The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/1746-8809.htm

Respect: give it to get it! Does Leadership

complimented
leadership complimented with with respect

respect can foster creativity?

Mahnoor Hai
Superior University, Lahore, Pakistan
Received 13 November 2019
Shahid Latif Revised 27 March 2020
University of Management and Technology, Sialkot Campus, Sialkot, Pakistan 27 May 2020
26 July 2020
Ahmad Raza Bilal 6 September 2020
Accepted 16 October 2020
Sohar University, Sohar, Oman, and
Bilal Ahmad
Superior University, Lahore, Pakistan

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this study is to advance the prevalent leadership–creativity perspective by
examining respectful engagement as a missing link between transformational leadership and employees
creativity in the tourism and hospitality industry of Pakistan.
Design/methodology/approach – Data were collected from 288 supervisor–subordinate dyads of hotel and
tourism industry in Pakistan. Partial least square structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) technique was used
to validate the measurement model and to test the proposed hypotheses using SmartPLS 3.0.
Findings – The results suggest that transformational leadership and respectful engagement are significantly
related and that respectful engagement fosters employee creativity. The study further confirmed that
respectful engagement mediates the relationship between transformational leadership and employee
creativity.
Practical implications – Besides theoretical contribution, the study has several managerial implications for
the tourism and hospitality industry. Globally, in the tourism and hospitality industry, the service selling
proposition is largely based on creativity. Hence, the study suggests the managers of tourism and hospitality
industry should adopt a transformational leadership style to achieve a sustainable competitive advantage of
creativity. The study further recommends the managers capitalize on their transformational leadership style to
observe respectful engagement in the workplace, which in turn can encourage employees to behave creatively.
Originality/value – Theoretically, this paper contributes to the existing body of knowledge in a couple of
ways. Firstly, while several empirical studies have discussed the impact of transformational leadership on
employee creativity, and various mediating models have also been tested in this regard, little effort has been
made to study the links between transformational leadership and employee creativity despite existing
awareness about the importance of respectful engagement for employee creativity. Thus, the current study
examines employee creativity with the lens of transformational leadership and respectful engagement.
Secondly, the study integrates the theories of transformational leadership, employee engagement and
employee creativity.
Keywords Transformational leadership, Respectful engagement, Creativity, Tourism, Pakistan
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
The increased prominence of “employee creativity” for all business organizations has
triggered the interest of scholars to understand the antecedents and consequences of the
phenomenon. Researchers have been striving to explore the predictors of employees’
creativity as they are already aware that creative employees are vital for the development of
International Journal of Emerging
Markets
The authors would like to acknowledge the Senior Editor, Dr. Paresha N. Sinha and three anonymous © Emerald Publishing Limited
1746-8809
referees for their valuable comments and suggestions to improve the version of this paper. DOI 10.1108/IJOEM-11-2019-0931
IJOEM innovative products, design of exceptional service delivery mechanisms and efficient
processes. This holds true particularly in the services sector, such as the tourism and
hospitality industry (Robinson and Beesley, 2010; Wong and Ladkin, 2008). Businesses in this
industry are facing a greater degree of competition in terms of service quality and sustainable
competitive advantage. This has fueled the need to acquire, develop and retain a creative
workforce in the tourism and hospitality industry (Claver-Cortes et al., 2006).
The term “creativity” refers to an individual’s ability to adopt innovative ideas and smart
methods to complete tasks that require immediate attention (Amabile, 1983, 1988).
Creative employees support organizations in achieving and maintaining a competitive
advantage in a dynamic business environment (Amabile et al., 2005; George, 2007). The
hospitality industry is labor intensive by nature; therefore, it is essential for organizations to
attain, retain and develop a creative workforce for a sustainable competitive advantage,
exceptional service delivery and customer satisfaction (Mohsin and Lockyer, 2010; Robinson
and Beesley, 2010; Wong and Pang, 2003).
One of the critical issues associated with the tourism and hospitality industry in Pakistan
is a lack of focus on developing human resources (Arif and Shikirullah, 2019). A recent report
has articulated that the tourism and hospitality industry have the potential for growth and
needs such a creative workforce that can cater to the growing need for the provision of better
hospitality services (The News, 2019). Success of hospitality industry is backed-up by
creative practices for which the employees’ ability plays a major role (Chang et al., 2011). The
industry demands creativity and innovation for the realization of competitiveness and
success (Tsai et al., 2015). Regrettably, the Pakistani hospitality and tourism industry lacks
creative workforce which has impaired the development of this sector (Arif and
Shikirullah, 2019).
Recent research on the matter has revealed that supervisors’ leadership behavior may
impact the creative performance of employees (e.g. Chammas and Hernandez, 2019; Buil et al.,
2018). Among these styles of leadership, the transformational leadership has gained a greater
attention of scholars (e.g. Mittal and Dhar, 2015; Jaiswal and Dhar, 2015). In the perspective of
leader–follower interaction, transformational leaders appreciate their subordinates’
achievements and motivate them to capitalize on their potential. This leader–follower
interaction has made the transformational leadership style as superior to other leadership
styles (Burns, 1978).
For the past two decades, transformational leadership has been studied in relation to
various work-related outcomes (Mittal and Dhar, 2015). The most recent work has suggested
that transformational leadership is imperative for satisfied employees (Elenkov, 2002; Miao
et al., 2018; Shah et al., 2017; Barnett, 2018). Another stream on the subject matter has been
interested in knowing the popularity of various leadership styles in relation to job satisfaction
across various organizational settings (Rothfelder et al., 2012; Belias et al., 2015; Ho et al.,
2016). Parallel to employees’ job satisfaction, organizational performance has also been a
subject of attention (Ogbonna and Harris, 2000; Chammas and Hernandez, 2019). Having
validated the impact of transformational leadership on various job-related outcomes, the
current scholarship is more focused on employee performance (e.g. Buil et al., 2018) like
employee creativity (Jaiswal and Dhar, 2015; Zhang and Kwan, 2018), work engagement
(Breevaart and Bakker, 2018; Balwant et al., 2019) and employees’ affective commitment
(Ribeiro et al., 2018). However, to date no attention has been given to understand the
mediating and moderating mechanisms of various antecedents of employee creativity
(Jaiswal and Dhar, 2015).
Literature on behavioral sciences has documented that the concept of “respect” has been
discussed in the context of marital relationships (e.g. Gottman, 1994). However, the same
concept has not been studied extensively in the context of workplace relationships (Carmeli
et al., 2015). In a workplace, respectful interaction may support the employees to generate and
capitalize on psychological and behavioral resources (e.g. the capability to act creatively). Leadership
That capability development fosters employees’ discretionary actions (Dutton, 2003). When complimented
employees are treated with respect in the workplace, they develop a positive view about
themselves; which in turn triggers discretionary behavior (Friedman et al., 2018). When
with respect
employees perceive that they are being respected and valued within teams, they start to
exceed the expectations of stakeholders through investing in their team-related efforts
(Ellemers et al., 2013). Given the importance of respect for employees to demonstrate positive
outcomes in a workplace, it has been an underresearched area in management. Specifically, it
has not been adequately researched in relation to the leadership and creativity. Drawing on
the above inconsistencies in the literature and to underpin the respectful notion somewhere in
between the leadership and creativity, we propose that transformational leadership style and
employee creativity are bridged through respect engagement. The present study investigates
the mediating role of respect engagement on the relationship between transformational
leadership and employee creativity. Thus, we put forth the following research questions:
RQ1. Is transformational leadership related to respect engagement?
RQ2. Is respect engagement related employee creativity?
RQ3. Does respect engagement mediate the relationship between transformational
leadership and employee creativity?

