Why and when do employees become more proactive under humble leaders? The roles of psychological need satisfaction and Chinese traditionality

New generation employees have become the main force of the organization, and their proactive behavior directly affects the organization’s future development. How to effectively stimulate the proactive behavior of new generation employees has become a hot topic in the field of organizational management. Based on the integrated perspective of social exchange and self-enhancement, we constructed a multistep mediation model to explore the influence mechanism of distributed leadership on the proactive behavior of new generation employees. We designed a three-stage research method of supervisor-employee pairing to collect data from 26 supervisors and 304 new generation employees in a new energy vehicle company in East China. Results indicated that (a) distributed leadership is positively related to proactive behavior of new generation employees; (b) idiosyncratic deals and meaningfulness of work mediated the linkage between distributed leadership and new generation employees’ proactive behavior; (c) idiosyncratic deals and meaningfulness of work play a multistep mediation role between distributed leadership and new generation employees’ proactive behavior. These findings have theoretical implications for the proactive behavior literature and managerial implications for practitioners.

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Distributed Leadership and New Generation Employees’ Proactive Behavior: Roles of Idiosyncratic Deals and Meaningfulness of Work

Zhang

Dai

et al. 2021

“…The fact that personalized charismatic leaders have disregard for their followers’ needs signifies a lack of empathy which is also associated with narcissism ( Tang et al, 2018 ). Moreover, personalized charismatic leaders exhibit a morally righteous “image” to enhance their influence and elevate their social status ( Chen et al, 2021 ). Such behavioral characteristics of exhibitionism and social assertiveness further corroborate their narcissistic tendencies.…”

Section: Theoretical Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

What’s charisma got to do with it? Three faces of charismatic leadership and corporate social responsibility engagement

Dutta

2022

In response to both internal and external expectations and pressures, companies increasingly consider corporate social responsibility (CSR) as an essential factor in their strategic planning, but in a very diverse manner. To help synthesize the flourishing research in CSR variation across firms, we propose a three-orientation framework to map out a wide range of CSR strategies in current literature. Furthermore, we emphasize the importance of executive leadership and suggest that differences in leader’s values are the key drivers of CSR heterogeneity. This study offers a parsimonious model that maps out three primary pathways between leadership values and CSR strategic configurations. Drawing from charismatic leadership theory, we argue that three distinct types of leader power motives define three modes of leader’s strategic decision frames, which, in turn, influence corresponding CSR orientations. Specifically, socialized charismatic leaders favor prosocial decision frame that results in integrative CSR orientation; neutralized charismatic leaders embrace instrumental decision frame leading to strategic CSR mode; and personalized charismatic leaders tend to adopt self-serving CSR strategies driven by the self-serving decision frame. This holistic view advances the knowledge about the micro-foundations of CSR drivers and the essential role of leader values.

“…Subordinates’ dissatisfaction or negative attitudes toward their superiors will damage their interpersonal relationships, thus impeding their ability to execute their jobs effectively and advance their careers within the company ( Liu et al, 2010 ). Prior research has found that traditionality moderates the relationship between justice and organizational citizenship behaviors ( Farh et al, 1997 ), transformational leadership and leader effectiveness ( Spreitzer et al, 2005 ), inclusive leadership and follower’s taking charge ( Wang et al, 2020 ), leader humility and employees’ proactive behavior ( Chen et al, 2021 ), supervisor’s mentoring quality and subordinate’s proactive behavior ( Wu et al, 2019 ). Traditionality can also moderate the relationships among parental support, career decision-making self-efficacy and career adaptability ( Guan et al, 2016 ).…”

Section: Theory and Hypotheses Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

An analysis of the trickle-down effect of supervisor knowledge hiding on subordinate knowledge hiding based on displaced aggression theory

Tang

Zhu²,

Du³

2022

The harm of horizontal knowledge hiding behavior (colleague–colleague) to individuals and organizations has been discussed and confirmed by many studies. The negative consequences of top-down (supervisor–subordinate) knowledge hiding have now emerged as a new focus of research. This study aims to enrich the understanding of the consequences of supervisor knowledge hiding by exploring its trickle-down effect and mechanism. Based on the displaced aggression theory in psychology, this paper analyses and examines the cognitive psychological process and mechanism informing employee knowledge hiding from colleagues when faced with their supervisor’s malicious knowledge hiding behavior. Using a three-stage time-lag questionnaire survey strategy, we collect 233 valid samples of full-time employees from representative provinces and cities in China, covering multiple industries. The following findings are observed: (1) Supervisor knowledge hiding from subordinates (SKHS) positively affects subordinate knowledge hiding from colleagues (SKHC); (2) Revenge motivation plays a mediating role; (3) Traditionality weakens the influence of supervisor knowledge hiding on a subordinates’ revenge motivation. This study confirms the trickle-down effects of supervisor knowledge hiding behavior, extends research on the consequences of top-down knowledge hiding and its mechanism and provides new insights for organizational practice.