The International Journal of Human Resource Management,
           Vol. 19, No. 10, October 2008, 1842–1863
           Transformational leadership and followers’ attitudes: the mediating role of
                                   psychological empowerment
                                      a               ˜
                Carmen Barroso Castro*, M Mar Villegas Perinan and Jose Carlos Casillas Bueno
                            ´                                        ´
            Dpto. de Administracion de Empresas y Marketing, Facultad de Ciencias Economicas y Empresariales,
                                                     ˜
                                           Sevilla, Espana
                There is now strong evidence that transformational leadership substantially influences the
                work attitudes and behaviours of followers. However, the mechanisms by which
                transformational leaders influence their followers have not been studied in a systematic
                fashion. The purpose of the present study is, therefore, to analyse how transformational
                leadership promotes:i)jobsatisfaction amongemployees;andii)affectivecommitmenttothe
                organization. In particular, the possible mediating role of psychological empowerment in
                these two relationships is conceptually hypothesised and empirically tested. The results
                demonstrate that psychological empowerment mediates the relationship between transforma-
                tional leadership and employee attitudes.
                Keywords: attitudes; behaviours; empowerment; followers; transformational leadership
           Introduction
           There is a general consensus among researchers that leadership is jointly established by leaders
           andfollowers (Howell and Shamir 2005). Followers experience the reality of a leader’s mode of
           action and are thus best placed to evaluate its effects on the relationship between a leader and his
           orherfollowers(Hollander1995).Modelsofleadershipshouldthereforetakeaccountoftherole
           of followers, their cognitions and their psychological states (Ilies, Morgeson and Nahrgang
           2005; McCann, Langford and Rawlings 2006).
              The present article is especially concerned with transformational leadership. This form of
           leadership involves the creation of an emotional attachment between leaders and their followers,
           and this emotional attachment helps to shape the values, aspirations, and priorities of followers
           (Yukl 1999; Antonakis and House 2002). In transformational leadership, the followers develop
           feelings of identity with the leader and the team that is being led (Kark and Shamir 2002).
              Transformational leadership is important in so far it has a significant influence on the work
           attitudes and behaviours of followers. There is substantial evidence that transformational
           leadership is positively related to indicators of leadership effectiveness – such as the
           satisfaction, motivation, and performance of followers (Barling, Weber and Kelloway 1996;
           Behling and McFillen 1996; Lowe, Kroeck and Sivasubramaniam 1996; DeGroot, Kiker and
           Cross 2000; Dvir, Eden, Avolio and Shamir 2002; Dumdum, Lowe and Avolio 2002; McCann
           et al. 2006). However, the mechanisms by which transformational leaders influence their
           followershavenotbeenstudiedinasystematicmanner(Avolio,Zhu,KohandBhatia2004),and
           several authors have suggested that greater attention should be paid to an understanding of how
           *Corresponding author. Email: barroso@us.es
           ISSN 0958-5192 print/ISSN 1466-4399 online
           q2008Taylor & Francis
           DOI: 10.1080/09585190802324601
           http://www.informaworld.com
                            The International Journal of Human Resource Management           1843
             these influential processes operate in transformational leadership (Bass 1999; Conger 1999;
             Yukl 1999; Conger, Kanungo and Menon 2000; Kark and Shamir 2002).
                Despite the lack of systematic research in this area, previous research has examined some
             mediators in the relationship between transformational leadership and outcomes for followers.
             These mediator variables have included: i) collective efficacy (Walumbwa, Wang, Lawler and
             Shi 2004); ii) self-concordance at work (Bono and Judge 2003); iii) core job characteristics
             (Piccollo and Colquitt 2006); iv) person–organizationfit (Huang, Cheng andChou2005);andv)
             leader–member exchange (Wang, Lawler, Hackett, Wang and Chen 2005). In this context, the
             present study examines the possible mediating role of ‘psychological empowerment’.
