Transformational leadership and public employee performance: The mediating roles of employee participation and public service motivation

Abstract

Despite the growing attention given to the connection between transformational leadership (TL) and job performance (JP), the precise mechanisms driving this association remain inadequately understood. This research delves into diverse causal factors that elucidate the TL–JP relationship. Drawing upon both TL theory and self-determination theory, the study explores the mediating role of employee participation in developing performance measures (PM participation) and public service motivation in the TL–JP relationship. The survey encompassed 208 pairs of employees and their direct managers operating in 208 different public organizations in Vietnam. Employing partial least square regression, the study validates that PM participation and public service motivation partly mediate the TL–JP relationship. The findings furnish valuable insights for managers seeking to enhance the performance of public employees in Vietnam and within emerging economies characterized by comparable structures.

Points for Practitioners

This study advocates for public sector leaders to adopt a transformational leadership approach. It emphasizes the importance of encouraging employee participation in the design, implementation and improvement of performance measures. Such engagement is anticipated to boost public service motivation, subsequently contributing to increased work efficiency among employees.

Keywords

Employee participation in developing performance metrics job performance public service motivation transformational leadership

Introduction

Scholars widely acknowledge the importance of organizational identification in the public sector, impacting both individual and organizational performance (Paarlberg & Lavigna, 2010). Organizational identification refers to individuals aligning themselves with organizational attributes. Consequently, organizations aim to improve employee performance and outcomes (Buil et al., 2019; Groen, Wilderom et al., 2017a). Prior research consistently links leadership style to individual and organizational performance in public organizations (Bellé, 2014; Schwarz et al., 2020). Transformational leadership (TL) is recognized as a powerful driver for motivating superior employee performance in these contexts (Buil et al., 2019; Wright et al., 2012). Transformational leadership prioritizes organizational goals, fostering teamwork and organizational commitment (Jensen & Bro, 2018), aligning with the public sector's focus on citizen and community welfare (Paarlberg & Lavigna, 2010; Wright et al., 2012).

Transformational leadership theory highlights leaders’ efforts to develop, communicate and uphold the organization's vision, motivating employees to transcend self-interest and achieve collective goals (Bass, 1999; Jensen & Bro, 2018). Transformational leadership's focus on organizational objectives also encompasses individual considerations, suggesting its potential to foster collaborative design, implementation, and modification of performance measurement methods that accurately evaluate employee performance and facilitate performance enhancement (Groen, Wilderom et al., 2017a). Notably, TL has been observed to promote public service motivation (PSM) through employee participation (Park, 2015; Park & Rainey, 2008). Caillier (2014) proposed researching TL's connection with PSM and other factors to better grasp the TL–performance relationship. Employee participation, a vital subject in human resource management research (Abernethy & Bouwens, 2005), continues to be a crucial focus for HR managers, investigating its impact on job performance (Groen, Wouters et al., 2017b).

While employee participation has been extensively studied in the realm of management accounting, recent attention has shifted toward performance measures (PM) participation owing to the uncertain impact of performance metrics on performance outcomes (Groen, Wilderom et al., 2017a). Contemporary research views PM participation as the degree to which employees influence the design, implementation, and maintenance of the performance measures they utilize (Groen, Wouters et al., 2017b). Further investigation is recommended by Groen, Wilderom et al. (2017a) to comprehensively elucidate the interplay between PM participation and job performance. Drawing on self-determination theory (SDT) (Ryan & Deci, 2004), involving employees in the design of their performance measures addresses their needs for competence, autonomy, and relevance, leading to increased enjoyment and intrinsic motivation, thereby enhancing performance (Groen, Wouters et al., 2017b).

While prior studies have shed light on TL's impact on public employee performance, the interplay between TL, PM participation, and PSM in influencing performance remains an area that requires further exploration, especially in different institutional contexts (Buil et al., 2019; Paarlberg & Lavigna, 2010). Hence, conducting a survey with 208 employee–manager pairs in 208 public organizations in Vietnam and utilizing partial least squares regression, this study aims to provide insights into how PM participation and PSM can mediate to help transformational leaders in public organizations improve employee performance, employing TL theory and SDT. These insights are necessary for public organizations to receive the full benefits of PM participation and PSM. Addressing inconsistent findings in prior TL–job performance (JP) studies (Buil et al., 2019; Caillier, 2014; Paarlberg & Lavigna, 2010), we explore PM participation and PSM as key mediators. Employing a rigorous longitudinal approach following Perry and Vandenabeele's recommendation (2015), we collect supervisor-rated performance data and employee-rated TL, PM participation, and PSM at three time points, overcoming methodological limitations associated with self-reported measures. Additionally, our study extends TL understanding in the context of Vietnamese public organizations. Here, both central and local governments implement focused training programs to boost managerial skills. Leadership engagement plays a crucial role in enacting reforms and tackling accountability challenges. It is essential to fortify senior leadership and elevate public employee performance in Vietnam's public sector, as highlighted by Pham (2018).

