Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-16T17:03:13.693Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Joint mediation of psychological empowerment and work–life balance between transformational leadership and in-role performance of accounting personnel: 360-degree feedback

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 May 2023

Ernest O. Ugwoke
Affiliation:
Department of Business Education, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Enugu State, Nigeria
Nathaniel Ifeanyi Edeh*
Affiliation:
Department of Business Education, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Enugu State, Nigeria
Felicia Ogonnia Nwokike
Affiliation:
Department of Business and Entrepreneurship Education, Enugu State University of Science and Technology, Enugu State, Nigeria
Emeka Promise Ugwunwoti
Affiliation:
Department of Business and Entrepreneurship Education, Enugu State University of Science and Technology, Enugu State, Nigeria
Wama Binga Emmanuel
Affiliation:
Department of Business and Entrepreneurship Education, Enugu State University of Science and Technology, Enugu State, Nigeria
Benuh Adama Idris
Affiliation:
Business Education Department, School of Vocational Education, Federal College of Education, Kontagora, Nigeria
Clement Odey
Affiliation:
Department of Business and Entrepreneurship Education, Enugu State University of Science and Technology, Enugu State, Nigeria
Joshua Samson
Affiliation:
Department of Business and Entrepreneurship Education, Enugu State University of Science and Technology, Enugu State, Nigeria
Victoria Obiageli Nnamani
Affiliation:
Department of Business Education, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Enugu State, Nigeria
Joseph Tunga Yaro
Affiliation:
Department of Business Education, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Enugu State, Nigeria
Gloria Mgboyibo Eya
Affiliation:
Department of Business and Entrepreneurship Education, Enugu State University of Science and Technology, Enugu State, Nigeria
Gold Chiamaka Arua
Affiliation:
Department of Business and Entrepreneurship Education, Enugu State University of Science and Technology, Enugu State, Nigeria
Elisha Terkuma Guma
Affiliation:
Department of Business Education, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Enugu State, Nigeria
Joseph Bonglo Kingsley
Affiliation:
Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities, University Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM), Address-line, Bangi, Malaysia
*
Corresponding author: Nathaniel Ifeanyi Edeh, E-mail: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The study determined whether psychological empowerment and work–life balance jointly mediate between transformational leadership and in-role performance of employees in Nigerian not-for-profit (NFP) universities using data collected through a 360-degree performance review of employees. Data were collected from the employees, their supervisors, colleagues, and customers. A sample of 360 comprising 36 faculty finance officers (the employees), 36 assistant faculty finance officers (colleagues), 36 deans of faculties (supervisors), 36 finance supervisors (supervisors), 108 undergraduate and 108 postgraduate students (customers) from Nigerian universities were surveyed using Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire, employees' in-role performance questionnaire, four dimensions of psychological empowerment questionnaire, and work–life balance questionnaire. The reliabilities of the questionnaires were estimated using Cronbach's α technique. Data collected were analyzed using descriptive statistics and correlations at the preliminary level, while three separate Hierarchical Multiple Regression and 5000 re-samples BC bootstrapping method on PROCESS macro were used to test the hypotheses to determine the total, direct, and indirect effects of the study variables. The study established that psychological empowerment and work–life balance jointly and significantly mediated the high relationship between transformational leadership and the in-role performance of the faculty finance officers. The implications for researchers and organizational practitioners, limitations, and suggestions for future research were discussed.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press in association with the Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management

Introduction

The indispensability of human resource in every organization challenges the managers to search for capable employees (Abdollahi & Naveh Ibrahim, Reference Abdollahi and Naveh Ibrahim2011). Managers strive to recruit employees that have deep knowledge and skills, and empower them to increase their capabilities (Hossein, Saleh, Iman, & Jaafar, Reference Hossein, Saleh, Iman and Jaafar2012; Surbakti, Reference Surbakti2013; Ugwu, Enwereuzor, & Orji, Reference Ugwu, Enwereuzor and Orji2015). This has become more necessary now because organizations struggle for survival and competitive advantage among other competitors and rapid development in technologies. Incidentally, the growth and development of every organization is hinged on the employees' performance. Performance has been variously defined as measurable actions, behaviors, and outcomes that employees cause to happen to achieve organizational goals (Campbell, Reference Campbell, Dunnette and Hough1990; Viswesvaran & Ones, Reference Viswesvaran and Ones2000). Although researchers have differentiated in-role performance and extra-role performance as the two aspects of employees' performance (Bakker & Demerouti, Reference Bakker and Demerouti2008; Williams & Anderson, Reference Williams and Anderson1991), this study will focus on in-role performance. A worker's in-role performance comprises the duties and responsibilities he undertakes as his job assignment (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, & Bommer, Reference Podsakoff, MacKenzie and Bommer1996; Vigoda, Reference Vigoda2000). For instance, faculty finance officers (FFOs) with their assistants in universities, working under the finance supervisors and the deans of faculties, handle cash and noncash payments from students and others, prepare petty cash update, reconcile bank statements with the cash book, and advise faculties on financial matters among other general financial and administrative duties that may be assigned to them. However, with the increase in students' enrolment, expansion in faculty activities, and the need for accountability and transparency of transactions especially in a developing country like Nigeria, the finance officers experience job overloads and exertions that may be detrimental to their personal life expectations. This is more especially because computer-based accounting practice that can make job easy is still low in developing countries, including Nigeria. The finance officers like other employees therefore need motivation and empowerment from their leaders to balance their work–life expectations for high performance.

Although considerable studies have been done on job performance and its antecedents in the survival and sustainability of organizations, more understanding of the involvement of leaders and other variables in the in-role performance of the employees is an imperative. Since the exhibition of transformational leadership behaviors may not always guarantee enhanced employees' performance (Ugwu, Enwereuzor, & Orji, Reference Ugwu, Enwereuzor and Orji2015), examining other psychological and motivational components that may explain the relationship between transformational leadership style and in-role performance is equally imperative (Tims, Bakker, & Derks, Reference Tims, Bakker and Derks2014; Ugwu, Enwereuzor, & Orji, Reference Ugwu, Enwereuzor and Orji2015). Thus, we examined whether psychological empowerment and work–life balance are jointly an instrumental factor in explaining the relationship.

