交易型领导的结构和作用机制研究

The Multifactor Leadership theory developed by Bass (1985) has become the new paradigm of leadership research. The empirical results of the effectiveness of transformational and transactional leadership in the literature, however, are not consentient. Researchers in China found the different structure of transformational leadership, but have not developed the transactional leadership. This study attempts to investigate three key questions in the unique Chinese socio-economic context: 1) what is the structure of transactional leadership in China? 2) What are the differences between western countries and China? And 3) what is the relationship between the transformational and transactional leadership mechanism? This study examines data collected from 3,500 participants, using Explored Factor Analysis (EFA), Confirmed Factor Analysis (CFA), Hierarchical Regression Analyses, partial correlations and other statistics methods. The major finings are listed as follows： Firstly, inductive methods was used to explore the structure of transactional leadership and the result show that transactional leadership is a four dimensions structure which includes contingent reward, contingent punishment , process control and anticipated investment. Reliability analysis, item analysis, EFA and CFA show the reliability and validity of the transactional leadership questionnaire we designed is good enough, the design of the item is effectively and properly. Contrast to other researches, anticipated investment emphasis on the leader’s recessive investment for subordinate, and this kind of transaction is quite special under the Chinese culture. While the content of the contingent reward with the contingent punishment is wider than the contingent reward in the western country, and the process control is wider than the management by exception and including goal setting and the management during the process. Secondly, hierarchical regression analyses showed that transformational and transactional leadership were significant positively related with in-role performance, extra-role performance, satisfaction and leadership effectiveness while negatively related to intention to leave. The effects of transactional and transformational leadership are different. Transactional leadership could significantly predict intention to leave controlling for transformational leadership, while transformational leadership could significantly predict in-role performance, extra-role performance, satisfaction and leadership effectiveness controlling for transactional leadership. Thirdly, the income level and the rank of subordinates are the moderators between the transformational, transactional leadership and leadership effectiveness. The leadership effectiveness of transactional leadership would decrease as the rank of subordinates increased, while the leadership effectiveness of transformational leadership would increase as the rank of subordinates increased. Transactional leadership is positively related to the effectiveness when the level of the subordinate income is low, but negatively related to the effectiveness when the level of the subordinate income is high. However the income level of the subordinate could not influence the leadership effectiveness of transformational leadership.

领导行为的复杂性、角色结构及其有效性研究

As the social and organizational environment become more and more complex, the topic of leadership complexity is gaining more and more attention. So far, some critical issues in this field need further exploration, such as clarifying the theoretical framework, developing and validating the measurments and exploring the mechanism of the its effectiveness. Using BEI(Behavioral Event Interview), content analysis and EFA/CFA, ANOVA, regression analysis and other qualitative/quantitative methods, this research explored the leadership structure of Chinese enterprise managers, developed a new leadership questionnaire, investigated the differences of the leadership roles among various managerial areas and on different hirachical levels, and examined the impacts of the leadership roles and leadership complexity on different indicators of leadership effectiveness in various organizational contexts. 1,020 managers were surveyed. The followings are the main findings： First，the structure of leadership behaviors of Chinese enterprise managers included ethical model, authoritarian, producer, director, monitor, mentor, strategist, enterpriser, among which ethical model and authoritarian are the new findings in Chinese cultural context. Ethical model was characterized by presenting honesty, setting an example to others, being just and diligent. Authoritarian was characterized by showing power and arbitrariness. In addition, mentor, strategist and enterpriser incarnated some cultural features of present China. The new developed leadership questionnaire’s reliability and validity reached the criterion of standardized measurement. Second, there were significant differences of frequency of leadership behaviors among the managers at different managerial postions and hirachical levels, while the impacts of different leadership roles on different leadership effectiveness indicators were also singnificantly different. Ethical model had positive impacts on the whole performance and three indicators across task and context performance, and authoritarian’s impacts on the whole performance and department performance were negatively significant. Third, the impact of leadership complexity on the whole leadership effectiveness was positively significant, while the moderating effects of organization level and position function was not significant.

工作幸福感的结构、测量及作用机制

With the emergence and development of positive psychology, happiness has been the focus of academia and business. However, there is no uniform measure of happiness, because of many different theories of happiness, which are not compatible with others. It bounds the further development of happiness theory. It is also the same with the research of work well-being, which refers to the emotional experience and quality of psychological functioning of employee in the workplace. Subjective well-being (SWB) and psychological well-being (PWB) are two major theories of happiness. Prior research has demonstrated the integration of these two theories theoretically, but still needs more empirical support. Besides, in line with the development of positive psychology, a body of knowledge about positive leadership is advocated. Transformational leadership is treated as one kind of positive leadership, since it emphasizes the leader’s motivational and elevating effect on followers. But the extent to which the transformational leadership can enhance work well-being, and what the mechanism is, these are the questions need to be explored. Based on the integration of SWB and PWB, this research tried to investigate the structure, measurement and mechanism of work well-being, and combining with the theory of transformational leadership, this study also tried to investigate the relationship between transformational leadership and work well-being. The structure and measurement of work well-being, the relationships between work well-being and job characteristics (including job resources and job demands), the relationships among transformational leadership, job resources, work well-being and corresponding outcomes, the relationships among transformational leadership, job demands, work well-being and corresponding outcomes, and the relationships among transformational leadership, group job characteristics, group work well-being and corresponding group outcomes were explored by using content analysis, Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) discussion, and structural questionnaire surveys. More than 7000 subjects were surveyed, and Explore Factor Analysis (EFA), Confirm Factor Analysis (CFA), Structural Equation Modeling (SEM), Hierarchical Linear Modeling (HLM) and other statistics methods were used. The following is the major conclusions. Firstly, work well-being is a two high-order factors structure, which includes affective well-being (AWB) and cognitive well-being (CWB). AWB is similar to SWB, and CWB is similar to PWB. Besides, the construct of AWB includes sub-dimensions of positive emotional experience and negative emotional experience. And the construct of CWB consists of work autonomy, personal growth, work competent, and work significance. Secondly, the relationships between job characteristics and AWB and CWB are different. On one hand job demands are directly related to AWB, and are indirectly related to CWB through the full mediation of AWB, on the other job resources are directly related to CWB, and are indirectly related to AWB through the full mediation of CWB, which means AWB and CWB reciprocally influences each other in the model of job demands-resources. These results were concluded as the process model of work well-being. Thirdly, AWB and CWB are positively related to many workplace outcomes, including job satisfaction, group satisfaction, organizational commitment, turnover intention, job performance, organizational citizenship behavior (OCB), and general psychological health and general physiological health. Fourthly, transformational leadership is indirectly related to CWB through the full mediation of job resources, and is related to AWB through the partial mediation of job demands. Meanwhile, transformational leadership is related to many workplace outcomes through the mediation of job characteristics and work well-being. These results implied that transformational leadership is indeed one kind of positive leadership. Fifthly, in the group level, transformational leadership is indirectly related to group CWB through the full mediation of group job resources, and is related to group AWB through the full mediation of group job demands. Group AWB has positive influence on group CWB, but not vice versa. Group job characteristics and group work well-being fully mediate the relationships between transformational leadership and intragroup cooperation and group performance.