ISSN 0439-755X
CN 11-1911/B
主办：中国心理学会
　　　中国科学院心理研究所
出版：科学出版社

心理学报 ›› 2015, Vol. 47 ›› Issue (12): 1472-1485.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2015.01472

• 论文 • 上一篇    下一篇

自我牺牲型领导能促进员工的前瞻行为吗？——责任感知的中介效应及其边界条件

田晓明1,3,4;李锐2,3,4   

  1. (1苏州大学心理学系, 苏州 215123) (2苏州大学东吴商学院, 苏州 215021)
    (3教育部人文社科重点研究基地−苏州大学中国特色城镇化研究中心, 苏州 215006)
    (4苏州大学东吴智库, 苏州 215006)
  • 发布日期:2015-12-25 出版日期:2015-12-25
  • 通讯作者: 李锐, E-mail: rlee_ap@163.com
  • 基金资助:

    中国博士后科学基金面上项目(2013M530270)和特别资助项目(2014T70548); 国家自然科学基金项目(71302120; 71102176; 71073108); 江苏省高校哲学社会科学研究基金项目(2013SJB6300082); “新型城镇化与社会治理协同创新中心”资助项目; 苏州大学青年教师后期资助项目; 苏州大学211工程资助项目。

Can Self-Sacrificial Leadership Promote Employee Proactive Behavior? The Mediating Effect of Felt Obligation and Its Boundary Conditions

TIAN Xiaoming1,3,4; LI Rui2,3,4   

  1. (1 Department of Psychology, Soochow University, Suzhou 215123, China) (2 School of Business, Soochow University,
    Suzhou 215021, China) (3 Key Research Institute of Education Ministry-Center for Chinese Urbanization Studies,
    Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, China) (4 Dongwu Think tank, Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, China)
  • Online:2015-12-25 Published:2015-12-25
  • Contact: LI Rui, E-mail: rlee_ap@163.com

PDF (PC)

21204

摘要：

采用309份上司–下属配对数据, 探讨了自我牺牲型领导对员工前瞻行为的影响, 尤其是考察了责任感知的中介作用以及前瞻行为效能感和模糊容忍度的调节作用。结果发现：(1)自我牺牲型领导对员工前瞻行为存在显著的正向影响; (2)在自我牺牲型领导影响员工前瞻行为的过程中, 责任感知的单纯中介效应不显著, 而是与前瞻行为效能感或模糊容忍度构成被调节的中介效应。当员工的前瞻行为效能感或模糊容忍度较高时, 责任感知的中介效应均显著; 当员工的前瞻行为效能感或模糊容忍度较低时, 责任感知的中介效应则均不显著。

关键词: 自我牺牲型领导, 前瞻行为, 责任感知, 前瞻行为效能感, 模糊容忍度

Abstract:

The existing literature on the relationship between self-sacrificial leadership and employee work-related behaviors has primarily focused on the influence of this leadership on “good soldier” behaviors. Empirical investigations of the effect and the impact mechanism of self-sacrificial leadership on “good change agent” behaviors remain blank. Using proactive behavior as an example, this study aimed to expand the behavioral outcomes of self-sacrificial leadership to employees’ “good change agent” behaviors to fill the gap mentioned above. Specifically, we examined the influence of self-sacrificial leadership on employee proactive behavior, and investigated the mediating role of felt obligation as well as the moderating roles of proactive behavior efficacy and ambiguity tolerance playing in the relationship between self-sacrificial leadership and employee proactive behavior.
A structured questionnaire was employed as the research instrument for this study. It consisted of five scales designed to measure the variables of interest, namely self-sacrificial leadership, proactive behavior, felt obligation, proactive behavior efficacy, and ambiguity tolerance. To avoid the Chinese people’s tendency of choosing the mid-point of the scale regardless of their true feelings or attitudes, all of the items on the survey were responded to on 6-point Likert scales which did not include a mid-point. Data were collected in two waves from 309 dyads of employees and their immediate supervisors from five high technology companies located in southern Jiangsu. Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for the above measures were from 0.79 to 0.92, demonstrating good measurement reliabilities. Results of confirmatory factor analysis indicated the discriminant validity of the measurement was also satisfactory. Hierarchical regression modeling and PROCESS were used to test the hypotheses proposed.
Results revealed that: (1) Self-sacrificial leadership had a significant positive influence on employee proactive behavior. (2) In the process of self-sacrificial leadership impacting on employee proactive behavior, the simple mediating effect of felt obligation was insignificant, while both proactive behavior efficacy and ambiguity tolerance moderated the relationship between felt obligation and proactive behavior, as well as the mediated relationship self-sacrificial leadership and employee proactive behavior via felt obligation. The relationships were stronger for employees high rather than low in proactive behavior efficacy or ambiguity tolerance.
The present study, with dyadic and time-lag design, offered robust evidence for the role of supervisors’ self-sacrificial leadership in facilitating employee proactive behavior. Moreover, our study confirmed the mediating role of felt obligation and its boundary conditions. As to the practical implications, this study suggested that more efforts should be made to encourage managers’ self-sacrificial leadership. Meanwhile, organizations should strengthen employees’ felt obligation in order to promote proactive behavior. Another important managerial implication of our findings is that higher proactive behavior efficacy and ambiguity tolerance can enhance the positive effect of self-sacrificial leadership on employee proactive behavior via felt obligation, so managers should take steps to enhance employees’ efficacy beliefs of proactive behavior, and pay attention to the behavioral response of employees high in ambiguity tolerance.

Key words: self-sacrificial leadership, proactive behavior, felt obligation, proactive behavior efficacy, ambiguity tolerance