The fact that most previous studies regarding transformational leadership, empowerment, motivation, and performance of employees were conducted in countries other than Nigeria and in profit-making organizations, and considering that research findings are somewhat based on the cultural background in which they were obtained (Bacha, Reference Bacha2014; Chun, Yammarino, Dionne, Sosik, & Moon, Reference Chun, Yammarino, Dionne, Sosik and Moon2009; Podsakoff, MacKenzie, & Bommer, Reference Podsakoff, MacKenzie and Bommer1996; Ugwu, Enwereuzor, & Orji, Reference Ugwu, Enwereuzor and Orji2015; Zacher & Jimmieson, Reference Zacher and Jimmieson2013), we are not certain whether transformational leadership will enhance the in-role performance of accounting personnel (FFOs), and whether psychological empowerment and work–life balance of the personnel will jointly give more credence to this relationship in a different cultural setting like Nigeria and in a not-for-profit (NFP) organization like the university sector. Furthermore, most past studies on job performance of employees relied on employees' self-reports (Lam & O'Higgins, Reference Lam and O'Higgins2012; Tims, Bakker, & Derks, Reference Tims, Bakker and Derks2014) or supervisors' reports (Ugwu, Enwereuzor, & Orji, Reference Ugwu, Enwereuzor and Orji2015) with some reservations existing in literature concerning the inbuilt shortcomings associated with self-reported measures of employees' job performance (Keeney & Svyantek, Reference Keeney, Svyantek, Rahim, Golembiewski and Mackenzie2000). Similarly, the difficulty in eradicating completely all forms of common method biases in one-source assessment has been reported in literature (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, & Bommer, Reference Podsakoff, MacKenzie and Bommer1996; Ugwu, Enwereuzor, & Orji, Reference Ugwu, Enwereuzor and Orji2015). We therefore determined whether 360-degree feedback, otherwise known as multi-source assessment system (Kanaslan & Iyem, Reference Kanaslan and Iyem2016), to a better extent, explains the in-role performance of FFOs in Nigerian universities. Increasing the number of raters through a 360-degree feedback from many stakeholders, such as the employee, the boss, colleagues, peers, subordinates, and customers, enhances fairness and objectivity in the rating of employee performance (Gallagher, Reference Gallagher2008). Similarly, investigating the impact of transformational leadership on in-role performance of employees to a relatively unexplored setting, like universities (NFP organizations) in a developing country like Nigeria using the 360-degree feedback approach will enable researchers to have a more balanced knowledge of the relationship. This study is germane because the issue of staff performance in universities gives stakeholders concern based on the importance of education to society, and the need to improve the workers' conditions of service for quality performance. The study will explain the quality management theory which believes that organizational quality is guaranteed when employees are empowered and motivated by their leaders (Shewhart, Reference Shewhart1931). Quality management is customer focused and requires employees to use strategies, data, and effective communication to build quality into organizational processes and products (Shewhart & Deming, Reference Shewhart and Deming1939). More so, the severe organizational quality change and development (OCD) challenges facing high education institutions worldwide can be solved through quality management systems (Leiber, Reference Leiber2019; Leiber, Stensaker & Harvey, Reference Leiber, Stensaker and Harvey2018).

Literature review and development of hypotheses

The in-role performance of an employee encompasses all the job requirements assigned to the employee to achieve the organizational goals (Williams & Anderson, Reference Williams and Anderson1991). It refers to the duties and responsibilities a worker undertakes as his job assignment (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, & Bommer, Reference Podsakoff, MacKenzie and Bommer1996; Vigoda, Reference Vigoda2000). Employees' in-role performance can depend a great deal on the employees' interaction with their leaders (Anderson, de Dreu, & Nijstad, Reference Anderson, de Dreu and Nijstad2004). Researchers have variously provided evidence on the positive relationship between transformational leadership and workers' in-role performance (Avolio, Bass, & Jung, Reference Avolio, Bass and Jung1995; Cavazotte, Moreno, & Bernardo, Reference Cavazotte, Moreno and Bernardo2013; Cavazotte, Moreno & Hickmann, Reference Cavazotte, Moreno and Hickmann2012; Ndirangu, Reference Ndirangu2018; Chandrasekara, Reference Chandrasekara2019). Transformational leadership approach with its four dimensions (idealized influence, intellectual stimulation, inspirational motivation, and individualized consideration) is a change agent that can enable the leader to articulate clear visions that are consistent with organizational goals to foster the trust and respect of the followers, to act as a role model while motivating followers to exceed the performance standards, to encourage followers to be innovative and seek solutions to prevailing problems and to devote energy, resources, and attention toward the needs of his/her followers to ensure that they are accountable for their own development and that of others, respectively (Avolio, Bass & Jung, Reference Avolio, Bass and Jung1999; Cheng et al., Reference Cheng, Cheng, Bartram, Bartram, Karimi, Karimi and Leggat2016). Generally, workers that benefit from transformational leadership exhibit higher levels of performance (Kirkpatrick & Locke, Reference Kirkpatrick and Locke1996; Spreitzer, Perttula, & Xin, Reference Spreitzer, Perttula and Xin2005; Cavazotte, Moreno & Hickmann, Reference Cavazotte, Moreno and Hickmann2012). For instance, it is in literature that the leadership of public universities needs to focus on transformational strategies that act on psychological empowerment and work–life balance of staff to promote the performance and effectiveness of the staff, including the accounting personnel (Abdulrab, Zumrah, Almaamari, & Al-Tahitah, Reference Abdulrab, Zumrah, Almaamari and Al-Tahitah2017). The accounting personnel in universities are responsible for accounting and financial proceedings in the institutions. The accounting personnel are usually stressed by intense and heavy workload, frequent deadlines given to them, long hours of work, and new technologies. Since stress threatens the mental health of employees and reduces their performance, it brings pressure on management to introduce policies that can deal with the accruing challenges of higher staff turnover, damage to the firm's reputation, and nonattainment of organizational goals. Introducing organizational justice with fair feedbacks on accounting personnel will improve their performance and well-being (Becker, Reference Becker1997; Bonache, Reference Bonache2022; Herzberg, Mansner & Snyderman, Reference Herzberg, Mausner and Snyderman1959), because favorable company policies, the work itself, and relationship with co-workers and supervisors have been identified as the key determinants of job performance and satisfaction of accounting personnel (Beau, Reference Beau2018; Bono & McNamara, Reference Bono and McNamara2011). Since psychological empowerment and work–life balance of employees remains an effective technique used generally by transformational leaders/management of organizations to handle innovative, performance, and productivity issues among staff, including accounting personnel (Barry, Reference Barry1993; Foy, Reference Foy1994; Johnson, Reference Johnson1993), we therefore hypothesize that:

Hypothesis 1: Transformational leadership predicts the in-role performance of accounting personnel in universities.

Psychological empowerment is viewed as the perception or attitude of individuals toward their work and role in the organization (Thomas & Velthouse, Reference Thomas and Velthouse1990). Transformational leaders use psychological empowerment to motivate employees for higher performance. They empower the employees by modifying the ways they work, increasing their morale and boosting their confidence levels to improve their feelings of self-determination, competence, impact, and meaningfulness, which are the fundamental elements of psychological empowerment (Baird, Su, & Munir, Reference Baird, Su and Munir2018; Bose & Patnaik, Reference Bose and Patnaik2015). Self-determination is the ability of an employee to control his behavior toward the task to be completed; competence is his ability to perform job tasks skillfully; impact is his ability to influence the administrative, strategic, and operating results, while meaningfulness is his ability to believe that his work is significant to him (Thomas & Velthouse, Reference Thomas and Velthouse1990). A psychologically empowered employee has a stronger sense of self-efficacy and can understand customers' demand, solve problems timely and effectively, and show more outstanding in-role performance in service (Khan, Saboor, Khan, & Ali, Reference Khan, Saboor, Khan and Ali2011; Towsen, Stander, & Vaart, Reference Towsen, Stander and Vaart2020). Since transformational leadership style is strongly linked to psychological empowerment and high performance of employees (Attari, Reference Attari2013; Orogbu, Onyeizugbe, & Chukwuemeke, Reference Orogbu, Onyeizugbe and Chukwuemeke2015; Ibrahim, Ismail, Mohamed, Salim, & Yusuf, Reference Ibrahim, Ismail, Mohamed, Salim and Yusuf2015; Kibozi & Michael, Reference Kibozi and Michael2018), we therefore hypothesize that:

Hypothesis 2: Transformational leadership predicts accounting personnel's psychological empowerment in universities.

Hypothesis 3: Psychological empowerment predicts accounting personnel's in-role performance in universities.

