The Investigation of the Relations Between Paternalistic Leadership, Organizational Creativity and Organizational Dissent

Year 2021, Volume: 6 Issue: 4, 748 - 794, 29.12.2021

Bünyamin Ağalday , Abidin Dağlı

https://doi.org/10.30828/real/2021.4.1

Cited By: 5

Abstract

The aim of the
research is to find out the relationship between the paternalistic leadership
behaviours of public primary school principals and teachers’ organizational
creativity and organizational dissent perception levels according to the
perceptions of primary school teachers. Correlational
survey method was utilized in the research. The sample of the research consists
of 1059 teachers working in public primary schools selected by methods of
stratified sampling method in Mardin city center and 8 districts of Mardin
during 2016-2017 academic year. The data of the research were obtained by using
the “Headmasters’ Paternalistic Leadership Behaviours Scale”, “Organizational
Creativity Scale” and “Organizational Dissent Scale”. The data analysis revealed the
following findings: There was a positive and
significant correlation between the paternalistic leadership behaviours of
primary school administrators and teachers’ perceptions toward organizational
creativity and organizational dissent and paternalistic leadership behaviors of
primary school administrators were found to be a significant predictor of
teachers’ perceptions toward organizational creativity and organizational
dissent. The
headmasters should exhibit benevolent leadership behaviours that enchance the
teachers organizational creativity perceptions, such as endeavouring to create
a family milieu in school, being tolerant of teachers and supporting teachers
to take the initiative. 

Keywords

Paternalistic leadership, organizational creativity, organizational dissent, primary school

References

• Agrell, A., & Gustafson, R. (1994). The team climate inventory (TCI) and group innovation: A psychometric test on a Swedish sample of work groups. J Occup Organ Psychol, 67(2), 143-151.
• Ağalday, B. (2013). İlköğretim okullarında görevli öğretmenlerin örgütsel muhalefete ilişkin görüşleri (Mardin ili örneği) [The opinions of the teachers in primary schools related to the organizational dissent (The case of Mardi̇n province)]. Unpublished master’s thesis. Dicle University Social Science Institute, Diyarbakır.
• Ağalday, B., Özgan, H., & Arslan, M.C. (2014). İlkokul ve ortaokullarda görevli yöneticilerin örgütsel muhalefete ilişkin algıları [The perceptions of the administrators working in primary and secondary schools related to the organizational dissent]. Pegem Eğitim ve Öğretim Dergisi, 4(3), 35-50.
• Akada, T. (2015). Örgütsel muhalefete ilişkin öğretmen görüşleri [Teachers views regarding organizational dissent]. Unpublished master’s thesis. Dokuz Eylül University Educational Sciences Institute, İzmir.
• Amabile, T. M. (1988). A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. Staw and L. L. Cummings, eds. In: B. M. (pp.123-167.). Research in Organizational Behavior. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
• Amabile, T. M. (1997). Motivating creativity in organizations: On doing what you love and loving what you do. California Management Review, 40(1), 39-58.Amabile, T. M. (1998). How to kill creativity. Harvard Business Review.
• Amabile, T.M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J., & Herron, M. (1996). Assessing the work environment for creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 1154-1184.
• Amabile, T. M., Schatzel, E., Moneta, G., & Kramer, S. (2004). Leader behaviors and the work environment for creativity: Perceived leader support. Leadership Quarterly, 15(1), 5-32.
• Anderson, C. M., & Martin, M. M. (1995). Why employees speak to coworkers and bosses: Motives, gender, and organizational satisfaction. Journal of Business Communication, 32(3), 249-265.
• Andriopoulos, C. (2001). Determinants of organizational creativity: A literature review. Management Decision, 39(10), 834-840.
• Anwar, H. (2013). Impact of paternalistic leadership on employees’ outcome- A study on the banking sector of Pakistan. IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 7(6), 109-115.
• Asyalı, E. & Cerit, A.G. (2014). Paternalistic leadership: A preliminary study on maritime students. Maritime Education Summit.
• Aycan, Z. (2001). Human resource management in Turkey: Current issues and future challenges. International Journal of Manpower, 22(3), 252-260.
