dimensions. There are two different ways of conceptualizing sub-
ordinate dependence in the literature. On the one hand, subordinate
dependence may be construed from a psychological approach, which
describes the extent to which an employee wishes the leader to facili-
tate the paths towards individual, group, and/or organizational goals
(e.g. Kerr and Jermier, 1978 ). An alternative view is to construe it as
resource-based dependence imposed by the organizational structure
(e.g. French and Raven, 1960 ). This reflects the degree of the mana-
gers’ dominance over subordinates in the workplace. We use this
second view of dependence. Redding ( 1990 ) suggested that the strong
dependence of subordinates on their supervisor is a salient character-
istic of paternalism in overseas Chinese family businesses. This struc-
turally imposed dependence is a useful angle for understanding the
boundary conditions of PL effects. The logic behind this hypothesized
effect is straightforward. Subordinates are less likely to respond to
paternalistic leadership when they are resource-independent than
when they are resource-dependent.
Farhet al.( 2006 ) studied the moderating effects of subordinates’
dependence on the leader for resources on the relationship between
the PL dimensions and subordinates’ outcomes. Consistent with their
general predictions, they found that (i) authoritarianism was more
strongly associated with fear of the leader when the subordinates’
resource dependence was high than when it was low; and (ii) benevo-
lence had a stronger, positive effect on subordinates’ identification,
compliance, and organizational commitment when subordinates’
resource dependence was high than when it was low. These findings,
taken together, suggest that when subordinates depend heavily on
their leaders for resources, authoritarian and benevolent leadership
tend to have stronger effects on subordinates. Interestingly, Farhet al.
( 2006 ) reported a ‘‘reverse’’ moderating effect for moral leadership.
That is, the leader’s morality had a stronger positive effect on the
subordinates’ identification, compliance, and commitment when sub-
ordinates’ dependence was low than when it was high. The leader’s
morality actually had a more potent effect when subordinates did not
depend on their leaders for resources. If these results can be replicated
in future research, they suggest that the three dimensions of PL
involve different psychological mechanisms in influencing workers’
attitudes and behaviors. Future research should examine this issue
further.
Paternalistic leadership in Chinese organizations 183