1

ORGANISATIONAL CONSTRAINTS, ETHICAL

LEADERSHIP AND OCCUPATIONAL SELF-
EFFICACY AS PREDICTORS OF WORK
ENGAGEMENT AMONG INDUSTRIAL
WORKERS
 2

CHAPTER ONE

Introduction

Workers in manufacturing industries are employees of organisation focused on the

production of goods and rendering services on a large scale to other individuals, corporate

bodies and public or private establishments. They are usually tasked with multiple job

descriptions beginning from the preproduction, production and post-production stages/phases

of their work. Oftentimes also, deadlines accompany most production jobs that are given,

such that extra amount of hours, sometimes beyond the regular/usual working hours, need to

be invested to get the job accomplished. And although accomplishing these jobs are the

collective responsibility of the workers, their various job descriptions at each of these stages,

require high demands of commitment, involvement, passion, enthusiasm, absorption, focused

effort, zeal, dedication and energy. These are what the present study stand to accomplish.

Workers in manufacturing industries however have the choice to accept to be

committed, passionate, involved and enthusiastic about the job or not. The art of committing

totally and wholeheartedly to the job from start to finish despite the demands of the job, is

referred to as work engagement. Efforts to improve organisational performance have begun

to emphasize positive organisational behaviour concepts and positive emotions (Bakker &

Schaufeli, 2008; May, Gilson, & Harter, 2004). These include concepts such as optimism,

trust and engagement. Much of the earlier organisational behaviour research focused on

negative concepts and emotions such as job dissatisfaction, alienation, burnout, and intent to

quit. Interestingly, this study is aimed at filling these knowledge gaps by studying concepts

such as organisational constraint, ethical leadership and occupational self-efficacy. And how

they can predict work engagement.

 3

The term work engagement was first coined by Kahn (1990) and he was one of the first

to establish a theoretical basis for work engagement and who referred to it as workers’

positive attitude at their workplace. He describes engaged employees as being fully

physically, cognitively and emotionally connected with their work role.

Maslach and Leiter (1997) in their opinion defined engagement as the opposite of

burnout; engaged employees have a sense of energetic and effective connection with their

work and is characterized by energy, involvement and professional efficacy – the direct

opposites of the three core burnout dimensions. Saks (2006) recently defined work

engagement as “a distinct and unique construct consisting of cognitive, emotional and

behavioural components associated with individual role performance”. Conceptualizing work

engagement as a construct that includes long term emotional involvement with the work role,

Saks (2006) and Wagner and Harter (2006) emphasized its consequential side, indicating it

exerts its positive influence on workers’ motivation and several positive organisational

outcomes.

Work engagement is defined as positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind that is

characterised by vigour, dedication and absorption (Schaufeli et al., 2002). In essence work

engagement captures how workers experience their work, as stimulating and energetic and

something to which they really want to devote time and effort (the vigour component) as a

significant and meaningful pursuit (dedication); and as engrossing and something on which

they are fully concentrated (absorption) (Bakker & Demerouti, 2008). Vigour is characterised

by high levels of energy and mental resilience while working, the willingness to invest effort

in one’s work, and persistence even in the face of difficulties. Dedication refers to being

strongly involved in one’s work and experiencing a sense of significance, enthusiasm,

inspiration, pride and challenge. Finally, absorption is characterised by being fully

 4

concentrated and happily engrossed in one’s work, whereby time passes quickly and one has

difficulty with detaching oneself from work.

Qualitative research that revealed that engaged employees are highly energetic, self-

efficacious individuals who exercise influence over events that affect their lives (Schaufeli &

Bakker, 2001). Organisations need to leash the talents and motivations of their employees if

they are to achieve peak performance (Burke & Copper. 2007; Leiter & Bakker, 2010;

Ketzenbach, 2000). One of the best ways for organisations to have a connective advantage

over others is to physically, psychologically and emotionally engage employees in their jobs

(Harrad, 2006; Kahn, 1990).

Employees who are engaged in their work are fully connected with their work roles.

They are bursting with energy, dedicated to their work, and immersed in their work activities.

Engagement refers to focused energy that is directed towards organisational goals (Macey,

Schneider, 2008). Engaged employees are more likely to work harder through increased level

of discretionary effort than are those who are disengaged.

There are several reason why engaged workers performs better than non-engaged

workers (Demerouti & Cropanzano, 2010), but one of the most convincing argument is that

engaged employees often experience positive emotions, including happiness, joy, and

enthusiasm. Positive emotion seem to broaden people’s thought-action repertoires, implying

that they build a variety of personal resources (Fredrickson, 2001). Personal resources are

positive self-evaluation that are linked to resiliency and refer to individual’s sense of their

ability to successfully control and have an impact on their environment (Hobfoll, Johnson,

Ennis, & Jackson, 2003). These resources may include physical resources (e.g. physical

skills, health), social resources (e.g. friendship, social support networks), intellectual

resources (e.g. knowledge, executive control), or psychological resources (e.g. self-efficacy,

 5

optimism). These personal resources can be used to cope with the job demands and to

perform well (Bakker & Xanthopoulou, 2009; Luthans, 2010).

Job resources such as social support, coaching or performance feedback may play either

intrinsic or an extrinsic motivational role (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007). As intrinsic

motivators, job resources, by fulfilling basic human needs such as the needs for competence,

belongingness and autonomy cultivate individuals’ growth and development (Deci & Ryan,

1985). For instance, an effective training and development strategy increases job competence

whereas job control and social support satisfy the need for autonomy and the need to belong,

respectively. As extrinsic motivators job resources inspire employees to exert effort in their

work and as a result increase the chances that the employees will be able to complete their

tasks successfully and consequently attain their work goals (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007;

Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004). In both cases, it is likely that the availability of job resources

augments employees’ work engagement, whereas their absence may obstruct goal

accomplishment and as a result breed feelings of frustration and failure (Bakker &

Demerouti, 2007).

In most organisations, performance is the result of the combined effort of individual

employees. It is therefore conceivable that the crossover of engagement among members of

the same work team increases performance. Crossover or emotional contagion can be defined

as the transfer of positive (or negative) experiences from one person to the other (Bakker,

Westman & van Emmerik, 2001). If colleagues influence each other with their work

engagement, they may perform better as a team.

According to Grant and Ashford (2008), employees do not just let life happen to them.

Rather they try to affect, shape, curtail, expand and temper what happens in their lives.
 6

Employees may actively change the design of their jobs by choosing tasks, negotiating

different job content, and assigning meaning to their tasks or jobs (Parker & Ohly, 2008).

Nevertheless, there is conceivable interest in the short-term (i.e. daily or weekly)

fluctuations in the experiences of work engagement for a particular individual. In many work

setting, there are specific times and periods during which it is necessary that employees are

highly engaged, for example, when making an important presentation to a new customer or

when facing other novel and challenging job requirements.

The driving force behind the importance of work engagement is that it has positive

consequences for the organisation. For example, empirical research on work engagement

reports that high level of engagement leads to enhanced organisational commitment,

increased job satisfaction, lower absenteeism and turnover rates, improved health and well-

being, more extra role behaviours, higher performance and a greater exhibition of personal

initiative, proactive behaviour and learning motivation (Schaufeli & Salanova, 2007). Thus

investing in conditions, which foster work engagement among employees is vital for the

growth and profitability of organisations.

Organisational constraints represent situations or things that prevent employees from

translating ability and effort into high levels of job performance. Organisational constraints

are limiting factors stemming from the organisation such as fundamentals, internal customers,

resources, and production capabilities. These constraints are the forces that every

organisation must contend with in order to execute its strategy. Each organisation has its own

unique set of constraints that collectively influence its competitive position in its industry.

Some of the few basic constraints that businesses typically face include: time, assets, liquid

assets, resources, quality, knowledge, regulatory compliance, interest of stakeholders,

organisational culture, risk tolerance and so on. As an important job stressor, organisational
 7

constraints (e.g., lack of resources) prevent employees from translating their motivation and

ability into high-level job performance (Peters & O’Connor, 1980).

The investigation of job-related stress involves studying the relationship between

stressful aspects of jobs (normally termed stressors) and the reputed results of stressor

exposure (normally termed strains). Although several diverse theoretical models of the

process by which stressors impact employees exist (e.g., Ivancevich & Matteson, 1980; Jex,

in press; Jex & Beehr, 1991; Kahn & Byosiere, 1992), most models propose that employees

are exposed to stressful working conditions, these conditions are perceived, and finally

employees exhibit strains, which can include behaviours (e.g., increased smoking), physical

illness, and psychological distress.

