Editorial Board

A Refereed Monthly International Journal of Management

Proactive Workplace Behaviors in the Automotive Sector: The Effect of Transformational Leadership Behavior

H.Tezcan Uysal

 Assoc. Prof.,

Department of Health Management,

Bilecik Şeyh Edebali University,

Bilecik, Turkey.

Email: h.tezcanuysal@hotmail.com

ORCID: 0000-0002-8962-7824

Murat Ak

Assoc. Prof.,

Department of International Business and Trade,

Karamanoğlu Mehmetbey University, Turkey.

muratak1578@hotmail.com

ORCID: 0000-0001-8065-7245

Aytek Koşar

 Ph.D Student,

Department of Management Information Systems,

 Institute of Social Sciences

Karamanoğlu Mehmetbey University, Turkey.

ORCID: 0000-0002-9409-4858

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to investigate whether there is a significant relationship between proactive workplace behaviors and transformational leadership behavior among private sector employees. If there is a meaningful relationship, the study aims to determine the direction and level of the impact of perceived transformational leadership behavior on proactive workplace behaviors. To achieve this objective, data was collected through face-to-face surveys from employees working in the workshops of Toyota, Nissan, and Peugeot companies operating in the automotive sector in Turkey. Structural equation modeling was employed to test the proposed hypotheses. Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), a variance-based structural equation modeling method, was used to analyze the relationship between the factors included in the research model. The results of the analysis revealed a high and significant relationship between transformational leadership behavior and proactive workplace behaviors. Furthermore, it was found that transformational leadership behavior significantly and positively influenced the sub-dimensions of proactive workplace behaviors, including voice, taking charge, problem prevention, and individual innovation factors.

Keywords: Transformational Leadership, Proactive Workplace Behaviors, Automotive Industry, Job Attitude

Introduction

Individuals actively involved in business life need someone to show them what to do when they encounter situations outside of normal operations or face new circumstances. In organizations, individuals in such positions also take responsibility for the work, even if they are not actively involved in it. These individuals are generally referred to as managers. However, the concept that takes management to a higher level is the concept of leadership. Although they may seem similar at first glance, leadership is a concept that goes beyond management. It is considered ideal for individuals with leadership qualities to perform managerial tasks in many institutions. In many small businesses, the manager or leader is often the owner or partner of the company, but as the business grows, individuals who better reflect the concept of leadership are appointed to this status. A leader strives to use all available resources to sustain, develop, and avoid problems in the business. Moreover, a leader is someone who benefits the region where they are located and influences their surroundings in proportion to their ability to use their power effectively. They take responsibility and make decisions based on intelligence and knowledge. On the other hand, a manager holds the position of being responsible for a unit. The more active, visionary, and skilled in interpersonal relationships a manager/leader is in a company, the more it can positively impact the motivation of employees and the profitability of the company. Business owners nowadays select not only managers who merely stand above the workers, constantly reprimand employees, and rarely leave their offices unless there is a problem but also leaders who add value to the company and enhance the atmosphere of harmony.

The topic of leadership has been widely addressed in scientific research. It does not only focus on a single type of leadership model, but different concepts are discussed based on the characteristics of the leader. One of these concepts is transformational leadership. Another topic is proactive workplace behaviors. These behaviors can be considered as the ability to anticipate potential problems in the workplace, develop solutions, and quickly adapt to new situations. Similar to transformational leadership, proactive workplace behaviors also create a positive perception. Therefore, this study aims to explore whether individuals exhibiting transformational leadership behaviors also demonstrate proactive workplace behaviors and whether transformational leaders motivate employees to exhibit proactive workplace behaviors. The research conducted focuses on the development and maximization of proactive workplace behaviors, which are crucial for the continuity and performance objectives in organizations, and it aims to contribute to the literature in this regard.

Literature Review

Transformational Leadership

The concept of leadership in the Oxford Dictionary is defined as “the action of leading a group of people or an organization, or the ability to do this” (İbicioğlu et al., 2009). In the literature, the concept of leadership has been defined by some authors as follows: According to Sabuncuoğlu and Tüze (2001), a leader is someone who directs people towards a specific goal and enables them to take action. Burns (1978) defines leaders as individuals who mobilize followers by utilizing personal, political, economic, and other powers to achieve different or common objectives. Bass (1990) states that a leader is someone who can bring together at least two of the following aspects in group behaviors and processes: achieving goals, creating synergy, being powerful, and making decisions. Fischer (2016) defines leadership as the title given to someone who directs their followers to behave in a desired manner and manages this process over time.

