Solved by verified expert:If possible, need to summarize the attached article in three paragraphs and then analyze in fourth paragraphs. Thanks!
getting_respect_from_a_boss_you_respect_how_different_types_of_respect_interact_to_explain_subordinates__job_satisfaction_as_mediated_by_self_determination.pdf
Unformatted Attachment Preview
J Bus Ethics (2015) 131:543–556
DOI 10.1007/s10551-014-2291-8
Getting Respect from a Boss You Respect: How Different Types
of Respect Interact to Explain Subordinates’ Job Satisfaction
as Mediated by Self-Determination
Catharina Decker • Niels Van Quaquebeke
Received: 10 April 2014 / Accepted: 5 July 2014 / Published online: 20 July 2014
Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014
Abstract Interpersonal respect can be differentiated into
two kinds: (1) horizontal respect, i.e. treating someone with
dignity; and (2) vertical respect, i.e. genuinely honoring
someone’s merits. With the present research, we draw on
motivation theory to explore their interplay in leadership
relations. Specifically, we argue for a moderated mediation
hypothesis in that (a) leaders’ horizontal respect for their
subordinates fundamentally speaks to subordinates’ selfdetermination and (b) that the message of respectful leadership is enhanced by the vertical respect subordinates have
for their leaders. As a result, subordinates are more satisfied with their jobs, which should also show in a decreased
willingness to leave. The proposed model was supported in
two survey studies (N = 391 and N = 518) and an
experimental scenario study (N = 107)—thus suggesting
that perceived leader behavior needs to be complemented
by leader standing.
Keywords Horizontal respect Intention to leave Job
satisfaction Respect for the leader Respectful
leadership Self-determination Vertical respect
C. Decker
RespectResearchGroup, University of Hamburg,
Rothenbaumchaussee 34, 20148 Hamburg, Germany
e-mail: decker@respectresearchgroup.org
N. Van Quaquebeke (&)
Management & Economics, Kühne Logistics University, Grosser
Grasbrook 17, 20457 Hamburg, Germany
e-mail: niels.quaquebeke@the-klu.org
Introduction
Working for a leader who treats subordinates with respect
is one of the most valued aspects in people’s daily jobs.
Indeed, for many people the importance of this factor is
equal to, or even greater than, aspects such as salary or job
security (Van Quaquebeke et al. 2009). As a consequence
of such respectful leadership, people feel more identified
with their leaders, more satisfied with their jobs, and more
committed to their teams and organizations (Boezeman and
Ellemers 2007, 2008a, b; De Cremer and Tyler 2005;
Ellemers et al. 2013; Sleebos et al. 2006a, b; Van Quaquebeke and Eckloff 2010, 2013; Wombacher and Felfe
2012).
While the topic of treating subordinates respectfully has
attracted some attention within leadership research,
respective research on respect has predominantly taken a
leader-centric view thereby overlooking that the follower
plays a role in the dyad as well. Indeed, leaders and subordinates will both see and treat each other in certain ways.
It is our belief we can delineate more nuanced predictions
by considering such combination of action and perception.
Specifically, we argue that how one regards the source of
respect may be just as important as the condition of being
respected. Put differently, subordinates may be more profoundly impacted by a leader’s respect or disrespect if said
leader is held in high regard. In explaining this dynamic,
we draw on self-determination theory (Ryan and Deci
2004) to argue that self-determination is a key factor in
respectful leadership, and that the support of self-determination is experienced differently depending on the vertical respect for the source.
With our investigation, we seek to extend extant leadership literature in four significant ways. First, we follow
calls to assess leaders’ behavior and subordinates’
123
544
perception of leaders in interaction with one another in
order to fully understand subordinates’ workplace behavior
(De Cremer et al. 2009). Second, and even more to the
point, our research integrates different streams of respect
research by empirically addressing different types of
respect in a leader–subordinate dyad in interaction—
something that has been called for in respective theory on
respect at the workplace, e.g. by Grover (2013) who states
that ‘‘future research […] should consider how the two
types of respect affect the leader–follower relationship’’ (p.
18; cf. also Clarke 2011). Third, and central to our reasoning, we offer a key motivational mediating mechanism.
In doing so, the present research extends our understanding
on the dynamics of respect at the workplace by tying the
concept to the well-elaborated theoretical framework of
self-determination (Deci et al. 1989). Lastly, the present
research also provides some nuanced practical recommendations beyond a mere call for respectful leadership
training by arguing that behavior needs to be complemented by standing.
