Abstract:Abusive supervision, manifesting in nonphysical forms of hostility from supervisors toward subordinates (Tepper, 2000), has been found to cause serious harms to subordinates and organizations, such as diminishing subordinates’ well-being, proactive behaviors, and job performance (for reviews, see Mackey, Frieder, Brees, & Martinko, 2017; Martinko, Harvey, Brees, & Mackey, 2013; Tepper, 2007; Tepper, Simon, & Park, 2017). A number of theoretical perspectives have been used to understand abusive supervision, including a social construction perspective (Tepper, 2000; Tepper et al., 2017), a self-control theory perspective (Lian, Brown, Ferris, Liang, Keeping, & Morrison, 2014; Lian, Ferris, Morrison, & Brown, 2014), and a mixed relationship perspective (Duffy, Ganster, & Pagon, 2002). However, questions remain to be answered with these theoretical perspectives. For example, although a social construction perspective suggests that abusive supervision reflects subordinates’ perception (Tepper, 2000), it is unclear what factors may affect subordinates’ perceptions of supervisors’ behaviors and thus affect subordinates’ experiences of and reactions to abusive supervision. Moreover, a self-control theory perspective suggests that organizations can benefit greatly from selecting individuals with high self-control because supervisors with high self-control are less likely to engage in abusive supervision and subordinates with high self-control are less likely to retaliate against abusive supervisors. However, considering the downside of high self-control as suggested by recent development in self-control theory, is it likely that high self-control may promote abusive supervision among supervisors or bring in negative outcomes for subordinates who refrain from retaliating against abusive supervisors? Finally, a mixed relationship perspective suggests that supervisors may engage in both abusive and supportive supervision and abusive supervision is more detrimental when it occurs in combination with supportive supervision. However, it is unclear why supervisors switch between abusive and supportive supervision and if a combination of abusive and supportive supervision is always worse. In this symposium, we provide rich theoretical and empirical accounts of the mechanisms and boundary conditions to address these unanswered questions. The four papers included in this symposium adopt different methodologies including a multi-wave survey design, an experience sampling design, and latent profile analyses. Participants of this symposium are form different countries including USA, China, Canada, and Singapore. We believe that these different backgrounds and approaches will not only allow us to collide our views and thus generate new understandings of abusive supervision, but also enable us to better understand how to manage and reduce abusive supervision in the workplace. When Critical Supervisory Feedback is Perceived as Abusive Supervision: Social Hierarchy Perspective Presenter: Jo K. Oh; U. of Connecticut Presenter: Hun Whee Lee; Michigan State U. Too Much Self-Control? The Case of Abusive Supervision and Employee Job Tension Presenter: Lindie Hanyu Liang; Wilfrid Laurier U. Presenter: Douglas J. Brown; U. of Waterloo Presenter: Dan Ni; School of Economics and Management Tsinghua U. Presenter: Xiaoming Zheng; Tsinghua U. Impulsive and Strategic Abuse: An Actor-Centric Model with a Self- Regulation Perspective Presenter: Mingyun Huai; Tongji U. Presenter: Huiwen Lian; U. of Kentucky Presenter: Jiing-Lih Farh; China Europe International Business School (CEIBS) Presenter: Haijiang Wang; School of Management, Huazhong U. of Science and Technology Worse Together? A Latent Profile Analysis of Abusive and Supportive Supervisory Behaviors Presenter: Lingtao Yu; U. of British Columbia

The ingredients of supervisor failure

Failure to fail - Perspective from junior faculty preceptors on the challenges of evaluating underperforming students in the experiential learning environment

Supervising the PhD: identifying common mismatches in expectations between candidate and supervisor to improve research training outcomes

Psychology trainee and supervisor perspectives of multicultural supervision.

Supervision an essential tool in medical (and psychiatric) training

Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Supervision in a University-Based Training Clinic: A Case Study in Bridging the Gap Between Rigor and Relevance

Requirements for nurse supervisor training: A qualitative content analysis

Serve Yourself or Serve Your Students? How and When Supervisor Narcissism is Related to Mental Health of Graduate Students

Assessing supervisor versus trainee viewpoints of entrustment through cognitive and affective lenses: an artificial intelligence investigation of bias in feedback

Managing clinical supervision dilemmas: A mixed-methods vignette study.

Abusive supervision and subordinate performance: Instrumentality considerations in the emergence and consequences of abusive supervision.

Abusive Supervision: New Understandings and Practical Implications

Abusive Supervision Mediates Self-Fulfilling Prophecies: the Moderating Role of Outcome Dependence

No Cookie Cutter Approach: Supervision in Community College Student Affairs

Development of the Psychotherapy Supervisor: Review of and Reflections on 30 Years of Theory and Research

Consistent and low is the only way to go: A polynomial regression approach to the effect of abusive supervision inconsistency.

The Relationship Between Counseling Trainee Perfectionism and the Working Alliance With Supervisor and Client

(Mis)alignments between postdoctoral and supervisors' perceptions of mentorship competencies in engineering and computer science

The Form, Function, and Content of Clinical Supervision:

Supervision in Occupational Therapy, Part 1: The Supervisor's Anxieties

Do high performers always obtain supervisory career mentoring? The role of perspective-taking