AMBO UNIVERSITY WOLISO CAMPUS

COLLEGE OF BUSINESS & ECONOMICS

Article Review on

Effect Of Authoritarian Leadership On User Resistance To Change: Evidence

From Is Project Implementation In China

Submitted To
Dinkisa K. (PhD)

School of Postgraduate Studies

Department of Management
Program: Weekend

Course Title: Business Policy And Strategic Management

Course Code: MGMT 7051

Reviewed/Submitted By
ID /14

January, 2023,
Woliso, Ethiopia
 Table of contents
Table Page

Introduction_________________________________________________________
The main purpose of the article under-review_______________________________
The central argument of the article under-review____________________________
The specific Project issues under-review___________________________________
The major ideas or core issues under-review________________________________
Approaches__________________________________________________________
Methodology_________________________________________________________
Finding_____________________________________________________________
Conclusion__________________________________________________________
Strength and weakness of the paper_______________________________________

Page 1 per 16
Abstract
Purpose – User resistance to change has been identified as a significant cause of
information system (IS) implementation failure. Previous studies have proposed
antecedents of user resistance to change. However, whether project leadership (e.g.
authoritarian leadership) can lead to user resistance to change remains unclear. By
drawing on project leadership, affective event theory and contingency theory of
leadership, the authors address this void by empirically examining whether
authoritarian leadership can lead to user resistance to change through the mediation of
negative emotion and whether the magnitude of this mediation depends on the power
distance level. Design/methodology/approach – This study examines the authors’
research model that integrates authoritarian leadership, negative emotion, power
distance and user resistance to change using data from a matched-pair survey of 278
users and their supervisors involved in IS project implementation in China. Findings –
Negative emotion plays a mediating role in the relationship of authoritarian leadership
and user resistance to change. In addition, power distance moderates the relationship
between authoritarian leadership and negative emotion and the indirect effect of
authoritarian leadership on user resistance to change in IS project implementation
through negative emotion. Originality/value – The authors’ research provides a
comprehensive understanding of the antecedents of user resistance to change in IS
project implementation and ultimately contributes to the IS project implementation
literature and practice.

Synopsis
A review of research on the relationship between authoritarian leadership and
user resistance to change in an information system (IS) project in China features
the following:.
In ‘Effect of authoritarian leadership on user resistance to change’, Yajun Zhang and
colleagues (2020) noted that power distance negatively moderates the indirect effect
of authoritarian leadership on user resistance to change in IS project implementation
through negative emotion. This study contributes to the IS project. implementation
literature by exploring the influence of authoritarian. leadership onuser resistance.
Authoritarian leadership could increase user resistance to change through the
mediating role of negative emotion. Authoritarian supervisors must reduce users’

Page 2 per 16
negative emotions when implementing IS projects. This suggestion is true for users
with low power distances. The indirect effect of authoritarian leadership on user
resistance via negative emotion is significant.

278 users were included in the study.

Aspects of the researchers’ results look to challenge prior research in this area: “This
work follows the new trends in academic research, which emphasizes the influences
of negative leadership, introduces authoritarian leadership and examines its positive
influence on user resistance to change. It also addresses the existing contradiction in
which authoritarian leadership has both negative and positive effects,” Zhang argued.

Discussing possible improvements, “Future research can consider other

measurements, such as the scale developed by Shepherd and Wolfe. Future research
should explore the influencing mechanism of authoritarian leadership on user
resistance by using other theories,” they acknowledge.

The authors contend that they measured negative emotion with a scale developed by
Watson et al. Future research should explore the influencing mechanism of
authoritarian leadership on user resistance by using other theories, such as
conservation of resource theory.

Sccholarcy sammary
Introduction
Information system (IS) projects have historically been plagued by schedule delays,
budget overruns and failure due to changes in contemporary organizations (Fiedler,
2010; Kim and Kankanhalli, 2009; Hornstein, 2015; Li et al, 2011; Liu and Wang,
2014; Love et al, 2002; Vrhovec et al, 2015).
Extensive changes arise with IS project implementation, such as changing positions of
power, readjusting work contents and fluctuating salaries and welfare.
All these changes can have salient influences on the interests of users.

