# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
USPS chief wants agency to improve end-to-end shipping visibility

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The agency’s efforts to boost transparency include using Bluetooth devices to identify bottlenecks for high-value shippers, a spokesperson said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
By Waylon Cunningham

NEW YORK, Jan 27 (Reuters) - Four CEOs over five years have blamed lost sales on its struggle to keep its thousands of U.S. stores reliably stocked with coffeehouse essentials like milk, pastries, and cup lids.

Current CEO Brian Niccol has made fixing the shortages a main measure of his turnaround campaign.

But shortages at are a more deeply rooted problem than has been publicly reported. And Niccol's ongoing efforts to keep shelves stocked have so far met with limited success as he encounters outdated technology and a splintered network of suppliers, according to Reuters interviews with 10 current and former Starbucks corporate employees, including senior managers.

Reuters also reviewed online videos showing glitches in Starbucks' latest AI inventory technology, as well as previously unreported photographs provided by baristas of excessive shipments.

"We've been transparent about the opportunities in our supply chain, and our transformation plans. We're modernizing systems with AI‑ready platforms, strengthening demand forecasting, and making our distribution network more agile so the right products reach the right coffeehouses each day. This work is already improving reliability for our partners and customers," Starbucks said in a statement.

Supply chain experts say one of the most critical measures of a supply chain's reliability is how often delivery trucks arrive at the right time and with the full amount of products. The goal is 95% or more, said Douglas Kent, executive vice president of the nonprofit Association for Supply Chain Management, and rates less than that indicate dysfunction.

In early 2024, less than a third of truck deliveries to Starbucks' distribution centers - company facilities that supply stores - were unloaded on time and included the full amount of the milks, pastries and other products, according to two former employees with direct knowledge of the company's supply chain. Employees involved in logistics blamed Starbucks' failure to coordinate its many suppliers. Issues continued into at least late 2025, said two former employees who left around that time.

Starbucks' share price is up about 5% since Niccol took over in September 2024, outperforming a 1% increase in Reuters' U.S. Restaurant Index but underperforming a 26% gain in the S&P 500 Index. Starbucks' U.S. sales declined for six quarters before its most recent earnings in October, when it reported flat U.S. sales. Niccol is due to lay out his strategy to investors on Thursday, following earnings on Wednesday.

NICCOL TAKING ON ISSUE WITH NEW HIRES, TECHNOLOGY

Additional problems can cascade down the supply chain -- such as inaccurate predictions of stores' product needs -- culminating in overstuffed warehouses, empty shelves in stores, and unhappy customers who can't buy what they want off the menu, according to Starbucks employees at the corporate and store level who requested anonymity because they are not authorized to speak to the media.

While avoiding shortages is critical to retaining customers, consultants say, restaurants must at the same time avoid ordering more products than customers will actually buy. Costly waste can sink already-thin profit margins in the restaurant industry. "It's a tightrope to walk," said Spencer Michiel, a consultant at the tech-focused Back of House firm.

Niccol's efforts have taken many forms, including giving store managers more autonomy for ordering supplies from distribution centers. The Starbucks mobile app was tweaked to better allow customers to see where shortages are reported by baristas. In a recent example, the app showed a New York area store was out of bacon and egg sandwiches.

The CEO has also hired veteran logistics executives including new Chief Technology Officer Anand Varadarajan, who previously headed supply chain operations for Amazon's grocery business.

But Niccol's changes haven't gone far enough, said independent supply chain consultant Brittain Ladd, who has previously advised Instacart and Kroger, and said he spoke at length with Starbucks supply chain executive Mike Bassani after Niccol hired Bassani last year.

Ladd, based on his own conversations with multiple Starbucks corporate employees, said Starbucks needs a fundamental overhaul of its supply chain, and criticized Niccol's highest-profile effort to date - attempting to partially automate store inventory counts - as a band-aid.

In September, Starbucks announced the rapid rollout of a tool called "automated counting" that is designed to improve Starbucks' visibility into shortages at stores. The AI-powered app aimed to replace hand-counts of some products with automated ones that are faster and more accurate. Cafe workers hold a computer tablet up to shelves for syrups, milks and other beverage products, which the app scans with LIDAR and camera data.

But the app frequently miscounts and mislabels items, such as confusing similar milk types or missing them altogether, according to 10 cafe workers and managers. For example, a video uploaded by Starbucks shows the app failing to recognize a peppermint syrup bottle on the shelf as it counts adjacent bottles.

The app's provider, NomadGo, says on its website it is "99% accurate."

"What NomadGo set out to do is modernize inventory counting to make it faster and less burdensome while providing timely, actionable data on product availability," the company said in a statement.

Starbucks said adoption of the app had improved product availability in stores, but did not specify by how much.

PREDECESSOR'S EFFORTS ROLLED BACK

Niccol isn't the first CEO in recent years to try to tackle Starbucks' supply chain problems, which staffers said became more apparent after competitors bounced back from pandemic-era supply shocks while Starbucks struggled to recover balance.

In 2021, former CEO Kevin Johnson told investors in an earnings call that the company was making progress against pandemic-related challenges on "inventory availability."

By 2023, former CEO Laxman Narasimhan regularly referred to shortages as "another reason customers choose not to complete their orders" in earnings calls.

Narasimhan, in the top office for nearly 18 months until Niccol's appointment, sought to address out-of-stocks in part by automating how stores order products from distribution centers. The "automated ordering" program, created in partnership with tech firm o9 Solutions, used machine learning techniques to continually refine predictions of upcoming store sales.

The program erred toward recommending too few products, employees said, and in late summer 2024, Narasimhan sought to refine it through an effort called "Never-Out," which selectively tested larger product shipments, according to employees.

"Never-Out," an initiative that has not previously been reported, was rolled back roughly eight weeks later after Narasimhan was ousted in favor of Niccol, who also later scaled back "automated ordering" shortly before Starbucks' Fall promotion last year, according to operations employees.

Starbucks in a statement to Reuters said the company had returned "ownership of inventory to coffeehouse teams so they can manage availability."

o9 Solutions did not respond to a request for comment.

STARBUCKS' HIDDEN BOTTLENECKS

Some employees characterized Starbucks' supply chain problems as end-to-end, starting with supplier contracts.

Starbucks supplies many of its food products from small, regional vendors that struggle to ramp up production when demand spikes, according to former warehouse employees. "Starbucks never cultivated the relationships with large suppliers that it needed," said one.

Scattered sourcing creates more headaches. For example, Starbucks juggles 1,500 cup-and-lid pairings from different vendors, executives said in a 2023 earnings call. Former workers say the lack of standardized packaging from these suppliers prevents the chain from automating store-level inventory counts using cameras, as other U.S. food chains do - or as Starbucks does in China, according to employees.

Another key kink in the supply chain is outdated IBM computer hardware that Starbucks uses to process store inventories and resupply orders. In 1997, Starbucks executives touted to a trade publication the company's use of the IBM AS/400 system for mission-critical operations. Nearly 30 years later, staffers in the company's technology teams say Starbucks uses what is fundamentally the same architecture.

Starbucks told Reuters in a statement it is modernizing systems, "including replacing platforms like AS/400 with more advanced technology," to improve product availability and "deliver the consistent experience our customers expect."

Doing so could prove costly and complicated, staffers said. "It would be like changing the engine of an airplane while it's flying," said one involved in supply chain technology.

TOO LITTLE STORAGE, TOO MUCH WASTE

Every chain has problems with demand forecasting, supply chain experts said, but employees said that Starbucks' business model gives it less margin for error.

Whereas other fast-food chains have large backroom storage, Starbucks has less storage in its cafes -- and its food and milks are more perishable.

"When you set up a company that's based on beverages, and then add food, the supply chain isn't really equipped to scale with it," said one employee who worked on store operations.

Until about a decade ago, Starbucks stores were designed largely for beverages, with little room in the back to store food products, employees said. The growth of food as a revenue category - from 15% of revenue in 2005 to 23% in 2025, according to Starbucks filings - was a surprise, employees said.

Starbucks donates or throws away products that can't fit in storage, according to store employees.

An example came in September, shortly after Niccol rolled back "automated ordering" ahead of Starbucks' Fall food and beverage promotion. Bacon sandwiches, apple croissants and other seasonal foods temporarily flooded stores across the U.S., according to café workers and corporate employees.

Reuters also reviewed six photos of overstocked products. The Food Bank for New York City confirmed it saw an increase in donations of unsold food from Starbucks in September.

Jake Domey, a unionized barista in Danbury, Connecticut, said that one night he threw away three garbage bags of food - the most he's ever seen in 13 years at Starbucks. "It was an astronomical amount of waste," he said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Inside Starbucks' supply struggles: AI glitches, scattered suppliers and sandwich shortages By Reuters

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Inside Starbucks' supply struggles: AI glitches, scattered suppliers and sandwich shortages

# data[].attributes.body
Lafleur & Margot

# data[].attributes.body
Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
By Waylon Cunningham

NEW YORK, Jan 27 (Reuters) - Four CEOs over five years have blamed lost sales on its struggle to keep its thousands of U.S. stores reliably stocked with coffeehouse essentials like milk, pastries, and cup lids.

Current CEO Brian Niccol has made fixing the shortages a main measure of his turnaround campaign.

But shortages at are a more deeply rooted problem than has been publicly reported. And Niccol's ongoing efforts to keep shelves stocked have so far met with limited success as he encounters outdated technology and a splintered network of suppliers, according to Reuters interviews with 10 current and former Starbucks corporate employees, including senior managers.

Reuters also reviewed online videos showing glitches in Starbucks' latest AI inventory technology, as well as previously unreported photographs provided by baristas of excessive shipments.

"We've been transparent about the opportunities in our supply chain, and our transformation plans. We're modernizing systems with AI‑ready platforms, strengthening demand forecasting, and making our distribution network more agile so the right products reach the right coffeehouses each day. This work is already improving reliability for our partners and customers," Starbucks said in a statement.

Supply chain experts say one of the most critical measures of a supply chain's reliability is how often delivery trucks arrive at the right time and with the full amount of products. The goal is 95% or more, said Douglas Kent, executive vice president of the nonprofit Association for Supply Chain Management, and rates less than that indicate dysfunction.

In early 2024, less than a third of truck deliveries to Starbucks' distribution centers - company facilities that supply stores - were unloaded on time and included the full amount of the milks, pastries and other products, according to two former employees with direct knowledge of the company's supply chain. Employees involved in logistics blamed Starbucks' failure to coordinate its many suppliers. Issues continued into at least late 2025, said two former employees who left around that time.

Starbucks' share price is up about 5% since Niccol took over in September 2024, outperforming a 1% increase in Reuters' U.S. Restaurant Index but underperforming a 26% gain in the S&P 500 Index. Starbucks' U.S. sales declined for six quarters before its most recent earnings in October, when it reported flat U.S. sales. Niccol is due to lay out his strategy to investors on Thursday, following earnings on Wednesday.

NICCOL TAKING ON ISSUE WITH NEW HIRES, TECHNOLOGY

Additional problems can cascade down the supply chain -- such as inaccurate predictions of stores' product needs -- culminating in overstuffed warehouses, empty shelves in stores, and unhappy customers who can't buy what they want off the menu, according to Starbucks employees at the corporate and store level who requested anonymity because they are not authorized to speak to the media.

While avoiding shortages is critical to retaining customers, consultants say, restaurants must at the same time avoid ordering more products than customers will actually buy. Costly waste can sink already-thin profit margins in the restaurant industry. "It's a tightrope to walk," said Spencer Michiel, a consultant at the tech-focused Back of House firm.

Niccol's efforts have taken many forms, including giving store managers more autonomy for ordering supplies from distribution centers. The Starbucks mobile app was tweaked to better allow customers to see where shortages are reported by baristas. In a recent example, the app showed a New York area store was out of bacon and egg sandwiches.

The CEO has also hired veteran logistics executives including new Chief Technology Officer Anand Varadarajan, who previously headed supply chain operations for Amazon's grocery business.

But Niccol's changes haven't gone far enough, said independent supply chain consultant Brittain Ladd, who has previously advised Instacart and Kroger, and said he spoke at length with Starbucks supply chain executive Mike Bassani after Niccol hired Bassani last year.

Ladd, based on his own conversations with multiple Starbucks corporate employees, said Starbucks needs a fundamental overhaul of its supply chain, and criticized Niccol's highest-profile effort to date - attempting to partially automate store inventory counts - as a band-aid.

In September, Starbucks announced the rapid rollout of a tool called "automated counting" that is designed to improve Starbucks' visibility into shortages at stores. The AI-powered app aimed to replace hand-counts of some products with automated ones that are faster and more accurate. Cafe workers hold a computer tablet up to shelves for syrups, milks and other beverage products, which the app scans with LIDAR and camera data.

But the app frequently miscounts and mislabels items, such as confusing similar milk types or missing them altogether, according to 10 cafe workers and managers. For example, a video uploaded by Starbucks shows the app failing to recognize a peppermint syrup bottle on the shelf as it counts adjacent bottles.

The app's provider, NomadGo, says on its website it is "99% accurate."

"What NomadGo set out to do is modernize inventory counting to make it faster and less burdensome while providing timely, actionable data on product availability," the company said in a statement.

Starbucks said adoption of the app had improved product availability in stores, but did not specify by how much.

PREDECESSOR'S EFFORTS ROLLED BACK

Niccol isn't the first CEO in recent years to try to tackle Starbucks' supply chain problems, which staffers said became more apparent after competitors bounced back from pandemic-era supply shocks while Starbucks struggled to recover balance.

In 2021, former CEO Kevin Johnson told investors in an earnings call that the company was making progress against pandemic-related challenges on "inventory availability."

By 2023, former CEO Laxman Narasimhan regularly referred to shortages as "another reason customers choose not to complete their orders" in earnings calls.

Narasimhan, in the top office for nearly 18 months until Niccol's appointment, sought to address out-of-stocks in part by automating how stores order products from distribution centers. The "automated ordering" program, created in partnership with tech firm o9 Solutions, used machine learning techniques to continually refine predictions of upcoming store sales.

The program erred toward recommending too few products, employees said, and in late summer 2024, Narasimhan sought to refine it through an effort called "Never-Out," which selectively tested larger product shipments, according to employees.

"Never-Out," an initiative that has not previously been reported, was rolled back roughly eight weeks later after Narasimhan was ousted in favor of Niccol, who also later scaled back "automated ordering" shortly before Starbucks' Fall promotion last year, according to operations employees.

Starbucks in a statement to Reuters said the company had returned "ownership of inventory to coffeehouse teams so they can manage availability."

o9 Solutions did not respond to a request for comment.

STARBUCKS' HIDDEN BOTTLENECKS

Some employees characterized Starbucks' supply chain problems as end-to-end, starting with supplier contracts.

Starbucks supplies many of its food products from small, regional vendors that struggle to ramp up production when demand spikes, according to former warehouse employees. "Starbucks never cultivated the relationships with large suppliers that it needed," said one.

Scattered sourcing creates more headaches. For example, Starbucks juggles 1,500 cup-and-lid pairings from different vendors, executives said in a 2023 earnings call. Former workers say the lack of standardized packaging from these suppliers prevents the chain from automating store-level inventory counts using cameras, as other U.S. food chains do - or as Starbucks does in China, according to employees.

Another key kink in the supply chain is outdated IBM computer hardware that Starbucks uses to process store inventories and resupply orders. In 1997, Starbucks executives touted to a trade publication the company's use of the IBM AS/400 system for mission-critical operations. Nearly 30 years later, staffers in the company's technology teams say Starbucks uses what is fundamentally the same architecture.

Starbucks told Reuters in a statement it is modernizing systems, "including replacing platforms like AS/400 with more advanced technology," to improve product availability and "deliver the consistent experience our customers expect."

Doing so could prove costly and complicated, staffers said. "It would be like changing the engine of an airplane while it's flying," said one involved in supply chain technology.

TOO LITTLE STORAGE, TOO MUCH WASTE

Every chain has problems with demand forecasting, supply chain experts said, but employees said that Starbucks' business model gives it less margin for error.

Whereas other fast-food chains have large backroom storage, Starbucks has less storage in its cafes -- and its food and milks are more perishable.

"When you set up a company that's based on beverages, and then add food, the supply chain isn't really equipped to scale with it," said one employee who worked on store operations.

Until about a decade ago, Starbucks stores were designed largely for beverages, with little room in the back to store food products, employees said. The growth of food as a revenue category - from 15% of revenue in 2005 to 23% in 2025, according to Starbucks filings - was a surprise, employees said.

Starbucks donates or throws away products that can't fit in storage, according to store employees.

An example came in September, shortly after Niccol rolled back "automated ordering" ahead of Starbucks' Fall food and beverage promotion. Bacon sandwiches, apple croissants and other seasonal foods temporarily flooded stores across the U.S., according to café workers and corporate employees.

Reuters also reviewed six photos of overstocked products. The Food Bank for New York City confirmed it saw an increase in donations of unsold food from Starbucks in September.