The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. The following section develops the hypotheses. The third section discusses the research method and explains the sample and data used. The fourth section analyzes the results and reports additional tests. Finally, the fifth section offers a summary and concluding remarks.

Hypotheses development

Transformational leadership and job performance

Transformational leadership, originating with Burns in 1978 and expanded by Bass in 1985 (Avolio & Bass, 1995), involves key components: inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, individualized consideration and idealized influence (Yammarino & Dubinsky, 1994). These components collectively drive employees to align with organizational goals (Bass, 1999), impacting current and future performance (Caillier, 2014; Yammarino et al., 1998).

In the public sector, TL is applied to enhance performance by transforming attitudes, beliefs, values, and ethics (Orazi et al., 2013; Bottomley et al., 2016), potentially boosting both employee and organizational outcomes (Paarlberg & Lavigna, 2010). Empirical evidence, such as Caillier's (2014) US study and Alshehhi et al.'s (2019) findings in the UAE, supports the positive TL–performance relationship. Therefore, drawing on both theoretical foundations and empirical findings, we propose the following research hypothesis:

H1: Transformational leadership is positively related to JP.

Employee participation in developing performance measures and public service motivation

Performance measures participation, as defined by Abernethy and Bouwens (2005), refers to the extent to which employees perceive themselves to have influence over the design, implementation and maintenance of performance measures. This encompasses their involvement in the design, implementation, and maintenance stages (Groen, Wouters et al., 2017b). During design phase, employees contribute to indicator selection, data identification, and performance report templates (Groen et al., 2012). In the implementation stage, employees use the developed measures to assess their performance. Subsequently, they offer feedback and adjustments to improve measure quality (Groen, Wilderom et al., 2017a). Public service motivation is the willingness to serve with the purpose of doing good for people and society (Perry & Wise, 1990). Engaging in the development of performance measurement designs not only fosters a sense of respect and heightened autonomy among employees, but it also translates into increased dedication to their tasks. This heightened commitment, in turn, leads to an enhancement in the overall drive of public employees to contribute positively towards the welfare of others. Drawing from SDT (Pedersen, 2015), PM participation contributes to employees’ enjoyment of work, self-motivation, mental well-being, and motivation to make meaningful contributions to society. Work engagement, as suggested by Bakker (2015), is strongly related to PSM, as it creates incentives for employees to strive for significant organizational outcomes. Consequently, we propose the following hypothesis:

H2: Performance measures participation is positively related to PSM

The mediating role of PM participation

In the contemporary public sector, leaders are adopting private sector management tools to enhance organizational performance (Jensen & Bro, 2018). These tools encompass performance measurement systems (Groen et al., 2012) and performance-based rewards (Bashir & Hassan, 2020). In support of this, Clarke's meta-analytic path analysis (2013) demonstrates that leader behaviors, particularly TL, positively impact employee participation. Notably, transformational leaders have a crucial role in fostering a safe work environment that encourages employee participation (Nazari et al., 2022).

Drawing upon TL theory (Avolio & Bass, 1995), transformational leaders adeptly motivate employees for exceptional performance, encouraging innovative ideas and creative approaches. They address participation challenges, facilitate shared experiences among employees, and strive for improved performance (Nazari et al., 2022). Empowering employees to excel in their tasks is a key focus of TL (Bass, 1999; Orazi et al., 2013). Consequently, transformational leaders actively promote employee participation in various organizational activities, such as the design, implementation, and improvement of performance measures. They collaborate with employees to develop new measures or refine existing ones (Groen, Wilderom et al., 2017a).

The positive impact of TL on employees’ work engagement with the organization has been demonstrated by Buil et al. (2019). Transformational leadership serves as a catalyst for improving employee engagement, leading to a heightened willingness among employees to actively participate in various aspects of their work. This, in turn, establishes a crucial foundation that underpins the augmentation of employees’ perception regarding their ability to exert influence on performance measures. In essence, by fostering engagement through TL, employees become more inclined to contribute actively and feel a stronger sense of empowerment in shaping performance outcomes. Additionally, Nazari et al. (2022), in a survey of 483 senior and middle managers at the agricultural bank of Iran, found a significant positive effect of TL on employee participation. Based on these findings, we anticipate that TL will foster increased PM participation.

H3a: Transformational leadership is positively related to PM participation.