Page 3 per 16
Users may use various implicit and explicit behaviors to resist the changes brought
about by IS project implementation and cause undesirable outcomes (Kim and
Kankanhalli, 2009).
IMDS organizations have failed to achieve desired benefits because user resistance to
change often occurs, several IS projects have been implemented successfully
(Altuwaijri and Khorsheed, 2012; Bakker et al, 2011; Emam and Koru, 2008; Legris
and Collerette, 2006; Liu, 2015, 2016; Liu and Wang, 2016; Venkatesh and Bala,
2008).
Investigating user resistance to change during IS project implementation has received
considerable attention from researchers and practitioners (Laumer et al, 2016b;
Markus, 1983; Kim and Kankanhalli, 2009; Shang, 2012; Kim and Lee, 2016; Kim,
2011)
Methods
4.1 Data collection Surveys were conducted in Beijing, Zhengzhou, Wuhan, Guiyang
and other places in China to collect data for testing our hypotheses.
As China has accumulated rich experiences in IS project implementation and the
questions were situated in the Chinese cultural context, we chose China as the setting
for our survey.
We collected data from 16 firms in different industries, such as manufacturing,
finance, medicine, construction and telecommunications.
The firms were selected because they were implementing IS projects at that time.
To mitigate the impact of common method bias, we collected data from users and
their direct supervisors.
The user resistance to IS project implementation was reported by their direct
supervisors.
The elements of authoritarian leadership, negative emotion, leadership–member
exchange, information quality, system quality and power distance were reported by
users
Results
This study followed the steps of Baron and Kenny (1986) to test whether negative
emotion mediates the effect of authoritarian leadership on user resistance to change in
project implementation.
As presented in Model 2, the path coefficient between authoritarian leadership and
user resistance is positive and significant (β 5 0.33, p < 0.001).

Page 4 per 16
Model 5 shows that the path coefficient between authoritarian leadership and negative
emotion is positive and significant (β 5 0.44, p < 0.001).
Model 3 reveals that negative emotion positively predicts user resistance to change (β
5 0.35, p < 0.001), whereas the impact of authoritarian leadership on user resistance to
change is weak (β 5 0.18, p < 0.01), thereby lending support to H2.
The indirect effect of authoritarian leadership on user resistance via negative emotion
is significant, and this outcome further supports H2
Conclusion
This study contributes to the IS project implementation literature by exploring the
influence of authoritarian leadership on user resistance to change in IS project
implementation, as well as the mediating mechanism and boundary conditions.
Results shows that authoritarian leadership could increase user resistance to change
through the mediating role of negative emotion.
The relationship between authoritarian leadership and negative emotion and the
indirect relationship between authoritarian leadership and user resistance to change
were moderated by power distance.
Authoritarian supervisors must reduce users’ negative emotions when implementing
IS projects.
This suggestion is true for users with low power distances.
This study takes a further step toward a more comprehensive understanding of the
antecedents of user resistance to change in IS project implementation

Scholarcy highlights
Power distance moderates the effect of authoritarian leadership on negative emotion
and the indirect effect of authoritarian leadership on user resistance to change in
Information system (IS) project implementation through negative emotion
Power distance negatively moderates the indirect effect of authoritarian leadership on
user resistance to change in IS project implementation through negative emotion
H4: Power distance negatively moderates the indirect effect of authoritarian
leadership on user resistance to change in IS project implementation through negative
emotion
Consistent with our hypothesis, this work reveals that power distance negatively
moderates the influence of authoritarian leadership on negative emotion as well as the

Page 5 per 16
indirect effect of authoritarian leadership on user resistance to change in IS project
implementation through negative emotion
The indirect effect of authoritarian leadership on user resistance via negative emotion
is significant, and this outcome further supports H2
This study contributes to the IS project implementation literature by exploring the
influence of authoritarian leadership on user resistance to change in IS project
implementation, as well as the mediating mechanism and boundary conditions.

