본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

리더의 영향력 전술이 구성원의 직무수행에 미치는 영향

The Effects of Leaders' Influence Tactics on Subordinates' Job Performance

윤석화|이수진|변국도
한국인적자원관리학회 (Korean Academy Of Human Resource Management)|2016.09|인적자원관리연구 (Journal of Human Resource Management Research)|제23권 제3호|pp. 47-78

0

조회

0

다운로드

5

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

조직시민행동task performanceintrinsic motivationOCB역할모호성과업성과role ambiguity내재적 동기부여영향력 전술리더에 대한 호감influence tacticsliking for the supervisor
주제분류경영학

초록

빠르고 복잡한 경영 환경의 변화로 인해 조직 구성원들은 매번 예측할 수 없는 상황에 놓이게 되고, 이에 따라 조직의 리더에 대한 기대는 더욱 높아진다. 이러한 환경 하에서 전통적으로 타당하다고 인정되는 단일의 리더십을 복잡한 경영 현실에 적용하기에는 한계가 따를 뿐만 아니라, 실무적으로 그 효과 또한 제한적일 것이다. 이에 따라 구성원들에게 리더의 영향력을 효과적으로 발휘하기 위한 구체적인 행동 지침이 그 어느 때보다 필요하고 중요하다. 이에 본 연구에서는 리더의 영향력 전술이 구성원의 직무수행에 미치는 영향을 구체적으로 살펴보고자 한다. 대부분의 선행연구에서는 전술 자체의 선호와 선택에 초점이 맞추어져 영향력 전술의 효과에 대한 실증이 부족하였다. 또한 개념적 범주화를 한 선행연구에서의 일관되지 않은 연구 결과는 통일된 연구 축적을 어렵게 하는 결정적인 한계점이 될 것이다. 이에 따라 영향력 전술의 메타구분, 구체적으로 강성적(hard)·연성적(soft) 전술을 통해서 구성원의 직무수행에 미치는 효과를 검증하는 것은 영향력 전술의 이론적 공백을 메우며 실무적으로 유익한 지침을 제공할 수 있을 것이다. 나아가 영향력 전술과 결과 변수 간의 역동적인 관계를 파악하기 위해서는 둘 사이에 내재하는 메커니즘과 상황적 요인에 대한 이해가 필요하다. 과연 리더의 영향력 전술이 어떤 맥락에서 어떤 메커니즘을 거쳐 구성원의 직무수행에 영향을 미치게 되는가를 검토하기 위해 전술과 직무수행 사이의 매개변수와 조절변수에 대하여 실증하고자 한다. 이에 본 연구에서는 Breckler (1984)가 제시한 태도의 3요소인 행동·정서·인지적 측면 중 행동과 정서적 측면에 기반하여 구성원의 내재적 동기부여와 리더에 대한 호감의 매개효과를 검토하고, 구체적 상황 요인으로서 직무 특성인 역할모호성의 조절효과를 살펴볼 것이다. 이 과정은 리더의 영향력 전술과 구성원의 성과 간의 관계를 보다 체계적이고 명확하게 이해할 수 있게 하며 나아가 실무적 적용 가능성을 높일 수 있는 중요한 작업이 될 것이다. 본 연구는 국내 대기업 6개 조직에 근무하는 구성원들과 그들의 직속리더로 구성되었으며, 최종 리더-구성원 241쌍의 자료가 분석에 사용되었다. 위계적 회귀분석을 이용한 분석결과, 강성적 영향력 전술의 경우 구성원의 과업성과에 유의한 부적관계가, 연성적 영향력 전술의 경우 모든 직무수행에서 유의한 정적관계가 있는 것으로 나타났다. 또한 매개변수인 리더에 대한 호감이 연성적 영향력 전술과 모든 직무수행 간의 관계를 매개한다는 것을 알 수 있었다. 끝으로 조절효과의 경우, 강성적 영향력 전술과 과업성과와 조직지향 조직시민행동 사이의 관계에서 역할 모호성의 유의한 조절효과를 확인할 수 있었다. 본 연구의 시사점은 다음과 같다. 첫째, 메타 구분에 의한 리더의 각 영향력 전술이 구성원의 직무수행에 미치는 영향을 확인함으로써 조직상황에서 영향력 전술의 유효성을 실증적으로 밝혀냈다. 둘째, 각 영향력 전술과 구성원의 직무수행 간의 관계에 내재된 메커니즘의 일부를 규명함으로써 이론적으로 영향력 전술의 과정에 대한 이해를 높였을 뿐만 아니라 실무적으로도 전술 사용의 구체적인 효과를 제시함으로써 리더가 영향력 전술을 사용하는 것에 대한 설득력을 높이는데 기여하였다. 셋째, 영향력 전술과 역할 모호성 간의 상호작용효과를 일부 확인함으로써 영향력 전술의 효과를 실증함에 있어 구체적인 상황에 대한 이해를 도모하고자 하였다. 하지만 본 연구는 이러한 시사점에도 불구하고 몇 가지 한계점을 가지고 있다. 첫째, 횡단연구 설계로 인하여 인과관계를 명확히 하는데 한계가 있다. 둘째, 구성원의 다양한 직무활동에 대한 리더의 영향력 전술의 효과를 살펴볼 필요가 있다. 끝으로, 보다 다양한 측면에서 조절변수에 대한 검토가 이루어질 필요가 있다. 이상에서 언급한 본 연구의 한계점을 극복하고 향후 연구를 이어간다면 영향력 전술에 관한 이론의 전체적인 틀을 구성하는데 기여할 뿐만 아니라 구체적인 행동 지침을 요구하는 실무에서의 요청을 어느 정도 수용할 수 있을 것으로 기대된다.

