Article Component Papers (Ethical and Servant Leadership)
Deonpalmgrove
LODJ-02-2015-00191.pdf
See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/295702722
Servant Leadership and Followership Creativity: The Influence of
Workplace Spirituality and Political Skill
Article in Leadership & Organization Development Journal · February 2016
DOI: 10.1108/LODJ-02-2015-0019
CITATIONS
2
READS
257
5 authors, including:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
A dark side of political skill? Awareness and life satisfaction in a Latin American Business: View project
The entrepreneurial marketing of Trumpet Records View project
Alex Williams
Texas A&M University-Commerce
24 PUBLICATIONS 50 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Brandon Randolph-Seng
Texas A&M University-Commerce
36 PUBLICATIONS 337 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Mario Hayek
Texas A&M University-Commerce
33 PUBLICATIONS 99 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Stephanie Pane Haden
Texas A&M University-Commerce
20 PUBLICATIONS 198 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Guclu Atinc on 01 January 2018.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.
Leadership & Organization Development Journal Servant leadership and followership creativity: The influence of workplace spirituality and political skill Wallace Alexander Williams Jr, Randolph-Seng Brandon, Mario Hayek, Stephanie Pane Haden, Guclu Atinc,
Article information: To cite this document: Wallace Alexander Williams Jr, Randolph-Seng Brandon, Mario Hayek, Stephanie Pane Haden, Guclu Atinc, (2017) "Servant leadership and followership creativity: The influence of workplace spirituality and political skill", Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 38 Issue: 2,pp. 178-193, doi: 10.1108/LODJ-02-2015-0019 Permanent link to this document: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-02-2015-0019
Downloaded on: 29 March 2017, At: 13:07 (PT) References: this document contains references to 86 other documents. To copy this document: [email protected] The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 84 times since 2017*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded: (2017),"The influence of servant leadership, trust in leader and thriving on employee creativity", Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 38 Iss 1 pp. 2-21 (2016),"Supervisory servant leadership and employee’s work role performance: A multilevel mediation model", Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 37 Iss 7 pp. 860-881 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-11-2014-0230
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by
For Authors If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.
D ow
nl oa
de d
by T
ex as
A &
M U
ni ve
rs it
y C
om m
er ce
, D oc
to r
B ra
nd on
R an
do lp
h- S
en g
A t
13 :0
7 29
M ar
ch 2
01 7
(P T
)
Servant leadership and followership creativity
The influence of workplace spirituality and political skill
Wallace Alexander Williams Jr, Brandon Randolph-Seng, Mario Hayek, Stephanie Pane Haden and Guclu Atinc
Department of Marketing and Management, Texas A&M University – Commerce, Commerce, Texas, USA
Abstract Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine how servant leadership and political skill combine to impact workplace spirituality and employee creativity. Design/methodology/approach – Participants were working adults recruited by graduate and undergraduate students from a US public regional comprehensive university. Data were collected across three time periods, with a final sample size of 280 participants. Findings – The authors’ findings suggest that servant leaders impact employee creativity by fostering an environment that promotes workplace spirituality. Furthermore, this relationship is strengthened to the extent that the servant leader possesses high levels of political skill. Research limitations/implications – This study provides a foundation for the interplay between servant leadership and political skill. Therefore, the data collection procedures undertaken in this study (i.e. from sources in multiple organizations) are beneficial. A limitation to this study is the use of a single informant to measure all of the constructs, which may cause a bias in the results. Practical implications – This study provides a foundation for the interplay between servant leadership and political skill. Therefore, the data collection procedures undertaken in this study (i.e. from sources in multiple organizations) are beneficial. Originality/value – Although servant leadership research continues to receive increased attention in the extant literature, researchers have tended to focus on the relational aspects of servant leadership. Curiously, the “leader” side of servant leadership has been largely neglected. As a result, some have questioned the construct as a viable leadership model. Greenleaf (1977), however, noted that servant leaders also possess conceptual skills; yet, these skills are rarely included in servant leadership measurements or empirical studies. The authors argue that political skill captures the essence of these abilities, and that including it strengthens the servant leader’s impact on workplace spirituality, ultimately influencing employee creativity. Keywords Employee creativity, Political skill, Workplace spirituality, Servant leadership Paper type Research paper
Introduction The ability to “generate novel and useful ideas” (Amabile, 1988, p. 126) is considered “the 21st century’s most important economic resource” (Agars et al., 2012, p. 271) because of its relationship to organizational innovation, growth, effectiveness, and even survival (Oldham and Cummings, 1996; Zhou and Shalley, 2003). Research suggests that intrinsic motivation is an important antecedent to creativity as it increases curiosity, cognitive flexibility, and persistence (Amabile, 1996; Shalley et al., 2004). Organizational leaders can stimulate intrinsic motivation and hence creativity by providing resources and building an environment that encourages job autonomy, goal-setting, and risk-taking (Shalley and Gilson, 2004). A leadership style that resonates with these outcomes is servant leadership. The purpose of this research, therefore, was to explore the relationship between servant leadership and followership creativity (see Figure 1). Specifically, we suggest that workplace spirituality serves as a mediating mechanism through which servant leaders enhance follower creativity. Furthermore, we posit that this relationship is
Leadership & Organization Development Journal Vol. 38 No. 2, 2017 pp. 178-193 © Emerald Publishing Limited 0143-7739 DOI 10.1108/LODJ-02-2015-0019
Received 11 February 2015 Revised 22 July 2015 14 November 2015 5 February 2016 Accepted 22 February 2016
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at: www.emeraldinsight.com/0143-7739.htm
178
LODJ 38,2
D ow
nl oa
de d
by T
ex as
A &
M U
ni ve
rs it
y C
om m
er ce
, D oc
to r
B ra
nd on
R an
do lp
h- S
en g
A t
13 :0
7 29
M ar
ch 2
01 7
(P T
)
strengthened to the extent that the servant leader possesses the political skill needed to execute their leadership style.
By examining these connections, we make several contributions to the servant leadership literature. First, we empirically examine the relationship between servant leadership and employee creativity. This is important, given that there is insufficient empirical studies using the servant leadership construct, as the “preponderance of servant leader writing has been prescriptive” (Humphreys et al., 2014, p. 44). Therefore, our study helps to further build empirical support concerning servant leadership. Second, by investigating the combined impact of servant leadership and political skill, we answer calls to expand our knowledge of the core features and outcomes of servant leadership (Avolio et al., 2009). Third, our research serves as an empirical examination and extension of the Bowen et al. (2010) conceptualization of the impact of politically skilled servant leaders on workplace spirituality. Although Bowen et al. (2010) provided an extensive research agenda, to the best of our knowledge, their model has not been empirically tested. We aim to fill this gap by investigating the relationship between servant leadership, political skill, and workplace spirituality, while also extending research in this area by proffering self-determination theory (SDT) as its theoretical underpinning and demonstrating that spirituality serves as a mediating mechanism between these leaders and their followers’ creativity. Lastly, by including workplace spirituality as a potential mediator of this relationship, we answer calls for research on alternative mediating conditions impacting creativity (Shalley and Gilson, 2004).
