Leadership & Organization Development Journal

Transformational leadership, pride in being a follower of the leader and organizational

commitment
Simon C.H. Chan W.M. Mak
Article information:
To cite this document:
Simon C.H. Chan W.M. Mak , (2014),"Transformational leadership, pride in being a follower of the leader
and organizational commitment", Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 35 Iss 8 pp. 674 -
690
Downloaded by ONDOKUZ MAYIS UNIVERSITY At 14:34 13 November 2014 (PT)

Permanent link to this document:

http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-12-09-0076
Downloaded on: 13 November 2014, At: 14:34 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 63 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 342 times since 2014*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Jon Welty Peachey, Laura J. Burton, Janelle E. Wells, (2014),"Examining the influence of transformational
leadership, organizational commitment, job embeddedness, and job search behaviors on turnover intentions
in intercollegiate athletics", Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 35 Iss 8 pp. 740-755
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-10-2012-0128
Herman H.M. Tse, (2014),"Linking leader-member exchange differentiation to work team performance",
Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 35 Iss 8 pp. 710-724 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/
LODJ-09-2012-0119
Angelo Mastrangelo, Erik R. Eddy, Steven J. Lorenzet, (2014),"The relationship between enduring
leadership and organizational performance", Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 35
Iss 7 pp. 590-604 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-08-2012-0097

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 549136 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.
 *Related content and download information correct at time of download.
Downloaded by ONDOKUZ MAYIS UNIVERSITY At 14:34 13 November 2014 (PT)

LODJ
35,8
674
Received 25 June 2012
Revised 26 April 2013
17 September 2013
Downloaded by ONDOKUZ MAYIS UNIVERSITY At 14:34 13 November 2014 (PT)
18 September 2013
Accepted 18 September 2013
Leadership & Organization
Development Journal
Vol. 35 No. 8, 2014
pp. 674-690
r Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0143-7739
DOI 10.1108/LODJ-12-09-0076
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0143-7739.htm
Transformational leadership,
pride in being a follower of the
leader and organizational
commitment
Simon C.H. Chan and W.M. Mak
Department of Management and Marketing,
The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Kowloon, Hong Kong
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship among transformational
leadership, pride in being a follower of the leader, and organizational commitment, as represented by
affective and normative commitment.
Design/methodology/approach – Data were collected from two samples in Mainland China (Study
1 of 145 executive MBA students in one of the local universities located in Xian; Study 2 of 210
employees in a service-based private-owned company located in Shenzhen). Descriptive statistics and
regression analyses, Sobel tests, and bootstrapping tests were used to analyze the data.
Findings – Both studies found that transformational leadership is positively related to pride in being
a follower of the leader, and affective and normative commitment. Results indicated that pride in being
a follower of the leader fully mediated the relationship between transformational leadership, affective
and normative commitment.
Research limitations/implications – The main limitation of this study is to collect data from a
self-reported single source in a cross-sectional survey design. The findings are susceptible to problems
of common method variance of the independent variable, mediator and dependent variables.
Practical implications – The findings assist managers to better understand the importance of
getting the support of their followers. If the followers are pride in being a follower of their leader, they
are more likely to be committed toward an organization.
Originality/value – This paper contributes to the existing literature by which pride in being a
follower of the leader as a mediator between transformational leadership and organizational
commitment in the Chinese context.
Keywords Transformational leadership, Affective commitment, Normative commitment,
Pride in being a follower of the leader
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Transformational leadership theory, as a leader-focussed research study, has become
widespread among researchers in the last few decades (Bass, 1985, 1999; Lowe et al.,
1996; Podsakoff et al., 1990, 1996, 2000). Over the past decades, accumulating evidence
suggests that transformational leadership is significantly associated with follower
attitudes and performance (Barling et al., 1996; Dvir et al., 2002; Fuller et al., 1996;
Howell and Hall-Merenda, 1999; Piccolo and Colquitt, 2006). The psychological states
on how transformational leadership behaviors are transmitted to followers’ work
outcomes have received considerable research attention (Dumdum et al., 2002; Ozaralli,
2003; Yukl, 1989), such as empowerment, and trust in the leader (Kark et al., 2003;
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or
not-for-profit sectors.
 Wang et al., 2005). Indeed, Yukl (1989) argued that “a variety of different influence Leader and
processes may be involved in transformational leadership” (p. 328). There is still an organizational
area for research to further examine the process of the relationship between
transformational leadership and follower attitudes and behaviors. commitment
Empirical studies have explored the “black box” of transformational leadership
process (e.g. Bono and Judge, 2003; Landry and Vandenberghe, 2009), but there has
been scant effort to understand how transformational leadership exerts its effect on 675
organizational commitment, such as pride in being a follower of the leader. Pride in
being a follower of the leader is a positive emotion which is likely to motivate followers’
work behavior (Hart and Matsuba, 2007). Although one empirical study (Boezeman
and Ellemers, 2007) examined pride and respect as the mediators between perceived
Downloaded by ONDOKUZ MAYIS UNIVERSITY At 14:34 13 November 2014 (PT)

importance and organizational commitment in the voluntary context, there is less work
considering possible explanations for the effect of transformational leadership on
organizational commitment. Indeed, on the basis of social identity theory, Boezeman
and Ellemers (2007) argued that individuals psychologically linked to the groups and
organizations to which they belong and consider the characteristics that apply to the
group and organization. In particular, the findings explained that organizations may
do well to implement pride and respect individuals in voluntary context. The main
purpose of this study is to examine the mediating mechanism of transformational
leadership influences followers’ organizational commitment by pride in being a follower
of the leader.
The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, this study contributes to the literature of
leadership through an examination of the effect of transformational leadership on
followers’ organizational commitment (e.g. Allen and Meyer, 1990; Podsakoff et al.,
1996). The impacts of transformational leadership on followers’ behaviors are further
developed. Second, this study uses social identity theory to advance the explanation of
psychological mechanism between transformational leadership and followers’
organizational commitment. Pride in being a follower of the leader as a mediator of
the transformational leadership and followers’ organizational commitment
relationship generates new insights on its impacts. Third, an empirical study
conducted by Boezeman and Ellemers (2007) attempted to explore the psychological
states, such as pride and respect between transformational leadership and
organizational commitment in the voluntary context. This study, compared to the
existing research, contributes to the impact of transformational leadership on
followers’ emotion and organizational commitment in the Chinese work settings.
The structure of the paper is organized as follows: an overview of transformational
leadership theory for the explanation of three hypotheses among transformational
leadership, pride in being a follower of the leader, follower commitment. The
methodology section is divided into the data collection in a sample of executive MBA
students in one of the local universities located in Xian (Study 1), and a sample of
service-based employees located in Shenzhen (Study 2). Results are reported to
highlight the key findings. Finally, a discussion of the findings and implications for
further research are proposed.

