Search results

The present research aimed to develop and test cognitive processes through which instrumental leadership leads to creativity via problem-solving rumination and knowledge sharing with coworkers, based on the self-regulatory perspective of goal progress theory.

Data were collected from 166 male construction workers (nested within 19 male leaders) who completed the total of 1,642 daily diary questionnaires. Further, a group-mean centering approach and several control variables were used in order to improve causal inferences of the results.

It was found that instrumental leadership predicts problem-solving rumination (an intrapersonal self-regulatory process) and knowledge sharing with coworkers (an interpersonal self-regulatory process), which, in turn, result in creativity.

In addition to motivational processes that explain the relationships between several leadership styles and creativity, the current research found a crucial role of instrumental leadership in predicting creativity.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the influence of transformational and instrumental leadership on the individual performance of the employee and the financial performance in Brazilian startups.

The adopted methodological construction strategy was structural equation modeling, with the purpose of applying the model to primary data collected from a sample of leaders of Brazilian startups (n = 126).

Results suggest that when leadership types are analyzed separately, both directly influence employee performance.

This study has four main contributions: to test the influence of the two leadership styles on employee performance and thus to help advance the theoretical understanding of leadership; to perform this test in the context of Brazilian startups; to equip professionals with more information about the effects of crucial leadership types on individual type of employee performance; and to expand knowledge for recruitment and managerial training in initial-stage companies.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the possible consequences of the intra-individual level-based perceptions of participative, supportive and instrumental leadership styles and the dissonance factors of leadership styles perceptions on employee engagement using the information-processing and connectionist perspectives of leadership perceptions.

Hypotheses relating to direct and moderated effects of perceptions of leadership styles on employee engagement were tested using a two-stage intra-individual level study (n=172 in each stage). Hierarchical regression analysis was used to test the hypotheses.

The findings revealed that perceptions of preferred and experienced supportive leadership styles are individually important predictors of employee engagement. It was also revealed that differentiated leadership styles have stronger (complementary) effect on employee engagement when the perceptions of experienced participative and supportive leadership styles were aligned with perceptions of respective preferred leadership styles. Furthermore, it was also found that the low level compared to the high level of dissonance factor or the difference between preferred and experienced instrumental leadership style acted as a complementer on employee engagement.

This study has made contributions to facilitate scholars to build better information-processing models and implicit theories for differentiated leadership and employee engagement links. Finally, the study provides new information on the consequence of perceptions of leadership style and the dissonance factor of leadership perceptions on followers’ actions such as employee engagement.

This will be the first empirical study examining the relationships between the dissonance factor of leadership perceptions of participative, supportive and instrumental styles and employee engagement.

The purpose of this paper is to develop a greater understanding of the effect of innovation leadership (participative, supportive, and instrumental) on supervisory-rated employee creativity through greater employee regulatory focus (i.e. promotion and prevention).

Data were collected from dyads of 103 employees and employee supervisors working in Taiwan’s high-tech industry. A structural equation modelling approach was used to examine the relationship posited in this study.

Results reveal that both participative and supportive leadership are positively associated with the creativity of supervisory-rated subordinates when those subordinates adopted a focus on promotion. The data also show that these relationships are partially mediated by employee promotion focus. At the same time, the positive relationship between instrumental leadership and employee creativity is fully mediated by employee prevention focus.

The results of this study show that participative and supportive leaders cultivate employee promotion focus, which then enhances employee creativity. Instrumental leaders will induce employee prevention focus, which also enhances employee creativity. These findings imply that when enhancing employee creativity, employees with a promotion focus are more suited to participative and supportive leaders, while employees who do not have a promotion focus may be more suited to leaders who provide these employees with specific instructions on the rules, regulations, and procedures to follow to accomplish given tasks and common goals.

The path‐goal theory of leadership states that the leader helps subordinates to achieve their goals by providing a clear path for them to follow. This research project used data collected in Taiwan to test the applicability of this theory in a non‐western culture. The three groups of subjects studied (peers, managers and subordinates), perceived the level of task structure to be equivalent. Three aspects of leadership were measured: instrumental, supportive and participative leadership. Leaders reported that they used each style of leadership at a statistical significantly higher level than their peers believed. Two dimensions of motivation were also considered: efforts that lead to performance and efforts that lead to rewards. Overall, the results provide some support for the path‐goal theory of leadership. The theory was supported for the relationship between managers and subordinates but not supported for the relationship between managers and peers.

