Leadership and Employee Work Passion: Propositions for Future Empirical Investigations

Abstract

There has been growing research interest in work passion; however, limited research has been conducted on the role of work environment antecedents on which employee cognitions and affect are formed and employee work intentions are developed. Research has shown that leadership is fundamental and influential in contemporary organizations, and it affects numerous positive employee and organizational outcomes, yet questions relating to which leadership behaviors encourage (or discourage) employee work passion, and how such processes occur, remain unanswered. Our analysis of two distinct streams of research—employee work passion and leadership theory—resulted in the development of a theoretical model that links leadership (behavior and values), employee affect, and employee work intentions. We propose that employee affect will mediate relations between leadership and work intentions. Research propositions and recommendations for future research are presented.

Keywords

passion work passion leadership affect intentions

Introduction

Over the last decade and a half, two streams of research have been independently evolving through the efforts of researchers in the fields of psychology, organizational psychology, and organizational behavior. One stream of inquiry relates to understanding the nature of affect-based leadership. Within this stream, one group of scholars has investigated the influence of leader emotions in organizations (e.g., Connelly & Ruark, 2010; Damen, van Knippenberg, & van Knippenberg, 2008; Gaddis, Connelly, & Mumford, 2004). Another group has focused on leaders’ emotional competencies within organizations (e.g., Fambrough & Hart, 2008; Goleman, Boyatzis, & McKee, 2002; Harms & Credé, 2010). A third group has been concerned with leadership behavior and its impacts on fundamental human processes; for example, the cognitive-emotional interface of followers (e.g., Dasborough, 2006; Gooty, Connelly, Griffith, & Gupta, 2010; Rajah, Song, & Arvey, 2011). Within this broad area of inquiry, the acknowledgment of the role of emotions for both leaders and followers has contributed to the latest evolution of leadership theory, that is, beyond the principles of agency theory—with its assumption of leaders who are individualistic, opportunistic, and self-serving—to leadership that is committed to people-centered values and is fully employee centered (Chalofsky, 2004; Luthans, 2012; van Dierendonck, 2011).

A second stream of scholarship has focused on the role of affect and emotion in employee experiences of work. Some scholars have investigated employee affect in organizations (e.g., Brief & Weiss, 2002; Watson & Tellegen, 1985; Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996). Others have been concerned with employee engagement, a construct that consists of cognitive, emotional, and behavioral components and has positive impacts on employee psychological well-being (e.g., Harter, Schmidt, & Hayes, 2002; Kahn, 1990; Rich, Lepine, & Crawford, 2010; Saks, 2006; Shuck & Reio, 2011). A third group of researchers has focused on understanding the role of employee affect within passion in work activities (e.g., Cardon, 2008; Ho, Wong, & Lee, 2011; Vallerand et al., 2003; Zigarmi, Nimon, Houson, Witt, & Diehl, 2009). This article used these two broad streams of inquiry as conceptual cornerstones to explore the integration of leadership theory and work passion theory, two distinct but potentially related areas of research, a linkage that has not yet been demonstrated in the literature.

Why would human resource development (HRD) practitioners benefit from a deeper understanding of relations between leadership and work passion? In an article published in the Human Resource Development Review, Peterson (2004) suggested that HRD practitioners assume a strategically prominent organizational role by effecting systematic change through the implementation of employee programs focused on performance needs, relational needs (supervisors and colleagues), learning, innovation, individual-organization values alignment, career pathing and work–life balance. Concurrently, HRD practitioners support the organization to continuously improve its culture, experience greater efficiency, develop more innovative and competitive practices, and become more profitable (Gilley, Shelton, & Gilley, 2011). In an article published in the Human Resource Development Quarterly, Chalofsky (2007) posited that HRD is primarily concerned with creating workplace environments that are “embodied in the constructs of people, learning and organizations” (p. 437), and enable people to fulfill their potential and enhance their performance through learning. We agree with numerous authors (e.g., Gilley et al., 2011; Hoon Song, Kolb, Hee Lee, & Kyoung Kim, 2012; Nadler, 1990) who posited that integral to fulfillment of this purpose is the effective development of leadership at the individual, group, and organizational levels. We suggest that the issues of leadership and work passion are inseparable in organizational practice. By investigating theoretical links between leadership and work passion, we can assist HRD practitioners to develop leaders, employees, and workplace cultures that foster learning, humanistic values, and performance.

Scholars reported that passionate workers are associated with positive organizational outcomes such as positive work performance (Ho et al., 2011), employee well-being and performance (McAllister, Harris, Hochwarter, Perrewe, & Ferris, 2016), and proenvironmental behaviors (Robertson & Barling, 2013). Also, practitioners (commercial consulting firms, professional industry associations, HRD practitioners) have highlighted purported benefits associated with passionate workers (e.g., Boyatzis, McKee, & Goleman, 2002; Hagel, Brown, Ranjan, & Byler, 2014; Whitehurst, 2016). Notwithstanding, research on understanding the formulation of employee work passion, that is, the psychological processes that are experienced by employees when they become passionate (or dispassionate) about their work activities, is in its nascent stage of development. For example, Vallerand et al. (2007) stated that research is needed to “understand the intricacies of the psychological process through which passion contributes to performance” (p. 530).

These findings have led to calls for further research examining links between environmental conditions and work passion. For example, Ho et al. (2011) opined that the conceptualizations of job passion have been “imprecise, incompatible, or completely lacking” (p. 26) and called for studies to examine the antecedents of work passion. Perrewe, Hochwarter, Ferris, McAllister, and Harris (2014) concluded that “theory development as well as thoughtful considerations regarding the boundary conditions under which passion results in favorable or unfavorable outcomes is needed” (p. 149). One area that is yet to receive adequate research attention is relations between leadership, a phenomenon that is widely considered as fundamental and influential in contemporary organizations (Avolio, Walumbwa, & Weber, 2009; Northouse, 2010; Yammarino, 2013; Yukl, 2012), and behavioral intentions that reflect employee passion in work activities. Forest, Mageau, Sarrazin, and Morin (2011) highlighted this gap when they called for research investigating “supervisory behaviors [other than autonomy-support] that could promote harmonious passion and prevent or diminish obsessive passion for work” (p. 37). This article responds to these calls for studies to consider antecedents of work passion.

Purpose

The purpose of this article was to explore theoretical links between leadership and work passion. We aim to highlight the underlying processes that influence the formation of work passion, and to enhance understanding of relationships between key latent constructs i.e., leadership (behavior and values), employee affect, and employee work intentions. We adopted Zigarmi et al.’s (2009) appraisal-based conceptualization of employee work passion as a lens through which to explore such linkages. Specifically, we argue that employee perceptions of leadership (as an antecedent) differentially impact on work intentions indicative of passionate (or dispassionate) employees via the mediating construct of employee affect.

From a theoretical perspective, this article advocates an understanding of work passion beyond previous research because we draw attention to relations between leadership as the object of employee appraisal, associated affective inferences, and resultant work intentions. Developing a greater understanding of the role of leadership and its impacts on work intentions will contribute to filling a knowledge gap that should be explored in relation to the purported benefits associated with work passion (Zigarmi et al., 2009).

In terms of practical implications, by exploring theoretical links between leadership, employee affect, and work intentions, we develop and provide a relevant theoretical framework for future discussion, analysis, and refinement. With a clearer understanding of how leadership affects employee affect and employee work intentions, HRD practitioners can measure the antecedents to and consequences of work passion accurately. Subsequently, appropriate behavioral interventions, such as training and coaching programs that aim to increase leader awareness and skills needed to build workplace environments where employees can choose to be passionate about their work, can be developed.

In the sections that follow, we present a review of academic literature relating to passion, work passion, and leadership constructs that we believe will prove influential antecedent variables in the creation of employee work passion. Proposed relations between leadership (behavior and values), employee affect, and work intentions are presented. Recommendations for future research conclude this article.

Review of Relevant Literature

Passion

The study of passion evolved in the field of social psychology (Vallerand, 2015). Little research had been conducted on passion for an activity until Vallerand et al. (2003) developed the Dualistic Model of Passion (DMP) in which passion was defined as “a strong inclination toward activity that people like, that they find important, and in which they invest time and energy” (p. 757). To the extent that an individual comes to value his or her work activities and finds them meaningful, they become central to that individual’s identity and he or she is likely to develop a passion for them (Vallerand, 2008). The DMP proposed two types of passion—harmonious and obsessive—that can be distinguished in terms of how the passionate activity has been internalized by an individual. Harmonious passion derives from an autonomous internalization, and therefore results in positive affect and well-being, heightened concentration and flow (Vallerand, 2015). Obsessive passion stems from a controlled internalization, and therefore can be maladaptive, resulting in negative affect and ill-being and rigid persistence (Vallerand, 2015). In addition, Vallerand et al. (2003) posited that the DMP is congruent with self-determination theory (SDT; Deci & Ryan, 1985), which hypothesized that all individuals engage in activities throughout their life (including work activities) in the hope of fulfilling three basic psychological needs: competence (a desire to interact effectively with the environment), autonomy (a desire to feel a sense of initiative), and relatedness (a desire to feel connected to significant others). According to the DMP, there is a strong positive relationship between basic psychological need satisfaction and harmonious passion (Vallerand et al., 2003).

Researchers have investigated passion in various life domains, including sport (Mageau & Vallerand, 2003), education (Carbonneau, Vallerand, Fernet, & Guay, 2008), parenting (Mageau et al., 2009), romance (Hatfield, Bensman, & Rapson, 2010), gaming (Utz, Jonas, & Tonkens, 2012), gambling (Ratelle, Vallerand, Mageau, Rousseau, & Provencher, 2004), and recreational activities (Vallerand et al., 2003). A meta-analytical review of a decade of empirical research on the psychology of passion highlighted that activity domain plays a central and moderating role between passion and intrapersonal outcomes (Curran, Hill, Appleton, Vallerand, & Standage, 2015). For example, in the domains of sport, leisure, and the performing arts, activities are chosen freely and individuals engage in the activity out of a sense of identity and enjoyment. In contrast, participation in activities at work and in education is often required or even mandated, and consequently impacts on harmonious and obsessive passion manifest differently (Curran et al., 2015). In comparison with research on passion in other life domains, research on work passion has occurred to a much lesser extent (Lavigne, Forest, Fernet, & Crevier-Braud, 2014; McAllister et al., 2016). Furthermore, our review of the passion literature revealed that most studies focused on passion and its intrapersonal effects (e.g., well/ill-being, mental health, burnout, motivational factors, cognitive outcomes, behavior, and performance). Less research has investigated passion’s impacts on interpersonal outcomes (e.g., leader–follower relations; Vallerand, 2015).

