In plain language
Why do conflicts between bosses and employees so often escalate rather than resolve? This conference paper, presented at the 2007 Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management (ANZAM) meeting, tackles that question by proposing a theoretical model of aggressive communication between superiors and subordinates in the workplace. The core idea is that the two parties can become locked in a spiral: aggressive communication triggers emotional reactions, which in turn fuel further aggression, ultimately damaging attitudes, performance, and staff retention.
Drawing on Infante's theory of aggressive communication and Scherer's appraisal theory of emotion, the authors map out how organisational culture and individual characteristics shape this cycle. They distinguish constructive forms of aggressive communication (assertiveness and argumentativeness) from destructive forms (hostility and verbal aggressiveness), and lay out eight testable propositions linking organisational culture, gender traits, personality, trust, self-esteem, affective states, and emotional intelligence to the aggression spiral and its downstream consequences for employees' organisational identity, performance, and turnover intentions.
Although the paper is theoretical rather than empirical, it matters because it puts emotion at the centre of workplace aggression research. If the model holds, managing destructive communication is not just about policing behaviour — it requires attending to the emotional states of both parties, and to organisational cultures that normalise aggression. The authors suggest practitioners could redesign cultures and develop emotion-management strategies to minimise destructive communication at work.
Key findings
- Proposes that superiors and subordinates can become locked in a reciprocal spiral in which aggressive communication and emotional reactions feed each other, leading to lower performance and higher turnover.
- Distinguishes constructive aggressive communication (assertiveness, argumentativeness) from destructive forms (hostility, verbal aggressiveness), following Infante's theory.
- Presents eight propositions: organisational culture influences superiors' aggressive communication and subordinates' attitudes; gender traits shape personal characteristics; and personal characteristics (personality, trust, self-esteem) drive aggressive communication.
- Argues that emotional characteristics — positive/negative affect and emotional intelligence — influence how each party reacts emotionally to aggressive exchanges.
- Links subordinates' emotional reactions to their attitudes (organisational identity, perceived masculine vs. feminine organisation) and, in turn, to considered behaviours such as performance and turnover, consistent with Affective Events Theory.
- Extends Lutgen-Sandvik's model of workplace emotional abuse by adding the roles of emotional, gender, and personal traits of both superiors and subordinates.
How to cite
APA
Melgoza, A. R., Ashkanasy, N. M., Ciarrochi, J., & Wolfram Cox, J. (2007). A model of superiors' and subordinates' aggressive communication in the workplace. In ANZAM 2007: Managing our intellectual and social capital. Sydney, Australia: Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management.
BibTeX
@inproceedings{melgoza2007model,
author = {Melgoza, Alberto R. and Ashkanasy, Neal M. and Ciarrochi, Joseph and Wolfram Cox, Julie},
title = {A model of superiors' and subordinates' aggressive communication in the workplace},
booktitle = {ANZAM 2007: Managing our intellectual and social capital},
year = {2007},
address = {Sydney, Australia},
publisher = {Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management}
}
Related work
- All publications by Joseph Ciarrochi (searchable, with free PDFs)
- Process-Based Therapy & Idionomic Analysis
Author: Joseph Ciarrochi (ORCID 0000-0003-0471-8100). Free copy hosted with permission for scholarly use. Please cite the published version.