{"id":{"repo_id":"bielefeld","oai_identifier":"oai:pub.uni-bielefeld.de:3003032"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/bielefeld/oai:pub.uni-bielefeld.de:3003032","repository":{"repo_id":"bielefeld","name":"Universität Bielefeld","base_url":"https://pub.uni-bielefeld.de/oai"},"display":{"title":"You Can’t Pour from an Empty Cup: A Resource-Based Perspective on Leader Well-Being","abstract":"“As a vibrant research field in the past few decades, leadership presents a unique opportunity for scholars to develop expertise and change the world” (Zhao & Li, 2019, p. 411). This quotation underlines that, in light of the mounting and increasingly multifaceted challenges confronting organizations, the study of leadership represents a highly relevant field, offering insights that can inform and address urgent practical concerns. The relevance of this area of research has been further emphasized by the global COVID-19 pandemic, which had a major impact on the years 2020 to 2023. The observation that numerous employees, and leaders in particular, experienced elevated levels of demanding challenges and rapid change underscored the importance of leadership behavior and leader decisions for both follower outcomes and leaders themselves (Inceoglu et al., 2021). While research on leader well-being has received increasing attention in the last years, it is still in its infancy. The aim of this dissertation is to contribute to this emerging topic. Due to their dual responsibility for processes and for the people they lead, leaders have a pivotal role within organizations. But they are just as affected as they are accountable. Therefore, we aim to learn more about the context in which leaders operate, their working conditions and their well-being.
Against this backdrop, three studies have been carried out, framed by the Conservation of Resources theory (COR theory; Hobfoll, 1989; Hobfoll et al., 2018):
To capture the aforementioned COVID-19 crisis context in terms of leader-specific demands and leaders’ resources, Study 1 was conducted as a mixed methods study with a sample of 60 leaders from lower and middle management. We hypothesized leaders’ work intensification and emotional demands (i.e., resource-draining factors attributed to requirements from upper organizational levels and to the social interaction with followers) to be related to higher irritation and emotional exhaustion. Consistent with COR theory (here combined with assumptions from the Job Demands-Resources model; Demerouti et al., 2001), we examined organizational instrumental support (i.e., an organizational resource) and occupational self-efficacy (i.e., a personal resource) as possible moderators and assumed a buffering effect on impaired well-being. Our results show that, during the peak phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, leaders experienced work intensification and emotional demands as specific challenges with an impact on their well-being. Organizational instrumental support was able to buffer the health-damaging effects of work intensification, with transparent communication, information, and clear orientation being the most important mechanisms, even for experienced leaders. In the context of high work intensification, occupational self-efficacy exhibited an ambivalent role. Leaders with higher self-efficacy exhibited a stronger positive association with emotional exhaustion.
Based on a person-centered approach, Study 2 aims to explore profiles of both leadership behavior (transformational leadership, abusive supervision) and leader well-being indicators (cognitive irritation, emotional exhaustion). Additionally, we considered whether work intensification, leader autonomy, and psychological contract fulfillment (i.e., resource-draining and resource-creating factors from the leaders’ work context attributed to upper organizational levels) are related to profile membership. The profiles were built using latent profile analysis (LPA) on data from 153 leaders and their 1,077 followers. LPA resulted in an interpretable four-profile solution with the profiles named (1) Good health – constructive leading, (2) Average health – inconsistent leading, (3) Impaired health – constructive leading, and (4) Impaired health – destructive leading. The two groups with the highest sample share – Profiles 1 and 3 – both show highly constructive leadership behavior, but differ significantly in their well-being indicators. Regression analyses showed that work intensification and psychological contract fulfillment are significantly related to profile membership. As work intensification increases, the probability of belonging to a profile with impaired well-being also increases. Conversely, as psychological contract fulfillment increases, the probability of belonging to the Good health – constructive leading profile increases, which underlines the importance of leader-organization reciprocity. Moreover, leaders who experience high levels of work intensification are more likely to be classified as belonging to the Impaired health – destructive leading profile when they also rate their psychological contract fulfillment as low.
