Is being a leader a mixed blessing? A dual‐pathway model linking leadership role occupancy to well‐being

• Author: Jia Lin Xie,Anita C. Keller,John M. Schaubroeck,Wen‐Dong Li
• Date: 01 October 2018
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/job.2273
• Published date: 01 October 2018

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Is being a leader a mixed blessing? A dual‐pathway model

linking leadership role occupancy to well‐being

Wen‐Dong Li

1

|John M. Schaubroeck

2

|Jia Lin Xie

3

|Anita C. Keller

4

1

Department of Management, CUHK Business

School, The Chinese University of Hong Kong,

Hong Kong, China

2

The Eli Broad Graduate School of

Management and Department of Psychology,

Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI,

U.S.A.

3

Rotman School of Management, University of

Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

4

Department of Psychology, University of

Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

Correspondence

Wen‐Dong Li, Management, CUHK Business

School, The Chinese University of Hong Kong,

12 Chak Cheung Street, Shatin, Hong Kong,

China.

Email: oceanbluepsy@gmail.com

Summary

Recent leadership research has drawn greater attention to how the well‐being of leaders influ-

ences leadership behaviors, follower performance and well‐being, and overall leadership effec-

tiveness. Yet little attention has been paid to the relationship between occupying leadership

positions and job incumbents' well‐being. This research addresses this question by developing

and testing a dual‐pathway model. Our model proposes that incumbency in leadership positions

is positively related to high levels of both job demands and job control, whereas job demands and

job control have offsetting effects on well‐being. Results based on a longitudinal sample revealed

that employees who transitioned from nonleadership positions to leadership rolesshowed trajec-

tories of increasing job demands and job control, whereas such trends were weaker among those

who remained in nonleadership positions. Findings from three additional samples generally dem-

onstrated that leadership role occupancy was indirectly related to various indices of psychological

and physiological well‐being through job demands and job control. Because the signs of the indi-

rect effects through job demands and job control differed in expected ways, the overall relation-

ship between leadership role occupancy and the well‐being outcomes was generally small and

nonsignificant. We discuss research and practical implications of our framework and findings

for organizations, employees, and leaders.

KEYWORDS

health, job characteristics, job demands and control,leadership role occupancy, well‐being

1|INTRODUCTION

Recent leadership research suggests that the well‐being of leaders

affects their leadership behaviors (Barnes, Lucianetti, Bhave, &

Christian, 2015; Kouchaki & Desai, 2015; Lin, Ma, & Johnson, 2016;

Tepper, Duffy, Henle, & Lambert, 2006), followers' performance and

well‐being (Roche, Haar, & Luthans, 2014; Sy, Côté, & Saavedra,

2005), and overall leadership effectiveness (Bass & Bass, 2008;

Hambrick, Finkelstein, & Mooney, 2005). Yet, despite its importance,

leaders' well‐being has “almost escaped attention”in the leadership

literature (Barling & Cloutier, 2017, p. 394). Little attention has been

devoted to examining how holding a leadership position (i.e., leadership

role occupancy; Arvey, Zhang, Avolio, & Krueger, 2007; Zaccaro, 2007)

impacts one's own well‐being (Ganster, 2005; Quick, Gavin, Cooper,

Quick, & Gilbert, 2000). A deeper understanding of this question may

help organizations support leaders in their efforts to cope with

stressors. It may also equip employees to anticipate the longer term

costs of undertaking supervisory responsibilities and make more

informed career choices. As contended by Barling and Cloutier (2017),

“we need to know more about the transitions into and out of leadership

positions,”and how they affect job incumbents' well‐being (p. 400).

Scholarly treatments of leaders' well‐being have largely empha-

sized one of two contrasting views. One view draws from the literature

on managerial work stress (e.g., Burke, 1988; Cooper & Marshall, 1978;

Lee & Ashforth, 1991) and suggests that being a leader is detrimental to

one's well‐being. A critical reason is that work involving supervisory

responsibilities is associated with a high level of psychosocial job

demands. In addition to carrying out a variety of tasks on their own,

leaders must also exert considerable energy and effort in support of

their followers and broad organizational aims (Mintzberg, 1971; Yukl,

2012). The relatively large scope of leaders' roles is often reflected in

long working hours, heavy workloads, and continual change and

uncertainty (Ganster, 2005; Quick et al., 2000). This view is consistent

with popular opinion that emphasizes the importance of leaders'

Authors' note: An earlier version of this paper was presented in the 2013 Annual

Meeting of Academy of Management, Orlando, Florida. The second and third

authors contributed equally to the paper. We thank Aichia Chuang, Doris Fay,

and Rico Lam for their helpful comments on an earlier version of this paper.