To this end, we organize our paper as follows. First, we provide an overview of employee creativity, servant leadership, and political skill. Next, using SDT as our theoretical foundation, we hypothesize the potential impact of politically skilled servant leaders on employee creativity, and how workplace spirituality acts as the mediator within this relationship. Finally, we explain the methods, present results, and discuss our findings.
Theoretical background and hypotheses Employee creativity Employee creativity is essential to organizational innovation (Amabile, 1988), and organizational leaders often play an intricate role in cultivating that creativity (Amabile and Khaire, 2008). We accept Amabile’s (1988, p. 126) definition of creativity as the “production of novel and useful ideas,” as this conceptualization recognizes that the nature of creativity is complex and embraces the notion that it “has a rather broad construct space” (Tierney et al., 1999, p. 615). This is also consistent with researchers focusing on the theoretical development (e.g. Woodman et al., 1993) and the empirical investigation (e.g. Oldham and Cummings, 1996; Tierney et al., 1999) of creativity. Typically, individuals capable of producing such original and beneficial ideas possess certain characteristics or traits. For example, researchers suggest that creative employees tend to embody particular personal characteristics (Oldham and Cummings, 1996) and exhibit an innovative cognitive style orientation and higher levels of intrinsic motivation (Amabile, 1988; Tierney et al., 1999; Woodman et al., 1993).
Leader Political Skill
Servant Leadership
Workplace Spirituality
Employee Creativity
Figure 1. Hypothesized model
179
Servant leadership and
followership creativity
D ow
nl oa
de d
by T
ex as
A &
M U
ni ve
rs it
y C
om m
er ce
, D oc
to r
B ra
nd on
R an
do lp
h- S
en g
A t
13 :0
7 29
M ar
ch 2
01 7
(P T
)
In addition to the individual characteristics of creative employees, leaders and the relationships that leaders foster with their employees can substantially impact the level of creativity that can emerge among organizational members. Tierney et al. (1999) found that positive leader-member exchange (LMX) relations are associated with higher levels of employee creativity when the employee possessed a moderately innovative or adaptive cognitive style (creativity was high for very innovative employees regardless of the quality of their LMX relations). Furthermore, creativity increases when both leader and follower are intrinsically motivated (Tierney et al., 1999). Cheung and Wong (2011) uncovered a positive relationship between transformational leadership and follower creativity, indicating that the relationship was even stronger when leaders provided high degrees of task and relations support.
Building upon the work of Amabile (1988, 1996) and Woodman et al. (1993), Shalley and Gilson (2004) explored social and contextual factors that shape a leader’s ability to influence follower creativity, both at the individual and job levels. At the individual level, followers are more creative when they are stimulated to take risks (Shalley and Gilson, 2004). Similarly, at the job level, the authors provided several factors that influence employee creativity, including: job autonomy, properly established goals and role expectations, possessing sufficient resources to accomplish the task at hand, appropriate rewards for creative behaviors, supervisory support, and external evaluation of their work. Therefore, Shalley and Gilson (2004) suggested that leaders can impact follower creativity by shaping the social and contextual environment of their followers in these areas.
Servant leadership Based on the seminal work of Greenleaf (1970), servant leadership marks an others-perspective of leadership actions because it is horizontally follower-centric and, therefore, different in its primary focus when compared to other more vertical, leader-centric styles. Resonating with Follett’s (1926) ideas of relational power and focus on service, Greenleaf (1970) asserted that the servant leader is “primus inter pares”, or “first among equals.” In other words, servant leaders emphasize power-with through follower engagement, as opposed to power-over through leader authority (Follett, 1926).
Although Greenleaf (1970) provided the initial conceptualization required for an understanding of servant leadership, his writings did not provide a concrete definition (Humphreys, 2005). However, research has revealed three main characteristics that, when taken together, set servant leadership apart from other leadership concepts (Ehrhart, 2004; Parolini et al., 2009; Sendjaya and Pekerti, 2010; Walumbwa et al., 2010). First, the servant leader’s highest priority is service to others, including stakeholders inside and outside the organization. Servant leadership, therefore, is based on the assumption that these leaders have a desire to serve (Graham, 1991).
Second, the servant leader’s primary focus is on the follower. Van Dierendonck (2011) argues that servant leaders value their follower’s growth, and view it developmentally as an end in and of itself. Still, servant leaders feel responsible for serving all organizational stakeholders, but primarily through their followers, trusting that they will do what is best for the organization and its constituents (Stone et al., 2004).
Third, servant leadership incorporates a moral component. The moral compass (Ehrhart, 2004) or code (Russell and Stone, 2002; Williams et al., 2014) of servant leaders manifests itself in multiple ways. For example, Ehrhart (2004) argues that servant leaders strive to avoid inconsistencies in how they treat their subordinates. Further, this striving reflects the servant leader’s power motivation, which is primarily a relational power based upon a need to serve (Graham, 1991; Van Dierendonck, 2011).
Summarizing these three characteristics, servant leadership has been defined as, “an understanding and practice of leadership that places the good of those led over the
180
LODJ 38,2
D ow
nl oa
de d
by T
ex as
A &
M U
ni ve
rs it
y C
om m
er ce
, D oc
to r
B ra
nd on
R an
do lp
h- S
en g
A t
13 :0
7 29
M ar
ch 2
01 7
(P T
)
self-interest of the leader, emphasizing leader behaviors that focus on follower development, and de-emphasizing glorification of the leader” (Hale and Fields, 2007, p. 397). With its focus on serving the needs of followers in an authentic and empowering manner, the concept of servant leadership is well suited for today’s knowledge-rich and innovation-intensive organizations that are committed to aiding followers in maximizing their creative potential. We suggest that by understanding diverse social situations, servant leaders can build strong social networks in order to gain valuable tangible and intangible organizational resources (Ferris et al., 2005, 2007), which will further enhance their follower’s creativity. In the next section, we provide an overview of political skill, how it can enhance servant leadership, and their combined impact on follower creativity.
Political skill and the impact of politically skilled servant leaders Political skill is defined as “the ability to effectively understand others at work, and to use this knowledge to influence others to act in ways that enhance one’s personal and/or organizational objectives” (Ferris et al., 2005, p. 127). The political skill construct has been conceptualized as a second order factor that includes the following four dimensions: apparent sincerity, social astuteness, interpersonal influence, and network ability (Ferris et al., 2005).
Apparent sincerity reflects a perception by others that the individual is authentic in his/her intentions. Social astuteness suggests an understanding of the organizational and social context. Interpersonal influence is the ability to modify ones behavior to elicit desired reactions from others. Network ability is the capacity to develop relationships with diverse organizational actors. Taken together, these four psychometrically distinct dimensions describe leaders who have the ability to build vast social networks in order to understand, adapt to, and take advantage of their environment. Intra-personally, these abilities can lead to the development of a strong and positive reputation by inspiring trust among their followers (Ammeter et al., 2002; Blass et al., 2007; Ferris et al., 2007); creating a perception of justice and fairness (Gavin et al., 1995); and enjoying greater organizational resources (Ammeter et al., 2002).
Although political skill resembles other social effectiveness constructs, empirical research has found the political skill construct to indeed be distinct from others such as general mental ability (Munyon et al., 2015) emotional intelligence (Mayer et al., 2008), and political savvy (Ferris et al., 2005). Furthermore, political skill is the result of individual traits as well as experience, training, and socialization (Ferris et al., 2002, 2007, 2008; Pfeffer, 2010).
