Asia Pacific Management Review 26 (2021) 95e102

H O S T E D BY Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Asia Pacific Management Review

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apmrv

Mapping the relationship between transformational leadership, trust in

leadership and employee championing behavior during organizational change
M. Nazmul Islam*, Fumitaka Furuoka, Aida Idris
University of Malaya, Malaysia

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Linking social bond theory and psychological contract theory, this study examined the influence of
Received 22 January 2020 transformational leadership on employee championing behavior and tested the mediating role of trust in
Received in revised form leadership between transformational leadership and championing behavior in the context of organiza-
3 September 2020
tional change. This study collected data through a questionnaire survey from 300 full-time employees
Accepted 23 September 2020
who were working in Bangladesh’s banking sector. The structural equation modelling technique was
Available online 15 December 2020
used to test the proposed hypothesizes. The results of this study reveal that transformation leadership
significantly influences employee trust in leadership and championing behavior during organizational
Keywords:
Transformational leadership
change. Also, this study uncovers the mediating effect of trust in leadership in the relationship between
Trust in leadership transformational leadership and employee championing behavior during organizational change.
Championing behavior © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of College of Management, National Cheng Kung
Organizational change University. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/
Bangladesh licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction explores employee CB in the context of organizational change of the

In the context of organizational change, the behavior of em-
ployees plays an important role in managing organizational change
effectively (Gilley et al., 2009; Hirschi, 1969; Parish et al., 2008). Due
to the uncertainty and complexity related to organizational change,
an employee feels fear, cynicism, and demonstrates burnout,
disengagement, and unwillingness to involve in the organizational
change process (Brown & Cregan, 2008). Researchers and practi-
tioners underlined the importance of employee change supportive
behavior for managing organizational change successfully (Agote et
al., 2016; Cullen et al., 2013; Faupel & Süß, 2019). Therefore,
championing behavior (CB) of employees is considered as one of
the effective change supportive behavior for managing organiza-
tional change successfully (Faupel & Süß, 2019; Islam et al., 2020a).
However, regardless of vast attention on employee change sup-
portive behavior, limited empirical evidence addressed CB as a key
behavior during organizational change. Moreover, limited research
studies highlighted CB in the context of the service industry. Also,
previous study observed CB based on western context (Carter et al.,
2012; Newman, 2000). Therefore, this study addresses this gap and
banking sector in Bangladesh. Bangladesh’s baking sector plays a
direct and indirect role in improving the country’s economic
development and social progress (Braun et al., 2013). However,
Bangladesh’s banking sector is lacking behind while comparing
international standards (Hussain & Rizwan, 2014). Moreover,
recently Bangladesh’s banking sector was ranked 130th in banking
soundness among the 141 countries around the world. This report
showed that the performance of Bangladesh’s banking sector is the
worst among the South Asian countries (Ovi, 2019). Therefore, to
meet international standards as well as customers’ expectations the
banking sector in Bangladesh is going through the massive trans-
formation process (Ahmed et al., 2015; Hasan et al., 2019; Islam et
al., 2020b; Julia & Kassim, 2019; Regi & Golden, 2019). However,
different Bangladeshi banks are struggling to cope up with the
current changes. Hence, the champion employee may play a key
role to cope up with the complex change process. Therefore, the
formulation of this research is to identify key influencing factors
that enhance CB of employee during organizational change.
Prior research studies highlighted different leadership ap-
proaches as an important factor for enhancing employee change

