Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Effects of Transformational and Transactional Leadership On Employees' Creative Behaviour - Mediating Effects of Work Motivation and Job Satisfaction
Effects of Transformational and Transactional Leadership On Employees' Creative Behaviour - Mediating Effects of Work Motivation and Job Satisfaction
To cite this article: Joung-Gun Kim & Su-Yol Lee (2011) Effects of transformational and
transactional leadership on employees' creative behaviour: mediating effects of work
motivation and job satisfaction, Asian Journal of Technology Innovation, 19:2, 233-247, DOI:
10.1080/19761597.2011.632590
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
Downloaded by [University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee] at 04:30 30 January 2015
Asian Journal of Technology Innovation
Vol. 19, No. 2, December 2011, 233 –247
a
Global Business Coaching Institute, #205 Poranze, Seongnae, Gangdong, Seoul, South Korea
b
Chonnam National University, Yongbong 300, Buk, Gwangju, South Korea
Innovation has emerged as an important business issue and facilitating employee creativity is
considered a necessity for any organization interested in achieving and maintaining a
competitive advantage in a world characterized by rapid technological change. This paper
examines the direct and indirect effects of transformational and transactional leadership on
employees’ creative behaviour in South Korea by considering work motivation and job
satisfaction as two mediating variables. The results of a cross-sectional survey and structural
equation modelling indicate that (a) transformational and transactional leadership had no
direct effects on employees’ creative behaviour (implying that the relationship between
leadership and employee creativity should not be seen as straightforwardly causal); (b)
transformational leadership worked through employees’ work motivation to ultimately
influence their creative behaviour; and (c) transformational and transactional leadership had
indirect positive effects on employees’ creative behaviour through job satisfaction. The
results have practical and meaningful implications for managers interested in fostering
employee creativity through leadership, work motivation, and job satisfaction.
Keywords: creative behaviour, leadership, mediating effects, structural equation modelling,
South Korea
1. Introduction
Given rapid technological advances, heightened competition, and turbulent operating environ-
ments, firms are increasingly recognizing that innovation and employee creativity are critical
factors in organizational performance and success (Amabile 1997; Bharadwaj and Menon
2000; Yang and Wang 2010). Managers increasingly realize the importance of fostering employee
creativity (Shalley and Gibson 2004) because creative employees facilitate and implement the
development of novel ideas, useful products, and effective procedures (Oldham and Cummings
1996). There is considerable evidence that employee creativity plays a critical role in organiz-
ational performance. For instance, firms belonging to Business Week’s ‘50 Most Innovative Com-
panies’ outperformed the S&P Global 1200 firms in terms of increased profitability from 1997 to
2006 (McGregor 2007).
Previous studies on creativity have examined creative behaviour by exploring what creativity
is, how creative potential can be enhanced, what conditions facilitate creativity, and how employ-
ees can be encouraged to suggest new ideas. Recent studies have suggested that the production of
∗
Corresponding author. Email: leesuyol@chonnam.ac.kr
Schippers and Stam 2010; Zhang and Bartol 2010) to suggest that our understanding of the
relationships between transformational and transactional leadership and creative behaviour may
benefit from the identification of intervening variables that can provide a better understanding
of how these relationships can be positive or negative. In addition, few studies have examined
the effects of leadership on employees’ creative behaviour in the Asian context (e.g. Yang and
Wang 2010), that is previous studies of creativity have typically focused on Western countries.
This study builds and empirically tests a theory about the relationships between transforma-
tional and transactional leadership and employees’ creative behaviour in the Korean workplace
and considers the two important intervening variables of work motivation and job satisfaction.
We posited that these two mediating mechanisms would help explain the relationships between
transformational and transactional leadership and employees’ creative behaviour and explored
the indirect effects of transformational and transactional leadership on employees’ creative behav-
iour through work motivation and job satisfaction as well as their direct effects.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows: Section 2 provides a brief review of previous
research on creative behaviour and presents the research framework and hypotheses about the
relationships between leadership, work motivation, job satisfaction, and creative behaviour.
