Organizational Culture as a Moderator Between Paternalistic Leadership Style and Organizational Commitment: A Case of Banking Sector, Pakistan

This study seeks to examine the moderating role of organizational culture between Paternalistic Leadership Style and organizational commitment in the banking setting. This is an explanatory study based on 345 employees working in two private banks located in Lahore, Pakistan by using stratified sampling technique. Data were collected using the organizational commitment scale, paternalistic leadership scale and organizational culture scale. Descriptive statistics, reliability analysis, Pearson correlation were employed and hypotheses were tested using Hierarchical Multiple Regression. The results indicate that paternalistic leadership style significantly related to organizational commitment and organizational culture acted as a moderator in this relationship. Moreover, study also indicated the positive relationship between paternalistic leadership style and organizational culture and organizational commitment and organizational culture.

Financial sector, one of the paramount contributors of service industry, plays pivotal role in developing the economic life of a country (Chang, 2000). The financial service sector is prevalent in the world in terms of earnings and this sector consists of diverse range of businesses comprising banks, insurance companies and credit card companies (Sutton & Jenkins, 2007). While talking about the financial sector of Pakistan, Bushra et al., (2011) explored that today's economy is heavily dependent on banking sector in terms of day to day transactions and banks play vibrant and advantageous role in the progress of a developing country like ours. Samuel (2011) conducted a research in banking sector and established the relations of leadership, job satisfaction (JS) and organizational commitment (OC). Study concluded that leadership style is one of the most important aspects in increasing the employee commitment level and in providing a good and a professional environment. He further mentioned about the significant and positive relations of leadership style and service quality, leadership style and OC and leadership style and JS. Environment of a bank influences the effectiveness of leadership and its influence on behavioral and performance outcomes of employees (Malhotra & Mukherjee, 2004). Therefore, influence of culture on the relationship of leadership and outcomes is of paramount importance and requires in-depth investigation. An attempt had been made to find empirical evidence in Pakistan, but it was observed that this area was largely ignored in this part of the world, which validated the premise of this investigation. Therefore, the present study is framed in Pakistani context and has been carried out in the banking sector of Pakistan. It would be interesting to see how culture act as a moderating variable and influence the relation of paternalistic leadership style and organizational commitment within banking sector.

Objectives of the study
The study seeks to explore that how culture act as a moderating variable. Main objectives of the study include the following: i. To explore the existence of a relation between Paternalistic Leadership Style (PLS) and Organizational Commitment (OC) ii. To test the impact of a relation between Paternalistic Leadership Style (PLS) and Organizational Culture iii. To explore the existence of a relation between Organizational Culture and Organizational Commitment (OC) iv. To investigate the moderating role of organizational culture between PLS and OC

Significance
The key feature of the research is that it will help the organizations to develop strong organizational culture and adopt such leadership style which will be advantageous and which will provide them higher productivity and profitability. Leaders in any organization are the ones that can motivate and can demotivate the employees therefore it is essential for the organizations to choose the best and most effective leadership style. Practically it will help the managers of banking sector to understand which leadership style makes employees more committed and loyal towards the organization. It will also help the managers to recognize that when employees are committed, they participate in such behaviors that increase the overall productivity of organization.
The research work will also help the policy makers to revamp their strategy as to improve its human resources and organization related issues, since organizations are continuously fighting over to develop the best organizational culture and to find the suitable ways of encouraging employees to improve their work productivity. This study will generate valuable facts on the current culture of the private banks of Lahore, Pakistan. This study will contribute in the extension of management and HRM literature. On the basis of this study, managers will be able to discover best methods to develop better culture which leads employees towards OC. Therefore, organizations should critically analyze which type of culture and leadership style will be advantageous for them and subsequently organizations should appropriately proclaim it to every individual respectively with the intention of making and keeping a committed workforce.

