The Role of Servant Leadership in Predicting Job Performance of Public Sector Employees: Examining the Mediation of Work Engagement and Moderation of Trust in Leader and Self-Efficacy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61506/01.00495Keywords:
Social exchange theory, self-efficacy, work engagement, trust in leader, servant leadership style, job performanceAbstract
This paper discusses an important issue concerning the contribution of servant leadership in terms of predicting job performance based on work engagement as the mediator while trust in leader and self-efficacy serve as the moderators. In line with the social exchange theory, research puts forward the notion that the positive emotional states with reciprocated trust lead the high levels of work engagement which subsequently contribute to more impressive job performance. The study obtained data from 350 employees of the public sector in Pakistan with 320 valid responses that were analyzed using SPSS 22 and Hayes Process Macro for mediating and moderating analyses. This means that servant leadership significantly boosts work engagement, which is a mediator in its effect on job performance. Moreover, trust in the leader strengthens the relationship of servant leadership style and the employees’ work engagement, and finally, the perceived self-efficacy amplifies the effect of work engagement on job performance. In this light, the findings have important implications for understanding how servant leadership proves to be an important factor in creating a strong and vibrant organizational culture that supports and fosters employee engagement, commitment, and productivity through the activation of trust in leadership and self-efficacy as critical boundary conditions. By situating the analysis within the context of Pakistan, a high power-distance culture with limited empirical exploration of its leadership dynamics, the study offers important theoretical and practical contributions. It enriches the understanding of servant leadership in underrepresented contexts and emphasizes the strategic importance of fostering trust and self-efficacy within organizational frameworks. Such findings are of great importance for managers and policymakers, since they show how these constructs can be used to effectively operate in resource-constrained and rapidly changing environments.
References
Abbas, Q., & Khaliq, A. (2016). Leadership styles and organizational performance: A critical review. Journal of Management Research, 9(1), 23-38.
Agarwal, U. (2014). Linking justice, trust, and innovative work behavior to work engagement. Personnel Review, 43(1), 41-73. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-02-2012-0019
Ahearne, M., Mathieu, J., & Rapp, A. (2005). To empower or not to empower your sales force? An empirical examination of the influence of leadership empowerment behavior on customer satisfaction and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(5), 945–955. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.5.945
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.51.6.1173
Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1997). Task performance and contextual performance: The meaning for personnel selection research. In R. W. Brimm & R. A. Williams (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 3, pp. 271–322). Consulting Psychologists Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327043hup1002_3
Carmeli, A., & Schaubroeck, J. (2007). The influence of leaders' and other referents' normative expectations on individual involvement in creative work. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(1), 35–48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2006.11.001
Creswell, J. W., & Garrett, A. L. (2008). The "movement" of mixed methods research and the role of educators. South African Journal of Education, 28(3), 321–333. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v28n3a176
Creswell, J. W., & Tashakkori, A. (2007). Differing perspectives on mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(4), 303–308. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689807306132
De Clercq, D., Haq, I. U., & Azeem, M. U. (2014). The influence of servant leadership on organizational citizenship behavior: The moderating role of work engagement. Journal of Business Research, 67(4), 394–399.
Den Hartog, D. N., & Belschak, F. D. (2012). Work engagement and leadership. In D. G. Latham (Ed.), Handbook of employee engagement (pp. 346-360). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Farhadi, M. (2021). Exploring the Impact of Internal Marketing and Job Satisfaction on Internal Brand Equity. Journal of Policy Options, 4(1), 30-35.
Greenleaf, R. K. (2002). Servant leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate power and greatness. Paulist Press.
Hakanen, J. J., Ropponen, A., Schaufeli, W. B., & De Witte, H. (2019). Who is engaged at work?: A large-scale study in 30 European countries. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 61(5), 373–381. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0000000000001528
Hasan, T., & Sadat, A. (2023). Dynamics of Job Satisfaction in Bangladesh's Banking Sector Implications for Employee Engagement and Organizational Success. Journal of Business and Economic Options, 6(4), 36-42.
Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 692–724. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5465/256287
Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30(3), 607–610. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/001316447003000308
Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Liao, C., & Meuser, J. D. (2014). Servant leadership and serving culture: Influence on individual and unit performance. Academy of Management Journal, 57(5), 1434–1452. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2013.0034
Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Zhao, H., & Henderson, D. (2008). Servant leadership: Development of a multidimensional measure and multi-level assessment. The Leadership Quarterly, 19(2), 161–177. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2008.01.006
Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 397-422. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.397
Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1(1), 61-89. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/1053-4822(91)90011-Z
Parris, D. L., & Peachey, J. W. (2013). A systematic literature review of servant leadership theory in organizational contexts. Journal of Business Ethics, 113, 377–393. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1322-6
Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2004). Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(3), 293–315. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/job.248
Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Salanova, M. (2002). The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(4), 701–716. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164405282471
Schwarzer, R., & Jerusalem, M. (1995). Generalized self-efficacy scale. In J. Weinman, S. Wright, & M. Johnston (Eds.), Measures in health psychology: A user's portfolio (pp. 35-37). Windsor. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/t00393-000
Van Dierendonck, D., & Nuijten, I. (2011). The servant leadership survey: Development and validation of a multidimensional measure. Journal of Business and Psychology, 26, 249-267. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-010-9194-1
Wadud, H. (2022). Assessing Human Resource Management Strategies and Their Influence on Job Satisfaction in Private Banks. Journal of Policy Options, 5(1), 15-21.
