Review of the Importance of Adaptive Leadershipmanagement of Change

Introduction

Since the initial widespread of coronavirus disease 2022 (COVID-19) beginning in early 2020, the world has been experiencing unprecedented times of disruptions and disorder ranging from economic losses, unemployment, and organizational and job-design overhauls all the way to health issues and increased mortality rates (Chong et al., 2020; Gallup, 2020; Guyot and Sawhill, 2020). According to the Globe Wellness System (2020), as of December 28, 2020, in that location has been a total number of 79,673,754 confirmed cases of COVID-19, including 1,761,381 deaths. Numerous studies accept attempted to examine the touch of such a pandemic on the workplace and the employees (due east.g., Caldas et al., 2020; Trougakos et al., 2020). For example, a recent written report past Fu et al. (2021) plant that the anxiety levels of the employees are afflicted by the reported number of COVID-nineteen cases and the dispatch and velocity at which the reported number is changing, thus affecting the employees' work functioning (engagement, operation, and emotional exhaustion). Nonetheless, fewer studies take looked at what constitutes effective leadership in the workplace during such a crisis and its potential antecedents (e.g., Hu et al., 2020; Yuan et al., 2021).

Leaders play an important function in the workplace due to their capacity to influence the environment by providing employees with the necessary resources to overcome their job demands or mitigating potential resources loss (Bakker and Demerouti, 2017). For example, a written report past Fernet et al. (2015) constitute that transformational leadership is related to fewer follower task demands (eastward.yard., emotional, physical, and cognitive demands) and increased job resources (e.yard., quality of relationships, participation in decision-making, and task recognition), which indirectly lead to the followers having positive work attitudes and increased job performance. Equally a effect, having an effective leader is especially crucial in times of massive resource loss and increased demands, such as the case with the COVID-nineteen crisis. Due to the unexpected and disorderly nature of crises, having flexibility and readiness to change as a managing director is of utmost importance as such circumstances are characterized past constrained rationality, ambiguity, time pressure level, and life and death stakes (Parry, 1990; Mumford et al., 2007; Sommer et al., 2016). In other words, managers who demonstrate adaptive performance (i.e., constructive handling of emergencies and work stress, creative problem solving, constant learning, and interpersonal adjustability; Pulakos et al., 2000) are necessary to provide the well-nigh suitable resources and conform the department/team'due south structure, job blueprint, and targets in order to coincide with the COVID-19 crunch.

According to the social cognitive theory (SCT; Bandura, 1986), the personal factors of the individual (i.east., cognitive, affective, and biological factors) touch their behavioral patterns. Therefore, a director who demonstrates adaptive functioning is more likely to have an adaptive personality. Although the concept of adaptivity has been thoroughly discussed in the literature (Judge et al., 1999; Kilcullen, 2004; Ployhart and Bliese, 2006; Hirschi et al., 2015; Rudolph et al., 2017), there is little research that has conceptualized it as a personality trait rather than a skill, motivation, or capacity. A recent written report by Fuller et al. (2018) operationalized the concept of adaptive personality and defined it as "a predisposed willingness to change oneself in response to the needs and demands of a alter in the surround. Individuals with adaptive personalities focus upon maintaining a good fit with their surroundings, so they are mindful of changes that occur and are set to modify thought and behavior patterns to adjust the new situation" (p. 12). Those with adaptive personalities tend to be at-home during stressful situations and possess the personal resources needed to confidently embrace modify and brand the all-time out of it (Fuller et al., 2018). Scholars call for research that empirically validates constructs of adaptivity every bit a personal trait (Baard et al., 2014).

In addition to emphasizing the role of personal factors in influencing the individual's behaviors, SCT also sheds light on the critical role of self-efficacy. Self-efficacy refers to the conventionalities the private holds regarding their capability to achieve the desired results (Bandura, 1999). It is based on the level of self-efficacy that individuals choose which challenges to undertake and how much energy to invest in overcoming them (Locke and Latham, 1990; Bandura, 1991). One such course of self-efficacy is the leaders' efficacy to lead during a crisis (i.e., crunch leader cocky-efficacy; Hadley et al., 2011). Co-ordinate to the Conservation of Resource (COR) theory, people are motivated to obtain, retain, and protect their resource (Hobfoll, 1989). Equally a event, individuals are more than likely to be motivated to take on opportunities for resources gain or protection from resource loss when they perceive they can do so (resource investment principle; Hobfoll et al., 2018). In the context of crunch management, Hadley et al. (2011) call for inquiry by proposing a theoretical framework in which crunch leader self-efficacy and motivation to pb during a crunch serve every bit ii explanatory mechanisms of the relationship betwixt the leader's characteristics and performance during a crunch.

This written report attempts to answer the mentioned calls for research and gaps past integrating SCT and COR theory in the context of the COVID-nineteen crisis, thereby offer multiple contributions to the crunch management literature (James et al., 2011). First, this study examines three antecedents of constructive leadership during the COVID-19 crunch (i.e., leader adaptive performance). 2nd, it extends previous literature arguing that personality plays a part in predicting adaptive performance by empirically testing a newly adult measure of adaptive personality utilizing a sample of full-time managers in Saudi Arabia during the COVID-xix crisis (Huang et al., 2014; Park and Park, 2019). Third, the report examines crisis leader self-efficacy and motivation to lead during the COVID-19 crisis equally two explanatory mechanisms through which the director's adaptive personality affects his/her adaptive performance during the pandemic (encounter Figure 1).

Figure 1. Hypothesized model. Motivation to lead and adaptive performance reflect the levels of motivation and operation during the COVID-19 crisis, respectively.

Theoretical Background

Introduced by Bandura (1986), SCT is a learning theory that states that individuals acquire new behaviors through observational learning and that the individuals' personal factors, the behavior itself, and the surround affect and are affected by each other, a concept known every bit triadic reciprocal causation (Bandura, 1999). Dissimilar other social learning theories, SCT emphasizes the role of personal agency such that people are producers likewise as products of their environment (Bandura, 1999). Only put, people are self-reactors who are able to motivate, regulate, and guide their behaviors instead of solely being controlled/shaped by the imposed environment. Perceived self-efficacy is considered as one of the core cocky-regulatory mechanisms through which someone is motivated to engage in a certain behavior or not (Bandura, 1999)—having the belief that an individual is able to produce the desired results influences their decision-making, perception of threats and challenges, and vulnerability to the imposed environs (Bandura, 1999). More specifically, those with high self-efficacy tend to exist more motivated to engage in behaviors that enhance their well-being, provide them with more resources, and/or protect their electric current ones (Hobfoll et al., 2018).