Literature Review
Leadership is one of the greatest study matters in social sciences. It is a common action and is apparent in humans and animals (Bass, 2008). According to Van Vugt (2006), sociologists agree upon that no human societies exist in the absence of leadership. Leadership exists in all cultures and is present since the people have cooperated with each other (Rukmani et al., 2010). Leadership is very significant for all cultures but regardless of its significance, little consensus is present about its origins, definitions and importance (Celik et al., 2015;Dickson et al., 2003). It is notable that the word leadership becomes visible in the British Parliament for the first time around 200 years ago (Dorfman, 1996). According to Northouse (2007), leadership is a process and the ability of an individual to inspire a group of people towards the accomplishment of mutual goals. Aksu (2009) stated that for every kind of problem in the organizations, there is a suitable leadership theory.

Paternalistic Leadership
Paternalism is originated from the Latin language and word 'pater' meaning 'father' (Oner, 2012). There has been extensive amount of research on Paternalistic leadership in the last few years (Chan et al., 2012). In the last two decades paternalistic leadership has got great attention around the world (Aycan, 2006;Pearce, 2005;Pellegrini & Scandura, 2008). Paternalism can be linked to the early works of Max Weber. Weber hypothesized that paternalism is one form of legitimate authority (Pellegrini & Scandura, 2008). Scholars of leadership studies have identified that Asian countries give more favor to this form of legitimate authority (DenHartog, 2004). In Asia, Paternalistic leadership is an influenced leadership (Chan et al., 2012). Farh and Cheng (2000) argue that in Asia paternalistic leadership is based on the ideology of Confucianism. Wang and Cheng (2010) argue that paternalistic leadership was proposed as a prime Chinese Leadership theory. The concept of this leadership theory was developed to cover the behavior of Chinese business leaders in organizations (Farh & Cheng, 2000). Uhl-Bien and Maslyn (2005) state that paternalistic leadership is considered negative in the Western world whereas Pellegrini and Scandura (2008) argue that in non-Western world like India, Pakistan, China, Japan and Turkey, it is perceived as positive style. This style has received a great attention in the non-Western culture (Farh et al., 2008).

Organizational Culture
Organizational culture is a widely used term. The concept of culture is extracted from the metaphor as something cultivated (Watson, 2006). According to Hofstede (2001) culture exists at different levels in the organization. It is the responsibility of managers to develop a strong organizational culture in the organization (Watson, 2006). Organizational culture has been described by Poskiene (2006) as the complex set of philosophies, commitment, values, assumptions, beliefs and norms that are shared among the members and that joins an organization together and become a source of advantage and innovation for the organization.
Culture can be divided into different categories. Daft (2005) classified the organizational culture as Adaptability, Clan, Achievement and Bureaucratic. Culture can also be divided in Clan, Adhocracy, Market and Hierarchy cultures (Cameron & Freeman, 1991;Quinn & Rohrbaugh, 1983). Goffee and Jones (1998) classified culture into Communal, Fragmented, Networked and Mercenary types. Wallach (1983) categorized culture into three types as Bureaucratic, Innovative and supportive culture. Wallach's (1983) categorization of culture is utilized for this study, as it is widely used and accepted categorization. Wallach (1983) stated that these three categories are the lifeblood of an organization.
A bureaucratic culture is managed by rules and regulations. In such culture employee is not given empowerment and employee fulfills his tasks as specified by his managers and an employee is not given any freedom in such culture. This type of culture is a hierarchical culture (Kaungo et al., 2001). In this type of culture, managers can effectively control, administer, coordinate and maintain efficiency (Cameron & Quinn, 1999). Williams and Attaway (1996) stated that bureaucratic culture is slow to change. In such culture, participant's jobs and duties are contractual in nature and the roles of participants are setoff in advance. The congruity of goals is low in such culture and for the attainment of goals; each group uses the other group for its own purpose.
The supportive culture emphasizes on team work and collaboration. Such culture is people-oriented and employees collaborate with each other in a trusting working environment (Kaungo et al., 2001). A supportive culture consists of teamwork and trusting working environment. People are usually friendly and cooperative. In such culture employees encourage each other's contributions and accomplishments and support each other (Marks et al., 2001). In a supportive culture, empowerment and cooperation level is very high. In such culture, managerial control is also present but this control is only based on inter-relationships and socialization which leads to a mutual commitment of both the manager and the subordinate. The congruity of goals is high in supportive culture and participants of supportive culture share healthy goal congruence (Williams & Attaway, 1996).