Section 3 describes the research method, and Section 4 presents the results of the empirical analy-
sis. Section 5 discusses this study’s implications and limitations and provides some interesting
avenues for future research.
employees’ creative behaviour based on the interactive influence perspective and considers
work motivation and job satisfaction as the mediating factors based on the individual attribute
and social context perspectives.
transactional leadership on brainstorming tasks and found that transformational leadership is more
likely to induce ideas than transactional leadership. Other studies have provided support for the
argument that transactional leaders are less likely to emphasize innovation than transformational
leaders (e.g. Church and Waclawski 1998). Because transactional leadership clarifies the leader’s
expectations, followers’ perceptions of their leaders’ preferences are likely to suppress the fol-
lowers’ motivation to engage in creative behaviour. In this regard, we propose the following
hypothesis:
2.3. Mediating effects of leadership on creative behaviour: work motivation and job
satisfaction
2.3.1. Leadership, work motivation, and creative behaviour
There is evidence that demonstrates a close relationship between leadership style and employee
motivation over the roles of transformational and transactional leadership that facilitate employ-
ees’ creative behaviour. Work motivation is defined as ‘a broad construct pertaining to the con-
ditions and processes that account for the arousal and direction, magnitude and maintenance of
effort in a person’s job’ (Katzel and Thompson 1990, p. 144); in addition, intrinsic motivation
refers to the extent to which an individual is interested in a task and engages in it for the sake
of the task itself (Utman 1997). Thomas and Velthouse (1990) argued that empowered employees
are more likely to be motivated. Others have addressed the positive relationship between trans-
formational leadership and work motivation, especially intrinsic motivation (e.g. Gagne,
Senecal and Koestner 1997).
By contrast, transactional leaders actively monitor employees’ deviance from standards, mis-
takes, and errors, and they sometimes wait passively for employees to make mistakes (Bass and
Avolio 1994). These leaders tend to influence subordinates through economic means, are unlikely
to individualize the needs of subordinates, and place no emphasis on employee development.
These attributes may reduce an employees’ work motivation, particularly for employees in
hi-tech industries. In this regard, we propose the following hypotheses:
Numerous studies have indicated that creative behaviour requires a substantial amount of time
and effort on the part of the individual (Amabile 1983). For individuals to be creative, they
have to focus on pertinent issues and must be motivated to work hard to find novel and useful
Asian Journal of Technology Innovation 237
solutions. Motivation is believed to play an important role in creativity in the context of emerging
problems through the emphasis of the identification of novel solutions. Thus, motivation has been
a topic of special interest in creativity research for explaining individual differences in creative
behaviour (Woodman and Schoenfeldt 1990; Shalley 1995; Amabile 1997). For instance, pre-
vious studies have found that R&D professionals emphasize work motivation for creativity
(Amabile and Gryskiewicz 1989). In this regard, we propose the following hypothesis:
Numerous theoretical and empirical studies have demonstrated that the supervisor’s leadership
style has considerable influence on employees’ job satisfaction (e.g. Bass 1985; Nielsen, Yarker
and Randall 2009). Job satisfaction is defined as a pleasurable or positive emotional that results
from job appraisals and job experience (Locke 1976). Transformational leaders are likely to intrin-
sically foster job satisfaction because of the ability to motivate employees by instilling confidence
and elevating the value of work-related outcomes. In the process of motivating employees, a trans-
formational leader may help subordinates better understand their work and facilitate shared feelings
that may increase job satisfaction. Bass (2006) suggested that transformational leaders are inspira-
tional, committed to their organizations, challenge subordinates to think differently, show genuine
concern for their followers, and are likely to increase their followers’ job satisfaction; however,
taking the management-by-exception approach, transactional leaders are more likely to be per-
ceived as reactive than proactive (Bass 1985). Further, followers of these leaders, who typically
take a quid-pro-quo approach, are likely to be dissatisfied with reward system equity. These
leaders often consider one mistake to outweigh multiple contributions, thereby fostering dissatis-
faction among their followers. In this regard, we propose the following hypotheses:
Few studies have examined the relationship between job satisfaction and employee creativity.
Kim, Hon and Crant (2009) examined the effects of employee creativity on career satisfaction
and found that employee creativity increases new employees’ career satisfaction. Although the
causal relationship between job satisfaction and creative behaviour in Kim et al. (2009) is
opposite to that in the present study, their study provided strong evidence of a positive
relationship between the two variables. Similarly, Seibert, Crant and Kraimer (1999)
showed that job satisfaction and career success are positively related to innovative behaviour.
