Please wait a minute...
Advances in Psychological Science    2020, Vol. 28 Issue (5) : 711-730     DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2020.00711
Conceptual Framework |
Mechanism of the cross-level interaction between implicit entrepreneurial leadership and proactive followership
NI Yuan1(),LI Cui2
1 School of Economics and Management, Beijing Information Science & Technology University, Beijing 100192, China;
2 School of Economics and Management, Beijing City University, Being 100083, China
Download: PDF(1087 KB)   HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks    
Abstract  

Multilevel proactive followership has been an important determinant during the growth of startup enterprises. Existing literatures have emphasized how different explicit leaderships influence followership, yet the conclusions are controversial. In response to this, based on the implicit leadership theory, we built a multi-level interactive model of “implicit entrepreneurial leadership-proactive following”. In this model, implicit entrepreneurial leadership could promote proactive followership of individuals and teams through relationship identification and leadership representation, while in turn team proactive followership may shape implicit entrepreneurial leadership through positive psychological capital. Besides, it has been found that team’s Chaxu atmosphere, employee traditionalism and leader’s regulatory focus are important boundary conditions of interactive relationship.

Keywords implicit entrepreneurial leadership      proactive followership      cross-level analysis      interaction mechanism      entrepreneurial team     
ZTFLH:  B849: C93  
Corresponding Authors: Yuan NI     E-mail: niyuan230@163.com
Issue Date: 27 March 2020
Service
E-mail this article
E-mail Alert
RSS
Articles by authors
Yuan NI
Cui LI
Cite this article:   
Yuan NI,Cui LI. Mechanism of the cross-level interaction between implicit entrepreneurial leadership and proactive followership[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2020, 28(5): 711-730.
URL:  
http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlkxjz/EN/10.3724/SP.J.1042.2020.00711     OR     http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlkxjz/EN/Y2020/V28/I5/711
  
  
  
  
  
  
1 蔡莉, 单标安 . ( 2013). 中国情境下的创业研究:回顾与展望. 管理世界, 29( 12), 160-169.
2 曹元坤, 徐红丹 . ( 2017). 调节焦点理论在组织管理中的应用述评. 管理学报, 14( 8), 1254.
3 陈志霞, 典亚娇 . ( 2018). 组织差序氛围: 概念、测量及作用机制. 外国经济与管理, 40( 6), 86-98.
4 丁桂凤, 张澎涛 . ( 2013). 领导不当督导与追随者规范承诺:追随力的中介作用应用心理学. 心理与行为研究, 11( 6), 796-800.
5 段锦云, 王朋, 朱月龙 . ( 2012). 创业动机研究:概念结构、 影响因素和理论模型. 心理科学进展, 20(5), 698-704.
6 段锦云, 徐悦, 郁林瀚 . ( 2018). 中国儒家传统中的自我修为思想:对交换范式的审视与补充. 心理科学进展, 26( 10), 1890-1900.
url: http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlkxjz/CN/article/article4485.shtml
7 樊景立, 郑伯埙 . ( 2000). 华人组织的家长式领导: 一项文化观点的分析. 本土心理学研究, 13( 1), 127-180.
8 胡国栋, 王天娇 . ( 2019). 基于《贞观政要》文本解读的儒家伦理与领导纳谏行为关系研究. 管理学报, 16( 8), 1107-1116.
9 李超平, 田宝, 时勘 . ( 2006). 变革型领导与员工工作态度: 心理授权的中介作用. 心理学报, 38( 2), 297-307.
10 李磊, 席酉民, 葛京, 李鹏飞, 张晓军, 李圭泉 . ( 2013). 领导研究中的“情境”——内容、方法与未来展望. 管理工程学报, 27( 3), 1-10.
11 李晔, 张文慧, 龙立荣 . ( 2015). 自我牺牲型领导对下属工作绩效的影响机制——战略定向与领导认同的中介作用. 心理学报, 47( 5), 653-662.
