How Do Leaders vs. Followers Construct Followership? A Field Study of implicit followership theories and Work-Related Affect Using Latent Profile Analysis
{"title":"How Do Leaders vs. Followers Construct Followership? A Field Study of implicit followership theories and Work-Related Affect Using Latent Profile Analysis","authors":"P. Coyle, Roseanne J. Foti","doi":"10.1177/15480518211053529","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this study, we integrate follower categorization theory with affective events theory (AET) to investigate the extent to which within-person patterns of implicit followership theories (IFTs) and work-related affect predict job satisfaction for leaders versus followers. Latent profile analysis (LPA) was used to identify and to describe distinct profiles of IFTs and work-related affect for leaders versus followers. For the sample of 242 leaders, two profiles with distinct patterns of IFTs and work-related affect (Proactive and Alienated) were found. Leaders with Proactive views of followers showed above-average ratings of work-related affect, while leaders with Alienated views of followers showed lower ratings of work-related affect. In the sample of 240 followers, there were four profiles of followers with distinct patterns of IFTs and work-related affect (Conforming, Alienated, Proactive, and Negative). Despite showing a similar pattern of IFTs, followers with Alienated views of their own role showed below-average ratings of work-related affect, while followers with Negative views of their own role showed the highest ratings of work-related affect. These findings suggest that IFTs and work-related affect show unique within-person interaction for followers. Furthermore, for followers, profile membership of IFTs and work-related affect significantly predicted mean levels of job satisfaction. Implications are discussed.","PeriodicalId":51455,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies","volume":"29 1","pages":"115 - 130"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15480518211053529","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: 6
Abstract
In this study, we integrate follower categorization theory with affective events theory (AET) to investigate the extent to which within-person patterns of implicit followership theories (IFTs) and work-related affect predict job satisfaction for leaders versus followers. Latent profile analysis (LPA) was used to identify and to describe distinct profiles of IFTs and work-related affect for leaders versus followers. For the sample of 242 leaders, two profiles with distinct patterns of IFTs and work-related affect (Proactive and Alienated) were found. Leaders with Proactive views of followers showed above-average ratings of work-related affect, while leaders with Alienated views of followers showed lower ratings of work-related affect. In the sample of 240 followers, there were four profiles of followers with distinct patterns of IFTs and work-related affect (Conforming, Alienated, Proactive, and Negative). Despite showing a similar pattern of IFTs, followers with Alienated views of their own role showed below-average ratings of work-related affect, while followers with Negative views of their own role showed the highest ratings of work-related affect. These findings suggest that IFTs and work-related affect show unique within-person interaction for followers. Furthermore, for followers, profile membership of IFTs and work-related affect significantly predicted mean levels of job satisfaction. Implications are discussed.