Relationships among supervisor’s political skill, trust in him or her, and employees’ altruistic behavior

Abstract

Under the guidance of Social Exchange Theory, Role Theory and Self-Determination Theory, this study examines the relationships among supervisors’ political skill, cognition-based and affect-based trust in the supervisor, and employees’ altruistic behavior. The dataset of the research consists of 323 questionnaires collected from nurses working in three private hospitals in Ankara. For data entry, the SPSS 24.0 program was used, while statistical analyses were conducted through SPSS 24.0 and AMOS 24.0 programs. Following preliminary analyses, overall model confirmatory factor analysis, Harman’s single-factor test, common latent factor analysis, internal consistency and composite reliability assessments, convergent validity analysis, Pearson correlation analysis, structural equation modeling, and the Sobel test were performed. Additionally, the bootstrap method with 5,000 resamples was applied. According to the analysis results with respect to the participants, nurses’ perceptions of their supervisors’ political skill significantly and positively affect both their cognition-based and affect-based trust in these supervisors, and these forms of trust directly and positively influence the altruistic behavior exhibited by subordinate nurses. Furthermore, supervisors’ political skill impacts subordinate nurses’ altruistic behavior both directly and indirectly through cognition-based and affect-based trust in the supervisor. In other words, within the mechanism established in the study, cognition-based and affect-based trust play partial mediating roles. Based on the research findings, it is concluded that the reinforcing effect of nurse supervisors’ political skill on subordinate nurses’ levels of cognition-based and affect-based trust in their supervisors enhances the altruistic behavior subordinates exhibit, thereby making it possible to contribute to the hospital.

Keywords

• political skill
• trust in supervisor
• altruistic behavior
• self-determination theory
• role theory

Yöneticinin politik yetisi, ona duyulan güven ve çalışanların özgeci davranışı arasındaki ilişkiler

Abstract

Bu çalışmada, Sosyal Mübadele Kuramı, Rol Kuramı ve Öz-Belirleme Kuramı ışığında, yöneticinin politik yetisi, yöneticiye duyulan bilişsel/duygusal güven ve çalışanların özgeci davranışı arasındaki ilişkiler incelenmiştir. Araştırmanın veri seti, Ankara’daki üç özel hastanede çalışan hemşirelerden elde edilen 323 anketten oluşmaktadır. Araştırmanın veri girişi için SPSS 24.0 programı kullanılmıştır. İstatistiksel analizler ise SPSS 24.0 ve AMOS 24.0 programları aracılığıyla gerçekleştirilmiştir. Bu çalışmada; ön analizlerden sonra bütün bir yapıda doğrulayıcı faktör analizi, Harman’ın tek faktör testi, ortak örtük faktör analizi, iç tutarlılık, bileşik güvenirlik ve birleşim geçerliliği analizleri, Pearson korelasyon analizi, yapısal eşitlik modellemesi ve Sobel testi yapılmış, ayrıca bootstrap yöntemi 5.000 yeniden örnekleme ile uygulanmıştır. Çalışmaya katılanlar bakımından analiz sonuçlarına göre; hemşirelerin bir üst yöneticilerinin sahip oldukları politik yetiye dair algısı, onların bu yöneticilerine duydukları hem bilişsel hem de duygusal güveni, bilişsel ve duygusal güven de ast konumundaki hemşirelerin sergiledikleri özgeci davranışı anlamlı ve pozitif bir şekilde doğrudan etkilemektedir. Ayrıca yönetici hemşirelerin politik yetisi; ast konumundaki hemşirelerin özgeci davranışını hem doğrudan hem de yöneticiye duyulan bilişsel ve duygusal güven üzerinden dolaylı olarak anlamlı ve pozitif bir şekilde etkilemektedir. O halde, çalışma kapsamında kurulan mekanizmada; bilişsel ve duygusal güven kısmi aracı değişkenlerdir. Bu çalışmada; yönetici hemşirelerin sahip oldukları politik yetinin ast konumundaki hemşirelerin bu yöneticilere duydukları bilişsel ve duygusal güven düzeyleri üzerindeki pekiştirici etkisi sayesinde ast konumundaki hemşirelerin sergiledikleri özgeci davranış düzeyini yükseltmek suretiyle hastaneye katkı sağlamanın mümkün olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmaktadır.

