The Influence of Authoritarian-Benevolent Leadership on Subordinates’ Work Engagement: A Social Information Processing Perspective

References

• Smith SM, Butler S. Maintaining the fight for equality through and beyond COVID-19: a focus on the build back better report and ambidextrous leadership. Strateg HR Rev. 2021;20(1):17–22. doi:10.1108/SHR-08-2020-0075
   Google Scholar
• Rosing K, Frese M, Bausch A. Explaining the heterogeneity of the leadership-innovation relationship: ambidextrous leadership. Leadersh Q. 2011;22(5):956–974. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.07.014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerlach F, Rosing K, Zacher H. Flexible adaptation of leader behavior. J Pers Psychol. 2021;20(4):198–206. doi:10.1027/1866-5888/a000274
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kober R, Thambar PJ. Paradoxical tensions of the COVID-19 pandemic: a paradox theory perspective on the role of management control systems in helping organizations survive crises. Account Audit Account. 2022;35(1):108–119. doi:10.1108/AAAJ-08-2020-4851
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berti M, Cunha MP. Paradox, dialectics or trade-offs? A double loop model of paradox. J Manage Stud. 2023;60(4):861–888. doi:10.1111/joms.12899
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith WK. Dynamic decision making: a model of senior leaders managing strategic paradoxes. J Acad Manage J. 2014;57(6):1592–1623. doi:10.5465/amj.2011.0932
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu G, An R. Applying a Yin-Yang perspective to the theory of paradox: a review of Chinese management. Psychol Res Behav Manag. 2021;14:1591–1601. doi:10.2147/PRBM.S330489
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farh J-L, Cheng B-S. A cultural analysis of paternalistic leadership in Chinese organizations. In: Li JT, Tsui AS, Weldon E, editors. Management and Organizations in the Chinese Context. Palgrave Macmillan UK; 2000:84–127.
   Google Scholar
• Hou N, Peng J. Authoritarian-benevolent leadership, active implementation and job performance: an investigation on the effectiveness of ambidextrous leadership in the Chinese context. Acta Psychol Sin. 2019;51(1):117–127. doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2019.00117
   Google Scholar
• Yin J. Living with tensions in the workplace: a grounded theory of paradoxical leadership in cultivating subordinates’ paradox mindset. Leadersh Org Dev J. 2022;43(6):862–873. doi:10.1108/LODJ-04-2021-0151
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meng L, Li T, Yang M, Wang S. A study on the influence of authoritarian-benevolent leadership on employees’ innovative behavior from the perspective of psychological perception-based on fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis. Front Psychol. 2022;13:886286. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.886286
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hou N, Peng J, Yin K, Yang J. An investigation on the dark side of benevolent authoritarian and its boundary condition: an uncertainty management theory perspective. Nankai Bus Rev. 2019;22(06):77–87.
   Google Scholar
• Chen L, Weng Q. Authoritarian-benevolent leadership and employee behaviors: an examination of the role of LMX ambivalence. J Bus Ethics. 2023;186(2):425–443. doi:10.1007/s10551-022-05225-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhao H, Guo L, Luo J. The double-edge sword effects of ambidextrous leadership——an integrated model of two approaches based on cognitive strain and vitality at work. Manage Rev. 2021;33(8):21–223.
