The impact of the fit between needed and received empowering leadership on followers’ job-related outcomes: The mediating role of emotional ex-haustion

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2021.00890

Abstract

Abstract:

Based on the theory of person-environment fit and the transactional model of stress, we discuss the impact of the fit between needed and received empowering leadership on followers’ attitude, behavior, and performance and the mediating role of emotional exhaustion. In this study, we collected data from 150 leaders and 150 followers (Study 1), 50 leaders and 243 followers (Study 2) in two multi-wave, multi-source surveys. We conducted multi-level polynomial regression and response surface analysis to test the hypothesized model. The results of data analyses showed that: (a) the misfit between needed and received empowering leadership was positively and significantly related to followers’ emotional exhaustion; (b) compared with deficient empowerment, followers’ emotional exhaustion was higher when they received excessive empowerment; and (c) followers’ emotional exhaustion mediated the effect of the fit between needed and received empowering leadership on followers’ satisfaction with their leaders, organizational citizenship behavior, and job performance.

Key words: needed empowering leadership, received empowering leadership, needs-supplies fit, emotional exhaustion

SONG Qi, CHEN Yang. (2021). The impact of the fit between needed and received empowering leadership on followers’ job-related outcomes: The mediating role of emotional ex-haustion. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 53(8), 890-903.

