Content uploaded by Wenjuan Mei
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Wenjuan Mei on Jun 04, 2024
Content may be subject to copyright.
The unintended consequences of
temporal leadership: a multilevel
investigation of the effects of
temporal leadership on
employee silence
Yu Zhu and Wenjuan Mei
School of Management, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China
Meilan Nong
School of Management, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China and
School of Economics and Management, Guangxi Normal University, Guilin, China, and
Yanfei Wang
School of Business Administration, South China University of Technology,
Guangzhou, China
Abstract
Purpose –Existing research has generally viewed that temporal leadership has positive impacts on
employees but ignores its potential drawbacks. This study aims to develop a model to explore its possible
negative impacts on employees, drawing upon social information processing theory.
Design/methodology/approach –This study conducts a multi-wave and multisource survey to test the
model, and the authors test the hypotheses with multi-level analysis using Mplus 7.4 and R package for Monte Carlo.
Findings –Results suggest that temporal leadership induces employee work alienation, thus leading to employee
silence. Furthermore, shared temporal cognitions moderate both the relationship between temporal leadership and
work alienation and the indirect effect of temporal leadership on employee silence via work alienation.
Originality/value –Taken together, this study reveals the potential dark side of temporal leadership and
provides a more comprehensive and dialectical research perspective for temporal leadership literature.
Keywords Temporal leadership, Work alienation, Employee silence, Shared temporal cognitions
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Temporal leadership refers to “leader behaviors that aid in structuring, coordinating and
managing the pacing of task accomplishment in a team”(Mohammed and Nadkarni, 2011,
p. 492). Representing managers’understanding of the time complexity in work environments
(Erve, 2004), temporal leadership is crucial for advancing time management. The existing
body of temporal leadership literature consistently reports a positive association between
Yu Zhu, Wenjuan Mei, and Meilan Nong have contributed equally to this work and share the first authorship.
Funding: This work was supported by National Social Science Foundation of China [22BGL126], the
Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [23JNLH07] National Natural Science Foundation of
China [72272053], General Foundation Program of the Ministry of Education of Humanities and Social Science
[17YJA630101].
Temporal
leadership on
employee
silence
Received17 April 2023
Revised 30 September2023
8 December 2023
6 February 2024
Accepted31 March 2024
Chinese Management Studies
© Emerald Publishing Limited
1750-614X
DOI 10.1108/CMS-04-2023-0159
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
https://www.emerald.com/insight/1750-614X.htm
temporal leadership and various favorable outcomes within both Western and Chinese contexts.
These outcomes include enhanced performance (Liu et al.,2021;Siddiquei et al.,2022;Siddiquei
et al.,2023), decreased team conflict (Santos et al.,2016) and stimulation of innovative behavior
(Xiao et al., 2020). Given the well-documented positive impacts of temporal leadership, it is
unsurprising that scholars and organizations worldwide encourage leaders to adopt and
implement temporal leadership strategies. This recognition stems from its potential to foster
positive outcomes for both individuals and teams (Mohammed and Alipour, 2014).
While there is considerable knowledge about the positive impacts of temporal leadership,
insufficient attention has been devoted to its potential adverse aspects. This oversight may
contribute to an incomplete and potentially biased understanding of temporal leadership,
thereby limiting its practical significance and credibility in both academic and professional
settings. For instance, scholars have noted that temporal leadership often emphasizes speed
and efficiency, placing potential pressure on employees (Gevers and Demerouti, 2013;
Rastegary and Landy, 1993;Xiao et al.,2020). In the Chinese context, studies have
emphasized the necessity to explore temporal leadership further. Recent findings from China
suggest that temporal leadership does not consistently lead to innovation, as observed in
other cultural contexts (Duan et al.,2023;Xiao et al.,2020). China’s cultural landscape often
exhibits distinct hierarchical structures and a concentration of power (Hofstede et al.,1990).
Leaders may exhibit tendencies to exercise control and direct subordinates in terms of timing
and tasks in China (Duan et al.,2023), potentially leading to negative consequences associated
with temporal leadership. Consequently, the influence of temporal leader behaviors and their
outcomes in the Chinese context can markedly differ from those in Western context due to
these cultural differences (Duan et al.,2018;Li et al.,2014;Tu et al., 2017). Moreover, Chinese
scholars in 2021 pointed out that “temporal leadership in the Chinese context is extremely
scarce”(Liu et al.,2021, p. 6) and deserves further study. In light of these considerations, there
is a compelling need to conduct temporal leadership research in the Chinese context,
supporting the assertion that the positive effects of temporal leadership may vary in this
setting (Duan et al.,2023;Xiao et al.,2020), redirecting attention to its negative dimensions
and acknowledging that it is not a universal remedy. This theoretical examination of
potential drawbacks enriches the temporal leadership literature within the Chinese context,
providing a more comprehensive and balanced view. From a practical standpoint,
understanding the entirety of temporal leadership, including its potential downsides in the
Chinese context, equips practitioners with the knowledge needed to effectively manage it.
This study integrates social information processing (SIP) theory with insights from temporal
leadership to explore the potential negative impacts of temporal leadership on employees. We
chose SIP theory because it is a well-established framework particularly helpful for
understanding the influences of leaders’practices on employees’behaviors, as indicated in related
research (Ye et al., 2022;Zheng et al.,2022). SIP theory posits that individuals’processing and
interpretation of social information determine their subsequent attitudes and behaviors (Salancik
and Pfeffer, 1978). Drawing on SIP theory, the time urgency conveyed by a temporal leader
emerges as pivotal social information within employees’workplace dynamics (Xiao et al.,2020).
Consequently, employees might develop a heightened sense of urgency and constraints, feeling
they cannot arrange work independently (Briker et al.,2021;Duan et al.,2023). In high power
distance and high-collectivism cultures like China, temporal leadership might not directly lead to
overt resistance or conflict. However, the pressure to adhere to time constraints and deadlines set
by temporal leaders could still lead to internalized feelings of work alienation (i.e. an attitude
towards the work domain reflecting a state of psychological disengagement from the
organization; Hirschfeld et al.,2000;Jiang et al.,2019;Muttar et al.,2019;Santas et al.,2016). In line
with SIP theory, this work attitude further influences employee work behavior, such as causing
CMS
employees to consciously conceal information, suggestions or ideas about organization-related
issues –termed employee silence (Pinder and Craig, 2001). We chose work alienation as the
mediator due to its role as a representative negative work attitude responding to unfavorable
informational cues within the SIP theory framework (Kakkar et al.,2022;Lagios et al., 2022).
Simultaneously, we selected employee silence as our outcome because it represents a typical
adverse result of an employee’s information processing, aligning with the SIP theory framework
(Aboramadan et al.,2020;Duan et al., 2018;Wei et al.,2022). From a practical perspective,
employee silence is also a common and potentially harmful issue that organizations need to solve
(Morrison, 2014).
