How transformational leaders get employees to take initiative and display creativity: the catalytic role of work overload
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This study investigates the mediating role of personal initiative taking in the link between employees' exposure to transformational leadership and their engagement in creative behavior, as well as a potential catalytic role of perceived work overload in this process. Design/methodology/approach The research hypotheses were tested with survey data collected among employees of a large organization that operates in the telecommunications sector. Findings Transformational leadership translates into enhanced creative work efforts among employees, because these employees adopt an action-based approach toward work. This mediating role of personal initiative taking is particularly prominent among employees who encounter excessive workloads in their daily jobs, because their initiative and creativity promise solutions to this resource-draining work situation. Practical implications For human resource managers, this study reveals that employees who go out of their way to address problem situations offer an important means by which a leadership style that inspires and challenges followers can be leveraged to produce enhanced creative outcomes. It also pinpoints how this process can be triggered by employees' beliefs that work demands are excessive. Originality/value This study adds to prior research by detailing a hitherto overlooked factor (personal initiative) and catalyst (perceived work overload), related to the translation of transformational leadership into increased creative behavior.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".