Employee participation is very effective in promoting ideas and involving more employees in the activities and processes of the organization, and puts employees on the path to improved job performance (Nazari et al., 2022). We also argue that when employees are involved in the design of performance measures, they consider these measures to be of better quality and control to better assist their jobs, thereby improving JP (Groen, Wilderom et al., 2017a). Performance measures participation increases proactive attitudes, because it gives employees a certain amount of autonomy, thereby increasing the productivity of individuals in the organization (Groen et al., 2012). Recently, empirical studies in the Netherlands show that PM participation is positively related to JP (Groen, Wilderom et al., 2017a; Groen, Wouters et al., 2017b). Thus, we postulate:

H3b: Performance measures participation is positively related to JP

It becomes evident that TL plays a multifaceted role in bolstering employee engagement, extending its influence across various dimensions such as the conception, execution, and upkeep of performance metrics. This not only cultivates a proactive attitude within employees but also serves as a catalyst for enhancing overall organizational productivity. Recently, Nazari et al. (2022) found that TL style through employee participation has a positive and significant effect on sustainable job performance of employees within Keshavarzi Bank of Iran. This outcome further reinforces the pivotal role of TL in fostering an environment conducive to heightened performance. In addition, based on the above (H3a and H3b), we propose that PM participation mediates the relationship between TL and JP. Thus, we postulate:

H3c: Performance measures participation positively mediates the relationship between TL and JP.

The mediating role of PSM

Many scholars have reported that PSM is especially important in public organizations, which itself is a complex concept that includes many components and is greatly influenced by the institutional factors of each economy (Miao et al., 2019). Accordingly, PSM has been viewed as a key mechanism explaining how leaders influence JP in the public sector (Paarlberg & Lavigna, 2010). Transformational leadership, characterized by its capacity to nurture employee innovation and facilitate their growth, has been recognized as a catalyst for augmenting intrinsic motivation and altruism among employees in their service to the community. This, in turn, engenders a sense of satisfaction, enthusiasm, and commitment to both the task at hand and personal advancement. Extensive research has consistently demonstrated a positive correlation between TL and PSM (Andersen et al., 2018; Park & Rainey, 2008; Vandenabeele, 2014). Hence, we also anticipate that TL will enhance PSM. According to self-determination theory, PSM represents a more self-determined form of motivation (Pedersen, 2015). This heightened sense of self-determination enables individuals to experience a greater sense of purpose and significance in their work, leading to feelings of joy, excitement, commitment, and focused engagement (Ryan & Deci, 2004). Therefore, in line with self-determination theory, PSM enhances employees’ intrinsic motivation and subsequently contributes to their JP. We, therefore, propose that:

H4a: Transformational leadership is positively related to PSM.

H4b: Public service motivation is positively related to JP.

H4c: Public service motivation positively mediates the relationship between TL and JP.

The sequential mediating role of pm participation and PSM

Based on TL theory, we find that leaders encourage employee autonomy (Bass, 1999). Transformational leadership enhances empowerment activities, encourages employee participation in organizational activities (Orazi et al., 2013), and engages with employees in the design, implementation, and maintenance of performance measures (Groen, Wilderom et al., 2017a). In this sense, when employees participate in developing performance measures, they feel respected and their autonomy is enhanced. This principle resonates with the insights offered by self-determination theory, where workplace autonomy emerges as a catalyst for enhancing employee PSM (Ryan & Deci, 2004).

Consequently, PM participation serves as a catalyst for increased employee autonomy, leading to heightened intrinsic motivation (Groen, Wilderom et al., 2017a). Research conducted by Park and Rainey (2008) affirms that workplace autonomy enhances employee motivation to serve the public, thereby promoting JP (Miao et al., 2019). In particular, employees with a strong sense of PSM, as discussed earlier, exert greater effort in their work, prioritizing organizational commitments to realize the public organization's mission of community service (Paarlberg & Lavigna, 2010). As a result, employees with high levels of PSM are more likely to achieve superior performance (Pedersen, 2015; Van der Kolk et al., 2019). Consequently, based on the above arguments (H2, H3c, and H4c), we propose that:

H5: Performance measures participation and PSM sequentially mediate the relationship between TL and JP.

The proposed model and corresponding hypotheses are shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Hypothetical model.

Methodology

Data collection and participants

Social science has encountered challenges in formulating universally applicable theories, thereby relying predominantly on context-specific knowledge. A method particularly well suited for generating such context-dependent knowledge is the case study (Flyvbjerg, 2006). The utility of applied designs, such as case-study research, is evident when it yields practical insights. Moreover, this approach retains the potential for generalizability to other countries, contributing to scientific advancement, and remains conducive for hypothesis testing (Flyvbjerg, 2006). Enhancing social science may be achieved through an increased emphasis on well-executed case studies. In this study conducted in Vietnam, the design holds promise for extrapolation to other countries, offering relevance to the literature on administrative science. Our research methodology employs quantitative techniques, specifically utilizing surveys, to effectively address the research questions (Hair et al., 2017).