Jake Domey, a unionized barista in Danbury, Connecticut, said that one night he threw away three garbage bags of food - the most he's ever seen in 13 years at Starbucks. "It was an astronomical amount of waste," he said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Inside Starbucks' supply struggles: AI glitches, scattered suppliers and sandwich shortages By Reuters

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Inside Starbucks' supply struggles: AI glitches, scattered suppliers and sandwich shortages

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
By Waylon Cunningham

NEW YORK, Jan 27 (Reuters) - Four CEOs over five years have blamed lost sales on its struggle to keep its thousands of U.S. stores reliably stocked with coffeehouse essentials like milk, pastries, and cup lids.

Current CEO Brian Niccol has made fixing the shortages a main measure of his turnaround campaign.

But shortages at are a more deeply rooted problem than has been publicly reported. And Niccol's ongoing efforts to keep shelves stocked have so far met with limited success as he encounters outdated technology and a splintered network of suppliers, according to Reuters interviews with 10 current and former Starbucks corporate employees, including senior managers.

Reuters also reviewed online videos showing glitches in Starbucks' latest AI inventory technology, as well as previously unreported photographs provided by baristas of excessive shipments.

"We've been transparent about the opportunities in our supply chain, and our transformation plans. We're modernizing systems with AI‑ready platforms, strengthening demand forecasting, and making our distribution network more agile so the right products reach the right coffeehouses each day. This work is already improving reliability for our partners and customers," Starbucks said in a statement.

Supply chain experts say one of the most critical measures of a supply chain's reliability is how often delivery trucks arrive at the right time and with the full amount of products. The goal is 95% or more, said Douglas Kent, executive vice president of the nonprofit Association for Supply Chain Management, and rates less than that indicate dysfunction.

In early 2024, less than a third of truck deliveries to Starbucks' distribution centers - company facilities that supply stores - were unloaded on time and included the full amount of the milks, pastries and other products, according to two former employees with direct knowledge of the company's supply chain. Employees involved in logistics blamed Starbucks' failure to coordinate its many suppliers. Issues continued into at least late 2025, said two former employees who left around that time.

Starbucks' share price is up about 5% since Niccol took over in September 2024, outperforming a 1% increase in Reuters' U.S. Restaurant Index but underperforming a 26% gain in the S&P 500 Index. Starbucks' U.S. sales declined for six quarters before its most recent earnings in October, when it reported flat U.S. sales. Niccol is due to lay out his strategy to investors on Thursday, following earnings on Wednesday.

NICCOL TAKING ON ISSUE WITH NEW HIRES, TECHNOLOGY

Additional problems can cascade down the supply chain -- such as inaccurate predictions of stores' product needs -- culminating in overstuffed warehouses, empty shelves in stores, and unhappy customers who can't buy what they want off the menu, according to Starbucks employees at the corporate and store level who requested anonymity because they are not authorized to speak to the media.

While avoiding shortages is critical to retaining customers, consultants say, restaurants must at the same time avoid ordering more products than customers will actually buy. Costly waste can sink already-thin profit margins in the restaurant industry. "It's a tightrope to walk," said Spencer Michiel, a consultant at the tech-focused Back of House firm.

Niccol's efforts have taken many forms, including giving store managers more autonomy for ordering supplies from distribution centers. The Starbucks mobile app was tweaked to better allow customers to see where shortages are reported by baristas. In a recent example, the app showed a New York area store was out of bacon and egg sandwiches.

The CEO has also hired veteran logistics executives including new Chief Technology Officer Anand Varadarajan, who previously headed supply chain operations for Amazon's grocery business.

But Niccol's changes haven't gone far enough, said independent supply chain consultant Brittain Ladd, who has previously advised Instacart and Kroger, and said he spoke at length with Starbucks supply chain executive Mike Bassani after Niccol hired Bassani last year.

Ladd, based on his own conversations with multiple Starbucks corporate employees, said Starbucks needs a fundamental overhaul of its supply chain, and criticized Niccol's highest-profile effort to date - attempting to partially automate store inventory counts - as a band-aid.

In September, Starbucks announced the rapid rollout of a tool called "automated counting" that is designed to improve Starbucks' visibility into shortages at stores. The AI-powered app aimed to replace hand-counts of some products with automated ones that are faster and more accurate. Cafe workers hold a computer tablet up to shelves for syrups, milks and other beverage products, which the app scans with LIDAR and camera data.

But the app frequently miscounts and mislabels items, such as confusing similar milk types or missing them altogether, according to 10 cafe workers and managers. For example, a video uploaded by Starbucks shows the app failing to recognize a peppermint syrup bottle on the shelf as it counts adjacent bottles.

The app's provider, NomadGo, says on its website it is "99% accurate."

"What NomadGo set out to do is modernize inventory counting to make it faster and less burdensome while providing timely, actionable data on product availability," the company said in a statement.

Starbucks said adoption of the app had improved product availability in stores, but did not specify by how much.

PREDECESSOR'S EFFORTS ROLLED BACK

Niccol isn't the first CEO in recent years to try to tackle Starbucks' supply chain problems, which staffers said became more apparent after competitors bounced back from pandemic-era supply shocks while Starbucks struggled to recover balance.

In 2021, former CEO Kevin Johnson told investors in an earnings call that the company was making progress against pandemic-related challenges on "inventory availability."

By 2023, former CEO Laxman Narasimhan regularly referred to shortages as "another reason customers choose not to complete their orders" in earnings calls.

Narasimhan, in the top office for nearly 18 months until Niccol's appointment, sought to address out-of-stocks in part by automating how stores order products from distribution centers. The "automated ordering" program, created in partnership with tech firm o9 Solutions, used machine learning techniques to continually refine predictions of upcoming store sales.

The program erred toward recommending too few products, employees said, and in late summer 2024, Narasimhan sought to refine it through an effort called "Never-Out," which selectively tested larger product shipments, according to employees.

"Never-Out," an initiative that has not previously been reported, was rolled back roughly eight weeks later after Narasimhan was ousted in favor of Niccol, who also later scaled back "automated ordering" shortly before Starbucks' Fall promotion last year, according to operations employees.

Starbucks in a statement to Reuters said the company had returned "ownership of inventory to coffeehouse teams so they can manage availability."

o9 Solutions did not respond to a request for comment.

STARBUCKS' HIDDEN BOTTLENECKS

Some employees characterized Starbucks' supply chain problems as end-to-end, starting with supplier contracts.

Starbucks supplies many of its food products from small, regional vendors that struggle to ramp up production when demand spikes, according to former warehouse employees. "Starbucks never cultivated the relationships with large suppliers that it needed," said one.

Scattered sourcing creates more headaches. For example, Starbucks juggles 1,500 cup-and-lid pairings from different vendors, executives said in a 2023 earnings call. Former workers say the lack of standardized packaging from these suppliers prevents the chain from automating store-level inventory counts using cameras, as other U.S. food chains do - or as Starbucks does in China, according to employees.

Another key kink in the supply chain is outdated IBM computer hardware that Starbucks uses to process store inventories and resupply orders. In 1997, Starbucks executives touted to a trade publication the company's use of the IBM AS/400 system for mission-critical operations. Nearly 30 years later, staffers in the company's technology teams say Starbucks uses what is fundamentally the same architecture.

Starbucks told Reuters in a statement it is modernizing systems, "including replacing platforms like AS/400 with more advanced technology," to improve product availability and "deliver the consistent experience our customers expect."

Doing so could prove costly and complicated, staffers said. "It would be like changing the engine of an airplane while it's flying," said one involved in supply chain technology.

TOO LITTLE STORAGE, TOO MUCH WASTE

Every chain has problems with demand forecasting, supply chain experts said, but employees said that Starbucks' business model gives it less margin for error.

Whereas other fast-food chains have large backroom storage, Starbucks has less storage in its cafes -- and its food and milks are more perishable.

"When you set up a company that's based on beverages, and then add food, the supply chain isn't really equipped to scale with it," said one employee who worked on store operations.

Until about a decade ago, Starbucks stores were designed largely for beverages, with little room in the back to store food products, employees said. The growth of food as a revenue category - from 15% of revenue in 2005 to 23% in 2025, according to Starbucks filings - was a surprise, employees said.

Starbucks donates or throws away products that can't fit in storage, according to store employees.

An example came in September, shortly after Niccol rolled back "automated ordering" ahead of Starbucks' Fall food and beverage promotion. Bacon sandwiches, apple croissants and other seasonal foods temporarily flooded stores across the U.S., according to café workers and corporate employees.

Reuters also reviewed six photos of overstocked products. The Food Bank for New York City confirmed it saw an increase in donations of unsold food from Starbucks in September.

Jake Domey, a unionized barista in Danbury, Connecticut, said that one night he threw away three garbage bags of food - the most he's ever seen in 13 years at Starbucks. "It was an astronomical amount of waste," he said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Inside Starbucks' supply struggles: AI glitches, scattered suppliers and sandwich shortages By Reuters

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Inside Starbucks' supply struggles: AI glitches, scattered suppliers and sandwich shortages

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
By Waylon Cunningham

NEW YORK, Jan 27 (Reuters) - Four CEOs over five years have blamed lost sales on its struggle to keep its thousands of U.S. stores reliably stocked with coffeehouse essentials like milk, pastries, and cup lids.

Current CEO Brian Niccol has made fixing the shortages a main measure of his turnaround campaign.

But shortages at are a more deeply rooted problem than has been publicly reported. And Niccol's ongoing efforts to keep shelves stocked have so far met with limited success as he encounters outdated technology and a splintered network of suppliers, according to Reuters interviews with 10 current and former Starbucks corporate employees, including senior managers.

Reuters also reviewed online videos showing glitches in Starbucks' latest AI inventory technology, as well as previously unreported photographs provided by baristas of excessive shipments.

"We've been transparent about the opportunities in our supply chain, and our transformation plans. We're modernizing systems with AI‑ready platforms, strengthening demand forecasting, and making our distribution network more agile so the right products reach the right coffeehouses each day. This work is already improving reliability for our partners and customers," Starbucks said in a statement.

Supply chain experts say one of the most critical measures of a supply chain's reliability is how often delivery trucks arrive at the right time and with the full amount of products. The goal is 95% or more, said Douglas Kent, executive vice president of the nonprofit Association for Supply Chain Management, and rates less than that indicate dysfunction.

In early 2024, less than a third of truck deliveries to Starbucks' distribution centers - company facilities that supply stores - were unloaded on time and included the full amount of the milks, pastries and other products, according to two former employees with direct knowledge of the company's supply chain. Employees involved in logistics blamed Starbucks' failure to coordinate its many suppliers. Issues continued into at least late 2025, said two former employees who left around that time.

Starbucks' share price is up about 5% since Niccol took over in September 2024, outperforming a 1% increase in Reuters' U.S. Restaurant Index but underperforming a 26% gain in the S&P 500 Index. Starbucks' U.S. sales declined for six quarters before its most recent earnings in October, when it reported flat U.S. sales. Niccol is due to lay out his strategy to investors on Thursday, following earnings on Wednesday.

NICCOL TAKING ON ISSUE WITH NEW HIRES, TECHNOLOGY

Additional problems can cascade down the supply chain -- such as inaccurate predictions of stores' product needs -- culminating in overstuffed warehouses, empty shelves in stores, and unhappy customers who can't buy what they want off the menu, according to Starbucks employees at the corporate and store level who requested anonymity because they are not authorized to speak to the media.

While avoiding shortages is critical to retaining customers, consultants say, restaurants must at the same time avoid ordering more products than customers will actually buy. Costly waste can sink already-thin profit margins in the restaurant industry. "It's a tightrope to walk," said Spencer Michiel, a consultant at the tech-focused Back of House firm.

Niccol's efforts have taken many forms, including giving store managers more autonomy for ordering supplies from distribution centers. The Starbucks mobile app was tweaked to better allow customers to see where shortages are reported by baristas. In a recent example, the app showed a New York area store was out of bacon and egg sandwiches.

The CEO has also hired veteran logistics executives including new Chief Technology Officer Anand Varadarajan, who previously headed supply chain operations for Amazon's grocery business.

But Niccol's changes haven't gone far enough, said independent supply chain consultant Brittain Ladd, who has previously advised Instacart and Kroger, and said he spoke at length with Starbucks supply chain executive Mike Bassani after Niccol hired Bassani last year.

Ladd, based on his own conversations with multiple Starbucks corporate employees, said Starbucks needs a fundamental overhaul of its supply chain, and criticized Niccol's highest-profile effort to date - attempting to partially automate store inventory counts - as a band-aid.

In September, Starbucks announced the rapid rollout of a tool called "automated counting" that is designed to improve Starbucks' visibility into shortages at stores. The AI-powered app aimed to replace hand-counts of some products with automated ones that are faster and more accurate. Cafe workers hold a computer tablet up to shelves for syrups, milks and other beverage products, which the app scans with LIDAR and camera data.

But the app frequently miscounts and mislabels items, such as confusing similar milk types or missing them altogether, according to 10 cafe workers and managers. For example, a video uploaded by Starbucks shows the app failing to recognize a peppermint syrup bottle on the shelf as it counts adjacent bottles.

The app's provider, NomadGo, says on its website it is "99% accurate."

"What NomadGo set out to do is modernize inventory counting to make it faster and less burdensome while providing timely, actionable data on product availability," the company said in a statement.

Starbucks said adoption of the app had improved product availability in stores, but did not specify by how much.

PREDECESSOR'S EFFORTS ROLLED BACK

Niccol isn't the first CEO in recent years to try to tackle Starbucks' supply chain problems, which staffers said became more apparent after competitors bounced back from pandemic-era supply shocks while Starbucks struggled to recover balance.

In 2021, former CEO Kevin Johnson told investors in an earnings call that the company was making progress against pandemic-related challenges on "inventory availability."

By 2023, former CEO Laxman Narasimhan regularly referred to shortages as "another reason customers choose not to complete their orders" in earnings calls.

Narasimhan, in the top office for nearly 18 months until Niccol's appointment, sought to address out-of-stocks in part by automating how stores order products from distribution centers. The "automated ordering" program, created in partnership with tech firm o9 Solutions, used machine learning techniques to continually refine predictions of upcoming store sales.

The program erred toward recommending too few products, employees said, and in late summer 2024, Narasimhan sought to refine it through an effort called "Never-Out," which selectively tested larger product shipments, according to employees.

"Never-Out," an initiative that has not previously been reported, was rolled back roughly eight weeks later after Narasimhan was ousted in favor of Niccol, who also later scaled back "automated ordering" shortly before Starbucks' Fall promotion last year, according to operations employees.

Starbucks in a statement to Reuters said the company had returned "ownership of inventory to coffeehouse teams so they can manage availability."

o9 Solutions did not respond to a request for comment.

STARBUCKS' HIDDEN BOTTLENECKS

Some employees characterized Starbucks' supply chain problems as end-to-end, starting with supplier contracts.

Starbucks supplies many of its food products from small, regional vendors that struggle to ramp up production when demand spikes, according to former warehouse employees. "Starbucks never cultivated the relationships with large suppliers that it needed," said one.

Scattered sourcing creates more headaches. For example, Starbucks juggles 1,500 cup-and-lid pairings from different vendors, executives said in a 2023 earnings call. Former workers say the lack of standardized packaging from these suppliers prevents the chain from automating store-level inventory counts using cameras, as other U.S. food chains do - or as Starbucks does in China, according to employees.

Another key kink in the supply chain is outdated IBM computer hardware that Starbucks uses to process store inventories and resupply orders. In 1997, Starbucks executives touted to a trade publication the company's use of the IBM AS/400 system for mission-critical operations. Nearly 30 years later, staffers in the company's technology teams say Starbucks uses what is fundamentally the same architecture.

Starbucks told Reuters in a statement it is modernizing systems, "including replacing platforms like AS/400 with more advanced technology," to improve product availability and "deliver the consistent experience our customers expect."

Doing so could prove costly and complicated, staffers said. "It would be like changing the engine of an airplane while it's flying," said one involved in supply chain technology.

TOO LITTLE STORAGE, TOO MUCH WASTE

Every chain has problems with demand forecasting, supply chain experts said, but employees said that Starbucks' business model gives it less margin for error.

Whereas other fast-food chains have large backroom storage, Starbucks has less storage in its cafes -- and its food and milks are more perishable.

"When you set up a company that's based on beverages, and then add food, the supply chain isn't really equipped to scale with it," said one employee who worked on store operations.

Until about a decade ago, Starbucks stores were designed largely for beverages, with little room in the back to store food products, employees said. The growth of food as a revenue category - from 15% of revenue in 2005 to 23% in 2025, according to Starbucks filings - was a surprise, employees said.

Starbucks donates or throws away products that can't fit in storage, according to store employees.

An example came in September, shortly after Niccol rolled back "automated ordering" ahead of Starbucks' Fall food and beverage promotion. Bacon sandwiches, apple croissants and other seasonal foods temporarily flooded stores across the U.S., according to café workers and corporate employees.

Reuters also reviewed six photos of overstocked products. The Food Bank for New York City confirmed it saw an increase in donations of unsold food from Starbucks in September.

