J Bus Ethics (2015) 126:513–529
DOI 10.1007/s10551-013-1967-9
Does Moral Leadership Enhance Employee Creativity? Employee
Identification with Leader and Leader–Member Exchange (LMX)
in the Chinese Context
Qinxuan Gu • Thomas Li-Ping Tang •
Wan Jiang
Received: 31 October 2013 / Accepted: 4 November 2013 / Published online: 21 November 2013
 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013
Abstract In this article, drawing from a relational
perspective, we explore the relationship between moral
leadership and employee creativity, treat employee identi-
fication with leader and leader–member exchange (LMX)
as two mediators, and develop a new theoretical model of
employee creativity. Our data collected from 160 super-
visor–subordinate dyads in the People’s Republic of China
demonstrate that moral leadership is positively related to
both employee identification with leader and LMX. Fur-
ther, employee identification with leader partially mediates
the relationship between moral leadership and LMX. In
particular, employee identification with leader greatly
enhances LMX which leads to high creativity. Overall, the
relationship between moral leadership and employee cre-
ativity is mediated by not only employee identification with
leader but also LMX. Our findings offer a new theoretical
framework for future theory development and testing on
creativity as well as practical implications for researchers
and managers in business ethics.
Keywords Paternalistic leadership
Moral
leadership
Identification with leader
Leader–
Q. Gu
W. Jiang
Management and Organization Department, Antai College of
Economics & Management, Shanghai Jiao Tong University,
535 Fa Hua Zhen Rd, Shanghai 200052, China
e-mail: qxgu@sjtu.edu.cn
W. Jiang
e-mail: jiangwan@sjtu.edu.cn
T. L.-P. Tang (&)
Department of Management and Marketing, Jennings A. Jones
College of Business, Middle Tennessee State University,
Murfreesboro, TN 37132, USA
e-mail: Thomas.Tang@mtsu.edu
member exchange (LMX)
Relational process

Confucianism
Employee creativity
Introduction
With significant and rapid technological, cultural, demo-
graphic, and economic changes in our knowledge-based
economy, employee creativity has become an increasingly
crucial challenge for organizations to develop employees,
enhance the core competence of the corporation (Prahalad
and Hamel 1990), and help organizations not only survive
but also maintain sustainable competitive advantage in the
global market (Amabile 1996; Hirst et al. 2009a, b;
McGrath 2013; Porter 1998; Shalley et al. 2004; Xia and
Tang 2011). Naturally, organizations increasingly seek
different ways to foster employee creativity (Hirst et al.
2009a, b; Zhou and George 2001). The quest to understand
effective leadership has become one of the most important
goals and common aspiration for researchers, individuals,
organizations, and societies around the world.
According to David Gergen, Director of Harvard’s
Center for Political Leadership, the metaphor for leaders
and managers in this new challenging environment is not
‘‘climbing ladders’’ but ‘‘riding waves’’ (Coleman et al.
2012, p. 53). People now-a-days are expected to ride seven
or eight different waves in their careers. Moreover, some of
the waves may collapse under their feet and many new
waves do not exist. This metaphor offers the following
implications: Creativity is a continuous process (Tang
2010; Tang et al. 1987, 1989) or a life-long marathon for
both individuals and organizations. Creativity is everyone’s
business. When everyone in an organization is creative, it
helps them become a creative organization (March 1991).
Those with the right strategy will ride the current and
123
514
future waves; those without will face the end of competi-
tive advantage (McGrath 2013).
Absorptive capacity theory of knowledge acquisition
asserts that individuals with more accumulated prior
knowledge and strong problem-solving skills are more
likely to recognize and acquire new external knowledge,
put new knowledge in memory, exploit new relevant
information, recall the information, utilize it in new set-
tings, and become creative than those without (Cohen and
Levinthal 1990). Following ‘‘the Matthew Effect,’’1 Mer-
ton (1968) discussed the Nobel Prize winners in science:
The pattern of recognition skewed in favor of the estab-
lished scientists (the Nobel Prize winners) who are already
famous. Eminent scientists develop a great sense of taste
and judgment in seizing significant and important prob-
lems, focus on not just problem-solving but ‘‘problem-
finding,’’ set their sights high, display a degree of ven-
turesome fortitude, take risks, expand their access, main-
tain their conviction and prolonged commitment to the
issue, and become prophets who can fulfill their own
prophesy. Furthermore, only selected universities (Harvard,
Columbia, Chicago, MIT, Berkeley, Stanford, Yale, Cor-
nell, and Princeton) have produced the most Nobel laure-
ates in the US (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_
Nobel_laureates_by_university_affiliation). It creates rich-
get-richer and poor-get-poorer patterns of achievement
(Stanovich 1986). Nobel laureates provide an outstanding
role model, instill a creative and venturesome fortitude,
develop a warm working relationship, bestow a supportive
culture with respect and resources, and inspire other sci-
entists around them to become creative in organizations
(Barsade 2002; Staw and Barsade 1993). We discuss Nobel
Prize winners in the context of ‘‘creativity’’ because the
Nobel laureates have been recognized for their highest
level of creativity in chemistry, physics, medicine, litera-
ture, economics, and peace around the world.
On the other hand, a creative personality and a creative
mindset promote individuals’ ability to justify their
behavior, which, in turn, leads to unethical behavior—the
‘‘dark side’’ of creativity (Gino and Ariely 2012). Fol-
lowing the meritocratic principle (Castilla and Benard
2010), the Matthew Effect (Merton 1968; Tang 1996), and
tournament theory of compensation (O’Reilly et al. 1988),
those with accumulated wealth, power, and position in
organizations (the haves) are likely to acquire new external
power, resources, and access, exploit new situations,
engage in wealth acquisition, and develop an entitlement
mentality (Klotz and Bolino 2013; Malhotra and Gino
2011). Due to pressure, opportunity, and obsession with
1 identification with leader represents the extent to which the
To anyone who has, more will be given, and he will grow rich; from
anyone who has not, even what he has will be taken away. (Matthew
13: 12) See also The Parable of the Talents, Matthew 25: 14–30.
123
Q. Gu et al.
love of money, many fall into temptation and become
corrupt (Chen et al. 2013; Chen and Tang 2006; Lemrová
et al. 2013; Tang and Sutarso 2013; Tang et al. 2011). That
is why we have witnessed various forms of corruption,
scandals, and unethical behaviors involving large corpo-
rations (e.g., Enron and Worldcom) and many individuals
(e.g., Bernie Madoff and Changxin Lai) in the US and
around the world (e.g., Bazerman and Gino 2012). Their
‘‘creative’’ ways to become corrupt for personal and
financial gains have caused the loss of approximately $3.5
trillion—5 % of global annual revenues (Association of
Certified Fraud Examiners 2012).
The aforementioned review serves as the backdrop of
our present research on moral leadership and creativity.
Leadership is one of the most influential predictors of
employee creative behavior (Atwater and Carmeli 2009;
Mumford et al. 2002; Volmer et al. 2012). Extant research
has given attention to the effects of transformational
leadership (e.g., Basu and Green 1997; Gilmore et al. 2013;
Shin and Zhou 2003), leader–member exchange (LMX)
(Erdogan and Liden 2002; Olsson et al. 2012), authentic
leadership (Rego et al. 2012, 2013), and ethical leadership
(Tu and Lu 2013) on creativity. Moral leadership has
gained increasing importance (Brown and Treviño 2006;
Farh et al. 2008; Sebastian et al. 2013; Tang and Liu 2012;
Tang et al. 2011) due to subordinates’ trust in leader and
perceived justice (Wu et al. 2012), normative commitment
(Erben and Güneser 2008), psychological empowerment
(Li et al. 2012), and organizational citizenship behavior.
However, it has been neglected in leadership–creativity
relationship.
Further, most leadership studies are based on Western
culture. Researchers have recognized the impact of national
culture on influencing leadership attributes and effectiveness
(e.g., Dorfman et al. 2012; Javidan and Carl 2004), yet no
research has explicitly investigated the relationships
between moral leadership and employee creativity that are
specific in the cultural context. Only two studies have
examined the effect of morality-specific leadership behav-
iors and characteristics on employee creativity (Rego et al.
2012; Tu and Lu 2013). We searched the Web of Knowledge
using three terms—moral leadership, creativity, and China
or Chinese—and found that no research has examined how
and why moral leadership relates to employee creativity in
the Chinese context, as of October 20, 2013.
In this study, our major aim is to explore the role of
employee identification with leader (Shamir et al. 1998)
and LMX (Dansereau et al. 1975) as two mediators in
studying the relationship between moral leadership and
employee creativity in the Chinese context. Employee
leader is included in the follower’s relational self (Kark
et al. 2003; Wang and Rode 2010). LMX signifies the
Does Moral Leadership Enhance Employee Creativity?
Moral Identification
Leadership with Leader
Fig. 1 A theoretical model of creativity
quality of the exchange relationship between leaders and
subordinates (Graen and Uhl-Bien 1995; Liden and Maslyn
1998; Wayne et al. 1997). We investigate the mediating
role of identification with leader (Walumbwa and Hartnell
2011) and LMX (Walumbwa et al. 2011). Our data col-
lected from 160 supervisor–subordinate dyads in China
demonstrate that employee identification with leader par-
tially mediates the relationship between moral leadership
and LMX. Employee identification with leader greatly
enhances LMX which leads to high creativity. The rela-
tionship between moral leadership and employee creativity
is mediated by not only employee identification with leader
but also LMX. Our findings offer a new theoretical
framework for future theory development and testing on
creativity as well as practical implications for researchers
and managers in business ethics (Fig. 1).
Theory and Hypotheses
Creativity
Creativity, defined as the generation of novel and useful
ideas, is a social process (Amabile 1983; Perry-Smith
2006; Woodman et al. 1993). It is a function of three
major components: (1) expertise, (2) creative-thinking
skills, and (3) motivation (Amabile 1998). According to
Einstein, creativity is ‘‘combinatorial play.’’ It is as if the
mind is throwing a bunch of balls into the cognitive space,
juggling them around until they collide in interesting
ways. People must have sufficient time to create the balls
and then juggle the balls. If balls that do not normally
come near one another collide, then, the ultimate novelty
of the solution will be greater. Environmental factors,
such as (1) encouragement of creativity, (2) autonomy or
freedom, (3) resources, (4) pressures, and (5) organiza-
tional impediments to creativity, affect creativity (Ama-
bile et al. 1996). Innovation suffers when work
environment stimulants to creativity decrease and work
environment obstacles increase (Amabile and Conti
1999). Having relatively unstructured, unpressured time
to create and develop new ideas may lead to creativity
(Amabile et al. 2002). Intrinsic motivation or labor-of-
love enhances creativity.
515
Leader-Member Employee
Exchange Creativity
Leaders can provide their expertise, resources, skills,
and motivation to and share them with their members and
followers and encourage creativity in organizations, cre-
ating the ripple effect (Barsade 2002). In this paper, we
discuss employee creativity in the Chinese context. We
explore the intricate process of how and why moral lead-
ership may lead to creativity from the relationship per-
spective in organizations, the aforementioned constructs
and guanxi (Farh et al. 1998), in the sections below.
Paternalistic Leadership
Paternalistic leadership is a prevalent leadership style in
Chinese business organizations and rooted in indigenous
constructs such as Confucianism (Farh and Cheng 2000).
Researchers have investigated this and similar constructs in
Pacific Asia, Middle-East, North America, and Latin
America (e.g., Aycan 2006; Cheng et al. 2004; Ötken and
Cenkci 2012; Pellegrini and Scandura 2008). Despite the
abundant theoretical work, Pellegrini and Scandura (2008)
stated that ‘‘there is still very little empirical research on
paternalism’’ (p. 567). We answer their call and investigate
paternalistic leadership (PL), specifically.
Following values deeply rooted in Confucianism, Farh
and Cheng (2000) defined paternalistic leadership as ‘‘a
style that combines strong discipline and authority with
fatherly benevolence and moral integrity’’ (p. 94), and
developed a conceptual framework which consists of three
distinctive dimensions: (1) authoritarianism, (2) benevo-
lence, and (3) morality. First, authoritarianism is defined as
‘‘a leader’s behavior that asserts absolute authority and
control over subordinates and demands unquestionable
obedience from subordinates’’ (Cheng et al. 2004, p. 91).
Second, benevolence reflects the leader’s behavior that
‘‘demonstrates individualized, holistic concern for subor-
dinates’ personal or familial wellbeing’’ (p. 91). Finally,
moral leadership is broadly identified as ‘‘a leader’s
behavior that demonstrates superior personal virtues, self-
discipline, and unselfishness’’ (p. 91). It entails setting an
example for subordinates, such as integrity and fulfilling
one’s obligations, never taking advantage of others, and
selfless paragon (Farh et al. 2008).
Empirical research conducted in East Asia has estab-
lished that authoritarianism in the paternalistic leadership
123
516
construct is negatively related to the other two dimen-
sions—benevolence and morality (Pellegrini and Scandura
2008). Given the negative inter-dimensional correlations
among the three components, the paternalistic leadership
framework allows researchers to investigate the distinct
influences of these dimensions on work-related outcomes
separately (Chou et al. 2005; Farh et al. 2006; Wu et al.
2012).
Moral leadership is particularly important for employees
in the Chinese context because of Confucian ideology and
moral-oriented values (Chen and Farh 2009; Farh and
Cheng 2000). In this study, we specifically select moral
leadership from paternalistic leadership theory. Moral
leadership is similar to ethical leadership, yet important
differences between the two exist. Ethical leadership is
defined as ‘‘the demonstration of normatively appropriate
conduct through personal actions and interpersonal rela-
tionships, and the promotion of such conduct to followers
through two-way communication, reinforcement, and
decision-making’’ (Brown et al. 2005, p. 120). The moral
or ethical aspects of the two leadership theories overlap
with some similarities—integrity, role modeling, concern
for others, and ethical decision-making; and display key
differences—ethical leaders emphasize moral management
(Brown and Treviño 2006), while moral leaders emphasize
personal virtues and role modeling (Cheng et al. 2004).
Cheng et al. (2004) argued that leadership behaviors
conforming to Chinese cultural characteristics will be more
effective, whereas those conflicting with Chinese cultural
features, less effective. Research on paternalistic leadership
suggests that moral leadership is strongly related to posi-
tive employee attitudes and behavior (Farh et al. 2006).
Specifically, moral leadership has an effect on employees’
intrinsic task motivation and trust in leader (Li et al. 2012;
Wu et al. 2012) which, in turn, may impact on employee
behaviors and performance. Recent research has demon-
strated the effect of morality-specific leadership (e.g.,
ethical and authentic leadership) on employee creativity,
both directly and indirectly (Rego et al. 2012; Tu and Lu
2013). Tu and Lu (2013) found that ethical leadership, with
a strong emphasis on morality, is positively related to
employees’ creative behavior.
Specifically, in their cross-level analysis, both percep-
tion of ethical leadership (level 1) and group ethical lead-
