(2) 致謝詞 在經管所兩年的學習過程，隨著論文的付梓，即將劃上句點，這段時間以來的點點 滴滴，有回憶，有不捨；回憶之情將在我的懷中日漸晶瑩光耀，不捨之心將使我的人生 成就勇氣。 本論文能順利完成，幸蒙恩師 吳毓麒博士的指導與教誨。古云:「業精於勤，荒於 嬉」，吳老師卻以獨特的「業精於嬉」的教導與哲學，如引線般的爆發出我無限的創意， 恩師以亦師亦友的相處模式方式給我很大的發揮空間，並且適時的給予協助，這樣的恩 師，難在一般業師裡尋覓，我有幸遇之，更是人生一大福氣，誠永誌在心;對於研究的 方向、觀念的啟迪、架構的匡正、資料的提供與求學的態度逐一斧正與細細關懷，當我 遇到求學遇到挫折時，多虧有吳老師的關心與幫助，讓我穩住求學步伐、讓我更有衝勁 向前邁進，於此獻上最深的敬意與謝意。論文口試期間，承蒙口試委員蔡進士博士與鄭 育仁博士的鼓勵與疏漏處之指正，使得本論文更臻完備，在此謹深致謝忱;最後，獻給 曾給予我挫折和磨練的人，謝謝你們讓我心智更加成熟與堅強。 論文寫作期間，感謝佳伶、佳芸在我遇到最辛苦的瓶緊時給我足夠的時間做緩衝; 佳慧有時的逗趣讓壓力頓時煙消雲散，還有我的摯友晉霖陪我一起邁步向前，有這些好 友為我在異鄉求學的道路上又增添了一份力量，和他們的友情，是我莫大的財富；尤其 是我最麻吉的小阿姨、大姊姊、表哥小白、小哥哥在我出國發表論文時，給我最實際的 贊助，讓我得以順利的完成發表。感謝所有幫我發放問卷的每一位親朋好友，讓調查工 作順遂地完成，內心無限的感激與感動溢於言表。 最後，特將本文獻給我最敬愛母親，感謝您無怨無悔的養育與無時無刻的關懷照 顧，還有父親在經濟上與精神上的支持，以及姊姊的關懷與支持，雖然我們總是聚少離 多，但你們是我最強而有力的後盾，讓我能專注於課業研究中，願以此與家人共享。 如同西方諺語『參透為何，才能迎接任何』。今後，將秉持著經管所提倡的『拓展 學習新視野，未來無限寬廣』之精神，不斷地精進自己。願以此期勉自己的未來，作一 個『思考、創造、有理想』的青年。. 蔡秉儒 謹誌於 國立高雄大學經營管理研究所 中華民國九十九年七月 ii.
(3) Influence of Paternalistic Leadership on Organizational Ethical Climate Advisor：Dr. Yu-Chi Wu Institute of Business and Management National University of Kaohsiung. Student：Ping-Ju Tsai Institute of Business and Management National University of Kaohsiung. ABSTRACT Different ethical climates result in different organizational outcome. For example, Myint (2006) indicated that benevolent and principled ethical climates may enhance overall organizational commitment. Leaders’ behaviors play the essential roles to influence and shape the ethical climates of organizations. The content and style of leadership and practical policies are influenced by the culture, while Chinese society is different from Western society in cultural values. In terms of the Chinese business organizational leadership: The clear and obvious character of top managers in Chinese business organizations also called paternalistic leadership (PL). Prior studies regarding the relationship between paternalistic leadership and ethical climate have focused on the discussion of their unidimensional constructs relationship. However, the existing literature lacks for discussions of the multidimensional constructs relationships between paternalistic leadership and ethical climate. Multidimensional constructs may be distinguished from unidimensional constructs, which refer to a single theoretical concept (Edwards, 2001), and multiple dimensions regarded as distinct but related concepts rather than a single overall concept. This study argues that different paternalistic leader behaviors may lead to different type of ethical climates. Thus, this study tries to explore the multidimensional relationships between paternalistic leadership (i.e., authoritarian leadership, benevolent leadership, and moral leadership) and ethical climate (i.e., egoistic climate, benevolence climate and principled climate).. iii.
(4) The results of this study clarifying our current knowledge of the influences of paternalistic leadership on ethical climate can be useful in guiding efforts intended to enhance the usefulness of organizational training programs and recruiting or promoting activities for subsequent leaders.. ： Paternalistic Leadership, Organizational Ethical Climate,. Keywords. Unidimensional Constructs, Multidimensional Constructs. iv.
(5) 家長式領導對組織倫理氣候之影響. 指導教授：吳毓麒 博士 國立高雄大學經營管理研究所. 學生：蔡秉儒 國立高雄大學經營管理研究所. 摘要 不同的組織倫理氣候會導致不同的組織結果，Myint (2006)指出仁慈型和原則型 的倫理氣候可能會增強整體的組織承諾。領導者的行為對於組織倫理氣候的形塑和影響 扮演著重要的角色。領導的內容和風格均會受到文化的影響，然而在文化價值上，華人 社會是有別於西方社會的；根據華人組織的領導研究指出：華人企業的高階領導擁有清 晰而鮮明的特色，可稱之為家長式領導（Paternalistic Leadership; PL） 。先前關於家長式 領導和組織倫理氣候的研究均是以單一構面(unidimensional)探討之；然而，對於多重構 面(multidimensional)的探討是相當欠缺的。此外，Edwards (2001)認為多重構面的探討有 別於單一構面的探討(因為它代表著單一的理論概念)，多重構面是一種不同但相關的概 念，而不是一個單一整體概念，本研究認為不同的家長式領導作風相對會造成不同類型 的組織倫理氣候。因此，本研究將對家長式領導(即：威權領導、仁慈領導及德行領導) 和組織倫理氣候(即：自利型氣候、仁慈型氣候及原則型氣候)的多重構面之間關係進行 探討。本研究的結果顯示家長式領導作風確實會影響組織的倫理氣候，該結果對於後續 的領導者或目前的領導者在培訓或是招募培訓活動上是一個很大的幫助。. 關鍵字： 關鍵字：家長式領導、組織倫理氣候、單一構面、多重構面. v.
(6) CONTENTS Acknowledgments………….…………………..………………………………..….…ii Abstract in English………………….……..……………………………….…………iii Abstract in Chinese…………………..…………………………………….…….…....v Contents……………………………………………………………………………….vi List of Figures……………………………………………………………………….viii List of Tables…………………….……………………………………………..……viii CHAPTER ONE: AN INTRODUCTION…………..……………………………..01 1.1. Research Background and Motivation………….………….………01. 1.2. Problem Statement…………….…………………………...………03. 1.3. Research Purpose……………...………………………...…………04. 1.4. Research Questions………………………………………………05. 1.5. Research Procedure……………………………..………………….06. CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW...…………………….…….…..…..07 2.1. Paternalistic Leadership…………………..………………………..07. 2.2. Cultural of Paternalistic Leadership…………..…………………...14. 2.3. Organizational Ethical Climate…………………………………….17. CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY…...……21 3.1. Research Hypotheses……..………………………………………..21. 3.2. The Conceptual Model………………………………..……………28. 3.3. Construct Measurement……………………..……………………..28. 3.4. Sample…………………………..………………………………….29. 3.5. Questionnaire Design….………………………….………………..30. 3.6. Measures………………..…………..……………………………....31. vi.