• Aycan, Z. (2006). Paternalism: Towards conceptual refinement and operationalization. In K. S. Yang, K. K. Hwang ve U. Kim (ed), Scientific advances in indigenous psychologies: Empirical, philosophical, and cultural contributions. London: Sage Ltd. 445-466.
• Aycan, Z., & Fikret-Paşa, S. (2003). Career choices, job selection criteria, and leadership preferences in a transitional nation: The case of Turkey. Journal of Career Development, 30(2), 29-144.
• Aycan, Z., & Kanungo, R.N. (2000). Toplumsal kültürün kurumsal kültür ve insan kaynakları uygulamaları üzerine etkileri (in Turkish). Aycan, Z. (ed.). Akademisyenler ve profesyoneller bakış açısıyla Türkiye’de yönetim, liderlik ve insan kaynakları uygulamaları (ss: 25-57). Ankara: Türk Psikologlar Derneği Yayınları.
• Aycan, Z., Kanungo, R. N., & Sinha, J.B.P. (1999). Organizational culture and human resource management practices: The model of culture fit. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 30(4), 501-516.
• Aycan, Z., Kanungo, R.N., Mendonca, M. Yu, K., Deller, J. Stahl, G., et al. (2000). Impact of culture on human resource management practices: A ten country comparison. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 49(1), 192-220.
• Aydın, M.A. (2015). Sınıf öğretmenlerinin örgütsel muhalefet, örgütsel politika ve politik davranış algıları arasındaki ilişki [The relationship among the organizational dissent, organizational policies and political behaviour perceptions of classroom teachers]. Unpublished master’s thesis, Abant İzzet Baysal University Educational Sciences Institute, Bolu.
• Aydıntan, B. (2016). Relationship between emotional intelligence and paternalistic leadership: A field study on the Turkish university students. International Journal of Business and Management Invention, 5(12), 98-102.
• Atwater, L., & Carmeli, A. (2009). Leader-member exchange, feelings of energy and involvement in creative work. The Leadership Quarterly, 20(3), 264-275.
• Bakan, İ., & Büyükbeşe, T. (2004). Yaratıcılık ve yaratıcılık yönetimi (in Turkish). İsmail Bakan (ed.), Çağdaş yönetim yaklaşımları ilkeler, kavramlar ve yaklaşımlar içinde (ss. 5-33). İstanbul: Beta Basım Yayım Dağıtım.
• Basadur, M. (1997). Organizational development interventions for enhancing creativity in the workplace. Journal of Creative Behavior, 31(1), 52-97.
• Baykul, Y., & Güzeller, C.O. (2014). Sosyal bilimler için istatistik (in Turkish). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
• Bell-Robinson, V.D. (2016). Exploring the relationship between self-efficacy and dissent among college student organizational members: A mixed-methods study. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Department of Educational Leadership, Miami University.
• Bharadwaj, S., & Menon, A. (2000). Making innovation happen in organizations: Individual creativity mechanism, organizational creativity mechanism or both?. Journal of Product Innovation Mangement, 17, 424-434.
• Bouda, D. (2015). The expression of organizational dissent among sub-saharan African student migrants in the United States. Unpublished master’s thesis, Minnesota State University.
• Brown, M., & Rutherford, D. (1998). Changing roles and raising standards: New challenges for heads of department. School Leadership and Management, 18, 75- 88.
• Burns, T. & Wagner, C. (2013). Organizational dissent: A form of feedback. NASSP Principal Leadership, 14(4) 28-32.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2010). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı (in Turkish). Ankara:Pegem Akademi.
• Can, A. (2016). SPSS ile bilimsel araştırma sürecinde nicel veri analizi (4. Baskı-in Turkish). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
• Cheng, B.S. (1995). The relationship between parent’s authority and leadership behaviors: A case study of president of a Taiwanese enterprise. Report on Special Topics, National Science Committee.
• Cheng, B.S., Chou, L.F., & Farh, J. L. (2000). Paternalistic leadership scale: Construction, and measure of a triple model. Indigenous Psychology Journal, 14, 3-64.
• Cheng, B. S., Chou, L. F., Wu, T. Y., Huang, M. P., & Farh, J. L. (2004). Paternalistic leadership and subordinate responses: Establishing a leadership model in Chinese organizations. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 7, 89-117.