As discussed in the previous section, the servant leader’s primary goal is service to others, particularly their followers. On the other hand, politically skilled leaders focus on building and influencing social network connections. Taken together, we reason that conveying high levels of political skill will enable servant leaders to recognize diverse social situations, understand the importance of adapting their behavior to reach various target audiences, and build strong social networks that allow them to procure organizational knowledge and resources for their followers’ success.
Furthermore, politically skilled servant leaders may be able to embrace the notion that the ultimate goal of leadership is to create pro-active, self-confident followers, who are given the opportunity to pursue activities that they enjoy as well as tasks in which they can learn and grow (Van Dierendonck and Nuijten, 2011). These leaders allow their workers to achieve “balance, meaning, and personal fulfillment” (Bowen et al., 2010, p. 127) in their work, enhancing their follower’s motivation and creative efforts. With this in mind, we now discuss workplace spirituality as the mechanism mediating politically skilled servant leadership and employee creativity.
Workplace spirituality Although many definitions of spirituality have been proffered (see Ashforth and Pratt, 2010), spirituality has typically been defined as “any belief, practice, relationship, or experience
181
Servant leadership and
followership creativity
D ow
nl oa
de d
by T
ex as
A &
M U
ni ve
rs it
y C
om m
er ce
, D oc
to r
B ra
nd on
R an
do lp
h- S
en g
A t
13 :0
7 29
M ar
ch 2
01 7
(P T
)
associated with the sacred” (Exline and Bright, 2011, p. 124). Religion, although strongly related to spirituality, typically is associated with more formally established systems such as religious affiliations (Exline and Bright, 2011). In order to understand how spirituality and work may intersect, researchers have studied the integration of spirituality into the workplace (e.g. Blair et al., 2012; Byrne et al., 2011; Geh and Tan, 2009; Mckee et al., 2008).
Workplace spirituality also lacks an agreed upon definition (see Duchon and Plowman, 2005). Nevertheless, for the purpose of the current research, we adopt Ashmos and Duchon’s (2000, p. 137) definition of workplace spirituality as, “the recognition that employees have an inner life that nourishes and is nourished by meaningful work that takes place in the context of community.” Following Duchon and Plowman (2005), we conceptualize the three components of this definition – inner life, meaningful work, and community – as similar to the established organizational behavior concepts of self-concept, job enrichment, and organizational climate, respectively. Self-concept in this context is related to the spiritual dimension of the person’s identity and how that dimension is expressed in a workplace domain. Job enrichment in this context is related to the degree to which spiritual strivings are satisfied by the fulfillment people receive in their work. Finally, organizational climate in this context is related to other people in the organization and the degree to which a person’s connections with those others at work are spiritually sustaining.
Many researchers have studied the positive work-related outcomes that occur when spirituality is integrated into the work context (e.g. King and Williamson, 2005; Krishnakumar and Neck, 2002), including greater job involvement and morale, enhanced creativity, higher productivity, increased honesty and trust, and an enhanced feeling of fulfillment (Burack, 1999; Duchon and Plowman, 2005; Freshman, 1999; Kolodinsky et al., 2008; Milliman et al., 2003; Wagner-Marsh and Conley, 1999).
SDT (Deci and Ryan, 1985) proposes that needs satisfaction enhances motivation and well-being, which in turn promotes important work outcomes such as cognitive flexibility, problem solving, and creativity (Baard et al., 2004). Because the social environment influences the individual’s ability to achieve need satisfaction (Gagné and Deci, 2005), leadership can play a major role in either supporting or detracting from an employee’s needs fulfillment. With this in mind, workplace spirituality may serve as the mechanism through which politically skilled servant leaders’ impact employee creativity. SDT states that individuals strive to satisfy three basic psychological needs of autonomy (choice), competence (challenging activities), and interpersonal relatedness (belongingness; Deci and Ryan, 1985). We suggest that workplace spirituality encompasses these needs through its dimensions of inner life (i.e. the ability to bring the whole self to work), meaningful work (i.e. finding value in one’s job activities), and community (i.e. recognizing an inter-connectedness to others), respectively. Accordingly, we argue that servant leaders foster follower creativity by acknowledging and showing sincerity toward employees’ needs, by allowing their employees the freedom to do what they do best, and by helping their followers find meaning in their work and workplace experiences. Therefore, we propose:
H1. The relationship between servant leadership and employee creativity is mediated by workplace spirituality.
Further, we believe that politically skilled servant leaders are uniquely equipped to create the type of environment that is conducive to workplace spirituality, resulting in employee creativity. Research has shown that when servant leaders build trust in their followers through quality exchange relationships, they demonstrate acceptance of their follower’s perspective and feelings (Van Dierendonck, 2011) and inspire creative efforts among their followers. For example, Liden et al. (2014) found that a serving culture propagated by servant leadership was positively related to employee job performance, customer service behaviors, and
182
LODJ 38,2
D ow
nl oa
de d
by T
ex as
A &
M U
ni ve
rs it
y C
om m
er ce
, D oc
to r
B ra
nd on
R an
do lp
h- S
en g
A t
13 :0
7 29
M ar
ch 2
01 7
(P T
)
creativity. Furthermore, politically skilled leaders understand the importance of fairness among all employees (Treadway et al., 2004). They exhibit the “social astuteness and behavioral flexibility and adaptability necessary to effectively address the needs and aspirations of followers in ways that favorably influence their work reactions and behavior, and indeed, affect the climate of the work unit” (Ahearn et al., 2004, p. 314). By putting their follower’s needs first, and demonstrating their commitment to this through sincerity and authenticity in their actions, we believe politically skilled servant leaders are positioned to create a spiritual workplace. As such we predict:
H2. The relationship between servant leadership and workplace spirituality is moderated by the leader’s political skill, such that the relationship is more positive the greater the level of political skill.
Method Sample and procedures Participants for this study were working adults recruited by undergraduate and graduate students from a public regional comprehensive university located in the Southern US. Data were collected across three separate time periods. Students, enrolled in both fully online and face-to-face courses, were notified at the beginning of the semester of an extra credit opportunity to be completed over the semester. Students were encouraged to prepare a list of potential participants (friends, relatives, coworkers, etc.) as long as the person met the following eligibility requirements: 18+ years of age, working 40 hours or more per week, and not currently enrolled as a student.
Following procedures outlined in Matthews et al. (2010), we trained students on the data collection and the ethics of conducting this study. Via e-mail, students received invitations to participate as well as further instructions regarding the data collection dates, a link to the first web-based survey, and an e-mail template to distribute to working adults. The e-mail template informed the working adults that the survey would request their e-mail address and telephone number only for the purposes of matching their data across all three data collection periods, and contacting a portion of them to confirm their voluntary participation in the study. We also reminded participants of this on the first page of each survey, and informed them that their names would not be connected to their data after the verification phase of the process. Additionally, participants were asked to include the student’s e-mail address at the end of the survey so that the student could receive the extra credit.
