ArticlePDF Available

Are leaders' well-being behaviours and style associated with the affective well-being of employees? A systematic review of three decades of research

Taylor & Francis
Work & Stress
Authors:

Abstract and Figures

This study is an overview of published empirical research on the impact of leaders and leadership styles on employee stress and affective well-being. A computerized search and systematic review of nearly 30 years of empirical research was conducted. Forty-nine papers fulfilled the inclusion criteria, which include the requirements for papers to report empirical studies and to be published during the period 1980 to 2009 in English-language peer-reviewed journals. The studies were mostly cross-sectional (43/49 papers) and examined the impact of leaders' stress (4 papers), leaders' behaviours (e.g. support, consideration and empowerment) (30 papers) and specific leadership styles (20 papers) on employees' stress and affective well-being. Three research questions were addressed. The review found some support for leader stress and affective well-being being associated with employee stress and affective well-being. Leader behaviours, the relationship between leaders and their employees and specific leadership styles were all associated with employee stress and affective well-being. It is recommended that future studies include more qualitative data, use standardize questionnaires and examine the processes linking leaders with employee stress. This may lead to effective interventions.
Content may be subject to copyright.
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
This article was downloaded by:
[National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark]
On:
30 June 2010
Access details:
Access Details: [subscription number 912938718]
Publisher
Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-
41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Work & Stress
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713697904
Are leaders' well-being, behaviours and style associated with the affective
well-being of their employees? A systematic review of three decades of
research
Janne Skakona; Karina Nielsenb; Vilhelm Borgb; Jaime Guzmanc
a Institute of Psychology, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark b National Research
Centre for the Working Environment, Copenhagen, Denmark c Occupational Health & Safety Agency
for Healthcare in British Colombia, Vancouver, Canada
Online publication date: 29 June 2010
To cite this Article Skakon, Janne , Nielsen, Karina , Borg, Vilhelm and Guzman, Jaime(2010) 'Are leaders' well-being,
behaviours and style associated with the affective well-being of their employees? A systematic review of three decades
of research', Work & Stress, 24: 2, 107 — 139
To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/02678373.2010.495262
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2010.495262
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf
This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or
systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses
should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,
actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly
or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
Are leaders’ well-being, behaviours and style associated with the affective
well-being of their employees? A systematic review of three decades
of research
Janne Skakon
a
*, Karina Nielsen
b
, Vilhelm Borg
b
and Jaime Guzman
c
a
Institute of Psychology, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark;
b
National Research
Centre for the Working Environment, Copenhagen, Denmark;
c
Occupational Health & Safety
Agency for Healthcare in British Colombia, Vancouver, Canada
This study is an overview of published empirical research on the impact of leaders and
leadership styles on employee stress and affective well-being. A computerized search and
systematic review of nearly 30 years of empirical research was conducted. Forty-nine papers
fulfilled the inclusion criteria, which include the requirements for papers to report empirical
studies and to be published during the period 1980 to 2009 in English-language peer-reviewed
journals. The studies were mostly cross-sectional (43/49 papers) and examined the impact of
leaders’ stress (4 papers), leaders’ behaviours (e.g. support, consideration and empowerment)
(30 papers) and specific leadership styles (20 papers) on employees’ stress and affective well-
being. Three research questions were addressed. The review found some support for leader
stress and affective well-being being associated with employee stress and affective well-being.
Leader behaviours, the relationship between leaders and their employees and specific
leadership styles were all associated with employee stress and affective well-being. It is
recommended that future studies include more qualitative data, use standardize questionnaires
and examine the processes linking leaders with employee stress. This may lead to effective
interventions.
Keywords: systematic review; leaders; leaderemployee interaction; leadership style; well-
being; stress
Introduction
Work-related stress is estimated to be the second largest problem related to the
working environment in the European Union; every fourth wage earner in the EU
will, at some point, suffer from work-related stress in their working life (ETUC,
UNICE, UEAPME, & CEEP, 2004). Studies suggest that in Europe between 50%
and 60% of all lost working days have some link with work-related stress (European
Agency for Safety and Health at Work, 2005). This represents a huge cost in terms of
both human distress and impaired economic performance. In 2002, the European
Commission reported that the yearly cost of work-related stress in the European
Union was EUR 20,000 million each year (Levi & Levi, 2002). A wide variety of
*Corresponding author. Email: janne.skakon@psy.ku.dk
Work & Stress
Vol. 24, No. 2, AprilJune 2010, 107139
ISSN 0267-8373 print/ISSN 1464-5335 online
#2010 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/02678373.2010.495262
http://www.informaworld.com
Downloaded By: [National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark] At: 05:42 30 June 2010
research has established a link between working conditions and employee stress and
affective well-being (e.g. Cox, Griffiths, & Rial-Gonza´lez, 2000; De Jonge, Bosma,
Peter, & Siegrist, 2000; De Lange, Taris, Kompier, Houtman, & Bongers, 2004;
Grawitch, Gottschalk, & Munz, 2007). Leaders play an important role in defining an
environment in which employees can thrive and experience well-being (Nielsen,
Yarker, Brenner, Randall, & Borg, 2008; Rasulzada, Dackert, & Johansson, 2003).
Leadership has been studied from many different angles. Frequently, leadership is
referred to as something extraordinary, which requires special tools and capabilities.
Alvesson and Sveningsson (2003) suggested a rethinking of leadership, taking
seriously the mundane, almost trivial, aspects of what managers and leaders actually
do. A particular behaviour from the leader, or a part of a particular leadership style
can inherently be either stressful or positive for employees, and as a result influence
their levels of stress and affective well-being.
Although this seems intuitively plausible, findings on this issue are still scattered.
Therefore, the aim of this study is to provide a systematic review of the research on
the relationship between leaders, their behaviours and more specific leadership styles
on one hand,and employee stress and affective well-being on the other. Using the
information that we obtained, we address three main research questions, which are
described in the following sections.
Leaders’ stress and its link with employee stress and affective well-being
It could be argued that stress involves a crossover contagion process, where leaders
mood is seen as being ‘‘contagious.’’ Research in this area has focused on studying
the effects of leadersmood on individuals and the affective tone of groups (Johnson,
2008; Sy, Cole, & Saavedre, 2005), in much the same way as parental stress can spill
over to children (Zlotnik, 2001). Sutherland and Davidsons (1989) qualitative study
of stress among construction site managers in the United Kingdom showed that job
dissatisfaction among managers was mostly related to employee relation issues. It is
possible that leadersstress levels and affective well-being have an impact on the
stress and affective well-being of employees. Thus, we formulated our first research
question:
Research Question 1: Are the stress levels and affective well-being of leaders associated
with the stress and affective well-being of their employees?
Specifically, we propose that leaderswho suffer from stress and have low affective well-
being are more likely to have employees who also report stress and low well-being.
Leaders’ behaviours and employee stress and affective well-being
Leader behaviours such as support, empowerment and a high-quality relationship
between leaders and their employees might prevent both stress, and improve
employeesstress coping and affective well-being (Schaufeli & Enzmann, 1998).
Stress among leaders and employees may be influenced by relationships at work,
with colleagues, employees and leaders. Selye (1974) suggested that good relation-
ships between members of a group are a key determinant of individual and
organizational health. Research into work relationships has concluded that many
108 J. Skakon et al.
Downloaded By: [National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark] At: 05:42 30 June 2010
stress-related symptoms and illnesses arise when a relationship between an employee
and a leader is perceived as psychologically unhealthy (Cooper & Payne, 1991).
Studies have shown that the leaderemployee relationship is one of the most
common sources of stress in organizations (Landeweerd & Boumans, 1994; Tepper,
2000). Thus, leader support and empowering leader behaviours, and a good
relationship between leaders and their employees, are mentioned as leader
behaviours that may reduce stress and improve well-being among employees (Bass,
1990; Yukl, 1994). Conversely, abusive leader behaviours may be related to high
levels of stress and low well-being among employees. The Leader-Member Exchange
(LMX) Theory focuses on the relationships between leaders and their employees. It
posits that leaders develop different forms of exchange relationships with their
subordinates, and that employees who maintain good exchange relationships receive
benefits that others who maintain suboptimal relationships do not (Graen & Uhl-
Bien, 1995). Our second research question is therefore:
Research Question 2: What is the association between leadersbehaviours (including the
relationship between leaders and employees) and employee stress and affective well-
being?
Leadership styles and employee stress and affective well-being
In recent years, there has been an explosion in interest in leadership styles (Bass &
Riggio, 2006). Leadership styles refer to sets of behaviours that leaders employ to
influence the behaviours of subordinates (Antonakis, Cianciolo, & Sternberg, 2004;
Bass & Riggio, 2006). One of the dominant theories in this field is the transforma-
tional leadership theory (Bass, 1999a; Bass, 1999b; Bass & Riggio, 2006). This theory
focuses on three leadership styles: transformational leadership, transactional leader-
ship and laissez-faire leadership.
Four elements characterize transformational leadership: Idealized influence the
leader acts as a role model; inspirational motivation the leader provides meaning
and challenge to subordinateswork; intellectual stimulation the leader encourages
subordinates to be creative and approach problems in news ways; and finally,
individualized consideration the leader pays attention to the individual subordi-
nates needs and provides coaching and mentoring (Bass & Riggio, 2006).
Transactional leadership consists of two elements. The first is contingent reward, in
which the leader obtains subordinatesagreement on what needs to be done in
exchange for the promised reward. The second is management-by-exception, either
actively, by monitoring deviances from standards and taking action to correct these,
or passively, by pointing out mistakes when they have already occurred (Bass &
Riggio, 2006). Finally, laissez-faire leaders do not lead: They avoid making decisions,
delay actions and ignore leader responsibilities (Bass & Riggio, 2006).
There is a growing body of research that has found that these various leadership
styles are associated with employee behaviours and perceptions (Bass, 1999a).
Another prominent leadership style theory is that of situational leadership, where the
leader adjusts his or her leadership style according to the employees needs for
structure and socio-emotional support (Hersey, Blanchard, & Johnson, 1996). In
doing so, he or she either adopts a telling style (high structure and support); a selling
style (low structure, high support); a participating style (low task and high
Work & Stress 109
Downloaded By: [National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark] At: 05:42 30 June 2010
relationship); or a delegating style (low structure and low relationship) (Hersey et al.,
1996). This leads to our third research question:
Research Question 3: Are specific leadership styles related to employee stress and
affective well-being?
Definition of stress and affective well-being outcomes
Although the definition of stress has been debated (Ganster & Schaubroeck, 1991),
most researchers would generally agree that stress is an unpleasant emotional
experience associated with elements of fear, dread, anxiety, irritation, annoyance,
anger, sadness, grief and depression (Larazus & Folkman, 1992; Motowidlo,
Packard, & Manning, 1986). We used the operational definition of affective well-
being suggested by Van Horn, Taris, Schaufeli, and Schreurs (2004). This includes
emotional exhaustion (the most often measured aspect of burnout, Kristensen,
Borritz, Villadsen, & Christensen, 2005) covering the enthusiasm-depression con-
tinuum; job satisfaction, which covers the pleasuredispleasure dimension; and well-
being, which covers the tirednessvigour dimension. However, we should mention
that many papers examining well-being did not specify the content of the well-being
measures.
Method
Our review focused on papers that were published in scientific journals in the area of
psychological-, organizational-, leadership-, management-, and occupational health
literature during the last three decades (January 1980 to July 2009). Relevant studies
were identified by searching 15 electronic databases and manual searches of current
English-language journals, primarily from Europe and the United States. These
databases were OSH-ROM, HSELINE, NIOSHTIC2, RILOSH, the Stress database
at the National Institute of Public Health, PsycInfo, PubMed, Copenhagen Business
School Library, Netpunkt, Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Arbline,
Bizigate and the DIALOG database ‘‘Business & Management Practices.’’ Three sets
of key words were used. The first set included Leader*/manager* -stress, -coping, -
well-being. The second set included Employee*/subordinate* -stress, -coping, -job
satisfaction, -well-being, -burnout, -health. Finally, the third set included Empirical
studies. Relevant studies mentioned at least one key word from each set of key words.