Literature review
Transformational leadership theory
Transformational leadership is an effective and influential leadership style to influence
the behaviors and performance of followers (Bass, 1985; Burns, 1978). It articulates a
compelling vision, offers clear goals, provides support and stimulates followers to
 LODJ work (Bycio et al., 1995). Bass (1985) identified inspirational motivation, individualized
35,8 consideration, idealized influence, and intellectual stimulation as the four dimensions
of transformational leadership behaviors. Inspirational motivation refers to the style
which creates an attractive goal of the future and the demonstration of optimism and
enthusiasm (Bruch and Walter, 2007) and individualized consideration provides
encouragement and support to followers. Idealized influence refers to the leadership
676 style as a personal example and maintains high ethical standards. Intellectual
stimulation encourages followers to challenge and be aware of the problems (Avolio
et al., 1991).
The significance of transformational leadership on followers’ work attitudes and
behaviors has been well reported (e.g. Bartram and Casimir, 2007). In addition, DeGroot
Downloaded by ONDOKUZ MAYIS UNIVERSITY At 14:34 13 November 2014 (PT)

et al. (2000) and Lowe et al. (1996) meta-analyses have demonstrated the positive
relationship between transformational leadership and follower outcomes. Results
provided an explanation on the effect of transformational leadership on the basic
values, beliefs, and attitudes of followers (Podsakoff et al., 1990). Although the existing
findings have demonstrated a positive association on transformation leadership
theory, the mediating mechanism of transformational leadership is worthy of further
development.

Organizational commitment
Organizational commitment refers to a psychological attachment of an individual
toward an organization (Mathieu and Zajac, 1990). It is a relative strength of an
individual’s identification and involvement in an organization (Mowday et al., 1982,
p. 27). Generally, there are three forms of organizational commitment namely affective,
continuance, and normative commitment (Meyer and Allen, 1991). Affective
commitment refers to the employee’s emotional attachment to, identification with,
and involvement in the organization. Continuance commitment refers to commitment
based on the costs that the employee associates with leaving the organization.
Normative commitment refers to the employee’s feelings of obligation to stay with the
organization.
Empirical studies have identified organizational and personal factors as the
determinants of organizational commitment (Allen and Meyer, 1990, 1996). Many
studies have examined the relationship between transformational leadership and
organizational commitment in a variety of organizational settings (Bono and Judge,
2003; Dumdum et al., 2002). A meta-analysis found that Affective, continuance, and
normative commitment are related to job satisfaction, job involvement, and
occupational commitment (Meyer et al., 2002). Recently, Joo et al. (2012) examined
the impact of core self-evaluation and transformational leadership on employees’
organizational commitment.

Hypotheses
Transformational leadership and pride in being a follower of the leader
Transformational leadership stimulates followers to exchange ideas and generate a
mission within organizations. A transformational leader encourages followers with
high motive and belief at work, which enhances the personal meaningfulness of
followers. This action arouses followers’ emotional attachment and involvement in
identifying the leader. The identification of a leader reflects the extent to which
followers’ have confidence and belief in their leader. Followers are likely to engage with
a leader when they express their feelings of pride to others as members.
 Previous studies have attempted to demonstrate the relationship between Leader and
transformational leadership and pride in being a follower of the leader (Boezeman organizational
and Ellemers, 2007). This study focusses on pride in being a follower of the leader as
the psychological state, which is referred to as “generated by appraisals that one is commitment
responsible for a socially valued outcome or for being a socially valued person”.
Followers are treated as a member of the inner group of a leader with high status and
appreciation. They highly value themselves as being a member of the leader (Tyler and 677
Blader, 2002). Transformational leadership is likely to enhance followers’ emotion in
attaching to a leader who provides a clear direction and appreciates their efforts. We
propose that transformational leadership has a positive relationship on pride in being a
follower of the leader. Thus:
Downloaded by ONDOKUZ MAYIS UNIVERSITY At 14:34 13 November 2014 (PT)

H1. Transformational leadership is positively associated with pride in being a

follower of the leader.

Pride in being a follower of the leader and organizational commitment

Accumulating evidence has shown that pride in being a follower of the leader (Doosje
et al., 2002) induces psychological attachment and perceived importance of work and
organizational commitment (Boezeman and Ellemers, 2007). In the current study, it
focussed on affective and normative commitment instead of continuance commitment
for two main reasons. First, empirically, affective and normative commitment had
shown to be most significantly related to leadership behaviors ( Joo et al., 2012; Meyer
et al., 2002). In particular, affective commitment and normative commitment had the
strongest and most positive correlations with desirable work outcomes such as
attendance, in-role performance, and organizational citizenship behavior among three
components of organizational commitment (Meyer et al., 2002). These two types of
organizational commitment are more likely to be affected by a leader who articulated
the vision, promoted group goals, and provided intellectual stimulation. Second, as
previous work has suggested that continuance commitment was calculative in nature
(Boezeman and Ellemers, 2007), it is less likely to be affected by the behaviors of a
leader. Affective commitment and normative commitment are more relevant to
examine the impact of transformational leadership behaviors.
Organizational researchers have examined the impact of workgroup commitment
on absenteeism, turnover intention and extra-role performance in collectivistic contexts
(e.g. Felfe and Yan, 2009). Tyler and Blader (2000) indicated pride as a reflection that
followers are valued and accepted as a member of the organization. Followers take pride
in being a follower of the leader when they are engaged with the social status or attracted
by the outstanding charisma and performance of their leader (Tyler and Blader, 2000,
2001). The motivating influence of the feeling of pride in being a follower of the leader is
likely to foster followers’ emotional attachment to the leader. Followers with high levels
of pride in being a follower of the leader perceive that they would enhance their affective
commitment.
Furthermore, transformational leader provides individualized care to their followers,
involving benefits and support which go beyond their expectations. Followers who
perceive their leader as extraordinary will become strongly dependent on the leader for
guidance and inspiration (Yukl, 1989). When followers who experience pride evoke
feelings of accomplishment to their leaders, they do feel that they take responsibility to
stay with the leader. Followers committed to the leaders as of feelings of obligation by the
recognition of their leaders. Pride in being a member of the leader emphasizes the high
 LODJ level of identification with the leader-follower relationship, and as a result to increase the
35,8 normative commitment of the followers. Thus:

