See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/363946602
Relational leadership and employee creativity: the role of knowledge-sharing
behaviour and leader–follower dyadic tenure
Article in Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Insights · September 2022
DOI: 10.1108/JHTI-06-2022-0218
CITATION
READS
1
39
3 authors, including:
Abraham Ansong
Ethel Esi Ennin
University of Cape Coast
University of Cape Coast
46 PUBLICATIONS 550 CITATIONS
1 PUBLICATION 1 CITATION
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Call for Book Chapter-Corporate Governance models and Application in Developing Countries View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Ethel Esi Ennin on 23 February 2023.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
https://www.emerald.com/insight/2514-9792.htm
Relational leadership and
employee creativity: the role of
knowledge-sharing behaviour and
leader–follower dyadic tenure
Abraham Ansong
Department of Management, School of Business, University of Cape Coast,
Cape Coast, Ghana
Ethel Esi Ennin
Relational
leadership and
employee
creativity
Received 3 June 2022
Revised 3 July 2022
10 August 2022
13 September 2022
Accepted 14 September 2022
Centre for Continuing Education, University of Cape Coast, Cape Coast, Ghana, and
Moses Ahomka Yeboah
Department of Entrepreneurship and Agric-Business,
Cape Coast Technical University, Cape Coast, Ghana
Abstract
Purpose – The study investigated the effects of relational leadership on hotel employees’ creativity, using
knowledge-sharing behaviour and leader–follower dyadic tenure as intervening variables.
Design/methodology/approach – A self-administered questionnaire was used to collect data from 355
employees of authorized hotels from the conurbation of Cape Coast and Elmina in Ghana. To evaluate the
study’s research hypotheses, the authors used WarpPLS and PLS-SEM.
Findings – The findings demonstrated that while knowledge-sharing behaviour did not directly affect
employee creativity, it did have a significant mediating effect on the link between relational leadership and the
creativity of employees. The study also revealed that the ability of relational leaders to drive knowledgesharing behaviour was not contingent on leader–follower dyadic tenure.
Practical implications – The results of this study have practical relevance for human resource practitioners
in the hospitality industry. Given that relational leadership has a positive relationship with employee creativity,
the authors recommend that hotel supervisors relate well with employees by sharing valuable information and
respecting their opinions in decision-making.
Originality/value – Studies on the role of relational leadership and employee creativity are scanty. This study
develops a model to explain how relational leadership could influence employee creativity by incorporating
knowledge-sharing behaviour and leader–follower dyadic tenure.
Keywords Relational leadership, Employee creativity, Knowledge-sharing behaviour,
Leader–follower dyadic tenure, Hotels, Ghana
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
The hospitality industry consists of clients that are increasingly searching for better services
that meet and/or exceed their expectations (Ampong et al., 2021; Bani-Melhem et al., 2018;
Vakira et al., 2022). Hence, the industry seeks a workforce that has a strong capacity for
creativity to help meet these ever-increasing demands (Javed et al., 2017; Lee et al., 2019;
Nasifoglu Elidemir et al., 2020). Researchers in hotel management have highlighted the need
for employees to be creative so as to effectively carry out both regular job demands and other
specialized customer service (Lan et al., 2022). At the organizational level, it has been found
that employee creativity has a strong impact on an organization’s competitive advantage and
growth (Khalid and Zubair, 2014; Zhou and Hoever, 2014). Employee creativity also fuels
organizational innovation (Tu et al., 2019; Zhou and Hoever, 2014) which can heighten an
organization’s ability to adapt and remain relevant (Gerstein and Friedman, 2017; Zhou and
Journal of Hospitality and Tourism
Insights
© Emerald Publishing Limited
2514-9792
DOI 10.1108/JHTI-06-2022-0218
JHTI
Hoever, 2014). At the individual level, creative employees are known to be more comfortable
embracing the unknown (Hensley, 2020). They have also demonstrated higher levels of
resilience when seeking ways of handling uncertainty (Venckut_e et al., 2020).
Employee creativity is an intellectual process of generating fresh and practically useful
ideas (Zhou et al., 2022). Creative ideas are the foundation of all innovation, as Amabile and
Pratt (2016) pointed out. A person or team needs to have a strong concept and the ability to
develop it beyond its initial state in order to successfully implement new initiatives, new
product debuts or new services. The hotel industry needs the creativity of its frontline
employees, who are usually in close contact with guests and thus tend to know their needs
and wants, to develop new products and services. Th suggestions of frontline workers assist
change in current work procedures in areas such as administration, information flow, service
range and back-office innovation (Danvour et al., 2021). Their recommendations help to
modernize present working practices in administration, information flows, service scope and
back-office innovation, among other areas. Some scholars claim that frontline workers often
have a greater understanding of the need for workplace improvements than top management
(Carmeli and Spreitzer, 2009). Zona and Adrian (2020) advanced that factors such as
self-encouragement and encouragement from the environment promote the realization of
individual creativity. Leaders are instrumental at creating a workplace environment that
fosters employee creativity.
Although leadership styles, in the hotel sector, have been recognized as significant
influencers of employee creativity (Bhutto et al., 2021; Hassi, 2019; Wang et al., 2014; Wang
et al., 2021), there is a paucity of evidence on how relational leadership style affects employee
creativity. Also, Elkhwesky et al. (2022) bemoaned the neglect of relevant intervening
variables by researchers in investigating the nexus between leadership styles and employee
behaviour following their critical review of empirical studies on leadership styles in
contemporary hospitality. According to Breevaart and de Vries (2021), relational leadership
focuses on the overall welfare of followers by connecting with them, listening to their input,
demonstrating trust and confidence in them and praising their accomplishments. Unlike
other forms of leadership styles, relational leaders provide encouragement to employees in
risky and challenging tasks, recognize their efforts and ensure the availability of resources
necessary to engender creativity (De Jong and Den Hartog, 2007). Kim et al. (2021) posited that
although a leader’s knowledge-sharing behaviour plays a critical role in promoting employee
creativity, it has not received the required attention from scholars. Hence, this study seeks to
answer two main questions, including (1) does relational leadership positively influence
employee creativity? and (2) If yes, do knowledge-sharing behaviour and leader–follower
dyadic tenure play any intervening role in the hospitality and tourism industry of Ghana?
Ghana is proud of its heritage tourist industry, which is largely a result of the 400-year-old
transatlantic slave trade (Boateng et al., 2018; Dillette, 2021; Yankholmes and McKercher,
2015). More so, it is a destination for business travellers, backpackers and volunteer tourism
alike (Adu-Ampong, 2018; Bargeman et al., 2018; Dayour et al., 2016; Mensah et al., 2017;
Yankholmes, 2018). The 2020 Tourism Report by the Ministry of Tourism, Arts and Culture
reported on some of the most visited places in Ghana. This includes the Kwame Nkrumah
Memorial Park, Manhyia Palace, Kintampo Waterfalls, Komfo Anokye Sword, Lake
Bosomtwi, Mole National Park, Kumasi Zoo, Shai Hills Reserve, Nzulezo, Boabeng-Fiema
Monkey Sanctuary and Zenga Crocodile Pond. Furthermore, the report also ranked Kakum
National Park to be 1st among the top ten most visited attractions/sites in Ghana from 2016 to
2020. This is followed by the Cape Coast Castle as the 2nd, and Elmina Castle is ranked 5th.
These three tourist sites are located in Cape Coast and Elmina. The study adds to the body of
knowledge and current practice in the hospitality and tourist sectors. First, it combines
research in the hospitality sector on relational leadership and knowledge management.
