MANAS Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi 2018 Cilt: 7 Sayı: 1

MANAS Journal of Social Studies 2018 Vol.: 7 No: 1

THE ROLE OF ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE ON LEADERSHIP STYLES

Res. Asst. Burcu AYDIN

Istanbul Gelisim University
baydin@gelisim.edu.tr

Abstract
Objectives: One of the most influential concepts in organizational behavior literature is also
organizational culture. The concept of organizational culture has gained wide importance from
past to today for business. Organizational culture helps business to understand human at
organizational level. Divided into four dimensions, which are clan, adhocracy, market,
hierarchy, organizational culture have shown to be associated with several organizational
outcomes, including leadership style. Leadership can be defined as the ability of an individual
or organization to "lead" or guide other individuals, teams, or entire organizations. There are
several leadership styles in present literature. Paternalistic, transformational, transactional,
ethical, servant and laissez-faire leadership styles are some of the leadership styles in the
relevant literature and they have been used for this study. Within this framework, this study
aims to specify the interrelationship between dimensions of organizational culture and different
leadership styles.
Method: In relation with the main objective of this study, data has been obtained from 173
employees who work in a private construction sector in Turkey. Data were analyzed through
SPSS, statistical packaged software.
Results: Results showed that clan culture differs significantly according to the servant
leadership and paternalistic leadership. Adhocracy culture only differs significantly according
to transformational leadership. Market culture differs significantly according to
transformational and servant leadership. Hierarchy culture differs significantly according to
transactional and paternalistic leadership. Finally, dimensions of organizational culture show
neither a large mean difference nor a large effect size on laissez- faire leadership style.
Originality: Organizational culture and leadership style have a crucial role in order to achieve
specified outcomes for business. The harmony between culture and leader within organization
undoubtedly will affect relationships and business processes. In this point, the study has
provided further detail on the possible relationships between two variables.
Keywords: Organizational culture, leaderships styles, construction sector.

Introduction
Many researchers have emphasized that the strong relationship between organizational
culture and leadership styles. Yet, there are two different perspectives in the literature in terms
of how a culture originates and whether leaders have any impact on shaping organizational
culture. According to some researchers, the culture is the organization itself. There is
something which can be manipulated within organization. The leader can also manage and
manipulate the culture to some degree. The opposite idea says that leaders have a potential to
create the organizational culture and undoubtedly they also have an impact on shaping it.

ISSN: 1624-7215
268 Manas Journal of Social Studies

Leaders define and maintain values, goals, mission and vision of organization and thus they
form organizational culture (Acar, 2012).
When the studies on this relationship are evaluated, Kwantes and Boglarsky found that
there was a stronger relationship between organizational culture and leadership effectiveness
than that between organizational culture and personal effectiveness. In addition, Tsai, Wu and
Chunq discovered that there was a relationship between organizational culture and managers'
leading behavior and the results showed that organizational cultures influenced the style of
leadership (Alas, et.al., 2011).
In these studies the results obtained have suggested that there is a relationship between
both leadership styles and organizational culture, and in this concept, the present study is
about relations between those variables in the construction industry.
According to the British Chamber of Commerce Turkey (BCCT), approximately 1.8
million employees work in the construction sector and the this industry constitutes 5.9% of
Turkey’s GDP. Indeed, construction is one of the economy’s most important areas. The
industry sits behind food and beverages as the second largest section of Turkey’s national
income. Food and beverage expenditures account for 20% of the total figure. Private
construction investment and household consumption for houses constitutes 17% of the sum
which is set aside to be spent on the construction industry - demonstrating the huge value of
the construction industry to Turkey.
In the light of the literature, the basis of this study is about the contents of leadership
styles and organizational culture. The result of this study and discussion are presented in the
following sections.