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: nzmuljoy@gmail.com (M.N. Islam), fumitaka@um.edu.my (F. Furuoka), aida_idris@um.edu.my (A. Idris).
Peer review under responsibility of College of Management, National Cheng Kung University.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmrv.2020.09.002
1029-3132/© 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of College of Management, National Cheng Kung University. This is an open access article under the CC
BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
M.N. Islam, F. Furuoka and A. Idris
supportive behavior (Agote et al., 2016; Bakari et al., 2017). Espe-
cially, the transformational leadership (TL) approach is considered
the most suitable style to nurture followers’ attitudes in the context
of organizational change (Sharma & Krishnan, 2012). Researchers
also argued that during organizational change TL influences the CB
of employees (Faupel & Süß, 2019; Herscovitch & Meyer, 2002). In
addition, prior research works also witnessed that TL enhances
follower’s trust in leadership (trust) (Jung & Avolio, 2000;
Podsakoff et al., 1990) and influences follower’s attitude and
behavior in the context of organizational change (Yasir et al., 2016).
Hence, this study seeks to answer the following questions: (1) Does
TL influence employee CB in the context of organizational change?
(2) Does trust mediate the relationship between TL and CB of the
employee in the context of organizational change?
This study contributes to the existing literature of leadership,
human resource management, and change management by crafting
original hypotheses to uncover the impact of TL on employee CB in
the context of organizational change. A theoretical model is
developed leveraging the social bond theory (SBT) to establish the
linkages between TL and employee CB during organizational
change. According to SBT, bonding between leader and employee
lessen the negative behavior of the employee, which ultimately
removes the barrier to accomplish organizational objectives
(Hirschi, 1969). Moreover, using psychological contract theory
(PCT), this study uncovers the mediating effect of trust between TL
and CB in the context of organizational change. According to
Rousseau (1995), the psychological contract is an unwritten
agreement between the employee and employer, and psychological
contract develops bonding between the leader and followers,
which ultimately drives followers (who realize their leaders as
trustworthy) performance like a champion in the context of orga-
nizational change. Based on the theoretical underpinnings a
research model in Fig. 1 is outlined. The model is tested using pri-
mary data from Bangladesh’s banking sector and the structural
equation modelling technique is used to examine the hypotheses of
this study.
The remainder of this paper is structured as follows: the next
section describes the theoretical support of this research and the
development of the hypotheses tested in this study. Next in the
methodology section, presents a sampling frame, data, and statis-
tical model and software that was used for testing the hypotheses.
Subsequently, the empirical findings of the proposed hypothesized
model are presented. The paper concludes with a summary of the
important findings, limitations of the study, and directions of future
research to develop this burgeoning area of organizational change
management.
2. Theoretical foundation and hypotheses development
2.1. Transformational leadership and championing behavior
TL is known as one of the prominent leadership styles for the
Fig. 1. Conceptual model.
96
Asia Pacific Management Review 26 (2021) 95e102
last two decades (Judge & Piccol, 2004). TL is a proactive leader who
acts as a change agent, raises followers’ awareness by transcending
their collective interests, and helps them to achieve exceptional
goals (Busari et al., 2019). Jyoti and Dev (2015) stated TL transfers
vision, strengthens creativity, raises awareness, and develops an
emotional association with the followers to achieve high order
goals. Bass (1997) discussed four dimensions of TL, namely:
“Charisma or Idealized Influence” e which develops the moral and
trustworthy relationship between the leader and followers
(Krishnan, 2004); “Inspirational Motivation” e inspires and im-
proves followers level of confidence; “Intellectual Stimulation” e
helps followers by providing the solution to their problem; and
“Individual Consideration” e offers individual care and support to
the followers (Sivanathan et al., 2004, pp. 241e255). According to
Middleton et al. (2015) TL style is the most effective and influential
leadership style for managing change in the organization. More-
over, Basu (2015) mentioned the strength of TL for altering the
employees’ mindset to expedite the organizational change process.
CB is “demonstrating extreme enthusiasm of an individual for a
change by going above and beyond what is formally required to
ensure the success of change and promoting change to others”
(Herscovitch & Meyer, 2002). Champions efficiently transfer posi-
tive outlooks of the change to the co-workers and stakeholders
(Heng et al., 1999). Moreover, Clarysse and Moray (2004)
mentioned a person who takes an initiative and cooperates until
the completion of organizational change process is called cham-
pion. Also, the champion employee puts additional efforts and
takes risks for achieving a tough goal like organizational change.
Alike TL, the champion employee often influences the confidence
level of team members by minimizing confusion, insecurity, and
influencing the attitude and behavior of the colleagues to involve in
the organizational change process (Howell & Shea, 2006). Cham-
pions enthusiastically and dedicatedly contribute to the develop-
ment of organizational creativity, innovation, and change through
the critical phases (Rothwell et al., 1974). Similarly, employee CB is
positively linked with employee readiness for change and
employee willingness for change (Faupel & Süß, 2019).
TL is a suitable leadership style to manage organizational change
effectively (Krishnan, 2004). According to Faupel and Süß (2019), TL
influences employee CB during organizational change. The present
study also focuses on the relationship between TL and CB in the
context of organizational change. This study connects the associa-
tion of TL and CB in the lens of SBT. Strong bonding reduces the
complexities in the organization (Abdul Rashid et al., 2004). Ac-
cording to SBT, employee deviant and negative attitude can be
reduced by maintaining strong bonding between the leader and
followers (Hirschi, 1969). During change, the employee demon-
strates negative behavior due to the uncertainty and complexity
related to organizational change and such behavior of employees
leads to the ethical rule-breaking (Zhang & Arvey, 2009). Sims
(2002) underlined the importance of SBT to reduce the likelihood
of an ethical rule-breaking attitude of employees. Therefore, in the
settings of SBT, this study justifies the relationship between TL and
CB. Also, the leadership quality of TL enhances the level of moti-
vation of the followers and develops bonding between the leader
and followers (Burns, 1978). Moreover, TL can influence followers’
minds through charismatic leadership and involve them with the
organizational change process (Chou, 2015). Faupel and Süß (2019)
also explored that TL ensures CB of the employee in the context of
organizational change. Hence, this study proposes:
Hypothesis 1. There is a positive relationship between perceived
TL and CB in the context of organizational change.
M.N. Islam, F. Furuoka and A. Idris
2.2. Trust in leadership as a mediator
Trust is the willingness of taking risk as per leaders’ actions and
expectations of positive outcomes from the leaders’ initiative
(Schoorman et al., 2007). McAllister (1995) defined trust as “the
extent to which a person is confident in and willing to act on the
basis of the words, actions, and decisions of another.” According to
Dirks and Ferrin (2002) trust highly depends on the employees’
perception of leaders’ competency, care, integrity, and feelings for
others. The success of the organization highly depends on
employee trust (Kelloway et al., 2012). Moreover, in the context of
organizational change trust leads employees to feel motivated,
empowered, involved them with the organizational change pro-
cess, and bring new changes in the organization. Also, trust works
as a powerful motivating factor for the employee that fuels orga-
nizational performance and the change process. A trustworthy
environment in an organization develops a high level of coopera-
tion and knowledge sharing atmosphere in the organization
(Fairholm, 1994; Ka €ser & Miles, 2002). Also, trust plays an essential
role in reducing uncertainty and fear among employees in an un-
predictable situation like organizational change. Judge et al. (2006)
also supported that leader maintains a trustworthy relationship
with the followers to strengthen the followers’ ability to effectively
handle organizational change.
Different research studies highlighted TL style and trust are
positively connected (Kelloway et al., 2012; Podsakoff et al., 1990).
In the context of organizational change, TL enhances trust among
the followers (Howarth & Rafferty, 2009). TL nurtures followers’
psychological state by showing concern for their followers, which
enhances trust among the employee. Different research studies
witnessed a positive association between TL and trust (Braun et al.,
2013; Jung & Avolio, 2000). Moreover, TL develops the bonding
between leaders and followers, where one raises another to the
upper stages of belief and motivation (Burns, 1978). Therefore, this
study uses SBT to explain the rationale between TL and trust. TL
cares and feels for their subordinates’ emotions and concerns for
their career progress that builds a trustworthy relationship be-
tween them during organizational change and reduces negative
behavior, disengagement level of the employee. Hence, this study
proposes:
Hypothesis 2. There is a positive relationship between perceived
TL and trust in the context of organizational change.
Trust is an important factor during organizational change (Yasir
et al., 2016). Trust influences the mental model or psychology of the
employee (Erkutlu & Chafra, 2013). Different researchers also
mentioned that psychological contract influences the behavior of
employees (Spiess & Zehrer, 2020; Turnley et al., 2003). This study
conceptualized the mediating effect of trust in the lens of PCT
(Rousseau, 1995). According to Rousseau (1995) psychological
contract develops bonding between the leader and followers. Such
bonding between the leader and followers develops a trustworthy
relationship and enhances the psychological ownership of the
employee (Griep et al., 2017, pp. 79e101) that drives them to serve
as a champion in the context of organizational change. Hence, this
study proposes:
Hypothesis 3. There is a positive relationship between trust and
CB in the context of organizational change.
In summary, the relationship between TL and CB; TL and trust;
trust and CB explain in the above discussion sections. Hence, it is
rational to propose that TL influences trust, which in turn affects
employee CB. More specifically, the employee level of trust may
differ during organizational change and TL can increase the level of
97
Asia Pacific Management Review 26 (2021) 95e102
trust of the employee that enhances CB of employees during
organizational change. This rationale is also supported by the PCT
(Rousseau, 1995), which indicates that the psychological effect of
the individual level of trust influences the association between TL
and CB of the employee in the context of organizational change.
With this background, it can be proposed that trust can act as a
potential mediator in the relationship between TL and CB.
Accordingly, this study proposes:
Hypothesis 4. Trust mediates the relationship between TL and CB
in the context of organizational change.
Based on the above discussion, this study proposed a conceptual
model in Fig. 1, where it is hypothesized that TL influences trust
which enhances CB in the context of organizational change. It is
also proposed that trust has a mediational effect on the relationship
between TL and CB while managing organizational change.
3. Method
3.1. Procedure and participants
Data were collected applying a non-probability judgmental
sampling technique. Also, two phases technique (Reynolds et al.,
1993) were applied to collect the data. Full-time employees who
experienced an organizational change in their tenure from Ban-
gladeshi banks listed in Dhaka Stock Exchange - DSE 30 index
(Dhaka Stock Exchange, 2019) have participated as respondents in
this study. In the first phase, 10% of the total sample was collected as
a pilot survey to test data normality. Data quality and results were
found satisfactory to proceed in the next phase.
In the second phase, 585 questionnaires were distributed and
347 (59%) questionnaires returned. Finally, after deleting 47 ques-
tionnaires (due to unengaged and incomplete responses), 300 re-
sponses were used to perform data analysis. Power analysis
reported (effect size of 0.15 and probability error of 0.05) 300
sample size was sufficient for SEM analysis and also KMO value
(0.86) was higher than the recommended value (Kaiser, 1974).
Moreover, the collection of data was not restricted to one particular
type of organizational change. Around 35% of respondents experi-
enced service changes, 19.3% experienced product changes, 16%
experienced technology change, 10% experienced leadership
change, 7% experienced administrative change, 5.7% experienced
process change, 3.7% experienced market change, and 2.7% expe-
rienced supply chain change in their organization. Among the
participants, 58.3% are male and 41.7% are female employees.
Table 1 presents the participant’s demographic profile.
3.2. Measures
A five-point Likert scale (1 ¼ strongly disagree to 5 ¼ strongly
agree) was used in this study to measure all the variables.
Seven items of the Global Transformational Leadership (GTL)
scale were adopted and used (Carless et al., 2000) to measure TL.
Carless et al. (2000) reported (a ¼ 0.93) high value of alpha (a). The
sample question of GTL includes, “My leader communicates a clear
and positive vision of the future “, “My leader treats staff as in-
dividuals, supports and encourages their development”, and “My
leader gives encouragement and recognition to staff”.
Six items were adopted from Podsakoff et al. (1990) to measure
trust and reported TLI ¼ 0.96 and CR ¼ 0.9. Furthermore, Podsakoff
et al. (1996) reported high alpha (a ¼ 0.89) value. Sample question
includes, “During organizational change, I feel quite confident that
my leader will always try to treat me fairly”, “In the context of
organizational change, my manager would never try to gain an
advantage by deceiving workers” and “I have complete faith in the
M.N. Islam, F. Furuoka and A. Idris Asia Pacific Management Review 26 (2021) 95e102

