The Journal of applied psychology
-
We investigated how employees can, simultaneously, speak up to leaders at different levels of the organizational hierarchy. In particular, we examined 2 targets of employees' upward voice on work-related issues: the direct leader (i.e., the supervisor) and the skip-level leader (i.e., supervisor's boss). ⋯ By contrast, the association between voice to the skip-level leader and the quality of the employee's relationship with the skip-level leader was more positive when the relationship between the direct leader and the skip-level leader was weaker. The implications of these findings are discussed.
-
Prior research on job insecurity has demonstrated its detrimental effects on both employees and the organization, yet no research has detailed how people actively deal with it. Drawing from proactivity research, this article argues that job insecurity prompts a proactive use of impression management tactics in the workplace. ⋯ A 3-wave survey study of 271 Chinese employees and their supervisors showed that employees experiencing job insecurity in Time 1 reported using a variety of tactics to impress their supervisors at Time 2 and that these tactics curbed the affect associated with job insecurity and enhanced supervisor rated performance, through supervisor's liking and attributed motives. The relationship between impression management and increased supervisor-rated performance was moderated by supervisor attributions; the relationship between impression management and reduced affective job insecurity depended on supervisor liking.
-
The majority of studies on idiosyncratic employment arrangements ("i-deals") are based on social exchange theory. The authors suggest that self-enhancement theory, in addition to social exchange, can be used to explain the effects of i-deals. ⋯ The results of bootstrapping analyses confirm the mediating effects of social exchange and self-enhancement. In addition, employees with high levels of individualism are more receptive to self-enhancement effects; in contrast, employees with low levels of individualism are more receptive to social exchange effects.