Determinants of passion

The DMP contends that the type of internalization process that occurs in an individual is affected by both personal and social factors (Vallerand, 2015; Vallerand et al., 2003). Scholars have investigated the role of personal factors within the DMP; for example, personality preferences (Balon, Lecoq, & Rimé, 2013; Verner-Filion & Vallerand, 2016), emotional intelligence (Houlfort & Rinfret, 2010), and signature strengths (Forest et al., 2012). Overall, such research is in its preliminary stages.

Several social or environmental factors have been reported to be related to harmonious and obsessive passion, and include autonomy support (e.g., Bonneville-Roussy, Vallerand, & Bouffard, 2013; Mageau & Vallerand, 2003; Mageau et al., 2009), leadership and organizational culture (e.g., Houlfort & Vallerand, 2013), and organizational support (e.g., Fernet, Lavigne, Vallerand, & Austin, 2014). Much of this research focused on the role of autonomy-supportive environments in the development of passion. Vallerand, Houlfort, and Forest (2014) underscored the need for further research on the determinants of passion when they commented that “additional research is needed to increase the understanding of the development of passion. Both personal and social factors as well as their interaction should be further scrutinized” (p. 101).

Work Passion

Only a small number of conceptualizations of passion for activities in the work domain have developed (Kocjan, 2015). Cardon (2008) proposed a model of passion in an entrepreneurial work role. Perttula (2004), studied passion in the work domain. However, subsequent empirical research to validate these models has been infrequent. Some scholars have investigated Vallerand et al.’s (2003) DMP in the work domain. For example, harmonious passion has been found to be related to employee positive psychological well-being (Forest et al., 2011). Ho et al. (2011) reported empirical support for the positive role of harmonious passion (but not obsessive passion) and its impacts on employee performance. Donahue et al. (2012) investigated passion for work activities and burnout. In addition, some research has assessed the role of environmental determinants of harmonious and obsessive passion in work activities. For example, autonomy support (Mageau et al., 2009) and job autonomy (Fernet et al., 2014) were empirically related to measures of harmonious or obsessive passion in employees. McAllister et al. (2016) reported that employee perceptions of resource availability were empirically related to employees’ well-being and performance. We located only two studies that explored the role of leadership and the DMP in the work domain. Houlfort and Vallerand (2013) assessed the role of transactional and transformational leadership and organization support in the development of subordinates’ work passion. They found that transformational leadership and workplace cultures that promoted autonomy support fostered the development of harmonious passion. Robertson and Barling (2013) reported that transformational leadership positively predicted harmonious passion of employees. Overall, our review revealed that investigation of the determinants of harmonious and obsessive passion in work activities has not been extensive.

Employee work passion

Zigarmi et al. (2009) developed a conceptualization of work passion when they merged the conceptual foundations of the social cognitive theory of appraisal (Bandura, 1986; Lazarus & Folkman, 1984) and those of the DMP (Vallerand et al., 2003) in an operational definition of employee work passion: “an individual’s persistent, emotionally positive, meaning-based, state of job well-being stemming from reoccurring cognitive and affective appraisals of various job and organization situations that result in consistent, constructive work intentions and behaviors” (p. 310). In addition, Zigarmi et al. (2009) proposed the Employee Work Passion Appraisal (EWPA) model, a theoretical framework that explains how employee work passion is formed (see Figure 1).

Figure 1.

The Employee Work Passion Appraisal model.

The EWPA model suggested that the formation of employee work passion occurs through ongoing appraisals of organization, job, and interpersonal factors that have impacts on employee affect (the emotional reactions generated in the appraisal process resulting from perceptions that the work environment is either threatening or enhancing to the appraiser; James & James, 1989), job well-being (the balance of pleasure or displeasure in an immediate work experience; Schimmack, Schupp, & Wagner, 2008), and behavioral intentions (a mental representation of behavior an individual might or will use to cope with his or her evaluation of his or her work experience; Bagozzi, 1992).

The appraisal process within social cognitive theory explains general behavior, and uses the terms of cognition, affect, well-being, and intention (Bandura, 1986; Lazarus, 1991a; Tzeng, 1975). However, Zigarmi et al. (2009) situated the appraisal process in the context of work. There are two phases of the EWPA process: First, employees cognitively appraise organization, job and interpersonal events, situations and experiences. Employees determine whether the event, situation, or experience is relevant to them and if so, affect generated from the appraisal determines an employee’s sense of job well-being. Second, employees make judgments about forming conscious intentions that lead to subsequent behavior such as how to cope with the environment’s impact on their sense of job well-being (or lack thereof). Without the appraisal process, individuals could not grasp the significance of what is happening during encounters with the environment, nor could they choose among alternative values and courses of action (Lazarus, 1991b). Furthermore, at the heart of the EWPA model is the belief that employee work passion is dynamic and in a state of fluidity with each new appraisal (Zigarmi et al., 2009). Therefore, employee work passion should be viewed as a process, not a final state of being (Shuck, Ghosh, Zigarmi, & Nimon, 2013).

Furthermore, the EWPA model holds the theoretical underpinnings of the DMP at its conceptual heart because it advocates that passionate commitment in employees comes from (a) an employee’s appraisals of his or her work environment which leads to a positive or negative sense of job well-being and consequent behavioral intentions, and (b) repeated involvement in self-defining activities which become a central feature in an employee’s identity (Zigarmi et al., 2009). Shuck, Zigarmi, and Owen (2015) argued that these theoretical underpinnings allow work passion to offer a positive upper echelon of passionate commitment beyond constructs such as employee engagement (Rich et al., 2010) and work engagement (Schaufeli, Salanova, González-Romá, & Bakker, 2002). Ho et al. (2011) and Shuck et al. (2015) contended that although employee engagement and work passion constructs may be related conceptually, empirical evidence suggested measurement distinction. We acknowledge that this discussion relating to the empirical distinctiveness of the work passion construct is ongoing, and further empirical scrutiny of its nomological network is needed.

Empirical investigations of the EWPA model

Zigarmi, Nimon, Houson, Witt, and Diehl (2011) conducted the initial empirical test of the EWPA model’s hypothesized factor structure. This study utilized a volunteer sample of 447 employees from an organization based in the United States. Results confirmed a structural model that showed that the correlations between the EWPA model’s four latent constructs were differentially important, and that job well-being partially mediated relations between cognition/affect and intentions (see Figure 2).

Figure 2.

Employee Work Passion structural model.

Subsequent research focused on two aspects of the EWPA model: One area of investigation examined the construct validity of key latent constructs within the EWPA model, for example, work cognition (e.g., Nimon & Zigarmi, 2015; Nimon, Zigarmi, Houson, Witt, & Diehl, 2011) and work intentions (e.g., Zigarmi, Nimon, Houson, Witt, & Diehl, 2012). A second area of inquiry focused on personal (e.g., Roberts & Zigarmi, 2014; Zigarmi, Galloway, & Roberts, 2016) and work environment (e.g., Zigarmi & Roberts, 2012; Zigarmi, Roberts, & Randolph, 2015) determinants of employee work passion. For example, Zigarmi et al. (2016) examined relations between personal antecedents of the appraiser (employee locus of control), motivational outlook (as a cognitive judgment), job well-being, and behavioral intentions. Using a sample of 2,654 individuals generated from a database housed by an international management consulting company, partial mediation testing found that both locus of control and motivational outlook influenced employee harmonious passion. Zigarmi et al. (2015) assessed employee perceptions of leaders’ use of structural power at the organization level, employee affect and work intentions using a convenience-based sample of 651 individuals from a U.S.-based professional association. These authors concluded that leaders who desire to foster passionate employees should use expert and referent power, and reduce reliance on legitimate and coercive power.

A need to refine the EWPA model

Such research has provided initial empirical evidence to support the underlying factor structure of the EWPA model. However, to develop and refine the EWPA model and to move the research base forward in a meaningful way, such studies need to be replicated and extended. Research opportunities relate to adopting alternate research strategies and designs, and yet to be explored theoretical aspects of the EWPA model. For example, much of the research on the EWPA model has used convenience-based samples from a database owned by an international management consulting company based in the United States. Data from within organizational samples and non-U.S. samples would enable the factor structure of the EWPA model to be tested in different organizational contexts and in different countries, and results may allow the factor structure of the EWPA model to be generalized more broadly. In addition, most of the studies that examined the EWPA model used a quantitative research strategy. While there are several strengths that stem from a quantitative research strategy (Sekaran & Bougie, 2013), qualitative methods (e.g., the use of case studies, interviews, or diary studies) that are not grounded in an a priori hypothesized model could further enlighten the employee work passion appraisal process or uncover contextual factors that may influence it. Also, most of the tests of the EWPA model used a cross-sectional design; thus, the temporal primacy of the focal constructs could not be verified. Conclusions regarding the order of causality among constructs would be possible with a longitudinal design as variance within individuals across time could be examined in addition to variance between individuals in relation to the constructs of interest (Sekaran & Bougie, 2013).

Two reasons support our choice to use the EWPA model as a theoretical framework on which to base our exploration of relations between leadership and work passion: First, the appraisal-based EWPA model is the only conceptualization of work passion that describes the psychological processes through which employees become passionate (or dispassionate) in their work. Furthermore, because the EWPA model provides clear distinction between the latent constructs that comprise it, less blurring of concepts and less inference from items used to measure its latent constructs result (Shuck et al., 2013). Accordingly, the EWPA model offers HRD practitioners unique insight relating to the measurement and application of employee work passion in organizations.

