رابطه مدیریت روان‌پریش و شهرت سازمانی با میانجی‌گری سرپرستی مخرب و مسئولیت‌پذیری اجتماعی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسنده

استادیار دانشگاه پیام نور و عضو هیئت علمی گروه مدیریت، دانشگاه پیام نور، تهران، ایران

چکیده

      مدیریت روان‌پریش، به عنوان نوعی رهبری ناکارآمد، می‌تواند تأثیر منفی بر شهرت و پیشایندهای سازمانی آن داشته باشد. لذا هدف این مقاله بررسی آن است که چگونه مدیریت روان‌پریش بطور غیر مستقیم از طریق تجلی سرپرستی مخرب و افول مسئولیت‌پذیری اجتماعی، شهرت شرکت‌ها را تضعیف می‌کند. پژوهش بر اساس هدف کاربردی و از جهت شیوه گردآوری داده‌ها توصیفی از نوع همبستگی است. برای گردآوری داده‌های پژوهش از  پرسشنامه‌های استاندارد روان‌پریش سازمانی متیو و همکاران (2014)، سرپرستی مخرب تپر (2000)، مسئولیت‌پذیری اجتماعی لی و لی (2012) و شهرت سازمانی ولش و بیتی (2009) استفاده شد. جامعه آماری پژوهش مشتمل بر کلیه کارکنان شرکت‌های فعال در صنایع فلزی شهر کرمان است که به روش نمونه‌گیری تصادفی ساده 350 نفر از آنها انتخاب گردید. جهت تأیید پایایی پرسشنامه‌ها از آلفای کرونباخ و پایایی ترکیبی استفاده شد که میزان آن برای هر چهار پرسشنامه بالاتر از 7/0 بود. مقادیر به دست آمده برای روایی همگرا نیز نشان‌دهنده روایی پرسشنامه‌ها بود. تحلیل داده‌ها با روش مدل معادلات ساختاری و با استفاده از نرم‌افزار PLS انجام پذیرفت. یافته‌ها حاکی از آن است که با حضور مدیران روان‌پریش، میزان رفتارهای سرپرستی مخرب افزایش و سطح مسئولیت‌پذیری اجتماعی ادراک‌شده شرکت توسط کارکنان کاهش می‌یابد. همچنین هر  چند ارتباط مستقیمی بین مدیریت روان‌پریش با شهرت سازمانی مشاهده نشد، اما طبق شواهد می‌توان استدلال نمود که مدیریت روان‌پریش بطور غیر مستقیم بواسطه  تجلی سرپرستی مخرب و افول سطح مسئولیت‌پذیری اجتماعی، شهرت شرکت را متأثر می‌سازد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Relationship between Psychopath Management and Organizational Reputation with Mediating of Abusive Supervision and Social Responsibility

نویسنده [English]

  • Iman Hakimi
Assistant Professor, Faculty of Business Management & IT Management, Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

Extended Abstract
Abstract
Psychopath management, as a form of ineffective leadership, can have a negative impact on reputation and its organizational antecedents. There fore the purpose of this paper is to examine how Psychopath management indirectly through the manifestation of abusive supervision and the decline of social responsibility undermine corporates reputation. The research is applied in terms of purpose and in terms of data collection is descriptive correlational. To collect the research data, standard questionnaires of Corporate psychopathy of Mathieu etal (2014), abusive supervision of Tepper (2000), social responsibility of Lii & Lee (2012) and organizational reputation  of Welch & Beatty (2009) were used. The statistical population of the study consisted of all employees of the companies operating in the metal industries of Kerman, whom 350 of them were selected by simple random sampling. Cronbach's alpha and composite reliability were used to confirm the reliability of the questionnaires, which was higher than 0.7 for all four questionnaires. The values ​​obtained for convergent validity also indicated the validity of the questionnaires. Data were analyzed using structural equation modeling using PLS software. The findings indicate that with the presence of psychopath managers, the rate of abusive supervisory behaviors increases and the level of employees perceived social responsibility decreases. Also, Although there was no direct relationship between Psychopath management and organizational reputation, there is evidence to suggest that Psychopath management indirectly affects corporate reputation through the manifestation of abusive supervision and a decrease in the level of social responsibility.
