心理科学进展, 2019, 27(8): 1363-1383 doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2019.01363

元分析

领导风格与敬业度关系的元分析

胥彦1, 李超平,1,2

1 中国人民大学公共管理学院组织与人力资源研究所, 北京 100872

2 新乡医学院管理学院, 新乡 453003

The relationship between leadership styles and engagement: A meta-analysis

XU Yan1, LI Chaoping,1,2

1 School of Public Administration and Policy, Renmin University of China, Beijing 100872, China

2 Management Institude of Xinxiang Medical University, Xinxiang 453003, China

通讯作者: 李超平, E-mail: lichaoping@ruc.edu.cn

收稿日期: 2019-01-11   网络出版日期: 2019-07-26

基金资助: * 国家自然科学基金资助.  71772171, 71372159
教育部人文社会科学规划基金项目资助.  17YJA630073
中国人民大学“中央高校建设世界一流大学(学科)和特色发展引导专项资金”支持.  

Received: 2019-01-11   Online: 2019-07-26

摘要

采用元分析方法探讨领导风格与敬业度的关系。经筛选, 共有148篇文献162个独立样本符合元分析标准(N = 84836)。元分析结果发现, 授权型领导、伦理型领导、变革型领导、领导-成员交换、真实型领导、交易型领导、服务型领导以及家长式领导与敬业度之间均呈显著的正相关关系, 且对敬业度的解释力递减; 不同的敬业度量表对领导-成员交换、真实型领导与敬业度之间的关系有显著的调节作用, UWES为中等正相关, 其他量表为高等正相关; 不同的研究设计对伦理型领导与敬业度的关系调节作用显著, 横截面研究设计测得的相关程度比纵向研究高; 文化背景能够显著调节变革型领导、领导-成员交换、真实型领导、伦理型领导、服务型领导以及交易型领导与敬业度之间的关系, 除服务型领导外, 东方文化背景下的相关系数均比西方文化背景下高。

关键词: 变革型领导 ; 领导-成员交换 ; 真实型领导 ; 敬业度 ; 元分析

Abstract

This article fills the void in leadership and engagement literature through conducting a quantitative review to explore the disparities among relationships between different leadership styles and engagement. Based on a meta-analysis of 148 cases and 162 independent effect sizes (N = 84836). We found positive associations between various leadership styles and engagement, and the results of relative weights analysis suggest that engagement was decrementally predicted by empowering leadership, ethical leadership, transformational leadership, leader-member exchange, authentic leadership, transactional leadership, servant leadership and paternalistic leadership. Moderator analyses revealed that the particular engagement scale, design of research and cultural background all produce meaningful influences on the relationships in the meta-analysis.

Keywords: transformational leadership ; leader-member exchange ; authentic leadership ; engagement ; meta-analysis

PDF (934KB) 元数据 多维度评价 相关文章 导出 EndNote| Ris| Bibtex  收藏本文

本文引用格式

胥彦, 李超平. (2019). 领导风格与敬业度关系的元分析. 心理科学进展, 27(8), 1363-1383

XU Yan, LI Chaoping. (2019). The relationship between leadership styles and engagement: A meta-analysis. Advances in Psychological Science, 27(8), 1363-1383

1 引言

敬业度(engagement)是指个体在工作中从生理(physical)、认知(cognition)和情感(emotion)多方位的积极融入状态(胡少楠, 王詠, 2014), 与员工高水平的创造力、任务绩效、组织公民行为以及客户满意度都是息息相关的(Bakker, Demerouti, & Sanz-Vergel, 2014)。因此, 无论是公共组织还是私人组织, 都想要提高员工的敬业度水平, 以促进组织的健康发展。在过去的20多年时间里, 敬业度得到了国内外研究者的广泛关注, 最近的研究开始探索敬业度的远端预测因子, 研究者发现领导在影响员工的敬业度方面发挥了很大作用(Park, Kim, Yoon, & Joo, 2017; Bakker & Albrecht, 2018), 如变革型领导(李超平, 毛凯贤, 2018; Schmitt, den Hartog, & Belschak, 2016)、真实型领导(王聪颖, 杨东涛, 2014; Giallonardo, Wong, & Iwasiw, 2010)、伦理型领导(Demirtas, 2015)、服务型领导(Sousa & van Dierendonck, 2017)等对敬业度都有不同程度的影响, 但是不同的领导风格对敬业度的影响到底有何不同, 对敬业度的解释力孰强孰弱尚不明确。

国内外研究均表明, 即使是同一种领导风格对员工敬业度的研究结果也存在一定差异, 如变革型领导与敬业度的相关系数从0.08 (Gillet, Fouquereau, Bonnaud-Antignac, Mokounkolo, & Colombat, 2013)到0.75 (Kovjanic, Schuh, & Jonas, 2013), 真实型领导与敬业度的相关系数从0.01 (Giallonardo et al., 2010)到0.71 (Hsieh & Wang, 2015), 相关程度差别很大。那么, 要清楚领导风格与敬业度之间的关系究竟如何, 在解释敬业度时有何区别, 受哪些因素影响, 就有必要对领导风格和敬业度之间的关系进行元分析。

Hoch, Bommer, Dulebohn和Wu (2018)使用元分析方法比较了伦理型领导、真实型领导、服务型领导与变革型领导四种领导风格对一些结果变量的影响, 但是该研究没有涉及到中文文献, 仅对英文文献进行元分析探讨, 相关研究结果是否适用于中国情境有待考察(王海雯, 张淑华, 2018)。王震、孙健敏和赵一君(2012)对中国组织情境下的变革型领导、领导-部属交换和破坏型领导的效果进行了元分析比较, 但没有考察伦理型领导、家长式领导等更符合中国文化情境的领导风格, 并且, 以上两个元分析均没有对影响领导风格与结果变量间关系的调节因素做深入研究, 无法了解领导风格与结果之间的关系受哪些因素影响。本研究不只包括样本为中国人的英文文献, 还包括了样本为中国人的中文文献, 关于中国人的研究更为完整, 结合中英文实证研究结果, 运用元分析方法探讨领导风格对敬业度的影响, 比较几种领导风格对敬业度的解释力大小, 同时考虑不同的敬业度测量工具、研究设计以及文化背景对领导风格与敬业度关系的影响, 深入探讨领导风格与敬业度之间的关系及影响因素, 为组织管理者提高员工敬业度水平提供科学建议。

1.1 敬业度的概念与测量

敬业度一般是指一种积极的、充实的、与工作相关的状态(Schaufeli, Salanova, González-Romá, & Bakker, 2002), Kahn (1990)最早将敬业度界定为: 组织成员能够全身心融入工作角色, 并用身体、认知和情感表达自己的状态。 胡少楠和王詠(2014)通过梳理和比较, 提出了敬业度的整合概念, 即个体面对工作时产生的一种同时包含积极的情绪体验、谨敏的认知和高度激发的体能状态在内的、持久的心理行为状态。然而, 最近的研究也表明, 敬业度是会随着时间和情境的变化而波动的(Bakker, 2014; Reina-Tamayo, Bakker, & Derks, 2017; 陆欣欣, 涂乙冬, 2015), 是一种处于动态变化中的工作状态。Schaufeli等人(2002)认为敬业度具有活力(vigor)、奉献(dedication)和专注(absorption)三个特征。活力是指员工在工作时精力充沛, 即使在困难面前也坚持不懈的状态; 奉献是指员工享受工作意义, 不计回报地对工作热情投入的状态; 专注是指员工全神贯注地投入工作, 很难脱离工作的状态。

员工敬业度常用的测量工具包括以下几种: (1)Schaufeli等(2002)的三维度量表UWES (Utrecht Work Engagement Scale), 张轶文和甘怡群(2005)对UWES进行了修订, 显示有较好的跨文化一致性, Schaufeli, Bakker和Salanova (2006)又对UWES进行缩减, 得到了9道题目的简版量表(UWES-9)。(2) Shirom (2003)的量表SMVM (ShiromMelamed Vigor Measure)。当前研究中最常采用的就是以上两种测量方法(Wefald, Mills, Smith, & Downey, 2012), 除此之外, 还有盖洛普公司(GALLUP)的Q12和GWA (Gallup work-place audit)量表、Sakes (2006)的六题目量表, 以及 Rich, LePine和Crawford (2010)的认知、情绪和生理三维度敬业度量表等。

1.2 领导风格的概念与测量

领导是影响下属工作态度和工作行为的重要环境因素, 领导者在影响员工的敬业度方面发挥了很大作用(Park et al., 2017; Bakker & Albrecht, 2018)。本研究重点关注与敬业度关系研究最多的、包含中国文化情境特色涵义的领导风格, 即变革型领导, 交易型领导, 授权型领导, 领导-成员交换, 真实型领导, 服务型领导, 伦理型领导以及家长式领导。

变革型领导(transformational leadership)通过提升员工内在动机, 帮助员工认识工作意义, 激发下属更高层次的需要, 促使下属为了组织的利益积极工作, 并达到超过预定期望的结果(Bass, 1995), 包括领导魅力、感召力、智能激发和个性化关怀四个维度, 常用的测量工具包括MLQ问卷(Bass & Avolio, 1995)等; 中国情境下的变革型领导则包括德行垂范、领导魅力、愿景激励与个性化关怀四个维度, 对应中国情境下的变革型领导问卷(李超平, 时勘, 2005)。交易型领导与变革型领导是共存和相互补充的(陈文晶, 时勘, 2014), 交易型领导(transactional leadership)在了解下属需要的基础上, 明确成员达成组织目标时可获得的报酬, 并提供必要的工作资源, 促使员工努力完成工作, 从而满足员工需要(Bass, 1985; 刘金栋, 郑向敏, 2012)。Pearce和Conger (2003)依领导者对下属工作直接干预的程度从大到小, 将领导风格分为: 命令型领导、交易型领导、变革型领导和授权型领导(李燚, 魏峰, 2010), Zhang和Bartol (2010)将授权型领导(empowering leadership)界定为通过阐明工作意义、允许较大自主性、对员工能力表示信心、排除绩效障碍等方式实现同员工共享权力的过程(唐贵瑶, 李鹏程, 李骥, 2012)。

与其他领导理论不同, 领导-成员交换(leader-member exchange, LMX)理论认为, 领导者在工作中会区分不同的部属, 采取不同的管理策略和管理方式(Liao, Liu, & Loi, 2010; 王冬冬, 钱智超, 2017), 建立远近亲疏程度不同的交换关系, 形成圈内部属和圈外部属(任孝鹏, 王辉, 2005)。不同学者对领导-成员交换的结构有着不同看法, Graen等认为其是单维结构(Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995; Scandura & Graen, 1984), 对应单维LMX量表(LMX-7), Liden等人则认为是情感、忠诚、贡献、专业尊敬的四维结构(Dienesch & Liden, 1986; Liden & Maslyn, 1998), 对应四维LMX量表(LMX-MDM), 中国学者王辉、牛雄鹰和Law (2004)对LMX-MDM进行了修订, 并补充了领导-成员交换在中国情境下的涵义。

近些年, 组织中高层领导者的不道德行为导致的组织丑闻和领导危机频发, 引起了学者们对道德伦理为基础的新兴领导风格的关注(Woods & West, 2010), 包括真实型领导、服务型领导以及伦理型领导等(Dinh et al., 2014)。真实型领导(authentic leadership)是指领导者诚实、正直、忠于自己, 会与下属构建真实的关系, 是其他积极领导形式的“根源构念” (Avolio & Gardner, 2005; 王震, 宋萌, 孙健敏, 2014)。服务型领导(service Leadership)是以员工利益为先, 以员工个人发展为重的一种特殊领导风格(胥彦, 李超平, 2018), 坚持“服务优先”而不是“领导优先”, 帮助下属实现自身目标, 同时也实现组织和社会整体目标(陈佩, 杨付, 石伟, 2016)。

相对于前文所提到的领导风格, 伦理型领导和家长式领导都是更符合中国文化情境的领导风格, 伦理型领导(ethical leadership), 又称道德领导, 是通过个人行动和人际关系展示规范性合意的行为(孙健敏, 陆欣欣, 2017), 并通过双向交流、强化和制定决策来促使他人形成这种行为的领导风格(Brown, Treviño, & Harrison, 2005; 孟慧, 宋继文, 艾亦非, 陈晓茹, 2014)。家长式领导(paternalistic leadership)是基于中国传统文化而有别于西方领导理论的本土领导理论(周浩, 龙立荣, 2005), 包括德行领导, 仁慈领导和威权领导(郑伯壎, 周丽芳, 樊景立, 2000), 德行领导受中国传统儒家文化的影响, 道德品行是对一个领导者的基本要求; 仁慈领导重视、关怀下属, 对下属宽容; 威权领导则关注领导权威和对下属的绝对控制。

1.3 领导风格与敬业度的关系

社会交换理论、资源保存理论和组织认同理论为解释领导风格与敬业度之间的关系提供了理论基础。工作资源和工作需求共同决定了员工的敬业度水平(陆欣欣, 涂乙冬, 2015), 由于个体具有获得、保护和维持资源的动机, 常常会努力获得和维持他们认为有价值的资源, 组织中员工获得的工作资源越多, 敬业度程度越高(王桢, 2012), 而领导者正是工作资源的重要来源之一(Bakker & Demerouti, 2007), 因此, 员工通过与领导者的互动, 从领导者那里获得资源和机会越多, 基于社会交换理论, 对领导资源支持的回报就越多, 员工会更加努力工作, 敬业度水平随之也越高。另外, 员工通常会将领导者视为组织及其价值观和政策的代表(Zhu, He, Treviño, Chao, & Wang, 2015), 领导者的支持与员工的组织认同高度相关(Epitropaki & Martin, 2005), 而如果员工将自身组织一员的身份与自我概念相结合, 对组织会更有归属感(李超平, 毛凯贤, 2018), 能够将组织目标视为个人目标, 从而积极投入工作, 贡献自己的一份力量(简浩贤, 徐云飞, 曹曼, 赵曙明, 2017)。