We tested the hypotheses by means of a survey of pairs of employees and their direct managers working in public organizations in Vietnam. The pairs of respondents must meet two basic criteria as follows: (1) the employees and their managers must have worked together in the current department for at least 5 years; and (2) their public organizations must have applied JP measures. We selected the sample by a convenience method combined with snowball sampling. Snowball sampling is using responsive-driven sampling, which involves asking each potential respondent for the contact details of other people who meet a set criteria (Groen, Wouters et al., 2017b). Salganik and Heckathorn (2004) suggest that snowball sampling leads to methodically unbiased samples, which do not depend on one's starting point, allowing good sampling and even better than random sampling methods. Accordingly, many previous studies have used this sampling method to select a suitable sample for their study (e.g. Groen, Wilderom et al. 2017a; Groen, Wouters et al. 2017b).

We sought respondents by contacting people in our network. In particular, we focused on departmental managers who participate in leadership training courses organized by the Ministry of Home Affairs, which has 279 managers working at 279 public institutions. Upon outlining the survey's purpose, a total of 267 departmental managers willingly agreed to participate, providing us with their contact information and the contact details of their employees who met the pre-specified criteria. In each organization, we randomly selected an employee from the list provided by managers, inviting them to partake in an online survey. Once the employees within each public organization had concluded their surveys, we disclosed the specific employee names to the respective managers, allowing them to complete the online survey as well. To ensure confidentiality, we communicated clearly to all survey respondents that their responses would be kept confidential. As a result, employees and managers received personalized feedback reports containing only their own results, with no access to the results of the other half of their pair.

In this study, we have collected data in three phases. During phase 1, we asked employees to provide their demographic information as well as to rate the TL of their immediate supervisors and their level of PM participation. At the end of phase 1, we have received 236 matching responses. At phase 2, two months later, employees who had completed the ﬁrst survey (236 employees) were asked to rate their own PSM level. As a result of phase 2, 208 employees responded and completed the survey. Thus, a total of 208 employees responded to two online surveys, resulting in a rather high response rate of 74.5%. Finally, at phase 3, two months later, the 208 department heads were asked to provide their own demographic information and rate the JP of their subordinates. We checked and made sure that the answers from employees and their superiors matched exactly, with no duplication between the respondents. Thus, the survey was completed by 208 pairs of respondents representing 208 public organizations in Vietnam. The public sector in Vietnam is dominated by public service organizations (over 50%), followed by administrative agencies and other public organizations (General Statistics Office, 2018). We present an overview of respondents’ characteristics in Table 1 (see online).

Variable measurement

Our research used pre-validated multi-item scales. Following popular public administration studies (Campbell, 2018), TL was measured using a five-item scale as developed by Wright et al. (2012). Performance measures participation is understood as how employees perceive their influence over the design, implementation, and maintenance of performance metrics used to measure their own performance (Abernethy & Bouwens, 2005). Thus, PM participation was assessed following Groen, Wouters et al. (2017b). In this case, PM participation was measured using a five-item scale.

Public service motivation is present in all sectors, but is especially important in the public sector (Pandey et al., 2008). Wright et al. (2012) measured PSM by using ﬁve items adapted from Perry & Wise (1990). This scale has also been validated as a global measure of PSM in the public sector (Caillier, 2014; Wright et al., 2012). Therefore, our research measured PSM as Wright et al. (2012). Public employee performance can be understood as the level of individual contribution to achieve the mission of serving the community (Williams & Anderson, 1991). We measured JP using five items according to Groen, Wilderom et al. (2017a), based on the well-known scale developed by Williams and Anderson (1991). These items are used to measure the extent to which employees meet the job requirements required by managers in the organization. Evaluating employees’ job performance by their direct managers is a means to reduce bias in self-reporting (Groen, Wilderom et al., 2017a).

In addition, our research uses employees’ demographic characteristics as control variables. Previous studies have shown that such demographic characteristics can explain differences in employee performance, such as for example, Miao et al. (2019); Schwarz et al. (2020). Specifically, the control variables used in this study included gender, age, and education. At phase 1, employees will self-report on these demographic characteristics. Consistent with previous studies, we measured gender (coded 1 = male and 2 = female), age and education using ordinal variables.

Common method bias assessment

In this study, the common method variance may be a concern when both TL and PM participation were measured at phase 1. However, we employed Harman's test to examine this issue (Tehseen et al., 2017). The results show that the Harman single factor is 39.05%, which is smaller than the threshold level of 50% of the total variance extracted from the model, so the common method variance does not seriously affect the accuracy of the study results (Tehseen et al., 2017).

Results

Measurement model

According to the instructions of Hair et al. (2017), we have checked the reliability, convergence value and discriminant value of the research concepts in the model. Table 2 (see online) shows that both Cronbach's alpha coefficient and composite reliability values were greater than 0.7, implying that the scales have high reliability. We evaluate the external load coefficient of the observed variable combined with average variance extracted value (AVE). The results show that the load factors are all greater than the threshold of 0.708, ranging from 0.76 to 0.93. At the same time, all of the corresponding t-test values of the observed variables (values from 12.78 to 78.87) also meet the requirements of greater than 2.57 for statistical significance at 1%. Finally, AVE values were greater than 0.5. Therefore, we conclude that the scales are fully convergent.

