The search result changed since you submitted your search request. Documents might be displayed in a different sort order.
  • search hit 54 of 2162
Back to Result List

When proactivity produces a power struggle

  • Previous research informs us about facilitators of employees’ promotive voice. Yet little is known about what determines whether a specific idea for constructive change brought up by an employee will be approved or rejected by a supervisor. Drawing on interactionist theories of motivation and personality, we propose that a supervisor will be least likely to support an idea when it threatens the supervisor’s power motive, and when it is perceived to serve the employee’s own striving for power. The prosocial versus egoistic intentions attributed to the idea presenter are proposed to mediate the latter effect. We conducted three scenario-based studies in which supervisors evaluated fictitious ideas voiced by employees that – if implemented – would have power-related consequences for them as a supervisor. Results show that the higher a supervisors’ explicit power motive was, the less likely they were to support a power-threatening idea (Study 1, N = 60). Moreover, idea support was less likely when this idea was proposed by an employeePrevious research informs us about facilitators of employees’ promotive voice. Yet little is known about what determines whether a specific idea for constructive change brought up by an employee will be approved or rejected by a supervisor. Drawing on interactionist theories of motivation and personality, we propose that a supervisor will be least likely to support an idea when it threatens the supervisor’s power motive, and when it is perceived to serve the employee’s own striving for power. The prosocial versus egoistic intentions attributed to the idea presenter are proposed to mediate the latter effect. We conducted three scenario-based studies in which supervisors evaluated fictitious ideas voiced by employees that – if implemented – would have power-related consequences for them as a supervisor. Results show that the higher a supervisors’ explicit power motive was, the less likely they were to support a power-threatening idea (Study 1, N = 60). Moreover, idea support was less likely when this idea was proposed by an employee that was described as high (rather than low) on power motivation (Study 2, N = 79); attributed prosocial intentions mediated this effect. Study 3 (N = 260) replicates these results.show moreshow less

Export metadata

Additional Services

Search Google Scholar Statistics
Metadaten
Author details:Tina UrbachORCiDGND, Doris FayORCiDGND
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2018.1435528
ISSN:1359-432X
ISSN:1464-0643
Title of parent work (English):European journal of work and organizational psychology : the official journal of The European Association of Work and Organizational Psychology
Subtitle (English):how supervisors’ power motivation affects their support for employees’ promotive voice
Publisher:Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group
Place of publishing:Abingdon
Publication type:Article
Language:English
Year of first publication:2018
Publication year:2018
Release date:2022/03/31
Tag:Promotive voice; idea support; power motive; proactivity; supervisor support
Volume:27
Issue:2
Number of pages:16
First page:280
Last Page:295
Organizational units:Humanwissenschaftliche Fakultät / Strukturbereich Kognitionswissenschaften / Department Psychologie
DDC classification:1 Philosophie und Psychologie / 15 Psychologie / 150 Psychologie
License (German):License LogoCC-BY - Namensnennung 4.0 International
Accept ✔
This website uses technically necessary session cookies. By continuing to use the website, you agree to this. You can find our privacy policy here.