The Effects of Vacillating Leadership Style on Subordinate Voice Behaviors and Creativity and Its Mechanisms
Location
Sasquatch Room 124 C
Start Date
22-4-2023 3:50 PM
End Date
22-4-2023 5:05 PM
Publication Date
2023
Disciplines
Arts and Humanities | Law | Social and Behavioral Sciences
Description
Prior studies (Acuna & Male, 2022; Watkins & Walker, 2021) have linked toxic leaders' negative consequences to subordinates. For example, research has shown a yearly organizational-cost of $450billion-$550billion in the United States because of toxic leaders. Nevertheless, the same organizations could save $12,500 if they avoid recruiting toxic leaders (Bremer, 2020). Another study revealed that toxic leadership cost the United Kingdom £15.7billion/per annum (Baker, 2020). Schmidt’s (2008) qualitative study explained toxic leadership on a five-dimensional pattern. Of these dimensions, existing studies focus on Abusive-Supervision, Narcissism, Authoritarian Leadership and Self-promotion. Yet, there is little research on vacillating leadership (Schilling et al., 2022), a core element of toxic leadership that makes a leader toxic (Schmidt, 2008), and its possible effects on voice behaviours and creativity. Vacillating/Unpredictable leadership has been associated with behavioural volatility that deteriorates communication, productivity, and approachability, instilling fear in subordinates (Schmidt, 2008). Scholars have expressed vacillating leadership as Unpredictable (Acuna & Male, 2022), Inconsistent (Vullinghs et al., 2020), Volatile (Swan, 2018), Erratic (Aravena, 2019) and Fickle (Spain, 2019). The empirical works of Greer et al. (2013) linked vacillation to a leader’s emotional expression and not behaviour. However, Acuna and Male (2022) argued that leader vacillation/unpredictability are behaviours that weaken morale, and adversely influence proactive behaviours. A recent follow-up study by Schilling et al. (2022) revealed that vacillating/inconsistent leadership is in its infancy with sparse research. Indeed, vacillating leadership is a social problem, and the contradictory studies, scarce research and unexplored dimensions justify scholarly investigation to determine its effects on voice behaviours and creativity, using social exchange theory.
Description Format
html
Recommended Citation
Akinyele, Adebisi, "The Effects of Vacillating Leadership Style on Subordinate Voice Behaviors and Creativity and Its Mechanisms" (2023). International Conference on Hate Studies. 77.
https://repository.gonzaga.edu/icohs/2023/seventh/77
Full Text of Presentation
wf_no
Media Format
flash_audio
Type
Workshop
The Effects of Vacillating Leadership Style on Subordinate Voice Behaviors and Creativity and Its Mechanisms
Sasquatch Room 124 C
Prior studies (Acuna & Male, 2022; Watkins & Walker, 2021) have linked toxic leaders' negative consequences to subordinates. For example, research has shown a yearly organizational-cost of $450billion-$550billion in the United States because of toxic leaders. Nevertheless, the same organizations could save $12,500 if they avoid recruiting toxic leaders (Bremer, 2020). Another study revealed that toxic leadership cost the United Kingdom £15.7billion/per annum (Baker, 2020). Schmidt’s (2008) qualitative study explained toxic leadership on a five-dimensional pattern. Of these dimensions, existing studies focus on Abusive-Supervision, Narcissism, Authoritarian Leadership and Self-promotion. Yet, there is little research on vacillating leadership (Schilling et al., 2022), a core element of toxic leadership that makes a leader toxic (Schmidt, 2008), and its possible effects on voice behaviours and creativity. Vacillating/Unpredictable leadership has been associated with behavioural volatility that deteriorates communication, productivity, and approachability, instilling fear in subordinates (Schmidt, 2008). Scholars have expressed vacillating leadership as Unpredictable (Acuna & Male, 2022), Inconsistent (Vullinghs et al., 2020), Volatile (Swan, 2018), Erratic (Aravena, 2019) and Fickle (Spain, 2019). The empirical works of Greer et al. (2013) linked vacillation to a leader’s emotional expression and not behaviour. However, Acuna and Male (2022) argued that leader vacillation/unpredictability are behaviours that weaken morale, and adversely influence proactive behaviours. A recent follow-up study by Schilling et al. (2022) revealed that vacillating/inconsistent leadership is in its infancy with sparse research. Indeed, vacillating leadership is a social problem, and the contradictory studies, scarce research and unexplored dimensions justify scholarly investigation to determine its effects on voice behaviours and creativity, using social exchange theory.