Appraising and reacting to delegation: The contingent roles of leader credit sharing and leader blame taking

While prior research has documented the advantages of delegation for employees and organizations, accumulating evidence suggests it can also burden employees, producing paradoxical outcomes. Drawing on the transactional theory of stress, we reconceptualize delegation as an ambivalent workplace stressor and examine a contingent model that delineates when and how employees engage in different coping responses toward delegated responsibilities. We highlight the uncertainty about outcome attribution in delegation and, accordingly, identify two leader behaviors (leader credit sharing and blame taking) as key contingency factors. To test our theoretical model, we conducted three complementary studies: two scenario-based experiments that separately examined the challenge pathway (Study 1a, N = 217) and the hindrance pathway (Study 1b, N = 218), and a two-wave field survey investigating both pathways (Study 2, N = 330). Across studies, leader blame taking consistently weakens the delegation–hindrance appraisal link, reducing turnover intention. Leader credit sharing strengthens the delegation–challenge appraisal link and subsequent taking charge in the experiment, but this effect is not replicated in the field study. We discuss theoretical and practical implications of these findings, including the boundary conditions under which each pattern holds.