The citations retrieved in electronic searches were scrutinized by reading the titles
and abstracts. To be included in this review, a paper had to fulfil five criteria: (1) The
study reported the results of empirical data analyses. (2) The study reported on the
impact of the leadersstress, leader behaviours or style on employeesstress or
affective well-being. (3) The study was published between January 1980 and July
2009. (4) The study was published in an English-language peer-reviewed journal. (5)
It reported on field research, that is, laboratory studies were excluded, as in such
studies the connection with and application to real-life situations may not be
warranted (Robson, 1994).
The methods for the review were partly adapted from the QUOROM Group
Statement and the Overview Quality Assessment Questionnaire (Moher et al., 1999;
Oxman & Guyatt, 1991). The included papers were divided into three main
110 J. Skakon et al.
Downloaded By: [National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark] At: 05:42 30 June 2010
Table 1. Theoretical propositions of associations between leaders and employee stress and affective well-being (49 studies).
No. Authors, year Review of theories
1 Arnold et al. (2007) Transformational leadership is related to employee well-being as such leaders mentor their employees. This link
may be partly explained by the degree to which employees experience their work as meaningful, as
transformational leaders activate higher-level needs (Maslows need pyramid).
2 Bono et al. (2007) Supervisors may influence employeesmoods, as employees may be anxious about their performance appraisals.
Transformational leadership may moderate the relationship between emotional regulation, stress and job
satisfaction.
3 Brouer et al. (2007) The relationship between leaders and employees (LMX exchange) influences employeestension levels, as a high
quality relationship will be characterised by trust, good communication and emotional support from
supervisors. However, this relationship is moderated by affectivity.
4 Chen et al. (2005) The degree to which situational leadership (i.e. the degree to which the leader matches his or her behaviours in
terms of telling, selling, delegating and participating, with the needs of the employee) is related to job
satisfaction, leadership effectiveness, turnover intention and job stress depends on the willingness and abilities of
employees.
5 Densten (2005) Visioning leadership behaviours are negatively related to burnout as they create an awareness of valued
outcomes.
6 Dobreva-Martinova (2002) Stress arises from role ambiguity and leads to job dissatisfaction etc. Individual coping skills, workplace
leadership and social support moderate occupational stress.
7 Duxbury et al. (1984) The leader can moderate the effect of a demanding work environment by a leadership style that is supportive of
the need of employees, as a first line support. The leader should balance between task and relation focus.
8 Epitropaki et al. (2005) The relationship between the quality of the relationship between leader and employee (LMX) and well-being
and job satisfaction depends on the employeesexpectancies (implicit leadership theory).
9 Gilbreath & Benson (2004) There is a positive relationship between supervisorssupportive behaviours and employee well-being, and an
inverse relationship between supervisor supportive behaviours and employee tension and health complaints.
10 Glasøet al. (2005) When leaders and employees interact they experience emotions, and the intensity and quality of these emotions
are related to employeesjob and life satisfaction.
11 Harris et al. (2006) The association between the quality of the relationship between leaders and employees and stress is curvilinear,
as having too close a relationship with your leader may result in difficulties saying no to tasks.
Work & Stress 111
Downloaded By: [National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark] At: 05:42 30 June 2010
Table 1 ( Continued )
No. Authors, year Review of theories
12 Harvey et al. (2007) Abusive leadership is related to tension and emotional exhaustion, but this relationship is moderated by positive
affectivity and ingratiation in that employees view the leader in a more positive light and attempt to minimize
the abuse by flattering and doing favours for the leader.
13 Hetland et al. (2007) Transformational and transactional leadership are both positively related to employee burnout, as
transformational leaders support their employees and transactional leaders clarify goals and provide feedback.
14 Hooper et al. (2007) The degree to which members of a team agree on the quality of the relationship between themselves and their
manager is related to job satisfaction and well-being as team members will experience more conflict and
frustration and anger with colleagues.
15 Kanste et al. (2007) Transformational leadership, transactional leadership and laissez-faire leadership are associated with burnout,
as transformational leaders are considerate and transactional leaders, through contingent reward, may enhance
their employeesfeelings of personal accomplishment.
16 Laschinger et al. (1999) Facilitative leadership, where employees are empowered to make decisions based on their expert judgement and
to act without seeking unnecessary permission from higher authorities, are considered important in change
processes (work redesign). Kanters empowerment model and Conger and Kanungos empowerment process
model included as theoretical background.
17 McGee (1987) Supervisory support influence on job stress. Limited theoretical considerations on leaderemployee interaction.
Meta-level reflections concerning job characteristics and co-worker relations are included.
18 Mardanov et al. (2008) LMX is positively associated with job satisfaction and so is satisfaction with supervision. This is because a high
quality relationship means that leaders and employees work towards shared goals.
19 Mazur & Lynch (1989) Leadership style including support relates to (low degree of) employee burnout and laissez-faire leadership is
positively related to burnout.
20 Medley (1995) Leadership style is related to employee job satisfaction. Transformational leaders are able to motivate employees
to accomplish change.
21 Morrison et al. (1997) Transformational leadership shapes employeesself-efficacy. Empowerment is an important part of
transformational leadership, regarding influence on employees.
22 Moyle (1998) Leader support is particularly strongly linked to low stress levels and job satisfaction among employees due to
the influence of leaders. Over time support strengthens the employees ability to engage in interpersonal
relationships.
112 J. Skakon et al.
Downloaded By: [National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark] At: 05:42 30 June 2010
Table 1 ( Continued )
No. Authors, year Review of theories
23 Nielsen, Randall
et al. (2008)
Transformational leaders influence well-being through the creation of a working environment that is
characterized by offering opportunities for development, a meaningful work and role clarity. They do this
providing a clear vision and encouraging employees to seek challenges, and coaching and mentoring their
employees.
24 Nielsen, Yarker
et al. (2008)
Transformational leadership is related to job satisfaction and well-being through employeesperception of
meaningful work, involvement and influence. The leaders do this by providing a clear vision and encourage
employees to take responsibility for solving problems and finding innovative ways of doing the job.
25 Nielsen et al. (2009) Transformational leadership is related to job satisfaction and well-being through how it makes employees
perceive themselves and their team colleagues. Through encouraging employees to take independent decisions
and coaching and mentoring employees, leaders make employees see themselves and their colleagues as being
capable of coping with challenges at work (self- and team efficacy).
26 Offermann & Hellmann
(1996)
Leaders underestimate their own behaviour in relation to employee stress in comparison with the employee
perspective. Employee stress is associated with leaders offering little worker control and participation, low goal
clarity and high performance pressure.
27 Parasuraman & Alutto (1984) Supportive leadership practices are related to employees(low degree of) perceived stress.
28 Price & Weiss (2000) Interplay among coaches, athletes and burnout may be effectively explained within the coaching behaviours and
leadership styles. A positive approach to coaching emphasises praise for desirable behaviours, reduces
competitive anxiety and increases satisfaction and enjoyment. With inadequate amounts of positive or
instructional feedback, athletes may develop negative attitude towards coaches, decreased motivation etc.
Athletesfeeling of burnout is associated with pressure from coaches. Burned out coaches who are emotionally
and physically exhausted feel withdrawn from or negative towards athletes, and experience feelings of
inadequacy, may provide less training and instructions, positive feedback and social support and lean towards a
decision making style that is easier to implement and more impersonal. Chelladurais (1978) model of leadership
and behaviour (instruction, social support, positive feedback) form the theoretical basis.
29 Prottas (2008) Employees who perceive their leaders to behave with integrity have better job and life satisfaction, less stress,
better health and less absence. This is because equity theory predicts that unfairness in the distribution of
rewards is related to negative outcomes.
Work & Stress 113
Downloaded By: [National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark] At: 05:42 30 June 2010
Table 1 ( Continued )
No. Authors, year Review of theories
30 Schaubroeck et al. (2007) Leaders who have destructive traits will be associated with somatic complaints, depression, anxiety, job
dissatisfaction, low commitment and turnover intentions in employees when employees have jobs with little
scope (enrichment), as the negative impact of the leader will be more prominent.
31 Schulz (1995) Leadership processes influence the work environment. Social support from leaders is significantly associated
with employee burnout.
32 Sellgren et al. (2008) Through supportive leadership behaviours leaders create meaningful, stimulating work with a sense of
coherence. This creates a good work climate and job satisfaction.
33 Seltzer & Numerof (1988) Burnout is induced by immediate leader style (consideration). Employees are more prone to stress and burnout
than leaders, partly due to lack of administrative support from leaders and frontline experiences.
34 Seltzer et al. (1989) Transformational leadership, including leaders rated low on consideration and low in initiation of structure, are
most likely associated with lower symptoms of burnout and achieve high levels of employee performance and
satisfaction.
35 Shieh et al. (2001) Transactional leaders clarifying the roles and requirements for employees, and have a positive impact on
employee job satisfaction.
36 Skogstad et al. (2008) Laissez-faire leadership is related to psychological distress as it creates a climate for poor relations among
employees.
37 Sosik & Godschalk (2000) Mentoring is a form of social support, which may alleviate employeesjob related stress. Leadership behaviours
such as supporting, motivating, inspiring and developing employees, are involved in mentoring and also defines
transformational leadership style. This leadership style may decrease employee stress.
38 Sorrentino et al. (1992) Leader support is a moderator of the relationship between leader direction and employee satisfaction. Leader
behaviour is motivational when it makes satisfaction of the subordinatesneeds conditional on effective
performance, and complements the environment of the subordinates by providing coaching, guidance, support
and rewards.
39 Steinhardt et al. (2003) Leader support relates to lower job stress and higher job satisfaction and plays a role as a coping resource,
assisting employees in coping with work-related stress.
40 Stordeur et al. (2001) Transformational leadership encompasses supportive behaviours, and should therefore buffer negative effects of
stress factors on emotional exhaustion.
114 J. Skakon et al.
Downloaded By: [National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark] At: 05:42 30 June 2010
Table 1 ( Continued )
No. Authors, year Review of theories
41 Studenski & Barzcyk (1987) Inadequacy of immediate leadership is an occupational stressor for employees.
42 Theorell et al. (2001) Pronounced decrease in decision latitude is associated with an elevated risk of developing physical and
psychological symptoms; thus is it possible to increase decision authority for employees via leader training.
43 Tourigny et al. (2005) If employees are emotionally exhausted and receive little support from their leader they will experience higher
levels of depersonalization.
44 van Dierendonck (2004) The leader-employee relationship is one of the most common sources of stress in organizations. Leader
behaviour characterized by trust, confidence, recognition and feed-back enhances wellbeing among employees.
Leaders who have a controlling, less supporting style, who fail to clarify responsibilities and provide supportive
feedback, and who exert undue pressure may be expected to have employees who report lower levels of
well-being. Relationship is bidirectional, meaning that employeeswellbeing will influence leader behaviour.
45 Vealey et al. (1998) The interactional nature of burnout is a result of complex relationships between intrapersonal (cognitive,
personality dispositions) and environmental (nature of task, support and resources) factors. Cognitive appraisal
and physiological responses to stress influence the development of burnout in individuals. Chelladurais (1978)
model of leadership and behaviour (e.g. instruction, social support, positive feedback) is used.
46 Wilcoxon (1989) Leadership behaviours such as willingness to develop structure in expectation and routine and consideration for
employee morale are critical elements in administrative support for employees in high stress environments.