变革型领导能够帮助员工认识工作的意义和重要性, 塑造愿景激励下属, 与员工动机和投入正向相关(Breevaart et al., 2014; Kovjanic et al., 2013), 变革型领导对工作的热情和激情也会对下属产生强烈的情绪影响(Bono, Foldes, Vinson, & Muros, 2007; den Hartog & Belschak, 2012), 这些积极情绪正是敬业度的关键组成部分。交易型领导在完成工作的过程中始终如一地为员工提供奖励, 因而下属员工与领导者都建立了较好的信任关系(Popli & Rizvi, 2017), 增强了对工作的投入程度。授权型领导能够鼓励员工体验工作意义, 当员工充满能量并强烈认同自己的工作时, 将更投入工作(Park et al., 2017)。领导-成员交换是影响领导和成员双方态度和行为的关键, 高质量的领导-成员交换关系能给员工带来工作资源, 提高员工的敬业度和绩效水平(Breevaart, Bakker, Demerouti, & van der Heuvel, 2015), 另一方面, 领导者的敬业态度和行为也能够通过领导-成员之间的交换关系, 提升员工的敬业度(Gutermann, Lehmann-Willenbrock, Boer, Born, & Voelpel, 2017)。

真实型领导诚实、正直、忠于自己, 倾向于与员工构建真实的关系, 能够促使下属产生支持感和公平感, 增加员工心理上的意义感、可得性和安全感(Liu, Fuller, Hester, Bennett, & Dickerson, 2018), 更加投入工作。服务型领导强调关注下属个人成长的重要性(李超平, 毛凯贤, 2018), 下属能够获得足够的个人和社会资源, 心理上的获得感更强(Bao, Li, & Zhao, 2018), 对员工的敬业度产生正向影响。伦理型领导重视道德品质和个人操守, 为员工树立起道德的榜样, 成为员工忠诚、追随与模仿的对象(路红, 孙桂芳, 刘毅, 2014), 员工的组织公平认知高(Demirtas, 2015), 员工与领导之间建立了良好信任关系, 员工对工作更加专注、投入(Chughtai, Byrne, & Flood, 2015)。家长式领导中的仁慈领导、德行领导维度关注的是领导者的关怀、施恩以及潜移默化的美德教化, 员工的效仿和回报心态会使得他们更加投入工作, 而威权领导重视领导权威, 缺乏关怀, 可能使得下属产生逆反心理, 对工作消极懈怠(钟定国, 卢丹, 2014), 但是仁慈领导能够部分地缓解威权领导带来的负面效应(赵安安, 高尚仁, 2005)。

因此, 提出假设1: 变革型领导与敬业度正相关; 交易型领导与敬业度正相关; 授权型领导与敬业度正相关; 领导-成员交换与敬业度正相关; 真实型领导与敬业度正相关; 服务型领导与敬业度正相关; 伦理型领导与敬业度正相关; 家长式领导与敬业度正相关。

虽然已有诸多实证研究探索了领导风格与敬业度之间的关系, 但是具体不同领导风格对敬业度的影响有何差别、哪种领导风格对敬业度的影响更大尚不明确。Christian, Garza和Slaughter (2011)对敬业度的前因变量和结果变量进行了元分析, 发现变革型领导和领导-成员交换两种领导风格与敬业度之间存在正向相关关系, Hoch等人(2018)通过元分析发现, 真实型领导和伦理型领导与变革型领导的概念之间存在高度相关性, 而服务型领导是一种独立的领导方式, 与敬业度之间的关系更强, 本研究试图扩展以往领导理论的研究成果, 通过对文献的全面回顾, 对领导风格的作用机制进行比较, 检验领导风格对敬业度的影响大小差别。由假设1的提出可知, 领导者对下属敬业度产生影响的途径有以下几个: 一是通过影响下属对工作环境的感知(Salancik & Pfeffer, 1978), 如给予下属工作自主性, 为下属提供所需支持等, 下属认识到工作的意义, 会更加投入工作; 二是通过激励下属的主动行为(Breevaart et al., 2014), 如工作控制(Tims & Bakker, 2010)、授权等, 鼓励下属为自己的工作主动获取资源, 并提供给下属所需资源, 来促进员工工作投入; 三是通过领导者的榜样力量, 如领导者对工作饱含热情、正直诚实、重道德伦理、以下属利益为先等行为, 通过为下属树立榜样或建立良好的信任关系, 激励下属投入工作。

变革型领导能够为下属创造愿景, 激励下属并予以个性化的感召, 能够从多方面影响下属的敬业度, 此前的实证研究和元分析也表明, 变革型领导在解释员工行为、态度和关系认知上都有着高于其他领导风格的解释力(Eagly, Johannesen- Schmidt, & van Engen, 2003; Judge & Piccolo, 2004; Hoch et al., 2018; 毛晋平, 周卓钊, 吴逸飞, 2017), 而交易型领导通过奖励及与下属进行交换的方式来鼓励下属, 是一种短期的交换结果(何立, 凌文辁, 2010), 相比于其他领导风格, 交易型领导更关注交换而不是服务来达到工作目标(Bass, 1995; Washington, 2007), 对敬业度的解释力较低(Popli & Rizvi, 2017; Breevaart et al., 2014), 所以, 变革型领导对敬业度的影响可能是最高的, 而交易型领导对敬业度的影响可能是最低的。

因此, 提出假设2: 不同的领导风格对敬业度的作用大小不同, 对敬业度的解释力存在差别, 其中, 变革型领导的解释力最强, 交易型领导的解释力最弱。

1.4 领导风格与敬业度的关系: 调节变量

敬业度测量工具。在敬业度的相关研究中, 不同的定义和结构对应着不同的测量工具, 其中, Schaufeli等人的研究在学术和实践领域是最被广泛引用的范式之一(Jeung, 2011; 胡少楠, 王詠, 2014), 大部分研究者都沿用了Schaufeli等人(2002)关于敬业度的定义和结构, 并使用UWES量表对敬业度进行测量, 在本次元分析所囊括的文献中, 84.5%的研究都使用了UWES系列量表(k = 137), 但是有研究表明, 在某些情境下, 使用UWES量表测量并不一定比其他量表对工作结果的预测作用更强, UWES与其他量表在内涵和结构上都有一定差别(Wefald et al., 2012), 而测量方法的不同会直接影响变量之间的关系强度(丁凤琴, 赵虎英, 2018; Eisenberg & Miller, 1987), 因此, 领导风格与敬业度之间的关系可能会受敬业度测量工具的调节。

研究设计。根据数据收集时间点和收集次数, 研究设计可以分为横截面设计与追踪研究设计。横截面研究设计会导致不准确的参数检验和显著性检验(Pitariu & Ployhart, 2010), 存在共同方法变异的可能性也更大; 追踪研究则通过对同一研究对象进行三次或三次以上的重复测量, 能够对现象发展的内在机制和过程进行深入研究, 发现个体心理、态度和行为的具体变化(胥彦, 李超平, 2019), 并且, 敬业度本身也在随着时间和情境的变化而波动(Bakker, 2014; Reina-Tamayo et al., 2017; 陆欣欣, 涂乙冬, 2015), 使用追踪研究设计对其进行调查的结果会更加准确。因此, 研究设计不同, 领导风格与敬业度之间的关系可能不同。

文化背景。敬业度受文化背景的影响, 怡安翰威特(Aon Hewitt)2017年关于全球员工敬业度趋势的报告指出, 各国家的敬业度水平和趋势依旧存在很大差异, 可能的原因包括文化差异、政治因素和经济稳定等因素。领导风格与文化背景关系也十分密切, 领导的概念和构成因国家文化的不同而不同(李超平, 时勘, 2005)。霍夫斯泰德的跨文化分析模型包括权力距离, 个人主义和集体主义, 生活数量和生活质量, 不确定性规避以及长期导向和短期导向五个维度(方振邦, 2011)。其中, 权力距离是指个体对组织内权力被不平等分配的接受程度(Clugston, Howell, & Dorfman, 2000), 个人主义和集体主义是指一个国家的人民喜欢以个体/群体成员形式进行活动的程度。东方文化属于集体主义、高权力距离, 注重尊卑上下和伦理道德约束, 领导决策, 包括中国以及大多数亚洲国家; 西方文化属于个人主义、低权力距离, 注重个体的自主性和参与决策, 包括美国、荷兰等西方国家。低权力距离的西方文化背景下, 员工对领导者的行为关注相对较少, 他们的责任知觉和心理安全感更多地与工作本身相关, 而不是领导者的行为(梁建, 2014), 反之, 高权力距离的东方文化背景下, 员工对领导的依赖性更强(Tepper et al., 2009), 受领导行为的影响更大。因此, 文化背景可能是领导风格与敬业度关系的调节变量。

2 研究方法

2.1 文献检索与筛选

检索中文数据库(中国知网期刊全文数据库、中国博士学位论文全文数据库、中国优秀硕士学位论文全文数据库、维普中文科技期刊、万方数据检索系统)和英文数据库(EBSCO、PROQUEST、SAGE、Wiley、Google Scholar、Web of Science)。中文检索主题词确定为领导、领导者、工作投入、员工投入、敬业度, 英文检索英文主题词为leadership, leader, lmx, engagement, work engagement, employee engagement。文献搜索直到2018年11月。

将得到的文献通过以下标准进行筛选: (1)研究是包括领导风格与敬业度之间关系的实证研究, 不包括纯理论研究、综述研究以及案例研究等; (2)研究中必须同时使用了信效度良好的敬业度量表以及领导风格量表, 并明确报告了研究所使用的的样本量、以及变量之间的相关数据, 不包括仅运用回归分析、结构方程模型以及其他统计方法的数据(王海雯, 张淑华, 2018); (3)调查样本均为在职员工, 研究情境为工作场所, 不包括学生等调查群体; (4)文献中所涉及的调查数据不可重复使用, 若学位论文发表在学术期刊上, 则以发表的期刊论文为准(丁凤琴, 赵虎英, 2018)。

最终符合上述标准的文献共有148篇, 主要包括中文文献51篇, 英文文献97篇; 期刊文献138篇, 学位论文10篇。由于有的研究文献包含多个独立效应量, 因此, 本研究最终得到独立样本有162个, 共包括84836名被试。

2.2 文献编码

对纳入元分析的文献进行如下编码: 文献信息(作者名+文献题目), 样本量大小, 相关系数大小, 敬业度维度, 敬业度测量工具(UWES/other), 领导风格类型, 领导风格维度, 研究设计(横向/纵向), 文化背景(east/west)。其中, 研究设计编码严格按照追踪研究的标准(胥彦, 李超平, 2019), 只有在三个及以上时间点收集数据, 且在各个时间点都测量了所有变量的研究才编码为追踪研究; 文化背景依霍夫斯泰德的跨国文化调查数据进行编码(Hofstede, Hofstede, & Minkov, 2010), 马来西亚、中国大陆、阿拉伯国家、印度尼西亚、越南、土耳其、韩国、伊朗、西班牙、巴基斯坦等较高权力距离国家编码为east, 意大利、美国、加拿大、澳大利亚等较低权力距离国家编码为west。即使是英文文献, 如果样本属于东方国家, 也编为east。对每个独立样本编码一次, 如果一篇文献中有多个独立样本, 则分别进行编码; 对重复发表的研究, 只编码一次。文献编码过程由2名研究者依据事先确定的文献筛选和编码标准进行单独编码(Kappa值为0.96), 并通过两名研究者的交叉检验, 最终确保了本研究编码准确。

2.3 统计分析

本研究选用开源软件R3.5.1的Meta程序包对数据进行分析和检验, 以相关系数r作为效应值, 采用Fisher Z将r转换成近似正态分布的Zr值, 再转换为相关系数以展示结果。

3 研究结果

3.1 同质性检验结果

同质性检验是为了检验效应量之间是否同质, 以此确定后续数据分析应基于固定效应模型还是随机效应模型, 如同质选用固定效应模型进行分析, 如异质选用随机效应模型进行分析。

表1展示了不同的领导风格与敬业度的同质性检验结果。各领导风格与敬业度的Q值在统计学上都达到了显著水平(p < 0.001), 表明各效应量之间存在异质, 可能是由于使用不同的敬业度测量工具、研究设计不同以及文化背景不同等原因造成的; I2值分界点25%、50%、75%分别代表低、中、高异质程度(Higgins, Thompson, Deeks, & Altman, 2003), 各领导风格与敬业度的 I2值都高于75%, 说明各效应值之间为高异质性; Tau2说明了研究间变异有多少部分可以用来计算权重; H检验是Q效应量的校正值, H > 1.5 则表示研究间存在高度异质性。综上, 各领导风格与敬业度之间效应量存在异质, 因此本研究选择随机效应模型。

表1   效应值同质性检验结果

自变量 研究数(k) N 异质性 Tau-squared
Q df (Q) I2 [95%CI] Tau2 H [95%CI]
TL 50 27498 783.97*** 49 93.7% [92.4%;94.7%] 0.03 3.98 [3.63; 4.36]
LMX 43 16316 492.36*** 42 91.5% [89.4%;93.1%] 0.03 3.42 [3.07; 4.82]
AL 22 7869 253.25*** 21 91.7% [88.8%;93.9%] 0.03 3.47 [2.98; 4.04]
EL 11 5591 101.91*** 10 90.2% [84.5%;93.8%] 0.02 3.19 [2.54; 4.02]
SL 8 2548 51.42*** 7 86.4% [75.2%;92.5%] 0.02 2.71 [2.01; 3.66]
TAL 6 1986 20.40*** 5 75.5% [44.7%;89.1%] 0.01 2.02 [1.35; 3.03]
EML 6 7468 71.13*** 5 93.0% [87.4%;96.1%] 0.03 3.77 [2.82; 5.05]
PAL 6 1842 11.86* 5 57.8% [0.0%;82.9%] 0.01 1.54 [1.00; 2.42]

注:* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001。

TL: 变革型领导; LMX: 领导-成员交换; AL: 真实型领导; EL: 伦理型领导; SL: 服务型领导; TAL: 交易型领导; EML: 授权型领导; PAL: 家长式领导。下同。