1. Organizational Culture
The concept of culture has stemmed from the study of ethnic and national differences
in the disciplines of sociology, anthropology and social psychology. Culture can be
considered as social heritage of a society. It is a pattern of responses discovered, developed,
or invented during the society's history of handling problems which arise from interactions
among its members, and between them and their environment. If these responses are
considered the correct way to perceive, feel, think, and act, they are passed on to the new
members through experiencing and teaching. Culture determines what is acceptable or
unacceptable, important or unimportant, right or wrong, workable or unworkable. It involves
all learned and shared, such as assumptions, beliefs, norms, values, and knowledge, as well as
attitudes, behavior, dress, symbols, heroes, rituals and language. Symbols, heroes, and rituals
The Role of Organizational Culture on Leadership Styles 269

etc. are the tangible or visual aspects of the practices of a culture. The true cultural meaning of
the practices is intangible; this is revealed only when the practices are interpreted by the
members of society (Hofstede, 2011).
The results of all literature have a consensus that the culture affects our whole life. Not
only the culture has an important role in our relationship between each other of our daily life, but
also it is very important within an organization, playing a large role in whether it is a happy and
healthy environment in which to work. The culture of organization creates a frame for managers
and employees. For instance, if the culture enables to communication between managers and
subordinates easily, this situation can influence their work behavior and attitudes. When the
interaction between the managers and employees is good, this effective relationship can reflect as
a greater contribution to organizational communication and collaboration, and thus, can also
encourage to accomplish the mission and objectives assigned by the organization. Such an
organizational culture is not necessary for types of all organization because each organization has
a different perspective about how it perceives the world around them and a system of
assumptions, values, norms, and attitudes, manifested through symbols (Moyce, 2015).
Organizational culture has been a focus of debate for researchers and professionals
since the 1980s, which led to several studies over the years (e.g., Deal and Kennedy, 1982;
Cooke and Lafferty, 1983; Hofstede,1990; Schein, 2004; Cameron and Quinn, 1999). The
concept of organizational culture has gained wide importance, because it allows to understand
human systems as well as organizations (Quinn & Rohrbaugh, 1983). According to Hofstede,
at organizational level, culture can be defined as the collective programming of the minds of
group members by which one group distinguishes itself from other groups in just the same
way as the definition of national culture. Yet, he added that an organization is less complex
and less diffuse than a nation (McSweeney, 2002).In another definition made by Schein
(2004), the culture of an organization has been defined as “a pattern of shared basic
assumptions that was learned by a group as it solved its problems of external adaptation and
internal integration, that has worked well enough to be considered valid and, therefore, to be
taught to new members as the correct way to perceive, think and feel in relation to those
problems.” (Arditi, et.al., 2016).Common and shared idea about the organizational culture is
that it has been considered as an important means for organizations to integrate internal
processes and adapt to external conditions (Tusi et al. 2006).
Cameron and Quinn (1999) who studied on the organizational culture developed the
model of the “Competing Values Framework” (OCAI) which consists of four competing values.
According to their model, there are four types of organizational culture and every organization
270 Manas Journal of Social Studies