ership (level 2) were positively related to individual
innovative work behavior (level 1). Individual intrinsic
motivation (level 1) partially mediated the relationship
between perception of ethical leadership and innovative
work behavior and fully mediated that of group ethical
leadership (level 2) and innovative work behavior. Group
intrinsic motivation (level 2) partially mediated the rela-
tionship of group ethical leadership (level 2) and individual
innovative work behavior. Following these new findings,
123
Q. Gu et al.
we assert that moral leadership is positively related to
employee creativity through intermediating mechanisms
such as subordinates’ psychological responses. In this
study, our aim is to unfold explicitly and clearly the
mediating processes from moral leadership to employee
creativity.
It should be noted that in the literature, guanxi—an
indigenous concept in the Chinese context which is the
existence of direct particularistic ties between an individual
and others—is extremely important for people doing
business in China (Farh et al. 1998). We posit that both
identification with leader and LMX are highly related to the
notion of guanxi as well as the relationship between moral
leadership and employee creativity in the Chinese context.
We explore them in more detail below.
Moral Leadership and Employee Identification
with Leader
Identity is the core of an individual’s psychological self-
concept and development (Josselson 1994). Employee
identification with leader is a follower’s relational self
based on close relations with the leader, which is different
from a follower’s collective self (referred to as social
identity) based on the group or organization membership
and identification (Kark et al. 2003; Wang and Rode 2010).
Identification with leader usually represents identification
in two different ways: One evokes a subordinate’s self-
concept in the recognition that he or she shares similar
values with the leader, the other gives rise to a subordi-
nate’s desire to change his or her self-concept so that his or
her values and beliefs become more similar to that of the
leader (Pratt 1998). Priming subordinates’ relational self-
concepts is crucial for leaders to achieve their effects on
the subordinates (Kark et al. 2003).
Moral leaders are moral individuals who have not only
superior personal virtues such as unselfishness and self-
discipline but also extraordinary paragons and behaviors of
supporting and encouraging moral behavior of the fol-
lowers. Serving as a role model, a critical facet of moral
leadership (Westwood 1997) implies a process by which
subordinates mold their perceptions, beliefs, and behaviors
according to what the leader displays. Furthermore, leaders
serving as role models lead to follower identification (Kark
et al. 2003; Pratt 1998).
Similarly, following the literature related to authentic
leadership and religious values from the Western culture,
Tang and Liu (2012) investigated the construct of
ASPIRE2—perceptions of authentic supervisor’s personal
integrity and character—with three sub-constructs: (1)
Honesty and Integrity, (2) Caring Servant, and (3)
2
We ‘‘aspire’’ to please him (2 Corinthians 5: 9).
Does Moral Leadership Enhance Employee Creativity?
Transparent Help. This new construct—ASPIRE—sug-
gests that an authentic supervisor or leader (1) has honesty3
(Murphy 1993), fairness (Colquitt et al. 2001; Folger and
Konovsky 1989), and integrity (Dineen et al. 2006; Pa-
lanski and Yammarino 2009; Simons et al. 2007); (2) cares
about others’ work and provides services to subordinates as
a servant4 (Avolio et al. 2004; Bass and Steidlmeier 1999;
Greenleaf 1970); and (3) is friendly and trustworthy (Gil-
bert and Tang 1998) and offers transparent decision-mak-
ing (Milton 2009) and professional development. In a
multiple wave panel study, a significant interaction effect
between love of money (LOM) and ASPIRE on unethical
behavior intentions provides the following novel, profound,
and interesting findings: People with high love of money
and low ASPIRE had the highest unethical behavior
intentions; whereas those with high love of money and high
ASPIRE had the lowest. These findings indirectly support
the notion that perceptions of their leaders’ moral values,
as measured by the ASPIRE scale, curtail their own
unethical intentions. We, hence, posit strongly that moral
leaders may also possess the same attributes discussed in
the ASPIRE construct. Subordinates may also aspire to
please their leaders, to be like them, and identify with
them. In addition, research on paternalistic leadership
suggests that moral leadership greatly contributes to sub-
ordinates’ psychological responses in identifying with the
leader and respecting for the leader’s superior virtues and
moral activities (Cheng et al. 2004; Pellegrini and Scan-
dura 2008). Thus, we propose the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 1 Moral leadership is positively related to
employee identification with leader.
Moral Leadership and Leader–Member Exchange
Leader–member exchange, a social exchange process,
reflects a work-related relationship between supervisors and
subordinates. The quality of LMX relationship is based on
mutual trust, liking, and respect (Mahsud et al. 2010; Yukl
2001). Leader behavior has been recognized as an important
currency in the exchange relationship with a subordinate
(Mahsud et al. 2010; Walumbwa et al. 2011). Most studies on
leader behavioral antecedents of LMX have focused on
transformational leadership (e.g., Bass 1985; Deluga 1992;
Wang et al. 2005), which includes idealized influence such as
displaying unselfishness and conviction (Gilmore et al.
2013) and moral orientation (Simola et al. 2010). Several
recent studies found that ethical leadership, which values
3
They acted with complete honesty (2 Kings 12:15).
4
Then he poured water into a basin and began to wash the disciples’
feet and dry them with the towel around his waist…. Peter said to
him, ‘‘You will never wash my feet.’’ Jesus answered him, ‘‘Unless I
wash you, you will have no inheritance with me’’ (John 13: 5, 8).
517
morality, fairness, and integrity, is positively related to LMX
(Mahsud et al. 2010; Walumbwa et al. 2011). Similarly,
moral leadership requires leaders to treat subordinates with
respect, kindness, and fairness, and to demonstrate high
levels of trustworthiness by caring about employees (Farh
et al. 2008). Therefore, subordinates are likely to perceive
themselves as being in a social exchange relationship with
their leaders (Brown et al. 2005). A moral leader who has
integrity and unselfishness is likely to increase trustworthi-
ness (Mayer et al. 1995). Subordinates’ trust in supervisor
positively predicts their experience of LMX quality (Sue-
Chan et al. 2012). We argue that a positive relationship
between moral leadership and LMX exists.
Employee identification with leader may foster LMX. The
role modeling’s influence on leadership is particularly
effective in evoking subordinates’ identification with leader
(Wang et al. 2005). When subordinates attribute exception-
ally strong positive qualities, such as the integrity, unself-
ishness, and job devotion to a moral leader, personal
identification prevails. Subordinates with high identification
with their leader internalize their leader’s values and beliefs
and behave consistently with them (Tang and Liu 2012;
Wang et al. 2005). Such subordinates are committed to the
leader, thoughtful regarding the leader’s needs (Sluss and
Ashforth 2007), and sensitive to the leader’s expectations
regarding subordinate behaviors (van Knippenberg et al.
2004; Wang and Rode 2010). In so doing, subordinates
receive more recognition and praise from their leader, which,
in turn, result in a higher quality of social exchange rela-
tionship with the leader (Wang et al. 2005). In contrast,
subordinates with low identification with leader are less
likely to subscribe to and emulate their leader’s beliefs and
values and are less likely to make an effort and develop high-
quality relationship with their leader (Ashforth and Mael
1989). Thus, we believe that employee identification with
leader fosters high quality of LMX. In addition, as men-
tioned, since moral leadership could strongly evoke
employee identification (Hypothesis 1); we thereby posit that
employee identification with leader mediates the relation-
ship between moral leadership and LMX. Taken together, we
propose the following hypotheses:
Hypothesis 2 Moral leadership is positively related to the
quality of leader–member exchange.
Hypothesis 3 The relationship between moral leadership
and leader–member exchange is mediated by employee
identification with leader.
Employee Identification with Leader and Employee
Creativity
Research suggests that both the interaction with others and
social influence resulting from leadership are important to
123
518
creativity (Woodman et al. 1993). Identification with leader
is a relational self-concept which specifies the relationship
with the leader (Wang and Rode 2010). Sluss and Ashforth
(2008) proposed that identification with one referent may
be extended to other workplace targets. Since moral leaders
use social power on behalf of collective interest and display
job devotion, employees with a strong identification with
leader are likely to identify their leader as their team or
organization prototype. When employees identify with
their collective-oriented leader, they assimilate the collec-
tive aim into their sense of self and, thereby, internalize the
collective or group goals (Deci and Ryan 2000). Identifi-
cation with leader is likely to cultivate a self-motivating
interest in work activities (Hirst et al. 2009a, b). Similar to
intrinsic motivation, identification is conducive to adaptive
problem-focused collective goals which encourage the
individual employees to see task accomplishment as an
important end in itself (Deci and Ryan 2000; Tang and
Baumeister 1984). Walumbwa and Hartnell (2011) found
that employees’ perception of identification with the
supervisor is positively related self-efficacy, which is
positively related to employee performance, including the
ability to be creative and innovative. Following our liter-
ature review, we propose the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 4 Employee identification with leader is
positively related to employee creativity.
Leader–Member Exchange and Employee Creativity
LMX has theoretically been noted to have reasonable posi-
tive relationships with employee creativity. A good LMX
relationship serves as a channel for leaders to distribute
organizational resources, task-related benefits, and psycho-
logical support to followers (Graen and Uhl-Bien 1995).
Employees in a high-quality LMX relationship are perceived
to be competent and dependable, focus on approaches to
change and adapt tasks together, gain additional task-related
resources and interpersonal support which are conducive to
successfully complete the tasks, and receive more recogni-
tion and appreciation as a consequence. Employees with a
high-quality LMX relationship feel that they work under an
encouraging psychological climate and are obliged to
reciprocate the favors from their leader by engaging in dis-
cretionary process and creative work (Atwater and Carmeli
2009; Volmer et al. 2012). Although results on LMX–
employee creativity are mixed (Hammond et al. 2011;
Tierney et al. 1999), some empirical studies support the
positive relationship between LMX and employee creativity.
For example, Basu and Green (1997) found that LMX quality
is significantly related to employee innovative behavior,
based on data collected from 225 leader–member dyads in a
manufacturing plant. Similarly, Volmer et al. (2012)
123
Q. Gu et al.
revealed that the quality of LMX is positively associated
with employees’ creative work involvement based on lon-
gitudinal field survey data. Therefore, we posit that LMX is
positively related to employee creativity.
However, one important theoretical question bags for
answers. How do employee identification with leader and
LMX relate to each other in the process of fostering
employee creativity? As discussed earlier (Hypothesis 3),
employee identification with leader may raise LMX. We
have also hypothesized that employee identification with
leader is positively related to employee creativity
(Hypothesis 4). In addition, we argue that LMX is posi-
tively related to employee creativity. We, thus, hypothesize
that LMX mediates the relationship between the identifi-
cation with leader and employee creativity. This mediating
role highlights the notion: Employee identification with
leader is important to the sustainable development of
organizations because it affects employee creativity
through LMX. Together, we define the relationship among
three variables (employee identification with leader, LMX,
and employee creativity) in the following hypotheses:
Hypothesis 5 LMX is positively related to employee
creativity.
Hypothesis 6 The relationship between employee iden-
tification with leader and employee creativity is mediated
by leader–member exchange.
The Mediation Effects Between Moral Leadership
and Employee Creativity
Hypotheses 1 through 6 suggest that moral leadership fosters
creativity through employee identification with leader and
LMX. A crucial theoretical question one may ask is this:
How are (1) employee identification with leader and (2)
LMX related to each other in the influencing process
between moral leadership and employee creativity? When
(1) identification with leader and (2) LMX are tested as
independent variables of employee creativity, it is possible
that LMX may also foster employee identification with lea-
der, because leaders may form high-quality exchange rela-
tionship with subordinates based on trust, information
sharing, and open communication (Walumbwa et al. 2011).
This LMX relationship increases subordinates’ relationship
with their leader which then is likely to lead to identification
with the leader. However, we expect the reverse to be more
likely, and particularly, this expectation is more relevant to
moral leadership, because moral leadership in Confucian
ideology is a highly valued leadership behavior. Followers
are more likely to develop strong identification with a moral
leader (Cheng et al. 2004; Wu et al. 2012). Indeed, moral
leadership with its emphasis on a leader’s integrity, unself-
ishness, job devotion, role modeling, and responsibility for
Does Moral Leadership Enhance Employee Creativity? 519