Jake Domey, a unionized barista in Danbury, Connecticut, said that one night he threw away three garbage bags of food - the most he's ever seen in 13 years at Starbucks. "It was an astronomical amount of waste," he said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Inside Starbucks' supply struggles: AI glitches, scattered suppliers and sandwich shortages By Reuters

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Inside Starbucks' supply struggles: AI glitches, scattered suppliers and sandwich shortages

# data[].attributes.body
Inside Starbucks’ supply struggles: AI glitches, scattered suppliers and sandwich shortages By Reuters

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
By Waylon Cunningham

NEW YORK, Jan 27 (Reuters) - Four CEOs over five years have blamed lost sales on its struggle to keep its thousands of U.S. stores reliably stocked with coffeehouse essentials like milk, pastries, and cup lids.

Current CEO Brian Niccol has made fixing the shortages a main measure of his turnaround campaign.

But shortages at are a more deeply rooted problem than has been publicly reported. And Niccol's ongoing efforts to keep shelves stocked have so far met with limited success as he encounters outdated technology and a splintered network of suppliers, according to Reuters interviews with 10 current and former Starbucks corporate employees, including senior managers.

Reuters also reviewed online videos showing glitches in Starbucks' latest AI inventory technology, as well as previously unreported photographs provided by baristas of excessive shipments.

"We've been transparent about the opportunities in our supply chain, and our transformation plans. We're modernizing systems with AI‑ready platforms, strengthening demand forecasting, and making our distribution network more agile so the right products reach the right coffeehouses each day. This work is already improving reliability for our partners and customers," Starbucks said in a statement.

Supply chain experts say one of the most critical measures of a supply chain's reliability is how often delivery trucks arrive at the right time and with the full amount of products. The goal is 95% or more, said Douglas Kent, executive vice president of the nonprofit Association for Supply Chain Management, and rates less than that indicate dysfunction.

In early 2024, less than a third of truck deliveries to Starbucks' distribution centers - company facilities that supply stores - were unloaded on time and included the full amount of the milks, pastries and other products, according to two former employees with direct knowledge of the company's supply chain. Employees involved in logistics blamed Starbucks' failure to coordinate its many suppliers. Issues continued into at least late 2025, said two former employees who left around that time.

Starbucks' share price is up about 5% since Niccol took over in September 2024, outperforming a 1% increase in Reuters' U.S. Restaurant Index but underperforming a 26% gain in the S&P 500 Index. Starbucks' U.S. sales declined for six quarters before its most recent earnings in October, when it reported flat U.S. sales. Niccol is due to lay out his strategy to investors on Thursday, following earnings on Wednesday.

NICCOL TAKING ON ISSUE WITH NEW HIRES, TECHNOLOGY

Additional problems can cascade down the supply chain -- such as inaccurate predictions of stores' product needs -- culminating in overstuffed warehouses, empty shelves in stores, and unhappy customers who can't buy what they want off the menu, according to Starbucks employees at the corporate and store level who requested anonymity because they are not authorized to speak to the media.

While avoiding shortages is critical to retaining customers, consultants say, restaurants must at the same time avoid ordering more products than customers will actually buy. Costly waste can sink already-thin profit margins in the restaurant industry. "It's a tightrope to walk," said Spencer Michiel, a consultant at the tech-focused Back of House firm.

Niccol's efforts have taken many forms, including giving store managers more autonomy for ordering supplies from distribution centers. The Starbucks mobile app was tweaked to better allow customers to see where shortages are reported by baristas. In a recent example, the app showed a New York area store was out of bacon and egg sandwiches.

The CEO has also hired veteran logistics executives including new Chief Technology Officer Anand Varadarajan, who previously headed supply chain operations for Amazon's grocery business.

But Niccol's changes haven't gone far enough, said independent supply chain consultant Brittain Ladd, who has previously advised Instacart and Kroger, and said he spoke at length with Starbucks supply chain executive Mike Bassani after Niccol hired Bassani last year.

Ladd, based on his own conversations with multiple Starbucks corporate employees, said Starbucks needs a fundamental overhaul of its supply chain, and criticized Niccol's highest-profile effort to date - attempting to partially automate store inventory counts - as a band-aid.

In September, Starbucks announced the rapid rollout of a tool called "automated counting" that is designed to improve Starbucks' visibility into shortages at stores. The AI-powered app aimed to replace hand-counts of some products with automated ones that are faster and more accurate. Cafe workers hold a computer tablet up to shelves for syrups, milks and other beverage products, which the app scans with LIDAR and camera data.

But the app frequently miscounts and mislabels items, such as confusing similar milk types or missing them altogether, according to 10 cafe workers and managers. For example, a video uploaded by Starbucks shows the app failing to recognize a peppermint syrup bottle on the shelf as it counts adjacent bottles.

The app's provider, NomadGo, says on its website it is "99% accurate."

"What NomadGo set out to do is modernize inventory counting to make it faster and less burdensome while providing timely, actionable data on product availability," the company said in a statement.

Starbucks said adoption of the app had improved product availability in stores, but did not specify by how much.

PREDECESSOR'S EFFORTS ROLLED BACK

Niccol isn't the first CEO in recent years to try to tackle Starbucks' supply chain problems, which staffers said became more apparent after competitors bounced back from pandemic-era supply shocks while Starbucks struggled to recover balance.

In 2021, former CEO Kevin Johnson told investors in an earnings call that the company was making progress against pandemic-related challenges on "inventory availability."

By 2023, former CEO Laxman Narasimhan regularly referred to shortages as "another reason customers choose not to complete their orders" in earnings calls.

Narasimhan, in the top office for nearly 18 months until Niccol's appointment, sought to address out-of-stocks in part by automating how stores order products from distribution centers. The "automated ordering" program, created in partnership with tech firm o9 Solutions, used machine learning techniques to continually refine predictions of upcoming store sales.

The program erred toward recommending too few products, employees said, and in late summer 2024, Narasimhan sought to refine it through an effort called "Never-Out," which selectively tested larger product shipments, according to employees.

"Never-Out," an initiative that has not previously been reported, was rolled back roughly eight weeks later after Narasimhan was ousted in favor of Niccol, who also later scaled back "automated ordering" shortly before Starbucks' Fall promotion last year, according to operations employees.

Starbucks in a statement to Reuters said the company had returned "ownership of inventory to coffeehouse teams so they can manage availability."

o9 Solutions did not respond to a request for comment.

STARBUCKS' HIDDEN BOTTLENECKS

Some employees characterized Starbucks' supply chain problems as end-to-end, starting with supplier contracts.

Starbucks supplies many of its food products from small, regional vendors that struggle to ramp up production when demand spikes, according to former warehouse employees. "Starbucks never cultivated the relationships with large suppliers that it needed," said one.

Scattered sourcing creates more headaches. For example, Starbucks juggles 1,500 cup-and-lid pairings from different vendors, executives said in a 2023 earnings call. Former workers say the lack of standardized packaging from these suppliers prevents the chain from automating store-level inventory counts using cameras, as other U.S. food chains do - or as Starbucks does in China, according to employees.

Another key kink in the supply chain is outdated IBM computer hardware that Starbucks uses to process store inventories and resupply orders. In 1997, Starbucks executives touted to a trade publication the company's use of the IBM AS/400 system for mission-critical operations. Nearly 30 years later, staffers in the company's technology teams say Starbucks uses what is fundamentally the same architecture.

Starbucks told Reuters in a statement it is modernizing systems, "including replacing platforms like AS/400 with more advanced technology," to improve product availability and "deliver the consistent experience our customers expect."

Doing so could prove costly and complicated, staffers said. "It would be like changing the engine of an airplane while it's flying," said one involved in supply chain technology.

TOO LITTLE STORAGE, TOO MUCH WASTE

Every chain has problems with demand forecasting, supply chain experts said, but employees said that Starbucks' business model gives it less margin for error.

Whereas other fast-food chains have large backroom storage, Starbucks has less storage in its cafes -- and its food and milks are more perishable.

"When you set up a company that's based on beverages, and then add food, the supply chain isn't really equipped to scale with it," said one employee who worked on store operations.

Until about a decade ago, Starbucks stores were designed largely for beverages, with little room in the back to store food products, employees said. The growth of food as a revenue category - from 15% of revenue in 2005 to 23% in 2025, according to Starbucks filings - was a surprise, employees said.

Starbucks donates or throws away products that can't fit in storage, according to store employees.

An example came in September, shortly after Niccol rolled back "automated ordering" ahead of Starbucks' Fall food and beverage promotion. Bacon sandwiches, apple croissants and other seasonal foods temporarily flooded stores across the U.S., according to café workers and corporate employees.

Reuters also reviewed six photos of overstocked products. The Food Bank for New York City confirmed it saw an increase in donations of unsold food from Starbucks in September.

Jake Domey, a unionized barista in Danbury, Connecticut, said that one night he threw away three garbage bags of food - the most he's ever seen in 13 years at Starbucks. "It was an astronomical amount of waste," he said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Inside Starbucks' supply struggles: AI glitches, scattered suppliers and sandwich shortages By Reuters

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Inside Starbucks' supply struggles: AI glitches, scattered suppliers and sandwich shortages

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How technology is transforming accounting

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Enforced return to office leads workers to seek new jobs

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Manufacturing Sector in India: Market Size, FDI, Govt Initiatives | IBEF

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Read the Latest News and Updates on Manufacturing Sector in India. Get all the News about Indian Manufacturing Industry.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
KPMG Australia’s CEO Andrew Yates quits over whistleblower scandal

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Yates says ‘we have let ourselves down’ when dealing with allegations of client information being misused

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Tax & Accounting Blog Posts by Thomson Reuters

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The state of AI in audit in 2026: Interview with experts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We sat down with industry experts to discuss where AI in audit stands today, where it’s headed, and what firms should be doing now to prepare.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
20251121 AM-ACCOUNTING - AI revolutionary role in accounting

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
20251119 AM-ACCOUNTING - Could AI take the grind out of accountancy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Agatha Christie, in full Dame Agatha Mary Clarissa Christie, née Miller, (born September 15, 1890, Torquay, Devon, England-died January 12, 1976, Wallingford, Oxfordshire), English detective novelist and playwright whose books have sold more than 100 million copies and have been translated into some 100 languages.

Educated at home by her mother, Christie began writing detective fiction while working as a nurse during World War I. Her first novel, The Mysterious Affair at Styles (1920), introduced Hercule Poirot, her eccentric and egotistic Belgian detective; Poirot reappeared in about 25 novels and many short stories before returning to Styles, where, in Curtain (1975), he died. The elderly spinster Miss Jane Marple, her other principal detective figure, first appeared in Murder at the Vicarage (1930). Christie's first major recognition came with The Murder of Roger Ackroyd (1926), which was followed by some 75 novels that usually made best-seller lists and were serialized in popular magazines in England and the United States.

Christie's plays included The Mousetrap (1952), which set a world record for the longest continuous run at one theatre (8,862 performances-more than 21 years-at the Ambassadors Theatre, London) before moving in 1974 to St Martin's Theatre, where it continued without a break until the COVID-19 pandemic closed theatres in 2020, by which time it had surpassed 28,200 performances; and Witness for the Prosecution (1953), which, like many of her works, was adapted into a successful film (1957). Other notable film adaptations included And Then There Were None (1939; film 1945), Murder on the Orient Express (1933; film 1974 and 2017), Death on the Nile (1937; film 1978), and The Mirror Crack'd From Side to Side (1952; film [ The Mirror Crack'd] 1980). Her works were also adapted for television.

In 1926 Christie's mother died, and her husband, Colonel Archibald Christie, requested a divorce. In a move she never fully explained, Christie disappeared and, after several highly publicized days, was discovered registered in a hotel under the name of the woman her husband wished to marry. In 1930 Christie married the archaeologist Sir Max Mallowan; thereafter she spent several months each year on expeditions in Iraq and Syria with him. She also wrote romantic nondetective novels, such as Absent in the Spring (1944), under the pseudonym Mary Westmacott. Her Autobiography (1977) appeared posthumously. She was created a Dame Commander of the Order of the British Empire in 1971.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Agatha Christie | Biography, Books, Movies, Poirot, & Facts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Agatha Christie, English detective novelist and playwright whose books have sold more than 100 million copies and have been translated into some 100 languages. Her first novel, in 1920, introduced her eccentric and egotistic Belgian detective Hercule Poirot; Miss Jane Marple first appeared in 1930.

# data[].attributes.headline
Recruitment process : Floriane, Amine and Habib

# data[].attributes.subject
Recruitment process : Floriane, Amine and Habib

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Offices with Slides 9 Reasons Your Office Needs a Slide | Open Sourced Workplace

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
You fondly remember the days of your childhood spent at the playground, riding on swings and catapulting down slides. Whether metal or plastic, the thrill…

# data[].attributes.headline
Random subject press review: «  The highest form of intelligence : Sarcasm increases creativity for both expressers and recipients » ( By Malicka and Dydy)

# data[].attributes.subject
Random subject press review: «  The highest form of intelligence : Sarcasm increases creativity for both expressers and recipients » ( By Malicka and Dydy)

# data[].attributes.headline
Management Press review : How to counter sexism in the workplace (by Malicka and Dydy)

# data[].attributes.subject
Management Press review : How to counter sexism in the workplace (by Malicka and Dydy)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How to Counter Sexism in the Workplace | Deloitte Netherlands

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Workplace sexism affects all genders, damaging performance, well-being, and satisfaction. It leads to higher turnover and lower productivity and diversity. The article suggests creating a psychologically safe environment to counter and prevent sexism.

# data[].attributes.headline
PRESS REVIEW ABOUT MANAGEMENT : IMPACT OF HRM ORGANIZATION PERFORMANCE.  FLORIANE, AMINE AND HABIB

# data[].attributes.subject
PRESS REVIEW ABOUT MANAGEMENT : IMPACT OF HRM ORGANIZATION PERFORMANCE.  FLORIANE, AMINE AND HABIB

# data[].attributes.headline
PRESS REVIEW ABOUT ANOTHER SUBJECT : USA AND THE WORLD CUP 2026.  FLORIANE, AMINE AND HABIB

# data[].attributes.subject
PRESS REVIEW ABOUT ANOTHER SUBJECT : USA AND THE WORLD CUP 2026.  FLORIANE, AMINE AND HABIB

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The American Immigration Council is a non-profit, non-partisan organization. Sign up to receive our latest analysis as soon as it's published.

Today, millions of people across the globe will tune into the draw for the 2026 FIFA World Cup. The ceremony will decide which countries will play each other at next summer's tournament, co-hosted for the first time by the United States, Canada, and Mexico.

Hosting the World Cup, the largest sporting event in history, typically means welcoming all who love the beautiful game. It is an opportunity for hosts to advertise the best that their nation has to offer.

But the Trump administration's restrictive immigration agenda, including a travel ban on 19 countries and aggressive interior enforcement, signals the opposite: that the U.S. is working to severely narrow who can come and who can stay, and stepping back from the international stage while the world watches on.

For many soccer fans, excitement about the World Cup will be mixed with anxiety about whether they will be allowed to travel to the U.S. for the games and if they will feel safe doing so. With record-high ticket costs already pricing out many would-be travelers, the U.S. should not be turning away fans who could fill stadiums and generate the economic activity host cities are counting on.

What policies will have the biggest impact on the 2026 World Cup?

On June 4, 2025, President Donald Trump issued a proclamation restricting or limiting the entry of nationals from 19 countries, mostly from the Middle East and Africa. Fans from each of these countries will largely be unable to attend any games in the U.S during next year's tournament, unless they have a valid visa issued before June 9, 2025.

Notably, "any athlete or member of an athletic team, including coaches, persons performing a necessary support role, and immediate relatives, traveling to the World Cup" is exempt from the policy, according to the proclamation.

While the ban only impacts travel to the U.S., the vast majority of 2026 World Cup games will be played there. Of the tournament's 104 games, 78 will take place in U.S. cities, including the two semifinals and final, compared to 13 each in Canada and Mexico.

Which qualified teams are impacted by the travel ban?

Haiti and Iran are the two teams that were included in the June travel ban and have also qualified for the 2026 World Cup. Both nations face near-complete travel bans.

Haiti qualified for the tournament for the first time in over 50 years. Yet due to the travel ban, most fans from the island will not be able to watch their team play in the U.S. To make matters worse, the Trump administration recently ordered an end to Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Haitians, despite rampant gang violence on the island. This means 340,000 Haitians currently living in the country will lose legal protection and work authorization by February 3, 2026. And with the White House not ruling out immigration enforcement actions at World Cup games, some newly-undocumented Haitian fans may face a risk by watching their team play in-person.

Iran, on the other hand, decided to boycott the draw altogether, claiming that the U.S. denied visas to members of its delegation.

Fans from other soccer-crazed nations like Sierra Leone and Republic of the Congo also face a travel ban and will likely miss out on the World Cup experience, regardless of whether their teams qualified.

What comes next?

The Trump administration is reportedly considering adding up to 36 nations to an expanded travel ban. Five of these countries, all from Africa, have already qualified for the tournament: Cabo Verde, Côte d'Ivoire, Egypt, Ghana, and Senegal.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem doubled down on the need to expand the list of banned countries following the tragic shooting of two National Guard members by an Afghan national in Washington DC last week.

