Search results

Drawing upon a dynamic managerial capabilities perspective, this study aims to unpack how and when chief experience officer (CEO) transformational leadership influences firm innovation. Specifically, a moderated mediation model linking CEO transformational leadership to firm innovation, which includes strategic flexibility as a mediator and top management team (TMT) knowledge diversity as a moderator, is theorized and empirically tested.

The authors conducted a survey of 354 TMT members and 62 CEOs from 62 firms in China’s construction industry to explore these relationships. Path analysis using Mplus 7.4 was undertaken to test our proposed moderated mediation model.

The results revealed that strategic flexibility mediates the positive relationship between CEO transformational leadership and firm innovation. Additionally, TMT knowledge diversity positively moderates the relationship between CEO transformational leadership and strategic flexibility.

Taken together, these findings help advance and deepen our understanding of the mechanisms through which CEO transformational leadership influences firm innovation and boundary conditions under which CEO transformational leadership influences strategic flexibility. At the same time, this study also contributes to the literature on strategic flexibility and the CEO-TMT interface by revealing the interactive effect of CEO transformational leadership and TMT knowledge diversity on strategic flexibility.

Although the positive influence of CEO transformational leadership on firm innovation has been widely recognized, the specific mechanisms underlying this effect have yet to be fully theorized. This study proposes and tests a nuanced theoretical framework linking CEO transformational leadership to firm innovation via a firm’s strategic flexibility. It also argues that TMT knowledge diversity enhances the indirect effect of CEO transformational leadership on firm innovation through strategic flexibility; that is, this indirect effect is significant when TMT diversity is high, but not when TMT diversity is low.

The purpose of this paper is to draw on the theory of servant leadership to examine the influence of chief executive officer (CEO) servant leadership on firm performance in the hospitality industry. It examined the mediating role of the service climate and the moderating role of competitive intensity in the relationship between CEO servant leadership and firm performance.

Multiple regression was used to analyze multi-wave, multi-source data from 92 hotels in China. A moderated path analysis was used to test the moderating effects.

CEO servant leadership positively influenced firm performance via the service climate in the hospitality industry. Competitive intensity strengthened the direct effect of the service climate on firm performance, and the indirect effect of CEO servant leadership on firm performance via service climate.

The findings offer managerial insights into CEO succession, service management and human resource management.

This is one of the first studies to investigate how and when CEO servant leadership might shape firm outcomes in the hospitality industry. Theoretically, the findings enrich our understanding of how CEO leadership might shape firm-level outcomes.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the extent to which chief executive officer (CEO) transactional and transformational leader behaviors as well as CEO self-enhancing versus self-transcendent values permeate through the organization to influence middle-level managers.

Using a multi-level longitudinal design, the authors collected self-reported value data from 32 CEOs and 119 top management team (TMT) members rated their CEOs on transactional and transformational leader behaviors at Time 1; 18 months later, TMTs rated the in-role behaviors and organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs) of 331 mid-level managers. Also, at Time 2, mid-level managers evaluated their relationship with the organization in terms of economic and social exchange. HLM was used to analyze the data.

The authors found the positive relationship between transactional CEO leader behaviors and mid-level manager in-role behaviors to be enhanced when CEOs hold self-transcendent values, whereas this relationship was weakened by CEO self-enhancing values. Similarly, the relationship between CEO transformational leader behaviors and mid-level manager OCBs was found to be strengthened when leaders espoused self-transcendent values. Finally, the authors found that economic exchange mediated the relationship between the transactional leadership * self-enhancing values interaction term and mid-level manager in-role behaviors. Similarly, social exchange mediated the relationship between the transformational leadership * self-transcendent values interaction term and mid-level manager OCBs.

Leadership/OB.

Corporate entrepreneurship is an important way for organizations to gain competitive advantages and achieve sustainable development. However, few studies pay attention to the influence of CEO strategic leadership on corporate entrepreneurship. Drawing on social identity theory and uncertainty-identity theory, this study aims to investigate whether CEO relationship-focused leadership impacts corporate entrepreneurship through middle managers’ (MMs’) organizational identification and whether the indirect effect is moderated by environmental uncertainty.

Using 192 Chinese samples with 192 firm-level and 716 department-level observations, this study uses multilevel structural equations modeling by Mplus 8.0 to test the theoretical model.

This study finds that CEO relationship-focused leadership positively predicts MMs’ organizational identification and corporate entrepreneurship, and MMs’ organizational identification mediates the relationship between CEO relationship-focused leadership and corporate entrepreneurship. In addition, environmental uncertainty moderates not only the relationship between CEO relationship-focused leadership and MMs’ organizational identification but also the indirect effect of CEO relationship-focused leadership on corporate entrepreneurship through MMs’ organizational identification.

This study enriches the understanding of process and contextualization of CEO strategic leadership influencing on corporate entrepreneurship.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is among the first to explore the influence of CEO relationship-focused leadership on corporate entrepreneurship.

The purpose of this paper is to examine empirically the effect of cultural and social acceptance on CEO leadership.

Several instruments were used to capture key concepts (i.e. Organisational Culture Profile, Marlowe‐Crowne Social Desirability Scale, Transformational Leadership Inventory, and Leader Reward and Punishment Questionnaire), which were examined using confirmatory factor analysis. Data were collected from 635 Australian CEOs.

The results of hierarchical multi‐regression analysis clarified the importance of self‐deception and impression management as influential context factors, and how both operate at the pinnacle of organisations. The study also identifies that transformational and transactional leadership behaviours were uniquely influenced by specific cultural dimensions, and suggests that CEOs use combinations of these behaviours to respond to four cultural dimensions (i.e. emphasis on rewards, performance orientation, innovation, and stability) in order to produce competitive advantages.

