While the crossover of psychological states and experiences has been widely studied between partners and colleagues, crossover within the leader-follower relationship seems to be little investigated. Considering the great importance of leaders’ role in shaping followers’ experience at work and the advancement in Crossover theory, this review explores the studies drawing upon the crossover to explain the influence of leaders on followers. A systematic review was performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. A total of 267 articles were retrieved from three databases (Scopus, Web of Science, EBSCO PsychINFO), 35 of which fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Crossover was investigated both considering negative and positive constructs. The indirect process is the most used to explain how crossover occurs, using mediators and moderators about leaders’ leadership styles, characteristics, behaviors, and quality of relationship. The review also reveals a not-so-low number of studies on crossover from followers to leader. Studies on followership and transfer from followers to leaders represent a gap to be bridged. More recent studies are in line with the advancement of Conservation of Resources theory, in which crossover acts as a mechanism able to explain more deeply how transference can occur.
AronAAronENNormanC (2001) Self-expansion model of motivation and cognition in close relationships and beyond. In: FletcherGClarkM (eds) Blackwell Handbook of Social Psychology: Interpersonal Processes. Blackwell, 478–501.
2.
AronALewandowskiGWMashekD, et al. (2013) The self-expansion model of motivation and cognition in close relationships. In: SimpsonJACampbellL (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Close Relationships. Oxford University Press, 90–115.
3.
BakkerABDemeroutiE (2009) The crossover of work engagement between working couples: a closer look at the role of empathy. Journal of Managerial Psychology24(3): 220–236. doi: 10.1108/02683940910939313.
4.
BakkerABDemeroutiE (2013) The spillover-crossover model. In: GrzywaczJGDemeroutiE (eds) Current Issues in Work and Organizational Psychology: New Frontiers in Work and Family Research. Psychology Press, 55–70.
5.
BakkerABXanthopoulouD (2009) The crossover of daily work engagement: test of an actor–partner interdependence model. Journal of Applied Psychology94(6): 1562–1571. doi: 10.1037/a0017525.
6.
BakkerABDemeroutiESchaufeliWB (2005) The crossover of burnout and work engagement among working couples. Human Relations58(5): 661–689. doi: 10.1177/0018726705055967.
7.
BakkerABEmmerikHVEuwemaMC (2006) Crossover of burnout and engagement in work teams. Work and Occupations33(4): 464–489. doi: 10.1177/0730888406291310.
8.
BakkerABDemeroutiEDollardMF (2008) How job demands affect partners’ experience of exhaustion: integrating work-family conflict and crossover theory. Journal of Applied Psychology93(4): 901–911. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.93.4.901.
9.
BakkerABWestmanMvan EmmerikIH (2009) Advancements in crossover theory. Journal of Managerial Psychology24(3): 206–219. doi: 10.1108/02683940910939304.
10.
BakkerABDemeroutiESanz-VergelA (2023) Job demands–resources theory: ten years later. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior10: 25–53. doi: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-120920-053933.
11.
BanduraA (1986) Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Prentice-Hall.
12.
BanduraAWaltersRH (1977) Social learning theory. Prentice Hall, Vol. 1.
13.
BaralRSampathP (2019) Exploring the moderating effect of susceptibility to emotional contagion in the crossover of work–family conflict in supervisor–subordinate dyads in India. Personnel Review48(5): 1336–1356. doi: 10.1108/PR-05-2017-0139.
14.
BassBM (1990) From transactional to transformational leadership: learning to share the vision. Organizational Dynamics18(3): 19–31. doi: 10.1016/0090-2616(90)90061-S.
15.
BronfenbrennerU (1977) Toward an experimental ecology of human development. American Psychologist32: 513–531. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.32.7.513.
16.
BroughPMullerWWestmanM (2018) Work, stress, and relationships: the crossover process model. Australian Journal of Psychology70(4): 341–349. doi: 10.1111/ajpy.12208.
17.
BroughPWestmanMChenS, et al. (2022) Psychological crossover: definitions, explanations, and new directions. In: BroughPGardinerEDanielsK (eds) Handbook on Management and Employment Practices. Springer International Publishing, 665–685.
18.
Bull SchaeferRA (2010) Indirect crossover of psychological contract underfulfillment: a leader–member analysis. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies17(3): 276–286. doi: 10.1177/1548051810368680.
19.
