The Effect of Transformational Mentorship on Individual Creativity in Educational Research
Teams: the Mediating Role of LMX and Intrinsic Motivation
LI Hong 1, PEI Ruimin 2
1 Graduate School of Management, Graduate University, Chinese Academy of Sciences, P.R. China, 100190
2 National Science Library, Chinese Academy of Sciences, P.R. China, 100190
Abstract: We developed and testified a theoretical model
which explained how transformational mentorship style
influences individual creativity and job satisfaction in the
context of educational research teams in the context of
educational research teams. Our sample included 81
teams consisting of 258 graduate students from the
mainland China. The dyadic data indicated that the LMX
fully mediated the relationship between transformational
leadership and job satisfaction and the intrinsic
motivation fully mediated the relationship between
transformational leadership and creativity. The results of
this present study extended the transformational
leadership theory in the educational research settings,
and shed the light on the mechanism how leadership
style behavior would influence the member’s creativity.
Furthermore, the study had the practical implication for
education management and research management
concerning about how to create the contextual
environment in order to facilitate the members’
individual creativity.
Keywords: transformational leadership，
mentorship ，leader-member exchange (LMX)，
intrinsic motivation
1.
Introduction
The research team is becoming basic unit for
knowledge creation and technology innovation.
Specifically, in educational research team which consists
of mentor and graduate students, besides the goals of
complementing research projects，fostering the potential
young scientists is its primary goal. Therefore, the
relationship between mentor and the graduate students is
a critical kind of interpersonal relationships like leadermember relationship in general teams in organization. In
the same way, the behavior style of mentors will have
great impact on the graduate performance like that of
leaders on team member in other teams. However,
although educational research team is becoming main
force in implementing scientific innovation and
knowledge creation in China, there are few studies to
examine how the mentors’ mentorship style would affect
the performance, especially creative performance of
graduate students. Therefore, to examine the mechanism
of mentorship on mentee’s creative performance would
not only make a new contribute to leadership theory by
testifying the leadership style in the context of
educational research teams, but also deepen the
understanding of how to improve the graduate students’
creativity via the vehicle of the mentorship.
This paper aims to examine how the
transformational mentorship in an educational research
team, affect the creative performance of mentees. Since
the role of the mentors in the educational research team
is quite similar to that of the leaders of general teams in
many ways, and the graduate students/mentees to the
followers. We applied the full range leadership theory to
describe the mentorship style in this study. The full
range leadership style depicts the leadership from lazzi
faire style to transactional and transformational style.
And many empirical studies demonstrate the evidence
that transformational leadership style would positively
affect the follower’s creativity. Therefore, in this study,
we focused on examining how the transformational
mentorship influences the mentee’s creativity in
educational research team.
The paper is organized as follows: the second section
is the literature review of leadership theory, LMX,
intrinsic motivation and individual performance in the
educational research teams and proposal of the
hypotheses; the third section is the methodology, in
which the sample, data collection and measurement are
indicated; the results of the analysis will be presented
next; and the final section is the conclusion and
discussion.
2.
Literature review
2.1Transformational leadership
Leadership is a strategic factor to influence the
individual performance and organizational performance
in various organization settings. It is defined as a process
that includes influencing the task objectives and
strategies of a group or organization, influencing people
in the organization to implement the strategies and
achieve the objectives, influencing group maintenance
and identification, and influencing the culture of the
organization. There are affluent researches from
different perspectives to study leadership.
Leadership styles have been defined as those
behaviors exhibited by leaders which can be measured or
compared [1]. Leadership styles have also been explained
as the processes through which decisions are made
within an organization [2]. Leadership styles may vary
widely along the spectrum of leadership [3]. Different
leadership styles encourage different types of responses
from followers, affecting their productivity, motivation,
and morale, depending upon the context of the
organization.
Full Range Leadership Theory (FRL) identifies
three styles of leadership – transformational leadership,
transactional leadership and passive/avoidant leadership
– as a continuum spectrum with nine sub-dimensions.
Transformational and transactional leadership was first
conceptualized by [4], was further brought to light by [5]
and was then expanded upon by Bass, who studied its
application in business, military, and educational settings
[3, 6, 7]
. Transactional leadership is rooted in mutual
exchanges between leader and follower; they contain
contingent reward and management by exception
behaviors. In contrast, transformational leadership is
those behaviors that inspire followers to go beyond the
quid-pro-quo exchange found in transactional behaviors.
Transformational behaviors inspire a higher level of
motivation and morality [5] and influence followers to
expend additional effort that transcends normal
expectations. Transformational leaders provide a vision
to their followers, transform the individual to the
collective, and provide individual support [7-9] describes
transformational leadership as a process of influence on
the follower, and research has supported the effect on a
follower’s attitudes, beliefs, and values [7, 10]. The
outcomes of transformational leadership are well
documented and include a large cadre of organizational
outcomes and individual follower effects [11].
Transformational leadership style is comprised of
four components defined as “4Is” – charisma leadership
or idealized influence (CL or II), inspirational motivation
–attitude and behavior (IM-A&B), intellectual
stimulation (IS), and individualized consideration (IC) [3].
Research has shown these individual elements are highly
correlated, and the measurement of transformational
leadership should be considered an aggregate set of
behaviors [9, 12-15].