Second, using knowledge-sharing behaviour and leader–follower dyadic tenure as
intervening variables, it studies relational leadership and employee innovation in the
hospitality sector. Finally, the study offers practical recommendations for hoteliers that
embrace relational leadership and thus stimulate a discussion on how hoteliers and managers
can work better with employees to achieve desired organizational outcomes in the context of
social exchange theory.
Literature review
Theoretical review
The social exchange theory, proposed by Blau (1964), advanced that social exchanges
necessitate undefined obligations. When a person demonstrates kindness towards another
person, he/she feels pretty sure that he/she will get a response in an undefined time, place and
style in the future (Wayne et al., 1997). The basic idea behind the principle of reciprocity is that
obligations of repayment are based on the value attributed to the benefit received (Gouldner,
1960). Alternatively said, the degree to which one feels obligated to return will depend on how
valuable the exchange with the other party is seen to be. There is a suggestion that some
elements, including the degree of the recipient’s exigency and the parties’ status during the
period of the exchange, may have an impact on the exchange’s worth and the subsequent
sense of obligation (Gouldner, 1960). Thus, we reasoned that leaders who build positive
relationships with employees, through knowledge-sharing behaviour, will engender greater
felt obligation on the part of employees to be creative because knowledge is a cherished
resource employees use in building their competencies at work (Liu et al., 2010). Leaders’
knowledge-sharing behaviour has been acknowledged as being among some of the important
determinants of hotel efficiency and improvement given the influence it has on employee
creativity (Al Hawamdeh, 2022). Consequently, using the principles of social exchange
theory, this study investigates the association among relational leadership, knowledgesharing behaviour, leader–follower tenure and employee creativity.
Hypotheses development
Relational leadership and employee creativity
Relational leadership improves employee creativity because it embraces inclusiveness (Amabile
and Pratt, 2016; Baafi et al., 2021; Javed et al., 2017). From the viewpoint of social exchange
theory, leaders that promote inclusiveness have a tendency to enhance employee creativity by
being accessible and available to assist employees. Actions such as creating opportunities for
professional and personal growth and encouraging risk-taking behaviour among employees are
known attributes of relational leaders (Hollander, 2012). They also promote employees’
creativeness by making organizational resources available to their subordinates (Hollander,
2012). In addition, the emotional bonds that develop between relational leaders and their
employees promote creativity since employees feel pressured to assist their leaders to become
successful by creatively solving organizational challenges efficiently (Blau, 1964; Northouse,
2019). However, Ferch and Mitchell (2001) indicate the need to encourage intentional forgiveness
in organizations that practice relational leadership style to ensure its effectiveness. The authors
argue that this is necessary due to the likely manifestations of personality clashes, ideological
differences and dysfunctional communication between the leader and his followers. These
downsides to relational leadership could lead to low employee creativity and productivity.
Empirical evidence, based on studies employing attributes of relational leadership, suggests
relational leadership could have positive impact on employee creativity. For instance, Hassi
(2019) found that empowering leadership improves climate for creativity which then positively
affects management innovation among employees of 127 hotels in Morocco. Again, Bhutto et al.
(2021) analysed data from 302 workers in the tourist and hospitality industry and found that
there is a link between green inclusive leadership and green creativity. Hence, we propose that:
Relational
leadership and
employee
creativity
JHTI
H1. Relational leadership has a significant positive relationship with employee
creativity.
Relational leadership and knowledge-sharing behaviour
Relational leadership that empowers employees has been viewed as a crucial prerequisite for
promoting knowledge-sharing behaviour (Bavik et al., 2018; Jada et al., 2019). Relational
leadership fosters knowledge-sharing due to its tendency to empower employees (Jada et al.,
2019). Relational leaders are known to be supportive and this includes allowing for autonomous
thought among staff and providing constructive criticism (Amundsen and Martinsen, 2014).
Specifically, such leaders encourage subordinates by sharing information through business
official documents, the media, telling stories about organizational successes and failures as well
as discussing their personal work experiences with subordinates. Using the social exchange
theory as a foundation, it is reasonable to posit that relational leaders create a favourable climate
for active learning, thereby stimulating personal initiatives (Kim and Beehr, 2018). Also,
relational leaders in their quest to treat their followers well are more likely to adhere to moral
principles, which could evoke favourable emotions and ease mental tension, resulting in the
feeling of positive commitment and knowledge-sharing among workers (Lindebaum et al., 2017).
By promoting high-quality workplace relationships, relational leaders establish a friendly
communication atmosphere that encourages knowledge-sharing (Bonner et al., 2016). Thus, we
anticipate that relational leaders are more likely to encourage knowledge-sharing behaviour in
an organization. Hence, we predict that:
H2. Relational leadership has a significant positive relationship with knowledge-sharing
behaviour.
Knowledge-sharing behaviour and employee creativity
Knowledge-sharing is described as the process through which individuals exchange information
and work together to develop new ideas (Lan et al., 2022). In the context of a hotel, knowledge
refers to information necessary for rendering excellent customer service by complying with
specified operational procedures (Yang and Wan, 2004). Knowledge is a resource that can be
employed by organizations to improve the capabilities and skills of their employees (Liu et al.,
2010). Liao et al. (2018) advanced that whenever knowledge is donated and received, employees
gain novel ideas about crafting their jobs in a more meaningful way. Also, knowledge-sharing
behaviour stimulates creativity because employees receive valuable insights from their
supervisors, which boosts confidence and enhances their creative performance in the workplace.
The positive impact of knowledge-sharing on employee creativity has been demonstrated in a
number of earlier research (Akhavan et al., 2015; Kim and Lee, 2013; Nieves and Diaz-Meneses,
2018; Nham et al., 2020; Phung et al., 2017). Thuan (2020) used a paper-based survey among
information technology businesses in Southern Vietnam to examine the effects of supervisor
knowledge-sharing behaviour on subordinate innovation. Because employees profited from
their supervisors’ expertise, information, experience and ideas, the study demonstrated that
knowledge-sharing behaviours had a beneficial impact on employee creativity. In Vietnam,
Phung et al. (2017) investigated the relationship between knowledge-sharing and creative work
practices. According to the findings, the organization was able to encourage employee creativity
because of the supervisors and employees’ willingness to share their knowledge. Again, the
association between knowledge-sharing activities and innovation capability was examined by
Nham et al. (2020). The results demonstrated that knowledge-sharing activities were crucial for
enhancing personal creativity. Finally, with the help of 257 employees from 22 high-tech
businesses in Iran, Akhavan et al. (2015) conducted study on the knowledge-sharing
determinants, behaviours and innovative work behaviours and came to the conclusion that
these behaviours increased employee creativity. Therefore, this study anticipates that:
H3. Knowledge-sharing behaviour has a significant positive relationship with employee
creativity.
