Country differences in the relationship between leadership and employee engagement: A meta-analysis

verifiedrich profile · The Leadership Quarterly · 2021

Li, Peikai; Sun, Jian-Min; Taris, Toon W.; Xing, Lu; Peeters, Maria C.W.

10.1016/j.leaqua.2020.101458 · CrossRef: verified

What this article reports

The findings we extracted from this work, normalized into Principia’s relationship form (X → Y). Each feeds the synthesized models below.

abusive supervision → work engagement

r = -0.233 · k=9 · grade A · unverified

transformational leadership → work engagement

r = 0.43 · k=100 · grade A · unverified

servant leadership → work engagement

r = 0.474 · k=26 · grade A · unverified

Models this article informs

The meta-analytic priors this article contributes evidence to — its place in the broader synthesis.

abusive supervision predicts work engagement

r̄ ≈ -0.23 · k=1 · uninformative

servant leadership predicts work engagement

r̄ ≈ +0.49 · k=2 · informative

transformational leadership predicts work engagement

r̄ ≈ +0.43 · k=1 · weakly informative

What the literature says about it

Attributed, open-access quotes from other works that cite this article, plus the citation-graph verdict tally. Corroborations and disputes, in one place — the honest-broker view.

4 supporting1 disputing

disputes “The meta-analysis study by Li et al. (2021) revealed the moderator role of UA in the relationship between transformational leadership and employee engagement.”

The Relationship Between Transformational Leadership and Teacher Self-efficacy in Terms of National Culture (2023) · CCBY

supports “Moreover, specific leadership styles - servant, empowering, ethical, charismatic, positively correlates with employee engagement (Li et al., 2021).”

NEW GENERATION’S EXPECTATIONS FOR 21ST CENTURY LEADER AND PERCEPTION BY YOUNG EMPLOYEES OF LEADERSHIP IN ORGANIZATIONS (2021) · CCBY

supports “…the correspondence between s ervant leadership and subordinate engagement (cf. Baikovich & Wasserman, 2020) is less likely to vary across national cultural characteristics (Li et al., 2021), the generalizability in terms of applying the Hofstede framework for prediction might work in large part.”

A consideration of the dimensions of servant leadership in intercultural contexts: a focal case study of a UK executive in Japan (2023) · cc-by-nc

supports “A recent meta-analysis found that the relationship between abusive supervision and employee engagement was slightly stronger for longitudinal studies than for cross-sectional studies, but this difference was not statistically significant (Li et al., 2021).”

Are Bad Leaders Indeed Bad for Employees? A Meta-Analysis of Longitudinal Studies Between Destructive Leadership and Employee Outcomes (2023) · CCBY

supports “The meta-analysis study by Li et al. (2021) revealed the moderator role of UA in the relationship between transformational leadership and employee engagement.”

The Relationship Between Transformational Leadership and Teacher Self-efficacy in Terms of National Culture (2023) · CCBY

Ancillary research

Neighbouring works in the citation graph around this article.

Assembled from Principia’s registry — bibliographic record, extracted effect sizes, the models they inform, and open-access citing literature.