Paternalistic Leadership in Korean Small and Medium Scale Enterprises: Applicability of a Turkish Paternalism Scale

Öz

Social and cultural exchange between Korea and Turkey has been rapidly increasing and is expected to be accelerated for the future. Especially business exchange is interest of many people in both countries. This paper aims to provide insights for business people in Korea and Turkey to understand each country’s cultural aspects. Among different perspectives, paternalism is focused in the study. Paternalism is an important intersection of both cultures but it did not receive much attention. Even though both Turkish and Korean leaders are paternalistic, the origin of the characteristic is based on different background. The current studies of paternalism in Korea are based on Confucianism and economic crisis whereas those of Turkey are based on nomadic history, military Coup d'Etat, complicated bureaucracy, and economic instability. Using a paternalism scale developed with Turkish sample, this study measured Korean employees’ perception on paternalism and paternalistic leadership. The results showed that the scale is applicable in Korean organizations as well.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Paternalism; Paternalistic Leadership; Korean Organizational Culture; Turkish Organizational Culture; Cross Cultural Studies

Kore Küçük ve Orta Ölçekli İşletmelerinde Paternalistik Liderlik: Türkçe Paternalizm Ölçeğinin Uygulanabilirliği

Öz

Kore ve Türkiye arasındaki sosyal ve kültürel değişimler hızlı bir şekilde artmakta ve bu artışın gelecekte daha da devam edeceği beklenmektedir. Özellikle işletme alanındaki değişimler iki ülke için önem arz etmektedir. Bu çalışmada Kore ve Türkiye’deki iş dünyasına karşılıklı ülke kültürlerini anlamaları açısından yardımcı olacak içgörüler sağlamak hedeflemiştir. Bunun için önemli bir kültürel unsur olan paternalizm incelenmiştir. Paternalizm iki kültür için önemli bir kesişme noktası olmakla beraber yeterince incelenmemiş bir kavramdır.  Türk ve Kore liderleri paternalist olmakla beraber, sahip oldukları bu özelliklerin arkasında farklı sebepler vardır. Kore’deki paternalizm çalışmaları Konfüçyüsçülük ve ekonomik krizin etkilerine dayanmaktayken, Türkiye’deki çalışmalar ise göçebelik geçmişi, askeri darbeler, karmaşık bürokrasi ve ekonomik istikrarsızlığa dayanmaktadır. Çalışmada Türk bir örneklem için düzenlenmiş olan bir paternalizm ölçeği kullanılarak Kore’deki çalışanların paternalizm ve paternalist liderlik üzerine olan algıları ölçülmüştür. Çalışmanın sonuçları ölçeğin Kore örgütlerinde de uygulanabilir olduğunu göstermiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Paternalizm; Paternalist Liderlik; Kore Örgüt Kültürü; Türk Örgüt Kültürü; Kültürlerarası Çalışmalar

Kaynakça

1. Aldemir, C., Özmen, N.T.Ö., Arbak, Y., &Çakar, U. (2004).Turkish Work Mentality at the Organizational Level.In İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Kültür Yönetim ve Organizasyon Çalıştayı.İstanbul.
2. Aycan, Z. (2006). Paternalism.Towards conceptual refinement and operationalization. In Kim, U., Yang, K., & Hwang, K. (Eds.), Indigenous and Cultural Psychology Understanding People in Contest (pp. 445- 466). The United States of America: Springer.
3. Aycan, Z., Kanungo, R.N., Mendonca, M., Yu, K., Deller, J., Stahl, G., &Khursid, A. (2000). Impact of culture on human resource management practices: A ten country comparison. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 49(1), 192–220.
4. Bae, J. (2013, May 23). Istanbul-Gyeongju expo to fuel Hallyu in Turkey.The Korea Herald.Retrieved from http://khnews.kheraldm.com/view.php?ud=20130523000722.
5. Cha, E. S., Kim, K. H., &Erlen, J. A. (2007). Translation of scales in cross-cultural research: Issues and techniques. Journal of advanced nursing, 58(4), 386-395.
6. Chang, E. (1999). Career commitment as a complex moderator of organizational commitment and turnover intention.Human Relations, 52(10), 1257–1278.
7. Cheng, B. S., Boer, D., Chou, L. F., Huang, M. P., Yoneyama, S., Shim, D., …Tsai, C. Y. (2014). Paternalistic leadership in four East Asian societies: Generalizability and cultural differences of the triad model. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 45(1), 82-90.
8. Cheng, B. S., Chou, L. F., Wu, T. Y., Huang, M. P., & Farh, J. L. (2004). Paternalistic leadership and subordinates responses: Establishing a leadership model in Chinese organizations. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 7(1), 89-117.

9. Cho, Y. H., & Yoon, J. (2001). The origin and function of dynamic collectivism: An analysis of Korean corporate culture. Asia Pacific Business Review, 7(4), 70-88.
10. Farh, J. L., & Cheng, B. S. (2000).A cultural analysis of paternalistic leadership in Chinese organizations.Management and Organizations in the Chinese Context, 84-127.
11. Form, W., & Bae, K. H. (1988). Convergence theory and the Korean connection.Social Forces, 66(3), 618-644.
12. GS E&C Wins $1.03b order from Turkey. (2013, May 21). Retrieved from http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20130521000798.
13. Guvenc, B. (1995). Turk kimligi: Kultur tarihinin kaynaklari [Turkish identity: Roots of cultural history]. Istanbul: Remzi Yayinevi.
14. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis. New Jersey: Pearson Education.
15. Hartley, R. D., Kwak, D. H., Park, M., & Lee, M. S. (2011). Exploring sex disparity in sentencing outcomes: A focus on narcotics offenders in South Korea.International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 55(2), 268-286.
16. Hau, K. T., & Marsh, H. W. (2004). The use of item parcels in structural equation modelling: Non‐normal data and small sample sizes. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 57(2), 327-351.
17. Hofstede, G. (1997). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. New York: McGraw Hill
18. Hsieh, K.,& Chen, Y. (2011). Development and significance of paternalistic leadership behavior scale. Asian Social Science, 7(2), 45-55.
19. Hyundai E&C is working on Turkey’s new third Bosporus Bridge. (2013). World Highways.Retrieved from http://www.worldhighways.com/categories/road-highway-structures/news/hyundai-ec-is-working-on-turkeys-new-third-bosporus-bridge/.
20. Invest in Turkey. (2013). Retrieved from http://www.invest.gov.tr/en-US/infocenter/news/Pages/050613-ispat-kotra-mou-signed.aspx.
21. Im, T. (2013). Bureaucracy in three different worlds: The assumptions of failed public sector reforms inKorea. Public Organization Review, 1-20.
22. Kee, T. S. (2008). Influences of Confucianism on Korean corporate culture.Asian Profile, 36(1),1-15,
23. Kim, J. K. (2011). The politics of culture in multicultural Korea.Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 37(10), 1583-1604.
24. Kim, S. (2005). Gender differences in the job satisfaction of public employees: A study of Seoul metropolitan government, Korea. Sex Roles, 52(9-10), 667-681.
25. Kim, U., & Park, Y. S. (2000).Confucianism and family values. ZeitschriftfürErziehungswissenschaft, 3(2), 229-249.
26. Korea Turkey, construction machinery investment and export support agreement (2013, June 24).The Construction Equipment News, Retrieved from http://www.kungiin.co.kr/sub_read.html?uid=11705.
27. Korean Statistical Information Service (2013). Gender of supervisor. Retrieved from http://kosis.kr/statHtml/statHtml.do?orgId=154&tblId=DT_MOGE_1520 001006&conn_path=I2.
28. Lee, J. K. (2001). Confucian thought affecting leadership and organizational culture of Korean higher education. Radical Pedagogy, 3(3), 1-11.
29. Lee, S. M., & Yoo, S. (1987). Management style and practice of Korean Chaebols.California Management Review, 95, 95-110.
30. McGorry, S. Y. (2000). Measurement in a cross-cultural environment: survey translation issues. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 3(2), 74-81.
31. Mathur, P., Aycan, Z., & Kanungo, R. N. (1996). Work cultures in Indian organisations: A comparison between public and private sector. Psychology & Developing Societies, 8(2), 199-222.
32. Mensik, S., Grainger, R. J., &Chatterje, S. R. (1999). Trends and transitions in Japanese and Korean management approaches.Australia: Curtin University of Technology.
33. Mocan-Aydin, G. (2000). Western models of counselling and psychotherapy within Turkey crossing cultural boundaries. The Counselling Psychologist, 28(2), 281-298.
34. Newman, K. L., & Nollen, S. D. (1996). Culture and congruence: The fit between management practices and national culture. Journal of International Business Studies, 27 (4), 753-779.
35. Oh, H., Chung, M. H., & Labianca, G. (2004). Group social capital and group effectiveness: The role of informal socializing ties. Academy of Management Journal, 47(6), 860-875.
36. Olsson, U. H., Foss, T., Troye, S. V., & Howell, R. D. (2000).The performance of ML, GLS, and WLS estimation in structural equation modeling under conditions of misspecification and nonnormality. Structural equation modeling, 7(4), 557-595.
37. Padavic, I.,& Earnest, W. R. (1994).Paternalism as a component of managerial strategy.Social Science Journal, 31(4), 389–405.
38. Pellegrini, E. K. (2006). The relations among organizational justice, paternalism, delegation and Leader-member exchange (LMX) relationships (Doctoral dissertation, University of Miami, Florida). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses.
39. 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.
40. Pellegrini, E. K., &Scandura, T. A. (2008). Paternalistic leadership: A review and agenda for future research. Journal Of Management, 34(3), 566-593.
41. Pellegrini, E. K., Scandura, T. A., &Jayaraman, V. (2010). Cross-cultural generalizability of paternalistic leadership: An expansion of Leader-member exchange theory. Group & Organization Management, 35(4), 391-420.
42. Redding, S. G., Norman, A., & Schlander, A. (1994). The nature of individual attachment to theory: A review of East Asian variations. In H. C. Triandis, M. D. Dunnett, & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 674-688). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists.
43. Republic of Turkey Ministry of Economy.(2013). South Korea.Retrieved fromhttp://www.economy.gov.tr/index.cfm?sayfa=countriesandregions&country=KP®ion=6.
44. Samsung (2015). Retrieved from http://www.samsung.co.kr/main.do.
45. Sargut, S. (2001). Kulturlerarasi farklilasma ve yonetim [Cross-cultural differences and management]. Ankara: Verso Yayincilik.
46. Seo, M. K., Kim, S. H., & Rhee, M. (2013). Coercion in psychiatric care: Can paternalism justify coercion?.International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 59(3), 217-223.
47. Timmerman, C. (2000). Muslim women and nationalism: The power of the image. Current Sociology, 48(4), 15-27.
48. Turkey’s TCMA Signs MoU with South Korean textile body. (2013). Retrieved from http://www.fibre2fashion.com/news/textile-news/newsdetails.aspx?news_id=151452.
49. Yang, I. (2006). Jeong exchange and collective leadership In Korean organizations. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 23(3), 283-298.
50. Zhou, J. (2006). A model of paternalistic organizational control and group creativity.National Culture and Groups Research on Managing Groups and Teams, 9.75-94.