(7) 3.7. Data Analysis Procedures.………………………..………………...33. CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS OF THE RESEARCH……......................…..…..34 4.1. Descriptive Analysis…………….………………………………..….34. 4.2. Pearson Correlation Analysis…………….……………………...…..38. 4.3. Partial Least Square for the Interrelationships among Paternalistic Leadership and Organizational Ethical Climate………39. CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS...…………………..47 5.1. Discussions.…………………………………..………….……….47. 5.2. Limitations…………………………..………………………….…49. 5.3. Conclusions…………………………………………..…………….50. 5.4. Theoretical Implications……………………………..……….……52. 5.5. Managerial Implications…….…………….………………..……..52. 5.6. Suggestions for Future Studies…………………..…………………53. REFERENCE...……………………...…………………………………………….56 APPENDIX I. Scale (In English)….……………………….…………..………....64. APPENDIX II Questionnaire (In Chinese)…..……………...………………..…..67. vii.
(8) LIST OF FIGURES 1-1. The Flowchart of this study……………………………………………………06. 2-1. The Preliminary Model of Paternalistic Leadership……………………….….12. 2-2. Paternalistic Leadership Behavior and Subordinate Response……………….13. 2-3. Cultural Roots of Paternalistic Leadership………………………………...…16. 3-1. Research Model of This Study…………………………………………..……29. 4-6. Result from the PLS Analysis……….……………………………………….45. LIST OF TABLES 4-1. Summary of Questionnaires and Response Rates………………………….….35. 4-2. Characteristics of the Respondents for Taiwan Public Sector…………………36. 4-3. Descriptive Analysis and Reliability for Paternalistic Leadership Types…….37. 4-4. Descriptive Analysis and Reliability for Organizational Ethical Climate Types37. 4-5. Pearson Correlation for All Constructs……………………………..…….……38. 4-6. Assessment of the Measurement Model……………………………………….41. 4-7. Discriminant Validity (Interrcorrelations) of Variable Constructs……………41. 4-8. Factoring Loading (Bolded) and Cross Loadings……………………………43. 4-9. Conclusions with Respect to the Hypotheses…………………………………46. 5-1. Advantages and Disadvantages of Non-Probability Sampling Methods………50. viii.
(9) CHAPTER ONE AN INTRODUCTION 1.1. Research Background and Motivation Leadership is about the leader's ability to mobilize followers towards a particular. goal. Founders of organizations establish the initial culture of their organizations (Schein, 1992; Schneider, 1987; Schneider, Goldstein, & Smith, 1995), and founders and subsequent leaders continue to influence the organizational culture (Thompson & Luthans, 1990; Schein, 1992; Yukl, 2002). The concept of organizational culture has gained wide acceptance as a way to understand human systems. From an open system perspective, each aspect of organizational culture can be seen as an important environmental condition affecting the system and its subsystem. The development of leadership theories has been based on the values of Western society. The leadership theories developed by the West has been cross-culturally taken for granted as general principles. However, the leadership is imbricated in culture as a special phenomenon (Hofstede, 1980). The content and style of leadership and practical policies are influenced by the culture. How to choose a leadership pattern will reflect the cultural values, while Chinese society is different from Western society in cultural values (Hsu, 1981). The philosophy and practices of management in Chinese business organizations come to the foreground among many researchers, (Redding, 1990; Whitley, 1992; Cheng, 2003) on the preliminary investigation. In terms of the leadership：The clear and obvious characters of top managers in Chinese business organizations also called paternalistic leadership (hereinafter refers to as PL) (Westwood & Chan, 1992; Farh & Cheng, 2000). They indicated that PL as a style that combines strong discipline and authority with fatherly benevolence and moral integrity couched in a personal 1.
(10) atmosphere. The dimensions of PL (Paternalistic Leadership) and its style not only appear in the family enterprises but also are found in the non-family enterprises and government organizations in Asia (Pay, 1981, 1985). The cultural origin of PL can be traced back to Confucianism. Among the five essential kinds of Chinese relationships (ruler-subject, father-son, husband-wife, brother-brother, friend-frined) except for friends, the other four essential relationships center on the power relationships, individual loyalty and obedience to the authorities are viewed as the prerequisites of social harmony (Bond & Hwang, 1986). PL theory has been brought up in high power distance society, this so-called high power distance is relate to a culture’s willingness to accept a difference in power over other members of a culture. Thus, according to Hofstede, countries that rank highest in power distance index mean they in general are willing to accept the fact that inequality in power is considered the norm (Ahmed, Mouratidis & Preston, 2009). “Seeing that power is distributed unequally, it tends to suggest that a society’s level of inequality is endorsed by the followers as much as by the leaders. This also signifies that elders take the lead and be regarded as significant role models and wise elders (Abdullah, 2005, p. 105).” In larger power distance cultures, individuals tend to value hierarchy, and this means that they are more likely to show respect for superiors and expect them to take the lead (Abdullah, 2005). All in all, because everyone who lives in the hierarchy clearly can accept his unfair power relations with others since his childhood. Everyone obeys this concept not matter in aspect of perception, action, feels, subconsciousness or unconsciousness (Cheng, 2009). Taylor (1975) asserted ethics explores the nature and basis of moral, including moral judgment, standard and principled of conduct. Hence, the shaping of ethical climate relies on the entry of an employee in formal organization structures and informal interpersonal relationships,. 2.
(11) who feels ethical climate and then respects the position and authorities of others. With the conception of the PL (paternalistic leadership) emerging, the relative issues have been gradually emphasized by researchers, while ethical climate of organization changes with varieties of a leadership and systems. Thus, ethical climate is influenced by individual characteristics and contextual factors like values, codes, rules, organizational. form. (mechanistic. or. organic).. One. of. the. important. organizational-specific factors influencing perceptions of the ethical climate is leader behaviors since leaders are seen responsible for inspiring moral values and ethical standards in their subordinates (Dickson et al., 2001; Treviño et al., 1998). The “climate” of an organization leads the development of each staff member, the influence of which is widespread. For example, when the low climate of an organization comes, all members will be hauntingly influenced and in low spirit, the attitudes all staff members assume will not be active when an organizations does not properly runs. Therefore, it is very important for leaders to establish "correct" policies for the climate of an organization. Ethical climate is a type of organizational work climate, which is suitable understood as a group of prescriptive climates reflecting organizational procedures, policies, and practices with moral consequences (Cullen et al., 2003; Martin & Cullen, 2006).. 1.2 Problem Statement According to previous research, the exploration about the PL and ethical climate, has. been. under. the. overall. constructed. relationship. without. considering. sub-dimensional relation between these two constructs mostly, multidimensional constructs may be distinguished from unidimensional constructs, which refer to a single theoretical concept (Edwards, 2001), and from multiple dimensions regarded as distinct but related concepts rather than a single overall concept. Besides, the 3.