Mediating role of knowledge-sharing behaviour on the nexus between relational leadership
and employee creativity
Although empirical literature in the hospitality industry has demonstrated that relational
dimensions of leadership stimulate employee creativity (Bhutto et al., 2021; Hassi, 2019), the role
of knowledge-sharing behaviour in the association between relational leadership and employee
creativity has not been given much attention. Leaders are important agents for employee
creativity because they are responsible for effective knowledge management (Mota Veiga et al.,
2022; Shukla et al., 2022). Relational leaders could possess better knowledge management
capabilities and as such they could spur innovative behaviours among employees leading to the
provision of newer and better services to clients. Based on the reciprocity argument supported
by the central tenets of social exchange theory and our earlier justifications as well as the
research evidence for hypotheses 2 and 3, it is reasonable to assume that relational leadership
can affect knowledge-sharing behaviour, which may then favourably affect employee creativity
(Blau, 1964; Gouldner, 1960; Wayne et al., 1997). We propose that the knowledge-sharing
behaviour plays a major intermediary role in transmitting the effects of relational leadership on
employee creativity. Hence, we hypothesize that:
H4. The positive link between relational leadership and employee creativity is mediated
by knowledge-sharing behaviour.
Moderating role of leader–follower dyadic tenure on the nexus between relational leadership
and knowledge-sharing behaviour
Although there are conceptual and empirical reasons to expect that relational leaders could
facilitate knowledge-sharing behaviour, relational leadership, by nature, provides employees
with a lot of flexibility. Nevertheless, leader–follower dyadic tenure can actively encourage
knowledge-sharing behaviour by increasing the frequency at which leaders and followers
interact. Such interactions provide opportunities for employees to learn from managers and
also offer suggestions to enhance the operational efficiency of organizations. Several studies
have opined that an employee’s time spent with a leader might be an important determinant
of the amount and quality of information the leader may be willing to share due to trust
(Gnankob et al., 2022; Lewicki and Bunker, 1996). Over time, trust develops, mostly as a result
of the parties’ history of productive interactions. (Jian and Dalisay, 2017). As a result, we
anticipate that leader–follower tenure and relational leadership will interact to affect
knowledge-sharing behaviour. Hence, we propose that:
H5. Leader-follower dyadic tenure strengthens the association between relational
leadership and knowledge-sharing behaviour.
Conceptual framework
This study developed an integrated framework to illustrate the hypothesized relationships
(see Figure 1): Relational leadership has direct relationships with employee creativity (H1)
and knowledge-sharing behaviour (H2), respectively; knowledge-sharing behaviour has a
direct relationship with employee creativity (H3); and also mediates the relationship between
relational leadership and employee creativity (H4), respectively. Finally, leader–follower
dyadic tenure moderates the connection between relational leadership and knowledgesharing behaviour (H5).
Relational
leadership and
employee
creativity
JHTI
Leaders-follower
Hotel
grade
dyadic tenure
H4
Knowledge-sharing
Relational leadership
behaviour
4
Employee
H3
creativity
H2
H1
Self-efficacy
Figure 1.
Conceptual model
Source(s): Researchers’ construction
Research methods
Sample size, sampling procedure and data collection procedure
This study was based on a positivist paradigm. It used a cross-sectional survey design to
gather data from the respondents. Quantitative approaches to research make it possible for
the social environment, like the present study, to be represented as variables with numerical
values so that their relationships can be statistically analysed (Creswell, 2014). The study was
conducted among 62 licenced hotels within the Cape Coast-Elmina conurbation, Ghana.
Geographically, Cape Coast and Elmina were chosen because they are geographically
adjacent in terms of settlement and development. Also, they hold and receive the greatest
number of attractions and tourist arrivals due to their diversity of attractions, which include
historical, ecological and cultural attractions (Dayour, 2014). The Ghana Tourism Authority
(GTA) categorizes hotels as 1-Star, 2-Star, 3-Star, Budget and Guest House. The nonmanagerial/non-supervisory staff population was also identified as, 102 office staff, 133
kitchen, restaurant and bar staff, 22 sales, marketing and accounts staff, 157 housekeeping
staff and 151 engineering, security and support staff. From a heterogeneous population of 565
non-managerial/non-supervisory staff, 400 were randomly sampled, using a stratified
sampling technique. The modified formula by Adam (2020) states that 316 is the minimal
sample size needed for a population of 565. A 27% upward adjustment was made to this
minimal sample size to account for potential non-responses. 355 out of the 400 respondents
answered (i.e., 88.75% response rate) the questionnaire, which meets the minimum required
sample size. Data were gathered based on a survey carried out from 1st December 2021 to
31st January 2022. Table 1 indicates the complete demographic information of the
respondents.
Instrument development
Multiple indicators were used to measure the primary variables (relational leadership,
knowledge-sharing behaviour, employee creativity and self-efficacy) in our research model.
Socio-demographic characteristics
Gender
Age
Missing
Highest level of education
Missing
Marital status
Hotel-grade
Department
Male
Female
Less than 20
21–30
31–40
41–50
51–60
Total
System
Primary
JHS
SHS
Vocational/technical
Tertiary
Middle school
Total
System
Single
Married
Divorced
Widow/widower
3-star
2-star
1-star
Budget
Guest house
Front Office
Kitchen/Restaurant/Bar
Engineering/Security/Support
Sales/Marketing/Account
Housekeeping
Frequency (n 5 355)
Percent (%)
193
162
10
171
143
28
2
354
1
10
26
136
99
79
3
353
2
217
128
7
3
89
96
84
70
16
74
102
80
22
77
54.4
45.6
2.8
48.2
40.3
7.9
0.6
99.7
0.3
2.8
7.3
38.3
27.9
22.3
0.8
99.4
0.6
61.1
36.1
2.0
0.8
25.1
27.0
23.7
19.7
4.5
20.8
28.7
22.5
6.2
21.7
To improve content validity, every indicator variable employed in the current study was
sourced from existing literature (Straub et al., 2004). The final questionnaire was given to
experienced professionals in the hospitality industry and some experts in the study area
to cross-check for consistency, relevance, clarity and ambiguity. This was done in order to
determine the validity of the instrument based on the research objectives. The items were
then reworded to reflect the context of the study. To make the questionnaire understandable
and user-friendly, their suggestions were integrated.
Measurement instrument
Twenty-five questions from the RLQ scale created by Carifio (2010) were utilized to estimate
relational leadership. This scale had five sub-scales, namely; inclusiveness, empowering,
caring, ethical and vision. Each of the dimensions of RLQ consisted of 5 items. The questions
put forth by Lee (2001) about knowledge-sharing behaviours were modified to meet the
survey items based on the views of Van Den Hooff and De Ridder (2004) and De Vries et al.
(2006). The total number of items in this scale was 14. The eight items utilised to calculate
employee creativity were also derived from Bass and Avolio (1995). Likewise, the New
General Self-Efficacy (NGSE) Scale with eight items derived from Chen et al. (2001) was
adapted to measure self-efficacy. They were calculated with a seven-point Likert scale where
1 represents the least level of agreement and 7 represents the highest level of agreement.
Participants indicated how many months/years they had worked with their boss or
Relational
leadership and
employee
creativity
Table 1.
Non-managerial/nonsupervisory staff
demographic of Cape
Coast-Elmina
conurbation hotels
JHTI
supervisor to calculate leader–follower dyadic tenure and the hotel grades were obtained
from Ghana Tourism Authority.
We controlled for self-efficacy and hotel rating. High self-efficacy, according to Bandura
(1986), influences motivation and the capacity to engage in particular behaviours, making it a
crucial condition for personal creativity. Abuelhassan and AlGassim (2022) postulated that
employees who perceive themselves to be competent are more capable of meeting diverse job
demands because they also tend to be very creative. Empirical research shows that
individuals with high levels of self-efficacy frequently provide novel concepts and solutions
(De Jesus et al., 2013). Also, we reasoned that employees in higher star rating hotels could be
more creative than those in lower star rating hotels because highly graded hotels are more
likely to have organizational resources to support their creativity.
Data analysis
Before the data gathered were analysed, it was essential to determine its suitability. Hence,
using WarnPLS Version 7.0 of partial least squares structural equation modelling (SEM), we
examined the validity and reliability of the items used in the study (Chin, 1998; Kock, 2017;
Moqbel et al., 2013). Three things were tested for: convergent validity, reliability and
discriminant validity. Table 2 provides the CFA, Cronbach’s alpha, composite reliability and
average variance extracted data. The interpretation of the mediation results is based on the
postulation of Hayes (2013). The author argued that it was still possible to have a significant
mediation effect if only one of the paths are significant because the mediation effect is
the product of the a-path and b-path. Therefore, even if one of the direct paths is insignificant,
the indirect path may still be significant.
Results
Reliability, validity and common method variance analyses
Measures of reliability included Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability. All the composite
reliability and Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were above the 0.7 cut-off point suggested by
Hair et al. (2017). The average full collinearity VIF (AFVIF), which is 1946, and the variance
inflation factors (VIFs), all of which are less than 3, show that collinearity is not a concern in
the models under examination (Kock, 2011). The results demonstrate that the instruments
had sufficient convergent validity and reliability because the items, respectively, had strong
and significant loadings on the constructs (Hair et al., 2010).
Common method variance
The likelihood of variance in the measurement model was determined by evaluating common
method bias through Harman’s one-factor test (Baron and Tang, 2009). Only 17.3% of the
data variation was explained by the first unrotated factor. As a result, no single component
emerged, and the primary factor did not fully explain the variance (less than 50%). Therefore,
it appears unlikely that the results are impacted by common technique variance in light of
these findings.
Results and hypothesis testing
The results of the structural paths, represented in Figure 2, demonstrate that there was a
positive and significant association between relational leadership and employee creativity
(5 0.12, p 0.10), supporting hypothesis 1. Relational leadership and knowledge-sharing
behaviour had a positive and significant association (r 5 0.37, p 0.05.) Therefore, H2 is
supported. The results show that knowledge-sharing behaviour did not influence employee
creativity (β 5 0.03, p > 0.10). Thus, H3 is not supported. Furthermore, the inclusion of
Construct
Items
Relational Leadership
α 5 0.96; CR 5 0.97;
AVE 5 0.54
Creates opportunities for professional and personal growth
0.75
Encourages risk-taking amongst staff
Engages in well-mannered, polite, civil discourse that respects
differences and values equity and involvement
Readily maintains attitudes that respect differences and values equity
and involvement
Recognizes and engages all internal and external stakeholders in
building coalitions
Builds the professional capabilities of others and promotes selfleadership
Encourages others by sharing information bringing people into the
group process and promoting individual and group learning
Shares important tasks with others
Acknowledges the abilities and skills of others
Shows appreciation for the contribution of others
Steps out of his/her frame of reference into that of others
Shows sensitivity to the needs and feelings of employees
Establishes relationships built on values, caring and support
Promotes individual development and responds to the needs of others
Nurtures growth and remains connected to staff, through
interpersonal relationships
Influences others by mutual liking and respect
Conforms to the established standards of administrative practice
Actively practices “leading with integrity”
Considers opposing viewpoints and the values and the values of
others in decision-making
Encourages a shared process of leadership through the creation of
opportunity and responsibility for others
Provides inspiring and strategic goals
Inspirational, able to motivate by articulating effectively the
Importance of what staff are doing
Has vision; often brings ideas about possibilities for the future
Articulates natural mental ability that is associated with the
experience
Often exhibit unique behaviour that symbolizes deeply held beliefs
My immediate manager or supervisor often shares:
0.67
0.65
Knowledge-sharing
Behaviour
α 5 0.93; CR 5 0.94;
AVE 5 0.53
Business official documents, proposals or reports with me
Business manuals, models and methodologies with me
Stories of success and failure with me
Business knowledge obtained from newspapers, magazines,
television or the internet with me
Know-how work experiences with me
Knowledge obtained from instruction or training with me
Problem-solving knowledge with me
I often ask my immediate manager or supervisor:
To share business official documents, proposals or reports, when
necessary
To share business manuals, models and methodologies, when
necessary
Loadings
Relational
leadership and
employee
creativity
0.76
0.75
0.73
0.69
0.73
0.74
0.68
0.76
0.75
0.73
0.78
0.75
0.74
0.81
0.79
0.70
0.74
0.72
0.76
0.73
0.68
0.75
0.68
0.65
0.71
0.66
0.69
0.71
0.55
0.76
0.78
(continued )
Table 2.
Reliability and
convergent validity
factor analysis of
constructs
JHTI
Construct
Employee Creativity
α 5 0.91; CR 5 0.93
AVE 5 0.61
Self-Efficacy
α 5 0.93; CR 5 0.95
AVE 5 0.68
Hotel Grade
α 5 1.00; CR 5 1.00;
Table 2.
AVE 5 1.00
Leader-Follower Dyadic
Tenure
α 5 1.00; CR 5 1.00;
AVE 5 1.00
Items
To share stories of success or failure, when necessary
To share business knowledge obtained from newspapers, magazines,
television or the Internet, when necessary
To share know-how from work experiences, when necessary
To share knowledge gained from instruction or training when
necessary
To share problem-solving knowledge
I am a creative problem-solver
I use my creative abilities when faced with challenges
I take risks with my ideas
I am comfortable with others critiquing my ideas
I always think of new ways to do things
It is easy for me to think of many ideas when looking for an answer to
a question
I tend to do things that are unusual for most people
I always stand out in a crowd
I do not avoid difficult tasks
I am a very determined person
Once I set my mind to a task almost nothing can stop me
I have a lot of self-confidence
I am at my best when I am challenged
I believe that it is shameful to give up something I started
Things always seem worth the effort
I do not find it difficult to take risks
Which of these Ghana Tourist Board classifications does your Hotel
belong to currently?
For how long have you worked with your immediate supervisor?
Loadings
0.82
0.77
0.82
0.79
0.72
0.79
0.83
0.79
0.79
0.83
0.78
0.75
0.70
0.83
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.82
0.80
0.79
0.82
1.00
1.00
knowledge-sharing behaviour as a mediation variable between the relationship between
relational leadership and employee creativity showed a positive and significant effect
(β 5 0.37, p < 0.05). This supports H4. Finally, leader–follower dyadic tenure did not have a
moderating effect on the nexus between relational leadership and knowledge-sharing
behaviour (β 5 0.06, p > 0.10). This does not support H5 (See Table 3).
Discussion and conclusions
Conclusions
Despite frantic efforts and investments, organizations are struggling with how to improve
employees’ creativity, particularly, organizations in the hospitality industry. Therefore, this
study examined the direct and indirect effects of relational leadership on employee creativity
among hospitality organizations in Ghana. This study adds to the body of evidence
supporting earlier research on how leader knowledge-sharing behaviour affects employee
creativity at work. We found that relational leadership has a positive effect on knowledgesharing behaviour and employee creativity. Further, knowledge-sharing behaviour mediated
the relationship between relational leadership and employee creativity, although knowledgesharing behaviour did not have a significant effect on employee creativity. Finally, this study
showed that leader–follower tenure does not play any vital role on the relationship between
relational leadership and employee creativity.
ES
(F)8i
LFDT
(F)1i
KSB
(F)14i
2
R = 0.15
β = –0.06
(P = 0.13)
β = 0.37
(P < 0.01)
β = 0.76
(P < 0.01)
β = –0.03
(P = 0.32)
EC
(F)8i
β = 0.12
2
R = 0.71
(P = 0.01)
RL
(F)25i
β = 0.02
(P = 0.35)
HG
(F)1i
Structural path
Relational
leadership and
employee
creativity
Beta(R)
Total effect
Std. deviation
p-value
Decision
Control variables
Self-efficacy → EC
Hotel-grade → EC
0.76
0.021
0.65
0.003
0.048
0.053
0.001**
0.348
Direct effects
RL → EC
RL →KSB
KSB → EC
0.12
0.37
0.025
0.07
0.144
0.01
0.052
0.050
0.053
0.012*
0.001**
0.318
H1 5 supported
H2 5 supported
H3 5 Not supported
Moderating effect
RL 3 LDT 3 KSB
0.06
0.011
0.053
0.13
H4 5 Not supported
Mediating effect
RL → LDT → EC
0.37
0.000
0.054
0.001**
Note(s): *Significance at 0.10, **significance at 0.05, ***significance at 0.01
Figure 2.
Path diagram showing
path coefficients and
variance
H5 5 supported
Theoretical implications
This study contributes to the literature in several ways. To our knowledge, the present study is
the first to contribute to social exchange theory by demonstrating the connections among
relational leadership, leader–follower dyadic tenure, knowledge-sharing behaviour and
employee creativity in the hospitality industry. Another unique contribution of our study to
the extant literature on the effects of leadership styles on employee behaviour in the hospitality
industry is our findings addressing the intervening role of follower–leader dyadic tenure. Prior
related investigations have been limited to knowledge-sharing behaviour (Al Hawamdeh, 2022),
service climate (Ling et al., 2016) and unit identification (Liden et al., 2014), failing to address the
thorny question of whether leader–follower dyadic tenure influences employee creative
behaviour. Our results showed that leader–follower dyadic tenure does not strengthen the
Table 3.
Summary of results
JHTI
relationship between relational leadership and knowledge-sharing behaviour. This is because
the hospitality industry in Ghana is characterized by high labour turnover rate because the
sector is labour-intensive, pays low salaries and provides minimal opportunities for career
advancement (Amissah et al., 2016). Again, De Gilder (2003) argued that some leaders are simply
more powerful, more resourceful and better positioned. This allows such leaders to provide highquality exchanges with their followers, including insightful information or knowledge
irrespective of the leader–member follower dyadic tenure. In the same way, followers who
may have initially recognized the advantages of their leaders’ relationships may eventually
become less reliant on the leader since they may have established an informal network that
serves as alternate sources of information (Liden et al., 1997).
Third, our study emphasized that positive leadership styles do not only advance knowledge
management literature but they are also important channels for promoting employee creative
behaviours (Ansong et al., 2022). Our findings support the view that high-quality interaction
between leaders and followers in the hospitality industry promotes employee creativity as they
feel indebted and seek diverse means to ensure the sustenance of their organizations (Akgunduz
et al., 2022). Fundamentally, relational leadership has been conceptualised as a social context that
is full of integrated and interwoven interactions, carried out by the sharing of information (Wiig,
1999). Relational leaders respect employees’ opinions in decision-making and share valued
resources which could promote employee creativity (Mo et al., 2019). This study enriches and
advances previous studies on job embeddedness and dedication (Akgunduz et al., 2022), work
engagement (Al Hawamdeh, 2022; Vakira et al., 2022) and civic virtue behaviour (Khan et al.,
2020). Finally, this study revealed the mediating role of knowledge-sharing behaviour on the link
between relational leadership and employee creativity, thus indicating how relational leadership
behaviours transfers to employees’ creative behaviour. The results demonstrated that
knowledge-sharing behaviour mediates the link between relational leadership and employee
creativity. Le and Lei (2019) asserted that leaders who develop appropriate climate for
knowledge-sharing behaviour, in turn, enhance creativity. The inclusive nature of relational
leadership develops the strengths and talents of followers to creatively contribute to
organizational goals (Komives et al., 2009).
Practical implications
This study examined the need for hotel managers to adopt relational leadership style to
enhance knowledge-sharing behaviour and employee creativity from the lens of social
exchange theory (Blau, 1964). We proffer the following suggestions for hotel supervisors to
implement based on the findings of the study. First, hotel supervisors should adopt relational
leadership behaviours. They must delegate and empower employees to act freely. For
instance, employees could be given the opportunity to serve guests without necessarily
waiting for the approval of their superiors. Employees with new ideas with regard to new
products or services should be given the necessary support to execute these ideas. Beyond the
usual first day of the week meetings held to assign roles and responsibilities, managers
should also develop a ritual of holding weekly informal discussions with employees during
break periods to share personal and other work-related experiences. Supervisors should
promote inclusiveness and collaboration by assigning group assignments and rewards. This
could enhance workplace friendship and knowledge-sharing and create a synergetic
environment necessary for employee creativity. Occasionally, supervisors may allow the
family of employees to visit them at the workplace to appreciate the nature of their work.
Hotel managers should address the needs of their employees by providing family-supportive
facilities and professional growth opportunities and improving working conditions.
Finally, we recommend that hotels should employ persons with good human relations as
supervisors. They should also invest in regular professional training programmes to enhance
the human relation skills of supervisors. Furthermore, hotels should designate only supervisors
with good human relations for training and knowledge-sharing assignments since the act of
stimulating employee creativity goes beyond the mere provision of information. Employee
creativity requires the warmth and care of persons that supply such information and knowledge.
With regard to knowledge-sharing, managers should be prepared to share their personal
experiences and information with employees. This could encourage employees to freely express
their views and suggest ways for improving products, services and work procedures.
Employees that suggest good ideas should be recognized and rewarded publicly.
Limitations and future research
First, the study employed a cross-sectional design. This design cannot be used to establish
causal relationships among the variables. Future research might use a longitudinal design to
draw causal inferences from the model. Second, while this study looked at a potential
mediator in the connection between relational leadership and employee creativity, it
neglected to take into account other crucial factors such as organizational practices, cultures,
knowledge acquisition and knowledge integration. Given that these factors have the potential
to play an intervening role in the relationship between relational leadership and employee
creativity, future research can build on this study by taking them into account. Third, since
data were collected only from employees in the hospitality industry at the Cape Coast-Elmina
conurbation of Ghana, the findings may not apply to other sectors and geographical
locations. Hence, it will be fruitful for future researchers to consider other sectors and
geographical locations to validate our findings. Finally, the study also runs the risk of
common method bias because it is based on self-reported data. However, we did not find a
common method variance to be a significant issue in this study, according to our tests. The
correctness of the data and the conclusions were supported by the study’s use of several
assessments such as Cronbach alphas, composite reliability, convergent validity and
discriminant validity. To improve the research design, future studies may include objective
measures for employee creativity.
References
Abuelhassan, A.E. and AlGassim, A. (2022), “How organizational justice in the hospitality industry
influences proactive customer service performance through general self-efficacy”, International
Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 34 No. 7, pp. 2579-2596.
Adam, A.M. (2020), “Sample size determination in survey research”, Journal of Scientific Research and
Reports, Vol. 26 No. 5, pp. 90-97.
Adu-Ampong, E. (2018), “Tourism and national economic development planning in Ghana,
1964-2014”, International Development Planning Review, Vol. 40 No. 1, pp. 75-95.
Akgunduz, Y., Turksoy, S.S. and Nisari, M.A. (2022), “How leader–member exchange affects job
embeddedness and job dedication through employee advocacy”, Journal of Hospitality and
Tourism Insights, Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print.
Akhavan, P., Hosseini, S.M., Abbasi, M. and Manteghi, M. (2015), “Knowledge-sharing determinants,
behaviours, and innovative work behaviours: an integrated theoretical view and empirical
examination”, Aslib Journal of Information Management, Vol. 6 No. 5, pp. 562-591.
Al Hawamdeh, N. (2022), “The influence of humble leadership on employees’ work engagement: the
mediating role of leader knowledge-sharing behaviour”, VINE Journal of Information and
Knowledge Management Systems, Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print.
Amabile, T.M. and Pratt, M.G. (2016), “The dynamic componential model of creativity and innovation
in organizations: making progress, making meaning”, Research in Organizational Behaviour,
Vol. 36, pp. 157-183.
Relational
leadership and
employee
creativity
JHTI
Amissah, E.F., Gamor, E., Deri, M.N. and Amissah, A. (2016), “Factors influencing employee job
satisfaction in Ghana’s hotel industry”, Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality and Tourism,
Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 166-183.
Ampong, G.O.A., Abubakari, A., Mohammed, M., Appaw-Agbola, E.T., Addae, J.A. and Ofori, K.S.
(2021), “Exploring customer loyalty following service recovery: a replication study in the
Ghanaian hotel industry”, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Insights, Vol. 4 No. 5, pp. 639-657.
Amundsen, S. and Martinsen, Ø.L. (2014), “Empowering leadership: construct clarification,
conceptualization, and validation of a new scale”, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 25 No. 3,
pp. 487-511.
Ansong, A., Agyeiwaa, A.A. and Gnankob, R.I. (2022), “Responsible leadership, job satisfaction and
duty orientation: lessons from the manufacturing sector in Ghana”, European Business Review,
Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print.
Baafi, F., Ansong, A., Dogbey, K.E. and Owusu, N.O. (2021), “Leadership and innovative work
behaviour within Ghanaian metropolitan assemblies: mediating role of resource supply”,
International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol. 34 No. 7, pp. 765-784.
Bandura, A. (1986), Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory, PrenticeHall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Bani-Melhem, S., Zeffane, R. and Albaity, M. (2018), “Determinants of employees’ innovative
behaviour”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 30 No. 3,
pp. 1601-1602.
Bargeman, B., Richards, G. and Govers, E. (2018), “Volunteer tourism impacts in Ghana: a practice
approach”, Current Issues in Tourism, Vol. 21 No. 13, pp. 1486-1501.
Baron, R.A. and Tang, J. (2009), “Entrepreneurs’ social skills and new venture performance: mediating
mechanisms and cultural generality”, Journal of Management, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 282-306.
Bass, B.M. and Avolio, B.J. (1995), MLQ: Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire, 2nd ed., Mind Garden,
Redwood City, CA.
Bavik, Y.L., Tang, P.M., Shao, R. and Lam, L.W. (2018), “Ethical leadership and employee knowledge
sharing: exploring dual-mediation paths”, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 322-332.
Bhutto, T.A., Farooq, R., Talwar, S., Awan, U. and Dhir, A. (2021), “Green inclusive leadership and
green creativity in the tourism and hospitality sector: serial mediation of green psychological
climate and work engagement”, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Vol. 29 No. 10,
pp. 1716-1737.
Blau, P.M. (1964), “Justice in social exchange”, Sociological Iinquiry, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 193-206.
Boateng, H., Okoe, A.F. and Hinson, R.E. (2018), “Dark tourism: exploring tourist’s experience at the
Cape Coast Castle, Ghana”, Tourism Management Perspectives, No. 27, pp. 104-110.
Bonner, J.M., Greenbaum, R.L. and Mayer, D.M. (2016), “My boss is morally disengaged: the role of
ethical leadership in explaining the interactive effect of supervisor and employee moral
disengagement on employee behaviours”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 137 No. 4, pp. 731-742.
Breevaart, K. and de Vries, R.E. (2021), “Followers’ HEXACO personality traits and preference for
charismatic, relationship-oriented, and task-oriented leadership”, Journal of Business and
Psychology, Vol. 36 No. 2, p. 256.
Carifio, J. (2010), “Development and validation of a measure of relational leadership: implications for
leadership theory and policies”, Current Research in Psychology, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 16-28.
Carmeli, A. and Spreitzer, G.M. (2009), “Trust, connectivity, and thriving: implications for innovative
behaviour at work”, The Journal of Creative Behaviour, Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 169-191.
Chen, G., Gully, S.M. and Eden, D. (2001), “Validation of a new general self-efficacy scale”,
Organizational Research Methods, Vol. 4 No. 1, p. 79.
Chin, W.W. (1998), “The partial least squares approach to structural equation modelling”, Modern
Methods for Business Research, Vol. 295 No. 2, pp. 295-336.
Creswell, J.W. (2014), A Concise Introduction to Mixed Methods Research, SAGE publications, London.
Danvour, F., Adongo, C.A., Amuquando, F.E. and Adam, I. (2021), “Managin the COVID-19 crisis:
coping and post-recovery strategies for hospitality and tourism businesses in Ghana”, Journal
of Hospitality and Tourism Insights, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 373-392.
Dayour, F. (2014), “Are backpackers a homogeneous segment? A study of backpackers’ motivations in
the Cape Coast-Elmina conurbation, Ghana”, Tourismos, Vol. 9 No. 2, p. 108.
Dayour, F., Adongo, C.A. and Taale, F. (2016), “Determinants of backpackers’ expenditure”, Tourism
Management Perspectives, No. 17, pp. 36-43.
De Gilder, D. (2003), “Commitment, trust and work behaviour: the case of contingent workers”,
Personnel Review, Vol. 32 No. 5, pp. 588-604.
De Jong, J.P. and Den Hartog, D.N. (2007), “How leaders influence employees’ innovative behaviour”,
European Journal of Innovation Management, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 41-64.
De Jesus, S.N., Rus, C.L., Lens, W. and Imaginario, S. (2013), “Intrinsic motivation and creativity
related to product: a meta-analysis of the studies published between 1990-2010”, Creativity
Research Journal, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 80-84.
De Vries, R.E., Van den Hooff, B. and De Ridder, J.A. (2006), “Explaining knowledge sharing: the role
of team communication styles, job satisfaction, and performance beliefs”, Communication
Research, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 115-135.
Dillette, A. (2021), “Roots tourism: a second wave of double consciousness for African Americans”,
Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Vol. 29 Nos 2-3, pp. 412-427.
Elkhwesky, Z., Salem, I.E., Ramkissoon, H. and Casta~
neda-Garcıa, J.-A. (2022), “A systematic and
critical review of leadership styles in contemporary hospitality: a roadmap and a call for future
research”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 34 No. 5,
pp. 1925-1958.
Ferch, S.R. and Mitchell, M.M. (2001), “Intentional forgiveness in relational leadership: a technique for
enhancing effective leadership”, Journal of Leadership Studies, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 70-83.
Gerstein, M. and Friedman, H.H. (2017), “A new corporate ethics and leadership paradigm for the age
of creativity”, Journal of Accounting, Ethics and Public Policy, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 179-180.
Gnankob, R.I., Ansong, A. and Issau, K. (2022), “Servant leadership and organizational citizenship
behaviour: the role of public service motivation and length of time spent with the leader”,
International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 236-253.
Gouldner, A.W. (1960), “The norm of reciprocity: a preliminary statement”, American Sociological
Review, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 161-167.
Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Balin, B.J. and Anderson, R.E. (2010), Multivariate and Data Analysis,
International Editions, Maxwell Macmillan, New York.
Hair, J.F., Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C.M., Sarstedt, M. and Thiele, K.O. (2017), “Mirror, mirror on the wall: a
comparative evaluation of composite-based structural equation modelling methods”, Journal of
the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 45 No. 5, pp. 616-632.
Hassi, A. (2019), “Empowering leadership and management innovation in the hospitality industry
context: the mediating role of climate for creativity”, International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 1785-1800.
Hayes, A.F. (2013), Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A
Regression-Based Approach, Guilford Press, New York, NY.
Hensley, N. (2020), “Educating for sustainable development: cultivating creativity through
mindfulness”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 243, 118542.
Hollander, E. (2012), Inclusive Leadership: The Essential Leader-Follower Relationship, Routledge,
New York.
Relational
leadership and
employee
creativity
JHTI
Jada, U.R., Mukhopadhyay, S. and Titiyal, R. (2019), “Empowering leadership and innovative work
behaviour: a moderated mediation examination”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 23
No. 5, pp. 915-930.
Javed, B., Naqvi, S.M.M.R., Khan, A.K., Arjoon, S. and Tayyeb, H.H. (2017), “Impact of inclusive
leadership on innovative work behaviour: the role of psychological safety–corrigendum”,
Journal of Management and Organization, Vol. 23 No. 3, p. 472.
Jian, G. and Dalisay, F. (2017), “Conversation at work: the effects of leader-member conversational
quality”, Communication Research, Vol. 44 No. 2, pp. 177-197.
Khalid, S. and Zubair, A. (2014), “Emotional intelligence, self-efficacy, and creativity among employees
of advertising agencies”, Pakistan Journal of Psychological Research, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 203-221.
Khan, N.A., Khan, A.N., Soomro, M.A. and Khan, S.K. (2020), “Transformational leadership and civic
virtue behaviour: valuing act of thriving and emotional exhaustion in the hotel industry”, Asia
Pacific Management Review, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 216-225.
Kim, M. and Beehr, T.A. (2018), “Can empowering leaders affect subordinates’ well-being and careers
because they encourage subordinates’ job crafting behaviours?”, Journal of Leadership and
Organizational Studies, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 184-196.
Kim, T.T. and Lee, G. (2013), “Hospitality employee knowledge-sharing behaviours in the relationship
between goal orientations and service innovative behaviour”, International Journal of
Hospitality Management, Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 324-337.
Kim, M.S., Phillips, J.M., Park, W.W. and Gully, S.M. (2021), “When leader-member exchange leads to
knowledge sharing: the roles of general self-efficacy, team leader modeling, and LMX
differentiation”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 11 No. 1,
pp. 1-28.
Kock, N. (2011), “Using WarpPLS in e-collaboration studies: mediating effects, control and second
order variables, and algorithm choices”, International Journal of E-Collaboration (IJeC), Vol. 7
No. 3, pp. 1-13.
Kock, N. (2017), “Common method bias: a full collinearity assessment method for PLS-SEM”, Partial
Least Squares Path Modeling, Springer, Cham, pp. 245-257.
Komives, S.R., Lucas, N. and McMahon, T.R. (2009), Exploring Leadership: For College Students Who
Want to Make a Difference, John Wiley & Sons, San Francisco, p. 368.
Lan, J., Wong, C.-S. and Wong, I.A. (2022), “The role of knowledge sharing in hotel newcomer
socialization: a formal intervention program”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management, Vol. 34 No. 6, pp. 2250-2271.
Le, P.B. and Lei, H. (2019), “Determinants of innovation capability: the roles of transformational
leadership, knowledge sharing and perceived organizational support”, Journal of Knowledge
Management, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 527-547.
Lee, J.N. (2001), “The impact of knowledge sharing, organizational capability and partnership quality
on IS outsourcing success”, Information and Management, Vol. 38 No. 5, pp. 323-335.
Lee, C., Hallak, R. and Sardeshmukh, S.R. (2019), “Creativity and innovation in the restaurant sector:
supply-side processes and barriers to implementation”, Tourism Management Perspectives,
Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 54-55.
Lewicki, R.J. and Bunker, B.B. (1996), “Developing and maintaining trust in work relationships”, Trust
in Organizations: Frontiers of Theory and Research, Vol. 114 No. 1, p. 139.
Liao, S.H., Chen, C.C. and Hu, D.C. (2018), “The role of knowledge sharing and LMX to enhance
employee creativity in theme park work team: a case study of Taiwan”, International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 30 No. 5, pp. 2343-2359.
Liden, R.C., Sparrowe, R.T. and Wayne, S.J. (1997), “Leader-member exchange theory: the past and
potential for the future”, Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, No. 15,
pp. 47-120.
Liden, R.C., Wayne, S.J., Liao, C. and Meuser, J.D. (2014), “Servant leadership and serving culture:
influence on individual and unit performance”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 57 No. 5,
pp. 1434-1452.
Lindebaum, D., Geddes, D. and Gabriel, Y. (2017), “Moral emotions and ethics in organizations:
introduction to the special issue”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 141 No. 4, pp. 645-656.
Ling, Q., Lin, M. and Wu, X. (2016), “The trickle-down effect of servant leadership on frontline
employee service behaviours and performance: a multilevel study of Chinese hotels”, Tourism
Management, Vol. 52, pp. 341-368.
Liu, X., Wright, M., Filatotchev, I., Dai, O. and Lu, J. (2010), “Human mobility and international
knowledge spillovers: evidence from high-tech small and medium enterprises in an emerging
market”, Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 340-355.
Mensah, E.A., Agyeiwaah, E. and Dimache, A.O. (2017), “Will their absence make a difference? The
role of local volunteer NGOs in home-stay intermediation in Ghana’s Garden City”, International
Journal of Tourism Cities, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 69-86.
Mo, S., Ling, C.D. and Xie, X.Y. (2019), “The curvilinear relationship between ethical leadership and
team creativity: the moderating role of team fault lines”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 154
No. 1, pp. 229-242.
Moqbel, M., Nevo, S. and Kock, N. (2013), “Organizational members’ use of social networking sites and
job performance: an exploratory study”, Information Technology and People, Vol. 26 No. 3,
pp. 240-264.
Mota Veiga, P., Fernandes, C. and Ambrosio, F. (2022), “Knowledge spillover, knowledge management
and innovation of the Portuguese hotel industry in times of crisis”, Journal of Hospitality and
Tourism Insights, Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print.
Nasifoglu Elidemir, S., Ozturen, A. and Bayighomog, S.W. (2020), “Innovative behaviours, employee
creativity, and sustainable competitive advantage: a moderated mediation”, Sustainability,
Vol. 12 No. 8, p. 3295.
Nham, T.P., Nguyen, T.M., Tran, N.H. and Nguyen, H.A. (2020), “Knowledge sharing and innovation
capability at both individual and organizational levels: an empirical study from Vietnam’s
telecommunication companies”, Management and Marketing, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 275-301.
Nieves, J. and Diaz-Meneses, G. (2018), “Knowledge sources and innovation in the hotel industry”,
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 30 No. 6,
pp. 2537-2561.
Northouse, P.G. (2019), Leadership: Theory and Practice, 8th ed., SAGE Publications, Los Angeles.
Phung, V.D., Hawryszkiewycz, I., Chandran, D. and Ha, B.M. (2017), “Knowledge sharing and
innovative work behaviour: a case study from Vietnam”, ACIS 2017 Proceedings, p. 91.
Shukla, B., Sufi, T., Joshi, M. and Sujatha, R. (2022), “Leadership challenges for Indian hospitality
industry during COVID-19 pandemic”, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Insights, Vol. aheadof-print No. ahead-of-print.
Straub, D., Boudreau, M.C. and Gefen, D. (2004), “Validation guidelines for IS positivist research”,
Communications of the Association for Information Systems, Vol. 13 No. 1, p. 24.
Thuan, L.C. (2020), “The role of supervisor knowledge-sharing behaviour in stimulating subordinate
creativity”, VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems, Vol. 50 No. 4,
pp. 597-613.
Tu, M., Cheng, Z. and Liu, W. (2019), “Spotlight on the effect of workplace ostracism on creativity: a
social cognitive perspective”, Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 10 No. 1, p. 1215.
Vakira, E., Shereni, N.C., Ncube, C.M. and Ndlovu, N. (2022), “The effect of inclusive leadership on
employee engagement, mediated by psychological safety in the hospitality industry”, Journal of
Hospitality and Tourism Insights, Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print.
Relational
leadership and
employee
creativity
JHTI
Van Den Hooff, B. and De Ridder, J.A. (2004), “Knowledge sharing in context: the influence of
organizational commitment, communication climate and CMC use on knowledge sharing”,
Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 8 No. 6, pp. 117-130.
Venckut_e, M., Mulvik, I.B., Lucas, B. and Kampylis, P. (2020), “Creativity–a transversal skill for
lifelong learning. An overview of existing concepts and practices”, JRC Working Papers,
(JRC122016).
Wang, C.J., Tsai, H.T. and Tsai, M.T. (2014), “Linking transformational leadership and employee
creativity in the hospitality industry: the influences of creative role identity, creative selfefficacy, and job complexity”, Tourism Management, Vol. 40, pp. 79-89.
Wang, X., Wen, X., Pa$samehmetog!lu, A. and Guchait, P. (2021), “Hospitality employee’s mindfulness
and its impact on creativity and customer satisfaction: the moderating role of organizational
error tolerance”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 94, pp. 1-11.
Wayne, S.J., Shore, L.M. and Liden, R.C. (1997), “Perceived organizational support and leader-member
exchange: a social exchange perspective”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 40 No. 1,
pp. 82-111.
Wiig, K.M. (1999), “Introducing knowledge management into the enterprise”, Knowledge Management
Handbook, CRC Press, New York, pp. 3.1-3.41.
Yang, J.T. and Wan, C.S. (2004), “Advancing organizational effectiveness and knowledge management
implementation”, Tourism Management, Vol. 25 No. 5, pp. 593-601.
Yankholmes, A. (2018), “Tourism as an exercise in three-dimensional power: evidence from Ghana”,
Tourism Management Perspectives, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 1-12.
Yankholmes, A. and McKercher, B. (2015), “Understanding visitors to slavery heritage sites in
Ghana”, Tourism Management, Vol. 51 No. 1, pp. 22-32.
Zhou, J. and Hoever, I.J. (2014), “Research on workplace creativity: a review and redirection”, Annual
Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behaviour, Vol. 1 No. 1, p. 334.
Zhou, J., Oldham, G.R., Chuang, A. and Hsu, R.S. (2022), “Enhancing employee creativity: effects of
choice, rewards and personality”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 107 No. 3, pp. 503-513.
Zona, M.A. and Adrian, A. (2020), “Innovation and employee creativity in hospitality industry in west
Sumatra”, 4th Padang International Conference on Education, Economics, Business and
Accounting (PICEEBA-2 2019), Atlantis Press, pp. 767-773.
Further reading
Amabile, T.M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, L. and Herron, M. (1996), “Assessing the work
environment for creativity”, The Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 4 No. 39,
pp. 154-184.
Chiang, C.F. and Chen, J.A. (2021), “How empowering leadership and a cooperative climate influence
employees’ voice behaviour and knowledge sharing in the hotel industry”, Journal of Quality
Assurance in Hospitality and Tourism, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 476-495.
Choi, S.B., Tran, T.B.H. and Park, B.I. (2015), “Inclusive leadership and work engagement: mediating
roles of affective organizational commitment and creativity”, Social Behaviour and Personality:
An International Journal, Vol. 43 No. 6, pp. 931-943.
Hansen, M.T., Mors, M.L. and Løv
as, B. (2005), “Knowledge sharing in organizations: multiple
networks, multiple phases”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 48 No. 5, pp. 776-793.
Hollander, E.P. (2014), “Leader-follower relations and the dynamics of inclusion and idiosyncrasy
credit”, Conceptions of Leadership, Palgrave Macmillan, New York, pp. 201-221.
Jung, D.I. (2001), “Transformational and transactional leadership and their effects on creativity in
groups”, Creativity Research Journal, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 185-195.
Regan, H.B. and Brooks, G.H. (1995), Out of Women’s Experience: Creating Relational Leadership,
Corwin Press, CA.
Corresponding author
Abraham Ansong can be contacted at: aansong@ucc.edu.gh
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
View publication stats
Relational
leadership and
employee
creativity