has its own mix of these four types of organizational cultures (Yu and Wu, 2009). These
proposed four dominant culture types in OCAI are hierarchy, market, clan and adhocracy.
Firstly, the hierarchy culture refers to a formalized and structured work environment. The
procedures and the rules decide what employees do because these formal rules and policy keep
the organization together. The long-term goals are stability and results, paired with efficient of
tasks. The success is defined as trustful delivery, smoothly scheduling, and low costs. The
leaders pride themselves on being good coordinators and organizers, who are efficiency-minded
(Cameron and Quinn, 1999). For these organizations, efficiency, timeliness, consistency, and
uniformity are value drivers (Linley, et.al., 2010) Secondly, the market refers to a result-based
organization that emphasizes finishing work and getting things done. Because the
organizational style is based on competition, employees are competitive and focused on goals as
well as leaders are hard drivers, producers, and rivals. All time, it emphasis on winning and this
value holds together all organization. The most important thing is reputation and success. Long-
term focus is on rival activities and reaching goals (Cameron and Quinn, 1999). Market share,
goal achievement, profitability are values drivers (Linley, et.al., 2010). Thirdly, the clan culture
refers to a very friendly place to work. Employees have a lot in common, and they are similar to
a large family. The managers are seen as mentors or maybe even as father figures. The
organization is held together by loyalty and tradition. There is great involvement within
organization because there is an open communication climate. The organization emphasizes
long-term benefit of human resource development. Organization’s cohesion and all employees’
morale have great importance. Mean of success for this organization’s type is to framework of
addressing the needs of the customers and caring for the people. The organization promotes
teamwork, participation, and consensus. Commitment, communication, development are values
drivers (Cameron and Quinn, 1999). Finally, adhocracy culture means that this is a dynamic and
creative working environment. As employees take risks, leaders are seen as risk takers. Yet, it is
believed that this result enable to innovation, commitment and experiment. The long-term goal
of members of organization is to grow and acquire new resources and the availability of new
products or services is seen as key factor of success. All results show that the organization
promotes individual initiative and freedom (Cameron and Quinn, 1999).Innovative outputs,
transformation, and agility are values drivers (Linley, et.al., 2010).
There are another suggested model related to organizational culture as well as
Competing Values Framework which was developed by Cameron and Quinn (Hofstede, 1985;
O'Reilly, 1991; Denison, 1990; Deal and Kennedy, 1982; Schein, 1992; Johnson, 1998;
Harris, 1994; Handy, 1976). Each company may have “own unique culture” and, sometimes,
The Role of Organizational Culture on Leadership Styles 271

co-existing or conflicting subcultures because each subculture is linked to a different

department within organization ( Schein, 1992; Deal and Kennedy,2000). In this study, it was
used the scale of Cameron and Quinn for analyzing gained data. Therefore, only, it is
explained dimensions of OCAI.

2. Leadership Style
Leadership is both a research area and a practical skill encompassing the ability of an
individual or organization to "lead" or guide other individuals, teams, or entire organizations.
Leadership is complex and much extended context in management literature and there are
different types of leadership styles in work environments. Each leadership style has some
advantages and disadvantages for organization with regard to managing members of organization.
In here, the most important point is that how much the leadership style, the culture and goals of an
organization harmony with each other. In the light of this information, some companies offer
several leadership styles within the organization, dependent upon the necessary tasks to complete
and departmental needs (Chemers, 1997; Chin and Roger, 2015; Trevisani, 2016).
When it is considered leadership style, transactional leadership is a style of leadership
in which leaders promote compliance by followers through both rewards and punishments.
This leadership approach has been the “traditional model of leadership with its roots from an
organizational or business perspective in the ‘bottom line”. Thus, to ensure the attainment of
performance (financial), such leaders resort to the establishment of specific parameters,
guidelines, rules and performance standards, coupled with the establishment of reward and
punitive systems to enforce positive work behaviors and discourage negative ones,
respectively (Russell, 2011). This situation thus portrays transactional leaders as more task- or
goal-oriented than people-oriented (Baah, 2015). Unlike transactional approach,
transformational leadership style is not based on a "give and take" relationship. The Leader
behaviors enable followers to transform themselves and to be inspired in order to perform
beyond expectations while transcending self-interest for the good of the organization (Guay,
2012). According to Burns, transformational leadership serves to make leaders and followers
advance each other to a higher level of morality and motivation. They are a role model for
followers in order to inspire them and to raise their interest in the work; challenging followers
to take greater ownership for their work, and understanding the strengths and weaknesses of
followers, allowing the leader to align followers with tasks that enhance their performance
(Lowe, et.al., 1996). Laissez-Faire leadership style is a non-authoritarian leadership style.
Laissez faire leaders try to give the least possible guidance to subordinates, and try to achieve
272 Manas Journal of Social Studies