We test in three ways for discriminant validity, namely, the heterotrait–monotrait (HTMT) ratios method (Henseler et al., 2015), and the Fornell and Larcker criterion (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Firstly, all HTMT ratios between variables were below 0.8. Next, we determined that the root-squared values of the AVE (with values between 0.80 and 0.91) were above the correlations between pairs of variables (with values between 0.29 and 0.68). The results in Table 3 (see online) conﬁrm that the scales in our study are able to ensure a very good discriminant validity.

Structural model

Following Nevitt and Hancock (2001), the bootstrapping nonparametric technique of resampling with 3000 subsamples was applied to test the proposed model. Table 4 presents the coefficients β, the t-values for paths in the model, and the adjusted R² for each endogenous variable. First, we used the corresponding inflation factor variance values of independent variables to control potential multicollinearity issues (O’brien, 2007). The results show that the inflation factor variance values for each relationship between the independent variables are lower than 5 (Hair et al., 2017), with the values ranging from 1.0 to 1.99. These results help confirm that there is no multicollinearity problem in our research model.

The adjusted R² coefficients in Table 4 indicate that TL and PM participation explain 49% of the PSM; and combined with PSM explain 52% of the JP. These results contribute to demonstrating that the proposed model suitably fits the collected data (Hair et al., 2017).

The regression analysis for the hypothesized relationships is also detailed in Table 4 (see online). Hypothesis 1 suggests that leaders in public organizations who adopt a TL style motivate employees to perform better. As predicted, TL (β = 0.41, p < 0.01) was significantly positively related to JP. Hypothesis 2 suggests that PM participation is positively related to PSM. This can be interpreted as enhancing PM participation, encouraging their love of work, enhancing self-motivation, and improving employee's PSM. As predicted, PM participation (β = 0.20, p < 0.01) was significantly positively related to PSM. This result is consistent with SDT (Pedersen, 2015). To test the mediation effects, we used the procedure suggested by Hair et al. (2017), applying a bootstrap analysis. In addition, following the procedure of Fritz and MacKinnon (2007), we calculated conﬁdence intervals for each speciﬁc indirect effect.

Hypothesis 3a suggests that TL is positively related to PM participation. The data analysis results in Table 4 show that this hypothesis is accepted (β = 0.29; t-value = 5.17). This result is consistent with previous studies (Buil et al., 2019; Nazari et al., 2022). Hypothesis 3b suggests that PM participation is positively related to JP. The results in Table 4 show that this hypothesis is accepted (β = 0.14; t-value = 2.47). This result is consistent with previous studies (Groen, Wilderom et al., 2017a; Groen, Wouters et al., 2017b). Hypothesis 3c predicts that TL will be positively related to JP indirectly through increasing PM participation. In line with hypothesis 3c, PM participation partially mediated the relationship between TL and JP (β = 0.04, t-value = 2.31, confidence interval, CI = [0.01; 0.08]). This result indicates that TL style promotes PM participation, which, in turn, enhances JP.

Next, hypothesis 4a suggests that TL is positively related to PSM. The results in Table 4 show that this hypothesis is accepted (β = 0.62; t-value = 10.4). This result is consistent with previous studies (Park and Rainey, 2008; Wright et al., 2012). Hypothesis 4b suggests that PSM is positively related to JP. The results in Table 4 show that this hypothesis is accepted (β = 0.31; t-value = 3.53). This result is consistent with SDT (Ryan & Deci, 2004; Pedersen, 2015). Hypothesis 4c postulates that PSM mediates the effect of TL on JP. The results showed that the indirect effect of TL on JP through PSM was 0.19 (99% CI = [0.08; 0.32]). This result indicates that leaders in public organizations who apply the principles of TL can harness the power of their employees’ public service motivations to enhance JP.

Finally, hypotheses 5 predicts that the effect of TL on JP is explained by its positive inﬂuence on PM participation, which, in turn, enhances PSM. As predicted, a strong partial sequential mediation for the relationship between TL and JP through PM participation and PSM is supported (β = 0.02, t-value = 2.29, CI = [0.01; 0.04]). In line with these ﬁndings, hypothesis 5 is accepted.

Additional testing results

To test the validity of the results, this study also considered the impact coefficient f² as a means of assessing the significance of exogenous variables to the R² value of the endogenous latent variables (Hair et al., 2017). The analysis results in Table 5 (see online) show a vital role of TL for PSM and JP in public organizations.

We also evaluate the suitability of both the inner structural and outer measurement models for the data by using the standardized root mean squared residual (SRMR) value (Henseler et al., 2016). The results in Table 5 show that the SRMR was 0.079, indicating a good model fit in our research.

