Effects of leader-member exchange ambivalence on work attitudes: a moderated mediation model

Abstract

PurposeThis study examines whether the relationship between ambivalence in leader-member exchange (LMX) and career commitment is influenced by organizational embeddedness as a mediating variable. There is also an investigation of when and to what extent job strain influences the conditional indirect effect between LMX ambivalence on career commitment via the mediator.Design/methodology/approachData were collected from 1,134 accountants working in various disciplines. The PROCESS macro and a bootstrapping procedure were used to test and analyze the hypothesized relationships.FindingsThe results revealed that the direct relationship between LMX ambivalence and career commitment was partially mediated by organizational embeddedness. In addition, high levels of job strain through organizational embeddedness conditionally make the effects of ambivalence on career commitment stronger.Practical implicationsOrganizations should motivate employees to tolerate uncertain situations at work and practice ways of maintaining a positive attitude. Training programs for employees to appreciate ambivalence and for leaders to be more behaviorally consistent and more effective in team communication should be considered.Originality/valueThis research is among the initial attempts to extend relevant knowledge in the fields of LMX quality and organizational embeddedness by identifying an important moderator that amplifies the structural relationship.

Safety Performance Assessment of Construction Sites under the Influence of Psychological Factors: An Analysis Based on the Extension Cloud Model

“…The ambiguous intimacy ( ) of the leadership is the root cause of the leader–member ambivalence; subordinates do not adequately have a united front with the leader and tend to take conservative or even stagnant approaches to performing their tasks [ 4 ]. Dechawatanapaisal [ 41 ] proposed that employees’ ambivalence has a direct impact on career commitment. Wu et al [ 42 ] revealed that employees tend to adopt compromised approaches whether actively coping or passively avoiding such ambiguous intimacies.…”

Gender Differences in the Impact of Leader-Member Exchange Quality on Job Embeddedness and Turnover Intention

“…According to a meta-analysis (Ilies et al, 2007), a high LMX level can reduce turnover intention. Furthermore, high-quality exchanges between leaders and subordinates increase job embeddedness (Amoah et al, 2021;Dechawatanapaisal, 2021). Conversely, in low-quality LMX, subordinates are considered "outsiders" and have less than ideal social interaction (Dechawatanapaisal, 2018b(Dechawatanapaisal, , 2021.…”

“…Furthermore, high-quality exchanges between leaders and subordinates increase job embeddedness (Amoah et al, 2021;Dechawatanapaisal, 2021). Conversely, in low-quality LMX, subordinates are considered "outsiders" and have less than ideal social interaction (Dechawatanapaisal, 2018b(Dechawatanapaisal, , 2021. Based on this description, the following hypothesis is proposed: H 2 : LMX has a negative impact on turnover intention.…”

“…This concept is known as job embeddedness, widely known as the opposite of turnover intention (Mitchell et al, 2001). Recently, researchers in various countries have found a negative effect of job embeddedness on turnover intention (Afsar et al, 2018;Coetzer et al, 2019;Dechawatanapaisal, 2021;Shah et al, 2020); additionally, studies have shown that leadership plays an essential role in predicting both job embeddedness and turnover intention (Huning et al, 2020;Yang et al, 2019).Considering the importance of leadership in influencing employee attitudes and behavior, the question of what kind of leadership model can increase job embeddedness while reducing the potential for turnover intention becomes significant. Leader-member exchange (LMX) is a leadership model that is widely associated with job embeddedness and turnover intention (Dechawatanapaisal,…”

“…This concept is known as job embeddedness, widely known as the opposite of turnover intention (Mitchell et al, 2001). Recently, researchers in various countries have found a negative effect of job embeddedness on turnover intention (Afsar et al, 2018;Coetzer et al, 2019;Dechawatanapaisal, 2021;Shah et al, 2020); additionally, studies have shown that leadership plays an essential role in predicting both job embeddedness and turnover intention (Huning et al, 2020;Yang et al, 2019).…”