315

Work 49 (2014) 315324

DOI 10.3233/WOR-131713
IOS Press

Psychosocial resources and the relationship

between transformational leadership and
employees psychological strain
Burkhard Schmidta,, Adrian Loerbroksa, Raphael Herra , David Litakera,b , Mark Wilsonc ,
Michael Kastnera and Joachim Fischera
a

Mannheim Institute of Public Health, Social and Preventive Medicine, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg
University, Mannheim, Germany
b
Departments of Medicine, Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA
c
Department of Health Promotion and Behavior, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA

Received 29 November 2012

Accepted 5 April 2013

Abstract.
BACKGROUND: Leadership behavior may both serve as a supportive resource or as a source of psychological distress in the
workplace.
OBJECTIVE: Transformational leadership (TL), a behavior of superiors that fosters motivation, empowerment and a sense
of teamness, has been associated with employee well-being, but the mechanisms that underlie these effects are unclear. We
therefore explored the relationship between TL and stress by examining potential mediating roles for established organizational
and personal resources.
METHODS: We used cross-sectional data on TL, psychosocial resources and employee strain from a company wide survey.
Linear regression and structural equation modeling assessed potential mediation following the method outlined by Baron and
Kenny.
RESULTS: In a convenience sample consisting of mostly white-collar employees (n = 320, 42.6% male), we observed a relationship between TL and employees perceived work-related stress that was fully mediated by protective psychosocial resources
( = 0.33, p < 0.01). Additionally, we found that TL positively affected these resources ( = 0.61; p < 0.01) and that absence
of resources led to more psychological strain ( = 0.54, p < 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: Transformational leadership seems to be associated with lower stress among employees and a perception of
more available psychosocial resources. These findings indicate that TL might serve as a valuable focus for tailored interventions
to improve employee health.
Keywords: Stress, workplace, leadership, mediation

1. Introduction
Many adults spend a substantial proportion of their
daily life in the workplace [13], making it an impor Corresponding author: Burkhard Schmidt, Mannheim Institute
of Public Health, Social and Preventive Medicine, Medical Faculty
Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Ludolf-Krehl-Str. 7-11, D-68167
Mannheim, Germany. Tel.: +49 621 383 6987; Fax: +49 621 383
9920; E-mail: burkhard.schmidt@medma.uni-heidelberg.de.

tant setting for public health research. Previous studies, for example, have demonstrated that psychosocial conditions in the workplace and resulting stress
(e.g. high job demands and job decision latitude, lack
of social support, abusive leadership) may contribute
to chronic diseases (e.g. cardiovascular disease, diabetes or asthma) or severe mental health problems
(e.g. burnout or depression) [48] and are linked to
an increased risk of mortality for all major causes [9].
The importance of leadership in general on possible

c 2014 IOS Press and the authors. All rights reserved

1051-9815/14/$27.50 

316

B. Schmidt et al. / Relationship between transformational leadership and employees psychological strain

health effects is an emerging research field, yet the

magnitude and underlying mechanisms as to how leaders behavior influences health have not been satisfactorily explained [10]. In addition a previous study
by Westerlund et al. supports an individual influence
of leadership on employee stress, health and absenteeism, although they concluded that additional work
was needed on specific aspects of leadership behavior
to enable development of tailored health promoting interventions in the workplace [10].
Studies grounded in occupational stress theory have
previously described a range of work-related stressors
(e.g. high work load, time pressure) and protective psychosocial resources (e.g. social support, the balance
in work-related efforts and rewards or the perceived
meaningfulness of the tasks) [1119] associated with
health-related outcomes. For example, research based
on the Job Demand Resources Model (JD-R) [13,19],
a model that combines the features of the Job Demand
Control Model with effort-reward imbalance, demonstrates that increased job demands in the absence of
psychosocial resources is associated with burnout or
lower psychological well-being. This relationship, in
turn, is linked to severe health risks while the availability of protective job resources, whether arising from
the employee or employer, is associated with a buffering effect [20].
Related models further suggest that organizational
climate and culture, shaped by leadership behavior, appears especially important for employee health [21]
and psychological well-being [22,23]. Leaders, for example, have influence over health-relevant psychosocial working conditions as they have the opportunity to influence workload, specify job expectations,
give feedback, reward employee efforts and restrict or
grant autonomy in work roles. Previous work documents positive associations between people-oriented
leadership, a style that focuses on strengthening interpersonal relationships and mutual trust, and employee well-being, job satisfaction and absenteeism
rather than leadership more directly oriented toward
serving management goals (e.g., creating structures,
dividing and assigning specific responsibilities, and
maintaining adherence to established company procedures and policies) [24]. Moreover, leadership support for and commitment to worksite-based health promotion programs is a factor thought to be a key element for their success in contributing to the health of
employees [2527]. A previous systematic review addressing leadership styles and health-related employee
outcomes demonstrated that positive leader behaviors

