悖论型领导对员工工作投入的影响:有调节的中介模型
|
摘要
通过构建有调节的中介模型,本研究揭示了悖论型领导"如何"影响员工工作投入以及影响在"何时"更弱或更强。通过收集3个时点的员工数据,研究发现:悖论型领导正向影响员工的工作投入;心理授权部分中介了悖论型领导对工作投入的影响;工作复杂性调节了悖论型领导对员工心理授权的影响,还调节了心理授权在悖论型领导与工作投入之间的中介作用。
As organizational environments become increasingly turbulent and complex, there is need to focus on leadership effectiveness in addressing intensified paradoxical demands. Paradoxical leadership in people management, referring to seemingly competing, yet interrelated behaviors to meet structural and follower demands simultaneously and over time, includes five dimensions:(1) Combining self-centeredness with other-centeredness;(2) Maintaining both distance and closeness;(3) Treating subordinates uniformly, while allowing individualization;(4) Enforcing work requirements,while allowing flexibility;(5) Maintaining decision control, while allowing autonomy(Zhang et al., 2015). Because the construct and the measurement of paradoxical leadership have been proposed recently, several studies in China have tested whether and how paradoxical leadership affects team innovation, and current research has not yet focused on the influence of paradoxical leadership on follower work engagement and the mechanism underlying the relationship between paradoxical leadership and work engagement. The aim of this study is to investigate "how" paradoxical leadership influences employee work engagement, and to find out "when" this influence is stronger or weaker in Chinese workplace. Drawing on the individual level, therefore, this study examined the effect of paradoxical leadership on employee work engagement and tested the mediating role of psychological empowerment as well as the moderating role of job complexity playing in the linkages between paradoxical leadership and follower work engagement.The present study tested the hypotheses using a sample of 320 employees from three state-owned enterprises in Tianjin across various sectors and collected data at three times. Established measures with high reliability and validity were used to capture the key variables. Hierarchical regression analysis was mainly conducted for data analysis. Consistent with hypotheses, it was found that:(1) Paradoxical leadership was positively related to follower work engagement;(2) Psychological empowerment played a partial mediating role in the relationship between paradoxical leadership and work engagement;(3) Job complexity positively moderated the relationship between paradoxical leadership and psychological empowerment. When job complexity was high, paradoxical leadership was more positively related to psychological empowerment.(4) Job complexity positively moderated the mediating role of psychological empowerment in the relationship between paradoxical leadership and work engagement. Specifically, when job complexity was high, psychological empowerment mediated the relationship between paradoxical leadership and work engagement; when job complexity was low, however, the mediating effect was not significant.In conclusion, by investigating the effect of paradoxical leadership on follower work engagement and the mechanism and moderating condition in the process, our study extended the current literature in three ways. First, we examined the influence of paradoxical leadership on follower work engagement, extending the research scope of paradoxical leadership study. Furthermore, we found that the mediating role of psychological empowerment in the relationship between paradoxical leadership and psychological empowerment, providing extra knowledge to understand the mechanism in paradoxical leadership effectiveness. Finally, this study helped to understand the moderation condition of the paradoxical leadership effectiveness through job complexity, which induced the different levels of psychological empowerment indirectly affecting the relationship between paradoxical leadership and work engagement. The conclusion of the study has important reference value for enhancement of employee work engagement for enterprise leaders.
