Peer Reviewed Papers on Trust in the Workplace
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 January; 17(i): 250.
Bridging the Gap between Authentic Leadership and Employees Communal Relationships through Trust
Muhammad Khalil Khan
2College of Media and International Culture, Zhejiang University, 866 Yuhangtang Road, Hangzhou 310058, China; nc.ude.ujz@nahk
Amira Khattak
3Department of Marketing, Prince Sultan University, P.O. Box 66833, Riyadh 11586, Saudi Arabia; as.ude.usp@kattahka
Received 2019 Nov 3; Accustomed 2019 Dec 23.
Abstract
Authentic leadership has emerged as a positive relational-leadership approach that has gained the attention of academicians and practitioners by stimulating a healthy piece of work environment. This study examined the direct influence of authentic leadership on employees' communal relationships. In addition, the study examined the mediating role of affective- and cognitive-based trust on these relationships. Nosotros adopted a cross-sectional study design and collected data from 200 employees working in the private banking sector in Pakistan. The findings indicated that authentic leadership was positively correlated with communal employee relationships. In add-on, both melancholia- and cerebral-based trust were found to take a positive mediating effect on the relationship between authentic leadership and communal employee relationships. The practical implications, limitations and suggestions for future research are discussed.
Keywords: authentic leadership, melancholia-based trust, cognitive-based trust, communal relationship, banking sector, Pakistan
1. Introduction
Employees' positive organizational relationships non just play an important role in shaping organizational reputation, only as well contribute towards the achievement of organizational aims and boosting employee effectiveness. Likewise, no consignment can exist finer accomplished if disagreement occurs between employees, and their arrangement [one,2]. Employees who maintain a respectable relationship with their leadership and the arrangement in which they are working consider organizational issues as their own and endeavor to find solutions for them as if they were their own issues [iii]. Employees' communal relationships are a form of positive relationship, introduced by Clark and Mills [four] as "the efforts to give benefits to other party with no expectation of returns in futurity". Empirical evidence reveals that a communal relationship plays a significant role in assisting organizational management to pay specific attention to its duties because it then assists its employees without any expectations [five,6].
Accurate leadership has nowadays appeared as a class of leadership mode that has gained the attention of numerous scholars [7,eight,9] and practitioners [10,xi,12]. The interest on accurate leadership stems from the recent corporate scandals and organizational malfeasance, like leadership dishonesty and unethical practices [thirteen], and the reduction of conventional leadership approaches, such as transformational and charismatic leadership, which emphasize attaining organizational performance through leadership. Centering on authenticity and morality, accurate leadership focuses on upstanding dilemmas and motivates firms to establish a positive learning and organizational climate [14,fifteen]. In addition, authentic leadership has attracted researchers' attending due to its positive influence on employees' chore outcomes and organizational-goal achievements [xvi,17,18], and the call for more empirical work [seven,8,xix].
Empirical evidence reveals the significant role of authentic leadership in affecting employees' workplace outcomes [xx]. For example, authentic leadership has been revealed to raise employees' organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) [sixteen,17,21] positively related to an ethical civilisation [22], improving employees' organizational delivery [23], increasing employees' work date [24,25], better employee functioning [26], and trust [25,27]. Notwithstanding, little research exists into investigating the direct impact of authentic leadership and employees' communal relationships [9]. In addition, although empirical evidence reveals a positive clan between authentic leadership and employees' communal relationships [nine], the psychological mechanism underlying this relationship is less clear.
This research makes an of import addition to the literature on authentic leadership by examining a novel mediation framework that explains the process through which authentic leaders impact their subordinates' communal relationships. Focusing on relational-model theory [28] and social-substitution theory [29], nosotros examined the mediating effect of affective- and cognitive-based trust in transmitting the effect of accurate leadership to enhance employees' communal relationships. Accurate leadership is divers as having optimistic beliefs that inculcate qualities of hope, trust, and positive emotions in their subordinates [7,30,31]. Similarly, Dirks and Ferrin [32], in their meta-analytic review, called for scholars to consider 2 dimensions of trust, affective- and cognitive-based trust, and to "effort to distinguish betwixt the processes involved" (p. 623), even so, very few studies have followed this call [33,34,35]. In addition, this is the first report that focuses on affective- and cognitive-based trust as a mediating variable while examining the relationship betwixt authentic leadership and employees' communal relationships. It is suitable to explore the mediating issue of affective- and cerebral-based trust at the individual level, equally they were initially theorized as individual-level constructs; an increasing body of research has also revealed leadership's influence on individuals and group levels [36].
Conducting research related to authentic leadership and OCB in the context of Pakistan is important because well-nigh inquiry related to these topics has been conducted in Western cultures, which are quite different from S Asian cultures (specifically Pakistani civilisation); this is a new contribution by examining this relationship in Islamic republic of pakistan's collectivistic culture.
In improver, by studies take urged for more empirical research to examine authentic-leadership types globally [7,xx]. This report is an attempt to answer to this telephone call, and it explores the office of authentic leadership in affecting employees' communal relationships by focusing on the collectivistic culture of Pakistan, which is quite different from Western culture. In addition, this is a 3-way written report in which authentic leadership influences employees' communal relationship through 2 sequential mediators, namely, melancholia- and cognitive-based trust. By investigating processes through which these two dimensions of trust transmit the effects of authentic leadership on employees' communal relationships, our report extends the authentic-leadership and trust literature in a new important direction.
ii. Theory and Hypothesis
2.i. Accurate Leadership
Authentic leadership (AL) appeared equally a significant area of research in the academic arena with the emergence of the positive-psychology movement [13]. According to Avolio, Luthans, and Walumbwa (2004), authentic leaders are those "who are deeply enlightened of how they think and deport and are perceived by others as existence enlightened of their ain and others values/moral perspectives, cognition and strengths; enlightened of the context in which they operate; and who are confident, hopeful, optimistic, resilient, and of high moral character" (p.4). The definition of authentic leadership given by Walumbwa, Avolio [16] is the one most commonly used in the academic literature. They define AL every bit: "a pattern of leader behavior that draws upon and promotes both positive psychological capacities and a positive ethical climate, to foster greater self-sensation, an internalized moral perspective, balanced processing of information, and relational transparency on the part of leaders working with followers, fostering positive cocky-development" (p. 94).
