Yejun Zhang

Purpose: This study examines how ambivalent leader–member exchange (LMX ambivalence) – characterized by the simultaneous presence of positive and negative relational experiences – shapes employees’ presenteeism. Drawing on sociometer theory, we theorize that LMX ambivalence undermines organization-based self-esteem (OBSE), thereby influencing employees’ health-related attendance decisions. We further propose supervisor's organizational embodiment (SOE), or the extent to which supervisors are perceived as representing the organization, as a key boundary condition. Design/methodology/approach: We tested the proposed model across two multi-wave field studies conducted in China. Study 1 surveyed 370 finance employees across three time points. Study 2 replicated and extended the model in a sample of 345 employees, controlling for alternative antecedents and mechanisms. Findings: LMX ambivalence was negatively associated with OBSE, which in turn was positively related to presenteeism. Moreover, the indirect effect of LMX ambivalence on presenteeism via OBSE emerged only when SOE was high. These relationships remained robust after accounting for theoretical predictors and mechanisms. Originality/value: This research advances presenteeism theory by identifying LMX ambivalence as a novel social antecedent and by elucidating OBSE as a core psychological mechanism grounded in sociometer theory. By highlighting SOE as a critical contextual moderator, the study demonstrates when and why ambivalent leader relationships are most consequential for employee self-worth and health-related work behavior. Together, the findings underscore the fundamentally social nature of presenteeism and offer actionable insights for leadership practices and organizational health.

Drawing on attachment theory, the present study develops a theoretical model to explore whether, how, and when daily leader secure‐base support impacts employees' daily in‐role and extra‐role performance. To test this model, we employed an experience‐sampling method and collected daily diary data over 3 weeks. Results of multilevel path analysis indicated that daily leader secure‐base support was positively related to both employees' daily in‐role and extra‐role performance. Moreover, we found that daily leader secure‐base support indirectly influenced employees' in‐role performance via their self‐esteem, whereas it indirectly influenced employees' extra‐role performance via their gratitude. Finally, attachment anxiety moderated the within‐person relationship between daily leader secure‐base support and employees' self‐esteem as well as the indirect effect of daily leader secure‐base support on employees' subsequent in‐role performance via their self‐esteem. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these findings, as well as future research directions.

This study probes the temporal nature of work–family balance satisfaction (WFBS). Drawing on distributed connectionist models and conservation of resources (COR) theory, we hypothesize that changes in work and family overload are positively associated with changes in WFBS, and these relationships are mediated by changes in work and family fatigue, respectively. Additionally, we propose that work and family crafting behaviors (decreasing hindering work and family demands) are helpful in building resources that mitigate the relationships above. We tested these hypotheses by sampling 71 full‐time employees over a work week. The results identified positive relationships between changes in role overload and changes in WFBS. In addition, we found full support for the moderating role of crafting behaviors in the work domain and partial support for the family domain. Further analyses suggested that employees' work and family crafting behaviors (i.e., decreasing hindering demands) buffered the negative effects of changes in work and family overload on changes in work and family fatigue, respectively. Also, decreasing hindering work demands moderated the indirect effect of changes in work overload on changes in WFBS. We discuss theoretical and practical implications as well as future research directions.

Purpose: Prior research suggests that organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) can have both positive and negative effects on employees; however, it is unclear about the mediating mechanisms of this relationship and how the effects of challenging and supportive OCB may differ. Drawing on the dual-pathway model of proactivity and OCB research, the authors derive a theoretical model that attempts to reveal how different types of employees' daily organizationally focused citizenship behaviors can affect employees.Design/methodology/approach: The authors examine the relationships using a daily-diary study using experience sampling methodology (ESM). The survey includes 72 employees who completed three surveys a day for 10 working days resulting in 614 daily observations.Findings: The authors find that advocacy participation increases perceptions of prosocial impact, which in turn increases daily job satisfaction; the authors also find that advocacy participation decreases ego depletion, which then reduces daily job stress. Daily voice likewise increases perceptions of prosocial impact, which in turn increases daily job satisfaction; however, unlike advocacy participation, voice increases ego depletion, which then increases daily job stress.Originality/value: The study is one of the first studies to simultaneously examine the personal perceptions and emotions of engaging in daily organizationally focused OCB and recognize the fact that different types of prosocial behavior have differential outcomes. The authors also extend prior research by documenting the mechanisms by which OCB impacts employees.

A burgeoning stream of research is emerging on the importance of entrepreneurial imaginativeness in the new venture development process. Empirical studies so far have focused predominantly on its i...

Although empowering leadership is generally thought to be beneficial to employees and organizations, an emerging stream of work shows its potential negative impact. Drawing upon social exchange the...

Although empowering leadership is generally thought to be beneficial to employees and organizations, an emerging stream of work shows its potential negative impact. Drawing upon social exchange theory, we propose an integrated model that simultaneously examines the benefits and costs of empowering leadership. Specifically, we propose that team‐level empowering leadership can relate to both organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) and unethical pro‐organizational behavior (UPB). We also examine the mediating role of employee workplace status and the moderating role of felt obligation in these processes. Using data from 301 employees and 57 leaders across two time points, we found that team‐level empowering leadership linked to leader‐rated OCB and employee‐rated UPB through workplace status. However, the positive indirect effect of team‐level empowering leadership on OCB was significant only when employees' felt obligation was high, and the indirect effect of team‐level empowering leadership on UPB was positive and significant only when employees' felt obligation was low. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these findings, as well as future research directions.