Discussion and conclusion

The literature on public sector leadership observes many different leadership styles and reveals that their influence on performance is quite complex (Orazi et al., 2013; Van Wart, 2003). In line with TL theory (Bass, 1999), our findings indicate that a TL style has a positive and direct influence on the JP of employees working in public organizations in Vietnam. This result is also consistent with previous studies conducted in the context of public organizations in different countries (Alshehhi et al., 2019; Bellé, 2014; Caillier, 2014). Our findings therefore provide additional reasons for the need of TL in organizations (Jensen & Bro, 2018), especially public organizations (Orazi et al., 2013).

Our research builds upon the previous work conducted by Groen, Wouters et al. (2017b) by being the first study to examine the relationship between TL, PM participation, and JP. In doing so, we expand upon the existing understanding of the relationship between PM participation and JP as established by Groen, Wilderom et al. (2017a) and Groen et al. (2012) by identifying TL as the antecedent variable for these two constructs. Specifically, our study contributes to the literature by elucidating how TL influences JP through the mediating role of PM participation. Furthermore, our findings extend the research conducted by Groen, Wilderom et al. (2017a) and Groen, Wouters et al. (2017b) by confirming the direct relationship between PM participation and JP.

This study also provides a unique contribution by highlighting the mediating role of PSM in linking TL and JP. While previous studies have explored the association between TL and PSM (Jensen & Bro, 2018; Vandenabeele, 2014; Wright et al., 2012), our study offers empirical evidence supporting the view of Paarlberg and Lavigna (2010) that TL indirectly influences JP through PSM. This finding aligns with self-determination theory, which posits that TL enhances intrinsic motivation, ultimately improving employee work efficiency (Jensen & Bro, 2018; Paarlberg & Lavigna, 2010). Additionally, our study broadens the understanding of the indirect influence of different leadership styles on JP through PSM (Schwarz et al., 2020; Schwarz et al., 2016).

Interestingly, our research reveals that PM participation and PSM operate as sequential mediators in the relationship between TL and JP. Previous studies have highlighted the incentivizing effect of employee participation on organizational performance (Bakker, 2015; Groen et al., 2012). Furthermore, PSM has been identified as a key mechanism for explaining how TL influences employee performance in the public sector (Paarlberg & Lavigna, 2010). However, no studies have examined how these two mechanisms work together to explain the relationship between TL and JP. Our study confirms the presence of this sequential mediation effect within the public sector and extends prior research by demonstrating that PM participation and PSM may collectively elucidate the relationship between TL and JP.

From a practical standpoint, our study offers significant management implications for public administrators aiming to enhance JP. Firstly, public organizations can benefit from adopting TL styles by training their managers accordingly. Currently, the Ministry of Home Affairs in Vietnam conducts regular training courses for public organization managers. However, the effectiveness of these programs is limited owing to their short duration and focus on updating documents rather than providing comprehensive training in TL skills. In line with Caillier's (2014) suggestion, we recommend that public institutions invest in long-term training programs lasting at least 6 months, with a specific emphasis on practicing TL skills, including effective communication with employees.

Furthermore, our findings highlight the mediating roles of PM participation and PSM in the relationship between TL and JP. Based on these findings, we recommend that HR managers foster employee engagement to collaboratively develop JP measures. In Vietnam, most public organizations primarily rely on performance measures dictated by state regulations for evaluating employee performance. However, this approach results in numerous deficiencies, such as incomplete measurement content, inappropriate measurement methods, and unfairness in evaluations. Therefore, public organizations should involve employees in the design of performance metrics, allowing them to define the specific criteria needed for accurate performance assessment. Additionally, public organizations should sustain employee involvement in revising and upgrading performance measurement methods. Simultaneously, capacity-building and skill development programs should be offered to employees to enhance their competence and confidence, thus improving the effectiveness of PM participation.

Lastly, PSM holds significant importance in the public sector owing to its positive relationship with JP (Perry & Vandenabeele, 2015; Perry & Wise, 1990). Our research contributes by revealing that PSM acts as a link between TL, PM participation, and JP. Considering the similarities between the political institutions of Vietnam and China (Miao et al., 2019), employment in public organizations is highly esteemed, but public employees receive relatively low wages compared with the private sector, and career advancement opportunities are limited, potentially dampening their enthusiasm for work (Perry & Vandenabeele, 2015). To promote higher levels of PSM among employees, we recommend that managers in public organizations monitor changes in employee PSM and promptly adjust policies to prevent low levels from leading to poor performance or inappropriate behavior.

