from manufacturing organizations in KPK and Punjab including all the members working in public and private manufacturing organizations of Rawalpindi, Islamabad, Wah Cantt, Hattar, Kamra, Peshawar and Kahuta, constitute the study population. Respondents included managers, deputy managers, assistant managers, team heads, officers, and internees. The reason for selection is, as these individuals directly work under the supervision of departmental heads and team leads which helps collect relevant information for this research study. The manufacturing sector is selected because according to the Economic survey of 2018–2019 1 13% of GDP is contributed by the manufacturing sector of Pakistan, making it the third-largest contributor. 20 questionnaires were distributed in each organization. The judgement sampling technique was used. In judgement sampling, only those individuals were selected who were in the best position to provide information about abusive leadership practices and who were directly affected by abuse at the workplace. At the initial level, the HR department was contacted to provide detailed organograms of the organizations. With help of the HR department individuals who are working under the direct supervision of a departmental head or a team lead, were identified and to take consent from the individuals a list of emails Id’s was furnished. Permission to participate in the survey was taken through sending emails. A cover letter was attached with each questionnaire to assure the confidentiality of data. An empty envelope was also attached, and participants were instructed to seal the response to ensure confidentiality.

Data were collected through self-administered survey forms and forms were also sent through by post mail. It almost took 10–12 minutes to fill the questionnaire. Non-respondents were sent a soft reminder after three days, to avoid non-response bias. To deal with response bias, questions were kept simple, short, and non-leading. To ensure the confidentiality of the responses, a blank envelope was attached with each survey questionnaire. Respondents were asked to seal their responses right after filling in the survey form. A total of 330 questionnaires were received back. An assessment of missing values and outliers provided 309 usable responses for data analysis with a response rate of 77.25%. A final data set of 309 respondents is used for data analysis through Smart-PLS 3. Table 1 below provides an overview of the demographic profile of respondents.

Table 1
Demographic Profile of Respondents

S# Demographics Frequency (%)

1 Gender Male 80.9

Female 19.1

2 Age (yrs) 20–25 7.1

26–30 16.8

31–35 31.1

36–40 17.2

41 and above 27.8

3 Education Less than bachelors 8.4

Bachelors 31.4

Masters 57.9

Others 2.3

4 Income (Rs) 31k –40k 29.1

41k –50k 8.7

51k –60k 17.8

61k –70k 12

70k and above 32.4

5 Tenure (yrs) Less than a yr 12

1–5 yrs 39.2

6 –10 yrs 36.2

11–15 yrs 4.9

15 yrs and above 7.8

6 Managerial level Top level 1.6

Middle level 63.4

Lower level 35

S#	Demographics		Frequency (%)
1	Gender	Male	80.9
		Female	19.1
2	Age (yrs)	20–25	7.1
		26–30	16.8
		31–35	31.1
		36–40	17.2
		41 and above	27.8
3	Education	Less than bachelors	8.4
		Bachelors	31.4
		Masters	57.9
		Others	2.3
4	Income (Rs)	31k –40k	29.1
		41k –50k	8.7
		51k –60k	17.8
		61k –70k	12
		70k and above	32.4
5	Tenure (yrs)	Less than a yr	12
		1–5 yrs	39.2
		6 –10 yrs	36.2
		11–15 yrs	4.9
		15 yrs and above	7.8
6	Managerial level	Top level	1.6
		Middle level	63.4
		Lower level	35

^*n = 309.

Results of the demographic profile in Table 1 above, show that most of the respondents were males (80.9%). This may be because of preference given to males over females in hiring and promotions within organizations [46]. Most of the respondents were between the age of 31 and 35 (31.1%), holding master’s degree (57.9%) with an income level between 31k to 40k (29.1%), working for the current employer for 1–5 years (39.2%) at middle-level management (63.4%). It can be observed that most of the respondents belong to middle-level management with low-income levels, which may be because of poor economic and employability conditions [46].

3.2 Measures

The questionnaire used was originally in the English language. It included age, gender, education, income level and tenure in current organization or project and managerial level as demographic variables. Abusive leadership was measured using a scale by Tepper (2000) [14]. Sample items include “My supervisor ridicules me” and “My supervisor is rude to me.” Negative emotions were measured using the anger and fear scale by Watson et al. (1988) [48]. Sample items include “sacred, irritable, and jittery”. Proactive behaviours were measured using a scale by Seibert (1999) [49]. Sample items include “Wherever I have been, I have been a powerful force for constructive change and during the past few weeks, I attacked problems actively.” Family motivation was measured using scale by Menges et al. (2017) [22]. Sample items include ‘I care about supporting my family. A 5-point Likert scale was used for measuring all items whereby 5 = strongly agree and 1 = strongly disagree.