2. Literature review
2.1 Transformational leadership
For more than 20 years, researchers have been studying the transformational leadership style
as a lens to understand its linkages to organizational innovation (Wang et al., 2011; Bono and
Judge, 2004). As argued by Zhu et al. (2018), almost half of the available literature on
leadership deals with transformational or charismatic leadership styles. Bass is known for his
significant contribution to leadership research (Zhu et al., 2018) and for his full-range
leadership theory (FLRT) (Bass et al., 1987). This is evident by the fact that the most recent
research on leadership is led by Bass (Lord et al., 2017).
The transformational leadership is defined as a “style of leadership that transforms
followers to rise above their self-interest by altering their morale, ideals, interests, and
values, motivating them to perform better than initially expected” (Pieterse et al., 2010, p.
610). According to Kim (2014), “transformational leaders have the ability to transform
organizations through their vision for the future, and by clarifying their vision, they can
empower the employees to take responsibility for achieving that vision” (p. 398). Bass
(1990) asserts that the transformational leadership style “occurs when leaders broaden
and elevate the interests of their employees, when they generate awareness and
acceptance of the purposes and mission of the group, and when they stir their employees
to look beyond their own self-interest for the good of the group” (p. 21).
Contrary to the transformational leadership style, the transactional leadership style is
believed to be the most conventional management style that uses power in dealing with
followers (Bass and Riggio, 2006). Transactional leaders believe that fear of the immediate top
line of command over the subordinates is essential to make them creative and innovative at
work (Bass and Riggio, 2006). Further, Bass (1990) asserted that a transactional leadership
style can only be observed when leaders “exchange promises of rewards and benefits to
subordinates for the subordinates’ fulfillment of agreements with the leader” (p. 53). Finally,
the least desirable style is “laissez faire leadership” (Bass and Stogdill, 1990) where the
followers are supposed to work independently and without the guidelines of leader (Bass and
Riggio, 2006).
IJOEM One of the core characteristics of transformational leaders is that they appreciate their
subordinates for their achievements and motivate them to capitalize on their potential. More
often than not, transformational leaders use their ability to displace the focus and interest of
their followers from the individual to a collective level, where they tend to perform and deliver
more than their actual duties (Rubin et al., 2005). Therefore, the transformational leadership
style is thought to have the potential to yield superior outcomes, not only at the individual
level but also at the organizational level (Bass and Avolio, 2000). This leader–follower
interaction makes the transformational leaders superior to other leadership styles (Burns,
1978). As stated by Ingram (2018), such attributes of the transformational leadership lead to
higher employee productivity and low turnover. Transformational leaders not only facilitate
their subordinates to develop their personal and professional prospects but also foster the
employees’ capability for the achievement of organizational prospects (Travis, 2018) (see
Table 1).
2.2 Respectful engagement
Basit (2019) asserted that respect engagement exhibits the respect received from superiors
and colleagues in the form of appreciation, attention and focus on good qualities. In the
context of organizational research, respect engagement is an idiosyncratic construct in
multiple ways. Firstly, it is dissimilar from the leader–member exchange (LMX) theory where
mutual respect is considered as one facet of the quality of leader–follower associations (Graen
and Uhl-Bien, 1995). Secondly, in respect engagement the actual behavior is the main focus
during interaction with others. This contingency perspective separates respect engagement
from a coworker’s support (Chiaburu and Harrison, 2008), interpersonal risk perceptions
(Edmondson, 1999) and conditions of being in relationship with others such as a readiness to
accept vulnerability (Mayer et al., 1995). Thirdly, respect engagement is also different from
perceived organizational support – in which organizational support is extended to the
employees (Rhoades and Eisenberger, 2002). Fourthly, Rogers (1967) believed that employee
engagement fosters respect and acceptability toward others. Baumeister and Leary (1995)
stated that respect engagement is desirable for satisfying the growth and development needs
of the employees.
The construct has been viewed as a dimension of relational quality and status exhibition
in the literature of organizational respect but ignores behaviors that engender respect among
members of the organization (Carmeli et al., 2015). To address this limitation, Carmeli et al.

Functional attributes Accompanying attributes

Idealized influence/charisma Vision

Trust
Respect
Risk-sharing
Integrity
Modeling
Inspirational motivation Commitment to goals
Communication
Enthusiasm
Intellectual stimulation Rationality
Problem-solving
Individualized consideration Personal attention
Table 1. Mentoring
Attributes of Listening
transformational Empowerment
leadership Source(s): c.f. Stone et al. (2004)
(2015) have developed this construct that emphasizes on respect generating behavior by Leadership
interaction with each other. Research on this construct is underway to declare its complimented
distinctiveness from other relational constructs (Basit, 2019) as explained above; therefore,
empirical studies employing this construct are scant. In some studies, it has been discussed,
with respect
for instance, Friedman et al. (2018) have developed integrative logic to understand that how
and why respect engagement is important for fostering help-seeking behavior. Stephens and
Carmeli (2017) have studied the influence of respect engagement on creative work
involvement. Basit (2019) has studied respect engagement in relation to task performance.
However, it has been an underresearched dimension in the context of transformational
leadership and creativity.
2.3 Employee creativity
Creativity is a complex phenomenon (Jain and Jain, 2017). In the context of social process,
creativity refers to the process of novel and useful idea generation (Amabile, 1983; Woodman
et al., 1993; Perry-Smith, 2006). Individuals’ expertise, creative thinking skills and motivation
are the three main components of creativity (Amabile, 1998). Creativity is also defined in
terms of value and new thoughts, which augment the overall organizational process
effectiveness (Gong et al., 2009). employee creativity can be seen both at the individual and
group level (Zhou and Hoever, 2014). At the individual level, Amabile (1983) refers it to idea
generation, which is useful for an organization. At group level, Paulus (2008) defined it as a
shared activity in which a team of employee shares ideas regarding processes, products,
services and procedures (Shin and Zhou, 2007).
In the organizational perspective, Zhou and Hoever (2014) assert that employee creativity
plays a central role toward innovation and success. Recent studies on creativity have found
that psychological capital (Yu et al., 2019), perceived organizational politics (Malik et al., 2019),
high performance work system (Tang et al., 2017), empowering leadership (Zhang and Zhou,
2014), intrinsic motivation (Dewett, 2007), transformational leadership (Gumusluoglu and
Ilsev, 2009) and job dissatisfaction (Zhou and George, 2001) are the antecedents of creativity.
Apart from these antecedents of creativity, a recent study has found creativity to be a good
stress handler at work (Helzer and Kim, 2019). In this study, employee creativity is proposed
as a consequence of respect engagement.

3. Theory and hypotheses

3.1 Leader–member exchange (LMX) theory
The LMX’s basic premise revolves around the argument that leaders have a high quality
associated with their subordinates (Liden et al., 1997) and leader–follower association is an
essential part of the context of leadership effectiveness (Gottfredson et al., 2020). This theory
was introduced by Dansereau, Graen and colleagues during the 1970s and it was originally
called a vertical dyad linkage approach (Dansereau et al., 1975). In the past four decades, it has
witnessed a dramatic growth and shed light on how exchange in resources between leader
and follower influences both (Matta and Van Dyne, 2020). It also focuses on mutual respect
between leader and follower association (Carmeli et al., 2015). Even from the employee’s
perspective, the association of leader and follower is manifested by a high level of mutual
respect and support (Farr-Wharton et al., 2011). Arguably, in an organization, an association
of leaders with their subordinates may have the potential to get them engaged respectfully.
Under the theoretical underpinning of LMX, we have presented that manifestation of respect
from leaders has the potential to enhance the respectful engagement.

3.2 Transformational leadership and respectful engagement

A transformational leader has the ability to inspire others while securing respect from their
followers (Yukl, 2010). Undoubtedly, the prominence of respect in the workplace is associated
IJOEM with the presence of an effective leadership (Sarros et al., 2002; Charlesworth et al., 2003;
Bernthal and Wellins, 2005). In the context of transformational leadership, the behavior of a
leader is the reason to develop respect (Bass, 1985). When people have an active level of
engagement with each other, respect can be seen as a result of this identification. This
conception of respect is closely related to the transformational theory of leadership (Clarke,
2011). Thus, drawing on the theory of transformational leadership and the findings of
previous research studies, we hypothesize that:
H1. There is a significant positive relationship between transformational leadership and
respectful engagement.

3.3 Respectful engagement and employee creativity

Creativity as a social process has progressively gained prominence (Perry-Smith and
Mannucci, 2017). Earlier scholars have asserted that interacting with each other can amplify
the creative process (Woodman et al., 1993; Simonton, 1984). In this regard, social network
perspective has extensively been used in the realm of creativity and innovation (Obstfeld,
2005; Tsai, 2001). Perry-Smith and Mannucci (2017) have argued that for creativity and
innovation, the idea journey passes through four phases, i.e. generation, elaboration,
championing and implementation. In all these phases the creator of the idea has certain needs,
and individuals move successfully ahead when their needs are aligned with their network
and relational structure.
Several researchers have documented that individuals hold different kinds of
relationships at the workplace, which influence their motivation and engagement of
creative behavior (c.f Stephens and Carmeli, 2017). This includes but is not limited to
relationships with coworkers (Hargadon and Bechky, 2006; Madjar et al., 2011) and
supervisor (e.g. Mainemelis et al., 2015; Shalley and Gilson, 2004).
The phenomenon of creativity involves the social interaction process (Csikszentmihalyi,
1990). This interaction is interpersonal in nature due to which value and worth emerge in the
form of respect (Carmeli et al., 2015). Theorists of social network argue that any individual’s
social interaction has an influence on their idea generation capacity (Burt, 2004). Further, in
this context, Chen et al. (2008) have suggested that creativity is influenced by such
interactions. Soda and Buzzi (2012) have argued that social interaction creates positive as well
as negative impact on creativity. In such interactions, based upon the study of Carmeli et al.
(2015), it is further argued that respectful engagement and employee creativity are associated
with each other both at the individual and group levels. When employees are engaged in a
respectful manner in the workplace, they perceive it as acceptance by others in the team
(Strom and Strom, 1987). Such acceptance triggers positive emotions which further supports
individuals in capacity building to acquire durable resources such as creativity (Carmeli
et al., 2015).
Stephens and Carmeli (2017) stated that “particularized respect that focuses on a focal
individual’s attributes can be particularly impactful, and would focus on the worth of their
creative activities”. In LMX theory “professional respect” is one of the dimensions of the
relationship quality (c.f. Stephens and Carmeli, 2017). According to Liden and Maslyn (1998)
this professional respect reflects an individual’s sense of being acknowledged for their
capabilities. In view of the discussed literature, it is hypothesized that:
H2. There is a significant positive relationship between respectful engagement and
employee creativity
3.4 Respectful engagement as mediator
Respect is discussed substantially in the contemporary agendas of different organizations for
elevation of diversity (Emmott and Worman, 2008) and support of flexibility (Fleetwood,
2007). Treating others with fairness and impartiality signals one’s self-worth (Clarke, 2011). Leadership
Particularly, this respectful behavior from people in authority in an organizational setting complimented
conveys to others that they are being valued and respected (Clarke, 2011). Further, while
discussing the respectful engagement in organizations, Carmeli et al. (2015) argued that
with respect
respect actually has substantial influence on an employee’s creativity (see Figure 1).
Transformational leadership theory posits that supervisory support lessens the fear of
subordinates of being isolated and disintegrated from their supervisors. Further, individuals
tend to participate in the creative process as a result of supervisors vesting such support and
trust in their subordinates (c.f. Azim et al., 2019). The leader–follower relationship building on
such grounds (i.e. trust and support) results in positive behavioral outcomes (Mittal and Dhar,
2015; Wang et al., 2014; Jaiswal and Dhar, 2015). This relationship is best explained by the
LMX theory that discusses the two-way process of leader–follower relationship (Graen and
Uhl-Bien, 1995). As reflected in the LMX theory, leader and follower are emotionally attached
to each other because of mutual respect. Eventually, this respectful engagement leads to the
subordinates’ creativity. As argued by Tierney and Farmer (2002), a supervisor’s verbal
endorsement of their subordinates’ traits (e.g. respect, trust, confidence) may lead to
creativity. Drawing on these arguments and LMX theory, we propose that:
H3. Respectful engagement mediates the relationship between transformational
leadership and employee creativity.

