The prevalence of narcissistic leaders globally, exemplified by figures like Steve Jobs and Elon Musk, has sparked research into their impact on organizations. While some studies suggest narcissistic leaders can enhance employee organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) through autonomy or open communication, others show negative effects, such as increased hindrance stress and disrupted reciprocity. This inconsistency highlights the complexity of the relationship. This study aims to clarify this by exploring the mediating and moderating factors that influence the relationship between narcissistic leadership and employees' change-oriented organizational citizenship behavior (COCB). Specifically, it examines how narcissistic leadership's impact on employee COCB is channeled through the development of a 'team chaxu climate' – a phenomenon where leaders favor some team members over others – and how this is moderated by the level of family affective support the leader receives.

The concept of narcissism has evolved from its mythological origins to its current understanding as a personality trait characterized by inflated ego, dysfunctional relationships, and exploitative tendencies. Research on narcissistic leadership shows that while such leaders might initially motivate with charisma and grand visions, their negative traits – disregard for others' interests, arrogance, and a lack of empathy – often lead to unfavorable outcomes. Regarding OCB, while some affiliative OCBs maintain the status quo, COCB involves proactive behaviors that challenge the status quo and aim for organizational improvement. This inherent risk of challenging the leader makes COCB a particularly interesting context to study the impact of narcissistic leadership. Existing research on the relationship between narcissistic leadership and OCB provides mixed results; some showing negative relationships and others showing positive relationships. This research gap motivates this study to investigate the mediating role of team chaxu climate and moderating role of family affective support.

This study employed a three-wave time-lagged questionnaire survey involving 363 employees from 61 teams in central China. Data collection occurred in three waves: Wave 1 collected data on narcissistic leadership and family affective support from team leaders (n=74); Wave 2 assessed team chaxu climate (n=408 from 68 teams); and Wave 3 measured employees' COCB (n=363 from 61 teams). The study used established scales for measuring narcissistic leadership (Jonason & Webster, 2010), team chaxu climate (Liu, 2003), COCB (Choi, 2007), and family affective support (Li & Zhao, 2009). Control variables included leader gender, age, education level, and tenure. Data analysis involved Harman's one-factor test and ULMC to assess common method bias, multilevel confirmatory factor analysis (MCFA) using Mplus 7.4 for discriminant validity, multilevel structural equation modeling (SEM) to test hypotheses, and Monte Carlo simulation (100,000 replications) to analyze mediation and moderated mediation effects.

The multilevel SEM analysis revealed a significant negative relationship between narcissistic leadership and COCB (β = -0.306, p < 0.001), supporting Hypothesis 1. Team chaxu climate significantly mediated this relationship (β = -0.104, 95% CI [-0.153, -0.061]), supporting Hypothesis 2. Narcissistic leadership significantly and positively predicted team chaxu climate (β = 0.317, p < 0.001). Furthermore, family affective support significantly moderated the relationship between narcissistic leadership and team chaxu climate (β = -0.645, p < 0.001), supporting Hypothesis 3. The Monte Carlo simulation confirmed the significant mediating effect of team chaxu climate, but this effect was moderated by family affective support; the mediating effect was significant under low family affective support (-0.228, 95% CI [-0.145, -0.063]) but not significant under high family affective support (0.019, 95% CI [-0.0656, 0.001]), thus supporting Hypothesis 4. The difference in mediating effects between high and low family support was significant (0.247, 95% CI [0.057, 0.084]).

The findings support the hypothesized negative influence of narcissistic leadership on employees' COCB, mediated by team chaxu climate. This suggests that narcissistic leaders, driven by resource conservation strategies (COR theory), create an unequal team climate by favoring certain members, thereby discouraging high-risk COCB from both favored and unfavored employees. The moderating role of family affective support further clarifies that the leaders' relational resource needs at work are contingent on their resource experience at home. When family support is low, the leader's need to build connections with select subordinates (to compensate for resource deficiency) strengthens the negative impact on COCB. Conversely, high family support reduces this need, weakening the relationship between narcissistic leadership and team chaxu climate. These findings integrate COR and W-HR models, expanding the understanding of narcissistic leadership.

This study advances the understanding of narcissistic leadership's impact on employee COCB by highlighting the mediating role of team chaxu climate and the moderating role of family affective support. It contributes to OCB literature by offering a nuanced explanation for inconsistent findings regarding the relationship between narcissistic leadership and employee OCB. The study also empirically validates the W-HR model and provides practical implications for organizations regarding leadership selection, team climate management, and leader support. Future research should explore longitudinal relationships, other OCB types, cross-cultural validation, and the impact of extra-organizational factors.

The study's limitations include its cross-sectional design, which restricts definitive causal inferences; the focus on COCB, rather than other OCB types; the sample's geographical concentration in China; and the potential influence of regional cultural factors. Future research should address these limitations by employing longitudinal studies, examining various OCBs, utilizing broader geographic samples, and considering cross-cultural differences.