subordinates and others in the work environment creates a of all measures based on original scales published in
trustworthiness, supportive, and encouraging climate. This English, except moral leadership (developed in Chinese).
warm and supporting climate, in turn, is more likely to evoke Among them, moral leadership, identification with leader,
employees’ self-concept and recognition that they share and LMX were measured using a five-point scale that
similar values with the leader, which further leads to ranges from 1, strongly disagree to 5, strongly agree, while
employees’ identification with the leader. Therefore, we employee creativity was measured using a five-point scale
suggest that the moral leadership flows to employee identi- that ranges from 1, not at all characteristic to 5, very
fication with leader, to LMX, and then to employee crea- characteristic.
tivity. We propose the following hypothesis:
Moral Leadership
Hypothesis 7 The relationship between moral leadership
and creativity is mediated by employee identification with
We adopted a 6-item scale, developed specifically for the
leader and leader–member exchange.
Chinese context (Cheng et al. 2000). Sample items inclu-
ded: ‘‘My supervisor does not take advantage of me for
personal gain’’; ‘‘My supervisor does not use personal
Method
relationships or back-door practices to obtain illicit per-
sonal gains.’’ The Cronbach’s alpha for the scale was .88 in
Sample and Data Collection
the present research.
We collected data from two sources: the subordinates and
Identification with Leader
their supervisors. The subordinate questionnaire included
the independent variables, intermediating variables, and
We selected a 5-item scale developed by Shamir et al.
control variables, whereas the supervisor questionnaire
(1998). Sample items included: ‘‘My supervisor represents
included the dependent variable of employee creativity.
values that are important to me’’; ‘‘My supervisor is a
Respondents’ confidentiality of response was assured. The
model for me to follow.’’ The Cronbach’s alpha of the
subordinate questionnaires were coded and distributed to
scale was .90.
208 full-time supervisors and team leaders—118 part-time
MBA students and 90 trainees in a managerial training
Leader–Member Exchange
program of a leading university located in Shanghai, China.
After we collected the completed subordinate question-
We employed an 11-item LMX scale (Liden and Maslyn
naires, we gave these MBA students and trainees a super-
1998). Sample items were: ‘‘I like my supervisor very
visor questionnaire sealed in a pre-paid and pre-addressed
much as a person,’’ ‘‘I do work for my supervisor that
envelope and asked them to give the envelope to their
goes beyond what is specified in my job description.’’
immediate supervisor. We assigned the same code number to
Four of the seven items were later deleted due to low
both, in order to match the two questionnaires. The imme-
factor loadings. The Cronbach’s alpha of the retained
diate supervisors completed the questionnaires and sent them
seven items was .87.
directly to researchers using the envelopes provided.
We received 174 completed rating forms from the supervi-
Employee Creativity
sors of 208 subordinates. The final sample included 160
supervisor–subordinate dyads, after removing 14 sets due to
Supervisors used a 13-item scale developed by Zhou and
excessive missing data. Overall, the response rate was 76.92 %.
George (2001) to rate employee creativity. Sample items
For subordinates, the majority of sample members were male
included: ‘‘He/she comes up with new and practical ideas
(71.88 %). Education levels varied from high school to post-
to improve performance’’; ‘‘He/she suggests new ways of
graduate or above. Specifically, 6.88 % graduated from high
performing work tasks.’’ Cronbach’s alpha of the scale
school, 11.25 % had an associate degree, 32.50 % had a
was .97.
bachelor’s degree, and others had a master’s degree or higher.
The average age and tenure of the respondents were 29.55 years
Control Variables
(SD = 2.92) and 7.51 years (SD = 2.93), respectively.
Similar to previous research (e.g., George and Zhou 2007;
Measures Janssen and Huang 2008), we controlled for employees’
gender, education, and organization tenure. Employee’s
Following the translation and back-translation procedure task-related knowledge and expertise have potential impact
suggested by Brislin (1986), we created a Chinese version on creativity (Amabile 1988). One dummy variable was

