Employee Strengths Mindset and Voice Behavior: The Roles of General Self-Efficacy and Leader–Member Exchange
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review and Hypothesis Development
2.1. Strengths Mindset and Voice Behavior
2.2. Mediating Effect of General Self-Efficacy
2.3. Mediating Effect of LMX
3. Method
3.1. Data Collection and Study Sample
3.2. Measurement Scales
3.3. Data Analysis Strategy
4. Results
4.1. Descriptive Statistics
4.2. Confirmatory Factor Analysis
4.3. Hypothesis Testing
5. Conclusions and Discussion
5.1. Theoretical Implications
5.2. Managerial Implications
5.3. Limitations and Future Research Directions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Kortmann, S. The mediating role of strategic orientations on the relationship between ambidexterity-oriented decisions and innovative ambidexterity. J. Prod. Innovat. Manag. 2015, 32, 666–684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Caniëls, M.C.; Baaten, S.M. How a learning-oriented organizational climate is linked to different proactive behaviors: The role of employee resilience. Soc. Indic. Res. 2019, 143, 561–577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Parker, S.K.; Collins, C.G. Taking stock: Integrating and differentiating multiple proactive behaviors. J. Manag. 2010, 36, 633–662. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Morrison, E.W. Employee voice and silence. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psychol. 2014, 1, 173–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Du, Y.; Wang, Z. How does emotional labor influence voice behavior? The roles of work engagement and perceived organizational support. Sustainability 2021, 13, 10524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shin, D.; Woodwark, M.J.; Konrad, A.M.; Jung, Y. Innovation strategy, voice practices, employee voice participation, and organizational innovation. J. Bus. Res. 2022, 147, 392–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Avery, D.R.; Quiñones, M.A. Disentangling the effects of voice: The incremental roles of opportunity, behavior, and instrumentality in predicting procedural fairness. J. Appl. Psychol. 2002, 87, 81–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shih, H.A.; Wijaya, N.H.S. Team-member exchange, voice behavior, and creative work involvement. Int. J. Manpow. 2017, 38, 417–431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, L.; Zhang, Z.D.; Jia, W.T. When and why leaders’ helping behavior promotes employees’ thriving: Exploring the role of voice behavior and perceived leader’s role overload. Front. Psychol. 2020, 11, 553512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morrison, E.W. Employee voice behavior: Integration and directions for future research. Acad. Manag. Ann. 2011, 5, 373–412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hsiung, H.H. Authentic leadership and employee voice behavior: A multi-level psychological process. J. Bus. Ethics 2012, 107, 349–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Y.; Sun, J.M. Traditional Chinese leadership and employee voice behavior: A cross-level examination. Leadersh. Q. 2015, 26, 172–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fuller, J.B.; Marler, L.E.; Hester, K. Promoting felt responsibility for constructive change and proactive behavior: Exploring aspects of an elaborated model of work design. J. Organ. Behav. 2006, 27, 1089–1120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wijaya, N.H.S. Proactive personality, LMX, and voice behavior: Employee–supervisor sex (Dis) similarity as a moderator. Manag. Commun. Q. 2019, 33, 86–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ari, E.; Karatepe, O.M.; Rezapouraghdam, H.; Avci, T. A conceptual model for green human resource management: Indicators, differential pathways, and multiple pro-environmental outcomes. Sustainability 2020, 12, 7089. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- White, M.A.; Waters, L.E. A case study of ‘The Good School’: Examples of the use of Peterson’s strengths-based approach with students. J. Posit. Psychol. 