In alignment with social exchange theory (SET), the present research aims to explore the mediating effects of psychological empowerment (PE) and change-oriented organizational citizenship behavior (CO-OCB) on the relationship between inclusive leadership (IL) and pro-social rule breaking (PSRB). We collected data from 542 employees working in Fortune 500 information and technology (IT) companies in India through an online survey using pre-existing scales. We conducted data analyses using structural equation modeling (SEM). The findings confirmed the hypothesized positive association between IL and PSRB, mediated by PE and CO-OCB. This research provides valuable insights for the information and technology industry, emphasizing the role of IL in encouraging PSRB behavior, thereby shifting from destructive to constructive. The results can guide top management in fostering IL by creating a psychologically secure workplace where team members feel safe to voice their opinions without fear of negative repercussions. Furthermore, the study establishes that PE and CO-OCB significantly influence the relationship between IL and PSRB.
Abu-BaderS., & JonesT. V. (2021). Statistical mediation analysis using the Sobel test and Hayes SPSS process macro. International Journal of Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methods. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3799204
2.
AhmedM., & KhanM. I. (2023). Beyond the universal perception: Unveiling the paradoxical impact of ethical leadership on employees’ unethical pro-organizational behavior. Heliyon, 9(11). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e21618
3.
AliH., LiM., & QiuX. (2022). Employee engagement and innovative work behavior among Chinese millennials: Mediating and moderating role of work–life balance and psychological empowerment. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 942580. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.942580
4.
BelhassenY., & ShaniA. (2013). Substance abuse and job attitude among hotel workers: Social labeling perspectives. Tourism Management, 34, 47–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2012.03.008
5.
BennettR. J., GalperinB. L., WangL., & ShuklaJ. (2024). Norm-violating behavior in organizations: A comprehensive conceptual review and model of constructive and destructive norm-violating behavior. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 11(1), 481–507. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-110721-043001
6.
BettencourtL. A. (2004). Change-oriented organizational citizenship behaviors: The direct and moderating influence of goal orientation. Journal of Retailing, 80(3), 165–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2003.12.001
7.
CarmeliA., Reiter-PalmonR., & ZivE. (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
8.
ChenC., DuanJ., & PengY. (2024). How does sense of power influence change-oriented organizational citizenship behavior? Evidence from China. Public Performance & Management Review, 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2023.2298414
9.
ChenL., LuoF., ZhuX., HuangX., & LiuY. (2020). Inclusive leadership promotes challenge-oriented organizational citizenship behavior through the mediation of work engagement and moderation of organizational innovative atmosphere. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 560594. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.560594
10.
ChiX., LeeS. K., AhnY., & KiatkawsinK. (2020). Tourist-perceived quality and loyalty intentions towards rural tourism in China. Sustainability, 12(9). https://doi.org/10.3390/su12093614
11.
ChoiJ. N. (2007). Change-oriented organizational citizenship behavior: Effects of work environment characteristics and intervening psychological processes. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28(4), 467–484. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.433
12.
CohenJ. (1988). Power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York University.
13.
CookS. (2008). The essential guide to employee engagement: Better business performance through staff satisfaction. Kogan Page.
14.
CrossC., & DundonT. (2019). Social exchange theory, employment relations, and human resource management. In Elgar’s introduction to human resources theories and employment relations (pp. 264–279). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://www.elgaronline.com/abstract/edcoll/9781786439000/9781786439000.00026.xml
15.
DahlingJ. J., ChauS. L., MayerD. M., & GregoryJ. B. (2012). Breaking rules for the right reasons? An investigation of pro-social rule breaking. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33(1), 21–42. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.730
16.
De ClercqD., & PereiraR. (2024). How resilient employees can prevent family ostracism from escalating into diminished work engagement and change-oriented organizational citizenship behavior. International Studies of Management & Organization, 54(1), 25–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/00208825.2023.2277968
17.
DéprezG. R. M., BattistelliA., BoudriasJ.-S., & CangialosiN. (2020). Constructive deviance and proactive behaviors: Two distinct approaches to change and innovation in the workplace. Le Travail Humain, 83(3), 235–267. https://doi.org/10.3917/th.833.0235
18.
DonnellyR. (2015). Tensions and challenges in the management of diversity and inclusion in IT services multinationals in India. Human Resource Management, 54(2), 199–215. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21654
19.
FornellC., & LarckerD. F. (1982). The algebra of factor analytic structural modeling. In: A second generation of multivariate analysis: Measurement and evaluation (Vol. 2, p. 331). Praeger.
20.
GhoshK. (2022). When and how employees cross the line for the job in hospitality firms. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 103, 103187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2022.103187
21.
GhoshA., & ShumC. (2019). Why do employees break rules? Understanding organizational rule-breaking behaviors in hospitality. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 81, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2019.02.003
22.
HairJ. F., BlackW. C., BabinB. J., AndersonR. E., & TathamR. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Pearson Prentice Hall.
23.
HairJ. F., Jr., MatthewsL. M., MatthewsR. L., & SarstedtM. (2017). PLS-SEM or CB-SEM: Updated guidelines on which method to use. International Journal of Multivariate Data Analysis, 1(2), 107. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMDA.2017.087624
24.
HairJ. F., RingleC. M., & SarstedtM. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 139–152. https://doi.org/10.2753/MTP1069-6679190202
25.
HairJ. F., RisherJ. J., SarstedtM., & RingleC. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2–24. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203
26.
HayesA. F. (2013). Mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis. In: Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (Vol. 1(6), pp. 12–20). Guilford Press.
27.
HeB., HeQ., & SarfrazM. (2021). Inclusive leadership and subordinates’ pro-social rule breaking in the workplace: Mediating role of self-efficacy and moderating role of employee relations climate. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 14, 1691–1706. https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S333593
28.
HenselerJ., RingleC. M., & SarstedtM. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
29.
IrshadM., BartelsJ., MajeedM., & BashirS. (2022). When breaking the rule becomes necessary: The impact of leader–member exchange quality on nurses pro-social rule-breaking. Nursing Open, 9(5), 2289–2303. https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.979
30.
JabeenS., & AliJ. (2022). Impact of servant leadership on the development of change-oriented citizenship behavior: Multi-mediation analysis of change readiness and psychological empowerment. In Key factors and use cases of servant leadership driving organizational performance (pp. 110–129). https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-8820-8.ch004
31.
JaleelA., & SarmadM. (2024). Inclusive leader and job crafting: The role of work engagement and job autonomy in service sector organisations. Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance, 11(4), 948–966. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOEPP-12-2022-0361
32.
JohnL. M., & ShafiM. (2020). Impact of organizational structure and social support on pro-social rule breaking: A frontline perspective. Cogent Business & Management, 7(1), 1781994. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2020.1781994
33.
KanterR. M. (1983). The change masters. Simon and Schuster.
34.
KhanN. U., ZadaM., & EstayC. (2023). Servant leadership and employee pro-social rule-breaking: The underlying effects of psychological safety and compassion at work. PLoS One, 18(4), https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0282832
35.
KhattakS. R., ZadaM., NoumanM., RahmanS. U., FayazM., UllahR., Salazar-SepúlvedaG., Vega-MuñozA., & Contreras-BarrazaN. (2022). Investigating inclusive leadership and pro-social rule breaking in hospitality industry: Important role of psychological safety and leadership identification. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(14), 8291.
36.
KieserlingA. (2019). Blau (1964): Exchange and power in social life. In:Schlüsselwerke der netzwerkforschung (pp. 51–54). Springer.
37.
KorkmazA. V., Van EngenM. L., KnappertL., & SchalkR. (2022). About and beyond leading uniqueness and belongingness: A systematic review of inclusive leadership research. Human Resource Management Review, 32(4), 100894.
38.
LeeJ. J., & OkC. M. (2014). Understanding hotel employees’ service sabotage: Emotional labor perspective based on conservation of resources theory. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 36, 176–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2013.08.014
39.
LeeJ., & ShinH. (2024). Effects of inclusive leadership on the diversity climate and change-oriented organizational citizenship behavior. Behavioral Sciences, 14(6), 491. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14060491
40.
LinM., XieM., & LiZ. (2023). Organizational error tolerance and change-oriented organizational citizenship behavior: Mediating role of psychological empowerment and moderating role of public service motivation. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 4133–4153. https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S431373
41.
LiuZ., HouD., & ZahidR. A. (2024). Intersecting paths: Corporate and green innovation in Chinese firms—A penal cointegration analysis. PLoS One, 19(1), e0295633.
42.
MalikP. (2024). Individual-focused transformational leadership and change-oriented organizational citizenship behavior: Mediating and moderating mechanisms of job crafting and employee resilience. Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance, 11(1), 90–113. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOEPP-05-2022-0120
43.
MalikL. R., & MishraM. (2023). Pro-social rule-breaking: A systematic literature review. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Insights. https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JHTI-11-2022-0561/full/html
44.
MaraneB. M. O. (2012). The mediating role of trust in organization on the influence of psychological empowerment on innovation behavior. European Journal of Social Sciences, 33(1), 39–51.
45.
MartinezN., KilagO. K., & MacarioR. (2023). The impact of organizational culture on leadership strategies in crisis management. Excellencia: International Multi-Disciplinary Journal of Education (2994–9521), 1(5), Article 5.
46.
MorrisonE. W. (2006). Doing the job well: An investigation of pro-social rule breaking. Journal of Management, 32(1), 5–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206305277790
47.
MorrisonE. W., & PhelpsC. C. (1999). Taking charge at work: Extrarole efforts to initiate workplace change. Academy of Management Journal, 42(4), 403–419. http://www.jstor.org/stable/257011?origin=JSTOR-pdf
48.
MoulikM., & GiriV. N. (2024). Job crafting for workplace happiness: A study of millennials across Indian service sectors. Business Perspectives and Research, 12(2), 242–260. https://doi.org/10.1177/22785337221148252
49.
MuppidathiP., & KrishnanV. R. (2021). Transformational leadership and follower’s perceived group cohesiveness: Mediating role of follower’s Karma-yoga. Business Perspectives and Research, 9(2), 269–285. https://doi.org/10.1177/2278533720966065
50.
OrgambídezA., BenítezM., León-PérezJ. M., & Cantero-SánchezF. J. (2024). Structural empowerment, personal initiative, and job satisfaction in service employees: Exploring the mediating role of psychological empowerment. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 65(5), 911–918. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.13040
51.
ParkE. H., KimJ., ParkY. S., & ChunK. H. (2024). Facilitating and impeding factors to insiders’ pro-social rule breaking in South Korea. Computers & Security, 136, 103572. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2023.103572
52.
PoulstonJ. (2008). Rationales for employee theft in hospitality: Excuses, excuses. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 15(1), 49–58. https://doi.org/10.1375/jhtm.15.49
53.
PradhanR. K., JanduK., HatiL., & PandaM. (2024). Being nice goes long way: Manifesting compassion for others enacts in experiencing positive emotions and workplace happiness for the employees. Business Perspectives and Research, 12(2), 208–223. https://doi.org/10.1177/22785337221113157
54.
QureshiT., SaleemI., & AhmedS. (2021). Breaking organizational rules for a reason: A framework to deal with pro-social rule breaking. Psychology (Savannah, Ga.), 58, 4135–4151.
55.
RandelA. E., GalvinB. M., ShoreL. M., EhrhartK. H., ChungB. G., DeanM. A., & KedharnathU. (2018). Inclusive leadership: Realizing positive outcomes through belongingness and being valued for uniqueness. Human Resource Management Review, 28(2), 190–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2017.07.002
56.
RappaportJ. (1987). Terms of empowerment/exemplars of prevention: Toward a theory for community psychology. American Journal of Community Psychology, 15(2), 121–148. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00919275
57.
RingleC. M., BeckerJ.-M., CheahJ.-H., & SarstedtM. (2022). PLS-SEMs most wanted guidance. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4205561
58.
SahadevS., ChangK., MalhotraN., KimJ.-H., AhmedT., & KitchenP. (2024). Psychological empowerment and creative performance: Mediating role of thriving and moderating role of competitive psychological climate. Journal of Business Research, 170, 114310.
59.
SarstedtM., & MooiE. (2014). A concise guide to market research: The process, data, and methods using IBM SPSS statistics. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-53965-7
60.
SharmaN., & DharR. L. (2024). Workplace ostracism: A process model for coping and typologies for handling ostracism. Human Resource Management Review, 34(1), 100990.
61.
