Social Exchange Influences on ethical leadership and employee commitment in a developing country

Jeremy Mitonga-Monga*

University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa

* Address correspondence to Dr. Jeremy Mitonga-Monga, Post Doctorate Fellow, Department of Industrial and People Management, University of Johannesburg (UJ), PO Box 524, Auckland Park 2006, South Africa. E-mail: mitonmj@uj.ac.za

Abstract

This study examined the extent to which Social Exchange Theory moderates the

relationship between ethical leadership and perceptions of organisational

commitment. This study’s sample comprised 355 employees from a Public Works

Department in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) (women = 39%). The

employees completed the Social Exchange Theory Scale (Colquitt, Baer, Long &

Halvorsen, 2014), the Ethical Leadership Scale (Brown et al., 2005), and the

Organisational Commitment Scale (Meyer & Allen, 1997). Data was analysed by using

Hierarchical Moderator Regression Analysis to influence employee commitment

towards ethical leadership in collaboration with social exchange. The findings indicate

that social exchange moderated the relationship between ethical leadership and

affective, continuance and normative commitment.

Keywords: ethical leadership, employee commitment, social exchange theory,

Democratic Republic of Congo

Introduction

Nationwide, moral deficiency and corruption in the public and private sectors, as well

as amongst NGOs have raised questions of the ethical conduct of those who hold

influential positions (Mitonga-Monga, 2018). Most researchers nowadays have written

about philosophical and normative views of leaders’ ethicality and moral reputation

(Brown & Michell, 2010), and the ethical elements present in modern styles of

leadership associated with transformational and transactional leadership (Avolio &

Bass, 1991), and charismatic leadership (Kanungo, 1998; Judge, Woolf, Hurst &

Livingston, 2006). Ethical leadership refers to a demonstration of normative

appropriate contact through actions and interpersonal relationships, and the promotion

of such conduct amongst followers through two-way communication, reinforcement,

and decision making (Brown, Treviňo & Harrisson, 2005; Demirtas & Akdogan, 2015).

Employee commitment refers to an individual’s identification and involvement in the

organisation’s mission and goals (Choi, Cundiff, Kim & Akhatib, 2018). Leaders are

described as those individuals whose responsibility it is to provide conducive working

conditions that are honest, fair, respectful, challenging, and democratic (Demirtas,

Hannah, Gok, Arslan & Capar, 2017). Ethical leadership is said to increase employees’

levels of commitment (Mitonga-Monga & Cilliers, 2016), job satisfaction (Shafique,

Kalyar & Ahmad, 2018) and organisational citizenship behaviours (Yang & Wei, 2018).

Yet, while research examined the influence of Social Exchange Theory in the

relationship between ethical leadership and attitudinal variables, remains limited.

Moreover, there is no research evidence in this regard from developing countries,

which have higher levels of a culture of corruption, poor leadership (Mitonga-Monga &

Hoole, 2018), and under-developed human resource management portfolios

(Mitonga-Monga, 2019). This study investigated how Social Exchange Theory mediate

the relationships between ethical leadership and organisational commitment. This

study contributes to the scarce pool of research on ethical leadership and retention

within the DRC context. While there is a growing body of empirical research evidencing

the positive impacts of ethical leadership on some work-outcomes in different

organisational settings, studies conducted in the DRC’s Public Works Department

context, is scarce.

DRC’S Public Works Department Context

The DRC is situated in central Africa, and has a population of over 75 million. The

country has huge economic potential owing to its vast mineral wealth (such as gold,

copper, cobalt and diamonds). Political conflict in the country has resulted in violence,

plundering of the nation’s natural resources over many years, and poor service

delivery (Mitonga-Monga, 2019). According to Mitonga-Monga (2019), this has

resulted in the country being ranked below 7% on all economic indicators (Mitonga-

Monga & Cilliers, 2016), with the lowest score on government effectiveness, rule of

law, and control of corruption (Transparency International, 2018). The DRC’s Public

Works Department is in charge of all public workers, and deals with all the country’s

infrastructure. The department is characterised by a high number of workers,

mismanagement, corruption, poor leadership, a culture of impunity, low wages, and a

lack of good working conditions (Mitonga-Monga, 2019). A lack of leaders’ culture of

accountability has led skilled employees to leave this department in search for jobs in

the private sector instead (Mitonga-Monga, 2018). This has affected the Public Works

Department’s reputation and viability, which, in turn, influences commitment and

performance levels, as well as service delivery negatively. This influence in developed

countries has largely focused on business organisations.

Theoretical perspective

Organisational commitment (OC)

Several researchers define OC, and while there is no commonly-accepted definition,

a shared theme around the concept is that committed workers are likely to be involved

and identify with organisational goals, and desire to refrain from exiting the employing

organisation (Biltawi, Sweis, Sukkari & Sweis, 2020; Mitonga-Monga, 2019). OC refers

to an individual’s psychological bind with the organisation, which influences him/her to

act steadily with the organisation’s interests (Mitonga-Monga, 2019). OC, developed

by Meyer and Allen (1997), describes an individual’s affective and psychological

attachment to, and participation in an organisation. OC is also seen as an individual’s

identification with, and loyalty to the employing organisation, and the extent to which

he/she is ready to act on its behalf, whilst extending his/her stay at the organisation

(Malaysia, Tarmizi & Park, 2020). Committed employees tend to extend their

membership with the employing organisation. If they perceive their employer to

cultivate high-quality relationships, they will likely be trusting and loyal towards the

organisation (Cropanzano & Mitchell, 2005; Prebitero, Newman, Le, Jiang & Zheng,

2020).

