Drawing on fairness theory and the “too-much-of-a-good-thing” perspective, this study examines the curvilinear relationship between leader leniency and follower psychological safety and its downstream association with follower job performance. It further examines whether third-party wrongdoing severity moderates this relationship.
Data were collected through a time-lagged and multi-source field survey. Multilevel path modeling was used to test the proposed hypotheses.
The results show an inverted U-shaped relationship between leader leniency and follower psychological safety, which is positively associated with job performance. This relationship varies with third-party wrongdoing severity: it is nonlinear at higher levels of severity but approximately positive and linear at lower levels.
Moderate leniency is associated with higher psychological safety and performance, whereas excessive leniency may weaken these benefits. Leaders may therefore benefit from aligning leniency with wrongdoing severity when responding to misconduct.
By conceptualizing leader leniency as a double-edged phenomenon, this study provides a more nuanced account of when and why leniency is beneficial or detrimental. It extends research on leadership and misconduct management by identifying both the underlying mechanism and the contextual condition shaping the effects of leader leniency.