Beyond these travel restrictions, the tournament will take place in the context of the Trump administration's aggressive immigration enforcement in major cities. So far this year, federal officials have conducted large scale operations in Los Angeles (a World Cup host city) along with Chicago, Charlotte, New Orleans, and the Twin Cities, arresting immigrants and U.S. citizens, alike, while sowing fear and chaos.

During this past summer's FIFA Club World Cup, also hosted in the U.S., Customs and Border Protection published (and then deleted) a social media post signaling that it would have a presence at the tournament.

This all begs the question: can Trump's restrictive immigration agenda coexist with the largest global sporting event in history? We will find out next summer.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Trump's Travel Ban Decides the Real Winners and Losers of the 2026 FIFA World Cup Draw - American Immigration Council

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As the 2026 World Cup draw unfolds, Trump's travel ban and enforcement raise questions about who can attend-and how safe fans will feel.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Say goodbye to your manager - EXAM PRACTICE

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Présentation entreprise professionnel  simple bleu

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
cross cultural management amine lafleur Malicka

# data[].attributes.body
This comparison analyses Japan and the United States using Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions Theory. It highlights key cultural differences and similarities and explains how these differences influence business practices, communication, and management styles in both countries.

1. Power Distance Index (PDI)

Japan: Medium–High
Hierarchy is respected. Managers have authority, and employees rarely challenge decisions openly.

USA: Low
Organizations are flatter. Employees can question managers and give opinions freely.

Business example:

In Japan, decisions often come from senior management.

In the USA, employees participate in decision-making.

2. Individualism vs. Collectivism (IDV)

Japan: More collectivist
Group harmony, loyalty, and teamwork are very important. The focus is on “We.”

USA: Highly individualist
Personal success, independence, and individual goals are emphasized. The focus is on “I.”

Business example:

In Japan, success is shared by the team.

In the USA, performance is measured individually.

3. Uncertainty Avoidance Index (UAI)

Japan: Very High
Strong need for rules, planning, and risk reduction.

USA: Medium–Low
More comfortable with uncertainty, change, and innovation.

Business example:

Japanese companies plan carefully and avoid risk.

American companies accept experimentation and failure.

4. Masculinity vs. Femininity (MAS)

Japan: Very Masculine
Strong focus on competition, performance, success, and hard work.

USA: Masculine
Achievement and success are important, but work-life balance is more accepted.

Business example:

In Japan, long working hours show commitment.

In the USA, results matter more than time spent at work.

5. Long-Term vs. Short-Term Orientation (LTO)

Japan: Long-Term Oriented
Focus on future growth, patience, perseverance, and long-term strategy.

USA: Short-Term Oriented
Focus on quick results, short-term success, and fast returns.

Business example:

Japanese companies invest for long-term stability.

American companies expect fast performance and results.

6. Indulgence vs. Restraint (IVR)

Japan: Restraint
Society controls pleasure and emotions. Discipline is valued.

USA: Indulgence
People value freedom, leisure, and enjoying life.

Business example:

In Japan, emotions are controlled at work.

In the USA, personal expression is more accepted.

Business Etiquette

🇯🇵 Japan

Formal greetings (bowing, exchanging business cards with two hands)

Silence is normal and respectful in meetings

Indirect communication

Strong respect for hierarchy and seniority

🇺🇸 USA

Handshake and direct eye contact

Direct and clear communication

First names are used quickly

Time is money → meetings are efficient and punctual

BIG MAC INDEX (Simple Explanation)

The Big Mac Index compares the price of a Big Mac in different countries to measure purchasing power.

A Big Mac is usually more expensive in Japan than in the USA.

This shows differences in cost of living, wages, and currency value.

The Big Mac Index helps companies understand pricing and economic differences, not culture directly.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Three things to stop doing when working across cultures-ANSWER KEYS

# data[].attributes.headline
NETFLIX BM, DESIGNED BY SARAH, AMINE AND HABIB

# data[].attributes.subject
NETFLIX BM, DESIGNED BY SARAH, AMINE AND HABIB

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
5-MANAGEMENT HR & STRATEGY-Cross culture

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Henry Mintzberg: IMpact for leadership to organizational development

# data[].attributes.body
Malicka et margot

# data[].attributes.body
People Who Keep Company Secrets Find More Meaning at Work

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Flying Taxis? China Has Them. And Drone Lunch Deliveries, Too.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
China’s experiments in clean energy can feel like living in the future. Even when things don’t quite work.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Teamwork is better with a little laughter-because a happy office is a productive office!

getty

Leadership is often associated with qualities like decisiveness, resilience and the ability to keep a straight face during a never-ending Zoom call. But one powerful-and often overlooked-leadership tool is humor. No, this doesn't mean cracking dad jokes in board meetings (though, used wisely, that might help).

Research shows that laughter in the workplace isn't just good for morale; it actually boosts leadership effectiveness and even makes Monday mornings a little less painful.

Incorporating humor into the workplace leads to measurable benefits. The World Economics Forum found that employees who watched a comedy clip before working were 10% more productive than those who did not. Humor also fosters creativity and innovation, helping teams think outside the box and solve problems more effectively. Additionally, workplaces that embrace humor experience higher employee retention rates, as a positive and engaging environment makes employees more likely to stay.

Laughter is more than just a social nicety. Laughing has a biological impact on stress and emotional well-being. When people laugh, their bodies release endorphins, the brain's natural feel-good chemicals, while simultaneously reducing cortisol, the stress hormone. This physiological response creates a sense of relaxation, reducing workplace tension and increasing employees' ability to handle challenges effectively.

A study published in Frontiers in Psychology highlights that leaders who incorporate humor into their management style foster higher team performance and satisfaction levels. When employees experience a workplace culture that embraces lightheartedness, they tend to feel more engaged.

The Right Way To Use Humor

While humor has many benefits, it must be used wisely to be effective. The key is situational awareness; it's about understanding when and how to inject humor appropriately without disrupting professionalism. If misused, it alienates employees or create an unproductive work environment.

Leaders who master the art of humor do so with intention, ensuring that it aligns with their communication style and the situation at hand. Here are some essential guidelines for using humor effectively in leadership:

Keep it inclusive. Humor should bring people together, not divide them. Avoid sarcasm and offensive jokes. A safe rule of thumb is to skip a joke if there's even a slight chance it could be misinterpreted or make someone uncomfortable. Instead, focus on lighthearted, universally relatable humor that enhances camaraderie.

Be authentic-Forced or overly scripted humor often falls flat. Use humor that aligns with yor personality and the workplace culture. If you're not naturally a joke-teller, you can still incorporate humor by sharing amusing workplace moments or funny observations that feels natural and relatable.

Balance is key-Humor should support productivity, not detract from it. While creating a fun work environment is valuable, a leader who always jokes risks losing credibility when it comes to serious matters. Laughter should be used strategically to lighten the mood, ease tension or reinforce a message without diminishing the importance of professional responsibilities.

Know your audience-What one person finds funny, another might not. Leaders should be mindful of their team's personalities, cultural backgrounds and sensitivities.

Use humor as a leadership tool-Studies show that humor make leaders appear more competent and approachable. By weaving humor into presentations or team meetings, leaders create a workplace culture where employees feel more connected and engaged.

Mastering the use of humor in leadership is about striking the right balance-making the workplace enjoyable while maintaining professionalism and respect. The best leaders recognize that a little laughter goes a long way in driving success.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Laughter In Leadership: How Humor Enhances Workplace Performance

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Laughter is a powerful leadership tool that boosts morale and enhances teamwork. Learn how to use humor effectively in the workplace.

# data[].attributes.body
Caleb

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Abstract

Although the detrimental effects of laissez-faire leadership are well documented, research on the underlying mechanisms and the boundary conditions associated with these effects remains scarce. Using the identity orientation framework and social exchange theory, we propose that employees with stronger relational self-concepts are more likely to be affected by laissez-faire leadership. As these employees define themselves through dyadic relationships, they may react more negatively to laissez-faire leadership by diminishing their contributions to mutual goals and reducing their affective organizational commitment. These predictions were tested within a three-wave longitudinal study through structural equations modeling analyses with full information maximum likelihood estimation on a sample of employees from multiple organizations ( N = 449). As predicted, the relational self-concept was associated with a stronger negative effect of laissez-faire leadership on the contribution dimension of leader-member exchange and a stronger negative indirect effect on affective organizational commitment. The implications of these findings for our understanding of the mechanisms related to laissez-faire leadership are discussed.

Keywords: Laissez-faire leadership, Leader-member exchange, Affective organizational commitment, Relational self-concept, Identity orientation framework, Social exchange theory

Leadership has always been at the forefront of organizational research. Most research has focused on what constitutes a good leader, neglecting negative forms of leadership (Tepper, 2000, 2007; Schyns & Schilling, 2013; Most research has focused on what constitutesMost research has focused on what constitutesZellars, Tepper, & Duffy, 2002). However, according to the principle that "bad is stronger than good" (Baumeister, Bratslavsky, Finkenauer, & Vohs, 2001), negative forms of leadership may be more influential than positive forms of leadership. It is thus surprising that this area of research has been underinvestigated (Hinkin & Schriesheim, 2008a; Judge & Piccolo, 2004). Despite recent interest into destructive leadership (Schyns & Schilling, 2013), more passive yet destructive forms of leadership such as laissez-faire leadership did not receive the same attention (Che, Zhou, Kessler, & Spector, 2017). Passive forms of leadership, which include laissez-faire as the most extreme passivity of leaders, can still have detrimental effects on employees and organizations (Hinkin & Schriesheim, 2008a; Kelloway, Sivanathan, Francis, & Barling, 2005; Skogstad, Einarsen, Torsheim, Aasland, & Hetland, 2007). For example, laissez-faire leadership was found to be associated with reduced job satisfaction, leader effectiveness, satisfaction with the leader (Judge & Piccolo, 2004), and performance (Yammarino, Spangler, & Bass, 1993). Similarly, a study (Skogstad et al., 2014) found laissez-faire leadership to be the sole (negative) leadership predictor of job satisfaction over a 2-year period. However, despite being one of the most prevalent forms of negative leadership in modern organizations (Aasland, Skogstad, Notelaers, Nielsen, & Einarsen, 2010), laissez-faire leadership has been understudied (Skogstad, Hetland, Glasø, & Einarsen, 2014). Organizational research would gain from investigating this particular type of (negative) leadership given both its prevalence and its likely detrimental effects on employees and organizations.

Laissez-faire leadership is part of the full-range leadership model (Avolio, 2011), one of the most established (Den Hartog, Van Muijen, & Koopman, 1997) and popular models of leadership (Dumdum, Lowe, & Avolio, 2002; Judge & Piccolo, 2004; Lowe, Kroeck, & Sivasubramaniam, 1996), which also comprises transformational and transactional dimensions. Defined as avoidance and abdication of one's responsibilities (Hinkin & Schriesheim, 2008b; Skogstad, Hetland, et al., 2014), "laissez-faire has been consistently found to be the least satisfying and least effective management style" (Bass & Bass, 2008, p. 145). However, as research has mainly focused on the direct effects of laissez-faire leadership (Bass & Bass, 2008; Hinkin & Schriesheim, 2008a), the mechanisms and contextual boundaries associated with these effects have received little attention, which is a gap we intend to fill with the current study. Our attempt at doing so resonates with the call for a more nuanced approach to laissez-faire leadership (Wong & Giessner, 2018), as its effects may depend on the context (Yang, 2015; Yang & Li, 2017). By shedding light on these processes, we take a step toward understanding how the detrimental effects of laissez-faire leadership can be reduced, hence providing clues for practitioners.

First, laissez-faire leadership may differentially affect individuals depending on their individual dispositions. An important individual disposition that has been considered in prior leadership research is the self-concept (Lord, Brown, & Freiberg, 1999; van Knippenberg, van Knippenberg, De Cremer, & Hogg, 2004). The self-concept refers to the ways in which people define themselves and, as such, influences the perceptions of oneself and others (Brewer & Gardner, 1996; Lord & Brown, 2004; Markus & Wurf, 1987). It is composed of distinct motivations, sources of self-worth, and self-knowledge (Brickson, 2000). Multiple levels of the self-concept have been identified, namely, the individual, relational, and collective levels (e.g., Brewer & Gardner, 1996; Lord & Brown, 2004). Since leadership involves dyadic relationships between leaders and subordinates, a relational self-concept, which refers to the significance of dyadic relationships in people's life (Johnson & Saboe, 2011), is a salient characteristic that may influence employee reactions to leaders (Brewer & Gardner, 1996). Employees with a strong relational self-concept are likely more affected by, and to react more strongly to, laissez-faire leadership because such leadership poses a threat to their goals, needs, and identity-defining relationship (Wisse & Sleebos, 2016). The absence of decisions and interactions with the leader may violate their expectations that a leader should attend to work-related problems and their relational needs (Lord & Brown, 2001). Therefore, individuals with strong relational self-concepts may experience laissez-faire leadership as disappointing, resulting in negative attitudes toward their supervisors and the organization.

Second, we explore the possibility that laissez-faire leadership may negatively affect the quality of the exchange relationship between employees and leaders. Leader-member exchange (LMX) theory suggests that leaders develop differential relationships with employees, ranging from low-quality to high-quality relationships (Boies & Howell, 2006; Chen, He, & Weng, 2018; Erdogan & Bauer, 2010; Liden & Graen, 1980). As laissez-faire leadership involves the abdication of one's responsibilities, it may result in reduced LMX, particularly among employees with strong relational self-concepts. As these individuals are more sensitive to expressions of support and recognition and the active involvement of their leaders in decisions (Brewer & Gardner, 1996), laissez-faire leaders-because they do not attend to employees' relational needs-will not be able to entice them to cooperate and contribute to mutual goals (De Cremer, 2003). Among the dimensions of LMX (i.e., affect, loyalty, contribution, and professional respect; Liden & Maslyn, 1998), one particularly reflects that "currency of exchange" (Dienesch & Liden, 1986; Greguras & Ford, 2006; Law, Wang, & Hui, 2010; Maslyn & Uhl-Bien, 2001) we allude to here. Specifically, the contribution dimension of LMX (i.e., the activity put forth toward mutual goals; Liden & Maslyn, 1998) is most likely to be affected because laissez-faire leadership involves a failure to invest in the relationship with the employee. Thus, as a result of laissez-faire leadership, employees with strong relational self-concepts may be inclined to reduce their contributions to mutual goals. We further argue that a lack of contribution by these employees will in turn lead to reduced affective organizational commitment (AOC) because it is well established that relationships with supervisors have implications for attitudes toward the organization (Dulebohn, Bommer, Liden, Brouer, & Ferris, 2012).

This study contributes to the leadership literature in several ways. First, we extend this literature by delving into the mechanisms and boundary conditions explaining how laissez-faire leadership negatively relates to AOC. Our focus is on examining the quality of the relationship between employees and leaders (i.e., LMX) as a primary reason why laissez-faire may affect AOC. Second, in doing so, we take a disaggregated approach to LMX and identify its contribution dimension as the most relevant aspect of LMX that should be affected by laissez-faire leadership. To further demonstrate the unique sensitivity of LMX's contribution dimension to laissez-faire leadership, this study shows in parallel that the other LMX dimensions (i.e., affect, loyalty, and professional respect) are not affected by laissez-faire leadership. Third, we examine employees' relational self-concepts as a boundary condition and, as such, depart from the leader-centric approaches that dominate the field (Schyns & Schilling, 2013). The relational self-concept is used as an individual difference variable that magnifies the value that individuals attribute to dyadic relationships. Fourth, our focus on laissez-faire leadership as an antecedent to LMX and AOC breaks new ground by expanding the spectrum of negative antecedents to these constructs. Finally, our hypotheses were tested within a dynamic perspective as we controlled for the baseline levels of our mediator and outcome variables in a three-wave longitudinal study. Hypotheses are developed in the next sections.

Theoretical Framework and Hypotheses

Laissez-Faire Leadership

Laissez-faire leadership is characterized by avoidance and inaction (Bass & Bass, 2008; Avolio, 2011; Hinkin & Schriesheim, 2008b; Skogstad, Hetland, et al., 2014). Laissez-faire leaders avoid making decisions, abdicate their responsibilities, delay actions, and refrain from using the authority associated with their roles (Bass & Bass, 2008; Den Hartog et al., 1997). They also fail to provide feedback and recognition to subordinates (Hinkin & Schriesheim, 2008b) and they tend to ignore followers' needs, as they do not deal with work-related problems (Yukl, 2010). These leaders do not take sides in disputes and are disorganized in dealing with priorities (Bass, 1998). Based on their survey, Aasland et al. ( 2010) noted that 21% of employees had experienced laissez-faire behaviors from their leaders during the previous six months, making laissez-faire the most prevalent form of negative leadership.