Relationship between variables and related hypotheses

This study explored the influence of social exchange on the relationship between EL

and OC. EL has developed among scholars and practitioners as an important topic in

the field of management and organisational behaviours (Lin & Liu, 2017). Available

literature on organisational behaviours and ethics indicates that ethical leadership

relates to integrity and fairness (Mitonga-Monga, 2019). EL is described as a leader’s

demonstration of acceptable conduct, good actions and interpersonal relationships, as

well as the promotion of ethical conduct through communication and decision-making

(Lin & Liu, 2017). Ethical leaders are believed to be trustworthy, fair, and principled

decision-makers who behave ethically in their daily lives (Mitonga-Monga, Flotman &

Moerane, 2019). They are also characterised as being honest, caring and just

(Mitonga-Monga et al., 2029). They set clear ethical standards for their organisations,

adhere to those standards, reward and punish wrong-doers, and strive to establish

an ethical culture (Demirtas et al., 2017). EL creates a context in which values and

principles are disseminated and reinforced, rendering the organisation an attractive

place with which to be associated (Brown & Mitchell, 2010)

As a construct, EL, which was developed by Brown et al. (2005), has been described

as normatively appropriate behaviours, and disciplinary actions against employees’

(mis)conduct. This description focuses on compliance, whilst also on a relativistic

approach to ethics, leaving the content of moral norms and standards to the respective

cultural context (Brown et al., 2005). According to Brown and Trevino (2006), EL

comprises two aspects: the ’moral person’ aspect; and the ’moral manager’ aspect.

The moral manager refers to a leader’s intentional efforts to influence and manage

followers’ ethical conduct, for example, by encouraging them, maintaining ethical

communication standards, and by punishing wrongdoing. The moral person aspect

refers to a leader’s personality in terms of his/her moral characteristics and traits such

as respect, integrity, honesty and altruism, which manifest in his/her personal and

professional life (Brown et al., 2005; Kuenzi, Mayer & Greenbaum, 2020). Previous

studies indicate that EL is a good driver of some work-related outcomes such as job

satisfaction (Mitonga-Monga, 2019), and employee commitment (Mitonga-Monga &

Cilliers, 2016). Employees who perceive their ethical leader to be honest, respect

them, and display altruism, will likely identify with, and be involved in organisational

goals (Wang & Yang, 2016). Employees who perceive their ethical leader to

encourage them, communicate ethical conduct, and punish wrong-doers, are likely to

refrain from leaving their organisation (Wang & Yang, 2016). Mitonga-Monga (2019)

and Mitonga-Monga and Cilliers (2016) postulate that ethical leadership influences OC

and JS positively, whilst a study by Quakouak, Zaitouni and Arya (2020) found that EL

predicts employees’ turnover intentions negatively. In their study, Ghanbari and

Abdolmaleki (2020) reported that EL relates positively to employee loyalty. Employees

who perceived their ethical leader to be a role model who treats them with dignity, will

likely be committed, productive, and contribute fully towards achieving the

organisation’s goals, whilst extending their stay in the organisation (Ghanbari &

Abdolmaleki, 2020).

According to Meyer and Allen (1997), OC comprises three components, namely

affective commitment, continuance commitment, and normative commitment. These

are explained below:

• Affective commitment refers to employees’ psychological, emotional bonds

and engagement in the organisation;

• Continuance commitment is the moderating effects of social exchange in

respect of an individual’s assessment of whether the costs of leaving the

organisation are greater than the costs of staying, with a related influence on

his or her decision to exit or quit; and

• Normative commitment refers to an individual employee’s sense of

indebtedness to the organisation because of social norms. Affective and

normative commitment refers to an employee’s attitudinal dispositions, while

continuance commitment reflects his or her behavioral orientation (Meyer &

Allen, 1997; Mitonga-Monga, 2019).

The interest in OC originated from the work-related outcomes that it offers such as

decreased abandonment behaviours, including lateness, leaving, dedication,

efficiency, and loyalty.

Social exchange refers to a relationship between two interacting partners, namely an

individual and/or an institution (Blau, 1960; Cropanzano & Mitchell, 2004). A review of

literature in management research examined different forms of interpersonal

exchange (Mitchell, Cropanzano & Quisenberg, 2012). Of special interest to social

exchange theorists are differences in the parties’ involvement in the relationship

(Porter, 2018). The main assumption is that employees can form distinguishable social

exchange relationships. However, these relationships are operationalized with their

supervisor, co-workers and employer (Flynn, 2003; Liden, Fu, Liu & Song, 2016;

Moorman, Blakely & Niehoff, 1998). Empirical studies support the notion that social

exchange is an intervening or mediating variable when it is conceptualized within

organisational research (Cropanzano, Anthony, Daniel & Hall, 2017). The benefits of

social exchange are often understood in reciprocal terms - an employee who perceives

their leader or employer to be supportive, is likely to return the gesture (Liden et al.,

2012). When an ethical leader portrays high levels of respect, honesty, and altruism,

employees are (some conditions) more likely to demonstrate high levels of

commitment (Hansen, 2011), better performances (Shafique et al., 2018), and

reduced absenteeism and turnover intention (Lin & Liu, 2017).

Relationship between EL and OC

Research on the relationship between EL and OC are well documented. Mitonga-

Monga and Cilliers (2016) suggest that employees’ positive perceptions of a leader’s

ethics, fairness, integrity, honesty, increased levels of organisational identification, and

loyalty encourage them to extend their relationship with the employing organisation.

When employees perceive their ethical leader to have their best interests at heart and

cares about them, they will likely identify with, and share in the organisation’s values

and goals, dedicating their time to achieving these goals (Mitonga-Monga, 2019). They

are psychologically and emotionally bound to the organisation, emulate ethical

behaviours, refrain from unethical conduct, and demonstrate high levels of affective

bonding, and reveal openly their intention to extend their membership with the

employer (Mitonga-Monga & Cilliers, 2016). When committed employees are treated

fairly, listened to, and respected by their ethical leader, they would likely be determined

to maintain the employment relationship (Mitonga-Monga & Cilliers, 2016). Previous

research shows that EL predicts employees’ OC (Den Hartog et al., 2008; Mitonga-

Monga & Cilliers, 2016). Kim and Brymer (2011), indicating that EL influences the

relationship between JS and OC. This implies that employees who perceive fairness,

respect and altruism, and who are satisfied with their working conditions, will likely

reciprocate with higher levels of OC (Mitonga-Monga & Cilliers, 2016). Thus, given

that EL can affect OC, the researcher proposes the following hypothesis:

H1: EL affects OC positively and significantly.