The COR theory, a motivational theory introduced past Hobfoll (1989), defines resources as "those objects, personal characteristics, weather condition, or energies that are valued past the individual or that serve as a means for the attainment of these objects, personal characteristics, conditions, or energies" (p. 516). Although resource are usually idea of in terms of money, time, or objects, Hobfoll (1989) emphasizes the importance of personal characteristics, such as personality traits and skills, as invaluable resources in dealing with stressors. According to the COR theory, stressful situations are characterized by (1) perceived threat toward one'south current resource, (2) loss of one's current resources, and/or (iii) failure to gain boosted resource following significant effort or investment (Hobfoll, 1989; Hobfoll et al., 2018). When individuals are faced with such stressful situations, they tend to act in ane of two means depending on their electric current puddle of resources. If the individual has the necessary resource to deal with the stressful state of affairs, they tend to utilize their current pool of resources to offset the resource loss. Moreover, if the stressful situation imposes circumstances of huge resource loss, such as in the case of a crunch, individuals are more likely to use their resources to also gain boosted resources in the process as resource gains become more than salient/important in such contexts (gain paradox principle; Hobfoll, 1989; Hobfoll et al., 2018). On the other manus, if the individual lacks the necessary resources to bargain with the stressful situation, they tend to exist more vulnerable to it and enter a defensive, aggressive, and potentially irrational state by engaging in behaviors of withdrawal or self-protection as a last resort (agony principle; Hobfoll, 1989; Hobfoll et al., 2018). The drawn insights from SCT and COR theory tin exist illustrated in the type of behaviors managers engage in when dealing with stressful situations in the workplace, such as those of a crisis.

In their theoretical framework of leader development and performance, Chan and Drasgow (2001) discussed the concepts of cocky-efficacy and personal resource as ii important characteristics in influencing a leader's motivation to atomic number 82 in a certain context and their performance as a result. Hadley et al. (2011) built upon the work of Chan and Drasgow (2001) and apply it to the context of crunch; more than specifically, they innovate and develop a mensurate for the concept of crunch leader cocky-efficacy, which refers to the efficacy beliefs the leader holds about themselves regarding data assessment and decision-making in public health and rubber crisis. The information assessment attribute of crunch leader self-efficacy involves the leader's beliefs regarding their capability to determine the menses of information during a crisis, collect and place information needed for crunch resolution, and prevent/reduce errors and biases (Hadley et al., 2011, p. 634). On the other hand, crisis decision-making involves the leader'south beliefs regarding their capability to generate response options and utilize the gathered information to evaluate, recommend, and choose the all-time course of action during a crunch (Hadley et al., 2011, p. 634). The authors contend that leaders with high self-efficacy to lead in a crisis are more likely to be motivated to lead and perform amend during a crunch. Furthermore, they argue that crisis leader cocky-efficacy can be predicted by the leader's characteristics, such equally individual differences, general leadership background, crisis training, and procedural preparedness (Hadley et al., 2011).

Adaptive Personality and Crisis Leader Self-Efficacy

Although the positive bear upon of proactive personality regarding self-initiated effective change has been thoroughly discussed in the literature (Fuller and Marler, 2009; Spitzmuller et al., 2015), adaptivity is considered as a crucial, initial footstep when faced with situations requiring organizational alter (Strauss et al., 2015), such as in the case of the COVID-19 crunch. Strauss et al. (2015) argue that adaptivity is crucial for subsequent proactivity as it creates disquisitional resources during instances of organizational modify by acquiring noesis of and adjusting to changes in stakeholders' goals and strategy, enhancing one'south self-efficacy to cope with such change, and maintaining positive relationships. Fuller et al. (2018) distinguish adaptive personality from proactive personality and their polar opposites by proposing the Alter-Control Circumplex Model, which is based on 2 axes: control orientation and modify orientation. Whereas control orientation refers to the tendency to the preference to feel in control of one'southward changing surroundings (Rothbaum et al., 1982), change orientation refers to the tendency to approach or avoid change (Fuller et al., 2018). Although both proactive and adaptive personalities are characterized by approaching modify, proactive personality emphasizes main control (modify the environment to fit i'south needs) while adaptive personality emphasizes secondary control (accommodate to ecology conditions; Fuller et al., 2018). Adaptive individuals tend to exist nowadays-oriented, flexible, quick learners, optimistic regarding change, and willing to accommodate change and attempt better ways of doing things (Fuller et al., 2018).

Drawing insight from SCT, we fence that the flexible and accommodating nature of adaptive personality regarding embracing change is more than likely to welcome numerous experiences of adaptation every bit imposed past the environment during the individual's lifetime (Bandura, 1986). Namely, instead of resisting change, such equally in the instance of passive or change-resistant individuals, adaptive individuals are more likely to make the necessary adjustments to fit into their environment when needed (Fuller et al., 2018). Thus, such a constant tendency to engage in behaviors of accommodation is argued to result in more learning experiences in dealing with various forms of change. Given the urgent, cryptic, and dynamic nature of crises (Pearson and Clair, 1998; Boin et al., 2005; Mumford et al., 2007), being able to speedily adapt to the imposed situation is a disquisitional resource for any leader (Hadley et al., 2011). Therefore, managers with an adaptive personality are more likely to have the conviction to lead during a crisis as they tend to take the necessary feel to back information technology upwardly. In other words, nosotros argue that adaptive managers are more likely to believe in their capacity to accurately assess the available information at the time of the crisis and brand/recommend the necessary adjustments. Thus, we hypothesize the following:

Hypothesis ane. Adaptive personality volition be positively related to crisis leader self-efficacy.

Crisis Leader Cocky-Efficacy and Leader Motivation During the COVID-19 Crisis

The COVID-19 crisis has established a "new normal" for almost everyone due to its unprecedented far-reaching impact and the needed articulation and commonage effort past nations, governments, communities, and industries to overcome it (Maragakis, 2020; Mull, 2020; Solomon, 2020). The rapid spread of COVID-19 has only emphasized the need for evolving, adaptive countermeasures to go along up with such volatility, resulting in an environment of ambivalence, complication, and dynamism that has afflicted numerous sectors (Chong et al., 2020; Djeebet, 2020; Evans, 2020; Lim-Lange, 2020). The question then becomes "what would increase managers' motivation to lead during the COVID-19 crunch?" Chan and Drasgow (2001) introduced the construct of motivation to lead and defined information technology as a "construct that affects a leader'southward or leader-to-be's decisions to assume leadership training, roles, and responsibilities and that affect his or her intensity of endeavor at leading and persistence equally a leader" (p. 482). One core mechanism discussed by the authors regarding enhancing one's motivation to lead is one'south beliefs of self-efficacy (Mitchell and Embankment, 1976; Mitchell, 1980; Bandura, 1986; Chan and Drasgow, 2001).

