This study investigates whether job stressors such as role ambiguity, procedural unfairness, and perceived competition may prompt high Machiavellian employees to use amoral manipulation at work. We also examine whether these manipulative behaviors are consequently related to their own task performance and affiliative citizenship behaviors. A weekly diary study was conducted among 111 Dutch employees over five consecutive working weeks, resulting in 446 assessed occasions. Using a multilevel moderated mediation model, we found that the relationship between weekly job stressors and (...) weekly amoral manipulation (AM) was contingent on trait AM, when the job stressor was role ambiguity (but not when the job stressor was either weekly procedural unfairness or weekly perceived competition). Our results also revealed significant indirect effects of weekly role ambiguity on weekly task performance and weekly display of courtesy through state AM, when trait AM was high. Our findings suggest that role ambiguity activates high Machiavellian employees’ manipulative behaviors at work, which in turn leads to impaired task performance and less courtesy toward others during the same working week. (shrink)

The extant literature has largely conceptualized abusive supervision as a hot and impulsive form of aggression. In this paper, we offer a cold and strategic perspective on how abusive supervision might be used strategically to achieve goals. Drawing on the Machiavellian literature and social interaction theory of aggression, we develop a moderated serial mediation model, in which leader Machiavellianism predicts their strategic use of abusive supervision on subordinates via the mediating role of leaders’ guanxi with direct supervisor. We further theorize (...) that this mediation effect is more pronounced when guanxi among team members (team member guanxi, TMG) is stronger, because Mach leaders are more likely to perceive high TMG as a threat to their power. Finally, we propose that Mach leaders’ strategic use of abusive supervision has negative implications for team outcomes, manifested in low levels of team voice and team organizational citizenship behaviors toward fellow team members (OCBI). Analyses of two studies—Study 1 using multi-wave data (355 leaders) from a US sample and Study 2 using a multi-wave, multi-source, and multilevel data (1252 subordinates and 273 leaders) from a Chinese sample—corroborated our model. This study provides a comprehensive examination of who, how, and when strategic abuse unfolds in the workplace and its negative implication for team outcomes. (shrink)

Actions that financially benefit one person may present risk to another person. For example, the payment incentives of portfolio managers and investors are often asymmetrical such that actions that benefit a portfolio manager can pose financial risk to clients. Despite the presence and potential harm of these asymmetries, few have addressed the question of who exploits these asymmetries and how to mitigate potential harm. Our study examined the effect of selfish personality traits (the Dark Triad) and interpersonal bonding on decision-making (...) for the self, another person, and another person with under reward asymmetry present. Results demonstrated that individuals higher in narcissism and psychopathy made risky decisions for themselves. However, when reward asymmetries were present, all three Dark Triad traits were associated with making riskier decisions for another person in order to benefit the self. There was also a significant interaction between interpersonal closeness generated through bonding and psychopathy such that bonding made the decision-making processes of those high in psychopathy less risky for others. These findings have implications for how different individuals with different relationships make self and other-based financial decisions, and how those decisions change when rewards are asymmetrical. (shrink)