Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Why and When Employees Like to Speak up More Under Humble Leaders? The Roles of Personal Sense of Power and Power Distance

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Research investigating the underlying mechanisms and boundary conditions under which leader humility influences employee voice remains underdeveloped. Drawing from approach–inhibition theory of power and leader humility literature, we developed a moderated-mediation model in which personal sense of power (i.e., employees’ ability to influence other individuals such as their leader) was theorized as a unique mechanism underlining why employees feel motivated to speak up under the supervision of humble leaders. Additionally, the cultural value of power distance was proposed to be a relevant boundary condition to influence such relationship. We tested the model using time-lagged supervisor–subordinate matched data. Results of mixed models analyses provided support for our hypotheses confirming that employees’ personal sense of power mediates the relationship between leader humility and employee voice, and such relationship was found to be stronger when employees’ power distance was lower rather than higher.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. In the current study, we adopt a different theoretical perspective (i.e., the approach–inhibition theory of power; Keltner et al. 2003) to examine the leadership–voice relationship. A review of the literature suggests that very few major theories have been used to explain the potential effects of different leadership styles on employee voice. Zhang et al. (2015) used the social exchange theory to examine the relationship between paternalistic leadership and employee voice. Hsiung (2012) investigated the influence of authentic leadership on voice based on leader-member exchange theory (LMX), and Mo and Shi (2016) explored the relationship between ethical leadership and voice using the affect theory of social exchange. Tangirala and Ramanujam (2012) used logic (based on expectancy theory) to explain how supervisor consultation enhanced subordinates’ upward voice via motivational states and employees’ beliefs, and thus affected key decisions in organizations. Burris et al. (2008) used the LMX theory to examine the indirect relationship between LMX and subordinates’ voices via the meditating role of psychological detachment. Conversely, the current study adopts the approach–inhibition theory of power. This theory is deemed relevant to the current research because it explains the role of personal sense of power as a mediator, and the individual cultural value of power distance as a moderator. Further, it has not been previously used to explain the leadership–voice relationship.

  2. An additional analysis was conducted to test the first-stage moderation (i.e., the effect of the joint effect of employees’ power distance and leader humility on personal sense of power); however, the results did not support this moderation. The results of this additional analysis are available upon request.