123
520 Q. Gu et al.

Table 1 Comparison of measurement models

Models Factors v2 df Dv2 RMSEA IFI TLI CFI

Baseline Four factors 794.94 426 .07 .91 .91 .91

model
Model 1 Three factors: Moral leadership and identification with leader combined 960.57 429 165.64*** .09 .88 .86 .88
into one factor
Model 2 Three factors: Moral leadership and LMX combined into one factor 967.24 429 172.31*** .09 .88 .86 .87
Model 3 Three factors: LMX and identification with leader combined into one 974.65 429 179.71*** .09 .87 .86 .87
factor
Model 4 Two factors: Moral leadership, identification with leader and LMX 863.53 431 68.59*** .08 .90 .89 .90
combined into one factor
Model 5 One factor: All variables combined into one factor 872.20 432 77.27*** .08 .91 .91 .91
Notes * p \ .05, ** p \ .01, *** p \ .001

created to control for gender. Education level was mea- creativity are distinguishable constructs. The composite
sured on a four-point scale, ranging from 1, ‘‘middle high reliabilities of these four variables were .88, .90, .87, and
school,’’ to 4, ‘‘postgraduate or above.’’ .97, respectively.

Common Method Variance Issue

Results
Validity Analysis
Before testing our hypotheses, we first conducted confir-
matory factor analyses (CFAs) to empirically demonstrate
the distinctiveness of the variables in this study. We
employed four variables: moral leadership, identification
with leader, LMX, and employee creativity. We developed
a baseline four-factor model and five alternative models
and then tested Chi square differences to see which model
provided the better fit to the data (Anderson and Gerbing
1988). As shown in Table 1, the baseline four-factor model
fit the data well and provided substantial improvement in fit
indices over the alternative models (v2/df = 1.87,
IFI = .91, TLI = .91, CFI = .91, RMSEA = .07 (Hinkin
1998; Steiger 1990). These CFA results demonstrated that
the four-factor model had satisfactory discriminant
validity.
To provide further evidence for the discriminant valid-
ity, we followed the procedures recommended by Fornell
and Larcker (1981) and Netemeyer et al. (1990) to examine
the discriminant validity of moral leadership, identification
with leader, LMX, and employee creativity. That is, the
variance captured by moral leadership, identification with
leader, and LMX must be larger than .50 and greater than
the squared correlation between these two latent constructs.
The variance-extracted estimates for moral leadership,
identification with leader, LMX, and employee creativity
were .55, .65, .50, and .70, respectively. These statistics,
together with the CFA results, support the notion that moral
leadership, identification with leader, LMX, and employee
The common method variance (CMV) (Podsakoff et al.
2003) is a potential threat to the validity of research find-
ings. We collected data from separate sources for the cri-
terion (employee creativity from supervisors) and predictor
variables (moral leadership, employee identification with
leader, and LMX from employees) to avoid the possible
CMV effects in this study. We followed suggestions in the
literature and tested the CMV issue in two steps.
First, we used Harman’s (1960) single-factor test. Sig-
nificant CMV exists, if one general factor accounts for the
majority of covariance in the measures. Results of our
exploratory factor analysis (EFA) using all variables in this
study yielded five factors with eigenvalues greater than one
that accounted for 73.15 % of the total variance and the
first factor accounted for 30.68 % of the variance. There-
fore, a single factor did not emerge and one factor did not
account for the most of the variance.
Second, we compared (1) the measurement model with
the addition of an unmeasured latent CMV factor
(v2 = 681.07, df = 395, p = .00, v2/df = 1.72, IFI = .93,
TLI = .92, CFI = .93, RMSEA = .07) and (2) the same
measurement model without the CMV factor (v2 = 794.94,
df = 426, p = .00, v2/df = 1.87, IFI = .91, TLI = .91,
CFI = .91, RMSEA = .07) and found that the changes of
the fit indices were not significant (DTLI = .01,
DRMSEA = .00, respectively). Since this measurement
model did not significantly improve the fit over our mea-
surement model without a CMV factor, the CMV was not a
problem (Cheung and Rensvold 2002). Our solid mea-
surement properties enhanced our confidence in testing our
hypotheses in the following section.

123
Does Moral Leadership Enhance Employee Creativity?
Table 2 Means, standard deviations, and correlations among variables
Variables Mean SD
1. Moral leadership 3.73 .78
2. Identification with leader 3.78 .73
3. Leader–member exchange 3.85 .64
4. Employee creativity 3.48 .73
5. Gender .28 .45
6. Education 3.24 .91
7. Tenure 7.51 2.93
Notes Cronbach’s alphas are presented in parentheses. Education: 1 High School or below, 2 College, 3 University, and 4 Postgraduate or above
* p \ .05, ** p \ .01, *** p \ .001
Hypotheses Testing
Descriptive Statistics
Table 2 presents the descriptive statistics as well as their
zero-order correlations of all major variables. Moral lead-
ership was significantly correlated to identification with
leader (r = .70, p \ .001) and LMX (r = .69, p \ .001).
Moreover, identification with leader was positively asso-
ciated with employee creativity (r = .36, p \ .001). Iden-
tification with leader was also significantly associated with
LMX (r = .71, p \ .001). These correlations satisfied the
conditions for mediation recommended by Baron and
Kenny (1986).
Modeling and Path Analysis
Prior to testing hypotheses in the alternative modeling, we
examined the direct relationship between moral leadership
and employee creativity and found a significant relation-
ship between the two (b = .30, p \ .001), after controlling
employees’ education level and organizational tenure.
Moral leadership accounted for 6.4 % of the variance in
employee creativity beyond the two control variables.
Thus, the question is whether the relationship is mediated
by employee identification with leader and LMX, as we
suggested.
In order to test these hypotheses, we examined a series
of nested models. The results are presented in Table 3.
Model 1, our baseline model, included all of hypothesized
relationships between the variables. Specifically, Model 1
included the direct paths from moral leadership to
employee identification with leader and LMX, from
employee identification with leader to LMX and creativity,
and from LMX to employee creativity. All fit indices were
acceptable for the model (v2 = 832.63, df = 517;
CFI = .93; IFI = .93; TLI = .92, RMSEA = .06).
We examined four nested models, below, against the
baseline model. Model 2 depicted that identification with
521
1 2 3 4 5 6
(.88)
.70*** (.90)
.69*** .71*** (.87)
.33*** .36*** .46*** (.97)
.02 .06 .05 -.02
.10 .15 .26** .41*** -.18*
-.12 -.12 -.03 -.01 -.06 .02
leader was a full mediator of the relationship between
moral leadership and LMX by eliminating the direct path
from moral leadership to LMX from Model 1. Model 3
illustrated that LMX was a full mediator of the relationship
between identification with leader and employee creativity
by eliminating the direct path from identification with
leader to employee creativity from Model 1. Model 4
presented that both identification with leader and LMX
were full mediators of the relationship between moral
leadership and employee creativity. Model 5 demonstrated
that both identification with leader and LMX were partial
mediators.
Our results showed that Model 2 was significantly dif-
ferent from Model 1 (Dv2 = 16.18, p \ .001) and had a
poorer model fit than Model 1, suggesting that full medi-
ation between moral leadership and LMX was not suffi-
cient to consider for the total relationship between the two
variables. Our results also showed that both Model 4 and
Model 5 were significantly different from Model 1
(Dv2 = 22.98, p \ .001; Dv2 = 22.51, p \ .001) and had
poorer model fits than Model 1, suggesting that the two
mediators of the relationship between moral leadership and
employee creativity might be related. Model 3 was not
significantly different from Model 1 (Dv2 = .06, p [ .10).
Results showed that identification with leader was not
sufficient to account for the direct relationship with
employee creativity. According to the principle of model
parsimony, Model 3 was the most preferred model in our
data analyses.
Table 4 shows the standardized coefficients for the
structural paths estimated in Model 1. Results suggested
that moral leadership had positive relationships with both
identification with leader (b = .78, p \ .001) and LMX
(b = .42, p \ .001) and that identification with leader was
positively related to LMX (b = .50, p \ .001), suggesting
the partial mediating effect of identification with leader on
the moral leadership to LMX relationship (see Fig. 2).
Hypotheses 1 and 2 were supported. Hypothesis 3 was
partially supported. Hypothesis 4 was not supported
123
522 Q. Gu et al.