4 Results

As the model of the study includes measurement of several causal relationships so, structural equation modelling is used as suggested by Hair, Risher, Sarstedt, & Ringle, (2019) [50] and Sarstedt et al. (2020) [51] through Smart PLS 3 software. Analysis was performed in two steps i.e., Confirmatory Composite Analysis (CCA) [52] or Measurement model assessment and Structural model assessment [51].

4.1 CCA or measurement model assessment

For assessment of validity and reliability of study scales, CCA is used. Henseler et al. (2014) [53] first proposed the concept of CCA as equivalent to CFA and the same has been explained in detail by Hair et al. (2020) [52]. Researchers contend that for measurement model confirmation, both CFA and CCA can be used to improve the reliability of individual items as well as scale, thereby, facilitating the convergent, discriminant and predictive validity measures. Table 2 below shows the indicator loadings for all the study variables.

Table 2
Indicator Loadings

AL NE PB

AL1 0.616

AL2 0.701

AL3 0.746

AL4 0.667

AL5 0.635

AL6 0.695

AL7 0.778

AL8 0.679

AL9 0.675

AL10 0.782

AL11 0.643

NE1 0.778

NE2 0.747

NE3 0.657

NE4 0.690

NE5 0.642

NE6 0.558

NE7 0.658

PB1 0.621

PB2 0.782

PB3 0.645

PB4 0.604

PB5 0.628

PB6 0.735

PB7 0.624

PB8 0.689

PB9 0.607

PB10 0.681

	AL	NE	PB
AL1	0.616
AL2	0.701
AL3	0.746
AL4	0.667
AL5	0.635
AL6	0.695
AL7	0.778
AL8	0.679
AL9	0.675
AL10	0.782
AL11	0.643
NE1	0.778
NE2		0.747
NE3		0.657
NE4		0.690
NE5		0.642
NE6		0.558
NE7		0.658
PB1			0.621
PB2			0.782
PB3			0.645
PB4			0.604
PB5			0.628
PB6			0.735
PB7			0.624
PB8			0.689
PB9			0.607
PB10			0.681

n = 309^*, AL = abusive leadership, NE = negative emotions, PB =proactive behaviours.

Results show that all the items used for measuring constructs of the study have indicator loadings above the minimum threshold level of 0.5 [54] ranging from 0.604 for PII_PB4 to 0.782 for V_AL6. So, no item was deleted. Figure 2 below shows the measurement model of the study with path coefficients clarifying the direction of relationships among variables.

Fig. 2

Measurement model with path coefficients.

Table 3 below presents the internal consistency reliability of the constructs. Internal consistency reliability is measured through Composite Reliability (CR), Cronbach’s alpha (CA) and rho_A.

Table 3

Internal consistency measures

Variables	CA	rho_A	CR
AL	0.879	0.871	0.895
NE	0.804	0.815	0.856
PB	0.838	0.780	0.846

n = 309^*, AL = abusive leadership, NE = negative emotions, PB =proactive behaviours.

Results show that all the measures of internal consistency show satisfactory results as all the values are above the threshold level of 0.70 [52]. The values of CA range from 0.804 for negative emotions and 0.879 for abusive leadership. The values for rho_A range from 0.780 for proactive behaviours to 0.871 for abusive leadership. The values for CR range from 0.846 for proactive behaviours to 0.895 for abusive leadership. This shows that all the constructs of the study explain high levels of internal consistency measures.

For measuring convergent validity Average Variance Extracted (AVE) is calculated. AVE values above 0.5 are acceptable [52]. Table 4 below shows the results of convergent validity assessment for study constructs. All the values of AVE are above the minimum threshold level. This means that all the items of each construct share high inter-scale correlations conforming to the convergent validity standards.

Table 4

Average value extracted (AVE)

Variables	Average Variance Extracted (AVE)
AL	0.774
NE	0.641
PB	0.763

n = 309^*, AL = abusive leadership, NE = negative emotions, PB =proactive behaviours.

Fornell –Larcker criterion and Hetro-trait Mono-trait (HTMT) is used to determine the discriminant validity of constructs. Table 5 shows the results of the Fornell Larcker criterion. The results show that all the diagonal values are greater than all other non-diagonal values of the indicators with other constructs. This conforms to the discriminant validity of the constructs used for the study. Similarly, the second criteria for determining the discriminant validity of the constructs is HTMT proposed by Henseler et al. [53].