2015, 10, 69–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ding, H.; Yu, E. Strengths-based leadership and employee psychological well-being: A moderated mediation model. J. Career Dev. 2022, 49, 1108–1121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Green, Z.A. Character strengths intervention for nurturing well-being among Pakistan’s university students: A mixed-method study. Appl. Psychol. Health Well Being 2022, 14, 252–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ignjatovic, C.; Kern, M.L.; Oades, L.G. Flow support at work: Examining the relationship between strengths use and flow at work among school staff over a three-year period. J. Happiness Stud. 2022, 23, 455–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ding, H.; Liu, J. Paying close attention to strengths mindset: The relationship of employee strengths mindset with job performance. Curr. Psychol. 2022, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zahrt, O.H.; Crum, A.J. Effects of physical activity recommendations on mindset, behavior and perceived health. Prev. Med. Rep. 2020, 17, 101027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Jia, J.; Zhao, R.; Cai, Y.; Lv, H. I can and I am willing: A dual mediation model of a strengths-based psychological climate and voice behavior. Curr. Psychol. 2022, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peng, J.C.; Chen, S.W. In search of a cross-level mechanism linking paternalistic leadership to employee voice behavior. Manag. Decis. 2022, 60, 2238–2255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bandura, A.; Adams, N.E. Analysis of self-efficacy theory of behavioral change. Cogn. Ther. Res. 1977, 1, 287–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mostert, K.; Theron, B.; de Beer, L.T. Validating strengths use and deficit correction behaviour scales for South African first-year students. Sa. J. Ind. Psychol. 2017, 43, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Liu, Y.L.; Yang, M.Y.; Hsu, C.T.; Liou, J.C. Investigating the Effects of Self-Efficacy and Participative Leadership on Voice Behavior. In Academy of Management Proceedings; Academy of Management: Briarcliff Manor, NY, USA, 2012; Volume 2012, p. 12242. [Google Scholar]
- Wayne, S.J.; Shore, L.M.; Liden, R.C. Perceived organizational support and leader-member exchange: A social exchange perspective. Acad. Manag. J. 1997, 40, 82–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, Y.; Zhu, L.; Zhou, M.; Li, J.; Maguire, P.; Sun, H.; Wang, D. Exploring the influence of ethical leadership on voice behavior: How leader-member exchange, psychological safety and psychological empowerment influence employees’ willingness to speak out. Front. Psychol. 2018, 9, 1718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Toding, M.; Mädamürk, K.; Venesaar, U.; Malleus, E. Teachers’ mindset and attitudes towards learners and learning environment to support students’ entrepreneurial attitudes in universities. Int. J. Manag. Educ. 2023, 21, 100769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Steverink, N.; Lindenberg, S.; Spiegel, T.; Nieboer, A.P. The associations of different social needs with psychological strengths and subjective well-being: An empirical investigation based on social production function theory. J. Happiness Stud. 2020, 21, 799–824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ng, T.W.; Feldman, D.C. Employee voice behavior: A meta-analytic test of the conservation of resources framework. J. Organ. Behav. 2012, 33, 216–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, W.R.; Choi, S.B.; Kang, S.W. How leaders’ positive feedback influences employees’ innovative behavior: The mediating role of voice behavior and job autonomy. Sustainability 2021, 13, 1901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ng, T.W.; Feldman, D.C. Idiosyncratic deals and voice behavior. J. Manag. 2015, 41, 893–928. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Raub, S.; Robert, C. Empowerment, organizational commitment, and voice behavior in the hospitality industry: Evidence from a multinational sample. Cornell. Hosp. Q. 2013, 54, 136–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ghielen, S.T.S.; van Woerkom, M.; Christina Meyers, M. Promoting positive outcomes through strengths interventions: A literature review. J. Posit. Psychol. 2018, 13, 573–585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lavy, S.; Littman-Ovadia, H. My better self: Using strengths at work and work productivity, organizational citizenship behavior, and satisfaction. J. Career. Dev. 2017, 44, 95–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Proctor, C.; Maltby, J.; Linley, P.A. Strengths use as a predictor of well-being and health-related quality of life. J. Happiness Stud. 2011, 12, 153–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Duan, J.; Wang, X.; Brinsfield, C.T.; Liu, S. How enhancing employee well-being can encourage voice behavior: A desire fulfillment perspective. Hum. Perform. 