Second, considering the EWPA model is still emergent, research is needed to illuminate aspects of it that have yet to be explored fully. For example, in a comprehensive qualitative review of literature examining leadership, affect, and emotions, Gooty et al. (2010) commented that “regardless of the leadership lens one looks through (e.g., transformational leadership, leader–member exchange, charismatic leadership), affect and emotions are deeply intertwined with the process of leading, leader outcomes and follower outcomes” (p. 979). In the empirical tests that have examined the EWPA model, evidence suggested that employee affect plays a mediating role in relations between antecedent and outcome variables. However, only two empirical studies (see Zigarmi et al., 2011; Zigarmi & Roberts, 2012) and no conceptual or qualitative studies have assessed relations between leadership as an antecedent variable and other latent constructs within the EWPA model.

Zigarmi et al. (2011) reported that although job well-being was found to be a strong mediator of relations between cognition/affect and intentions, significant and direct correlations between cognition and intentions and affect and intentions were found. Considering these findings and in keeping with the tenets of the broader appraisal literature that asserts cognition, emotion, and coping are the three central constructs in appraisal theory (Fugate, Harrison, & Kinicki, 2011; Lazarus & Folkman, 1984), the focus of this article is relations between cognitive perceptions of leadership, employee affect, and employee work intentions. In the following sections, these three constructs are discussed, and theoretical relations between them are proposed.

Leadership Behavior

In a meta-analytical review of relations between psychological climate and work outcomes, Parker et al. (2003) highlighted that the range of psychological dimensions covered most aspects of the individual’s work environment, including job characteristics, leadership style, the physical environment, and coworker and supervisor relationships. Nimon and Zigarmi (2015) contended that 12 first-order work environment factors are associated with employee appraisals of workplace experiences, and these could be grouped into three second-order factors: organization cognition (procedural justice, distributive justice, growth, and performance expectations); job cognition (meaningful work, autonomy, workload balance, and task variety); and people cognition (connectedness with colleagues, connectedness with leader, collaboration, and feedback). These authors also suggested that researchers and practitioners might “focus on a particular type of experience and administer a single scale or set of scales relating to job, organization or people” (p. 130). In this article, we followed this recommendation and focused on one work environment antecedent, that is, leadership. The following rationale supports this decision.

Literature findings over the past 70 years have indicated that in the context of leader–follower relations, leader effectiveness is linked to numerous positive employee and organizational outcomes (Avolio, Reichard, Hannah, Walumbwa, & Chan, 2009; Bass, 2008; Judge & Piccolo, 2004; Judge, Piccolo, & Ilies, 2004). For example, Avolio, Reichard, et al. (2009) conducted a meta-analysis of 200 studies, and found that leadership interventions increased the probability of yielding positive affective, behavioral, and work outcomes. Judge and Piccolo’s (2004) meta-analysis (based on 626 correlations and 87 sources) reported that transformational leadership was positively associated with leadership effectiveness and organization performance across different organizations, levels of analysis and cultures. Furthermore, Servant Leadership was found to have a positive influence on employee job satisfaction, organization commitment, empowerment and engagement, and team effectiveness (van Dierendonck, 2011). Such evidence suggested that leadership is a necessary ingredient to create the context in which employees can be fully present in their job setting. Yet, research investigating how employee perceptions of their experiences with organizational leaders affect employee work passion is sparse. There remains a gap in understanding which leader behaviors are impactful in the creation of employee work passion and how this process occurs.

Initiating Structure and Consideration

Researchers at the Bureau of Business Research at Ohio State University defined Initiating Structure as the extent to which a leader clarifies leader and employee roles, and is active in providing information, scheduling and evaluating performance toward goal attainment (Fleishman & Peters, 1962; Fleishman & Simmons, 1970; Halpin, 1954). Consideration was defined as the extent to which a leader shows concern and respect for employees, develops mutual trust and warmth in the relationship, and is considerate of workers’ feelings (Fleishman & Peters, 1962; Fleishman & Simmons, 1970; Halpin, 1954).

Initiating Structure and Consideration were the focus of much research until the advent of the Contingency theories of the 1970s. Two key factors contributed to the demise of research interest in these constructs: First, some researchers at the time (e.g., Korman, 1966; Weissenberg & Kavanagh, 1972) reported inconsistencies in the validity of the two constructs. Fleishman and Harris (1962) argued that the validities relating to these constructs were curvilinear (i.e., that there is a point of diminishing returns relating to the benefits of increased use of Initiating Structure and Consideration). It was not until many decades later that Judge et al. (2004) reported linear relationships between Initiating Structure and Consideration and outcomes, and stated that linear and nonlinear relationships between leadership behaviors can coexist. These conclusions contradicted the earlier findings that questioned the validities of Initiating Structure and Consideration. Second, as Initiating Structure and Consideration had fallen from research focus prior to the advent of meta-analytical techniques in the 1990s, the constructs did not receive due analytical attention. The quality of recent meta-analyses (e.g., De Rue, Narghang, Wellman, & Humphrey, 2011; Judge et al., 2004) has enabled the reexamination and confirmation of the validities of the Ohio State dimensions.

Empirical studies of Initiating Structure and Consideration

Significant correlations between Initiating Structure and Consideration and important follower and organization effectiveness outcomes have been reported in both past research (Fleishman & Harris, 1962; Fleishman & Simmons, 1970; Halpin, 1954) and recent research (Blickle et al., 2013; De Rue et al., 2011; Judge et al., 2004; Piccolo et al., 2012; Schurer-Lambert, Tepper, Carr, Holt, & Barelka, 2012). For example, Judge et al. (2004) conducted a meta-analysis that involved 159 correlations for Initiating Structure and 163 correlations for Consideration, and reported each dimension was strongly correlated to follower motivation (.40 and .50), follower satisfaction with leader (.33 and .78), follower job satisfaction (.22 and .46), leader effectiveness (.39 and .52), and leader job performance (.24 and .25). Judge et al. (2004) reported that “the validities for each behavior generalized–across criteria, across measures and even over time and across sources” (p. 44). De Rue et al. (2011) reported results from a meta-analytic test of the relative predictive validity of leader traits and leader behaviors, and found that Initiating Structure and Consideration were correlated to various leadership effectiveness criteria: leader effectiveness (.39 and .52), group performance (.35 and .28), follower job satisfaction (.22 and .46), and satisfaction with leader (.33 and .78). Furthermore, Piccolo et al. (2012) conducted a meta-analytical test of the relative validities of transformational and transactional leadership, Initiating Structure, and Consideration with respect to employee job satisfaction and perceptions of leadership effectiveness. Results indicated that Consideration was a consistent predictor of job satisfaction when controlling for the other leader behaviors, and Initiating Structure was found to be a consistent predictor of leadership effectiveness.

This recent empirical evidence suggested that Initiating Structure and Consideration are impactful leadership constructs. Although our review of the literature located no studies on Initiating Structure and Consideration in the context of work passion, Piccolo et al. (2012) concluded that “leadership scholars would be well advised to include ‘the forgotten one’ (Judge et al., 2004) of Consideration (and to a lesser degree, Initiating Structure) into research efforts focussing on effective leadership” (p. 579).

HRD and the use of Initiating Structure and Consideration

Support for the inclusion of Initiating Structure and Consideration within our proposed theoretical framework also relates to current HRD practice. As discussed, research on Initiating Structure and Consideration was prominent during the 1950s and 1960s but was almost completely absent from the literature from the mid-1970s until the early 2000s (Judge et al., 2004). However, we agree with Rost (1993) who argued that once leadership theories “. . . gained a certain currency, they remained in the literature. The theories also remained in the behavioral habits of practitioners who continued to put the theories into practice long after they were discredited” (p. 28). For example, many leadership theories, including Fiedler’s (1967) Contingency Model of Leadership and Hersey and Blanchard’s (1969) life cycle theory, were built on the conceptual foundation provided by the Ohio State leadership dimensions.

Furthermore, life cycle theory forms the foundation of the Situational Leadership® model (SL; Hersey & Blanchard, 1969; Hersey, Blanchard, & Johnson, 2012) and the Situational Leadership® II model (SLII; Blanchard, Zigarmi, & Zigarmi, 1985, 2013) that have demonstrated widespread applicability in organizations and “considerable robustness and sustainability, and remain popular after more than 30 years” (Meirovich & Gu, 2015, p. 61). Thompson and Vecchio (2009 ) stated, “The theory [Situational Leadership] has stood the test of time in the market place of leadership training programs, as it is well-known and commonly used for training leaders” (p. 838). Avery and Ryan (2002) conducted a qualitative study involving a sample of Australian managers and concluded that SLII was a “valuable management tool, because it provides a framework for managing people; is relevant, useful, intuitive; and matches common sense” (p. 260). Indeed Bass (2008) commented that “the Hersey-Blanchard model has had remarkable wide-spread intuitive appeal to practicing managers” (p. 522).

Considering that contemporary organizations offer leadership development programs that include models that are conceptually based on the Ohio State leadership dimensions (Avery & Ryan, 2002; Meirovich & Gu, 2015; Thompson & Vecchio, 2009) and several authors (e.g., Blickle et al., 2013; De Rue et al., 2011; Piccolo et al., 2012; Schurer-Lambert et al., 2012) have called for additional research on the relationship between Initiating Structure and Consideration and a wider range of effectiveness outcomes, we believe investigation of these dimensions in the context of employee work passion is warranted.

This article responds to the calls from authors, including Judge et al. (2004), De Rue et al. (2011), and so on, to investigate further the effects of the Ohio State leadership dimensions on employee effectiveness outcomes. We suggest that Initiating Structure and Consideration will positively influence employee cognitive and affective appraisals of their experience with organizational leaders (see Figure 3). We propose the following:

Proposition 1: Initiating Structure and Consideration behavior will promote employee work passion.

Figure 3.

Theoretical model depicting relations between environment variables, employee affect, and employee work intentions.

To explicate the role of leadership as an antecedent within the EWPA model, next, we discuss the literature relating to leadership and values.

