Pamukkale Üniversitesi

Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi

Pamukkale University Journal of Social Sciences Institute

ISSN 1308-2922 E-ISSN 2147-6985

Article Info/Makale Bilgisi

√Received/Geliş:23.11.2020 √Accepted/Kabul:20.01.2021
DOI:10.30794/pausbed.829858
Araştırma Makalesi/ Research Article

Düger, Y. S. (2021). "The Effect of Empowering Leadership on Employees’ Innovative Behavior: The Role of Affective Commitment and Psychological
Empowerment" Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Sayı 46, Denizli, ss. 479-496.

THE EFFECT OF EMPOWERING LEADERSHIP ON EMPLOYEES’ INNOVATIVE

BEHAVIOR: THE ROLE OF AFFECTIVE COMMITMENT AND PSYCHOLOGICAL
EMPOWERMENT
Yavuz Selim DÜGER*
Abstract
In today’s globalized business world where innovation is considered the source of competition, companies develop various
strategies to positively influence the behavior of employees, who are the essential factor that achieves innovation. These
strategies are built on antecedents, which have a positive effect on employees’ innovative behavior. In this study, a
model is proposed to reveal the antecedents of the employees’ innovative behavior. It is aimed to measure the effect of
empowering leadership, psychological empowerment, and affective commitment on employees’ innovative behavior, based
on the assumption that there is more than one driving force that can affect the employees’ innovative behavior. Besides, it
is aimed to empirically investigate the roles of psychological empowerment and affective commitment in the relationship
between empowering leadership and employees’ innovative behavior. The data were collected from 234 white-collar
workers of a ready-made clothing company operating in Istanbul. According to the research results; empowering leadership,
psychological empowerment, and affective commitment have a positive impact on the employees’ innovative behavior.
However, psychological empowerment mediates, and affective commitment moderates between empowering leadership
and employees’ innovative behavior.
Keywords: Empowering leadership, Employees’ innovative behavior, Affective commitment, Psychological empowerment.

GÜÇLENDİRİCİ LİDERLİĞİN ÇALIŞANLARIN YENİLİKÇİ DAVRANIŞINA ETKİSİ: DUYGUSAL

BAĞLILIK VE PSİKOLOJİK GÜÇLENDİRMENİN ROLÜ
Öz
İnovasyonun rekabetin kaynağı olarak kabul edildiği günümüzün küreselleşen iş dünyasında, işletmeler inovasyonu yaratan
unsur olan çalışanların davranışlarını olumlu yönde yöneltmek için çeşitli stratejiler geliştirmektedir. Bu stratejiler, çalışanların
yenilikçi davranışlar sergilemesine olumlu etki eden öncüler üzerine kurgulanmaktadır. Bu çalışmada, çalışanların yenilikçi
davranışlarının öncülerini ortaya koyması için bir model önerilmektedir. Çalışanların yenilikçi davranışlarını etkileyebilecek birden
fazla itici gücün olduğu varsayımından hareketle, güçlendirici liderlik, psikolojik güçlendirme ve duygusal bağlılığın çalışanların
yenilikçi davranışına etkisini ölçmek amaçlanmaktadır. Ayrıca, güçlendirici liderlik ile çalışanların yenilikçi davranışları arasındaki
ilişkide psikolojik güçlendirmenin ve duygusal bağlılığın rolleri ampirik olarak araştırmak amaçlanmaktadır. İstanbul’da faaliyet
gösteren bir hazır giyim firmasının 234 beyaz yaka çalışanından veriler toplanmıştır. Araştırma sonuçlarına göre; güçlendirici
liderlik, psikolojik güçlendirme ve duygusal bağlılık çalışanların yenilikçi davranışlarını olumlu yönde etkilemektedir. Ayrıca,
güçlendirici liderlik ile çalışanların yenilikçi davranışı arasındaki ilişkide psikolojik güçlendirmenin aracı, duygusal bağlılığında
düzenleyici etkisi bulunmaktadır.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Güçlendirici liderlik, Çalışanların yenilikçi davranışı, Duygusal bağlılık, Psikolojik güçlendirme.

*Assist. Prof. Dr., Kütahya Dumlupinar University, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, KÜTAHYA.
e-posta: yselim.duger@dpu.edu.tr, (https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3523-9671)
 Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Sayı 46, Eylül 2021 Y. S. Düger

1. INTRODUCTION

In the globalizing world, offering products or services beyond meeting the needs of consumers, is extremely
significant for businesses to gain competitiveness and to survive. In this context, the ability of businesses to offer
innovative products that can be activating the demands and expectations of consumers by developing various
strategies takes businesses one step further. In the business world where change is experienced rapidly, an
effective innovation process will significantly support the survival of businesses. In a business environment where
the change occurred rapidly, an effective innovation process will significantly support the survival of businesses.
Innovation, which is acknowledged as an essential factor that increases productivity and competitiveness,
contributes to the quality of employment and life, and delivers economic and social value, constitutes the source
of business success. Besides, innovation is considered as a fundamental factor in the long-term survival, growth,
and performance of businesses. In this context, innovation is acknowledged as the main source of competitive
advantage. In this regard, Schumpeter (1986) emphasizes the significance of innovation and, in a way, the
destructive effect of not innovating by arguing the businesses that do not innovate will disappear.

According to Scott and Bruce (1994), although the source of innovation is new ideas, it is stated that those
who research, produce, support, and implement these ideas are individual employees. Besides, the argument
that innovative behaviors exhibited by employees is a critical factor in achieving organizational success (Jafri,
2010: 63), forces to identify antecedents that encourage the employees’ innovative behaviors. In the literature,
it is observed that various factors are investigated as the antecedents of the employees’ innovative behavior.
Some of those; fair rewarding (Janssen, 2000), human resources activities (Bücker and van der Horst, 2017),
affective commitment, organizational citizenship behavior (Xerri and Brunetto, 2013), job involvement (Peng,
2020), organizational justice (Akram et al., 2020). Moreover, leadership is acknowledged as one of the main
factors affecting the employees’ innovative behaviors (Scott and Bruce, 1994: 600). There are some researches
on the effects of ethical leadership (Düger, 2020a), leader-member exchange (Peng, 2020), transformational
leadership (Choi et al., 2016), entrepreneurial leadership (Bagheri, 2017), democratic, authoritarian, and laissez-
faire leadership (Lin and Wu, 2018) styles on employees’ innovative behaviors.

Leaders can encourage employees to exhibit innovative behaviors by instilling positive energy, psychologically
empowering them, and developing quality relationships with employees (Ma et al., 2013: 1410). Besides,
an effective leadership style can catalyze employees to exhibit innovative behavior (Atitumpong and Badir,
2018: 32). In this sense, empowering leadership, as an effective leadership style that involves employees in
the decision-making process, increases their sense of self-efficacy and provides autonomy, greatly encourages
them to innovate. Empowering leadership is regarded as a much more effective leadership style than directive,
transactional, and transformational leadership, especially for knowledge-based workers (Liu et al., 2003: 143).
The feature that distinguishes empowering leadership from other types of leadership is that it aims to create
independent and self-directed individuals rather than creating individuals who cannot act independently.
Although empowering leadership is acknowledged as an effective leadership style, studies on the impact of
empowering leadership on employees’ innovative behavior are inadequate in the literature (Rao Jada et al.,
2019: 916).

An employee’s innovative behavior means going beyond the scope of core business requirements and
responsibilities. Accordingly, it is assumed that other factors may have a positive effect on employees’ innovative
work behaviors. Affective commitment, stated as the employees’ emotional belonging to the organization, is
considered as an important factor influencing innovative behaviors. Employees who have an affective commitment
also have a high sense of belonging, become a participant in organizational activities, and are willing to perform
extra effort to achieve the goals of the organization (Rhoades et al., 2001: 825). It is observed that employees
who feel an affective commitment to the organization demonstrate a high level of willingness to perform better
and exhibit innovative behaviors (Jafri, 2010: 66). Psychological empowerment, which reflects the employees’
emotional control power over the work, is thought to have a positive effect on employees’ innovative behaviors.
Employees who are psychologically empowered feel that they have achieved work autonomy and independence.
This situation lays form a basis for employees to exhibit innovative behavior (Ramamoorthy et al., 2005: 144).

