Employees’ Perceived Use of Leader Power and Implications for Affect and Work Intentions

Abstract

The concept of power in organizations has been studied at both the macro level (analyses of structural systems or policies) and at the micro level (individual perceptions). In this study, we examine employee perceptions of their leader's use of power at the individual/psychological level. Applying social cognitive theory, employee perceptions of their leader's use of various forms of power were explored in relationship to employees’ negative or positive affect and corresponding work intentions. Structural equation modeling was used to examine data from 651 employees. Positive and negative affect mediated employees’ perceptions of their managers’ use of various power bases and five work intentions: intentions to perform, to endorse the organization and its leadership, to stay in the organization, to use discretionary effort, and to be an organizational citizen. Implications for practice and future research are discussed.

Leadership behavior: A partial test of the employee work passion model

“…These results suggested that employee negative affective responses to leader behaviors and leader values were not related to work intentions. Results relating to the nature of relations between employee positive and negative affect and work intentions, respectively, support those reported in the employee work passion literature (e.g., Zigarmi et al, , ; Zigarmi & Roberts, ). The presence of significant specific indirect effects between supportive behavior, leader other‐orientation, and leader self‐concern on work intentions through positive affect, and the absence of significant direct effects in the final structural model, support the hypothesized role of affect (albeit positive affect) in completely and indirectly mediating relations between environmental constructs and work intentions (although relations between directive behavior and work intentions were exceptions).…”

“…Zigarmi and Roberts () reported significant relations between managerial behavior, managerial values, employee affect, and work intentions. Zigarmi, Roberts, and Randolph () assessed structural power at the organizational level and found empirical associations between leaders' use of power, employee affect, and work intentions. In this study, we chose a singular focus on leadership, an organization environmental antecedent variable within the work passion appraisal process, to provide HRD practitioners with insight relating to a key boundary condition to the formulation of employee work passion.…”

“…First, Zigarmi et al () provided evidence supporting the overall factor stucture of the EWPA model including significant correlations between its four latent constructs (cognition, affect, job well‐being, and work intentions). Second, previous research examined the influence of antecedent variables within the EWPA model, for example, personal characteristics (see Shuck et al, ; Zigarmi et al, ) and various organization environmental antecedents (see Zigarmi et al, , ), however, such research is in its formative stage. Third, the tenets of the broader appraisal literature assert that cognition, emotion, and coping are the three central constructs in appraisal theory (Fugate, Harrison, & Kinicki, ; Lazarus & Folkman, ).…”

Employee Affect- and Cognition-Based Trust in Their Leader and the Implications for Employee Work Intentions: A Canonical Correlation Study

“…These five intentions have also been shown to be highly correlated with positive and negative feelings toward their manager. In two separate studies Zigarmi, Roberts, and Randolph () showed that positive and negative affect mediated the relationship between leaders’ use of various forms of power and the five intentions used in this study. Zigarmi and Roberts () also found that negative and positive affect toward the job mediated the relationship between managers’ perceived values (concerns for others versus self‐concerns) and the five intentions used in the study.…”

Introducing a Model of Transformational Prosocial Leadership

“…In short, two types and three styles of relational leaders can be distinguished in the academic literature: transactional leader, and transformational leader (charismatic or prosocial). Each style of leader and leadership is related to a follower (Cardona, ; Zigarmi, Roberts, & Randolph, ): the reactive subordinate, proactive professional, and cooperative team member. Leaders and followers influence and are influenced by one another while creating different levels of leadership for the organization, and different results and outcomes (see Table ).…”