Leadership and Values

There appears to be an implicit understanding that effective leadership depends upon a leader defining personal and professional values, articulating them and then acting upon them consistently (Bass, 2008; Kouzes & Posner, 1993; Westwood & Posner, 1997). Nirenberg (1998) went so far as to state, “Ultimately, leadership is the expression of values” (p. 95). In addition, the hypothesis that individual values held by a leader can influence his or her behavior is widely accepted (Bass, 2008; Burns, 1978; England & Lee, 1974; Michie & Gooty, 2005). Such studies are important in terms of their contribution to the values of literature, although few investigate directly the relations between leader values, leader behavior, employee affect, and employee behavior.

Self-concern and other-orientation

Once established within the individual’s identity, value orientations are a relatively permanent perceptual framework which shape and influence the general nature of an individual’s behavior (England & Lee, 1974). There is considerable support in the literature for measuring individual value orientations, as opposed to measuring individual values separately (see Higgs & Lichtenstein, 2011; Rohan, 2000; Sagiv & Schwartz, 2000; Schwartz & Bilsky, 1987).

Self-concern and other-orientation (De Dreu, 2006) is a model of value orientations which has its origins in the social-psychological theory of social value orientations (SVOs) and was built on related works from organizational psychology and organizational behavior, including leadership (Blake & Mouton, 1967) and SDT (Deci & Ryan, 1985). SVO explains how individuals differ when approaching situations requiring interdependent decision making; for example, negotiations (De Dreu & Boles, 1998), cross-functional teamwork when resources are scarce (Nauta, de Dreu, & van der Vaart, 2002) and in situations where leader–follower relations are characterized by goal interdependence (Deutsch, 1973).

Self-concern is defined as thinking and acting in a way that is expected to lead to maximum outcomes and consequences for oneself based on one’s values and risk preferences (De Dreu, 2006). Individuals who demonstrate high self-concern have high dispositional achievement motivation, a strong performance orientation, and see themselves as independent from others (De Dreu & Nauta, 2009). Other-orientation is defined as a concern for the interest, needs, and desires of others and group-level attributes and consequences (De Dreu, 2006). Individuals who demonstrate high other-orientation show dispositional empathy and agreeableness, display a high concern for others, and see themselves as interdependent with others and part of a social system (De Dreu & Nauta, 2009).

De Dreu and Nauta (2009) argued that self-concern and other-orientation are independent, orthogonal constructs. They also stated that self-concern and other-orientation may be correlated positively or negatively depending upon the specific context and “across situations, we expect these two dimensions to be uncorrelated” (De Dreu & Nauta, 2009, p. 914). In addition, they concluded that other-orientation has effects different from those triggered by self-concern. De Dreu, Nijstad, and van Knippenberg (2008) posited that self-concern and other-orientation drive an individual’s work behavior to focus on self-serving versus group-related cues, respectively. Adopting this theoretical precedent, we believe that self-concern and other-orientation have distinct and contrasting motives.

Empirical studies of leader self-concern and leader other-orientation

Within the fields of organizational, behavioral, and social sciences, empirical research on self-interest has been considerable (e.g., Cropanzano, Stein, & Goldman, 2008; De Dreu, 2006; De Dreu & Nauta, 2009; Meglino & Korsgaard, 2007). Furthermore, scholars have examined leader self-interest and its influence on organizational and follower outcomes (e.g., Barrow & Mirabella, 2009; De Dreu & Nauta, 2009; Haynes, Josefy, & Hitt, 2015; Wang & Murnighan, 2011). For example, Barrow and Mirabella (2009) conducted a comparative study of self-interested and other-oriented leadership, and reported that employees prefer leaders who are other-oriented.

Leader other-orientation and its relations with organizational and follower outcomes have also been a common research focus. Important contributions include studies of ethical leadership (Brown & Trevino, 2006), servant leadership (van Dierendonck, 2011), and self-sacrificial leadership (De Cremer, 2006; De Cremer, Mayer, van Dijke, Bardes, & Schouten, 2009). For example, self-sacrificing leadership behavior was reported to have significant and positive impact on employee emotions and motivation to work with the leader (De Cremer, 2006), follower prosocial behavior (De Cremer et al., 2009), leader effectiveness (De Cremer & van Knippenberg, 2004), and follower performance (van Knippenberg & van Knippenberg, 2005). These findings indicated that self-sacrificial leadership is related positively to numerous leadership effectiveness criteria, including employee affect (De Cremer, 2006). Marinova and Park (2014) conducted a meta-analytical study of the impact of other-orientated leadership involving 151 effect sizes, and found strong evidence for it at the individual, group, and organizational levels.

In the context of work passion, we located only one study that investigated the impacts of leader self-concern and leader other-orientation. Zigarmi and Roberts (2012) reported that manager other-orientation behaviors were positively related to work intentions, whereas manager self-concern behaviors were negatively related to work intentions. Despite this dearth of research, we contend that there is adequate support in the broader leadership and SVO literatures to suggest that leader self-concern and leader other-orientation will influence employee cognitive and affective appraisals of their experience with organizational leaders (see Figure 3). We propose the following:

Proposition 2: Other-oriented behaviors will promote employee work passion more than will self-concern behaviors.

Leadership, Values, Affect, and Intentions

Watson and Tellegen (1985) defined affect, in a broad sense, as a “phenomenological state of feeling,” usually described in terms of positive or negative emotions, for example, happy, sad, joyful, anxious. Affect can be thought of as an overarching term encompassing both “state affects,” which are in-the-moment, short-term affective experiences and “trait or dispositional affects,” which are more stable tendencies to feel and act in certain ways, and are a dimension of personality (Watson and Tellegen, 1985).

Several lines of research have hypothesized that an individual’s appraisal of an object or situation contains a substantial “state” affective component which affects a variety of job-related outcomes (Thoresen, Kaplan, Barsky, Warren, & de Chermont, 2003). For example, Forgas and George (2001) proposed the Affect Infusion Model (AIM) and hypothesized that job attitudes (job satisfaction, organizational commitment, burnout, turnover intentions) are partially a function of affect that “infuses” an individual’s cognitive processing in forming evaluations of the object of appraisal. A central tenet of cognitive appraisal theory (CAT; Lazarus & Folkman, 1984) contended that affect refers to the unconscious or conscious emotional reactions generated during the first phase of the appraisal process stemming from perceptions that the work experience is either threatening or enhancing to the appraiser’s sense of job well-being. Lazarus (1991b) hypothesized that depending on the situation, three possible outcomes arise as functions of appraisal, and these are (a) biological urges to act, (b) affect or subjective experience, and (c) physiological responses. The unique combination of these outcomes determines which emotion (e.g., anger, joy, sadness, pride, anxiety) will result from any appraisal (Lazarus, 1991b). Zigarmi et al. (2011) concluded that an individual’s ongoing appraisal of work experience is substantially a function of work “state” affect.

Leadership and affect

Research has suggested that some leadership styles and processes influence follower affect significantly, and include affective events theory (AET; Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996), CAT (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984), charismatic leadership (Conger & Kanungo, 1998; House, 1977), the charismatic elements of transformational leadership (Bass, 1985), leader–member exchange (LMX) theory (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995), and emotional contagion (i.e., the transfer of emotions between leaders and followers which, in turn, affects follower and work group outcomes; Barsade, 2002; Bono & Ilies, 2006). For example, Dasborough (2006) conducted a qualitative study, used AET as a conceptual lens, and found that leader behaviors prompted either positive or negative affective responses in employees, employees recalled more negative incidents than positive incidents, and they recalled them more intensely and in more detail. Several studies have reported that LMX relationships are related to the perceived quality of the leadership-member exchange via member (follower) affective responses (e.g., Ballinger, Schoorman, & Lehman, 2009; Tse, Dasborough, & Ashkanasy, 2008). Furthermore, according to theoretical considerations relating to SDT, when leadership behavior is the object of employee appraisal, one of the consequences is the generation of employee positive or negative affect (Baard, Deci, & Ryan, 2004; Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2008). Such studies demonstrate that there is a rich tradition of research within the organizational literature that has established connections between leadership behavior, follower affect, and follower outcomes.

Notwithstanding, we located only two recent studies that examined relations between Initiating Structure and Consideration and employee affect. Blickle et al. (2013) found that followers’ affective reactions to leader’s use of position, power, and political skill were mediated by leader’s use of Initiating Structure and Consideration. However, this study used a measure of employee job satisfaction as a proxy measure of employee affect. Schurer-Lambert et al. (2012) examined the effects of fit between Initiating Structure and Consideration needed and received on employees’ work-related attitudes (i.e., trust in the supervisor, job satisfaction, and affective commitment to the organization), however, did not measure employee affect directly. In a related study, Zigarmi and Roberts (2012) investigated managerial behavior and employee work passion and reported that employee perceptions of “connectedness with leader” and “connectedness with colleagues” were positively associated with employee positive affect.

In keeping with the meta-analytical findings of Judge et al. (2004) and De Rue et al. (2011) who reported positive empirical relations between Initiating Structure and Consideration and follower satisfaction with leader and follower job satisfaction, respectively, we posit that employees will report positive affect when appraising these leadership behaviors. We propose the following:

Proposition 3: Initiating Structure and Consideration will be positively related to positive affect and negatively related to negative affect.

Values and affect

Leaders with a high other-orientation are sensitive to the needs of followers, emphasize the collective identity of followers, and develop open, trusting, and respectful relationships (De Dreu & Nauta, 2009). We suggest that when leaders engage in such behaviors, employee needs for meaningful interpersonal connection are likely to be satisfied (Baard, 2002; Shamir, 2007), which, in turn, will engender employee positive affect (De Cremer, 2006; Gooty et al., 2010). Leaders who demonstrate high self-concern tend to put their needs above those of others, focus on their personal outcomes and success, and are unlikely to engender open and fulfilling relationships (De Dreu & Nauta, 2009). Accordingly, follower needs for meaningful interpersonal connection may not be satisfied (Baard, 2002; Shamir, 2007), and employee negative affect is likely to result (De Cremer, 2006; Gooty et al., 2010).

