Authentic Leadership's Impact on Employees Felt Obligation: Moderated Mediation Model

Authentic Leadership's Impact on Employees Felt Obligation: Moderated Mediation Model | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Authentic Leadership's Impact on Employees Felt Obligation: Moderated Mediation Model Sina Eslamdoust, Tahmineh Borhani, Rasam Dorri, Minoo Karandish This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-5118661/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Review Version 1 posted 9 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract In contemporary organizational settings, leadership significantly shapes organizational dynamics and influences employee attitudes and behaviors. Despite extensive research on leadership styles, there remains a gap in understanding the impact of authentic leadership on key employee outcomes, such as organizational identification and felt obligation. Drawing on Social Identity Theory (SIT), this paper examines how authentic leadership fosters organizational identification and influences felt obligation among employees. We propose a framework that considers the role of job fit as a moderating factor in these relationships. By exploring the mechanisms through which authentic leadership enhances employee identification and obligation, this study bridges the gap between leadership theory and practical applications in organizational behavior. The findings offer valuable insights for organizational leaders and human resource practitioners on promoting authentic leadership and ensuring proper job fit to enhance overall organizational effectiveness. Authentic leadership Organizational identification Felt obligation Job fit Social Identity Theory Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Introduction Leadership is a pivotal force in shaping the dynamics of organizations and significantly affecting employee attitudes and behaviors. The concept of authenticity in leadership has historical roots that trace back to the 1960s, when the leadership literature began to delve into philosophical understandings, influenced by humanistic psychology and the seminal works of figures like Maslow [ 60 ] and Rogers [ 61 ]. The idea of authenticity itself is derived from ancient Greek philosophy, embodied in the well-known aphorism "Know Thyself." This expression underscores the importance of self-awareness as a pathway to authenticity—being true to oneself—and indicates that the notion of authenticity has a rich, enduring presence in human thought and cultural traditions [ 1 , 35 ]. Harter [ 62 ] defines authenticity as the act of taking ownership of one's internal experiences, including desires, thoughts, feelings, goals, and beliefs. By acknowledging and valuing these experiences, individuals can cultivate greater self-awareness and lead a more genuine life. In essence, authenticity involves being true to oneself by accepting and integrating all aspects of one's unique identity. This concept has formed the theoretical foundation for numerous theories of authentic leadership [17]. By examining and understanding the various elements that contribute to authenticity, researchers have developed sophisticated theories of authentic Leadership that highlight the critical role of authenticity in effective leadership [47, 57, 21]. Authentic leadership, which gained prominence in the early 2000s, is centered on values-based leadership characterized by honesty, transparency, integrity, trustworthiness, ethics, and truthfulness [ 5 ]. It also emphasizes fairness, accountability, consistency in behavior both personally and interpersonally, and upholding high ethical standards [ 18 ]. This leadership style is defined as a pattern of behavior that leverages and promotes positive psychological capacities and an ethical climate, aiming to enhance self-awareness, an internalized moral perspective, balanced information processing, and relational transparency among leaders working with followers, thereby fostering positive self-development [57]. Authentic leaders are committed to upholding high moral standards and integrity, which cultivates positive expectations and encourages active participation in decision-making processes. This approach enhances trust and collaboration toward achieving organizational goals [ 19 ]. These leaders focus on building enduring relationships, working diligently, and leading with purpose, meaning, and values. They create positive ethical climates, which support self-development and improve overall performance and well-being [ 53 ]. According to Avolio et al. [6], authentic leadership influences staff attitudes and behaviors by fostering essential psychological processes such as organizational identification. Organizational identification refers to the perception of openness and a sense of belonging within an organization [59, 4]. It involves the cognitive or emotional connection of an individual's self-concept to the organization [ 40 ]. The cognitive aspect of organizational identification encompasses shared characteristics and goals between employees and the organization, as well as the perceived benefits of identifying as a member [ 3 ]. The emotional dimension, on the other hand, generates a sense of pride in individuals about being part of the organization [ 48 ]. When individuals identify with their organization, they are more likely to embrace its mission and values and work towards achieving its objectives. Organizational identification serves as a framework for understanding how identity influences individual behavior and cognitive processes within organizations [45]. By enhancing the quality of members' work attitudes and behaviors, organizational identification contributes to organizational performance [ 23 ]. It plays a vital role in uniting employees and maintaining their commitment to the organization [ 10 , 30 ], thereby increasing their effort levels and sense of obligation [ 44 ]. According to Eisenberger et al. [ 14 ] and Aselage and Eisenberger [ 2 ], employees who strongly identify with their organization often feel a heightened sense of obligation to contribute positively to the organization's goals. Felt obligation represents a form of controlled motivation that more accurately explains employees' routine task performance [ 56 ]. Defined as the prescriptive belief about one's duty to support the organization, felt obligation motivates employees to engage in behaviors that are advantageous to the organization [ 14 ]. It involves both a moral and emotional compulsion to reciprocate the organization's investment in them by increasing their dedication, loyalty, and effort. Through felt obligation, employees reveal the ethical reasoning behind their decisions to either engage with or withdraw from relationships with their organization [ 32 ]. Whereas a low level of obligation suggests that individuals do not feel a duty to benefit their employer, whereas a high level indicates that they believe they owe something to their organization [ 33 ]. This paper focuses on two significant employee outcomes linked to authentic leadership: organizational identification and felt obligation. Utilizing Social Identity Theory [ 49 ], we investigate the relationship between authentic leadership and organizational identification, as illustrated in Fig. 1 . Additionally, we analyze how organizational identification impacts felt obligation, considering different levels of job fit, which refers to the alignment between individuals and their job roles [ 12 ]. Social Identity Theory (SIT) offers a strong foundation for understanding these connections. The theory suggests that people derive a significant part of their self-concept from their membership in social groups, including their workplace [ 4 ]. When leaders exhibit authenticity, they cultivate a culture where employees feel a deeper bond with the organization. This bond strengthens organizational identification, as employees view their roles within the organization as significant and congruent with their personal values [ 5 ]. As a result, stronger identification with the organization leads to a heightened sense of duty and obligation to contribute positively [15, 17]. Organizational identification thus serves as a crucial link, amplifying the influence of authentic leadership on felt obligation. Furthermore, a high level of job fit indicates that employees find their roles fulfilling and well-suited to their skills [58]. When job fit is high, organizational identification becomes more meaningful and impactful. Employees perceive their contributions as valuable and aligned with organizational goals, which enhances their felt obligation [ 29 ]. By examining these intricate relationships, this study aims to contribute to several key areas. First, it enhances the understanding of how authentic leadership influences employee outcomes, highlighting the critical role of organizational identification. Second, it underscores the importance of job fit in strengthening the positive effects of organizational identification on felt obligation. This dual focus offers practical insights for organizational leaders and human resource practitioners on the significance of fostering authentic leadership and ensuring proper job fit. Additionally, the study explores the effect of organizational identification on felt obligation, suggesting that a strong sense of identification with the organization can enhance employees' moral and emotional commitment, motivating them to engage in behaviors that support organizational goals. Ultimately, the findings provide a comprehensive framework for developing leadership strategies and organizational policies that promote employee engagement, commitment, and overall effectiveness, contributing to the creation of resilient and high-performing organizations. Hypotheses Development Authentic Leadership and Organizational Identification In recent years, the concept of authentic leadership has gained significant attention in the field of organizational behavior due to its potential to foster positive outcomes. Authentic leadership emphasizes leaders being true to themselves and their values, promoting honesty, openness, and ethical behavior [ 23 ]. It is characterized by self-awareness, relational transparency, balanced processing, and an internalized moral perspective [57]. Authentic leaders are deeply aware of their values and beliefs and consistently act in ways that align with them. They cultivate an environment of trust and integrity, which can lead to higher levels of employee engagement and satisfaction [ 5 ]. By providing emotional and social support, authentic leaders help meet their followers' psychological needs for belonging and self-esteem, reinforcing employees' sense of belonging to the organization and their identification with it [ 23 ]. Organizational identification refers to the degree to which employees align themselves with and feel a sense of belonging to their organization. It involves the alignment of an individual's self-concept with the organization's identity [ 40 ], leading to a sense of commitment to the organization's goals and values [59]. This identification can drive motivation, loyalty, and positive behaviors that benefit the organization [ 23 ]. The relationship between authentic leadership and organizational identification can be explored through the lens of Social Identity Theory (SIT). Social Identity Theory posits that individuals derive part of their self-concept from their membership in social groups, including organizations [ 50 ]. According to SIT, people strive for a positive social identity by associating themselves with groups that have positive distinctiveness [ 4 ]. The characteristics and behaviors of leaders significantly impact how employees perceive their organizational identity and, consequently, their organizational identification [ 52 ]. Authentic leaders' emphasis on core values and ethical behavior closely aligns with the values and beliefs of their followers. The relational transparency exhibited by authentic leaders builds trust within the organization. By fostering an ethical, open, and supportive organizational culture, authentic leaders create a positive and distinctive organizational identity [6]. As a result, employees are more likely to identify with an organization perceived as ethical and trustworthy, thus enhancing their organizational identification [ 10 ]. Accordingly, the present study proposes the following hypothesis: Hypothesis 1 Authentic leadership is positively related to organizational identification. Organizational Identification and Felt Obligation Organizational identification is a pivotal concept in organizational behavior, describing how individuals come to define themselves through their membership in an organization, aligning their own values and goals with those of the organization [ 3 ]. This identification involves individuals embracing the organization's identity, including its strengths, virtues, and imperfections, as part of their own self-concept and viewing the organization's successes and failures as personal [22]. When individuals strongly identify with their organization, they typically experience higher job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and loyalty, feeling a profound connection to the organization [ 10 ]. This deep connection often serves as a powerful motivator, prompting employees to dedicate greater effort to organizational goals [ 30 ], thereby increasing their perceived obligation to perform well and support the organization’s initiatives. Employees who see the organization as an extension of themselves are likely to feel more accountable for its outcomes [ 33 ]. In contrast, felt obligation refers to the sense of responsibility employees feel towards their organization, often stemming from feelings of loyalty and duty [14, 27]. This sense of obligation prompts employees to reciprocate positive treatment from the organization with increased effort on its behalf [ 15 , 42 ]. This construct is linked to positive outcomes and can encourage employees to engage in behaviors that support organizational success [59; 54]. According to social identity theory, the alignment of an individual's identity with the group enhances their commitment to the group and its objectives [ 50 ]. Organizational identification can be viewed as a form of social exchange, where employees reciprocate the support, values, and resources provided by the organization. Strong identification may lead employees to feel indebted to the organization for its support, resources, and opportunities, thereby enhancing their felt obligation [ 31 ]. Employees who identify strongly with their organization are likely to adopt its values and goals as their own, creating a psychological bond that fosters a sense of duty towards the organization [ 14 ]. This reciprocal relationship can enhance employees' felt obligation to contribute to the organization’s success. We propose that organizational identification is positively associated with felt obligation. When employees see themselves as integral to the organization, they are likely to feel a sense of responsibility toward its success, driven by their identification with its values and goals. Hypothesis 2 organizational identification is positively related to felt obligation. Mediating Role of Organizational Identification The current study not only explores the direct effects but also investigates how organizational identification acts as an intermediary process through which leaders' authenticity influences employees’ felt obligation. We expect a chain effect wherein authentic leadership enhances employees’ organizational identification, subsequently leading to provide more obligated employees. This relationship can be elucidated through the lenses of social identity theory [ 50 ]. According to Social Identity Theory, we argue that authentic leaders foster an environment that resonates with employees' values and ethical standards, thereby promoting a transparent and ethical organizational culture [6]. This environment encourages employees to identify more deeply with the organization [ 23 ]. When employees perceive the organization as a reflection of their own values and beliefs, their identification with it grows stronger [ 39 ]. Employees who strongly identify with the organization are typically more committed and loyal [59]. This strong identification leads to a heightened sense of duty towards the organization, thereby increasing their felt obligation to support its goals and values [ 14 , 31 ]. In essence, organizational identification serves as a bridge, translating the ethical and transparent behaviors of authentic leaders into a deeper sense of obligation towards the organization. Hypothesis 3 Organizational identification mediates the relationship between authentic leadership and employees' felt obligation. Moderating Role of Personal Job Fit We argue that organizational identification, defined as the degree to which employees align with their organization's values and goals [ 4 ], often leads to increased commitment and a sense of obligation towards the organization [ 40 ]. This sense of duty reflects employees' desire to reciprocate the support and opportunities provided by the organization by contributing positively to its goals [ 14 ]. However, the extent to which organizational identification results in these positive outcomes may be influenced by employees' personal job fit. Personal job fit refers to the alignment between an employee’s skills, abilities, and the demands of their job [ 24 ]. This concept posits that a high level of job fit can lead to increased job satisfaction, commitment, and engagement [ 12 , 32 ]. Additionally, person-job fit is closely linked to the experience of meaningful work, as employees whose skills and interests align with their job tasks are more likely to find their work fulfilling [ 29 ]. When employees perceive their job and organizational environment as well-suited to their skills and values, they are more likely to feel a moral responsibility to contribute positively to the organization [ 14 ]. This sense of obligation can manifest in various ways, such as increased effort, loyalty, and a willingness to go above and beyond in their roles [ 3 ]. According to Social Identity Theory, employees who experience a high level of job fit are likely to feel a stronger psychological connection to their job and the organization [ 24 ]. This connection enhances their organizational identification, ensuring that their personal goals, values, and skills are well-aligned with their job roles and the organization's objectives [ 12 ]. This alignment amplifies the positive effects of organizational identification on felt obligation, as employees view their contributions as both personally fulfilling and essential to the organization’s success. Furthermore, a high job fit reduces role conflict and ambiguity, providing employees with a clear understanding of their responsibilities and expectations [ 9 ]. This clarity enables employees to focus on fulfilling their obligations to the organization, thereby strengthening the relationship between organizational identification and felt obligation. Employees who strongly identify with their organization and experience high job fit are likely to exhibit increased organizational commitment. This commitment further enhances the sense of duty and obligation to support the organization’s goals and reciprocate the organization’s support [ 24 ]. Based on these arguments, we propose the following hypotheses: Hypothesis 4 personal job fit positively moderates the relationship between organizational identification and felt obligation. In addition to the moderating effect of job fit, we consider a moderated moderation effect where the relationship between organizational identification and felt obligation is further influenced by job fit, contingent on authentic leadership. Authentic leadership, which emphasizes transparency, ethical behavior, and genuine relationships, can enhance the process through which employees align themselves with organizational values, thereby strengthening their identification with the organization [57]. However, the impact of authentic leadership on organizational identification and, subsequently on felt obligation may vary based on employees' perceptions of job fit. When job fit is high, authentic leadership is likely to amplify the positive effects of organizational identification on felt obligation, as employees who perceive their roles as well-suited to their skills and values are more likely to internalize organizational goals and feel a moral responsibility to contribute. On the other hand, when job fit is low, the positive effects of authentic leadership on organizational identification may be diminished, as employees may feel misaligned or undervalued in their roles, reducing their sense of duty towards the organization. Thus, we propose that authentic leadership interacts with job fit to moderate the relationship between organizational identification and felt obligation, influencing how effectively employees' identification with the organization translates into a sense of duty. Hypothesis 5 Personal job fit positively moderates the indirect effects of authentic leadership on felt obligation through organizational identification. Method Participants and Procedures This study employed a two-phase online survey conducted via a questionnaire. Participants were recruited through the Prolific online platform, which facilitates connections between researchers and individuals willing to engage in virtual tasks, such as surveys [ 34 ]. By leveraging Prolific's panel, researchers were able to specifically choose participants based on predefined demographic criteria from a large and diverse pool. This ensured that only eligible individuals meeting the specified criteria could participate, thereby improving the quality of participant selection and streamlining the data collection process [ 26 ]. Additionally, research suggests that data collected through the online Prolific platform tends to be of higher quality compared to other platforms such as Mturk [ 11 ]. In the initial survey, a total of 300 participants from diverse backgrounds across the United States responded to the questionnaire via the link provided by the Prolific online platform. This survey focused on gathering demographic information along with assessing authentic leadership (the independent variable) and felt obligation (the dependent variable). However, 24 participants were disqualified either due to not meeting the minimum tenure criteria with the same supervisor in the last six months or failing to correctly answer the attention checks. After 14 days, the second survey was conducted, with 276 participants who had successfully completed the first survey. This time, the survey aimed to investigate organizational identification (as a mediator) and job fit (as a moderator). The second survey garnered 231 responses, resulting in an 83.6% response rate. Among the qualified participants, 108 identified as male (46.8%), 116 as female, and 3% identified as third-gender or non-binary. In terms of racial demographics, 71% of participants identified as white, 11% as Asian, 9% as black or African American, and less than 10% as Latin or other races. Additionally, over 60% of participants held a bachelor's degree or higher, with a mean organization tenure of 2.82 years (SD = 1.11) and a mean tenure with the supervisor of 2.32 years (SD = 0.7). Measures To measure the variables relevant to our study, we utilized a 7-point Likert scale. This scale allowed participants to indicate their attitudes towards the variables, ranging from "strongly disagree" (rated as 1) to "strongly agree" (rated as 7). Authentic Leadership (T1) To assess authentic leadership, we utilized a 14-item scale developed by Neider and Schriesheim [63], which has been extensively used in prior research. Sample items from the scale include statements like "My supervisor clearly communicates intentions" and "My supervisor demonstrates consistency between beliefs and actions" (α = .93). Felt Obligation (T1) To assess felt obligation, we employed the 6-item scale developed by Eisenberger et al. [ 14 ]. Example items include " I feel a personal obligation to do whatever I can to help the organization achieve its goals " and " I have an obligation to the organization to ensure that I produce high-quality work." In our study, the internal consistency of this scale was determined to be (α = .87). Organization Identification (T2) To assess organization identification, we employed the 5-item scale developed by Smidts et al. [64]. Example items include " I feel strong ties with my organization " and " I experience a strong sense of belonging to my organization." The internal consistency of this scale was determined to be (α = .95). Job Fit (T2) To evaluate job fit, we utilized the 4-item scale developed by Saks and Ashforth [65]. Example items include " To what extent do your knowledge, skills, and abilities match the requirements of your job?" and " To what extent does the job fulfill your needs." In our study, the internal consistency of this scale was deemed satisfactory (α = .89). Control Variables To address potential biases in our results, we accounted for various demographic factors, including age, sex, race, employees' education level, tenure with the supervisor, organizational tenure, and working hours. Age was measured in years, sex as a binary variable (1 for females, 2 for males), employee tenure in years, and education level ranging from no schooling to doctorate level. Results Table 1 presents the means, standard deviations, reliabilities, and correlations among the primary variables. Table 1 Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations Note. N = 231 . Reliabilities are on the diagonal in parentheses. * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001. Variables M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1. Gender 1.56 .55 2. Age 36.10 10.75 .13 3. Race 1.90 1.65 .01 − .11 4. Education Level 4.73 .98 − .01 .04 .08 5. Tenure in Organization 2.82 1.11 − .11 .38 ** − .11 .01 6. Working Hours 2.13 .69 − .19 ** .04 − .07 .10 .33 ** 7. Tenure with Supervisor 2.32 1.02 − .05 .35 ** − .05 − .09 .71 ** .24 ** 8. Authentic Leadership 5.28 .99 − .04 .11 .06 − .07 .10 − .06 .12 (.93) 9. Organization Identification 4.72 1.49 − .12 .23 ** − .09 − .04 .18 ** .03 .25 ** .49 ** (.95) 10. Felt Obligation 4.54 1.34 − .10 .29 ** − .07 − .03 .17 * .07 .21 ** .43 ** .71 ** (.87) 11. Job Fit 4.98 1.30 − .00 .22 ** − .11 .03 .20 ** .01 .26 ** .44 ** .69 ** .58 ** (.89) Before hypotheses were tested, a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed to validate the proposed model and ensure that the key variables were distinct from each other. The findings indicated that the proposed model had an acceptable fit, as indicated by the incremental fit index (IFI) and comparative fit index (CFI), all surpassing the recommended threshold of .90 and acceptable RMSEA [ 8 ]. Additionally, the average variance extracted (AVE) values were higher than .5 [ 16 ], and the composite reliability (CR) values were above .7 [ 20 ], suggesting satisfactory convergent validity. We also utilized the method proposed by Fornell and Larcker [ 16 ] to assess discriminant validity, which revealed that the calculated average variance extracted (AVE) of each construct exceeded the shared variance with all other constructs, therefore supporting the discriminant validity of the measures [ 55 ]. Hypothesis 1 suggested a positive link between authentic leadership and organization identification. Analysis in Model 2 of Table 2 supported this hypothesis, revealing a significant positive relationship between authentic leadership and organization identification (β = .46, p < .001). Hypothesis 2 proposed a positive relationship between organization identification and employees' felt obligation. Model 5 (Table 2 ) confirmed Hypothesis 2 , by showing a significant positive relationship between these variables (β = .69, p < .001). Table 2 Results of Mediation and Moderation Effect Organization Identification Felt Obligation Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 5 Model 6 Model 7 1. Control variables Gender − .10 − .08 − .06 − .04 .01 .01 − .01 Age .15 * .12 .25 *** .23 *** .15 ** .15 ** .13 ** Race − .06 − .10 − .03 .06 .01 − .00 .02 Education Level − .02 .02 − .02 .00 − .01 − .01 − .02 Tenure in Organization − .03 − .06 − .06 − .08 − .04 − .05 − .03 Working Hours − .04 .01 .03 .07 .06 .07 .06 Tenure with Supervisor .21 * .18 * .15 .12 .01 .01 − .03 2. Main effect Authentic Leadership .46 *** .40 *** .11 * 3. Mediation effect Organization Identification .69 *** .63 *** .62 *** 4. Moderator Job Fit .16 ** 5. Interaction Effect Organization Identification \(\:\times\:\) Job Fit .12 ** Overall F 3.52 *** 12.31 *** 3.91 *** 10.06 *** 31.84 *** 29.19 *** 28.07 *** R 2 .10 .30 .11 .26 .53 .54 .56 Changed in F 66.57 *** 47.33 *** 202.51 *** 134.09 *** 6.89 *** Changed in R 2 .20 .15 .42 .27 .01 Effect Boot SE LL 95% CI UL 95% CI Indirect effect (Bootstrapping) .39 .06 .27 .53 Note. N = 231 . Standardized coefficients are presented. * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001. Bootstrap sample size = 20,000. * LLCI = lower limit confidence interval; ** ULCI = upper limit confidence interval. Hypothesis 3 posited that organization identification mediates the relationship between authentic leadership and employees' felt obligation. Models 2, 5, and 6 (Table 2 ) demonstrated that authentic leadership positively influenced organization identification (β = .46, p < .001), and organization identification in turn positively impacted employees' felt obligation (β = .63, p < .001), even after controlling for the direct effect of authentic leadership [ 7 ]. The mediation effect was verified using 20,000 bootstrap samples with a 95% confidence interval (CI). The CI, ranging from .27 to .53 and excluding zero [43], confirmed the statistical significance of the indirect effect, supporting Hypothesis 3 . Hypothesis 4 suggested that employees' personal job fit moderates the relationship between organization identification and felt obligation. In Model 7 (Table 2 ), a statistically significant coefficient for the interaction term (β = .12, p < .01) provided support for Hypothesis 4 . As presented in Table 3 , the results concerning the conditional effects of organization identification on employees' felt obligation across different levels of job fit exhibited statistical significance across all regions, spanning from M − 1 SD (-1.29) to M (.00) to M + 1 SD (1.29). With the evident significant moderating impact of personal job fit, we conducted further analysis by segmenting the moderating variable into low, moderate, and high subgroups. As depicted in Fig. 2 , the positive association between organization identification and felt obligation is more pronounced under conditions of higher personal job fit compared to lower levels. These findings offer support for Hypothesis 4 . Table 3 Conditional Effect of Organization Identification on Felt Obligation at Values of Job Fit Moderator Effect se t LLCI * ULCI ** Job Fit -1.29 (M-1SD) .42 .06 6.55 .29 .54 .00(M) .52 .05 8.78 .40 .64 1.29 (M + 1SD) .63 .07 8.24 .47 .78 Note. N = 231 . Bootstrap sample size = 20,000. * LLCI = lower limit confidence interval; ** ULCI = upper limit confidence interval. Hypothesis 5 suggests that job fit moderates the indirect effect of authentic leadership on felt obligation via organization identification. To examine the moderated mediation effect, we used the SPSS Process Macro Model 14 [ 38 ]. As shown in Table 4 , the conditional indirect effect of authentic leadership was statistically significant across all levels, ranging from M − 1 SD (-1.29) to M (.00) to M + 1 SD (1.29). Moreover, the moderated mediation index for authoritarian leadership was .05, with a 95% confidence interval (CI) ranging from .01 to .10. Notably, the confidence interval does not encompass zero, confirming the validation of the moderated mediation effect. Hence, Hypothesis 5 is supported. Table 4 Conditional Indirect Effects of Authentic Leadership on Felt Obligation via Organization Identification Conditional Indirect Effect (AL → Org_Id → Felt_O) Effect Boot se Boot LLCI * Boot ULCI ** Moderator Job Fit -1.29 (M-1SD) .29 .07 .16 .46 .00(M) .36 .07 .23 .52 1.29 (M + 1SD) .44 .08 .28 .61 Moderated Mediation Index Boot se Boot LLCI * Boot ULCI ** Authoritarian leadership .05 .02 .01 .10 Note. N = 231 . Bootstrap sample size = 20,000. AL = Authentic Leadership, Org_Id = Organizational Identification, Felt_O = Felt Obligation. * LLCI = lower limit confidence interval; ** ULCI = upper limit confidence interval. Discussion This study has confirmed a positive relationship between authentic leadership and organizational identification. It has also supported the notion that organizational identification is positively linked with felt obligation. Specifically, employees who strongly identify with their organization are more likely to feel a moral obligation to reciprocate the organization's support. Our findings suggest that organizational identification mediates the relationship between authentic leadership and felt obligation, indicating that the positive impact of authentic leadership on employees' sense of obligation is significantly influenced by their identification with the organization. Additionally, the study highlights the role of job fit in this relationship. It reveals that the positive relationship between organizational identification and felt obligation is more pronounced when employees perceive a strong fit between their job characteristics and their personal attributes. Finally, the significant moderated mediation in our model provides further evidence that the relationship between authentic leadership and felt obligation through organizational identification depends on the level of job fit. Theoretical and Practical Implications This study offers significant contributions to our understanding of the relationships between authentic leadership, organizational identification, felt obligation, and job fit, aligning closely with established theories in organizational behavior and psychology. The findings underscore the critical role of social identity in organizational settings, affirming that authentic leadership behaviors enhance organizational identification by fostering a sense of belonging among employees [ 51 ]. This alignment suggests that employees who perceive their leaders as authentic are more likely to identify with the organization, which in turn enhances their commitment and loyalty [ 23 , 13 ]. The role of organizational identification as a mediator between authentic leadership and felt obligation highlights how identity alignment can influence employee behaviors and attitudes. This finding supports existing research that indicates a strong sense of organizational identification leads to increased employee engagement and a greater sense of obligation to reciprocate the organization's support [30, 27]. Moreover, the moderating effect of job fit on the relationship between organizational identification and felt obligation extends our understanding of how contextual factors can impact the effectiveness of leadership behaviors. This supports role congruence theory, which suggests that alignment between personal characteristics and job demands enhances job satisfaction and performance [ 32 , 25 ]. It indicates that the effectiveness of authentic leadership in fostering organizational identification and felt obligation is contingent upon the degree to which employees perceive their jobs as fitting their skills and values [58]. By integrating Social Identity Theory and concepts of authentic leadership, this study provides a comprehensive framework for understanding the complex interactions between leadership behaviors, employee identity, and organizational outcomes. This integration helps in conceptualizing how leadership practices can be designed to align not only with organizational goals but also with employees' personal values and identities [6]. The insights derived from this study also provide valuable guidance for organizations seeking to boost employee engagement and commitment through strategic leadership development and thoughtful role design. Developing authentic leadership within an organization is essential. Leaders who exhibit transparency, ethical behavior, and consistency can significantly foster a strong sense of organizational identification among their employees. This alignment not only builds trust and loyalty but also enhances employee engagement and retention, as employees who feel a connection to their leaders are more likely to be committed to the organization. In addition to leadership qualities, the design of job roles should be aligned with employees' skills, interests, and values. Ensuring that employees' roles are a good fit for their personal attributes can increase job satisfaction, reduce turnover, and enhance organizational commitment. This might involve regular assessments of job roles to make adjustments based on employee feedback and performance metrics, ensuring that employees feel fulfilled in their positions. Training and development programs should focus on nurturing authentic leadership qualities. These programs can include modules on ethical decision-making, emotional intelligence, and effective communication. Such training helps leaders connect more effectively with their teams, foster a positive organizational culture, and encourage behaviors that align with the organization's values. Organizations should also implement regular feedback mechanisms to assess how well job roles align with employees' skills and values. This feedback is crucial for making informed decisions about role adjustments and development opportunities, ensuring that employees remain satisfied and motivated in their roles. Investing in leadership development programs that emphasize authenticity in leadership can prepare future leaders to cultivate strong organizational identification among their employees. This investment not only supports individual employee satisfaction but also contributes to overall organizational effectiveness. Limitations and Future Directions Every research study has its limitations, and this one is no exception. While the study provides valuable insights, several limitations must be acknowledged that could affect the interpretation and generalizability of the findings. First, the cross-sectional design limits our ability to establish causal relationships among the key variables [41]. A longitudinal approach could provide more robust evidence regarding the dynamic effects and temporal sequences of these relationships over time [ 36 ]. Second, to address common method bias (CMB), we took steps such as ensuring confidentiality, conducting attention checks, and collecting data in two phases [ 37 , 46 ]. Despite these precautions, caution is advised when interpreting the findings. Utilizing mixed methods approaches, such as integrating data from supervisors, peers, or objective performance metrics, could enhance the robustness of the findings and provide a more comprehensive view of the constructs under study. Third, data were collected via the Prolific platform, which may not fully represent the broader population, potentially limiting the generalizability of the results across different cultural or socio-economic contexts [ 28 ]. Expanding the demographic diversity of participants and exploring a variety of organizational settings will also be crucial for enhancing the external validity of the results. Additionally, investigating other potential moderators and mediators, such as organizational culture, job characteristics, and external environmental factors, could provide deeper insights into the complex interplay of factors that influence organizational behavior. Declarations Disclosure Statement There are no conflicts of interest in the conduct and reporting of this research, neither financial nor non-financial. Data Availability Statement The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. Ethics Approval This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the University of Idaho, following the relevant ethical guidelines and regulations (Protocol #026564). Consent to Participate/Publish Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. Author Contribution S.E. was responsible for developing the research hypotheses, including the conceptual framework, and identifying relevant variables. S.E. also contributed to the literature review, methodology sections, and data analysis.T.B. handled the data analysis and interpretation, ensuring that the statistical methods used were appropriate for testing the hypotheses. T.B. also collaborated in drafting the results section.R.D. contributed to drafting the discussion and conclusion sections, focusing on interpreting the findings in the context of existing literature and outlining implications for future research.M.K. prepared figures 1-3 and assisted with formatting the manuscript. M.K. also participated in revising the manuscript for clarity and structure.All authors reviewed and approved the final manuscript. References Arias Rodriguez, I., Muniz Jr, J., & Munyon, T. P. (2024). Authentic leadership and motivation as moderators of the organizational politics–knowledge sharing relationship: A test amidst crisis. BRQ Business Research Quarterly, 27 (1), 91–102. Aselage, J., & Eisenberger, R. (2003). Perceived organizational support and psychological contracts: A theoretical integration. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 24 (5), 491–509. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.211 Ashforth, B. E., Harrison, S. H., & Corley, K. G. (2008). Identification in organizations: An examination of four fundamental questions. Journal of Management , 34 (3), 325–374. Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization. The Academy of Management Review , 14 (1) 20–39. Avolio, B. J., & Gardner, W. L. (2005). Authentic leadership development: Getting to the root of positive forms of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly , 16 (3), 315–338. Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Walumbwa, F. O., Luthans, F., & May, D. R. (2004). Unlocking the mask: A look at the process by which authentic leaders’ impact follower attitudes and behaviors. Leadership Quarterly, 15: 801–823. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51 (6), 1173. Barrett, P. (2007). Structural equation modelling: Adjudging model fit. Personality and Individual Differences, 42 (5), 815–824. Cable, D. M., & DeRue, D. S. (2002). The convergent and discriminant validity of subjective fit perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87 (5), 875. Demir, K. (2015). The effect of organizational justice and perceived organizational support on organizational citizenship behaviors: The mediating role of organizational identification. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 60, 131–148. Doi: 10.14689/ejer.2015.60.8 Douglas, B. D., Ewell, P. J., & Brauer, M. (2023). Data quality in online human-subjects research: Comparisons between MTurk, Prolific, CloudResearch, Qualtrics, and SONA. Plos one, 18 (3), e0279720. Edwards, J. R. (1991). Person-job fit: A conceptual integration, literature review, and methodological critique. John Wiley & Sons . Edú Valsania, S., Moriano, J. A., & Molero, F. (2016). Authentic leadership and intrapreneurial behavior: cross-level analysis of the mediator effect of organizational identification and empowerment. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 12 (1), 131–152. Eisenberger, R., Armeli, S., Rexwinkel, B., Lynch, P. D., & Rhoades, L. (2001). Reciprocation of perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86 , 42–51. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.1.42 Eisenberger, R., Wen, X., Zheng, D., Yu, J., Liu, Z., Zhang, J., … Kim, T. H. (2023).Does Felt Obligation or Gratitude Better Explain the Relationship Between Perceived Organizational Support and Outcomes?. Group & Organization Management , 10596011231180388. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18 (1), 39–50. Gardner, W. L., Avolio, B. J., Luthans, F., May, D. R., & Walumba, F. O. (2005). Can you see the real me? A self-based model of authentic leader and follower development. The Leadership Quarterly . Gardner, W. L., Karam, E. P., Alvesson, M., & Einola, K. (2021). Authentic leadership theory: The case for and against. The Leadership Quarterly, 32 (6), 101495. George, W. (2003). Authentic leadership: Rediscovering the secrets to creating lasting value. San Francisco7 Jossey-Bass. Hair, JF., Tatham, RL., Anderson, RE., & Black, W. (1998). Multivariate data analysis. (Fifth Ed.) Prentice-Hall: London. Ilies, R., Morgeson, F. P., & Nahrgang, J. D. (2005). Authentic leadership and eudaemonic wellbeing: Understanding leader-follower outcomes. Leadership Quarterly, 16 (3), 373–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.03.002 Kazmi, S. W., & Javaid, S. T. (2022). Antecedents of organizational identification: implications for employee performance. RAUSP Management Journal, 57 , 111–130. Kim, B. J., Nurunnabi, M., Kim, T. H., & Kim, T. (2018). Doing good is not enough, you should have been authentic: organizational identification, authentic leadership and CSR. Sustainability , 10 (6), 2026. Kristof-Brown, A. L., Zimmerman, R. D., and Johnson, E. C. (2005). Consequences of individuals’ fit at work: a meta-analysis of person-job, person-organization, person group, and person-supervisor fit. Pers. Psychol. 58, 281–342. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.00672.x Li, J., Yang, H., Weng, Q., & Zhu, L. (2023). How different forms of job crafting relate to job satisfaction: The role of person-job fit and age. Current Psychology, 42 (13), 11155–11169. Litman, L., Rosen, Z., Hartman, R., Rosenzweig, C., Weinberger-Litman, S. L., Moss, A. J., & Robinson, J. (2023). Did people really drink bleach to prevent COVID-19? A guide for protecting survey data against problematic respondents. Plos one, 18 (7), e0287837. Lu, G., Liang, Y., Ding, Y., Tang, H., Zhang, Y., Huang, H., & Chen, C. (2022). Nurses’ feeling trusted and knowledge hiding: The role of psychological safety, felt obligation and traditionality. Frontiers in Psychology, 13 , 1034882. Luthans, F., & Avolio, B. J. (2009). The “point” of positive organizational behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 30 (2), 291–307. Merdiaty, N. (2024). Person-job fit on work engagement with meaningful work as mediator. International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147–4478) , 13 (1), 134–145. Miao, Q., Eva, N., Newman, A., & Schwarz, G. (2019). Public service motivation and performance: The role of organizational identification. Public Money & Management, 39 (2), 77–85. Neill, M. S., Men, L. R., & Yue, C. A. (2020). How communication climate and organizational identification impact change. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 25 (2), 281–298. Oelberger, C., Eaton, A., & Choi, J. H. (2023). One Size Fits All? Exploring Motivation for Public Employees With a Job Fit Framework and Response Surface Analysis. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 0734371X231218898. Paillé, P., & Valéau, P. (2021). “I don’t owe you, but I am committed”: Does felt obligation matter on the effect of green training on employee environmental commitment?. Organization & Environment, 34 (1), 123–144. Palan, S., & Schitter, C. (2018). Prolific. ac—A subject pool for online experiments. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, 17 , 22–27. Parke, H. W., & Wormell, D. E. W. (1956). The Delphic Oracle: Volume I, The History . Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Ployhart, R. E., & Vandenberg, R. J. (2010). Longitudinal research: The theory, design, and analysis of change. Journal of Management, 36 (1), 94–120. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88 (5), 879. Preacher, K. J., Rucker, D. D., & Hayes, A. F. (2007). Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 42 (1), 185–227. Rhoades, L., & Eisenberger, R. (2002). Perceived organizational support: A review of the literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87 (4), 698–714. Riketta, M., & Van Dick, R. (2005). Foci of attachment in organizations: A meta-analytic comparison of the strength and correlates of workgroup versus organizational identification and commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 67, 490–510. Rindfleisch, A., Malter, A. J., Ganesan, S., & Moorman, C. (2008). Cross-sectional versus longitudinal survey research: Concepts, findings, and guidelines. Journal of Marketing Research, 45 (3), 261–279. Roch, S. G., Shannon, C. E., Martin, J. J., Swiderski, D., Agosta, J. P., & Shanock, L. R. (2019). Role of employee felt obligation and endorsement of the just world hypothesis: A social exchange theory investigation in an organizational justice context. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 49 (4), 213–225. Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: new procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7 (4), 422. Simon, H. A. (1947). Administrative behavior: A study of decision-making processes in administrative organization. New York: Macmillan . Sluss, D.M., Klimchak, M., & Holmes, J.J. (2008). Perceived organizational support as a mediator between relational exchange and organizational identification. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73, 457–464. Spector, P. E. (2006). Method variance in organizational research: truth or urban legend?. Organizational Research Methods, 9(2), 221–232. Spitzmuller, M., & Ilies, R. (2010). Do they [all] see my true self? Leader's relational authenticity and followers' assessments of transformational leadership. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 19 (3), 304–332. Tajfel, H. (1972). Social categorization. In Moscovoci, S. (Ed.). Introduction a la Psychologie, Volume 1 (pp. 272e302). Paris: Larousse. Tajfael, H. (1978). Differentiation between social groups. London: Academic Press . Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In Austin W.& Worchel S. (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations (pp. 33–47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J.C. (1986) The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behavior. In: Worchel, S. and Austin, W.G., Eds., Psychology of Intergroup Relation, Hall Publishers, Chicago, 7–24. Teresi, M., Pietroni, D. D., Barattucci, M., Giannella, V. A., & Pagliaro, S. (2019). Ethical climate (s), organizational identification, and employees’ behavior. Frontiers in Psychology, 10 , 466115. Uluturk, B., Yilmaz Altuntas, E., & Hürmeriç, P. (2024). Authentic Leadership, Motivating Language, Psychological Empowerment, and Work Engagement: A Serial Mediation Model. International Journal of Business Communication, 23294884231223521. Van Dyne, L., Graham, J. W., & Dienesch, R. M. (1994). Organizational citizenship behavior: Construct redefinition, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 37 (4), 765–802. Voorhees, C. M., Brady, M. K., Calantone, R., & Ramirez, E. (2016). Discriminant validity testing in marketing: an analysis, causes for concern, and proposed remedies. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 44 , 119–134. Yu, C., & Frenkel, S. J. (2013). Explaining task performance and creativity from perceived organizational support theory: Which mechanisms are more important? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34 (8), 1165–1181. Walumbwa, F. O., Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Wernsing, T. S., & Peterson, S. J. (2008). Authentic leadership: Development and validation of a theory-based measure. Journal of Management, 34 (1), 89–126. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206307308913 Zhang, Z., & Yan, Z. (2024). The impact of core self-evaluations and person-job fit on work-related outcomes. Frontiers in Psychology, 15 , 1341717. Zhou, Y., Cheng, Y., Liu, G., Zhang, Z., & Zhu, H. (2024). How does empowering leadership promote employee creativity? The sequential mediating mechanism of felt obligation for constructive change and job crafting. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 148 , 103955. Maslow, A. (1968). Some educational implications of the humanistic psychologies. Harvard educational Review, 38 (4), 685–696. Rogers, C. R. (1962). Toward becoming a fully functioning person. Perceiving, behaving, becoming: A new focus for education , 21–33. Harter, S. (2002). Authenticity. Handbook of Positive Psychology/Oxford University Press . Neider, L. L., & Schriesheim, C. A. (2011). The authentic leadership inventory (ALI): Development and empirical tests. The Leadership Quarterly, 22 (6), 1146–1164. Smidts, A., Pruyn, A. T. H., & Van Riel, C. B. (2001). The impact of employee communication and perceived external prestige on organizational identification. Academy of Management Journal, 44 (5), 1051–1062. Saks, A. M., & Ashforth, B. E. (2002). Is job search related to employment quality? It all depends on the fit. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87 (4), 646–654. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files APPENDIX.