However, we acknowledge the limitation of this study in not utilizing multidimensional measures of PSM and therefore aspects of PSM may not be fully evaluated. Perry & Wise (1990) introduced a multidimensional PSM scale that encompasses four dimensions comprising commitment to the public interest/civic duty, compassion, self-sacrifice, and attraction to public policy making. Future research should explore whether our results are robust to multidimensional PSM scales. Second, this study solely focused on the mediating roles of PM participation and PSM in the relationship between TL and JP. Given the complex structure of public leadership and the existence of various leadership styles (Orazi et al., 2013; Van Wart, 2003), the link between each leadership style and outcome variables like PM participation, PSM, and JP may differ. For instance, in a similar Chinese context, Schwarz et al. (2016) studied servant leadership while Schwarz et al. (2020) explored accountability, rule-following, political loyalty, and network governance approaches. Future studies should investigate the distinctiveness of public leadership styles in relation to PM participation, PSM, and employee performance, providing a more nuanced understanding of public leadership's influence on employee performance (Orazi et al., 2013). Lastly, the sample size may limit the generalizability of results. As outlined by Salganik and Heckathorn (2004), we employed snowball sampling to ensure methodically unbiased samples. However, it is essential to note that our initial contact was established through a convenience-based approach within our own network. This may hinder the validity of our findings for broader population generalization. Thus, we recommend that future researchers replicate our study, expanding data collection to various sectors and countries.

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-1-ras-10.1177_00208523241230439 - Supplemental material for Transformational leadership and public employee performance: The mediating roles of employee participation and public service motivation

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-ras-10.1177_00208523241230439 for Transformational leadership and public employee performance: The mediating roles of employee participation and public service motivation by Yen Thi Tran and Trang Cam Hoang in International Review of Administrative Sciences

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

This research is funded by University of Economics Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam (UEH).

Declaration of conflicting interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the University of Economics Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam (grant number 2022-04-29-0967).

ORCID iDs

Yen Thi Tran

Trang Cam Hoang

Supplemental material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

Tables, figures and appendix are available online at .

Yen Thi Tran is a lecturer at the Department of Economics and Accounting at Quy Nhon University, Vietnam. She received her PhD in Accounting from the University of Economics Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. Yen's research spans the accounting and public administration areas. Her current interests include financial reporting quality, performance measurement systems, and public service motivation. Her work has appeared in academic journals, including Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, International Journal of Public Administration, Journal of Accounting in Emerging Economies, and Journal of Asia Business Studies.

Trang Cam Hoang is a lecturer at the School of Accounting, University of Economics Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. She received her PhD in accounting and finance from the University of Wollongong, Australia. Trang's research spans the accounting and finance areas. Her work has appeared in academic journals, including Journal of Business Ethics, Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Research in International Business and Finance, Finance Research Letters, Australian Accounting Review, and Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, among others.

References

Abernethy

Bouwens

(2005) Determinants of accounting innovation implementation. Abacus 41(3): 217–240.

Alshehhi

Abuelhassan

Nusari

(2019) Effect of transformational leadership on employees’ performances through job satisfaction within public sectors in UAE. International Journal of Innovative Technology and Exploring Engineering 8(8S2): 588–597.

Andersen

Bjørnholt

Bro

, et al. (2018) Leadership and motivation: A qualitative study of transformational leadership and public service motivation. International Review of Administrative Sciences 84(4): 675–691.

Avolio

Bass

(1995) Individual consideration viewed at multiple levels of analysis: A multi-level framework for examining the diffusion of transformational leadership. The Leadership Quarterly 6(2): 199–218.

Bakker

(2015) A job demands–resources approach to public service motivation. Public Administration Review 75(5): 723–732.

Bashir

Hassan

(2020) The need for ethical leadership in combating corruption. International Review of Administrative Sciences 86(4): 673–690.

Bass

(1999) Two decades of research and development in transformational leadership. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 8(1): 9–32.

Bellé

(2014) Leading to make a difference: a field experiment on the performance effects of transformational leadership, perceived social impact, and public service motivation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 24(1): 109–136.

Bottomley

Mostafa

AMS

Gould-Williams

, et al. (2016) The impact of transformational leadership on organizational citizenship behaviours: the contingent role of public service motivation. British Journal of Management 27(2): 390–405.

10.

Buil

Martínez

Matute

(2019) Transformational leadership and employee performance: The role of identification, engagement and proactive personality. International Journal of Hospitality Management 77: 64–75.

11.

Caillier

(2014) Toward a better understanding of the relationship between transformational leadership, public service motivation, mission valence, and employee performance: A preliminary study. Public Personnel Management 43(2): 218–239.

12.

Campbell

(2018) Efficiency, incentives, and transformational leadership: Understanding collaboration preferences in the public sector. Public Performance & Management Review 41(2): 277–299.

13.

Clarke

(2013) Safety leadership: A meta-analytic review of transformational and transactional leadership styles as antecedents of safety behaviours. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 86(1): 22–49.

14.

Flyvbjerg

(2006) Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry 12(2): 219–245.

15.

Fornell

Larcker

(1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research 18(1): 39–50.

16.

Fritz

MacKinnon

(2007) Required sample size to detect the mediated effect. Psychological Science 18(3): 233–239.

17.

General Statistics Office (2018) Statistical Yearbook 2017. Hanoi, Vietnam: Statistical Publishing House.

18.

Groen

Wilderom

Wouters

(2017a) High job performance through co-developing performance measures with employees. Human Resource Management 56(1): 111–132.

19.