Organisational constraints as one of the job stressors have been rarely studied. The

Organisational Constraints Scale (OCS) was developed by Peters & O’Conor (1980) and

intended to measure constraints on performance at work. The OCS contained one item for

each of the constraints areas. Although situational constraint is treated as a single variable,

individual items of the scale are not considered parallel forms of the same construct. Having

poor equipment, for example, is not equivalent to being interrupted by co-workers. Although

we might sum the number of constraints, presuming that the larger the number, the more

constraints, we would not expect the individual items to be highly and uniformly inter-

correlated. Because situational constraints, by definition, are things that interfere with job

performance, we expected it to relate to performance. In addition, it should relate to affective

strains, such as frustration and job dissatisfaction (Peters & O'Connor, 1988; Villanova &

Roman, 1993), and the by-product of job dissatisfaction, intention of quitting (e.g., Carsten &

Spector, 1987). They further predicted that situational constraints would be positively related

to physical symptoms typically associated with job stress. Given the frustration likely

associated with constraints, it is quite possible that these may have physical manifestations.
 8

Organisational constraints tend to limit the level of motivation of the employees to

engage in a particular job. For instance, in a situation where there are no adequate finances or

instruments to carry out a particular tasks, the employees tend to be withdrawn or participate

less in that task. And when these sources of constraints are being looked into and taken care

of properly, then the employees could start to get more engaged in their work. When the

working environment is very conducive, they would not want to leave very early or always

give excuses for why the job will not be done, and most of all the job will be done accurately

and satisfactorily.

Given the high level of involvement exemplified by engaging employees, the

possibility that the leadership style operated (ethical leadership), is the reason for this

commitment is high and therefore requires exploration. Ethical leadership is among one of

factors which may influence work engagement among industrial workers. For employees to

perform optimally, it is possible that the behaviour of their leader could influence them. As

such, one type of leadership that is of interest in the present study is ethical leadership.

Ethical leadership has been the most basic construct that has wide currency among scholars

and practicing managers alike as a tool to encourage staffs to have a sense of identification in

their jobs (Avolio, Walumbwa, & Weber, 2009; Brown, Trevino, & Harrison, 2005). Ethical

leadership has been defined as “the demonstration of normatively appropriate conduct

through personal actions and interpersonal relationships, and the promotion of such conduct

to followers through two-way communication, reinforcement and decision making.” (Brown

et al., 2005, p. 120). Kanungo (2001) noted that ethical leaders engage in acts and behaviours

that benefit others, and at the same time, they refrain from behaviours that can cause any

harm to others.

Leadership has been considered as a major factor that has an indisputable influence on

employee performance in any kind of organisation (Ogbonna & Harris, 2000). But how
 9

employees perform under different kinds of leadership has been a point of contention among

researchers and scholars alike (Gadot, 2006). Studies have shown that employee performance

increases under an extraverted leadership when employees are passive, and if employees are

proactive result will be opposite (Gadot, 2006). Wang et al. (2005) stated that leadership has

an immense influence on the performance of employees. Better improvement of employee

performance is a clarion call for organisations in the midst of continual rising challenges due

to scandals and unethical behaviours. Brown et al. (2005) suggested that ethical leadership

behaviour plays an important role in promoting enhanced employee attitudes and behaviours

in any organisation whether public or private. It is believed by managers and management

researchers that organisational goals are unattainable without the enduring identification of

members of the organisation.

Ethical leadership may present a style of leadership that can address the issue of

enhanced employee outcomes (Brown et al, 2005). That is why corporate executives are

continually pressed to make organisational improvements, measured by both internal process

advances and external performance measures. Executives endeavour to fulfil organisational

goals through improved effectiveness and efficiency (Burton & Obel, 2001). The success and

viability of an organisation are important responsibilities of the organisation’s leaders.

Because leadership is an influential process (Ciulla, 1995; Yukl, 2002), organisational goals

are partly dependent on leaders’ abilities to inspire organisational members to work towards

those goals through increased performance. A leader’s capacity to affect employee attitudes

and behaviours can be measured by a variety of factors including employee job performance,

job involvement, and organisational identification (Daft, 2004; McShane & von Glinow,

2010).

Thus, ethical leaders can effectively achieve greater performance within organisations

by exhibiting qualities that will influence employees to work harder. This will at the long run
 10

assist organisations to achieve their goals and objective optimally. Ethical leaders affect

change and goal achievement by influencing organisational members to perform at high

levels (Drucker, 2001). The construct domain of ethical leadership is broad, and several

different types of values may be relevant to the employee’s identification with the

organisation including altruism, compassion, honest, fairness and justice. Positive employee

attitudes and behaviours are potential indicators of increased job performance (Tanner,

Brugger, van Schie & Lebherz, 2010). Ethical leadership is also indicated by behaviours

reflecting these organisational values. Examples include being very supportive and helpful

when an employee has a problem, being fair when distributing rewards and benefits to

employees, being open and honest when communicating to employees, making sacrifices to

benefit others, talking about the importance of the organisational values, setting clear ethical

standards for the work, keeping actions consistent with espoused organisational values, and

holding people accountable for ethical and unethical actions (Brown et al., 2005).

Ethical leadership includes transactional leader behaviours such as setting ethical

standards and holding followers accountable for ethical conduct. Resick, Hanges, Dickson,

and Mitchelson (2006) identified six key attributes that characterised ethical leadership which

includes character and integrity; ethical awareness; community/people-orientation;

motivation; encouraging and empowering; and managing ethical accountability. These unique

qualities that characterised ethical leaders make them different from other leaders of

corporate organisations. The role of ethical leadership in influencing the performance of the

employees rests on the pedestal of behavioural motivation, inspiration and individualized

consideration (Brown et al., 2005). Bello (2012) asserts that the idealized influence allows a

more reliable and integrative process of business practice based on moral characterization,

strong concerns for self and others and a demonstration of ethical values. In view of this,

Bennis and Nanus (2007) highlight a foundational tenet that is embedded in the vision
 11

creation and vision fulfilment. With regard to this, it is plausible to note that ethical

leadership influences a host of employees by considerable using rewards, formal authority

and sanction to influence the compliance and behaviour of the employee.

Work engagement is the driver behind an organisation’s competitiveness and success,

in that an engaged employee demonstrates the willingness to put extra effort into the work

and to reach optimal performance. Because the relationship between leaders and followers is

so important in the company, leadership is a key aspects that should be considered, especially

when it can contribute to the presence of employee work engagement. Ethical leadership is

considered important, because, together with leader integrity, it promotes effective interaction

between leaders and their followers. According to Brown and Trevino (2006), ethical leaders

are perceived as honest and trustworthy, which is necessary for healthy working

relationships.

When employees are treated in a fair and respectful way by their leaders, they are likely

to think about their relationship with their leader in terms of social exchange (Blau, 1964)

rather than economic exchange. Furthermore, they are likely to reciprocate by putting extra

effort into their work, through enhanced job dedication (Brown et al., 2005) and willing to

become more actively engaged in work (Macey et al., 2009). When an employee has the

freedom to make decisions and take action without consulting the supervisor all the time, it

can result in work engagement (Macey et al., 2009). Bellingham (2003) states that ethical

leaders want to empower employees through training and support and they want to provide

freedom to their employees to show initiative through responsibility and authority. Ethical

leaders take their followers into consideration and through open communication (Brown &

Trevino, 2006) make it clear what the organisation’s goals are and what is expected from

subordinates, which leads to employee engagement in their work (Macey et al., 2009). Brown

et al. (2005) found a positive correlation between ethical leadership and job dedication, which
 12

is a major element of work engagement (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2003). Through regression

analysis, Den Hartog and Belschak (2012) confirmed that ethical leadership has a positive

relationship with work engagement. They found that followers tend to report higher

engagement in their work when they perceive their leaders as acting ethically.

Another variable that is of interest in the present study is occupational self-efficacy.

Self-efficacy is the belief that one is capable of performing in a certain manner to attain a

certain set of goals. Occupational self-efficacy can be used to assess “self-efficacy over

different jobs, organisations, levels, etc. Occupational self-efficacy can be used to predict

work related variables such as commitment and performance which shows that occupational

self-efficacy has value in organisation and it is not only relevant for existing staff but also for

the selection of staff.

Occupational self-efficacy of an employee is how the individual believe in his or her

capability to perform in a certain manner so as to achieve the goals of his or her organisation.

According to Schwarzer and Hallum (2008), people will be more incline to take on a task if

they believe they can succeed in their occupation. People generally avoid tasks where their

self-efficacy is low but engage in tasks where their self-efficacy is high. Occupational self-

efficacy beliefs can be viewed as a major mediator of behaviour and behaviour change

(Schwarzer & Hallum, 2008).

Research shows that the “optimum” level of self-efficacy is a little above ability. This

encourages tackling challenging tasks and gaining valuable experience. People with high

sense of self-efficacy persist longer in facing obstacles and set themselves more challenging

goals. Therefore high occupational self-efficacy of an employee should be able to face

obstacles he or she found in their workplace and be able to tackle it and set to achieve

challenging goals. The stronger the self-efficacy or mastery experience, the more active the
 13

effort will be. Self-efficacy beliefs can enhance human accomplishment and well-being in

countless ways like they influence the choices people make and the courses of action they

pursue. One tends to select tasks and activities in which one feels competent and confident

and avoid those in which one does not feel confident about.

According to Schyns and Collani (2002), occupational self-efficacy is a broad concept

that related to various jobs and professions. Occupational self-efficacy can be seen as a sense

of confidence that is related to the workplace and can be viewed as one’s sense of conviction

that one can perform behaviour that are relevant to one’s job and that one has the ability to

successfully fulfil work-related tasks (Rigotti, Schyns, & Mohr, 2008). It is important to

study occupational self-efficacy in order to enhance our understanding of well-being, to

enable people positive well-being and to reduce the effect of burnout. Self-efficacy is

concerned with how effectively an individual will be able to deal with a prospective situation

or problem. Bandura (1997) states that self-efficacy should not be seen as a trait but must be

seen as a state which is open to development.