Theoretical Background
C. Decker, N. Van Quaquebeke
as more important than being vertically respected and
appreciated for good performance (Van Quaquebeke et al.
2009). In contrast, leaders who are by definition superior
face the question of whether their subordinates are vertically respecting, i.e. informally also acknowledging the
status differential. In this regard, Ellingsen and Johannesson (2004, p. 135) propose that leaders need ‘‘proving to be
a worthy audience.’’
In the actual workplace phenotype, both types of respect
show themselves as slightly different compared to the pure
theoretical concepts. Horizontal respect from the leader, or
respectful leadership, is a behavior that leads to perceptions
of meaning and self-worth in the subordinate: The leader
recognizes and considers the presence of the subordinate as
well as treats him or her as a full-fledged counterpart (cf.
Dillon 1992; Van Quaquebeke et al. 2007, 2009; Van
Quaquebeke and Eckloff 2010). In contrast, vertical respect
at the workplace manifests itself in a voluntary influence
asymmetry, i.e., in enjoying being able to learn and seeking
advice from the respected person (cf. Clarke 2011; Van
Quaquebeke and Eckloff 2010). Consequently, subordinates’ vertical respect toward their leaders can be understood as a form of openness to influence (Van Quaquebeke
et al. 2011a).
Respect at Work
Horizontal Respect and Job Satisfaction
In recent philosophical and applied studies, two forms of
respect have been distinguished: horizontal (cf. recognition) and vertical (cf. appraisal) respect (Clarke 2011;
Darwall 1977; Grover 2013; Van Quaquebeke et al. 2007).
Horizontal respect is (or should be) unconditionally guaranteed to every human being: It is a personal attitude of
treating others as equals or, at least, extending them equal
dignity. In contrast, vertical respect is paid to people for
reasons such as their expertise, excellence, or status; it is
conditional in the sense of being based on differences
between people (cf. Clarke 2011; Darwall 1977). Vertical
respect hence depicts an attitude that communicates the
positive evaluation of the other in difference to oneself,
which often entails an openness toward influence from the
respected person (Van Quaquebeke et al. 2007, 2009).
While horizontal and vertical respect are two dimensions on which every-day interactions between people can
be mapped (cf. Ellemers et al. 2013; Van Quaquebeke et al.
2007), their occurrences in work interactions are less balanced. Theory implies that horizontal respect is a generally
experienced, process-related characteristic and that vertical
respect, by contrast, is a more selectively experienced,
outcome-related characteristic (Darwall 1977; Van Quaquebeke et al. 2007). As a result, it seems that leaders and
subordinates tend to prioritize certain types of respect in
their roles. Recent research has shown that subordinates,
for instance, consider the horizontal respect of their leaders
123
Given its significant impact on organizational performance
on various levels (Grandey et al. 2002; Harter et al. 2002;
Ilies et al. 2009), considerable research has been conducted
on the antecedents of job satisfaction. In this respect, a
meta-analysis by Humphrey et al. (2007) shows that the
social characteristics of the workplace can explain large
amounts of variance in job satisfaction and intention to
leave. Recent research has, moreover, concluded that
leaders constitute the most influential social signal for
subordinates at their workplaces (Grandey et al. 2002). For
example, Ronen and Mikulincer (2012) pointed out that the
quality of relationships leaders have with their subordinates
contributes directly to subordinates’ job satisfaction.
Here it is important to note that job satisfaction can be
defined as the degree of value fulfillment concerning the
work setting (Locke 1970). Keeping this in mind, Van
Quaquebeke and colleagues’ procedure (2009) is interesting as it used a value-centered approach by asking subordinates to rate the importance and perceived practice of 19
work values. ‘‘Working for a supervisor who treats me with
respect’’ (Van Quaquebeke et al. 2009, p. 427) was ranked
as the second-most important work value. Strikingly, the
same item was also found to be among the values with the
highest differences between importance and perceived
actual practice. Hence, unsurprisingly, respectful leadership has later also been empirically linked directly to job
Getting Respect from a Boss You Respect
satisfaction (e.g. Van Quaquebeke and Eckloff 2010).
However, the question remains as to why this link exists, or
against Locke’s (1970) definition what values do respectful
leadership cater for so that people experience job
satisfaction.
The Mediating Role of Self-determination
According to the motivational theory of self-determination
(Deci et al. 1989), a person feels self-determined when she/
he experiences herself/himself to be acting autonomously
(Ryan and Connell 1989), to be effective in actions or
interactions (Ryan and Deci 2004), and to be connected to
other individuals or groups (Baumeister and Leary 1995).