12 林琼 . ( 2003). 当前中国人内隐领导理论研究——来自深圳、广州、杭州的调查(博士学位论文). 暨南大学.
13 林嵩 . ( 2012). 创业情境研究综述与展望. 外国经济与管理, 34( 7), 35-41.
14 林嵩, 刘小元 . ( 2013). 创业活动活跃程度的先决变量:创业情境的视角. 管理评论, 25( 8), 64-76.
15 凌文辁, 方俐洛, 艾尔卡 . ( 1991). 内隐领导理论的中国研究: 与美国的研究进行比较. 心理学报, 23( 3), 14-20.
16 刘军, 章凯, 仲理峰 . ( 2009). 工作团队差序氛围的形成与影响: 基于追踪数据的实证分析. 管理世界, 25( 8), 92-101.
17 刘毅, 彭坚, 路红 . ( 2016). 积极型追随力: 概念、结构、量表开发与Rasch分析. 西北师大学报:社会科学版, 53( 1), 115-124.
18 卢会志 . ( 2008). 内隐领导理论的认知结构与影响因素(博士学位论文). 华东师范大学.
19 吕力 . ( 2019). 中国本土管理研究中的“传统文化构念”及其变迁. 商业经济与管理, 39( 5), 39-45.
20 毛畅果 . ( 2017). 调节焦点理论: 组织管理中的应用. 心理科学进展, 25( 4), 682-690.
21 沈璐, 庄贵军, 姝曼 . ( 2016). 品牌帖子转发与品牌偏好之间的因果关系. 管理科学, 29( 1), 86-94.
22 陶厚永, 李薇, 陈建安, 李玲 . ( 2014). 领导-追随行为互动研究: 对偶心理定位的视角. 中国工业经济, 28( 12), 104-117.
23 佟岩, 徐峰 . ( 2013). 我国上市公司内部控制效率与盈余质量的动态依存关系研究. 中国软科学, 28( 2), 111-122.
24 王弘钰, 刘伯龙 . ( 2018). 创业型领导研究述评与展望. 外国经济与管理, 40( 4), 84-95.
25 王雁飞, 周良海, 朱瑜 . ( 2019). 领导心理资本对变革导向行为的影响机理研究. 科研管理, 40( 6), 265-275.
26 肖君宜, 段锦云 . ( 2015). 团队层面建言行为研究: 员工建言研究的新视角. 人类工效学, 21( 2), 84-86.
27 辛杰, 兰鹏璐 . ( 2018). 传统文化背景下企业家儒释道价值观及其价值创造机制. 财经论丛, 239( 11), 93-103.
28 许晟 . ( 2018). 调节焦点视角员工追随选择分化: 前因与后果的影响机制. 心理科学进展, 26( 3), 400-410.
29 许晟, 曹元坤 . ( 2012). “追随力”三概念探析. 江西社会科学, 32( 1), 211-216.
30 杨静 . ( 2012). 创业型领导研究述评. 中国人力资源开发, 24( 8), 5-9.
31 杨静, 王重鸣 . ( 2013). 女性创业型领导:多维度结构与多水平影响效应. 管理世界, 9, 102-117.
32 杨中芳, 刘萃侠, 杨宜音 . ( 2001). 中国人的人际关系, 情感与信任: 一个人际交往的观点——本土心理研究丛书. 台北: 远流出版事业有限公司.
33 原涛, 凌文辁 . ( 2010). 追随力研究述评与展望. 心理科学进展, 18( 5), 769-780.
34 张党珠, 王晶, 齐善鸿 . ( 2019). 基于扎根理论编码技术的道本领导理论模型构建研究. 管理学报, 16( 8), 1117-1126.
35 张建卫, 李海红, 刘玉新, 赵辉 . ( 2018). 家长式领导对多层面创造力的作用机制. 心理科学进展, 26( 7), 1319-1330.
url: http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlkxjz/CN/article/article4384.shtml
36 张晓军, 韩巍, 席酉民, 葛京, 刘鹏, 李磊 . ( 2017). 本土领导研究及其路径探讨. 管理科学学报, 20( 11), 36-48.
