Do leadership styles influence employee psychological well-being? : a systematic review

(1)

Do leadership styles influence employee

psychological well-being?

A systematic review

Amsterdam, June 30, 2014

J.M. de Groot Student number: 10034323

Thesis seminar Business studies Supervisor: Dr. C.K. Buengeler Academic year: 2013-2014 Semester 2, Block 3

(2)

Abstract

The present thesis has systematically reviewed papers from scientific journals in mainly business, management, psychological and health fields. The main objective was to give an overview of empirical studies on the effect of leadership styles and employee psychological outcomes. By clustering leadership styles with similar characteristics together, the study tried to answer four research questions. Articles were collected from three online databases and coded for their relevance. 72 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria of being empirical and written in English. Results indicate that there exists a positive relationship between both new paradigm leadership styles (i.e. transformational and charismatic leadership) and ethical leadership styles (i.e. authentic, ethical and servant leadership) and employee psychological well-being (i.e. positive affect, life satisfaction and happiness). Traditional leadership styles (i.e. transactional leadership) could not be directly linked with employee well-being. Only contingent reward seemed to have this positive relationship with well-being. Lastly, this review took a first step in systematically linking followers’ well-being to leader well-being. Results indicate that followers’ mood plays a role in perceiving the leaders’ leadership style and also the leaders’ affectivity. Subsequently, these findings have important organizational implications. Maintaining employee well-being will benefit organizational commitment and satisfaction. Furthermore, as the findings suggest, organizational leaders will also benefit from employee well-being.

(3)

Foreword

This thesis was written for my Bachelor degree in Business studies at the University of Amsterdam. After four months of preparing and writing, I’m finally satisfied with the result. During this period I had help from some special people whom I would like to thank. First of all, I would like to thank my supervisor, Dr. C.K. Buengeler, for sharing her advice and insights of the research field. Her guidance sparked my motivation to solve the problems I encountered during the way. Secondly, I would like to thank my parents for supporting me and keeping me extra motivated to finish this thesis. Finally, my special gratitude goes to Alexander de Groot, for continuously joining me to the library. And with whom I could discuss any ideas on the topic.

(5)

Introduction

Much research has been conducted on the effects of employee psychological well-being and success (Boehm and Lyubomirsky, 2008; Fischer, 2010 and Achor, 2011) . Evidence from these studies shows that having a positive mindset, or being happy, positively affects your productivity, creativity and job satisfaction (Lyubomirsky et al., 2005). In the past decade this has been a significant finding in different academic fields, for example in behavioral

psychology (Diener, 2000) and behavioral economics.

Definition of psychological well-being

Well-being is described as people’s emotional and cognitive evaluation of their lives, including what lay people call happiness, peace, fulfillment, and life satisfaction (Diener, Oishi and Lucas, 2003). Studies on the effect of organizational environment on workers’ well-being has been characterized by two streams (Harter et al., 2003). The first stream originates from the study of stress and health. This stream indicates that well-being can be hindered by too much challenge or too little challenge (Harter et al., 2003). As Harter et al. (2003) summarizes: “When demands exceed or fall below the resources, individuals experience undesirable states (e.g., strain or boredom) that hinder the quality and quantity of performance as well as their well-being.” The second stream draws for the behavioral, cognitive and health benefits of positive feelings and positive perceptions (Harter et al., 2003;Warr, 1999). In terms of employee demands, when slightly exceeded, individuals experience positive emotional states (e.g., pleasure, joy, energy) and they perceive themselves as growing, engaged and productive (Harter, et al., 2003; Waterman, 1993).Supervisors and leaders contribute a lot to the internal organizational environment. It is the quality of the relationship with an employee that causes well-being.

When examining studies of leadership, many papers use different scales to measure well-being. Frequently used are the Positive and Negative Affect Scale (PANAS) and the Job-related Affective Well-being (JAWS) for measuring affectivity or mood, General Health Questionnaire (GHQ) for physical and psychological well-being and the Quality of Work Life scale (QWL) to see if work environment, job requirements and supervisor behavior meet the employee need. It has to be acknowledged that not all papers have defined well-being as the above stated definition by Diener, Oishi and Lucas (2003). So in line with above stated

(6)

measurement, this review has also included positive affect and positive mood as part of the well-being definition.

As previously mentioned, the quality of the leader-follower relationship matters a great deal to the well-being of the employee. The way a leader behaves is called the

leadership style of the leader. It is clear that this is an important determinant that influences employee happiness, since manager-employee interactions are the most common in

organizations. One can find an extensive amount of literature dedicated to manager-employee (also often defined as ‘leader-follower’) relations and its influence on stress, performance and well-being. According to Piccolo and Buengeler (2013) one of the most recent and most cited definitions of leadership is given by Yukl (2006) as “the process of influencing others to understand and agree about what needs to be done and how to do it, and the process of facilitating individual and collective efforts to accomplish shared objectives”. Hence, leadership is about influencing people to perform well in an organization.

The academic literature distinguishes between many types of leadership, for example path-goal leadership, team leadership, empowering leadership or authentic leadership. Historically, leadership has been the interest of many academics across the academic world (Burns, 2003). The above mentioned leadership styles are a few of the many leadership forms developed over the years. However, one of the most studied leadership types is

transformational leadership, as introduced by Bass (1985). He contrasted two forms of leadership, namely transactional and transformational leadership. These two practices of leadership can be seen as two ends of a continuum, where a leader can use a combination of the two distinct styles (Kirkbride, 2006). On the one hand, transactional leadership constitutes an exchange of work for some reward. One can suggest this to be the more traditional type of leadership. Also, what is typical for transactional leadership is that it mostly creates extrinsic motivation of the employee and does therefore not significantly affect happiness (Bass,1977). On the other hand, transformational leadership constitutes more than an exchange of rewards for work. As this type of leader is inspiring, engaged and motivational, employees tend to behave in an intrinsic way of working and will develop longer lasting job satisfaction and job successes (Bass, 1985). As mentioned before, there exist a wide scale of different leadership styles. Some of these leadership styles have a ‘transformational character’, in a sense that they tend to transform relationships between them and the employee. Styles which fall under this new leadership paradigm are, for example, charismatic leadership and visionary leadership.

Leadership has been linked to many different outcomes, such as an increase in

(7)

atmosphere (Limsila and Ogunlana, 2008; Lok and Crawford, 2004). Furthermore, on group level, leadership has positively been associated with an increase in group performance (Jung and Avolio, 1999; Jung and Sosik, 2002). In general it is accepted that a leaders’ interaction with the individual or group changes the level of these above mentioned outcomes.

