The Effect of Paternalistic Leadership on the Voice Behavior of Employees: Mediated by Leader-member Exchange

Studies of Psychology and Behavior ›› 2016, Vol. 14 ›› Issue (3): 384-389.

Previous Articles Next Articles

The Effect of Paternalistic Leadership on the Voice Behavior of Employees: Mediated by Leader-member Exchange

Wu Kai¹, Li Yongxin¹, Liu Xia²

1 Institute of Psychologyy & Beahvior,Henan University, Kaifeng 475004;
2 Institute of Developmental Psychology, Beijing Normal Universtiy, Beijing 100871

Received:2015-08-11 Online:2016-06-06 Published:2016-05-20

家长式领导与员工建言行为：领导-成员交换的中介作用

务凯¹,李永鑫¹,刘霞²

1 河南大学心理与行为研究所，开封 475004;
2 北京师范大学发展心理所，北京 100871

通讯作者: 李永鑫,E-mail:liyongxin@henu.edu.cn；刘霞,E-mail:liuxia776@bnu.edu.cn
基金资助:
河南省高校科技创新人才(人文社科类)资助项目（教社科[2013]404号）、河南省教育厅人文社会科学研究重点项目（2014-zd-100）、河南大学教育科学学院青年科研基金项目（2014-JKJJ-10）

Abstract

Abstract: This paper was to explore the mediating effect of leadership-membership exchange(LMX)between paternalistic leadership and voice behavior. A three-phase survey data were collected from 176 employees. We administered three scales of surveys at three different time points. The results of hierarchical regression analysis(HRA)showed that superior′s moral leadership has significant positive effect on prohibitive voice behavior of subordinates, and benevolence leadership has significant positive effect on promotive voice behavior. Authoritarianism has significant positive effect on prohibitive voice behavior. Then, Bootstrap analysis procedures were used to test the mediation relationships among the study variables. The results only showed LMX mediates the relationship between moral leadership and voice behavior. Specifically, moral leadership's positive effect on promotive voice was fully mediated by LMX, while its positive effect on prohibitive voice was partially mediated by LMX. The mediating effects of benevolence leadership and authoritarian leadership on the two kinds of voice behavior were not found.

Key words: paternalistic leadership, leader-member exchange, voice behavior

摘要： 为了探讨家长式领导影响员工建言行为的内在作用机制，在三个时间节点上对176名企业员工进行问卷调查，采用层次回归分析和Bootstrap技术进行检验的结果表明：（1）家长式领导对员工的建言行为有显著地影响；（2）德行领导通过领导-成员交换的部分中介效应影响员工的抑制性建言行为；（3）德行领导通过领导-成员交换的完全中介效应影响员工的促进性建言行为。

关键词: 家长式领导, 领导-成员交换, 建言行为

CLC Number:

B849: C93-051

Wu Kai, Li Yongxin, Liu Xia. The Effect of Paternalistic Leadership on the Voice Behavior of Employees: Mediated by Leader-member Exchange[J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2016, 14(3): 384-389.

务凯,李永鑫,刘霞. 家长式领导与员工建言行为：领导-成员交换的中介作用[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2016, 14(3): 384-389.