Drawing insight from the COR theory, personal resources such as crisis leader self-efficacy are more probable to play a vital role in how managers answer to crises such equally COVID-19 (Hobfoll, 1989; Hadley et al., 2011). More specifically, nosotros argue that managers tend to be faced with two options in terms of reacting to the COVID-xix crunch: (ane) withdraw from the leadership part and/or responsibilities in a concluding attempt to save their current resources or (ii) utilize their current resources to offset the resource loss associated with COVID-19 and probably recoup for the loss. The COR theory suggests that ane's decision to withdraw or tackle a stressful situation will depend on one current puddle of resources and its relevance to the situation (Hobfoll et al., 2018). A previous study empirically demonstrated that self-efficacy is positively related to motivation (Çetin and Aşkun, 2018). Therefore, we argue that a managing director who is confident in their adequacy to lead during times of crisis is more likely to be motivated to lead during the COVID-xix crisis instead of vulnerably suffering the losses equally they meet themselves having the necessary resources to plough the tide in their favor. Thus, we hypothesize the post-obit:

Hypothesis two. Crisis leader self-efficacy will be positively related to motivation to lead during the COVID-19 crisis.

Furthermore, integrating the SCT and COR theory, nosotros fence for adaptive managers' potential to be motivated to lead during the COVID-nineteen crisis due to their beliefs of self-efficacy to lead during a crisis. More specifically, due to the tendency of adaptive managers to welcome alter and change their ways when needed (Fuller et al., 2018), they are more likely to have accumulated a wealth of knowledge and feel in adapting to situations of ambivalence, complexity, and dynamism, resulting in them experiencing high levels of self-efficacy to lead in such situations, including crises. As a result, such high levels of crisis leader self-efficacy from years of experience are argued to raise the manager's motivation to lead during an actual crisis, such as that of COVID-19. Thus, we hypothesize the following:

Hypothesis iii. Crisis leader self-efficacy volition mediate the relationship between adaptive personality and motivation to atomic number 82 during the COVID-19 crisis.

Adaptive Performance as a Form of Effective Leadership During the COVID-19 Crunch

The COVID-19 crisis has brought near numerous changes to the construction of many organizations as well equally their job designs (Foss, 2020a,b; Seetharaman, 2020). Given the sudden, imposed nature of the COVID-19 crunch, 1 effective form of action that managers are apt to take in response to the accompanied alter in job requirements is to demonstrate adaptive performance (Allworth and Hesketh, 1999; Griffin et al., 2007; Jundt et al., 2015). Adaptive performance has been divers equally "chore-operation-directed behaviors individuals enact in response to or apprehension of changes relevant to job-related tasks" (Jundt et al., 2015, pp. 54–55). In the workplace, adaptive performance tends to be exhibited when individuals demand to adjust their cognition, skills, and abilities to "adopt new roles, acquire new skills, or. change existing work behaviors" (Chan, 2000, p. 2) such that they are able to maintain their level of performance or reduce any operation loss during instances of change. Furthermore, adaptive performance can be both anticipatory and/or reactive such that it demonstrates non simply behaviors of learning and preparation for predictable changes but also react to ones that have already occurred (Jundt et al., 2015). Adaptive operation also includes cerebral and/or skill-based adaptations also as interpersonal and structural ones as long as the individual and the system tin can minimize the losses associated with change and reap its benefits when possible (Jundt et al., 2015).

Managers who exhibit adaptive functioning tend to (1) handle emergencies and stress by remaining calm during times of difficulty and ambiguity while rapidly analyzing options for dealing with such times, (two) engage in creative problem-solving by employing and generating new, unique ideas, (iii) always be on the watch for data that will heighten their learning and better their work methods, and (iv) demonstrate interpersonal flexibility by welcoming other people's views and cooperating with them (Pulakos et al., 2000; Charbonnier-Voirin et al., 2010). These types of behaviors are more likely to minimize the resources loss associated with the COVID-19 crisis, rendering these behaviors an effective grade of leadership during such a time. Therefore, managers who are motivated to pb during the COVID-19 crisis are more likely to dedicate their try and time in a manner that enhances their well-beingness, the well-beingness of their squad, and the success of the organization equally a whole; in other words, they are more likely to appoint in adaptive operation as a behavioral manifestation of such motivation. Pulakos et al. (2002) investigated the taxonomy of adaptive performance using supervisor ratings of their employees' functioning and found that self-efficacy and motivation are significant predictors of adaptive performance. Thus, in the context of COVID-19, we hypothesize the post-obit:

Hypothesis 4. Motivation to lead the during the COVID-19 crisis will be positively related to adaptive performance during the COVID-19 crisis.

Building on the previous arguments and integrating the SCT and COR theory (Bandura, 1986; Hobfoll, 1989), managers are more than probable to engage in adaptive performance if they believe in their capability to make a modify in response to a situation; otherwise, it will seem like an unworthy investment of energy and fourth dimension, which is also seen as a source of loss (Halbesleben and Buckley, 2004; Hobfoll et al., 2018). This likewise relates to Lazarus and Folkman (1984) concept of secondary appraisal, which states that the type of coping strategy an private implements depends on the private'due south appraisal of whether they accept the necessary resources and ability to cope with the situation. Therefore, managers that have crisis leader cocky-efficacy are more than probable to be motivated to lead during the COVID-19 and demonstrate such capability to reduce the losses associated with such a crisis past engaging in adaptive performance. Furthermore, such managers are more than likely to take such high behavior of self-efficacy and motivation to lead during the COVID-19 crisis because of their by experience in dealing with similar ambiguous, dynamic, and/or challenging situations, which is the case for managers with adaptive personality (Pulakos et al., 2002). Thus, we hypothesize the post-obit:

Hypothesis 5. Motivation to lead during the COVID-19 crisis will mediate the relationship between crisis leader cocky-efficacy and adaptive functioning during the COVID-xix crunch.

Hypothesis half-dozen. Crunch leader self-efficacy and motivation to lead during the COVID-19 crisis will sequentially mediate the relationship betwixt adaptive personality and adaptive operation during the COVID-19 crisis.

Methods

Participants

Online surveys were randomly distributed amid full-time managers in public, private, and charitable sectors in Saudi Arabia through multiple channels (due east.g., social media outlets, grooming courses, and executive MBA courses) with instructions emphasizing the targeted population. Furthermore, the data were collected during the summer of 2022 (May–Baronial) to reflect the targeted context of the COVID-nineteen crisis. We asked every participant to state whether they currently work in a full-time managerial position or not at the time of taking the survey, thereby filtering out those who do not. An initial sample size of around 196 was collected. Utilizing the listwise-deletion method of missing information and deleting responses that failed the attention checks (e.thou., "we capeesh your attention, please choose "strongly disagree" for this item"), the final sample size was 116. This method was used considering the authors look the data to be missing completely at random and have sufficient statistical power (Newman, 2014). The sample size adheres to the recommended ratio of xv observations per contained variable and the preferred sample size of xc observations to run the analysis in this written report, as suggested by Hair et al. (2018). Furthermore, to take a power of 0.80 (i.e., 1-β), resulting in limited a possibility of a type 2 fault of 0.twenty (i.eastward., β), with an anticipated medium effect size of.15 at an α equal to 0.05, we collected a sample size that is larger than the minimum recommended sample size of 97 based on Cohen (1992). Thirty-2 percentage of the respondents were female and their ages ranged from 25 to 74 years onetime with an average of 43 years. Respondents' work feel ranged from two to 45 years with an average of 18 years. The sample characteristics and bones descriptive analysis are provided in Table ane.

