CC BY-NC-ND
64
Original article
DOI: 10.17323/1999-5431-2022-0-5-45-64
EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP BEHAVIORS FOR PUBLIC SERVANTS' POSITIVE MOOD, SATISFACTION AND ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT: EVIDENCE FROM VIETNAM
1 Mai Ngoc Khuong,
2 Tran Phuong Mai
1 2 Center for Public Administration, School of Business, International University, HCMC, Vietnam; Vietnam National University, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. Quarter 6, Linh Trung Ward, Thu Duc District, HCMC, Vietnam
1 Ph.D., Associate professor, Lecturer; mnkhuong@hcmiu.edu.vn; ORCID: 0000-0002-0527-3046 (Corresponding author)
2 phuongmai872@gmail.com; ORCID: 0000-0001-6835-7717
Abstract. The study aims to examine the correlations among leadership styles, employee job satisfaction, positive moods, and organizational commitment in the public sector in Vietnam. A quantitative approach was implemented using partial least square structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM). The questionnaire was distributed to 457 respondents working in public agencies in seven southern provinces of Vietnam. The findings concluded that three leadership styles (task-oriented, relation-oriented, change-oriented) directly predicted positive moods, but only task-oriented and change-oriented leadership directly affected employee job satisfaction. Further associations were also confirmed, including the positive effects of positive mood and job satisfaction on organizational commitment. Consequently, the indirect influences between the independent variables (leadership styles) were also indicated. Perceiving the significance of organizational commitment as well as job satisfaction and positive moods from the empirical results, public leaders are able to establish their own appropriate strategies and policies to improve organizational performance in the public sector. Moreover, this article would provide a basis for further analyses in public administration, as this paper is one of the very first leading academic studies in Vietnam public sector.
Keywords: public sector, public leaders, public servant, positive mood, organizational commitment, public leadership behavior, Vietnam public administration.
For citation: Khuong, M. N. and Mai, T. P. (2022) 'Effective leadership behaviors for public servants' positive mood, satisfaction and organizational commitment: Evidence from Vietnam, Public Administration Issues, 5 (Special Issue II, electronic edition), pp. 45-64 (in English). DOI: 10.17323/1999-5431-2022-0-5-45-64.
Introduction
The purpose of the current study is to provide a better understanding of leadership behaviours in the relationship with public servants' mood, satisfaction, and organizational commitment. Leadership itself plays a pivotal role no matter what type of organization (Wart, 2003) in fostering employee creativity, job satisfaction, personal development, and work-related behaviours such as organizational commitment. In public administration today, due to the complex demands of stakeholders, the public leader was considered as a primary vehicle in producing public value by determining the challenges and problems, developing appropriate solutions, and communicating the outcomes. The influence of leadership on organizational commitment and job satisfaction was also supported by some recent studies (G and K, 2016).
The significance of organizational commitment on organizational variables was commonly demonstrated as the impacts on organizational performance as an antecedent and as a mediator. Organizational commitment has been widely explored for a long time (Cook and Wall, 1980); however, there are few articles addressing this concept in developing countries, especially in the public sector. While most outstanding studies about the organizational commitment of public administration conducted in developed countries such as the United States and Greece (Markovits et al., 2007), there have been few studies conducted in the public sector of developing countries (Addae et al., 2008). Therefore, it is advocated to conduct organizational commitment research in developing countries to increase the generalisability and accuracy. Similarly, job satisfaction has always been an attractive concern to academic researchers. Some differences were found in the analysis of employee satisfaction between the private and public sectors in the early stages (DeSantis and Durst, 1996). Later, they demonstrated that management philosophy influenced job satisfaction, in terms of as fairness, loyalty, leadership style, training and development (Voon et al., 2011). However, there is still a need to link different leadership behaviours, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment instead of focusing on only transactional and transformational leadership in the public sector (Asencio, 2016).
Context of public administration in Vietnam
Before considering each variable, it is important to understand and interpret the structure of public administration in Vietnam. Vietnam is a one-party, unitary state with the Communist Party of Vietnam leading the whole country.
In 1986 a remarkable public sector reform (PSR) took place, transforming the entire Vietnam from a nation suffering from food shortage to the second largest exporter of rice in the world. The public and private sectors support each other in different aspects in order to contribute to the socio-economic development of a country. Fox et al. (2002) divided the role of the public sector into four main categories: mandating, facilitating, partnering, and endorsing to assist business organization performance. However, it is undeniable that the public sector in Vietnam attracts little interest from researchers. Therefore, it is desirableto conduct an analysis of leadership and organizational commitment in the public sector to obtain meaningful results for appropriate recommendations and implications for leaders in the public sector to address current problems issues and develop potential strengths.
The lack of research in the public administration is the main source of motivation to carry out this study in order to have a deeper understanding of the organizational commitment. There is also a call for scrutinizing leadership behaviours and their positive impacts on public organizations (G and K, 2016). Hence, this article investigates whether leadership styles (task-oriented, relation-oriented, change-oriented) are related to public employees' positive mood, job satisfaction and organizational commitment. The current study is proudly one of the leading studies in Vietnam addressing leadership behaviours in the public sector. The findings of this article could be the principles and premises for other scholars to develop and expand the research model to provide supportive recommendations for management levels and strengthen the operation of public agencies.
