چشم انداز مدیریت دولتی

تحلیل رابطه بین مهارت‌های رهبری پایدار و هم‌آفرینی با میانجی‌گری اعتمادشناختی در بین اعضای هیأت علمی دانشگاه بیرجند درسال 1399

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار، گروه مدیریت آموزشی، دانشکده علوم تربیتی و روانشناسی، دانشگاه بیرجند، بیرجند، خراسان جنوبی.

2 کارشناس ارشد مدیریت آموزشی، گروه مدیریت آموزشی، دانشکده علوم تربیتی و روانشناسی، دانشگاه بیرجند، بیرجند، خراسان جنوبی

چکیده

هدف: پژوهش حاضر با هدف تحلیل رابطه بین مهارت‌های رهبری پایدار و مؤلفه‌های هم‌­آفرینی با نقش میانجی اعتماد شناختی از دیدگاه اعضای هیأت علمی دانشگاه بیرجند انجام گرفت.
طراحی/روش­‌شناسی/رویکرد: روش پژوهش توصیفی- همبستگی بود. جامعه آماری پژوهش شامل کلیه اعضای هیأت علمی دانشگاه بیرجند در سال تحصیلی 98-99 به تعداد 323 نفر بودند که با استفاده از روش نمونه­‌گیری تصادفی ساده تعداد 230 نفر انتخاب شدند. برای سنجش متغیرهای پژوهش از پرسش­نامه محقق‌­ساخته مهارت‌های رهبری پایدار با پایایی 93/0، پرسشنامه هم­‌آفرینی طاهرپور با پایایی 95/0 و پرسشنامه اعتماد شناختی یانگ و ماس‌هولدر با پایایی 80/0 استفاده شد. روایی محتوایی پرسشنامه محقق‌ساخته توسط متخصصان تایید شد و روایی سازه نیز با استفاده از تحلیل عاملی تأییدی مورد تایید قرار گرفت. ضریب پایایی پرسشنامه‌­ها با استفاده از ضریب آلفای کرونباخ بررسی شد. تجزیه و تحلیل داده‌­ها در سطح توصیفی و سطح استنباطی انجام گرفتند.
یافته‌­های پژوهش: مقایسه ضرایب استاندارد مستقیم با ضرایب استاندارد غیرمستقیم نشان داد که اعتماد شناختی نقش میانجی ایفا می­‌کند. با توجه به ضریب استاندارد 47/0 در سطح خطای کوچکتر از 01/0، مهارت‌های رهبری پایدار پیش‌بینی‌­کننده هم‌­آفرینی بود و همچنین با ضریب استاندارد 60/0 اعتماد شناختی را پیش‌بینی می‌کرد. ضریب استاندارد اعتماد شناختی و هم‌­آفرینی نیز 24/0 و معنی‌­دار بود. در خصوص الگوی پیشنهادی پژوهش روابط بررسی گردید و الگو از برازش لازم برخوردار بود.
پیامدهای عملی: با بهره‌­گیری از مهارت‌های رهبری پایدار می­‌توان زمینه اعتماد شناختی بین ذی‌نفعان را تضمین کرد و میزان هم­‌آفرینی و اشتراک دانش و مهارت‌ها را ارتقاء بخشید.
ابتکار یا ارزش مقاله: در این مطالعه برای اولین بار متغیر مهارت‌های رهبری پایدار مورد بررسی قرار گرفته است و سنجه ویژه­ای برای این امر طراحی و اعتباریابی شده است. همچنین برای نخستین بار این چند متغیر به صورت یکجا در میان اعضای هیات علمی دانشگاه‌ها مورد بررسی قرار گرفته است.
محدودیت‌­ها: از روش‌های کیفی در گردآوری داده­‌ها مانند مصاحبه استفاده نشد. اثرات نمونه­‌گیری و خطای اندازه‌گیری، گستردگی آموزش عالی ایران، پر­هزینه بودن جمع‌­آوری داده­‌ها، کمبود مطالعات انجام شده و عدم همکاری خبرگان آموزش عالی از جمله محدودیت­‌های پژوهش حاضر بود.
نوع مقاله: پژوهشی

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Analysis relationship between Sustainable leadership Skills And Co-creation with Mediation of Cognition-Based Trust

نویسندگان [English]

  • Fatemeh Taherpour 1
  • Hojjat Nasehyan 2

1 Department of Educational Sciences. Faculty of Education and Psychology. University of Birjand, Iran

2 Master of Educational Management, Birjand University, Birjand, South Khorasan, Iran

چکیده [English]