Tabular array one. Sample characteristics.

Measurement

In addition to utilizing the English versions of the used measures, we created Standard arabic versions of all the used measures following Brislin (1980) back-translation procedures. All items were measured on a v-point Likert-type scale where one = strongly disagree and v = strongly concur. Adaptive personality was measured using the fourteen-item scale adult past Fuller et al. (2018). Nosotros asked the participants to indicate to what extent they agree or disagree with a set of statements regarding their trait characteristics in general. An example item includes "I am flexible when it comes to making changes." Crisis leader self-efficacy was measured using the eight-particular calibration adult by Hadley et al. (2011). We asked the participants to indicate to what extent they concord or disagree with a set of statements regarding their self-efficacy to atomic number 82 during a crisis. Item number 3 of the original scale was removed due to it having a low factor loading. An instance detail includes "I can anticipate the political and interpersonal ramifications of my decisions and actions." Motivation to lead during the COVID-19 crisis was measured using an adjusted version of the eight-item calibration of Chan and Drasgow (2001) general measure of motivation to lead, which is similar to that of Hadley et al. (2011) in lodge to reverberate the context of the COVID-19 crisis. In doing then, we reduced the total number of items from 27 in the original scale to the eight items that are most relevant to the COVID-xix crisis. Nosotros asked the participants to bespeak to what extent they agree or disagree with a set of statements regarding their motivation to lead during the COVID-19 crisis. An example detail includes "I am the type of person who likes to exist in accuse of others." Adaptive performance was measured using the nineteen-item scale adult by Charbonnier-Voirin et al. (2010) based on Pulakos et al. (2000) conceptualization of adaptive performance. We asked the participants to indicate to what extent they concord or disagree with a prepare of statements regarding their operation during the COVID-xix crunch. An example particular includes "I apace take effective action to solve the problem." Gender, age, and organizational tenure were used as control variables as these variables take been plant to be associated with an individual's adaptive performance (Pulakos et al., 2000).

Analysis

Hierarchical multiple regression analysis was used to appraise the direct effect among adaptive personality, crisis leader self-efficacy, motivation to lead during the COVID-19 crunch, and adaptive performance during the COVID-xix crisis. To assess the mediation effect, a test was conducted via the PROCESS macro (v3.5) using SPSS 27 software with the bootstrap sampling method (sample size = five,000), as recommended by Hayes (2013). The bootstrap sampling method was used to generate asymmetric confidence intervals (CIs) for the mediating issue.

Results

Harman'due south single cistron test (Harman, 1967) was conducted to bank check for the being of Common Method Bias (CMB). For this test, a substantial amount of CMB is nowadays if a unmarried factor emerges from the factor analysis, or one full general gene accounts for most of the covariance among the variables (Podsakoff et al., 2012). Principal component analysis with varimax rotation on the questionnaire items revealed the existence of xiv distinctive factors with eigenvalues >1.0. These factors accounted for seventy.88% of the total variance. Moreover, the starting time (and largest) cistron accounted for 31.xix% of the total variance, which is significantly <50% (i.e., the minimum threshold for influential CMB every bit per Harman's unmarried cistron test; Podsakoff et al., 2012). Since more than one factor emerged and no general factor accounted for the majority of the total variance, concerns of CMB were minimized and CMB was less probable to have significantly confounded the results of this study (Podsakoff et al., 2003). Also, the correlations among the study variables were examined to discover if they showed any sign of inflation (Spector, 2006). The correlations among the appreciable variables were inside the acceptable range except for adaptive personality and performance, which is justifiable considering they are closely related constructs, still distinctive. This empirical show together with the consistency of the findings with the theoretical statement and previous research should alleviate whatsoever concerns related to CMB.

Table 2 provides the means, standard deviations, correlation coefficients, and reliabilities of the study variables. All the internal consistency reliabilities of the study variables were acceptable for research purposes (above 0.70; Hair et al., 2018). Adaptive personality was constitute to be positively correlated with crisis leader self-efficacy (r = 0.58, p < 0.01), motivation to lead during the COVID-19 crisis (r = 0.62, p < 0.01), and adaptive performance during the COVID-nineteen crisis (r = 0.78, p < 0.01). Similarly, crisis leader self-efficacy was positively correlated with motivation to pb during the COVID-19 crunch (r = 0.61, p < 0.01) and adaptive operation during the COVID-19 crisis (r = 0.64, p < 0.01), respectively. Lastly, motivation to pb during the COVID-19 crisis was positively correlated with adaptive functioning during the COVID-19 crisis (r = 0.65, p < 0.01).

Tabular array two. Means, standard deviations, correlations, and reliabilities (N = 116).

Table iii summarizes the regression results for hypotheses i, 2, and 4. All of the models were not susceptible to multicollinearity every bit they had tolerance values well higher up 0.two and Variance Aggrandizement Factors (VIF) well below v (Bowerman and O'Connell, 1990). Hypothesis i was supported as adaptive personality positively predicted crisis leader cocky-efficacy in Model 2 (b = 0.62, p < 0.01). Hypothesis 2 was also supported as crunch leader self-efficacy positively predicted motivation to atomic number 82 during the COVID-19 crunch in Model 4 (b = 0.75, p < 0.01). Lastly, hypothesis 4 was supported every bit motivation to lead during the COVID-19 crisis positively predicted adaptive performance during the COVID-19 crunch in Model 7 (b = 0.47, p < 0.01).

Table three. Summary of the hierarchical regression results (Unstandardized coefficients; N = 116).

To test hypotheses 3, 5, and 6, Hayes (2013) PROCESS add-on was utilized. The results indicate that the indirect consequence of adaptive personality on motivation to lead during the COVID-nineteen crisis through crisis leader self-efficacy was statistically significant (b = 0.29, SE = 0.09, 95% BCa CI [0.14, 0.49]), supporting hypothesis iii. Furthermore, the results show that the indirect effect of crunch leader self-efficacy on adaptive functioning through motivation to lead during the COVID-nineteen crisis was statistically significant (b = 0.23, SE = 0.06, 95% BCa CI [0.11, 0.35]), supporting hypothesis 5. Lastly, the results testify that the indirect upshot of adaptive personality on adaptive performance through crisis leader cocky-efficacy and motivation to lead during the COVID-19 crunch was statistically significant (b = 0.22, SE = 0.06, 95% BCa CI [0.10, 0.36]), supporting the full series mediation as argued for in hypothesis half dozen (run into Figure 2).