Each student was awarded up to three percentage points of extra credit for recruiting three participants, as long as the participant completed each of the three surveys. The students were therefore encouraged to send the Time 1 link to as many eligible participants that they deemed necessary (since these would be the only participants eligible to participate in Time 2 and 3 collection phases). Survey administrators sent e-mail reminders to the students, as well as an updated list of how many participants had completed the survey on their behalf. We did not provide students with the e-mail address or phone number of participants who completed the survey. Students were given approximately three weeks to encourage their participants to complete Survey 1. After this three-week period, the Survey 1 link became inactive, and the Survey 2 link was sent to students. This process was followed approximately three weeks later for Survey 3. Survey 1 collected data on the main independent variables, including servant leadership and political skill. Survey 2 consisted of various organizational outcomes, including workplace spirituality. Survey 3 included employee creativity, other measures of employee and organizational outcomes, and demographic measures. Each survey took approximately 15 minutes to complete.
As noted in Matthews et al. (2010), this type of initial recruitment procedure does not allow for the calculation of a response rate since there is no way to obtain how many
183
Servant leadership and
followership creativity
D ow
nl oa
de d
by T
ex as
A &
M U
ni ve
rs it
y C
om m
er ce
, D oc
to r
B ra
nd on
R an
do lp
h- S
en g
A t
13 :0
7 29
M ar
ch 2
01 7
(P T
)
participants the students contacted. Across two semesters (a total of nine classes), we obtained approximately 735 respondents to Survey 1, 579 for Survey 2, and 480 for Survey 3. We successfully matched surveys 1-3 for 374 participants. After checking for completeness, we obtained a final sample size of 280 participants. The participants were 60 percent female and 51 percent were White/Caucasian. Furthermore, 68 percent had a Bachelor’s degree or higher, and the participants predominantly worked in professional (42 percent) or managerial (32 percent) job types.
Measures The response scale for each measure was a seven-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The following measures were utilized.
Servant leadership survey. Our measure of servant leadership was taken from Asag-Gau and van Dierendonck (2011), who identified the five core dimensions of the servant leadership survey (Van Dierendonck and Nuijten, 2011) as empowerment, standing back, accountability, humility, and stewardship. We used the summated values for each of the five dimensions to index servant leadership (α ¼ 0.83). A sample item is, “My manager enables me to solve problems myself instead of just telling me what to do.”
Political skill. We used the summated values for the four dimensions of the political skill inventory (α¼ 0.93) from Ferris et al. (2005): apparent sincerity, social astuteness, interpersonal influence, and network ability. A sample item is, “My manager is good at building relationships with influential people at work.” Participants were asked to respond in terms of their immediate supervisor. This modification of the original self-assessed scale items is in line with other political skill research (see Douglas and Ammeter, 2004; Treadway et al., 2010).
Workplace spirituality. Workplace spirituality (α ¼ 0.73) was measured using Ashmos and Duchon’s (2000) Meaning and Purpose at work questionnaire. As suggested by Duchon and Plowman (2005), we used only the measures representing the individual level of spirituality at work. This consists of the three dimensions of inner life, community, and meaning at work. A sample item is, “My spirit is energized by my work.”
Employee creativity. We used the nine-item employee creativity scale (α ¼ 0.91) developed by Tierney et al. (1999). A sample item is, “I take risks in terms of producing new ideas in doing my job.”
Control variables. Spector and Brannick (2011) and Atinc et al. (2012) discussed the appropriate use (and potential misuse) of control variables in non-experimental research. They recommended that before using any extraneous control variables, previous findings and theory should be considered. Therefore, we controlled for four demographic variables that research has found to be significantly related to employee creativity (Shalley et al., 2004; Tierney et al., 1999; Zhang and Bartol, 2010): gender, age, education, and company tenure. Gender was dummy coded (1¼ “male” and 2¼ “female”). Age was measured in years. Education was measured using four categories (1 ¼ “high school/GED” to 4¼ “doctoral degree”), while tenure was assessed in terms of the number of years worked within the organization.
Results We used PLS-SEM to analyze the data, with the SmartPLS (Ringle et al., 2015) software. This structural equation modeling technique combines “factor analysis, representing the relation between constructs and measures, and path analysis of the structural relations between constructs” (De Jong et al., 2014, p. 266), and has many advantages (see Hair et al., 2012) that have led to its increased use in management research (Bontis et al., 2007; Gruber et al., 2010; Wilden et al., 2013). We chose this method due to its ability to handle non-categorical variables as moderators through a product term approach (Henseler and Fassott, 2010; Wilson, 2010), and follow the guidelines proposed by Hair et al. (2011, 2013) for testing and reporting the results.
184
LODJ 38,2
D ow
nl oa
de d
by T
ex as
A &
M U
ni ve
rs it
y C
om m
er ce
, D oc
to r
B ra
nd on
R an
do lp
h- S
en g
A t
13 :0
7 29
M ar
ch 2
01 7
(P T
)
While PLS-SEM does not have the same goodness of fit measures as covariance-based SEM, it does require establishing reliability and validity prior to testing the hypotheses. This is achieved through average variance extracted (AVE) and discriminant validity. Table I displays descriptive statistics, including means, standard deviations, AVE, and correlations for the variables used in this study. Hair et al. (2011) suggests that an AVE value of 0.50 or greater is sufficient for convergent validity, and all variables fulfilled this requirement. Similarly, the composite reliability values for servant leadership (0.89), political skill (0.95), workplace spirituality (0.83), and employee creativity (0.93) are above the cutoff of 0.70 for establishing internal reliability (Nunnally, 1978).
As shown in Table I, we note a high correlation between servant leadership and political skill (0.77, po0.01). Theoretically, Bowen et al. (2010) proposed that while some overlap between servant leadership and political skill exists, many of their skill sets complement each other. For example, the appearance of sincerity, authenticity, and genuineness, considered “hallmarks of political skill” (Bowen et al., 2010, p. 135), are necessary for followers to believe that their servant leader places the follower’s needs first. Hence, there is a need to establish discriminant validity between these two variables. Regarding this, we utilized two separate methods recommended by Hair et al. (2013) in the case of PLS-SEM.
First, per Hair et al.’s (2013) guidelines, we performed a check of discriminant validity aimed at empirically ensuring that political skill and servant leadership indeed are separate constructs. This procedure involves establishing that an “indicator’s loading on a construct is higher than all of its cross loadings with other constructs” (Hair et al., 2013, p. 111). Results showed that all of the indicators’ loading values were highest on their corresponding construct when compared to their cross loadings on any other construct. To be more specific, the loadings of the political skill indicators were higher on the political skill construct than their loadings on servant leadership or any other construct.
Second, a more conservative approach is Fornell and Larcker’s (1981) criterion for establishing discriminant validity. This procedure involves ensuring that the square root of the AVE of each construct is higher than the construct’s highest correlation with any other construct in the model. The square roots of the AVEs for servant leadership (0.79), political skill (0.90), workplace spirituality (0.80) and creativity (0.76) are greater than correlations of these constructs with other latent variables in the study. These results showed that each construct shares more variance with its associated indicators than any other construct (Hair et al., 2013, p. 105).
In summary, the cross loadings test as well as the Fornell and Larcker (1981) method results provide evidence for establishing discriminant validity between political skill and servant leadership.
Finally, and as recommended by Hair et al. (2011), we examined the degree of multicollinearity by examining the variance inflation factors of all indicators to determine if
Variables Mean SD AVE CR 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1. Gender 1.60 0.49 2. Age 29.16 1.25 0.04 3. Education 1.98 0.83 −0.11 −0.01 4. Organizational tenure 7.75 8.87 0.02 0.50** −0.11 5. Servant leadership 5.27 0.90 0.63 0.89 0.00 0.03 −0.12* 0.16** 6. Political skill 5.19 1.12 0.82 0.95 −0.02 0.03 −0.08 0.09 0.77** 7. Workplace spirituality 5.35 0.88 0.64 0.83 0.09* 0.11** 0.04 0.14** 0.48** 0.48** 8. Employee creativity 5.44 0.87 0.58 0.93 −0.06 0.00 0.08 0.09 0.18** 0.13* 0.33** Notes: n ¼ 280. *Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed); **Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed)
Table I. Descriptive statistics
185
Servant leadership and
followership creativity
D ow
nl oa
de d
by T
ex as
A &
M U
ni ve
rs it
y C
om m
er ce
, D oc
to r
B ra
nd on
R an
do lp
h- S
en g
A t
13 :0
7 29
M ar
ch 2
01 7
(P T
)
any were greater than the cutoff value of 5. No indicators exceeded this cutoff. Based on the analysis above, we proceeded with the tests of our hypotheses.
PLS-SEM assesses a structural model’s quality using two evaluation criteria: the variance explained (R2) within the endogenous variables (workplace spirituality and employee creativity), and the path coefficients’ significance (Chin, 1998; Hair et al., 2011). Based on the recommended 0.10 cutoff value (Falk and Miller, 1992), results indicated that our model obtained acceptable R2 statistics for employee creativity (0.13) and workplace spirituality (0.25).
H1 predicted that workplace spirituality mediates the relationship between servant leadership and employee creativity. Based on the procedures outlined by Hair et al. (2013), mediation analysis was first conducted without political skill included so that the main effect of servant leadership could be assessed. The first step in performing mediation analysis in PLS-SEM is to assess the direct effect (servant leadership → employee creativity) without the presence of the mediator (workplace spirituality). Path coefficients of a PLS-SEM bootstrapping procedure are interpreted as standardized β coefficients in a regression analysis (Hair et al., 2011). Table II shows the results. The relationship between servant leadership and employee creativity is significant (b ¼ 0.25, po0.001). In step 2, we included workplace spirituality as a mediator in order to analyze its effect on the servant leadership – employee creativity relationship. Servant leadership was significantly related to workplace spirituality (b ¼ 0.50, po0.001) and workplace spirituality was significantly related to creativity (b ¼ 0.32, po0.001). Additionally, the indirect effect’s size is 0.16. The results of the bootstrapping procedure allowed a calculation of the standard deviation (0.04), resulting in a significant t-value for the indirect effect (t ¼ 4.03, po0.01). Therefore, we can conclude that workplace spirituality mediates the relationship between servant leadership and employee creativity. As a final step of the mediation analysis, we determine the strength of the mediation by assessing the variance accounted for (VAF). The VAF of servant leadership on employee creativity through workplace spirituality is 0.85. Hair et al. (2013) suggest that values above 0.80 indicate full mediation. Therefore, H1 is supported.
H2 predicted that political skill moderates the relationship between servant leadership and workplace spirituality. Therefore, we included the direct effect of political skill and the interaction term (servant leadership × political skill) on workplace spirituality in our model. Servant leadership and political skill were mean-centered prior to testing the interaction. As shown in Table II, both servant leadership (b ¼ 0.37, po0.001) and
Mediation analysis (Step 1)
Mediation analysis (Step 2)
Moderation analysis
Control variables Gender → creativity −0.05 −0.08 −0.08 Age → creativity −0.07 −0.08 −0.08 Education → creativity 0.12 0.07 0.07 Organizational tenure → creativity 0.10 0.09 0.09
Main variables Servant leadership → creativity 0.25*** 0.03 Servant leadership → workplace spirituality 0.50*** 0.37*** Workplace spirituality → creativity 0.32*** 0.33*** Political skill → workplace spirituality 0.31** Servant leadership × Political skill → workplace spirituality 0.19*** R2 (Workplace spirituality) 0.25 0.32 R2 (Creativity) 0.08 0.13 0.13 Notes: **po0.01 (two-tailed); ***po0.001 (two-tailed)
Table II. Path coefficients
186
LODJ 38,2
D ow
nl oa
de d
by T
ex as
A &
M U
ni ve
rs it
y C
om m
er ce
, D oc
to r
B ra
nd on
R an
do lp
h- S
en g
A t
13 :0
7 29
M ar
ch 2
01 7
(P T
)
political skill (b ¼ 0.31, po0.01) are significant and positively related to workplace spirituality. The interaction term is also significant and positively related to workplace spirituality (b ¼ 0.19, o0.001). Figure 2 suggests that the higher the level of political skill, the greater the impact of servant leadership on workplace spirituality. Therefore, H2 is also supported.
Discussion, implications, and future directions Servant leadership continues to garner increased attention among researchers and practitioners (Humphreys et al., 2014; Van Dierendonck, 2011; Yoshida et al., 2014). Indeed, Parris and Peachey (2013, p. 389) state that servant leadership provides, “the ethical grounding and leadership framework needed to help address the challenges of the twenty-first century […]”. Unfortunately, the “leader” side of servant leadership is often neglected (Van Dierendonck and Nuijten, 2011), causing managers to suppose that implementing its tenets may “imply softness and weakness” (Van Dierendonck, 2011, p. 1251), and therefore not be appropriate for organizational leaders. While its foundations support the principles of servanthood and caring for followers, the theory also highlights many leader attributes (Greenleaf, 1977; Liden et al., 2008; Spears, 1995). Therefore, the aim of this study was to explore how the inclusion of the leader attributes of servant leadership can account for an even greater impact on followers and organizations more broadly.
To this end, we explored how political skill captured the key attributes that align with the conceptualization of servant leadership (Byrd, 1987; Spears, 1995). Additionally, we empirically demonstrated how politically skilled servant leaders (based on SDT) can impact the key organizational outcome of employee creativity through workplace spirituality. Our results support the assertion in our introduction that servant leadership exerts an even greater influence when we account for its key leader attributes through political skill. In other words, our findings suggest that servant leaders have a greater impact on their employees’ perceptions of workplace spirituality when they also
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
S p ir
itu a lit
y
–0.1
–0.2
–0.3
–0.4
–0.5
–1.00 –0.75 –0.50 –0.25 0.00
Servant Leadership
Political Skill at – 1 SD Political Skill at Mean Political Skill at + 1 SD
0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00
Figure 2. Interaction analysis
187
Servant leadership and
followership creativity
D ow
nl oa
de d
by T
ex as
A &
M U
ni ve
rs it
y C
om m
er ce
, D oc
to r
B ra
nd on
R an
do lp
h- S
en g
A t
13 :0
7 29
M ar
ch 2
01 7
(P T
)
demonstrated high levels of political skill. Furthermore, by creating this environment that promotes meaningful work while embracing the employee’s inner life and sense of community, servant leaders also enhance their follower’s creative efforts.
From a practical perspective, our findings build a case for managers implementing the tenets of servant leadership in its entirety; that is, not only addressing those dimensions related to supporting and serving their followers (i.e. empowerment and humility), but also the key “leader” attributes (i.e. organizational insight, persuasion, conceptualization, etc.). In terms of workplace spirituality, those looking to employ servant leadership may have an even greater impact on their followers by exhibiting authenticity and sincerity (key attributes of political skill) in their care for their followers’ well-being. Likewise, by cultivating their networks, servant leaders may receive the insight into organizational resources that benefit their followers. Rooted in SDT, our research suggests that politically skilled servant leaders impact the intrinsic motivation within followers, allowing them to find increased meaning and purpose within their work, and ultimately influencing employee creativity.
For the purposes of theory development and providing a foundation for the interplay between servant leadership and political skill, the data collection procedures undertaken in this study (i.e. from sources in multiple organizations) are beneficial. However, this also produces certain limitations and presents opportunities for future research. For example, the use of a single informant to measure all of the constructs may serve as a bias to our results. Therefore, assessing politically skilled servant leaders in an organizational setting may not only reduce potential common methods and/or same source biases, but it may also provide other avenues for research in this area. One potential avenue is the opportunity to assess how politically skilled servant leaders impact work group and team dynamics, especially in terms of their ability to manage and cultivate a spiritually rich workplace within a diverse team. Similarly, assessing this leader’s impact on creativity within work groups may also be fruitful. For example, Yoshida et al. (2014) found support for leader identification mediating the relationship between servant leadership and employee creativity. Perhaps including political skill would account for the leader’s ability to display sincerity toward their followers, while also showing an understanding for their individual needs through interpersonal influence. Our research suggests that these may strengthen both the follower’s identification with the leader as well as their overall creativity.
The continued focus on leader-follower relationships points to a growing need within organizations to show concern for the well-being of their employees. Since researchers and practitioners continue to turn toward the tenets of servant leadership, uncovering the servant leader’s impact on the organization as a whole becomes increasingly important for assessing its viability (Parris and Peachey, 2013). The presence of conceptual skills (e.g. persuasion, foresight, communication, etc.) in and of itself does not distinguish servant leaders, since these skills form the foundation for most prominent leadership styles. What is interesting is how servant leaders take advantage of these skills. As demonstrated through the findings of this paper, servant leaders who also possess not only the foundational people-oriented aspects, but also the conceptual skills found within political skill, can have an even greater impact on their follower’s workplace spirituality and creativity.
References
Agars, M.D., Kaufman, J.C., Deane, A. and Smith, B. (2012), “Fostering individual creativity through organizational context: a review of recent research and recommendations for organizational leaders”, in Mumford, M.D (Ed.), The Handbook of Organizational Creativity, Elsevier, London, pp. 271-291.
Ahearn, K.K., Ferris, G.R., Hochwarter, W.A., Douglas, C. and Ammeter, A.P. (2004), “Leader political skill and team performance”, Journal of Management, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 309-327.
188
LODJ 38,2
D ow
nl oa
de d
by T
ex as
A &
M U
ni ve
rs it
y C
om m
er ce
, D oc
to r
B ra
nd on
R an
do lp
h- S
en g
A t
13 :0
7 29
M ar
ch 2
01 7
(P T
)
Amabile, T.M. (1996), Creativity in Context, Westview Press, Boulder, CO.
Amabile, T.M. (1988), “A model of creativity and innovation in organizations”, in Staw, B.M. and Cummings, L.L. (Eds), Research in Organizational Behavior, JAI, Greenwich, CT, pp. 123-167.
Amabile, T.M. and Khaire, M. (2008), “Creativity and the role of the leader”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 86 No. 10, pp. 100-109.
Ammeter, A.P., Douglas, C., Gardner, W.L., Hochwarter, W.A. and Ferris, G.R. (2002), “Toward a political theory of leadership”, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 13 No. 6, pp. 751-796.
Asag-Gau, L. and van Dierendonck, D. (2011), “The impact of servant leadership on organisational commitment among the highly talented: the role of challenging work conditions and psychological empowerment”, European Journal of International Management, Vol. 5 No. 5, pp. 463-483.
Ashforth, B.E. and Pratt, M.G. (2010), “Institutionalized spirituality: an oxymoron”, in Giacalone, R.A. and Jurkiewicz, C.L. (Eds), Handbook of Workplace Spirituality and Organizational Performance, M.E. Sharpe, New York, NY, pp. 44-58.
Ashmos, D. and Duchon, D. (2000), “Spirituality at work”, Journal of Management Inquiry, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 134-145.
Atinc, G., Simmering, M.J. and Kroll, M.J. (2012), “Control variable use and reporting in macro and micro management research”, Organizational Research Methods, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 57-74.
Avolio, B.J., Walumbwa, F.O. and Weber, T.J. (2009), “Leadership: current theories, research, and future directions”, Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 60 No. 1, pp. 421-449.
Baard, P.P., Deci, E.L. and Ryan, R.M. (2004), “Intrinsic need satisfaction: a motivational basis of performance and well-being in two work settings”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 34 No. 10, pp. 2045-2068.
Blair, A.L., Kunz, J.A., Jeantet, S. and Kwon, D. (2012), “Prophets, priests and kings: re-imagining ancient metaphors of diffused leadership for the twenty-first century organization”, Journal of Management, Spirituality & Religion, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 127-145.
Blass, F.R., Brouer, R.L., Perrewé, P.L. and Ferris, G.R. (2007), “Politics understanding and networking ability as a function of mentoring the roles of gender and race”, Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 93-105.
Bontis, N., Bart, C., Wakefield, P., Bontis, N., Booker, L.D. and Serenko, A. (2007), “The mediating effect of organizational reputation on customer loyalty and service recommendation in the banking industry”, Management Decision, Vol. 45 No. 9, pp. 1426-1445.
Bowen, M.G., Ferris, G.R. and Kolodinsky, R.W. (2010), “Political skill, servant leadership, and workplace spirituality in the creation of effective work environments”, in Giacalone, R.A. and Jurkiewicz, C.L. (Eds), Handbook of Workplace Spirituality and Organizational Performance, M.E. Sharpe, New York, NY, pp. 164-180.
Burack, E.H. (1999), “Spirituality in the workplace”, Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 280-292.
Byrd, R.E. (1987), “Corporate leadership skills: a new synthesis”, Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 34-43.
Byrne, C.J., Morton, D.M. and Dahling, J.J. (2011), “Spirituality, religion, and emotional labor in the workplace”, Journal of Management, Spirituality & Religion, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 299-315.
Cheung, M.F.Y. and Wong, C.-S. (2011), “Transformational leadership, leader support, and employee creativity”, Leadership and Organization Development Journal, Vol. 32 No. 7, pp. 656-672.
Chin, W.W. (1998), “The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling”, in Marcoulides, G.A. (Ed.), Modern Methods for Business Research, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc., Mahwah, NJ, pp. 295-336.
De Jong, A., Hooghiemstra, R. and van Rinsum, M. (2014), “To accept or refuse an offer to join the board: Dutch evidence”, Long Range Planning, Vol. 47 No. 5, pp. 262-276.