In our proposed theoretical framework (see Figure 3), we included a commonly used model for measuring “state” affect which consists of two unipolar dimensions corresponding to positive and negative activation (Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988; Watson & Tellegen, 1985). Positive activation, known as positive affect, represents the extent to which individuals feel enthusiastic, active, alert, and energetic (Watson & Tellegen, 1985). Negative activation, known as negative affect, represents the extent to which individuals feel anger, fear, guilt, and nervousness (Watson & Tellegen, 1985). Three reasons support the inclusion of a positive/negative activation model in our proposed theoretical framework: First, considering the role of affect in the employee work passion appraisal process, a “state” measure of affect was needed, so results are not blurred with an individual’s disposition (Zigarmi et al., 2011). Second, we expect that employees will perceive different leadership behaviors (e.g., self-concern, other-orientation) as different valence concepts which will generate employee affect of different valence. Third, most organizational studies measuring “state” affect use the positive activation/negative activation approach (Thompson, 2007). We propose the following:

Proposition 4: Other-orientation will be positively related to positive affect and negatively related to negative affect. Self-concern will be positively related to negative affect and negatively related to positive affect.

Affect and intentions

Ajzen (1991) described intentions as mental representations of behavior an individual might or will use that serve to guide purposeful action. There are two types of intentions: goal intentions and implementation intentions (Gollwitzer, 1999; Heckhausen & Beckmann, 1990). Goal or outcome intentions specify a certain end, for example, a performance level or an outcome. The consequence of having a formed goal intention is a sense of commitment that obligates the individual to pursue and attain the goal (Gollwitzer, 1999). Implementation intentions specify the how, when, and where of responses that lead to goal completion. They play the role of enabling the individual to get started on a path toward goal attainment (Gollwitzer, 1999).

Appraisal theory contended that the second phase of the appraisal process involves individuals forming future strategies to cope with the environments’ positive or negative impact on their sense of well-being (Bandura, 1986; Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). Theories such as the theory of reasoned action (TRA; Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980) and the theory of planned behavior (TPB; Ajzen, 1991) asserted that intention is the most immediate and important predictor of behavior (Webb & Sheeran, 2006). Empirical evidence supports this assertion. For example, Armitage and Conner’s (2001) meta-analysis of 185 empirical studies of the TPB found that the weighted sample average correlation between measures of intention and behavior was R = .47. These findings suggested that intentions are more predictive of behavior than job satisfaction or organization commitment, both of which are more distal outcomes. These results support the hypothesis that changing behavioral intentions engenders behavior change (Webb & Sheeran, 2006).

From a methodological perspective, implementation intentions are included as dependent variables within the EWPA model to reduce the risk of blurring constructs and inferring states of engagement through a correlation of perceptions of environment variables concerning the conditions under which employees work and cognitive expressions of job satisfaction or organization commitment (Zigarmi et al., 2012). Furthermore, Zigarmi et al. (2012) reported acceptable levels of construct and convergent validity for the following five intention scales: Intent to Use Discretionary Effort, Intent to Perform, Intent to Endorse the Organization, Intent to Stay in the Organization, and Intent to use Organizational Citizenship Behaviors (OCB).

Research has focused on affect and job-related attitudinal variables such as job satisfaction, organization commitment, intentions to quit, and job-related burnout (e.g., Ng & Sorensen, 2009; Thoresen et al., 2003). For example, in a meta-analytical study Thoresen et al. (2003) reported that positive affect was correlated strongly with job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and personal accomplishment, whereas negative affect correlated significantly with emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and turnover intentions. In addition, positive and negative affect contributed uniquely to the prediction of each job-related attitude. They concluded that affective processes play a central role in the determination of job attitudes.

In studies that examined relations between affect and intentions within the context of the EWPA model (e.g., Roberts & Zigarmi, 2014; Zigarmi et al., 2011; Zigarmi & Roberts, 2012, 2015), significant positive relations between positive affect and intentions, and significant and nonsignificant negative relations between negative affect and intentions were reported. Also, these studies found that the magnitude of the correlations indicated a stronger relation between positive affect and intentions than between negative affect and intentions. To align with these methodological and empirical precedents in both the job attitudes and the employee work passion literature, five work intention scales were included as dependent variables in our proposed model (see Figure 3). We propose the following:

Proposition 5: Positive affect will be positively related to work intentions. Negative affect will be negatively or not significantly related to work intentions. Positive affect will be more strongly related to work intentions than will be negative affect.

Empirical examinations of the affective aspects of employees’ appraisals of their interpersonal work experiences concluded that affect is best considered a partial mediator of relations between antecedent environment variables and work intentions (Zigarmi et al., 2011; Zigarmi & Roberts, 2012, 2015). Put simply, although employee affect did explain a portion of the variance, significant direct relations between antecedent environment variables and work intentions indicated that it is likely that influences other than employee affect are involved. Alternative influences that could explain the mediating role of employee affect further could be related but not limited to cultural differences of the appraiser, organization type, organization size, and organization culture. Overall, we believe that relations between employee cognitive perceptions of leadership and work intentions will be mediated by employee affect (see Figure 3). We propose the following:

Proposition 6: Affect will mediate relations between leadership and work intentions.

Discussion, Recommendations for Research, and Conclusion

In this article, we explored theoretical relations between leadership and work passion within the context of Zigarmi et al.’s (2009) EWPA model, a linkage that is yet to receive extensive research attention. The hypothesized relations depicted in Figure 3 suggest that employee cognitive appraisals of organizational leaders’ use of Initiating Structure, Consideration, other-orientated and self-concern behaviors will have positive or negative impacts on employee affect. Resultant employee work intentions include engaging in discretionary effort, performing at higher than average levels, endorsing the organization, staying with the organization, and being an altruistic organizational citizen.

Two key considerations contributed to the development of Figure 3. First, the multifaceted nature of the EWPA model required a distinction between the latent constructs that comprise it (cognitive, affective, and behavioral; Zigarmi et al., 2012). Second, theoretical and empirical support in the appraisal literature, the leadership and affect literature, and the employee work passion literature suggested that the role of affect in influencing relations between leadership (behavior and values) and work intentions will be significant. Indeed we anticipate that positive affect will be a stronger predictor of work intentions than negative affect. However, whether affect partially or completely mediates these relations remains a subject for empirical investigation.

We recommend that leaders understand that their behavior is likely to have at least three impacts on employee work passion: First, when employees perceive that a leader is using Initiating Structure, Consideration, and other-oriented behaviors, employee positive affect will result. Second, when employees perceive that a leader is unduly self-concerned their behavior will contribute to employee negative affect. Third, employee intentions are predicated, primarily, on the positive affect generated by their appraisals of organizational leaders.

We offer three considerations for future research: First, the EWPA model suggested relations between the latent aspects that comprise it and, therefore, certain research methodological considerations are warranted. For example, a multiple measures approach would allow relations between latent constructs to be measured simultaneously, and antecedents to and outcomes of employee work passion to be clarified. Thus, we recommend that independent measures of constructs such as cognition, affect, and intentions be employed.

Second, the nature of the latent variables in Figure 3 has implications for sample selection. We suggest that the work environment variables are measured through employee perceptions (or other ratings) as opposed to leader self-ratings. There are two reasons that support this recommendation: First, evidence suggested that self-ratings are only weakly related to other-ratings (Atwater, Ostroff, Yammarino, & Fleenor, 1998; Harris & Schaubroeck, 1988). This finding has been observed in relation to perceptions of traits, behavior, skills, and performance (Brutus, Fleenor, & McCauley, 1999; Podsakoff & Organ, 1986). Second, research examining individual values as independent variables typically involves gathering leader self-report data and comparing it with follower perceptions of dependent variable measures such as job satisfaction or organization commitment (Agle & Caldwell, 1999; Bardi, Calogero, & Mullen, 2008). Although the self-report paradigm has been justified in studying values in some contexts (see Rohan, 2000), limitations can arise. For example, self-report responses are prone to response biases such as social desirability and leniency (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff, 2003). Thus, the correlations among variables can be inflated or deflated, and therefore threaten the validity of the conclusions drawn. To minimize the occurrence of reporting bias in self-report data relating to individual values, some authors (e.g., Agle & Caldwell, 1999; Meglino & Ravlin, 1998) argued that measuring employees’ perceptions of leaders’ value-driven behavior is a largely unexplored and potentially beneficial methodology. Accordingly, we recommend that employee cognitive perceptions of leader value orientations (not leader-based self-perceptions) be used. Furthermore, the affect variables in Figure 3 represent internal states of the appraiser, and the work intention variables measure the appraisers’ behavioral intentions. Some authors (e.g., Kuppens, Tuerlinckx, Russell, & Barrett, 2013; Spector, 2006) contended that self-ratings are the most feasible, appropriate, and accurate measures of such internal constructs. Thus, we recommend that affect and work intentions be measured by employee perceptions.

The third consideration relates to the measurement of direct and indirect effects. We hypothesized that the influences of the four environment variables on the five work intention variables will be explained through two mediating variables (i.e., positive affect and negative affect). Thus, a multiple mediation analytic strategy is recommended to investigate hypothesized relations (Preacher & Hayes, 2008).

We offer our theoretical framework to scholars and HRD practitioners, and invite debate, analysis, refinement, and application. We hope it provides a new avenue of inquiry and application that assists organizational leaders and HRD practitioners who are challenged with developing humanistic organizational cultures that encourage employees to be passionate in their work. In this way, organizations and employees may reap the positive outcomes that are associated with work passion.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

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

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author Biographies

Richard Egan is an organizational development consultant and an adjunct lecturer in business management at the University of Canberra, Australia. His research interests include leadership, employee engagement, work passion, values, and learning organizations.

Mark Turner is a visiting professor at the School of Business, University of New South Wales (UNSW; Canberra), Australia, and is emeritus professor at the University of Canberra, Australia. He has special interests in public sector management and reform, leadership, decentralization, development policy and politics of the Asia Pacific. He has published widely on these subjects in international journals and several books.

