بررسی تأثیر رهبری زهرآگین بر دلبستگی کاری کارکنان در سازمان‌های دولتی

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

استادیار، گروه مدیریت دولتی، واحد کرمان، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، کرمان، ایران

10.22111/jmr.2019.30307.4621

چکیده

       هدف این پژوهش، بررسی تأثیر رهبری زهرآگین بر دلبستگی کاری کارکنان در سازمان‌های دولتی شهر کرمان است. روش تحقیق توصیفی- همبستگی می‌باشد که به روش پیمایشی انجام شده است. جامعه آماری، شامل کارکنان سازمان‌های دولتی شهر کرمان (هفت سازمان) است و تعداد 301 نفر به عنوان حجم نمونه انتخاب شدند. همچنین روش نمونه‌گیری در این تحقیق، طبقه‌ای متناسب با حجم است. ابزارهای مورد استفاده جهت جمع‌آوری داده‌ها، دو پرسشنامه‌ رهبری زهرآگین اشمیت (2008) و دلبستگی کاری شافیلی و باکر (2003) می‌باشد که روایی محتوایی و سازه و همچنین پایایی آن­ها به تایید رسیده است. برای تحلیل داده‌ها از مدل‌سازی معادلات ساختاری استفاده شده است و نرم‌افزارهای مورد استفاده، SPSS و AMOS می‌باشند. با توجه به مدل نهایی می‌توان گفت که رهبری زهرآگین و ابعاد آن یعنی رهبری توهین‌آمیز، رهبری خودکامه، خودشیفتگی رهبری، جاه‌طلبی رهبری و غیرقابل‌پیش‌بینی بودن بر دلبستگی کاری کارکنان تأثیر منفی و معنادار می­گذارند. با توجه به نتایج حاصله پیشنهاد می‌گردد که اقدامات و سازوکارهای لازم در جهت پیش‌گیری از به وجود آمدن سبک رهبری زهرآگین در سازمان‌های دولتی به عمل آید.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Investigating the Impact of Toxic Leadership on Work Engagement in Governmental Organizations

نویسندگان [English]

  • zahra Shokoh
  • Amin Nikpour
Assistant Professor, Department of Management, Kerman Branch, Islamic Azad University, Kerman, Iran
چکیده [English]

Abstract
The goal of this research is investigating the impact of toxic leadership on work engagement in governmental organizations in Kerman city. This study is a descriptive- correlation research that has been conducted through the survey method. Community statistical is includes employee of governmental organizations of Kerman city (seven organizations) that were selected 301 people as the sample size. Also sampling in this study is class proportional to the size of the community. Tools used to collect the data are toxic leadership questionnaire of Schmidt (2008) and work engagement questionnaire of Yakin and Erdil (2012) that content validity structures and reliability of their approval reached. For data analysis is used of structural equation modeling and software used are the SPSS and Amos. According to the final model can be said that toxic leadership and its sub variables as abusive supervision, authoritarian leadership, narcissistic leadership, petty tyranny and unpredictable have negative impact on employees’ work engagement. According to the results suggest that measures and mechanism is necessary in order to prevent the coming toxic leadership style virulent in governmental organizations.
Introduction
In governments especially the bureaucratic ones, it is the government which plays the most important role in the society. In our country, 80% of the organizations are public. Considering the saliency of the role of government and public organizations in managing the society, it could be explicated that if the executive officers/directors of these organizations lack the required competence and merit, the organization shall be faced with dangerous and unwanted consequences due to behaviors such as leadership inefficiency, mischief, corruption, immoral behavior (even if legal) and organized crime (Hamidizadeh et al., 2017: 3). One form of extremely harmful leadership is called toxic leadership. Such leaders tend to decrease the sense of motivation and enthusiasm for team work among the subordinates and would eventually push them towards self-centeredness in the organization(Roter, 2011). In general, the most notorious consequences of toxic leadership and its negative outcomes in the organization could be lob change, stress, emotional boredom and a feeling of organizational injustice among the employees which would lead to weaken the sense of belonging and commitment by them (Spranger, 2014: 12).
Taking the above into consideration, the present survey aims to indicate the impact of toxic leadership on employees’ work engagement in public sector.
Materials and Methods
The present survey is a kind of descriptive- correlational research that was conducted using a survey. Also, this study is in terms of the objective of the development-applied research. Statistical population of the survey consists of all public sector employees of Kerman governmental organizations out of which 301 persons were chosen as sample volume based on stratified proportionate with the volume.
Data gathering was carried out using 2 questionnaires. Schmidt questionnaire (2008) consisting of 29 questions was used to measure toxic leadership. Schaufeli and Bakker (2003) questionnaire containing 17 statements was used to measure work engagement.
Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to analyze the data using SPSS and AMOS softwares.
Results
The results of the survey showed that toxic leadership has a negative impact on employees’ work engagement in Kerman governmental organizations. Other results manifested negative impact the dimensions of toxic leadership such as abusive supervision, authoritarian leadership, narcissistic leadership, petty tyranny and unpredictable on employees’ work engagement in Kerman governmental organizations. Among dimensions of toxic leadership, abusive supervision shows the most negative impact, while the dimension of petty tyranny has the least negative impact on employees’ work engagement.
Discussion and Conclusion
In this research, the relationship between toxic leadership and employees’ work engagement was theoretically explicated before being exposed to testing. Indeed, the goal of this survey was to investigate the impact of toxic leadership on work engagement in governmental organizations of Kerman city. The findings of the survey showed that toxic leadership and its sub variables as abusive supervision, authoritarian leadership, narcissistic leadership, petty tyranny and unpredictable have negative impact on employees’ work engagement in Kerman governmental organizations.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Toxic leadership
  • work engagement
  • Governmental organizations
1-Ajami, A. & Dadfar, E. (2017). Investigating toxic leadership with anti-productive behaviors in Meshkin Shahr and Lahroud Education Bureaus. Annual Conference of Business Management and Economy, Tehran, Iran. (In Persian)