Table 3 Model comparisons

Model Structure v2 df Dv2 RMSEA IFI TLI CFI

1 832.63 517 .06 .93 .92 .93

2 848.81 518 16.18*** .06 .92 .91 .92

3 832.69 518 .06 .06 .93 .92 .93

4 855.61 518 22.98*** .06 .92 .91 .92

5 855.14 517 22.51*** .06 .92 .91 .92

Table 4 Path coefficients in the baseline model
Structural path Path
coefficients
Moral leadership ? Identification with leader .78***
Moral leadership ? Leader–member exchange .42***
Identification with leader ? Leader–member exchange .50***
Identification with leader ? Employee creativity -.03
Leader–member exchange ? Employee creativity .44***
Notes * p \ .05, ** p \ .01, *** p \ .001
because the link between identification with leader and
employee creativity was non-significant (b = -.03,
p [ .10). These results suggested that LMX had a posi-
tively relationship with employee creativity (b = .44,
p \ .01), supporting Hypothesis 5. Taken together, these
results offered support for Hypothesis 6 in that LMX fully
mediated the relationship between employee identification
with leader and creativity.
In addition, we further examined the hypothesized
mediation effects. First, following Preacher and Hayes’
(2008) procedure of assessing and contrasting multiple
simultaneous mediators, we used the bootstrap approach to
re-examine the mediation effects of identification with
leader and LMX, respectively. As shown in Table 5, the
bootstrap test suggested that the indirect effect of moral
leadership on LMX via identification with leader was sig-
nificant (indirect effect = .24, p \ .01, 95 % CI = .09,
.36) and thus supported Hypothesis 3 again. LMX mediated
the positive effects of identification with leader on
employee creativity (indirect effect = .22, p \ .01, 95 %
CI = .07, .45), supporting Hypothesis 6 again. Then, fol-
lowing the tests of the three-path mediated effect (Taylor
et al. 2008), as shown in Table 5, the results indicated that
the indirect effect from moral leadership to employee
creativity involving two mediators—Identification with
leader and then LMX was also significant (indirect
effect = .08, p \ .01, 95 % CI = .01, .19). Thus,
Hypothesis 7 was supported.
Discussion
The purpose of this study is to understand how moral
leadership affects employee creativity and how employee
identification with leader and LMX are related to each
other in the process leading to creativity by integrating

123
Does Moral Leadership Enhance Employee Creativity? 523

.42***

.78*** .50*** .44**

Moral Identification Leader-Member Employee

Leadership with Leader Exchange Creativity

-.03

Fig. 2 Path coefficients of our theoretical model of creativity

Table 5 Results on the mediating roles of identification with leader
and leader–member exchange
Indirect
effects
Bootstrapping
Moral leadership ? Identification with .24 (.06)
leader ? Leader–member exchange
Identification with leader ? Leader– .22 (.09)
member exchange ? Employee
creativity
Three path mediation
Moral leadership ? Identification with .04 (.08)
leader ? Employee creativity
Moral leadership ? Leader–member .11 (.05)
exchange ? Employee creativity
Moral leadership ? Identification with .08 (.04)
leader ? Leader–member
exchange ? Employee creativity
Notes BCa means bias corrected, 1,000-bootstrap samples, CI confi-
dence interval
relational identity process and social exchange. Our results
demonstrate that (1) moral leadership fosters employee
identification with leader, (2) moral leadership affects
LMX and does so partially through employee identification
with leader, (3) LMX facilitates employee creativity, and
(4) employee identification with leader affects creativity
fully through LMX. Finally, results support the following
chain of relationship: Moral leadership leads to employee
identification with leader, to LMX, and, then, to employee
creativity.
Theoretical Implications
This study offers the following important theoretical con-
tributions. The primary contribution is that we identify the
mechanism that moral leadership is positively related to
employee creativity. Our findings extend beyond the moral
leadership literature.
This study investigated the chain-mediating effects of
identification with leader and LMX in the moral
leadership–employee creativity relationship from a rela-
tional perspective, and made an important contribution to
BCa creativity theory. Identification with leader highlights
95 % CI relational self-concept in which employees recognized
their leader as self-referential, while LMX emphasizes the
quality of leader–subordinate exchange relationship, and
(.09, .36)
employees with a high quality of the LMX relationship
gain task-related resources and interpersonal support from
(.07, .45)
the leader and perceive discretionary freedom and auton-
omy, or empowerment at work. Although both identifica-
tion with leader and LMX are involved in the leader–
(-.12, .20) subordinate linkage, conceptually they are distinct. This
study combined the two concepts and empirically demon-
(.03, .20) strated their relationships. Our findings contribute to the
understand of how identification with leader and LMX
(.01, .19) relate to each other in facilitating employee creativity,
supporting and extending van Knippenberg et al.’s (2007)
argument that identification and LMX may together influ-
ence employee behaviors.
Our findings demonstrate that employee identification
with leader is a key part of a complex process from moral
leadership to employee creativity. Results also support the
viewpoint that morality of leadership has its charismatic
power to influence subordinates (Sosik et al. 2011). It is
likely to evoke subordinates’ psychological response such
as: identification with leader and psychological empower-
ment (Cheng et al. 2004; Li et al. 2012), which fosters
LMX and then employee creativity, creating the ripple
effect (Barsade 2002).
Identification with leader fosters employee creativity
fully through LMX. This result, in particular, provides a
brand new perspective about the impact process of identi-
fication with leader on LMX in the relationship between
moral leadership and employee creativity: One is that
employee identification with leader is positively related to
LMX. The other is that employee identification with leader
does not simply and directly facilitate creativity. This result
illumines the fact that LMX provides an important mech-
anism for the effect of identification with leader on
employee creativity, and suggests that it may be quite
effective in enhancing employee creativity by serving as a