(12) discussion relating to ethical climate are partially insufficient, and most of recent exploration about PL (paternalistic leadership) relations focus on the sports domains of relations (Tang & Sung, 2004) and explore how the PL behaviors can apply to the reactions of a subordinate and the improvement of leadership effectiveness in recent years; while most studies of ethical climates mainly circulates around organizational commitment (Shafer, 2009). The criticism at present (Farh & Cheng, 2000) that suggested, there are many issues with PL to be clarified; otherwise we do not understand completely the PL and predict its relationship between organizations, groups and employee effectiveness. Given above, although leader behaviors and ethical climate have drawn much attention, the focus was generally on the overall relationship between paternalistic leadership and ethical climate. There has been no effort to further analyze the dimensions relationship between paternalistic leadership and ethical climate. Because of the dimensions of the PL and ethical climate have some potential causal relationship, for example, the benevolent dimension of PL can be correspond to benevolent dimension of ethical climate. With this in mind, further investigation of the relationship between paternalistic leadership and ethical climate associated with it would be an appropriate step toward gaining a better understanding.. 1.3 Research Purpose The purpose of this study is to explore how the PL and ethical climates relate to each other, In other words, it is meaningful to discuss different PL behaviors will lead to different type of ethical climate. This is tally with achievements on research of researchers, and thought leadership of managers will infect the ethical climates in organizations, because different ethical climate result in different outcome of organizations on the contrary. For example, a self-interest ethical climate has a 4.
(13) significant negative influence on work satisfaction. Strategies that organizations may use to diminish such self-centered concerns include ethics audits and the use of personal moral development level as selection and promotion criteria. (Elci & Alpkan, 2008) Another research (Myint, 2006) indicated that managers can enhance overall organizational commitment and all types of organizational commitment by ensuring that their organization has benevolent and principled climates. When people perceive a caring or benevolent environment, they develop more of an attachment to the organization. The caring environment typical of an individual or local benevolent climate is more likely to encourage positive affect among organizational members, which in turn can result in higher attachment to the organization (Wech et al., 1998). In sum, understanding the relationship between paternalistic leadership and organizational ethical climate, leaders can change the ethical climate in organizational, avoiding subordinates have the unethical behaviors, because it may be harm for organizations or society with unethical behaviors (Wimbush & Shepare, 1994). Hence, it is a feasibility path by changing the organizational ethical climate can make subordinates generate positive powers (Sinclair, 1993). In other words, we can chose leaders or develop training programs for leaders so that correspond to we wanted. This study could help fill the gap in the existing antecedents of ethical climate literature. And the results of this study are helpful for senior managers in companies regarding the issues with leadership.. 1.4 Research Questions The only question this research intends to discover is whether or not multidimensional constructs of paternalistic leadership have a significant relation toward multidimensional constructs of organizational ethical climate?. 5.
(14) 1.5 Research Procedure. Identify research objective and research scope. Identify research motivation and purpose. Literature review. Construct the research framework. Formulating research hypotheses. Identify operational definition of research variables. Questionnaire designs. Pilot test. Modify questionnaire. Return the questionnaire. Collection of survey data. Data analysis. Discussion of the interrelation between variables. Conclusions and suggestions 6. Figure 1-1 The Flowchart of This Study. Formal test.
(15) CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW This chapter will explain the definition of research variables (1) paternalistic leadership and (2) organizational ethical climate. Consequently, the relationships between paternalistic leadership and organizational ethical climate are literaturally explained.. 2.1 Paternalistic Leadership Leadership in Asian countries such as Chinese is oftentimes described as paternalistic leadership. Paternalistic Leadership is a native Chinese leadership style, which is deeply rooted in China's patriarchal tradition and in Confucianism (Farh et al., 2008). Based on an extensive review of this literature, Farh and Cheng (2000) proposed a Three Dimensional Model of Paternalistic Leadership (see Figure 2-1), in which PL was defined as a type of leadership that combines strong and clear authority with concern, consideration, and elements of moral leadership. At the heart of the model are the three dimensions of PL (i.e., authoritarian leadership, moral leadership, and benevolent leadership) and their corresponding subordinate responses. Therefore, the phenomenon of PL is hypothesized to thrive in the context of a host of facilitative social / cultural and organizational factors. The key social / cultural factors consist of a strong emphasis on familism and the Confucian values of respect for authority, personalism / particularism, the norm of reciprocity, interpersonal harmony, and leadership by virtuous example (Chen & Farh, 2010). As much as the leadership style known as paternalistic management contains some autocratic dynamism, it comes as being a bit warm and a bit fuzzy within the precincts of its approach. In its paternal aspect, it harkens in the line of a father being 7.
(16) firm though has good intentions in the life of one's children and in the business limelight, the subordinates. Just like most paternal beings are, except for those dads who keep saying: “I told you”, the typical paternalistic manager most of the times explains the specific reason as to why he has taken certain actions in management and for his subordinates. He is very far from being autocratic and looks after the harmony within his or her team. Paternalism is a cultural characteristic, more than just being a type of leadership behavior. Moreover, it is not a concept that merely signifies the quality of a relation in terms of both parties’ responsibilities and duties (Erben & Güneser, 2008). Paternalism can be analyzed with respect to the parental relations or organizational level relations. PL (Paternalistic leadership) is the prevalent leadership style in Chinese business organizations. With an approach similar to patriarchy, PL entails an evident and powerful authority that shows consideration for subordinates with moral leadership (Cheng et al., 2004). PL has three specific dimensions, i.e., Authoritarianism, Benevolence and Moral leadership. While Benevolence and Moral leadership refer to the warm consideration of the subordinates and exhibition of moralistic leadership activities respectively, Authoritarianism entails a stringent control and power play in the leader-follower relationship (Chen, et al., 2007). Authoritative leadership Authoritative leadership means that a leader stresses their unquestionable and absolute authority and that they will take rigorous control over subordinates and demand complete obedience from them. The concrete behavior that characterizes authoritarian leadership includes control and domination, underestimating the ability. 8.
(17) of subordinates, building a lofty image of the leader, and instructing subordinates in a didactic style (Cheng, 1995). As distinct from the supervisory power that comes with position in the West, the power of authoritative leadership reflects the cultural characteristics of familism, paternalistic control, and submission to authority that are typical of Chinese society (Westwood, 1997). However, authoritative leadership is based on the legitimacy of unequal authority and rights granted to unequal roles, with more authority and rights accorded to the superior and less to the subordinate. To be sure, Confucian authoritarianism balances greater authority and rights of the superior with greater moral, social, and economic responsibilities and obligations associated with the exercise of that authority. Theoretically, at least the Confucian conception of authoritarian leadership is tightly coupled with benevolent and moral leadership. Benevolent leadership Farh and Cheng (2000) devoted much attention to the social and cultural forces underlying benevolent leadership. They concluded that benevolent leadership originates in Confucianism, which highlights mutuality in social relations. According to Confucian ethics, a ruler should be benevolent to his ministers, and, in turn, the ministers should be loyal to the ruler. Similarly, a father should be kind to his children, and, in turn, the children should show gradtitude and obeidence to their father. When each party dutifully performs his or her respective role, relational harmony is maintained (Cheng, et al., 2009). As these Confucian principles are applied to the contemporary workplace, mutual obligations on the basis of duty fulfillment emerge. Leaders demonstrate benevolence in order to fulfill a role obligation specified by cultural consensus. In response to benevolent leadership, subordinates show respect. 9.