Comparative analysis
Introduction and prior work
Such emotion can be converted into certain work behaviors, including agreeing
verbally without actual action and going on strikes (Antonio and Riccardo, 2005;
Fiedler, 2010). As users’ negative behaviors such as resistance to change are always
asserted in connection with negative emotion such as stress and uneasiness (Oreg,
2003), we speculate that negative emotion may play a mediating role between
authoritarian leadership and user resistance

Differs from previous work

Moreover, IS researchers propose that there exist some inhibitors that could cultivate
negative emotions (Cenfetelli, 2004; Ishak and Newton, 2018). However, previous
studies (e.g. Sun and Mouakket, 2015) have mainly focused on the enablers of IS
adoption or continuance, the inhibitors that lead to negative emotion require further
examination

Builds on previous research

System quality involved a five-point Likert-type scale (ranging from “not at all” to
“very much”) developed by Wang and Chen (2007) with five items, including
“Degree to which the alternative system can work successfully even in exceptional
cases” (Cronbach’s alpha: 0.90). To measure information quality, we utilized a five-
point Likert-type scale developed by Lee and Kuo (2009)

Differs from previous work

Page 6 per 16
Therefore, to verify whether negative emotion is novel explanation paths, this paper
controlled for lead leader–member exchange (LMX). LMX used a five-point Likert-
type scale (ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”) developed by Graen
and Uhl-Bien (1995) and which had seven items, including “I know very well whether
my supervisor is satisfied with my job performance” (Cronbach’s alpha: 0.92)

Builds on previous research

However, Ashforth and Humphrey (1995). This study followed the steps of Baron and
Kenny (1986) to test whether negative emotion mediates the effect of authoritarian
leadership on user resistance to change in project implementation

Results and prior work

Thus, H3 is fully supported. We followed the procedure recommended by Edwards
and Lambert (2007) to test whether power distance moderates the indirect effect of
authoritarian leadership on user resistance through negative emotion

Counterpoint to earlier claims

Consequently, this work follows the new trends in academic research, which
emphasizes the influences of negative leadership, introduces authoritarian leadership
and examines its positive influence on user resistance to change. Moreover, our work
also addresses the existing contradiction in which authoritarian leadership has both
negative and positive effects (Yan and Xie, 2017; Wang and Guan, 2018)

Managerial implications and prior work

A larger sample size should be obtained to support the results. Third, we measured
negative emotion with a scale developed by Watson et al (1988).

Study and subject analysis

users: 278
By drawing on project leadership, affective event theory and contingency theory of
leadership, the authors address this void by empirically examining whether
authoritarian leadership can lead to user resistance to change through the mediation of

Page 7 per 16
negative emotion and whether the magnitude of this mediation depends on the power
distance level. Design/methodology/approach – This study examines the authors’
research model that integrates authoritarian leadership, negative emotion, power
distance and user resistance to change using data from a matched-pair survey of 278
users and their supervisors involved in IS project implementation in China. Findings –
Negative emotion plays a mediating role in the relationship of authoritarian leadership
and user resistance to change
firms: 16
As China has accumulated rich experiences in IS project implementation and the
questions were situated in the Chinese cultural context, we chose China as the setting
for our survey. We collected data from 16 firms in different industries, such as
manufacturing, finance, medicine, construction and telecommunications. The firms
were selected because they were implementing IS projects at that time
respondents: 278
Of the 380 questionnaires we sent out, 298 were returned. After deleting the invalid
questionnaires, that is, those that were incomplete and not filled out seriously, useful
questionnaires were obtained from 278 respondents (i.e. users and their supervisors).
User data indicated 163 male respondents (58.6%)
male respondents: 163
After deleting the invalid questionnaires, that is, those that were incomplete and not
filled out seriously, useful questionnaires were obtained from 278 respondents (i.e.
users and their supervisors). User data indicated 163 male respondents (58.6%). Most
respondents (184 and 66.2%) were between 26 and 35 years old
participants: 141
Most respondents (184 and 66.2%) were between 26 and 35 years old. The
educational level of 141 participants (50.7%) involved college degrees. Table 1
presents the characteristics of the users and projects
firms: 16
Hence, a longitudinal research may be conducted to clarify the relationships among
different variables. Second, we tested the hypotheses using data from 16 firms in
China, and such feature may limit research generalizability. A larger sample size
should be obtained to support the results
Cronbach’s alpha 0.87