Table 1 acceptable range < 0.08 (Hair et al., 1998). Moreover, the boot-
Participants’ demographic profile. strapping resampling technique was used to test the mediating
Item Category Frequency % effect of trust in the association between TL and CB (Preacher &
Gender Male 175 58.3
Hayes, 2004). To perform SEM and factor analysis, this study used
Female 125 41.7 IBM SPSS AMOS (version 24) software.
Age Under 25 year 43 14.3
25e34 years 164 54.7
4. Results
35e44 years 61 20.3
45e54 years 27 9
55 years or more 5 1.7 4.1. Descriptive statistics and correlations test
Education PhD 2 0.7
Masters 139 46.3 Table 2 presents the descriptive statistics, correlation coefficient,
Bachelor 159 53
skewness, and kurtosis results for the variables examined in this
Position Officer 102 34
Senior Officer 67 22.3 study.
Middle Manager 49 16.3 Among the variables in the context of organizational change, a
Senior Manager 31 10.3 significant positive relationship was found between TL and CB
Others 51 17
(0.27, p > 0.01). There was also a significant positive association was
Experience Under 1 year 74 24.7
1e2 years 109 36.3 detected among TL and trust (0.26, p > 0.01). Finally, a significant
3e5 years 48 16 positive relationship was found between trust and CB (0.55,
6e10 years 40 13.3 p > 0.01). Taken together, these findings might be considered as
Over 10 years 29 9.7 primary evidence to support the hypotheses of the study.
Note. n ¼ 300. In addition, skewness (0.03 to 0.32) and kurtosis (0.89
to 1.2) values of all constructs used in this study indicated a
normal distribution.
integrity of manager/supervisor while managing organizational
change”. 4.2. Construct validity of the three measurement scales
Four items from Herscovitch and Meyer (2002) were used to (measurement model)
measure CB. Reported very high consistent reliability (CR ¼ 0.86)
value. The sample question includes: “I try to find ways to over- TL as construct fitted the data sufficiently: c2 ¼ 11, c2/df ¼ 2.5,
come change-related difficulties”, “I encourage the participation of p ¼ 0.004, GFI ¼ 0.98, AGFI ¼ 0.94, CFI ¼ 0.97, TLI ¼ 0.95, NFI ¼ 0.95,
others in the change” and “I speak positively about the change to RMSEA ¼ 0.07. CFA revealed that the items of TL loaded signifi-
co-workers”. cantly (b ¼ 0.51 to 0.75, a ¼ 0.81 and CR ¼ 0.83) to the TL construct.
This study controls three variables: gender (Male and Female), Similarly, trust fitted the data sufficiently: c2 ¼ 24, c2/df ¼ 2.7,
education (Ph.D., Masters and Bachelors), and experience (less than p ¼ 0.004, GFI ¼ 0.98, AGFI ¼ 0.94, CFI ¼ 0.97, TLI ¼ 0.96, NFI ¼ 0.96
1, 1e2, 3e5, 6e10, and over 10 years). During organizational and RMSEA ¼ 0.075. CFA revealed that the items loaded signifi-
change, these three variables were considered potentially relevant. cantly (b ¼ 0.53 to 0.77, a ¼ 0.83 and CR ¼ 0.83) to the trust
The outcome may reveal that for managing organizational change, construct.
employee gender differences might show that female employees The CFA for CB was over-fitted: c2 ¼ 0.989, c2/df ¼ 0.494,
are more efficient than male employees (Deprez & Raeymaeckers, p ¼ 0.61, GFI ¼ 1, AGFI ¼ 0.99, CFI ¼ 1, TLI ¼ 1, NFI ¼ 1 and
2012), education level might also influence the employee RMSEA ¼ 0.000. Four items of CB loaded significantly (b ¼ 0.42 to
behavior and performance (Ng & Feldman, 2009) and the experi- 0.90, a ¼ 0.82 and CR ¼ 0.8) to the CB construct.
enced employee might also make an impact on employee behavior The results of the measurement model revealed that the fit in-
(Deprez & Raeymaeckers, 2012). dexes of each construct fitted the data adequately and achieved the
required level of validity (). Moreover, all factor loadings of the
3.3. Procedures for data analysis items are significantly loaded to each construct and confirm the
satisfactory level of convergent validity of the construct (Fornell &
This study used a two-step process for structural equation Larcker, 1981). Also, Cronbach’s a values of each construct also were
modelling (SEM) technique (Anderson & Gerbing, 1988) to test the in the recommended range (a ¼ 0.60e0.70) suggested by Hair et al.
hypothesized research model. At the first step (measurement (2019), and CR values of each construct also suppressing the cutoff
model), this study tests reliability, loadings, and goodness-of-fit (TL, value of 0.7 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Therefore, both a and CR
trust, and CB) for each scale. Also, to test the reliability, this study values satisfied the validity of each construct. In addition, correla-
measured the Cronbach’s alpha (a) value and composite reliability tional values between the constructs also confirmed the satisfac-
(CR) value of each construct. Moreover, this study compared the tory level of discriminant validity. Also, the tolerance value (0.931)
correlation between the variables to test the discriminant validity. and variance inflation (1.07) confirmed no multicollinearity issue in
In the second step (structural model), this study addressed the this study (Hair et al., 2010). Therefore, the above-mentioned three
overall association between different construct of the research and scales fulfilled the threshold of different indices (Byrne, 2010) and
stressed how each construct fit in the model (Byrne, 2010). Besides,
to assess the model fit adequacy this study adopted different model
fits indices (Bandalos, 2002). The model fit indices include: chi- Table 2
Descriptive statistics and Pearson correlation coefficients.
square (x2), chi-square/degree of freedom (x2/df) e acceptable
range 2.0e5.0 (Hair et al., 2010), comparative fit index (CFI), Mean SD Skewness Kurtosis TL Trust CB
goodness-of-fit index (GFI), Tucker Lewin Index (TLI) - acceptable TL 3.97 .48 .32 -.61 1 .26** .27**
range  0.90 (Bentler, 2007), adjusted goodness-of-fit index (AGFI) Trust 3.99 .51 -.03 1.2 .26** 1 .55**
- acceptable range  0.80 (Chau & Hu, 2001), root mean square CB 4.05 .62 -.31 -.89 .27** .55** 1
error of approximation (RMSEA) - acceptable range  0.08 (Browne Note. **.Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed); SD ¼ Standard
& Cudeck, 1993), standardized root mean residual (SRMR) - Deviation.