Figures/Tables 10

References 49

[1]	Bala, H., & Venkatesh, V. (2016). Adaptation to information technology: A holistic nomological network from implementation to job outcomes. Management Science, 62(1), 156-179.
[2]	Bliese, P. D., Edwards, J. R., & Sonnentag, S. (2017). Stress and well-being at work: A century of empirical trends reflecting theoretical and societal influences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102 (3), 389-402. doi: 10.1037/apl0000109 pmid: 28125263
[3]	Bliese, P. D., & Hanges, P. J. (2004). Being both too liberal and too conservative: The perils of treating grouped data as though they were independent. Organizational Research Methods, 7 (4), 400-417. doi: 10.1177/1094428104268542 URL
[4]	Bryk, A. S., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1992). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Newbury Park, CA, US: Sage.
[5]	Burke, R. J., & Greenglass, E. (1993). Work stress, role conflict, social support, and psychological burnout among teachers. Psychological Reports, 73 (2), 371-380. pmid: 8234588
[6]	Cao, J., & Hamori, M. (2020). How can employers benefit most from developmental job experiences? The needs-supplies fit perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 105 (4), 422-432. doi: 10.1037/apl0000449 URL
[7]	Carter, M. Z., & Mossholder, K. W. (2015). Are we on the same page? The performance effects of congruence between supervisor and group trust. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100 (5), 1349-1363. doi: 10.1037/a0038798 pmid: 25688640
[8]	Cheong, M., Spain, S. M., Yammarino, F. J., & Yun, S. (2016). Two faces of empowering leadership: Enabling and burdening. The Leadership Quarterly, 27 (4), 602-616. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2016.01.006 URL
[9]	Cole, M. S., Carter, M. Z., & Zhang, Z. (2013). Leader-team congruence in power distance values and team effectiveness: The mediating role of procedural justice climate. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98 (6), 962-973. doi: 10.1037/a0034269 URL
[10]	Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55 (1), 68-78. pmid: 11392867
[11]	Edwards, J. R. (1996). An examination of competing versions of the person-environment fit approach to stress. Academy of Management Journal, 39 (2), 292-339.
[12]	Edwards, J. R., & Cable, D. M. (2009). The value of value congruence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94 (3), 654-677. doi: 10.1037/a0014891 URL
[13]	Edwards, J. R., & Parry, M. E. (1993). On the use of polynomial regression equations as an alternative to difference scores in organizational research. Academy of Management Journal, 36 (6), 1577-1613.
[14]	Follett, M. P. (1920). The new state. New York: Longmans, Green and Co.
[15]	Gabriel, A. S., Diefendorff, J. M., Chandler, M. M., Moran, C. M., & Greguras, G. J. (2014). The dynamic relationships of work affect and job satisfaction with perceptions of fit. Personnel Psychology, 67 (2), 389-420. doi: 10.1111/peps.2014.67.issue-2 URL
[16]	Gavin, M. (2019). 7 ways to empower your employees. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://online.hbs.edu/blog/post/how-to-empower-employees
[17]	Grant, A. M., Berg, J. M., & Cable, D. M. (2014). Job titles as identity badges: How self-reflective titles can reduce emotional exhaustion. Academy of Management Journal, 57 (4), 1201-1225. doi: 10.5465/amj.2012.0338 URL
[18]	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. doi: 10.1177/014920639802400504 URL
[19]	Humborstad, S. I. W., & Kuvaas, B. (2013). Mutuality in leader- subordinate empowerment expectation: Its impact on role ambiguity and intrinsic motivation. The Leadership Quarterly, 24 (2), 363-377. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.01.003 URL
[20]	Janssen, O. (2001). Fairness perceptions as a moderator in the curvilinear relationships between job demands, and job performance and job satisfaction. Academy of Management Journal, 44 (5), 1039-1050.
[21]	Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling . New York: Guilford.
[22]	Krasikova, D., Heydarifard, Z., & Werland, T. (2019, July). Energizing and exhausting effects of empowerment: A within- person study of empowering leadership. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management. Briarcliff Manor, NY.
[23]	Kristof-Brown, A., & Guay, R. P. (2011). Person-environment fit. In S. Zedeck (Ed.), APA handbook of industrial and organizational psychology, maintaining, expanding, and contracting the organization (pp. 3-50). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
[24]	Landis, R. S., Beal, D. J., & Tesluk, P. E. (2000). A comparison of approaches to forming composite measures in structural equation models. Organizational Research Methods, 3 (2), 186-207. doi: 10.1177/109442810032003 URL
[25]	Langfred, C. W., & Moye, N. A. (2004). Effects of task autonomy on performance: An extended model considering motivational, informational, and structural mechanisms. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89 (6), 934-945. pmid: 15584833
[26]	Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Progress on a cognitive-motivational- relational theory of emotion. American Psychologist, 46 (8), 819-834. pmid: 1928936