When employees are satisfied with their job and work, they are more likely to have the motiv-
ation to generate new ideas, find new solutions, and work together to solve complex problems.
Thus, employees’ creative behaviour may be related to job satisfaction; therefore, we propose
the following hypothesis:
Based on the literature review and the hypotheses, this study considers a research framework that
focuses on the relationships between transformational and transactional leadership and employ-
ees’ creative behaviour as well as on two important intervening variables: work motivation and
job satisfaction (Figure 1).
238 J.-G. Kim and S.-Y. Lee
Downloaded by [University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee] at 04:30 30 January 2015
Creative behaviour. Creative behaviour, the dependent variable, was measured by using a
modified scale of creative performance. A four-item Likert-type scale (Cronbach’s a ¼ .82)
was adapted from Oldham and Cumming’s (1996) and Scott and Bruce’s (1994) measures of crea-
tive performance.
The measurement instruments of this study were tested for their reliability, validity, and uni-
dimensionality. In terms of their reliability, Cronbach’s a for all the constructs (except for the con-
tingent reward construct) exceeded the recommended value of .70 (Nunnally 1978). Cronbach’s a
for the contingent reward construct was .65; however, all of the indicators were retained because
previous studies have found this measurement to be reliable. A confirmatory factor analysis
(CFA) was conducted to evaluate the construct validity and unidimensionality. Table 1 presents
the standardized factor loading, Cronbach’s a, averaged variance extracted (AVE), and composite
Downloaded by [University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee] at 04:30 30 January 2015
reliability for the measures. In general, the loading of each indicator should exceed .50 with a sig-
nificant t-value (t . 2.0) (Li, Humphreys, Yeung and Cheng 2007). In this study, all of the load-
ings exceeded .50 except for three items (.49, .45, and .43); however, all the indicators were
retained because they were reasonably close to .50.
3.3. Analysis
Structural equation modelling (SEM) with LISREL 8.30 (Joreskog and Sorborn 1996) was used
to simultaneously estimate the relationships between latent constructs. The SEM results indicate
that the hypothesized model provided a good fit to the data (Hu and Bentler 1999). Table 1 pro-
vides the descriptive statistics and correlations and Table 2 summarizes all the fit indices.
IS3 .67
IS4 .63
Individual consideration (IC) IC1 .76 .72 .52 .81
IC2 .65
IC3 .45
IC4 .61
Transactional leadership
Management-by-exception (MBEP) MBEP1 .67 .86 .68 .89
MBEP2 .78
MBEP3 .86
MBEP4 .75
Contingent reward (CRW) CRW1 .62 .65 .53 .77
CRW2 .54
CRW3 .70
Work motivation MOT1 .62 .74 .48 .82
MOT2 .61
MOT3 .71
MOT4 .43
MOT5 .66
Job satisfaction JSAT1 .65 .75 .51 .84
JSAT2 .57
JSAT3 .56
JSAT4 .68
JSAT5 .59
Creative behaviour (Self-reported) CB1 .78 .81 .67 .89
CB2 .82
CB3 .76
CB4 .55
7. Work motivation 3.13 .64 .02 .13∗∗ .08+ .08+ -.02 -.01 -
8. Job satisfaction 3.30 .71 .33∗∗ .29∗∗ .31∗∗ .36∗∗ .08+ .32∗∗ .15∗∗ -
9. Creative behaviour 3.07 .71 .18∗∗ .21∗∗ .15∗∗ .22∗∗ .02 .20∗∗ .24∗∗ .32∗∗ -
Notes: +p-value , .10, ∗ p-value ,.05, ∗∗ p-value , .01.
motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individual consideration (e.g. Gange et al. 1997; Utman
1997). By contrast, the results for the transactional model in Figure 6 and Figure 7 do not provide
support for H2b, that is, management-by-exception and contingent reward (attributes of transfor-
mational leadership) had no influence on employees’ work motivation.
The results provide support for H3 that predicted that employees’ work motivation would be
positively related to creative behaviour. As shown from Figures 2 – 8, the path coefficients for the
relationship between work motivation and creative behaviour for all leadership attributes were
significantly different from 0 (p , .01). That is, employees were likely to be creative when
they were intrinsically motivated.