Organizational Commitment
Organizational commitment (OC) is a broader concept that can be overlapped with the other concepts such as job involvement and career satisfaction (Reichers, 1985). For more than thirty years organizational commitment is considered as a significant topic of organizational studies (Fisher et al., 2010). Extensive amount of research is present about organizational commitment and different scholars and researchers have identified various antecedents and outcomes of organizational commitment (Elele & Fields, 2010). OC is an approach that defines the connection between the employee and the organization and to demonstrate this connection, employee follow a are important factors in achieving the organizational goals and leadership behavior is noteworthy in maintaining the workers commitment (Firth et al., 2004). Leadership behavior is directly related with employee's outcomes such as employee's commitment (Erkutlu, 2008). Employee's commitment is greatly influenced by the leader's behavior such as creativity and supportiveness. In order to keep an employee committed, there must be effective communication and trustworthiness between employee and leader (Avolio et al., 2004). Bass (2008) found that followers show higher level of organizational commitment when a leader trust the followers, include the followers in decision-making, motivate the followers to apply new techniques and methods to solve the problems and identify the follower's needs. Walumbwa and Lawler (2003) found that leaders who recognize the needs of the followers and motivate them to work with their full potential, their employees show higher level of organizational commitment. Leaders who motivate the followers, their follower's dignity, self-actualization and morale are increased by the action of their leaders which ultimately enhance the employee's commitment for their organization (Srithongrung, 2011). Erben and Guneser (2008) established a significant positive association of paternalistic leadership style and OC. Their study resulted that all three elements of paternalistic leadership (Authoritarianism, Benevolence, Moral leadership) is positively linked with the three types of OC (AC, NC, CC). Moreover, Rehman and Afsar (2012) conducted a study in SME's of Pakistan and they found that paternalistic leadership has positive impact on increasing the commitment of employees. It can be hypothesized by considering previous findings that: H1: There is a positive relationship between paternalistic leadership style and organizational commitment. Leadership style is an important aspect to accomplish organizational goals. Numerous factors contribute to organization's success, such as leadership style and organizational environment that plays a fundamental role in the success of an organization (Lecturer, 2018). Various studies show that paternalistic leadership is significantly related with organizational culture (Ciralkar et al., 2016). According to Harwiki (2016), employees can adjust to the organization's environment and can perform better if they get a fair guide to carry out their tasks and duties. Gupta and Sharma (2016) proposed that leaders with clear vision and benevolent style enhance employee's ability to perform their duties and such leaders help in creating and maintaining a positive and fair culture in organizations.
A study conducted by Sinaga et al., (2018) concluded that there is a direct positive relationship between leadership style and organizational culture. In their study, they have found out that leaders, who take care of employees' needs, inspire their subordinates, and help them in achieving their goals as well as organizational goals effectively, become a role model and such leaders create positive environment in workplace and help in increasing organizational productivity. Bedi (2019) conducted a meta-analysis review of paternalistic leadership and found the association between paternalistic leadership and followers results with their tasks and duties. The findings suggested that both benevolence leadership and moral leadership significantly and positively affect the followers' outcomes while authoritarian leadership is negatively associated with the followers result. And organizational environment plays a consequential role in the association between paternalistic leadership style and followers work outcomes.
Liu (2014) did a research on Chinese SMEs (Small and Medium Enterprises). The purpose of this investigation was to explore the linkage between organizational culture and paternalistic leadership style. His study resulted that all four types of culture (Group culture, Developmental Culture, Hierarchical culture and Rational culture) have positive association with all three components of paternalistic leadership style i.e., Benevolent leadership, Moral leadership and Authoritarian leadership. Yuzbasioglu and Dogan (2018) conducted a study with a sample of 243 employees of hotel industries functioning in Antalya, Turkey. They found out that there is a positive direct relationship between paternalistic leadership style and organizational culture. Paternalistic leaders can increase the commitment of employees and together paternalistic leaders and employees can make a positive work environment. Following hypothesis has been developed on the basis of aforementioned findings; H2: There is a positive relationship between paternalistic leadership style and organizational culture Significant work has been done on organizational commitment and organizational culture in different settings (Mohammadi & Zarei, 2015;Ismail & Razak, 2016;Anitha & Begum, 2016;Inanlou & Ahn, 2017;and Al-Shurufat & Halim, 2018). Hadian (2017) pointed out that many researches show the significant relationship between organizational commitment and organizational culture and they both majorly contribute in organizational performance. Edward (2016) argued that organizational culture is the most vital factor of organizational achievement and organizational commitment. Anitha and Begum (2016) conducted a research on service sector and found a positive and significant association between organizational commitment and organizational culture.
Al-Shurufat and Halim (2018) reviewed a number of studies on organizational commitment and organizational culture. Their paper pointed out that there is a strong significant relationship between organizational commitment and organizational culture, however in some studies they found out the weak association between these variables as well. Wiseman et al., (2017)  Medical Sciences and studied the relationship between organizational commitment and organizational culture. Findings of their study pointed out a strong and significant relationship between organizational culture and all three dimensions of organizational commitment (affective commitment, normative commitment and continuance commitment). Mitic et al., (2016) conducted a study on 129 companies in Serbia and found the effect of certain components of organizational culture (future orientation, power distance, human orientation and performance orientation). Results of their study showed that dimensions of organizational culture are significantly correlated with organizational commitment. Carvalho et al., (2018) investigated the relationship between organizational culture (clan culture, hierarchical culture, adhocracy culture and market culture) and organizational commitment in the banking sector of Brazil. The study results suggested that Clan culture has a significant effect on all types of organizational commitment; Hierarchical culture has no significant correlation with affective commitment but has a significant relationship with continuance commitment and normative commitment. Similarly the results indicated that Adhocracy culture is significantly linked with affective commitment and normative commitment, while on the other hand Market culture has a significant and positive correlation with the continuance commitment. Wambui and Gichanga (2018) concluded that organizational commitment and organizational culture are significantly linked with each other and organizational culture has a crucial role in determining an employee's commitment. Mohammadi and Zarei (2015) examined the relationship between organizational commitment and organizational culture in Fajr Jam Gas Refinery with a sample of 280 subjects. The result of their study showed a strong and significant relationship between organizational commitment and organizational culture. Based on the previous findings, it can be hypothesized; H3: There is a positive relationship between organizational commitment and organizational culture Organizational culture has important role in producing commitment and increasing the performance of employee (Lok & Crawford, 2001). Studies show that innovative and supportive culture is positively related with commitment and job satisfaction (Rashid, et al., 2003;Silverthorne, 2004). Fisher and Mansell (2009) stated that meta-analytic analysis research on commitment shows that affective commitment, normative commitment and continuous commitment along with leadership have same shares across cultures as other variables have. Organizational culture and leadership are two closely linked terms (Schein, 2004). Gelfand et al., (2007) pointed out that in the leadership and commitment research there is an indication for both generalizability and culture uniqueness. Randeree and Chaudhry (2012) argued that leadership styles may differ across cultures. According to Yukl (2002) certain leadership styles may influence innovation through cooperation with organizational culture. Li (2004) pointed out that different leadership behaviors have influenced on organizational commitment and this influence is dependent on organizational culture. In her study, it was found that all three kinds of organizational culture (Bureaucratic, Innovative and Supportive) acted as a moderating variable in the association of leadership behavior with OC. Moreover this moderation effect was found negative in her study. Yiing and Ahmad (2009) posited that organizational culture has no effect on the association of leadership behavior and OC. This hypothesis was partially rejected in their study as they found organizational culture a significant moderating variable in the association of leadership behavior and OC. Bureaucratic, Innovative and Supportive cultures were found significant moderating variables in the relationship of participative and supportive leadership behaviors with OC while on the other hand, bureaucratic culture did not significantly moderated the relationship of directive leadership behavior with organizational commitment but the innovative and supportive cultures were significant moderating variables in the association of directive leadership behavior with OC. Considering previous findings it can be hypothesized that:

