Advertisement

Journal of Happiness Studies

, Volume 20, Issue 4, pp 1217–1240 | Cite as

Linking Managerial Coaching and Leader–Member Exchange on Work Engagement and Performance

  • Jussi TanskanenEmail author
  • Liisa Mäkelä
  • Riitta Viitala
Research Paper
  • 415 Downloads

Abstract

This study investigates how individual- and unit-level performance can be fostered by supervisors’ behavioural styles (managerial coaching) and the personal relationship between supervisor and subordinate (leader–member exchange, LMX). The JD-R model holds that good leadership serves as a job resource and triggers a motivational process that will lead through work engagement to good performance. This study first introduces and validates novel measurement instruments for managerial coaching, LMX, and self-rated performance. Then, the study utilizes multilevel methodology (MSEM) to investigate the connections between study variables at the individual- and unit-level. A sample from two organizations (N = 655) was utilized in the measurement validation and a sample from multiple organizations (N = 879) in the hypothesis testing. Samples using self-rating measurements were collected from different Finnish organizations between 2011 and 2012. The results show that, while managerial coaching was connected more to the unit-level performance, LMX had stronger effect to the individual performance and work engagement, which was connected with the unit-level performance. Analysing two leadership constructs at the same time suggests that there are different mechanisms driving managerial coaching and the LMX relationship in the motivational process and towards good performance as the JD-R model proposes. The study also contributes to literature by introducing and validating measurement instruments.

Keywords

Managerial coaching Leader–member exchange Work engagement Performance JD-R model Mediation 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by The Finnish Work Environment Fund (Grant No. 110314).