Abstract

In today's severe competitive business environment, the role of leaders has become more and more important. One of the most significant determinants of leadership effectiveness is the success of influencing subordinates. To be effective as a leader in the organization, it is critical to influence his/her subordinates to meet desired organizational process and performance outcomes. The ways in which leaders affect their subordinates have been investigated in terms of influence tactics, which refers to the specific types of behaviors used to gain support for decisions, requests, and policies, and to motivate subordinates to implement them. Based on the work of Kipnis and colleagues (1980), many researchers have examined on identifying specific influence behaviors, categorizing the most frequently used tactics, and founding the antecedents of the use of influence tactics. However, much of existing research in this area has focused on assessing upward influence tactics, with less attention given to the influence tactics used by leaders to influence their subordinates. Accordingly, eminent scholars have urged researchers to examine the use and effectiveness of leaders' influence tactics using established conceptual frameworks of dyadic influences as a foundation. Therefore, this study focuses on leaders' downward influence tactics. Specifically, to advance the understanding of the dynamics of downward influence tactics in work settings, this study has three main purposes. First, this study investigates the relationship between leaders' downward influence tactics and subordinates' job performance (i.e., task performance and organizational citizenship behaviors: OCB) by grouping influence tactics into two meta-categories: hard tactics and soft tactics. Second, to examine a psychological process in this relationship, this study explores the mediating roles of intrinsic motivation and liking for the supervisor based on the three components of an attitude (i.e., cognitive, affective, and behavioral component). Third, recognizing the importance of situational factors in the leadership influence process, this study further investigates the moderating effects of subordinates' role ambiguity in the relationships between leaders' influence tactics and their job performance. Thus, our study takes an important step toward developing a better understanding of how influence tactics in general, and leaders' downward influence tactics in particular, affect subordinates' job performance. Data were collected from questionnaires distributed to subordinates and their direct supervisors in 6 major companies in South Korea. Most of the respondents were full-time focal employees in international electronic companies, international automobile companies, and nationwide telecom companies. After excluding missing data, we were able to match responses for a total of 241 pairs to constitute the final sample for this study. Hierarchical regression analysis was used to test all of the hypothesized relationships using SPSS 19.0. The results demonstrated not only the negative relationship between leaders' hard influence tactics and subordinates' task performance but also the positive relationships between leaders' soft influence tactics and subordinates' all job performance (i.e., task performance, OCBI, and OCBO). In addition, subordinates' liking for their supervisors mediated the relationships between leaders' soft influence tactics and subordinates' job performance. The results of moderated multiple regression analyses suggested that role ambiguity moderated the relationships between leaders' hard influence tactics and subordinates' task performance and OCBO. Specifically, the negative relationships between leaders' hard influence tactics and task performance/OCBO became stronger when role ambiguity was low than when it was high. The purpose of this study was to develop and test a comprehensive model of the relationship between leaders' downward influence tactics and subordinates' job performance. This study contributes to the literature on influence tactics in various aspects. First, using two meta-categories of influence tactics, this study empirically demonstrated the effects of leaders' influence tactics on their subordinates' job performance. Despite the obvious importance of this subject, there has little empirical research on the use and effectiveness of leaders' influence tactics. Thus, this study advanced comprehensive understanding of influence tactics at workplace, particularly demonstrated importance of downward influence behaviors in the subordinate-supervisor linkages. Second, the results of this study found some of mechanisms underlying the effects of leaders' influence tactics on subordinates' job performance by verifying the mediating effects of liking for the supervisor on the relationship between soft influence tactics and job performance. Third, this study demonstrated that situation factors moderated the effects of leaders' influence tactics on subordinates' job performance. These findings suggest that job characteristics can play an important role determining the effects of leaders' downward influence tactics, in line with leadership contingency theories. Despite these implications, this study has some limitations that should be noted. First, the cross-sectional nature of the data prevents us from inferring any causality in this study. Second, further research is needed to explore the meta-categories of influence tactics. Third, this study included only limited numbers of variables that might influence the relationships between leaders' influence tactics and subordinates' job performance. Future research needs to include the other outcome variables (e.g., creativity, knowledge sharing, and social loafing) and other critical boundary factors (e.g., leaders' social skill or power and subordinates' emotional intelligence). It is acknowledged that this study provides a limited test of the hypothesized model. However, the findings highlight that leaders' influence tactics can have a significant effect on individual subordinate's attitudes and behaviors in relation to organizational desired work outcomes. Additional future research in this area seems not only warranted but critical to advance our understanding of influence tactics at workplace.

참고문헌 (82)