新窗口打开| 下载CSV


3.2 发表偏差检验

发表偏差(publication bias)是指已发表的研究文献不能系统全面地代表该领域已经完成的研究总体(Rothstein, Sutton, & Borenstein, 2005)。我们在文献搜索阶段尽可能获取了没有发表的文献, 并采用漏斗图(funnel plot)、Egger's回归系数检验与Begg秩相关检验三种方法, 对所纳入的领导风格-敬业度的研究文献进行发表偏差检验。由于漏斗图对于只包含10个或10个以内研究的Meta分析效率很低, 接近50% (杨书, 李婷婷, 刘新, 2007), 因此, 仅使用漏斗图判断研究数较多的三种领导风格的发表偏差, 图1图2图3分别是变革型领导、领导-成员交换和真实型领导与敬业度关系各效应值的分布情况, 从漏斗图来看, 变革型领导和真实型领导的效应值主要分布在漏斗图的顶部, 左右两边的效应值基本呈对称形式, 且大部分研究集中在漏斗图的中上部, 表明本元分析存在发表偏差的可能性很小, 领导-成员交换则有个别效应值处在漏斗图的边缘, 可能存在一定的发表偏差。

图1

图1   变革型领导与敬业度关系各效应值分布的漏斗图


图2

图2   领导-成员交换与敬业度关系各效应值分布的漏斗图


图3

图3   真实型领导与敬业度关系各效应值分布的漏斗图


为了进一步精确检验发表偏差, 本研究采用Egger's回归系数检验与Begg秩相关检验的方法, 检验结果见表2。除了领导-成员交换之外, 各领导风格的Egger's回归系数p值都不显著(p > 0.05), Begg秩相关检验p值也都不显著(p > 0.05), 说明研究结果不受发表偏差的影响。为了对领导-成员交换做进一步分析, 我们参考吴鹏和刘华山(2014)的做法, 采用剪粘法(Trim and Fill) 检验发表偏差对元分析结果的影响(Duval & Tweedie, 2000), 结果发现, 剪粘文献后, 总效应仍然显著(观测值 = 0.46, 调整值 = 0.44), 变化值为0.02, 表明元分析受出版偏差的影响较小。此外, 在领导-成员交换最终进行元分析的文献中, 未发表的文献占12%, 这一比例已经很大。综合以上结果, 虽然本研究中的领导-成员交换可能存在轻微的发表偏差, 但是元分析的主要结论还是有效的。

表2   发表偏差检验结果

自变量 Egger's回归系数检验 Begg秩相关检验
intercept SE t df p Z p
TL 0.25 1.16 0.22 48 0.830 -0.41 0.682
LMX 4.26 1.91 2.23 41 0.032 2.48 0.013
AL 2.36 2.91 0.81 20 0.428 -0.08 0.933
EL 0.03 3.71 0.01 9 0.993 0.70 0.484
SL 4.64 2.29 2.02 6 0.089 -0.247 0.805
TAL -2.80 1.73 -1.61 4 0.181 -0.94 0.348
EML -1.43 2.48 -0.58 4 0.594 -1.69 0.091
PAL 1.10 2.47 0.44 4 0.679 0.18 0.851

新窗口打开| 下载CSV


3.3 主效应检验

各领导风格与敬业度关系的主效应检验结果见表3 (k < 3的领导风格不纳入分析)。表中显示, 变革型领导(r = 0.48)、领导-成员交换(r = 0.46)、真实型领导(r = 0.45)、伦理型领导(r = 0.50)、服务型领导(r = 0.40)、交易型领导(r = 0.43)、授权型领导(r = 0.61)以及家长型领导(r = 0.28)与敬业度之间均呈显著的正相关关系(p < 0.001)。根据Lipsey与Wilson (2001)的标准, r值为0.10、0.25、0.40时分别对应相关程度的低、中、高。结果表明, 各领导风格与敬业度均是中等程度以上的正相关, 假设1得到支持。

表3   主效应检验结果

自变量 ZCOR 95% CI Z p
TL 0.48 [0.43; 0.53] 18.76 < 0.0001
LMX 0.46 [0.41; 0.51] 17.02 < 0.0001
AL 0.45 [0.37; 0.53] 11.28 < 0.0001
EL 0.50 [0.42; 0.58] 11.43 < 0.0001
SL 0.40 [0.29; 0.51] 6.87 < 0.0001
TAL 0.43 [0.33; 0.53] 8.21 < 0.0001
EML 0.61 [0.47; 0.76] 8.32 < 0.0001
PAL 0.28 [0.20; 0.35] 7.27 < 0.0001

新窗口打开| 下载CSV


3.4 相对权重分析

为了确定领导风格在解释敬业度上的差距, 我们进行了相对权重分析(relative weight analysis), 相对权重分析能够通过数据转换、相关和回归分析, 计算各自变量对因变量的独立作用(Johnson, 2000; LeBreton & Tonidandel, 2008; 王震等, 2012)。我们选用以往元分析和实证研究的领导风格相关结果, 形成研究变量之间的相关矩阵(表4), 由于相关矩阵中部分相关值的缺失, 本研究参考Hoch等人(2018)的做法, 将每种领导风格与变革型领导两两对比以验证假设2。相对权重分析结果见表5, 结果显示, 不同领导风格对敬业度的解释力存在差别, 具体地, 与变革型领导相比, 授权型领导和伦理型领导解释力更强, 与交易型领导相比, 服务型领导和家长型领导的解释力更弱, 假设2得到部分支持。

表4   研究变量间的相关矩阵

研究变量 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1 TL 1
k, N
2 LMX 0.64a 1
k, N 20, 4591
3 AL 0.67a 0.62a 1
k, N 10, 2397 4, 1468
4 EL 0.63a 0.65a 0.85 1
k, N 20, 3717 18, 4052 2, 440
5 SL 0.47a 0.59a 0.61 0.38 1
k, N 5, 774 4, 938 1, 1132 2, 1486
6 TAL 0.21 0.46 0.37a 0.61a 0.11 1
k, N 3, 601 1, 345 4, 770 13, 2232 1, 207
7 EML 0.73 0.62 0.53 0.86 0.34 1
k, N 3, 469 3, 1068 1, 259 1, 199 2, 394
8 PAL 0.56 0.39 0.58 0.70 0.49 1
4, 976 2, 868 1, 256 2, 1132 3, 688
9 EE 0.48 0.46 0.45 0.50 0.40 0.43 0.61 0.28 1

注: EE: 敬业度。a Hoch et al., (2018); 未标记的相关系数、独立样本和总样本量是本研究计算的。

新窗口打开| 下载CSV


表5   相对权重分析结果

领导风格 LMX TL AL TL EL TL SL TL TAL TL EML TL PAL TL
相对权重 47 53 45 55 53 47 37 63 43 57 69 31 17 83
R2 0.27 0.26 0.30 0.27 0.34 0.38 0.23

新窗口打开| 下载CSV


3.5 调节效应检验

由于本研究文献的高异质性, 对调节效应的检验也采用随机效应模型。检验结果见表6。各领导风格如在亚组研究数不足(k < 3)则不纳入分析。

表6   调节效应检验结果

调节变量 领导风格 类别 k N r 95%CI Qw I2 QB df
敬业度
测量工具
TL UWES 41 18073 0.42 [0.39:0.44] 1258.90 91.3 1.73 1
other 9 9807 0.46 [0.40; 0.52] 261.56 94.3
LMX UWES 30 12475 0.42 [0.38; 0.45] 244.23 86.5 4.58* 1
other 13 3840 0.54 [0.44; 0.64] 598.82 96.7
AL UWES 16 5227 0.38 [0.35; 0.41] 908.17 88.2 24.30** 2
other 5 1675 0.46 [0.42; 0.51] 95.54 81.2
研究设计 TL 横向 46 27184 0.43 [0.40; 0.45] 1538.86 92.3 1.61 1
纵向 4 431 0.32 [0.15; 0.47] 16.78 70.2
EL 横向 8 3898 0.51 [0.46; 0.56] 107.53 88.8 6.95** 1
纵向 3 1693 0.34 [0.22; 0.46] 14.52 86.2
文化背景 TL 东方 23 9313 0.47 [0.44; 0.50] 734.28 90.5 23.13*** 1
西方 27 18185 0.35 [0.31; 0.39] 651.82 91.7
LMX 东方 33 10938 0.49 [0.44; 0.54] 793.9 94.5 12.23*** 1
西方 10 5377 0.36 [0.31; 0.41] 45.95 80.4
AL 东方 17 6751 0.44 [0.42; 0.47] 771.00 90.4 31.18*** 1
西方 5 1118 0.30 [0.26; 0.34] 430.85 87.0
EL 东方 6 3040 0.51 [0.46; 0.56] 105.78 90.5 5.52* 1
西方 5 2551 0.40 [0.32; 0.48] 23.99 83.3
SL 东方 4 776 0.31 [0.24; 0.37] 1.91 0 4.42* 1
西方 4 1772 0.45 [0.33; 0.56] 23.14 87.0
TAL 东方 3 1446 0.49 [0.45; 0.53] 0.06 0 7.93** 1
西方 3 540 0.29 [0.15; 0.43] 8.17 63.3

注:* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001。采用随机效应模型; Qw 表示组内异质性; QB 表示组间异质性

新窗口打开| 下载CSV


对敬业度测量工具进行调节分析发现, 敬业度量表对变革型领导-敬业度调节作用不显著(QB = 1, 73, p > 0.05); 对领导-成员交换-敬业度调节作用显著(QB = 4.58, p < 0.05), 使用UWES测得的领导风格与敬业度的关系相对低于其他量表; 对真实型领导-敬业度调节作用显著(QB = 24.30, p < 0.01), 使用UWES测得的领导风格与敬业度的关系相对低于其他量表。

对研究设计进行调节分析发现, 研究设计对变革型领导-敬业度调节作用不显著(QB = 1.61, p > 0.05); 对伦理型领导-敬业度调节作用显著(QB = 6.95, p < 0.01), 使用横截面研究设计测得的领导风格与敬业度的关系高于追踪研究设计。对文化背景进行调节分析发现, 文化背景对变革型领导-敬业度调节作用显著(QB = 23.13, p < 0.001), 东方文化背景下变革型领导与敬业度的关系高于西方文化背景; 对领导-成员交换-敬业度调节作用显著(QB = 12.23, p < 0.001), 东方文化背景下领导-成员交换与敬业度的关系高于西方文化背景; 对真实型领导-敬业度调节作用显著(QB = 31.18, p < 0.001), 东方文化背景下真实型领导与敬业度的关系高于西方文化背景; 对伦理型领导-敬业度调节作用显著(QB = 5.52, p < 0.05), 东方文化背景下伦理型领导与敬业度的关系高于西方文化背景; 对服务型领导-敬业度调节作用显著(QB = 4.42, p < 0.05), 东方文化背景下服务型领导与敬业度的关系低于西方文化背景; 对交易型领导-敬业度调节作用显著(QB = 7.93, p < 0.01), 东方文化背景下交易型领导与敬业度的关系高于西方文化背景。

4 讨论

4.1 领导风格与敬业度的主效应

国内学术界对领导理论的考察已有30多年的历史, 但是到目前为止, 国内还鲜有对中外领导理论系统的、定量的回顾。借助元分析技术, 本文综合领导理论实证研究成果, 考察常见的领导风格对员工敬业度的作用效果, 以及可能影响二者关系的调节变量, 并探讨了领导风格的内在联系和作用效果大小。与以往大多数研究结果一致, 本研究发现, 领导风格与敬业度关系非常密切, 变革型领导(r = 0.48)、领导-成员交换(r = 0.46)、真实型领导(r = 0.45)、伦理型领导(r = 0.50)、服务型领导(r = 0.40)、交易型领导(r = 0.43)、授权型领导(r = 0.61)以及家长式领导(r = 0.28)与敬业度之间均呈显著的正相关关系, 澄清了以往研究中存在的分歧, 从整体上厘清了领导风格与敬业度之间的关系。符合社会交换理论、资源保存理论以及组织认同理论对领导风格与下属敬业度之间关系的解释。

首先, 领导是员工获得资源的关键途径, 变革型领导、授权型领导能够帮助员工认识工作的意义, 激励下属 (Breevaart et al., 2014; Park et al., 2017), 为下属提供工作所需要的资源, 员工获取资源后能够充满能量, 更加享受工作、投入工作。交易型领导持续提供奖励, 能够与员工之间建立良好的相互信任关系(Chughtai et al., 2015; 胥彦, 李超平, 2018; Popli & Rizvi, 2017), 作为对领导和组织的回报, 员工会更加投入工作。领导-成员交换关注领导者与下属的双向互动与交换, 领导者是员工工作资源的主要来源, 领导者为员工提供工作资源, 能够提高员工的敬业度和绩效(Breevaart et al., 2015), 另一方面, 基于对领导者的感恩回报之心, 下属也会全身心投入工作。真实型领导和服务型领导都是以伦理道德为基础的积极领导风格(Hoch et al., 2018), 真实型领导诚实、正直, 为员工着想, 服务型领导以员工利益为先, 基于对领导者和组织的回报, 下属会积极投入工作, 努力创造高绩效。伦理型领导和家长式领导强调重视领导者的道德品质和个人操守, 下属以领导者为行为榜样, 对领导者的行为和组织产生发自内心的认同, 会更加认真投入工作, 虽然家长式领导的威权领导部分可能对下属的敬业度产生了一定的负面影响, 如逆反心理, 对工作消极懈怠等(钟定国, 卢丹, 2014), 但是家长式领导的仁慈和德行方面会帮助缓解其影响, 因此, 家长式领导对员工敬业度仍具有一定程度的正向影响。

本研究涉及的都是比较积极的领导风格, 能够帮助员工获得足够的个人和社会资源, 与领导之间建立良好的信任, 心理上的获得感和安全感更强(Liu et al., 2018; Bao et al., 2018), 对领导以及组织的认同更深刻, 把组织目标当成自己的目标一样努力, 积极投入工作。因此, 今后组织领导者在管理员工时, 需要多注意自身言行, 以德服人, 下属对领导给予高度的认同, 能够积极投身到工作中; 管理者还可以通过一系列措施, 帮助员工认识工作的意义, 并塑造愿景激励员工, 下属受到鼓舞, 能够专心投入工作, 提高个人绩效甚至组织绩效; 更为重要的是, 不要吝啬为员工提供所需要的各种资源, 下放适当的工作权限, 满足员工心理上的需求, 建立与员工之间的良好信任关系, 下属知恩图报, 就能够更加心甘情愿地投入工作。