were associated with low degrees of employee stress

and positive employee psychological well-being while
abusive or destructive behavior led to negative outcomes [28,29]. One of the few epidemiological studies linked leadership behavior to the incidence of ischemic heart diseases in employees [30]. Other work
links psychosocial resources to psychological strain in
the workplace [19,21]. Less clear, however, are the
processes through which leadership behavior affects
health.
Earlier theoretical work may be useful in envisioning a potential mediating role for psychosocial resources, whether organizational or individual, in affecting the psychological well-being of employees.
Hobfolls Conservation of Resources theory (COR),
for example, suggests that stress is related to the loss
or depletion of psychosocial resources leaving the individual unable to respond to impending demands [31].
Independent of leadership characteristics the fear of
losing resources can also lead to anticipatory stress,
which has emotional consequences similar to those of
experienced stress [32]. Thus, to prevent negative effects on well-being, resources must be identified, used
and replenished. This theory further suggests that those
with more resources at their disposal are more resilient
and thus are more readily capable of responding to future demands more rapidly. These individuals may also
find it easier to replenish resources, whereas those with
fewer resources (spending resources without time to
recuperate) can end in an ongoing downward spiral.
The conceptual model we used to design and conduct this study (Fig. 1) proposes that psychosocial resources are direct determinants of mental and physical health. The role of leadership behavior is somewhat more complex as it may reflect an upstream
determinant of health through either a direct pathway, or through an indirect pathway through leaders ability to strengthen or weaken organizational resources such as culture or norms and to promote or
interfere with the development of personal resources
such as self-efficacy. Several types of leadership behaviors have been identified [33,34]; laissez-faire (the
leader avoids taking any action), management by exception (leader only takes actions when the employee
fails to meet standards), transactional (extrinsically
motivated exchange relationship based on the selfinterest of leader and employee) and the transformational style, which is thought to provide intrinsic motivation that goes beyond mutual self-interests, and
empowers the employee to strive for higher achievement, self-concordance, the well-being of others, the

B. Schmidt et al. / Relationship between transformational leadership and employees psychological strain

317

Fig. 1. General conceptual model on the mechanisms of leadership and health.

company and society through actions such as goal

setting and effort rewarding. While transformational
and transactional leadership styles are complementary
and often co-exist [35], the former is considered more
closely associated with employee well-being [28,34].
A clearer understanding of the relationship between
specific leadership styles, psychosocial resources and
employee health is needed as the basis for interventions to reduce stress or other deleterious health-related
outcomes in the workplace. The objectives of this
study, therefore, were to assess the strength and magnitude of a direct association between transformational
leadership style and employee-perceived work-related
strain. Furthermore we evaluated the extent to which
this association, if present, was mediated through the
perceived availability of psychosocial resources arising from the organization or employee. We also aim to
add evidence from Germany to the research field.

2. Methods
We conducted a secondary analysis of cross-sectional data collected in May 2009 from a larger, federallyfunded research project in which several companies
participated. The sole inclusion criterion for the current study was that a workplace health promotion intervention was in place, enabling the collection and
analysis of health related data from employees. The
only site meeting this criterion was a large provider
of professional services in Germany, with a white collar workforce comprised of employees with an academic or administrative background. All employees of
the company were invited to complete an online ques-

tionnaire described more fully below (see appendix

for a translation of items), which was open for one
month. Voluntary participation implied informed consent. Of 500 employees, 320 accessed the questionnaire (64% response rate). 285 persons provided complete data (57%). The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and was fully
supported by the works council and the commissioner
for data protection at the study site. Wherever possible, we used previously standardized instruments. In
instances in which specific scales were not available,
items were created. Basic psychometric properties for
each scale or new item were confirmed in the study
sample using Cronbachs alpha, inter-item correlation
and discriminatory power [36].
2.1. Independent variables
The independent variable in our analysis captured
participants perceptions of the extent to which the prevailing leadership style within the company was transformational in character. Previous work has defined
transformational leadership as being intrinsically motivating, empowering, attentive to the needs of employees, and one that fosters team spirit and provides a clear
vision. These features are thought to reflect motivational aspects with strong emotional components that
are linked, in turn, to employees affective well-being
in terms of high job satisfaction [37], better employee
mental health in the workplace [38], and a more closely
aligned employee behavior with expectations within
the organizational culture [39,40]. Previous empirical
data supports a meaningful role for transformational
leadership in studying associations with health [41].

318

B. Schmidt et al. / Relationship between transformational leadership and employees psychological strain

We used Likert ratings (1 = do not agree; 5 = strongly agree) from subscales of the German version of the
Transformational Leadership Inventory (TLI) [42
44] to develop a composite score for Transformational
Leadership. The first subscale, Identifying and articulating a vision (TLI-AV, 5 items), assesses whether
leaders have established a vision for the workgroup
and are able to motivate employees with a clear understanding of where the group is headed. Providing an
appropriate role model (TLI-PAM, 3 items) reflects
whether leaders are perceived as demonstrating exemplary behavior and a practice what you preach mentality. Fostering the acceptance of group goals (TLIFAG, 4 items) reflects the extent to which leaders are
concerned about subordinates being team players and
promote group functioning as a team working toward
a shared goal. Leaders Providing Individualized Support (TLI-IS, 4 items) show respect, appreciation, and
concern for the feelings of individual employees. The
Intellectual stimulation (TLI-ISN, 3 items) subscale
identifies leaders who encourage their employees to
think out of the box or who inspire them to develop
innovative solutions. The sixth subscale Contingent
reward (TLI-CR, 4 items), from a measure of transactional leadership assesses the extent to which leaders
recognize performance, give positive feedback and are
aware of potential imbalances in effort and reward. We
elected to include these subscale items given past work
demonstrating significant intercorrelations and interaction with subscales assessing transformational leadership [34,44,45]. The TLI has the advantages of high internal consistency ( = 0.97 for the composite score)
and relative brevity (n = 23 items).
2.2. Dependent variable
The dependent variable psychological strain was a
composite value derived from ratings on four subscales
from the standardized German version of the Symptom Check List (SCL-90R), a validated clinical screening tool for stress [46]. Subscales included Somatization (12 items), Depression (13 items), Anxiety
(10 items) and Interpersonal sensitivity (9 items).
High ratings on the Somatization subscale indicate
high levels of stress-induced pain or other symptoms
(e.g. headaches, breast pain, sickness, hot flashes etc.).
The Depression subscale reflects evidence of significant mental strain (e.g. reduced sexual desire, loneliness, suicidal tendencies, worries etc.). High subscale
scores for Anxiety indicate stress-related disorders
(e.g. tension, sudden shock situations, palpitation with

fear etc.). Respondents with perceived interpersonal

sensitivity rated high on items like feeling oversensitive to events in daily life, having low self-esteem, not
being liked by others or feeling awkward in public situations. The subscales showed excellent internal consistency ( = 0.96). Although we relied exclusively on
self-report, others have observed that subjective perception of health correlates well with objective measures of health status [47].
2.3. Potential mediators
Psychosocial resources represents a potential mediator in the association between leadership style and
psychosocial strain. Its measurement in this study was
informed by the Job-Demands-Resources-Model (JDR) [13,48] that incorporates three important stress
models (Job-Demand-Control Model [49]; Effort-Reward-Imbalance-Model (ERI) [50]; and the Conservation of Resources theory [31]). The JD-R was developed to provide a global reflection of psychological
distress (e.g. burnout) as consequences of the balance
between demands and resources in organizational settings. In this context, job demands are comprised of
the physical or psychological efforts that must be expended at work and thus reflect individual (mental)
health costs while job resources refer to physical,
psychological, social and organizational aspects of the
job that are able to buffer the negative effects of job
demands and their consequences [48].
We identified several previously validated German
language subscales [5156] to measure psychosocial
resources (see appendix), choosing each for the presence of strong support for positive associations with
mental health and well-being [5,6,14,17,5759]. The
subscale decision latitude (3 items) assesses employees perceived ability to influence decisions about their
work. Social support (4 items) measures the quality of team spirit in terms of perceived support, openness, acceptance and sense of membership in a team.
Organizational culture (3 items) addresses the topics
of caring for employees and transparency in decisionmaking. Employee satisfaction (2 items) measures
overall employee satisfaction. Work life balance
(4 items) measures employees ability to cope with
stress by securing resources outside the work environment. To assess overall self-efficacy, we used items derived from the German version of the General SelfEfficacy Scale (9 items) [60]. Two final items asked
employees to rate the overall meaningfulness of their
job and the specific tasks they performed. In each case,

B. Schmidt et al. / Relationship between transformational leadership and employees psychological strain

319

Table 1
Correlations of Strain, Leadership and Resources (n = 285)
Factors
1. Psychological strain
2. Transformational Leadership
3. Decision latitude
4. Social Support
5. Organizational culture
6. Employee satisfaction
7. Work life balance
8. Self-Efficacy
9. Meaningfulness
p

Mean Std. Dev.

1.38
0.42
3.45
0.77
3.76
0.83
3.77
0.85
3.06
0.70
3.81
0.74
3.62
0.84
3.79
0.57
4.14
0.65

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
0.24 0.21 0.32 0.26 0.31 0.51 0.43 0.40
0.24
1
0.35 0.46 0.33 0.47 0.14
0.24 0.31
0.21 0.35
1
0.35 0.28 0.43 0.15 0.24 0.31
0.32 0.46 0.35
1
0.24 0.39 0.18 0.21 0.30
0.26 0.33 0.28 0.24
1
0.43 0.15 0.15 0.25
0.31 0.47 0.43 0.39 0.43
1
0.26 0.33 0.52
0.51 0.14
0.15 0.18 0.15 0.26
1
0.46 0.34
0.43 0.24 0.24 0.21 0.15 0.33 0.46
1
0.48
0.40 0.31 0.31 0.30 0.25 0.52 0.34 0.48
1

< 0.01, p < 0.05.

a 5-point Likert-scale was used to rate items in each

subscale (1 = do not agree; 5 = strongly agree). Age
and sex were added to adjust for a potential confounding influence.

the independent and dependent variables [6466]. We

used the software SPSS 19.0 and AMOS 19.0 for our
calculations.

2.4. Statistical analyses

3. Results

The distribution of composite scores from each subscale was assessed. Although most were normally distributed, skewness in the distribution of the dependent
variable psychosocial strain (SCL90-R) required that
we apply a log transformation to meet the assumption
of data normality for linear models.
Our analysis proceeded in three steps. First, we
examined unadjusted two-tailed correlations between
score means for transformational leadership, psychosocial resources and psychosocial strain. Next, we tested
mediation using the Freedman-Schatzkin test in a series of nested linear regression models. In this test,
a mediating effect is thought to be present when the
t-statistic of the Freedman-Schatzkin test is significant [61]. In the baseline model, the association between transformational leadership and psychological
strain was assessed, accounting for age and sex. In
subsequent models, subscale scores for individual psychosocial resources were added. Change in variance
in the association between transformational leadership and psychological strain represented the extent
to which mediation by a psychosocial resource was
present. The last model included all resources in addition to the baseline model. The final step in the analysis used structural equation modeling to confirm and
quantify the degree of mediation using a method described by Baron and Kenny [62,63]. To improve the
accuracy of this estimate, we used bootstrapping to
generate 1000 samples that provided maximum likelihood estimates for the models and 95% confidence intervals [64]. The bootstrapping approach also allowed
us to generate a p-value for an indirect effect between

3.1. Descriptive and correlation analysis

The participants were mostly male, mostly whitecollar employees, between the ages of 3050 years (Table 1). We found multiple highly significant unadjusted
correlations between strain, transformational leadership and the individual psychosocial resources.
3.2. Linear regression
Table 2 shows the beta coefficients for the association between transformational leadership, psychological strain and the variance explained by each model,
adding the t-statistics for the Freedman-Schatzkin mediation test and the p-value for mediation. While an
association between transformational leadership and
strain ( = 0.24, p = 0.00) exists, relatively little
variance (7%) is explained. Subsequent models containing psychosocial resources explain more variance
while the association of transformational leadership
with psychological strain is attenuated to the point that
it is no longer statistically significant. The FreedmanSchatzkin test is significant for every psychosocial resource and for the complete model as well, indicating
a significant mediation effect.
3.3. Mediation analysis
Table 3 reports results from structural equation modeling with Fig. 2 showing the complete model. The
model fit indices (CMIN = 236,382; df = 139; p =
0.00; CMIN/DF = 1.7; CFI = 0.97; TLI = 0.96;

320

B. Schmidt et al. / Relationship between transformational leadership and employees psychological strain

Table 2
Linear Regression with dependent variable Psychological Strain
(n = 285) with mediating resources (adjusted for age and sex)
R2
0.07

Model
Model 0
Transformational Leadership
Age
Sex

Beta

P value

0.24
0.01
0.11

0.00
0.81
0.06

Model 0 LS +
Decision latitude

0.20
0.13

0.00
0.03

0.07

Model 0 LS +
Social support

0.12
0.27

0.06
0.00

0.13

Model 0 LS +
Organizational Culture

0.18
0.19

0.00
0.00

0.10

Model 0 LS +
Employee satisfaction

0.12
0.25

0.06
0.00

0.12

Model 0 LS +
Work-life-balance

0.16
0.50

0.00
0.00

0.31

Model 0 LS +
Self-efficacy

0.15
0.40

0.01
0.00

0.21

Model 0 LS +
Meaningfulness

0.13
0.35

0.02
0.00

0.18

Model 0 LS +
Decision Latitude +
Social support +
Organizational Culture +
Employee satisfaction +
Work-life-balance +
Self-efficacy +
Meaningfulness

0.01
0.04
0.17
0.11
0.01
0.37
0.15
0.14

0.87
0.44
0.00
0.05
0.94
0.00
0.01
0.03

0.39

RMSEA = 0.05; PNFI = 0.75) suggest good model

fit [67]. The model method automatically involved a
confirmatory factor analysis of the latent constructs.
With factor loadings of 0.76 to 0.92 for the TLI, 0.35
to 0.77 for resources and 0.65 to 0.95 for psychological strain, the model construction of the latent variables
is acceptable with the loadings for personal resources
Work-life balance and Self-Efficacy being the weakest.
The first model shows a negative association between leadership and self-reported psychological strain
( = 0.28, p = 0.00) with stress reported as significantly higher when transformational leadership was
perceived to be low. The next steps establish a strong
direct effect between transformational leadership and
resources ( = 0.61, p = 0.00) as well as a strong
negative effect ( = 0.54, p = 0.00) between resources and strain. In the full model (Fig. 2), the association of transformational leadership and strain is
nearly fully mediated by resources, with an estimated
indirect effect from transformational leadership, incorporating the influence on resources, on psychological
strain that is somewhat stronger than direct effects observed in the initial model ( = 0.33, p = 0.00).

4. Discussion
In this study, we observed a negative relationship between transformational leadership and psychological
strain that was primarily mediated through the availability of organizational and individual psychosocial
resources.
We find support for our initial hypothesis (Fig. 1)
that employees perception of the presence of transformational leadership behavior has potential for influencing organizational and personal protective resources in a way that was associated with lower employee strain. However the assumption that transformational leadership was still associated with employee
strain in the presence of psychosocial resources could
not be verified. This would actually support the theoretical aspect of transformational leadership to elevate the employees level of maturity and empowering
the individual by providing /protecting psychosocial
resources [34]. Consistent with the work of others, our
results further indicate that transformational leadership
behavior has a stronger influence on organizational resources than personal resources (e.g., Work life balance, Self-Efficacy) [24]. A potential explanation for
this finding is that leaders might find it easier to influence the availability of organizational resources rather
than those primarily available to or within individuals. With respect to healthy organizational climate, this
study also supports previous work on the importance of
the relationship between supervisors and their employees [12,68]. Our findings are consistent with the CORTheory in suggesting that psychosocial resources have
an important relationship to psychological strain.
Our results seem to fit generally with previous findings in the literature that support the linkage between
leadership, well-being and employee stress [10,23,28,
37,69]. Nielsen et al. [38] pointed to the possibility
that the effect of transformational leadership on mental
health exists only when perceived work characteristics
change. Our work extends these findings by identifying
the specific contribution of organizational and personal
protective resources, use of a standardized method for
assessing mediation and by accounting for factors that
may potentially confound results.
To our knowledge this is one of the first studies
to explore various subdimensions of transformational
leadership, which might actually influence employee
stress by incorporating potential pathways over different psychosocial work environment factors as well as
personal resources.
It is important to consider these results within the
context of several limitations. First, we used a cross-

B. Schmidt et al. / Relationship between transformational leadership and employees psychological strain

321

Table 3
Direct and indirect effects of the mediation steps by Baron and Kenny (1000 Bootstrap samples)
Model
1. Leadership Strain
2. Leadership Resources
3. Resources Strain
4. Complete Model
Leadership Resources
Resources Strain
Leadership Strain
Indirect effect
Leadership Resources Strain

Beta
0.28
0.61
0.54

p
0.00
0.00
0.00

Lower B.
0.40
0.48
0.66

Upper B.
0.16
0.71
0.41

0.61
0.54
0.03

0.00
0.00
0.63

0.49
0.72
0.11

0.71
0.38
0.19

0.33

0.00

0.47

0.21

Fig. 2. Potential Mediation of psychosocial resources between leadership and employee strain.

sectional study design and can therefore neither assert

the presence of causal relationships nor rule out the
possibility of reverse causality between the factors under consideration. Studies using longitudinal designs
are needed to address these issues further. Second, although our sample size was relatively small, the response rate for participants within the target population
(64%) was acceptable reducing the likelihood of significant response bias. Related to this point, our sample was drawn from a single company consisting primarily of white collar employees, necessarily limiting

the generalizability of our findings. Despite this, we

feel that our findings justify further assessment in other
settings using more heterogeneous samples of employees. Finally, we used self-report of employee strain
rather than more objective assessments such as physiological measures of stress. Studies employing objective measures of stress and biomarkers for chronic diseases (CVD, metabolic syndrome) are currently underway within our group and will be valuable in extending
our understanding of the associations we report.

322

B. Schmidt et al. / Relationship between transformational leadership and employees psychological strain

5. Conclusion
Our study explores how transformational leadership,
as suggested in theoretical models, might strengthen
psychosocial resources to lower employee stress in
forms of depression or anxiety symptoms. Some of
the associations presented here are not surprising since
psychosocial risk factors have long been identified as
relevant to the health of working adults [10,70,71], yet
it further highlights the potential importance of leadership behavior and protective resources in occupational
health. These findings may be useful in designing tailored interventions at the workplace with the goal to
preserve organizational and personal resourcesand thus
strengthen employee health.

Acknowledgment
The study was supported by the German Federal
Ministry of Education and Research.

References
[1]
[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

Lurie N, Fremont A. Building bridges between medical care

and public health. JAMA. 2009 Jul 1; 302(1): 8486.
Goetzel RZ, Ozminkowski RJ. The health and cost benefits
of work site health-promotion programs. Annu Rev Public
Health. 2008 Jan; 29(1): 303323.
Linnan L, Bowling M, Childress J, Lindsay G, Blakey C,
Pronk S, et al. Results of the 2004 National Worksite Health
Promotion Survey. Am J Public Health. 2007/12/01 ed. American Public Health Association; 2008 Aug; 98(8): 15031509.
Boehm JK, Peterson C, Kivimaki M, Kubzansky L. A
prospective study of positive psychological well-being and
coronary heart disease. Health Psychol. 2011 May; 30(3):
259267.
Nixon AE, Mazzola JJ, Bauer J, Krueger JR, Spector PE. Can
work make you sick? A meta-analysis of the relationships between job stressors and physical symptoms. Work and Stress.
2011 Jan; 25(1): 122.
Robone S, Jones AM, Rice N. Contractual conditions, working conditions and their impact on health and well-being. Eur
J Health Econ. 2011 Oct; 12(5): 429444.
Loerbroks A, Schilling O, Haxsen V, Jarczok MN, Thayer JF,
Fischer JE. The fruits of ones labor: Effort-reward imbalance
but not job strain is related to heart rate variability across the
day in 35-44-year-old workers. J Psychosom Res. 2010/07/14
ed. 2010; 69(2): 151159.
Loerbroks A, Gadinger MC, Bosch JA, Strmer T, Amelang
M. Work-related stress, inability to relax after work and risk of
adult asthma: a population-based cohort study. Allergy. 2010
Oct; 65(10): 12981305.
Russ TC, Stamatakis E, Hamer M, Starr JM, Kivimaki
M, Batty GD. Association between psychological distress
and mortality: individual participant pooled analysis of 10
prospective cohort studies. BMJ. 2012 Jul 31; 345(Jul 31 4):
e4933e4933.

[10]

Westerlund H, Nyberg A, Bernin P, Hyde M, Oxenstierna G,

Jppinen P, et al. Managerial leadership is associated with employee stress, health, and sickness absence independently of
the demand-control-support model. Work. 2010 Jan; 37(1):
7179.
[11] Kuper H, Marmot M. Job strain, job demands, decision latitude, and risk of coronary heart disease within the Whitehall
II study. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2003 Feb; 57(2):
147153.
[12] Wilson MG, Dejoy DM, Vandenberg RJ, Richardson HA,
McGrath AL. Work characteristics and employee health
and well-being: Test of a model of healthy work organization. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology.
Blackwell Publishing Ltd; 2004; 77(4): 565588.
[13] Bakker AB, Demerouti E. The Job Demands-Resources
model: state of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology.
2007; 22(3): 309328.
[14] Halbesleben JRB. Sources of social support and burnout: a
meta-analytic test of the conservation of resources model. J
Appl Psychol. 2006 Sep; 91(5): 11341145.
[15] Warr P. A conceptual framework for the study of work and
mental health. Work and Stress. 1994 Apr; 8(2): 8497.
[16] Antonovsky A. The salutogenic model as a theory to guide
health promotion. Health Promotion International. 1996;
11(1): 1118.
[17] Karasek RD, Theorell T. Healthy Work. New York: Perseus;
1990.
[18] Demerouti E, Bakker ABA, Nachreiner F, Schaufeli WB. The
job-demands-resources-model of burnout. Journal of Applied
Psychology. 2001; 86: 499512.
[19] Nahrgang JD, Morgeson FP, Hofmann DA. Safety at work:
A meta-analytic investigation of the link between job demands, job resources, burnout, engagement, and safety outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology. US: American Psychological Association; 2010 Jan; 96(1): 7194.
[20] Bakker AB, Hakanen JJ, Demerouti E, Xanthopoulou D. Job
resources boost work engagement, particularly when job demands are high. Journal of Educational Psychology. 2007;
99(2): 274284.
[21] Schaufeli WB, Bakker AB. Job demands, job resources, and
their relationship with burnout and engagement: a multisample study. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 2004 May
30; 25(3): 293315.
[22] Van Dierendonck D, Haynes C, Borrill C, Stride C. Leadership behavior and subordinate well-being. J Occup Health
Psychol. 2004 Apr; 9(2): 165175.
[23] Arnold KA, Turner N, Barling J, Kelloway EK, McKee MC.
Transformational leadership and psychological well-being:
the mediating role of meaningful work. J Occup Health Psychol. 2007 Jul; 12(3): 193203.
[24] Kuoppala J, Lamminp A, Liira J, Vainio H. Leadership, job
well-being, and health effects a systematic review and a
meta-analysis. J Occup Environ Med. 2008 Aug; 50(8): 904
915.
[25] DeJoy D, Bowen H, Baker K. Management support and worksite health promotion program effectiveness. Health Aspects
of Work. 2009; 1322.
[26] Gurt J, Elke G, Bochum R. Health Promoting Leadership:
The Mediating Role of an Organizational Health Culture. In:
Karsh B-T, editor. Ergonomics and Health Aspects of Work
with. 2009. p. 2938.
[27] Kuoppala J, Lamminp A, Husman P. Work health promotion, job well-being, and sickness absences a systematic re-

B. Schmidt et al. / Relationship between transformational leadership and employees psychological strain

[28]

[29]

[30]

[31]

[32]

[33]
[34]

[35]

[36]

[37]

[38]

[39]

[40]

[41]

[42]

[43]

[44]

view and meta-analysis. J Occup Environ Med. 2008 Nov;

50(11): 12161227.
Skakon J, Nielsen K, Borg V, Guzman J. Are leaders wellbeing, behaviours and style associated with the affective
well-being of their employees? A systematic review of three
decades of research. Work and Stress. Routledge; 2010 Apr;
24(2): 107139.
Nyberg A, Holmberg I, Bernin P, Alderling M, erblom S,
Widerszal-Bazyl M, et al. Destructive managerial leadership
and psychological well-being among employees in Swedish,
Polish, and Italian hotels. Work. 2011 Jan; 39(3): 267281.
Nyberg A, Alfredsson L, Theorell T, Westerlund H, Vahtera J,
Kivimki M. Managerial leadership and ischaemic heart disease among employees: the Swedish WOLF study. Occup Environ Med. 2009 Jan; 66(1): 5155.
Hobfoll SE. Conservation of resources. A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist. 1989 Mar; 44(3):
513524.
Hobfoll SE. The influence of culture, community and the
nested-self in the stress process. Applied Psychology. 2001;
50(3): 337421.
Bass BM. Leadership and Performance beyond exspectations.
New York: Academic Press; 1985.
Bass BM. Two Decades of Research and Development in
Transformational Leadership. European Journal of Work and
Organizational Psychology. 1999 Mar; 8(1): 932.
Judge TA, Piccolo RF. Transformational and Transactional
Leadership: A Meta-Analytic Test of Their Relative Validity.
Journal of Applied Psychology. 2004; 89(5): 755768.
Schmidt B. Transformationale und transaktionale Fhrung als
erfolgreicher Fhrungsstil fr Leistung und Gesundheit?
Eine kritische berprfung des Full Range of Leadership Konzeptes fr das betriebliche Gesundheitsmanagement. Technical University Dortmund; 2012. p. 314.
Gurt J, Schwennen C, Elke G. Health-specific leadership:
Is there an association between leader consideration for the
health of employees and their strain and well-being? Work
and Stress. 2011 Apr; 25(2): 108127.
Nielsen K, Randall R, Yarker J, Brenner S-O. The effects
of transformational leadership on followers percieved work
characteristics and psychological well-being: A longitudinal
study. Work and Stress. 2008 Jan; 22(1): 1632.
Bono JE, Judge TA. Self-concordance at work: toward understanding the motivational effects of transformational leaders.
Academy of Management Journal. 2003; 46(5): 554571.
Shamir B, House RJ, Arthur MB. The Motivational aspect of
Charismatic Leadership. A self-concept based theory. Steers
RM, Porter LW, Bigley GA, editors. Motivation and leadership at work. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1993; 4(4): 577594.
Piccolo RF, Bono JE, Heinitz K, Rowold J, Duehr E, Judge
TA. The relative impact of complementary leader behaviors:
Which matter most? The Leadership Quarterly. 2012 Jun;
23(3): 567581.
Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Moorman RH, Fetter R.
Transformational leader behaviors and their effects on followers trust in leader, satifaction, and organizational citizenship
behaviors. Leadership Quaterly. 1990; 1(2): 107142.
Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Fetter R. Substitutes for
leadership and the management of professionals. Leadership
Quaterly. 1993; 4(1): 144.
Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Bommer WH. Transformational Leader Behaviors and Substitutes for Leadership as
Determinants of Employee Satisfaction, Commitment, Trust,

323

and Organizational Citizenship Behaviors. Journal of Management. 1996 Apr 1; 22(2): 259298.
[45] Heinitz K. Gtekriterien einer deutschen Adaptation des
Transformational Leadership Inventory ( TLI ) von Podsakoff.
2007; 51.
[46] Derogatis LR, Unger R. Symptom Checklist-90-Revised. The
Corsini Encyclopedia of Psychology. John Wiley and Sons,
Inc.; 2010.
[47] Benyamini Y. Why does self-rated health predict mortality? An update on current knowledge and a research agenda
for psychologists. Psychol Health. 2011 Nov; 26(11): 1407
1413.
[48] Hakanen JJ, Schaufeli WB, Ahola K. The Job DemandsResources model: A three-year cross-lagged study of burnout,
depression, commitment, and work engagement. Work and
Stress. Routledge; 2008 Jul; 22(3): 224241.
[49] Van der Doef M, Maes S. The Job Demand-Control (-Support)
Model and psychological well-being: A review of 20 years of
empirical research. Work and Stress. Routledge; 1999; 13(2):
87114.
[50] Siegrist J. Adverse Effects of high effort low reward conditions at work. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology.
1996; 1: 2743.
[51] Semmer NK, Zapf D, Dunckel H. Instrument zur Stressbezogenen Ttigkeitsanalyse ISTA. In: Dunckel H, editor. Handbuch psychologischer Arbeitsanalyseverfahren. Zrich: vdf
Hochschulverlag; 1999. p. 179204.
[52] Rimann M, Udris I. Belastungen und Gesundheitsressourcen
im Berufs - und Privatbereich - eine quantitative Studie.
Zrich: Eidgenssische Technische Hochschule, Institut fr
Arbeitspsychologie; 1993.
[53] Rosenstiel L von, Bogel R. Betriebsklima geht jeden an! 4th
ed. Munchen: Bayerisches Staatsministerium fr Arbeit und
Sozialordnung; 1992.
[54] Tuomi K, Ilmarinen J, Jahkola A, Katajarinnel TA. Work
Ability Index. Occupational Health Care. Helsinki: Finnish
Institute of Occupational Health.; 1998.
[55] Angermeyer MC, Kilian R, Matschinger H. WHOQOL-100
und WHOQOL-BREF. Handbuch fr die deutsche Version
der WHO Instrumente zur Erfassung von Lebensqualitt. Gttingen: Hogrefe; 2000.
[56] Nbling M, Stel U, Hasselhorn H-M, Michaelis M, Hofmann F. Methoden zur Erfassung psychischer Belastungen
- Erprobung eines Messinstrumentes (COPSOQ). Schriftenreihe der Bundesanstalt fr Arbeitsschutz und Arbeitsmedizin, Fb 1058. Bremerhaven: Wirtschaftsverlag NW; 2005.
[57] Karasek RD. Job demands, job decision latitude and mental
strain: Implications for job redesign. Administrative Science
Quaterly. 1979; 24: 285308.
[58] Hackman JR, Oldham GR. Work redesign. Reading, MA:
Addison-Wesley; 1980.
[59] Sonnentag S, Frese M. Stress in organizations. Comprehensive Handbook of Psychology, Volume Twelve: Industrial and
Organizational Psychology. 2003.
[60] Schwarzer R, Jerusalem M. Generalized Self-Efficacy scale.
In: Weinman J, Wright S, Johnston M, editors. Measures in
health psychology: A users portfolio. Causal and control beliefs. Windsor, UK: NFER-NELSON; 1995. p. 3537.
[61] Taylor L, Loerbroks A, Herr RM, Lane RD, Fischer JE,
Thayer JF. Depression and smoking: mediating role of vagal
tone and inflammation. Ann Behav Med. 2011 Dec; 42(3):
334340.
[62] Baron RM, Kenny DA. The moderatormediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strate-

324

[63]

[64]

[65]

[66]

[67]

B. Schmidt et al. / Relationship between transformational leadership and employees psychological strain
gic, and statistical considerations. Inc E, editor. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. American Psychological Association; 1986; 51(6): 11731182.
Zhao X, Lynch Jr. JG, Chen Q, Lynch Jr JG. Reconsidering
Baron and Kenny: Myths and Truths about Mediation Analysis. Journal of Consumer Research. Journal of Consumer Research, Inc.; 2010 Aug; 37(2): 197206.
Hayes AF. Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical Mediation
Analysis in the New Millennium. Communication Monographs. Routledge; 2009 Dec; 76(4): 408420.
Bollen KA, Stine R. Direct and indirect effects: Classical and
bootstrap estimates of variability. Sociological Methodology.
1990; 20: 115140.
Bollen KA, Stine RA. Bootstrapping Goodness-of-Fit Mea
sures in Structural Equation Models. Sociological Methods
and Research. 1992 Nov 1; 21(2): 205229.
Hooper D, Coughlan J, Mullen MR. Structural Equation
Modelling: Guidelines for Determining Model Fit. Journal of

[68]

[69]

[70]

[71]

Business Research. 2008; 6(1): 5360.

Eriksson A, Axelsson R, Axelsson SB. Health promoting
leadership different views of the concept. Work. 2011 Jan;
40(1): 7584.
Siebert-Adzic M. Emotions and leadership. Reasons and impact of emotions in organizational context. Work: A Journal of
Prevention, Assessment and Rehabilitation. 2012; 41: 5671
5673.
Rosengren A, Hawken S, Ounpuu S, Sliwa K, Zubaid M,
Almahmeed WA, et al. Association of psychosocial risk factors with risk of acute myocardial infarction in 11119 cases
and 13648 controls from 52 countries (the INTERHEART
study): case-control study. Lancet. 2004; 364(9438): 953
962.
Faragher EB, Cass M, Cooper CL. The relationship between
job satisfaction and health: a meta-analysis. Occup Environ
Med. 2005 Feb; 62(2): 105112.

Appendix
Scale
German items
Decision latitude Ich habe Mglichkeiten, meine Arbeitsgeschwindigkeit
selbstzu bestimmen.
Ich habe Mglichkeiten, bei der Arbeit Neues zu erlernen.
Ich habe Freirume fr Eigeninitiative.

English items
I can manage the speed at which I work on my own.
I have the opportunity to learn new things at my job.
I am free to show initiative.

Social support

Ich habe Untersttzung bei der Arbeit durch die Kollegen.

Ich habe das Gefhl, dass meine Kollegen Verstndnis fr
meine persnlichen Schwierigkeiten haben/htten.
Ich habe das Gefhl, in das Team eingebunden zu sein.
Ich habe ein Gefhl von Offenheit und Ehrlichkeit im Team.

My coworkers support me at my job.

I feel that my coworkers show understanding for any
personal problems I might have.
I feel I am part of a team (at my job).
I feel that my coworkers are open and honest.

Employee
satisfaction

Wie beurteilen Sie Ihre Zufriedenheit mit Ihrer Ttigkeit?

Wie beurteilen Sie Ihr Wohlbefinden im Unternehmen?

How would you rate your satisfaction with your job?

How would you rate your overall well-being in your
company?

Meaningfulness

Betrachten Sie ihre derzeit ausgebte Ttigkeit als sinnvoll?

Betrachten Sie ihr Leben als sinnvoll?

Do you think of your current job as meaningful?

Do you think of your life as being meaningful?

Organizational
culture

Wie beurteilen Sie die Frsorge des Unternehmens fr die How would you rate the way your company cares for its
employees?
Mitarbeiter?
Wie beurteilen Sie die Transparenz der Unternehmenspolitik? How would you rate the transparency of company policies?
Wie beurteilen Sie die Umsichtigkeit mit der Vernderungen How would you rate the care with which changes are
umgesetzt werden?
implemented in your company?

Work life
balance

Ich schaffe mir bewusst einen Ausgleich im Privaten.

Ich habe Mittel und Wege, um mit Belastungen umzugehen.
Ich nehme mir ausreichend Zeit fr Familie und Freunde.
Ich nehme mir ausreichend Zeit fr mich selbst.

I consciously balance work and private life.

I have ways to cope with strain.
I take enough time for friends and family.
I take enough time for myself.

Copyright of Work is the property of IOS Press and its content may not be copied or emailed
to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written
permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.