Neglecting one's responsibilities as a leader harms both the organization and the subordinates (Hinkin & Schriesheim, 2008a; Skogstad et al., 2007). Laissez-faire leadership is not only ineffective but also destructive (Aasland et al., 2010; Einarsen, Aasland, & Skogstad, 2007; Skogstad, Aasland, et al., 2014; Skogstad, Hetland, et al., 2014). Empirically, laissez-faire leadership has been found to be associated with reduced subordinate effort (Bass & Stogdill, 1990), performance (Yammarino et al., 1993), job satisfaction, perceived leader effectiveness, and satisfaction with the leader (Judge & Piccolo, 2004); increased stress and interpersonal conflicts (Skogstad et al., 2007); and more role ambiguity and role conflict (Skogstad et al., 2007; Skogstad, Hetland, et al., 2014). However, the inactivity characterizing laissez-faire leadership makes this style of leadership unique and distinct from other forms of negative leadership because its negative consequences result from the absence of constructive behaviors rather than from the presence of destructive ones (Kelloway, Mullen, & Francis, 2006). Therefore, further inquiry into laissez-faire leadership is warranted.

Laissez-Faire Leadership and Leader-Member Exchange

We posit that a primary mechanism through which laissez-faire leadership may affect employees pertains to the quality of the exchange relationship with the leader or LMX (e.g., Buch, Martinsen, & Kuvaas, 2015). Indeed, employees may be unmotivated to uphold a good relationship with a leader with whom they expect to have limited interactions (van Knippenberg & Steensma, 2003). According to social exchange theory (Blau, 1964), employees invest in a relationship when they feel that contributing their time and energy may lead to reciprocal exchanges. However, laissez-faire leaders fail to provide resources such as information, challenging task assignments, and autonomy-supportive conditions. In such circumstances, employees may feel they are not receiving their due in the relationship with their leader, which may reduce their desire to engage in tasks and duties beyond what is formally required.

The exchange of resources and opportunities is central to LMX development (Liden & Graen, 1980) and depending on the resources/opportunities that are valued by the exchange partners (Graen & Cashman, 1975), different "currencies of exchange" may be salient to LMX (Dienesch & Liden, 1986; Law et al., 2010). Liden and Maslyn ( 1998) (see also Dienesch & Liden, 1986) developed a conceptualization of LMX comprising four dimensions reflecting different aspects of these currencies: affect (i.e., mutual affection based on interpersonal attraction), loyalty (i.e., the expression of public support for the goals and the other member's character), contribution (i.e., the amount, direction and quality of work toward mutual goals), and professional respect (i.e., the perception of reputation and excellence). While many studies have adopted a unidimensional view of LMX (Dulebohn, Wu, & Liao, 2017), it is likely that high LMX is derived from different dimensions depending on circumstances (Liden & Maslyn, 1998; Maslyn & Uhl-Bien, 2001), such as the leadership style adopted (Lee, 2005). Thus, the very nature of laissez-faire leadership may indicate which dimension of LMX is more likely to be solicited.

As laissez-faire leadership involves unfulfilled responsibilities, these leaders set standards that lower the value of work-related exchanges (Liden & Maslyn, 1998). Therefore, the task-related behaviors of employees (Graen & Scandura, 1987; Liden & Maslyn, 1998; Maslyn & Uhl-Bien, 2005) and employees' own efforts to develop LMX (Maslyn & Uhl-Bien, 2001) may be limited. With laissez-faire leadership, the contribution dimension of LMX, which refers to the "perception of the amount, direction, and quality of work-oriented activity each member puts forth toward the mutual goals (explicit or implicit) of the dyad" (Dienesch & Liden, 1986, p. 624), is likely affected (e.g., Lee, 2005). From the employee's perspective, LMX's contribution reflects the subordinate's willingness to help the leader and contribute to his or her goals. Following social exchange theory (Blau, 1964), laissez-faire leaders do not encourage subordinates to contribute to mutual goals over what is included in their job descriptions as they may think they do not receive their dues (e.g., support, recognition) in the relationship with the leader. It is also likely that LMX's contribution dimension is mostly affected in response to laissez-faire leadership because it is the only dimension that reflects the exchange from a behavioral perspective. The other dimensions ( affect, loyalty, and respect) do not refer to the behavioral component of the exchange relationship. Laissez-faire leaders echo to this dimension by not taking actions that would signal support and recognition to subordinates. It is thus the absence of constructive behaviors (Kelloway et al., 2006) in laissez-faire leaders that makes LMX's contribution mostly affected.

However, as theory has stipulated that because of limited resources and time, leaders differentiate among followers (Dansereau Jr., Graen, & Haga, 1975; Graen & Cashman, 1975; Graen & Scandura, 1987; Liden & Graen, 1980; Maslyn & Uhl-Bien, 2005), distinct LMX relationships are found across followers (Boies & Howell, 2006; Chen et al., 2018; Erdogan & Bauer, 2010; Henderson, Liden, Glibkowski, & Chaudhry, 2009; Herdman, Yang, & Arthur, 2017; Le Blanc & González-Romá, 2012; Liden, Erdogan, Wayne, & Sparrowe, 2006; Wu, Tsui, & Kinicki, 2010). Thus, while laissez-faire leadership may lend itself to poor LMX relationships, particularly in regard to its contribution dimension, there may be variability in the extent to which employees' relationships with their leaders are impacted by laissez-faire leadership. One factor that may explain this variability relates to employees' self-concepts (Jackson & Johnson, 2012), which we now discuss.

Levels of the Self-concept

Leadership practices do not operate in a vacuum (Epitropaki, Kark, Mainemelis, & Lord, 2017). Rather, leaders' behavior interacts with the characteristics of followers (Padilla, Hogan, & Kaiser, 2007). Such interactionist perspective suggests that a better understanding of leaders' influence can be gained by accounting for followers' expectations about leaders' behavior. To illustrate such individual differences, research has identified the self-concept as an important background construct that guides individuals' reactions to leaders' behavior (Lord et al., 1999). The self-concept is a self-regulatory mechanism that drives self-esteem and organizes self-relevant knowledge (Brewer & Gardner, 1996). As a chronic representation of identity that promotes a self-definition anchored at the individual, relational, or collective level, the self-concept influences how people feel, think, and behave (Lord & Brown, 2004; Markus & Wurf, 1987). Research has shown that the levels of the self-concept influence employees' interpretations of leaders' behavior (Chang & Johnson, 2010; Jackson & Johnson, 2012; Lord & Brown, 2004; Lord et al., 1999; Wu et al., 2010) and influence leaders' effectiveness (Hogg, Martin, & Weeden, 2003; Lord & Brown, 2004; Lord et al., 1999). By extension, we expect the self-concept to play a similar role regarding laissez-faire leadership.

Three levels of the self-concept have been identified (Brewer & Gardner, 1996; Brickson, 2000; Johnson, Selenta, & Lord, 2006; Lord & Brown, 2004; Lord et al., 1999; Sedikides & Brewer, 2001; Sedikides, Gaertner, & O'Mara, 2011). The collective self-concept involves the self-definition derived from belonging to groups such as organizations or teams; the relational self-concept involves a focus on dyadic relationships as a source of identity; and the individual self-concept stresses an individual's uniqueness and self-interests (Brewer & Gardner, 1996; Lord et al., 1999; Sedikides & Brewer, 2001; van Knippenberg et al., 2004). Even though the different levels may coexist within the same person, individuals differ regarding the importance they place on each level of the self-concept (Brewer & Chen, 2007).

Although the employee self-concept has been shown to exert a moderating role on leader effectiveness, this effect has been mostly studied using the collective self-concept (Hogg, 2001; Hogg & van Knippenberg, 2003; Lord et al., 1999; Lord & Brown, 2004; van Knippenberg & Hogg, 2003). However, the relational self-concept has been largely overlooked. This is surprising because individuals are more likely to be affected by threats at the relational level than by those at the collective level of the self (Gaertner et al., 2012). Moreover, the relational identity becomes relevant when one looks at the outcomes of the leader's actions from the perspective of the dyadic relationship (i.e., LMX; Chang & Johnson, 2010; Lord et al., 1999; Schyns & Day, 2010). As subordinates with strong relational self-concepts place a premium on dyadic exchanges (Wisse & Sleebos, 2016) and affective bonds with specific others (Brewer & Gardner, 1996), their self-worth should be particularly dependent on how their leader responds to their relational expectations.

Moderating Role of the Relational Self-concept

Reliable role performance is rooted in how interactions between leader and subordinate unfold and whether the partners' role expectations are fulfilled (Graen & Scandura, 1987). By abdicating the responsibilities related to their role, laissez-faire leaders violate subordinates' role expectations (Eagly, Johannesen-Schmidt, & van Engen, 2003; Hinkin & Schriesheim, 2008a; Skogstad et al., 2007). However, the discrepancy between employees' expectations and leaders' behavior is likely stronger among employees with a relational self-identity because these employees are particularly sensitive to the fulfillment of role expectations (Andersen & Chen, 2002). Indeed, these employees have important relational needs, entertain affective ties with significant others (Brewer & Gardner, 1996; Flynn, 2005; Wisse & Sleebos, 2016), and expect dyadic partners to engage in behaviors that satisfy their relational expectations. Therefore, they are likely to feel frustrated if their leader does not engage in actions liable to maintain the relationship vivid and constructive.

Laissez-faire leaders may discourage employees from investing resources in LMX (Aryee, Chen, Sun, & Debrah, 2007; Xu, Huang, Lam, & Miao, 2012). Per the tenets of social exchange theory (Blau, 1964), a balance is expected between inputs and contributions in LMX relationships (Kuvaas, Buch, Dysvik, & Haerem, 2012). As laissez-faire leaders fall short of maintaining balanced relationships (e.g., they delay decisions and do not take actions when needed), employees with relational self-concepts would experience this as a threat to their identity (Brewer & Gardner, 1996; Flynn, 2005). This is so because they tend to define themselves in terms of their relations with others (Ferris, Yan, Lim, Chen, & Fatimah, 2016). Employees with a relational self-concept may thus experience their sense of self-worth as being undermined by the laissez-faire behavior of their leader (Swann Jr., Chang-Schneider, & Angulo, 2007), which would lower their motivation to cooperate with him or her (Tyler, 2003). As a result, employees with a relational self-concept may thrive to protect themselves by reducing their contribution to the relationship (Flynn, 2005). Thus, the lack of reciprocity (Herdman et al., 2017) instilled by laissez-faire behaviors would encourage these employees to reduce their contributions to the attainment of mutual goals, which represents an integral aspect of LMX (Maslyn & Uhl-Bien, 2001). In sum, these employees would fall back on formal and contractual obligations (Erdogan & Liden, 2002; Liden & Graen, 1980; Shore, Bommer, Rao, & Seo, 2009).

Hypothesis 1: The employee's relational self-concept will moderate the relationship between laissez-faire leadership and LMX-Contribution such that this relationship will be stronger (vs. weaker) and negative when the relational self-concept is high (vs. low).

Affective Organizational Commitment

AOC reflects an emotional attachment to and identification with one's organization (Allen & Meyer, 1990; Meyer & Allen, 1997). It is the most impactful component of organizational commitment (Meyer & Herscovitch, 2001) and the most robust predictor of work-related behaviors (Lavelle, Rupp, & Brockner, 2007). Multiple studies have reported a positive relationship between LMX and AOC (Dulebohn et al., 2012; Gerstner & Day, 1997; Liden & Maslyn, 1998; Liden, Wayne, & Sparrowe, 2000). AOC is one the most studied outcomes of LMX (Eisenberger et al., 2010; Meyer, 2016; Wayne et al., 2009). Liden and Maslyn ( 1998) theorized that the contribution dimension of LMX reflects a willingness to complete tasks that go beyond one's job description and benefit the organization as a whole. Thus, more specifically, LMX-Contribution should be positively related to AOC (Greguras & Ford, 2006; Lee, 2005; Shore & Wayne, 1993). Indeed, since leaders carry out responsibilities and make decisions on behalf of the organization, they are seen as representing the organization (Skarlicki & Folger, 1997) and as agents connecting employees to the organization (Seers & Graen, 1984). Therefore, positive exchange relationships between leaders and employees as reflected in strong LMX-Contribution should ultimately result in stronger AOC (Eisenberger, Aselage, Sucharski, & Jones, 2004).

As argued above, we expect a higher relational self-concept to be associated with a more negative relationship between laissez-faire leadership and LMX-Contribution. Following a social exchange account (Blau, 1964), this effect should extend to the indirect relationship between laissez-faire leadership and AOC. That is, employees with strong relational self-concepts should feel that their needs and expectations are unfulfilled when their leaders abdicate their responsibilities because dyadic relationships occupy a central place in these individuals' self-definitions. This feeling would encourage them to reduce their contribution to mutual goals. In turn, this decreased contribution would penalize employee commitment to the organization because the relative quality of the exchange relationship with the supervisor tends to generalize to the attachment to the organization (Eisenberger, Stinglhamber, Vandenberghe, Sucharski, & Rhoades, 2002).

Hypothesis 2: The employee's relational self-concept will moderate the indirect relationship between laissez-faire leadership and AOC through LMX-Contribution such that this indirect relationship will be stronger (vs. weaker) and negative when the relational self-concept is high (vs. low).

Method

Sample and Procedure

Data were gathered through survey questionnaires that were administered in three waves with intervals of four months. Participants were recruited through the alumni association of a French business school. Prospective participants received an email inviting them to participate in an online study of job attitudes based on three questionnaires administered over several months. They were informed of the study objectives and ensured that participation was voluntary and responses would be kept confidential. The criteria for participation were having (a) salaried employment and (b) an identifiable supervisor. To encourage participation, the respondents had the opportunity to make a $5 gift to a charity of their choice at each wave of the surveys. The questionnaires were answered in French or English. At time 1, we measured the self-concept levels, laissez-faire leadership, LMX dimensions, AOC, and demographics, among other variables. The LMX dimensions were measured again at time 2, while AOC was also measured at time 3. The baseline (i.e., time 1) levels of the mediator (i.e., LMX-Contribution) and outcome (i.e., AOC) variables were controlled for while examining the moderation effect of the relational self-concept in the relationships among laissez-faire leadership, LMX-Contribution, and AOC. This approach provided a strong test of the longitudinal moderated mediation effects (Maxwell & Cole, 2007).

Excluding careless respondents ( n = 4) and participants who left supervisors or organizations during the study period ( n = 60), there remained 449 respondents at time 1, 182 at time 2, and 120 at time 3 (i.e., 27% response rate). We first examined whether respondent attrition across time was randomly distributed. Specifically, we conducted a logistic regression analysis with time 1 self-concept levels, laissez-faire leadership, LMX dimensions, AOC, and demographics predicting the probability of remaining in the sample at time 3 (Goodman & Blum, 1996). The logistic regression model was nonsignificant ( χ ²(13) = 15.15, ns) and none of the predictors was significant, indicating random attrition. Because the data were missing completely at random across time, we used full information maximum likelihood (FIML) estimation within structural equations modeling (see Results section) to test hypotheses (Ployhart & Vandenberg, 2010). This estimation procedure uses all the available information from the covariance matrix ( N = 449) and is the recommended method for dealing with missing data (Newman, 2009).

In the final sample used for analyses, age averaged 37.67 years ( SD = 9.00), organizational tenure averaged 6.07 years ( SD = 5.67), and tenure with the supervisor averaged 2.95 years ( SD  = 2.28). Most of the participants were women (63%), worked full-time (92%), had a graduate-level education (94%), and were employed in organizations of 1000 or more employees (56%). They worked in various industries, such as finance and insurance (15%), professional, scientific and technical services (11%), manufacturing (7%), health care and social assistance (5%), retail trade (5%), and information and cultural industries (4%).

Measures

When needed, French versions of the English scales were created using a translation-back-translation procedure (Schaffer & Riordan, 2003). Responses were obtained on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 ( strongly disagree) to 5 ( strongly agree), unless otherwise specified.

Laissez-Faire Leadership

We measured laissez-faire leadership at time 1 using a 7-item version (Hinkin & Schriesheim, 2008a, 2008b) of the laissez-faire scale from the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire 5X (Bass & Avolio, 1991). A sample item is "[In the past few weeks] my immediate supervisor avoided making decisions about my work," with response options of 1 ( strongly disagree) to 5 ( strongly agree). Cronbach's alpha for this scale was .93.

LMX-Contribution

Participants answered the 12-item multidimensional measure of LMX (LMX-MDM) developed by Liden and Maslyn ( 1998) at time 1 and time 2, which contains four 3-item scales pertaining to the four LMX dimensions. The internal consistency for the 3-item LMX-Contribution scale was .79 at time 1 and .80 at time 2. A sample item is "I do work for my supervisor that goes beyond what is specified in my job description." For exploratory purposes, we also measured the other LMX dimensions using their respective 3-item scales: affect (e.g., "I like my supervisor very much as a person"; α = .90 at time 1 and .91 at time 2); loyalty (e.g., "My supervisor would defend me to others in the organization if I made an honest mistake"; α = .91 at time 1 and .90 at time 2); and professional respect (e.g., "I admire my supervisor's professional skills"; α  = .94 at time 1 and .95 at time 2).