Page 8 per 16
The five items included “My supervisor has personal control of most matters”
(Cronbach’s alpha: 0.87)
Cronbach’s alpha 0.95
The negative emotion used a scale developed by Watson et al (1988) with ten items,
including “Upset” (Cronbach’s alpha: 0.95)
Cronbach’s alpha 0.94
The six items included “Supervisors should make most decisions without consulting
employees” (Cronbach’s alpha: 0.94)
Cronbach’s alpha 0.86
Kim and Kankanhalli (2009) with four items, including “He/She will not abide with
the changes brought by alternative system project implementation” (Cronbach’s
alpha: 0.86)
Cronbach’s alpha 0.90
System quality involved a five-point Likert-type scale (ranging from “not at all” to
“very much”) developed by Wang and Chen (2007) with five items, including
“Degree to which the alternative system can work successfully even in exceptional
cases” (Cronbach’s alpha: 0.90)
Cronbach’s alpha 0.88
This scale ranged from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree” and had four items,
including “Information outputs of the alternative system are understandable”
(Cronbach’s alpha: 0.88)
Cronbach’s alpha 0.92
LMX used a five-point Likert-type scale (ranging from “strongly disagree” to
“strongly agree”) developed by Graen and Uhl-Bien (1995) and which had seven
items, including “I know very well whether my supervisor is satisfied with my job
performance” (Cronbach’s alpha: 0.92)
confirmatory factor analysis
Measure validation We conducted confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to examine the
variable distinctiveness and item consistency of all constructs
χ2 1.47
Our hypothesized seven-factor model fit the data well (χ2 5 1113.61, df 5 758, χ2/df 5
1.47, CFI 5 0.95, TLI 5 0.95, RMSEA 5 0.04), whereas the six alternative models
exhibited significantly poorer fit
Cronbach’s alpha

Page 9 per 16
Table 3 summarizes the average variance extracted (AVE), construct reliabilities,
Cronbach’s alpha and factor loadings
Cronbach’s alpha
The Cronbach’s alpha and construct reliabilities were higher than 0.7
p < 0.000
The Cronbach’s alpha and construct reliabilities were higher than 0.7. All factor
loadings exceeded or were close to 0.7 and were significant at p < 0.000. Model χ2 df
χ2/df
p < 0.001: Tucker–Lewis index p < 0.001
One-factor model. Note(s): RMSEA, root mean square error of approximation; TLI,
Tucker–Lewis index; CFI, comparative fit index. ***p < 0.001 Six-factor model:
system quality and information quality were combined into one factor Five-factor
model: system quality and information quality were combined into one factor;
authoritarian leadership and negative emotion were combined into one factor Four-
factor model: system quality and information quality were combined into one factor;
authoritarian leadership, negative emotion and user resistance were combined into one
factor Three-factor model: system quality, information quality and power distance
were combined into one factor; authoritarian leadership, negative emotion and user
resistance were combined into one factor Two-factor model: system quality,
information quality, power distance and leader–member exchange were combined
into one factor; authoritarian leadership, negative emotion and user resistance were
combined into one factor One-factor model: system quality, information quality,
power distance, leader–member exchange, authoritarian leadership, negative emotion
and user resistance were combined into one factor. Moreover, the square root of the
AVE of each variable exceeded variable correlation (Table A3), thereby
demonstrating discriminant validity
p < 0.001
Table 4 presents the results of the analyses. First, as presented in Model 2, the path
coefficient between authoritarian leadership and user resistance is positive and
significant (β 5 0.33, p < 0.001). Thus, H1 is supported
p < 0.001
Thus, H1 is supported. Second, Model 5 shows that the path coefficient between
authoritarian leadership and negative emotion is positive and significant (β 5 0.44, p <
0.001). Finally, Model 3 reveals that negative emotion positively predicts user

