Identifying the Indicators and Outcomes of Exploitative Leadership in Government Organizations with FCM Approach

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

• Ali Shariat Najade ¹
• Farnaz Mehdikhani ²

¹ Assistant Professor of University of Lorestan

² Ph. D Student in Public Administration of Lorestan University

https://doi.org/10.22067/tmj.2024.84834.1491

Abstract

 
1- INTRODUCTION
Considering the importance of the role of government organizations in society, it should be stated that if the leaders of these organizations do not have leadership competence and competence, they can have dangerous effects on the organization with any of their behaviors, such as leadership incompetence, corruption, vandalism, immoral behavior, and criminal behavior. Therefore, it can be said that it is necessary to pay attention to the managers' leadership style, specifically exploitative leadership in these organizations. So far, most studies have investigated positive and constructive leadership styles, but less attention has been paid to the exploitative leadership style. In fact, despite a high amount of research on destructive leadership and its different styles in the country, there is little about exploitative leadership style, indicating a theoretical and practical gap. As a result, this research seeks to identify and highlight the indicators of exploitative leadership and the unfortunate outcomes of this leadership style in government organizations.
 
2- THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
Exploitative leadership falls under the umbrella of destructive leadership because these leaders show a variety of negative behaviors. Despite research on leader self-interest, there is limited understanding of leader exploitation. Exploitative leadership is defined as a destructive leadership style in which the leader (1) exhibits selfish behavior, (2) pressures employees, and (3) undermines their skills and expertise and creates barriers to their personal growth. Previous research has shown many unfavorable effects of exploitative leadership on employees, including reduced job satisfaction and emotional commitment, increased turnover intention, burnout, workplace deviance, and perceived imbalance in social exchange.
 
3- METHODOLOGY
The current research is an applied study in terms of purpose, and regarding the method, it is an exploratory study. The expert team of the current research is the managers of the government organizations of Lorestan province along with the university professors, which was conducted using the purposeful sampling method and numbered 25 people. The tool for collecting information is an interview in the qualitative part and a questionnaire in the quantitative part. Qualitative data were analyzed using the opinions of 25 experts and up to the point of information saturation and theoretical adequacy. Qualitative data were analyzed with "Atlas T" software and content analysis method, and quantitative data were analyzed with the fuzzy cognitive mapping method.
 
 
4- RESULTS & DISCUSSION
The findings of the research show that the most influential indicators of exploitative leadership are extreme ambition, hubristic personality, self-centeredness, and self-interest. Also, the reduction of motivation and innovative performance of employees, job and emotional burnout, the emergence of a paranoid atmosphere, and the spread of organizational pessimism were identified as the most significant consequences of exploitative leadership.
 
5- CONCLUSIONS & SUGGESTIONS
The performance and actions of leaders do not always lead to the organization's success and progress. In some cases, adverse and unethical leadership styles, such as exploitative leadership, can be the cause of pushing employees and the organization toward decline. In general, exploitative leadership can have unfavorable effects on the performance of employees and, consequently, on the organization's performance. Therefore, the current research was conducted to identify indicators and consequences of exploitative leadership in government organizations.

Keywords

• Leadership
• Destructive leadership
• Exploitative leadership
• Government organizations

References

Abdulmuhsin, A. A.; Zaker, R. A., & Asad, M. M. (2021). How exploitative leadership influences on knowledge management processes: The moderating role of organisational citizenship behaviour. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 29(3), 529-561.

Akhtar, M. W.; Huo, C.; Syed, F.; Safdar, M. A.; Rasool, A.; Husnain, M., & Sajjad, M. S. (2022). Carrot and stick approach: the exploitative leadership and absenteeism in education sector. Frontiers in Psychology, 13(8), 1-10.

Anser, M. K.; Ali, M.; Usman, M.; Rana, M. L. T., & Yousaf, Z. (2021). Ethical leadership and knowledge hiding: an intervening and interactional analysis. The Service Industries Journal, 41(5-6), 307-329.

Bies, R. J. (2000). Interactional (in)justice: the sacred and the profane. In: Greenberg, J., Cropanzano, R. (Eds.), Advances in Organizational Behavior: Forthcoming. Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA.

Butt, A. S.; Ahmad, A. B., & Shah, S. H. H. (2021). Role of personal relationships in mitigating knowledge hiding behaviour in firms: a dyadic perspective. Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems, 53(4), 766-784.

Carnevale, J.; Huang, L. & Harms, P. (2018). “Speaking up to the “emotional vampire”: a conservation of resources perspective”. Journal of Business Research, Vol. 91, pp. 48-59.

Eissa, G. (2020). Individual initiative and burnout as antecedents of employee expediency and the moderating role of conscientiousness. Journal of Business Research, 110, 202–212.

Elsaied, M. (2022). Exploitative leadership and organizational cynicism: The mediating role of emotional exhaustion. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 43(1), 25-38.

Feng, Y.; Ayub, A., Fatima, T., Irfan, S., & Sarmad, M. (2022). I cannot be creative due to my exploitative leader! A moderated mediation interplay of leader–member exchange quality and knowledge hiding. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 35(3), 558-579.

Garlatti Costa, G.; Aleksić, D., & Bortoluzzi, G. (2021). The power of balance: Interplay effects of exploitative leadership style, work–family balance and family-friendly workplace practices on innovation implementation. European Journal of Innovation Management, ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print).