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Review Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 21 Nov, 2024 Reviews received at journal 18 Nov, 2024 Reviewers agreed at journal 13 Nov, 2024 Reviews received at journal 07 Nov, 2024 Reviewers agreed at journal 20 Oct, 2024 Reviewers invited by journal 08 Oct, 2024 Editor assigned by journal 30 Sep, 2024 Submission checks completed at journal 27 Sep, 2024 First submitted to journal 19 Sep, 2024 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-5118661","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":380823191,"identity":"2012f908-f103-40a4-b3cf-cb40e28b08b8","order_by":0,"name":"Sina Eslamdoust","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Southern Illinois University College of Business","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Sina","middleName":"","lastName":"Eslamdoust","suffix":""},{"id":380823192,"identity":"55dc9693-4125-4b23-ae7c-80070c1c4da1","order_by":1,"name":"Tahmineh Borhani","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Idaho","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Tahmineh","middleName":"","lastName":"Borhani","suffix":""},{"id":380823193,"identity":"9d2a6221-d67f-498f-a878-127d6e8ab0f3","order_by":2,"name":"Rasam Dorri","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of California","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Rasam","middleName":"","lastName":"Dorri","suffix":""},{"id":380823194,"identity":"99395fb0-0f52-4bc4-bfbd-a79d43a8e5ba","order_by":3,"name":"Minoo Karandish","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Kennesaw State University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Minoo","middleName":"","lastName":"Karandish","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2024-09-19 17:07:39","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-5118661/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-5118661/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":70596049,"identity":"76c5ef26-5d66-4865-8115-9c57dd26523e","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-12-04 18:15:31","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":6401,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003etheoretical framework.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5118661/v1/6873ef7efa173060ad9826ad.png"},{"id":70596051,"identity":"f380fbe5-5cf8-43bd-a0ef-c7ab7d991392","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-12-04 18:15:31","extension":"jpg","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":18172,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eConditional Effect of Organization Identification on Felt Obligation across Values of Job Fit\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5118661/v1/4bbf08aae97e939d45ba48a9.jpg"},{"id":70597022,"identity":"70097e47-57be-4b9c-b108-c5f58e2b10b5","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-12-04 18:31:32","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":865721,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5118661/v1/ee95ec11-5217-4207-9adc-8f74e799d7c6.pdf"},{"id":70596563,"identity":"29ab301b-a36d-46d2-99ea-c1ed7e42b39d","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-12-04 18:23:31","extension":"docx","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":20568,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"APPENDIX.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5118661/v1/5a38a207e03eda541f0e15af.docx"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Authentic Leadership's Impact on Employees Felt Obligation: Moderated Mediation Model","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eLeadership is a pivotal force in shaping the dynamics of organizations and significantly affecting employee attitudes and behaviors. The concept of authenticity in leadership has historical roots that trace back to the 1960s, when the leadership literature began to delve into philosophical understandings, influenced by humanistic psychology and the seminal works of figures like Maslow [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e60\u003c/span\u003e] and Rogers [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e61\u003c/span\u003e]. The idea of authenticity itself is derived from ancient Greek philosophy, embodied in the well-known aphorism \"Know Thyself.\" This expression underscores the importance of self-awareness as a pathway to authenticity\u0026mdash;being true to oneself\u0026mdash;and indicates that the notion of authenticity has a rich, enduring presence in human thought and cultural traditions [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e35\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHarter [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e62\u003c/span\u003e] defines authenticity as the act of taking ownership of one's internal experiences, including desires, thoughts, feelings, goals, and beliefs. By acknowledging and valuing these experiences, individuals can cultivate greater self-awareness and lead a more genuine life. In essence, authenticity involves being true to oneself by accepting and integrating all aspects of one's unique identity. This concept has formed the theoretical foundation for numerous theories of authentic leadership [17]. By examining and understanding the various elements that contribute to authenticity, researchers have developed sophisticated theories of authentic Leadership that highlight the critical role of authenticity in effective leadership [47, 57, 21].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAuthentic leadership, which gained prominence in the early 2000s, is centered on values-based leadership characterized by honesty, transparency, integrity, trustworthiness, ethics, and truthfulness [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e]. It also emphasizes fairness, accountability, consistency in behavior both personally and interpersonally, and upholding high ethical standards [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e]. This leadership style is defined as a pattern of behavior that leverages and promotes positive psychological capacities and an ethical climate, aiming to enhance self-awareness, an internalized moral perspective, balanced information processing, and relational transparency among leaders working with followers, thereby fostering positive self-development [57]. Authentic leaders are committed to upholding high moral standards and integrity, which cultivates positive expectations and encourages active participation in decision-making processes. This approach enhances trust and collaboration toward achieving organizational goals [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e]. These leaders focus on building enduring relationships, working diligently, and leading with purpose, meaning, and values. They create positive ethical climates, which support self-development and improve overall performance and well-being [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e53\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAccording to Avolio et al. [6], authentic leadership influences staff attitudes and behaviors by fostering essential psychological processes such as organizational identification. Organizational identification refers to the perception of openness and a sense of belonging within an organization [59, 4]. It involves the cognitive or emotional connection of an individual's self-concept to the organization [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e40\u003c/span\u003e]. The cognitive aspect of organizational identification encompasses shared characteristics and goals between employees and the organization, as well as the perceived benefits of identifying as a member [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e]. The emotional dimension, on the other hand, generates a sense of pride in individuals about being part of the organization [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e48\u003c/span\u003e]. When individuals identify with their organization, they are more likely to embrace its mission and values and work towards achieving its objectives. Organizational identification serves as a framework for understanding how identity influences individual behavior and cognitive processes within organizations [45]. By enhancing the quality of members' work attitudes and behaviors, organizational identification contributes to organizational performance [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e]. It plays a vital role in uniting employees and maintaining their commitment to the organization [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e30\u003c/span\u003e], thereby increasing their effort levels and sense of obligation [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e44\u003c/span\u003e]. According to Eisenberger et al. [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e] and Aselage and Eisenberger [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e], employees who strongly identify with their organization often feel a heightened sense of obligation to contribute positively to the organization's goals.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFelt obligation represents a form of controlled motivation that more accurately explains employees' routine task performance [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e56\u003c/span\u003e]. Defined as the prescriptive belief about one's duty to support the organization, felt obligation motivates employees to engage in behaviors that are advantageous to the organization [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e]. It involves both a moral and emotional compulsion to reciprocate the organization's investment in them by increasing their dedication, loyalty, and effort. Through felt obligation, employees reveal the ethical reasoning behind their decisions to either engage with or withdraw from relationships with their organization [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e]. Whereas a low level of obligation suggests that individuals do not feel a duty to benefit their employer, whereas a high level indicates that they believe they owe something to their organization [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e33\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis paper focuses on two significant employee outcomes linked to authentic leadership: organizational identification and felt obligation. Utilizing Social Identity Theory [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e49\u003c/span\u003e], we investigate the relationship between authentic leadership and organizational identification, as illustrated in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e. Additionally, we analyze how organizational identification impacts felt obligation, considering different levels of job fit, which refers to the alignment between individuals and their job roles [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSocial Identity Theory (SIT) offers a strong foundation for understanding these connections. The theory suggests that people derive a significant part of their self-concept from their membership in social groups, including their workplace [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e]. When leaders exhibit authenticity, they cultivate a culture where employees feel a deeper bond with the organization. This bond strengthens organizational identification, as employees view their roles within the organization as significant and congruent with their personal values [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e]. As a result, stronger identification with the organization leads to a heightened sense of duty and obligation to contribute positively [15, 17]. Organizational identification thus serves as a crucial link, amplifying the influence of authentic leadership on felt obligation. Furthermore, a high level of job fit indicates that employees find their roles fulfilling and well-suited to their skills [58]. When job fit is high, organizational identification becomes more meaningful and impactful. Employees perceive their contributions as valuable and aligned with organizational goals, which enhances their felt obligation [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBy examining these intricate relationships, this study aims to contribute to several key areas. First, it enhances the understanding of how authentic leadership influences employee outcomes, highlighting the critical role of organizational identification. Second, it underscores the importance of job fit in strengthening the positive effects of organizational identification on felt obligation. This dual focus offers practical insights for organizational leaders and human resource practitioners on the significance of fostering authentic leadership and ensuring proper job fit. Additionally, the study explores the effect of organizational identification on felt obligation, suggesting that a strong sense of identification with the organization can enhance employees' moral and emotional commitment, motivating them to engage in behaviors that support organizational goals. Ultimately, the findings provide a comprehensive framework for developing leadership strategies and organizational policies that promote employee engagement, commitment, and overall effectiveness, contributing to the creation of resilient and high-performing organizations.\u003c/p\u003e "},{"header":"Hypotheses Development","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eAuthentic Leadership and Organizational Identification\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn recent years, the concept of authentic leadership has gained significant attention in the field of organizational behavior due to its potential to foster positive outcomes. Authentic leadership emphasizes leaders being true to themselves and their values, promoting honesty, openness, and ethical behavior [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e]. It is characterized by self-awareness, relational transparency, balanced processing, and an internalized moral perspective [57]. Authentic leaders are deeply aware of their values and beliefs and consistently act in ways that align with them. They cultivate an environment of trust and integrity, which can lead to higher levels of employee engagement and satisfaction [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e]. By providing emotional and social support, authentic leaders help meet their followers' psychological needs for belonging and self-esteem, reinforcing employees' sense of belonging to the organization and their identification with it [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational identification refers to the degree to which employees align themselves with and feel a sense of belonging to their organization. It involves the alignment of an individual's self-concept with the organization's identity [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e40\u003c/span\u003e], leading to a sense of commitment to the organization's goals and values [59]. This identification can drive motivation, loyalty, and positive behaviors that benefit the organization [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e]. The relationship between authentic leadership and organizational identification can be explored through the lens of Social Identity Theory (SIT).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSocial Identity Theory posits that individuals derive part of their self-concept from their membership in social groups, including organizations [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e50\u003c/span\u003e]. According to SIT, people strive for a positive social identity by associating themselves with groups that have positive distinctiveness [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e]. The characteristics and behaviors of leaders significantly impact how employees perceive their organizational identity and, consequently, their organizational identification [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e52\u003c/span\u003e]. Authentic leaders' emphasis on core values and ethical behavior closely aligns with the values and beliefs of their followers. The relational transparency exhibited by authentic leaders builds trust within the organization. By fostering an ethical, open, and supportive organizational culture, authentic leaders create a positive and distinctive organizational identity [6]. As a result, employees are more likely to identify with an organization perceived as ethical and trustworthy, thus enhancing their organizational identification [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e]. Accordingly, the present study proposes the following hypothesis:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eHypothesis 1\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eAuthentic leadership is positively related to organizational identification.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eOrganizational Identification and Felt Obligation\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOrganizational identification is a pivotal concept in organizational behavior, describing how individuals come to define themselves through their membership in an organization, aligning their own values and goals with those of the organization [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e]. This identification involves individuals embracing the organization's identity, including its strengths, virtues, and imperfections, as part of their own self-concept and viewing the organization's successes and failures as personal [22]. When individuals strongly identify with their organization, they typically experience higher job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and loyalty, feeling a profound connection to the organization [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e]. This deep connection often serves as a powerful motivator, prompting employees to dedicate greater effort to organizational goals [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e30\u003c/span\u003e], thereby increasing their perceived obligation to perform well and support the organization\u0026rsquo;s initiatives. Employees who see the organization as an extension of themselves are likely to feel more accountable for its outcomes [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e33\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn contrast, felt obligation refers to the sense of responsibility employees feel towards their organization, often stemming from feelings of loyalty and duty [14, 27]. This sense of obligation prompts employees to reciprocate positive treatment from the organization with increased effort on its behalf [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e42\u003c/span\u003e]. This construct is linked to positive outcomes and can encourage employees to engage in behaviors that support organizational success [59; 54].