Walumbwa, Avolio [16] suggested four components of authentic leadership. Self-awareness is related to the awareness of one's strengths and weaknesses, and their values and beliefs [37]. Authentic leaders have a stable sense of self-knowledge [38]. Relational transparency is related to presenting i's truthful self to other people, profitable in forming trust and cooperation, and nurturing teamwork among colleagues [31]. Counterbalanced processing is related to a leader's ability to exist unbiased in considering all relevant data before reaching any decision [39]. Internalized moral perspective is related to the leaders beliefs and moral values that are compatible with their behaviors [xvi]. Leaders are considered to be authentic when they correspond these iv components. The theoretical and empirical findings of past studies also recommend that authentic leadership can be the association between the 4 same components [16,31,40,41].
two.two. Authentic Leadership and Employees' Communal Relationships
Authenticity plays a significant role in influencing employees' organizational relationships in the subject area of organizational behavior. Employees' experiences of accurate organizational behavior depend on transparency, trustfulness, and consistency in leadership approaches [42]. In improver, fifty-fifty though many scholars examined the employees' organizational relationships [43,44], uncertainty still remains. Hon and Grunig [five] emphasized that management must develop communal relationships with their employees in gild to enhance the importance of employees' organizational relationships. Such types of actions could enable direction to concentrate on their duties, profiting employees without whatsoever hope of returns [5]. Recent empirical bear witness revealed the positive office of accurate leadership in influencing employees' communal relationships [9].
The association between accurate leadership with employees' communal relationships can be discussed from the perspective of relational-model theory [28,45], which comprises four major mental schemas: communal sharing, equality matching, authorisation ranking, and marketplace pricing. Communal-sharing schemas indicate showing intendance and concern for other people and satisfying their necessities [28]. Similarly, Iqbal, Farid [9] demonstrated that communal-sharing schemas could be linked with authentic leadership, as authentic leaders could increment social interactions with their subordinates, show business for other members in a neutral manner, and gain precise information before making any determination. Therefore, on the basis of the theoretical component of the communal-sharing mental schema, it was conceived that, when employees perceive their leader'southward behavior every bit authentic, they showroom more than involvement in their work and bear witness care for organizational reputation, which helps the organisation become more successful. Hence, information technology is suggested that authentic leadership is positively related with employees' communal relationships (Figure i) and the following is proposed:
Hypothesis1.
Accurate leadership is positively correlated with employees' communal relationships.
Hypothetical model of human relationship between authentic leadership (independent variable), affective- and cognitive-based trust (mediators), and communal relationships (dependent variable).
2.3. Authentic Leadership and Trust
Trust refers to "a psychological state including the intention to accept vulnerability based upon optimistic expectations of the intentions or behavior of some other" [46]. On the basis of the aforementioned definition, we can say that the extent to which employees show their willingness to subject themselves to piece of work, in the interest of their leader, depends upon the exchange relationship between employee and leader. Social-exchange theory [29] too suggests that the actions of individuals depend on the rewards they received from others in the past or expect to receive in the future [47]. Konovsky and Pugh [48] stated that trust was a basic element in developing and fostering exchange-based relationships. In addition, leadership and trust could also be perceived as an commutation relationship betwixt leaders and followers [49]. We chose the two-dimensional trust model of McAllister [50] (affective- and cognitive-based trust) to better understand how melancholia- and cognitive-based trust mediates the relationship betwixt authentic leadership and employees' communal relationships. We adopted McAllister's [fifty] model of trust for several reasons. First, although by studies revealed a stiff association of authentic leadership with trust, previous scholars take typically ignored the multidimensionality of the trust construct [25,27,51,52,53]. 2nd, in contempo years [50], the model of melancholia- and cognitive-based trust has been profoundly examined and validated in different contexts [27,32,34]. Finally, the McAllister [l] model of trust is more commonly used in leadership studies relative to other existing trust models [35,54,55].
Affective-based trust is a relation-based approach, adult on the basis of ongoing exchanges of social relationships rather than economical exchanges, and it is comprised of intendance, business organization, and mutual obligation, and an understanding of reciprocated sentiments [32,50,54,55,56]. Cerebral-based trust is a graphic symbol-based approach most the character of a leader. Dirks and Ferrin [32] observed that "trust-related concerns about a leader'south graphic symbol are of import because the leader may have authority to make decisions that have a meaning affect on a follower and the follower'south ability to achieve his or her goals (e.yard., promotions, pay, work assignments, layoffs)" (p. 612).
Moreover, an employee's inclination to trust a leader is afflicted by the actions and character of that leader [57]. Authentic leaders are those who evidence authenticity and can enhance respect, dignity, integrity, and trust among followers [24]. Authentic leadership is likely to show to subordinates that the leader is concerned about their welfare through the leader's lack of bias in considering all relevant information before reaching whatsoever decisions [39]. In addition, Gardner, Avolio, Luthans and Walumbwa [31] argued that an authentic leader is aware of their ain strengths and weaknesses, tin nowadays their truthful self to other people, assists in constructing trust and cooperation, and nurtures team work amidst colleagues. Such behavior fosters the development of melancholia-based trust.
