SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 12 Sayı: 2

The Effect of Paternalistic Leadership on Organizational Identifıcation: A Study on Private Security Employees

Paternalist Liderliğin Örgütsel Özdeşleşme Üzerindeki Etkisi: Özel Güvenlik Çalışanları Üzerine Bir Araştırma

Turhan Moç(IĞDIR ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-9639-2974
Halil Özcan Özdemir(Kırşehir Ahi Evran Üniversitesi)0000-0002-0021-3618
Gokhan Buzkan0009-0004-9818-0704
Pages
547–564
Publication Date
2026-07-31
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

As a result of the study, it was found that paternalistic leadership has a positive and moderate effect on employees' identification with their organisations.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The purpose of this study is to examine the effect of paternalistic leadership on organizational identification, which is an important behavior for organizations.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this regard, it aims to reveal whether there is a relationship between public private security officers' perceptions of paternalistic leadership and their organizational identification.The population of the research carried out in the relational survey model consists of 207 employees working as private security guards in Iğdır province.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As a result of the study, it was found that paternalistic leadership has a positive and moderate effect on employees' identification with their organisations.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Liderlik · peternalist lider · özdeşleşme

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to examine the effect of paternalistic leadership on organizational identification, which is an important behavior for organizations. In this regard, it aims to reveal whether there is a relationship between public private security officers' perceptions of paternalistic leadership and their organizational identification.The population of the research carried out in the relational survey model consists of 207 employees working as private security guards in Iğdır province. In this study, paternalistic leadership scale and organisational identification scale were used. In the analysis of the data obtained as a result of the questionnaire application, SPSS and SEM programmes were used and descriptive statistical methods were used. As a result of the study, it was found that paternalistic leadership has a positive and moderate effect on employees' identification with their organisations. In addition, in this study, all sub-dimensions of paternalistic leadership were found to have a positive effect on organisational identification. In addition, as a result of the difference analyses, it was found that there were significant differences between organisational identification and job satisfaction, financial satisfaction with the job, choosing the profession willingly, age and income, and between paternalistic leadership and job satisfaction and choosing the profession willingly. As a result, it can be said that paternalistic leadership can be an effective leadership model in the field of private security, which is a security service. Private security managers can show paternalistic leadership behaviour and enable private security employees to identify more with their organisations and to take more ownership of their work and organisations.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacı, paternalist liderliğin örgütler için önemli bir davranış olan örgütsel özdeşleşme üzerindeki etkisini incelemektir. Bu doğrultuda kamu özel güvenlik görevlilerinin paternalist liderlik algıları ile örgütsel özdeşleşmeleri arasında ilişki olup olmadığını ortaya koymak amaçlanmıştır. İlişkisel tarama modelinde yürütülen araştırmanın evrenini; Iğdır ilinde özel güvenlik görevlisi olarak görev yapan 207 çalışandan oluşmaktadır. Bu çalışmada paternalist liderlik ölçeği ve örgütsel özdeşleşme ölçekleri kullanılmıştır. Anket çalışması sonucunda elde edilen verilerin analizinde SPSS ve YEM programı kullanılmış ve betimsel istatistiksel yöntemler kullanılmıştır. Çalışma sonucunda paternalist liderliğin ve alt boyutlarının çalışanların örgütleriyle özdeşleşmelerinde pozitif ve orta düzeyde bir etkiye sahip olduğu bulunmuştur. Ayrıca farklılık analizleri sonucunda örgütsel özdeşleşme ile iş memnuniyeti, işten maddi olarak tatmin olma, mesleği isteyerek seçme, yaş ve gelir arasında, peternalist liderlik ile iş memnuniyeti ve mesleği isteyerek seçme arasında anlamlı farklıklar olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Sonuç olarak paternalist liderliğin bir güvenlik hizmeti olan özel güvenlik alanında etkili bir liderlik modeli olabileceği söylenebilir. Özel güvenlik yöneticileri paternalist liderlik davranışı gösterebilir ve özel güvenlik çalışanlarının daha fazla örgütleriyle özdeşleşmelerini sağlayarak örgütü işin ve örgütlerini daha fazla sahiplenmelerini sağlayabilir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Moç, T., Özdemir, H. Ö., Buzkan, G. (2026). The Effect of Paternalistic Leadership on Organizational Identifıcation: A Study on Private Security Employees. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Cilt: 12 Sayı: 2, 547–564. https://doi.org/10.31592/aeusbed.1900860

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (52)