Received: 27 November 2015 Revised: 19 January 2018 Accepted: 25 January 2018

DOI: 10.1002/job.2273

J Organ Behav. 2018;39:971–989. Copyright © 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/job 971

devoting themselves to the stakeholders (Shamir, House, & Arthur,

1993). However, the assumption that occupying a leadership role

tends to deplete psychological resources and adversely impact

well‐being has received very little empirical scrutiny (Ganster, 2005;

Quick et al., 2000).

A separate perspective argues that occupying leadership positions

may be beneficial to one's well‐being. Leaders likely perceive higher

levels of control in their jobs because they have more decision

making authority and are granted more autonomy than most

nonleaders (e.g., Mintzberg, 1971; Yukl, 2012). Consistent with this

perspective, Sherman et al. (2012) found that leaders reported lower

levels of the stress hormone cortisol than nonleaders. They credited

this difference to the leaders' high level of perceived control over

others. This perspective, however, has yet to be fully articulated or

comprehensively tested.

Yet posing the question of leadership role occupancy and well‐

being in terms of an either‐or distinction is limiting. Leadership roles

may have highly stressful demands while simultaneously conferring

high levels of control. Such distinct pathways connecting leadership

role occupancy to well‐being may be mutually countervailing. Thus,

determining the impact of leadership roles on one's well‐being may

ultimately be a question that concerns the relative strengths of the

detrimental and salutary paths. We therefore sought to reconcile the

two contrasting perspectives by developing and testing a dual‐

pathway model in which leadership role occupancy is positively related

to both job demands and job control, and these constructs are in turn

differentially related to a range of indices of physical and psychological

well‐being (Figure 1). In building our model, we drew upon research

concerning the nature of leadership/supervisory work (e.g., Mintzberg,

1971; Yukl, 2012) and stress (Averill, 1973; Ganster & Rosen, 2013).

Notably, we examine incumbency in formal and informal leadership

roles and do not distinguish between levels of hierarchical leadership

or engagement in particular activities (e.g., promoting change). Thus,

although the concept of leadership role occupancy would be seen by

some scholars (e.g., Zaleznik, 1977) as referring to management

that involves authority over workers, we maintain an objective

operationalization across studies that fits within the literature on

leadership roles.

The present research contributes to the literature in two impor-

tant ways. First, we provide a stringent examination of the causal

relationship between leadership role occupancy and job demands and

job control with a longitudinal quasi‐experimental design (Sample 1).

We tracked changes in job control and job demands among partici-

pants who transitioned from nonleadership into leadership roles. We

also compared their trajectories with employees in the same cohort

who remained in nonleadership roles. Such a design directly tests the

effect of leadership role occupancy on job demands and job control.

Second, our research extends the prior work by developing a dual‐

pathway model of the relationship between leadership role occupancy

and well‐being. By simultaneously examining both beneficial and detri-

mental features associated with being a leader, this research provides a

framework and a set of findings that may reconcile the two opposing

views on the relationship between leadership role occupancy and

well‐being. Incumbency in a leadership position may promote well‐

being through effects that are related to job control and decrease

well‐being through its association with high job demands. The offset-

ting signs of these two proposed mediators complicate the overall

relationship between leadership role occupancy and well‐being, and

thus, their relative strengths may vary depending on the context and

the type of well‐being outcome. Our model offers a plausible explana-

tion for the mixed findings from previous studies that undertook less

complete analyses (Sherman et al., 2012; Skakon, Kristensen,

Christensen, Lund, & Labriola, 2011). It also points to specific

means through which organizations may seek to enhance their leaders'

well‐being.

We tested the hypotheses with four samples from different

cultural contexts (i.e., Switzerland, USA, China, and Japan) that used

different research designs (i.e., longitudinal, cross‐sectional, and lagged

designs). Data for two of the studies were based on probabilistic

sampling designs (Samples 2 and 4), thereby assuring a broad represen-

tation of occupations. We examined a diverse range of indicators of

psychological and physiological well‐being.

2|THEORETICAL DEVELOPMENT AND

HYPOTHESES

Some evidence suggests that serving in a leadership position enhances

the risk for an individual to suffer from physical and psychological well‐

being problems. Such evidence has largely been collected from leaders

only and thus did not compare leaders with nonleaders (e.g., Burke,

1988; Roche et al., 2014). There is also some evidence indicating the

opposite, proposing that individuals' well‐being may potentially benefit

from serving as leaders (e.g., Sherman et al., 2012). Yet these two

opposing perspectives have not been investigated jointly in an effort

to determine if the effects of higher demands of leadership roles may

be offset by higher job control. Thus, in proposing our dual‐pathway

model, we first evaluate theory and evidence in the literatures on

FIGURE 1 A dual‐pathway model of the

relationship between leadership role

occupancy and job incumbents' well‐being

972 LI ET AL.