ORIGINAL RESEARCH

published: 23 June 2022

doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.934831

Inclusive Leadership and Innovative

Performance: A Multi-Level
Mediation Model of Psychological
Safety
Tong Li* and Ningyu Tang

Antai College of Economics and Management, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China

Taking both individual and team levels into consideration has been called for years
in terms of research on leadership. Inclusive leadership, a trending leadership style
emerging from the global needs of managing the increasingly diversified workplace
Edited by:
nowadays, has yet been rarely studied at both levels. To answer these calls, we
Wangshuai Wang, specifically analyzed the relationship between inclusive leadership, team psychological
Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool
safety, and innovative performance via a multilevel analysis. The results are based on
University, China
a study of 356 employees from 90 working teams. Individual perceptions of inclusive
Reviewed by:
Hui Wang, leadership are positively related to the individual innovative performance through the
Xiangtan University, China mediation of individual psychological safety. Team perceptions of inclusive leadership
Yangchun Fang,
Zhejiang University of
are positively related to the team innovative performance through the mediation of team
Technology, China psychological safety. Moreover, team perceptions of inclusive leadership are positively
Oleg Sychev,
related to the individual innovative performance through the cross-level mediation of
Volgograd State Technical
University, Russia individual psychological safety. Implications for both theory and practice are discussed.
*Correspondence: Keywords: inclusive leadership, multi-level analysis, psychological safety, individual innovative performance, team
Tong Li innovative performance
[email protected]

Specialty section: INTRODUCTION

This article was submitted to
Organizational Psychology, Workforce diversity, catalyzed by economic globalization and technology development, has
a section of the journal
become a trend in the workplace (Pelled et al., 1999). The diversity not only includes demographic
Frontiers in Psychology
factors like gender, age, and living status but also involves underlying levels such as values and social
Received: 03 May 2022 cognition (Harrison et al., 1998). Therefore, the diversity of employees in the workplace brings
Accepted: 27 May 2022
complications for the management, such as serious problems of inequality and discrimination in
Published: 23 June 2022
the workplace (Kelly and Dobbin, 1998; Mor Barak et al., 2003; Mor Barak, 2007; Smith et al.,
Citation:
2012). To deal with the challenges brought by workforce diversity, organizational leaders have
Li T and Tang N (2022) Inclusive
Leadership and Innovative
become increasingly aware of the importance of creating an inclusive environment (Nishii and
Performance: A Multi-Level Mediation Rich, 2014). Furthermore, inclusive leadership emerges as an ideal leadership style to motivate
Model of Psychological Safety. diversified employees to better realize themselves as well as to treat them fairly (Roberson, 2006).
Front. Psychol. 13:934831. Through fair treatment of and providing strong motivation to the employees from diversified
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.934831 backgrounds, inclusive leadership may positively influence the performance at both individual and

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 1 June 2022 | Volume 13 | Article 934831

Li and Tang Inclusive Leadership and Innovative Performance

organizational levels (Pless and Maak, 2004; Echols, 2009; Shore THEORETICAL BACKGROUNDS AND
et al., 2011; Bowers et al., 2012; Tang and Zhang, 2015). HYPOTHESES
Among the positive effects that inclusive leadership exerts
on multiple kinds of individual or organizational performance, Inclusive Leadership and Innovative
this study mainly focuses on the relationship between inclusive Performance
leadership and innovative performance for two reasons. In the current study, we developed an overall theory mainly
First, innovative performance is recognized as crucial for from the perspective of the social exchange theory. According
organizational success and survival (Amabile, 1988), which to the social exchange theory, when leaders provide material
makes it essential to explore ways to improve the innovative or nonmaterial resources to employees, they will form an
performance of organizations. In this study, we attempted emotional social exchange relationship with employees,
to examine whether a specific style of leadership, inclusive which makes employees generate the willingness and take on
leadership, would elevate innovative performance. Second, action to give back to their leaders (Blau, 1964). Therefore,
previous studies have proved that workforce diversity wields we argue that inclusive leadership, which allows employees
a positive influence on both employees’ and organization’s to perceive belongingness and present uniqueness at the
innovative performance (Govendo, 2005; Mohammadi et al., same time (Roberson, 2006), provides lots of psychological
2017). Thus, it is worth studying whether inclusive leadership, supportive resources to help employees live comfortably in
which is developed to manage workforce diversity, can also boost organizations. In return, employees would repay their leaders
innovative performance. by working harder and pursuing higher performance such as
Despite scholars’ growing interests in inclusive leadership, innovative performance.
previous studies on this topic mostly focus on the individual As Yammarino and Dansereau (2008) argued, leadership
level, which indicates limited knowledge. This is mainly because is a multilevel construct in nature. Considering this inherent
the structure of organizations has been evolving from individual- multilevel characteristic, as well as few studies on inclusive
based to team-based, and supervisors are more frequently leadership that covered multilevel interplay, the current study
requested to lead employees as individuals as well as teams investigated the influence of inclusive leadership on innovative
(Cohen and Bailey, 1997; Hackman, 2002; Kozlowski and Bell, performance at multiple levels. According to Chun et al.
2003). The team-based trend prompted a series of management (2009), the multilevel construct should consider the difference
issues from both theoretical and practical perspectives (Chen between teams, the difference within teams, and the difference
and Kanfer, 2006). Leading teams rather than individuals between followers independent of their teams. Therefore, we have
raises new questions, such as how team-focused leadership discussed our research model from several plausible levels.
affects individuals, and whether trade-offs may occur between
managing teams and individuals (Chen et al., 2007; Wang and Individual-Level Relationships
Howell, 2012). Therefore, research on leadership should integrate Inclusive leadership, constructed as motivating employees’
individual- and team-level processes to answer these questions participation and achieving organizational support by showing
(Kozlowski and Bell, 2003). three attributes, namely, openness, availability, and accessibility
To further fill the gap, the current study intends to examine (Edmondson, 2004), is an important method to manage the
the multilevel influences of inclusive leadership on innovative workforce diversity and achieve organizational inclusion (Pless
performance. Drawing from the social exchange theory (Blau, and Maak, 2004). Some earlier studies investigated the effects
1964), we argue that inclusive leadership offers employees higher of inclusive leadership on innovative working behaviors at
levels of psychological safety, which is a kind of desirable the individual level and provided evidence mostly for positive
psychological resource. This in turn draws employees to present relations (Carmeli et al., 2010; Javed et al., 2018, 2019a).
better innovative performance as a return to their inclusive The perception of inclusive leadership may foster individual
leaders. As inclusive leadership and team psychological safety are innovative performance in three aspects. First, according to the
both team-level constructs and hold individual perceptions, we social exchange theory, when inclusive leaders are perceived to
bring up our assertions according to the direct consensus model provide assistance and support to employees, employees would
(Chan, 1998). feel obliged to repay the leader and organization (Blau, 1964).
The current study makes three contributions to the existing Thus, employees are more likely to reciprocate by displaying
research. First, this study reviewed a modest number of extra-role behavior such as innovative working behaviors (Pless
studies that explore the influences of leadership on the and Maak, 2004; Choi et al., 2015). Second, inclusive leaders are
relevant outcomes at both individual and team levels. perceived to be open to employees expressing their views and
Second, we extended the previous research on the positive to be always available and accessible to be their listeners, which
effect of inclusive leadership on innovative performance by guarantees that employees can freely generate and present new
examining how inclusive leadership promotes innovative ideas without being ignored or rejected (Carmeli et al., 2010).
performance at both levels and by cross-level means. Third, Third, by actively communicating and providing assistance to
we expanded the literature on psychological safety in terms employees, inclusive leaders make employees feel supported by
of the multilevel analysis by proving it to be a cross-level their leaders (Javed et al., 2019b), which makes employees more
mediator within the relationship between inclusive leadership likely to perform innovative behaviors (Clegg et al., 2002; Janssen,
and innovative performance. 2005). To sum up, we conclude that individual perceptions of

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 2 June 2022 | Volume 13 | Article 934831

Li and Tang Inclusive Leadership and Innovative Performance

inclusive leadership would encourage employees to express novel may accept new information, listen to a new voice, and receive
ideas as well as to transform the ideas into innovative behaviors a new challenge (Hirak et al., 2012), which encourages every
and further improve their innovative performance. Hence, we team member to generate and express creative ideas. We believe
hypothesize the following: that when someone in the team witnesses other members getting
appreciated for exhibiting innovative behaviors by inclusive
Hypothesis 1: Individual perceptions of inclusive leadership
leaders, he or she may probably suppose that it is appropriate
are positively related to individual innovative performance.
to act the same. Thus, inclusive leadership can affect individuals
by affecting other team members. For another, by creating “an
Team-Level Relationships
environment that acknowledges, welcomes, and accepts different
According to Braun et al. (2013, p. 271), “if theoretical
approaches, styles, perspectives, and experiences” (Winters, 2014,
constructs relate to individuals nested in teams, one must
p. 206), inclusive leadership effectively manages the workforce
acknowledge the team as a meaningful entity.” Thus, in addition
diversity and positively influences the team process by promoting
to considering individual perceptions of inclusive leadership, we
coordination and mitigating conflicts (Qi and Liu, 2017; Randel
should investigate the team perceptions of inclusive leadership
et al., 2018). The environment created by inclusive leaders not
as well.
only benefits the teams they lead but also makes every team
Unlike individual performance, to improve team
member feel supported and energized to better engage in their
performance, leaders consider not only how to improve
tasks to repay their leaders (Pless and Maak, 2004). Hence, we
performance at the individual level but also how to display
further argue that individual innovative performance can be
team-focused behaviors that promote shared commitment
improved by these team-focused inclusive leading behaviors. We
to teams and promote positive team processes (Kozlowski
hypothesize the following:
et al., 1996; Morgeson et al., 2010). Despite that we mentioned
inclusive leadership may positively affect individual innovative Hypothesis 3: Team perceptions of inclusive leadership are
performance, these individuals, as team members, need to positively related to individual innovative performance.
be encouraged to commit to the team and cooperate as a
whole to improve the team’s innovative performance. As the
Psychological Safety as a Mediator
characteristics of inclusive leadership (openness, availability,
Psychological safety is defined as perceptions of the consequences
and accessibility) help leaders to focus on facilitating group
of taking interpersonal risks in a particular context such as a
members to feel themselves as part of the group (belongingness)
workplace (Edmondson, 1999). In this study, we introduced
and retaining their sense of individuality (uniqueness) while
psychological safety as a mediator from the perspective of the
contributing to the group processes and outcomes, employees
social exchange theory (Blau, 1964). As we discussed before, the
can all feel inclusiveness and further get committed to the team
three characteristics, openness, availability, and accessibility of
(Randel et al., 2018). This commitment to the team can also
inclusive leadership, make employees feel supported and behave
be considered as team members’ giving back to their leaders’
more comfortably in organizations (Edmondson, 2004), so they
inclusiveness from the perspective of the social exchange theory
would put more effort into extra-role behavior such as improving
(Blau, 1964). Moreover, by overcoming the barriers between
innovative performance to repay their leaders’ kindness. In this
team members from different backgrounds, inclusive leadership
logic, we further put forth that psychological safety is one
can build a positive social environment where team members are
of the essential psychological resources that employees receive
more aware of the team goals and increase work coordination
from an inclusive leadership style (Carmeli et al., 2010), which
(Wasserman et al., 2008; Mor Barak, 2013; Qi and Liu, 2017),
would further drive them to repay their leaders with higher
which might be the most important mediating mechanism for
innovative performance.
team outcomes (Anderson and West, 1998). Overall, at the
Though first brought up as a team-level construct
team level, inclusive leadership improves the commitment to
(Edmondson, 1996, 1999), research on psychological safety
teams of team members and shapes a comprehensive work
has gained fruitful findings by treating psychological safety as
atmosphere where team members feel comfortable to generate
a phenomenon at multiple levels including individual level,
innovative ideas and cooperate with each other to accomplish
group/team level, and organization level (Edmondson and Lei,
team innovation. Thus, we hypothesize the following:
2014). Edmondson and Lei (2014) also mentioned that, despite
Hypothesis 2: Team perceptions of inclusive leadership are the multilevel findings, research on psychological safety should
positively related to team innovative performance. pay attention to how phenomena at different levels of analysis
interact. Thus, we separately discuss the mediating role of
Cross-Level Relationships psychological safety at different levels in this section.
Furthermore, we suggest that team perceptions of inclusive
leadership exert a cross-level main effect on the individual Individual-Level Mediation
innovative performance. In this case, the individual innovative We first argue that individual perceptions of inclusive leadership
performance will not only be improved by inclusive leadership will positively influence individual psychological safety.
experiencing indirect interactions with the supervisor but also According to the essence of inclusive leadership, if an individual
by leadership behaviors that are directed toward other team perceives a leader to be inclusive, he/she is likely to consider the
members or the team as a whole. For one reason, inclusive leaders leader to be open, available, and accessible in the leader–follower

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 3 June 2022 | Volume 13 | Article 934831

Li and Tang Inclusive Leadership and Innovative Performance

relationship. As Edmondson (2004) addressed, the openness, invite and listen to team members to express their suggestions
availability, and accessibility exhibited by leaders are likely to and concerns, and motivate team members to implement ideas
promote the development of psychological safety. By being open, without worrying about the risk of being criticized and punished
inclusive leaders actively communicate with employees about (Ye et al., 2019). Moreover, inclusive leaders may exhibit socio-
achieving work goals or catching new opportunities, and the emotional support behaviors to develop strong emotional links
feeling of being invited and appreciated for their voice would help and interpersonal relationships with team members (Hollander,
facilitate the development of employees’ psychological safety 2009). Thus, inclusive leadership would cause team members
(Nembhard and Edmondson, 2006). By being available and to feel safe to take interpersonal risks in the team, which, in
accessible, inclusive leaders send a clear signal that employees other words, facilitates feelings of psychological safety of team
can easily get in touch with them and address issues (Carmeli members. Furthermore, we suggest that the feelings of safety of
et al., 2010). Therefore, when individuals perceive high levels every team member would converge into a shared belief as team
of leader inclusiveness, they would feel safe to reach out to the psychological safety.
leader and express their ideas without worrying about causing Then, we conceive that team psychological safety relates
interpersonal risk, which assists employees to develop individual positively to team innovative performance in several ways. As we
psychological safety. mentioned earlier, team innovative performance refers to more
Then, we propose that individual psychological safety fosters than a simple aggregation of individual innovative performance.
individual innovative performance. To achieve higher innovative Team members need to cooperate with each other and work as a
performance, an employee needs to generate creative ideas whole to promote team innovation. Indeed, psychological safety
and exhibit innovative behaviors. However, employees may has been identified as an essential factor in understanding how
take risks in the context of innovation by proposing and people in a group collaborate to achieve a shared outcome in
implementing new ideas, since many of them could end up with organizational research (Edmondson, 1999, 2004). In specific, in
organizational failure (Janssen, 2002; Mathisen et al., 2012; Javed a team with high psychological safety, team members are found to
et al., 2019b). Therefore, employees need support in terms of be more likely to question suggestions and decisions (Burke et al.,
psychological safety to alleviate the risks and become involved 2006), share knowledge (Collins and Smith, 2006; Siemsen et al.,
in the innovation process and realize their creative potential 2009), and join team learning (Huang et al., 2008). Moreover,
(Harrington et al., 1987). Indeed, Kark and Carmeli (2009) through these team processes, team members would take more
proved that psychological safety induces feelings of vitality to initiatives to develop new products and services (Baer and Frese,
impact an individual’s involvement in creative work. Carmeli 2003), which can lead to a better team innovative performance.
et al. (2010) further proved that psychological safety positively Altogether, we argue that team perceptions of inclusive leadership
influences employees’ involvement in creative behaviors, which is would nourish a shared belief of team psychological safety,
important for their creative performance. Therefore, we suggest which will further promote team cooperation and improve
that, at the individual level, higher psychological safety would team innovative performance. We conclude and suggest the
motivate employees to create more original ideas, get more following hypothesis:
involved in innovative behaviors, and eventually improve their
Hypothesis 5: Team psychological safety mediates the positive
innovative performance.
relationship between team perceptions of inclusive leadership
To conclude, we discuss that perceptions of inclusive
and team innovative performance.
leadership would make individuals feel safe to voice their feelings
and perform and develop feelings of psychological safety, which
may sequentially drive individuals to engage in innovative work Cross-Level Mediation
and manifest higher innovative performance. We hypothesize Finally, we propose that the cross-level relationship between
the following: the team perceptions of inclusive leadership and individual
innovative performance is mediated by individual psychological
Hypothesis 4: Individual psychological safety mediates
safety. So far, we have discussed how individual psychological
the positive relationship between individual perceptions of
safety encourages individuals to perform better at innovative
inclusive leadership and individual innovative performance.
work, but we need to further investigate how a team’s perceptions
of inclusive leadership cultivate individual psychological safety.
Team-Level Mediation That is, individual psychological safety would be improved
The analysis of team psychological safety originated from the by not only the inclusive leadership experienced in indirect
research by Edmondson (1996, 1999), in which she posited team interactions with the leader but also the leader’s behaviors toward
psychological safety as a shared belief by team members that the other team members or the team as a whole. For one thing,
team is safe for interpersonal risk-taking. In a similar vein, we first inclusive leaders are open to opinions and suggestions generated
discuss the relationship between team perceptions of inclusive by team members and always ready to get reached by team
leadership and team psychological safety. Team perceptions of members for communication and discussion (Carmeli et al.,
inclusive leadership imply the average level at which the leader 2010). By doing this, inclusive leaders ensure that every team
is perceived to be inclusive by the team. If a leader is perceived to member feels psychologically safe and takes no worry about
be inclusive in the context of a team, he/she may be perceived interpersonal risks. We believe that, when team perceptions
to acknowledge and respect the uniqueness of team members, of inclusive leadership are high, even if an individual does

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 4 June 2022 | Volume 13 | Article 934831

Li and Tang Inclusive Leadership and Innovative Performance

FIGURE 1 | Research model.

not receive the inclusiveness by oneself, he/she would probably Hypothesis 6: Individual psychological safety mediates the
witness other team members being included to take actions in positive relationship between the team’s perceptions of
teams without worrying about being criticized or punished. As a inclusive leadership and individual innovative performance.
result, he/she will develop a sense of psychological safety because
In conclusion, Figure 1 presents the multilevel mediation model
he/she can act just like everyone else and get treated equally
of inclusive leadership, psychological safety, and innovative
by the inclusive leaders. For another thing, inclusive leadership
performance examined in this study.
influences the team as a whole by motivating team processes
such as knowledge sharing and team learning (Huang et al.,
2008; Siemsen et al., 2009). Though directed toward the whole
METHODOLOGY
team, these processes can make every team member benefit. With
more interaction and cooperation with other team members, an Participants and Procedure
individual may develop stronger bonds with the others, which We collected data for this study from the operating departments
may trigger a higher level of psychological safety (Edmondson of two large companies (one from the automobile industry and
and Mogelof, 2005). Moreover, inclusive leadership shapes and another one from the chemical industry, respectively) located
maintains a favorable work environment and cultural norm in northern and southern China. With the help of the HR
in teams (Carmeli et al., 2010), in which every team member department, we were able to distribute surveys to participants
would be impacted by the safe and comfortable climate and during their work hours on site. Due to the risk of lockdown
feel psychologically safe in the team. Combining with earlier policy during the COVID-19 pandemic, we collected the data
discussion, we conclude that a team-level inclusive leadership in one wave. To prevent the common method bias that may
would have a cross-level influence on individual psychological be caused by one-wave data collection, we employed a paired-
safety, which would in turn promote better individual innovative questionnaire design. The survey consists of two versions.
performance. We hypothesize the following: The supervisor version, rated by the team leaders, includes

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 5 June 2022 | Volume 13 | Article 934831

Li and Tang Inclusive Leadership and Innovative Performance

TABLE 1 | Summary of constructs in this study.

Construct References Sample item Cronbach’s α

Inclusive leadership Carmeli et al. (2010) The team leader is open to hearing new ideas. 0.942
Psychological safety Edmondson (1999) It is safe to take a risk on this team. 0.741
Individual innovative performance Welbourne et al. (1998) The employee does a good job at coming up with new ideas. 0.944
Team innovative performance Lovelace et al. (2001) The innovativeness of the team’s product is good. 0.710

measurements of the individual innovative performance, team Psychological Safety

innovative performance, and team-level controls. The employee We use seven items adapted from Edmondson (1999) to measure
version is rated by employees and composed of measurements psychological safety. Sample items included the following: “If I
on inclusive leadership, psychological safety, and individual-level make a mistake on this team, it is often held against me” (Reverse)
controls. We invited 102 working teams to take part in the study and “It is safe to take a risk on this team.” The Cronbach’s α for
and distributed paper questionnaires to both team leaders and the scale in our study is 0.741.
team members, and 12 team leaders did not respond to the
surveys. Hence, the final sample for this study consists of 90 Individual Innovative Performance
teams (including 90 questionnaires from team leaders and 356 We measure the individual innovative performance by adapting
questionnaires from team members, representing response rates four items of the “innovator role” from Welbourne et al.’s role-
of 88.2%). based performance scales (Welbourne et al., 1998). Sample items
Within the sample of 90 team leaders, 86.7% are men, 72.2% included the following: “The employee does a good job at coming
are married, 51.1% grew up in rural areas, and their average age up with new ideas” and “The employee does well in working to
is 33.7 years old. In terms of educational level, 28.9% have a high implement new ideas.” The Cronbach’s α for the scale in our
school degree and below, 15.6% have a college degree, 45.6% study is 0.944.
have a bachelor’s degree, and 10% have a master’s degree and
above. Team leaders’ job tenure ranged from <3 years (8.9%), Team Innovative Performance
3–5 years (20.0%), 5–8 years (15.6%), 8–10 years (11.1%), and We used a four-item scale adapted from Lovelace et al. (2001)
more than 10 years (44.4%). Team leaders’ job positions ranged to measure the team’s innovative performance. Sample items
from general staff (6.7%), junior manager (53.3%), middle-level included the following: “The innovativeness of the team’s
manager (35.6%), and senior manager (4.4%). product is good” and “The number of innovations or new ideas
Within the sample of team members, 72.2% are men, 43.0% introduced by the teams is outstanding.” The Cronbach’s α for
are married, 52.5% grew up in rural areas, and their average age the scale in our study is 0.710.
is 28.2 years old. In terms of educational level, 32.3% have a high
Control Variables
school degree and below, 22.5% have a college degree, 39.0%
We controlled for possible alternative explanations by including
have a bachelor’s degree, and 6.2% have a master’s degree and
both individual-level and team-level control variables. Previous
above. Team members’ job tenure ranged from <3 years (33.7%),
studies suggested some demographic variables of both team
3–5 years (28.4%), 5–8 years (11.5%), 8–10 years (6.7%), and
leader and team members for controlling, such as gender (1
more than 10 years (19.7%). Team members’ job position ranged
= male, and 2 = female), age (self-reported in numbers),
from general staff (92.4%), junior manager (7.0%), middle-level
educational level (1 = high school degree and below, 2 = college,
manager (0.6%), and senior manager (0%).
3 = bachelor’s degree, and 4 = master’s degree and above), marital
status (1 = married, and 2 = not married), birthplace (1 = rural
Measures and 2 = urban), job tenure (1 = less than 3 years, 2 = 3–5 years,
Although the original measurements were in English, our study 3 = 5–8 years, 4 = 8–10 years, and 5 = more than 10 years),
was conducted in the Chinese context, so we followed the and job position (1 = general staff, 2 = junior manager, 3 =
back-translation procedures recommended by Brislin (1970) for middle-level manager, and 4 = senior manager; Carmeli et al.,
survey translation across different languages. All measurements 2010; Javed et al., 2018). Besides, we controlled for team size at
have a 5-point Likert-scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = the team level according to previous findings that team size is
strongly agree). related to both psychological safety and innovative performance
(Hülsheger et al., 2009; Edmondson and Lei, 2014; Ye et al., 2019).
Inclusive Leadership The summary of all the constructs employed in this study is
We used the nine-item scale adapted from Carmeli et al. (2010) presented in Table 1.
to measure inclusive leadership. Sample items included the
following: “The team leader is open to hearing new ideas;” Analytic Strategy
“The team leader is available for consultation on problems;” and We employed the software AMOS 23.0, SPSS 25.0, and HLM
“The team leader encourages me to access him/her on emerging 7.0 to test our proposed research model. First, we conducted a
issues.” The Cronbach’s α for the scale in our study is 0.942. confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) with AMOS 23.0 to assess

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 6 June 2022 | Volume 13 | Article 934831

Li and Tang Inclusive Leadership and Innovative Performance

the discriminant validity of core variables in the model. Second, are included as observed indicators (Landis et al., 2000). We
correlation analysis was conducted to assess the correlations of constructed an individual-level model with three factors, loading
the variables in the model. Third, we conducted hierarchical separately. Table 2 presents the results of CFA, indicating that the
regression analysis with the SPSS 25.0 to test hypotheses at the hypothesized three-factor model (χ 2 = 32.344, Df = 24, χ 2 /Df =
mono-level. Last, we conducted hierarchical linear modeling with 1.348 TLI = 0.992, CFI = 0.995, RMSEA = 0.031) fits better than
HLM 7.0 to test the cross-level hypotheses. The hierarchical the other competitive models.
linear modeling considered both individual- and team-level
residuals, which can recognize the partial interdependence
Descriptive Statistics
among individuals in the same team. We modeled inclusive
Table 3 shows the means, standard deviations, and correlations
leadership as a team-level variable, and to support the aggregation
of key variables at the individual level. The results indicate
of team members’ perceived inclusive leadership to the team-level
that individual perceptions of inclusive leadership are positively
variable, we also calculated within-team agreement, intraclass
correlated with the individual perceptions of psychological safety
correlations, and reliabilities of the means.
(r = 0.434, p < 0.01) and individual innovative performance (r
= 0.295, p < 0.01). The individual perceptions of psychological
RESULTS safety are positively correlated with \ individual innovative
performance (r = 0.323, p < 0.01).
Common Method Bias Test Table 4 shows the means, standard deviations, and
Though our data was collected from different sources (team correlations of key measured variables at the team level.
leaders and team members), they were also measured at the The results indicate that team perceptions of inclusive leadership
same time, which introduced the potential for common method are positively correlated with team psychological safety (r =
variance. For this reason, we employed the widely used Harman’s 0.538, p < 0.01) and team innovative performance (r = 0.367, p
single-factor test. The results of the test showed that the first < 0.01). Team psychological safety is positively correlated with
factor explained only 31.506% of the variance, which is lower team innovative performance (r = 0.360, p < 0.01).
than half of the total variance explained (64.679%) as well
as the critical value of 40%. Because of the limitations of
this method, we also examined the effects of adding a latent Hypotheses Testing
common methods factor to the hypothesized measurement Hypotheses Testing at the Individual Level
model (Podsakoff et al., 2003). The fit of this model is not We conducted a hierarchical regression analysis at the individual
significantly better than that of the hypothesized model (1χ 2 level to test the impact of individual perceptions of inclusive
= 10.662, 1Df = 9). Meanwhile, the variance extracted by the leadership on individual innovative performance and the
common methods factor was only 0.185, falling below the 0.500 mediating role of individual perceptions of psychological safety
cutoff that has been suggested as indicating the presence of a between the two variables. Table 5 presents the results of the
latent factor representing the manifest indicators (Hair et al., hierarchical regression analyses at the individual level.
1998). Therefore, both results suggest that common method bias As can be seen from model 4, individual perceptions
has been sufficiently controlled in our study. of inclusive leadership are significantly related to individual
innovative performance (β = 0.285, p < 0.001). Thus, hypothesis
Validity Analysis 1 is supported. In model 2, the individual perceptions of inclusive
Data Aggregation leadership are significantly related to individual perceptions of
As inclusive leadership and psychological safety at the team psychological safety (β = 0.442, p < 0.001). After entering
level refer to the shared perceptions of the team members, we individual perceptions of psychological safety as the mediator
aggregated the individual perceptions of these two variables to in model 6, individual perceptions of psychological safety are
yield the measures at the team level. To assess the appropriateness positively related to individual innovative performance (β =
of aggregation, we calculated within-team agreement (Rwg; 0.258, p < 0.001), and individual perceptions of inclusive
James et al., 1984), intraclass correlations (ICC1), and reliabilities leadership are still significantly related to individual innovative
of the means (ICC2; Bliese, 2000). The Rwg, ICC1, and ICC2 performance (β = 0.171, p < 0.01) but weaker than that in model
values supported aggregating individual scores to the team level 4. Therefore, the results reveal a significant mediating effect of the
of analysis (inclusive leadership: ICC1 = 0.475, ICC2 = 0.782, individual perceptions of psychological safety on the relationship
Rwg = 0.972; psychological safety: ICC1 = 0.378, ICC2 = 0.706, between the individual perceptions of inclusive leadership and
Rwg = 0.964; James, 1982; James et al., 1993). individual innovative performance (Baron and Kenny, 1986; Wu,
2008). Thus, hypothesis 4 is supported.
Construct Validation
Before examining our hypotheses, we performed a CFA to Hypotheses Testing at the Team Level
evaluate the construct distinctiveness of the measurement Similarly, we conducted hierarchical regression analyses at the
model consisting of perceived inclusive leadership, perceived team level to test the influence of team perceptions of inclusive
psychological safety, and individual innovative performance. leadership on team innovative performance and the mediating
We used item parceling based on the single-factor method role of team psychological safety. Table 6 presents the results of
(Bentler and Chou, 1987) to check if all the measurement items the hierarchical regression analyses at the team level.

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 7 June 2022 | Volume 13 | Article 934831

Li and Tang Inclusive Leadership and Innovative Performance

TABLE 2 | Results of confirmatory factor analysis.

Model Factors χ2 Df χ 2 /Df CFI TLI RMSEA

Three-factor model PIL, PPS, IIP 32.344 24 1.348 0.995 0.992 0.031
Two-factor model 1 PIL+PPS, IIP 132.954 26 5.114 0.933 0.908 0.108
Two-factor model 2 PIL, PPS+IIP 188.042 26 7.232 0.899 0.860 0.132
Single-factor model PIL+PPS+IIP 661.515 27 24.501 0.605 0.473 0.257

PIL, Individual perceptions of inclusive leadership; PPS, Individual Perceptions of psychological safety; IIP, Individual innovative performance.

TABLE 3 | Means, standard deviations, and correlations among variables at the individual level.

Variable M S.D. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1. Team member’s gender 1.278 0.449

2. Team member’s age 28.219 6.118 0.184**
3. Team member’s educational level 2.191 0.963 0.085 −0.170**
4. Team member’s marital status 1.570 0.496 −0.132* −0.590** 0.161**
5. Team member’s birthplace 1.475 0.500 0.126* 0.212** 0.033 −0.106*
6. Team member’s job tenure 2.503 1.498 0.273** 0.743** −0.248** −0.641** 0.166**
7. Team member’s job position 1.081 0.294 0.063 0.106* 0.194** −0.146** 0.062 0.163**
8. Perceived inclusive leadership 3.902 0.537 0.066 0.026 0.077 −0.042 −0.089 0.019 0.005
9. Perceived psychological safety 3.453 0.377 0.063 −0.038 0.094 0.071 0.048 −0.021 0.000 0.434**
10. Individual innovative performance 4.276 0.864 −0.033 0.017 0.056 −0.030 −0.107* 0.013 −0.003 0.295** 0.323**

n = 356. **p < 0.01, *p < 0.05, reliabilities are mentioned in parentheses on the diagonal.

TABLE 4 | Means, standard deviations, and correlations among variables at the team level.

Variable M S.D. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1. Team leader’s gender 1.133 0.342

2. Team leader’s age 33.733 8.829 0.053
3. Team leader’s educational level 2.367 1.011 0.020 0.301**
4. Team leader’s marital status 1.278 0.450 −0.097 −0.512** −0.004
5. Team leader’s birthplace 1.489 0.503 0.139 0.017 −0.003 0.039
6. Team leader’s job tenure 3.622 1.442 0.081 0.753** 0.173 −0.650** −0.068
7. Team leader’s job position 2.378 0.680 0.023 0.335** 0.646** −0.016 −0.020 0.227*
8. Team size 3.956 1.005 0.148 0.132 0.072 −0.097 0.088 0.027 0.140
9. Inclusive leadership 3.907 0.424 0.092 0.324** −0.087 −0.252* −0.015 0.445** −0.140 −0.041
10. Team psychological safety 3.448 0.280 0.121 0.301** 0.073 −0.130 0.109 0.318** −0.129 0.066 0.538**
11. Individual innovation performance 3.625 0.486 −0.186 0.251* 0.163 −0.212* −0.149 0.256* 0.068 0.069 0.367** 0.360**

n = 90. **p < 0.01, *p < 0.05, reliabilities are mentioned in parentheses on the diagonal.

As can be seen from model 4, team perceptions of relationship between team perceptions of inclusive leadership
inclusive leadership are significantly related to team innovative and team innovative performance (Baron and Kenny, 1986; Wu,
performance (β = 0.381, p < 0.001). Thus, hypothesis 2 is 2008). Thus, hypothesis 5 is supported.
supported. In model 2, team perceptions of inclusive leadership
are significantly related to team psychological safety (β = 0.445, Hypotheses Testing of the Cross-Level Effect
p < 0.001). After entering team psychological safety as the Table 7 presents the HLM results of testing the cross-
mediator in model 6, team psychological safety is positively level effect of the team’s perceptions of inclusive leadership
related to team innovative performance (β = 0.257, p < 0.05), on individual innovative performance through individual
and team perceptions of inclusive leadership are still significantly perceptions of psychological safety. First, we examined whether
related to team innovative performance (β = 0.267, p < 0.05) there is a significant between-team variance in innovative
but weaker than that in model 4. Therefore, the results revealed a performance. We followed the procedure recommended by
significant mediating effect of team psychological safety on the Bryk and Raudenbush (1992) and conducted a null hierarchical

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 8 June 2022 | Volume 13 | Article 934831

Li and Tang Inclusive Leadership and Innovative Performance

TABLE 5 | Results of hypotheses testing at the individual level.

Variables Individual perceptions of Individual innovative performance

psychological safety

M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6

Team member’s gender 0.051 0.023 −0.041 −0.060 −0.058 −0.065

Team member’s age −0.040 −0.055 0.025 0.015 0.038 0.030
Team member’s educational level 0.087 0.048 0.084 0.059 0.055 0.046
Team member’s marital status 0.085 0.107+ −0.030 −0.016 −0.058 −0.043
Team member’s birthplace 0.046 0.095+ −0.117* −0.086 −0.132* −0.110*
Team member’s job tenure 0.066 0.071 0.030 0.034 0.008 0.015
Team member’s job position −0.017 −0.009 −0.021 −0.016 −0.016 −0.014
Individual perceptions of inclusive leadership 0.442*** 0.285*** 0.171**
Individual perceptions of psychological safety 0.333*** 0.258***
Index
F 1.001 11.560*** 1.030 4.799*** 6.441*** 6.905***
R2 0.020 0.210 0.020 0.100 0.129 0.152
1R2 – 0.191 – 0.079 0.109 0.053

+p < 0.1, *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.

TABLE 6 | Results of hypotheses testing at the team level.

Variables Team psychological safety Team innovative performance

M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6

Team leader’s gender 0.083 0.052 −0.207* −0.234* −0.238* −0.247*

Team leader’s age 0.194 0.149 0.095 0.056 0.023 0.018
Team leader’s educational level 0.222+ 0.237* 0.192 0.206 0.110 0.145
Team leader’s marital status 0.213 0.153 −0.086 −0.138 −0.165 −0.177
Team leader’s birthplace 0.096 0.096 −0.120 −0.120 −0.156 −0.145
Team leader’s job tenure 0.367* 0.137 0.131 −0.066 −0.005 −0.101
Team leader’s job position −0.428** −0.310* −0.130 −0.029 0.029 0.051
Team size 0.075 0.086 0.090 0.100 0.063 0.078
Team perceptions of Inclusive leadership 0.445*** 0.381*** 0.267*
Team psychological safety 0.371*** 0.257*
Index
F 3.275** 5.623*** 1.943+ 3.223** 3.203** 3.493***
R2 0.244 0.387 0.161 0.266 0.265 0.307
1R2 – 0.143 – 0.105 0.104 0.040

+p < 0.1, *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.

linear modeling (HLM) analysis. The results revealed that both the independent variable and the mediator into model
the interclass correlation coefficient (ICC1) of individual 4, the HLM results showed that individual perceptions of
innovation performance was 0.285/(0.285+0.475)=0.375>0.060. psychological safety had a positive within-level impact (u0 =
This finding provided a basis for examining individual-level 0.512, p < 0.001) as well as a between-level impact (γ 02 = 0.657,
and team-level predictors of individual innovative performance. p < 0.05) on individual innovative performance. Meanwhile,
Second, the results in model 2 revealed that team perceptions team perceptions of inclusive leadership were still significantly
of inclusive leadership significantly helped to predict individual correlated to individual innovative performance (γ 01 = 0.368, p
innovative performance (γ 01 = 0.608, p < 0.001). Therefore, < 0.01) but weaker than before. Thus, perceived psychological
hypothesis 3 is supported. Third, the HLM results in model safety partially mediated the relationship, which provides support
3 revealed that team perceptions of inclusive leadership for hypothesis 6.
were significantly correlated with individual perceptions of In addition, we conducted a Sobel test to further examine
psychological safety (γ 01 = 0.360, p < 0.001). After we put the mediating effects (Sobel, 1982). The Sobel test’s z-value of

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 9 June 2022 | Volume 13 | Article 934831

Li and Tang Inclusive Leadership and Innovative Performance

TABLE 7 | Results of hierarchical linear model.

Model Parameter estimation

γ00 γ01 γ02 u0 σ2 τ 00

M1: null model

L1: IIPij =β0j +rij 4.278*** 0.475 0.285***
L2: β0j =γ00 +u0j
M2: Team perceptions of inclusive leadership → individual innovative performance
L1: IIPij =β0j +rij 1.903*** 0.608*** 0.476 0.222***
L2: β0j =γ00 +γ01 *(TILj ) +u0j
M3: Team perceptions of inclusive leadership → individual perceptions of psychological safety
L1: IPSij =β0j +rij 2.046*** 0.360*** 0.089 0.030***
L2: β0j =γ00 +γ01 *(TILj ) +u0j
M4: inclusive leadership →perceived psychological safety→ individual innovation performance
L1: IIPij =β0j +β1j *(IPSij ) +rij 0.572 0.368** 0.657* 0.512*** 0.452 0.209***
L2: β0j =γ00 +γ01 *(TILj ) +γ02 *(TPSj ) +u0j
L2: β1j =γ10 +u1j

*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001. σ2 is the residual of level 1; τ00 is the residual of intercept, that is u0j .
IIP, Individual innovative performance; TIL, team perceptions of inclusive leadership; IPS, individual perceptions of psychological safety; TPS, team perceptions of psychological safety.
In all models, level 1 variables are group-mean centered.

individual perceptions of psychological safety was 2.218, which team perceptions of inclusive leadership and team innovative
exceeded the benchmark of 1.960, which further confirms the performance (team-level mediation), individual perceptions of
cross-level mediating effect. psychological safety mediate the relationship between individual
perceptions of inclusive leadership and the individual innovative
performance (individual-level mediation), and individual
DISCUSSION perceptions of psychological safety mediate the relationship
Theoretical Contribution between team perceptions of inclusive leadership and the
We believe that our study advances the previous research in individual innovative performance (cross-level mediation). The
three ways. First, we addressed the call to pay more attention findings contribute to the understanding of the multilevel effects
to the multilevel nature of leadership (Bliese et al., 2002). on psychological safety.
As several previous studies only focused on the multilevel
influences of transformational leadership (Wang and Howell, Practical Implications
2012; Braun et al., 2013) and authentic leadership (Braun and In addition to the theoretical contribution, our study provides
Nieberle, 2017), we further added inclusive leadership to our several practical implications as well. To begin with, we remind
analysis to fill the gap. By examining the relationship between the supervisors in organizations of the importance of inclusive
inclusive leadership and innovative performance at multiple leadership in motivating employees’ innovative performance.
levels, we responded to the suggestions from past studies that Based on our multilevel findings, we suggest supervisors
leadership research should incorporate individual and team exhibit more inclusive behaviors because inclusive leadership is
relations (Schriesheim et al., 2006). proven to exert a positive influence on employees’ innovative
Second, we substantiated the theoretical and empirical performance from both the team level and the individual
findings on the positive influence of inclusive leadership on level. Furthermore, supervisors should not only facilitate the
innovative performance. In addition to verifying the relationship belongingness and respect the uniqueness of every individual
at the individual level and team level separately as earlier studies but also advocate an inclusive environment and encourage team
did, we further analyze the cross-level influence of inclusive cooperation for teams as a whole.
leadership on the individual innovative performance. The results Then, for organizations, inclusive leadership should be taken
prove that the effect of inclusive leadership can be exerted to into account in the process of hiring, promoting, and training
motivate employees to perform better at team-level, individual- supervisors. As demonstrated in the present study, inclusive
level, and cross-level, which enriches the knowledge of the leadership, characterized by a leader’s openness, availability,
multilevel positive influences of inclusive leadership. and accessibility, can enhance employees’ psychological safety
Third, we extend the literature on the multilevel effects and sequentially improve their innovative performance. As
of psychological safety. Considering that psychological safety promoting innovation is imperative for organizations in the
can be conceptualized as a phenomenon at different levels current competitive environment (Chowhan et al., 2017; Hu
(Edmondson and Lei, 2014), we empirically examine that the et al., 2018), it is beneficial for organizations to appoint
team psychological safety mediates the relationship between supervisors with high levels of inclusiveness.

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 10 June 2022 | Volume 13 | Article 934831

Li and Tang Inclusive Leadership and Innovative Performance

Moreover, our study highlights the influence of psychological psychological safety can be influenced by many other factors.
safety. With the growth of knowledge economies and teamwork For example, contextual factors such as organizational context
presence, psychological safety has become an essential topic and country or culture context, team characteristics, and other
(Edmondson and Lei, 2014). According to the results of our individual characteristics, such as job duties, could potentially
study that higher psychological safety fosters better innovative affect the mediating role of psychological safety (Edmondson
performance of employees, we recommend supervisors to pay and Lei, 2014). Combined with the multilevel model of our
attention to establishing the psychological safety of employees. study, future research should explore the boundary conditions at
Furthermore, supervisors should notice that psychological safety different levels to generate more inspiring findings. Besides, when
might be affected by both team-focused and individual-focused investigating the boundary conditions, we also call for studies
leader behaviors as our study indicates. Hence, supervisors focused on more multilevel mediating mechanisms underlying
should work on facilitating employees’ individual psychological the relationship between inclusive leadership and innovative
safety as well as building a psychologically safe climate within performance, through which we can gain more knowledge about
the teams. the positive influences of inclusive leadership.

Limitations and Future Directions DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

Despite the theoretical and practical implications presented by
our study, there are also several issues worth noticing. First, The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be
due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the data were cross-sectional made available by the authors, without undue reservation.
through the one-way collection, which made it difficult to infer
a causal relationship between inclusive leadership and innovative ETHICS STATEMENT
performance via psychological safety in our study. Even though
the causal effect can be supported by our theoretical discussion Ethical review and approval was not required for the study
and findings from previous studies, future research should choose on human participants in accordance with the local legislation
a multi-wave data collection procedure or longitudinal design to and institutional requirements. Written informed consent for
further improve the explaining power of the causal relationship. participation was not required for this study in accordance with
Second, we exerted the measurements developed by Carmeli the national legislation and the institutional requirements.
et al. (2010) in the Western context to examine the positive
influence of inclusive leadership in the Chinese context. AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
Although we carefully checked the reliability and validity of the
scales in our study, the results may still have some deviation, Both authors listed have made a substantial, direct, and
which could potentially weaken the applicability of the results of intellectual contribution to the work and approved it
our study. As Tang et al. (2015) addressed, inclusion and inclusive for publication.
management in China may contain special contents. Thus, future
research is suggested to develop new measures in the Chinese FUNDING
context and conduct more indigenous studies.
Third, we did not investigate the boundary conditions of This research was supported by the National Natural Science
the multilevel mediation model. Indeed, the mediation of Foundation of China (71672114).

REFERENCES Bliese, P. D. (2000). “Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability:

implications for data aggregation and analysis,” in Multilevel Theory, Research,
Amabile, T. M. (1988). “A model of creativity and innovation in organizations,” and Methods in Organizations: Foundations, Extensions, and New Directions,
in Research in Organizational Behavior, eds B. M. Staw, and L. L. Cummings eds K. J. Klein and S. W. J. Kozlowski (Hoboken, NJ: Jossey-Bass), 349–381.
(Stamford, CT: JAI Press), 123–167. Bliese, P. D., Halverson, R. R., and Schriesheim, C. A. (2002). Benchmarking
Anderson, N. R., and West, M. A. (1998). Measuring climate multilevel methods in leadership: the articles, the model, and the data set.
for work group innovation: development and validation of Leadersh. Quart. 13, 3–14. doi: 10.1016/S1048-9843(01)00101-1
the team climate inventory. J. Org. Behav. 19, 235–258. Bowers, K. W., Robertson, M., and Parchman, M. L. (2012). How inclusive
doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(199805)19:3<235::AID-JOB837>3.0.CO;2-C leadership can help your practice adapt to change: the most effective leaders
Baer, M., and Frese, M. (2003). Innovation is not enough: climates for initiative and realize that everyone’s input is valuable. Family Practice Manag. 19, 8–11.
psychological safety, process innovations, and firm performance. J. Org. Behav. Braun, S., and Nieberle, K. W. A. M. (2017). Authentic leadership extends beyond
24, 45–68. doi: 10.1002/job.179 work: a multilevel model of work-family conflict and enrichment. Leadersh.
Baron, R. M., and Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable Quart. 28, 780–797. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2017.04.003
distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic and Braun, S., Peus, C., Weisweiler, S., and Frey, D. (2013). Transformational
statistical considerations. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 51, 1173–1182. leadership, job satisfaction, and team performance: a multilevel mediation
doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173 model of trust. Leadersh. Quart. 24, 270–283. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2012.11.006
Bentler, P. M., and Chou, C. P. (1987). Practical issues in structural modeling. Brislin, R. W. (1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research. J. Cross Cult.
Sociol. Methods Res. 16, 78–117. doi: 10.1177/0049124187016001004 Psychol. 1, 185–216. doi: 10.1177/135910457000100301
Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and Power in Social Life. Piscataway, NJ: Bryk, A. S., and Raudenbush, R. W. (1992). Hierarchical Linear Models:
Transaction Publishers. Applications and Data Analysis Methods. Newcastle upon Tyne: Sage.