control through less obvious means. They believe that people can successfully complete their
own works when they are left alone to respond to their responsibilities and obligations in their
own ways. Therefore, they tend to delegate tasks but employees have very little information
about how they will do the job. In here, the leader trusts their employees or team to perform
the job themselves. Even if this style criticizes by some researchers because of its some
negative outcome for organization, at the point of the employees are skilled, loyal,
experienced and intellectual, this style works advantageously (Chaudhry and Javed, 2012).
Paternalistic leadership may be defined as treating the relationship with discipline,
fatherly authority and morality embedded in it. According to this definition, paternalistic
leadership composes of mainly three elements: authoritarianism, benevolence, and moral
leadership. Authoritarianism may explain as the leadership style in which leader exercise
authority over subordinates and each subordinate has a duty to obey the leader. Benevolent
leadership means that leader lead subordinate by care and has individualized concern toward
subordinate and their well-being. Moral leadership style reveals higher moral qualities,
selflessness, and self-discipline (Rehman and Afsar, 2012). Another leadership style is
ethical leadership. This style focuses on ethical beliefs and values and the dignity and rights
of others. It is thus related to concepts such as trust, honesty, consideration, charisma and
fairness (Stansbury, 2009). Generally, Ethics is concerned with the kinds of values and morals
that is an individual’s or a society’s desirable or appropriate. In addition, because ethics is
concerned with the virtuousness of individuals and their motives, leader's choices are also
influenced by their moral development (Freeman and Stewart, 2006). Servant leadership
which is one of leadership style emphasizes increased service to others, a holistic approach to
work, promoting a sense of community, and the sharing of power in decision making.
Greenleaf (1970) defined that the servant leader is one who is a servant first. In the servant as
leader, according to him, “It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve, to serve
first. Then conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead”. After, other researchers have
contributed in developing model of servant leadership. In the light of the literature, there are
ten characteristics of servant leadership: listening, empathy, healing, awareness, persuasion,
conceptualization, foresight, stewardship, commitment to the growth of people, building
community (Spears, 2010).
In literature, there are various definitions of leader and leadership styles. Yet, all of
them have reached a consensus about leader and its styles. The key factor for leader is to
influence. All leaders’ aim is to influence their followers and to ensure that their followers
follow them in order to achieve the aim.
The Role of Organizational Culture on Leadership Styles 273

As it was previously mentioned in this study, leadership style and organizational

culture are crucial concepts for organizations. In addition, many studies have shown that there
is a significant relationship between leadership style and organizational culture. As a matter of
fact, employee– manager relationship has been recognized as a social exchange relationship in
many studies (Liu and Deng, 2008). Here, it is important that which culture requires which
leadership style because leader is a person who meets expectations of employees and is able
to managed work flow within organization properly for a specific organization. In this
situation, leadership style will differ according to each organization.
Highlighted leadership style in organizational culture guides organization about the way of
work, the relationship between employee and top management and so forth. Even, organizational
culture is determinant on mission and vision of organization. Therefore, leadership style affects
them. For instance, each organization may not include written rules. In place of written rules, they
have norms, customs, values, beliefs. In order to avoid failure consequence, survive and sustain
their existence, leader is the most important factor and links with organizational culture.

3. Methodology
3.1. Research Questions: The aim of this study is to discover whether there is a
relationship between organizational culture and leadership style. The survey of this study was
conducted on 173 employees of human resources, marketing, accounting departments in a
private construction company in İstanbul. Survey data were collected during June- July 2017.
Thus, the research questions of the current study can be presented as follows:
RQ1. Does leadership style differ significantly according to the organizational culture
levels of employees?
In relation with that, the overall proposed theoretical research model of the present study
has been presented in Figure 1. In this context, the following hypotheses have been generated:
H1: Organizational culture differs significantly according to the leadership styles.
H1.1: Clan culture differs significantly according to the leadership style.
H2.1: Adhocracy culture differs significantly according to the leadership style.
H3.1: Market culture differs significantly according to the leadership style.
H4.1: Hierarchy culture differs significantly according to the leadership style.
3.2. Research Aim: In this study it is aimed to identify whether leadership style differ
significantly according to the organizational culture levels of employees To test the
hypothesized relationship, a field survey using questionnaires was conducted.
274 Manas Journal of Social Studies