Literature review
Leadership styles
Leadership theory is a multidisciplinary field of research with many facets including traits, skills, or behaviours (Wart, 2003). Therefore, interpretation of this complex concept would shed a new light on academic research and provide pragmatic insights for practitioners. One of the neglected challenges in examining leadership theory is the changing contexts. After a decade, Wart (2013) highlighted the developments in a historical, cultural, economic and political context, which has been creating emergent pressures on leaders in public sector. In parallel with these evolutions, there was an increase in the number of public journals and articles, which indicated the vital role of leadership in public administration and the growing awareness of leadership theory. Exceptionally, transactional and transformational leadership styles have prevailed in many studies of leadership behavior to date (Werder and Holtzhausen, 2009).
The diversity of leadership styles in definitions and implications has raised the interest of scholars worldwide in both private and public industries. Hansen and Villadsen (2010) pointed out the differences between the leadership styles of public and private sector managers resulting from individual job contexts such as job complexity, role clarity, and job autonomy. Moreover, the determinants of leadership style on organizational performance are also attractive to ac-
ademic researchers. Ohemeng et al. (2018) demonstrated the significant effects of leadership styles on the relationship between leaders and team members, and employee performance. Leadership behaviours provide a role model to increase the collaboration and relationship among employees in order to gain collective goals and foster creative ideas (Men and Stacks, 2013). Despite a variety of leadership styles, Fernandez et al. (2010) defined a new concept of integrated leadership, which was the combination of five essential leadership styles including task-oriented leadership, relations-oriented leadership, change-oriented leadership, diversity-oriented leadership, and integrity-oriented leadership. This integrated leadership was concluded to be positively associated with organizational performance in public administration. Therefore, the current study will focus on three leadership styles: task-oriented leadership, relation-oriented leadership, and change-oriented leadership, which were considered integral to leadership success.
Task-oriented leadership
According to Schmid (2008), task-oriented leaders are those who emphasize planning, administration, and decision-making for organizational goals with a high degree of control and supervision but a low tolerance for rules and processes. In general, several positive effects of task-oriented leadership have been indicated in a wide range of contexts such as the impacts on group efficacy and positivism of group members in education (Tabernero et al., 2009), job satisfaction in health care (Havig et al., 2011), organizational commitment in public administration (Moldogaziev and Silvia, 2014), and employee motivation in auditing companies (Mai and Dang, 2015). Similarly, Fernandez (2008) also pointed out the positive correlation between task-oriented leadership and perceptions of performance. However, the article disputed the positive effect on job satisfaction as some experts believed that employees perceived task-oriented leaders to be directive, authoritarian, and impersonal. Furthermore, it was suggested to combine task-oriented and socio-emotional leadership to be more effective in the implementation and increase the perceptions of both leaders and subordinates (Casimir and Ngee Keith Ng, 2010). On the other hand, Zhao et al. (2016) highlighted the necessity of adopting both task-oriented and relationship-oriented leadership to increase productivity and performance. Along with the substantial impacts of task-oriented leadership, some predictors have also been studied to interpret and implement this leadership style. Engelbert and Wallgren (2016) argued about the relationship between early experience and task-oriented leadership style. Meanwhile, a personality trait such as conscientiousness was identified to be related to task-oriented leadership (De Vries, 2012) and supervisors managerial self-efficacy positively affected task-oriented leadership behaviours (Ju et al., 2019).
Relationship-oriented leadership
Relationship-oriented leadership was summarized as leaders who provide recognition, kindness, and respect for the contributions of their subordinates (Ehrhart and Klein, 2001). Relationship-oriented leaders were described with
appreciation as they create friendly and supportive environments, encourage for creativity, and respect followers' values. Owing to the distinct advantages of this leadership, relationship-oriented leadership is currently and mostly preferred by new generation employees (Ren et al., 2018).
While task-oriented leadership styles influence group efficacy and positivism, relationship-oriented leadership increases group cohesion (Tabernero et al., 2009). In addition, it was also concluded to have a significant effect on the self-oriented dimension of Leader-Member Exchange (Ruzgar, 2018). The scholar also emphasized the importance of the different effects of each type of leadership that should be understood not only by leaders but also by subordinates in order to be productive and beneficial. Henkel et al. (2019) also confirmed that both task-oriented and relationship-oriented leadership are beneficial depending on the situation and purpose, and in some cases even the combination was recommended (Zhao et al., 2016).
Changeoriented leadership
Yukl (2002) defined change-oriented leadership behaviours as innovation and flexibility to adapt to change and developing strategic decisions for changes and renovation, which is considered critical in a rapidly developing world. Numerous consequences have been discovered over the decades. The positive association between change-oriented leadership and psychological safety, team learning, and team performance was found in the healthcare industry (Ortega et al., 2013). Similarly, other effects of change-oriented leadership on company performance (Siren et al., 2016), job involvement, work performance, job satisfaction (Mikkelsen and Olsen, 2018), and organisational commitment (Moldogaziev and Silvia, 2014) have been found in different cases and domains.
In Vietnam's public administration, leaders believe that managing change is the priority factor in leadership competence . It was confirmed in the research of Mai and Ta (2018) that besides the adaptability with task requirements, leaders need to control changes inside and outside the organization. In comparison with the private sector, while most people believe that business leaders are more change-oriented than public managers, Andersen (2010) concluded that in fact, public sector leaders are more change-oriented than business leaders. In the article the causes for this difference were also figured out including organizational characteristics, career choice, and criteria for promotion to senior positions. Similar to task-oriented leadership, change-oriented leadership has also been found to be significant in other industries in Vietnam (Mai and Dang, 2015); however, it has not been noticed seriously in public administration.
