Transformational leadership, self‐efficacy, group cohesiveness, commitment, and performance

By Rajnandini Pillai, E. Williams. 2004

474 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Clinical Psychology, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/8bef8fc2dd5f09bdc18aba2c349d2acaadccb2e3

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Clinical Psychology

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Transformational leadership and commitment: A multilevel analysis of group-level influences and mediating processes (2010, background): “Empowerment (Avolio et al., 2004), self-concordance (Bono & Judge, 2003), direct sympathy and liking (Brown & Keeping, 2005), higher team cohesion (Pillai & Williams, 2004), and collective self-efficacy (Walumbwa, Peng, Lawler, & Kan, 2004) have been identified as mediators in recent studies.”
A Critical Assessment of Charismatic—Transformational Leadership Research: Back to the Drawing Board? (2013, background): “Self-efficacy was also found to mediate relationships with attitudinal outcomes such as job satisfaction, work stress (Liu, Siu, & Shi, 2010a), and commitment (Pillai & Williams, 2004).”
Follower Behavior and Organizational Performance: The Impact of Transformational Leaders (2007, background): “This result holds for different organizational contexts and different success criteria, e.g., (group) performance (Dvir, Eden, Avolio, & Shamir, 2002; Pillai & Williams, 2004), project success in R&D departments (Keller, 1992), and innovation (Howell & Higgins, 1990; Shin & Zhou, 2003).”
Organizational interventions: A research-based framework for the evaluation of both process and effects (2013, background): “Although mental models are individual, shared mental models may develop over time as organizational members share experiences (Pillai & Williams, 2004).”
Charismatic leadership and organizational outcomes: The mediating role of employees' work‐group identification (2007, unknown): “Thus, charismatic features of both charismatic and transformational leadership have been defined as highly associated with positive work outcomes (Avolio & Bass, 1988 , 1995 ; Avolio, Waldman, & Einstein, 1988 ), ie, level of performance (eg, Bass, 1985 , 1999 ; Bass et al, 2003 ; Kon, Steers,”
Does shared and differentiated transformational leadership predict followers' working conditions and well-being?☆ (2012, methodology): “In our data collection we followed the recommendations of Podsakoff et al. (2003) in constructing our survey to minimize such bias.”
Explaining Knowledge Sharing (2006, background): “…and social cohesion, charismatic leaders, who score higher on extraversion (Bono & Judge, 2004), also engender more trust in employees than noncharismatic or transactional leaders (Conger, Kanungo, & Menon, 2000; Jung & Avolio, 2000; Pillai, Schriesheim, & Williams, 1999; Pillai & Williams, 2004).”
Group Cohesion as an Enhancement to the Justice—Affective Commitment Relationship (2008, background): “First, the quality of the dyadic relationship between the individual and supervisor can affect affective commitment (Pillai & Williams, 2004).”