An accumulating amount of research has documented the harmful effects of abusive supervision on either its victims or third parties (peer abusive supervision). The abusive supervision literature, however, neglects to investigate the spillover effects of abusive supervision through third-party employees’ (i.e., peers’) mistreatment actions toward victims. Drawing on social learning theory, we argue that third parties learn mistreatment behaviors from abusive leaders and then themselves impose peer harassment and peer ostracism on victims, thereby negatively affecting victims’ performance. Further, we posit (...) that, if a victim has a proactive personality, this will weaken these indirect, negative effects. We conducted two studies, both with three-wave longitudinal data, to verify the hypotheses. The results of Study 1 evidence the significant indirect effects of abusive supervision on employee creative performance via both peer harassment and peer ostracism. Contrary to our moderation hypothesis, the analysis shows that victims’ proactive personality strengthens rather than weakens the negative indirect effects of peer harassment. Study 2 generally replicated the results of Study 1 with employee’s objective job performance as outcome. Our research contributes to the abusive supervision literature by highlighting a social learning process of third-party peer mistreatment, suggesting a spillover channel of abusive supervision on the victim’s performance. (shrink)

A correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-021-04793-5.

Animal welfare in livestock farming is a general concept that involves many concrete ethical issues for which solutions need to be developed. To avoid disturbing the internal market, the European Union encourages market players to develop harmonized solutions to such issues. One issue is the castration of piglets without pain relief, the practice of which causes pain to piglets. Although scientists have found alternatives to replace castration without pain relief, the process of solving the castration issue has stagnated. Questions remain (...) as to why this painful castration practice has still not been addressed after three decades, how it is likely to develop in the near future, and whether it will lead to a single harmonized solution for the EU. To answer these questions, this study examines the development of the castration issue using in-depth interviews and desk research. The results show that different countries have developed different solutions at different stages of the issue’s development. For a long period, the developments did not set a course toward a single solution; most EU pork producers waited for a castration ban in Germany. Such a situation was turbulent in solving the issue because the heterogeneous EU was unlikely to agree upon on a single alternative. With the EU now taking a market-based orientation, however, solving the issue now seems more likely. More attention is needed to understand market opportunities and chain integration in this area. (shrink)