Mutuality in leader–subordinate empowerment expectation: Its impact on role ambiguity and intrinsic motivation

Abstract

Drawing on leader role set theory, we examine the relationship between the congruence of leaders' and subordinates' empowerment expectations and subordinates' experiences of role ambiguity and intrinsic motivation. Based on cross-level polynomial regression analysis using 168 subordinates and 33 leaders, the results indicated that the relationship between congruence and role ambiguity and intrinsic motivation vary depending on whether leaders misevaluate subordinate empowerment expectations, as well as whether the expectations match. Specifically, subordinates had low role ambiguity and low intrinsic motivation when leaders' and subordinates' empowerment expectations matched at low levels and when leaders underestimated subordinates' empowerment expectations. However, subordinates had low role ambiguity and high intrinsic motivation when expectations matched at high levels.Furthermore, role ambiguity was high and intrinsic motivation was low when the leaders overestimated subordinates' empowerment expectations. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Build Coalitions to Fit: Autonomy Expectations, Competence Mobilization, and Job Crafting

“…Autonomy expectation was measured using six items derived from Humborstad and Kuvaas (). Both subordinates (Time 1 survey) and their leaders (leader survey) rated them.…”

“…Thus, autonomy expectations resonate with role expectations, or employees’ beliefs about what a work role does or does not entail (Katz & Kahn, ). Role expectations are influenced by leadership (Humborstad & Kuvaas, ), in that subordinates are likely to receive various cues from their leaders about expectations, including autonomy‐related tasks (Berger, Wagner, & Zeldich, ). These autonomy expectations should guide subordinates’ role behaviors with respect to how decision‐making responsibilities should be shared and the degree to which subordinates should be self‐managing (Paul, Niehoff, & Turnley, ).…”

“…However, such role beliefs are also subject to various individual needs and self‐interests (Tsui & Ohlott, ). Thus, how subordinates interpret their work roles and the autonomy provided to them may not necessarily conform to their leaders’ expectations, resulting in role expectation discrepancies (Humborstad & Kuvaas, ).…”

“…Employees also need to identify with the decision‐making responsibilities derived from the degree of autonomy they are provided with at work to act on the autonomy given to craft (Parker, ). Given that job autonomy involves a process of sending and receiving role expectations between leaders and subordinates (Humborstad & Kuvaas, ), it is thus important to consider how leaders’ and subordinates’ interactions, in terms of their respective autonomy expectations, may influence subordinate job‐crafting behavior.…”

“…Consequently, the extent to which leaders and their respective subordinates share mutual role expectations influences the way in which they work together. Negative responses, such as conflict and uncertainty, arise when their expectations deviate from each other (Humborstad & Kuvaas, ). In the current study, we propose that congruence between the autonomy expectations held by subordinates and their leaders enables subordinates’ understanding of their roles to craft their jobs.…”