480
 Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Sayı 46, Eylül 2021 Y. S. Düger

In the literature, although there are a limited number of studies that address the effects of empowering
leadership (Mutonyi et al., 2020; Rao Jada et al., 2019), psychological empowerment (Afsar and Badir, 2016),
and affective commitment (Jafri, 2010; Nazir et al., 2019; Odoardi et al., 2019; Xerri and Brunetto, 2013) on
employees’ innovative behavior from different perspectives, no study has been found that addresses the impact
of other factors on the relationship between empowering leadership and employees’ innovative behavior. This
study proposes a model to reveal the antecedents of the employees’ innovative behavior. In this context, it is
suggested that empowering leadership, psychological empowerment, and affective commitment are predictors
of employees’ innovative behavior. It is aimed to measure the effect of empowering leadership, psychological
empowerment, and affective commitment on employees’ innovative behavior, based on the assumption that
there is more than one driving force that can affect the employees’ innovative behavior. Besides, it is aimed to
empirically investigate the roles of psychological empowerment and affective commitment in the relationship
between empowering leadership and employees’ innovative behavior. This study aims to contribute to the
literature by focusing on explaining the employees’ innovative behavior from an extensive perspective.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Empowering Leadership

Empowering leadership refers to a relational leadership style that reveals the necessary conditions for
involving employees in the decision-making process, increasing their sense of self-efficacy, enabling them to
participate, eliminating the feeling of powerlessness, and being autonomous in their areas of responsibility
(Ahearne et al., 2005: 946). Arnold et al. (2000) define empowering leadership as “behaviors that facilitate team
members’ performance by raising their level of autonomy, encouraging subordinates to express opinions and
ideas, promoting teamwork, information sharing, and collaborative decision-making”. Srivastava et al., (2006)
define empowering leadership as a leader that sharing his power with his subordinates to motivate them.
Empowering leadership is investigated from two perspectives at studies in the literature: the leader’s behavior
and the employees’ attitudes. Leadership behaviors generally focus on areas such as power-sharing, autonomy,
and allocate responsibility. Employee attitudes focus on employees’ motivation and positive role behavior, which
occur as a result of the empowering behaviors of the leader (Tung and Chang, 2011: 44). Arnold et al. (2000)
generally consider empowering leadership behaviors as leadership, participant decision-making, coaching,
informing, and being interested in followers. Besides, Amundsen and Martinsen (2014) stated that empowering
leadership has three significant roles: (1) power-sharing (2) motivational support, and (3) development support.
Empowering leadership has a great significance in increasing the potential of employees and organizational
effectiveness (Wong and Kuvaas, 2018: 272).

2.2 Innovative Behavior

Innovation is defined as “the development and implementation of new ideas by employees interacting in an
institutional order” (Van de Ven, 1986: 590). Midgley and Dowling (1978) defined individual innovativeness as
“the individual’s openness to new ideas and deciding to adopt an innovation independent of the experience of
other employees”. In other words, innovative behavior is defined as “a multi-stage process in which new ideas
are developed to solve problems in the organization or to improve products, services or processes” (Carmeli et
al., 2006: 78). In this context, the innovative behavior of employees is beyond the development of new ideas,
it is a process that includes encouraging employees for new ideas and the application of new ideas (Zehra and
Waheed, 2017: 452).

Scott and Bruce (1994) evaluated individual innovation as a multi-stage process and stated that there are
different activities and different individual behaviors required at each stage. It consists of three basic processes:
creating ideas, developing ideas, and realizing ideas. Similarly, Nazir et al. (2019) suggest that innovative
behavior occurs as a result of three stages. These are respectively; defining problems, creating innovative ideas
and solutions, and supporting innovative ideas and solutions. However, it is necessary to spread these behaviors
to all employees and participate in all employees in the organization, for the sustainability of innovative work
behaviors.

481
 Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Sayı 46, Eylül 2021 Y. S. Düger

Innovative behavior involves the formal work tasks of the employees as well as beyond them. Therefore,
innovative behavior consists of a combination of in-role and extra-role behaviors (Odoardi et al., 2019: 103).
Employees’ innovative behavior includes thinking about present problems and improving business processes,
identifying people’s unmet needs, following up new trends and changes, proposing new solutions, sharing
information, and addressing problems in new ways (De Jong and Den Hartog, 2007: 42; Yidong and Xinxin, 2013:
443). As a result, employees are the initiators and sustainers of innovation, which is considered as the main
source of competition with their behaviors (Düger, 2020a: 707).

2.3 Psychological Empowerment

Empowerment is expressed as a personal phenomenon in which employees take responsibility for their
own actions and also a tool that enables them to make their own decisions (Erstad, 1997: 325). Ahearne et al.
(2005) state that there are two main approaches to empowerment. The first of these is based on authorization
in an institutional context. This empowerment approach involves giving employees increased autonomy and
decision-making authority to fulfill their primary task work (Leach et al, 2003: 28). The second empowerment
approach is based on the psychological dimension that reflects the employees’ emotional control over the work.
Conger and Kanungo (1988) define psychological empowerment as “determining the conditions that increase
weakness in the process of developing a sense of self-efficacy among organization members and it is eliminated
through organizational practices and effective information”. Ramamoorthy et al. (2005) define psychological
empowerment as “autonomy and perception of power that can make unique and positive employees’ innovative
behaviors of tick”. Psychological empowerment is based on a sense of empowerment in the process of making
their own decisions and sharing responsibility (Düger, 2020b: 1220).

Spreitzer (1995) states the psychological empowerment as a motivational structure with four cognitive
elements in terms of employees’ orientation to the work role. In order to fully understand psychological
empowerment, Spreitzer (1995) discussed it with four dimensions: meaning, competence, self-determination,
and impact. Meaning expresses how important the work is for the individual and to what extent he cares.
Competence is a person’s belief in their specialist knowledge and capacity to successfully carry out work activities.
Self-determination is a set of perceptions regarding autonomy in the performance of work-related duties and
self-decision making. Impact refers to an individual’s belief that it can affect results in the workplace. Spreitzer
(1995) argued that these four cognitive elements should be present at the same time in order for employees
to become fully psychologically empowered; that is, in the event that any cognitive element is missing, the
perceived empowerment will be limited.

2.4 Affective Commitment

Affective commitment, one of the three components of organizational commitment; it is defined as the
emotional attachment of employees to the organization, and it also reflects that the employees’ intention to
stay in the organization (Shore et al., 2008: 635). Affective commitment is defined as “the power of an employee
to identify with the workplace and feel as a part of it” (Mowday et al., 1979: 226). Similarly, Meyer et al. (2002)
defined affective commitment as “an employee’s emotional attachment to, identification with and involvement
with the organization”.

Affective commitment refers to the degree to which employees identify with the organization and enjoy
being a part of the organization. In addition, affective attachment motivates employees to believe in the goals
and values ​​of the business and to help the business achieve its goals (Jafri, 2010: 66). Meyer et al. (2002) argue
that affective commitment is significantly associated with employees’ positive behaviors towards work, such
as organizational citizenship behavior. Affectively committed employees tend to put the organization benefit
before their personal benefits to demonstrate their commitment to the organization by exhibiting behaviors like
a good organizational citizen (Rhoades et al., 2001: 825).