  1. Agarwal, U. A., Datta, S., Blake-Beard, S. ve Bhargava, S. (2012). Linking LMX, innovative work behaviour and turnover intentions: The mediating role of work engagement. Career Development International, 17(3), 208-230.
  2. Albert S, Ashforth B.E. ve Dutton J. E. (2000). Organizational identity and identification: Charting new waters and building new bridges. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 13-17. doi:10.5465/amr.2000.2791600.
  3. Al-Malki, M. ve Juan, W. (2018). Leadership styles and job performance: A literature review. Journal of International Business Research and Marketing, 3(3), 40-49.
  4. Ashforth, B. E. ve Mael, F. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 20-39.
  5. Aycan, Z. (2006). Paternalism. U. Kim, K. Yang ve K. Hwang (Ed.), Indigenous and Cultural Psychology: Understanding People in Context içinde (ss. 445-466). Springer: New York.
  6. Aycan, Z., Schyns, B., Sun, J., Felfe, J. ve Saher, N. (2013). Convergence and Divergence of Paternalistic Leadership: A Cross-Cultural Investigation of Prototypes, Journal of International Business Studies, 1-8.
  7. Babalola, S. (2016). The effect of leadership style, job satisfaction and employee-supervisor relationship on job performance and organizational commitment. Journal of Applied Business Research, 32(3), 935-946.
  8. Bacaksiz, F. E., Tuna, R. ve Seren, A. K. H. (2017). The relationships between organisational identification, job performance, and job crafting: A study among nurses. International Journal of Caring Sciences, 10(1), 251-259.
  9. Bing, S. (2004). Sun Tzu was a sissy: Conquer your enemies, promote your friends, and wage the real art of war. New York: HarperCollins.
  10. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2019). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı: İstatistik, araştırma deseni, SPSS uygulamaları ve yorum [Data analysis manual for social sciences: Statistics, research design, SPSS applications and interpretation]. (18th Edition). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  11. Cenkci, A. T. ve Özçelik, G. (2015). Leadership styles and subordinate work engagement: the moderating impact of leader gender. Global Business & Management Research, 7(4), 8-20.
  12. Chan, S. C., Huang, X., Snape, E. ve Lam, C. K. (2013). The janus face of paternalistic leaders: Authoritarianism, benevolence, subordinates’ organization-based self-esteem, and performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(1), 108-128. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1797.
  13. Cheng, B.S., L.F. Chou ve J.L. Farh (2000). A Triad Model of Paternalistic Leadership: The Constructs and Measurement. Indigenous Psychological Research in Chinese Societies, (14), 3-64. (In Chinese).
  14. Cheng, M. Y. ve Wang, L. (2015). The Mediating Effect of Ethical Climate on the Relationship Between Paternalistic Leadership and Team Identification: A Team-Level Analysis in the Chinese Context. Journal of Business Ethics, 129(3), 639-654.
  15. Farh, J. L. ve Cheng, B. S. (2000). A cultural analysis of paternalistic leadership in Chinese organizations. J. T. Li, A. S. Tsui ve E. Weldon (Ed.), Management and organization in the Chinese context içinde (ss. 85-127). London: Macmillan.
  16. Farh, J., Cheng, B., Chou, L. ve Chu, X. (2006). Authority and benevolence: Employees’ responses to paternalistic leadership in China. A. Tsui, Y. Bian ve L. Cheng (Ed.), China’s domestic private firms: Multidisciplinary perspectives on management and performance içinde (ss. 230- 260). Sharpe: New York.
  17. Fornell, C. ve Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error: Algebra and Statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 382-388. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3150980.
  18. Garengo, P. ve Betto, F. (2024). The role of organisational culture and leadership style in performance measurement and management: a longitudinal case study. Production planning & control, 35(2), 151-169.
  19. George, D. ve Mallery P. (2003). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference. 11.0 update (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
  20. Giray, M. D. ve Şahin, D. N. (2014). Liderlik Stillerinin Duygusal Bağlılık ve İşten Ayrılma Niyetiyle İlişkilerinde Örgütsel Destek Algısının Aracılık Rolü, Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 29(73), 1-17.
  21. Göncü, A., Aycan, Z. ve Johnson, R. E. (2014). Effects of Paternalistic and Transformational Leadership on Follower Outcomes, International Journal of Management and Business, 5(1), 36-58.
  22. Gürlek, M. ve Tuna, M. (2019). Corporate social responsibility and work engagement: Evidence from the hotel industry. Tourism Management Perspectives, 31, 195–208. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2019.05.004.
  23. Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations. Sage, London.
  24. Hogg, M. (2006). Social Identity Theory: Contemporary Social Psychology Theories. S. McKeown, R. Haji ve N. Ferguson (Ed), Understanding Peace and Conflict Through Social Identity Theory içinde (ss. 111-136). California: Stanford University.
  25. James, K., Chen, D. L. ve Cropanzano, R. (1996). Culture and leadership among Taiwanese and U.S. workers: Do values influence leadership ideals? M. N. Ruderman, M. W. Hughes James ve S. E. Jackson (Ed), Selected research on work team diversity içinde (ss. 33-52). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association/Center for Creative Leadership.
  26. Kanten, P. (2012). The role of organizational confidence and organizational confidence in the establishment of commitment and proactive behavior in workers. PhD Thesis, Süleyman Demirel University, Social Sciences Institute, Turkey.
  27. Kim, J. ve Jin, Y. (2013). The Effect of Paternalistic Leadership on Employees’ Organizational Identification and Organization-based Selfesteem in Hotel Restaurant, Tourism Research, 6, 103-122.
  28. Kline, RB. (2005). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. New York: Guilford Press.
  29. Köksal, O. (2011). Bir kültürel liderlik paradoksu: Paternalizm. Mustafa Kemal University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 8(15), 101-122.
  30. Kreiner, G. E. ve Ashforth, B. E. (2004). Evidence toward an expanded model of organizational identification. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(1), 1–27. doi.org/10.1002/job.234.
  31. Lau, E. W. (2012). A study of effective leadership in the Chinese context. Academy of Management 2012 Annual Meeting.
  32. Lehr, J. K. ve Rice, R. E. (2002). Motivation, organizational identification, and experiences of the quality examiner. Quality Management Journal, 9, 63-90. Liu, Y., Zhang, J. ve Huang, G. (2010). Paternalistic Leadership and Its Impact on Organizational Effectiveness”, 260-266, IFERA 2010 Family Business Forum, Zhuhai, China.
  33. Loğa, A. (2003). Çalışanların demografik özelliklerinin örgütsel özdeşim, örgütsel bağlılık ve örgütsel vatandaşlık davranışına etkileri: askeri birimlerde bir araştırma. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Başkent Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  34. López-Cabarcos, M. Á., Vázquez-Rodríguez, P. ve Quiñoá-Piñeiro, L. M. (2022). An approach to employees’ job performance through work environmental variables ve leadership behaviours. Journal of Business Research, 140, 361-369.
  35. Maccoby, M. (2004). Why people follow the leader: The power of transference. Harvard Business Review, 82(9), 76-85.
  36. Mael, F. A. (1991). Desire for career upward mobility and workplace adaptation. The International Journal of Career Management, 4, 10-16.
  37. Mael, F. A. ve Ashforth, B. E. (1992). Alumni and their alma mater: a partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13(2), 103-123. doi:10.1002/job.4030130202.
  38. Millward, L. J. ve Brewerton, P. M. (1999). Contractors and their psychological contracts. British Journal of Management, 10, 253-274.
  39. Mussolino, D. ve Calabro, A. (2014). Paternalistic leadership in family firms: Types and implications for intergenerational succession. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 5, 197-210.
  40. Padavic, I. ve Earnest, W. (1994). Paternalism as a component of managerial strategy. Social Science Journal, 31(4), 389-405.
  41. Paşa, S. F., Kabasakal, H. ve Bodur, M. (2001). Society, organizations, and leadership in Turkey. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 50, 559-589.
  42. Pellegrini, E. K. ve Scandura, T. A. (2006). Leader-member exchange (LMX), paternalism and delegation in the Turkish business culture: An empirical investigation. Journal of International Business Studies, 37(2), 264-279.
  43. Pellegrini, E. ve Scandura, T. (2008). Paternalistic leadership: A review and agenda for future research. Journal of management, 34(3), 566-593.
  44. Redmond, J. ve Sharafizad, J. (2020). Discretionary effort of regional hospitality small business employees: Impact of non-monetary work factors. International Journal of Hospitality Management 86. 1-11.
  45. Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., Gonzalez-Roma, V. ve Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3(1), 71-92.
  46. Şimşek, Ö. F. (2007). Yapısal eşitlik modellemesine giriş, temel ılkeler ve LİSREL uygulamaları [Introduction to structural equation modeling, basic principles, and LISREL applications]. Ankara: Ekinoks Eğitim ve Danışmanlık Hizmetleri, Siyasal Basın ve Dağıtım.
  47. Ural, A. ve Kılıç, İ. (2021). Bilimsel araştırma süreci ve SPSS ile veri analizi [Scientific research process and data analysis with SPSS]. Ankara: Detay Yayıncılık.
  48. van Dick, R. ve Kerschreiter, R. (2016). The social identity approach to effective leadership: An overview and some ideas on cross-cultural generalizability. Frontiers of Business Research in China, 10(3), 363–384. DOI: 10.3868/s070-005-016-0013-3.
  49. van Knippenberg, D., van Knippenberg, B., De Cremer, D. ve Hogg, M. A. (2004). Leadership, self, and identity: A review and research agenda. The Leadership Quarterly, 15(6), 825-856. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2004.09.002.
  50. Wang, Y., Tang, C., Naumann, S. E. ve Wang, Y. (2019). Paternalistic leadership and employee creativity: A mediated moderation model. Journal of Management & Organization, 25(1), 137–156. https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2017.8.
  51. Zhu, W., He, H., Treviño, L. K., Chao, M. M. ve Wang, W. (2015). Ethical leadership and follower voice and performance: The role of follower identifications and entity morality beliefs. The Leadership Quarterly, 26(5), 702-718.
  52. Zhuang, W. and Lee, C., ve Ma, C. (2021). Hotel employees’ voice behavior: The role of paternalistic leadership and organizational ıdentification. Sustainability 14(1), 256.