Hierarchical bullying in public healthcare organizations is an entrenched negative behaviour that results in a range of adverse outcomes for staff, including diminished wellbeing. This study integrates social exchange and conservation of resources theories as a lens for formulating hypotheses and employs multilevel statistical modelling to examine whether team-level compassion moderates the impact of hierarchical bullying on wellbeing. Using multilevel statistical modelling, the study analysed cross-sectional data from 632 healthcare workers nested within 48 teams in a single public health district in Australia. The findings indicate that work teams with higher levels of team compassion can mitigate the negative effects of hierarchical bullying on employee wellbeing. The results imply that investing in developing compassion within teams is an effective strategy for mitigating some harmful effects of hierarchical bullying on employee outcomes.

This study uses Appreciative Inquiry (AI) as a lens for informing the process for building on employees' existing wellbeing within one Australian organisation, using the ‘discovery, dreaming, designing, and achieving destiny’ process. Using POSH as a theoretical framework, we worked with a large Not-For-Profit healthcare organisation as part of the ‘discovery’ phase to identify elements of what was positive, flourishing, and life-giving in the practices of their employees. During the ‘dreaming’ process, employees' wellbeing was identified as a strength. During the ‘designing’ phase, a training program was co-designed to build on employees' existing levels of wellbeing. This paper reports outcomes as part of the ‘achieving destiny component’ of the AI process. In particular, the outcomes show that employees' knowledge of, and ability to use positive emotions increased, which is a positive first step for increasing employees' wellbeing and organisational resilience.

This paper examines one type of negative work behaviour, work harassment, using two theoretical frameworks: Social Exchange Theory (SET) and Similarity-Attraction (SA). SET explains work harassment as a product of poor management practices, whereas using SA theory explains it as a result of the growing normalisation of high workloads. The study undertakes latent mean and path model comparison analysis using structural equation modelling of data from 189 nurses in the UK and 401 nurses in the USA. The findings indicate a good model fit showing a significant path from Leader Member Exchange (LMX) to work harassment, wellbeing and subsequent turnover intentions, with LMX fully mediating the path from LMX to wellbeing for UK nurses, but only partially mediating the same path for nurses in the USA. The findings suggest SET provides a better explanation for work harassment for UK nurses, whereas SA theory better explains the US nurse experience.

This study used two theoretical lenses (positive organizational behaviour and social exchange theory) to examine the influence of an individual attribute – psychological capital (PsyCap), and an organizational factor – leader–member exchange, upon police officers’ perceptions of learning options (teamwork and training) and affective commitment. A cross-sectional design using a survey-based, self-report strategy was used to collect data from 588 frontline police officers in the United States. The findings indicate that leader–member exchange explained almost a fifth of PsyCap and together leader–member exchange and PsyCap accounted for almost a third of police officers’ satisfaction with training. Further, leader–member exchange, PsyCap, training and teamwork collectively explain almost half of affective commitment. One implication of the findings is that if senior management want police officers to be more committed, they have to improve officers’ relationships with their supervisors, upskill them (especially their supervisors) in PsyCap, and improve teamwork opportunities and processes.

The paper used a social exchange lens to explore the impact of the quality of the relationship between supervisors and service employees on individual and organisational outcomes. The findings provide further evidence that the quality of the relationship between supervisors and service employees is a significant factor - in this case explaining almost half of the reasons as to why employees accepted or rejected organisational changes. Using the social exchange lens, the theory argues that the same characteristics evident in high quality leader–member exchange (LMX) relationships (effective levels of information, feedback and respect) are also likely to provide the ideal conditions for employees' to address their fears and answer their questions about potential organisational changes. As a result, service employees are more likely to accept the organisational changes. In addition, this study suggests that approximately half of job productivity and satisfaction is affected by the way LMX firstly affects employees' satisfaction with organisational communication processes, and secondly, their acceptance of organisational changes within SMEs.

In the Australian healthcare sector, many changes in the public sector have affected nurse management and thereby, nurses. Yet it is unclear whether such efficiency measures, based on private sector business models, have impacted private sector nurses in similar ways. This paper examines four important issues for nurses: supervisor–subordinate relationships; perceptions of autonomy; role clarity in relation to patients; and job satisfaction. The paper uses an embedded mixed methods research design to examine the four issues and then compares similarities and differences between public and private sector nurses. The findings suggest supervisor–subordinate relationships, patient role clarity and autonomy significantly predict job satisfaction. The private sector nurses reported more satisfaction than public sector nurses with their supervisor–subordinate relationships, plus higher perceptions of patient role clarity and autonomy, and hence, higher levels of job satisfaction. The findings raise questions about whether present management practices (especially public sector) optimise service delivery productivity.