Relationship between SE and EL

The main perspective for understanding the effects of ethical leadership is the Social

Exchange Theory (SET) (Brown et al., 2005). Cropanzano and Mitchell (2005) indicate

that social exchange involves a set of the interactions, which lead to many obligations.

Yukl, Mashsud, Hassan and Prussia (2013) report that SE relates to EL. In line with

the SE perspective, ethical leadership is viewed as a tension between altruistic and

egoistic motives (Kalshoven & Den Hartog, 2009). This implies that ethical leaders are

driven by systems of accepted beliefs, and judgement instead of self-interest, which

is beneficial to followers, the organisation and society (Yukl et al., 2013). Mitonga-

Monga (2019) mentions that employees of ethical leaders are more likely to perceive

themselves as being in a social exchange relationship with their leaders because of

the ethical treatment that they receive. SE is described as a means for employees to

maintain a well-balanced and equitable relationship with their leader as one of mutual

trust, respect and obligations (high SE). This implies that employees who perceive

higher levels of SE will likely reciprocate with beneficial behaviours in the organisation,

especially when these employees experience relatively low levels of commitment.

Qureshi, Zaman and Butt (2020) studied the relationship between SE and Leader-

Member-Exchange, and found that the construct was related. Furthermore, Yukl et al.

(2013) indicate that SE is important in the role that leaders play in making employees

feel obliged to reciprocate with positive outcomes such as commitment. Thus, the

researcher proposed the following hypothesis:

H2: SE affects EL significantly and positively.

Relationship between SE and OC

SE affects work-related behaviours such as OC, absenteeism, and turnover intention

(Mitchell et al., 2012). SE is described as voluntary actions of individuals that are

motivated by the returns that they are expected to bring and typically do bring from

others (Blau, 1964). In an SE relationship, employees perceive their contributions to

the organisation to be valued, and they may feel obligated to reciprocate to the

organisation to achieve its goals. For instance, Cropanzano and Mitchell (2005) report

that employees are likely to exchange their commitment for the employer’s support.

Furthermore, Cropanzano et al. (2017) state that employees who perceive positive

support from the employer are likely to reciprocate with increased OC, as they believe

that they need to in turn identify with, and strive to achieve the organisation’s goals.

Cropanzano et al. (2017) argue that an SE relationship influences employees’ feelings

of personal obligations, gratitude and trust – employees choose whether to give their

skills and competencies to the organisation, depending if they feel that the SE will

involve a set of interactions, which lead to several obligations.

For example, a study by Rhoades, Eisenberger and Armeli (2001) found that an SE

relationship influenced employees’ organisational commitment through organisational

support. Thus, the researcher proposes that employees who engage in an SE process

and receives support from the organisation, will likely commit to the organisation. This

implies that committed employees are likely to give their services to the organisation,

and hence decide to stay longer at the organisation (Jung & Kim, 2012). Thus, the

researcher proposes the following hypothesis:

H3: SE affects OC significantly and positively.

Moderating effect of social exchange

As noted earlier, several arguments support the notion that SE mediates the

relationship between EL and OC (Cropanzano et al., 2012). Advantageous and fair

transactions between strong relationships produce effective work behaviours and

positive employee attitudes (Hansen, 2011). Lioukas and Reuer (2015) suggest that

employees’ willingness to reciprocate has been named as a positive reciprocity belief,

as this can influence the degree of endorsing SE. According to the SE relationship

and the norm of reciprocity, the main belief of SE is dependent on the obligation of

return benefits to the exchange partner (Blau, 1964; Gouldner, 1960). Nonetheless, in

the process of SE, the interactions will not always flourish overnight because

individuals differ in the degree to which they accept reciprocity in the exchange

relationship (Brown & Mitchell, 2010). Individual employees who endorse reciprocity

in the exchange relationship (high SE) are likely to perceive that their ethical leaders

treat them with fairness, honesty, and respect, which in turn, encourage them to be

loyal, and become involved in accomplishing the organisation’s goals (Lioukas &

Reuer, 2015). When employees perceive support from the organisation (indicative of

high SE), then they will likely see themselves in an exchange relationship and perceive

their leader to portray high levels of altruism, integrity and fairness (Cropanzano et al.,

2012), and will hence likely commit to the organisation (Mitonga-Monga- Cilliers,

2016).

Cropanzano et al. (2012) indicate that SE related positively with a high quality of LME.

This implies that leaders provide the first signal of the desire for a close relationship

with the subordinate by using direct communication. If employees respond favourably,

then the leaders will initiate a new episode. Teng, Lu, Huang and Fang (2020) suggest

that SE mediates the relationship between LME and OCB, and decreases turnover

intention. The limitations of previous studies (Yildiz, Yildiz & Force, 2016) suggest that

research, which deals with the influence of EL on employee commitment that interacts

with SE, is still required. Given the literature on SE as an intervening variable for the

relationship between EL and OC, this research study proposes that employees who

see themselves in the relationship, and who perceive support from their employer, will

likely perceive their leader to be interested in them, respect them, and be true to their

word. They will be loyal to the organisation, and increase their intention or desire to be

a long term employee. Hence, the following hypothesis:

H4: SE moderates the relationship between EL and OC.

Effects of age and seniority

A synthesis of literature indicates that tenure is a variable whose results vary across

studies (Mitonga-Monga, 2015). Mitonga-Monga (2015) indicates that senior

employees who perceive their ethical leaders to be fair and respectful will likely

demonstrate higher levels of commitment to the organisation. For example, previous

studies yielded evidence that showed that ethical leaders that communicate with, and

treat their employees fairly, may influence their attitudes and behaviours (Rai &

Banerjee, 2019). This implies that as tenure increases, employees are likely to

perceive fair treatment (Rai et al., 2019). Consequently, long-tenure workers that

perceive their leader positively are likely to extend their membership with the employer

(Mitonga-Monga, 2015). Further, in terms of organisational commitment, Brown and

Trviňo (2006) found that an employee’s tenure differed significantly in respect of

his/her level of commitment towards the organisation. Findings reported by Mitonga-

Monga (2015) further indicate that experienced employees were more committed than

younger and less experienced employees. Thus, we hypothesise that their age and

tenure, as well as their commitment levels will influence employees’ perceptions of

their ethical leader.

