PurposeTransformational leadership (TFL) has been suggested to create positive changes in employees with the goal of developing them into leaders. The authors integrate this well-established leadership style with recent research on idiosyncratic deals (i-deals). The authors suggest TFL as a predictor of task and development-based i-deals, and propose i-deals as a mediating mechanism linking TFL to employee outcomes (job satisfaction, job stress and manager-rated performance).Design/methodology/approachThe authors used a time-lagged research design, and collected four waves of data from 140 employees and 78 leaders.FindingsTFL was found to be an important predictor of i-deals. I-deals predicted job satisfaction and job stress; and it mediated the relationship between TFL and these two employee outcomes. Yet, i-deals were not associated with employee performance and did not mediate the relationship.Originality/valueFirst, it shows that transformational leaders who consider employees' unique skills and support their professional growth are more likely to grant personalized arrangements. Second, drawing from social exchange theory, it illustrates that i-deals may act as a linkage between TFL and employee outcomes. The paper bridges leadership and i-deals literature to identify key leverage points through which leaders can enhance employee satisfaction, well-being and performance.

The literature on the bright side of leadership has established that leaders differentiate among their followers. This paper examines a negative leadership style, authoritarian leadership (AL) and, based on group value and engagement models, proposes that AL differentiation softens the negative effects of mean AL on team cohesion, which in turn influences team and individual performance. Based on social comparison and justice theories, we also test the opposite effects of AL differentiation on these outcomes as a competing hypothesis. The results (multi-source cross-level data from 381 employees of 63 teams) support our main hypothesis but not the competing hypothesis. When team leaders exhibited authoritarian behaviors to all members (low differentiation), team cohesion decreased drastically, which reduced individual (in-role, extra-role, but not innovative performance) and team performance. In the high differentiation condition, the negative effects of mean AL via team cohesion on in-role and extra-role performance and team performance were alleviated.

Motivated by the Attachment Security Enhancement Model (Arriaga et al., 2018), the present research investigated the associations between positive relationship experiences and romantic attachment avoidance in three dyadic studies that combined multiple methods, including daily diaries, laboratory observations, and longitudinal follow-ups. Frequency of daily positive relationship events (but not external positive events) during a 21-day diary period predicted declines in romantic attachment avoidance (but not anxiety) from pre- to post-diary in fledgling couples (Study 1) and newlyweds (Study 2). Video-recorded discussions of fledgling couples' shared positive experiences revealed that behaviors validating the relationship (but not simply showing conversational interest) predicted lagged declines in romantic attachment avoidance (but not anxiety) over 1 month (Study 3). The associations were mediated by positive affect during the diary period in Studies 1 and 2, and by changes in positive affect from pre- to post-discussion in Study 3. Positive relationship experiences did not significantly interact with time in predicting romantic avoidance over a 1-year follow-up with quarterly assessments of attachment orientations in Study 1, over an 8-month follow-up with monthly assessments in Study 2, or over a 2-month follow-up with monthly assessments in Study 3. Altogether, these studies provide one of the most comprehensive tests of how positive relationship experiences in nondistressing contexts are linked to romantic attachment.

[This study investigates how the leader–follower agreement on authoritarian leadership influences the quality of communication experience with the leader across three countries: Taiwan, Turkey, and the U.S. We also examine the mediating role of the quality of communication in linking agreement on authoritarianism to subordinate in-role and extra-role performance. Our sample consisted of 674 Taiwanese, 409 Turkish, and 294 American employees and their leaders. The results demonstrate that in the U.S., the leader–follower agreement on this negative form of leadership has positive effects on the quality of communication. In Turkey, however, the leader–follower agreement on high levels of authoritarian leadership has a negative effect on interpersonal interactions. In Taiwan, agreement or disagreement on authoritarian leadership is not as important as in the U.S. or Turkey. We also found that the quality of communication experience was a significant mediating mechanism between the leader–follower agreement and follower performance in all three countries.