37 张永军, 张鹏程, 赵君 . ( 2017). 家长式领导对员工亲组织非伦理行为的影响:基于传统性的调节效应. 南开管理评论, 20( 2), 169-179.
38 赵慧军, 席燕平 . ( 2015). 员工追随行为结构验证及其对工作绩效的影响. 中国人力资源开发, 27( 15), 40-46.
39 周文杰, 宋继文, 李浩澜 . ( 2015). 中国情境下追随力的内涵、结构与测量. 管理学报, 12( 3), 355.
40 朱瑜, 谢斌斌 . ( 2018). 差序氛围感知与沉默行为的关系:情感承诺的中介作用与个体传统性的调节作用. 心理学报, 50( 5), 539-548.
41 Avolio B. J., &Bass B. M . ( 1995). Individual consideration viewed at multiple levels of analysis: A multi-level framework for examining the diffusion of transformational leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 6( 2), 199-218.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/1048-9843(95)90035-7
42 Baron R.A . ( 2004). The cognitive perspective: A valuable tool for answering entrepreneurship's basic “why” questions. Journal of Business Venturing, 19( 2), 221-239.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(03)00008-9
43 Baron R. M., &Kenny D. A . ( 1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51( 6), 1173-1182.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173
44 Bastardoz N. & van Vugt , M. ( 2019). The nature of followership: Evolutionary analysis and review. The Leadership Quarterly, 30( 1), 81-95.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2018.09.004
45 Benson A. J., Hardy J., & Eys M . ( 2016). Contextualizing leaders' interpretations of proactive followership. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 37( 7), 949-966.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.2077
46 Bjugstad K., Thach E. C., Thompson K. J., & Morris A . ( 2006). A fresh look at followership: A model for matching followership and leadership styles. Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management, 7( 3), 304.
47 Campbell D.P . ( 1991). The challenge of assessing leadership characteristics. Leadership in Action, 11( 2), 1-8.
48 Cardon M. S., Wincent J., Singh J., & Drnovsek M . ( 2009). The nature and experience of entrepreneurial passion. Academy of management Review, 34( 3), 511-532.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amr.2009.40633190
49 Carsten M. K., Uhl-Bien M., West B. J., Patera J. L., & McGregor R . ( 2010). Exploring social constructions of followership: A qualitative study. The Leadership Quarterly, 21( 3), 543-562.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2010.03.015
50 Chaleff, I. ( 2009). The courageous follower: Standing up to & for our leaders. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
51 Chen C. C., Chen Y. R., & Xin K . ( 2004). Guanxi practices and trust in management: A procedural justice perspective. Organization Science, 15( 2), 200-209.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1030.0047
52 Chong M. P. M., Peng T. K., Fu P. P., Richards M., Muethel M., Caldas M. P., & Shang Y. F . ( 2015). Relational perspectives on leaders’ influence behavior: The mediation of western leader-member exchange and Chinese guanxi. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 46( 1), 71-87.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022022114554035
53 Der Foo M., Knockaert M., & Erikson T . ( 2011). When does promotion focus predict entrepreneurial intentions? Only in favorable conditions (No. 11/706). Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
54 Dixon G. &Westbrook J. , ( 2003). Followers revealed. Engineering Management Journal, 15( 1), 19-26.
55 Duffy M. K., &Shaw J. D . ( 2000). The Salieri syndrome: Consequences of envy in groups. Small Group Research, 31( 1), 3-23.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/104649640003100101
56 Dvir T. &Shamir B. , ( 2003). Follower developmental characteristics as predicting transformational leadership: A longitudinal field study. The Leadership Quarterly, 14( 3), 327-344.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(03)00018-3
57 Eden D. &Leviatan U. , ( 1975). Implicit leadership theory as a determinant of the factor structure underlying supervisory behavior scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60( 6), 736-741.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.60.6.736
58 Ehrhart M. G., &Klein K. J . ( 2001). Predicting followers' preferences for charismatic leadership: The influence of follower values and personality. The Leadership Quarterly, 12( 2), 153-179.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(01)00074-1
59 Ehrhart M.G . ( 2012). Self-concept, implicit leadership theories, and follower preferences for leadership. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 220( 4), 231-240.