The question arises whether leadership contributes not only to positive feelings at work (i.e., job satisfaction), but also to happiness, life satisfaction, and positive affect. This means that the way a leader behaves may not only affect business outcomes, but also the psychological well-being of an individual. Prior research has less focused on this linkage, even though it seems highly plausible that this link exists. For example, Avey et al. (2012) found a positive association between ethical leadership and employee positive affect. Other studies found positive linkage between transformational leadership and employee well-being (Halverson, 2004; Krishnan, 2005; McMurray, 2009). Knowing if, and how, leadership effects well-being is important because of the possible influences it has on the organization. For example, it is reasonable to suggest that employee well-being will decrease its turnover, increase organizational loyalty and commitment. Employees will be motivated to work well, which will evidently increase the organizational value.

So although there has been some research on this link, a systematic approach to review these studies is missing. The current study aims to fill this gap by reviewing existing literature on this topic. It will try to structure the different kinds of leadership styles by clustering them in the following terms: new paradigm leadership, traditional leadership and ethical orientated leadership styles. These clusters will be further explained in the following section.

Furthermore, to review an even newer topic, this study will look at the possibility of a reverse causality between a leader and follower. Meaning that there exist a linkage between follower behavior and leaders’ style (and consequently his performance). Some articles have found evidence that employees’ positive affect increases positive leader evaluations. Others suggest that employee affectivity will affect leaders’ mood. This follower-leader relationship can best be examined by looking at the Leader-Member exchange (LMX) which addresses the

relationship between the two constructs. Recent studies have found evidence that through this link followers effect leader.

The four clusters will be examined in the next section and address four research questions. It will start with looking at the new paradigm leadership styles and end with the follower-leader relationship.

(8)

One of the most studied theories is the Transformational leadership theory (Bass, 1999a; Bass, 1999b; Bass & Riggio, 2006, Skakon et al., 2010). Bass and Avolio (1998) define

transformational leadership as a leader’s ability to see needed change, creating a vision and motivating followers to execute the task ahead. Looking at the literature one could suggest that there are multiple ‘Transformational oriented styles’, of which the most reviewed are Transformational leadership (Cherry, Davis, and Thorndyke, 2011; Connelly and Ruark 2010; Seo et al., 2012; Chi and Tsai, 2011), Charismatic leadership (Johnson, 2009; Naidoo and Lord, 2008; Parry and Kempster, 2014) and Visionary Leadership (Groves, 2006; Rowe, 2001; Langley, 2012). These styles can be summarized as new paradigm leadership styles.

According to the research of Bass and Avolio (1998) a leader can transform his follower by engaging in different leadership behaviors. The four elements of

Transformational leadership are: Individualized consideration- the leaders shows

consideration for each of his followers, listens to their thoughts and problems and promotes self development (Kirkbride, 2008); Intellectual stimulation- the leader stimulates the follower to work on their own idea’s, promoting solutions the follower thought of; Inspirational motivation- the leaders compels followers with a vision they can relate to, motivate them to push themselves to the limit and creates a purpose for their work; Idealized influence- the last element in the transformational ladder explains how the leader can be a role model. He will demonstrate unusual competence, celebrates follower’s achievements and using his power for positive gain (Bass and Avolio, 1998; Bass and Riggio, 2006; Kirkbride, 2008).

Charismatic and visionary leadership have many overlapping properties with

transformational leadership. Similarly to transformational leadership, a charismatic leader will inspire and motivate followers in achieving a specific goal. Furthermore, followers will view a charismatic leader as their role model, imitating the leader’s behavior, accept the leader’s task objectives, comply with the leader’s requests, and put in some extra effort to please the leader (Yukl, 1999). These behaviors are identical to a transformational leader’s idealized influence. Similarly, visionary leadership will create the same follower outcomes in a similar way. A difference may be that visionary leadership is narrower than the other two, focusing more on the vision component. It is argued that the difference between transformational and charismatic, or visionary leadership lies in the dependency of followers. As Yukl (1999) stated: “Strong personal identiﬁcation creates loyal, obedient followers, but it may inhibit them from providing feedback to the leader or showing initiative. They will be reluctant to disagree with leader, criticize the leader’s plans, or deviate from them. They will tend to

(9)

ignore or rationalize any evidence that the plans and policies proposed by their leader are unrealistic and impractical” (p. 294). In turn it is believed that these followers would not be able to work in the same way without their leader to guide them. This seems not the case with transformational leader, since these leaders motivate followers to develop their own ideas, which in turn leads to a high degree of self-efficacy. However it is highly reasonable to suggest that dependency may also be created by transformational leadership. The absence of this type of leader may inhibit a decrease in motivation and performance, similar to the absence of a charismatic leader.

Ignoring the negative outcomes of an absent leader, it is clear that the link to psychological well-being is based on the interaction between the leader and follower. The leader inspires, motivates and cares about his employee and, as a consequence, transforms the behaviors and feelings of the individual. The same seems to exist in groups, although well-being outcomes may differ if the leader is chosen undemocratically (De Cremer et al., 2004). Seeing the interactions between leader and followers, it is very likely that Transformational, Charismatic and Visionary leadership positively affect employee psychological well-being. Therefore the first research question is:

Q1: What is the link between new paradigm leadership styles(including leader-member exchange) and employee psychological well-being?

Traditional leadership style and positive employee well-being

Transactional leadership, a more traditional form of leadership, has to a lesser extent been researched in recent literature (MacKenzie, Podsakoff and Rich, 2001). It seems that in the past two decades leadership literature in tendency focused more on transforming leadership styles instead of transactional based leadership (Avolio, Bass and Jung, 1999; Eagly, Johannesen-Schmidt and Van Engen, 2003). By definition, transactional leadership is described as an exchange process based on the fulfillment of contractual obligations

(Antonakis, Avolio and Sivasubramaniam, 2003). This means that a leader will set up goals and objectives and will monitor the employee performing the job. In the end, the leader will reward or punish according the outcome (Antonakis, Avolio and Sivasubramaniam, 2003).

According to Bass and Avolio (1990) Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire,

transactional leadership is reflected by the following three factors. Firstly, Contingent reward leadership refers to a leader’s role to clarify task requirements and provide followers with material or psychological rewards contingent on the fulfillment of contractual obligations

(10)

(Judge and Piccolo, 2004). Secondly, active management by exception refers to actively monitoring of goals and see if standards are met. Finally, with passive management by exception, a leader will only intervene when mistakes have happened (Antonakis, Avolio and Sivasubramaniam, 2003; Bass and Avolio, 1990). Some studies mention associations between transactional leadership factors, especially contingent reward, and job satisfaction, less stress and lower chances of burnout (Judge and Piccolo, 2004; Kanste et al., 2007; Morrison et al., 1997; Shieh et al., 2001; Skakon et al., 2010). Although the focus of this study is not to examine stress and burnout, it seems relevant to include them in the review. The logic behind this decision lies in the assumption that less stress could mean an increase in well-being. One factor of the multifactor leadership questionnaire that is considered to be the most effective transactional behavior, is contingent reward (Judge and Piccolo, 2004). It is believed that setting specific goals and rewards will motivate employees up to a certain point (Avolio, 1999; Jugde and Piccolo, 2004).

Q2: What is the link between traditional leadership styles and employee psychological well-being?

