PurposeThe present research integrates conservation of resources theory (COR) and adaptation theory to investigate the dynamics of entrepreneurs' reactions to obstacles. Furthermore, this research explores whether entrepreneurs' effort allocations following an obstacle influence how entrepreneurs appraise subsequent loss-related events. Finally, this research seeks to understand why some entrepreneurs handle obstacles better than others by considering the role of optimism.Design/methodology/approachThis research utilized a longitudinal survey with 130 nascent entrepreneurs across 4 time periods. This research used a multivariate latent change analysis model to examine the temporal dynamics of new venture effort after exposure to obstacles.FindingsThe results indicated that entrepreneurial obstacles at time t were associated with decreased effort in new ventures at time t+1. Furthermore, new venture effort at time t was associated with decreased effort in new ventures at time t+1. The results also demonstrated that the allocation of greater effort may lead to a decrease in subsequent obstacle appraisals, a relationship that also varies as a function of nascent entrepreneurs' optimism.Originality/valueThis research extends the understanding of the dynamic pattern of reactions following exposure to entrepreneurial obstacles. The findings suggest that, rather than being straightforward, reactions are likely to ebb and flow over time.

Research suggests that when leaders, as servant leaders, focus on their followers’ needs, this can have a positive effect on organizational functioning. Yet results are inconsistent in establishing the strength of the relationships, limiting understanding of the theoretical impact and practical reach of the servant leadership (SL) construct. Using a quantitative meta-analysis based on 130 independent studies, the current research provides evidence that SL has incremental predictive validity over transformational, authentic, and ethical leadership. Further, the link between SL and a range of individual- and team-level behavioural outcomes can be partially explained by trust in the leader, procedural justice, and leader–member exchange. The paper also explores moderators to better establish SL's criterion-related validity and to clarify the magnitude of effects across boundary conditions, such as research design, national culture, and industry. Practitioner points: Servant leadership has predictive validity over other leadership approaches, and therefore, organizations would benefit by developing their current leaders into SLs. Organizations should aim to select SLs into influential positions: Training programmes and selection profiles and processes would need to be aligned and developed to capture attitudes and behaviours associated with SL inside and outside the organization. Servant leaderships should seek to create a culture that positively promotes the development of trust, fairness, and high-quality leader–follower relationships, as these conditions collectively enable the effects of SL to be transmitted onto desirable follower outcomes.

In this paper, we introduce a novel construct, leader–member exchange (LMX) importance, which we position as a meta-perception indicating whether followers view their LMX relationship as personally important or valuable to them. Based on social exchange theory, we examine the extent to which the obligation followers feel towards their leader depends jointly on the quality and the importance of the LMX relationship. We examine how LMX importance influences the process through which LMX quality affects employees’ level of organizational citizenship behaviour (OCB) by focusing on felt obligation (a measure of followers’ reciprocity obligation in the social exchange process) as a mediating variable. Across two studies, we found that high levels of both LMX quality and LMX importance interacted to engender a greater feeling of obligation in followers to repay the perceived favourable exchanges with their leader. Felt obligation predicted leader-rated OCB, demonstrating support for our hypothesized moderated mediation model. However, psychological empowerment, when included alongside felt obligation (in Study 2), did not mediate the LMX-OCB relationship. Overall, our findings extend the focus of LMX theory beyond the confines of LMX quality to incorporate the importance of the LMX relationship. Practitioner points: Leaders should be aware that followers vary in the extent to which they perceive the leader–follower relationship to be personally important. As such, they may decide to invest heavily in helping followers understand that the relationship is instrumental for their success at work. Leaders should invest not only in trying to build positive relationships, but also in establishing the importance of these relationships. Doing so will maximize the benefits of developing a high-quality relationship. Followers appear to be more willing to reciprocate when they perceive a high-quality relationship with the leader and one when they perceive the relationship to be important. Thus, managers should be aware that the norm of reciprocity may vary depending on how important followers perceive the relationship to be and leaders may need to find other ways to motivate employees who do not see the relationship as important. When followers do not see the leader–follower relationship as important, managers should avoid trying to engage in reciprocity contingent influence tactics and/or try to change followers’ perceptions of the importance of the relationship.