AOC

We measured AOC at time 1 and time 3 using an adapted version (Bentein, Vandenberg, Vandenberghe, & Stinglhamber, 2005) of Meyer, Allen, and Smith's ( 1993) 6-item scale that was developed for international replications (cf., Meyer, Barak, & Vandenberghe, 1996). A typical item is "I feel emotionally attached to this organization." The alpha coefficient for this scale was .93 at time 1 and time 3.

Relational Self-concept

The relational self-concept was measured at time 1 through a 5-item scale developed by Selenta and Lord ( 2005) and used in Johnson et al. ( 2006). A factor analysis of the scale items indicated that one item ("Knowing that a close other acknowledges and values the role that I play in their life makes me feel like a worthwhile person") had a low loading on the factor (< .40) and reduced its internal consistency. Hence, we dropped that item from the scale. The remaining 4-item scale had a reliability of .71. A sample item is "If a friend was having a personal problem, I would help him/her even if it meant sacrificing my time or money."

Control Variables

While testing our hypotheses and model, we controlled for the individual and collective levels of the self-concept, as other researchers have done (e.g., Johnson & Chang, 2008; Johnson et al., 2006). Indeed, as the three levels of the self-concept are generally correlated with one another (Kashima & Hardie, 2000), controlling for the individual and collective self-concepts helps avoid confounding effects. The individual ( α = .82) and collective ( α = .77) self-concepts were each measured at time 1 by a 5-item scale from Selenta and Lord ( 2005) (see also Johnson et al., 2006). Sample items include "I often compete with my friends" and "It is important to me to make a lasting contribution to groups that I belong to," respectively.

Results

Confirmatory Factor Analyses

First, as a preliminary test, we used confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) through Mplus 7.31 (Muthén & Muthén, 2010) and maximum likelihood (ML) estimation to examine the dimensionality of the LMX measure at time 2. We allowed the errors of items 7 and 8 of the scale to correlate, which is recommended when there is wording similarity (Marsh et al., 2010, 2013). The four-factor model of time 2 LMX yielded a good fit ( χ ²(47) = 87.00, CFI = .98, TLI = .97, RMSEA = .068, SRMR = .043) and outperformed a one-factor model ( Δ χ ²(6) = 599.09, p < .001), supporting the idea of treating LMX dimensions (e.g., LMX-Contribution) separately. Similarly, the eight-factor model including the four LMX dimensions at time 1 and time 2 yielded a good fit ( χ ²(212) = 558.06, CFI = .95, TLI = .93, RMSEA = .06) and outperformed a two-factor model (time 1 LMX vs. time 2 LMX) (χ ²(27) = 1717.26, p < .001) and a one-factor model ( χ ²(28) = 2124.89, p  < .001).

Second, we tested the distinctiveness of our variables within the hypothesized eight-factor model (i.e., time 1 laissez-faire leadership, time 1 self-concept levels, time 1 LMX-Contribution, time 1 AOC, time 2 LMX-Contribution, and time 3 AOC) and compared this model with more parsimonious models using a nested sequence approach (Bentler & Bonett, 1980). The FIML method was used because it relies on all the available information from the covariance matrix (e.g., Enders, 2010; Fitzmaurice, Laird, & Ware, 2004; Graham, 2009, 2012) and is the recommended approach in longitudinal research when respondent attrition across time is random (Ployhart & Vandenberg, 2010). The errors of parallel items were allowed to correlate across time (Geiser, 2012). In addition, the errors of two pairs of items of the same constructs were allowed to correlate within time due to wording similarity (Marsh et al., 2010, 2013) (i.e., laissez-faire: items 1 and 2; individual self-concept: items 1 and 5). These specifications were incorporated in the test of the longitudinal model (Little, 2013).

The CFA results are reported in Table 1. The hypothesized eight-factor model yielded a good fit ( χ ²(663) = 1373.00, CFI = .92, TLI = .91, RMSEA = .05). Moreover, this model was superior to any simpler model obtained by merging specific factors ( p < .01). Our variables were thus distinguishable. As evidence of convergent validity, in the eight-factor model, loadings were significant ( p  < .001) and sizeable (standardized factor loadings ranged from .48 to .90).

Measurement Invariance

Because our theoretical model controlled for time 1 LMX-Contribution and AOC, we needed to establish that their measurement was invariant across time to ensure that the construct meaning remained stable (Cole & Maxwell, 2003; Millsap, 2011). A sequential approach was adopted (e.g., Vandenberg & Lance, 2000) where increasingly stringent constraints were added to the CFA model of LMX-Contribution and AOC. Robust maximum likelihood (MLR) was used to test measurement invariance. The results are shown in Table 2. As we proceeded to test the sequence of constraints from configural invariance, to weak invariance (i.e., loadings), strong invariance (i.e., loadings and thresholds), and strict invariance (i.e., loadings, thresholds, and uniquenesses), the Satorra-Bentler scaled χ ² values were nonsignificant at each step for both LMX-Contribution and AOC. 1 This finding indicates strict invariance for both variables across time, stable psychometric properties, and suitability for longitudinal analysis (Byrne, Shavelson, & Muthén, 1989; Cheung & Lau, 2012). Thus, these specifications were added to the longitudinal tests of our hypotheses.

Descriptive Statistics and Correlations

Descriptive statistics, correlations and reliability coefficients are reported in Table 3. Laissez-faire leadership was negatively related to time 2 LMX ( r = − .22, p < .01) but unrelated to time 3 AOC ( r = − .15, ns). Time 2 LMX-Contribution was positively related to time 3 AOC ( r = .36, p < .01). The relational self-concept was unrelated to laissez-faire leadership ( r = − .04, ns) and time 2 LMX-Contribution ( r = .04, ns) but positively correlated with time 3 AOC ( r = .18, p  < .05).

Hypothesis Testing

We tested our hypotheses through latent moderated structural equation modeling (LMS; Klein & Moosbrugger, 2000; Maslowsky, Jager, & Hemken, 2015; Sardeshmukh & Vandenberg, 2017) and maximum likelihood (i.e., FIML) estimation using numerical integration and raw data. We used the XWITH command in Mplus and robust standard errors estimation. By considering the measurement errors of the observed variables and factoring in the nonnormally distributed interactions of the latent variables, the LMS approach generates reliable estimates and unbiased standard errors, and has increased power to detect interaction effects (Cheung & Lau, 2017; Klein & Moosbrugger, 2000; Sardeshmukh & Vandenberg, 2017). Thus far, LMS is the most efficient and unbiased approach to testing interactions among latent variables (Klein & Moosbrugger, 2000; Sardeshmukh & Vandenberg, 2017; Schermelleh-Engel, Werner, Klein, & Moosbrugger, 2010).

As LMS does not assume multivariate normality, commonly used fit indices (e.g., RMSEA, CFI, TLI; Maslowsky et al., 2015) are not provided. We therefore followed the recommended two-step approach (Dimitruk, Schermelleh-Engel, Kelava, & Moosbrugger, 2007; Sardeshmukh & Vandenberg, 2017) to test our hypotheses. We first assessed the fit of a baseline model where the interaction between laissez-faire and the relational self-concept was constrained to zero. We then compared this model with a model including the interaction term. The two models were compared using a log-likelihood difference test (D-2LL; Dimitruk et al., 2007) and the Akaike information criterion (AIC) and Bayesian information criterion (BIC) indices (Sardeshmukh & Vandenberg, 2017). A significant D-2LL value indicates that the augmented model should be retained as the best model (Dimitruk et al., 2007), while smaller values for the AIC and BIC are needed to ensure that there is no dramatic loss of information relative to the baseline model (Sardeshmukh & Vandenberg, 2017). We used 95% confidence intervals (CIs) from 5000 bootstrap samples (MacKinnon, Lockwood, & Williams, 2004) in Mplus and the ML estimator for testing the significance of the moderation and moderated mediation effects predicted in Hypotheses 1-2.

Hypothesis 1. The baseline model including the main effects of laissez-faire leadership and relational self-concept on time 2 LMX-Contribution, controlling for time 1 LMX-Contribution and the main effects of individual and collective self-concepts, yielded a good fit to the data ( χ ²(311) = 636.83, CFI = .93, TLI = .92, RMSEA = .05). However, the moderated model outperformed the baseline model (D-2LL(1) = 10.29, p < .01). Moreover, this model displayed smaller values for the AIC (27,594.32 vs. 27,601.25) and BIC (27,984.48 vs. 27,987.31). Thus, the moderated model was retained. As shown in Table 4, the interaction between laissez-faire leadership and the relational self-concept predicting LMX-Contribution was significant ( B = − .67, SE = .28, p < .05). The interaction is graphed in Fig. 1. Laissez-faire leadership was significantly negatively related to LMX-Contribution ( B = − .34, SE = .15, p < .05) when relational self-concept was high (1 SD above the mean) but unrelated to LMX-Contribution ( B = .26, SE = .14, ns) when relational self-concept was low (1 SD below the mean). Moreover, the difference between these two relationships was significant ( B = − .60, SE = .25, p < .05). Interestingly, the relationship between laissez-faire leadership and LMX-Contribution was significantly negative ( p < .05) when relational self-concept had a standardized value of at least .245 but was significantly positive ( p  < .05) when relational self-concept had a standardized value of − .572 or lower. Hypothesis 1 is thus supported.

Fig. 1.

Interaction between laissez-faire leadership and relational self-concept (RSC) predicting LMX-Contribution. Relationships are shown at one 1 SD below and above the mean of RSC

Hypothesis 2. The moderated mediation relationship predicted in Hypothesis 2 was tested following Sardeshmukh and Vandenberg's ( 2017) recommendations. We first specified a mediation model including (a) the main effects of laissez-faire leadership and relational self-concept on time 2 LMX-Contribution, controlling for time 1 LMX-Contribution, and on time 3 AOC, controlling for time 1 AOC, and (b) the effect of time 2 LMX-Contribution on time 3 AOC. Moreover, the model controlled for the main effects of the individual and collective self-concepts on time 2 LMX-Contribution and time 3 AOC. This baseline model showed an acceptable fit ( χ ²(688) = 1328.24, CFI = .92, TLI = .91, RMSEA = .05). We then compared this model with a moderated mediation model in which relational self-identity moderated the first stage of the mediated relationship between laissez-faire leadership and time 3 AOC through time 2 LMX-Contribution. The latter model outperformed the baseline model (D-2LL(1) = 9.31, p  < .01) and displayed smaller values for the AIC (35,619.84 vs. 35,627.67) and BIC (36,161.97 vs. 36,165.69). Thus, this model was retained and used to examine the conditional indirect effects of interest.

Using bootstrapping, the indirect relationship between laissez-faire leadership and time 3 AOC through time 2 LMX-Contribution was found to be significantly negative ( B = − .05, SE = .03, 95% CI [− .111, − .002]) when relational self-concept was high (1 SD above the mean) but nonsignificant ( B = .04, SE = .02, 95% CI [− .004, .098]) when relational self-concept was low (1 SD below the mean) (Table 4). Moreover, the difference between these two relationships was significant ( B = − .09, SE = .05, 95% CI [− .197, − .007]). Notably, the conditional indirect effect of laissez-faire leadership was significantly negative ( p < .05) when relational self-concept had a standardized value of at least .387. Hypothesis 2 is thus supported. The path estimates associated with the moderated mediation model as obtained by standardizing the data before analysis (e.g., Klein & Moosbrugger, 2000; Maslowsky et al., 2015) are reported in Fig. 2. 2

Fig. 2.

Standardized parameter estimates for the moderated mediation model. T1, time 1; T2, time 2; T3, t3; LMX, leader-member exchange; AOC, affective organizational commitment. For the sake of parsimony, control variables (i.e., individual and collective self-concepts) are omitted (their effects are reported in Table 4). Correlations among exogenous variables are not shown. * p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p  < .001

Additional Analyses

We explored the possibility that a relational self-concept could moderate the indirect relationship between laissez-faire leadership and time 3 AOC through the other dimensions of (time 2) LMX, namely affect, loyalty, and professional respect. Using the same procedure as for testing Hypothesis 2, we found the baseline models to display a good fit (LMX-Affect: χ ²(688) = 1196.57, CFI = .94, TLI = .93, RMSEA = .04; LMX-Loyalty: χ ²(688) = 1167.63, CFI = .94, TLI = .94, RMSEA = .04; LMX-Professional respect: χ ²(688) = 1210.72, CFI = .94, TLI = .93, RMSEA = .04). However, the moderated mediation model with time 2 LMX-Affect, LMX-Loyalty, and LMX-Professional respect as alternative mediators did not improve over the baseline model (D-2LL(1) = 2.61, ns; D-2LL(1) = 3.30, ns; and D-2LL(1) = 1.65, ns; respectively). This finding indicates that the relational self-concept did not moderate the indirect relationship between laissez-faire leadership and time 3 AOC through the other dimensions of time 2 LMX.

Similarly, we examined whether the collective and individual self-concepts exerted a similar moderating effect in our mediation model. The baseline model (which was identical in both cases) displayed a good fit ( χ ²(688) = 1328.24, CFI = .92, TLI = .91, RMSEA = .05). Unexpectedly, for both self-concept levels, we found that the moderated mediation model improved over the baseline model (D-2LL(1) = 5.75, p < .05 (collective self-concept); and D-2LL(1) = 5.77, p < .05 (individual self-concept)). In these models, the interaction between laissez-faire and the collective ( B = − .40, SE = .17, p < .05) and the individual ( B = − .29, SE = .13, p < .05) self-concept were significant predictors of LMX-Contribution. The relationship between laissez-faire leadership and LMX-Contribution was significantly negative at high levels (i.e., 1 SD above the mean) of the collective ( B = − .32, SE = .13, p < .05) and individual ( B = − .26, SE = .11, p < .05) self-concept but nonsignificant at low levels (1 SD below the mean) of these moderators ( B = .19, SE = .15, ns; and B = .10, SE = .12, ns; respectively). Differences between the two relationships were also significant for both the collective and the individual self-concept ( B = − .52, SE = .22, p < .05; and B = − .36, SE = .16, p  < .05, respectively).

Moreover, the indirect effect of laissez-faire leadership on AOC through LMX-Contribution was significantly negative ( B = − .05, SE = .02, 95% CI [− .113, − .006]) when collective self-concept was high (1 SD above the mean) but nonsignificant ( B = .03, SE = .02, 95% CI [− .004, .108]) when it was low (1 SD below the mean); the difference between the two effects was significant ( B = − .08, SE = .04, 95% CI [− .208, − .013]). In contrast, the indirect effect of laissez-faire leadership on AOC was nonsignificant at both high ( B = − .04, SE = .02, 95% CI [− .083, .000]) and low ( B = .02, SE = .02, 95% CI [− .022, .055]) levels of individual self-concept and did not differ across levels of this moderator ( B = − .05, SE  = .03, 95% CI [− .116, .000]). We elaborate on these results in the discussion.

Discussion

This study demonstrates that the relational self-concept acts as an important individual difference variable that affects the strength of the relationships among laissez-faire leadership, the LMX contribution dimension, and AOC. Using a three-wave longitudinal study, these relationships were found to be stronger and negative among employees with strong relational self-concepts. As such, this study is a preliminary attempt to examine the mechanisms and boundary conditions that explain how laissez-faire leadership practices affect subordinates' reactions. Our conclusions are particularly robust given the use of a longitudinal approach that controlled for the baseline levels of the mediator and outcome variables. The next sections outline the implications of this study for our understanding of laissez-faire leadership.

Theoretical Implications

The overriding goal of the present study was foremost to address the theoretical gap surrounding the mechanisms and boundary conditions specifying when and how laissez-faire leadership is expected to relate to AOC. This research endeavor was timely given recent calls to increase our understanding of the effects of laissez-faire leadership (Bass & Bass, 2008; Wong & Giessner, 2018; Yang, 2015) and the need to account for subordinates' characteristics in examining these effects (Nielsen, Skogstad, Gjerstad, & Einarsen, 2019). Building on the identity orientation framework (Brewer & Gardner, 1996), we posited that a relational self-concept drives an employee's perception and evaluation of the appropriateness of laissez-faire leadership behaviors. Specifically, because dyadic relationships with significant others (e.g., supervisors) are an important part of an employee's self-definition, employees with strong relational self-concepts have high expectations about their leaders' behavior. Laissez-faire leadership violates these expectations, resulting in a reduced willingness of employees to contribute to the mutual goals associated with the relationship. As such, this study furthers our knowledge of the role of employees' characteristics, which are usually neglected in studies about negative leadership (Schyns & Schilling, 2013). It also contributes to a growing body of literature that has highlighted the role of the employee self-concept as an important trait-like variable to consider in work settings (e.g., van Knippenberg et al., 2004).