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAccording to social identity theory, the alignment of an individual's identity with the group enhances their commitment to the group and its objectives [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e50\u003c/span\u003e]. Organizational identification can be viewed as a form of social exchange, where employees reciprocate the support, values, and resources provided by the organization. Strong identification may lead employees to feel indebted to the organization for its support, resources, and opportunities, thereby enhancing their felt obligation [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e31\u003c/span\u003e]. Employees who identify strongly with their organization are likely to adopt its values and goals as their own, creating a psychological bond that fosters a sense of duty towards the organization [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e]. This reciprocal relationship can enhance employees' felt obligation to contribute to the organization\u0026rsquo;s success. We propose that organizational identification is positively associated with felt obligation. When employees see themselves as integral to the organization, they are likely to feel a sense of responsibility toward its success, driven by their identification with its values and goals.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eHypothesis 2\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eorganizational identification is positively related to felt obligation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eMediating Role of Organizational Identification\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe current study not only explores the direct effects but also investigates how organizational identification acts as an intermediary process through which leaders' authenticity influences employees\u0026rsquo; felt obligation. We expect a chain effect wherein authentic leadership enhances employees\u0026rsquo; organizational identification, subsequently leading to provide more obligated employees. This relationship can be elucidated through the lenses of social identity theory [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e50\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e According to Social Identity Theory, we argue that authentic leaders foster an environment that resonates with employees' values and ethical standards, thereby promoting a transparent and ethical organizational culture [6]. This environment encourages employees to identify more deeply with the organization [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e]. When employees perceive the organization as a reflection of their own values and beliefs, their identification with it grows stronger [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e39\u003c/span\u003e]. Employees who strongly identify with the organization are typically more committed and loyal [59]. This strong identification leads to a heightened sense of duty towards the organization, thereby increasing their felt obligation to support its goals and values [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e31\u003c/span\u003e]. In essence, organizational identification serves as a bridge, translating the ethical and transparent behaviors of authentic leaders into a deeper sense of obligation towards the organization.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eHypothesis 3\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizational identification mediates the relationship between authentic leadership and employees' felt obligation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eModerating Role of Personal Job Fit\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe argue that organizational identification, defined as the degree to which employees align with their organization's values and goals [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e], often leads to increased commitment and a sense of obligation towards the organization [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e40\u003c/span\u003e]. This sense of duty reflects employees' desire to reciprocate the support and opportunities provided by the organization by contributing positively to its goals [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e]. However, the extent to which organizational identification results in these positive outcomes may be influenced by employees' personal job fit.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePersonal job fit refers to the alignment between an employee\u0026rsquo;s skills, abilities, and the demands of their job [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e]. This concept posits that a high level of job fit can lead to increased job satisfaction, commitment, and engagement [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e]. Additionally, person-job fit is closely linked to the experience of meaningful work, as employees whose skills and interests align with their job tasks are more likely to find their work fulfilling [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e]. When employees perceive their job and organizational environment as well-suited to their skills and values, they are more likely to feel a moral responsibility to contribute positively to the organization [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e]. This sense of obligation can manifest in various ways, such as increased effort, loyalty, and a willingness to go above and beyond in their roles [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAccording to Social Identity Theory, employees who experience a high level of job fit are likely to feel a stronger psychological connection to their job and the organization [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e]. This connection enhances their organizational identification, ensuring that their personal goals, values, and skills are well-aligned with their job roles and the organization's objectives [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e]. This alignment amplifies the positive effects of organizational identification on felt obligation, as employees view their contributions as both personally fulfilling and essential to the organization\u0026rsquo;s success. Furthermore, a high job fit reduces role conflict and ambiguity, providing employees with a clear understanding of their responsibilities and expectations [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e]. This clarity enables employees to focus on fulfilling their obligations to the organization, thereby strengthening the relationship between organizational identification and felt obligation. Employees who strongly identify with their organization and experience high job fit are likely to exhibit increased organizational commitment. This commitment further enhances the sense of duty and obligation to support the organization\u0026rsquo;s goals and reciprocate the organization\u0026rsquo;s support [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e]. Based on these arguments, we propose the following hypotheses:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eHypothesis 4\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003epersonal job fit positively moderates the relationship between organizational identification and felt obligation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn addition to the moderating effect of job fit, we consider a moderated moderation effect where the relationship between organizational identification and felt obligation is further influenced by job fit, contingent on authentic leadership. Authentic leadership, which emphasizes transparency, ethical behavior, and genuine relationships, can enhance the process through which employees align themselves with organizational values, thereby strengthening their identification with the organization [57]. However, the impact of authentic leadership on organizational identification and, subsequently on felt obligation may vary based on employees' perceptions of job fit. When job fit is high, authentic leadership is likely to amplify the positive effects of organizational identification on felt obligation, as employees who perceive their roles as well-suited to their skills and values are more likely to internalize organizational goals and feel a moral responsibility to contribute. On the other hand, when job fit is low, the positive effects of authentic leadership on organizational identification may be diminished, as employees may feel misaligned or undervalued in their roles, reducing their sense of duty towards the organization. Thus, we propose that authentic leadership interacts with job fit to moderate the relationship between organizational identification and felt obligation, influencing how effectively employees' identification with the organization translates into a sense of duty.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eHypothesis 5\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003ePersonal job fit positively moderates the indirect effects of authentic leadership on felt obligation through organizational identification.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Method","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eParticipants and Procedures\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study employed a two-phase online survey conducted via a questionnaire. Participants were recruited through the Prolific online platform, which facilitates connections between researchers and individuals willing to engage in virtual tasks, such as surveys [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e34\u003c/span\u003e]. By leveraging Prolific's panel, researchers were able to specifically choose participants based on predefined demographic criteria from a large and diverse pool. This ensured that only eligible individuals meeting the specified criteria could participate, thereby improving the quality of participant selection and streamlining the data collection process [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e]. Additionally, research suggests that data collected through the online Prolific platform tends to be of higher quality compared to other platforms such as Mturk [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn the initial survey, a total of 300 participants from diverse backgrounds across the United States responded to the questionnaire via the link provided by the Prolific online platform. This survey focused on gathering demographic information along with assessing authentic leadership (the independent variable) and felt obligation (the dependent variable). However, 24 participants were disqualified either due to not meeting the minimum tenure criteria with the same supervisor in the last six months or failing to correctly answer the attention checks.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAfter 14 days, the second survey was conducted, with 276 participants who had successfully completed the first survey. This time, the survey aimed to investigate organizational identification (as a mediator) and job fit (as a moderator). The second survey garnered 231 responses, resulting in an 83.6% response rate.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAmong the qualified participants, 108 identified as male (46.8%), 116 as female, and 3% identified as third-gender or non-binary. In terms of racial demographics, 71% of participants identified as white, 11% as Asian, 9% as black or African American, and less than 10% as Latin or other races. Additionally, over 60% of participants held a bachelor's degree or higher, with a mean organization tenure of 2.82 years (SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.11) and a mean tenure with the supervisor of 2.32 years (SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.7).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eMeasures\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo measure the variables relevant to our study, we utilized a 7-point Likert scale. This scale allowed participants to indicate their attitudes towards the variables, ranging from \"strongly disagree\" (rated as 1) to \"strongly agree\" (rated as 7).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eAuthentic Leadership (T1)\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo assess authentic leadership, we utilized a 14-item scale developed by Neider and Schriesheim [63], which has been extensively used in prior research. Sample items from the scale include statements like \"My supervisor clearly communicates intentions\" and \"My supervisor demonstrates consistency between beliefs and actions\" (α\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.93).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eFelt Obligation (T1)\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo assess felt obligation, we employed the 6-item scale developed by Eisenberger et al. [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e]. Example items include \" I feel a personal obligation to do whatever I can to help the organization achieve its goals \" and \" I have an obligation to the organization to ensure that I produce high-quality work.\" In our study, the internal consistency of this scale was determined to be (α\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.87).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eOrganization Identification (T2)\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo assess organization identification, we employed the 5-item scale developed by Smidts et al. [64]. Example items include \" I feel strong ties with my organization \" and \" I experience a strong sense of belonging to my organization.\" The internal consistency of this scale was determined to be (α\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.95).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eJob Fit (T2)\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo evaluate job fit, we utilized the 4-item scale developed by Saks and Ashforth [65]. Example items include \" To what extent do your knowledge, skills, and abilities match the requirements of your job?\" and \" To what extent does the job fulfill your needs.\" In our study, the internal consistency of this scale was deemed satisfactory (α\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.89).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eControl Variables\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo address potential biases in our results, we accounted for various demographic factors, including age, sex, race, employees' education level, tenure with the supervisor, organizational tenure, and working hours. Age was measured in years, sex as a binary variable (1 for females, 2 for males), employee tenure in years, and education level ranging from no schooling to doctorate level.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e presents the means, standard deviations, reliabilities, and correlations among the primary variables.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"colspec\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"colspec\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"colspec\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003ctable id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMeans, Standard Deviations, and Correlations Note. \u003cem\u003eN\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;231\u003c/em\u003e. Reliabilities are on the diagonal in parentheses. \u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.05, \u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.01, \u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVariables\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eM\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSD\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth colspan=\"3\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth colspan=\"3\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1. Gender\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.56\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.55\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2. Age\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e36.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10.75\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.13\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3. Race\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.65\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.01\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4. Education Level\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.73\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.98\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.01\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.04\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5. Tenure in Organization\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.82\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.38\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.01\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6. Working Hours\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.13\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.69\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.19\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.04\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.07\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.33\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7. Tenure with Supervisor\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.32\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.02\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.05\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.35\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.05\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.09\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.71\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.24\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8. Authentic Leadership\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.28\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.99\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.04\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.06\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.07\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.06\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(.93)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9. Organization Identification\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.72\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.49\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.23\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.09\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.04\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.18\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.03\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.25\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.49\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(.95)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10. Felt Obligation\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.54\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.34\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.29\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.07\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.03\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.17\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.07\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.21\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.43\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.71\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(.87)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11. Job Fit\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.98\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.30\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.22\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.03\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.20\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.01\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.26\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.44\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.69\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.58\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(.89)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBefore hypotheses were tested, a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed to validate the proposed model and ensure that the key variables were distinct from each other. The findings indicated that the proposed model had an acceptable fit, as indicated by the incremental fit index (IFI) and comparative fit index (CFI), all surpassing the recommended threshold of .90 and acceptable RMSEA [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e]. Additionally, the average variance extracted (AVE) values were higher than .5 [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e], and the composite reliability (CR) values were above .7 [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e], suggesting satisfactory convergent validity. We also utilized the method proposed by Fornell and Larcker [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e] to assess discriminant validity, which revealed that the calculated average variance extracted (AVE) of each construct exceeded the shared variance with all other constructs, therefore supporting the discriminant validity of the measures [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e55\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHypothesis 1\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003esuggested a positive link between authentic leadership and organization identification. Analysis in Model 2 of Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e supported this hypothesis, revealing a significant positive relationship between authentic leadership and organization identification (\u0026beta;\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.46, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001). Hypothesis \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e proposed a positive relationship between organization identification and employees\u0026apos; felt obligation. Model 5 (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e) confirmed Hypothesis \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e, by showing a significant positive relationship between these variables (\u0026beta;\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.69, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"colspec\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"colspec\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003ctable id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eResults of Mediation and Moderation Effect\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth colspan=\"4\" rowspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth colspan=\"3\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOrganization Identification\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth colspan=\"6\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFelt Obligation\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cspan class=\"Underline\"\u003eModel 1\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cspan class=\"Underline\"\u003eModel 2\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cspan class=\"Underline\"\u003eModel 3\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cspan class=\"Underline\"\u003eModel 4\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cspan class=\"Underline\"\u003eModel 5\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cspan class=\"Underline\"\u003eModel 6\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cspan class=\"Underline\"\u003eModel 7\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cspan class=\"Underline\"\u003e1. Control variables\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"11\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.06\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.04\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.01\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.01\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.01\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAge\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.15\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.25\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.23\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.15\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.15\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.13\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRace\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.06\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.03\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.06\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.01\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.02\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEducation Level\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.02\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.02\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.02\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.01\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.01\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.02\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTenure in Organization\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.03\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.06\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.06\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.04\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.05\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.03\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWorking Hours\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.04\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.01\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.03\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.07\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.06\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.07\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.06\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTenure with Supervisor\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.21\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.18\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.15\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.01\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.01\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.03\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cspan class=\"Underline\"\u003e2. Main effect\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAuthentic Leadership\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.46\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.40\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.11\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cspan class=\"Underline\"\u003e3. Mediation effect\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOrganization Identification\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.69\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.63\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.62\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cspan class=\"Underline\"\u003e4. Moderator\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eJob Fit\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.16\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cspan class=\"Underline\"\u003e5. Interaction Effect\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOrganization Identification \u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:\\times\\:\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e Job Fit\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.12\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOverall F\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.52\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.31\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.91\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10.06\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e31.84\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e29.19\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e28.07\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eR\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.30\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.26\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.53\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.54\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.56\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eChanged in F\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e66.57\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e47.33\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e202.51\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e134.09\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.89\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eChanged in R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.15\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.42\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.27\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.01\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEffect\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBoot SE\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLL 95% CI\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUL 95% CI\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIndirect effect (Bootstrapping)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.39\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.06\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.27\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.53\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"14\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote. N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;231\u003c/em\u003e. Standardized coefficients are presented. \u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.05, \u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.01, \u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001. Bootstrap sample size\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;20,000. \u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003eLLCI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;lower limit confidence interval; \u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003eULCI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;upper limit confidence interval.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHypothesis 3\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eposited that organization identification mediates the relationship between authentic leadership and employees\u0026apos; felt obligation. Models 2, 5, and 6 (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e) demonstrated that authentic leadership positively influenced organization identification (\u0026beta;\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.46, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001), and organization identification in turn positively impacted employees\u0026apos; felt obligation (\u0026beta;\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.63, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001), even after controlling for the direct effect of authentic leadership [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e]. The mediation effect was verified using 20,000 bootstrap samples with a 95% confidence interval (CI). The CI, ranging from .27 to .53 and excluding zero [43], confirmed the statistical significance of the indirect effect, supporting Hypothesis \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHypothesis 4\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003esuggested that employees\u0026apos; personal job fit moderates the relationship between organization identification and felt obligation. In Model 7 (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e), a statistically significant coefficient for the interaction term (\u0026beta;\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.12, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.01) provided support for Hypothesis \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs presented in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e, the results concerning the conditional effects of organization identification on employees\u0026apos; felt obligation across different levels of job fit exhibited statistical significance across all regions, spanning from M \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1 SD (-1.29) to M (.00) to M\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;1 SD (1.29). With the evident significant moderating impact of personal job fit, we conducted further analysis by segmenting the moderating variable into low, moderate, and high subgroups. As depicted in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e, the positive association between organization identification and felt obligation is more pronounced under conditions of higher personal job fit compared to lower levels. These findings offer support for Hypothesis \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"colspec\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003ctable id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eConditional Effect of Organization Identification on Felt Obligation at Values of Job Fit\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eModerator\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEffect\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ese\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003et\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLLCI\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eULCI\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"3\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eJob Fit\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-1.29 (M-1SD)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.42\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.06\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.55\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.29\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.54\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.00(M)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.52\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.05\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.78\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.40\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.64\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.29 (M\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;1SD)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.63\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.07\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.24\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.47\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.78\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"7\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote. N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;231\u003c/em\u003e. Bootstrap sample size\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;20,000. \u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003eLLCI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;lower limit confidence interval; \u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003eULCI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;upper limit confidence interval.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHypothesis 5\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003esuggests that job fit moderates the indirect effect of authentic leadership on felt obligation via organization identification. To examine the moderated mediation effect, we used the SPSS Process Macro Model 14 [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e38\u003c/span\u003e]. As shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e, the conditional indirect effect of authentic leadership was statistically significant across all levels, ranging from M \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1 SD (-1.29) to M (.00) to M\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;1 SD (1.29). Moreover, the moderated mediation index for authoritarian leadership was .05, with a 95% confidence interval (CI) ranging from .01 to .10. Notably, the confidence interval does not encompass zero, confirming the validation of the moderated mediation effect. Hence, Hypothesis \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e is supported.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"colspec\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003ctable id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eConditional Indirect Effects of Authentic Leadership on Felt Obligation via Organization Identification\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth colspan=\"3\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eConditional Indirect Effect\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(AL \u0026rarr; Org_Id \u0026rarr; Felt_O)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth colspan=\"2\" rowspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEffect\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth colspan=\"2\" rowspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBoot \u003cem\u003ese\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth colspan=\"2\" rowspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBoot LLCI\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth rowspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBoot ULCI\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eModerator\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth rowspan=\"3\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eJob Fit\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-1.29 (M-1SD)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.29\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.07\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.16\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.46\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.00(M)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.36\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.07\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.23\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.52\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.29 (M\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;1SD)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.44\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.28\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.61\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eModerated Mediation Index\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBoot \u003cem\u003ese\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBoot LLCI\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBoot ULCI\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAuthoritarian leadership\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.05\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.02\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.01\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"10\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote. N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;231\u003c/em\u003e. Bootstrap sample size\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;20,000. AL\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Authentic Leadership, Org_Id\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Organizational Identification, Felt_O\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Felt Obligation. \u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003eLLCI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;lower limit confidence interval; \u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003eULCI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;upper limit confidence interval.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study has confirmed a positive relationship between authentic leadership and organizational identification. It has also supported the notion that organizational identification is positively linked with felt obligation. Specifically, employees who strongly identify with their organization are more likely to feel a moral obligation to reciprocate the organization's support. Our findings suggest that organizational identification mediates the relationship between authentic leadership and felt obligation, indicating that the positive impact of authentic leadership on employees' sense of obligation is significantly influenced by their identification with the organization. Additionally, the study highlights the role of job fit in this relationship. It reveals that the positive relationship between organizational identification and felt obligation is more pronounced when employees perceive a strong fit between their job characteristics and their personal attributes. Finally, the significant moderated mediation in our model provides further evidence that the relationship between authentic leadership and felt obligation through organizational identification depends on the level of job fit.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eTheoretical and Practical Implications\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study offers significant contributions to our understanding of the relationships between authentic leadership, organizational identification, felt obligation, and job fit, aligning closely with established theories in organizational behavior and psychology. The findings underscore the critical role of social identity in organizational settings, affirming that authentic leadership behaviors enhance organizational identification by fostering a sense of belonging among employees [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e51\u003c/span\u003e]. This alignment suggests that employees who perceive their leaders as authentic are more likely to identify with the organization, which in turn enhances their commitment and loyalty [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e]. The role of organizational identification as a mediator between authentic leadership and felt obligation highlights how identity alignment can influence employee behaviors and attitudes. This finding supports existing research that indicates a strong sense of organizational identification leads to increased employee engagement and a greater sense of obligation to reciprocate the organization's support [30, 27].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMoreover, the moderating effect of job fit on the relationship between organizational identification and felt obligation extends our understanding of how contextual factors can impact the effectiveness of leadership behaviors. This supports role congruence theory, which suggests that alignment between personal characteristics and job demands enhances job satisfaction and performance [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e]. It indicates that the effectiveness of authentic leadership in fostering organizational identification and felt obligation is contingent upon the degree to which employees perceive their jobs as fitting their skills and values [58]. By integrating Social Identity Theory and concepts of authentic leadership, this study provides a comprehensive framework for understanding the complex interactions between leadership behaviors, employee identity, and organizational outcomes. This integration helps in conceptualizing how leadership practices can be designed to align not only with organizational goals but also with employees' personal values and identities [6].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe insights derived from this study also provide valuable guidance for organizations seeking to boost employee engagement and commitment through strategic leadership development and thoughtful role design. Developing authentic leadership within an organization is essential. Leaders who exhibit transparency, ethical behavior, and consistency can significantly foster a strong sense of organizational identification among their employees. This alignment not only builds trust and loyalty but also enhances employee engagement and retention, as employees who feel a connection to their leaders are more likely to be committed to the organization. In addition to leadership qualities, the design of job roles should be aligned with employees' skills, interests, and values. Ensuring that employees' roles are a good fit for their personal attributes can increase job satisfaction, reduce turnover, and enhance organizational commitment. This might involve regular assessments of job roles to make adjustments based on employee feedback and performance metrics, ensuring that employees feel fulfilled in their positions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTraining and development programs should focus on nurturing authentic leadership qualities. These programs can include modules on ethical decision-making, emotional intelligence, and effective communication. Such training helps leaders connect more effectively with their teams, foster a positive organizational culture, and encourage behaviors that align with the organization's values. Organizations should also implement regular feedback mechanisms to assess how well job roles align with employees' skills and values. This feedback is crucial for making informed decisions about role adjustments and development opportunities, ensuring that employees remain satisfied and motivated in their roles. Investing in leadership development programs that emphasize authenticity in leadership can prepare future leaders to cultivate strong organizational identification among their employees. This investment not only supports individual employee satisfaction but also contributes to overall organizational effectiveness.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eLimitations and Future Directions\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eEvery research study has its limitations, and this one is no exception. While the study provides valuable insights, several limitations must be acknowledged that could affect the interpretation and generalizability of the findings.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFirst, the cross-sectional design limits our ability to establish causal relationships among the key variables [41]. A longitudinal approach could provide more robust evidence regarding the dynamic effects and temporal sequences of these relationships over time [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e]. Second, to address common method bias (CMB), we took steps such as ensuring confidentiality, conducting attention checks, and collecting data in two phases [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e37\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e46\u003c/span\u003e]. Despite these precautions, caution is advised when interpreting the findings. Utilizing mixed methods approaches, such as integrating data from supervisors, peers, or objective performance metrics, could enhance the robustness of the findings and provide a more comprehensive view of the constructs under study. Third, data were collected via the Prolific platform, which may not fully represent the broader population, potentially limiting the generalizability of the results across different cultural or socio-economic contexts [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e]. Expanding the demographic diversity of participants and exploring a variety of organizational settings will also be crucial for enhancing the external validity of the results. Additionally, investigating other potential moderators and mediators, such as organizational culture, job characteristics, and external environmental factors, could provide deeper insights into the complex interplay of factors that influence organizational behavior.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDisclosure Statement\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThere are no conflicts of interest in the conduct and reporting of this research, neither financial nor non-financial.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eData Availability Statement\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eEthics Approval\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the University of Idaho, following the relevant ethical guidelines and regulations (Protocol #026564).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eConsent to Participate/Publish\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eInformed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eS.E. was responsible for developing the research hypotheses, including the conceptual framework, and identifying relevant variables. S.E. also contributed to the literature review, methodology sections, and data analysis.T.B. handled the data analysis and interpretation, ensuring that the statistical methods used were appropriate for testing the hypotheses. T.B. also collaborated in drafting the results section.R.D. contributed to drafting the discussion and conclusion sections, focusing on interpreting the findings in the context of existing literature and outlining implications for future research.M.K. prepared figures 1-3 and assisted with formatting the manuscript. M.K. also participated in revising the manuscript for clarity and structure.All authors reviewed and approved the final manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eArias Rodriguez, I., Muniz Jr, J., \u0026amp; Munyon, T. P. (2024). Authentic leadership and motivation as moderators of the organizational politics\u0026ndash;knowledge sharing relationship: A test amidst crisis. BRQ Business Research Quarterly, \u003cem\u003e27\u003c/em\u003e(1), 91\u0026ndash;102.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAselage, J., \u0026amp; Eisenberger, R. (2003). Perceived organizational support and psychological contracts: A theoretical integration. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, \u003cem\u003e24\u003c/em\u003e(5), 491\u0026ndash;509. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/job.211\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/job.211\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAshforth, B. E., Harrison, S. H., \u0026amp; Corley, K. G. (2008). Identification in organizations: An examination of four fundamental questions. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e34\u003c/em\u003e(3), 325\u0026ndash;374. Ashforth, B. E., \u0026amp; Mael, F. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization. \u003cem\u003eThe Academy of Management Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e14\u003c/em\u003e(1) 20\u0026ndash;39.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAvolio, B. J., \u0026amp; Gardner, W. L. (2005). Authentic leadership development: Getting to the root of positive forms of leadership. \u003cem\u003eThe Leadership Quarterly\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e16\u003c/em\u003e(3), 315\u0026ndash;338. Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Walumbwa, F. O., Luthans, F., \u0026amp; May, D. R. (2004). Unlocking the mask: A look at the process by which authentic leaders\u0026rsquo; impact follower attitudes and behaviors. \u003cem\u003eLeadership Quarterly, 15: 801\u0026ndash;823.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBaron, R. M., \u0026amp; Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator\u0026ndash;mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, \u003cem\u003e51\u003c/em\u003e(6), 1173.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBarrett, P. (2007). Structural equation modelling: Adjudging model fit. Personality and Individual Differences, \u003cem\u003e42\u003c/em\u003e(5), 815\u0026ndash;824.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCable, D. M., \u0026amp; DeRue, D. S. (2002). The convergent and discriminant validity of subjective fit perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, \u003cem\u003e87\u003c/em\u003e(5), 875.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDemir, K. (2015). The effect of organizational justice and perceived organizational support on organizational citizenship behaviors: The mediating role of organizational identification. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 60, 131\u0026ndash;148. Doi: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.14689/ejer.2015.60.8\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.14689/ejer.2015.60.8\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDouglas, B. D., Ewell, P. J., \u0026amp; Brauer, M. (2023). Data quality in online human-subjects research: Comparisons between MTurk, Prolific, CloudResearch, Qualtrics, and SONA. Plos one, \u003cem\u003e18\u003c/em\u003e(3), e0279720.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEdwards, J. R. (1991). Person-job fit: A conceptual integration, literature review, and methodological critique. \u003cem\u003eJohn Wiley \u0026amp; Sons\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEd\u0026uacute; Valsania, S., Moriano, J. A., \u0026amp; Molero, F. (2016). Authentic leadership and intrapreneurial behavior: cross-level analysis of the mediator effect of organizational identification and empowerment. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e(1), 131\u0026ndash;152.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEisenberger, R., Armeli, S., Rexwinkel, B., Lynch, P. D., \u0026amp; Rhoades, L. (2001). Reciprocation of perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, \u003cem\u003e86\u003c/em\u003e, 42\u0026ndash;51. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.1.42\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/0021-9010.86.1.42\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEisenberger, R., Wen, X., Zheng, D., Yu, J., Liu, Z., Zhang, J., \u0026hellip; Kim, T. H. (2023).Does Felt Obligation or Gratitude Better Explain the Relationship Between Perceived Organizational Support and Outcomes?. \u003cem\u003eGroup \u0026amp; Organization Management\u003c/em\u003e, 10596011231180388.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFornell, C., \u0026amp; Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, \u003cem\u003e18\u003c/em\u003e(1), 39\u0026ndash;50.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGardner, W. L., Avolio, B. J., Luthans, F., May, D. R., \u0026amp; Walumba, F. O. (2005). Can you see the real me? A self-based model of authentic leader and follower development. \u003cem\u003eThe Leadership Quarterly\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGardner, W. L., Karam, E. P., Alvesson, M., \u0026amp; Einola, K. (2021). Authentic leadership theory: The case for and against. The Leadership Quarterly, \u003cem\u003e32\u003c/em\u003e(6), 101495.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGeorge, W. (2003). Authentic leadership: Rediscovering the secrets to creating lasting value. \u003cem\u003eSan Francisco7 Jossey-Bass.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHair, JF., Tatham, RL., Anderson, RE., \u0026amp; Black, W. (1998). Multivariate data analysis. (Fifth Ed.) \u003cem\u003ePrentice-Hall: London.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eIlies, R., Morgeson, F. P., \u0026amp; Nahrgang, J. D. (2005). Authentic leadership and eudaemonic wellbeing: Understanding leader-follower outcomes. Leadership Quarterly, \u003cem\u003e16\u003c/em\u003e(3), 373\u0026ndash;394. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.03.002\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.03.002\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKazmi, S. W., \u0026amp; Javaid, S. T. (2022). Antecedents of organizational identification: implications for employee performance. RAUSP Management Journal, \u003cem\u003e57\u003c/em\u003e, 111\u0026ndash;130.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKim, B. J., Nurunnabi, M., Kim, T. H., \u0026amp; Kim, T. (2018). Doing good is not enough, you should have been authentic: organizational identification, authentic leadership and CSR. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e10\u003c/em\u003e(6), 2026.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKristof-Brown, A. L., Zimmerman, R. D., and Johnson, E. C. (2005). Consequences of individuals\u0026rsquo; fit at work: a meta-analysis of person-job, person-organization, person group, and person-supervisor fit. Pers. Psychol. 58, 281\u0026ndash;342. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.00672.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.00672.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLi, J., Yang, H., Weng, Q., \u0026amp; Zhu, L. (2023). How different forms of job crafting relate to job satisfaction: The role of person-job fit and age. Current Psychology, \u003cem\u003e42\u003c/em\u003e(13), 11155\u0026ndash;11169.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLitman, L., Rosen, Z., Hartman, R., Rosenzweig, C., Weinberger-Litman, S. L., Moss, A. J., \u0026amp; Robinson, J. (2023). Did people really drink bleach to prevent COVID-19? A guide for protecting survey data against problematic respondents. Plos one, \u003cem\u003e18\u003c/em\u003e(7), e0287837.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLu, G., Liang, Y., Ding, Y., Tang, H., Zhang, Y., Huang, H., \u0026amp; Chen, C. (2022). Nurses\u0026rsquo; feeling trusted and knowledge hiding: The role of psychological safety, felt obligation and traditionality. Frontiers in Psychology, \u003cem\u003e13\u003c/em\u003e, 1034882.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLuthans, F., \u0026amp; Avolio, B. J. (2009). The \u0026ldquo;point\u0026rdquo; of positive organizational behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, \u003cem\u003e30\u003c/em\u003e(2), 291\u0026ndash;307.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMerdiaty, N. (2024). Person-job fit on work engagement with meaningful work as mediator. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147\u0026ndash;4478)\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e13\u003c/em\u003e(1), 134\u0026ndash;145.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMiao, Q., Eva, N., Newman, A., \u0026amp; Schwarz, G. (2019). Public service motivation and performance: The role of organizational identification. Public Money \u0026amp; Management, \u003cem\u003e39\u003c/em\u003e(2), 77\u0026ndash;85.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNeill, M. S., Men, L. R., \u0026amp; Yue, C. A. (2020). How communication climate and organizational identification impact change. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, \u003cem\u003e25\u003c/em\u003e(2), 281\u0026ndash;298.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOelberger, C., Eaton, A., \u0026amp; Choi, J. H. (2023). One Size Fits All? Exploring Motivation for Public Employees With a Job Fit Framework and Response Surface Analysis. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 0734371X231218898.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePaill\u0026eacute;, P., \u0026amp; Val\u0026eacute;au, P. (2021). \u0026ldquo;I don\u0026rsquo;t owe you, but I am committed\u0026rdquo;: Does felt obligation matter on the effect of green training on employee environmental commitment?. Organization \u0026amp; Environment, \u003cem\u003e34\u003c/em\u003e(1), 123\u0026ndash;144.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePalan, S., \u0026amp; Schitter, C. (2018). Prolific. ac\u0026mdash;A subject pool for online experiments. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, \u003cem\u003e17\u003c/em\u003e, 22\u0026ndash;27.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eParke, H. W., \u0026amp; Wormell, D. E. W. (1956). The Delphic Oracle: \u003cem\u003eVolume I, The History\u003c/em\u003e. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePloyhart, R. E., \u0026amp; Vandenberg, R. J. (2010). Longitudinal research: The theory, design, and analysis of change. Journal of Management, \u003cem\u003e36\u003c/em\u003e(1), 94\u0026ndash;120.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePodsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., \u0026amp; Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, \u003cem\u003e88\u003c/em\u003e(5), 879.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePreacher, K. J., Rucker, D. D., \u0026amp; Hayes, A. F. (2007). Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate Behavioral Research, \u003cem\u003e42\u003c/em\u003e(1), 185\u0026ndash;227.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRhoades, L., \u0026amp; Eisenberger, R. (2002). Perceived organizational support: A review of the literature. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Applied Psychology, 87\u003c/em\u003e(4), 698\u0026ndash;714. Riketta, M., \u0026amp; Van Dick, R. (2005). Foci of attachment in organizations: A meta-analytic comparison of the strength and correlates of workgroup versus organizational identification and commitment. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Vocational Behavior, 67, 490\u0026ndash;510.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRindfleisch, A., Malter, A. J., Ganesan, S., \u0026amp; Moorman, C. (2008). Cross-sectional versus longitudinal survey research: Concepts, findings, and guidelines. Journal of Marketing Research, \u003cem\u003e45\u003c/em\u003e(3), 261\u0026ndash;279.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRoch, S. G., Shannon, C. E., Martin, J. J., Swiderski, D., Agosta, J. P., \u0026amp; Shanock, L. R. (2019). Role of employee felt obligation and endorsement of the just world hypothesis: A social exchange theory investigation in an organizational justice context. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, \u003cem\u003e49\u003c/em\u003e(4), 213\u0026ndash;225.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShrout, P. E., \u0026amp; Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: new procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, \u003cem\u003e7\u003c/em\u003e(4), 422.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSimon, H. A. (1947). Administrative behavior: A study of decision-making processes in administrative organization. \u003cem\u003eNew York: Macmillan\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSluss, D.M., Klimchak, M., \u0026amp; Holmes, J.J. (2008). Perceived organizational support as a mediator between relational exchange and organizational identification. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Vocational Behavior, 73, 457\u0026ndash;464.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSpector, P. E. (2006). Method variance in organizational research: truth or urban legend?. \u003cem\u003eOrganizational Research Methods, 9(2), 221\u0026ndash;232.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSpitzmuller, M., \u0026amp; Ilies, R. (2010). Do they [all] see my true self? Leader's relational authenticity and followers' assessments of transformational leadership. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, \u003cem\u003e19\u003c/em\u003e(3), 304\u0026ndash;332.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTajfel, H. (1972). Social categorization. In Moscovoci, S. (Ed.). \u003cem\u003eIntroduction a la Psychologie, Volume 1 (pp. 272e302). Paris: Larousse.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTajfael, H. (1978). Differentiation between social groups. \u003cem\u003eLondon: Academic Press\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTajfel, H., \u0026amp; Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In Austin W.\u0026amp; Worchel S. (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eThe Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations (pp. 33\u0026ndash;47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTajfel, H., \u0026amp; Turner, J.C. (1986) The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behavior. In: Worchel, S. and Austin, W.G., Eds., \u003cem\u003ePsychology of Intergroup Relation, Hall Publishers, Chicago, 7\u0026ndash;24.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTeresi, M., Pietroni, D. D., Barattucci, M., Giannella, V. A., \u0026amp; Pagliaro, S. (2019). Ethical climate (s), organizational identification, and employees\u0026rsquo; behavior. Frontiers in Psychology, \u003cem\u003e10\u003c/em\u003e, 466115.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUluturk, B., Yilmaz Altuntas, E., \u0026amp; H\u0026uuml;rmeri\u0026ccedil;, P. (2024). Authentic Leadership, Motivating Language, Psychological Empowerment, and Work Engagement: A Serial Mediation Model. International Journal of Business Communication, 23294884231223521.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVan Dyne, L., Graham, J. W., \u0026amp; Dienesch, R. M. (1994). Organizational citizenship behavior: Construct redefinition, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, \u003cem\u003e37\u003c/em\u003e(4), 765\u0026ndash;802.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVoorhees, C. M., Brady, M. K., Calantone, R., \u0026amp; Ramirez, E. (2016). Discriminant validity testing in marketing: an analysis, causes for concern, and proposed remedies. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, \u003cem\u003e44\u003c/em\u003e, 119\u0026ndash;134.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYu, C., \u0026amp; Frenkel, S. J. (2013). Explaining task performance and creativity from perceived organizational support theory: Which mechanisms are more important? Journal of Organizational Behavior, \u003cem\u003e34\u003c/em\u003e(8), 1165\u0026ndash;1181.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWalumbwa, F. O., Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Wernsing, T. S., \u0026amp; Peterson, S. J. (2008). Authentic leadership: Development and validation of a theory-based measure. Journal of Management, \u003cem\u003e34\u003c/em\u003e(1), 89\u0026ndash;126. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/0149206307308913\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/0149206307308913\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhang, Z., \u0026amp; Yan, Z. (2024). The impact of core self-evaluations and person-job fit on work-related outcomes. Frontiers in Psychology, \u003cem\u003e15\u003c/em\u003e, 1341717.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhou, Y., Cheng, Y., Liu, G., Zhang, Z., \u0026amp; Zhu, H. (2024). How does empowering leadership promote employee creativity? The sequential mediating mechanism of felt obligation for constructive change and job crafting. Journal of Vocational Behavior, \u003cem\u003e148\u003c/em\u003e, 103955.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMaslow, A. (1968). Some educational implications of the humanistic psychologies. Harvard educational Review, \u003cem\u003e38\u003c/em\u003e(4), 685\u0026ndash;696.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRogers, C. R. (1962). Toward becoming a fully functioning person. \u003cem\u003ePerceiving, behaving, becoming: A new focus for education\u003c/em\u003e, 21\u0026ndash;33.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHarter, S. (2002). Authenticity. \u003cem\u003eHandbook of Positive Psychology/Oxford University Press\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNeider, L. L., \u0026amp; Schriesheim, C. A. (2011). The authentic leadership inventory (ALI): Development and empirical tests. The Leadership Quarterly, \u003cem\u003e22\u003c/em\u003e(6), 1146\u0026ndash;1164.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSmidts, A., Pruyn, A. T. H., \u0026amp; Van Riel, C. B. (2001). The impact of employee communication and perceived external prestige on organizational identification. Academy of Management Journal, \u003cem\u003e44\u003c/em\u003e(5), 1051\u0026ndash;1062.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSaks, A. M., \u0026amp; Ashforth, B. E. (2002). Is job search related to employment quality? It all depends on the fit. Journal of Applied Psychology, \u003cem\u003e87\u003c/em\u003e(4), 646\u0026ndash;654.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"discover-psychology","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"discpsy","sideBox":"Learn more about [Discover Psychology](https://www.springer.com/44202)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"Discover Psychology","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Discover Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Authentic leadership, Organizational identification, Felt obligation, Job fit, Social Identity Theory","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-5118661/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-5118661/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eIn contemporary organizational settings, leadership significantly shapes organizational dynamics and influences employee attitudes and behaviors. Despite extensive research on leadership styles, there remains a gap in understanding the impact of authentic leadership on key employee outcomes, such as organizational identification and felt obligation. Drawing on Social Identity Theory (SIT), this paper examines how authentic leadership fosters organizational identification and influences felt obligation among employees. We propose a framework that considers the role of job fit as a moderating factor in these relationships. By exploring the mechanisms through which authentic leadership enhances employee identification and obligation, this study bridges the gap between leadership theory and practical applications in organizational behavior. The findings offer valuable insights for organizational leaders and human resource practitioners on promoting authentic leadership and ensuring proper job fit to enhance overall organizational effectiveness.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Authentic Leadership's Impact on Employees Felt Obligation: Moderated Mediation Model","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2024-12-04 18:15:27","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-5118661/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2024-11-21T08:45:43+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2024-11-18T13:59:45+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"153755445385798070896489336722637466968","date":"2024-11-13T13:05:56+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2024-11-07T08:40:13+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"46591918903447460245864857725570437398","date":"2024-10-21T02:59:57+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2024-10-08T15:01:14+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2024-09-30T07:09:24+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2024-09-27T12:01:47+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Discover Psychology","date":"2024-09-19T17:06:18+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"discover-psychology","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"discpsy","sideBox":"Learn more about [Discover Psychology](https://www.springer.com/44202)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"Discover Psychology","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Discover Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"15c6ae8d-8b7b-4891-b90b-06540c945cc3","owner":[],"postedDate":"December 4th, 2024","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"under-review","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-05-12T11:53:45+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2024-12-04 18:15:27","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-5118661","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-5118661","identity":"rs-5118661","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"qtupq5eGEP_6zYnWcrvyt","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}