Philip M. Podsakoff

Bio: Philip M. Podsakoff is an academic researcher from University of Florida. The author has contributed to research in topics: Organizational citizenship behavior & Organizational behavior. The author has an hindex of 64, co-authored 99 publications receiving 102887 citations. Previous affiliations of Philip M. Podsakoff include Pennsylvania State University & Indiana University.

Effects of message, source, and context on evaluations of employee voice behavior.

Abstract: The article contained a production-related error. In Table 5, the four values in the rows for Study 1 Prosocial motives and Study 1 Constructive voice should have been shifted one column to the right, to the Direct and Total Performance evaluations columns. All versions of this article have been corrected.] Although employee voice behavior is expected to have important organizational benefits, research indicates that employees voicing their recommendations for organizational change may be evaluated either positively or negatively by observers. A review of the literature suggests that the perceived efficacy of voice behaviors may be a function of characteristics associated with the (a) source, (b) message, and (c) context of the voice event. In this study, we manipulated variables from each of these categories based on a model designed to predict when voice will positively or negatively impact raters' evaluations of an employee's performance. To test our model, we conducted 3 laboratory studies in which we manipulated 2 source factors (voicer expertise and trustworthiness), 2 message factors (recommending a solution and positively vs. negatively framing the message), and 2 context factors (timing of the voice event and organizational norms for speaking up vs. keeping quiet). We also examined the mediating effects of liking, prosocial motives, and perceptions that the voice behavior was constructive on the relationships between the source, message, and context factors and performance evaluations. Generally speaking, we found that at least one of the variables from each category had an effect on performance evaluations for the voicer and that most of these effects were indirect, operating through one or more of the mediators. Implications for theory and future research are discussed.

Substitutes for leadership and the management of professionals

Abstract: In a recent study, Podsakoff, Niehoff, MacKenzie, and Williams (1993) reported that although several of the subordinate, task, and organizational variables identified in Kerr and Jermier's (1978) Substitutes for Leadership model had main effects on subordinate criterion variables, few of these “substitutes” actually moderated the relationships between leader behaviors and the criterion variables in a manner consistent with that specified by Howell, Dorfman, and Kerr (1986). The goal of this study was to explore the possibility that the reason for the lack of support reported by Podsakoff and his colleagues, was their use of a sample comprised primarily of nonprofessionals, by testing the substitutes model using a more professional sample (n = 411 professional, managerial, and whitecollar employees drawn from 10 different organizations). In addition, other key objectives of this study were to: (a) provide a definitional and statistical clarification of Howell, Dorfman, and Kerr's (1986) “substituting,” “neutralizing,” and “enhancing” effects; (b) report the psychometric properties of a refined and reduced substitutes-for-leadership scale; (c) test the moderating effects of the substitute variables on a broader range of criterion variables than had been previously examined; and (d) investigate the proportion of variance explained in these criterion variables by the main effects of the leader behaviors and the substitutes for leadership. The results indicate that few of the substitutes variables moderated the relationships between the leader behaviors and the subordinate criterion variables, and that the majority of the moderated relationships identified did not meet the criteria specified by Howell, Dorfman, and Kerr. Possible reasons for these findings, and their implications for the substitutes model, are then discussed.

Leadership Effectiveness: Past Perspectives and Future Directions for Research

Abstract: Although systematic research into the topic of leadership is a product of the twentieth century, interest in identifying the properties that make leaders effective is almost as old as recorded history. Indeed, Bass and Stogdill (Bass, 1990) noted that discussions relating to leadership and leadership effectiveness can be found in the Greek and Latin Classics, the Old and New Testaments of the Bible, the writings of ancient Chinese philosophers, and in early Icelandic sagas. Part of the fascination with the topic of leadership undoubtedly relates to our desire to understand why it is that some men or women are more effective than others at leading groups, organizations, and/or societies. However, another more practical reason for the interest in leadership may be our desire to improve our ability or that of others to become more effective leaders in organizations.

Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies.

Abstract: Interest in the problem of method biases has a long history in the behavioral sciences. Despite this, a comprehensive summary of the potential sources of method biases and how to control for them does not exist. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to examine the extent to which method biases influence behavioral research results, identify potential sources of method biases, discuss the cognitive processes through which method biases influence responses to measures, evaluate the many different procedural and statistical techniques that can be used to control method biases, and provide recommendations for how to select appropriate procedural and statistical remedies for different types of research settings.

Sources of Method Bias in Social Science Research and Recommendations on How to Control It

Abstract: Despite the concern that has been expressed about potential method biases, and the pervasiveness of research settings with the potential to produce them, there is disagreement about whether they really are a problem for researchers in the behavioral sciences. Therefore, the purpose of this review is to explore the current state of knowledge about method biases. First, we explore the meaning of the terms “method” and “method bias” and then we examine whether method biases influence all measures equally. Next, we review the evidence of the effects that method biases have on individual measures and on the covariation between different constructs. Following this, we evaluate the procedural and statistical remedies that have been used to control method biases and provide recommendations for minimizing method bias.

Leadership in Organizations

Abstract: Chapter 1. Introduction Chapter 2. Managerial Work Chapter 3. Effective Leadership Behavior Chapter 4. Leading Change and Innovation Chapter 5. Participative Leadership and Empowerment Chapter 6. Leadership Traits and Skills Chapter 7. Contingency Theories and Adaptive Leadership Chapter 8. Power and Influence Tactics Chapter 9. Dyadic Relations and Followers Chapter 10. Leadership in Groups and Teams Chapter 11. Strategic Leadership in Organizations Chapter 12. Charismatic and Transformational Leadership Chapter 13. Ethical, Servant, Spiritual, and Authentic Leadership Chapter 14. Cross-cultural Leadership and Diversity Chapter 15. Developing Leadership Skills Chapter 16. Overview and Integration