Methodology
This study is causal in nature with quantitative strategy been used. Cross section research design has been used as researchers have collected data at one point of time. The population is the private banks in Lahore, Pakistan. The target populations of current study are the employees from managerial level and non-managerial level of private banks Lahore, Pakistan. HBL and Silk Bank have been selected for collection of data. The reason for selecting these banks is that these two banks are private, where HBL is the largest private bank of Pakistan, Silk Bank is also expanding its branch network and has a good position in banking sector of Pakistan. Also these two banks cover a great proportion of the banked population of Pakistan. So the selection of these two banks was made to fulfill the objectives of this study. The sample size for employees was calculated based on Yamane's formula (Yamane, 1967). Thus a random sample of size 345 is selected for this study using random sampling strategy with the help of sampling frame list.
A structural questionnaire is used in order to collect data. The questionnaire is based on 36 items, out of which 13 questions are adapted to measure PLS, 15 items measures the organizational culture and 8 items measure the organizational commitment using five point Likert scale.
The instruments of this study were adopted from different researchers and as follows;  et al., (1974) As far as reliability is concerned, this study has used Chronback's Alpha to check the reliability. Gliem and Gliem (2003) provided the following rule of thumb for the Cronbach's alpha. i.e.: Reliability > 0.9 excellent, Reliability > 0.8 good, Reliability > 0.7 acceptable, Reliability > 0.6 questionable, Reliability > 0.5 poor and Reliability < 0.5 unacceptable.

