Summary :Using longitudinal data collected in two waves, nine months apart, from 372 employees, this research is an empirical assessment of individual-level change within an organizational setting.
Specifically, strategies used by change implementers were operationalized as six transformational leader behaviors, and then hypothesized to influence employees’ cynicism about organizational change (CAOC). A combination of social learning theory, and communication
research served as the theoretical rationale to explain transformational leadership’s hypothesized effects. As posited, transformational leader behaviors (TLB) generally were associated with lower employee CAOC. Further, the direction of causality was consistent in suggesting that the TLB reduced employee CAOC. A discussion concerning the ethical use of TLBs and recommendations for future research are provided. Copyright#2005 JohnWiley & Sons, Ltd.
Introduction
The topic of organizational change has been an active area in management research for decades.
Despite its consistent attention, the change literature has seemingly little empirical data to advance research and inform practitioners in the area of process change, or actions undertaken to enact change (Armenakis & Bedian, 1999). That is not to say that it has been completely ignored; however, the general focus has been on conceptual change models, the context of change (i.e., factors underlying successful change efforts; e.g., see Baer & Frese, 2003) and factors relating to organizational effectiveness (Armenakis & Bedeian, 1999). This rings particularly true for the leadership literature in which studies typically show a single ‘snap-shot’ of leaders’ influence on followers and conclude that leadership is effective or not. Given the difficulty of collecting valid data that demonstrates utility of leadership over time, the gap in the literature is accordingly understandable. Nonetheless, evidence regarding theinfluence of leadership behavior over time is seminal to evaluating the overall utility of any particular leadership style. Thus, we see a strong need for empirical evidence from longitudinal research testing the efficacy of leader behavior on employee attitudes over time. Although we are expressly interested in leadership, we think it is important to link leadership to the larger context of organizational change since leadership influence on followers represents organizational change at the individual level.
Kanter, Stein, and Jick (1992) provide an organizing framework for examining the consequences of strategies used by change implementers on the outcomes experienced by change recipients. In the current study, these two categories are operationalized by transformational leader behavior (i.e., strategies used by implementers) impacting the cynicism about organizational change of employees (CAOC; i.e., attitudes of the change recipients toward change). Further, so that the relationships can be better understood, we used a longitudinal research design (i.e., cross-lagged panel) that allows for the exploration of change across time, as well as the direction of those relationships.
Through Kanter et al.’s (1992) framework, we examine whether or not change implementers’ strategies have the influential positive effects upon change recipients hypothesized by leadership researchers. Put simply, we are interested in understanding whether transformational leader behavior reduces
Specifically, strategies used by change implementers were operationalized as six transformational leader behaviors, and then hypothesized to influence employees’ cynicism about organizational change (CAOC). A combination of social learning theory, and communication
research served as the theoretical rationale to explain transformational leadership’s hypothesized effects. As posited, transformational leader behaviors (TLB) generally were associated with lower employee CAOC. Further, the direction of causality was consistent in suggesting that the TLB reduced employee CAOC. A discussion concerning the ethical use of TLBs and recommendations for future research are provided. Copyright#2005 JohnWiley & Sons, Ltd.
Introduction
The topic of organizational change has been an active area in management research for decades.
Despite its consistent attention, the change literature has seemingly little empirical data to advance research and inform practitioners in the area of process change, or actions undertaken to enact change (Armenakis & Bedian, 1999). That is not to say that it has been completely ignored; however, the general focus has been on conceptual change models, the context of change (i.e., factors underlying successful change efforts; e.g., see Baer & Frese, 2003) and factors relating to organizational effectiveness (Armenakis & Bedeian, 1999). This rings particularly true for the leadership literature in which studies typically show a single ‘snap-shot’ of leaders’ influence on followers and conclude that leadership is effective or not. Given the difficulty of collecting valid data that demonstrates utility of leadership over time, the gap in the literature is accordingly understandable. Nonetheless, evidence regarding theinfluence of leadership behavior over time is seminal to evaluating the overall utility of any particular leadership style. Thus, we see a strong need for empirical evidence from longitudinal research testing the efficacy of leader behavior on employee attitudes over time. Although we are expressly interested in leadership, we think it is important to link leadership to the larger context of organizational change since leadership influence on followers represents organizational change at the individual level.
Kanter, Stein, and Jick (1992) provide an organizing framework for examining the consequences of strategies used by change implementers on the outcomes experienced by change recipients. In the current study, these two categories are operationalized by transformational leader behavior (i.e., strategies used by implementers) impacting the cynicism about organizational change of employees (CAOC; i.e., attitudes of the change recipients toward change). Further, so that the relationships can be better understood, we used a longitudinal research design (i.e., cross-lagged panel) that allows for the exploration of change across time, as well as the direction of those relationships.
Through Kanter et al.’s (1992) framework, we examine whether or not change implementers’ strategies have the influential positive effects upon change recipients hypothesized by leadership researchers. Put simply, we are interested in understanding whether transformational leader behavior reduces
Postingan
