The Impact of Supervisor Incivility on Subordinates’ Thriving at Work: The Role of Psychological Capital and Competitive Psychological Climate

Abstract

Background: Supervisor incivility is increasingly prevalent in today's fiercely competitive business landscape. While numerous societies adhere to a general norm of civility, not all organisations or organisational members may share a uniform perspective regarding demonstrating respect for one another in the workplace. There may be increased supervisor incivility within organisations, as these supervisors can implement the strategies necessary for business success. This raises important questions about the implications of supervisor incivility for employees' mental health and job performance. This study specifically focuses on those employees who have experienced and witnessed incivility from their supervisors.

Research suggests that supervisors' behaviour can influence employees' wellbeing. This study focuses on thriving at work, representing a more active state than wellbeing, emphasising continuous growth and learning. Wellbeing emphasises comfort and stability while thriving concerns adaptation and progress. This concept is especially relevant in competitive environments, where maintaining motivation and productivity involves feeling connected to growth and development and not just avoiding burnout. While existing literature has acknowledged the impact of supervisors on employees' wellbeing, there remains a gap in understanding how supervisor incivility— especially witnessed—affects employees' ability to thrive at work.

Aim: The study examines the relationship between supervisor incivility and employee thriving at work. The study addresses three research objectives. First, it seeks to determine the differences among the types of supervisor incivility. Second, it examines the effect of supervisor incivility (experienced and witnessed) on employees thriving at work. Third, it seeks to investigate the indirect influence of the two types of supervisor incivility on subordinates' thriving at work through Psychological Capital (PsyCap) (mediator), with Competitive Psychological Climate (CPC) (moderator) as the boundary condition. The study utilises the Transactional Theory of Stress (TTS) to understand how individuals appraise and respond to workplace challenges and Social Learning Theory (SLT) to provide insight into how employees adopt behaviours based on observed interactions, underpinning the effects of managerial behaviours on employee thriving.

Method: A mixed methods approach is used to collect and analyse the data, including surveys and interviews. Using an online survey approach in the main study, Phase One, data were gathered from 412 Junior Medical Officers (JMOs) in Saudi Arabia and analysed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS), regression, and PROCESS macro. Using the interview approach in Phase Two, data were gathered from 25 JMOs and analysed using thematic analysis to comprehend the findings of Phase One.

Results: Phase one of the study showed that the levels of PsyCap and the thriving of subordinates vary in line with the type of supervisor incivility in increasingly competitive and pressured workplace environments. Specifically, the findings show that supervisor incivility affects employees' PsyCap. Further, the indirect effect of supervisor incivility on thriving at work through PsyCap is weaker when the CPC is low and stronger when it is high. In a highly competitive work environment, experiencing supervisor incivility results in lower PsyCap. However, it weakened the relationship between witnessed supervisor incivility and PsyCap. Hence, a subordinate appraised witnessing supervisor incivility as a challenge, increasing PsyCap and, in turn, thriving at work.

Phase Two of the study explored why subordinates considered supervisor incivility as a challenge. The main reasons that participants highlighted were fear, personal agendas, desire to be in the in-group with their supervisor and cultural values such as respect. The findings also highlighted how JMOs learnt to adapt to incivility, used negative peer experiences as lessons on what to avoid at work with their supervisors and focused on long-term outcomes. All these mechanisms enabled them to thrive at work. Overall, the results showed that supervisor incivility has a bright side in competitive climates and helps employees thrive at work.

Contributions and Implications: This study addresses gaps in the literature on supervisor incivility and how employees in high-stress environments, such as healthcare, appraise and manage uncivil behaviour. The present study contributes to knowledge by identifying coping responses, competitive climate, social process, and psychological capital as possible reinforcements of the supervisor witnessed incivility. As such, the study model can be used to understand the negative and positive findings concerning supervisor incivility. The study also provides a Middle Eastern perspective on the types of incivility and their effects on workplace thriving. Empirically, it examines the dual perspectives of victims and observers, offering new insights into how both experienced and witnessed supervisor incivility impact thriving at work. Theoretical contributions include applying TTS to clarify appraisal processes and conditions under which incivility affects subordinates and using SLT to understand why observed supervisor incivility helps employees thrive at work. Practically, the study guides organisations in creating supportive policies and strategies for enhancing employee thriving. It also gives supervisors insights into how their behaviour influences employee responses, ultimately improving organisational effectiveness.