References

  • Aiken, L. S., West, S. G., & Reno, R. R. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, C., & Berdahl, J. L. (2002). The experience of power: Examining the effects of power on approach and inhibition tendencies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(6), 1362–1377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, C., & Galinsky, A. D. (2006). Power, optimism, and risk-taking. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36(4), 511–536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, C., John, O. P., & Keltner, D. (2012). The personal sense of power. Journal of Personality, 80(2), 313–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Argandona, A. (2015). Humility in management. Journal of Business Ethics, 132(1), 63–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basford, T. E., Offermann, L. R., & Behrend, T. S. (2014). Please accept my sincerest apologies: Examining follower reactions to leader apology. Journal of Business Ethics, 119(1), 99–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bliese, P. (2000). Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability. In K. Klein & S. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multi-level theory, research, and methods in organizations (pp. 349–381). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brislin, R. W. (1986). The wording and translation of research instrument. In W. J. Lonner & J. W. Berry (Eds.), Field methods in cross-cultural research (pp. 137–164). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brockner, J., Ackerman, G., Greenberg, J., Gelfand, M. J., Francesco, A. M., Chen, Z. X., et al. (2001). Culture and procedural justice: The influence of power distance on reactions to voice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37(4), 300–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burris, E. R., Detert, J. R., & Chiaburu, D. S. (2008). Quitting before leaving: The mediating effects of psychological attachment and detachment on voice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(4), 912–922.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Z. X., & Aryee, S. (2007). Delegation and employee work outcomes: An examination of the cultural context of mediating processes in China. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 226–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiu, C. Y. C., Owens, B. P., & Tesluk, P. E. (2016). Initiating and utilizing shared leadership in teams: The role of leader humility, team proactive personality, and team performance capability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(12), 1705–1720.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daniels, M. A., & Greguras, G. J. (2014). Exploring the nature of power distance implications for micro-and macro-level theories, processes, and outcomes. Journal of Management, 40(5), 1202–1229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Earley, P. C., & Erez, M. (1997). The transplanted executive: Why you need to understand how workers in other countries see the world differently. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farh, J. L., Hackett, R. D., & Liang, J. (2007). Individual-level cultural values as moderators of perceived organizational support–employee outcome relationships in China: Comparing the effects of power distance and traditionality. Academy of Management Journal, 50(3), 715–729.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fast, N. J., Sivanathan, N., Mayer, N. D., & Galinsky, A. D. (2012). Power and overconfident decision-making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 117(2), 249–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frostenson, M. (2016). Humility in business: A contextual approach. Journal of Business Ethics, 138(1), 91–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuller, J. B., Marler, L. E., & Hester, K. (2006). Promoting felt responsibility for constructive change and proactive behavior: Exploring aspects of an elaborated model of work design. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27(8), 1089–1120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galinsky, A. D., Gruenfeld, D. H., & Magee, J. C. (2003). From power to action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(3), 453–466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galinsky, A. D., Rucker, D. D., & Magee, J. C. (2015). Power: Past findings, present considerations, and future directions. In M. Mikulincer & P. Shaver (Eds.), APA handbook of personality and social psychology (pp. 421–460). Washington DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grenberg, J. (2005). Kant and the ethics of humility: A story of dependence, corruption and virtue. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirschman, A. O. (1970). Exit, voice, and loyalty: Responses to decline in firms, organizations, and states. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofmann, D. (1997). An overview of the logic and rationale of hierarchical linear models. Journal of Management, 23(6), 723–744.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsiung, H. H. (2012). Authentic leadership and employee voice behavior: A multi-level psychological process. Journal of Business Ethics, 107(3), 349–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • James, L. R., Demaree, R. G., & Wolf, G. (1984). Estimating within-group inter-rater reliability with and without response bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69(1), 86–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keltner, D., Gruenfeld, D. H., & Anderson, C. (2003). Power, approach, and inhinition. Psychological Review, 110(2), 265–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirkman, B. L., Chen, G., Farh, J. L., Chen, Z. X., & Lowe, K. B. (2009). Individual power distance orientation and follower reactions to transformational leaders: A cross-level, cross- cultural examination. Academy of Management Journal, 52(4), 744–764.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liang, J., Farh, C. I., & Farh, J. L. (2012). Psychological antecedents of promotive and prohibitive voice: A two-wave examination. Academy of Management Journal, 55(1), 71–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Little, T. D., Rhemtulla, M., Gibson, K., & Schoemann, A. M. (2013). Why the items versus parcels controversy needn’t be one. Psychological Methods, 18, 285–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loi, R., Lam, L. W., & Chan, K. W. (2012). Coping with job insecurity: The role of procedural justice, ethical leadership and power distance orientation. Journal of Business Ethics, 108(3), 361–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maynes, T. D., & Podsakoff, P. M. (2014). Speaking more broadly: An examination of the nature, antecedents, and consequences of an expanded set of employee voice behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(1), 87–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mo, S., & Shi, J. (2016). The voice link: A moderated mediation model of how ethical leadership affects individual task performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 1–11. doi:10.1007/s10551-016-3332-2.

  • Morris, J. A., Brotheridge, C. M., & Urbanski, J. C. (2005). Bringing humility to leadership: Antecedents and consequences of leader humility. Human Relations, 58(10), 1323–1350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, E. W. (2011). Employee voice behavior: Integration and directions for future research. The Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 373–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, E. W. (2014). Employee voice and silence. Annual Review Organizational Psychology Organization Behavior, 1(1), 173–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, E. W., See, K. E., & Pan, C. (2015). An approach-inhibition model of employee silence: The joint effects of perceived sense of power and target openness. Personnel Psychology, 68(3), 547–580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2010). Mplus user’s guide (6th ed.). Los Angeles: Muthén and Muthén.

