仁慈領導雙構面模式之再探：內涵釐清與量表建構

Revisiting the Dual Dimensions of Benevolent Leadership: Construct Clarification and Scale Development

仁慈領導是一種具有華人特色的領導風格，因同時具有工作照顧與生活照顧兩個構面，而與西方領導理論有明顯的不同。然而，過去對於仁慈領導雙構面模式的討論卻較為少見，以至於在概念內涵與測量工具上仍有待評估。有鑑於此，本文以兩個子研究試圖解決此理論缺口。研究一採取歸納研究途徑，蒐集100位企業員工知覺領導者照顧行為之事例，以關鍵事例法建構工作照顧與生活照顧之內涵；研究二則根據雙構面之內涵編寫量表，以386位企業員工為對象，進行探索性與驗證性因素分析，以確認雙構面題項之信效度。綜合來說，本文發現當代仁慈領導的工作照顧與生活照顧各包含五項具體的展現方式類別，其中，工作照顧包含了人才培育、排除險阻、權益發聲、讚揚鼓舞，及傾聽協調；生活照顧包含了生活支援、人生指引、噓寒問暖、家眷關照，及生活扶持。而分析結果發現這十項向度可進一步整併為三個構面：工作照顧、關懷照護，及濟困解危。最後，作者將本文發現與既存理論進行對話，並為日後的研究提供一些新的發展方向。

Benevolent leadership is a work- and life-oriented leadership style characterized by traditional Chinese values. It entails individualized care in two dimensions: work-related (e.g., allowing opportunities to correct mistakes, providing coaching and mentoring, or showing concern for the career development of employees) and life-related (e.g., treating employees as family members, providing assistance during a personal crisis, or showing holistic concern beyond the professional relationship).
The unique feature of benevolent leadership in comparison with Western leadership styles such as supportive leadership, individual consideration, servant leadership, and authentic leadership, is its dual-dimensional nature. Although previous studies have provided preliminary evidence of this dual-dimensional structure, several research gaps remain. First, the original concept of benevolent leadership was based on an observational study of the founders of Chinese family businesses. Since Chinese culture is characterized by significant power-distance relationships, the difference in power and resources between the highest-level founder and middle management are significant. This power inequality has the potential to generate different benevolent behaviors. Research focusing on the work and life consideration behaviors of middle management is needed. Second, if the globalization of values has impacted younger generations to reduce emphasis on hierarchy, the behavioral representation of benevolent leadership based on traditional culture may need updating. For example, how leaders display their work- and life-oriented consideration behaviors may differ from leaders of the previous generation. Research focusing on leaders’benevolent behavior in modern organizations is needed. Third, the existing measurement tool for assessing the dual dimensions of benevolent leadership was generated based on the original benevolent leadership theory. Whether this instrument is sufficient for describing current leaders’caregiving behaviors remains an open question. These potential theoretical and methodological problems are the main reason for the lack of recent discussion of the benevolent leadership model and they hinder progression of the theory.
We conducted two studies. Study 1 clarified the characteristics of leaders’work and life caring behaviors. We collected data from 100 employees in Taiwan, including 176 critical incidents in the work domain and 96 in the life domain. We adopted an inductive approach to analyze the data. We identified 10 behavioral categories that could be classified into the work-oriented dimension (talent cultivation, problem elimination, voices of followers, inspiration, and coordination with listening) and the life-oriented dimension (life assistance, life guidance, daily care, family concerns, and relief of suffering).
In Study 2, we developed a reliable scale to measure benevolent leadership in the work and life domains. First, we generated 21 new items based on the theoretical definitions and critical incidents we identified in Study 1. Next, we conducted a forced categorization procedure to confirm the face and content validity of the items based on the responses of 60 undergraduate students. We combined these 21 newly developed items with the 11 original items to analyze their structure. We divided a sample of 386 employees into two random groups for exploratory (EFA) and confirmatory factor analyses (CFA). A total of 18 items reached the acceptable criteria for factor analysis, and the EFA identified three factors. The work-oriented factor comprised 8 new items; we deleted the original work domain items due to cross-loading or insufficient factor loading. The other two factors comprised life-orientated behaviors: life-orientation (5 items, including 1 newly-developed item and 4 original items) and problem-solving orientation (5 newly-developed items). We found moderate positive correlations among the three dimensions. The CFA showed that the second-order dual-factor model had appropriate fit indices, confirming the reliability and validity of the three-dimensional structure of the updated benevolent leadership scale.
We revisited the characteristics of the work and life domain caring behaviors expressed as a part of benevolent leadership. The analyses revealed that benevolent leadership has a three-dimensional structure. In addition to the original work and life dimensions, we also identified a problem-solving dimension from new life dimension items. We developed a reliable questionnaire to assess the three-dimensional structure of benevolent leadership.
We posit that these dimensions may cross management levels and industry because our participants contained both middle and C-suite leaders, they came from diverse industries and occupations (not just traditional family businesses), and we changed the research perspective from leader to follower to investigate behaviors perceived by followers. Our results provide a new understanding of the work and life dimensions of benevolent leadership in modern organizations along with a measurement tool. We discuss our findings in the context of the existing leadership literature, and identify future research directions.