H5: Age and tenure moderate the relationship between EL and OC.

In respect of the above discussions, a hypothesised model for this study is depicted in

Figure 1 below.

Figure 1: Hypothesised model proposing the interacting effect

Organisational commitment

Ethical leadership

Social exchange

Goal of the study

The purpose of this study was to examine to what extent employees’ perceptions of

their SE moderates the relationship between EL and OC. The study’s research

questions are posed below.

How do employees’ levels of SE influence their levels of EL and OC?

How do employees’ levels of EL, SE and OC differ in terms of age and tenure?

The research study’s findings may contribute to areas such as Industrial and

Organisational Psychology, as well as Human Resource Management interventions,

leadership development and retention strategies.

Method

Participants and setting

This study used a non-probability convenience sample of 353 permanently employed

employees at the Department of Public Works in the DRC. The sample comprised

56% men, and 44% whose ages ranged from 40-49 years. A total of 36% of the

respondents had a Bachelor degree, and most had six to ten years’ tenure.

Measures

In the study the Public Works Department employees revealed their age, gender,

educational level and tenure. They also completed the Ethical Leadership Scale (ELS)

(Brown et al., 2005), the Social Exchange Scale (SES) (Colquitt, Baer, Long &

Halvorsen, 2014), and the Organisational Commitment Scale (OCS) (Meyer & Allen,

1997).

The ELS is a ten-item self-reported measure of leaders’ ethical behaviours, scored on

a five-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). Brown et al.

reported a Cronbach alpha coefficient of 0.91. The present study obtained Cronbach

alpha coefficients of 0.90 for a score from the ELS.

The SES is a nine-item self-reported measure of the social exchange relationship,

which is scored on a five-point Likert scale (1 = Strongly disagree; 5 =Strongly agree).

(Colquitt et al., 2014) reported an internal consistency (Cronbach alpha coefficient) of

88 for the SES. While the present study obtained a Cronbach Alpha Coefficient of 0.81

for the SES.

The OCS is a 24-item self-reported measure of dimensions, which include Affective,

Continuance and Normative dimensions, scored on a five-point Likert-scale (1 =

strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree). Meyer and Allen (1997) reported internal

consistency reliability coefficients, which ranged from 0.76 to 0.89. The present study

obtained Cronbach alpha coefficients, which ranged from 0.76 to 0.81 for scores from

the OCS.

Procedures

Permission to conduct the research was obtained from the Higher Degree Committee

at the University of Johannesburg, and from the DRC’s Department of Public Works.

Participants provided their consent in writing to participate in the study, and each

participant received a package consisting of the following: an approval letter from the

Human Resource Department, an invitation letter, indicating the purpose and

objectives of the research, and a letter explaining the individual’s consent and

voluntary participation in the research project, confirmation of the safe keeper, and

confidentiality of the responses, as well as the request to complete the questionnaire.

Data analysis

Data was analysed by using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS)

Version 26 for Windows (Arbuckle, 2020). In the first stage, descriptive statistics were

computed to determine means and standard deviations. The second stage conducted

hierarchical regression analysis to determine if the SES construct acted as a

moderator in the association between the EL (ELS) and the OCS variables. Prior to

conducting the regression analysis, collinearity diagnosis was performed to ensure

that zero-order correlations were below the rule of thumb (r≥ 0.80), that the variance

inflation factors did not exceed 10, and that the tolerance values were close to 1

(Tabachnick & Fidell, 2016). The interactions were explored by using a simple slope

test and the value of the moderator at the -1SD mean +1SD, as well as standard

deviations above and below the mean (Cohen et al., 2013). In order to counter the

probability of type I errors, the significant value was set at the 95% confidence interval

level (p ≤ 0.05). For the purpose of this study, the practical significance of R2 values

was determined by calculating effect sizes (f2) (see Cohen, 1992).

Results

Descriptive statistics and correlations

Table 1 below presents the variables’ mean, standard deviations, Cronbach alpha

coefficients, and correlations. SE (using the SE) obtained the highest mean score (M

= 4.61; SD = 0.77), while EL (ELS) obtained a mean score of M = 4.11; SD = 1.14).

<Insert Table 1 about here>

The OC variables, respectively, obtained the highest mean scores OC (M = 4.86; SD

= 1.53), continuance commitment (M = 4.86; SD = 1.60), and normative commitment

(M = 4.01; SD = 0.61), and, lastly, affective commitment (M = 4.87; SD = 1.63). All

three components indicated a relatively high level of OC in the sample.

Relating EL, OC and social exchange

Table 1 above shows the significant relationships between the ELS, SES, and OCS

variables. The results show that the SE variable related significantly and positively to

the EL and the Normative OC variables (r ≥ 0.11, small practical effect size, to r ≥ 0.85,

large practical effect size). These results show that the zero-order correlation

coefficients were below the threshold level of concern (r ≥ 0.90) in terms of multi-

collinearity. Normative OC variables associated positively and significantly with the SE

variable (p ≤ 0.05).

Social exchange as a moderator of the relationship between EL and OC

The most significant finding of the slope test analysis was that the SE variable,

consistently moderates the association between EL and AC, CC, and NC variables.

The results indicate that respondents’ associations between EL and AC, CC, and NC

were stronger for those with a high level of SE. Figures 1 to 3 below explain the

interacting effects of the SE variable on the relationship between EL and AC, CC, and

NC.