• Cerit, Y. (2012). Paternalistik liderlik ile yöneticiden ve işin doğasından doyum arasındaki ilişki [The relationship between paternalistic leadership and satisfaction from administrator and work]. Ondokuz Mayis University Journal of Education Faculty, 31(2), 35-56.
• Cerit, Y. (2013). Paternalist liderlik ile öğretmenlere yönelik yıldırma davranışları arasındaki ilişki [The relationship between paternalistic leadership and bullying behaviours towards classroom teachers]. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri,13(2), 839-851.
• Cerit, Y., Özdemir, T., & Akgün, N. (2011). Sınıf öğretmenlerinin okul müdürlerinin paternalist liderlik davranışları sergilemelerini istemeye yönelik görüşlerinin bazı demografik değişkenler açısından incelenmesi [Classroom teachers’ opinions toward primary school principal fulfillment of paternalistic leadership behaviors in terms of some demographic variables]. AİBÜ Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 11(1), 87-99.
• Chen, X.P., Eberly, M.B., Chiang, T.J., Farh, J.L., & Cheng, B.S. (2011). Affective trust in Chinese leader: Linking paternalistic leadership to employee performance. Journal of Management, 40(3), 796-819.
• Chou, H.J. (2012). Effects of paternalistic leadership on job satisfaction: Regulatory focus as the mediator. The International Journal of Organizational Innovation, 4(4), 62- 85.
• Chou, H.J. (2012). Effects of paternalistic leadership on job satisfaction: Regulatory focus as the mediator. The International Journal of Organizational Innovation, 4(4), 62- 85.
• Çalışkan, S.C. (2010). The interaction between paternalistic leadership style, organizational justice and organizational citizenship behavior: A study from Turkey. China-USA Business Review, 9(10), 67-80.
• Çavuş, M.F. (2006). İşletmelerde personel güçlendirme uygulamalarının örgütsel yaratıcılık ve yenilikçiliğe etkileri üzerine imalat sanayinde bir uygulama [An application in manufacturing industry on the effects of organizational creativity and innovativeness of employee empowerment applications in companies]. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Selçuk University Social Science Institute, Konya.
• Dağlı, A. (2015). Örgütsel muhalefet ölçeğinin Türkçe'ye uyarlanması: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması [Adaptation of organizational dissent scale into Turkish language: The study of validity and reliability]. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 14(53), 198-218.
• Dağlı, A. (2017). Investigating the relationship between organizational dissent and life satisfaction. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 5(4), 600-607.
• Dağlı, A., & Ağalday, B. (2014a). Öğretmenlerin örgütsel muhalif davranış biçimlerine ilişkin görüşleri [The opinions of the teachers related to the types of organizational dissident behaviours]. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 13(50),112-128.
• Dağlı, A., & Ağalday, B. (2014b). Öğretmenlerin örgütsel muhalefetin sonuçlarına ilişkin görüşleri [The opinions of the teachers related to the effects of organizational dissent]. Akademik Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 2(1), 170-182.
• Dağlı, A., & Ağalday, B. (2015). Öğretmenlerin örgütsel muhalefetin nedenlerine ilişkin görüşleri [The opinions of the teachers related to the causes of organizational dissent]. İlköğretim Online, 14(3), 885-898.
• Dağlı, A., & Ağalday, B. (2017). Developing a headmasters’ paternalistic leadership behaviours scale in Turkey. Journal of Education and Practice, 8(30), 190-200.
• De Nobile, J.J., & McCormick, N. (2008). Organizational communication and job satisfaction in Australian Catholic primary schools. Educational Management and Leadership, 36(1), 101-122.
• Develi, N. (2008). Family enterprises, management and organization problems encountered in family enterprises: Mersin case (in Turkish). Pamukkale University School of Social Sciences, 3(45), 23-45.
• Dimmock, C. (1999). The management of dilemmas in school restructuring: A case analysis. School Leadership and Management, 19, 97-113.
• Einsteine, P., & Hwang, K. P. (2007). An appraisal for determinants of organizational creativity and impacts on innovative behavior. Proceedings of the 13th Asia Pacific Management Conference, Melbourne, Australia, 1041-1055.