Table 5

Fornell Larcker criterion

Variables	AL	NE	PB
AL	0.879
NE	0.666	0.801
PB	0.581	0.760	0.873

n = 309^*, AL = abusive leadership, NE = negative emotions, PB =proactive behaviours.

Table 6 shows the results for the HTMT criterion. Results show that all the values are below the threshold level of 0.90. This indicates that all the constructs are distinct measuring dissimilar traits and thus establishing discriminant validity of all the scales used for the study. Moreover, the complete bootstrap test also confirms the discriminant validity of the constructs as the lower bound CI value at minimum 2.5% level and CI value at maximum 97.5% level does not contain 1 in between.

Table 6

Hetro-Trait Mono-Trait (HTMT) criterion

Variables	AL	NE	PB	FM
AL
NE	0.777
PB	0.682	0.718
FM	0.672	0.701	0.727

n = 309^*, AL = abusive leadership, NE = negative emotions, PB =proactive behaviours.

4.2 Structural model assessment

For path analysis and hypothesis testing, the structural model assessment was performed through bootstrapping procedure with 3,000 bootstrap samples. Estimation of collinearity measures shows that there is no multicollinearity issue in a structural model of the study as all VIF values for indicators are above the acceptable minimum level of 5. PLS algorithm is run to estimate the significance of relationships among variables. Figure 3 below shows the structural model of the study.

Fig. 3

Structural model of the study.

Table 7 below shows the results of the structural model assessment. For estimation of direct relationships between variables, results show that abusive leadership is significantly positively related to negative emotions, H1 (β= 0.666, (t-value = 28.721, p = 0.000). The values of bias-corrected confidence interval [0.614, 0.707] do not contain zero which ensures the stability of the path coefficient for the relationship of abusive leadership as a predictor of negative emotions. Regarding the relationship of negative emotions with proactive behaviors, H3, results show empirical support (β= 0.131, (t-value = 2.692, p = 0.007). Lastly, for the direct relationship of abusive leadership with proactive behaviours, thus the results support H4, that abusive leadership is negatively related to proactive behaviours (β= –0.193, (t-value = 3.756, p = 0.000). The specific indirect effect of abusive leadership on proactive behaviours through negative emotions shows that negative emotions fully mediate the direct relationship between abusive leadership and proactive behaviours. The direct relationship of abusive leadership with proactive behaviors is negative while the indirect relationship is significantly positive (β= 0.087, (t-value = 2.668, p = 0.008). The results support the hypothesized relationships of the study.

Table 7

Structural Model Path Coefficients

	Path coefficients (β)	t –value	p –value	CI (Bias Corrected)		Decision	Hypotheses
				5.0%	95.0%	(p < 0.05)	No.	Status
AL ->NE	0.666	28.721	0.000	0.614	0.707	Significant	H1	Accepted
AL ->PB	–0.193	3.756	0.000	0.286	0.084	Significant	H4	Accepted
NE ->PB	0.131	2.692	0.007	0.026	0.219	Significant	H3	Accepted
AL->NE ->PB	0.087	2.668	0.008	0.017	0.145	Significant	H2	Accepted

n = 309, p < 0.05, t > 1.96, AL = abusive leadership, NE = negative emotions, PB = proactive behaviours.

4.3 Moderation analysis

To estimate the significance of the moderation effect of family motivation on the direct relationship of negative emotions and proactive behaviours, bootstrapping procedure is used with 3000 bootstrap samples. Results of the moderation analysis are presented in Table 8.

Table 8
Moderation Analysis Using FM as a Moderator

Paths β Simple effect f ² t - value p - value Bias corrected CI Remarks Hypothesis H5

5% 95%

Moderating Effect FM ->PB 0.214 0.313 0.047 5.765 0.000 0.153 0.277 Significant Accepted

Paths	β	Simple effect	f ²	t - value	p - value	Bias corrected CI	Remarks	Hypothesis H5
Moderating Effect FM ->PB	0.214	0.313	0.047	5.765	0.000	0.153	0.277	Significant	Accepted

n = 309, p < 0.05, t > 1.96, AL = abusive leadership, NE = negative emotions, PB = proactive behaviours.