H2. Pride in being a follower of the leader is positively related to (a) affective
commitment, and (b) normative commitment.

678 Pride in being a follower of the leader as mediator

Transformational leadership has found a strong positive effect on followers’
organizational commitment (Bhal and Ansari, 2007; Lee, 2005; Liao and Chuang,
2007; Walumbwa et al., 2005). For example, Lo et al. (2010) examined the effect of
transformational and transactional leadership on organizational commitment in
Downloaded by ONDOKUZ MAYIS UNIVERSITY At 14:34 13 November 2014 (PT)

Malaysia. A shared goal commitment emerges among followers when a transformational

leader encourages the beliefs of goal accomplishment, which in turn enhances followers’
organizational commitment (Bono and Judge, 2003; Hughes and Avey, 2009; Krishnan,
2004). The effect of transformational leadership on organizational commitment is
underpinned by the notion that reflects a psychological relationship between leader and
followers (Kupers and Weibler, 2006).
Social identity theory has been introduced to explain the behavior of individuals in
social groups and organizations. It is best described as a theory to predict group
behaviors on the bases of certain characteristics. Individuals tend to classify themselves
and others into various categories, such as organizational membership, groups, etc. The
process of social identification links the relationship between a transformational leader
and followers’ attitudes by pride in being a follower of the leader. It provides an
explanation on the basis for how a transformational leader enhances the perception of
pride to follow the leader by followers.
When followers have a good impression of their leader, they tend to identify with
the one who guides them to achieve goals, motivates them to work, and inspires them
to go beyond self-interest. Transformational leadership is likely to increase followers’
self-worth and work value by being a member of the leader. Followers receive better
support and take pride in being a member of the leader so as to enhance their
commitment toward organizations. The mediation mechanism of pride in being a
follower of the leader between transformational leadership and organizational
commitment is proposed. We therefore hypothesize that:

H3. Pride in being a follower of the leader mediates the relationship between
transformational leadership and affective and normative commitment.
Figure 1 illustrates the theoretical model of transformational leadership, pride in being
a follower of the leader, and organizational commitment.

Affective
Commitment

Figure 1. Pride of being a

Transformational Transformational member of the
Leadership leader
leadership, pride of being
a member of the leader,
organizational Normative
commitment Commitment
 Study 1 methodology Leader and
The sample of Study 1 included 150 executive MBA students taking classes in one of organizational
the local universities in Xian, China. The survey was collected voluntarily and
anonymously. The researchers administered survey questionnaires during regular commitment
classes and provided instructions to participants. The participants directly returned
the completed questionnaires to the researcher on-site, and all were assured that
their replies would keep confidential and for research purpose only. A total of 145 679
out of 150 questionnaires were returned, with a usable response rate of 96.7 percent.
For the student sample, 55.2 percent were male and 72.4 percent had had a tertiary
education or above. The majority of the respondents were in the age group of 36-45.
The mean of organizational tenure and leader tenure were 14.7 and 4.6 years,
Downloaded by ONDOKUZ MAYIS UNIVERSITY At 14:34 13 November 2014 (PT)

respectively.

Measurements
Transformational leadership. Transformational leadership behaviors were measured
by the 23-item scale (1 ¼ strongly disagree; 7 ¼ strongly agree) developed by Podsakoff
et al. (1990). They provided an appropriate model, identifying and articulating a vision,
fostering the acceptance of group goals, high performance expectations, providing
individualized support, and intellectual stimulation. A few of the sample items were
“talks about the future in an enthusiastic, existing way,” “sets a positive example
for others to follow,” and “shows concern for me as a person.” As the dimensions of
transformational leadership are highly correlated, we combined the six behaviors
of the transformational leadership index into a composite one ( Judge and Piccolo, 2004;
Schaubroeck et al., 2007). The Cronbach’s a coefficient of transformational leadership
was 0.92.
Pride in being a follower of the leader. Pride in being a follower of the leader in the
Autonomous Pride Scale was measured by the three-item scale (1 ¼ strongly disagree;
7 ¼ strongly agree) developed by Tyler and Blader (2002). A sample item was “I am
proud of being a member of my leader.” The Cronbach’s a coefficient of pride in being
a follower of the leader was 0.88.
Organizational commitment. Affective and normative commitment were measured
by the three-item scale (1 ¼ strongly disagree; 7 ¼ strongly agree) developed by Allen
and Meyer (1990). A sample item of affective and normative organizational
commitment was “The organization has personal meaning to me,” and “One of the
major reasons I continue to work for the organization is that I find my mission
important,” respectively. The Cronbach’s a coefficient of affective commitment and
normative commitment were 0.82 and 0.72.
Control variables. Gender, education level, age, organization tenure, and leader-
follower dyad tenure were collected as the control variables as these variables have
been found to influence followers’ attitudes. Gender (1 ¼ male, 2 ¼ female) and the
education levels of the respondents (below college ¼ 0, college or above ¼ 1) were
dummy coded. Age was classified into different age groups. Organization tenure and
leader-follower dyad were self-reported years.