Transformational leader is considered as an
effective leader in industry, military and educational
settings [16], and considerable evidences have testified the
effectiveness of transformational leadership. A number
of studies show that transformational leadership has
positive relationship with individual performance [17-28] ,
team /group performance [29-33], and organizational
performance [34-36] in business setting [17, 21, 23, 29, 30, 34] ,
sports setting[18, 36, 37] , military setting[31] , medical
setting[35], school or academic setting[19, 25, 27], R&D
teams or groups[26, 38, 39] and other organizations[32] using
either field study and experiment or quasi-experiment
study[22].
More recently, some scholars are getting interested
in examining the effect of leadership style to creative
performance [40-45] and organizational innovation [46]. The
relationship between transformational leadership and
individual creativity of followers still needs to further
investigation. Especially, the mechanism of the influence
of transformational leadership on followers’ individual
creativity still remains unclear and worth more studies.
2.2 Transformational leadership and leader-member
exchange
Leader-member exchange (LMX) was first
introduced by Dansereau et al. (1975) as vertical dyad
linkage theory (VDL) [47]. To date, LMX has evolved
into a multidimensional construct [48] and is one of the
most studied and useful approaches to understand the
relationship between leader and followers and to
examine the effects of leadership in groups or
organizations. Briefly, LMX reflects a reciprocal process
in the dyadic linkage between leader and follower, in
which followers hold role expectations of their leaders
and they can reject, embrace, or renegotiate roles
prescribed by their leaders [24] and it is premised on
notions of role making [49], social exchange, reciprocity,
and equity [50].
The high-quality LMX relationship reflects not only
the instrumental transactional exchange but also the
affective bonding accompanied by largely unstated
mutual expectations of reciprocity [24]. We argue that
transformational leadership predicts high-quality LMX
because the charismatic leaders appeal to and influence
the followers by building a strong role model and
articulating a clear vision to convince the followers to
believe that this mission is the right thing to do;
inspirational motivation gets the followers to transcend
their own self-interest for the sake of the group, and it
moves followers to address higher level needs [7] which
will raise the group spirit and team support as well as the
relationship between team leader and followers;
according to social exchange theory, transformational
leader with individual consideration trait treats his
followers individually, build the dyadic social and
affective bonding with his followers, satisfies their needs,
assist and motivate them at the dyadic level, which
predict a high-quality LMX.
Although there is a dearth of empirical research
incorporating both LMX and transformational leadership,
it is believed that the transformational leadership is one
of the major reasons to predict high LMX [24, 51, 52].
In educational research teams (ERT), the mentors
with transformational leadership style assist the graduate
students and treat them individually rather than
collectively and consider the individual developmental
needs. Subsequently, they are more likely to build the
affective bonding with the graduate students. Based on
the reciprocal process of LMX, the mentees who
received the mentor’s individualized mentoring and
respect will response to their mentor in a positive way,
which means a high-quality dyadic relationship, in other
word, the high-quality LMX. Consequently, we posit
that high-quality LMX is beneficial for the individual
academic development (in the current study, we use
academic satisfaction and individual creativity) in ERT,
and transformational leadership rather than transactional
leadership predict high-quality LMX.
Leader–member exchange theory posits that the
quality of the relationship developed between a leader
and a follower is predictive of outcomes at the individual,
group, and organizational level of analysis [53].
Consequently, we propose in the current study that LMX
mediates the relationship between the transformational
leadership and the individual creativity in ERTs.
There are several reasons for postulating a link
between transformational leadership and intrinsic
motivation. According to cognitive evaluation
motivation, controlling aspect of rewards decreases
intrinsic motivation[62]. However, transformational
leaders are known to empower, elevate rather than
control their followers [63]. This is supported to some
extent by data showing that a leadership style that is
supportive and promotes autonomy, which would be
consistent with transformational leadership, enhances
intrinsic motivation [64]. This empowering process is
thought to increase followers' self-efficacy and capacity
for self-determination [63].
Transformational leaders stir individuals to think for
themselves, and to approach old problems in new ways.
The intellectual-stimulation component of
transformational leadership is likely to increase
knowledge, learning, and understanding. Similarly,
charismatic leader raises individuals’ and groups’
expectations about what they can achieve and is likely to
increase the accomplishment and task-orientation
component of intrinsic motivation. Transformational
leader, who is supportive and promotes autonomy, will
enhance intrinsic motivation.
Intrinsic motivation is believed to be positively
related with creativity, and numerous studies have
testified this statement [65-73]. We hypothesize in this
study that intrinsic motivation will be a mediator in the
relationship between transformational leadership and
individual creativity.
2.4 Transformational leadership and outcome
variables
Based on the above, we propose the hypotheses in
this paper as follows:
2.3Transformational leadership and intrinsic
motivation
H1: Transformational mentorship is positively related
with individual creativity and job satisfaction.
Motivations are considered as a psychological
process to do a thing. Besides the external rewards or
punishment which drive people to achieve a goal,
researchers found that sometimes people do things
because of their involvement in the thing itself rather
than external factors. Based on the orientation of focus,
motivation can be distinguished into intrinsic motivation
from extrinsic motivation [54].
H2: LMX mediates the relationship between
transformational mentorship and individual creativity.
