Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 5, No 3, 2019 551 Volume and Issues Obtainable at Center for Sustainability Research and Consultancy Review of Economics and Development Studies ISSN:2519-9692 ISSN (E): 2519-9706 Volume 5: No. 3, 2019 Journal homepage: www.publishing.globalcsrc.org/reads Emotional Instability, Employees Work Outcomes among Academia: Compulsory Citizenship Behavior and Leadership Style as Moderators 1 Zara Hayat, 2 Iram Batool, 3 Sahar Hayat, 4 Uzma Amin 1 Department of Applied Psychology, Bahauddin Zakariya University Multan, Pakistan 2 Department of Applied Psychology, Bahauddin Zakariya University Multan, Pakistan: i.batool@bzu.edu.pk 3 Department of Business Administration, NFC-IET Multan, Pakistan 4 Department of Applied Psychology, Bahauddin Zakariya University Multan, Pakistan ARTICLE DETAILS ABSTRACT History Revised format: 30 June 2019 Available Online: 31 July 2019 Nowadays Employees Work Outcomes is the primary concern of academia of higher education. Hence, to understand this perspective the current study has examined the impact of emotional instability on employees work outcomes (Workaholism, Organizational Citizenship Behavior and Burnout). This study also examined the moderating role of compulsory citizenship behavior and transactional and transformational leadership styles. Sample of the study was faculty members of public and private universities. Finding of the study showed that there was negative and significant relationship between emotional instability, workaholism and organizational citizenship behavior whereas, there was positive and significant relationship between emotional instability and burnout. Further results demonstrated that transactional and transformational leadership play moderating role in relation to emotional instability and workaholism. Nevertheless, this study will provide insight to develop policies to lowers the level of burnout, and will also help administrators to implement such leadership style that decrease emotional instability and raise performance. © 2019 The authors, under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial 4.0 Keywords Emotional Instability, Burnout, Transformational Leadership, Transactional Leadership, Compulsory Citizenship Behavior JEL Classification: M12, M54 Corresponding author’s email address: i.batool@bzu.edu.pk Recommended citation: Hayat, Z., Batool, I., Hayat, S. and Amin, U. (2019). Emotional Instability, Employees Work Outcomes among Academia: Compulsory Citizenship Behavior and Leadership Style as Moderators. Review of Economics and Development Studies, 5 (3), 551-562 DOI: 10.26710/reads.v5i3.573 1. Introduction Work is determined and worthwhile action, which people perform to accomplish and achieve psychological and physical demands. However, different feelings and emotions generated by work varies, as some perceive work as compulsion (Morin, 2004) and some view work as a positive feelings (Rothmann, 2003). Hence, work has both negative and positive impact on employees (Berg, 2006). Over few decades, working environment has been changed remarkably (Rothmann, Mostert and Strydom, 2006; Worrall, Mather and Cooper, 2016). In this era of growing global economy the workers are demanded to invest more energy and time in work, which in return has decreased career opportunity and job security (Cooper, Dewe and O’ Driscoll, 2001). The educational and academic territory is considered as one of the service providing area. Many researches have indicated that instructors experience high level of burnout, emotional shakiness and those http://www.publishing.globalcsrc.org/reads Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 5, No 3, 2019 552 who are neurotics, have less interpersonal relations and positive association with burnout (Cano Gracia et al., 2005; Zimmerman 2008). Burnout is three-dimensional syndrome comprising mental, physical and emotional dimension as well as negative attitude towards career, people and life (Akbaba, 2014). Burnout comprises feelings of hopelessness, chronic fatigue, low self-esteem, low productivity and exhaustion (Salvagioni et al., 2017). According to Mathison (2015), the load and stress of working in teaching domain has been progressively increased in recent years which in turn has put continuous pressure on instructors. Anderson (2006) concluded that instructors during probation period experiences increased burnout due to their concerns about career building and heavy workloads. The term “workaholism” is used with different synonyms such as heavy investment at work (Golden, 2014), work craving (Wojdylo et al., 2017) and excessive working (Andreassen, 2013). Initially this concept was thought to have correspondence with alcoholism as in both there are pattern of inappropriate obsession or reliance. However, the concept of workaholism grow with passage of time, Some researchers perceived workaholism from individual characteristics wise and mentioned them as depressed unhappy, neurotic catastrophic figure who do not fulfil their job obligation, and creates trials from idea of co-workers (Naughton, 1987). According to Kinman (1998), workaholism is a result of nature and policies of organization