4. Methodology
4.1 Measures
We used prevalidated scales for all the constructs being used in the study on a 5-point Likert
scale, where 1 represents “strongly disagree” and 5 represents “strongly agree”. Separate
questionnaires were used to obtain the responses from the participants (see Appendix 1) and
their respective supervisors (see Appendix 2). Transformational leadership was measured
using a 7-item leadership questionnaire developed by Carless et al. (2000). A sample item is:
“my supervisor communicates a clear and positive vision of the future”. The construct reflects
a good value of internal consistency (α 5 0.880). Respectful engagement was measured using
a 9-item scale developed by Carmeli et al. (2015). A sample item is “organizational members
here are always available to hear out and listen to each other”. The construct had a good
reliability (α 5 0.873). A 4-item scale, developed by Tierney and Farmer (2011), was used to
measure the employee creativity through their immediate supervisors. A sample item is “this
subordinate identifies opportunities for new ways of dealing work”. The construct had a good
reliability (α 5 0.793).

4.2 Control variables

Recent studies on creativity (e.g. Mittal and Dhar, 2015; Jaiswal and Dhar, 2015) have
suggested and empirically demonstrated that variables such as respondents’ age, gender,
qualification and experience should be controlled during analysis, as these can develop
expertise and knowledge, which may further act as a catalyst for creative performance
(Richter et al., 2012). Therefore, we controlled the study for gender, age, qualification and
experience.

Figure 1.
The proposed model
for leadership, respect,
and creativity
relationship
IJOEM 4.3 Sample and data collection
Data for this study were collected from tourism and hospitality industry employees located in
15 selected cities of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. We restricted our survey to these
identified cities in order to meet the sample selection criteria (five-star hotels). We rendered
the services of a locally renowned travels and tours agency to compile the detail of five-star
hotels across the country. Finally, with the coordination of the agency, we had the details (e.g.
city, category, email) of 36 hotels. We developed two electronic mail surveys, one for
employees to capture the details regarding transformational leadership and respectful
engagement (Appendix 1), and second for supervisors to evaluate the creativity of their
respective subordinates (Appendix 2).
The link to an online questionnaire was sent to either the human resources representative
or the administrator of each hotel via email. The linked questionnaires were complemented
with instructions asking the employees and their respective supervisors to submit completed
surveys. Each questionnaire pertaining to the supervisors was marked with a unique code.
All supervisors were instructed to communicate the code to their respective subordinates and
further to ask them to mention this code on their responses in order to connect the responses
of subordinates with their respective supervisors. According to Heerwegh (2009) and
Saunders et al. (2007), when the target or potential respondents are geographically dispersed,
electronic mail surveys are the most appropriate technique to adopt. Also, this technique
serves to minimize the likelihood of social desirability bias (Heerwegh, 2009). In January 2019,
all the resource persons (36 in total) were contacted via email for data collection. This was
then followed by five fortnightly follow-ups. We also used personal references to accelerate
the data collection process and to increase the response rate. After four months, by the end of
April 2019, we had 300 responses in total out of 635, reflecting a response rate of 47%. After
excluding responses with missing values and responses with suspicious patterns (Hair et al.,
2014), we had 288 responses left for further analysis (see Table 2).

Frequency employees Frequency supervisors

Category (n 5 288) % (n 5 36) %

Gender
Male 163 56.60 27 75.00
Female 125 43.40 9 25.00
Age
20–30 years 112 38.89 5 13.89
31–40 years 94 32.64 18 50.00
41–50 years 82 28.47 13 36.11
Qualification
College diploma/ 223 77.43 19 52.78
certificate
Undergraduate degree 38 13.19 8 22.22
Postgraduate degree 27 9.38 9 25.00
Experience
1–5 years 129 44.79 5 13.89
6–10 years 113 39.24 9 25.00
11–15 years 21 7.29 13 36.11
Table 2. 16–20 years 16 5.56 5 13.89
Respondents’ profile Above 20 years 9 3.13 4 11.11
4.4 Missing values treatment Leadership
Little (1988) believes that “missing data is a pervasive problem in sample surveys” (p. 287) complimented
and handling this phenomenon has been a challenge in social sciences research like tourism
and hospitality (Rezaei et al., 2016). Though there are several remedies to address this issue,
with respect
the method of multiple imputations is considered as most reliable (Rezaei and Ghodsi, 2014).
The method of multiple imputation (Rubin, 1987) is “a simulation technique that replaces each
missing datum with a set of complete data > 1 plausible values” (Schafer and Olsen, 1998,
p. 545). We used Little’s (1988) expectation maximization algorithm through SPSS software to
achieve the purpose of imputation of missing values. The results confirmed that missing
values in our data are at random (χ 2 5 210.95, df 5 189, p 5 0.131).

4.5 Assessment of common method variance (CMV) and nonresponse bias

Occurrence of CMV is very common in survey-based research (Schwarz et al., 2017). When
data are collected through a single source, there are chances that covariance may exist among
the measured items (Hair et al., 2014). Following the recommendations of Reio (2010) and
Schwarz et al. (2017), we took procedural and statistical measures to lessen the extent of CMV.
At the process level, secrecy and confidentiality of the respondents was maintained, pilot
testing was done to assess the understandability level of the questionnaire’s contents, and
clear instructions were issued to fill in the questionnaire via separate document. At the
statistical level, Harman’s (1967) single-factor technique was employed to check the existence
of CMV. The outcomes of both the procedural and statistical treatments confirmed that CMV
is not an issue in our data.
As defined by Lewis et al. (2013), nonresponse bias is “a systematic and significant
difference between those who respond to a survey and those who do not in terms of
characteristics central to the research focus” (pp. 240–241). We performed wave analysis to
gauge the potential issues of nonresponse bias within the data. To achieve this, we classified
the responses obtained within the first month as “early respondents” and those who
responded within the last month were grouped as “late respondents”. An independent sample
t-test was performed, which confirmed that no significant difference exists between both
groups (early respondents and late respondents) in terms of their response to the
questionnaire.