Intrinsic motivation is defined as the activation of
goal-oriented behavior within an individual due to
internal factors within a person rather than due some
external factors acting on the individual. It reflects
individuals choosing to engage in activities for the
pleasure that they bring [55]. Intrinsic motivation has been
linked to many other dispositions as well as several
aspects of employee behavior [56-61].
H3: Intrinsic motivation mediates the relationship
between transformational leadership and individual
creativity.
H4: An individual’s job satisfaction is positively related
with his/her individual creativity.
3.
Method
3.1 Sample
The participants for this study are the members in
educational research teams in academic settings. We
collected data from 81 research teams, consisting of 258
valid dyadic responses during three-month investigation.
The average age of the sample is 26.22, ranging from 22
to 33, the average size of the team is 8.18, ranging from
2 to 21. There are 107 female graduate students,
consisting of 41.5% of total sample, and 151 male
graduate students, consisting of 58.5% of total sample.
We collected the measurement of transformational
mentorship, LMX, job satisfaction, intrinsic motivation,
self-evaluated creativity from the graduate students, and
collected the creativity rating of the graduate students
from mentors.
3.2 Measurement
3.2.1Transformational Mentorship
Items taken from the Multifactor Leadership
Questionnaire (MLQ) 5X is used to measure
transformational mentorship, including idealized
influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual
stimulation, and individualized consideration [74]. All the
items were changed as referring to “my mentor”, instead
of “my leader”. Although these subscales are
theoretically distinct, in this study, we make no
distinction among the component factors of
transformational leadership. This is consistent with
recent empirical developments on transformational
leadership, which have repeatedly shown that these
dimensions are highly correlated and reflect the highorder construct of transformational leadership [6, 75, 76].
Ratings are completed on a 1 to 5 scale, with 1
representing “Not at all” and 5 representing “Frequently,
if not always”. In the present study, the reliability
coefficient (Cronbach’s alpha) of the transformational
leadership scale is 0.92.
3.2.2 Leader-member exchange (LMX)
This variable is assessed using seven items based on
the member version of leader-member exchange
questionnaires developed and used in prior research [77-80].
Respondents indicate the extent to which the items
characterized the quality of their dyadic relationship with
their supervisors. Ratings are completed on a 1 to 7 scale,
with 1 representing “to a very low extent” and 7
representing “to a very high extent”. In the present study,
the reliability coefficient (Cronbach’s alpha) of the LMX
scale is 0.902.
3.2.3 Intrinsic motivation
The intrinsic motivation scale in this paper is from
WPI (the Work Preference Inventory) scales with 15
items and 2 components – enjoyment and challenge [81].
Ratings are completed on a 1 to 5 scale, with 1
representing “Not at all” and 5 representing “Frequently,
if not always”. In the present study, the reliability
coefficient (Cronbach’s alpha) of the intrinsic motivation
scale is 0.814.
3.2.4 Outcome variables
Satisfaction on the job is measured using a fiveitem scale developed by Bacharach, Bamberger, and
Conley (1991). This general job satisfaction scale
“emphasizes the match between expectations and
perceived reality for broad aspects of the job taken as a
whole” [82]. This scale is also used in other empirical
studies between LMX and job satisfaction [77].
Appropriate to the context of this study, items are
justified based on the tasks in educational research teams.
Ratings are completed on a 1 to 5 scale, with 1
representing “very dissatisfied” and 5 representing “very
satisfied”. In the present study, the reliability coefficient
(Cronbach’s alpha) of the job satisfaction scale is 0.912.
Based on the measurement of individual creativity
in Farmer et al.’s work, four items are justified to
measure the individual creativity in this study [83].
Ratings are completed on a 1 to 5 scale, with 1
representing “Not at all” and 5 representing “Frequently,
if not always”. In the present study, the reliability
coefficient (Cronbach’s alpha) of the individual
creativity scale is 0.84.
Results: Among the 258 valid respondents, 58.5% are
male, and 41.5% are female. The mean of age and team
size are 24.8 and 8.37, respectively. The descriptive
statistics of and correlations between each variables
measured in this study were presented in Table 1.
The results of the construct validity of each
construct using confirmatory factor analyses are
presented in Table 2. As shown, we tested each construct
with their recommended number of factors, and the good
of fitness shows that all the scales measured the
constructs well.
Table 1 Means, Standard deviations and correlations a
Variables
Mean
S.D.
TFM
TFM b
3.750
0.599
(0.920)
b
LMX
Intrinsic
Motivation
LMX
Job
Satisfaction
5.015
1.090
0.755 ***
(0.902)
Intrinsic Motivation
3.705
0.403
0.380 ***
0.360 ***
(0.814)
Job Satisfaction
3.324
0.755
0.464 ***
0.501 ***
0.216 ***
(0.912)
Individual Creativity
3.507
0.618
0.333 ***
0.361 ***
0.466 ***
0.531 ***
a
N=258; reliability coefficients for the scales are in parentheses along the diagonal.