189
Servant leadership and
followership creativity
D ow
nl oa
de d
by T
ex as
A &
M U
ni ve
rs it
y C
om m
er ce
, D oc
to r
B ra
nd on
R an
do lp
h- S
en g
A t
13 :0
7 29
M ar
ch 2
01 7
(P T
)
Deci, E.L. and Ryan, R.M. (1985), Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior, Springer Science & Business Media.
Douglas, C. and Ammeter, A.P. (2004), “An examination of leader political skill and its effect on ratings of leader effectiveness”, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 537-550.
Duchon, D. and Plowman, D.A. (2005), “Nurturing the spirit at work: impact on work unit performance”, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 16 No. 5, pp. 807-833.
Ehrhart, M.G. (2004), “Leadership and procedural justice climate as antecedents of unit-level organizational citizenship behavior”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 57 No. 1, pp. 61-94.
Exline, J.J. and Bright, D.S. (2011), “Spiritual and religious struggles in the workplace”, Journal of Management, Spirituality & Religion, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 123-142.
Falk, R.F. and Miller, N.B. (1992), A Primer for Soft Modeling, University of Akron Press, Akron, OH.
Ferris, G.R., Anthony, W.P., Kolodinsky, R.W., Gilmore, D.C. and Harvey, M.G. (2002), “Development of political skill”, in Wankel, C. and Defillippi, B. (Eds), Rethinking Management Education for the 21st Century, IAP, Greenwich, CT, pp. 3-25.
Ferris, G.R., Blickle, G., Schneider, P.B., Kramer, J., Zettler, I., Solga, J., Noethen, D. and Meurs, J.A. (2008), “Political skill construct and criterion-related validation: a two-study investigation”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 23 No. 7, pp. 744-771.
Ferris, G.R., Treadway, D.C., Kolodinsky, R.W., Hochwarter, W.A., Kacmar, C.J., Douglas, C. and Frink, D.D. (2005), “Development and validation of the political skill inventory”, Journal of Management, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 126-152.
Ferris, G.R., Treadway, D.C., Perrewé, P.L., Brouer, R.L., Douglas, C. and Lux, S. (2007), “Political skill in organizations”, Journal of Management, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 290-320.
Follett, M.P. (1926), “The giving of orders”, in Metcalf, H.C. (Ed.), Foundations of Business Administration, Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore, MD, pp. 152-157.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50.
Freshman, B. (1999), “An exploratory analysis of definitions and applications of spirituality in the workplace”, Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 318-329.
Gagné, M. and Deci, E.L. (2005), “Self-determination theory and work motivation”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 331-362.
Gavin, M.B., Green, S.G. and Fairhurst, G.T. (1995), “Managerial control strategies for poor performance over time and the impact on subordinate reactions”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 63 No. 2, pp. 207-221.
Geh, E. and Tan, G. (2009), “Spirituality at work in a changing world: managerial and research implications”, Journal of Management, Spirituality and Religion, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 287-300.
Graham, J.W. (1991), “Servant-leadership in organizations: inspirational and moral”, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 105-119.
Greenleaf, R.K. (1970), The Servant as Leader, The Robert Greenleaf Center, Indianapolis, IN.
Greenleaf, R.K. (1977), Servant Leadership: A Journey into the Nature of Legitimate Power and Greatness, Paulist Press, Mahwah, NJ.
Gruber, M., Heinemann, F., Brettel, M. and Hungeling, S. (2010), “Configurations of resources and capabilities and their performance implications: an exploratory study on technology ventures”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 31 No. 12, pp. 1337-1356.
Hair, J.F., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2011), “PLS-SEM: indeed a silver bullet”, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 139-152.
Hair, J.F. Jr, Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C. and Sarstedt, M. (2013), A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
190
LODJ 38,2
D ow
nl oa
de d
by T
ex as
A &
M U
ni ve
rs it
y C
om m
er ce
, D oc
to r
B ra
nd on
R an
do lp
h- S
en g
A t
13 :0
7 29
M ar
ch 2
01 7
(P T
)
Hair, J.F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C.M. and Mena, J.A. (2012), “An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling in marketing research”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 414-433.
Hale, J.R. and Fields, D.L. (2007), “Exploring servant leadership across cultures: a study of followers in Ghana and the USA”, Leadership, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 397-417.
Henseler, J. and Fassott, G. (2010), “Testing moderating effects in PLS path models: an illustration of available procedures”, in Esposito Vinzi, V., Chin, W.W., Henseler, J. and Wang, H. (Eds), Handbook of Partial Least Squares, Springer, Berlin, pp. 713-735.
Humphreys, J.H. (2005), “Contextual implications for transformational and servant leadership: a historical investigation”, Management Decision, Vol. 43 No. 10, pp. 1410-1431.
Humphreys, J.H., Williams, W.A. Jr, Haden, S.P., Hayek, M., Pryor, M.G. and Randolph-Seng, B. (2014), “Servant leadership: approaching the paradox from the life-stories of Ping Fu”, Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 43-60.
King, J.E. and Williamson, I.O. (2005), “Workplace religious expression, religiosity and job satisfaction: clarifying a relationship”, Journal of Management, Spirituality & Religion, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 173-198.
Kolodinsky, R.W., Giacalone, R.A. and Jurkiewicz, C.L. (2008), “Workplace values and outcomes: exploring personal, organizational, and interactive workplace spirituality”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 81 No. 2, pp. 465-480.
Krishnakumar, S. and Neck, C.P. (2002), “The ‘what’, ‘why’ and ‘how’ of spirituality in the workplace”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 153-164.
Liden, R.C., Wayne, S.J., Liao, C. and Meuser, J.D. (2014), “Servant leadership and serving culture: influence on individual and unit performance”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 57 No. 5, pp. 1434-1452.
Liden, R.C., Wayne, S.J., Zhao, H. and Henderson, D. (2008), “Servant leadership: development of a multidimensional measure and multi-level assessment”, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 161-177.
Mckee, M.C., Mills, J.H. and Driscoll, C. (2008), “Making sense of workplace spirituality: towards a new methodology”, Journal of Management, Spirituality & Religion, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 190-210.
Matthews, R.A., Barnes-Farrell, J.L. and Bulger, C.A. (2010), “Advancing measurement of work and family domain boundary characteristics”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 77 No. 3, pp. 447-460.
Mayer, J.D., Roberts, R.D. and Barsade, S.G. (2008), “Human abilities: emotional intelligence”, Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 59, pp. 507-536.
Milliman, J., Czaplewski, A.J. and Ferguson, J. (2003), “Workplace spirituality and employee work attitudes: an exploratory empirical assessment”, Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 426-447.
Munyon, T.P., Summers, J.K., Thompson, K.M. and Ferris, G.R. (2015), “Political skill and work outcomes: a theoretical extension, meta-analytic investigation, and agenda for the future”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 68 No. 1, pp. 143-184.
Nunnally, J.C. (1978), Psychometric Theory, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Oldham, G.R. and Cummings, A. (1996), “Employee creativity: personal and contextual factors at work”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 39 No. 3, pp. 607-634.
Parolini, J., Patterson, K. and Winston, B. (2009), “Distinguishing between transformational and servant leadership”, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 274-291.
Parris, D.L. and Peachey, J.W. (2013), “A systematic literature review of servant leadership theory in organizational contexts”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 113 No. 3, pp. 377-393.