References

[1] 陈瑞, 郑毓煌, 刘文静.(2013). 中介效应分析: 原理、程序、bootstrap方法及其应用. 营销科学学报, 9(4), 120-135.
[2] 段锦云.(2012). 家长式领导对员工建言行为的影响: 心理安全感的中介机制. 管理评论, 24(10), 109-116, 142.
[3] 樊景立, 郑伯埙.(2000). 华人组织的家长式领导: 一项文化观点的分析. 本土心理学研究, 13, 127-180.
[4] 景保峰.(2012). 家长式领导对员工建言行为影响的实证研究. 博士学位论文. 华南理工大学. 广州.
[5] 裴瑞敏, 李虹, 高艳玲.(2013). 领导风格对科研团队成员创造力的影响机制研究——内部动机和LMX的中介作用. 管理评论, 25(3), 111-145.
[6] 温忠麟, 张雷, 侯杰泰, 刘红云.(2004). 中介效应检验程序及其应用. 心理学报, 36(5), 614-620.
[7] 务凯, 赵国祥.(2009). 中国大陆地区家长式领导的结构与测量. 心理研究, 02(2), 56-59.
[8] 许彦妮, 顾琴轩, 蒋琬.(2014). 德行领导对员工创造力和工作绩效的影响: 基于LMX理论的实证研究. 管理评论, 26(2), 139-147.
[9] Baruch, Y., O′Creevy, M. F., Hind, P., & Vigoda-Gadot, E.(2004). Prosocial behavior and job performance on members′ organizational identity and identification. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46, 399-411.
[10] Botero, I. C., & Dyne, L. V.(2009). Employee voice behavior interactive effects of lmx and power distance in the united states and colombia. Management Communication Quarterly, 23(1), 84-104.
[11] Burris, E. R.(2012). The risks and rewards of speaking up: Managerial responses to employee voice. Academy of Management Journal, 55(4), 851-875.
[12] Detert, J. R., & Burris, E. R.(2007). Leadership behavior and employee voice: Is the door really open?. Academy of Management Journal, 50(4), 869-884.
[13] Farh, J. L., Cheng, B. S., Chou, L. F., & Chu, X. P.(2006). Authority and benevolence: Employees′ responses to paternalistic leadership in China. In A. S. Tsui, Y. Bian, & L. Cheng(Eds.), China′s domestic private firms: Multidisciplinary perspectives on management and performance(pp.230-260). New York: M. E. Sharpe.
[14] Graen, G. B., & UhlBien, M.(1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of leader-member exchange(lmx) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. Leadership Quarterly, 6(2), 219-247.
[15] Hayes, A. F.(2013). An introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York: Guilford Press.
[16] Hsiung, H. H.(2012). Authentic leadership and employee voice behavior: A multi-level psychological process. Journal of Business Ethics, 107(3), 349-361.
[17] Liang, J., & Farh, J. L.(2008). Promotive and prohibitive voice behavior in organizations: A two-wave longitudinal examination. Paper presented at the Third Conference of the International Association for Chinese Management Research, Guangzhou, China.
[18] Liang, J. C., Farh, C. I., & Farh, J. L.(2012). Psychological antecedents of promotive and prohibitive voice: A two-wave examination. Academy of Management Journal, 55(1), 71-92.
[19] Liu, X. Y., & Wang, J.(2013). Abusive supervision and organizational citizenship behaviour：Is supervisor-subordinate guanxi a mediator?. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(7), 1471-1489.
[20] Morrison, E. W., & Phelps, C. C.(1999). Taking charge at work: Extra-role efforts to initiate workplace change. Academy of management Journal, 42(4), 403-419.
[21] Ning, H. Y., Zhou, M. J., Lu, Q., & Wen, L. Q.(2012). Exploring relationship between authority leadership and organizational citizenship behavior in China, the role of collectivism. Chinese Management Studies, 6(2), 231-244.
[22] Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F.(2004). Spss and sas procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods Instruments & Computers A Journal of the Psychonomic Society Inc, 36(4), 717-731.
[23] Van, D. L., Kamdar, D., & Joireman, J.(2008). In-role perceptions buffer the negative impact of low lmx on helping and enhance the positive impact of high lmx on voice. Journal of Applied Psycholog, 93(6), 1195-1207.
[24] Zhao, X. S., Lynch, J. G., & Chen, Q. M.(2010). Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(2), 197-206.

The Effect of Paternalistic Leadership on the Voice Behavior of Employees: Mediated by Leader-member Exchange

家长式领导与员工建言行为：领导-成员交换的中介作用

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

References

Related Articles 6

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

[1]	LI Xiaoyu, ZHAO Shenran, GAO Ang, GAO Dongdong. The Impact of Differential Leadership on Employee Voice Behavior: A Multiple Mediation Model of Organizational Commitment and Perceived Insider Status [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2019, 17(3): 408-414,432.
[2]	SHEN Xiangying, MU Guibin. The Effect of Paternalistic Leadership on the Voice Behavior of Employees: Mediated by Organizational Identification [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2018, 16(6): 841-846.
[3]	WU Kai, ZHANG Zaixuan, LI Yongxin. The Effect of Paternalistic Leadership on the Turnover Intention of Employees: Mediated by Organizational Identification [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2018, 16(4): 557-562.
[4]	XU Yue, DUAN Jinyun, LI Chengyan. The Impact of Benevolent Leadership on Employee Voice: Dual Path of Self-prevention and Self-improvement [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2017, 15(6): 839-845.
[5]	Zhang Haijun. The Relationship of Coaches′ Paternalistic Leadership Behaviors and High-level Athletes′ Sportspersonship in College: a Mediated-Moderator Model [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2015, 13(1): 109-114.
[6]	Wei Lei,Shi Kan. PATERNALISTIC LEADERSHIP AND JOB INVOLVEMENT: THE MEDIATING ROLE OF PSYCHOLOGICAL EMPOWERMENT [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2010, 8(2): 88-93.