Today, a growing number of companies are in trouble because leaders are lack of authentic leadership. Small and midium sized companies have the same issue. To correct the issue, there must be a real change in the relationship between managers and employees of the company as well as outside the company. In 21st century, authentic leadership is required. However, the research about determinants of change supportive behavior is not sufficient. Therefore, the purpose of this study is how manager's transformational leadership and authentic leadership affects change supportive behavior of employees in small and midium sized companies. The study also has to prove the role of positive psychological capital as a parameter. Data were collected from 424 employees working for small and midium sized companies in metropolitan area around Seoul and Gyeonggi. The data were analyzed using statistical package SPSS ver.21.0 and AMOS ver.18.0. Based on the research, First, the transformational leadership does not affect the change supportive behavior. However, authentic leadership affects the change supportive behavior. Also, positive psychological capital playes a role as parameter when transformational and authentic leadership, that are independent variable, affect change supportive behavior. On the other hand, the research shows that authentic leadership has more influence than transformational leadership on positive psychological capital. Transformational leadership without genuine attitude cannot affect change support behavior of employees in small and medium sized companies. Therefore, to affect change supportive behavior of employee, authentic leadership with genuine mind is required. After discussing the conclusions and implications of this study. the direction of the study for the follow - up study was suggested.
Kim Jeong-gi (pen-name: Changsan, Mar. 31, 1930 - Aug. 26, 2015) made a major breakthrough in the history of cultural property excavation in Korea: In 1959, he began to develop an interest in cultural heritage after starting work as an employee of the National Museum of Korea. For about thirty years until he retired from the National Research Institute of Cultural Heritage in 1987, he devoted his life to the excavation of our country's historical relics and artifacts and compiled countless data about them. He continued striving to identify the unique value and meaning of our cultural heritage in universities and excavation organizations until he passed away in 2015. Changsan spearheaded all of Korea's monumental archeological excavations and research. He is widely known at home and abroad as a scholar of Korean archeology, particularly in the early years of its existence as an academic discipline. As such, he has had a considerable influence on the development of Korean archeology. Although his multiple activities and roles are meaningful in terms of the country's archaeological history, there are limits to his contributions nevertheless. The Deoksugung Palace period (1955-1972), when the National Museum of Korea was situated in Deoksugung Palace, is considered to be a time of great significance for Korean archeology, as relics with diverse characteristics were researched during this period. Changsan actively participated in archeological surveys of prehistoric shell mounds and dwellings, conducted surveys of historical relics, measured many historical sites, and took charge of photographing and drawing such relics. He put to good use all the excavation techniques that he had learned in Japan, while his countrywide archaeological surveys are highly regarded in terms of academic history as well. What particularly sets his perspectives apart in archaeological terms is the fact that he raised the possibility of underwater tombs in ancient times, and also coined the term "Haemi Culture" as part of a theory of local culture aimed at furthering understanding of Bronze Age cultures in Korea. His input was simply breathtaking. In 1969, the National Research Institute of Cultural Heritage (NRICH) was founded and Changsan was appointed as its head. Despite the many difficulties he faced in running the institute with limited financial and human resources, he gave everything he had to research and field studies of the brilliant cultural heritages that Korea has preserved for so long. Changsan succeeded in restoring Bulguksa Temple, and followed this up with the successful excavation of the Cheonmachong Tomb and the Hwangnamdaechong Tomb in Gyeongju. He then explored the Hwangnyongsa Temple site, Bunhwangsa Temple, and the Mireuksa Temple site in order to systematically evaluate the Buddhist culture and structures of the Three Kingdoms Period. We can safely say that the large excavation projects that he organized and carried out at that time not only laid the foundations for Korean archeology but also made significant contributions to studies in related fields. Above all, in terms of the developmental process of Korean archeology, the achievements he generated with his exceptional passion during the period are almost too numerous to mention, but they include his systematization of various excavation methods, cultivation of archaeologists, popularization of archeological excavations, formalization of survey records, and promotion of data disclosure. On the other hand, although this "Excavation King" devoted himself to excavations, kept precise records, and paid keen attention to every detail, he failed to overcome the limitations of his era in the process of defining the nature of cultural remains and interpreting historical sites and structures. Despite his many roles in Korean archeology, the fact that he left behind a controversy over the identity of the occupant of the Hwangnamdaechong Tomb remains a sore spot in his otherwise perfect reputation.