Translation of questionnaire items

The questionnaire items were originally in English and were translated into Chinese.
To ensure the accuracy of each item, a back-translation was conducted with the items
being translated back to English (Brislin et al., 1973).
 LODJ Common method variance (CMV)
35,8 As the data were collected from a single source, the findings are susceptible to
problems of CMV of the independent variable, mediator and dependent variables.
Harman’s one factor (or single-factor) test was examined which involves all the
variables into an exploratory factor analysis. It examined the unrotated factor solution
to determine the number of factors that account for the variance in the variables.
680 Principal components analysis was done on the four variables (one independent
variable, one mediator and two dependent variables. Two factors emerged instead of
a one general factor account for the majority of the covariance among the measures.
It showed that common method bias may not have significantly affected the results.
Downloaded by ONDOKUZ MAYIS UNIVERSITY At 14:34 13 November 2014 (PT)

Study 1 data analysis

Confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs)
We used structural equation modeling (SEM) analysis to test the CFA model
(transformational leadership, pride in being a follower of the leader, affective and
normative commitment). Transformational leadership was modeled using six parcels,
with items of leadership behavior assigned to each parcel randomly (Bagozzi and
Edwards, 1998). This approach can reduce the number of parameters in SEM analysis
and keep a reasonable degree of freedom in the model (Bandalos, 2002). To assess if
the observed covariance matrix fitted the transformational leadership model, the
comparative fit index (CFI), the Tucker-Lewis coefficient (TLI), and the root mean
square error of approximation (RMSEA) were used to measure the overall model fit.
The CFI with values above 0.90 suggests that the hypothesized model represents an
adequate fit to the data (Bentler, 1990). The TLI takes values ranging from 0 to 1, with
zero representing not significant. The RMSEA, with values of lower than 0.05 (Byrne,
2001), indicates a close fit (Browne and Cudeck, 1993).
A CFA was then conducted to assess discriminant validity. A five-factor model was
assessed, including transformational leadership, pride in being a follower of the leader,
affective commitment, and normative commitment. Results showed that the
hypothesized four-factor model (CFI ¼ 0.92, TLI ¼ 0.90, RMSEA ¼ 0.09) yielded a
better fit than the three-factor model of transformational leadership, pride in being a
follower of the leader, organizational commitment (combine affective and normative
commitment) (CFI ¼ 0.88, TLI ¼ 0.85, RMSEA ¼ 0.12), with a w2 change of 58.27
(Ddf ¼ 3, po0.001), and a one-factor model (CFI ¼ 0.61, TLI ¼ 0.54, RMSEA ¼ 0.21),
with a w2 change of 446.4 (Ddf ¼ 6, po0.001).

Descriptive statistics
The means, standard deviations, and zero-order Pearson correlations of all the key
variables are presented in Table I.
The results of the regression analysis, Sobel tests, and bootstrapping tests were
reported. As shown in Table II, results indicated that transformational leadership was
positively related to pride in being a follower of the leader (b ¼ 0.42, po0.001). H1 was
supported. Pride in being a follower of the leader was positively related to affective
commitment (b ¼ 74, po0.001), and normative commitment (b ¼ 0.27, po0.001). H2a
and H2b were supported, which predicts that pride in being a follower of the leader is
positively related to organizational commitment.
H3 predicts the mediating effects of pride in being a follower of the leader on the
relationships between transformational leadership and affective and normative
commitment. After entering all the control variables, the mediating variables (pride in
 Downloaded by ONDOKUZ MAYIS UNIVERSITY At 14:34 13 November 2014 (PT)

Variables Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1. Gender 0.45 0.50 –

2. Age 5.54 1.31 0.09 –
3. Education 4.34 1.50 0.27** 0.53** –
4. Organization tenure 14.73 8.53 0.13 0.69** 0.56** –
5. Dyad tenure 4.62 11.93 0.16* 0.06 0.02 0.00 –
6. Transformational leadership 4.94 0.91 0.28** 0.08 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.92
7. Pride in being a follower of the leader 5.35 1.01 0.29** 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.10 0.48** 0.88
8. Affective commitment 4.90 1.21 0.32** 0.02 0.14 0.04 0.04 0.42** 0.76** 0.82
9. Normative commitment 5.60 0.91 0.05 0.13 0.08 0.17* 0.05 0.18* 0.28** 0.39** 0.72
Notes: n ¼ 145. Reliability coefficients appear along the diagonal. The correlation coefficients are significant at *po0.05; **po0.01
organizational
commitment

and reliabilities of
Means, standard
Leader and

measures in Study 1
681

deviations, correlations,
Table I.
 Downloaded by ONDOKUZ MAYIS UNIVERSITY At 14:34 13 November 2014 (PT)

35,8

682
LODJ

Table II.

indirect effect of
transformational
Results of direct and

a follower of the leader,

commitment in Study 1
affective and normative
leadership, pride in being
Pride in being a
follower of the leader Affective commitment Normative commitment
Variables Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4

Control variables
Followers’ gender 0.34** 0.19* 0.31** 0.19* 0.06 0.05 0.09 0.03 0.01 0.02
Followers’ age 0.01 0.06 0.06 0.12 0.06 0.08 0.04 0.07 0.04 0.06
Followers’ education 0.05 0.01 0.08 0.14 0.12 0.13 0.00 0.03 0.01 0.02
Organization tenure 0.05 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.13
Dyad tenure 0.15 0.11 0.09 0.06 0.02 0.02 0.07 0.05 0.02 0.02
Independent variable
Transformational leadership 0.42*** 0.38*** 0.08 0.18* 0.08
Mediator variable
Pride in being a follower of the leader 0.74*** 0.71*** 0.27*** 0.23*
Overall R2 0.11 0.27 0.11 0.24 0.60 0.61 0.04 0.07 0.10 0.11
Change R2 11 0.16 0.11 0.13 0.49 0.37 0.04 0.03 0.06 0.04
Indirect effect testing Sobel test estimate Bootstrap (95% confidence interval)
Lower Upper Significance test
TFL – Pride – AC 3.88*** 3.52 23.1 Yes
TFL – Pride – NC 1.02* 1.11 4.32 Yes
Notes: n ¼ 145. *po0.05; **po0.01; ***po0.001
 being a follower of the leader) on the independent variable (transformational Leader and
leadership) was regressed, thus meeting the requirements for mediation. Pride in being organizational
a follower of the leader was found to significantly mediate the relationship between
transformational leadership and followers’ affective commitment (b ¼ 0.71, po0.001) commitment
and normative commitment (b ¼ 0.27, po0.001). After adding the effect of pride in
being a follower of the leader, the b of transformational leadership was insignificant to
followers’ affective commitment (b ¼ 0.08, ns), and normative commitment (b ¼ 0.08, 683
ns), which full mediation was presented.
We then conducted the Sobel test (Sobel, 1982) to further assess the mediating
effects of pride in being a follower of the leader on the relationships between
transformational leadership and affective and normative commitment. Results
Downloaded by ONDOKUZ MAYIS UNIVERSITY At 14:34 13 November 2014 (PT)