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 11 June 2022 | Volume 13 | Article 934831

Li and Tang Inclusive Leadership and Innovative Performance

Burke, C. S., Stagl, K. C., Salas, E., Pierce, L., and Kendall, D. (2006). Understanding Hollander, E. P. (2009). Inclusive Leadership: The Essential Leader-Follower
team adaptation: a conceptual analysis and model. J. Appl. Psychol. 91, Relationship. London: Routledge.
1189–1207. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.91.6.1189 Hu, J., Erdogan, B., Jiang, K., Bauer, T. N., and Liu, S. (2018). Leader humility and
Carmeli, A., Reiter-Palmon, R., and Ziv, E. (2010). Inclusive leadership team creativity: the role of team information sharing, psychological safety, and
and employee involvement in creative tasks in the workplace: the power distance. J. Appl. Psychol. 103, 313–323. doi: 10.1037/apl0000277
mediating role of psychological safety. Creat. Res. J. 22, 250–260. Huang, C., Chu, C., and Jiang, P. (2008). “An empirical study of psychological
doi: 10.1080/10400419.2010.504654 safety and performance in technology R&D teams,” in Paper Presented at the 4th
Chan, D. (1998). Functional relations among constructs in the same content IEEE International Conference on Management of Innovation and Technology.
domain at different levels of analysis: a typology of composition models. J. Appl. Bangkok. doi: 10.1109/ICMIT.2008.4654580
Psychol. 83, 234–246. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.83.2.234 Hülsheger, U. R., Anderson, N., and Salgado, J. F. (2009). Team-level predictors of
Chen, G., and Kanfer, R. (2006). Toward a systems theory of motivated behavior in innovation at work: a comprehensive meta-analysis spanning three decades of
work teams. Res. Org. Behav. 27, 223–267. doi: 10.1016/S0191-3085(06)27006-0 research. J. Appl. Psychol. 94, 1128–1145. doi: 10.1037/a0015978
Chen, G., Kirkman, B. L., Kanfer, R., Allen, D., and Rosen, B. (2007). A multilevel James, L. R. (1982). Aggregation bias in estimates of perceptual agreement. J. Appl.
study of leadership, empowerment, and performance in teams. J. Appl. Psychol. Psychol. 67, 219–229. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.67.2.219
92, 331–346. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.92.2.331 James, L. R., Demaree, R. G., and Wolf, G. (1984). Estimating within-group
Choi, S. B., Tran, T. B. H., and Park, B. I. (2015). Inclusive leadership and interrater reliability with and without response bias. J. Appl. Psychol. 69, 85–98.
work engagement: mediating roles of affective organizational commitment and doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.69.1.85
creativity. Soc. Behav. Personal. 43, 931–943. doi: 10.2224/sbp.2015.43.6.931 James, L. R., Demaree, R. G., and Wolf, G. (1993). RWG: An assessment
Chowhan, J., Pries, F., and Mann, S. (2017). Persistent innovation and the role of within-group inter-rater agreement. J. Appl. Psychol. 78, 306–309.
of human resource management practices, work organization, and strategy. J. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.78.2.306
Manag. Org. 23, 456–471. doi: 10.1017/jmo.2016.8 Janssen, O. (2002). Transformational leadership and innovative work behavior of
Chun, J. U., Yammarino, F. J., Dionne, S. D., Sosik, J. J., and Moon, employees: a question of approachability of the leader. Behav. Org. 15, 275–293.
H. K. (2009). Leadership across hierarchical levels: multiple levels of Janssen, O. (2005). The joint impact of perceived influence and supervisor
management and multiple levels of analysis. Leadersh. Quart. 20, 689–707. supportiveness on employee innovative behaviour. J. Occup. Org. Psychol. 78,
doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.06.003 573–579. doi: 10.1348/096317905X25823
Clegg, C., Unsworth, K., Epitropaki, O., and Parker, G. (2002). Implicating Javed, B., Abdullah, I., Zaffar, M. A., ul Haque, A., and Rubab, U. (2019a).
trust in the innovation process. J. Occup. Org. Psychol. 75, 409–422. Inclusive leadership and innovative work behavior: the role of psychological
doi: 10.1348/096317902321119574 empowerment. J. Manag. Org. 25, 554–571. doi: 10.1017/jmo.2018.50
Cohen, S. G., and Bailey, D. E. (1997). What makes teams work: group effectiveness Javed, B., Khan, A. K., and Quratulain, S. (2018). Inclusive leadership and
research from the shop floor to the executive suite. J. Manag. 23, 239–290. innovative work behavior: examination of LMX perspective in small capitalized
doi: 10.1177/014920639702300303 textile firms. J. Psychol. 152, 594–612. doi: 10.1080/00223980.2018.1489767
Collins, C. J., and Smith, K. G. (2006). Knowledge exchange and combination: the Javed, B., Naqvi, S. M. M. R., Khan, A. K., Arjoon, S., and Tayyeb, H. H.
role of human resource practices in the performance of high-technology firms. (2019b). Impact of inclusive leadership on innovative work behavior: the role
Acad. Manag. J. 49, 544–560. doi: 10.5465/amj.2006.21794671 of psychological safety. J. Manag. Org. 25, 117–136. doi: 10.1017/jmo.2017.3
Echols, S. (2009). Transformational/servant leadership: a potential synergism for Kark, R., and Carmeli, A. (2009). Alive and creating: the mediating role of vitality
an inclusive leadership style. J. Relig. Leadersh. 8, 85–116. and aliveness in the relationship between psychological safety and creative work
Edmondson, A. C. (1996). Learning from mistakes is easier said than done: group involvement. J. Org. Behav. 30, 785–804. doi: 10.1002/job.571
and organizational influences on the detection and correction of human error. Kelly, E., and Dobbin, F. (1998). How affirmative action became diversity
J. Appl. Behav. Sci. 32, 5–28. doi: 10.1177/0021886396321001 management: employer response to antidiscrimination law, 1961 to
Edmondson, A. C. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work 1996. Am. Behav. Sci. 41, 960–984. doi: 10.1177/00027642980410
teams. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44, 350–383. doi: 10.2307/2666999 07008
Edmondson, A. C. (2004). “Psychological safety, trust, and learning in Kozlowski, S. W., Gully, S. M., McHugh, P. P., Salas, E., and Cannon-Bowers, J. A.
organizations: a group level lens,” in Trust and Distrust in Organizations: (1996). A dynamic theory of leadership and team effectiveness: developmental
Dilemmas and Approaches, eds R. M. Kramer and K. S. Cook (New York, NY: and task contingent leader roles. Res. Person. Hum. Resour. Manag. 14, 253–306.
Russell Sage Foundation), 239–272. Kozlowski, S. W. J., and Bell, B. S. (2003). “Work groups and teams in
Edmondson, A. C., and Lei, Z. (2014). Psychological safety: the history, organizations,” in Comprehensive Handbook of Psychology: Vol. 12. Industrial
renaissance, and future of an interpersonal construct. Ann. Rev. Org. Psychol. and Organizational Psychology, eds W. C. Borman, D. R. Ilgen and R. J.
Org. Behav. 1, 23–43. doi: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091305 Klimoski (Hoboken, NJ: Wiley), 333–375.
Edmondson, A. C., and Mogelof, J. P. (2005). “Explaining psychological safety Landis, R. S., Beal, D. J., and Tesluk, P. E. (2000). A comparison of
in innovation teams,” in Creativity and Innovation in Organizations, eds L. approaches to forming composite measures in structural equation
Thompson and H. Choi (Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum), 109–136. models. Org. Res. Methods 3, 186–207. doi: 10.1177/10944281003
Govendo, J. A. (2005). Workforce, diversity and corporate creativity. Handb. Bus. 2003
Strategy 6, 213–218. doi: 10.1108/08944310510557495 Lovelace, K., Shapiro, D. L., and Weingart, L. R. (2001). Maximizing cross-
Hackman, J. R. (2002). Leading Teams: Setting the Stage for Great Performance. functional new product teams’ innovativeness and constraint adherence:
Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. a conflict communications perspective. Acad. Manag. J. 44, 779–793.
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., and Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate doi: 10.5465/3069415
Data Analysis, 5th Edn. Hoboken, NJ: Prentice Hall. Mathisen, G. E., Einarsen, S., and Mykletun, R. (2012). Creative leaders
Harrington, D. M., Block, J. H., and Block, J. (1987). Testing aspects of promote creative organizations. Int. J. Manpower 33, 367–382.
Carl Rogers’s theory of creative environments: child-rearing antecedents of doi: 10.1108/01437721211243741
creative potential in young adolescents. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 52, 851–856. Mohammadi, A., Broström, A., and Franzoni, C. (2017). Workforce composition
doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.52.4.851 and innovation: how diversity in employees’ ethnic and educational
Harrison, D. A., Price, K. H., and Bell, M. P. (1998). Beyond relational demography: backgrounds facilitates firm-level innovativeness. J. Product Innov. Manag. 34,
time and the effects of surface- and deep-level diversity on work group 406–426. doi: 10.1111/jpim.12388
cohesion. Acad. Manag. J. 41, 96–107. doi: 10.5465/256901 Mor Barak, M. E. (2007). Managing diversity: toward a globally
Hirak, R., Peng, A. C., Carmeli, A., and Schaubroeck, J. M. (2012). inclusive workplace. Acad. Manag. Learn. Educ. 6, 285–286.
Linking leader inclusiveness to work unit performance: the importance of doi: 10.5465/amle.2007.25223469
psychological safety and learning from failures. Leadersh. Quart. 23, 107–117. Mor Barak, M. E. (2013). Managing Diversity: Toward a Globally Inclusive
doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.11.009 Workplace, 3rd Edn. Newcastle upon Tyne: SAGE.