Trust has been studied extensively in psychology, economics, and sociology, and its importance has been emphasized not only in marketing, but also in business disciplines in general. Unlike past relationships between suppliers and buyers, which take considerable advantage of private networks and may involve unethical business practices, partnerships between suppliers and buyers are at the core of success for industrial marketing amid intense global competition in the 21st century. A high level of mutual cooperation occurs through an exchange relationship based on trust, which brings long-term benefits, competitive enhancements, and transaction cost reductions, among other benefits, for both buyers and suppliers. In spite of the important role of trust, existing studies in buy-supply situations overlook the role of trust and do not systematically analyze the effect of trust on relational performance. Consequently, an in-depth study that determines the relation of trust to the relational performance between buyers and suppliers of business services is absolutely needed. Business services in this study, which include those supporting the manufacturing industry, are drawing attention as the economic growth engine for the next generation. The Korean government has selected business services as a strategic area for the development of manufacturing sectors. Since the demands for opening business services markets are becoming fiercer, the competitiveness of the business service industry must be promoted now more than ever. The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of the mutual trust between buyers and suppliers on relational performance. Specifically, this study proposed a theoretical model of trust-relational performance in the transactions of business services and empirically tested the hypotheses delineated from the framework. The study suggests strategic implications based on research findings. Empirical data were collected via multiple methods, including via telephone, mail, and in-person interviews. Sample companies were knowledge-based companies supplying and purchasing business services in Korea. The present study collected data on a dyadic basis. Each pair of sample companies includes a buying company and its corresponding supplying company. Mutual trust was traced for each pair of companies. This study proposes a model of trust-relational performance of buying-supplying for business services. The model consists of trust and its antecedents and consequences. The trust of buyers is classified into trust toward the supplying company and trust toward salespersons. Viewing trust both at the individual level and the organizational level is based on the research of Doney and Cannon (1997). Normally, buyers are the subject of trust, but this study supposes that suppliers are the subjects. Hence, it uniquely focused on the bilateral perspective of perceived risk. In other words, suppliers, like buyers, are the subject of trust since transactions are normally bilateral. From this point of view, suppliers' trust in buyers is as important as buyers' trust in suppliers. The suppliers' trust is influenced by the extent to which it trusts the buying companies and the buyers. This classification of trust using an individual level and an organization level is based on the suggestion of Doney and Cannon (1997). Trust affects the process of supplier selection, which works in a bilateral manner. Suppliers are actively involved in the supplier selection process, working very closely with buyers. In addition, the process is affected by the extent to which each party trusts its partners. The selection process consists of certain steps: recognition, information search, supplier selection, and performance evaluation. As a result of the process, both buyers and suppliers evaluate the performance and take corrective actions on the basis of such outcomes as tangible, intangible, and/or side effects. The measurement of trust used for the present study was developed on the basis of the studies of Mayer, Davis and Schoorman (1995) and Mayer and Davis (1999). Based on their recommendations, the three dimensions of trust used for the study include ability, benevolence, and integrity. The original questions were adjusted to the context of the transactions of business services. For example, a question such as "He/she has professional capabilities" has been changed to "The salesperson showed professional capabilities while we talked about our products." The measurement used for this study differs from those used in previous studies (Rotter 1967; Sullivan and Peterson 1982; Dwyer and Oh 1987). The measurements of the antecedents and consequences of trust used for this study were developed on the basis of Doney and Cannon (1997). The original questions were adjusted to the context of transactions in business services. In particular, questions were developed for both buyers and suppliers to address the following factors: reputation (integrity, customer care, good-will), market standing (company size, market share, positioning in the industry), willingness to customize (product, process, delivery), information sharing (proprietary information, private information), willingness to maintain relationships, perceived professionalism, authority empowerment, buyer-seller similarity, and contact frequency. As a consequential variable of trust, relational performance was measured. Relational performance is classified into tangible effects, intangible effects, and side effects. Tangible effects include financial performance; intangible effects include improvements in relations, network developing, and internal employee satisfaction; side