Integrating COR theory and assumptions of the Social Identity Theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1986), Study 3 examines how leader and follower team identification jointly moderate the relationship between transformational leadership behavior and leaders’ own well-being. Analyzing multilevel and multisource data from 43 leaders and their 212 followers collected in a daily diary study, we found that transformational leadership was positively related to leader work engagement and negatively related to leader emotional irritation. High follower team identification (i.e., a kind of social resource for leaders resulting from the interaction with followers) strengthened the negative relationship between transformational leadership and leader emotional irritation. The cross-level interaction of leader team identification was not supported. These findings provide a deeper understanding of transformational leadership behavior as a leader’s resource investment combined with leader-follower reciprocity expectations.
Taken together, the studies used a resource-based perspective on leaders themselves and seek to answer what it takes to ensure a comprehensive understanding of good and healthy leadership – with special emphasis on the exchange relationships leaders have due to their specific position. Given the practical relevance previously highlighted, there is a strong focus on practical recommendations derived from the results of the three studies.","abstract_html":"“As a vibrant research field in the past few decades, leadership presents a unique opportunity for scholars to develop expertise and change the world” (Zhao & Li, 2019, p. 411). This quotation underlines that, in light of the mounting and increasingly multifaceted challenges confronting organizations, the study of leadership represents a highly relevant field, offering insights that can inform and address urgent practical concerns. The relevance of this area of research has been further emphasized by the global COVID-19 pandemic, which had a major impact on the years 2020 to 2023. The observation that numerous employees, and leaders in particular, experienced elevated levels of demanding challenges and rapid change underscored the importance of leadership behavior and leader decisions for both follower outcomes and leaders themselves (Inceoglu et al., 2021). While research on leader well-being has received increasing attention in the last years, it is still in its infancy. The aim of this dissertation is to contribute to this emerging topic. Due to their dual responsibility for processes and for the people they lead, leaders have a pivotal role within organizations. But they are just as affected as they are accountable. Therefore, we aim to learn more about the context in which leaders operate, their working conditions and their well-being.<br /><br /> Against this backdrop, three studies have been carried out, framed by the Conservation of Resources theory (COR theory; Hobfoll, 1989; Hobfoll et al., 2018): <br /> To capture the aforementioned COVID-19 crisis context in terms of leader-specific demands and leaders’ resources, Study 1 was conducted as a mixed methods study with a sample of 60 leaders from lower and middle management. We hypothesized leaders’ work intensification and emotional demands (i.e., resource-draining factors attributed to requirements from upper organizational levels and to the social interaction with followers) to be related to higher irritation and emotional exhaustion. Consistent with COR theory (here combined with assumptions from the Job Demands-Resources model; Demerouti et al., 2001), we examined organizational instrumental support (i.e., an organizational resource) and occupational self-efficacy (i.e., a personal resource) as possible moderators and assumed a buffering effect on impaired well-being. Our results show that, during the peak phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, leaders experienced work intensification and emotional demands as specific challenges with an impact on their well-being. Organizational instrumental support was able to buffer the health-damaging effects of work intensification, with transparent communication, information, and clear orientation being the most important mechanisms, even for experienced leaders. In the context of high work intensification, occupational self-efficacy exhibited an ambivalent role. Leaders with higher self-efficacy exhibited a stronger positive association with emotional exhaustion.<br /><br /> Based on a person-centered approach, Study 2 aims to explore profiles of both leadership behavior (transformational leadership, abusive supervision) and leader well-being indicators (cognitive irritation, emotional exhaustion). Additionally, we considered whether work intensification, leader autonomy, and psychological contract fulfillment (i.e., resource-draining and resource-creating factors from the leaders’ work context attributed to upper organizational levels) are related to profile membership. The profiles were built using latent profile analysis (LPA) on data from 153 leaders and their 1,077 followers. LPA resulted in an interpretable four-profile solution with the profiles named (1) Good health – constructive leading, (2) Average health – inconsistent leading, (3) Impaired health – constructive leading, and (4) Impaired health – destructive leading. The two groups with the highest sample share – Profiles 1 and 3 – both show highly constructive leadership behavior, but differ significantly in their well-being indicators. Regression analyses showed that work intensification and psychological contract fulfillment are significantly related to profile membership. As work intensification increases, the probability of belonging to a profile with impaired well-being also increases. Conversely, as psychological contract fulfillment increases, the probability of belonging to the Good health – constructive leading profile increases, which underlines the importance of leader-organization reciprocity. Moreover, leaders who experience high levels of work intensification are more likely to be classified as belonging to the Impaired health – destructive leading profile when they also rate their psychological contract fulfillment as low.