In addition, an authentic leader tin act in accord to their beliefs and moral values that are uniform with their beliefs [16]. From the social-exchange perspective, when followers believe in their leader'south authenticity, competence, and honesty, that leader is signaled equally an appropriate partner with whom to engage in a social-commutation relationship, which is the feature of cognitive-based trust [50]. By studies indicated a positive and significant clan betwixt leadership and followers' cerebral-based trust [35,54,58]. As mentioned in the earlier sections, by studies accept examined the McAllister [fifty] model of affective- and cognitive-based trust on the association betwixt transformational or ethical leadership and employees' job outcomes [35,54]. However, to the all-time of our knowledge, no study has been conducted to date on the direct result of authentic leadership on affective- and cognitive-based trust. To make full this gap, we investigated the bear on of authentic leadership on followers' melancholia- and cerebral-based trust (Figure 1), and hypothesized the following.
Hypothesis2.
Authentic leadership is positively associated with affective-based trust.
Hypothesis3.
Accurate leadership is positively associated with cerebral-based trust.
2.4. Affective- and Cognitive-Based Trust, and Employees' Communal Relationships
Affective-based trust is more interpersonal in nature [33] and indicates an exchange-based perspective that happens when a leader engages in a social-commutation relationship with their subordinates [34]. Most relationships between organizational management and employees originate from exchange-based relationships. In order to strengthen these relationships and make them more than durable, much depends upon the leadership to propagate them in communal relationships. Empirical evidence showed that melancholia trust had a strong influence on followers organizational citizenship behavior when compared to cognitive-based trust [55]. Yet, no study has examined the result of affective-and cognitive-based trust on employees' communal relationships. Both affective- and cognitive-based trust are also crucial determinants of the extent to which employees tend to enhance their individual relationships with theirs coworkers and leaders, which ultimately helps in edifice communal relationships with them. To fill this gap, we causeless that affective- and cognitive-based trust were positively related with employees' communal relationships (Figure 1), and hypothesized the following:
Hypothesis4.
Affective-based trust is positively associated with employees' communal relationships.
Hypothesisv.
Cerebral-based trust is positively associated with employees' communal relationships.
2.5. Mediating Office of Affective- and Cerebral-Based Trust on the Human relationship between Accurate Leadership and Employees' Communal Relationships
Nosotros examined subordinate trust (affective- and cognitive-based trust) on leaders as a mediating mechanism through which authentic leadership translates its positive influence on communal employee relationships. Trust has been identified equally a potential mediator in past studies [59]; previous research using a social-exchange-based perspective for understanding the result of authentic leadership has not included a clear mensurate of this key mediating mechanism. Therefore, this was a pioneering report that tested social commutation as a theoretical background for understanding the result of authentic leadership past integrating affective- and cerebral-based trust as a mediating variable.
As discussed above, authentic leaders are those "who are deeply aware of how they think and behave and are perceived by others every bit beingness aware of their own and others values/moral perspectives, knowledge and strengths; enlightened of the context in which they operate; and who are confident, hopeful, optimistic, resilient, and of high moral character" [xxx], (p. 4). Moreover, recent empirical testify reveals the positive effect of authentic leadership on employees' communal human relationship [ix]. Past studies have also examined the mediating machinery of trust in the effect of authentic leadership on followers' workplace attitudes and behaviors [25,51,52,53]. Every bit discussed above, all mentioned studies accept used trust every bit a unidimensional construct. Focusing on the uniqueness of the McAllister [50] model of melancholia- and cognitive-based trust, nosotros causeless that trust mediated the relationship between authentic leadership and employees' communal relationships for several theoretical reasons. Kickoff, accurate leaders may enhance subordinates' affective-based trust by inculcating a sense of obligation, which, in turn, may stimulate subordinates' sense of a communal relationship. Second, subordinates' cognitive-based trust is grounded on an authentic leader's character and positive attributes that helps in reducing the perceived chance in their relationships. In plow, subordinates are more willing to engage in communal relationships. Therefore, on the basis of the aforementioned discussions, we suggested that melancholia- and cognitive-based trust positively mediates the relationship betwixt accurate leadership and employees' communal relationships (Figure one), and posited the following:
Hypothesis6.
Affective-based trust has a positive mediating effect on the relationship between authentic-leadership behaviors and employees' communal relationships.
Hypothesis7.
Cognitive-based trust has a positive mediating effect on the human relationship between accurate-leadership behaviors and employees' communal relationships.
three. Materials and Methods
Nosotros adopted a cross-sectional report blueprint and nerveless information from 200 employees working in different private-sector banking organizations in the urban center of Peshawar of Pakistan. We highlighted the study'southward significance to every bank manager and motivated staff members to participate. After the formal approval of managers, the self-administered questionnaire was distributed amidst all bank employees, ensuring the confidentiality of the respondents' responses.
Through a convenient sampling technique, we circulated 300 questionnaires, but received 200 completed questionnaires. Tabular array 1 indicates that out of the 200 total respondents, the bulk (143; 71%) were male, and 57 (29%) were female. Most of the respondents (104; 52%) were 21–30 years old, 79 (forty%) respondents were 31–40 years old, and the remaining 17 (8%) were 41–50 years former. In addition, the majority (120; 60%) of respondents were married, and 80 (twoscore%) were unmarried; 53 (26%) had a available'due south degree, 118 (59%) had a principal's degree, and the remaining 29 (xv%) had an MPhil or higher up level of education. Further, the majority (108; 54%) of respondents had 1–v years of work feel, l (25%) had half dozen–10 years of feel, 21 (11%) had 11–15 years of experience, and the remaining 12 (half dozen%) had 16–20 years of experience. Lastly, out of the total respondents, simply 49 (25%) worked every bit a bank manager, and the majority (151; 75%) worked as banking staff members.
