不同情商水平下领导行为与员工组织承诺关系的实证研究

结合对变革型/交易型领导以及员工组织承诺的理论分析,本论文将情商作为调节变量引入领导效果研究的模型,认为领导与下属的情商会促进或阻碍特定领导风格作用的发挥.对六家企业内241对上下级(95个部门经理及他们的241个直接下属)样本数据的统计分析表明,高领导者情商同时有助于交易型和变革型领导行为的实施而获得下属的组织承诺;高下属情商有助于员工识别交易型领导的实质而指导他们对组织的情感性承诺.     

Does emotional intelligence as ability predict transformational leadership? A multilevel approach

This study assesses to what extent emotional intelligence as ability (EI) can predict transformational leadership. Norwegian executives (N = 104) completed measures of personality (NEO PI-R) and EI (MSCEIT), and were rated on transformational leadership (MLQ 5X) by subordinates (N = 459). This study improves upon previous studies in three ways: First, because the validity and reliability of the scores from MSCEIT has been questioned, an alternative set of scales from MSCEIT were included, which provide reliable and interpretable scores (Føllesdal & Hagtvet, 2009). Second, in addition to personality, general mental ability (GMA) was controlled for by utilizing Monte Carlo studies. Third, a multilevel approach was used to analyze the scores, due to their hierarchical structure. Neither the four branch scores, nor the Total EI score from MSCEIT predicted transformational leadership. A suppression effect was found, however, among two subscales from Perceiving Emotions. The validity of scores from MSCEIT is questioned.     

Emotional intelligence and leadership emergence in small groups

We report the findings from two studies that examine the association between emotional intelligence and leadership emergence in small groups. In both studies, members of groups completed measures of emotional intelligence and other individual differences prior to working on a group project. Their peers rated their leadership emergence at the conclusion of the project. Overall emotional intelligence and a number of its dimensions were associated with leadership emergence over and above cognitive intelligence, personality traits, and gender. These findings were observed when emotional intelligence was measured with an ability test but not when it was measured with a self-report scale. Among the dimensions of emotional intelligence, the ability to understand emotions was most consistently associated with leadership emergence.     

Transformational leadership sub-dimensions and their link to leaders' personality and performance

The multi-dimensionality of the transformational leadership construct has been under debate in the last decades. To shed more light on this issue, we conducted a meta-analysis (k = 58 studies), examining the transformational leadership sub-dimensions and their links to leader personality and performance in order to gather empirical evidence of the multi-dimensionality of transformational leadership. First, the results showed that the Big 5 personality traits are directly linked to transformational leadership sub-dimensions and to the overall measure, and are indirectly linked to leader performance. Interestingly, however, different combinations of the personality traits are differentially related to the transformational leadership behaviors. For instance, whereas inspirational motivation is related to all personality traits, only openness to experience and agreeableness affect individualized consideration. These findings emphasize the importance of examining the transformational leadership sub-dimensions separately to gain a deeper understanding of the nature and the antecedents of these leadership behaviors.     

Do transformational CEOs always make the difference? The role of TMT feedback seeking behavior

In the present paper, we raise the question whether CEO transformational leadership invariably makes a difference for team performance and change effectiveness. Since in general, CEOs are surrounded by a team of highly influential top managers, we argue that the effectiveness of CEO transformational leadership is contingent on the feedback seeking behavior of their top management team (TMT). Data from 38 TMTs and their CEOs demonstrated that transformational leadership was positively related to both TMT performance and effectiveness of organizational change, but only when the TMT engaged in low levels of feedback seeking behavior. As predicted, there was no relationship between CEO transformational leadership and performance and change effectiveness for teams exhibiting high levels of feedback seeking behavior. These findings suggest that for high-feedback seeking TMTs, organizational results can be achieved without a transformational CEO.     

Revisiting the mediating role of trust in transformational leadership effects: Do different types of trust make a difference?

This study examines the mediating effects of cognitive and affective trust on the relationship between follower perceptions of transformational leadership behavior and their work outcomes. Using data obtained from 318 supervisor–subordinate dyads from a manufacturing organization located in mainland China, structural equation modeling results revealed that affective trust fully mediated the relationships between transformational leadership and the work outcomes of followers, including their affective organizational commitment, organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs), and job performance. In contrast, cognitive trust negatively mediated the relationship between transformational leadership and follower job performance, and had insignificant effects on their affective organizational commitment and organizational citizenship behaviors. These findings highlight the importance of affective trust as a mechanism which translates transformational leadership into positive work outcomes for the organization.     