As can be understood, a leader stands out within a group with qualities such as ideas, authority, vision, and many others. Leadership is a concept that can be developed, but it is also known that many individuals have inherent leadership qualities. Life experiences may have compelled some people to become leaders, while others may be inclined to think, “Leadership is not for me; it requires a lot of thinking and taking on a lot of responsibility.” Nevertheless, individuals who demonstrate leadership behavior are sought after by companies, and as their experience grows, they can receive better offers. People who have previously held leadership/managerial positions in their former workplaces often apply for managerial roles when transitioning to a new job and are frequently hired as managers based on their resumes by human resources departments.

The concept of transformational leadership was introduced in the book “Leadership” by Burns (1978), where various leadership models were examined (Dede, 2019). Burns (1978) is the scholar who coined the term “transformational leader,” defining it as someone who changes the needs, beliefs, and values of their followers (Koçel, 2003). The definition was further developed by Bass (1985). There are various definitions of transformational leadership in the literature. Some of them are as follows: According to İntepeler and Barış (2018), transformational leadership refers to the processes that meet the expectations and needs of employees and motivate them towards the organization's goals. A transformational leader is one who positively organizes their followers and motivates them towards change and innovation (Şahin, 2009). According to Bass (1985), transformational leaders develop and articulate an attractive vision for the future, provide constructive feedback to employees, inspire them to work towards common goals, and motivate them to achieve high levels of performance. Transformational leaders believe that there is more than one way to achieve success and take into account the intellectual and emotional needs of their followers (Bass, 1997). Pieterse et al. (2010) describe transformational leadership as a leadership style that develops the interests, ideals, and values of followers in line with the organization's goals and motivates them to achieve higher performance than expected. Jung et al. (2003) define transformational leaders as individuals who can effect change through influence and charisma, acting as role models within the community. Çoğaltay et al. (2014) also state that transformational leadership is a concept that includes emotions and values, focusing on long-term goals and aiming to transform and change followers during this process. Cafoğlu (1997) states that transformational leaders, due to their extraordinary structures, are not satisfied with the existing and continuously produce new thoughts and ideas, internalizing them to their followers, and they are responsible for creating a vision within the organization. Kaygın and Kaygın (2012) describe transformational leaders as taking the role of a teacher or counselor, considering the individual needs of all employees. They closely engage with employees' problems, establishing healthy and quality connections, and thus creating a mutual trust environment. Additionally, Odumeru and Ogbonna (2013) define transformational leaders as leaders who help their employees discover their strengths and weaknesses, bring out their qualities, and strive to involve them in the activities.

Kouzes and Posner (2012) have defined five important leadership characteristics in transformational leadership. These characteristics are: providing direction, developing a shared vision, following processes, supporting employees' development, and congratulating followers on their achievements to encourage them. According to Bass (1990), transformational leadership is built upon four fundamental components in the literature. These are: idealized influence (charisma), inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration (Bass and Avolio, 1994). Podsakoff et al. (1990) have stated that transformational leadership should encompass the following six characteristics:

·         Articulating a standardized vision

·         Being an appropriate role model

·         Facilitating the acceptance of the community's goals

·         Having high expectations for achievement

·         Providing individualized support

·         Providing intellectual/scientific stimulation

Transformational leaders enhance employees' motivation, work enthusiasm, job satisfaction, and improve the work environment (Walumbwa et al., 2005). According to Carless et al. (2000), the concept of transformational leadership is associated with the following behaviors: providing a vision, promoting the development of employees, offering support and contributions, empowering and enabling employees, being innovative, serving as a role model, and having charismatic presence. Transformational leaders break conventional norms, take risks, and serve as a source of inspiration for everyone. They involve the organization in exploratory activities and contribute to the development of synchronized communication and feedback processes (Purvee and Enkhtuvshin, 2014). On a personal level, transformational leaders support the development and active participation of their followers while contributing to a sense of unity and togetherness among the staff. This naturally builds a sense of trust among employees (Braun et al., 2013). Compared to transactional leadership styles, the transformational leadership style can generally lead to higher performance within an organization. Leaders with this style possess charismatic and visionary qualities. They can inspire their subordinates to look towards the future, taking the set goals, objectives, and visions beyond their current limits (Hassan et al., 2019). The transformational leadership theory focuses on the significant role leaders can play in promoting both personal and organizational change and in helping employees meet and exceed performance expectations (Avolio, 2005).