4. Method
4.1. Sample and Data Collection: For this study, survey’s form was shared with
employees by online via survey’s link and delivering with hand. 173 complete questionnaires
were received from participants of the study. 43 (24%) of employees are female and 130
(75%) are male working in the different departments of the company. Of the 173 respondents,
142 employees (82%) are married, 31 employees (18%) are single. When it is evaluated with
respect to educational status, 19 employees (11%) has a master degree and the rest (89%)
have a bachelor degree. The average age between employees who participated this survey is
44 years. Employees who work in their current positions between six and 10 years are 87
persons (50%), those who work between one to five years are 41 persons (24%) and those
who work less than one year are 45 persons (26%). When it is evaluated in terms of their
tenure, 95 persons (55%) work between six and 15 years; 37 persons (21%) work between
one and five years; 41 persons (24%) work less than one years. Finally, data obtained from
those 173 were analyzed through the SPSS statistical program and hypotheses were tested
trough statistical analyses.
4.2. Measurements: To prepare the scales and questionnaires, it used scales which are
tested analysis of validity and reliability. Firstly, for the measuring organizational culture
(OC) is the Organizational Culture Assessment Instrument (OCAI) suggested by Kim
Cameron and Robert Quinn (2006). This questionnaire form was developed “Competing
Values Framework” including clan, hierarchy, adhocracy and market culture. All the items
included in the questionnaires were answered using a 5-point Likert scale of strongly disagree
(coded as 1), disagree (2), uncertain (3), agree (4), and strongly agree (5).
Leadership Questionnaire which is suggested by Çağlar (2011) was used to measure
leadership style. The researcher selected items from different leadership style scales because
the original version of these different leadership styles were very long and so, would not be
completed the survey by participants. For this part, items were answered using a 6-point
Likert scale from almost never (1) to almost always (6).

5. Findings
5.1. Factor Analysis and Reliability of the Scales: All two scales were applied both
factor analysis and reliability testing using data collected in this study. For two instruments,
initially, the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy was at least .800, above the
recommended value of .600 and Bartlett’s test of sphericity was significant (p value = .000).
Secondly, in order to measure internal consistency (reliability), it was used Cronbach’s Alpha
 The Role of Organizational Culture on Leadership Styles 275

statistic. All the measuring instruments was greater than 0.80. The results of factor and
reliability analysis are shown on the Table 1.

Table 1. The summary statistics of survey (N=173)

Factor Number of items KMO Cronbach’s Alpha(α) p value
Organizational 16 0.827 0.880 .000
Culture
Leadership Style 38 0.841 0.900 .000
KMO: Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Test

5.2. Analysis and Results: As mentioned about, in the main hypothesis for this study,
the effect between organizational culture and leadership style is proposed. In this context,
Table 2 reports the means, standard deviations and correlations of two variables. In general,
results shows that there are significant correlations as statistically between variables on a
middle level of research model. Firstly, “leadership style” has positive significant relationship
with organizational culture (r=0,698; p< .01).

Table 2. Means, Standard Deviations, Correlations of Variables

Mean SD 1 2
1. Leadership Style 4.02 0.63 1.000 .698(*)
2.Organizational 3.7 0.59 .698(*) 1.000
Culture
*p < .01

Whether there is a significant difference between leadership styles and organizational

culture was analyzed with one way variance analysis and the results are shown in Table 3.

Table 3. ANOVA results for leadership styles and dimensions of organizational culture.
Dimen. of Lead. Transformational Transactional Paternalistic
Ethical L. Servant L.
Style L. L. L.
Dimen. of F Sig. F Sig. F Sig. F Sig. F Sig.
Org. Cult.

Clan Culture .899 .607 .890 .765 .621 .900 3.432 .002* 10.83 .000*
9

Adhocracy Culture 3.967 .011* .118 2.12 4.77 1.13 3.45 .548 1.876 .378

Market Culture 18.54 0.002 34.78 .212 1.734 .32 3.234 .003* .900 .321
4 *
Hierarchy Culture 12.76 .32 10.41 .000* 2.554 .23 9.006 .12 10.76 .002*
7
N: 173; p < .01

The results of ANOVA were based on opinions of statistically significant differences

between two variables. As shown in Table 3, the results obtained in the ANOVA analysis
revealed a statistical significant difference of its sub-dimensions of each of variables.
276 Manas Journal of Social Studies

Generally, there were statistically significant differences between some sub-dimensions.