• Ekvall, G. (1996). Organizational climate for creativity and innovation. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 5(1), 105-123.
• Ekvall, G., & Ryhammar, L. (1998). Leadership style, social climate and organizational outcomes: A study of a Swedish University College. Creativity and Innovation Management, 7(3), 126-130.
• Erben, G. S. (2004). Toplumsal kültür aile kültürü etkileşimi bağlamında paternalizm boyutuyla işletme kültürü: Türkiye örneği. 1. Aile İşletmeleri Kongresi, (17-18 Nisan), (Ed.: Koçel, T.), İstanbul: İstanbul Kültür Üniversitesi Yayınları: 345-356.
• Erben, G. S., & Güneşer, A.B. (2008). The relationship between paternalistic leadership and organizational commitment: Investigating the role of climate regarding ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 82, 955-968.
• Ergün, H. (2017). Örgütsel muhalefet etki eden başlatıcı ve aracı değişkenler [Initiator and mediator variables that affecting organizational dissent]. Unpublished doctoral thesis. Pamukkale University Educational Sciences Institute, Denizli.
• Ersoy, N.C., Born, M., Derous, E., & Molen, H.T. (2012). The effect of cultural orientation and leadership style on self-versus other-oriented organizational citizenship behaviour in Turkey and the Netherlands. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 15, 249-260.
• Farh, J. L., & Cheng, B.S. (2000). A cultural analysis of paternalistic leadership in Chinese organizations. London: Macmillan.
• 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 ve L. Cheng (eds.). China’s domestic private firms: Multidisciplinary perspectives on management and performance: 230-260. New York: Sharpe.Ford, C. R. (1996). A theory of individual creative action in multiple social domain. Academy of Management Review, 21(4), 1112-1142.
• Ford, B., & Kleiner, B.H. (1987) Managing engineers effectively. Business, 37, 49-52.
• Fullan, M. (2002). The change leader. Educational Leadership, 8, 16-22.
• Gelfand, M.J., Erez, M., & Aycan, Z. (2007). Cross-cultural organizational behavior. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 479-514.
• Gorden, W. I., & Infante, D. A. (1987). Employee rights: Content, argumentativeness verbal aggressiveness and career satisfaction. In C.A.B. Osigweh (eds.). Communicating employee responsibilities and rights: A modern management mandate (pp. 149-163). Westport, CT: Greenwood.
• Gorden, W.I., Infante, D.A., & Graham, E.E. (1988). Corporate conditions condusive to employee voice: A subordinate perspective. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 1, 101-111.
• Graham, J.W. (1986). Principled organizational dissent: A theoretical essay. Research in Organizational Behavior, 8, 1-52.
• Gu, Q., Tang, T.L., & Jiang, W. (2015). Does moral leadership enhance employee creativity? Employee identification with leader and leader-member exchange (lmx) in the Chinese context. J Bus Ethics, 126, 513-529.
• Gunter, H. M. (2001). Leaders and leadership in education. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
• Hallinger, P. (2003). Leading educational change: Reflections on the practice of instructional and transformational leadership. Cambridge Journal of Education, 33, 329-351.
• Harris, A. (2004). Editorial: School leadership and school improvement: A simple and a complex relationship. School Leadership and Management, 24, 3-5.
• Hayek, M., Novicevic, M. M., Humphreys, J., & Jones, N. (2010). Ending the denial of slavery in management history: Paternalistic leadership of joseph emory davis. Journal Of Management History, 16(3), 367-379.
• Hegstrom, T. G. (1991). Mimetic and dissent conditions in organizational rhetoric. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 18, 141-152.
• Hofstede, G. H. (2006). What did Globe really measure? Researchers’ minds versus respondents‘ minds. Journal of International Business Studies, 37(6), 882-896.Jones, N. (1999). The changing role of the primary school head. Educational Management and Administration, 27, 441-451.
• Jung, D. I. (2001). Transformational and transactional leadership and their effects on creativity in groups. Creativity Research Journal, 13(2), 185-195.
• İraz, R. (2010). Yaratıcılık ve Yenilik Bağlamında Girişimcilik ve Kobiler (in Turkish). Konya: Çizgi Kitabevi.