These results are consistent with the findings of previous studies that reported that the relation-
ship between transformational leadership and employee creativity is mediated by several impor-
tant intervening variables such as intrinsic motivation (e.g. Zhang and Bartol 2010). In addition,
transactional leadership had no relationship with employees’ innovative behaviour, as indicated in
some studies (e.g. Boerner et al. 2007; Moss and Ritossa 2007).
and .32 for idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individual
consideration (transformational leadership attributes), respectively, and .37 and .29 for manage-
ment by exception and contingent rewards (transactional leadership attributes), respectively.
The results for H4 and H5 indicate that both transformational leadership and transactional
leadership worked through job satisfaction to influence creative behaviour. Transformational
leadership has traditionally been considered to foster job satisfaction and creativity because
of its ability to provide a sense of purpose and intellectual stimulation and to encourage fol-
lowers to be more responsible and autonomous. However, previous studies have suggested that
transactional leadership can reduce job satisfaction by excessively emphasizing a quid-pro-quo
approach that in turn can limit the production of new ideas and products (Emery and Barker
2007). The results of the present study suggest that even transactional leadership may play an
important role in fostering job satisfaction and creative behaviour. Strong transactional leader-
ship in the form of contingent rewards may lead to situations in which deeper levels of trust
are formed, thereby facilitating job satisfaction and performance (Podsakoff, Todor, Grover
and Huber 1984).
5. Conclusion
5.1. Summary and implications
Understanding the direct and indirect effects of different leadership styles such as transforma-
tional and transactional leadership on employees’ creative behaviour is crucial for fostering the
potential for innovation and creativity. In this study, we developed and empirically examined a
theory on how leadership works through two important intervening variables (work motivation
and job satisfaction) that influence employees’ creative behaviour in the Korean workplace.
The results have important theoretical and managerial implications.
First, the results verify the mediated effects of transformational and transactional leadership
on employees’ creative behaviour, to demonstrate that the relationship between transformational
and transactional leadership and employees’ creative behaviour should not be seen as straightfor-
wardly causal. Leadership is believed to indirectly influence employees’ creative behaviour
through individual- and work-related mediating variables such as work motivation and job satis-
faction instead of influencing it directly. This explains why previous studies of the direct relation-
ship between leadership and employee creativity have produced mixed results.
Second, the results demonstrate the important mediating roles of work motivation and job sat-
isfaction on employee creativity. These provide strong support for the positive relationship
between them and suggests that work motivation and job satisfaction play crucial roles to encou-
rage employees’ creative behaviour. Work motivation and job satisfaction are influenced by leader-
ship as well as by diverse factors such as personality traits, team climate, and organizational
systems; therefore, managers should take a more comprehensive approach in consideration of
employees’ work motivation and job satisfaction when influencing their creative behaviour.
Third, the results suggest that transactional leadership plays an important role in employees’
creative behaviour. Previous studies have typically taken a negative view of transactional leader-
ship (e.g. Bass 1985); however, the results of this study illustrate that certain forms of transactions
(e.g. contingent rewards) between leaders and followers may have positive effects on job satisfac-
tion and performance. For example, employees whose leaders set clearly defined expectations and
agreed-upon levels of performance are more likely to achieve their goals; therefore, managers
should consider the positive side of transactional leadership that includes contingent rewards to
foster their followers’ job satisfaction and creativity.
The results provide support for the argument that a ‘one-size-fits-all approach’ should be
avoided when encouraging employees’ creative behaviour. For instance, the positive form of
Asian Journal of Technology Innovation 245
autonomy to enhance employee creativity is evident in behaviour patterns of leaders whose sub-
ordinates perceive a high level of leader support and perform effectively, whereas the negative
form is evident in those of leaders whose subordinates perceive a low level of leader support
and perform ineffectively (Amabile et al. 2004). Transformational and transactional leadership
can have positive as well as negative attributes depending on employees’ capabilities, awareness,
and desires. Therefore, leaders wishing to foster employee creativity should consider diverse
aspects of the work atmosphere as well as the individual characteristics of subordinates.
common method variance. Previous studies suggested that self-report bias cannot be avoided
because of social desirability and the respondent’s consistency motif (Podsakoff and Organ
1986). In this study, we verified that common method variance did not influence the data and
the data were reasonable. However, future research should enhance the generalizability of this
study’s findings by using more bias-free data (e.g. leader – member exchange data), employing
ratings by others, and observing employees in real work settings, among others.
