领导风格与心理授权:一项元分析

IF 5 3区 管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies Pub Date : 2022-01-05 DOI:10.1177/15480518211067751
C. Schermuly, L. Creon, Philipp Gerlach, C. Graßmann, Jan Koch
{"title":"领导风格与心理授权:一项元分析","authors":"C. Schermuly, L. Creon, Philipp Gerlach, C. Graßmann, Jan Koch","doi":"10.1177/15480518211067751","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Psychological empowerment has become a popular construct in organizational research and practice. Leadership ranks high among the best predictors of employees’ psychological empowerment, yet little is known about which leadership styles prove more effective than others. This meta-analysis investigates the effects of four leadership styles on psychological empowerment. More specifically, we test whether empowering leadership evokes more psychological empowerment than transformational leadership, servant leadership, or transactional leadership. We found that empowering, transformational and servant leadership contribute almost equally to psychological empowerment. No relationship was found with transactional leadership. In an explorative manner, we tested the effects on the different dimensions of psychological empowerment. We found that the leadership styles had a weaker influence on the competence dimension of psychological empowerment. We also investigated the effects of several moderators on the relationships with psychological empowerment: country culture (power balanced freedom (PBF)), study design (cross-sectional vs. multi-wave studies) and publication status (published vs. unpublished). We found no moderating effects of culture, which indicates the universally empowering effects of the leadership styles. The relationships between leadership and empowerment were somewhat weaker when data were collected at different measurement points, and publication bias does not seem to be an issue in this research field.","PeriodicalId":51455,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies","volume":"29 1","pages":"73 - 95"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"15","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Leadership Styles and Psychological Empowerment: A Meta-Analysis\",\"authors\":\"C. Schermuly, L. Creon, Philipp Gerlach, C. Graßmann, Jan Koch\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/15480518211067751\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Psychological empowerment has become a popular construct in organizational research and practice. Leadership ranks high among the best predictors of employees’ psychological empowerment, yet little is known about which leadership styles prove more effective than others. This meta-analysis investigates the effects of four leadership styles on psychological empowerment. More specifically, we test whether empowering leadership evokes more psychological empowerment than transformational leadership, servant leadership, or transactional leadership. We found that empowering, transformational and servant leadership contribute almost equally to psychological empowerment. No relationship was found with transactional leadership. In an explorative manner, we tested the effects on the different dimensions of psychological empowerment. We found that the leadership styles had a weaker influence on the competence dimension of psychological empowerment. We also investigated the effects of several moderators on the relationships with psychological empowerment: country culture (power balanced freedom (PBF)), study design (cross-sectional vs. multi-wave studies) and publication status (published vs. unpublished). We found no moderating effects of culture, which indicates the universally empowering effects of the leadership styles. The relationships between leadership and empowerment were somewhat weaker when data were collected at different measurement points, and publication bias does not seem to be an issue in this research field.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51455,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"73 - 95\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"15\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/15480518211067751\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15480518211067751","RegionNum":3,"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: 15

摘要

心理赋权已经成为组织研究和实践中一个流行的概念。领导力在员工心理赋权的最佳预测因素中排名靠前,但人们对哪些领导风格比其他领导风格更有效知之甚少。这项荟萃分析调查了四种领导风格对心理赋权的影响。更具体地说,我们测试赋权领导力是否比变革型领导力、仆人型领导力或交易型领导力更能唤起心理赋权。我们发现,赋权、转型和仆人式领导对心理赋权的贡献几乎相等。未发现与交易型领导有任何关系。以探索性的方式,我们测试了心理赋权的不同维度的影响。我们发现,领导风格对心理赋权能力维度的影响较弱。我们还调查了几个调节因子对心理赋权关系的影响:国家文化(权力平衡自由(PBF))、研究设计(横断面研究与多波研究)和出版状态(出版与未出版)。我们没有发现文化的调节效应,这表明领导风格的普遍赋权效应。当在不同的测量点收集数据时,领导力和赋权之间的关系有所减弱,发表偏见似乎不是这一研究领域的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Leadership Styles and Psychological Empowerment: A Meta-Analysis
Psychological empowerment has become a popular construct in organizational research and practice. Leadership ranks high among the best predictors of employees’ psychological empowerment, yet little is known about which leadership styles prove more effective than others. This meta-analysis investigates the effects of four leadership styles on psychological empowerment. More specifically, we test whether empowering leadership evokes more psychological empowerment than transformational leadership, servant leadership, or transactional leadership. We found that empowering, transformational and servant leadership contribute almost equally to psychological empowerment. No relationship was found with transactional leadership. In an explorative manner, we tested the effects on the different dimensions of psychological empowerment. We found that the leadership styles had a weaker influence on the competence dimension of psychological empowerment. We also investigated the effects of several moderators on the relationships with psychological empowerment: country culture (power balanced freedom (PBF)), study design (cross-sectional vs. multi-wave studies) and publication status (published vs. unpublished). We found no moderating effects of culture, which indicates the universally empowering effects of the leadership styles. The relationships between leadership and empowerment were somewhat weaker when data were collected at different measurement points, and publication bias does not seem to be an issue in this research field.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.70
自引率
2.10%
发文量
23
期刊最新文献
Hierarchical Leader-Leader Fit: Examining Authentic Leader Dyads and Implications for Junior Leader Outcomes Does Leaders’ Impression Management Help or Hurt? It Depends on the Perspective of the Follower Wo∼Men and Leadership: Re-Thinking the State of Research on Gender and Leadership Through Waves of Feminist Thinking The Corporate Chief of Staff: Strategic Leadership Influence From Outside the Spotlight Impact of Leadership on Unethical Pro-Organizational Behavior: A Systematic Literature Review and Future Research Directions
×
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