Strategic leadership for exploration and exploitation: The moderating role of environmental dynamism

This study advances prior theoretical research by linking transformational and transactional behaviors of strategic leaders to two critical outputs of organizational learning: exploratory and exploitative innovation. Findings indicate that transformational leadership behaviors contribute significantly to adopting generative thinking and pursuing exploratory innovation. Transactional leadership behaviors, on the other hand, facilitate improving and extending existing knowledge and are associated with exploitative innovation. In addition, we argue that environmental dynamism needs to be taken into account to fully understand the effectiveness of strategic leaders. Our study provides new insights that misfits rather than fits between leadership behaviors and innovative outcomes matter in dynamic environments. Hence, we contribute to the debate on the role of strategic leaders in managing exploration and exploitation, not only by examining how specific leadership behaviors impact innovative outcomes, but also by revealing how the impact of leadership is contingent upon dynamic environmental conditions.     

Predictors of the emergence of transformational leadership in virtual decision teams

This study examined the etiology of transformational leadership in virtual team contexts. First, we compared 127 members of virtual decision-making teams with 135 members of traditional face-to-face teams in terms of the relationship between aspects of personality and the emergence of transformational leadership. The type of communication media (face-to-face versus “pure” virtual) was found to interact with extraversion and emotional stability in the prediction of emerging transformational leadership. In line with prior findings, we showed how these personality characteristics were relevant to transformational leadership emergence in our face-to-face teams. However, they were largely unrelated to such leadership in the virtual team context. We also focused specifically on the virtual context by analyzing the content of team interactions. After accounting for the effect of degree of activity level, the linguistic quality in one's written communication was found to predict the emergence of transformational leadership in virtual teams.     

To whom does transformational leadership matter more? An examination of neurotic and introverted followers and their organizational citizenship behavior

Despite the massive amount of transformational leadership research, the role of followers has not been well-examined in the transformational leadership literature. To understand how leader–follower interactions influence follower organizational citizenship behavior (OCB), we examined the cross-level interactions between transformational leadership and two follower personality traits (neuroticism and extraversion). Using a sample of 215 leaders and 1284 followers, results showed that follower neuroticism moderated the relationships between transformational leadership and organizational citizenship behavior directed toward other individuals (OCB-I) and toward the organization (OCB-O), such that relationships were stronger for those high in neuroticism. Further, follower extraversion moderated the relationships between transformational leadership and OCB-I and OCB-O, such that relationships were stronger for those low in extraversion. Therefore, the inspirational and developmental nature of transformational leaders can offset follower neuroticism and introversion and guide these employees to perform more OCB despite their tendencies to worry, lack confidence, and be shy and withdrawn.     

Does leadership need emotional intelligence?

Interest in emotional intelligence has bloomed over the last few years. That it has become a standard concept in general and applied psychology, as well as in applied business settings, is indubitable. Is this popularity warranted? Casting a shadow over the concept of emotional intelligence are concerns about its meaningfulness and the construct and predictive validity of its various measures. The following series of letters explores various issues surrounding emotional intelligence and leadership including: whether emotional intelligence is theoretically needed for leadership, the types of emotional intelligence tests that may hold the most promise, methodological standards for testing whether emotional intelligence matters, evidence from the neuroscience literature on emotions and intelligence, and evidence regarding the links between leader emotional intelligence and follower outcomes.     

Impact of rater personality on transformational and transactional leadership ratings

This study addresses the role of rater personality in ratings of transformational and transactional leadership. In a naturalistic field study, we found that rater personality (i.e., agreeableness, openness, extraversion, and conscientiousness) was positively associated with ratings of transformational leadership, but significant rater personality effects were not found in an experimental study where leadership behavior was invariant. These results suggest that disagreements among raters about leaders' behaviors are not due solely to random error and may instead reflect true differences either in (a) the behaviors leaders exhibit toward individual followers or (b) personality-related differences between followers in attention to and recall of leadership behaviors. We also found that personality (of subordinates and peers) was not randomly distributed across leaders, though clustering effects were generally small. Practically, our results suggest that (a) individual reports of leadership may be better at predicting leadership outcomes than aggregated group reports – especially those related to individual attitudes and behaviors – though they are rarely used in the literature; (b) aggregation is complicated because rater personality is associated with leadership ratings and is not randomly distributed across leaders; and (c) corrections for measurement error based on inter-rater agreement may not be appropriate due to non-random unique rater variance.     

