Table 2.
Supervisor-subordinate power distance orientation congruence effects on subordinate job performance when mediated by subordinate job strain
| Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dyad relationship conflict difference | 0.185* | (0.086) | −0.009 | (0.053) | 0.010 | (0.054) |
| Dyad tenure | −0.028 | (0.022) | 0.005 | (0.014) | 0.002 | (0.014) |
| Supervisor education | 0.040 | (0.081) | −0.029 | (0.050) | −0.025 | (0.050) |
| Supervisor work experience | −0.014† | (0.007) | 0.003 | (0.004) | 0.002 | (0.004) |
| Supervisor gender (1 = female) | −0.097 | (0.158) | −0.237* | (0.098) | −0.247* | (0.097) |
| Subordinate gender (1 = female) | −0.268† | (0.153) | 0.168† | (0.095) | 0.141 | (0.094) |
| Subordinate age | −0.029 | (0.052) | −0.019 | (0.032) | −0.022 | (0.032) |
| Subordinate race (1 = white) | 0.164 | (0.153) | 0.151 | (0.095) | 0.168† | (0.094) |
| Service industry | −0.106 | (0.144) | 0.128 | (0.089) | 0.117 | (0.089) |
| Subordinate power distance (P) | 0.054 | (0.124) | −0.037 | (0.077) | −0.031 | (0.076) |
| Supervisor power distance (S) | 0.106 | (0.131) | −0.153† | (0.081) | −0.142† | (0.080) |
| P2 | 0.095 | (0.131) | 0.110 | (0.081) | 0.119 | (0.080) |
| P × S | −0.798** | (0.192) | −0.058 | (0.119) | −0.140 | (0.124) |
| S2 | 0.065 | (0.098) | 0.125* | (0.061) | 0.132* | (0.060) |
| Strain (subordinate-reported) | −0.103* | (0.049) | ||||
| Constant | 2.966** | (0.367) | 4.167** | (0.227) | 4.472** | (0.267) |
| R2 | 0.179 | 0.115 | 0.140 | |||
| Coef. | SD | |||||
| Congruence (S = P) line | ||||||
| Slope | 0.16 | (0.16) | ||||
| Curvature | −0.64** | (0.20) | ||||
| Congruence (S = −P) line | ||||||
| Slope | −0.05 | (0.20) | ||||
| Curvature | 0.96** | (0.25) | ||||
n = 172. The coefficients and standard errors (in parentheses) are reported
*p < .05
**p < .01. (two-tailed)
†p < .10