Organizational commitment
Organizational commitment has been always attractive to academic researchers due to its importance to the overall organization performance. Only few studies in the public sector investigate the effect of organizational commitment. Similar to private organizations, employee organizational commitment in public administration has been considered as a crucial factor in employee well-being and
organizational performance (Morrow, 1995). Meanwhile, Camilleri and Van Der Heijden (2007) pointed out that organizational commitment as an important link between public service motivation and individual performance. There is a variety of definitions and reviews of organizational commitment in different industries. Cook and Wall (1980) conceptualized organizational commitment as the affective reactions and attachment of individuals to the goals and values of their organizations. Later, in addition to the attitudinal and behavioural perspectives of commitment, Meyer and Allen (1991) psychologically divided employee commitment into affective, continuance and normative commitment.
With regard to public organizations, in Liou and Nyhan's (1994) analysis of two dimensions of organizational commitment (continuance and affective commitment), they emphasized the significance of affective employee commitment over continuance commitment for public employee commitment in general. The positive impacts of employee tenure and supervisory position on affective commitment were also clarified in the article. Due to its multidimensional nature, employee commitment was further divided into identification commitment, affiliation commitment, and exchange commitment in order to identify antecedents and outcomes in public organizations (Balfour and Wechsler, 1996). Another difference between the public sector and the private sector was the bureaucracy in public organizations that created the employee behaviours' restriction (Whorton and Worthley, 1981), which negatively affects organizational commitment.
In public administration Addae et al. (2008) demonstrated that the low connection between an organization's goals and public employees' goals would lead to low employee commitment to the organization. Therefore, it is essential to investigate the impacts and antecedents of organizational commitment in the public sector of developing countries. Several considerable antecedents of organizational commitment in public organizations have been discovered recently including employees' perception of the organization, job characteristics (Camilleri and Van Der Heijden, 2007), motivation for public service (Vandenabeele, 2009), autonomy, interesting work, peer support , satisfaction with human resource management (HRM), leadership style (Steijn and Leisink, 2006), interpersonal trust and system trust (Nyhan, 1999).. In addition to the popular correlation between job satisfaction and organizational commitment, leadership styles also leave determinant effects on organizational commitment.
Job satisfaction
It is quite popular to evaluate the significance of job satisfaction for human resource management. The correlation between job satisfaction and organizational commitment has always been of interest to academic researchers (Vandenabeele, 2009). There are numerous definitions of employee job satisfaction. Locke (1969) long ago defined job satisfaction as a positive emotional state of an individual coming from one's achievement appraisal. Spector (1997) described job satisfaction as a reflection of feelings about various aspects of work.
In terms of public administration, job satisfaction has also been considered as the most determinant factor in organizational success (Voon et al., 2011) and
organizational performance (Vermeeren et al., 2013). Since then, researchers have become more concerned about antecedents of job satisfaction in both private and public sectors. Some notable predictors of job satisfaction were job characteristics (Wright and Davis, 2003), public service motivation and supervisor satisfaction, organizational characteristics, HRM practices (Steijn, 2004), empowerment, participation, working conditions, reward and recognition, teamwork, training, personal development (Turkyilmaz et al., 2011). Among these antecedents, the relationship between leadership styles and job satisfaction is appealing to public researchers. A number of scholars mentioned the impacts of leadership styles including transformational and transactional leadership on job satisfaction in public administration. While Voon et al. (2011) proved the negative impact of transactional leadership on job satisfaction and the positive relationship between transformational leadership and job satisfaction, Asencio (2016) implied that both transactional and transformational leadership were positively associated with employee job satisfaction. On the other hand, leadership styles in general have a positive connection with job satisfaction.
Positive moods
Typically, mood has been identified as an emotional state that can affect thoughts and actions (Poon, 2001). In the past, mood met with little interest in research until the eighties when Watson et al. (1988) developed and evaluated the constructs of positive and negative affect and defined positive moods or positive affect as enthusiastic and active feelings. Several articles also began to find out the consequences of moods as well as antecedents of them. Regarding the determinants of moods, Poon's (2001) synthesis of scientific knowledge on moods divided antecedents of moods into external factors such as physical environment and internal factors such as personality
Regarding the effects of moods, Poon (2001) reviewed the works of prominent scholars to point out the significant effects of moods, including cognitive effects (memory, cognitive organisation, persuasion, decision making, risk-taking), behavioural effects (helping behaviour, conflict resolution, evaluative behaviour), and motivational effects (self-efficacy, goals, job satisfaction). In detail, Tsai et al. (2007) indicated the indirect prediction of employee's positive moods on task performance by interpersonal (helping behaviour) and motivational processes (self-efficacy). After that, a partial mediation of positive moods on the correlation between transformational leadership and employees' helping behaviours as well as employees' task performance was also found. To a greater extent, positive moods not only mediated the association between inclusive leadership and employees' learning from mistakes (Ye et al., 2018) but also had significant effects on performance and creativity (Liu, 2016).
Whereas most scholars focused on the importance of positive moods, George and Zhou (2007) valued both negative and positive moods as they would result in a high level of creativity and tackle concerned issues. They did not encourage negative moods; however, it was normal for employees to experience negative moods. In this case, most researchers recommended employees deal with the problems and find appropriate solutions rather than being pessimistic.
Proposed research hypotheses
The evidence presented in this section suggests that leadership styles are important for public administration. Consequently, the conceptual framework was established in order to estimate the relationship between these leadership styles and their effects on employee job satisfaction, moods and organizational commitment.
H1: The leadership styles: task-oriented leadership (H1a), relationship-oriented relationship (H1b), and change-oriented leadership (H1c) are positively associated with employee positive moods.