Self-efficacy affects how people respond to failure. For example, a person with high

self-efficacy in regards to mathematics may attribute a poor result to a harder than usual test,

feeling sick, insufficient preparation while a person with low self-efficacy will attribute the

result to poor ability in mathematics (Luthans & Peterson, 2002). According to Grassley

(2008), general self-efficacy is commonly understood as domain specific, that is, one can

have more or less firm self-beliefs in different domain or particular situation of functioning,

therefore occupational self-efficacy goes with the general self-efficacy proposed by Grassley

but it occurs or focuses on worker’s self-efficacy towards his or her workplace or

organisation.
 14

It is one thing to consider the way the employees perceive their job and it is another to

consider the way they perceive themselves. If an employee does see chances of carrying out a

particular job successfully, then there is little or no chances of getting engaged in that work.

Employees work engagement level can be determined by their level of self-efficacy, and of

course high level of self-efficacy comes with commitment and motivation to accomplish a

task.

Statement of the Problem

The dearth in literature regarding workers in manufacturing industries’ work

engagement and other potential factors intended to increase or decrease this engagement, is a

major problem the current research is confronted with.

It is on these account that the present research seeks to examine the predictive roles

organisational constraint, ethical leadership and occupational self-efficacy on work

engagement among workers in manufacturing industries. To fill the gaps in literature, this

study attempts to provide answers to the following research questions:

1. Will organisational constraints significantly predict work engagement among workers

in manufacturing industries?

2. Will ethical leadership significantly predict work engagement among workers in

manufacturing industries?

3. Will occupational self-efficacy predict work engagement among workers in

manufacturing industries?

Purpose of Study

The purpose of the present study is to investigate the role organisational constraint,

ethical leadership and occupational self-efficacy will play in predicting work engagement

among workers in manufacturing industries. It therefore seeks to examine whether:

 15

1. Organisational constraint will significantly predict work engagement among workers in

manufacturing industries

2. Ethical leadership will significantly predict work engagement among workers in

manufacturing industries

3. Occupational self-efficacy will significantly predict work engagement among workers in

manufacturing industries

Operational Definition of Terms

Work engagement: This refers to a positive, fulfilling, wok-related state of mind that is

characterised by vigour, dedication, and absorption as measured by the Utrecht Work

Engagement Scale (UWES) (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2006)

Organisational constraint: This refers to situations or things that prevent employees from

translating ability and effort into high levels of job performance as measured by

Organisational Constraint Scale (OCS) (Spector & Jex, 1998)

Ethical leadership: This refers to the demonstration of normatively appropriate conduct

through personal actions and interpersonal relationships, and the promotion of such conduct

to followers through two-way communication, reinforcement, and decision making as

measured by Ethical Leadership Scale (ELS) (Brown et al., 2005)

Occupational self-efficacy: This refers to as individual’s confidence or belief in his or her

ability to successfully fulfil a task in an organisation as measured by Occupational Self-

efficacy Scale – Short Form (OSS-SF) (Rigotti et al., 2008)

 16

CHAPTER TWO

Literature Review

The current chapter tries to review and summarize some of these theories and the

empirical works on these issues of interest in this study. It is divided into two major sections,

namely; Theoretical Review and Empirical Review.

Theoretical Review

For the purpose of this research, the following theories will be reviewed:

 Hobfoll’s conservation theory (Hobfoll, 1989)

 Exchange theory of leadership style (Emerson, 1976)

 Social Cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986)

 Trait theory of leadership style (Gader, 1989)

 Social Learning theory (Bandura, 1977, 1986)

Hobfoll’s Conservation Theory

The Conservation of Resources Theory by Stevan Hobfoll has grown in popularity, as

a new theory of stress, since the 1980s. COR theory is a comprehensive motivational stress

theory. At the foundation of the theory is the assertion that individuals strive to obtain, retain,

protect and foster those things they most value. These valued entities are termed resources. A

general assumption of Hobfoll's theory is that an individual has some resources at his/her

disposal which he/she greatly appreciates and is inclined to protect and never loose them.

According to Hobfoll’s (1989) conservation of resource (COR) model, people strive to build

and protect their resources. Hobfoll and Freedy (1993) argued that major sources of job stress

are (a) being threatened with resource loss, (b) an actual loss of the resources required to

sustain the individual, or (c) failing to gain resources after resource investment. From this
 17

perspective, resources are defined as things that one values, specifically objects, states, and

conditions (Halbesleben, Paustian-Underdal, & Westman, 2014). COR states that loss of

these types of resources will drive individuals into certain levels of stress (Hobfoll, 1989)

This perspective bears marked similarity with the P–E fit model, specifically in that

both approaches examine the interaction of the person and the environment, and the degree of

correspondence between demands in the environment and the individual’s resources to deal

with those demands. One key difference (outlined by Hobfoll, 2001) is that the P–E fit model

focuses predominantly on people’s perceptions of fit, whereas COR theory incorporates more

objective indicators of actual fit. Nevertheless, there is considerable overlap between these

approaches.

Exchange Theory

Exchange theory was first promulgated by Emerson (1976) and was applied by Saks

(2006) to explain the sources of engagement. According to exchange theory, as individuals

interact overtime, they experience and reciprocate the support and assistance of the other

person, usually referred to as the norm of reciprocity (Blau, 1983). For example, if employees

perceive justice and fairness in the organisation, these employees will experience an

obligation reciprocate at some time in the future, offering a form of assistance that is equal in

magnitude. If this norm of reciprocity is fulfilled, a trusting and loyal relationship evokes.

Saks (2006) maintained that engagement on an employee might represent a form of

obligation to the organisation. That is, if organisation offer support to their employees, these

employees feel obliged to become cognitively, emotionally, and physically engaged in their

work role. They feel they should direct constructive behaviours, such as positive attitudes,

towards the organisation. Consistent with this perspective, when organisations do offer
 18

support and resources, employees do indeed report levels of engagement (Saks, 2006). The

exchange theory also states that employees who are provided with enriched and challenging

jobs will feel obliged to respond with higher levels of engagement.

According to exchange theory, when both parties abide by the exchange rules, the result

will be a more trusting and loyal relationship and mutual commitments (Cropanzo &

Mitchell, 2005). Hence, individuals who are more engaged are likely to be in more trusting

and high-equality relationships with their employer and will, therefore, be more likely to

report more positive attitudes and intentions towards the organisation,

Social Cognitive Theory

Albert Bandura (1986) defined self-efficacy as one’s belief in one’s ability to succeed

in specific situations. One’s sense of self-efficacy can play a role in how one approaches

goals, tasks and challenges. Self-efficacy beliefs provide the foundation for human

motivation, well-being and personal accomplishments. This is because unless people believe

that their actions can produce outcomes they desire, they have little incentive to act or to

persevere in the face of difficulties. The theory of self-efficacy lies at the center of Bandura’s

social cognitive theory, which emphasizes the role of observational learning and social

experience in the development of personality by the actions that the individual has observed

in others. Because self-efficacy is developed from external experiences and self-perception

and is influential in determining the outcome of many events, it is an important aspect of

social cognitive theory. Self-efficacy represents the personal perception of external social

factors.

According to Bandura’s theory, people with high self-efficacy that is those who believe

they can perform well are more likely to view difficult tasks as something to be mastered
 19

rather than something to be avoided. Self-efficacy beliefs help determine the outcomes one

expects. Confident individuals anticipate successful outcomes. Those confident in their

academic skills expect high marks on exams and expect the quality of their work reap

personal and professional benefits while those who lack confidence in their academic skills

get low grades before they begin an examination or enrol in a course. This aspect of self-

efficacy plays a pivotal role in social cognitive theory. In his latest book, Self-Efficacy: The

Exercise of Control (Freeman, 1997), Bandura provides a detailed conceptual analysis and

empirical overview of how self-efficacy operates in concert with socio-cognitive

determinants represented by social cognitive theory in influencing human actions, adaptation,

and change.

Trait Theory of Leadership Style

The trait theory approach to leadership was one of the earliest theories of leadership,

although it is not fully an articulated theory with well-developed hypothesis. The trait

approach formed the basis of most early leadership research (Gader, 1989). This approach

focuses on the personal attribute (or traits) of a leader such as physical or personal

characteristics, competence, and values. It views leadership solely from the perception of the

individual leader. Implicit in this approach is the assumption that traits produce patterns of

behaviour that are consistent across situations. That is, leadership traits are considered to be

enduring characteristics that people are born with and that remain relatively stable over time

(Muchinsky, 1983).

Trait researchers’ often developed lists of characteristics that they believed were related

to successful leadership. In creating researches mixed together very different attributes. For

example, that list included some leadership traits that are aspects of behaviour and skills, in
 20

addition to other traits that were related to temperaments and intellectual ability. These lists

of traits typically included characteristics such as self-confidence, intelligence, ambition,

perseverance, emotional stability, creativity and motivation.

Social Learning Theory

This theory was proposed by Albert Bandura (1977, 1986). According to social

learning theory, anything can be learned through direct observation of behaviours and its

consequences. Social learning theory posits that people learn through observing others’

behaviour, attitudes and outcomes of those behaviours. ‘Most human behaviour is learned

observationally through modelling: from observing others, one forms an idea of how new

behaviours are performed, and on later occasions, this coded information serves as a guide for

action’ (Bandura, 1977 p. 22). Social learning theory explains human behaviour in terms of

cognitive, behavioural and environmental influences.