Furthermore, literature has it that employees in organizations that implement work–life balance policies engage effectively in their work and ultimately deliver high performance (Shah, Khattak, & Shah, Reference Shah, Khattak and Shah2020). Work–life balance refers to work arrangements that allow employees to strike a balance between their work and personal life responsibilities (Redmond, Valiulis, & Drew, Reference Redmond, Valiulis and Drew2006). It is the equilibrium between the amount of time and effort somebody devotes to work and personal activities to maintain an overall sense of harmony in life (Clarke, Koch, & Hill, Reference Clarke, Koch and Hill2004). Work–life balance initiatives are broadly divided into four dominant categories: flexible work arrangement (home working, compressed hours); leave arrangement (annual leave, parental leave); dependent care assistance (childcare arrangements and Crèche); and general services (employment assistant programs) (De Cieri & Bardoel, Reference De Cieri and Bardoel2009). Supervisors who operate transformational leadership have been strongly linked to greater work–life balance and higher in-role performance of employees (Kibozi & Michael, Reference Kibozi and Michael2018). We therefore hypothesize that:

Hypothesis 4: Transformational leadership predicts accounting personnel's work–life balance in universities.

Hypothesis 5: Work–life balance predicts accounting personnel's in-role performance in universities.

Finally, it is noteworthy that the positive relationship between transformational leadership and workers' in-role performance is well elaborated in literature. More so, the mediating mechanisms of psychological empowerment and work–life balance in the relationship between transformational leadership and employee in-role performance are recognized in literature. However, available literature shows that research on the mediating mechanisms have focused more on the direct effects of single variables. For instance, results on direct and single mediation of psychological empowerment and work–life balance between transformational leadership and in-role performance of employees are sufficient in literature. However, it has been suggested that a better understanding of mediation mechanisms in the relationship between transformational leadership and in-role performance of followers can be obtained through a more fine-grained approach like joint mediation of variables and 360-degree feedback approach because individual mediators might give different results (Bartram & Casimir, Reference Bartram and Casimir2007). Although the total, direct, and indirect effects of the study variables will be determined in this study, our major objective is to determine whether psychological empowerment and work–life balance jointly mediate between transformational leadership and accounting personnel's in-role performance of accounting personnel in universities. We therefore hypothesize that:

Hypothesis 6: Psychological empowerment positively mediates between transformational leadership and accounting personnel's in-role performance in universities.

Hypothesis 7: Work–life balance positively mediates between transformational leadership and accounting personnel's in-role performance in universities.

Hypothesis 8: Psychological empowerment and work–life balance jointly mediate between transformational leadership and accounting personnel's in-role performance in universities.

Conceptual model

The conceptual model presented in Figure 1 is a multiple mediation model developed by the researchers based on the hypothesis of this study. Specifically, the multiple mediation model depicts the relationships among psychological empowerment, transformational leadership, work–life balance, and in-role performance (Hayes, Reference Hayes2013).

Figure 1. Path diagram multiple mediation model for effect of psychological empowerment and transformational leadership on work–life balance and in-role performance.

Our model supports multiple mediators (psychological empowerment and work–life balance) on the relationship between transformational leadership and in-role performance (Hayes, Reference Hayes2013). There is increasing evidence in literature that multiple mediation reduces estimate errors that might occur because of separate mediations (Golec de Zavala & van Bergh, Reference Golec de Zavala and van Bergh2007). Hence, the multiple mediation model shows both the mediated and unmediated regressions. According to the model, path a, b, and d tested the relationships between transformational leadership and each of in-role performance, psychological empowerment, and work–life balance (Ugwu, Enwereuzor, & Orji, Reference Ugwu, Enwereuzor and Orji2015). Again, path c, f, and g depict the separate mediating and joint mediating effect of psychological empowerment between transformational leadership and in-role performance. In addition, path e and g tested mediating effect of work–life balance between transformational leadership and in-role performance of employees.

Research method

Sample and procedure

The study was conducted in 36 faculties randomly selected from federal universities in Nigeria. The universities studied are NFP institutions. The sample size is 360 comprising 36 deans of faculties, 36 finance supervisors, 36 FFOs are accounting personnel studied, 36 assistant FFOs, 108 undergraduate, and 108 postgraduate students. The in-role performance, psychological empowerment, and work–life balance of the FFOs were studied. The assistant FFOs (accounting personnel) are colleagues of the FFO in the same office. The FFOs are directly supervised by the finance supervisors (accounting personnel) while the deans of faculties are also monitored the activities of FFO to ensure that they effectively attend to students who are their customers (the students pay school fees and levies and obtain receipts from the FFO). Before the commencement of the study, we obtained permission from the Vice-chancellors and the Bursars of the universities studied through a formal letter stating the purpose of the study and the target population. Afterwards, an informed consent forms were distributed to the students online to fill and indicate their willingness to participate in the study. Again, before the administration of the instrument, the respondents were assured of the confidentiality of their responses through a cover letter. Then after, 372 structured questionnaires were administered to them directly by the researchers and five research assistants. The participants were allowed to complete the questionnaires within a period of 2 weeks.

The age range for the FFOs was between 20 and 35 years (33%), 36 and 42 years (42%), 43 and 60 years (25%). The assistant FFOs had their age range as 20–35 years (31%), 36–42 years (47%), and 43–60 years (22%) (see Table 1). The FFOs work for a maximum of 5 years in one faculty. The FFOs sampled consisted of 15 (42%) males and 21 (58%) females. Among them, 11 (31%) were single, while 25 (69%) were married. The sampled supervisors consisted of 24 (67%) males and 12 (33%) females. The ages of the supervisors were 18–35 years (8 [31%]), 36–42 years (11 [22%]), and 46–60 years (17 [47%]). The average tenure of the supervisors was 10 years. Again, from the biographic data collected, 7 (19%) of the supervisors were single, while 29 (81%) of them were married. Out of the 372 copies of questionnaires distributed, 360 were retrieved and were used for data analysis, thus representing 97% response rate.

Table 1. Demographic characteristics of the sample showing baseline equivalence

DOF, deans; FS, finance supervisors; FFO, faculty finance officers; AFFO, assistant faculty finance officers; UGS, undergraduate students; PGS, postgraduate students.

Measures

We used three sets of researchers' developed instruments for the study. The first instrument contained item statements and was used to elicit information from the FFOs. The finance officers were asked to rate the transformational leadership style of the finance supervisors and the degree to which the supervisors empower them psychologically and the level of influence of the empowerment on their work–life balance. The second questionnaire elicited information from the deans of faculties, the finance supervisors, the assistant FFOs, and the students. These groups of people were asked to assess the in-role performance of the FFOs. In the in-role performance surveys, we included either the faculty, phone, and staff number of the particular FFO that each respondent was expected to assess. It was therefore easy for the respondents to identify and rate a particular FFO with certainty. In the third questionnaire, FFOs were asked to rate the level of their psychological empowerment and work–life balance.

