Search results

The purpose of this paper is to explore newcomers as active participants within their own socialization, through the influence of self-leadership on proactivity and subsequently organizational socialization and organizational commitment.

Data collected from 193 organizational newcomers (i.e. individuals within their first year at an organization) working in a variety of industries were examined within three serial mediation models in PROCESS.

The results of these analyses suggest that self-leadership influences organizational newcomers’ adjustment and subsequent commitment by assisting them in seeking organizational resources.

This study answers calls to explore both the mediating mechanisms through which self-leadership processes influence organizational outcomes and the complex relationships between human workplace interactions and the proximal and distal outcomes of socialization.

The findings indicate that organizational stakeholders should enhance the self-leadership abilities of newcomer, thereby easing the socialization burden on organizations.

This paper offers a novel framework (i.e. self-leadership) for understanding newcomer socialization and provides an encompassing model that recognizes individual capacities, communicative behaviors, adjustment and subsequent organizational attitudes.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the role of self-leadership in enhancing work engagement through the mediating mechanisms of affective, normative and continuance organizational commitment.

Data collected from 258 transportation workers were examined in a parallel mediation model in PROCESS.

The results of these analyses suggest that the positive relationship between self-leadership and work engagement is partially mediated by affective commitment and normative commitment, but not by continuance commitment.

The findings imply that organizational decision makers should implement practices designed to increase self-leadership in the workplace and enhance employee work engagement. These practices include empowering leadership, recruitment and selection of self-leading employees, and self-leadership training interventions. The study was subject to limitations common to attitudinal survey research.

This study responds calls to explore the mediating mechanisms through which self-leadership affects organizational outcomes and helps explain why self-leadership affects employee work engagement.

The COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically altered the daily lives of millions of people around the world, substantially increasing anxiety and stress levels for many. Psychological capital (PsyCap), a multidimensional construct that includes hope, optimism, resilience and self-efficacy, may serve as a resource for helping people more effectively cope with uncertainty resulting in lower levels of perceived stress. The authors hypothesize a negative relationship between PsyCap and perceived stress that is partially and differentially mediated by adaptive and maladaptive coping styles. The authors further hypothesize that work context (home vs workplace) will moderate the relationships between coping styles and perceived stress.

After receiving Institutional Review Board approval, data were collected during the first week of May 2020 using an online survey. The hypothesized model was tested using structural equation modeling (SEM) techniques, specifically Mplus 8. The authors validated their initial findings using PROCESS Model 14 with 5,000 boot-strapped samples and a 95% confidence interval.

The authors’ results show that adaptive and maladaptive coping styles differentially mediate the effects of PsyCap on perceived stress with the indirect effects of PsyCap on perceived stress through maladaptive coping being stronger than the indirect effects through adaptive coping. The authors found support for the relationships in our hypothesized model.

The authors’ findings suggest that health interventions aimed at increasing PsyCap may be an effective means of reducing maladaptive coping and perceived stress. Future research should continue to explore PsyCap as a potential means of shaping positive health behaviors.

This study makes a unique contribution to the literature by explaining how PsyCap operates through coping to affect perceptions of stress in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.

This paper aims to explore the potential explanatory mechanisms linking leader–member exchange (LMX) and a perceived supportive environment for corporate entrepreneurship. Specifically, this paper develops and tests a hypothesized moderated mediation model of the relationship between LMX and a perceived supportive environment for corporate entrepreneurship through psychological empowerment as conditional upon the level of control orientation.

Data were collected from a sample of 682 full-time working adults in the USA and were examined in a moderated mediation model in PROCESS.

The findings suggest that higher LMX augments perceptions of a supportive environment for corporate entrepreneurship with a mediating role for psychological empowerment and a moderating role for control orientation on that conditional relationship.

This research suggests that high quality LMX relationships may enrich the human capital of firms, helping them to innovate and outperform competitors in the context of modern competitive dynamics. The study findings are limited by several factors including a cross-sectional design and a student-recruited sampling approach.

The study offers unique contributions to the leadership and entrepreneurship literature by being among the first to empirically investigate the relationship between LMX and a perceived supportive environment for corporate entrepreneurship as mediated by psychological empowerment and moderated by control orientation, yielding important insights regarding effective leadership practices for facilitating innovative behaviors and corporate entrepreneurship.

Transformational leadership (TFL) has been identified by a number of studies as a positive force for business success. However, few studies have explicitly examined its influence on the cooperative employment relationship, such as frontline employees' voice in the workplace. Thus, this study conducts an empirical analysis of dual-level (i.e. group-focused and individual-focused) TFL and its effect on frontline employees' cooperative voice.

This empirical study is based on data from a survey of 468 full-time frontline workers from 38 hotels in China.

