Authoritarian leadership and employee silence in China

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

We examine the relationship between authoritarian leadership and employee silence behaviour with 324 employees in 16 state-owned manufacturing enterprises in China. We draw from theories of motivation and person–environment fit to explain the mediating roles of psychological safety and organization-based self-esteem, and the moderating effects of power distance orientation. Regression analyses show that authoritarian leadership has a positive relationship with employee silence behaviour. Mediation analyses show that both psychological safety and organization-based self-esteem partially mediate the relationship between authoritarian leadership and employee silence. Moderation analysis revealed that the direct relationship between authoritarian leadership and employee silence behaviour is stronger for employees with high (as opposed to low) power distance orientation. Additionally, moderated-mediation analyses show that the mediating effects of both psychological safety and organization-based self-esteem are stronger for employees with low (as opposed to high) power distance orientation. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.

Related collections

Most cited references 89

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies.

Philip M Podsakoff, Scott MacKenzie, Jeong-Yeon Lee … (2003)

Interest in the problem of method biases has a long history in the behavioral sciences. Despite this, a comprehensive summary of the potential sources of method biases and how to control for them does not exist. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to examine the extent to which method biases influence behavioral research results, identify potential sources of method biases, discuss the cognitive processes through which method biases influence responses to measures, evaluate the many different procedural and statistical techniques that can be used to control method biases, and provide recommendations for how to select appropriate procedural and statistical remedies for different types of research settings.