Data Analysis
Data analysis has been done through descriptive statistics and inferential statistics.  305 employees belong to HBL and have a proportion of 88.4% whereas 40 employees have been selected from Silk Bank and have a proportion of 11.6%. On the basis of level of job, 103 employees with 29.9% belong to the lower level, 173 employees belong to the middle level with a proportion of 50.1% and 69 employees were belong to the top level and had a proportion of 20%. Rest details are self-explanatory and are presented in the above table.  Table 4 discusses the descriptive statistics of the study by taking mean and standard deviation. The descriptive analysis showed that the association between organizational commitment and variables Paternalistic Leadership, Bureaucratic Culture, Innovative Culture and Supportive Culture lied at 3. It demonstrated that they have propensity in the direction of mean. Moreover, employees showed greatest commitment towards their organization. The employees were satisfied and happy for working in this organization and had no contrition on their decision for working in their organizations. H1: There is a positive relationship between paternalistic leadership style and organizational commitment.

H2(1):
There is a positive relationship between paternalistic leadership style and bureaucratic culture.

H2(2):
There is a positive relationship between paternalistic leadership style and innovative culture.

H2(3):
There is a positive relationship between paternalistic leadership style and supportive culture.

H3(1):
There is a positive relationship between organizational commitment and bureaucratic culture.