Transformational leadership

We adapted the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ)/subscale of Bass and Avolio (Reference Bass and Avolio1995) cited in Ismail, Mohamad, Mohamed, Rafiuddin, and Zhen (Reference Ismail, Mohamad, Mohamed, Rafiuddin and Zhen2010), and Ugwu, Enwereuzor, and Orji (Reference Ugwu, Enwereuzor and Orji2015) to assess transformational leadership dimensions of the finance supervisors. The scale measures transformational leadership from one dimension with 10 items. This is congruent with current approach, that transformational leadership as a construct is best assessed using one-dimensional approach (Lam & O'Higgins, Reference Lam and O'Higgins2012; Zacher & Jimmieson, Reference Zacher and Jimmieson2013). The MLQ allowed the respondents to indicate the degree to which the finance supervisor engaged in certain transformational leadership behaviors using options ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The scale was scored from 10 to 70 according to the options. The items in the MLQ include ‘considers moral and ethical consequences’ and ‘increases my motivation,’ among others. Scores of 70 and above indicate higher level of transformational leadership style. The Cronbach's α obtained by Ismail et al. (Reference Ismail, Mohamad, Mohamed, Rafiuddin and Zhen2010) is .95, while the Cronbach's α obtained for the scale in this study is .81.

In-role performance

We adapted the four items for assessing in-role performance from Eisenberger, Armeli, Rexwinkel, Lynch, and Rhoades (Reference Eisenberger, Armeli, Rexwinkel, Lynch and Rhoades2001), as cited in Ugwu, Enwereuzor, and Orji (Reference Ugwu, Enwereuzor and Orji2015). To forestall the problems that are inherent in a common source, each finance supervisor rated the in-role performance of the FFO that is directly under his/her supervision, just as the deans and the students rated finance officer working in their faculties. Each of the assistant FFOs rated the FFO he/she assists. The supervisors, the assistant finance officers, the deans, and students rated the in-role performance of the FFOs using a 7-point scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The respondents' ratings on this scale were scored from 4 to 28. Some of the sample items on the scale are: ‘Meets formal performance requirements of the job,’ and ‘Adequately completes assigned duties.’ The scores of all the items were summed to obtain the overall in-role performance score. As in the transformational leadership, a score of 70 and above indicates high in-role performance. The Cronbach's α of the scale obtained by Eisenberger et al. (Reference Eisenberger, Armeli, Rexwinkel, Lynch and Rhoades2001) was .93 while .81 was obtained in this study.

Psychological empowerment

The four dimensions of psychological empowerment (meaning, competence, self-determination, and impact) of the FFOs were measured with a 12-item questionnaire we adapted from Spreitzer (Reference Spreitzer1995). The questionnaire included three items each from the four dimensions, respectively. The questionnaire was a self-reported measure by the FFOs. Sample items for each of the four dimensions include ‘The work I do is very important to me (meaning),’ ‘I am confident about my ability to do my job’ (competence), ‘I can decide on my own how to go about doing my work’ (self-determination), and ‘My impact on what happens in my department is large’ (impact). The FFOs indicated the extent to which they agreed with each item statement on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The reliability of the questionnaire has been validly demonstrated in Spreitzer (Reference Spreitzer1995), with the Cronbach's α of each dimension as: meaning = .93, competence = .89, self-determination = .85, and impact = .93, and an arithmetic mean of .90 for the entire questionnaire. The Cronbach's α obtained for all the dimensions in this study is .92. The score of each item ranged from 10 to 70. To obtain the overall psychological empowerment of the finance officers, the score of all the items was summed. A score of 35 and above indicates high psychological empowerment but a score below 35 indicates low psychological empowerment. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) results showed that the model fits well with the data (χ2 = 289.30, p < .01, CFI = .96, TFI = .95, RMSEA = .08, SRMR = .04).

Work–life balance

We measured the work–life balance of the FFOs with a 15-item assessment questionnaire adapted from Hayman (Reference Hayman2005). The questionnaire assessed the following three dimensions of work–life balance: work interference with personal life (WIPL – 7 items), personal life interference with work (PLIW – 4 items), and work/personal life enhancement (WPLE – 4 items). The items in WIPL include ‘Personal life suffers because of work’ and ‘put personal life on hold for work.’ The PLIW reveals the extent to which work interferes with personal life. The items in PLIW indicate the opposite direction of WIPL. Examples of the items in WIPL are: ‘My work suffers because of my personal life’ and ‘It is hard to work because of personal matters.’ They illustrate the extent to which one's personal life interferes with work. The items of the third dimension (WPLE) involved positive effects of one's work on personal life or the extent to which one's personal life increases work. Examples of the items in WPLE are: ‘I have a better mood at work because of personal life’ and ‘I have a better mood because of my job.’ The questionnaire was structured on a 5-point scale of strongly disagree −1, disagree – 2, neither agree nor disagree – 3, agree − 4, strongly agree − 5, the scoring was done as 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 for the dimensions of WIPL (except item 7, which was reverse scored, since the items were negatively worded). High score indicated lower interference, and lower levels of interference were interpreted as higher levels of work–life balance. The dimension of WPLE was scored 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 (i.e., strongly disagree − 1, disagree − 2, neither agree nor disagree – 3, agree − 4, strongly sgree – 5) as the items were positively worded. High score indicated high work/personal life enhancement. Higher levels of work/personal life enhancement are considered to be associated with higher levels of work–life balance. The overall work–life balance score was computed by summing all the scores in the three dimensions (WIPL, PLIW, and WPLE). Results of higher order factor analysis provided empirical evidence that the three dimensions were indicators of a single latent construct (Fisher-McAuley, Stanton, Jolton, & Gavin, Reference Fisher-McAuley, Stanton, Jolton and Gavin2003). The reliability of the questionnaire was estimated using Cronbach's α to obtain .93 for WIPL, .85 for PLIW, and .70 for WPLE. The overall Cronbach's α for the entire questionnaire was found to be .82 by calculating the arithmetic mean of the three dimensions (Smeltzer, Cantrell, Sharts-Hopko, Heverly, Jenkinson, & Nthenge, Reference Smeltzer, Cantrell, Sharts-Hopko, Heverly, Jenkinson and Nthenge2016).

Control variables

We controlled extraneous variables (i.e., threats that may pose problems to the validity of data collected for the study) using the following approaches: first, the demographic variables were checked in the regression models in line with previous studies that examined similar interactions (Bacha, Reference Bacha2014). Again, we controlled for demographic characteristics of the supervisors (such as gender, age, working tenure, and marital status). In addition, we created two dummy variables in the study regression modeling. For gender we used 1 = male, 2 = female, while in marital status we used 1 for single, 2 for married. However, the organizational tenure was used as a continuous variable and was interpreted using a continuous scale.

Data analysis

We conducted a preliminary analysis on data collected using descriptive statistics to determine the mean and standard deviation and correlation of the study variables. To determine the reliabilities of the transformational leadership, psychological empowerment, work–life balance, and in-role performance indicators, Cronbach's α technique was adopted. Again, we conducted three independent Hierarchical Multiple Regressions (HMR) using psychological empowerment, work–life balance, and in-role performance as reliant (dependent) variables. To compute the first regression, we introduced the supervisors' characteristics (gender, age, working tenure, marital status, and the type of establishment they worked). This approach helped us to control the possible effects of the characteristics on the subordinates' psychological empowerment, and transformational leadership, and to observe their predictive effect on the study outcomes. The same measure was repeated in the second regression, so as to determine their effects on work–life balance. Furthermore, we introduced transformational leadership, to determine its predictive effect on work–life balance and in-role performance. We also introduced transformational leadership, to observe its predictive effect on in-role performance and psychological empowerment and work–life balance, to observe their separate and joint mediating predictive effects in the relationship between transformational leadership of the finance supervisors and in-role performance of the FFOs.