Moreover, our study delves into the moderating role of shared temporal cognitions in the
relationship between temporal leadership and employee silence within the framework of SIP theory
and the temporal literature. While work alienation provides valuable insights into why negative
outcomes may be triggered by temporal leadership, the question of when and how to mitigate these
negative effects remains unanswered. SIP literature suggests that team-level factors have the
potential to influence how individuals process information originating from leaders (Yang et al.,
2018;Ye et al., 2022;Zheng et al., 2022). Within this theoretical framework, shared temporal
cognitions may emerge as a key variable for addressing this research gap. Shared temporal
cognitions represent a classic example of a team-level factor that not only encapsulates the overall
temporal state of a team but also plays a crucial role in buffering individuals’information
processing in response to social stimuli (Tang et al., 2020). According to SIP theory, shared temporal
cognitions encompass a team’s collective understanding of “the temporal aspects of a specificgroup
task”(Gevers et al., 2006), functioning as a team-level provider of collective temporal information
(Tang et al., 2020) to shield employees’perceptions from external cues, such as those arising from
temporal leadership. This suggests that the influence of temporal leadership on work alienation and
employee silence may hinge on shared temporal cognitions (Gevers et al., 2006;Gevers et al., 2020;
Santos et al., 2016). Specifically, employees with high levels of shared temporal cognitions are better
equipped to comprehend the temporal dynamics inherent in leadership and teamwork (Standifer
et al., 2015), potentially mitigating the work alienation induced by temporal leadership.
Consequently, shared temporal cognitions may play a pivotal role in ameliorating the adverse
effects of temporal leadership on employees. Thus, drawing from SIP theory and temporal
literature, we aim to explore the impact of temporal leadership on employee silence while
considering the moderating role of shared temporal cognitions.
This study makes several noteworthy contributions. Firstly, it represents a pivotal
shift in research focus on temporal leadership, transitioning from a primary emphasis on
its benefits to a thorough examination of its potential costs within both the Chinese and
Western contexts. In the emerging temporal leadership literature, the consequences of
temporal leadership have predominantly been construed as positive in both Chinese and
Western contexts (Mohammed and Alipour, 2014;Mohammed and Nadkarni, 2011),
while the potential adverse aspects have largely gone unnoticed worldwide. Recent
studies have started recognizing the paradoxical outcomes of temporal leadership within
the Chinese context (Duan et al., 2023;Xiao et al., 2020). In response, our study delves
into the potential drawbacks of temporal leadership, reshaping the discourse within
temporal leadership literature. Instead of an exclusive focus on positive consensus, we
expand our scope to encompass its aversive effects. This approach offers a fresh
perspective for understanding the multifaceted role of temporal leadership within the
Chinese organizational landscape.
Furthermore, this study serves as a critical step toward advancing our understanding of
why temporal leadership may yield negative outcomes for employees within the unique
context of China. The intricacies of the relationship between temporal leadership and
Temporal
leadership on
employee
silence
employee silence in the Chinese workplace have remained relatively uncharted. This
research bridges this knowledge gap by identifying work alienation as the fundamental
mechanism that underpins the adverse effects of temporal leadership, aligning with the
principles of SIP theory. Our study introduces a novel explanatory framework, highlighting
work alienation as a pivotal intermediary mechanism arising from employees’interpretation
of temporal leadership cues, ultimately culminating in the manifestation of employee silence.
In doing so, it enriches the comprehension of the dynamics at play in the Chinese
organizational landscape.
This study contributes to the expansion of SIP theory and the temporal leadership
literature by investigating the moderating influence of shared temporal cognitions. It seeks
to uncover not only why temporal leadership may yield negative effects but also the
conditions under which these negative effects are mitigated. SIP theory posits that a team’s
situational factors can mold how individuals process information (Yang et al., 2018;Ye et al.,
2022;Zheng et al.,2022). Therefore, aligned with our research objectives and guided by SIP
theory, this study proposes that shared temporal cognitions, a collective temporal state
(Tang et al.,2020), may significantly shape individuals’interpretations of temporal
leadership. Consequently, our research offers valuable insights into the circumstances under
which the detrimental impact of temporal leadership on employees can be attenuated.
Furthermore, it extends SIP theory by suggesting that additional situational factors within
teams, particularly shared temporal cognitions in this context, play a pivotal role in shaping
individuals’information processing.
Theoretical overview and hypothesis development
Temporal leadership
Temporal leadership involves the task-oriented behaviors exhibited by leaders, with a
specific focus on temporality (Mohammed and Nadkarni, 2011). This concept encompasses
actions such as reminding team members of deadlines, coordinating and overseeing the
pacing of task completion and allocating temporal resources (Mohammed and Nadkarni,
2011). Unlike broader and established leadership concepts (e.g. transformational leadership,
leaders’time urgency personality and time management skills), temporal leadership adds to
the leadership literature by emphasizing leader actions aimed at optimizing the utilization of
limited temporal resources and possessing characteristics of time-orientation, time
sensitivity and dynamism (Mohammed and Nadkarni, 2011;Siddiquei et al., 2022;Zheng
et al.,2022).
Previous research has shown that temporal leadership is positively associated with
team performance (Siddiquei et al., 2022;Siddiquei et al., 2023), innovation (Xiao et al.,
2020) and safety behavior (Zheng et al., 2022). However, it is noteworthy that, despite
these positive effects, the potential dark side of temporal leadership has received
limited attention in research. This lack of emphasis could contribute to an incomplete
and biased comprehension of temporal leadership, thereby restricting its practical
significance in both academic and professional contexts. Furthermore, given the
relative scarcity (Liu et al., 2021) and potential cultural differences (Duan et al., 2018;
Li et al., 2014;Tu et al., 2017) in temporal leadership studies specific to the Chinese
context, delving into the potential negative effects of temporal leadership emerges as a
crucial research endeavor.
Social information processing theory
In this study, we explore the negative effects of temporal leadership within Chinese context,
drawing upon the SIP theory. SIP theory posits that individuals rely on information from
CMS
their environment to shape their perceptions and subsequent actions (Salancik and Pfeffer,
1978). Applying this framework to temporal leadership, employees construct their
perceptions and attitudes based on the social information from temporal leadership, which
in turn affects their behavior. Specifically, employees interpret these cues from temporal
leadership as signals of surveillance and immediacy because temporal leadership places a
strong emphasis on precise time requirements and urgency (Casimir, 2001;Judge et al.,
2004). Consequently, employees may feel powerless, leading them to withhold concerns
about organizational issues, resulting in silence. Therefore, in line with SIP theory, we posit
that the cognitive outcome of processing information from temporal leadership can induce
employees’perceptions of work alienation and motivate them to engage in silent behavior.
Employee silence is a crucial topic in management research, prior research has primarily
examined the triggers of employee silence within organizations (Hao et al.,2022). Precisely,
this body of work has identified predictive factors encompassing individual characteristics
(e.g. proactive personality, power distance and negative affect; Hao et al., 2022;Lam and Xu,
2019), leadership-related elements (e.g. abusive supervision, authoritarian leadership and
narcissistic leadership; Aboramadan et al., 2020;Duan et al., 2018;Guo et al., 2018;Lam and
Xu, 2019) and job-related perceptions (e.g. job autonomy, organizational identification
and work alienation; Dong et al.,2022;Hao et al.,2022). Among these influential factors, the
leadership component has garnered significant attention (Duan et al.,2018;Lam and Xu,
2019;Wang et al., 2023;Wei et al., 2022). Nevertheless, prior inquiries into the connection
between leadership and employee silence have primarily revolved around entirely negative
leadership behaviors that contribute to silence (Duan et al.,2018;Lam and Xu, 2019;Wang
et al.,2023). Meanwhile, the potential impact of leadership behaviors like temporal
leadership, typically perceived as positive and conducive to favorable outcomes for both
employees and organizations (Mohammed and Alipour, 2014;Mohammed and Nadkarni,
2011;Liu et al.,2021;Zhang et al., 2021;Zheng et al., 2022), on employee silence remains a
relatively unexplored realm. This study aims to address a crucial research gap by
examining the adverse effects of temporal leadership, with a specific focus on employee
silence as a potential outcome within the framework of SIP theory. Through this
investigation, we seek to shed light on the potential negative consequences associated with
temporal leadership.