b
TFM Transformational Mentorship, LMX Leader-member exchange
Individual
Creativity
(0.840)
* p<.05 , ** p<.01 ,*** p<.001
Table 2 Results of confirmatory factor analyses
# of
factors
2
df
GFI
TLI
CFI
RMSEA
CMIN/df
TFM
4
147.263
91
0.932
0.964
0.973
0.049
1.618
LMX
Intrinsic
motivation
1
23.026
11
0.976
0.978
0.989
0.065
2
146.41
83
0.927
0.948
0.959
0.055
1.764
Job satisfaction
Individual
Creativity
1
6.492
4
0.99
0.993
0.997
0.049
1.623
1
13.772
2
0.976
0.92
0.973
Constructs
2.093
0.151
6.886
Table 3 Comparison of Structural Equation Models
Model
Description
2
df
Model 1
1649.154
1001
1648.465
1000
1645.481
Model 5
TFL IM+LMXJS+IC
TFL IM+LMXJS+IC
& TFLIC
TFL IM+LMXJS+IC
& TFLJS
TFLIM+LMXJS+IC
& TFL JS+IC
TFL+LMX+IMJS+IC
Model 6
JS+IC TFL+LMX+IM
Model 2
Model 3
Model 4
2
GFI
TLI
CFI
RMSEA
CMIN/df
0.792
0.900
0.907
0.050
1.648
0.689
0.792
0.900
0.907
0.050
1.648
1000
3.673
0.792
0.900
0.907
0.050
1.645
1644.542
999
4.612
0.792
0.900
0.907
0.050
1.646
1915.427
1001
0.774
0.858
0.869
0.060
1.914
1903.990
1001
0.771
0.860
0.870
0.059
1.902
Note: TFL Transformational leadership; LMX  Leader-member exchange; IMIntrinsic motivation; JS Job satisfaction; IC
The univariate correlations between
transformational mentorship and individual creativity
and job satisfaction (provide preliminary evidence to
support Hypothesis 1, which states that transformational
mentorship in ERT has positive relationship with the
mentees’ job satisfaction and individual creativity. To
test the following hypotheses, we use the structural
equation models, whose results are presented in Table 3.
job satisfaction and individual creativity. This model
does not have the direct paths from transformational
leadership to job satisfaction and individual creativity.
Because we speculate there is relationship between job
satisfaction and individual creativity, we add the path
from job satisfaction and individual creativity in
transformational leadership and job satisfaction and
individual creativity in model 1-4. As Table 3 shows, all
fit indexes showed a good fit (2 =1649.154, df =1001,
RMSEA =0.05, GFI = 0.792, TLI = 0.9, and CFI =0.907).
Model 1, our baseline model, represents a fully
mediating model. We specify paths from
transformational leadership to LMX and intrinsic
motivation and from LMX and intrinsic motivation to
Against the baseline model, we nest three nested
models. In model 2, we add to a direct path from
transformational leadership to job satisfaction. Model 3
is also identical to model 1, except for the addition of a
4.
Results
direct path from transformational leadership to individual
creativity. In our third nested model, model 4, we add to
two direct paths from transformational leadership to both
job satisfaction and individual creativity. As shown in
Table 4, the differences between chi-squares are not
significant for model 1 compared with models 2, 3 and 4.
Under the principle of model parsimony, therefore, these
results suggest that model 1 best fits our data. We
conclude that leader-member exchange and intrinsic
motivation mediated the relationship between
transformational mentorship and both job satisfaction
and individual creativity. Model 5 and 6 are alternative
models that are not nested within the above four models.
As shown in Table 4, the alternative models are not as
good as the nested models. Figure 1 shows the path
coefficients between the variables. The coefficient of the
path from transformational leadership to LMX is
significant (β = 0.856, p<0.001), as is the coefficient of
the path from LMX to job satisfaction (β = 0.549,
p<0.001), which supported hypotheses 2. The coefficient
of the path from transformational leadership to intrinsic
motivation is significant (β = 0.448, p<0.001), as is the
coefficient of the path from intrinsic motivation to
individual creativity (β = 0.376, p<0.001), which support
hypotheses 3. In addition, there is significant coefficient
of the path from job satisfaction and individual creativity.
LMX
0.549***
Job Satisfaction
0.856***
Transformational
Mentorship
0.517***
0.448***
Intrinsic
Motivation
0.376***
Individual
Creativity
Figure 1: Results of structural equation modeling on the
mediating effect of LMX and intrinsic motivation
5.
Conclusion and discussion
Mentorship in educational research teams is as
important as leadership in other teams in common
organizational settings. This study investigated the
effectiveness of transformational leadership in a special
context – education research team which is an important
context for developing the potential researchers in the
relevant fields based on human capital theory.
Recently, how transformational leadership affects
performance has begun to attract empirical scrutiny.
Early evidence suggested that transformational
leadership affects performance indirectly via several
mediating mechanisms, like self-efficacy beliefs [23, 84],
affective commitment [85], trust in management [85],
LMX[24], empowerment [86], job characteristics[87] and
intrinsic motivation in sports setting [18]. This study
contributes to the leadership theory by investigating the
conceptual and empirical links between transformational
leadership and leader-member exchange. Another
mediator—intrinsic motivation shows that how
transformational leadership influences on the members’
creativity in a special context.
The findings in the current study are consistent with
the notions that: (1) transformational leadership
behaviors are social currency, nourishing high-quality
LMX; (2) transformational leadership is effective in
most contexts and positively related with the outcome
variables such as job satisfaction; (3) transformational
leaders enhance member receptivity to role-expanding
offers and extra-role behaviors through processes of
personal and /or social identification [24]; (4)
transformational leaders enhance the intrinsic motivation
of members which infers to an enhancement in members’
creativity.