Proactive Workplace Behaviors

Proactive is a term used in dictionaries to refer to being willing to take risks, initiate action, and possess foresight. Proactivity involves self-initiated behavior that is focused on change and the future. Being proactive means making efforts to predict future outcomes, control and improve the environment, and initiate actions and changes without being prompted (Crant, 2000; Frese and Fay, 2001; Grant and Ashford, 2008). It is essential to avoid confusing two similar concepts. Proactive personality and proactive workplace behaviors measure different aspects, but it cannot be said that they have no relationship. Uncuoğlu-Yolcu (2017), in her doctoral thesis, conducted a detailed literature review and concluded that proactive personality is one of the antecedents of Proactive workplace behavior. Proactive workplace behavior is discussed in three different dimensions. The first one is the organizational environment (Proactive workplace behavior within the organization), the second is the organization's alignment with the external environment (proactive strategic behavior), and the third and final dimension is the individual's adaptability to the organizational environment (proactive person-environment fit) (Parker and Collins, 2010). This study will examine the topic of Proactive workplace behavior, specifically looking at the characteristics, perceptions, and attitudes of employees and managers in the workplace. However, there are still limitations in the research as validated tools to measure Proactive workplace behavior are primarily conducted only in the most commonly used language, which is English (Uri, 2017).

Proactive workplace behavior is defined differently in various literature sources. It involves making decisions that will improve the current situation, challenging obstacles instead of conforming to the usual situation (Crant, 2000). Proactive workplace behavior is an approach where individuals initiate tasks independently, touching the routine functioning of a job (Frese et al., 1997). According to Parker et al. (2006), Proactive workplace behavior refers to the forward-looking activities initiated by individuals aiming to change and update themselves or their behaviors. Grant and Ashford (2008) define Proactive workplace behavior as “the anticipatory activities that employees exhibit to change themselves and/or their environments.” Different authors have explored the components that explain Proactive workplace behavior, such as taking responsibility, expressing ideas, taking preventive measures against problems, and individual innovation (Palabıyık and Yücel, 2018).

Bindl and Parker (2010) have listed three important reasons for organizations and individuals to exhibit proactive behavior. These reasons include taking initiative regarding opportunities and threats, supporting creative activities by assuming responsibility, and taking responsibility in individual career/performance competition. Uysal (2014) listed the fundamental features of Proactive workplace behavior as being anticipatory, open to change, and taking independent responsibility in decision-making in his doctoral thesis. Finally, receiving support from leaders encourages a higher sense of self-determination (Oldham and Cummings, 1996) and increases employees' sense of competence and their willingness to initiate future-focused changes (Parker and Wu, 2014).

Research Methodology

The Population and Sample of the Research

The population of the research consists of employees working in the automotive sector (private sector) in Turkey. The sample of the research consists of employees working in the automotive sector in the city of Izmir. The purposive sampling method, which is a non-probability sampling method, has been used in the research, and 75 out of 95 managers from the Toyota, Nissan, and Peugeot companies in the sector have responded, ensuring the integrity of the data. The reason for selecting private sector employees as the sample is due to the prevalence of transformational leadership behaviors in the competitive private sector. Additionally, most of the studies related to transformational leadership have been conducted in the private sector, and the need for Proactive workplace behavior is higher due to the competitive environment.

The Data Collection Method of the Research

In the research, the survey method was used to collect data. The survey consists of a 5-point Likert scale with a total of 26 items. The first section of the survey includes questions about demographic information such as age, gender, educational background, as well as questions about the number of years working in the current workplace and the job role. The second section utilizes a 13-item adapted version of the Transformational Leadership Scale (TLS), developed by Çağlayan (2017), to measure the perception of transformational leadership. In the third section, a 13-item Proactive workplace behavior Scale, developed by Parker and Collins (2010) and adapted into Turkish by Uri (2017), is used to assess proactive workplace behaviors.

The Research Model

A scanning model was used in the research. Within the scope of the developed hypotheses, the main dependent variable of the study is Proactive workplace behavior, and the sub-dependent variables are voice, taking charge, problem prevention, and individual innovation. The independent variable is transformational leadership, and the conceptual model is represented in Figure 1.