Keywords

• Politik yeti
• yöneticiye güven
• özgeci davranış
• öz-belirleme kuramı
• rol kuramı

References

1. Afsar, B. ve Saeed, B. B. (2010). Subordinate’s trust in the supervisor and its impact on organizational effectiveness. The Romanian Economic Journal, 13(38), 3-25. Erişim adresi: https://ideas.repec.org/a/rej/journl/v13y2010i38p3-25.html
2. Ahearn, K. K., Ferris, G. R., Hochwarter, W. A., Douglas, C. ve Ammeter, A. P. (2004). Leader political skill and team performance. Journal of Management, 30(3), 309-327. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jm.2003.01.004
3. Akram, A., Kamran, M., Iqbal, M. S., Habibah, U. ve Atif Ishaq, M. (2018). The impact of supervisory justice and perceived supervisor support on organizational citizenship behavior and commitment to supervisor: The mediating role of trust. Cogent Business & Management, 5(1), 1493902. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2018.1493902
4. Akyol, A., Ergeneli, A., Tas, A. ve Gultekin, S. (2013). Mediating effect of firms’ social responsibility on the relationships between individual’s altruistic personality, ethical sensitivity and sustainable behavior. in the 7th International Days of Statistics and Economics (pp. 1-10), Prague, September 19-21, The Czech Republic. Erişim adresi: https://msed.vse.cz/files/2013/76-Akyol-Aylin-paper.pdf
5. Altıntaş, M., Palabıyık, N. ve Yıkılmaz, İ. (2024). The effect of perceived management skills on trust in supervisors: The mediating role of supervisor support. Journal of Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Economics and Administrative Sciences Faculty, 11(1), 758-777. Doi: https://doi.org/10.30798/makuiibf.1419808
6. Anderson, J. C. ve Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411-423. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411
7. Asgari, A., Silong, A. D., Ahmad, A. ve Samah, B. A. (2008). The relationship between transformational leadership behaviors, organizational justice, leader-member exchange, perceived organizational support, trust in management and organizational citizenship behaviors. European Journal of Scientific Research, 23(2), 227-242. Erişim adresi: https://www.researchgate.net/
8. Atay, S. (2009). Politik yeti envanterinin Türkiye’de test edilmesi. 17. Ulusal Yönetim ve Organizasyon Kongresi Bildiriler Kitabı içinde (ss. 891-896), Osmangazi Üniversitesi, 21- 23 Mayıs, Eskişehir, Türkiye.

9. Atay, S. (2010). Geliştirilebilir yönetim becerisi: Teorik ve ampirik yönleriyle politik yeti. Amme İdaresi Dergisi, 43(2), 65-80. Erişim adresi: https://ammeidaresi.hacibayram.edu.tr/Dergiler
10. Avcı, D., Aydın, D. ve Özbaşaran, F. (2013). Hemşirelik öğrencilerinde empati-özgecilik ilişkisi ve özgeci davranışların bazı değişkenler açısından incelenmesi. Balıkesir Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi, 2(2), 108-113. Erişim adresi: https://izlik.org/JA39GM47UG
11. Baron, R. M. ve Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social pychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173
12. Bateman, T. S. ve Organ, D. W. (1983). Job satisfaction and the good soldier: The relationship between affect and employee citizenship. Academy of Management Journal, 26(4), 587-595. Doi: https://doi.org/10.5465/255908
13. Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
14. Browne, M. W. ve Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen and J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136-162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
15. Burns, D. J., Reid, J. S., Toncar, M., Fawcett, J. ve Anderson, C. (2006). Motivations to volunteer: The role of altruism. International Review on Public and Non Profit Marketing, 3(2), 79-91. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02893621
16. Buseyne, S., Depaepe, F. ve Raes, A. (2026). Personality’s voice: How personality traits shape verbal processes in collaborative problem-solving. Frontiers in Psychology, 17, 1830668. Doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1830668
17. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2012). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı (17. baskı). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
18. Canipe, J. S. (2006). Relationships among trust, organizational commitment, perceived organizational support, and turnover intentions (Doctoral dissertation). Alliant International University, California School of Business and Organizational Studies, Organizational Studies Division, Industrial/Organizational Psychology, San Diego. Erişim adresi: https://www.proquest.com
19. Chen, C. H. V., Wang, S. J., Chang, W. C. ve Hu, C. S. (2008). The effect of leader-member exchange, trust, supervisor support on organizational citizenship behavior in nurses. Journal of Nursing Research, 16(4), 321-328. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.JNR.0000387319.28010.5e
20. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd edition). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Publishers.
