Abstract:

Star employees can enhance the organizational value creation not only through their direct and disproportionate contribution, but also by their extensive and profound influence on colleagues via interpersonal interaction. The existing studies mainly focus on the interpersonal effect of stars on non-star employees; however, the investigations on the interpersonal dynamics between star employees and their direct leader remain limited. Drawing on social interdependence theory and dominance complementarity theory, this study elucidates the nuanced mechanisms underlying the interpersonal interactions of star employees with team leaders. We propose a moderated mediation model to dissect the cooperative and competitive facets of goal dependency between star performers and team leaders, elucidating both positive and negative outcomes in their interactions.

Specifically, the positive effect emerges from goal congruence between team leader and the star subordinates in “completing team tasks and improving team performance”, fostering cooperation and prompting team leader to offer positive appraisals of star subordinates, thereby catalyzing collaborative behaviors such as leader empowerment; conversely, the negative effect stems from goal misalignment between team leader and the star subordinates in “individual power and status allocation”, leading to competitive evaluations by team leader and consequent competitive behaviors like leader ostracism towards the star subordinates perceived as threats to their status.

Furthermore, our study also investigates strategies to cultivate positive interpersonal interactions between team leader and star employees while mitigating negative ones. Based on social interdependence theory, the nature and intensity of goal dependency hinge upon the team leader’s subjective assessment of whether the presence of star employees facilitates her/his own goal attainment. Additionally, dominance complementarity theory posits that such subjective evaluation is shaped by the interpersonal traits of star employees and their interpersonal compatibility with the team leader. Integrating these theories, our study examines how the dominance traits of star employees influence team leader’s evaluations of their goal dependency, subsequently influencing her/his interpersonal reactions towards star subordinates.

To sum, our theoretical model is shown in Figure 1. This model offers a novel perspective on leader-star employee dynamics, highlighting the dual nature of their goal dependency and the moderating role of star’s dominance trait. By elucidating the mechanisms underlying these interactions, organizations can better understand and navigate the complexities of star employees’ integration within teams, ultimately fostering more productive and harmonious work environments.

We conducted a scenario-based experiment and a field study to test our theoretical model. In the scenario experiment (Study 1), we manipulated “the subordinate’s stardom” (i.e., star or non-star) and “the subordinate’s dominance trait” (i.e., high or low), resulting in a 2 by 2 categories of the scenarios. Data was collected from the participants enrolled in an Executive Development Program at a Chinese university through an online questionnaire platform (https://www.wjx.cn). The final sample comprised 356 respondents. Table 1 shows descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations for the whole sample.

As depicted in Figure 2, the subordinate’s stardom was positively related to the leader’s trust in subordinate (β = 0.34, SE = 0.05, p < 0.001) and perceived threat to status (β = 0.16, SE = 0.05, p = 0.001). Leader’s trust had a positive effect on the leader’s empowerment (tendency) (β = 0.63, SE = 0.04, p < 0.001) and a negative effect on the leader’s ostracism (tendency) (β = -0.24, SE = 0.05, p < 0.001). The indirect effect of leader’s trust on both the relationship between subordinate’s stardom and leader’s empowerment (tendency) (b = 0.40, SE = 0.07, 95% CI = [0.28,0.54]) and the relationship between subordinate’s stardom and leader’s ostracism (tendency) (b = -0.21, SE = 0.05, 95% CI = [-0.33, -0.12]) were significant. Additionally, leader’s perceived threat to status had a negative effect on the leader’s empowerment (tendency) (β = -0.12, SE = 0.04, p = 0.008) and a positive effect on the leader’s ostracism (tendency) (β = 0.39, SE = 0.06, p < 0.001). The indirect effect of perceived threat to status on both the relationship between subordinate’s stardom and leader’s empowerment (tendency) (b = -0.04, SE = 0.02, 95% CI = [-0.08, -0.01]) and the relationship between subordinate’s stardom and leader’s ostracism (tendency) (b = 0.16, SE = 0.06, 95% CI = [0.07,0.29]) were significant. However, the interaction between subordinate’s stardom and subordinate’s dominance trait was not significantly related to leader’s trust (β = 0.05, SE = 0.05, p = 0.267), but it was significantly correlated with the leader’s perceived threat to status (β = 0.12, SE = 0.05, p = 0.026). Specifically, when the subordinate’s dominance trait was high, his or her stardom had a significant influence on the leader’s empowerment (tendency) through leader’s perceived threat to status (b = -0.06, SE = 0.03, 95% CI = [-0.14, -0.02]). Conversely, when subordinate’s dominance trait was low, his or her stardom was not significantly related to the leader’s empowerment (tendency) through leader’s perceived threat to status (b = -0.01, SE = 0.02, 95% CI = [-0.05, 0.02]). Furthermore, when subordinate’s dominance trait was high, his or her stardom had a significant influence on the leader’s ostracism (tendency) through leader’s perceived threat to status (b = 0.28, SE = 0.08, 95% CI = [0.14,0.46]). When subordinate’s dominance trait was low, his or her stardom was not significantly related to the leader’s ostracism (tendency) through leader’s perceived threat to status (b = 0.05, SE = 0.07, 95% CI = [-0.10, 0.19]).

To replicate these findings and enhance their external validities, we then conducted a multi-source, multi-wave field study (Study 2). Employees and their direct supervisors from a Chinese new material manufacturing company were invited to participate in our survey. We collected the data at two time points (i.e., a one-month time lag) through another online questionnaire platform (https://end.huajuetech.com). The paired sample size was 291. Table 2 shows descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations for the whole sample.

As illustrated in Figure 3, Study 2 replicated most of the findings in Study 1, except for the indirect effect of subordinate’s stardom on leader’s empowerment behavior through perceived threat to status, which was not significant. To be specific, subordinate’s stardom was positively associated with the leader’s trust in subordinate (β = 0.30, SE = 0.06, p < 0.001) and the leader’s perceived threat to status (β = 0.14, SE = 0.06, p = 0.024). The leader’s trust in subordinate positively influenced leader’s empowerment (β = 0.17, SE = 0.06, p = 0.003) and negatively affected leader’s ostracism (β = -0.16, SE = 0.06, p = 0.008). Significant indirect effects were observed for leader's trust on the relationship between subordinate's stardom and leader empowerment (b = 0.18, SE = 0.07, 95% CI = [0.06,0.35]), as well as between subordinate's stardom and leader's ostracism (b = -0.22, SE = 0.10, 95% CI = [-0.45, -0.07]). The leader’s perceived threat to status was not significantly related to leader’s empowerment (β = 0.03, SE = 0.06, p = 0.639) but was positively correlated with leader’s ostracism (β = 0.18, SE = 0.09, p = 0.048). The indirect effect of leader’s perceived threat to status on the relationship between subordinate’s stardom and leader’s ostracism was significant (b = 0.12, SE = 0.09, 95% CI = [0.003,0.37]). Although the interaction between subordinate’s stardom and dominance trait was not significantly related to leader’s trust (β = 0.05, SE = 0.04, p = 0.147), it was positively associated with leader’s perceived threat to status (β = 0.16, SE = 0.06, p =0.008). When subordinate’s dominance trait was high, there was no significant relationship between the subordinate's stardom and leader's empowerment through perceived threat to status (b = 0.03, SE = 0.07, 95% CI = [-0.08, 0.19]). Similarly, when subordinate’s dominance trait was low, the subordinate’s stardom was not significantly related to the leader’s empowerment through leader’s perceived threat to status (b = -0.001, SE = 0.02, 95% CI = [-0.06, 0.03]). However, when subordinate’s dominance trait was high, the subordinate’s stardom had a significantly positive influence on the leader’s ostracism through leader’s perceived threat to status (b = 0.25, SE = 0.15, 95% CI = [0.02,0.62]). When subordinate’s dominance trait was low, the subordinate’s stardom was not significantly related to the leader’s ostracism through leader’s perceived threat to status (b = -0.01, SE = 0.07, 95% CI = [-0.19, 0.11]).

In summary, our study makes three important contributions: (1) We clarified the consequences and mechanisms of star employees’ interpersonal interaction on team leaders, thereby enriching research on the interpersonal effect of star employees. (2) By examining the boundary conditions of stars’ impact on team leaders, our study prompted scholars and managers to explore how to build a proper work context to leverage stars’ value. (3) Our study aided leadership researchers to further investigate the antecedents of positive or negative leadership behaviors (i.e., empowerment and ostracism) from the perspective of “the interpersonal relationship between a leader and the key minority subordinates”.