The empirical results revealed that both individual-level and group-level TFL are significantly associated with frontline employees' cooperative voice. Person–Organization value congruence and Person–Supervisor value congruence both act as mediators in the linkage between group-level TFL and employees' cooperative voice behaviors. The partial mediating role of Demand–Ability congruence on the relationship between individual-level TFL and cooperative voice is also established.

First, this study investigates the dual-level effects of TFL on the cooperative voice behavior of frontline employees. Second, this study explores whether three dimensions of value congruence mediate the influence of TFL on the voice behaviors of employees.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a thorough review of self‐leadership literature past and present, including a historical overview of how the concept was created and expanded as well as a detailed look at more recent self‐leadership research trends and directions. The paper also presents a theoretical and conceptual explanation and differentiation of the self‐leadership concept relative to other related motivational, personality, and self‐influence constructs.

Self‐leadership research and related literatures of motivation, personality and self‐influence are discussed and described in order to present the current state of the self‐leadership body of knowledge and to suggest future directions to explore and study.

It is suggested that self‐leadership is a normative model of self‐influence that operates within the framework of more descriptive and deductive theories such as self‐regulation and social cognitive theory.

While self‐leadership research composes an impressive body of knowledge, it is a domain of study that has been under‐investigated in some aspects, both empirically and conceptually.

This paper suggests several future directions that researchers can undertake to advance self‐leadership knowledge.

This paper fills a void in the organizational literature by reviewing the body of self‐leadership knowledge, by stating how self‐leadership is a distinctive theory in its own, and by presenting directions for future self‐leadership research.

In terms of the body of knowledge examining work teams, several books and articles have attempted to address the underlying causes of why work teams fail. However, a scarcity of writings has focused on the issue of work team sustainability. The dictionary defines “sustain” as “to prevent from falling, collapsing, or giving way,” and “to endure.” This definition gives rise to the following question: “What are the factors that contribute to those work teams that ‘endure’ and that do not ‘fall, collapse, or give way’ during challenging organizational experiences?” In this paper, we will take an initial step toward answering this question by presenting a cognitive model of work team sustainability based upon established cognitive principles of individual‐level effort and performance sustainability. This model is designed to provide some practical insights into the long‐term team performance sustainability issue while also serving as a possible foundation for future research efforts.

This study examined the relationship between self‐leadership and personality through an analysis and comparison of hierarchical factor structures. Structural equation modeling techniques were used to examine several competing models combining the hierarchical factor structures of self‐leadership and personality. Model fit increased significantly through a progression of models that reflected increasingly greater distinction between self‐leadership skill dimensions and key personality traits. The best fitting model consisted of a hierarchical factor structure with three first‐order self‐leadership factors, three first‐order personality factors, and two correlated second‐order factors. Unexpectedly, the general second‐order factors of self‐leadership and personality were statistically indistinguishable. Nevertheless, these results seem to provide some initial evidence that self‐leadership dimensions are distinct from, yet related to, certain key personality traits. The implications of these results for future self‐leadership research and practice are discussed.

The purpose of this paper is to develop and present a model of self‐leadership, innovation and creativity.

Drawing upon existing theoretical and empirical evidence the paper develops and presents a conceptual model of the relationships between self‐leadership, innovation, creativity, and organizational support. The paper also presents research propositions based upon the relationships suggested by the model.

The model suggests that individuals with strong self‐leadership will consider themselves to have more innovation and creativity potential than individuals who have weak self‐leadership, and that individuals who have innovation and creativity potential will be more likely to practise innovation and creativity when they perceive strong support from the workplace than individuals who perceive weak support from the workplace.

Future researchers should examine empirically the linkages suggested by this model along with other relationships asserted or implied by the creativity and self‐leadership literature as summarized in the paper.

The model suggests that organizational leaders would be well advised to encourage the practice of self‐leadership among the members of organizations while striving to build work environments that support of creativity and innovation at the group, supervisor, and organizational levels.

This paper makes a valuable contribution to both the self‐leadership and creativity literatures by being one of the first to examine the relationships between these important organizational concepts.

The purpose of this brief commentary is to provide a brief overview of Max Weber's life, work, and contributions to management thought before addressing the question of whether his notion of authority still holds in the twenty‐first century.

The commentary begins with a brief biographical sketch followed by an examination of Weber's conceptualization of authority, its influence on the field of management and its relevancy in the twenty‐first century.

Weber's writings on charismatic authority have been and continue to be instrumental in shaping modern leadership theory, that the charismatic form of authority may be particularly applicable and effective in today's chaotic and rapidly changing environments, and that the empowered and self‐managing organizational forms of the twenty‐first century may represent merely a different incarnation of Weber's iron cage of legal/rational authority.

This commentary makes an important contribution to the management history literature by examining an important aspect of Weber's influence on management thought, theory, and practice.