Introduction
Corporate reputation is defined as the overall evaluation of stakeholders from images created through the activities, communications, and symbolic behavior of the company over time (Gotsi & Wilson, 2001).Corporate reputation is a unique resource that can create positive financial performance and provide a competitive advantage (Weng & Chen, 2017). In this regard, it is important to note that although the company's reputation has grown over the years, it can in the very short term be destroyed by ineffective management and in addition to direct costs, it may also lead to a decline in the market value of stocks (Linthicum etal. ., 2010). In other words, resolving disputes over the cost of accepting social responsibility, safety, and care, despite their impact on improving company reputation (Aksak etal., 2016), may be unilaterally resolved individually by tyrannical, cruel, and immoral managers such as psychopaths who are likely to be in high positions Compared to front-line managers (Boddy, 2012). Therefore, this study aimed to focus on the relationship between the behavior of business leaders with the psychological characteristics of psychopath individuals. While the behavior and policies of individuals and in particular psychopath managers may seem to be in line with organizational aspirations for success, but at the expense of ethical and spiritual issues, they may also have undesirable consequences, such as the decline of reputation and social responsibility of the organization (Gudmundsson & Southey, 2011). Therefore, the present study attempted to investigate the potential consequences of the presence of psychopath managers on corporate reputation through abusive supervisory behaviors and corporate social irresponsibility. In the following, the literature review of research and development of hypotheses are presented.
Case study
The statistical population of the study consisted of all employees of the companies operating in the metal industries of Kerman, whom 350 of them were selected by simple random sampling.
Materials and Methods
The present study is applied in term of purpose and is descriptive-correlational in terms of data collection. Participants rated their supervisors' psychotic attributes with the corporate psychopath scale proposed by Mathieu et al., 2014.Also for measuring other research constructs, abusive leadership questionnaire (Tepper, 2000), social responsibility questionnaire (Lii & Lee, 2012) and organizational reputation questionnaire (Walsh & Beaty, 2009) were used. Content validity and construct validity were used to assess the validity of the questionnaire. Also, for each construct, two indices of average variance extracted (AVE) and composite reliability (CR) were calculated respectively to measure construct validity and reliability. Finally, data were analyzed by SPSS 19 software as well as PLS 2 and LISREL 8.8 soft wares.
Discussion and Results
Based on the evidence, it can be concluded that the direct relationship between all variables of research, except the relationship between psychopath management with organizational reputation is significant. Also, the evidence suggests that the absolute value of the Sobel test, respectively, to explain the mediating role of abusive supervision in the relationship between psychopath attributes of management with organizational reputation and the mediating role of corporate social responsibility between psychopath management with organizational reputation It is greater than 1.96 (equal to 2.48 and 3.16).  Thus, it can be argued that the presence of psychopath management is gradually eroding the company's reputation foundations through the manifestation of abusive supervisory behaviors and the decline in perception of corporate social responsibility by employees.
Conclusion
The results of present study showed that there is a significant relationship between the psychotic properties of management and abusive supervision. The results of the data obtained from the respondents confirm that fear, abuse and bullying can be mentioned as obvious traits of psychopath managers in the present study. Evidence also shows that with the presence of psychopath management, all components of social responsibility construct have shown a significant turn in the negative direction. Further, the results showed that abusive supervision was associated with decline in organizational reputation. Finally, the results indicate that although the psychotic properties of management did not directly influence organizational reputation decline, But the evidence confirms the influence of psychotic characteristics of management on organizational reputation through the mediating variables abusive supervision and corporate social responsibility.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Corporate psychopathy
  • Abusive supervision
  • Corporate Social Responsibility
  • Organizational reputation
1-Aksak, E. O., Ferguson, M. A., & Duman, S. A. (2016). Corporate social responsibility and CSR fit as predictors of corporate reputation: A global perspective. Public Relations Review, 42(1), 79-81.
