4.6 Article

Responsible Leadership and Sustainable Development in East Asia Economic Group: Application of Social Exchange Theory

期刊

SUSTAINABILITY
卷 14, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/su14106020

关键词

sustainable leadership; knowledge management; sustainable development; large manufacturing firms; leadership theories; Asia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study revealed the significant influence of responsible leadership on sustainable performance, with knowledge sharing partially mediating the relationship between the two. It highlighted the importance of leadership training and knowledge sharing activities in organizations.
This study aimed to investigate the integrated relationship of responsible leadership, knowledge sharing, and sustainable performance, drawing from social exchange theory. Data from 264 employees of manufacturing firms in China were collected using online survey forms, exhibiting a response rate of 52.80 percent. Subsequently, the partial least square-structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) was applied to examine responsible leadership's direct and indirect effect on sustainable performance. Current empirical evidence revealed that responsible leaders influence sustainable performance significantly among these firms. Moreover, knowledge sharing has partially mediated the link between responsible leadership-sustainable performance. Overall, the present study contributed to the responsible leadership theory and enriched the literature on sustainable development, where it was found that responsible leaders play a critical role in the latter. Policymakers and practitioners in organisations should take the initiative in fostering specific leadership training and knowledge sharing activities. Accordingly, several recommendations were suggested to policymakers, in which strong leadership is considered the primary role behind several organisational aspects. These aspects include success, knowledge, and information, encouraging sustainable development goals.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据