47 Wolfram et al. (2009) If managers and employees are similar in their perception of having meaningful work, self-efficacy and
emotional irritation there is a positive relationship between transformational leadership and job satisfaction.
48 Wu et al. (2009) If employees experience little co-worker support and are susceptible to emotional contagion they are more likely
to experience emotional exhaustion if their supervisor is abusive.
49 Yagil (2006) If employees experience their supervisors to be abusive they will experience higher levels of depersonalisation
and exhaustion and lower levels of personal accomplishment. If their supervisor is perceived to be supportive
these relationships will be the opposite.
Work & Stress 115
Downloaded By: [National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark] At: 05:42 30 June 2010
categories, representing the three research questions. As such, the aspects of
leadership differed, while the employee outcomes (stress and affective well-being)
remained the same. One category looked at the association between leadersstress
and employee stress and affective well-being, another category looked at the impact
of leadership behaviours, and the relationship between leaders and employees on
employee stress and affective well-being and finally, the third category looked at
the relationship between specific leadership styles and employee stress and affective
well-being.
Results
Out of more than 10,000 citations, 378 potentially relevant references, published
between January 1980 and July 2009 (criterion 3), were identified by a first screening
and subsequently catalogued. Further examinations revealed that 156 of these 378
papers were based on empirical research (criterion 1). Of these 156 studies, 105 did
not adequately relate to the topic (criterion 2), nor did they match inclusion criteria
concerning field research (criterion 5), leaving 49 papers. Finally, it was ensured that
the papers were peer-reviewed (criterion 4). This was the case for all 49 papers, which
provides the basis for the current review.
Theoretical bases of the studies
Most papers included in the review stated in their introductions that only a few
published studies examined specific leader behaviours and the links with employees
sense of, for example, stress and affective well-being. Table 1 presents the reviewed
paperstheoretical propositions regarding the association between leader stress and
employee stress and affective well-being.
Overview of the papers surveyed
The 49 papers reported quantitative empirical survey studies of which one employed
an Experience Sampling Method design (Bono, Foldes, & Muros, 2007), five used a
longitudinal study design (Epitropaki & Martin, 2005; Moyle, 1998; Nielsen,
Randall, Yarker, & Brenner, 2008; van Dierendonck, Haynes, Borrill, & Stride,
2004), one of which was an intervention study (Theorell, Emdad, Arnetz, &
Weingarten, 2001), and the remainder were cross-sectional studies.
As the topic of each paper varied, the findings related to this review were often
only a selection of the many possible topics addressed in these studies. Four papers
examined the relationship between leader stress and well-being and employee
stress and well-being. Thirty papers examined the relationships between leader
behaviours and employee stress and well-being. Finally, 20 papers examined the
relationship between specific leadership styles and employee stress and well-being.
Some papers covered more than one research question and are therefore included
more than once. Table 2, 3 and 4 present the findings related to the three research
questions, and provide the specific research question, the empirical findings and a
condensation of the study results related to those questions.
116 J. Skakon et al.
Downloaded By: [National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark] At: 05:42 30 June 2010
Are leadersstress and affective well-being associated with employeesstress and
affective well-being?
As shown in Table 2, four papers concerned the relationship between leader stress
and well-being and employee stress and well-being. Two of the papers addressed
burnout, showing that leader burnout was associated with employee burnout.
According to results from Vealey, Armstrong, Comar, and Greenleaf (1998), (a)
coach burnout was significantly related to perceived coaching styles and behaviour,
(b) perceived coaching styles and behaviour were predictive of athlete burnout and
(c) athlete anxiety and athlete burnout were significantly related. Perceived coaching
style and behaviour was not a significant predictor of athlete anxiety. In the study by
Theorell et al. (2001), managers of the experimental department in a large insurance
corporation underwent two-hour biweekly training sessions for one year for a total
of 60 hours. The authors found that a psychosocial manager programme lasting for
one year was beneficial for the employees with regards to lowered serum cortisol
(indicating lower stress levels).
Price and Weiss (2000) found that coaches with a higher level of emotional
exhaustion were perceived as making more democratic decisions, which was
associated with lower levels of athlete burnout, but at the same time these coaches
were seen as providing less training and instructions and providing less social
support. The latter was associated with athletes reporting higher levels of anxiety and
burnout, and lower levels of enjoyment and perceived competence. In a study by
Glasøand Einarsen (2006) it was found that when interacting, leaders and employees
would experience similar emotions. When positive emotions were described in the
situation, these were shared by leaders and employees; however, when negative
emotions were experienced these were more strongly experienced by employees than
their leaders.
In conjunction, these studies show support for our first research question:
Leadershigh levels of stress and poor affective well-being are associated with high
stress levels and poor well-being among subordinates.
What is the association between leadersbehaviours and the quality of the leader
employee relationship and employee stress and affective well-being?
Thirty papers examined the relationship between leadersbehaviours and the quality
of the relationship between leaders and employees on the one hand, and employee
stress and affective well-being on the other (Table 3). Eleven of these studies
found a relationship between supportive leaders and low employee stress levels
(Gilbreath & Benson, 2004; Moyle, 1998; Offermann & Hellmann, 1996; Parasura-
man & Alutto, 1984; Sorrentino, Nalli, & Schriesheim, 1992; Steinhardt, Dolbier,
Gottlieb, & McCalister, 2003), less burnout (Mazur & Lunch, 1989; Price & Weiss,
2000; Tourigny, Baba, & Lituchy, 2005; Yagil, 2006), high job satisfaction (Moyle,
1998; Sellgren, Ekvall, & Tomson, 2008; Sorrentino et al., 1992) and positive
affective well-being (Gilbreath & Benson, 2004). One of these studies found that the
relationship between leader support on the one hand and stress and job satisfaction
on the other was mediated by employeesperceptions of control and role ambiguity
(Moyle, 1998). Five papers analyzed empowering leader behaviours in relation
to low stress levels (Laschinger, Wong, McMahon, & Kaufmann, 1999; Schulz,
Work & Stress 117
Downloaded By: [National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark] At: 05:42 30 June 2010
Table 2. Findings for research question 1: leader stress and affective well-being associations
with employee stress and affective well-being (4 studies).
No. Authors, year Research Question Findings
1
Condensation of
study results related
to current review
1 Glasø
et al. (2006)
What are the
underlying emotional
factors that leaders
and employees
experience when
they interact and
how are these related
to the experience of
the quality of the
relationship and the
level of job and life
satisfaction?
When interacting, both leader
and employees experience
emotions. Some emotions
were related to the quality
of the relationship and
job and life satisfaction but
not all. Positive emotions
were equally experienced by
leaders and their employees
but negative emotions were
experienced more strongly
by employees.
Leadersemotions
are related to
employees
emotions and their
life satisfaction.
2 Price & Weiss
(2000)
What is the
relationship among
coach burnout,
coaching behaviours
and athletes
psychological
responses?
Coaches higher in
emotional exhaustion were
perceived by their team as
providing less training and
instruction and social
support and making fewer
autocratic and greater
democratic decisions.
Leader burnout is
related to employee
burnout. When
leadership is less
autocratic it does
not correlate with
employeesburnout
and anxiety.
3 Theorell
et al. (2001)
How will efforts to
improve the
psychosocial
competence of
managers change the
work environment
and health of the
employees?
A moderately intensive
psychosocial manager
program (1 year) can be
beneficial for both leaders
and employees with regard
to both lowered serum
cortisol and improved
authority over decisions.
Leader stress is
associated with
employee stress.
4 Vealey
et al. (1998)
How does athletes
perception of their
coachs behaviour
and communication
style relate to levels
of burnout and
anxiety experienced
by athletes?
Coach burnout was
significantly related to
perceived coaching styles/
behaviour, perceived
coaching styles/behaviour was
predictive of athlete burnout,
and athlete anxiety and athlete
burnout were significantly
related. Emotional exhaustion
and depersonalisation in
coaches was positively related
to use of dispraise and an
autocratic coaching style and
negatively related to use of
praise, empathy, and effective
communication by coaches.
Leader burnout is
associated with
burnout through the
exertion of coaching
style.
1
In most papers, leader stress was only one factor out of several measured. Therefore will the main findings
from the paper often point to other aspects than the research questions of the current review.
118 J. Skakon et al.
Downloaded By: [National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark] At: 05:42 30 June 2010
Greenley, & Brown, 1995; Theorell et al., 2001), low burnout (Schulz et al., 1995;
Vealey et al., 1998) and job satisfaction (Morrison, Jones, & Fuller, 1997; Schulz
et al., 1995) and found support for these relationships. One study reported that if
leaders acted with integrity this was positively related to job satisfaction and less
stress among employees (Prottas, 2008) and another study showed that leaders
hostility and negative affectivity was related to job dissatisfaction and anxiety among
employees in jobs with little decision latitude (Schaubroeck, Walumbwa, Ganster, &
Kebes, 2007). Two studies found that employees who experienced their leaders as
engaging in abusive behaviours reported higher levels of burnout (Wu & Hu, 2009;
Yagil, 2006).
Four studies examined the relationship between considerate leader behaviours
and employee outcomes. In one study considerate behaviours were linked to job
satisfaction and low stress (Dobreva-Martinova, 2002) and another found a
relationship with job satisfaction and low burnout (Duxbury, Armstrong, Drew,
& Henly, 1984). Similarly, Wilcoxon (1989) and Seltzer and Numerof (1988) found
a link between considerate behaviours and low burnout. Finally, six studies
examined the impact of the quality of the relationship between employees and
their leaders on employee stress and affective well-being: One study reported that a
difficult relationship between the leader and the employees was related to high
stress levels among employees (McGee, Goodson, & Cashman, 1987). Two studies
found that the level of LMX was positively related to job satisfaction (Epitropaki &
Martin, 2005; Mardanov, Heischmidt, & Henson, 2008) and one study found a
positive association with affective well-being (Epitropaki & Martin, 2005). One
study found that this relationship was moderated by the degree to which team
colleagues also experienced the same quality in their relationships with the leader
(Hooper & Martin, 2008). With regard to stress and tension, one study found the
relationship between LMX and stress to be curvilinear (Harris & Kacmar, 2006)
and another study found that employees who are high in negative affectivity
experience high levels of tension even if they have a good relationship with their
leader (Brouer & Harris, 2007). One study found that among lower-level managers
the autocratic behaviours of their superior were related to stress (Studentski &
Barczyk, 1987).
Basically, these studies show support for our second research question: Positive
leader behaviours, including consideration and support, are positively related to
employee affective well-being and low stress levels among employees, whereas the
opposite is the case for negative leader behaviours. A good quality relationship was
also associated with employee well-being and low stress levels.
What is the association between leadership style and employee stress and affective well-
being?
In 20 papers the relationship between leadership style and employee outcomes was
examined (Table 4). These studies mainly included the relationships between
transactional and transformational leadership and employee stress, burnout and
affective well-being. In most cases, both transformational and transactional leader-
ship styles were associated with positive employee outcomes.
Work & Stress 119
Downloaded By: [National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark] At: 05:42 30 June 2010
Table 3. Findings for research question 2: leader behaviours and the quality of leader-employee relationships and their associations with employee
stress and affective well-being (30 studies).
No. Authors, year Research question Findings
Condensation of study results
related to current review
1 Brouer
et al. (2007)
Is there a relationship between
LMX exchange and employee
tension and how is this
moderated by affectivity?
People who were high in negative affectivity did not benefit
from high levels of LMX as they experience high levels of
tension.
The relationship between
LMX and tension depends on
employee traits.
2 Dobreva-
Martinova,
(2002)
What is the association between
occupational role stress and
individual and organizational
well-being in the Canadian forces?
Workplace leadership, in particular, consideration, was a
significant independent predictor of job satisfaction.