123
524
conduit through which identification with leader influence
employee creativity.
This study was conducted in the Chinese context with a
high collectivist and high power distance culture.
Employees in such a cultural context are more dependent
on and also more vulnerable to the authorities than those in
individualistic and low power distance cultures. Mean-
while, personalism, describing a situation where an indi-
vidual uses personal criteria and relationships as a basis for
making decisions (Cheung and Wu 2012; Westwood
1997), is a critical characteristic of Chinese cultural values.
In such a cultural context, moral leaders are more likely to
obtain subordinates’ identification and respects, meanwhile
subordinates also rely more on leaders for developing and
maintaining a high-quality LMX relationship. Therefore,
Chinese employees’ identification with leader may be more
likely to foster LMX which may be perceived to be a
critical and vital factor that is conducive to creativity by
offering work resource, interpersonal support, and discre-
tionary feelings in the creative involvement. Thus, the
Chinese context provides an ideal and specific setting for
identifying and examining the role of moral leadership in
fostering employee creativity and the mechanism.
Managerial Implications
This study also provides several important managerial
implications. First of all, moral leadership has an impact on
employee creativity which is seemingly unrelated to the
leadership theory for most lay people. Specifically, we
demonstrate that moral leadership has the power to affect
followers’ relational self which facilitates social exchange
with the leader, which, in turn, enhances follower creativity.
Thus, organizations may consider leader selection with an
emphasis on moral requirements in addition to the other
important qualifications, provide moral leadership training
and education, recognize and reward moral behaviors, and
create a culture of corporate moral values and creativity in
organizations. These approaches target developing moral
leadership in order to increase employee creativity and
prevent the potential dark side of employee creativity
(Bazerman and Gino 2012; Gino and Ariely 2012).
Second, by showing how employee identification with
leader and LMX as two mediators relate to each other with
respect to creativity and enhancing employee creativity,
managers should consider to raise their identification from
subordinates and to establish the quality of the relationship
with them. Employee identification with leader—one form
of relational self-concept—is an important mediator of the
relationship between moral leadership and employee cre-
ativity. This relational self-concept may amplify the Mat-
thew Effect on moral leaders’ morality in the positive
direction which further helps leaders prevent employees
123
Q. Gu et al.
from falling into temptations (Chen et al. 2013; Lemrová
et al. 2013; Tang and Sutarso 2013; Tang et al. 2011).
Thus, moral leaders could be well served to focus on their
behaviors by demonstrating personal integrity (Tang and
Liu 2012), using authorized power on behalf of collective
interests, treating people fairly and being responsible for
others, displaying role modeling to foster employees’
identification, which in turn facilitates LMX, and then
enhancing employee creativity.
Third, the Chinese context with strong roots in Confu-
cianism is relevant to a modern Chinese society which has
implemented the economic reform and open-door policy to
Western countries for more than 30 years. Rapid industri-
alization and increased diversity in values have emerged in
China. A new generation of individualistic and egalitarian
Chinese has become an indispensable part of the Chinese
workforce (Liu 2003). More than ever before, leaders in
China should pay attention to their own moral behaviors,
e.g., integrity, self-discipline, fairness, and role modeling
which may enhance employees’ identification, LMX, and
employee creativity. These findings thus provide useful
managerial implications that may meet these emerging
needs in the modern Chinese society.
For the past three decades, due to abundant opportunities
and double-digit increase of GDP per capita, China has
become the second largest economy in the world. According
to the 2013 Forbes China Rich list, there are 168 billionaires
in China (Flannery 2013). We also have about one million
millionaires. We trust that employee creativity may have
played an important role here. Due to these developments,
however, many researchers have expressed serious concerns
regarding rapid growth and rising corruption in China (Dong
and Torgler 2013; Gong 2012; Gong and Wu 2012), i.e., the
‘‘dark side’’ of creativity (Gino and Ariely 2012; Malhotra
and Gino 2011). Some may apply their creative mind-set;
store up for themselves treasures on earth; and become bad
apples (Kish-Gephart et al. 2010). Further the rich envy the
super rich. It is not ‘‘money’’ but ‘‘the love of money’’ that
leads to corruption (Tang and Chiu 2003). Money (a symbol
of power) (Lemrová et al. 2013; Malhotra and Gino 2011) is
metaphorically an addictive and insatiable drug (Lea and
Webley 2006)—the more they have, the more they want.
Most individuals in our societies aspire to accumulate for
more which leads to overearning (Hsee et al. 2013). Focusing
more on materialistic consumptions and less on virtues (Piffa
et al. 2012) leads to the development of an entitlement, or
license to corrupt, mentality (Klotz and Bolino 2013). Cor-
ruption may increase costs, risks, and uncertainty; curb for-
eign direct investment (FDI); and damage the economy.
Research suggests that managers in corrupt cultures with low
perceived corporate ethical values (CEV) (Baker et al. 2006)
have the highest magnitude of corruption (Tang et al. 2011).
Results of this study provide novel ethical implications that
Does Moral Leadership Enhance Employee Creativity?
moral values are very important in achieving success. In the
global market, all executives and moral leaders must provide
an ethical vision and mission; create a culture with strong
corporate ethical values in organizations; move beyond their
self-interests and personal financial gains; and promote
people’s creativity, quality of products and services, and
sustainable development for the well-being of individuals in
organizations and society as a whole.
Limitations and the Directions for Future Research
First, common method variance (CMV) may exist,
although we collected data from two different sources—
moral leadership, identification with leader, and LMX from
subordinates and employee creativity from supervisors. We
tested the CMV issue in two steps and found no serious
concerns in our measurements. Our results of discriminant
validity test revealed the distinctiveness of these con-
structs: moral leadership, identification with leader, and
LMX. Future research should use a time-lagged design to
reduce common method variance and a longitudinal design
to better understand the proposed casual relationships.
Second, we cannot fully establish the causality between
employee identification with leader and LMX by using
cross-sectional data. Theoretically, moral leaders should
naturally foster subordinate identification because of their
salient qualities, such as personal integrity, unselfishness,
and role modeling (Cheng et al. 2004; Pellegrini and
Scandura 2008), and identified leaders are more likely to
foster LMX relationships (Bass 1985; Wang et al. 2005).
However, to the best of our knowledge, no research has
empirically examined the causal relationship between
identification with leader and LMX. Future researchers
must explore the identification with leader to the LMX
relationship using a longitudinal design. Third, we col-
lected data from only one side of dyadic perceptions
regarding LMX. Future scholars should consider the entire
dyadic system and investigate both the leaders and subor-
dinates’ perspectives and offer a complete view of the
LMX process. Finally, we collected our sample from the
eastern China region. To generalize the validity of our
results, future researchers need to test our model empiri-
cally using samples from other regions and other Asian
cultures. More research is needed in this direction.
Conclusion
In this study, we identify the mechanism by which moral
leadership is positively related to employee creativity from
a relational perspective in a Chinese context where Con-
fucianism, collectivism, and high power distance exist. We
found that the relationship between moral leadership and
525
employee creativity is mediated by employee identification
with the leader and LMX. Further, identification with the
leader partially mediates the relationship between moral
leadership and LMX. LMX fully mediates the relationship
between employee identification with the leader and
employee creativity. Our contributions may spark curiosity
and add new vocabulary to the conversation regarding
moral leadership and employee creativity in the Confu-
cianism-specific context.
Acknowledgment We would like to thank the National Natural
Science Foundation of China for a Grant awarded to the first author
(Grant No. 71032003). The opinions expressed are those of the
authors and do not represent views of the National Natural Science
Foundation of China. We also would like to thank Anne S. Tsui for
her insightful comments on the conceptual design of this research.
References
Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity: A
componential conceptualization. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 45(2), 357–377.
Amabile, T. M. (1988). A model of creativity and innovation in
organizations. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.),
Research in organizational behavior (pp. 123–167). Greenwich,
CT: JAI Press.
Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context. Boulder, CO: Westview.
Amabile, T. M. (1998). How to kill creativity. Harvard Business
Review, 76(5), 76–87.
Amabile, T. M., & Conti, R. (1999). Changes in the work
environment for creativity during downsizing. Academy of
Management Journal, 42(6), 630–640.
Amabile, T. M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J., & Herron, M.
(1996). Assessing the work environment inventory for creativity.
Academy of Management Journal, 39(5), 1154–1184.
Amabile, T. M., Hadley, C. N., & Kramer, S. J. (2002). Creativity
under the gun. Harvard Business Review, 80(8), 52–61.
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation
modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step
approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411–423.
Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. (1989). Social identity theory and the
organization. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 20–39.
Association of Certified Fraud Examiners. (2012). Report to the
nations: On occupational fraud and abuse. 2012 Global fraud
study. Retrieved from http://www.acfe.com/rttn.aspx.
Atwater, L., & Carmeli, A. (2009). Leader–member exchange,
feelings of energy, and involvement in creative work. The
Leadership Quarterly, 20(3), 264–275.
Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Walumbwa, F. O., Luthans, F., & May,
D. R. (2004). Unlocking the mask: A look at the process by
which authentic leaders impact follower attitudes and behaviors.
The Leadership Quarterly, 15(6), 801–823.
Aycan, Z. (2006). Paternalism: Towards conceptual refinement and
operationalization. In K. S. Yang, K. K. Hwang, & U. Kim
(Eds.), Scientific advances in indigenous psychologies: Empir-
ical, philosophical, and cultural contributions (pp. 445–466).
London: Sage.
Baker, T. L., Hunt, T. G., & Andrews, M. C. (2006). Promoting
ethical behavior and organizational citizenship behaviors: The
influence of corporate ethical values. Journal of Business
Research, 59(7), 849–857.
123
526
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator
variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual,
strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182.
Barsade, S. G. (2002). The ripple effect: Emotional contagion and its
influence on group behavior. Administrative Science Quarterly,
47(4), 644–675.
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expecta-
tions. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Bass, B. M., & Steidlmeier, P. (1999). Ethics, character, and authentic
transformational leadership behavior. The Leadership Quarterly,
10(2), 181–217.
Basu, R., & Green, S. G. (1997). Leader–member exchange and
transformational leadership: An empirical examination of inno-
vative behaviors in leader-member dyads. Journal of Applied
Social Psychology, 27(6), 477–499.
Bazerman, M. H., & Gino, F. (2012). Behavioral ethics: Toward a
deeper understanding of moral judgment and dishonesty. Annual
Review of Law and Social Science, 8, 85–104.
Brislin, R. W. (1986). The wording and translation of research
instruments. In W. J. Lonner & J. W. Berry (Eds.), Field methods
in cross-cultural research (pp. 137–164). Beverly Hills, CA:
Sage.
Brown, M. E., & Treviño, L. K. (2006). Ethical leadership: A review
and future directions. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 595–616.
Brown, M. E., Treviño, L. K., & Harrison, D. A. (2005). Ethical
leadership: A social learning perspective for construct develop-
ment and testing. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 97(2), 117–134.
Castilla, E. J., & Benard, S. (2010). The paradox of meritocracy in
organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 55(4),
543–576.
Chen, C. C., & Farh, J. L. (2009). Developments in understanding
Chinese leadership: Paternalism and its elaborations, modera-
tions, and alternatives. In M. Bond (Ed.), Handbook of Chinese
psychology (pp. 599–622). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Chen, J. Q., Tang, T. L. P., & Tang, N. Y. (2013). Temptation,
monetary intelligence (love of money), and environmental
context on unethical intentions and cheating. Journal of Business
Ethics,. doi:10.1007/s10551-013-1783-2.
Chen, Y. J., & Tang, T. L. P. (2006). Attitude toward and propensity
to engage in unethical behavior: Measurement invariance across
major among university students. Journal of Business Ethics,
69(1), 77–93.
Cheng, B. S., Chou, L., & Farh, J. L. (2000). A triad model of
paternalistic leadership: The constructs and measurement.
Indigenous Psychological Research in Chinese Societies, 14,
3–64.
Cheng, B. S., Chou, L. F., Wu, T. Y., Huang, M. P., & Farh, J. L.
(2004). Paternalistic leadership and subordinate responses:
Establishing a leadership model in Chinese organizations. Asian
Journal of Social Psychology, 7(1), 89–117.
Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit
indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation
Modeling, 9(2), 233–255.
Cheung, M. F. Y., & Wu, W. P. (2012). Leader–member exchange
and employee work outcomes in Chinese firms: The mediating
role of job satisfaction. Asia Pacific Business Review, 18(1),
65–81.
Chou, L. F., Cheng, B. S., & Jen, C. K. (2005). The contingent model
of paternalistic leadership: Subordinate dependence and leader
competence. Paper presented at the meeting of the Academy of
Management, Honolulu, Hawaii.
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A
new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128–152.
123
Q. Gu et al.
Coleman, J., Gulati, D., & Segovia, W. O. (2012). Passion &
purpose: Stories from the best and brightest young business
leaders. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press.
Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C. O. L. H., &
Ng, K. Y. (2001). Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic
review of 25 years of organizational justice research. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 86(3), 425–445.
Dansereau, F., Graen, G., & Haga, W. J. (1975). A vertical dyad
linkage approach to leadership in formal organizations: A
longitudinal investigation of the role making process. Organi-
zational Behavior and Human Performance, 13(1), 46–78.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The ‘‘what’’ and ‘‘why’’ of goal
pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior.
Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268.
Deluga, R. J. (1992). The relationship of leader–member exchanges
with laissez-faire, transactional, and transformational leadership.
In K. E. Clark, M. B. Clark, & D. R. Campbell (Eds.), Impact of
leadership (pp. 237–247). Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative
Leadership.
Dineen, B. R., Lewicki, R. J., & Tomlinson, E. C. (2006). Supervisory
guidance and behavioral integrity: Relationships with employee
citizenship and deviant behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology,
91(3), 622–635.
Dong, B., & Torgler, B. (2013). Causes of corruption: Evidence from
China. China Economic Review, 26, 152–169.
Dorfman, P., Javidan, M., Hanges, P., Dastmalchian, A., & House, R.
(2012). GLOBE: A twenty year journey into the intriguing world
of culture and leadership. Journal of World Business, 47(4),
504–518.
Erben, G. S., & Güneser, A. B. (2008). The relationship between
paternalistic leadership and organizational commitment: Inves-
tigating the role of climate regarding ethics. Journal of Business
Ethics, 82(4), 955–968.
Erdogan, B., & Liden, R. C. (2002). Social exchange in the
workplace: A review of recent developments and future research
directions in leader–member exchange theory. In L. I. Neider &
C. A. Schriesheim (Eds.), Leadership (pp. 65–114). Greenwich:
Information Age.
Farh, J. L., & Cheng, B. S. (2000). A cultural analysis of paternalistic
leadership in Chinese organizations. In J. T. Li, A. S. Tsui, & E.