98
M.N. Islam, F. Furuoka and A. Idris
proceed for assessing the structural model.
4.3. Structural model
Results from the CFA provides evidence that the hypothesized
model fitted the data adequately (c2 ¼ 214.19, c2/df ¼ 1.88,
p ¼ 0.000, GFI ¼ 0.92, AGFI ¼ 0.90, CFI ¼ 0.94, TLI ¼ 0.93, NFI ¼ 0.88,
RMSEA ¼ 0.054 and SRMR ¼ 0.0584). All items were loaded from
0.43 to 0.86 and both of the steps meet the requirements.
5. Hypotheses testing
Figure e 2 presents, TL as a construct explains 10% of the vari-
ance in trust. Also, TL and trust together explain 45% of the variance
in CB (Fig. 2).
The results (Table 3) showed that without a mediating effect, TL
significantly influences CB during organizational change (H1),
which is consistent with the earlier research findings of Faupel and
Süß (2019). Moreover, results also showed that TL significantly
influences trust in the context of organizational change (H2), which
is also similar to the findings of Braun et al. (2013). Also, trust was
positively related to CB. This finding suggests that trust enhances
employee CB while managing organizational change (H3). This
study is the first to expose the relationship between trust and CB in
the context of organizational change. However, numerous research
studies in different contexts revealed a positive association be-
tween trust and employee behavioral outcomes (Gilstrap & Collins,
2012; Kelloway et al., 2012; Phong et al., 2018). Finally, this study
applied a bootstrapping approach (Preacher & Hayes, 2004) to test
the mediating effect of trust between the TL and CB. The results
confirmed the mediating effect of trust in the relationship between
TL and CB (H4). Results from the mediation investigation specified
that the direct effect of TL on CB become insignificant (b ¼ 0.09,
p ¼ 0.157) when controlling trust as a mediator, therefore results
suggest full mediation effect (H4). In other word, indirect effect
showed significant (p ¼ 0.001) and direct effect showed insignifi-
cant (p ¼ 0.157) results. Moreover, indirect effect showed insig-
nificant (p ¼ 0.205, 95% CI: 0.123 to 0.304) result. To the best of
knowledge, this is the first study to test the mediating effect of trust
Fig. 2. Structural model.
99
Asia Pacific Management Review 26 (2021) 95e102
in the relationship between the TL and CB in the context of orga-
nizational change. However, prior study experienced the mediating
effect of trust in different settings and the outcome of the study was
similar to the findings of the current study (Kelloway et al., 2012).
Also, Harman’s single-factor test resulted in a 30% variance of all
variables, which indicates no risk for common method bias (CMB)
(Fulleret al., 2016).
This study also examined the model with three control vari-
ables: gender, education and experience. All of the control vari-
ables: gender, education and experience were found non-
significant (Table 4) for both trust (0.906, 0.645 and 0.181;
p < 0.001) and CB (0.280, and 0.576, 0.465 and 0.130; p < 0.001).
6. Contributions, limitation and suggestions for the future
study
In the domain of leadership, organizational change manage-
ment, and HRM, this study makes a unique contribution by
addressing the significant association between TL, trust, and CB
during the organizational change of Bangladesh’s banking sector.
Moreover, this study uncovers the mediating effects of trust in the
relationship between TL and CB in the context of an organizational
change of banking employees in Bangladesh, which indicates how
the psychological model of employee influences the bonding be-
tween TL and CB for managing organizational change. Also, this
research offers theoretical and practical implications for the
academician, practitioners, and experts. Lastly, this study highlights
and recommends future areas of research.
Theoretically, this study has numerous novel contributions.
First, this study contributes by unboxing the limited understanding
of TL and its relationship with CB in the context of organizational
change by using SBT. This study highlights that TL reduces
employee negative behavior such as change disengagement, fear,
unwillingness to involve in the organizational change process as
well as can enhance CB of employees during organizational change
by developing bonding with them (Faupel & Süß, 2019). Second,
using SBT, this study also reveals the effectiveness of TL for devel-
oping a trustworthy relationship between the leader and followers.
Unique characteristics of TL enhance bonding between the leader
M.N. Islam, F. Furuoka and A. Idris Asia Pacific Management Review 26 (2021) 95e102