H2: The leadership styles: task-oriented leadership (H2a), relationship-oriented relationship (H2b), and change-oriented leadership (H2c) are positively associated with employee job satisfaction.
H3: The leadership styles: task-oriented leadership (H3a), relationship-oriented relationship (H3b), and change-oriented leadership (H3c) are positively associated with employee organizational commitment.
H4: Employee positive moods are positively related to job satisfaction.
H5: Employee positive moods are positively related to organizational commitment.
H6: Employee job satisfaction is positively related to organizational commitment.
H7: The leadership styles: task-oriented leadership (H7a), relationship-oriented leadership (H7b), and change-oriented leadership (H7c) indirectly affect employee organizational commitment through the mediation of employee positive moods.
H8: The leadership styles: task-oriented leadership (H8a), relationship-oriented leadership (H8b), and change-oriented leadership (H8c) indirectly affect employee organizational commitment through the mediation of employee job satisfaction.
H9: The leadership styles: task-oriented leadership (H9a), relationship-oriented leadership (H9b), and change-oriented leadership (H9c) indirectly affect employee job satisfaction through the mediation of employee positive moods.
Research methodology
Questionnaire design and data collection
Questionnaire design
Inspired by the previous studies (Havig et al., 2011), the model was developed to determine the effects of the three main leadership styles (task-oriented, relationship-oriented, change-oriented) on job satisfaction, positive moods and organizational commitment in public administration. To ensure the validity and reliability of the variables, all constructs were adopted from previous well-known researchers.
The independent variables or leadership styles were adopted from Yukl's (1999) research. While positive moods and job satisfaction were constructed from Watson et al. (1988) and Papavasili et al. (2019), respectively, the dependent variable, organizational commitment, was based on early articles (Cook and Wall, 1980). Other demographic variables such as position, gender, age, marital
status, working period, educational levels, and office location were used to estimate sample characteristics.
Data collection
The study aims to address public administration. Therefore, the survey was distributed to 457 experts, junior managers, and middle managers in different seven regions in southern Vietnam to obtain accurate and general results. The 5-Point Likert scale with 1=strongly disagree, 2=disagree, 3=neutral, 4=agree, 5=strongly agree was implemented to measure the degree of each variable.
Analysis
Smart PLS with partial least squares (PLS) technique was applied in this research for data analysis. Following Anderson and Gerbing (1988), a two-step approach was prioritized to analyse data for further research. The method comprised Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) to verify the reliability and validity using a wide range of indicators such as Cronbach's Alpha, factor loading, composite reliability (CR), average variance extracted (AVE), and Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) to identify the causal relationship between variables and prove the research hypotheses.
Results
Demographic profiles of respondents
Descriptive statistics provided detailed information about sample background is summarized in Table 1.
Table 1
Demographic statistics
Frequency Valid Percent
Position Expert 307 67.2
Junior Manager 34 7.4
Middle Manager 116 25.4
Gender Male 234 51.2
Female 223 48.8
Marital Status Single 166 36.3
Married 291 63.7
Age 18-25 38 8.3
26-35 284 62.1
36-45 106 23.2
46-55 28 6.1
>55 1 .2
Frequency Valid Percent
Seniority <1 year 22 4.8
2-5 years 147 32.2
6-10 years 151 33.0
11-15 years 78 17.1
>15 years 59 12.9
The level of education High school 3 .7
Vocational 8 1.8
College 21 4.6
University 332 72.6
Post university 93 20.4
Office location An Giang Province 35 7.7
Long An Province 47 10.3
Vinh Long Province 23 5.0
Tay Ninh Province 142 31.1
Binh Duong Province 97 21.2
Dong Nai Province 25 5.5
HCM City 88 19.3
Sources: Accordingto the authors' own research (- hereinafter, unless otherwise noted).
The majority of respondents were experts (67.2%) and middle managers (25.4%), while the percentage of junior managers was only 7.4%. In terms of gender, there was an equal number of males (51.2%) and females (48.8%). As for marital status, up to 63.7% were married while the remaining part was single. Moreover, 62.1% of the respondents belonged to the age group of 26-35 years old and of the respondents belonged to the age group of 35-45years old. Most of the respondents had a university degree (72.6%), or a post-university degree (20.4%) and had been employed between 2 and10 years (more than 60%). As the research was conducted in the south of Vietnam, the highest number of respondents was in Tay Ninh with 31.1%, followed by Binh Duong with 21.2% and HCM City with 19.3%. From the sample profile, it could be concluded that public officers seemed to be committed more to their organizations and their education level was quite high compared to private public officers.
Reflective measurement model
To test the reliability and validity of the constructs, composite reliability (CR) and average variance extracted (AVE) were utilized. Composite reliabil-
ity was related to internal consistency and indicator reliability, with the value acceptable greater than 0.8 for the constructs with five to eight items (Nete-meyer et al., 2003).
Meanwhile, AVE was to estimate the convergent validity with a satisfactory value of at least 0.5 (Fornell and David, 1981). According to Table 2, both reliability and validity of the constructs were confirmed with all CR greater than 0.9 and AVE greater than 0.6. Regarding outer loadings, following a common rule of thumb, standardized outer loadings should be equal to or greater than 0.708 (Hair et al., 2017).