<br /><br /> Integrating COR theory and assumptions of the Social Identity Theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1986), Study 3 examines how leader and follower team identification jointly moderate the relationship between transformational leadership behavior and leaders’ own well-being. Analyzing multilevel and multisource data from 43 leaders and their 212 followers collected in a daily diary study, we found that transformational leadership was positively related to leader work engagement and negatively related to leader emotional irritation. High follower team identification (i.e., a kind of social resource for leaders resulting from the interaction with followers) strengthened the negative relationship between transformational leadership and leader emotional irritation. The cross-level interaction of leader team identification was not supported. These findings provide a deeper understanding of transformational leadership behavior as a leader’s resource investment combined with leader-follower reciprocity expectations.<br /><br /> Taken together, the studies used a resource-based perspective on leaders themselves and seek to answer what it takes to ensure a comprehensive understanding of good and healthy leadership – with special emphasis on the exchange relationships leaders have due to their specific position. Given the practical relevance previously highlighted, there is a strong focus on practical recommendations derived from the results of the three studies.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Wittmers, Anja"],"institution":"Universität Bielefeld","degree_name":null,"degree_level":"thesis.doctoral","degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2025,"date_issued":"2025-02-26","date_published":"2025-02-26","updated_at":"2026-07-27T18:50:07Z","subjects":[],"languages":[],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://pub.uni-bielefeld.de/record/3003032","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"source_url"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Wittmers, Anja"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:publisher","label":"Institution","values":["Universitätsbibliothek Bielefeld"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["doctoralThesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["thesis.doctoral"]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["Universität Bielefeld"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["“As a vibrant research field in the past few decades, leadership presents a unique opportunity for scholars to develop expertise and change the world” (Zhao & Li, 2019, p. 411). This quotation underlines that, in light of the mounting and increasingly multifaceted challenges confronting organizations, the study of leadership represents a highly relevant field, offering insights that can inform and address urgent practical concerns. The relevance of this area of research has been further emphasized by the global COVID-19 pandemic, which had a major impact on the years 2020 to 2023. The observation that numerous employees, and leaders in particular, experienced elevated levels of demanding challenges and rapid change underscored the importance of leadership behavior and leader decisions for both follower outcomes and leaders themselves (Inceoglu et al., 2021). While research on leader well-being has received increasing attention in the last years, it is still in its infancy. The aim of this dissertation is to contribute to this emerging topic. Due to their dual responsibility for processes and for the people they lead, leaders have a pivotal role within organizations. But they are just as affected as they are accountable. Therefore, we aim to learn more about the context in which leaders operate, their working conditions and their well-being.
Against this backdrop, three studies have been carried out, framed by the Conservation of Resources theory (COR theory; Hobfoll, 1989; Hobfoll et al., 2018):
To capture the aforementioned COVID-19 crisis context in terms of leader-specific demands and leaders’ resources, Study 1 was conducted as a mixed methods study with a sample of 60 leaders from lower and middle management. We hypothesized leaders’ work intensification and emotional demands (i.e., resource-draining factors attributed to requirements from upper organizational levels and to the social interaction with followers) to be related to higher irritation and emotional exhaustion. Consistent with COR theory (here combined with assumptions from the Job Demands-Resources model; Demerouti et al., 2001), we examined organizational instrumental support (i.e., an organizational resource) and occupational self-efficacy (i.e., a personal resource) as possible moderators and assumed a buffering effect on impaired well-being. Our results show that, during the peak phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, leaders experienced work intensification and emotional demands as specific challenges with an impact on their well-being. Organizational instrumental support was able to buffer the health-damaging effects of work intensification, with transparent communication, information, and clear orientation being the most important mechanisms, even for experienced leaders. In the context of high work intensification, occupational self-efficacy exhibited an ambivalent role. Leaders with higher self-efficacy exhibited a stronger positive association with emotional exhaustion.