Table 3
Summary of the result for tested hypotheses.

ß SE CR p-value Result Analysis

Before the inclusion of the mediator (Trust)

Hypothesis-1 CB TL .30 .136 4.0 .001 Significant Accepted

After the inclusion of the mediator (Trust)

Hypothesis-2 Trust TL .32 .109 4.3 .001 Significant Accepted

Hypothesis-3 CB Trust .64 .101 9.0 .001 Significant Accepted

Hypothesis-4 CB TL .09 .157 1.5 .138 Insignificant Full Mediation

Note. ***.Highly significant p-value (<0.001); ß ¼ Beta Estimate; CR ¼ Critical Ratio.

Table 4
Control variables estimation (gender, education and experience).

Estimate SE CR (p < 0.001)

Trust Gender -.007 .063 -.117 .906

Trust Education -.024 .053 -.460 .645

Trust Experience .043 .032 1.34 .181

CB Gender -.071 .066 1.08 .280

CB Education -.040 .055 -.731 .465

CB Experience .052 .034 1.514 .130

Note. ***.Highly significant p-value (<0.001); SE ¼ Standard Error.

and followers and reduces cynicism, which in turn enhances
employee level of trust during organizational change (Howarth &
Rafferty, 2009). Third, using PCT, this research study highlights
that psychological mechanism works when the employee feels
their leader is trustworthy or not. Positive psychological factor
(trustworthiness) enhances employee CB and negative psycholog-
ical (distrust) factor causes vice versa in the context of organiza-
tional change (Turnley et al., 2003). Finally, this study explores the
mediating effect of trust between TL and CB in the context of
organizational change. In the lens of PCT, this study shows that trust
plays an important role in the relationship between TL and CB
(Kelloway et al., 2012) during organizational change. This study
reveals the psychological effect of trust. The higher level of
employee trust strengthens the bonding between TL and CB. The
lower level of trust weakens the bonding between TL and CB in the
context of organizational change. Moreover, this study tests the
hypothesized model for ensuring CB during the organizational
change in the setting of the banking sector of a non-western
country like Bangladesh, which differs significantly from the
research conducted in the western country context. Hence, the
findings of this study also extend our knowledge of TL, trust, and CB
during the organizational change in the context of Bangladeshi
banking employees.
Managing organizational change is a continues to process for
every business organization. Outcomes of this research can help
practitioners and management bodies of the organizations to tackle
the complexity of the organizational change process. This research
has two main practical implications. First, this research reveals the
association between TL and employee change supportive behavior
(e.g. trust in leadership and championing behavior) during orga-
nizational change. More specifically, in the context of organiza-
tional change TL reduces employees’ uncertainty, fear, unwilling
ness, cynicism, and disengagement to participate in the organiza-
tional change process by developing bonding and a trustworthy
relationship between the leader and followers. Hence, this study
suggests that the management body of the organization may give
emphasize the organization to practice the TL approach in their
organizational settings to maintain a trustworthy relationship with
the followers as well as to develops CB among the followers.
Therefore, organizations need to check whether their corporate
culture of the organization is properly aligned with the traits of the
TL likely, charisma, empowerment, the vision of the leader, sup-
portive leader, led by example, innovative thinking, and staff
development. Also, the organization should consider traits of TL as
a prime credential of employees while selecting him or her as a
manager or promoting existing employees as a manager. Because,
individual differences such as personal characteristics and per-
sonalities are highly connected with the leadership consequences
(Bass & Stogdill, 1990). Moreover, organizations may provide
formal training to managers about the skills and attitude of TL as
well as train them to apply the TL skills to foster the trust and CB
during organizational change.
Second, outcomes of this research suggest that if the association
between TL and CB is influenced by the other factor such as trust,
the effect of that association will be changed as well. In other
words, in an organization, if the TL approach is practiced during
organizational change as well as trust is higher that increases the
bonding between leader and followers. On the other hand, low
trust would weaken the bonding between leaders and followers
during organizational change. Therefore, this study recommends
that managers of the organizations in the uncertain and volatile
condition like organizational change should be more careful and
responsible to understand different antecedents of the trust
namely, the psychology of the employee (Clapp-smith et al., 2009),
communicating the change outcome (Tzafrir et al., 2004), employee
expectation and valence (Faupel & Süß, 2019), employee commit-
ment to change (Neves & Caetano, 2009), perceived organizational
support and justice (Dirks & Ferrin, 2002), job security (Wong et al.,
2010), organizational control mechanism (Chan, Huang, & Ng,
2008), organizational culture (Choi, Dixon, & Jung, 2004), organi-
zational characteristics (Tan & Lim, 2009), employee motivation
(Tefera & Mutambara, 2016) and employee work engagement

