As we can see from the analysis, we have found that respecting employee personality (EPR), the internal honesty of the leader (IH), and the recognition of employees' achievements (EAR) are a positive and statistically significant influence on the perception of the “reality and reason” of the leader (RR). The perception of the “reality and reason” thus appears to be dependent on other behavioral forms of the leader (constructs), such as respect for employee personality, the recognition of their achievements, and the inner honesty of the leader.

The results obtained show that the more the leaders respect the personality of the employees, recognize their achievements, and are internally honest with themselves, the more likely shall the employees perceive them as “real and reasonable.” At the same time, the more authentic, moral and firm the leader is, as well as committed to cooperation and progress, the more he or she shall be perceived as “real and reasonable,” and vice versa. Likewise, the less the leaders respect the personality of their employees, acknowledge their achievements and are internally honest, the less they will be perceived as “real and reasonable”. The negative statistically significant influence of the perceived “reality and reasonableness” suggests that the higher the perception of “reality and reasonableness” is, the less the employees will be temporarily absent from work and vice versa.

Table: Standardized and non-standardized regression coefficients of connections between constructs in the JB model











Leader reality and reason (RR)












→, ← - way of connection; B – non-standard regression coefficient; β – standardized regression coefficient; p – degree of statistical characteristics; *** – p < 0,001; RR – reality and reason; EPR – employee personality respect; IH – internal honesty; EAR – employee achievement recognition.

The central relationship in the JB model is the influence of the perceived reality and reasonableness of the leader on sickness absence, expressed by the number of days of temporary absence from work in the last 12 months. The impact is shown as statistically significant (βRR→SICKNESS ABSENCE = -0.106; p <0.001), whereas the value of the standardized regression coefficient indicates a weak impact. The negative regression coefficient indicates an inverse-proportional relationship between the perceived leader reality and reason and sickness absence, which means the higher the perceived reality and reasonableness of the leader is, the lower the sickness absence. In other words – in the event of an increase in the perception of reality and reasonableness of one grade on the scale (measured on a 5-point scale), the sickness absence of one employee would decrease by 2.5 days per year and vice versa.

The leader “Reality and Reasonableness” (RR) is largely defined by the leader’s authenticity (β = 0.977; p <0.001) and the commitment to cooperation and progress (development) (β = 0.930; p <0.001), and to a lesser extent (but still strong) the morality and strength of the leader (β = 0.890; p <0.001). Three independent behavioral dimensions positively affect the perception of “reality and reasonableness”, the most positive is the respect of personality of employees (βSOZ→RR = 0.421; p <0.001), internal honesty (βNO→RR = 0.390; p <0.001) and the recognition of employee achievements (βPZDZ→RR = 0.243; p <0.001).

All connections in the JB model are statistically significant at p <0.001. Proceeding from this, we can say that certain leader behaviors affect sickness absence – but at this point, it is important to emphasize that there are many other (different) factors (especially in the working environment) that affect sickness absence which cannot be explained with leader behavior.