↓ Skip to main content

‘Killing Me Softly With His/Her Song’: How Leaders Dismantle Followers’ Sense of Work Meaningfulness

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
125 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
‘Killing Me Softly With His/Her Song’: How Leaders Dismantle Followers’ Sense of Work Meaningfulness
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, May 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00654
Pubmed ID
Authors

Petra Kipfelsberger, Ronit Kark

Abstract

Leaders influence followers' meaning and play a key role in shaping their employees' experience of work meaningfulness. While the dominant perspective in theory and in empirical work focuses on the positive influence of leaders on followers' work meaningfulness, our conceptual model explores conditions in which leaders may harm followers' sense of meaning. We introduce six types of conditions: leaders' personality traits, leaders' behaviors, the relationship between leader and follower, followers' attributions, followers' characteristics, and job design under which leaders' meaning making efforts might harm or 'kill' followers' sense of work meaningfulness. Accordingly, we explore how these conditions may interact with leaders' meaning making efforts to lower levels of followers' sense of meaning, and in turn, lead to negative personal outcomes (cynicism, lower well-being, and disengagement), as well as negative organizational outcomes (corrosive organizational energy, higher turnover rates, and lower organizational productivity). By doing so, our research extends the current literature, enabling a more comprehensive understanding of leaders' influence on followers' work meaningfulness, while considering the dark side of meaning making.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 125 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 125 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 19%
Student > Doctoral Student 17 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 11%
Student > Bachelor 9 7%
Researcher 5 4%
Other 18 14%
Unknown 38 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Business, Management and Accounting 25 20%
Psychology 24 19%
Social Sciences 11 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 4%
Engineering 5 4%
Other 13 10%
Unknown 42 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 May 2018.
All research outputs
#13,356,560
of 23,043,346 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#12,643
of 30,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,119
of 327,413 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#370
of 637 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,043,346 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,345 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 327,413 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 637 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.