Effect of Chief Executive Officer’s Sustainable Leadership Styles on Organization Members’ Psychological Well-Being and Organizational Citizenship Behavior

Abstract

Situational leadership theory and the contingency approach of leadership were utilized and applied based on situational theory. Based on a total of four foundational theories, that is, bottom-up spillover theory, theories of prosocial behavior, and so on, this study empirically analyzed what influence a chief executive officer’s (CEO’s) sustainable leadership styles (servant, ethical, and authentic leadership) have on the psychological well-being and organizational citizenship behaviors of organization members. The study was conducted on adult employees of midsized or larger companies (including subsidiaries) across four countries: South Korea, the United Kingdom, the United States, and South Africa. Data were obtained from 649 adult employees. SmartPLS was used to conduct structural equation modeling analysis of the data. The results were as follows: (1) CEOs’ servant and authentic leadership styles had statistically significant positive (+) effects on employees’ psychological well-being; however, ethical leadership did not. (2) CEOs’ ethical leadership had a statistically significant (+) effect on employees’ organizational citizenship behavior; however, servant and authentic leadership did not. (3) Employees’ psychological well-being had a statistically significant (+) effect on organizational citizenship behavior. CEOs are attracting more attention than ever, leading companies in today’s rapidly changing times. This suggests that it is necessary to comprehend principles that show when, where, and how important leaders are and sustainable leadership styles that can increase their chances of success. Moreover, this study derived constructive implications that a leader can overcome today’s challenges through sustainable leadership styles.

Sustainable leadership and wellbeing of healthcare personnel: A sequential mediation model of procedural knowledge and compassion

“…Second, our study extends the understanding of psychological mechanisms built in previous studies (Choi, 2021; Lee and Rhee,…”

“…Further, Lee (2017) integrate internal CSR and sustainable human resource management (HRM) elements into sustainable leadership with diversity management, employee development, organizational justice, progress development and work-life balance impact satisfaction, motivation, and performance. On the other hand, Choi (2021) operationalized sustainable leadership as concrete behavioral practices related to servant, authentic and ethical leadership styles.…”

“…Sustainable leadership aims to strike a balance between an organization’s human resources, profitability, and the planet over its lifecycle ( McCann and Holt, 2010 ). According to Choi (2021) , sustainable leadership behavior is an umbrella framework involving servant, authentic and ethical leadership characteristics that have in common an empowering and supportive behavior toward the employees. Sustainable leadership is highly effective in environmental challenges because it emphasizes environmental diversity, sustained learning, efficient stakeholder management, development of resources, long-lasting success, amicable relationships with the workforce, and social, ethical, and responsible behavior.…”

Value-Based Governance as a Performance Element in Social and Solidarity Economy Organizations: A French Sustainable Post-Modern Proposal

“…This helps value-based management to create a new source of motivation, namely the idea of using work to concretize political ambitions by imbuing professional achievements with technical quality. The ultimate aim here is the wellbeing of each and every person involved [68,69], a project that can be implemented quite prudently thanks to new technologies (company social networks, learning communities, collaborative innovations, etc.) that were made possible by social innovations themselves enabled by postmodern management pursuing a dual mission: the creation of human relationships and the development of meaning.…”

Green Transformational Leadership and Employees’ Taking Charge Behavior: The Mediating Role of Personal Initiative and the Moderating Role of Green Organizational Identity

“…There have been several types of leadership concepts for the study of green management, including sustainable leadership and green transformational leadership. Sustainable leadership is a leadership style that takes into consideration a comprehensive scope of complex interconnections among corporate profits, business growth, preservation of the environment, and social values, which emphasizes obtaining success in the long term based on strategic decision-making value [ 2 ]. Compared with sustainable leadership that has a broader connotation, green transformational leadership, which reflects the green values of leaders and explains the mechanisms by which leaders influence green organizational change, places more emphasis on the environmental benefits of the organization [ 3 , 4 ].…”