Shopping cart
0 Items | US$ 0.00
List of Figures
Figure 1: The JD-R Model (van den Heuvel et al., 2009, p. 126)...VI
Figure 2: The expanded JD-R Model (in part) by Xanthopoulou et al. (2007, p. 135)..VI
Figure 3: The Personal Resources Adaption Model by van den Heuvel et al. (2009,
p. 138)...VII
Figure 4: Scatterplot of the EL - WE Relationship (SPSS-Output)...VIII
Figure 5: Final Model (Partial Mediation)...14
.
IV
List of Tables
Table 1: Internal Consistency: Cronbach´s alpha...VII
Table 2: Descriptive Statistics Frequencies (Gender, Age, Education)...11
Table 3: Descriptive Statistics (Gender, Age, Education)...12
Table 4: Means, Standard Deviations, Internal Consistencies (Cronbach's
D
on the
diagonal) and Correlations among the variables...12
Table 5: Linear Regression Direct Effect of EL on WE (Overall Model)...IX
Table 6: Linear Regression Direct Effect of EL on WE (ANOVA)...IX
Table 7: Linear Regression Direct Effect of EL on WE (Coefficients)...IX
Table 8: Linear Regression Effect of SLF on EL and WE (Overall Model...X
Table 9: Linear Regression Effect of SLF on EL and WE (ANOVA)...X
Table 10: Linear Regression Effect of SLF on EL and WE (Coefficients)...X
Table 11: Linear Regression Effect of SLS on EL and WE (Overall Model)...XI
Table 12: Linear Regression Effect of SLS on EL and WE (ANOVA)...XI
Table 13: Linear Regression Effect of SLS on EL and WE (Coefficients)...XI
V
Abstract
The Change Management Study investigated the relationship between Empowering
Leadership and Work Engagement. Consistent with social learning and social identity
theories, Self-Efficacy was examined as a mediator of the Empowering Leadership to
Work Engagement relationship. Results from 147 participants showed that Empowering
Leadership is positively and significantly related to Work Engagement and that this
relationship is mediated by Self-Efficacy. Furthermore, the influence of Self-Esteem on
the Empowering Leadership to Work Engagement relationship was investigated. As the
internal consistency coefficient of Self-Esteem was unacceptable, this effect had to be
neglected in the current study. Results, Limitations and Future Research Directions are
discussed.
1 Introduction
As modern organizations seek for changes to enhance their competitive positions and
their survivability in global markets (Higgs & Rowland, 2005), the successful
implementation of organizational change has become an important management task.
But still, many companies are unable to succeed in change processes (Higgs &
Rowland, 2005; Jaros, 2010). Failures show, that there is considerable room for
researchers to provide insights into opportunities for improving the success of
organizational change events (Parish, Cadwallader & Busch, 2007). Given the fact, that
individuals are the most important units in organizational change (Graetz & Smith,
2010), a successful implementation requires employees' acceptance and support (Fedor,
Caldwell & Herold, 2006). Hence, employees´ positive attitudes and their Work
Engagement are considered to be fundamental requirements (Fedor et al., 2006).
Nevertheless, there is limited understanding of the multitudinous factors associated with
employees´ decision to support organizational change (Lamm & Gordon, 2010).
Basically, organizational change is stressful as it requires the readiness to embrace
change and the readjustment of employees' routine tasks. In this regard, leadership is
considered to be one of the most important variables affecting the attitudinal dimension
1
of organizational processes (Jaskyte, 2003). Yousef (2000), also, identified leadership
as a critical element in organizational change. In respect of the types of leadership
behavior and their exchange relationship with followers, several reviews and meta-
analyses have shown, that Empowering Leadership can result in individual, group and
unit performance beyond expectations.
Empowering Leadership implies sharing power to foster employees' motivation and
engagement in their work (Kirkman & Rosen, 1999). It is the process of establishing
conditions that enable sharing power with an employee by indicating the significance of
the employee's job, providing greater decision-making autonomy, demonstrating trust
in the employee´s capabilities and providing each employee with the opportunity to act
as flexibly as circumstances allow for (Arnold et al., 2000). Thus, Empowering
Leadership emerges when supervisors foster trust-based relationships with followers,
show interest in their personal problems, facilitate participative decision-making and
coach them to be more self-reliant (Kirkman & Rosen, 1999). These specifications
show, that this leadership style is highly relevant to Employee Work Engagement.
However, relatively few studies have tested how and why Empowering Leadership
relates to Follower Work Engagement in organizational change environments.
In this context, students from the University of Potsdam came up with the Change
Management Study, which is explicated in the following.
The purpose of this term paper is to examine how Empowering Leadership affects
Employee Work Engagement in organizational change processes by investigating the
roles of two potential mediators, Self-Efficacy and Self-Esteem.
2 Literature Review and Hypothesis Development
The following course of action is based on the assumptions of the Job Demands-
Resources Model (JD-R Model) and its extended forms (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007).
The JD-R Model provides a framework for understanding the processes by which work
environment factors determine well-being and motivation (i.e. Work Engagement)
through job demands and job resources (see Figure 1 in the Appendix).
2
Hakanen, Bakker, & Schaufeli (2006) stated, that job resources (e.g. leadership
behavior) are considered to be the most important predictors, when it comes to
explaining differences in Employee Work Engagement.