Figure two. The unstandardized coefficients for the indirect relationship between adaptive personality and adaptive functioning through crisis leader self-efficacy and motivation to lead during the COVID-19 crisis (Due north = 116). Total consequence, b = 0.73, SE = 0.06, p = 0.001; Direct consequence, b = 0.51, SE = 0.07, p = 0.001; Total Indirect effect, b = 0.22, SE = 0.06, 95% BCa CI [0.x, 0.36]; Indirect effect through crisis leader cocky-efficacy, b = 0.11, SE = 0.06, 95% BCa CI [0.01, 0.24]; Indirect result through motivation to lead, b = 0.eleven, SE = 0.05 95% BCa CI [0.01, 0.22]. Motivation to lead and adaptive functioning reflect the levels of motivation and functioning during the COVID-xix crunch, respectively.

Give-and-take

This study investigates the role personality plays in the emergence of constructive leaders during the COVID-19 crisis. More specifically, it examines the issue of the newly adult construct of adaptive personality on full-fourth dimension managers' adaptive functioning in Saudi arabia during the COVID-19 crisis. Furthermore, this study examines crisis leader self-efficacy and motivation to atomic number 82 during the COVID-19 crisis as ii sequential, explanatory mechanisms betwixt adaptive personality and adaptive performance during the COVID-nineteen crisis based on Hadley et al. (2011) theoretical framework. The findings indicate that managers with an adaptive personality are more likely to have increased levels of self-efficacy to lead during the times of a crisis, which supports previous enquiry that has emphasized the importance of personality in the development of one's confidence to perform (Larson and Borgen, 2006; Fuller and Marler, 2009; Li et al., 2017). The findings too indicate that crisis leader cocky-efficacy was constitute to be significantly related to motivation to lead during the COVID-xix crisis, suggesting that managers who have high beliefs regarding their capability to lead in any crunch are more likely to exist motivated to pb during the COVID-19 crisis. Furthermore, those managers were found to be more likely to manifest such motivation by demonstrating adaptive performance given its relevance during times of much needed adaptivity due to the sudden, imposed organizational changes (Jundt et al., 2015; Strauss et al., 2015; Park and Park, 2019).

Theoretical Implications

This written report has multiple theoretical contributions. Kickoff, information technology contributes to the scholars' work on adaptivity such as that of Hirschi et al. (2015) and Rudolph et al. (2017) by finding support for the reliability and predictive validity of adaptive personality, a newly developed construct past Fuller et al. (2018) and Baard et al. (2014). More specifically, the construct of adaptive personality in this written report follows and provides empirical evidence for the conceptual framework discussed in Rudolph et al. (2017) based on the career construction model of adaptation (Savickas, 2005, 2013; Savickas et al., 2009; Savickas and Porfeli, 2012) such that adaptivity as a trait (adaptive personality) tends to event in adaptation results (adaptive performance) through adapting responses (eastward.k., self-efficacy).

Second, cartoon insight from the SCT and COR theory, this study finds support for the role of individual differences in influencing the leader'south beliefs through self-efficacy and motivation to atomic number 82 as argued for by the theoretical framework developed by Chan and Drasgow (2001). Taking the context of crisis into consideration, this study, therefore, provides empirical evidence for Hadley et al. (2011) adopted theoretical framework, based on Chan and Drasgow (2001) framework, such that private characteristics tend to impact one's crisis leader cocky-efficacy, motivation to atomic number 82 during a crisis, and, equally a issue, their operation during the crisis.

3rd, this study contributes to the crisis management literature past investigating the office of private differences in influencing one'southward coping outcomes during the COVID-nineteen crisis in Kingdom of saudi arabia, thereby expanding the findings to new contexts. For instance, a study past Zacher and Rudolph (2021) nerveless data from 979 individuals in Germany and found that individual differences in life satisfaction, positive touch on, and negative touch outcome in different types and levels of coping strategies during the COVID-19 crisis (e.g., controllability appraisals, positive reframing, using emotional back up, self-arraign). Furthermore, utilizing a sample of 408 doctors and nurses in Wuhan City, Cathay, another study by Yi-Feng Chen et al. (2021) found that proactive personality tends to influence one's performance, resilience, and thriving through strengths use during the COVID-nineteen crunch. Such findings from multiple countries emphasize the importance of individual differences and its persistence in coping with the COVID-19 crisis.

Applied Implications

This study also offers multiple practical implications regarding crisis direction, especially during the current times of the COVID-xix crunch. First, it recommends that organizations recruit and hire managers with adaptive personality due to their increased adaptive functioning during crises such equally that of COVID-xix, with their increased motivation and confidence to lead during a crisis. 2d, although personality traits are relatively stable, they are not completely static (Robins et al., 2001; Damian et al., 2019); therefore, current managers should exist assigned to attend grooming programs that heighten their adaptivity and adaptive behaviors to be better able to handle the COVID-19 crunch and other similar situations (Aguinis and Kraiger, 2009). Third, organizations should provide a culture of adaptivity for the adaptive managers to thrive in and eliminate any factors that might hinder the manifestation of their motivation as adaptive performance (Schein, 2010).

Limitations and Future Directions

This study has limitations similar any other. Beginning, due to the nature of the studied constructs, the data collection was based on a self-report design where the managers responded to statements regarding their ain personality, beliefs, motivation, and performance, which might raise small issues of CMB (Podsakoff et al., 2012). Although (ane) a study past Fuller et al. (2016) point that CMB needs to exist present in high levels before it becomes influential in unmarried-source studies and (2) the results of this written report regarding the Harman unmarried factor test, correlational analysis, and VIFs mitigate any concerns relating to CMB (Harman, 1967; Kock, 2015), future research should further control for CMB when attempting to replicate the findings of the study using other techniques (e.g., the correlational mark technique, the CFA marker technique; Lindell and Whitney, 2001; Williams et al., 2010, respectively). Second, due to the self-report nature of the study, subjective measures of the leaders' adaptive performance were collected. Although this might heighten some concerns regarding the validity of the outcome, Janssen (2001) noted that subjective measures of performance are also as constructive every bit other-rated performance measures equally objective measures of functioning are more likely to result in idiosyncratic interpretations and are likely to vary across different raters. Tertiary, this study utilized a cross-exclusive pattern to collect the data by collecting all the data at a single point in time, which might raise concerns regarding the hypothesized relationships' temporal precedence (Bowen and Wiersema, 1999). Thus, future research should utilise a longitudinal or a time-wave design when replicating this written report through collecting the data at multiple points in time (Ployhart and Vandenberg, 2010).