As organizational environments become increasingly turbulent and complex, there is need to focus on leadership effectiveness in addressing intensified paradoxical demands. Paradoxical leadership in people management, referring to seemingly competing, yet interrelated behaviors to meet structural and follower demands simultaneously and over time, includes five dimensions:(1) Combining self-centeredness with other-centeredness;(2) Maintaining both distance and closeness;(3) Treating subordinates uniformly, while allowing individualization;(4) Enforcing work requirements,while allowing flexibility;(5) Maintaining decision control, while allowing autonomy(Zhang et al., 2015). Because the construct and the measurement of paradoxical leadership have been proposed recently, several studies in China have tested whether and how paradoxical leadership affects team innovation, and current research has not yet focused on the influence of paradoxical leadership on follower work engagement and the mechanism underlying the relationship between paradoxical leadership and work engagement. The aim of this study is to investigate "how" paradoxical leadership influences employee work engagement, and to find out "when" this influence is stronger or weaker in Chinese workplace. Drawing on the individual level, therefore, this study examined the effect of paradoxical leadership on employee work engagement and tested the mediating role of psychological empowerment as well as the moderating role of job complexity playing in the linkages between paradoxical leadership and follower work engagement.The present study tested the hypotheses using a sample of 320 employees from three state-owned enterprises in Tianjin across various sectors and collected data at three times. Established measures with high reliability and validity were used to capture the key variables. Hierarchical regression analysis was mainly conducted for data analysis. Consistent with hypotheses, it was found that:(1) Paradoxical leadership was positively related to follower work engagement;(2) Psychological empowerment played a partial mediating role in the relationship between paradoxical leadership and work engagement;(3) Job complexity positively moderated the relationship between paradoxical leadership and psychological empowerment. When job complexity was high, paradoxical leadership was more positively related to psychological empowerment.(4) Job complexity positively moderated the mediating role of psychological empowerment in the relationship between paradoxical leadership and work engagement. Specifically, when job complexity was high, psychological empowerment mediated the relationship between paradoxical leadership and work engagement; when job complexity was low, however, the mediating effect was not significant.In conclusion, by investigating the effect of paradoxical leadership on follower work engagement and the mechanism and moderating condition in the process, our study extended the current literature in three ways. First, we examined the influence of paradoxical leadership on follower work engagement, extending the research scope of paradoxical leadership study. Furthermore, we found that the mediating role of psychological empowerment in the relationship between paradoxical leadership and psychological empowerment, providing extra knowledge to understand the mechanism in paradoxical leadership effectiveness. Finally, this study helped to understand the moderation condition of the paradoxical leadership effectiveness through job complexity, which induced the different levels of psychological empowerment indirectly affecting the relationship between paradoxical leadership and work engagement. The conclusion of the study has important reference value for enhancement of employee work engagement for enterprise leaders.
引文
陈国权,陈子栋.(2017).领导授权行为对员工学习能力影响机制研究.科研管理,38(3),114-127.
李燕萍,涂乙冬.(2011).与领导关系好就能获得职业成功吗?一项调节的中介效应研究.心理学报,43(8),941-952.
李燕萍,吴丹.(2016).程序公平对员工工作投入影响的研究--状态焦虑与上下级沟通的作用.科学学与科学技术管理,37(5),138-149.
罗瑾琏,胡文安,钟竞.(2017).悖论式领导、团队活力对团队创新的影响机制研究.管理评论,29(7),122-134.
尚玉钒,李磊.(2015).领导行为示范、工作复杂性、工作调节焦点与创造力.科学学与科学技术管理,36(6),147-158.
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.
赵斌,刘桂霞,宇卫昕,周倩倩.(2017).差错管理氛围、工作复杂性对员工创新行为影响的跨层次研究.预测,36(5),15-23.
Avolio,B.J.,Zhu,W.C.,Koh,W.,&Bhatia,P.(2004).Transformational leadership and organizational commitment:Mediating role of psychological empowerment and moderating role of structural distance.Journal of Organizational Behavior,25(8),951-968.
Bakker,A.B.,&Demerouti,E.(2017).Job demands-resources theory:Taking stock and looking forward.Journal of Occupational Health Psychology,22(3),273-285.
Chan,S.C.H.,Huang,X.,Snape,E.,&Lam,C.K.(2013).The Janus face of paternalistic leaders:Authoritarianism,benevolence,subordinates’organization-based self-esteem,and performance.Journal of Organizational Behavior,34(1),108-128.
Hackman,J.R.,&Oldham,G.R.(1975).Development of the job diagnostic survey.Journal of Applied Psychology,60(2),159-170.
