Investigating Leader Role Congruity and Counterproductive Work Behavior

Being stressed in the family or married with work? A literature review and clustering of work-family conflict

“…In this case, work-family conflict is related to some buffering effects, such as organisational citizenship (Gracia et al , 2006; Deery et al , 2017; Wattoo and Zhao, 2018) which increases perceived support, self-efficacy, well-being (Binde and Coad, 2013; Kim et al , 2015; Chernyak-Hai and Tzine, 2016; Deng and Gao, 2017; Wattoo and Zhao, 2018; Conte et al , 2019; Obrenovich et al , 2020; Watoo et al , 2020) and vulnerability factors such as role overload and workload (Gurbuz et al , 2013; Chan et al , 2015; Goh et al , 2015; Rubel et al , 2017). Work-family conflict can influence the organisation of the worker, increasing her/his turnover intention (Daderman and Basinka, 2016; Naibaho et al , 2019); or damaging her/his performance (Karatepe, 2013; Yustina and Valeriana, 2018; Biermeyer-Anderson and Coyle, 2019; De Clercq et al , 2020). Cluster 4: Social and family support (seven items, 10% co-occurrence)…”

Fulfilled Expectations about Leaders Predict Engagement through LMX

“…When ILTs were used in applied settings to determine their impact on various organizational outcomes, researchers measured them either directly, by asking participants about the degree to which their leaders possess specific ILTs traits (e.g., Khorakian & Sharifirad, 2019) or indirectly, by measuring two sets of ILTs traits, one representing participants' expectations from ideal leaders and a parallel one, assessing recognition of those ILTs traits in their actual leaders (e.g., Biermeier-Hanson & Coyle, 2019). In the second case, researchers computed a congruence score, underpinning the ideal-actual match, which they used to predict various outcomes.…”

“…Correspondence for this article should be addressed to Andreea A. Petruș, Psychology Department, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Studies, University of Bucharest, Panduri Street, 90, Bucharest, Romania, E-mail: andreea.petrus@drd.unibuc.ro ILTs have been proven to have considerable significance in predicting employees' organizational attitudes and their performance (e.g., Ayman & Chemers, 1983;Biermeier-Hanson & Coyle, 2019;Epitropaki & Martin, 2005;Junker, Schyns, van Dick, & Scheurer, 2011;Khorakian & Sharifirad, 2018;Riggs & Porter, 2016). Building upon initial theoretical assumptions, most of the research conducted on ILTs has focused on how ILTs impact various organizational outcomes through the relationship between leaders and followers (leader-member exchange, LMX; Junker & van Dick, 2014).…”

“…Specifically, when leaders live up to their followers' expectations, there is a high likelihood for followers to have positive affective reactions towards their leaders and to develop high-quality relationships with them, whereas when leaders fall short of their followers' expectations, followers tend to develop negative affective responses and low-quality relationship with their leaders (Lord & Maher, 1991). Consequently, followers behave in a manner aligned with their feelings and the perceived quality of the dyadic relationship which eventually will lead to different outcomes, such as counterproductive work behaviors (CWB) in case of low LMX (Biermeier-Hanson & Coyle, 2019) or organizational commitment in case of high LMX (Epitropaki & Martin, 2005).…”

How protestant work ethic impacts employees' counterproductive work behaviors: The moderating effects of gender and party affiliation

“…Research on potential predictors of CWB‐O has focused on both environmental conditions and individual differences. Examples of situational predictors are leader role congruity (Biermeier‐Hanson & Coyle, 2019), organizational structure (Dischner, 2015), and job stressors (Yu, Liu, & Li, 2019). Examples of individual‐level antecedents are integrity (Hogan & Hogan, 1989), personality (Ying & Cohen, 2018), and locus of control (Storms & Spector, 1987).…”