   Google Scholar
• Soares ME, Mosquera P. Fostering work engagement: the role of the psychological contract. J Bus Res. 2019;101:469–476. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.01.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Busse R, Regenberg S. Revisiting the “authoritarian versus participative” leadership style legacy: a new model of the impact of leadership inclusiveness on employee engagement. J Leadersh Organ Stud. 2019;26(4):510–525. doi:10.1177/1548051818810135
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herr RM, Van Harreveld F, Uchino BN, et al. Associations of ambivalent leadership with distress and cortisol secretion. J Behav Med. 2019;42(2):265–275. doi:10.1007/s10865-018-9982-z
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salancik GR, Pfeffer J. A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design. Adm Sci Q. 1978;23(2):224–253. doi:10.2307/2392563
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saeed I, Khan J, Zada M, Zada S. Employee sensemaking in organizational change via knowledge management: leadership role as a moderator. Curr Psychol. 2023. doi:10.1007/s12144-023-04849-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Suurd Ralph C, Barling J. Leader inconsistency, subjective ambivalence, and follower outcomes. J Bus Psychol. 2022. doi:10.1007/s10869-022-09852-w
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Siddique CM, Siddique HF, Siddique SU. Linking authoritarian leadership to employee organizational embeddedness, LMX and performance in a high-power distance culture: a mediation-moderated analysis. J Strategy Manag. 2020;13(3):393–411. doi:10.1108/JSMA-10-2019-0185
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang Y, Huai M, Xie Y. Paternalistic leadership and employee voice in China: a dual process model. Leadersh Q. 2015;26(1):25–36. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2014.01.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee A, Thomas G, Martin R, Guillaume Y. Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) ambivalence and task performance: the cross-domain buffering role of social support. J Manag. 2019;45(5):1927–1957. doi:10.1177/0149206317741190
   Google Scholar
• Schilling J, Schyns B, May D. When your leader just does not make any sense: conceptualizing inconsistent leadership. J Bus Ethics. 2023;185(1):209–221. doi:10.1007/s10551-022-05119-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang J, van Woerkom M, Breevaart K, Bakker AB, Xu S. Strengths-based leadership and employee work engagement: a multi-source study. J Vocat Behav. 2023;142:103859. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2023.103859
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown KW, Ryan RM. The benefits of being present: mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. J Appl Psychol. 2003;84(4):822–848. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.822
   Google Scholar
• Leroy H, Anseel F, Dimitrova NG, Sels L. Mindfulness, authentic functioning, and work engagement: a growth modeling approach. J Vocat Behav. 2013;82(3):238–247. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2013.01.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ashforth BE, Rogers KM, Pratt MG, Pradies C. Ambivalence in organizations: a multilevel approach. Organ Sci. 2014;25(5):1453–1478. doi:10.1287/orsc.2014.0909
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chou W, Chou L, Cheng B, Jen C. Juan-Chiuan and Shang-yan: the components of authoritarian leadership. Indig Psychol Res Chin Soc. 2010;34:223–284.
   Google Scholar
• Safi AQ, Ali A, Saeed I. Exploitative leadership on innovative work behavior; knowledge hiding as the mediator. Int J Bus Manage Sci. 2023;4(2):165–179.
   Google Scholar
• Fan T, Khan J, Khassawneh O, Mohammad T. Examining toxic leadership nexus with employee cyberloafing behavior via mediating role of emotional exhaustion. J Organ End User Comput. 2023;35(1):1–23. doi:10.4018/JOEUC.320817
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sarwar U, Al Hassan S, Khassawneh O, Mohammad T, Parveen R. One pot sets another boiling: a case of social learning perspective about leader self-serving behaviour and followers self-serving counterproductive work behaviour. Heliyon. 2023;9(3):e14611–e14611. doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e14611
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheng BS, Chou LF, Farh JL. A triad model of paternalistic leadership: the constructs and measurement. Indig Psychol Res Chin Soc. 2000;14:3–64.
   Google Scholar
• Zada M, Zada S, Khan J, et al. Does servant leadership control psychological distress in crisis? Moderation and mediation mechanism. Psychol Res Behav Manag. 2022;15:607–622. doi:10.2147/PRBM.S354093
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khassawneh O, Elrehail H. The effect of participative leadership style on employees’ performance: the contingent role of institutional theory. Adm Sci. 2022;12(4):195. doi:10.3390/admsci12040195
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fulk J, Steinfield CW, Schmitz J, Power JG. A social information processing model of media use in organizations. Commun Res. 1987;14(5):529–552. doi:10.1177/009365087014005005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yaffe T, Kark R. Leading by example: the case of leader OCB. J Appl Psychol. 2011;96(4):806–826. doi:10.1037/a0022464
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peng J, Wang Z, Chen X. Does self-serving leadership hinder team creativity? A moderated dual-path model. J Bus Ethics. 2019;159(2):419–433. doi:10.1007/s10551-018-3799-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hogg MA. Influence and leadership. In: Fiske ST, Gilbert DT, Lindzey G, editors. Handbook of Social Psychology. John Wiley & Sons, Inc; 2010:1166–1207.
   Google Scholar
• Paustian-Underdahl SC, Halbesleben JRB. Examining the influence of climate, supervisor guidance, and behavioral integrity on work-family conflict: a demands and resources approach. J Organ Behav. 2014;35(4):447–463. doi:10.1002/job.1883
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katz–Navon T, Kark R, Delegach M. Trapped in the middle: challenging the linear approach to the relationship between leadership and safety. Acad Manag Discov. 2020;6(1):81–106. doi:10.5465/amd.2017.0014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sparrowe RT, Liden RC. Process and structure in leader-member exchange. Acad Manage Rev. 1997;22(2):522–552. doi:10.2307/259332
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Han Y. Ambivalence in the Leader-Follower Relationship: Dispositional Antecedents and Effects on Work-Related Well-Being [ dissertation]. Canada: Carleton University; 2020.