Hatcher,L.,Ross,T.L.,&Collins,D.(1989).Prosocial behavior,job complexity,and suggestion contribution under gainsharing plans.Journal of Applied Behavioral Science,25(3),231-248.
Lavine,M.H.(2014).Paradoxical leadership and the competing values framework.Journal of Applied Behavioral Science,50(2),189-205.
Miron-Spektor,E.,Ingram,A.,Keller,J.,Smith,W.K.,&Lewis,M.W.(2018).Microfoundations of organizational paradox:The problem is how we think about the problem.Academy of Management Journal,61(1),26-45.
Owens,B.P.,Johnson,M.D.,&Mitchell,T.R.(2013).Expressed humility in organizations:Implications for performance,teams,and leadership.Organization Science,24(5),1517-1538.
Owens,B.P.,Wallace,A.S.,&Waldman,D.A.(2015).Leader narcissism and follower outcomes:The counterbalancing effect of leader humility.Journal of Applied Psychology,100(4),1203-1213.
Schaufeli,W.B.,&Bakker,A.B.(2004).Job demands,job resources,and their relationship with burnout and engagement:A multi-sample study.Journal of Organizational Behavior,25(3),293-315.
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.
Seibert,S.E.,Wang,G.,&Courtright,S.H.(2011).Antecedents and consequences of psychological and team empowerment in organizations:A meta-analytic review.Journal of Applied Psychology,96(5),981-1003.
Singh,M.,&Sarkar,A.(2012).The relationship between psychological empowerment and innovative behavior:A dimensional analysis with job involvement as mediator.Journal of Personnel Psychology,11(3),127-137.
Spreitzer,G.M.(1995).Psychological empowerment in the workplace:Dimensions,measurement,and validation.Academy of Management Journal,38(5),1442-1465.
Tims,M.,Derks,D.,&Bakker,A.B.(2016).Job crafting and its relationships with person-job fit and meaningfulness:A three-wave study.Journal of Vocational Behavior,92,44-53.
Xanthopoulou,D.,Bakker,A.B.,Demerouti,E.,&Schaufeli,W.B.(2007).The role of personal resources in the job demands-resources model.International Journal of Stress Management,14(2),121-141.
Xanthopoulou,D.,Bakker,A.B.,Demerouti,E.,&Schaufeli,W.B.(2009).Reciprocal relationships between job resources,personal resources,and work engagement.Journal of Vocational Behavior,74(3),235-244.
Xanthopoulou,D.,Bakker,A.B.,Dollard,M.F.,Demerouti,E.,Schaufeli,W.B.,Taris,T.W.,&Schreurs,P.J.G.(2007).When do job demands particularly predict burnout?The moderating role of job resources.Journal of Managerial Psychology,22(8),766-786.
Zhang,Y.,Waldman,D.A.,Han,Y.L.,&Li,X.B.(2015).Paradoxical leader behaviors in people management:Antecedents and consequences.Academy of Management Journal,58(2),538-566.
Zhao,X.S.,Lynch,J.G.,&Chen,Q.M.(2010).Reconsidering Baron and Kenny:Myths and truths about mediation analysis.Journal of Consumer Research,37(2),197-206.
李燕萍,涂乙冬.(2011).与领导关系好就能获得职业成功吗?一项调节的中介效应研究.心理学报,43(8),941-952.
李燕萍,吴丹.(2016).程序公平对员工工作投入影响的研究--状态焦虑与上下级沟通的作用.科学学与科学技术管理,37(5),138-149.
罗瑾琏,胡文安,钟竞.(2017).悖论式领导、团队活力对团队创新的影响机制研究.管理评论,29(7),122-134.
尚玉钒,李磊.(2015).领导行为示范、工作复杂性、工作调节焦点与创造力.科学学与科学技术管理,36(6),147-158.
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.
赵斌,刘桂霞,宇卫昕,周倩倩.(2017).差错管理氛围、工作复杂性对员工创新行为影响的跨层次研究.预测,36(5),15-23.
