Honesty Is Not Always the Best Policy: The Role of Self-Esteem Based on Others’ Approval in Qualifying the Relationship Between Leader Transparency and Follower Voice

IF 5 3区 管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT
Ellen Choi, Lieke L. ten Brummelhuis, Hannes Leroy
{"title":"Honesty Is Not Always the Best Policy: The Role of Self-Esteem Based on Others’ Approval in Qualifying the Relationship Between Leader Transparency and Follower Voice","authors":"Ellen Choi, Lieke L. ten Brummelhuis, Hannes Leroy","doi":"10.1177/15480518241231045","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article, we integrate social exchange theory with insights from contingent self-esteem to explain why leader transparency (LT) might not always be reciprocated by enhanced follower voice. We theorize that when leaders are transparent, they initiate a social process that offers the exchange of honesty by signaling that the work environment is psychologically safe enough for followers to express their opinions in return. Yet, for individuals whose self-esteem fragilely relies on the approval of others (i.e., self-esteem based on others’ approval), reciprocating transparent communication is more difficult because speaking up exposes their self-worth to the potential for rejection. We test our model at the individual and team level. In Study 1 (individual level), we find that LT is positively related to follower self-rated voice one-month later through enhanced follower psychological safety, but only when follower self-esteem based on others’ approval is low as opposed to high. In Study 2 (team level), we find that team LT is positively related to leader-rated team voice six-months later through team psychological safety; however, only when team level self-esteem based on others’ approval is low, but not high. These results underscore that leader transparency can be reciprocated with enhanced follower voice, but only when followers have secure and stable self-esteem.","PeriodicalId":51455,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15480518241231045","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this article, we integrate social exchange theory with insights from contingent self-esteem to explain why leader transparency (LT) might not always be reciprocated by enhanced follower voice. We theorize that when leaders are transparent, they initiate a social process that offers the exchange of honesty by signaling that the work environment is psychologically safe enough for followers to express their opinions in return. Yet, for individuals whose self-esteem fragilely relies on the approval of others (i.e., self-esteem based on others’ approval), reciprocating transparent communication is more difficult because speaking up exposes their self-worth to the potential for rejection. We test our model at the individual and team level. In Study 1 (individual level), we find that LT is positively related to follower self-rated voice one-month later through enhanced follower psychological safety, but only when follower self-esteem based on others’ approval is low as opposed to high. In Study 2 (team level), we find that team LT is positively related to leader-rated team voice six-months later through team psychological safety; however, only when team level self-esteem based on others’ approval is low, but not high. These results underscore that leader transparency can be reciprocated with enhanced follower voice, but only when followers have secure and stable self-esteem.
诚实并不总是最好的政策:基于他人认可的自尊在限定领导者透明度与追随者声音之间关系中的作用
在这篇文章中,我们将社会交换理论与或然自尊的观点相结合,来解释为什么领导者的透明度(LT)并不总是能够通过提高追随者的话语权而得到回报。我们的理论是,当领导者透明时,他们会启动一个社会过程,通过发出工作环境在心理上足够安全的信号,让追随者表达他们的观点,从而提供诚实的交换。然而,对于自尊脆弱地依赖于他人认可(即自尊基于他人的认可)的个体来说,回应透明的沟通会更加困难,因为直言不讳会使他们的自我价值暴露在被拒绝的可能性之下。我们在个人和团队层面测试了我们的模型。在研究 1(个人层面)中,我们发现一个月后,LT 通过增强追随者的心理安全感与追随者的自我评价声音呈正相关,但只有当追随者基于他人认可的自尊较低而不是较高时,LT 才与之呈正相关。在研究 2(团队层面)中,我们发现团队 LT 与六个月后领导者通过团队心理安全感评价的团队声音呈正相关;但是,只有当团队层面基于他人认可的自尊较低而非较高时,团队 LT 才与领导者评价的团队声音呈正相关。这些结果表明,领导者的透明度可以通过提高追随者的话语权得到回报,但前提是追随者拥有安全稳定的自尊。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.70
自引率
2.10%
发文量
23
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信