4.6 Structural equation modeling

We applied a partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) technique to
analyze the measurement model (parametric evaluation) and structural model (hypothesis
evaluation). PLS-SEM has gained more recognition as compared to other competing
applications due to its rigorousness (Penga and Lai, 2012). We used PLS-SEM for three
reasons; first, it is being preferred for empirical studies on tourism and hospitality research
(Jeon et al., 2019; Bilro et al., 2018); second, our study involves the forecasting of relevant
dependent variables (Roldan and Franco, 2012) and third, due to the presence of an additional
variable between the dependent and independent variable in the study (i.e. respectful
engagement as a mediator between transformational leadership and employee creativity) (c.f.
Memon et al., 2017).
Sarstedt (2008) believes that it is more appropriate to explain and examine the complex
structures through variance-based structural equation modeling as compared to covariance-
based structural equation modeling techniques. Further, flexible nature of PLS-SEM
regarding normality of data and sample size requirement is an added advantage of the
application (Vinzi et al., 2010). PLS-SEM also allows the estimation of heterogeneity within the
path models. Following the suggestions of Henseler (2010) and Chin (2010), we applied two-
stage technique of model evaluation, i.e. the measurement model evaluation followed by the
structural model evaluation.
IJOEM 5. Results
5.1 Measurement model
Mean, standard deviation and correlation of variables are reported in Table 3.
Transformational leadership was found to be positively correlated with respectful
engagement (r 5 0.534) and employee creativity (r 5 0.264). Further, respectful
engagement and employee creativity were also significantly related (r 5 0.397).
We tested the measurement model to examine the reliability (internal) and validity
(convergent and discriminant) of the constructs. Internal reliability reflects the level to which
the items of a particular construct are representative of the respective latent construct
(Ramayah et al., 2016; Hair et al., 2014). Internal reliability was examined through composite
reliability (CR) (Hair et al., 2017). The minimum recommended value of CR is 0.7 (Richter et al.,
2012). The results of the measurement model evaluation indicated that all the constructs had
a value of CR above the cut-off value (0.70) – transformational leadership (0.90), respectful
engagement (0.89) and employee creativity (0.86) – thereby reflecting that measures of the
study have good internal consistency (See Table 4).
As defined by Hair et al. (2017), convergent validity (CV) refers to “the extent to which a
measure correlates positively with alternative measures of the same construct” (p. 112). We
assessed the CV through the outer loadings of the items and average variance extracted
(AVE). Normally, acceptable value of outer loadings should be 0.70 or higher, and for AVE,
the 0.5 is an acceptable value (Avkiran, 2017). However, as suggested by Chin et al. (1997),
value of 0.6 is also acceptable. Hair et al. (2017) in their extended explanation on the matter,
have suggested that the indicators showing weaker loadings may also be treated as good if
the items showing higher loadings can explicate 50% of the variance (AVE 5 0.50).
Discriminant validity (DV) reflects to the degree to which a given construct in the model is
dissimilar from the other constructs (Hair et al., 2017). Following the criteria of Fornell and
Larcker (1981), the results (see Table 5) indicated that the values of the square root of AVE are
higher than the values of correlation in the rows and columns. Moreover, we used heterotrait–
monotrait ratio (HTMT, Henseler et al., 2015) to evaluate the DV. Hair et al. (2017) suggest that
a value of HTMT higher that 0.9 indicates the absolute similarity among all the constructs in
a given model. Hence, DV becomes questionable in such cases. Our results (see Table 5)
indicate that the value of DV is adequate in our study. In conclusion, our measurement model
evaluation has confirmed the adequacy of the model in terms of internal reliability, CV and
DV (see Table 6).

5.2 Structural model

Before the examination of the structural model, we checked the model for any potential issue
of collinearity. Burns and Burns (2008) recommend that the value greater than 10 of variance

Variables Mean S.D. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

(1) Gender 1.43 0.50 1

(2) Age 1.90 0.82
0.008 1
(3) Education 1.32 0.64
0.098
0.050 1
(4) Experience 1.83 1.00
0.026 0.038
0.018 1
(5) Transformational 4.26 0.74
0.005 0.039
0.088 0.093 1
Table 3. leadership
Means, standard (6) Respectful engagement 3.94 0.68
0.012 0.020
0.010 0.041 0.534** 1
deviations and (7) Employee creativity 3.76 0.80
0.044
0.049
0.041 0.036 0.264** 0.397** 1
correlation of variables Note(s): n 5 288, **p < 0.01 (two-tailed)
Construct and items Loadings CRa AVEb
Leadership
complimented
Transformational leadership (TL) (α 5 0.880) 0.905 0.578 with respect
My supervisor . . .
Communicates a clear and positive vision of the future (TL1) 0.723
Treats staff members as individuals, supports and encourages their 0.742
development (TL2)
Gives encouragement and recognition to staff members (TL3) 0.812
Fosters trust, involvement and cooperation among team members (TL4) 0.833
Encourages thinking about problems in new ways and questions assumptions 0.741
(TL5)
Is clear about his/her values and practices what he/she preaches (TL6) 0.714
Instills pride and respect in others and inspires me by being highly competent 0.749
(TL7)
Respectful engagement (RE) (α 5 0.873) 0.899 0.500
My supervisor . . .
Is always available to hear out and listen to each other (RE1) 0.720
Pays the utmost attention to each other’s needs (RE2) deleted
Expresses genuine interest in each other’s position and the units he/she is 0.748
managing and responsible for (RE3)
Recognizes and understands what goes into each other’s work (RE4) 0.714
Emphasizes other members’ good sides (RE5) 0.730
Expresses appreciation and respects for each other’s contribution to the 0.731
organization (RE6)
Appreciates how valuable other members’ time is (RE7) 0.718
Make requests, not demands from each other (RE8) 0.705
Speaks to each other in a respectful rather than in a demanding way (RE9) 0.749
Employee creativity (EC) (α 5 0.793) 0.863 0.612
This subordinate . . .
Identifies opportunities for new ways of dealing work (EC1) 0.786
Seeks new ideas and ways to solve problems (EC2) 0.851
Generates novel, but operable work-related ideas (EC3) 0.785
Demonstrates originality in his/her work (EC4) 0.700
Note(s): a Composite reliability 5 (square of the summation of the factor loadings) / [square of the summation
of the factor loadings) þ (square of the summation of the error variance)]; b AVE 5 (Summation of squared Table 4.
factor loadings) / (Summation of squared factor loadings) (Summation of error variances); RE2 was removed Validity and reliability
due to low factor loadings; α 5 Cronbach’s alpha of constructs

Construct EC RE TL

Fornell and Larcker’s (1981) criterion

Employee creativity (EC) 0.782
Respectful engagement (RE) 0.529 0.706
Transformational leadership (TL) 0.380 0.694 0.760
Heterotrait–monotrait ratio (HTMT)
Employee creativity (EC)
Respectful engagement (RE) 0.593
Transformational leadership (TL) 0.390 0.733 Table 5.
Note(s): The italicized off-diagonal values are the square root of AVEs Discriminant validity
IJOEM inflation factor (VIF) is an indication of multicollinearity. Conversely, Hair et al. (2014) are of
the view that a value of 5.0 is an indication of the presence of multicollinearity. For all the
constructs in our model, VIF value was below 5.0, indicating that the collinearity is not an
issue in our data.
We employed bootstrapping technique with 5,000 resample to calculate the significance of
our proposed theoretical model (Hair et al., 2017). Table 7 shows the results of causal
relationship between the variables, which are also being demonstrated in Figure 2. We found
a positive relationship of transformational leadership and respectful engagement (H1:
β 5 0.694, p < 0.01, LL: 0.638, UL: 0.758). Thus, the H1 was accepted as we proposed. Further,
respectful engagement was also found to be related to employee creativity (H2: β 5 0.512,
p < 0.01, LL: 0.376, UL: 0. 0.632), as we hypothesized. Thus, the H2 was also accepted. Latest
quantitative methodologies treat total effects or direct effects as least important while
analyzing mediating models (Hayes and Rockwood, 2016; Rucker et al., 2011). Hence, we
tested indirect effect instead. We examined the mediating role of respectful engagement on
the relationship between transformational leadership and employee creativity, and found
that respectful engagement mediates the relationship between transformational leadership
and employee creativity (H3: β 5 0.355, p < 0.01, LL: 0.261, UL: 0. 0.455). Thus, the H3 was
accepted. However, a direct link between transformational leadership and employee

Constructs Items TL RE EC

Transformational leadership (TL) TL1 0.723 0.684 0.471

TL2 0.742 0.380 0.204
TL3 0.812 0.526 0.199
TL4 0.833 0.590 0.284
TL5 0.741 0.407 0.205
TL6 0.714 0.415 0.165
TL7 0.749 0.526 0.340
Respectful engagement (RE) RE1 0.460 0.720 0.298
RE3 0.580 0.748 0.407
RE4 0.423 0.714 0.355
RE5 0.429 0.730 0.457
RE6 0.618 0.731 0.379
RE7 0.397 0.718 0.303
RE8 0.602 0.705 0.487
RE9 0.443 0.749 0.338
Employee creativity (EC) EC1 0.411 0.530 0.786
Table 6. EC2 0.292 0.401 0.851
Discriminant validity – EC3 0.287 0.364 0.785
loading and cross EC4 0.115 0.293 0.700
loading criterion Note(s): Italicized values are loadings for items that are above the recommended value i.e. 0.5

Hypothesis Path β t-value CI (LL, UL) R2 Q2 f2 Decision

H1 TL → RE 0.694 22.15* 0.638, 0.758 0.481 0.214 0.927 Supported

H2 RE → EC 0.512 7.72* 0.376, 0.632 0.280 0.151 0.189 Supported
Table 7. H3 TL → RE → EC 0.355 6.84* 0.261, 0.455 Supported
Results of structural Note(s): TL 5 Transformational leadership, RE 5 Respectful engagement, EC 5 Employee creativity;
model assessment CI 5 Confidence interval, LL 5 Lower level, UL 5 Upper level; *p < 0.01
 Leadership
complimented
with respect