H3(2):
There is a positive relationship between organizational commitment and innovative culture.
The results in the above Table 5 demonstrated that Pearson Correlation is .805 between PLS and OC. The pvalue 0.005 is less than level of significance 0.01. Hence, the result could be stated that there is a strong positive correlation between paternalistic leadership style and OC. Significant scores of paternalistic leadership style produce greater OC in workers. Therefore, H1 is accepted and concludes that there is a positive relationship between paternalistic leadership style and organizational commitment.
Moreover, as far as relationship between PLS and organizational culture (bureaucratic, innovative and supportive) is concerned, table 5 demonstrated that Pearson Correlation is 0.246, 0.778 and 0.755 between PLS and Bureaucratic culture, innovative culture and supportive culture respectively at p-value 0.008, 0.000 and 0.000 respectively i.e. less than level of significance 0.01. Hence, the result could be stated that there is a strong positive correlation between paternalistic leadership style and organizational culture (innovative and supportive) whereas weak positive relation between PLS and bureaucratic culture. Therefore, H2(1), H2(2), H2(3) are accepted and concludes that there is a positive relationship between paternalistic leadership style and all dimensions of organizational culture.
Furthermore, table 5 also depicted the relationship between OC and dimensions of organizational culture. Pearson Correlation found to be 0.208, 0.702 and 0.891 between OC and Bureaucratic culture, innovative culture and supportive culture respectively at p-value 0.000 i.e. less than level of significance 0.01. Hence, the result could be stated that there is a strong positive correlation between OC and organizational culture (innovative and supportive) whereas weak positive relationship between OC and bureaucratic culture. Therefore, H3(1), H3 (2) www.iiste.org ISSN 2222-1905(Paper) ISSN 2222-2839(Online) Vol.12, No.1, 2020    0.824 0.831 0.007 0.000 -0.850 -1.139 -3.621 0.000 Notes: a R 2 including paternalistic leadership and innovative culture, but excluding the interaction paternalistic leadership * innovative culture; b R 2 including interaction term paternalistic leadership * innovative culture; d Coefficients of innovative culture in the model: (constant), paternalistic leadership, innovative culture, paternalistic leadership * innovative culture    0.845 0.864 0.019 0.000 -1.520 -2.060 -6.844 0.000 Notes: a R 2 including paternalistic leadership and supportive culture, but excluding the interaction paternalistic leadership * supportive culture; b R 2 including interaction term paternalistic leadership * supportive culture; d Coefficients of supportive culture in the model: (constant), paternalistic leadership, supportive culture, paternalistic leadership * supportive culture  Table 6-8 showed that positive association between paternalistic leadership and OC was weakened after adding the moderating variables (Bureaucratic, Innovative and Supportive). The interaction impacts for paternalistic leadership and bureaucratic culture (∆R 2 = 0.023, β = -1.244, þ > 0.05), innovative culture (∆R 2 = 0.007, β = -0.850, þ < 0.05), and supportive culture (∆R 2 = 0.019, β = -2.060, þ < 0.05) were significant for organizational commitment, supporting H4(2) and H4(3) and rejecting H4(1),. Therefore, the null hypothesis pertaining H4 is partially rejected. Organizational Culture (Innovative and Supportive) has significant negative moderating effect on the relationship between paternalistic leadership style and organizational commitment whereas bureaucratic culture couldn't moderate the relationship. Figure 2-4 graphically presents the interactional paternalistic leadership -organizational commitment association as moderated by bureaucratic, innovative and supportive culture, for which high and low levels are represented as one SD above and below the mean, correspondingly.

Conclusion
This study explores the relationships among paternalistic leadership style, organizational commitment, and organizational culture based on two private banks in Lahore, Pakistan. After complete analysis, it is found that all hypotheses of the study are supported and just H4(1) is partially rejected as bureaucratic culture did not significantly moderated the relationship of paternalistic leadership style and organizational commitment. This could be due to the bureaucratic environment of banks where employees are not given freedom and empowerment and employees fulfill their tasks as specified by the manager. Moreover, the commitment of employees is effective by the leadership style and culture of the organization. The results from current investigation can aid in developing and understanding the effect of leadership style and organizational culture towards organizational commitment in Pakistani Private banking sector. This study is a significant contribution and helps the policy makers who plan to improve their prevailing working structure. In a nutshell, leader's style and culture of the organization influences the commitment of workers which ultimately leads to organizational growth and productivity. Therefore, with a true and positive leadership style and comfortable working environment in the organization, employees are most likely to perform their tasks effectively and develop a greatest commitment towards their organizations in the long run.