The role of supportive organizational culture in the influence of the authentic leadership on contextual performance: A research in a public institution

Öz

The purpose of this study is to examine the effect of authentic leadership on contextual performance and whether supportive organizational culture has a mediating role on this effect or not. Another aim of the study is to investigate how authentic leadership, contextual performance and supportive organizational culture may differ according to demographic characteristics. This study uses a quantitative survey design. Within the scope of the study, 452 civil servants and contracted personnel working in a metropolitan municipality were selected by convenience sampling technique and evaluated with an online survey between 23.03.2022 and 01.01.2023, and the obtained data was analyzed using the SPSS 26.0 package program. Study findings show that authentic leadership affects employees’ contextual performance. Support-ive organizational culture plays a mediating role in this effect; It also affects authentic leadership and contextual performance separately. It has been determined that authentic leader, contextual performance and supportive organizational culture show significant differences according to some socio-demographic characteristics. This research shows that authentic leadership is an antecedent of contextual performance. A supportive organizational culture in organizations can facilitate employees’ adoption of the leadership style, encouraging trust, commitment, and the spread of positive results throughout the organizational climate, which can contribute to the overall success and contextual performance of the organization.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Authentic Leader
• Contextual Performance
• Supportive Organizational Culture

Otantik liderliğin bağlamsal performansa etkisinde destekleyici örgüt kültürünün rolü: Kamu kurumunda bir araştırma

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, otantik liderin bağlamsal performans üzerindeki etkisini ve destekleyici örgüt kültürünün bu etki üzerinde aracılık rolüne sahip olup olmadığını incelemektir. Otantik liderin, bağlamsal performansın ve destekleyici örgüt kültürünün demografik özelliklere göre nasıl farklılık gösterebileceğini araştırmak çalışmanın bir diğer amacını oluşturmaktadır. Bu çalışmada nicel bir tarama deseni kullanılmaktadır. Çalışma kapsamında bir büyükşehir belediyesinde görev yapan 452 memur ve sözleşmeli personel, kolayda örnekleme tekniğiyle seçilerek, 23.03.2022-01.01.2023 tarihleri arasında çevrimiçi anketle değerlendirilmiş ve elde edilen veriler SPSS 26.0 paket programı kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir. Çalışma bulguları, otantik liderliğin çalışanların bağlamsal performansını etkilediğini göstermektedir. Destekleyici örgüt kültürü bu etkiye aracılık etmektedir; ayrıca otantik liderlik ve bağlamsal performans üzerinde ayrı ayrı etkilidir. Otantik liderin, bağlamsal performansın ve destekleyici örgüt kültürünün bazı sosyo-demografik özelliklere göre anlamlı farklılıklar gösterdiği belirlenmiştir. Bu araştırma, otantik liderliğin bağlamsal performansın öncülü olduğunu göstermektedir. Kurumlarda destekleyici bir örgüt kültürü, çalışanların liderlik tarzını benimsemelerini kolaylaştırarak güven, bağlılık ve olumlu sonuçların örgüt iklimine yayılmasını teşvik edebilir, bu da kurumun genel başarısına ve bağlamsal performansına katkı sağlayabilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Otantik Lider
• Bağlamsal Performans
• Destekleyici Örgüt Kültürü

Kaynakça

1. Akkoç, İ., Çalışkan, A., & Turunç, Ö. (2012). The effect of development culture and perceived organizational support to the job satisfaction and job performance: The mediating role of trust. Yönetim ve Ekonomi, 19(1), 105–136. [Turkish]
2. Aktuğ, M. (2016). Örgütsel adalet ve örgütsel güvenin çalışan performansına etkisi [Unpublished master’s thesis]. İstanbul Gelişim University Institute of Social Sciences. [Turkish]
3. Altaş, S. S., & Kuzu, A. (2013). The relation between organizational ethics, organizational trust and individual job performance: a research on preschool teachers. Elektronik Mesleki Gelişim ve Araştırmalar Dergisi, 1(2), 29–41.