60 Epitropaki O. &Martin R. , ( 2004). Implicit leadership theories in applied settings: Factor structure, generalizability, and stability over time. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89( 2), 293-310.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.2.293
61 Epitropaki O. &Martin R. , ( 2005). From ideal to real: A longitudinal study of the role of implicit leadership theories on leader-member exchanges and employee outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90( 4), 659-676.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.4.659
62 Epitropaki O., Kark R., Mainemelis C., & Lord R. G . ( 2016). Leadership and followership identity processes: A multilevel review. The Leadership Quarterly, 28( 1), 104-129.
63 Epitropaki O., Sy T., Martin R., Tram-Quon S., & Topakas A . ( 2013). Implicit leadership and followership theories “in the wild”: Taking stock of information-processing approaches to leadership and followership in organizational settings. The Leadership Quarterly, 24( 6), 858-881.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.10.005
64 Fredrickson B.L . ( 2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American psychologist, 56( 3), 218-226.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.218
65 Freeman D. & Siegfried Jr, R. L . ( 2015). Entrepreneurial leadership in the context of company start‐up and growth. Journal of leadership studies, 8( 4), 35-39.
66 Foti R. J., Hansbrough T. K., Epitropaki O., & Coyle P. T . ( 2017). Dynamic viewpoints on implicit leadership and followership theories: Approaches, findings, and future directions. The Leadership Quarterly, 28( 2), 261-267.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2017.02.004
67 Gawronski B. , & Payne, B. K. (Eds.).( 2011) . Handbook of implicit social cognition: Measurement theory and applications New York: Guilford Press Measurement theory and applications. New York: Guilford Press.
68 Guenter H., Schreurs B., van Emmerik I. H., & Sun S . ( 2017). What does it take to break the silence in teams: Authentic leadership and/or proactive followership?. Applied Psychology, 66( 1), 49-77.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/apps.12076
69 Gupta V., MacMillan I. C., & Surie G . ( 2004). Entrepreneurial leadership: Developing and measuring a cross-cultural construct. Journal of Business Venturing, 19( 2), 241-260.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(03)00040-5
70 Haslam N. &Fiske A. P . ( 1992). Implicit relationship prototypes: Investigating five theories of the cognitive organization of social relationships. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 28( 5), 441-474.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(92)90041-H
71 Ho C.L . ( 2012). Implicit leadership theories: Explicit and implicit measures and their respective relationship to leadership perceptions and followers' characteristics (Unpublished doctorial dissertation). North Carolina State University.
72 Hofmann D. A., &Gavin M. B . ( 1998). Centering decisions in hierarchical linear models: Implications for research in organizations. Journal of Management, 24( 5), 623-641.
73 Hofmann D. A., Griffin M. A., & Gavin M. B . ( 2000) The application of hierarchical linear modeling to organizational research. In K. J. Klein & S. W. J. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions(pp. 467-511).. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
74 Hofstede G.( 1980). Motivation, leadership, and organization: Do American theories apply abroad?. Organizational Dynamics, 9( 1), 42-63.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0090-2616(80)90013-3
75 Hogg M.A . ( 2001). A social identity theory of leadership. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5( 3), 184-200.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0503_1
76 Hollander E. P. (1978). Leadership dynamics:A practical guide to effective relationships. New York:Free Press.
77 House R. J., Hanges P. J., Javidan M., Dorfman P. W., & Gupta V . (Eds.). (2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. Thousand Oaks: Sage publications.
78 Hughes R. G., Ginnett R. C. R., & Curphy G . (2009). Leadership: Enhancing the lessons of experience . New York:McGraw Hill.
