从认同领导到认同组织:对认同转化边界条件的探讨

When Employees' Identification with Supervisors Helps to Shape Their Identification with Organizations: Looking at the Roles of Supervisor-Organization Value Fit and Supervisor's Organizational Embodiment

以往研究指出员工会对不同主体产生多重认同,且这些认同之间具有转化性,突出表现为对"领导者"的个体性认同会转化到对"组织"的群体性认同。本文考察了这一转化过程的边界条件,指出员工对领导者的认同在多大程度上能转化为对组织的认同取决于领导者与组织的关系。基于对266名员工的调查,研究发现:当领导者与组织价值观相匹配,或领导者被员工视为组织的化身时,员工对领导者的认同更有可能转化为对组织的认同;进一步地,领导者-组织价值观匹配对认同转化过程的调节是通过领导者组织化身的中介作用而实现的。

Given the low job switching costs and high employee turnover in the competitive market, organizations have realized the importance of enhancing employees＇ identifications as to promote their organizational commitment and to improve their performance. Identification is a multifoci concept, two primary types of which are collective identification and personal identification, characterized as organizational identification and supervisor identification, respectively. Previous literature has found a spillover effect in which employees＇ supervisor identification would generalize to their identification with the organization. However, less attention has been paid to the boundary condition for such an effect. Therefore, the aim of this study is to examine that under what conditions employees＇ personal identification with their supervisors will be transformed to their collective identification with the organization. Based on the person-organization fit and organizational agent theory, an integrative model is developed to investigate the roles of supervisor-organization value fit（SOF） and supervisor＇s organizational embodiment（SOE）.This study used multiple linear regression and collected data through a two-wave survey from 266 employees across different industries. Moderation and mediated moderation analyses were conducted to test the hypotheses. Consistent with our predictions, the results revealed that：（1） Both SOF and SOE positively moderated the relationship between followers＇ supervisor identification and organizational identification in a way that supervisor identification was more likely to influence organizational identification when employees perceived their supervisor as a person who shared the value with the organization, or as the embodiment of the organization;（2） SOF had a positive effect on SOE;（3） The moderating effect of SOF on the ＂supervisor identification-organizational identification＂ relationship was mediated by SOE.In general, the current study answers under what condition supervisor identification is more likely to be generalized to organizational identification. By doing so, the research has both theoretical and practical implications. Theoretically, by identifying the boundary conditions of the supervisor identification and organizational identification relationship, the study provides an insight into the transformation of identification and hence contributes to organizational identity theory. In addition, the study enriches the literature on supervisor＇s organizational embodiment by identifying one of its antecedences, i.e., supervisor-organization value fit, indicating the positive effect of supervisor＇s value fit with organization on increasing his or her organizational embodiment. Practically, this research suggests that organizations should develop employees＇ dual identifications, thus inspiring their positive attitudes and behaviors originated from high levels of identification. Furthermore, organizations are supposed to recruit and select supervisors whose values coincide with the organizations in order to accelerate the transforming process from employees＇ supervisor identification to organizational identification. Nevertheless, this study has some limitations that suggest avenues for further research. First, as we collected data from a single source, the possible common method bias may impact the reliability of research findings. Although the results of analysis excluded the possibility of severe common method bias in the current study, we encourage further research that collects data from different sources. Another limitation is about using the employees＇ report of supervisor-organization value fit, which may not be the most accurate measuring. Future research are encouraged to address these problems, and to examine the boundary conditions of supervisor identification-organizational identification relationship from alternative perspectives..