IMPACT OF PATERNALISTIC LEADERSHIP ON EMPLOYEE COMMITMENT AND INNOVATIVE WORK BEHAVIOR WITH IDIOSYNCRATIC DEALS AND EMPLOYEE EMPOWERMENT AS MEDIATORS

IMPACT OF PATERNALISTIC LEADERSHIP ON EMPLOYEE
COMMITMENT AND INNOVATIVE WORK BEHAVIOR WITH
IDIOSYNCRATIC DEALS AND EMPLOYEE EMPOWERMENT
AS MEDIATORS
BY
AHMAD HASSAN
1) ROLL #: 19141720-008
2) REGISTRATION #: 15013220457
3) DEGREE PROGRAM: MASTER OF PHILOSPHY (M. PHIL)
4) DEPARTMENT: MANAGEMENT SCIENCES
5) FACULTY: MANAGEMENT & ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCES
6) CAMPUS NAME: HAFIZ HAYAT CAMPUS
7) SUPERVISOR NAME: DR. AYESHA NAZISH
8) DEGREE ENROLLMENT SEMESTER: FALL-2019
9) FIRST TIME THESIS/DISERTATATION ENROLLMENT SEMESTER: FALL-2020
10) FREEZED OR MISSED SEMESTER (IF ANY): NIL
11) SEMESTER IN WHICH SUPERVISOR WAS ALLOTED: FALL-2020
12) EXPECTED THESIS COMPLETION SEMESTER: SPRING-2021
13) DATE OF SYNOPSIS SUBMISSION TO DEPARTMENT: 09-12-2020
Scholar’s Signature Supervisor’s Signature Signature of the Convener DRRC
Signature of the Convener Faculty Board
Date of Submission to Directorate ASRB: ………………………………………………….
Date of Approval by ASRB: …………………………………………………………………

(Page 2 of 19)
1. Description of Research Work
Innovation is a key concern of HR now a days. It is the key requirement for organizational success (Akram,
Lei, Haider, & Hussain, 2018). It gives new ways to do work, to overcome situations, to solve problems
and to make decisions. Dedahanov et al. (2019) claims that PLB and EE promotes innovative work
behaviour of employees. This positive impact can be enhanced by I-deals that are now trending in
manipulating job behaviours of employees. Recent studies conducted by Microsoft Japan on a four-day
working week claims that, not only the employees became happier and satisfied, they became productive
at workplace. These shortened working weeks and flexibility made employees more efficient and
productive at workplace (Paul, 2019). Leadership styles are now playing major roles in organizations and
are proved to be crucial factors for their success. PLB is a practical approach to get maximum out of
employees. According to Hornung, Rouseau, Glaser, Angerer, and Weigh (2011), loyalty and commitment
of employees are major outcomes of PLB. When employees are committed at workplace, their performance
boost ups which ultimately effects the organizational performance positively. This study is conducted to
observe and to describe the role of PLB on employee’s commitment level and how I-deals can mediate this
relationship in pharmaceutical sector. According to PPMA (2017), Pakistan’s pharmaceutical industry is
progressive, vibrant and future oriented. It consists of more than 700 manufacturing units, having 25-
multinational pharmaceutical units working in country. 70% of country’s demand of finished medicines is
been met by this sector and have shown a remarkable growth over last ten years and has export turnover of
more than 12 million and accounts for less than one percent of country’s GDP. To observe this productive
phenomenon of PLB, I-deals, EE, IWB and commitment in such a fast-growing sector can help to develop
positive outcomes for them.
2. Research Gap along with Significance of Research
Innovation in working behaviors is now an emerging trend in organizations while commitment of
employees is one of the crucial need of organization as it leads to better performance (Afsar, Al-Ghazali,
Cheema, & Javed, 2020). All these factors can be affected by the extent of empowerment style of leadership
practiced in organizations (Mahmood, Akhtar, Talat, Shuai, & Hyatt, 2019). According to Saleem, Bhutta,
Nauman, and Zahra (2019), PLB can manipulate innovation in working behavior of employees. Moreover,
I-deals are now prevalent in organizations (Hou, Hong, Zhu, & Zhou, 2019).
A. Kimwolo and Cheruiyot (2019), suggests that EC should also be tested with other management practices
and comprehensive sets of HR development, so in this study, the impact of EE and PLB on EC is tested.
I-deals satisfy both the employers and employees by satisfying the personal needs of employees and
workers (A. Kimwolo & T. Cheruiyot, 2019). According to Jia, Zhou, Zhang, and Jiang (2020), I-deals are

(Page 3 of 19)
studied in healthcare sector and knowledge workers in Germany and US, so there is a need to study the
concept of I-deals in other professions.
Luu and Djurkovic (2019) suggests that the linkage of PLB – I-deals should be tested in other industries
in which I-deals can play a role in enhancing the quality of service and data should be collected from other
countries where PLB is prevalent as in their study they collected data from Republic of Korea. So, the study
is conducted to observe the impact of PLB – I-deals in pharmaceutical sector of Pakistan.
2.1 Problem Statement
Leadership in organizations is trendy in this day and age (Luu & Djurkovic, 2019). It is vitally important
for organizational success, as it removes barriers and foster employees to act independently (Aslam, 2018).
Committed employees are considered to be the major asset for any organization as it helps them to achieve
competitive edge (Pratima, 2019). Hou et al. (2019) claims that, paternalistic leaders usually have
employees committed to them. Moreover, providing employees with I-deals is in fashion now. It amplifies
the IWB of employees (Unler & Kilic, 2019). According to Ho and Tekleab (2016), EE helps to enhance
the commitment of employees. It is a fact in pharmaceutical field that flexibility and empowerment proves
to be a performance booster for the employees as it makes them satisfied and encourages them to perform
more efficiently and effectively (H. K. Laschinger, Read, & Zhu, 2016). The pharmaceutical sector is
among one of the fast-growing sectors of Pakistan. The pharmaceutical employees travel and work at
divergent times in day and night because they have to adjust their working hours as according to doctor’s
schedule who are practicing at various hospitals and HCE’s. The working hours and schedules of physicians
and doctor differ in accordance to their area of specialization. Moreover, the pharmaceutical employees are
sometimes dealt inhumanly by doctors and have to compromise with their self-respect to promote their
products. In this kind of situation, the pharmaceutical employees are in need of support and leadership from
their leaders. However, till now, the concept of I-deals, PLB and empowerment is not implemented properly
and little empirical data exits to check the effect of PLB and I-deals on behaviors of employees. So, in order
to boost up the performance of pharmaceutical employees, there is a need to study the impact of PLB, I-
deals and empowerment on IWB and commitment level of employees. The problem statement of this
research revolves around the statement:
“Impact of PLB on EC & IWB with I-deals and EE as mediators”
2.2 Research Objectives
Following are the objectives of this research
• To investigate the relationship of PLB with empowerment. and I-deals

(Page 4 of 19)
• To investigate the affect of PLB on commitment and on employee’s IWB.
• To investigate the importance of I-deals and to show its relationship with EC and IWB of
employees.
• To investigate the significance of EE and to investigate its relationship with IWB and commitment
level of employees.
• To investigate how the relation of PLB with EC and IWB can be affected by mediating role of I-
deals.
• To investigate how the relationship of PLB with employee’s IWB and EC can be affected by
mediating role of EE.
3. Literature Review
In this section, the constructs of theoretical model are defined and their relationship with each variable is
proved. The first part explains the operational definitions of variables involved in this study and second
part explains about the relationship of each variable with other.
3.1 Operational Definitions
3.1.1 Paternalistic Leadership Behavior
J.L. Farh and Cheng (2000) have defined PLB as a style of leadership that involves combination of
discipline and fatherly kindness. Paternalistic leaders deal their followers with kindness, love, same as the
way a parent loves their children, teaches them about right and wrong, shape their behavior, develop values
and cares for their happiness. Dedahanov, Bozorov, & Sung ( 2019) have used this concept to define PLB
in their study too.
3.1.2 Idiosyncratic deals in Job (I-deals)
According to Hou et al. (2019), I-deals are personalized and voluntary agreements that employees negotiate
with managers and employers regarding working terms that could benefit both. These employment
conditions differ from regular employment conditions experienced by others and are beneficial both for
employer and employee.
3.1.3 Employee Empowerment
According to Denise Rousseau (2015), EE is process to give employees the power, responsibility, authority,
access to resources and the freedom to take decisions to solve problems in organizations. The allocation of
this authority is trust based relationship established among employers and employees.

(Page 5 of 19)
3.1.4 Employee Commitment
According to Paille and Boiral (2013), EC is employee’s psychological state that characterizes relationship
of employee with organization and have implications about decision to be or not to be a part of organization.
Mowday et al. (1979) defines employee commitment as a strength of employee’s identification and
involvement in a certain organization, their acceptance of organizational values, goals, their willingness to
put efforts for organizational progress and their desire to maintain strong relationships with the
organization.
3.1.5 Innovative Work Behavior
IWB is defined as intentional conduction and application of new procedures, ideas, processes in work roles,
jobs, groups and organizations and includes idea generation, promotion and realization (Meyer, Allen, &
Smith, 1993).
3.2 Relational hypotheses
3.2.1 PLB and IWB
IWB is considered as a significant contributor towards organizational performance as it helps organizations
to be competitive in business environment (West & Farr, 1990). Various studies analysed the relationship
between PLB and IWB, their results suggests that, PLB influences the IWB of employees (Gu, Tang, &
Jiang, 2015; Oldham & Cummings, 1996). Zhang, Tsui, and Wang (2011) in their study describes that
paternalistic leaders are kind in nature, they show kindness and gratitude at workplace and cares for their
workers. According to J.L. Farh and B.S. Cheng (2000), the kindness and gratitude shown by paternalistic
leaders promotes hard work and innovation in employees and helps them to take initiatives and to think
creatively thus enhancing innovation in working behavior of employees. This concept can be hypothesized
as follows:
H1: PLB significantly impacts the IWB of employees
3.2.2 PLB and EC
PLB is considered as a typical leadership style for Asian culture having deep roots in Chinese Confucianism
(L. J. L. Farh & B. Cheng, 2000). PLB is considered as an effective way to influence employee behaviors
(Cheng, Chou, Wu, Huang, & Farh, 2004). According to Pellegrini and Scandura (2008), EC is considered
as one of the most important outcome of PLB. Paternalistic leaders treat their employees with care that
fosters emotional attachment and level of identification with organization (Farh et al., 2006). Whenever
employees consider organization as their home and family rather than a company, they feel emotional

(Page 6 of 19)
attachment and commitment due to implicit attribution for the ideal prototypes of leader. This environment
is considered suitable for employees thus their well-being and confidence is enhanced. This concept is
hypothesized as follows:
H2: PLB significantly impacts the commitment level of employees
3.2.3 PLB and I-deals
I-deals are reflectors for the quality and strength of employer-employee relationship (Anwar, 2013).
Leaders having parent like role in organization proffers support and care for employee’s personal and
professional life in exchange of loyalty and compliance that seems to be effective in shaping beneficial I-
deals (Liu, Lee, Hui, Kwan, & Wu, 2013). According to Pellegrini and Scandura (2008), paternalistic
leaders show individualized care for their employees for quality of life and work which creates a bond
between them and employees consider organizations as their second home. It leads towards motivation to
negotiate for work flexibility with their leaders. Furthermore, the kindness and moral values of paternalistic
leaders, their caregiving nature and fairness on I-deals are in tune (Tian & Sanchez, 2017). Thus, this
concept can be hypothesized as follows:
H3: PLB significantly impacts I-deals of employees
3.2.4 PLB and EE
Paternalistic leaders support employees (Anand, Meuser, Vidyarthi, Rousseau, & Srinivas, 2017), and
prefer social exchange relationships with them (K. H. Wang, Chu, & Chu, 2017). The leader’s support
results in enhanced sense of personal power of employees and the feeling to have impact on others is
increased (Crozier, 1964; Loi, Mao, & Ngo, 2009). According to Spreitzer (1995), paternalistic leaders
provides employees with autonomy and opportunity for skill development that boost up self-determination
of employees.. Moreover, these leaders show respect to employees and provides them with autonomy to
carry out routine tasks which makes employees self-determined (Cheng et al., 2004). This concept can be
hypothesized as follows:
H4: PLB significantly impacts the empowerment of employees
3.2.5 I-deals and IWB
Innovation in working ideas are generated to overcome work-related problems (Li, Wu, Johnson, & Wu,
2012), and the employee should be motivated in a way that they display innovation in working behaviors.
One of the most effective way to motivate employees is to approve I-deals (Dorenbosch, Engen, &
Verhagen, 2005). I-deals evoke employee’s internal motivation by fulfilling their personal needs, off the
job demands, flexibility in schedule and freedom in working ways and as a result it evokes innovative and

(Page 7 of 19)
creative thinking (DM Rousseau, 2006). It helps them to explore, generate, popularize and to put these
actions into innovative ideas, processes and procedures. This concept can be hypothesized as follows:
H5: I-deals significantly impacts the IWB of employees
3.2.6 EE and EC
EE is widely recognized as essential contributor for organizational success and many authors have observed
its effect on EC (Janssen, 2004). Various past studies have found that EE has a positive effect on EC
(Gholami, Soltanahmadi, Pashavi, & Nekouei, 2013; Meyerson & Dewettinck, 2012). According to Insan,
Astuti, Raharjo, and Hamid (2013), the empowerment culture at workplace promotes employee’s
commitment. From above discussions, the concept can be hypothesized as follows:
H6: EE significantly impacts the commitment level of employees
3.2.7 I-deals and EC
H. K. S. Laschinger, Finegan, and Shamian (2002) described two reasons for the positive relation of I-deals
and organizational commitment. The first reason is based on justification of studies of Ng and Feldman
(2010) that individuals who perceive contracts as I-deals feel privileged to get valued and rare sources and
these positive emotions strengthens the organizational commitment of employees. According to Hornung
et al. (2009), I-deals enhance the feeling of trust with employers and concretes their relations with them. I-
deals occur as a result of strong relationship among employers and employees and various researchers in
their studies have noted EC as the basic outcome of strong employer-employee relationships (DM
Rousseau, 2005). This concept can be hypothesized as follows:
H7: I-deals significantly impacts the commitment level of employees
3.2.8 EE and IWB
Existing literature supports the concept that when employees are empowered in organizations, the
innovativeness sparks (Ndegwa, 2015). According to Uzunbacak (2015), EE plays a vital and critical role
for employee’s idea fluency. Seibert, Wang, and Courtright (2011) suggested that empowerment boosts up
the innovation and creativity of employees. Amabile (1988) described in their study that, when individuals
feel control over organizational matters, the sense of impact gets increased consequently resulting in
exhibition of innovativeness. This concept can be hypothesized as follows:
H8: EE significantly impacts the IWB of employees

(Page 8 of 19)
3.2.9 PLB and IWB with I-deals as mediator
Dedahanov, Kim, and Rhee (2015) claims that, the kindness and care shown by a paternalistic leader sparks
innovation in employees and aids them to take initiatives in a creative way thus enhancing innovativeness.
According to (Liu et al., 2013), I-deals are considered to be one of the most effective way to enhance
innovativeness. I-deals is been previously used as a mediator by DM Rousseau (2006) in their study
between LMX and work redesign. I-deals enhanced the relationship of LMX and work redesign. So, we
can assume I-deals as a mediator between PLB and IWB. This concept can be hypothesized as follows:
H9: I-deals mediates the relationship between PLB and IWB
3.2.10 PLB and EC with I-deals as mediator
According to Hornung, Rousseau, Weigl, Mueller, and Glaser (2014), moral values of paternalistic leaders,
their caregiving nature and fairness are constituents of I-deals. Anand et al. (2017) claims that, I-deals
enhance the feeling of trust with employers and concretes their relations with them thus promoting EC.
According to DM Rousseau (2005), employees working under paternalistic leaders experience less work-
family conflicts that leads to increase in their level of commitment. Meyer (2016) in their study have used
I-deals as a mediator between employee-oriented leadership and quality of working life. So, in this study,
I-deals is used as a mediator between PLB and EC. This concept can be hypothesized as follows:
H10: I-deals mediates the relationship between PLB and commitment level of employees
3.2.11 PLB and IWB with EE as mediator
IWB is a major factor that enhances organizational performance as it helps them to compete in tough
business environment (Hornung et al., 2011). A number of studies has predicted positive relationship among
PLB and employee’s IWB (Gu et al., 2015; Oldham & Cummings, 1996). Spreitzer (1995) in their study
claims that EE increases the abilities of employees to implement their ideas and opinions that leads to higher
levels IWB of employees. Dedahanov et al., (2019); Seibert et al. (2011) in their study have used EE as
mediator between PLB and IWB. So, in this study, EE is reused as a mediator between PLB and IWB of
employees.
H11: EE mediates the relationship between PLB employee’s IWB
3.2.12 PLB and EC with EE as mediator
PLB is considered effectual to influence employee behaviors (Dedahanov et al., 2019). As discussed above,
PLB significantly impacts EC and empowerment of employees is enhanced due to PLB. Moreover, Chen
et al. (2019) claims that EE promotes EC. H. K. Laschinger et al. (2016) have used EE as mediator between

(Page 9 of 19)
transformational leadership and employee outcomes. In this study, EE is used as mediator between PLB
and EC. This concept can be hypothesized as follows:
H12: EE mediates the relationship between PLB and commitment level of employees.
3.3 Theoretical Framework
Positive emotions are outcomes of positive behaviors as it helps to produce long term optimal functioning
as argued by broaden and build theory of positive emotions (Fredrickson, 2004). Leadership styles are the
cultivators of emotions within organizations and flexibility is considered as a booster for positive emotions.
One of the most positive behavior shown by employees at work place is EC and innovation in working
behavior is considered as an optimal functioning of employee. This study is based on the concept of
broaden and build theory in a way that PLB produces positivity in employees and flexibility and
empowerment are proven as fuel to enhance positive emotions
3.4 Research Model
Paternalistic
Leadership Behavior
Idiosyncratic deals
Innovative work
behavior
H12
Paternalistic
Leadership Behavior
Innovative work
behavior
Employee
Commitment
t
Employee
Empowerment
H8
H2
H4
H5
In
P
a
t
e
r
n
al
is
ti
c
L
e
a
d
e
rs
hi
p
B
e
h
a
vi
o
r
H6
H7
H8
H1
H9
c
H10
H11 H12
H3

(Page 10 of 19)
4. Methodology
In section of Methodology, population, sample design, sampling technique, sample size, data analysis
techniques and instrument of data collection are discussed.
4.1 Population
The target population of this research are pharmaceutical employees working at various designations in
pharmaceutical companies. However, the sampled population of this study are the employees of
pharmaceutical companies working within Gujranwala Division (Gujrat, Kharian, Gujranwala,
MandiBahuDin)
4.2 Sample Design
4.2.1 Sampling Technique
According to Olsen and St George (2004), cluster sampling technique is used to collect sample from
respondents when mutually homogenous but internally heterogenous groups are evident in population.
Ahmed (2009), in their report claims that there are approximately 760 pharmaceutical companies working
in Pakistan each having its franchisers and sole distributors in each division and mutually homogenous but
internally heterogenous groups are evident in pharmaceutical sector. As it would be too time consuming
and costly to collect the data from employees of 760 pharmaceutical companies in Gujranwala division so
we have divided our target population into three clusters of districts and data will be collected from
employees of 10 pharmaceutical companies from each cluster (district) Gujrat, Gujranwala and
Mandibahudin.
4.2.2 Sample Size
According to a report published by PPMA (2017), there are more than 150,000 employees working in
pharmaceutical industry of Pakistan. To determine the sample size for our study, the average of outcomes
of two techniques is taken that are described below.
• Firstly, the sample is taken by multiplying the total number of items of all constructs with ten
(Munro, 2012). So, according to this procedure, the sample size determined is 740 (i.e.,74 item x
10 = 740).
• Secondly, the formula given by Yamane (1973) is used to calculate sample size that was also used
by Osahon & Kingsley (2016) to calculate sample size. The procedure is as follows:

(Page 11 of 19)
N
1 + Ne2
150,000
1+ 150,000(0.05)2
399
By taking average of these two figures:
740+399
2
570
So, the sample size for this study will be 570, based on the average taken of outcomes of two methods.
4.3 Data Analysis Techniques
For Descriptive statistics, SPSS 21 will be used to check frequency, mean, Standard deviation to explain
demographic profile of respondents. To check the model fitness, reliability and validity will be assessed.
For reliability tests, Cronbach’s alpha value will be used. For checking the validity of the instrument,
confirmatory factor analysis will be used through AMOS. However, path analysis will be used for the
verification of hypotheses.
4.4 Instrument of Study
For this study, data will be collected through questionnaires The Questionnaire consists of two parts.
Section A
The section A of questionnaire asks about the demographic profile of respondents that includes age, gender,
designation and name of organization
Section B
The section B of questionnaire includes five set of questions for five variables
n =
n =
n =
n =
n =

(Page 12 of 19)
Table 1: Constructs
Constructs Sources Items
PLB Cheng, Chou, and Wu (2004) 25
EC Mowday et al. (1979) 15
EE Lim, Lim, Lim, Moh, and Phua (2013) 12
I-deals Miller (2015) 16
IWB Dedahanov, Bozorov, & Sung (2019) 6
Total Number of Items 74
Keywords: PLB (Paternalistic leadership behavior), EC (Employee commitment), EE (Employee
empowerment), IWB ((Innovative work behavior), I-deals (Idiosyncratic deals in job)
5. References

(Page 13 of 19)
1. Afsar, B., Al-Ghazali, B. M., Cheema, S., & Javed, F. (2020). Cultural intelligence and innovative
work behavior: the role of work engagement and interpersonal trust. European Journal of
Innovation Management.
2. Ahmed, S. (2009). cluster sampling.
3. Akram, T., Lei, S., Haider, M. J., & Hussain, S. T. (2018). Exploring the impact of knowledge
sharing on the innovative work behavior of employees: A study in China. International Business
Research, 11(3), 186-194.
4. Al-Madadha, A., Al-Adwan, A. S., Alrousan, M. K., & Jalghoum, Y. A. (2019). Organisational
climate and team performance: the mediating role of psychological empowerment at Jordanian
pharmaceutical companies. International Journal of Management Practice, 12(2), 228-245.
5. Alkhodary, D. (2016). The Relationship between Employees’ Empowerment and Innovative Work
Behavior. International Journal of Managerial Studies
6. Research Journal of Social Science , Management Decision, 4(2), 1-15.
7. Amabile, T. M. (1988). A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. Research in
organizational behavior, 10(1), 123-167.
8. Anand, S., Meuser, J. D., Vidyarthi, P. R., Rousseau, D. M., & Srinivas, E. (2017). I-deal makers
in workgroups: Multi-level effects of leader fairness and i-deal distribution. Paper presented at the
Academy of Management Proceedings.
9. Anwar, H. (2013). Impact of paternalistic leadership on employees’ outcome–A study on the
banking sector of Pakistan. IOSR Journal of Business Management 7(6), 109-115.
10. Aparna. (2020). Employee Empowerment. Retrieved from Economic Discussions website:
https://www.economicsdiscussion.net/human-resource-management/employee-
empowerment/31827
11. Aslam, M. (2018). Current trends and issues affecting academic libraries and leadership skills.
Library Management.
12. Chen, Y., Zhou, X., & Klyver, K. (2019). Collective efficacy: Linking paternalistic leadership to
organizational commitment. Journal of Business Ethics, 159(2), 587-603.
13. Cheng, B. S., Chou, L. F., Wu, T. Y., Huang, M. P., & Farh, J. L. (2004). Paternalistic leadership
and subordinate responses: Establishing a leadership model in Chinese organizations. Asian
Journal of Social Psychology, 7(1), 89-117.
14. Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., & LePine, J. A. (2007). Trust, trustworthiness, and trust propensity:
A meta-analytic test of their unique relationships with risk taking and job performance. Journal of
applied psychology, 92(4), 909.
15. Crozier, M. (1964). The Bureaucratic Phenomenon, University of Chicago Press. In: Chicago.

(Page 14 of 19)
16. Dedahanov, A. T., Bozorov, F., & Sung, S. (2019a). Paternalistic leadership and innovative
behavior: Psychological empowerment as a mediator. Sustainability, 11(6), 1770.
17. Dedahanov, A. T., Bozorov, F., & Sung, S. J. S. (2019b). Paternalistic leadership and innovative
behavior: Psychological empowerment as a mediator. 11(6), 1770.
18. Dedahanov, A. T., Kim, C., & Rhee, J. (2015). Centralization and communication opportunities
as predictors of acquiescent or prosocial silence. Social Behavior Personality: an international
journal, 43(3), 481-492.
19. Dorenbosch, L., Engen, M. L. v., & Verhagen, M. (2005). On‐the‐job innovation: The impact of
job design and human resource management through production ownership. Creativity innovation
management 14(2), 129-141.
20. Erkutlu, H., & Chafra, J. (2016). Benevolent leadership and psychological well-being. Leadership
organization development journal.
21. Farh, J.-L., & Cheng, B.-S. (2000). A cultural analysis of paternalistic leadership in Chinese
organizations. In Management and organizations in the Chinese context (pp. 84-127): Springer.
22. Farh, J., Cheng, B., Chou, L., Chu, X., Tsui, A., Bian, Y., & Cheng, L. (2006). China’s domestic
private firms: Multidisciplinary perspectives on management and performance.
23. Farh, L. J. L., & Cheng, B. (2000). Paternalistic leadership in Chinese organizations: a cultural
analysis. indigenous Psychological Research in Chinese Societies, 13, 127.
24. Gholami, Z., Soltanahmadi, J. A., Pashavi, G., & Nekouei, S. (2013). Empowerment as a basic
step in upgrading organizational commitment and organizational citizenship behaviors: A Case
study on public sector in Iran. World Applied Sciences Journal, 21(11), 1693-1698.
25. Göncü, A., Aycan, Z., & Johnson, R. E. (2014). Effects of paternalistic and transformational
leadership on follower outcomes. International Journal of Business Management, 5(1), 36-58.
26. Gu, Q., Tang, T. L.-P., & Jiang, W. (2015). Does moral leadership enhance employee creativity?
Employee identification with leader and leader–member exchange (LMX) in the Chinese context.
Journal of Business Ethics, 126(3), 513-529.
27. Ho, V. T., & Tekleab, A. G. (2016). A model of idiosyncratic deal-making and attitudinal
outcomes. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 642-656. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-12-
2014-0369
28. Hornung, S., Rouseau, D. M., Glaser, J., Angerer, P., & Weigl, M. (2011). Employee-oriented
leadership and quality of working life: Mediating roles of idiosyncratic deals. Psychological
Reports, 108(1), 59-74.

(Page 15 of 19)
29. Hornung, S., Rousseau, D. M., & Glaser, J. (2009). Why supervisors make idiosyncratic deals:
Antecedents and outcomes of i‐deals from a managerial perspective. Journal of Managerial
Psychology.
30. Hornung, S., Rousseau, D. M., Weigl, M., Mueller, A., & Glaser, J. (2014). Redesigning work
through idiosyncratic deals. European Journal of Work Organizational Psychology, 23(4), 608-
626.
31. Hou, B., Hong, J., Zhu, K., & Zhou, Y. (2019). Paternalistic leadership and innovation: the
moderating effect of environmental dynamism. European Journal of Innovation Management, 22
(3), 562-582 doi:10.1108/EJIM-07-2018-0141
32. Insan, A., Astuti, E. S., Raharjo, K., & Hamid, D. (2013). The effect of empowerment of the
organizational commitment and the job satisfaction of the employees of the National Electricity
Company (Ltd.) in South Sulawesi Province Indonesia. Asian transactions on basic applied
sciences, 3(4), 13-23.
33. Janssen, O. (2004). How fairness perceptions make innovative behavior more or less stressful.
Journal of organizational behavior, 25(2), 201-215.
34. Jia, J., Zhou, S., Zhang, L., & Jiang, X. (2020). Exploring the influence of paternalistic leadership
on voice behavior. Employee Relations: The International Journal.
35. Kimwolo, A., & Cheruiyot, T. (2019). Intrinsically motivating idiosyncratic deals and innovative
work behaviour. International Journal of Innovation Science, 11(1), 31-47. doi:10.1108/IJIS-05-
2017-0038
36. Kimwolo, A., & Cheruiyot, T. J. I. J. o. I. S. (2019). Intrinsically motivating idiosyncratic deals
and innovative work behaviour.
37. Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities.
Educational psychological measurement, 30(3), 607-610.
38. Krishnan, & Venkat. (2012). Transformational leadership and personal outcomes: empowerment
as mediator. Leadership Organization Development Journal.
39. Laschinger, H. K., Read, E., & Zhu, J. (2016). Employee empowerment and organizational
commitment. In Handbook of Employee Commitment: Edward Elgar Publishing.
40. Laschinger, H. K. S., Finegan, J., & Shamian, J. (2002). The impact of workplace empowerment,
organizational trust on staff nurses' work satisfaction and organizational commitment. In Advances
in health care management: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
41. Li, C., Wu, K., Johnson, D. E., & Wu, M. (2012). Moral leadership and psychological
empowerment in China. Journal of Managerial Psychology.

(Page 16 of 19)
42. Liao, C., Wayne, S., & Rousseau, D. M. (2016). Idiosyncratic deals in contemporary
organizations: A qualitative and meta-analytical review. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 37.
doi:10.1002/job.1959
43. Lim, J. Y., Lim, P. S., Lim, Y. X., Moh, H. M., & Phua, W. K. (2013). Organization attractiveness
and employees’ commitment: An empirical study on Malaysian banks. UTAR,
44. Liu, J., Lee, C., Hui, C., Kwan, H. K., & Wu, L.-Z. (2013). Idiosyncratic deals and employee
outcomes: The mediating roles of social exchange and self-enhancement and the moderating role
of individualism. Journal of applied psychology, 98(5), 832.
45. Loi, R., Mao, Y., & Ngo, H. y. (2009). Linking leader‐member exchange and employee work
outcomes: The mediating role of organizational social and economic exchange. Management
Organization Review, 5(3), 401-422.
46. Luu, T. T., & Djurkovic, N. (2019). Paternalistic leadership andidiosyncratic deals in a healthcare
context. Management Decision, 57, 621-648. doi: 10.1108/MD-06-2017-0595
47. Mahmood, A., Akhtar, M. N., Talat, U., Shuai, C., & Hyatt, J. C. (2019). Specific HR practices
and employee commitment: the mediating role of job satisfaction. Employee Relations: The
International Journal.
48. Meyer, J. P. (2016). Handbook of employee commitment: Edward Elgar Publishing.
49. Meyer, J. P., Allen, N. J., & Smith, C. A. (1993). Commitment to organizations and occupations:
Extension and test of a three-component conceptualization. Journal of applied psychology, 78(4),
538.
50. Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnytsky, L. (2002). Affective, continuance,
and normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, and
consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61(1), 20-52.
51. Meyerson, G., & Dewettinck, B. (2012). Effect of empowerment on employees performance.
Advanced Research in Economic Management Sciences, 2(1), 40-46.
52. Miller, M. (2015). Relationships Between Job Design, Job Crafting, Idiosyncratic Deals, and
Psychological Empowerment.
53. Mowday, R. T., Steers, R. M., & Porter, L. W. (1979). The measurement of organizational
commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14(2), 224–247
54. MR, J. (1994). The Velvet Glove: Paternalism and Conflict in Gender, Class, and Race Relations,
Retrieved from Berkeley, CA.
55. Munro, B. H. (2012). Statistical methods for health care research (5th ed. Vol. 1): lippincott
williams & wilkins.

(Page 17 of 19)
56. Ndegwa, T. (2015). Perceived relationship between employee empowerment and organizational
performance among commercial banks in Kenya. University of Nairobi,
57. Ng, T. W., & Feldman, D. C. (2010). Idiosyncratic deals and organizational commitment. Journal
of Vocational Behavior, 76(3), 419-427.
58. Oldham, G. R., & Cummings, A. (1996). Employee creativity: Personal and contextual factors at
work. Academy of management journal, 39(3), 607-634.
59. Olsen, C., & St George, D. (2004). Cross-sectional study design and data analysis. 26(03), 2006.
Retrieved from College Board website: www.collegeboard.com
60. Osahon, O. J., & Kingsley, O. (2016). Statistical approach to the link between internal service
quality and employee job satisfaction: A case study. American Journal of Applied Mathematics
and Statistics, 4(6), 178-184.
61. Paillé, P., & Boiral, O. (2013). Pro-environmental behavior at work: Construct validity and
determinants. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 36, 118-128.
62. Paul, K. (Producer). (2019, November 4). The Upside. The Guardian. Retrieved from
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/nov/04/microsoft-japan-four-day-work-week-
productivity
63. Pellegrini, E. K., & Scandura, T. A. (2008). Paternalistic leadership: A review and agenda for
future research. Journal of management, 34(3), 566-593.
64. PPMA. (2017). Pakistan Pharmaceutical Industry Retrieved from http://www.ppma.org.pk/wp-
content/uploads/2017/09/Final-Report-Pharma-Industry_August-10.pdf
65. Rousseau, D. (2005). I-Deals: Idiosyncratic Deals Employees Bargain for Themselves, . ME
Sharp.
66. Rousseau, D. (2006). The shift in risk from employers to workers in the new employment
relationship. America at work: Choices & challenges, 153-172.
67. Rousseau, D. (2015). I-deals: Idiosyncratic Deals Employees Bargain for Themselves (2 ed.).
Newyork Routledge.
68. Saleem, M. A., Bhutta, Z. M., Nauman, M., & Zahra, S. J. I. J. o. B. M. (2019). Enhancing
performance and commitment through leadership and empowerment.
69. Seibert, S. E., Wang, G., & Courtright, S. H. (2011). Antecedents and consequences of
psychological and team empowerment in organizations: A meta-analytic review. Journal of
applied psychology, 96(5), 981.
70. Spreitzer, G. M. (1995). Psychological empowerment in the workplace: Dimensions,
measurement, and validation. Academy of management Journal, 38(5), 1442-1465.

(Page 18 of 19)
71. Tian, Q., & Sanchez, J. (2017). Does paternalistic leadership promote innovative behavior? The
interaction between authoritarianism and benevolence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology,
47(5), 235-246.
72. UKEssays. (2020). Employee Commitment to an Organisation. Retrieved from
https://www.ukessays.com/essays/management/employee-commitment-to-an-
organisation.php#citethis
73. Ünler, E., & Kılıç, B. (2019). Paternalistic leadership and employee organizational attitudes: The
role of positive/negative affectivity. SAGE Open, 9(3), 2158244019862665.
74. Uzunbacak, H. H. (2015). THE IMPACTS OF EMPLOYEE EMPOWERMENT ON
INNOVATION: A SURVEY ON ISPARTA AND BURDUR ORGANIZED INDUSTRIAL
ZONES. Journal of International Social Research, 8(37).
75. Wang, A. C., & Cheng, B. S. (2010). When does benevolent leadership lead to creativity? The
moderating role of creative role identity and job autonomy. Journal of Organizational Behavior,
31(1), 106-121.
76. Wang, K. H., Chu, S. C., & Chu, T. Y. (2017). Employee Engagement; Tool of Talent Retention:
Study of a Pharmaceutical Company. Oncotarget, 8(37), 61133-61145.
doi:10.18632/oncotarget.18024
77. West, M. A., & Farr, J. L. (1990). Innovation and creativity at work: Psycological and
organizational strategies: John Wiley.
78. Yamane, T. (1967). Elementary sampling theory.
79. Zhang, A. Y., Tsui, A. S., & Wang, D. X. (2011). Leadership behaviors and group creativity in
Chinese organizations: The role of group processes. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(5), 851-862

(Page 19 of 19)
APPENDIX A
Turnitin Originality Report
Tested on 9 December 9, 2020, by Turnitin Anti Plagiarism Software Provided by Higher
Education Commission of Pakistan to the Instructors of University of Gujrat, Punjab, Pakistan
Synopsis Title:
Scholar’s Name: Ahmad Hassan
Institution: University of Gujrat
PRIMARY SOURCES
SIMILARITY INDEX INTERNET
SOURCE
PUBLICATIONS STUDENT PAPERS
12% 6% 5% 7%
Internet Source 6%
1. global.oup.com
2. journals.sagepub.com
3. emeraldinsight.com
Publications 5%
1. Ela Ünler, Bülent Kılıç. "Paternalistic Leadership and Employee Organizational Attitudes: The Role of
Positive/Negative Affectivity", SAGE Open, 2019
2. Ning Sun, Haiyan Song, Haiyan Kong, Naipeng Bu. "Development and validation of a hospitality
idiosyncratic deals scale", International Journal of Hospitality Management, 2019
Student Papers 7%
1. Submitted to Higher Education Commission Pakistan
2. Submitted to Higher Education Commission Pakistan
Impact of Paternalistic leadership on Employee Commitment and
Innovative work behavior with I-Deals & Employee Empowerment as Mediators

IMPACT OF PATERNALISTIC LEADERSHIP ON EMPLOYEE COMMITMENT AND INNOVATIVE WORK BEHAVIOR WITH IDIOSYNCRATIC DEALS AND EMPLOYEE EMPOWERMENT AS MEDIATORS

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to IMPACT OF PATERNALISTIC LEADERSHIP ON EMPLOYEE COMMITMENT AND INNOVATIVE WORK BEHAVIOR WITH IDIOSYNCRATIC DEALS AND EMPLOYEE EMPOWERMENT AS MEDIATORS

Similar to IMPACT OF PATERNALISTIC LEADERSHIP ON EMPLOYEE COMMITMENT AND INNOVATIVE WORK BEHAVIOR WITH IDIOSYNCRATIC DEALS AND EMPLOYEE EMPOWERMENT AS MEDIATORS (20)

More from MehranMouzam

More from MehranMouzam (10)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

IMPACT OF PATERNALISTIC LEADERSHIP ON EMPLOYEE COMMITMENT AND INNOVATIVE WORK BEHAVIOR WITH IDIOSYNCRATIC DEALS AND EMPLOYEE EMPOWERMENT AS MEDIATORS