Based on a person-centered approach, Study 2 aims to explore profiles of both leadership behavior (transformational leadership, abusive supervision) and leader well-being indicators (cognitive irritation, emotional exhaustion). Additionally, we considered whether work intensification, leader autonomy, and psychological contract fulfillment (i.e., resource-draining and resource-creating factors from the leaders’ work context attributed to upper organizational levels) are related to profile membership. The profiles were built using latent profile analysis (LPA) on data from 153 leaders and their 1,077 followers. LPA resulted in an interpretable four-profile solution with the profiles named (1) Good health – constructive leading, (2) Average health – inconsistent leading, (3) Impaired health – constructive leading, and (4) Impaired health – destructive leading. The two groups with the highest sample share – Profiles 1 and 3 – both show highly constructive leadership behavior, but differ significantly in their well-being indicators. Regression analyses showed that work intensification and psychological contract fulfillment are significantly related to profile membership. As work intensification increases, the probability of belonging to a profile with impaired well-being also increases. Conversely, as psychological contract fulfillment increases, the probability of belonging to the Good health – constructive leading profile increases, which underlines the importance of leader-organization reciprocity. Moreover, leaders who experience high levels of work intensification are more likely to be classified as belonging to the Impaired health – destructive leading profile when they also rate their psychological contract fulfillment as low.
Integrating COR theory and assumptions of the Social Identity Theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1986), Study 3 examines how leader and follower team identification jointly moderate the relationship between transformational leadership behavior and leaders’ own well-being. Analyzing multilevel and multisource data from 43 leaders and their 212 followers collected in a daily diary study, we found that transformational leadership was positively related to leader work engagement and negatively related to leader emotional irritation. High follower team identification (i.e., a kind of social resource for leaders resulting from the interaction with followers) strengthened the negative relationship between transformational leadership and leader emotional irritation. The cross-level interaction of leader team identification was not supported. These findings provide a deeper understanding of transformational leadership behavior as a leader’s resource investment combined with leader-follower reciprocity expectations.
Taken together, the studies used a resource-based perspective on leaders themselves and seek to answer what it takes to ensure a comprehensive understanding of good and healthy leadership – with special emphasis on the exchange relationships leaders have due to their specific position. Given the practical relevance previously highlighted, there is a strong focus on practical recommendations derived from the results of the three studies."]},{"key":"dc:format.medium","label":"Dc Format Medium","values":["application/pdf"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["You Can’t Pour from an Empty Cup: A Resource-Based Perspective on Leader Well-Being"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:creator":["Wittmers, Anja"],"dc:description.abstract":["“As a vibrant research field in the past few decades, leadership presents a unique opportunity for scholars to develop expertise and change the world” (Zhao & Li, 2019, p. 411). This quotation underlines that, in light of the mounting and increasingly multifaceted challenges confronting organizations, the study of leadership represents a highly relevant field, offering insights that can inform and address urgent practical concerns. The relevance of this area of research has been further emphasized by the global COVID-19 pandemic, which had a major impact on the years 2020 to 2023. The observation that numerous employees, and leaders in particular, experienced elevated levels of demanding challenges and rapid change underscored the importance of leadership behavior and leader decisions for both follower outcomes and leaders themselves (Inceoglu et al., 2021). While research on leader well-being has received increasing attention in the last years, it is still in its infancy. The aim of this dissertation is to contribute to this emerging topic. Due to their dual responsibility for processes and for the people they lead, leaders have a pivotal role within organizations. But they are just as affected as they are accountable. Therefore, we aim to learn more about the context in which leaders operate, their working conditions and their well-being.
