, 1
5775 
9966Previous studies on employees’ deviance mainly focus on its disruptive aspects, while employees’ constructive deviance, as a kind of extra-role behavior that is beneficial to the organization, has long been neglected and studies on it are relatively scarce. The proactive motivation model holds that the leadership style is an important working situational factor to motivate employees to engage in proactive behavior. Inclusive leadership, as a kind of supportive leadership style, plays an important role in promoting employees’ constructive deviance. Based on the proactive motivation model, this paper mainly focuses on the relationship between inclusive leadership and employees’ constructive deviance, the mediating role of psychological ownership and the moderating role of employees’ traditionality in the Chinese context. In this paper, 253 questionnaires were distributed to employees from high-tech enterprises and manufacturing industry. After excluding invalid questionnaires, 230 valid sample data were obtained. In the samples, 46.5% are male; most of the participants range from 26–35 years old; most of the participants have been working more than 4 years; most of the participants have college degrees. To examine the distinctiveness of variables, this paper conducts a confirmatory factor analysis by using AMOS 17.0. This paper also conducts a multiple regression analysis to test the mediating and moderating effects by using SPSS 17.0. Results show that inclusive leadership has a significantly positive effect on employees’ constructive deviance, and psychological ownership fully mediates the relationship between them. Employees’ traditionality negatively moderates the relationship between them, that is to say, the lower employees’ traditionality is, the stronger the effect of inclusive leadership on employees’ constructive deviance is. There are two primary theoretical contributions in this study. Firstly, the findings enrich the theoretical foundation of the influence research of inclusive leadership on employees’ behavior. In previous studies, scholars tend to use the social exchange theory to construct the theoretical framework, while this paper constructs a research framework between inclusive leadership and employees’ constructive deviance based on the proactive motivation model. Secondly, the findings expand the research perspectives of employees’ constructive deviance. This paper takes inclusive leadership as an important factor which can motivate employees’ constructive deviance and enriches the research perspectives of employees’ constructive deviance. Meanwhile, the findings shed light on the mediating transmission mechanism and boundary conditions of inclusive leadership influencing employees’ constructive deviance. In addition, there are several limitations in this study. Firstly, the use of cross-sectional data implies that cause-effect relations cannot be inferred from the findings. Future research should adopt longitudinal data to fully address the issue of causality. Secondly, there may be differences in understanding inclusiveness between Chinese and Western cultures, so the connotations and dimensions of inclusive leadership in the Chinese context should be explored in the future. Third, this paper mainly explores the influencing factors of employees’ constructive behavior, but does not involve the influencing effects of employees’ constructive behavior. In the future, we can explore the double-edged sword effect of employees’ constructive deviance.
/ Journals / Foreign Economics & Management
Foreign Economics & Management
LiZengquan, Editor-in-Chief
ZhengChunrong, Vice Executive Editor-in-Chief
YinHuifang HeXiaogang LiuJianguo, Vice Editor-in-Chief
A Research on the Motivating Mechanism of Inclusive Leadership on Employees’ Constructive Deviance
Foreign Economics & Management Vol. 41, Issue 03, pp. 54 - 69 (2019) DOI:10.16538/j.cnki.fem.2019.03.004
Summary
References
Summary
[1] Fang Yangchun. The effect of inclusive leadership on team performance: Based on the mediating effect of self-efficacy[J]. Science Research Management, 2014, (5): 152-160.
[2] Gu Yinhua. The influence of inclusive leadership to employees’ innovation behavior: A moderated mediation model[J]. Economic Management, 2016, (4): 93-103.
[3] Lang Yi, Wang Hui. Empowering leadership behavior and organizational citizenship behavior: The role of supervisor identification and psychological ownership for organization[J]. Journal of Psychological Science, 2016, (5): 1229-1235.
[4] Li Hong, Liu Hong. A literature review of constructive deviance in organizations and prospects[J]. Foreign Economics & Management, 2014, (8): 45-52.