Temporal leadership and work alienation
We propose that temporal leadership has a positive relationship with employee work
alienation. As we noted before, SIP theory suggests that individuals construct their
perceptions and attitudes by processing information cues in the workplace (Salancik and
Pfeffer, 1978). SIP research posits that leaders are critical providers of informational cues in
the work context and influence followers’job perceptions (Chiu et al.,2016). Specifically,
temporal leadership is a task-oriented behavior characterized by the allocation of time
resources and control of temporal strategy (Casimir, 2001;Judge et al.,2004), which may
inadvertently neglect employees’individual characteristics, diverse perspectives and
personal needs (Briker et al.,2021). For employees, these social cues emanating from
temporal leadership make them feel a sense of limited control and powerlessness regarding
task completion timelines, fostering a perception of being disempowered. Simultaneously, as
leaders emphasize the expeditious execution of tasks and operational efficiencies through
temporal leadership behaviors, this “urgent”view of time may place employees under a
series of constraints and pressure, thereby making them feel that they cannot arrange work
independently (Briker et al.,2021;Duan et al., 2023;Xiao et al., 2020). Consequently, it
induces employees to build a state of psychological disengagement from the organization,
Temporal
leadership on
employee
silence
namely, work alienation (Hirschfeld et al.,2000;Jiang et al.,2019). Moreover, previous
research has established that employees’experience of work alienation is linked to a
perceived lack of control and autonomy under specific leadership styles (Jiang et al.,2019).
Accordingly, the perception of powerlessness stemming from the information delivered by
temporal leaders may cause employee work alienation. Therefore, based on the arguments
above, we propose that:
H1. Temporal leadership is positively related to employee workalienation.
Temporal leadership, work alienation and employee silence
We propose that temporal leadership likely increases employee silence via work alienation.
Employee silence refers to “the withholding of any form of genuine expression about the
individual’s behavioral, cognitive and/or affective evaluations of his or her organizational
circumstances to persons who are perceived to be capable of effecting change or redress”
(Pinder and Craig, 2001, p. 334). Based on SIP theory, individuals’attitudes are affected by
processing social cues in the workplace, which then affects their behaviors (Salancik and
Pfeffer, 1978). Accordingly, when employees suffer from work alienation caused by
temporal leadership, they are likely to adjust their behavior. Specifically, when employees
experience work alienation, characterized by feelings of powerlessness, detachment and
disillusionment (Kakkar et al., 2022;Nair and Vohra, 2010), they often perceive their work
environment as unsupportive and unresponsive to their concerns (Dong et al., 2022). SIP
theory posits that individuals evaluate whether it is worthwhile to voice their opinions or
concerns based on how much degree they perceive their voice can be effective (Aboramadan
et al., 2020;Al-Hawari et al., 2020;Deniz and Çimen, 2022). In the context of work alienation,
they perceive organizational cues that appear disregarding, inattentive or undervaluing
according to SIP theory (Aboramadan et al.,2020;Wei et al.,2022), so they may feel that their
expressions will be futile or even detrimental to their position. As a result, they choose
silence as a means of self-protection, withholding their genuine evaluations of their
organizational circumstances (Lam and Xu, 2019). Accordingly, work alienation may reduce
employees’willingness to speak out and lead to silence. Therefore, based on the arguments
above, we propose that:
H2. Work alienation is positively related to employee silence.
SIP theory highlights that individuals adapt their attitudes and perceptions through the
processing and interpretation of social information, subsequently influencing their behaviors
(Salancik and Pfeffer, 1978). Therefore, we proposed that temporal leadership is positively
relatedtoemployeeworkalienation(H1) because employees may develop a sense of
powerlessness after they interpret the tight time information conveyed by temporal leadership,
leading to a state of psychological disengagement from the organization, namely, work
alienation (Hirschfeld et al., 2000;Jiang et al., 2019). Following the tenets of SIP theory, we also
propose that work alienation is positively related to employee silence because the disregarding
and inattentive interpretation conveyed by work alienation will let employees feel that their
expressions will be futile, leading to silence. To summarize, based on SIP theory, combined
with H1 that temporal leadership is positively related to employee work alienation and H2 that
work alienation is positively related to employee silence, we propose that:
H3. Temporal leadership has a positive indirect effect on employee silence via work
alienation.
CMS
The moderating effect of shared temporal cognitions
Drawing upon SIP theory and the temporal literature, we propose that shared temporal
cognitions moderate the influence of temporal leadership on work alienation. As mentioned
earlier, we have outlined why temporal leadership can be harmful, but the optimal conditions
for minimizing adverse outcomes are still unknown. Extensive research within the SIP
literature has demonstrated that individuals’interpretation of cues from leaders can be
significantly influenced by the situational factors present in their teams (Salancik and Pfeffer,
1978;Yang et al., 2018;Ye et al.,2022;Zheng et al., 2022). Our particular focus centers on shared
temporal cognitions as a classic team-level factor in our model, not only because it reflects the
team’s collective temporal state but also plays a pivotal role in buffering how individuals
process information in response to social stimuli (Tang et al., 2020). In line with SIP theory,
shared temporal cognitions represent a team’s collective understanding of the temporal aspects
of a specificgrouptask(Gevers et al.,2006;Tang et al., 2020), functioning as a team-level
provider of temporal information to mitigate the impact of cues from stimuli, such as temporal
leadership. This implies that temporal leadership influences work alienation, and employee
silence hinges on the degree of congruence among group members’perceptions of temporal
aspects, namely, their shared temporal cognitions (Gevers et al., 2006;Gevers et al., 2020;Santos
et al., 2016). Specifically, shared temporal cognitions lead employees to interpret temporal cues
from temporal leadership in a consistent manner (Santos, 2016) and foster a shared
comprehension of time-related task scheduling established by temporal leaders (Mohammed
and Nadkarni, 2014). Therefore, when team members exhibit high levels of shared temporal
cognitions, employees are more likely to share a common understanding of completing tasks
within specified time limits set by their team (Mohammed and Nadkarni, 2014)andmaypay
less attention to urgent information conveyed by temporal leadership and be even more
receptive to temporal leadership’s time-related directives, ultimately alleviating work
alienation. Conversely, in cases where team members’shared temporal cognitions are low,
differing perceptions about the time required for task completion within the team (Santos et al.,
2016)mayleadtoconflicting expectations and interpretations of temporal cues from leaders,
making it challenging to align with temporal leadership directives and, consequently,
strengthening the influence of temporal leadership on work alienation. Based on the principles
of SIP theory and insights from the temporal literature, we propose that:
H4. Shared temporal cognitions moderate the relationship between temporal leadership
and employee work alienation, such that the relationship is stronger when shared
temporal cognitions are low.
Furthermore, combining H3 (the indirect relationship between temporal leadership and
employee silence via work alienation) and H4 (the moderating effect of shared temporal
cognitions on the relationship between temporal leadership and employee work alienation),
we propose that:
H5. Shared temporal cognitions moderate the indirect relationship between temporal
leadership and employee silence via work alienation, such that the relationship is
stronger when shared temporal cognitions are low.