Leader-member exchange (LMX) theory proposes that leaders develop different quality relationships with those they manage and this is predictive of work performance. While LMX quality has been viewed as univalent (ranging from low to high quality), this paper proposes that it can also be bivalent in nature (i.e. coexisting positive and negative thoughts towards the relationship), which we refer to as LMX ambivalence. A survey measure of LMX ambivalence is developed, and through three validation and two main studies, it is shown to have construct, discriminant, and incremental predictive validity beyond that of LMX quality. Hypotheses concerning LMX ambivalence and task performance are tested in two main studies and show that (1) LMX ambivalence is negatively related to performance regardless of LMX quality, (2) high levels of perceived support from the organization (Study 1) or coworkers (Study 2) nullify the negative association between LMX ambivalence and performance, and (3) high LMX ambivalence leads to more negative affect and in turn lower task performance, but only when coworker support is low (Study 2). These results show the importance of viewing LMX quality not only in terms of its absolute level (low vs. high quality) but also as a bivalent construct where both positive and negative cognitions can coexist. They also demonstrate the value of social support in buffering the negative effects of LMX ambivalence. Furthermore, our findings extend a central tenet of LMX theory by implying that LMX quality varies not only within groups (i.e. LMX differentiation) but also within leader-follower dyads.

In the current study, we aimed to extend the understanding of how and when leader–member exchange social comparison (LMXSC) influences followers’ work behaviour. Based on social exchange theory, we argue that felt obligation to one's leader is a mediator of the relationship between LMXSC and follower outcomes. Further, we posit that the relationship between LMXSC and felt obligation will occur over and above overall LMX quality. We also investigate whether the effect of LMXSC is not consistent across employees but influenced by their level of psychological entitlement (PE). We found evidence that LMXSC was associated with followers’ organizational commitment in Study 1 (using data collected in two phases from 188 employees) and both organizational commitment and job performance in Study 2 (based on data collected in two phases from 300 employees and their 34 supervisors) via felt obligation towards the leader. In both studies, we found this relationship was significant while controlling for LMX quality, suggesting that perceptions of relative LMX standing are more influential than overall LMX quality. Moreover, high levels of PE reduced employees’ feelings of obligation to reciprocate positive treatment and the extent to which they exhibit higher levels of organizational commitment and job performance. Our findings show that individual differences play a significant role in determining the outcomes of exchange relationships. Practitioner points: Followers do not evaluate their Leader–member exchange (LMX) relationship in isolation from their co-workers, and social comparisons in this context have powerful effects on followers. If leaders want to motivate their followers, treating each follower in the same way and avoiding differentiation may be ineffective. Followers appear to be more willing to reciprocate when they perceive a better LMX relationship with the leader than their co-workers’ LMX relationship with the leader. Managers should be cognizant that followers with varying levels of psychological entitlement may respond differently to LMX relationships. As such, managers could decide to invest more heavily in building strong relationships with followers low in psychological entitlement, as these followers are likely to respond more positively to favourable treatment by the leader. Managers should be aware that the norm of reciprocity might not apply to the same extent when employees are high in psychological entitlement; and thus, other influence tactics may be required to get the most out of these employees. Managers should set clear guidelines and expectations on followers early in the employment relationship. When entitled employees are made fully aware of the relationship expectations, they may be more prepared to meet them.

The concept of empowering leadership (EL) has seen increasing scholarly interest in recent years. This study reports a meta-analysis investigating the effects of EL on employee work behavior. On the basis of data from 105 samples, we found evidence for the positive effects of EL on performance, organizational citizenship behavior, and creativity at both the individual and team levels. We further examined these relationships by exploring potential boundary conditions and the incremental contribution of EL over transformational leadership and leader–member exchange. Furthermore, at the individual level, both trust in leader and psychological empowerment mediated the relationships of EL with task performance, organizational citizenship behavior, and creativity. We also found evidence that leader–member exchange was a significant mediator between EL and task performance. At the team level, empowerment mediated the effects of EL on team performance, whereas knowledge sharing showed no significant indirect effect. Our results have important theoretical and practical implications and suggest some areas that require further research.