Due to the complexity and dynamism of work in contemporary organizations, time management plays an essential organizational role. Researchers who have examined the role of leadership in time management have proposed the concept of temporal leadership, which straddles multiple periods and builds a temporal architecture (Ancona et al., 2001). Temporal leadership is defined as a set of processes through which leaders allocate time, as well as effectively arranging and coordinating tasks, schedules, and work pace. Temporal leadership can also optimize employees’ time resources and promote their, or their team’s, performance (Mohammed & Alipour, 2014). Although a newly constructed concept, temporal leadership has received considerable attention from researchers.

Although prior researchers have examined the relationship between temporal leadership and various positive outcomes, such as innovative job performance (Zhang et al., 2020), they have paid little attention to negative outcomes, such as employee workplace deviance and turnover intention. Thus, there is a lack of comprehensive understanding of the effect of temporal leadership and the potential dangers of its organizational practice. In addition, the underlying mechanism of how temporal leadership affects employees’ behavior has not been fully explored. Most researchers discussing leader–employee interaction have examined the role of temporal leadership in employee cognition or motivation (Zhang et al., 2020). Few have explored how temporal leadership might affect employees’ task perception and the subsequent effects.

In addition, prior studies have mainly investigated the impact of the allocation of time resources on employees’ performance and creativity from the perspectives of time conflict and passion for work (Santos et al., 2016). Perceived illegitimate tasks, however, can reveal the mechanism of the effect of temporal leadership on employee workplace deviance. Perceived illegitimate tasks are an important psychological perception of the nature of assigned tasks, and reflect employees’ understanding of the nature of tasks assigned by a leader. As the coordination of employees’ tasks for the improvement of their work efficiency is stressed by temporal leadership, the perceived legitimacy of tasks assigned by leaders should be enhanced (Muntz et al., 2019).

In addition, when there is goal congruence (i.e., leaders and followers share the same goals), leaders’ goals and tasks will be accepted by employees, resulting in high task legitimacy. In this situation, employees are more devoted to their work, thereby reducing employee workplace deviance. Thus, we explored the relationship between temporal leadership and employee workplace deviance, and tested the mediating role of perceived illegitimate tasks and the moderating role of goal congruence in this relationship. The research model is presented in Figure 1. In this study we have expanded the theoretical boundary of temporal leadership by exploring its influence on employees’ perceived illegitimate tasks and its impact on their behavior, and we have provided guidance for effective intervention in regard to the effect of temporal leadership.

Literature Review and Hypothesis Development

Temporal Leadership and Employee Workplace Deviance

The concept of temporal leadership, proposed by Mohammed and Nadkarni (2011), refers to a series of processes through which leaders coordinate and manage employees’ tasks. It accentuates the organizing and synchronizing of employees’ tasks in a scheduled time. Temporal leaders can improve employees’ work efficiency by rationally adjusting their work schedules and allocating their time resources. Due to its unique effectiveness in time management, we conjectured that temporal leadership would reduce employee workplace deviance.

Employee workplace deviance refers to potential or actual damage to an organization or its members by an employee, whether spontaneously or purposefully. This behavior is regarded as a violation of the expectations or norms of a society or organization, and includes being late for work, leaving work early, delaying work, and abusing or attacking colleagues (Robinson & Bennett, 1995). Previous researchers have shown that leadership behavior is a key factor in employee workplace deviance; that is, leaders’ positive behavior, such as servant leadership that pays attention to the needs and interests of team members (Eva et al., 2019), can reduce employee workplace deviance. Servant leadership’s six dimensions of emotional healing, creating value for community, conceptual skills, helping subordinates grow and succeed, putting subordinates first, and behaving ethically have been found to have a negative impact on employee deviance (Paesen et al., 2019), whereas leaders’ negative behavior, such as abusive supervision, can increase employee workplace deviance (Park et al., 2019).

Temporal leaders are likely to allocate the time for employees’ tasks and schedules in an effective manner, which improves employees’ work effectiveness and reduces their task conflict and work pressure. This type of leader helps employees plan and fulfill their organizational work tasks (Mohammed & Nadkarni, 2011), thereby reducing their workplace deviance. Thus, as temporal leadership limits employees’ tasks and behavior to a given time, this reduces their time to engage in deviant behavior. Therefor, we proposed the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 1: Temporal leadership will be negatively related to employee workplace deviance.

Mediating Role of Perceived Illegitimate Tasks

Task legitimacy refers to when tasks performed by employees conform to their job role expectations and organizational protocols, whereas perceived illegitimate tasks refers to the task being perceived as a violation of the employees’ job role expectations or organizational protocols (Semmer et al., 2010). Perceived illegitimate tasks comprise two aspects: unreasonable and unnecessary (Semmer et al., 2010). Tasks are considered unreasonable when they are not designated by a specific legitimate superior. For example, employees with higher qualifications may assign tasks to recruits even though they are unauthorized to perform them. Tasks are considered unnecessary mainly because they are viewed as meaningless or unworthy of much attention. For example, a leader who pursues perfection may devote enormous energy to a small matter, which employees may believe is an unnecessary investment.

Temporal leadership may affect employee workplace deviance through employees’ perceived illegitimate tasks, because, when tasks assigned by an organization or a leader are perceived as illegitimate, employees tend to develop a negative mentality that includes avoiding the tasks, and may result in workplace deviant behavior (Zhou et al., 2018). However, temporal leaders’ ability to arrange and synchronize task times allows employees to complete their work more effectively. Thus, tasks assigned by temporal leaders are likely to be acknowledged by employees because they believe that the tasks are necessary (Mohammed & Alipour, 2014). As this reduces employees’ perception of illegitimate tasks, their deviant behavior is also reduced. Temporal leaders’ ability to coordinate time resources also increases employees’ recognition of the leaders, and prompts employees to adhere to them, enhancing their perceived legitimacy of the leaders’ role (Maruping et al., 2015). This reduces employees’ perceived illegitimate tasks and leads to less employee workplace deviance. Therefore, we proposed the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 2: Perceived illegitimate tasks will mediate the direct relationship between temporal leadership and employee workplace deviance.

Moderating Role of Goal Congruence

Goal congruence refers to the degree to which employees and leaders’ goals are consistent with organizational goals, reflecting the degree of overlap in the resource input between leaders and employees (Vancouver & Schmitt, 1991). When goal congruence is high, employees tend to work actively and think in the same direction as their leaders, and this motivates them to understand their leaders’ behavior and task arrangements (De Clercq et al., 2014). Thus, employees’ perceived illegitimate tasks may be relatively low. In addition, when employees are actively engaged in their work, the role of temporal leadership in the reduction of employees’ perceived illegitimate tasks may be weakened, thereby reducing the impact of temporal leadership on employee workplace deviance. In contrast, when goal congruence is low, employees and leaders tend to work in, or focus on, different directions (Pattie et al., 2013).

Differences may therefore exist in the allocation of time and resources between leaders and employees. To weaken employees’ perceived illegitimate tasks, temporal leaders should arrange employees’ task time appropriately and allocate time resources (Santos et al., 2016). Employees who focus only on their own goals may have doubts and resist tasks arranged by the leader, which increases their perceived illegitimate tasks. When goal congruence is high, temporal leaders can effectively solve time or resource conflict caused by inconsistent goals, thereby reducing employees’ perceived illegitimate tasks, and deviant behavior such as psychological resistance and work delays. Therefore, we proposed the following hypotheses:
Hypothesis 3: Goal congruence will moderate the relationship between temporal leadership and employees’ perceived illegitimate tasks, such that when goal congruence is high (vs. low), temporal leadership has a higher (vs. lower) impact on employees’ perceived illegitimate tasks.
Hypothesis 4: Goal congruence will moderate the influence of temporal leadership on employee workplace deviance through employees’ perceived illegitimate tasks, such that when goal congruence is high, temporal leadership will reduce employees’ perceived illegitimate tasks, thereby reducing employee workplace deviance. In contrast, when goal congruence is low, temporal leadership will have less of an impact on employee workplace deviance through employees’ perceived illegitimate tasks.

