SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Uluslararası Ekonomi Siyaset İnsan ve Toplum Bilimleri Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 9 Sayı: 1

Linking Distributed Leadership to Organizational Citizenship Behavior in Turkish Software Development Companies: The Mediating Role of Work Engagement

Türkiye'deki yazılım geliştirme şirketlerinde dağıtılmış liderliğin örgütsel vatandaşlık davranışına bağlanması: İşe bağlılığın aracılık rolü

Kamal Elkafarna(ISTANBUL COMMERCE UNIVERSITY)0009-0006-4151-9396
Necla Öykü İyigün(ISTANBUL COMMERCE UNIVERSITY)0000-0003-4708-5825
Pages
87–101
Publication Date
2026-01-15
🏛️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)

This research fills a critical gap as it is the first empirical study to test the mediating role of work engagement in the relationship between distributed leadership and organizational citizenship behavior within Türkiye’s software development companies.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This research examines how distributed leadership shapes organizational citizenship behavior within Türkiye’s software development sector, with work engagement positioned as a mediating variable.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Data were collected through an online questionnaire completed by 273 software practitioners positioned in different locations in Türkiye.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:This research fills a critical gap as it is the first empirical study to test the mediating role of work engagement in the relationship between distributed leadership and organizational citizenship behavior within Türkiye’s software development companies.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Dağıtılmış Liderlik · Örgütsel Vatandaşlık Davranışı · İş Katılımı

Abstract

This research examines how distributed leadership shapes organizational citizenship behavior within Türkiye’s software development sector, with work engagement positioned as a mediating variable. As authority disperses from a singular leader toward a collective, collaborative framework, distributed leadership becomes ever more salient in agile, knowledge-intensive businesses such as software development. Data were collected through an online questionnaire completed by 273 software practitioners positioned in different locations in Türkiye. The sample encompassed a spectrum of occupational roles, educational attainments, and professional longevity, thereby reflecting the sector’s heterogeneous character. Results highlight that higher levels of distributed leadership are associated with higher work engagement and organizational citizenship behavior. A major distributed leadership impact on organizational citizenship behavior is channeled through work engagement, which underscores the cognitive and affective pathways through which distributed leadership facilitates organizational citizenship behavior. These findings contribute to the leadership literature by showing how distributed leadership takes advantage of intrinsic motivation and discretionary effort, particularly in highly innovative and collaborative environments, and they align with results reported in previous studies on leadership, engagement, and citizenship behavior. From a managerial perspective, the study recommends the promotion of shared decision-making and engagement as means to enhance work engagement. This research fills a critical gap as it is the first empirical study to test the mediating role of work engagement in the relationship between distributed leadership and organizational citizenship behavior within Türkiye’s software development companies.

Özet

Bu araştırma, Türkiye yazılım geliştirme sektöründe dağıtılmış liderliğin örgütsel vatandaşlık davranışını nasıl şekillendirdiğini incelemektedir ve işe bağlılık aracı bir değişken olarak konumlandırılmaktadır. Otorite tek bir liderden kolektif, iş birlikçi bir çerçeveye doğru yayıldıkça, yazılım geliştirme gibi çevik ve bilgi yoğun işletmelerde dağıtılmış liderlik giderek daha belirgin hale gelmektedir. Veriler, Türkiye genelindeki teknoloji parklarında görev yapan 273 yazılım uygulayıcısı tarafından doldurulan çevrimiçi bir anket aracılığıyla toplanmıştır. Örneklem, mesleki roller, eğitim düzeyleri ve mesleki kıdem gibi çeşitli alanları kapsamakta ve böylece sektörün heterojen yapısını yansıtmaktadır. Sonuçlar, daha yüksek düzeyde dağıtılmış liderliğin daha yüksek iş bağlılığı ve örgütsel vatandaşlık davranışı ile ilişkili olduğunu vurgulamaktadır. Dağıtılmış liderliğin örgütsel vatandaşlık davranışı üzerindeki önemli bir etkisi, dağıtılmış liderliğin örgütsel vatandaşlık davranışını kolaylaştırdığı bilişsel ve duygusal yolları vurgulayan işe bağlılık yoluyla yönlendirilmektedir. Bu bulgular, dağıtılmış liderliğin, özellikle son derece yenilikçi ve iş birliğine dayalı ortamlarda, içsel motivasyon ve isteğe bağlı çabadan nasıl yararlandığını göstererek liderlik literatürüne katkıda bulunmakta ve liderlik, katılım ve vatandaşlık davranışı üzerine yapılan önceki çalışmalarda bildirilen sonuçlarla örtüşmektedir. Yönetimsel bir bakış açısıyla, çalışma, iş katılımını artırmanın bir yolu olarak ortak karar alma ve katılımın teşvik edilmesini önermektedir. Bu araştırma, Türkiye'deki yazılım geliştirme şirketlerinde dağıtılmış liderlik ve örgütsel vatandaşlık davranışı arasındaki ilişkide iş katılımının aracılık rolünü test eden ilk ampirik çalışma olması nedeniyle kritik bir boşluğu doldurmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Elkafarna, K., İyigün, N. Ö. (2026). Linking Distributed Leadership to Organizational Citizenship Behavior in Turkish Software Development Companies: The Mediating Role of Work Engagement. Uluslararası Ekonomi Siyaset İnsan ve Toplum Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 9 Sayı: 1, 87–101. https://doi.org/10.59445/ijephss.1794207