References

  1. Agarwal, R., Angst, C. M., & Magni, M. (2009). The performance effects of coaching: A multilevel analysis using hierarchical linear modeling. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 20(10), 2110–2134.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09585190903178054.Google Scholar
  2. Agarwal, U. A., Datta, S., Blake-Beard, S., & Bhargava, S. (2012). Linking LMX, innovative work behaviour and turnover intentions: The mediating role of work engagement. Career Development International, 17(3), 208–230.  https://doi.org/10.1108/13620431211241063.Google Scholar
  3. Alimo-Metcalfe, B., Alban-Metcalfe, J., Bradley, M., Mariathasan, J., & Samele, C. (2008). The impact of engaging leadership on performance, attitudes to work and wellbeing at work: A longitudinal study. Journal of Health Organization and Management, 22(6), 586–598.  https://doi.org/10.1108/14777260810916560.Google Scholar
  4. Alvesson, M., & Kärreman, D. (2016). Intellectual failure and ideological success in organization studies: The case of transformational leadership. Journal of Management Inquiry, 25(2), 139–152.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492615589974.Google Scholar
  5. Ashill, N. J., Carruthers, J., & Krisjanous, J. (2005). Antecedents and outcomes of service recovery performance in a public health-care environment. Journal of Services Marketing, 19(5), 293–308.  https://doi.org/10.1108/08876040510609916.Google Scholar
  6. Babcock-Roberson, M. E., & Strickland, O. L. (2010). Leadership, work engagement, and organizational citizenship behaviors. The Journal of Psychology, 144(3), 313–326.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00223981003648336.Google Scholar
  7. Bakker, A. B. (2011). An evidence-based model of work engagement. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20(4), 265–269.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721411414534.Google Scholar
  8. Bakker, A. B., Albrecht, S. L., & Leiter, M. P. (2011). Key questions regarding work engagement. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 20(1), 4–28.  https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432x.2010.485352.Google Scholar
  9. Bakker, A. B., & Bal, P. M. (2010). Weekly work engagement and performance: A study among starting teachers. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 83, 189–206.  https://doi.org/10.1348/096317909X402596.Google Scholar
  10. Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The job demands-resources model: State of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22(3), 309–328.  https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940710733115.Google Scholar
  11. Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2008). Towards a model of work engagement. Career Development International, 13(3), 209–223.  https://doi.org/10.1108/13620430810870476.Google Scholar
  12. Baptiste, N. R. (2008). Tightening the link between employee wellbeing at work and performance: A new dimension for HRM. Management Decision, 46(2), 284–309.  https://doi.org/10.1108/00251740810854168.Google Scholar
  13. Basu, R., & Green, S. G. (1997). Leader–member exchange and transformational leadership: An empirical examination of innovative behaviors in leader–member dyads. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 27(6), 477–499.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1997.tb00643.x.Google Scholar
  14. Berg, M. E., & Karlsen, J. T. (2007). Mental models in project management coaching. Engineering Management Journal, 19(3), 3–13.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10429247.2007.11431736.Google Scholar
  15. Bond, C., & Seneque, M. (2013). Conceptualizing coaching as an approach to management and organizational development. Journal of Management Development, 32(1), 57–72.  https://doi.org/10.1108/02621711311287026.Google Scholar
  16. Breevaart, K., Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & van den Heuvel, M. (2015). Leader–member exchange, work engagement, and job performance. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 30(7), 754–770.  https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-03-2013-0088.Google Scholar
  17. Brudan, A. (2010). Rediscovering performance management: Systems, learning and integration. Measuring Business Excellence, 14(1), 109–123.  https://doi.org/10.1108/13683041011027490.Google Scholar
  18. Burch, T. C., & Guarana, C. L. (2014). The comparative influences of transformational leadership and leader–member exchange on follower engagement. Journal of Leadership Studies, 8(3), 6–25.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jls.21334.Google Scholar
  19. Burke, C. S., Stagl, K. C., Klein, C., Goodwin, G. F., Salas, E., & Halpin, S. M. (2006). What type of leadership behaviors are functional in teams? A meta-analysis. Leadership Quarterly, 17(3), 288–307.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2006.02.007.Google Scholar
  20. Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14(3), 464–504.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701301834.Google Scholar
  21. Choi, Y. (2013). The differences between work engagement and workaholism, and organizational outcomes: An integrative model. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 41(10), 1655–1665.  https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2013.41.10.1655.Google Scholar
  22. Christian, M. S., Garza, A. S., & Slaughter, J. E. (2011). Work engagement: A quantitative review and test of its relations with task and contextual performance. Personnel Psychology, 64, 89–136.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2010.01203.x.Google Scholar
