The influence of transformational leadership dimensions on intrapreneurial behaviour through mediators

Article history: Received: December 12, 2020 Received in revised format: December 29 2020 Accepted: February 21, 2021 Available online: February 21, 2021 The present study aimed to examine the direct impact of transformational leadership dimensions on employee strategic renewal behaviour and venture behaviour, and through a mediating role of job satisfaction and employee commitment to organizational change. The study sample consisted of 464 employees in different firm types in Ho Chi Minh city of Vietnam. The data is analysed using a structural equation model (SEM). The paper shows that dimensions of transformational leadership (namely intellectual stimulation, inspirational motivation, and individual consideration) have positive and significant influence employee strategic renewal behaviour and venture behaviour directly, and via job satisfaction and commitment to organizational change (affective commitment and normative commitment) as a moderating mechanism. © 2021 by the authors; licensee Growing Science, Canada


Introduction
Organizations are constantly facing change, which is a result of technological and economic innovation.Firms currently recognise the role of organizational innovation capacity and employee innovation behaviour in enhancing growth, competitive advantage and coping with change in the global economy (Anning-Dorson & Nyamekye, 2020).Employee intrapreneurial behaviour is crucial for firm sustainable competitiveness, based on facilitating strategic innovation and access to new resources and skills (Alpkan et al., 2010;Do & Luu, 2020;Duradoni & Di Fabio, 2019;Falola et al., 2018;Fellnhofer, 2017;Kuratko & Audretsch, 2013;Luu, 2020;Rigtering & Weitzel, 2013;Zahra, 1991).Leadership is a vital factor in the orientation of followers' positive attitude and innovation behaviour in the organisation (Daan van Knippenberg, 2019;Peng & Kim, 2020;Rao-Nicholson et al., 2016;Robert Lord et al., 2020;Smithikrai & Suwannadet, 2018).The importance of leadership to the organisational change process is based on the requirement of creating a new system, new institutional factors and new approaches to the management system (Battilana et al., 2010;Eisenbach et al., 1999;Herold et al., 2007;Kotter, 1996).Transformational leadership is a significant contributor to organisational change due to leaders' ability to motivate and support employees' commitment to the change with effective human resource management implementation (Farahnak et al., 2020;Nemanich & Keller, 2007;Savery, 1994).Although transformational leadership is recognised to be a vital factor of organisational change performance, few studies have investigated the relationship between four dimensions of transformational leadership and employee intrapreneurial behaviour in dynamic environments facing significant organisational changes.Positive employee attitudes such as job satisfaction and commitment to change play a vital role in employee acceptance of organisational change and its long-term success (Cordery et al., 1993;Herold et al., 2007;Meyer et al., 2007;Parish et al., 2008;Shum et al., 2008;Svensen et al., 2007;Van Dierendonck & Jacobs, 2012;Yousef, 2017).Job satisfaction is significant for organi-sational change because it relates to employee well-being, and employee well-being during organisational change is fundamentally important (Cartwright & Cooper, 1993).Antecedents, correlations and consequences of organisational commitment have continued to be a major focus of organisational behaviour studies, where considerable attention has been given to theory development (Meyer et al., 2002;Meyer & Allen, 1991;Mowday et al., 1979;Tepayakul & Rinthaisong, 2018).Employee commitment to change is found to be one of the most crucial antecedents of failed change implementation (Conner & Patterson, 1982;Herscovitch & Meyer, 2002;Judge et al., 1999;Oreg, 2003).However, the relationship between job satisfaction, dimensions of employee commitment to organizational change and employee intrapreneurial behaviour is not investigated in previous studies.It is special to examine the direct influence of transformational leadership dimensions on intrapreneurial behaviour, and through the mediating role of job satisfaction and employee commitment to change in an emerging economy context.
This study aims to investigate the direct influence of transformational leadership dimensions on intrapreneurial behaviour, and through the mediating role of job satisfaction and employee commitment to change in an emerging economy context.The paper contributes to the current knowledge by granting advanced knowledge about the influencing mechanism of transformational leadership constructs on employee strategic renewal behaviour and venture behaviour.