[5] Li Yuhui, Wang Zhen, Huang Canwei, et al. The effects of abusive supervision on psychological distress and job performance: A moderated mediation[J]. Management Review, 2016, (2): 127-137.
[6] Liu Yang, Zhu Wei, Zhao Shuming. CEO inclusive leadership and employee proactive behaviors: The mediating effect of employment relation climate[J]. Chinese Journal of Management, 2016, (10): 1482-1489.
[7] Wang Yanfei, Huang Jiaxin, Zhu Yu. Research on the relationship between inclusive leadership and voice behavior: Based on cognitive and affective integration perspective[J]. Chinese Journal of Management, 2018, 15(9) : 1311-1318.
[8] Xin Xun, Miao Rentao. The influential mechanism of employees’ job crafting on creative performance: A moderated double-mediation model[J]. Business Management Journa, 2018, (5): 108 -122
[9] Zhang Yajun, Zhang Jinlong, Zhang Qianfan, et al. Influence of authoritarian and empowering leadership on employee’s tacit knowledge sharing[J]. Management Review, 2015, (9): 130-139.
[10] Zhang Yongjun, Zhang Pengcheng, Zhao Jun. The relationship between paternalistic leadership and unethical pro-organizational behavior: Traditionality as a moderator[J].Nankai Business Review, 2017, (2) : 169-179.
[11] Zhu Yu, Qian Shuting. Analysis of the frontier of inclusive leadership research and future prospects[J]. Foreign Economics & Management, 2014, (2): 55-64.
[12] Avey J B, Avolio B J, Crossley C D, et al. Psychological ownership: Theoretical extensions, measurement and relation to work outcomes[J]. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 2009, 30(2): 173-191.
[13] Bienefeld N, Grote G. Speaking up in ad hoc multiteam systems: Individual-level effects of psychological safety, status, and leadership within and across teams[J]. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 2014, 23(6): 930-945.
[14] Caesens G, Marique G, Hanin D, et al. The relationship between perceived organizational support and proactive behaviour directed towards the organization[J]. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 2016, 25(3): 398-411.
[15] Choi S B, Tran T B H, Kang S W. Inclusive leadership and employee well-being: The mediating role of person-job fit[J]. Journal of Happiness Studies, 2017, 18(6): 1877-1901.
[16] Choi S B, Tran T B H, Park B I. Inclusive leadership and work engagement: Mediating roles of affective organizational commitment and creativity[J]. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 2015, 43(6): 931-943.
[17] Dahling J J, Gutworth M B. Loyal rebels? A test of the normative conflict model of constructive deviance[J]. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 2017, 38(8): 1167-1182.
[18] Dawkins S, Tian A W, Newman A, et al. Psychological ownership: A review and research agenda[J]. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 2017, 38(2): 163-183.
[19] Farh J L, Hackett R D, Liang J. Individual-level cultural values as moderators of perceived organizational support-employee outcome relationships in China: Comparing the effects of power distance and traditionality[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2007, 50(3): 715-729.
[20] Galperin B L. Exploring the nomological network of workplace deviance: Developing and validating a measure of constructive deviance[J]. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 2012, 42(12): 2988-3025.
[21] Guan P P, Capezio A, Restubog S L D, et al. The role of traditionality in the relationships among parental support, career decision-making self-efficacy and career adaptability[J]. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 2016, 94: 114-123.
[22] Hirak R, Peng A C, Carmeli A, et al. Linking leader inclusiveness to work unit performance: The importance of psychological safety and learning from failures[J]. The Leadership Quarterly, 2012, 23(1): 107-117.
[23] Hong Y, Liao H, Raub S, et al. What it takes to get proactive: An integrative multilevel model of the antecedents of personal initiative[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2016, 101(5): 687-701.
[24] Javed B, Khan A K, Quratulain S. Inclusive leadership and innovative work behavior: Examination of LMX perspective in small capitalized textile firms[J]. The Journal of Psychology, 2018, 152(8): 594-612.
[25] Kim M, Beehr T A. Self-efficacy and psychological ownership mediate the effects of empowering leadership on both good and bad employee behaviors[J]. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 2017, 24(4): 466-478.
[26] Kura K M, Shamsudin F M, Chauhan A. Organisational trust as a mediator between perceived organisational support and constructive deviance[J]. International Journal of Business and Society, 2016, 17(1): 1-18.
[27] Kurtessis J N, Eisenberger R, Ford M T, et al. Perceived organizational support: A meta-analytic evaluation of organizational support theory[J]. Journal of Management, 2017, 43(6): 1854-1884.
[28] Li S L, Huo Y, Long L R. Chinese traditionality matters: Effects of differentiated empowering leadership on followers’ trust in leaders and work outcomes[J]. Journal of Business Ethics, 2017, 145(1): 81-93.
[29] Liu J, Kwan H K, Fu P P, et al. Ethical leadership and job performance in China: The roles of workplace friendships and traditionality[J]. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 2013, 86(4): 564-584.
[30] Liu J, Wang H, Hui C, et al. Psychological ownership: How having control matters[J]. Journal of Management Studies, 2012, 49(5): 869-895.
[31] Lu C Q, Du D Y, Xu X M, et al. Revisiting the relationship between job demands and job performance: The effects of job security and traditionality[J]. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 2017, 90(1): 28-50.
[32] Mustafa M, Martin L, Hughes M. Psychological ownership, job satisfaction, and middle manager entrepreneurial behavior[J]. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 2016, 23(3): 272-287.
[33] Ng T W H, Lucianetti L. Within-individual increases in innovative behavior and creative, persuasion, and change self-efficacy over time: A social-cognitive theory perspective[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2016, 101(1): 14-34.
[34] Ngo H Y, Li H. Chinese traditionality and career success: Mediating roles of procedural justice and job insecurity[J]. Career Development International, 2015, 20(6): 627-645.
[35] [52] O’driscoll M P, Pierce J L, Coghlan A M. The psychology of ownership: Work environment structure, organizational commitment, and citizenship behaviors[J]. Group & Organization Management, 2006, 31(3): 388-416.
[36] Pan X F, Qin Q W, Gao F. Psychological ownership, organization-based self-esteem and positive organizational behaviors[J]. Chinese Management Studies, 2014, 8(1): 127-148.
[37] Parker S K, Bindl U K, Strauss K. Making things happen: A model of proactive motivation[J]. Journal of Management, 2010, 36(4): 827-856.
[38] Peng H, Pierce J. Job-and organization-based psychological ownership: Relationship and outcomes[J]. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 2015, 30(2): 151-168.
[39] Randel A E, Dean M A, Ehrhart K H, et al. Leader inclusiveness, psychological diversity climate, and helping behaviors[J]. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 2016, 31(1): 216-234.
[40] Randel A E, Galvin B M, Shore L M, et al. Inclusive leadership: Realizing positive outcomes through belongingness and being valued for uniqueness[J]. Human Resource Management Review, 2018, 28(2): 190-203.
[41] Shore L M, Cleveland J N, Sanchez D. Inclusive workplaces: A review and model[J]. Human Resource Management Review, 2018, 28(2): 176-189.
[42] Vadera A K, Pratt M G, Mishra P. Constructive deviance in organizations: Integrating and moving forward[J]. Journal of Management, 2013, 39(5): 1221-1276.
[43] Wang H J, Lu C Q, Lu L. Do people with traditional values suffer more from job insecurity? The moderating effects of traditionality[J]. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 2014, 23(1): 107-117.
[44] Wu X F, Kwan H K, Wu L Z, et al. The effect of workplace negative gossip on employee proactive behavior in China: The moderating role of traditionality[J]. Journal of Business Ethics, 2018, 148(4): 801-815.
Cite this article
Wang Yanzi, Tian Yanan. A Research on the Motivating Mechanism of Inclusive Leadership on Employees’ Constructive Deviance[J]. Foreign Economics & Management, 2019, 41(3): 54-69.
Export Citations as:
For
ISSUE COVER
RELATED ARTICLES