ButtHPTariqHWengQD, et al. (2019) I see you in me, and me in you: the moderated mediation crossover model of work passion. Personnel Review48(5): 1209–1238. doi: 10.1108/PR-05-2018-0176.
20.
CaniëlsMCJCurseuPL (2023) Satisfied on our own, yet ready to leave together: an actor–partner interdependence mediation model on job satisfaction and turnover intentions in leader–follower dyads. British Journal of Psychology115(3): 386–405. doi: 10.1111/bjop.12694.
21.
CaputoAGattiPClariM, et al. (2023) Leaders’ Role in Shaping Followers’ well-being: crossover in a sample of nurses. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health20(3): 2386. doi: 10.3390/ijerph20032386.
22.
CaputoAToscanoFDolceV, et al. (2024) Leadership in face-to-face and virtual teams: a systematic literature review on hybrid teams management. Informing Science: The International Journal of an Emerging Transdiscipline27: 1–25. doi: 10.28945/5342.
23.
CarlsonDSThompsonMJKacmarKM, et al. (2011) Pay it forward: the positive crossover effects of supervisor work—family enrichment. Journal of Management37(3): 770–789. doi: 10.1177/0149206310363613.
24.
ChenSWestmanMHobfollSE (2015) The commerce and crossover of resources: resource conservation in the service of resilience. Stress and Health: Journal of the International Society for the Investigation of Stress31(2): 95–105. doi: 10.1002/smi.2574.
25.
ChenLChenMZhangH, et al. (2022) Interrupting the crossover effect of leader’s role overload on employee’s negative affect: the moderating role of self-concordance goal. Journal of Managerial Psychology37(4): 361–378. doi: 10.1108/JMP-04-2021-0219.
26.
De HooghAHBDen HartogDN (2009) Neuroticism and locus of control as moderators of the relationships of charismatic and autocratic leadership with burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology94(4): 1058–1067. doi: 10.1037/a0016253.
27.
DemeroutiEBakkerABNachreinerF, et al. (2001) The job demands-resources model of burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology86(3): 499–512. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.499.
28.
DiebigMPoethkeURowoldJ (2017) Leader strain and follower burnout: exploring the role of transformational leadership behaviour. German Journal of Human Resource Management: Zeitschrift für Personalforschung31(4): 329–348. doi: 10.1177/2397002217721077.
29.
DociEHofmansJJudgeTA (2021) Personalities in sync: the covariation of psychological resources in leader–follower dyads. European Journal of Personality35(4): 1–14. doi: 10.1177/08902070211012935.
30.
FanWLuoYCaiY, et al. (2020) Crossover effects of Leader’s resilience: a multilevel mediation approach. Journal of Managerial Psychology35(5): 375–389. doi: 10.1108/JMP-02-2019-0109.
31.
FredricksonBL (2001) The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: the broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist56(3): 218–226. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.218.
32.
GarzaroGGattiPCaputoA, et al. (2021) Job demands and perceived distance in leader-follower relationships: a study on emotional exhaustion among nurses. Applied Nursing Research: ANR61: 151455. doi: 10.1016/j.apnr.2021.151455.
33.
GootyJConnellySGriffithJ, et al. (2010) Leadership, affect and emotions: a state of the science review. The Leadership Quarterly21(6): 979–1004. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2010.10.005.
34.
GottfredsonRKWrightSLHeaphyED (2020) A critique of the leader-member exchange construct: back to square one. The Leadership Quarterly31(6): 101385. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2020.101385.
35.
GraenGBUhl-BienM (1995) Relationship-based approach to leadership: development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. The Leadership Quarterly6(2): 219–247. doi: 10.1016/1048-9843(95)90036-5.
36.
GroulxPMaisonneuveFHarveyJ-F, et al. (2024) The ripple effect of strain in times of change: how manager emotional exhaustion affects team psychological safety and readiness to change. Frontiers in Psychology15: 1298104. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1298104.
37.
GutermannDLehmann‐WillenbrockNBoerD, et al. (2017) How leaders affect followers’ work engagement and performance: integrating leader−member exchange and crossover theory. British Journal of Management28(2): 299–314. doi: 10.1111/1467-8551.12214.
38.
HatfieldECacioppoJTRapsonRL (1994) Emotional Contagion. Cambridge University Press.
39.
Hemshorn De SanchezCSGerpottFHLehmann‐WillenbrockN (2022) A review and future agenda for behavioral research on leader–follower interactions at different temporal scopes. Journal of Organizational Behavior43(2): 342–368. doi: 10.1002/job.2583.