and one’s zest to do work. Broadly, the academic staff of universities face high work demands and low support. It is important to optimize workplace for optimizing the wellbeing of employees and their families. Due to intensive competition and globalization education sector are encountering the consequences of burnout (Mujtaba and Cartney, 2008). Professional burnout and stress has been examined in this sector and strategies to generate healthier work environment for successful job performance has been suggested (Sanford Kaila, 2017; King and Haar (2017). An organizational environment reinforces workaholic behavior and promotes work-addicts (Johnstone and Johnston, 2005). Universities seem to have various conditions linked with both poor psychological health and workaholic behavior (Winefield et al., 2014; Samad et al., 2015). The changes in education sector have intense impact on working environment and organizational culture in modern decades (Shattock, 2013). Emotional Instability (Neuroticism) is defined an enduring and distinctive pattern, a tendency to view world as an alarming place, to experience unpleasant emotions such as anxiety, depression, anger, impulsivity, high susceptibility to stress and impulsivity (Djurkovic,2006; Levine, 2018) and to put oneself in a situation that foster negative effect (Spurk et al., 2016). The term “Emotional Instability” is a part of FFM and is generally termed as “Big Five” (Costa and McCrae, 2017). Emotionally unstable personalities experienced less life satisfaction and poor subjective wellbeing (Olesen, Thomsen and O’ Toole, 2015). Literature support about relationship between workaholism and emotional instability (Shkoler, Rabenu, and Tziner, 2017; Clark et al., 2010; Schaufeli, 2016). Over the past few decades, the issue of leadership has been matter of concern. However, the debate of effective leader and leadership has been a hot topic in today’s world (Bolden, 2004). Leadership is broadly discussed concept based on the success of any institution, organization and nation (Nei et al., 2014; Harper et al., 2015). No single definition of leadership exists in the literature, Chemers (2014), described leadership as a process in which leaders influence group of followers to achieve objectives and to provide coherent or cohesive direction. Similarly, Nei et al (2014), viewed leadership as an attempt of leaders to influence others for achieving specific goals. The leadership concept is still in process of refinement (Goleman, Boyatzis and Mckee, 2013) and this refinement had led towards the development of transformational and transactional leadership style (Bass and Avolio, 1994). Robert (2014), states that transformational leadership triggers, a positive change in worker’s attitude towards the goals and strategies of the organization. Bass (1995), outline four features of transformational leaders that enable them to trigger motivation in others and these features are IM (inspirational motivation), IS (intellectual stimulation), IF (idealized influence) and IC (individualized consideration). Whereas, Transactional leadership is a process of exchange in which leader and followers engage to attain goals (Hunter et al., 2013). Zhang (2015) proposed that transactional leadership is pivotal for the effective management as the effectiveness ultimately leads towards the success of any institution. Indeed, leadership style is the attitude of the leaders towards their subordinates and the behavior they exhibit on daily basis through interaction (Naseer et al., 2016). A leader plays important in both positive and negative behavior. Organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) has been considered, as beneficial and valuable for organization (Knippenberg et al., 2015). Since its conception, it has been area of research and interest for many researchers and scholars (Chiang et al., 2012). Initially OCB was considered as an employee’s extra-role behavior at the workplace Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 5, No 3, 2019 553 (Smith et al., 1983). Later researchers redefined the idea, referring Organizational Citizenship Behavior as a discretionary workplace behavior that is a part of the routine duties and which assist individuals psychological and social setting (Cem Ersoy et al., 2011; Zeinabadi and Salehi, 2011). Alfonso et al. (2016) outline two categories of OCB that are OCB-I (in which behavior is directed towards people) and OCB-B (in which behavior is directed towards organization). OCB-I comprises individuals who help their colleagues who are habitually absent from work and take personal interest in other employees. OCB-B comprises individuals who work for the betterment of the organization. (Alfonso, Zenasni, Hodzic and Ripoll, 2016). Some researchers have found that organizational citizenship behavior occurs with the supervisor and organizational support (Chiang et al., 2012; van Knippenberg et al., 2015). Indeed, employees OCB have been recognized as a valuable behavior for organizations and societies (Dai et al., 2013; Podsakoff, 2013; Somech et al., 2013). Research conducted by Kumar et al. (2009) indicates that neuroticism (emotional instability) has no effect