Affective commitment supports employees’ willingness to go beyond formal job descriptions and to
contribute constructively to the organization. Indeed, this situation indicates that affective commitment forms
the motivation basis for the extra role behavior of employees (Carmeli and Nihal Colakoglu, 2005: 80). It is

482
 Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Sayı 46, Eylül 2021 Y. S. Düger

known that affective commitment is an antecedent of in-role and extra-role behaviors such as task performance
(Riketta, 2002: 257) and organizational citizenship behavior (Battistelli et al., 2013), and also employees are less
likely to quit their jobs (Allen and Meyer, 1990: 1).

3. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN VARIABLES AND HYPOTHESES

3.1 Empowering Leadership and Innovative Behavior

Empowering leadership, as a leadership style that has some characteristics such as sharing power with
subordinates, participatory decision-making, increasing subordinates’ self-efficacy, responsibility and flexibility,
and reducing the feeling of powerlessness (Ahearne et al., 2005: 946; Srivastava et al., 2006: 1239), provides a
great contribution to the improvement of individual, team and organizational results. Empowering leadership
contributes positively to employee satisfaction (Wong and Kuvaas, 2018), affective commitment and self-
confidence (Kim and Beehr, 2018a-b), creativity and work effort (Amundsen and Martinsen, 2015), knowledge
sharing and team effectiveness (Srivastava et al., 2006), work performance (Kundu et al., 2019), task performance
(Lee et al., 2017) and team performance (Tung and Chang, 2011).

Empowering leadership expands employees’ control area and deliver them autonomy, which helps them to
be more engaged in their work and to be more internally motivated. This situation encourages employees to
have a spirit of continuous improvement and development, to displays higher productivity and performance, and
to offer more value for the organization (Liu et al., 2003: 143). Employees who empowered by leaders achieve a
high level of psychological empowerment to display innovative behavior. This situation causes employees to be
internally motivated and thus finding the work more meaningful and to seek innovative solutions (Rao Jada et
al., 2019: 918). Gkorezis (2016) argues that empowering leaders give their employees flexibility and autonomy,
while at the same time enable employees to do research, and this situation forms a basis for innovation in the
business environment. Cheong et al. (2016) similarly state that, with the empowerment of employees, increases
the autonomy to take independent actions and possibility of exhibiting the innovative behavior of employees.

Empowering leadership behaviors have also negative effects as well as positive effects on employees.
Fernandez and Moldogaziev (2012) argue that employees who are over-empowered by leaders may have too
much autonomy, which may lead to failure to fully set goals and performance expectations and, as a result,
inhibit the innovative behavior. In addition, Humborstad et al. (2014) argue that under-empowerment can limit
the performance of employees and negatively influence their job duties. Based on all these discussions, the
hypothesis assuming that empowering leadership will lead to an increase in employees’ innovative behavior is
suggested below:

H1: Empowering leadership is positively related to employees’ innovative behaviors.

3.2 Empowering Leadership and Psychological Empowerment

Structural empowerment, individual characteristic, work design, leadership, and organizational support are
recognized as significant antecedents of psychological empowerment (Maynard et al., 2012: 1242). Seibert et
al. (2011) state that leadership influences the psychological empowerment of employees more than any other
antecedent. In this context, empowering leadership creates an environment that increases the employee’s
self-confidence by delegating authority and responsibility and, as a result, enables employees to experience
psychological empowerment (Maynard et al., 2012: 1246).

Zhang and Bartol (2010) mentioned four significant contributions of empowering leadership to clarify the
effect of empowering leadership on psychological empowerment. First, empowering leadership supports
employees to understand the significance of their contribution to the work and thus make the work more
meaningful to employees. Second, an empowering leader expresses trust in employees by delegating authority
and responsibility to them. Thus, the leader expects high performance from the employees. Third, empowering
leadership provides autonomy by encouraging employees to decide how to do their work and allows for self-
determination. Finally, empowering leadership encourages employees to participate in the decision-making
process to prompt a sense of influence. This situation gives employees a feeling that they can have more control

483
 Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Sayı 46, Eylül 2021 Y. S. Düger

over the work and make a difference in work results (Zhang and Bartol, 2010: 110). Based on all these discussions,
the hypothesis assuming that empowering leadership will lead to an increase in employees’ innovative behavior
is suggested below:

H2: Empowering leadership is positively related to psychological empowerment.

3.3 Psychological Empowerment and Innovative Behavior

Psychological empowerment, which reflects employees’ sense of autonomy and control over the work, is
a significant motivational tool. In other words, as a result of psychological empowerment, the desire to shape
the work role and content of the employees, and active orientation of them to work (Spreitzer, 1995: 1444),
the autonomy and motivation of the employees increase. This increases the probability of employees to exhibit
innovative behaviors. Employees who have a certain autonomy, find their work meaningful, believe that they
have an effect on work and processes, that is, feel empowered, have a high motivation to exhibit innovative
behavior (Afsar and Badir, 2016: 8). As a result of psychological empowerment, employees gain work autonomy
and independence and can learn new things through trial and error. This situation also forms a basis for
innovation. With the work autonomy that employees gain, they can produce more new ideas by eluding the
bureaucratic rules and regulations that limit innovation. Besides, employees’ perceptions of autonomy positively
influence the innovative behaviors of the employees and exhibit participatory behaviors in innovation processes
(Ramamoorthy et al., 2005: 144). Innovation also includes the risk of failure, and psychological empowerment of
employees helps to reduce this risk (Afsar and Badir, 2016: 9). However, Alge et al. (2006) argued that delegated
employees develop a desire to innovate and make positive changes in the organization with the effect of
empowerment. Based on all these discussions, the hypothesis assuming that empowering leadership will lead to
an increase in employees’ innovative behavior is suggested below:

H3: Psychological empowerment is positively related to employees’ innovative behaviors.

3.4 Affective Commitment and Innovative Behavior

Employees’ affective commitment to the organization is a significant factor in the emergence of high
loyalty and commitment. However, employees with affective attachment feel a high sense of belonging to
the organization, participate in organizational activities, and are willing to make extra effort to achieve the
organization’s goals (Rhoades et al., 2001: 825). Employees with affective attachment are more willing to align
their individual goals with the goals of the organization and to exhibit positive behavior towards organizational
goals. Furthermore, these employees are more concerned about the welfare of the organization (Nazir et al.,
2019: 1291). Employees who feel affective attachment tend to have positive emotions and high levels of intrinsic
motivation and thus triggering the emergence of individual creativity (Odoardi et al., 2019: 104). Jafri (2010)
states that employees with affective commitment feel a deep sense of belonging to the organization, and this
situation causes employees to display better performance and exhibit innovative behaviors. Besides, employees
who have an affective commitment to the organization, exhibit organizational citizenship behavior and naturally
worry about the well-being of the organization, and tend to approach organizational problems in an innovative
way (Xerri and Brunetto, 2013: 3166). Based on all these discussions, the hypothesis assuming that empowering
leadership will lead to an increase in employees’ innovative behavior is suggested below:

H4: Affective commitment is positively related to employees’ innovative behaviors.

3.5 The Mediating Role of Psychological Empowerment

It is considered that employees who are empowered psychologically will have positive attitudes and beliefs
towards the work and the organization and will exhibit more participatory approaches (Garg and Dhar, 2016:
380). As a result of psychological empowerment, employees with high self-motivation behave with a sense of
self-efficacy and do not hesitate to take initiative and responsibility for the work, they also share their positive
opinions and ideas with the manager and other employees within the company (Wang et al., 2016: 608).
Empowered employees feel that they have the skills, abilities, capacities, self-worth, and self-confidence. These

484
 Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Sayı 46, Eylül 2021 Y. S. Düger

feelings encourage employees to exhibit extra-role behavior in terms of being innovative and influencing others
(Afsar and Badir, 2016: 10).

Zhang and Bartol (2010) emphasized that in order for a leader’s empowering behavior to have the intended
effect, employees should feel empowered psychologically. It is acknowledged that empowering leadership
positively affects psychological empowerment (Amundsen and Martinsen, 2014: 492). Moreover, psychological
empowerment has a mediating role in the relationship between empowering leadership and many variables, such
as extra-role behavior (Raub and Robert, 2010), behavioral empowerment (Boudrias et al., 2009), job satisfaction
and organizational commitment (Konczak et al., 2000), creativity (Zhang and Bartol, 2010), and intention to
stay (Dewettinck and van Ameijde, 2011). It is considered that empowering leadership alone is not enough for
employees to exhibit innovative behaviors. Therefore, it is assumed that the effect of empowering leadership
on employees’ innovative behaviors will occur depending on psychological empowerment. Based on all these
discussions, the hypothesis assuming that psychological empowerment has a mediator role in the relationship
between empowering leadership and employees’ innovative behavior is suggested below:

H5: Psychological empowerment mediates the relationship between empowering leadership and employees’
innovative behavior

3.6 The Moderator Role of Affective Commitment

The leader grants autonomy to the employees by exhibiting empowering behaviors, shares his power with
them and supports their development, empowering leaders who have these behaviors, cause to increase the
motivation and effectiveness of the employees and causes them to exhibit positive attitudes towards the work
and the organization (Kim and Beehr, 2018a: 2022). Affective commitment (Meyer and Allen, 1991: 67), which
demonstrates the deep emotional relationship of employees to the organization, develops as a result of the
interaction between the leader and the employees. Therefore, an affective commitment expressed as a positive
emotion is likely to increase the influence of the leader’s behavior.

Employees generally consider their leaders as representatives of the organization. Therefore, every behavior
of the leader also reflects the company management or organization. Rousseau (1998) reveals that the
psychological contract theory perceives employees’ promises of the leader as the promises of the organization.
Cropanzano and Mitchell (2005) state that according to social exchange theory, the positive behavior of the
leader will increase the loyalty of the employees and they will have a sense of commitment to the organization.
Eisenberger et al. (2010) emphasize that according to the organizational support theory, employees consider
the support they perceive from leaders as the support they receive from the organization. These theories prove
that the leader is perceived as a person representing the organization. In this context, as a result of empowering
leadership behavior, it supports the development of employees, and gives autonomy and authority to determine
their own destiny and also it will increase the employees’ desire to establish an emotional linkage with the
organization, and therefore organizational affective commitment will occur (Kim and Beehr, 2018a: 2023). As
a consequence, it will be ensured that employees exhibit extra-role behaviors beyond positive attitudes and
behaviors with the increase of affective commitment of employees. Therefore, it is assumed that affective
commitment strengthens the relationship between empowering leadership and innovative behavior, which is
acknowledged as a positive employee behavior. Based on all these discussions, the hypothesis assuming that
affective commitment has a moderator role in the relationship between empowering leadership and employees’
innovative behavior is suggested below:

H6: Affective commitment moderates the relationship between empowering leadership and employees’
innovative behavior

485
 Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Sayı 46, Eylül 2021 Y. S. Düger

H4
Affective
Commitment

H6 (Moderating Effect)
H1
Empowering Innovative
Leadership Behaviors
H5 (Mediating Effect)

H2 H3
Psychological
Empowerment

Figure 1. Research Model

4. METHODOLOGY AND ANALYSIS

4.1 Purpose, Scope and Method of the Research

In this study, a model is proposed to reveal the antecedents of innovative behavior. In this context, it is aimed
to measure the effect of empowering leadership, psychological empowerment, and affective commitment on
employees’ innovative behavior. In addition, it is aimed to empirically investigate the roles of psychological
empowerment and affective commitment in the relationship between empowering leadership and employees’
innovative behavior. In the scope of the research, the white-collar workers of a ready-made clothing company
with high brand awareness operating in Istanbul were chosen as the main population. The ready-made clothing
industry has been selected as the research area because it is an important export item for Turkey and innovation
has a critical significance in this industry. In the company, which has a total of 4,000 (400 of them are white-collar
workers) employees in March 2020, 350 questionnaires were handed out to white-collar workers by hand and
online using the convenience sampling method, and 234 (67%) available questionnaire forms were returned.
The questionnaires consist of two parts; in the first part, there are 6 statements about determining demographic
variables, and in the second part, there are 41 statements about the scales of empowering leadership, innovative
behavior, psychological empowerment, and affective commitment.

4.2 Data Collection and Analysis

Since the research is a quantitative study, the data were obtained by the survey technique. A total of
four scales are used in the research, consisting of empowering leadership, innovative behavior of employees,
psychological empowerment, and affective commitment. In this study, the empowering leadership scale
developed by Konczak et al. (2000) was used. This scale consists of five sub-dimensions (delegation of authority,
accountability, self-directed decision making, information sharing, and skill development) and 17 statements.
The innovative behaviors scale consisting of a single dimension and 6 statements developed by Scott and Bruce
(1994) is used. The psychological empowerment scale consisting of four sub-dimensions (meaning, competence,
self-determination and impact) and 12 expressions developed by Spreitzer (1995) is used. Affective commitment
scale consisting of a single dimension and 6 statements developed by Meyer et al. (1993) is used. The expressions
used in the scales were used in the 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = Strongly Disagree - 5 = Strongly Agree). The
data obtained from the questionnaires were analyzed in the framework of exploratory and confirmatory factor
analysis, correlation analysis, linear regression analysis, moderation (Model-1), and mediation analysis (Model-4)
by using AMOS, SPSS program, and Process Macro (Hayes, 2013).

486
 Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Sayı 46, Eylül 2021 Y. S. Düger

4.3 Research Findings

When the demographic characteristics of 234 employees participating in the study are investigating; 30.8%
are women, 69.2% are men, 44.4% of them are single and 55.6% are married. 14.5% of the employees are in the
18-25 age group, 36.8% in the 26-30 age group, 40.2% in the 31-39 age group, 7.6% in the 40-54 age group, and
0.9% in the 55 age and above. 12% of the participants are primary education, 36.8% high school, 15.8% associate
degree, 32.4% undergraduate, and 3% graduate degree. In addition, 31.2% of the participants have a working
period of less than 1 year, 54.7% 1-5 years, 13.2% 6-10 years, and 0.9% 11-20 years.

In order to clarify the factor structures of the scales used in the research model, and to determine their
reliability and validity, factor analysis was performed first. The scales were subjected to factor analysis and
confirmatory factor analysis for individual principal components using the Varimax rotation method. According
to the exploratory factor analysis result; a statement of the accountability dimension is removed from the
analysis because it is loaded in different dimensions at the same time. Also, according to the confirmatory factor
analysis results; one statement each belonging to meaning and competence dimensions, and twice statements
each belonging to innovative behaviors and affective commitment variables were removed from the analysis
because it has low factor loadings. The findings of the renewed exploratory factor analysis are given in Table 1.

Table 1: Exploratory Factor Analysis Findings

Number Factor Cronbach’s Kaiser-Meyer-

Variables Sub-Dimension
of Items Loading Alpha Value Olkin

Delegation of Authority 3 (0.690-0.867)

Accountability 2 (0.797-0.880)
Self-Directed Decision
Empowering Leadership 3 (0.779-0.806) 0.923 0.887
Making
Information Sharing 2 (0.771-0.789)
Skill Development 6 (0.601-0.817)
Innovative Behaviors Innovative Behaviors 4 (0.706-0.886) 0.811 0.750
Affective Commitment Affective Commitment 4 (0.753-0.873) 0.846 0.728
Meaning 2 (0.862-0.905)
Psychological Competence 2 (0.849-0.879)
0.840 0.756
Empowerment Self-determination 3 (0.831-0.903)
Impact 3 (0.838-0.897)

According to the factor analysis results; it was determined that the factor loads of the statements related
to empowering leadership were between 0.601-0.880, the Cronbach Alpha value of the scale was 0.923 and
the KMO value was 0.887. The factor loads of the statements related to Innovative behaviors ranged from
0.706-0.886, the Cronbach Alpha value of the scale was 0.811 and the KMO value was 0.750. The factor loads
of the statements related to the affective commitment scale were in the range of 0.753-0.873, the Cronbach
Alpha value of the scale was 0.846 and the KMO value was 0.728. The factor loads of the expressions related to
psychological empowerment were in the range of 0.831-0.905, the Cronbach Alpha value of the scale was 0.840
and the KMO value was 0.756. According to Kalaycı (2016), these results indicated that the factor structures of
all scales are uniformly distributed and highly reliable.