Figure 2.
Structural equation
modeling of the
proposed model

creativity was not supported (β 5 0.024, p < 0.760, LL:
0.133, UL: 0.183) which implies that
respectful engagement fully mediates the relationship between transformational leadership
and employee creativity.
Following the guidelines of Hair et al. (2017), we also calculate the coefficient of
determination (R2), effect size (f2) and predictive relevance (Q2). Theoretically, R2 refers to the
degree to which an independent variable explains the variance in the corresponding
dependent variable. The results show that transformational leadership explains a sizeable
variance in respectful engagement (R2 5 0.481), and that respectful engagement also explains
a considerable variance in employee creativity (R2 5 0.280). The magnitude of the
contribution of each independent variable to the R2 of the respective dependent variable is
termed as effect size (f2). As suggested by Cohen (1988), f2 5 0.02 shows small effect size,
f2 5 0.15 shows medium effect size and f2 5 0.35 shows large effect size. The results show
that transformational leadership on respectful engagement (f2 5 0.927) has a large effect and
respectful engagement on employee creativity (f2 5 0.189) has a medium effect. Next, Q2
refers to the predictive power (out-of-sample) of a model for a particular construct (Hair et al.,
2014). As recommended by Hair et al. (2014), “Q2 values larger than zero for a certain reflective
endogenous latent variable indicate the path model’s predictive relevance for the particular
construct” (p. 178). The results indicate an acceptable extent of predictability for
transformational leadership on respectful engagement (Q2 5 0.214) and employee
creativity (Q2 5 0.151).
IJOEM Regarding control variables, we found no relationship between employees creativity and
demographic variables (gender, age, education and experience). Despite having evidence that
employee creativity is related to employees’ gender, age, education and experience (Richter
et al., 2012); some recent studies have found no such relationship (e.g. Abdelmotaleb et al.,
2018). However, there are also some studies which found a partial relationship between
employee creativity and demographic variables. For example, Wang et al. (2014) in their
empirical study on hospitality and tourism have found that employee creativity and gender
are significantly related.

6. Discussion and implications

The last two decades have witnessed a substantial growth in the volume of transformational
leadership research in relation to various work-related outcomes (Mittal and Dhar, 2015), job
satisfaction (Elenkov, 2002; Miao et al., 2018 Shah et al., 2017; Barnett, 2018) and
organizational performance (Ogbonna and Harris, 2000; Wang and Rode, 2010; Chammas
and Hernandez, 2019). Drawing on the previous findings that transformational leadership
style is a significant predictor of various job-related outcomes, the current scholarship on the
transformational leadership is more focused on the employee performance (e.g. Buil et al.,
2018), for example the employee creativity (Jaiswal and Dhar, 2015; Zhang et al., 2018).
However, the mediating mechanism of various antecedents of employee creativity (Jaiswal
and Dhar, 2015) has not been addressed adequately in the past. The present study
investigates the mediating role of respectful engagement on the relationship between
transformational leadership and employee creativity in the tourism and hospitality industry
of Pakistan.
The results of this study have confirmed that there exists a significant positive
relationship between transformational leadership and respectful engagement. This finding
has the support of previous literature that transformational leadership among other
leadership styles is the reason to develop respect (Bass, 1985) among subordinates. A
respectful culture at the workplace is always desirable and can be fostered well both
vertically and horizontally through transformational leadership style. The study also found a
significant positive relationship between respectful engagement and employee creativity.
This outcome is also consistent with the findings of past studies (e.g. Carmeli et al., 2015). This
finding has led us to suggest that employees tend to behave creatively and innovatively when
they perceive that they are being treated fairly and respectfully at the workplace. Lastly, in
line with the findings of previous scholarships, the study further confirmed that respectful
engagement mediates the relationship between transformational leadership and employee
creativity. Integrating the findings of previous studies (e.g. of Bass, 1985 for transformational
leadership effect on respectful engagement, and of Carmeli et al., 2015 for respectful
engagement effect on employee creativity), we endorse and add to the claim of Jaiswal and
Dhar (2015) that the transformational leadership style is related to the employee creativity
but this relationship holds in the presence of respectful engagement.

6.1 Theoretical implications

In theoretical sense, this research has contributed by raising a new explanation of respectful
engagement as a mediator between transformational leadership and employee creativity.
Under the underpinnings of transformational leadership, LMX theory and social network
framework; respectful engagement transfers the impact of transformational leadership
toward employee creativity. Previous literature is scant in examining the mediating role of
respectful engagement between transformational leadership and employee creativity.
Our study contributes to the existing literature on tourism and hospitality in a couple of
ways. Firstly, we have integrated the theories of transformational leadership, employee
engagement and employee creativity. Previous studies have explored several mediating Leadership
mechanisms of the relationship between transformational leadership and employee creativity complimented
(e.g. Jaiswal and Dhar, 2015; Wang et al., 2014). However, despite having empirical evidence
that respectful engagement may foster employee creativity, there is a lack of research as to
with respect
how employees can be engaged respectfully for creative outcomes. Secondly, this is the first
study that examines the respectful engagement as a mediator between transformational
leadership and employee creativity in the tourism and hospitality industry. In the hospitality
industry, critical success factors like quality of service, competitive advantage and
profitability are achieved and maintained through the creativity of employees (Lin and
Wu, 2008; Robinson and Beesley, 2010; Wong and Pang, 2003). Thus, our model having
strong theoretical and empirical foundation, can be used to gauge the extent to which the
transformational leadership impacts the employee creativity through respectful engagement.

6.2 Practical implications

This research proposes many real time implications for the management and the managers of
the tourism and hospitality industry. The role of leadership, as evident both from the past
literature and the results of our study, is critical in developing creative vibes among
subordinates. As suggested by Horng et al. (2016), “the leader of an organization should
literally ‘take the lead’ in supporting new ideas and being creative”. This implies that creative
aptitude of subordinates does not work well unless it is supplemented with supervisory
support and initiatives. Managers can optimize employees’ perception of being listened to,
motivated, recognized and appreciated by their line manager through their transformational
leadership style. This leader–follower relational perspective supports the development of
confidence and creativity among subordinates that further impacts customer satisfaction and
loyalty (Wang et al., 2014).
Managers and individuals in supervisory roles are suggested to revisit their relationship
with their subordinates. Our results have led us to suggest that management of hotels and
tourism companies build an inventory of traits that reflect the transformational leadership
style. Also, they should embed these traits in people on supervisory roles. Individuals having
traits similar to that of a transformational leader can better develop a culture where
subordinates are treated respectfully by line managers that further encourage them to
develop creative behaviors (Tyler and Lind, 1992). All member hotels of Pakistan Hotel
Association offer best-in-class luxury hotel services. These member hotels have proper
human resource or administration department. Contrary to the practices of human resource
management at corporate level, administration of human resource in Pakistan hotel industry
is of classical nature. There is lack of strategic human resource management and in-house
experts. Therefore, ex-house expert consultancy should be a preferred option for the hotel
management to build and implement traits inventory of transformational leadership.
Transformational leaders show greater concern for their subordinates, regarding their
problems of domestic nature and continuously strive for their well-being. Consequently, a
sense of being respected and owned is developed among the employees, which triggers their
instinct of creative behavior (Shin and Zhou, 2003). Hence, managers can maintain
relationship with their subordinates other than professional affiliation for building a gesture
of mutual respect. Drawing on this finding, there is need to develop a mechanism of leader–
follower interaction – which should not merely a reflection of professional association.
Building closed social media groups can be a good idea to provide space to the subordinates
to echo their domestic concerns. Hence, individuals at leadership role in hotel industry should
interact with their subordinates through some informal channel. Moreover, transformational
leaders can strategically compact the leader–follower distance to develop an interactive work
environment – necessary to shift the conventional approach of the subordinates’ of doing
work to an innovative and creative perspective (Mittal and Dhar, 2015).
IJOEM 6.3 Limitations and future research directions
This study has certain limitations. Firstly, our proposed integrated model is based on theories
developed in the West, but we have collected data from employees of the hotel and tourism
industry in Pakistan to check the model empirically. Therefore, it is suggested to interpret
and apply the results of this study with caution. Future researchers may replicate this study
across cultures to increase its validity. Secondly, the study collects data through cross-
sectional survey design, therefore the variability on causality over the time among the study
constructs is hard to establish. Future studies may adopt longitudinal study design to
overcome this weakness. Thirdly, the study may be replicated across industries other than
the tourism and hospitality sector to revalidate the results and to test the extent to which the
study can be generalized.

6.4 Conclusion
Previous research has well documented the impact of the transformational leadership on
employee creativity. However, respectful engagement has been an underresearched concept
in an organizational setting; particularly, in the tourism and hospitality industry. The present
research seeks to fulfill the gap pertaining to the missing link of the respectful engagement as
a mediator between the transformational leadership and employee creativity in the
hospitality and tourism industry of Pakistan. In this context, our data supported that
transformational leadership style fosters respectful engagement at the workplace, which in
turn, triggers the employee creativity.

