Charismatic leadership (CL) is defined as the relationship between a leader and their followers based on the perception of the leader’s exemplary character (Waldman et al., 2001). Charisma is derived from a leader’s exceptional referent power (Bass, 1985). According to the prior research (e.g., Bass, 1985; Choi, 2006; Conger and Kanungo, 1998), charismatic leadership predicts individual outcomes including job attitudes, OCB and task performance. Upon recognizing a charismatic leader’s outstanding qualities, followers are likely to exhibit complete personal devotion to the leader and their articulated vision (Waldman et al., 2001). A leader’s charisma inspires followers to achieve extraordinary outcomes through joint efforts by cultivating collective missions and values (Bass and Riggio, 2006; Shamir et al., 1993; Waldman et al., 2001).

A charismatic leader influences followers to prioritize their collective interests over self-interest and elevate their collective identity (Cicero and Pierro, 2007; House et al., 2001). Important mechanisms that charismatic leaders use to influence their followers could be to put their collective interests above self-interests and enhance their collective identity (Cicero and Pierro, 2007; Conger et al., 2000; House et al., 2001; Shamir et al., 1993). Group-level value congruence induces an escalated sense of homogeneity among followers (Klein and House, 1995). Identification with a group causes followers to adopt their group’s interests as their own (Brewer and Gardner, 1996). Such collective and shared identity strengthened by CL leads followers to engage in more collaborative and altruistic behaviors, such as organizational citizenship behavior (OCB).

The OCB refers to discretionary, extra-role behavior that underpins the social environment in which task performance occurs. Research indicates that the salience of shared identity could increase OCB (Organ et al., 2006). As discussed above, CL would lead to followers’ adaptation to a collective orientation, which generates enthusiasm for altruistic behaviors toward others within an organization, i.e., OCB (e.g., Bass, 1985; Den Hartog et al., 2007). Therefore, our first hypothesis is:

We suggest that followers’ PG fit could modify the influence of CL on OCB. Since follower-related aspects could be essential contingencies limiting leader influence (Kerr and Jermier, 1978), we build an organizing framework for these relationships based on substitutes for leadership theory and research on follower characteristics (Kelley, 1992; Kerr and Jermier, 1978). From an interactionist perspective, individual behaviors are assumed to be determined by the interaction of person and situational factors (Gilmore et al., 2013; Meyer et al., 2010).

Person-group, or PG, fit is the compatibility between an individual and his/her immediate workgroup (Werbel and Gilliland, 1999). It is based on the idea that many employment positions require interpersonal interactions with group members (Werbel and Johnson, 2001). PG fit is likely to increase this motivational component by improving collegial relationships (Werbel and Johnson, 2001). It has been shown to have a positive link to the quality of work relationships, as well as both in-role and extra-role performance (Kristof-Brown et al., 2005). A group context contains various unique characteristics (e.g., values, goals, and skills; Werbel and Gilliland, 1999) that determine how an individual fits in, and the combination of social and task elements is particularly salient in workgroups (Crawford and LePine, 2013; DeRue and Morgeson, 2007).

As for PG fit, Muchinsky and Monahan (1987) presented two distinct types of fit: supplementary and complementary. Supplementary fit refers to the similarity between a person and the characteristics of their workgroup. Perceived PG fit by followers, i.e., value fit and DA fit, captures complementary and supplementary interaction with CL. In particular, PG value fit in the form of supplementary fit corresponds to the value congruence or similarity-attraction paradigm within a group (Ostroff and Judge, 2007). Since values play a vital role in-group identity (Feldman, 1984), value congruence is the most suitable predictor of important outcomes, including OCB (e.g., Chiang and Hsieh, 2012; Wat and Shaffer, 2005).