4. Anggapradja, I. T., & Wijaya, R. (2017). Effect of commitment organization, organizational culture, and motivation to performance of employees. Jurnal Aplikasi Manajemen, 15(1), 74–80. [CrossRef]
5. Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Walumbwa, F. O., Luthans, F., & May, D. R. (2004). Unlocking the mask: A look at the process by which authentic leaders impact follower attitudes and behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly, 15, 801–823. [CrossRef]
6. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182. [CrossRef]
7. Baykal, E. (2020). Mediator effect of perceived organizational support in the relationship between authentic leadership and organizational commitment. Manas Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 9(3), 1674–1688. [CrossRef]
8. Bandura, C. T., & Kavussanu, M. (2018). Authentic leadership in sport: Its relationship with athletes’ enjoyment and commitment and the mediating role of autonomy and trust. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 13(6), 968–977. [CrossRef]

9. Beğenirbaş, M., & Turgut, E. (2014). İş performansının sağlanmasında çalışanın duygusal emeğinin ve örgütte güven algısının etkileri. İşGüç Endüstri İlişkileri ve İnsan Kaynakları Dergisi, 16(3), 131–149. [Turkish] [CrossRef]
10. Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1993). Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of contextual performance. In N. Schmitt, & W. C. Borman (Eds.), Personnel selection in organizations (pp. 71–98). Jossey-Bass.
11. Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1997). Task performance and contextual performance: The meaning for personnel selection research. Human Performance, 10(2), 99–109. [CrossRef]
12. Büyükyılmaz, O., & Fidan, Y. (2017). The mediating role of organizational trust in the effect of perceived organizational support on organizational citizenship behavior. Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 5(3), 500–524.
13. Cankül, D., Kılıç, İ., & Doğantekin, A. (2018). Restoran çalışanlarının algılamış oldukları örgütsel güven düzeylerinin örgütsel vatandaşlık ve iş performansına etkisi: Eskişehir örneği. Journal of Tourism and Gastronomy Studies, 6(1), 372–389. [Turkish] [CrossRef]
14. Černe, M., Jaklič, M., & Škerlavaj, M. (2013). Authentic leadership, creativity, and innovation. A multilevel perspective. Leadership, 9(1), 63–85. [CrossRef]
15. Chathoth, P. K., Mak, B., Jauhari, V., Manaktola, K. (2007). Employees' perceptions of organizational trust and service climate: a structural model combining their effects on employee satisfaction. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 31(3), 338–357. [CrossRef]
16. Conway, J. M. (1999). Distinguishing contextual performance from task performance for managerial jobs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(1), 3–13. [CrossRef]
17. Çalışkan, D. A. (2013). The impact on innovation and creativity performance in the organizational factors: An application in the service sector. ISGUC The Journal of Industrial Relations and Human Resources, 15(1), 88–112. [CrossRef]
18. Çetin, F., Hazır, K., & Basım, H. N. (2013). The interaction between supportive organizational culture and psychological capital: The mediating role of locus of control. Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 31(1), 31–52. [Turkish] [CrossRef]
19. Daft, R. L. (2015). Örgüt kuramları ve tasarımını anlamak. (Ö. N. Timurcanday Özmen, et al. Translation Ed.). Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık. [Turkish]
20. Deal, T. E., & Kennedy, A. A. (1982). Corporate cultures: The rites and rituals of organizational life. A. Addison-Wesley.