  1. Aguinis, H., "The use of influence tactics in persuasion", Journal of Social Psychology, 134, pp.429~438 (1994)
  2. Aiken, L. S., "Multiple regression : Testing and interpreting interactions" (1991), Sage
  3. Baccili, P. A., "Effects of company and manager psychological contract violation on justice, negative affect and commitment", Paper presented at the Academy of Management (2003)
  4. Baron, R. M., "The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research : Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, pp.1173~1182 (1986)
  5. Bass, B. M., "Leadership and performance beyond expectations" (1985), Free Press
  6. Bass, B. M., "Bass and Stogdills handbook of leadership" (1990), Free Press
  7. Bauer, T. N., "A longitudinal study of the moderating role of extraversion: Leadermember exchange, performance, and turnover during new executive development", Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, pp.298~310 (2006)
  8. Bedeian, A. G., "A path-analytic study of the consequences of role conflict and ambiguity", Academy of Management Journal, 24, pp.417~424 (1981)
  9. Bennett, R. J., "Development of a measure of workplace deviance", Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, pp.349~360 (2000)
  10. Berson, Y., "The relationship between self-other rating agreement and influence tactics and organizational processes", Group & Organization Management, 32, pp.675~698 (2007)
  11. Bettencourt, L. A., "Change-oriented organizational citizenship behaviors : The direct and moderating influence of goal orientation", Journal of Retailing, 80, pp.165~180 (2004)
  12. Blau, P. M., "Exchange and power in social life" (1964), Transaction Publishers
  13. Breckler, S. J., "Empirical validation of affect, behavior, and cognition as distinct components of attitude", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, pp.1191~1205 (1984)
  14. Burns, J. M., "Leadership" (1978), Harper & Row
  15. Chiu, S. F., "Relationship between job characteristics and organizational citizenship behavior : The mediational role of job satisfaction", Social Behavior and Personality, 33, pp.523~539 (2005)
  16. Clarke, S., "The role of leader influence tactics and safety climate in engaging employees' safety participation", Risk Analysis : An International Journal, 26, pp.1175~1185 (2006)
  17. Cohen, A. R., "Studies in social power", pp.35~52 (1959), Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan
  18. Deci, E. L., "Self-determination in a work organization", Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, pp.580~590 (1989)
  19. Deci, E. L., "Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior" (1985), Plenum Press
  20. Deci, E. L., "The"what"and"why"of goal pursuits : Human needs and the self-determination of behavior", Psychological Inquiry, 11, pp.227~268 (2000)
  21. Dobbins, G. J., "A contingency approach to appraisal satisfaction : An initial investigation of the joint effect of organizational variables and appraisal characteristics", Journal of Management, 16, pp.619~632 (1990)
  22. Dunegan, K. J., "LMX and subordinate performance : The moderating effects of task characteristics", Journal of Business and Psychology, 17, pp.275~285 (2002)
  23. Falbe, C. M., "Consequences for managers of using single influence tactics and combinations of tactics", Academy of Management Journal, 35, pp.638~652 (1992)
  24. Farmer, S. M., "Putting upward influence strategies in context", Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18, pp.17~42 (1997)
  25. Fiedler, F. E., "Advances in experimental social psychology" (1964), Academic Press
  26. French, J., "Studies of social power", pp.150~167 (1959), Institute for Social Research
  27. Furst, S. A., "Employee resistance to organizational change : Managerial influence tactics and leader-member exchange", Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, pp.453~462 (2008)
  28. Gagne´, M., "Self-determination theory and work motivation", Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, pp.331~362 (2005)
  29. George, J. M., "Extrinsic and intrinsic origins of perceived social loafing in organizations", Academy of Management Journal, 35, pp.191~202 (1992)
  30. Gouldner, A. W., "The norm of reciprocity:A preliminary statement", American Sociological Review, pp.1161~178 (1960)