Employee intrapreneurial behaviour
Employee intrapreneurial behaviours is a bottom-up approach or a behavioural-approach, which refer to employee dynamic behaviours for firm changing and improvement (Gawke et al., 2017;Rigtering & Weitzel, 2013).A behaviour-based approach might grant an extensive conception of intrapreneurship with the organisational-level approach (Gawke et al., 2019).Employees might contribute to firm development over employee strategic renewal practices and venture activities (Do & Luu 2020).This approach may help differentiate intrapreneurial employee behaviours from general notions, which are characteristics of intrapreneurship (Neessen et al., 2019).This study employed the two feasible intrapreneurship activities of employee strategic renewal behaviour and venture behaviour.Employee strategic renewal behaviour consists of employee efforts on the lookout for solutions to innovate existing products/services, work practices, functioning and business strategies for enhancing the organisation competitiveness (Do & Luu, 2020;Woo, 2018).New business venturing is the most prominent characteristic of intrapreneurship because it can result in a new business creation within an existing company by redesign firm products or services and developing new markets (Do & Luu, 2020).In practice, employee strategic renewal behaviour and venture behaviour pertain to whether individuals are developing new business-related operations and change for their organisations by renovating existing organisation and developing novel business-related activities (GEM, 2020).

Commitment to organisational change
Organisational change can occur at various levels, which is defined as an attempt or series of attempts to modify an organisation's structure, goals, technology or work tasks (Carnall, 1986;Nadler & Tushman, 1990).A variety of changes in any organisation might be conducted, such as process reengineering, continuous improvements, restructuring, downsizing and rightsizing, venture, and mergers and acquisitions (Kavanagh & Ashkanasy, 2006;Martins & Roodt, 2008).Organisational change thus refers to any structural, strategic, cultural, human or technological transformation capable of generating impact in an organisation (Wood, 2000).Commitment to an organisation has various types, including engagement, attachment, and involvement within a broad spectrum of foci (Martin & Roodt, 2008).Commitment to change could be defined as the mechanism that provides the crucial linkage between employees and organizational change goals, which based on positive employee attitudes toward change and a belief in the social desirability of modes of conduct (Conner & Patterson, 1982;Kabanoff et al., 1995;Lau & Woodman, 1995).Meyer and Herscovitch (2001) suggested that the essence of commitment should be the same, regardless of the target of that commitment.Commitment to change is an extension of the organisational commitment model of an employee at the workplace (Neves & Caetano, 2009).Herscovitch and Meyer (2002) identified a commitment to change as an employee constraint related to an organisation's changing goals, including three forms: 1. Affective commitment to change focuses on a desire to support a change.2. Normative commitment to change is an obligation to be supportive.3. Continuance commitment to change is based on perceived association costs with resisting change.

Job satisfaction
Job satisfaction refers to employees' attitudes toward or feelings about their work, based on the comparison of job expectation and perception in the organisation (Hackman & Oldham, 1974;Porter & Lawler, 1968).According to Bruck et al. (2002), the facets of job satisfaction are pay, promotion, fringe benefits, supervision, co-workers, operating conditions, nature of the work, communication and rewards (namely pay, promotion, and fringe benefits all types of rewards).Specific satisfaction is measured by sub-scales, including job security, pay and compensation, social protection, supervision and growth (Hackman & Oldham, 1974).Burns (1978) argued that transformational leadership related to leaders' ability to support and motivate their followers to go beyond their interests to form a commitment to the organisational tasks and goals.Yukl (1989) defines transformational leadership as a process that to a significant extent affects changes in attitudes and behaviour among employees and strengthens their commitment to the mission and goals.Transformational leadership has been acknowledged as an underlying determinant of organisational change, which is measured by four dimensions, including idealised influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation and individualised consideration (Avolio & Bass, 2004;Bass & Avolio, 1993).Inspirational motivation includes leader behaviour to promote a consistent vision, mission and set of values for its members.The transformation leaders guide their subordinates by giving them meaning and challenges and work enthusiastically and optimistically to promote teamwork and accountability.Idealized influence includes the leader role in gaining the trust and respect of their subordinates through placing the needs of their subordinates above their own, sacrificing personal benefits for their subordinates, and exhibiting high ethical standards.Individual consideration refers to the leader behaviour as mentors to subordinates and rewards them for their creativity and innovation.Subordinates are treated differently according to talent and knowledge, who are empowered to make decisions and are always provided with the support they need to make those decisions.Intellectual stimulation comprises leader behaviour that encourages subordinates to create and innovate new ideas, to question the operating rules and systems that no longer serve the organization mission and goals (Jung et al., 2008).

Transformational leadership and job satisfaction
The quality of the leader-employee relationship has a great impact on employee self-confidence and job satisfaction (McCormick, 2001).Among leadership styles in a period of change, transformational leadership might be the most likely to stimulate organisational commitment and job satisfaction (Long et al., 2014;Nielsen et al., 2009;Yousef, 2000).Transformational leadership is positive and significant influences employee satisfaction (Luu & Phan, 2020;Nemanich & Keller, 2007;Savović, 2017;Shafi et al., 2020;Wang et al., 2017).
Hypothesis 1: Transformational leadership dimensions (idealised influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation and individualised consideration) directly and positively influence job satisfaction.Yousef (2000) argued that changes in leadership behaviour would lead to an increase in the levels of employee organisational commitment.Transformational leadership has been strongly related to follower change commitment than change-specific leadership practices, especially in cases in which the change had a significant personal impact on employees (Herold et al., 2008).Transformational leadership is found to positively relate to subordinates' work engagement and negatively relate to subordinates' project turnover intentions (Ding et al., 2017).Transformational leadership and its dimensions are found have a significant impact on employee commitment to organisational change (Amankwaa et al., 2019;Herold et al., 2008;Luu & Phan, 2020;Rafferty & Griffin, 2004;Top et al.,2015).

Job satisfaction and organisational commitment with change
Job satisfaction dimensions (pay, career advancement, work characteristics, the work environment, and co-worker relationships) and overall job satisfaction significantly contributed to organisational commitment (Hackman & Oldham, 1974;Herzberg et al., 1959;Maslow, 1943).Expanded studies have provided evidence of the impact of job satisfaction on organisational commitment, loyalty and low turnover intention (Kyei-Poku & Miller, 2013;Lambert et al., 2001;Meyer et al., 2002).The findings indicate that dimensions of job satisfaction and general job satisfaction have a significant effect on affective commitment, normative commitment and continuance commitment (Gunlu et al., 2010;Luu & Phan, 2020;Martin & Roodt, 2008;Yousef, 2000).Hypothesis 3a: Job satisfaction directly and positively influences affective commitment with organisational change.Hypothesis 3b: Job satisfaction directly and positively influences normative commitment with organisational change.Hypothesis 3c: Job satisfaction directly and negatively influences continuance commitment with organisational change.
Hypothesis 4a: Transformational leadership dimensions (idealised influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation and individualised consideration) directly and positively influence employee strategic renewal behaviour.
Hypothesis 4b: Transformational leadership dimensions (idealised influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation and individualised consideration) directly and positively influence employee venture behaviour.

Job satisfaction and employee intrapreneurial behaviour
Employee motivation and job satisfaction have a positive association with intrapreneurship (Antoncic & Antoncic, 2011;Dhar, 2015;Giannikis & Nikandrou, 2013;Rutherford & Holt, 2007).These attitudes are linked with intrapreneurship at an organisational level, based on corporate entrepreneurship (Antoncic & Antoncic 2011;Hendri, 2019;Rutherford & Holt, 2007).A direct relationship between satisfaction and activities of the employees refers to the selling of their idea within the organization (De Clercq et al., 2011).Entrepreneurial employees leave the corporation and implement their own ideas due to job dissatisfaction.However, Johnson and Wu (2012) reveal that nascent entrepreneurs are satisfied with their job but still leave the corporation to start their own venture, based on experience of the industry.
H5a: Job satisfaction directly and positively influence employee strategic renewal behaviour.H5b: Job satisfaction directly and positively influence employee venture behaviour.Farrukh et al. (2017) reveal that affective commitment and normative commitment has a positive and significant influence intrapreneurial behaviour, but continuance commitment is negatively associated with employee intrapreneurial behaviour.However, Camelo-Ordaz et al. (2012) argue that long organizational tenure might exhibit innovative behaviour und implement new ideas because of a passive attitude to decision making and resistance to change.Employee commitment and identification are also found mediating the relationship between transformational leadership and employee intrapreneurial behaviour (Sanders & Shipton, 2012;Valsania et al., 2016).

Commitment to change and employee intrapreneurial behaviour
H6a: Affective commitment with organisational change directly and positively influences employee strategic renewal behaviour.
H6b: Affective commitment with organisational change directly and positively influences employee venture behaviour.
H6c: Normative commitment with organisational change directly and positively influences employee strategic renewal behaviour.
H6d: Normative commitment with organisational change directly and positively influences employee venture behaviour.
H6e: Continuance commitment with organisational change directly and negatively influences employee strategic renewal behaviour.
H6f: Continuance commitment with organisational change directly and negatively influences employee venture behaviour.