  23. Chughtai, A., & Buckley, F. (2011). Work. Antecedents, the mediating role of learning goal orientation and job performance. Career Development International, 16(7), 684–705.  https://doi.org/10.1108/13620431111187290.Google Scholar
  24. Dansereau, F., Graen, G., & Haga, W. J. (1975). A vertical dyad linkage approach to leadership within formal organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 13, 46–78.Google Scholar
  25. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268.  https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01.Google Scholar
  26. Demerouti, E., & Cropanzano, R. (2010). From thought to action: Employee work engagement and job performance. In A. B. Bakker & M. P. Leiter (Eds.), Work engagement: A handbook of essential theory and research (pp. 147–163). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  27. Dess, G. G., & Robinson, R. B. J. (1984). Measuring organizational performance in the absence of objective measures: The case of the privately-held firm and conglomerate business unit. Strategic Management Journal, 5(3), 265–273.Google Scholar
  28. Duff, A. J. (2013). Performance management coaching: Servant leadership and gender implications. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 34(3), 204–221.  https://doi.org/10.1108/01437731311326657.Google Scholar
  29. Dulebohn, J. H., Bommer, W. H., Liden, R. C., Brouer, R. L., & Ferris, G. R. (2012). A meta-analysis of antecedents and consequences of leader–member exchange: Integrating the past with an eye toward the future. Journal of Management, 38(6), 1715–1759.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206311415280.Google Scholar
  30. Ellinger, A. D., Ellinger, A. E., Bachrach, D. G., Wang, Y.-L., & Elmadag Bas, A. B. (2011). Organizational investments in social capital, managerial coaching, and employee work-related performance. Management Learning, 42(1), 67–85.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507610384329.Google Scholar
  31. Ellinger, A. D., Ellinger, A. E., & Keller, S. B. (2003). Supervisory coaching behavior, employee satisfaction, and warehouse employee performance: A dyadic perspective in the distribution industry. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 14(4), 435–458.  https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.1078.Google Scholar
  32. Ellinger, A. D., Hamlin, R. G., & Beattie, R. S. (2008). Behavioural indicators of ineffective managerial coaching: A cross-national study. Journal of European Industrial Training, 32(4), 240–257.  https://doi.org/10.1108/03090590810871360.Google Scholar
  33. Ferris, G. R. (1985). Role of leadership in the employee withdrawal process: A constructive replication. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70(4), 777–781.Google Scholar
  34. Fisk, G. M., & Friesen, J. P. (2012). Perceptions of leader emotion regulation and LMX as predictors of followers’ job satisfaction and organizational citizenship behaviors. Leadership Quarterly, 23(1), 1–12.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.11.001.Google Scholar
  35. Folan, P., Browne, J., & Jagdev, H. (2007). Performance: Its meaning and content for today’s business research. Computers in Industry, 58(7), 605–620.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2007.05.002.Google Scholar
  36. Gagné, M., & Forest, J. (2008). The study of compensation systems through the lens of self-determination theory: Reconciling 35 years of debate. Canadian Psychology, 49(3), 225–232.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012757.Google Scholar
  37. Geroy, G. D., Bray, A., & Venneberg, D. L. (2005). The CCM model: A management approach to performance optimization. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 18(2), 19–36.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1937-8327.2005.tb00331.x.Google Scholar
  38. Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bein, M. (1995). Relationship based approac to leadership: Development of leader–member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years. Leadership Quarterly, 6(2), 219–247.Google Scholar
  39. Gruman, J. A., & Saks, A. M. (2011). Performance management and employee engagement. Human Resource Management Review, 21, 123–136.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2010.09.004.Google Scholar
  40. Hagen, M. S., & Peterson, S. L. (2014). Coaching scales: A review of the literature and comparative analysis. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 16(2), 221–241.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422313520203.Google Scholar
  41. Hair, J. F. J., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective (7th ed.) (Global edi.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.Google Scholar
  42. Halbesleben, J. R. B., & Wheeler, A. R. (2008). The relative roles of engagement and embeddedness in predicting job performance and intention to leave. Work and Stress, 22(3), 242–256.  https://doi.org/10.1080/02678370802383962.Google Scholar
  43. Harris, K. J., Harris, R. B., & Brouer, R. L. (2009). LMX and subordinate political skill: Direct and interactive effects on turnover intentions and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 39(10), 2373–2395.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2009.00530.x.Google Scholar
  44. Harter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L., & Hayes, T. L. (2002). Business-unit-level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(2), 268–279.  https://doi.org/10.1037//0021-9010.87.2.268.Google Scholar
  45. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Structural equation modeling: Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118.Google Scholar
  46. Huang, J.-T., & Hsieh, H.-H. (2015). Supervisors as good coaches: Influences of coaching on employees’ in-role behaviors and proactive career behaviors. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 26(1), 42–58.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2014.940993.Google Scholar