  31. Grant, A. M., "Does intrinsic motivation fuel the prosocial fire? Motivational synergy in predicting persistence, performance, and productivity", Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, pp.48~58 (2008)
  32. Grouzet, F. M. E., "From environmental factors to outcomes : A test of an integrated motivational sequence", Motivation and Emotion, 28, pp.331~346 (2004)
  33. Hall, R. J., "Multi-level information-processing explanations of followers'leadership perceptions", The Leadership Quarterly, 6, pp.265~287 (1995)
  34. Heider, F., "The psychology of interpersonal relations" (1958), Wiley
  35. Higgins, C. A., "Influence tactics and work outcomes : A meta-analysis", Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, pp.89~106 (2003)
  36. House, R. J., "Leadership theory and research: Perspectives and directions", pp.81~107 (1993), Academic Press
  37. Howell, J. P., "Moderator variables in leadership research", Academy of Management Review, 11, pp.88~102 (1986)
  38. Jensen, J. L., "Getting one's way in policy debates : Influence tactics used in group decision-making settings", Public Administration Review, 67, pp.216~227 (2007)
  39. Kahn, R. L., "Organizational stress" (1964), Wiley
  40. Katz, D., "The social psychology of organizations" (1978), John Wiley
  41. Kelman, H., "Processes of opinion change", Public Opinion Quarterly, 25, pp.57~78 (1961)
  42. Kerr, S., "Substitutes for leadership : Their meaning and measurement", Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 22, pp.375~403 (1978)
  43. Kipnis, D., "Why do I like thee: Is it your performance or my orders?", Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, pp.324~328 (1981)
  44. Kipnis, D., "Intraorganizational influence tactics : Explorations in getting one's way", Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, pp.440~452 (1980)
  45. Kuvaas, B., "Performance appraisal satisfaction and employee outcomes : Mediating and moderating roles of motivation", International Journal of Human Resource Management, 17, pp.504~522 (2006)
  46. Kuvaas, B., "Work performance, affective commitment, and work motivation : The roles of pay administration and pay level", Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27, pp.365~385 (2006)
  47. Kuvaas, B., "Different relationships between perceptions of developmental performance appraisal and work performance", Personnel Review, 36, pp.378~397 (2007)
  48. Law, K. S., "The construct and criterion validity of emotional intelligence and its potential utility for management studies", Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, pp.483~496 (2004)
  49. Lee, D. R., "An assessment of influence tactics used by project managers", Engineering Management Journal, 13, pp.16~24 (2001)
  50. LePine, J. A., "Voice and cooperative behavior as contrasting forms of contextual performance : Evidence of differential relationships with Big Five personality characteristics and cognitive ability", Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, pp.326~336 (2001)
  51. Northouse, P. G., "Leadership : Theory and practice" (2004), Sage
  52. Organ, D. W., "Organizational citizenship behavior : The good soldier syndrome" (1988), Lexington Books
  53. Piccolo, R. F., "Transformational leadership and job behaviors : The mediating role of core job characteristics", Academy of Management Journal, 49, pp.327~340 (2006)
  54. Rizzo, J. R., "Role conflict and ambiguity in complex organizations", Administrative Science Quarterly, 15, pp.150~163 (1970)
  55. Robbins, S. P., "Essentials of organizational behavior" (2008), Pearson Education
  56. Ryan, R. M., "Perceived locus of causality and internalization : Examining reasons for acting in two domains", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, pp.749~761 (1989)
  57. Schriesheim, C. A., "Influence tactics used by subordinates : A theoretical and empirical analysis and refinement of the Kipnis, Schmidt, and Wilkinson subscales", Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, pp.246~257 (1990)
  58. Seifert, C. F., "Effects of repeated multi-source feedback on the influence behavior and effectiveness of managers : A field experiment", The Leadership Quarterly, 21, pp.856~866 (2010)