其次, 本研究结果还显示, 不同领导风格对敬业度的影响大有不同, 授权型领导、伦理型领导、变革型领导、领导-成员交换、真实型领导、交易型领导、服务型领导和家长式领导对敬业度的解释力递减。这可能是因为, 相比于其他领导风格, 授权型领导除了能够通过帮助员工认识工作意义、与下属建立良好的相互关系等方式来促进员工敬业度, 还能够下放一定的权力给予员工, 给员工提供学习的机会, 员工归属感会更强(Lee, Idris, & Delfabbro, 2017); 也有很多研究从心理授权角度证实了授权型领导与敬业度间的紧密关系(Bhatnagar & Jyotsna, 2012; de Villiers & Stander, 2011), 授权型领导倾向于表现更多授权行为, 员工心理授权程度更高, 相信自己拥有一定的自主权, 就会更加投入工作(Huertas-Valdivia, Llorens- Montes, & Ruiz-Moreno, 2018)。可见, 授权型领导通过分享权力, 共同决策, 激发员工的自主性, 会让员工感受到精力充沛, 并持续不断地努力, 更适合当今的管理实践。

家长式领导相比服务型领导, 对敬业度的解释力更低, 这也与以往研究的结果基本一致(邓志华, 陈维政, 黄丽, 胡冬梅, 2012), 可能的原因是, 家长式领导并非对工作投入直接产生影响, 而是通过心理授权或领导成员交换关系起作用(魏蕾, 时勘, 2010; 钟定国, 卢丹, 2014); 并且, 威权领导可能使得下属产生逆反心理, 对工作消极懈怠(钟定国, 卢丹, 2014), 反而减少工作投入。因此, 采用家长式领导风格的管理者, 应当注意减少表现威权领导行为, 多表现仁慈和德行行为, 在树德施恩的同时, 借鉴授权型领导、领导-成员交换等其他积极领导风格的内涵, 给予下属充分的支持和信任, 建立良好的相互关系, 提高员工工作投入程度。除此之外, 敬业度和领导风格的测量工具、研究设计以及文化背景也可能会影响元分析结果, 为此, 本元分析对领导风格与敬业度之间的关系也进行了调节效应的分析。

4.2 领导风格与敬业度的调节效应

元分析测量结果表明, 敬业度测量工具对领导-成员交换(QB = 4.58, p < 0.05)、真实型领导(QB = 24.30, p < 0.01)与敬业度的关系调节作用显著, 使用UWES测量领导风格与敬业度关系低于其他量表。敬业度测量工具会影响领导-成员交换、真实型领导与敬业度之间的关系。出现这个结果的原因可能是, 各敬业度量表拓展与延伸的内涵及其量表结构有所差异, 有的量表不只体现了敬业度, 还涉及了其他的变量, 影响了领导风格与敬业度之间的关系。Wefald等(2012)就研究发现, UWES与工作满意度和情感承诺的概念有一定的重叠, 而Shirom的SMVM量表与工作满意度和情感承诺间的重叠则不明显, 对个体是否投入到工作以及投入程度能够比UWES有更好的解释力; Rich等(2010)也认为UWES中的一些题目与敬业度的前因和结果变量重复混淆。由此可见, 敬业度的不同界定取向会影响我们了解领导风格对员工敬业度的作用程度, 广泛使用的UWES量表不一定能够更好地反映真实型领导对员工敬业度的作用, 今后研究需要根据研究主题选择合适的测量工具, 以探讨领导风格与敬业度的实质关系。

结果表明, 研究设计对伦理型领导-敬业度调节作用显著(QB = 6.95, p < 0.01), 横截面研究设计比纵向研究设计的相关程度高。研究设计对伦理型领导与敬业度的关系存在显著影响。敬业度本身就具有波动性, 可能会由于诸多因素发生变化, 同时, 领导行为是影响员工日常敬业度的重要因素(Breevaart et al., 2014), 变革型领导(Tims, Bakker, & Xanthopoulou, 2011)和伦理型领导(Bormann, 2017)等均能够影响敬业度的波动和变化。因此, 横截面研究无法捕捉到敬业度的动态变化及领导风格与敬业度之间的相互关系, 并且可能会导致参数检验和显著性检验不准确(Pitariu & Ployhart, 2010), 存在共同方法变异的可能性也更大(胥彦, 李超平, 2019), 导致研究的有效性比多时间点研究的有效性低很多, 高估了领导风格与敬业度之间的相关程度。未来应该针对领导风格与敬业度开展更多的追踪研究设计, 更准确地把握敬业度的变化趋势以及二者之间的关系。

结果显示, 文化背景对变革型领导(QB = 23.13, p < 0.001)、领导-成员交换(QB = 12.23, p < 0.001), 真实型领导(QB = 31.18, p < 0.001)、伦理型领导(QB = 5.52, p < 0.05)、交易型领导(QB = 7.93, p < 0.01)调节作用显著, 东方文化背景下的相关关系高于西方。领导作为一种现实的建构, 它的有效性会受到情境及文化因素的显著影响(Hamilton & Bean, 2005)。在西方低权力距离的文化背景下, 员工工作自主性高, 对领导者的行为关注相对较少(梁建, 2014), 工作态度和行为受领导者行为的影响就相对较小, 而高权力距离的东方文化具有明显的层级主义特征, 员工认为忽视或绕开领导者是“犯上”的表现(Kirkman, Chen, Farh, Chen, & Lowe, 2009), 领导对下属态度和行为的影响相较西方社会更为突出(孙健敏, 陆欣欣, 2017)。具体地, 在东方文化背景下, 变革型领导的魅力和感召力更能够激励下属, 领导-成员交换、交易型领导提供资源或者持续奖励等行为, 对于下属积极的态度和行为影响更大, 真实型领导和伦理型领导则能够给予下属更强烈的榜样力量, 因此, 东方文化背景下的相关关系高于西方。

文化背景对服务型领导与敬业度调节作用显著(QB = 4.42, p < 0.05), 东方文化背景下的相关关系低于西方, 在高权力距离情境下, 员工习惯依靠组织决策, 领导者独自决策有助于提高下级的工作满意度(Sagie & Aycan, 2003), 如果采取民主方式进行领导, 员工反而感到压力而无所适从(陈佩 等, 2016), 员工不习惯“被服务”, 甚至可能会认为领导者的服务行为是为了个人利益, 如拉拢员工、收买人心等等, 非但不领情, 反而可能会对服务型领导进行消极归因, 认为领导者的服务行为是为了个人利益(胥彦, 李超平, 2018), 从而影响了服务型领导的作用效果。而在低权力距离情境下, 服务型领导与伦理型领导、真实型领导等相比更加独立, 下属认可领导者的“服务”, 对员工敬业度的解释力更强(Hoch et al., 2018)。另一方面, 敬业度本身也受文化背景的影响, 文化差异、政治因素和经济稳定等因素都会带来敬业度水平的差异, 未来可以开展更多跨文化研究, 深入比较领导风格与敬业度的关系在不同文化背景下的具体差异。

4.3 研究局限及展望

本元分析中的不足与展望: (1)元分析统计方法对文献要求很高, 虽然本文对已发表的相关元分析涉及的文献进行了对照补充, 并扩大文献搜索范围, 但是由于工具和语言的限制, 难免会遗漏部分数据。(2)在主效应和调节效应分析中, 有些领导风格研究数量不足、样本量不足, 无法对其进行全面分析, 导致元分析结果可能出现偏差。(3)领导行为变量间的相关矩阵尚存在缺失值, 将来等有更多元分析结果出来后, 在补齐相关矩阵后, 可以采用meta SEM来更深入分析领导风格与敬业度的作用机制。(4)本研究发现领导风格与敬业度之间关系的研究使用追踪研究设计的较少, 而研究准确性的需要、组织现象自身的特点以及组织理论的潜在要求无一不使得追踪研究越来越受到研究者重视(胥彦, 李超平, 2019), 追踪研究是未来一个研究热点(Day & Dragoni, 2015; Li, Arvey, & Song, 2011), 可以采用潜变量增长曲线(Chan, 1998)或者潜变计分模型(Li, Fay, Frese, Harms, & Gao, 2014; McArdle, 2009)来研究敬业度的发展变化以及和领导行为相互影响的关系。(5)本研究发现文化背景是影响领导风格与敬业度间关系的重要因素, 今后可以开展更多跨文化研究, 探讨二者关系在不同文化背景下的具体差异。

5 结论

本研究采用元分析的方法发现: (1)整体上来看, 变革型领导、领导-成员交换、真实型领导、伦理型领导、服务型领导、交易型领导、授权型领导以及家长式领导与敬业度之间均呈显著的正相关关系。(2)领导风格对敬业度的解释力存在差异, 综合中英文文献分析发现, 授权型领导、伦理型领导、变革型领导、领导-成员交换、真实型领导、交易型领导、服务型领导和家长式领导对敬业度的解释力递减。(3)敬业度测量工具、研究设计和文化背景能够调节领导风格与敬业度之间的关系。

参考文献

包桂秋 . (2017).

道德式领导与护士核心自我评价对合同制护士工作投入的影响研究

护理管理杂志, 17( 2), 87-89.

URL    

陈佩, 杨付, 石伟 . (2016).

公仆型领导:概念、测量、影响因素与实施效果

心理科学进展, 24( 1), 143-157.

[本文引用: 2]

陈世民, 孙配贞, 段鑫星 . (2017).

中国文化背景下魅力型领导对关系绩效的影响:尽责性与工作投入的链式中介作用

中国临床心理学杂志, 25( 4), 747-749.

陈文晶, 时勘 . (2014).

中国管理者交易型领导的结构与测量

管理学报, 11( 10), 1453-1459.

[本文引用: 1]

储成祥, 毛慧琴, 江芮澜 . (2012).

领导行为、组织支持和员工敬业度的关系——以通信企业为例

北京邮电大学学报(社会科学版), 14( 5), 91-99.

邓志华, 陈维政, 黄丽, 胡冬梅 . (2012).

服务型领导与家长式领导对员工态度和行为影响的比较研究

经济与管理研究, 7, 101-110.

[本文引用: 1]

丁凤琴, 赵虎英 . (2018).

感恩的个体主观幸福感更强? ——一项元分析

心理科学进展, 26( 10), 1749-1764.

URL     [本文引用: 2]

董霞, 高燕, 马建峰 . (2018).

服务型领导对员工主动性顾客服务绩效的影响——基于社会交换与社会学习理论双重视角

旅游学刊, 33( 6), 61-72.

方振邦( 主编 ). (2011). 管理学基础(第二版). 北京: 中国人民大学出版社.

[本文引用: 1]

冯彩玲, 杨锡雨 . (2018).

交易型领导对工作绩效的影响——工作投入的中介作用

鲁东大学学报(自然科学版), 34( 2), 178-183.

URL    

何洁, 丁宁宁, 王冬冬 . (2015).

承诺型人力资源管理实践对员工敬业度的影响: 自我决定与社会交换的整合视角

中国人力资源开发, ( 13), 58-63.

何立, 凌文辁 . (2010).

领导风格对员工工作绩效的作用: 组织认同和工作投入的影响

企业经济, ( 11), 65-68.

[本文引用: 1]

胡少楠, 王詠 . (2014).

工作投入的概念、测量、前因与后效

心理科学进展, 22( 12), 1975-1984.

[本文引用: 3]

黄昱方, 张璇 . (2016).

角色清晰对员工敬业度的影响研究: 一个被中介的调节模型

中国人力资源开发, (5), 76-84.

霍苑渊 . (2008).

员工敬业度的构成维度及其影响因素研究:基于两个典型企业中的调查(硕士学位论文)

浙江大学, 杭州.

简浩贤, 徐云飞, 曹曼, 赵曙明 . (2017).

基于组织认同视角的包容性领导与员工敬业度关系研究

管理学报, 14( 11), 1624-1630.

[本文引用: 1]

李超平, 毛凯贤 . (2018).

变革型领导对新员工敬业度的影响: 认同视角下的研究

管理评论, 30( 7), 136-147.

URL     [本文引用: 3]

李超平, 时勘 . (2005).

变革型领导的结构与测量

心理学报, 37( 6), 803-811.

[本文引用: 2]

李栋华 . (2018).

家长式领导风格对员工离职倾向的影响研究——以员工敬业度为中介变量(硕士学位论文)

首都经济贸易大学, 北京.

李衎, 宋欢欢, 孙媛媛, 俞蔚巍, 郝海霞, 高伟, 杨濮瑞 . (2017).

Picc专科护士工作投入与其感知护士长变革型领导的相关性

现代临床护理, 16( 2), 1-4.

URL    

李燚, 魏峰 . (2010).

领导理论的演化和前沿进展

管理学报, 7( 4), 517-524.

[本文引用: 1]

李永鑫, 周海龙, 田艳辉 . (2014).

真实型领导影响员工工作投入的多重中介效应

心理科学, 37( 3), 716-722.

梁建 . (2014).

道德领导与员工建言:一个调节-中介模型的构建与检验

心理学报, 46( 2), 252-264.

[本文引用: 2]

刘层层 . (2013).

领导成员交换关系、心理授权与员工敬业度关系的实证研究(硕士学位论文)

西南财经大学, 成都.

刘光辉, 谢义忠 . (2013).

论变革型领导与核心自我评价对员工工作积极性的影响

湖南科技大学学报(社会科学版), 16( 2), 89-92.

刘慧慧 . (2017).

领导成员交换与感知组织支持对员工工作投入的影响研究(硕士学位论文)

华侨大学, 厦门.

刘金栋, 郑向敏 . (2012).

变革型领导和交易型领导理论研究综述

企业活力, ( 10), 87-92.

[本文引用: 1]

路红, 孙桂芳, 刘毅 . (2014).

德行领导对工作投入的影响

广州大学学报(自然科学版), 13( 4), 91-95.

[本文引用: 1]

陆欣欣, 涂乙冬 . (2015).

工作投入的短期波动

心理科学进展, 23( 2), 268-279.

[本文引用: 3]

马玉 . (2016).

大五人格特质对员工敬业度的影响研究--领导成员交换关系的中介作用

中外企业家, 9( 25), 152-154.