The present results are consistent with the view that, even if laissez-faire leadership is a form of passive leadership, it can have destructive effects (e.g., Skogstad et al., 2007) because it can damage the employee-supervisor relationship and organizational commitment, at least when employees have strong relational self-concepts. This view extends the LMX literature, which has traditionally focused on the outcomes rather than on the predictors of LMX (Erdogan & Liden, 2002; Yukl, O'Donnell, & Taber, 2009). Furthermore, our results demonstrate that different styles of leadership may foster different aspects of LMX (e.g., Lee, 2005) and provide further support to the benefits of considering a disaggregated approach to the study of LMX. Moreover, previous research has mostly investigated leadership antecedents that may foster LMX, such as transformational leadership (e.g., Wang, Law, Hackett, Wang, & Chen, 2005), neglecting those leadership styles that act as negative antecedents of LMX. The present results suggest that LMX is affected by negative forms of leadership, which should encourage researchers to examine negative reciprocity as a specific mechanism accounting for the sensitivity of LMX to negative leadership.

Nonetheless, the present findings suggest that the negative effects of laissez-faire leadership are not universal. Rather, these effects particularly occur when employees hold strong relational self-concepts. As such, the relational self-concept is particularly important to explain the impact of laissez-faire leadership on AOC, possibly because individuals with relational self-concepts are more inclined to direct their affective reactions toward their exchange partners (Flynn, 2005), which are then generalized to the organization. Consequently, it appears important to consider the intraindividual context of laissez-faire leadership. Our results also echo Johnson and Chang's ( 2008) proposition that individual differences may calibrate employees' relative sensitivity to the antecedents of AOC. The present findings indicate that employees with low relational self-concepts do not reduce their contribution to mutual goals when they are exposed to laissez-faire leadership. They may even increase this contribution when they hold very low relational self-concepts. Thus, laissez-faire leadership cannot be said to be universally detrimental to employees' relationship with supervisors and attachment to the organization. This observation goes against the literature that has concluded to consistent negative effects of laissez-faire leadership across situations and contexts (e.g., Bass & Bass, 2008).

As self-concepts and their associated needs shape the perception and interpretation of what constitutes appropriate leader behavior, it is actually the congruence between leader behavior and employees' expectations and needs that would drive employee reactions (e.g., Wong & Giessner, 2018). Thus, leaders need to adjust their behavior to followers' characteristics, an argument set forth by the theories of situational or contingent leadership (Fiedler, 2006; Vroom & Jago, 2007; Yukl, 2010). By extension, one may think that followers differ in their needs for leadership and that it is the nonresponse to employees' specific needs that has the largest influence (de Vries, Roe, & Taillieu, 2002). In sum, this study provides a preliminary answer to Bass and Bass's ( 2008, p. 1193) call for addressing the question of "when is laissez-faire leadership appropriate and effective?"

Directions for Future Research

Unexpectedly, all three levels of the self-concept were found to enhance the impact of laissez-faire leadership. Therefore, in addition to the relational expectations associated with the relational self-concept, other mechanisms may come into play. One potential mechanism is that individuals may be sensitive to any threat to their self-definitions and the accomplishment of the goals they are striving for (e.g., Leavitt & Sluss, 2015). Laissez-faire leaders would have negative effects because they would fall short of meeting the expectations and goals associated with all three self-concept levels. We speculate that when any level of the self-concept is high, a feeling of identity threat will emerge from exposure to laissez-faire leadership. For example, as employees with strong individual self-concepts are committed to achieve career goals (Johnson, Chang, & Yang, 2010), they may be frustrated by laissez-faire leaders because they do not take actions that facilitate their career progress. Similarly, employees with strong collective self-concepts take the well-being of their workgroup to heart (Johnson et al., 2010) and may thus be disappointed to see laissez-faire leaders not working at building cohesion within their workgroup, which would threaten their identities as members of the group. This may reduce their contributions to mutual goals and ultimately AOC. In line with these avenues for future inquiry, past research has suggested that the same leadership style may influence multiple identity-related processes among employees (e.g., Wu et al., 2010). Future research is needed to examine how laissez-faire leadership can threaten the achievement of the goals associated with each of the self-concept levels.

Another avenue for future research would be to examine why leaders engage in laissez-faire behaviors. Do they simply engage in laissez-faire behaviors unknowingly or because they do not have the desire, the knowledge, or the resources to fulfill their prescribed role? Courtright, Colbert, and Choi ( 2014) suggested that leaders may engage in such behaviors due to developmental challenges and emotional exhaustion. Studying the antecedents of and potential explanations for such behaviors would increase our knowledge regarding when laissez-faire leadership behaviors emerge in the workplace, hence contributing to leadership development (Day, Fleenor, Atwater, Sturm, & McKee, 2014). While these reasons may differ across leaders, identifying those factors that foster laissez-faire practices would help work against its potentially harmful effects and implement interventions that limit their occurrence. For example, examining leaders' own self-concept levels would be worthwhile (van Knippenberg et al., 2004). Speculatively, leaders with strong individual self-concepts may be more focused on their own ambitions and personal goals, thus neglecting employees' needs, which may pave the way for laissez-faire behaviors. These leaders may want to move up the corporate ladder and think that a management position is a step toward this goal, even in the absence of a personal desire to supervise employees. Previous research has associated the individual self-concept with more frequent abusive behaviors (Johnson, Venus, Lanaj, Mao, & Chang, 2012). This logic could be extended to laissez-faire leadership, with stronger individual self-concepts making leaders more prone to engage in laissez-faire behaviors.

More generally, laissez-faire leadership remains an understudied form of leadership. One area where more work is needed concerns the similarities and differences between laissez-faire leadership and other destructive forms of leadership. In a recent meta-analysis of destructive leadership in military contexts, Fosse, Skogstad, Einarsen, and Martinussen ( 2019) found that active-destructive leadership (e.g., abusive supervision, supervisor undermining) and passive-destructive leadership (e.g., laissez-faire) had similar negative relationships with job performance, job attitudes, and employee health and well-being. However, as LMX was not included in the outcomes addressed in this meta-analytic review, it remains unclear how the different forms of destructive leadership distinctively contribute to undermine LMX development and whether some LMX dimensions are particularly affected by them. Future research should thus attempt to disentangle the effects of the different forms of destructive leadership on LMX development.

Practical Implications

Organizations should train leaders to detect, reduce, and understand the implications of laissez-faire behaviors, just as they do for positive leadership practices. This approach would help practitioners to know not only when to act but also when not to act. Practitioners should be aware that appropriate actions may not only depend on situations per se but on an employee's specific needs as well. Discrepancies between the leader's behaviors and the employee's expectations or specific needs may explain the relative impact of laissez-faire leadership. Therefore, interventions implemented to increase the quality of relationships between employees and leaders and to foster organizational commitment must be adapted based on employees' levels of the self-concept because these levels drive their expectations. As our research has shown, even individuals who tend to focus on contributing to others' well-being (i.e., with a strong relational self-concept; Brewer & Gardner, 1996) are still capable of developing attitudes and behaviors that go against their natural tendencies. Thus, laissez-faire leadership may result in the relational potential of employees being wasted because it promotes inappropriate behaviors. Practitioners should take the time to get to know their employees' needs and self-concepts, communicate on these aspects, and strive to fulfill employees' expectations. Hence, organizations should pay greater attention to the diversity of employees' characteristics to fully realize the potential of their employees. Recognizing the diversity of identity-related expectations should be reflected in programs and practices, such as recruitment and socialization processes (Ashforth & Schinoff, 2016), that are tied to employees' self-concept orientations (Pratt, 2000). By taking advantage of these diverse opportunities, organizations could build stronger bonds and hope for better performance and increased retention among employees.

Limitations

As study measures were self-reported, common method bias may be an issue (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, & Podsakoff, 2012). Nonetheless, self-reports might be appropriate given our focus on perceptions of self-identity levels and attitudes in the workplace (Conway & Lance, 2010; Spector, 2006). Previous research on the self-concept has indeed traditionally relied on self-report measures (Byrne, 2002). Moreover, our longitudinal analysis controlled for the baseline levels of both the mediator (i.e., LMX-Contribution) and outcome (i.e., AOC) variables, thus considerably reducing any endogeneity related to our findings (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff, 2003) and lending confidence to their robustness. Furthermore, because our hypotheses focused on the interaction between laissez-faire leadership and the relational self-concept, common method variance is unlikely to have affected the findings (Siemsen, Roth, & Oliveira, 2010). We also recognize that this study used a specific sample of highly educated employees from a culturally individualistic context. It is possible that different results would be found in a collectivistic culture, as self-concepts are known to be developed in relation to the social context and to vary across cultures (Oyserman, 2001). Hence, people from a Western culture would have stronger individual self-concepts, while those from Eastern countries would possess stronger collective identities (Kitayama, Markus, Matsumoto, & Norasakkunkit, 1997). Nonetheless, even if some findings seem to support a universalist perspective of the self (Sedikides et al., 2011), future research is needed to further examine the generalizability of our findings. Finally, we used the LMX-MDM measure (Liden & Maslyn, 1998) to capture the social exchange-based relationship between employees and leaders. However, this instrument has been criticized for providing an imperfect assessment of social exchange, leading to the development of leader-member social exchange (LMSX) as an alternative measure of the construct (Bernerth, Armenakis, Feild, Giles, & Walker, 2007). It would be worth exploring whether the current findings could be replicated using this alternative measure of social exchange relationships in employee-supervisor dyads.

Conclusion

The present study indicates that laissez-faire leadership negatively relates to AOC through decreased levels of the LMX contribution dimension but only when the employee's relational self-concept is high. As such, this study highlights how relational expectations can strengthen the (negative) impact of laissez-faire leadership and reveals that it is through employees' reduced contribution to mutual goals that AOC comes to be affected by laissez-faire leadership. We hope the present study will encourage future attempts at exploring the conditions and mechanisms associated with the effects of laissez-faire leadership in organizations.

Footnotes

¹

Note that we did not allow the errors of T1 item 1 and T2 item 1 to correlate in the invariance tests of the LMX-Contribution scale across time because the models including that specification did not converge.

²

Although our study controlled for the baseline levels of the mediator (LMX-Contribution) and AOC, the data were not cross-lagged, making it possible that AOC drives LMX-Contribution over time. To examine this possibility, we used data from a separate sample to test a cross-lagged model of LMX-Contribution and AOC over a period of 6 months. These data were part of a larger project examining job attitudes and the study was conducted in French. Participants were recruited through convenience sampling from the network of the research team. The time 1 sample comprised 312 respondents. In this initial sample, 22 participants changed organizations and 37 participants changed supervisors before the time 2 survey (i.e., six months later), hence were dropped, reducing the sample to 253 individuals. In this sample, 119 participants provided usable responses at time 2. We first examined whether attrition over time was randomly distributed by conducting a logistic regression analysis predicting the probability of remaining in (vs. being dropped from) the final sample among time 1 respondents ( N = 253) using time 1 variables (i.e., LMX-Contribution and AOC) as predictors. The logistic regression model was nonsignificant ( χ ²(2) = 3.51, ns) and none of the predictors was significant. This indicates that data were missing completely at random (MCAR; Ployhart & Vandenberg, 2010) over time, allowing us to examine our cross-lagged model using all the available information from the covariance matrix ( N = 253) through the FIML method and MLR in Mplus (version 7.31 was used; Muthén & Muthén, 2010). In the sample ( N = 253), 63% of the participants were female, average age was 38.77 years ( SD = 10.22), and average organizational tenure was 7.89 years ( SD = 6.05). Participants worked in a variety of industries such as professional, scientific and technical services (23%), health services and social assistance (18%), and finance, insurance, real estate and public administration (16%). AOC was measured using the same 6-item, adapted version of Meyer et al.'s ( 1993) original scale (Bentein et al., 2005) as in the main study. The same 3-item scale of LMX-Contribution from the LMX-MDM instrument (Liden & Maslyn, 1998) as in the main study was also used. The internal consistency was good for both AOC ( αs = .88 and .89 at time 1 and time 2, respectively) and LMX-Contribution ( αs = .76 and .74 at time 1 and time 2, respectively). The strict invariance model was used for AOC and the weak invariance model was used for LMX-Contribution because adding further constraints revealed significant differences with less constrained models of invariance. Nonetheless, retaining weak invariance still allows testing the relations among latent constructs (Vandenberg & Lance, 2000). The cross-lagged model yielded a good fit to the data ( χ ²(141) = 223.77, p < .001, CFI = .95, TLI = .95, RMSEA = .05). In this model, time 1 LMX-Contribution was significantly related to time 2 AOC ( B = .24, SE = .09, p < .01), controlling for its autoregressive effect ( B = .67, SE = .08, p < .001). In contrast, time 1 AOC did not relate to time 2 LMX-Contribution ( B = .01, SE = .10, ns), controlling for its autoregressive effect ( B = .74, SE = .13, p < .001). These results provide support for the idea that LMX-Contribution temporally precedes AOC, which is consistent with the model presented in Fig. 2.

Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Contributor Information

Véronique Robert, Email: veronique.robert@hec.ca.

Christian Vandenberghe, Email: christian.vandenberghe@hec.ca.

References

1. Avolio BJ. Full range leadership development. 2. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2011. [Google Scholar]

2. Bass BM. Transformational leadership: Industrial military, and educational impact. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1998. [Google Scholar]

3. Bass BM, Avolio BJ. Multifactor leadership questionnaire (form 5X) Center for Leadership Studies: School of Management, Binghamton University; 1991. [Google Scholar]

4. Bass BM, Bass R. The Bass handbook of leadership: Theory, research, and managerial applications. 4. New York: Free Press; 2008. [Google Scholar]

5. Bass BM, Stogdill RM. Bass & Stogdill's handbook of leadership: Theory, research, and managerial applications. 3. New York: Simon and Schuster; 1990. [Google Scholar]

6. Blau PM. Exchange and power in social life. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1964. [Google Scholar]

7. De Cremer, D. (2003). A relational perspective on leadership and cooperation: Why it matters to care and be fair. In D. van Knippenberg & M. A. Hogg (Eds.), Leadership and power: Identity processes in groups and organizations (pp. 109-122). London, UK: Sage Publications. 10.4135/9781446216170.n9.

8. Dumdum UR, Lowe KB, Avolio BJ. A meta-analysis of transformational and transactional leadership correlates of effectiveness and satisfaction: An update and extension. In: Avolio BJ, Yammarino FJ, editors. Transformational and charismatic leadership: The road ahead. Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science; 2002. pp. 35-66. [Google Scholar]

9. Eisenberger R, Aselage J, Sucharski IL, Jones JR. Perceived organizational support. In: Coyle-Shapiro J, Shore L, Taylor S, Tetrick L, editors. The employment relationship: Examining psychological and contextual perspectives. New York: Oxford University Press; 2004. pp. 207-225. [Google Scholar]

10. Enders CK. Applied missing data analysis. New York: Guilford Press; 2010. [Google Scholar]

11. Erdogan B, Liden RC. Social exchanges in the workplace: A review of recent developments and future research directions in leader-member exchange theory. In: Neider LL, Schriesheim CA, editors. Leadership. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing; 2002. pp. 65-114. [Google Scholar]

12. Fiedler FE. The contingency model: A theory of leadership effectiveness. In: Levine JM, Moreland RL, editors. Small groups: Key readings. New York: Psychology Press; 2006. pp. 369-381. [Google Scholar]

13. Fitzmaurice GM, Laird NM, Ware JH. Applied longitudinal analysis. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Interscience; 2004. [Google Scholar]

14. Geiser C. Data analysis with Mplus. New York: Guilford Press; 2012. [Google Scholar]

15. Graen GB, Cashman JF. A role making model of leadership in formal organizations: A developmental approach. In: Hunt JG, Larson LL, editors. Leadership frontiers. Kent, OH: Kent State University Press; 1975. pp. 143-165. [Google Scholar]

16. Graen GB, Scandura TA. Toward a psychology of dyadic organizing. Research in Organizational Behavior. 1987;9:175-208. [Google Scholar]

17. Graham JW. Missing data: Analysis and design. New York, NY: Springer; 2012. [Google Scholar]

18. Hogg MA, Martin R, Weeden K. Leader-member relations and social identity. In: van Knippenberg D, Hogg MA, editors. Leadership and power: Identity processes in groups and organizations. London, UK: Sage Publications; 2003. pp. 18-33. [Google Scholar]

19. Hogg MA, van Knippenberg D. Social identity and leadership processes in groups. In: Zanna MP, editor. Advances in experimental social psychology. San Diego, CA: Elsevier Academic Press; 2003. pp. 1-52. [Google Scholar]

20. Kelloway EK, Sivanathan N, Francis L, Barling J. Poor leadership. In: Barling J, Kelloway EK, Frone MR, editors. Handbook of work stress. London, UK: SAGE Publications; 2005. pp. 89-112. [Google Scholar]

21. Little TD. Longitudinal structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Press; 2013. [Google Scholar]

22. Lord RG, Brown DJ. Leadership processes and follower self-identity. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers; 2004. [Google Scholar]

23. MacKinnon DP, Lockwood CM, Williams J. Confidence limits for the indirect effect: Distribution of the product and resampling methods. Multivariate Behavioral Research. 2004;39:99-128. doi: 10.1207/s15327906mbr3901_4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

24. Maslowsky J, Jager J, Hemken D. Estimating and interpreting latent variable interactions: A tutorial for applying the latent moderated structural equations method. International Journal of Behavioral Development. 2015;39:87-96. doi: 10.1177/0165025414552301. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

25. Maslyn JM, Uhl-Bien M. LMX differentiation: Key concepts and related empirical findings. In: Graen GB, Graen JA, editors. Global organizing designs (LMX leadership: The series) Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing; 2005. pp. 73-98. [Google Scholar]

26. Meyer JP. Handbook of employee commitment. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing; 2016. [Google Scholar]

27. Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1997). Commitment in the workplace: Theory, research, and application. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 10.4135/9781452231556.