Table ane
Demographic variable results.
| Demographic Variables | Frequencies | Sample Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Respondent Gender | ||
| Male | 143 | 71% |
| Female | 57 | 29% |
| Respondent Historic period | ||
| 21–30 years | 104 | 52% |
| 31–forty years | 79 | 40% |
| 41–l years | 17 | 8% |
| Respondent Marital Status | ||
| Married | 120 | lx% |
| Single | 80 | xl% |
| Respondent Educational activity | ||
| Available'southward degree | 53 | 26% |
| Principal degree | 118 | 59% |
| MPhil and above | 29 | 15% |
| Respondent Work Feel | ||
| 1–5 years | 108 | 54% |
| 6–10 years | 50 | 25% |
| 11–15 years | 21 | 11% |
| 16–20 years | 12 | vi% |
| Respondent Job title | ||
| Manager | 49 | 25% |
| Staff fellow member | 151 | 75% |
| Total | 200 | 100 |
iii.one. Measurement
We used a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree, to measure all scales used in the study.
iii.2. Accurate Leadership
The authentic-leadership scale was measured by using a cocky-reported scale developed by Walumbwa, Avolio [16]. The scale comprised of 16 items, and sample items included "My manager seeks feedback to improve interactions with others," "My managing director admits mistakes when they are made," and "My director demonstrates beliefs that are consequent with deportment". The blastoff was 0.873.
3.3. Communal Relationships
The communal-relationships scale adult by Clark, Oullette [60] was adopted for the study. The scale comprised xiv items. Example items included "When making a decision, I take other people's needs and feelings into business relationship" and "I expect people I know to exist responsive to my needs and feelings". The alpha was 0.795.
3.4. Melancholia- and Cognitive-Based Trust
Affective- and cognitive-based trust were measured by using a cocky-reported calibration developed by McAllister (1995). The calibration of affective-based trust comprised v items, and cognitive-based trust comprised half-dozen items. Sample items of affective-based trust included "My director and I have a sharing relationship. We can both freely share our ideas, feelings, and hopes" and "If I shared my issues with my manager, I know he would reply constructively and caringly". The alpha of the affective-based-trust scale was 0.754. Sample items of cognitive-based trust included "My manager approaches his/her chore with professionalism and dedication" and "I tin rely on my director not to make my task more hard by careless piece of work". The alpha of the cognitive-based-trust calibration was 0.726.
iv. Results
4.ane. Descriptive Statistics
The chief characteristics of the sample, including ways, standard deviations, and variable correlations, are shown in Tabular array 2. Correlation between authentic leadership and communal relationships (r = 0.339, p < 0.01) was found to be positive and significant, as expected; also, the correlation between accurate leadership and affective-based trust (r = 0.511, p < 0.01) was also establish to be positive and meaning. The correlation betwixt authentic leadership and cognitive-based trust was r = 0.382, p < 0.01. In addition, correlation between communal human relationship and melancholia-based trust (r = 0.410, p < 0.01) was plant significant, equally expected. Communal-relationship correlation with cognitive-based trust (r = 0.347, p < 0.01) was too found to exist positive and meaning, every bit expected. Finally, correlation betwixt affective- and cognitive-based trust (r = 0.566, p < 0.01) was also found significant.
Table two
Descriptive statistics, mean, standard deviation (SD), and correlation of variables.
| Heading Column | Mean | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Accurate leadership | 3.573 | 0.55903 | ane | |||
| Communal relationship | 3.6014 | 0.56811 | 0.339 ** | 1 | ||
| Affective-based trust | four.0130 | 0.60420 | 0.511 ** | 0.410 ** | 1 | |
| Cerebral-based trust | iii.9183 | 0.76129 | 0.382 ** | 0.347 ** | 0.566 ** | 1 |
four.2. Confirmatory-Factor Assay (CFA) for Authentic Leadership, Communal Relationships, and Affective- and Cognitive-Based Trust
To examine the convergence and discriminant validity of the scales, CFA was performed by using SPSS Amos version 20. First, authentic leadership, communal relationships, melancholia- and cerebral-based trust were compared in a hypothesized 4-factor model (Model 1) with three other models. Second, communal relationships and affective-based-trust items were combined into a new unmarried factor in the three-factor model (Model 2). Third, communal relationships, and affective- and cognitive-based-trust items were combined into a new single factor in a two-cistron model (Model three). Finally, we loaded all items of the studied variables (authentic leadership, affective- and cognitive-based trust, and communal relationships together into a new single gene in a ane-factor model (Model four). Confirmatory-gene analysis with maximum-likelihood estimation was performed for all three proposed models. Factor-loading for each component was found positive and significant, and indicated skilful convergence validity. Boilerplate extracted variance of all proposed variables was checked, and the square root of every average variance extracted (AVE) was found to be greater than all variable coefficients [61]. Results shown in Table 3 indicate a practiced model fit for the hypothesized three-factor model (Model 1; chi square/degree of freedom (CMIN/DF) = 1.366, comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.918, incremental fit indices (IFI) = 0.920, Tucker–Lewis Index (TLI) = 0.907, root mean square fault of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.043) compared to other alternative models.
Table three
Confirmatory-factor-analysis results for authentic leadership, affective- and cerebral-based trust, and communal relationships.
| Measurement Models | CMIN/DF | CFI | IFI | TLI | RMSEA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M1. Hypothesized four-factor model. | 1.366 | 0.918 | 0.920 | 0.907 | 0.043 |
| M2. Three-factor model: affective-based trust and communal relationships were merged. | 1.550 | 0.876 | 0.880 | 0.869 | 0.053 |
| M3. Ii-gene model: Affective- and cognitive-based trust, and communal relationships were merged. | ane.636 | 0.857 | 0.861 | 0.838 | 0.057 |
| M4. 1-factor model, accurate leadership, affective- and cognitive-based trust, and communal relationships were merged. | 1.830 | 0.819 | 0.825 | 0.789 | 0.065 |
four.3. Regression Analysis of Authentic Leadership, Affective- and Cognitive-Based Trust, and Communal Relationships
Multiple linear regression was performed to examine the main hypotheses of the study. Results presented in Table 4 indicate the influence of the independent variable (authentic leadership) and command variables (gender and age) on the dependent variable (communal relationships).