High value fit as a contingency factor attenuates CL’s influence on followers’ OCB. Substitutes for leadership theory explains that when employees belong to tight-knit groups with high group cohesiveness, the power of leadership is likely diminished (Kerr and Jermier, 1978). This is because positive relationships within a workgroup allow group members to commit to, and identify with, their group (Van der Vegt and Bunderson, 2005). Value congruence could be a contingency for CL since leaders have less influence on the mutual commitment and transformational qualities of followers in groups where followers hold values and identities congruent with each other (Bass and Riggio, 2006; Li et al., 2013; Shamir et al., 1993). High PG value fit, or value congruence, likely leads to a strong sense of social identity, one of CL’s main mechanisms. That is, while identities are inherently social (Mead, 1934), a follower’s high PG value fit would increase collective identity orientation with a group, which makes CL’s impact on the collective identity of a broader social entity less effective or redundant (Howell and Shamir, 2005).

While a certain amount of incongruence between individuals and the organization may be motivating (Argyris, 1964), excessive value fit or conformity in values could promote not simply harmony but also sticking to the status quo or social loafing, both of which negatively affect creativity (Runco, 2004). Following this logic, we propose that PG value fit acts as a substitute for CL and, thus, attenuates the relationship between CL and subordinate OCB. Therefore, we propose the following:

As one of the components of person-job (PJ) fit, DA fit refers to the degree to which a person’s knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs) align with the job’s requirements (Cable and DeRue, 2002). This is a complementary fit, as DA fit is achieved when an individual’s characteristics fill gaps that others cannot address (Muchinsky and Monahan, 1987). Traditional job analysis serves as the basis for assessing this fit (Werbel and Johnson, 2001), and this fit can provide salient cues used in developing job-related attitudes and informing work-related decisions (Boon and Biron, 2016). Regarding followers’ PG DA fit as a contingency factor, we expect that high demand abilities (DA) fit further strengthens the positive influence of CL on followers’ OCB.

Individuals who perceive their abilities as closely matching their environment (i.e., high DA fit) focus less on their deficiencies and feel a high level of self-efficacy (Greguras and Diefendorff, 2009). The scarcity of attributes in a group also promotes the activation of independence or unique characteristics (cf. Luria et al., 2019). Similarly, Research shows that employees who work independently are less inclined to share mental models with coworkers (DeChurch and Mesmer-Magnus, 2010) and are less drawn to the collective (Hoffman et al., 2011).

Research suggests CL stimulates group identification by emphasizing shared values in a highly diverse group. In a group with more fragile team identification, team leaders’ devotion to a group identity will significantly affect followers’ attitudes and behaviors, including OCB (Li et al., 2013). While DA fit has little effect on employee attitude (Kristof-Brown et al., 2005), CL can be an intense situation (Mischel, 1977), which provides a clue as to desired specific behaviors. Accordingly, we propose the following:

We expect that CL enhances task performance via OCB. Individual task performance, as reflected in organizational reward systems, is directly related to the organizational and technical core (Borman and Motowidlo, 1997). An individual’s performance at work consists of task performance, and empirical findings indicate a strong positive correlation between OCB and task performance (e.g., Williams and Anderson, 1991). This is because citizenship behaviors underline the maintenance and enhancement of the social and psychological context that supports task performance (Organ et al., 2006).

Some scholars, however, argue that when time is controlled, the relationship between OCB and task performance becomes zero-sum or even a negative correlation, as found in both lab and field studies (Allen and Rush, 1998). Since OCB involves an individual’s active engagement and extra effort (Gilmore et al., 2013), a trade-off between OCB and task performance is expected. Engaging in OCB could harm individual outcomes (Bergeron, 2007). A resource allocation perspective supports this line of argument, as multiple demands must compete for resources between OCB and task performance. Engaging in OCB can be highly strenuous when task demands stretch group members to their limits, requiring adequate attentional resources (Kanfer and Ackerman, 1989).