2-Ashforth, B. E. (1997). Petty tyranny in organizations: A preliminary examination of antecedents and consequences. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 14(2), 126-140.

3-Babiak, P. & Hare, R. D. (2006). Snakes In Suits: When Psychopaths Go To Work. New York: Regan Books, Harper Collins Publishers.

4- Bradley, P. & Charbonneau, D. (2004). Transformational leadership: Something new, something old. Canadian Military Journal, 5(1), 7-14.

5-Demir, D. & Rodwell, J. (2012). Psychosocial antecedents and consequences of workplace destructive leadership and its outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 24(1), 138-158‌.

6-Einarsen, S., SchankeAasland, M. & Skogstad, A. (2007). Destructive leadership behavior: A definition and conceptual model. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(3), 207-216.

7-Elci, M., Sener, I., Aksoy, S. & Alpkan, L. (2012). The impact of ethical leadership and leadership effectiveness on employees’ turnover intention: The mediating role of work related stress. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 58, 289-297.

8- Fathollahi, A. & Pouraghajan-Hosseini, S. R. (2017). Investigating the effect of social capital on organizational misbehavior considering the role of toxic leadership (case study: Employees of Imam Khomeini (RH) Marine University). Marine Education, 4(11), 81-93. (In Persian)

9- Flynn, G. (1999). Stop Toxic Managers Before They Stop You. Workforce. Retrieved from: www. workforce.com

10- Frunham, A. & Taylor, J. (2011). The Dark Side of Behaviour at Work: Understanding and Avoiding Employees Leaving, Thieving and Deceiving. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

11- Ghapanchi, A. H. & Aurum, A. (2010). Antecedents to IT personnel's intentions to leave: A systematic literature review. Journal of Systems and Software, 84 (2), 238-249.

12- Hamidizadeh, A., Zareimati, H. & Zafari, H. (2017). Investigating the effect of toxic leadership style and malfunctioning behaviors on the outcomes and job attitudes of employees. Organizational Behavior, 6(23), 1-31. (In Persian)

13- Heppell, T. (2011). Toxic leadership: Applying the Lipman-Blumen model to political leadership. Representation, 47(3), 241-249.

14- Hu, H. H. (2012). The influence of employee emotional intelligence on coping with‌ supervisor abuse in a banking context. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 40(5),‌ 863-874

15-Karatepe, O. M. (2013). High-performance work practices, work social support and their effects on job embeddedness and turnover intentions. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 25(6), 903-921.

16- Karatepe, O. M. & Vatankhah, S. (2014). The effects of high-performance work practices and on flight attendants' performance outcomes. Journal of Air Transport Management, 37, 27-35.

17- Kheyrandish, M. & Dorani, A. (2018). The mediating role of employee’s work engagement on the effect of genuine leadership on decreasing organizational pessimism. Human Sources Studies, 8(30), 69-86. (In Persian)

18- Leet, E. (2011). The impact toxic or severe dysfunctional leadership has on the effectiveness of an organisation. PhD Thesis, Murdoch University, Australia.