Brown et al. (2005) used this social learning theory to explain the influence of ethical

leadership on employee job performance. According to this theory, ethical leadership can

lead to job performance. Employees can learn from their leaders on how to perform their

jobs. This process can surely occur when leaders act as role models, by virtue of their

position and roles in the organisation. Through this process, followers can learn what

behaviours are rewarded, expected and punished naturally. By engaging in fair, just, caring

behaviours towards followers and creating a fair working culture, ethical leaders become the

source of ethical conduct and emulation spontaneously. A key point of the departure of the

social learning perspective is that leaders influence their followers by way of demonstrating

appropriate standards so that employees learn and imitate what to do and what not to do by

observing their leaders’ behaviour and this in turn strengthens employee job performance
 21

(Brown et al., 2005). In particular, because of leaders’ role of authority and the power to

reward and punish, employees pay close attention to and mimic leaders’ behaviour by

engaging in activities that are rewarded and avoiding those that are punished in the

organisation, importantly, these rewards do not need to be direct but can also learned

indirectly in the organisation by observing how others in the organisation are disciplined for

non-compliance and rewarded for doing what is ‘right’. Similarly, a social learning

perspective on ethical leadership proposes that ethical leaders are likely to influence

followers’ self-efficacy and performance because they are attractive and legitimate role

models that seek to help employees reach their potential at work and improve in their job

performance.

Empirical Review

The review of relevant empirical studies is organised under three sub headings:

1. Organisational constraint and work engagement

2. Ethical leadership and work engagement

3. Occupational self-efficacy and work engagement

Organisational Constraint and Work Engagement

Boermans et al. (2014) explored the effects of collective team work engagement and

organisational constraints during military deployment on individual‐level psychological

outcomes afterwards. Participants were 971 Dutch peacekeepers within 93 teams who were

deployed between the end of 2008 and beginning of 2010, for an average of 4 months, in the

International Security Assistance Force. Surveys were administered 2 months into

 22

deployment and 6 months afterwards. Multi‐level regression analyses demonstrated that team

work engagement during deployment moderated the relation between organisational

constraints and post‐deployment fatigue symptoms. Team members reported less fatigue

symptoms after deployment if they were part of highly engaged teams during deployment,

particularly when concerns about organisational constraints during deployment were high. In

contrast, low team work engagement was related to more fatigue symptoms, particularly

when concerns about organisational constraints were high. Contrary to expectations, no

effects for team work engagement or organisational constraints were found for post‐traumatic

growth.

Elena, Ines, Cinzia, & Piergiorgio (2013) conducted a study to compare work

engagement and occupational stress perceptions of healthcare professional categories. A

cross‐sectional survey research was conducted with self‐report questionnaires. The Maslach

Burnout Inventory–General Survey, the Areas of Worklife Scale and four scales from the

Occupational Stress Indicator were administered to a sample of 198 hospital staff (registered

nurses, nurse aides, physicians and physiotherapists), of which 110 participated in the study.

The most significant predictors of energy were workload, mental health and job satisfaction;

the best predictors of involvement were community, workload, mental health and job

satisfaction; professional efficacy was best predicted by values and job satisfaction. In

relation to the second aim, physiotherapists had the highest levels of occupational stress and

disengagement from their work, while nurse aides were the most work‐engaged and job‐

satisfied professional category, with positive perceptions of the work environment.

Padula, et al (2012) evaluated the association between occupational stress and work

engagement. Participated in this study were 457 male and female workers of a metallurgical

industry. Subjects answered personal data, and the Job Stress Scale and Utrecht Work
 23

Engagement Scale were applied. Results showed an association between occupational stress

and work engagement (P=0,001). The way the individual deals with his frustrations, or rather

the work engagement, is associated with the occupational stress.

Coetzee & de Villiers (2010) examined the relationship between employees’ sources

of job stress, work engagement and career orientations and how they differ with respect to

these variables in terms of socio-demographic contextual factors such as gender, race,

employment status and age. A sample of 90 employees participated in this study, and a

Sources of Job Stress Scale, the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale and the Career Orientations

Inventory were administered. The results indicated a significant relationship between the

participants’ sources of job stress, levels of work engagement and career orientations.

Significant differences regarding these variables were also detected between males and

females, blacks and whites, temporary and permanently employed participants and the

various age groups.

Schaufeli & Bakker (2004) conducted a study which focuses on burnout and its

positive antipode - engagement. A model was tested in which burnout and engagement have

different predictors and different possible consequences. Structural equation modelling was

used to simultaneously analyse data from four independent occupational samples (total N ¼

1698). Results confirm the hypothesized model indicating that: (1) burnout and engagement

are negatively related, sharing between 10 per cent and 25 per cent of their variances; (2)

burnout is mainly predicted by job demands but also by lack of job resources, whereas

engagement is exclusively predicted by available job resources; (3) burnout is related to

health problems as well as to turnover intention, whereas engagement is related only to the

latter; (4) burnout mediates the relationship between job demands and health problems,

whereas engagement mediates the relationship between job resources and turnover intention.

The fact that burnout and engagement exhibit different patterns of possible causes and
 24

consequences implies that different intervention strategies should be used when burnout is to

be reduced or engagement is to be enhanced

Ethical Leadership and Work Engagement

Amos, Gardielle, and Bright (2017) investigated how leader integrity and ethical

leadership can influence trust in the leader and employee work engagement. Data were

collected using an electronic web-based questionnaire completed by 204 employees from

various business organisations. Data were analysed by means of item analysis and

confirmatory factor analysis conducted via structural equation modelling. High levels of

reliability were found for the measurement scales. Good model fit was demonstrated for the

measurement and structural models. Empirical support was found for all the postulated

relationships in the structural model. The findings emphasise the key role played by ethical

leaders in creating an ethical and trusting work climate conducive for employee engagement.

Engelbrecht, Heine, and Mahembe (2014) conducted a study to investigate the

relationship between ethical leadership and trust in the leader and the effect these constructs

have on the work engagement of employees. The study on the role of ethical leadership

practices on employee engagement was motivated by the need to create an engaged

workforce and a trusting work environment. Data was collected using an electronic web-

based questionnaire comprising three scales, namely the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale

(UWES), Leader Trust Scale (LTS) and the Leadership of Ethics Scale (LES). In total, 204

completed questionnaires were returned. Data was analysed by means of item and

confirmatory factor analysis conducted via structural equation modelling (SEM). High levels

of reliability were found for all the measurement scales used. The results from the structural

equation modelling (SEM) indicated positive relationships between trust in the leader and
 25

work engagement, between ethical leadership and work engagement and between ethical

leadership and trust in the leader. The findings emphasise the role played by ethical

leadership behaviour of managers in promoting work engagement through the creation of

employee relationships anchored on trust. Future studies should develop the theoretical model

further by identifying other variables that influence work engagement

Jen-Wei, Shu-Ching, Jyh-Huei, and Yu Ha (2014) conducted a study to draw on ethical

leadership and regulatory focus theory perspectives to examine the mediating role of work

engagement in the relationship between ethical leadership and voice behaviour, and it

addresses the moderating effect of promotion focus on the relationship between ethical

leadership and work engagement. The paper uses a sample of 239 supervisor-subordinate

dyads collected from a large economic research institution in northern Taiwan to test all

hypotheses. The paper finds that ethical leadership facilitates subordinates to engage in their

work and encourages subordinates to speak up. This study also reveals a positive relationship

between ethical leadership and work engagement that is moderated by the subordinate's self-

regulatory focus, which is driven by a focus on promotion. The paper extends ethical

leadership theory by considering that work engagement serves as a cognitive motivational

underpinning in support of the link between ethical leadership and voice behaviour. The

results provide new and deeper insights in explaining the impact of ethical leadership on

voice behaviour by strengthening the mediating role of work engagement.

den Hartog and Belschak (2012) in two multi-source studies, first tested a model

suggesting that work engagement acts as a mediator in the relationships between ethical

leadership and employee initiative (a form of organisational citizenship behaviour) as well as

counterproductive work behaviour. Next, they focus on whether ethical leadership always

forms an authentic expression of an ethical identity, thus in the second study, they added

leader Machiavellianism to the model. For Machiavellian leaders, the publicly expressed
 26

identity of ethical leadership is inconsistent with the privately held unethical Machiavellian

norms. Literature on surface acting suggests people can at least to some extent pick up on

such inauthentic displays, making the effects less strong. We thus argue that the positive

effects of ethical leader behaviour are likely to be suppressed when leaders are highly

Machiavellian. Support for this moderated mediation model was found: The effects of ethical

leader behaviour on engagement are less strong when ethical leaders are high as opposed to

low on Machiavellianism.

Occupational Self-efficacy and Work Engagement

Chaudhary, Santosh, and Mukesh (2013a) proposed a model and tested it with

occupational self-efficacy as the intervening variable between human resource development

climate and work engagement. The sample for the study consisted of 214 business executives

from both public and private sector manufacturing and service organisations with 81.7 % of

them being males. Hypotheses were tested using a cross sectional design with the help of

hierarchical regression analysis. The series of hierarchical regression analyses revealed that

self-efficacy partially mediates the climate-engagement relationship. In addition, results of

moderated regression analysis provided support for moderating effects of self-efficacy, with

the relationship between climate and engagement being stronger for low self-efficacious

individuals as compared to high self-efficacious ones.