2020, 33, 425–446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, X.; Lam, L.W.; Zhang, L.L. The curvilinear relationship between job satisfaction and employee voice: Speaking up for the organization and the self. Asia Pac. J. Manag. 2020, 37, 587–607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Madrid, H.P. Emotion regulation, positive affect, and promotive voice behavior at work. Front. Psychol. 2020, 11, 1739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clifton, D.O.; Nelson, P. Soar with Your Strengths; Dell: New York, NY, USA, 1996. [Google Scholar]
- Wood, R.; Bandura, A. Impact of conceptions of ability on self-regulatory mechanisms and complex decision making. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1989, 56, 407–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Azizli, N.; Atkinson, B.E.; Baughman, H.M.; Giammarco, E.A. Relationships between general self-efficacy, planning for the future, and life satisfaction. Pers. Indiv. Differ. 2015, 82, 58–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kale, E. Attachment styles and job performance in the hospitality industry: The mediating role of general self-efficacy. J. Hum. Resour. 2020, 19, 23–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luszczynska, A.; Gutiérrez-Doña, B.; Schwarzer, R. General self-efficacy in various domains of human functioning: Evidence from five countries. Int. J. Psychol. 2005, 40, 80–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yao, Y.; Wang, W.; Wang, F.; Yao, W. General self-efficacy and the effect of hospital workplace violence on doctors’ stress and job satisfaction in China. Int. J. Occup. Med. Environ. 2014, 27, 389–399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Siu, O.L.; Lu, C.Q.; Spector, P.E. Employees’ well-being in Greater China: The direct and moderating effects of general self-efficacy. J. Appl. Psychol. 2007, 56, 288–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bandura, A. Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control; Freeman: New York, NY, USA, 1997. [Google Scholar]
- Raub, S.; Liao, H. Doing the right thing without being told: Joint effects of initiative climate and general self-efficacy on employee proactive customer service performance. J. Appl. Psychol. 2012, 97, 651–667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Mielniczuk, E.; Laguna, M. Positive affect mediates the relationship between self-efficacy and innovative behavior in entrepreneurs. J. Creat. Behav. 2020, 54, 267–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Paramasivam, G.M. Role of self-efficacy and family supportive organizational perceptions in teachers’ organizational citizenship behaviour. Asian Educ. Dev. Stud. 2015, 4, 394–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brooke, J.; Mohd Rasdi, R.; Abu Samah, B. Modelling knowledge sharing behaviour using self-efficacy as a mediator. Eur. J. Train. Dev. 2017, 41, 144–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eibl, B.; Lang, F.R.; Niessen, C. Employee voice at work: The role of employees’ gender, self-efficacy beliefs, and leadership. Eur. J. Train. Dev. 2020, 29, 570–585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, C.H.; Parker, S.K. The role of leader support in facilitating proactive work behavior: A perspective from attachment theory. J. Manag. 2017, 43, 1025–1049. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, G.; Gully, S.M.; Eden, D. Validation of a new general self-efficacy scale. Organ. Res. Methods 2001, 4, 62–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Scherbaum, C.A.; Cohen-Charash, Y.; Kern, M.J. Measuring general self-efficacy: A comparison of three measures using item response theory. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 2006, 66, 1047–1063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fiori, K.L.; Mcilvane, J.M.; Brown, E.E.; Antonucci, T.C. Social relations and depressive symptomatology: Self-efficacy as a mediator. Aging Ment. Health 2006, 10, 227–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zeng, W.; Zeng, Y.; Xu, Y.; Huang, D.; Shao, J.; Wu, J.; Wu, X. The influence of post-traumatic growth on college students’ creativity during the COVID-19 pandemic: The mediating role of general self-efficacy and the moderating role of deliberate rumination. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 665973. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ding, H.; Quan, G. How and when does follower’s strengths-based leadership relate to follower innovative behavior: The roles of self-efficacy and emotional exhaustion. J. Creat. Behav. 2021, 55, 591–603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pap, Z.; Tisu, L.; Vîrgă, D. From personal resources to proactive work strategies and performance: Testing the antecedents and outcomes of strengths use in a three-wave study. Career Dev. Int. 2023, 28, 55–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bakker, A.B.; van Woerkom, M. Strengths use in organizations: A positive approach of occupational health. Can. Psychol. 2018, 59, 38–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chu, X.; Zhang, L.; Li, M. Nurses’ strengths use and turnover intention: The roles of job crafting and self-efficacy. J. Adv. Nurs. 2022, 78, 2075–2084. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- van Woerkom, M.; Oerlemans, W.; Bakker, A.B. Strengths use and work engagement: A weekly diary study. Eur. J. Work Organ. Psychol. 2016, 25, 384–397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- van Woerkom, M.; Meyers, M.C. Strengthening personal growth: The effects of a strengths intervention on personal growth initiative. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 2019, 92, 98–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jones-Smith, E. Strengths-Based Therapy: Connecting Theory, Practice and Skills; Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Schyns, B. Are group consensus in leader-member exchange (LMX) and shared work values related to organizational outcomes? Small Group Res. 2006, 37, 20–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ilies, R.; Nahrgang, J.D.; Morgeson, F.P. Leader-member exchange and citizenship behaviors: A meta-analysis. J. Appl. Psychol. 2007, 92, 269–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dienesch, R.M.; Liden, R.C. Leader-member exchange model of leadership: A critique and further development. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1986, 11, 618–634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cropanzano, R.; Anthony, E.L.; Daniels, S.R.; Hall, A.V. Social exchange theory: A critical review with theoretical remedies. Acad. Manag. Ann. 2017, 11, 479–516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Harris, T.B.; Li, N.; Kirkman, B.L. Leader–member exchange (LMX) in context: How LMX differentiation and LMX relational separation attenuate LMX’s influence on OCB and turnover intention. Leadersh. Q. 2014, 25, 314–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Janssen, O.; Van Yperen, N.W. Employees’ goal orientations, the quality of leader-member exchange, and the outcomes of job performance and job satisfaction. Acad. Manag. J. 2004, 47, 368–384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Eisenberger, R.; Karagonlar, G.; Stinglhamber, F.; Neves, P.; Becker, T.E.; Gonzalez-Morales, M.G.; Steiger-Mueller, M. Leader–member exchange and affective organizational commitment: The contribution of supervisor’s organizational embodiment. J. Appl. Psychol. 2010, 95, 1085–1103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lapierre, L.M.; Hackett, R.D. Trait conscientiousness, leader-member exchange, job satisfaction and organizational citizenship behaviour: A test of an integrative model. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 2007, 80, 539–554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Muldoon, J.; Keough, S.M.; Lovett, S. The mediating role of workplace attitudes on the leader–member exchange—Turnover intention relationship. Psychol.-Manag. J. 2018, 21, 229–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dulebohn, J.H.; Bommer, W.H.; Liden, R.C.; Brouer, R.L.; Ferris, G.R. A meta-analysis of antecedents and consequences of leader-member exchange: Integrating the past with an eye toward the future. J. Manag. 2012, 38, 1715–1759. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carnevale, J.B.; Huang, L.; Crede, M.; Harms, P.; Uhl-Bien, M. Leading to stimulate employees’ ideas: A quantitative review of leader–member exchange, employee voice, creativity, and innovative behavior. J. Appl. Psychol. 