Tabular array four
Regression analysis of authentic leadership, affective- and cognitive-based trust, and communal relationships.
| Variables | Affective-Based Trust | Cognitive-Based Trust | Communal Relationships |
|---|---|---|---|
| Constant | |||
| Gender | 128 | 0.348 ** | 0.119 |
| Age | −0.023 | −0.009 | 0.044 |
| Authentic leadership | 0.553 *** | 0.520 *** | 0.344 *** |
| Affective-based trust | 0.386 *** | ||
| Cognitive-based trust | 0.259 *** | ||
| R2 | 0.262 | 0.146 | 0.115 |
| ∆R2 | 0.258 | 0.142 | 0.110 |
| F | lxx.152 *** | 33.863 *** | 25.631 *** |
Results presented in Table iv indicate the positive association of accurate leadership with communal relationships (β = 0.344, p < 0.0001), supporting Hypothesis 1. Hypothesis 2 predicted the positive relationship between authentic leadership with affective-based trust. Results revealed that accurate leadership had a positive association with affective-based trust (β = 0.553, p < 0.0001); hence, Hypothesis 2 was also fully supported. Hypothesis 3 predicted the positive clan betwixt authentic leadership with cognitive-based trust. Results revealed that authentic leadership had a positive clan with cognitive-based trust (β = 0.520, p < 0.0001); hence, Hypothesis 3 was also fully supported. Hypothesis four predicted the positive association betwixt affective-based trust with communal relationships. Results indicated that melancholia-based trust had a positive and significant association with communal relationships (β = 0.386, p < 0.0001); hence, Hypothesis 4 was supported. Similarly, Hypothesis 5 predicted a positive association between cognitive-based trust with communal relationships. Results indicated that cognitive-based trust had a positive and significant association with communal relationships (β = 0.259, p < 0.0001); hence, Hypothesis 5 was too fully supported.
4.4. Arbitration Assay
In the current study, the process program for SPSS developed by Hayes [62] was used to analyze the mediating hypotheses. For this, we selected Model 4 from the Hayes templates to observe the direct influence of authentic leadership on communal relationships, as well as the mediating role of affective- and cerebral-based trust on the association between authentic leadership and communal relationships. Moreover, a 95% correct bias confidence interval with 5000 bootstrapping-procedure sample estimates was selected.
In Hypothesis 6, we hypothesized that affective-based trust had a positive mediating influence on the association between authentic leadership and communal relationships. The results (Table five) showed that affective-based trust mediated the association betwixt authentic leadership and communal relationships (β = 0.177, p < 0.02), supporting Hypothesis 6.
Table five
Mediation coefficient and bootstrapping.
| Testing Paths | Unstandardized Coefficient | T | Sig | Bootstrapping | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Coefficient Error | LLCI ULCI | |||||
| IV→Chiliad (a) | 0.553 | 0.066 | 8.376 | 0.0001 | 0.423 | 0.683 |
| M→DV (b) | 0.302 | 0.070 | 4.300 | 0.0001 | 0.163 | 0.440 |
| Four→M→DV (c') | 0.177 | 0.076 | ii.331 | 0.02 | 0.028 | 0.327 |
| Four→DV (c) | 0.344 | 0.068 | 5.063 | 0.0001 | 0.210 | 0.478 |
| Indirect effects | 0.167 | 0.048 | 0.083 | 0.327 | ||
Similarly, in Hypothesis seven, it was hypothesized that cerebral-based trust had a positive mediating influence on the association between authentic leadership and communal relationships. The results shown in Table 6 revealed that cognitive-based trust mediated the clan between accurate leadership and communal relationships (β = 0.177, p < 0.02), supporting Hypothesis 7.
Table half-dozen
Mediation coefficient and bootstrapping.
| Testing Paths | Unstandardized Coefficient | T | Sig | Bootstrapping | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Coefficient Error | LLCI ULCI | |||||
| 4→Thou (a) | 0.520 | 0.089 | 5.819 | 0.0001 | 0.344 | 0.697 |
| Thousand→DV (b) | 0.190 | 0.052 | 3.632 | 0.0001 | 0.087 | 0.294 |
| Four→Grand→DV (c') | 0.245 | 0.071 | 3.432 | 0.001 | 0.104 | 0.386 |
| 4→DV (c) | 0.344 | 0.068 | 5.063 | 0.0001 | 0.210 | 0.478 |
| Indirect furnishings | 0.099 | 0.035 | 0.042 | 0.182 | ||
5. Discussion
The present study explored the direct effect of authenticity on employees' communal relationships as well as the indirect effect of an accurate leadership on employees' communal relationships through affective- and cognitive-based trust.
This study indicated the vital function of accurate leadership in affecting employees' communal relationships. Every bit discussed in the literature section, authentic leadership has attracted researchers' attention due to its positive role in affecting employees and organizational-goal achievements [16,17,xviii], calling for more empirical work [seven,8,19]. Nosotros filled this gap past investigating the affect of authentic leadership on communal relationships among employees working in the banking sector of Pakistan. Moreover, in line with past studies [9], this study revealed the positive function of authentic leadership in affecting employees' communal relationships, supporting Hypothesis 1.
On the basis of relational model theory by Fiske [28] and its theoretical component, specifically the communal-sharing mental schema, we argue that, when employees perceive their leader's behavior equally authentic, they display more concern for their piece of work and take care of organizational fame, which aids the organisation in accomplishing its goals. Past adding relational-model theory, this study makes an important theoretical contribution to the literature in the field of psychology.