Moderation results in Table 8 show a significant moderation effect of family motivation on the relationship of negative emotions and proactive behaviours (β= 0.214). The simple effect of negative emotions on proactive behaviours is 0.016 for an average level of family motivation. Results indicate that for higher levels of family motivation (FM increases by 1 SD) the relationship between negative emotions and proactive behaviours increases by the size of the interaction term (0.313 + 0.214 = 0.527). This means that a 1SD increase in the level of family motivation will bring a 52.7% change in the relationship between negative emotions and proactive behaviours. On the other hand, for lower levels of family motivation (FM decreases by 1 SD), the relationship between negative emotions and proactive behaviours becomes 0.313 –0.214 = 0.099. Figure 4 below shows the moderation effect of family motivation.

Fig. 4

Moderation effect of FM.

Figure 5 below shows the simple slope plot for the interaction effect of NE^*FM. The slope shows that at higher levels of family motivation the relationship of negative emotions and proactive behaviours becomes stronger as the slope is steeper. Whereas the relationship becomes weaker at lower levels of family motivation as the slope is flatter. Further analysis of the bootstrap results shows that family motivation is significantly positively moderating the relationship between negative emotions and proactive behaviours (p = 0.000, (t-value = 5.765). Similarly, the bias-corrected bootstrap CI at 95% for the effect of NE^*FM is [0.153, 0.277]. As the values of CI does not contain zero in between, it is concluded that the interaction effect of NE^*FM is significant. To provide a complete understanding of the relation effect size (f²) is also calculated. Results in Table 5 –16 show that effect size (f²) has a value of 0.047. According to Joseph F Hair Jr et al. (2016) [54], this value represents a large effect size. This means that family motivation explains 4.7% of the proactive behaviours among employees.

Fig. 5

Slope of the interaction effect NE^*FM.

Table 9

Construct Cross Validated Redundancy

Variables	SSO	SSE	Q² (= 1-SSE/SSO)	Remarks
AL	7865	7865
FM	2860	2860
NE	5005	4006.342	0.2	Medium
PB	7150	6532.447	0.086	Small

n = 309, Q² value > 0, AL = abusive leadership, NE = negative emotions, PB = proactive behaviours.

Table 10

Summary of results

No.	Hypotheses	Accepted / Rejected
H₁	Abusive leadership is positively related to negative emotions.	Accepted
H₂	Negative emotions mediate the indirect relationship of abusive leadership and proactive behaviours.	Accepted
H₃	Negative emotions are positively related to employee proactive behaviours.	Accepted
H₄	Abusive leadership is negatively associated with employee proactive behaviors.	Accepted
H₅	Family motivation moderates the direct positive relationship of negative emotions and proactive behaviours such that the relationship of negative emotions and proactive behaviours are strengthened with high levels of family motivation.	Accepted

4.4 Blindfolding

To determine the predictive ability of the model blindfolding procedure is used as suggested by Geisser (1974) [55] and Stone (1974) [56]. Table 9 shows the construct cross validity redundancy. The Q² values are well above zero, meaning that the model can predict hypothesized relationships. However, negative emotions show a medium level of predictive ability and proactive behaviours shows a small level of predictive ability as suggested by Hair et al. (2020) [52]. This means that these variables can be kept in the model and have significant predictive ability to predict endogenous construct. Figure 6 below shows the blindfolded model.

Fig. 6

Blindfolding.

A summary of hypotheses acceptance and rejection is presented in Table 10.

5 Discussion

Leadership styles are a strong determinant of the success or failure of organizational systems [61, 62]. The findings of this study suggest some interesting insights into the relationships of abusive leadership and proactive behaviours with an important role played by the emotions of individuals and their prosocial family motivation. Research suggests that family provides a clear sense of intrinsic motivation for the employees at work. More specifically, when employees perceive that their job helps improve the quality of life of their family and provides support, they engage themselves in behavioural modifications benefitting them at work. This study hypothesized that abusive leadership has a direct positive relationship with negative emotions, H1. The findings of the study are consistent with the previous studies [30], thus H1 is accepted. A large body of knowledge supports the fact that the most common outcome of workplace abuse is negative emotions among employees. Anger and fear are commonly felt negative emotions in response to abuse. However, these discrete negative emotions do not always lead towards negative consequences. This study hypothesized that negative emotions lead towards increased levels of proactivity among employees H3. The findings are consistent with the previous studies [31], hence, H3 is accepted. The reason behind this proactivity is the avoidance behaviours of employees. When employees experience abuse directly or indirectly at the workplace they try to modify their behaviours to avoid future recurrence of similar events. They try to engage themselves in either ‘fight’ or ‘flight’ behaviours. So, we can conclude that negative emotions generated in response to facing abuse at the workplace are positively associated with the proactive behaviours of employees. Where negative emotions act as a mediator between the direct relationship of abuse and proactivity, H2, altering the direct negative relationship of abusive leadership with proactive behaviour, H4. Hence the proposed hypotheses H2 and H4 are also accepted.