2017, 66, 517–552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bhal, K.T.; Ansari, M.A. Leader-member exchange-subordinate outcomes relationship: Role of voice and justice. Leadersh. Org. Dev. J. 2007, 28, 20–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jiang, Z.; Le, H.; Gollan, P.J. Cultural intelligence and voice behavior among migrant workers: The mediating role of leader–member exchange. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2018, 29, 1082–1112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sue-Chan, C.; Au, A.K.; Hackett, R.D. Trust as a mediator of the relationship between leader/member behavior and leader-member-exchange quality. J. World Bus. 2012, 47, 459–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Els, C.; Viljoen, J.; Beer, L.D.; Brand-Labuschagne, L. The mediating effect of leader-member exchange between strengths use and work engagement. J. Psychol. Afr. 2016, 26, 22–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Viljoen, J. Investigating the Impact of Strengths Use on Well-Being: The Mediating Role of Leader-Member Exchange. Ph.D. Thesis, North-West University, Potchefstroom, South Africa, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Karatepe, O.M.; Beirami, E.; Bouzari, M.; Safavi, H.P. Does work engagement mediate the effects of challenge stressors on job outcomes? Evidence from the hotel industry. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2014, 36, 14–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yan, Z.; Mansor, Z.D.; Choo, W.C.; Abdullah, A.R. Mitigating effect of psychological capital on employees’ withdrawal behavior in the presence of job attitudes: Evidence from five-star hotels in Malaysia. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 617023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brislin, R.W. Back-translation for cross-cultural research. J. Cross Cult. Psychol. 1970, 1, 185–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scholz, U.; Doña, B.G.; Sud, S.; Schwarzer, R. Is general self-efficacy a universal construct? Psychometric findings from 25 countries. Eur. J. Psychol. Assess. 2002, 18, 242–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Breukelen, W.I.M.; Konst, D.; Van Der Vlist, R.E.N.E. Effects of LMX and differential treatment on work unit commitment. Psychol. Rep. 2002, 91, 220–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Liang, J.; Farh, C.I.C.; Farh, J.-L. Psychological antecedents of promotive and prohibitive voice: A two-wave examination. Acad. Manag. J. 2012, 55, 72–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Duan, J.; Li, C.; Xu, Y.; Wu, C.H. Transformational leadership and employee voice behavior: A Pygmalion mechanism. J. Organ. Behav. 2017, 38, 650–670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Alhija, F.N.A.; Wisenbaker, J. A Monte Carlo study investigating the impact of item parceling strategies on parameter estimates and their standard errors in CFA. Struct. Equ. Model. 2006, 13, 204–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Podsakoff, P.M.; MacKenzie, S.B.; Lee, J.Y.; Podsakoff, N.P. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 2003, 88, 879–903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rogers, B.A.; Christian, J.S.; Jennings, R.E. “If I Can Change, So Can You”: The Growth Mindset at Work and Daily Prosocial Behavior. In Academy of Management Proceedings; Academy of Management: Briarcliff Manor, NY, USA, 2019; Volume 2019, p. 12001. [Google Scholar]
- Yeager, D.S.; Dweck, C.S. What can be learned from growth mindset controversies? Am. Psychol. 2020, 75, 1269–1284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, X.; Xue, Y.; Liang, H.; Yan, D. The impact of paradoxical leadership on employee voice behavior: A moderated mediation model. Front. Psychol. 2020, 11, 537756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lian, L.; Guo, S.; Wang, Q.; Hu, L.; Yang, X.; Li, X. Calling, character strengths, career identity, and job burnout in young Chinese university teachers: A chain-mediating model. Child. Youth Serv. Rev. 2021, 120, 105776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Duan, J.; Lapointe, É.; Xu, Y.; Brooks, S. Why do employees speak up? Examining the roles of LMX, perceived risk and perceived leader power in predicting voice behavior. J. Manag. Psychol. 2019, 34, 560–572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, L.; Lou, M.; Guan, H. How and when perceived leader narcissism impacts employee voice behavior: A social exchange perspective. J. Manag. Organ. 