[27]	Lazarus, R. S. (1993). From psychological stress to the emotions: A history of changing outlooks. Annual Review of Psychology, 44, 1-21. pmid: 8434890
[28]	Lazarus, R.., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping . New York: Springer.
[29]	Lee, H. W., Bradburn, J., Johnson, R. E., Lin, S. H. J., & Chang, C. H. D. (2019). The benefits of receiving gratitude for helpers: A daily investigation of proactive and reactive helping at work.[J] ournal of Applied Psychology, 104 (2), 197-213.
[30]	Lee, S., Cheong, M., Kim, M., & Yun, S. (2017). Never too much? The curvilinear relationship between empowering leadership and task performance. Group & Organization Management, 42 (1), 11-38.
[31]	Li, W. D., Li, S., Feng, J. J., Wang, M., Zhang, H., Frese, M., & Wu, C.-H. (2020). Can becoming a leader change your personality? An investigation with two longitudinal studies from a role-based perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000808
[32]	Lorinkova, N. M., Pearsall, M. J., & Sims, H. P. (2013). Examining the differential longitudinal performance of directive versus empowering leadership in teams. Academy of Management Journal, 56 (2), 573-596. doi: 10.5465/amj.2011.0132 URL
[33]	Martin, S. L., Liao, H., & Campbell, E. M. (2013). Directive versus empowering leadership: A field experiment comparing impacts on task proficiency and proactivity. Academy of Management Journal, 56 (5), 1372-1395. doi: 10.5465/amj.2011.0113 URL
[34]	Matta, F. K., Scott, B. A., Colquitt, J. A., Koopman, J., & Passantino, L. G. (2017). Is consistently unfair better than sporadically fair? An investigation of justice variability and stress. Academy of Management Journal, 60 (2), 743-770. doi: 10.5465/amj.2014.0455 URL
[35]	Motowidlo, S. J., Packard, J. S., & Manning, M. R. (1986). Occupational stress: Its causes and consequences for job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71 (4), 618-629. pmid: 3804934
[36]	Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2019). Mplus user’s guide (8th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
[37]	Oishi, Y., Xu, Q., Wang, L., Zhang, B. J., Takahashi, K., Takata, Y., .. Lazarus, M. (2017). Slow-wave sleep is controlled by a subset of nucleus accumbens core neurons in mice. Nature Communications, 8, 734-746. doi: 10.1038/s41467-017-00781-4 pmid: 28963505
[38]	Peng, J., & Wang, Z. (2018). Being a prototypic follower: Burdening or enabling? The paradoxical effect of followership prototype. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 50 (2), 216-225. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2018.00216 URL
[39]	Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Moorman, R. H., & Fetter, R. (1990). Transformational leader behaviors and their effects on followers’ trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly, 1 (2), 107-142. doi: 10.1016/1048-9843(90)90009-7 URL
[40]	Rubinstein, J. S., Meyer, D. E., & Evans, J. E. (2001). Executive control of cognitive processes in task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 27 (4), 763-797.
[41]	Spreitzer, G. M. (1995). Psychological empowerment in the workplace: Dimensions, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 38 (5), 1442-1465.
[42]	Tang, G., Chen, Y., van Knippenberg, D., & Yu, B. (2020). Antecedents and consequences of empowering leadership: Leader power distance, leader perception of team capability, and team innovation. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 41 (6), 551-566. doi: 10.1002/job.v41.6 URL
[43]	Tepper, B. J., Dimotakis, N., Lambert, L. S., Koopman, J., Matta, F. K., Park, H. M., & Goo, W. (2018). Examining follower responses to transformational leadership from a dynamic, person-environment fit perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 61 (4), 1343-1368. doi: 10.5465/amj.2014.0163 URL
[44]	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. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.11.007 URL
[45]	Vogel, R. M., Rodell, J. B., & Sabey, T. B. (2020). Meaningfulness misfit: Consequences of daily meaningful work needs-supplies incongruence for daily engagement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 105 (7), 760-770. doi: 10.1037/apl0000464 pmid: 31697115
[46]	Watkins, M. B., Ren, R., Umphress, E. E., Boswell, W. R., Triana, M. D. C., & Zardkoohi, A. (2014). Compassion organizing: Employees’ satisfaction with corporate philanthropic disaster response and reduced job strain. Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 88 (2), 436-458.
[47]	Wong, S. I., & Giessner, S. R. (2018). The thin line between empowering and laissez-faire leadership: An expectancy- match perspective. Journal of Management, 44 (2), 757-783. doi: 10.1177/0149206315574597 URL
[48]	Wu, J. Y., & Kwok, O. M. (2012). Using SEM to analyze complex survey data: A comparison between design-based single-level and model-based multilevel approaches. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 19 (1), 16-35. doi: 10.1080/10705511.2012.634703 URL
[49]	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. doi: 10.5465/amj.2010.48037118 URL