Effects on OC

As indicated in Table 2 below, in terms of the main effects, EL did not act as a

significant predictor of the AC (F (3; 349) = 145.71; p ≤ .05), (B = 0.19; SEB = 0.16;

95%CI = [-0.12; 0.50]; p = ns), denoting that EL was not associated with an increase

in the percentage of the AC. However, SE acted as a significant predictor of (F (3;

349) = 145.71; p ≤ .05), (B = 0.75; SEB = 0.23; 95%CI = [1.23; 0.26]; p = 0.000),

denoting that SE was associated with an increase in the percentage of AC. The

interactions were explored by using a simple slope test, and by graphing the

interactions, using the value of the moderator at the mean, as well as standard

deviations above, and below the mean (Cohen et al., 2013). As shown in Table 2, SE

acted as a moderator in the relationship between EL and AC (F (3; 349) = 145.71; p ≤

.05), (B = 0.12; SEB = 0.00; 95%CI = [0.00; 0.02]; p = 0.012).

<Insert Table 2 about here>

As indicated in Table 2 above, in terms of the main effects, EL did not act as a

significant predictor of the CC (F (3; 349) = 145.71; p ≤ .05), (B = 0.17; SEB = 0.16;

95%CI = [-0.14; 0.49]; p = ns), denoting that EL was not associated with an increase

in the percentage of the CC. However, SE acted as a significant predictor of (F (3;

349) = 145.71; p ≤ .05), (B = 0.79 = 0.25; 95%CI = [1.26; 0.27]; p = 0.003), denoting

that SE was associated with an increase in the percentage of CC. The interactions

were explored by using a simple slope test, and by graphing the interactions, using

the value of the moderator at the mean, as well as standard deviations above and

below the mean (Cohen et al., 2013). As shown in Table 2, SE acted as a moderator

in the relationship between EL and CC (F (3; 349) = 145.71; p ≤ .05), (B = 0.02; SEB

= 0.00; 95%CI = [0.00; 0.02]; p = 0.016).

As indicated in Table 2 above, in terms of the main effects, EL did not act as a

significant predictor of the NC (F (3; 349) = 145.71; p ≤ .05), (B = 0.00; SEB = 0.15;

95%CI = [-0.30; 0.31]; p = ns), denoting that EL was not associated with an increase

in the percentage of the NC. However, SE acted as a significant predictor of (F (3;

349) = 145.71; p ≤ .05), (B = 1.03 = 0.24; 95%CI = [1.50; 0.56]; p = 0.000), denoting

that SE was associated with an increase in the percentage of NC. The interactions

were explored by using a simple slope test, and by graphing the interactions, using

the value of the moderator at the mean, as well as standard deviations above and

below the mean (Cohen et al., 2013). As shown in Table 2, SE acted as a moderator

in the relationship between EL and NC (F (3; 349) = 145.71; p ≤ .05), (B = 0.02; SEB

= 0.14; 95%CI = [0.01; 0.03]; p = 0.001).

Effects of Tenure

One-way Analyse of Variance was conducted to explore the effect of tenure on EL,

OC and SE. Participants were divided into five groups according to their tenure. Group

1: less than 1 year (M= 49.74; SD =12.85); Group 2: 1-3 years (M= 59.19; SD =12.40);

Group 3: 4-5 years (M= 57.23; SD =12.13); Group 4: 6-10 years (M= 55.83; SD

=11.86); and Group 5: 10 years and more (M= 54.76; SD =12.62).

As shown in Table 3, there was a statistically significant difference between three

groups in total EL [F (4,348) =5.59, p =.001]. However, there was no emerged

significant difference between the less than 10 years and more groups. The Scheffe

Post Hoc Test of multiple comparisons indicated that the mean scores of total EL in

participants who had worked there for less than 1 year and those who had worked

there for 10 years and more, were lower than the mean scores of the other groups.

As shown in Table 3, there was a statistically significant difference between two groups

in AC [F (4; 348) =5.53 p =.000]. Nonetheless, there was no emerged significant

difference between the less than 1 year, 4-5 years, 6-10 years and 10 years and more

groups.

As shown in Table 3, there was a statistically significant difference between two groups

in CC [F (4; 348) =5.49 p =.000]. Nonetheless, there was no emerged significant

difference between the less than 1 year, 4-5 years, 6-10 years and 10 years and more

groups.

As shown in Table 3, there was a statistically significant difference between two groups

in AC [F (4; 348) =3.05 p =.000. Nonetheless, there was no emerged significant

difference between the less than 1 year, 4-5 years, 6-10 years, and 10 years and more

groups. As shown in Table 4, there was no statistically significant difference between

the five groups in SE [F (4,348) =0.87, p =0.49].

Discussion

The objective of this study was to determine whether EL relates to SE and OC. The

main purpose was to investigate whether SE moderates the relationship between El

and OC.

The results show that there is a significant positive relationship between EL and OC.

SE moderates the relationship between EL and AC, CC, and NC so that when an

employee’s score for SE was high, his/her self-reported EL and OC variables (AC, CC,

and NC) were also high. These findings mirror those of previous studies that reported

that employees’ SE is important for their psychological bond to the organisation and,

ultimately, as means to decrease turnover intention (Mitonga-Monga-Cilliers, 2016).

The findings are likely to be explained by the fact that employees who perceive support

from their employer, and engage in positive social relationships, will likely perceive

higher levels of EL and OC (see Cropanzano et al. 2012 and Mitonga-Monga et al.,

2019). Employees who are privileged with fair transactions, mutual relationships, and

whose organisation supports them, will likely commit to the organisation. This, in turn,

could lead to employees producing effective work behaviours, which decrease

turnover intention and absenteeism (Den Hartog et al., 2008). The results show that

SE related to NC. This implies that when employees perceive that the employer values

their contributions and cares about their well-being, they will likely feel obligated and

that it is morally right to continue to be involved in, or stay at the organisation. These

findings are broadly in line with those of previous researchers such as Cropanzano

and Mitchell (2005), who found that employees who fulfil their mutual obligations are

likely to stay at the organisation for a longer time.

SE as a moderator

The results indicate that SE moderates employees’ emotional bond to, and

engagement with the organisation, hence them wishing to stay there longer. This might

be expounded by the fact that when employees score high with the SE variable, they

might tend to perceive fair treatment, respect, and good ethical practices from their

ethical leaders (Mitonga-Monga & Cilliers, 2016), and show their intention to stay or

continue their employment relationship (Shafique et al., 2018).