2022, 28, 77–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Burnette, J.L.; Pollack, J.M.; Forsyth, R.B.; Hoyt, C.L.; Babij, A.D.; Thomas, F.N.; Coy, A.E. A growth mindset intervention: Enhancing students’ entrepreneurial self-efficacy and career development. Entrep. Theory Pract. 2020, 44, 878–908. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harzer, C.; Ruch, W. Your strengths are calling: Preliminary results of a web-based strengths intervention to increase calling. J. Happiness Stud. 2016, 17, 2237–2256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bandura, A. Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. Am. Psychol. 1982, 37, 122–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Appelbaum, S.H.; Hare, A. Self-efficacy as a mediator of goal setting and performance: Some human resource applications. J. Manag. Psychol. 1996, 11, 33–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chan, S.C.; Mak, W.M. Benevolent leadership and follower performance: The mediating role of leader–member exchange (LMX). Asia Pac. J. Manag. 2012, 29, 285–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, Z.; Chun, D.; Wang, X.; Liu, J. Does workplace fun affect employees’ voice behavior? Leader–member exchange as a mediator. Soc. Behav. Personal. 2021, 49, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, H.; Law, K.S.; Hackett, R.D.; Wang, D.; Chen, Z.X. Leader-member exchange as a mediator of the relationship between transformational leadership and followers’ performance and organizational citizenship behavior. Acad. Manag. J. 2005, 48, 420–432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mostafa, A.M.S.; El-Motalib, E.A.A. Servant leadership, leader–member exchange and proactive behavior in the public health sector. Public Pers. Manag. 2019, 48, 309–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chiang, Y.H.; Hsu, C.C.; Shih, H.A. Experienced high performance work system, extroversion personality, and creativity performance. Asia Pac. J. Manag. 2015, 32, 531–549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luria, G.; Kahana, A.; Goldenberg, J.; Noam, Y. Contextual moderators for leadership potential based on trait activation theory. J. Organ. Behav. 2019, 40, 899–911. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tett, R.P.; Toich, M.J.; Ozkum, S.B. Trait activation theory: A review of the literature and applications to five lines of personality dynamics research. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psychol. 2021, 8, 199–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Variable | M | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. Gender | 1.49 | 0.50 | - | |||||
2. Age | 32.61 | 6.24 | −0.11 * | - | ||||
3. Education | 2.24 | 0.62 | 0.10 * | −0.10 * | - | |||
4. Strengths mindset | 3.85 | 0.70 | −0.06 | −0.03 | 0.05 | - | ||
5. General self-efficacy | 3.87 | 0.64 | −0.14 ** | −0.03 | −0.03 | 0.49 ** | - | |
6. LMX | 3.68 | 0.94 | −0.12 ** | −0.05 | −0.02 | 0.47 ** | 0.71 ** | - |
7. Voice behavior | 3.74 | 0.77 | −0.13 ** | 0.04 | −0.05 | 0.44 ** | 0.53 ** | 0.53 ** |
Models | χ2 | df | χ2/df | RMSEA | CFI | TLI | IFI |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Four-factor model (Baseline) | 122.74 | 71 | 1.73 | 0.04 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.99 |
Three-factor model a | 461.63 | 74 | 6.24 | 0.10 | 0.95 | 0.94 | 0.95 |
Two-factor model b | 803.92 | 76 | 10.58 | 0.13 | 0.91 | 0.89 | 0.91 |
One factor model c | 1609.40 | 77 | 20.90 | 0.19 | 0.80 | 0.76 | 0.80 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Liu, F.; Liu, J.; Ding, H. Employee Strengths Mindset and Voice Behavior: The Roles of General Self-Efficacy and Leader–Member Exchange. Sustainability 2023, 15, 11706. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151511706
Liu F, Liu J, Ding H. Employee Strengths Mindset and Voice Behavior: The Roles of General Self-Efficacy and Leader–Member Exchange. Sustainability. 2023; 15(15):11706. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151511706
Chicago/Turabian StyleLiu, Feng, Jun Liu, and He Ding. 2023. "Employee Strengths Mindset and Voice Behavior: The Roles of General Self-Efficacy and Leader–Member Exchange" Sustainability 15, no. 15: 11706. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151511706
APA StyleLiu, F., Liu, J., & Ding, H. (2023). Employee Strengths Mindset and Voice Behavior: The Roles of General Self-Efficacy and Leader–Member Exchange. Sustainability, 15(15), 11706. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151511706