Perceived organizational support was a significant
independent predictor of stress, job satisfaction, and
affective commitment, even when occupational role stress
was already taken into account. Negative association
between occupational role stress and both individual (strain)
and organizational (job satisfaction and organizational
commitment) well-being. No moderating effects were
found for coping strategies, workplace leadership, or
perceived organizational support, although these factors had
direct relationships with both individual and organizational
well-being.
Considerate leader
behaviours are associated
with job satisfaction and low
stress.
3 Duxbury
et al. (1984)
What is the relationship between
head nurse leadership style and
staff nurse burnout and job
satisfaction?
Head nurse consideration was clearly related to staff nurse
satisfaction. Head nurse leadership style based on
consideration and job structure was significantly associated
with low burnout and satisfaction. High consideration
protected against potential negative responses to job
structure. Low consideration did not negatively influence
staff nurse burnout or satisfaction if it was coupled with
low job structure. Low consideration and high job structure
differed significantly on satisfaction.
Leader consideration is
associated with employee
job satisfaction and low
burnout, depending on
the degree of job structure.
120 J. Skakon et al.
Downloaded By: [National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark] At: 05:42 30 June 2010
Table 3 ( Continued )
No. Authors, year Research question Findings
Condensation of study results
related to current review
4 Epitropaki
& Martin
(2005)
Is the relationship between LMX
and job satisfaction, commitment
and well-being mediated by
Implicit Leadership Theories?
Implicit leadership assumptions predicted LMX,which in
turn was related to well-being, job satisfaction and
commitment.
High quality relationships
between leaders and
employees are related to job
satisfaction and well-being.
5 Gilbreath &
Benson
(2004)
How does supervisor behaviour
contribute to employee psychological
well-being?
Positive supervisor behaviour was negatively correlated with
employees reported psychiatric disturbance. Supervisor
behaviour makes a significant incremental contribution to the
production of employee well-being.
Leader support is associated
with employee well-being and
low stress.
6 Harris &
Kacmar
(2006)
Is the relationship between LMX
and employeesstress curvilinear?
The relationship between LMX and stress was curvilinear. The relationship between
LMX and stress is
curvilinear.
7 Hooper &
Martin
(2008)
How are different perceptions of
LMX in teams related to job
satisfaction and well-being? Is this
relationship mediated by team
conflict?
LMX variability in a team is negatively related to job
satisfaction and well-being. This relationship can partially be
explained by team conflict
The level of agreement of
LMX in a team is associated
with job satisfaction and
well-being.
8 Laschinger
et al. (1999)
Do leadersbehaviours have an
impact on the way employees
experience empowerment in their
work setting?
Leader empowering behaviour significantly influenced
employees perceptions of formal and informal power and
access to empowerment structures and was related to lower
stress levels
Empowering leader
behaviour predicts low
employee stress
9 McGee
et al. (1987)
Among employees experiencing a
common high level of stress, what
factors differentiate those who
become dissatisfied with their jobs
from those who do not?
Comparisons of the two groups indicated that highly stressed
subordinates who remained satisfied perceived their jobs as
more challenging and interesting, perceived organizational
communication as more timely and useful, perceived fewer
supervisory problems (as defined by difficulties in the
relationship between the respondent and the leader), and
worked with managers whom they perceived to be high in
referent power
Difficulties in the relationship
between employee and
leader predict employee job
satisfaction and stress
Work & Stress 121
Downloaded By: [National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark] At: 05:42 30 June 2010
Table 3 ( Continued )
No. Authors, year Research question Findings
Condensation of study results
related to current review
10 Mardanov
et al. (2008)
What is the relationship between
LMX and satisfaction with
supervision and job satisfaction?
LMX predicts job satisfaction as does satisfaction with
supervision
LMX predicts job
satisfaction as does
satisfaction with supervision
11 Mazur &
Lynch
(1989)
To what extent are teacher
personality characteristics,
organizational structure, and
the principals behaviours
determinants of teacher burnout?
Leadership supportive behaviours were not significant
predictors of teacher burnout. Organizational stress factors
such as work load, leader support and isolation were
significant predictors of teacher burnout.
Personality characteristics were significant predictors of
teacher burnout
Leader supportive behaviour
is associated with low
employee burnout
12 Morrison et
al. (1997)
What is the relation between
leadership style and empowerment
and its effect on job satisfaction
among the nursing staff?
Empowerment was positively related to job satisfaction Empowering leader
behaviour predicts job
satisfaction
13 Moyle
(1998)
Is there a relationship between
control and ambiguity, leader
support and employee stress and
job satisfaction?
Leader support both had a direct effect on low stress and
job satisfaction cross-sectionally and longitudinally and
this relationship was also found to be mediated by control
and role ambiguity
Leader support is related to
low stress and high job
satisfaction. This was
mediated by control and
role ambiguity
14 Offermann
& Hellmann
(1996)
What is the relationship between
leader behaviours and subordinate
work stress from a multiple
perspective, 3608view?
Leader behaviours did relate to stress experienced by staff;
however, leadersviews of what related to subordinate stress
did not always coincide with the factors that subordinates
themselves associated with stress. The relationships of leader
delegation and subordinate participation to lower subordinate
reports of stress were particularly underestimated by leaders
Leader emotional support
is related to low employee
stress (while leader
control correlates with high
employee stress)
122 J. Skakon et al.
Downloaded By: [National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark] At: 05:42 30 June 2010
Table 3 ( Continued )
No. Authors, year Research question Findings
Condensation of study results
related to current review
15 Parasuraman
& Alutto
(1984)
What is the pattern of relationship
among (different sets of variables)
sources and outcomes of stressful
organizational settings?
There was a relationship between perceived stress and
externality, leadership behaviour, and organizational
commitment. Supportive supervision had a negative effect on
employee stress, due to lack of individual control
Leader support is negatively
related to employee stress
16 Price &
Weiss
(2000)
What is the relationship among
coach burnout, coaching behaviour
and athletespsychological
responses?
Athletesperceptions of greater leader training and
instruction, social support, positive feedback, democratic
decisions, and less autocratic style were related to more
positive and less negative psychological outcomes
Leader social support
predicts employee burnout
17 Prottas
(2008)
Is there a relationship between
employee perceptions of leaders
perceived behavioural integrity
and employee life satisfaction, job
satisfaction, stress, health and
absence?
Leadersintegrity is related to job satisfaction, life
satisfaction, stress, health and absenteeism
Leadersbehavioural
integrity is related to
employeesjob satisfaction,
stress and health
18 Schaubroeck
et al. (2007)
Do leadershostility and negative
affectivity interact with limited job
scope to create anxiety, job
dissatisfaction and turnover
intentions?
Leadershostility and negative affectivity was found to
interact with low job scope to impact on outcomes
Leaderstraits together with
jobs with little enrichment
are related to job satisfaction
and anxiety
19 Schulz et al.
(1995)
What are the associations between
organization, management and
client effects on staff burnout?
Organization structure, culture and management process
were related to work environment and in turn to satisfaction
and subsequently to burnout. Managers, through
organization and management process, influenced the work
environment
and worker satisfaction to buffer feelings of burnout
Empowering leader
behaviour is linked to low
employee stress, little burnout
and job satisfaction
20 Sellgren
et al. (2008)
What is the relationship between
supportive leader behaviours and
work climate and job satisfaction?
Supportive leadership behaviours are correlated with
creative work climate and job satisfaction
Leaderssupport is related
to job satisfaction
Work & Stress 123
Downloaded By: [National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark] At: 05:42 30 June 2010
Table 3 ( Continued )
No. Authors, year Research question Findings
Condensation of study results
related to current review
21 Seltzer &
Numerof
(1988)
How is supervisor behaviour,
measured by consideration and
initiating structure scales, related to
reported subordinate burnout?
Subordinates who rated their supervisors high on
consideration for their subordinateswelfare reported low
burnout
Considerate leader
behaviours are associated
with low employee burnout
22 Sorrentino
et al. (1992)
What is the effect of head
nurse behaviours on nurse job
satisfaction and performance?
Significant correlations between supportive leader
behaviour and job satisfaction and performance
Leader support is associated
with employee well-being
and low stress
23 Steinhardt
et al. (2003)
What is the relationship between
hardiness, supervisor support, group
cohesion and job stress as predictors
of job satisfaction?
High hardiness, supervisor support and group cohesion
were related to lower levels of job stress, which in turn was
related to higher levels of job satisfaction
Leader emotional support is
related to low employee stress
(while leader control
correlates with high employee
stress)
24 Studenski &
Barczyk
(1987)
Investigating occupational stressors
in mining to verify a proposed model
of stress consequences.
Results indicate that stress is caused mainly by the health-
and life-endangering job environment, hindrances at work,
time pressure, shortages of materials and manpower,
excessive work, autocratic management, responsibility for
the results of the work and safety of others, and lack of
clear criteria for the distribution of bonuses. For lower level
managers autocratic behaviours were correlated with stress.
Findings confirm that occupational stressors may cause
sleep disorders and job dissatisfaction
Lower-level managers
experience higher levels of
stress if their superiors
exert autocratic behaviours
25 Theorell
et al. (2001)
How will efforts to improve the
psychosocial competence of
managers change the work
environment and health of the
employees?
A moderately intensive psychosocial manager program
(1 year) can be beneficial for employees with regard to
both lowered serum cortisol and improved authority over
decisions
Leader behaviour is
associated with low
employee stress
124 J. Skakon et al.
Downloaded By: [National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark] At: 05:42 30 June 2010
Table 3 ( Continued )
No. Authors, year Research question Findings
Condensation of study results
related to current review
26 Tourigny
et al. (2005)
Does supervisor support mediate the
relationship between emotional
exhaustion and depersonalisation?
The better the supervisory support among exhausted
employees the lower levels of depersonalization
Leader support interacts
with emotional exhaustion to
minimize depersonalisation
27 Vealey et al.
(1998)
How do athletesperceptions of
their coachs behaviour and
communication style relate to levels
of burnout and anxiety experienced
by athletes?
Coach burnout was significantly related to perceived
coaching styles/behaviour, perceived coaching styles/behaviour
was predictive of athlete burnout, and athlete anxiety and
athlete burnout were significantly related. Emotional
exhaustion and depersonalisation in coaches was positively
related to use of dispraise and an autocratic coaching style
Leader burnout is associated
with burnout through the
exertion of coaching style
and negatively related to use of praise, empathy, and effective
communication by coaches. Perceived coaching style/
behaviour was not a significant predictor of athlete anxiety
28 Wilcoxon
(1989)
What are the relationship between
therapist-perceived leader behaviour
of administrators and burnout
symptoms of therapists?
Agencies with administrators perceived to be high in
initiation structure and consideration had fewer instances
of therapist burnout
Leader considerate behaviour
is negatively associated
with burnout
29 Wu et al.
(2009)
What is the relationship between
abusive supervision and emotional
exhaustion, and is this relationship
moderated by susceptibility to
emotional contagion and co-worker
support?
Abusive supervision is related to emotional exhaustion.
This relationship is stronger if employees experience high
levels of co-worker support and if employees are susceptible
to emotional contagion
Abusive supervision is related
to emotional exhaustion
30 Yagil (2006) How is abusive and supportive
supervision related to aspects of
burnout?
Employee depersonalisation and emotional exhaustion are
positively related to abusive supervision, whereas supportive
supervision and personal accomplishment are positively
related.
Both abusive and supportive
leader behaviours are
related to burnout
Work & Stress 125
Downloaded By: [National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark] At: 05:42 30 June 2010
Table 4. Findings for research question 3: associations between leadership style and employee stress and affective well-being (20 studies).
No. Authors, year Research question Findings
Condensation of study results
related to current review
1 Arnold et al.
(2007)
Is there a relationship between
transformational leadership and
well-being, and is this mediated by
meaningful work?
The link between transformational leadership and
employee well-being was explained through employees
experience of their work as meaningful.
