Inclusive Leadership and Employee Proactive Behavior: A Cross-Level Moderated Mediation Model

Figures & data

Figure 1 Conceptual model of this research.

Table 1 Results of Confirmatory Factor Analysis

Measurement Model	χ^2	df	Δχ^2/Δdf	NFI	TLI	CFI	SRMR	RMSEA
Hypothesized four-factor model	953.21	521		0.91	0.95	0.96	0.04	0.05
Three-factor model	2841.78	524	629.52***	0.73	0.75	0.77	0.11	0.10
Two-factor model	3770.09	526	563.38***	0.64	0.65	0.67	0.13	0.14
One-factor model	6208.97	527	875.96***	0.41	0.39	0.43	0.20	0.19

Note: ***p < 0.001.

Table 2 Descriptive Statistics and Intercorrelations

Variables	Mean	SD	1	2	3	4	5	6
Individual level
1. Gender	0.64	0.48
2. Age	30.95	7.44	−0.01
3. Education level	2.94	0.57	0.01	0.02
4. Tenure	4.21	5.07	0.02	0.52***	−0.04
5. Inclusive leadership	4.05	0.78	−0.06	0.03	−0.09	−0.02
6. Employee trust	3.95	0.77	−0.06	0.03	−0.05	−0.01	0.53***
7. Proactive behavior	3.79	0.65	−0.00	0.01	0.06	0.07	0.34***	0.41***
Team level
1. Team size	8.53	1.54
2. Procedural justice climate	3.20	1.28	0.11

Note: ***p < 0.001.

Table 3 Results of Hypotheses Testing

Variables	ET (Model 1)	PB (Model 2)	PB (Model 3)	PB	ET
Individual level (N = 304)
Intercept				3.80***	3.94***
IL	0.53***	0.34***	0.17**	0.28***	0.53***
ET			0.32***
Team level (N = 40)
PJC				0.04	0.00
Cross-level interactions
IL × PJC				0.13*	0.14*

Notes: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.

Abbreviations: IL, inclusive leadership; ET, employee trust; PB, proactive behaviour; PJC, procedural justice climate.

Figure 2 Moderating effect of procedural justice climate on the relationship between inclusive leadership and employee trust.

Figure 3 Moderating effect of procedural justice climate on the relationship between inclusive leadership and proactive behaviour.