Table 2
Reflective meassurement model
Constructs Items Factor loadings CR AVE
Task-oriented leadership (TOL) 7 0.823-0.923 0.960 0.728
Relation-oriented leadership (ROL) 6 0.763-0.863 0.921 0.752
Change-oriented leadership (COL) 7 0.758-0.905 0.949 0.636
Positive moods (PA) 6 0.797-0.924 0.948 0.714
Job satisfaction (JS) 9 0.722-0.834 0.940 0.662
Organizational commitment (ORCO) 5 0.772-0.884 0.926 0.776
Fornell-Larcker Criterion including indicator cross-loadings and interrelations among constructs was applied to examine the discriminant validity, which was defined as the extent of distinction of a construct compared to other constructs by empirical standards (Hair et al., 2017).
All latent constructs were higher than correlations between constructs. These interrelations between constructs by the square root of AVE are given in the bold diagonals in Table 3; as a result, the discriminant validity was guaranteed.
Table 3
Discriminant Validity Coefficients
COL PA JS ORCO ROL TOL
COL 0.853
PA 0.680 0.867
JS 0.766 0.653 0.797
ORCO 0.628 0.558 0.757 0.845
ROL 0.813 0.662 0.708 0.577 0.813
TOL 0.838 0.688 0.765 0.622 0.780 0.881
Structural Model Results
The first step in this stage was to examine collinearity based on tolerance values less than 0.2 or VIF values greater than 5 (Hair et al., 2017). The result indicated that all VIF values were below 5, which explained that there was no collinearity existence affecting the structural model. Secondly, in order to identify the predictive accuracy, coefficient of determination (R2 value) was measured. Following the rule of thumb, ranging from 0 to 1, the higher R2 value, the higher levels of prediction the predictive accuracy (Hair et al., 2011). The R2 value for positive moods, job satisfaction and organizational commitment were 0.526, 0.656, and 0.583, respectively. These numbers indicate the high accuracy of hypothesis prediction. In addition to the R2 value, Stone and Geisser (1974) also proposed the predictive relevance Q2 value for analysis. If the Q2 value is above zero, the predictive relevance for a specific endogenous variable is confirmed. From the construct cross-validated redundancy table, the Q2 value was more than 0.38 indicating high predictive relevance for further analysis.
Nonparametric bootstrapping with 1000 replicates was applied to verify the structural model with 95% confidence interval. Table 4 shows that H1, H4, and H6 were fully supported, and H2 was partially supported. Meanwhile, H3 and H5 were rejected completely. From the effect size result (f2), public officer satisfaction had the greatest effect on organizational commitment (f2 = 0.332). The other relationships all belonged to the small effects group. The impacts of TOL, ROL, and COL on PA were f2 = 0.058, f2 = 0.034, and f2 = 0.025 respectively. Similarly, the effects of TOL, COL, PA on JS were f2 = 0.073, f2 = 0.063, and f2 = 0.033 correspondingly.
Table 4
Path coefficients
Hypothesis Relationship Path coefficients P Values Decision
H1a TOL PA 0.319 0.000 Supported
H1b ROL PA 0.229 0.001 Supported
H1c COL PA 0.227 0.001 Supported
H2a TOL JS 0.314 0.000 Supported
H2b ROL JS 0.108 0.099 Rejected
H2c COL JS 0.308 0.000 Supported
H3a TOL ORCO 0.027 0.722 Rejected
H3b ROL ORCO 0.004 0.945 Rejected
H3c COL ORCO 0.059 0.378 Rejected
H4 PA JS 0.155 0.004 Supported
H5 PA ORCO 0.080 0.085 Rejected
H6 JS ORCO 0.638 0.000 Supported
Figure 1. PLS-SEM Results
Discussion and implication
Concluded from the table, all three leadership styles directly influence positive moods and job satisfaction, supporting H1 and H2 partially. However, only relation-oriented leadership has no significant impact on job satisfaction. The outcomes again considerably confirm the previous articles including Tabernero et al. (2009) in identifying the positive impacts of task-oriented, relation-oriented, and change-oriented leadership on positive affect. Similarly, the significant relationships between task-oriented and change-oriented leadership on job satisfaction support the findings from Mikkelsen and Olsen (2018) and Havig et al. (2011), but the result denies the effects of relation-oriented leadership on job satisfaction. Hence, the findings are the suggestions for leaders to increase employee positive moods and job satisfaction via these leadership styles. In order to enhance employee moods, following the research model, public managers should prioritize task-oriented leadership over the other styles with the highest impact (b=0.319) while relation-oriented and change-oriented leadership were lower with b=0.229 and b=0.227 respectively.
On the other hand, there is no direct effect of these leadership styles and positive affect on organizational commitment, rejecting H3 and H5. The surprising consequences are not in line with several recent research, which demonstrated the substantial influence of these three leadership styles on organizational commitment (Moldogaziev and Silvia, 2014). This may be because the public sector is more stable and resistant to change than private organizations. Therefore, other indicators such as employee tenure, supervisory position and organizational culture were pointed out to be positively associated with organizational commitment in public administration apart from leadership styles (Liou and Nyhan, 1994). Nevertheless, the notable predictor of organizational commitment is job satisfaction with the highest path coefficient (b=0.638), accepting H6. As a result, there are indirect impacts of task-oriented and change-oriented leadership on organizational commitment through the mediation of job satisfaction, supporting H8a and H8c. A similar pattern happens with positive moods and job satisfaction with the significant connection between them (b=0.115), confirming H4, which results in the indirect influences of three leadership styles on job satisfaction through the mediation of positive moods, supporting all H9. Especially, from the PLS-SEM report, task-oriented and change-oriented leadership have also been proved to indirectly predict organizational commitment through positive moods, supporting H7a and H7c.