毛晋平, 谭美金 . (2015).

变革型领导风格对中小学教师工作投入的影响: 心理资本的中介和调节作用

教师教育研究, 27( 5), 14-22.

毛晋平, 周卓钊, 吴逸飞 . (2017).

变革型领导、真诚型领导与中小学教师工作投入关系的比较研究

教师教育研究, 29( 2), 48-54.

[本文引用: 1]

孟慧, 宋继文, 艾亦非, 陈晓茹 . (2014).

中国道德领导的结构与测量初探

管理学报, 11( 8), 1101-1108.

[本文引用: 1]

彭伟, 朱晴雯, 陈奎庆 . (2017).

基于效忠主管和权力距离影响的包容型领导与员工工作投入关系研究

管理学报, 14( 5), 686-694.

乔红晓, 张鹏涛 . (2013).

诚信领导对教师工作投入的影响--教师职业认同的中介作用

管理学家(学术版), ( 5), 62-70.

任孝鹏, 王辉 . (2005).

领导-部属交换(lmx)的回顾与展望

心理科学进展, 13( 6), 86-95.

[本文引用: 1]

孙健敏, 陆欣欣 . (2017).

伦理型领导的概念界定与测量

心理科学进展, 25( 1), 121-132.

[本文引用: 2]

孙维, 王怀明 . (2013).

家长式领导与员工敬业度:领导公正感的作用

广西财经学院学报, ( 6), 73-79.

唐春勇, 陈冰, 赵曙明 . (2018).

中国文化情境下包容性领导对员工敬业度的影响

经济与管理研究, 39( 3), 110-120.

URL    

唐贵瑶, 李鹏程, 李骥 . (2012).

国外授权型领导研究前沿探析与未来展望

外国经济与管理, 34( 9), 73-80.

[本文引用: 1]

唐汉瑛, 龙立荣, 周如意 . (2015).

谦卑领导行为与下属工作投入:有中介的调节模型

管理科学, 28( 3), 77-89.

万鹏宇, 冯志远, 徐奥, 黄霞妮, 徐明津, 杨新国 . (2016).

真诚领导和工作投入对税务系统基层公务员离职倾向影响

中国职业医学, 43( 5), 564-567.

王聪颖, 杨东涛 . (2014).

基于信任氛围感知与个体主义作用视角的诚信型领导对员工工作态度的影响

管理学报, 11( 4), 533-540.

[本文引用: 1]

王冬冬, 钱智超 . (2017).

领导成员交换差异与新生代员工敬业度的关系研究

科学学与科学技术管理, 38( 4), 174-182.

[本文引用: 1]

王海雯, 张淑华 . (2018).

情绪劳动策略与工作满意度关系的元分析

心理科学进展, 26( 4), 599-613.

URL     [本文引用: 2]

王辉, 牛雄鹰, Law K.S ,(2004).

领导-部属交换的多维结构及对工作绩效和情境绩效的影响

心理学报, 36( 2), 179-185.

[本文引用: 1]

王羽, 周启帆, 史占彪 . (2017).

公务员工作投入与心理幸福感的关系:有中介的调节模型

中国临床心理学杂志, 25( 6), 1109-1113.

王桢 . (2012).

团队内工作投入的人际传导机制

心理科学进展, 20( 10), 1531-1537.

[本文引用: 1]

王桢, 陈乐妮, 李旭培 . (2015).

变革型领导与工作投入: 基于情感视角的调节中介模型

管理评论, 27( 9), 120-129.

王桢, 李旭培 . (2013).

变革型领导和情绪劳动策略: 工作投入的中介作用

管理学家(学术版), ( 9), 21-30.

王震, 孙健敏, 赵一君 . (2012).

中国组织情境下的领导有效性: 对变革型领导、领导-部属交换和破坏型领导的元分析

心理科学进展, 20( 2), 174-190.

[本文引用: 3]

王震, 宋萌, 孙健敏 . (2014).

真实型领导:概念、测量、形成与作用

心理科学进展, 22( 3), 458-473.

魏蕾, 时勘 . (2010).

家长式领导与员工工作投入: 心理授权的中介作用

心理与行为研究, 8( 2), 88-93.

[本文引用: 1]

吴鹏, 刘华山 . (2014).

道德推理与道德行为关系的元分析

心理学报, 46( 8), 1192-1207.

肖潇 . (2018).

领导-成员交换关系对产业工人敬业度的影响——被中介的调节效应研究(硕士学位论文)

华中农业大学, 武汉.

谢义忠, 吴萍 . (2017).

变革型领导、社会交换关系对员工工作场景中主观幸福感的影响

软科学, 31( 2), 61-65.

胥彦, 李超平 . (2018).

服务型领导如何影响员工建言?领导信任和消极归因的作用

中国人力资源开发, 35( 12), 6-17.

URL     [本文引用: 3]

胥彦, 李超平 . (2019).

追踪研究在组织行为学中的应用

心理科学进展, 27( 4), 1-11.

URL     [本文引用: 4]

徐佳妮, 于德华, 孙蔚, 杨震, 李文秀, 刘薇群, 丁燕华 . (2012).

基于领导风格的医院员工工作敬业度及其影响因素分析

中国医院, 16( 2), 23-25.

徐振亭, 曲怡颖, 罗瑾琏 . (2018).

自我牺牲型领导对员工工作投入的跨层次影响研究

科学学与科学技术管理, 39( 11), 142-157.

URL    

薛丁铭, 李永鑫 . (2017).

包容型领导对幼儿园教师工作投入的影响

学前教育研究, ( 7), 11-19.

姚春序, 刘艳林 . (2013).

魅力型领导与下属工作投入:双维认同构念的中介机制

心理科学, 36( 4), 942-948.

杨红明 . (2017).

挑战性工作要求对变革型领导的“替代”:科研人员敬业度作用的间接调节模型

科技进步与对策, 34( 7), 88-93.

杨克俭, 闫晓飞, 罗正学 . (2017).

辱虐管理与临床护士工作投入和团队满意度之间的关系

职业与健康, 33( 4), 506-508.

URL    

杨书, 李婷婷, 刘新 . (2007).

应用漏斗图识别发表性偏倚的效率研究

成都医学院学报, 2( 1), 33-34.

[本文引用: 1]

杨婷婷, 钟建安 . (2013).

组织内社会交换关系与工作投入:心理资本的中介效应

人类工效学, 19( 1), 51-54.

袁凌, 李静, 李健 . (2016).

差序式领导对员工创新行为的影响——领导创新期望的调节作用

科技进步与对策, 33( 10), 110-115.

赵安安, 高尚仁 . (2005).

台湾地区华人企业家族式领导风格与员工压力之关联性研究

应用心理学研究, 27, 111-131.

[本文引用: 1]

张洁, 郑一宁 . (2015).

护士长诚信领导行为对护士工作投入的影响

中国护理管理, 15( 5), 555-558.

张洁, 郑一宁 . (2016).

护士长诚信领导、护理组织文化与护士工作投入的关系研究

中华护理杂志, 51( 9), 1054-1058.

张静, 宋继文, 郑晓明, 倪丹 . (2018).

基于调节性中介模型的领导与下属特质正念对工作投入的影响研究

管理学报, ( 11), 1629-1637.

张轶文, 甘怡群 . (2005).

中文版utrecht工作投入量表(uwes)的信效度检验

中国临床心理学杂志, 13( 3), 268-270.

[本文引用: 1]

张征, 古银华 . (2017).

下属-主管匹配对企业研发人员工作投入的影响机制研究

科技进步与对策, 34( 4), 134-139.

周浩, 龙立荣 . (2005).

恩威并施, 以德服人——家长式领导研究述评

心理科学进展, 13( 2), 227-238.

[本文引用: 1]

郑伯壎, 周丽芳, 樊景立 . (2000).

家长式领导量表: 三元模式的建构与测量

本土心理学研究, 14, 3-64.

[本文引用: 1]

朱莉 . (2014).

领导风格与员工敬业度的关系研究

齐鲁师范学院学报, 29( 1), 88-91.

钟定国, 卢丹 . (2014).

家长式领导行为对员工工作投入的影响作用——基于领导成员交换的中介作用

西安工业大学学报, 34( 1), 57-63.

[本文引用: 4]

钟鑫, 徐亚雄, 廖银燕 . (2015).

领导-成员交换对员工敬业度的影响研究——基于金融服务业一线员工的数据

中国劳动, ( 16), 90-95.

Adil A., &Kamal A, (2016).

Impact of psychological capital and authentic leadership on work engagement and job related affective well-being

Pakistan Journal of Psychological Research,31(1), 1-21.

Agarwal U. A., Datta S., Blake-Beard S., & Bhargava S . (2013).

Linking lmx, innovative work behaviour and turnover intentions: The mediating role of work engagement

Career Development International,17(3), 208-230.

Alfes K., Shantz A. D., Truss C., & Soane E. C . (2013).

The link between perceived human resource management practices, engagement and employee behaviour: A moderated mediation model

The International Journal of Human Resource Management,24(2), 330-351.

Aryee S., Walumbwa F. O., Zhou Q., & Hartnell C. A . (2012).

Transformational leadership, innovative behavior and task performance: Test of mediation and moderation processes

Human Performance,25(1), 1-25.

Magsci    

We use the self-concept based theory of leadership and social exchange theory to hypothesize processes linking transformational leadership to follower performance outcomes. Specifically, we hypothesize that (a) transformational leadership relates to followers' work engagement both directly and indirectly through their psychological states, (b) work engagement relates to innovative behavior, (c) innovative behavior relates to task performance, and (d) the work engagement-innovative behavior relationship is moderated by leader-member exchange. Results from a test of these relationships in a sample of employees of a large telecommunication company in China largely support our hypothesized model.

Avolio B., &Bass B.M . (1995).

Individual consideration viewed at multiple levels of analysis: A multi-level framework for examining the diffusion of transformational leadership

Leadership Quarterly,6(2), 199-218.

AvolioB. J. & W.L . (2005).

Authentic leadership development: Getting to the root of positive forms of leadership,

The Leadership Quarterly, 16( 3), 315-338.

[本文引用: 1]

Aw V. K., &Ayoko O.B . (2017).

The impact of followers’ conflict behaviors on teams’ transformational leadership, team member exchange and engagement

International Journal of Conflict Management,28(4), 509-532.

Babcock-Roberson M., &Strickland O.J . (2010).

The relationship between charismatic leadership, work engagement, and organizational citizenship behaviors

Journal of Psychology,144(3), 313-326.

Bae S. H., Song J. H., Park S., & Kim H. K . (2013).

Influential factors for teachers’ creativity: Mutual impacts of leadership, work engagement, and knowledge creation practices

Performance Improvement Quarterly,26(3), 33-58.

Bakker A . (2014).

Daily fluctuations in work engagement: An overview and current directions

European Psychologist,19(4), 227-236.

Magsci     [本文引用: 1]

This article presents an overview of the literature on daily fluctuations in work engagement. Daily work engagement is a state of vigor, dedication, and absorption that is predictive of important organizational outcomes, including job performance. After briefly discussing enduring work engagement, the advantages of diary research are discussed, as well as the concept and measurement of daily work engagement. The research evidence shows that fluctuations in work engagement are a function of the changes in daily job and personal resources. Particularly on the days that employees have access to many resources, they are able to cope well with their daily job demands ( e. g., work pressure, negative events), and likely interpret these demands as challenges. Furthermore, the literature review shows that on the days employees have sufficient levels of job control, they proactively try to optimize their work environment in order to stay engaged. This proactive behavior is called job crafting and predicts momentary and daily work engagement. An important additional finding is that daily engagement has a reciprocal relationship with daily recovery. On the days employees recover well, they feel more engaged; and engagement during the day is predictive of subsequent recovery. Finding the daily balance between engagement while at work and detachment while at home seems the key to enduring work engagement.

Bakker A., & Albrecht. S . (2018).

Work engagement: Current trends

Career Development International,23(1), 4-11.

[本文引用: 2]

Bakker A., &Demerouti E, (2007).

The job demands- resources model: State of the art

Journal of Managerial Psychology,22(3), 309-328.

[本文引用: 1]

Bakker A. B., Demerouti E., & Sanz-Vergel A. I . (2014).

Burnout and work engagement: The JD-R approach

Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior,1(1), 389-411.

[本文引用: 2]

Bakker A., &Xanthopoulou D, (2013).

Creativity and charisma among female leaders: The role of resources and work engagement

International Journal of Human Resource Management,24(14), 2760-2779.

Magsci    

In this study among 84 female school principals and 190 teachers, we tested the central process proposed by the Job Demands-Resources model of work engagement. We hypothesized that job resources have a positive impact on creativity and charismatic leadership behavior first through personal resources, and then through work engagement. School principals filled in a questionnaire via a secured website and indicated their levels of job resources, personal resources and work engagement, whereas teachers filled in a questionnaire about their school principal's creativity and charismatic leadership. Results supported the intervening effects of personal resources and work engagement in the job resources-creativity link. In addition, engaged school principals scored highest on charismatic leadership.

Bamford M., Wong C. A., & Laschinger H . (2013).

The influence of authentic leadership and areas of worklife on work engagement of registered nurses

Journal of Nursing Management,21(3), 529-540.

Bao Y., Li C., & Zhao H . (2018).

Servant leadership and engagement: A dual mediation model

Journal of Managerial Psychology,33(6), 406-417.

[本文引用: 2]

Bass B. M. (1985).Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press.

Bass B . (1995).

Theory of transformational leadership redux

Leadership Quarterly,6(4), 463-478.

[本文引用: 4]

Bass B., &Avolio B.J . (1995).

Multifactor leadership questionnaire for research. Mind Garden, Inc, Palo Alto

CA.

Bass B. I., Cigularov K. P., Chen P. Y., Henry K. L., Tomazic R. G., & Li Y . (2016).

The effects of student violence against school employees on employee burnout and work engagement: The roles of perceived school unsafety and transformational leadership

International Journal of Stress Management,23(3), 318-336.

Baxter L . (2013).

Supportive Leadership, Employee Engagement and Occupational Safety: A Field Study (Unpublished doctorial dissertation). The University of Tennessee

Knoxville.

Besieux T., Baillien E., Verbeke A. L., & Euwema M. C . (2018).

What goes around comes around: The mediation of corporate social responsibility in the relationship between transformational leadership and employee engagement

Economic and Industrial Democracy,39(2), 249-271.

Bhatnagar & . (2012).

Management of innovation: role of psychological empowerment, work engagement and turnover intention in the indian context

The International Journal of Human Resource Management,23(5), 928-951.

[本文引用: 1]

Bono J. E., Foldes H. J., Vinson G., & Muros J. P . (2007).

Workplace emotions: The role of supervision and leadership

Journal of Applied Psychology,92(5), 1357-1367.

[本文引用: 1]

Breevaart K &Bakker A.B . (2018).

Daily job demands and employee work engagement: The role of daily transformational leadership behavior

Journal of Occupational Health Psychology,23(3), 338-349.

Breevaart K., Bakker A. B., Demerouti E., & Derks D . (2016).

Who takes the lead? A multi-source diary study on leadership, work engagement, and job performance

Journal of Organizational Behavior,37(3), 309-325.

Breevaart K., Bakker A. B., Demerouti E., & van der Heuvel , M. (2015).

Leader-member exchange, work engagement, and job performance

Journal of Managerial Psychology,30(7), 754-770.

[本文引用: 2]

Breevaart K., Bakker A. B., Hetland J., Demerouti E., Olsen O. K., & Espevik R . (2014).

Daily transactional and transformational leadership and daily employee engagement

Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology,87(1), 138-157.

[本文引用: 5]

Brunetto Y., Xerri M., Trinchero E., Farr-Wharton R., Shacklock K., & Borgonovi E . (2015).

Public-private sector comparisons of nurses’ work harassment using set: Italy and australia

Public Management Review,18(10), 1479-1503.

Bormann K . (2017).

Linking daily ethical leadership to followers’ daily behaviour: The roles of daily work engagement and previous abusive supervision

European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 26( 4), 590-600.

[本文引用: 1]

Brown M. E., Treviño L. K., & Harrison D. A . (2005).

Ethical leadership: A social learning perspective for construct development and testing

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,97 2), 117-134.

Bui H. T. M., Zeng Y., & Higgs M . (2017).

The role of person-job fit in the relationship between transformational leadership and job engagement

Journal of Managerial Psychology,32(5), 373-386.

Burch T., &Guarana C.L . (2015).

The comparative influences of transformational leadership and leader-member exchange on follower engagement

Journal of Leadership Studies,8(3), 6-25.

Cai D., Cai Y., Sun Y., &Ma J, (2018).

Linking empowering leadership and employee work engagement: The effects of person-job fit, person-group fit, and proactive personality

Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1304.

Caniëls M. C. J., Semeijn J. H., Renders I. H. M . (2018).

Mind the mindset! The interaction of proactive personality, transformational leadership and growth mindset for engagement at work

Career Development International,23(1), 48-66.

Chan D. (1998).

The conceptualization and analysis of change over time: An integrative approach incorporating longitudinal mean and covariance structures analysis (LMACS) and multiple indicator latent growth modeling (MLGM)

Organizational Research Methods,1(4), 421-483.

[本文引用: 1]

Chughtai A . (2018).

Examining the effects of servant leadership on life satisfaction

Applied Research in Quality of Life,13(4), 873-889.

Chughtai A., Byrne M., & Flood B . (2015).

Linking ethical leadership to employee well-being: The role of trust in supervisor

Journal of Business Ethics,128(3), 653-663.

[本文引用: 2]

Christian M. S., Garza A. S., & Slaughter J. E . (2011).

Work engagement: A quantitative review and test of its relations with task and contextual performance

Personnel Psychology,64(1), 89-136.

Magsci     [本文引用: 1]

Many researchers have concerns about work engagement's distinction from other constructs and its theoretical merit. The goals of this study were to identify an agreed-upon definition of engagement, to investigate its uniqueness, and to clarify its nomological network of constructs. Using a conceptual framework based on <link rid="b117">Macey and Schneider (2008; Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1, 3-30), we found that engagement exhibits discriminant validity from, and criterion related validity over, job attitudes. We also found that engagement is related to several key antecedents and consequences. Finally, we used meta-analytic path modeling to test the role of engagement as a mediator of the relation between distal antecedents and job performance, finding support for our conceptual framework. In sum, our results suggest that work engagement is a useful construct that deserves further attention.

Clugston M., Howell J. P., & Dorfman P. W . (2000).

Does cultural socialization predict multiple bases and foci of commitment?

Journal of Management,26(1), 5-30.

[本文引用: 1]

Crizelle E., Jolandie V., de Beer L., & Lelani B-L . (2016).

The mediating effect of leader-member exchange between strengths use and work engagement,

Journal of Psychology in Africa,26(1), 22-28.

Day D., &Dragoni L, (2015).

Leadership development: An outcome-oriented review based on time and levels of analyses

Annual Review of Organizational Psychology & Organizational Behavior, 2, 133-156.

[本文引用: 1]

de Clercq D., Bouckenooghe D., Raja U., & Matsyborska G . (2014).

Servant leadership and work engagement: The contingency effects of leader-follower social capital

Human Resource Development Quarterly,25(2), 183-212.

deVilliers J.R., &Stander M.W . (2011).

Psychological empowerment, work engagement and turnover intention: The role of leader relations and role clarity in a financial institution

Journal of Psychology in Africa,21(3), 405-412.

Magsci     [本文引用: 1]

This study investigated the relationship between leader-member exchange, role clarity, psychological empowerment, engagement and turnover intention within a financial institution in South Africa. A cross-sectional survey design was used. A convenience sample (N = 278) was taken (males = 31%, females = 60%; 88% younger than 35 years; 57% with 2 - 5 years service) from the total population (N = 889). They completed the Leader-Member Exchange Questionnaire (Liden, Wayne, & Stilwell, 1993) Role Conflict and Ambiguity Questionnaire (Rizzo, House, & Lirtzman, 1970), Measuring Empowerment Questionnaire (Spreitzer, 1995), Engagement Questionnaire (May, Gilson, & Harter, 2004) and Intention-to-leave Scale (Sjoberg & Sverke, 2000). A path model was tested with SPSS to determine the relationships of the variables. Furthermore, a theoretical model was tested through the use of structural equation modelling (Arbuckle, 2008). The latent variables included LMX (consisting of two parcels), role clarity (consisting of two parcels), psychological empowerment (consisting of four variables, namely meaning, competence, impact, and self-determination), work engagement (consisting of two parcels), and turnover intention (a manifest variable). Role clarity mediated the relationship between leader-member exchange and psychological empowerment, while psychological empowerment mediated the relationship between role clarity and work engagement as well as turnover intention. Leader-member relations lead to better understanding of roles, while role clarity empowers and engages employees.

deSousa M. J.C., &Dierendonck D, (2014).

Servant leadership and engagement in a merge process under high uncertainty

Journal of Organizational Change Management,27(6), 877-899.

Magsci    

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to aim mainly at further understanding how servant leadership can affect engagement during a merger with high levels of uncertainty through the mediating role of organizational identification and psychological empowerment. In addition, the research aimed at validating the servant leadership survey (SLS) in a new culture and language.
Design/methodology/approach - In total, 1,107 respondents from two merging Portuguese companies answered a survey. Structural equation modeling was used to further test the mediation model proposed.
Findings - SLS proved to be valid and reliable in the Portuguese context and language. Servant leadership strongly affected work engagement in conditions of high uncertainty. Organizational identification and psychological empowerment acted as mediating variables.
Research limitations/implications - Future research could include longitudinal studies, the effect of specific servant leadership dimensions and the distinction between servant leadership and other leadership models during a merger in conditions of high uncertainty.
Practical implications - This study extends the applicability of the servant leadership model, and the corresponding SLS in a new national culture and as an effective leadership approach under conditions of high uncertainty, such as in a merge process.
Social implications - Multinational corporations can see servant leadership as a valid model that can permeate the whole organizational culture, inducing greater performance and the well-being of the workforce for increased engagement. Given the increasing uncertainty and volatility of the work environment, servant leadership could be particularly useful in such contexts.
Originality/value - This study benefits both leadership scholars and practitioners by providing evidence on the value of servant leadership in ensuring workforce engagement in conditions of high uncertainty, as in dynamic merger processes. The fact that the study was conducted right in the middle of the change process is rather unique. Moreover, servant leadership effectiveness is for the first time tested in Portugal, a country typically with a relatively strong power distance culture.

Demirtas O. (2015).

Ethical leadership influence at organizations: Evidence from the field

Journal of Business Ethics,126(2), 273-284.

[本文引用: 2]

Demirtas O., Hannah S. T., Gok K., Arslan A., & Capar N . (2017).

The moderated influence of ethical leadership, via meaningful work, on followers’ engagement, organizational identification, and envy

Journal of Business Ethics,145(1), 183-199.

denHartog D.N., &Belschak F.D . (2012).

When does transformational leadership enhance employee proactive behavior? The role of autonomy and role breadth self-efficacy

Journal of Applied Psychology,97(1), 194-202.

Magsci     [本文引用: 1]

Two multisource studies address the interactive effects of personal and contextual variables on employees' proactive behavior. In line with previous work, we find positive main effects of transformational leadership, role breadth self-efficacy, and job autonomy on employee proactive behavior (personal initiative in Study 1 and prosocial proactive behavior in Study 2). As expected, a 3-way interaction qualifies these main effects: In situations of high autonomy, transformational leadership relates positively to proactive behavior for individuals high (but not low) on self-efficacy. Vice versa, in situations low on job autonomy, transformational leadership relates positively to proactive behavior for individuals low (but not high) on self-efficacy. This pattern is found both for self-ratings and peer-ratings of employees' proactive behavior in Study 1 and for supervisor ratings of such behavior in Study 2.

denHartog D.N., &Belschak F.D . (2012).

Work engagement and machiavellianism in the ethical leadership process

Journal of Business Ethics,107(1), 35-47.

Magsci    

Leaders who express an ethical identity are proposed to affect followers' attitudes and work behaviors. In two multi-source studies, we first test a model suggesting that work engagement acts as a mediator in the relationships between ethical leadership and employee initiative (a form of organizational citizenship behavior) as well as counterproductive work behavior. Next, we focus on whether ethical leadership always forms an authentic expression of an ethical identity, thus in the second study, we add leader Machiavellianism to the model. For Machiavellian leaders, the publicly expressed identity of ethical leadership is inconsistent with the privately held unethical Machiavellian norms. Literature on surface acting suggests people can at least to some extent pick up on such inauthentic displays, making the effects less strong. We thus argue that the positive effects of ethical leader behavior are likely to be suppressed when leaders are highly Machiavellian. Support for this moderated mediation model was found: The effects of ethical leader behavior on engagement are less strong when ethical leaders are high as opposed to low on Machiavellianism.

Dienesch R &Liden R, (1986).

Leader-member exchange model of leadership: A critique and further development

Academy of Management Review,11(3), 618-634.

[本文引用: 2]

Dinh J. E., Lord R. G., Gardner W. L., Meuser J. D., Liden R. C., & Hu J . (2014).

Leadership theory and research in the new millennium: Current theoretical trends and changing perspectives

The Leadership Quarterly,25 1), 36-62.

[本文引用: 1]

Duval S &Tweedie R, (2000).

Trim and fill: A simple funnel-plot-based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis

Biometrics,56(2), 455-463.

[本文引用: 1]

Eagly A. H., Johannesen-Schmidt M. C., &van Engen M. L. (2003).

Transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership styles: A meta-analysis comparing women and men

Psychological Bulletin,129(4), 569-591.

[本文引用: 1]

Eisenberg N. & Miller P. A. .(1987). Empathy, sympathy,and altruism:Empirical and conceptual links. In N. Eisenberg & J. Strayer (Eds.), Cambridge studies in social and emotional development. Empathy and its development (pp. 292-316). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Enwereuzor I. K., Ugwu L. I., & Eze O. A . (2018).

How transformational leadership influences work engagement among nurses: Does person-Job fit matter?

Western Journal of Nursing Research,40(3), 346-366.

Epitropaki O &Martin R, (2005).

The moderating role of individual differences in the relation between transformational/transactional leadership perceptions and organizational identification

Leadership Quarterly,16(4), 569-589.

[本文引用: 1]

Espinoza-Parra S., Molero F., & Fuster-Ruizdeapodaca M. J . (2015)

Transformational leadership and job satisfaction of police officers (carabineros) in Chile: The mediating effects of group identification and work engagement

Revista de Psicología Social,30(3), 439-467.

García-Sierra R &Fernández-Castro J, (2018).

Relationships between leadership, structural empowerment and engagement in nurses

Journal of Advanced Nursing,74 12), 1-11.

Ghadi M. Y., Fernando M., Caputi P . (2013).

Transformational leadership and work engagement: The mediating effect of meaning in work

Leadership & Organization Development Journal,34(6), 532-550.

Giallonardo L. M., Wong C. A., & Iwasiw C. L . (2010).

Authentic leadership of preceptors: Predictor of new graduate nurses’ work engagement and job satisfaction

Journal of Nursing Management,18(8), 993-1003.

[本文引用: 2]

Gillet N., Fouquereau E., Bonnaud-Antignac A., Mokounkolo R., & Colombat P . (2013).

The mediating role of organizational justice in the relationship between transformational leadership and nurses’ quality of work life: A cross-sectional questionnaire survey

International Journal of Nursing Studies,50(10), 1359-1367.

Magsci     [本文引用: 1]

Background: The importance of transformational leadership for nurses' well-being is increasingly acknowledged. However, there is a paucity of research examining the mechanisms that may explain the relationships between transformational leadership and nurses' quality of work life.
Objectives: First, to examine two possible psychological mechanisms that link transformational leadership behaviors to nurses' quality of work life. Second, to study the relationship between nurses' quality of work life and their work engagement.
Design: Cross-sectional study design.
Settings: The study took place in 47 different hematology, oncology, and hematology/oncology units in France. Participants were nurses and auxiliary nurses.
Participants: 343 nurses completed the questionnaire. Surveys were sent to all nurses working in the units. 95% were female, the average age was 36.30 years.
Methods: Nurses were asked to rate their supervisor's transformational leadership style and their perceptions of distributive and interactional justice in the unit. They were also asked to evaluate their own level of quality of work life and their work engagement.
Results: Distributive justice and interactional justice were found to fully mediate the relationship between transformational leadership and nurses' quality of work life. In addition, nurses' quality of work life positively related to their work engagement.
Conclusions: Transformational leaders may help ensure nurses' quality of work life which in turn increases their work engagement. These leadership practices are thus beneficial for both employees and organization. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Goswami A., Nair P., Beehr T., & Grossenbacher M . (2016).

The relationship of leaders’ humor and employees’ work engagement mediated by positive emotions

Leadership & Organization Development Journal,37(8), 1083-1099.

Graen G., &Uhl-Bien M, (1995).

Relationship-based Approach to Leadership: Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a Multi-Level-Multi-Domain perspective

Leadership Quarly,6 2), 219-247.

[本文引用: 1]

Gutermann D., Lehmann-Willenbrock N., Boer D., Born M., & Voelpel S. C . (2017).

How leaders affect followers’ work engagement and performance: Integrating leader? Member exchange and crossover theory

British Journal of Management,28(2), 299-314.

[本文引用: 1]

Hamilton F &Bean C.J . (2005).

The importance of context, beliefs and values in leadership development

Business Ethics: A European Review,14(4), 336-347.

[本文引用: 2]

Hansen A., Byrne Z., & Kiersch C . (2014).

How interpersonal leadership relates to employee engagement

Journal of Managerial Psychology,29(8), 953-972.

Magsci    

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to examine organizational identification as an underlying mechanism for how perceptions of interpersonal leadership are related to employee engagement, and its relationship with commitment and job tension.
Design/methodology/approach - A sample of 451 full-time employees at an international firm completed a web-based survey.
Findings - Organizational identification mediated the relationship between perceived interpersonal leadership and engagement, which mediated the relationship between perceived interpersonal leadership and commitment. Engagement mediated the relationship between identification and job tension.
Research limitations/implications - Limitations include cross-sectional data. Strengths include a large field sample. Implication is that leaders who encourage employees' identification with the organization may also encourage their engagement.
Practical implications - Interpersonal leadership characteristics can be developed, and are positively related to employees' identification, commitment, and engagement, which are negatively related to job tension.
Social implications - Interpersonal leaders are positively associated with employees' engagement; high engagement has been related to positive employee health and well-being. A healthy workforce translates into a healthy society.
Originality/value - This study is one of the few to examine the underlying mechanisms through which leadership relates to engagement.

Hawkes A. J., Biggs A., & Hegerty E . (2017).

Work engagement: investigating the role of transformational leadership, job resources, and recovery

The Journal of Psychology,151(6), 509-531.

Higgins J., Thompson S., Deeks J., & Altman D . (2002).

Statistical heterogeneity in systematic reviews of clinical trials: A critical appraisal of guidelines and practice

Journal of Health Services Research & Policy,7(1), 51-61.

[本文引用: 1]

Hoch J. E., Bommer W. H., Dulebohn J. H., & Wu D . (2018).

Do ethical, authentic, and servant leadership explain variance above and beyond transformational leadership? A meta-analysis

Journal of Management,44(2), 501-529.

[本文引用: 6]

Hofstede G., Hofstede G. J &Minkov M, (2010).

Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind (Rev. 3rd ed.). New York:

McGraw-Hill.

[本文引用: 1]

Horn D., Mathis C. J., Robinson S. L., & Randle N . (2015).

Is charismatic leadership effective when workers are pressured to be good citizens?

The Journal of Psychology,149(8), 751-774.

Hsieh C-C &Wang D-S, (2015).

Does supervisor- perceived authentic leadership influence employee work engagement through employee-perceived authentic leadership and employee trust?

The International Journal of Human Resource Management,26(18), 2329-2348.

[本文引用: 1]

Huertas-Valdivia I., Llorens-Montes F. J., & Ruiz-Moreno A . (2018).

Achieving engagement among hospitality employees: A serial mediation model

International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management,30(1), 217-241.

[本文引用: 1]

Jeung C-W. (2011).

The concept of employee engagement: A comprehensive review from a positive organizational behavior perspective

Performance Improvement Quarterly,24(2), 49-69.

[本文引用: 2]

*Jiang H &Men R.L . (2017).

Creating an engaged workforce: The impact of authentic leadership, transparent organizatiolal communication, and work-life enrichment

Communication Research,44(2), 225-243.

Jihye O., Daeyeon C., Doo H. L . (2018).

Authentic leadership and work engagement: The mediating effect of practicing core values

Leadership & Organization Development Journal,39(2), 276-290.

Johnson J . (2000).

A heuristic method for estimating the relative weight of predictor variables in multiple regression

Multivariate Behavioral Research,35 (1), 1-19.

[本文引用: 1]

Joo B-K., Lim D. H., & Kim S . (2016).

Enhancing work engagement: The roles of psychological capital, authentic leadership, and work empowerment

Leadership & Organization Development Journal,37(8), 1117-1134.

Judge T., &Piccolo R.F . (2004).

Transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analytic test of their relative validity

Journal of Applied Psychology,89(5), 755-768.

Tanskanen J., Mäkelä L., & Viitala R . (2019).

Linking managerial coaching and leader-member exchange on work engagement and performance

Journal of Happiness Studies,20(4), 1217-1240.

[本文引用: 1]

Kahn W . (1990).

Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work

Academy of Management Journal,33(4), 692-724.

[本文引用: 1]

Khan M., Malik, M. F . (2017).

“My leader’s group is my group.” Leader-member exchange and employees’ behaviours

European Business Review,29(5), 551-571.

Kim M-S.,Koo D-W., (2017).

Linking lmx, engagement, innovative behavior, and job performance in hotel employees

International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management,38(2), 242-258.

Kirkman B., Chen G., Farh J., Chen Z., & Lowe K.B . (2009).

Individual power distance orientation and follower reactions to transformational leaders: A cross-level, cross-cultural examination

Academy of Management Journal,52(4), 744-764.

[本文引用: 1]

Kopperud K. H., Martinsen Ø., & Humborstad S. W . (2014).

Engaging leaders in the eyes of the beholder: On the relationship between transformational leadership, work engagement, service climate, and self-other agreement

Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies,21(1), 29-42.

Kovjanic S., Schuh S. C., & Jonas K . (2013).

Transformational leadership and performance: An experimental investigation of the mediating effects of basic needs satisfaction and work engagement

Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology,86(4), 543-555.

[本文引用: 2]

LeBreton J., &Tonidandel S, (2008).

Multivariate relative importance: Extending relative weight analysis to multivariate criterion spaces

Journal of Applied Psychology,93 2), 329-345.

[本文引用: 1]

Lebrón M., Tabak F., Shkoler O., & Rabenu E . (2018).

Counterproductive work behaviors toward organization and leader-member exchange: The mediating roles of emotional exhaustion and work engagement

Organization Management Journal, 15( 4), 1-15.

Lee M. C. C., Idris M. A., & Delfabbro P. H . (2017).

The linkages between hierarchical culture and empowering leadership and their effects on employees' work engagement: Work meaningfulness as a mediator

International Journal of Stress Management,24(4), 392-415.

[本文引用: 1]

Li H., Chen T., & Cao G . (2017).

How high-commitment work systems enhance employee creativity: A mediated moderation model

Social Behavior & Personality An International Journal,45(9), 1437-1450.

Li X &Frenkel S, (2016).

Where hukou status matters: Analyzing the linkage between supervisor perceptions of hr practices and employee work engagement

The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 28( 17), 2375-2402.

Li X., Sanders K., & Frenkel S . (2012).

How leader-member exchange, work engagement and HRM consistency explain Chinese luxury hotel employees’ job performance

International Journal of Hospitality Management,31(4), 1059-1066.

Magsci    

This paper provides insights into the relationship between leader-member exchange (LMX) and employee job performance. An integrative model that includes work engagement and human resource management (HRM) consistency, defined as the extent to which various HR practices are viewed as consistent with one other, was developed to explain this relationship. Results from a hierarchical linear model based on 298 employees (survey data) and 54 supervisors in a large luxury hotel in southern China indicated that LMX was positively related to employee job performance. Moreover, as expected, work engagement mediated this relationship and HRM consistency strengthened the influence of LMX on work engagement. Important research and practical implications are discussed. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Li W. D., Fay D., Frese M., Harms P. D., & Gao X . (2014).

Reciprocal relationship between proactive personality and work characteristics: A latent change score approach

Journal of Applied Psychology,99(5), 948-965.

Magsci     [本文引用: 1]

Previous proactivity research has predominantly assumed that proactive personality generates positive environmental changes in the workplace. Grounded in recent research on personality development from a broad interactionist theoretical approach, the present article investigates whether work characteristics, including job demands, job control, social support from supervisors and coworkers, and organizational constraints, change proactive personality over time and, more important, reciprocal relationships between proactive personality and work characteristics. Latent change score analyses based on longitudinal data collected in 3 waves across 3 years show that job demands and job control have positive lagged effects on increases in proactive personality. In addition, proactive personality exerts beneficial lagged effects on increases in job demands, job control, and supervisory support, and on decreases in organizational constraints. Dynamic reciprocal relationships are observed between proactive personality with job demands and job control. The revealed corresponsive change relationships between proactive personality and work characteristics contribute to the proactive personality literature by illuminating more nuanced interplays between the agentic person and work characteristics, and also have important practical implications for organizations and employees.

Li W-D., & Arvey R. D., & Song Z . (2011).

The influence of general mental ability, self-esteem and family socioeconomic status on leadership role occupancy and leader advancement: The moderating role of gender

The Leadership Quarterly,22(3), 520-534.

[本文引用: 1]

Liao F-Y., Yang L-Q., Wang M., Drown D., & Shi J . (2013).

Team-member exchange and work engagement: Does personality make a difference

Journal of Business & Psychology, 28(1), 63-77.

Liao H., Liu D., Loi R . (2010).

Looking at both sides of the social exchange coin: A social cognitive perspective on the joint effects of relationship quality and differentiation on creativity

Academy of Management Journal,53(5), 1090-1109.

[本文引用: 1]

Liao-Holbrook F. (2013).

Integrating leader fairness and leader-member exchange in predicting work engagement: A contingency approach

Dissertations and Theses,924.

Liden R., Maslyn J.M . (1998).

Multidimensionality of leader-member exchange: An empirical assessment through scale development

Journal of Management,24(1), 43-72.

[本文引用: 1]

Liu Y., Fuller B., Hester K., Bennett R. J., & Dickerson M. S . (2018).

Linking authentic leadership to subordinate behaviors

Leadership & Organization Development Journal,39(2), 218-233.

[本文引用: 2]

Mauno S., Ruokolainen M., Kinnunen U., & de Bloom J . (2016).

Emotional labour and work engagement among nurses: Examining perceived compassion, leadership and work ethic as stress buffers

Journal of Advanced Nursing, 72( 5), 1169-1181.

Mcardle J . (2009).

Latent variable modeling of differences and changes with longitudinal data

Annual Review of Psychology,60(1), 577-605.

[本文引用: 1]

Mehmood Q., Nawab S., &Hamstra, M. R. W ., (2016).

Does authentic leadership predict employee work engagement and in-role performance? Considering the role of learning goal orientation

Journal of Personnel Psychology,15(3), 139-142.

Mencl J., Wefald A. J., & van Ittersum K. W . (2016).

Transformational leader attributes: Interpersonal skills, engagement, and well-being

Leadership & Organization Development Journal,37(5), 635-657.

Meng F., &Wu J.N . (2015).

Merit pay fairness, leader-member exchange, and job engagement: Evidence from mainland china

Review of Public Personnel Administration, 35( 1), 47-69.

Mitonga-monga J., Flotman A-P., & Cilliers F . (2016).

Workplace ethics culture and work engagement: The mediating effect of ethical leadership in a developing world context

Journal of Psychology in Africa,26(4), 326-333.

Öge E., Çetin M., & Top S . (2018).

The effects of paternalistic leadership on workplace loneliness, work family conflict and work engagement among air traffic controllers in Turkey

Journal of Air Transport Management,66, 25-35.

Park Y., Song J. H., & Lim D. H . (2016).

Organizational justice and work engagement: The mediating effect of self-leadership

Leadership & Organization Development Journal,37(6), 711-729.

Park J. G., Kim J. S., Yoon S. W., & Joo B-K . (2017).

The effects of empowering leadership on psychological well-being and job engagement: The mediating role of psychological capital

Leadership & Organization Development Journal,38(3), 350-367.

[本文引用: 4]

PearceC. L. & J.A . Eds.) (2003).

Shared leadership: Reframing the hows and whys of leadership

.Thousand Oaks, CA:SAGE Publications.

[本文引用: 1]

Pitariu A., &Ployhart R.E . (2010).

Explaining change: Theorizing and testing dynamic mediated longitudinal relationships

Journal of Management,36(2), 405-429.

[本文引用: 2]

Popli S &Rizvi I.A . (2017).

Leadership style and service orientation: The catalytic role of employee engagement

Journal of Service Theory and Practice,27(1), 292-310.

[本文引用: 3]

Prochazka J., GilovaH., &Vaculik M, (2017),

The relationship between transformational leadership and engagement: Self-efficacy as a mediator

Journal of Leadership Studies,11(2), 22-33.

Qin Q., Wen B., Ling Q., Zhou S., & Tong M . (2014).

How and when the effect of ethical leadership occurs? A multilevel analysis in the Chinese hospitality industry

International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management,26(6), 974-1001.