79 Ireland R. D., &Hitt M. A . ( 1999). Achieving and maintaining strategic competitiveness in the 21st century: The role of strategic leadership. Academy of Management Perspectives, 13( 1), 43-57.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/ame.1999.1567311
80 Junker N. M., & van Dick R. , ( 2014). Implicit theories in organizational settings: A systematic review and research agenda of implicit leadership and followership theories. Leadership Quarterly, 25( 6), 1154-1173.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2014.09.002
81 Kam C., Risavy S. D., Perunovic E., & Plant L . ( 2014). Do subordinates formulate an impression of their manager's implicit person theory?. Applied Psychology, 63( 2), 267-299.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2012.00521.x
82 Kark R. & van Dijk D. , ( 2007). Motivation to lead, motivation to follow: The role of the self-regulatory focus in leadership processes. Academy of Management Review, 32( 2), 500-528.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amr.2007.24351846
83 Kellerman B . (2008). How followers are creating change and changing leaders. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
84 Kelley R.E . ( 2008). Rethinking followership.In R. E. Riggio, I. Chaleff, & J. Lipman-Blumen (Eds.), The art of followership(pp. 5-16). San Francisco, CA: Josey-Bass.
85 Kenney R. A., Schwartz-Kenney B. M., & Blascovich J . ( 1996). Implicit leadership theories: Defining leaders described as worthy of influence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22( 11), 1128-1143.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/01461672962211004
86 Kim T. Y., Liden R. C., Kim S. P., & Lee D. R . ( 2015). The interplay between follower core self-evaluation and transformational leadership: Effects on employee outcomes. Journal of Business and Psychology, 30( 2), 345-355.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10869-014-9364-7
87 Koryak O., Mole K. F., Lockett A., Hayton J. C., Ucbasaran D., & Hodgkinson G. P . ( 2015). Entrepreneurial leadership, capabilities and firm growth. International Small Business Journal, 33( 1), 89-105.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0266242614558315
88 Leitch C. M., &Volery T. , ( 2017). Entrepreneurial leadership: Insights and directions. International Small Business Journal, 35( 2), 147-156.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0266242616681397
89 Leroy H., Anseel F., Gardner W. L., & Sels L . ( 2015). Authentic leadership, authentic followership, basic need satisfaction, and work role performance: A cross-level study. Journal of Management, 41( 6), 1677-1697.
90 Lewin K . ( 1943). Defining the field at a given time. Psychological review, 50( 3), 292-310.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0062738
91 Li S. L., Huo Y., & Long L. R . ( 2017). Chinese traditionality matters: Effects of differentiated empowering leadership on followers’ trust in leaders and work outcomes. Journal of Business Ethics, 145( 1), 81-93.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2900-1
92 Lockwood P., Jordan C. H., & Kunda Z . ( 2002). Motivation by positive or negative role models: Regulatory focus determines who will best inspire us. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83( 4), 854-864.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.83.4.854
93 Lord R. G., Foti R. J &de Vader C. L. , ( 1984). A test of leadership categorization theory: Internal structure, information processing, and leadership perceptions. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 34( 3), 343-378.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(84)90043-6
94 Martin R. . ( 2015). A review of the literature of the followership since 2008: The importance of relationships and emotional intelligence. Sage Open, 5( 4), 1-9.
95 Mccormick M. J., &Martinko M. J . ( 2004). Identifying leader social cognitions: Integrating the causal reasoning perspective into social cognitive theory. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 10( 4), 2-11.
url: http://dx.doi.org/urnal of Leadership
96 Offermann L. R., &Coats M. R . ( 2018). Implicit theories of leadership: Stability and change over two decades. The Leadership Quarterly, 29( 4), 513-522.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2017.12.003
97 Offermann L. R., Kennedy Jr J. K., & Wirtz P. W . ( 1994). Implicit leadership theories: Content, structure, and generalizability. The Leadership Quarterly, 5( 1), 43-58.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/1048-9843(94)90005-1
98 Padilla A., Hogan R., & Kaiser R. B . ( 2007). The toxic triangle: Destructive leaders, susceptible followers, and conducive environments. The Leadership Quarterly, 18( 3), 176-194.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2007.03.001
99 Platow M. J., & van Knippenberg , D. ( 2001). A social identity analysis of leadership endorsement: The effects of leader ingroup prototypicality and distributive intergroup fairness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27( 11), 1508-1519.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/01461672012711011