Chaudhary, Santosh, and Mukesh (2013b) analysed the impact of occupational self-

efficacy and its factors on employee engagement. The survey was completed by 78 middle

and senior level executives in select Indian organisations from both private and public

sectors. The Utrecht Work Engagement Scale and Occupational Self-Efficacy Scale were

used. The results clearly show that occupational self-efficacy is correlated positively and is a
 27

significant predictor of employee engagement. The six factors of occupational self-efficacy

were all significantly related to employee engagement. Of the six factors of occupational self-

efficacy confidence was found to be most strong predictor of employee engagement. The

small sample size of poses a limit to the extent, to which results can be generalized. This

study has demonstrated the importance of occupational self-efficacy in enhancing the

engagement level of employees. Thus the managers can plan the interventions accordingly to

enhance the employee engagement. This paper enhances one's knowledge of factors linked to

employee engagement.

Chaudhary, Santosh, and Mukesh (2012a) investigated the effects of occupational self-

efficacy and human resource development (HRD) climate on work engagement among

business executives of select business organisations in India. In addition, it aims to attempt to

examine the mediating effect of HRD climate on self-efficacy and work engagement

relationship. The sample consisted of 150 business executives from both public and private

sector manufacturing and service organisations in India. Data were collected through both

personal visits and online questionnaires. Correlation and regression analyses were used to

test the research hypotheses. Specifically, Baron and Kenny's method was used for testing the

hypotheses of mediation. A significant relationship was found between all variables in the

study. All the study hypotheses were supported. HRD climate was found to partially mediate

the relationship between occupational self‐efficacy and work engagement. Interestingly, both

HRD climate and self‐efficacy affect work engagement both directly and indirectly through

influencing the other.

Chaudhary, Santosh, and Mukesh (2012b) conducted a study of 126 business

executives to examine whether an engaged workforce could be differentiated from its

disengaged counterpart based on occupational self-efficacy, which is an individual difference

variable. They anticipated that work engagement would be characterised by high

 28

occupational self-efficacy and therefore predicted that it would positively correlate with

occupational self-efficacy. Fisher's linear discriminant analysis was used to distinguish

engaged employees from disengaged ones. The results showed that the command and

adaptability dimensions of self-efficacy are found to be the most important in distinguishing

engaged employees from their non-engaged counterparts. A logistic regression analysis was

also carried out to determine whether socio-demographic variables contributed to group

differences. The results of the logistic regression supported the findings of the discriminant

analysis.

Simbula, Guglielmi, and Schaufeli (2011) tested the motivational process of the Job

Demands-Resources model among Italian schoolteachers (N ¼ 104). Specifically, it aims to

test how job resources, self-efficacy and work engagement are related over time. Results of

structural equation modelling analysis showed that the model with reciprocal relationships

between resources and work engagement exhibited the best fit with the data. Job resources

and self-efficacy had a short- (4 months) and longer term (8 months) lagged effect on work

engagement, but the reverse pattern was true as well: Work engagement had a short and long-

term lagged effect on job resources and self-efficacy. These findings suggest that is important

to think in terms of reciprocity: Resourceful environments and self-efficacy beliefs mean

engaged teachers, and vice versa.

 29

Summary of Literature Review

The theories reviewed are Hobfoll’s conservation of resource model, Exchange theory,

Social Cognitive theory, Trait theory of leadership style and Social Learning theory.

Hobfoll’s (1989) conservation of resource (COR) model posits that people strive to

build and protect their resources. On the basis of the COR model, organisational constraints,

such as lack of supplies, poor equipment, and inadequate help from others, are obstacles in

the workplace that “threaten resource depletion whereby personal investment is not

compensated.

Exchange theory uphold that a give and take (transaction) between the organisation and

employees, foster work engagement, indicating that in such an atmosphere, reciprocity

thrives from which evolves a trusting and loyal friendship.

Social cognitive theory postulates that people with high self-efficacy that is those who

believe they can perform well are more likely to view difficult tasks as something to be

mastered rather than something to be avoided.

Trait theory of leadership style postulates that leadership traits exists and produce

patterns of behaviour that are consistent across situations, indicating that focus was on the

personal attributes of leaders such as physical and personal characteristics, competences and

values.

Social learning theory holds that leaders act as role models, by virtue of their position

and roles in the organisation. Through this process followers can learn what behaviours are

rewarded, expected and punished naturally.

The studies reviewed showed that ethical leadership is positively related to work

engagement (Engelbrecht, Heine, &Mahembe, 2014; Jen-Wei, Shu-Ching, Jyh-Huei, &Yu

 30

Ha,2014). Occupational self-efficacy was also proven in several studies to be positively

related to work engagement (Chaudhary, Santosh, & 2012; Simbula, Guglielmi, &Schaufeli,

2011). No previous study has been conducted on organisational constraint and work

engagement, to the knowledge of the researcher.

This study will investigate the role of organisational constraint, ethical leadership and

occupational self-efficacy in predicting work engagement among workers in manufacturing

industries.

Hypotheses

The following hypotheses will be tested:

1. Organisational constraint will not significantly predict work engagement among

workers in manufacturing industries.

2. Ethical leadership will not significantly predict work engagement among workers in

manufacturing industries.

3. Occupational self-efficacy will not significantly predict work engagement among

workers in manufacturing industries.

 31

CHAPTER THREE

Method

Participants

A total number of three hundred and fifty participants comprising 222 males (63.4%)

and 128 females (36.6%) participated in the present study. The participants were selected

using convenience sampling technique consisting of those who were willing to participate

were selected. The average respondent age of the sample was 30.79 (SD = 3.33, ranging from

24 to 42 years). The participants were selected in four different industries, they include:

Aritec Ventures Nigeria limited, Paxpen duo enterprises, Streams Ultimate concerns, and

Abundance Globe, all in Delta State. Participation was voluntary. With respect to the marital

status of the participants, 74.0% (n=259) were married, 22.0% (n=77) were not married,

while 4.0% (n=14) ticked for others. Then for the level of education attained by the

participants, 12.9% (n=45) has attained the HND/ Bachelor’s degree while 87.1% (n=305)

has attained the masters level.

Instruments

A total of four (4) scales were used in this present study: The Utrecht Work

Engagement Scale – 9 ((UWES-9); Organisational Constraint Scale (OCS); Ethical

Leadership Scale (ELS); and Occupational Self-efficacy Scale – Short Form (OSS-SF). A

demographic data questionnaire was used to obtain information about the participants’

gender, age, marital status and highest educational qualification.

Utrecht Work Engagement Scale – 9 ((UWES-9)

Utrecht Work Engagement Scale - 9 (UWES-9) by Schaufeli and Bakker (2006) was

used to measure work engagement. A sample of item from the scale is “At my work, I feel
 32

bursting with energy”. Items on three dimensions, vigour, dedication, and absorption are

scored in a seven-point frequency rating scale, ranging from (0) never to (6) always.

Schaufeli and Bakker found a high internal consistency of .85 for the UWES-9. In order to

adapt the UWES-9 for Nigerian samples, it was subjected to reliability test by Ugwu (2013).

The result of the reliability test that was run on UWES-9 using 268 respondents, the item-

total correlation ranged from .41 to .66. For the individual scales, vigour dimension has a

Cronbach’s of .76, dedication has .79, and absorption has .74. The 9 items yielded a

Cronbach’s of .91. The mean score of the three UWES subscales is the bases for interpreting

the scores of respondents. This is achieved by adding the scores on the particular scale or

subscale and dividing the sum by the number of items of the scale or subscale. Hence, the

UWES yields three subscale (vigour, dedication and absorption) scores and/or a total score

that range between 0 and 6 that totals 102 for the full version and 54 for the short version.

High scores on the UWES means that the respondent feels engaged in his/her work while low

score means disengagement at work. A test-retest reliability coefficient of .87 after three

weeks interval was also obtained. This agrees with earlier studies (e.g. Schaufeli, et al., 2002)

which asserted that UWES-9 has acceptable psychometric properties.

In the present study, a revalidation study was conducted by the researcher and the data

obtained from the pilot study conducted using 70 participants from Wintech Industries

Limited in Delta State was subjected to reliability analysis. Cronbach’s Alpha of .83 was

obtained for the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale, which shows that the items are internally

consistent. (See Appendix B for details).

Organisational Constraint Scale (OCS)

A commonly used measure of organisational constraint is Spector and Jex’s (1998)

OCS. The Organisational Constraints Scale is an 11-item scale covering each of the

constraints areas discussed in Peters and O'Connor (1980). Each area is assessed with a single
 33

item, and a total constraint score is computed as the sum. For each item, the respondent is

asked to indicate how often it is difficult or impossible to do his or her job because of each

item. Response choices range from less than once per month or never, coded 1, to several

times per day, coded 5. High scores represent high levels of constraints, with a possible range

of scores from 11 to 55.