The ambidextrous leadership model specifically describes opening and closing leader behaviors in the innovation process. This paper aims to emphasize the relevance of the ambidextrous leadership model with respect to leadership in innovation processes.

In this longitudinal research design, 54 employees rated the ambidextrous leader behaviors and innovation performance concerning an innovation project over a period of six weeks. Traditional leadership styles (i.e. transformational, transactional, instrumental leadership, leader–member exchange) were assessed at a between-person level to identify their effects with respect to innovation performance.

Multilevel regression analysis results showed that instrumental leadership as well as opening and closing leader behaviors were positively related to innovation performance. By contrast, transformational and transactional leadership as well as leader–member exchange (LMX) did not show significant associations with innovation performance.

The findings support the relevance of specific leader behaviors to the innovation process and therefore underline the importance of the ambidextrous leadership model.

The study from which this article is derived was carried out in eight diversely located primary schools in the United States of America. Each had implemented the system of Individually Guided Education (IGE) several years previously; and each was chosen from among 42 schools that had already been randomly selected and studied by researchers from the Wisconsin Research and Development (R & D) Centre because they met several predetermined operational criteria. One of the several questions investigated in the study concerned the impact of the principal's leader behaviour on the decision‐making processes used in the schools, each of which was typified by the principal sharing leadership responsibilities with a representative cabinet type leadership committee, called the Instructional Improvement Committee (IIC). Field methodology incorporating interviews, observations and questionnaires was used to collect the data. In this article the background to the study is presented, the theoretical considerations of educational leadership relevant to the question explored are outlined, the research methodology is described, the pertinent collected data are tabulated and analysed, the major findings concerning the leader behaviour of the principal are reported, and the implications for practice set down. The conclusion is drawn that the leadership of the principal is a crucial factor in the functioning of the IIC.

This article presents four basic innovation leadership styles: charismatic, instrumental, strategic and interactive innovation leadership. The leadership styles and their characteristsics relate to process and product innovations in construction projects. A theoretical framework – which synthesizes these relations – enables explorative research into the effects of leadership on organizational innovativeness. Four case studies, observing the same manager in four comparable projects, explore the effects of each leadership style on a construction project’s innovativeness in ecological terms. On an analytical level the case study explorations indicate that a manager’s consistent performance of a leadership style stimulates the project’s ecological innovativeness when the manager also injects the project with ecological information, knowledge and competence. It also indicates that a manager’s consistent performance of a leadership style, without an injection of information, knowledge and competence in the project, does not stimulate the project’s ecological innovativeness.

Serious questions have been raised regarding the necessity to continue focusing our research on what constitutes individual, or what the authors refer to as singular leadership. Although the authors consider these questions to be important to advancing the field of leadership theory, research, and practice, they also suggest that attempts to minimize the relevance of singular leadership may hinder progress in other domains of leadership research. In this chapter, the authors explore how and why singular leaders and their leadership matter, and how they may influence follower, peer, and organizational outcomes. The authors use a paradoxical framework to present a theoretical model and propositions that allow us to clarify the influence of different forms of singular leadership within organizations. In our examination of singular leadership, the authors consider both positive and harmful modes of attributes, cognitions, and behaviors.

In this chapter, we briefly trace the history of the neo-charismatic movement and review Bass and Avolio’s full-range leadership theory (FRLT). We present the FRLT as the flame bearer of the movement, and argue that it should be used as a platform to integrate similar leadership theories. We identify conditions that may moderate the factor structure of the FRLT, and review the validity of the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire – the instrument underlying the FRLT. Furthermore, we identify theoretical deficiencies in the FRLT and propose the addition of a broad class of behaviors labeled instrumental leadership, which, we argue, is distinct from transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership. Finally, we discuss the utility of dispositional variables in predicting the emergence of leadership.