100
M.N. Islam, F. Furuoka and A. Idris
(Faupel & Süß, 2019) to enhance employee CB in the context of
organizational change. Because of the positive influence of trust
transfers TL quality to enhance employee level of CB during orga-
nizational change.
This study has some limitations. First, a self-reported survey
technique was used to test the variable of this study, which may
cause biased results. Although, Harman’s one-factor test shows
CMB may not comprise an important problem in this study (Fuller
et al., 2016). However, this study recommends future research
studies to use dissimilar data collection approaches in future
research studies where researchers may test the TL scale from the
leader, trust, and CB from the employees. Using a cross-sectional
research design is another limitation of this study. Therefore,
future researchers may use a longitudinal analysis to overcome this
limitation. Finally, this study would like to suggest valence as a
potential mediator for future researchers to improve the current
model, and the inclusion of the mediator will provide new insights
to the practitioners and researchers for further research studies.
This study concludes that this empirical study validates in the
context of organizational change, TL ensures more bonding with
the followers and such bonding fosters CB of the employee when
the psychological effect of trust between leader and followers
triggers in the context of organizational change. Future studies will
validate the current study and also will extend the present model.
References
Abdul Rashid, Z., Sambasivan, M., & Abdul Rahman, A. (2004). The influence of
organizational culture on attitudes toward organizational change. The Leader-
ship & Organization Development Journal, 25(2), 161e179. https://doi.org/
10.1108/01437730410521831
Agote, L., Aramburu, N., & Lines, R. (2016). Authentic leadership perception, trust in
the leader, and followers’ emotions in organizational change processes. The
Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 52(1), 35e63. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0021886315617531
Ahmed, S. U., Ahmed, S., Islam, M., & Ullah, G. M. (2015). Impact of BASEL-II
implementation on financial performance of private commercial banks of
Bangladesh. European Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Sciences,
77, 73e84.
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A
review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3),
411e423. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411
Bakari, H., Hunjra, A. I., & Niazi, G. S. K. (2017). How does authentic leadership
influence planned organizational change? The role of employees’ perceptions:
Integration of theory of planned behavior and lewin’s three step model. Journal
of Change Management, 17(2), 155e187. https://doi.org/10.1080/
14697017.2017.1299370
Bandalos, D. L. (2002). The effects of item parceling on goodness-of-fit and
parameter estimate bias in structural equation modeling. Structural Equation
Modeling, 9(1), 78e102. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0901_5
Bass, B. M. (1997). Personal selling and transactional transformational leadership
with effective leadership. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management,
17(3), 19e28. http://proquest.umi.com.library.capella.edu/pqdweb?
index¼0&did¼14480309&SrchMode¼1&sid¼2&Fmt¼6&VInst¼PROD&VType
¼PQD&RQT¼309&VName¼PQD&TS¼1132628772&
clientId¼62763.
Bass, B. M., & Stogdill, R. M. (1990). Bass & Stogdill’s handbook of leadership: Theory,
research, and managerial applications. Simon and Schuster.
Basu, K. K. (2015). The leader’s role in managing change: Five cases of technology-
enabled business transformation. Journal of Organizational Excellence, 34(3),
28e42. https://doi.org/10.1002/joe
Bentler, P. M. (2007). On tests and indices for evaluating structural models”, Per-
sonality and Individual differences. Personality and Individual Differences, 42(4),
825e829.
Braun, S., Peus, C., Weisweiler, S., & Frey, D. (2013). Transformational leadership, job
satisfaction, and team performance: A multilevel mediation model of trust. The
Leadership Quarterly, 24(1), 270e283. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.leaqua.2012.11.006
Brown, M., & Cregan, C. (2008). Organizational change cynicism: The role of
employee involvement. Human Resource Management, 47(4), 667e686. https://
doi.org/10.1002/hrm
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In
K. A. Bollen, & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models. Beverly Hills,
CA: Sage Publisher.
Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. Harper & Row.
Busari, A. H., Khan, S. N., Abdullah, S. M., & Mughal, Y. H. (2019). Transformational
101
Asia Pacific Management Review 26 (2021) 95e102
leadership style, followership, and factors of employees’ reactions towards
organizational change. Journal of Asia Business Studies, 14(2), 181e209. https://
doi.org/10.1108/JABS-03-2018-0083
Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, appli-
cations, and programming. Routledge.
Carless, S. A., Wearing, A. J., & Mann, L. (2000). A short measure of transformational
leadership. Journal of Business and Psychology, 14(3), 389e405. https://doi.org/
10.1023/A:1022991115523
Carter, M. Z., Armenakis, A. A., Feild, H. S., & Mossholder, K. (2012). Transformational
leadership, relationship quality, and employee performance during continuous
incremental organizational change. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(7),
942e958. https://doi.org/10.1002/job. J. Organiz. Behav.
Chan, K. W., Huang, X., & Ng, P. M. (2008). Managers’ conflict management styles
and employee attitudinal outcomes: The mediating role of trust. Asia Pacific
Journal of Management, 25(2), 277e295. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-007-
9037-4
Chau, P. Y. K., & Hu, P. J. H. (2001). Information technology acceptance by individual
professionals: A model comparison approach. Decision Sciences, 32(4), 699e719.
Choi, N. H., Dixon, A. L., & Jung, J. M. (2004). Dysfunctional behavior among sales
representatives: The effect of supervisory trust, participation, and information
controls. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 24(3), 181e198.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08853134.2004.10749030
Chou, P. (2015). Transformational leadership and employee ’ s behavioral support
for organizational change. European Journal of Business and Management, 7(3),
110e123.
Clapp-smith, R., Vogelgesang, G. R., & Avey, J. B. (2009). Authentic leadership and
positive psychological capital: The mediating role of trust at the group level of
analysis. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 15(3), 227e240.
Clarysse, B., & Moray, N. (2004). A process study of entrepreneurial team formation:
The case of a research-based spin-off. Journal of Business Venturing, 19(1),
55e79. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(02)00113-1
Cullen, K. L., Edwards, B. D., Casper, W. C., & Gue, K. R. (2013). Employees’ adapt-
ability and perceptions of change-related uncertainty: Implications for
perceived organizational support, job satisfaction, and performance. Journal of
Business and Psychology, 29(2), 269e280. https://doi.org/10.1007/s
Deprez, A., & Raeymaeckers, K. (2012). A longitudinal study of job satisfaction
among flemish professional journalists annelore. Journalism and Mass
Communication, 2(1), 235e249.
Dhaka Stock Exchange. (2019). Monthly review. www.dsebd.org/pdf/Mreview_July_
19.pdf.
Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2002). Trust in leadership: Meta-analytic findings and
implications for research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4),
611e628. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.611
Erkutlu, H., & Chafra, J. (2013). Effects of trust and psychological contract violation
on authentic Effects of trust and psychological contract violation on authentic
leadership and organizational contract violation on authentic leadership and
organizational deviance leadership and organ. Management Research Review,
36(9), 828e848.
Fairholm, G. W. (1994). Leadership and the culture of trust. Greenwood Publishing
Group.
Faupel, S., & Süß, S. (2019). The effect of transformational leadership on employees
during organizational changeean empirical analysis. Journal of Change Man-
agement, 19(3), 145e166. https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2018.1447006
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with un-
observable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research,
18(1), 39e50. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312
Fuller, C. M., Simmering, M. J., Atinc, G., Atinc, Y., & Babin, B. J. (2016). Common
methods variance detection in business research. Journal of Business Research,
69(8), 3192e3198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.12.008
Gilley, A., McMillan, H. S., & Gilley, J. W. (2009). Organizational change and char-
acteristics of leadership effectiveness. Journal of Leadership & Organizational
Studies, 16(1), 38e47. https://doi.org/10.1177/000276428102400503
Gilstrap, J. B., & Collins, B. J. (2012). The importance of being trustworthy: Trust as a
mediator of the relationship between leader behaviors and employee job