In addition, the current written report significantly contributes to the existing literature related to authentic leadership and trust by giving a more than comprehensive understanding of the mediating office played by trust on the association betwixt authentic leadership and employees' workplace-relationship outcomes than past studies, which typically hypothesized trust as a one-dimensional construct. Dirks and Ferrin [32], in their meta-analytic review, urged researchers to consider multiple constructs of trust, including affective- and cognitive-based trust, and "attempt to distinguish between the processes involved" (p. 623), merely very few studies have followed this call [35,36,37]. Nosotros filled this alienation and explored the indirect result of authentic leadership on employees' communal relationships through affective- and cognitive-based trust. In agreement with our initial expectations, authentic leadership was found to be positively associated with melancholia- and cognitive-based trust. In addition, affective- and cognitive-based trust both positively mediated the relationship betwixt accurate leadership and employees' communal relationships. From a social-substitution perspective, our findings have also revealed that trust stimulates positive workplace-relationship outcomes, which is important; this is pioneering, as it examined both affective- and cerebral-based trust as a mediating mechanism on exploring the relationship between authentic leadership with employees' communal relationships, making a new contribution to the accurate-leadership literature.
Applied Implications, Limitations, and Time to come Research
The electric current study has confirmed that leadership plays an important office in influencing employee attitudes and behaviors within organizations. The results of the written report suggested that an organization needs to pay specific attention to authentic leadership and to enhance follower workplace-relationship outcomes, such as employees' communal relationships. To gain the full benefits of authentic leadership, organizations should consider integrating components of authentic leadership into their evolution, appraisal, and selection processes. For example, an organization may give more importance to training both leaders and subordinates to advance their concerns with regard to workplace issues. This results in more authentic behavior by leaders, too as enhancing the receptivity of subordinates to such behaviors. The electric current study too revealed the vital role of the affective- and cognitive-based-trust mediating mechanism underlying the relationship betwixt authentic leadership and communal relationships. This study suggests that leaders should rationally consider approaches they utilize to influence their subordinates' behaviors in the workplace. Specifically, our report suggests that authentic leadership may exist used as an instrument by managers to influence employees' communal relationships through the development of trust.
This study also had some limitations. Starting time, we simply focused on the private banking sector. Hence, it is suggested that the study should exist extended to other piece of work settings to farther develop the understanding of relationships between the studied variables. Second, mutual-method bias was likewise a limitation. Furthermore, studies should exist expanded to other departments and groups as well. Third, the current study should be replicated in other countries to increase the generalizability of our findings. Future studies are encouraged to consider other organizational variables, such as work engagement and well-existence, while focusing on authentic leadership and trust.
6. Conclusions
This study contributes to the existing literature by examining trust-based mechanisms on the relationship between authentic leadership and employees' communal relationships. In addition, it also makes an important contribution past clearly presenting how authentic leadership influences employees' communal relationships through affective- and cognitive-based trust. Our results revealed that both cognitive- and affective-based trust positively mediate the human relationship between accurate leadership and employees' communal relationships. We hope that the present study will encourage future researchers to examine the trust-based mechanisms by which accurate leadership influences employee work outcomes.
Author Contributions
South.I. and T.F. equally contributed to writing the original typhoon, the conceptualization, information collection, formal analysis, and methodology. J.M. provided resources and administered the project. M.Thousand.K., Q.Z., and A.Thousand. reviewed and edited the paper. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of People's republic of china under grant number (71871201). The APC was funded past National Natural Science Foundation of China under grant number (71871201).
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
References
i. Bajaj R., Sinha Southward., Tiwari V. Crucial Factors of Human Resource Management for Practiced Employee Relations: A Example Written report. Int. J. Min. Metall. Mech. Eng. 2013;ane:90–92. [Google Scholar]
2. Tansel A., Gazîoğlu Ş. Direction-employee relations, firm size and job satisfaction. Int. J. Manpow. 2014;35:1260–1275. doi: 10.1108/IJM-09-2014-0179. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
3. Kim J.-N., Rhee Y. Strategic thinking about employee communication behavior (ECB) in public relations: Testing the models of megaphoning and scouting effects in Korea. J. Public Relat. Res. 2011;23:243–268. doi: 10.1080/1062726X.2011.582204. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
iv. Clark M.Southward., Mills J. Interpersonal attraction in exchange and communal relationships. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 1979;37:12. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.37.1.12. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
five. Hon L.C., Grunig J.Eastward. Guidelines for Measuring Relationships in Public Relations. Plant for Public Relations; Gainesville, FL, USA: 1999. [Google Scholar]
vi. Hung C.-J.F. Exploring types of organisation–public relationships and their implications for relationship management in public relations. J. Public Relat. Res. 2005;17:393–426. doi: ten.1207/s1532754xjprr1704_4. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
7. Gardner W.Fifty., Cogliser C.C., Davis M.M., Dickens M.P. Authentic leadership: A review of the literature and research agenda. Leadersh. Q. 2011;22:1120–1145. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.09.007. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
8. Avolio B.J., Walumbwa F.O. The Oxford Handbook of Leadership and Organizations. Oxford University Printing; Oxford, Britain: 2014. Authentic Leadership Theory, Inquiry and Exercise: Steps Taken and Steps that Remain. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