Figure-1 A Conceptual Model of this Research

The hypotheses of the research;

H_1e: There is a positive relationship between transformational leadership and Proactive workplace behavior.

H_1a: Transformational leadership has an effect on the voice factor.

H_1b: Transformational leadership has an effect on the taking charge factor.

H_1c: Transformational leadership has an effect on the problem prevention factor.

H_1d: Transformational leadership has an effect on the individual innovation factor.

4. Results

According to the descriptive statistics presented in Table 1, 73.3% of the participants in the study are male, while 26.7% are female. The majority, accounting for 61.3%, are married. Participants within the age range of 26-41 make up 61.4% of the sample, and the highest level of education is high school with 48%. About 46.6% of the sample has more than 10 years of work experience in their profession. The participants work in maintenance-repair, service, and general personnel departments with approximately equal distribution, and 85.3% of them hold the position of “employee.”

Table-1 Descriptive Statistics

The data obtained from the research were analyzed using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). SEM has two different approaches: covariance-based and variance-based modeling (Hair et al., 2017). In the analysis of the relationships between factors included in the research model, the variance-based Structural Equation Modeling method called PLS-SEM (Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling) was used. One of the most significant features of PLS-SEM is its ability to predict complex research problems in a synchronized and detailed manner (Anderson and Gerbing, 1988). During the development of the measurement model, the responses to the questions were taken into consideration. The evaluation of the research model included assessing the item reliability in terms of factor loadings, the construct reliability in terms of composite reliability, the convergent validity examined through Average Variance Extracted (AVE) values, and the discriminant validity examined through correlations.

Table-2 Factor Analysis Results of the Model

As seen in Table 2, the factor loading values range from 0.717 to 0.938. In scale development or model research, a factor loading value between 0.50 and 0.60 can be considered acceptable (Hulland, 1999). Therefore, based on the model, items S01 and S09, which have factor loading values below 0.50, have been removed from the scale. The rest of the items in the model were found to be within the specified range. Cronbach's Alpha value represents the internal consistency of the questionnaire items. Cronbach's Alpha value ranges from “0” to “1.” If the alpha values are below 0.50, the responses are considered unreliable; if they are between 0.50 and 0.80, they are moderately reliable; and if they are above 0.80, they are highly reliable (Salvucci et al., 1997:115). In the model, the Cronbach's Alpha value for transformational leadership was found to be 0.941; for the voice factor, it was 0.792; for the taking charge factor, it was 0.879; for the problem prevention factor, it was 0.903; and for the individual innovation factor, it was 0.879. These results indicate that the model has internal consistency and ensures item reliability.

Composite Reliability (CR) represents the reliability of the model. The values of Composite Reliability (CR) should be equal to or greater than 0.70 (Doğan, 2019). In the model, the Composite Reliability (CR) value for transformational leadership factors was 0.950; for the voice factor, it was 0.877; for the taking charge factor, it was 0.925; for the problem prevention factor, it was 0.939; and for the individual innovation factor, it was 0.926. All factors had Composite Reliability (CR) values above 0.70, indicating the expression and structural reliability of the model.

Convergent validity of the model was examined by looking at the Average Variance Extracted (AVE) values. AVE should be greater than 0.50 (Doğan, 2019). In the model, the AVE value for transformational leadership factors was 0.656; for the voice expression factor, it was 0.705; for the taking charge factor, it was 0.805; for the problem prevention factor, it was 0.837; and for the individual innovation factor, it was 0.806. The AVE values were above the specified threshold, indicating the model's convergent validity. The discriminant validity values in the model showed the largest values within the corresponding rows and columns, which demonstrates a proper structure (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). Table 3 presents the discriminant validity values according to the Fornell-Larcker criteria. Upon examination of this table, it is evident that the factors have the largest values within their corresponding rows and columns, indicating that the model adheres to the criteria for discriminant validity.

Table-3 Differential Validity by Fornell-Larcker Criteria

To confirm discriminant validity, cross-factor loadings were examined. Cross-factor loadings should be higher for the external loads of the model than for the cross-loads of other constructs (Hair et al., 2014:106). In the model, items S10 and S16 were removed from the analysis as their cross-loading values were higher on other factors. Cross-factor loadings are shown in Table 4. Upon examination of this table, it is evident that after removing items S10 and S16 from the model, each factor's loadings were higher than all cross-loadings, indicating that the cross-factor loadings met the specified criteria and thus confirming the discriminant validity.

