Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

When leaders and their employees disagree: investigating the consequences of differences in cognitions of workplace event criticality

When leaders and their employees disagree: investigating the consequences of differences in... Criticality cognitions regarding the same workplace event often differ between leaders and employees. Nevertheless, its consequences on employee work outcomes remain unknown. In this study, we draw on cognitive dissonance theory to examine how and why leader–employee differences in cognitions of workplace event criticality impact employee job-related outcomes.Design/methodology/approachWu used multilevel polynomial regression analyses from a time-lagged, multi-source field study with 145 leader–employee dyads to test our proposed model.FindingsLeader–employee differences in cognitions of workplace event criticality can bring both benefits and perils to employees. Specifically, such differences can cause employee rumination, which in turn leads to an increase in both employee voice and fatigue.Originality/valueThis study contributes to the event and cognitive discrepancy literature in four ways. First, prior event studies largely adopted a singular employee perspective for investigation (e.g. Chen et al., 2021; Lin et al., 2021). By examining the impacts of event criticality from the dual perspective of leaders and employees, we attain a more comprehensive understanding of the implications of workplace events in organizational life. Second, extant studies have predominantly focused on the dark side of cognitive discrepancy (e.g. Bashshur et al., 2011; Erdogan et al., 2004; Grandey et al., 2013). Our study reveals that leader–employee differences in criticality cognitions can have both a bright and a dark side on employee outcomes, offering a more balanced and dialectical view of the consequences of cognitive discrepancy. Third, drawing on cognitive dissonance theory, we introduce employee rumination as an underlying mechanism to explain the impacts of leader–employee differences in criticality cognitions on employee voice and fatigue. Finally, while prior cognitive dissonance research has primarily employed an intrapersonal perspective (e.g. Sivanathan et al., 2008; Pugh et al., 2011; Grandey et al., 2013), our study adopts an interpersonal lens and underscores that interpersonal differences in cognitions can also serve as an example of cognitive discrepancy to instigate internal dissonance processes. By doing so, we enrich our understanding of cognitive dissonance theory. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Managerial Psychology Emerald Publishing

When leaders and their employees disagree: investigating the consequences of differences in cognitions of workplace event criticality

Download PDF
23 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/when-leaders-and-their-employees-disagree-investigating-the-b7LkJLe4Q7

References (85)

Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
© Emerald Publishing Limited
ISSN
0268-3946
DOI
10.1108/jmp-09-2022-0471
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Criticality cognitions regarding the same workplace event often differ between leaders and employees. Nevertheless, its consequences on employee work outcomes remain unknown. In this study, we draw on cognitive dissonance theory to examine how and why leader–employee differences in cognitions of workplace event criticality impact employee job-related outcomes.Design/methodology/approachWu used multilevel polynomial regression analyses from a time-lagged, multi-source field study with 145 leader–employee dyads to test our proposed model.FindingsLeader–employee differences in cognitions of workplace event criticality can bring both benefits and perils to employees. Specifically, such differences can cause employee rumination, which in turn leads to an increase in both employee voice and fatigue.Originality/valueThis study contributes to the event and cognitive discrepancy literature in four ways. First, prior event studies largely adopted a singular employee perspective for investigation (e.g. Chen et al., 2021; Lin et al., 2021). By examining the impacts of event criticality from the dual perspective of leaders and employees, we attain a more comprehensive understanding of the implications of workplace events in organizational life. Second, extant studies have predominantly focused on the dark side of cognitive discrepancy (e.g. Bashshur et al., 2011; Erdogan et al., 2004; Grandey et al., 2013). Our study reveals that leader–employee differences in criticality cognitions can have both a bright and a dark side on employee outcomes, offering a more balanced and dialectical view of the consequences of cognitive discrepancy. Third, drawing on cognitive dissonance theory, we introduce employee rumination as an underlying mechanism to explain the impacts of leader–employee differences in criticality cognitions on employee voice and fatigue. Finally, while prior cognitive dissonance research has primarily employed an intrapersonal perspective (e.g. Sivanathan et al., 2008; Pugh et al., 2011; Grandey et al., 2013), our study adopts an interpersonal lens and underscores that interpersonal differences in cognitions can also serve as an example of cognitive discrepancy to instigate internal dissonance processes. By doing so, we enrich our understanding of cognitive dissonance theory.

Journal

Journal of Managerial Psychology – Emerald Publishing

Published: Aug 29, 2024

Keywords: Workplace event criticality; Differences in cognitions; Cognitive dissonance theory; Rumination; Voice

There are no references for this article.