Method
Sample and procedure
Participants were mainly obtained through training programs and recruited from MBA and
EMBA alumni of a university in southern China, and these participants worked in various
Temporal
leadership on
employee
silence
industries, such as manufacturing, technology and service. With the help of the human
resources director, we randomly chose leaders and followers, and 98 team leaders and their
312 direct followers were eventually willing to participate in our survey. To mitigate
potential issues related to common method bias and establish a clear temporal sequence
among the study variables (Ma, 2023;Podsakoff et al.,2012), this research collected data at
three distinct time points, with a two-week interval between each assessment. The selection
of a two-week interval aligns with recommendations from previous studies, emphasizing
that shorter time intervals enhance the ability to detect the most robust associations
(Fasbender et al., 2023). Furthermore, this choice remains consistent with prior research in
the domain of leadership (Mohammed and Nadkarni, 2011;Rasheed et al., 2023). Prior to
conducting the formal survey, the researcher will report comprehensive ethical statements
to the respondents. This information will cover the voluntary nature of the survey, its
objectives and general details (e.g. a three-wave study). The aim is to ensure that
respondents are well-informed about the survey and to guarantee the anonymity,
confidentiality and ethical standards of the research. It is essential to emphasize that the
research will not compromise commercial secrets or invade privacy. They can only begin
filling out the questionnaire after agreeing to take part in the survey. We collected data
online, utilizing web links to distribute our surveys. At Time 1, leaders completed measures
of temporal leadership and their demographic information; followers completed measures of
shared temporal cognitions and their demographic information. 96 leaders’questionnaires
and 305 followers’questionnaires were returned. At Time 2, followers completed measures
of work alienation, and 278 followers’questionnaires were returned. Finally, at Time 3,
leaders evaluate their direct followers’silence, and 89 leaders’questionnaires and 278
followers’questionnaires were returned.
Participants who did not have matching responses between the leader and subordinate
questionnaires, those who did not complete all the surveys, individuals providing identical
answers throughout the study, or those with unusually brief response times were excluded
from the analyses. After eliminating the invalid questionnaires in this survey, the matching
data of 85 team leaders and 261 followers were finally obtained, corresponding to a response
rate of 86.73% and 83.65%. Among leaders, 49.4% were male, with an average age of
36.02 years old, and 70.5% were bachelor’s degrees or above. Among followers, the sample
exhibited a relatively equal gender ratio (51% were female), with an average age of
31.19 years old and being well-educated (69.7% held a bachelor’s degree or higher). In
addition, most followers’tenure under their leader was two years or more (41.4%). Finally,
the participants worked in various industries, including manufacturing (28.3%), technology
(37.2%), service (20.7%) and other industries (13.8%).
Measures
We applied a translation and back-translation approach (Brislin et al.,1973) to translate the
English-based items into Chinese. All measures in this study were used on a five-point
Likert scale, ranging from 1 to 5 (1 ¼“strongly disagree”and 5 ¼“strongly agree”).
Temporal leadership. Temporal leadership was measured by a seven-item scale
developed by Mohammed and Nadkarni (2011). A sample item is “I often remind members
of important deadlines.”(
a
¼0.731).
Shared temporal cognitions. Shared temporal cognitions were measured by a four-item
scale developed by Gevers et al. (2006). A sample item is “In my team, we have similar ideas
about the time it takes to perform certain tasks.”(
a
¼0.871).
CMS
Work alienation. Work alienation was measured by an eight-item scale developed
by Nair and Vohra (2010). A sample item is “I do not feel like putting my best effort at work.”
(
a
¼0.893).
Employee silence. Employee silence was measured by a five-item scale developed by
Tangirala and Ramanujam (2008). A sample item is “This subordinate chooses to remain
silent when team has concerns.”(
a
¼0.817).
Control variables. According to prior research (Zhang et al., 2021), we controlled for
follower gender, age, education, tenure and the time spent with leaders.
Analytic strategy
Temporal leadership and shared temporal cognitions were considered team-level variables
in our theoretical model, whereas work alienation and employee silence were individual-
level variables. Our hypotheses were tested with multi-level analysis using Mplus 7.4.
Owing to temporal leadership was rated by leaders, data aggregation was not required. We
first calculated the R
wg
and ICC (1) of the shared temporal cognitions to determine whether a
multi-level analysis is required. The results show that the R
wg
¼0.884, ICC (1) ¼0.144 and
ICC (2) ¼0.428, thereby requiring a multi-level analysis for hypothesis verification. Then,
we employed preliminary tests of common method bias, reliability and validity. Finally, to
verify the significance of the mediating and moderating effects, we also conducted Monte
Carlo with R 4.0.0, resampling 20,000 times, and created 95% confidence intervals.
Results
Preliminary tests
We conducted Harman’s one-factor test to examinethe potential common method bias in our
study (Podsakoff et al., 2003). The results revealed that the first unrotated factor explained
28.948% of the variance, indicating no serious common-method bias in the research data.
Furthermore, the composite reliabilities of the temporal leadership, shared temporal
cognitions, work alienation and silence scales were 0.731, 0.870, 0.897 and 0.820,
respectively, and were greater than the threshold of 0.7, indicating a good convergence
validity (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). The root squares of the AVEs of the temporal
leadership, shared temporal cognitions, work alienation and silence scales were 0.547, 0.791,
0.725 and 0.693, respectively. Root square of the AVEs was higher than the intercorrelations
among the variables, implying that discriminant validity is good (Aboramadan et al.,2020).
Moreover, we also conducted a set of multilevel confirmatory factor analyses to examine
the distinctiveness of variables. The results (see Table 1) showed that the four-factor
model (
x
2
¼221.974, df ¼130,
x
2
/df ¼1.707, RMSEA ¼0.052, CFI ¼0.959, TLI ¼0.951,
SRMR ¼0.043) assumed has the best fitting effect compared with the other four competitive
models, indicating that the discriminant validity of this study is good.
Descriptive statistics and correlations
Descriptive statistics, correlations and Cronbach’s alpha were presented in Table 2.
Hypothesis testing
The multilevel-level modeling path analysis results are also presented in Figure 1. As shown
in Figure 1, temporal leadership had a significant positive effect on work alienation (
g
¼
0.254, p<0.01), thus, H1 was supported. Work alienation significantly affected employee
silence (
g
¼0.187, p<0.01), which supported H2. Combining with H1 and H2,H3 was
initially supported. Moreover, shared temporal cognitions significantly moderated the
Temporal
leadership on
employee
silence
relationship betweentemporal leadership and work alienation (
g
¼0.671, p<0.001), which
supported H4.
We further conducted the simple slope test to verify the moderating effect of shared
temporal cognitions on the relationship between temporal leadership and work alienation.
As shown in Figure 2, the effect of temporal leadership on work alienation was more
significant when shared temporal cognitions were low (mean-SD). H4 was further verified.
We used Monte Carlo to verify the moderating and moderated mediating effects. As shown
in Table 3, the mediating effect of work alienation on the relationship between temporal
leadership and employee silence was significant (estimate ¼0.047, SE ¼0.021, 95% CI
[0.253, 0.033]), thus H3 was further supported. Results showed that the direct effect of
temporal leadership on work alienation was significant when shared temporal cognitions were
low (estimate ¼0.562, SE ¼0.124, 95% CI [0.322, 0.796]), whereas the effect was not significant
when shared temporal cognitions were high (estimate ¼0.054, SE ¼0.115, 95% CI [0.273,
0.169]). Furthermore, the difference between the high and low groups was significant
(estimate ¼0.616, SE ¼0.180, 95% CI [0.953, 0.273]). Thus, H4 was further supported.
Table 2.