  59. Sheldon, K. M., "Wanting, having, and needing : Integrating motive disposition theory and self-determination theory", Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 101, pp.1106~1123 (2011)
  60. Sparrowe, R. T., "Do leaders' influence tactics relate to members' helping behavior? It depends on the quality of the relationship", Academy of Management Journal, 49, pp.1194~1208 (2006)
  61. Srivastava, A., "Empowering leadership in management teams : Effects on knowledge sharing, efficacy, and performance", Academy of Management Journal, 49, pp.1239~1251 (2006)
  62. Steensma, H., "Why managers prefer some influence tactics to other tactics : A net utility explanation", Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 80, pp.355~362 (2007)
  63. Steensma, H., "Bases of power, procedural justice and outcomes of mergers : The push and pull factors of influence tactics", Journal of Collective Negotiations in the Public Sector, 30, pp.113~134 (2003)
  64. Su, C. -J., "An examination of the usage and impact of upward influence tactics by workers in the hospitality sector of Taiwan : Expanding the framework of Rao, Schmidt, and Murray(1995)", Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 27, pp.306~319 (2010)
  65. Tepper, B. J., "Test of justice-based model of subordinates' resistance to downward influence attempts", Group & Organization Management, 23, pp.144~160 (1998)
  66. Tepper, B. J., "Abusive supervision and subordinates'organization deviance", Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, pp.721~732 (2008)
  67. van Scotter, J., "Effects of task performance and contextual performance on systemic rewards", Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, pp.526~535 (2000)
  68. van Vianen, A. E. M., "Person-organization and personsupervisor fits : Employee commitments in a Chinese context", Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32, pp.906~926 (2011)
  69. Wang, H., "Leader-member exchange, employee performance, and work outcomes : an empirical study in the Chinese context", The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 19, pp.1809~1824 (2008)
  70. Wang, H., "Leader-member exchange as a mediator of the relationship between transformational leadership and followers' performance and organizational citizenship behavior", Academy of Management Journal, 48, pp.420~432 (2005)
  71. Wayne, S. J., "Influence tactics, affect, and exchange quality in supervisor-subordinate interactions : A laboratory experiment and field study", Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, pp.487~499 (1990)
  72. Wayne, S. J., "The role of upward influence tactics in human resource decisions", Personnel Psychology, 50, pp.979~1006 (1997)
  73. Williams, L. J., "Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors", Journal of Management, 17, pp.601~617 (1991)
  74. Yukl, G., "Leadership in organizations" (2006), Pearson Education
  75. Yukl, G., "Influence tactics and objectives in upward, downward, and lateral influence attempts", Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, pp.132~140 (1990)
  76. Yukl, G., "Antecedents of influence outcomes", Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, pp.309~317 (1996)
  77. Yukl, G., "Validation of the extended influence behavior questionnaire", The Leadership Quarterly, 19, pp.609~621 (2008)
  78. Yukl, G., "Consequences of influence tactics used with subordinates, peers, and the boss", Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, pp.525~535 (1992)
  79. Yun, S., "Employee self-enhancement motives and job performance behaviors : Investigating the moderating effects of employee role ambiguity and managerial perceptions of employee commitment", Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, pp.745~756 (2007)
  80. Zapata-Phelan, C. P., "Procedural justice, interactional justice, and task performance : The mediating role of intrinsic motivation", Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108, pp.93~105 (2009)
  81. Zhang, X., "Linking empowering leadership and employee creativity : The influence of psychological empowerment, intrinsic motivation, and creative process engagement", Academy of Management Journal, 53, pp.107~128 (2010)
  82. Zhou, J., "When job dissatisfaction leads to creativity : Encouraging the expression of voice", Academy of Management Journal, 44, pp.662~696 (2001)