Against this backdrop, three studies have been carried out, framed by the Conservation of Resources theory (COR theory; Hobfoll, 1989; Hobfoll et al., 2018):
To capture the aforementioned COVID-19 crisis context in terms of leader-specific demands and leaders’ resources, Study 1 was conducted as a mixed methods study with a sample of 60 leaders from lower and middle management. We hypothesized leaders’ work intensification and emotional demands (i.e., resource-draining factors attributed to requirements from upper organizational levels and to the social interaction with followers) to be related to higher irritation and emotional exhaustion. Consistent with COR theory (here combined with assumptions from the Job Demands-Resources model; Demerouti et al., 2001), we examined organizational instrumental support (i.e., an organizational resource) and occupational self-efficacy (i.e., a personal resource) as possible moderators and assumed a buffering effect on impaired well-being. Our results show that, during the peak phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, leaders experienced work intensification and emotional demands as specific challenges with an impact on their well-being. Organizational instrumental support was able to buffer the health-damaging effects of work intensification, with transparent communication, information, and clear orientation being the most important mechanisms, even for experienced leaders. In the context of high work intensification, occupational self-efficacy exhibited an ambivalent role. Leaders with higher self-efficacy exhibited a stronger positive association with emotional exhaustion.
Based on a person-centered approach, Study 2 aims to explore profiles of both leadership behavior (transformational leadership, abusive supervision) and leader well-being indicators (cognitive irritation, emotional exhaustion). Additionally, we considered whether work intensification, leader autonomy, and psychological contract fulfillment (i.e., resource-draining and resource-creating factors from the leaders’ work context attributed to upper organizational levels) are related to profile membership. The profiles were built using latent profile analysis (LPA) on data from 153 leaders and their 1,077 followers. LPA resulted in an interpretable four-profile solution with the profiles named (1) Good health – constructive leading, (2) Average health – inconsistent leading, (3) Impaired health – constructive leading, and (4) Impaired health – destructive leading. The two groups with the highest sample share – Profiles 1 and 3 – both show highly constructive leadership behavior, but differ significantly in their well-being indicators. Regression analyses showed that work intensification and psychological contract fulfillment are significantly related to profile membership. As work intensification increases, the probability of belonging to a profile with impaired well-being also increases. Conversely, as psychological contract fulfillment increases, the probability of belonging to the Good health – constructive leading profile increases, which underlines the importance of leader-organization reciprocity. Moreover, leaders who experience high levels of work intensification are more likely to be classified as belonging to the Impaired health – destructive leading profile when they also rate their psychological contract fulfillment as low.
Integrating COR theory and assumptions of the Social Identity Theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1986), Study 3 examines how leader and follower team identification jointly moderate the relationship between transformational leadership behavior and leaders’ own well-being. Analyzing multilevel and multisource data from 43 leaders and their 212 followers collected in a daily diary study, we found that transformational leadership was positively related to leader work engagement and negatively related to leader emotional irritation. High follower team identification (i.e., a kind of social resource for leaders resulting from the interaction with followers) strengthened the negative relationship between transformational leadership and leader emotional irritation. The cross-level interaction of leader team identification was not supported. These findings provide a deeper understanding of transformational leadership behavior as a leader’s resource investment combined with leader-follower reciprocity expectations.
Taken together, the studies used a resource-based perspective on leaders themselves and seek to answer what it takes to ensure a comprehensive understanding of good and healthy leadership – with special emphasis on the exchange relationships leaders have due to their specific position. Given the practical relevance previously highlighted, there is a strong focus on practical recommendations derived from the results of the three studies."],"dc:format.medium":["application/pdf"],"dc:publisher":["Universitätsbibliothek Bielefeld"],"dc:title":["You Can’t Pour from an Empty Cup: A Resource-Based Perspective on Leader Well-Being"],"dc:type":["doctoralThesis"],"thesis:degree_level":["thesis.doctoral"],"thesis:institution_name":["Universität Bielefeld"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-27T18:50:07Z"}