The study highlights how CEOs are still vulnerable to conforming to the social norms of their organisation and also how CEOs use a repertoire of leadership behaviours, in response to the importance of different cultural dimensions.

The paper contributes to the leadership literature by directly addressing how context impacts on CEO leadership in three specific areas: social acceptance needs, demographics and culture. Further, the study investigates CEO transformational and transactional leadership behaviours rather than global constructs, and directly addresses the common method variance issue.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the linkages between CEO transformational leadership and the new product development (NPD) process through organizational learning and innovation culture.

A large-scale survey by a sample of 269 manufacturing firms in Thailand was conducted. Structural equation modeling was used to test the proposed relationships.

CEO transformational leadership was strongly and positively associated with organizational learning and innovation culture. Additionally, organizational learning and innovation culture were positively related to the NPD process.

Managers should pay more attention to organizational learning since it has a strong impact on the NPD process. CEOs with an innovation-oriented attitude should develop their transformational leadership to support organizational learning and an innovation culture.

The study extends the understanding of the connections between CEO transformational leadership and the NPD process. The results highlight the mediating roles of organizational learning and innovation culture on the relationship between CEO transformational leadership and the NPD process.

Because of the paucity of information about what and how Chinese leadership styles contribute to organizational success, this study aims to elucidate Chinese leadership styles with reference to Confucian and Daoist schemata, relate them to organizational success, and explicate the relationships by exploring a grounded theory.

To obtain such knowledge, this study applies a grounded theory approach to analyzing interview data from 11 Hong Kong Chinese CEOs.

Results delineated the Chinese leadership styles based on relationship building, virtuous practice, hierarchical and centralized organization, and humility and self‐effacement. These practices were conducive to trust, cooperation, competence, and other achievements in the staff. The contributions of the Chinese leadership styles tend to reflect a security theory in that sustaining followers' security appears to mediate leadership practices and their outcomes.

Because the tradition of Confucian and Daoist teachings can be a basis for successful Chinese leadership styles, the teachings can still be valuable for leadership development today.

Organizational innovation is critical for firm competitive advantage. Yet, we do not know enough about the relationship between leadership and organizational innovation. The purpose of this paper is to examine the influence of chief executive officer (CEO) transformational and transactional leadership on organizational innovation. The authors examine the moderating role of environmental dynamism.

The authors collected survey-based data from top management team members in 163 companies in services, construction, manufacturing and other industries in the USA. The authors used multiple regression analyses to test the study hypotheses.

The empirical findings indicate that CEO transformational and transactional leadership behaviors positively influence organizational innovation. However, organizations benefit more from transformational leadership in dynamic environments.

This study highlights the role of CEO leadership behavior in the pursuit of organizational innovation. Significantly, the study shows that both transformational and transactional leadership can enhance organizational innovation. However, their effectiveness is contingent on environmental dynamism. This contributes to the firm innovation literature by clarifying how specific types of CEO leadership influence organizational innovation in different environmental conditions.

This paper examines the relationship between chief executive officers' (CEOs') leadership behaviors (consideration and initiating structure) and firm and individual performance (i.e. profitability, affective commitment and employees' willingness to change) in small and medium-sized firms (SMEs) that need to adapt to changing environments.

Survey data was collected from SMEs (28 firms, 235 employees) in the accounting industry along with objective performance register data (profit and return on assets). The predicted model was tested with multilevel structural equations modeling (MSEM) using a maximum likelihood estimator.

The CEO leadership behavior of initiating structure was positively related to firms' profitability, while the CEO leadership behavior of consideration was positively related to employees' willingness to change and affective commitment.

Small accounting firms typically offer standard services that are now being replaced by digital solutions. These firms have an incentive to offer new services, such as business advisory services. Therefore, leaders should embrace the duality of consideration and initiating structure to gain employees' willingness to change and optimize overall firm performance.

The paper contributes to leadership literature by examining a novel context (CEO consideration and initiation of structure in SMEs in uncertain environments) using a combination of firm performance measures (e.g. objective outcomes at the firm level and employees' willingness to change as a new measure at the individual level). In addition, it reports a comprehensive test of the full model using MSEM, the findings of which demonstrate the importance of dual leadership behaviors for CEOs.

The purpose of this study is to identify similarities and differences between the leadership practices of managing entrepreneurs and professional CEOs and to investigate how these impact on their immediate subordinates' satisfaction, commitment, motivation, and effectiveness (engagement).

A multiple‐respondents survey, aiming at CEOs and their immediate subordinates, was conducted. Factor analysis, correlations and moderated regression analysis were used in order to reach conclusions.

Two leadership dimensions are found to be most influential: being a good manager/mentor and articulating vision. Although good manager/mentor characteristics prove crucial for both types of CEOs, the effect of vision articulation on subordinates is moderated by the type of company the CEO is leading. No significant differences are found in the leadership style that the two types of CEOs adopt, except for their calmness and self‐possession, which is lower among entrepreneurs.

The findings raise questions regarding the differences in subordinate expectations from owners – CEOs, as opposed to professional CEOs; and point at certain characteristics which could be developed in order to enhance leadership effectiveness in both groups of top managers.

The study underlines the importance of sound vision development and articulation in entrepreneur‐run firms, as it appears that people working for such firms expect more direction from the Head. It is also sustained that good management and mentoring are essential in any kind of firm, in order to develop an effective, committed and motivated top management team, which will bring corporate success.