Ethical leadership and positive employee well-being.

With the current interest in corporate social responsibility (Greenfield, 2004; Lindgreen and Swaen, 2010), being ethically responsible is increasingly becoming an important factor in leadership styles. This is evident from recent literature found in the leadership field

(Walumbwa et al., 2011; Mayer, Aquino and Greenbaum, 2012; Piccolo et al., 2010). Ethical leadership is defined by Brown, Treviño and Harrison (2005) as ‘‘the demonstration of normatively appropriate conduct through personal actions and interpersonal relationships, and the promotion of such conduct to followers through two-way communication, reinforcement, and decision making’’ (p. 120). The leader’s credibility is a crucial factor in potentially influencing followers’ trust and affective state (Piccolo et al., 2010; Yang, 2013). A leader earns this by treating his followers the same way, and showing no signs of self-enrichment (Yang, 2013).

One could say that ethical leadership is one of the styles receiving most research attention. However, other ethical orientated leadership styles are also found in the literature. Most notably these include authentic, servant and resonant leadership. Firstly authentic leaders are defined as individuals who have a moral character, deep awareness of their own and others values/perspectives and the context in which they operate, and are positive in their

(11)

outlook (Avolio et al., 2004; Bass and Steidlmeier, 1999; Gardner et al., 2005; Sendjaya et al., 2008). Secondly, servant leaders as defined by Greenleaf (2002) are those leaders who want to serve in the first place. Giving priority to followers’ need, the underlying assumption is to create more people who want to serve to create change. Lastly, resonant leaders are in tune with the people around them (McKee and Massimilian, 2006). As a consequence, they try to build strong trusting relationships with their followers and manage their own emotions productively (McKee and Massimilian, 2006).

Although these leadership styles share similarities with other transformational leadership styles, they are distinct in the way the leader is fulfilling his or her role in the relationship with the follower. Where a transformational leader would ultimately be

concerned with organizational objectives, the more ethical oriented leader would care for the people who he sees as followers (Stone, Russell, Patterson, 2004). Another difference is the way a leader exercises his role. A transformational leader will inspire followers to action, while, for example, a servant leader would be “as one who goes ahead and guide the way” (Greenleaf, 1977, p. 287).

Ethics has positively been linked to the organizational environment and its influence on employee satisfaction, commitment, performance or citizen behavior (Ofori, 2000; Treviño et al., 2000; Weaver and Treviño, 2001). Mayer et al. (2009) explained top management and supervisory ethical leadership with the use of social learning theory. In short they found that leadership influences members of the group. This resulted in lower levels of deviance and higher levels of organizational commitment. Therefore, it could be argued that the increase in psychological well-being is also a consequence of ethical leadership behavior, for there is a strong relationship with its followers. Being an ethical orientated leader might therefore positively affect employee well-being. Thus, the third question of interest is:

Q3: What is the link between Ethical orientated leadership styles and positive employee psychological well-being?

Followers’ influence on leaders

Not yet fully investigated, but not new in the leadership literature, is the thought that

followers influences leadership behavior (Howell and Shamir, 2005). Concretely this suggests that how the employee feels affects the way a leader feels, and most likely his psychological well-being. Little research has been conducted to test this relationship, since most of the leadership theories are ‘leader centric’, focusing on leadership traits and behaviors and their

(12)

impact on followers attitudes and behaviors (Howell and Shamir, 2005). However, reflecting on the relationship between leader-follower it is not unlikely that these two interact in

opposite directions. It is clear that leaders and followers are relational partners who work together towards a shared goal (Hollander, 1992; Johnson, 2008).

This interdependent relationship is not fully ignored in the more famous leadership theories, which are considered to be leader-centric. In transformational leadership theory followers are transformed into leaders, and both leader and follower will become more effective and ethical (Johnson, 2008). Burns (1978) who coined the term transforming leadership, notes: “Such leadership occurs when one or more person engage with others in such a way that leaders and followers raise one another to higher levels of motivation and morality” (p. 2). Here Burns suggests that leader and follower work together (raise one another) to better performance.

A model that also partly agrees with this relationship is the leader-member exchange (LMX) theory developed by Graen and Uhl-Bien (1995). This model recognizes the two-way interaction that exists between leader and follower, and emphasizes that both leader and follower determine the quality of their relationship (Howell and Shamir, 2005). Some

followers enjoy relationships with their leader that are marked by high levels of trust, support and mutual influence (Johnson, 2008). Followers in these high quality (high LMX)

relationships are more productive, satisfied and committed than their low LMX counterparts (Gerstner and Day, 1997; Johnson, 2008). Still this theory can still be considered to be leader-centric.

A theory that shifts the attention almost completely to followers is the Social Identity Theory (Lord and Brown, 2004). Here, leaders effectiveness is determined by how leaders speak to the self-images of followers (Van Knippenberg et al., 2004). This means that it is not obvious that leaders will influence followers, because followers need to relate to what the leader is saying. What seems to be consistent between many studies is the role of emotional contagion (Ashkanasy and Humphrey, 2011). In a systemic review by Ashkanasy and Humphrey (2011) it was found that emotional contagion causes the mutual feeling

experienced by leader and follower. Meaning that follower feelings will also transfer to the leader.

One can argue that the follower-centric relationship is equally important in the leadership theory. Even though there is no sufficient research linking this to well-being, it seems plausible that leaders affectivity changes due the psychological well-being of their follower (Johnson, 2008). Therefore this study also examines the following question:

(13)

Q4: What is the association between follower well-being (and LMX theory) and a leader’s psychological well-being?

Method

The present thesis has systematically reviewed papers from scientific journals in mainly business, management, psychological and health fields. This has been done by following the PRISMA statement by Moher et al. (2009). As defined by Moher et al. (2009): “A systematic review is a review of a clearly formulated question(s) that uses systematic and explicit

methods to identify, select, and critically appraise relevant research, and to collect and analyze data from the studies that are included in the review”. Although not intentionally, all papers are published between the years 2000 and 2014. The focus has been on three electronic databases. Two of these are scientific databases, namely the Business Source Premier and PsycINFO. These are valid academic databases recognized in the field of Organizational Behavior and Human Resources Management. The third database used is Google Scholar, which, as a search engine, gave a richer result on our search. To avoid having to review all these hits, I have decided to limit the search to the first ten pages of the suggested results.

Four sets of keywords were used for conducting searches in the three databases. In the case of PsycINFO, an advanced search was conducted, allowing for what the database calls a “Multi-field search”. The first set of keywords were Leadership AND happiness. The second set looked at Leadership AND Life Satisfaction. Lastly, Leadership AND Positive affect; Leadership AND Mood were the third and fourth set of keywords respectively. Afterwards the same procedure was done, but this time for the Business Source Premier. Papers were received on the 4th of April 2014.