Research suggests that employee behavioural modifications are always backed by strong intrinsic motivations. The study conducted by Menges et al. (2017) [22] has taken family motivation as a strong predictor of employee performance at work. Similarly, the studies conducted by Tariq and Ding (2018) [21] and Umrani et al. (2019) [19] have also verified the strong moderating and mediating effects of family motivation as a strong intrinsic motivator to derive employee behaviours at work keeping in view the prosocial intent towards benefitting one’s family. This study assumed the role of family motivation as a moderator on the direct relationship between negative emotions and proactive behaviours. The findings of the study prove that family motivation plays a significant positive interaction effect in strengthening the relationship of negative emotions and proactive behaviours, hence accepting H5. This is because Pakistan is a collectivist society and families usually live, in joint family structures. Moreover, the responsibility of benefiting one’s family through improving work performance on the job and the desire to retain jobs because of the low employability conditions of the current job market has contributed towards lesser employee voice and more behavioural modifications. Family is always considered a top priority when it comes to employee preferences [19]. Individuals with a strong sense of prosocial motivation deliberately focus on fulfilling the needs of others [63] based on which they consciously try to focus on improving their performance by completing their tasks effectively [35]. Similarly, according to Perry and Wise (1990) [64] prosocially motivated employees influence employee behaviours and enhance their creative innovative support for the organization. So, this study advocates the fact that higher levels of abuse at work lead to higher levels of felt negative emotions. In repose to which, employees try to modify their behaviours either in cases of felt anger or by fear of repeating the errors. Employees engage in proactive behaviours. However, family motivation provides a strong reason to individuals to keep engaging in proactivity and towards the permanent modification of behaviours, contributing towards benefiting employees as well as organizations at large.

6 Theoretical implications

This study provides new insight into existing theoretical research by studying the mediation role of negative emotions between the relationship of abusive leadership and proactive behaviours, which was still missing in empirical research. Oh and Farh (2017) [31] conducted a qualitative study and presented a model on causal relationships of anger and fear with proactive behaviours of employees. However, the researchers suggested investigating the “when of how” phenomenon as described by Hayes (2018) [57]. They asked future researchers to investigate when individuals will be able to behave proactively while they are emotionally feeling angry and fearful. This research studied the impact of family motivation as an intrinsic motivator that can influence individuals to become emotionally intelligent and behave proactively keeping in view their prosocial intent of family support. The findings of this study are consistent with the assumptions of AET, that all human behaviours are a product of context and human emotions. The present Pakistani context of the study affirms the theory as well. From the extant literature available it is evident that no such studies are documented in Western and Eastern contexts which challenge the existing assumptions about abusive leadership and its outcomes. The selected, much-studied variables in one novel model to study how and why behavioural modification happens in abusive circumstances and how it impacts proactive behaviours, clearly contributes new insights into theories related to abusive leadership and emotions. These relationships with similar mediations and moderations, integrated into a process model, are not yet studied especially in countries like Pakistan, which is the key highlight of this dissertation.

7 Practical implications

The results of the current study are practically useful for organizations as it helps them to realize the importance of controlling and channelizing the energies generated by felt negative emotions. The role of family motivation, as a moderator, in altering the harmful consequences of negative emotions at work will help organizations focus on the alignment of organizational objectives with the personal objectives of employees. They may try to design problem-specific interventions and policies helping them to mitigate the effects of negative emotional undercurrents within an organization. Pakistani organizations lack dedicated human resource development efforts which affect the overall productivity of employees as well as the organizations [58]. Similar studies can be conducted in developing countries with similar economic constraints e.g., India. Studies focusing on the asymmetric impacts of abuse on employee behaviours must be explored to identify factors other than family which may have a strong moderating impact like self-efficacy and grit. This will help progress theory and practice in this regard. Moreover, moderating impacts of family motivation may also be tested in other pressure intensive organizations like the military or hospitals. Organizations can improve upon 4C’s of work environment i.e., communication, culture, consultative management, and career planning [46] to enhance positive emotional reactions instead of negative ones. Moreover, rewarding proactivity and contribution towards organizational progress will help practitioners to control sustainable employee behavioural modifications effectively. So, this study provides insight into an important fact that family motivation needs to be considered as an important intrinsic factor in motivating employees.