19-Martino, V. D. (2003), Relationship of work stress and
workplace violence in the health sector. International Labour Office, International Council of Nurses, World Health Organization.

20-Nazemi, G. R. & Feizi, M. (2014). Investigating the effect of toxic leadership on employees’ behavior (case study: Ardebil engineering council). MA Thesis, Islamic Azad University, Garmsar, Iran. (In Persian)

21-Nielsen, R. P. (2003). Corruption networks and implications for ethical corruption reform. Journal of Business Ethics, 42(2), 125-149.

22-Padilla, A., Hogan, R. & Kaiser, R. B. (2007). The toxic triangle: Destructive leaders, susceptible followers, and conductive environments. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(3), 176-194.

23-Rahimi, A., Ahmadi, F. & Akhounzadeh, M. R. (2004). Factors affecting on nurses’ work tension, employed in some hospitals in Tehran. Hayat, 10(22), 13-23. (In Persian)

24- Rahimnia, F., Salehi, S. & Islami, G. (2017). Investigating the effect of security and job independence on leaving jobs due to work engagement in government organizations. Public Management, 9(2), 333-357. (In Persian)

25- Rangriz, H., Sajjad, A. & Latifijaliseh, S. (2017). Factors affecting on employees’ work engagement via meta-analysis. Occupational and Organizational Consulting, 10(37), 117-146. (In Persian)

26- Reed, G. E. (2015). Tarnished: Toxic Leadership in the US Military. Washington: Potomac Books.

27- Rezapour, M. & Ebrahimi, J. (2016). The effect of cultural capital on work engagement among the professors of Mohaghegh Ardebili University. Social Sciences Studies, 13(3), 93-106. (In Persian)

28-Roter, A. B. (2011). The lived experiences of registered nurses exposed to toxic leadership behaviors. PhD Thesis, Capella University, Minneapolis, United States.

29-Rothbard, N. P. (2001). Enriching or depleting? The dynamics of engagement in work and family roles. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(4), 655-684.

30-Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2003). Test manual for the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale. Unpublished manuscript, Utrecht University, the Netherlands. Retrieved from: http://www.schaufeli.com

31-Schmidt, A. A. (2008). Development and validation of the toxic leadership scale. Master Thesis, University of Maryland, Maryland, United States.

32- Seyedjavadeyn, S. R., Gholipour, A. & Janalizadehshoki, M. (2014). Recognition of the effect of applying toxic leadership style in the organization on the results and outcomes of human resources. Human Resources Management Research, 6(4), 109-127. (In Persian)

33-Spranger, A. (2014). Toxic leadership and organizational engagement. Submitted to the Virtual Conference on Moral Leadership and the Journal of Virtues and Leadership, Virginia, United States.

34- Taherlou, S., Fazlzadeh, A., Sanobar, N. & Faryabi, M. (2017). The effect of person-job proportion on willingness to leave job and improve job quality emphasizing on the role of work engagement: Evidences from brokerage industry. Management of Organizational Culture, 15(2), 249-269. (In Persian)

35- Tajvaran, M. & Seyf, M. H. (2016). Work engagement predictability model based on quality of working life and organizational justice of Shiraz physical education teachers, mediating role of conflict and organizational commitment. Management and Sports Development, 6(3), 71-85. (In Persian)

36- Tepper, B. J., Duffy, M. K., Henle, C. A. & Lambert, L. S. (2006). Procedural injustice, victim precipitation, and abusive supervision. Personnel Psychology, 59(1), 101-123.

37- Whicker, M. L. (1996). Toxic Leaders: When Organizations Go Bad. Westport: Quorum Books.

38- Wilson-Starks, K. Y. (2003). Toxic leadership. Transleadership, Inc.

39-Xu, E., Huang, X., Lam, C. K. & Miao, Q. (2012). Abusive supervision and work behaviors: The mediating role of LMX. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33(4), 531-543.

40-Yaghoubi, M. & Yaghoubi, N. M. (2015). The role of empowerment components of psychology on predicting work engagement. Iranian Management Research. 21(3), 243-261. (In Persian)

41-Yarmohammadzadeh, P. & Feizi, A. (2015). The mediating role of work engagement and relationship between occupational features and employees’ work commitment of the employees of Shahid Madani University. New Psychological Researches, 10(38), 203-225. (In Persian)