References
Abdelmotaleb, M., Mohamed Metwally, A.B.E. and Saha, S.K. (2018), “Exploring the impact of being
perceived as a socially responsible organization on employee creativity”, Management Decision,
Vol. 56 No. 11, pp. 2325-2340.
Amabile, T.M., Barsade, S.G., Mueller, J.S. and Staw, B.M. (2005), “Affect and creativity at work”,
Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 50 No. 3, pp. 367-403.
Amabile, T.M. (1983), The Social Psychology of Creativity, Springer-Verlag, New York.
Amabile, T.M. (1988), “A model of creativity and innovation in organizations”, Research in
Organizational Behavior, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 123-167.
Amabile, T.M. (1998), How to Kill Creativity, Vol. 87, Harvard Business School Publishing,
Boston, MA.
Arif, A.M. and Shikirullah, A.S. (2019), “Tourism problems in Pakistan: an analysis of earlier
investigations”, Walia Journal, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 122-126.
Avkiran, N.K. (2017), An In-Depth Discussion and Illustration of Partial Least Squares Structural
Equation Modeling in Health Care, Health Care Management Science, pp. 1-8.
Azim, M.T.A., Fan, L., Uddin, M.A., Jilani, M.M.A.K. and Begum, S. (2019), “Linking transformational
leadership with employees’engagement in the creative process”, Management Research Review,
Vol. 42 No. 7, pp. 837-858.
Balwant, P.T., Mohammed, R. and Singh, R. (2019), “Transformational leadership and employee
engagement in Trinidad’s service sector”, International Journal of Emerging Markets, Vol. 15
No. 4, pp. 691-715.
Barnett, D.E. (2018), “Online adjunct faculty: a quantitative examination of the predictive relationship
between leadership and job satisfaction”, International Journal of Research in Education and
Science, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 226-236.
Basit, A.A. (2019), “Examining how respectful engagement affects task performance and affective
organizational commitment”, Personnel Review, Vol. 48 No. 3, pp. 644-658.
Bass, B.M. and Avolio, B.J. (2000), MLQ Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire, Mind Garden, Redwood Leadership
City, CA.
complimented
Bass, B.M. and Riggio, R.E. (2006), Transformational Leadership, Psychology Press.
with respect
Bass, B.M. and Stogdill, R.M. (1990), Bass and Stogdill’s Handbook of Leadership: Theory, Research,
and Managerial Applications, Simon and Schuster.
Bass, B.M., Avolio, B.J. and Goodheim, L. (1987), “Biography and the assessment of transformational
leadershipat the world-class level”, Journal of Management, Vol. 13, pp. 7-19, doi: 10.1177/
014920638701300102.
Bass, B.M. (1985), Leadership and Performance beyond Expectation, Harper, New York.
Bass, B.M. (1990), “From transactional to transformational leadership: learning to share the vision”,
Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 18, pp. 19-32.
Baumeister, R. and Leary, M.R. (1995), “The need to belong: desire for interpersonal attachments as a
fundamental human motivation”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 117 No. 3, pp. 497-529.
Belias, D., Koustelios, A. and Gkolia, A. (2015), “Leadership style and job satisfaction of Greek
banking institutions”, International Journal of Management and Business Research, Vol. 5 No. 3,
pp. 237-248.
Bernthal, P.R. and Wellins, R. (2005), United Kingdom Global Comparison: Leadership Forecast 2005 -
2006: Best Practices for Tomorrow's Global Leaders, Development Dimensions International,
Pittsburgh, PA.
Bilro, R.G., Loureiro, S.M.C. and Ali, F. (2018), “The role of website stimuli of experience on
engagement and brand advocacy”, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology, Vol. 9 No. 2,
pp. 204-222.
Bono, J.E. and Judge, T.A. (2004), “Personality and transformational and transactional leadership: a
meta-analysis”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 89 No. 5, p. 901.
Breevaart, K. and Bakker, A.B. (2018), “Daily job demands and employee work engagement: the role of
daily transformational leadership behavior”, Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, Vol. 23
No. 3, p. 338.
Buil, I., Martinez, E. and matute, J. (2018), “Transformational leadership and employee performance:
the role of identification, engagement and proactive personality”, International Journal of
Hospitality Management, Vol. 77, pp. 64-75.
Burns, R.B. and Burns, R.A. (2008), Business Research Methods and Statistics Using SPSS, SAGE, Los
Angeles, CA.
Burns, J.M. (1978), Leadership, Harper & Row, New York.
Burt, R.S. (2004), “Structural holes and good ideas”, American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 10 No. 2,
pp. 349-399.
Carless, S.A., Wearing, A.J. and Mann, L. (2000), “A short measure of transformational leadership”,
Journal of Business and Psychology, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 389-405.
Carmeli, A., Dutton, J.E. and Hardin, A.E. (2015), “Respect as an engine for new ideas: linking
respectful engagement, relational information processing and creativity among employees and
teams”, Human Relations, Vol. 68 No. 6, pp. 1021-1047.
Chammas, C.B. and Hernandez, J.M.D.C. (2019), “Comparing transformational and instrumental
leadership: the influence of different leadership styles on individual employee and financial
performance in Brazilian startups”, Innovation and Management Review, Vol. 16 No. 2,
pp. 143-160.
Chang, S., Gong, Y. and Shum, C. (2011), “Promoting innovation in hospitality companies through
human resource management practices”, International Journal of Hospitality Management,
Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 812-818.
IJOEM Charlesworth, K., Cook, P. and Crozier, G. (2003), Leading Change in the Public Sector: Making the
Difference, Chartered Management Institute, London.
Chen, M., Chang, Y. and Hung, S. (2008), “Social capital and creativity in R&D project teams”, R&D
Management, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 21-34.
Chiaburu, D.S. and Harrison, D.A. (2008), “Do peers make the place? Conceptual synthesis and
metaanalysis of co-worker effects on perceptions, attitudes, OCBs and performance”, Journal of
Applied Psychology, Vol. 93 No. 5, pp. 1082-1103.
Chin, W.W., Gopal, A. and Salisbury, W.D. (1997), “Advancing the theory of adaptive structuration:
the development of a scale to measure faithfulness of appropriation”, Information Systems
Research, Vol. 8, pp. 342-367.
Chin, W.W. (2010), “How to write up and report PLS analyses”, in Esposito Vinzi, V., Chin, W.W.,
Henseler, J. and Wang, H. (Eds), Handbook of Partial Least Squares, Springer, Berlin,
Heidelberg, pp. 655-690.
Clarke, M. (2011), “Advancing women’s careers through leadership development programs”, Employee
Relations, Vol. 33 No. 5, pp. 498-515.
Claver-Cortes, E., Molina-Azorın, J.F. and Pereira-Moliner, J. (2006), “Strategic groups in the hospitality
industry: intergroup and intragroup performance differences in Alicante, Spain”, Tourism
Management, Vol. 27 No. 6, pp. 1101-1116.
Cohen, J. (1988), Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed., Lawrence Erlbaum,
Hillsdale, NJ.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990), “The domain of creativity”, in Runco, M.A. and Albert, R.S. (Eds),
Theories of Creativity, Sage Publications, Inc, Thousand Oaks, CA, US.
Dansereau, F. Jr, Graen, G. and Haga, W.J. (1975), “A vertical dyad linkage approach to leadership
within formal organizations: a longitudinal investigation of the role making process”,
Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 46-78.
Dewett, T. (2007), “Linking intrinsic motivation, risk taking, and employee creativity in an R&D
environment”, R&D Management, Vol. 37 No. 3, pp. 197-208.
Dutton, J.E. (2003), Energize Your Workplace: How to Create and Sustain High Quality Relationships at
Work, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Edmondson, A.C. (1999), “Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams”, Administrative
Science Quarterly, Vol. 44 No. 2, pp. 350-383.
Elenkov, D.S. (2002), “Effects of leadership on organizational performance in Russian companies”,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 55 No. 6, pp. 467-480.
Ellemers, N., Pagliaro, S. and Barreto, M. (2013), “Morality and behavioural regulation in groups: a
social identity approach”, European Review of Social Psychology, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 160-193.
Emmott, M. and Worman, D. (2008), “The steady rise of CSR and diversity in the workplace”, Strategic
HR Review, Vol. 7 No. 5, pp. 28-33.
Farr-Wharton, R., Brunetto, Y. and Shacklock, K. (2011), “Professionals’ supervisor–subordinate
relationships, autonomy and commitment in Australia: a leader–member exchange theory
perspective”, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 22 No. 17,
pp. 3496-3512.
Fleetwood, S. (2007), “Why work life balance now”, International Journal of HRM, Vol. 18 No. 3,
pp. 387-400.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable
variables and measurement errors”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50.
Friedman, A., Carmeli, A. and Dutton, J.E. (2018), “When does respectful engagement with one’s
supervisor foster help-seeking behaviors and performance?”, Journal of Vocational Behavior,
Vol. 104, pp. 184-198.
George, J.M. (2007), “Creativity in organizations”, The Academy of Management Annals, Vol. 1 No. 1, Leadership
pp. 439-477.
complimented
Gong, Y., Huang, J.C. and Farh, J.L. (2009), “Employee learning orientation, transformational
leadership, and employee creativity: the mediating role of employee creative self-efficacy”,
with respect
Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 52 No. 4, pp. 765-778.
Gottfredson, R.K., Wright, S.L. and Heaphy, E.D. (2020), “A critique of the Leader-Member Exchange
construct: back to square one”, The Leadership Quarterly, In Press, doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2020.
101385.
Gottman, J.M. (1994), Why Marriages Succeed or Fail. . . and How You Can Make Yours Last, Simon &
Schuster, New York.
Graen, G.B. and 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, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 219-247.
Gumusluoglu, L. and Ilsev, A. (2009), “Transformational leadership, creativity, and organizational
innovation”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 62, pp. 461-473.
Hair, F.J. Jr, Sarstedt, M., Hopkins, L. and Kuppelwieser, G.V. (2014), “Partial least squares structural
equation modeling (PLS-SEM) an emerging tool in business research”, European Business
Review, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 106-121.
Hair, J.F., Halt, G.T.M., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2017), A Primer on Partial Least Squares
Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), 2nd ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Hargadon, A.B. and Bechky, B.A. (2006), “When collections of creatives become creative collectives: a
field study of problem solving at work”, Organization Science, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 484-500.
Harman, H.H. (1967), Modern Factor Analysis, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
Hayes, A.F. and Rockwood, N.J. (2016), “Regression-based mediation and moderation analysis in
clinical research: observations, recommendations, and implementation”, Behaviour Research
and Therapy, Vol. 98, pp. 39-57.
Heerwegh, D. (2009), “Mode differences between face-to-face and web surveys: an experimental
investigation of data quality and social desirability effects”, International Journal of Public
Opinion Research, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 111-121.
Helzer, E.G. and Kim, S.H. (2019), “Creativity for workplace well-being”, Academy of Management
Perspectives, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 134-147.
Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2015), “A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity
in variance-based structural equation modeling”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 115-135, doi: 10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8.
Henseler, J. (2010), “On the convergence of the partial least squares path modeling algorithm”,
Computational Statistics, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 107-120.
Ho, J.P.Y., Victor Chen, D.T. and Ng, D. (2016), “Distributed leadership through the lens of activity
theory”, Educational Management Administration and Leadership, Vol. 44 No. 5, pp. 814-836.
HorngTsai, J.S.C.Y., Yang, T.C. and Liu, C.H. (2016), “Exploring the relationship between proactive
personality, work environment and employee creativity among tourism and hospitality
employees”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 54, pp. 25-34.
Ingram, D. (2018), Transformational Leadership vs. Transactional Leadership Definition, Chron.
Jain, R. and Jain, C. (2017), “Employee creativity: a conceptual framework”, Management and Labour
Studies, Vol. 41 No. 4, pp. 294-313.
Jaiswal, N.K. and Dhar, R.L. (2015), “Transformational leadership, innovation climate, creative self-
efficacy and employee creativity: a multilevel study”, International Journal of Hospitality
Management, Vol. 51, pp. 30-41.
IJOEM Jeon, H.M., Ali, F. and Lee, S.W. (2019), “Determinants of consumers’ intentions to use smartphones
apps for flight ticket bookings”, Service Industries Journal, Vol. 39 Nos 5-6, pp. 385-402.
Kim, H. (2014), “Transformational leadership, organizational clan culture, organizational affective
commitment, and organizational citizenship behavior: a case of South Korea’s public sector”,
Public Organization Review, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 397-417.
Lewis, E.F., Hardy, M. and Snaith, B. (2013), “An analysis of survey reporting in the imaging
professions: is the issue of non-response bias being adequately addressed?”, Radiography,
Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 240-245.
Liden, R.C. and Maslyn, J.M. (1998), “Multidimensionality of leader-member exchange: an empirical
assessment through scale development”, Journal of Management, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 43-72.
Liden, R.C., Sparrow, R.T. and Wayne, S.J. (1997), “Leader-member exchange theory: the past and
potential for the future”, Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, Vol. 15,
pp. 47-120.
Lin, C.T. and Wu, C.S. (2008), “Selecting a marketing strategy for private hotels in Taiwan using the