21. Costigan, R. D., İlter, S. S. ve Berman, J. J. (1998). A multi-dimensional study of trust in organizations. Journal of Managerial Issues, 10(3), 303-318. Erişim adresi: https://www.jstor.org/stable/40604201
22. Deci, E. L. ve Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum Press. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7
23. Deci, E. L. ve Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
24. Deluga, R. J. (1995). The relation between trust in the supervisor and subordinate organizational citizenship behavior. Military Psychology, 7(1), 1-16. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327876mp0701_1
25. Ehrhart, M. G. (2004). Leadership and procedural justice climate as antecedents of unit-level organizational citizenship behavior. Personnel Psychology, 57(1), 61-94. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2004.tb02484.x
26. Eichhorn, B. R. (2014). Common method variance techniques. Cleveland State University.Erişim adresi: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Common-Method-Variance-Techniques Eichhorn/2693d0aa990aa0b07b58f227f168e96349892746
27. Ergeneli, A. (2005). The moral codes of salespeople and their relation to ethical perception: An empirical examination in Turkey. Boğaziçi Journal, 19(1-2), Erişim adresi: https://bogazici.edu.tr/media/web/userfiles/files/bujournal.bogazici.edu.tr/docs/13315679981_Azize%20Ergeneli.pdf
28. Ergeneli, A. (2006). Örgüt ve insan. Ankara: Hacettepe Üniversitesi Yayınları.
29. Farid, T., Iqbal, S., Khan, A., Ma, J., Khattak, A. ve Naseer Ud Din, M. (2020). The impact of authentic leadership on organizational citizenship behaviors: The mediating role of affective‐and cognitive-based trust. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1975. Doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01975
30. Ferris, G. R., Berkson, H. M., Kaplan, D. M., Gilmore, D. C., Buckley, M. R., Hochwarter, W. A. ve Witt, L. A. (1999). Development and initial validation of the political skill inventory. In Academy of Management, 59th Annual National Meeting, August, Chicago, USA.
31. Ferris, G. R., Davidson, S. L., Perrewe, P. L. ve Atay, S. (2010). İş yaşamında politik yeti: İş verimliliğine etkisi (2. baskı). (S. Atay, Çev.). İstanbul: Namar Yayınları.
32. Ferris, G. R., Treadway, D. C., Kolodinsky, R. W., Hochwarter, W. A., Kacmar, C. J., Douglas, C. ve Frink, D.D. (2005). Development and validation of the political skill inventory. Journal of Management, 31(1), 126-152. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206304271386
33. Ferris, G. R., Treadway, D. C., Perrewé, P. L., Brouer, R. L., Douglas, C. ve Lux, S. (2007). Political skill in organizations. Journal of Management, 33(3), 290-320. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206307300813
34. Ferris, G.R., Witt, L.A. ve Hochwarter, W.A. (2001). Interaction of social skill and general mental ability on job performance and salary. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(6), 1075-1082. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.6.1075
35. Frazier, M. L., Gooty, J., Little, L. M. ve Nelson, D. L. (2015). Employee attachment: Implications for supervisor trustworthiness and trust. Journal of Business and Psychology, 30(2), 373-386. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-014-9367-4
36. Ghosh, R., Reio Jr, T. G. ve Haynes, R. K. (2012). Mentoring and organizational citizenship behavior: Estimating the mediating effects of organization‐based self‐esteem and affective commitment. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 23(1), 41-63. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.21121
37. Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25(2), 161-178. Doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/2092623
38. Gürbüz, S. (2019). AMOS ile yapısal eşitlik modellemesi. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
39. Gürel, H. (2012). Kurumsal sorumluluk-örgütsel vatandaşlık davranışı ilişkisinde bireysel sorumluluğun aracı rolü ve çalışanların kurumsal sorumluluk anlayışı ile örgütle özdeşleşmenin şartlı etkileri (Doktora tezi). Marmara Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Örgütsel Davranış Bilim Dalı, İstanbul. Erişim adresi: https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi
40. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J. ve Anderson, R. E. (2014). Multivariate data analysis (7th edition). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
41. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J. ve Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th edition). Andover, Hampshire: Cengage Learning.