Explaining ambidextrous leadership in the aerospace and defense organizations

Researchers have increasingly been using the term of organizational ambidexterity to denote the simultaneous use of exploration and exploitation in organizations. Exploration refers to innovation, whereas exploitation addresses cost efficiency. However, despite the plethora of research output on ambidexterity, very few studies are actually providing insights into what specific behaviors and leadership styles accomplish ambidexterity and how organizational constraints influence ambidextrous leadership. In this research, we aim to explain the key properties of ambidextrous leadership, where we propose that ambidexterity is most efficiently promoted by ambidextrous leaders who combine two leadership styles: transformational leadership and transactional leadership. In our study, we associate transformational leadership to exploration, whereas transactional leadership is linked to exploitation. We conduct a research on ambidextrous leadership in the aerospace and defense organizations while also taking into account how organizational structure and environmental dynamism impact leadership styles. The results of our research reveal that both leadership styles are present at the senior management level. Top management, however, mostly uses transactional leadership in part because of structural and environmental constraints while also employing some limited form of transformational leadership style. Therefore, our study concludes that in this particular field the ambidextrous leaders are primarily focused on exploitative activities, while only a limited amount of their time is being allocated on exploration-oriented objectives.     

A meta-analytic examination of the effects of the agentic and affiliative aspects of extraversion on leadership outcomes

Building on previous research that has shown that extraversion is the strongest Big Five personality predictor of effective leadership, the present study employed meta-analytic procedures to examine the independent effects of the two main aspects of extraversion—agency and affiliation—on leadership outcomes (transformational leadership and leadership effectiveness). Results showed that it is specifically the agentic aspect of extraversion that has a positive impact on leadership, whereas the affiliative aspect is unrelated to transformational leadership and negatively related to leadership effectiveness. Additionally, we demonstrate that assessing extraversion in terms of these two aspects leads to substantial improvements in predictive validity relative to broad measures of extraversion. Limitations associated with common method bias and modest effect sizes notwithstanding, our findings inform theory on specifically why it is that extraverts are perceived as better leaders than introverts. We also discuss practical implications for how to select and develop leaders in organisational settings and outline the types of organisations in which agency measures are likely to be most useful for selection purposes.     

The relative impact of complementary leader behaviors: Which matter most?

Despite conceptual overlap between the transformational–transactional model of leadership and the Ohio State two-factor model (i.e., Consideration and Initiating Structure), no systematic research examines correspondence among these behaviors or estimates their relative validities across a common set of outcomes. The current studies a) examine the factor structure of five key dimensions of these two models (transformational, contingent reward, laissez faire, Initiating Structure, and Consideration) and b) estimate relative validities with respect to two organizational outcomes: employee job satisfaction and perceptions of leadership effectiveness. Although results of a meta-analysis show that transformational leadership is significantly related to both Consideration (ρ = .74) and Initiating Structure (ρ = .50), results of two primary studies provide support for the independence of these leadership dimensions. Moreover, dominance analyses (Budescu, 1993) reveal that Consideration and transformational leadership are the most important predictors of employee job satisfaction and ratings of leadership effectiveness, and each had incremental validity when controlling for the effects of the other. Overall, results suggest that dimensions from both models are important predictors of employee outcomes.     

Transformational Leadership,Organizational Clan Culture,Organizational Affective Commitment,and Organizational Citizenship Behavior: A Case of South Korea's Public Sector

The present study examines whether transformational leadership is associated with clan culture, affective commitment, and organizational citizenship behavior and whether affective commitment is positively related to organizational citizenship behavior. The study also examines whether affective commitment mediates the effects of clan culture on organizational citizenship behavior and whether clan culture mediates the effects of transformational leadership on affective commitment. The results of this study indicate a positive relationship between transformational leadership and clan culture as well as between transformational leadership and affective commitment; no significant relationship between clan culture and organizational citizenship behavior as well as between transformational leadership and organizational citizenship behavior; and a significant positive relationship between affective commitment and organizational citizenship behavior as well as between clan culture and affective commitment . Thus, the results clearly show that affective commitment fully mediates the relationship between clan culture and organizational citizenship behavior and that clan culture partially mediates the relationship between transformational leadership and affective commitment. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings as well as interesting avenues for future research are discussed.     