Magsci    

Purpose - This study aims to examine the mechanism of action of ethical leadership by testing the direct and indirect effects of ethical leadership on employee work outcomes (i.e. individual job satisfaction, work engagement and customer-oriented behavior) and the moderating effects of group job satisfaction on the relationship between ethical leadership and its consequences.
Design/methodology/approach - A hierarchical linear model is used. The valid sample is composed of 285 front-line service personnel in 56 work groups from five hotels and five golf clubs in South China.
Findings - Results indicate that group job satisfaction has a significant moderating effect on the relationship between ethical leadership and employee work engagement. That is, compared with that in groups with high job satisfaction, the relationship between ethical leadership and employee work engagement is significantly more positive in groups with low job satisfaction. Employee work attitudes (including individual job satisfaction and work engagement) mediate the effect of ethical leadership on employee customer-oriented behavior.
Research limitations/implications - The main limitations are as follows. First, some of the reported relationships may be affected by common method bias, as our study collected data from a single source. Second, whether the findings can be generalized to other industries in other countries remains unknown. Third, as the current study is based on a cross-sectional design, establishing causality is difficult among the study variables.
Practical implications - The findings show that the managers in hospitality and tourism companies should adopt ethical leadership to enhance employee customer-oriented behavior by improving positive work attitudes. At the same time, hospitality and tourism companies should improve group job satisfaction as a substitute for ethical leadership in the absence of ethical leadership.
Originality/value - A key contribution of this research is demonstrating how and when the effects of ethical leadership occur by analyzing the mediating and moderating effects in the same study. This study systematically examines the mediating effect of employee work attitudes on the influence of ethical leadership on employee work behavior and discusses the moderating effect of the group-level variable. The findings extend ethical leadership theory and make a contribution to the existing research on discussing the substitutes for the leadership model.

Radstaak M &Hennes A, (2017).

Leader-member exchange fosters work engagement: The mediating role of job crafting

SA Journal of Industrial Psychology/SA Tydskrif vir Bedryfsielkunde, 43( 0), a1458.

Reina-Tamayo A. M., Bakker A. B., & Derks D . (2017).

Episodic demands, resources, and engagement: An experience-sampling study

Journal of Personnel Psychology,6(3), 125-136.

[本文引用: 2]

Rich B. L., LePine J. A., & Crawford E. R . (2010).

Job engagement: Antecedents and effects on job performance

Academy of Management Journal,53(3), 617-635.

[本文引用: 2]

Rothstein H. R., Sutton A. J., & Borenstein M . (2005).

Publication bias in meta-analysis. In H. R. Rothstein,A. J. Sutton, & M. Borenstein (Eds.),Publication bias in meta-analysis: Prevention, Assessment and Adjustments(pp. 1-7)

Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[本文引用: 1]

Runhaar P. R., Konermann J., & Sanders K . (2013).

Teachers' organizational citizenship behaviour: Considering the roles of their work engagement, autonomy and leader-member exchange

Teaching & Teacher Education,30(1), 99-108.

Saeed S & RiasatAli P.D . (2018).

Exploring authentic leadership in relation to work engagement in public and private sector universities

Journal of Applied Environmental and Biological Sciences,8(2), 59-67.

Sagie A &Aycan Z, (2003).

A cross-cultural analysis of participative decision-making in organizations

Human Relations,56(4), 453-473.

[本文引用: 1]

Sahu S., Pathardikar A., & Kumar A . (2018).

Transformational leadership and turnover: Mediating effects of employee engagement, employer branding, and psychological attachment

Leadership & Organization Development Journal,39(1), 82-99.

Saks A . (2006).

Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement

Journal of Managerial Psychology,21(7), 600-619.

Salancik G., &Pfeffer J, (1978).

A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design

Administrative Science Quarterly,23(2), 224-253.

[本文引用: 1]

Salanova M., Lorente L., Chambel M. J., & Martínez I. M . (2011).

Linking transformational leadership to nurses’ extra-role performance: The mediating role of self-efficacy and work engagement

Journal of Advanced Nursing,67(10), 2256-2266.

Magsci    

Aims. This paper is a report of a social cognitive theory-guided study about the link between supervisors' transformational leadership and staff nurses' extra-role performance as mediated by nurse self-efficacy and work engagement.
Background. Past research has acknowledged the positive influence that transformational leaders have on employee (extra-role) performance. However, less is known about the psychological mechanisms that may explain the links between transformational leaders and extra-role performance, which encompasses behaviours that are not considered formal job requirements, but which facilitate the smooth functioning of the organization as a social system.
Methods. Seventeen supervisors evaluated nurses' extra-role performance, the data generating a sample consisting of 280 dyads. The nurses worked in different health services in a large Portuguese hospital and the participation rate was 76.9% for nurses and 100% for supervisors. Data were collected during 2009. A theory-driven model of the relationships between transformation leadership, self-efficacy, work engagement and nurses' extra-role performance was tested using Structural Equation Modelling.
Results. Data analysis revealed a full mediation model in which transformational leadership explained extra-role performance through self-efficacy and work engagement. A direct relationship between transformational leadership and work engagement was also found.
Conclusion. Nurses' supervisors with a transformational leadership style enhance different 'extra-role' performance in nurses and this increases hospital efficacy. They do so by establishing a sense of self-efficacy but also by amplifying their levels of engagement in the workplace.

Sarti D. (2014).

Leadership styles to engage employees: Evidence from human service organizations in Italy

Journal of Workplace Learning,26(3/4), 202-216.

Scandura T &Graen G.B . (1984).

Moderating effects of initial leader-member exchange status on the effects of a leadership intervention

Journal of Applied Psychology,69(3), 428-436.

[本文引用: 1]

Schaufeli W. B., Bakker A. B., & Salanova M . (2006).

The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study

Educational and Psychological Measurement,66(4), 701-716.

[本文引用: 1]

Schaufeli W. B., Salanova M., González-Romá V., & Bakker A. B . (2002).

The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach

Journal of Happiness Studies,3(1), 71-92.

Magsci     [本文引用: 4]

This study examines the factorial structure of a new instrument to measure engagement, the hypothesized `opposite'' of burnout in a sample of university students (<i>N</i>=314) and employees (<i>N</i>=619). In addition, the factorial structure of the Maslach-Burnout Inventory-General Survey (MBI-GS) is assessed and the relationship between engagement and burnout is examined. Simultaneous confirmatory factor analyses in both samples confirmed the original three-factor structure of the MBI-GS (exhaustion, cynicism, and professional efficacy) as well as the hypothesized three-factor structure of engagement (vigor, dedication, and absorption). Contrary to expectations, a model with two higher-order factors &#xx2013; <img src="/content/HC82G16YTW7FJ728/xxlarge8216.gif" alt="lsquo" align="BASELINE" border="0">burnout<img src="/content/HC82G16YTW7FJ728/xxlarge8217.gif" alt="rsquo" align="BASELINE" border="0"> and <img src="/content/HC82G16YTW7FJ728/xxlarge8216.gif" alt="lsquo" align="BASELINE" border="0">engagement<img src="/content/HC82G16YTW7FJ728/xxlarge8217.gif" alt="rsquo" align="BASELINE" border="0"> &#xx2013; did <i>not</i> show a superior fit to the data. Instead, our analyses revealed an alternative model with two latent factors including: (1) exhaustion and cynicism (<img src="/content/HC82G16YTW7FJ728/xxlarge8216.gif" alt="lsquo" align="BASELINE" border="0">core of burnout<img src="/content/HC82G16YTW7FJ728/xxlarge8217.gif" alt="rsquo" align="BASELINE" border="0">); (2) all three engagement scales plus efficacy. Both latent factors are negatively related and share between 22% and 38% of their variances in both samples. Despite the fact that slightly different versions of the MBI-GS and the engagement questionnaire had to be used in both samples the results were remarkably similar across samples, which illustrates the robustness of our findings.

Shirom A. (2003).

Feeling vigorous at work? The construct of vigor and the study of positive affect in organizations

Research in Occupational Stress & Well Being,3(6), 135-164.

[本文引用: 1]

Shokory S., &Suradi N. R.M . (2018).

Transformational Leadership and its impact on extra-role performance of project team members: The mediating role of work engagement

Academy of Strategic Management Journal,17(5), 1-6.

Shreya G &Rajib D, (2017).

Employee service innovative behavior: The roles of leader-member exchange (LMX), work engagement, and job autonomy

International Journal of Manpower,38(2), 242-258.

Shu C-Y.,Lazatkhan L.,., (2017).

Effect of leader-member exchange on employee envy and work behavior moderated by self-esteem and neuroticism

Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology,33(1), 69-81.

Song J. H., Bae S. H., Park S., & Kim H. K . (2013).

Influential factors for knowledge creation practices of cte teachers: Mutual impact of perceived school support, transformational leadership, and work engagement

Asia Pacific Education Review,14(4), 467-482.

Magsci    

This study examined the structural relationships among perceived school support, transformational leadership, teachers' work engagement, and teachers' knowledge creation practices. It also investigated the mediating effects of transformational leadership and work engagement in explaining the association between perceived school support and knowledge creation practices. Samples included 284 career and technical education teachers in the United States. Structural equation modeling was employed. Perceived school support was positively associated with transformational leadership and teachers' work engagement, but had no direct impact on knowledge creation practices. Transformational leadership was found to affect knowledge creation practices, but not work engagement of teachers. Although a supportive school climate had no direct relationship with knowledge creation practices, it indirectly affected this outcome variable through transformational leadership and teachers' work engagement. The results suggest that in order to increase teachers' knowledge creation activities, a supportive school climate should be provided with efforts to improve teachers' work engagement and transformational behaviors of the principal.

Song J. H., Kolb J. A., Lee U. H., & Kim H. K . (2012).

Role of transformational leadership in effective organizational knowledge creation practices: mediating effects of employees’ work engagement

Human Resource Development Quarterly,23(1), 65-101.

Sousa M &Dierendonck D, (2017).

Servant leadership and the effect of the interaction between humility, action, and hierarchical power on follower engagement

Journal of Business Ethics,141(1), 13-25.

[本文引用: 1]

Strom D. L., Sears K. L., & Kelly K. M . (2014).

Work engagement: The roles of organizational justice and leadership style in predicting engagement among employees

Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies,21(1), 71-82.

Swati C &Archana S, (2013).

The influence of leader-member exchange relations on employee engagement and work role performance

International Journal of Organization Theory and Behavior,16(4), 465-493.

Swati D., & Archana D ., (2014).

Psychological capital, LMX, employee engagement & work role performance

The Indian Journal of Industrial Relationships,50(2), 342-356.

Sylvie V-H., Muser C., & Janneck M . (2012).

Transformational leadership, work engagement, and occupational success

Career Development International,17(7), 663-682.

Tekleab A. G., Sims H. P. Jr., Yun S., Tesluk P. E., & Cox J . (2007).

Are we on the same page? effects of self-awareness of empowering and transformational leadership

Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies,14(3), 185-201.

Tepper B. J., Carr J. C., Breaux D. M., Geider S., Hu C., Lockhart D., & HUA Wei . (2009).

Abusive supervision, intentions to quit, and employees' workplace deviance: A power/dependence analysis

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes.109( 2), 156-167.

[本文引用: 1]

Tims M &Bakker A.B . (2010).

Job crafting: Towards a new model of individual job redesign

SA Journal of Industrial Psychology,36(2), 1-9.

[本文引用: 1]

Tims M., Bakker A. B., & Xanthopoulou D . (2011).

Do transformational leaders enhance their followers’ daily work engagement?

The Leadership Quarterly,22(1), 121-131.

Trinchero E., Borgonovi E., & Farr-Wharton B . (2014).

Leader-member exchange, affective commitment, engagement, wellbeing, and intention to leave: Public versus private sector Italian nurses

Public Money & Management,34(6), 381-388.

vanAssen M.F . (2016).

Exploring the impact of higher management’s leadership styles on lean management

Total Quality Management & Business Excellence,( 3), 1-30.

van Dierendonck D., Stam D., Boersma P., de Windt N., & Alkema J . (2014).

Same difference? Exploring the differential mechanisms linking servant leadership and transformational leadership to follower outcomes

The Leadership Quarterly,25(3), 544-562.

Walumbwa F. O., Avolio B. J., Gardner W. L., Wernsing T. S., & Peterson S. J . (2008).

Authentic leadership: Development and validation of a theory-based measure

Journal of Management,34(1), 89-126.

Walumbwa F. O., Wang P., Wang H., Schaubroeck J., & Avolio B. J . (2010).

Psychological processes linking authentic leadership to follower behaviors

The Leadership Quarterly,21(5), 901-914.

Wang D-S &Hsieh C-C, (2013).

The effect of authentic leadership on employee trust and employee engagement

Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal,41(4), 613-624.

Wang Z., Li C., & Li X . (2017).

Resilience, leadership and work engagement: The mediating role of positive affect

Social Indicators Research,132(2), 699-708.

Washington R . (2007).

Empirical relationships among servant, transformational, and transactional leadership: Similarities, differences, and correlations with job satisfaction and organizational commitment

Dissertations & Theses - Gradworks,96(9), 813-819.

[本文引用: 1]

Wei F., Li Y., Zhang Y., & Liu S . (2016).

The interactive effect of authentic leadership and leader competency on followers’ job performance: The mediating role of work engagement

Journal of Business Ethics, 153( 3), 763-773.

Weiss M., Razinskas S., Backmann J., & Hoegl M . (2018).

Authentic leadership and leaders' mental well-being: An experience sampling study

Leadership Quarterly,29(2), 309-321.

Wefald A. J., Mills M. J., Smith M. R., & Downey R. G . (2012).

A comparison of three job engagement measures: Examining their factorial and criterion-related validity

Applied Psychology Health & Well-being,4(1), 67-90.

[本文引用: 3]

Wefald A. J., Reichard R. J., & Serrano S. A . (2011).

Fitting engagement into a nomological network: The relationship of engagement to leadership and personality

Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies,18(4), 522-537.

Zhu W., He H., Treviño L. K., Chao M. M., & Wang W . (2015).

Ethical leadership and follower voice and performance: The role of follower identifications and entity morality beliefs

The Leadership Quarterly,26(5), 702-718.

[本文引用: 1]

Woods S., &West M, (2010).

The psychology of work and organizations

London (UK): CENGAGE.

[本文引用: 1]

Zhang X &Bartol K.M . (2010).

Linking empowering leadership and employee creativity: The influence of psychological empowerment, intrinsic motivation, and creative process engagement

Academy of Management Journal,53(1), 107-128.

[本文引用: 1]

Zhu W., Avolio B. J., & Walumbwa F. O . (2009).

Moderating role of follower characteristics with transformational leadership and follower work engagement

Group & Organization Management,34(5), 590-619.

版权所有 © 《心理科学进展》编辑部
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发  技术支持:support@magtech.com.cn

/