Table-4 Cross Factor Loads

The research examines the hypothesis H_1e, which proposes the following problem statement: “There is a positive relationship between transformational leadership and Proactive workplace behavior.” The analysis results related to testing this proposition are presented in Table 5. When the total scores of transformational leadership and Proactive workplace behavior were subjected to two-tailed Pearson correlation using the PSPP statistical software, a high positive correlation was observed (r=0.839; p<0.05), and H_1e was accepted.

Table-5 Results of Correlation Analysis

The path model results indicate whether the established relationships are supported by the model. When Table 6 is examined, it is observed that the T-values for the path coefficients of hypotheses H_1a, H_1b, H_1c and H_1d are greater than the critical T-table value of 1.96 at a 95% confidence interval, as stated in the literature. Additionally, the p-values for hypotheses H_1a, H_1b, H_1c and H_1d are also found to be less than 0.05. As a result, it can be concluded that hypotheses H_1a, H_1b, H_1c and H_1d are supported.

Table-6 Path Coefficients and Test Results

Another aspect to consider in path analysis is the effect size, which is represented by the R² values. R² indicates the percentage of variance in the endogenous variable explained by the exogenous variables. R² values of 0.25 are considered weak, 0.50 moderate, and 0.75 strong. In the conducted R² analysis within the scope of the research, it was found that the R2 value for the voice factor is 0.579, indicating a moderate level of explanation of the voice factor by transformational leadership. For the taking charge factor, the R² value is 0.384, indicating a weak level of explanation of the taking charge factor by transformational leadership. The problem prevention factor has an R² value of 0.576, indicating a moderate level of explanation of the problem prevention factor by transformational leadership. Lastly, for the individual innovation factor, the R² value is 0.672, indicating a moderate level of explanation of the individual innovation factor by transformational leadership.

Conclusions and Recommendations

If an organization is established for commercial purposes, increasing productivity and success, as well as profitability, becomes the primary goal. To achieve this, many variables need to be aligned with each other. Simply investing in good marketing and advertising will not solve all problems. Ultimately, the main element of an organization is its people. If the right people perform the right tasks at the right time, success can be achieved. Among these individuals, managers play a crucial role in contributing to success. It is essential for a manager to possess “leadership” qualities that are relevant to the era. Leaders think comprehensively about the organization and have a vision and mission. They communicate with everyone involved in the organization, listen to and attempt to solve problems, and take suggestions into account. They are open to technological innovations and opportunities brought by the times. They do not just give orders but also persuade employees, making tasks embraced by the workforce. They treat employees fairly, maintaining a certain distance while establishing bonds of love and respect with everyone. They inspire trust and possess charisma. Numerous distinctive characteristics demonstrate a person's leadership qualities. Transformational leaders take these qualities to the next level. They lead the organization towards its goals and develop new objectives and visions. They expect their followers to adapt quickly to innovations, feel a sense of belonging to the organization, perform tasks without waiting for orders, and, when necessary, take initiatives. The desired behavior aligns with the pro-active work behaviors described in the study.

The participants of our study were employees in the private sector working in the automotive sector. Based on the collected data, a positive relationship between transformational leadership and proactive workplace behaviors was identified. The relationship between transformational leadership and the sub-dimensions of proactive workplace behaviors was also found to be generally positive. When interpreting these findings, it is believed that followers under a transformational leader can express their thoughts openly. This suggests that in companies with leaders possessing similar characteristics, expressions like “will I face consequences if I voice my opinion?” may not be applicable. Followers under such leaders are not hesitant to take responsibility, as they are aware of the leader's problem-solving approach. They actively seek solutions to problems that arise during work and present them to the leader. They are open to individual innovations and also consider the motivating aspect of innovation.

Recommendations can be provided for managers aspiring to become transformational leaders. First and foremost, while considering the organization's interests, individuals should not be overlooked, and fairness should be maintained. Instead of taking credit individually for every success, they should emphasize the team spirit and highlight the achievements of the employees. They should be present alongside the organization in the field. Being a good listener and observer is crucial. When explaining the measures and decisions taken, they should be straightforward and honest. They should never forget that their followers/employees are also human beings, with personal lives and problems, and acknowledge that they too have families. Remembering special occasions and offering support as a friend during difficult times is important. Rather than using accusatory language, they should use motivational language and be inclined to forgive mistakes, if unintentional. They should make an effort to use “we” language instead of “I” language.