Ghanbari, S., & Majouni, H. (2021). Investigating the relationship between exploitative leadership and knowledge concealment through the mediating role of psychological distress. New Psychological Research Quarterly, 17(66), 239-249. (in Persian).

Ghanbari, S.; Majouni, H., & Teghabani, M. (2021). Investigating the relationship between exploitative leadership and innovative performance through the mediating role of knowledge concealment. Applied sociology, 33(4), 123-144. (in Persian).

Guo, L.; Cheng, K., & Luo, J. (2021). The effect of exploitative leadership on knowledge hiding: A conservation of resources perspective. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 42, 83–98.

Guo, L.; Cheng, K., & Luo, J. (2020). The effect of exploitative leadership on knowledge hiding: a conservation of resources perspective. Leadersh Organ, Dev. J. 42, 83–98.

Jacobs, C. M. (2019). Ineffective-leader-induced occupational stress. SAGE Open.

Lee, S.; Kim, S. L., & Yun, S. (2018). “A moderated mediation model of the relationship between abusive supervision and knowledge sharing”. The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 29(3), 403-413.

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

Lyu, Y. J.; Wu, L. Z.; Ye, Y. J.; Kwan, H. K., & Chen, Y. Y. (2022). Rebellion under exploitation: How and when exploitative leadership evokes employees’ workplace deviance. Journal of Business Ethics.

Majeed, M., & Fatima, T. (2020). Impact of exploitative leadership on psychological distress: A study of nurses. Journal of Nursing Management, 28: 713–724.

Metin-Orta, I. (2021). The impact of destructive leadership on followers' well-being. in destructive leadership and management hypocrisy. Emerald Publishing Limited. Bingley, 1, 101-115.

Parmar Ajaib Singh, G. K.; Subramaniam, A., Mahomed, A. S. B., Mohamed, R., & Ibrahim, S. (2020). Role of authentic leadership, servant leadership and destructive leadership behaviour on employee engagement in Malaysian hospitality industry. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 10(9), 113-125.

Peng, J.; Wang, Z., & Chen, X. (2019). Does self-serving leadership hinder team creativity? A moderated dualpath model. Journal of Business Ethics, 159(2): 419–4

Piccolo, R. F., & Colquitt, J. A. (2006). Transformational leadership and job behaviors: the mediating role of core job characteristics. Acad. Manag, 49(2), 327–340.

Rosso, B. D.; Dekas, K. H., & Wrzesniewski, A. (2010). On the meaning of work: A theoretical integration and review. Research in Organizational Behavior, 30, 91–127.

Schmid, E. A.; Pircher Verdorfer, A., & Peus, C. V. (2018). “Different shades-different effects? Consequences of different types of destructive leadership”, Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 9, p. 1289.

Schmid, E. A.; Pircher Verdorfer, A., & Peus, C. (2019). Shedding light on leaders’ self-interest: Theory and measurement of exploitative leadership. Journal of Management, 45(4), 1401–1433.

Shen, Y.; Chou, W., & Schaubroeck, J. (2019). The roles of relational identification and workgroup cultural values in linking authoritarian leadership to employee performance. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 28(4), 498-509.

Shojaei, S.; Qolizadeh, F.; Tajri, T., & Georgia, M. (2021). Designing a poisonous leadership model with an interpretative structural approach. Organizational development of the police, 19(80), 39.61. (in Persian)

Shokoh, Z., & Nikpour, A. (2018). Examining the effect of toxic leadership on the work attachment of employees in government organizations. Public Management Research, 44(12), 133-154. (in Persian)

Sun, Z. Z.; Wu, L. Z.; Ye, Y. J., & Kwan, H. W. (2023). The impact of exploitative leadership on hospitality employees’ proactive customer service performance: A self-determination perspective. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 35(1), 46–63.

Syed, F.; Naseer, S.; Akhtar, M. W.; Husnain, M., & Kashif, M. (2021). Frogs in boiling water: A moderatedmediation model of exploitative leadership, fear of negative evaluation and knowledge hiding behaviors. Journal of Knowledge Management.

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.

Tyler, T. R. (1994). “Psychological models of the justice motive: antecedents of distributive and procedural justice”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 67 No. 5, pp. 850-863

Wang, Z. N.; Chen, Y. H.; Ren, S.; Collins, N.; Cai, S. H., & Rowley, C. (2021a). Exploitative leadership and employee innovative behaviour in China: A moderated mediation framework. Asia Pacifc Business Review.

Wang, Z.; Ren, S.; Chadee, D., & Chen, Y. (2023). Employee Ethical Silence Under Exploitative Leadership: The Roles of Work Meaningfulness and Moral Potency. Journal of Business Ethics, 1-18.

Zhang, J.; Van Eerde, W.; Gevers, J. M., & Zhu, W. (2020). How temporal leadership boosts employee innovative job performance. European Journal of Innovation Management, 42(1), 23-42.

Zhou, ZE.; Meier LL, & Spector PE. (2014). The role of personality and job stressors in predicting counterproductiv wrr eeiiii or: A trr ewa intrratt i Itt eraatiolll rrrr lll ff lll cction and Assessment. Sep; 22(3):286-29.