Deborah Blackman is a professor of public sector management strategy at the School of Business at UNSW (Canberra), Australia, and a member of the UNSW Centre for Public Service Research. Her research interests include public sector policy implementation, employee performance management, organization learning, soft knowledge management, organization effectiveness, psychological contract, and governance.

References

Agle

B. R.

Caldwell

C. B.

(1999). Understanding research on values in business: A level of analysis framework. Business & Society, 38, 326-387. doi:10.1177/000765039903800305

Ajzen

(1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179-211. doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t

Ajzen

Fishbein

(1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Armitage

C. J.

Conner

(2001). Efficacy of the theory of planned behavior: A meta-analytic review. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 471-499.

Atwater

L. E.

Ostroff

Yammarino

F. J.

Fleenor

J. W.

(1998). Self-other agreement: Does it really matter? Personnel Psychology, 51, 577-598.

Avery

G. C.

Ryan

(2002). Applying situational leadership in Australia. Journal of Management Development, 21, 242-262. doi:10.1108/02621710210423784

Avolio

B. J.

Reichard

R. J.

Hannah

S. T.

Walumbwa

F. O.

Chan

(2009). A meta-analytic review of leadership impact research: Experimental and quasi-experimental studies. The Leadership Quarterly, 20, 764-784. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.06.006

Avolio

B. J.

Walumbwa

F. O.

Weber

T. J.

(2009). Leadership: Current theories, research, and future directions. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 421-449. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163621

Baard

P. P.

(2002). Intrinsic need satisfaction in organizations: A motivational basis of success in for-profit and not-for-profit settings. In Deci

E. L.

Ryan

R. M.

(Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 255-275). Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.

10.

Baard

P. P.

Deci

E. L.

Ryan

R. M.

(2004). Intrinsic need satisfaction: A motivational basis of performance and well-being in two work settings. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34, 2045-2068. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2004.tb02690.x

11.

Bagozzi

R. P.

(1992). The self-regulation of attitudes, intentions, and behavior. Social Psychology Quarterly, 55, 178-204.

12.

Ballinger

Schoorman

Lehman

(2009). Will you trust your new boss? The role of affective reactions to leadership succession. The Leadership Quarterly, 20, 219-232. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.01.012

13.

Balon

Lecoq

Rimé

(2013). Passion and personality: Is passionate behaviour a function of personality? European Review of Applied Psychology, 63, 59-65. doi:10.1016/j.erap.2012.06.001

14.

Bandura

(1986). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: Freeman.

15.

Bardi

Calogero

R. M.

Mullen

(2008). A new archival approach to the study of values and value-behavior relations: Validation of the value lexicon. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 483-497. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.93.3.483

16.

Barrow

L. M. S.

Mirabella

(2009). An empirical study of other-oriented and rational self-interest leadership approaches. Journal of Leadership Studies, 3, 44-54. doi:10.1002/jls.20107

17.

Barsade

S. G.

(2002). The ripple effect: Emotional contagion and its influence on group behavior. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47, 644-675.

18.

Bass

B. M.

(1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York, NY: The Free Press.

19.

Bass

B. M.

(2008). Bass & Stogdill’s handbook of leadership: Theory, research and managerial applications (4th ed.). New York, NY: The Free Press.

20.

Blake

R. R.

Mouton

J. S.

(1967). The managerial grid in three dimensions. Training & Development Journal, 21, 2-5.

21.

Blanchard

Zigarmi

(1985). Leadership and the one minute manager. New York, NY: William Morrow.

22.

Blanchard

Zigarmi

(2013). Leadership and the one minute manager: Increasing effectiveness through situational leadership®. New York, NY: HarperCollins.

23.

Blickle

Kane-Frieder

R. E.

Oerder

Wihler

von Below

Schutte

. . .Ferris

G. R.

(2013). Leader behaviors as mediators of the leader characteristics–follower satisfaction relationship. Group & Organization Management, 38, 601-629. doi:10.1177/1059601113503183

24.

Bonneville-Roussy

Vallerand

R. J.

Bouffard

(2013). The roles of autonomy support and harmonious and obsessive passions in educational persistence. Learning and Individual Differences, 24, 22-31. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2012.12.015

25.

Bono

J. E.

Ilies

(2006). Charisma, positive emotions and mood contagion. The Leadership Quarterly, 17, 317-334. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2006.04.008

26.

Boyatzis

McKee

Goleman

(2002). Reawakening your passion for work. Harvard Business Review, 80, 86-94.

27.

Brief

A. P.

Weiss

H. M.

(2002). Organisational behavior: Affect in the workplace. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 279-307.

28.

Brown

M. E.

Trevino

L. K.

(2006). Ethical leadership: A review and future directions. The Leadership Quarterly, 17, 595-616. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2006.10.004

29.

Brutus

Fleenor

J. W.

McCauley

C. D.

(1999). Demographic and personality predictors of congruence in multi-source ratings. Journal of Management Development, 18, 417-435.

30.

Burns

J. M.

(1978). Leadership. New York, NY: Harper & Row.

31.

Carbonneau

Vallerand

R. J.

Fernet

Guay

(2008). The role of passion for teaching in intrapersonal and interpersonal outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 977-987. doi:10.1037/a0012545

32.

Cardon

M. S.

(2008). Is passion contagious? The transference of entrepreneurial emotion to employees. Human Resource Management Review, 18, 77-86. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2008.04.001

33.

Chalofsky

(2004). The human workplace: Aligning value-based organizational culture, meaningful work, and life balance (Unpublished manuscript, The George Washington University). Retrieved from http://www.distributedworkplace.com/DW/Research/The%20Essence%20of%20Workplace%20Community.pdf

34.

Chalofsky

(2007). The seminal foundation of the discipline of HRD: People, learning, and organizations. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 18, 431-442. doi:10.1002/hrdq.1212

35.

Conger

J. A.

Kanungo

R. N.

(1998). Charismatic leadership in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

36.

Connelly

Ruark

(2010). Leadership style and activating potential as moderators of the relationships among leader emotional displays and outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 21, 745-764. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2010.07.005

37.

Cropanzano

Stein

Goldman

(Eds.). (2008). Self-interest. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

38.

Curran

Hill

A. P.

Appleton

P. R.

Vallerand

R. J.

Standage

(2015). The psychology of passion: A meta-analytic review of a decade of research on intrapersonal outcomes. Motivation and Emotion, 39, 631-655. doi:10.1007/s11031-015-9503-0

39.

Damen

F. B.

van Knippenberg

(2008). Affective match in leadership: Leader emotional displays, follower positive affect, and follower performance. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38, 868-902. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2008.00330.x

40.

Dasborough

M. T.

(2006). Cognitive asymmetry in employee emotional reactions to leadership behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly, 17, 163-178. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.12.004

41.

Deci

E. L.

Ryan

R. M.

(1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Rochester, NY: Plenum Press.

42.

Deci

E. L.

Ryan

R. M.

(2008). Facilitating optimal motivation and psychological well-being across life’s domains. Canadian Psychology, 49, 14-23. doi:10.1037/0708-5591.49.1.14

43.

De Cremer

. (2006). Affective and motivational consequences of leader self-sacrifice: The moderating effect of autocratic leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 17, 79-93. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.10.005

44.

De Cremer

Mayer

D. M.

van Dijke

Bardes

Schouten

B. C

. (2009). When does self-sacrificial leadership motivate prosocial behavior? It depends on followers’ prevention focus. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 887-899. doi:10.1037/a0014782

45.

De Cremer

van Knippenberg

. (2004). Leader self-sacrifice and leadership effectiveness: The moderating role of leader self-confidence. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 95, 140-155. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2004.04.002

46.

De Dreu

C. K. W

. (2006). Rational self-interest and other orientation in organizational behavior: A critical appraisal and extension of Meglino and Korsgaard (2004). Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 1245-1252. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.91.6.1245

47.

De Dreu

C. K. W.

Boles

T. L

. (1998). Share and share alike or winner take all? The influence of social value orientation upon choice and recall of negotiation heuristics. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 76, 253-276. doi:10.1006/obhd.1998.2806

48.

De Dreu

C. K. W.

Nauta

. (2009). Self-interest and other-orientation in organization behavior: Implications for job performance, prosocial behavior, and personal initiative. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 913-926. doi:10.1037/a0014494

49.

De Dreu

C. K. W.

Nijstad

B. A.

van Knippenberg

. (2008). Motivated information processing in group judgment and decision making. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12, 22-49.

50.

De Rue

D. S.

Narghang

J. D.

Wellman

N. E. D.

Humphrey

S. E

. (2011). Trait and behavioral theories of leadership: An integration and meta-analytic test of their relative validity. Personnel Psychology, 64, 7-52. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2010.01201.x

51.

Deutsch

(1973). The resolution of conflict: Constructive and destructive processes. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

52.

Donahue

E. G.

Forest

Vallerand

R. J.

Lemyre

Crevier-Braud

Bergeron

. (2012). Passion for work and emotional exhaustion: The mediating role of rumination and recovery. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-being, 4, 341-368. doi:10.1111/j.1758-0854.2012.01078.x

53.

England

G. W.

Lee

(1974). The relationship between managerial values and managerial success in the United States, Japan, India, and Australia. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59, 411-419.

54.

Fambrough

Hart

R. H.

(2008). Emotions in leadership development: A critique of emotional intelligence. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 10, 740-758. doi:10.1177/1523422308323542

55.

Fernet

Lavigne

G. L.

Vallerand

R. J.

Austin

(2014). Fired up with passion: Investigating how job autonomy and passion predict burnout at career start in teachers. Work and Stress, 28, 270-288. doi:10.1080/02678373.2014.935524

56.

Fiedler

F. E.

(1967). A theory of leadership effectiveness. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

57.

Fleishman

E. A.

Harris

E. F.

(1962). Patterns of leadership behavior related to employee grievances & turnover. Personnel Psychology, 15, 43-56.

58.

Fleishman

E. A.

Peters

D. R.

(1962). Interpersonal values, leadership attitudes and managerial success. Personnel Psychology, 15, 127-143.

59.