Transformational leadership is
related to well-being through
employeesexperience of
having a meaningful job
2 Bono et al.
(2007)
What is the relationship between
transformational leadership,
emotions and job satisfaction?
Transformational leadership buffers the negative effects of
emotion regulation on job satisfaction and stress
Transformational leadership is
associated with job satisfaction
and stress.
3 Chen et al.
(2005)
What is the relationship between
situational leadership style,
employee willingness and job
satisfaction and stress?
The higher the leaderssituational leadership score and
the higher an employees willingness to perform a task the
higher job satisfaction and the lower job stress
Situational leadership is only
related to job satisfaction and
well-being when employees are
willing to engage
4 Densten (2005) Is visionary leadership style
related to burnout?
A visioning leadership style is negatively related to burnout Visionary leadership behaviours
are negatively related to burnout
5 Harvey et al.
(2007)
Is the relationship between
abusive leadership and tension,
emotional exhaustion and
turnover intentions moderated by
positive affectivity and ingratiation?
For employees who were high in positive affectivity and
ingratiation, abusive leadership did not influence their
tension levels
Whether abusive leadership
has an effect depends on
employeestraits
6 Hetland et al.
(2007)
Are transformational and
transactional leadership related
to burnout?
Transformational and passive avoidant leadership
behaviours are, respectively, negatively and positively
related to burnout
Transformational leadership is
negatively related to burnout
whereas passive avoidant
leadership is positively related
to burnout
7 Kanste et al.
(2007)
How are transformational
leadership, transactional
leadership and laissez faire
leadership related to burnout?
Rewarding transformational leadership and active
management-by-exception are negatively related to
aspects of burnout whereas laissez-faire leadership is
positively related to emotional exhaustion and personal
accomplishment
Transformational leadership,
transactional leadership and
laissez faire leadership are
related to burnout
126 J. Skakon et al.
Downloaded By: [National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark] At: 05:42 30 June 2010
Table 4 ( Continued )
No. Authors, year Research question Findings
Condensation of study results
related to current review
8 Mazur & Lynch
(1989)
To what extent are teacher
personality characteristics,
organizational structure, and the
principals leadership style
determinants of teacher burnout?
Leadership style was not a significant predictor of teacher
burnout. Organizational stress factors such as work load,
support and isolation were significant predictors of teacher
burnout. Personality characteristics were significant
predictors of teacher burnout
Leadership (from autocratic to
laissez faire) was not
significantly associated with
burnout
9 Medley &
Larochelle
(1995)
What is the relationship of head
nurse leadership style and their
staff nursesjob satisfaction?
A significant positive relationship between head nurses
exhibiting a transformational leadership style and the job
satisfaction of their staff nurses
Transformational leadership
predicts employee well-being.
No significant correlations
between transactional leadership
and employee well-being
10 Morrison et al.
(1997)
What is the relation between
leadership style and empowerment
and its effect on job satisfaction
among the nursing staff?
Both transformational and transactional leadership were
positively related to job satisfaction
Transactional and
transformational leadership
styles are related to job
satisfaction
11 Nielsen,
Randall et al.
(2008)
Can the relationship between
transformational leadership and
employee well-being be explained
by the effect on employees
perceptions of the working
environment?
Role clarity, meaningfulness and opportunities for
development mediated the relationship between
transformational leadership and employee well-being
Transformational leadership is
linked to well-being through
the impact on the working
environment
12 Nielsen, Yarker
et al. (2008)
Can the relationship between
transformational leadership and
employee well-being and job
satisfaction be explained by the
effect on employeesperceptions
of the working environment?
Involvement, meaningfulness and influence mediated the
relationship between transformational leadership and
employee well-being and job satisfaction
Transformational leadership is
linked to well-being and job
satisfaction through the impact
on the working environment
Work & Stress 127
Downloaded By: [National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark] At: 05:42 30 June 2010
Table 4 ( Continued )
No. Authors, year Research question Findings
Condensation of study results
related to current review
13 Nielsen et al.
(2009)
Is the relationship between
transformational leadership and
job satisfaction and employee
well-being mediated through
team and self-efficacy?
Self-efficacy was found to mediate the relationship
between the relationship between transformational
leadership and well-being whereas team efficacy was
found to mediate between job satisfaction and well-being
The link between
transformational leadership
and job satisfaction and well-
being can partly be explained
by team and self-efficacy
14 Seltzer et al.
(1989)
Is transformational leadership
style by a superior more likely to
lead to negative outcomes such as
stress symptoms or burnout
among subordinates?
Burnout and stress symptoms are inversely and
significantly related to the transformational scales,
suggesting that charismatic leadership, individual
consideration, and intellectual stimulation may reduce
burnout, and to a lesser extent, stress symptoms.A
transformational style may help to reduce burnout in
general and is positively associated with subordinates
satisfaction with the leader, the leaders effectiveness
and general willingness to make an extra effort
Transformational leadership is
negatively associated with
burnout and stress
15 Shieh et al.
(2001)
What is the influence of nursing
deans and nursing director
transformational and transactional
leadership style on nursing
faculty in baccalaureate and
associate degree nursing programs?
Idealized influence, intellectual stimulation and
contingent reward leadership styles significantly and
positively predicted job satisfaction. Active management-
by-exception significantly and negatively predicted job
satisfaction.
Transformational leadership is
related to job satisfaction as
is contingent reward.
Management-by-exception was
negatively related to job
satisfaction
16 Skogstad et al.
(2008)
What is the relationship between
destructive leadership (laissez
faire) and psychological distress?
Laissez faire leadership is associated with psychological
distress through conflict with co-workers, role conflict,
role ambiguity and bullying
Laissez faire leadership is
related to psychological
distress through the impact
on poor social relations
128 J. Skakon et al.
Downloaded By: [National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark] At: 05:42 30 June 2010
Table 4 ( Continued )
No. Authors, year Research question Findings
Condensation of study results
related to current review
17 Sosik &
Godshalk
(2000)
Does transformational leadership
have a more favourable effect on
job-related stress, as compared to
other leadership styles (laissez
faire and transactional contingent
reward)?
Mentor transformational behaviour was more positively
related to mentoring functions received than transactional
contingent reward behaviour, while mentor laissez-faire
behaviour was negatively related to mentoring functions
received. Both mentor transformational behaviour and
mentoring functions received were negatively related to
prote´ge´job-related stress. Development-oriented
leadership (i.e. transformational) coupled with social
support (i.e. mentoring functions received) can reduce
stress experienced by prote´ge´s.
Transformational leadership is
associated with less employee
stress. Transactional- and
laissez-faire leadership styles are
not associated with employee
stress
18 Stordeur,
Dhoore &
Vandenberghe
(2001)
What is the effect of work
stressors and head nurses
transactional and
transformational leadership on
the levels of emotional exhaustion
experienced among their staff?
Leadership dimensions explained 9% of the variance in
emotional exhaustion. Active management-by-exception
leadership was significantly associated with emotional
exhaustion. Transformational and contingent reward
leadership did not influence emotional exhaustion
Aspects of transactional
leadership predict burnout
19 Van
Dierendonck
et al. (2004)
What is the nature of the relation
between leader behaviour and the
wellbeing of subordinates and
what is the timeframe of this
behaviour?
Both leadership behaviour and well-being were relatively
stable across time. Well-being positively influenced
leadership behaviour
Transformational leadership*
predicts less employee stress.
Empowering leader behaviour is
correlated with less employee
stress
20 Wolfram
et al. (2009)
Do similarity, self-efficacy and
emotional irritability moderate
the relationship between
transformational leadership and
job satisfaction?
Similarity, occupational self-efficacy and emotional
irritability were not found to moderate the relationship
between transformational leadership and job satisfaction
A direct link was found between
transformational leadership
and job satisfaction
* The measurement of leader behaviour described in the paper was translated by the current authors to transformational leadership.
LMX leader-member exchange.
Work & Stress 129
Downloaded By: [National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark] At: 05:42 30 June 2010
Transformational leadership. Twelve papers reported that a transformational leader-
ship style was positively related to job satisfaction (Bono et al., 2007; Nielsen,
Yarker, Randall, & Munir, 2009; Nielsen, Yarker et al., 2008; Wolfram & Mohr,
2009), less stress (Bono et al., 2007; Seltzer, Numerof, & Bass, 1989; Sosik &
Godshalk, 2000), less burnout (Hetland, Sandal, & Johnsen, 2007; Kanste, Kynga
¨s,
& Nikkila
¨, 2007; Seltzet et al., 1989) and affective well-being (Arnold, Turner,
Barling, Kelloway, & Mckee, 2007; Nielsen et al., 2009; Nielsen, Randall et al.,
2008; Nielsen, Yarker et al., 2008; van Dierendonck et al., 2004). Visionary
leadership which forms part of transformational leadership was negatively
related to burnout (Densten, 2005). Only one study found no association between
transformational leadership and burnout (Stordeur, Dhoore, & Vandenberghe,
2001). Two studies found that the relationship between transformational leadership
and job satisfaction could be partly explained by team and self-efficacy (Nielsen
et al., 2009) and having good working conditions (Nielsen, Yarker et al., 2008).
Also, in four papers, the relationship between transformational leadership and
affective well-being could be explained by good working conditions (Arnold et al.,
2007; Nielsen, Randall et al., 2008; Nielsen, Yarker et al., 2008) and self-efficacy
(Nielsen et al., 2009).
Transactional leadership. With regard to transactional leadership the results were
mixed. Two studies found no significant relationship between transactional leader-
ship and stress (Sosik & Godshalk, 2000) or employee well-being (Medley &
Larochelle, 1995). Two studies found that transactional leadership was related to
lower levels of burnout (Kanste et al., 2007) and job satisfaction (Morrison et al.,
1997). Shieh, Mills, and Waltz, (2001) found management-by-exception to be
associated with job dissatisfaction and Stordeur et al. (2001) found that active
management-by-exception was related to burnout. Hetland et al. (2007) found
passive avoidant leadership to be associated with higher levels of burnout.
Laissez-faire leadership. The relationships between laissez-faire leadership style and
stress and affective well-being, examined in three papers, were also not clear. Sosik
and Godschalk (2000) and Mazur and Lynch (1989) found no relationship between
laissez-faire leadership and stress and burnout. Skogstad, Einarsen, Torsheim,
Aasland, and Hetland (2007) found the relationship between laissez-faire leadership
and distress to be partly explained by conflicts with co-workers, bullying, role conflict
and ambiguity.
Abusive leadership. Harvey, Stoner, Hochwarter, and Kacmar (2007) found that
abusive leadership was related to employee tension levels. Finally, situational
leadership was only found to be related to job satisfaction and affective well-being
in employees who were engaged in their job (Chen & Silverthorne, 2005).
Taken together, we may conclude from these studies that the third research
question received mixed support: While the transformational leadership style was
associated with low stress levels and high well-being among subordinates, some
studies found an association between transactional leadership and laissez-faire
leadership and employee stress while others failed to show a relationship.
130 J. Skakon et al.
Downloaded By: [National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark] At: 05:42 30 June 2010
Discussion
To summarize, in relation to our three research questions, the evidence discussed
above shows the following. Research question (1): Leader stress and affective well-
being are associated with employee stress and affective well-being. Most of the
studies build upon the assumption that leader stress spills over to employees, but it is
unclear how precisely this happens, as the authors offered few theoretical
explanations. Research question (2): Positive leader behaviours (support, empower-
ment and consideration) are associated with a low degree of employee stress and with
high employee affective well-being. Conversely, abusive behaviours are found to be
associated with negative employee outcomes. Research question (3): Transforma-
tional leadership style was found to be strongly associated with positive employee
outcomes, whereas transactional leadership and laissez-faire leadership styles are less
consistently related to employee outcomes. While we found support for the
association between leader stress, specific leadership styles and leader support and
employee stress and affective well-being, it was impossible to establish evidence for
causal relationships, as most studies were cross-sectional in nature.