  47. Huang, J., Wang, Y., & You, X. (2015). The job demands-resources model and job burnout: The mediating role of personal resources. Current Psychology.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-015-9321-2.Google Scholar
  48. Jensen, S. M., Luthans, K. W., Lebsack, S. A., & Lebsack, R. R. (2007). Optimism and employee performance in the banking industry. Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, 12(3), 57–72.Google Scholar
  49. Joseph, D. L., Newman, D. A., & Sin, H.-P. (2011). Leader–member exchange (LMX) measurement: Evidence for consensus, construct breadth, and discriminant validity. In Building methodological bridges. Research methodology in strategy and management 6 (pp. 89–135). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
  50. Killic, C., & Dursun, T. (2008). Job-related antecedents and performance outcomes of individual: Level customer orientation. The Business Review, 10(1), 39–46.Google Scholar
  51. Kim, S., Egan, T. M., Kim, W., & Kim, J. (2013). The impact of managerial coaching behavior on employee work-related reactions. Journal of Business and Psychology, 28(3), 315–330.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-013-9286-9.Google Scholar
  52. Kuvaas, B. (2007). Different relationships between perceptions of developmental performance appraisal and work performance. Personnel Review, 36(3), 378–397.  https://doi.org/10.1108/00483480710731338.Google Scholar
  53. Le Blanc, P. M., & González-Romá, V. (2012). A team level investigation of the relationship between leader–member exchange (LMX) differentiation, and commitment and performance. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(3), 534–544.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.12.006.Google Scholar
  54. Lebas, M. J. (1995). Performance measurement and performance management. International Journal of Production Economics, 41(1–3), 23–35.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0925-5273(95)00081-X.Google Scholar
  55. Li, X., Sanders, K., & Frenkel, S. (2012). How leader–member exchange, work engagement and HRM consistency explain Chinese luxury hotel employees’ job performance. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31(4), 1059–1066.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2012.01.002.Google Scholar
  56. Liden, R. C., & Maslyn, J. M. (1998). Multidimensionality of leader–member exchange: An empirical assessment through scale development. Journal of Management, 24(1), 43–72.  https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639802400105.Google Scholar
  57. Martínez-Martí, M. L., & Ruch, W. (2017). The relationship between orientations to happiness and job satisfaction one year later in a representative sample of employees in Switzerland. Journal of Happiness Studies, 18(1), 1–15.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-016-9714-4.Google Scholar
  58. Mazur, K. (2012). Leader–member exchange and individual performance. The meta-analysis. Management, 16(2), 40–53.  https://doi.org/10.2478/v10286-012-0054-0.Google Scholar
  59. Moen, F., & Federici, R. A. (2012). The effect of external executive coaching and coaching-based leadership on need satisfaction. Organization Development Journal, 30(3), 63–74.Google Scholar
  60. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2015). Mplus User’s Guide. Seventh Edition. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.Google Scholar
  61. Podsakoff, P. M., Mackenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 539–569.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452.Google Scholar
  62. Pransky, G., Finkelstein, S., Berndt, E., Kyle, M., Mackell, J., & Tortorice, D. (2006). Objective and self-report work performance measures: A comparative analysis. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 55(5), 390–399.  https://doi.org/10.1108/17410400610671426.Google Scholar
  63. Preacher, K. J., Zyphur, M. J., & Zhang, Z. (2010). A general multilevel SEM framework for assessing multilevel mediation. Psychological Methods, 15(3), 209–233.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020141.Google Scholar
  64. Salanova, M., Agut, S., & Peiró, J. M. (2005). Linking organizational resources and work engagement to employee performance and customer loyalty: The mediation of service climate. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(6), 1217–1227.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1217.Google Scholar
  65. Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Salanova, M. (2006). The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(4), 701–716.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164405282471.Google Scholar
  66. Schriesheim, C. A., Castro, S. L., & Cogliser, C. C. (1999). Leader–member exchange (LMX) research: A comprehensive review of theory, measurement, and data-analytic practices. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(1), 63–113.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s1048-9843(99)80009-5.Google Scholar
  67. Selig, J. P., & Preacher, K. J. (2008). Monte Carlo method for assessing mediation: An interactive tool for creating confidence intervals for indirect effects. http://quantpsy.org/.
  68. Seligman, M. E. P. (2002). Authentic happiness: Using the new positive psychology to realize your potential for lasting fulfillment. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  69. Seppälä, P., Mauno, S., Feldt, T., Hakanen, J., Kinnunen, U., Tolvanen, A., et al. (2009). The construct validity of the utrecht work engagement scale: Multisample and longitudinal evidence. Journal of Happiness Studies, 10(4), 459–481.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-008-9100-y.Google Scholar