100 Raudenbush S. W., &Bryk A. S . ( 2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (Vol. 1). Sage.
101 Renko M., El Tarabishy A., Carsrud A. L., & Br?nnback M . ( 2015). Understanding and measuring entrepreneurial leadership style. Journal of Small Business Management, 53( 1), 54-74.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12086
102 Rowe W.G . ( 2001). Creating wealth in organizations: The role of strategic leadership. Academy of Management Perspectives, 15( 1), 81-94.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/ame.2001.4251395
103 Ruvio A., Rosenblatt Z., & Hertz-Lazarowitz R . ( 2010). Entrepreneurial leadership vision in nonprofit vs. for-profit organizations. The Leadership Quarterly, 21( 1), 144-158.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.10.011
104 Schyns B., Kiefer T., Kerschreiter R., & Tymon A . ( 2011). Teaching implicit leadership theories to develop leaders and leadership: How and why it can make a difference. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 10( 3), 397-408.
url: http://dx.doi.org/ademy of Management Learning
105 Schyns B., Kroon B., & Moors G . ( 2008). Follower characteristics and the perception of leader-member exchange. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23( 7), 772-788.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02683940810896330
106 Scott C. P. R., Jiang H., Wildman J. L., & Griffith R . ( 2018). The impact of implicit collective leadership theories on the emergence and effectiveness of leadership networks in teams. Human Resource Management Review, 28( 4), 464-481.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2017.03.005
107 Sevier R. A., &Communicationsjnc S. , ( 1999). Follow the Leader., USA: Research and Marketing Stamatas Communications,Inc.
108 Siddiqui S , ( 2007). An empirical study of traits determining entrepreneurial leadership: An educational perspective. Skyline Business Review, 4( 1), 37-44.
109 Singer J.D . ( 1998). Using SAS proc mixed to fit multilevel models, hierarchical models, and individual growth models. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 23( 4), 323-355.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/10769986023004323
110 Sklaveniti C.( 2017). Processes of entrepreneurial leadership: Co-acting creativity and direction in the emergence of new SME ventures. International Small Business Journal,35( 2), 197-213.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0266242616673420
111 Sluss D. M., &Ashforth B. E . ( 2007). Relational identity and identification: Defining ourselves through work relationships. Academy of Management Review, 32( 1), 9-32.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amr.2007.23463672
112 Solansky S., Gupta V., & Wang J . ( 2017). Ideal and Confucian implicit leadership profiles in China. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 38( 2), 164-177.
url: http://dx.doi.org/eadership
113 Stamper C. L., &Masterson S. S . ( 2002). Insider or outsider? How employee perceptions of insider status affect their work behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23( 8), 875-894.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.175
114 Tee E. Y. J., Paulsen N., & Ashkanasy N. M . ( 2013). Revisiting followership through a social identity perspective: The role of collective follower emotion and action. The Leadership Quarterly, 24( 6), 902-918.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.10.002
115 Tett R. P., &Guterman H. A . ( 2000). Situation trait relevance, trait expression, and cross-situational consistency: Testing a principle of trait activation. Journal of Research in Personality, 34( 4), 397-423.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jrpe.2000.2292
116 Uhl-Bien M., Riggio R. E., Lowe K. B., & Carsten M. K . ( 2014). Followership theory: A review and research agenda. The Leadership Quarterly, 25( 1), 83-104.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.11.007
117 van Gils S., van Quaquebeke N., & van Knippenberg D . ( 2010). The X-factor: On the relevance of implicit leadership and followership theories for leader-member exchange agreement. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 19( 3), 333-363.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13594320902978458
118 van Knippenberg, D., &Hogg M. A . ( 2003). A social identity model of leadership effectiveness in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 25, 243-295.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0191-3085(03)25006-1
119 van Knippenberg , D. ( 2011). Embodying who we are: Leader group prototypicality and leadership effectiveness. The Leadership Quarterly, 22( 6), 1078-1091.