40.
HobfollSE (1989) Conservation of resources: a new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist44(3): 513–524.
41.
HobfollSEHalbeslebenJNeveuJP, et al. (2018) Conservation of resources in the organizational context: the reality of resources and their consequences. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior5: 103–128. doi: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032117-104640.
42.
HollanderEPOffermannLR (1990) Power and leadership in organizations: relationships in transition. American Psychologist45: 179–189. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.45.2.179.
43.
HongQNPluyePFàbreguesS, et al. (2018) The mixed methods appraisal tool (MMAT), version 2018 for information professionals and researchers. Education for Information34(4): 285–291. doi: 10.3233/EFI-180221.
44.
HuangJWangYYouX (2016) The job demands-resources model and job burnout: the mediating role of personal resources. Current Psychology35: 562–569. doi: 10.1007/s12144-015-9321-2.
45.
InceogluIThomasGChuC, et al. (2018) Leadership behavior and employee well-being: an integrated review and a future research agenda. The Leadership Quarterly29(1): 179–202. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2017.12.006.
46.
JudgeTABonoJEIliesR, et al. (2002) Personality and leadership: a qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of Applied Psychology87: 765–780. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.765.
47.
KimSChoSChungW (2023) Benefits of leaders’ pleasurable recovery activities on follower performance via emotional contagion. Journal of Applied Psychology108(8): 1336–1355. doi: 10.1037/apl0001076.
48.
KishinoS (2015) The effect of supervisor characteristics on subordinates’ work-life balance: a dyadic analysis in Japan. Journal of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict19(3): 19–30.
49.
KöppeCKammerhoffJSchützA (2018) Leader-follower crossover: exhaustion predicts somatic complaints via StaffCare behavior. Journal of Managerial Psychology33(3): 297–310. doi: 10.1108/JMP-10-2017-0367.
50.
LamJFoxKFanW, et al. (2015) Manager characteristics and employee job insecurity around a merger announcement: the role of status and crossover. The Sociological Quarterly56(3): 558–580. doi: 10.1111/tsq.12092.
51.
LandisJRKochGG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics33(1): 159–174. doi: 10.2307/2529310.
LiYWangZYangLQ, et al. (2016) The crossover of psychological distress from leaders to subordinates in teams: the role of abusive supervision, psychological capital, and team performance. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology21(2): 142–153. doi: 10.1037/a0039960.
54.
LiACropanzanoRButlerA, et al. (2021) Work–family crossover: a meta-analytic review. International Journal of Stress Management28(2): 89–104. doi: 10.1037/str0000225.
55.
LidenRCWayneSJZhaoH, et al. (2008) Servant leadership: development of a multidimensional measure and multi-level assessment. The Leadership Quarterly19(2): 161–177.
56.
LidenRCAnandSVidyarthiP (2016) Dyadic relationships. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior3: 139–166. doi: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-041015-062452.
57.
MaCWuCHChenZX, et al. (2020) Why and when leader humility promotes constructive voice: a crossover of energy perspective. Personnel Review49(5): 1157–1175. doi: 10.1108/PR-02-2019-0049.
58.
MingXBaiXLinL (2020) Kick the cat: a serial crossover effect of Supervisors’ Ego Depletion on Subordinates’ deviant behavior. Frontiers in Psychology11: 1314. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01314.
59.
NeffASonnentagSNiessenC, et al. (2015) The crossover of self-esteem: a longitudinal perspective. European Journal of Work & Organizational Psychology24(2): 197–210. doi: 10.1080/1359432X.2013.856298.
60.
NevesPCunhaMP (2018) Exploring a model of workplace ostracism: the value of coworker humor. International Journal of Stress Management25(4): 330–347. doi: 10.1037/str0000069.
61.
NiDZhengXLiangLH (2023) How and when leader mindfulness influences team member interpersonal behavior: evidence from a quasi-field experiment and a field survey. Human Relations76(12): 1940–1965. doi: 10.1177/00187267221128571.
62.
PageMJMcKenzieJEBossuytPM, et al. (2021) The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. International Journal of Surgery88: 105906. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2021.105906.
63.
PanSYYehYJ (2019) The crossover effect of work-family conflict among hotel employees. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management31(2): 812–829. doi: 10.1108/IJCHM-11-2017-0742.
64.
PanSYChuangAYehYJ (2021) Linking supervisor and subordinate’s negative work–family experience: the role of family supportive supervisor behavior. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies28(1): 17–30. doi: 10.1177/1548051820950375.
65.
Parent-RocheleauXTremblayM (2020) Energy crossover from leader to followers: a time-lagged study of the effects of energy discrepancy and leader-member exchange. Revista de Psicologia Del Trabajo Y De Las Organizaciones36(2): 135–145. doi: 10.5093/jwop2020a13.
66.
PindekSLucianettiLKesslerSR, et al. (2020) Employee to leader crossover of workload and physical strain. International Journal of Stress Management27(4): 326–334. doi: 10.1037/str0000211.
67.
PodsakoffPMMacKenzieSBLeeJ-Y, et al. (2003) Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology88(5): 879–903. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879.
68.
RofcaninYLas HerasMBoschMJ, et al. (2019) A closer look at the positive crossover between supervisors and subordinates: the role of home and work engagement. Human Relations72(11): 1776–1804. doi: 10.1177/0018726718812599.
69.
RofcaninYWangSHerasM, et al. (2023) Perceptions of support trickle Down: effects on energetic resources via psychological empowerment. European Management Review21: 1–14. doi: 10.1111/emre.12577.
70.
SampathPBaralRRastogiM (2020) Crossover of work–family conflict in supervisor–subordinate dyads in India: does LMX matter?South Asian Journal of Business Studies9(3): 373–390. doi: 10.1108/SAJBS-11-2019-0212.
71.
ScanduraTAMeuserJD (2022) Relational dynamics of leadership: problems and prospects. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior9: 309–337. doi: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-012420-091249.
72.
SteinMVincent-HoperSGregersenS (2020) Why busy leaders may have exhausted followers: a multilevel perspective on supportive leadership. The Leadership & Organization Development Journal41(6): 829–845. doi: 10.1108/LODJ-11-2019-0477.
73.
SyTCôtéSSaavedraR (2005) The contagious leader: impact of the leader’s mood on the mood of group members, group affective tone, and group processes. Journal of Applied Psychology90(2): 295–305. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.90.2.295.
74.
TariqHWengQDGaravanTN, et al. (2019) Another sleepless night: does a leader’s poor sleep lead to subordinate’s poor sleep? A spillover/crossover perspective. Journal of Sleep Research29(1): e12904. doi: 10.1111/jsr.12904.
75.
Ten BrummelhuisLLHaarJMRocheM (2014) Does family life help to be a better leader? A closer look at crossover processes from leaders to followers. Personnel Psychology67: 917–949. doi: 10.1111/peps.12057.
76.
TummersLGBakkerAB (2021) Leadership and job demands-resources theory: a systematic review. Frontiers in Psychology12: 722080. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.722080.
77.
Uhl-BienMRiggioRELoweKB, et al. (2014) Followership theory: a review and research agenda. The Leadership Quarterly25(1): 83–104. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.11.007.
78.
VeraMSànchez-CardonaI (2021) Is it your engagement or mine? Linking supervisors’ work engagement and employee performance. International Journal of Human Resource Management34(5): 912–940. doi: 10.1080/09585192.2021.1996431.
79.
WangPWangZLuoZ (2020) From Supervisors’ work–family conflict to employees’ work–family conflict: the moderating role of employees’ organizational tenure. International Journal of Stress Management27(3): 273–280. doi: 10.1037/str0000154.
80.
WestmanM (2001) Stress and strain crossover. Human Relations54(6): 717–751. doi: 10.1177/0018726701546002.
81.
WestmanMBroughPKalliathT (2009) Expert commentary on work–life balance and crossover of emotions and experiences: theoretical and practice advancements. Journal of Organizational Behavior30(5): 587–595. doi: 10.1002/job.616.
82.
WestmanMShadachEKeinanG (2013) The crossover of positive and negative emotions: the role of state empathy. International Journal of Stress Management20(2): 116–133. doi: 10.1037/a0033205.
83.
WirtzNRigottiTOttoK, et al. (2017) What about the leader? Crossover of emotional exhaustion and work engagement from followers to leaders. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology22(1): 86–97. doi: 10.1037/ocp0000024.
84.
World Medical Association (2013) World medical association declaration of helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA310(20): 2191–2194. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.281053.
85.
YaffeTKarkR (2011) Leading by example: the case of leader OCB. Journal of Applied Psychology96: 806–826. doi: 10.1037/a0022464.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