indicated that pride in being a follower of the leader significantly mediated the links
between transformational leadership and affective and normative commitment
(z ¼ 3.88, po0.001; z ¼ 1.02, po0.05, respectively). Also, the bootstrapping test
indicated that the range of the indirect effect of pride in being a follower of the leader
was from 3.52 to 23.1 for affective commitment, and 1.11 to 4.32 for normative
commitment. As results did not include zero, a significant and full mediation between
transformational leadership and affective and normative commitment were supported.
Therefore, H3 was supported.

Study 2 methodology
Although Study 1 supported the notation that pride in being a follower of the leader
mediated between transformational leadership and affective and normative
commitment, the data was collected in a student sample. It may not be
representative of work practice in business organizations. To increase the validity
and generalizability of the model, Study 2 aimed to replicate our results from Study 1
by testing the three hypotheses in the Chinese work context.
The sample of Study 2 included 210 employees from a private-owned company in
the service industry located in Shenzhen, Mainland China. The jobs of the employees
varied from administrative work to supervisory role of frontline workers. Researchers
visited the respondents and conducted the survey following the same procedure as in
Study 1. We received 210 out of 250 usable questionnaires returned, with a usable
response rate of 84 percent. For the employee sample, 66.7 percent were male and 87.1
percent had had a tertiary education or above. The majority of the respondents
belonged to the age group of 36-45. The mean organizational tenure and leader tenure
were 8 and 4.1 years, respectively.

Measures
The key measures as transformational leadership (the independent variable), pride in
being a follower of the leader (the mediator variable), affective and normative
commitment (the independent variables), and the control variables, were used as in
Study 1. The Cronbach’s a coefficient of transformational leadership, pride in being a
follower of the leader, affective commitment and normative commitment in Study 2
were 0.89, 0.84, 0.81, and 0.76, respectively.

Study 2 data analysis

Results
CFAs. A CFA was performed to test the discriminant validity. The results suggested
that the hypothesized four-factor model (CFI ¼ 0.91, TLI ¼ 0.90, RMSEA ¼ 0.09)
 LODJ yielded a better fit than the three-factor model of transformational leadership, pride
35,8 of being a follower of the leader, organizational commitment (combine affective
commitment, and normative commitment) (CFI ¼ 0.87, TLI ¼ 0.87, RMSEA ¼ 0.11),
with a w2 change of 73.77 (Ddf ¼ 3, po0.001), and a one-factor model (CFI ¼ 0.65,
TLI ¼ 0.59, RMSEA ¼ 0.18), with a w2 change of 465.71 (Ddf ¼ 6, po0.001).
Descriptive statistics. The standard deviations and zero-order Pearson correlations
684 of all the key variables are presented in Table III.
Results indicated that transformational leadership was positively related to pride in
being a follower of the leader (b ¼ 0.51, po0.001), as shown in Table IV. H1 was
supported. Pride in being a follower of the leader was positively related to affective
commitment (b ¼ 57, po0.001), and normative commitment (b ¼ 0.44, po0.001).
Downloaded by ONDOKUZ MAYIS UNIVERSITY At 14:34 13 November 2014 (PT)

H2a and H2b were supported. Pride in being a follower of the leader was found to
significantly mediate the relationship between transformational leadership and
followers’ affective commitment (b ¼ 0.46, po0.001) and normative commitment
(b ¼ 0.32, po0.001). After adding the effect of pride in being a follower of the leader,
the b of transformational leadership was insignificant to followers’ affective commitment
(b ¼ 0.12, ns), and normative commitment (b ¼ 0.09, ns), which full mediation was
presented.
The Sobel test results indicated that pride in being a follower of the leader
significantly mediated the links between transformational leadership and affective
and normative commitment (z ¼ 2.05, po0.001; z ¼ 0.24, po0.001, respectively). The
bootstrapping test indicated that the range of the indirect effect of pride in being a
follower of the leader was from 3.52 to 50.69 for affective commitment, and 1.43 to 33.89
for normative commitment. H3 was supported.

Discussion
This study examined the relationship among transformational leadership, pride in
being a follower of the leader, and affective and normative commitment. In Study 1, the
results indicated that transformational leadership is positively related to pride in being
a follower of the leader, affective commitment and normative commitment. The effect
of the transformational leadership on affective and normative commitment was

Variables Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Gender 0.4 0.69 –

Age 5.05 1.52 0.22** –
Education 4.24 0.92 0.10 0.03 –
Organization tenure 10.62 8.01 0.19** 0.54** 0.00 –
Dyad tenure 4.43 4.07 0.08 0.28** 0.05 0.43** –
Transformational
leadership 5.40 0.69 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.07 0.05 0.89
Pride in being a
follower of the leader 5.92 0.75 0.09 0.05 0.10 0.17 0.10 0.52** 0.84
Affective
commitment 5.46 0.99 0.13 0.04 0.11 0.01 0.09 0.43** 0.57** 0.81
Table III. Normative
Means, standard commitment 5.78 0.90 0.14* 0.10 0.00 0.02 0.30 0.37** 0.44 0.52 0.76
deviations, correlations,
a
and reliabilities of Notes: n ¼ 210. Reliability coefficients appear along the diagonal. The correlation coefficients are significant
measures in Study 2 at *po0.05; **po0.01
 Downloaded by ONDOKUZ MAYIS UNIVERSITY At 14:34 13 November 2014 (PT)