Considered as the strongest linkage with organizational commitment, job satisfaction has a determinant role in the model to connect the independent variables with mediating and dependent variables. To enhance the level of employee satisfaction, as drawn in the model, it is highly recommended to improve three leadership styles depending on different contexts and individuals. In terms of task-oriented leadership, as leaders who follow this type of leadership tend to focus on details and work completion (Henkel et al., 2019), it is advisable for public leaders to apply this type to junior employees to give them specific guides to increase the adaptability. On the other hand, it is possible to implement task-oriented leadership to senior staff with consideration in some appropriate situations; otherwise, it might be regarded as a managerial and authoritarian style rather than a leadership style and lead to unexpected negative consequences (Fernandez, 2008).
Regarding relation-oriented leadership, it was believed to be more preferred than task-oriented leadership. In sport, more than half of managers used relation-oriented leadership while only less than a fifth chose task-oriented leadership (Azmsha et al., 2012). Despite the popularity of this leadership style, it should be under control in implementation. Based on the mentioned above definition (Ehrhart and Klein, 2001), relation-oriented leaders are suggested to perform like subordinates' friends to sympathize and understand their obstacles to help them overcome as well as to recognize and develop their strengths. Flexibility and rewards are also highly recommended in relation-oriented leadership to create motivation and encouragement for employees. Yet, the misuse of relation-oriented leadership might cause leaders to lose their position power. Therefore, the combination of task-oriented leadership and relation-oriented leadership had remained a source of controversy for several years until Hersey et al. (1979) created a model
called Situational Leadership Theory indicating the leadership styles application depending on the situations and the people at the moment.
Concerning change-oriented leadership from the table, the direct and indirect effects of change-oriented leadership on positive affect, job satisfaction and organizational commitment were remarkably concluded. Thus, managers should notice this type of leadership if they want to progress other factors. It is advisable for leaders who want to generate change-oriented leadership to propose innovative and flexible strategies in each particular suitable context. Another suggestion for leaders is to encourage and inspire their followers to raise their creativity by facilitating the open discussion about the strengths and weaknesses of the current and previous situations to well prepare for future change (Ortega et al., 2013).
The findings of the current study have broadened the results of Havig et al. (2011) in clarifying the direct and indirect relationship of three leadership styles with not only job satisfaction but also with organizational commitment and positive moods in the public sector. Since then, management levels could determine the essential factors to produce better organizational productivity.
Conclusion
To sum up, the study validated the direct positive effect of three leadership styles on positive moods, task-oriented leadership and change-oriented leadership on job satisfaction. Moreover, the direct relationship of positive moods and job satisfaction on organizational commitment resulted in the indirect influence of three leadership styles on job satisfaction through the mediation of positive moods as well as the task-oriented and change-oriented leadership on organizational commitment through the mediation of job satisfaction and positive moods. Perceiving the substantial findings, managers in the public sector are able to prioritize and apply the right leadership styles in each circumstance to increase employee job satisfaction, positive moods and organizational commitment.
The current research is one of the very first articles highlighting the leadership theory in public administration in Vietnam. Thanks to the valid results and the variety in sample data, futurer scholars could develop the model and broaden the scope for further scrutiny to improve the public sector performance in Vietnam. Nevertheless, there are some unavoidable limitations in the study. Firstly, the generalisation strength was restricted as the survey was distributed only to the south of Vietnam. Next, other significant leadership behaviours such as result-oriented and cognitive leadership should be identified further regarding their effects in public organizations besides task-oriented, relation-oriented and change-oriented leadership. Last but not least, the cross-sectional study using SmartPLS was appropriate with the sample size; however, it was unable to guarantee the timing effect on the variables. Hence, future studies should increase the generalisation by conducting in several provinces and cities throughout Vietnam. Moreover, it is advisable for future scholars to apply longitudinal studies to observe and follow the employee's behaviours to determine the patterns over a period of time, which is considered to be more effective than a cross-sectional study.
REFERENCES
1. Addae, H.M., Parboteeah, K. and Velinor, N. (2008) 'Role stressors and organizational commitment: public sector employment in St Lucia', International Journal of Manpower, 29(6), pp. 567-582.
2. Andersen, J.A. (2010) Assessing Public Managers' Change-Oriented Behavior: Are Private Managers Caught in the Doldrums?', International Journal of Public Administration, 33(6), pp. 335-345.
3. Asencio, H. (2016) 'Leadership, trust, and job satisfaction in the public sector: A study of US federal employees', International Review of Public Administration, 21(3), pp. 250-267.
4. Azmsha, T., Mehdipour, A. and Heydarinejad, S. (2012) 'The relationship between leadership styles and job stress in sport managers', World Journal of Sport Sciences, 6(2), pp. 188-193.
5. Balfour, D. L. and Wechsler, B. (1996) 'Organizational commitment: Antecedents and outcomes in public organizations', Public Productivity and Management Review, 19(3), pp. 256-277.
6. Camilleri, E. and Van Der Heijden, B. (2007) 'Organizational commitment, public service motivation, and performance within the public sector', Public Performance and Management Review, 31(2), pp. 241-274.
7. Casimir, G. and Ngee Keith Ng, Y. (2010) 'Combinative aspects of leadership style and the interaction between leadership behaviors', Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 31(6), pp. 501-517.
8. Cook, J. and Wall, T. (1980) 'New work attitude measures of trust, organizational commitment and personal need non-fulfilment', Journal of Occupational Psychology, 53, pp. 39-52.