   Google Scholar
• Spencer-Rodgers J, Peng K, Wang L, Hou Y. Dialectical self-esteem and east-west differences in psychological well-being. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2004;30(11):1416–1432. doi:10.1177/0146167204264243
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhao Q, Zhou W. Good or bad? The ambivalent leader-follower relationships. Front Psychol. 2021;12:690074. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.690074
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crick NR, Dodge KA. A review and reformulation of social information-processing mechanisms in children’s social adjustment. Psychol Bull. 1994;115(1):74–101. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.115.1.74
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schaufeli WB, Salanova M, González-romá V, Bakker AB. The measurement of engagement and burnout: a two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. J Happiness Stud. 2002;3(1):71–92. doi:10.1023/A:1015630930326
   Google Scholar
• Bakker AB, Demerouti E. Towards a model of work engagement. Career Dev Int. 2008;13(3):209–223. doi:10.1108/13620430810870476
   Google Scholar
• Fincham FD, Linfield KJ. A new look at marital quality: can spouses feel positive and negative about their marriage? J Fam Psychol. 1997;11(4):489–502. doi:10.1037/0893-3200.11.4.489-502
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang Y, Waldman DA, Han Y, Li X. Paradoxical leader behaviors in people management: antecedents and consequences. J Acad Manage J. 2015;58(2):538–566. doi:10.5465/amj.2012.0995
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Harreveld F, Nohlen HU, Schneider IK. The ABC of ambivalence: affective, behavioral, and cognitive consequences of attitudinal conflict. In: Olson JM, Zanna MP, editors. Adv Exp Soc Psychol. Academic Press; 2015:285–324.
   Google Scholar
• Liu Y, Xu S, Zhang H, Zhu J. Love and hate together: the influence of LMX ambivalence on employee proactive behavior. Foreign Econ Manag. 2021;43(05):123–136. doi:10.16538/j.cnki.fem.20201115.302
   Google Scholar
• Dechawatanapaisal D. Effects of leader-member exchange ambivalence on work attitudes: a moderated mediation model. J Manag Dev. 2021;40(1):35–51. doi:10.1108/JMD-07-2020-0233
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li J, Wong IA, Kim WG. Does mindfulness reduce emotional exhaustion? A multilevel analysis of emotional labor among casino employees. Int J Hosp Manag. 2017;64:21–30. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2017.03.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee J, Kim KH, Webster CS, Henning MA. The evolution of mindfulness from 1916 to 2019. Mindfulness. 2021;12(8):1849–1859. doi:10.1007/s12671-021-01603-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Badham R, King E. Mindfulness at work: a critical re-view. Organization. 2019;28(4):531–554. doi:10.1177/1350508419888897
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roche M, Haar JM, Luthans F. The role of mindfulness and psychological capital on the well-being of leaders. J Occup Health Psychol. 2014;19(4):476–489. doi:10.1037/a0037183
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wayne JH, Musisca N, Fleeson W. Considering the role of personality in the work–family experience: relationships of the big five to work–family conflict and facilitation. J Vocat Behav. 2004;64(1):108–130. doi:10.1016/S0001-8791(03)00035-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Methot JR, Melwani S, Rothman NB. The space between us: a social-functional emotions view of ambivalent and indifferent workplace relationships. J Manag. 2017;43(6):1789–1819. doi:10.1177/0149206316685853
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grover SL, Teo STT, Pick D, Roche M. Mindfulness as a personal resource to reduce work stress in the job demands-resources model. Stress Health. 2017;33(4):426–436. doi:10.1002/smi.2726
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kersemaekers W, Rupprecht S, Wittmann M, et al. A workplace mindfulness intervention may be associated with improved psychological well-being and productivity. A preliminary field study in a company setting. Front Psychol. 2018;9:195. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00195
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riedl EM, Thomas J. The moderating role of work pressure on the relationships between emotional demands and tension, exhaustion, and work engagement: an experience sampling study among nurses. Eur J Work Organ Psychol. 2019;28(3):414–429. doi:10.1080/1359432X.2019.1588251
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kabat-Zinn J. Mindfulness-based interventions in context: past, present, and future. Clin Psychol-Sci Pract. 2003;10(2):144–156. doi:10.1093/clipsy.bpg016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bostock S, Crosswell AD, Prather AA, Steptoe A. Mindfulness on-the-go: effects of a mindfulness meditation app on work stress and well-being. J Occup Health Psychol. 2019;24(1):127–138. doi:10.1037/ocp0000118
