Why do bootlickers get empowered more than boat-rockers? The effects of voice and helping on empowering leadership through threat and goal congruence perceptions.
Troy A Smith,Tobias Dennerlein,Stephen H Courtright,Bradley L Kirkman,Pengcheng Zhang
{"title":"Why do bootlickers get empowered more than boat-rockers? The effects of voice and helping on empowering leadership through threat and goal congruence perceptions.","authors":"Troy A Smith,Tobias Dennerlein,Stephen H Courtright,Bradley L Kirkman,Pengcheng Zhang","doi":"10.1037/apl0001303","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As empowering leadership becomes increasingly needed in today's complex organizations, so does the need to understand what motivates leaders to give more (or less) empowering leadership to followers. We draw on threat rigidity theory to examine how followers' challenging and supportive voice differentially impact the extent to which leaders empower their followers. We argue that leaders perceive followers' challenging voice as more threatening and tend to empower them less, whereas leaders perceive followers' supportive voice as reflective of their goal congruence with followers, which motivates leaders to give them more empowering leadership. We further leverage threat rigidity theory to explain how leader-directed helping moderates the degree to which leaders respond to each type of voice in terms of threat and goal congruence perceptions and ultimately, with empowering leadership. We argue that leader-directed helping buffers challenging voice's positive effect on perceived threat and amplifies supportive voice's positive effect on leaders' perceptions of goal congruence with followers, which, subsequently, affects leaders' willingness to empower them. We mostly find support for these predictions in a time-lagged, multisource field study and a scenario-based experiment conducted across different countries and cultures. We discuss our theoretical contributions to the literature and practical implications for followers and leaders. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":15135,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Psychology","volume":"115 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":9.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001303","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
As empowering leadership becomes increasingly needed in today's complex organizations, so does the need to understand what motivates leaders to give more (or less) empowering leadership to followers. We draw on threat rigidity theory to examine how followers' challenging and supportive voice differentially impact the extent to which leaders empower their followers. We argue that leaders perceive followers' challenging voice as more threatening and tend to empower them less, whereas leaders perceive followers' supportive voice as reflective of their goal congruence with followers, which motivates leaders to give them more empowering leadership. We further leverage threat rigidity theory to explain how leader-directed helping moderates the degree to which leaders respond to each type of voice in terms of threat and goal congruence perceptions and ultimately, with empowering leadership. We argue that leader-directed helping buffers challenging voice's positive effect on perceived threat and amplifies supportive voice's positive effect on leaders' perceptions of goal congruence with followers, which, subsequently, affects leaders' willingness to empower them. We mostly find support for these predictions in a time-lagged, multisource field study and a scenario-based experiment conducted across different countries and cultures. We discuss our theoretical contributions to the literature and practical implications for followers and leaders. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Applied Psychology® focuses on publishing original investigations that contribute new knowledge and understanding to fields of applied psychology (excluding clinical and applied experimental or human factors, which are better suited for other APA journals). The journal primarily considers empirical and theoretical investigations that enhance understanding of cognitive, motivational, affective, and behavioral psychological phenomena in work and organizational settings. These phenomena can occur at individual, group, organizational, or cultural levels, and in various work settings such as business, education, training, health, service, government, or military institutions. The journal welcomes submissions from both public and private sector organizations, for-profit or nonprofit. It publishes several types of articles, including:
1.Rigorously conducted empirical investigations that expand conceptual understanding (original investigations or meta-analyses).
2.Theory development articles and integrative conceptual reviews that synthesize literature and generate new theories on psychological phenomena to stimulate novel research.
3.Rigorously conducted qualitative research on phenomena that are challenging to capture with quantitative methods or require inductive theory building.