The findings of this study also shed light on potential time to come inquiry avenues. First, although the importance of adaptive performance during crises has been noted (Pulakos et al., 2000), future inquiry would benefit from examining how the adaptive functioning of managers, in the context of crises, relates to other more distal forms of performance and leadership effectiveness measures (east.k., creative performance, contextual performance, office operation, section operation; Katz and Kahn, 1978; Campbell, 1990; Borman and Motowidlo, 1993; Harari et al., 2016). Another future research avenue involves investigating other explanatory mechanisms through which a manager'southward adaptive personality affects their adaptive performance. For instance, the concept of resilience can human action equally such explanatory machinery as those who are resilient tend to have basic abilities to adapt to adverse events based on their individual, unit, family, and community resource (Masten et al., 2009; Britt et al., 2016). In other words, adaptive managers are more likely to have increased levels of individual resources and, equally a result, resilience as they tend to have faced and adapted to challenging situations throughout their life, rendering them more able to adapt to such situations in the time to come, and thus, demonstrate it through adaptive operation. Lastly, future inquiry can investigate the influence of the COVID-19 crisis as a moderator of the investigated relationships in this study, and how such a crisis might accept a dissimilar, unique impact compared to other types/forms of crises (e.g., due to lockdown or isolation) on outcomes such equally utilization of online resources and/or teleworking (Belzunegui-Eraso and Erro-Garcés, 2020; Contreras et al., 2020).

Decision

In this paper, nosotros investigate a newly developed measure of adaptive personality as a potential antecedent to what constitutes effective leadership during the unprecedented COVID-xix crisis. More specifically, we investigate crisis leader cocky-efficacy and motivation to lead during the COVID-19 crisis as two mediators that aid explain the human relationship between adaptive personality and adaptive performance during the crunch. The results advise that adaptive managers are more likely to be more confident in themselves to atomic number 82 during a crisis and, thus, be more than motivated to lead during the actual COVID-19 crisis. Equally a event, they are more probable to invest more time and energy to accommodate to the situation at hand through behaviors such as constructive handling of emergencies and work stress, creative problem solving, constant learning, and interpersonal adaptability, rendering such managers as an invaluable asset to any department or organization.

Data Availability Argument

The raw information supporting the conclusions of this article will be made bachelor by the authors, without undue reservation.

Ethics Statement

The studies involving human being participants were reviewed and canonical by Deanship of Scientific Research, Male monarch Abdulaziz University. The patients/participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.

Writer Contributions

ABaj: conceptualization, wrote–original draft, wrote–review and editing, and visualization. SBaj: methodology, formal analysis, investigation, wrote–review and editing, funding conquering, and project administration. MA, ABas, and SBas: funding acquisition, resource, and conceptualization. All authors contributed to the article and canonical the submitted version.

Disharmonize of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed equally a potential disharmonize of interest.

References

Aguinis, H., and Kraiger, 1000. (2009). Benefits of training and development for individuals and teams, organizations, and society. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 60, 451–474. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163505

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Allworth, E., and Hesketh, B. (1999). Construct-oriented biodata: capturing change-related and contextually relevant future performance. Int. J. Select. Assess. 7, 97–111. doi: 10.1111/1468-2389.00110

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Idea and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Bandura, A. (1991). Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Procedure 50, 248–287. doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90022-L

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Belzunegui-Eraso, A., and Erro-Garcés, A. (2020). Teleworking in the context of the Covid-xix crisis. Sustainability 12:3662. doi: x.3390/su12093662

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Boin, A., 't Hart, P., Stern, E., and Sundelius, B. (2005). The Politics of Crisis Direction: Understanding Public Leadership When it Matters Most. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511490880

CrossRef Full Text

Borman, W. C., and Motowidlo, South. J. (1993). "Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of contextual performance," in Personnel Selection in Organizations, eds North. Schmitt, and W. C. Borman (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Ba), 71–98.

Google Scholar

Bowen, H. P., and Wiersema, M. F. (1999). Matching method to paradigm in strategy research: limitations of cantankerous-exclusive assay and some methodological alternatives. Strat. Manag. J. 20, 625–636. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199907)20:7and<625::Aid-SMJ45and>3.0.CO;2-V

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Bowerman, B. L., and O'Connell, R. T. (1990). Linear Statistical Models: An Applied Approach. Boston, MA: Brooks/Cole.

Brislin, West. (1980). "Translation and content analysis of oral and written material," in Handbook of Cross-Cultural Psychology, eds H. C. Triandis, and J. West. Berry (Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon), 389–444.

Google Scholar

Britt, T. W., Shen, W., Sinclair, R. R., Grossman, Thousand. R., and Klieger, D. Grand. (2016). How much do we really know nearly employee resilience? Ind. Organ. Psychol. 9, 378–404. doi: 10.1017/iop.2015.107

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Caldas, M. P., Ostermeier, K., and Cooper, D. (2020). When helping hurts: COVID-nineteen critical incident involvement and resources depletion in health care workers. J. Appl. Psychol. 106, 29–47. doi: x.1037/apl0000850

PubMed Abstruse | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Campbell, J. P. (1990). "Modeling the functioning prediction problem in industrial and organizational psychology," in Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, eds M. D. Dunnette, and L. K. Hough (Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press), 687–732.

Google Scholar

Çetin, F., and Aşkun, D. (2018). The effect of occupational self-efficacy on piece of work operation through intrinsic piece of work motivation. Manag. Res. Rev. 41, 186–201. doi: 10.1108/MRR-03-2017-0062

CrossRef Total Text | Google Scholar

Chan, D. (2000). "Agreement adaptation to changes in the work surround: Integrating individual departure and learning perspectives," in Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, eds G. Ferris (Greenwich, CT: JAI Press), one–42.

Google Scholar

Chan, One thousand. Y., and Drasgow, F. (2001). Toward a theory of private differences and leadership: understanding the motivation to atomic number 82. J. Appl. Psychol. 86, 481–498. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.86.three.481

CrossRef Total Text | Google Scholar

Charbonnier-Voirin, A., El Akremi, A., and Vandenberghe, C. (2010). A multilevel model of transformational leadership and adaptive performance and the moderating office of climate for innovation. Group Organ. Manag. 35, 699–726. doi: ten.1177/1059601110390833

CrossRef Total Text | Google Scholar

Chong, S., Huang, Y., and Chang, C. H. D. (2020). Supporting interdependent telework employees: a moderated-mediation model linking daily COVID-19 task setbacks to next-day work withdrawal. J. Appl. Psychol. 105, 1408–1422. doi: 10.1037/apl0000843

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Total Text | Google Scholar

Contreras, F., Baykal, E., and Abid, G. (2020). E-leadership and teleworking in times of COVID-xix and across: what we know and where do we get. Front end. Psychol. 11:3484. doi: ten.3389/fpsyg.2020.590271

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Damian, R. I., Spengler, M., Sutu, A., and Roberts, B. W. (2019). Sixteen going on sixty-six: a longitudinal study of personality stability and change across l years. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 117, 674–695. doi: 10.1037/pspp0000210

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Total Text | Google Scholar

Djeebet, H. (2020, April). What is the impact of COVID-19 on the global hospitality manufacture? Hospitality Net. Available online at: https://www.hospitalitynet.org/opinion/4098062.html (accessed Dec 15, 2020).