Sample and data collection
In this study, the "rules of thumb" is adopted to obtain an adequate sample size for SEM (Soper, 2020).The study adopts a sample of 464 employees and middle-level managers of organizations from different industries in Ho Chi Minh City of Vietnam, based on non-probability sampling methods.The correspondent list is supplied by managers who approve participating in the research.Data is gathered by a direct interviewing method with on-the-job interview approach.The common method bias (CMB) phenomenon is reduced by the multiple phases (Podsakoff et al., 2003).Table 1 shows the sample data characteristics.

Measures
The transformational leadership style is measured by four sub-dimensions from the multifactor leadership questionnaires, including idealised influence (4 items; e.g., "My leader instils pride in me for being associated with him/her"), inspirational motivation (3 items; e.g., "My leader talks optimistically about the future"), intellectual stimulation (4 items; e.g., "My leader gets me to look at problems from many different angles"), and individualised consideration (3 items; e.g., "My leader considers me as having different needs, abilities, and aspirations from others") (Avolio & Bass, 2004;Bass & Avolio, 1997).Each item is measured by a five-point Likert scale (5 = strongly agree; 1 = strongly disagree.Job satisfaction is assessed by satisfaction with five items (e.g., "The amount of personal growth and development I get in doing my job") (Hackman & Oldham, 1974).A five-point Likert scale measured each item (5 = strongly satisfied; 1 = strongly dissatisfied).A 13-item scale measuring commitment to change is adopted from Herscovitch and Meyer's (2002) instrument, including affective commitment to change (4 items; e.g., "This change is a good strategy for this organisation"), normative commitment to change (4 items; e.g., "I feel a sense of duty to work toward this change"), and continuance commitment to change (5 items; e.g., "I have no choice but to go along with this change").Each item is measured by a five-point Likert scale (5 = strongly agree; 1 = strongly disagree).Measurement scale by Do and Luu ( 2020) is adopted to measure intrapreneurship behaviour.This measurement includes two dimensions, namely, strategic renewal behaviour (3-items; e.g., "I undertake activities that change the structure of my organization.")and venture behaviour (6-items; e.g., "I undertake activities to set up new business units.").Responses are given on a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = never to 5 = always-results in Table 2 described detail questions, mean, standardised deviation and reliability criteria of measured scales.

Descriptive statistics
Demographic variables among employees consisted of gender, age, level of education, management level, job tenure, and firm types.Some demographic characteristics of the research samples are shown in Fig. 2.

Gender
Age Educational background

Management level
Type of Enterprise Job tenure Fig. 1.Demographic data

Hypothesis testing
Estimation results by SEM shows the good model fit: c 2 (725, N = 464) = 1551.01;c 2 /df = 2.14 (Kettinger et al., 1995), GFI = 0.87, TLI = 0.89, CFI = 0.90, IFI = 0.90 (Chin & Todd, 1995;Segars & Grover, 1991), RMESA = 0.05 (Segars & Grover, 1993).The estimated results in Table 4 revealed   Multigroup analysis is adopted to assess measurement invariance across consumer groups, based on the chi-square difference tests.The multigroup analysis results in Table 4 reveal that firm types moderate the impact of transformational leadership dimensions on employee intrapreneurial behaviour directly and through the moderating role of job satisfaction and commitment to organisational change.The main finding in Table 5 provides manifest evidence that organizational climate among different firm types might influence employee intrapreneurial behaviours, based on the effects of transformational leadership dimensions, job satisfaction and commitment to change.The impact of leadership style transformation, job satisfaction and organizational cohesion on intrapreneurial behaviour in service firms is stronger than in industrial or agricultural firms.This can be explained based on the fact that the implementation of innovation behaviours and resource requirements for innovation by service firms are lower than that of other firms.Resources for investment projects in construction and industrial enterprises are huge, while investment opportunities and innovation in agricultural enterprises are limited.