Firstly, clan culture differs significantly according to the servant leadership and paternalistic
leadership. However, present variable doesn’t show statistically significant differences
according to other dimensions of leadership. Secondly, adhocracy culture only differs
significantly according to transformational leadership. This dimension doesn’t show any
differences significantly with others. Thirdly, it was found statistically significant differences
for market culture. Market culture differs significantly according to transformational and
servant leadership. Hierarchy culture differs significantly according to transactional and
paternalistic leadership. Finally, dimension of organizational culture show neither a large
mean difference nor a large effect size on laissez- faire leadership style.

Discussion and Conclusion

The results of the present study have revealed that “clan culture” Clan culture differs
significantly according to perceived leadership style by their employees is “servant and
paternalistic leadership” model in the same organization. According to Cameron an Quinn
(2011), clan culture refers to a very friendly place to work where people share a lot of
themselves. (p.66).
Employees feel as if their co-workers were a member of their family. Unlike perceived
standard manager role, the manager in the organization behaves as a mentor, and, generally
they even play a role like employees’ parent. This perception enables employees to feel a
considerable commitment to the organization. Thus, it is thought that employee loyalty will
be at a high degree. All these results show that traditions are important with regard to
organization perspective because of close ties among all employees and managers. For this
organization, the long-term benefits are emphasized and group cohesion is given importance.
It means that when a decision is made about anything related to organization, it is expected
that all employees participate in it. Thus, employees’ morale will increase (p.66). At this
point, organizational commitment can be mentioned and subsequently, job satisfaction will
increase. In such an organizational culture, employees can easily communicate with each
other because there is an open communication climate in the organization. Employees may
influence one another’s behavior and build common values related to the organization. This is
also related to encouragement or discouragement of employees. A leader who is suitable for
clan culture treats employees as a mentor and this provides the organization with open
communication. Besides, relationship between employees is affective trust-based. Employees
have a confidence especially for their manager. Moreover, there are free and open exchange
The Role of Organizational Culture on Leadership Styles 277

of information and constructive conflict resolution (Nordin, et.al., 2013). All of these may be
based on “Social Identity Theory” and “Social Exchange Theory” since employees shows
behaviors in accordance with their identification with the organization and how much they are
structurally supported and recognized by the organization. In organization, job satisfaction
enables employees to feel commitment to the their organization (for clan culture, affective
commitment dimension of Allen and Mayer’ model) and thus, their motivation will also
increase. Here, due to manager’s coaching, encouraging, showing concern and interacting
with the organization roles, it can be said that manager empowers the employees. These
include behaviors such as helping to develop good relationship among employees and
working closely with the organization, helping them to become self-reliant and solving
problems together (Arnold, et.al., 2000).
While these results are positive outcome associated with the clan culture, some results
can also be named as negative. For instance, a clan culture tends to be a homogeneous
organization. Generally, there are employees who have common beliefs, goals or even
demographic characteristics. Almost everybody looks at solving a problem from the same
perspective. If there are any employees who have different ideas on the problems, they cannot
express their own idea. Sometimes, another idea for solving a problem efficiently may be
required. Another problem is that clan culture is open to abuse. Because of features such as
being a friendly place, freedom, teamwork and autonomy, it is vulnerable to abuse if
employees use its tolerance as an opportunity to relax rather than an opportunity to contribute.
Loafs can be experienced in organization while employees work. Another problem can arise
because of leadership role. Employees very often make mistakes since they know they will be
forgiven by managers and their manager will be correct their mistakes.
When servant leadership is considered, it can most likely be associated with the
participative leadership style. The highest priority of a servant leader is to encourage, support
and enable subordinates to demonstrate their full potential and abilities. This leads to an
obligation to delegate responsibility and engage in participative decision-making. This
participative style of leadership is presented as the approach with the greatest possible
performance and employee satisfaction (Keith and Dinner, 2009). When it is compared with
other leadership styles, servant leaders are similar to some leaders such as paternalistic leaders
and transformational leaders. The perceived leadership style within this organization
emphasizes long-term goals and includes development of their employees for organization
vision. Thus, both the organization and all the employees will benefit from with point of this
view. Servant leader gives confidence and provides emotional support to subordinates. It is
278 Manas Journal of Social Studies