on organizational citizenship behavior. The term “Compulsory Citizenship Behavior” originates from the reexamination of OCB (Organizational Citizenship Behavior). It represents the more negative side of the extra-role behavior at the workplace (Porpara, 1989). Vigoda Gadot (2006), coined the term “Citizenship Behavior”. Compulsory Citizenship Behavior has been described as workers violation of their readiness to display extra-roles that are conducted due to some organizational pressure or occupational factors (Vigoda-Gadot, 2007; Bolino et al., 2010; Zhao et al., 2014). Vigoda examines that expectation to display extra-role may put pressure on employee’s and make employee’s believe that they have to display organizational citizenship behavior to create a positive image in the workplace (Yam et al., 2017). Compulsory Citizenship Behavior is an enforced behavior in which workers take situational factor such as implicit oppression and suppression from authorities unwillingly and are vulnerable to it (Vigoda- Gadot, 2007; Bolino et al., 2015). Compulsory Citizenship Behavior may deteriorate the employee’s psychological resources cause a person to encounter negative feelings and leads toward negative attitude and behavior at work. (Peng et al., 2012). Therefore, compulsory citizenship behavior reflects an instability between workers behavior and attitude. Bergeron (2007), noted that compulsory citizenship behavior markedly reduced job satisfaction, increased one’s intention of leaving the organization and cause work-family conflict (Bolino, Turnely and Nichoff, 2004). When Destructive Leadership signals stress (Wong et al., 2018; Liu and Wang, 2013), the subordinates feel pressure of insufficient resources, therefore exhibit negative behavior such as CCB at workplace (Zang et al., 2014). Some studies have found that Compulsory Citizenship behavior reduce organizational performance and organizational effectiveness and increase workers intention to leave the organization, organizational politics and job stress (Vigoda-Gadot, 2007). The purpose of the present study was to examine emotional instability, employees’ work outcomes (i.e. workaholism, organizational citizenship behavior and burnout) among academia. Furthermore it was aimed to explore the moderating effects of compulsory citizenship behavior and leadership styles (transformational and transactional). 2. Objectives of the Study a) To access the association between emotional instability, workaholism, organizational citizenship behavior and burnout b) To inspect the moderating role of leadership style and compulsory citizenship in relationship of emotional instability, organizational citizenship behavior and workaholism and in relationship of emotional instability and burnout Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 5, No 3, 2019 554 3. Conceptual Framework Model 1 (a) Model 1 (b) 3.1 Method 3.1.1 Participants Teachers working in public and private sectors have been taken for the current study. Data has been collected from different cities of Pakistan (i-e Multan, Pakpattan, Lahore, Faisalabad and Islamabad). Convenient Sampling technique was utilized in the current study which means to select those respondents that are easily accessible in order to reach sample size. Participants who have omitted any response were not included in the study. The aim of the study was to recruit at least 400 participants. Five-hundred self-report questionnaires were distributed out of which 472 were returned. Due to missing values, 72 questionnaires have been dropped out. 3.1.2 Instruments Instruments are being used in the current study, are as follow a) Big Five-Personality Inventory b) Organizational Citizenship Behavior Scale c) Short-Version Burnout Questionnaire d) Workaholism Battery (Work-Bat) e) Compulsory Citizenship Behavior Scale f) Leadership Style Questionnaire 3.1.3 Big Five-Personality Inventory Scale devised by John and Srivastave (1999) has been applied to measure emotional instability. The Inventory comprises Forty-Four items. However, emotional instability has been measure using eight items from the inventory (i-e 4, 14, 19, 29, 29, 39) and three-items are reversed coded (i-e 9, 24, 34). Each Participants were supposed to Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 5, No 3, 2019 555 specify the degree of disagreement and agreement for every statement. Likert-type Scale has been used (Strongly Disagree “5” to Strongly Agree “1”). 3.1.4 Organizational Citizenship Behavior To measure organizational Citizenship Behavior scale of Smith et al (1983) has been used. Eight items have been adopted from their scale of which three item were reversed-scored (i-e 3, 4 and 7). 3.1.5 Shorter-Version Burnout Questionnaire Burnout scale by Ayala Malach Pines (2005) has been used by using ten items. This scale access the individual’s level of mental and physical exhaustion. 3.1.6 Workaholism Battery (Work-Bat) Workaholism Battery proposed by Spence and Robbins (1992) has been used to access participant’s degree of workaholism. This Battery consist of twenty five items which is divided into 3 sub-scales a) Work Drive (3, 5, 14, 18, 20, 22 and 25) b) Work Enjoyment (2, 4, 7, 9, 10, 11, 16, 17) c) Work Involvement (1, 6, 8, 12, 13, 15, 21 and 24) Items no. 1, 6, 8 and 11 are reversed coded . 3.1.7 Compulsory Citizenship Behavior Scale Compulsory Citizenship Behavior was assessed by Vigoda-Gadot (2007) scale. It is five Likert-type item scale. “The management in my organization put pressure on employees to engage in extra-role work activities beyond their formal job tasks” is an example of item measuring compulsory citizenship behavior. 3.1.8 Leadership Style Questionnaire Transformational and Transactional leadership style has been measured by Oterkiil and Ertesvag (2012). The questionnaire consists of eight Likert-type items distributed along two sub-scales: Transactional Style (1, 2, 3, 4) and Transformational Style (5, 6, 7, 8). 3.1.9 Procedure Participants selected for the current study were given questionnaires at their work place. Instructions were being communicated to teachers on how to fill the survey questionnaire. Demographic sheet and informed consent were being attached with the booklet. Questions in other section were being coded to analyze data using SPSS and Smart-PLS version 3. 3.2 Data Analysis 3.2.1 Reliability Analysis of the Construct Scale Firstly, the internal consistency among the items was measured. Internal consistency was measured by Cronbach Alpha having value 0 to 1. Result of the study demonstrates high internal consistency of the instrument. Table 1: Cronbach Alpha reliability of Scales Scales Items Sample Cronbach Alpha Emotional Instability 08 400 0.722 Organizational Citizenship Behavior Burnout Workaholism Leadership Compulsory Citizenship Behavior 08 10 25 08 05 400 400 400 400 400 0.750 0.914 0.824 0.885 0.811 Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 5, No 3, 2019 556 3.2.2 Descriptive Information of the Participants The descriptive information of the respondent demographic characteristics showed that about 60% of the respondent were males. Mostly participant’s age was between 24 to 32 years. Majority of the participants were holding M.Phil degree. Out of 400 respondents, approximately 58% were having work experience between one to nine years, 52% respondents were lecturer and 88% were permanent employees. Approximately 60% respondents in this survey were government employees. Table 2: Two-tailed Correlation among Variables Variables EI OCB BO WD WE WI TS TF CCB EI OCB -.135** BO .519** -.464 WD -.114* .499** .076 WE -.441 .511** -.130** .573** WI -.265** .503** -.032 .597** .497** TS .085 .271** -.056 .254** .243** .219** TF .052 .322** -.094 .263** .307** .209** .658** CCB .334** -.117* .459** .072 .007 .048 .128* .057 *p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001 3.2.3 Hypothesis Testing and Direct Effect In order to test hypothesis and to determine direct association between the variables including t-value and path co- efficient structure model of Smart (PLS) has been utilized. This study utilized bootstrapping resampling for 400 observation. The t-value should be > than 1.64 for significant relationship. The central theme of the present study was to determine model evaluation by analyzing the direct association and to verify the proposed assumed relationship of the variable with the help of structural model. However in the current study (05) hypothesis have direct relationship were analyzed, out of which (04) were supported and only (1) was not supported. Moreover, figure (1) demonstrates direct effect. Figure 1: Structure Model of Relationship Figure (1) fully explains and highlight the direct effect of each variable on the dependent variable. Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 5, No 3, 2019 557 Table 3: Summary of Direct Hypothesis Testing Direct Hypothesis Beta SD T Stats P Values Interpretation EI→WH -0.390 0.050 8.100 0.000 Supported EI→WD -0.442 0.121 3.615 0.000 Supported EI→WE -0.483 0.121 3.921 0.000 Supported EI→WI -0.426 0.112 3.823 0.000 Supported EI→OCB -0.263 0.084 3.145 0.002 Supported EI→BO 0.386 0.289 2.991 0.022 Supported WH→OCB 0.412 0.050 8.495 0.000 Supported WD→OCB 0.125 0.070 1.786 0.074 Supported WE→OCB 0.242 0.058 4.140 0.000 Supported WE→OCB 0.221 0.053 4.186 0.000 Supported WH→BO -0.100 0.119 0.911 0.036 Not Supported WD→BO 0.053 0.097 0.551 0.582 Not Supported WE→BO -0.165 0.097 1.697 0.090 Supported WI→BO -0.241 0.088 1.605 0.030 Not Supported In order to test hypothesis and to determine the significance of path coefficient, this study utilized bootstrapping re- sampling method. In the table (3), the results demonstrated that there is negative relationship between emotional instability and workaholism and its dimension (work drive, enjoyment, involvement). The result came out to be significant because the level of significance is 0.000. The result revealed that there is a negative relationship between emotional instability and organizational citizenship behavior and it has been found that there is positive association between emotional instability and burnout. Whereas, dimension of workaholism is also negatively associated with organizational citizenship behavior and work drive and involvement has no direct relationship with burnout. 