ISSN 0439-755X
CN 11-1911/B

心理学报 ›› 2021, Vol. 53 ›› Issue (9): 1018-1031.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2021.01018

• 研究论文 • 上一篇    下一篇


佘卓霖1, 李全2(), 杨百寅3, 杨斌3   

  1. 1中国人民大学公共管理学院, 北京 100872
    2南开大学商学院, 天津 300071
    3清华大学经济管理学院, 北京 100084
  • 收稿日期:2020-07-06 发布日期:2021-07-22 出版日期:2021-09-25
  • 通讯作者: 李全
  • 基金资助:

The double-edged sword effects of leader workaholism on team performance

SHE Zhuolin1, LI Quan2(), YANG Baiyin3, YANG Bin3   

  1. 1School of Public Administration and Policy, Renmin University of China, Beijing 100872, China
    2Business School, Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, China
    3School of Economics and Management, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China
  • Received:2020-07-06 Online:2021-07-22 Published:2021-09-25
  • Contact: LI Quan


随着行业竞争压力的加剧, 工作狂领导在职场中愈发普遍。然而对于工作狂领导在组织中的有效性, 无论是在实践界还是在学术界都尚存争议。鉴于此, 本研究基于社会信息加工理论, 分析工作狂领导对团队绩效的双刃剑作用机制。通过对某物业管理服务公司进行多时点、多来源的问卷调查, 研究结果表明:一方面, 工作狂领导会提升团队工作卷入, 促进团队绩效; 另一方面, 工作狂领导也会引发团队消极情绪, 损害团队绩效表现; 团队工作重要性能有效缓解工作狂领导对团队绩效的消极作用, 同时促进其积极作用。以上研究发现有助于辨证理解工作狂领导有效性, 为组织培育管理人才提供有益借鉴。

关键词: 工作狂领导, 团队绩效, 团队工作卷入, 团队消极情绪, 团队工作重要性


Currently, workaholic leaders are prevalent in the workplace, and the relevant research has substantially increased. However, regarding the effectiveness of leader workaholism, researchers have found inconsistent and even contradictory results. In addition, prior research has mostly centered on the effects of leader workaholism at the employee or firm level while ignoring its impacts at the team level. To address these gaps, the current research aims to investigate the double-edged sword effects of leader workaholism on team performance. Based on social information processing theory, we propose that leader workaholism influences team performance through two distinct mechanisms: on the one hand, leader workaholism enhances team job involvement, which has a subsequent positive effect on team performance, and on the other hand, leader workaholism induces team negative affect, which in turn negatively influences team performance. In addition, we also expect that team task significance can mitigate the negative effects and enhance the positive effects of leader workaholism.

We conducted a multitime, multisource questionnaire survey on a property management company in China. Before collecting the data, all participants were assured that their responses would be confidential and used only for academic research. In Wave 1, the team leader rated his or her workaholism, and team members rated team task significance. In Wave 2 (one month later), team members were asked to complete the questionnaire containing questions on team job involvement and team negative affect. In Wave 3 (one month after Wave 2), general managers were invited to evaluate each team’s performance. The three rounds of data collection resulted in 105 matched team leader-team member responses (105 team leaders, 512 team members), with a 69.08% overall response rate for team leaders and a 61.03% overall response rate for team members.

Before testing the hypotheses, we conducted a measurement model assessment to verify whether the manifest variables could accurately measure the theoretical constructs. Then, we performed a path analysis through Mplus 7.0. The results showed that leader workaholism was positively related to team job involvement, resulting in higher team performance. However, leader workaholism also heightened team negative affect, thus decreasing team performance. Moreover, team task significance moderated the above two mediating paths. Specifically, when team task significance was higher, the negative mediating effect of team negative affect was attenuated, and the positive mediating effect of team job involvement was enhanced.

The current research makes essential theoretical contributions and has practical implications. First, this study is among the first to examine the relationship between leader workaholism and team performance, answering the call for more research on the effects of leader workaholism at the team level (Clark et al., 2016). Second, based on social information processing theory, we examine two mechanisms through which leader workaholism affects team performance and demonstrate the coexistence of opposite effects in this process, which is helpful for understanding the complicated relationship between leader workaholism and team performance. Third, we elaborate on the moderating role of team task significance, which provides important insights about the contingency factors that shape the effectiveness of leader workaholism. Practically, we suggest that organizations take a dialectical perspective to consider the role of leader workaholism in team management and adopt selection procedures to identify qualified managers.

Key words: leader workaholism, team performance, team job involvement, team negative affect, team task significance