not a surprising result a servant leadership style is displayed in an organization in which clan
culture is dominant.
When adhocracy culture is considered, it is not surprise transformational leadership differs
significantly according to this culture. Adhocracy oriented cultures are dynamic and
entrepreneurial, with a focus on risk-taking, innovation, and “doing things first. In such a culture,
it is important encouraging them before process and while in all process. Furthermore, for a
creative work environment that is needed, transformational leaders may be proper person because
of their ability to adapt quickly to changing conditions. This feature of leader may provide
employees to increase resilience in face of difficulties. At same time, perception of innovation that
dominates in adhocracy culture requires to intellectual knowledge and leader’s accumulation of
knowledge is source of inspiration for employees. As stated on Self-determination Theory,
intrinsic and varied extrinsic sources of motivation facilitate their performance, initiative and
well-being. Employees’ experience of autonomy, competence, and relatedness with organization
foster their motivation and engagement for activities, especially about creativity.
Here, if leader supports employees’ natural or intrinsic tendencies to behave in
effective way, and give an important employees’ needs, their development, individual
differences, degree of employees ‘self-confidence will be at high degree. Thus, everybody in
this organization may show their fact performances. Besides, according to Table 3., it is seen
that market culture differs significantly with transformational and servant leadership. It is
logical when we consider that market culture is long term-oriented and competitor climate in
organization. Therefore, employees need leadership style as transformational and servant
leader because these leaders motivate them about being success and be role model them by
working as much as they do. Also, in construction sector, in order to do creative work and
design, employees should be motivated with aforementioned factors.
Finally, results show that hierarchy culture differs significantly according to
transactional and paternalistic leadership styles. Hierarchy culture refers to formalized and
structured work environment. Especially, for some culture, hierarchy comes from power
relationship and superior-subordinate relationship, status or ownership are determinant. As a
result, hierarchical order may belong to such conditions. Leaders are proud of their efficiency-
based coordination and organization. So, in hierarchy culture, leader can perceive as a father
by employees if manager is compassionate. In addition, reason of being associated with
transactional leadership can be that leader wants to know all process the step-by-step and that
works want to run the business systematically.
The Role of Organizational Culture on Leadership Styles 279

Limitations of the Study and Suggestions for Future Work

Despite these promising results, the present research has some limitations. First of all,
the questionnaire survey was performed among the employees working in just certain private
construction sector located in Istanbul in Turkey. Because of that, the findings might not be
generalized for all types of organizations or sectors in all cities or countries. Secondly, the
effects of culture are so specify and so, this study mustn’t be generalized. Culture and climate
are factors which shouldn’t be overlooked. At same time, total sample size of this study is not
also enough in order to reach a general opinion. For that reason, it is recommended that
further studies should be performed with larger samples and different sectors for the
generalizability of the findings. In the relationship between organizational culture and
leadership styles, other variables are also determinant factors. Therefore, researchers would be
to look further whether relationship can be associated with other organizational outcomes
when they study on this relationship.