Fernet, C., Trépanier, Southward. G., Austin, S., Gagné, Yard., and Forest, J. (2015). Transformational leadership and optimal functioning at work: on the mediating part of employees' perceived job characteristics and motivation. Work Stress 29, 11–31. doi: 10.1080/02678373.2014.1003998

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Foss, North. J. (2020a). Behavioral strategy and the COVID-19 disruption. J. Manag. 46, 1322–1329. doi: 10.1177/0149206320945015

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Foss, N. J. (2020b). The impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on firms' organizational designs. J. Manag. Stud. 58, 270–274. doi: 10.1111/joms.12643

CrossRef Total Text | Google Scholar

Fu, Southward. Q., Greco, L. G., Lennard, A. C., and Dimotakis, Northward. (2021). Feet responses to the unfolding COVID-19 crisis: patterns of alter in the experience of prolonged exposure to stressors. J. Appl. Psychol. 106, 48–61. doi: 10.1037/apl0000855

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Fuller, B., and Marler, Fifty. E. (2009). Modify driven by nature: a meta-analytic review of the proactive personality literature. J. Vocat. Behav. 75, 329–345. doi: x.1016/j.jvb.2009.05.008

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Fuller, B., Marler, Fifty. E., Bajaba, S., and Lovett, D. M. (2018). "Deconstructing the proactive personality construct: exploring a change-command circumplex model," in University of Management Proceedings, Vol. 2018 (Briarcliff Estate, NY: Academy of Direction), 13504. doi: 10.5465/AMBPP.2018.13504abstract

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Fuller, C. M., Simmering, M. J., Atinc, G., Atinc, Y., and Babin, B. J. (2016). Common methods variance detection in business concern research. J. Bus. Res. 69, 3192–3198. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.12.008

CrossRef Total Text | Google Scholar

Griffin, M. A., Neal, A., and Parker, S. K. (2007). A new model of work role functioning: positive behavior in uncertain and interdependent contexts. Acad. Manag. J. 50, 327–347. doi: 10.5465/amj.2007.24634438

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Hadley, C. North., Pittinsky, T. L., Sommer, Southward. A., and Zhu, W. (2011). Measuring the efficacy of leaders to assess information and make decisions in a crisis: the C-Pb scale. Leadersh. Q. 22, 633–648. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.05.005

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Hair, J. F., Blackness, W. C., Babin, B. J., and Anderson, R. Due east. (2018). Multivariate Data Analysis. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

Google Scholar

Halbesleben, J. R., and Buckley, Yard. R. (2004). Burnout in organizational life. J. Manag. 30, 859–879. doi: 10.1016/j.jm.2004.06.004

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Harari, M. B., Reaves, A. C., and Viswesvaran, C. (2016). Creative and innovative performance: a meta-analysis of relationships with task, citizenship, and counterproductive task performance dimensions. Eur. J. Piece of work Organ. Psychol. 25, 495–511. doi: x.1080/1359432X.2015.1134491

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Harman, H. (1967). Mod Factor Analysis. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Printing, Chicago, III.

Google Scholar

Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to Arbitration, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

Google Scholar

Hirschi, A., Herrmann, A., and Keller, A. C. (2015). Career adaptivity, adaptability, and adapting: a conceptual and empirical investigation. J. Vocat. Behav. 87, i–10. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2014.11.008

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Hobfoll, S. E., Halbesleben, J., Neveu, J. P., and Westman, M. (2018). Conservation of resource in the organizational context: the reality of resources and their consequences. Ann. Rev. Organ. Psychol. Organ. Behav. five, 103–128. doi: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032117-104640

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Hu, J., He, W., and Zhou, K. (2020). The mind, the middle, and the leader in times of crisis: how and when COVID-xix-triggered bloodshed salience relates to state anxiety, job date, and prosocial behavior. J. Appl. Psychol. 105, 1218–1233. doi: ten.1037/apl0000620

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Huang, J. Fifty., Ryan, A. M., Zabel, K. L., and Palmer, A. (2014). Personality and adaptive functioning at work: a meta-analytic investigation. J. Appl. Psychol. 99, 162–179. doi: 10.1037/a0034285

PubMed Abstruse | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

James, E. H., Wooten, L. P., and Dushek, K. (2011). Crisis management: informing a new leadership research calendar. Acad. Manag. Annal. 5, 455–493. doi: 10.1080/19416520.2011.589594

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Janssen, O. (2001). Fairness perceptions as a moderator in the curvilinear relationships betwixt job demands, and job performance and job satisfaction. Acad. Manag. J. 44, 1039–1050. doi: ten.2307/3069447

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Judge, T. A., Thoresen, C. J., Pucik, V., and Welbourne, T. Chiliad. (1999). Managerial coping with organizational change: a dispositional perspective. J. Appl. Psychol. 84, 107–122. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.84.1.107

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Jundt, D. Grand., Shoss, M. K., and Huang, J. L. (2015). Individual adaptive performance in organizations: a review. J. Organ. Behav. 36, S53–S71. doi: 10.1002/job.1955

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Katz, D., and Kahn, R. 50. (1978). The Social Psychology of Organizations, Vol. 2. New York, NY: Wiley.

Google Scholar

Kilcullen, B. (2004). "Test of adaptable personality," in Presentation given at the ARI Special Forces User Review (Arlington, VA).

Kock, Due north. (2015). Common method bias in PLS-SEM: a total collinearity assessment arroyo. Int. J. eastward-Collaboration 11, 1–10. doi: ten.4018/ijec.2015100101

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Larson, Fifty. M., and Borgen, F. H. (2006). Do personality traits contribute to vocational self-efficacy? J. Career Assess. 14, 295–311. doi: 10.1177/1069072706286446

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Lazarus, R. S., and Folkman, Southward. (1984). Stress, Appraisement, and Coping. New York, NY: Springer publishing visitor.

Google Scholar

Li, M., Wang, Z., Gao, J., and Yous, X. (2017). Proactive personality and job satisfaction: the mediating furnishings of self-efficacy and work date in teachers. Curr. Psychol. 36, 48–55. doi: 10.1007/s12144-015-9383-1

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Locke, E. A., and Latham, G. P. (1990). A Theory of Goal Setting and Chore Performance. Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Google Scholar

Masten, A. S., Cutuli, J. J., Herbers, J. Eastward., and Reed, M. G. (2009). "Resilience in development," in Oxford Handbook of Positive Psychology, eds S. J. Lopez, and C. R. Snyder (New York, NY: Oxford University Printing), 117–131. doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195187243.013.0012

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Mitchell, T. R. (1980). "Expectancy-valence models in organizational psychology," in Expectations and Deportment: Expectancy-Value Models in Psychology, eds N. T. Feather (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum), 293–312.