  • Oc, B., Bashshur, M. R., Daniels, M. A., Greguras, G. J., & Diefendorff, J. M. (2015). Leader humility in Singapore. The Leadership Quarterly, 26(1), 68–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ou, A. Y., Tsui, A. S., Kinicki, A. J., Waldman, D. A., Xiao, Z., & Song, L. J. (2014). Humble chief executive officers’ connections to top management team integration and middle managers’ responses. Administrative Science Quarterly, 59(1), 34–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Owens, B. P., & Hekman, D. R. (2012). Modeling how to grow: An inductive examination of humble leader behaviors, contingencies, and outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 55(4), 787–818.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Owens, B., & Hekman, D. R. (2016). How does leader humility influence team performance? Exploring the mechanisms of contagion and collective promotion focus. Academy of Management Journal, 30(4), 1088–1111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Owens, B. P., Johnson, M. D., & Mitchell, T. R. (2013). Expressed humility in organizations: Implications for performance, teams, and leadership. Organization Science, 24(5), 1517–1538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Owens, B. P., Rowatt, W. C., & Wilkins, A. L. (2011). Exploring the relevance and implications of humility in organizations. In K. S. Cameron & G. M. Spreitzer (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of positive organizational scholarship (pp. 260–272). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Owens, B. P., Wallace, A. S., & Waldman, D. A. (2015). Leader narcissism and follower outcomes: The counterbalancing effect of leader humility. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(4), 1203–1213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rego, A., Cunha, M. P., & Simpson, A. V. (2016). The perceived impact of leaders’ humility on team effectiveness: An empirical study. Journal of Business Ethics, 1–14. doi:10.1007/s10551-015-3008-3.

  • Rego, A., Owens, B., Yam, K. C., Bluhm, D., Cunha, M. P. E., Silard, A., et al. (2017). Leader humility and team performance: Exploring the mediating mechanisms of team PsyCap and task allocation effectiveness. Journal of Management. doi:10.1177/0149206316688941.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schein, E. (2016). The changing role of leadership and the need for humble leadership. 2016 installment of ILA’s Leadership Perspectives webinar series. Retrieved from http://www.ilanet.org/webinars/Archive/EdSchein.html

  • Spreitzer, G. M. (1996). Social structural characteristics of psychological empowerment. Academy of Management Journal, 39(2), 483–504.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tangirala, S., & Ramanujam, R. (2008). Exploring nonlinearity in employee voice: The effects of personal control and organizational identification. Academy of Management Journal, 51(6), 1189–1203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tangirala, S., & Ramanujam, R. (2012). Ask and you shall hear (but not always): Examining the relationship between manager consultation and employee voice. Personnel Psychology, 65(2), 251–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tangney, J. P. (2002). Humility. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 411–419). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Dyne, L., Ang, S., & Botero, I. C. (2003). Conceptualizing employee silence and employee voice as multidimensional constructs. Journal of Management Studies, 40(6), 1359–1392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, M. (1947). The theory of social and economic organization. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Y., Huai, M. Y., & Xie, Y. H. (2015). Paternalistic leadership and employee voice in China: A dual process model. The Leadership Quarterly, 26(1), 25–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Research School of Management, College of Business and Economics, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia

    Xiaoshuang Lin, Zhen Xiong Chen & Chao Ma

  2. Department of Management, Monash Business School, Caulfield Campus, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

    Herman H. M. Tse

  3. Department of Business Administration, School of Economics and Management, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China

    Wu Wei

Authors
  1. Xiaoshuang Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Zhen Xiong Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Herman H. M. Tse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Wu Wei
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Chao Ma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wu Wei.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

Humans (employees) were involved in the survey of our current study. We got ethical approval from the human ethics committee of our university before conducting the survey. Thus, all procedures performed in our study involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the human ethics committee of our university and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lin, X., Chen, Z.X., Tse, H.H.M. et al. Why and When Employees Like to Speak up More Under Humble Leaders? The Roles of Personal Sense of Power and Power Distance. J Bus Ethics 158, 937–950 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3704-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3704-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation