Leader Power, Conflict Handling Styles, and Subordinate Compliance: A Study on Information Technology Professionals in Turkey
Article Category: Research Article
Published Online: Mar 29, 2018
Page range: 18 - 35
Received: Jul 25, 2017
Accepted: Feb 10, 2018
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/ijme-2018-0003
Keywords
© 2018 Ada T. Cenkci, published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.
Results of the Factor Analysis of the Styles of Handling Conflict with Subordinates Scale
| Handling Conflict With Subordinates (Overall) Cronbach’s Alpha: 0.893 | Factor Loading |
|---|---|
| Usually proposes a middle ground for breaking deadlocks. | 0.858 |
| Collaborates with us to come up with decisions acceptable to us. | 0.856 |
| Negotiates with us so that a compromise can be reached. | 0.852 |
| Tries to work with us to find solutions to a problem that satisfies our expectations. | 0.845 |
| Generally tries to satisfy our needs. | 0.828 |
| Tries to integrate his/her ideas with our ideas to come up with a decision jointly. | 0.827 |
| Tries to investigate an issue with us to find a solution acceptable to us. | 0.826 |
| Tries to work with us for a proper understanding of a problem. | 0.825 |
| Tries to bring all our concerns out in the open so that the issues can be resolved in the best possible way. | 0.822 |
| Exchanges accurate information with us to solve a problem together. | 0.818 |
| Tries to satisfy our expectations. | 0.795 |
| Tries to find a middle course to resolve an impasse. | 0.788 |
| Accommodates our wishes. | 0.761 |
| Uses a “give-and-take” approach so that a compromise can be made. | 0.682 |
| Often goes along with our suggestions. | 0.631 |
| Gives in to our wishes. | 0.553 |
| Tries to stay away from disagreement with us. | 0.835 |
| Avoids an encounter with us. | 0.790 |
| Tries to keep his/her disagreement with us to himself/herself in order to avoid hard feelings. | 0.648 |
| Tries to avoid unpleasant exchanges with us. | 0.567 |
| Attempts to avoid being “put on the spot” and tries to keep his/her conflict with us to himself/herself. | 0.529 |
| Usually allows concessions to us. | 0.526 |
| Sometimes uses his/her power to win a competitive situation. | 0.769 |
| Uses his/her authority to make a decision in his/her favor. | 0.726 |
| Uses his/her expertise to make a decision in his/her favor. | 0.706 |
| Uses his/her influence to get his/her ideas accepted. | 0.701 |
| Is generally firm in pursuing his/her side of the issue. | 0.699 |
Correlations Among Study Variables
| Variables | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| – | 0.662 Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) | –0.062 | 0.375 Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) | 0.767 Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) | 0.401 Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) | –0.512 Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) | 0.425 Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) | ||
| – | –0.013 | 0.255 Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) | 0.668 Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) | 0.315 Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) | –0.435 Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) | 0.275 Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) | |||
| – | 0.322 Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) | –0.104 | –0.144 Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) | 0.279 Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) | 0.069 | ||||
| – | 0.294 Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) | 0.248 Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) | –0.018 0.668 Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) | 0.273 Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) | |||||
| – | 0.576 Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) | –0.615 Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) | 0.304 Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) | ||||||
| – | –0.292 Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) | 0.033 | |||||||
| – –0.127 correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed). | –0.340 Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) | ||||||||
| - | 0.384 Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed) | ||||||||
| - |
Results of the Factor Analysis of Compliance with Supervisor’s Wishes Scale
| Compliance with Supervisor’s Wishes (Overall) Cronbach’s Alpha: 0.870 | Factor Loading |
|---|---|
| I comply with the instructions of my superior. | 0.882 |
| I do what my superior suggests. | 0.859 |
| I follow the work procedures set up by my superior. | 0.850 |
| I like to do what my superior suggests. | 0.836 |
| I comply with the directives of my superior. | 0.814 |
| I prefer to follow the work procedures set up by my superior. | 0.812 |
| I prefer not to comply with the directives of my superior. Reverse-scored items. Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin value: 0.880; Bartlett significance value: 0.000; | 0.915 |
| I don’t like to follow my superior’s orders. Reverse-scored items. Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin value: 0.880; Bartlett significance value: 0.000; | 0.649 |
Descriptive Statistics of the Sample
| Variable | N | Percentage | Mean | Standard Deviation | Range |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | |||||
| Male | 230 | 65.2 | – | – | – |
| Female | 123 | 34.8 | – | – | – |
| Age | – | – | 32.1 | 7.3 | 21–61 years |
| Marital Status | |||||
| Married | 177 | 50.1 | – | – | – |
| Single | 176 | 49.9 | – | – | – |
| Education Level | |||||
| High School | 17 | 4.8 | – | – | – |
| University | 234 | 66.3 | – | – | – |
| Masters’ Degree | 99 | 28.0 | – | – | – |
| PhD | 3 | 0.8 | – | – | – |
| Tenure | – | – | 4.6 | 5.5 | 1–35 years |
| Total Experience | – | – | 9.9 | 7.7 | 1–40 years |
| Position | |||||
| Top Management | 40 | 11.3 | – | – | – |
| Middle Management | 113 | 32.0 | – | – | – |
| Nonsupervisory Employee | 200 | 56.7 | – | – | – |
Results of the Factor Analysis of the Bases of the Leader Power Scale
| Bases of Leader Power (Overall) Cronbach’s Alpha: 0.891 | Factor Loading |
|---|---|
| When a tough job comes up, my superior has the technical “know-how” to get it done. | 0.815 |
| My superior has considerable professional experience to draw from in helping me to do my work. | 0.795 |
| My superior does | 0.790 |
| I prefer to do what my superior suggests because he (she) has high professional expertise. | 0.752 |
| I approach my superior for advice on work-related problems because she (he) is usually right. | 0.733 |
| My superior has specialized training in his (her) field. | 0.713 |
| My superior has a pleasing personality. | 0.682 |
| My superior is | 0.679 |
| I like the personal qualities of my superior. | 0.677 |
| My superior can recommend a promotion for me if my performance is consistently above average. | 0.827 |
| My superior can get me a bonus for earning a good performance rating. | 0.801 |
| My superior can recommend me for merit recognition if my performance is especially good. | 0.757 |
| If I put forth extra effort, my superior can take it into consideration to determine my pay raise. | 0.721 |
| My superior can provide opportunities for my advancement if my work is outstanding. | 0.694 |
| My superior | 0.620 |
| My superior can fire me if I neglect my duties. | 0.842 |
| My superior can fire me if my performance is consistently below standards. | 0.781 |
| My superior can see to it that I get no pay raise if my work is unsatisfactory. | 0.694 |
| My superior can suspend me if I am habitually late in coming to work. | 0.632 |
| My superior can take disciplinary action against me for insubordination. | 0.569 |
| I should do what my superior wants because she (he) is my superior. | 0.804 |
| My superior’s position entitles her (him) to expect support of her (his) policies from me. | 0.702 |
| It is reasonable for my superior to decide what he (she) wants me to do. | 0.627 |
| My superior has the right to expect me to carry out her (his) instructions. | 0.581 |
Means and Standard Deviations of Scales and Subscales
| Scale | Mean | Standard Deviation |
|---|---|---|
| Expert and Referent Power (Factor 1) | 3.877 | 1.232 |
| Reward Power (Factor 2) | 3.547 | 1.239 |
| Coercive Power (Factor 3) | 3.510 | 1.056 |
| Legitimate Power (Factor 4) | 3.611 | 0.962 |
| Cooperative Style (Factor 1) | 3.713 | 1.120 |
| Avoiding Style (Factor 2) | 3.171 | 0.921 |
| Dominating Style (Factor 3) | 3.331 | 1.169 |
| Behavioral Compliance (Factor 1) | 4.184 | 0.913 |
| Attitudinal Compliance (Factor 2) | 4.212 | 1.114 |
Regression Analyses for Compliance with the Supervisor’s Wishes
| Dependent Variable: Behavioral Compliance (Factor 1) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Independent Variables: | Beta | t | p One-tailed |
| Cooperative Style (Factor 1) | 0.274 | 4.629 | |
| Dominating Style (Factor 3) | 0.178 | 3.922 | |
| Expert and Referent Power (Factor 1) | 0.248 | 4.430 | |
| Legitimate Power (Factor 4) | 0.497 | 12.946 | |
| R | |||
| t | p One-tailed | ||
| Avoiding Style (Factor 2) | –0.212 | –4.151 | |
| Dominating Style (Factor 3) | –0.24 | –4.137 | |
| Expert and Referent Power (Factor 1) | 0.310 | 5.097 | |
| Legitimate Power (Factor 4) | 0.205 | 3.987 | |
| R |