Xanthopoulou et al. (2007) expanded the JD-R Model by examining how personal
resources affect relations of the model´s processes (see Figure 2 in the Appendix).
Personal resources are defined as factors of the self, that refer to resiliency and to
individuals' sense of their ability to control and impact upon their organizational
environment successfully (Hobfoll, Johnson, Ennis & Jackson, 2003). They included
three typical personal resources, namely, Self-Efficacy (Bandura, 1977), organizational-
based Self-Esteem (Pierce et al., 1989) and Optimism.
Previous studies have shown that these personal resources are not only related to stress
resilience, but also have positive effects on employees´ well-being at the workplace
(Pierce et al., 1989). Additionally, they concluded that these resource levels are
cultivated by environmental factors (i.e. leadership behavior during organizational
change).
Based on these findings, Pierce and Gardner (2004) suggested, that personal resources
mediate the relationship between resourceful work characteristics (i.e. leadership style:
e.g. perceived fairness, support, influence) and employee motivation / attitudes (i.e.
Work Engagement). That supports the idea of mediating effects by personal resources in
the relationship between Empowering Leadership and Work Engagement.
In the context of organizational change, van den Heuvel et al. (2009) came up with an
extended concept of the JD-R Model, namely, the Personal Resources Adaption Model
(see Figure 3 in the Appendix). When it comes to understanding organizational change
events, employees´ personal resources are considered to be the most relevant factors,
rather than job resources. This model suggests a reciprocal relationship between
employees´ personal resources (Self-Efficacy and Self-Esteem in this case) and the
work environment (leadership behavior during organizational change).
Based on the findings above, this term paper derives three hypotheses, which are
explicated in the following.
3
2.1 Empowering Leadership and Work Engagement
Empowering Leadership aims at the development of follower self-management / self-
leadership skills. The historical roots of Empowering Leadership are found in
behavioral self-management (Mahoney & Thoresen, 1974), social cognitive theory
(Bandura, 1986), cognitive behavior modification research (Meichenbaum, 1977) and
participative goal-setting research (Erez & Arad, 1986). Representative behaviors imply
encouraging independent action, opportunity thinking, self-development, self-reward as
well as using participative goal-setting and decision-making.
Macey and Schneider (2008) specified different definitions of Work Engagement.
According to Schaufeli and Bakker (2004), Work Engagement is a positive, affective-
motivational and work-related state that is characterized by vigor, dedication and
absorption. Vigor refers to high levels of energy, the willingness to invest effort in one´s
tasks and mental resilience while working. Dedication is characterized by a strong
involvement in one´s work, accompanied by feelings of enthusiasm and significance
and by a sense of inspiration and pride. Absorption refers to a pleasant state of total
captivation in one´s work, which is characterized by time passing quickly and being
unable to disengage oneself from the it. Work Engagement can be enhanced by
autonomy and responsibility, social support and coaching, performance feedback, high
levels of perceived fairness as well as task variety (these aspects can be developed by
empowerment).
Empowering Leadership can play an intrinsic and an extrinsic motivational role to
stimulate engagement. Intrinsically, Empowering Leadership behavior facilitates
employees meet the fundamental need for self-determination and control (Ryan & Deci,
2000). By encouraging followers to use self-rewards, allow for follower self-leadership,
engaging in participative goal-setting and encouraging teamwork as well as independent
action, empowering leaders transfer power to their subordinates (Manz & Sims, 1987).
In doing so, they foster followers' capacity for self-determination and feelings of
mastery, which in turn, reduce change-related stressors, such as fear or mistrust.
Extrinsically, the outcome of an increased feeling of mastery and self-determination
fosters motivation for task accomplishment (Conger & Kanungo, 1988). Due to
4
delegation, consultation and support, this enhanced level of motivation is combined
with the capacity to succeed and achieve work- as well as change-related goals.
Thus, Empowering Leadership is supposed to foster Employee Work Engagement via
intrinsic and extrinsic motivational processes, which leads to the first assumption.
Hypothesis 1: There is a direct positive relationship between Empowering Leadership
and Employee Work Engagement.
2.2 The Mediating Roles of Self-Efficacy
According to Baron and Kenny (1986), the role of Self-Efficacy (SLF in the following)
as a mediator of the EL - WE relationship is supported, in part, by the links between: (1)
EL and WE, (2) EL and SLF, (3) SLF and WE. The mentioned links, except the link
between EL and WE, which was discussed above, are discussed as follows.
2.2.1 Empowering Leadership and Self-Efficacy
As a key element in Bandura's (1977) theory of social learning, SLF refers to an
individual's belief in his or her capability to achieve a course of action needed to adhere
the demands of a specific work situation. Bandura (1977) stated that SLF should not be
conceptualized and measured in terms of generalized feelings of mastery, but rather in
reference to dealing with a specific situation or performing a specific behavior. In
regard with the Change Management Study, SLF is related to organizational change.
Change-related SLF can be defined as an employee´s perceived ability to function well
on the job, despite the demands of a changing work environment (Wanberg & Banas,
2000). Employees who doubt their ability to respond to the demands of any
organizational change event are more likely to focus attention on their feelings of
incompetence, which will be accompanied by a sense of psychological distress and a
failure to cope with the situation (Bandura, 1977). In contrast, employees who have
high levels of change-related SLF are less likely to be distressed by a feeling of
inadequacy. They are rather expected to persist in their efforts to tackle the
organizational change process.
5