analytic hierarchy process”, Service Industries Journal, Vol. 28 No. 8, pp. 1077-1091.
Little, R.J. (1988), “A test of missing completely at random for multivariate data with mizsing values”,
Journal of the American Statistical Association, Vol. 83 No. 404, pp. 1198-1202.
Lord, R.G., Zaccaro, S.J., Day, D.V. and Avolio, B.J. (2017), “Leadership in applied psychology: three
waves of theory and research”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 102, pp. 434-451.
Madjar, N., Greenberg, E. and Chen, Z. (2011), “Factors for radical creativity, incremental creativity,
and routine, noncreative performance”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 96 No. 4, p. 730.
Mainemelis, C., Kark, R. and Epitropaki, O. (2015), “Creative leadership: a multi-context
conceptualization”, The Academy of Management Annals, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 393-482.
Malik, O.F., Shahzad, A., Raziq, M.M., Khan, M.M., Yusaf, S. and Khan, A. (2019), “Perceptions of
organizational politics, knowledge hiding, and employee creativity: the moderating role of
professional commitment”, Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 142, pp. 232-237.
Matta, F.K. and Van Dyne, L. (2020), “Understanding the disparate behavioral consequences of LMX
differentiation: the role of social comparison emotions”, Academy of Management Review,
Vol. 45 No. 1, pp. 154-180.
Mayer, R.C., Davis, J.H. and Schoorman, F.D. (1995), “An integrative model of organizational trust”,
Academy of Management Review, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 709-734.
Memon, M.A., Sallaeh, R., Baharom, M.N.R., Md Nordin, S. and Ting, H. (2017), “The relationship
between training satisfaction, organisational citizenship behaviour, and turnover intention: a
PLS-SEM approach”, Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance, Vol. 4
No. 3, pp. 267-290.
Miao, Q., Newman, A., Schwarz, G. and Cooper, B. (2018), “How leadership and public service
motivation enhance innovative behavior”, Public Administration Review, Vol. 78 No. 1, pp. 71-81.
Mittal, S. and Dhar, R.L. (2015), “Transformational leadership and employee creativity: mediating role
of creative self-efficacy and moderating role of knowledge sharing”, Management Decision,
Vol. 53 No. 5, pp. 894-910.
Mohsin, A. and Lockyer, T. (2010), “Customer perceptions of service quality in luxury hotels in New
Delhi, India: an exploratory study”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 160-173.
Obstfeld, D. (2005), “Social networks, the tertius iungens orientation, and involvement in innovation”,
Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 50 No. 1, pp. 100-130.
Ogbonna, E. and Harris, L.C. (2000), “Leadership style, organizational culture and performance:
empirical evidence from UK companies”, International Journal of Human Resource
Management, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 766-788.
Paulus, P.B. (2008), “Fostering creativity in groups and teams”, in Zhou, J. and Shalley, C.E. (Eds), Leadership
Handbook of Organizational Creativity, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New York, pp. 165-188.
complimented
Penga, D.X. and Lai, F. (2012), “Using partial least squares in operations management research: a
practical guideline and summary of past research”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 30
with respect
No. 6, pp. 467-480.
Perry-Smith, J.E. and Mannucci, P.V. (2017), “From creativity to innovation: the social network drivers
of the four phases of the idea journey”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 42 No. 1,
pp. 53-79.
Perry-Smith, J.E. (2006), “Social yet creative: the role of social relationships in facilitating individual
creativity”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 49 No. 1, pp. 85-101.
Pieterse, A.N., Van Knippenberg, D., Schippers, M. and Stam, D. (2010), “Transformational and
transactional leadership and innovative behavior: the moderating role of psychological
empowerment”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 609-623.
Ramayah, T., Cheah, J., Chuah, F., Ting, H. and Memon, M.A. (2016), Partial Least Squares Structural
Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) Using SmartPLS 3.0: An Updated and Practical Guide to
Statistical Analysis, Pearson, Singapore.
Reio, T.G. Jr (2010), “The threat of common method variance bias to theory building”, Human
Resource Development Review, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 405-411.
Rezaei, S. and Ghodsi, S.S. (2014), “Does value matters in playing online game? An empirical study
among massively multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPGs)”, Computers in Human
Behavior, Vol. 35, pp. 252-266.
Rezaei, S., Ali, F., Amin, M. and Jayashree, S. (2016), “Online impulse buying of tourism products: the
role of web site personality, utilitarian and hedonic web browsing”, Journal of Hospitality and
Tourism Technology, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 60-83.
Rhoades, L. and Eisenberger, R. (2002), “Perceived organizational support: a review of the literature”,
Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 87 No. 4, pp. 698-714.
Ribeiro, N., Duarte, A.P. and Filipe, R. (2018), “How authentic leadership promotes individual
performance: mediating role of organizational citizenship behavior and creativity”,
International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 67 No. 9,
pp. 1585-1607.
Richter, A.W., Hirst, G., Van Knippenberg, D. and Baer, M. (2012), “Creative self-efficacy and
individual creativity in team contexts: cross-level interactions with team informational
resources”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 97 No. 6, pp. 1282-1290.
Robinson, R.N. and Beesley, L.G. (2010), “Linkages between creativity and intention to quit: an
occupational study of chefs”, Tourism Management, Vol. 31 No. 6, pp. 765-776.
Rogers, C.R. (1967), “The interpersonal relationship: the core of guidance”, in Rogers, C.R. and Stevens,
B. (Eds), Person to Person, the Problem of Being Human, Pocket Books, New York, pp. 85-101.
Roldan, J.L. and Sanchez -Franco, M.J. (2012), “Variance -based structural equation modeling:
guidelines for using partial least squares in information systems research”, Research
Methodologies, Innovations and Philosophies in Software Systems Engineering and
Information Systems, IGI Global, pp. 193-221.
Rothfelder, K., Ottenbacher, M.C. and Harrington, R.J. (2012), “The impact of transformational,
transactional and non-leadership styles on employee job satisfaction in the German hospitality
industry”, Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 201-214.
Rubin, R.S., Munoz, D.D. and Bommer, W.H. (2005), “Leading from within: effects of emotional
recognition and personality on transformational leadership behavior”, Academy of
Management Journal, Vol. 48 No. 5, pp. 845-858.
Rubin, D.B. (1987), Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse In Surveys, J. Wiley and Sons, New York.
IJOEM Rucker, D.D., Preacher, K.J., Tormala, Z.L. and Petty, R.E. (2011), “Mediation analysis in social
psychology: current practices and new recommendations”, Social and Personality Psychology
Compass, Vol. 5 No. 6, pp. 359-371.
Sarros, J.C., Gray, J.H. and Densten, I. (2002), Australian Business Leadership Survey, Management
Business Series, No. 1/2003, Australian Institute of Management.
Sarstedt, M. (2008), “A review of recent approaches for capturing heterogeneity in partial least
squares path modeling”, Journal of Modelling in Management, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 140-161.
Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2007), Research Methods for Business Students, Financial
Times Prentice Hall, Edinburgh Gate, Harlow.
Schafer, J.L. and Olsen, M.K. (1998), “Multiple imputation for multivariate missing-data problems: a
data analyst’s perspective”, Multivariate Behavioral Research, Vol. 33 No. 4, pp. 545-571.
Schwarz, A., Rizzuto, T., Carraher-Wolverton, C., Roldan, J.L. and Barrera-Barrera, R. (2017),
“Examining the impact and detection of the urban legend of common method bias”, ACM
SIGMIS - Data Base: The DATABASE for Advances in Information Systems, Vol. 48 No. 1,
pp. 93-119.
Shah, N., Irani, Z. and Sharif, A.M. (2017), “Big data in an HR context: exploring organizational change
readiness, employee attitudes and behaviors”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 70, pp. 366-378.
Shalley, C.E. and Gilson, L.L. (2004), “What leaders need to know: a review of social and contextual
factors that can foster or hinder creativity”, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 33-53.
Shin, S.J. and Zhou, J. (2003), “Transformational leadership, conservation, and creativity: evidence
from Korea”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 46 No. 6, pp. 703-714.
Shin, S.J. and Zhou, J. (2007), “When is educational specialization heterogeneity related to creativity in
research and development teams? transformational leadership as a moderator”, Journal of
Applied Psychology, Vol. 92 No. 6, pp. 1709-1721.
Simonton, D.K. (1984), “Artistic creativity and interpersonal relationships across and within
generations”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 46 No. 6, p. 1273.
Soda, G. and Bizzi, L. (2012), “Think different? An investigate of network antecedents and
performance consequences of creativity as deviation”, Strategic Organization, Vol. 10 No. 2,
pp. 99-127.
Stephens, J.P. and Carmeli, A. (2017), “Relational leadership and creativity: the effects of respectful
engagement and caring on meaningfulness and creative work involvement”, in Hemlin, S. and
Mumford, M.D. (Eds), Handbook of Research on Creativity and Leadership, Edward Elgar
Publishing, Cheltenham, pp. 273-296.
Strom, R. and Strom, S. (1987), “Preparing grandparents for a new role”, Journal of Applied
Gerontology, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 476-486.
Stone, A.G., Russel, R.F. and Patterson, K. (2004), “Transformational versus servant leadership: a
difference in leader focus”, Leadership and Organization Development Journal, Vol. 25 No. 4,
pp. 349-361.
Tang, G., Yu, B., Cooke, F.L. and Chen, Y. (2017), “High-performance work system and employee
creativity: the roles of perceived organisational support and devolved management”, Personnel
Review, Vol. 46, pp. 1318-1334.
The News (2019), “Pakistan has a lot of potential for hospitality industry: President Alvi”, The News,
May 27, available at: https://www.thenews.com.pk/latest/477110-pakistan-has-a-lot-of-potential-
for-hospitality-industry-president-alvi (accessed 19 March 2020).
Tierney, P. and Farmer, S.M. (2002), “Creative self-efficacy: its potential antecedents and relationship
to creative performance”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 45 No. 6, pp. 1137-1148.
Tierney, P. and Farmer, S.M. (2011), “Creative self-efficacy development and creative performance
over time”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 96 No. 2, p. 277.
Travis, E. (2018), A Look at the Benefits of Transactional Leadership Style.
Tsai, C.Y., Horng, J.S., Liu, C.H. and Hu, D.C. (2015), “Work environment and atmosphere: the role of Leadership
organizational support in the creativity performance of tourism and hospitality organizations”,
International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 46, pp. 26-35. complimented
Tsai, W. (2001), “Knowledge transfer in intraorganizational networks: effects of network position and
with respect
absorptive capacity on business unit innovation and performance”, Academy of Management
Journal, Vol. 44 No. 5, pp. 996-1004.
Tyler, T.R. and Lind, A.E. (1992), “A relational model of authority in groups”, Advances in
Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 25, pp. 115-191.
Vinzi, V.E., Chin, W.W., Henseler, J. and Wang, H. (2010), Handbook of Partial Least Squares, Springer,
Berlin.
Wang, P. and Rode, J.C. (2010), “Transformational leadership and follower creativity: the moderating
effects of identification with leader and organizational climate”, Human Relations, Vol. 63 No. 8,
pp. 1105-1128.
Wang, J., Xie, H. and Fisher, J.F. (2011), Multilevel Models: Applications Using SAS, Walter de Gruyter.
Wang, C.J., Tsai, H.T. and Tsai, M.T. (2014), “Linking transformational leadership and employee
creativity in the hospitality industry: the influences of creative role identity, creative self-
efficacy, and job complexity”, Tourism Management, Vol. 40, pp. 79-89.
Wong, S.C.K. and Ladkin, A. (2008), “Exploring the relationship between employee creativity and job-
related motivators in the Hong Kong hotel industry”, International Journal of Hospitality
Management, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 426-437.
Wong, S. and Pang, L. (2003), “Motivators to creativity in the hotel industry-perspectives of managers
and supervisors”, Tourism Management, Vol. 24 No. 5, pp. 551-559.
Woodman, R.W., Sawyer, J.E. and Griffin, R.W. (1993), “Toward a theory of organizational creativity”,
Academy of Management Review, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 293-321.
Yu, X., Li, D., Tsai, C. and Wang, C. (2019), “The role of psychological capital in employee creativity”,
Career Development International, Vol. 24 No. 5, pp. 420-437.
Yukl, G. (2010), Leadership in Organizations, Global Edition, Pearson, Harlow.
Zhang, X. and Kwan, H.K. (2018), Empowering leadership and team creativity: the roles of team
learning behavior, team creative efficacy, and team task complexity, Creative Leadership,
Routledge, pp. 95-121.
Zhang, X. and Zhou, J. (2014), “Empowering leadership, uncertainty avoidance, trust, and employee
creativity: interaction effects and a mediating mechanism”, Organizational Behavior and
Human Decision Processes, Vol. 124, pp. 150-164.
Zhou, J. and George, J.M. (2001), “When job dissatisfaction leads to creativity: encouraging the
expression of voice”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 44, pp. 682-696.
Zhou, J. and Hoever, I.J. (2014), “Research on workplace creativity: a review and redirection”, Annual
Review of Organizational Psychology and Organ Behavior, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 333-359.
Zhu, J., Liao, Z., Yam, K.C. and Johnson, R.E. (2018), “Shared leadership: a state-of-the-art review and
future research agenda”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 39 No. 7, pp. 834-852.

