CHAPTER 3 HYPOTHESES, MODELS AND METHODS
3.1 Hypotheses and Models
3.1.2 Servant Leadership, Public Service Self-efficacy and Employee
(1) The relationship between public service self-efficacy and employee service performance. Ability has long been considered the most important predictor of employee performance. According to expectation theory (Vroom, 1964) and AMO theory (Pringle & Blumberg, 1982; Bailey, 1993; Appelbaum et al., 2000; Bailey et al., 2001), employee ability is also regarded as an important factor influencing employee performance. However, according to the theory of self-efficacy, effective functioning requires not only the skills but also the efficacy beliefs of using them well. “Perceived self-efficacy is not a measure of the skills one has but a belief about what one can do under different sets of conditions with whatever skills one possesses” (Bandura, 1997, p.31). Therefore, scholars often use self-efficacy instead of ability to study. Whatever other factors may operate as guides and motivators, they are rooted in the core belief that one has the power to produce effects by one’s actions (Bandura, 1999,). “Perceived self-efficacy influences thought processes, the level and persistency of motivation, and affective states, all of which are important contributors to the types of performances that are realized” (Bandura, 1997, p.39).
Self-efficacy can be divided into three levels according to the concreteness of tasks, activities and situations. The first is the self-efficacy of specific tasks, which refers to the belief of completing a specific task. The second is domain self-efficacy, which refers to the self-belief of any task in a domain. The third is general self-belief, which refers to the self-belief of completing any problem in multiple fields (Bandura, 1997).
It is unrealistic to expect personality measures explicate in generalities the contribution of personal factors to psychosocial functioning in diverse task domains and contexts and under different circumstances (Bandura, 1997). So, undifferentiated and
H1 Servant
leadership
Service performance
contextless measures of personal efficacy have little predictive effect. Situational self- efficacy has more predictive effect than general self-efficacy. Therefore, when examining the public service performance of employees in the public sector, the employees' public service self-efficacy is more predictive than the general self-efficacy.
Wang and Xu (2017) also empirically verified that employees' self-perception of service ability is an effective variable to predict service performance. Based on the above analysis, the following hypothesis was proposed:
Hypothesis 2b (H2b): Public service self-efficacy positively affects employee service performance.
(2) The relationship between servant leadership and public service self- efficacy. According to the theory of self-efficacy, self-efficacy beliefs are constructed from four main sources: enactive mastery experiences; vicarious experiences; verbal persuasion and allied types of social influences; and physiological and affective states (Albert Bandura, 1997). Service leadership influence employees' public service self- efficacy by influencing these four sources.
The first source is enactive mastery experiences. It refers to the direct experience of the individual about his own ability through his own action. Enactive mastery experiences are the most important source of efficacy information because they provide the most authentic evidence of whether one person can succeed (Albert Bandura, 1997).
One of the most important characteristics of servant leadership is to help employees grow and succeed (Laub, 1999; M. G. Ehrhart, 2004; R. C. Liden et al., 2008; R. C.
Liden et al., 2015). In the public service sector, such growth and success mainly refer to helping subordinates effectively provide public services and win the favor and praise of the public. These successful experiences will contribute to employees' public service self-efficacy.
The second source is vicarious experiences. Vicarious experience means that individuals form expectations of their own behaviors and results by observing the models’ behaviors and results and obtain the assessments of their abilities to complete corresponding behaviors. Servant leadership advocate serving and helping subordinates, giving back to society, and have conceptual skills (R. K. Greenleaf, 1977; Laub, 1999;
M. G. Ehrhart, 2004; R. C. Liden et al., 2008; R. C. Liden et al., 2015). In general, competent models attract more attention and have a greater educational impact than
incompetent ones (Bandura, 1986). Therefore, the helpful, altruistic and public-welfare modeling behaviors of servant leadership are easy for employees to learn and imitate.
Meanwhile, the successful experience of servant leadership and the respect they gain can also help improve the employees’ public service self-efficacy.
The third source is verbal persuasion. Verbal persuasion refers to convincing the observers that they have the belief to complete the tasks through persuasive means such as encouragements and affirmations. When others, especially those who have important influence on the individual, affirm their abilities to complete the tasks, it is beneficial to improve the self-efficacy of the individual to complete the tasks, especially when the individuals face difficulties (Bandura, 1997). Servant leadership helps subordinates grow and succeed through a series of ways such as verbal encouragement, trust and authorization (M. G. Ehrhart, 2004; R. C. Liden et al., 2008; R. C. Liden et al., 2015).
These encouraging behaviors are bound to increase employees' public service self- efficacy. The fourth source is physiological and affective states. People rely to some extent on physical information conveyed by physical and emotional states to judge their abilities, especially in areas of sports, health and stress response (Bandura, 1997).
Servant leadership focuses on building harmonious relationship between leaders and employees by means of emotional comfort to employees (M. G. Ehrhart, 2004; R. C.
Liden et al., 2008; J. C. S. and J. C. S. Sen Sendjaya, 2008; R. C. Liden et al., 2015).
Good physical and emotional states can improve employees' self-efficacy. Based on the above analysis, the following hypothesis was proposed:
Hypothesis 2a（H2a）：Servant leadership positively affects employees' public service self-efficacy.
(3) The relationships between servant leadership, employees' public service self-efficacy and employee service performance. The above analyses indicated that servant leadership may positively affect the employee service performance through their public service self-efficacy. This implication is supported by some empirical researches. Using a sample of 238 hairstylists and 470 of their customers, Chen and others (2015) found that hair stylists’ self-efficacy and group identification played a partial mediating role between salon managers’ servant leadership and stylists’ service performance, measured as service quality, customer-focused citizenship behavior, and customer-oriented prosocial behavior, as rated by the customers. Using the autonomous
motivational framework of Self-Determination Theory (SDT), Chiniara and Bentein (2016a) found that competence need satisfaction mediated effect of servant leadership on task performance only. Based on the above analyses, the following hypothesis was proposed:
Hypothesis 2c (H2c): Employee's public service self-efficacy mediates the positive influence of servant leadership on employee service performance.
Figure 3.2 Hypothesis 2a, Hypothesis 2b and Hypothesis 2c
3.1.3 Servant Leadership, Employees' Public Service Motivation and