At the final analysis, we used SPSS to run the HMR analyses, and PROCESS macro. This approach helped to authenticate the multiple mediation analysis we used and gave us opportunity to estimate indirect effect. In addition, we used 5000 re-samples BC bootstrapping method on PROCESS macro program of SPSS to determine the total, direct, and indirect effects of the variables (Preacher & Hayes, Reference Preacher and Hayes2008).

Results

We conducted a preliminary analysis using the preliminary data on the study variables to affirm the need for mediation analysis across the variables established in the study model (Figure 1) (Baron & Kenny, Reference Baron and Kenny1986). First, the descriptive analysis was carried out to determine the mean and standard deviation, Cronbach's α, and correlation analysis. The result on Table 2 revealed mean and standard deviations of the study variables as follows: transformational leadership 63.82 ± 20.16, psychological empowerment 50.67 ± 10.43, work–life balance 36.16 ± 3.78, in-role performance 31.77 ± 5.8, competence 26.55 ± 4.29, self-determination 28.93 ± 4.54, personal life 37.16 ± 6.05, and autonomy 33.30 ± 3.98. Again, the result revealed that the Cronbach's α values for the study variables are relatively high. The α values in the order of their presentation as contained in Table 2 are as follow: .894, .963, .880, .904, 869, .947, .813, and .776, respectively, indicating a high measure of internal consistency (see Table 2).

Table 2. Descriptive statistics, Cronbach's α coefficients and correlations of the study variables

Note: Cronbach's α values are enclosed in diagonal parentheses.

N = 360, Cronbach's α values are reported along the diagonal in parenthesis, * p < .05 (2-tailed), ** p < .01 (2-tailed), *** p < .001 (2-tailed). Gender: 0 = male, 1 = female; marital status: 0 = single, 1 = married.

There is also a high internal consistency of the alpha values for the antecedent and consequence variables confirming the stringent .80 criterion established by authors (Henson, Reference Henson2001). Similarly, Table 2 reveals that there are moderate and significant correlations among the study constructs, hence, the need to conduct the mediation analysis (Baron & Kenny, Reference Baron and Kenny1986).

Hypotheses 1, 2, and 3

Table 3 presented the results of the HMR on hypotheses 1, 2, and 3 on transformational leadership as predictor of in-role performance, followers' psychological empowerment, and work–life balance as well as the study control characteristics/variables such as supervisors' gender, age, organizational tenure (measured in years), and the faculty officers' marital status. The outcome of the control variables as depicted in the first step of the equation showed negative significance of −.8% of transformational leadership on in-role performance, followers' psychological empowerment, and work–life balance (adjusted R 2 = −.008, F[5, 358] = .93, p = .66), implying that the variable made no significant contribution to the prediction of in-role performance, followers' psychological empowerment, and work–life balance (see Table 3). However, when we introduced transformational leadership to the equation, there was a significant difference of 63.4% of the variance in in-role performance, followers' psychological empowerment, and work–life balance (β = .862, ΔR 2 = .634, p < .001). Based on the findings, we established that transformational leadership positively predicts the FFOs' in-role performance, psychological empowerment, and work–life balance. Therefore, hypotheses 1, 2, and 3 were accepted.

Table 3. Summary of transformational leadership as predictors of followers' in-role performance, psychological empowerment, and work–life balance

* = p < .05; ** = p < .001; N = 360; OT (MY), organizational tenure (measured in years); TL, transformational leadership; IRP, in-role performance; FPE, followers' psychological empowerment; WLB, work–life balance.

Hypotheses 4 and 5

Again, the results on Table 3 on hypotheses 4 and 5 showed that the respondents' control variables (gender, age, organizational tenure, and marital status) had no significant influence on the faculty officers' in-role performance. However, when psychological empowerment and work–life balance were included in the second step of the equation, it accounted for higher significant value of 52.6% of the variance in in-role performance revealing followers' psychological empowerment (β = .814) and work–life balance (β = .773) (ΔR 2 = .562, p < .001). Thus, confirming both hypotheses 4 and 5. We therefore concluded that both followers' psychological empowerment and work–life balance positively predict the FFOs' in-role performance.

The result of the second HMR presented in Table 4 showed that the control variables accounted for low or insignificant variance of −.43% of the in-role performance, thus, reflecting an adjusted R 2 = .042, F(5, 358) = 1.55, p < .66. Afterward, we tested hypothesis 6 to confirm whether psychological empowerment positively mediates the effect of transformational leadership on followers' in-role performance. The result presented confirmed that psychological empowerment significantly mediates transformational leadership and followers' in-role performance when the control variables were controlled (β = .635, ΔR 2 = .840, p = .840).

Table 4. Summary of mediating role of psychological empowerment and work–life balance between transformational leadership and followers' in-role performance

*p < .05; **p < .001; OT (MY), organizational tenure (measured in years).

Furthermore, we determined if transformational leadership and in-role performance jointly predicted psychological empowerment and work–life balance. It was found that in-role performance and transformational leadership in the third equation accounted for a 53.90% variance in psychological empowerment and work–life balance (β = .869, ΔR 2 = .886, p < .001), signifying that transformational leadership and in-role performance significantly predicted psychological empowerment and work–life balance (β = .773, p < .001).

In addition, we tested whether work–life balance positively mediates the effect of transformational leadership on followers' in-role performance. The result in Table 4 showed that work–life balance accounted for 95.00% variance in transformational leadership adjusted R 2 = .054, F(5, 189) = 1.55, p < .001 and significantly predicted followers' in-role performance (β = .950, p < .001)

To ensure congruence of our mediation analysis to an established model, we followed the four procedures of Baron and Kenny (Reference Baron and Kenny1986). First, Baron and Kenny purported that for a mediation to occur, the four mediating conditions must be fulfilled, namely: the independent variable must significantly predict the proposed mediator (conduct a simple regression analysis with X predicting Y to test for path c alone, Y = B 0, + B 1 X + e).

Secondly, the independent variable must significantly predict the dependent variable (conduct a simple regression analysis with X predicting M to test for path a, M = B 0, + B 1 X + e). Again, the proposed mediator must significantly predict the dependent variable (conduct a simple regression analysis with M predicting Y to test the significance of path b alone, Y = B 0 B 1M + e), and finally, the significant association between the independent variable and the dependent variable ought to become nonsignificant or substantially reduced if the proposed mediator is included into the model (conduct a multiple regression analysis with X and M predicting Y (Y = B 0 B 1 + B 2M + e). The results of both the first and second HMR satisfied these conditions, thus giving us the opportunity to check for total, direct, and indirect effects of the study variables.

We conducted unmediated analysis and the result of the total effects obtained using PROCESS macro showed significant β = .875, SE = .892, t = 13.786, p < .0001 (see Table 5). This result justified the multiple mediation model for effect of psychological empowerment and transformational leadership on work–life balance and in-role performance model adopted in this study.

Table 5. Total and direct effects of transformational leadership, psychological empowerment on employees' in-role performance and faculty finance officers' work–life balance

S, significant.

Finally, we analyzed to determine the mediating effect of the study variables based on the eight hypotheses studied. We found that the effects of transformational leadership on the in-role performance were statistically significant (CI .074–.279). Therefore, we inferred that transformational leadership has partial mediation on the in-role performance of the FFOs in universities. Again, we found from the result that the indirect effect (CI = .448–.109, p < .01) was statistically significant when transformational leadership was tested for mediation on the followers' psychological empowerment. The outcome depicts that transformational leadership partially mediated the followers' psychological empowerment. Similarly, our result across other hypotheses showed that the indirect effects were all statistically significant when the independent variables were tested against the dependent variables (see Table 6).

