Impact of participative and authoritarian leadership on employee creativity: organizational citizenship behavior as a mediator

Abstract

PurposeThe aim of this study is twofold; to test the effects of participative and authoritarian leadership styles on employee creativity; and to examine whether organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) mediates the relationship between these leadership styles and employee creativity.Design/methodology/approachA survey tool was employed in this research for data collection from the staff at higher education institutions in Malaysia. The collected data were analyzed via PLS-SEM to verify research hypotheses and reach at conclusions.FindingsThe outcomes verified that participative leadership positively affects OCB as well as employee creativity. The findings also demonstrated that authoritarian leadership does not really have any impact on the creativity and OCB of employees. Finally, the results demonstrated that OCB mediates the connection between a leader's participative approach and employee creativity, while its mediating effect among authoritarian leadership and employee creativity is not supported.Originality/valueThis paper addresses research gaps in the existing literature with regards to the role of participative and authoritarian leadership in predicting employee creativity through OCB. There are also scarce research studies on the linkages among the chosen constructs, particularly in higher education context.

Feeling ostracized? Exploring the hidden triggers, impact on silence behavior and the pivotal role of ethical leadership

“…PLS-SEM bests in treating complex models, notably those with moderation and mediation effects (Preacher and Hayes, 2004;Henseler et al, 2015;Hair et al, 2021), and provides an insightful interface and graphs compared to alternatives like MPLUS, AMOS, and LISREL (Aftab et al, 2023). It also reduces the need for normality checks in SmartPLS (Hair et al, 2021), making it a robust, increasingly prevalent choice for recent research (Poon and Mohamad, 2020;Aftab et al, 2023;Hanaysha, 2023).…”

“…, 2021), making it a robust, increasingly prevalent choice for recent research (Poon and Mohamad, 2020; Aftab et al. , 2023; Hanaysha, 2023).…”

The trends in contemporary authoritarian leadership studies: A bibliometric data analysis

“…Moreover, the authoritarian leadership style may impede creativity and innovation, as subordinates' contributions are seldom acknowledged (Du et al, 2020). This lack of recognition may extend to negative effects on morale and job satisfaction, limiting opportunities for autonomous decision-making and professional development (Hanaysha, 2023). The long-term sustainability and effectiveness of authoritarian leadership are subjects of debate, primarily due to its top-down approach, which may impede the development of a collaborative and inclusive organizational culture crucial in today's globalized and diverse work environments (Asim et al, 2021).…”

“…While existing literature has produced contradictory findings on the effects of authoritarian leadership (Chiang et al, 2021), the theoretical underpinnings guiding these investigations are not explicitly articulated. Some studies posit detrimental outcomes such as reduced employee satisfaction, diminished organizational citizenship behavior, and limited creativity (Hanaysha, 2023). Conversely, other research suggests positive effects on employee performance and job satisfaction (Liu et al, 2023).…”

The Impact of Mentoring Relationships on Innovation Performance of Post-90s Employees: A Dual-Path Model of Cognition and Affect

“…In response to this challenge, an increasing number of Chinese companies are beginning to experiment with the implementation of mentorship programs as a formal organizational socialization strategy to help 'post-90s' employees within the organization [10]. The mentoring system in an organization is highly regarded as an essential tool for human resource management and development [11,12]. Mentoring relationships are supportive and developmental interpersonal exchanges between employees with limited knowledge, experience, and skills (protégés) and those with abundant knowledge, experience, and skills (mentors) [13].…”