Individualism and collectivism

Social scientists often estimate models from correlational data, where the independent variable has not been exogenously manipulated; they also make implicit or explicit causal claims based on these models. When can these claims be made? We answer this question by first discussing design and estimation conditions under which model estimates can be interpreted, using the randomized experiment as the gold standard. We show how endogeneity – which includes omitted variables, omitted selection, simultaneity, common-method variance, and measurement error – renders estimates causally uninterpretable. Second, we present methods that allow researchers to test causal claims in situations where randomization is not possible or when causal interpretation could be confounded; these methods include fixed-effects panel, sample selection, instrumental variable, regression discontinuity, and difference-in-differences models. Third, we take stock of the methodological rigor with which causal claims are being made in a social sciences discipline by reviewing a representative sample of 110 articles on leadership published in the previous 10 years in top-tier journals. Our key finding is that researchers fail to address at least 66% and up to 90% of design and estimation conditions that make causal claims invalid. We conclude by offering 10 suggestions on how to improve non-experimental research.

On making causal claims : A review and recommendations

The extensive research examining relations between group member dissimilarity and outcome measures has yielded inconsistent results. In the present research, the authors used computer simulations to examine the impact that a methodological feature of such research, participant nonresponse, can have on dissimilarity-outcome relations. Results suggest that using only survey responders to calculate dissimilarity typically results in underestimation of true dissimilarity effects and that these effects can occur even when response rates are high.

https://psycnet.apa.org/journals/apl/92/5/1414.pdf

Assessing dissimilarity relations under missing data conditions: Evidence from computer simulations

Leadership styles and outcome patterns for the nursing workforce and work environment: A systematic review

The authors examined antecedents of abusive supervision and the relative importance of interactional and procedural justice as mediators of the relationship between abusive supervision and the work outcomes of affective organizational commitment and individual- and organization-directed citizenship behaviors. Data were obtained from subordinate-supervisor dyads from a telecommunication company located in southeastern China. Results of moderated regression analysis revealed that authoritarian leadership style moderated the relationship between supervisors' perceptions of interactional justice and abusive supervision such that the relationship was stronger for supervisors high rather than low in authoritarian leadership style. In addition, results of structural equation modeling analysis revealed that subordinates' perceptions of interactional but not procedural justice fully mediated the relationship between abusive supervision and the work outcomes. Implications for future investigations of abusive supervision are discussed. Copyright 2007 by the American Psychological Association.

Antecedents and outcomes of abusive supervision: test of a trickle-down model.

Paternalistic leadership (PL) 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. Although PL is widespread in Chinese business organizations, very few studies have focused on this leadership style and those that have were simply conceptual analyses and not empirical studies. We sampled 543 subordinates from local businesses in Taiwan to investigate PL, Western transformational leadership, and subordinate responses to these two leadership styles. Our hypotheses were as follows: (1) PL has a significant and unique effect on subordinate responses compared to Western transformational leadership; (2) there exists an interaction between the three elements of PL (benevolence, morality, and authoritarianism) and subordinate responses; and (3) the authority orientation of a subordinate's traditionality has a moderating effect upon the relation between PL and subordinate responses. Statistical analyses generally supported these hypotheses. Directions for follow-up studies are offered and implications for leadership theory and practice are discussed.

/pdf/paternalistic-leadership-and-subordinate-responses-1gknc4hukl.pdf

Paternalistic leadership and subordinate responses: Establishing a leadership model in Chinese organizations

Paternalistic leadership (PL) 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. Although PL is widespread in Chinese business organizations, very few studies have focused on this leadership style and those that have were simply conceptual analyses and not empirical studies. We sampled 543 subordinates from local businesses in Taiwan to investigate PL, Western transformational leadership, and subordinate responses to these two leadership styles. Our hypotheses were as follows: (1) PL has a significant and unique effect on subordinate responses compared to Western transformational leadership; (2) there exists an interaction between the three elements of PL (benevolence, morality, and authoritarianism) and subordinate responses; and (3) the authority orientation of a subordinate’s traditionality has a moderating effect upon the relation between PL and subordinate responses. Statistical analyses generally supported these hypotheses. Directions for follow-up studies are offered and implications for leadership theory and practice are discussed.

REGULAR ARTICLE Paternalistic leadership and subordinate responses: Establishing a leadership model in Chinese organizations

A Triad Model of Paternalistic Leadership: Constructs and Measurement

Authority and Benevolence: Employees’ responses to Paternalistic Leadership in China

P aternalistic leadership (PL) is an indigenous Chinese leadership style that is rooted in China's patriarchal tradition and has been found to be prevalent in overseas Chinese family businesses. Farh and Cheng (2000) proposed a model of PL that has three components: authoritarianism, benevolence, and moral leadership. Since then, a series of empirical studies have been conducted by Cheng and his colleagues to examine the validity of Farh and Cheng's PL model using a variety of samples from Taiwan and mainland China. In this chapter, we review this body of research and identify promising areas for future research. Introduction In the second half of the twentieth century, entrepreneurship among overseas Chinese exploded not only in Chinese-dominated communities such as Hong Kong, Singapore, and Taiwan, but also in South-east Asian countries, such as Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, and the Philippines, where the Chinese are in the minority (Weidenbaum, 1996). Scholars who were intrigued by this phenomenon embarked on a series of studies of the practices of overseas Chinese businesses. They discovered a distinct management/leadership style called paternalism, widely practiced among the owners/managers of overseas Chinese family businesses (e.g. Cheng, 1995c; Redding, 1990; Silin, 1976; Westwood, 1997). Paternalism, which is rooted in the traditional Chinese family structure, has crossed the boundary of families and generalized to the workplace.

Li-Fang Chou

Papers

Paternalistic leadership and subordinate responses: Establishing a leadership model in Chinese organizations

REGULAR ARTICLE Paternalistic leadership and subordinate responses: Establishing a leadership model in Chinese organizations

A Triad Model of Paternalistic Leadership: Constructs and Measurement

Authority and Benevolence: Employees’ responses to Paternalistic Leadership in China

Paternalistic leadership in Chinese organizations: Research progress and future research directions