This study used the free reference managing program Mendeley to export and safe our hits found in the databases. In an attempt to structure the search, hits of the individual

keyword-searches were saved in one folder. This way four folders, each containing the hits from the distinct search, were created to examine independently. From there on citations were further examined by reading the title and abstracts. To be included in the review a citation had to comply with a two main criteria: 1) Abstracts had to mention leadership and its effect on one of the outcome keywords. 2) The study was published in a English-language peer-reviewed journal. Unpublished doctoral dissertations were also examined and included accordingly. To avoid exclusion of relevant papers I did not explicitly search for the word ‘empirical’ in the abstract, since some do not mention being an empirical study, but until later

(14)

in the paper. Abstracts which gave doubts on their relevance were initially checked by

opening the paper, and included or excluded accordingly. Selections were dragged into a new folder specified for their keyword-search. So in the end there were four selection folders. From this point all the selections were dragged into one ‘final selection’ folder which was checked for duplicated by using the duplicate tool. In the case of Google Scholar only the first ten pages of hits were examined. This was done by opening the provided link and reading the abstract. Like before, the document was opened and read more extensively when in doubt of the relevance. I considered the first ten pages of hits to be an appropriate range in finding relevant articles. Furthermore, in the case of Google Scholar, Mendeley could not be used to save citations. So relevant articles were directly included in the review.

After the selection of relevant articles, the study continued with coding the information contained in the articles in SPSS, one of the most widely used programs for statistical data analysis in the social sciences. Coding is done to identify relevant correlations of leadership and outcome variables. Furthermore, it helps to see what the papers in question have investigated. For example, by coding for leader/employee orientated sample, country of sample, leadership style, leadership measures, outcome measures, correlations etc. During the coding process some papers were considered to be irrelevant after all. After reexamining these papers it became clear that these abstract were a bit deceiving of some sort. In most cases papers did not examine the relevant information in enough detail or were non-scientific. In the case of some doctoral dissertations, access was hard to achieve. Mainly because one had to pay to access the online document. Fortunately, in some cases, I got access after writing the respective author and a few I found after searching the web. Any elimination of papers from the dataset has been documented as to preserve an as high as possible level of objectivity. In the end a clear and structured dataset was created which allowed to easily access relevant data.

Results

A total of 216 and 174 hits (date of search: 14-04-2014) were found for PsychINFO and Business Source Premier, respectively. Google Scholar, when only looking at the first 10 pages, gave a total of 400 hits for the four outcome variables Happiness, Life Satisfaction, Positive Affect, and Mood. After reading the title and abstract, 119 relevant papers, published between 2000 and 2014 were left. During the coding process 46 papers were excluded,

(15)

because they were irrelevant after closer inspection. These papers either had different hypotheses or could simply not be accessed, because some were dissertations which could only be received after payment. Other exclusions were non-scientific papers which were qualitative in nature or only made opinion based remarks on some leadership construct.

Table 1 presents the 72 reviewed papers and their theoretical propositions concerning the associations of leadership style and employee well-being. Four papers identified

themselves as primary studies (Boyatzis et al., 2011; Hooper and Martin, 2008; Kelloway et al., 2012; Zhang and Bartol, 2010). Nine articles were reviews, mostly investigating a specific leadership style and effects on a specific well-being outcome (Ashkanasy, Neal and

Humphrey, 2011; Barsade and Gibson, 2007; D’Intino et al., 2007; Hackett and Wang, 2012; Lanley, 2012; Rajah, Song and Arvey, 2011; Robert and Wilbanks, 2012; Rosenberg, 2010). Two articles had no clear structure or indication on its research type whatsoever. The first titled ‘Primal Leadership’ was part of a textbook (Goleman, Boyatzis and McKee, 2001). The second paper appeared to be a summary of a bigger empirical study, of which the underlying study I found after an extra search in Google Scholar (Moneke and Umeh, 2013). Fifty-eight articles reported to be empirical studies. Furthermore, twelve papers reported a longitudinal study (Armelius and Westerberg, 2011; Boyatzis, Brizz and Godwin, 2011;De Cremer and Alberts, 2004; Epitropaki and Martin, 2005; Harrison, 2008; Nam Choi and Johnson, 2013; Neubert et al., 2008; Nielsen et al., 2008; Schyns and Sanders, 2003; Tafvelin, Sy, Seo et al., 2012; Tsai et al., 2009; van Dierendonck et al., 2004), all other papers were cross-sectional studies.

Table 1. Theoretical propositions of associations between leadership and employee psychological well-being (72 studies).

No. Authors, year Review of theories

1 Arnold et al. (2007)

Transformational leadership influences workers well-being. Perceiving work as meaningful has a positive influence on this relationship.

2 Ashkanasy and Humphrey (2011)

Review looking at current research on emotion in the organizational behavior field based on five levels of analysis: within person, between persons, dyadic interactions, leadership and teams, and

(16)

organization-wide. Important finding is that there is a two-way interaction of positive affect between in the leader-follower relationship through emotional contagion.

3 Avey et al. (2012)

Ethical leadership has a positive influence on employee well-being. This relationship is mediated by job satisfaction.

4 Barsade et al. (2000)

Similarity in trait positive affect between a group leader and his or her group members will lead to the leader’s using a more

participative than autocratic decision-making style. 5 Barsade et al.

(2007)

Emotions play an important role on the workplace. Leader’s display of emotions effects follower’s affectivity.

7 Ben-Zur et al. (2005)

Transformational leaders are likely to lower reluctance to change and will increase positive mood among followers.

8 Bierhoff and Müller (2005)

Transformational leadership positively influences group member’s mood which leads to increased cooperative support.

9 Bono et al. (2006)

Charismatic leaders increases follower positive mood by their display of positive emotions. Emotional contagions plays a role in

transferring these positive emotions. 10 Bono et al.

(2007)

Leaders may influence employee’s mood, as employees may be anxious about their performance appraisal. Transformational leadership may moderate the relationship between emotional regulation, stress and job satisfaction.

11 Boyatzis et al. (2011)

Pastoral leaders, engaging in authentic leadership will increase parishioners life satisfaction. This is partly explained due their expressions of power and self-transcendence.

12 Boyatzis et al. (2012)

Employees’ memories of resonant leaders active parts in the brain associated with positive affect and happiness. Remembering a dissonant leader activates part of anger and negative affect. 13 Breugst (2011) Entrepreneurs’ passion for inventing and developing will enhance

positive affect of the employer. While the passion of founding will decrease positive affect at work.

14 Carton (2008) Goal clarity and specifically contingent reward will enable leaders to be effective and will increase employee performance and satisfaction. 15 Cherry et al. Training physician will enhance positive affectivity among

(17)

(2011) employees.

16 Chi et al. (2011) Transformational leadership and emotional contagion mediate the relationship between leader’s mood and group performance. Transformational leadership influences positive affectivity of the group.

17 Connelly and Ruark (2010)

Leader’s emotions, moderated by the leadership style, have the potential to influence follower satisfaction, perceptions of the leader and follower performance.