6.
Limitation and future study
Firstly, using the graduate student samples to test a
general theory limits the generalization of the results.
Although we articulate that the investigation is for the
educational research teams, we hope that the results
could be generic across the samples, however, the
sample limits the generalization of this study. In the
future, the framework of the study should be testified in
other team settings,
Secondly, our study was cross-sectional design
which made it difficult to understand the dynamic
process how LMX formed from the beginning and
forged by the leadership behaviors. In the future, the
longitudinal design is needed for understanding the
process. Furthermore, although there are linkages
between transformational leadership and LMX from the
theoretical perspective, the empirical evidences are
limited [24, 51, 52]. This paper adds evidence to this theory
linkage and we also consider that the relationship
between transformational leadership and LMX will be
moderated by the characteristics of individual differences
such as the personality which could be tested in the
future studies.
7.
Practical implications
Overall, our findings suggest that effective leadership
express their transformational behaviors within a
personal,
dynamic relational exchange context [24] in the
educational research teams. Job satisfaction and
individual creativity are the important indexes reflecting
the performance and effectiveness of educational
research teams and leadership style is one of the vital
factors to influence these performance and effectiveness
in ERT. The findings in this study provide evidence to
suggest a transformational leader in ERT because its
effectiveness in building the high-quality LMX and
enhancing the intrinsic motivation of followers, which
are the key process predicting the positive influence on
the outcome variables, in this study, the job satisfaction
and creativity.
Additionally, our findings provide insights into how
high-quality leader-member exchange relationships can
be developed and how it enhances the intrinsic
motivation of followers. The previous LMX literature
focuses strongly on the outcomes of high-quality leadermember exchange, giving less attention to its antecedents.
The extent transformational leadership literature has a
primary focus on performance-enhancing leader
behaviors. The intrinsic motivation literature focuses on
the rewards and external limitation’s influence on the
intrinsic motivation. Our findings suggest that (1)
transformational leadership are instrumental to
developing high-quality LMX relationships [24]; and (2)
the appropriate leadership – the transformational
leadership also enhances the intrinsic motivation of
followers. For the educational implication, results of this
study shed some lights on how to create a nurturing
context to increase the members’ creativity via
leadership behaviors in order to better the quality of
higher education.
References
[1] Sun, J., Understanding the impact of perceived
principal leadership style on teacher commitment.
International Studies in Educational Administration,
2004. 32(2): p. 18-31.
[2] Schreiber, C. and K. Carley, Leadership style as an
enabler of organizational complex functioning.
Emergence: Complexity and Organization, 2006.
8(4): p. 61-77.
[3] Avolio, B. and B. Bass, Multifactor Leadership
Questionnaire: Mannual and sampler set (3rd
ed.)1995, Lincoln, NE: Mind Garden.
[4] Downton, J., Rebel Leadership1973, New York:
Free Press.
[5] Burns, J.M., Leadership1978, New Yorker: Harper
& Row.
[6] Avolio, B.J. and B.M. Bass, Re-examining the
components of transformational and transactional
leadership using the Multifactor Leadership
Questionnaire. Journal of Occupational &
Organizational Psychology, 1999. 72(4): p. 441-462.
[7] Bass, B.M., Leadership and Performance beyond
Expectations1985, New York: Free Press.
[8] Podsakoff, P.M., S.B. MacKenzie, and W.H.
Bommer, Transformational leader behaviors and
substitutes for leadership as determinants of
employee satisfaction, commitment, trust, and
organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of
Management, 1996. 22(2): p. 259-298.
[9] Yukl, G., Leadership in organizations (6th ed.)2006,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
[10] Rafferty, A.E. and M.A. Griffin, Dimensions of
transformational leadership: Conceptual and
empirical extensions. Leadership Quarterly, 2004.
15(3): p. 329-354.
[11] Judge, T.A. and R.F. Piccolo, Transformational and
transactional leadership: A meta-analytic test of
their relative validity. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 2004. 89(5): p. 755-768.
[12] Bass, B. and R. Riggio, Transformational
leadership2006, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
[13] Carless, S.A., Assessing the discriminant validity of
transformational leadership behaviour as measured
by the MLQ. Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, 1998. 71: p. 353-358.
[14] Hsu, C.-H., A structural equation modeling analysis
of transformational leadership, organizational
culture and organizational effectiveness in
Taiwanese sport/fitness organizations, 2002, United
States Sports Academy: United States -- Alabama.
p. 137.
[15] Lowe, K.B., K.G. Kroeck, and N. Sivasubramaniam,
Effectiveness correlates of transformational and
transactional leadership: A meta-analytic review of
the MLQ literature. Leadership Quarterly, 1996.
7(3): p. 385-425.
[16] Bass, B.M., Transformational Leadership:
Industrial, Military, and Educational Impact1998,
Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
[17] Carter, M.Z., et al., TRANSFORMATIONAL
LEADERSHIP AND FOLLOWERS'
PERFORMANCE: JOINT MEDIATING EFFECTS
OF LEADER-MEMBER EXCHANGE AND
INTERACTIONAL JUSTICE. Academy of
Management Proceedings, 2009: p. 1-6.