Second, all the participants were employees at the same company in South Korea. We selected
these participants to control for confounding variables at the organizational level (e.g. Yang and
Wang 2010); however, this may have reduced external validity. In this regard, future research
should consider diverse organizational settings in various Asian countries to enhance the general-
izability of the findings to other types of employees, organizations, and industries.
Acknowledgement
The second author is grateful for the financial support provided by the Research Foundation of the College of
Business Administration, Chonnam National University, Republic of Korea, 2011.
References
Amabile, T.M. (1983), ‘The social psychology of creativity’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
45, 357 –376.
Amabile, T.M. (1996), Creativity in Context, Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Amabile, T.M. (1997), ‘Motivating creativity in organizations: on doing what you love and loving what you
do’, California Management Review, 40, 39–58.
Amabile, T.M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J., and Herron, M. (1996), ‘Assessing the work environment
for creativity’, Academy of Management Journal, 39, 1154–1184.
Amabile, T.M., and Gryskiewicz, N. (1989), ‘The creative work environment scales: the work environment
inventory’, Creativity Research Journal, 2, 231–254.
Amabile, T.M., Hill, K.G., Hennessey, B.A., and Tighe, E.M. (1994), ‘The work preference inventory: asses-
sing intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66,
950–967.
Amabile, T.M., Schatzel, E.A., Moneta, G.B., and Kramer, S.J. (2004), ‘Leader behaviours and the work
environment for creativity: perceived leader support’, Leadership Quarterly, 15, 5–32.
Avolio, B.J., Bass, B.M., and Jung, D.I. (1999), ‘Re-examining the components of transformational and
transactional leadership using the multifactor leadership questionnaire’, Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, 72, 441–462.
Bass, B.M. (1985), Leadership and Performance beyond Expectations, New York: Free Press.
Bass, B.M. (1999), ‘Two decades of research and development in transformational leadership’, European
Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8, 9–32.
Bass, B.M. (2006), Transformational Leadership (2nd ed.), Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bass, B.M., and Avolio, B.J. (1994), Improving Organizational Effectiveness through Transformational
Leadership, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
246 J.-G. Kim and S.-Y. Lee
Bass, B.M., and Avolio, B.J. (1995), MLQ Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (2nd ed.), Redwood City,
CA: Mind Garden.
Bharadwaj, S., and Menon, A. (2000), ‘Making innovation happen in organizations: individual creativity
mechanisms, organizational creativity mechanisms or both?’, Journal of Product Innovation
Management, 17, 424–434.
Boerner, S., Eisenbeiss, S.A., and Griesse, D. (2007), ‘Follower behaviour and organizational performance:
the impact of transformational leaders’, Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 13, 15–26.
Brislin, R. (1980), ‘Translation and content analysis of oral and written material’, in Handbook of
Crosscultural Psychology, eds. H.C. Triandis and J.W. Berry, Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon, pp. 398–444.
Church, A.H., and Waclawski, J. (1998), ‘The relationship between individual personality orientation and
executive leadership behaviour’, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 71, 99–125.
Emery, C.R., and Barker, K.J. (2007), ‘The effect of transactional and transformational leadership styles on
the organizational commitment and job satisfaction of customer contact personnel’, Journal of
Downloaded by [University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee] at 04:30 30 January 2015
Podsakoff, P.M., and Organ, D.W. (1986), ‘Self-reports in organizational research: problems and prospects’,
Journal of Management, 12, 531–544.
Podsakoff, P.M., Todor, W.D., Grover, R.A., and Huber, V.L. (1984), ‘Situational moderators of leader
reward behaviour and punishment behaviours: fact or fiction?’, Organizational Behaviour and
Human Performance, 34, 21–63.
Scott, S.G., and Bruce, R.A. (1994), ‘Determinants of innovative behaviour: a path model of individual inno-
vation in the workplace’, Academy of Management Journal, 37, 580–607.
Shalley, C.E. (1995), ‘Effects of coaction, expected evaluation, and goal setting on creativity and pro-
ductivity’, Academy of Management Journal, 38, 483–503.
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’, Leadership Quarterly, 15, 33–53.
Shalley, C.E., Gilson, L.L., and Blum, T.C. (2009), ‘Interactive effects of growth need strength, work
context, and job complexity on self-reported creative performance’, Academy of Management
Downloaded by [University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee] at 04:30 30 January 2015