Pride in being a follower of the leader Affective commitment Normative commitment

Variables Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4

Control variables
Followers’ gender 0.13 0.10 0.14* 0.12 0.06 0.07 0.13 0.11 0.07 0.08
Followers’ age 0.05 0.06 0.04 0.05 0.01 0.02 0.13 0.14 0.11 0.12
Followers’ education 0.12 0.09 0.13 0.11 0.06 0.07 0.02 0.00 0.03 0.03
Organization tenure 0.20* 0.15* 0.02 0.06 0.13 0.13 0.11 0.06 0.01 0.01
Dyad tenure 0.04 0.09 0.13 0.17* 0.10 0.13 0.03 0.07 0.01 0.04
Independent variable
Transformational leadership 0.51*** 0.44*** 0.12 0.38*** 0.09
Mediator variable
Pride in being a follower of the leader 0.57*** 0.46*** 0.44*** 0.32***
Overall R2 0.06 0.32 0.05 0.24 0.35 0.38 0.03 0.17 0.21 0.25
Change R2 0.06 0.26 0.05 0.19 0.30 0.14 0.03 0.14 0.18 0.08
Indirect effect testing Sobel test estimate Bootstrap (95% confidence interval)
Lower Upper Significance test
TFL – pride – AC 3.56*** 2.05 50.69 Yes
TFL – pride – NC 3.24*** 1.43 33.89 Yes
Notes: n ¼ 210. *po0.05; **po0.01; ***po0.001
organizational

leadership, pride in being

commitment

transformational
Results of direct and
indirect effect of
Table IV.
Leader and

commitment in Study 2
a follower of the leader,
685

affective and normative

 LODJ mediated by pride in being a follower of the leader. In Study 2, transformational
35,8 leadership would enhance the commitment of employees and induce feelings of pride of
being a follower of the leader. Both studies demonstrated the same results on the
mediating role of pride in being a follower of the leader between transformational
leadership and organizational commitment.

686 Implications for theory and practice

The theoretical implication of this study is the extension of a transformational
leadership model that advances our knowledge in the transformational leadership
mediating process on followers’ organizational commitment. First, this study suggests
that transformational leadership is an important predictor for pride in being a follower
Downloaded by ONDOKUZ MAYIS UNIVERSITY At 14:34 13 November 2014 (PT)

of the leader. Followers are primarily driven and motivated by their leaders who are
perceived to be transformational. Little leadership research has demonstrated the
relationship between transformational leadership and pride in being a follower of their
leader. It demonstrates the relationships between pride in being a follower of the leader
and the two organizational commitments (i.e. affective and normative commitment).
In fact, followers are committed to an organization when they feel pride of their leaders.
Second, this study contributes to the literature by examining the effect of pride in
being a follower of the leader between transformational leadership and organizational
commitment. Results indicated support for the notion of social identity theory in further
development of theory and additional research in the leadership literature. Consistent
with the results of Boezeman and Ellemers (2007) in the voluntary context, our results
provided implications for the influence of work context on transformational leadership,
the psychological state, and organizational commitment. This study investigates the
importance of transformational leadership as antecedent for the impact of pride in being
a follower of the leader and affective and normative commitment.
Third, this study examines pride in being a follower of the leader as the mediator
between transformational leadership and affective and normative commitment in the
Chinese context. Pride in being a follower of the Chinese leader appears to be a significant
factor on the impact of transformational leadership. Chinese followers’ pride of
themselves as being a follower of the leader may influence their commitment level
toward the organization.
Lastly, a practical implication might be that leaders need to utilize the behaviors of
transformational leadership in order to facilitate followers becoming proud of their
leaders. Leaders should pay attention to followers’ emotion, and if possible develop
each follower’s attributes. Followers have to self-sacrifice and behaving in ways that
are consistent with shared values of their leaders. Importantly, this might be useful to
enforce followers to take pride in being a follower of their leader, so as to build
commitment within organizations and work groups.

Limitations
This study has several limitations. First, this study collected data by a cross-sectional
design in both Study 1 and Study 2, which implied the cause-effect relations cannot be
inferred from our findings. The measures of transformational leadership, pride of
being a follower of their leader, and commitment were self-reported. Future research
should avoid the issue by collecting data from a longitudinal design and would mitigate
the CMV by collecting data.
Second, this study proposed a transformational leadership model on pride in
being a follower of the leader, which in turn affects organizational commitment.
 Future research should examine other followers’ emotion as the mediating processes as Leader and
this study replicated the evidence in a voluntary context to the business context organizational
(Boezeman and Ellemers, 2007).
Third, this study only obtained data from students and employees, i.e. followers of commitment
the leader. Future research should use different sources of data in various work
settings. Fourth, we only examined the impact of transformational leadership on
organizational commitment by an individual-level of analysis. As a leader may 687
supervise at least one or more than one follower, a dyad- , team-, or organizational-level
of analysis should be a minimum for future research.
In conclusion, this study examined pride in being a follower of the leader to fully
mediate the relationship between transformational leadership and organizational
Downloaded by ONDOKUZ MAYIS UNIVERSITY At 14:34 13 November 2014 (PT)

commitment. To further explore transformational leadership theory in the Chinese

context, the two samples in this study explained how transformational leadership was
exerted and influenced organizational commitment which would be beneficial for
future research.