Although the OCS yields a total score, the individual items are not considered parallel

forms of the same underlying construct. Rather this scale was viewed as a causal indicator

scale (Bollen & Lennox, 1991), rather than the traditional effect indicator scale. With the

latter, items are said to be replicates of one another, and in structural equation modeling

terms, responses are the effects of the underlying construct. A causal indicator scale consists

of items which are not manifestations of the same underlying construct, but which combined

constitute the construct (i.e., the items cause the construct). Thus coefficient alpha is not an

appropriate index of reliability for such scales. For example, it would not be said that having

poor equipment is equivalent to having inadequate training. However, having both represents

a higher level of constraints than only having one

In the present study, a pilot study was conducted by the researcher using participants

from Wintech Industries Limited and the data collected was subjected to reliability analysis.

Cronbach’s Alpha of .81 was obtained for the Organisational Constraints Scale, which shows

that the items are internally consistent. (See appendix B for details).

Ethical Leadership Scale (ELS)

This is a 10-item scale developed by Brown et al. (2005) to measure ethical leadership

that could apply to both formal and informal leaders at all organisational levels. Participants

are required to indicate on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5

(strongly agree) with higher scores indicating greater ethical leadership behaviour. Examples
 34

of items in ELS include, “Has the best interest of employees in mind” and “disciplines

employees who violate ethical standards”. Reliability estimates indicated that ELS

demonstrated excellent internal consistency and were stable over 3 studies <=.92, N=127;

<=.91, N=184; <=.94, N=87 respectively (Brown et al., 2005).

In the present study, a pilot study was conducted by the researcher using participants

from Wintech Industries Limited and the data collected was subjected to reliability analysis.

Cronbach’s Alpha of .75 was obtained for the Ethical Leadership Scale, which shows that the

items are internally consistent. (See appendix B for details).

Occupational Self-efficacy Scale – Short Form (OSS-SF)

The Occupational Self-efficacy Scale – Short form (OSS-SF; Rigotti et al., 2008) refers

to a reduced form of the OSS (Schyns & von Collani, 2002). The OSS-SF is composed of six

items that are answered on a Likert scale of six points, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6

(strongly agree). Higher scores indicated greater levels of self-efficacy while lower scores

indicated lower levels of self-efficacy. An example of some of the items of the scale is ‘When

I am confronted with a problem in my job, I can usually find different solutions’.

In the present study, a pilot study was conducted by the researcher using participants

from Wintech Industries Limited and the data collected was subjected to reliability analysis.

Cronbach’s Alpha of .76 was obtained for the Occupational Self-efficacy Scale – Short form,

which shows that the items are internally consistent. (See appendix B for details)

Procedure

The researcher introduced himself to each manager/director of five different industries

in Delta, and sought to be permitted to distribute questionnaires to the workers. After all the

approval was given. The manager assigned a junior staff to help the researcher distribute the

questionnaire.
 35

Three hundred and fifty (350) copies of questionnaire containing the four instruments

were distributed to the employees using convenient sampling techniques. Those who gave

consent were given the questionnaires to fill. The researcher explained the nature of the study

to the participants, what they were required to do and who was undertaking the research.

Participants were informed that they were free to withdraw at any stage of the study, without

any prejudice, and that their personal information would remain confidential. They were also

encouraged to answer the questions as honestly as possible.

All the participants voluntarily agreed to participate in the study, and were not provided

with any reward for participation. The researcher returned a week later to collect the filled

questionnaire from the junior staff that distributed them. The researcher encouraged

participants to respond to all the items in order to obtain complete data. In total, 350

questionnaires that were administered were all properly completed and returned to the

researcher. A pilot study was conducted to validate the scales. The participants used for main

study were different from the participants used for the pilot study.

Design/Statistics

This is primarily a survey research, and cross-sectional design was adopted.

Hierarchical multiple linear regression was used to test the hypotheses.

 36

CHAPTER FOUR
Results
Means, standard deviations, and correlations among the study variables are presented

in Table 1. The results of hierarchical multiple regression appear in Table 2.

Table 1
Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations among the Study Variables
Variable M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6
1 Gender — — —
2 Age 30.79 3.34 -.11* —
3 Education — — -.03 -.09 —
4 Organisational constraints 35.49 6.25 -.02 .11* .05 —
5 Ethical leadership 21.3743 6.95 .12* -.01 .01 .13* —
6 Occupational self-efficacy 19.99 4.95 -.06 .14** .16** .16** -.17** —
7 Work engagement 29.77 10.87 .08 .02 .21*** -.11* -.01 .30***
Note: N = 350, * = p ≤ .05 (two-tailed), ** = p < .01 (two-tailed), *** = p ≤ .001 (two-tailed). Gender was coded 0 = male, 1 =
female; age was coded using number of years, such that higher scores represent older age; education was coded 1 =
SSCE/WAEC, 2 = OND/NCE, 3 = HND/Bachelor Degree, 4 = Masters/PhD, such that higher scores represent higher
educational qualification.

The results of the correlations in Table 1 indicated that among the demographic

variables, only education was positively and significantly correlated with work engagement

(r = .21, p < .001) whereas gender and age were not significantly correlated with work

engagement. The correlations between organisational constraints and work engagement was

negative and significant (r = -.11, p = .046). Ethical leadership was not significantly

correlated with work engagement. There was a positive and significant correlation between

occupational self-efficacy and work engagement (r = .30, p < .001).

 37

Table 2

Hierarchical Multiple Regression for Predictors of Work Engagement

Variable Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4
β β β β
Controls
Gender .09 .09 .09 .09
Age .05 .06 .06 .06
Education .22*** .22*** .22*** .17***

Predictors
Organisational constraints -.12* -.12* -.17***
Ethical leadership -.01 .05
Occupational self-efficacy .31***

Adjusted R2 .044 .056 .054 .138

∆R2 .052 .015 .000 .085
∆F 6.388*** 5.460* .016 34.523***
Note.* = p< .05, ** = p < .01, *** = p < .001.

The results of the hierarchical multiple regression in Table 2 in which work

engagement was the outcome variable indicated that the demographic variables entered as

controls (i.e., gender, age, and education), in Step 1 of the equation, collectively accounted

for 4.4% variance in work engagement. Only education made unique positive and significant

contribution to the prediction of work engagement (β = .22 p< .001), whereas gender and age

did not contribute significantly to the prediction of work engagement. When organisational

constraints was entered in Step 2 of the equation as predictor, it accounted for additional

1.5% variance in work engagement below that of the control variables. Organisational

constraints also negatively and significantly predicted work engagement (β = -.12, p = .020),

thus, H1 was not confirmed. The introduction of ethical leadership in Step 3 of the equation as

a predictor did not account for any additional variance in work engagement. Ethical

leadership was also not a significant predictor of work engagement, thus H2 was confirmed.

Finally, when occupational self-efficacy was entered in Step 4 of the equation; it contributed

additional 8.5% variance in work engagement over and above those of the control variables
 38

and organisational constraints. Occupational self-efficacy also positively and significantly

predicted work engagement (β = .31, p< .001), thus H3 was not confirmed.
 39

CHAPTER FIVE

Discussion

The present study examined organisational constraint, ethical leadership and

occupational self-efficacy as predictors of work engagement. The result revealed that

organisational constraint negatively and significantly predicted work engagement. Thus the

first hypothesis which states that organisational constraint will not significantly predict work

engagement was not confirmed. This result suggests that when there are high levels of

organisational constraints which represent situations or things that prevent employees from

translating ability and effort into high levels of job performance, there tends to be a decrease

in work engagement. No worker enjoys working in a stressful working condition and as such

tries to avoid or dodge work in every possible way, and such issues might affect the

industries level of output.

The present study further reveal that ethical leadership was not a significant predictor of

work engagement. Thus the second hypothesis which states that ethical leadership will not

significantly predict work engagement was confirmed. The result disagrees with the findings

by Amos et al. (2017) where there result findings emphasised the key role played by ethical

leaders in creating an ethical and trusting work climate conducive for employee engagement.

Also the work disagrees with the work of Engelbrecht et al. (2014) whose result emphasised

the role played by ethical leadership behaviour of managers in promoting work engagement

through the creation of employee relationships anchored on trust. The finding of the study

rather suggests that being an ethical leader does not necessarily determine if the workers will

be engaged with their works.

The result of the study also revealed that occupational self-efficacy would positively

predicted work engagement. Thus the third hypothesis which states that occupational self-
 40

efficacy will not significantly predict work engagement was not confirmed. The finding is

consistent with the work of Chaudhary et al. (2013b) that revealed in their work that

occupational self-efficacy is correlated positively and is a significant predictor of employee

engagement. This finding means that occupational self-efficacy can determine how an

employee gets to be engaged or attached to their work and as such can lead to either high or

low productivity and efficiency. Self-efficacy takes a lot of confidence and motivation to be

firmly gotten and people with high level of self-efficacy does whatever it takes to carry out

their task. They are very much engaged with their jobs and would go to whatever level to

attain a certain level of success

Implication of Study

The result of the study indicated that organisational constraint was a negative and

significant predictor of work engagement. Therefore, when organisational constraints - which

represent situations or things that prevent employees from translating ability and effort into

high levels of job performance – increases, then work engagement tends to reduce. Physical

and mental constraints are suggested to be reduced drastically in the work setting so as to be

able to aid in maximum concentration and production of adequate and efficient results. When

they are ignored, they might increase at certain levels and when they do, they get to a point

where the employees start to dodge getting engaged in certain works. For instance, in a

situation where maximum comfort is needed so as to be able to produce an accurate work, but

then there is no light, no airy work space and a whole lot of work being assigned to one

person. In such situation, the person tends to be overloaded and might start to dodge or lapse

in certain areas. Such situations can bring about conflict because both the employer and the

employee will not be satisfied with the outcome. So with the finding of this study, it can then

be further suggested that organisational constraint be thoroughly controlled for in the

workplace.
 41

The study also indicated that adoption of ethical leadership style will not significantly

promote work engagement. Therefore, it does not necessarily influence work engagement.