effects include those not included either in the tangible or intangible effects. Three hundred fifty pairs of companies were contacted, and one hundred five pairs of companies responded. After deleting five company pairs because of incomplete responses, one hundred five pairs of companies were used for data analysis. The response ratio of the companies used for data analysis is 30% (105/350), which is above the average response ratio in industrial marketing research. As for the characteristics of the respondent companies, the majority of the companies operate service businesses for both buyers (85.4%) and suppliers (81.8%). The majority of buyers (76%) deal with consumer goods, while the majority of suppliers (70%) deal with industrial goods. This may imply that buyers process the incoming material, parts, and components to produce the finished consumer goods. As indicated by their report of the length of acquaintance with their partners, suppliers appear to have longer business relationships than do buyers. Hypothesis 1 tested the effects of buyer-supplier characteristics on trust. The salesperson's professionalism (t=2.070, p<0.05) and authority empowerment (t=2.328, p<0.05) positively affected buyers' trust toward suppliers. On the other hand, authority empowerment (t=2.192, p<0.05) positively affected supplier trust toward buyers. For both buyers and suppliers, the degree of authority empowerment plays a crucial role in the maintenance of their trust in each other. Hypothesis 2 tested the effects of buyerseller relational characteristics on trust. Buyers tend to trust suppliers, as suppliers make every effort to contact buyers (t=2.212, p<0.05). This tendency has also been shown to be much stronger for suppliers (t=2.591, p<0.01). On the other hand suppliers trust buyers because suppliers perceive buyers as being similar to themselves (t=2.702, p<0.01). This finding confirmed the results of Crosby, Evans, and Cowles (1990), which reported that suppliers and buyers build relationships through regular meetings, either for business or personal matters. Hypothesis 3 tested the effects of trust on perceived risk. It has been found that for both suppliers and buyers the lower is the trust, the higher is the perceived risk (t=-6.621, p<0.01 for buyers; t=-2.437, p<0.05). Interestingly, this tendency has been shown to be much stronger for buyers than for suppliers. One possible explanation for this higher level of perceived risk is that buyers normally perceive higher risks than do suppliers in transactions involving business services. For this reason, it is necessary for suppliers to implement risk reduction strategies for buyers. Hypothesis 4 tested the effects of trust on information searching. It has been found that for both suppliers and buyers, contrary to expectation, trust depends on their partner's reputation (t=2.929, p<0.01 for buyers; t=2.711, p<0.05 for suppliers). This finding shows that suppliers with good reputations tend to be trusted. Prior experience did not show any significant relationship with trust for either buyers or suppliers. Hypothesis 5 tested the effects of trust on supplier/buyer selection. Unlike buyers, suppliers tend to trust buyers when they think that previous transactions with buyers were important (t=2.913 p<0.01). However, this study did not show any significant relationship between source loyalty and the trust of buyers in suppliers. Hypothesis 6 tested the effects of trust on relational performances. For buyers and suppliers, financial performance reportedly improved when they trusted their partners (t=2.301, p<0.05 for buyers; t=3.692, p<0.01 for suppliers). It is interesting that this tendency was much stronger for suppliers than it was for buyers. Similarly, competitiveness was reported to improve when buyers and suppliers trusted their partners (t=3.563, p<0.01 for buyers; t=3.042, p<0.01 for suppliers). For suppliers, efficiency and productivity were reportedly improved when they trusted buyers (t=2.673, p<0.01). Other performance indices showed insignificant relationships with trust. The findings of this study have some strategic implications. First and most importantly, trust-based transactions are beneficial for both suppliers and buyers. As verified in the study, financial performance can be improved through efforts to build and maintain mutual trust. Similarly, competitiveness can be increased through the same kinds of effort. Second, trust-based transactions can facilitate the reduction of perceived risks inherent in the purchasing situation. This finding has implications for both suppliers and buyers. It is generally believed that buyers perceive higher risks in a highly involved purchasing situation. To reduce risks, previous studies have recommended that suppliers devise risk-reducing tactics. Moving beyond these recommendations, the present study uniquely focused on the bilateral perspective of perceived risk. In other words, suppliers are also susceptible to perceived risks, especially when they supply services that require very technical and sophisticated manipulations and maintenance. Consequently, buyers and suppliers must solve problems together in close collaboration. Hence, mutual trust plays a crucial role in the problem-solving process. Third, as found in this study, the more authority a salesperson has, the more he or she can be trusted. This finding is very important with regard to tactics. Building trust is a long-term assignment; however, when mutual trust has not been developed, suppliers can overcome the problems they encounter by empowering a salesperson with the authority to make certain decisions. This finding applies to suppliers as well.