Psychological Safety in Ghana: Empirical Analyses of Antecedents and Consequences

Abstract

This study examines psychological safety as a mediator in the relationship between Leader–Member Exchange (LMX) and voice behavior. Based on the conservation of resources theory, a moderated mediation framework was used to examine human capital investments, specifically employee education and tenure, as boundary conditions of this relationship. The research hypotheses were tested with a sample of 207 employee-supervisor dyads working in a time-lagged design. The study found that psychological safety is an intermediary mechanism through which LMX affects voice behavior. Employees’ level of education negatively moderates the relationship between LMX and psychological safety. Furthermore, the results suggest that organizational tenure accentuates the relationship between LMX and psychological safety, and strengthens the indirect effect of LMX on voice behavior. The theoretical contributions and managerial implications are discussed in addition to directions for future research.

Analysis of the Influence of Entrepreneur’s Psychological Capital on Employee’s Innovation Behavior Under Leader-Member Exchange Relationship

“…Contribution had a very significant positive correlation with employee innovation behavior (p < 0.001). Emotion and loyalty had a significant positive correlation with employee innovation behavior (p < 0.05), which was the same as the research results of Opoku et al (2020), indicating LMX was a significant positive predictor of employee innovation behavior, and its contribution was the strongest. On the other hand, there was no significant correlation between professional respect and employee innovation behavior (p > 0.05).…”

Guanxi HRM Practice and Employees’ Occupational Well-Being in China: A Multi-Level Psychological Process

“…Bennis [29] argued that organizations must recognize and create a psychologically safe work environment, as safety is a fundamental human need. When employees feel a high level of psychological safety within a workgroup, they are likely to speak up and voice opinions [30], learning from failures [31]. Thus, psychological safety was found to be positively related to a host of employee outcomes, such as performance [32], creativity [33], helping behavior [34], and job satisfaction [35].…”

Promoting Innovative Behavior in Employees: The Mechanism of Leader Psychological Capital

“…The researchers explored the mediation effect of subordinate psychological safety in the relationship between leader PsyCap and innovative behavior. Previous empirical studies verified that psychological safety was a vital cognitive process which links leaders and followers ( Hirak et al, 2012 ; Zhu and Zhang, 2019 ), but existing literature over the research on antecedents of psychological safety is included in an area that involves the following styles: transformational leadership (i.e., Detert and Burris, 2007 ; Nemanich and Vera, 2009 ), ethical leadership (i.e., Walumbwa and Schaubroeck, 2009 ; Sağnak, 2017 ; Hu et al, 2018 ; Men et al, 2018 ), servant leadership (i.e., Schaubroeck et al, 2011 ; Chughtai, 2016 ), empowering leadership (i.e., Jada and Mukhopadhyay, 2018 ), humble leadership (i.e., Wang et al, 2018a , b ), and leader-member exchange ( Hu et al, 2018 ; Opoku et al, 2020 ). Moreover, existing studies over the result of psychological safety mainly focus on information sharing ( Siemsen et al, 2009 ; Bunderson and Boumgarden, 2010 ), voice behavior (i.e., Chughtai, 2016 ; Sağnak, 2017 ; Hu et al, 2018 ; Jada and Mukhopadhyay, 2018 ; Opoku et al, 2020 ; Song et al, 2020 ), creativity ( Wang et al, 2018a , b ), and task performance ( Baer and Frese, 2003 ; Schaubroeck et al, 2011 ).…”