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 12 June 2022 | Volume 13 | Article 934831

Li and Tang Inclusive Leadership and Innovative Performance

Mor Barak, M. E., Findler, L., and Wind, L. H. (2003). Cross-cultural aspects of Leinhart (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass), 290–312. doi: 10.2307/
diversity and well-being in the workplace: an international perspective. J. Soc. 270723
Work Res. Eval. 4, 145–169. Tang, N., Jiang, Y., Chen, C., Zhou, Z., Chen, C. C., and Yu, Z. (2015).
Morgeson, F. P., DeRue, D. S., and Karam, E. P. (2010). Leadership in teams: a Inclusion and inclusion management in the Chinese context: an exploratory
functional approach to understanding leadership structures and processes. J. study. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 26, 856–874. doi: 10.1080/09585192.2014.
Manag. 36, 5–39. doi: 10.1177/0149206309347376 985326
Nembhard, I. M., and Edmondson, A. C. (2006). Making it safe: the effects of leader Tang, N., and Zhang, K. (2015). Inclusive leadership: review and prospects.
inclusiveness and professional status on psychological safety and improvement Chin. J. Manag. 12, 932–938. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-884x.2015.
efforts in health care teams. J. Org. Behav. 27, 941–966. doi: 10.1002/job.413 06.019
Nishii, L. H., and Rich, R. E. (2014). “Creating inclusive climates in diverse Wang, X. H. F., and Howell, J. M. (2012). A multilevel study of transformational
organizations,” in Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion, eds B. M leadership, identification, and follower outcomes. Leadersh. Quart. 23, 775–790.
Ferdman and B. R. Deane (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass), 205–228. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2012.02.001
doi: 10.1002/9781118764282.ch11 Wasserman, I. C., Gallegos, P. V., and Ferdman, B. M. (2008). “Dancing with
Pelled, L. H., Ledford Jr, G. E., and Mohrman, S. A. (1999). Demographic resistance: leadership challenges in fostering a culture of inclusion,” in Diversity
dissimilarity and workplace inclusion. J. Manag. Stud. 36, 1013–1031. Resistance in Organizations, ed K. M. Thomas (Oxfordshire: Taylor and
doi: 10.1111/1467-6486.00168 Francis), 175–200.
Pless, N., and Maak, T. (2004). Building an inclusive diversity culture: Welbourne, T. M., Johnson, D. E., and Erez, A. (1998). The role-based performance
principles, processes and practice. J. Bus. Ethics 54, 129–147. scale: validity analysis of a theory-based measure. Acad. Manag. J. 41, 540–555.
doi: 10.1007/s10551-004-9465-8 doi: 10.5465/256941
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., and Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Winters, M. (2014). “From diversity to inclusion: an inclusion equation,” in
Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion, eds B. M. Ferdman and B. R. Deane
literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 88, 879–903. (San Francisco, CA Jossey-Bass), 205–228. doi: 10.1002/9781118764282.ch7
doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879 Wu, W. (2008). Dimensions of social capital and firm competitiveness
Qi, L., and Liu, B. (2017). Effects of inclusive leadership on employee voice behavior improvement: the mediating role of information sharing. J. Manag. Stud.
and team performance: the mediating role of caring ethical climate. Front. 45, 122–146. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2007.00741.x
Commun. 2:8. doi: 10.3389/fcomm.2017.00008 Yammarino, F. J., and Dansereau, F. (2008). Multi-level nature of and
Randel, A. E., Galvin, B. M., Shore, L. M., Ehrhart, K. H., Chung, B. G., Dean, multi-level approaches to leadership. Leadersh. Quart. 19, 135–141.
M. A., et al. (2018). Inclusive leadership: realizing positive outcomes through doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2008.01.001
belongingness and being valued for uniqueness. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 28, Ye, Q., Wang, D., and Guo, W. (2019). Inclusive leadership and
190–203. doi: 10.1016/j.hrmr.2017.07.002 team innovation: the role of team voice and performance
Roberson, Q. M. (2006). Disentangling the meanings of diversity and pressure. Eur. Manag. J. 37, 468–480. doi: 10.1016/j.emj.2019.
inclusion in organizations. Group Org. Manag. 1098, 212–236. 01.006
doi: 10.1177/1059601104273064
Schriesheim, C. A., Castro, S. L., Zhou, X., and DeChurch, L. A. (2006). Conflict of Interest: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the
An investigation of path-goal and transformational leadership theory absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a
predictions at the individual level of analysis. Leadersh. Quart. 17, 21–38. potential conflict of interest.
doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.10.008
Shore, L. M., Randel, A. E., Chung, B. G., Dean, M. A., Holcombe Ehrhart, K., and
Singh, G. (2011). Inclusion and diversity in work groups: a review and model Publisher’s Note: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors
for future research. J. Manag. 37, 1262–1289. doi: 10.1177/0149206310385943 and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of
Siemsen, E., Roth, A. V., Balasubramanian, S., and Anand, G. (2009). the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in
The influence of psychological safety and confidence in knowledge on this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or
employee knowledge sharing. Manufact. Service Operat. Manag. 11, 429–447. endorsed by the publisher.
doi: 10.1287/msom.1080.0233
Smith, A. N., Morgan, W. B., King, E. B., Hebl, M. R., and Peddie, C. I. (2012). Copyright © 2022 Li and Tang. This is an open-access article distributed under the
The ins and outs of diversity management: the effect of authenticity on terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution
outsider perceptions and insider behaviors. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 42, 21–55. or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and
doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2012.01021.x the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal
Sobel, M. E. (1982). “Asymptotic intervals for indirect effects in is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or
structural equations models,” in Sociological Methodology, ed S. reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 13 June 2022 | Volume 13 | Article 934831