Are the effects of servant leadership only spurious? The state of research on the causal effects of servant leadership, recommendations, and an illustrative experiment

IF 9.1 1区 管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT Leadership Quarterly Pub Date : 2023-12-01 DOI:10.1016/j.leaqua.2023.101722
Annika F. Schowalter, Judith Volmer
{"title":"Are the effects of servant leadership only spurious? The state of research on the causal effects of servant leadership, recommendations, and an illustrative experiment","authors":"Annika F. Schowalter,&nbsp;Judith Volmer","doi":"10.1016/j.leaqua.2023.101722","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span><span>Causality is essential in informing science and policy. In the present study, we investigate the current state of research regarding causality in the field of servant (and authentic) leadership and provide recommendations on how causally identified studies can be conducted. After explaining the methodological problems that potentially prevent causal inferences (i.e., endogeneity bias and issues in experimental design), we provide two </span>systematic literature reviews<span> of servant and authentic leadership showing that these problems remain very prevalent. We then discuss two solutions on how causal effects of servant leadership or perceptions thereof can be established: randomized experiments and instrumental variable<span> regression. To illustrate our recommendations, we report an experiment on the effect of a combination of two servant leadership dimensions (i.e., stewardship and authenticity) on follower performance and also investigate the effect of combined stewardship and authenticity </span></span></span><em>perceptions</em> using instrumental variable regression. The results do not indicate that combined stewardship and authenticity <em>behavior</em> or <em>perceptions</em> affect follower performance. Our study can serve as a roadmap, especially for servant leadership researchers, to address potential endogeneity and conduct causally identified research.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48434,"journal":{"name":"Leadership Quarterly","volume":"34 6","pages":"Article 101722"},"PeriodicalIF":9.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Leadership Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1048984323000486","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Causality is essential in informing science and policy. In the present study, we investigate the current state of research regarding causality in the field of servant (and authentic) leadership and provide recommendations on how causally identified studies can be conducted. After explaining the methodological problems that potentially prevent causal inferences (i.e., endogeneity bias and issues in experimental design), we provide two systematic literature reviews of servant and authentic leadership showing that these problems remain very prevalent. We then discuss two solutions on how causal effects of servant leadership or perceptions thereof can be established: randomized experiments and instrumental variable regression. To illustrate our recommendations, we report an experiment on the effect of a combination of two servant leadership dimensions (i.e., stewardship and authenticity) on follower performance and also investigate the effect of combined stewardship and authenticity perceptions using instrumental variable regression. The results do not indicate that combined stewardship and authenticity behavior or perceptions affect follower performance. Our study can serve as a roadmap, especially for servant leadership researchers, to address potential endogeneity and conduct causally identified research.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
仆人式领导的效果只是虚假的吗?仆人领导因果效应的研究现状、建议和一个例证实验
因果关系对于科学和政策的制定至关重要。在本研究中,我们调查了仆人(和真实)领导领域中关于因果关系的研究现状,并就如何进行因果关系识别研究提出了建议。在解释了可能阻碍因果推断的方法论问题(即内生性偏见和实验设计中的问题)后,我们提供了两篇关于仆人和真实领导的系统文献综述,表明这些问题仍然非常普遍。然后,我们讨论了如何建立仆人领导或其感知的因果效应的两种解决方案:随机实验和工具变量回归。为了说明我们的建议,我们报告了一项关于两个仆人领导维度(即管理和真实性)组合对追随者表现的影响的实验,并使用工具变量回归调查了管理和真实感组合的影响。研究结果并没有表明管理和真实性行为或感知的结合会影响追随者的表现。我们的研究可以作为一个路线图,特别是对于仆人领导研究人员来说,解决潜在的内生性并进行因果识别研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
15.20
自引率
9.30%
发文量
58
期刊介绍: The Leadership Quarterly is a social-science journal dedicated to advancing our understanding of leadership as a phenomenon, how to study it, as well as its practical implications. Leadership Quarterly seeks contributions from various disciplinary perspectives, including psychology broadly defined (i.e., industrial-organizational, social, evolutionary, biological, differential), management (i.e., organizational behavior, strategy, organizational theory), political science, sociology, economics (i.e., personnel, behavioral, labor), anthropology, history, and methodology.Equally desirable are contributions from multidisciplinary perspectives.
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board Exogenous shocks: Definitions, types, and causal identification issues Editorial Board Advancing Organizational Science With Computational Process Theories The research transparency index
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1