9. DeSantis, V.S. and Durst, S L. (1996) 'Comparing job satisfaction among public-and private-sector employees', The American Review of Public Administration, 26(3), pp. 327-343.
10. De Vries, R.E. (2012) 'Personality predictors of leadership styles and the self-other agreement problem', Leadership Quarterly, 23(5), pp. 809-821.
11. Ehrhart, M.G. and Klein, K. (2001) "Predicting followers' preferences for charismatic leadership: the influence of follower values and personality', Leadership Quarterly, 12(2), pp. 153-179.
12. Engelbert, B. and Wallgren, L. (2016) 'The origins of task- and people-oriented leadership styles: remains from early attachment security and influences during childhood and adolescence', SAGE Open, 6(2), pp. 1-19.
13. Fernandez, S. (2008) 'Examining the effects of leadership behavior on employee perceptions of performance and job satisfaction', Public Performance and Management Review, 32(2), pp. 175-205.
14. Fernandez, S., Cho, Y. J. and Perry, J. L. (2010) 'Exploring the link between integrated leadership and public sector performance', Leadership Quarterly, 21(2), pp. 308-323.
15. Fornell, C. and David, L. (1981) 'Evaluating structural equation models with un-observable variables and measurement error', Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), pp. 39-50.
16. Fox, T., Ward, H. and Howard, B. (2002) Public sector roles in strengthening corporate social responsibility: A baseline study. The World Bank.
17. G, M. S. and K, B. (2016) 'Effects of leadership behavior on the organizational commitment and job satisfaction: a public sector research', Journal of Entrepreneurship and Organization Management, 5(2).
18. Geisser, S. (1974) 'A predictive approach to the random effect model', Biometrika, 61(1), pp. 101-107.
19. George, J.M. and Zhou, J. (2007) 'Dual tuning in a supportive context: joint contributions of positive mood, negative mood, and supervisory behaviors to employee creativity', Academy of Management Journal, vol. 50, no 3, pp. 605-622.
20. Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. and Sarstedt, M. (2011) 'PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet', Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), pp. 139-152.
21. Hair, J.F., Hult, G.T. M., Ringle, C. M. and Sarstedt, M. (2017) A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). 2nd Edition ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
22. Hansen, J.R. and Villadsen, A. (2010) 'Comparing Public and Private Managers' Leadership Styles: Understanding the Role of Job Context', International Public Management Journal, 13(3), pp. 247-274.
23. Havig, A.K., Skogstad, A., Veenstra, M. and Romoren, T. (2011) 'The effects of leadership and ward factors on job satisfaction in nursing homes: a multilevel approach', Journal of Clinical Nursing, 20(23-24), pp. 3532-3542.
24. Henkel, T., Marion, J. and Bourdeau, D. (2019) 'Project manager leadership behavior: task-oriented versus relationship-oriented', Journal of leadership education, 18(2).
25. Hersey, P., Blanchard, K. and Natemeyer, W. (1979) 'Situational leadership, perception, and the impact of power', Group and Organization Management, 4(4), pp. 418-428.
26. Ju, D., Huang, M., Liu, D., Qin, X., Hu, Q. and Chen, C. (2019) 'Supervisory consequences of abusive supervision: An investigation of sense T of power, managerial self-efficacy, and task-oriented leadership behavior', Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 154, pp. 80-95.
27. Liou, K.-T. and Nyhan, R. (1994) 'Dimensions of organizational commitment in the public sector: An empirical assessment', Public Administration Quarterly, 18(1), pp. 99-118.
28. Liu, W. (2016) 'Effects of positive mood and job complexity on employee creativity and performance', Social Behavior and Personality An International Journal, 44(5), pp. 865-880.
29. Locke, E.A. (1969) 'What is Job Satisfaction?', Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 4(4), pp. 309-336.
30. Mai, N. and Dang, T. (2015) 'The effects of leadership styles on employee motivation in auditing companies in Ho Chi Minh city, Vietnam', International Journal of Trade, Economics and Finance, 6(4), pp. 210-217.
31. Mai, T. and Ta, H. (2018) 'The leadership competency in Vietnam public administration', Organizations and Markets in Emerging Economies, 9(1), pp. 8-20.
32. Markovits, Y., Davis, A. and van Dick, R. (2007) 'Organizational commitment profiles and job satisfaction among Greek private and public sector employees', International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 7(1), pp. 77-99.
33. Men, L.R. and Stacks, D. (2013) 'The impact of leadership style and employee empowerment on perceived organizational reputation', Journal of Communication Management, 17(2), pp. 171-192.
34. Meyer, J.P. and Allen, N. (1991) 'A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment', Human Resource Management Review, 1(1), pp. 61-89.
35. Mikkelsen, A. and Olsen, E. (2018) 'The influence of change-oriented leadership on work performance and job satisfaction in hospitals - the mediating roles of learning demands and job involvement', Leadership in Health Services, 31(1), pp. 37-53.
36. Moldogaziev, T.T. and Silvia, C. (2014) 'Fostering affective organizational commitment in public sector agencies: The significance of multifaceted leadership roles', Public Administration, 93(3), pp. 557-575.
37. Morrow, P.C. (1995) The theory and measurement of work commitment. Greenwich: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
38. Netemeyer, R.G., Bearden, W. and Sharma, S. (2003) Scaling procedures: Issues and applications. SAGE.
39. Nyhan, R. (1999) 'Increasing affective organizational commitment in public organizations', Review of Public Personnel Administration, 19(3), pp. 58-70.
40. Ohemeng, F.L., Amoaks-Asiedu, E. and Obuobisa Darko, T. (2018) 'The relationship between leadership style and employee performance: An exploratory study of the Ghanaian public service', International Journal of Public Leadership, 14(4), pp. 274-296.
41. Ortega, A., Van den Bossche, P., Sanchez-Manzanares, M., Rico, R. and Gil, F. (2013) 'The influence of change-oriented leadership and psychological safety on team learning in healthcare teams', Journal of Business and Psychology, 29, pp. 311-321.
42. Papavasili, T., Kontogeorgos, A., Siskou, T. and Chatzitheodoridis, F. (2019) 'Municipal employees in the era of economic crisis: Exploring their job satisfaction', Public Administration Issues, 5, pp. 120-139. DOI: 10.17323/1999-5431-2019-0-5-120-139.
43. Poon, J.M. (2001) 'Mood: a review of its antecedents and consequences', International Journal of Organization Theory and Behavior, 4(3/4), pp. 357-388.
44. Ren, S., Xie, Y., Zhu, Y. and Warner, M. (2018) 'New generation employees' preferences towards leadership style in China', Asia Pacific Business Review, 24(4), pp. 437-458.
45. Ruzgar, N. (2018) 'The effect of leaders' adoption of task-oriented or relationship-oriented leadership style on leader-member exchange (LMX) in the organizations that are active in service sector: A research on tourism agencies', Journal of Business Administration Research, 7(1), pp. 50-60.
46. Schmid, H. (2008) 'Leadership Styles and Leadership Change in Human and Community Service Organizations', in: Cnaan R.A. and Milofsky C. Handbook of Community Movements and Local Organizations. New York: Springer, pp. 395-409.
47. Sirén, C., Patel, P. and Wincent, J. (2016) 'How do harmonious passion and obsessive passion moderate the influence of a CEO's change-oriented leadership on company performance?', The Leadership Quarterly, 27(4), pp. 653-670.
48. Spector, P.E. (1997) Job satisfaction: Application, assessment, causes, and consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
49. Steijn, B. (2004) 'Human resource management and job satisfaction in the dutch public sector', Review of Public Personnel Administration, 24(4), pp. 291-303.
50. Steijn, B. and Leisink, P. (2006) 'Organizational commitment among Dutch public sector', International Review of Administrative Sciences, 72(2), pp. 187-201.
51. Stone, M. (1974) 'Cross-validatory choice and assessment of statistical predictions', Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 36(2), pp. 111-147.
52. Tabernero, C., Chambal, M., Curral, L. and Arana, J. (2009) 'The role of task-oriented versus relationship-oriented leadership on normative contract and group performance', Social Behavior and Personality: An international journal, 37(10), pp. 1391-1404.
53. Tsai, W.-C., Chen, C.-C. and Liu, H.-L. (2007) 'Test of a model linking employee positive moods and task performance', Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(6), pp. 1570-1583.
54. Turkyilmaz, A., Akman, G., Ozkan, C. and Pastuszak, Z. (2011) 'Empirical study of public sector employee loyalty and satisfaction', Industrial Management and Data Systems, 111(5), pp. 675-696.
55. Vandenabeele, W. (2009) 'The mediating effect of job satisfaction and organizational commitment on self-reported performance: More robust evidence of the PSM-perfor-mance relationship', International Review of Administrative Sciences, 75(1), pp. 11-34.
56. Vermeeren, B., Kuipers, B. and Steijn, B. (2013) 'Does leadership style make a difference? Linking HRM, job satisfaction, and organizational performance', Review of Public Personnel Administration, 34(2), pp. 174-195.
57. Voon, M., Lo, M., Ngui, K. and Ayob, N. (2011) 'The influence of leadership styles on employees' job satisfaction in publicsector organizations in Malaysia', International Journal of Business, Management and Social Sciences, 2(1), pp. 24-32.
58. Wart, M.V. (2003) 'Public-sector leadership theory: An assessment', Public Administration Review, 63(2), pp. 214-228.
59. Wart, M.V. (2013) 'Administrative leadership theory: A reassessment after 10 years', Public Administration, 91(3), pp. 521-543.
60. Watson, D., Clark, L. and Tellegen, A. (1988) 'Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales', Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), pp. 1063-1070.
61. Werder, K.P. and Holtzhausen, D. (2009) An analysis of the influence of public relations department leadership style on public relations strategy use and effectiveness', Journal of Public Relations Research, 21(4), pp. 404-427.
62. Whorton, J.W. and Worthley, J. (1981) 'A perspective on the challenge of public management: environmental paradox and organizational culture', Academy of Management Review, 6(3), pp. 357-361.
63. Wright, B.E. and Davis, B. (2003) 'Job satisfaction in the public sector: The role of the work environment', The American Review of Public Administration, 33(1), pp. 70-90.
64. Ye, Q., Wang, D. and Li, X. (2018) 'Promoting employees' learning from errors by inclusive leadership: Do positive mood and gender matter?', Baltic Journal of Management, 13(1), pp. 125-142.
65. Yukl, G. (1999) 'An evaluative essay on current conceptions of effective leadership', European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8(1), pp. 33-48.
66. Yukl, G.A. (2002) Leadership in organizations. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc.
67. Zhao, X., Hwang, B.-G. and Lee, H. (2016) 'Identifying critical leadership styles of project managers for green building projects', International Journal of Construction Management, 16(2), pp. 1501-60.
The article was submitted: 28 November 2020; approved after reviewing: 10 September 2021; accepted for publication: 14 April 2022.