42. Harman, H. H. (1967). Modern factor analysis (2nd edition). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
43. Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York: Guilford Press.
44. Hirst, G., Walumbwa, F., Aryee, S., Butarbutar, I. ve Chen, C. J. H. (2016). A multi-level investigation of authentic leadership as an antecedent of helping behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 139(3), 485-499. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2580-x
45. Hoffman, M. L. (1981). Is altruism part of human nature?. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40(1), 121-137. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.40.1.121
46. Hosmer, L. T. (1995). Trust: The connecting link between organizational theory and philosophical ethics. Academy of Management Review, 20(2), 379-403. Doi: https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9507312923
47. Hu, L. T. ve Bentler, P. M. (1995). Evaluating model fit. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: concepts, ıssues, and applications (pp. 76-99). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
48. Hu, L. T. ve Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
49. Huff, L. ve Kelley, L. (2003). Levels of organizational trust in individualist versus collectivist societies: A seven nation study. Organization Science, 14(1), 81-90. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.14.1.81.12807
50. Ji, S. ve Jan, I. U. (2020). Antecedents and consequences of frontline employee’s trust-in-supervisor and trust-in-coworker. Sustainability, 12(2), 716. Doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/su12020716
51. Kahn, R. L., Wolfe, D. M., Quinn, R. P., Snoek, J. D. ve Rosenthal, R. A. (1965). Organizational stress: Studies in role conflict and ambiguity. Administrative Science Quarterly, 10(1), 125-129. Doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/2391654
52. Kalaycı, Ş. (2010). SPSS uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistik teknikleri. Ankara: Asil Yayınevi.
53. Karadağ, E. ve Mutafçılar, I. (2009). Prososyal davranış ekseninde özgecilik üzerine teorik bir çözümleme. Felsefe ve Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, (8), 41-69. Erişim adresi: https://izlik.org/JA99RR63XL
54. Keleş Dalmaz, B. (2024). Örgütsel sinizm, bağlılık ve vatandaşlık davranışları: Sağlık çalışanları üzerinde bir araştırma (Yüksek lisans tezi). Hakkari Üniversitesi, Lisansüstü Eğitim Enstitüsü, Hakkari. Erişim adresi: https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi
55. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd edition). New York: Guilford Press.