nine. Iqbal S., Farid T., Ma J., Mehmood Q. Cultivating Employees' Communal Human relationship and Organizational Citizenship Beliefs through Authentic Leadership: Studying the Influence of Procedural Justice. Psychol. Res. Behav. Manag. 2018;11:545. doi: ten.2147/PRBM.S179019. [PMC gratis article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
ten. Cashman K., Forem J. Awakening the Leader within: A Story of Transformation. John Wiley and Sons; Hoboken, NJ, Us: 2003. [Google Scholar]
11. George B. Authentic Leadership: Rediscovering the Secrets to Creating Lasting Value. John Wiley and Sons; Hoboken, NJ, USA: 2003. [Google Scholar]
12. George B., Sims P., McLean A.N., Mayer D. Discovering your authentic leadership. Harv. Bus. Rev. 2007;85:129. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
13. Avolio B.J., Luthans F. Authentic leadership: A positive development arroyo. In: Cameron Thousand.Southward., Dutton J.East., Quinn R.Eastward., editors. Positive Organizational Scholarship. Barrett-Koehler; San Francisco, CA, USA: 2003. pp. 241–258. [Google Scholar]
14. Avolio B.J., Walumbwa F.O., Weber T.J. Leadership: Current theories, research, and hereafter directions. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2009;60:421–449. doi: ten.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163621. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
15. Crossan M.M., Lane H.W., White R.E. An organizational learning framework: From intuition to institution. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1999;24:522–537. doi: 10.5465/amr.1999.2202135. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
xvi. Walumbwa F.O., Avolio B.J., Gardner W.L., Wernsing T., Peterson S. Accurate leadership: Development and validation of a theory-based mensurate. J. Manag. 2008;34:89–126. doi: ten.1177/0149206307308913. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
17. Walumbwa F.O., Wang P., Wang H., Schaubroeck J., Avolio B.J. Retracted: Psychological processes linking accurate leadership to follower behaviors. Leadersh. Q. 2010;21:901–914. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2010.07.015. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
18. Walumbwa F.O., Luthans F., Avey J.B., Oke A. Retracted: Authentically leading groups: The mediating role of commonage psychological capital and trust. J. Organ. Behav. 2011;32:iv–24. doi: 10.1002/job.653. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
19. Alilyyani B., Wong C.A., Cummings G. Antecedents, mediators, and outcomes of authentic leadership in healthcare: A systematic review. Int. J. Nurs. Stud. 2018;83:34–64. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2018.04.001. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
20. Boehm S.A., Dwertmann D.J.G., Bruch H., Shamir B. The missing link? Investigating organizational identity strength and transformational leadership climate equally mechanisms that connect CEO charisma with firm operation. Leadersh. Q. 2015;26:156–171. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2014.07.012. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
21. Edú Valsania S., Moriano León J.A., Molero Alonso F., Topa Cantisano G. Authentic leadership and its effect on employees' organizational citizenship behaviours. Psicothema. 2012;24:561–566. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
22. Morris J.T. The impact of authentic leadership and ethical firm culture on auditor behavior. J. Behav. Stud. Motorbus. 2014;vii:one. [Google Scholar]
23. Gatling A., Kang H.J.A., Kim J.S. The effects of authentic leadership and organizational delivery on turnover intention. Leadersh. Organ. Dev. J. 2016;37:181–199. doi: 10.1108/LODJ-05-2014-0090. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
24. Bamford M., Wong C.A., Laschinger H. The influence of accurate leadership and areas of worklife on work engagement of registered nurses. J. Nurs. Manag. 2013;21:529–540. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2834.2012.01399.x. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
25. Hassan A., Ahmed F. Accurate leadership, trust and work appointment. Int. J. Hum. Soc. Sci. 2011;six:164–170. [Google Scholar]
26. Leroy H., Anseel F., Gardner Westward.Fifty., Sels L. Authentic leadership, authentic followership, basic need satisfaction, and work part functioning: A cross-level study. J. Manag. 2015;41:1677–1697. doi: 10.1177/0149206312457822. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
27. Wong C.A., Spence Laschinger H.K., Cummings 1000.G. Authentic leadership and nurses' voice behaviour and perceptions of intendance quality. J. Nurs. Manag. 2010;eighteen:889–900. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2834.2010.01113.x. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
28. Fiske A.P. Structures of Social Life: The Four Elementary Forms of Man Relations: Communal Sharing, Authority Ranking, Equality Matching, Market Pricing. Free Printing; New York, NY, Us: 1991. [Google Scholar]
29. Blau P.M. Exchange and Power in Social Life. Transaction Publishers; New York, NY, USA: 1964. [Google Scholar]
xxx. Avolio B.J., Gardner W.L., Walumbwa F.O., Luthans F., May D.R. Unlocking the mask: A wait at the procedure by which authentic leaders impact follower attitudes and behaviors. Leadersh. Q. 2004;fifteen:801–823. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2004.09.003. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
31. Gardner W.L., Avolio B.J., Luthans F., May D.R., Walumbwa F. "Tin can you see the existent me?" A self-based model of authentic leader and follower evolution. Leadersh. Q. 2005;16:343–372. doi: x.1016/j.leaqua.2005.03.003. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
32. Dirks G.T., Ferrin D.Fifty. Trust in leadership: Meta-analytic findings and implications for enquiry and exercise. J. Appl. Psychol. 2002;87:611. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.611. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
33. Schaubroeck J., Lam S.Due south., Peng A.C. Cognition-based and bear upon-based trust every bit mediators of leader behavior influences on team performance. J. Appl. Psychol. 2011;96:863. doi: 10.1037/a0022625. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
34. Yang J., Mossholder Thousand.W. Examining the effects of trust in leaders: A bases-and-foci approach. Leadersh. Q. 2010;21:l–63. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.10.004. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
35. Zhu Y., Akhtar S. How transformational leadership influences follower helping behavior: The function of trust and prosocial motivation. J. Organ. Behav. 2014;35:373–392. doi: 10.1002/job.1884. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