References
Allen, N.J. and Meyer, J.P. (1990), “The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance
and normative commitment to the organization”, Journal of Occupational Psychology,
Vol. 63 No. 1, pp. 1-18.
Allen, N.J. and Meyer, J.P. (1996), “Affective, continuance and normative commitment to the
organization: an examination of construct validity”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 49
No. 3, pp. 252-276.
Avolio, B.J., Waldman, D.A. and Yammarino, F.J. (1991), “Leading in the 1990s: the four is of
transformational leadership”, Journal of European Industrial Training, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 9-16.
Bagozzi, R.P. and Edwards, J.R. (1998), “A general approach for representing constructs in
organizational research”, Organizational Research Methods, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 45-87.
Bandalos, D.L. (2002), “The effects of item parceling on goodness-of-fit and parameter estimate bias
in structural equation modelling”, Structure Equation Modeling, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 78-102.
Barling, J., Weber, T. and Kelloway, E.K. (1996), “Effects of transformational leadership training
on attitudinal and financial outcomes: a field experiment”, Journal of Applied Psychology,
Vol. 81 No. 6, pp. 827-832.
Bartram, T. and Casimir, G. (2007), “The relationship between leadership and follower in-role
performance and satisfaction with the leader: the mediating effects of empowerment and
trust in the leaders”, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 4-19.
Bass, B.M. (1985), Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations, Free Press, New York, NY.
Bass, B.M. (1999), “Two decades of research and development in transformational leadership”,
European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 9-32.
Bentler, P.M. (1990), “Comparative fit indexes in structural models”, Psychological Bulletin,
Vol. 107 No. 2, pp. 238-246.
Bhal, K.T. and Ansari, M.A. (2007), “Leader-member exchange-subordinates outcomes
relationship: role of voice and justice”, Leadership & Organizational Development
Journal, Vol. 28 No. 8, pp. 20-35.
Boezeman, E.J. and Ellemers, N. (2007), “Volunteering for charity: pride, respect, and the
commitment of volunteers”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 92 No. 3, pp. 771-785.
Bono, J. and Judge, T. (2003), “Self-concordance at work: toward understanding the motivational
effects of transformational leadership”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 46 No. 5,
pp. 554-571.
 LODJ Brislin, R., Lonner, W.J. and Thorndike, R. (1973), Cross-Cultural Research Methods, Wiley,
New York, NY.
35,8 Browne, M.W. and Cudeck, R. (1993), “Alternative ways of assessing model fit”, in Bollen, K.A.
and Scott Long, J. (Eds), Testing Structural Equation Models, Sage Publications, Newbury
Park, CA, pp. 136-162.
Bruch, H. and Walter, F. (2007), “Leadership in context: investigating hierarchical impacts on
688 transformational leadership”, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 28
No. 8, pp. 710-726.
Burns, J.M. (1978), Leadership, Harper & Row, New York, NY.
Bycio, P., Hackett, R.D. and Allen, J.S. (1995), “Further assessment of Bass’s (1985)
conceptualization of transactional and transformational leadership”, Journal of Applied
Downloaded by ONDOKUZ MAYIS UNIVERSITY At 14:34 13 November 2014 (PT)

Psychology, Vol. 80 No. 4, pp. 468-478.

Byrne, B.M. (2001), Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS. Basic Concepts, Applications, and
Programming, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
DeGroot, T., Kiker, D.S. and Cross, T.C. (2000), “A meta-analysis to review organizational
outcomes related to charismatic leadership”, Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences,
Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 356-371.
Doosje, B., Spears, R. and Ellemers, N. (2002), “Social identity as both cause and effect: the
development of group identification in response to anticipated and actual changes in
the intergroup status hierarchy”, British Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 57-76.
Dumdum, U.R., Lowe, K.B. and Avolio, B. (2002), “A meta-analysis of transformational and
transactional leadership correlates of effectiveness and satisfaction: an update and
extension”, in Avolio, B.J. and Yammarino, F.J. (Eds), Transformational and Charismatic
Leadership: The Road Ahead, Vol. 2, Elsevier Science, Oxford, pp. 35-66.
Dvir, T., Eden, D., Avolio, B.J. and Shamir, B. (2002), “Impact of transformational leadership on
follower development and performance: a field experiment”, Academy of Management
Journal, Vol. 45 No. 4, pp. 735-744.
Felfe, J. and Yan, W.H. (2009), “The impact of workgroup commitment on organizational
citizenship behavior, absenteeism, and turnover intention: the case of Germany and
China”, Asia Pacific Business Review, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 433-450.
Fuller, J.B., Patterson, C.E.P., Hester, K. and Stringer, D.Y. (1996), “A quantitative review of
research on charismatic leadership”, Psychological Reports, Vol. 78, pp. 271-287.
Hart, D. and Matsuba, K.M. (2007), “The development of pride and moral life”, in Tracy, J.L.,
Robbins, R.W. and Tangney, J.P. (Eds), The Self-Conscious Emotions, Guilford, New York,
NY, pp. 114-133.
Howell, J.M. and Hall-Merenda, K.E. (1999), “The ties that bind: the impact of leader-member
exchange, transformational leadership and transactional leadership, and distance on
predicting follower performance”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 84 No. 5, pp. 680-694.
Hughes, L.W. and Avey, J.B. (2009), “Transforming with levity: humor, leadership and follower
attitudes”, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 30 No. 6, pp. 540-562.
Joo, B.K., Yoon, H.J. and Jeung, C.W. (2012), “The effects of core self-evaluations and
transformational leadership on organizational commitment”, Leadership & Organization
Development Journal, Vol. 33 No. 6, pp. 564-582.
Judge, T.A. and Piccolo, R.F. (2004), “Transformational and transactional leadership: a meta-analytic
test of their relative validity”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 89 No. 5, pp. 755-768.
Kark, R., Shamir, B. and Chen, G. (2003), “The two faces of transformational leadership:
empowerment and dependency”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 2, pp. 246-255.
Krishnan, V.R. (2004), “Impact of transformational leadership on followers’ influence strategies”,
Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 58-72.
 Kupers, W. and Weibler, J. (2006), “How emotional is transformational leadership really? Some Leader and
suggestions for a necessary extension”, Leadership & Organization Development Journal,
Vol. 27 No. 5, pp. 368-383. organizational
Landry, G. and Vandenberghe, C. (2009), “Role of commitment to the supervisor, leader-member commitment
exchange, and supervisor-based self esteem in employee-supervisor conflicts”, The Journal
of Social Psychology, Vol. 149 No. 1, pp. 5-27.
Lee, J. (2005), “Effects of leadership and leader-member exchange on commitment”, Leadership 689
and Organizational Development Journal, Vol. 26 No. 8, pp. 655-672.
Liao, H. and Chuang, A. (2007), “Transforming service employees and climate: a multilevel,
multisource examination of transformational leadership in building long-term service
relationships”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 92 No. 4, pp. 1006-1019.
Downloaded by ONDOKUZ MAYIS UNIVERSITY At 14:34 13 November 2014 (PT)