Discussion
Organizational change may decrease employee satisfaction and commitment, resulting in lower innovative behaviour (Rafferty & Restubog, 2010).The paper provides empirical evidence that dimensions of transformational leadership show the direct positive and significant impact on employee intrapreneurial behaviour, and through mediating the role of job satisfaction, affective commitment and normative commitment to change.The findings are linked to previous studies in the different mechanism, but consistent in theoretical and practical implications (Afsar et al., 2017;Karatepe et al., 2020;Moriano et al., 2014;Pandey et al., 2020;Valsania et al., 2016).Job satisfaction and commitment to change influence intrapreneurial behaviour (Bicknell et al., 2010;Hendri, 2019;Giannikis & Nikandrou, 2013;Rutherford & Holt, 2007).Workplace happiness, workplace spirituality is found to influence employee innovative behaviour (Afsar et al., 2017;Bani-Melhem et al., 2018;Dhar, 2015).Affective commitment and normative commitment has a positive and significant influence on intrapreneurial behaviour (Farrukh et al., 2017;Moriano et al., 2014;Valsania et al., 2016).Continuance commitment to the organisation has always presented either opposite effects to those accounted for by affective commitment to the organisation or no effect at all, while normative commitment presents the same relationships as affective commitment, albeit not as strongly (Meyer et al., 2002).Additionally, considerable evidence has shown the insignificant relationship between dimensions of job satisfaction and continuance commitment to change (Gunlu et al., 2010;Kaplan et al., 2012;Lumley et al., 2011).Employee organizational commitment may be understood as passion, effort with the job, physically, cognitively and emotionally connected with the work, which results in more efficient and creative work performance (Gawke et al., 2017).Employee engagement is based on knowledge and ideas to improve products and services and to innovate in the way they work, while unattached employees who act as a handbrake on their efforts to accelerate productivity and innovation behaviour.
Leadership might improve the organisational change performance based on flattening the integration process into the dynamic system for employees (Kiessling & Harvey, 2006).Agle et al. (2006) suggest that leaders need to promote participation in the process of maintaining good relationships with employees, delegating responsibilities, and disclosing all decisions and relevant information during organisational change.Transformation leadership is significantly related to commitment and motivation of subordinates (Avolio et al., 2004;Van Dierendonck et al., 2014;Zhu et al., 2009).Transformational leadership might help to reduce the uncertainties and develop a positive attitude toward change among employees, which translates into job satisfaction, organisational commitment and intrapreneurial behaviour (Farahnak et al., 2020;Savović, 2017).Transformational leadership predicts employee motivations not only from external factors such as income and quality working conditions but also from internal factors such as organizational empowerment.Consequently, a transformational leader may focus on standards, values, needs, and competencies and can also adhere to them actively.It refers to intimate personal communication and increases employee competence.Transformational leadership makes subordinates believe they are valuable contributors to the organization (Zhu et al., 2009).The transformation leaders give their subordinates more confidence that their change is on the right track and that leads to success in the organization.Besides, the transformation leader can transform subordinates by having them review their work, demonstrate work intent, and show behaviour that is consistent with the organization mission and vision.Transforming leadership requires subordinates to properly apply the values and work standards they orient, thereby strengthening their subordinate confidence in the organization as well as increasing their commitment to organizational goals (Kuhnert & Lewis, 1987).Transformation leadership is the process by which individuals commit themselves to the prosperity of the organization and create connections that increase the motivation and morale of subordinates.
Transformational leadership might stimulate employee creativity, innovation, adaptability and proactivity at work (Khalili, 2016;Moriano et al., 2014;Wang et al., 2017).This paper reveals that transformational leadership constructs (namely intellectual stimulation, inspirational motivation, and individual consideration) are positive and significantly influence employee intrapreneurial behaviour.Constructs of transformational leadership are visionaries, inspirational, courageous and adventurous, which are coherent with intrapreneur traits (Alam et al., 2020;Mahmoud et al., 2020;Marques et al., 2019;Woo, 2018).Transformational leadership might reinforce intrapreneurship in the direct and indirect channel.In the direct approach, leaders influence employee innovative behaviour through their deliberate actions aiming to stimulate idea generation and application and daily behaviour (De Jong & Den Hartog, 2007).Besides, transformational leadership may adopt mediating mechanisms to promote employee intrapreneurial behaviour, namely entrepreneurial orientation, corporate social responsibility practices, organizational learning and innovation culture, job autonomy, employee psychological capital, organizational empowerment, organizational identification and organisational support (Amankwaa et al., 2019;Chang et al., 2017;Lei et al., 2020;Sattayaraksa & Boon-itt, 2016;Yariv & Galit, 2017).
The overall effect of transformational leadership on employee innovation behaviour is consistent in the literature (Afsar & Umrani, 2019;Amankwaa et al., 2019;Sanders & Shipton, 2012;Shafi et al., 2020;Tung, 2016).However, the partial effects of transformational leadership dimensions are divergent among scholars.Shafi et al. (2020) indicate that three constructs of transformational leadership, including idealized influence, intellectual stimulation, and inspirational motivation have a significant direct influence on employee creativity but individual consideration is not found to be significantly related to employee creativity.Tajasom et al. (2015) show that idealised influence, intellectual stimulation, and individualised consideration had significant positive effects on innovation performance.Boukamcha (2019) reveals the crucial influence of the intellectual stimulation and the inspirational motivation, triggered by transformational leaders on employee innovativeness, proactiveness and new business venturing.These assorted results might be controlled by organizational context, that intrapreneurship is conducted.This paper proves that firm type plays a crucial role in promoting employee intrapreneurial behaviour through providing of supportive innovation climate (Basco et al., 2020;Camelo-Ordaz et al., 2012;Kuratko et al., 2005;Lee & Kim, 2019;Urbano et al., 2013).This paper reveals that the relationship between intrapreneurship and transformational leadership strongly depend on the organisational environment for intrapreneurship activities (Karatepe et al., 2020;Wiklund & Shepherd, 2005).Besides, employee demographics as gender, age, level of education, income level, level of management, experience and firm types have been mostly studied in the context of employee change (Camelo-Ordaz et al., 2012;Luu & Phan, 2020;Madsen et al., 2005).An additional discussion out of the paper scope is how to translate the findings into firm policies in practices.Human resource management correlates significantly with positive attitudes and behaviour among employees in the organisational change (Cooke et al., 2020;Deschamps et al., 2016).Human resource practices are undertaken in the areas of culture, leadership, cross-functional integration, training, communication and might positively influence employee perception, thus reducing resistance and increasing commitment to change and innovation behaviour (Maheshwari & Vohra, 2015;Morris et al., 2011).Human resource management practices might affect innovation behaviour through their influence on human capital development by coaching (Nieves & Quintana, 2016).Human resource practices and change leadership style during an organisational change play a critical role in maintaining employee satisfaction, organizational commitment to change and intrapreneurship (Chung et al., 2014;Deschamps et al., 2016;Escribá-Carda et al., 2020;Herold et al., 2007;Lord et al., 2020;Smithikrai & Suwannadet, 2018;Vasilaki et al., 2016).