For future studies, research in different business sectors and with broader participation is necessary. The current situation has been attempted to be presented here at a fundamental level. Such studies should also be complemented and supported by qualitative research methods.

References

Anderson, J. C. and Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: A Reviewand Recommended Two-Step Approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 411-423.

Avolio, B. J. (2005), Leadership Development in Balance: Made/Born, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.

Bass, B. (1990). From Transactional to Transformational Leadership: Learning to Share the Vision, StogdillHandbook of Leadership. (Third Edition). New York: FreePress.

Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. Collier Macmillan.

Bass, B. M. (1997). Personal Selling and Transactional/Transformational Leadership. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 17(3), 19-28.

Bass, B. M. and Avolio, B. J. (1994). Introduction. Bass, B. M. ve Avolio, B. J. (Eds.) Improving organizational effectiveness through transformational leadership (s. 1-8). Sage.

Bindl, U. K. and Parker, S. K. (2010). APA Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psycholog (2th ed.). Washington: American Psychological Association.

Braun, S., Peus, C., Weisweiler, S. and Frey, D. (2013). Transformational leadership, job satisfaction, and team performance: A multilevel mediation model of trust. The Leadership Quarterly, 24(1), 270-283.

Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper&RowPublishers,

Cafoğlu, Z. (1997). Liderlik, Bilgi-Karizma-Değişim. 21. Yüzyılda Liderlik Sempozyumu, Bildiriler Kitabı, (1), İstanbul, Deniz Harp Okulu Basımevi.

Carless, S. A., Wearing, A. J. & Mann, L. (2000). A Short Measure of Transformational Leadership. Journal of Business and Psychology, 14(3), 389-404.

Crant, J. M. (2000). Proactive behavior in organizations. Journal of Management, 26, 435-462.

Çoğaltay, N., Karadağ, E. and Öztekin, Ö. (2014). Okul müdürlerinin dönüşümcü liderlik davranışlarının öğretmenlerin örgütsel bağlılığına etkisi: Bir metaanaliz çalışması. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 20(4), 483-500.

Dede, N. P. (2019). Dönüşümcü Liderlik Ve Örgütsel Bağlılık İlişkisinde Lidere Olan Güvenin Aracı Rolü Üzerine Bir Araştırma, Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 7(4), 1923-1943.

Doğan, D. (2019). Smart PLS ile Veri Analizi. Ankara: Zet Yayınları.

Fischer, S. A. (2016). Transformational leadership in nursing: a concept analysis. Journal of advanced nursing, 72(11), 2644-2653.

Fornell, C. and Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation model swithun observable variable sand measurement error: Algebra and statistics.

Frese, M. and Fay, D. (2001). Personal initiative (PI): An active performance concept for work in the 21st century. In B. M. Staw&R.M. Sutton (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 23, pp. 133-187). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier Science

Frese, M., Fay, D., Hilburger, T., Leng, K. and Tag, A. (1997). The concept of personal initiative: Operationalization, reliability and validity in two German samples. Journal of occupational and organizational psychology, 70(2), 139-161.

Grant, A. M. and Ashford, S. J. (2008). The dynamics of proactivity at work. Research in Organizational Behavior, 28, 3-34.

Hair Jr, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. and Sarstedt, M. (2017). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). 2.nd ed. Sagepublications.

Hair, F. Jr, J., Sarstedt, M., Hopkins, L. and G. Kuppelwieser, V. (2014). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) an emerging tool in business research. European Business Review, 2(26), 106-121.

Hassan, H., Hamzah, N., Saleh, N. M. and Kamaluddın, A. (2019). The Effect of Transformational Leadership Styles towards Managing Knowledge Assets Asian Journal of Accounting and Governance, Asian Journal of Accounting and Governance, 11, 171-180.

Hulland, J. (1999). Use of Partial Least Squares (PLS) in strategic management research: a review of four recent studies. Strategic Management Journal, 20(2), 195-204.

İbicioğlu, H., Özmen, Ö. H. İ. and Sebahattin, T. A. Ş. (2009). Liderlik Davranışı Ve Toplumsal Norm İlişkisi: Ampirik Bir Çalışma. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 14(2), 1-23.