Weldon (Eds.), Management and organizations in the Chinese
context (pp. 84–127). London: Macmillan.
Farh, J. L., Cheng, B. S., Chou, L., & Chu, X. P. (2006). Authority and
benevolence: Employees’ responses to paternalistic leadership in
China. In A. S. Tsui, Y. Bian, & L. Cheng (Eds.), China’s domestic
private firms: Multidisciplinary perspectives on management and
performance (pp. 230–260). New York: M.E. Sharpe.
Farh, J. L., Liang, J., Chou, L., & Cheng, B. S. (2008). Paternalistic
leadership in Chinese organizations: Research progress and
future research directions. In C. C. Chen & Y. T. Lee (Eds.),
Business leadership in China: Philosophies, theories, and
practices (pp. 171–205). Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Farh, J. L., Tsui, A. S., Xin, K., & Cheng, B. S. (1998). The influence
of relational demography and guanxi: The Chinese case.
Organization Science, 9(4), 471–488.
Flannery, R. (2013). Inside the 2013 Forbes China 400: A record 168
billionaires. Retrieved October 27, 2013, from http://www.forbes.
com/sites/russellflannery/2013/10/21/inside-the-2013-forbes-
china-400-a-record-168-billionaires/.
Folger, R., & Konovsky, M. A. (1989). Effects of procedural and
distributive justice on reactions to pay raise decisions. Academy
of Management Journal, 32(1), 115–130.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation
models with unobservable variables and measurement error.
Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.
Does Moral Leadership Enhance Employee Creativity?
George, J. M., & Zhou, J. (2007). Dual tuning in a supportive context:
Joint contributions of positive mood, negative mood, and
supervisory behaviors to employee creativity. Academy of
Management Journal, 50(3), 605–622.
Gilbert, J. A., & Tang, T. L. P. (1998). An examination of
organizational trust antecedents. Public Personnel Management,
27(3), 321–338.
Gilmore, P. L., Hu, X. X., Wei, F., Tetrick, L. E., & Zacaro, S. (2013).
Positive affectivity neutralizes transformational leadership’s
influence on creative performance and organizational citi-
zenship behaviors. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34,
1061–1075.
Gino, F., & Ariely, D. (2012). The dark side of creativity: Original
thinkers can be more dishonest. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 102(3), 445–459.
Gong, T. (2012). Double paradox: Rapid growth and rising corruption
in China. China Quarterly, 221, 857–858.
Gong, T., & Wu, A. M. (2012). Does increased civil service pay deter
corruption? Evidence from China. Review of Public Personnel
Administration, 32(2), 192–204.
Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (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. The Leadership Quarterly, 6(2), 219–247.
Greenleaf, R. (1970). The servant as leader. Newton Center, MA:
Robert K. Greenleaf Center.
Hammond, M. M., Neff, N. L., Farr, J. L., Schwall, A. R., & Zhao, X.
Y. (2011). Predictors of individual level innovation at work: A
meta-analysis. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts,
5(1), 90–105.
Harman, H. H. (1960). Modern factor analysis. Chicago: The
University of Chicago Press.
Hinkin, T. R. (1998). A brief tutorial on the development of measures
for use in survey questionnaires. Organizational Research
Methods, 1(1), 104–121.
Hirst, G., van Dick, D., & van Knippenberg, D. (2009a). A social
identity perspective on leadership and employee creativity.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30(7), 963–982.
Hirst, G., van Knippenberg, D., & Zhou, J. (2009b). A cross-level
perspective on employee creativity: Goal orientation, team
learning behavior, and individual creativity. Academy of Man-
agement Journal, 52(2), 280–293.
Hsee, C. K., Zhang, J., Cai, C. F., & Zhang, S. (2013). Overearning.
Psychological Science, 24(6), 852–859.
Janssen, O., & Huang, X. (2008). Us and me: Team identification and
individual differentiation as complementary drivers of team
members’ citizenship and creative behaviors. Journal of Man-
agement, 34(1), 69–88.
Javidan, M., & Carl, D. E. (2004). East meets west: A cross-cultural
comparison of charismatic leadership among Canadian and
Iranian executives. Journal of Management Studies, 41(4),
665–691.
Josselson, R. (1994). Identity and relatedness in the life cycle. In H.
A. Bosma, T. L. G. Graafsma, H. D. Grotevant, & D. J. de Levita
(Eds.), Identity and development: An interdisciplinary approach
(pp. 81–102). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kark, R., Shamir, B., & Chen, G. (2003). The two faces of
transformational leadership: Empowerment and dependency.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(2), 246–255.
Kish-Gephart, J. J., Harrison, D. A., & Treviño, L. K. (2010). Bad
apples, bad cases, and bad barrels: Meta-analytic evidence about
sources of unethical decisions at work. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 95(1), 1–31.
Klotz, A. C., & Bolino, M. C. (2013). Citizenship and counterpro-
ductive work behavior: A moral licensing view. Academy of
Management Review, 38(2), 292–306.
527
Lea, S. E. G., & Webley, P. (2006). Money as tool, money as drug:
The biological psychology of a strong incentive. Behavioral and
Brain Sciences, 29(2), 161–209.
Lemrová, S., Reiterová, E., Fatěnová, R., Lemr, K., & Tang, T. L. P.
(2013). Money is power: Monetary intelligence—love of money
and temptation of materialism among Czech University students.
Journal of Business Ethics. doi:10.1007/s10551-013-1915-8.
Li, C. W., Wu, K., Johnson, D. E., & Wu, M. (2012). Moral
leadership and psychological empowerment in China. Journal of
Managerial Psychology, 27(1), 90–108.
Liden, R. C., & Maslyn, J. M. (1998). Multidimensionality of leader–
member exchange: An empirical assessment through scale
development. Journal of Management, 24(1), 43–72.
Liu, S. (2003). Cultures within culture: Unity and diversity of two
generations of employees in state-owned enterprises. Human
Relations, 56(4), 387–417.
Mahsud, R., Yukl, G., & Prussia, G. (2010). Leader empathy, ethical
leadership, and relations-oriented behaviors as antecedents of
leader–member exchange quality. Journal of Managerial Psy-
chology, 25(6), 561–577.
Malhotra, D., & Gino, F. (2011). The pursuit of power corrupts:
Investing in outside options motivates opportunism in relation-
ships. Administrative Science Quarterly, 56(4), 559–592.
March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational
learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71–87.
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative
model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review,
20(3), 709–734.
McGrath, R. G. (2013). The end of competitive advantage: How to
keep your strategy moving as fast as your business. Boston:
Harvard Business Review Press.
Merton, R. K. (1968). The Matthew effect in science: The reward and
communication systems of science are considered. Science,
159(3810), 56–63.
Milton, C. L. (2009). Transparency in nursing leadership: A chosen
ethic. Nursing Science Quarterly, 22(1), 23–26.
Mumford, M. D., Scott, G. M., Gaddis, B., & Strange, J. M. (2002).
Leading creative people: Orchestrating expertise and relation-
ships. The Leadership Quarterly, 13(6), 705–750.
Murphy, K. R. (1993). Honesty in the workplace. Pacific Grove, CA:
Brooks/Cole Publishing Co.
Netemeyer, R. G., Johnston, M. W., & Burton, S. (1990). Analysis of
role conflict and role ambiguity in a structural equations
framework. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(2), 148–157.
O’Reilly, C. A., Main, B. G., & Crystal, G. S. (1988). CEO
compensation as tournament and social-comparison: A tale of 2
theories. Administrative Science Quarterly, 33(2), 257–274.
Olsson, L., Hemlin, S., & Pousette, A. (2012). A multi-level analysis
of leader–member exchange and creative performance in
research groups. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(3), 604–619.
Ötken, A. B., & Cenkci, T. (2012). The impact of paternalistic
leadership on ethical climate: The moderating role of trust in
leader. Journal of Business Ethics, 108(4), 525–536.
Palanski, M. E., & Yammarino, F. J. (2009). Integrity and leadership:
A multi-level conceptual framework. The Leadership Quarterly,
20(3), 405–420.
Pellegrini, E. K., & Scandura, T. A. (2008). Paternalistic leadership:
A review and agenda for future research. Journal of Manage-
ment, 34(3), 566–593.
Perry-Smith, J. E. (2006). Social yet creative: The role of social
relationships in facilitating individual creativity. Academy of
Management Journal, 49(1), 85–101.
Piffa, P. K., Stancatoa, D. M., Côtéb, S., Mendoza-Dentona, R., &
Keltnera, D. (2012). Higher social class predicts increased
unethical behavior. Proceedings of National Academy of Science
of the United States of America (PNAS), 109(11), 4086–4091.
123
528
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 and recommended remedies.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903.
Porter, M. E. (1998). Clusters and the new economics of competition.
Harvard Business Review, 76, 77–90.
Prahalad, C. K., & Hamel, G. (1990). The core competence of the
corporation. Harvard Business Review, 68(3), 79–91.
Pratt, M. G. (1998). To be or not to be: Central questions in
organizational identification. In D. A. Whetten & P. C. Godfrey
(Eds.), Identity in organizations: Building theory through
conversation (pp. 171–207). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling
strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in
multiple mediator models. Behavioral Research Methods,
40(3), 879–891.
Rego, A., Sousa, F., Marques, C., & Cunha, M. P. E. (2012).
Authentic leadership promoting employees’ psychological cap-
ital and creativity. Journal of Business Research, 65(3),
429–437.
Rego, A., Vitoria, A., Magalhaes, A., Ribeiro, N., & Cunha, M. P. E.
(2013). Are authentic leaders associated with more virtuous,
committed and potent teams? The Leadership Quarterly, 24(1),
61–79.
Sebastian, C. S., Zhang, X., & Tian, P. (2013). For the good or the
bad? Interactive effects of transformational leadership with
moral and authoritarian leadership behaviors. Journal of Busi-
ness Ethics, 116(3), 629–640.
Shalley, C. E., Zhou, J., & Oldham, G. R. (2004). The effects of
personal and contextual characteristics on creativity: Where
should we go from here? Journal of Management, 30(6),
933–958.
Shamir, B., Zakay, E., Breinin, E., & Popper, M. (1998). Correlates of
charismatic leader behavior in military units: Subordinates’
attitudes, unit characteristics, and superiors’ appraisals of leader
performance. Academy of Management Journal, 41(4), 387–409.
Shin, S. J., & Zhou, J. (2003). Transformational leadership, conser-
vation, and creativity: Evidence from Korea. Academy of
Management Journal, 46(6), 703–714.
Simola, S. K., Barlin, J., & Turner, N. (2010). Transformational
leadership and leader moral orientation: Contrasting an ethic of
justice and an ethic of care. The Leadership Quarterly, 21(1),
179–188.
Simons, T., Friedman, R., Liu, L. A., & Parks, J. M. (2007). Racial
differences in sensitivity to behavioral integrity: Attitudinal
consequences, in-group effects, and ‘‘trickle down’’ among black
and non-black employees. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(3),
650–665.
Sluss, D. M., & Ashforth, B. E. (2007). Relational identity and
identification: Defining ourselves through work relationships.
Academy of Management Review, 32(1), 9–32.
Sluss, D. M., & Ashforth, B. E. (2008). How relational and
organizational identification converge: Processes and conditions.
Organization Science, 19(6), 807–823.
Sosik, J. J., Juzbasich, J., & Chun, J. U. (2011). Effects of moral reasoning
and management level on ratings of charismatic leadership, in-role
and extra-role performance of managers: A multi-source examina-
tion. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(2), 434–450.
Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some conse-
quences of individual-differences in the acquisition of literacy.
Reading Research Quarterly, 21(4), 360–407.
Staw, B. M., & Barsade, S. G. (1993). Affect and managerial
performance: A test of the sadder-but-wiser vs. happier-and-
smarter hypotheses. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(2),
304–331.
123
Q. Gu et al.
Steiger, J. H. (1990). Structural model evaluation and modification:
An interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioral
Research, 25(2), 173–180.
Sue-Chan, C., Au, A. K., & Hackett, R. D. (2012). Trust as a mediator
of the relationship between leader/member behavior and leader-
member-exchange quality. Journal of World Business, 47(3),
459–468.
Tang, T. L. P. (1996). Pay differentials as a function of rater’s sex,
money ethic, and job incumbent’s sex: A test of the Matthew
Effect. Journal of Economic Psychology, 17(1), 127–144.
Tang, T. L. P. (2010). From increasing gas efficiency to enhancing
creativity: It pays to go green. Journal of Business Ethics, 94(2),
149–155.
Tang, T. L. P., & Baumeister, R. F. (1984). Effects of personal values,
perceived surveillance, and task labels on task preference: The
ideology of turning play into work. Journal of Applied Psychol-
ogy, 69(1), 99–105.
Tang, T. L. P., & Chiu, R. K. (2003). Income, money ethic, pay
satisfaction, commitment, and unethical behavior: Is the love of
money the root of evil for Hong Kong employees? Journal of
Business Ethics, 46(1), 13–30.
Tang, T. L. P., & Liu, H. (2012). Love of money and unethical
behavior intention: Does an authentic supervisor’s personal
integrity and character (ASPIRE) make a difference? Journal of
Business Ethics, 107(3), 295–312.
Tang, T. L. P., & Sutarso, T. (2013). Falling or not falling into
temptation? Multiple faces of temptation, monetary intelligence,
and unethical intentions across gender. Journal of Business
Ethics, 116(3), 529–552.
Tang, T. L. P., Sutarso, T., Ansari, M. A., Lim, V. K. G., Teo, T.
S. H., Arias-Galicia, F., et al. (2011). The love of money is the
root of all evil: Pay satisfaction and CPI as moderators. In L.
A. Toombs (Ed.), Best paper proceedings of the Academy of
Management.
Tang, T. L. P., Tollison, P. S., & Whiteside, H. D. (1987). The effect
of quality circle initiation on motivation to attend quality circle
meetings and on task performance. Personnel Psychology, 40,
799–814.
Tang, T. L. P., Tollison, P. S., & Whiteside, H. D. (1989). Quality
circle productivity as related to upper-management attendance,
circle initiation, and collar color. Journal of Management, 15,
101–113.
Taylor, A. B., MacKinnon, D. P., & Tein, J. Y. (2008). Tests of the
three-path mediated effect. Organizational Research Methods,
11(2), 241–269.
Tierney, P., Farmer, S. M., & Graen, G. B. (1999). An examination of
leadership and employee creativity: The relevance of traits and
relations. Personnel Psychology, 52(3), 591–620.
Tu, Y. D., & Lu, X. X. (2013). How ethical leadership influence
employees’ innovative work behavior: A perspective of intrinsic
motivation. Journal of Business Ethics, 116(2), 441–455.
van Knippenberg, D., van Dick, R., & Tavares, S. (2007). Social
identity and social exchange: Identification, support, and with-
drawal from the job. Journal of Applied Social Psychology,
37(3), 457–477.
van Knippenberg, D., van Knippenberg, B., De Cremer, D., & Hogg,
M. A. (2004). Leadership, self, and identity: A review and
research agenda. The Leadership Quarterly, 15(6), 825–856.
Volmer, J., Spurk, D., & Niessen, C. (2012). Leader–member
exchange (LMX), job autonomy, and creative work involvement.
The Leadership Quarterly, 23(3), 456–465.
Walumbwa, F. O., & Hartnell, C. A. (2011). Understanding transfor-
mational leadership-employee performance links: The role of
relational identification and self-efficacy. Journal of Occupa-
tional and Organizational Psychology, 84(1), 153–172.
Does Moral Leadership Enhance Employee Creativity?
Walumbwa, F. O., Mayer, D. M., Wang, P., Wang, H., Workman, K.,
& Christensen, A. L. (2011). Linking ethical leadership to
employee performance: The roles of leader–member exchange,
self-efficacy, and organizational identification. Organizational
Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 115(2), 204–213.
Wang, H., Law, K. S., Hackett, R. D., Wang, D. X., & Chen, Z. X.
(2005). Leader–member exchange as a mediator of the relation-
ship between transformational leadership and followers’ perfor-
mance and organizational citizenship behavior. Academy of
Management Journal, 48(3), 420–432.
Wang, P., & Rode, J. C. (2010). Transformational leadership and
follower creativity: The moderating effects of identification with
leader and organizational climate. Human Relations, 63(8),
1105–1128.
Wayne, S. J., Shore, L. M., & Linden, R. C. (1997). Perceived
organizational support and leader–member exchange: A social
exchange perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 40(1),
82–111.
529
Westwood, R. (1997). Harmony and patriarchy: The cultural basis for
paternalistic leadership among the overseas Chinese. Organiza-
tion Studies, 18(3), 445–480.
Woodman, R. W., Sawyer, J. E., & Griffin, R. W. (1993). Toward a
theory of organizational creativity. Academy of Management
Review, 18(2), 293–321.
Wu, M., Huang, X., Li, C., & Liu, W. (2012). Perceived interactional
justice and trust-in-supervisor as mediators for paternalistic
leadership. Management and Organization Review, 8(1),
97–121.
Xia, Y., & Tang, T. L. P. (2011). Sustainability in supply chain
management: Suggestions for the auto industry. Management
Decision, 49(4), 495–512.
Yukl, G. (2001). Leadership in organizations (5th ed.). Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Zhou, J., & George, J. M. (2001). When job dissatisfaction leads to
creativity: Encouraging the expression of voice. Academy of
Management Journal, 44(4), 682–696.
123