Agresif Mizahın İntikam Niyetine Etkisinde Babacan Liderliğin Rolü

Öz

Hayatımızda önemli bir yere sahip olan mizah, olumlu çağrışımlarının yanı sıra kötü sonuçları da beraberinde getirebilecek güce sahip bir iletişim aracıdır. Buradan hareketle bu çalışmada agresif mizahın intikam niyetine olan etkisi ve bu iki değişken arasındaki ilişkide babacan liderliğin aracı rolünün tespit edilmesi amaçlanmıştır. Bu amaç doğrultusunda sivil havayolu taşımacılığı sektöründe faaliyette bulunan bir firmanın yer ve uçuş hizmetlerinde görevli 273 çalışan ile nicel bir araştırma gerçekleştirilmiştir. Anket tekniği ile elde edilen veriler, kısmi en küçük kareler (Partial Least Squares - PLS) temelli yapısal eşitlik yaklaşımı benimsenerek analiz edilmiştir. Yapılan analizler sonucunda çalışanların maruz kaldığı agresif mizahın, intikam niyeti üzerinde pozitif bir etkiye sahip olduğu görülmüştür. Ayrıca babacan liderliğin agresif mizah ile intikam niyeti arasındaki ilişkiye aracılık ettiği belirlenmiştir. Buna göre babacan lidere sahip olan çalışanların maruz kaldıkları agresif mizahın intikam niyetine dönüşme olasılığı azalmaktadır. Yapılan çoklu grup analizi sonuçlarına göre ise yer ve uçuş hizmetlerinde görevli çalışanların tutumlarında farklılıklar tespit edilmiştir. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Agresif Mizah
• İntikam Niyeti
• Babacan Liderlik
• Sivil Havayolu Taşımacılığı
• PLS

The Role of Paternalistic Leadership in the Effect of Aggressive Humor on the Intention to Revenge

Öz

Humor, which has an essential place in our lives, is a communication tool that has the power to bring bad results along with its positive connotations. From this point of view, it is aimed to determine the effect of aggressive humor on revenge intention and the mediating role of paternalistic leadership in the relationship between these two variables. For this purpose, quantitative research is carried out with 273 employees working in the ground and flight services of a company operating in the civil air transportation sector. The data obtained by the survey are analyzed by adopting the structural equation approach based on partial least squares (PLS). As a result of the analyzes, the aggressive humor that the employees are exposed to has a positive effect on the intention of revenge. Moreover, it is also determined that paternalistic leadership mediated the relationship between aggressive humor and intention to revenge. Hereunder, the possibility of the aggressive humor that employees are exposed to turning into intention of revenge decreases by paternal leadership. According to the results of the multi-group analysis, differences are detected in the attitudes of employees working in ground and flight services.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Aggressive Humor
• Intention to Revenge
• Paternalistic Leadership
• Civil Airline Transportation
• PLS

Kaynakça

1. Anderson, L. (2015), Racist humor, Philosophy Compass, 10(8), 501-509.
2. Axelrod, R. ve Hamilton, W. D. (1981). The evolution of cooperation. Science, 211(4489), 1390-1396.
3. Aycan, Z. (2006). Paternalism: Towards conceptual refinement and operationalization. K. S. Yang, K. K. Hwang ve U. Kim (Ed.), Scientific advances in indigenous psychologies: Empirical, philosophical, and cultural contributions içinde (445-466), London: Sage Inc.
4. Aycan, Z., Kanungo, R. N., Mendonca, M., Yu, K., Deller, J. ve Stahl, G. (2000). Impact of culture on human resource management practices: A ten country comparison. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 49(1), 192-220.
5. Aycan, Z., Schyns, B., Sun, J. M., Felfe, J. ve Saher, N. (2013). Convergence and divergence of paternalistic leadership: A cross-cultural investigation of prototypes. Journal of International Business Studies, 44(9), 962-969.
6. Bannister, S. (2006). Making sense of humour in the workplace. Canadaone.com, Erişim adresi: http://www.canadaone.com/ezine/oct06/humour_at_work.html/, (05.04.2020).
7. Banta, M. (1969). Rebirth or revenge: The endings of "Huckleberry Finn" and "The American". Modern Fiction Studies, 15(2), 191-207.
8. Beaumont, L. R. (2005). Revenge, getting even. Erişim adresi: http://www.emotionalcompetency.com/revenge.htm/, (08.04.2020).