The relationship between leadersstress and well-being and employee stress and well-
being
With regard to research question one that stated that leader stress and well-being
would be related to employeeslevels of stress and well-being, the research mostly
measured stress from an intrapersonal perspective and as related to the individuals
perception of stressors or the individuals stress reactions (Ben Porath & Tellegen,
1990). Current research pays little attention to interpersonal stress relationships
within organizations, and it can be concluded that a lack of knowledge still exists
concerning the understanding of stress dynamics, that is, how leader stress and
affective well-being may influence employee stress and affective well-being.
Furthermore, two of these studies focused on sports settings, which may not be
easily transferable to other settings where the relationships may be of a different
nature.
The relationship between leader behaviours and quality of the relationship between
leaders and employees, and employee stress and well-being
Research question 2 examined whether leader behaviours and the quality of the
relationships between employees and leaders, are associated with employee stress and
well-being. The research provided support for the notion that positive leader
behaviours such as support, feedback, trust, confidence and integrity are associated
with both employee affective well-being and less stress, and helps employees in
coping with stress. From the stress literature it appears that only a few of these
behaviours are present in stressed people (Lazarus & Folkman, 1992; Netterstrøm,
2002) and we believe that this includes leaders. The research represented in our
review also emphasizes that negative leader behaviours such as control, low support
and abuse are associated with stress and poor well-being among subordinates. In
addition, these behaviours are mentioned as possible reactions to stress in the
literature (Lazarus & Folkman, 1992), and might be displayed by stressed leaders.
Work & Stress 131
Downloaded By: [National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark] At: 05:42 30 June 2010
Based on our review, we propose that negative leader behaviours occur more often in
situations with stressed leaders, which in turn may negatively affect the leader
employee relationship. Price and Weiss (2000) refer to this, explaining their results
by burnt-out coaches who are emotionally and physically exhausted, feel withdrawn
from or negative towards athletes and experience feelings of inadequacy. The coaches
may provide less training and instructions, positive feedback and social support and
lean towards a decision-making style that is more impersonal and easier to
implement.
The relationship between specific leadership styles and employee stress and well-being
Regarding our third research question, transformational leadership was found to be
associated with a low degree of employee stress and with positive employee affective
well-being. The results for transactional leadership were mixed; while some found no
significant relationships, others found a positive relationship between transforma-
tional leadership and employee affective well-being but the subcomponent of this
style, management-by-exception, was related to poor well-being. With regards to
laissez-faire leadership, results were also mixed. Some studies failed to find a
significant relationship but others reported that laissez-faire leadership was related to
stress and poor affective well-being. This corresponds partly with the literature,
where transformational leadership as compared to transactional leadership and
especially laissez-faire leadership, has been mentioned as a leadership style that may
bring about positive outcomes (Bass, 1999a; Yukl, 1994). Abusive leadership styles
were found to be related to high levels of employee burnout.
Strengths and limitations
We believe that this review adds knowledge to that on the role of leaders in ensuring
employee stress and affective well-being, as it provides an overview of the current
literature and also identifies the gaps where knowledge is still limited. However,
several limitations with regard to both the review and the studies included should be
considered. First, unpublished literature was not included in the review. On the one
hand, this could be viewed as a limitation, as it leaves a possibility for important
research to be overlooked. On the other hand, it can also be considered a strength: it
may be assumed that peer-reviewed journals only publish important research and
subject submissions to a rigorous quality control.
A second limitation concerns the relationship between our three research
questions and the wide diversity of research questions in the 49 papers. As compared
to a Cochrane review that is based on randomized controlled trials of which research
questions and measures are directly comparable, the measures in our review varied
depending on the original focus of each study. This complicated the comparison of
studies.
Finally, several limitations of the studies reviewed carry over to the present
review. First, we mainly found cross-sectional studies (43) and only five longitudinal
studies and an Experience Sampling study. Therefore, conclusions regarding the
directions of causality among variables cannot be drawn. Second, a limitation of
several studies is that leader behaviour was reported through the perception of their
employees. This perception can be influenced by factors relevant to the occasion and
132 J. Skakon et al.
Downloaded By: [National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark] At: 05:42 30 June 2010
the individual, as mentioned by van Dierendonck et al. (2004). Third, various
professions as well as worksites were included, which might make it difficult to
compare the results. Fourth, theoretical and operational definitions of leadership,
stress, burnout, job satisfaction and affective well-being were often varied or vague,
and the measurement tools diverse. Therefore, it may be difficult to compare results.
The understanding and definition of ‘‘leadership’’ in the papers might depend on
contextual factors such as national culture, trade, organizational culture, size of
organization and so on. In conclusion, the ability to measure meaningful outcomes is
often limited by the lack of precise definitions and sensitive specific measurement
tools.
Implications for future research and practice
In spite of these limitations, our review offers both methodological and substantive
implications and recommendations for future research and practice.
First, research methodology should be expanded. Previous research on stress has
primarily used quantitative methodology, which restricts responses to preset
categories relating to a particular hypothesis. Even though the extensive research
that has been carried out points to there being associations between stress and
psychosocial factors at work (Karasek & Theorell, 1990), few studies have analyzed
how stress can be influenced by working relations. Stress and affective well-being
have most often been treated as dependent variables, and research including
contextual factors as well stress dynamics and possible feedback loops is limited.
As a result, we know little about the way organizational and extra-organizational
factors may mediate or moderate the relationship between leadersstress, behaviour
and style on the one hand and employees stress and affective well-being on the other.
This may be explored further by taking a qualitative explanatory perspective about
how relationships can develop and be experienced, and research examining and
describing leadersand employeesown accounts of stress, and how they understand
the pathways between leadersand employeesstress. In addition, research on
leadership and employee health and well-being could be expanded by using direct
observational and other ‘‘objective’’ data, longitudinal approaches with larger
samples, method triangulations including qualitative methods. Such approaches
could contribute to understanding the complexity of the relationships between
leadership and employee stress and affective well-being.
Second, based on the large variety of questionnaires that appear in the studies
included in this review, we recommend that researchers aim to use a standard set of
measures to assess individualsperception of stress and leadership, so as to enable
comparison of findings across studies.
Third, a major recommendation is that research should be extended beyond
merely examining the association between stress in leaders and employees, and begin
to focus on the processes linking leader stress and employee stress. As we have seen,
there has been only limited research focused on the widespread assumption that
leader stress and affective well-being exerts an important influence on employee
stress and affective well-being. Results indicate that leader stress, leader behaviours
and leadership style impact on employee stress and affective well-being. However, it
is still unclear how precisely this happens, and the possible relations between leader
stress and leadership style and behaviour still need to be explored. Leadership
Work & Stress 133
Downloaded By: [National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark] At: 05:42 30 June 2010
influences not only stress an affective well-being among employees, but also how the
employees themselves feel and behave has influence on how they are treated by their
leaders (Nielsen, Randall et al., 2008; van Dierendonck et al., 2004), which is in line
with the LMX theory. Only two papers researched a bidirectional relationship
(Nielsen, Randall et al., 2008; van Dierendonck et al., 2004), looking at whether
employeesaffective well-being influenced leader behaviour. They found that
employees who felt better about themselves also reported that their leader had a
more active and supportive (transformational) leadership style. This is partly
explained by the possibility of the affective well-being of employees influencing
leadersaffiliation behaviour, as people, including leaders, have a tendency to avoid
depressed people (Joiner & Coyne, 1999) and prefer to interact with people who are
feeling more positive as that is more pleasant (Schaufeli, Maslach, & Marek, 1993).
The organizational context and work environment may also impact on the dynamics
between leaders and employees, in addition to employees and leaders having an
impact on their work environment and vice versa. As such, an important part of the
psychosocial work environment can be described as an ongoing co-creation by the
employees and leaders (Pearce & Cronen, 1980). Furthermore, an individualsability
to cope with conditions and demands at work is of high importance (Lazarus &
Folkman, 1992). Therefore, we need to take individual as well as situational and
relational factors into account in future research.
Finally, increased knowledge about the transfer of stress between leader and
employees may lead to a more appropriate development of interventions regarding
stress reduction and management. Looking at the field of stress reduction and stress
management, major practitioner and consultancy activity is emerging. However, this
activity is hardly based on current research, and it has contributed only scarcely to
the research field. The methods used are rarely tested, and the mutual enhancement
of research and practice is a theoretical possibility rather than a fact in the field of
organizational stressors (Kompier & Cooper, 2007; Semmer, 2006), although a small
but growing body of literature supports the effectiveness of leadership development
as a means of positively influencing health and safety relevant outcomes (Kelloway &
Barling, in press).
Conclusion
In evaluating the evidence for our three research questions, we found limited support
for the proposition that leader stress and well-being is associated with employee
stress and well-being. Although no theoretical connection was suggested in the
literature, this might be explained by the stressed leaders negative behaviour
affecting employees, as we found that positive leader behaviour, leader support
and transformational leadership were associated with high employee affective well-
being and low degrees of employee stress.
Although the literature on both stress and leadership in general is comprehensive,
empirical research on how leader stress is related to stress among employees and on
the interactions between leaders and employees in relation to stress and affective
well-being has to date been limited, and consists mostly of reported associations in
cross-sectional studies. In this era of evidence-based practice, longitudinal research
that adequately accounts for possible misinterpretation is urgently needed. Align-
ment of measurement tools would enable comparisons of studies, and mixed
134 J. Skakon et al.
Downloaded By: [National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark] At: 05:42 30 June 2010
methods design that included qualitative research could begin to entangle underlying
causes. We suggest that areas for future research include more investigation of stress
dynamics concerning leaderemployee interaction, which would add to evidence-
based interventions aimed at the management of stress and its reduction or
prevention.
References
Papers marked * were included in the systematic review.
Alvesson, M., & Sveningsson, S. (2003). Managers doing leadership: The extra-ordinarization
of the mundane. Human Relations,56, 1435 1459.
Antonakis, J., Cianciolo, A.T., & Sternberg, R.J. (2004). The nature of leadership. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
*Arnold, K.A., Turner, N., Barling, J., Kelloway, E.K., & Mckee, M.C. (2007). Transforma-
tional leadership and psychological well-being: The mediating role of meaningful work.
Journal of Occupational Health Psychology,12, 193203.
Bass, B.M. (1990). Bass & Stogdill’s handbook of leadership: Theory, research, and managerial
applications (3rd ed.). New York: Free Press.
Bass, B.M. (1999a). Two decades of research and development in transformational leadership.
European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology,8,932.
Bass, B.M. (1999b). Current developments in transformational leadership: Research and
applications. Psychologist-Manager Journal,3,521.
Bass, B.M., & Riggio, R.E. (2006). Transformational leadership (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Ben Porath, Y.S., & Tellegen, A. (1990). A place for traits in stress research. Psychological
Inquiry,1,1417.
*Bono, J.E., Foldes, H.J., & Muros, J.P. (2007). Workplace emotions: The role of supervision
and leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology,92, 1357 1367.
*Brouer, R., & Harris, K. (2007). Dispositional and situational moderators of the relationship
between leadermember exchange and work tension. Journal of Applied Social Psychology,
37, 14181441.
*Chen, J.-C., & Silverthorne, C. (2005). Leadership effectiveness, leadership style and
employees readiness. Leadership & Organization Development Journal,26, 280288.
Cooper, C.L., & Payne, R. (1991). Personality and stress: Individual differences in the stress
process. Chichester, UK: John Wiley.
Cox, T., Griffiths, A., & Rial-Gonza´ lez, E. (2000). Research on work-related stress (Rep. No.
203). Bilbao, Spain: European Agency for Safety and Health at Work.