Groen

Wouters

Wilderom

(2012) Why do employees take more initiatives to improve their performance after co-developing performance measures? A field study. Management Accounting Research 23(2): 120–141.

20.

Groen

Wouters

Wilderom

(2017b) Employee participation, performance metrics, and job performance: A survey study based on self-determination theory. Management Accounting Research 36: 51–66.

21.

Hair

Hult

GTM

Ringle

, et al. (2017) A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

22.

Henseler

Hubona

Ray

(2016) Using PLS path modeling in new technology research: Updated guidelines. Industrial Management & Data Systems 116(1): 2–20.

23.

Henseler

Ringle

Sarstedt

(2015) A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 43(1): 115–135.

24.

Jensen

Bro

(2018) How transformational leadership supports intrinsic motivation and public service motivation: The mediating role of basic need satisfaction. The American Review of Public Administration 48(6): 535–549.

25.

Miao

Eva

Newman

, et al. (2019) Public service motivation and performance: The role of organizational identification. Public Money & Management 39(2): 77–85.

26.

Nazari

Fallahnejad

Fard

(2022) Achieving sustainable job performance of employees through transformational leadership and employee participation. Journal on Innovation and Sustainability RISUS 13(3): 162–175.

27.

Nevitt

Hancock

(2001) Performance of bootstrapping approaches to model test statistics and parameter standard error estimation in structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 8(3): 353–377.

28.

O’brien

(2007) A caution regarding rules of thumb for variance inflation factors. Quality & Quantity 41(5): 673–690.

29.

Orazi

Turrini

Valotti

(2013) Public sector leadership: New perspectives for research and practice. International Review of Administrative Sciences 79(3): 486–504.

30.

Paarlberg

Lavigna

(2010) Transformational leadership and public service motivation: Driving individual and organizational performance. Public Administration Review 70(5): 710–718.

31.

Pandey

Wright

Moynihan

(2008) Public service motivation and interpersonal citizenship behavior in public organizations: Testing a preliminary model. International Public Management Journal 11(1): 89–108.

32.

Park

(2015) Employee participation and outcomes: Organizational strategy does matter. Employee Relations 37(5): 604–622.

33.

Park

Rainey

(2008) Leadership and public service motivation in US federal agencies. International Public Management Journal 11(1): 109–142.

34.

Pedersen

(2015) Activating the forces of public service motivation: Evidence from a low-intensity randomized survey experiment. Public Administration Review 75(5): 734–746.

35.

Perry

Vandenabeele

(2015) Public service motivation research: Achievements, challenges, and future directions. Public Administration Review 75(5): 692–699.

36.

Perry

Wise

(1990) The motivational bases of public service. Public Administration Review 50(3): 367–373.

37.

Pham

(2018) Leadership and public sector reform in Vietnam. In: Leadership and Public Sector Reform in Asia. Bingley, UK: Emerald, 127–149.

38.

Ryan

Deci

(2004) Autonomy is no illusion: Self-determination theory and the empirical study of authenticity, awareness, and will. In: Greenberg

Koole

Pyszczynski

(eds) Handbook of Experimental Existential Psychology. New York: Guilford Press, 449–479.

39.

Salganik

Heckathorn

(2004) Sampling and estimation in hidden populations using respondent-driven sampling. Sociological Methodology 34(1): 193–240.

40.

Schwarz

Eva

Newman

(2020) Can public leadership increase public service motivation and job performance? Public Administration Review 80(4): 543–554.

41.

Schwarz

Newman

Cooper

, et al. (2016) Servant leadership and follower job performance: The mediating effect of public service motivation. Public Administration 94(4): 1025–1041.

42.

Tehseen

Ramayah

Sajilan

(2017) Testing and controlling for common method variance: A review of available methods. Journal of Management Sciences 4(2): 142–168.

43.

Vandenabeele

(2014) Explaining public service motivation: The role of leadership and basic needs satisfaction. Review of Public Personnel Administration 34(2): 153–173.

44.

Van der Kolk

Van Veen-Dirks

PMG

Ter Bogt

(2019) The impact of management control on employee motivation and performance in the public sector. European Accounting Review 28(5): 901–928.

45.

Van Wart

(2003) Public-sector leadership theory: An assessment. Public Administration Review 63(2): 214–228.

46.

Williams

Anderson

(1991) Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. Journal of Management 17(3): 601–617.

47.

Wright

Moynihan

Pandey

(2012) Pulling the levers: Transformational leadership, public service motivation, and mission valence. Public Administration Review 72(2): 206–215.

48.

Yammarino

Dubinsky

(1994) Transformational leadership theory: Using levels of analysis to determine boundary conditions. Personnel Psychology 47(4): 787–811.

49.

Yammarino

Spangler

Dubinsky

(1998) Transformational and contingent reward leadership: Individual, dyad, and group levels of analysis. The Leadership Quarterly 9(1): 27–54.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.04 MB