9. Bies, R. J. ve Tripp, T. M. (1998). The many faces of revenge: The good, the bad, and the ugly. Dysfunctional Behavior in Organizations, 1, 49-68.
10. Bies, R. J., Tripp, T. M. ve Kramer, R. M. (1997). At the breaking point: Cognitive and social dynamics of revenge in organizations. R. Giacalone ve J. Greenberg (Ed.), Antisocial Behavior in Organizations içinde (18–36), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
11. Bradfield, M. ve Aquino, K. (1999). The effects of blame attributions and offender likableness on forgiveness and revenge in the workplace. Journal of management, 25(5), 607-631.
12. Brislin, R. W. (1980). Translation and content analysis of oral and written materials. Methodology, 389-444.
13. Chan, S. C. (2014). Paternalistic leadership and employee voice: Does information sharing matter?. Human Relations, 67(6), 667-693.
14. Chen, X. P., Eberly, M. B., Chiang, T. J., Farh, J. L. ve Cheng, B. S. (2014). Affective trust in Chinese leaders: Linking paternalistic leadership to employee performance. Journal of management, 40(3), 796-819.
15. Chin, W. W. ve Dibbern, J. (2010). An introduction to a permutation based procedure for multi-group PLS analysis: Results of tests of differences on simulated data and a cross cultural analysis of the sourcing of information system services between Germany and the USA. Handbook of partial least squares içinde (171-193), Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
16. Çiçek, B. ve Deniz, M. (2017). Liderlere ve organizasyonlara değer temelli yaklaşım: değer merkezli liderlik ve etik iklim ilişkisi üzerine bir araştırma. İşletme Araştırmaları Dergisi, 9(2), 150-168.
17. Cloke, K. (1993). Revenge, forgiveness, and the magic of mediation. Mediation Quarterly, 11(1), 67-78.
18. Cortina, L. M. ve Magley, V. J. (2001). Incivility in the workplace: Incidence and impact. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6(1), 64-80.
19. Crawford, C. B. (1994). Theory and implications regarding the utilization of strategic humor by leaders. Journal of Leadership Studies, 1(4), 53-68.
20. Crino, M. D. (1994). Employee sabotage: A random or preventable phenomenon?. Journal of Managerial Issues, 6(3), 311-330.
21. Daly, J. P. (1991). The effects of anger on negotiations over mergers and acquisitions. Negotiation Journal, 7(1), 31-39.
22. de Oliveira Medeiros, C. R. ve Alcapadipani, R. (2016). In the corporate backstage, the taste of revenge: Misbehavior and humor as form of resistance and subversion. Revista de Administração, 51(2), 123-136.
23. Erben, G. S. ve Güneşer, A. B. (2008). The relationship between paternalistic leadership and organizational commitment: Investigating the role of climate regarding ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 82(4), 955-968.
24. Farh, J. L. ve Cheng, B. S. (2000). A cultural analysis of paternalistic leadership in Chinese organizations. L. A. Keister (Ed.), Management and organizations in the Chinese context içinde (84-127), London: Palgrave Macmillan.
25. Fornell, C. ve Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 382-388.
26. Friedman, L. W. ve Friedman, H. H. (2018). Just kidding: When workplace humor is toxic. F. Maon, A. Lindgreen, J. Vanhamme, R. J. Angell ve J. Memery, (Ed.), Not All Claps and Cheers içinde (216-227), London: Routledge.
27. Gerçek, M. (2018). Yöneticilerin babacan (paternalist) liderlik davranışlarının psikolojik sözleşme bağlamındaki beklentileri üzerindeki etkilerine yönelik bir çalışma. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 13(2), 101-118.
28. Hair Jr, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. ve Sarstedt, M. (2017). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). NY: Sage publications.
29. Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M. ve Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2-24.
30. Hampton, J. (1988). The retributive idea. Forgiveness and Mercy, 111, 130-140.