Page 10 per 16
resistance to change (β 5 0.35, p < 0.001), whereas the impact of authoritarian
leadership on user resistance to change is weak (β 5 0.18, p < 0.01), thereby lending
support to H2
p < 0.001
Second, Model 5 shows that the path coefficient between authoritarian leadership and
negative emotion is positive and significant (β 5 0.44, p < 0.001). Finally, Model 3
reveals that negative emotion positively predicts user resistance to change (β 5 0.35, p
< 0.001), whereas the impact of authoritarian leadership on user resistance to change
is weak (β 5 0.18, p < 0.01), thereby lending support to H2. To further justify the
significance of this indirect effect, we used the PRODCLIN program to conduct a
product of coefficients test
p < 0.01
The indirect effect of authoritarian leadership on user resistance via negative emotion
is significant (indirect effect 5 0.154, 99% CI 5 [0.077, 0.251]), and this outcome
further supports H2. In addition, Model 6 indicates a significant interaction term
between authoritarian leadership and power distance on negative emotion (β 5 À0.22,
p < 0.01). The moderating effect of power distance is depicted as an interaction plot
following Aiken and West’s (1991) procedure
p < 0.001
The moderating effect of power distance is depicted as an interaction plot following
Aiken and West’s (1991) procedure. Figure 2 shows that the effect of authoritarian
leadership on negative emotion is high when power distance is low (simple slope 5
0.60, p < 0.001). Thus, H3 is fully supported
Cronbach’s alpha 0.87
Cronbach’s alpha 0.87 0.95
p < 0.01
Note(s): Unstandardized coefficients were presented and the corresponding standard
errors were reported in the parentheses. **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001. 0.04 (0.08) À0.05
(0.06) À0.02 (0.05) À0.01 (0.03)
p < 0.05
Note(s): PMX refers to path from authoritarian leadership to negative emotion. PYM
refers to path from negative emotion to user resistance *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01. H1:
Authoritarian leadership positively influences user resistance to change in IS project
implementation

Page 11 per 16
Methods

First, we performed Harman’s single-factor test in our research. Our results showed
that the largest factor explained 32.82% of the total variance, indicating no single
factor could dominate the overall variance. Thus, common method bias was unlikely a
threat in our research. Second, we further evaluated the common method bias
following the procedures recommended by Liang et al (2007). We created a partial
least squares (PLS) model by adding a common method factor. Our results showed
that the majority of common method factor loadings were insignificant, whereas the
loadings of our principal variable were all significant (Table A2), further indicating
that common method bias was unlikely a threat in our research.

Results

This study followed the steps of Baron and Kenny (1986) to test whether negative
emotion mediates the effect of authoritarian leadership on user resistance to change in
project implementation. Table 4 presents the results of the analyses. First, as
presented in Model 2, the path coefficient between authoritarian leadership and user
resistance is positive and significant (β 5 0.33, p < 0.001). Thus, H1 is supported.
Second, Model 5 shows that the path coefficient between authoritarian leadership and
negative emotion is positive and significant (β 5 0.44, p < 0.001). Finally, Model 3
reveals that negative emotion positively predicts user resistance to change (β 5 0.35, p
< 0.001), whereas the impact of authoritarian leadership on user resistance to change
is weak (β 5 0.18, p < 0.01), thereby lending support to H2. To further justify the
significance of this indirect effect, we used the PRODCLIN program to conduct a
product of coefficients test. The indirect effect of authoritarian leadership on user
resistance via negative emotion is significant (indirect effect 5 0.154, 99% CI 5
[0.077, 0.251]), and this outcome further supports H2.

Page 12 per 16
Conclusion

This study contributes to the IS project implementation literature by exploring the

influence of authoritarian leadership on user resistance to change in IS project
implementation, as well as the mediating mechanism and boundary conditions.
Results shows that authoritarian leadership could increase user resistance to change
through the mediating role of negative emotion. Moreover, the relationship between
authoritarian leadership and negative emotion and the indirect relationship between
authoritarian leadership and user resistance to change were moderated by power
distance. Therefore, authoritarian supervisors must reduce users’ negative emotions
when implementing IS projects. This suggestion is particularly true for users with low
power distances. Overall, this study takes a further step toward a more comprehensive
understanding of the antecedents of user resistance to change in IS project
implementation.

Limitation

Limitations and future research

Our research has several limitations. First, we adopted altitude cross-sectional data to
test our hypotheses. However, such data cannot be used to certify the casual
relationships of authoritarian leadership and user resistance to change in IS project
implementation or negative emotion and user resistance to change. Hence, a
longitudinal research may be conducted to clarify the relationships among different
variables. Second, we tested the hypotheses using data from 16 firms in China, and
such feature may limit research generalizability. A larger sample size should be
obtained to support the results. Third, we measured negative emotion with a scale
developed by Watson et al (1988). Nevertheless, negative emotions have many forms
of expressions and measurement methods. Future research can consider other
measurements, such as the scale developed by Shepherd and Wolfe (2011). Finally,
the routes of the influences of authoritarian leadership on user resistance to change in
IS project implementation are varied. Hence, future research should explore the

Page 13 per 16
influencing mechanism of authoritarian leadership on user resistance by using other
theories, such as conservation of resource theory.

Page 14 per 16