The fit index values obtained according to the confirmatory factor analysis results of empowering leadership,
innovative behaviors, psychological empowerment, and affective commitment scales are given in Table 2.

487
 Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Sayı 46, Eylül 2021 Y. S. Düger

Table 2: Fit Indices for Confirmatory Factor Analysis

Variables (X2/sd) NFI CFI RMSEA GFI RMR

Empowering Leadership 2.56 0.908 0.941 0.082 0.889 0.044
Innovative Behaviors 5.84 0.966 0.971 0.144 0.975 0.026
Affective Commitment 4.55 0.932 0.935 0.141 0.950 0.040
Psychological Empowerment 3.53 0.920 0.941 0.104 0.921 0.039

As a result of the confirmatory factor analysis, it is observed that the goodness of fit values ​​for the scales are
in the acceptable fit value range. The GFI (the goodness of fit index) value of the empowering leadership scales
is below the acceptable fit index value range. According to Shevlin and Miles (1998), the GFI value is sensitive
to sample size and factor loadings, so it is not possible to expect the GFI value at the lower limit of 0.90 for all
analyzes. Since the fit index values except GFI were within the acceptable range in the analysis results, it was
accepted that the scales indicated sufficient fit. It is also observed that p significance is p <0.01 and the t values
for the statements exceed 2.56. These results reveal that the scales are statistically significant.

As a result of the correlation analysis, the means, standard deviations, and correlation values of the scales
were calculated. These values are given in detail in Table 3.

Table 3: Means, Standard Deviation, and Correlation Values

Variables Mean SD 1 2 3 4
1 Empowering Leadership 3.8357 0.6436 1
2 Innovative Behaviors 3.9274 0.7162 0.536** 1
3 Affective Commitment 3.8814 0.7971 0.666** 0.492** 1
4 Psychological Empowerment 3.8615 0.5627 0.608** 0.602** 0.590** 1
**Significant at p<0.01

According to Table 3, it is observed that the averages of the scales are high and there is a positive significant
relationship between each variable. It was determined that there is a high level of a positive relationship between
innovative behavior and empowering leadership, psychological empowerment, and affective commitment.

4.4 Testing Research Hypotheses

According to the correlation analysis, it was determined that there was a relationship between all variables.
The strength and direction of the effects of the relationships between variables were measured according
to the research hypotheses with linear regression analysis. In order to determine the roles of psychological
empowerment and affective commitment in the relationship between empowering leadership and employees’
innovative behavior, initially, analyzes were performed for mediating and moderating effects. As a result of these
analyzes, it was determined that psychological empowerment has a mediating role and affective commitment has
a moderator role. Process Macro Model-4 analysis was applied to determine the mediating role of psychological
empowerment in the relationship between empowering leadership and innovative behaviors. Analysis results
are given in Table 4 in detail.

488
 Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Sayı 46, Eylül 2021 Y. S. Düger

Table 4: Regression Analysis and Mediator Effect

Hypotheses R2 β SE t p

a Empowering Leadership ---> Psychological Empowerment 0.369 0.608 0.046 11.655 0.000
b Psychological Empowerment ---> Innovative Behaviors 0.363 0.602 0.067 11.487 0.000
c Empowering Leadership ---> Innovative Behaviors 0.288 0.536 0.062 9.677 0.000

c’ Empowering Leadership ---> Psychological Empowerment ---> 0.409 0.270 0.071 4.257 0.000
Innovative Behaviors
Affective Commitment ---> Innovative Behaviors 0.242 0.492 0.051 8.605 0.000
Bootstrap results for indirect effect

β SE LL 95% UL 95%
CI CI
ab paths 0.266 0.038 0.1937 0.3407
Indirect effect and significance using Sobel test
β SE z p

ab paths 0.266 0.055 6.1003 0.000

According to the regression analysis results; empowering leadership has a positive and significant effect
on psychological empowerment (β=0.608, t=11.655, p<0.001), psychological empowerment has a positive and
significant effect on innovative behaviors (β=0.602, t=11.487, p<0.001), empowering leadership has a positive
and significant effect on innovative behaviors (β=0.536, t=9.677, p<0.001), affective commitment has a positive
and significant effect on innovative behaviors (β=0.492, t=8.605, p<0.001). According to the regression analysis
results, the values of the relationship between the variables are observed that p significance is p<0.01, the β
values being positive and the t values for the statements exceed 2.56. According to these results, H1, H2, H3, and
H4 hypotheses were accepted.

To measure the mediating effect of psychological empowerment, “Bootstrap” developed by Preacher and
Hayes (2004) and regression analysis developed and consisting of three stages by Baron and Kenny (1986) were
used together. First of all, the effect of empowering leadership on psychological empowerment was analyzed
(path a) β=0.608 (p<0.01). Afterwards, the effect of psychological empowerment on innovative behavior (path
b) β=0.602 (p<0.01) and the effect of empowering leadership on innovative behavior were analyzed (path c)
β=0.536 (p<0.01). According to the results, it was determined that there is a positive significant relationship
between the variables. With the inclusion of psychological empowerment in the model in which empowering
leadership influences innovative behavior, the effect of empowering leadership on innovative behavior (c’)
decreased to β=0.270 (p<0.01). This reduction occurred indicates that there is partial mediation. The Sobel test
was conducted using the MedGraph-I program developed by Jose (2013a) to determine whether the partial
mediation was significant. It was concluded that the obtained results (z= 6.10, p<0.01) were significant. As a
result of the regression analysis in the Process Macro (Model-4) method, it was concluded that the indirect
effect (path ab) was β=0.266 and the lower and upper confidence intervals were 0.1937-0.3407. Preacher and
Hayes (2004) state that in order for the β value to be significant, the lower and upper confidence intervals in the
Bootstrap method should not contain zero, that is, the lower and upper confidence interval values should be
either positive or negative. According to this result, the partial mediating effect of psychological empowerment
was significant and H5 hypotheses were accepted.

Regression analysis was performed using the Process Macro (Model-1) developed by Hayes (2013) to
determine the moderator effect of affective commitment in the relationship between empowering leadership
and innovative behavior. The results of the analysis are given in Table 5.

489
 Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Sayı 46, Eylül 2021 Y. S. Düger

Table 5: Moderator Effect of Affective Commitment

Variables Coefficient SE t p
LL 95% CI UL 95% CI

Interaction term of Empowering Leadership x 0.1932 0.0671 -2.8808 0.004 0.611 0.3253
Affective Commitment

Conditional effect of empowering leadership on innovative behaviors at low and high values of affective commitment
Low 0.2787 0.093 2.995 0.003 0.0953 0.4620
High 0.5685 0.095 5.958 0.000 0.3805 0.7565
R R² F p
Model Summary
0.5864 0.3438 40.176 0.000
R increase due to interaction
2
ΔR² F p

0.0237 82.993 0.004

The interaction term of empowering leadership x affective commitment (β=0.1932; p<0.01) is significant.
Summary values of the model for moderator effect R2=0.344; F=40.18; p<0.01 appears to be significant. The
ratio of empowering leadership to explain innovative behavior increased from 29% to 34% (See Table 4). It
was concluded that the R2 value, which increased as a result of the interaction, increased 2.4% at the p<0.01
significance level. As a result, it has been concluded that affective commitment has a moderator role in the effect
of empowering leadership on innovative behavior. Accordingly, the H6 hypothesis was accepted.

