Servant Leadership and Work Engagement: The Contingency Effects of Leader–Follower Social Capital

AuthorDirk De Clercq,Dave Bouckenooghe,Ganna Matsyborska,Usman Raja
Date01 June 2014
Published date01 June 2014
DOIhttp://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.21185
HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT QUARTERLY, vol. 25, no. 2, Summer 2014 © Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) • DOI: 10.1002/hrdq.21185 183
ARTICLES
Servant Leadership and Work
Engagement: The Contingency
Effects of Leader–Follower Social
Capital
Dirk De Clercq, Dave Bouckenooghe, Usman Raja,
Ganna Matsyborska
Drawing from research on work engagement, contingent leadership, and
social capital, the authors investigate the relationship between servant
leadership and work engagement, as well as how this relationship might
be moderated by leader–follower social capital. Data captured from 263
employees of four information technology (IT) companies show that
servant leadership enhances work engagement, especially at higher levels
of goal congruence and social interaction. In addition, a signifi cant three-
way interaction effect shows that, in conditions marked by high social
interaction, goal congruence more strongly enables the conversion of
servant leadership into enhanced work engagement. These fi ndings have
signifi cant implications for HRD research and practice.
Key Words: servant leadership, work engagement, goal congruence, social
interaction, contingency effects
Positive organizational behavior, which is an outcome of the firm’s focus
on the well-being of employees, represents an emerging domain of inquiry
(Luthans & Avolio, 2009). Proponents of this approach attend to the positive
aspects of individual employees and their work environments, rather than
to their negative elements (Luthans, 2002), yet more remains to be discov-
ered about employees’ capacity to engage in positive behaviors (Cameron,
Dutton, & Quinn, 2003; Halbesleben, Harvey, & Bolino, 2009). While many
organizations emphasize the promotion of engagement among their work-
force, few studies inform human resource development (HRD) professionals
how they can increase employees’ work engagement (Shuck, Reio, & Rocco,
184 De Clercq, Bouckenooghe, Raja, Matsyborska
HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT QUARTERLY • DOI: 10.1002/hrdq
2011; Wollard & Shuck, 2011), defi ned as the extent to which employees
are physically, emotionally, and cognitively attached to their work (Schaufeli,
Salanova, Gonzalez-Roma, & Bakker, 2002). In this inquiry, we explore how
servant leaders, or leaders who set aside their self-interest for the benefi t of
their followers (Greenleaf, 1977; Liden, Wayne, Zhao, & Henderson, 2008),
can stimulate work engagement among followers, as well as how the social
capital embedded in leader–follower relationships (Adkere & Roberts, 2008;
Payne, Moore, Griffi s, & Autry, 2011) can invigorate this process.
As a key source of organizational sustainability through human resources,
work engagement among employees sparks notable interest among scholars
(Schaufeli, Taris, & Van Rhenen, 2008). Engaged employees are strongly
enthusiastic about their work (May, Gilson, & Harter, 2004) and function as
a critical source of inspiration for others (Bakker & Xanthopoulou, 2009).
Several studies confi rm the benefi cial role of work engagement for individual
and organizational performance (Halbesleben & Wheeler, 2008; Rurkkhum
& Bartlett, 2012; Shuck, Reio, etal., 2011; Shuck, Ghosh, Zigarmi, & Nimon,
2013). Investigating what makes employees more likely to exhibit strong work
engagement is thus of high interest to HRD practitioners (Shuck etal., 2013)
and to organizational decision makers in general (Bakker, 2009).
Accomplishing sustained levels of work engagement among employees
is challenging, though, because of the high levels of resources and energy
required (Macey & Schneider, 2008). We argue that an important stimulant
of sustained energy levels among employees may be selfl ess leadership by
immediate supervisors. Contrary to more commonly researched leadership
styles—such as charismatic (e.g., Balkundi, Kilduff, & Harrison, 2011) or
transformational (e.g., Liu, Siu, & Shi, 2010)—this style of servant leader-
ship places the interests of followers before those of the organization and
focuses on the personal development and growth of followers (Greenleaf,
1977; Schaubroeck, Lam, & Peng, 2011). Although previous research has
linked work engagement to different leadership types, including transforma-
tional (Macey & Schneider, 2008), ethical (Den Hartog & Belschak, 2012),
and authentic (Walumbwa, Wang, Wang, Schaubroeck, & Avolio, 2010),
published research on the relationship between servant leadership and work
engagement is scarce (van Dierendonck, 2011). This gap is somewhat sur-
prising, in light of previous discussions in HRD scholarship of the usefulness
of follower-based leadership for developing an engaged workforce (Shuck &
Herd, 2012).
Nor has theory-driven empirical work defi ned the challenges underly-
ing the successful implementation of servant leadership. Servant leaders may
instill positive energy among their followers, but this infl uence does not mate-
rialize automatically and instead may vary across different organizational cir-
cumstances (Greenleaf, 1977; Smith, Montagno, & Kuzmenko, 2004). Thus,
we need a better understanding of the conditions in which servant leadership
most effectively enhances work engagement, particularly those that enable

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT