IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/bushor/v53y2010i3p291-303.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Dispelling misconceptions and providing guidelines for leader reward and punishment behavior

Author

Listed:
  • Podsakoff, Nathan P.
  • Podsakoff, Philip M.
  • Kuskova, Valentina V.

Abstract

One unfortunate consequence of the focus on "charismatic," "transformational," and "visionary" leader behaviors during the past few decades has been the tendency to diminish the importance that transactional leadership behaviors have on leadership effectiveness. We say that this is unfortunate because recent research has shown that transactional leadership, in the form of contingent reward and punishment behaviors, can have substantial effects on a variety of important employee attitudes, perceptions, and measures of job performance. Therefore, in this article we discuss some possible reasons why transactional leadership has been relegated to a lesser role than transformational leadership, summarize the research that indicates the importance of leader contingent reward and punishment behavior to leadership effectiveness, and identify some of the mechanisms that these forms of leadership behavior work through to influence employee attitudes and behaviors. Following this, we address ten misconceptions managers often have regarding the administration of rewards and punishments, and provide some recommendations about how leaders can improve their effectiveness in administering recognition and discipline in organizational settings.

Suggested Citation

  • Podsakoff, Nathan P. & Podsakoff, Philip M. & Kuskova, Valentina V., 2010. "Dispelling misconceptions and providing guidelines for leader reward and punishment behavior," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 291-303, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:bushor:v:53:y:2010:i:3:p:291-303
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0007-6813(10)00004-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Daniele Nosenzo & Theo Offerman & Martin Sefton & Ailko van der Veen, 2016. "Discretionary Sanctions and Rewards in the Repeated Inspection Game," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(2), pages 502-517, February.
    2. Mehmet KIZILOĞLU & Sabahat BAYRAK KÖK, 2020. "Denison Örgüt Kültürü Modeli Bağlamında Örgüt Kültürü ve Örgütsel Güç İlişkisi Üzerine Bir Araştırma," Istanbul Business Research, Istanbul University Business School, vol. 49(1), pages 60-85, May.
    3. Lin Liu & Qiang Mei & Lixin Jiang & Jinnan Wu & Suxia Liu & Meng Wang, 2021. "Safety-Specific Passive-Avoidant Leadership and Safety Compliance among Chinese Steel Workers: The Moderating Role of Safety Moral Belief and Organizational Size," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(5), pages 1-18, March.
    4. Molina, Roger & Unsworth, Kerrie & Hodkiewicz, Melinda & Adriasola, Elisa, 2013. "Are managerial pressure, technological control and intrinsic motivation effective in improving data quality?," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 26-34.
    5. Billinger, Stephan & Rosenbaum, Stephen Mark, 2023. "On the limits of hierarchy in public goods games: A survey and meta-analysis on the effects of design variables on cooperation," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    6. Tremblay, Michel & Simard, Gilles, 2018. "A multifoci approach to study social support and job performance: A target similarity consideration of development-enhancing practices, leadership, and structure," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 118-130.
    7. Claudiu George Bocean & Cristina Claudia Rotea & Anca Antoaneta Vărzaru & Andra-Nicoleta Ploscaru & Cătălin-Ștefan Rotea, 2021. "A Two-Stage SEM—Artificial Neural Network Analysis of the Rewards Effects on Self Perceived Performance in Healthcare," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-19, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:bushor:v:53:y:2010:i:3:p:291-303. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/bushor .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.