Identity Leadership, Employee Burnout and the Mediating Role of Team Identification: Evidence from the Global Identity Leadership Development Project.

Do leaders who build a sense of shared social identity in their teams thereby protect them from the adverse effects of workplace stress? This is a question that the present paper explores by testing the hypothesis that identity leadership contributes to stronger team identification among employees and, through this, is associated with reduced burnout. We tested this model with unique datasets from the Global Identity Leadership Development (GILD) project with participants from all inhabited continents. We compared two datasets from 2016/2017 (n = 5290; 20 countries) and 2020/2021 (n = 7294; 28 countries) and found very similar levels of identity leadership, team identification and burnout across the five years. An inspection of the 2020/2021 data at the onset of and later in the COVID-19 pandemic showed stable identity leadership levels and slightly higher levels of both burnout and team identification. Supporting our hypotheses, we found almost identical indirect effects (2016/2017, b = -0.132; 2020/2021, b = -0.133) across the five-year span in both datasets. Using a subset of n = 111 German participants surveyed over two waves, we found the indirect effect confirmed over time with identity leadership (at T1) predicting team identification and, in turn, burnout, three months later. Finally, we explored whether there could be a "too-much-of-a-good-thing" effect for identity leadership. Speaking against this, we found a u-shaped quadratic effect whereby ratings of identity leadership at the upper end of the distribution were related to even stronger team identification and a stronger indirect effect on reduced burnout.

I believe I can craft! introducing Job Crafting Self-Efficacy Scale (JCSES).

Job crafting is beneficial for employees and organizations. To better predict these behaviors, we introduce the concept of job crafting self-efficacy (JCSE) and define it as an individual's beliefs about their capability to modify the demands and resources of their job to better fit their needs. This article describes the development and validation of a scale to measure JCSE. We conducted a qualitative study to design and four quantitative studies to test the psychometric properties of this scale among Polish and American employees in both paper-and-pencil and online versions. Three independent (N1 = 364; N2 = 432; N3 = 403) confirmatory factor analyses demonstrated a good fit to a 3-factor solution comprising JCSE beliefs about increasing (a) structural job resources, (b) social job resources, and (c) challenging job demands. The 9-item JCSE Scale had good internal consistency, high time stability, and good validity. It correlated positively with general self-efficacy. JCSE explained unique variance in job crafting behaviors over and above general self-efficacy, and was more important in predicting job crafting than contextual factors. We demonstrate the role of social cognitions in shaping job redesign behaviors and provide a useful tool to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions dedicated to empowering JCSE.

How Person-Organization Fit Impacts Employees' Perceptions of Justice and Well-Being.

Regulatory fit theory predicts that when individuals adopt strategies that sustain their motivational orientations, they feel right about what is happening. Our aim was to test these predictions at the person-organization level. Across three studies, we expected and found that a feeling right experience that results from a match between an employee and an organizational climate produces perceptions that the company's prevailing procedures are fair. In Study 1 (N = 300), a survey among employees of distinct companies, we observed that the more organizational characteristics matched individual promotion and prevention focus of the employees, the more the employees perceived their workplace as just. Study 2 (N = 139), a randomized-control experiment, replicated this pattern by demonstrating that individuals with a predominant promotion focus assigned fairness to the organizational conduct most strongly when they recalled events characterizing a promotion-oriented environment; on the contrary, individuals with a predominant prevention focus deemed their workplace most fair when they were asked to recall prevention-related conduct of their company. In Study 3 (N = 376), a cross-sectional field study, we found that regulatory non-fit was associated with lower procedural justice perceptions and this, in turn, related to higher burnout. Theoretical and practical implications of applying regulatory fit theory to person-organization relationships are discussed.

[The role of job satisfaction in the person-organization fit relationship in terms of goal pursuit strategies, and mental health]. / Rola satysfakcji z pracy w relacji miedzy dopasowaniem czlowieka do organizacji w zakresie strategii realizacji celów a zdrowiem psychicznym.

BACKGROUND: Person-organization (P-O) fit is a predictor of job satisfaction, and a misfit is a potential stressor. We aimed to examine the consequences of fit between a person and an organization in terms of goal pursuit strategies. We tested whether job satisfaction mediates the relationship between regulatory fit and mental health. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Research was conducted in a group of 169 employees. They were asked to fill in questionnaires assessing their chronic work regulatory focus, organiza tional regulatory focus and job satisfaction. To measure mental well-being we administered the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-28). We conducted mediation analysis in regression. RESULTS: The results of the mediation analysis confirmed the me- diating role of job satisfaction in the relation between regulatory focus misfit and physical and mental symptoms of distress. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study point to the fact that P-O fit can relate to goal pursuit strategies. It influences not only job satisfaction, but also employees' health.The conclusions can be applied in the human resources management practices, e.g., it may serve as a useful argument to motivate employers to shape goals and strategies individually by managers, according to employees preferences. The results should be interpreted with caution because of non-random sampling.