İntepeler, Ş. S. and Barış, V. K. (2018). Dönüşümcü ve Etkileşimci Lider İzleyen İlişkilerinin Hemşirelik ve Sağlık Hizmetlerine Etkisi. Acıbadem Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi, (2), 97-104.

Jung, D. I., Chow, C. and Wu, A. (2003). The Role of Transformational Leadership in Enhancing Organizational Innovation: Hypotheses and Some Preliminary Findings. The Leadership Quarterly, 14: 525-544.

Kaygın, E. and Kaygın, C. Y. (2012). Çalışanların dönüştürücü liderlik algılarını belirlemeye yönelik bir araştırma. Organizasyon ve Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi, 4(2), 29-38.

Koçel, T. (2003), İşletme Yöneticiliği, Beta BasımYayım ve Dağıtım, İstanbul.

Kouzes, J. M. and Posner, B. Z. (2023). The leadership challenge: How to make extraordinary things happen in organizations. John Wiley & Sons.

Odumeru, J. A. and Ogbonna, I. G. (2013). Transformational vs. transactional leadership theories: Evidence in literature. International review of management and business research, 2(2), 355.

Oldham, G. R. and Cummings, A. (1996). Employee creativity: Personal and contextual factors at work. Academy osf Management Journal, 39(3), 607-634.

Palabıyık, N. and Yücel, İ. (2018). Bir İş Yerinde Beyaz Ve Mavi Yakalı Çalışanların Kariyer Çıpaları İle Proaktif İş Davranışları Arasındaki İlişkinin Karşılaştırılması. UİİİD-IJEAS,(17. UİK Özel Sayısı), 41-56.

Parker, S. K. and Collins, C. G. (2010). Taking stock: Integrating and differentiating multiple proactive behaviors. Journal of Management, 36(3), 633-662.

Parker, S. K. and Wu, C.-H. (20140). Leading for proactivity: How leaders cultivate staff who make things happen. In Volume 9/5 Spring, 157-184.

Parker, S. K., Williams, H. M. and Turner, N. (2006). Modeling the antecedents of proactive behavior at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91 (3), 636-652.

Paulsen, N., Callan, V. J., Ayoko, O. and Saunders D. (2013). Transformational leadership and innovation. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 26(3), 595-610.

Pieterse, A. N., Van Knippenberg, D., Schippers, M. and Stam, D. (2010). Transformational and transactional leadership and innovative behavior: The moderating role of psychological empowerment. Journal of organizational behavior, 31(4), 609-623.

Purvee, A. and Enkhtuvshin, D. (2014). Transformational leadership and managers’ ambidexterity: Mediating role of environmental dynamism. International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology, 5(6), 434-437.

Sabuncuoğlu, Z. and Tüz, M. (2001). Örgütsel Psikoloji. Bursa: Ezgi Kitabevi

Salvucci, S., Walter, E., Conley, V., Fink, S. and Saba, M. (1997). Measurement Error Studies at the National Center for Education Statistics, U. S. Department of Education, Washington, NCES 97464 Publication.

Şahin, B. (2009). Örgütsel Gelişmenin Sağlanmasında Dönüşümcü Liderlerin Rolü. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 11(3), 97-118.

Uncuoğlu-Yolcu, İ. and Çakmak, A. F. (2017). Proaktif Kişilik İle Proaktif Çalışma Davranışı İlişkisi Üzerinde Psikolojik Güçlendirmenin etkisi. Uluslararası Yönetim İktisat ve İşletme Dergisi, 13(2), 425-438.

Uri, C . (2017). Measurıng Proactive Work Behaviour Construct And Its Components: Validating Turkish Version of the Scales. Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 26(1), 102-114.

Uysal, B. (2014), Çalışma Yaşamındaki Güncel Gelişmeler Çerçevesinde İş Dizaynı ve İş Özelliklerinin Proaktif İş Davranışına Etkisi Üzerine Bir Araştırma. İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü İşletme Ana Bilim Dalı İnsan Kaynakları Yönetimi Bilim Dalı, Doktora Tezi

Walumbwa, F. O., Orwa, B., Wang, P. and Lawler, J. J. (2005). Transformational leadership, organizational commitment, and job satisfaction: A comparative study of Kenyan and US financial firms. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 16(2), 235-256.