• Kabasakal, H., & Bodur, M. (1998). Leadership, values, and Instutitions: The case of Turkey. Paper presented at Western Academy of Management Conference, Istanbul, Turkey, June.
• Kadı, A., & Beytekin, O.F. (2015). Okul kültürü ve örgütsel muhalefet davranışları arasındaki ilişkinin mesleki değerler aracılığıyla araştırılması [A research on the partial mediating effect of professional values in the relationship between organizational dissent behaviors and school culture]. Kalem Eğitim ve İnsan Bilimleri Dergisi, 5(1), 71-97.
• Kallio, T. J., & Kallio, K.M. (2011). Organisatorinen luovuus: Hypestä kohti luovuuden mahdollistavia organisaatiorakenteita. Liiketaloustieteellinen Aikakauskirja, 11(1), 33-64.
• Karasar, N. (2005). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi (in Turkish). Ankara:Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
• Karasel, N., Altınay, Z. Altınay, F., & Dağlı, G. (2017). Paternalist leadership style of the organizational trust. Quality & Quantity International Journal of Methodology, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-017-0580-x.
• Kassing, J. W. (1997a). Articulating, antagonizing, and displacing: A model of employee dissent. Communication Studies, 48(4), 311-332.
• Kassing, J. W. (1997b). Development and validation of the organizational dissent scale. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Kent State University.
• Kassing, J. W. (1998). Development and validation of the organizational dissent scale. Management Communication Quarterly, 12(2), 183-229.
• Kassing, J. W. (2000a). Exploring the relationship between workplace freedom of speech, organizational identification, and employee dissent. Communication Research Reports, 17, 387-396.
• Kassing, J. W. (2000b). Investigating the relationship between superior-subordinate relationship quality and employee dissent. Communication Research Reports, 17, 58-70.
• Kassing, J.W. (2002). Speaking up: Identifying employees’ upward dissent strategies. Management Communication Quarterly, 16(2), 187-209.
• Kesen, M., & Pabuçcu, H. (2016). Örgütsel muhalefet ve işe yabancılaşmanın duygusal tükenmişliğe etkisinin anfis modeli ile incelenmesi. Uluslararası Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 9(42), 1552-1563.
• Kim, U.M. (1994). Significance of paternalism and communalism in the occupational welfare system of korean firms: A national survey. In U. Kim, H.C. Triandis, C. Kagitcibasi, S. Choi, & G. Yoon (eds.). Individualism and collectivism: Theory, method and applications (pp. 251-266). London, England: SAGE.
• Korucuoğlu, T. (2016). Örgütsel güç oyunları ve örgütsel muhalefet arasındaki ilişki [The relationship between organizational political games and organizational dissent]. Unpublished master’s thesis, Eskişehir Osmangazi University Educational Sciences Institute, Eskişehir.
• Köksal, O. (2011). Paternalizm ile algılanan örgütsel adalet arasındaki ilişkinin tespitine yönelik bir araştırma [An empirical study towards determination of the relationship between paternalism and perceived organizational justice]. C.Ü. İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 12(2), 159-170.
• Kurt, İ. (2013). Babacan liderlik ile çalışanların işlerine yaratıcı katılım algıları arasındaki ilişkiyi araştırmaya yönelik bir çalışma [A research study on the relationship between paternalistic leadership and employee creative work involvement perceptions]. Sosyal ve Beşeri Bilimler Dergisi, 5(1), 321-330.
• Lakomski, G. (2008). Functionally adequate but casually idle: w(h)ither distributed leadership. Journal of Educational Administration, 46(2), 159-171.
• Leck, J. D., & Saunders, D. M. (1992). Hirschman’s loyalty: Attitude or behavior?. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 5, 219-230.
• Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (1999). The relative effects of principal and teacher sources on student engagement with school. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35, 679- 706.
• Leithwood, K., Steinbach, R., & Ryan, S. (1997). Leadership and team learning in secondary schools. School Leadership and Management, 17, 303-325.
• Martinez, P.G. (2003). Paternalism as a positive form of leader-subordinate exchange: Evidence from Mexico. Journal of Iberoamerican Academy of Management, 1, 227- 242.
• Mayer, R.C., Davis, J.H., & Schoorman, F.D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20, 709-734.
• McKnight, D.H., Cummings, L.L., & Chervany, N.L. (1998). Initial trust formation in new organizational relationships. Academy of Management Review, 23, 473-490.
• Miller, F.G., & Wertheimer, A. (2007). Facing up to paternalism in research ethics. Hasting Center Report, 37(3), 24-34.
• Mumford, M. D., & Connelly, M. S. (1999). Leadership. In M. A. Runco ve S. R. Pritzker (eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (pp. 139-146). San Diego:Academic Press.
• Mumford, M. D., Ginamaire, M.S., Gaddis, B., & Strange, J.M. (2002). Leading creative people: Orchestrating expertise and relationships. Leadership Quarterly, 13, 705- 750.
• Mumford, M.D., & Gustafson, S.B. (1988). Creativity syndrome: Integration, application, and innovation. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 27-43.
• Niu, C.P., Wang, A.C., & Cheng, B.S. (2009). Effectiveness of a moral and benevolent leader: Probing the interactions of the dimensions of paternalistic leadership. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 12, 32-39.
• Oldham, G. R., & Cummings, A. (1996). Employee creativity: Personal and contextual factors at work. Academy of Management Journal, 39(3), 607-634.
• Oral-Ataç, L. (2015). Örgütsel demokrasi ve örgütsel muhalefet ilişkisi: Beyaz yakalılar üzerine bir araştırma [The relationship between organizational democracy and organizational dissent: A research on white collars]. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Manisa Celal Bayar University Social Science Institute, Manisa.
• Özdemir, M. (2010). Ankara ili kamu genel liselerinde görev yapan yönetici ve öğretmenlerin örgütsel muhalefete ilişkin görüşleri [The opinions of administrators and teachers working in public high schools in Ankara province on organizational dissent]. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Ankara University Educational Sciences Institute, Ankara.
• Paşa, S.F., Kabasakal, H., & Bodur, M. (2001). Society, organizations, and leadership in Turkey. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 50(4), 559-589.
• Pellegrini, E. K., & 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.
• Pellegrini, E.K., Scandura, T A., & Jayaraman, V. (2010). Cross-Cultural generalizability of paternalistic leadership: an expansion of leader-member exchange theory (LMX). Group and Organization Management, 35, 391-420.
• Pienaar, J., Sieberhagen, C.F., & Mostert, K. (2007). Investigating turnover intentions by role overload, job satisfaction and social support moderation. Journal of Industrial Psychology, 33(2), 62-67.
• Redding, S. G. (1990). The spirit of Chinese capitalism. New York: Walter de Gruyter & Co.
• Redding, W. C. (1985). Rocking boats, blowing whistles, and teaching speech communication. Communication Education, 34, 245-258.
• Redmond, M. R., Mumford, M. D., & Teach, R. (1993). Putting creativity to work: Effects of leader behavior on subordinate creativity. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 55, 120-151.
• Rehman, M., & Afsar, B. (2012). The impact of paternalistic leadership on organization commitment and organization citizenship behaviour. Journal of Business Management and Applied Economics, 5,1-12.
• Sadykova, G., & Tutar, H. (2014). Örgütsel demokrasi ve örgütsel muhalefet arasındaki ilişki üzerine bir inceleme [A study on the relationship between organizational democrasy and organizational dissent]. İşletme Bilimi Dergisi, 2(1), 1-16.
• Sheer, V. C. (2010). Transformational and paternalistic leaderships in Chinese organizations: Construct, predictive, and ecological validities compared in a Hong Kong sample. Intercultural Communication Studies, 19(1), 121-140.
• Sheer, V.C. (2012). In search of Chinese paternalistic leadership: Conflicting evidence from samples of Mainland China and Hong Kong's small family businesses. Management Communication Quarterly, 27(1), 34-60.
• Schein, E. H. (2004). Organizational culture and leadership. CA, USA:Josey Bass.
• Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23-74.
• Scott, S.G., & Bruce, R.A. (1994). Determinants of innovative behavior: A path model of individual innovation in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), 580-607.
• Shin, S. J., & Zhou, J. (2003). Transformational leadership, conservation, and creativity: Evidence from Korea. Academy of Management Journal, 46, 703-714.
• Sillins, H., & Mulford, B. (2002). Leadership and school results. In K. Leithwood & P. Hallinger (eds.). Second International handbook of educational leadership and administration. (561-612). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
• Sternberg, R. J. (2005). A model of educational leadership: Wisdom, intelligence, and creativity synthesized. International Journal of Leadership in Education: Theory & Practice, 8, 347-364.
• Styhre, A., & Sundgren, M. (2005). Managing Creativity in Organizations: Critique and Practices. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Taylor, R. (1990). Interpratation of the correlation coefficient: A basic review. Journal of Diagnostic Medical Sonography, 6, 35-39.
• Teski, A. (2017). Okul yöneticilerinin liderlik tarzları ile öğretmenlerin örgütsel muhalefet algıları arasındaki ilişki [The relationship between teachers and organizational dissent of leadership of school administrators]. Unpublished master’s thesis, Uşak University Social Science Institute, Uşak.
• Tezbaşaran, A. (1997). Likert tipi ölçek hazırlama kılavuzu (in Turkish). Ankara: Türk Psikologlar Derneği.
• Tierney, P., Farmer, S. M., & Graen, G. B. (1999). An examination of leadership and employee creativity: The relevance of traits and relationships. Personnel Psychology, 52, 591-620.
• Timperley, H. S., & Robinson, V.M.J. (2001). Achieving school improvement through challenging and changing teachers’ schema. Journal of Educational Change, 6, 227-245.
• Uçar, A. (2016). Yöneticilerin kayırmacı davranışlarının, örgütsel muhalefet üzerindeki etkisi [The effect of administrators’ behaviors that involves favoritism on organizational opposition]. Unpublished master’s thesis, Siirt University Social Science Institute, Siirt.
• Uğurlu, E. (2017). Öğretmenlerin politik yetileri ile örgütsel muhalefet düzeyleri arasındaki ilişki [The relationship between teachers' political skills and organizational dissent levels]. Unpublished master’s thesis, Uşak University Social Science Institute, Uşak.
• Uhl-Bien, M., Tiemey, P. S., Graen, G. B., & Wakabayashi, M. (1990). Company paternalism and the hidden investment process: Identification of the “right type” for line managers in leading Japanese organizations. Group and Organization Studies, 15, 414-430.
• Volmer, J., Spurk, D., & Niessen, C. (2012). Leader-member exchange (LMX), job autonomy, and creative work involvement. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(3), 456- 465.
• Wang, A.C., & Cheng, B.S. (2010). When does benevolent leadership lead to creativity? The moderating role of creative role identity and job autonomy. Journal of Organizational Behavior.
• Wang, A.C., Kuo, S.Y., Cheng, B.S., & Tsai, C.Y. (2009). Paternalistic leadership and creativity: The moderating role of leader’s gender. Academy of Management Conference.
• Westwood, R. I. (1997). Harmony and patriarchy: The cultural basis for paternalistic headship among the overseas Chinese. Organization Studies, 18(3), 445-480.Woodman, R.W., Sawyer, J. E., & Griffin, R. W. (1993). Toward a theory of organizational creativity. Academy of Management Review, 18(2), 293-321.
• Yetim, N., & Yetim, Ü. (2006). The cultural orientations of entrepreneurs and employees’ job satisfaction: The Turkish small and medium sized enterprises (smes) case. Social Indicators Research, 77(2), 257-286.
• Yıldız, K. (2013). Örgütsel bağlılık ile örgütsel sinizm ve örgütsel muhalefet arasındaki ilişki. International Periodical For The Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic Volume, 8(6), 853-879.
• Yılmaz, E., & Sünbül, A. M. (2008). Okulların örgütsel yaratıcılıklarının öğretmenlerin yabancılaşma eğilimleri açısından incelenmesi [Analysing the organizational creativity from the point of employees alienation levels]. 2. International Congress on Entrepreneurship, Manas University.
• Yukl, G. A. (2010). Leadership in organizations (7th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc.
• Zhang, Y., Huai, M.Y., & Xie Y.H. (2015). Paternalistic leadership and employee voice in China: A dual process model. The Leadership Quarterly, 26, 25-36.
• Zhao, S. (1994). Human resource management in China. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 32 (2), 3-12.