Descriptive statistics
and correlations
Variables M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Level 1 variables
1. Follower gender (T1) 1.510 0.500 –
2. Follower age (T1) 31.19 7.455 0.060 –
3. Follower edu (T1) 2.835 0.804 0.171** 0.128* –
4. Follower tenure (T1) 2.808 1.423 0.024 0.582** 0.317** –
5. Time spent with leaders (T1) 2.556 1.307 0.035 0.405** 0.194** 0.614** –
6. Work alienation (T2) 3.990 0.602 0.148** 0.041 0.125* 0.167* 0.116 0.894
7. Employee silence (T3) 3.673 0.720 0.090 0.071 0.230** 0.047 0.035 0.326** 0.811
Level 2 variables
1. Temporal leadership (T1) 4.310 0.413 0.730
2. Shared temporal cognitions
(T1)
4.070 0.659 0.017 0.868
Notes: Level-2 N¼85; level-1 n¼261. For gender, 1 ¼male; T1/2/3 ¼time1/2/3; Alphas are reported on
the diagonal *p<0.05; **p<0.01
Source: Table created by authors
Table 1.
Results of multilevel
confirmatory factor
analysis
Models
x
2
df
x
2
/df CFI TLI RMSEA SRMR
Four-factor model 221.974 130 1.707 0.959 0.951 0.052 0.043
Three-factor model
(a)
401.217 132 3.039 0.881 0.858 0.088 0.060
Three-factor model
(b)
565.650 132 4.285 0.808 0.771 0.112 0.109
Three-factor model
(c)
595.439 132 4.511 0.794 0.755 0.116 0.115
Two-factor model 748.745 133 5.630 0.727 0.678 0.133 0.117
Notes: Level 1 ¼n¼261; Level 2: N¼85. Four-factor model ¼temporal leadership; shared temporal
cognitions; work alienation; employee silence; Three-factor model
(a)
: temporal leadership; shared
temporal cognitionsþwork alienation; employee silence; Three-factor model
(b)
: temporal leadership;
shared temporal cognitions; work alienationþemployee silence; Three-factor model
(c)
:temporal
leadership; shared temporal cognitionsþemployee silence; work alienation; Two-factor model: temporal
leadership; shared temporal cognitionsþwork alienationþemployee silence
Source: Table created by authors
CMS
Table 3 also revealed that when shared temporal cognitions were low, the indirect effect of
temporal leadership on employee silence through work alienation is 0.105 (95%CI [0.032,
0.197]), indicating a significant effect. When shared temporal cognitions were high, the
indirect effect of temporal leadership on employee silence through work alienation was
0.010 (95% CI [0.059, 0.032]), which includes 0, indicating a not significant indirect effect.
Furthermore, the indirect effect difference between the high and low groups was 0.115 (95%
CI [0.234, 0.029]), indicating that the indirect effect of the high and low differences was
significant. Thus, H5 was supported.
Figure 2.
Interaction effects of
temporal leadership
and shared temporal
cognitions on work
alienation
Figure 1.
Estimated
unstandardized
coefficients of indirect
effects and
interaction effects of
temporal leadership
on outcomes
Temporal
leadership on
employee
silence
General discussion
Drawing upon SIP theory, this study offers compelling evidence of the potential negative
consequences of temporal leadership on employees. Through a comprehensive multi-wave
and multisource survey, our findings underscore that temporal leadership has the capacity
to elevate employee work alienation, subsequently triggering employee silence.
Furthermore, our results showed that these direct and indirect relationships are amplified
when shared temporal cognitions are low; as such, low shared temporal cognitions enhance
the positive effects of temporal leadership on employee silence.
Theoretical implications
Our work contributes significantly to the temporal leadership literature in several ways.
First, this research contributes to temporal leadership literature by extending the
compressive understanding of the consequences of temporal leadership within the Chinese
context. To date, most studies have primarily explored the positive effects of temporal
leadership in Western contexts (Mohammed and Alipour, 2014;Mohammed and Nadkarni,
2011). However, an overemphasis on the positive aspects of temporal leadership in existing
literature may lead scholars and organizations to overlook its potential negative impacts,
which may foster an incomplete and potentially skewed understanding of temporal
leadership, limiting its practical relevance and credibility within the academic and
professional spheres. Scholars further implied that temporal leadership tends to focus on
speed and efficiency, which may put pressure on employees (Gevers and Demerouti, 2013).
Therefore, temporal leadership may not always be beneficial. Recently, although research
from China has noted that temporal leadership has a paradoxical influence on team
outcomes (Duan et al., 2023), researchers further propose that how temporal leadership
relates to employee outcomes has lagged behind within the Chinese context (Liu et al.,2021).
Moreover, the influence of leader behaviors and its consequences in the Chinese context may
be different from those in Western context because of cultural differences (Duan et al.,2018;
Li et al.,2014;Tu et al.,2017). Therefore, in response to this research gap, necessity and the
call for localized investigations in China, we challenge the prevailing notion that “temporal
leadership is always beneficial”in current temporal leadership literature within both
Chinese and Western contexts (Mohammed and Alipour, 2014;Zhang et al., 2021) by delving
into the potential adverse effects of temporal leadership in the Chinese context. Specifically,
we introduce SIP theory and reveal that temporal leadership can trigger negative employee
behaviors, such as employee silence. Consequently, this research provides a more
Table 3.
Results of moderated
mediation analysis
(full model)
Paths Estimate SE
95%CI
LL UL
Temporal leadership !work alienation
High shared temporal cognitions (HSTC) 0.054 0.115 0.273 0.169
Low shared temporal cognitions (LSTC) 0.562 0.124 0.322 0.796
Difference between HSTC and LSTC conditions 0.616 0.180 0.953 0.273
Temporal leadership !work alienation !employee silence 0.047 0.021 0.253 0.033
High shared temporal cognitions (HSTC) 0.010 0.022 0.059 0.032
Low shared temporal cognitions (LSTC) 0.105 0.042 0.032 0.197
Difference between HSTC and LSTC conditions 0.115 0.051 0.234 0.029
Notes: CI ¼confidence intervals; LL ¼lower limit; UL ¼upper limit. 20,000 times
Source: Table created by authors
CMS
comprehensive and nuanced understanding of the impact of temporal leadership and
underscores the importance of considering its potential negative implications within the
Chinese context and worldwide.
Second, drawing upon SIP theory, we contribute to the temporal leadership literature by
introducing a novel mechanism through which temporal leadership might induce employee
silence within Chinese context. Previous studies have primarily investigated the influence of
temporal leadership on employees’positive outcomes through variables such as job
passions (Xiao et al.,2020), vigor (Zhang et al.,2021) and attentiveness (Zheng et al.,2022)in
Chinese context. However, the potential mechanism between temporal leadership and the
adverse outcomes remains unclear, which may hinder the development of exploring the
targeted interventions to mitigate these negative effects from temporal leadership. Our
findings help us better understand the adverse impact of temporal leadership on employee
silence by exploring the mediating role of work alienation. As such, work alienation,
characterized by a negative attitude encompassing feelings of meaninglessness and
powerlessness in one’s job (Jiang et al., 2019), serves as a comprehensible mechanism for
explaining why and how the adverse effects of temporal leadership manifest. Specifically,
this mediator, rooted in the SIP framework, underscores the byproduct of information
processing in temporal leadership and underscores the significance of employees’
interpretation of social cues within work contexts. By elucidating this mechanism, our study
sheds light on why temporal leadership can lead to negative outcomes within the Chinese
context and worldwide as well.