Table 6. Indirect (mediation) 5000 re-samples BC bootstrap test effects of transformational leadership and psychological empowerment on faculty finance officers' in-role performance and work–life balance

PM, partial mediation.

Discussion

This study determined the joint mediation role of psychological empowerment and work–life balance in the relationship between transformational leadership and in-role performance of FFOs. In line with hypothesis 1, we established that financial supervisors' transformational leadership directly explains significant increment in FFOs' in-role performance. The outcome suggests that to increase the finance officers' in-role performance, the supervisors must apply transformational leadership style for effectiveness in the universities. The findings are congruent with previous studies (Bacha, Reference Bacha2014; Lam & O'Higgins, Reference Lam and O'Higgins2012; Ugwu, Enwereuzor, & Orji, Reference Ugwu, Enwereuzor and Orji2015) that transformational leaders encourage their followers to attain their daily job duties by engaging them in creative and innovative activities to attain their job and personal life demands.

Furthermore, the result showed that transformational leadership significantly predicted followers' psychological empowerment. This means that transformational leaders act as role models and show commitments to the needs of their subordinates (Bartram & Casimir, Reference Bartram and Casimir2007). Similarly, transformational leaders develop cordial and mutual relationship with their subordinates to improve the subordinates' in-role performance (Turner, Barling, Epitropaki, Butcher, & Milner, Reference Turner, Barling, Epitropaki, Butcher and Milner2002).

The result of the study also revealed positive and significant association between psychological empowerment and employees' in-role performance. The findings indicated that employees psychologically empowered by their supervisors can perform wonderfully in their duties. The finding agrees with previous studies that transformational leadership positively predicts employees' in-role performance (Aydogmus, Camgoz, Ergeneli, & Ekmekci, Reference Aydogmus, Camgoz, Ergeneli and Ekmekci2018; Jauhari, Singh, & Kumar, Reference Jauhari, Singh and Kumar2017).

Our result also confirmed hypotheses 4 and 5 that significant relationship exists between transformational leadership and work–life balance of employees. The study established that flexible work arrangements offer financial officers' prime opportunities to have a work–family friendly relationship, resulting to increase in organizational goal attainment, healthy living, and meaningful life at work and at home (Kamau, Muleke, Makaya & Wagoki, Reference Kamau, Muleke, Makaya and Wagoki2013; Orogbu, Onyeizugbe, & Chukwuemeke, Reference Orogbu, Onyeizugbe and Chukwuemeke2015).

We further found from hypothesis 6 that transformational leadership plays a significant role in enhancing followers' psychological empowerment and in-role performance (Abdulrab et al., Reference Abdulrab, Zumrah, Almaamari and Al-Tahitah2017). The finding agrees that organizations that implement flex-time, and empower her employees psychologically, keep the employees engaged in their work and ultimately increase their performance (Shah, Khattak, & Shah, Reference Shah, Khattak and Shah2020).

The result of hypothesis 7 confirmed that positive statistical correlation exists among workers' work–life balance, transformational leadership, and followers' in-role performance. This suggests that good work–life policy of an organization significantly helps workers to cope in the conflicts between work assignments and nonwork duties (Thevanes & Mangaleswaran, Reference Thevanes and Mangaleswaran2018).

Finally, we tested hypothesis 8 and found that the association between psychological empowerment and work–life balance was positive, and that transformational leadership significantly improves followers' in-role performance. This finding implies that finance officers' psychological empowerment and work–life balance can be attributed to the transformational leadership styles of the supervisors. It also indicated that a combination of leadership policies, workers' interest, and welfare promote the organizational success through the workers' in-role performance (Avolio, Zhu, Koh, & Bhatia, Reference Avolio, Zhu, Koh and Bhatia2004). Our findings further clarified that the associations among transformational leadership, workers' in-role performance, their psychological empowerment, and work–life balance are better determined using joint mediation approaches. We established that as at the time of this study, there was paucity of studies on joint mediation of psychological empowerment and work–life balance in the relationship between transformational leadership and workers' in-role performance.

Implications for organizational practitioners

The outcomes of this study have implications for organizational practitioners. Leaders of organizations, especially the human resource managers (HRM), should always strive to motivate their workers by implementing policies that promote workers' psychological empowerment and work–life balance to improve the workers' in-role performance. The confident level of the workers in the leaders and their overall performance can be enhanced if they are effectively motivated for work and their personal life goals. This is most important for HRM in NFP organizations, including higher education institutions, where evidence-based OCD is indispensable for improvement in the quality of processes and products. University administrators, especially those involved in human resource management, should focus more on strategies that can empower their staff psychologically and balance their work–life to alleviate the severe organizational performance, quality change, and development challenges facing higher education institutions worldwide (Leiber, Reference Leiber2019; Leiber et al., Reference Leiber, Stensaker and Harvey2018). The findings also require the leadership of educational institutions and firms of all categories to develop their managers through trainings on transformational leadership style and quality management systems.

Implications for researchers

Another implication of the study is that researchers should incorporate multiple mediation when studying the effects of leadership styles and subordinates' job performance. Multiple mediation gives a wider view of the underlying mechanisms that can promote organizational strategies that can enhance employees' welfare and productivity (Ugwu, Enwereuzor, & Orji, Reference Ugwu, Enwereuzor and Orji2015). Researchers should note that since individual mediators might give different results (Bartram & Casimir, Reference Bartram and Casimir2007), a better understanding of mediation mechanisms in the relationship between transformational leadership and in-role performance of followers can be obtained through a more fine-grained approach like joint mediation of variables. It is expected that future researchers, especially those that will work on transformational leadership and in-role performance of followers, should focus more on the joint or combined roles of mediating variables in the relationship between independent and dependent variables.

Theoretical contribution of the study

The study has contributed to quality management theory by advancing strategies that promote workers' performance for quality processes and products in organizations. The study explained transformational leadership style, psychological empowerment, and work–life balance that promote workers' in-role performance and improve quality to maximize goal achievement in organizations. The study also showed that the joint mediation effect of psychological empowerment and work–life balance greatly improves workers' in-role performance which by extension improves organizational quality because quality management systems guarantee organizational quality (Shewhart, Reference Shewhart1931).

Limitations of the study

One of the observed limitations to this study is that we used only the faculty financial officers in the universities. This may call for caution in generalizing the findings of the study particularly beyond the study's contextual environments. However, we used 5000 re-samples BC bootstrapping method using PROCESS macro package for SPSS to determine the total, direct, and indirect effects of the study variables (Hayes, Reference Hayes2013). Although we used 360-feedback method to elicit information from the employees, their bosses, subordinates, and students (Kanaslan & Iyem, Reference Kanaslan and Iyem2016; Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff, Reference Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee and Podsakoff2003), using different scale ranges and response formats can better help explain the in-role performance of employees and increase the efficacy of the findings.

Conclusion

This study established that transformational leadership is a significant positive predictor of in-role performance, psychological empowerment, and work–life balance of the FFOs in universities. This may be because effective transformational leadership takes into cognizance the psychological needs and work–life balance of staff when making organizational policies that can improve workers' in-role performance and organizational success. The advancement of transformational leadership style can ensure that the general health of an organization and its goals are attained. This study contributes to the management literature by establishing the correlation between transformational leadership and other study variables by eliciting information through the 360-degree feedback method from a wide range of stakeholders, thus making the findings more reliable and authentic. The study also proved that the joint mediation of psychological empowerment and work–life balance can promote the relationship between leaders and followers' in-role performance.