56. Konaklioglu, E. ve Sevin, H. D. (2015). Defining the relationship between trust, reputation and political skills in service business. International Journal of Business and Social Research, 5(11), 1-8. Erişim adresi: https://thejournalofbusiness.org/index.php/site/article/view/855
57. Loi, R., Ngo, H. Y., Zhang, L. ve Lau, V. P. (2011). The interaction between leader-member exchange and perceived job security in predicting employee altruism and work performance. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 84(4), 669-685. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1348/096317910X510468
58. Lvina, E., Johns, G., Treadway, D. C., Blickle, G., Liu, Y. L., Liu, J., Atay, S., Zettler, I., Solga, J., Noethen D. ve Ferris, G. R. (2012). Measure invariance of the political skill inventory (PSI) across five cultures. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 12(2), 171-191. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1470595812439870
59. MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J. ve Fritz, M. S. (2007). Mediation analysis. Annual Review Psychology, 58(1), 593-614. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085542
60. Masih, S., Punchanathan, U. E., Naqshbandi, M. M. ve Ahmed, F. (2025). How inclusive leadership drives change-oriented extra-role behaviors via leader-member exchange and trust in leadership. Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication. Advance online publication. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/GKMC-05-2024-0276
61. Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H. ve Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709-734. Doi: https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9508080335
62. McAllister, D. J. (1995). Affect and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperations. Academy of Management Journal, 38(1), 24-59. Doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/256727
63. McGaghie, W. C., Mytko, J. J., Brown, W. N. ve Cameron, J. R. (2002). Altruism and compassion in the health professions: A search for clarity and precision. Medical Teacher, 24(4), 374-378. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590220145734
64. Min, P. J. ve Ko, S. H. (2016). The structural relationship among authentic leadership, trust in supervisor, innovative behavior and organizational citizenship behavior. Indian Journal of Science and Technology, 9(25), 1-8. Doi: https://doi.org/10.17485/ijst/2016/v9i25/97193
65. Mintzberg, H. (1983). Power in and around organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice‐Hall.
66. Mintzberg, H. (1985). The organization as political arena. Journal of Management Studies, 22(2), 133-154. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.1985.tb00069.x
67. Moon, C. ve Morais, C. (2022). Understanding the consequences of workplace incivility: The roles of emotional exhaustion, acceptability and political skill. International Journal of Conflict Management, 33(3), 425-447. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/ijcma-09-2021-0147
68. Newman, A., Kiazad, K., Miao, Q. ve Cooper, B. (2014). Examining the cognitive and affective trust-based mechanisms underlying the relationship between ethical leadership and organisational citizenship: A case of the head leading the heart?. Journal of Business Ethics, 123(1), 113-123. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1803-2
69. Niwes, A., Kulachai, W., Wannarak, J. ve Homyamyen, P. (2024). Unleashing potential: The impact of supervisor trust on organizational citizenship and job performance. Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology, 8(6), 1517-1528. Doi: https://doi.org/10.55214/25768484.v8i6.2269
70. Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome. Lexington: Lexington Book.
71. Özen İşbaşı, J. (2000). Çalışanların yöneticilerine duydukları güvenin ve örgütsel adalete ilişkin algılamalarının örgütsel vatandaşlık davranışının oluşumundaki rolü: Bir turizm örgütünde uygulama (Yüksek lisans tezi). Akdeniz Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Antalya. Erişim adresi: https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi
72. Özkara, Z. (2024). Alturistik liderlik, lider-üye etkileşimi ve yöneticiye güven arasındaki ilişkiler. 11. Örgütsel Davranış Kongresi Tam Bildiri Kitabı içinde (ss. 155-161), Kastamonu Üniversitesi, 31 Ekim-3 Kasım, Kastamonu, Türkiye.
73. Özkara, Z. (2025). Alturistik liderliğin işten ayrılma niyeti üzerindeki etkisi: Bilişsel ve duygusal güvenin rolü. 12. Örgütsel Davranış Kongresi tam bildiri kitabı içinde (ss. 48-60), Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi, 30 Ekim-1 Kasım, Konya, Türkiye.
74. Özkara, Z. U. (2019). Örgütlerde otantik liderlik ve politik yeti: Hemşireler üzerinde bir araştırma. Ankara: Gazi Kitabevi.
75. Özkara, Z. U. ve Sağlam Arı, G. (2019). Örgütlerde güven ve liderlik: Kavramlar-kuramlar-modeller ve uygulama. Ankara: Gazi Kitabevi.