A graph was obtained using the ModGraph-I program developed by Jose (2013b) to better determine the
moderator effect of affective commitment at different levels. The moderator effects are given in cases where
affective commitment has low and high values in Graph 1. When affective commitment is at a low level, B=0.279
(t=2.995) at a significance level of p<0.01 and at a high level, B=0.568 at a significance level of p<0.01; (t=5.958).
These results indicated that when affective commitment increases, the moderator effect increases accordingly.

5
Affective
Commitment
Innovative Behaviors

4 Low

High
3

1
Low High

Empowering Leadership

Graph 1: Interaction Level of Affective Commitment as a Moderator

490
 Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Sayı 46, Eylül 2021 Y. S. Düger

5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

It is an undeniable fact that in today’s markets where change is occurring rapidly, companies that cannot
innovate have reduced their competitive ability and face the risk of withdrawing from the market. It is
observed that companies that are constantly innovating have achieved a higher organizational performance
level, increasing their market share and profitability. Employees’ innovative behavior is considered a critically
significant factor for companies to gain a competitive advantage and survive in the competitive business
environment in the long term. In this context, it has become extremely significant to identify the antecedents
that encourage the innovative behavior of employees, which are the basis of innovation. Accordingly, a model is
suggested for employees to reveal the antecedents of their innovative behavior. It is aimed to measure the effect
of empowering leadership, psychological empowerment, and affective commitment on employees’ innovative
behavior, based on the assumption that there is more than one driving force that can affect the employees’
innovative behavior. Besides, it is aimed to empirically investigate the roles of psychological empowerment and
affective commitment in the relationship between empowering leadership and employees’ innovative behavior.

As a result of the research, it has been determined that empowering leadership positively influences the
employees’ innovative behaviors. It is observed that when the leaders share their power with the employees,
expand areas of responsibility, and grant autonomy to the employees, it causes the employees to exhibit extra-
role behavior in order to contribute to the business and the organization within the framework of innovation.
The leader delegates authority and responsibility to employees empowers them and reflects their trust in
them. This situation leads to an increase in the motivation and performance of the employees. It is thought
that empowering leadership will facilitate the transition to holacracy management, which is evaluated as the
management approach of the future and focuses on giving employees autonomy, authority, responsibility, and
decision-making authority. The result of this research is similar to the studies in the literature (Mutonyi et al.,
2020; Rao Jada et al., 2019). In addition, it was concluded that empowering leadership influences psychological
empowerment positively. Maynard et al. (2012) recognize that empowering leadership is an important antecedent
of psychological empowerment. Empowering leadership enables employees to understand the significance of
their contribution to the work and provide them the opportunity to self-determination, and empower employees
psychologically, as a result, the leadership leads to exhibit positive behavior of employees. The result of this
research is similar to the studies in the literature (Dewettinck and van Ameijde, 2011; Zhang and Bartol, 2010).

This study proves that psychological empowerment positively influences employees’ innovative behavior.
Employees’ sense of control over their work contributes to the emergence of innovative ideas as well as working
more efficiently. Employees who are empowered psychologically are much more likely to engage in constructive
behaviors towards the work and the organization, and they are willing to fulfill extra-role as well as in-role tasks.
The result of this research is similar to the studies in the literature (Afsar and Badir, 2016). According to another
result of the study, it was concluded that affective commitment positively influences the innovative behaviors
of the employees. Employees with affective commitment feel a high sense of belonging to the organization,
participate in organizational activities, and are willing to perform extra effort to achieve the goals of the
organization (Rhoades et al., 2001: 825). In this context, increasing the affective commitment of the employees
leads to better performance and innovative behaviors. The result of the research is similar to various studies
(Jafri, 2010; Nazir et al., 2019; Odoardi et al., 2019; Xerri and Brunetto, 2013) in the literature that deals with the
relationship between affective commitment and innovative behavior from various perspectives.

As a result of the mediation analysis, it was concluded that psychological empowerment has a partial mediating
effect on the relationship between empowering leadership and employees’ innovative behavior. According to
this result; empowering leadership alone is not enough for employees to exhibit innovative behaviors. The
effect of empowering leadership on employees’ innovative behavior is realized via the employees’ feeling of
control of work. In other words, the effect of empowering leadership on innovative behavior depends on the
level of psychological empowerment. Finally, according to the analysis results, it was concluded that affective
commitment has a moderator effect on the relationship between empowering leadership and employees’
innovative behavior. According to this result; the strength of the relationship between empowering leadership
and innovative behavior increases with the moderating effect of affective commitment. Employees’ sense of

491
 Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Sayı 46, Eylül 2021 Y. S. Düger

belonging to the organization and considering that they are a part of the organization leads to an increase in the
effect of empowering leadership and, consequently, an increase in the impact on the emergence of innovative
behaviors.

White-collar workers are considered as a significant force that makes ready the company for the future, guides
them and enables them to achieve their goals for almost every sector. The motivation, success, and performance
of white-collar workers influence the performance of blue-collar workers and the outcomes of the organization.
In this context, it is expected that the organizational behaviors of white-collar workers who are empowered
by the leaders have a much higher impact power. Among the characteristics of empowerment; autonomy,
authorization, and decision-making based on cooperation, lead employees to transfer their knowledge to work,
become researchers, following, seeking, and implementing recent innovation. In this context, it should be taken
into consideration that empowered employees who exhibit innovative behavior are critically significant for the
ready-made clothing industry, where continuous change occurs and where innovation and design are vital.

In the summary of the study; it was determined that there are positive effect of empowering leadership,
psychological empowerment, and affective commitment on employees’ innovative behavior. One of the most
important differences of these results from other studies in the literature is that it focuses on the behavioral
characteristics of white-collar workers. As an example, some research in the literature focuses on public employees
(Mutonyi et al., 2020), supervisor-subordinates (Afsar and Badir, 2016; Rao Jada et al., 2019), nursing employees
(Xerri and Brunetto, 2013), frontline service employees (Dewettinck and van Ameijde, 2011), and managers
(Nazir et al., 2019). Besides, it was empirically determined that there are the mediating role of psychological
empowerment and the moderator role of affective commitment in the relationship between empowering
leadership and employees’ innovative behavior. These empirical results, which reflect the major difference of
this study from others, are expected to contribute to further studies. In this study, it is a significant limitation of
the research to use only the data obtained from the employees of a company for analysis. Other limitations of
the study are the limited cost, time, and sample size. One should be paid attention at the point of generalizing the
result, because of the measurement of the variables based on personal statement and perceptions. In order to
generalize the research results, it is recommended to conduct studies in different sectors and with larger sample
size. In future research, it is suggested that empowering leadership should be handled within the framework of
holacracy, culture, and Industry 4.0.

REFERENCES
Afsar, B. and Badir, Y. (2016). “The Mediating Role of Psychological Empowerment on the Relationship between
Person-Organization Fit and Innovative Work Behavior”, Journal of Chinese Human Resource Management,
7/1, 5-26.
Ahearne, M., Mathieu, J. and Rapp, A. (2005). “To Empower or Not to Empower Your Sales Force? An Empirical
Examination of the Influence of Leadership Empowerment Behaviour on Customer Satisfaction and
Performance”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 9/5, 945-955.
Akram, T., Lei, S., Haider, M. J. and Hussain, S. T. (2020). “The Impact of Organizational Justice on Employee
Innovative Work Behavior: Mediating Role of Knowledge Sharing”, Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 5/2,
117-129.
Alge, B. J., Ballinger, G. A., Tangirala, S. and Oakley, J. L. (2006). “Information Privacy in Organizations: Empowering
Creative and Extrarole Performance”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 91/1, 221-234.
Allen, N. J. and Meyer, J. P. (1990). “The Measurement and Antecedents of Affective, Continuance and Normative
Commitment to the Organization”, Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63/1, 1-18.
Amundsen, S. and Martinsen, Ø. L. (2014). “Empowering Leadership: Construct Clarification, Conceptualization,
and Validation of a New Scale”, The Leadership Quarterly, 25, 487-511.
Amundsen, S. and Martinsen, Ø. L. (2015). “Linking Empowering Leadership to Job Satisfaction, Work Effort,
and Creativity: The Role of Self-Leadership and Psychological Empowerment”, Journal of Leadership &
Organizational Studies, 22/3, 304-323.