The relationship between transformational leadership behaviors,psychological, and training outcomes in elite military recruits

Two studies examined the effects of a differentiated model of transformational leadership on follower outcomes. In Study 1, 484 UK Royal Marine recruits completed questionnaires about their trainers' leadership behaviors and their own attitudes towards training. Training outcome was measured as successful completion of training or non-completion. Discriminant function analyses identified that fostering acceptance of group goals, inspirational motivation, appropriate role model, individual consideration, and contingent reward significantly discriminated between pass and failure. A separate discriminant function analyses revealed that the attitudinal variables of self-confidence, resilience, and satisfaction also successfully discriminated between pass and failure. Study 2 used a true experimental design to examine the effectiveness of a transformational leadership intervention. Participants were 85 experimental and 67 control recruits who completed questionnaires at weeks 5 and 15 of recruit training. Results revealed that 3 of the 5 key leadership behaviors, and all of the 3 recruit attitudinal variables measured, were significantly enhanced by the intervention.     

Does leadership still not need emotional intelligence? Continuing “The Great EI Debate”

The study of emotional intelligence (EI) in the field of leadership, and in the organizational sciences in general, has often been characterized by controversy and criticism. But the study of EI has nonetheless persisted by developing new measures and models to address these concerns. In a prior letter exchange by Antonakis, Ashkanasy, and Dasborough (2009), two author teams debated the role of EI in the leadership literature, but also set an agenda for research and reconciliation for the future. The present exchange revisits these arguments using evidence accumulated over the past decade. Specifically, the authors debate not only the evidence for the predictive power of EI for workplace outcomes, but also the validity of EI as a construct, the measurement of EI, and the appropriateness of analytical tests for establishing the value of EI. Although the author teams agree on the value of the study of emotions and the need for rigorous research in this area, they nonetheless propose alternative agendas and priorities for the future. Further, they conclude that the issues identified in this exchange are not unique to the study of EI; but should also serve to inform the study of other personality factors and leadership more broadly.     

变革型领导与员工对组织变革认同感的关系研究

通过对25家科技型企业的360名员工的问卷调查,研究变革型领导风格与员工对组织变革认同感之间的关系.结果显示:变革型领导风格对组织变革过程和组织变革认同感都有显著的正效应;组织变革过程对变革型领导风格与组织变革认同感关系有一定的中介作用.研究表明,变革型领导在组织变革时期是一种有效的领导风格.     

变革型领导、组织公民行为与心理授权关系研究

探讨变革型领导行为对下属的组织公民行为产生影响的作用机制,即变革型领导是否会通过心理授权的中介作用对下属的组织公民行为产生影响.采用结构方程模型的方法分析了变革型领导行为、组织公民行为以及心理授权的不同维度之间的关系,研究的样本包括高科技组织中282名员工以及他们所对应的领导者.研究结果表明,变革型领导行为通过心理授权作为中介变量对下属员工的组织公民行为具有显著的影响作用;心理授权中的意义性和自我效能两个维度在变革型领导与组织公民行为之间起到中介作用;关系导向和任务导向的变革型领导对心理授权和组织公民行为的不同维度产生影响作用的路径是不同的.     

Transformational leadership in context: Face-to-face and virtual teams

This experimental study examined transformational leadership in the context of traditional teams using face-to-face communication and virtual teams using computer-mediated communication. Thirty-nine leaders led both face-to-face and virtual teams. Repeated-measures analyses revealed similar mean levels of transformational leadership in both team types; however, leader rank order varied across team type. Post hoc analyses revealed that the most effective leaders where those who increased their transformational leadership in virtual teams. Furthermore, analyses at the team level revealed that the effect of transformational leadership on team performance was stronger in virtual than in face-to-face teams. Team-member ratings of transformational leadership were equally linked to project satisfaction in face-to-face and virtual teams. Considered as a whole, our results suggest that transformational leadership has a stronger effect in teams that use only computer-mediated communication, and that leaders who increase their transformational leadership behaviors in such teams achieve higher levels of team performance.