21. Dirik, D., Eryılmaz, İ., & Gülova, A. A. (2016, November 4-5). Liderin güç kaynakları, iş tatmini ve bağlamsal performans arasındaki ilişkide örgütsel politikanın rolü. IV. Örgütsel Davranış Kongresi, Çukurova Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi İşletme Bölümü, Adana. [Turkish]
22. Durmuş, B., Yurtkoru, E. S., & Çinko, M. (2018). Sosyal bilimlerde SPSS’le veri analizi. Beta Yayıncılık. [Turkish]
23. Ece, Ş., & Erkmen, T. (2022, December 26-27). Otantik liderlik ile bağlamsal performans ilişkisinde yöneticiye olan güvenin rolü: Kamu işletmesinde bir araştırma. IX. Yıldız Uluslararası Sosyal Bilimler Kongresi, Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul. [Turkish]
24. Eren, E. (2012). Örgütsel davranış ve yönetim psikolojisi. Beta Yayıncılık. [Turkish]
25. Erkılıç, E., & Aydın, E. (2019). Authentic leadership and its impact on organisational trust: A research over accommodation businesses employees. Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 7(5), 2427–2446. [Turkish]
26. Goodman, S. A., & Svyantek, D. J. (1999). Person–organization fit and contextual performance: Do shared values matter. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 55(2), 254–275. [CrossRef]
27. Goris, J. R., Vaught, B. C., & Pettit, J. D. (2003). Effects of trust in superiors and influence of superiors on the association between individual-job congruence and job performance/satisfaction. Journal of Business and Psychology, 17, 327–343. [CrossRef]
28. Graham, T. H., & Bennet, R. (1998). Human resource management. Financial Times Prentice Hall.
29. Groysberg, B., Lee, J., Price, J., & Cheng, J. Y. (2021). Liderlerin kurum kültürü rehberi. In D. A. Garvin (Ed.), HBR’s 10 must reads: Kurum kültürü (L. Göktem, Translation Ed.), (pp. 7–40). Optimist Kitap. [Turkish]
30. Güler, M., & Cinnioğlu, H. (2021). The effect of perceived authentic leadership behavior on the organizational commitment and performance level of employees: A research on hotel employees. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Issues, 3(2), 124–139. [Turkish] [CrossRef]
31. Güney, S. (2020). Liderlik. Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık. [Turkish]
32. Gürbüz, S., & Şahin, F. (2018). Sosyal bilimlerde araştırma yöntemleri. Seçkin Yayıncılık. [Turkish]
33. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2013). Multivariate data analysis. Pearson Education Limited.
34. House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Ruiz-Quintanilla, S. A., Dorfman, P. W., Javidan, M., Dickson, M. W., & Gupta, V. (1999). Cultural influences on leadership and organizations: Project GLOBE. In W. H. Mobley, M. J. Gessner, & V. Arnold (Eds.), Advances in global leadership (pp. 171–233). JAI Press.
35. Jufrizen, J., Mukmin, M., Nurmala, D., & Jasin, H. (2021). Effect of moderation of work motivation on the influence of organizational culture on organizational commitment and employee performance. International Journal of Business Economics (IJBE), 2(2), 86–98.
36. Karacaoğlu, K., & Satır, F. (2019). The effects of employees on the performance of authentic and servant leadership perceptions: Implementation of a business in Kayseri organized industrial zone. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, (53), 87–111. [Turkish] [CrossRef]
37. Kavkalı, Z., & Yeşiltaş, M. (2018). Etik örgüt kültürünün sorun bildirme davranışına etkisi: Ankara ilinde faaliyet gösteren dört ve beş yıldızlı otellerde uygulama. Turizm Akademik Dergisi, 5(2), 85–96. [Turkish]
38. Koçak, O. (2019). The relationship between school leaders' authentic leadership behavior and teachers’ organizational citizenship behaviors and organizational commitment levels [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Fırat University Institute of Educational Sciences. [Turkish]
39. Koesmono, H. T. (2014). The influence of organizational culture, servant leadership, and job satisfaction toward organizational commitment and job performance through work motivation as moderating variables for lecturers in economics and management of private universities in East Surabaya. Educational Research International, 3(4), 25–39. [Turkish]
40. Korku, C., & Yıldız, A. (2023). Authentic leadership and contextual performance: mediating effect of work engagement. Hacettepe Sağlık İdaresi Dergisi, 26(1), 85–98. [Turkish]
41. Koşar, D. (2020). Otantik liderlik. In Yılmaz, K. (Ed.), Liderlik: Kuram araştırma, uygulama (pp. 217–241). Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık. [Turkish] [CrossRef]
42. Lee, Y. (2019). A study on the effect of authentic leadership of hospital organization on organizational commitment and organizational citizenship behavior: Focusing on mediating effect of LMX. The Journal of Industrial Distribution & Business, 10(3), 73–83.