Avolio,B.J.,Zhu,W.C.,Koh,W.,&Bhatia,P.(2004).Transformational leadership and organizational commitment:Mediating role of psychological empowerment and moderating role of structural distance.Journal of Organizational Behavior,25(8),951-968.
Bakker,A.B.,&Demerouti,E.(2017).Job demands-resources theory:Taking stock and looking forward.Journal of Occupational Health Psychology,22(3),273-285.
Chan,S.C.H.,Huang,X.,Snape,E.,&Lam,C.K.(2013).The Janus face of paternalistic leaders:Authoritarianism,benevolence,subordinates’organization-based self-esteem,and performance.Journal of Organizational Behavior,34(1),108-128.
Hackman,J.R.,&Oldham,G.R.(1975).Development of the job diagnostic survey.Journal of Applied Psychology,60(2),159-170.
Hatcher,L.,Ross,T.L.,&Collins,D.(1989).Prosocial behavior,job complexity,and suggestion contribution under gainsharing plans.Journal of Applied Behavioral Science,25(3),231-248.
Lavine,M.H.(2014).Paradoxical leadership and the competing values framework.Journal of Applied Behavioral Science,50(2),189-205.
Miron-Spektor,E.,Ingram,A.,Keller,J.,Smith,W.K.,&Lewis,M.W.(2018).Microfoundations of organizational paradox:The problem is how we think about the problem.Academy of Management Journal,61(1),26-45.
Owens,B.P.,Johnson,M.D.,&Mitchell,T.R.(2013).Expressed humility in organizations:Implications for performance,teams,and leadership.Organization Science,24(5),1517-1538.
Owens,B.P.,Wallace,A.S.,&Waldman,D.A.(2015).Leader narcissism and follower outcomes:The counterbalancing effect of leader humility.Journal of Applied Psychology,100(4),1203-1213.
Schaufeli,W.B.,&Bakker,A.B.(2004).Job demands,job resources,and their relationship with burnout and engagement:A multi-sample study.Journal of Organizational Behavior,25(3),293-315.
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.
Seibert,S.E.,Wang,G.,&Courtright,S.H.(2011).Antecedents and consequences of psychological and team empowerment in organizations:A meta-analytic review.Journal of Applied Psychology,96(5),981-1003.
Singh,M.,&Sarkar,A.(2012).The relationship between psychological empowerment and innovative behavior:A dimensional analysis with job involvement as mediator.Journal of Personnel Psychology,11(3),127-137.
Spreitzer,G.M.(1995).Psychological empowerment in the workplace:Dimensions,measurement,and validation.Academy of Management Journal,38(5),1442-1465.
Tims,M.,Derks,D.,&Bakker,A.B.(2016).Job crafting and its relationships with person-job fit and meaningfulness:A three-wave study.Journal of Vocational Behavior,92,44-53.
Xanthopoulou,D.,Bakker,A.B.,Demerouti,E.,&Schaufeli,W.B.(2007).The role of personal resources in the job demands-resources model.International Journal of Stress Management,14(2),121-141.
Xanthopoulou,D.,Bakker,A.B.,Demerouti,E.,&Schaufeli,W.B.(2009).Reciprocal relationships between job resources,personal resources,and work engagement.Journal of Vocational Behavior,74(3),235-244.
Xanthopoulou,D.,Bakker,A.B.,Dollard,M.F.,Demerouti,E.,Schaufeli,W.B.,Taris,T.W.,&Schreurs,P.J.G.(2007).When do job demands particularly predict burnout?The moderating role of job resources.Journal of Managerial Psychology,22(8),766-786.
Zhang,Y.,Waldman,D.A.,Han,Y.L.,&Li,X.B.(2015).Paradoxical leader behaviors in people management:Antecedents and consequences.Academy of Management Journal,58(2),538-566.
Zhao,X.S.,Lynch,J.G.,&Chen,Q.M.(2010).Reconsidering Baron and Kenny:Myths and truths about mediation analysis.Journal of Consumer Research,37(2),197-206.