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (38)

  1. Ariani, D. W. (2013). The relationship between employee engagement, organizational citizenship behavior, and counterproductive work behavior. International Journal of Business Administration, 4(2), 46–56. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijba.v4n2p46
  2. Basım, H. N., Şeşen, H. (2006). Adaptation and comparison study of the Organizational Citizenship Behavior scale. Ankara University Journal of Social Sciences, 61(4), 83–101.
  3. Blau, P. M. (1964). Justice in social exchange. Sociological Inquiry, 34(2), 193–206. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-682X.1964.tb00583.x
  4. Bolden, R. (2011). Distributed leadership in organizations: A review of theory and research. International Journal of Management Reviews, 13(3), 251–269. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2011.00306.x
  5. Cropanzano, R., Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31(6), 874–900. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206305279602
  6. Fallash, A., Helmi, S., Gujarto, M., Mellita, D. (2024). The influence of transformational leadership, job satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behavior mediated by employee engagement at Bank Sumsel Babel. Formosa Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 3(10), 3803–3816. https://doi.org/10.55927/fjmr.v3i10.11545
  7. Gronn, P. (2002). Distributed leadership as a unit of analysis. The Leadership Quarterly, 13(4), 423–451.
  8. Güler, M., Çetin, F., Basım, H. N. (2019). İşe tutulma ölçeği çok kısa versiyonu (UWES-3) geçerlilik ve güvenilirlik çalışması: Alternatif bir versiyon (UWES-6) önerisi. İş ve İnsan Dergisi, 6(2), 187–195. https://doi.org/10.18394/iid.516921
  9. Güvendi, K., İyigün, N. Ö. (2024). Algılanan yönetici desteğinin yeşil örgütsel davranış üzerindeki etkisinde psikolojik iyi oluşun düzenleyici rolü. Erciyes Akademi, 38(1), 228–247. https://doi.org/10.48070/erciyesakademi.1400720
  10. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Pearson.
  11. Harris, A. (2008). Distributed leadership: According to the evidence. Journal of Educational Administration, 46(2), 172–188. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230810863253
  12. Harris, A. (2013). Distributed leadership matters: Perspectives, practicalities, and potential. Corwin press.
  13. Hu, L. T., Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55.
  14. Hulpia, H., Devos, G., Rosseel, Y. (2009). Development and validation of scores on the Distributed Leadership Inventory. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69(6), 1013–1034. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164409344490
  15. Hulpia, H., Devos, G., Van Keer, H. (2010). The influence of Distributed Leadership on teachers’ organizational commitment: A multilevel approach. The Journal of Educational Research, 103(1), 40–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220670903231201
  16. Jang, J.-K. (2022). A study on the relationship between Distributed Leadership, psychological empowerment, and Organizational Citizenship Behavior. Journal of Tourism and Sports Research, 1(1), 37–45. https://doi.org/10.56336/kirf.2022.1.1.37
  17. Jöreskog, K. G., Sörbom, D. (1984). Advances in factor analysis and structural equation models. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
  18. Jufrizen, J., Sari, M., Siregar, Z., Nasution, M. I. (2023). Transformational leadership and organizational citizenship behavior: Mediating role of affective commitment and work engagement of hotel employees in Indonesia. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 21(4), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.21511/ppm.21(4).2023.01
  19. Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 692–724. https://doi.org/10.5465/256287
  20. Kiat, E. S., Nordin, N. A., Rahim, S. A. (2023). The influence of work engagement towards organisational citizenship behaviour among Malaysian police officers. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, 13(6), 243–250. https://doi.org/10.29322/IJSRP.13.06.2023.p13833