Thirdly, this study contributes to the expansion of SIP theory and temporal leadership
research by investigating the boundary conditions that influence the mechanisms through
which temporal leadership triggers employees’negative outcomes in Chinese context. It is
crucial to investigate strategies for mitigating these adverse effects because research
indicates that without proper measures to address potential negative consequences of
specific leadership styles, organizations risk compromising their overall performance (Yam
et al., 2021). In addition, in alignment with SIP theory, which posits that the process of
acquiring, interpreting and processing information cues is subject to situational factors
within a team (Yang et al.,2018;Ye et al., 2022;Zheng et al., 2022), this study addresses a gap
in the temporal leadership literature. It introduces the concept of collective temporal states,
specifically shared temporal cognitions (Tang et al.,2020), as moderating mechanisms in the
relationship between temporal leadership and employees’negative outcomes in Chinese
context (e.g. employee silence). Our findings demonstrate that shared temporal cognitions
can serve as a buffer, mitigating the positive association between temporal leadership and
employee silence via work alienation. In doing so, this study enriches the temporal
leadership literature and extends the principles of SIP theory by offering new insights into
how a collective temporal state, such as shared temporal cognitions, can influence
individuals’information processing in response to social stimuli in Chinese context.
Practical implications
Chinese companies are currently grappling with a range of time-related challenges,
including fierce competition, rapid technological advancements and ever-changing customer
preferences (Liu et al., 2021). Therefore, both scholars and practitioners have shown a
growing interest in the concept of temporal leadership. Our findings provide significant
managerial implications for Chinese organizations and managers. First, we found that
temporal leadership indirectly induces more employee silence, which reminds managers to
be alert to the possible adverse effects of temporal leadership in China. Therefore, when
implementing temporal leadership behavior, managers should avoid focusing only on the
Temporal
leadership on
employee
silence
timely completion of tasks and pay attention to employees’attitudes and emotional
responses to temporal leadership (Xiao et al.,2020). We recommend that managers
communicate with employees, encourage employees to express their opinions on scheduling,
time synchronization and time resource allocation during the implementation of temporal
leadership and adjust the intensity and frequency of temporal leadership according to the
feedback.
Second, our results indicated that temporal leadership might increase silent behavior
through work alienation. Therefore, we suggest that Chinese practitioners pay more attention
to followers’work alienation if they want to reduce the cost of temporal leadership. For
example, managers could provide followers with working conditions that satisfy the job
demand and create an inclusive work climate, thus alleviating followers’sense of work
alienation (Deniz and Çimen, 2022). Moreover, managers can also enhance communication and
mutual help among followers through work-sharing and job rotation to satisfy their needs for
autonomy and belonging and, ultimately, dilute their work alienation (Jiang et al., 2019).
Third, our findings inform managers about how to manage employees under temporal
leadership effectively. Our results revealed that a high level of shared temporal cognitions
alleviates the hazards of temporal leadership. As a result, in the Chinese context, we
recommend that organizations take proactive steps to foster shared temporal cognitions
among team members (Mohammed and Nadkarni, 2014). For example, in daily work,
managers should pay attention to discussing their expectations of deadlines and pacing
with employees and make them part of the development of the team charter.
Limitations and future direction
We acknowledge several limitations in our present study. Firstly, while we diligently
collected data at three-time points with two-week intervals to assess our hypotheses, it is
essential to recognize that the design could benefit from further refinement. Recent research
underscores the need to perceive time as a dynamic process to comprehensively comprehend
its role in diverse phenomena, as demonstrated by Santos et al. (2016). Consequently, a time-
lagged design may fall short of capturing the nuanced influence of temporal leadership.
Therefore, we strongly advocate for future investigations to incorporate temporal
leadership’s inherent time dynamics into their research designs, potentially through
longitudinal studies or experimental approaches for a more comprehensive understanding.
Second, our research contributed to the theoretical framework by pinpointing shared
temporal cognition as a critical boundary condition that moderates the impact of temporal
leadership on employee silence. Nevertheless, it is imperative to note that Mohammed and
Nadkarni’s (2014) work has illuminated the importance of considering not only shared
temporal cognition but also other temporal team cognitions, such as temporal transactive
memory systems, as invaluable sources of insight into temporal-related phenomena.
Hence, they advocate for the inclusion of both of these temporal team cognitions to advance
the field of temporal research. In light of this, we recommend that future studies explore the
nuanced interplay of diverse cognitions among team members, including temporal
transactive memory systems (Mohammed and Nadkarni, 2014), future time perspective
(Mohammed and Angell, 2004;Mohammed and Nadkarni, 2011) or synchrony preference
within the research model. By doing so, researchers can offer a more holistic understanding
of the effects of temporal leadership. Furthermore, our research just considered a limited
range of outcomes (employee silence) of temporal leadership. This study provides an
example of the role of work alienation in temporal leadership and its outcomes on employee
silence. Future research could explore other plausible consequences of temporal leadership,
contributing to a more comprehensive understanding of its adverse effects.
CMS
Third, in this study, temporal leadership was assessed through leaders’self-reports, a
methodology employed to capture inner leadership orientations not readily observable by
others, as noted by Qin et al. (2021) and adopted in previous related research (e.g. Courtright
et al.,2016;Johnson et al.,2012). Nonetheless, it is important to acknowledge that self-
reported assessments may introduce inflation bias (Horwitz and Horwitz, 2007).
Consequently, future investigations may benefit from diversifying measurement
approaches by incorporating other-reported evaluations to enhance the robustness and
validity of temporal leadership assessments.
Finally, while we have diligently controlled for follower gender, age, education, tenure
and the duration of their association with leaders, in alignment with prior research
recommendations, it is imperative to address additional potential factors in future studies.
For instance, extant research has illuminated the impact of leaders’time-based personality
characteristics, such as time urgency, on employees’behavior (Briker et al.,2021). Therefore,
we propose that forthcoming research consider incorporating leaders’time-based
personality characteristics, including time urgency, time perspective and pacing style, as
supplementary control variables (Mohammed and Harrison, 2013;Mohammed and
Nadkarni, 2011) as control variables.
References
Aboramadan, M., Turkmenoglu, M.A., Dahleez, K.A. and Cicek, B. (2020), “Narcissistic leadership and
behavioral cynicism in the hotel industry: the role of employee silence and negative workplace
gossiping”,International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 33 No. 2,
pp. 428-447, doi: 10.1108/IJCHM-04-2020-0348.
Al-Hawari, M.A., Bani-Melhem, S. and Quratulain, S. (2020), “Abusive supervision and frontline
employees’attitudinal outcomes: the multilevel effects of customer orientation”,International
Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 1109-1129, doi: 10.1108/
IJCHM-16-2019-0510.
Briker, R., Walter, F. and Cole, M.S. (2021), “Hurry up! the role of supervisors’time urgency and self-
perceived status for autocratic leadership and subordinates’well-being”,Personnel Psychology,
Vol. 74 No. 1, pp. 55-76, doi: 10.1111/peps.12400.
Brislin, R.W., Lonner, W.J. and Thorndike, R.M. (1973), Cross-Cultural Research Models, Wiley, New
York, NY.
Casimir, G. (2001), “Combinative aspects of leadership style: the ordering and temporal spacing of
leadership behaviors”,The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 245-278, doi: 10.1016/S1048-
9843(01)00079-0.
Chiu, C.Y., Owens, B.P. and Tesluk, P.E. (2016), “Initiating and utilizing shared leadership in teams: the
role of leader humility, team proactive personality, and team performance capability”,Journal of
Applied Psychology, Vol. 101 No. 12, pp. 1705-1720, doi: 10.1037/apl0000159.
Courtright,S.H.,Gardner,R.G.,Smith,T.A.,Mccormick,B.W.andColbert,A.E.(2016),“My family made me
do it: a cross-domain, self-regulatory perspective on antecedents to abusive supervision”,Academy of
Management Journal, Vol. 59 No. 5, pp. 1630-1652, doi: 10.5465/amj.2013.1009.
Deniz, S. and Çimen, M. (2022), “The mediating role of work alienation in the effect of workplace
ostracism on employee voice”,Hospital Topics, pp. 1-10, doi: 10.1080/00185868.2022.2116375.
Dong, R., Yu, W., Ni, S. and Hu, Q. (2022), “Ageism and employee silence: the serial mediating roles of
work alienation and organizational commitment”,Ethics and Behavior, Vol. 33 No. 8, pp. 1-20,
doi: 10.1080/10508422.2022.2126843.
Duan, J., Bao, C., Huang, C. and Brinsfield, C.T. (2018), “Authoritarian leadership and employee silence
in China”,Journal of Management and Organization, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 62-80, doi: 10.1017/
jmo.2016.61.
Temporal
leadership on
employee
silence
Duan, C., Zhang, M.J., Liu, X., Ling, C.D. and Xie, X.Y. (2023), “Investigating the curvilinear relationship
between temporal leadership and team creativity: the moderation of knowledge complexity and
the mediation of team creative process engagement”,Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 44
No. 4, pp. 717-738, doi: 10.1002/job.2698.
Erve, M. (2004), “Temporal leadership”,European Business Review, Vol. 16 No. 6, pp. 605-617, doi:
10.1108/09555340410565422.
Fasbender, U., Burmeister, A. and Wang, M. (2023), “Managing the risks and side effects of workplace
friendships: the moderating role of workplace friendship self-efficacy”,Journal of Vocational
Behavior, Vol. 143, p. 103875, doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2023.103875.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable
variables and measurement error”,Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50, doi:
10.2307/3151312.
Gevers, J.M. and Demerouti, E. (2013), “How supervisors’reminders relate to subordinates’absorption
and creativity”,Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 28 No. 6, pp. 677-698, doi: 10.1108/JPM-
09-2011-0055.
Gevers, J.M., Li, J., Rutte, C.G. and van Eerde, W. (2020), “How dynamics in perceptual shared cognition
and team potency predict team performance”,Journal of Occupational and Organizational
Psychology, Vol. 93 No. 1, pp. 134-157, doi: 10.1111/joop.12287.
Gevers, J.M., Rutte, C.G. and Van Eerde, W. (2006), “Meeting deadlines in work groups: implicit and
explicit mechanisms”,Applied Psychology, Vol. 55 No. 1, pp. 52-72, doi: 10.1111/j.1464-
0597.2006.00228.x.
Guo, L., Decoster, S., Babalola, M.T., De Schutter, L., Garba, O.A. and Riisla, K. (2018), “Authoritarian
leadership and employee creativity: the moderating role of psychological capital and the
mediating role of fear and defensive silence”,Journal of Business Research, Vol. 92, pp. 219-230,
doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.07.034.
Hao, L., Zhu, H., He, Y., Duan, J., Zhao, T. and Meng, H. (2022), “When is silence golden? A meta-
analysis on antecedents and outcomes of employee silence”,Journal of Business and Psychology,
Vol. 37 No. 5, pp. 1039-1063, doi: 10.1007/s10869-021-09788-7.
Hirschfeld, R.R., Feild, H.S. and Bedeian, A.G. (2000), “Work alienation as an individual-difference
construct for predicting workplace adjustment: a test in two samples”,Journal of Applied Social
Psychology, Vol.30 No. 9, pp. 1880-1902, doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2000.tb02473.x.
Hofstede, G., Neuijen, B., Ohayv, D.D. and Sanders, G. (1990), “Measuring organizational cultures: a
qualitative and quantitative study across twenty cases”,Administrative Science Quarterly,
Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 286-316, doi: 10.2307/2393392.
Horwitz, S.K. and Horwitz, I.B. (2007), “The effects of team diversity on team outcomes: a meta-analytic
review of team demography”,Journal of Management, Vol. 33 No. 6, pp. 987-1015, doi: 10.1177/
0149206307308587.
Jiang, H., Chen, Y., Sun, P. and Li, C. (2019), “Authoritarian leadership and employees’unsafe behaviors:
the mediating roles of organizational cynicism and work alienation”,Current Psychology, Vol. 38
No. 6, pp. 1668-1678, doi: 10.1007/s12144-017-9726-1.
Johnson, R.E., Venus, M., Lanaj, K., Mao, C. and Chang, C.H. (2012), “Leader identity as an antecedent of
the frequency and consistency of transformational, consideration, and abusive leadership
behaviors”,Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 97 No. 6, pp. 1262-1272,doi: 10.1037/a0029043.
Judge, T.A., Piccolo, R.F. and Ilies, R. (2004), “The forgotten ones? The validity of consideration and
initiating structure in leadership research”,Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 89 No. 1,
pp. 36-51, doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.89.1.36.
Kakkar, S., Kuril, S., Singh, S., Saha, S. and Dugar, A. (2022), “The influence of remote work
communication satisfaction and CSR association on employee alienation and job satisfaction: a
moderated-mediation study”,Information Technology and People, Vol. 36 No. 5, pp. 1810-1834,
doi: 10.1108/ITP-01-2021-0030.
CMS
Lagios, C., Lagios, N., Stinglhamber, F. and Caesens, G. (2022), “Predictors and consequences of work
alienation in times of crisis: evidence from two longitudinal studies during the COVID-19
pandemic”,Current Psychology, Vol. 42 No. 26, pp. 1-15, doi: 10.1007/s12144-022-03372-9.
Lam, L.W. and Xu, A.J. (2019), “Power imbalance and employee silence: the role of abusive leadership,
power distance orientation, and perceived organizational politics”,Applied Psychology, Vol. 68
No. 3, pp. 513-546, doi: 10.1111/apps.12170.
Li, F.J., Kuo, F.Y., Yang, J.X., Qi, Z.J. and Jeanne, H.F. (2014), “Authentic leadership, traditionality, and
interactional justice in the Chinese context”,Management and Organization Review, Vol. 10
No. 2, pp. 249-273, doi: 10.1111/more.12027.
Liu, Z., Liu, X. and Zhang, X. (2021), “How to solve the time dilemma? The influence of team temporal
leadership on team innovation performance”,Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 12, p. 634133. doi:
10.3389/fpsyg.2021.634133.
Ma, J.Y. (2023), “Curious supervisor puts team innovation within reach: investigating supervisor trait
curiosity as a catalyst for collective actions”,Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, Vol. 175, p.104236, doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2023.104236.
Muttar, A.K., Keir, M.Y.A., Mahdi, O.R. and Nassar, I.A. (2019), “Antecedents and consequences of
work alienation –a critical”,Journal of Statistics Applications and Probability, Vol. 8 No. 3,
pp. 279-288, doi: 10.18576/jsap/080311.
Mohammed, S. and Alipour, K.K. (2014), “It’s time for temporal leadership: individual, dyadic, team,
and organizational effects”,Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 178-182,
doi: 10.1111/iops.12128.
Mohammed, S. and Angell, L.C. (2004), “Surface and deep level diversity in workgroups: examining the
moderating effects of team orientation and team process on relationship conflict”,Journal of
Organizational Behavior, Vol. 25 No. 8, pp. 1015-1039, doi: 10.1002/job.293.
