Antonia J. Kaluza, Diana Boer, Claudia Buengeler, R. van Dick
{"title":"Leadership behaviour and leader self-reported well-being: A review, integration and meta-analytic examination","authors":"Antonia J. Kaluza, Diana Boer, Claudia Buengeler, R. van Dick","doi":"10.1080/02678373.2019.1617369","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT While the link between leadership and follower well-being is well established, less is known about the relation between leaders’ leadership behaviour and their own well-being. Particularly, a systematic integration of existing studies is missing. Based on an integrated framework summarising major theories on the leader well-being–leadership link, we quantitatively synthesised findings on the relations between different leadership behaviours and leader well-being indicators. The meta-analytical results (95 effect sizes; N = 12,617) confirmed significant relationships of constructive and destructive leadership with leader well-being in the expected directions. Relative weight analyses on the constructive leadership behaviours showed that change-oriented and relational-oriented leadership (e.g. transformational, participative) accounted for more variance in leader well-being than task-oriented leadership (e.g. transactional). Regarding destructive leadership, active destructive leadership (e.g. abusive supervision) showed stronger negative associations with leader well-being than passive leadership (e.g. laissez-faire). Based on our integrated framework, we proposed and found support for divergent patterns of associations for different forms of well-being (positive vs. negative, short-term vs. long-term, job-related vs. general). Our study demonstrates a considerable linkage between leader well-being and leadership, supporting the adoption of leadership development programmes and organisational health interventions for leaders given their impact on employees, teams and organisations.","PeriodicalId":48199,"journal":{"name":"Work and Stress","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02678373.2019.1617369","citationCount":"94","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Work and Stress","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2019.1617369","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 94
Abstract
ABSTRACT While the link between leadership and follower well-being is well established, less is known about the relation between leaders’ leadership behaviour and their own well-being. Particularly, a systematic integration of existing studies is missing. Based on an integrated framework summarising major theories on the leader well-being–leadership link, we quantitatively synthesised findings on the relations between different leadership behaviours and leader well-being indicators. The meta-analytical results (95 effect sizes; N = 12,617) confirmed significant relationships of constructive and destructive leadership with leader well-being in the expected directions. Relative weight analyses on the constructive leadership behaviours showed that change-oriented and relational-oriented leadership (e.g. transformational, participative) accounted for more variance in leader well-being than task-oriented leadership (e.g. transactional). Regarding destructive leadership, active destructive leadership (e.g. abusive supervision) showed stronger negative associations with leader well-being than passive leadership (e.g. laissez-faire). Based on our integrated framework, we proposed and found support for divergent patterns of associations for different forms of well-being (positive vs. negative, short-term vs. long-term, job-related vs. general). Our study demonstrates a considerable linkage between leader well-being and leadership, supporting the adoption of leadership development programmes and organisational health interventions for leaders given their impact on employees, teams and organisations.
期刊介绍：
Work & Stress is an international, multidisciplinary quarterly presenting high-quality papers concerned with the psychological, social and organizational aspects of occupational health and well-being, and stress and safety management. It is published in association with the European Academy of Occupational Health Psychology. The journal publishes empirical reports, scholarly reviews and theoretical papers. It is directed at occupational health psychologists, work and organizational psychologists, those involved with organizational development, and all concerned with the interplay of work, health and organisations. Research published in Work & Stress relates psychologically salient features of the work environment to their psychological, behavioural and health consequences, focusing on the underlying psychological processes. The journal has become a natural home for research on the work-family interface, social relations at work (including topics such as bullying and conflict at work, leadership and organizational support), workplace interventions and reorganizations, and dimensions and outcomes of worker stress and well-being. Such dimensions and outcomes, both positive and negative, include stress, burnout, sickness absence, work motivation, work engagement and work performance. Of course, submissions addressing other topics in occupational health psychology are also welcomed.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
