The impact of close monitoring on creativity and knowledge sharing: The mediating role of leader‐member exchange

Abstract

We examine the influence of supervisors' close monitoring on employees' creativity and knowledge sharing, both of which are important to the enhanced performance and survival of organizations in this era of uncertainty and change. We also identify the mechanism through which supervisors' close monitoring affects employees' creativity and knowledge sharing. A survey was conducted with military officers in South Korea, among whom supervisor–employee interactions occur daily. A regression analysis of 163 supervisor‐employee dyads shows that supervisors' close monitoring has a negative impact on employees' creativity and knowledge sharing; a mediation test using a bootstrapping methodology shows that supervisors' close monitoring has a significantly negative indirect impact on employees' creativity and knowledge sharing with leader‐member exchange (LMX) as the mediator. Our theoretical contribution is to provide an improved understanding of the relationships among the variables. We also offer a practical implication because our findings show that supervisors' close monitoring may hinder employees' creativity and knowledge sharing by undermining LMX.

The interaction effects of proactive personality and empowering leadership and close monitoring behaviour on creativity

“…Previous research has noted the positive effects of empowering leadership on various work‐related outcomes including task performance, organizational citizenship behaviour, voice behaviour and knowledge sharing (Lee et al, ). On the other hand, prior studies have found the negative effects of close monitoring behaviour on creativity and knowledge sharing (Son et al, ). The result of the current study found the negative relationship between close monitoring behaviour and creativity.…”

“…In addition, closely monitored employees might not be psychologically empowered because they tend to lack a sense of confidence and autonomy in their work. Some studies have found that close monitoring behaviour is negatively related to employee creativity (Son et al, ; Zhou, ). Thus, the research expects the following:Hypothesis Close monitoring behaviour is negatively related to creativity .…”

“…For example, some studies have found significant effects of transformational leadership on creativity (e.g., Gong, Huang, & Farh, ), whereas other studies have found significant interaction effects of transformational leadership and individual factors on creativity without direct effects of transformational leadership (Hirst et al, ; Pieterse, Van Knippenberg, Schippers, & Stam, ). Related studies have examined specific leader behaviours, such as supervisor encouragement, supervisor support and controlling behaviours as predictors of creativity (e.g., Hughes et al, ; Son, Cho, & Kang, ).…”

Reducing the harmful effect of work overload on creative behaviour: Buffering roles of energy‐enhancing resources

“…Previous research calls for more investigations of how adverse work conditions steer employees away from positive work behaviours (Boyd et al, 2011;Coelho, Augusto, & Lages, 2011;Pooja et al, 2016). A critical example of a positive work behaviour is the generation of new ideas that improve the current organizational situation, such that they offer novelty and usefulness (Son et al, 2017;Zhou & George, 2001). Employees' engagement in such creative behaviours can be instrumental to both employees and their employer.…”

“…An important path through which employees can contribute to organizational effectiveness is through their creative behaviours (Binyamin & Carmeli, 2010;Castro, Gomes, & de Sousa, 2012;Chen & Kaufmann, 2008;Frederiksen & Knudsen, 2017). Such behaviours generate new ideas that can improve the current organizational situation (Shalley & Gilson, 2004;Son, Cho, & Kang, 2017;Zhou & George, 2001) and offer powerful benefits, such as when they add to the organization's learning capacity (Oltra & Vivas-López, 2013) or the implementation of positive change (Maimone & Sinclair, 2014). Despite these beneficial effects, generating new ideas that improve the status quo can be challenging too, because other organizational members may consider the activities disruptive or threatening to their existing power bases (Hon, Bloom, & Crant, 2014;Zhou & George, 2001).…”