[18] Charbonneau, D., J. Barling, and E.K. Kelloway,
Transformational Leadership and Sports
Performance: The Mediating Role of Intrinsic
Motivation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology,
2001. 31(7): p. 1521-1534.
[19] Chung-Kai, L.I. and H. Chia-Hung, THE
INFLUENCE OF TRANSFORMATIONAL
LEADERSHIP ON WORKPLACE
RELATIONSHIPS AND JOB PERFORMANCE.
Social Behavior & Personality: An International
Journal, 2009. 37(8): p. 1129-1142.
[20] Dvir, T., et al., Impact of transformational
leadership on follower development and
performance: A field experiment. Academy of
Management Journal, 2002. 45(4): p. 735-744.
[21] Gooty, J., et al., In the Eyes of the Beholder:
Transformational Leadership, Positive
Psychological Capital, and Performance. Journal
of Leadership & Organizational Studies (Sage
Publications Inc.), 2009. 15(4): p. 353-367.
[22] Sivanathan, N., N. Turner, and J. Barling.
EFFECTS OF TRANSFORMATIONAL
LEADERSHIP TRAINING ON EMPLOYEE
SAFETY PERFORMANCE: A QUASIEXPERIMENT STUDY. Academy of Management.
[23] Walumbwa, F.O., B.J. Avolio, and W. Zhu, HOW
TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP WEAVES
ITS INFLUENCE ON INDIVIDUAL JOB
PERFORMANCE: THE ROLE OF
IDENTIFICATION AND EFFICACY BELIEFS.
Personnel Psychology, 2008. 61(4): p. 793-825.
[24] Wang, H., et al., Leader-member exchange as
a,mediator of the relationship between
transformational leadership and followers'
performance and organizational citizenship
behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 2005.
48(3): p. 420-432.
[25] Griffith, J., Relation of Principal Transformational
Leadership to School Staff Job Satisfaction, Staff
Turnover, and School Performance. Journal of
Educational Administration, 2004. 42(3): p. 333356.
[26] Kearney, E., Age differences between leader and
followers as a moderator of the relationship
between transformational leadership and team
performance. Journal of Occupational &
Organizational Psychology, 2008. 81(4): p. 803-811.
[27] Koh, W.L., R.M. Steers, and J.R. Terborg, The
effects of transformational leadership on teacher
attitudes and student performance in Singapore.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 1995. 16(4): p.
319-333.
[28] Purvanova, R.K., J.E. Bono, and J. Dzieweczynski,
Transformational Leadership, Job Characteristics,
and Organizational Citizenship Performance.
Human Performance, 2006. 19(1): p. 1-22.
[29] Dionne, S.D., et al., Transformational leadership
and team performance. Journal of Organizational
Change Management, 2004. 17(2): p. 177-193.
[30] Howell, J.M. and B.J. Avolio, Transformational
Leadership, Transactional Leadership, Locus of
Control, and Support for Innovation: Key
Predictors of Consolidated-Business-Unit
Performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1993.
78(6): p. 891-902.
[31] Lim, B.-C. and R.E. Ployhart, Transformational
leadership: relations to the five-factor model and
team performance in typical and maximum contexts.
The Journal Of Applied Psychology, 2004. 89(4): p.
610-621.
[32] Pillai, R. and E.A. Williams, Transformational
leadership, self-efficacy, group cohesiveness,
commitment, and performance. Journal of
[33]
[34]
[35]
[36]
[37]
[38]
[39]
[40]
[41]
[42]
Organizational Change Management, 2004. 17(2):
p. 144-159.
Jung, D.I. and J.J. Sosik, Transformational
Leadership in Work Groups: The Role of
Empowerment, Cohesiveness, and CollectiveEfficacy on Perceived Group Performance. Small
Group Research, 2002. 33(3): p. 313.
García-Morales, V.J., F.J. Lloréns-Montes, and A.J.
Verdú-Jover, The Effects of Transformational
Leadership on Organizational Performance
through Knowledge and Innovation. British Journal
of Management, 2008. 19(4): p. 299-319.
García-Morales, V.J., F. Matías-Reche, and N.
Hurtado-Torres, Influence of transformational
leadership on organizational innovation and
performance depending on the level of
organizational learning in the pharmaceutical
sector. Journal of Organizational Change
Management, 2008. 21(2): p. 188-212.
Matzler, K., et al., The Relationship between
Transformational Leadership, Product Innovation
and Performance in SMEs. Journal of Small
Business & Entrepreneurship, 2008. 21(2): p. 139151.
Ipinmoroti, O.A., Exhibition of Transformational
Leadership Behavior by Nigerian College Coaches:
Effects on Athletes' Satisfaction on Individual
Performance. Exhibition of Transformational
Leadership Behavior by Nigerian College Coaches:
Effects on Athletes' Satisfaction on Individual
Performance, 2007: p. 1-1.
Keller, R.T., Transformational Leadership and the
Performance of Research and Development Project
Groups. Journal of Management, 1992. 18(3): p.
489.
Keller, R.T., Transformational leadership,
initiating structure, and substitutes for leadership:
a longitudinal study of research and development
project team performance. The Journal Of Applied
Psychology, 2006. 91(1): p. 202-210.