Lo, M.C., Ramayah, T., Min, H.W. and Songan, P. (2010), “The relationship between leadership
styles and organizational commitment in Malaysia: role of leader-member exchange”, Asia
Pacific Business Review, Vol. 16 Nos 1-2, pp. 79-103.
Lowe, K.B., Kroeck, K.G. and Sivasubramaniam, N. (1996), “Effectiveness of correlates of
transformational and transactional leadership: a meta-analytic review of the MLQ
literature”, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 385-425.
Mathieu, J.E. and Zajac, D.M. (1990), “A review and meta-analysis of the antecedents, correlates,
and consequences of organizational commitment”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 108
No. 2, pp. 171-194.
Meyer, J.P. and Allen, N.J. (1991), “A three-component conceptualization of organizational
commitment”, Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 61-89.
Meyer, J.P., Stanley, D.J., Herscovitch, L. and Topolnytsky, L. (2002), “Affective, continuance, and
normative commitment to the organization: a meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates and
consequences”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 61 pp. 20-52.
Mowday, R.T., Porter, L.W. and Steers, R.M. (1982), Employee-Organization Linkages, Academic
Press, New York, NY.
Ozaralli, N. (2003), “Effects of transformational leadership on empowerment and team
effectiveness”, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 24 No. 6, pp. 335-344.
Piccolo, R.F. and Colquitt, J.A. (2006), “Transformational leadership and job behaviors: the
mediating role of core job characteristics”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 49 No. 2,
pp. 327-340.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B. and Bommer, W.H. (1996), “Transformational leader behaviors
and substitutes for leadership as determinants of employee satisfaction, commitment, trust,
and organizational citizenship behaviors”, Journal of Management, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 259-298.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Moorman, R.H. and Fetter, R. (1990), “Transformational leader
behaviors and their effects on followers’ trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational
citizenship behaviors”, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 107-142.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Paine, J.B. and Bacharach, D.G. (2000), “Organizational
citizenship behaviors: a critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and
suggestions for future research”, Journal of Management, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 513-563.
Schaubroeck, J., Lam, S.S.K. and Cha, S.E. (2007), “Embracing transformational leadership: team
values and the impact of leader behavior on team performance”, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 92 No. 4, pp. 1020-1030.
Sobel, M.E. (1982), “Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation
models”, in Leinhardt, S. (Ed.), Sociological Methodology, American Sociological
Association, Washington, DC, pp. 290-312.
Tyler, T.R. and Blader, S.L. (2000), Cooperation in Groups: Procedural Justice, Social Identity, and
Behavioral Engagement, Psychology Press, Philadelphia, PA.
 LODJ Tyler, T.R. and Blader, S.L. (2001), “Identity and cooperative behavior in groups”, Group
Processes & Intergroup Relations, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 207-226.
35,8
Tyler, T.R. and Blader, S.L. (2002), “Autonomous vs comparative status: must we be better than
others to feel good about ourselves?”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, Vol. 89 No. 1, pp. 813-838.
Walumbwa, F.O., Lawler, J.J., Avolio, B.J., Wang, P. and Shi, K. (2005), “Transformational leadership
690 effects on work-related attitudes: the moderating effects of collective efficacy and self efficacy
across cultures”, Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, Vol. 11, pp. 3-16.
Wang, H., Law, K.S., Hackett, R.D., Wang, D. and Chen, Z.X. (2005), “Leader-member exchange as
a mediator of the relationship between transformational leadership and followers’
performance and organizational citizenship behavior”, Academy of Management Journal,
Vol. 48 No. 3, pp. 420-432.
Downloaded by ONDOKUZ MAYIS UNIVERSITY At 14:34 13 November 2014 (PT)

Yukl, G.A. (1989), “Managerial leadership: a review of theory and research”, Yearly Review of
Management, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 251-289.

Further reading
Allen, N.J. and Meyer, J.P. (1991), “A three-component conceptualization of organizational
commitment”, Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 61-89.
Avolio, B.J., Zhu, W., Koh, W. and Bhatia, P. (2004), “Transformational leadership and
organizational commitment: mediating role of psychological empowerment and moderating
role of structural distance”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 25 No. 8, pp. 951-968.
Blau, P.M. (1964), Exchange and Power in Social Life, Wiley, New York, NY.
Bentler, P.M. (1995), “Comparative fit indexes in structural models”, Psychological Bulletin,
Vol. 107, pp. 238-246.
Ellemers, N., Wilke, H. and Van Knippenberg, A. (1993), “Effects of the legitimacy of low group or
individual status on individual and collective status-enhancement strategies”, Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 64 No. 5, pp. 766-778.
Michie, S. (2009), “Pride and gratitude: how positive emotions influence the pro-social behaviors
of organizational leaders”, Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, Vol. 15 No. 4,
pp. 393-403.
Shamir, B., House, R.J. and Arthur, M.B. (1993), “The motivational effects of charismatic
leadership: a self-concept based theory”, Organization Science, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 577-593.
Tyler, T.R. (1999), “Why people cooperate with organizations: an identity based perspective”, in
Sutton, R.I. and Staw, B.M. (Eds), Research in Organizational Behavior: An Annual Series
of Analytical Essays and Critical Reviews, JAI Press, Stamford, CT, pp. 210-246.

About the authors

Dr Simon C.H. Chan received his PhD, MPhil, and BA (Hons) (Organizational Behavior/Human
Resources Management) from the The Hong Kong Polytechnic University. He has published
research papers in Journal of Organizational Behavior, Asia Pacific Journal of Management,
International Journal of Human Resources Management, Personnel Review, etc. His main
research interests focus mainly on leadership and organizational behavior. Dr Simon C.H. Chan is
the corresponding author and can be contacted at: mssimon@polyu.edu.hk
Dr W.M. Mak is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Management and Marketing,
The Hong Kong Polytechnic University. He has conducted research on developing competent
managers and building learning organizations.

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints