Sil a, Ana Junça; Al es-Cae ano, An ónio
A icle
Unce ain y's impac on adap i e pe o mance in he pos -
COVID e a: The mode a ing ole o pe cei ed leade 's
e ec i eness
BRQ Business Resea ch Qua e ly
P o ided in Coope a ion wi h:
Asociación Cien í ica de Economía y Di ección de Emp esas (ACEDE), Mad id
Sugges ed Ci a ion: Sil a, Ana Junça; Al es-Cae ano, An ónio (2024) : Unce ain y's impac on adap i e
pe o mance in he pos -COVID e a: The mode a ing ole o pe cei ed leade 's e ec i eness, BRQ
Business Resea ch Qua e ly, ISSN 2340-9444, Sage Publishing, London, Vol. 27, Iss. 1, pp. 40-56,
h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/23409444231202809
This Ve sion is a ailable a :
h ps://hdl.handle.ne /10419/327032
S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen:
Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen
Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den.
Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle
Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich
machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen.
So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen
(insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en,
gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do
genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e.
Te ms o use:
Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you pe sonal
and schola ly pu poses.
You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial pu poses, o
exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem publicly a ailable on he
in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise use he documen s in public.
I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open Con en
Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you may exe cise
u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed licence.
h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/23409444231202809
Business Resea ch Qua e ly
2024, Vol. 27(1) 40 –56
© The Au ho (s) 2023
A icle euse guidelines:
sagepub.com/jou nals-pe missions
DOI: 10.1177/23409444231202809
jou nals.sagepub.com/home/b q
C ea i e Commons CC BY: This a icle is dis ibu ed unde he e ms o he C ea i e Commons A ibu ion 4.0
License (h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/) which pe mi s any use, ep oduc ion and dis ibu ion o he
wo k wi hou u he pe mission p o ided he o iginal wo k is a ibu ed as speci ied on he SAGE and Open Access pages
(h ps://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-a -sage).
In oduc ion
The wo ld is inc easingly ola ile, unce ain, complex,
and ambiguous— he VUCA wo ld (Madhok, 2021;
Taskan e al., 2022). The COVID-19 pandemic, oge he
wi h he wa has pushed he wo ld in o a highe unce -
ain e a ha is cha ac e ized by inc eased le els o eco-
nomic and wo k- ela ed unce ain y (Cha oensukmongkol
& Phungsoon ho n, 2021).
A bo h s a egic and o ganiza ional le els, he concep
o unce ain y, b oadly de ined as he inabili y o o esee
cause-and-e ec ela ionships o e an ex ended pe iod,
has ga ne ed conside able a en ion in esea ch spanning
he las decades (Hillen e al., 2017). None heless, he in e -
ac ion be ween his high-le el en i onmen al unce ain y
Unce ain y’s impac on adap i e
pe o mance in he pos -COVID e a:
The mode a ing ole o pe cei ed
leade ’s e ec i eness
Ana Junça-Sil a1,2,3 and An ónio Cae ano1,2
Abs ac
This s udy builds upon exis ing esea ch on daily adap i e pe o mance by ocusing on wo main aspec s: (1) he
luc ua ions wi hin indi iduals conce ning unce ain y in ela ion o daily nega i e a ec and daily adap i e pe o mance
and (2) he a ia ions be ween indi iduals in he pe cei ed e ec i eness o hei leade s as a ele an bounda y condi ion
o hese ela ionships. Da a we e ga he ed du ing a pos -COVID phase om a sample o 176 Po uguese wo king adul s,
o 10 days, esul ing in a o al o 1,760 measu emen occasions. The esul s o he mul ile el analysis e ealed a posi i e
co ela ion be ween luc ua ions in daily unce ain y and daily nega i e a ec . No ably, his ela ionship was in luenced
by he pe cei ed e ec i eness o leade s. Speci ically, he p esence o an e ec i e leade mi iga ed he heigh ened
nega i e a ec caused by inc eased unce ain y. In addi ion, he indings demons a ed a posi i e link be ween daily
nega i e a ec and daily adap i e pe o mance. Mo eo e , a s a is ically signi ican indi ec e ec was obse ed, indica ing
ha unce ain y led o luc ua ions in adap i e pe o mance h ough i s impac on daily nega i e a ec . Essen ially, highe
le els o unce ain y con ibu ed o inc eased nega i e a ec among employees, subsequen ly in luencing hei daily
adap i e pe o mance. I is impo an o no e ha his pa hway was u he in luenced by he pe cei ed e ec i eness o
leade s. In cases whe e employees pe cei ed hei leade s as less e ec i e, he connec ion be ween nega i e a ec and
adap i e pe o mance was mo e p onounced. This s udy unde sco es he signi icance o pe cei ed e ec i e leade ship,
pa icula ly in unique con ex s such as he pos -COVID e a: an e ec i e leade is always good o a ec i e egula ion,
bu a less e ec i e leade is no always bad ega ding adap i e pe o mance. This complexi y p omp s discussions on
implica ions o bo h heo e ical unde s anding and p ac ical applica ion.
JEL CLASSIFICATION: M0
Keywo ds
Pe cei ed leade ship e ec i eness, nega i e a ec , adap i e pe o mance, unce ain y
1Ins i u o Uni e si á io de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL), Lisboa, Po ugal
2Business Resea ch Uni —BRU (UNIDE-IUL), Lisboa, Po ugal
3Ins i u o Poli écnico de Toma (IPT), Toma , Po ugal
Co esponding au ho :
Ana Junça-Sil a, Ins i u o Uni e si á io de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL), A enida
das Fo ças A madas, 1649-026 Lisboa, Po ugal.
Email: [email p o ec ed]
1202809BRQ0010.1177/23409444231202809BRQ Business Resea ch Qua e lyJunça-Sil a and Cae ano
esea ch-a icle2023
Regula Pape
Junça-Sil a and Cae ano 41
and unce ain ies ela ed o job-speci ic ma e s, which
en ail sudden and un o eseen shi s in he dynamics o he
wo k en i onmen and job oles, has ecei ed compa a-
i ely less sc u iny. On his plane, day by day, a a ie y o
unce ain ies mani es in mul iple o ms, encompassing
ac o s such as ask p io i ies, deadlines, and a mul i ude o
un o eseen challenges. These ci cums ances equi e ex a
e o on he pa o wo ke s and can se e as p ecu so s o
ad e se a ec i e expe iences, including eelings o us-
a ion o ension (Li e al., 2021), subsequen ly exe ing
an impac on indi idual pe o mance, as posi ed by he
In eg a i e Model o Unce ain y Tole ance (IMUT; Hillen
e al., 2017).
Nega i e a ec , encompassing a ange o ad e se emo-
ions (e.g., sadness, ea ) expe ienced by indi iduals
(Diene e al., 2020), se es as a pi o al mechanism link-
ing si ua ional ac o s o wo k- ela ed ou comes, including
pe o mance (Kaplan e al., 2009). Mo eo e , his con-
s uc is ex ensi ely examined wi hin he amewo k o
daily da a nes ing, gi en i s subs an ial p edic i e powe
o e pe o mance- ela ed consequences (Kaplan e al.,
2009).
Conside ing he p onounced ins abili y and unce ain y
cha ac e izing he pos -COVID-19 phase wi hin he daily
wo k en i onmen (Junça-Sil a & Cae ano, 2023), adap-
i e pe o mance eme ges as a c ucial ace o e ec i ely
na iga ing his u bulen landscape. Adap i e pe o mance
pe ains o employees’ capaci y o acclima e o swi ly
e ol ing wo k condi ions whe e unce ain y emains a
cons an ac o (B. G i in & Heske h, 2005; Heske h &
Neal, 1999). I ep esen s a pe o mance dimension ha
signi ican ly in luences how employees add ess eme gen-
cies, cope wi h changes, and ackle unexpec ed challenges
(M. A. G i in e al., 2007). The impo ance o adap i e
pe o mance is unde sco ed by i s po en ial o yield a o a-
ble ou comes o o ganiza ions. This includes enhancing
ask pe o mance and o e all o ganiza ional p oduc i i y
(Pa k & Pa k, 2019; Shoss e al., 2012).
The IMUT asse s ha a con ex cha ac e ized by u bu-
lence, ola ili y, and ambigui y, such as he pos -COVID-19
e a, p omp s indi iduals o pe cei e unce ain y. This pe -
cep ion leads o he expe ience o nega i e a ec i e s a es
(e.g., wo y o ea ), which, in u n, in luence beha io al
ou comes such as a oidance o inac ion (Hillen e al.,
2017). The pos -COVID-19 con ex is pa icula ly unique
and wa an s u he in es iga ion due o i s inhe en ola-
ili y and ambigui y, elemen s ha appea o heigh en
employees’ pe cep ions o unce ain y wi hin he wo k-
place (Chen e al., 2022). Unce ain y possesses he po en-
ial o unde mine employees’ emo ional and beha io al
esponses (Leach e al., 2021), sugges ing ha heigh ened
unce ain y may ampli y nega i e emo ional esponses,
subsequen ly es ic ing adap i e beha io s.
D awing on he IMUT, his s udy p oposes ha pe -
cei ed unce ain y luc ua es o e ime, igge ing
co esponding wi hin-pe son luc ua ions in nega i e
a ec , which, in u n, in luence wi hin-pe son a ia ions in
adap i e pe o mance. We posi ha he pe cei ed e ec-
i eness o leade s, a judgmen o hei beha io al compe-
ence (Sy & an Knippenbe g, 2021), se es as a
mode a ing ac o wi hin hese ela ionships. Ex ensi e
e idence suppo s he no ion ha he pe cei ed e ec i e-
ness o leade s can mi iga e he de imen al e ec s o a
nega i e and ola ile wo k en i onmen (such as he
unce ain ies ma king he pos -COVID-19 e a) on bo h
a ec i e (e.g., nega i e a ec ) and beha io al ou comes
(e.g., adap i e pe o mance; Dabke, 2016; Dong & Zhong,
2022; Weinbe ge , 2009).
This s udy bea s signi icance as he empi ical es ing o
IMUT, pa icula ly in he con ex o wi hin-pe son luc ua-
ions and he pos -COVID-19 e a, emains limi ed.
Fu he mo e, he scan s udies examining agmen s o
IMUT ha e p edominan ly cen e ed on he heal hca e sec-
o (Pa el e al., 2022), unde sco ing he need o un a el
how employees, as a whole, eac bo h emo ionally and
beha io ally o pe cei ed unce ain en i onmen s. In addi-
ion, Junça-Sil a and Cae ano (2023) highligh ed he
necessi y o u he in es iga ions in o po en ial bounda y
condi ions, such as he pe cei ed e ec i eness o leade s,
which migh shape he ela ionship be ween unce ain
wo k con ex s and employee esponses.
While some s udies ha e explo ed he in e play be ween
leade ship s yles o leade cha ac e is ics and hei ollow-
e s’ pe o mance o beha io al ou comes (e.g., coope a-
ion beha io s; Mu lucan, 2011; Yousse , 2004), he e is a
dea h o esea ch, especially in he pos -COVID-19 e a,
ha explo es he in e ac ion e ec o pe cei ed leade
e ec i eness wi h bo h si ua ional ac o s (i.e., pe cei ed
unce ain y) and a ec i e ac o s (i.e., nega i e a ec )
conce ning beha io al ou comes (i.e., adap i e pe o -
mance). Thus, i is pe inen o comp ehend he ole o
leade s in guiding hei ollowe s’ eac ions o pe cei ed
unce ain y, pa icula ly wi hin a con ex ma ked by
heigh ened ola ili y and unce ain y such as he pos -
COVID-19 e a. By elucida ing he ole o leade s, ini ia-
i es can be o mula ed (e.g., enhancing leade s’ suppo
and a en i eness o employees’ needs and unce ain ies)
o aid employees in e ec i ely na iga ing unce ain and
ola ile wo k condi ions.
The goal o his s udy is o en ich he exis ing li e a u e
on pe cei ed unce ain wo k en i onmen s, pa icula ly
wi hin he pos -COVID-19 e a, and hei po en ial in lu-
ence on employee a ec i e and beha io al ou comes. I
also aims o con ibu e insigh s in o he ole o pe cei ed
leade e ec i eness unde unce ain wo king condi ions,
speci ically conce ning hei ollowe s’ a ec i e and
beha io al ou comes. The s udy’s speci ic aims include
un a eling (1) he a ec i e mechanism (nega i e a ec )
ha connec s employees’ pe cei ed unce ain y wi h hei
adap i e pe o mance and (2) he con ex ual ac o s
42 Business Resea ch Qua e ly 27(1)
(pe cei ed leade ship e ec i eness) ha migh mode a e
hese ela ionships. In his pu sui , he s udy seeks o
enhance comp ehension o how pe cei ed unce ain y
in luences employee adap i e pe o mance, conside ing
nega i e a ec as an in e media y p ocess, and pe cei ed
leade ship e ec i eness as a pi o al bounda y condi ion
in luencing he impac o pe cei ed unce ain y on adap-
i e pe o mance h ough he lens o expe ienced nega i e
a ec . To achie e his, he s udy elies on da a collec ed
om 176 wo king adul s who pa icipa ed in a daily online
su ey o e a span o 10 wo king days. Mul ile el analysis
ou comes un eiled ha daily unce ain y igge ed nega-
i e a ec in employees, se ing as a signal o adap pe -
o mance. Fu he mo e, he link be ween daily unce ain y,
nega i e a ec , and adap i e pe o mance was subjec o
mode a ion by pe cei ed leade e ec i eness, implying
he leade ’s di e en ial oles in in luencing ollowe s’
nega i e a ec and adap i e pe o mance.
In he subsequen sec ions, we begin by ou lining he
cons uc o pe cei ed unce ain y and i s connec ion o
nega i e a ec . We hen del e in o he ole o wo k- ela ed
nega i e a ec a he wi hin-pe son le el as a p ecu so o
adap i e pe o mance. Subsequen ly, we expound on he
associa ion be ween pe cei ed unce ain y and daily adap-
i e pe o mance. Finally, we p esen he comp ehensi e
esea ch model, encompassing he indi ec connec ion
be ween daily pe cei ed unce ain y and daily adap i e
pe o mance ia daily nega i e a ec , along wi h he
c oss-le el mode a ing in luence o pe cei ed leade ship
e ec i eness.
The pos -COVID-19 wo king con ex
The COVID-19 c isis ushe ed in subs an ial changes
ac oss a ious domains, including he ealms o wo k and
social in e ac ions. Fo ins ance, as COVID-19 posed a
global con agion isk, go e nmen s wo ldwide manda ed
o ganiza ions o implemen elewo k s a egies whene e
easible, aiming o cu b he sp ead o he i us while main-
aining o ganiza ional p oduc i i y (Milliken e al., 2020).
This c isis necessi a ed o ganiza ions o swi ly adjus o
no el wo k me hodologies, o en adop ing la ge-scale el-
ewo k policies, which ca ied implica ions o bo h
employees and o ganiza ions in he long e m (Gualano
e al., 2022).
The pandemic-induced changes ha e le an endu ing
impac on he s uc u e and execu ion o wo k, as well as
he oles assumed by leade s wi hin wo k se ings (A o a
& Su i, 2020). Fo ins ance, o ganiza ions wo ldwide
emb aced hyb id wo k models, a usion o emo e and in-
o ice wo k, designed o balance he ad an ages o emo e
wo k wi h he bene i s o in-pe son collabo a ion.
The e o e, i is impo an o ecognize ha he pos -
COVID wo king con ex does no in ol e e e ing o p e-
COVID o COVID-19 wo k ou ines. In essence, he
pos -COVID con ex ep esen s a depa u e om p e ious
no ms, as objec i e changes ha e aken place in wo k
dynamics, job design, ask p ocedu es, and goal es ablish-
men . No ably, a signi ican po ion o wo ke s in business
and p o essional se ices, including he sample in his
s udy, a e now engaged in hyb id wo k models, encom-
passing one o wo days o elewo k coupled wi h o ice
a endance. This phase pos -COVID is no synonymous
wi h he p e-COVID pe iod (a me e e u n o he p io
s a e), no is i compa able o he peak COVID phase
(when comple e elewo king was manda ed in some sec-
o s o ac i i y). O e all, his esh daily wo king con ex
necessi a ed adap abili y om bo h employees and lead-
e s, acili a ing hei adjus men o unp edic able and luid
wo k en i onmen s.
Hyb id wo king models in oduce dis inc wo king
dynamics and in e pe sonal in e ac ions. Unde his
model, no all colleagues con ene daily as hey p e i-
ously did, hus al e ing he social landscape and modes
o socializa ion. This shi unde sco es he need o
adjus men s, wi h leade ship equi ed o accommoda e
his no el social dynamic o e ec i e guidance.
Fu he mo e, his new eali y demands heigh ened lead-
e ship planning, con ol mechanisms, and suppo o
simul aneously ensu e engagemen , and p oduc i i y,
and os e us be ween leade s and eam membe s, as
well as among pee s. This pa adigm also b ings o h a
di e en ace o lexibili y— his in ol es coo dina ing
emo e wo kdays wi h colleagues and adap ing o new
o ms o o e sigh enac ed by leade ship. Ope a ional
leade ship has simila ly e ol ed o o e see employees,
de ine wo k objec i es, assis in managing wo k- ela ed
p essu es and o e load, and p omo e he de elopmen o
adap i e skills necessa y o na iga e unce ain y
(Benne & McWho e , 2021).
Li e a u e e iew and hypo hesis
de elopmen
Pe cei ed unce ain y
The ad en o he COVID-19 pandemic igge ed a - each-
ing ans o ma ions ac oss socie al, business, and indi idual
sphe es (Cha oensukmongkol & Phungsoon ho n, 2021).
Subsequen ly, he global en i onmen has become mo e
ola ile, unce ain, complex, and ambiguous, shaping he
con ex in which indi iduals bo h li e and wo k.
Unce ain y now cha ac e izes he daily expe iences o a
subs an ial numbe o indi iduals in hei wo k se ings.
I can be de ined as he incapabili y o an indi idual o
o ecas accu a e cause-and-e ec ela ionships (Downey
& Slocum, 1975; Duncan, 1972). Milliken (1987) p o-
posed ha unce ain y pe ained o “an indi idual’s pe -
cei ed inabili y o p edic some hing accu a ely” (p. 136).
Acco dingly, unce ain y eme ges when an indi idual
Junça-Sil a and Cae ano 43
disce ns gaps in in o ma ion conce ning cause-and-e ec
ela ionships o pe cei es an inabili y o disce n be ween
ele an (o i ele an ) in o ma ion o p edic ion
(Milliken, 1987). No ably, hese de ini ions encapsula e
he subjec i e expe ience o unce ain y and do no neces-
sa ily deno e an objec i e s a e o he ex e nal wo ld.
Employees may expe ience unce ain y when hei
wo k en i onmen (o speci ic componen s he eo )
becomes unp edic able. Fo ins ance, an employee migh
g apple wi h unce ain y ega ding he adap a ion equi ed
o new daily asks o e en he newly implemen ed ask
p ocedu es wi hin he o ganiza ion.
Pe cei ed unce ain y and nega i e a ec
The IMUT has del ed in o he cons uc o pe cei ed
unce ain y wi hin he wo k domain. Unce ain y eme ges
when indi iduals encoun e unknown s imuli in he wo k
con ex (e.g., e en s, si ua ions, o wo k condi ions; Han
e al., 2011; Hillen e al., 2017). These s imuli emain
unknown due o hei complexi y (e.g., echnological
changes such as he in eg a ion o a i icial in elligence),
ambigui y (e.g., insu icien in o ma ion o g asp new
skills), o unexpec edness (e.g., e e ing o p e ious wo k
me hods). These s imuli e oke a sense o unce ain y in
employees, in luencing hei esponses on cogni i e (e.g.,
h ea o doub ), a ec i e (e.g., wo y o ea ), and beha -
io al (e.g., a oidance e sus adap a ion) on s. These
esponses may be conscious o subconscious (Hillen e al.,
2017). While he pe cep ion o unce ain y is a conscious
p ocess, indi iduals’ esponses o unce ain si ua ions can
a y in e ms o awa eness, con ingen upon he deg ee o
which he pe cei ed unce ain objec /s imulus shapes hei
cogni i e, a ec i e, o beha io al p ocesses (Hillen e al.,
2017). Fu he mo e, hese cogni i e, a ec i e, and beha -
io al esponses can un old o e a ying ime ames
(McLain e al., 2015). Fo ins ance, one may pe cei e
unce ain y and expe ience ea , bu he beha io al
esponse (e.g., adap a ion) migh mani es la e . This pe -
cep ion and eac ion o unce ain y a e also in luenced by
con ex ual cha ac e is ics (e.g., job a ibu es), indi idual
dissimila i ies (e.g., pe sonali y ai s), and social ac o s
(e.g., leade ship; Hillen e al., 2017). Summing up, IMUT
a gues ha speci ic s imuli wi hin he wo k con ex can
induce employees o pe cei e unce ain y, po en ially
engende ing nega i e a ec such as ea and shaping hei
hough s and beha io s (Hillen e al., 2017).
Indeed, pe cei ed unce ain y has equen ly been asso-
cia ed wi h nega i e a ec (Junça-Sil a & Sil a, 2022).
Nega i e a ec comp ises emo ional s a es o discom o
ha may luc ua e in e ms o a ousal, encompassing ac i-
a ed emo ions (e.g., anxie y) e sus deac i a ed s a es
(e.g., sadness; Wa e al., 2014). Schola s posi ha emo-
ions a e adap i e p ocesses e lec ing cogni i e e alua-
ions o pe cei ed unce ain s imuli (Ande son e al.,
2019), c ucial o acili a ing indi idual eac ions and
adap a ions (Moo s e al., 2013).
The Fea o he Unknown heo y (Ca le on, 2016a,
2016b) suppo s he ela ionship be ween pe cei ed unce -
ain y and nega i e a ec . Simila ly, app aisal heo ies o
emo ions elucida e he linkage be ween unce ain y and
nega i e a ec ( e e o Moo s e al., 2013). App aisal he-
o ies con end ha a ec and emo ions eme ge as adap i e
esponses g ounded in how indi iduals app aise hei con-
ex s and si ua ions, e alua ing hei po en ial o hinde o
accele a e he a ainmen o pe inen goals. App aisals,
equen ly au oma ic associa ions, end o align wi h con-
ex pa e ns and e idence, assis ing indi iduals in adap -
ing (Ande son e al., 2019). These app aisals comp ise
aspec s such as goal ele ance and cong uence, indi idual
coping abili y, and unce ain y abou ou comes (Moo s
e al., 2013). Consequen ly, an app aised con ex o unce -
ain y is liable o igge nega i e a ec i e expe iences
(Junça-Sil a & Sil a, 2022).
Empi ical suppo o he ela ionship be ween pe -
cei ed unce ain y and nega i e a ec is e iden (Ande son
e al., 2019). Fo ins ance, Bo esi and colleagues (2018)
demons a ed ha pe cei ing unce ain y in he wo k en i-
onmen co ela ed wi h nega i e a ec i e s a es, ul i-
ma ely leading o emo ional dis ess. Pé ez-Fuen es and
colleagues (2020) illus a ed ha pe cei ed unce ain y
s emming om he COVID-19 h ea culmina ed in nega-
i e a ec i e expe iences. Bakioğlu and colleagues (2021),
in hei s udy du ing he pandemic c isis, es ablished ha
unce ain y p edic ed nega i e a ec i e s a es encompass-
ing ea , dep ession, anxie y, and dis ess. In hei daily
dia y s udy, Junça-Sil a and Sil a (2022) unde sco ed ha
an unce ain wo k con ex no only p edic ed wi hin-pe -
son luc ua ions in nega i e a ec bu also impac ed indi-
iduals’ men al heal h. Hence, d awing om IMUT and
he a o emen ioned empi ical indings, we o mula ed he
ollowing hypo hesis:
Hypo hesis 1. Wi hin-pe son luc ua ions in pe cei ed
unce ain y a e posi i ely ela ed o wi hin-pe son luc-
ua ions in nega i e a ec .
The ela ionship be ween nega i e a ec and
adap i e pe o mance
When employees g apple wi h nega i e a ec , hei pe -
o mance is p one o being in luenced (Zhao e al., 2019).
Pe o mance, a mul i ace ed cons uc , encompasses h ee
main dimensions: (1) ask pe o mance (comp ising
beha io s o ac ions aligned wi h o ganiza ional goals;
Campbell, 1990, p. 704); (2) con ex ual pe o mance (pe -
aining o beha io s ha bols e he o ganiza ional, social,
and psychological milieu whe ein he co e echnical ac i -
i ies anspi e; Bo man & Mo owidlo, 1993, p. 73); and (3)
44 Business Resea ch Qua e ly 27(1)
adap i e pe o mance ( he deg ee o which an indi idual
adjus s o shi s in he wo k ole o en i onmen ; M. A.
G i in e al., 2007, p. 331). This s udy concen a es on
adap i e pe o mance, a i al aspec du ing u bulen and
unce ain pe iods (Koopmans e al., 2014). Adap i e pe -
o mance holds signi icance when encoun e ing new ech-
nologies, al e ed ask p ocesses, o shi s in he wo k
landscape (e.g., wo k edesign), as hese necessi a e
beha io al adap a ions on he pa o employees (M. A.
G i in e al., 2007).
