|
|
|
| The Influence of Temporal Leadership on Employees′ Taking Charge Behavior from the Perspective of Proactive Motivation Model |
| Wei Yiyi1,Ma Lu2,Xie Peng3 |
| (1.School of Labor and Human Resources, Renmin University of China, Beijing 100872, China;2.School of Management, Guangxi University for Nationalities, Nanning 530006, China;3.School of Business Administration, Jiangxi University of Finance and Economics, Nanchang 330032, China) |
|
|
|
|
Abstract With greater uncertainty in today's dynamic and competitive business world, organizations seeking to gain a sustainable advantage over competitors are increasingly relying on their employees to take charge so as to build core competitiveness. Given the importance of employees taking charge, scholars and practitioners have wide discussion about the antecedents. There are mounting empirical studies regarding the impact of leadership on employees' taking charge behavior, such as empowering leadership, ethical leadership and participative leadership. However, little attention has so far been paid to the role of time in the leadership literature, as taking charge behaviors are often influenced by time. The behavior of taking charge is discretionary and requires time to initiate changes, and time pressure from the workplace may pose constraints on employee proactivity. Therefore, it is necessary to explore how managers orchestrate employees' daily work and improve their behavior of taking charge in response to such time-related challenges. Temporal leadership concerns a particular type of time management aiming to help employees organize their work tasks, such as defining clear schedules and reminding deadlines, synchronizing activities for employees. Such behaviors are expected to alleviate employees' time pressure, improve their working experience. According to the proactive motivation model, the positive emotional state is identified to be a key direct affective pathway to employee proactivity. In line with this reasoning, this study proposes that temporal leadership may promote employee taking charge behaviors.#br#The existing studies have yet to discuss the relationship between temporal leadership and employees' taking charge behavior. To unveil the underlying mechanism, this study draws on the proactive motivation model and takes positive emotion as mediating variable and employee mindfulness as moderating variable. It empirically examines the proposed model with 239 valid paired samples collected from a wide range of organizations in China. The results illustrate that temporal leadership can significantly promote employees' taking charge behavior, and positive emotion plays a partially mediating role in the relationship; employee mindfulness not only moderates the relationship between temporal leadership and positive emotion, but also moderates the mediating effect of positive emotion on the relationship between temporal leadership and employees' taking charge behavior. That is to say, the relationship of temporal leadership and positive emotion is relatively stronger when employee mindfulness is high, and the mediating effect is relatively stronger. #br#This study makes several important contributions to the existing literature. First, focusing on temporal leadership, the findings enriches the literature by identifying employee proactive behavior as an outcome of temporal leadership. It contributes to calls from previous scholars to include more nuanced leader behaviors when considering the impact of leadership on employee behaviors. Additionally, the study provides a novel insight to the extant literature regarding the antecedents of employees' taking charge behavior by incorporating the research field of temporal leadership, positive emotion, and employee mindfulness. Second, by building on the proactive motivation model, the study integrates positive emotion to unpack the ‘black box' of temporal leadership and employee taking charge behavior, which enriches the evidence for the motivational effects of temporal leadership on employees and organizations. It provides a more comprehensive understanding of how managers can motivate employee proactivity. Third, this study identifies employee mindfulness as a boundary condition of the relationship between temporal leadership and employees' taking charge behavior. The findings clarify the condition under which temporal leadership positively affects employee proactive behavior. This is also in response to previous calls for taking the role of employee mindfulness into account of leadership effectiveness. #br#Given that time is such a critical resource in the workplace, it provides important instructive implications by addressing the research gaps regarding the role of time in leadership for managerial practice. Considering the increased emphasis on employee proactivity, organizations need to realize the importance of temporal leadership in helping employees to work in an organized and rhythmic manner. Apart from leader behaviors, the results show that the positive effect of temporal leadership on employees' taking charge behavior is stronger with higher employee mindfulness. Organizations should therefore develop more training programs of mindfulness for employees to strengthen the effectiveness of temporal leadership.#br#
|
|
Received: 19 November 2020
|
|
|
|
|
|
| [1] PARKER S K,WILLIAMS H M,TURNER N. Modeling the antecedents of proactive behavior at work[J]. The Journal of Applied Psychology,2006,91(3):636-652. [2] BURNETT M F,CHIABURU D S,SHAPIRO D L,et al. Revisiting how and when perceived organizational support enhances taking charge[J]. Journal of Management,2015,41(7):1805-1826. [3] 马璐,谢鹏,韦依依. 下属默契对员工主动担责行为的影响研究:目标清晰度中介效应与组织支持感调节效应[J]. 中国软科学,2020，33(2):129-137. [4] MORRISON E W,PHELPS C C. Taking charge at work:extrarole efforts to initiate workplace change[J]. Academy of Management Journal,1999,42(4):403-419. [5] 张征,李锦. 员工主动变革行为:前因与后果[J]. 中国人力资源开发,2019,36(5):60-75. [6] LEUNG K,CHEN Z J,ZHOU F,et al. The role of relational orientation as measured by face and renqing in innovative behavior in China:an indigenous analysis[J]. Asia Pacific Journal of Management,2014,31(1):105-126. [7] LI S L,HE W,YAM K C,et al. When and why empowering leadership increases followers′ taking charge:a multilevel examination in China[J]. Asia Pacific Journal of Management,2015,32(3):645-670. [8] 李明,荣莹,李锐. 组织中的变革担当:积极组织行为研究的新主题[J]. 心理科学,2019,42(3):715-721. [9] LI N,CHIABURU D S,KIRKMAN B L. Cross-level influences of empowering leadership on citizenship behavior[J]. Journal of Management,2017,43(4):1076-1102. [10] LEE K. Ethical leadership and followers' taking charge:trust in,and identification with,leader as mediators[J]. Social Behavior and Personality:an International Journal,2016,44(11):1793-1802. [11] HUGHES D J,LEE A,TIAN A W,et al. Leadership,creativity,and innovation:a critical review and practical recommendations[J]. The Leadership Quarterly,2018,29(5):549-569. [12] ZHANG J C,VAN EERDE W,GEVERS J M P,et al. How temporal leadership boosts employee innovative job performance[J]. European Journal of Innovation Management,2020,24(1):23-42. [13] LIU W,TANGIRALA S,LEE C,et al. New directions for exploring the consequences of proactive behaviors: introduction to the special issue[J]. Journal of Organizational Behavior,2019,40(1):1-4. [14] MOHAMMED S,NADKARNI S. Temporal diversity and team performance:the moderating role of team temporal leadership[J]. Academy of Management Journal,2011,54(3):489-508. [15] PARKER S K,BINDL U K,STRAUSS K. Making things happen:a model of proactive motivation[J]. Journal of Management,2010,36(4):827-856. [16] CAI Z J,PARKER S K,CHEN Z J,et al. How does the social context fuel the proactive fire? a multilevel review and theoretical synthesis[J]. Journal of Organizational Behavior,2019,40(2):209-230. [17] COOPER C D,KONG D T,CROSSLEY C D. Leader humor as an interpersonal resource:integrating three theoretical perspectives[J]. Academy of Management Journal,2018,61(2):769-796. [18] BIRKELAND I K,NERSTAD C. Incivility is (not) the very essence of love: passion for work and incivility instigation[J]. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology,2016,21(1):77-90. [19] 段文杰. 正念研究的分歧:概念与测量[J]. 心理科学进展,2014,22(10):1616-1627. [20] 张静. 正念与领导力:基于交互的视角[M]. 北京:经济管理出版社,2019. [21] ZHENG X M,LIU X. The buffering effect of mindfulness on abusive supervision and creative performance:a social cognitive framework[J]. Frontiers in Psychology,2017,8:1588. [22] EISENBEISS S A,VAN KNIPPENBERG D. On ethical leadership impact: the role of follower mindfulness and moral emotions[J]. Journal of Organizational Behavior,2015,36(2):182-195. [23] MCALLISTER D J,KAMDAR D,MORRISON E W,et al. Disentangling role perceptions: how perceived role breadth,discretion,instrumentality,and efficacy relate to helping and taking charge[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology,2007,92(5):1200-1211. [24] 张军成,凌文辁. 时间领导研究述评与展望:一个组织行为学观点[J]. 外国经济与管理,2015,37(1):3-10,42. [25] MOHAMMED S,ALIPOUR K K. It's time for temporal leadership:individual,dyadic,team,and organizational effects[J]. Industrial and Organizational Psychology,2014,7(2):178-182. [26] KIM T Y,LIU Z Q. Taking charge and employee outcomes:the moderating effect of emotional competence[J]. The International Journal of Human Resource Management,2017,28(5):775-793. [27] 张军成,凌文辁. 时间领导对员工助人行为的影响:工作激情和主动型人格的作用[J]. 心理科学,2016,39(4):927-933. [28] GLASΦ L,SKOGSTAD A,NOTELAERS G,et al. Leadership,affect and outcomes:symmetrical and asymmetrical relationships[J]. Leadership & Organization Development Journal,2018,39(1):51-65. [29] 刘新梅,张新星,崔天恒. 时间压力与创造力的关系研究:时间领导的跨层调节作用[J]. 研究与发展管理,2017,29(5):13-21. [30] 张钢,岑杰. 知识型团队时间协调机制及其对效能的影响研究[J]. 科研管理,2015,36(6):145-156. [31] 卫武,赵鹤. 团队时间领导与团队创新行为:基于团队从工作中的心理解脱视角[J]. 南开管理评论,2018,21(4):39-49. [32] FRITZ C,YANKELEVICH M,ZARUBIN A,et al. Happy,healthy,and productive:the role of detachment from work during nonwork time[J]. The Journal of Applied Psychology,2010,95(5):977-983. [33] FRITZ C,SONNENTAG S. Antecedents of day-level proactive behavior:a look at job stressors and positive affect during the workday[J]. Journal of Management,2009,35(1):94-111. [34] CARLSON D S,KACMAR K M,GRZYWACZ J G,et al. Work-family balance and supervisor appraised citizenship behavior:the link of positive affect[J]. Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management,2013:14（2）：87-106. [35] 郭小艳,王振宏. 积极情绪的概念、功能与意义[J]. 心理科学进展,2007,15(5):810-815. [36] DANE E. Paying attention to mindfulness and its effects on task performance in the workplace[J]. Journal of Management,2011,37(4):997-1018. [37] 张静,宋继文,王悦. 工作场所正念:研究述评与展望[J]. 外国经济与管理,2017,39(8):56-70,84. [38] 刘生敏,信欢欢. 组织管理领域的正念研究:基于多层次视角[J]. 中国人力资源开发,2019,36(7):37-53,93. [39] SCHIRDA B,NICHOLAS J A,PRAKASH R S. Examining trait mindfulness,emotion dysregulation,and quality of life in multiple sclerosis[J]. Health Psychology,2015,34(11):1107-1115. [40] KILLINGSWORTH M A,GILBERT D T. A wandering mind is an unhappy mind[J]. Science,2010,330(6006):932. [41] GOOD D J,LYDDY C J,GLOMB T M,et al. Contemplating mindfulness at work[J]. Journal of Management,2016,42(1):114-142. [42] 郑晓明,倪丹. 组织管理中正念研究述评[J]. 管理评论,2018,30(10):153-168. [43] COLE M S,BRUCH H,VOGEL B. Emotion as mediators of the relations between perceived supervisor support and psychological hardiness on employee cynicism[J]. Journal of Organizational Behavior,2006,27(4):463-484. [44] LI R,ZHANG Z Y,TIAN X M. Can self-sacrificial leadership promote subordinate taking charge? the mediating role of organizational identification and the moderating role of risk aversion[J]. Journal of Organizational Behavior,2016,37(5):758-781. [45] BROWN K W,RYAN R M,CRESWELL J D. Mindfulness:theoretical foundations and evidence for its salutary effects[J]. Psychological Inquiry,2007,18(4):211-237. |
|
|
|