43. Luthans, F., & Avolio, B. (2003). Authentic leadership: A positive development approach. In K. S. Cameron, J. E. Dutton, & R. E. Quinn (Eds.), Positive organizational scholarship (pp. 241–258). Berrett-Koehler.
44. Malik, N. (2018). Authentic leadership–an antecedent for contextual performance of Indian nurses. Personnel Review, 47(6), 1244–1260. [CrossRef]
45. Miski Aydın, E. (2003). Örgüt kültürü değerlendirmesi ve bir uygulama [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Hacettepe University Institute of Social Sciences. [Turkish]
46. Murphy, K. R. (1989). Dimensions of job performance. In R. Dillon & J. Pellingrino (Eds.), Testing: Applied and theoretical perspectives (pp. 218–247). Praeger. [CrossRef]
47. Motowidlo, S. J., & Van Scotter, J. R. (1994). Evidence that task performance should be distinguished from contextual performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(4), 475–480. [CrossRef]
48. Oruç, E. (2020). Otantik liderlik. In H. T. Uysal, C. Aksoy, & F. Yılmaz (Eds.). Liderlik tarzları: Çağdaş yönetim yaklaşımıyla insan sanatında ustalaşma (pp. 331–352). Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık. [Turkish]
49. Ott, J. (1989). Computer-simulation methods in human linkage analysis. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 86(11), 4175–4178. [CrossRef]
50. Örücü, E., Gizlier, Ö., & Dinç, B. (2021, October 29-30). Otantik liderliğin işten ayrılma niyeti üzerindeki etkisi: Perakendecilik sektöründe bir araştırma. II. International Halich Congress on Multidisciplinary Scientific Research, İstanbul. [Turkish]
51. Özer, P. S., Topaloğlu, T., & Timurcanday, Ö. N. T. (2013). The moderating effect of supportive organizational climate on psychological capital and job satisfaction relationship. Ege Academic Review, 13(4), 437–447. [Turkish] [CrossRef]
52. Pettigrew, A. M. (1979). On studying organizational cultures. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(4), 570–581. [CrossRef]
53. Rashwan, K. A., & Ghaly, M. (2022). The effect of transformational, transactional and authentic leadership on innovation: The mediating role of organizational culture. Consumer Behavior in Tourism and Hospitality, 17(4), 561–575. [CrossRef]
54. Ribeiro, N., Duarte, A. P., Filipe, R., & David, R. (2022). Does authentic leadership stimulate organizational citizenship behaviors? The importance of affective commitment as a mediator. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 13(2), 320–340. [CrossRef]
55. Robbins, S. P. & Judge, T. A. (2015). Örgütsel davranış. (İ. Erdem, Translation Ed.). Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık. [Turkish]
56. Robbins, S. P. & Judge, T. A. (2020). Örgütsel davranışın temelleri. (İ. Erdem Artan, G. Eser, Translation Eds.). Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık. [Turkish]
57. Roncesvalles, M. C. T., & Gaerlan, A. A. (2021). The role of authentic leadership and teachers' organizational commitment on organizational citizenship behavior in higher education. International Journal of Educational Leadership and Management, 9(2), 92–121.
58. Sabuncuoğlu, Z., & Tüz, M. (2003). Örgütsel psikoloji. Furkan Ofset Yayınları. [Turkish]
59. Schein, E. H. (1992). Organizational culture and leadership. Jossey-Bass Publishers.
60. Setyaningrum, R. P., Setiawan, M., Surachman, S., & Irawanto, D. W. (2017). Employees performance; leadership, organizational commitment and trust. International Journal of Economic Perspectives, 11(2), 281–288.
61. Shrestha, N. (2021). Factor analysis as a tool for survey analysis. American Journal of Applied Mathematics and Statistics, 9(1), 4–11. [CrossRef]
62. Shun-Kun, Y. U., & Ou, Z. H. A. N. G. (2014). Research on relationship between authentic leadership and contextual performance. Commercial Research, 56(11), 138.
63. Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models. In S. Leinhardt (Ed.), Sociological methodology (pp. 290–312). American Sociological Association. [CrossRef]
64. Spender, J. C. (1983). Myths, recipes and acknowledge-bases in organizational analysis. Organisational Folklore Conference, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA.
65. Stogdill, R. M. (1974). Handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research. Free Press.
66. Sönmez, R. V. (2016). Örgüt kültürünü inovasyon üzerine etkisi ve bir araştırma [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. İnönü University Institute of Social Sciences. [Turkish]
67. Tezcan, C. (2019). Örgütsel güvenin çalışan performansına etkisinde destekleyici örgüt ikliminin aracı etkisi [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Ufuk University Institute of Social Sciences. [Turkish]
68. Turhan, M., Köprülü, O., & Helvacı, İ. (2018). Örgütsel güven ile bireysel iş performansı arasındaki ilişki. Siyaset, Ekonomi ve Yönetim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 6(5), 47–55. [Turkish]
69. Tutar, H. (2017). Örgüt kültürü. Detay Yayıncılık. [Turkish]
70. Uğur, Ç. (2017). Analysing the relationship between organizational culture level and types of leadership of the employees. Sağlık Akademisyenleri Dergisi, 4(4), 347–354. [Turkish] [CrossRef]
71. Urbach, N., & Ahlemann, F. (2010). Structural equation modeling in information systems research using partial least squares. Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application, 11(2), 5–40.
72. Van Scotter, J. R., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1996). Interpersonal facilitation and job dedication as separate facets of contextual performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(5), 525. [CrossRef]
73. Wallach, E. J. (1983). Individuals and organizations: The cultural match. Training & Development Journal, 37(2), 28–36.
74. Walumbwa, F., Avolio, B., Gardner, W., Wernsing, T., & Peterson, S. (2008). Authentic leadership: Development and validation of a theory-based measure. Journal of Management, 34(1), 89–126. [CrossRef]
75. Williams, L. L. (2005). Impact of nurses’ job satisfaction on organizational trust. Health Care Management Review, 30(3), 203–211. [CrossRef]
76. Yangın, S. (2017). The effects on organizational citizenship and business performance of authentic leadership perceptions of employees and mediating role of organizational trust: A research in İzmir Demir Çelik Sanayi A.Ş. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Haliç University Institute of Social Sciences. [Turkish]
77. Yetgin, M. A. (2016). The role of psychological capital and supportive organizational culture on authentic leadership: An empirical study. Third Sector Social Economic Review, 51(2), 128–156. [Turkish]
78. Yiğit, S. (2014). “Innovation culture” in the context of relationship between culture, organizational culture and innovation. Karamanoğlu Mehmetbey Üniversitesi Sosyal ve Ekonomik Araştırmalar Dergisi, 16(27), 1–7. [Turkish] [CrossRef]
79. Yorulmaz, M., & Karabacak, A. (2020). The relationship between organizational trust and job performance in port employees: The role of job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Balkan and Near Eastern Journal of Social Sciences, 6(2), 121–130. [Turkish]
80. Yukl, G. (1981). Leadership in organizations. Pearson Education.
81. Yukl, G. (2018). Örgütlerde liderlik. (Ş. Çetin & R. Baltacı Eds.). Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık. [Turkish]