2-Andrews, H., Furniss, P., & Evans, C. (2009). A successful leader or a psychopathic individual?. Management Services, 53(4), 22-24.
3-Babiak, P., & Hare, R. D. (2006). Snakes in suits: When psychopaths go to work. New York, NY: Regan Books.
4-Babiak, P., Neumann, C. S., & Hare, R. D. (2010). Corporate psychopathy: Talking the walk. Behavioral sciences & the law, 28(2), 174-193.
5-Bennis, W., Goleman, D., & O’Toole, J. (2008). Candor Killers: What impedes transparency?. Leadership Excellence, 25(9), 6-19.
6-Black, P. J., Woodworth, M., & Porter, S. (2014). The Big Bad Wolf? The relation between the Dark Triad and the interpersonal assessment of vulnerability. Personality and Individual Differences, 67, 52-56.
7-Boddy, C. R. (2007). The Origins of Corporate Psychopaths: A Review of the Literature. In Proceedings of the 2007 Doctoral Students Colloquium.
8-Boddy, C. R. (2010). Corporate psychopaths and organizational type. Journal of Public Affairs, 10(4), 300-312.
9-Boddy, C. R. (2011 a). Corporate psychopaths and organisational constraints. In Corporate Psychopaths (pp. 77-86). Palgrave Macmillan UK.
10-Boddy, C. R. (2011). Corporate Psychopaths, Bullying, Conflict and Unfair Supervision in the Workplace. In Corporate Psychopaths (pp. 44-62). Palgrave Macmillan UK.
11-Boddy, C. R. (2012). The impact of corporate psychopaths on corporate reputation and marketing. The Marketing Review, 12(1), 79-89.
12-Boddy, C. R., Ladyshewsky, R. K., & Galvin, P. (2010). The influence of corporate psychopaths on corporate social responsibility and organizational commitment to employees. Journal of Business Ethics, 97(1), 1-19.
13-Bromley, D. (2001). Relationships between personal and corporate reputation. European journal of marketing, 35(3/4), 316-334.
14-Cangemi, J. P., & Pfohl, W. (2009). Sociopaths in high places. Organization Development Journal, 27(2), 85-96.
15-Cao, Y., Myers, J., Myers, L., & Omer, T. C. (2015). Company reputation and the cost of equity capital. Review of Accounting Studies, 20(1), 42-81.
16-Devinney, T. M., Schwalbach, J., & Williams, C. A. (2013). Corporate social responsibility and corporate governance: Comparative perspectives. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 21(5), 413-419.
17-Gotsi, M., & Wilson, A. M. (2001). Corporate reputation: seeking a definition. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 6(1), 24-30.
18-Gudmundsson, A., & Southey, G. (2011). Leadership and the rise of the corporate psychopath: What can business schools do about the ‘snakes inside’?. E-Journal of Social & Behavioural Research in Business, 2(2), 18-27.
19-Hare, R. D., & Neumann, C. N. (2006). The PCL-R Assessment of psychopathy: development, structural properties, and new directions, Handbook of Psychopathy, Guilford, New York, NY, 58-88.
20-Jones, D., & Neria, A. L. (2015). The Dark Triad and dispositional aggression. Personality and Individual Differences, 86, 360-364.
21-Jones, D., & Paulhus, D. (2010). Different provocations trigger aggression in psychopaths. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 1(1), 12-18.
22-Lii, Y. S., & Lee, M. (2012). Doing Right Leads to Doing Well: When the Type of CSR and Reputation Interact to Affect Consumer Evaluations of the Firm. Journal of Business Ethics, 105, 69–81.
23-Linthicum, C., Reitenga, A. L., & Sanchez, J. M. (2010). Social responsibility and corporate reputation: The case of the Arthur Andersen Enron audit failure. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 29(2), 160-176.
24-Mahmut, M. K., Homewood, J., & Stevenson, R. J. (2008). The characteristics of non-criminals with high psychopathy traits: Are they similar to criminal psychopaths?. Journal of Research in Personality, 42(3), 679-692.
25- Marshall, A., Ashleigh, M., Baden, D., Ojiako, U., & Guidi, M. (2015). Corporate psychopathy: can ‘search and destroy’and ‘hearts and minds’ military metaphors inspire HRM solutions?. Business Ethics, 128(3), 495-504.
26-Mathieu, C., & Babiak, P. (2015). Tell me who you are, I'll tell you how you lead: Beyond the Full-Range Leadership Model. Personality and Individual Differences, 87, 8-12.
27-Mathieu, C., & Babiak, P. (2016). Corporate psychopathy and abusive supervision: Their influence on employees' job satisfaction and turnover intentions. Personality and Individual Differences, 91, 102-106.
28-Mathieu, C., Neumann, C. S., Hare, R. D., & Babiak, P. (2014). A dark side of leadership: Corporate psychopathy and its influence on employee well-being and job satisfaction. Personality and Individual Differences, 59, 83-88.
29-Mathieu, C., Neumann, C., Babiak, P., & Hare, R. D. (2015). Corporate psychopathy and the full-range leadership model. Assessment, 22(3), 267-278.
30-Mullins-Sweatt, S. N., Glover, N. G., Derefinko, K. J., Miller, J. D., & Widiger, T. A. (2010). The search for the successful psychopath. Journal of Research in Personality, 44(4), 554-558.
31-Neumann, C., Hare, R., & Newman, J. P. (2007). The super-ordinate nature of the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised. personality disorders, 21(2), 102-117.
32-Neumann, C., Hare, R., & Pardini, D. (2015). Antisociality and the construct of psychopathy: Data from across the globe. Personality, 83(6), 678-692.
33-Paulhus, D., & Williams, K. (2002). The dark triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism. Research in personality, 36(6), 556-563.
34-Pech, R., & Slade, B.  (2007). Organisational sociopaths: rarely challenged, often promoted. Why?. Society and Business Review, 2(3), 254-269.
35-Ray, J., & Jones, S. (2011). Self-reported psychopathic traits and their relation to intentions to engage in environmental offending. Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 55(3), 370-391.
36-Shaw, J. B., Erickson, A., & Harvey, M. (2011). A method for measuring destructive leadership and identifying types of destructive leaders in organizations. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(4), 575-590.
37-Shoss, M. K., Eisenberger, R., Restubog, S. L., & Zagenczyk, T. J. (2013). Blaming the organization for abusive supervision: The roles of perceived organizational support and supervisor's organizational embodiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(1), 158.
38-Šontaitė-Petkevičienė, M. (2015). CSR reasons, practices and impact to corporate reputation. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 213, 503-508.
39-Stevens, G., Deuling, J., & Armenakis, A. (2012). Successful psychopaths: Are they unethical decision-makers and why?. Journal of Business Ethics, 105(2), 139-149.
40-Takala, T. (2010). Dark leadership, charisma and trust. Psychology, 1(1), 59-63.
41-Ten Brinke, L., Black, P. J., Porter, S., & Carney, D. R. (2015). Psychopathic personality traits predict competitive wins and cooperative losses in negotiation. Personality and Individual Differences, 79, 116–122.
42-Tepper, B. J. (2000). Consequences of abusive supervision. Academy of management journal, 43(2), 178-190.
43-van der Jagt, R. (2005). Senior business executives see communication and reputation as a crucial part of their leadership role. Corporate Reputation Review, 8(3), 179-186.
44-Walsh, G., Beatty, S. E., & Shiu, E. M. (2009). The customer-based corporate reputation scale: Replication and short form. Journal of Business Research, 62(10), 924-930.
45-Wellons, S. (2012). The Devil in the Boardroom: Corporate Psychopaths and Their Impact on Business. PURE Insights, 1(1), 9.
46-Weng, P. S., & Chen, W. Y. (2017). Doing good or choosing well? Corporate reputation, CEO reputation, and corporate financial performance. The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, 39, 223-240.
47-Westerlaken, K. M., & Woods, P. R. (2013). The relationship between psychopathy and the Full Range Leadership Model. Personality and Individual Differences, 54(1), 41-46.