Examining the Effects of Cultural Value Orientations, Emotional Intelligence, and Motivational Orientations: How do LMX Mediation and Gender-Based Moderation Make a Difference?

Abstract

We examined the role of leader-member exchange (LMX) as a mediator between individual differences and outcomes across three separate studies with 838 participants. Gender-based moderation was used with the LMX mediation effect. Our results suggest that gender makes a dramatic difference. Specifically, we found that LMX mediation lowered the tendency of counterproductive work behaviors (CWBs) for men. In addition, we found that LMX mediated the effect extrinsic motivation has on extrinsic job satisfaction for women. We trace these differences to a tendency for women to express a more democratic and participative leadership style, which implies a different criterion for leader performance in some situations. We also present suggestions for how the findings of our studies can be extended via organizational practice and future research.

Abusive leadership: A moderated-mediation through leader-member exchange and by organizational politics

“…This is based on the observation that in dyadic relationships and organizational settings, managers tend to develop and use different relationship and management styles with each of their subordinates with varying outcomes (Dansereau et al, 1975;Graen and Cashman, 1975;Matta and Van Dyne, 2020). Different styles also produce different attitudes in the subordinates themselves 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.983199 (Ilies et al, 2007; see also Shkoler and Tziner, 2020;Tziner et al, 2020). Capitalizing upon social exchange theory (SET; Blau, 1964) and reciprocity theory (Gouldner, 1960), employees in good relationships with their managers (i.e., high LMX) usually feel obliged to mutually reciprocate (see also Adams, 1965).…”

Transformational Leadership, Ethical Leadership, and Participative Leadership in Predicting Counterproductive Work Behaviors: Evidence From Financial Technology Firms

“…Previous empirical studies on the antecedents that can mitigate negative work behaviors in Greater China lack sufficient research ( Lee and Huang, 2019 ; Wen et al, 2020 ; Zeng et al, 2020 ; Lan et al, 2021 ), thereby indicating the importance of exploring key antecedents of counterproductive work behaviors (CWBs) ( Baloch et al, 2017 ; Chen et al, 2017 ; Tziner et al, 2020 ; Yan et al, 2020 ). Moreover, CWBs are an important concept, because CWBs may cause lost productivity and withdrawal.…”

Perceived Organizational Politics, Leadership Style and Resilience: How Do They Relate to OCB, If at All?

“…Initially, three tests were employed to assess the extent to which inter-correlations among the variables might be an artifact of common method variance (CMV): (a) Harman's single-factor method (a confirmatory factor analysis [CFA] in which all items are concurrently loaded on one single factor); (b) a common latent factor method (a CFA in which all items are loaded on both their expected factors and one common latent factor is loaded on each of the items respectively, but are uncorrelated to their respective latent factors); and (c) a CFA without a common latent factor, as proposed by Podsakoff et al (2003), and backed by Jawahar, Schreurs and Mohammed (2018) and Tziner, Shkoler and Fein (2020).…”