The relationship between compulsory citizenship behavior and leadership: a research by accommodation businesses

Abstract

Purpose-Compulsory citizenship behaviour (CCB) is a disparate and new topic recently presented in management literature. Organizational citizenship behaviours (OCB), being expected to have positive impact on organizational success, having been transformed to CCB as a result of various administrative and social pressures may cause several negative results due to employers and organization. The basic problem of studying within this framework is to reveal the relation between compulsory citizenship behaviour (CCB) -being evolved from volunteering to obligation (Vigoda-Gadot, 2006)-and leadership styles by focusing on the negative effects of CCB within the organization. The primary objective of our research is to establish a general framework for Compulsory citizenship behaviour in accommodation businesses sector of Turkey and to present a perspective on how leadership affects compulsory citizenship behaviour. In this way, it is aimed to provide a perspective to leaders to develop solution proposals. Methodolgy-A five-item scale is benefited in the study, which is adapted by Compulsory Citizenship Behaviour Scale (CCBS) of Gadot (2007) in order to evaluate the compulsory citizenship behaviours of the participants. Within this scope, three hypotheses are tested based on the theoretical implications of the variables in our study. Findings-The findings acquired within the study indicate that compulsory citizenship behaviour (CCB) has a positive relation with despotic leadership while CCB has negative relations with transformative leadership and rewarding leadership. Additionally; there is a positive and significant relationship between transformative leadership and rewarding leadership while a negative relation is revealed with despotic relation. There is a negative relationship found between despotic leadership and rewarding leadership. By evaluating the findings of regression analysis in general; it is understood that compulsory citizenship behaviour (CCB) is quite effective to explain despotic leadership, a style of leadership that is often described as negative by employees. The environment in which CCB is developed can be achieved more easily via this leadership style. Besides; though it has negative effect on rewarding leadership style, the mentioned effect is limited. In this context; CCB is suggested to have significant effect on leading styles. Conclusion-By analysing the findings; despotic leadership has a significant impact on CCB. In the context of the study; while the negative impact of transformative leadership on CCB is detected, it is surprising that the same negative impact of rewarding leading style is limited on CCB.

Systems Shift: Creating and Navigating Change in Rhetoric and Composition Administration

“…Whether administrators choose or feel obligated to work excessively, workaholism and overwork often leads to compulsory citizenship behavior (CCB). CCB is also called the good soldier syndrome, where employees place the needs of the organization above their own needs for the "good" of the organization (Hayat et al, 2019;Soran et al, 2017;Vigoda-Gadot, 2006). For example, if an administrator is burned out but feels they must attend all meetings they are invited to for the good of students, faculty, their program, the department, etc., this is a sign of the good soldier syndrome.…”

Effect of supervisors’ stress on subordinates’ unethical behavior: moderating role of managers’ despotic leadership

“…Despotic leaders want to own, control and manipulate their subordinates as they are bossy (Aronson, 2001; De Hoogh and Den Hartog, 2008). Despotic leaders are found to have an aggressive and unfair attitude (Soran et al , 2017); they exploit those they control for their interests and gain and want unquestionable compliance (Schilling, 2009). Such leaders are morally corrupt (Naseer et al , 2016), require dominance and supremacy (Erkutlu and Chafra, 2018) and are disregarded (van Prooijen and de Vries, 2016).…”

When leader is morally corrupt: interplay of despotic leadership and self-concordance on moral emotions and bullying behavior

“…Second, the despotic leader has an oppressive and aggressive attitude (Soran et al, 2017) and such behavior can produce anger, disgust and contempt among followers toward the source. Then, followers engage in bullying behavior such as " making fun of or joking about the person in a way he/she does not like" (one item from Thornberg and Jungert's scale).…”

“…Despotic individuals hold advantages over others concerning their leadership emergence. The despotic leaders are bossy, (Aronson, 2001;De Hoogh and Den Hartog, 2008), desperately want to own, control and manipulate others (Carstarphen, 2018), have an oppressive and aggressive attitude (Soran et al, 2017), require unquestioned submission and exploit their subordinates for personal gains (Schilling, 2009), are morally corrupt (Naseer et al, 2016), strive for gaining supremacy and dominance (Erkutlu and Chafra, 2018), are concerned about their own needs, i.e. money, power and adulation (Friedman, 2016) and marginalized (van Prooijen and de Vries, 2016).…”