Arendt, L.A., TRANSFORMATIONAL
LEADERSHIP AND FOLLOWER CREATIVITY:
THE MODERATING EFFECT OF LEADER
HUMOR. Review of Business Research, 2009. 9(4):
p. 100-106.
Chen, C.-H.V., L. Hung-Hui, and T. Ya-Yun,
Transformational leadership and creativity:
exploring the mediating effects of creative thinking
and intrinsic motivation. International Journal of
Management & Enterprise Development, 2009.
6(2): p. 198-211.
Gong, Y., J.-C. Huang, and J.-L. Farh, EMPLOYEE
LEARNING ORIENTATION,
TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP, AND
EMPLOYEE CREATIVITY: THE MEDIATING
ROLE OF EMPLOYEE CREATIVE SELFEFFICACY. Academy of Management Journal,
2009. 52(4): p. 765-778.
[43] Shin, S.J. and J. Zhou, When is educational
specialization heterogeneity related to creativity in
research and development teams?
Transformational leadership as a moderator. The
Journal Of Applied Psychology, 2007. 92(6): p.
1709-1721.
[44] Shung Jae, S. and Z. Jing, TRANSFORMATIONAL
LEADERSHIP, CONSERVATION, AND
CREATIVITY: EVIDENCE FROM KOREA.
Academy of Management Journal, 2003. 46(6): p.
703-714.
[45] Sosik, J.J., S.S. Kahai, and B.J. Avolio,
Transformational Leadership and Dimensions of
Creativity: Motivating Idea Generation in
Computer-Mediated Groups. Creativity Research
Journal, 1998. 11(2): p. 111.
[46] 46. Gumusluoglu, L. and A. Ilsev,
Transformational leadership, creativity, and
organizational innovation. Journal of Business
Research, 2009. 62(4): p. 461-473.
[47] Dansereau, F., G. Graen, and W.J. Haga,
VERTICAL DYAD LINKAGE APPROACH TO
LEADERSHIP WITHIN FORMAL
ORGANIZATIONS - LONGITUDINAL
INVESTIGATION OF ROLE MAKING PROCESS.
Organizational Behavior and Human Performance,
1975. 13(1): p. 46-78.
[48] Dienesch, R.M. and R.C. Liden, LEADERMEMBER EXCHANGE MODEL OF
LEADERSHIP - A CRITIQUE AND FURTHER
DEVELOPMENT. Academy of Management
Review, 1986. 11(3): p. 618-634.
[49] Graen, G.B., Role making processes within complex
organization, in Handbook of industrial and
organizational psychology, M.D. Dunnette, Editor
1976, Rand-McNally: Chicago. p. 1201-1245.
[50] Deluga, R.J., SUPERVISOR TRUST BUILDING,
LEADER MEMBER EXCHANGE AND
ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOR.
Journal of Occupational and Organizational
Psychology, 1994. 67: p. 315-326.
[51] Deluga, R.J., The relationship of leader-member
exchanges with laissez-faire, transactional, and
transformational leadership in naval environments,
in Impact of leadership, K.E. Clark, M.B. Clark,
and D.P. Campbell, Editors. 1992, Center for
Creative Leadership: Greensboro, NC. p. 237-247.
[52] Howell, J.M. and K.E. Hall-Merenda, The ties that
bind: The impact of leader-member exchange,
transformational and transactional leadership, and
distance on predicting follower performance.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 1999. 84(5): p.
680-694.
[53] Graen, G. and W. Schiemann, Leader–member
agreement: A vertical dyad linkage approach.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 1978. 63(2): p.
206-212.
[54] Sansone, C. and J.M. Harackiewicz, Intrinsic and
extrinsic motivation: the search for optimal
[55]
[56]
[57]
[58]
[59]
[60]
[61]
[62]
[63]
[64]
[65]
[66]
[67]
[68]
[69]
motivation and performance2000, San Diego:
Academic Press, cop.
Deci, E.L. and R.M. Ryan, Intrinsic motivation and
self-determination in human behavior1985, New
York, NY: Plenum.
Gagne, M. and E.L. Deci, Self-determination theory
and work motivation. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 2005. 26(4): p. 331-362.
Borzaga, C. and E. Tortia, Worker motivations, job
satisfaction, and loyalty in public and nonprofit
social services. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector
Quarterly, 2006. 35(2): p. 225-248.
Bakker, A.B. and E. Demerouti, The Job DemandsResources model: state of the art. Journal of
Managerial Psychology, 2007. 22(3): p. 309-328.
Moynihan, D.P. and S.K. Pandey, The role of
organizations in fostering public service motivation.
Public Administration Review, 2007. 67(1): p. 4053.
Millette, V. and M. Gagne, Designing volunteers'
tasks to maximize motivation, satisfaction and
performance: The impact of job characteristics on
volunteer engagement. Motivation and Emotion,
2008. 32(1): p. 11-22.
Vansteenkiste, M., R. Ryan, and E.L. Deci, Selfdetermination theory and the explanatory role of
psychological needs in human well-being, in
Capabilities and happiness, L. Bruni, F. Comim,
and M. Pugno, Editors. 2008, Oxford University
Press: Oxford.
Rummel, A. and R. Feinberg, COGNITIVE
EVALUATION THEORY - A META-ANALYTIC
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE. Social Behavior
and Personality, 1988. 16(2): p. 147-164.