492
 Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Sayı 46, Eylül 2021 Y. S. Düger

Arnold, J. A., Arad, S., Rhoades, J. A., and Drasgow, F. (2000). “The Empowering Leadership Questionnaire: The
Construction and Validation of a New Scale for Measuring Leader Behaviors”, Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 21, 249-269.
Atitumpong, A. and Badir, Y. F. (2018). “Leader-Member Exchange, Learning Orientation and Innovative Work
Behavior”, Journal of Workplace Learning, 30/1, 32-47.
Bagheri, A. (2017). “The Impact of Entrepreneurial Leadership on Innovation Work Behavior and Opportunity
Recognition in High-Technology SMEs”, The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 28/2, 159-
166.
Baron, R.M. and Kenny, D.A. (1986). “The Moderator–Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological
Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
51/6, 1173-2001.
Boudrias, J.-S., Gaudreau, P., Savoie, A., and Morin, A. J. S. (2009). “Employee Empowerment: From Managerial
Practices to Employees’ Behavioral Empowerment”, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 30/7,
625-638.
Bücker, J. and van der Horst, E. (2017). “Innovative Work Behavior: To What Extent and How Can HRM Practices
Contribute to Higher Levels of Innovation Within SMEs?”, Issues of Human Resource Management, (Ed: L.
Mura), IntechOpen, London.
Carmeli, A. and Nihal Colakoglu, S. (2005), “The Relationship between Affective Commitment and Organizational
Citizenship Behaviors: The Moderating Role of Emotional Intelligence”, The Effect of Affect in Organizational
Settings (Research on Emotion in Organizations, Vol. 1), (Ed: Ashkanasy, N.M., Zerbe, W.J. and Härtel, C.E.J.),
Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley.
Carmeli, A., Meitar, R. and Weisberg, J. (2006). “Self-leadership Skills and Innovative Behavior at Work”,
International Journal of Manpower, 27/1, 75-90.
Cheong, M., Spain, S.M., Yammarino, F.J. and Yun, S. (2016). “Two Faces of Empowering Leadership: Enabling and
Burdening”, The Leadership Quarterly, 27/4, 602-616.
Choi, S.B., Kim, K., Ullah, S.E. and Kang, S.W. (2016). “How Transformational Leadership Facilitates Innovative
Behavior of Korean Workers: Examining Mediating and Moderating Processes”, Personnel Review, 45/3, 459-
479.
Conger, J. A. and Kanungo, R.N. (1988). “The Empowerment Process: Integrating Theory and Practice”, Academy
of Management Review, 13/3, 471-482.
Cropanzano, R. and Mitchell, M. S. (2005). “Social Exchange Theory: An Interdisciplinary Review”, Journal of
Management, 31, 874-900.
De Jong, J. P. J. and Den Hartog, D. N. (2007). “How Leaders Influence Employees’ Innovative Behavior”, Europe
Journal of Innovative Management, 10/1, 41-64.
Dewettinck, K. and van Ameijde, M. (2011). “Linking Leadership Empowerment Behaviour to Employee Attitudes
and Behavioural Intentions: Testing the Mediating Role of Psychological Empowerment”, Personnel Review,
40/3, 284-305.
Düger, Y. S. (2020a). “Ethical Leadership and Innovative Behavior of Employees: A Moderated Mediation Model
of Leader Member Exchange and Emotional Intelligence”, Ahi Evran University Journal of Social Sciences
Institute, 6/3, 706-725.
Düger, Y. S. (2020b). “The Effect of Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) on Employee Voice and Turnover Intention:
The Moderator Role of Psychological Empowerment”, Gaziantep University Journal of Social Sciences, 19/3,
1215-1236.
Eisenberger, R., Karagonlar, G., Stinglhamber, F., Neves, P., Becker, T. E., Gonzalez-Morales, M. G., and Steiger-
Mueller, M. (2010). “Leader–Member Exchange and Affective Organizational Commitment: The Contribution
of Supervisor’s Organizational Embodiment”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 1085-1103.
Erstad, M. (1997). “Empowerment and Organizational Change”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management, 9/73, 325-333.

493
 Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Sayı 46, Eylül 2021 Y. S. Düger

Fernandez, S. and Moldogaziev, T. (2012). “Using Employee Empowerment to Encourage Innovative Behavior in
the Public Sector”, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 23/1, 155-187.
Garg, S. and Dhar, R. L. (2016). “Extra-Role Customer Service: The Roles of Leader–Member Exchange (LMX),
Affective Commitment, and Psychological Empowerment”, International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism
Administration, 17/4, 373-396.
Gkorezis, P. (2016). “Principal Empowering Leadership and Teacher Innovative Behavior: A Moderated
Mediationmodel”, International Journal of Educational Management, 30/6, 1030-1044.
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis, The Guilford Press,
New York, NY.
Humborstad, S. I. W., Nerstad, C. G. L. and Dysvik, A. (2014). “Empowering Leadership, Employee Goal Orientations
and Work Performance: A Competing Hypothesis Approach”, Personnel Review, 43/2, 246-271.
Janssen, O. (2000). “Job Demands, Perceptions of Effort-Reward Fairness and Innovative Work Behavior”, Journal
of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73/3, 287-302.
Jose, P. E. (2013a). MedGraph-I: A Programme to Graphically Depict Mediation Among Three Variables: The
Internet Version, version 3.0. Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand. (19.10.2020).
https://psychology.victoria.ac.nz/medgraph.
Jose, P.E. (2013b). ModGraph-I: A Programme to Compute Cell Means for the Graphical Display of Moderational
Analyses: The Internet Version, Version 3.0. Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand.
(20.10.2020). https://psychology.victoria.ac.nz/modgraph.
Kalaycı, Ş. (2016). SPSS uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistik teknikleri, Asil Yayınları, Ankara.
Kim, M. and Beehr, T. A. (2018a). “Empowering Leadership: Leading People to Be Present Through Affective
Organizational Commitment?”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 31/16, 2017-
2044.
Kim, M. and Beehr, T.A. (2018b). “Organization-Based Self-Esteem and Meaningful Work Mediate Effects of
Empowering Leadership on Employee Behaviors and Well-Being”, Journal of Leadership & Organizational
Studies, 25/4, 385-398.
Konczak L. J., Stelly D. J. and Trusty M. L. (2000). “Defining and Measuring Empowering Leader Behaviors:
Development of an Upward Feedback Instrument”, Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60/2, 301-
313.
Kundu, S. C., Kumar, S. and Gahlawat, N. (2019). “Empowering Leadership and Job Performance: Mediating Role
of Psychological Empowerment”, Management Research Review, 42/5, 605-624.
Leach, D. J., Wall, T. D. and Jackson, P. R. (2003). “The Effect of Empowerment on Job Knowledge: An Empirical
Test Involving Operators of Complex Technology”, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology,
76, 27-52.
Lee, S., Cheong, M., Kim, M. and Yun, S. (2017). “Never Too Much? The Curvilinear Relationship between
Empowering Leadership and Task Performance”, Group & Organization Management, 42/1, 11-38.
Lin, Y. and Wu, J. (2018). “A Study of the Effects of Leadership Styles on Innovation Management and Organizational
Innovation in Environmental Protection Industry”, Ekoloji, 27/106, 771-777.
Liu, W., Lepak, D. P., Takeuchi, R. and Sims, Jr., H. P. (2003). “Matching Leadership Styles with Employment
Modes: Strategic Human Resource Management Perspective”, Human Resource Management Review, 13/1,
127-152.
Ma, Y., Cheng, W., Ribbens, B.A. and Zhou, J. (2013). “Linking Ethical Leadership to Employee Creativity:
Knowledge Sharing and Self-Efficacy as Mediators”, Social Behavior and Personality: an International Journal,
41/9, 1409-1419.
Maynard, M. T., Gilson, L. L., and Mathieu, J. (2012). “Empowerment—Fad or Fab? A Multilevel Review of the
Past Two Decades of Research”, Journal of Management, 38/4, 1231-1281.

