A conceptual model of leadership behavior: the Destructive and Constructive

Leadership model

A model that captures both constructive and destructive leadership has two basic
dimensions: subordinate- and organization-oriented behaviors.

The subordinate oriented dimension describes leadership behaviors ranging from

anti-subordinate behaviors to pro-subordinate behaviors.
Anti-subordinate behaviors violate the legitimate interest of the organization by
undermining or sabotaging the motivation, well-being, or job satisfaction of
subordinates. Such behaviors may be represented by bullying, harassment, or other
kinds of mistreatment of subordinates.
Pro-subordinate behaviors, on the other hand, are behaviors that foster the
motivation, well-being, and job satisfaction of subordinates. Examples of such
behaviors are listening to subordinates, attending to social relations among
subordinates, giving praise when due, and showing appreciation and respect.

The second dimension describes organization-oriented behaviors, ranging from

anti-organization behaviors to pro-organization behaviors.
In using anti-organizational behaviors a leader violates the legitimate interest of
the organization by e.g. stealing material, money or time, or working towards goals
that are opposite to those of the organization.
Pro-organizational behaviors involve working towards the fulfilment of the
organization’s goals, setting clear and unambiguous objectives, making or
supporting strategic decisions, and implementing organizational change, among
other things.
 By crosscutting the two dimensions, the model presents four categories of
leadership behaviors, three of which are destructive:
(1) Tyrannical Leadership Behavior (pro-organizational oriented behavior coupled
with anti-subordinate behavior);
(2) Derailed Leadership Behavior (anti-organizational behavior as well as anti-
subordinate behavior);
(3) Supportive–Disloyal Leadership Behavior (pro-subordinate behavior, while
simultaneously displaying anti-organizational behavior);
The model also suggests a fourth type of leadership behavior, constructive one:
(4) Constructive Leadership Behavior( act constructively on both dimensions in the
model, which is pro-subordinate and pro-organization behavior).

Tyrannical leaders undermine the motivation, well-being or job satisfaction of

subordinates, without necessarily being clearly destructive as regards to the
organization’s goals. Tyrannical leaders may behave in accordance with the goals,
tasks, missions and strategies of the organization, but they typically obtain results
not through, but at the cost of subordinates.1 They humiliate, belittle, and
manipulate subordinates in order to “get the job done.”

Derailed leaders may display anti-subordinate behaviors like bullying,

humiliation, manipulation, deception or harassment, while simultaneously
performing anti-organizational behaviors like absenteeism, shirking, fraud, or theft.

Supportive–disloyal leaders show consideration for the welfare of subordinates

while violating the legitimate interest of the organization by undermining task and
goal attainment. Such leaders may steal resources from the organization, be it
material, time, or financial resources.2

Constructive leaders behave constructively both towards subordinates and the

organization. First, these leaders act in accordance with the legitimate interests of
the organization, supporting and enhancing the goals, tasks, and strategy of the
organization as well as making optimal use of organizational resources. They
enhance the motivation, well-being and job satisfaction of their followers.

Outcomes of destructive leadership behaviors

1
Ashforth, B. (1994). Petty tyranny in organizations.Human Relations,47, 755−778.
2
Altheide, D. L., Adler, P. A., Adler, P., & Altheide, D. A. (1978). The social meaning of employee theft. In J. M.
Johnson & J. D. Douglas (Eds.),Crime at the top: Deviance in business and the professions.Philadelphia: J.B.
Lippincott.
Experiencing a destructive leader may have serious effects on the subordinates’
well-being such as psychological stress, anxiety, depression, decreased self-
efficacy, health complaints, burnout and stress at work.
Outcomes under study in the area of destructive leadership can broadly be
differentiated into leader-related concepts, job-related concepts, organization-
related concepts, and individual follower-related concepts.

 Leader-related concepts
Abusive supervision should lower trust in the supervisor. On a more general
level, it is likely that followers change their attitudes and behaviors towards the
source of destructive behavior, that is, their leader.
Destructive leadership will have negative relationships with positive leader-
related concepts (such as trust) and positive relationships with negative leader-
related concepts (such as resistance).

 Job-related concepts
Destructive leadership is negatively related to job satisfaction. Part of destructive
leadership is putting forwards unreasonable demands or ridiculing followers,
which are behaviors that make the daily experience of going to work displeasing.
Being dedicated to a job that involves destructive leader behavior is likely to be
difficult, even if the follower is dedicated to his/her profession in general.
Destructive leadership will have negative relationships with positive job-related
concepts and positive relationships with negative job-related concepts.

 Organization-related concepts
Petty tyranny is positively related to turnover intention. In addition, followers of
abusive leaders will also show what they call ‘displaced’ deviance towards the
organization.3 followers of abusive supervisors will perceive his/her behavior as
unjust and thus evaluated procedural justice as low.
Destructive leadership will have negative relationships with positive
organization-related concepts and positive relationships with negative
organization-related concepts.

 Individual follower-related concepts

Outcomes of destructive leadership on individual followers include affectivity,
stress, well-being, and performance. Technically, affectivity could also bean
antecedent of destructive leadership, as people might differ in how they evaluate a
leader's behavior based on their general affectivity. Long-term and frequent
exposition to destructive behavior from a person that is in charge is likely to cause
stress and lead to lower well-being. Negative relationships between destructive
leadership and motivation or well-being could explain why the performance of
followers of destructive leaders is low.
Destructive leadership will have negative relationships with positive individual
follower-related concepts and positive relationships with negative individual
follower-related concepts.

3
Mitchell, M. S., & Ambrose, M. L. (2007). Abusive supervision and workplace deviance and the moderating effects
of negative reciprocity beliefs.Journal of AppliedPsychology,92, 1159–1168