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between Sustainable leadership Skills and Co-creation with mediating role of Cognition-based trust in the perspective of faculty members of Birjand University.
Design/Methodology/Approach: The research method was descriptive - correlation. The statistical population of the study consisted of all faculty members of Birjand university at 2019-2020, which were selected by a simple random sampling method of 230 persons. In order to measure the Sustainable leadership Skills variable, a Researcher - Made Questionnaire with reliability of 93% , For measuring Co-creation Taherpour questionnaire with reliability of 95% and Cognition-based trust of the Yang & Mossholder  questionnaire was used with reliability of 80%. Content validity of the questionnaires was confirmed by experts and construct validity was confirmed by confirmatory factor analysis. the Reliability coefficient of the Questionnaires was investigated using Cronbach's Alpha coefficient.
Research Findings: Comparison of direct standard coefficients with indirect standard coefficients showed that Cognition-based trust plays a mediator role. According to the standard coefficient of 0/47 at the smaller error level than 0.01, Sustainable leadership Skills were the antecedents of Co-creation and also with a standard coefficient of 0.60 of Cognition-based trust. The Standardcoefficient of Cognition-based trust and Co-creation was also 0/24 and meaningful. Regarding to the proposed model, the relationships were studied and the model was fitted.
Limitations & Consequences: Not using qualitative methods in data collection such as interviews, the effects of the sample size and error rate, the prevalence of data collection, the lack of data collection, lack of studies and lack of cooperation of experts of higher education were among the limitation of this study
Practical Consequences: With the usage of sustainable leadership skills, we can guarantee the relationship between stakeholder’s Cognition-based trust and organization structure and enhance co-creation and knowledge and Skills sharing.
Innovation or value of the Article: In this study, for the first time, Sustainable Leadership Skill’s, variables have been investigated and a special measure is designed and fabricated. for the first time, the number of variables have been studied in one place among faculty members of the university.
Paper Type: Research Article

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Sustainable leadership Skills
  • Co-creation
  • Cognition-based trust
  • Faculty members
  • University of Birjand
  1. Akgün , A., Keskin, H., Byrne, J., & Imamoglu , S. (2007). Antecedents and consequences of team potency in software development projects. Information & Management, 44(7), 646-656. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2007.08.001
  2. Avery, G., & Bergsteiner, H. (2011). Sustainable leadership practices for enhancing business resilience and performance. Strategy & Leadership, 39(3), 5-15. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10878571111128766
  3. Bushman, R., Piotroski, J., & Smith, A. (2004). What determines corporate transparency? Journal of accounting research, 42(2), 207-252. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-679X.2004.00136.x
  4. Bligh, M. C. (2017). Leadership and trust. In Leadership today.21-42 doi:10.1007/978-3-319-31036-7_2
  5. Chou, H.-W., Lin, Y.-H., Chang, H.-H., & Chuang, W.-W. (2013). Transformational Leadership and Team Performance: The Mediating Roles of Cognitive Trust and Collective Efficacy. SAGE Open, 1-10. doi:10.1177/2158244013497027.
  6. Clutterbuck , D., & Hirst, S. (2002). Leadership communication: A status report. Journal of Communication, 6(4), 351-354. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13632540210807170
  7. Dalati , S., Raudeliūnienė , J., & Davidavičienė , V. (2017). Sustainable leadership, organizational trust on job satisfaction: empirical evidence from higher education institutions in Syria. Business, Management and Education, 15(1), 14-27. doi:10.3846/bme.2017.360
  8. Driskell , J., Goodwin , G., Salas, E., & O'Shea , P. (2006). What makes a good team player? Personality and team effectiveness. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 10(4), 249-271. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1089-2699.10.4.249
  9. Edelenbos, J., & Klijn , E.-H. (2007). Trust in complex decision-making networks: A theoretical and empirical exploration. Administration & Society, 39(1), 25-50. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399706294460
  10. Erdem, F., & Ozen, J. (2003). Cognitive and affective dimensions of trust in developing team performance. Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 9(5/6), 131-135. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/13527590310493846
  11. Ebrahimi, S. A., Mohammadi, F. A., & Haji, P. I. (2012). A Study Of The Role Of Confidence In Occupational Knowledge Sharing (A Case Study Of Tarbiat Modarres University),Quaterley A Research Quaterley In Military Managment,12(45),135-161. (in Persian)
  12. Farid, T., Iqbal, S., Khan, A., Ma, J., Khattak, A., & Ud Din, M. (2020). The Impact of Authentic Leadership on Organizational Citizenship Behaviors: The Mediating Role of Affective Cognitive. Frontiers in Psychology, 11(1975), 1-25. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01975
  13. Ferdig, M. (2007). Sustainability Leadership: Co-creating a Sustainable Future. Journal of Change Management, 7(1), 25-35. doi:10.1080/14697010701233809
  14. Gerard, L., McMillan, J., & D’Annunzio-Green , N. (2017). Conceptualising sustainable leadership. Industrial and Commercial Training, 49(3), 116-126. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/ICT-12-2016-0079
  15. Harvey, Kendra.(2018). Sustainable Leadership And The Relationship To Profitability U.S. Banking Institutions.Doctoral Study Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Business Administration, Liberty University, U.S.A.
  16. Hassanpour, A; Mohammadiha, F, Asgari, M (2018). the explanation of the relationship between transformative leadership and team performance (educational groups)in universities with emphasis on the Cognition-Trust Shahid Sattari Management College, 6 (25),67-86.(in Persian)
  17. Hallinger , P., & Suriyankietkaew , S. (2018). Science mapping of the knowledge base on sustainable leadership, 1990–2018. Sustainability, 10(12), 4846. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/su10124846
  18. Hargreaves , A., & Fink, D. (2004). The seven principles of sustainable leadership. Educational leadership, 61(7), 8-13.
  19. Hargreaves , A., & Fink , D. (2006). Sustainable Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
  20. Harter, J., Schmidt, F., & Hayes , T. (2002). Business-unit-level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of applied psychology, 87(2), 268–279. doi:https://doi: 10.1037//0021-9010.87.2.268
  21. Hardman, G. (2009). Regenerative leadership: An integral theory for transforming people and organizations for sustainability in business, education, and community. Florida: Florida Atlantic University.
  22. Hind, P., Van Velsor, E., Wilson , A., & Lenssen, G. (2009). Developing leaders for sustainable business. Corporate Governance: The international journal of business in society, 9(1), 7-20. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14720700910936029
  23. Jacoub , L. (2014). How cognitive and affective trust in the leader is related to leader behaviors and effectiveness. Retrieved from http://purl.utwente.nl/essays/65415
  24. Jones , S., Michelfelder, D., & Nair, I. (2017). Engineering managers and sustainable systems: the need for and challenges of using an ethical framework for transformative leadership. Journal of Cleaner Production, 140, 205-212. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.02.009
  25. Kantabutra, S., & Saratun, M. (2013). Sustainable leadership: Honeybee practices at Thailand’s oldest university. International Journal of Educational Management, 27(4), 356-376. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/09513541311316304
  26. Khorakian, A; Rahnama, N ;Eslami, G.(2021), Investigating the effect of employees’ empowerment on innovative behavior with mediating role of joy and its positive outcoms, Public Administration Perspective Scientific Quarterly, 3( 47) ,126-154 (in Persian)
  27. Kremer, H., Villamor, I., & Aguinis, H. (2019). Innovation leadership: Best-practice recommendations for promoting employee creativity, voice, and knowledge sharing. Business Horizons, 62(1), 65-74.
  28. Krot, K., & Lewicka, D. (2012). The Importance Of Trust In Manager-Employee Relationships. International Journal of Electronic Business Management, 10(3), 224-233.
  29. Kim, W., & Brymer, R. (2011). The effects of ethical leadership on manager job satisfaction, commitment, behavioral outcomes, and firm performance. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 30(4), 1020-1026. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2011.03.008
  30. Lambert, S. (2011). Sustainable leadership and the implication for the general further education college sector. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 35(1), 131-148. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2010.540319
  31. Levin, D., & Cross, R. (2004). The strength of weak ties you can trust: The mediating role of trust in effective knowledge transfer. Management Science, 50(11), 1477-1490.
  32. Ma , J., Schaubroeck , J., & LeBlanc, C. (2019). Interpersonal Trust in Organizations. Business and Management (pp. 1-26). USA: Oxford Research Encyclopedia . doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780190224851.013.167
  33. McCann, J., & Sweet, M. (2014). The perceptions of ethical and sustainable leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, 121(3), 373-383. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1704-4
  34. Massey, G., Wang , P., & Kyngdon , A. (2019). Conceptualizing and modeling interpersonal trust in exchange relationships: The effects of incomplete model specification. Industrial Marketing Management, 76, 60-71. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2018.06.012
  35. Minoiee, Q; Rezaei Dizgah, Murad and Dadashi Jokandan, Alireza (2018),Explanation of the role of Emotional Committment and Cognition-Trust in relation between satisfaction and intention of knowledge sharing (Case Study: Bank of Ansar province of gilan). Social sciences, 2 (3),31-44 . (in Persian)
  36. Miao, Q., Newman, A., & Huang, X. (2014). The impact of participative leadership on job performance and organizational citizenship behavior: distinguishing between the mediating effects of affective and cognitive trust. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(20), 2769-2810. doi:10.1080/09585192.2014.934890
  37. Mortazavi S., Mohamadzadeh Z.(2014). On The Relationship Of Perception Of Principal's Unethical And Empowering Behaviors To The Teachers’ Cognitive And Affective Trust In Principals. JOURNAL OF NEW APPROACH IN EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION WINTER 2014 , Volume 4 , Number 4 (16); Page(s) 1 To 17.
  38. interpersonal cooperation in organizations. Academy of management journal, 38(1), 24-59. doi:https://doi.org/10.5465/256727
  39. Opoku , A., & Fortune , C. (2011). The implementation of sustainable practices through leadership in construction organizations. Management, 1145-1154.
  40. Payne , A., Storbacka , K., & Frow , P. (2008). Managing the co-creation of value. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 36(1), 83-96. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-007-0070-0
  41. Prahalad, C.K. and Ramaswamy, Venkat (2004).co-creating unique value with
    customers”, Strategy and Leadership, 32(3), 4-9.
  42. Podsakoff, P., MacKenzie, S., Moorman, R., & Fetter , R. (1990). Transformational leader behaviors and their effects on followers' trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviors. The leadership quarterly, 1(2), 107-142. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/1048-9843(90)90009-7
  43. Rutten, W., Martin, H., & Franken, B. (2016). The impact of (low) trust on knowledge sharing. Journal of Knowledge Management, 20(2), 199-214. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-10-2015-0391
  44. Sadler, J. (2012). The importance of multiple leadership roles in fostering participation. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 33(8), 779-796. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/01437731211280839
  45. Saleem , F., Zhang, Y., Gopinath, C., & Adeel, A. (2020). Impact of Servant Leadership on Performance: The Mediating Role of Affective and Cognitive Trust. SAGE Open, 10(1), 1-16. doi:10.1177/2158244019900
  46. Senge, P. (1990). The Fifth Discipline. New York: NY: Double Day.
  47. Suriyankietkaew, S. (2016). Effects of sustainable leadership on customer satisfaction:. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Administration, 8(3), 245-259. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/APJBA-03-2016-0031
  48. Šimanskienė, L., & Župerkienė, E. (2014). Sustainable leadership: the new challenge for organizations. Forum Scientiae Oeconomia, 2(1), 81-93.
  49. Schaubroeck, J., Lam, S., & Peng, A. (2011). Cognition-Based and Affect-Based Trust as Mediators of Leader Behavior Influences on Team Performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(4), 863-871. doi:10.1037/a0022625
  50. Swift, P., & Hwang, A. (2013). The impact of affective and cognitive trust on knowledge sharing and organizational learning. The Learning Organization, 20(1), 20-37. doi:doi:10.1108/09696471311288500
  51. Tanev, S., Bailetti, T., Allen, S., Milyakov, H., Durchev, P., & Ruskov, P. (2011). How do value co-creation activities relate to the perception of firms' innovativeness? Journal of Innovation Economics Management, 7(1), 131-159. doi:http://10.3917/jie.007.0131
  52. Thomas, J. (2016). Sustainable Leadership: sourcing and multiplying happiness. India: Partridge Publishing.
  53. Taherpour, f (2021). Developing and Validation of co-creation Questionnaire, Public Administration Perspective Scientific Quarterly, 12( 1), doi: 10.29252/jpap.2021.100827 . (in Persian)
  54. Varra, L., & Timolo, M. (2017). Sustainable Leadership Practices According International Standard of CSR. Impresa Progetto‐ Electronic Journal of Management, 3, 1-24.
  55. Visser, W., & Courtice, P. (2011). Sustainability Leadership: Linking Theory and Practice. Available at SSRN 1947221. doi:https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1947221
  56. Zhu , W., Newman, A., Miao , Q., & Hooke , A. (2013). Revisiting the mediating role of trust in transformational leadership effects: Do different types of trust make a difference? The Leadership Quarterly, 24(1), 94-105. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2012.08.004
  57. Yang, J., & Mossholder , K. (2010). Examining the effects of trust in leaders: A bases-and-foci approach. The Leadership Quarterly, 21(1), 50-63. doi:https://doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.10.004
  58. Yi, Y., & Gong , T. (2013). Customer value co-creation behavior: Scale development and validation. Journal of Business research, 66(9), 1279-1284. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.02.026
  59. Yukl , G. (2012). Effective leadership behavior: What we know and what questions need more attention. Academy of Management Perspectives, 26(4), 66-85. doi:https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2012.0088
  60. Zulkiffli, N., & Latiffi, A. (2016). Theoretical Review on Sustainable Leadership (SL). MATEC Web of Conferences, 66, 1-8. doi:DOI: 10.1051/matecconf/20166
  61. Zur, A., Leckie , C., & Webster , C. (2012). Cognitive and affective trust between Australian exporters and their overseas buyers. Australasian Marketing Journal (AMJ), 20(1), 73-79.
چشم انداز مدیریت دولتی
دوره 13، شماره 4 - شماره پیاپی 52
دی 1401
صفحه 35-59