8 Limitations and future directions

The first limitation of the study relates to the methodology as the data was collected at one point in time and from one sample. So, there may be a possibility of common method bias. Future researchers may conduct time-lag studies or mixed-method research designs. Secondly, the current study has only focused on the manufacturing sector organizations for data collection which may limit the generalization of results in other industries. Future researchers may include service sector organizations as well and conduct comparative research in this regard. Thirdly, this study has considered only one moderator i.e., family motivation as a prosocial factor as a reason for behavioural modifications. Future researchers may investigate the impact of agentic factors, genders, self-efficacy, organizational support or work environmental factors as moderators. Moreover, different scales developed for measuring variables can be used to ensure the accuracy of results for the current study.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

The authors have no acknowledgments.

Author contributions

CONCEPTION: Saima Aftab

METHODOLOGY: Saima Aftab and Ajmal Waheed

DATA COLLECTION: Saima Aftab

INTERPRETATION OR ANALYSIS OF DATA: Saima Aftab

PREPARATION OF THE MANUSCRIPT: Saima Aftab

REVISION FOR IMPORTANT INTELLECTUAL CONTENT: Ajmal Waheed

SUPERVISION: Ajmal Waheed

References

Mitchell

, Tepper

. Theoretical and Empirical Developments on the Consequences of Abusive Supervision. Academy of Management Proceedings. 2013;2013(1):10172. doi:10.5465/ambpp.2013.10172symposium.

, Loi

, Lam

. The bad boss takes it all: How abusivesupervision and leader-member exchange interact to influenceemployee silence, The Leadership Quarterly. 2015;26(5):763–774. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2015.03.002

Weiss

, Cropanzano

. Affective Events Theory: A theoretical discussion of the structure, causes and consequences of affective experiences at work. In Research In Organizational Behavior: An Annual Series of Analytical Essays and Critical Reviews. 1996;18:1–74. US: Elsevier Science/JAI Press.

Bandura

, Walters

. Social Learning Theory (Vol. 1): Prentice-hall Englewood Cliffs, NJ. 1977.

Ashkanasy

, Humphrey

. Huy QN. Integrating Emotions and Affect in Theories of Management. Academy of Management Review. 2017;42(2).

Tepper . Abusive Supervision in Work Organizations: Review, Synthesis, and Research Agenda. Journal of Management. 2007;33(3):261–289. doi: 10.1177/0149206307300812.

Mackey

, Frieder

, Brees

, Martinko

. Abusive supervision: A meta-analysis and empirical review. Journal of Management. 2017;43(6):1940–1965.

Zellars

, Tepper

, Duffy

. Abusive supervision and subordinates’ organizational citizenship behaviour. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2002;87(6):1068–1076. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.87.6.1068.

Ashforth

. Petty Tyranny in organizations. Human Relations. 1994;47(7):755–778. doi: 10.1177/001872679404700701.

10.

Dinh

, Lord

, Gardner

, Meuser

, Liden

, Hu

. Leadership theory and research in the new millennium: Current theoretical trends and changing perspectives. The Leadership Quarterly. 2014;25(1):36–62.

11.

Frieder

, Hochwarter

, DeOrtentiis

. Attenuating the negative effects of abusive supervision: The role of proactive voice behaviour and resource management ability. The Leadership Quarterly. 2015;26(5):821–837.

12.

Martinko

, Harvey

, Brees

, Mackey

. A review of abusive supervision research. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 2013;34(S1):S120–S137.

13.

Qin

, Huang

, Johnson

, Hu

, Ju

. The short-lived benefits of abusive supervisory behaviour for actors: An investigation of recovery and work engagement. Academy of Management Journal. 2018;61(5):1951–1975.

14.

Tepper. Consequences of Abusive Supervision. Academy of Management Journal. 2000;43(2):178–190. doi: 10.5465/155637543(2).

15.

Liu

, Liao

, Loi

. The dark side of leadership: A three-level investigation of the cascading effect of abusive supervision on employee creativity. Academy of Management Journal. 2012;55(5):1187–1212.

16.

Peng

, Schaubroeck

, Chong

, Li

. Discrete emotions linking abusive supervision to employee intention and behaviour. Personnel Psychology. 2018.

17.

Yuan

, Xu

, Li

. Resource Depletion Perspective on the Link Between Abusive Supervision and Safety Behaviors. Journal of Business Ethics, 2018:1–16.

18.

Matthews

S H

, Kelemen

, Bolino

. How follower traits and cultural values influence the effects of leadership, The Leadership Quarterly. Vol (32) 1, 101497, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2021.101497

19.

Umrani

, Siyal

, Ahmed

, Arain

, Sayed

, Umrani

. Does family come first? Family motivation individualsOCBassessment via self-efficacy. Personnel Review 2019.

20.

Amstad

, Meier

, Fasel

, Elfering

, Semmer

. A meta-analysis of work-family conflict and various outcomes with a special emphasis on cross-domain versus matching-domain relations. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology. 2011;16(2):151.

21.

Tariq

, Ding

. Why am I still doing this job? The examination of family motivation on employees’ work behaviours under abusive supervision. Personnel Review 2018.

22.

Menges

, Tussing

, Wihler

, Grant

. When Job Performance is All Relative: How Family Motivation Energizes Effort and Compensates for Intrinsic Motivation. Academy of Management Journal. 2017;60(2):695–719. doi: 10.5465/amj.2014.0898.

23.

Adler

, Adler

. Peer power: Preadolescent culture and identity: Rutgers University Press. 1998.

24.

Bandura

. Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current directions in Psychological Science. 2000;9(3):75–78.

25.

Hays

. Structure and agency and the sticky problem of culture. Sociological Theory, 1994:57–72.

26.

Aquino

. Structural and individual determinants of workplace victimization: The effects of hierarchical status and conflict management style. Journal of Management. 2000;26(2):171–193.

27.

Aquino

, Bradfield

. Perceived victimization in the workplace: The role of situational factors and victim characteristics. Organization Science. 2000;11(5):525–537.

28.

Johnson

, Griffith

. Tilting the Scales of Abuse: How Adiposity Augments the Effects of Abusive Supervision. Academy of Management Proceedings. 2014;2014(1):16252. doi: 10.5465/ambpp.2014.16252abstract.

29.

Tepper. Moderators of the Relationship Between Coworkers’ Organizational Citizenship Behavior and Fellow Emp-loyees’ Attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2004;89(3):455–465.

30.

Lebel

. Moving beyond fight and flight: A contingent model of how the emotional regulation of anger and fear spark proactivity. Academy of Management Review. 2017;42(2):190–206.

31.

, Farh

. An emotional process theory of how subordinates appraise, experience, and respond to abusive supervision over time. Academy of Management Review. 2017;42(2):207–232.

32.

Gray

, Watson

, Payne

, Cooper

. Emotion, mood, and temperament: Similarities, differences, and a synthesis. Emotions at Work: Theory, Research and Applications for Management, 2001:21–43.

33.

Peltokorpi

. Abusive supervision and emotional exhaustion: the moderating role of power distance orientation and the mediating role of interaction avoidance. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources 2018.

34.

Parker , Bindl

, Strauss

. Making Things Happen: A Model of Proactive Motivation. Journal of Management. 2010;36(4):827–856. doi: 10.1177/0149206310363732.

35.

Grant

, Ashford

. The dynamics of proactivity at work. Researchin Organizational Behavior. 2008;28:3–34. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2008.04.002

36.

Fay

, Frese

. The concept of personal initiative: An overview of validity studies. Human Performance. 2001;14(1):97–124.

37.

Detert

, Burris

. Leadership Behavior and Employee Voice: Is the Door Open? Academy of Management Journal. 2007;50(4):869–884. doi: 10.5465/amj.2007.26279183.

38.

Adams

. Towards an understanding of inequity. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 1963;67(5):422.

39.

Vroom

. Expectancy theory. Work and motivation 1964.

40.

Locke

, Latham

. Goal-setting theory. Organizational behaviour 1: Essential theories of motivation and leadership. 1994;1:159–183.

41.

Deci

, Ryan

. Self-determination theory 2012.

42.

Kooij

, Nijssen

, Bal

, van der Kruijssen

. Crafting an interesting job: stimulating an active role of older workers in enhancing their daily work engagement and job performance. Work, Aging and Retirement. 2020;6(3):165–174.

43.

Davis

, Nolen-Hoeksema

, Larson

. Making sense of loss and benefiting from the experience: two construals of meaning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1998;75(2):561.

44.

Bernardi

, Huinink

, Settersten

. The life course cube: A toolfor studying lives. Advances in Life Course Research. 2019;41:100258. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.alcr.2018.11.004

45.