Method

Participants and Procedure

Ethical approval from the Research Ethics Committee of Wuhan University of Technology was gained for this study. We collected data from an expressway service company in Wuhan, China, for 3 months, from July to September 2019. The company has multiple service stations across China, and its business ranges from maintaining the normal operations of expressways to checking road conditions, solving congestion, and repairing damaged roads. After we had obtained consent from the owner of the company, we distributed questionnaires to the staff who had already been informed that the survey was anonymous and that the data collected would be strictly confidential and used only for scientific research. Participation in the research was voluntary. Data were collected with pencil and paper surveys and anyone who did not wish to continue could withdraw at any time. When participants had finished, the questionnaires were put into an envelope group by group to ensure anonymity. Each leader participant rated employee workplace deviance, and each team member participant rated temporal leadership, goal congruence, and perceived illegitimate tasks.

To avoid common method variance, we collected data over 3 weeks. In the first wave, 350 questionnaires were distributed to employees who rated temporal leadership and goal congruence. We received 303 (86.57%) surveys in return. In the second wave, questionnaires were distributed to 303 employees to rate perceived illegitimate tasks; 267 (88.12%) surveys were returned. In the third wave, questionnaires were distributed to the leaders of the 267 employees to rate their workplace deviance; 216 valid questionnaires were returned (recovery rate = 80.90%).

Of the final 216 participants, 102 (47%) were men and 114 (53%) were women (SD = 0.50). The average age of the participants was 29.66 years (SD = 7.67, range = 19–56). Their educational levels were as follows: master’s degree = 30 (14%); bachelor’s degree = 81 (37.4%); specialist qualifications (above middle high school and below bachelor’s degree) = 81 (37.4%); high school degree or lower = 24 (11.2%). The average work tenure was 5.66 years (SD = 7.50, range 0.08–32.25).

Measures

Each questionnaire was translated from English to Chinese by a professional English editor, after which we back-translated the items to double-check their content.

Temporal Leadership
To assess temporal leadership, we used Mohammed and Nadkarni’s (2011) seven-item questionnaire. Sample items are “To what extent does your project leader remind members of important deadlines?” and “To what extent does your project leader prioritize tasks and allocate time to each task?” Participants rate the items on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Cronbach’s alpha in this study was .91, indicating good reliability.

Goal Congruence
To assess goal congruence, we used the four-item questionnaire developed by De Clercq et al. (2011), and Tsai and Ghoshal (1998). Sample items are “My colleagues and I share a similar vision regarding the company’s future” and “My colleagues and I think alike on most issues about the company.” Participants rate the items on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Cronbach’s alpha for goal congruence in this study was .70.

Employee Workplace Deviance
To measure employee workplace deviance, we used Aquino et al.’s (1999) 14-item questionnaire, which comprises two dimensions: organizational deviance (eight items) and interpersonal deviance (six items). Sample items for organizational deviance are “I intentionally arrive late for work” and “I called in sick when I was not really sick.” Sample items for interpersonal deviance are “I teased a coworker in front of other employees” and “I made an obscene comment or gesture to a coworker.” Participants rate the items from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Cronbach’s alpha in this study was .97.

Perceived Illegitimate Tasks
We used Semmer et al.’s (2010) eight-item questionnaire to assess employees’ perceived illegitimate tasks. This measure comprises two dimensions: unnecessary tasks (four items) and unreasonable tasks (four items). Sample items for unnecessary tasks are “Do you have work tasks to take care of that make you wonder if they have to be done at all?” and “Do you have work tasks to take care of that make you wonder if they would not exist (or could be done with less effort) if things were organized differently?” Sample items for unreasonable tasks are “Do you have work tasks to take care of that you believe should be done by someone else?” and “Do you have work tasks to take care of that you believe are beyond you and should not be expected from you?” Participants rate the items on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly disagree). Cronbach’s alpha for this variable in this study was .90.

Control Variables
To avoid statistical bias, we controlled for participants’ gender, age, level of education, and work tenure.

Results

Descriptive Analysis

Means, standard deviations, and correlation coefficients among study variables are shown in Table 1. Temporal leadership was negatively correlated with both perceived illegitimate tasks and employee workplace deviance. In addition, perceived illegitimate tasks were positively correlated with employee workplace deviance.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis

To verify the discriminant validity of the study variables, we conducted a confirmatory factor analysis. As shown in Table 2, compared with the three-factor or two-factor models, the four-factor model (temporal leadership, goal congruence, perceived illegitimate tasks, and employee workplace deviance) showed a better fit to the data, chi square/degrees of freedom = 2.51, comparative fit index = .92, Tucker–Lewis index = .90, standardized root mean square residual = .05, root mean square error of approximation = .08. Thus, discriminant validity was confirmed, supporting the regression analysis results.

Hypothesis Testing

We first standardized all variables except employee workplace deviance (dependent variable). Then, to test the hypotheses, we conducted a regression analysis using SPSS 24.0. Regression results are shown in Table 3. The coefficient of the effect of temporal leadership on employee workplace deviance was significantly negative (Model 4, r = −.06, p < .05). After we had added temporal leadership to the regression model, compared with that of the control model, the goodness of fit of Model 3 improved (Model 4, ∆R² = .01). Thus, Hypothesis 1 was supported.

To test the mediating effect, we added perceived illegitimate tasks to the model, after which, as shown in Model 5, the coefficient of the effect of temporal leadership on employee workplace deviance was no longer significant, whereas the coefficient of task noncompliance was significantly positive (Model 5, r = .14, p < .001). In addition, after we had added perceived illegitimate tasks, the goodness of fit (Model 5, R² = .11) was significantly improved.

To test Hypotheses 3 and 4, we added the interaction term of temporal leadership × goal congruence into the model to perform regression analysis on perceived illegitimate tasks and employee workplace deviance. The results show that the coefficient of the interaction term and perceived illegitimate tasks was positively significant (Model 2, r = .11, p < .05), and compared with that of Model 1 (Model 2, R² = .06), the addition of the interaction term improved the model fit by 100%. As shown in Model 6 in Table 3, after we had added the mediator of perceived illegitimate tasks into the model, the coefficient of the interaction term of temporal leadership × goal congruence on employee workplace deviance was no longer significant (r = .09, p < .10). However, the coefficient of perceived illegitimate tasks and employee workplace deviance was significantly positive (r = .14, p < .001).

To further test the hypotheses, we conducted mediating and moderated mediating effect tests with Mplus 7. Results are presented in Tables 4 and 5. As shown in Table 4, the mediating effect of perceived illegitimate tasks was −.023, 95% confidence interval (CI) [−.060, −.002]. Therefore, Hypothesis 2 was supported.

When we considered the moderating effect of goal congruence, it appeared that as though participants had high goal congruence (M + 1 SD), and the direct effect of temporal leadership on perceived illegitimate tasks was mitigated to a greater extent (n = −.178, p < .01, 95% CI [−.317, −.029]), compared to when they had low goal congruence (M − 1 SD; n = −.342, p < .01, 95% CI [−.482, −.167]). The difference between high and low effects was also significant, 95% CI [−.274, −.058]. From the regression coefficients, we plotted the interaction effect of temporal leadership × goal congruence on perceived illegitimate tasks. As shown in Figure 2, when goal congruence was high (vs. low), the negative effect of temporal leadership on perceived illegitimate tasks was much greater. Therefore, Hypothesis 3 was supported.

Regarding the moderated mediation effect, as shown in Table 4, when goal congruence was high (M + 1 SD), the indirect effect of temporal leadership on employee workplace deviance through perceived illegitimate tasks was significantly negative, r = −.016, 95% CI [−.049, −.001]. When goal congruence was low (M − 1 SD), the indirect effect of temporal leadership on employee workplace deviance through perceived illegitimate tasks was also negative, r = −.031, 95% CI [−.076, −.001]. In addition, the difference between the high and low contextual indirect effects was significant, 95% CI [−.042, −.001]. Therefore, Hypothesis 4 was supported.

Discussion

We investigated how temporal leadership affects employee workplace deviance from the perspective of perceived illegitimate tasks. Our results show that temporal leadership reduced employee workplace deviance because of its effectiveness in task scheduling, which reduced employees’ perceived illegitimate tasks, thereby reducing employee workplace deviance. In addition, when goal congruence between employees and leaders was high, the role of temporal leadership in reducing employee workplace deviance through perceived illegitimate tasks became stronger, and vice versa.

We have extended the temporal leadership literature in the following ways: First, we empirically analyzed the relationship between temporal leadership and employee workplace deviance. Previous researchers of temporal leadership have focused on its positive outcomes, such as performance and creativity (Mohammed & Nadkarni, 2011; Pan et al., 2019). However, our focus on employee workplace deviance, a common negative behavior in organizations, expands knowledge of the role of temporal leadership and its organizational effectiveness.