494
 Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Sayı 46, Eylül 2021 Y. S. Düger

Meyer, J. P. and Allen, N. J. (1991). “A Three-Component Conceptualization of Organizational Commitment”,

Human Resource Management Review, 1, 61-89.
Meyer, J. P., Allen, N. J. and Smith, C. A. (1993). “Commitment to Organizations and Occupations: Extension and
Test of a Three-Component Conceptualization”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 538-551.
Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L. and Topolnytsky, L. (2002). “Affective, Continuance, and Normative
Commitment to the Organization: A Meta-analysis of Antecedents, Correlates, and Consequences”, Journal
of Vocational Behavior, 61/1, 20-52.
Midgley, D. F. and Dowling, G. R. (1978). “Innovativeness: The Concept and its Measurement”, Journal of
Consumer Research, 4/1, 229-242.
Mowday, R., Steers, R. and Porter, L., (1979). “The Measurement of Organizational Commitment”. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 14, 224-247.
Mutonyi, B.R., Slatten, T. and Lien, G. (2020). “Empowering Leadership, Work Group Cohesiveness, Individual
Learning Orientation and Individual Innovative Behaviour in The Public Sector: Empirical Evidence from
Norway”, International Journal of Public Leadership, 16/2, 175-197.
Nazir, S., Shafi, A., Atif, M. M., Qun, W. and Abdullah, S. M. (2019). “How Organization Justice and Perceived
Organizational Support Facilitate Employees’ Innovative Behavior at Work”, Employee Relations, 41/6, 1288-
1311.
Odoardi, C., Battistelli, A., Montani, F. and Peiró, J. M. (2019). “Affective Commitment, Participative Leadership,
and Employee Innovation: A Multilevel Investigation”, Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 35,
103-113.
Peng, Y.-P. (2020). “Relationship between Job Involvement, Leader-Member Exchange, and Innovative Behavior
of Public Librarians”, Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 52/2, 441-450.
Preacher, K. J. and Hayes, A. F. (2004). “SPSS and SAS Procedures for Estimating Indirect Effects in Simple
Mediation Models”, Behavior Research Methods, 36/4, 717-731.
Ramamoorthy, N., Flood, P.C., Slattery, T. and Sardessai, R. (2005). “Determinants of Innovative Work Behaviour:
Development and Test of an Integrated Model”, Creativity and Innovation Management, 14/2, 142-150.
Rao Jada, U., Mukhopadhyay, S. and Titiyal, R. (2019). “Empowering Leadership and Innovative Work Behavior: A
Moderated Mediation Examination”, Journal of Knowledge Management, 23/5, 915-930.
Raub, S., and Robert, C. (2010). “Differential Effects of Empowering Leadership on In-Role and Extra-Role Employee
Behaviors: Exploring the Role of Psychological Empowerment and Power Values”, Human Relations, 63/11,
1743-1770.
Rhoades, L., Eisenberger, R. and Armeli, S. (2001). “Affective Commitment to the Organization: The Contribution
of Perceived Organizational Support”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 86/5, 825-836.
Riketta, M. (2002). “Attitudinal Organizational Commitment and Job Performance: A Meta-Analysis”, Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 23/3, 257-266.
Rousseau, D. M. (1998). “The ‘Problem’ of the Psychological Contract Considered”, Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 19, 665-671.
Schumpeter, J. A. (1986). History of Economic Analysis. Oxford University Press, New York.
Scott, S.G. and Bruce, R.A. (1994). “Determinants of Innovative Behavior: A Path Model of Individual Innovation
in the Workplace”, Academy of Management Journal, 37/3, 580-607.
Seibert, S. E., Wang, G. and Courtright, S. H. (2011). “Antecedents and Consequences of Psychological and Team
Empowerment in Organizations: A Meta‐Analytic Review”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 96/5, 981-1003.
Shevlin, M. and Miles, J. N. V. (1998). “Effects of Sample Size, Model Specification and Factor Loadings on the GFI
in Confirmatory Factor Analysis”, Personality and Individual Differences, 25/1, 85-90.
Shore, T., Bommer, W. and Shore, L. (2008). “An Integrative Model of Managerial Perceptions of Employee
Commitment: Antecedents and Influences on Employee Treatment”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29,
635-655.

495
 Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Sayı 46, Eylül 2021 Y. S. Düger

Spreitzer, G.M. (1995). “Psychological Empowerment in the Workplace: Dimensions, Measurement, and
Validation”, The Academy of Management Journal, 38/5, 1442-1465.
Srivastava, A., Bartol, K.M. and Locke, E.A. (2006). “Empowering Leadership in Management Teams: Effects on
Knowledge Sharing, Efficacy, and Performance”, Academy of Management Journal, 49/6, 1239-1251.
Tung, H. and Chang, Y. (2011). “Effects of Empowering Leadership on Performance in Management Team:
Mediating Effects of Knowledge Sharing and Team Cohesion”, Journal of Chinese Human Resource
Management, 2/1, 43-60.
Van de Ven, A.H., (1986). “Central Problems in the Management of Innovation”, Management Sciences, 32/5,
590-607.
Wang, D., Gan, C. and Wu, C. (2016). “LMX and Employee Voice: A Moderated Mediation Model of Psychological
Empowerment and Role Clarity”, Personnel Review, 45/3, 605-615.
Wong, S.I. and Kuvaas, B. (2018), “The Empowerment Expectation–Perception Gap: An Examination of Three
Alternative Models”, Human Resource Management Journal, 28/2, 272-287.
Xerri, M. J. and Brunetto, Y. (2013). “Fostering Innovative Behaviour: The Importance of Employee Commitment
and Organisational Citizenship Behaviour”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management,
24/16, 3163-3177.
Yidong, T. and Xinxin, L. (2013). “How Ethical Leadership Influence Employees’ Innovative Work Behavior: A
Perspective of Intrinsic Motivation”, Journal of Business Ethics, 116, 441-455.
Zehra, T.T. and Waheed, A. (2017). “Influence of Ethical Leadership on Innovative Work Behavior: Examination of
Individual-Level Psychological Mediators”, Pakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Sciences, 11/2, 448-470.
Zhang, X. and Bartol, K. M. (2010). “Linking Empowering Leadership and Employee Creativity: The Influence
of Psychological Empowerment, Intrinsic Motivation, and Creative Process Engagement”, Academy of
Management Journal, 53/1, 107-128.

Beyan ve Açıklamalar (Disclosure Statements)

1. Bu çalışmanın yazarları, araştırma ve yayın etiği ilkelerine uyduklarını kabul etmektedirler (The authors of this
article confirm that their work complies with the principles of research and publication ethics).

2. Yazarlar tarafından herhangi bir çıkar çatışması beyan edilmemiştir (No potential conflict of interest was
reported by the authors).

3. Bu çalışma, intihal tarama programı kullanılarak intihal taramasından geçirilmiştir (This article was screened
for potential plagiarism using a plagiarism screening program).

4. Bu makale için etik kurul izni gerekmemektedir (Ethics committee permission is not required for this article).

496