Transformational and passive avoidant leadership as determinants of absenteeism

Abstract

PurposeDoes leadership style affect absenteeism in a company? The purpose of this paper is to contrast the effects of two leadership styles – transformational and passive avoidant – on absenteeism, both legitimate and illegitimate, as mediated by job satisfaction.Design/methodology/approachA self‐report questionnaire was completed by a sample of 120 employees of a national mail delivery company. Hierarchical regressions were used to analyze the data.FindingsIt was found that transformational leadership decreases illegitimate absenteeism, while passive avoidant leadership increases it. In regard to legitimate absenteeism, transformational leadership is shown to have no effect, while passive avoidant leadership is shown to be negatively related to it. Together, the findings regarding passive avoidant leaders suggest their subordinates tend to come to work when ill (presenteeism), but stay away from work when well (illegitimate absenteeism).Practical implicationsFor managers trying to reduce the costs of absenteeism, this suggests that leadership style can make a difference. Managers who give subordinates very little attention, or attention only when they have done something wrong – the passive avoidant style – are likely to experience the higher costs of both absenteeism and presenteeism. Adopting the transformational style may help to reduce these costs.Originality/valueThe paper helps to extend the current work on leadership; it examines the passive avoidant style, which remains understudied to date; and it enriches our understanding of the relationship between leadership style and absenteeism as an outcome variable by moving beyond a uni‐dimensional conceptualization of absenteeism. Finally, it serves as a basis for future research by providing evidence for a somewhat counter‐intuitive finding that, under passive avoidant leaders, workers appear to come to work when sick, but stay away from work when well.