Pfeffer, J. (2010), Power: Why Some People Have It – and Others Don’t, HarperBusiness, New York, NY.
Ringle, C.M., Wende, S. and Becker, J.M. (2015), SmartPLS 3, available at: www.smartpls.com
Russell, F.R. and Stone, A.G. (2002), “A review of servant leadership attributes: developing a practical model”, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 145-157.
191
Servant leadership and
followership creativity
D ow
nl oa
de d
by T
ex as
A &
M U
ni ve
rs it
y C
om m
er ce
, D oc
to r
B ra
nd on
R an
do lp
h- S
en g
A t
13 :0
7 29
M ar
ch 2
01 7
(P T
)
Sendjaya, S. and Pekerti, A. (2010), “Servant leadership as antecedent of trust in organizations”, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 31 No. 7, pp. 643-663.
Shalley, C.E. and Gilson, L.L. (2004), “What leaders need to know: a review of social and contextual factors that can foster or hinder creativity”, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 33-53.
Shalley, C.E., Zhou, J. and Oldham, G.R. (2004), “The effects of personal and contextual characteristics on creativity: where should we go from here?”, Journal of Management, Vol. 30 No. 6, pp. 933-958.
Spears, L.C. (1995), Reflections on Leadership – How Robert Greenleaf’s Theory of Servant-leadership Influenced Today’s Top Management Thinkers, Wiley, New York, NY.
Spector, P.E. and Brannick, M.T. (2011), “Methodological urban legends: the misuse of statistical control variables”, Organizational Research Methods, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 287-305.
Stone, A.G., Russell, R.F. and Patterson, K. (2004), “Transformational versus servant leadership: a difference in leader focus”, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 349-361.
Tierney, P., Farmer, S.M. and Graen, G.B. (1999), “An examination of leadership and employee creativity: the relevance of traits and relationships”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 52 No. 3, pp. 591-620.
Treadway, D.C., Breland, J.W., Adams, G.L., Duke, A.B. and Williams, L.A. (2010), “The interactive effects of political skill and future time perspective on career and community networking behavior”, Social Networks, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 138-147.
Treadway, D.C., Hochwarter, W.A., Ferris, G.R., Kacmar, C.J., Douglas, C., Ammeter, A.P. and Buckley, M.R. (2004), “Leader political skill and employee reactions”, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 493-513.
Van Dierendonck, D. (2011), “Servant leadership: a review and synthesis”, Journal of Management, Vol. 37 No. 4, pp. 1228-1261.
Van Dierendonck, D. and Nuijten, I. (2011), “The servant leadership survey: development and validation of a multidimensional measure”, Journal of Business and Psychology, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 249-267.
Wagner-Marsh, F. and Conley, J. (1999), “The fourth wave: the spiritually-based firm”, Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 292-302.
Walumbwa, F.O., Hartnell, C.A. and Oke, A. (2010), “Servant leadership, procedural justice climate, service climate, employee attitudes, and organizational citizenship behavior: a cross-level investigation”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 95 No. 3, pp. 517-529.
Wilden, R., Gudergan, S.P., Nielsen, B.B. and Lings, I. (2013), “Dynamic capabilities and performance: strategy, structure and environment”, Long Range Planning, Vol. 46 No. 1, pp. 72-96.
Williams, W.A. Jr, Thomas, C., Ammeter, A.P., Hayek, M. and Novicevic, M.M. (2014), “Accountability to a servant leader and OCB: the role of follower integrity”, in Selladurai, R. and Carraher, S. (Eds), Servant Leadership: Research and Practice, IGI Global, Hershey, PA, pp. 1-23.
Wilson, B. (2010), “Using PLS to investigate interaction effects between higher order branding constructs”, in Esposito Vinzi, V., Chin, W.W., Henseler, J. and Wang, H. (Eds), Handbook of Partial Least Squares, Springer, Berlin, pp. 621-652.
Woodman, R.W., Sawyer, J.E. and Griffin, R.W. (1993), “Toward a theory of organizational creativity”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 293-321.
Yoshida, D.T., Sendjaya, S., Hirst, G. and Cooper, B. (2014), “Does servant leadership foster creativity and innovation? A multi-level mediation study of identification and prototypicality”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 67 No. 7, pp. 1395-1404.
Zhang, X. and Bartol, K.M. (2010), “Linking empowering leadership and employee creativity: the influence of psychological empowerment, intrinsic motivation, and creative process engagement”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 53 No. 1, pp. 107-128.
Zhou, J. and Shalley, C.E. (2003), “Research on employee creativity: a critical review and directions for future research”, Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, Vol. 22, pp. 165-218.
192
LODJ 38,2
D ow
nl oa
de d
by T
ex as
A &
M U
ni ve
rs it
y C
om m
er ce
, D oc
to r
B ra
nd on
R an
do lp
h- S
en g
A t
13 :0
7 29
M ar
ch 2
01 7
(P T
)
About the authors Wallace Alexander Williams Jr is an Assistant Professor in the College of Business and Entrepreneurship at Texas A&M University – Commerce, where he teaches Organizational Behavior and Human Resources. His primarily research interests include leadership and management history. He earned his PhD in Management from The University of Mississippi (Oxford) and his Bachelor of Arts from Morehouse College (Atlanta, GA). Additionally, he has extensive experience as both a social entrepreneur and a business professional. Wallace Alexander Williams Jr is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: [email protected]
Brandon Randolph-Seng is an Assistant Professor of Management in the College of Business and Entrepreneurship at Texas A&M University – Commerce. He received his PhD from Texas Tech University. His research interests include the social and cognitive factors involved in leadership, groups and entrepreneurship.
Mario Hayek is an Assistant Professor in the College of Business and Entrepreneurship at Texas A&M University – Commerce. He obtained a PhD in Management from the University of Mississippi. His research interests include management history, entrepreneurial cognition, social responsibility and ethics. He has been teaching entrepreneurship and strategic management at the undergraduate and graduate levels for over 13 years. In addition, he has acquired over 15 years of experience as an international entrepreneur.
Stephanie Pane Haden is an Associate Professor of Management in the College of Business and Entrepreneurship at Texas A&M University – Commerce. She obtained a PhD in Management from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. Her research interests include management history, leadership and motivation, green management, and corporate social responsibility. She teaches courses in Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management. Her work has appeared in various outlets such as Management Decision, Sloan Management Review, the Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, and the Journal of Management History.
Guclu Atinc is an Assistant Professor of Management at Texas A&M University – Commerce. He received his DBA from Louisiana Tech University. His current research interests are in the area of upper echelons and boards of directors in young entrepreneurial firms and on the impact of environment in strategic decision making along with research methods in strategic management. His research appeared in journals like Organizational Research Methods, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Journal of Business Research, Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies and Journal of Managerial Issues among others.
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website: www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm Or contact us for further details: [email protected]
193
Servant leadership and
followership creativity
D ow
nl oa
de d
by T
ex as
A &
M U
ni ve
rs it
y C
om m
er ce
, D oc
to r
B ra
nd on
R an
do lp
h- S
en g
A t
13 :0
7 29
M ar
ch 2
01 7
(P T
)
View publication statsView publication stats