Footnotes

*

This article has been updated since its original publication. A notice detailing the edits can be found here: https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2023.36

References

Abdollahi, B., & Naveh Ibrahim, A. (2011). Employees empowerment. Tehran: Virayesh publication.Google Scholar
Abdulrab, M., Zumrah, A. R., Almaamari, Q., & Al-Tahitah, A. (2017). Transformational leadership and psychological empowerment in Malaysian public universities: A review paper. Research on Humanities and Social Sciences, 7(24), 98105.Google Scholar
Anderson, N. R., de Dreu, C. K. W., & Nijstad, B. A. (2004). The routinization of innovation research: A constructively critical review of the state-of-the-science. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(2), 147174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Attari, M. (2013). The impact of transformational leadership on nurse psychological empowerment. International Journal of Hospital Research, 2(2), 7176. http://ijhr.iums.ac.ir/article_4874_1776d2e9846e866af4425eac02c3c889.pdfGoogle Scholar
Avolio, B. J., Bass, B., & Jung, D. I. (1995). MLQ multifactor leadership questionnaire (Technical Report), Redwood City, CA, Mind Garden.Google Scholar
Avolio, B. J, Bass, B. M., & Jung, D. I. (1999). Re-examining the components of transformational and transactional leadership using the MLQ. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 72, 441462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Avolio, B. J., Zhu, W., Koh, W., & Bhatia, P. (2004). Transformational leadership and organizational commitment: Mediating role of psychological empowerment and moderating role of structural distance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 951968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aydogmus, C., Camgoz, S. M., Ergeneli, A., & Ekmekci, O. T. (2018). Perceptions of transformational leadership and job satisfaction: The roles of personality traits and psychological empowerment. Journal of Management & Organization, 24, 81107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bacha, E. (2014). The relationship between transformational leadership, task performance and job characteristics. Journal of Management Development, 33(4), 410420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baird, K., Su, S., & Munir, R. (2018). The relationship between the enabling use of controls, employee empowerment, and performance. Personnel Review, 47(1), 257274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2008). Towards a model of work engagement. Career Development International, 13(3), 209223. doi: 10.1108/13620430810870476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 11731182.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barry, T. (1993). Empowerment: The US experience. Empowerment in Organizations, 1(1), 2428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartram, T., & Casimir, G. (2007). The relationship between leadership and follower in-role performance and satisfaction with the leader: The mediating effects of empowerment and trust in the leader. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 28(1), 419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1995). MLQ multifactor leadership questionnaire for research: Permission set. Redwood City, CA: Mindgarden.Google Scholar
Beau, P. (2018). Individual performance evaluation and the feeling of justice: A study of psychosocial risks in Big Four audit firms. Accounting Auditing Control, 24(3), 97131.Google Scholar
Becker, D. A. A. (1997). The effects of choice on auditors’ intrinsic motivation and performance. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 9(1), 119.Google Scholar
Bonache, A. B. (2022). The stressors-performance relationship in accounting and auditing firms: Is there eustress out there? Accounting Auditing Control, 28(1), 87130.Google Scholar
Bono, J. E., & McNamara, G. (2011). Publishing in AMJ – part 2: Research design. Academy of Management Journal, 54(4), 657660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bose, S., & Patnaik, B. (2015). A theoretical model of transformational leadership and organizational identification of employees: The role of organizational learning, organizational justice and psychological empowerment. International Journal of Management & Information Technology, 10(5), 21992207. https://doi.org/10.24297/ijmit.v10i5.623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, J. P. (1990) Modeling the performance prediction problem in industrial and organizational psychology. In Dunnette, M. D. & Hough, L. M. (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (vol. 1, 2nd ed., pp 687732). Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press.Google Scholar
Cavazotte, F., Moreno, V., & Bernardo, J. (2013). Transformational leaders and work performance: the mediating roles of identification and self-efficacy. Brazillian Administration Review, 10(4), 18077692. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1807-76922013000400007Google Scholar
Cavazotte, F., Moreno, V., & Hickmann, M. (2012). Effects of leader intelligence, personality and emotional intelligence on transformational leadership and managerial performance. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(3), 443455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.10.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chandrasekara, W. S. (2019). The effect of transformational leadership style on employees’ job satisfaction and job performance: A case of apparel manufacturing industry in Sri Lanka. International Journal of Economics, Commerce and Management, 7(7), 385393.Google Scholar
Cheng, C., Cheng, C., Bartram, T., Bartram, T., Karimi, L., Karimi, L., … Leggat, S. (2016). Transformational, leadership and social identity as predictors of team climate, perceived quality of care, burnout and turnover intention among nurses. Personnel Review, 45(6), 12001216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chun, J. U., Yammarino, F. J., Dionne, S. D., Sosik, J. J., & Moon, H. K. (2009). Leadership across hierarchical levels: Multiple levels of management and multiple levels of analysis. Leadership Quarterly, 20(5), 689707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, M., Koch, L., & Hill, E. (2004). The work–family interface: Differentiating balance and fit. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 33(2), 121140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Cieri, H., & Bardoel, E. A. (2009). What does ‘work-life management’ mean in China and Southeast Asia for MNCs? Community, Work and Family, 12(2), 179196. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13668800902778959CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eisenberger, R., Armeli, S., Rexwinkel, B., Lynch, P. D., & Rhoades, L. (2001). Reciprocation of perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 4251.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fisher-McAuley, G., Stanton, J. M., Jolton, J. A., & Gavin, J. (2003). Modeling the relationship between work/life balance and organizational outcomes. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial-Organizational Psychology, April 12, 2003, Orlando, Florida.Google Scholar
Foy, N. (1994). Empowering people at work. London: Gower Publishing.Google Scholar
Gallagher, T. (2008). 360 Degree performance reviews offer valuable perspectives. Financial Executive, December, p. 61.Google Scholar
Golec de Zavala, A., & van Bergh, A. (2007). Need for cognitive closure and conservative political beliefs: Differential mediation by personal worldviews. Political Psychology, 28, 587608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediator, moderation and conditional process analysis: A regression-based analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: Guilford Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
Hayman, J. (2005). Psychometric assessment of an instrument designed to measure work life balance. Research and Practice in Human Resource Management, 13(1), 8591.Google Scholar
Henson, R. K. (2001). Understanding internal consistency reliability estimates: A conceptual primer on coefficient alpha. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 34(3), 177189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B.-C. (1959). The Motivation to work. Relations industrielles/Industrial Relations, 15(2), 275276. https://doi.org/10.7202/1022040Google Scholar
Hossein, R. D., Saleh, P. A., Iman, A. M., & Jaafar, A. (2012). An analysis of the empowerment level of employees and its relation to organizational factors. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(15), 255263.Google Scholar
Ibrahim, N., Ismail, A., Mohamed, N. K., Salim, S. S., & Yusuf, M. H. (2015). Effect of psychological empowerment and transformational leadership on organizational commitment. Makara Human Behavior Studies in Asia, 19(2), 7586. https://doi.org/10.7454/mssh.v19i2.3476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ismail, A., Mohamad, M. H., Mohamed, H. A.-B., Rafiuddin, N. M., & Zhen, K. W. P. (2010). Transformational and transactional leadership styles as a predictor of individual outcomes. Theory and Applied Economics, 17(6), 89104.Google Scholar
Jauhari, H., Singh, S., & Kumar, M. (2017). How does transformational leadership influence proactive customer service behavior of frontline service employees? Examining the mediating roles of psychological empowerment and affective commitment. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 2017(30), 3048.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, P. R. (1993). Empowerment in the global economy. Empowerment in Organizations, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.1108/09684899310042872CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kamau, J., Muleke, V., Makaya, S., & Wagoki, J. (2013). Work life balance practices on employee performance of Ecobank Kenya. European Journal Business and Management, 5(25), 179185.Google Scholar
Kanaslan, E. K., & Iyem, C. (2016). Is 360 degree feedback appraisal an effective way of performance evaluation? International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 6(5), 172182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keeney, M. J., & Svyantek, D. J. (2000). A review of psychological contract theory and research: Promise nothing and they still may get angry. In Rahim, M. A., Golembiewski, R. T. & Mackenzie, K. D. (Eds.), Current topics in management (vol. 5, pp. 6594). Stamford: JAI Press.Google Scholar
Khan, M. T., Saboor, A., Khan, N. A., & Ali, I. (2011). Connotation of employees’ empowerment emerging challenges. European Journal of social Science, 22(4), 556564.Google Scholar
Kibozi, S., & Michael, F. (2018). Nexus between work-life balance practices and affective organisational commitment: The mediating role of transformational leadership style. Business Management Review, 21, 6073.Google Scholar
Kirkpatrick, S. A., & Locke, E. A. (1996). Direct and indirect effects of three core charismatic leadership components on performance and attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(1), 3651. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.81.1.36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lam, C. S., & O'Higgins, E. R. E. (2012). Enhancing employee outcomes: The interrelated influences of managers’ emotional intelligence and leadership style. Leadership and Organizational Development Journal, 33(2), 149174.Google Scholar
Leiber, T. (2019). Organizational change and development through quality management in higher education institutions: Theory, practice, and recommendations for change agents. Germany: IGI Global Publisher.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leiber, T., Stensaker, B., & Harvey, L. (2018). Bridging theory and practice of impact evaluation of quality management in higher education institutions: a SWOT analysis. Journal article. European Journal of Higher Education, 8(3), 351365. https://doi.org/10.1080/21568235.2018.1474782CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ndirangu, J. W. (2018). Influence of transformational leadership on employee performance: A case study of local non-governmental organizations in Kenya. An unpublished dissertation submitted to the Chandaria School of Business in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Masters of Science in Organizational Development of the United States International University – Africa.Google Scholar
Orogbu, L. O., Onyeizugbe, C. U., & Chukwuemeke, D. N. (2015). Work-life balance and employee performance in selected commercial banks in Lagos State. European Journal of Research and Reflection in Management Sciences, 3(4), 6377.Google Scholar
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Bommer, W. H. (1996). Transformational leader behaviors and substitutes for leadership as determinants of employee satisfaction, commitment, trust, and organizational citizen behaviors. Journal of Management, 22(2), 259298.Google Scholar
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879891.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Redmond, J., Valiulis, M., & Drew, E. (2006) Literature review of issues related to work-life balance, workplace culture and maternity/childcare issues. Crisis Pregnancy Agency: Summary Report of the Consultation for the Strategy to Address the Issue of Crisis Pregnancy. http://doi.crisispregnancy.ie/pub/Rep3.pdfGoogle Scholar
Shah, M. W., Khattak, P., & Shah, M. H. (2020). The impact of flexible working hours and psychological empowerment on team performance with the mediating role of work engagement. British Journal of Research, 7(1), 49.Google Scholar
Shewhart, W. A. (1931). Economic control of quality of manufactured product. New York: D. Van Nostrand Company Inc.Google Scholar
Shewhart, W. E., & Deming, W. E. (1939). Statistical method from the view point of quality control. Washington: The Graduate School, U.S. Department of Agriculture.Google Scholar
Smeltzer, S. C., Cantrell, M. A., Sharts-Hopko, N. C., Heverly, M. A., Jenkinson, A., & Nthenge, S. (2016). Psychometric analysis of work/life balance self-assessment scale. Journal of nursing Measurement, 24(1), 5–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spreitzer, G. M. (1995). Psychological empowerment in the workplace: Dimensions, measurement, and validation. Academy of management Journal, 38(5), 14421465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spreitzer, G. M., Perttula, K. H., & Xin, K. (2005). Traditionality matters: An examination of the effectiveness of transformational leadership in the United States and Taiwan. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(3), 205227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Surbakti, M. P. (2013). Analisis Pengaruh Kepemimpinan Transformasional dan Motivasi terhadap Kinerja Pegawai: Studi pada PT. Kereta Api Indonesia Daop IV Semarang. Journal Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Diponegoro Semarang, 1(1), 5567.Google Scholar
Thevanes, N., & Mangaleswaran, T. (2018). Relationship between work-life balance and job performance of employees. IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 20(5), 1116. doi: 10.9790/487X-2005011116Google Scholar
Thomas, K. W., & Velthouse, B. A. (1990). Cognitive elements of empowerment: An ‘interpretive’ model of intrinsic task motivation. Academy of Management Review, 15(4), 666681. https://doi.org/10.2307/258687Google Scholar
Tims, M., Bakker, A. B., & Derks, D. (2014). Daily job crafting and the self-efficacy – performance relationship. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 29(5), 490507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Towsen, T., Stander, M. W., & Vaart, L. (2020). The relationship between authentic leadership, psychological empowerment, role clarity, and work engagement: Evidence from South Africa. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 113. doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01973.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Turner, N., Barling, J., Epitropaki, O., Butcher, V., & Milner, C. (2002). Transformational leadership and moral reasoning. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(2), 304311.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ugwu, L. I., Enwereuzor, I. K., & Orji, E. U. (2015). Is trust in leadership a mediator between transformational leadership and in-role performance among small-scale factory workers? Review of Managerial Science, 10, 628648. doi: 10.1007/s11846-015-0170-z.Google Scholar
Vigoda, E. (2000). Internal politics in public administration systems: An empirical examination of its relationship with job congruence, organizational citizenship behavior, and in- role performance. Public personnel management, 29(2), 185210. doi: 10.1177/009102600002900203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Viswesvaran, C., & Ones, D. S. (2000). Perspectives on models of job performance. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 8(4), 216226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, L. J., & Anderson, S. E. (1991). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. Journal of management, 17(3), 601617. doi: 10.1177/014920639101700305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zacher, H., & Jimmieson, N. L. (2013). Leader-follower interactions: Relations with OCB and sales productivity. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 28(1), 92106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Figure 0

Figure 1. Path diagram multiple mediation model for effect of psychological empowerment and transformational leadership on work–life balance and in-role performance.

Figure 1

Table 1. Demographic characteristics of the sample showing baseline equivalence

Figure 2

Table 2. Descriptive statistics, Cronbach's α coefficients and correlations of the study variables

Figure 3

Table 3. Summary of transformational leadership as predictors of followers' in-role performance, psychological empowerment, and work–life balance

Figure 4

Table 4. Summary of mediating role of psychological empowerment and work–life balance between transformational leadership and followers' in-role performance

Figure 5

Table 5. Total and direct effects of transformational leadership, psychological empowerment on employees' in-role performance and faculty finance officers' work–life balance

Figure 6

Table 6. Indirect (mediation) 5000 re-samples BC bootstrap test effects of transformational leadership and psychological empowerment on faculty finance officers' in-role performance and work–life balance