ShumC. (2021). The recursive relationship between abusive supervision and service performance. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Insights, 4(1), 18–34. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHTI-03-2020-0032
62.
ShumC., & GhoshA. (2022). Safety or service? Effects of employee pro-social safety-rule-breaking on consumer satisfaction. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 103, 103225.
63.
SpreitzerG. M. (1995). Psychological, empowerment in the workplace: Dimensions, measurement and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 38(5), 1442–1465. https://doi.org/10.2307/256865
64.
SuhailA., HaqI. U., AzeemM. U., & Vigoda-GadotE. (2024). Compulsory citizenship behavior, role overload, creativity and service-oriented voluntary behavior: Does generational difference have an impact?Personnel Review. https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/PR-12-2022-0894
65.
The Economic Times. (2024). What boards can do about employee engagement. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/jobs/c-suite/what-boards-can-do-about-employee-engagement/articleshow/103160885.cms?from=mdr
66.
The Times of India. (2021). How the IT Industry is shaping the future of India?https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/readersblog/youth2020/how-the-it-industry-is-shaping-the-future-of-india-36519/
67.
TranT. B. H., & ChoiS. B. (2019). Effects of inclusive leadership on organizational citizenship behavior: The mediating roles of organizational justice and learning culture. Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology, 13, e17. https://doi.org/10.1017/prp.2019.10
68.
TuC. K., & LuoB. (2020). Paternalistic leadership and pro-social rule breaking: The moderating roles of psychological empowerment and leader-member exchange. Human Systems Management, 39(1), 93–103. https://doi.org/10.3233/HSM-190531
69.
Ullah KhattakR., NaveedM., & KhattakS. R. (2024). Inclusive leadership and employees pro-social rules breaking in banking and insurance sector of Peshawar: Mediating role of psychological safety and moderating effect of leader-member exchange. Journal of Managerial Sciences, 18(1), 94–113. https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S333593
70.
UmraniW. A., BachkirovA. A., NawazA., AhmedU., & PahiM. H. (2024). Inclusive leadership, employee performance and well-being: An empirical study. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 45(2), 231–250. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-03-2023-0159
71.
Van BuskirkM. L. (2020). Inclusive leadership, psychological empowerment, and affective organizational commitment: A mediated model[Master of Science]. San Jose State University. https://doi.org/10.31979/etd.c8u5-2wxq
72.
VardamanJ. M., GondoM. B., & AllenD. G. (2014). Ethical climate and pro-social rule breaking in the workplace. Human Resource Management Review, 24(1), 108–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2012.05.001
73.
WangF., & ShiW. (2021). Inclusive leadership and pro-social rule breaking: The role of psychological safety, leadership identification and leader-member exchange. Psychological Reports, 124(5), 2155–2179. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033294120953558
74.
WoodR., & BanduraA. (1989). Impact of conceptions of ability on self-regulatory mechanisms and complex decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56(3), 407. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.56.3.407
75.
WoodsA., ZajacS. A., MiddletonE. D., CavanaughK. J., HayesW. C., JohnsonS. K., & HolladayC. L. (2024). Doing the work: The role of inclusive leadership in promoting psychological safety and openness to diversity through diversity, equity, and inclusion practices. Psychology of Leaders and Leadership, 27(1), 115.
76.
XiaJ., XuH., & XieL. (2024). Inclusive leadership and employee involvement in proactive behavior at the workplace: The mediating role of gratitude. Baltic Journal of Management, 19(2), 200–217. https://doi.org/10.1108/BJM-05-2023-0194
77.
YangM.-B., & ChungS.-J. (2020). Effect of organizational virtuousness on pro-social rule breaking: Mediating role of psychological empowerment and moderating role of proactive personality, 33(3), 689–719.
78.
YanziW., & YananT. (2019). A research on the motivating mechanism of inclusive leadership on employees’ constructive deviance. Foreign Economics & Management, 41(03), 54–69. https://doi.org/10.16538/j.cnki.fem.2019.03.004
79.
ZimmermanM. A. (1995). Psychological empowerment: Issues and illustrations. American Journal of Community Psychology, 23(5), 581–599. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02506983
80.
ZouW.-C., TianQ., & LiuJ. (2015). Servant leadership, social exchange relationships, and follower’s helping behavior: Positive reciprocity belief matters. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 51, 147–156.
