| Literature DB >> 35837639 |
Qaisar Iqbal1, Katarzyna Piwowar-Sulej2.
Abstract
Drawing on the conservation of resources theory and contingency theories of leadership, this study aims to investigate how sustainable leadership (SL) influences employees' wellbeing (WB) through employee resilience (ER) and to examine the moderating effect of environmental turbulence (ET) on the "sustainable leadership-employees' wellbeing" relationship. Data were collected from 593 employees and 373 supervisors adopting two-wave design among small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in China. The authors used structural equation modeling to empirically test the hypothesized model in this study. The research shows that SL is significantly related to the employees' WB in SMEs. Regarding mediating effect, SL also indirectly influences employees' WB through ER. Moreover, the impact of SL on employees' WB becomes more prominent in the presence of lower ET. To the best of the authors' knowledge, no prior study is available about the integrated relationship of SL, ER, ET, and employee WB.Entities:
Keywords: developing country; market turbulence; sustainable development; wellbeing at work; workplace wellbeing
Year: 2022 PMID: 35837639 PMCID: PMC9274281 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.939389
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
Figure 1Research framework.
Descriptive statistics and normality of data.
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Employee resilience | 4.203 | 0.579 | −0.622 | 0.126 | 0.686 | 0.252 |
| Sustainable leadership | 3.922 | 0.596 | −0.224 | 0.126 | 0.057 | 0.252 |
| Environmental turbulence | 4.005 | 0.608 | −0.183 | 0.126 | 0.089 | 0.252 |
| Employee wellbeing | 2.640 | 0.394 | −0.009 | 0.126 | −0.630 | 0.252 |
| Subjective wellbeing | 2.869 | 0.482 | −0.028 | 0.126 | −1.033 | 0.252 |
| Psychological wellbeing | 2.525 | 0.429 | 0.001 | 0.126 | −0.767 | 0.252 |
|
|
|
|
| |||
| Skewness | 1.97 | 122.607 | 0.000 | |||
| Kurtosis | 37.412 | −10.434 | 0.000 | |||
Figure 2Measurement model analysis.
Discriminant validity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Employee resilience |
| |||||
| Sustainable leadership | 0.729 |
| ||||
| Environmental turbulence | −0.739 | 0.726 |
| |||
| Employee wellbeing | 0.265 | 0.205 | 0.246 |
| ||
| Subjective wellbeing | 0.336 | 0.233 | 0.289 | 0.782 |
| |
| Psychological wellbeing | 0.175 | 0.151 | 0.176 | 0.837 | 0.515 |
|
The bold values indicates the square root of the respective AVE values.
Hypotheses testing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SL > WB | 0.151 | 0.028 | 5.412 | 0.000 | 0.096 | 0.206 |
| SL > ER | 0.715 | 0.032 | 21.767 | 0.000 | 0.650 | 0.779 |
| ER > WB | 0.172 | 0.043 | 3.974 | 0.000 | 0.087 | 0.257 |
| SL > ER> WB | 0.123 | 0.036 | 3.357 | 0.000 | 0.051 | 0.195 |
| SL*ET > WB | −0.092 | 0.0411 | −2.239 | 0.025 | −0.173 | −0.011 |
The .