The results suggest that SE influences the association between EL and AC, and that

employees who perceive their ethical leaders to be concerned about their interests,

and care about them, then they will likely become more devoted, loyal and

psychologically attached to the organisation. Committed employees are likely to

perceive their ethical leaders to act in their best interests, which will, in turn, render

amongst them a feeling of indebtedness to their organisation. Ultimately, they will

reciprocate with positive behaviour, including refraining from terminating their

respective employment contracts (Cropanzano & Mitchell, 2005; Mitonga-Monga &

Cilliers, 2016).

The results of the present study suggest that SE moderates EL and CC relationships.

This can be explained by the fact that an ethical leader’s employees who perceive the

employer to be supportive, are likely to behave positively within the organisation and

towards the organisation’s goals. When SE is high, they will likely perceive high levels

of fairness and respect from their leaders, influencing their intention to quit (Lioukas &

Reuer, 2015). These findings are consistent with previous studies by Mitonga-Monga

and Cilliers (2016), who indicate that through social exchange, employees’

perceptions of their leaders’ ethics related to their levels of psychological attachment.

The results indicate that participant’s’ perceptions of SE influence their perceptions of

EL and NC. This implies that when employees receive support from the organisation,

and they recognise that they have accumulated investment in the organisation, they

would be less likely to leave for fear of losing this, and will be more loyal to the

employer (Presbitero et al., 2019). Committed employees who perceive their ethical

leader to observe ethical conduct, share their power, and treat them with integrity and

respect, will feel obligated to stay for a longer time with the employing organisation.

These findings are in harmony with those of researchers such as Hansen et al. (2013)

and Cropanzano, Anthony, Daniels, and Hall (2017), who indicate that SE

relationships may increase employees’ perceptions of their ethical leaders, and reduce

their turnover intention.

Effects of tenure

The results further indicate that participants’ levels of seniority differ in terms of EL,

OC, AC, CC, and NC. This implies that senior employees who perceive their leaders

to act with integrity, honesty and who perceive positive relationships are likely to be

loyal and committed to the organisation’s goals. This may lead them to the stay longer

with the employing organisation. These findings are consistent with those of Mitonga-

Monga (2015), who reported that older and experienced employees were more

committed than younger and less experienced employees.

Implication for human resource practices

Scholars have increasingly recognized the practical significance of supporting

employee loyalty and commitment to the organisation (Mitonga-Monga, 2019).

Correspondingly, commitment has been shown to positively influence numerous work

outcomes (Ram & Prabhakar, 2011). Antecedents to commitment, however, have not

been adequately researched and, therefore, insufficient guidance has been offered to

organisations concerning how to increase employees’ levels of commitment. These

findings suggest that to increase workers’ loyalty, organisations should orientate their

leadership development programmes to focus partly on the development of ethical

leadership. Further, human resource practices might attend to fair transactions that

lead to interpersonal connections (social exchange relationships) between employers

and employees, which may engender beneficial consequences (i.e. extra efforts, job

performance, and reduced turnover) (Cropanzano et al., 2012). SE could also

influence some positive work outcomes such as loyalty and intention to stay (Madsen,

Miller & John, 2005). Therefore, raising employees’ commitment through ethical

leadership has numerous positive effects in organisations.

Limitations and future direction

Despite the strengths of this study and implications for human resources practices, the

study was limited. Firstly, the research was conducted at one organisation (Public

Works Department) in the DRC; therefore, the study should be replicated in other

sectors. Secondly, the study only investigated the influence of SE in the relationship

between EL and OC, while other related variables such as positive organisational

behaviours, turnover intention, and absenteeism could be included in future research

to ensure a broader understanding. Future research might explore the effects of

personality traits and emotional intelligence on the relationship between leaders’

integrity and some work-related outcomes. Further, combined methods could be

undertaken to explore and understand the lived experiences of employees regarding leaders’

integrity. Replicating this study in the context of a developed country could also yield different

insights, which could then be compared to the findings of this study.

Conclusion

This article explored the influence of the social exchange relationship in the relationship

between ethical leadership and organisational commitment among staff in the DRC’s Public

Works Department. Driven by a dearth of research and empirical evidence on the association

among these variables in a developing-country setting, this study found that employees’

perceptions of their social exchange relationship influenced their perceptions of their ethical

leaders and their levels of commitment. These findings led to the conclusion that the DRC’s

Public Works Department needs to retain their staff, and should hence strive to cultivate a

positive social exchange relationship, and treat their members with respect, integrity, and

honesty. This will encourage employees to reciprocate with loyalty and refrain from quitting

the organisation.

This study contributes theoretically by confirming the effects of an SE relationship in the

relationship between ethical leadership and organisational commitment in a developing

country. It also expands understanding of the role that the social exchange relationship context

could play in fostering employees’ willingness to stay at the employment organisation.

References

Avolio, B.J., & Bass, B.M. (1991). The full range of leadership development: Basic and advanced manuals. Binghamton, NY: Bass, Avolio & Associate.

