首页> 外文OA文献 >The influence of perceived constructive and destructive leadership on employee well-being and ill-being: the mediating role of self-conscious emotions.
【2h】

The influence of perceived constructive and destructive leadership on employee well-being and ill-being: the mediating role of self-conscious emotions.

机译:感知建设性和破坏性领导对员工福祉和生病的影响:自我意识情绪的中介作用。

摘要

This study investigates the influence of experienced leadership (i.e. transformational, abusive) on positive and negative follower well-being (i.e. job satisfaction, engagement, workaholism, burnout) and the mediating role of follower affect and the self-conscious emotions shame, guilt, and pride. Data used in this study was collected from two diverse studies, with Study 1 having obtained data from a Japanese multi-national firm (n=183), and Study 2 including data from an Irish local government emergency response organisation (n=237). The findings from my analysis showed that, as predicted, follower perceptions of transformational leadership positively and significantly predicted follower well-being outcomes of job satisfaction and engagement, and negatively predicted the follower ill-being outcome of burnout in both studies. The predicted negative relationship between perceived abusive supervision and follower job satisfaction and engagement was supported in Study 2, while the positive influence of abusive supervision on follower ill-being outcomes of workaholism and burnout was supported in both studies. Follower perceptions of a constructive or destructive leadership style had broadly the same relationship with follower positive and negative emotions in both studies. The research further confirmed follower emotions of pride and positive and negative affect (PANA) as emotional pathways through which constructive and destructive leaders influence follower well-being (i.e. engagement) and ill-being (i.e. workaholism-working compulsively and burnout) in Study 1. The research findings make three distinct contributions to the leadership and well-being literatures. Firstly, the research confirms the role of diverse leadership styles in influencing follower well-being and ill-being outcomes, thereby addressing calls to help understand ‘when, how, and what kinds of leadership behaviours influence engagement’ and well-being outcomes (Bakker, Albrecht & Leiter, 2011, p.14; Wu & Hu, 2009). Secondly, the research responds to calls for future leadership research to broaden the measurement criteria to enable us to understand how leaders and leadership are related to emotional constructs (Dasborough, Ashkanasy, Tee, & Herman, 2009; Hiller, DeChurch, Murase, & Doty, 2011) and to calls to identify the pathways through which leadership influences follower well-being and ill-being (Hansbrough, Lord, & Schyns, 2015; Skakon et al., 2010). Thirdly, the findings in both studies identify when leaders influence follower well-being and ill-being through the pathways of follower emotions. The research findings establish the important role of the leader in follower well-being (job satisfaction, engagement) and ill-being (workaholism, burnout), and identify the leader as positively or negatively influencing follower positive and negative emotions across both studies. The hypothesised mediating effects of follower emotions between perceived leadership style and well-being and ill-being outcomes was found only in Study 1. This highlights the need for future research to consider the role of the work environment when measuring the antecedents of well-being and ill-being at work. Overall, the research findings identify the important role of the leader in influencing follower emotions and well-being and ill-being at work and establish the abusive leader as a job demand placing emotional demands on the follower, and the transformational leader as a job resource, uplifting and supporting the follower with implications for theory and practice. udud udKeywords: abusive supervision, transformational leadership, affect, shame, guilt, pride, employee well-being, job satisfaction, engagement, workaholism, burnout.ud
机译:这项研究调查了经验丰富的领导(即变革型,辱骂性)对追随者的积极和消极幸福感(即工作满意度,敬业度,工作狂,倦怠)的影响以及追随者情感的中介作用以及自我意识,羞耻感,内,感,和骄傲。本研究中使用的数据是从两项不同的研究中收集的,研究1已从一家日本跨国公司(n = 183)获得了数据,研究2已从爱尔兰地方政府应急组织(n = 237)获得了数据。我的分析结果表明,正如所预测的那样,在两项研究中,追随者对变革型领导的看法都是积极的,并显着预测了工作满意度和敬业度的追随者的幸福感,而消极地预测了倦怠的追随者的不适感。研究2支持了感知的滥用监督与跟随者工作满意度和敬业度之间的负相关预测关系,而两项研究均支持滥用监督对工作狂和跟随者的跟随者不良后果的积极影响。在两种研究中,追随者对建设性或破坏性领导风格的看法与追随者的积极情绪和消极情绪之间的关系大致相同。这项研究进一步证实了研究者1中的追随者自豪感和积极和消极情感(PANA)作为情感途径,通过这种情感途径,建设性和破坏性领导者会影响跟随者的幸福感(即订婚)和不适(即工作狂,强迫性工作和倦怠)。研究结果对领导力和幸福感文学做出了三项独特的贡献。首先,该研究证实了不同的领导风格在影响跟随者的福祉和疾病结果中的作用,从而解决了有助于理解``何时,如何以及哪种类型的领导行为影响敬业度和福祉结果''的呼吁(Bakker ,Albrecht&Leiter,2011,第14页; Wu&Hu,2009)。其次,该研究回应了对未来领导力研究的呼吁,以扩大衡量标准,使我们能够理解领导者和领导力与情感结构的关系(达斯伯勒,阿什卡纳西,Tee和Herman,2009; Hiller,DeChurch,Murase和Doty (2011年),并呼吁人们确定领导层影响跟随者福祉和疾病的途径(Hansbrough,Lord和Schyns,2015年; Skakon等人,2010年)。第三,两项研究的发现都确定了领导者何时通过跟随者情绪的途径影响跟随者的幸福和不适。研究结果确立了领导者在跟随者幸福感(工作满意度,敬业度)和不适(工作狂,倦怠)中的重要作用,并确定领导者在这两项研究中对跟随者的积极和消极情绪产生正面或负面影响。仅在研究1中发现了追随者情绪在感知的领导风格与幸福感和病态结果之间的中介作用。这突出表明了未来的研究需要在衡量幸福感的前因时考虑工作环境的作用和工作中的不适。总体而言,研究发现确定了领导者在影响追随者情绪,工作中的福祉和不适方面的重要作用,并确立了虐待性领导者作为工作需求,将情感需求施加于跟随者,而变革型领导者则作为工作资源,提升并支持追随者,对理论和实践产生影响。 ud ud ud关键字:滥用监督,变革型领导,影响,羞耻,内lt,自尊心,员工福祉,工作满意度,敬业度,工作狂,倦怠。

著录项

  • 作者

    ODonoghue Ashley;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2016
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 en
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号