When proactivity produces a power struggle: how supervisors' power motivation affects their support for employees' promotive voice

Previous research informs us about facilitators of employees' promotive voice. Yet little is known about what determines whether a specific idea for constructive change brought up by an employee will be approved or rejected by a supervisor. Drawing on interactionist theories of motivation and personality, we propose that a supervisor will be least likely to support an idea when it threatens the supervisor's power motive, and when it is perceived to serve the employee's own striving for power. The prosocial versus egoistic intentions attributed to the idea presenter are proposed to mediate the latter effect. We conducted three scenario-based studies in which supervisors evaluated fictitious ideas voiced by employees that - if implemented - would have power-related consequences for them as a supervisor. Results show that the higher a supervisors' explicit power motive was, the less likely they were to support a power-threatening idea (Study 1, N=60). Moreover, idea support was less likely when this idea was proposed by an employee that was described as high (rather than low) on power motivation (Study 2, N=79); attributed prosocial intentions mediated this effect. Study 3 (N=260) replicates these results.