Transformational Leadership, Psychological Empowerment, Organizational .

LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL IDENTIFICATIONthat he/she can gain through associating with the organization. It also indicates thedegree to which a person identifies him/herself as a member of the organization, whilethe emotional component reflects an individual’s feelings of pride in being a member ofan organization. The emotional component of organizational identification plays animportant role in creating an individual’s positive image of one’s organization, and helpsto develop identification with the organization (Tajfel, 1972). Pratt (1998) proposed thatan individual has two main and basic motives for identification with an organization. Thefirst motive lies in the need for self-categorization, which helps an individual to seek aunique place and feel different from other members of the organization or society. Thesecond motive develops from a need for self-enhancement and self-esteem, whichmeans that an individual aspires to be rewarded and feel pride through association withor membership in an organization.Organizational identification appears to be distinct from organizational commitment.Specifically, organizational identification concerns an individual’s self-perception on howhe/she perceives being one with the organization which implies the self being the focalreferent, whereas organizational commitment concerns one’s general attitude towardthe organization and its members and focuses on one’s relationship with these referents(van Knippenberg & Sleebos, 2006). Organizational commitment contains affective,continuance, and normative components (Meyer & Allen, 1991), and meta-analytic workconducted by Riketta (2005) indicates an empirical overlap between organizationalidentification and affective organizational commitment. However, Riketta (2005)concluded that these constructs can be distinguished because they are conceptuallydifferent and lead to different organizational outcomes, such as organizationalidentification having a larger negative correlation with intent to leave than affectiveorganizational commitment.Transformational Leadership, Active Transactional Leadership, and Followers’Organizational IdentificationAn important construct for understanding the impact of transformational leadership issocial identity. Kark and Shamir (2002) proposed that transformational leaders influencetwo distinct levels of their followers’ self-concept: the relational and the collective self.Followers come to identify with their particular leader through the relational aspects ofthe followers’ self-concept, while organizational or social identification is influenced bypriming of their collective self. Transformational leaders emphasize organizationaljustice, so followers are more likely to identify with their leader and organization.Shamir, Zakay, Breinin, and Popper (1998) proposed that transformational leaderscould emphasize followers’ contribution to membership or group, and then shiftfollowers’ identification from the individual level to the collective level.Furthermore, leaders can create group level influences, including collectiveidentification, by establishing symbolic activities, which will increase follower self esteemand consequently lead to organizational identification (Shamir et al., 1993).Transformational leaders create a supportive work environment that emphasizesemployees’ needs and feelings, develops new skills, and helps solve various jobCopyright (c) 2012 Institute of Behavioral and Applied Management. All Rights Reserved.191

LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL IDENTIFICATIONproblems and other challenges. In addition, transformational leaders offer constructiveand positive suggestions to employees, which can help improve followers’ positivefeelings of being a member in an organization, and increase their identification with theorganization.Transformational leaders try to develop followers’ full potential (e.g., Bass, 1985;Johnson & Dipboye, 2008); therefore, followers may tend to feel that their organizationis effective and that it can provide future opportunity and development. As such, it isexpected that followers will be more likely to stay in the organization because they aresatisfying their needs for self-categorization/self-identity, and they have a sense ofbeing unique from other members in society. Organizational identification is thereforelikely to be strengthened. Thus,Hypothesis 1: Transformational leadership has a positive relationship withfollowers’ organizational identification.Theoretically speaking, as widely known, Bass and his colleagues (e.g., Avolio, 1999;Bass & Riggio, 2006; Sosik & Jung, 2010) categorized full range leadership intotransactional and transformational leadership behaviors. Transactional leadershipbehaviors include: passive management by exception (MBEP), active management byexception (MBEA), and contingent reward (CR). Transformational leadership behaviorsinclude inspirational motivation, idealized influence, intellectual stimulation, andindividualized consideration. Among three types of transactional leadership behaviors,passive management by exception (MBEP) is considered to be a passive transactionalleadership behavior, while active management by exception (MBEA) and contingentreward leadership behaviors are considered “active” transactional leadership, asdemonstrated empirically in a number of studies (e.g., Avolio, Bass, Walumbwa, & Zhu,2004; Bycio, Hackett, & Allen, 1995; Zhu, Riggio, Avolio, & Sosik, 2011).In addition to displaying transformational leadership behaviors, effective leaders alsodisplay active transactional leadership comprised of contingent reward and activemanagement-by-exception behaviors (Bass, 1985). With contingent reward,transactional leaders define and communicate what needs to be done, how it will bedone, and the rewards and recognition followers will receive if the assignments aredone satisfactorily. Another component of active transactional leadership is activemanagement-by-exception behavior, in which the leader specifies the standards forcompliance, as well as what constitutes ineffective performance, and may punishfollowers for being out of compliance with those standards. The leader arranges toactively monitor deviances, mistakes, and errors in the followers’ assignments and totake corrective action as necessary. Through the active form of management-byexception, transactional leaders monitor follower performance and take necessarycorrective actions to force followers to change their work attitudes and behaviors (Sosik& Jung, 2010). The main focus of both forms of management-by-exception is on settingstandards and monitoring deviations from the specified standards. Therefore, theleaders and followers find the exchange mutually rewarding, and contribute todeveloping this positive relationship, which is expected to contribute to followers’Copyright (c) 2012 Institute of Behavioral and Applied Management. All Rights Reserved.192

LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL IDENTIFICATIONidentification with the organization. As a result, one’s organizational identification islikely to be enhanced.This line of reasoning is supported by prior empirical and theoretical work. Specifically,Epitropaki and Martin (2005) proposed that transactional leadership promotes followers’organizational identification by triggering followers’ self-categorization processes(Turner, 1972). When leaders provide contingent rewards and monitor followers’performance for errors and deviations, they clarify followers’ expectations regardingnorms and values. Such clarification allows followers to better understand theirorganizational roles and the consistency between their personal values and theorganization’s values regarding goals and performance expectations, thereby promotingtheir identification with the organization. In a study of Greek bank employees, Epitropakiand Martin (2005) reported a significant positive relationship between these employees’perceptions of their leaders’ display of transactional leadership and their organizationalidentification. Thus,Hypothesis 2: Active transactional leadership has a positive relationship withfollowers’ organizational identification.The Mediating Role of Psychological EmpowermentAs previously mentioned, the process by which leadership influences followers’organizational identification has been under-researched. We propose that psychologicalempowerment is an important mechanism through which leaders can influencefollowers’ organizational identification. Leadership and supervision serve as one of themost important mechanisms to develop followers’ personal efficacy and feelings ofpower (Koberg, Boss, Senjem, & Goodman, 1999).Yukl (2010) proposed that leadership can enable the process of building commitment tothe organization’s objectives and can empower followers to accomplish theseobjectives. Followers who feel more empowered tend to reciprocate by being morecommitted to their organization (e.g., Koberg et al., 1999; Wang & Lee, 2009), whichsuggests that followers may be more likely to identify with their organization, given theconceptual and empirical similarities between organizational identification and affectiveorganizational commitment (Riketta, 2005).Several empirical studies (e.g., Avolio, Zhu, Koh, & Bhatia, 2004; Fuller, Morrison,Jones, Bridger, & Brown, 1999; Kark et al., 2003) have demonstrated a positiverelationship between transformational leadership and followers’ psychologicalempowerment. The authors of these studies highlighted transformational leadership’srole of creating more social identification with the group or organization in makingfollowers feel more empowered. Some researchers (e.g., Bass, 1985; Sosik & Jung,2010) proposed that transformational leaders have a clear and meaningful vision fortheir organization and direct their organization toward that goal. This vision is oftenpowerful and portrays a much-improved company and/or a better way of operating thebusiness. Transformational leaders create a strategic and innovative vision that isCopyright (c) 2012 Institute of Behavioral and Applied Management. All Rights Reserved.193

LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL IDENTIFICATIONcompelling, and they then communicate that vision to all employees so that they too willbelieve in it and will become excited by it. Thus, employees are more likely to believethat their work is important and their organization has a better and more meaningfulfuture. Given that employees are “meaning-seekers” and the process of socialidentification with collectives helps reduce uncertainty (Ashford et al., 2008), ameaningful vision may satisfy their needs for competence, self-determination, andimpact by being a member of an effective organization. Thus, followers’ psychologicalempowerment and identification with the organization would be more likely to increase.Transformational leaders possess great referent and inspirational power (Bass, 1985)which enables them to gain the respect, admiration, and trust of their followers. Theyare also seen as role models who exert significant and positive influence on followersthat creates a sense of meaningfulness (Bass, 1985). Employees who experience agreater sense of meaning from their work are likely to feel more empowered (Spreitzer,1995) and proud of being a member of the organization, and thereby enhance theiridentification with the organization (Koberg et al., 1999). Numerous researchers (e.g.,McCann, Langford, & Rawlings, 2006; Shamir et al., 1993; Sosik & Cameron, 2010;Sosik & Jung, 2010) have argued that transformational leaders get followers involved inenvisioning an attractive future and can also inspire the followers to identify with thevision through social identification processes. Transformational leaders align followers’self-identities with their organization’s values and mission (Shamir et al., 1993).According to social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1972), individuals seek consistencybetween their self-identity and the values associated with their organization. Whenindividuals perceive consistency between their self-identity and the actions required tosupport their organization’s values and mission, they are more likely to engage inactivities that are consistent with their self-identity and identify with the organizationbecause it embodies their self-construals (Tajfel, 1972).Transformational leaders’ enthusiasm and optimism can build team spirit and can alsoprovide meaning and challenge to followers’ work or tasks, enhancing followers’ feelingsof impact, competence, meaning, and autonomy associated with psychologicalempowerment. All these factors can contribute to organization members’ feeling pridefrom being a part of their organization, which consequently increases their identificationwith the organization (Ashford et al., 2008).Transformational leaders also show individualized consideration, such as listeningattentively and paying close attention to their followers’ needs for achievement andgrowth. Such behaviors encourage followers to take on increasingly moreresponsibilities in order to develop to their full potential (Bass, 1985), thereby increasingtheir perceived competence associated with psychological empowerment (Spreitzer,1995). Furthermore, transformational leaders provide followers with greateropportunities for decision latitude, challenge, and responsibility, which will causefollowers to feel more confident and meaningful, and therefore psychologicallyempowered. This helps to satisfy followers’ need for affiliation within the organization byimproving their self-esteem, which eventually may enhance their identification with theorganization (Ashford et al., 2008).Copyright (c) 2012 Institute of Behavioral and Applied Management. All Rights Reserved.194

LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL IDENTIFICATIONHypothesis 3: Psychological empowerment mediates the relationship betweentransformational leadership and followers’ organizational identification.Likewise, the effect of active transactional leadership on followers’ organizationalidentification is likely to be mediated by followers’ psychological empowerment.Gkorezis and Petridou (2008) proposed that three elements of active transactionalleadership, namely information feedback, recognition, and financial rewards, arepositively related to followers’ psychological empowerment. As such, both contingentreward and active management-by-exception leadership provides information such asgoals and positive and negative feedback to followers (Bass, 1985), and thereby mayallow followers to better assess their competence and the impact they are making ininfluencing organizational outcomes. Competence and impact are essential elements ofpsychological empowerment (Spreitzer, 1995).Contingent reward behavior, in the forms of defining what needs to be done, how to getthings done, and what performances need to be achieved, may enable followers to bepsychologically empowered by better understanding the significance, meaning, andvalue of their job (Epitropaki & Martin, 2005; Spreitzer, 2005). Through activemanagement-by-exception, followers are able to realize what behaviors andperformances are considered deviances, mistakes, and errors in the assignments andto take corrective action to respond accordingly (Sosik & Jung, 2010), thereby clarifyingrole expectations required for organizational identification (Epitropaki & Martin, 2005).Along the way, followers are likely to consider these active transactional leadershipbehaviors as positive feedback, which may make them feel more empowered.As a result of the transformational leader’s focus on developing followers into leadersand of active transactional leaders’ positive exchange relationships, followers are likelyto feel that their roles are worthwhile and meaningful, thus raising their level of selfesteem, which, in turn, increases follower identification with the organization (Ashford etal., 2008). Furthermore, since empowered followers have a sense of psychological selfworth and meaningfulness, they are likely to be proud members of the organization andhave stronger identification with their organization (Wang & Lee, 2009).Ashford et al. (2008) point out that there is empirical support for relationships betweenthe meaning individuals find in their work and their organizational identification. Forexample, in an empirical study of blue-collar workers in the shipping industry, Erturk(2010) reported a positive relationship between psychological empowerment andorganizational identification. Similarly, prior research has demonstrated a positiveassociation between psychological empowerment and affective organizationalcommitment for nurses in hospitals (Avolio et al., 2004) and for employees and theirsupervisors (Liden, Wayne, & Sparrow, 2000). These authors used social identity theory(Tajfel, 1972) to explain how empowered workers’ self-construals of competence,autonomy, purposeful work, and impact make them identify with their organization as aplace where they can achieve influence meaningful organizational outcomes andprosper in their personal and professional lives as well. These results provide supportCopyright (c) 2012 Institute of Behavioral and Applied Management. All Rights Reserved.195

LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL IDENTIFICATIONfor a proposed linkage between psychological empowerment and organizationalidentification. Taken together, the above arguments suggest:Hypothesis 4: Psychological empowerment mediates the relationship betweenactive transactional leadership and followers’ organizational identification.Comparing the Influences of Transformational versus Active Transactional LeadershipThe main orientation of transformational leadership is to develop followers’ full potentialinto leaders, but transactional leaders focus more on resource exchanges and onmonitoring and controlling employees through rational or economic means (Bass,2008). Therefore, we expect that transformational leadership would have a morepositive effect on followers’ organizational identification and psychologicalempowerment than transactional leadership.Theoretically, transactional leadership is purported to be a less effective form ofleadership than transformational leadership (Bass, 1985). Transactional leaders areconsidered to concentrate on compromise, intrigue, and control; theref

transformational leadership explained variance in followers' organizational identification . Theoretical Framework and Hypotheses Development Ashforth et al.'s (2008) model of narrow and broad formulations of organizational identification serves as the theoretical framework for our study. Briefly, this model