Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ndmmz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-26T16:06:27.567Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Employee proactive behaviors and LMX from a reverse lens perspective: the mediator role of leader perceived constructiveness

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 March 2023

Hsi-An Shih Open the ORCID record for Hsi-An Shih [Opens in a new window]  and
Tuong-Vy Nguyen Open the ORCID record for Tuong-Vy Nguyen [Opens in a new window]
Hsi-An Shih
Affiliation:
Institute of International Business, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, R.O.C Taiwan
Tuong-Vy Nguyen*
Affiliation:
Department of Business Management, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taiwan, R.O.C Taiwan Department of Business Management, National Taipei University of Technology, Taiwan, R.O.C Taiwan
*
*Corresponding author. Email: tvy.vivian@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Drawing on social resources theory and social exchange theory, we propose that two forms of employee proactive behaviors, namely voice and taking charge, influence a leader's perception of their employees and hence affect the interpersonal relationships within the dyad. We introduce an expanded construct, termed as the leader perceived constructiveness, as a mediating mechanism that links the effects. We further propose two conditional factors that also govern the effects. Pairwise data collected from Taiwanese employees and supervisors in two separate studies provide support for the theorized hypotheses and confirm that the indirect relationship between employees' proactive behaviors and leader–member exchange (LMX) is augmented by their past performance. Our study advances the literature by adopting a more follower-centered framework. Moreover, by demonstrating how and when employee-initiated behaviors affect upwardly and improve the dyad outcome, we also contribute to the LMX literature and provide useful insights for managerial practice.

Keywords

Employee voiceleader perceived constructivenessLMXperformancepromotion focustaking charge
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Management & Organization , First View , pp. 1 - 24
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press in association with the Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ahmed, I., Afzal, R., & Rasid, S. Z. A. (2021). Employees’ task performance and propensity to take charge: The role of LMX and leader's task orientation. Journal of Management Development, 40(3), 224–239 .CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, T. D., & Rush, M. C. (1998). The effects of organizational citizenship behavior on performance judgments: a field study and a laboratory experiment. Journal of applied psychology, 83(2), 247–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
Bolino, M. C. (1999). Citizenship and impression management: Good soldiers or good actors?. Academy of Management Review, 24(1), 82–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brislin, R. W. (1986). The wording and translation of research instruments. Beverly Hill: Sage publication.Google Scholar
Burris, E. R., Detert, J. R., & Romney, A. C. (2013). Speaking up vs. being heard: The disagreement around and outcomes of employee voice. Organization Science, 24(1), 22–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burris, E. R., Rockmann, K. W., & Kimmons, Y. S. (2017). The value of voice to managers: Employee identification and the content of voice. Academy of Management Journal, 60(6), 2099–2125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chan, D. (2006). Interactive effects of situational judgment effectiveness and proactive personality on work perceptions and work outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(2), 475–481.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cheng, J. W., Lu, K. M., Chang, Y. Y., & Johnstone, S. (2013). Voice behavior and work engagement: The moderating role of supervisor-attributed motives. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 51(1), 81–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chiaburu, D. S., Smith, T. A., Wang, J., & Zimmerman, R. D. (2014). Relative importance of leader influences for subordinates’ proactive behaviors, prosocial behaviors, and task performance. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 13(2), 70–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crant, J. M. (2000). Proactive behavior in organizations. Journal of management, 26(3), 435–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crowe, E., & Higgins, E. T. (1997). Regulatory focus and strategic inclinations: Promotion and prevention in decision-making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 69(2), 117–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dorsch, M. J., Törnblom, K. Y., & Kazemi, A. (2017). A review of resource theories and their implications for understanding consumer behavior. Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, 2(1), 5–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dulebohn, J. H., Bommer, W. H., Liden, R. C., Brouer, R. L., & Ferris, G. R. (2012). A meta-analysis of antecedents and consequences of leader-member exchange: Integrating the past with an eye toward the future. Journal of Management, 38(6), 1715–1759.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dulebohn, J. H., Wu, D., & Liao, C. (2017). Does liking explain variance above and beyond LMX? A meta-analysis. Human Resource Management Review, 27(1), 149–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyne, L. V., Ang, S., & Botero, I. C. (2003). Conceptualizing employee silence and employee voice as multidimensional constructs. Journal of Management Studies, 40(6), 1359–1392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foa, U. G. (1971). Interpersonal and economic resources: Their structure and differential properties offer new insight into problems of modern society. Science, 171(3969), 345–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foa, E. B., & Foa, U. G. (1980). Resource theory. In Gergen, K. J. (Ed.), Social exchange (pp. 77–94). New York: Plenum Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 382–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frese, M., & Fay, D. (2001). 4. Personal initiative: An active performance concept for work in the 21st century. Research in organizational behavior, 23, 133–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fuller, B., Marler, L. E., Hester, K., & Otondo, R. F. (2015). Leader reactions to follower proactive behavior: Giving credit when credit is due. Human Relations, 68(6), 879–898.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerbing, D. W., & Anderson, J. C. (1988). An updated paradigm for scale development incorporating unidimensionality and its assessment. Journal of Marketing Research, 25(2), 186–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gorden, W. I. (1988). Range of employee voice. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 1, 283–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. The Leadership Quarterly, 6(2), 219–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grant, A. M., Parker, S., & Collins, C. (2009). Getting credit for proactive behavior: Supervisor reactions depend on what you value and how you feel. Personnel Psychology, 62(1), 31–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greguras, G. J., & Ford, J. M. (2006). An examination of the multidimensionality of supervisor and subordinate perceptions of leader-member exchange. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 79(3), 433–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guthrie, J. P. (2001). High-involvement work practices, turnover, and productivity: Evidence from New Zealand. Academy of Management Journal, 44(1), 180–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Higgins, E. T. (1998). Promotion and prevention: Regulatory focus as a motivational principle. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 1–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44(3), 513–524.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. R. (2008). Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 53–60.Google Scholar
Huang, X., Xu, E., Huang, L., & Liu, W. (2018). Nonlinear consequences of promotive and prohibitive voice for managers’ responses: The roles of voice frequency and LMX. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103(10), 1101.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kark, R., & Van Dijk, D. (2007). Motivation to lead, motivation to follow: The role of the self-regulatory focus in leadership processes. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 500–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, T. Y., Liu, Z., & Diefendorff, J. M. (2015). Leader–member exchange and job performance: The effects of taking charge and organizational tenure. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36(2), 216–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kong, M., Xu, H., Zhou, A., & Yuan, Y. (2019). Implicit followership theory to employee creativity: The roles of leader–member exchange, self-efficacy and intrinsic motivation. Journal of Management and Organization, 25(1), 81–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lam, W., Huang, X., & Snape, E. (2007). Feedback-seeking behavior and leader-member exchange: Do supervisor-attributed motives matter? Academy of Management Journal, 50(2), 348–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lapierre, L. M., Naidoo, L. J., & Bonaccio, S. (2012). Leaders’ relational self-concept and followers’ task performance: Implications for mentoring provided to followers. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(5), 766–774.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LePine, J. A., & Van Dyne, L. (1998). Predicting voice behavior in work groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(6), 853.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, N., Liang, J., & Crant, J. M. (2010). The role of proactive personality in job satisfaction and organizational citizenship behavior: a relational perspective. Journal of applied psychology, 95(2), 395–404.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liao, H., Liu, D., & Loi, R. (2010). Looking at both sides of the social exchange coin: A social cognitive perspective on the joint effects of relationship quality and differentiation on creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 53(5), 1090–1109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liden, R. C., Anand, S., & Vidyarthi, P. (2016). Dyadic relationships. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 3(1), 139–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liden, R. C., & Maslyn, J. M. (1998). Multidimensionality of leader-member exchange: An empirical assessment through scale development. Journal of Management, 24(1), 43–72.Google Scholar
Liden, R. C., Sparrowe, R. T., & Wayne, S. J. (1997). Leader-member exchange theory: The past and potential for the future. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 15, 47–120.Google Scholar
Martin, R., Guillaume, Y., Thomas, G., Lee, A., & Epitropaki, O. (2016). Leader–member exchange (LMX) and performance: A meta-analytic review. Personnel Psychology, 69(1), 67–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maslyn, J. M., & Uhl-Bien, M. (2001). Leader–member exchange and its dimensions: Effects of self-effort and other's effort on relationship quality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(4), 697–708.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morrison, E. W., & Phelps, C. C. (1999). Taking charge at work: Extrarole efforts to initiate workplace change. Academy of Management Journal, 42(4), 403–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paglis, L. L., & Green, S. G. (2002). Both sides now: Supervisor and subordinate perspectives on relationship quality. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(2), 250–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parker, S. K., & Collins, C. G. (2010). Taking stock: Integrating and differentiating multiple proactive behaviors. Journal of Management, 36(3), 633–662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parker, S. K., Wang, Y., & Liao, J. (2019). When is proactivity wise? A review of factors that influence the individual outcomes of proactive behavior. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 6, 221–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parks, J. M., Conlon, D. E., Ang, S., & Bontempo, R. (1999). The manager giveth, the manager taketh away: Variation in distribution/recovery rules due to resource type and cultural orientation. Journal of Management, 25(5), 723–757.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Preacher, K. J., Rucker, D. D., & Hayes, A. F. (2007). Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 42(1), 185–227.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raykov, T., & Marcoulides, G. A. (2012). A first course in structural equation modeling. Mahwah, New Jersey: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shin, Y., Kim, M. S., Choi, J. N., Kim, M., & Oh, W.-K. (2017). Does leader-follower regulatory fit matter? The role of regulatory fit in followers’ organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Management, 43(4), 1211–1233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, J. P., Whitman, D. S., & Viswesvaran, C. (2010). Employee proactivity in organizations: A comparative meta-analysis of emergent proactive constructs. Journal of occupational and organizational psychology, 83(2), 275–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uhl-Bien, M., Riggio, R. E., Lowe, K. B., & Carsten, M. K. (2014). Followership theory: A review and research agenda. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), 83–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Dyne, L., Kamdar, D., & Joireman, J. (2008). In-role perceptions buffer the negative impact of low LMX on helping and enhance the positive impact of high LMX on voice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(6), 1195.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vecchio, R. P., & Norris, W. R. (1996). Predicting employee turnover from performance, satisfaction, and leader-member exchange. Journal of Business and Psychology, 11(1), 113–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallace, J. C., & Chen, G. (2005). Development and validation of a work-specific measure of cognitive failure: Implications for occupational safety. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 78(4), 615–632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, D., Gan, C., & Wu, C. (2016). LMX and employee voice: A moderated mediation model of psychological empowerment and role clarity. Personnel Review, 45(3), 605–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wayne, S. J., & Green, S. A. (1993). The effects of leader-member exchange on employee citizenship and impression management behavior. Human Relations, 46(12), 1431–1440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wayne, S. J., Shore, L. M., & Liden, R. C. (1997). Perceived organizational support and leader-member exchange: A social exchange perspective. Academy of Management journal, 40(1), 82–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whiting, S. W., Maynes, T. D., Podsakoff, N. P., & Podsakoff, P. M. (2012). Effects of message, source, and context on evaluations of employee voice behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(1), 159–182.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Williams, L. J., & Anderson, S. E. (1991). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. Journal of Management, 17(3), 601–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, K. S., Sin, H.-P., & Conlon, D. E. (2010). What about the leader in leader-member exchange? The impact of resource exchanges and substitutability on the leader. Academy of Management Review, 35(3), 358–372.Google Scholar
Wu, C., McMullen, J. S., Neubert, M. J., & Yi, X. (2008). The influence of leader regulatory focus on employee creativity. Journal of Business Venturing, 23(5), 587–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xu, A. J., Loi, R., Cai, Z., & Liden, R. C. (2019). Reversing the lens: How followers influence leader–member exchange quality. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 92(3), 475–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar