Why does leader attention scope matter for innovation ambidexterity? The mediating role of transformational leadership

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore the role leader attention plays in the nurture of transformational leadership (TL) behavior, as well as the mechanism by which TL affects innovation ambidexterity, this research empirically studied the relationship between leader attention scope (LAS) and innovation ambidexterity (exploratory innovation and exploitative innovation) through the mediating role of TL. Further, the moderating effect of environmental dynamism (ED) on the relationship between TL and innovation ambidexterity was examined. Design/methodology/approach Empirical study was adopted by distributing questionnaires to high echelon leaders in mainland China to assess related variables. Structural equation modeling was used to examine the relationships of the variables based on the 188 returned questionnaires. Findings The results show that LAS had a positive effect on innovation ambidexterity, and the relationship was partially mediated by TL. ED negatively moderated the relationship between TL and innovation ambidexterity. Practical implications The results suggest that upper echelon leaders receive more unfamiliar, outward-oriented, and source-diverse information to broaden their attention scope. The broad outlook they get obliges them to engage in TL behavior which is beneficial for innovation ambidexterity. Originality/value Based on upper echelons theory, this research reveals the realization mechanism of innovation ambidexterity from the perspectives of leader attention and leadership behavior. This paper avoids the previous research limitation of prevalently employing demographic measurements to substitute for leaders’ psychological processes. The study of LAS also explains the formation mechanism of TL. ED is considered to examine the effectiveness of TL.

From Anger to Attribution: Could Attention Be a Bridge?

We explored whether or not anger increases attribution bias toward salient information by narrowing attention scope. In Experiment 1, participants made attributions about 6 daily events while experiencing anger or in a neutral state. The anger group was more biased toward the salient factor compared to the neutral group. Using eye-tracking methodology, in Experiment 2 we further demonstrated that attention scope that is narrowed due to anger is related to a polarized distribution of attention resources, particularly decreased eye fixation on the phrase containing nonsalient factors. Finally, in Experiment 3 we separated attention process from information salience and further confirmed that narrowing attention scope (polarizing attention resource) could bias the attribution. In sum, our results indicate that attention scope is the bridge by which anger increases attribution bias.