References
Acar, A.Zafer. (2012). “Organizational Culture, Leadership Styles and Organizational Commitment in Turkish
Logistics Industry”, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences vol:58 pp.217 – 226 .
Alas, R., Übius, Ü. and Vanhala, S. (2011).“Connections between Organizational Culture, Leadership and The
Innovation Climate in Estonian Enterprises”, E-Leader Vietnam.
Arditi, D., Nayak, S. and Damci, A. (2016). “Effect of Organizational Culture on Delay in Construction”,
International Journal of Project Management, vol:35, pp.136–147.
Cameron, Kim S. and Quinn, Robert E. (1999), Diagnosing and Changing Organizational Culture: Based on the
Competing Values Framework, Prentice Hall, ISBN 978-0-201-33871-3, reprinted John Wiley & Sons,
2011.
Chaudhry, A. O. and Husnain J. (2012). “Impact of Transactional and Laissez Faire Leadership Style on
Motivation”, International Journal of Business and Social Science, vol:3, no:7.
Chemers M. (1997). An integrative theory of leadership. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. ISBN 978-
0-8058-2679-1.
Chin, R. (2015). "Examining Teamwork and Leadership in the Fields of Public Administration, Leadership, and
Management". Team Performance Management.
Cliff M. (2015). “Culture Change”, Management Services, vol:59, no:1, pp28-30.
Deal T. E. and Kennedy, A. A. (1982, 2000) Corporate Cultures: The Rites and Rituals of Corporate Life,
Harmondsworth, Penguin Books, 1982; reissue Perseus Books, 2000.
Freeman, R. Edward and Stewart, L. (2006). “Business Roundtable Institute for Corporate Ethics”.
http://www.corporate-ethics.org/pdf/ethical_leadership.pdf.
Hofstede, G. (2011). “Dimensionalizing Cultures: The Hofstede Model in Context”, Online Readings in
Psychology and Culture, vol:2, no:8.
Keith, K.M., and Dinner, C.F. (2009). “Servant Leadership in Business”.
Kotter, J. P.; Heskett, James L. (1992). Corporate Culture and Performance. New York: The Free Press. ISBN 0-
02-918467-3.
Kwasi D. Baah (2015). “Resilient Leadership: A Transformational-Transactional Leadership Mix”, Journal of
Global Responsibility, vol:6, no:1, pp. 99-112.
Linley, P.Alex, Harrington, S. and Garcea, N. (2010). Oxford Handbook of Positive Psychology and Work,
Oxford University Press: New York.
Lowe, Kevin B., K. G. Kroeck, and Negaraj Sivasubramaniam. (1996) "Effectiveness Correlates of
Transformational and Transactional Leadership: A Meta-analytic Review of the MLQ Literature." The
Leadership Quarterly, vol:7, no:3, pp.385-425.
McSweeney, B. (2002). “Hofstede’s Model of National Cultural Differences and Their Consequences: A
Triumph of Faith- A Failure of analysis”. Human Relations, vol:55, no:1, pp.89-118.
280 Manas Journal of Social Studies

Rehman, M. and Afsar, B. (2012). “The Impact of Paternalistic Leadership on Organization Commitment and
Organization Citizenship Behaviour”, Journal of Business Management and Applied Economics, vol.5.
Russell P. Guay, (2013). “The Relationship between Leader Fit and Transformational Leadership”, Journal of
Managerial Psychology, vol:28, no:1, pp. 55-73.
Russell, E. (2011), “Leadership theories and style: a traditional approach”, Unpublished paper submitted for the
General Douglas MacArthur Military Leadership Writing Competition.
Schein, Edgar (1992). Organizational Culture and Leadership: A Dynamic View. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Bass. p. 9.
Spears, Larry C. (2010). “Character and Servant Leadership: Ten Characteristics of Effective, Caring Leaders”,
The Journal of Virtues & Leadership, vol:1, no:1, pp.25-30.
Stansbury, J.(2009). “Reasoned Moral Agreement: Applying Discourse Ethics within Organizations”, Business
Ethics Quarterly, vol:19, no:1, pp.33-56.
Trevisani, D. (2016). Communication for Leadership: Coaching Leadership Skills (2 ed.). Ferrara: Medialab
Research. p. 21. ISBN 978-1-329-59007-6.
Yu, T., and Wu, N. (2009). “A Review of Study on the Competing Values Framework”, International Journal of
Business and Management, vol: 4, no:7.