18 Damen et al. (2008)

Leader display of emotions has more positive effects on follower behavior if the match between the valence of leader emotion and follower PA is strong rather than weak.

19 De Cremer and Alberts (2004)

Employees experienced a stronger degree of positive affect from leaders who were chosen by them.

20 D'Intino et al. (2007)

Self-leadership will work as a mediator between transformational leadership styles and employee affective well-being.

21 Eom and Kim (2012)

If IT managers engage in transformational leadership, the likely-hood of retaining personnel increases. This is explained by an increase in their well-being.

22 Epitropaki and Martin (2005)

The relationship between the quality of the relationship between leader and employee (LMX) and well-being and job satisfaction depends on the employee’s expectancies (implicit leadership theory). 23 Epitropaki and

Martin (2005)

Positive affectivity mediates the effect between

transformational/transactional leadership and organizational identification.

24 Erez et al. (2008)

In 2 studies, the authors found that leader charisma was positively associated with followers’ positive affect and negatively associated with followers’ negative affect. The authors hypothesized that leaders’ positive affect, positive expression, and aroused behavior will mediate these relationships.

25 Gilbreath and Benson (2004)

There is a positive relationship between leadership behavior and employee well-being. Positive behavior leads to higher well-being and lower stress.

(18)

(2001) advantage creating employees’ positive mood. 27 Glasø and

Einarsen (2006)

When leaders and employees interact they experience emotions, and the intensity and quality of these emotions are related to employees’ job and life satisfaction.

28 Graham (2013) Collaborative leadership, one of the components of a Professional learning communities, creates positive well-being among the teachers.

29 Hackett and Wang (2012)

Review of Aristotelian and Confucian literature on virtue ethics, linked to different leadership styles. All virtues are positive associated with follower positive affect.

30 Halverson (2004)

Transformational leadership has a positive influence on follower affectivity. Emotional contagion plays a role in transferring positive emotions, associated with transformational leadership, to the

follower.

31 Harrison (2008) Individuals experience of meaningful work contributes to work performance and positive affect. One of the major contributors to meaningful work is transformational leadership.

32 Hooper and Martin (2008)

The degree to which members of a team agree on the quality of the relationship between themselves and their manager is related to job satisfaction and well-being as team members will experience more conflict and frustration and anger with colleagues.

33 Hsiung (2012) The study proposes that employee positive mood and leader-member exchange quality mediate the relationship between authentic

leadership and voice behavior. 34 Jensen and

Luthans (2006)

Findings indicate that if employees in newer, small organizations view their founder/entrepreneur as an authentic leader, it can have a positive impact on their work-related attitudes and happiness.

35 Johnson (2008) An experiment with three groups of participants found that followers experience their positive mood due their charismatic leader.

36 Johnson (2009) An experiment with three groups of participants found that followers experience their positive mood due their charismatic leader.

Indicating the role of emotional contagion.

(19)

well-(2013) being, while transactional has this link not. 38 Kelloway et al.

(2012)

Trust fully mediates the positive relationship between

Transformational leadership and employees’ psychological well-being. Management-by-exception is negatively related to

psychological well-being. 39 Kelloway et al.

(2013)

A newly developed construct of positive leadership was positively associated with employee well-being. In a second study positive leadership predicted positive, and not negative, employee affect. 40 Kollée (2013) Follower mood mediates the effect between performance failure and

leadership perception. Since followers tend to attribute performance outcomes to leadership.

41 Krishnan (2005) Transformational leadership is positively related to leader-follower terminal value system congruence. Which is defined by Rokeach (1973) as “an enduring belief that a specific mode of conduct or end-state of existence is personally or socially preferable to an opposite mode.”

42 Langley (2012) Visionary leadership will positively influence follower affectivity. 43 Liu et al. (2009) Employees’ trust in the leader and self-efficacy partially mediates the

influence of transformational leadership on job satisfaction, and fully mediates the influence of transformational leadership on perceived work stress and stress symptoms.

44 McColl-Kennedy and Anderson (2002)

Transformational leadership has a direct influence on employee frustration and optimism. This in turn influence performance and affectivity.

45 McMurray (2009)

Supervisory transformational leadership will increase positive organizational climate, employee positive affect and performance. 46 Medvedeff

(2008)

Positive leadership behaviors will increase positive appraisal of employees, which in turn increases positive affect of employees. 47 Moneke and

Umeh (2013)

Leadership behaviors have a positive influence on job satisfaction of critical nurses.

48 Naidoo and Lord (2008)

High imagery speeches induces participants with higher levels of positive affect. Which resulted in leader ratings high on Charismatic

(20)

leadership. The opposite was true for low imagery. 49 Nawaz Khan

(2010)

This study explores and identifies the construct of authentic leadership and its effect on positive organizational outcomes. 50 Neubert et al.

(2008)

The authors test a model in which the regulatory focus of employees at work mediates the influence of leadership on employee behavior. Their model suggests that Servant leaders and leaders who initiate structure both positively influence employees’ positive affect. 51 Nielsen et al.

(2008)

Transformational leaders influence well-being through the creation of a working environment that is characterized by offering opportunities for development, a meaningful work and role clarity. They do this providing a clear vision and encouraging employees to seek challenges, and coaching and mentoring their employees. 52 Palmer et al.

(2000)

Emotional intelligence is associated with transformational leadership and mediates the influence of employee positive affect.

53 Parry and Kempster (2014)

Taking a narrative positivism approach. Charismatic leadership is mostly associated with feelings of happiness.

54 Ping Ping Fu (2010)

CEO’s values may either enhance or attenuate the effect of transformational behaviors on followers, depending on followers’ reactions to the congruence or incongruence between leaders’ internal values and their outward transformational behaviors. 55 Rajah et al.

(2011)

Review linking emotionally to leadership style and behaviors. Leaders expressing positive emotions will create positive affect in their employees due emotional contagion.

Rego et al. (2014)

To increase creativity among employees, managers should engage in authentic leadership which will influence both directly as indirectly through hope.

56 Robert and Wilbanks (2012)

Humor can be used by the leader to create positive mood within the group of followers.

57 Rosenberg (2010)

Facilitating room for change and happiness, requires reflective thinking. Authentic leaders are positively associated with reflective thinking.

(21)

58 Schyns and Sanders (2003)

Leader evaluations is prone to the current mood of the employee. Employee mood will influence the perception of one’s leadership style.

59 Schyns and Sanders (2004)

Same hypotheses as previous study, but now in an employee sample. Results indicate that mood and the perception of leadership are indeed connected, especially in the case of less active leadership styles.

60 Seo et al. (2012)

During organizational change, managers engaging in

transformational leadership positively influence employee behaviors towards the upcoming change.

61 Spiess (2011) In a service sector context, transformational leadership has a strong influence on employee happiness.

62 Sy et al. (2005) Investigates leader’s mood on mood of individual group members and affective tone of group. Based on the mood contagion model.