3.2.4 Moderation Analysis Ramaya et al. (2011), demonstrate that the analysis of moderation explains that how the variable of moderation effect the strength of relation between dependent and independent variable. Moreover, the moderator variable is added if there is a weak link between independent and dependent variable. In this study Smart PLS (3.0) has been utilized by adding interaction term in the model. Moreover, before adding interaction term R-square will also be examined. Additionally product indicator approach has been also employed. Lastly, this study examine moderating effect of transactional and transformation leadership style on the association between emotional instability and workaholism. The moderating role of compulsory citizenship behavior has been also examined among relation of workaholism and organizational citizenship behavior and in relationship of workaholism and burnout. Moderation Result Moderation Hypothesis Mean SD T-value P-value Interpretation TS Moderator→ WH 0.181 0.037 4.850 0.000 Moderation TF Moderator→ WH -0.144 0.038 3.730 0.002 Moderation CCB Moderator→ OCB 0.218 0.063 0.341 0.732 No Moderation CCB Moderator → BO 0.087 0.095 0.093 0.351 No Moderation The result indicated that transactional leadership strengthen the relationship of emotional instability and workaholism whereas, transformational leadership style weaken the relation of emotional instability which defend the hypothesis. The result indicated that Compulsory citizenship behavior has no moderating role in relationship of workaholism and organizational citizenship behavior and it does not effects the strength of relationship of workaholism and burnout. Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 5, No 3, 2019 558 4. Discussion Firstly, it was hypothesized that emotional instability is associated with workaholism and its dimension (drive, enjoyment and involvement). The results of our study indicated that emotional instability is negatively associated with workaholism and its dimension. The emotional unstable personalities usually experience negative emotion, less enjoyment and are less engaged in their work. So many researchers have concluded that emotional instability is positively associated with all dimension of workaholism (Or Shkoler et al., 2017; Souckova et al., 2014). As it revealed by many researchers work has the potential to elevate negative emotion (Ng et al., 2007). Therefore, working can be considered as mood modifier. Workaholism is discover as a personality trait by many researchers. So the higher score on traits such as neuroticism, leads to workaholic behavior (Andreassen et al., 2012; Burke et al., 2006; Clark et al., 2010) According to Shkoler et al. (2017), the individuals who are more emotional instable are more work driven. Secondly, it was assumed that emotional instability is associated with organizational citizenship behavior. Results indicated that emotional instability is negatively associated with organizational citizenship behavior. It means that academics who are emotional unstable lacks voluntarily commitment. The finding of our study are in line with study conducted by Jabbar et al. (2012) and Youngkeun et al. (2013). All these researchers found significant and negative relationship between emotional instability and organizational citizenship behavior Thirdly, it was hypothesized that emotional instability and burnout is associated with burnout. Results revealed that emotional instability is positively associated with burnout. It means individuals who are emotionally unstable are easily frustrated at the workplace. The finding of our study is supported by study of Kokkinoss (2007), who found that neuroticism is positive predictor of burnout. The perfectionist workaholics are less adaptive and display more maladaptive behavior. Many studies of work domains support, this supposition that emotional instability is associated with all the dimension of burnout (Hill and Curran, 2016). Fourthly, it was assumed that workaholism and its dimension are associated with organization citizenship behavior. The result unveiled that workaholism and its dimension are positively associated with organizational citizenship behavior. This indicates that employees, who are highly driven, full involve in their work and enjoy their work shows high level of organizational citizenship behavior. This supposition is supported by the study of Ali et al. (2012) who found meaningful and positive relationship between organizational citizenship behavior and dimensions of workaholism. Another assumption was that workaholism and its dimension are associated with burnout. Findings showed that workaholism and its dimensions have no relationship with burnout except work enjoyment has negative relationship with burnout. These findings were not consistent with many researches, which examined the association between workaholism and burnout. According to Marcello, workaholism is a predictor of burnout. (Marcello et al., 2018) Out of three dimension of workaholism, work drive is considered as strongest predictor of burnout (Goncalves, 2017). As in Pakistani perspective, employees work only for their job security and the fulfillment of essential needs. They are less committed and disorganized individuals who only work