Bernerth, J. B., Armenakis, A. A., Feild, H. S., Giles, W. F., & Walker, H. J. (2007). Leader–member social exchange (LMSX): Development and validation of a scale. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28, 979 –1003. doi:10.1002/job.443. Biltawi, I., Sweis, G. J., Sukkari, L. S., & Sweis, R. J. (2020). A Study to Assess Job Satisfaction, Organizational Commitment And Turnover Intention In The Jordanian Architecture Sector. Business and Management,12(3), 1-18. Blau, P.M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: John Wiley. Brown, M. E., & Mitchell, M. S. (2010). Ethical and unethical leadership: Exploring new avenues for future research. Business Ethics Quarterly,20(4), 583-616. https://doi.org/10.5840/beq201020439. Brown, M.E. & Treviño, L.K. (2006). Ethical leadership: A review and future directions. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 595-616. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2006.10.004. Brown, M.E., Treviño, L.K., & Harrison, D.A. (2005). Ethical leadership: A social learning perspective for construct development and testing. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 97(2), 117-134.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2005.03.002. Colquitt, J. A., Baer, M. D., Long, D. M., & Halvorsen-Ganepola, M. D. K. (2014). Scale indicators of social exchange relationships: A comparison of relative content validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(4), 599–618. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036374. Choi, S. B., Cundiff, N., Kim, K., & Akhatib, S. N. (2018). The effect of work‒family conflict and job insecurity on innovative behaviour of Korean workers: The mediating role of organisational commitment and job satisfaction. International Journal of Innovation Management, 22(1): 1850003. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363919618500032. Cropanzano, R., Anthony, E. L., Daniels, S. R., & Hall, A. V. (2017). Social exchange theory: A critical review with theoretical remedies. Academy of Management Annals, 11(1), 479-516. Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31(6), 874-900. Demirtas, O. & Akdogan, A.A. (2015). The effect of ethical leadership behavior on ethical climate, turnover intention, and affective commitment. Journal of Business Ethics, 130(1), 59-67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2196-6. Demirtas, O., Hannah, S. T., Gok, K., Arslan, A., & Capar, N. (2017). The moderated influence of ethical leadership, via meaningful work, on followers’ engagement, organizational identification, and envy. Journal of Business Ethics, 145(1), 183-199. doi: 10.1007/s10551-015-2907-7.

De Hoogh, A. H., & Den Hartog, D. N. (2008). Ethical and despotic leadership, relationships with leader's social responsibility, top management team effectiveness and subordinates' optimism: A multi-method study. The leadership quarterly, 19(3), 297-311. Eisenberger, R., Armeli, S., Rexwinkel, B., Lynch, P. D., & Rhoades, L. (2001). Reciprocation of perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 42-51. Farr‐Wharton, B., Brunetto, Y., & Shacklock, K. (2020). Formal and Functional Social Exchange Relationships in the Public Sector. The Handbook of Public Sector Communication, 127-138. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119263203.ch8. Flynn, F. J. (2003). What have you done for me lately? Temporal adjustments to favor evaluations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 91, 38-50. Hansen, D., Alge, B.J., Brown, M.E., Jackson, L.C. & Dunford, B.B. (2013). Ethical leadership: Assessing the value of a multifoci social exchange perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 115:435-449. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-012-1408-1. (PDF) Perceived ethical leadership in relation to employees’ organisational commitment in an organisation in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308986654_Perceived_ethical_leadership_in_relation_to_employees'_organisational_commitment_in_an_organisation_in_the_Democratic_Republic_of_Congo. [Accessed: June 27 2020]. Judge, T.A., Woolf, E.F., Hurt, C., & Livingston, B. (2006). Charismatic and Transformational leadership: A review and Agenda for future research. In J Barling & C L. Cooper. The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Behavior: Volume I - Micro Approaches. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781849200448.n19. Kuenzi, M., Mayer, D. M., & Greenbaum, R. L. (2020). Creating an ethical organizational environment: The relationship between ethical leadership, ethical organizational climate, and unethical behavior. Personnel Psychology, 73(1), 43-71. Liden, R., Fu, P., Liu, J., & Song, L. (2016). The influence of CEO values and leadership on middle manager exchange behaviors. Nankai Business Review International.7(1), 2-20. DOI 10.1108/NBRI-12-2015-0031. Lin, C.P., & Liu, M.L. (2017). Examining the effects of corporate social responsibility and ethical leadership on turnover intention. Personnel Review, 46(3), 526-550. Doi:10.1108/PR-11-2015-0293. Lioukas, C. S., & Reuer, J. J. (2015). Isolating trust outcomes from exchange relationships: Social exchange and learning benefits of prior ties in alliances. Academy of Management Journal, 58(6), 1826-1847.

Madsen, S.R., Miller, D., & John, C.R. (2005). Readiness for organisational change: Do organisational commitment and social relationships in the workplace make a difference? Human Resource Development and Quarterly, 16(2):213-233. DOI: 10.1002/hrdq.1134. Malaysia, P. P., Tarmizi, A. N., & Park, K. H. T. (2020). Turnover Intentions and Quality of Work-Life: Mediating Effects of Career and Organisational Commitment Dr. Lilis Surienty* School of Management Universiti Sains Malaysia. Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991). A Three-Component Conceptualization of Organizational Commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1(1), 61-89. Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1997). Commitment in the workplace: theory, research, and application. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Mitchell, M. S., Cropanzano, R. S., & Quisenberry, D. M. (2012). Social exchange theory, exchange resources, and interpersonal relationships: A modest resolution of theoretical difficulties. In Handbook of social resource theory. (pp. 99-118). Springer, New York, NY. Mitonga-Monga, J. (2018). Perceived ethical behaviour of leaders in relation to employees’ job satisfaction in a railway organisation in a developing-country setting Journal of Contemporary Management, 15 (1), 447-466. Mitonga-Monga, J., & Cilliers, F. (2016). Perceived ethical leadership: Its moderating influence on employees’ organisational commitment and organisational citizenship behaviours. Journal of Psychology in Africa, 26(1), 3542. https://doi.org/10.1080/14330237.2015.1124608.

Mitonga-Monga, J., Flotman, A.P., & Moerane, E.M. (2019). Influencing ethical leadership and job satisfaction through work ethics culture. Journal of Contemporary Management, 16(2), 673-694.

Mitonga-Monga, J., & Hoole, C. (2018) Perceived corporate ethical values and organisational justice in relation to employee commitment at a manufacturing company. Journal of Psychology in Africa, 28:4, 298-302, DOI: 10.1080/14330237.2018.1505242.

Moorman, R. H., Blakely, G. L., & Niehoff, B. P. (1998). Does perceived organizational support mediate the relationship between procedural justice and organizational citizenship behavior? Academy of Management Journal, 41(3), 351-357.

Kanungo, R. N., & Mendonca, M. (1998). Ethical Leadership in Three Dimensions. Journal of Human Values, 4(2), 133–148. https://doi.org/10.1177/097168589800400202.