63 Sy et al. (2013) Creating a dynamic view of charismatic leadership, they propose that charismatic leadership perceptions influence and is influenced by group mood.

64 Tafvelin et al. (2011)

Developed a conceptual model explaining the relationship between transformational leadership and well-being in the long-run.

65 Tee et al. (2013)

Leadership involves affective exchange. So a leader’s mood and task performance can be determined in part by follower mood displays. 66 Tsai et al.

(2009)

Positive mood is a mediator between transformational leadership and employee task performance. Transformational influences positive affect indirectly.

67 van

Dierendonck et al. (2004)

The leader-employee relationship is one of the most common sources of stress in organizations. Leader behavior characterized by trust, confidence, recognition and feed-back enhances wellbeing among employees. Leaders who have a controlling, less supporting style, who fail to clarify responsibilities and provide supportive feedback. Relationship is bidirectional, meaning that employees’ wellbeing will influence leader behavior.

(22)

(2013) relationship is mediated by the employee positive affect. 69 Walter and

Brunch (2008)

Positive leadership relations play a central role in collective affectivity.

70 Wang et al. (2010)

Looked at the mediating roles surrounding intrinsic motivation and positive mood. Creativity is more likely to be fostered if support for new ideas was provided by supervisors.

71 Yang (2013) Ethical leadership is negatively correlated to well-being, in a Chinese cultural setting. Job satisfaction is positively related to life

satisfaction and employee well-being. 72 Zhang and

Bartol (2010)

Synthesizing theories of leadership. This theoretical model found empowerment leadership to be positively related to empowerment psychology.

Naturally, findings related to this review were often only a small selection of the topic discussed in the reviewed paper. As a consequence, we have only reported the findings

relevant for this review. Finally, thirty-nine papers discussed transformational orientated leadership styles and their affect on employee positive well-being. Two paper investigated transactional orientated leadership and its effect on the outcome variables. Thirteen papers discussed ethical orientated leadership and its affect on employee positive well-being. And sixteen studies looked at employee psychological well-being and a leader’s leadership style. Table 2, 3, 4 and 5 present the findings related to the individual research questions and provide the specific research question, empirical findings with correlations, and the importance for this review.

Are new paradigm leadership styles associated with employee well-being?

Table 2 shows that thirty-nine papers discussed one of the new paradigm leadership styles and their effect on employee well-being. The table includes Twenty-six papers looked at

transformational leadership and its influence on employee/follower well-being. Of those twenty-six, twenty-one papers found a positive link with employee/follower positive affect (Ben-Zur, Yagil and Oz, 2005; Bierhoff and Müller, 2005; Cherry, Davis and Thorndyke, 2011; Chi, Chung and Tsai, 2011; Connelly and Ruark, 2010; Palmer, Walls, Burgess, and

(23)

Stough, 2000; Ping Ping, Tsui,, Jun Liu and Lan Li, 2010; Moneke and Umeh, 2013; Seo et al., 2012; Spiess, 2011; Tsai, Hsien-Wen, Jen-Wei, 2009; Halverson, 2004; Harrison, 2008; Hooper and Martin 2008; Medvedeff, 2008; Bono et al., 2007; Zhang and Bartol, 2010; McColl-Kennedy and Anderson, 2002; Nielsen et al., 2008; Epitropaki and Martin, 2005; McMurray et al., 2009; Wang, Xue and Su, 2010), seven papers positively related

transformational leadership to work-related aspects of quality of life, as measured with theQuality of Work Life measurement (QWL) (Armelius, and Westerberg, 2011; Arnold et al., 2007; Chi, Chung and Tsai, 2011; Eom and Kim, 2013; Kara et al., 2013; Liu, Siu and Shi, 2009; Spiess, 2011; Tafvelin et al., 2011), and three papers found a positive connection with employees’ general health status, as measured by the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ) (Gilbreath and Benson, 2004; Kelloway et al., 2012; Van Dierendonck et al., 2004). Furthermore, one paper found a positive correlation between transformational leadership and an improved relationship between leader and follower (Krishnan, 2005), which in turn led to higher satisfaction. Six papers investigated the relationship between charismatic leadership (Bono and Ilies, 2006; Johnson, 2009; Naidoo and Lord, 2008; Parry and Kempster, 2014; Robert and Wilbanks, 2012; Walter and Bruch, 2008) and positive affect, while one paper investigating visionary leadership found support for its positive relationship between visionary leadership and employee positive affect (Langley, 2012). Somewhat related to transformational and charismatic leadership, one paper examined entrepreneurial leadership and its association with positive affect of employees (Breugst, 2001). Measuring

entrepreneurial leadership of managers with the Perceived Passion Scale by Cardon et al. (2009), which describes entrepreneurship as inventing, founding and developing, the authors found a significant positive relationship between these dimensions and employee positive affect.

Basically, these studies show support for the first research question: Transformational orientated leadership, are positively related to employee psychological well-being.

(24)

Table 2. Findings for research question 1: New paradigm leadership styles and its link with employee psychological well-being (39 studies). *p<.05; **p<.01; ***p<.001 No. Authors, year Research question Findings Setting or Branch

Sample size and Correlations to: Interpretation in current review 1 Arnold et al. (2007) Is there a relationship between transformational leadership, the meaning individuals ascribe to their work, and their

psychological well-being?

Transformational leadership, mediated by employee’s perception of meaningful work, adds to the positive mental effects of followers. Canadian Healthcare N=319. Psychological well-being: 0,57** Meaningful work: 0,45** Transformational leadership is related to well-being through employee’s experience of meaningful work. 2 Ben-Zur et al. (2005) Is there an association between member’s leadership perceptions and affective reactions?

Perceived transformational leadership is positively associated with willingness to change and members positive affect.

Israeli Kibbutz N=252-265. Positive affect: 0,36***

Transformational leadership is positively related to member’s positive affect, because these leaders positive alter perceived change. 3 Bierhoff and Müller (2005) Do leadership styles influence voluntary collaboration between group members of project groups?

Transformational leadership effects groups member’s mood which in turn leads to better group cooperative support.

Organizational project groups

N=24. Positive affect: 0,72**

Member’s positive mood is positively influenced by transformational leadership.

4 Bono and What is the role of positive emotions in

Mood contagion may be one of the psychological mechanisms by which

Work N=71. Positive affect: 0,21**

Emotional contagion may play a role in explaining

(25)

Ilies (2006) the Charismatic leadership process?

charismatic leaders influence follower. the positive relationship between Charismatic leadership and follower’s positive affect. 5 Bono et al. (2007) What is the relationship between transformational leadership, emotions and job satisfaction?

Employees with supervisors high on transformational leadership experienced more positive emotions during and no decrease in job satisfaction.

Health care N=54.Positive affect: 0,31* Stress: -0,25 Interaction with transformational supervisor leads to positive emotions (affectivity), and reduces stress.

No. Authors, year

Research question

Findings Sample size and

Correlations to:

Interpretation in current review 6 Breugst et al.

