Academic journal article SAM Advanced Management Journal

Despotic Leadership, Workplace Ostracism and Knowledge Hoarding: A Serial Mediation Model

Academic journal article SAM Advanced Management Journal

Despotic Leadership, Workplace Ostracism and Knowledge Hoarding: A Serial Mediation Model

Article excerpt

Using social exchange and the Conservation of Resources (COR) theory, we propose a serial mediation model including despotic leadership, negative core self-evaluation, workplace ostracism, and knowledge hoarding. The objective is to inspect the impact of despotic leadership on knowledge hoarding of employees in the presence of mediators' negative core self-evaluation and workplace ostracism. This study also seeks to determine the role of proactive personality on the relationship of workplace ostracism and knowledge hoarding with employees in telecommunication, hotels, and hospital sectors through quantitative methodology. Pearson correlation, principle component analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, and mediation and moderation through regression were applied for analysis of the data, and the results showed positive and significant relationship of despotic leadership with knowledge hoarding through negative core self-evaluation and workplace ostracism. Moreover, proactive personality moderated the relationship of ostracism and knowledge hoarding. The study concludes with some limitations, implications, and recommendations for future researchers and scholars.


Leadership is ability of an individual to influence followers to help them achieve the objectives of an organization (Naseer, Raja, Syed, Donia, & Darr, 2016) locally and across international boundaries (Luthans & Doh, 2014). Since its beginning, the leadership domain highlighted only positive effects of leaders on individuals and organizations (Glaso, Einarsen, Mathiesen, & Skogstad, 2010), whereas the dark side of leadership is largely neglected. Research in this area of leadership is still in its beginning, despite its intuitive appeal and presence in the literature of political leadership (Naseer, Raja, Syed, Donia, & Darr, 2016). But, from previous years, researchers are concentrating on the obnoxious side of leadership styles. The dark side of leadership is essential to measure at the organizational level as negative aspects of leaders are becoming a serious concern (Hoobler & Hu, 2013). Schyns and Schilling (2013) conducted a meta-analysis on different outcomes of destructive leadership. This meta-analysis included only four papers on despotic leadership and, despite the newness of this variable, it is highly related with the leadership domain and needs research attention.

Knowledge sharing refers to the movement of knowledge between different actors, levels, and also departments of an organization (Bhatt, 2001). The basic purpose of knowledge sharing in any organization is the transfer of knowledge into resources and relevant assets (Dawson, 2001). Knowledge sharing is essential as it causes the spread of knowledge and assists organizations in using scarce resources efficiently (Grant, 1996). With the start of a knowledge economy era, service companies have started to work continuously on innovation to survive in the modern market. Service innovation not only helps companies gain customer confidence, but also acts as a driving force for enterprise development. Thus, transfer of knowledge is considered important to bring innovations and advancements in service organizations (Riege, 2005).

Knowledge hiding among employees also needs attention as it can be detrimental for an organizations overall leadership, productivity, and effectiveness (Mujtaba, 2014). Efficient knowledge transfer is key to the development and success of an organization (Evans et al., 2015). Despite knowing that researchers and practitioners are promoting knowledge sharing, organizational members still exhibit knowledge hoarding (Bock, Zmud, Kim, & Lee, 2005). According to Evans et al. (2015), knowledge hoarding is an intentional attempt of an individual to hide knowledge that is requested or might be requested by another person.

Knowledge hoarding is being studied in terms of its outcomes, but its antecedents are not studied widely (Holten, Hancock, Persson, Hansen, & Hogh, 2016). …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed


An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.