The current study examines the effects of two major dimensions of Paternalistic Leadership (PL), authoritarian and benevolent leadership, on the perceived workplace ethical climate in different cultural contexts. Based on social influence and organizational justice theories, we illuminate the processes underlying the effects of these leadership styles on ethical climate by proposing perceived procedural and interactional justice as potential mediators. We also test how these mediating effects vary in three different countries: Taiwan, Turkey, and the United States. Based on a sample of 674 Taiwanese, 409 Turkish, and 479 American employees, we identified several interesting mediation and moderation results on leadership-justice-ethical climate paths. To our surprise, while procedural justice was an important mechanism linking benevolent leadership and ethical climate in all three countries, it mediated the relationship between authoritarian leadership and ethical climate only in Turkey. However, interactional justice was found to be a significant mediating mechanism only in the United States and for both authoritarian and benevolent leadership. In addition, cultural context moderated the PL-justice link such that the strongest positive benevolent leadership and interactional justice relationship, as well as the strongest negative association between authoritarian leadership and both types of justice, were observed in Turkey.

In this study, we propose that manager job insecurity will moderate the nature of the relationship between perceived overqualification and employee career-related outcomes (career satisfaction, promotability ratings, and voluntary turnover). We tested our hypotheses using a sample of 124 employees and 54 managers working in a large holding company in Ankara, Turkey, collected across five time periods. The results suggested that average perceived overqualification was more strongly, and negatively, related to career satisfaction of employees when managers reported higher job insecurity. Furthermore, employee perceived overqualification was positively related to voluntary turnover when manager job insecurity was high. No direct or moderated effects were found for promotability ratings. Implications for overqualification and job insecurity literatures were discussed.

There is a growing amount of research integrating leadership and positive organizational behavior literatures in order to understand the processes through which leadership contributes to performance. One such mechanism through which leaders influence performance is psychological capital (PsyCap). Particularly, paternalistic leadership, which is a leadership style that combines discipline, authority, and power with fatherly benevolence, may be a critical antecedent to the development of followers' PsyCap. Yet no studies to date have investigated how paternalistic leaders affect followers' PsyCap, which, in turn, influences their task and innovative performance. To this end, based on a sample of 409 Turkish employees and their 72 leaders, the current study investigates the effects of three dimensions of paternalistic leadership (i.e., benevolent, authoritarian, and authoritative) on followers' leader-rated task and innovative performance. While there were no significant mediation effects for task performance, the results revealed that both benevolent and authoritative leadership positively influenced innovative performance through enhancing followers' PsyCap. Authoritarian leadership, however, has negative effects on PsyCap, which, in turn, mediates the effect on innovative performance of followers. The theoretical and practical implications of our findings, along with suggestions for future research, are discussed.

The current study examines the effects of two major dimensions of Paternalistic Leadership, authoritarian and benevolent, on the perceived workplace ethical climate in different cultural contexts. Based on social influence and organizational justice theories, we illuminate the processes underlying the effects of these leadership styles on ethical climate by proposing perceived procedural and interactional justice as potential mediators. We test how these mediating effects vary in three different countries: Taiwan, Turkey, and the U.S. Based on a sample of 674 Taiwanese, 409 Turkish, and 479 American employees, we identified several interesting mediation and moderation results on leadership – justice – ethical climate paths. To our surprise, while procedural justice was an important mechanism linking benevolent leadership and ethical climate in all three countries, it mediated the relationship between authoritarian leadership and ethical climate only in Turkey. However, interactional justice was found to be a significant mediating mechanism only in the U.S. and for both authoritarian and benevolent leadership. In addition, cultural context moderated the paternalistic leadership-justice link such that the strongest positive benevolent leadership and interactional justice relationship, as well as the strongest negative association between authoritarian leadership and both types of justice, were observed in Turkey.

Leaders play a key role in the creation and maintenance of processes that facilitate task and innovative performance. One such mechanism through which leaders affect performance is psychological capital (PsyCap). Particularly paternalistic leadership (PL) which is a leadership style that combines discipline, authority, and power with fatherly benevolence, may be a critical antecedent to the development of followers’ PsyCap. Yet, no studies to date have investigated how paternalistic leaders affect followers’ psychological capital which in turn, influence their task and innovative performance. To this end, based on a sample of 409 Turkish employees and their 72 leaders, the current study investigates the effects of three dimensions of PL (i.e., benevolent, authoritarian, and authoritative) on followers’ leader-rated task and innovative performance via development of their psychological resources. The results reveal that both benevolent and authoritative leadership influence task and innovative performance through PsyCap. Authoritarian leadership, however, has negative effects on PsyCap, which, in turn, mediates the effect on both task and innovative performance of followers. The theoretical and practical implications of our findings, along with suggestions for future research are discussed.