(2011)

How does perceived entrepreneurial behavior influence employee

commitment?

Perceived entrepreneurial passion for developing and inventing the venture positively influenced employee positive affect. Entrepreneurial organization N=124. Positive affect: 0,37***; 0,52*** Entrepreneurial leadership engaging in inventing and developing their venture can raise positive affectivity among employees. 7 Cherry et al.

(2011)

What are the results of training physician leaders through the Junior Faculty development plan on organizational outcomes?

Creating transformation leaders positive influence positive affectivity among employees.

Health care Positive affect: 0,43 Transformational physician leaders positively influence employee well-being.

(26)

8 Chi et al. (2011)

What are the

mechanism underlying the association between leader positive mood and team performance?

Transformational leadership mediates the relationship with leader’s positive mood and followers performance and positive affect.

Sales teams N=85. Group positive affect: 0,43**

Transformational leadership mediates the leader mood and follower mood relationship. Thus influencing employee positive affect. 9 Connelly and

Ruark (2010)

What effect has emotional valence, moderated by transformational leadership, on follower satisfaction, evaluations of the leader and performance?

Transformational leadership influences positive affect of employees.

University students N=288. Positive affect: 0,85** Transformational leadership forms an important element in the relationship between emotional valence and follower satisfaction.

10 Eom and Kim (2013)

How does leadership on the part of IT managers influence their IT personnel to develop and enhance their perception of their work?

IT leaders should engage in

‘Transformational’ leadership style to retain personnel. Since this type of leadership enhances personnel’s perception of quality of work life.

Intention to stay: 0,241 Quality-of-work-life: 0,506

Engaging in transforming leadership, IT managers will be able to increase personnel’s well-being and hence retaining them.

11 Epitropaki and Martin (2005) What is the relationship LMX, job satisfaction,

commitment and

well-Implicit leadership predicted LMX, which in turn was related to well-being, job satisfaction and commitment.

Employees working in a organization N=439.Satisfaction: 0,56*** Well-being: 0,46***

High quality relationships between leaders and employees are related to job satisfaction and

(27)

well-being? And is this mediated by Implicit leadership theories? being. 12 Gilbreath and Benson (2004)

How does supervisor behavior contribute to employee

psychological well-being?

Supervisor behavior was positively correlated with employee well-being. Furthermore it was negatively related to psychiatric disturbance, for example stress.

Variety of organizations, occupations and industries in the USA. N=167. GHQ: -0,39** Health practice: 0,26** Stress: -0,16*

Leader support is linked with lower employee stress and with higher well-being.

13 Halverson (2004)

What is the role of emotional contagion in the leader-follower relationship?

The positive influence of Transformational leadership on employee positive affectivity is explained by emotional contagion.

Positive mood: 0,40 Emotional contagion mediates the positive relationship between transformational leadership and follower affectivity.

14 Harrison (2008)

How does meaningful work relate to work performance and affect?

(Transformational)Leadership contributed a significant amount on to meaningful work experience. Positive mood: 0,25 Negative mood: -0,33 Transformational leadership contributes to an employee’s experience of meaningful work, which in turn contributes to positive affectivity of the employee

15 Hooper and Martin (2008)

How are different perceptions of LMX in teams related to job

LMX variability in a team is negatively related to job

satisfaction and well-being. This relationship can partially be

Work N=357. Well-being: 0,42**

Team conflict: -0,31**

The level of agreement of LMX in a team is associated

(28)

satisfaction and well-being? Is this relationship mediated by team

conflict?

explained by team conflict. well-being.

16 Johnson (2009)

What is the role of mood and mood contagion in the leader-follower mood relationship?

Leaders in positive moods were rated more as charismatic leaders and their followers experienced higher positive affect and higher performance.

Students N=200. Job affectivity: 0,40***

Negative job affectivity: -0,19**

Charismatic leaders in positive moods are contagious, resulting in followers with positive moods. 17 Kelloway et al. (2012) What is the relationship between employee’s perceptions of their managers’ transformational leadership style and employees’ psychological well-being?

Trust fully mediated the relationship between transformational leadership and positive employee well-being. Furthermore MBE and Laissez-faire styles were

negatively related to employee psychological well-being. Canadian telecom organization N=436. GHQ: -0,14* Trust: 0,46** Trust to GHQ: -0,24**

Findings suggest that transformational leadership influence psychological well-being through trust. While transactional leadership styles are negatively associated with well-being. 18 Krishnan (2005) What is the relationship between LMX, transformational leadership and the outcomes between

LMX is positively related to

transformational leadership, which in turn is positively related to terminal value system congruence. Transformational leadership is also a stronger predictor of employee effectiveness, satisfaction and

Non-profit organization. N=92-100. LMX to Satisfaction; Intention to quit: 0,77***; -0,50*** Transform. to LMX; Intention to quit; Job satisfaction: 0,76***;

-Transformational leadership and LMX predicts employees’ satisfaction and intention to stay.

(29)

leader and follower. extra effort. 0,46***; 0,86*** 19 Langley (2012) Does visionary leadership influence employees’ positive affect?

Visionary leaders inspire and motivate employees. Making them feel part of the goal and will therefore enhance their positive affectivity.

No correlation given, simply that there exist a correlation.

Visionary (a transforming style of leadership) positively influences followers positive affect. 20 Liu et al. (2009) How does transformational leadership influence employee well-being?

Employees' trust in the leader and self-efficacy partially mediated the influence of TL on job satisfaction, and fully mediated the influence of TL on perceived work stress and stress symptoms.

Corporate employees from various Chinese industries. N=745. Job satisfaction: 0,27** Trust: 0,53** Stress: -0,11** Trust to stress: -0,16** Transformational leadership decreases levels of stress and increases levels of trust, which in turn leads to job satisfaction and well-being. 21 McColl-Kennedy and Anderson (2002) Do emotions of frustration and

optimism influence the relationship between leader-subordinate performances?

Transformational leadership has a significant direct influence on employee frustration and optimism, which in turn influence employee performance.

Sales representatives of a global pharmaceutical firm. N=121Optimism: 0,36* Frustration: -0,43* Transformational leadership has a significant influence on employee optimism levels. Which gives them a likely increase in positive affect. 22 McMurray et

al. (2009)

What are the effects of leadership on

organizational climate, employee

psychological capital, commitment and

well-Findings suggests a strong positive relationships between employee ratings of their immediate supervisor's

transformational leadership and employee ratings, wellbeing, employee commitment and psychological capital.

Non-profit organization

N=43. Vision to PA; NA: 0,63**; -0,40**

Provides Model to PA: 0,55**

Intellectual stimulation to PA;NA: 0,54**; -0,34*

Almost all factors of the Transformational Leadership Inventory (TLI) are positively correlated to positive affect, and negatively to

(30)

being? Individual support to PA;NA: 0,58**; -0,44** Contingency rewards to PA;NA: 0,58**; -0,22 negative affect. 23 Medvedeff (2008)

What are the effects of leader affective display during a negative work event on follower appraisal and felt affect during the event.