De Jonge, J., Bosma, H., Peter, R., & Siegrist, J. (2000). Job strain, effort-reward imbalance
and employee wellbeing: A large-scale cross-sectional study. Social Science & Medicine,50,
13171327.
De Lange, A.H., Taris, T.W., Kompier, M.A.J., Houtman, I.L.D., & Bongers, P.M. (2004). The
relationships between work characteristics and mental health: Examining normal, reversed
and reciprocal relationships in a 4-wave study. Work & Stress,18, 149166.
*Densten, I.L. (2005). The relationship between visioning behaviours of leaders and follower
burnout. British Journal of Management,16, 105118.
*Dobreva-Martinova, T. (2002). Occupational role stress in the Canadian forces: Its
association with individual and organizational well-being. Canadian Journal of Behavioural
Science,34, 111121.
*Duxbury, M.L., Armstrong, G.D., Drew, D.J., & Henly, S.J. (1984). Head nurse leadership
style with staff nurse burnout and job satisfaction in neonatal intensive care units. Nursing
Research,33,97101.
Work & Stress 135
Downloaded By: [National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark] At: 05:42 30 June 2010
*Epitropaki, O., & Martin, R. (2005). From ideal to real: A longitudinal study of the role of
implicit leadership theories on leader-member exchanges and employee outcomes. Journal
of Applied Psychology,90, 659676.
ETUC, UNICE, UEAPME, & CEEP (2004). Work-related stress. Framework agreement on
work-related stress. Retrieved May 1, 2010, from http://etuce.homestead.com/News/2008/
March2008/ETUCE_implementation_guide_WRS_EN.pdf
European Agency for Safety and Health at Work. (2005). Expert forecast on emerging physical
risks related to occupational health and safety. Bilbao, Spain: EA-OSHA.
Ganster, D.C., & Schaubroeck, J. (1991). Work stress and employee health. Journal of
Management,17, 235271.
*Gilbreath, B., & Benson, P.G. (2004). The contribution of supervisor behaviour to employee
psychological well-being. Work & Stress,18, 255266.
*Glasø, L., & Einarsen, S. (2006). Experienced affects in leader-subordinate relationships.
Scandinavian Journal of Management,22,4973.
Graen, G.B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Develop-
ment of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a
multi-level multi-domain perspective. The Leadership Quarterly,6, 219247.
Grawitch, M.J., Gottschalk, M., & Munz, D. C. (2007). The path to a healthy workplace: A
critical review linking healthy workplace practices, employee well-being, and organizational
improvements. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research,58, 129147.
*Harris, K.J., & Kacmar, K.M. (2006). Too much of a good thing: The curvilinear effect of
leader-member exchange on stress. Journal of Social Psychology,146,6584.
*Harvey, P., Stoner, J., Hochwarter, W., & Kacmar, C. (2007). Coping with abusive
supervision: The neutralizing effects of ingratiation and positive affect on negative employee
outcomes. Leadership Quarterly,18, 264280.
Hersey, P., Blanchard, K.H., & Johnson, D.E. (1996). Management of organizational behaviour:
Utilizing human resources (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
*Hetland, H., Sandal, G.M., & Johnsen, T.B. (2007). Burnout in the information technology
sector: Does leadership matter? European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology,
16,5875.
*Hooper, D.T., & Martin, R. (2008). Beyond personal leader-member exchange (LMX)
quality: The effects of perceived LMX variability on employee reactions. Leadership
Quarterly,19,2030.
House, R.J. (2002). A path-goal theory of leader effectiveness. Fundamentals of Organizational
Behaviour,1, 249272.
Johnson, S.K. (2008). I second that emotion: Effects of emotional contagion and affect at
work on leader and follower outcomes. Leadership Quarterly,19,119.
Joiner, T., & Coyne, J.C. (1999). The interactional nature of depression: Advances in
interpersonal approaches. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
*Kanste, O., Kynga
¨s, H., & Nikkila
¨, J. (2007). The relationship between multidimensional
leadership and burnout among nursing staff. Journal of Nursing Management,15, 731739.
Karasek, R., & Theorell, T. (1990). Healthy work: Stress, productivity, and the reconstruction of
working life. New York: Basic Books.
Kelloway, E.K., & Barling, J. (in press). Leadership development as an intervention in
occupational health psychology. Work & Stress.
Kompier, M., & Cooper, C. (2007). Preventing stress,improving productivity. European case
studies in the workplace. London and New York: Routledge.
Kristensen, T.S., & Borritz, M. (1998). Forebyggelse af udbrændthed [Prevention of burn-out].
Copenhagen: Arbejdsmiljøfondet.
Kristensen, T.S., Borritz, M., Villadsen, E., & Christensen, K. B. (2005). The Copenhagen
Burnout Inventory: A new tool for the assessment of burnout. Work & Stress,19, 192207.
Landeweerd, J.A., & Boumans, N.P.G. (1994). The effect of work dimensions and need for
autonomy on nurses work satisfaction and health. Journal of Occupational and Organiza-
tional Psychology,67, 207217.
136 J. Skakon et al.
Downloaded By: [National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark] At: 05:42 30 June 2010
*Laschinger, H.K., Wong, C., McMahon, L., & Kaufmann, C. (1999). Leader behaviour
impact on staff nurse empowerment, job tension, and work effectiveness. Journal of Nursing
Administration,29,2839.
Lazarus, R.S., & Folkman, S. (1992). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer.
Levi, L., & Levi, I. (2002). Guidance on work-related stress: Spice of life or kiss of death?.
Luxembourg: Ofce for Ofcial Publications of the European Communities.
*Mardanov, I.T., Heischmidt, K., & Henson, A. (2008). Leader-member exchange and job
satisfaction bond and predicted employee turnover. Journal of Leadership and Organiza-
tional Studies,15, 159175.
*Mazur, P.J., & Lynch, M.D. (1989). Differential impact of administrative, organizational, and
personality factors on teacher burnout. Teaching & Teacher Education,5, 337353.
*McGee, G.W., Goodson, J.R., & Cashman, J.F. (1987). Job stress and job dissatisfaction:
Inuence of contextual factors. Psychological Reports,61, 367375.
*Medley, F., & Larochelle, D.R. (1995). Transformational leadership and job satisfaction.
Nursing Management,26, 64JJ64LL, 64NN.
Moher, D., Cook, D.J., Eastwood, S., Olkin, I., Rennie, D., & Stroup, D.F. (1999). Improving
the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: The QUOROM
statement. Lancet,354, 18961900.
*Morrison, R.S., Jones, L., & Fuller, B. (1997). The relation between leadership style and
empowerment on job satisfaction of nurses. Journal of Nursing Administration,27,2734.
Motowidlo, S.J., Packard, J.S., & Manning, M.R. (1986). Occupational stress: Its causes and
consequences for job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology,71, 618629.
*Moyle, P. (1998). Longitudinal inuences of managerial support on employee well-being.
Work & Stress,12,2949.
Netterstrøm, B. (2002). Stress pa
˚arbejdspladsen. a
˚rsager, forebyggelse og ha
˚ndtering [Stress at
work. Causes, prevention and management]. Copenhagen: Hans Reitzel.
*Nielsen, K., Randall, R., Yarker, J., & Brenner, S.O. (2008). The effects of transformational
leadership on followersperceived work characteristics and psychological well-being: A
longitudinal study. Work & Stress,22,1632.
*Nielsen, K., Yarker, J., Brenner, S.O., Randall, R., & Borg, V. (2008). The importance of
transformational leadership style for the well-being of employees working with older people.
Journal of Advanced Nursing,63, 465475.
*Nielsen, K., Yarker, J., Randall, R., & Munir, F. (2009). The mediating effects of team and
self-efcacy on the relationship between transformational leadership, and job satisfaction
and psychological well-being in healthcare professionals: A cross-sectional questionnaire
survey. International Journal of Nursing Studies,46, 12361244.
*Offermann, L.R., & Hellmann, P.S. (1996). Leadership behaviour and subordinate stress: A
360 degrees view. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology,1, 382390.
Oxman, A.D., & Guyatt, G.H. (1991). Validation of an index of the quality of review articles.
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology,44, 1271 1278.
*Parasuraman, S., & Alutto, J.A. (1984). Sources and outcomes of stress in organizational
settings: Toward the development of a structural model. Academy of Management Journal,
27, 330350.
Pearce, W.B., & Cronen, V.E. (1980). Communication, action, and meaning: The creation of
social realities. New York: Praeger.
*Price, M.S., & Weiss, M.R. (2000). Relationships among coach burnout, coach behaviours,
and athletespsychological responses. Sport Psychologist,14, 391409.
*Prottas, D. (2008). Perceived behavioural integrity: Relationships with employee attitudes,
well-being, and absenteeism. Journal of Business Ethics,81, 313322.
Rafferty, A.E., & Grifn, M.A. (2006). Perceptions of organizational change: A stress and
coping perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology,91, 11541162.
Rasulzada, F., Dackert, I., & Johansson, C.R. (2003). Employee well-being in relation to
organizational climate and leadership style. In S. Giga, P. Flaxman, J. Houdmont, & M.
Ertel (Eds.), Occupational health psychology: Flexibility, quality of working life and health.
Work & Stress 137
Downloaded By: [National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark] At: 05:42 30 June 2010
Proceedings of the Fifth European Conference of the European Academy of Occupational
Health Psychology, Berlin, November 2021, 2003 (pp. 220224). Nottingham: University of
Nottingham, I-WHO.
Robson, C. (1994). Real world research. A resource for social scientists and practitioner-
researchers. Oxford: Blackwell.
*Schaubroeck, J., Walumbwa, F.O., Ganster, D.C., & Kepes, S. (2007). Destructive leader
traits and the neutralizing inuence of an ‘‘enriched’’ job. Leadership Quarterly,18,
236251.
Schaufeli, W., & Enzmann, D. (1998). The burnout companion to study and practice: A critical
analysis. London: Taylor & Francis.
Schaufeli, W.B., Maslach, C., & Marek, T. (1993). Professional burnout: Recent developments in
theory and research. Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis.
*Schulz, R., Greenley, J.R., & Brown, R. (1995). Organization, management and client effects
on staff burnout. Journal of Health & Social Behaviour,36, 333345.
*Sellgren, S.F., Ekvall, Gr., & Tomson, Gr. (2008). Leadership behaviour of nurse managers
in relation to job satisfaction and work climate. Journal of Nursing Management,16,
578587.
Seltzer, J., & Numerof, R.E. (1988). Supervisory leadership and subordinate burnout.
Academy of Management Journal,31, 436446.
*Seltzer, J. Numerof, R.E., & Bass, B.M. (1989). Transformational leadership: Is it a source of
more burnout and stress? Journal of Health and Human Resources Administration,12,
174185.
Selye, H. (1974). Stress without distress (3rd ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Hodder & Stoughton.
Semmer, N. (2006). Job stress interventions. Scandinavian Journal of Work and Environmental
Health,32, 515527.
*Shieh, H.-L., Mills, M.E., & Waltz, C.E. (2001). Academic leadership style predictors for
nursing faculty job satisfaction in Taiwan. Journal of Nursing Education,40, 203209.
*Skogstad, A., Einarsen, S., Torsheim, T., Aasland, M.S., & Hetland, H. (2007). The
destructiveness of laissez-faire leadership behaviour. Journal of Occupational Health
Psychology,12,8092.
*Sorrentino, E.A., Nalli, B., & Schriesheim, C. (1992). The effect of head nurse behaviours on
nurse job satisfaction and performance. Hospital Health Service Administration,37,
103113.
*Sosik, J.J., & Godshalk, V.M. (2000). Leadership styles, mentoring functions received, and
job-related stress: A conceptual model and preliminary study. Journal of Organizational
Behaviour,21, 365390.
