Chinese culture. Given the importance of moral leadership, it is
conceivable that the leader’s morality may further reinforce the effects
of high authoritarianism–high benevolence leadership to produce a
highly effective leader.
Several studies have explored the interactive effects of the three PL
dimensions, using hierarchical multiple regression analysis. While
none of these studies found the three-way interaction, the two-way
interaction between authoritarianism and benevolence was sometimes
observed in attitudinal outcomes. For example, Cheng, Huang, and
Chou ( 2002 ) found a significant interaction between authoritarian
and benevolent leadership on satisfaction with the leader in work
teams in Taiwan. Similar interactions were observed for identification,
compliance, and repayment and gratitude in Chenget al.( 2004 ).
These two-way interactions, when plotted, reveal that when a leader
has high benevolence, authoritarian leadership has either a slightly
positive effect or no effect on the subordinates’ attitudes; when a
leader has low benevolence, authoritarianism has a negative effect
on the subordinates’ attitudes. This pattern of interaction offers some
support for the proposition that an ‘‘ideal’’ leader in Chinese organiza-
tions is simultaneously benevolent and ‘‘strict’’ (in the sense of applying
harsh discipline) toward subordinates.
In addition, an interaction between morality and authoritarianism
on attitudinal outcomes was sometimes observed (Chenget al., 2003 ;
Chenget al., 2004 ). This observation shows that when a leader was
perceived as having high morality, authoritarianism had a negative effect
on the subordinates’ attitudes; when the leader’s morality was perceived
as low, authoritarianism had a positive effect on the subordinates’
attitudes. This interactive effect is difficult to interpret, and we shall
not elaborate here. In sum, we found very limited evidence about the
interactive effects of PL dimensions on subordinate outcomes in existing
studies. The most promising finding appears to be the interaction
between authoritarianism and benevolence. Since this interactive effect
has not been found reliably across studies (Farhet al., 2006 ), there may
be some contextual factors that condition its effect. Future research
should examine this issue further before any firm conclusions are drawn.
Comparison with transformational leadership
Because PL is an indigenous leadership model, it is important to
determine whether its dimensions could account for unique variance
Paternalistic leadership in Chinese organizations 179