Variables	M	SD	1	2	3	4	5	6
1. Empowering leadership needed	5.30	0.94	(0.90)
2. Empowering leadership received	5.34	0.79	0.76^**	(0.81)
3. Emotional exhaustion	3.94	1.32	-0.25^**	-0.19^*	(0.93)
4. Satisfaction with the leader	5.37	0.94	0.68^**	0.62^**	-0.35^**	(0.90)
5. Organizational citizenship behavior	5.53	0.94	-0.03	-0.13	-0.23^**	-0.11	(0.89)
6. Job performance	5.50	0.88	0.53^**	0.63^**	-0.28^**	0.68^**	-0.13	(0.91)

Variables	M	SD	1	2	3	4	5	6
1. Empowering leadership needed	5.30	0.94	(0.90)
2. Empowering leadership received	5.34	0.79	0.76^**	(0.81)
3. Emotional exhaustion	3.94	1.32	-0.25^**	-0.19^*	(0.93)
4. Satisfaction with the leader	5.37	0.94	0.68^**	0.62^**	-0.35^**	(0.90)
5. Organizational citizenship behavior	5.53	0.94	-0.03	-0.13	-0.23^**	-0.11	(0.89)
6. Job performance	5.50	0.88	0.53^**	0.63^**	-0.28^**	0.68^**	-0.13	(0.91)

Variables	Emotional exhaustion
Variables	M₁	M₂
b₀Intercepts	3.95^**(0.08)	4.05^***(0.07)
b₁Empowering leadership needed (N)	-0.33 (0.18)	-0.58^***(0.14)
b₂ Empowering leadership received (R)	-0.03 (0.15)	0.14 (0.21)
b₃ N²		0.16 (0.13)
b₄ NR		-0.73^**(0.23)
b₅ R²		0.27^*(0.13)
F for the 3 quadratic terms (N², NR, R²)		5.46^**
Pseudo-R²	0.06	0.16^**
DPseudo-R²		0.10^**
Response surface analyses
Stationary point (N₀, R₀)		(-0.58, -1.05)
The first principal axis R = p₁₀+p₁₁N		R = -1.16- 1.72N
-p₁₀/(p₁₁+1)		-1.61
The lateral shift quantity (b₂-b₁)/[2′(b₃-b₄+ b₅)]		0.31^*
Incongruence line (N = -R)
Slope (b₁-b₂)		-0.72^*(0.32)
Curvature (b₃-b₄+b₅)		1.15^**(0.42)
Congruence line (N = R)
Slope (b₁+b₂)		-0.45^**(0.16)
Curvature (b₃+b₄+b₅)		-0.31^***(0.08)

Variables	Emotional exhaustion
Variables	M₁	M₂
b₀Intercepts	3.95^**(0.08)	4.05^***(0.07)
b₁Empowering leadership needed (N)	-0.33 (0.18)	-0.58^***(0.14)
b₂ Empowering leadership received (R)	-0.03 (0.15)	0.14 (0.21)
b₃ N²		0.16 (0.13)
b₄ NR		-0.73^**(0.23)
b₅ R²		0.27^*(0.13)
F for the 3 quadratic terms (N², NR, R²)		5.46^**
Pseudo-R²	0.06	0.16^**
DPseudo-R²		0.10^**
Response surface analyses
Stationary point (N₀, R₀)		(-0.58, -1.05)
The first principal axis R = p₁₀+p₁₁N		R = -1.16- 1.72N
-p₁₀/(p₁₁+1)		-1.61
The lateral shift quantity (b₂-b₁)/[2′(b₃-b₄+ b₅)]		0.31^*
Incongruence line (N = -R)
Slope (b₁-b₂)		-0.72^*(0.32)
Curvature (b₃-b₄+b₅)		1.15^**(0.42)
Congruence line (N = R)
Slope (b₁+b₂)		-0.45^**(0.16)
Curvature (b₃+b₄+b₅)		-0.31^***(0.08)

Variables	Mediator	Outcomes
Variables	Emotional exhaustion	Satisfaction with the leader	Organizational citizenship behavior	Job performance
Block variable (Empowering leadership needed and received fit)	0.92^***(0.18)	0.90^***(0.08)	1.06^***(0.25)	0.95^***(0.09)
Emotional exhaustion		-0.11^**(0.04)	-0.14^**(0.05)	-0.10^*(0.04)
Indirect effects
Indirect paths	Effect size		95% CI
Fit→Emotional exhaustion→Satisfaction with the leader	-0.10^*		[-0.20, -0.03]
Fit→Emotional exhaustion→Organizational citizenship behavior	-0.13^*		[-0.25, -0.04]
Fit→Emotional exhaustion→Job performance	-0.10^*		[-0.20, -0.02]