Despi e occasional con lic ing indings, ce ain heo-
is s p opose ha nega i e a ec is no in a iably de i-
men al (Knigh & Eisenk a , 2015). The social unc ional
heo ies o a ec (El enbein, 2007) lend c edence o he
cons uc i e impac o nega i e a ec on speci ic ou -
comes (e.g., posi i e beha io ). These heo ies posi ha
a ec u nishes indi iduals wi h he in o ma ion equi ed
o posi i e e olu ion, change, and adap a ion; in essence,
nega i e a ec (e.g., anxie y) migh signal he necessi y
o adap i e beha io s (e.g., al e ing ask app oaches) ha
ul ima ely suppo employees in adap ing o e ol ing
en i onmen al ci cums ances. Knigh and Eisenk a
(2015), o ins ance, ound ha nega i e a ec acili a ed
e ec i e social in eg a ion and ele a ed ask pe o mance.
Consequen ly, om his pe spec i e, nega i e a ec migh
con e pe o mance bene i s.
None heless, an ad e se link be ween nega i e a ec
and adap i e pe o mance has been empi ically subs an i-
a ed, pa icula ly media ed by mo i a ional p ocesses such
as (dis)sa is ac ion o occupa ional dis ess (Kaplan e al.,
2009). Roo ed in G ay’s p emises (1970), when indi idu-
als encoun e nega i e a ec in hei wo k milieu, hey
end o g a i a e owa d a oidance beha io s a he han
adap i e ones, gi en ha nega i e a ec is an in eg al
aspec o he beha io al inhibi ion sys em. Consequen ly,
he likelihood o a oidance-o ien ed ac ions ollowing
nega i e a ec su passes he p obabili y o engaging in
adap i e beha io s (Kaplan e al., 2009).
Mo eo e , g ounded in he conse a ion o esou ces
amewo k, indi iduals expe iencing nega i e a ec
may ind i mo e challenging o secu e he esou ces
essen ial o acili a ing adap i e pe o mance, such as
seeking assis ance (Zella s & Pe ewe, 2001). The con-
se a ion o esou ces heo y (Hob oll, 1998, 2001)
asse s ha indi iduals s i e o sa egua d, sus ain, and
amass esou ces. When esou ces a e deple ed, ulne a-
bili y o u he esou ce loss in ensi ies (Hob oll, 1998,
2001). Thus, i nega i e a ec emains inadequa ely
managed, he indi idual’s sel -e icacy migh diminish,
subsequen ly inhibi ing adap i e pe o mance in he
sho and long e m (Cook e al., 2000). Fu he mo e,
nega i e a ec e odes essen ial esou ces—including
ene gy, i ali y, sel - egula ion capabili ies, coping s a -
egies, and esilience—indispensable o execu ing adap-
i e beha io s, such as o mula ing s a egies o acqui e
no el p ocedu es (Hob oll e al., 2018; Junça-Sil a &
Cae ano, 2023).
Gi en hese empi ical insigh s, we asse ha indi idu-
als expe iencing nega i e a ec due o pe cei ed unce -
ain y migh ind hemsel es lacking he esou ces equisi e
o adap ing o such unce ain condi ions. Consequen ly,
hei inclina ion o engage in adap i e esponses could
diminish. Thus, we o mula e he ensuing hypo hesis:
Hypo hesis 2: Wi hin-pe son luc ua ions in nega i e
a ec a e nega i ely ela ed o wi hin-pe son luc ua-
ions in adap i e pe o mance.
Indi ec ela ionship om unce ain y o
adap i e pe o mance ia nega i e a ec
D awing on he IMUT amewo k (Hillen e al., 2017),
when indi iduals a e con on ed wi h an unce ain con ex ,
hey a e likely o expe ience a ange o nega i e a ec i e
s a es (e.g., om ea o us a ion o anxie y). Fo
ins ance, Junça-Sil a and Sil a (2022) demons a ed ha
an unce ain con ex led employees o expe ience us a-
ion and anxie y, posing a h ea o hei men al heal h.
Nega i e a ec ends o inhibi immedia e ac ion a he
han acili a e i , e ec i ely “pa alyzing” ac ion in he
sho e m (S ephens e al., 2021). The e o e, we posi ha
nega i e a ec i e eac ions a ising om an unce ain con-
ex will obs uc adap i e pe o mance.
App aisal heo ies o emo ions also lend suppo o he
link be ween unce ain y, nega i e a ec , and adap i e
pe o mance (Moo s e al., 2013). Acco ding o hese heo-
ies, a ec eme ges om app aisals o con ex s and e en s
(Ande son e al., 2019). App aisals can lean owa d posi-
i i y o nega i i y, undamen ally shaped by he pe cei ed
ele ance o he con ex and e en s o pe sonal o wo k-
ela ed objec i es (Moo s e al., 2013). In his ein, he
pe cep ion o unce ain y wi hin a con ex is likely o gi e
ise o nega i e a ec i e expe iences, ul ima ely impai ing
adap i e pe o mance (Ma ques-Quin ei o e al., 2019).
Resea ch examining he po en ial pa h om unce ain y o
pe o mance h ough a ec i e mechanisms has been lim-
i ed, wi h ew s udies es ing he IMUT in ela ion o pe -
o mance- ela ed ou comes (S ephens e al., 2021). Mos
esea ch applying he IMUT has ocused on heal h- ela ed
ou comes (e.g., s ess o men al heal h; Reize e al., 2021)
and, o ou knowledge, did no conside pa icula ly he
con ex ha ollowed a pandemic si ua ion, as i was he
COVID-19 c isis. Mill o h and F ey (2021) ound unce -
ain y p edic ed he ea o COVID-19 h ough expe i-
ences o anxie y. Quinlan and Deane (2021) also e idenced,
in a medical sample, ha unce ain y showed wi hin-pe -
son luc ua ions ha p edic ed anxie y, which in u n in lu-
enced pe o mance. Based on he li e a u e, i can be
in e ed ha nega i e a ec a ising om unce ain y migh
Junça-Sil a and Cae ano 45
hinde employees’ adap i e capaci y, leading o dimin-
ished le els o adap i e pe o mance. In essence, nega i e
a ec could se e as a media ing mechanism h ough
which unce ain y impac s adap i e pe o mance.
Gi en he IMUT’s p emises, we a gue ha wi hin-pe -
son luc ua ions in pe cei ed unce ain y gi e ise o co -
esponding luc ua ions in nega i e a ec , which
subsequen ly exe a nega i e in luence on adap i e pe -
o mance. Thus, we p opose he ollowing hypo hesis:
Hypo hesis 3: Wi hin-pe son luc ua ions in nega i e
a ec media e he ela ionship be ween wi hin-pe son
luc ua ions in pe cei ed unce ain y and daily luc ua-
ions in adap i e pe o mance.
C oss-le el in e ac ion o pe cei ed leade ’s
e ec i eness
The con ex in which indi iduals ope a e can signi ican ly
mode a e hei a ec i e and beha io al eac ions o pe -
cei ed unce ain y (Hillen e al., 2017). Pe cei ed leade -
ship e ec i eness, o ins ance, could shape how
employees espond emo ionally and beha io ally o an
unce ain con ex . Leade ship beha io s, such as suppo -
i eness, migh alle ia e he nega i e impac s o unce -
ain y on nega i e a ec and adap i e pe o mance.
Pe cei ed leade ship e ec i eness “ e lec s judgmen s
o how well someone pe o ms as a leade ” (Sy & an
Knippenbe g, 2021, p. 11). In apidly changing, complex
wo k en i onmen s cha ac e ized by high unce ain y and
ola ili y, pe cei ed leade ship e ec i eness holds pi o al
impo ance (Weinbe ge , 2009). Leade s wield signi ican
in luence o e eam membe s, o en emo ionally inspi ing
hem h ough posi i e a ec (Goleman e al., 2002). Fo
ins ance, posi i e in e ac ions wi h a leade on a gi en day
can ele a e employees’ posi i e a ec and, consequen ly,
enhance hei ask-di ec ed beha io (No man e al., 2010).
E ec i e leade ship is c i ical o o ganiza ional e i-
ciency and esul s, and o employee well-being and pe -
o mance (Alimo-Me cal e e al., 2008; Siddiqui e al.,
2021). Leade ship’s impac ex ends beyond me ely d i -
ing imp o ed pe o mance; e ec i e leade s con ibu e o
heigh ened employee well-being (Siddiqui e al., 2021).
Pe cei ed leade ship e ec i eness can se e as a mode a-
o in he ela ionship be ween con ex (e.g., an unce ain
en i onmen ) and a ious ou comes (Vecchio, 2002),
including a ec i e expe iences (e.g., nega i e a ec ) and
beha io s (e.g., adap i e pe o mance). E ec i e leade s
migh a enua e nega i e e ec s o unce ain y by demon-
s a ing suppo i e beha io s ha mi iga e nega i e a ec
and bols e adap i e pe o mance.
We a gue ha pe cei ed leade ship e ec i eness may
bu e he nega i e in luence o unce ain y on he wo k-
e ’s nega i e a ec and adap i e pe o mance o wo
easons. Fi s , he e a e aspec s o each unce ain
si ua ion ha may be accompanied by h ea - ela ed
beha io s (objec i ely, pe cei ed, o o e es ima ed) ha
could in ensi y he nega i e a ec i e eac ions and
dec ease he wo ke ’s abili y o adap (Ca le on, 2016a;
F ees on e al., 2020). Tha is, some leade s’ beha io s in
an unce ain con ex may he eby be unde s ood as
h ea s, ei he objec i ely o pe cei ed. Independen ly o
i s na u e, i is likely ha he in e play be ween he lead-
e ’s beha io s and an unce ain con ex may mode a e
he ollowe s’ nega i e a ec i e eac ions o unce ain y.
Fo ins ance, any help he leade may p o ide, in an
unce ain con ex , migh be unde s ood as a ep imand o
sugges ion o incompe ence, which will p obably in en-
si y he ollowe s’ nega i e a ec i e eac ions, and
he eby dec ease he likelihood o adap i e beha io s.
On he con a y, he same beha io om he leade , in a
s able con ex , may be app aised as ci ili y beha io ,
which will bu e he wo ke s’ nega i e a ec i e eac-
ions (e.g., ea ), and hei adap i e pe o mance. Fo
example, Sy and an Knippenbe g (2021) ound ha
leade s signi ican ly in luenced hei employees’ emo-
ional egula ion and beha io s, c ea ing posi i e wo k-
ing en i onmen s. Simila ly, Cha oensukmongkol and
Phungsoon ho n (2021) demons a ed ha leade ship
e ec i eness, pa icula ly suppo i e beha io s, mi i-
ga ed pe cei ed unce ain y, ac ing as a bu e be ween
leade ship and emo ional exhaus ion.
Second, he IMUT desc ibes ha he ela ionship
be ween daily pe cei ed unce ain y and a ec i e and
beha io al eac ions is mode a ed by con ex ual ac o s,
such as pe cei ed leade ship e ec i eness. Posi i e pe -
cep ions o leade ship can p omo e a bias owa d posi i e
in o ma ion, in luencing wo ke s in ways ha bu e pe -
cei ed h ea s o an unce ain con ex , po en ially dimin-
ishing nega i e a ec and enhancing adap i e pe o mance
(Weiss & C opanzano, 1996). As such, e ec i e leade s
may likely lowe he de imen al e ec s o an unce ain
con ex on nega i e a ec and adap i e pe o mance and,
he e o e, will be able o ind solu ions o educe he con-
ex ual pe cei ed unce ain ies, leading hem o expe ience
less nega i e a ec and adap i e pe o mance. On he con-
a y, an unce ain con ex will be mo e igh ening o
hose who pe cei e hei leade s as less e ec i e, which
will in ensi y hei nega i e a ec i e eac ions, and educe
hei adap i e beha io s.
In ligh o hese p emises, we p opose he ollowing
hypo heses:
Hypo hesis 4. Pe cei ed leade ship e ec i eness
mode a es he wi hin-pe son ela ionship be ween
daily luc ua ions in unce ain y and daily luc ua ions
in nega i e a ec in such a way ha o hose who
sco e lowe on pe cei ed leade ship e ec i eness,
unce ain y will be s ongly posi i ely ela ed o nega-
i e a ec .
46 Business Resea ch Qua e ly 27(1)
Hypo hesis 5. Pe cei ed leade ship e ec i eness mod-
e a es he wi hin-pe son ela ionship be ween daily
luc ua ions in nega i e a ec and daily luc ua ions in
adap i e pe o mance in such a way ha o hose who
sco e lowe on pe cei ed leade ship e ec i eness, neg-
a i e a ec will be s ongly and nega i ely ela ed o
adap i e pe o mance (see Figu e 1).
Me hods
Pa icipan s and p ocedu e
This mul ile el esea ch in ol ed bo h a gene al su ey
and a dia y su ey, conduc ed o e a span o 10 wo kdays
( om Monday o F iday o 2 weeks). The su eys we e
p epa ed in Po uguese, employing a p ocess o ansla ion
and back- ansla ion, and we e adminis e ed online o
eco d esponden s’ da e and ime o esponse.
A o al o 260 Po uguese wo king adul s we e in i ed
o pa icipa e in he s udy h ough he esea che ’s p o es-
sional ne wo ks. The s udy ook place be ween Oc obe
and Decembe 2022 ( he da e on which he pos -co id-19
phase o icially began).
In i a ions we e sen ia email, including in o med
consen , ou lining he s udy’s objec i es, da a collec ion
p ocess, and gua an ee o da a anonymi y and con iden i-
ali y. O he ini ial pa icipan s, 206 comple ed he gene al
su ey ( esponse a e: 79.2%), 194 comple ed a leas one
dia y su ey ( esponse a e: 74.6%), and 176 comple ed all
10 daily online su eys ( esponse a e: 67.7%, esul ing in
1,760 measu emen occasions). This sample size exceeded
he h eshold ecommended by Maas and Hox (2005) o
c oss-le el in e ac ions in a mul ile el amewo k (i.e., 30
esponden s), ensu ing su icien powe and accu acy in
he analysis.
The pa icipan demog aphic b eakdown was as ol-
lows: 33.4% emale, 42.2% wi h a high school diploma,
and 57.8% wi h a uni e si y diploma. The a e age age was
34.33 yea s (SD = 12.49), and he mean o ganiza ional en-
u e was 12.43 yea s (SD = 11.95). Pa icipan s epo ed
wo king an a e age o 34.52 h pe week (SD = 14.67)
ac oss a ious occupa ional jobs in business and p o es-
sional se ices, including human esou ces (58%), gene al
managemen (29%), and inance (13%).
Measu es
Gene al su ey. Socio-demog aphic da a (sex, age, enu e,
educa ional le el) and he be ween-pe son a iable o pe -
cei ed leade ship e ec i eness we e collec ed h ough a
gene al su ey.
Pe cei ed leade ship e ec i eness. Fou i ems de eloped by
Giessne and an Knippenbe g (2008) we e used.
Responses we e p o ided on a 5-poin Like - ype scale,
anging om 1 ( o ally disag ee) o 5 ( o ally ag ee). An
example i em was: “My leade leads he eam in a way ha
mo i a es he eam membe s.” The scale demons a ed
accep able in e nal consis ency (α = 0.74, ω = 0.76).
Daily su ey. The daily su ey ollowed ecommended
daily dia y me hods (Ohly e al., 2010) and employed he
use o he wo d “ oday” and he pas ense in all i ems o
ein o ce he daily na u e o he su ey. To enhance elia-
bili y and minimize pa icipan d opou , concise scales
we e employed. Le el-speci ic composi e eliabili y
(wi hin-pe son ω) was assessed ollowing he sugges ion
by Geldho and colleagues (2014). The daily su ey
included measu es o pe cei ed unce ain y, nega i e
a ec , and adap i e pe o mance.
Pe cei ed unce ain y. Fou i ems om he Ra e y and
G i in’s O ganiza ional Change Scale (2006) we e used o
gauge pe cei ed unce ain y. Pa icipan s a ed i ems on a
5-poin scale, anging om 1 (s ongly disag ee) o 5
(s ongly ag ee). Example i ems included: “Today, my
wo k en i onmen was changing in an unp edic able man-
ne ” and “Today, I el unsu e abou he e ec o change on
my wo k uni ” (ω = 0.64).
Dailype o mance
leade ship e ec i eness
Dailyunce ain y Dailynega i ea ec
Be weenpe son-le el
Wi hin pe son-le el
C oss-le elmode a o
In a-indi idual E ec s
H3
H1 H2
+
H4 H5
-
--
Figu e 1. The hypo hesized mul ile el mode a ed media ion model.
Junça-Sil a and Cae ano 47
Nega i e a ec . Expe ienced daily nega i e a ec was
assessed using eigh i ems om he Mul i-A ec Indica o
(Wa e al., 2014). Responden s indica ed hei esponses
on a 5-poin scale, anging om 1 (ne e ) o 5 (always;
ω = 0.86).
Adap i e pe o mance. Pe o mance was measu ed using
h ee i ems om he Indi idual Task Adap i i y Scale (M.
A. G i in e al., 2007). Pa icipan s a ed he i ems on a
5-poin Like - ype scale, anging om 1 ( e y li le) o 5
(a g ea deal). An example i em was: “Today, I adap ed
well o changes in co e asks” (ω = 0.79).
Con ol a iables. Gi en he daily dia y o ma o he s udy,
he ime o da a collec ion ( om Monday o F iday) was
included as a wi hin-pe son a iable, as i could po en ially
impac c i e ion a iables (Hox & Boeije, 2005).
Da a analysis
We used JASP o pe o m con i ma o y ac o analyses
and SPSS wi h mac o-Mul ile el media ion (MlMed) o
assess he hypo hesized mode a ed media ion model
(Rockwood, 2017). We used i because (1) o he s udies
ha e epo ed eliable indings h ough he use o i
(Rockwood, 2017); (2) i appea s o deli e simila esul s
o o he s a is ical so wa e (e.g., Mplus); and (3) i is pa -
icula ly ele an when es ing a c oss-le el in e ac ion
(Rockwood, 2017).
As we had a mul ile el da a s uc u e, ha is days
nes ed in indi iduals, we es ima ed he in a-class co ela-
ion coe icien (ICC) o pe cei ed unce ain y, nega i e
a ec , and pe o mance (Hox, 2010). We did no es ima e
an ICC o pe cei ed leade ship e ec i eness because his
a iable was only measu ed a a be ween-pe son le el. The
esul s indica ed ha a signi ican p opo ion o he a i-
ance (ICC alues we e 0.37, 0.58, and 0.40, espec i ely)
was a ibu able o wi hin-pe son luc ua ions. Mo eo e ,
because all he ICCs we e highe han 0.05, we assumed
ha he da a had a mul ile el s uc u e (days nes ed in
indi iduals); he e o e, we ollowed a mul ile el modeling
app oach (Ma coulides & Schumacke , 2013).
Resul s
Desc ip i e esul s
Table 1 p esen s he desc ip i e s a is ics and ze o-o de
and pe son-cen e ed co ela ions o he a iables o be
es ed.
Con i ma o y ac o analyses
We conduc ed CFAs in JASP wi h which we accoun ed o
he nes ed s uc u e o ou da a (i.e., days nes ed wi hin
indi iduals). Table 2 p esen s he i s a is ics. The i s
measu emen model (M1) was he hypo hesized model
and included he ollowing ou la en ac o s: pe cei ed
unce ain y, nega i e a ec , pe o mance, and pe cei ed
leade ship e ec i eness. Fou al e na i e CFA models
we e es ed: (1) one al e na i e model comp ised he same
ou la en ac o s and a common me hod ac o (M1*);
ano he al e na i e model comp ised he wo la en ac o s
in which pe cei ed unce ain y and nega i e a ec we e
loaded on o one ac o (M2), and (2) ano he one in which
pe cei ed unce ain y, nega i e a ec , and pe o mance
we e loaded on one ac o (M3). Finally, we es ed a CFA
wi h only one la en a iable (M4)— ha is, all he a ia-
bles we e loaded on o one ac o . In his way, we e alua ed
he model i o each o hese CFAs. They we e e alua ed
based on he oo mean squa e e o o app oxima ion
(RMSEA), he compa a i e i index (CFI), he Tucke –
Lewis index (TLI), and he s anda dized oo mean squa e
esidual (SRMR). As Sch eibe e al. (2006) desc ibed, a
model p esen s a good i when he alues o bo h CFI and
TLI a e highe han 0.90; and when he alues o bo h
RMSEA and SRMR a e below 0.08. Following hese c i e-
ia, he hypo hesized measu emen model (M1) had an
accep able i wi h he da a. In addi ion, we compa ed all
he models o he one we p oposed (M1) h ough he
Table 1. Means, s anda d de ia ions, and ze o-o de and pe son-cen e ed co ela ions.
Va iables M SD 1 2 3 4 5
1. Unce ain y 2.89 0.84 — 0.39*** 0.02 — −0.03
2. Nega i e a ec 2.43 0.92 0.48** — −0.15*** — 0.03
3. Pe o mance 3.67 0.68 −0.17** −0.30 ** — — −0.23**
4. Leade e ec i eness 3.61 0.98 −0.18** −0.17** 0.40** — —
5. Time — — −0.08 0.05 −0.03 −0.02 —
SD: s anda d de ia ion.
Ze o-o de co ela ions a e p esen ed below he diagonal (N = 176). Pe son-cen e ed co ela ions a e p esen ed abo e he diagonal (N = 1,760).
Means and s anda d de ia ions a e p esen ed a he be ween-pe son le el. We did no es ima e pe son-cen e ed co ela ions o he be ween-
pe son a iable pe cei ed leade ship e ec i eness.
p < 0.05. **p < 0.01. ***p < 0.001.
54 Business Resea ch Qua e ly 27(1)
in he pos -COVID-19 e a. Jou nal o Business &
Indus ial Ma ke ing, 37(10), 2064–2074. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1108/JBIM-01-2021-0066
Cook, K. W., Vance, C. A., & Spec o , P. E. (2000). The ela ion
o candida e pe sonali y wi h selec ion-in e iew ou comes.
Jou nal o Applied Psychology, 30, 867–885.
Dabke, D. (2016). Impac o leade ’s emo ional in elligence
and ans o ma ional beha io on pe cei ed leade -
ship e ec i eness: A mul iple sou ce iew. Business
Pe spec i es and Resea ch, 4(1), 27–40. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1177/2278533715605433
Decuype e, A., & Schau eli, W. (2020). Leade ship and wo k
engagemen : Explo ing explana o y mechanisms. Ge man
Jou nal o Human Resou ce Managemen , 34(1), 69–95.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/2397002219892197
Diene , E., Thapa, S., & Tay, L. (2020). Posi i e emo ions a
wo k. Annual Re iew o O ganiza ional Psychology
and O ganiza ional Beha io , 7, 451–477. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1146/annu e -o gpsych-012119-044908
Dong, W., & Zhong, L. (2022). How and when esponsible lead-
e ship acili a es wo k engagemen : A mode a ed media ion
model. Jou nal o Manage ial Psychology, 37(6), 545–558.
Downey, H. K., & Slocum, J. W. (1975). Unce ain y: Measu es,
esea ch, and sou ces o a ia ion. Academy o Managemen
Jou nal, 18(3), 562–578. h ps://doi.o g/10.5465/255685
El enbein, H. A. (2007). 7 emo ion in o ganiza ions: A e iew
and heo e ical in eg a ion. The Academy o Managemen
Annals, 1(1), 315–386. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/078559812
F ees on, M., Tiplady, A., Mawn, L., Bo esi, G., & Thwai es, S.
(2020). Towa ds a model o unce ain y dis ess in he con-
ex o co ona i us (COVID-19). The Cogni i e Beha iou
The apis , 13, A icle e31. h ps://doi.o g/10.1017/
S1754470X2000029X
Geldho , G. J., Bowe s, E. P., Muelle , M. K., Napoli ano, C. M.,
Callina, K. S., & Le ne , R. M. (2014). Longi udinal analy-
sis o a e y sho measu e o posi i e you h de elopmen .
Jou nal o You h and Adolescence, 43, 933–949. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1007/s10964-014-0093-z
Giessne , S. R., & an Knippenbe g, D. (2008). “License o
ail”: Goal de ini ion, leade g oup p o o ypicali y, and
pe cep ions o leade ship e ec i eness a e leade ailu e.
O ganiza ional Beha io and Human Decision P ocesses,
105(1), 14–35.
Gius iniano, L., Cunha, M. P., Simpson, A. V., Rego, A., &
Clegg, S. (2020). Resilien leade ship as pa adox wo k:
No es om COVID-19. Managemen and O ganiza ion
Re iew, 16(5), 971–975.
Goleman, D., Boya zis, R. E., & McKee, A. (2002). P imal
leade ship: Realizing he powe o emo ional in elligence.
Ha a d Business School.
G iep, R. H., Sil a-Cos a, A., San os, R. D. S., Al es, D. D. S.B.,
& Ro enbe g, L. (2022). Pe cepção de isco de adoecimen o
po COVID-19 en e abalhado es de unidades de saúde.
Re is a B asilei a de Saúde Ocupacional, 47, A icle eco 4.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1590/2317-6369/18721p 2022 47eco 4
G i in, B., & Heske h, B. (2005). A e conscien ious wo ke s
adap able? Aus alian Jou nal o Managemen , 30, 245–
259. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/031289620503000204
G i in, M. A., Neal, A., & Pa ke , S. K. (2007). A new model
o wo k ole pe o mance: Posi i e beha io in unce ain
and in e dependen con ex s. Academy o Managemen
Jou nal, 50(2), 327–347. h ps://doi.o g/10.5465/
amj.2007.24634438
Gualano, M. R., Rossi, M. F., Bo elli, I., San o o, P. E., Aman ea,
C., Daniele, A., Tumminello, A., & Mosca o, U. (2022).
Re u ning o wo k and he impac o pos COVID-19 condi-
ion: A sys ema ic e iew. Wo k, 73(2), 405–413. h ps://doi.
o g/10.3233/WOR-220103
Han, P. K., Klein, W. M., & A o a, N. K. (2011). Va ie ies o
unce ain y in heal h ca e: A concep ual axonomy. Medical
Decision Making, 31(6), 828–838.
Heske h, B., & Neal, A. (1999). Technology and pe o mance.
In D. R. Ilgen, & E. D. Pulakos (Eds.), The changing na u e
o pe o mance: Implica ions o s a ing, mo i a ion, and
de elopmen (pp. 21–55). Jossey-Bass.
Hillen, M. A., Gu heil, C. M., S ou , T. D., Sme s, E. M., & Han,
P. K. (2017). Tole ance o unce ain y: Concep ual analysis,
in eg a i e model, and implica ions o heal hca e. Social
Science & Medicine, 180, 62–75. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.
socscimed.2017.03.024
Hob oll, S. E. (1998). S ess, cul u e, and communi y: The psy-
chology and philosophy o s ess. Plenum Publishing.
Hob oll, S. E., Halbesleben, J., Ne eu, J. P., & Wes man, M.
(2018). Conse a ion o esou ces in he o ganiza ional con-
ex : The eali y o esou ces and hei consequences. Annual
Re iew o O ganiza ional Psychology and O ganiza ional
Beha io , 5, 103–128. h ps://doi.o g/10.1146/annu e -
o gpsych-032117-104640
Hox, J. J. (2010). Mul ile el analysis: Techniques and applica-
ions. Law ence E lbaum Associa es.
Hox, J. J., & Boeije, H. R. (2005). Da a collec ion, p ima y s.
seconda y. In K. Kemp -Leona d (Ed.), Encyclopedia o
social measu emen (Vol. 1, pp. 593–599). Else ie . h p://
doi.o g/10.1016/B0-12-369398-5/00041-4
Islam, M. N., Fu uoka, F., & Id is, A. (2020). The impac o
us in leade ship on o ganiza ional ans o ma ion. Global
Business and O ganiza ional Excellence, 39(4), 25–34.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1002/joe.22001
Junça-Sil a, A., & Cae ano, A. (2023). How ollowe s’ neu o i-
cism bu e s he ole o he leade in hei daily men al heal h
ia daily posi i e a ec : A mul ile el app oach. Pe sonali y
and Indi idual Di e ences, 208, A icle 112190. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1016/j.paid.2023.112190
Junça-Sil a, A., & Sil a, D. (2022). How is he li e wi hou
unico ns? A wi hin-indi idual s udy on he ela ionship
be ween unce ain y and men al heal h indica o s: The
mode a ing ole o neu o icism. Pe sonali y and Indi idual
Di e ences, 188, A icle 111462. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.
paid.2021.111462
Kaplan, S., B adley, J. C., Luchman, J. N., & Haynes, D. (2009). On
he ole o posi i e and nega i e a ec i i y in job pe o mance:
A me a-analy ic in es iga ion. Jou nal o Applied Psychology,
94(1), 162–176. h ps://doi.o g/10.1037/a0013115
Kawiana, I., Dewi, L. K. C., Ha a i, P. S., Se ini, M., & Asih, D.
(2021). E ec s o leade ship and psychological clima e on
o ganiza ional commi men in he digi iza ion e a. Jou nal
o Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 8(1), 1051–
1062.
Khan, M., Khan, M. A., Zubai , S. S., & Rizwan, A. (2022).
How ans o ma ional leade s a e engaged in wo k se ings
Junça-Sil a and Cae ano 55
du ing episode o COVID-19? Explo ing media ing e ec s
o s uc u al empowe men and p ocess inno a ion. Sage
Open, 12(2), A icle 21582440221093354. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1177/21582440221093354
Knigh , A. P., & Eisenk a , N. (2015). Posi i e is usually good,
nega i e is no always bad: The e ec s o g oup a ec on
social in eg a ion and ask pe o mance. Jou nal o Applied
Psychology, 100(4), 1214–1227. h ps://doi.o g/10.1037/
apl0000006
Koopmans, L., Be naa ds, C. M., Hildeb and , V. H., de Ve ,
H. C., & an de Beek, A. J. (2014). Cons uc alidi y o
he indi idual wo k pe o mance ques ionnai e. Jou nal o
Occupa ional and En i onmen al Medicine, 56(3), 331–
337. h ps://www.js o .o g/s able/48500406
Leach, M., MacG ego , H., Scoones, I., & Wilkinson, A. (2021).
Pos -pandemic ans o ma ions: How and why COVID-19
equi es us o e hink de elopmen . Wo ld De elopmen ,
138, A icle 105233. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.wo ld-
de .2020.105233
Li, Q., Luo, R., Zhang, X., Meng, G., Dai, B., & Liu, X. (2021).
In ole ance o Co id-19- ela ed unce ain y and nega i e
emo ions among Chinese adolescen s: A mode a ed media-
ion model o isk pe cep ion, social exclusion and pe -
cei ed e icacy. In e na ional Jou nal o En i onmen al
Resea ch and Public Heal h, 18(6), A icle 2864. h ps://
doi.o g/10.3390/ije ph18062864
Maas, C. J., & Hox, J. J. (2005). Su icien sample sizes o mul-
ile el modeling. Me hodology, 1(3), 86–92. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1027/1614-2241.1.3.86
Madhok, A. (2021). Globaliza ion, de-globaliza ion, and e-
globaliza ion: Some his o ical con ex and he impac o
he COVID pandemic. BRQ Business Resea ch Qua e ly,
24(3), 199–203.
Ma coulides, G. A., & Schumacke , R. E. (Eds.). (2013).
Ad anced s uc u al equa ion modeling: Issues and ech-
niques. Psychology P ess.
Ma ques-Quin ei o, P., Va gas, R., Ei le , N., & Cu al, L.
(2019). Employee adap i e pe o mance and job sa is ac-
ion du ing o ganiza ional c isis: The ole o sel -leade ship.
Eu opean Jou nal o Wo k and O ganiza ional Psychology,
28(1), 85–100.
McLain, D. L., Ke alloni is, E., & A mani, K. (2015). Ambigui y
ole ance in o ganiza ions: De ini ional cla i ica ion and
pe spec i es on u u e esea ch. F on ie s in Psychology, 6,
A icle 344. h ps://doi.o g/10.3389/ psyg.2015.00344
Me ho , J. R., Melwani, S., & Ro hman, N. B. (2017). The
space be ween us: A social- unc ional emo ions iew
o ambi alen and indi e en wo kplace ela ionships.
Jou nal o Managemen , 43(6), 1789–1819. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1177/0149206316685853
Milliken, F. J. (1987). Th ee ypes o pe cei ed unce ain y abou
he en i onmen : S a e, e ec , and esponse unce ain y.
Academy o Managemen Re iew, 12(1), 133–143.
Milliken, F. J., Kneeland, M. K., & Flynn, E. (2020). Implica ions
o he COVID-19 pandemic o gende equi y issues a
wo k. Jou nal o Managemen S udies, 57(8), 1767–1772.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/joms.12628
Mill o h, P., & F ey, R. (2021). Fea and anxie y in he ace
o COVID-19: Nega i e disposi ions owa ds isk and
unce ain y as ulne abili y ac o s. Jou nal o Anxie y
Diso de s, 83, A icle 102454. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.
janxdis.2021.102454
Moo s, A., Ellswo h, P. C., Sche e , K. R., & F ijda, N. H.
(2013). App aisal heo ies o emo ion: S a e o he a and
u u e de elopmen . Emo ion Re iew, 5, 119–124. h ps://
doi.o g/10.1177/1754073912468165
Mu lucan, N. Ç. (2011). A concep ual model o he au hen ic
leade ’s posi i e psychological capaci ies in he con ex o
inancial c isis. The Business Re iew, 18(1), 99–109.
No man, S. M., A olio, B. J., & Lu hans, F. (2010). The impac
o posi i i y and anspa ency on us in leade s and hei
pe cei ed e ec i eness. The Leade ship Qua e ly, 21(3),
350–364.
Ohly, S., Sonnen ag, S., Niessen, C., & Zap , D. (2010). Dia y
s udies in o ganiza ional esea ch. Jou nal o Pe sonnel
Psychology, 9(2), 79–93. h ps://doi.o g/10.1027/1866-
5888/a000009
Pa k, S., & Pa k, S. (2019). Employee adap i e pe o mance
and i s an eceden s: Re iew and syn hesis. Human
Resou ce De elopmen Re iew, 18(3), 294–324. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1177/1534484319836315
Pa el, P., Hancock, J., Roge s, M., & Polla d, S. R. (2022).
Imp o ing unce ain y ole ance in medical s uden s: A
scoping e iew. Medical Educa ion, 56(12), 1163–1173.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/medu.14873
Pé ez-Fuen es, M. D. C., Mole o Ju ado, M. D. M., Ma os
Ma ínez, Á., & Gázquez Lina es, J. J. (2020). Th ea o
COVID-19 and emo ional s a e du ing qua an ine: Posi i e
and nega i e a ec as media o s in a c oss-sec ional s udy
o he Spanish popula ion. PLOS ONE, 15(6), A icle
e0235305. h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0235305
Podsako , P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsako , N. P. (2012).
Sou ces o me hod bias in social science esea ch and
ecommenda ions on how o con ol i . Annual Re iew o
Psychology, 63(1), 539–569.
Quinlan, E., & Deane, F. P. (2021). A longi udinal s udy o ainee
psychologis s’ ole ance o unce ain y, s a e anxie y and con-
idence in case o mula ion. Aus alian Psychologis , 56(6),
499–510. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/00050067.2021.1965855
Ra e y, A. E., & G i in, M. A. (2006). Pe cep ions o o gani-
za ional change: A s ess and coping pe spec i e. Jou nal
o Applied Psychology, 91(5), 1154–1162. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1037/0021-9010.91.5.1154
Rego, A., Ca azo e, F., Cunha, M. P. E., Val e de, C., Meye ,
M., & Gius iniano, L. (2021). G i y leade s p omo ing
employees’ h i ing a wo k. Jou nal o Managemen ,
47(5), 1155–1184.
Reize , A., Ge en, L., & Koslowsky, M. (2021). Li e unde
he COVID-19 lockdown: On he ela ionship be ween
in ole ance o unce ain y and psychological dis ess.
Psychological T auma: Theo y, Resea ch, P ac ice, and
Policy, 13(4), 432–437. h ps://doi.o g/10.1037/ a0001012
Rockwood, N. J. (2017). Ad ancing he o mula ion and es ing
o mul ile el media ion and mode a ed media ion models
[PhD disse a ion]. The Ohio S a e Uni e si y, Columbus,
OH, Uni ed S a es.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human
po en ials: A e iew o esea ch on hedonic and eudaimonic
well-being. Annual Re iew o Psychology, 52(1), 141–166.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1146/annu e .psych.52.1.141
56 Business Resea ch Qua e ly 27(1)
Sch eibe , J. B., S age, F. K., King, J., No a, A., & Ba low, E.
A. (2006). Repo ing s uc u al equa ion modelling and
con i ma o y ac o analysis esul s: A e iew. The Jou nal
o Educa ional Resea ch, 99(6), 323–337. h ps://doi.
o g/10.3200/JOER.99.6.323-338
Schwa z, N. (2013). Feelings as in o ma ion: Implica ions o
a ec i e in luences on in o ma ion p ocessing. In L. L.
Ma in, & G. L. Clo e (Eds.), Theo ies o mood and cogni-
ion (pp. 159–176). Psychology P ess.
Schwa z, N., & Clo e, G. L. (2007). Feelings and phenomenal
expe iences. In E. T. Higgins, & A. K uglanski (Eds.),
Social psychology: A handbook o basic p inciples (2nd ed.,
pp. 385–407). Guil o d P ess.
Shoss, M. K., Wi , L. A., & Ve a, D. (2012). When does adap-
i e pe o mance lead o highe ask pe o mance? Jou nal
o O ganiza ional Beha io , 33(7), 910–924. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1002/job.780
Siddiqui, I., Au elio, M., Gup a, A., Bly he, J., & Khanji, M. Y.
(2021). COVID-19: Causes o anxie y and wellbeing sup-
po needs o heal hca e p o essionals in he UK: A c oss-
sec ional su ey. Clinical Medicine, 21(1), 66–72. 10.7861/
clinmed.2020-0502
S ephens, G. C., Rees, C. E., & Laza us, M. D. (2021). Explo ing
he impac o educa ion on p eclinical medical s uden s’
ole ance o unce ain y: A quali a i e longi udinal s udy.
Ad ances in Heal h Sciences Educa ion, 26(1), 53–77.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s10459-020-09971-0
S o beck, J., & Clo e, G. L. (2008). A ec i e a ousal as in o -
ma ion: How a ec i e a ousal in luences judgmen s,
lea ning, and memo y. Social and Pe sonali y Psychology
Compass, 2(5), 1824–1843. h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/j.1751-
9004.2008.00138.x
Sy, T., & an Knippenbe g, D. (2021). The emo ional leade :
Implici heo ies o leade ship emo ions and leade ship pe -
cep ions. Jou nal o O ganiza ional Beha io , 42(7), 885–
912. h ps://doi.o g/10.1002/job.2543
Taskan, B., Junça-Sil a, A., & Cae ano, A. (2022). Cla i ying
he concep ual map o VUCA: A sys ema ic e iew.
In e na ional Jou nal o O ganiza ional Analysis, 30(7),
196–217. h ps://doi.o g/10.1108/IJOA-02-2022-3136
Tuckey, M. R., Bakke , A. B., & Dolla d, M. F. (2012). Empowe ing
leade s op imize wo king condi ions o engagemen : A mul-
ile el s udy. Jou nal o Occupa ional Heal h Psychology,
17(1), 15–27. h ps://doi.o g/10.1037/a0025942
Van Klee , G. A., De D eu, C. K. W., & Mans ead, A. S. R.
(2010.). An in e pe sonal app oach o emo ion in social
decision making: The emo ions as social in o ma ion model.
In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Ad ances in expe imen al social psy-
chology (Vol. 42, pp. 45–96). Academic P ess.
an Knippenbe g, B., & an Knippenbe g, D. (2005). Leade sel -
sac i ice and leade ship e ec i eness: The mode a ing ole
o leade p o o ypicali y. Jou nal o Applied Psychology,
90(1), 25–37. h ps://doi.o g/10.1037/0021-9010.90.1.25
Vecchio, R. P. (2002). Leade ship and gende ad an age.
The Leade ship Qua e ly, 13(6), 643–671. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1016/S1048-9843(02)00156-X
Wa , P., Bindl, U. K., Pa ke , S. K., & Inceoglu, I. (2014).
Fou -quad an in es iga ion o job- ela ed a ec s and
beha iou s. Eu opean Jou nal o Wo k and O ganiza ional
Psychology, 23(3), 342–363. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/13594
32X.2012.744449
Weinbe ge , L. A. (2009). Emo ional in elligence, leade ship
s yle, and pe cei ed leade ship e ec i eness. Ad ances in
De eloping Human Resou ces, 11(6), 747–772. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1177/1523422309360811
Weiss, H. M., & C opanzano, R. (1996). A ec i e e en s heo y.
Resea ch in O ganiza ional Beha io , 18(1), 1–74.
Yousse , C. M. (2004). Resiliency de elopmen o o ganiza-
ions, leade s and employees: Mul i-le el heo y building
and indi idual-le el, pa h-analy ical empi ical es ing. The
Uni e si y o Neb aska-Lincoln. h ps://digi alcommons.
unl.edu/disse a ions/AAI3131572/
Yukl, G. (2012). E ec i e leade ship beha io : Wha we
know and wha ques ions need mo e a en ion. Academy
o Managemen Pe spec i es, 26(4), 66–85. h ps://doi.
o g/10.5465/amp.2012.0088
Yun, S., Cox, J., & Sims, H. P. J (2006). The o go en ollowe :
A con ingency model o leade ship and ollowe sel -lead-
e ship. Jou nal o Manage ial Psychology, 21, 374–388.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1108/02683940610663141
Zella s, K. L., & Pe ewe, P. L. (2001). A ec i e pe sonali y and
he con en o emo ional social suppo : Coping in o ganiza-
ions. Jou nal o Applied Psychology, 86, 459–467.
Zhao, J.-L., Li, X.-H., & Shields, J. (2019). Managing job bu n-
ou : The e ec s o emo ion- egula ion abili y, emo ional
labo , and posi i e and nega i e a ec a wo k. In e na ional
Jou nal o S ess Managemen , 26(3), 315–320. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1037/s 0000101