관련 논문AI추천

영향력 전술과 리더역할이 리더십유효성에 미치는 영향강정애, 최세경한국인적자원관리학회 · 인적자원관리연구2013 · 제20권 제4호하향적 영향력 전술이 리더십 효과성에 미치는 영향: 윤리적 리더십의 조절효과김병진, 임상혁한국기업경영학회 · 기업경영연구2018 · 제25권 제4호하향 영향력 전술과 구성원의 반응에 대한 리더-구성원 교환관계의 조절효과정승언한국상업경영학회 · 상업경영연구2014 · 제28권 제6호하향 영향력 전술과 웰빙, 동기부여에 대한 매개역할로서의 리더-구성원 교환관계김현아, 정승언한국상업경영학회 · 상업경영연구2008 · 제21권 리더의 리더십 역량이 직무성과에 미치는 영향에 관한 심리적 임파워먼트의 조절효과김미좌, 박계홍한국벤처창업학회 · 벤처창업연구2012 · 제7권 제3호관계 및 직무지향형 리더십유형과 조직유효성과의 관계에서 직무특성의 매개효과강병호, 박계홍한국상업경영학회 · 상업경영연구2009 · 제23권 제4호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (7건)

금전욕과 직무성과 및 조직몰입 관계에 있어 기업 윤리가치의 조절효과 연구김민정, 정회근, 심덕섭pp. 1-22해외 자회사에 대한 본사의 통제 방식이 자회사 현지 직원의 문화적응 스트레스에 미치는 영향: 상대적 박탈감의 매개효과이강표, 배준영pp. 23-45직장에서의 행복 연구: 직무와 조직 측면의 분석예지은, 장은미, 진현pp. 79-98사회적기업 종업원의 직무동기가 조직 유효성에 미치는 영향 - 민주적 의사결정의 조절효과 -전인, 이재훈, 강대식, 오선희pp. 99-122상사신뢰가 조직구성원의 직무태도에 미치는 영향 - 일가치감의 매개효과와 조직정치지각의 조절효과 -정원호, 김상훈pp. 123-145
원문 보기