Altogether, self-determination is proposed as a means of
ensuring optimal human functioning (Ryan and Deci 2004)
and is considered to be one of the most basic sources of
human motivation and well-being (Ryan and Deci 2000).
Consequently, Baard et al. (2004) also claimed that selfdetermination should be an important source for job satisfaction. It is true that people who perceive themselves as
self-determined report lower burnout (Van den Broeck
et al. 2008), higher job satisfaction (Ilardi et al. 1993;
Kovjanic et al. 2012), and lower intention to quit (Vansteenkiste et al. 2007). As self-determination is related to
various other positive business outcomes in addition to the
above (e.g. Puffer 1987; Vansteenkiste et al. 2007), Deci
et al. (1989) argue that leaders, being practically in the
driving seat, should see their prime responsibility as the
enhancement of their subordinates’ self-determination (see
also Richer and Vallerand 1995).
In this respect, it is noteworthy that especially respectful
leadership may contribute to subordinates’ self-determination. Research by De Cremer and Mulder (2007), for
instance, underlines that the presence of respect in people’s
interaction with authorities helps to foster a sense of
belonging (cf. De Cremer 2003; Ellemers et al. 2013;
Sleebos et al. 2006a). Further empirical research supports
the notion that respectful leadership does cultivate a sense
of identification with the leader (Van Quaquebeke and
Eckloff 2010). Lalljee et al. (2008) mirror above ideas by
proposing that the respecter recognizes and acknowledges
the counterpart in his or her integrity and autonomy. Their
claim is echoed by Barilan (2011), who argues that horizontal respect leads to autonomy because it grants individuals the right to choose and act freely. Lastly,
Boezemann and Ellemers (2007, 2008a, b) were able to
show that respectful messages from authorities also carry a
subtext of support for competence that motivates people in
and for voluntary work. In sum, leading others respectfully
should evoke a sense of self-determination (cf. Van Quaquebeke and Eckloff 2010) and such self-determination
545
SelfDetermination
(M)
Vertical Respect
for Leader
(W)
a
Respectful
Leadership
(X)
b
c’
Job
Satisfaction
(Y)
Fig. 1 Path diagram of hypothesized model
should translate to subordinates’ job satisfaction (Gagné
and Deci 2005; Ryan and Deci 2000). In other words:
Hypothesis 1 Self-determination mediates the positive
relationship between subordinates’ perceived respectful
leadership and subordinates’ job satisfaction.
The Moderating Role of Vertical Respect
As Hemmings (2002) notes, individuals who are vertically
respected by others have the opportunity to assert social
control and influence. This would seem especially true of
the leader–subordinate relationship given the formal nature
of the leader’s position. Fittingly, it appears that subordinates who vertically respect their leaders also demonstrate
a readiness for and openness to influence (Van Quaquebeke
et al. 2007, 2009). This openness is rooted in a social
comparison process in which differences in merit spur
subordinates to consciously and voluntarily seek input
(Dillon 2003; Van Quaquebeke et al. 2011b). In a nutshell,
leaders who compare favorably (i.e. are respected) in the
eyes of their subordinates become more relevant in the
interpersonal dynamic (cf. Fiske et al. 1999). Following our
argument on the positive influence of respectful leadership
on self-determination, we further reason that the effect of
respectful leadership on subordinates’ self-determination
will be stronger when leaders are vertically respected by
their subordinates (cf. the power perspective offered by
Yukl and Falbe 1991). This reasoning mirrors the argument
by Ellingsen and Johannesson (2004), who conceptually
noted that the value of respectful leadership should
increase for subordinates when they perceive their leader as
a respectable person. Hence, we can specifically hypothesize that the subordinate’s vertical respect for his or her
leader moderates the relationship between the perceived
respectful leadership and the subordinate’s self-determination (see Fig. 1).
Hypothesis 2 The relationship between respectful leadership and subordinate job satisfaction as mediated by selfdetermination (H1) is stronger the more subordinates vertically respect their leader.
123
546
C. Decker, N. Van Quaquebeke
Study Overview
Measures
We conducted three studies to test our model. Study 1 and
2 are survey studies, Study 3 is an experimental scenario
study. We conducted two field studies for three reasons:
First, simple replication foster confidence in the results.
Second, we used a different sampling strategy for each
study to show robustness of our findings against potential
self-selection biases and different working populations.
Third, we include ‘intention to leave’ in Study 2 as an
additional proxy for job satisfaction, as that variable
complements the more affective domain of job satisfaction
with a more behavioral (intent)-focused triangulation.
Additionally, we conducted an experimental study to
complement and substantiate findings with regard to
internal validity and causality across both dependent
measures (Dipboye 1990; Hole 2013).
According to Hayes (2013), moderated mediation
models can be tested using the PROCESS-macro in SPSS,
which refers to the general linear model. As the ANOVA
procedure is restricted to cases of the general linear model,
and because PROCESS can also compute moderated
mediation analyses for dichotomous variables, we computed every study using the PROCESS-macro. This uniformity allows for direct comparison over all three studies.
Study 1
To assess a leader’s horizontal respect as perceived by the
subordinates, we used the Respectful Leadership-scale
(Van Quaquebeke and Eckloff 2010). The scale contains
twelve items such as: ‘‘My leader treats me in a polite
manner’’ or ‘‘My leader takes me and my work seriously.’’
To assess subordinates’ vertical respect for their leaders,
we used the Appraisal Respect for Leaders scale (Van
Quaquebeke et al. 2011a, b). The scale contains six items
such as: ‘‘For me, my leader represents a positive role
model at the workplace’’ or ‘‘At work I enjoy being able to
learn from my leader.’’
To assess self-determination, we used the Basic Needs
Satisfaction in Relationship scale by La Guardia et al.
(2000). The scale contains nine items such as: ‘‘In the
working relationship with my direct leader, I feel like a
competent person,’’ ‘‘In the working relationship with my
direct leader, I often feel a large personal distance,’’ or ‘‘In
the working relationship with my direct leader, I have a say
in what happens and I can voice my opinion.’’
To assess subordinates’ job satisfaction, we used the
three-item measure of the Job Diagnostic Survey (Hackman and Oldham 1975) such as: ‘‘Generally speaking, I am
very satisfied with my job.’’
All scales were presented as five-point Likert scales,
with each item’s degree of agreement ranging from 1 (do
not agree at all) to 5 (agree completely).
Methods
Results
Sample
Table 1 provides the means, standard deviations, internal
consistencies, and correlations for all observed variables.
All the scales demonstrated good reliabilities (Cronbach’s
alpha coefficients range from .70 to .96). All correlations
support the predicted directions: Respectful leadership was
positively related to both self-determination and job satisfaction. Furthermore, self-determination was positively
related to job satisfaction. We conducted a confirmatory
factor analysis to determine whether the concepts are
empirically discriminable.
To recruit a sample from a wide range of industries and
occupations, we utilized the established snowball sampling
technique (Eddleston et al. 2006; Mayer et al. 2009;
Morgeson and Humphrey 2006; Zapata et al. 2013). Participants were recruited via the personal network of a PhD
student at a major German university. Participants were
informed that by partaking in the study, they could enter
into a lottery for a 150 € Amazon voucher. The sample
included 391 participants. The average age of the participants was 37.53 (SD = 9.74 years) with 56 % of them
identifying as female. Forty-four percent of the participants
had higher educational qualifications. On average, they had
already worked 15.51 years (SD = 10.37 years) under five
different superiors (SD = 3.63). Thirty-four percent of
participants had a female superior at the time of the survey,
compared to male superiors for 66 % of participants. Participants represented heterogeneous professional backgrounds covering 13 different areas of industry, with most
participants concentrated in service, health care, and social
work.
123
Confirmatory Factor Analysis
We employed a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of
covariances in AMOS 20.0 in order to test various measurement models for the validity of the indicators’ factor
structure with respect to their underlying constructs. In
order to ensure the existence of four distinct factors, we
compared the fit of a correlated four-factor model to the fit
of a one-factor model and the fit of an uncorrelated fourfactor model. We used three fit indices to provide unique
information about the fit of a model (cf. Hair et al. 1998).
Getting Respect from a Boss You Respect
547
Table 1 Mean scores, standard deviations, internal consistencies (Cronbach’s alphas on the diagonal), and intercorrelations of the variables in
Study 1
M
SD
1
2
3
1. Respectful leadership
3.25
.99
2. Vertical respect for leader
3.68
1.00
.79**
3. Self-determination
3.47
.85
.83**
.70**
4. Job satisfaction
3.71
.88
.54**
.48**
5. Subordinate age
37.53
9.74
-.06
-.16**
6. Subordinate sex
7. Leader sex
1.56
1.34
.50
.47
-.02
.02
.00
.07
4
5
6
-.21**
-.13**
.52**
(.96)
(.90)
(.91)
.58**
(.70)
Controls
.01
-.03
.00
.10*
-.01 …
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
