How Can Organizational Leaders Help? Examining the Effectiveness of Leaders’ Support During a Crisis

Abstract

Organizational leaders can make a large, positive impact on their employees during crises. However, existing research demonstrates that social support is not always effective in helping employees cope with stress, and existing research has not fully identified features of support attempts that determine their effectiveness. Using mixed methods, the authors investigate the efficacy of organizational leaders’ support efforts during a crisis. In the first study, 571 employees (196 university administrative staff, 192 licensed nurses, and 183 licensed engineers) described actions their leaders engaged in to support them during a global pandemic. Nine themes differentiated helpful from unhelpful leadership support: autonomy, changes, communication, personal resources, safety, timing, tone, work equipment, and workload. Study 2 used a quantitative methodology (162 licensed nurses and 239 licensed engineers) to demonstrate that leadership actions employees deemed as helpful in Study 1 were associated with less employee burnout and fewer physical symptoms. Drawing from emerging social support literature and the stressor-strain model, the findings inform optimal leadership support practices during crises.

A conditional time-varying multivariate latent growth curve model for the relationships between academics’ servant leadership behavior, affective commitment, and job performance during the Covid-19 pandemic

“…Also Mihalache and Mihalache ( 2022 ) noted that supervisor accessibility is one of the support forms that can help with uncertainty during the pandemic and increase affective commitment. Gray et al ( 2022 , in press), however, noted that not all attempted support behavior is actually helpful and identified nine themes that should be considered for reasonable support during crises, namely autonomy, communication, changes, personal resources, safety, time, tone, work equipment, and workload.…”

Burnout Among Chinese Anesthesiologists After the COVID-19 Pandemic Peak: A National Survey

“…It has been indicated that organizational leaders can have a large, positive impact on their employees during crises. 26 It is the team leader's responsibility to provide clear communication, access to adequate personal protection and adequate rest. 27 Furthermore, to protect health care providers, initiatives at the national professional society level can also help, including (1) acknowledging and regularly measuring the extent of burnout, (2) establishing professional wellness programs such as resilience courses, and (3) educating and advocating through social media as well as plenary sessions at national meetings.…”

“…The Impact of Events Scale-Revised (IES-R) has been proven to be suitable for the Chinese population, 13 and it was incorporated to evaluate the psychological impact of COVID-19. It is a 5-point Likert scale for which the total scores can be categorized into 4 different levels: subclinical (0-8), mild (9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25), moderate (26)(27)(28)(29)(30)(31)(32)(33)(34)(35)(36)(37)(38)(39)(40)(41)(42)(43), and severe (44-88). Scoring above the threshold of 33 was considered diagnostic of PTSD.…”

“…The Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) was used to assess depressive symptoms. The total score can be categorized into 5 severity levels: normal (0-4), mild depression (5-9), moderate depression (10)(11)(12)(13)(14), moderate to severe depression (15)(16)(17)(18)(19), and severe depression (20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27). 14…”

We need a hero: HR and the ‘next normal’ workplace

“…At best, monitoring is a nuisance. During the pandemic, employees perceived employers who sent too many emails or required extra timesheets to be unhelpful (Gray et al., 2020). Over the long run, monitoring damages the quality of employment relationships.…”