satisfaction. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 19(2), 152e163.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051811431827
Griep, Y., Wingate, T., & Brys, C. (2017). Theoretical orientations and practical ap-
plications of psychological ownership. Theoretical Orientations and practical
Applications of psychological ownership (issue november. Springer. https://www.
springer.com/gp/book/9783319702469.
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data
analysis: With readings (4th ed.). Prentice Hall.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis.
Pearson Prentice Hall.
Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to
report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2e24. https://
doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203
Hasan, I., Islam, M. N., & Chowdhury, M. A. F. (2019). Transformational human
resource management: Crafting organizational efficiency. Handbook of research
on managerial practices and disruptive innovation in Asia. https://doi.org/
10.4018/978-1-7998-0357-7.ch015
Heng, M. S. H., Trauth, E. M., & Fischer, S. J. (1999). Organisational champions of IT
innovation. Accounting, Management and Information Technologies, 9(3),
193e222. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-8022(99)00008-9
Herscovitch, L., & Meyer, J. P. (2002). Commitment to organizational change:
M.N. Islam, F. Furuoka and A. Idris
Extension of a three-component model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3),
474e487. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.3.474
Hirschi, T. (1969). Social control theory. In F. T. Cullen, & R. Agnew (Eds.), Crimi-
nological theory: Past to present. Roxbury Publishing Company.
Howarth, M. D., & Rafferty, A. E. (2009). Transformational leadership and organi-
zational change: The impact of vision content and delivery. In Academy of
management 2009 annual meeting: Green management matters (Vol. 2009).
https://doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.2009.44243043. AOM, 2004.
Howell, J. M., & Shea, C. M. (2006). Effects of champion behavior, team potency, and
external communication activities on predicting team performance. Group &
Organization Management, 31(2), 180e211. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1059601104273067
Hussain, Z., & Rizwan, N. (2014). Bangladesh development update. World Bank.
October 2014.
Islam, M. N., Furuoka, F., & Idris, A. (2020a). Employee championing behavior in the
context of organizational change: A proposed framework for the business or-
ganizations in Bangladesh. Journal of Asia Business Studies. https://doi.org/
10.1108/JABS-01-2019-0019. In press.
Islam, M. N., Furuoka, F., & Idris, A. (2020b). The impact of trust in leadership on
organizational transformation. Global Business and Organizational Excellence,
39(4), 1e10. https://doi.org/10.1002/joe.22001
Judge, W. Q., Bowler, M., & Douglas, T. (2006). Preparing for organizational change:
Evolution of the organizational capacity for change construct. Academy of
Management Proceedings, 1e6.
Judge, T. A., & Piccol, R. F. (2004). Transformational and transactional leadership: A
meta-analytic test of their relative validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(5),
755e768. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.5.755
Julia, T., & Kassim, S. (2019). Exploring green banking performance of Islamic banks
vs conventional banks in Bangladesh based on Maqasid Shariah framework.
Journal of Islamic Marketing, 11(3), 729e744. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIMA-10-
2017-0105
Jung, D. I., & Avolio, B. J. (2000). Opening the black box: An experimental investi-
gation of the mediating effects of trust and value congruence on trans-
formational and transactional leadership. Journal of Organizational Behavior,
21(8), 949e964. https://doi.org/10.1002/1099-1379(200012)21:8<949::AID-
JOB64>3.0.CO;2-F
Jyoti, J., & Dev, M. (2015). The impact of transformational leadership on employee
creativity: The role of learning orientation. Journal of Asia Business Studies, 9(1),
78e98. https://doi.org/10.1108/JABS-03-2014-0022
Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39(1), 31e36.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294054
Ka€ser, P. A. W., & Miles, R. E. (2002). Understanding knowledge activists’ successes
and failures. Long Range Planning, 35(1), 9e28. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-
6301(02)00020-1
Kelloway, E. K., Turner, N., Barling, J., & Loughlin, C. (2012). Transformational
leadership and employee psychological well-being: The mediating role of
employee trust in leadership. Work & Stress, 26(1), 39e55. https://doi.org/
10.1080/02678373.2012.660774
Krishnan, V. R. (2004). Impact of transformational leadership on followers’ influ-
ence strategies. The Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 25(1),
58e72. https://doi.org/10.1108/01437730410512778
McAllister, D. J. (1995). Affect- and cognition-based trust as foundations for inter-
personal cooperation in organizations. Published by : Academy of Manage.
Academy of Management Journal Academy of Management Journal, 38(1), 24e59.
author ( s ): Daniel J . McAllister Source.
Middleton, J., Harvey, S., & Esaki, N. (2015). Transformational leadership and
organizational change: How do leaders approach trauma-informed organiza-
tional change…twice? Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Social
Services, 96(3), 155e163. https://doi.org/10.1606/1044-3894.2015.96.21
Neves, P., & Caetano, A. (2009). Commitment to change: Contributions to trust in
the supervisor and work outcomes. Group & Organization Management, 34(6),
623e644. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601109350980
Newman, K. L. (2000). Organizational transformation during institutional upheaval.
Academy of Management, 25(3), 602e619.
Ng, T. W. H., & Feldman, D. C. (2009). How broadly does education contribute to job
performance? Personnel Psychology, 62(1), 89e134. https://doi.org/10.1111/
j.1744-6570.2008.01130.x
Ovi, I. H. (2019). Bangladesh lowest in bank soundness in S Asia. Dhaka Tribune.
October 23 https://www.dhakatribune.com/business/banks/2019/10/23/
bangladesh-lowest-in-bank-soundness-in-s-asia.
Parish, J. T., Cadwallader, S., & Busch, P. (2008). Want to, need to, ought to: Employee
102
Asia Pacific Management Review 26 (2021) 95e102
commitment to organizational change. Journal of Organizational Change Man-
agement, 21(1), 32e52. https://doi.org/10.1108/09534810810847020
Phong, L. B., Hui, L., & Son, T. T. (2018). How leadership and trust in leaders foster
employees’ behavior toward knowledge sharing. Social Behavior and Personality,
46(5), 705e720. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.6711
Podsakoff, P. M., Mackenzie, S. B., & Bommer, W. H. (1996). Transformational leader
behaviors and substitutes for leadership as determinants of employee satis-
faction, commitment, trust, and organizational citizenship behaviors the dan-
gers of poor construct conceptualization view project off duty deviance view
proj. Journal of Management, 22(2), 259e298. https://doi.org/10.1177/
014920639602200204. Article in.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Moorman, R. H., & Fetter, R. (1990). Trans-
formational leader behaviors and their effects on followers’ trust in leader,
satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly,
1(2), 107e142. https://doi.org/10.1016/1048-9843(90)90009-7
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect
effects in simple mediation models. Revista de Estudos Constitucionais, Herme-
neutica e Teoria Do Direito, 36(4), 717e731. https://doi.org/10.4013/
rechtd.2018.101.04
Regi, S. B., & Golden, S. A. R. (2019). Measuring public sector customers’ attitude
towards technological innovative banking services (ibs) using structural equa-
tion model (sem). International Journal of Hospitality Information Technology,
12(2), 37e45.
Reynolds, N., Diamantopoulos, A., & Schlegelmilch, B. (1993). Pre-testing in ques-
tionnaire design: A review of the literature and suggestions for further research.
Market Research Society. Journal, 35(2), 1e11. https://doi.org/10.1177/
147078539303500202
Rothwell, R., Freeman, C., Horsley, A., Jervis, V. T. P., & Townsend, J. (1974). SAPPHO
updated - PHO phase II project SAP- Technological guideposts and innovation
avenues. Research Policy, 3(3), 258e291.
Rousseau, D. (1995). Psychological contracts in organizations: Understanding written
and unwritten agreements. Sage publications.
Schoorman, F. D., Mayer, R. C., & Davis, J. H. (2007). An Integrative Model of Orga-
nizational Trust: Past, Present, and Future. Academy of Management Review,
32(2), 344e354.
Sharma, D., & Krishnan, V. R. (2012). The impact of pay satisfaction and trans-
formational leadership on employee engagement. Haridwar, India: 5th Interna-
tional Conference of Management and Behavioural Sciences. June, 1e12 https://
sites.google.com/site/venkatrkrishnan/home/writings/fulltext/devyani.pdf.
Sims, R. L. (2002). Ethical rule breaking by employees: A test of social bonding
theory. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 40(2), 101e109.
Sivanathan, N., Arnold, K. A., Turner, N., & Barling, J. (2004). Leading well: Trans-
formational leadership and well-being. Positive psychology in practice. Wiley.
Spiess, T., & Zehrer, A. (2020). Employees’ change-oriented and proactive behaviors

