{"title":"工作需求-资源理论中的建设性与破坏性领导:动机与健康损害路径的元分析检验","authors":"J. Pletzer, Kimberley Breevaart, Arnold B. Bakker","doi":"10.1177/20413866231197519","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Integrating the leadership literature with Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) theory, we conducted a pre-registered meta-analysis of the relations of different leadership behaviors with followers’ work engagement and burnout. We found that constructive leadership relates positively to followers’ work engagement ( k = 588, [Formula: see text] =.467) and negatively to followers’ burnout ( k = 346, [Formula: see text] =−.327), whereas destructive leadership relates negatively to followers’ work engagement ( k = 72, [Formula: see text] =−.220) and positively to followers’ burnout ( k = 122, [Formula: see text] =.381). We furthermore demonstrated that both followers’ work engagement and burnout partially mediate the relations of both constructive and destructive leadership with followers’ job performance. However, the indirect relation of constructive leadership with followers’ job performance via followers’ work engagement is clearly the strongest, suggesting that leaders stimulate followers’ job performance primarily because they motivate followers. We discuss how the findings of this theory-driven meta-analysis help to integrate leadership research in JD-R theory and generate important insights for leadership behavior and training.","PeriodicalId":46914,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Psychology Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Constructive and destructive leadership in job demands-resources theory: A meta-analytic test of the motivational and health-impairment pathways\",\"authors\":\"J. Pletzer, Kimberley Breevaart, Arnold B. Bakker\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/20413866231197519\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Integrating the leadership literature with Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) theory, we conducted a pre-registered meta-analysis of the relations of different leadership behaviors with followers’ work engagement and burnout. We found that constructive leadership relates positively to followers’ work engagement ( k = 588, [Formula: see text] =.467) and negatively to followers’ burnout ( k = 346, [Formula: see text] =−.327), whereas destructive leadership relates negatively to followers’ work engagement ( k = 72, [Formula: see text] =−.220) and positively to followers’ burnout ( k = 122, [Formula: see text] =.381). We furthermore demonstrated that both followers’ work engagement and burnout partially mediate the relations of both constructive and destructive leadership with followers’ job performance. However, the indirect relation of constructive leadership with followers’ job performance via followers’ work engagement is clearly the strongest, suggesting that leaders stimulate followers’ job performance primarily because they motivate followers. We discuss how the findings of this theory-driven meta-analysis help to integrate leadership research in JD-R theory and generate important insights for leadership behavior and training.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46914,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Organizational Psychology Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Organizational Psychology Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/20413866231197519\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Organizational Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20413866231197519","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
Constructive and destructive leadership in job demands-resources theory: A meta-analytic test of the motivational and health-impairment pathways
Integrating the leadership literature with Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) theory, we conducted a pre-registered meta-analysis of the relations of different leadership behaviors with followers’ work engagement and burnout. We found that constructive leadership relates positively to followers’ work engagement ( k = 588, [Formula: see text] =.467) and negatively to followers’ burnout ( k = 346, [Formula: see text] =−.327), whereas destructive leadership relates negatively to followers’ work engagement ( k = 72, [Formula: see text] =−.220) and positively to followers’ burnout ( k = 122, [Formula: see text] =.381). We furthermore demonstrated that both followers’ work engagement and burnout partially mediate the relations of both constructive and destructive leadership with followers’ job performance. However, the indirect relation of constructive leadership with followers’ job performance via followers’ work engagement is clearly the strongest, suggesting that leaders stimulate followers’ job performance primarily because they motivate followers. We discuss how the findings of this theory-driven meta-analysis help to integrate leadership research in JD-R theory and generate important insights for leadership behavior and training.
期刊介绍:
Organizational Psychology Review is a quarterly, peer-reviewed scholarly journal published by SAGE in partnership with the European Association of Work and Organizational Psychology. Organizational Psychology Review’s unique aim is to publish original conceptual work and meta-analyses in the field of organizational psychology (broadly defined to include applied psychology, industrial psychology, occupational psychology, organizational behavior, personnel psychology, and work psychology).Articles accepted for publication in Organizational Psychology Review will have the potential to have a major impact on research and practice in organizational psychology. They will offer analyses worth citing, worth following up on in primary research, and worth considering as a basis for applied managerial practice. As such, these should be contributions that move beyond straight forward reviews of the existing literature by developing new theory and insights. At the same time, however, they should be well-grounded in the state of the art and the empirical knowledge base, providing a good mix of a firm empirical and theoretical basis and exciting new ideas.