Leadership Research Summary:
- Drawing upon social exchange theory, the present study focuses on the role of feedback-seeking in linking empowering leadership to task performance, taking charge, and voice. The study tested the hypothesized model using data from a sample of 32 supervisors and 197 their immediate subordinates. Performing CFA, SEM, and bootstrapping, the results revealed that: (1) empowering leadership was positively associated with followers’ feedback-seeking; (2) employees’ feedback-seeking was positively correlated with task performance, taking charge, and voice; and (3) employees’ feedback-seeking mediated the positive relationships between empowering leadership and task performance, taking charge, and voice.
Leadership Research Implications and Findings:
- The research findings offer several theoretical contributions to the empowering leadership and feedback-seeking literatures. First, our findings concerning the relationship between empowering leadership and feedback-seeking extends the research stream of identifying feedback-seeking’s antecedents by investigating empowering leadership as a predictor (e.g., Barner-Rasmussen, 2003; Huang, 2012; Qian et al., 2012; Chun et al., 2014; Anseel et al., 2015). Previous studies have emphasized the importance of leaders encouraging the feedback-seeking behavior subordinates, such as authentic leadership (Qian et al., 2012, 2016) and transformational leadership (Anseel et al., 2015). Although scholars have attached importance to supervisors’ influences on followers’ feedback-seeking behaviors, little is known about the relationship between empowering leadership and feedback-seeking. Our findings fill this gap and show that employees are more motivated to engage in feedback-seeking behavior under the management of empowering leaders.
- Second, the findings note that employees’ feedback-seeking behaviors can enhance their task performance, taking charge, and voice. Previous studies have shown that employees who frequently seek feedback gain better task performance (Whitaker et al., 2007). Our findings advance Whitaker et al. (2007) work by revealing that feedback-seeking behavior cannot only improve employees’ in-role performance (i.e., task performance) but also enhance their extra-role performance (i.e., taking charge and voice). The study’s findings concerning the relationship between feedback-seeking and taking charge and voice also extends current knowledge of the consequences of feedback-seeking (Whitaker and Levy, 2012; Ashford et al., 2016; Gong et al., 2017).
- Additionally, previous scholars have identified three types of proactive behaviors and call for future researchers to investigate the relationships between different proactive behaviors (Parker and Collins, 2010). As a response to Parker and Collins (2010) call, our finding suggests that feedback-seeking behavior, as a proactive person-environment fit behavior, enhances the two proactive work behaviors, i.e., taking charge and voice. This finding contributes to the integration of proactive behaviors (Parker and Collins, 2010).
- Third, the findings demonstrate that feedback-seeking behavior fully mediates the relationships between empowering leadership and task performance, taking charge, and voice. Though previous studies have demonstrated that empowering leadership is associated with voice or taking charge (Yoon, 2012; Li et al., 2015). Indeed, prior findings with regard to full or partial mediating roles in the relationship between empowering leadership and extra-role behavior is contradictory (e.g., Raub and Robert, 2010; Yoon, 2012). For example, Raub and Robert (2010) found that psychological empowerment fully mediates the relationship between empowering leadership and challenging extra-role behaviors. In Yoon (2012) paper, however, the relationship of empowering leadership and voice behavior is partially mediated by psychological empowerment. In the present paper, we suggest that leaders’ empowering behaviors may give employees reasons to voice or taking charge, given that empowering leaders are likely to develop high-quality social exchange relationships with followers (Blau, 1964). That is why previous scholars identify the direct relationships between empowering leadership, voice, and taking charge (Yoon, 2012; Li et al., 2015). However, just having reasons is not enough when employees engage in risky behaviors (McAllister et al., 2007; Morrison, 2011; Li et al., 2015). Employees must have ability and confidence to engage in these extra-role behaviors. Feedback-seeking behaviors helps them gain work-related information (Ashford et al., 2003, 2016), thus giving employees ability and confidence to voice and taking charge.
- Although Baron and Kenny (1986) suggest that full mediation is the most powerful proof of the existence of a mediating effect, the distinction between complete and partial mediation is only one of the ways of verbal descriptions of the effect size of the mediational models (Preacher and Kelley, 2011). In fact, this does not mean that direct effects must not exist in fact. Actually, Preacher and Kelley (2011) argued that the notion of full mediation should be abandoned and all mediations be treated as partial mediations. Thus, we should interpret the results of this mediational model with caution.
- Fourth, scholars began to emphasize the importance of examining feedback-seeking as a critical mediating mechanism (Ashford et al., 2016). According to social exchange theory (Blau, 1964; Emerson, 1976), we argue that employees use feedback-seeking as an adaptive strategy to reciprocate empowering leaders’ benefits, which in turn enhances their task performance, taking charge, and voice. By using social exchange theory, this study provides a new theoretical lens for understanding the mediating roles of feedback seeking.
- The research findings also offer several implications for the managerial challenges of enhancing employees’ in-role performance (i.e., task performance) and extra-role performance (i.e., feedback-seeking behavior, taking charge, and voice). First, the findings show that empowering leadership plays an important role in stimulating followers’ feedback-seeking behaviors and following positive outcomes of performance enhancement, voice, and taking charge, which provides a new method for managerial practitioners to motivate subordinates to seek feedback and generate positive work outcomes.
- When recruiting and selecting managers, organizations should pay close attention to the personality traits of candidates in light of recent discoveries in the field of empowering leadership (Li et al., 2015). For example, prior studies argue that individuals who have a high need for achievement tend to fail to empower (Li et al., 2015); while supervisors who possess high levels of humility are very likely to show empowering leadership behaviors (Ou et al., 2014). In terms of training and encouraging managers to be empowering, organizations may require managers to participate in executive education programs or attend leadership centers and introduce empowering leadership behaviors into the performance evaluation system (Amundsen et al., 2014).
- Second, the findings indicate that feedback-seeking behavior has positive influences on task performance, taking charge, and voice, and mediates the relationships between empowering leadership and these outcomes. Accordingly, this study offers new insights into how to enhance employees’ in-role performance (i.e., task performance) and extra-role performance (i.e., taking charge and voice). In terms of employee recruitment, organizations can take individual differences associated with feedback-seeking behavior into account, such as feedback orientation (Dahling et al., 2012) and emotional intelligence (Kim et al., 2009). Additionally, when performing empowering behaviors to cultivate follower proactivity and performance improvement, supervisors should also take efforts to develop a supportive feedback environment (Dahling et al., 2012; Huang, 2012). For instance, supervisors can consistently provide specific, credible, and high-quality information for effective performance feedback (Dahling et al., 2012).