Problems with detecting moderators in leadership research using moderated multiple regression

Villa, Jennifer; Howell, Jon P.; Dorfman, Peter W.; Daniel, David L.

doi:10.1016/s1048-9843(02)00184-4

Cited by 73 publications

(69 citation statements)

References 72 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This is especially pressing for our data on organizations' financial health. Given the low statistical power of moderated regression analysis (e.g., Aguinis, 1995;Villa, Howell, Dorfman, & Daniel, 2003), more interaction effects may have been significant had the sample size been larger. At the same time, it also means that the moderator effects we did find need to be replicated across a larger database of firms in future research to test their robustness.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Charismatic leadership, environmental dynamism, and performance

Hoogh¹,

Hartog

Koopman³

et al. 2004

European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most studies relating charismatic leadership to performance have limitations concerning selection of criterion measures and investigation of moderators. Therefore, this study examines relationships between charismatic leadership and multiple performance outcomes under different levels of environmental dynamism (i.e., level of environmental uncertainty, degree of technological change) and per type of Chief Executive Officer (firm owner versus managing director). Results revealed that charismatic leadership was positively related to common-source and multi-source perceptual performance outcomes (i.e., subordinates' positive work attitude) and to organization profitability, but unrelated to organization liquidity and solvency. The relationship between charismatic leadership and perceptual performance was stronger under conditions of environmental uncertainty than under conditions of environmental certainty. Furthermore, charismatic leadership was more strongly related to organization profitability for firm owners than for managing directors who do not own their firm. The results are discussed and several potentially fruitful avenues for future research on charismatic leadership and employee as well as organizational performance are presented.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Charismatic leadership, environmental dynamism, and performance

Hoogh¹,

Hartog

Koopman³

et al. 2004

European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Given the low statistical power of moderated regression analysis (e.g., Aguinis, 1995;Villa, Howell, Dorfman, & Daniel, 2003) more interaction effects may have been significant had the sample size been larger. At the same time, it also means that the moderator effects we did find need to be replicated across a larger database of firms in future research to test their robustness.…”

Section: Limitations and Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Linking the Big Five‐Factors of personality to charismatic and transactional leadership; perceived dynamic work environment as a moderator

2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryIn this multi-source study we investigated the relationships between the Big Five personality traits and both charismatic and transactional leadership behavior, and whether dynamism (the degree that the work environment is deemed dynamic) moderates these relationships. We also tested whether dynamism moderates the relationship between leadership behavior and effectiveness. Personality was measured through self ratings using the NEO-PI-R. Subordinates rated their leaders' behavior, and peers and superiors provided ratings of effectiveness. Consistent with trait activation theory, results showed that perceived dynamic work environment moderated the relationships of four of the Big Five-Factors with both charismatic and transactional leadership. Also, charismatic leadership was positively related to perceived effectiveness, but only in dynamic contexts.

show abstract

“…They followed Kerr and Jermier (1978) to identify potential substitutes by drawing eclectically from theories of individual differences, task characteristics, and organization structure. Despite plausible rationales, no stable moderated relationships have been found (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, & Bommer, 1996), possibly because of power limitations in the available methods for identifying interactions (Aguinis, 1995;Villa, Howell, Dorfman, & Daniel, 2003). In order to replicate prior research showing their non-significant effects, these substitutes were measured and tested in the present study, but no dependable moderating effects were found (details available from the authors).…”

Section: Asian-based Moderatorsmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…The beta coefficients will be reported here where significant relationships were found. Considering low power of tests for interaction between normally distributed continuous variables when assessing moderating effects in organizational research (e.g., Aguinis & Stone-Romero, 1997;Villa et al, 2003), we decided to include relationships significant at the p < 0.10 level.…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, a variety of limitations such as low reliability of product interaction terms tend to understate the effects of interactions and make moderating effects notoriously difficult to detect (e.g., Aguinis, 1995;Villa et al, 2003). In addition, the feedback process by which the obvious moderator effects are recognized by managers who change their behavior by adapting their behavior to the requirements of their situation further reduces these effects.…”

Section: Boundaries On the Universality Of Contingent Leadershipmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Nation, demographic, and attitudinal boundary conditions on leader social rewards and punishments in local governments

Peng

Peterson

2007

J Organ Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryBoundary conditions on the relationships of contingent rewards and noncontingent punishments with evaluated performance and satisfaction are sought for supervisory and professional staff in local governments in the United States and Japan. Subgroup differences in tolerance for noncontingent punishment are reflected in mean differences in its use between nations (more reported in Japan), genders (less reported by women), and regions of the United States. The effects of noncontingent punishment on outcomes were not found for U.S. police sergeants. Evidence for a national contingency is reflected in the finding that the relationship of noncontingent punishments (but not contingent rewards) with cooperation, individual effectiveness, and satisfaction was stronger in the United States than in Japan. The study adds caution to the culture-free and contingency-free application of the theory of performance-contingent rewards and punishments. Implications for the theory of social rewards and punishments and for the contingencies and criteria considered in leadership research, particularly cross-cultural leadership research, are addressed.

show abstract

Problems with detecting moderators in leadership research using moderated multiple regression

Cited by 73 publications

References 72 publications

Charismatic leadership, environmental dynamism, and performance

Charismatic leadership, environmental dynamism, and performance

Linking the Big Five‐Factors of personality to charismatic and transactional leadership; perceived dynamic work environment as a moderator

Nation, demographic, and attitudinal boundary conditions on leader social rewards and punishments in local governments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About