url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.09.004
120 Vogel R., Hansen N. K., & Kreysch M . ( 2018). Implicit Leader-and Followership Theories and Interpersonal Attraction in Workplace Relationships. In Academy of Management Proceedings (Vol. 2018, No. 1, p.14181). Briarcliff Manor, NY 10510: Academy of Management .
121 Weidner N. . (2012). Dissecting implicit leadership theories: A generalizability analysis (Unpublished doctorial dissertation). Wayne State University.
122 Yagil D. &Medler-Liraz H. , ( 2014). Feel free, be yourself: Authentic leadership, emotional expression, and employee authenticity. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 21( 1), 59-70.
url: http://dx.doi.org/urnal of Leadership
123 Yang K.S . ( 1995). Chinese social orientation: An integrative analysis. Chinese Societies and Mental Health, 2, 19-39.
[1] LI Jingjing,ZHANG Jian,TIAN Huirong,Jeffrey B. VANCOUVER. Application of computational modeling in organizational behavior research[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2020, 28(2): 368-380.
[2] LI Qian,GONG Shiyang,LI Chaofan. The impact of team cultural diversity on team innovation[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2019, 27(9): 1521-1539.
[3] Ting WANG,Fu YANG. Leader humor: Consequences and theoretical explanation[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2019, 27(9): 1631-1642.
[4] XU Yan,LI Chaoping. The relationship between leadership styles and engagement: A meta-analysis[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2019, 27(8): 1363-1383.
[5] LIU Yuxin,CHEN Chen,ZHU Nan,JI Zheng. A multi-level paradigm analysis of organizational neuroscience: the philosophical foundation, theoretical foundation, and research method[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2019, 27(6): 1093-1110.
[6] WANG Hongyu,CUI Zhisong,ZOU Chunlong,YU Jiali,ZHAO Di. Loyal or rebel? Employee bootleg innovation in Chinese context[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2019, 27(6): 975-989.
[7] CHENG Ken,LIN Yinghui. Unethical pro-organizational behavior: A motivational perspective[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2019, 27(6): 1111-1122.
[8] ZHAO Jun,YAN Miao,XIAO Sufang,ZHANG Yongjun. The mutual relationship of organizational citizenship behaviors and counterproductive work behaviors: An integrated process of emotion and cognition[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2019, 27(5): 871-883.
[9] LI Haihong,DENG Zhou,HE Xin,SHEN Shaojing,ZOU Yawen,ZHU Minfan,WANG Yun,XIE Xiaofei. Normality rather than anomaly: The theory and application of endowment effect[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2019, 27(3): 394-405.
[10] Fulei CHU,Rui WANG,Zhonghua GAO. The dynamic evolution and influence mechanism of newcomers’ overqualification: Organizational socialization perspective[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2018, 26(12): 2101-2112.
[11] Shusong ZHAO,Yijie ZHANG,Jun ZHAO. The third-party perspective of organizational justice: Research perspective, content and design[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2018, 26(12): 2216-2229.
[12] Ting WANG,Fu YANG. Career success: Antecedents and mechanisms[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2018, 26(8): 1488-1500.
[13] ZHANG Ying, YANG Fu. Feedback-seeking behavior: Influencing factors and localization development[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2018, 26(6): 1121-1130.
[14] Mengdi LIN, Maolin YE, Jian PENG, Kui YIN, Zhen WANG. The employees’ sleep quality: A perspective of organizational behavior[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2018, 26(6): 1096-1110.
[15] SHI Jian, LONG Lirong.  The depletion effects of sleep deprivation among employees: A new topic in organization and management research[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2018, 26(5): 896-909.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
Copyright © Advances in Psychological Science
Support by Beijing Magtech