Cohen

, Wu

, Miller

. Religion and culture: Individualism and collectivism in the East and West. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. 2016;47(9):1236–1249.

46.

Aftab

, Khalid

. 4c’s of work environment and organizational performance: the mediating role of individual performance. International Transaction Journal of Engineering, Management, & Applied Sciences & Technologies. 2020;11(2):1–16. doi: 10.14456/ITJEMAST.2020.24.

47.

Rothbard

. Enriching or depleting? The dynamics of engagement in work and family roles. Administrative Science Quarterly. 2001;46(4):655–684.

48.

Watson

, Clark

, Tellegan

. Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1988;54(6):1063–1070.

49.

Seibert

, Crant Michael

, Kraimer , Maria

. Proactive personality and career success. Journal of Applied Psychology. 1999;84(3):416–427.

50.

Hair

, Risher

, Sarstedt

, Ringle

. When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review 2019.

51.

Sarstedt

, Ringle

, Cheah

J-H

, Ting

, Moisescu

, Radomir

. Structural model robustness checks in PLS-SEM. Tourism Economics. 2020;26(4):531–554.

52.

Hair

Jr , Howard

, Nitzl

. Assessing measurement model quality in PLS-SEM using confirmatory composite analysis. Journal of Business Research. 2020;109:101–110.

53.

Henseler

, Dijkstra

, Sarstedt

, Ringle

, Diamantopoulos

, Straub

, Calantone

. Common beliefs and reality about PLS: Comments on Rönkkö and Evermann (2013). Organizational Research Methods. 2014;17(2):182–209.

54.

Hair

Jr , Hult

GTM

, Ringle

, Sarstedt

. A primer on partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM): Sage publications 2016.

55.

Geisser

. A predictive approach to the random effect model. Biometrika. 1974;61(1):101–107.

56.

Stone

. Cross-validation and multinomial prediction. Biometrika. 1974;61(3):509–515.

57.

Hayes

. Partial, conditional, and moderated mediation: Quantification, inference, and interpretation. Communication Monographs. 2018;85(1):4–40. doi: 10.1080/03637751.2017.1352100.

58.

Aftab

. An exploratory study of human resource development. International Review of Business Research Papers. 2007;3(3):36–55.

59.

Yang

, Chen

. Emotional labor: A comprehensive literature review. Human Systems Management. 2021;40(4):479–501. doi: 10.3233/HSM-200937.

60.

Siebert-Adzic

. Emotions and leadership. Reasons and impact of emotions in organizational context. Work. 2012;41(Supplement 1):5671–5673. 10.3233/WOR-2012-0915-5671

61.

Bahmani, Ebrahim; Teimouri, Hadi; Moshref Javadi, Mohammad Hosein; Rabbani Khorasegani, Ali. Theoretical development of servant leadership in a military context: A mixed methods research. Human Systems Management. 2020;40:1–16. doi: 10.3233/HSM-200936.

62.

Koon , Vui-Yee;

, Tsu-Sin . Authentic leadership and employee engagement: The role of employee well-being. Human Systems Management. 2020;40:1–12. doi: 10.3233/HSM-200943.

63.

Piliavin

, Charng

. Altruism: A Review of Recent Theory and Research, Annual Review of Sociology. 1999;1(16):27–65.

64.

Perry

, Wise

. The motivational bases of public service, Public Administration Review. 1990;367-373.

65.

Aquino

, Thau

. Workplace victimization: Aggression from thetarget’s perspective. Annual Review of Psychology. 2009;60:717–741. doi: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163703

Abusive leadership and proactive behaviours: Role of family motivation as a moderator

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

OBJECTIVE:

METHODS:

RESULTS:

CONCLUSIONS:

Keywords

1 Introduction

2.1 Role of family motivation as a moderator

3. Research methods

3.1 Participants and procedures

4 Results

4.1 CCA or measurement model assessment

Table 8 Moderation Analysis Using FM as a Moderator Paths β Simple effect f 2 t - value p - value Bias corrected CI Remarks Hypothesis H5 5% 95% Moderating Effect FM ->PB 0.214 0.313 0.047 5.765 0.000 0.153 0.277 Significant Accepted

6 Theoretical implications

7 Practical implications

8 Limitations and future directions

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

Author contributions

References

Table 8
Moderation Analysis Using FM as a Moderator

Paths β Simple effect f ² t - value p - value Bias corrected CI Remarks Hypothesis H5

5% 95%

Moderating Effect FM ->PB 0.214 0.313 0.047 5.765 0.000 0.153 0.277 Significant Accepted