Transformational and paternalistic leadership in Vietnam: effects on employee ethical behaviors through employer brand perception
Phuong Tran Huy, Ha My Nguyen, Thi Minh Phuong Bui, Kim Anh Thu Nguyen, Hong Anh NguyenPurpose
Organizations in emerging economies (Vietnam) operate in collectivist and reputation-sensitive contexts where hierarchical traditions coexist with ethical expectations. Although transformational and paternalistic leadership (PL) are prevalent in such environments, prior studies have largely examined their ethical or unethical outcomes in isolation. This study aims to investigate how these leadership styles simultaneously shape ethically divergent employee behaviors by examining employer brand perception (EBP) as a mediating mechanism.
Design/methodology/approach
A sequential mixed-methods design was used. An exploratory qualitative phase involved semistructured interviews with 20 Vietnamese employees to refine measurement scales and ensure cultural relevance. The subsequent quantitative phase analyzed survey data from 464 employees across multiple organizations using partial least squares structural equation modeling to test the hypothesized relationships among transformational leadership (TL), PL, EBP, organizational citizenship behavior toward the organization (OCB-O) and unethical pro-organizational behavior (UPB).
Findings
Both transformational and PL positively influence EBP, which, in turn, affects OCB-O and UPB. TL shows a stronger effect on OCB-O than on UPB, whereas PL exerts comparable effects on both outcomes, indicating ethical ambivalence. EBP emerges as an identity-based but ethically neutral mechanism that motivates both constructive citizenship behaviors and unethical protective actions.
Originality/value
This study extends leadership and ethics research by conceptualizing EBP as a higher-order mediating mechanism within social identity theory. It reveals how culturally conditioned identity processes in reputation-sensitive contexts can produce ethical and unethical behaviors, challenging assumptions about the inherently ethical nature of admired leadership styles.