36. Dansereau F., Yammarino F.J., Kohles J.C. Multiple levels of analysis from a longitudinal perspective: Some implications for theory building. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1999;24:346–357. doi: 10.5465/amr.1999.1893940. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
37. Avolio B.J., Gardner West.L. Authentic leadership evolution: Getting to the root of positive forms of leadership. Leadersh. Q. 2005;16:315–338. doi: x.1016/j.leaqua.2005.03.001. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
38. Laschinger H.1000.Due south., Fida R. A time-lagged analysis of the effect of authentic leadership on workplace bullying, burnout, and occupational turnover intentions. Eur. J. Piece of work Organ. Psychol. 2014;23:739–753. doi: 10.1080/1359432X.2013.804646. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
39. Leroy H., Palanski M.Eastward., Simons T. Authentic leadership and behavioral integrity every bit drivers of follower delivery and functioning. J. Charabanc. Ethics. 2012;107:255–264. doi: ten.1007/s10551-011-1036-1. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
40. Kernis Thou.H., Goldman B.M. On Building, Defending and Regulating the Cocky: A Psychological Perspective. Psychology Press; London, United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland: 2005. From thought and experience to beliefs and interpersonal relationships: A multicomponent conceptualization of authenticity; pp. 31–52. [Google Scholar]
41. Rego A., Sousa F., Marques C., eastward Cunha Grand.P. Authentic leadership promoting employees' psychological capital and inventiveness. J. Omnibus. Res. 2012;65:429–437. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.10.003. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
42. Shen H., Kim J.-N. The authentic enterprise: Another buzz word, or a true commuter of quality relationships? J. Public Relat. Res. 2012;24:371–389. doi: 10.1080/1062726X.2012.690255. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
43. Kim H.-S. A multilevel study of antecedents and a mediator of employee—Organization relationships. J. Public Relat. Res. 2007;nineteen:167–197. doi: 10.1080/10627260701290695. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
44. Moon B., Rhee Y. Organizational culture, employee communication strategies, and employee–organization relationships. Korean J. J. Commun. 2008;52:122–150. [Google Scholar]
45. Haslam N., Fiske A.P. Relational Models Theory: A Contemporary Overview. Erlbaum; Mahwah, NJ, USA: 2004. Social expertise: Theory of mind or theory of relationships; pp. 147–163. [Google Scholar]
46. Rousseau D.Yard., Sitkin S., Burt R.Due south., Camerer C.F. Non so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1998;23:393–404. doi: 10.5465/amr.1998.926617. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
47. Penger South., Černe M. Authentic leadership, employees' task satisfaction, and work date: A hierarchical linear modelling arroyo. Econ. Res.-Ekon. Istraživanja. 2014;27:508–526. doi: 10.1080/1331677X.2014.974340. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
48. Konovsky M.A., Pugh S.D. Citizenship behavior and social exchange. Acad. Manag. J. 1994;37:656–669. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
49. Hsieh C.-C., Wang D.-S. Does supervisor-perceived authentic leadership influence employee piece of work engagement through employee-perceived authentic leadership and employee trust? Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2015;26:2329–2348. doi: 10.1080/09585192.2015.1025234. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
l. McAllister D.J. Impact-and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. Acad. Manag. J. 1995;38:24–59. [Google Scholar]
51. Clapp-Smith R., Vogelgesang G.R., Avey J.B. Authentic leadership and positive psychological capital: The mediating role of trust at the group level of analysis. J. Leadersh. Organ. Stud. 2009;xv:227–240. doi: 10.1177/1548051808326596. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
52. Wang D.-S., Hsieh C.-C. The outcome of authentic leadership on employee trust and employee engagement. Soc. Behav. Pers. 2013;41:613–624. doi: 10.2224/sbp.2013.41.4.613. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
53. Agote L., Aramburu Northward., Lines R. Authentic leadership perception, trust in the leader, and followers' emotions in organizational modify processes. J. Appl. Behav. Sci. 2016;52:35–63. doi: 10.1177/0021886315617531. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
54. Newman A., Kiazad Thousand., Miao Q., Cooper B. Examining the cognitive and affective trust-based mechanisms underlying the relationship between ethical leadership and organisational citizenship: A instance of the head leading the eye? J. Bus. Ethics. 2014;123:113–123. doi: x.1007/s10551-013-1803-2. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
55. Zhu Westward., Newman A., Miao Q., Hooke A. Revisiting the mediating function of trust in transformational leadership effects: Do dissimilar types of trust brand a difference? Leadersh. Q. 2013;24:94–105. doi: ten.1016/j.leaqua.2012.08.004. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
56. Colquitt J.A., Lepine J.A., Piccolo R.F., Zapata C.P., Rich B.L. Explaining the justice–performance human relationship: Trust as commutation deepener or trust as uncertainty reducer? J. Appl. Psychol. 2012;97:1. doi: x.1037/a0025208. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
57. Heyns M., Rothmann S. Dimensionality of trust: An analysis of the relations betwixt propensity, trustworthiness and trust. SA J. Ind. Psychol. 2015;41:01–12. doi: x.4102/sajip.v41i1.1263. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
58. Den Hartog D. The Trust Procedure in Organizations: Empirical Studies of the Determinants and the Process of Trust Development. Edward Elgar Pub; Cheltenham, UK: 2003. Trusting others in organizations: Leaders, direction and co-workers; pp. 125–146. [Google Scholar]
59. Cropanzano R., Mitchell 1000.S. Social commutation theory: An interdisciplinary review. J. Manag. 2005;31:874–900. doi: ten.1177/0149206305279602. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
threescore. Clark M.S., Ouellette R., Powell M.C., Milberg S. Recipient'southward mood, relationship type, and helping. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 1987;53:94. doi: ten.1037/0022-3514.53.1.94. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
61. Fornell C., Lacker D. Evaluating structural equation modeling for travel behavior enquiry. Transp. Res. Role B Methodol. 1981;37:one–25. [Google Scholar]
62. Hayes A.F. Model templates for Process for SPSS and SAS. Retrieved Dec. 2013;12:2013. [Google Scholar]
Articles from International Periodical of Environmental Research and Public Health are provided hither courtesy of Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Plant (MDPI)
Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6982109/
0 Response to "Peer Reviewed Papers on Trust in the Workplace"
Post a Comment