in small- and medium-sized family businesses. In J. M. Saiz-Alvarez, J. M. Palma-
Ruiz, & J. Leita~o (Eds.), Entrepreneurship and family business vitality (pp. 49e64).
Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15526-1_4.
Tan, H., & Lim, A. (2009). Trust in coworkers and trust in organizations. The Journal
of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 143(1), 45e66. https://doi.org/
10.3200/JRLP.143.1.45-66
Tefera, O., & Mutambara, E. (2016). Effect of organizational changes on e mployees ’
motivation at a country club in kwazulu Natal: From the employees ’ partici-
pation perspectives. 5(1), 1e14.
Turnley, W. H., Bolino, M. C., Lester, S. W., & Bloodgood, J. M. (2003). The impact of
psychological contract fulfillment on the performance of in-role and organi-
zational citizenship behaviors. Journal of Management, 29(2), 187e206. https://
doi.org/10.1016/S0149-2063(02)00214-3
Tzafrir, S. S., Baruch, Y., & Dolan, S. L. (2004). The consequences of emerging HRM
practices for employees’ trust in their managers. Personnel Review, 33(6),
628e647. https://doi.org/10.1108/00483480410561529
Wong, Y. T., Wong, S. H., & Wong, Y. W. (2010). A study of subordinateesupervisor
guanxi in Chinese joint ventures. The International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 21(12), 2142e2155.
Yasir, M., Imran, R., Irshad, M. K., Mohamad, N. A., & Khan, M. M. (2016). Leadership
styles in relation to employees’ trust and organizational change capacity: Evi-
dence from non-profit organizations. SAGE Open, 6(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/
2158244016675396
Zhang, Z., & Arvey, R. D. (2009). Rule breaking in adolescence and entrepreneurial
status: An empirical investigation. Journal of Business Venturing, 24(5), 436e447.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.04.009