The result highlights that the importance of ethical leadership in an organisation especially in

industries is not a factor to be highly stressed for the improvement of work efficiency. From

the finding of this study, it can be said that being an ethical leader does not give a full

assurance that the employees will be actively engaged with their works. Personality differs in

the work environment and as such, some people might like to adhere to certain ethics which

were laid down for the carrying out of a particular job while some others stand to oppose

these ideas and as such tend to fall out with the organisation. Other types of leadership might

successfully predict or be associated with work engagement, but ethical leadership was found

to be not associated to work engagement

Occupational self-efficacy was found to be positive predictor of work engagement.

Therefore the belief that one is capable of performing in a certain manner to attain a certain

set of goals will positive promote work engagement in industries. Occupational self-efficacy

has value in industries and it is not only relevant for existing staff but also for the selection of

staff. What one thinks about one self and how one perceives their capability can go a long

way to add to the success of a particular company. For instance, when one is faced with a

task, and the person has a very low self-efficacy, chances are that the person might have the

abilities to carry out such jobs successfully, but the mere cognitive thought and low

motivation might then hinder the outcome of the task. People with high self-efficacy, even

when with low abilities and opportunities stand a higher chance of carrying out tasks

successfully, because they will be willing to go to whatever extent it takes to get the job done.

Those with high self-efficacy also appear to be highly creative, because out of the idea that

they desperately want to get things done might then end up achieving other things or even

bringing up better ways of carrying out the task.

 42

Limitation of the Study

The first limitation of the study is the sample size used. A total number of three

hundred and fifty (350) industrial workers were used in the study. This number is not a fair

representation of the industrial workers in Delta state and Nigeria in general. Also the attitude

of industrial managers/owners towards research and test taking attitude of some workers

affected the responses.

Another limitation includes financial and time constraint, the study was not extended to

other industries across Delta because of limited time and finance. Only five industries were

covered in Delta. The use of quantitative self-administered questionnaires did not allow for

the researcher to fully explore the issues and reasons affecting work engagement. Due to the

design that was adopted, the participants are highly vulnerable to selection bias and

influences beyond the control of the researcher.

Suggestions for Further Research

In line with the limitations outlined in the study, further research are encouraged to

use more sample size while conducting similar studies to establish well-grounded

generalisation. Future research should also devise a means of convincing managers and

industry owners to permit the workers to engage effectively in the research

Also researchers should use longitudinal studies and devote more resources in

conducting a study using similar construct by so doing they could extend research to other

geographical location for pattern analysis and interpretation as this will unravel the networks

leading to work engagement. Focus groups can also be conducted to understand how workers

(employees) feel about their work. The design being used should be checked and well

managed
 43

Summary and conclusion

The present study examined the role of organisational constraint, ethical leadership and

occupational self-efficacy as predictors of work engagement among industrial workers. The

study aims to add to the existing literature. The following theories were reviewed in this work

to explain the variables: Exchange theory of leadership style, Social Cognitive theory, Trait

theory of leadership style, and Social Learning theory.

Results showed that organisational constraint negatively and significantly predicted

work engagement; that ethical leadership was not a significant predictor of work engagement;

and that occupational self-efficacy positively predicted work engagement. Among the three

hypothesis formulated and variables studied, the first hypothesis on organisational constraint

was not confirmed. The second hypothesis on ethical leadership was confirmed. The third

hypothesis on occupational self-efficacy was not confirmed. Therefore, organisational

constraint and occupational self-efficacy are good predictors of work engagement among

industrial workers.
 44

References

Amos, S. E., Gardielle, H., & Bright, M. (2017) "Integrity, ethical leadership, trust and work
engagement". Leadership & Organisation Development Journal, 38(3), 368-379.

Avolio, B. J., Walumbwa, F. O., & Weber, T. J. (2009). Leadership: Current theories,
research and future directions. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 421-449

Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The job demands resources model: State of the art.
Journal of Management Psychology, 22, 309-328

Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2008). Towards a model at work engagement. Career
Development International, 13, 209-223.

Bakker, A. B., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2008). Work engagement: An American concept in

occupational health psychology. Work & stress, 22, 187-200

Bakker, A. B., & Xanthopoulou, D. (2009). The crossover of daily work engagement. Test of
an actor-partner interdependent model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(5), 15-17.

Bakker, A. B., Westman, M., & Van Emmerik, I. J. H. (2009). Advancements in crossover
theory. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 24, 206 –219.

Bandura, A. (1997). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall

Bellingham, R. (2003). Ethical Leadership: Rebuilding trust in corporations. Amherst, MA,

HRD Press.

Bello, S. M. (2012). Impact of ethical leadership in employee job performance. International

Journal of Business and Social Sciences, 3(11), 228-236

Bennis, W., & Nanus, B. (2007). Leaders: Strategies for taking charge (2 nded.) New York:
Harpercollins

Best, R. G., Stapleton, L. M., & Downey, R. G. (2005). Core self-evaluations and job
burnout: The test of alternative models. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology,
10, 441– 451

Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and Power in Social Life. New York, NY, Wiley & Sons.

Boermans, S. M., Kamphuis, W., Delahaij, R., van den Berg, C., & Euwema, M. C. (2014).
Team spirit makes the difference: The interactive effects of team work engagement and
organisational constraints during a military operation on psychological outcomes
afterwards. Stress and Health, 30(5), 386-396.

Bollen, K., & Lennox, R. (1991). Conventional wisdom on measurement: A structural

equation perspective. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 305-314.

Brown, M. E., & Trevino, L. K. (2006). Ethical leadership: A review and future directions:
The Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 595-616.
 45

Brown, M. E., Trevino, L. K., & Harrison, D. (2005). Ethical leadership: A social learning
perspective for construct development and testing. Organisational Behaviour and
Human Decision Process, 97, 117-134

Burke, R. J., & Copper, C. L. (2007). Building more effective organisations. Cambridge:
University press

Burton, R. M., & Obel, B. (2001). Organisation. Encyclopaedia of operations research &
management services, 3, 589-595

Carsten, J. M., & Spector, P. E. (1987). Unemployment, job satisfaction, and employee
turnover: A meta-analytic test of the Muchinsky model. Journal of Applied Psychology,
72, 374-381.

Chaudhary, R., Santosh, R., & Mukesh, K. B. (2012a). Relationships between occupational
self-efficacy, human resource development climate, and work engagement, Team
Performance Management: An International Journal, 18(7/8), 370-383.

Chaudhary, R., Santosh, R., & Mukesh, K. B. (2012b). Impact of occupational self-efficacy
on employee engagement: An Indian perspective. Journal of the Indian Academy of
Applied Psychology, 38(2), 329-338.

Chaudhary, R., Santosh, R., & Mukesh, K. B. (2013b). Engaged versus disengaged: The role
of occupational self-efficacy. Asian Academy of Management Journal, 18(1), 91–108

Chaudhary, R., Santosh, R., & Mukesh, K. B. (2013a). HRD Climate, Occupational Self-
Efficacy and Work Engagement: A Study from India. The Psychologist-Manager
Journal, 15(2), 86-105

Ciulla, J. B. (1995). Leadership ethics: Mapping the territory. Business Ethics Quarterly,
5(1), 5-28

Coetzee, M., & de Villiers, M. (2010). Sources of job stress, work engagement and career
orientations of employees in a South African financial institution. Southern African
Business Review, 14(1), 2643-2655.

Daft, R. L. (2004). Organisational theory and design (8thed.) Mason, OH: South-Western

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human
behaviour. New York: Plenum

Demerouti, E., & Cropanzano, G. (2010). The job demands resources model of burnout.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 499-512.

denHartog, D. N., & Belschak, F. D. (2012). Work engagement and Machiavellianism in the
ethical leadership process. Journal of Business Ethics, 107(1), 35-47.

Drucker, P. (2001). The essential Drucker. New York: Happercollins

Elena, F., Ines, G., Cinzia, S., & Piergiorgio, A. (2013). Work engagement and occupational
stress in nurses and other healthcare workers: the role of organisational and personal
factors. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 22(17-18), 2614-2624.
 46

Engelbrecht, A. S., Heine, G., & Mahembe, B. (2014). The influence of ethical leadership on
trust and work engagement: An exploratory study. South African Journal of Industrial
Psychology/ SA TydskrifvirBedryfsielkunde, 40(1), 1210-1219.

Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotion in positive psychology: The broaden-
and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologists, 56, 218-226.

Gader, H. R. (1989). Authentic leadership of perceptors: Predictor of new graduate nurses’

work engagement and job satisfaction. Journal of Nursing Management, 18(8), 993-
1003.