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Good DJ, Lyddy CJ, Glomb TM, et al. Contemplating mindfulness at work: an integrative review. J Manag. 2016;42(1):114–142. doi:10.1177/0149206315617003
   Google Scholar
• Kudesia RS. Mindfulness as metacognitive practice. Acad Manage Rev. 2019;44(2):405–423. doi:10.5465/amr.2015.0333
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janssen M, Heerkens Y, Kuijer W, van der Heijden B, Engels J. Effects of mindfulness-based stress reduction on employees’ mental health: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2018;13(1):e0191332. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0191332
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brislin RW. Back-translation for cross-cultural research. J Cross-Cult Psychol. 1970;1(3):185–216. doi:10.1177/135910457000100301
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zacher H, Rosing K. Ambidextrous leadership and team innovation. Leadersh Org Dev J. 2015;36(1):54–68. doi:10.1108/lodj-11-2012-0141
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tu Y, Wang S, Lu L. Authoritarian, benevolent, and moral components of paternalistic leadership and employee performance: psychological safety as a mediator. Soc Behav Pers. 2023;51(3):109–120. doi:10.2224/sbp.12029
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yuan K, Zheng Y-B, Wang Y-J, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis on prevalence of and risk factors associated with depression, anxiety and insomnia in infectious diseases, including COVID-19: a call to action. Mol Psychiatr. 2022;27(8):3214–3222. doi:10.1038/s41380-022-01638-z
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Preacher KJ, Hayes AF. Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behav Res Methods. 2008;40(3):879–891. doi:10.3758/BRM.40.3.879
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Lee JY, Podsakoff NP. Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J Appl Psychol. 2003;88(5):879–903. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Putnam LL, Fairhurst GT, Banghart S. Contradictions, dialectics, and paradoxes in organizations: a constitutive approach. Acad Manag Ann. 2016;10(1):65–171. doi:10.5465/19416520.2016.1162421
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lu J, Zhang Z, Jia M. Does servant leadership affect employees’ emotional labor? A social information-processing perspective. J Bus Ethics. 2018;159(2):507–518. doi:10.1007/s10551-018-3816-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Breevaart K, Zacher H. Main and interactive effects of weekly transformational and laissez-faire leadership on followers’ trust in the leader and leader effectiveness. J Occup Organ Psychol. 2019;92(2):384–409. doi:10.1111/joop.12253
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• He G, Wang Y, Zheng X, Guo Z, Zhu Y. Linking paternalistic leadership to work engagement among Chinese expatriates: a job demand-resource perspective. Int J Manpow. 2022;43(4):889–909. doi:10.1108/IJM-07-2020-0322
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee M, Ding A. The relationship between market culture, clan culture, benevolent leadership, work engagement, and job performance: leader’s dark triad as a moderator. Psychol Rep. 2022;00332941221121564. doi:10.1177/00332941221121564
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rothman N, Melwani S. Feeling mixed, ambivalent, and in flux: the social functions of emotional complexity for leaders. Acad Manage Rev. 2017;42(2):259–282. doi:10.5465/amr.2014.0355
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ralph C. Leader Inconsistency, Subjective Attitude Ambivalence and Follower Outcomes [ dissertation]. Canada: Queen’s University; 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Lin X, Du J. What happens when leader is ambivalent and employee is indifferent? A moderated mediation model of LMX ambivalence and employee creativity. Chin Manag Stud. 2023. doi:10.1108/CMS-08-2022-0290
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Majeed M, Irshad M, Khan I, Saeed I. The impact of team mindfulness on project team performance: the moderating role of effective team leadership. Proj Manag J. 2023;54(2):162–178. doi:10.1177/87569728221140807
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith WK, Lewis MW. Toward a theory of paradox: a dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Acad Manage Rev. 2011;36(2):381–403. doi:10.5465/AMR.2011.59330958
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin R-M, Hong Y-J, Xiao H-W, Lian R. Honesty-Humility and dispositional awe in Confucian culture: the mediating role of Zhong-Yong thinking style. Pers Individ Differ. 2020;167:110228. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2020.110228
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar