Leader Tolerance of Ambiguity: Implications for Follower Performance Outcomes in High and Low Ambiguous Work Situations

Abstract

Individuals high in tolerance of ambiguity (TOA) are comfortable with, desire, and strive to manage ambiguous situations. We predicted leader TOA would be associated with better follower performance outcomes, depending on the level (Study 1) and nature (Study 2) of follower role ambiguity. Data were collected from employees (Study 1, n = 423) and managerial employees (Study 2, n = 326) who rated their leader on three facets of TOA and provided self-reports of their own performance outcomes. Positive implications of leader TOA for follower learning goal orientation and job performance (Study 1) were most pronounced when followers perceived low role ambiguity and, in the prediction of situational coping (Study 2), when ambiguous work situations were categorized as challenges (unexpected events requiring problem-solving) compared to hindrances. Findings have theoretical implications for understanding when TOA in leaders is optimal and have practical relevance for leaders seeking to adapt to the situational needs of their followers.

Keywords

personality leadership well-being organizational behavior

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Afsar

Masood

(2018). Transformational leadership, creative self-efficacy, trust in supervisor, uncertainty avoidance, and innovative work behaviors of nurses. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 54(1), 36–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886317711891

Alarcon

G. M.

(2011). A meta-analysis of burnout with job demands, resources, and attitudes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 79(2), 549–562. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2011.03.007

Altinay

Madanoglu

Daniele

Lashley

(2012). The influence of family tradition and psychological traits on entrepreneurial intention. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31(2), 489–499. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2011.07.007

Bradlow

(June, 2015). The impact of emerging technologies in the workforce of the future. In Australia's future workforce? (pp. 38–47). Committee for Economic Development of Australia.

Budner

(1962). Intolerance of ambiguity as a personality variable. Journal of Personality, 30(1), 29–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1962.tb02303.x

Buhr

Dugas

M. J.

(2006). Investigating the construct validity of intolerance of uncertainty and its unique relationship with worry. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 20(2), 222–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2004.12.004

Buhrmester

Kwang

Gosling

S. D.

(2011). Amazon's mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6(1), 3–5. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691610393980

Caligiuri

Tarique

(2012). Dynamic cross-cultural competencies and global leadership effectiveness. Journal of World Business, 47(4), 612–622. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2012.01.014

Carmeli

Reiter-Palmon

Ziv

(2010). Inclusive leadership and employee involvement in creative tasks in the workplace: The mediating role of psychological safety. Creativity Research Journal, 22(3), 250–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2010.504654

10.

Carnevale

J. B.

Hatak

(2020). Employee adjustment and well-being in the era of COVID-19: Implications for human resource management. Journal of Business Research, 116(August), 183–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.05.037

11.

Cavanaugh

M. A.

Boswell

W. R.

Roehling

M. V.

Boudreau

J. W.

(2000). An empirical examination of self-reported work stress among US managers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(1), 65–74. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.85.1.65

12.

Cronshaw

S. F.

Lord

R. G.

(1987). Effects of categorization, attribution, and encoding processes on leadership perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(1), 97–106. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.72.1.97

13.

Daniels

L. M.

Stupnisky

R. H.

Pekrun

Haynes

T. L.

Perry

R. P.

Newall

N. E.

(2009). A longitudinal analysis of achievement goals: From affective antecedents to emotional effects and achievement outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(4), 948–963. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016096

14.

Durrheim

Foster

(1997). Tolerance of ambiguity as a content specific construct. Personality and Individual Differences, 22(5), 741–750. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(96)00207-3

15.

Dvir

Shamir

(2003). Follower developmental characteristics as predicting transformational leadership: A longitudinal field study. The Leadership Quarterly, 14(3), 327–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(03)00018-3

16.

Dweck

C. S.

(1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41(10), 1040–1048. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.41.10.1040

17.

Fleeson

Jayawickreme

(2015). Whole trait theory. Journal of Research in Personality, 56(June), 82–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2014.10.009

18.

Frenkel-Brunswik

(1949). Intolerance of ambiguity as an emotional and perceptual personality variable. Journal of Personality, 18(1), 108–143. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1949.tb01236.x

19.

Fuller

C. M.

Simmering

M. J.

Atinc

Babin

B. J.

(2016). Common methods variance detection in business research. Journal of Business Research, 69(8), 3192–3198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.12.008

20.

Furnham

Marks

(2013). Tolerance of ambiguity: A review of the recent literature. Psychology (Savannah, Ga ), 4(9), 717–728. https://doi.org/10.4236/psych.2013.49102

21.

Furnham

Ribchester

. (1995). Tolerance of ambiguity: A review of the concept, its measurement and applications. Current Psychology: A Journal for Diverse Perspectives on Diverse Psychological Issues, 14(3), 179–199. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02686907

22.

Gray

Ulbrich

(2017). Ambiguity acceptance and translation skills in the project management literature. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 10(2), 423–450. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMPB-05-2016-0044

23.

Griffin

M. A.

Neal

Parker

S. K.

(2007). A new model of work role performance: Positive behavior in uncertain and interdependent contexts. Academy of Management Journal, 50(2), 327–347. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2007.24634438

24.

Hamstra

M. R.

Van Yperen

N. W.

Wisse

Sassenberg

(2014). Transformational and transactional leadership and followers’ achievement goals. Journal of Business and Psychology, 29(3), 413–425. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-013-9322-9

25.

Hancock

Mattick

(2020). Tolerance of ambiguity and psychological well-being in medical training: A systematic review. Medical Education, 54(2), 125–137. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.14031

26.

Hayes

A. F.

(2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (2^nd ed.). Guilford Press.

27.

Hayes

A. F.

Montoya

A. K.

(2017). A tutorial on testing, visualizing, and probing an interaction involving a multi-categorical variable in linear regression analysis. Communication Methods and Measures, 11(1), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2016.1271116

28.

Herman

J. L.

Stevens

M. J.

Bird

Mendenhall

Oddou

(2010). The tolerance for ambiguity scale: Towards a more refined measure for international management research. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 34(1), 58–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2009.09.004

29.

House

& Mitchell

(1974). Path-goal theory of leadership. Contemporary Business, 3(4), 81–98.

30.

House

R. J.

(1971). A path-goal theory of leader effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 16(3), 321–339. https://doi.org/10.2307/2391905

31.

House

R. J.

(1996). Path-goal theory of leadership: Lessons, legacy, and a reformulated theory. The Leadership Quarterly, 7(3), 323–352. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(96)90024-7

32.

House

R. J.

Aditya

R. N.

(1997). The social scientific study of leadership: Quo vadis? Journal of Management, 23(3), 409–473. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-2063(97)90037-4

33.

House

R. J.

Javidan

(2004). Overview of GLOBE. In House

R. J.

Hanges

P. J.

Javidan

Dorfman

Gupta

(Eds.), & GLOBE associates, Leadership, culture, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies (pp. 9–28). Corsage.

34.

Iannello

Mottini

Tirelli

Riva

Antonietti

(2017). Ambiguity and uncertainty tolerance, need for cognition, and their association with stress: A study among Italian practicing physicians. Medical Education Online, 22(1), 1270009. https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2016.1270009

35.

Jach

H. K.

Smillie

L. D.

(2019). To fear or fly to the unknown: Tolerance for ambiguity and Big five personality traits. Journal of Research in Personality, 79(April), 67–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2019.02.003

36.

Judge

T. A.

Bono

J. E.

Ilies

Gerhardt

M. W.

(2002). Personality and leadership: A qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 765–780. https://doi.org/10.1037//0021-9010.87.4.765

37.

Judge

T. A.

Thoresen

C. J.

Pucik

Welbourne

T. M.

(1999). Managerial coping with organizational change: A dispositional perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(1), 107–122. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.84.1.107

38.

Katsaros

K. K.

Tsirikas

A. N.

Nicolaidis

C. S.

(2014). Managers’ workplace attitudes, tolerance of ambiguity and firm performance. Management Research Review, 37(5), 442–465. https://doi.org/10.1108/mrr-01-2013-0021

39.

Kleysen

R. F.

Street

C. T.

(2001). Toward a multi-dimensional measure of individual innovative behavior. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 2(3), 284–296. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000005660

40.

Lane

M. S.

Klenke

(2004). The ambiguity tolerance interface: A modified social cognitive model for leading under uncertainty. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 10(3), 69–81. https://doi.org/10.1177/107179190401000306

41.

Latham

G. P.

Locke

E. A.

(1979). Goal setting: A motivational technique that works. Organizational Dynamics, 8(2), 68–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-2616(79)90032-9

42.

Lauriola

Foschi

Mosca

Weller

(2016). Attitude toward ambiguity: Empirically robust factors in self-report personality scales. Assessment, 23(3), 353–373. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191115577188

43.

Lauriola

Levin

I. P.

Hart

S. S.

(2007). Common and distinct factors in decision making under ambiguity and risk: A psychometric study of individual differences. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 104(2), 130–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2007.04.001

44.

Lepine

J. A.

Podsakoff

N. P.

Lepine

M. A.

(2005). A meta-analytic test of the challenge stressor-hindrance stressor framework: An explanation for inconsistent relationships among stressors and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 48(5), 764–775. https://doi.org/10.2307/2015969

45.

Lievens

De Corte

Schollaert

(2008). A closer look at the frame-of-reference effect in personality scale scores and validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(2), 268–279. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.2.268

46.

Madjar

Oldham

G. R.

Pratt

M. G.

(2002). There's no place like home?: The contributions of work and nonwork creativity support to employees’ creative performance. Academy of Management Journal, 45(4), 757–767. https://doi.org/10.5465/3069309

47.

Mazzola

Schonfeld

I. S.

Spector

P. E.

(2011). What qualitative research has taught us about occupational stress. Stress and Health, 27(2), 93–110. https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.1386

48.

McLain

D. L.

(1993). The MSTAT-I: A new measure of an individual's Tolerance for ambiguity. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53(1), 183–189. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164493053001020

49.

McLain

D. L.

(2009). Evidence of the properties of an ambiguity tolerance measure: The multiple stimulus types ambiguity tolerance scale–II (MSTAT–II). Psychological Reports, 105(3), 975–988. https://doi.org/10.2466/PR0.105.3.975-988

50.

McLain

D. L.

Kefallonitis

Armani

(2015). Ambiguity tolerance in organizations: Definitional clarification and perspectives on future research. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, Article 344. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00344

51.

Nicolaidis

C. S.

Katsaros

(2011). Tolerance of ambiguity and emotional attitudes in a changing business environment. Journal of Strategy and Management, 4(1), 44–61. https://doi.org/10.1108/17554251111110113

52.

O’Connor

Becker

Fewster

(2018). Tolerance of ambiguity at work predicts leadership, job performance, and creativity. Creating Uncertainty: An International Conference. Ascona, Switzerland, July 1-5, 2018.

53.

Örtqvist

Wincent

(2006). Prominent consequences of role stress: A meta-analytic review. International Journal of Stress Management, 13(4), 399–422. https://doi.org/10.1037/1072-5245.13.4.399

54.

Rizzo

J. R.

House

R. J.

Lirtzman

S. I.

(1970). Role conflict and ambiguity in complex organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 15(2), 150–163. https://doi.org/10.2307/2391486

55.

Schwarz

G. M.

Bouckenooghe

(2021). When the dodo became extinct: Why rethinking change should not take a pandemic. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 57(1), 5–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886320973809

56.

Searle

B. J.

Auton

J. C.

(2015). The merits of measuring challenge and hindrance appraisals. Anxiety, Stress, & Coping, 28(2), 121–143. https://doi.org/10.1080/10615806.2014.931378

57.

Spector

P. E.

(2006). Method variance in organizational research: Truth or urban legend? Organizational Research Methods, 9(2), 221–232. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428105284955

58.

Stewart

Stanford

(2017). Regulating work in the gig economy: What are the options? The Economic and Labor Relations Review, 28(3), 420–437. https://doi.org/10.1177/1035304617722461

59.

Sundararajan

(2016). The sharing economy: The end of employment and the rise of crowd-based capitalism. The MIT Press.

60.

Tett

R. P.

Burnett

D. D.

(2003). A personality trait-based interactionist model of job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(3), 500–517. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.3.500

61.

Theis

Sauerwein

Fischer

(2020). Perceived quality of instruction: The relationship among indicators of students’ basic needs, mastery goals, and academic achievement. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(Suppl 1), 176–192. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12313

62.

Tsirikas

A. N.

Katsaros

K. K.

Nicolaidis

C. S.

(2012). Knowledge management, tolerance of ambiguity and productivity: Evidence from the Greek public sector. Employee Relations, 34(4), 344–359. https://doi.org/10.1108/01425451211236814

63.

Tuckey

M. R.

Searle

B. J.

Boyd

C. M.

Winefield

A. H.

Winefield

H. R.

(2015). Hindrances are not threats: Advancing the multi-dimensionality of work stress. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 20(2), 131–147. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038280

64.

van Dam

(2015). Workplace goal orientation: Development of a measure. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 31(1), 62–68. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000207

65.

VandeWalle

(1997). Development and validation of a work domain goal orientation instrument. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 57(6), 995–1015. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164497057006009

66.

Vroom

V. H.

Jago

A. G.

(2007). The role of the situation in leadership. American Psychologist, 62(1), 17–24. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.62.1.17

67.

Wittenberg

K. J.

Norcross

J. C.

(2001). Practitioner perfectionism: Relationship to ambiguity tolerance and work satisfaction. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 57(12), 1543–1550. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.1116

68.

Zhang

Zhou

(2014). Empowering leadership, uncertainty avoidance, trust, and employee creativity: Interaction effects and a mediating mechanism. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 124(2), 150–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2014.02.002