31. Han, S. J., Bonn, M. A. ve Cho, M. (2016). The relationship between customer incivility, restaurant frontline service employee burnout and turnover intention. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 52, 97-106.
32. Hao, Z. ve Lirong, L. (2007). Relationship between paternalistic leadership and organizational justice. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 5, 17.
33. Harman, H. H. (1967). Modern factor analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
34. Henseler, J. (2012). PLS-MGA: A non-parametric approach to partial least squares-based multi-group analysis. W. A. Gaul, A. Geyer-Schulz, L. Schmidt-Thieme ve J. Kunze (Ed.), Challenges at the interface of data analysis, computer science, and optimization içinde (495-501), Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
35. Henseler, J. (2018). Partial least squares path modeling: Quo vadis?. Quality & Quantity, 52(1), 1-8.
36. Henseler, J., Hubona, G. ve Ray, P. A. (2016). Using PLS path modeling in new technology research: updated guidelines. Industrial management & data systems, 116(1), 2-20.
37. Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M. ve Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115-135.
38. Hochschild, A., Irwin, N. ve Ptashne, M. (1983). Repressor structure and the mechanism of positive control. Cell, 32(2), 319-325.
39. Hoel, H., Rayner, C. ve Cooper, C. L. (1999). Workplace bullying. NY: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
40. Hofstede, G. (1984). The cultural relativity of the quality of life concept. Academy of Management Review, 9(3), 389-398.
41. Holmes, J. ve Marra, M. (2002). Having a laugh at work: How humour contributes to workplace culture. Journal of Pragmatics, 34(12), 1683-1710.
42. Kock, N. (2015). Common method bias in PLS-SEM: A full collinearity assessment approach. International Journal of e-Collaboration (IJEC), 11(4), 1-10.
43. Marongiu, P. ve Newman, G. R. (1987). Vengeance: The fight against injustice. Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Littlefield.
44. Martin, R. A. (2001). Humor, laughter, and physical health: methodological issues and research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 127(4), 504-519.
45. Martin, R. A., Puhlik-Doris, P., Larsen, G., Gray, J. ve Weir, K. (2003). Individual differences in uses of humor and their relation to psychological well-being: Development of the Humor Styles Questionnaire. Journal of research in personality, 37(1), 48-75.
46. McGhee, P. E. (1999). Health, healing, and the amuse system: Humor as survival training. Dubuque: Kendall/Hunt.
47. McGhee, P. E. (2013). Team building humor strengthens a team identity or spirit. Erişim adresi: http://www.laughterremedy.com/articles/team_building.html/, (04.04.2020).
48. Medeiros, C. R. D. O. ve Alcapadipani, R. (2016). In the corporate backstage, the taste of revenge: Misbehaviour and humor as form of resistance and subversion. Revista de Administração (São Paulo), 51(2), 123-136.
49. Mesmer‐Magnus, J., Glew, D. J. ve Viswesvaran, C. (2012). A meta‐analysis of positive humor in the workplace. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 27(2), 155-190.
50. Moss, E. M. (2012, April 20). Sexual jokes and lewd conversations in the workplace: Where’s the line?. Erişim adresi: http://www.forbes.com/sites/goodmenproject/2012/04/20/blowjob-jokes-and-exclusionary-tactics-in-the-workplace/#5f995d0059a2/, (04.04.2020).
51. Mussolino, D. ve Calabrò, A. (2014). Paternalistic leadership in family firms: Types and implications for intergenerational succession. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 5(2), 197-210.
52. Noy, C. (2008). Sampling knowledge: The hermeneutics of snowball sampling in qualitative research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 11(4), 327-344.
53. Öner, Z. H. (2012). Servant leadership and paternalistic leadership styles in the Turkish business context. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 32(1), 300-316.
54. Ötken, A. B. ve Cenkci, T. (2012). The impact of paternalistic leadership on ethical climate: The moderating role of trust in leader. Journal of Business Ethics, 108(4), 525-536.
55. Pellegrini, E. K. ve 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.
56. Rahim, A. ve Cosby, D. M. (2016). A model of workplace incivility, job burnout, turnover intentions, and job performance. Journal of Management Development, 35(10), 1255-1265.
57. Rehman, M. ve Afsar, B. (2012). The impact of paternalistic leadership on organization commitment and organization citizenship behaviour. Journal of Business Management and Applied Economics, 5(5), 148-159.
58. Ringle, C. M., Wende, S. ve Becker, J. M. (2015). SmartPLS 3. Boenningstedt: SmartPLS GmbH.
59. Robert, C. ve Yan, W. (2007). The case for developing new research on humor and culture in organizations: Toward a higher grade of manure. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 26, 205-267.
60. Roberts, S. J., Scherer, L. L. ve Bowyer, C. J. (2011). Job stress and incivility: What role does psychological capital play?. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 18(4), 449-458.
61. Romero, E. J. ve Cruthirds, K. W. (2006). The use of humor in the workplace. Academy of Management Perspectives, 20(2), 58-69.
62. Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., Henseler, J. ve Hair, J. F. (2014). On the emancipation of PLS-SEM: A commentary on Rigdon (2012). Long Range Planning, 47(3), 154-160
63. Saygili, M., Özer, Ö. ve Karakaya, P. Ö. (2020). Paternalistic Leadership, Ethical Climate and Performance in Health Staff. Hospital Topics, 98(1), 26-35.
64. Şener, E. ve Çoşkun, V. (2015). Örgütsel intikam. İstanbul: Beta Basım Yayım Dağıtım.
65. Shellenbarger, S. (2013). Secrets of effective office humor. Erişim adresi: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324085304579008554174349982.html/, (06.04. 2020).
66. Shteynberg, G. (2005). The cultural psychology of revenge in the Unites States and South Korea. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, University of Maryland, College Park, ABD.
67. Soylu, S. (2011). Creating a family or loyalty-based framework: The effects of paternalistic leadership on workplace bullying. Journal of Business Ethics, 99(2), 217-231.
68. Streukens, S. ve Leroi-Werelds, S. (2016). Bootstrapping and PLS-SEM: A step-by-step guide to get more out of your bootstrap results. European Management Journal, 34(6), 618-632.
69. Stuckless, N. ve Goranson, R. (1992). The vengeance scale: Development of a measure of attitudes toward revenge. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 7(1), 25.
70. Terris, W. ve Jones, J. (1982). Psychological factors related to employees' theft in the convenience store industry. Psychological Reports, 51(3), 1219-1238.
71. Tian, Q. ve Sanchez, J. I. (2017). Does paternalistic leadership promote innovative behavior? The interaction between authoritarianism and benevolence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 47(5), 235-246.
72. Uniacke, S. (2000). Why is revenge wrong?. The Journal of Value Inquiry, 34(1), 61-69.
73. Wan, J., Le, Y., Wang, G., Xia, N. ve Liu, X. (2020). Carrot or stick? The impact of paternalistic leadership on the behavioral integration of top management teams in megaprojects. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, (Ön Baskı).
74. Wetzels, M., Odekerken-Schröder, G. ve Van Oppen, C. (2009). Using PLS path modeling for assessing hierarchical construct models: Guidelines and empirical illustration. MIS Quarterly, 33(1), 177-195.
75. Wu, M., Huang, X., Li, C. ve Liu, W. (2012). Perceived interactional justice and trust-in-supervisor as mediators for paternalistic leadership. Management and Organization Review, 8(1), 97-121.
76. Zhang, Y., Huai, M. Y. ve Xie, Y. H. (2015). Paternalistic leadership and employee voice in China: A dual process model. The Leadership Quarterly, 26(1), 25-36.