The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
TAKING EMPOWERMENT TO THE NEXT LEVEL: A MULTIPLE-LEVEL MODEL OF EMPOWERMENT, PERFORMANCE, AND SATISFACTION.
Abstract
Most research to date has approached employee empowerment as an individual-level phenomenon. In this study we proposed a work-unit-level construct, empowerment climate, and tested a multiple-level model integrating macro and micro approaches to empowerment. Empowerment climate was shown to be empirically distinct from psychological empowerment and positively related to manager ratings of work-unit performance. A cross-level mediation analysis using hierarchical linear modeling showed that psychological empowerment mediated the relationships between empowerment climate and individual performance and job satisfaction. Employee empowerment has become a trend over the last decade, approaching the status of a movement or of a fad, depending on one’s perspective (Abrahamson, 1996; Block, 1987). At its core the concept of empowerment involves increased individual motivation at work through the delegation of authority to the lowest level in an organization where a competent decision can be made (Conger & Kanungo, 1988; Thomas & Velthouse, 1990). Thus, the empowerment concept has roots in such substantive issues as intrinsic motivation, job design, participative decision making, social learning theory, and self-management (Liden & Tewksbury, 1995). Empirical support has begun to accumulate regarding the relationship of employee empowerment to important work-related outcomes (Liden,
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173 · Cited by 91,532
Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability.
Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.86.2.420 · Cited by 24,532
Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency
Bandura, A. (1982) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.37.2.122 · Cited by 15,975
Proactive Behavior in Organizations
Crant, J. M. (2000) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920630002600304 · Cited by 2,701
Levels issues in theory development, data collection and analysis
Klein, K. J., Dansereau, F., & Hall, R. J. (1994) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258703 · Cited by 1,607
Cited by
Intrinsic motivation and extrinsic incentives jointly predict performance: A 40-year meta-analysis.
Cerasoli, C. P., Nicklin, J. M., & Ford, M. T. (2014) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0035661 · Cited by 1,981
Empowering Leadership in Management Teams: Effects on Knowledge Sharing, Efficacy, And Performance
Srivastava, A., Bartol, K. M., & Locke, E. A. (2006) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2006.23478718 · Cited by 1,768
Psychological safety: a systematic review of the literature
Newman, A., Donohue, R., & Eva, N. (2017) · Human Resource Management Review · doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2017.01.001 · Cited by 1,408
Kirkman, B. L., Rosen, B., Tesluk, P. E., & Gibson, C. B. (2004) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/20159571 · Cited by 889
Ou, A. Y., Tsui, A. S., Kinicki, A. J., Waldman, D. A., Xiao, Z., & Song, L. J. (2014) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0001839213520131 · Cited by 561
Metadata
- Authors
- Seibert, S. E., Silver, S. R., & Randolph, W. A.
- Venue
- Academy of Management Journal
- Publisher
- Academy of Management
- Published
- 2004-06-01
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 332-349
- ISSN
- 0001-4273 (ISSN-L)
- 1948-0989
- OpenAlex
- W2104239385
- Cited by
- 815
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 31.56
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: TAKING EMPOWERMENT TO THE NEXT LEVEL: A MULTIPLE-LEVEL MODEL OF EMPOWERMENT, PERFORMANCE, AND SATISFACTION. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/20159585
- The paper
- Seibert, S. E., Silver, S. R., & Randolph, W. A. (2004). TAKING EMPOWERMENT TO THE NEXT LEVEL: A MULTIPLE-LEVEL MODEL OF EMPOWERMENT, PERFORMANCE, AND SATISFACTION. Academy of Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.2307/20159585
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.