4.6 Article

Test of a serial mediation model of Machiavellian leadership among hospitality and tourism employees

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2023.103462

关键词

Absenteeism; Hospitality and tourism employees; Machiavellian leadership; Turnover; Workplace ostracism

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Despite many studies on leadership in the hospitality and tourism field, there has been limited research on employees' perceptions of dark leadership and its outcomes. This paper proposes a conceptual model where workplace ostracism and absenteeism mediate the impact of Machiavellian leadership on turnover intentions in a sequential manner. Data collected from hospitality and tourism employees in the United Kingdom support the hypothesis that workplace ostracism and absenteeism sequentially mediate the impact of Machiavellian leadership on turnover intentions, but Machiavellian leadership does not significantly influence proclivity to quit.
Despite the abundance of studies on leadership in the hospitality and tourism literature, employees' perceptions of dark leadership and its potential outcomes have been subjected to limited empirical inquiries. With this realization, our paper proposes a conceptual model where workplace ostracism and absenteeism mediate the impact of Machiavellian leadership on turnover intentions in a sequential manner. To gauge these relationships , data were gathered from hospitality and tourism employees in the United Kingdom via Prolific, an online data collection platform. Results suggest that workplace ostracism mediates the influence of Machiavellian leadership on turnover intentions. This is also true for absenteeism that acts as a mediator between Machiavellian leadership and proclivity to quit. The empirical data support the hypothesis that workplace ostracism and absenteeism sequentially mediate the impact of Machiavellian leadership on turnover intentions. Contrary to our prediction, Machiavellian leadership does not significantly influence proclivity to quit.

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