On the other hand, CL is suggested to be immensely successful in enhancing followers’ performance in situations that followers perceive as demanding (e.g., Bass, 1985; Waldman et al., 2001). CL’s Warmth and trust make followers feel optimistic about acting in the group’s best interest, even in stressful situations (e.g., Tepper et al., 2018). Similarly, a study indicates that CL reduces follower’s strain levels, further facilitating OCB (Boerner et al., 2008). Additionally, since CL is positively related to workgroup identification, followers are more likely to exert extra effort, resulting in higher job involvement and improved group task performance (Cicero and Pierro, 2007; Le Blanc et al., 2021). Therefore, we propose as follows:

Furthermore, when considering PG value fit as a contingency factor, CL would be less effective on task performance via OCB when the value fit is high compared to when the value fit is low. The results of the meta-analysis suggest that task cohesion is more closely associated with performance than social cohesion (Beal et al., 2003). A high PG value fit is likely to generate high social cohesion. Employees with similar mental models may be prevented from thinking divergently and acting creatively (Seong and Choi, 2019, 2023), further hindering task performance. Since a high PG value fit attenuates CL’s influence on OCB, as discussed earlier, we propose:

It has been addressed that PG DA fit significantly impacts task performance (Kristof-Brown et al., 2005; Seong and Kristof-Brown, 2012). In considering PG DA fit as a contingency factor, CL would positively relate to task performance via OCB when the fit is high rather than low. Our final hypothesis is the following:

Data for this Research was gathered from a Korean firm in the public sector. The survey was conducted online in a two-stage process. In Stage 1, team members responded to the questionnaires. In Stage 2, one month after the Stage 1 survey of team members was completed, the team leaders filled out two types of questionnaires: First, to assess the team under their supervision and then, each team member’s performance. By this, we collected the questionnaires from 301 team members. However, among these, only 136 cases were selected because of the non-responses from some leaders to the OCB and the performance of their team members. The team members’ mean age was 41.6 years (SD = 8.2).

By adopting an interactionist approach and explaining the contingencies of CL, our study extends the boundary conditions for CL (cf. van Knippenberg and van Knippenberg, 2005). Our investigation contributes to the growing body of empirical studies examining the contextual variables that enhance or reduce CL (Ehrnrooth et al., 2023; Kim and Vandenberghe, 2018; Le Blanc et al., 2021; Waldman et al., 2001). Our study is one of the first to investigate how followers’ PG fit impacts the relationship between CL and OCB, and how this relationship, in turn, influences task performance. By considering PG fit as new contingencies, this Research expands our understanding of leadership boundaries (cf. Kerr and Jermier, 1978).

Enhancing either CL or PG fit increases work effectiveness when considered separately. However, a different pattern emerges when we believe their joint factors since increasing both can lead to suboptimal results due to their non-additive configuration. The interactionist approach (Amabile, 1996; Oldham and Cummings, 1996) argues that the leadership process should be examined in terms of how leadership interacts with followers’ characteristics (cf. Gilmore et al., 2013). Our study contributes to Research on followership by investigating followers’ characteristics closely (e.g., Howell and Shamir, 2005; Kelley, 1992; Kim and Vandenberghe, 2018; Klein and House, 1995; Tepper et al., 2018; Van Dijk et al., 2021), beyond the view that a leader is to be the single source of leadership. This study also demonstrates the theoretical and practical value of investigating leader and follower aspects together, rather than in isolation.

Finally, our study contributes to the discussion on PG fit as a contextual variable. Most Research so far has explored fit as either a dependent or independent variable (cf. Vogel and Feldman, 2009). Although modern organizations have widely adopted the application of work systems, relatively little Research has been conducted on person-group (PG) fit, compared to the extensive Research on person-organization (PO) fit (Oh et al., 2014; Seong et al., 2015). Moreover, even those studies regarding PG fit have investigated supplementary fit (in terms of values and goals, e.g., Kristof-Brown et al., 2005) to predict satisfaction with team members, feelings of cohesion, strain, and individual performance. By examining complementary fit (in terms of DA fit), our Research expands our understanding of the dynamics between PE fit and leadership. Simultaneous consideration of the different kinds of fit within a single study would provide a more holistic understanding of an organization and a group (Seong et al., 2015).