*Steinhardt, M.A., Dolbier, C.L., Gottlieb, N.H., & McCalister, K.T. (2003). The relationship
between hardiness, supervisor support, group cohesion and job stress as predictors of job
satisfaction. American Journal of Health Promotion,17, 382389.
*Stordeur, S., Dhoore, W., & Vandenberghe, C. (2001). Leadership, organizational stress, and
emotional exhaustion among hospital nursing staff. Journal of Advanced Nursing,35,
533542.
*Studenski, R., & Barczyk, J. (1987). Occupational stressors in mining as related to health,
job, attitudes, and accident-making. Polish Psychological Bulletin,18, 159168.
Sutherland, V., & Davidson, M.J. (1989). Stress among construction site managers: A
preliminary study. Stress Medicine,5, 221235.
Sy, T., Cote, S., & Saavedra, R. (2005). The contagious leader: Impact of the leaders mood on
the mood of group members, group affective tone, and group processes. Journal of Applied
Psychology,90, 295305.
Tepper, B.J. (2000). Consequences of abusive supervision. Academy of Management Journal,
43, 178190.
*Theorell, T., Emdad, R., Arnetz, B., & Weingarten, A.M. (2001). Employee effects of an
educational program for managers at an insurance company. Psychosomatic Medicine,63,
724733.
138 J. Skakon et al.
Downloaded By: [National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark] At: 05:42 30 June 2010
*Tourigny, L., Baba, V.V., & Lituchy, T.R. (2005). Job burnout among airline employees in
Japan: A study of the buffering effects of absence and supervisory support. International
Journal of Cross Cultural Management,5,6785.
*van Dierendonck, D., Haynes, C., Borrill, C., & Stride, C. (2004). Leadership behaviour and
subordinate well-being. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology,9, 165175.
Van Horn, J.E., Taris, T., Schaufeli, W.B., & Schreurs, P.A. (2004). The structure of
occupational well-being: A study among Dutch teachers. Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology,77, 365377.
*Vealey, R.S., Armstrong, L., Comar, W., & Greenleaf, C.A. (1998). Inuence of perceived
coaching behaviours on burnout and competitive anxiety in female college athletes. Journal
of Applied Sport Psychology,10, 297318.
*Wilcoxon, S.A. (1989). Leadership behaviour and therapist burnout: A study of rural agency
settings. Journal of Rural Community Psychology,10,314.
*Wolfram, H.J., & Mohr, G. (2009). Transformational leadership, team goal fulllment, and
follower work satisfaction: The moderating effects of deep-level similarity in leadership
dyads. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies,15, 260274.
*Wu, T.Y., & Hu, C. (2009). Abusive supervision and employee emotional exhaustion:
Dispositional antecedents and boundaries. Group & Organization Management,34,
143169.
*Yagil, D. (2006). The relationship of abusive and supportive workplace supervision to
employee burnout and upward inuence tactics. Journal of Emotional Abuse,6,4965.
Yukl, G. (1994). Leadership in organizations (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Zlotnik, G. (2001). Den stressede børnefamilie [The stressed family with young children.].
Copenhagen, DK: Psykiatri Information.
Work & Stress 139
Downloaded By: [National Institute of Occupational Health in Denmark] At: 05:42 30 June 2010
... Participants reflected on the impact of the organization's hierarchy throughout the theme of team structure. The hierarchy and relationship between employers and employees has significant impacts on employee stress and well-being (Skakon et al., 2010). Skakon et al. (2010) found that positive leader behaviors, including support, feedback, trust, confidence, and integrity, are related to improving employee stress and well-being. ...
... The hierarchy and relationship between employers and employees has significant impacts on employee stress and well-being (Skakon et al., 2010). Skakon et al. (2010) found that positive leader behaviors, including support, feedback, trust, confidence, and integrity, are related to improving employee stress and well-being. In parallel, negative leader behaviors, such as hostility, abusive behaviors, control, low support, and others correspond to higher stress levels and poor well-being (Skakon et al., 2010). ...
... Skakon et al. (2010) found that positive leader behaviors, including support, feedback, trust, confidence, and integrity, are related to improving employee stress and well-being. In parallel, negative leader behaviors, such as hostility, abusive behaviors, control, low support, and others correspond to higher stress levels and poor well-being (Skakon et al., 2010). de Jong et al. (2016) reported on negative impacts on employees stemming from the restructuring of organizations. ...
Article
This study examined the impact of organizational structure on worker well-being in victim services in Canada. With data collected from 915 survey respondents, 24 semi-structured interviews, and 19 focus group participants, we found that although there are many aspects that negatively affect worker well-being (e.g. lack of funding, inadequate compensation, understaffing, large caseloads), positive aspects helped ameliorate the negative (e.g. a positive team environment, support from supervisors, flexibility and autonomy within the position, and witnessing client resilience). Given the increases in workload and stress stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic, it is essential to understand the current landscape of worker well-being.
... Leadership plays a critical role in shaping the organizational culture and influencing how stress is addressed within the workplace [2]. Leaders who model effective stress management strategies, provide necessary resources, and offer emotional support can create a positive environment that helps mitigate the adverse effects of stress (Skakon et al., (2010). [3]. ...
... Leaders who model effective stress management strategies, provide necessary resources, and offer emotional support can create a positive environment that helps mitigate the adverse effects of stress (Skakon et al., (2010). [3]. Their approach can significantly impact employees' ability to cope with pressures, ultimately affecting their productivity and job satisfaction (Bass & Riggio, (2006). ...
Article
Full-text available
Purpose: This study aims to investigate the impact of leadership and peer support on stress management among bank employees in Kerala, focusing on how these factors influence stress levels and overall job satisfaction in a high-pressure environment.
... In the last five years before the survey, stress-related disorders such high blood pressure (15.6%), stomach ulcers (9.1%), and diabetes (4.5%) were the most often reported diagnoses. In Uganda, there is high teacher burnout attributed to severe resource constraints as teachers have many teaching hours per day, large classrooms, limited or no textbooks, and limited physical infrastructure yet the pay is also very low, which all make burnout one of the issues causing a crisis that needs to be urgently attended to [48]. The rise in private education institutions and their endless quest for flashy academic achievements means overstretching teachers so that they milk marks from learners. ...
... However [47], concentrated on librarians and consequently left a gap of re-examining laissez-faire leadership style and burnout among teachers in secondary schools. [48], investigated the relationship between leadership style and burnout among employees of a Norwegian IT company and discovered that laissez-faire leadership had a relationship with burnout in that high levels of passive-avoidant (laissez-faire) leadership were associated with high levels of burnout. The study termed burnout as a syndrome characterized by emotional tiredness, depersonalization, and a lack of professional achievement that had negative impacts on both the individual employee and the organization. ...
Article
Full-text available
The investigated the relationship between head teacher's laissez-faire leadership style and teacher burnout in secondary schools in Ibanda Municipality, Uganda. In order to ascertain the relationship between the two variables, a correlation design was used, and to accommodate both qualitative and quantitative data, a mixed approach combining quantitative and qualitative research methods was also adopted. 217 teachers and 15 head teachers from the 15 secondary schools in Ibanda municipality provided the data. A questionnaire was given to the teachers, while an interview guide was given to the head teachers. The Leadership Styles Questionnaire and the Maslach Burnout Inventory served as the foundation for the questionnaire. The findings indicate that laissez-faire leadership style had a negative but moderate relationship with burnout, according to the correlation between them, which is r =-0.39
... The impact of JS is not limited to employees' well-being; it can also have significant financial implications for organizations. High levels of JS have been linked to increased absenteeism, decreased productivity, and higher healthcare costs for companies (Blackburn, Horowitz, Edington, & Klos, 1986;Skakon et al., 2010). Therefore, organizations should prioritize addressing JS and promoting healthy work environments to ensure the well-being of their employees and organizational success. ...
Article
Full-text available
The COVID-19 pandemic compelled global confinement, resulting in the swift implementation of remote work policies. Although remote work encourages stable job functions and social distancing, it also poses challenges, including monotonous telecommunications and online interactions, which may lead to fatigue and exhaustion. This study investigates how employees effectively balance their professional and personal responsibilities while telecommuting. The empirical and quantitative analysis examines the impact of remote work versus office work on employees' daily work-life balance by evaluating two independent variables: work engagement and work strain, along with their contributions and effects on employees' work-life balance. The study also reveals that employees' genders, the types of their organizations (private, government, NGO), and their parental responsibilities significantly influence work-life balance and positional conflicts based on these factors. Findings demonstrate that remote work enhances work-life balance, enabling employees to manage their professional and domestic responsibilities with composure. Moreover, work engagement positively affects work-life balance. Simultaneously, job strain adversely affects work-life balance, resulting in a disproportionate work and family life for employees experiencing work-related stress while telecommuting.
... Health professional leaders in all hierarchies play an important role in reducing stressors at work and achieving a healthy work environment 20-23 . Their significant commitment to implementing effective prevention and intervention strategies, their shaping of culture within the organisation as well as their behaviour, skills and abilities are important in order to effectively reduce stressors at work 11,17,21,24 . ...
Article
Full-text available
Healthcare organisations worldwide are affected by the shortage of health professionals due to work-related stress and health professional leaders play an important role by implementing effective strategies. Therefore, this study aims to investigate whether the STRAIN intervention program (using evidence-based training for health professional leaders) can reduce work-related stress among health professionals. This study is based on a cluster randomised controlled trial, consists of three measurements and includes 165 participating hospitals, nursing homes and home care organisations. A total of 206 health professional leaders took part in the intervention programme and 19,340 health professionals participated in the study. Results showed no significant differences (p > 0.05) between the intervention and control group regarding the effort-reward imbalance ratio, quantitative demands, opportunities for development, bond with the organisation, quality of leadership, social community, role clarity, rewards, difficulties with demarcation and work–private life conflict. Pre-/post-test analysis revealed a tendency for significant positive results (p < 0.05) for stressors, stress symptoms and long-term consequences for organisations with a leaders’ participation rate of ≥ 75%. Leaders’ awareness, commitment and readiness is essential to implement effective strategies reducing work-related stress.
Chapter
Full-text available
"İşe İlişkin Duygusal İyi Oluş" Günümüzün sürekli değişen ve gelişen, rekabetçi çalışma ortamlarında, genel refahın sağlanması hem kişiler hem de örgütler için önemli bir endişe kaynağı hâline gelmiştir. Geleneksel yönetim yaklaşımında insanların duygularını göstermesine müsaade edilmemiş ve örgütler bu şekilde yapılandırılmıştır. Ancak son zamanlarda etkilerini göstermeye başlayan davranışçı yaklaşım ve alandaki araştırmalar ortaya çıkarmıştır ki rasyonel düşünce kadar, tutumlarımız ve davranışlarımız da duygularımızdan önemli derecede etkilenmektedir. Duygular, kişinin örgütteki deneyimlerini, algılarını ve genel refahını şekillendirmede merkezî bir rol oynamaktadır. Bu açıdan bakıldığında duygular, örgüt yaşamının doğal bir parçasıdır demek yanlış olmayacaktır. Kişiler, duygularının farkında olmalı ve duygularını yönetmelidir. Örgütlerde işlerini gerçekleştirirken neşe, sevinç ve memnuniyet gibi duygularının yanı sıra keder, öfke ve endişe gibi duygular da yaşayabilirler. Bu duygular, kişilerin özel yaşantısında olduğu gibi örgüt yaşamında da işlerine yönelik davranışlarının olumlu veya olumsuz yönde farklılaşmasına sebep olmaktadır. Hatta bazen duygular, özel yaşamımızla iş yaşamımız arasındaki ince çizgiyi belirlemektedir. Bu açıdan, örgüt içinde kişilerin daha verimli ve istekli bir şekilde çalışmaları için duyguların önemsizleştirilmemesi ve üzerinde dikkatle durulması gerekmektedir.