Fleishman

E. A.

Simmons

(1970). Relationship between leadership patterns and effectiveness ratings among Israeli foremen. Personnel Psychology, 23, 169-172.

60.

Forest

Mageau

G. A.

Crevier-Braud

Bergeron

Dubreuil

Lavigne

G. L.

(2012). Harmonious passion as an explanation for the relation between signature strengths’ use and well-being at work: A test of an intervention program. Human Relations, 65, 1233-1252. doi:10. 1177/0018726711433134

61.

Forest

Mageau

G. A.

Sarrazin

Morin

E. M.

(2011). “Work is my passion”: The different affective, behavioral, and cognitive consequences of harmonious and obsessive passion toward work. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 28, 27-40. doi:10.1002/CJAS.170

62.

Forgas

J. P.

George

J. M.

(2001). Affective influences on judgments and behavior in organizations: An information processing perspective. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86, 3-34. doi:10.1006/obhd.2001.2971

63.

Fugate

Harrison

Kinicki

A. J.

(2011). Thoughts and feelings about organization change: A field test of appraisal theory. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 18, 421-437. doi:10.1177/1548051811416510

64.

Gaddis

Connelly

Mumford

S. D.

(2004). Failure feedback as an affective event: Influences of leader affect on subordinate attitudes and performance. The Leadership Quarterly, 15, 663-686. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2004.05.011

65.

Gilley

J. W.

Shelton

P. M.

Gilley

(2011). Developmental leadership: A new perspective for human resource development. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 13, 386-405. doi:10.1177/1523422311424264

66.

Goleman

Boyatzis

McKee

(2002). Leadership: Realizing the power of emotional intelligence. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

67.

Gollwitzer

P. M.

(1999). Implementation intentions: Strong effects of simple plans. American Psychologist, 54, 493-503.

68.

Gooty

Connelly

Griffith

Gupta

(2010). Leadership, affect and emotions: A state of the science review. The Leadership Quarterly, 21, 979-1004. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2010.10.005

69.

Graen

G. B.

Uhl-Bien

(1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective (Paper No. 57). Management Department Faculty Publications. Retreived from http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/managementfacpub/57

70.

Hagel

Brown

J. S.

Ranjan

Byler

(2014). Passion at work: Cultivating worker passion as a cornerstone of talent development. New York, NY: Deloitte University Press.

71.

Halpin

(1954). The leadership behavior & combat performance of airplane commanders. Journal of Abnormal & Social Psychology, 49, 19-22. doi:10.1037/h0055910

72.

Harms

P. D.

Credé

(2010). Emotional intelligence and transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analysis. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 17, 5-17. doi:10.1177/1548051809350894

73.

Harris

M. M.

Schaubroeck

(1988). A meta-analysis of self-supervisor, self-peer, and peer-supervisor ratings. Personnel Psychology, 41, 43-62.

74.

Harter

Schmidt

Hayes

(2002). Business-unit-level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 268-279. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.87.2.268

75.

Hatfield

Bensman

Rapson

R. L.

(2010). A brief history of social scientists’ attempts to measure passionate love. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 29, 143-164. doi:10.1177/0265407511431055

76.

Haynes

K. T.

Josefy

Hitt

M. A.

(2015). Tipping point: Managers’ self-interest, greed, and altruism. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 22, 265-279. doi:10.1177/1548051815585171

77.

Heckhausen

Beckmann

(1990). Intentional action and action slips. Psychological Review, 97, 36-48.

78.

Hersey

Blanchard

(1969). Life cycle theory of leadership. Training & Development Journal, 23(5), 26-33.

79.

Hersey

Blanchard

Johnson

(2012). Management of organizational behavior: Utilizing human resources (10th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

80.

Higgs

Lichtenstein

(2011). Is there a relationship between emotional intelligence and individual values? An exploratory study. Journal of General Management, 37, 65-79.

81.

V. T.

Wong

Lee

C. H.

(2011). A tale of passion: Linking job passion and cognitive engagement to employee work performance. Journal of Management Studies, 48, 26-47. doi:10. 1111/j. 14 67-6486. 2009. 00878.x

82.

Hoon Song

Kolb

J. A.

Hee Lee

Kyoung Kim

. (2012). Role of transformational leadership in effective organizational knowledge creation practices: Mediating effects of employees’ work engagement. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 23, 65-101. doi:10.1002/hrdq.21120

83.

Houlfort

Rinfret

(2010). To facilitate the work satisfaction of general managers of health and social services: The impact of leadership style of passion for work. In Raveleau

D. B.

Hassle

F. B.

(Eds.), Human management in organizations: The ups and downs of the manager position. Paris, France: Editions L’Harmattan.

84.

Houlfort

Vallerand

R. J.

(2013). Leadership and organizational culture as determinants of passion for work. Unpublished Manuscript.

85.

House

R. J.

(1977). A 1976 theory of charismatic leadership. In Hunt

J. G.

Larson

L. L.

(Eds.), Leadership: The cutting edge (pp. 189-207). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.

86.

James

L. A.

James

L. R.

(1989). Integrating work environment perceptions: Explorations into the measurement of meaning. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 739-751.

87.

Judge

T. A.

Piccolo

R. F.

(2004). Transformational & transactional leadership: A meta-analytic test of their relative validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 755-768. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.89.5.755

88.

Judge

T. A.

Piccolo

R. F.

Ilies

(2004). The forgotten ones? The validity of consideration & initiating structure in leadership research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 36-51. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.89.1.36

89.

Kahn

W. A.

(1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement & disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 692-724. doi:10.2307/256287

90.

Kocjan

G. Z.

(2015). Disentangling the overlap between employee engagement and passion. Psychological Topics, 24, 233-258.

91.

Korman

A. K.

(1966). Consideration, initiating structure & organization criteria—A review. Personnel Psychology, 19, 349-361.

92.

Kouzes

J. M.

Posner

B. Z.

(1993). Credibility: How leaders gain & lose it, why people demand it. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

93.

Kuppens

Tuerlinckx

Russell

J. A.

Barrett

L. F.

(2013). The relation between valence and arousal in subjective experience. Psychological Bulletin, 139, 917-940. doi:10.1037/a0030811

94.

Lavigne

G. L.

Forest

Fernet

Crevier-Braud

(2014). Passion at work and workers’ evaluations of job demands and resources: A longitudinal study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 44, 255-265. doi:10.1111/jasp.12209

95.

Lazarus

R. S.

(1991a). Cognition and motivation in emotion. American Psychologist, 46, 352-367. doi:10.1037/0003-066x.46.4.352

96.

Lazarus

R. S.

(1991b). Progress on a cognitive-motivational-relational theory of emotion. American Psychologist, 46, 819-834. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.46.8.819

97.

Lazarus

R. S.

Folkman

(1984). Stress, appraisal and coping. New York, NY: Springer.

98.

Luthans

(2012). Psychological capital: Implications for HRD, retrospective analysis, and future directions. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 23, 1-8. doi:10.1002/hrdq.21119

99.

Mageau

G. A.

Vallerand

R. J.

(2003). The coach–athlete relationship: A motivational model. Journal of Sports Sciences, 21, 883-904. doi:10.1080/0264041031000140374

100.

Mageau

G. A.

Vallerand

R. J.

Charest

Salvy

Lacaille

Bouffard

Koestner

(2009). On the development of harmonious and obsessive passion: The role of autonomy support, activity specialization, and identification with activity. Journal of Personality, 77, 601-645. doi:10. 1111/j. 1467-6494. 2009. 00559.x

101.

Marinova

S. V.

Park

(2014). Does it matter if leadership is about us? A meta-analysis of other-orientated leadership. Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings, 2014, 1082-1087. doi:10.5465/AMBPP.2014.267

102.

McAllister

C. P.

Harris

J. N.

Hochwarter

W. A.

Perrewe

P. L.

Ferris

G. R.

(2016). Got resources? A multi-sample constructive replication of perceived resource availability’s role in work passion—Job outcomes relationships. Journal of Business Psychology, 32, 147-164. doi:10.1007/s10869-016-9441-1

103.

Meglino

B. M.

Korsgaard

M. A.

(2007). The role of other orientation in reactions to job characteristics. Journal of Management, 33, 57-83. doi:10.1177/0149206306295308

104.

Meglino

B. M.

Ravlin

E. C.

(1998). Individual values in organizations: Concepts, controversies, & research. Journal of Management, 24, 351-389.

105.

Meirovich

(2015). Empirical and theoretical validity of Hersey-Blanchard’s contingency model: A critical analysis. Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, 20, 56-74. doi:10.9774/GLEAF.3709.2015.ju.00006

106.

Michie

Gooty

(2005). Values, emotions, and authenticity: Will the real leader please stand up? The Leadership Quarterly, 16, 441-457. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.03.006

107.

Nadler

(1990). Developing human resources: Concepts and models (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

108.

Nauta

de Dreu

C. K. W.

van der Vaart

(2002). Social value orientation, organization goal concerns and interdepartmental problem-solving behavior. Journal of Organization Behavior, 23, 199-213. doi:10.1002/job.l36

109.

T. W. H.

Sorensen

K. L.

(2009). Dispositional affectivity and work-related outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 39, 1255-1287. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2009.00481.x

110.

Nimon

Zigarmi

(2015). The Work Cognition Inventory: Initial evidence of construct validity for the revised form. Journal of Career Assessment, 23, 117-136. doi:10.1177/1069072714523241

111.

Nimon

Zigarmi

Houson

Witt

Diehl

(2011). The Work Cognition Inventory: Initial evidence of construct validity. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 22, 7-35. doi:10.1002/hrdq.20064

112.

Nirenberg

(1998). Myths we teach, realities we ignore: Leadership education in business schools. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 5, 82-99. doi:10.1177/107179199800500109

113.

Northouse

P. G.

(2010). Leadership: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

114.

Parker

C. P.

Baltes

B. B.

Young

S. A.

Huff

J. W.

Altmann

R. A.

Lacost

H. A.

Roberts

J. E.

(2003). Relationships between psychological climate perceptions and work outcomes: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 389-416. doi:10.1002/job.198

115.