to achieve power (Oates, 1970). Therefore, work drive and involvement has no relationship with burnout. Transformational and transactional leadership styles moderate the relation of emotional instability and workaholism. Results suggested that when transformation leadership is high it will reduce negative relation of emotional instability and workaholism. Present study also hypothesized that compulsory citizenship behavior moderate the relation of workaholism and organizational citizenship behavior and the relation of workaholism and burnout. Findings does not support this assumption and suggested that compulsory citizenship behavior has no moderating role in relation of workaholism and organizational citizenship behavior and in relation of workaholism and burnout Nevertheless, all workers are not passionate to display voluntarily commitment and may feel pressure to conduct organizational citizenship behavior. According to Bolino et al. (2010), citizenship pressure is particular job requirement due to which employees feel pressure to perform OCBs. Vigoda-Gadot (2006; 2007) states that the voluntary nature of organizational citizenship behavior may change when employees face external pressure and OCB become a requirement. The individual who are highly driven enjoy their work and involved in their work Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 5, No 3, 2019 559 display voluntarily commitment to their organization so external pressure does not affect their committed behavior (Ali et al., 2012). 5. Practical Implication The individual differences have ample influence on work (the amount of time and energy invested at work). Therefore, employees’ related decision should be accounted. The management should give more attention to impact and interaction of external and internal aspects as these highly influence organizational practices. At macro level, organization promotes long working hours and expect their employees to spend time at work than formal job obligation for the enhancement of their organization. The appreciation can be shown by organization in numerous ways. For example according to Shimazu et al. (2015), employees who work for longer hours are considered as role models or heros. Such working environment may activates work drive, therefore organization should consider some intervention. So, employees get more involved, extracting pleasure from their work and overcoming negative consequences. In order to maintain and build inter-personal relation with worker, management plays a crucial role. Inter-personal relationship with worker aid to exalt employee’s enjoyment and to elevate their job performance. The results of the current study support the contention and stressed on the importance of the management (transformational leadership style) in contributing towards workers experience at the workplace. In fact, managerial skills lead to the development of good interpersonal relations between the boss and workers. 6. Conclusion This study investigates the relationship between variables such as emotional instability, workaholism, organizational citizenship behavior, burnout, leadership style and compulsory citizenship behavior. The result of the study indicates that emotional instability has direct relationship with organizational citizenship behavior and burnout. Moreover, the study also reveals that workaholism play mediating role in relation of emotional instability and organizational citizenship behavior. Further, the study also shows that transformational and transactional leadership style plays a moderating in relation of workaholism and organizational citizenship behavior. References Akbaba, S. (2014). A Comparison of the Burnout Levels of Teachers with Different Occupational Satisfaction Sources. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 14(4), 1253-1261. Andreassen, C. S. (2013). Workaholism: An overview and current status of the research. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 3(1), 1-11. Bakker, A. B., & Costa, P. L. (2014). Chronic job burnout and daily functioning: A theoretical analysis. Burnout Research, 1(3), 112-119. Bass, B. M. (1995). Universality of transformational leadership. Distinguished Scientific Awards Address, Society for Industrial & Organizational Psychology, Orlando, FL. Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1994). Transformational leadership and organizational culture. The International Journal of Public Administration, 17(3-4), 541-554. Bergeron, D. M. (2007). The potential paradox of organizational citizenship behavior: Good citizens at what cost?. Academy of Management review, 32(4), 1078-1095. Bolden, R. (2004). What is leadership?. Centre for Leadership Studies, University of Exeter. Bolen, H., Nei, K., & Fuhrmeister, K. (2014). Evaluation of Leadership Development Coaching: The Impact of Personality. In Paper presented at the SIOP poster Conference. Bolino, M. C., Hsiung, H.-H., Harvey, J., & LePine, J. A. (2015). “Well, I’m tired of tryin’!” Organizational citizenship behavior and citizenship fatigue. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(1), 56-74. Bolino, M. C., Turnley, W. H., & Niehoff, B. P. (2004). The other side of the story: Reexamining prevailing assumptions about organizational citizenship behavior. Human Resource Management Review, 14(2), 229- 246. Bolino, M. C., Turnley, W. H., Gilstrap, J. B., & Suazo, M. M. (2010). Citizenship under pressure: What's a “good soldier” to do?. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(6), 835-855. Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 5, No 3, 2019 560 Cano-García, F. J., Padilla-Muñoz, E. M., & Carrasco-Ortiz, M. Á. (2005). Personality and contextual variables in teacher burnout. Personality and Individual Differences, 38(4), 929-940. Chemers, M. (2014). An integrative theory of leadership. Psychology Press. Chiang, C. F., & Hsieh, T. S. (2012). The impacts of perceived organizational support and psychological empowerment on job performance: The mediating effects of organizational citizenship behavior. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31(1), 180-190. Clark, M. A., Lelchook, A. M., & Taylor, M. L. (2010). Beyond the Big Five: How narcissism, perfectionism, and dispositional affect relate to workaholism. Personality and Individual Differences, 48(7), 786-791. Cooper, C.L., Dewe, P.J. and O’Driscoll, M.P. (2001), Organizational Stress: A Review and Critique of Theory, Research and Applications, Sage Publications, CA. Dai, Y. D., Dai, Y. Y., Chen, K. Y., & Wu, H. C. (2013). Transformational vs transactional leadership: which is better? A study on employees of international tourist hotels in Taipei City. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 25(5), 760-778. Djurkovic, N., McCormack, D., & Casimir, G. (2006). Neuroticism and the psychosomatic model of workplace bullying. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21(1), 73-88. Golden, L. (2014). Distinctions between Overemployment, Overwork, Workaholism, and Heavy Investments in Work Time. In Heavy work investment. Routledge. Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R. E., & McKee, A. (2013). Primal leadership: Unleashing the power of emotional intelligence. Harvard Business Press. Gonçalves, G., Brito, F., Sousa, C., Santos, J., & Sousa, A. (2017). Workaholism and burnout: Antecedents and effects. In Occupational Safety and Hygiene (65-70). CRC Press. Hill, A. P., & Curran, T. (2016). Multidimensional perfectionism and burnout: A meta-analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 20(3), 269-288. Hunter, E. M., Neubert, M. J., Perry, S. J., Witt, L. A., Penney, L. M., & Weinberger, E. (2013). Servant leaders inspire servant followers: Antecedents and outcomes for employees and the organization. The Leadership Quarterly, 24(2), 316-331. Johnstone, A., & Johnston, L. (2005). The Relationship between Organizational Climate, Occupational Type and Workaholism. New Zealand Journal of Psychology, 34(3) 181-188. King, E., & Haar, J. M. (2017). Mindfulness and job performance: A study of Australian leaders. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 55(3), 298-319. Kokkinos, C. M. (2007). Job stressors, personality and burnout in primary school teachers. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(1), 229-243. Kumar, K., Bakhshi, A., & Rani, E. (2009). Linking the big five personality domains to organizational citizenship behavior. International Journal of Psychological Studies, 1(2), 73-81. LeVine, R. A. (2018). Culture, behavior, and personality: An introduction to the comparative study of psychosocial adaptation. Routledge. Liu, X. Y., & Wang, J. (2013). Abusive supervision and organizational citizenship behaviour: is supervisor– subordinate guanxi a mediator?. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(7), 1471- 1489. Morin, S. (2004,). The meaning of work in modern times. In Paper presented at the 10th World Congress on Human Resources Management, August 2004, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Mujtaba and McCartney, (2007), "Research over the situations begins stress" New Book, Publication, New Delhi. Naseer, S., Raja, U., Syed, F., Donia, M. B., & Darr, W. (2016). Perils of being close to a bad leader in a bad environment: Exploring the combined effects of despotic leadership, leader member exchange, and perceived organizational politics on behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly, 27(1), 14-33. Naughton, T. J. (1987). A conceptual view of workaholism and implications for career counseling and research. The Career Development Quarterly, 35(3), 180-187. Oates, W. E. (1971). Confessions of a workaholic: The facts about work addiction. World Publishing Company. Olesen, M. H., Thomsen, D. K., & O’Toole, M. S. (2015). Subjective well-being: Above neuroticism and Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 5, No 3, 2019 561 extraversion, autonomy motivation matters. Personality and Individual Differences, 77, 45-49. Peng, Z. L., & Zhao, H. D. (2012). Does organization citizenship behavior really benefit the organization? Study on the compulsory citizenship behavior in China. Nankai Business Review International, 3(1), 75-92. Petrina, S., Mathison, S., & Ross, E. W. (2015). Threat convergence: The new academic work, bullying, mobbing and freedom. Workplace: A Journal for Academic Labor, 2015 (24), 58-69. Podsakoff, N. P., Whiting, S. W., Welsh, D. T., & Mai, K. M. (2013). Surveying for “artifacts”: The susceptibility of the OCB–performance evaluation relationship to common rater, item, and measurement context effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(5), 863-874. Porpora, D. V. (1989). Four Concepts of Social Structure DOUGLAS V. PORPORA. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 19(2), 195-211. Rosenman, E. D., Ilgen, J. S., Shandro, J. R., Harper, A. L., & Fernandez, R. (2015). A systematic review of tools used to assess team leadership in health care action teams. Academic Medicine, 90(10), 1408-1422. Rothmann, S. (2003). Work engagement in the South African police service. In Paper presented at the 11th European Congress of Work and Organizational Psychology, 14-17 May 2003, Lisbon, Portugal. Rothmann, S., Mostert, K., & Strydom, M. (2006). A psychometric evaluation of the job demands-resources scale in South Africa. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 32(4), 76-86. Salvagioni, D. A. J., Melanda, F. N., Mesas, A. E., González, A. D., Gabani, F. L., & de Andrade, S. M. (2017). Physical, psychological and occupational consequences of job burnout: a systematic review of prospective studies. PloS One, 12(10), 01-29. Samad, A. (2015). Towards an understanding of the effect of leadership on employee wellbeing and organizational outcomes in Australian universities. The Journal of Developing Areas, 49(6), 441-448. Shattock, M. (2013). University governance, leadership and management in a decade of diversification and uncertainty. Higher Education Quarterly, 67(3), 217-233. Shimazu, A., Schaufeli, W. B., Kamiyama, K., & Kawakami, N. (2015). Workaholism vs. work engagement: The two different predictors of future well-being and performance. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 22(1), 18-23. Shkoler, O., Rabenu, E., & Tziner, A. (2017). The dimensionality of workaholism and its relations with internal and external factors. Revista de Psicología del Trabajo y de las Organizaciones, 33(3), 193-203. Smith, C. A., Organ, D. W., & Near, J. P. (1983). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(4), 653-663. Somech, A., & Drach-Zahavy, A. (2013). Organizational citizenship behavior and employee's strain: Examining the buffering effects of leader support and participation in decision making. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 22(2), 138-149. Spurk, D., Keller, A. C., & Hirschi, A. (2016). Do bad guys get ahead or fall behind? Relationships of the dark triad of personality with objective and subjective career success. Social psychological and personality science, 7(2), 113-121. Van Knippenberg, D., Van Prooijen, J. W., & Sleebos, E. (2015). Beyond social exchange: Collectivism’s moderating role in the relationship between perceived organizational support and organizational citizenship behavior. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 24(1), 152-160. Vigoda-Gadot, E. (2006). Compulsory citizenship behavior: Theorizing some dark sides of the good soldier syndrome in organizations. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 36(1), 77-93. Vigoda-Gadot, E. (2007). Redrawing the boundaries of OCB? An empirical examination of compulsory extra-role behavior in the workplace. Journal of Business and Psychology, 21(3), 377-405. Winefield, H. R., Boyd, C., & Winefield, A. H. (2014). Work-family conflict and well-being in university employees. The Journal of psychology, 148(6), 683-697. Wojdyło, K. (2017). Workaholism: The nature of the construct and the nomenclature as controversial issues in research on the phenomenon. A commentary on Staszczyk and Tokarz (2015). Annals of Psychology, 18(4), 547-552. Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 5, No 3, 2019 562 Wong, S. I., & Giessner, S. R. (2018). The thin line between empowering and laissez-faire leadership: An expectancy-match perspective. Journal of Management, 44(2), 757-783. Worrall, L., Mather, K., and Cooper, C. L. (2016). The changing nature of professional and managerial work: issues and challenges from an empirical study of the UK. In: Perspectives on contemporary professional work: challenges and experiences. New Horizons in Management. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham. Yam, K. C., Fehr, R., Keng-Highberger, F. T., Klotz, A. C., & Reynolds, S. J. (2016). Out of control: A self-control perspective on the link between surface acting and abusive supervision. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(2), 292-301. Zhang, X. A., Li, N., Ullrich, J., & van Dick, R. (2015). Getting everyone on board: The effect of differentiated transformational leadership by CEOs on top management team effectiveness and leader-rated firm performance. Journal of Management, 41(7), 1898-1933. Zhao, H., Peng, Z., & Chen, H. K. (2014). Compulsory citizenship behavior and organizational citizenship behavior: The role of organizational identification and perceived interactional justice. The Journal of psychology, 148(2), 177-196. Zimmerman, R. D. (2008). Understanding the Impact of Personality Traits on Individuals' Turnover Decisions: A Meta‐Analytic Path Model. Personnel Psychology, 61(2), 309-348.