Religiousness,collectivism, and helping behavior: The invigorating role of abusive supervision

IntroductionVoluntary helping behaviors are important for spurring organizational effectiveness.ObjectivesThis study investigates how employees’ religiousness and collectivism might enhance their propensity to help their peers on a voluntary basis, as well as how this relationship might be invigorated by the presence of abusive supervision.MethodsSurvey data were collected from employees and their supervisors in Pakistan-based organizations. The hypotheses were tested with hierarchical regression analysis.ResultsReligiousness relates positively to helping behavior, and this relationship is stronger when employees experience abusive supervision, possibly because their religiousness motivates them to protect their colleagues against the hardships created by such a resource-draining leadership style. Although collectivism does not have a direct significant relationship with helping behavior overall, abusive supervision invigorates this relationship.ConclusionFor organizations seeking to increase voluntary work behaviors, the results show that religiousness and collectivism are two personal resources that can enhance an organizational culture that promotes collegiality and mutual support, particularly when employees believe that their supervisors are hostile to followers and abuse their leadership positions.     

The relationship between abusive supervision,distributive justice and job satisfaction: A substitutes for leadership approach

IntroductionRecently, interest in abusive supervision has grown (Tepper, 2007). However, little is still known about organizational factors that can reduce the adverse effects of abusive supervision.ObjectiveBased on a substitute for leadership perspective (Kerr & Jermier, 1978), we predict that job resources adequacy and role clarity act as buffers in the negative relationship between abusive supervision, distributive justice and job satisfaction.MethodA sample of 253 employees from a City Hall was used to test our hypotheses.ResultsWe found that abusive supervision was significant and negatively related to distributive justice when job resources adequacy and role clarity were low, but not when job resources adequacy and role clarity were high, with consequences for job satisfaction.ConclusionsThese findings suggest that job resources adequacy and role clarity can reduce the negative impact of abusive supervision, which then lessens distributive unfairness perceptions and job dissatisfaction.     

“She was on my side,and grounded me when I needed it:” Research supervision in the field of therapy,based on counsellors’ and psychotherapists’ views on their engagement with research

Research‐supported practice is increasingly emphasised within counselling and psychotherapy at all stages of training. Guided by an interest in how to support therapists in their efforts to develop research knowledge during doctoral training, this paper focuses on research supervision. Research supervision is a surprisingly under‐researched area. Little is known to date about how supervisors “go about their supervision” (Bruce & Stoodley, 2013, p. 5), despite the fact that “high failure rates for research dissertations in the social sciences have been partly attributed to student dissatisfaction with supervision and poor student–supervisor relationships” (Armstrong, 2004, p. 134). Between 2016 and 2019, we explored accredited counsellors' and 'psychotherapists engagement with research during or after their doctoral training. This paper explores research supervision with these two previous studies serving as the backdrop (Bager‐Charleson et al., 2018; Bager‐Charleson et al., 2018b), together with a literature review into research supervision within social sciences and psychotherapy. Supervision is discussed as a crucial coping/support strategy to (a) link research with practice in therapy work, practically and epistemologically; (b) contain and make sense of the use of transformative learning; (c) balance “enculturation” with critical thinking and emancipation; and (d) support reflective and reflexive development. This paper discusses an adaptive research supervision model, akin to a “holding bond” (Stevens, 2016) which supports the student to reflexively position her/himself personally, intersubjectively, theoretically and socio‐culturally, whilst “negotiating the tension” (Lee, 2008) during a process of enculturation into the discipline, and also fostering critical thinking and emancipation to contribute to new knowledge.