Perrewe

Hochwarter

W. A.

Ferris

G. R.

McAllister

C. P.

Harris

J. N.

(2014). Developing a passion for work passion: Future directions on an emerging construct. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35, 145-150. doi:10.1002/job.1902

116.

Perttula

K. H.

(2004). The POW factor: Understanding and igniting passion for one’s work. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.

117.

Peterson

S. L.

(2004). Toward a theoretical model of employee turnover: A human resource development perspective. Human Resource Development Review, 3, 209-227. doi:10.1177/1534484304267832

118.

Piccolo

R. F.

Bono

J. E.

Heinitz

Rowold

Duehr

Judge

(2012). The relative impact of complementary leader behaviors: Which matter most? The Leadership Quarterly, 23, 567-581. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.12.008

119.

Podsakoff

P. M.

MacKenzie

S. B.

Lee

J. Y.

Podsakoff

N. P.

(2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature & recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879-903. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879

120.

Podsakoff

P. M.

Organ

(1986). Self-reports in organization research: Problems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12, 531-544.

121.

Preacher

K. J.

Hayes

A. F.

(2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879-891. doi:10.3758/BRM.40.3.879

122.

Rajah

Song

Arvey

(2011). Emotionality and leadership: Taking stock of the past decade of research. The Leadership Quarterly, 22, 1107-1119. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.09.006

123.

Ratelle

Vallerand

R. J.

Mageau

Rousseau

F. L.

Provencher

P. J.

(2004). Passion and gambling: A look at pathological gambling. Journal of Gambling Studies, 20, 105-119. doi:10.1023/B:JOGS.0000022304.96042.e6

124.

Rich

B. L.

Lepine

J. A.

Crawford

E. R.

(2010). Job engagement: Antecedents and effects on job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 53, 617-635. doi:10.5465/amj.2010.51468988

125.

Roberts

T. P.

Zigarmi

(2014). The impact of dispositional cynicism on job-specific affect and work intentions. International Journal of Psychology, 49, 381-398. doi:10.1002/ijop.12051

126.

Robertson

J. L.

Barling

(2013). Greening organizations through leaders’ influence on employees’ pro-environment behaviors. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34, 176-194. doi:10.1002/job.1820

127.

Rohan

M. J.

(2000). A rose by any name? The values construct. Personality & Social Psychology Review, 4, 255-277.

128.

Rost

J. C.

(1993). Leadership for the twenty-first century. Westport, CT: Praeger.

129.

Sagiv

Schwartz

S. H.

(2000). Value priorities and subjective well-being: Direct relations and congruity effects. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 177-198.

130.

Saks

A. M.

(2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21, 600-619. doi:10.1108/02683940610690169

131.

Schaufeli

W. B.

Salanova

González-Romá

Bakker

A. B.

(2002). The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3, 71-92.

132.

Schimmack

Schupp

Wagner

(2008). The influence of environment and personality on the affective and cognitive component of subjective well-being. Social Indicators Research, 89, 41-60. doi:10.1007/s 11205-007-9230-3

133.

Schurer-Lambert

Tepper

B. J.

Carr

J. C.

Holt

D. T.

Barelka

A. J.

(2012). Forgotten but not gone: An examination of fit between leader consideration and initiating structure needed and received. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 913-930. doi:10.1037/a0028970

134.

Schwartz

S. H.

Bilsky

(1987). Toward a universal psychological structure of human values. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 550-562. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.53.3.550

135.

Sekaran

Bougie

(2013). Research methods for business: A skill-building approach (6th ed.). West Sussex, UK: John Wiley.

136.

Shamir

(2007). From passive recipients to active coproducers: Followers’ roles in the leadership process. In Shamir

Pillai

Bligh

M. C.

Uhl-Bien

(Eds.), Follower-centered perspectives on leadership: A tribute to the memory of James R. Meindl (pp. ix-xxxix). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.

137.

Shuck

Ghosh

Zigarmi

Nimon

(2013). The jingle jangle of employee engagement: Further exploration of the emerging construct and implications for workplace learning and performance. Human Resource Development Review, 12, 11-35. doi:10.1177/1534484312463921

138.

Shuck

Reio

T. G.

(2011). The employee engagement landscape and HRD: How do we link theory and scholarship to current practice? Advances in Developing Human Resources, 13, 419-428. doi:10.1177/1523422311431153

139.

Shuck

Zigarmi

Owen

(2015). Psychological needs, engagement, and work intentions: A Bayesian multi-measurement mediation approach and implications for HRD. European Journal of Training and Development, 39, 2-21. doi:10.1108/EJTD-08-2014-0061

140.

Spector

P. E.

(2006). Method variance in organization research: Truth or urban legend? Organizational Research Methods, 9, 221-232. doi:10.1177/1094428105284955

141.

Thompson

E. R.

(2007). Development and validation of an internationally reliable short-form of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS). Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 38, 227-242. doi:10.1177/0022022106297301

142.

Thompson

Vecchio

R. P.

(2009). Situational leadership theory: A test of three versions. The Leadership Quarterly, 20, 837-848. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.06.014

143.

Thoresen

C. J.

Kaplan

S. A.

Barsky

A. P.

Warren

C. R.

de Chermont

(2003). The affective underpinnings of job perceptions and attitudes: A meta-analytic review and integration. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 914-945. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.129.6.914

144.

Tse

H. H.

Dasborough

M. T.

Ashkanasy

N. M.

(2008). A multi-level analysis of team climate and interpersonal exchange relationships at work. The Leadership Quarterly, 19, 195-211. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2008.01.005

145.

Tzeng

O. C.

(1975). Differentiation of affective and denotative meaning systems and their influence in personality ratings. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 978-988.

146.

Utz

Jonas

K. J.

Tonkens

(2012). Effects of passion for massively multiplayer online role-playing games on interpersonal relationships. Journal of Media Psychology, 24, 77-86. doi:101027/18641105/a000066

147.

Vallerand

R. J.

(2008). On the psychology of passion: In search of what makes people’s lives most worth living. Canadian Psychology, 49, 1-13. doi:10.1037/0708-5591.49.1.1

148.

Vallerand

R. J.

(2015). The psychology of passion: A dualistic model. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

149.

Vallerand

R. J.

Blanchard

Mageau

G. A.

Koestner

Ratelle

Léonard

. . .Marsolais

(2003). Les passions de l’âme: On obsessive and harmonious passion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 756-767. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.4.756

150.

Vallerand

R. J.

Houlfort

Forest

(2014). Passion for work: Determinants and outcomes. In Gagné

(Ed.), The Oxford handbook of work engagement, motivation, and self-determination theory (pp. 85-105). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

151.

Vallerand

R. J.

Salvy

S. J.

Mageau

G. A.

Elliot

A. J.

Denis

P. L.

Grouzet

F. M.

. . .Blanchard

(2007). On the role of passion in performance. Journal of Personality, 75, 505-533. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2007.00447.x

152.

van Dierendonck

. (2011). Servant leadership: A review and synthesis. Journal of Management, 37, 1228-1261. doi:10.1177/0149206310380462

153.

van Knippenberg

. (2005). Leader self-sacrifice and leadership effectiveness: The moderating role of leader prototypicality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 25-37. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.90.1.25

154.

Verner-Filion

Vallerand

R. J.

(2016). On the differential relationships involving perfectionism and academic adjustment: The mediating role of passion and affect. Learning and Individual Differences, 50, 103-116. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2016.07.018

155.

Wang

Murnighan

J. K.

(2011). On greed. Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 279-316. doi:10.1080/19416520.2011.588822

156.

Watson

Clark

L. A.

Tellegen

(1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063-1070. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063

157.

Watson

Tellegen

(1985). Toward a consensual structure of mood. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 219-235. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.98.2.219

158.

Webb

T. L.

Sheeran

(2006). Does changing behavioral intentions engender behavior change? A meta-analysis of the experimental evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 249-268. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.132.2.249

159.

Weiss

H. M.

Cropanzano

(1996). Affective events theory: A theoretical discussion of the structure, causes and consequences of affective experiences at work. Research in Organization Behavior, 18, 1-74.

160.

Weissenberg

Kavanagh

(1972). The independence of initiating structure and consideration: A review of the evidence. Personnel Psychology, 25, 119-130.

161.

Westwood

R. I.

Posner

B. Z.

(1997). Managerial values across cultures: Australia, Hong Kong and the United States. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 14, 31-66.

162.

Whitehurst

(2016, February). How to build a passionate company. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2016/02/how-to-build-a-passionate-company

163.

Yammarino

(2013). Leadership: Past, present, and future. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 20, 149-155. doi:10.1177/1548051812471559

164.

Yukl

(2012). Leadership in organizations (8th ed.). Essex, UK: Pearson.

165.

Zigarmi

Galloway

Roberts

T. P.

(2016). Work locus of control, motivational regulation, employee work passion, and work intentions: An empirical investigation of an appraisal model. Journal of Happiness Studies. Published Online 10 November 2016. doi:10.1007/S10902-016-9813-2

166.

Zigarmi

Nimon

Houson

Witt

Diehl

(2009). Beyond engagement: Toward a framework & operational definition for employee work passion. Human Resource Development Review, 8, 300-326. doi:10.1177/1534484309338171

167.

Zigarmi

Nimon

Houson

Witt

Diehl

(2011). A preliminary field test of an employee work passion model. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 22, 195-221. doi:10.1002/hrdq.20076

168.

Zigarmi

Nimon

Houson

Witt

Diehl

(2012). The Work Intention Inventory: Initial evidence of construct validity. Journal of Business Administration Research, 1, 24-42. doi:10.5430/jbar.v1n1p24

169.

Zigarmi

Roberts

T. P.

(2012). Leader values as predictors of employee affect and work passion intentions. Journal of Modern Economy and Management, 1, 1-28.

170.

Zigarmi

Roberts

T. P.

Randolph

W. A.

(2015). Employees’ perceived use of leader power and implications for affect and work intentions. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 26(4), 1-26. doi:10.1002/hrdq