Search

In accordance with the similarity attraction paradigm, this paper investigates when and how proactive employees can be rated as proactive performers by proposing supervisor-subordinate marital status similarity as a relational moderator and leader-member exchange as the mediator. It therefore advances understanding of performance evaluation of proactive employees. Data from a sample of 471 Chinese employees and their 161 supervisors are used to examine the models hypothesized. The results show that LMX mediates the interaction effect between a proactive personality and supervisor-subordinate marital status similarity on supervisors' evaluations of proactive performance. When proactive employees and their supervisors have similar (dissimilar) marital status, the indirect relationship between proactive personality and supervisor-rated proactive performance via LMX is stronger (weaker). Theoretical and practical implications are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although effective leaders are important for reducing employee stress during the COVID-19, limited studies have examined how follower behaviors can influence leader stress and well-being during the COVID-19. This study draws on defeat-entrapment theory to examine how followers' unclear demands during the COVID-19 consequently impact leaders' psychological states and well-being. We conducted a three-wave time-lagged investigation with a sample of 281 leaders in the United Kingdom and found that followers' unclear demands could generate feelings of entrapment in leaders, leading to decreased levels of well-being outcomes in leaders. Importantly, we found that leaders who have higher levels of leadership responsibility during the COVID-19 are likely to feel trapped by followers' unclear demands. They are also likely to face higher levels of feelings of entrapment and impaired well-being compared with leaders who have lower levels of leadership responsibility. We discuss the implications for theories and practices, as well as directions for future research., Competing Interests: No conflicts of interests., (© 2021 International Association of Applied Psychology.)