Second, our results highlight the effect of another important mechanism of temporal leadership on employees: perceived illegitimate tasks. Previous researchers of temporal leadership mainly focused on individual factors, such as employee motivation and emotions, and they usually applied social exchange, emotional exhaustion, and achievement motivation to the examination of the leadership–employee behavior relationship (Ererdi & Ünlüaslan Durgun, 2020; Yuan & Lo, 2016). However, we concentrated on an explanation of how leadership affects employees’ perception of tasks, which leads to different attitudes and behavior. Thus, we have contributed to the literature by revealing the role of temporal leadership and its relationship with employees’ perceived illegitimate tasks and employee workplace deviance.

Finally, we explored an important boundary condition for temporal leadership (i.e., leader–member goal congruence), and found that the effectiveness of temporal leadership largely depends on consistency in leaders’ and employees’ goals. A positive impact of leadership on staff can exist only when there is goal consistency. Previous research on temporal leadership has mostly explored the effect of boundary conditions of leadership on employees from a time perspective, such as time focus (Najam et al., 2018). We focused on the task itself and revealed the moderating role of goal congruence. This study is an active response to recent appeals for research on this topic to explore more boundary moderators from various perspectives.

Although we have made important theoretical and practical contributions to the literature, there are several limitations in this study. First, to avoid common method variance caused by utilizing a common data source, we used multiple time points in the measures, and employed peer assessment, which is the method used to measure leaders’ evaluation of employees’ deviant behavior. Due to the negativity of the items related to employee workplace deviance, it is difficult to measure employee workplace deviance objectively. This issue may have caused deviations in the statistical results. Future researchers could adopt an experimental method through observation of actual employee workplace deviance. Second, although we examined the moderating role of goal congruence from a task perspective, the nature of a task may include many facets, such as complexity, creativity requirements, and difficulty. These facets may be key factors that influence the effect of leadership behavior on employees’ perception of the nature of tasks. Therefore, future researchers could use different moderating variables from different perspectives to enrich understanding of temporal leadership.

References

Ancona, D. G., Goodman, P. S., Lawrence, B. S., & Tushman, M. L. (2001). Time: A new research lens. The Academy of Management Review, 26(4), 645–663.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3560246

Aquino, K., Lewis, M. U., & Bradfield, M. (1999). Justice constructs, negative affectivity, and employee deviance: A proposed model and empirical test. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20(7), 1073–1091.
https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(199912)20:7<1073::AID-JOB943>3.0.CO;2-7

De Clercq, D., Bouckenooghe, D., Raja, U., & Matsyborska, G. (2014). Unpacking the goal congruence–organizational deviance relationship: The roles of work engagement and emotional intelligence. Journal of Business Ethics, 124(4), 695–711.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1902-0

De Clercq, D., Thongpapanl, N., & Dimov, D. (2011). A closer look at cross-functional collaboration and product innovativeness: Contingency effects of structural and relational context. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 28(5), 680–697.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2011.00830.x

Ererdi, C., & Ünlüaslan Durgun, E. (2020). Conceptual review of leadership on organizational performance. Business and Management Studies: An International Journal, 8(1), 1044–1095.
https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v8i1.1336

Eva, N., Robin, M., Sendjaya, S., van Dierendonck, D., & Liden, R. C. (2019). Servant leadership: A systematic review and call for future research. The Leadership Quarterly, 30(1), 111–132.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2018.07.004

Maruping, L. M., Venkatesh, V., Thatcher, S. M. B., & Patel, P. C. (2015). Folding under pressure or rising to the occasion? Perceived time pressure and the moderating role of team temporal leadership. Academy of Management Journal, 58(5), 1313–1333.
https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2012.0468

Mohammed, S., & Alipour, K. K. (2014). It’s time for temporal leadership: Individual, dyadic, team, and organizational effects. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 7(2), 178–182.
https://doi.org/10.1111/iops.12128

Mohammed, S., & Nadkarni, S. (2011). Temporal diversity and team performance: The moderating role of team temporal leadership. Academy of Management Journal, 54(3), 489–508.
https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.61967991

Muntz, J., Dormann, C., & Kronenwett, M. (2019). Supervisors’ relational transparency moderates effects among employees’ illegitimate tasks and job dissatisfaction: A four-wave panel study. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 28(4), 485–497.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2019.1625888

Najam, U., Inam, A., Awan, H. M., & Abbas, M. (2018). The interactive role of temporal team leadership in the telecom sector of Pakistan: Utilizing temporal diversity for sustainable knowledge sharing. Sustainability, 10(5), Article 1309.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su10051309

Paesen, H., Wouters, K., & Maesschalck, J. (2019). Servant leaders, ethical followers? The effect of servant leadership on employee deviance. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 40(5), 624–646.
https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-01-2019-0013

Pan, Y., Shang, Y., & Xu, J. (2019). When is chronotype diversity related to team creativity? Team temporal leadership as a moderator. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2019(1), Article 18181.
https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2019.48

Park, H., Hoobler, J. M., Wu, J., Liden, R. C., Hu, J., & Wilson, M. S. (2019). Abusive supervision and employee deviance: A multifoci justice perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 158(4), 1113–1131.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3749-2

Pattie, M. W., Benson, G., Casper, W., & McMahan, G. C. (2013). Goal congruence: Fitting international assignment into employee careers. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(13), 2554–2557.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2012.744336

Robinson, S. L., & Bennett, R. J. (1995). A typology of deviant workplace behaviors: A multidimensional scaling study. Academy of Management Journal, 38(2), 555–572.
https://doi.org/10.5465/256693

Santos, C. M., Passos, A. M., Uitdewilligen, S., & Nübold, A. (2016). Shared temporal cognitions as substitute for temporal leadership: An analysis of their effects on temporal conflict and team performance. Leadership Quarterly, 27(4), 574–587.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2015.12.002

Semmer, N. K., Tschan, F., Meier, L. L., Facchin, S., & Jacobshagen, N. (2010). Illegitimate tasks and counterproductive work behavior. Applied Psychology, 59(1), 70–96.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2009.00416.x

Tsai, W., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital and value creation: The role of intrafirm networks. Academy of Management Journal, 41(4), 464–476.
https://doi.org/10.5465/257085

Vancouver, J. B., & Schmitt, N. W. (1991). An exploratory examination of person-organization fit: Organizational goal congruence. Personnel Psychology, 44(2), 333–352.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1991.tb00962.x

Yuan, C., & Lo, S. (2016). Relationship among team temporal leadership, competency, followership, and performance in Taiwanese pharmaceutical industry leaders and employees. Journal of Career Development, 45(3), 227–238.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0894845316680087

Zhang, J., van Eerde, W., Gevers, J. M. P., & Zhu, W. (2020). How temporal leadership boosts employee innovative job performance. European Journal of Innovation Management, 24(1), 23–42.
https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-05-2019-0112

Zhou, Z. E., Eatough, E. M., & Wald, D. R. (2018). Feeling insulted? Examining end-of-work anger as a mediator in the relationship between daily illegitimate tasks and next-day CWB. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 39(8), 911–921.
https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2266

Ancona, D. G., Goodman, P. S., Lawrence, B. S., & Tushman, M. L. (2001). Time: A new research lens. The Academy of Management Review, 26(4), 645–663.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3560246

Aquino, K., Lewis, M. U., & Bradfield, M. (1999). Justice constructs, negative affectivity, and employee deviance: A proposed model and empirical test. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20(7), 1073–1091.
https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(199912)20:7<1073::AID-JOB943>3.0.CO;2-7

De Clercq, D., Bouckenooghe, D., Raja, U., & Matsyborska, G. (2014). Unpacking the goal congruence–organizational deviance relationship: The roles of work engagement and emotional intelligence. Journal of Business Ethics, 124(4), 695–711.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1902-0

De Clercq, D., Thongpapanl, N., & Dimov, D. (2011). A closer look at cross-functional collaboration and product innovativeness: Contingency effects of structural and relational context. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 28(5), 680–697.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2011.00830.x

Ererdi, C., & Ünlüaslan Durgun, E. (2020). Conceptual review of leadership on organizational performance. Business and Management Studies: An International Journal, 8(1), 1044–1095.
https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v8i1.1336

Eva, N., Robin, M., Sendjaya, S., van Dierendonck, D., & Liden, R. C. (2019). Servant leadership: A systematic review and call for future research. The Leadership Quarterly, 30(1), 111–132.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2018.07.004

Maruping, L. M., Venkatesh, V., Thatcher, S. M. B., & Patel, P. C. (2015). Folding under pressure or rising to the occasion? Perceived time pressure and the moderating role of team temporal leadership. Academy of Management Journal, 58(5), 1313–1333.
https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2012.0468

Mohammed, S., & Alipour, K. K. (2014). It’s time for temporal leadership: Individual, dyadic, team, and organizational effects. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 7(2), 178–182.
https://doi.org/10.1111/iops.12128

Mohammed, S., & Nadkarni, S. (2011). Temporal diversity and team performance: The moderating role of team temporal leadership. Academy of Management Journal, 54(3), 489–508.
https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.61967991

Muntz, J., Dormann, C., & Kronenwett, M. (2019). Supervisors’ relational transparency moderates effects among employees’ illegitimate tasks and job dissatisfaction: A four-wave panel study. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 28(4), 485–497.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2019.1625888

Najam, U., Inam, A., Awan, H. M., & Abbas, M. (2018). The interactive role of temporal team leadership in the telecom sector of Pakistan: Utilizing temporal diversity for sustainable knowledge sharing. Sustainability, 10(5), Article 1309.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su10051309

Paesen, H., Wouters, K., & Maesschalck, J. (2019). Servant leaders, ethical followers? The effect of servant leadership on employee deviance. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 40(5), 624–646.
https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-01-2019-0013

Pan, Y., Shang, Y., & Xu, J. (2019). When is chronotype diversity related to team creativity? Team temporal leadership as a moderator. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2019(1), Article 18181.
https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2019.48

Park, H., Hoobler, J. M., Wu, J., Liden, R. C., Hu, J., & Wilson, M. S. (2019). Abusive supervision and employee deviance: A multifoci justice perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 158(4), 1113–1131.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3749-2

Pattie, M. W., Benson, G., Casper, W., & McMahan, G. C. (2013). Goal congruence: Fitting international assignment into employee careers. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(13), 2554–2557.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2012.744336

Robinson, S. L., & Bennett, R. J. (1995). A typology of deviant workplace behaviors: A multidimensional scaling study. Academy of Management Journal, 38(2), 555–572.
https://doi.org/10.5465/256693

Santos, C. M., Passos, A. M., Uitdewilligen, S., & Nübold, A. (2016). Shared temporal cognitions as substitute for temporal leadership: An analysis of their effects on temporal conflict and team performance. Leadership Quarterly, 27(4), 574–587.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2015.12.002

Semmer, N. K., Tschan, F., Meier, L. L., Facchin, S., & Jacobshagen, N. (2010). Illegitimate tasks and counterproductive work behavior. Applied Psychology, 59(1), 70–96.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2009.00416.x

Tsai, W., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital and value creation: The role of intrafirm networks. Academy of Management Journal, 41(4), 464–476.
https://doi.org/10.5465/257085

Vancouver, J. B., & Schmitt, N. W. (1991). An exploratory examination of person-organization fit: Organizational goal congruence. Personnel Psychology, 44(2), 333–352.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1991.tb00962.x

Yuan, C., & Lo, S. (2016). Relationship among team temporal leadership, competency, followership, and performance in Taiwanese pharmaceutical industry leaders and employees. Journal of Career Development, 45(3), 227–238.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0894845316680087

Zhang, J., van Eerde, W., Gevers, J. M. P., & Zhu, W. (2020). How temporal leadership boosts employee innovative job performance. European Journal of Innovation Management, 24(1), 23–42.
https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-05-2019-0112

Zhou, Z. E., Eatough, E. M., & Wald, D. R. (2018). Feeling insulted? Examining end-of-work anger as a mediator in the relationship between daily illegitimate tasks and next-day CWB. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 39(8), 911–921.
https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2266

This paper was supported by the Fundamental Research Funds for Central Universities (2020VI033

2020GYZX004

2020-ZY-061).

Li Li, School of International Education, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan 430070, People’s Republic of China. Email: [email protected]