Mitchell, T. R., and Beach, 50. R. (1976). A review of occupational preference and option inquiry using expectancy theory and decision theory. J. Occup. Psychol. 49, 231–248. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8325.1976.tb00348.x

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Mumford, M. D., Friedrich, T. Fifty., Caughron, J. J., and Byrne, C. L. (2007). Leader noesis in existent-world settings: how do leaders think about crises? Leadersh. Q. 18, 515–543. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2007.09.002

CrossRef Total Text | Google Scholar

Newman, D. A. (2014). Missing data: five practical guidelines. Organ. Res. Methods 17, 372–411. doi: 10.1177/1094428114548590

CrossRef Total Text | Google Scholar

Park, S., and Park, Southward. (2019). Employee adaptive performance and its antecedents: review and synthesis. Hum. Resour. Dev. Rev. eighteen, 294–324. doi: 10.1177/1534484319836315

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Parry, G. (1990). Coping With Crises. New York, NY: Routledge, Chapman, and Hall.

Pearson, C. M., and Clair, J. A. (1998). Reframing crunch management. Acad. Manag. Rev. 23, 59–76. doi: 10.5465/amr.1998.192960

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ployhart, R. E., and Bliese, P. D. (2006). "Individual adaptability (I-Adjust) theory: conceptualizing the antecedents, consequences, and measurement of individual differences in adjustability," in Advances in Human Performance and Cognitive Technology Enquiry (Vol. half-dozen). Understanding Adjustability: A Prerequisite for Effective Performance Within Complex Environments, eds C. South. Burke, 50. 1000. Pierce, and Eastward. Salas (Bingley: Elsevier), 3–39. doi: x.1016/S1479-3601(05)06001-7

CrossRef Total Text | Google Scholar

Ployhart, R. Due east., and Vandenberg, R. J. (2010). Longitudinal research: the theory, design, and analysis of change. J. Manag. 36, 94–120. doi: x.1177/0149206309352110

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Podsakoff, P. One thousand., MacKenzie, Southward. B., Lee, J. Y., and Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 88, 879–903. doi: ten.1037/0021-9010.88.v.879

PubMed Abstruse | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., and Podsakoff, Northward. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 63, 539–569. doi: ten.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452

PubMed Abstruse | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Pulakos, E. D., Arad, S., Donovan, M. A., and Plamondon, One thousand. Eastward. (2000). Adaptability in the workplace: development of a taxonomy of adaptive functioning. J. Appl. Psychol. 85, 612–624. doi: x.1037/0021-9010.85.four.612

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Pulakos, E. D., Schmitt, N., Dorsey, D. Due west., Arad, S., Borman, W. C., and Hedge, J. W. (2002). Predicting adaptive performance: further tests of a model of adjustability. Hum. Perform. 15, 299–323. doi: 10.1207/S15327043HUP1504_01

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Robins, R. W., Fraley, R. C., Roberts, B. Due west., and Trzesniewski, K. H. (2001). A longitudinal study of personality alter in immature adulthood. J. Pers. 69, 617–640. doi: 10.1111/1467-6494.694157

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Rothbaum, F., Weisz, J. R., and Snyder, Due south. S. (1982). Changing the world and changing the self: a two-procedure model of perceived control. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 42, 5–37. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.42.one.v

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Rudolph, C. West., Lavigne, K. Northward., and Zacher, H. (2017). Career adaptability: a meta-analysis of relationships with measures of adaptivity, adapting responses, and accommodation results. J. Vocat. Behav. 98, 17–34. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2016.09.002

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Savickas, M. L. (2005). "The theory and practice of career structure," in Career Evolution and Counselling: Putting Theory and Research to Work, eds S. D. Brownish, and R. Westward. Lent (Hoboken, NJ: Wiley), 42–70.

Google Scholar

Savickas, M. L. (2013). "Career structure theory and practice," in Career Development and Counseling: Putting Theory and Research into Work, 2nd Edn., eds R. W. Lent, and South. D. Brownish (Hoboken, NJ: Wiley), 147–183.

Google Scholar

Savickas, M. L., Nota, L., Rossier, J., Dauwalder, J. P., Duarte, G. E., Guichard, J., et al. (2009). Life designing: a paradigm for career construction in the 21st century. J. Vocat. Behav. 75, 239–250. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2009.04.004

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Savickas, M. L., and Porfeli, E. J. (2012). Career arrange-abilities calibration: construction, reliability, and measurement equivalence beyond 13 countries. J. Vocat. Behav. 80, 661–673. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2012.01.011

CrossRef Total Text | Google Scholar

Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational Culture and Leadership, Vol. two. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley and Sons.

Google Scholar

Seetharaman, P. (2020). Business models shifts: impact of Covid-nineteen. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 54:102173. doi: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102173

CrossRef Total Text | Google Scholar

Sommer, S. A., Howell, J. G., and Hadley, C. North. (2016). Keeping positive and building strength: the office of affect and team leadership in developing resilience during an organizational crunch. Group Organ. Manag. 41, 172–202. doi: 10.1177/1059601115578027

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Spector, P. E. (2006). Method variance in organizational research: truth or urban fable? Organ. Res. Methods 9, 221–232. doi: 10.1177/1094428105284955

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Spitzmuller, Yard., Sin, H. P., Howe, G., and Fatimah, Southward. (2015). Investigating the uniqueness and usefulness of proactive personality in organizational inquiry: a meta-analytic review. Hum. Perform. 28, 351–379. doi: 10.1080/08959285.2015.1021041

CrossRef Total Text | Google Scholar

Strauss, K., Griffin, K. A., Parker, Due south. K., and Mason, C. M. (2015). Building and sustaining proactive behaviors: the role of adaptivity and job satisfaction. J. Passenger vehicle. Psychol. 30, 63–72. doi: ten.1007/s10869-013-9334-v

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Trougakos, J. P., Chawla, Northward., and McCarthy, J. M. (2020). Working in a pandemic: exploring the touch on of COVID-19 health feet on work, family, and health outcomes. J. Appl. Psychol. 105, 1234–1245. doi: ten.1037/apl0000739

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Williams, 50. J., Hartman, N., and Cavazotte, F. (2010). Method variance and marking variables: a review and comprehensive CFA marker technique. Organ. Res. Methods 13, 477–514. doi: 10.1177/1094428110366036

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Yi-Feng Chen, N., Crant, J. M., Wang, Due north., Kou, Y., Qin, Y., Yu, J., et al. (2021). When in that location is a will at that place is a mode: the office of proactive personality in combating COVID-19. J. Appl. Psychol. 106, 199–213. doi: 10.1037/apl0000865

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Yuan, Z., Ye, Z., and Zhong, M. (2021). Plug back into work, safely: job reattachment, leader safe commitment, and task engagement in the COVID-nineteen pandemic. J. Appl. Psychol. 106, 62–lxx. doi: 10.1037/apl0000860

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Zacher, H., and Rudolph, C. W. (2021). Individual differences and changes in subjective wellbeing during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. Am. Psychol. 76, 50–62. doi: x.1037/amp0000702

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

kerneyporype.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.661628/full

Share this post