  21. Kılınç, A. Ç. (2014). A quantitative study of the relationship between Distributed Leadership and Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Perceptions of Turkish primary school teachers. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching, 3(2), 69–80. https://doi.org/10.5430/jct.v3n2p69
  22. Kılınç, A. Ç., Özdemir, S. (2015). An inquiry into leadership capacity: The case of Turkish primary schools. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 7(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.15345/iojes.2015.01.001
  23. Lin, J. S., Shieh, C. J. (2015). Effects of Distributed Leadership on Organizational Citizenship Behavior and organizational performance in chemical industry. Oxidation Communications, 38(2A), 1047–1059.
  24. Liu, Z., Chen, C., Cui, H., Hu, Y. (2023). The relationship between nurses’ social network degree centrality and organizational citizenship behavior: The multiple mediating effects of job satisfaction and work engagement. Heliyon, 9(9), e19612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e19612
  25. Organ, D. W. (1997). Organizational Citizenship Behavior: It’s Construct Clean-Up Time. Human Performance, 10, 85–97. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327043hup1002_2
  26. Özdemir, M. (2012). Dağıtımcı liderlik envanterinin Türkçe uyarlaması: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışmaları. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 18(4), 575–598.
  27. Özdemir, M., Demircioğlu, E. (2015). Distributed leadership and contract relations in Turkish schools. Educational Management Administration Leadership, 43(6), 918–938. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143214543207
  28. Podsakoff, N. P., Whiting, S. W., Podsakoff, P. M., Blume, B. D. (2009). Individual- and organizational-level consequences of Organizational Citizenship Behavior: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(1), 122–141. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013079
  29. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Moorman, R. H., Fetter, R. (1990). Transformational leader behavior and their effects on followers' trust in leader, satisfaction, and Organizational Citizenship Behavior. The Leadership Quarterly, 1(2), 107–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/1048-9843(90)90009-7
  30. Quek, S. J., Thomson, L., Houghton, R., Bramley, L., Davis, S., Cooper, J. (2021). Distributed leadership as a predictor of employee engagement, job satisfaction, and turnover intention in UK nursing staff. Journal of Nursing Management. https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.13321
  31. Sanayi ve Teknoloji Bakanlığı. (2023). 2023 yılı faaliyet raporu [2023 Annual Activity Report]. T.C. Sanayi ve Teknoloji Bakanlığı. https://www.sanayi.gov.tr
  32. Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B. (2004a). Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(3), 293–315. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.248
  33. Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B. (2004b). Utrecht Work Engagement Scale: Preliminary manual. Occupational Health Psychology Unit, Utrecht University.
  34. Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., González-Romá, V., 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. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015630930326
  35. TÜBİSAD. (2025). Bilgi ve iletişim teknolojileri sektörü 2024 pazar verileri [Information and Communication Technologies Sector 2024 Market Data]. Deloitte Danışmanlık A.Ş. Retrieved from https://www.tubisad.org.tr
  36. Türkiye Odalar ve Borsalar Birliği. (2025). Kurulan ve Kapanan Şirket İstatistikleri. Retrieved from https://www.tobb.org.tr/BilgiErisimMudurlugu/Sayfalar/KurulanKapananSirketistatistikleri.php
  37. Wibowo, V., So, I. G., Bandur, A., Furinto, A. (2024). An empirical study on the influence of Distributed Leadership, Work Engagement, and job crafting on fostering Organizational Citizenship Behavior. Journal of System and Management Sciences, 14(3), 26–53. https://doi.org/10.33168/JSMS.2024.0302
  38. Yasini, A., Panah, Y., Joyami, E. N. (2019). Distributed leadership style strategy on organizational citizenship behavior at the group level with mediating role of self-efficacy and trust in organization: A case study of sports media staff in Ilam Province. Communication Management in Sports Media, 6(23), 83–96.