(18) and loyalty to their benevolent leader in completion of their role obligations. Benevolent leadership indicates a leader who displays personal, overall, and long-term concern for the well being of subordinates, although it should be noted that it differs from the constructs of leader consideration and supportive leadership (Chou, et al., 2005). Benevolent leadership goes beyond the work domain and is also applied to personal issues, is long-term oriented, involves the granting of grace and protection to subordinates, and is exercised in the context of strong authority so that the subordinate does not forget who is boss (Cheng, et al., 2004). Moral leadership Leaders are obligated to set a moral example for organizational members and to determine those organizational activities which may be detrimental to the values of society in general (Aronson, 2001). Leaders are recognized by subordinates as “morally” superior individuals who lead because of an overwhelming superiority (Silin, 1976). This superiority is manifested in two ways: (1) through a leader's ability to translate abstract ideas about financial and commercial success into concrete reality, and (2) through a leader's ability to reject his egocentric impulses for a higher moral good (Silin, 1976). Leaders who engage in a moral response are driven by more than task accomplishment. They use virtues (e.g., prudence, honesty, and justice) throughout the decision-making process to achieve a virtuous outcome. This involves the use of goal setting strategies to achieve a solution that serves, helps, or benefits the greater good. This typically involves a consideration of one’s peers, subordinates, the boss, their organization, and some larger entity (e.g., the constitution, taxpayers, or environment) (Sekerka, et al., 2009). Moral responders have goals that go beyond 10.
(19) self-serving interests that influence the formation of their moral judgment (Sekerka, et al., 2009). Moral leadership is characterized by a higher degree of personal integrity, self-cultivation, and selflessness. A moral leader should demonstrate behavior that conforms to social norms and virtues to set an example to others, and should demonstrate that their authority is not only for personal benefit but also for the public good (Westwood, 1997). The actual behavior includes unselfishness, being upright and responsible, leading by example, and not mixing personal interests with business interests (Cheng, et al., 2000). Figure 2-2 is the complementarity of leader and subordinate roles, and it summarizes leader behaviors under each of the three key elements of PL and the corresponding subordinate responses. Under authoritarian leadership, the major types of leader behaviors include asserting authority and control, underestimating subordinate competence, building a lofty image and acting in a didactic style. The corresponding subordinate responses include compliance, obedience, respect, fear and shame. Leader benevolence is manifested mainly in individualized care. Its corresponding subordinate responses are gratitude and willingness to reciprocate. Leader morality and integrity is demonstrated by acting unselfishly and leading by example, which it turn inspire identification and imitation by subordinates.. 11.
(20) Leader’s Behaviors Moral Leader. Culture Factors Authoritative Leadership. Benevolent Leadership. Organizational Factors. Identification and Imitation Awe and Compliance. Gratitude and Repayment Subordinates’ Responses. Figure 2-1 The Preliminary Model of Paternalistic Leadership (Farh & Cheng, 2000). 12.
(21) Leader Behavior. Subordinate Response. Authoritarianism Authority and control. Compliance. ˙Unwilling to delegate ˙Top-down communication ˙Information secrecy ˙Tight control. ˙Show public support ˙Avoid open conflict with boss ˙Avoid expressing dissension Obedience. Underestimation of subordinate competence. ˙Accept leader’s directives unconditionally ˙Loyal to leader ˙Trust in leader. ˙Ignore subordinate suggestions ˙Belittle subordinate contributions Image building. Respect and fear. ˙Act in a dignified manner ˙Exhibit high self-confidence ˙Information manipulation. ˙Show deep respect ˙Express fear in awe of the leader. Didactic behavior. Have a sense of shame. ˙Insist in high performance standards ˙Reprimand subordinates for poor performance ˙Provide guidance and instructions for improvements. ˙Willing to confess mistakes ˙Take leader’s instructions seriously ˙Correct mistakes and improve. Benevolent Leadership Individualized care. Show gratitude. ˙Treat employees as family members ˙Provide job security ˙Assist during personal crises ˙Show holistic concern ˙Avoid embarrassing subordinates in public ˙Protect even grave errors of subordinates. ˙Never forget leader’s favours Strive to reciprocate ˙Sacrifice self-interest for leader ˙Take assignments seriously ˙Meet leader’s expectation ˙Work diligently. Leader Morality and Integrity Unselfishness. Identification. ˙Does not abuse authority for personal gain ˙Does no mix personal interests with business interests ˙Put collective interests ahead of personal interests. ˙Identify with leader’s values and goals ˙Internalize leader’s values Modelling. Lead by example. ˙Imitate leader behavior. ˙Act as an exemplar in work and personal conduct Figure 2-2 Paternalistic Leader Behavior and Subordinate Response (Cheng et.,al 2006:16) 13.
(22) 2.2 Cultural Roots of Paternalistic Leadership What are the primordial social and cultural forces in Chinese societies that render Chinese subordinates receptive to Paternalistic Leadership? Why Western society does not like Chinese society appear special leadership and subordinate response? In this sections, Farh and Cheng (2000) further traced the culture root of each dimensional of PL (paternalistic leadership). 2.2.1 Authoritative Leadership This kind of leadership mainly from the thinking of Confucian and Legalism. Under the thinking of Confucian, father / son axis is the important social relations and over others social relations. Father’s authority goes beyond his children (and other family members), authority can be said absolutely. Authority and legality of paternity are from role internalization of inferior in Confucian ethics, hence, obey the authority as seen as behavior that social expected by inferior (Farh & Chen, 2000). Thinking of Legalism focus on practical achievement and specific effect. According to hypothesis of human stain, Legalism reminder emperor does not believe subordinates and share authority as well. At same time, adopting all kinds of means to control subordinates (Cheng et al., 2000). 2.2.2 Benevolent Leadership In thinking of Confucian, the relationship between two people are building based on mutuality. Two principles are clear in cultural root of benevolent leadership. First, people who assume the superior roles (fathers, elder brothers, husbands, elders and rulers) should treat those who are in inferior roles (sons, younger brothers, wives, juniors and ministers) with kindness, gentleness, righteousness and benevolence. Second, persons who assume the inferior roles should respect their superiors by following the principles of filial duty, obedience, submission, deference, loyalty and 14.
(23) obedience. In sum, the cultural roots of benevolent leadership originate from the Confucian ideal of the kind, gentle superior, and they are further cemented by practical concern for exchanging superior favours for subordinate indebtedness, personal loyalty and obedience. All come under the umbrella of the powerful norm of reciprocity (Cheng, et al., 2000). 2.2.3 Moral Leadership As noted earlier, Confucius believed that the cultivation of individual virtues was the foundation of society. In the realm of government, Confucius emphasized the use of moral principles, moral examples and moral persuasion in governing. He did not believe in the efficacy of law and punishment, which he thought could regulate overt behaviors only, not inner thought. The most effective form of governance was therefore leading by virtue and by moral example. In sum, the importance of moral leadership has its roots in the Confucian philosophy of governance. A weak legal tradition and the rule of man further underscore the importance of moral character of those who occupy positions of authority. Figure 2-3 lists the cultural forces behind each of the three elements of PL (paternalistic leadership). This study has used the concept of an iceberg to depict the idea that PL rests on the tip of the mass of Chinese traditional values and ideology.. 15.