28. Meyer, J. P., Barak, I. & Vandenberghe, C. (1996). Revised measures of affective, continuance, and normative commitment to organizations. Unpublished manuscript. Department of Psychology, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada.

29. Millsap E. Statistical methods for studying measurement invariance. Abingdon, UK: Taylor & Francis; 2011. [Google Scholar]

30. Muthén LK, Muthén BO. Mplus user's guide, version 6.1. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén; 2010. [Google Scholar]

31. Newman DA. Missing data techniques and low response rates: The role of systematic nonresponse parameters. In: Lance CE, Vandenberg RJ, editors. Statistical and methodological myths and urban legends. New York, NY: Routledge; 2009. pp. 7-36. [Google Scholar]

32. Oyserman D. Self-concept and identity. In: Tesser A, Schwarz N, editors. Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Intraindividual processes. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing; 2001. pp. 499-517. [Google Scholar]

33. Schaffer, B. S., & Riordan, C. M. (2003). A review of cross-cultural methodologies for organizational research: A best-practices approach. Organizational Research Methods, 6, 169-215. 10.1177/1094428103251542.

34. Sedikides C, Brewer MB. Individual self, relational self, collective self. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press; 2001. [Google Scholar]

35. Selenta C, Lord RG. Development of the levels of self-concept scale: Measuring the individual, relational, and collective levels. University of Akron: Unpublished manuscript; 2005. [Google Scholar]

36. Swann WB, Jr, Chang-Schneider C, Angulo S. Self-verification in relationships as an adaptive process. In: Wood J, Tesser A, Holmes J, editors. Self and relationships. New York: Psychology Press; 2007. pp. 49-72. [Google Scholar]

37. Tyler TR. Justice, identity, and leadership. In: van Knippenberg D, Hogg MA, editors. Leadership and power: Identity processes in groups and organizations. London, UK: Sage Publications; 2003. pp. 94-108. [Google Scholar]

38. Wayne SJ, Coyle-Shapiro JA-M, Eisenberger R, Liden RC, Rousseau DM, Shore LM. Social influences. In: Klein HJ, Becker TE, Meyer JP, editors. Commitment in organizations: Accumulated wisdom and new directions. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis; 2009. pp. 253-284. [Google Scholar]

39. Wisse B, Sleebos E. When change causes stress: Effects of self-construal and change consequences. Journal of Business and Psychology. 2016;31:249-264. doi: 10.1007/s10869-015-9411-z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

40. Yukl G. Leadership in organizations. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson; 2010. [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Business and Psychology are provided here courtesy of Springer

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Laissez-Faire Leadership and Affective Commitment: the Roles of Leader-Member Exchange and Subordinate Relational Self-concept

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Although the detrimental effects of laissez-faire leadership are well documented, research on the underlying mechanisms and the boundary conditions associated with these effects remains scarce. Using the identity orientation framework and social ...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Warner Bros. Discovery advises shareholders to reject Paramount’s offer. But the battle isn’t over | CNN Business

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Warner Bros. Discovery is officially rejecting Paramount’s buyout offer, calling it “illusory” and arguing that the existing plan to sell most of the media company to Netflix is a better deal for shareholders.

# data[].attributes.body
The Crisis of Control and Growth

Under the impetus of the new Senior Executive , the company underwent a radical change. The management style was purely authoritarian, and the Lock became the symbol of his reign. He immediately imposed strict Rules , making the work environment rigid and bureaucratic.

In the face of this austerity, the Project Manager remained the engine of energy. He represented the Idea and, through his charisma and empathy, he ensured that the Team received the necessary Support. Like the Agility of a lizard, he managed to quickly navigate through the corridors of the new bureaucracy.

The Junior Executive found himself caught in the middle of this tension. His mission was twofold: to report to the General Manager with precise data and to manage the Constraints related to rising management costs . He was asked to supervise the entire department and to streamline Operations . He observed the rapid, almost uncontrolled Growth of certain processes that needed to be contained.

The Management Consultant arrived to support the effort, armed with his empirical analysis . His job was to uncover the hidden costs generated by the rigid system, providing the Junior Executive with the evidence needed to reintroduce Idea and Agility without crushing the Team .

The story is that of this Junior Executive, who must find the balance between the Mustachioed Head who wants the Lock secured and the Project Manager who wants the Lightbulb to shine for the Sheep, all while ensuring the cost Constraints are met.

# data[].attributes.body
Florianne, Malicka & Caleb

# data[].attributes.headline
Watch and complete the quiz (available on ScForm)

# data[].attributes.subject
Watch and complete the quiz (available on ScForm)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Dan Pink: The puzzle of motivation | TED Talk

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Career analyst Dan Pink examines the puzzle of motivation, starting with a fact that social scientists know but most managers don’t: Traditional rewards aren’t always as effective as we think. Listen for illuminating stories -- and maybe, a way forward.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What Is Emotional Intelligence (EQ)? Why It's Key to Career Growth

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Unleashing Potential with Venture Capital Management Software: An In-Depth Review of Top Industry Tools

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In the fast-paced and fiercely competitive field of venture capital, leveraging the right management software can be the game-changing factor that propels your firm to new heights. These cutting-edge digital solutions not only streamline your processes, but they also ensure you harness the full pote

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The top stocks and funds to buy according to DIY investors

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Precious metals like gold and silver sparkled in October, and DIY investors also dived into money market funds

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Starbucks’ bet on local expertise could help it regain ground in China

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Starbucks’ decision on Monday to sell up to 60% of its China business to local private equity firm Boyu Capital could help the hard-pressed brand regain ground in one of the world’s fastest-growing coffee markets.

# data[].attributes.body
Sarah and amine article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Anyone who decided to invest in gold early in 2024 was well-rewarded, and the global instability that had defined much of 2025 continued the yellow metal's strong run. But with gold selling off in recent months, many are questioning whether gold is still a good investment.

Gold prices hit all-time highs last month, peaking at $4,381 on 20 October. But over the following seven sessions, gold prices fell 11.3% from their all-time high to a recent low of $3,886 on 28 October.

Gold prices have steadied since then, recovering to around the $4,000 level at the start of November. Gold prices are still up over 50% so far in 2025. So does the recent gold selloff signal it's time to sell, or is it a buying opportunity?

Why now might be a good time to buy gold

With UK inflation hitting 3.8% in July, August and September, almost double the Bank of England's 2% target, UK investors worried about the impact of rising prices on their portfolios might be considering gold as one way of hedging against inflation.

"Gold prices (a classic inflation hedge) have pulled back from their highs," said Henry Allen, macro strategist at Deutsche Bank.

The heat has certainly come out of the gold rally but many experts believe that the core fundamentals driving gold demand remain in place.

The Federal Reserve cut US interest rates on 29 October, as expected, which helped arrest the downturn in gold prices as low interest rates are typically positive for investing in gold.

"Lower interest rates favour non-yielding assets," said Nikos Tzabouras, senior market analyst at Tradu. "Meanwhile, continued central bank buying remains bullion's bedrock amid a broader de-dollarisation trend, while debasement trends linked to mounting global deficits further strengthen the metal's appeal."

Tzabouras added that ongoing geopolitical uncertainty in Ukraine and Gaza, where the ceasefire has looked strained ever since it came into effect, are also underpinning gold demand.

Gold for diversification

One of the most compelling arguments for investing in gold is the diversification that it can offer to a portfolio.

"When bond yields stand at higher levels, shares and fixed income investments tend to track each other higher and lower," says Tom Stevenson, investment director at Fidelity International. "That reduces the incentive to own a mixture of both bonds and shares. And it means that investors need to look further afield, into commodities and property, to gain that portfolio balance."

Gold, by contrast, has "low-to-negative correlation to equities", according to Raymond Backreedy, chief investment officer at Sparrows Capital. It also typically sees lower drawdown rates, which Backreedy says is "particularly desirable especially in times of market stresses".

While it is of course not guaranteed to persist, there is some rationale behind the relationship.

"Historically, gold has a proven track record of performing well during economic uncertainty and global conflicts due to its intrinsic value, which is why many investors see gold as a safe haven," said Rick Kanda, managing director at The Gold Bullion Company. "During times of conflict, investors steer away from investing in assets such as stocks and bonds, as geopolitical events often threaten the infrastructures supporting these assets."

Is AI driving gold demand?

Often it's the macroeconomic factors that determine the gold price, especially the rate of US inflation.

Gold is therefore often viewed as a commodity with no industrial applications, in contrast to silver which serves a multitude of important purposes in industry. Lots of investors trade the two metals based on the gold-silver ratio which tracks the relative price of gold to silver. (At the time of writing, the gold-silver ratio is around 83; values above 80 have historically preceded strong rallies in the silver price.)

Gold is an important raw material in some industries though, one notable example being electronics. Gold is a superb conductor of electricity, and is therefore frequently used in high end electronic devices. There is almost certainly some gold in the device you're using to read this article.

As prices rose between 2001 and 2011, electronics manufacturers sought ways to move away from gold, with demand for gold in electronics peaking in 2010.

However, according to the World Gold Council, artificial intelligence (AI) is helping to prompt a recovery in this market. The processors, memory chips and sensors which are being deployed at vast scale to build the data centres that train models like ChatGPT all use gold in their construction.

"Gold's superior conductivity ensures that data can be processed and transmitted at high speed with minimal energy loss," wrote Louise Street, senior markets analyst and Trevor Keel, consultant, at the World Gold Council. "Furthermore, gold's resistance to corrosion ensures component longevity and durability - critical for continuous and intensive AI applications."

Is now a bad time to invest in gold?

On the other side of the ledger is the fact that gold has seen a sustained period of gains, and investors might be concerned that gold prices have now peaked.

Gold prices have gained 47% in dollar terms over the past 12 months, comfortably outperforming the S&P 500 during that time. Gold also hit its all-time high in real terms (adjusted for inflation) during September for the first time since 1980.

Those who have held gold during this period could be tempted to take some profit on their gains by selling off a small portion of their allocation. Those who haven't might feel that now isn't the best time to dive in, given that gold is still trading at close to the highest level in its history.

"Gold is an interesting investment at times of uncertainty but given its high price, a large amount of uncertainty and/or lower interest rates have already been priced in," said Joost van Leenders, senior investment strategist at Van Lanschot Kempen.

How much gold should you buy?

If you do decide that now is the time to buy gold, the final question is how much gold to buy.

Given the fact it pays no interest and has a historical tendency towards volatility, few experts advise investing a substantial part of your portfolio into gold.

When building multi-asset portfolios, "we typically allocate 3-10% [to gold] using the gold ETCs available on the market, depending on user case and overall percentage allocated to the defensive asset class", said Backreedy.

"It's better to take a long term view on portfolio construction and outcomes, and from this perspective, gold can act as a compliment to fixed income from a defensive perspective and as a portfolio diversifier.

"As such, we look to the above benefits of gold over the long term, rather than focusing on the short term price."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The gold rally has reversed, but does the fall in prices mean the good times are over, or is the dip an opportunity to invest in gold?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Tech News | Today's Latest Technology News | Reuters

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Find latest technology news from every corner of the globe at Reuters.com, your online source for breaking international news coverage.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What Trade War? China’s Export Juggernaut Marches On

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As Trump has imposed steep tariffs on China, American importers are buying much less. But China has offset the decline from the United States with breathtaking speed.

# data[].attributes.headline
The Washington Post - Free (limited) & student subscription (1$/4 weeks)

# data[].attributes.subject
The Washington Post - Free (limited) & student subscription (1$/4 weeks)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The New York Times - Breaking News, US News, World News and Videos

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Live news, investigations, opinion, photos and video by the journalists of The New York Times from more than 150 countries around the world. Subscribe for coverage of U.S. and international news, politics, business, technology, science, health, arts, sports and more.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Latest breaking news available as free video on demand | Euronews

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Latest breaking news available as free video on demand. Stay informed on European and world news about economy, politics, diplomacy... with Euronews.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
CNBC International is the world leader for news on business, technology, China, trade, oil prices, the Middle East and markets.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Hill - covering Congress, Politics, Political Campaigns and Capitol Hill

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Hill is a top US political website, read by the White House and more lawmakers than any other site -- vital for policy, politics and election campaigns.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Forbes is a global media company, focusing on business, investing, technology, entrepreneurship, leadership, and lifestyle.

# data[].attributes.headline
Harvard Business Review - free sign in - 15 articles per month

# data[].attributes.subject
Harvard Business Review - free sign in - 15 articles per month

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Harvard Business Review - Ideas and Advice for Leaders

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Find new ideas and classic advice on strategy, innovation and leadership, for global leaders from the world's best business and management experts.

# data[].attributes.headline
The Economist Expresso - free for students

# data[].attributes.subject
The Economist Expresso - free for students

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Free and Discounted Student Subscription | The Economist

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
For all students over 16, get 75% off our digital subscription or free access to our short-form daily news app Espresso.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Latest news, sport and opinion from the Guardian

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Latest Europe news, comment and analysis from the Guardian, the world's leading liberal voice

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Jem Bendell encourages us to think about societal collapse in ways that are 'profound and startlingly original', with the potential to birth whole new social movements, says Tom Doig.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Conversation: In-depth analysis, research, news and ideas from leading academics and researchers.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Curated by professional editors, The Conversation offers informed commentary and debate on the issues affecting our world. Plus a Plain English guide to the latest developments and discoveries from the university and research sector.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Copyright 2023 BBC. All rights reserved. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.

Beta Terms By using the Beta Site, you agree that such use is at your own risk and you know that the Beta Site may include known or unknown bugs or errors, that we have no obligation to make this Beta Site available with or without charge for any period of time, nor to make it available at all, and that nothing in these Beta Terms or your use of the Beta Site creates any employment relationship between you and us. The Beta Site is provided on an "as is" and "as available" basis and we make no warranty to you of any kind, express or implied.

In case of conflict between these Beta Terms and the BBC Terms of Use these Beta Terms shall prevail.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
BBC Home - Breaking News, World News, U.S. News, Sports, Business, Innovation, Climate, Culture, Travel, Video & Audio

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Visit BBC for trusted reporting on the latest world and U.S. news, sports, business, climate, innovation, culture and much more.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
French News and Views in English | The Connexion

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Visas and residency cards (cartes de séjour) for France help guide - Understand when visas and residency cards are required to move to France or come for an extended stay - Applies to Britons (post-Brexit) and to all other non-EU/non-EEA/Swiss nationalities - Useful to anyone considering a move to France, whether for work or otherwise, or wanting to spend more than three months at their French second home

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Key Takeaways Navigating the Sea of Working Capital Software Solutions In an increasingly competitive business landscape, cash flow optimization and working capital management remain paramount. In response to this need, a plethora of working capital software solutions have emerged, each

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Fintech 15 Funding Platform Companies in London, England, United Kingdom: Exploring the Future of Finance With the rise of technology and increasing interest in alternative financing options, funding platforms have become a hot topic in the world of finance. London, a

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
MoneyWeek | Investment advice, analysis, finance news

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Intelligent, easy-to-read analysis of the financial news, with practical investment advice and share tips from the UK’s best selling financial magazine.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Barron’s | Financial and Investment News

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Barron’s is a leading source of financial news, providing in-depth analysis and commentary on stocks, investments and how markets are moving across the world.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
By clicking "Accept All Cookies", you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Cookie Policy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What are the best apps for learning English? - Oxford International English Schools

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We took a look at the best apps out there to learn English on and compiled our a list here. Read on to find out which ones we think are worth the download

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Learn English with our free online listening, grammar, vocabulary and reading activities. Practise your English and get ready for your Cambridge English exam.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
BBC Learning English - BBC Learning English - Homepage

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Everything you find here has been specially created by the British Council, the world's English teaching experts.

We provide you with the right tools to help you interact confidently in the real world.

Practise your listening, reading, writing and speaking and learn useful language to use at work or to communicate effectively with friends.

Audio and video to practise your listening and speaking skills.

Model texts for all types of writing tasks.

Work on your reading skills to read more quickly and understand more.

Revise and practise your grammar to improve your language level and increase your confidence.

Clear and simple grammar explanations to help you revise and practise different grammar points.

Online exercises to help you check your understanding of the grammar points.

Use the grammar reference for further practice and more detailed explanations.

Learn new words and improve your language level to be able to communicate in English effectively.

Online exercises to help you learn the meaning, pronunciation and spelling of new words.

Learn new words connected to a wide range of different topics.

Play our word games and have fun as you improve your vocabulary.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Learn English online using our high-quality resources to quickly improve your English. Take our free level test to help you find your English language level, then find lessons and resources that are just right for you.