76. Özkara, Z. U., Taş, A. ve Aydıntan, B. (2022a). The relationships among supervisor support, affective commitment, and altruistic behavior. İşletme Araştırmaları Dergisi, 14(1), 788-801. Doi: https://doi.org/10.20491/isarder.2022.1410
77. Özkara, Z. U., Taş, A. ve Aydıntan, B. (2022b). Algılanan kurumsal sosyal sorumluluğun özgeci davranış üzerindeki etkisi: Olumlu duygu durumunun aracılık rolü. Gazi İktisat ve İşletme Dergisi, 8(2), 364-386. Doi: https://doi.org/10.30855/gjeb.2022.8.2.011
78. Pasamehmetoglu, A., Guchait, P., Tracey, J. B., Cunningham, C. J. L. ve Lei, P. (2017). The moderating effect of supervisor and coworker support for error management on service recovery performance and helping behaviors. Journal of Service Theory and Practice, 27(1), 2-22. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTP-06-2015-0130
79. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B. ve Hui, C. (1993). Organizational citizenship behaviors and managerial evaluation of employees’ performance: A review and suggestions for future research. G. R. Ferris (Ed.), in Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management (pp. 1-40). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
80. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y. ve Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879-903. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
81. Preacher, K. J. ve Leonardelli, G. J. (2010). Calculation for the Sobel test: An Interactive Calculation Tool for Mediation Tests. Erişim adresi: http://www.quantpsy.org/sobel/sobel.htm, Erişim tarihi: 29.03.2026
82. Profili, S., Sammarra, A. ve Innocenti, L. (2016). Can age make a difference? A moderated model of altruistic organizational citizenship behaviour antecedents. International Journal of Business Science & Applied Management (IJBSAM), 11(1), 18-31. Erişim adresi: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/190665
83. Rousseau, D. M, Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R. S. ve Camerer, C. (1998). Not so different after at all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 393-404. Doi: https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1998.926617
84. Sağlam Arı, G. (2003). İşletmelerde güven ve personel güçlendirme ilişkisi: Bankacılık sektöründe bir araştırma (Doktora tezi). Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara. Erişim adresi: https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi
85. Sağlam Arı, G. ve Tunçay, A. (2010). Yöneticiye duyulan güven ve tükenmişlik arasındaki ilişkiler: Ankara’daki devlet hastanelerinde çalışan idari personel üzerinde bir araştırma. Atatürk Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 24(4), 113-135. Erişim adresi: https://izlik.org/JA44MH67UX
86. Saunders, M., Lewis, P. ve Thornhill, A. (2009). Research methods for business students (5th edition). Prentice Hall.
87. Schaubroeck, J., Lam, S. S. K. ve Peng, A. C. (2011). Cognition-based and affect-based trust as mediators of leader behavior influences on team performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(4), 863-871. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022625
88. Schnake, M. E. ve Dumler, M. P. (2003). Levels of measurement and analysis issues in organizational citizenship behaviour research. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 76(3), 283-301. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1348/096317903769647184
89. Shlanger, J. L. (2009). Explaining the link between leader political skill and workplace outcomes: Should politically skilled leaders be trusted? (Master’s thesis). University of Guelph, Faculty of Graduate Studies, Guelph, Canada. Erişim adresi: https://atrium.lib.uoguelph.ca/server/api/core/bitstreams/5396b657-1caf-4f91-b392-1f3086f4944b/content
90. Smith, C. A., Organ, D. W. ve Near, J. P. (1983). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(4), 653-663. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.68.4.653
91. Tabachnick, B. G. ve Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th edition). Boston: Pearson.
92. Tabachnick, B. G. ve Fidell, L. S. (2019). Using multivariate statistics (7th edition.). New York, NY: Pearson.
93. Tan, H. H. ve Tan, C. S. (2000). Toward the differentiation of trust in supervisor and trust in organization. Genetic, Social, and Psychology Monographs, 126(2), 241-260. Erişim adresi: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/lkcsb_research/2678
94. Taş Kaya, A. (2025). Yöneticinin politik yetisi, etik liderlik tarzı ve ona duyulan güven arasındaki ilişkiler. 12. Örgütsel Davranış Kongresi Tam Bildiri Kitabı içinde (ss. 61-74), Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi, 30 Ekim-1 Kasım, Konya, Türkiye.
95. Taş, A. (2022). Politik yeti: Literatür taraması ve bibliyometrik analiz. Üçüncü Sektör Sosyal Ekonomi Dergisi, 57(3), 2254-2288. Doi: https://doi.org/10.15659/3.sektor-sosyal-ekonomi.22.09.1955
96. Taş, A., Özkara, Z. U. ve Aydıntan, B. (2020). Elektronik liderliğin temel boyutu: Sanal teknoloji yeterliğinin yöneticiye duyulan güvene etkileri. İşletme Araştırmaları Dergisi, 12(3), 2879-2894. Doi: https://doi.org/10.20491/isarder.2020.1014
97. Taş, A., Özkara, Z. U. ve Aydıntan, B. (2021). Yönetici desteğinin ona duyulan duygusal güven üzerindeki etkisi: Bilişsel güvenin aracılık rolü. Yaşar Üniversitesi E-Dergisi, 16(61), 147-169. Doi: https://doi.org/10.19168/jyasar.779352
98. Utomo, K. W. ve Siahaan, A. B. (2023). Leader member exchange mediates the relationship between political skills and narcissistic leadership with organizational citizen behavior. Fokus Bisnis Media Pengkajian Manajemen Dan Akuntansi, 22(1), 33-51. Doi: https://doi.org/10.32639/fokbis.v22i1.261
99. Van Dyne, L. ve LePine, J. A. (1998). Helping and voice extra-role behaviors: Evidence of construct and predictive validity. Academy of Management Journal, 41(1), 108-119. Doi: https://doi.org/10.5465/256902
100. Vandenberg, R. J., Lance, C. E. ve Taylor, S. C. (2005). A latent variable approach to rating source equivalence: Who should provide ratings on organizational citizenship dimensions?. D. L. Turnipseed (Ed.), in The Handbook of Organizational Citizenship Behavior: A Review of “Good Soldier” Activity in Organizations (pp. 109-141). New York: Nova Science.
101. Wei, M. S., Seok, C. B. ve Chiew, T. C. (2018). Employees’ trust in supervisor and organizational citizenship behavior among bank employees. Jurnal Psikologi dan Kesihatan Sosial, 2(1), 41-47. Doi: https://doi.org/10.51200/jpks.v2i1.6766
102. Wheaton, B., Muthen, B., Alwin, D. F. ve Summers, G. F. (1977). Assessing reliability and stability in panel models. Sociological Methodology, 8, 84-136. Doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/270754
103. Whitener, E. M., Brodt, S. E., Korsgaard, M. A. ve Werner, J. M. (1998). Managers as initiators of trust: An exchange relationship framework for understanding managerial trustworthy behavior. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 513-530. Doi: https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1998.926624
104. Williams, L. J. ve Anderson, S. E. (1991). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. Journal of Management, 17(3), 601-617. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700305
105. Wong, C. A. ve Cummings, G. G. (2009). The influence of authentic leadership behaviors on trust and work outcomes of health care staff. Journal of Leadership Studies, 3(2), 6-23. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/jls.20104
106. Yıldız, H. (2015). Pozitif psikolojik sermaye, örgütsel güven ve örgütsel vatandaşlık davranışı arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi: Bir alan araştırması (Doktora tezi). Balıkesir Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İşletme Anabilim Dalı, Balıkesir. Erişim adresi: https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi
107. Yıldız, H. (2019). Politik yeti. H. Yıldız ve T. Okan (Eds.), Örgütlerde güç ve politika içinde (ss. 169-186). İstanbul: Beta.
108. Yu-Ping, H., Chun-Yang, P., Ming-Tao, C., Chun-Tsen, Y. ve Qiong-Yuan, Z. (2020). Workplace friendship, helping behavior, and turnover intention: The mediating effect of affective commitment. Advances in Management and Applied Economics, 10(5), 55-75. Doi: https://doi.org/10.47260/amae/1054
109. Zaccaro, S. J. ve Bader, P. (2003). E-leadership and the challenges of leading e-teams: Minimizing the bad and maximizing the good. Organizational Dynamics, 31(4), 377-387. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0090-2616(02)00129-8
110. Zhu, Y. ve Akhtar, S. (2014). How transformational leadership influences follower helping behavior: The role of trust and prosocial motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(3), 373-392. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1884