                Psychological empowerment is defined as a motivational construct which focuses on the
             cognitions of the individual being empowered (Spreitzer 1995a; Menon 2001). Psychological
             empowerment plays an important role in employees’ attitudes and performance (Thomas and
             Velthouse 1990; Thomas and Tymon 1994; Fulford and Enz 1995; Spreitzer 1995b; Spreitzer,
             Kizilos and Nason 1997; Kirkman and Rosen 1999; Koberg, Boss, Senjem and Goodman 1999;
             Menon 2001). Despite the attention that has been given to psychological empowerment,
             relatively little is known about the effects of leadership on psychological empowerment of
             followers. Research on psychological empowerment has focused on antecedents such as the
             organization’s structure, climate, culture and personality traits (Spreitzer 1995a, 1995b; 1996;
             Koberg et al. 1999; Sigler and Pearson 2000; Menon 2001).
                Bass (1999) emphasized psychological empowerment as a potential mediator of
             transformational leadership effects, since transformational leadership acts through empower-
             ment in influencing work outcomes.
                McCann et al. (2006) building on the syncretic model of transformational leadership of
             Behling and McFillen (1996) who posited empowerment, together with awe and inspiration, as
             key beliefs among followers, and nominated these beliefs as being crucial to the ability of
             transformational leadership to have a positive influence on the responses of followers. In a
             similar vein, HepworthandTowler(2004)foundthattransformationalleadershipwasnegatively
             related to workplace aggression, and that psychological empowerment partially mediated this
             relationship. Moreover, Epitropaki and Martin (2005) have suggested that transformational
             leaders can use empowerment to create a perception among followers that they are being taken
             seriously, listened to and valued as members of the organization.
                However, despite this recognition of the apparent importance of empowerment, there is a
             paucity of previous studies on the exact motivational role of empowerment in enabling
             transformational leadership to exert an influence on followers (Thomas and Velthouse 1990;
             Conger 1989; Hollander 1992; Kark, Shamir and Chen 2003; Howell and Shamir 2005). The
             purpose of the present study is, therefore, to analyse the mediating role of psychological
             empowerment in the relationship between transformational leadership and followers’ attitudes
             with respect to job satisfaction and affective commitment to the organization.
                The remainder of the article is arranged as follows. Following this introduction, the next
             section presents a review of the existing literature and a conceptual framework for studying
             the effects of transformational leadership upon followers. The following section explains the
             methodology of the study. This is followed by a presentation of the results. Finally,
             the conclusion summarises the main findings of the study and the implications for management.
             Literature review and conceptual framework
             Conceptual framework
             Figure 1 illustrates the conceptual framework proposed for the present study. It can be seen from
             the diagram that the study proposes to examine:
                1844                                   C. Barroso Castro et al.
                Figure 1.  Conceptual framework for study.
                    . the direct relationship between transformational leadership and general job satisfaction;
                    . the direct relationship between transformational leadership and affective commitment
                       to the organization; and
                    . the possible mediating role of psychological empowerment in each of the above
                       relationships.
                Effect of transformational leadership on job satisfaction and organizational commitment
                According to Bass and Avolio (2000), transformational leadership is defined by five key
                dimensions. They can be summarised as follows:
                    . Idealized influence (attributed): which refers to the socialized charisma of the leader,
                       whereby the followers feel trust, admiration, loyalty and respect for the leader.
                    . Idealizedinfluence(behaviour):whichreferstothecharismaticactionsoftheleader,whereby
                       individuals transcend their self-interest for the sake of the organization and develop a
                       collective sense of mission and purpose; this dimension broadens the traditional leadership
                       role into that of a ‘manager of meaning’ (Bryman, Gillingwater and McGuinness 1996).
                    . Inspirational motivation:whichreferstothewayinwhichtransformationalleadersenergize
                       their followers by articulating a compelling vision of the future – thus creating enthusiastic
                       excitement, raising followers’ expectations, and communicating confidence that followers
                       can achieve ambitious goals;
                    . Intellectual stimulation: which refers to the way in which transformational leaders question
                       the status quo, appeal to followers’ intellect, stimulate them to question their assumptions,
                       and invite innovative and creative solutions to problems.
                    . Individualized consideration: which refers to leadership behaviour that contributes to
                       followersatisfactionbypayingcloseattentiontotheindividualneedsoffollowers,actingasa
                       mentororcoach,andenablingthemto develop and self-actualize.
                    Numerous studies have demonstrated that transformational leadership has a positive effect
                on the attitudes and behaviours of followers (Dumdum et al. 2002; Avolio et al. 2004). More
                specifically, it has been established that transformational leadership has a positive effect on:
                i) job satisfaction among followers (Barling et al. 1996; Bishop 2000; Walumbwa, Wang and
                Lawler 2003); and ii) commitment to the organization among followers (Bycio, Hackett
                and Allen 1995; Bono and Judge 2003; Dumdum et al. 2002; Walumbwa et al. 2003).
                    Job satisfaction was defined by Locke (1976, p. 1297) as ‘a pleasure or positive emotional
                state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job or job experience’. In addition to being satisfied
                            The International Journal of Human Resource Management           1845
             or dissatisfied with various specific aspects of a particular job (such as pay, coworkers, leader,
             andsoon),employeescanalsohaveageneralaffectiveresponsetotheirjob(Lucas,Babakusand
             Ingram 1990; McFarlin and Rice 1992).
                It has been established that job satisfaction is higher among employees whose leaders
             emphasizeconsideration, support, and concern for their followers (Allen and Meyer 1990, 1996;
             Yukl1999;Walumbwaetal.2003;RaffertyandGriffin2006).Inprovidingsuchindividualized
             consideration to followers, Bass (1985) identified a ‘developmental orientation’ and ‘supportive
             leadership’ as crucial elements. Wofford and Liska (1993) established that socio-emotional
             supportincreases positive affect and enjoyment in the workplace and communicatestofollowers
             that they are accepted and liked.
                Affective commitmentto anorganization is the degree to which an individual identifies with
             that organization (Porter, Steers, Mowday and Boulian 1974). Such commitment reflects
             an employee’s emotional attachment to the organization and involves: i) acceptance of
             the organization’s objectives and values; ii) willingness to make an extraordinary effort for the
             organization; and iii) a desire to remain with the company (Mowday, Steers and Porter 1979).
                Theemotionalattachmentthatexistsbetweenatransformationalleaderandhisorherfollowers
             increases affiliation with the leader and enhances affective commitment to the organization
             (Rhoades,EisenbergerandArmeli2001).Inaddition,empiricalresearchsuggeststhataleaderwho
             articulates a compelling vision of the future has a positive impact on affective commitment
             (Podsakoff, Mackenzie and Bommer 1996; Lowe and Barnes 2002; Rafferty and Griffin 2004).
             Finally, according to Kark and Shamir (2002), transformational leaders who emphasize a shared
             visionoforganizationalvaluesandidealswill‘prime’thecollectiveself-identityoftheirfollowers,
             enhance social cohesion, and stimulate affective commitment to organization.
                In view of the preceding discussion, the following hypothesis is proposed:
             Hypothesis 1: Transformational leadership is positively related to general job satisfaction and
                           affective commitment among followers.
             Effect of psychological empowerment on job satisfaction and organizational commitment
             Thediversity of approaches to empowerment has resulted in some ambiguity with regards to the
             nature of the empowerment construct. In line with Menon (2001) we can distinguish between
             empowerment from a structural approach and empowerment from a motivational approach.
                In the structural approach to ‘empowerment’, the term implies the granting of power and
             decision-making authority to subordinates (Kanter 1983; Thorlakson and Murray 1996). This
             has been the traditional approach to empowerment and it focuses on the actions of the holders of
             power who transfer some degree of autonomy to the less powerful.
                In the motivational approach, empowerment is conceptualised as psychological enabling, it
             focuses on the cognitions of the individual who are empowered; in other words, the internal
             process or psychological state of the individual.
                Several researchers have suggested that the perceptions of employees can mediate the
             relationship between management actions and employee performance (Deci and Ryan 1985;
             Bandura 1989; Behling and McFillen 1996; McCann et al. 2006). This has led to a greater
             research interest in the underlying psychological and cognitive states associated with
             empowerment from a motivational approach.
                Such a motivational approach was pioneered by Conger and Kanungo (1988), who defined
             empowerment as a process of enhancing feelings of self-efficacy among organizational
             members. According to Bandura (1989, p. 408), self-efficacy involves ‘beliefs in one’s
             capabilities to mobilise the motivation, cognitive resources, and courses of action needed to
             meet given situational demands’.