Appendix 1
Constructs and their underlying items

Transformational leadership (Carless et al., 2000)

My supervisor . . .
(1) Communicates a clear and positive vision of the future
(2) Treats staff members as individuals, supports and encourages their development
IJOEM (3) Gives encouragement and recognition to staff members
(4) Fosters trust, involvement and cooperation among team members
(5) Encourages thinking about problems in new ways and questions assumptions
(6) Is clear about his/her values and practices what he/she preaches
(7) Instills pride and respect in others and inspires me by being highly competent

Respectful engagement (Carmeli et al., 2015)

My supervisor . . .
(1) Is always available to hear out and listen to each other
(2) Pays the utmost attention to each other’s needs
(3) Expresses genuine interest in each other’s position and the units he/she is managing and
responsible for
(4) Recognizes and understands what goes into each other’s work
(5) Emphasizes other members’ good sides
(6) Expresses appreciation and respects for each other’s contribution to the organization
(7) Appreciates how valuable other members’ time is
(8) Make requests, not demands from each other
(9) Speaks to each other in a respectful rather than in a demanding way

Appendix 2

Employee creativity (Tierney and Farmer, 2011)

This subordinate . . .
(1) Identifies opportunities for new ways of dealing work
(2) Seeks new ideas and ways to solve problems
(3) Generates novel, but operable work-related ideas
(4) Demonstrates originality in his/her work

Corresponding author
Bilal Ahmad can be contacted at: azrabilalbashir@yahoo.com

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com