Paternalistic Leadership (PL), defined as a leadership style that combines discipline, authority and power with fatherly benevolence, is a prevalent style in collectivistic and high power distant countries. This study examines the effects of different dimensions of PL (i.e. authoritarian, and benevolent leadership) on ethical climate at the workplace. Based on organizational justice theory, we shed light on the processes underlying the effects of these leadership styles on ethical climate by proposing procedural and interactional justice as potential mediators. We explore how PL-justice and ethical climate paths vary in different cultural contexts, namely Turkey, Taiwan and the US. by testing a moderated mediation model. Based on a sample of 409 Turkish, 687 Taiwanese and 525 American employees, we identified several interesting mediation and moderation results on leadership – justice – ethical climate paths. While procedural justice was identified as an important antecedent of ethical climate in all three countries, the results were stronger for Turkey. Interactional justice however, had the strongest positive effects on ethical climate in the U.S. We identified the strongest positive effects of benevolent leadership on perceived interactional justice in Turkey and also the strongest negative effects of authoritarian leadership on both procedural and interactional justice in Turkey.

Studies of innovation have emphasized the importance of leadership for individual or team innovative behaviors, but have largely ignored cross-team innovative behaviors. Enhancing innovative behaviors across teams is particularly vital for organizations relying on large-scale, complex, and multiteam projects to compete in a dynamic environment. We extend the innovation literature by introducing benevolent leadership as an antecedent to innovative behavior within and across teams. We examine identification to the team and department as mediators based on social identity theory in a sample of 397 R&D employees (consisting of 68 teams). First, individuals reported that benevolent R&D leaders facilitate innovative behavior within their teams when employees are highly identified with these teams. Second, on average, teams reported that benevolent R&D leaders enhance their teams' innovative behavior across the boundaries when these teams are highly identified with the R&D department. Finally, in contrast to social identity theory's expectations, individuals reported that benevolent R&D leaders facilitate their innovative behaviors with other teams when employees are highly identified with their teams. The theoretical and practical implications of our findings along with suggestions for future research are discussed.

Although the success of team‐based organizations requires innovative behavior within and across teams, little research has considered how to foster both types of activity. This is problematic as strong team attachments such as team identification may have mixed effects on team innovative behavior, and may even negatively impact cross‐team innovative behavior. The present research explains these mixed effects through intra‐ and intergroup aspects of social identity theory and the concept of team reflexivity. Effects of team identification on team innovative behavior were expected to be contingent upon team reflexivity, such that team identification would be positively related to team innovative behavior only when team reflexivity was high. Where a team's innovative behavior involves working across team boundaries with other teams, i.e., cross‐team innovative behavior, this interaction between team identification and reflexivity was further expected to be qualified by perceived interdependence with another team. In a sample of 61 Turkish research and development (R&D) teams comprising 305 employees and 61 team leaders, the association between team identity and team innovative behavior was moderated by team reflexivity as predicted. Further, team identity was positively associated with cross‐team innovative behavior only when reflexivity and perceived interdependence between teams were both high, and negatively associated when reflexivity was low and perceived interdependence between teams was high.

Recent meta-analytic findings suggest that national culture may influence the development of high-quality relationships between managers and their direct reports known as Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) (Dulebohn, Bommer, Liden, Brouer & Ferris, 2012; Rockstuhl, Dulebohn, Ang & Shore, 2012). Rockstuhl et al. found lower associations between LMX and outcomes such as organizational citizenship behavior, perceptions of justice and trust in the leader. They argue that “…change in construct meaning across cultures is an alternative explanation” for attenuated relationships between LMX and outcomes (p. 1104). Pellegrini (2015) suggests that there is “…a critical need to incorporate emic (cultural-specific) conceptualizations of LMX in international research.” (p. 353). However, beyond correlations between cultural values of collectivism and power distance (Hofstede, 1980), we do not understand how and why LMX relationships develop in cultures other than the U.S. The majority of research in leadership (including LMX research) employs the universal approach (e.g., Peterson & Sondergaard, 2011; Zhang et al., 2012). Recent theory in international management suggests, however, that this method may fall short, and argues for more research that incorporates both universal and indigenous approaches (cf., Brannen & Doz, 2010; Tsui, Nifadkar, & Ou, 2007). Thus, this symposium will address this gap by presenting papers that offer a blend of indigenous and universal theory to offer a more complete view of Leader-Member Exchange in the international context. The papers employ samples that are not often seen in leadership research and include Greece, Turkey and the United Arab Emirates. Leader-Member Exchange and Paternalism in the Arab World Presenter: Terri A. Scandura; U. of Miami Presenter: Susan Crotty; Zayed U. Presenter: Monica M Sharif; San Francisco State U. Paternalistic Leadership and Innovation in Turkey Presenter: Zahide Karakitapoglu-Aygãn; Bilkent U. Presenter: Lale Gumusluoglu; Bilkent U. International LMX Research: An Overview and Directions for Future Research Presenter: Ekin K. Pellegrini; U. of Missouri, St. Louis LMX and Employability in Conditions of Employment Uncertainty Presenter: Olga Epitropaki; Durham U.

Studies of innovation have mostly emphasized the importance of leadership either for individual or team innovative behaviors, however cross-team innovative behavior has not been addressed. Enhancing innovative behaviors at individual, team and cross-team levels is vital for especially organizations relying on large-scale, complex and multi-team projects to compete in a dynamic environment. We extend innovation literature by introducing benevolent paternalistic leadership as an antecedent to innovative behavior at three levels, namely, individual, team and cross-team levels. Using a sample of N=397 Turkish R&D team members (from 68 teams), we first found that benevolent paternalism predicted individual level innovative behavior through the mediating role of identification with the leader. Second, based on the social identity theory, we proposed and found that benevolent R&D department leaders facilitate both team and cross-team innovative behaviors through creating strong identifications with the team and with the R&D department, respectively. The theoretical and practical implications of our findings along with suggestions for future research are discussed.

Research evidence and theoretical accounts of honor point to differing definitions of the construct in differing cultural contexts. The current studies address the question What is honor? using a prototype approach in Turkey and the Northern United States. Studies 1a/1b revealed substantial differences in the specific features generated by members of the two groups, but Studies 2 and 3 revealed cultural similarities in the underlying dimensions of self-respect, moral behavior, and social status/respect. Ratings of the centrality and personal importance of these factors were similar across the two groups, but their association with other relevant constructs differed. The tripartite nature of honor uncovered in these studies helps observers and researchers alike understand how diverse responses to situations can be attributed to honor. Inclusion of a prototype analysis into the literature on honor cultures can provide enhanced coverage of the concept that may lead to testable hypotheses and new theoretical developments.

Turkish Abstract: Bu calisma, donusturucu liderligin kulturel ve tarihsel acidan ozel bir konumu olan ulkemizde nasil algilandigini ve tanimlandigini, boyutlarinin neler oldugunu ve Bati literaturunden ne tur farkliliklar gosterdigini kulturel bir yaklasimla arastirmistir. Birinci calismada 31 bilgi calisani ile yapilan mulakatlar sonucunda donusturucu liderligin nasil algilandigi ve tanimlandigi incelenmistir. Ikinci calismada, 230 ARGE calisanindan veri toplanarak elde edilenkulturel maddelerin psikometrik ozellikleri test edilmistir. Evrensel ve kulturel maddelerin bir arada incelendigi faktor analizi sonuclari donusturucu liderligin uc boyutta toplandigini gostermistir: Ilgili-Babacan Liderlik, Ilham Veren Karizmatik Liderlik ve Aktif-Entellektuel Uyarici Liderlik. Bu faktorlerin Babacan ve Aktif taraflari kulturel ozellikleri temsil ederken, Ilham Veren Karizmatik Liderlik hem kulturel hem evrensel ozellikler tasimaktadir. Arastirmamizin hipotez testi olan ucuncu calismasinda ise, 256 ARGE calisani ve liderlerinden veri toplanmistir. Bu asamada ise uc boyutun literaturun isaret ettigi degiskenleri yordayip yordamadigina bakilarak soz konusu kulturel maddelerin evrensel maddelerin otesinde bir aciklama getirdigi gorulmustur. Bulgular ekonomik ve sosyal bir gecis donemi yasayan ulkemiz ozelinde pratik uygulamalari acisindan tartisilmakta ve donusturucu liderligin soz konusu kulturel ozelliklerine yonelik kuramsal oneriler sunulmaktadir. English Abstract: The present study adopting a cultural approach, investigated how transformational leadership is defined in the Turkish context, what its dimensions are and to what extent these cultural features differ from the universal dimensions in the literature. The first study examined how transformational leadership is defined and understood through interviews with 31 knowledge workers. In the second study with data from 230 R&D employees, we tested the psychometric properties of the emic items. Factor analysis conducted with both etic and emic items revealed three factors: Considerate-Paternalistic Leadership, Inspiring Charismatic Leadership, Active-Stimulating Leadership. Among these factors, Paternalistic and Active Leadership represented the emic aspects, while Inspiring-Charismatic Leadership included both emic and etic items. In the third hypotheses-testing study, data was collected from 256 R&D employees and their leaders. The results showed that 3 factors predicted important outcomes of transformational leadership and emic aspects of these dimensions predicted those outcomes above and beyond universal dimensions. Findings are discussed with reference to the recent economic and social change in Turkey in addition to theoretical suggestions regarding the emic aspects.

The construct of individualism–collectivism (IND-COL) has become the definitive standard in cross-cultural psychology, management, and related fields. It is also among the most controversial, in particular, with regard to the ambiguity of its dimensionality: Some view IND and COL as the opposites of a single continuum, whereas others argue that the two are independent constructs. We explored the issue through seven different tests using original individual-level data from 50 studies and meta-analytic data from 149 empirical publications yielding a total of 295 sample-level observations that were collected using six established instruments for assessing IND and COL as separate constructs. Results indicated that the dimensionality of IND-COL may depend on (a) the specific instrument used to collect the data, (b) the sample characteristics and the cultural region from which the data were collected, and (c) the level of analysis. We also review inconsistencies, deficiencies, and challenges of conceptualizing IND-COL and provide guidelines for developing and selecting instruments for measuring the construct, and for reporting and meta-analyzing results from this line of research.

The present study aims to explore positive and negative leadership behaviours (i.e. transformational and non-transformational leadership) in a non-Western ‘change and transformation’ context through qualitative methods. Thirty-one semi-structured interviews were conducted with knowledge workers in Turkey. In addition to the original dimensions found in the literature, four categories of transformational leadership emerged: benevolent paternalism, implementation of the vision, employee participation and teamwork, and proactive behaviour. Among these categories, benevolent paternalism was identified to be the most frequently mentioned aspect of transformational leadership in the Turkish context, which implies that cultural context may influence the form and enactment of transformational leadership. Regarding non-transformational leadership, five categories emerged: destructive, closed, passive/ineffective, active-failed and a miscellaneous category. Among these, destructive leadership that includes authoritarian elements was identified as the most frequently mentioned form of non-transformational leadership. These findings imply that non-transformational leadership comes in many forms, supporting the numerous constructs on the destructive/unethical–ineffective/incompetent continuum found in the negative leadership literature. The findings are discussed with reference to the literature and to social change in Turkey.

The present study adopting a cultural approach, investigated how transformational leadership is defined in the Turkish context, what its dimensions are and to what extent these cultural features differ from the universal dimensions in the literature. The first study examined how transformational leadership is defined and understood through interviews with 31 knowledge workers. In the second study with data from 230 R&D employees, we tested the psychometric properties of the emic items. Factor analysis conducted with both etic and emic items revealed three factors: Considerate-Paternalistic Leadership, Inspiring Charismatic Leadership, Active-Stimulating Leadership. Among these factors, Paternalistic and Active Leadership represented the emic aspects, while Inspiring-Charismatic Leadership included both emic and etic items. In the third hypotheses-testing study, data was collected from 256 R&D employees and their leaders. The results showed that 3 factors predicted important outcomes of transformational leadership and emic aspects of these dimensions predicted those outcomes above and beyond universal dimensions. Findings are discussed with reference to the recent economic and social change in Turkey in addition to theoretical suggestions regarding the emic aspects.