(24) Paternalistic Leadership Authoritarian Leadership. Moral Benevolent Leadership Leadership. ‧History of three. Cultural Roots. thousand years of imperial rule. ‧Politicized. ─. Confucianism Three Bonds (father as the ruler of son, emperor as the ruler of ministers, husband as the ruler of wife). ‧Legalism. ─Law and punishment ─Centralized power and authority ─Tactics of control. ‧Confucianism. ‧Confucianism. ─Governance by ─The obligations of virtue the father and ─Governance by emperor roles ─Human hearttdness moral example ─Governance by the rule of propriety. ‧Rule of Man. ‧Norm of reciprocity. Figure 2-3 Cultural Root of Paternalistic Leadership (Li et al., 2000:108). 16.
(25) 2.3 Organizational Ethical Climate Ethical climate refers to the psychological perceptions of subordinates toward the ethical policies and procedures of the organization (Schneider, 1975). Practitioners and academicians have been concerned for many years about the ethical climate within organizations, examining the link between ethical climate and organizational behaviors in a variety of circumstances. Ethical climate contains cues that guide subordinate’s behavior and reflects the ethical character of the organization (Cullen et al., 2003). Ethical climate has been defined as “the prevailing perceptions of typical organizational practices and procedures that have ethical content” or “those aspects of work climate that determine what constitutes ethical behavior at work.” (Victor & Cullen, 1988, p. 101). Due to differences in individuals’ positions, work groups, and employment histories, perceptions of organizational climate may vary within the organization (Victor & Cullen, 1988; Schwepker, 2001). Thus, it can also be described as a type of work climate that reflects organizational policies, procedures, and practices that have moral consequences (Mulki et al., 2007). Organizational leaders play a role in shaping ethical climate by both stating and implementing ethical policies and practices (Grojean et al., 2004). According to Victor and Cullen (1988), people who are benevolent tend to be less cognizant of laws or rules and may be less amenable to arguments employing rules or principles. In contrast, people who are principled tend to be less sensitive to particular effects on others. Given this, organizations might also be expected to develop relatively distinct forms of ethical climates. That is, organizations or subgroups within organizations may be prototypically benevolent, principled, or egoistic. However, although Victor and Cullen (1987) found that there was often a dominant climate type in an organization or 17.
(26) a group, organizations did not have single climate types. Since the loci of analysis often combine in unique ways for different organizations (Cullen, Victor, & Bronson, 1993), researchers (Cullen, Parboteeah, & Victor, 2003; Joseph & Deshpande, 1997) often develop hypotheses using the three basic criteria of moral judgment: egoistic, benevolent, and principled. Egoistic Climate An egoistic climate is emphasized on maximizing self-interest (Cullen et al., 2003). The egoistic climate is based on the moral philosophy of egoism, which implies that a consideration of what is in the individual’s best interest will dominate the ethical reasoning process (Ferrell & Fraedrich, 1997). Within an egoistic climate, the individual's self-interest becomes the expected primary source of moral reasoning when a decision has to be made (Victor & Cullen, 1987, 1988). The ethical climate of self-interest, company profit, and efficiency are based on the ethical theory of egoism. Ethical egoism suggests that individuals should make decisions based on what is best for themselves, without regard to stakeholders. In terms of organizational climates, the locus of concern could be the individual, but might also be the organization or larger social system. In any case, egoistic climate emphasize that organization members should behave in a manner consistent with their self-interest when interacting with others and that there is no duty to consider the welfare of stakeholders when making decisions (Barnett & Schubert, 2002). Benevolent Climate Benevolence is primarily based on concern for others (Victor & Cullen, 1987; 1988). The benevolent climate is based largely on utilitarian principles of moral philosophy, which suggest that individuals make ethical decisions by considering the. 18.
(27) positive or negative consequences of actions on referent others (Ferrell & Fraedrich, 1997). In short, in a benevolent climate, the expectation is that unit members are concerned with the well-being of each other within and outside the organization (Victor & Cullen, 1987, 1988). The ethical climates of friendship, team interest, and social responsibility are based on benevolence, which is consistent with the ethical theory of utilitarianism. A climate emphasizing benevolence requires individuals to consider the effect of their actions on others when making decisions. Climates based on benevolence suggest that ethical decisions result in outcomes with more positive than negative consequences for others. According to Victor and Cullen (1998), these others can be the individual subordinate's friends, some organizational unit (team, department, etc.), or external constituencies (community, customers, etc.). Benevolent climate are focus on two reasons. First, benevolent climates require that subordinates look beyond self-interest when making decisions. Second, benevolent climates focus on actions' consequences to others as a primary decision criterion (Barnett & Schubert, 2002). Principled Climate A principled climate is defined as the organizational normative system emphasizing the compliance with rules and standard operating procedures (Koh & Boo, 2001; Victor & Cullen, 1988; Weber, 1995). Principled climates are manifested through the application of organizational and plant rules and codes of conduct (Martin & Cullen, 2006). The principled ethical climate is based in large part on deontological principles of moral philosophy, which posit that individuals make ethical decisions after considering actions in regard to universal and unchanging principles of right and wrong (Ferrell & Fraedrich, 1997). In a principled climate, when faced with an ethical. 19.
(28) dilemma, organizational or group norms suggest that the decision-maker resort to decisions that are based on adherence to rules and codes (Victor & Cullen, 1988). The ethical climates of personal morality, rules and procedures, and laws and codes are based on principle, which is consistent with the ethical theory of deontology. Actions are judged, not based on consequences, but on universal principles of morality and absolute adherence is required. Principled climates should foster strong organizational values regarding appropriate standards for making decisions (Barnett & Schubert, 2002).. 20.
(29) CHAPTER THREE RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODLOGY This chapter first introduces the construct measurements of research constructs, including three paternalistic leadership types, and three dimensions of ethical climates. Then, the conceptual model of this research is presented. Finally, the research design, including the sampling plan, data collection, and data analysis techniques are described.. 3.1 Research Hypotheses 3.1.1 Authoritative Leadership and Egoistic Climate The authoritative leader may behave four kinds of behavior as follows: (1) autocratic style (2) debasing behavior (3) Image building (4) didactic behavior; and the subordinate reacted by compliance, obedience, fear, awe and shame (Cheng, 1998). Therefore, authoritative leaders use of the leader's legal right and always have others do things on his way without considering the subordinates volitions; in other words, that is to demand and rule stakeholders with his own standard. Lewin (1939) thought an authoritative leader focuses on his organizational target, merely concerned about the organizational interest. Because of his lacked of concerned about stakeholders, there is a widing gap between a leader and a stakeholders in a psychological sense. The insensitiveness of a leader toward stakeholders builds a wall of an alertness and hostility between each other, which facilitates the frustration and mechanize behaviors of subordinates and other subordinates. Therefore, authoritative leader behaviors will lead to egoistic climates promoting self-interested behaviors of an organization. In other words, stakeholders. 21.