Our findings are particularly pertinent to team-based organizational structures where the role of followers becomes more critical (Li et al., 2013). In such work environments, managers are advised to maximize their OCB and task performance by providing proper CL (Cicero and Pierro, 2007; Conger et al., 2000) and selecting followers with high PG fit (Seong et al., 2015). However, we should note that leadership and followership do not always reinforce one another. Since corporate success is not only a result of leadership per se but also due to effective followers (cf. Kelley, 1992), we must examine how the PG fit of followers interacts with CL of the leaders to influence followers’ receptiveness to leadership.

The results of this paper suggest that charismatic leaders need to recognize that their charisma could be redundant and offer virtually no effect on OCB and task performance in a highly congruent team based on the team members’ values (Kim and Vandenberghe, 2018). The results also suggest that leaders take the pulse of their teams and keep the PG value fit of their followers high. As indicated by our simple slope tests, CL has non-significant or even negative relationships with OCB and task performance when PG value fit is high, particularly in the case of excessive CL.

However, leaders are at an advantage if they exercise CL in situations with high PG DA fit. PG DA fit will help screen out people based on attraction and selection for providing a competitive advantage (Kristof-Brown et al., 2005). In many organizations where job design emphasizes high PG DA fit with clearly designated job responsibilities (Jansen and Kristof-Brown, 2006), CL’s role remains essential for OCB and task performance. A conventional job analysis rigidifying job responsibilities by exclusively focusing on DA fit would help ascertain individual ability to perform the job’s technical aspects. However, since industry moves increasingly toward a more complex and dynamic work environment, a team-oriented work environment requires more flexibility with job responsibilities (Werbel and Johnson, 2001). The presence of leadership becomes vital in fostering team-oriented environments.

Our study supports the argument that influential leaders intervene in subordinates’ affairs to complement and compensate for the latter’s existing abilities and deficiencies (House, 1996). Along with increased diversity in skills and demographic characteristics, CL could benefit the team or the organization in very tangible ways, such as by motivating employees by developing their value congruence and identity. Employees who exhibit a high level of DA fit and job performance are likely to decide to remain in the team or the organization when they feel a greater sense of community and value congruence with the group (Vogel and Feldman, 2009).

From a broader leadership perspective, contingencies may operate in other types of leadership and organizational CL (Grant et al., 2011). Therefore, we suggest that more studies investigate the extent to which different leadership types present either positive (e.g., empowering; Howell and Shamir, 2005) or negative (e.g., abusive or narcissistic) valence in consideration of contingencies (Li et al., 2013; Siangchokyoo et al., 2020).

Given that different types of fit (e.g., person-job, person-group, or person-organization fit) show unique relationships with attitudes and behaviors (Cable and DeRue, 2002), further investigation examining their interactive effects with CL on followers is warranted. Moreover, the supplementary and complementary fit may influence each other over time. For example, individuals who experience a higher value fit are more likely to understand norms and job-specific rules. With less role ambiguity (e.g., Edwards and Cable, 2009), they may invest more effort in acquiring relevant competencies. Over time, they are more likely to be positively reinforced for performing specific tasks (Kristof-Brown et al., 2002).

High leader-member exchange provides employees with better access to the resources necessary to fulfill their job demands (Boon and Biron, 2016). Leadership strengthens the relationship between PG value fit and DA fit perceptions. In addition to Research examining how PG value fit and DA fit affect each other over time (e.g., Boon and Biron, 2016; Shipp and Jansen, 2011), future studies could investigate how they interact with different leadership styles. Longitudinal, experimental, or quasi-experimental designs may help clarify this issue by capturing leaders’ actions across each workgroup’s history (e.g., Meslec et al., 2020; Tepper et al., 2018).

Finally, using the present Korean sample does not necessarily preclude the application of our findings to other cultures. Although the theoretical frameworks and arguments addressed in this article are generalizable across cultures (Den Hartog et al., 1999), certain cultural factors prevalent in Korean culture (e.g., collectivism) may influence the mean scores of specific variables. Relatedly, a meta-analysis of PE fit and work outcomes shows that PG fit has stronger relationships with outcomes in East Asia than in Europe and North America (Oh et al., 2014).