Kim, W. G., & Brymer, R. A. (2011). The effects of ethical leadership on manager job satisfaction, commitment, behavioral outcomes, and firm performance. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 30(4), 1020-1026.

Rai, H., & Banerjee, B. (2019). The Role of Gender & Leader Tenure in the Relationship between Spirituality & Ethical Leadership. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 54(3). 497-515. Shafique, I., Kalyar, M.N., & Ahmad, B. (2018). The Nexus of Ethical Leadership, Job Performance, and Turnover Intention: The Mediating Role of Job Satisfaction. Interdisciplinary Description of Complex Systems 16(1), 71-87. DOI: 10.7906/indecs.16.1.5. Ouakouak, M. L., Zaitouni, M. G., & Arya, B. (2020). Ethical leadership, emotional leadership, and quitting intentions in public organizations. Leadership & Organization Development Journal. 41(2), 257-279. doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-05-2019-0206. Porter, C. M. (2018). Long live social exchange theory. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 11(3), 498-504. Presbitero, A., Newman, A., Le, H., Jiang, Z., & Zheng, C. (2019). Organizational commitment in the context of multinational corporations: a critical review and directions for future research. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 30(1), 188-218. Shafique, I., N Kalyar, M., & Ahmad, B. (2018). The nexus of ethical leadership, job performance, and turnover intention: The mediating role of job satisfaction. Interdisciplinary Description of Complex Systems: INDECS, 16(1), 71-87. Teng, C. C., Lu, A. C. C., Huang, Z. Y., & Fang, C. H. (2020). Ethical work climate, organizational identification, leader-member-exchange (LMX) and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB). International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management. 32(1), 212-229. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-07-2018-0563. Transparency International. (2018). Corruption is threatening prosperity for all. [Internet: https://www.transparency.org/cpi; downloaded on 22 June 2020.] Wang, Y. D., & Yang, C. (2016). How appealing are monetary rewards in the workplace? A study of ethical leadership, love of money, happiness, and turnover intention. Social Indicators Research, 129(3), 1277-1290. DOI 10.1007/s11205-015-1160-x.

Yang, Q.I. & Wei, H. (2018). The impact of ethical leadership on organisational citizenship behaviour. Leadership & Organisation Development Journal. 39(1)100-113. DOI:10.1108LODJ.12.2016.0313.

Table 1: Mean, standard deviations, Cronbach alpha coefficients and correlations

Variables Mean SD α 1 2 3 4 5 6 EL 4.11 1.14 0.78 1 0.23* 0.77*** 0.73*** 0.71*** 0.75*** SE 4.61 0.77 0.81 1 0.09 0.08 0.06 0.11* OC 4.86 1.53 0.80 1 0.84*** 0.85*** 0.83** AC 4.87 1.63 0.78 1 0.85*** 0.81*** CC 4.86 1.60 0.81 1 0.84*** NC 4.86 1.65 0.76 1

Notes: N = 353, SD = standard deviations, α = Cronbach alpha coefficient, EL = ethical leadership, SE = social exchange, OC = organisational commitment, AF = affective commitment, CC = continuance commitment and NC = normative commitment

Table 2: Hierarchical Moderator Regression

Table 2: Hayes’ Process Regression Matrix for Moderating effect of the SE

on the relationship between EL and AC, CC and NC (N=553).

Variables B (SEs ) t P

95%Confidence Interval R R2

LLCI ULCI AC

Constant 20.99 (8.23) 2.55 0.001 4.80 37.19 0.75 0.56

EL -0.19(0.16)

-1.21 0.231 -0,11 0.50

SE 0.75 (0.25) 3.02 0.003 3.25 1.94

Interaction SE*EL

0.11 (0.00) 2.51 0.012 0.00 0.02

CC Constant

23.07 (8.40) 2.75 0.006 6.55 39.59 0.72 0.52

EL -0.17(0.16)

-1.07 0.283 -0.14 0.49

SE 0.77(0.25) 3.05 0.002 1.26 0.27 Interaction

SE*EL 0.12(00) 2.42 0.016 0.00 0.02

NC Constant

29.31 (8.02)) 3.65 0.000 13.53 45.10 0.77 0.59

EL -00(0.15) -0.01 0.986 -0.30 0.31

SE 1.03(0.24) 4.28 0.000 1.50 0.56 Interaction

SE*EL 0.02(00) 3.95 0.001 0.01 0.03

N = 353; *** p ≤ 0.001; ** p ≤ 0.01; * p ≤ 0.05.

.

Figure 1: Interacting effect between SE, EL and AC

Figure 2: Interacting effect between SE, EL and CC

1

1,5

2

2,5

3

3,5

4

4,5

5

Low EL High EL

Aff

ectiv

e co

mm

itmen

t

Low SEHigh SE

1

1,5

2

2,5

3

3,5

4

4,5

5

Low EL High EL

Con

tinua

nce

com

mitm

ent

Low SEHigh SE

Figure 3: Interacting effect between SE, EL and NC

Significant differences between tenure

Table 3: One Way ANOVA on OC, EL and SE with regards to seniority (N = 352)

Variables Source of variations Sum of squares

Df Mean Square

F P

EL Between groups 3382.83 4 845.71 5,591 000*** Within groups 52640.73 348 151.27 Total 56023.56 352

SE Between groups 101.76 4 25.44 0,865 0.049 Within groups 10235.80 348 29.41 Total 10337.56 352

OC Between groups 14613.69 4 3653.42 5,010 .001*** Within groups 253792.44 348 729.29 Total 268406.13 352

AC Between groups 2000.96 4 500.24 5,529 .000*** Within groups 31485.25 348 90.48 Total 33486.20 352

CC Between groups 1922.02 4 480.51 5,486 .000* Within groups 30479.77 348 87.59 Total 32401.80 352

CN Between groups 1167.58 4 291.89 3,053 0.017* Within groups 33268.62 348 95.60

1

1,5

2

2,5

3

3,5

4

4,5

5

Low EL High EL

Nor

mat

ive

com

mitm

ent

Low SEHigh SE

Total 34436.20 352 Note: ***p<.001, **p<.01, *p<.05