Kanungo, R.N. and M. Mendonca, Ethical
leadership in three dimensions. Journal of Human
Values, 1998. 4: p. 133-148.
Richer, S.F. and R.J. Vallerand, Supervisors'
interactional styles and subordinates' intrinsic and
extrinsic motivation. Journal of Social Psychology,
1995. 135(6): p. 707-722.
Conti, R., M.A. Collins, and M.L. Picariello, The
impact of competition on intrinsic motivation and
creativity: considering gender, gender segregation
and gender role orientation. Personality and
Individual Differences, 2001. 31(8): p. 1273-1289.
Dewett, T., Linking intrinsic motivation, risk taking,
and employee creativity in an R&D environment. R
& D Management, 2007. 37(3): p. 197-208.
Eisenberger, R. and L. Shanock, Rewards, intrinsic
motivation, and creativity: A case study of
conceptual and methodological isolation. Creativity
Research Journal, 2003. 15(2): p. 121-130.
Hennessey, B.A. and T.M. Amabile, Reward,
intrinsic motivation, and creativity. American
Psychologist, 1998. 53(6): p. 674-675.
Koestner, R., et al., SETTING LIMITS ON
CHILDRENS BEHAVIOR - THE DIFFERENTIALEFFECTS OF CONTROLLING VS
[70]
[71]
[72]
[73]
[74]
[75]
[76]
[77]
[78]
INFORMATIONAL STYLES ON INTRINSIC
MOTIVATION AND CREATIVITY. Journal of
Personality, 1984. 52(3): p. 233-248.
Krop, H., EFFECTS OF EXTRINSIC
MOTIVATION INTRINSIC MOTIVATION AND
INTELLIGENCE ON CREATIVITY - A
FACTORIAL APPROACH. Journal of General
Psychology, 1969. 80(2): p. 259-&.
Prabhu, V., C. Sutton, and W. Sauser, Creativity
and certain personality traits: Understanding the
mediating effect of intrinsic motivation. Creativity
Research Journal, 2008. 20(1): p. 53-66.
Selart, M., et al., Effects of reward on selfregulation, intrinsic motivation and creativity.
Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research,
2008. 52(5): p. 439-458.
Zhang, X.M. and K.M. Bartol, LINKING
EMPOWERING LEADERSHIP AND EMPLOYEE
CREATIVITY: THE INFLUENCE OF
PSYCHOLOGICAL EMPOWERMENT, INTRINSIC
MOTIVATION, AND CREATIVE PROCESS
ENGAGEMENT. Academy of Management Journal,
2010. 53(1): p. 107-128.
Bass, B.M. and B.J. Avolio, Full range of
leadership: Manual for Multifactor Leadership
Questionnaire1997, Redwood City: CA: Mind
Garden.
Antonakis, J., B.J. Avolio, and N.
Sivasubramaniam, Context and leadership: an
examination of the nine-factor full-range leadership
theory using the Multifactor Leadership
Questionnaire. The Leadership Quarterly, 2003.
14(3): p. 261-295.
Bass, B.M., Transformational leadership:
Individual, military and educational impact1998,
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Janssen, O. and N.W. Van Yperen, Employees' goal
orientations, the quality of leader-member
exchange, and the outcomes of job performance
and job satisfaction. Academy of Management
Journal, 2004. 47(3): p. 368-384.
Liden, R.C. and G. Graen, Generalizability of the
vertical dyad linkage model of leadership.
[79]
[80]
[81]
[82]
[83]
[84]
[85]
[86]
[87]
Academy of Management Journal, 1980. 23(3): p.
451-465.
Scandura, T.A. and G.B. Graen, Moderating effects
of initial leader-member exchange status on the
effects of a leadership intervention. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 1984. 69(3): p. 428-436.
Wayne, S.J., L.M. Shore, and R.C. Liden,
Perceived organizational support and leadermember exchange: A social exchange perspective.
Academy of Management Journal, 1997. 40(1): p.
82-111.
Amabile, T.M., et al., The Work Preference
Inventory: Assessing intrinsic and extrinsic
motivational orientations. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 1994. 66(5): p. 950-967.
Bacharach, S.B., P. Bamberger, and S. Conley,
Work-home conflict among nurses and engineers:
mediating the impact of role stress on burnout and
satisfaction at work. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 1991. 12(1): p. 39-53.
Farmer, S.M., P. Tierney, and K. Kung-McIntyre,
Employee creativity in Taiwan: An application of
role identity theory. Academy of Management
Journal, 2003. 46(5): p. 618-630.
Kirkpatrick, S.A. and E.A. Locke, Direct and
indirect effects of three core charismatic leadership
components on performance and attitudes. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 1996. 81(1): p. 36-51.
Barling, J., T. Weber, and E.K. Kelloway, Effects of
transformational leadership training on attitudinal
and financial outcomes: A field experiment. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 1996. 81(6): p. 827-832.
Avolio, B.J., et al., Transformational leadership
and organizational commitment: mediating role of
psychological empowerment and moderating role
of structural distance. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 2004. 25(8): p. 951-968.
Piccolo, R.F. and J.A. Colquitt, Transformational
leadership and job behaviors: The mediating role
of core job characteristics. Academy of
Management Journal, 2006. 49(2): p. 327-340.