(30) are expected to put the organizational interest in the first order under the leading of an authoritative leader. According to the descriptions above, the following hypothesis can be stated: Hypothesis 1: There is a positive relation between authoritative leadership and egoistic climate. 3.1.2 Benevolent Leadership and Benevolent Climate Benevolent leadership has two features as follows: (1) Individualized care: involves not only the magnanimous work but also the private questions including looking after the family support, and an emergency help; besides, take the long-term employment for old, loyal staff. (2) Avoid embarrassing subordinates in public: when they make mistakes, and even protect subordinates who make grave errors. For show below average of subordinates than formally, and leaders should continue to their subordinates whose performance are less well than average; even subordinates should be punished privately (Cheng, 1998). Leaders who adopt benevolent behavior for subordinates are similar to what Redding (1990) mentioned: take care of subordinates like father, the sensitiveness of a leader toward a subordinate demand, benevolence is similar to Westwood (1997) concept of taking care of individuals (Syu, et al., 2004); subordinates will reward in respect. Leaders think at any rate their companies are the place they live on without their companies, they lose their workplace, where they can earn for their livings, and they suffer by themselves without pay. Only when a company makes profits can one make profits after all; the efforts you make cannot absolutely accord with the profits your company makes. A subordinate who protects an organization interest has a sense of honor. A subordinate who has a sense of honor can consider the situation a whole, focusing on interests of a group, rather than personal benefits. Such a subordinate will 22.
(31) sacrifice his interests instead of damaging the interests of a group. Leaders understand that prospects of a self-development rely on the powerful development of an organization. In fact, a subordinate who shares the same belief can be in a position of trust (Chen, 2009). A benevolent leader should not limit empowerment to a top-down approach; rather, they should emphasize subordinates’ psychological empowerment. The goal of empowerment will be achieved only when empowerment is perceived by subordinates and influences their external behavior, therefore, organizations provide a humanized environment, including enterprise which present a culture of enterprise, leadership, and organization climate. Wright and Kehoe (2008) mentioned that empowermentenhancing practices can make subordinates have more opportunities to participant, knowledge sharing, respect each other, person-organization fit, and enhance identity of organization (Lee, 2004). Therefore, organizational operations were centered around subordinates. Moreover, a leader can establish an environment of openness and transparency by communicating clearly and effectively. It can lead to a work environment where team members willingly share information, experiences, and knowledge. These factors also instill trust – among all the participants – in their leader (Anantatmula, 2008), and further generate an agreeable and harmonious atmosphere. According to researchers Snowden and Gorton (2002), if there is a high level of trust, the leader can expect that members of the group will express their feelings, concerns, opinions, and thoughts more openly.. 23.
(32) As mention above, in the aspect of treatment, a leader would see a subordinate as the member of his extended family and gives preferential treatment. A leader will take into consideration the future life of an subordinate. There have always been the alternatives for subordinates when they have to terminate their relations in terms of a contract. Therefore, subordinates was concerned by leaders and felt that positive experiences and reputation of the organization were the overriding factors leading them to trust an organization. Hence, they would see the organization as his part. One specific behavior that subordinates pay close attention to the organization shares information with third parties. In addition, subordinates feel good relationship management is important as well as personal contacts. Hypothesis 2: There is a positive relation between benevolent leadership and benevolent climate. 3.1.3 Moral Leadership and Principled Climate The moral cultivation of the leadership is a critical point in Chinese organizations. According to Confucianism, the authoritative and benevolent behaviors of a leader should support by the nobility of his morality; set an example by his own acts, be able to serve the public without thinking of advantage to himself. A leader cannot use his positions to gain the benefit or snatch others benefits especially, and makes subordinates feel selfless. Hence, the nobility of his morality becomes his principles. It’s the core of leadership in Chinese organizations, and also ensures followers can submit willingly. Only by doing this can a leader show his effectiveness (Cheng, 1998). Therefore, a leader plays a critical role in providing a moral standard for organizational members (Barnard, 1938; Grojean et al., 2004; Mendonca, 2001) and shapes the overall characteristics of the organization (Moore, 2005; Wright & Goodstein, 2007). That is to say, organizations are under the style of leaders,. 24.
(33) emphasize rules, institutions, and procedures all are the principle that organizations runs. Go further, in this ethical climate, it makes subordinates to observe the principle and rule of operation strictly and understand the directions and policies of organization. For example, Sillin (1976) thought leaders have to show the achievement of finance and commerce and unselfish. Managers were seen as not only responsible for the financial success of their organizations, but also for instilling moral values and ethical standards in their subordinates (e.g., Mautz & Sharaf, 1961). Given above, a leader displays comely behavior to show his moral of dignity. For operating smoothly, a leader focused on an organization’s disciplines but less on his interaction with subordinates. All things have to operate according to the principles, and basic training is absolutely essential. In other words, an organization have a strong code of ethics includes a specific written policy and a culture that supports that policy. Hence, from the point of view of organizations, executing is kind of discipline, and from the point of view of subordinates, must be self-discipline plus discipline, this is also part of normative competence of individual. They regard the disciplines as essential of his life. Thus, this leadership style contributes to lawful subordinates. Due to the life discipline strictly is just for best self-supervising, when subordinates have to make decisions, one important situational source on which they rely is the organizational normative system. Although not completely homogeneous, the normative system is sufficiently well known to the subordinates (Lau & Wong, 2009). The daily life in organizations, subordinates learn from the conversations and readings and also learn from observe others behaviors, hence, subordinates will feel a form of doing things honor by law and feel shame when violating the law and awareness of noble sentiment of taking integrity as an honor. In other words,. 25.
(34) subordinates of a moral leader know that the leader will be holding them accountable for their decisions and will use rewards and discipline to do so. Thus, the subordinates of moral leaders should be more likely to focus on the ethical implications of their decisions and make more ethical decisions as a result (Brown & Treviño, 2006). At moral leadership core, which is conceptualized as discussing with subordinates what is the right course of action and acting with the best interests of subordinates in mind (Brown et al., 2005). Furthermore, subordinates consistent modeling of ethical behavior who earns the manager a reputation of being trustworthy can be considered to be faithful behavior (McCloskey, 2008), whereas conducting oneself both professionally and personally in accordance with high ethical principle is consistent with manifestations of temperate behavior (Peterson & Seligman, 2004). Hence, subordinates will strengthen conscious of lawful, self-esteem and self-love and impeach illegal actives bravely be a lawfully subordinate. Hypothesis 3: There is a positive relation between moral leadership and principled climate. 3.1.4 Authoritative leadership and Benevolence Climate Authoritative leaders adopt autocratic style, unwillingly empower, only exist the single way of operation between groups, lack of communication channel of parallelism in groups, and disadvantage interaction for each member. Moreover, a leader conceals information for subordinates, there is a poor communication between leader and subordinate (Farh & Cheng, 2000). When the single way of all communications or interactions spread out, all information become passive, only inquiry will get the information, otherwise the information cannot be transmitted in two-way circulation in organization. This phenomenon are opposite with the established relations each others on mutuality in Confucianism and definition of 26.
(35) benevolence. Everyone become unconcerned in organization. Therefore, working under the authoritative leadership, although there are high work spirits, but lack of interaction each other and unintelligible demand of subordinate. An authoritative leader control, order command, has long distance with subordinate, unconcerned with subordinate, so that cannot establish an work environments of warm and caring, and cannot create a good organizational ethical and subordinates are more likely to be evasive, competitive, devious, or uncertain in their actions with one another on the contrary (Snowden, 2002). Given above, the negative actives of subordinates have a contrast with positive benevolent leadership. Hypothesis 4: There is a negative relationship between authoritative leadership and benevolent climate. 3.1.5 Benevolent leadership and Principled Climate According to description of benevolent leadership, it is known that a benevolent leader believes that every subordinate is part of the organization and everyone should take the responsible. To make the organization grow better and become more competitive, the leader communicates with the subordinates in a healthy two-direction manner and encourages the subordinates to get involved in organizational decision making (Likert, 1976). Such involvement helps the subordinates to develop their analytical ability and encourages them to perform better. The leader believes that the capabilities of the subordinates are valuable assets or benefits for the organization (Maslow et al., 2007). Under the benevolent leadership, the greatest challenge is not to lead but to understand every one of the subordinates. He believes that there are too many unexpected accidents in the daily life, such as a subordinate get sick and a machine. 27.
(36) quits working. Therefore, a leader who has benevolence sets a more flexible organizational rules and regulations so that the subordinates have a certain degree of freedom and be able to make plans / decisions independently according to various situations, especially when accidents happen. Hypothesis 5: There is a negative relationship between benevolent leadership and principled climate.. 3.2 The Conceptual Model This study firstly integrates relevant literature and develops a research model of PL (paternalistic leadership) and organizational ethical climate to identify the relationship among relevant research constructs. Secondarily, the study also empirically tested the research model through conducting survey research. The research model of this study is shown in Figure 3-1.. 3.3 Construct Measurement Based on the above discussion, the research framework for this study can be represented by Figure 3-1. The following two major constructs are operationalized in this study: (1) Paternalistic Leadership, and (2) Organizational Ethical Climate. 28.
(37) Paternalistic Leadership Authoritative. Organizational Ethical Climate H1. Leadership. Benevolent. H4 H2. Leadership. Moral. Egoistic climate. Benevolent H5. H3. Leadership. Climate. Principled Climate. Figure 3-1 Research Model of This Study. 3.4 Sample In Chinese society, individual via family socialization process, and learned about psychology or behavior process in family life and spread in group life, and show a strong family ideology in common business or government organization (Fan, 2004). Based on above, our investigation of public sector for government; administrative organizations is a bureaucracy, manager has to under pressure from superior manager in organization, hence, an authoritative leader has to focus on task (Authoritative); manager has to concern about subordinates appropriately, find out the need of subordinates initiatively, and solve the problem for subordinate then cohere centripetal force of subordinates (Benevolent); besides, manager should strictly observe discipline of job, administration by law, impartial, established trust with subordinates in public organization, and show an aspect of active of job, and win the admire and emulate; manager has the responsibility for the illegal behavior of subordinate (Moral) by ability of professional, with an open mind attitude and integrity position of job. As noted earlier, we can infer to there are some component of PL (paternalistic 29.
(38) leadership) in public sector. Therefore, the subjects in this study were sampled from qualified civil servants in Taiwanese public sector, for example, police agency of ministry of the interior, civil servants in township office, city government, forest bureau, coast guard administration and the unit of judiciary in Hualien, Taipei, Kaohsiung, and Taoyuan etc. The population for this investigation included all qualified civil servants and. This study expects have over 300 respondents.. 3.5 Questionnaires Design As mentioned early, a 48-item survey questionnaire was developed to obtain the responses from the Taiwan Public Sector about their opinions on various research variables. The questionnaire items were also translated into “Chinese”. The questionnaire of this study is consisted of two constructs: “Paternalistic Leadership (33 items),” “Organizational Ethical Climate (15 items).” This research question and research method are sensitive, so it should not easily commit correct responses. However, for the safety, this research will take the following action to ensure its valid. First, voluntary participation is important (Babbie, 1998). It means every participant has the right to join and quit a research. As a result, participants will be received an informed consent before they take part in the research (Wysocki, 2004). If they are not interested in it, they can reject. Second, anonymity and confidentiality are also important issues (Babbie, 1998). Therefore, the questionnaire does not request the participants to give their name. In addition, the researcher and the participants should not know one another, because the questionnaire distribution and submission are via third parties.. 30.
(39) Third, at the beginning of the questionnaire, it is an introduction to explain the objectives of this research to participants. Although it may influence the response of the participants, it is necessary. It is because researchers have to be honest (Babbie, 1998). For the effectively, so we mixed the all items. Finally, the negative wordings will be avoided in the questionnaire, because negative wordings may give psychological harm to participants. An ethical research should not harm the participant physically and psychologically (Bryman, 2004).. 3.6 Measures 3.6.1 Preamble For measured the leaders behavior, PL (paternalistic leadership) scale is the main index, in business sample (Erben & Güneser, 2008) (the rate of return was 84%), authoritarianism, benevolence, and moral Cronbach’s α was 0.84, 0.83, 0.91, respectively; according to Victor and Cullen’s (1988) taxonomy, ethical climates involve three classes of ethical criteria: egoism, benevolence, and principled (Koh & Boo, 2001; Schminke et al., 2005). Egoistic climate, benevolent climate, and principled climate were assessed with Koh and Boo’s (2001) 12-item scale, four items for each climate type. Coefficient α of the scales were 0.67, 0.75, and 0.82, respectively. Alpha coefficients (Cronbach, 1951) are computed to assess the reliability of PL and organizational ethical climate. According to Robinson and Shaver (1973), ifαis greater than 0.7, it means that it has high reliability and ifαis smaller than 0.3, then it implies that there is low reliability. Hence, these two scales (please refer to Appendix I and II for details) are suitable for this study. 31.
(40) Paternalistic Leadership. Paternalistic leadership has three distinct elements: authoritative leadership, benevolent leadership, and moral leadership. The paternalistic leadership scale that was developed by Cheng, Chou and Farh (2000) was employed for measurement of this factor. Each of the three subtypes of leadership was measured with the 5 or 6 highest factor-loading items of the factor analysis result of Cheng et al. (2000). The internal reliability coefficient for the authoritarian leadership scale was 0.75, for the benevolent leadership scale was 0.87, and for the moral leadership scale was 0.86. Sample items include: “My supervisor is like a family member when he/she gets along with us,” “My supervisor does not take advantage of me for me for personal gain,” and “My supervisor asks me to obey his/her instructions completely”. Each type was measured using a six-point rating scales, with 1 representing “strongly disagree” to 6 representing “strongly agree”. Organizational Ethical Climate. Egoistic climate, benevolent climate, and principled climate were adopted from Victor and Cullen (1988) 9-item scale, three items for each climate type. Sample items of egoistic climate were: “My organization emphasizes the importance of furthering its interests’’ and “Employees in my organization are not expected to be concerned with the organization’s interests all the time.’’ Sample items of benevolent climate included: “Concern for employees is prevalent in my organization’’ and “My organization does not emphasize employee welfare.’’ Sample items of principled climate were: ‘‘Compliance with organization rules and procedures is very important in my organization’’ and ‘‘Employees in my organization are not expected to stick to organization policies strictly.’’ Each type was measured using a seven-point rating scales, with 1 representing “extremely disagree” to 7 representing “extremely agree”. Therefore, a low score shows the absence of a climate and a high score shows the presence of a climate. 32.
(41) 3.7 Data Analysis Procedures In order to achieve the purposes of this research and test, SPSS and Partial Least Square (PLS) software were employed to help us analyze the collected data. 3.7.1 Descriptive Data Analysis To better understand the characteristics of each variable, descriptive statistic analysis was used to illustrate the means, and standard deviation of each research variable. 3.7.2 Pearson Correlation Analysis and Partial Least Square Analysis Pearson correlation coefficient and correlation coefficient were used to assess the relationship between all the dimensions. If the p-value is between 0.05 and 0.01, the hypothesis is strongly significant. And if the p-value is less than or equal to 0.01, the hypothesis is extremely significant. To analyze the relationship of the linear components between criterions and predictors, we used partial least square (hereinafter refers to as PLS). Because the PLS approach for its advantages over the covariance approach. The advantages of this soft-modeling approach include theoretical conditions, measurement conditions, distributional considerations, and practical considerations (Falk & Miller, 1992). PLS is an exploratory methodology that relies on the data. The PLS approach matches the researcher’s prediction-oriented objective, does not require normal data distribution, and accommodates small sample sizes (Chin & Newsted, 1999). However, PLS approach to Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) is a useful and flexible tool for statistical model building. The flexibility and scope of PLS facilitates the analysis and investigation of large and complex path models, particularly in the more exploratory fashion, as in this research.. 33.
(42) CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS OF THE RESEARCH This chapter presents the empirical results of this study. The first section is the descriptive analysis of the respondents including the data collection, the attributes of the respondents, the results of the measurement variables and the reliability tests. The second section presents pearson’s correlation table is prepared to identify the interrelationships between independent variables and dependent variables. The third section presents a partial least square analysis is conducted to examine the significance and the relationships between the dimensions of PL (paternalistic leadership) and the dimension of organizational ethical climate.. 4.1 Descriptive Analysis Preliminary analyses were conducted in this section to provide information about the characteristics of respondents and the results of relevant research variables. 4.1.1 Data Collections The data were gathered via questionnaire form over three month period. Due to limited time and resources we used convenient sampling and delivered the questionnaire through the relatives and friends. Totally 254 questionnaires were collected, and 254 of those were answered. The study sample consisted of 254 individuals working in Taiwan Public Sector. Respondents work in different sectors such as police agency of ministry of the interior, civil servants in township office, city government, forest bureau, coast guard administration and the unit of judiciary. Two hundred and seventy-nine questionnaires were distributed and 254 were returned for a response rate of 91.04%. After data cleaning, 4 incomplete questionnaires were abolished, due to incomplete answers or because it was clear that the respondents had. 34.
(43) not treated the questionnaire seriously. For instance, some of them chose the same answer (score) for every question. There were no missing data among the 250 questionnaires, hence there are 250 effective samples participated in the study and valid retrieving rate is 89.61%. It is listed in Table 4-1 Table 4-1 Summary of Questionnaires and Response Rates Questionnaire Total. Distributed. Collected. 279. Valid. 254. 250. Response rate% 91.04 %. 4.1.2 Characteristics of the Respondents Table 4-2 show the basic attributes of the respondents, including 3 major items in this study:. (1) gender, (2) age, and (3) tenure. Data were collected by convenience. sampling. From the graph below, we notice that 72.8% of respondents were male. There is an imbalance of male gender representation in our sample. However, due to the conservative cultural conception of man are breadwinner and women are homemakers in Chinese society; there was nothing that could be done to correct this imbalance. According to Ken (2007) assumed that there may be lingering societal prejudice to assume that policing is “man’s work”, and that when help is needed “we want a policeman”. The age of collected sample is also quite young (37.6%) ranging from 27-36 and 34% ranging from 37-46 years old and the less of older in age (10.4%). The majority (20%) of the sample has a tenure that falls under the category of 10-15 years. Most of the tenure of respondents has a long working history and the less of the respondents have the short working history (7.6%).. 35.
(44) Table 4-2 Characteristics of the Respondents for Taiwan Public Sector Question. Frequency. Percentage (%). Male Female. Gender 182 68. 72.8% 27.2%. 18-26 27-36 37-46 47-56 More than56 Less than 1 1-5 (below) 5-10 (below) 10-15 (below) 15-20 (below) 20~25 (below) More than25. Age 26 94 85 38 7 Tenure 19 43 34 50 40 45 19. 10.4% 37.6% 34 % 15.2% 2.8% ..7.6% 17.2% 13.6% 20% 16% 18% 7.6%. 4.1.3 Descriptive Statistics and Cronbach’s Alpha Table 4-3 provides descriptive statistics by questionnaire items for the respondents of Taiwan public sector. These include 33 items of paternalistic leadership, 15 items of organizational ethical climate. The results of means and standard deviations as shown in Table 4-3 indicated that, for the construct of paternalistic leadership, respondents identified the presence of authoritative leadership (mean= 3.84). This was followed by the moral leadership (mean= 3.73) and benevolent leadership (mean= 3.44). According to the high means of authoritative leadership (3.84), this is tally with the research of Chen & Farh (1996): Authoritative leadership is one of the three main components of PL. While benevolence and moral leadership are integral, authoritarianism stands out, at least in 36.
(45) the assessment by Western researchers, as the most prominent and most representative of the Chinese leadership tradition.. Table 4-3 Descriptive Analysis and Reliability for Paternalistic Leadership Types. Authoritative Leadership Benevolent Leadership Moral Leadership. Mean Standard Deviation Cronbach’s Alpha Mean Standard Deviation Cronbach’s Alpha Mean Standard Deviation Cronbach’s Alpha. Taiwan Public Sector 3.84 0.95 0.920 3.44 0.99 0.924 3.73 1.18 0.935. Finally, for the construct of organizational ethical climate, Table 4-4 shows that respondents were identified the presence of organizational ethical climate, egoistic climate (mean=4.95). This was followed by the principle climate (mean=4.89) and benevolent climate (mean=4.11). If the Cronbach’s alpha is 0.7, the factor is reliable (Nunnally, 1978). These findings suggest that the majority of the respondents believed that their organizations major concern is about what is best for itself and subordinates are expected to comply with the law and professional standards, and to stick by organization rules and procedures. Table 4-4 Descriptive Analysis and Reliability for Organizational Ethical Climate Types. Egoistic climate Benevolent Climate Principled climate. Mean Standard Deviation Cronbach’s Alpha Mean Standard Deviation Cronbach’s Alpha Mean Standard Deviation Cronbach’s Alpha 37. Taiwan Public Sector 4.95 1.04 0.774 4.11 1.26 0.836 4.89 1.20 0.844.