Search

Based on uncertainty management theory (Lind & Van den Bos, 2002; Van den Bos & Lind, 2002), we explored whether uncertainty in the workplace (role ambiguity) as well as off the workplace (economic hardship) moderates the relationship between abusive supervision and subordinates' job burnout. Using survey method, we obtained 458 valid responses from employees in a transportation company in Taiwan. The results of moderated hierarchical regression showed that both role ambiguity and economic hardship induce the positive relationship between abusive supervision and subordinates' job burnout. Abusive supervision related more strongly to job burnout when subordinates perceived higher role ambiguity (higher uncertainty) or higher economic hardship (higher uncertainty). As predicted, high uncertainty increases subordinates' attentions to the injustice from abusive supervision and thus strengthens the negative psychological consequences of abusive supervision, regardless of whether the source of uncertainty corresponds to the source of (in)justice perception. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The US strategic ambiguity versus clarity has been a centerpiece in maintaining cross-strait stability since the 1995-96 Taiwan Strait crisis. Dialogues and debates abound regarding the relative effectiveness of discrete US policy choices. The current thaw in cross-strait relations does not forestall decisively the resurgence in the long run of the cross-strait tensions during 2000-08, rendering the strategic ambiguity/clarity still a relevant issue. This article argues that the discussions on the issue are seriously plagued by the lack of a sufficiently rigorous and commonly shared conceptualization of strategic ambiguity/clarity, and an internal logical contradiction or an inadequate practical utility as a tool to aid policy-making. To address these problems, this article seeks to clarify and elaborate on the conceptual foundation of strategic ambiguity/clarity by differentiating between two distinct analytic levels thereof, and proposing a conceptual framework for a fuller understanding of the US policy along various dimensions. It also reappraises some major issues or problems found in the existing discussions and US practice, and suggests possible solutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]