Positive leader affective displays were found to predict positive appraisals. In turn, participants’

positive appraisals and state positive affect led to the use of more problem-focused coping. Additionally, negative leader affective displays led to more negative appraisals. Participants’ negative appraisals and state negative affect subsequently influenced the use of emotion-focused and avoidant coping.

Positive affect: 0,08 Negative affect: -0,33

During negative work events, engaging in a transformational

leadership style will help in increasing employee positive affectivity.

24 Moneke and Umeh (2013)

What is the influence of managerial leadership on job satisfaction of critical nurses?

Leaders who model the way, challenge the process and inspire a shared vision have a positive influence on nurses job

satisfaction.

No correlation, simply that Model the way, Inspire and Challenge the process are positive related to job satisfaction.

Transforming leadership practices positively affect job satisfaction and can indirectly be linked to employee well-being. 25 Naidoo and

Lord (2008)

What are the effects of imagery in a leader’s speech on listeners’ perception of leaders’ charisma?

Listeners in high imagery speeches ranked the leaders higher on charisma, because this speech created an increase in their positive affectivity.

Students N=127. High positive affect on charismatic leader rating: 0,53**

Results suggest that charismatic leaders increase positive affectivity among their followers.

(31)

26 Nielsen et al. (2008)

Is the link between transformational leadership and employee well-being mediated by employee perception of the working environment?

Role clarity, meaningfulness and opportunities for development mediated the relationship between transformational leadership and employee well-being.

Danish elderly care sector

N=188. Well-being: 0,27**

Meaningful work: 0,36** Role clarity to Well-being: 0,30**

Meaningful work to Well-being: 0,36**

Transformational leadership is linked to well-being through the impact on the work environment. 27 Palmer et al. (2000) What is the relationship between emotional intelligence and effective leadership?

Emotional intelligence was correlated with transformational leadership, which was defined as effective leadership. In particular, emotional intelligence may account how effective leaders responds to subordinates and make them feel at work.

Past and present university students. N=43. Inspirational motivation to PA: 0,85** Individual consideration to PA: 0,86** Transformational leadership positively influences employee positive affect. This is mediated through leaders’ emotional intelligence. 28 Parry and

Kempster (2014)

What are felt affects of charismatic leadership translated in a narrative explanation?

Charismatic leadership was mostly described with positive affect, a form of love story. A minority experienced negative affect.

Students No correlations, since this is not a qualitative study. Study used a aesthetic narrative positivism method.

Charismatic leadership is associated with feelings of happiness and positive affect.

29 Ping Ping Fu (2010)

How does CEOs’ transformational leadership behaviors influence followers’ commitment?

Leaders’ self-enhancement values will attenuate transforming effects of leadership behavior. Whereas self-transcendent values will accentuate the effects of CEOs’ transformational behaviors. Two Chinese companies N=288.Transforming leadership to PA: 0,23* ‘Honest’ transformational leadership will more likely increase employees’ positive affect.

(32)

(2013) leadership more effective then transactional

leadership in fostering employee well-being?

transformational leadership in the hospitality industry.

employees. Life satisfaction: 0,37** QWL to life satisfaction: 0,43**

leadership has a direct effect on life satisfaction and quality of work life.

31 Robert and Wilbanks (2012)

What role does humor have in the

relationship between leader-follower?

Humor induces positive affect within the group which will create a escalatory process through which individual humor events can impact individuals.

No data. Findings indicate a positive relation with positive affect.

Humor as part of transformational leadership is linked to followers positive affect. 32 Seo et al.

(2012)

What is the role of leadership during organizational change?

Transformational leadership of work group managers help in shaping employees’ affective reactions and commitment to change at the initial phase of change, and thereby their subsequent behavioral responses in the later stage.

Working N=217. Positive affect: 0,22**

During organizational change, transformational leadership can create positive affectivity among the employees. Resulting in accepting change.

33 Spiess (2011) What is the

relationships between leaders and followers, and between

employees and customers in a service context?

Positive leadership behaviors will result in happy employees, who will create higher customer satisfaction. Working N=50. Transformational to QWL: 0,68** Positive affect: 0,94** Mood: 0,62** Job satisfaction: 0,83** Transformational leadership in service sector will increase positive affect of employees, which will create customer satisfaction. Sy et al.

(2005)

Does leaders’ mood result in same mood

Leaders’ positive mood is positively linked to followers positive mood. The same is

Students N=189. Leaders mood from positive to negative

Leaders mood determines the mood of followers,

(33)

affects of the follower?

seen when mood is negative. (manipulation) on pretask positive mood; pretask negative mood: -0,48***; 0,47***

this happens through mood contagion. 34 Tafvelin et al. (2011) Does transformational leadership influence employee well-being over time?

Results of structural equation modeling revealed that transformational leadership had no direct effect on well-being over time. Instead only in the short-run. Effects of transformational leadership was both in the short as in the long-run mediated by a positive climate for innovation.

Social service employees

N=158. Climate for innovation;Well-being: 0,56**;0,21*

Climate for innovation to well-being: 0,36**

Transformational leadership has no effect on well-being in the long-run.

35 Tsai et al. (2009)

What are the mediating effects between transformational leadership and employee positive mood?

Transformational leadership may indirectly influence employee task performance and help coworker behavior through employee positive mood.

Taiwanese insurance companies. N=282. Inspirational motivation to positive affect: 0,36** Intellectual stimulation to positive affect: 0,34** Individual consideration to PA: 0,40** Transformational leadership influences employee positive mood.

36 Van

Dierendonck (2004)

What is the

relationship between leader behavior and subordinates’ well-being?

Both leadership behavior and well-being were relatively stable across time. Well-being positively influenced leadership behavior. Community Trusts N=562. GHQ: 0,28 Job Affect: 0,29 Transformational leadership predicts less employee stress. And positively related to employee job affectivity. 37 Walter and

Bruch (2008)

How do positive affective similarities in

Positive leadership relations enhance the quality of in-group affectivity

Review, no correlations. Positive LMX is a big contributor to positive

(34)

work groups emerge? affect of groups and also on individual level. 38 Wang et al.

(2010)

What are the mediating roles of intrinsic motivation and positive mood in the effect of support from both supervisor and coworker on employee creativity?

Supervisor support created positive mood, which mediated the relationship between supervisor support and employee creativity.

Working N= 233.Supervisor support to PA: 0,57**

Transformational supervisor style creates positive moods among coworkers and will also create creativity.

39 Zhang and Bartol (2010)

What is the influence of empowering leadership on creativity?

Empowering leadership positively affected psychological empowerment, which in turn influenced both intrinsic motivation and creative process engagement.

Working N= 367. Psychological empowerment: 0,59**

Empowering leadership, which could be seen as a transforming leadership form is positively related to psychological

empowerment.

Do leadership styles influence employee psychological well-being? : a systematic review