  70. Shu, C.-Y. (2015). The impact of intrinsic motivation on the effectiveness of leadership style towards on work engagement. Contemporary Management Research Pages, 11(4), 327–350.  https://doi.org/10.7903/cmr.14043.Google Scholar
  71. Snape, E., & Redman, T. (2010). HRM practices, organizational citizenship behaviour, and performance: A multi-level analysis. Journal of Management Studies, 47(7), 1219–1247.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00911.x.Google Scholar
  72. Steel, R. P., & Van Scotter, J. R. (2003). The organizational performance cycle: Longitudinal assessment of key factors. Journal of Business and Psychology, 18(1), 31–50.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025030904021.Google Scholar
  73. Stoker, J. I. (2008). Effects of team tenure and leadership in self-managing teams. Personnel Review, 37(5), 564–582.  https://doi.org/10.1108/00483480810891682.Google Scholar
  74. Sung, S. Y., & Choi, J. N. (2014). Multiple dimensions of human resource development and organizational performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35, 851–870.  https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1933.Google Scholar
  75. Tierney, P., Farmer, S. M., & Graen, G. B. (1999). An examination of leadership and employee creativity: The relevance of traits and relationships. Personnel Psychology, 52(3), 591–620.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1999.tb00173.x.Google Scholar
  76. Torrente, P., Salanova, M., Llorens, S., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2012). Teams make it work: How team work engagement mediates between social resources and performance in teams. Psicothema, 24(1), 106–112.Google Scholar
  77. van Knippenberg, D., & Sitkin, S. B. (2013). A critical assessment of charismatic—Transformational leadership research: Back to the drawing board? The Academy of Management Annauls, 7(1), 1–60.  https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520.2013.759433.Google Scholar
  78. Varma, A., & Stroh, L. K. (2001). The impact of same-sex LMX dyads on performance evaluations. Human Resource Management, 40(4), 309–320.Google Scholar
  79. Vega, R. P., Anderson, A. J., & Kaplan, S. A. (2015). A within-person examination of the effects of telework. Journal of Business and Psychology, 30(2), 313–323.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-014-9359-4.Google Scholar
  80. Vigoda-Gadot, E. (2007). Leadership style, organizational politics, and employees’ performance. Personnel Review, 36(5), 661–683.  https://doi.org/10.1108/00483480710773981.Google Scholar
  81. Viitala, R. (2004). Towards knowledge leadership. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 25(6), 528–544.  https://doi.org/10.1108/01437730410556761.Google Scholar
  82. Voorhees, C. M., Brady, M. K., Calantone, R., & Ramirez, E. (2016). Discriminant validity testing in marketing: An analysis, causes for concern, and proposed remedies. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 44(1), 119–134.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-015-0455-4.Google Scholar
  83. Wageman, R. (2001). How leaders foster self-managing team effectiveness: Design choices versus hands-on coaching. Organization Science, 12(5), 559–577.Google Scholar
  84. Wang, H., Law, K. S., Hackett, R. D., Wang, D., & Chen, Z. X. (2005). Leader–member exchange as a mediator of the relationship between transformational leadership and followers’ performance and organizational citizenship behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 48(3), 420–432.  https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2005.17407908.Google Scholar
  85. Wang, G., Oh, I.-S., Courtright, S. H., & Colbert, A. E. (2011). Transformational leadership and performance across criteria and levels: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of research. Group and Organization Management, 36(2), 223–270.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601111401017.Google Scholar
  86. Wheeler, L. (2011). How does the adoption of coaching behaviours by line managers contribute to the achievement of organisational goals? International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring, 9(1), 1–15.Google Scholar
  87. Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2009). Work engagement and financial returns: A diary study on the role of job and personal resources. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 82, 183–200.  https://doi.org/10.1348/096317908X285633.Google Scholar
  88. Xu, X.-D., Zhong, J. A., & Wang, X.-Y. (2013). The impact of substitutes for leadership on job satisfaction and performance. Social Behavior and Personality, 41(4), 675–686.  https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2013.41.4.675.Google Scholar
  89. Yalabik, Z. Y., van Rossenberg, Y., Kinnie, N., & Swart, J. (2015). Engaged and committed? The relationship between work engagement and commitment in professional service firms. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(12), 1602–1621.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2014.953972.Google Scholar
  90. Yukl, G. (1999). An evaluation of conceptual weaknesses in transformational and charismatic leadership theories. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 285–305.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(99)00013-2.Google Scholar
  91. Zhao, Z. J., & Chadwick, C. (2014). What we will do versus what we can do: The relative effects of unit-level NPD motivation and capability. Strategic Management Journal, 35, 1867–1880.  https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2184.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of ManagementUniversity of VaasaVaasaFinland

Personalised recommendations