Gadot, E. (2006). Leadership style, organisational politics, and employees’ performance: An

empirical examination of two competing models. Leadership styles, 36(5), 661-683

Grant, A. M., & Ashford, S. J. (2008). The dynamics of proactivity at work research in
organisational behaviour. American Journal of Psychology, 28, 3-34

Grassley, J. (2008). Grandmother breast-feeding support: A gadamerican hermeneutic

analysis of women’s stories health care for women international. Women International
Journal, 29, 841-862

Halbesleben, J. B., Paustian-Underdal, S. C., & Westman, M. (2014). Getting to the "COR":
Understanding the Role of Resources in Conservation of Resources Theory. Journal of
Management, 40 (5): 1334–1364.

Harrad, S. A. (2006). Employee engagement: An interview with David Sharpley. New York:
Nelson Consulting.

Hobfoll, S. E. (2001). The influence of culture, community and the nested-self in the stress
process: Advancing conservation of resources theory. Applied Psychology: An
International Review, 50, 337–421.

Hobfoll, S. (1989). Conservation of Resources. A New attempt at conceptualizing stress. The

American Psychologist, 44 (3): 513–524.

Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress.

American Psychologist, 44, 513–524.

Hobfoll, S. E., & Freedy, J. (1993). Conservation of resources: A general stress theory
applied to burnout. In W. B. Schaufeli, C. Maslach, & T. Marek (Eds.), Professional
burnout: Recent developments in theory and research (pp. 115–129). Philadelphia:
Taylor & Francis.

Hobfoll, S. E., Johnson, R. J., Ennis, N., & Jackson, A. P. (2003). Resource loss, resource
gain, and emotional outcome among inner city women. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 84, 632-643

Ivancevich, J. M., & Matteson, M. T. (1980). Stress and work: A managerial perspective.
Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
 47

Jen-Wei, C., Shu-Ching, C., Jyh-Huei, K., &Yu Ha, C. (2014). Ethical leadership, work
engagement, and voice behaviour. Industrial Management & Data Systems 114(5),
2013-0429

Jex, S. M. (in press). Occupational stress and job performance. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Jex, S. M., & Beehr, T. A. (1991). Emerging theoretical and methodological issues in the
study of work-related stress. Research in Personnel and Human Resources
Management, 9, 311-365.

Kahn, R. L., & Byosiere, P. (1992). Stress in organisations. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M.

Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organisational psychology (2nd ed., Vol. 2,
pp. 571-650). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at

work. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 692-724

Kanungo, R. N. (2001). Ethical values of ethical leaders. Canadian Journal of Administrative

Sciences, 18, 257-260

Ketzenbach, J. R. (2000). Peak performance: Aligning the heart with the minds of your
employees. Boston: Harvard business school press

King, King, Foy, F., Keane, H., & Fairbank, F. (1999).“The Relationship of Time
Management to academic performance of masters level students”. InternationalJournal
of Business and Management Studies 2 (1)657- 684.

Leiter, M. P., & Bakker, A. B. (2010). Work engagement the essential theory of research.
New York: Psychology press

Luthans, F. (2010). Emerging positive organisational behaviour. Journal of Management, 33,

321-349

Luthans, F., & Peterson, S. J. (2002). Employee engagement and manager self-efficacy.
Journal of Management Development, 21(5), 376-387

Macey, W. H., & Schneider, B. (2008). The meaning of employee engagement. Industrial
and Organisational Psychology, 1, 1-30

Macey, W. H., Schneider, B., Barbera, K. M. & Young, S. A. (2009). Employee

Engagement: Tools for analysis, practice and competitive advantage. Wiley-Blackwell,
Oxford press.

Maslach, C., & Leiter, M. P. (1997). The truth about burnout: How organisations cause
personal stress and what to do about it. San Fransisco, C. A: Jossey-Bass

May, D. R., Gilson, R. L., & Harter, L. M. (2004). The psychological conditions of
meaningfulness, safety and availability and the engagement of the human spirit at work.
A longitudinal study. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 70, 149-171

McShane, S. L., & von Glinow, M. A. (2010). Organisational behaviour: Emerging

knowledge and practice for the real world (5thed.) New York: McGraw-Hill
 48

Muchinsky, J. U. (1983). Positive organisation: The role of leader behaviour in work

engagement and retention. Journal of industrial psychology, 37(1), 1-13

Ogbonna, E., & Harris, C. L. (2000). Leadership style, organisational culture and
performance: empirical evidence from UK companies. International Journal of Human
Resource Management, 11(4), 766-788

Padula, R. S., Chiavegato, L. D., Cabral, C. M., Almeid, T., Ortiz, T., & Carregaro, R. L.
(2012). Is occupational stress associated with work engagement? Publication Medicals,
41, 2963-2965.

Parker, S. K., & Ohly, S. (2008). Designing motivating jobs. In R. Kanfer, G. Chen, &
Protchard (Eds), work motivation: Past present and future. Organisational frontier
series.

Peters, L. H., & O'Connor, E. J. (1980). Situational constraints and work outcomes: The
influences of a frequently overlooked construct. Academy of Management Review, 5,
391-397.

Peters, L. H., & O'Connor, E. J. (1988). Measuring work obstacles: Procedures, issues, and
implications. In F. D. Schoorman & B. Schneider (Eds.), Facilitating work
effectiveness (pp. 105-123). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books

Porter, L. W., Lawler, L. E., & Hackmans, J. R. (1975). Behaviour is an organisation. New
York: McGraw-Hill

Resick, C. J., Hanges, P. J., Dickson, M. W., & Mitchelson, J. K. (2006). A cross-cultural
examination of the endorsement of ethical leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, 63,
345-359

Rigotti, T., Schyns, B., & Mohr, G. (2008). A short version of the occupational self-efficacy
scale: Structural and construct validity across five countries. Journal of Career
Assessment, 16(2), 238-255.

Rigotti, T., Schyns, B., & Mohr, G. (2008). A short version of the occupational self-efficacy
scale. Structural and construct validity across five countries. Journal of Career
Assessment, 16, 238-255

Saks, A. M. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of

Managerial Psychology, 21, 186-197

Schaufeli, W. B. & Bakker, A. B. (2004). Job demands, job resources and their relationship
with burnout and engagement: a multi-sample study. Journal of Organisational
Behaviour, 25, 293–315.

Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2001). Work and well-being: Towards a positive
approach in occupational and health psychology. Gedragenorganisatie, 14, 229-253

Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). Utrecht work engagement scale. Preliminary
manual, unpublished manuscript department of psychology. Utrecht University, the
Netherlands
 49

Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2004). Job demands, job resources ad their relationship
with burnout and engagement. A multi-sample study. Journal of organisational
behaviour, 25, 293-298

Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2006). Utrecht Work Engagement Scale. Preliminary
Manual, Occupational Health Psychology Unit. Utrecht University, Utrecht.

Schaufeli, W. B., & Salanova, M. (2007). The measurement of engagement and burnout: a
two sample confirmatory analytic approach. Journal of happiness studies, 3, 71-92

Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., Gonzalez-Roma, V., & Bakker, A. (2002). The measurement
of engagement and burnout: a two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach.
Journal of happiness studies, 3, 71-92

Schwarzer, R., & Hallum, S. (2008). Perceived teacher self-efficacy as a predictor of job
stress and burnout: Mediation analyses. Applied Psychology, 81, 219-227

Schyns, B., & Collani, G. V. (2002). A new occupational self-efficacy scale and its relation to
personality constructs and organisational variables. European journal of work and
organisational psychology, 11, 219-241

Schyns, B., & von Collani, G. (2002). A new occupational self-efficacy scale and its relation
to personality constructs and organisational variables. European Journal of Work and
Organisational Psychology, 11(2), 219-241.

Simbula, S., Guglielmi, D., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2011). 'A three-wave study of job resources,
self-efficacy, and work engagement among Italian schoolteachers'. European Journal
of Work and Organisational Psychology, 20(3), 285-304

Spector, P. E., & Jex, S. M. (1998). Development of four self-report measures of job stressors
and strains: Inter-personal conflict at work scale, Organisational constraints scale,
Quantitative workload inventory, and Physical symptoms inventory. Journal of
Occupational Health Psychology, 3, 356 –367.

Tanner, C., Brugger, A., van Schie, S., & Lebherz, C. (2010). Action speaks louder than
words: The beliefs of ethical behaviours of leaders. Zeitschrift fur Psychologie/Journal
of Psychology, 218(4), 225-233

Ugwu, F. O. (2013). Work engagement in Nigeria: Adaptation of the Utrecht work

engagement scale for Nigerian samples. International Journal of Multidisciplinary
Academic Research, 1, 3-35

Van den Broeck, A., Vansteekiste, M., & De Witte, H. (2008). Self-determination theory: A
theoretical and empirical overview in occupational health psychology, 5, 63-68

Villanova, P., & Roman, M. A. (1993). A meta-analytic review of situational constraints and
work-related outcomes: Alternative approaches to conceptualization. Human Resources
Management Review, 5, 147-175

Wagner, J., & Harter, L. M. (2006). Organisational behaviour at work. A critical

introduction. 2nd ed. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
 50

Wang, H., Law, K. S., Hackett, R. D., Wang, D., & Chen, Z. X. (2005). Leader-member
exchange as a mediator of the relationship between ethical leadership and followers’
performance and organisational citizenship behaviour. Academy of Management
Journal, 48, 420-432

Yukl, G. (2002). Leadership in organisation: Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc