Paternalistic Leadership,Conflict and TMT Strategic Decision Outcomes
Chen Lu,Yang Baiyin,Jing Runtian,Wang Guofeng
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1008-3448.2010.05.002
2010-01-01
Abstract:The developments in the fields of top management team (TMT) and leadership have represented some new insights from previous research.In the field of TMT studies, few researches have demonstrated how CEO leadership affects TMT and organization performance.In addition, the intermediate role of team process like conflict in linking leadership and team outputs is not yet fully understood.Therefore, a more specific evaluation on effects of CEO leadership on TMT decision outcomes and its intervening mechanism through conflicts can provide future insights for TMT studies.Meanwhile, the effects of paternalistic leadership have also been underappreciated in Western literature and many aspects of this developmental relationship remain unexplored.One of the unsolved issues is the influence of paternalistic leadership at the TMT level.Thus, there is a need to examine the influences of paternalistic leadership on the TMT process and on the TMT consequence.The study reviews the literature of paternalistic leadership, conflict and TMT, and proposes a theoretical model which links the relationship in between paternalistic leadership, conflict and TMT decision outcomes (i.e.decision quality, commitment consensus to decision, understanding consensus of decision and affective acceptance).The purpose of the study is to test the effect of paternalistic leadership on TMT decision outcomes and the mediating role of conflict between this relationship.We conduct a survey research and collect a sample data of 371 top managers from 78 enterprises in China.Using the statistic method of structural equa-tion modeling (SEM), we test the theoretical model and find most of the hypotheses are supported.First, the results indicate that moral leadership is positively related to decision outcomes, whereas authoritarianism leadership is negatively related to decision outcomes.However, we have not found the positive relationship between benevolent leadership and deci-sion outcomes.Second, the results show that conflicts served as a double edged sword in TMT decision making.Cognitive conflict is positively related to decision outcomes, whereas affective conflict is negatively related to decision outcomes.Finally, Conflicts emerge as a mediator between paternalistic leadership and decision outcomes.Cognitive conflict intermediates moral leadership with decision outcomes, while affective conflict intermediates authoritarianism leadership and benevolent leadership with decision outcomes.We discuss the conclusions and draw some implications for management practices, and also point out some limitations in research methodology.