Mohammed, S. and Harrison, D.A. (2013), “The clocks that time us are not the same: a theory of
temporal diversity, task characteristics, and performance in teams”,Organizational Behavior
and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 122 No. 2, pp. 244-256, doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2013.08.004.
Mohammed, S. and Nadkarni, S. (2011), “Temporal diversity and team performance: the moderating
role of team temporal leadership”,Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 54 No. 3, pp. 489-508,
doi: 10.5465/amj.2011.61967991.
Mohammed, S. and Nadkarni, S. (2014), “Are we all on the same temporal page? The moderating effects
of temporal team cognition on the polychronicity diversity–team performance relationship”,
Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 99 No. 3, pp. 404-422, doi: 10.1037/a0035640.
Morrison, E.W. (2014), “Employee voice and silence”,Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and
Organizational Behavior, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 173-197, doi: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091328.
Nair, N. and Vohra, N. (2010), “An exploration of factors predicting work alienation of knowledge
workers”,Management Decision, Vol. 48 No. 4, pp. 600-615, doi: 10.1108/00251741011041373.
Pinder, and Craig, C. (2001), “Employee silence: quiescence and acquiescence as responses to perceived
injustice”,Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, Vol. 20, pp. 331-369, doi:
10.1016/S0742-7301(01)20007-3.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.Y. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003), “Common method biases in
behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies”,Journal of
Applied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 5, pp. 879-903, doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2012), “Sources of method bias in social science
research and recommendations on how to control it”,Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 63 No. 1,
pp. 539-569, doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452.
Qin, X., Liu, X., Brown, J.A., Zheng, X. and Owens, B.P. (2021), “Humility harmonized? Exploring whether
and how leader and employee humility (in) congruence influences employee citizenship and deviance
behaviors”,Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 170 No. 1, pp. 147-165, doi: 10.1007/s10551-019-04250-4.
Temporal
leadership on
employee
silence
Rasheed, M.I., Hameed, Z., Kaur, P. and Dhir, A. (2023), “Too sleepy to be innovative? Ethical leadership
and employee service innovation behavior: a dual-path model moderated by sleep quality”,
Human Relations, Ahead in Print,doi:10.1177/00187267231163040.
Rastegary, H. and Landy, F.J. (1993), “The interactions among time urgency, uncertainty, and time
pressure”, in Svenson, O. and Maule, A.J. (Eds), Time Pressure and Stress in Human Judgment
and Decision Making, Springer US, New York, NY, pp. 217-239.
Salancik, G.R. and Pfeffer, J. (1978), “A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task
design”,Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 224-253, doi: 10.2307/2392563.
Santas, G., Isik, O. and Demir, A. (2016), “The effect of loneliness at work; work stress on work alienation and
work alienation on employees’performance in Turkish health care institution”,South Asian Journal
of Management Sciences, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 30-38, doi: 10.21621/sajms.2016102.03.
Santos, C.M. (2016), Shared Mental Models and Shared Temporal Cognitions: contributions to Team
Processes and Team Effectiveness, ISCTE-Instituto Universitario de Lisboa, Portugal.
Santos, C.M., Passos, A.M., Uitdewilligen, S. and Nübold, A. (2016), “Shared temporal cognitions as substitute
for temporal leadership: an analysis of their effects on temporal conflict and team performance”,The
Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 574-587, doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2015.12.002.
Siddiquei, A.N., Fisher, C.D. and Hrivnak, G.A. (2022), “Temporal leadership, team processes, and
project team task performance”,International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 40 No. 7,
pp. 715-724, doi: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2022.08.005.
Siddiquei, A.N., Fisher, C.D. and Hrivnak, G.A. (2023), “The relative importance of temporal leadership
and initiating structure for timely project completion”,Journal of Leadership and Organizational
Studies, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 173-186, doi: 10.1177/15480518231160880.
Standifer, R.L., Raes, A.M., Peus, C., Passos, A.M., Santos, C.M. and Weisweiler, S. (2015), “Time in
teams: cognitions, conflict and team satisfaction”,Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 30
No. 6, pp. 692-708, doi: 10.1108/JMP-09-2012-0278.
Tang, S., Richter, A.W. and Nadkarni, S. (2020), “Subjective time in organizations: conceptual
clarification, integration, and implications for future research”,Journal of Organizational
Behavior, Vol. 41 No. 2, pp. 210-234, doi: 10.1002/job.2421.
Tangirala, S. and Ramanujam, R. (2008), “Employee silence on critical work issues: the cross level
effects of procedural justice climate”,Personnel Psychology, Vol. 61 No. 1, pp. 37-68, doi: 10.1111/
j.1744-6570.2008.00105.x.
Tu, Y., Lu, X. and Yu, Y. (2017), “Supervisors’ethical leadership and employee job satisfaction: a social
cognitive perspective”,Journal of Happiness Studies, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 229-245, doi: 10.1007/
s10902-016-9725-1.
Wang, Z., Ren, S., Chadee, D. and Chen, Y. (2023), “Employee ethical silence under exploitative
leadership: the roles of work meaningfulness and moral potency”,Journal of Business Ethics,
Vol. 190 No. 1, pp. 1-18, doi: 10.1007/s10551-023-05405-0.
Wei, H., Shan, D., Wang, L. and Zhu, S. (2022), “Research on the mechanism of leader aggressive humor
on employee silence: a conditional process model”,Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 135,
p. 103717, doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2022.103717.
Xiao, H., Zhang, Z. and Zhang, L. (2020), “Is temporal leadership always beneficial? The role of job
passion and synchrony preference”,Personnel Review, Vol. 51 No. 1, pp. 299-316, doi: 10.1108/
PR-02-2020-0078.
Yam, K.C., Reynolds, S.J., Zhang, P. and Su, R. (2021), “The unintended consequences of empowering
leadership: increased deviance for some followers”,Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 181 No. 3,
pp. 683-700, doi: 10.1007/s10551-021-04917-x.
Yang, F., Qian, J., Liu, J., Huang, X., Chau, R. and Wang, T. (2018), “Bridging the gap: how supervisors’
perceptions of Guanxi HRM practices influence subordinates’work engagement”,Applied
Psychology, Vol. 67 No. 4, pp. 589-616, doi: 10.1111/apps.12144.
CMS
Ye, X., Cai, S. and Wang, Z. (2022), “The effect of abusive supervision on safety behaviour of Chinese
underground miners: a multi-level moderated mediation analysis”,Chinese Management
Studies, Vol. 16 No. 5, pp. 1124-1144, doi: 10.1108/CMS-08-2020-0342.
Zhang, J., van Eerde, W., Gevers, J.M. and Zhu, W. (2021), “How temporal leadership boosts employee
innovative job performance”,European Journal of Innovation Management, Vol. 24 No. 1,
pp. 23-42, doi: 10.1108/EJIM-05-2019-0112.
Zheng, J., Gou, X., Griffin, M.A., Goh, Y.M. and Xia, N. (2022), “Temporal leadership, attentiveness, and
safety behaviors: the moderating roles of abusive supervision and safety consciousness”,Safety
Science, Vol. 147, p. 105633, doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2021.105633.
Further reading
Yuan, C.C. and Lo, S.H. (2018), “Relationship among team temporal leadership, competency,
followership, and performance in Taiwanese pharmaceutical industry leaders and employees”,
Journal of Career Development, Vol. 45 No. 3, pp. 227-238, doi: 10.1177/0894845316680087.
Corresponding author
Yu Zhu can be contacted at: zhuyu@jnu.edu.cn
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
Temporal
leadership on
employee
silence
