Servant leadership has gained increasing attention as an emerging form of positive leadership in organizational research and practice. Unlike traditional leadership, servant leadership emphasizes prioritizing the development and interests of subordinates. Despite the initial expectation that servant leadership would inhibit employee work deviance, the empirical findings are mixed. The possible reason is it hasn’t separated constructive deviance from general deviant behaviors. It is unclear whether servant leadership promotes employees to go beyond organizational norms to help the organization and its members, much less has explored whether individual employee traits and organizational norms are boundary conditions for this relationship. This study examines potential mechanisms of influence between servant leadership and constructive deviance. Based on social exchange theory and the normative conflict model, we propose felt obligation as a mediating mechanism and psychological entitlement and normative conflict as boundary conditions.
In Study 1, a two-stage questionnaire was designed to preliminarily test the research hypotheses above mentioned. A total of 358 working subjects participated in the study. Path analysis revealed a positive effect of servant leadership on constructive deviance and felt obligation mediated the relationship between servant leadership and constructive deviance. The data did not support a moderating effect of psychological entitlement on the relationship between servant leadership and felt obligation, but suggested that normative conflict may be a boundary condition for the impact of felt obligation on constructive deviant behavior. The relationship between felt obligation and constructive deviance was stronger under higher normative conflict than lower normative conflict.
In Study 2, a single-factor between-subjects experiment was designed to further test the findings of Study 1, in which servant leadership was manipulated to different levels (high vs low), and the effect of servant leadership on felt obligation and constructive deviance was explored. A total of 124 working subjects recruited online participated in the study. Results showed that subjects in the high servant leadership group had significantly higher felt obligation and constructive deviance than those in the low servant leadership group, and that felt obligation mediated the effect of servant leadership on felt obligation.
In study 3, a 2(felt obligation: high vs. low)×2(normative conflict: high vs. low) between-subjects experiment was designed to explore the effect of felt obligation on constructive deviance and the moderating effect of normative conflict on the relationship. A total of 347 working subjects were recruited online for the study. The results demonstrated that the high felt obligation group had higher constructive deviance compared to the low felt obligation group, and the relationship between felt obligation and constructive deviance was stronger under high normative conflict conditions.
In summary, the current study examined the relationship between servant leadership on constructive deviance drawing from social exchange theory and the normative conflict model, which provides us with a more comprehensive understanding of servant leadership on employee deviance. At the same time, the investigation of the mediating role of felt obligation and the moderating role of normative conflict expands the theoretical mechanisms by which servant leaders influence constructive deviance and deepens our understanding of servant leadership. Finally, this study also has practical implications for how managers could facilitate subordinates’ constructive deviance.
修改评论