Theoretical implications
The paper investigates the critical role of transformational leadership dimensions in maintaining and improving employee motivation and commitment to change, which might translate to employee intrapreneurial behaviours.It supplies the advanced knowledge on the process that transformational leaders may foster intrapreneurial behaviour through building the comprehensive relationships based on intellectual stimulation, inspirational motivation and individual consideration; Once employee needs are satisfied and their motivating factors are conscious, they might commit themselves to the organization, which in turn positively cultivate employee innovation performance.

Practical implications
Organisations might be successful in maintaining and fostering intrapreneurial behaviour by applying transformational leadership approaches.Organisations have to supply adequate needs that enhance employee job satisfaction (including job security, pay and compensation, social protection, supervision and growth) which might enhance motivative and positive employee psychology, attitude and commitment toward organisational change.Besides, firms need to perceive that the effect of the transformational leadership constructs on intrapreneurship is dependent on the firm type, which may facilitate or inhibit innovation performance.

Conclusion
In the field of organisational behaviour, promoting positive employee attitudes and behaviour is a decisive factor in the organisational success of change implementation.The findings revealed that transformational leadership constructs, including intellectual stimulation, inspirational motivation and individual consideration, had a significant influence on intrapreneurial behaviour.It proposed an integrated analysis framework for the relationships between transformational leadership, job satisfaction and organizational commitment to change and intrapreneurial behaviour.Understanding the crucial role of leadership and organizational climate toward employee attitude might lead administrators to develop more successful initiatives to improve employees' intrapreneurial behaviour.
The study is limited by its sample, self-report questionnaire scale and cross-sectional data.The research model did not simultaneously test multiple antecedents (e.g., personality, context) and consequences of employee intrapreneurial behaviour.
Hypothesis 2a: Transformational leadership dimensions (idealised influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation and individualised consideration) directly and positively influence affective commitment with organisational change.Hypothesis 2b: Transformational leadership dimensions (idealised influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation and individualised consideration) directly and positively influence normative commitment with organisational change.Hypothesis 2c: Transformational leadership dimensions (idealised influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation and individualised consideration) directly and negatively influence continuance commitment with organisational change.

Table 1
Results of reliability and convergent validity tests

Table 2
Fornell-Larcker criterion analysis for testing discriminant validity and correlations matrix among constructs

Table 3
Results of testing hypothesis

Table 4
Results of the structural analysis

Table 5
Results of the multi-group structural analysis among firm types