DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Study on Factors Relevant to Effects of Shared Leadership, Organizational Trust and Job Performance

공유리더십, 조직신뢰, 직무성과의 영향 요인에 관한 연구

  • Kim, Jae-Boong (Department of Business Administration, Korea National University of Transportation)
  • 김재붕 (한국교통대학교 경영학과)
  • Received : 2019.06.17
  • Accepted : 2019.07.20
  • Published : 2019.07.28

Abstract

The change to the horizontal structure of the modern corporate management environment requires joint efforts and cooperation to share responsibility and purpose and to increase positive mutual influence in order to achieve the corporate goal beyond the individual capacity of the organizational members. In order to achieve the purpose of the organization, the organizational structure in which various members share information and aim at collective leadership is more effective than the structure concentrated on one individual (leader). This study was to examine the effectiveness of shared leadership, and to investigate the causal relationship and effect of shared leadership, organizational trust, and job performance. As a result of the analysis, shared leadership had a positive effect on organizational trust, and organizational trust had a positive effect on job performance. This means that high trust in organization has a positive effect on performance.This study is meaningful in that it examines the difference between shared leadership and existing leadership types that have not been studied yet.

OHHGBW_2019_v10n7_183_f0001.png 이미지

Fig. 1. Research Model

OHHGBW_2019_v10n7_183_f0002.png 이미지

Fig. 2. Hypotheses Testing

Table 1. Discriminant Validity Analysis

OHHGBW_2019_v10n7_183_t0001.png 이미지

Table 2. Correlation between Latent Variable

OHHGBW_2019_v10n7_183_t0002.png 이미지

Table 3. Hypotheses Testing

OHHGBW_2019_v10n7_183_t0003.png 이미지

Acknowledgement

Supported by : Korea National University of Transportation

References

  1. J. Bae & C. Rowley. (2013). Changes and continuities in South Korean HRM. Asia Pacific Business Review. 9(4), 76-105. DOI: 10.1080/13602380312331288720 https://doi.org/10.1080/13602380312331288720
  2. K. L. Bettenhausen. (1991). Five years of groups research: What we have learned and what needs to be addressed. Journal of management. 17(2), 345-381. DOI: 10.1177/014920639101700205 https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700205
  3. I. S. Yu. (2018). The effects of shared leadership on organizational performance in Korean public enterprise : focusing on the case of KOWEPO, Master's thesis. Seoul National University.
  4. D. Katz & R. L. Kahn. (1978) The social psychology of organizations. New York, Wiley.
  5. C. L. Pearce. (2004). The future of leadership: Combining vertical and shared leadership to transform knowledge work. Academy of Management Perspectives. 18(1), 47-57. DOI: 10.5465/ame.2004.12690298 https://doi.org/10.5465/ame.2004.12690298
  6. C. L. Pearce & Jr. H. P. Sims. (2002). Vertical versus shared leadership as predictors of the effectiveness of change management teams: An examination of aversive, directive, transactional, transformational, and empowering leader behaviors. Group dynamics: Theory, research, and practice. 6(2), 172-197. DOI: 10.1037/1089-2699.6.2.172 https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2699.6.2.172
  7. L. G. Zucker. (1986). Production of trust: Institutional sources of economic structure 1840-1920. Research in organizational behavior. 8, 53-111.
  8. A. K. Mishra. (1996). Organizational Responses to Crisis: The Centrality of Trust. In: Kramer, R.M. and Tyler, T.R., E., Eds., Trust in Organizations, Sage, Thousand Oaks, 261-287.
  9. R. Levering. (1988). A great place to work: What makes some employers so good (and most so bad). New York, Random House.
  10. R. Eisenberger, R. Huntington, S. Hutchison & D. Sowa.(1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied psychology. 71(3), 500-507. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.71.3.500
  11. M. Blumberg & C. D. Pringle. (1982). The missing opportunity in organizational research: Some implications for a theory of work performance. Academy of management Review. 7(4), 560-569. DOI: 10.2307/257222 https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1982.4285240
  12. J. E. Mathieu & D. M. Zajac. (1990). A review and meta-analysis of the antecedents, correlates, and consequences of organizational commitment. Psychological bulletin. 108(2), 171-194. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.108.2.171
  13. J. D. Pincus. (1986). Communication satisfaction, job satisfaction, and job performance. Human communication research. 12(3), 395-419. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.1986.tb00084.x https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1986.tb00084.x
  14. E. J. McCormick & D. R. Ilgen. (1980) Industrial psychology. Englewood Cliffs. N. J., Prentice-Hall.
  15. T. N. Martin, J. L. Price, C. W. Mueller. (1981). Job performance and turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology. 66(1), 116. DOI: 10.1016/S1053-4822(99)00032-7 https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.66.1.116
  16. S. A. Stumpf & K. Hartman. (1984). Individual exploration to organizational commitment or withdrawal. Academy of Management Journal. 27(2), 308-329. DOI: 10.5465/255927 https://doi.org/10.2307/255927
  17. T. Packard. (1989). Participation in decision making, performance, and job satisfaction in a social work bureaucracy. Administration in Social Work. 13(1), 59-73. DOI: 10.1300/J147v13n01_05 https://doi.org/10.1300/J147v13n01_05
  18. A. Bandura & S. Wessels. (1997). Self-efficacy. W.H. Freeman & Company.
  19. W. A. Fisher, C. T. Miller, D. Byrne & L. A. White. (1980). Talking dirty: Responses to communicating a sexual message as a function of situational and personality factors. Basic and Applied Social Psychology. 1(2), 115-126. DOI: 10.1207/s15324834basp0102_2 https://doi.org/10.1207/s15324834basp0102_2
  20. W. R. Fisher. (1984). Narration as a human communication paradigm: The case of public moral argument. Communications Monographs. 51(1), 1-22. DOI: 10.1080/03637758409390180 https://doi.org/10.1080/03637758409390180
  21. J. Barney. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of management. 17(1), 99-120. DOI: 10.1177/014920639101700108 https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108
  22. I. Bouty. (2000). Interpersonal and interaction influences on informal resource exchanges between R&D researchers across organizational boundaries. Academy of Management Journal. 43(1), 50-65. DOI: 10.2307/1556385 https://doi.org/10.2307/1556385
  23. S. A. Waddock & S. B. Graves. (1997). The corporate social performance-financial performance link. Strategic management journal. 18(4), 303-319. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199704)18:4<303::AID-SMJ869>3.0.CO;2-G
  24. M. H. Kim, K.W. Kim & C. H. Nam. (2013). The effects of corporate's social responsibility on the turnover intent for hotel employees. Journal of Food service Management. 16(4), 137-160.
  25. S. J. Kim. (2008). The Effect of Perceived Trusts in the Hotel On Organization Performance, Korean Hospitality and Tourism Academe. 17(4), 41-55.
  26. S. G. Ji & S. H. Jang. (2008). The Effects of the Relational Factors among Hotel Employees on Co-worker Trust and Performance, International Journal of Tourism Management and Sciences. 23(1), 23-42.
  27. B. M. Bass & R. M. Stogdill. (1990). Bass & Stogdill's Handbook of Leadership: Theory, Research, and Managerial Applications. Free Press.
  28. W. W. Chin. (1988). Commentary: Issues and Opinion on Structural Equation Modeling. MIS Quarterly. 22(1), 7-16.
  29. J. C. Nunnally. (1987). Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  30. C. Fornell & D. Larcker. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research. 18(1), 39-50. DOI: 10.2307/3151312 https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
  31. D. Barclay, C. Higgins & R. Thomson. (1995). The Partial Least Squares Approach to Causal Modeling, Personal Computer Adoption and Useasan Illustration. Technology Studies. 2(2), 285-309.
  32. R. F. Falk & N. B. Miller. (1992). A primer for soft modeling. Akron: OH University of Arkon Press.