Keywords

Paternalistic Leadership, Employee Voice Behavior

Introduction

Patriarchal leadership is an important term that has emerged during the past two decades, and this importance can be explained, as a result of the increasing desire to know the patriarchal leadership that has proven to have an effective influence in managerial styles. It can be said that it emerged as an alternative to the Western leadership style of transformational leadership. Scholars and researchers have likened this term in the field of management and organizational behavior, patriarchal leadership, and considered it as a nucleus that contains within it three main elements and together form a leadership model consisting of tyranny - charity - ethics. Leaders must be viewed as an important means in influencing employee behavior within the internal and external work environment, because they possess the qualities that enable them to play a good role in exercising authority with subordinates due to their possession of the philosophy of persuasion, as well as by moving away from many unethical behaviors within Work environment. This leads to instilling confidence in subordinates and generates a positive impact

Research Methodology

The Research Problem

Organizations of all types and activities face a set of challenges and rapid and complex events that plague their environment, as an inevitable consequence of these difficulties, the search for an appropriate leadership style that generates clear reflections on the overall performance of subordinates, and then positively influences the final output of the organization, and thus can Saying that the parental leadership style is the pattern that helps to achieve the goals set for the researched organization, and from the above, the problem of the study is crystallized by asking the main question (what is the effect of parental leadership practices on the vocal behavior of the employees in the university that was subjected to the research), so the following questions were raised: To contribute to clarifying the content of the study problem:

1- Do the administrative leaderships in the researched colleges apply the parental leadership style?

2- What is the level of vocal behavior of employees in the faculties in which the research was conducted?

3- What is the nature of the relationship and the impact between each of the dimensions of parental leadership and the voice behavior of the employees?

The Importance of the Study

The study derives its importance from the importance of the topic it deals with and the chosen site that it addresses (University of Anbar), and the importance can be determined on two levels:

Academic Level

The importance of studying academically is embodied in building a frame of knowledge for the subjects (parental leadership and Employees’ Voice Behavior) because of their great influence on the future of the organizations. Therefore, researchers seek to provide an intellectual framework that can help other researchers to enrich this topic in the future.

Field Level

The study of the independent variable (parental leadership) and its impact leads to the possibility of determining the required level of support and attention to these variables that positively affect the dependent variable on the vocal behavior of the educational organization in which the research was conducted.

This study is important at the field level, as it will provide an information base that can be employed in the research organization.

Research Objectives

The study aims to achieve the following:

Identify the extent to which the researched organization adopts the concept of parental leadership and employs it in a manner consistent with its requirements.

Presenting proposals and recommendations to the administrative leaderships in the faculties researched by paying attention to the elements of positive parenting leadership, through which it is possible to enhance the voice behavior of the employees.

The Hypothetical Supposed of the Paper

The Study Hypotheses

Within the framework of the above research outline, the following hypotheses emerge:

The First Main Hypothesis

There is a significant, significant correlation between the parental leadership and the vocal behavior of the employees at Anbar University. Several sub hypotheses are divided from it:

There is a significant correlation between authoritarian leadership and the Employees’ Voice Behavior at the university in which the research was conducted.

There is a significant correlation between the Benevolence leadership and the voice behavior of the employees at the university in which the research was conducted.

There is a significant correlation between the moral leadership and the voice behavior of the employees.

The Second Main Hypothesis

There is a significant, significant effect relationship of parental leadership on the vocal behavior of the employees in the researched university. Several sub-hypotheses are divided from it:

There is an influence relationship of Morale significance for authoritarian leadership in the Employees' Voice Behavior.

There is an influential relationship of morale significance for Benevolence leadership on the Employees' Voice Behavior.

There is an influence relationship of morale significance for moral leadership on the Employees' Voice Behavior

Limits of the Study

1. Human limits: The research sample was represented by employees with their various academic achievements in a number of colleges of Anbar University.

2. Spatial boundaries: as the research was conducted in a number of (10) colleges of Anbar University.

3. Temporal boundaries: This research was conducted during the period that started from preparing the data represented by the questionnaire and distributing it to the research sample in various faculties to return it and conduct statistical analysis on it for the period from 15/9/2020 to 3/1/2021.

Methods of Data Collection

There are two types of methods were used to collect data through the following:

1. The first type: related to covering the theoretical aspect through many scientific sources, such as books, magazines, periodicals, research papers and conferences related to study variables.

2. As for the second type of data, it was obtained through the field study, and the questionnaire form is the main tool in collecting data and information for the study. Relates to (gender, age, educational qualification (certificate), workplace). As for the second part: it included the paragraphs for the independent variable (parental leadership practices) and it included (17) paragraphs, while the third part: this part was devoted to paragraphs for the dependent variable (the Employees’ Voice Behavior) and it included (6) paragraphs. Table (1) shows the structure of the questionnaire according to the main and sub-variables of the study and the sources that were used to measure the variables.

Table 1 Structure of the Questionnaire
The Main Paper Variables	Sub Variables	Number of Paragraphs	The Items Numbers	The Source Approved for the Scale
Demographic variables	Gender, age, educational qualification, workplace	4		Preparing researchers
Parental Leadership Practices	Authoritarian leadership	6	6-1	(Erol &Senturk, 2018); (Sheer, 2012)
	Benevolence leadership	5	11-7	(Lau et al., (2020); (Lu et al., 2017)
	Moral leadership	6	17-12	(Ugurluoglu et al., (2018); (Wu & Tsai 2012)
Employees’ Voice Behavior		6	23-18	(Burris, 2012; Chiang & Chen, 2020)

Research Community and Sample

The research community consists of employees in (10) colleges affiliated with the University of Anbar, whose number is (1203) employees to determine the appropriate sample size, the researchers used the special table to determine the sample size in the book (Sekaran & Bougie, 2016), which shows that the appropriate sample size for the current research community of (1203) employees is (291), For the current research community of (1203) employees is (291), and the equation was also relied on (Thompson, 2012) to determine the size of the sample and it was also identical to (291) and to ensure obtaining this required number, the researchers distributed (320) A questionnaire according to the stratified sample method, and to know the number of forms that will be distributed to each college, the following law was based (the number of employees in the college divided by the total number of employees in the 10 colleges multiplied by the size of the sample). The number of questionnaire forms recovered (303) was among them (11) A questionnaire form that is not valid for analysis, and thus the number of questionnaires valid for analysis is (292) questionnaires and a response rate of (91%).

Theoretical Framework

The Concept of Patriarchal Leadership

The concept of parental leadership is one of the administrative concepts that began to flourish during the past two decades. And it proved to be a common leadership style and highly effective in non-western business organizations because it is based on building confidence by providing all kinds of support to subordinates, thus ensuring absolute authority. The concepts began in the mid-1980s, as they were described by researchers in the field of leadership and organizational behavior (Chan et al., 2012) as a cultural trait that combines benevolence and devotion with authoritarian control in decision-making. As for (Özçelik & Cenkci, 2014), he described it as a hierarchical relationship through which the administrative leader directs the professional and personal life of subordinates in a manner similar to the father, and in return the leader obtains loyalty, obedience and respect. (Ünler & K?l?ç, 2019) pointed out that it is an administrative style that requires the leader to provide care, protection and altruism to subordinates in the internal and external work environment.

The Importance of Patriarchal Leadership

The importance of patriarchal leadership emerges as one of the leadership styles prevalent in commercial, industrial and service organizations, except for Western organizations, and an effective and important strategic tool for organizations as it helps to control and maintain employees just as a compassionate father preserves his grandchildren, (Chen et al., 2014) pointed to the importance of parental leadership as it contributes to:

1. High concern for the personal well-being of all employees working in the organization, without exception, with active participation in their joys, such as marriage and success.

2. Strengthening the emotional bonds between the leader and subordinates to reach the distinguished performance of the organization.

3. (Saygili et al., 2020) indicated that patriarchal leadership.

It reduces the conflict between work in the organization and the family, and also helps to raise the level of independence and self-esteem. Whereas (Bedi, 2019) sees the importance of parental leadership through:

1. It helps to reduce the turnover of work for all subordinates in the organization and not to think about withdrawing from it.

2. Creating a work environment characterized by justice and support for all competencies in the organization, regardless of their affiliation.

3. Increasing job performance levels and also contributing to creating a work environment that is very similar to a single family based on compassion and virtuous morals.

4. In addition, it contributes to motivating employees by offering constructive ideas and proposals that form the nucleus of creativity and innovation and these are what the study of ( Dedahanov et al., 2016; Hou et al., 2019).

Dimensions of Parental Leadership

Authoritarian Leadership

As he knew it (Erben & Güne?er, 2008) It is the behavior of the leader that is characterized by absolute authority and control over subordinates while requiring subordinates to obey. (Chen et al., 2014) mentioned that it is the behavior of a leader that is characterized by strong authority and control over subordinates while asking them to carry out orders without discussion. (Shen et al., 2019) indicates that leaders strive to maintain the power asymmetry between them and their subordinates in the organization. (Gumusluoglu et al., 2020) indicated that the features of authoritarian leadership can be described as follows:

• Dictatorial leaders who exercise power and control over subordinates.

• Punishing subordinates for non-compliance with instructions issued.

• Authoritarian leadership behaviors lower levels of organizational justice.

• Leaders are the decision makers alone and do not waste time to listen to the suggestions made by the subordinates. Siddique, et al., (2020) believes that authoritarian leaders want to maintain an organizational structure that is hierarchical and not flexible, and they try to impose high-performance goals to which employees are not accustomed, which leads to poor morale, and contributes to an increase in the role conflict It greatly affects employee satisfaction and productivity. And in the same direction between (Wu et al., 2020), it increases employees' sense of insecurity, which negatively affects the employee's voice and the level of ideas in support of work. (Daft & Lane, 2015) noted that it emphasizes tight top-down oversight and management practice through impersonal analogy and analysis.

Benevolence Leadership

The cultural roots of charitable leadership stem from the Confucian ideology. That is based on social relationships. Like a benevolent leader with a loyal minister and a tender parent with his grandchildren. These principles are derived from cultural expectations that a leader should strive for luxury, not sell it (Ghosh, 2015) showed that it is the process of creating a cycle of motivation and encouragement and initiating organizational change in companies through ethical decision-making. In (Gumusluoglu et al., 2017), charitable leadership can be described as a practice that shows concern for all subordinates and works diligently to achieve the highest levels of well-being for them and their families. (Erkutlu & Chafra, 2016) stated that it is a kind of care at the individual level in the field of work, such as giving opportunities to correct and amend mistakes, avoid their public humiliation in front of subordinates, provide guidance, training, and pay attention to their career development, strive to solve their work problems, and show inclusiveness and concern for them with what It goes beyond professional work relationships. Pointed (Huang & Lin, 2020) It helps increase motivation for positive teamwork, contributes to increasing respect for the decisions taken by their leader, increases trust among co- workers, strengthens the team relationship more, reduces employee differentiation, and helps reduce job fatigue. He mentioned (Ho & Le, 2020). It affects the behavior of organizational citizenship, and the higher the level of concern for employees, it will lead to an increase in their organizational commitment and their complete recovery to follow their leader, obey him and frequent interaction with him, which is reflected in the willingness to form and maintain high- quality relationships. It encourages the innovative behavior of employees and increases their identity for their teams and units in which they work (Gumusluoglu et al., 2017).

Moral Leadership

Moral leadership has received great attention from academic researchers and those interested in leadership now, as a result of the frequent scandals and traumas that diverge from the ethical aspects and practices of the organizational processes of organizations in various sectors (Yao & Li, 2019; Bao & Li, 2019). It is defined as the behavior of a leader who sets high ethical standards (Ugurluoglu et al., 2018). It can be commonly portrayed as the behavior of a leader who possesses a superior moral character, does not act selfishly, is impartial, and is an example to others (Cheng & Wang, 2015) He is the one who works to implement his authority by showing the ideal model of good morals, which helps the leader to win the affection and respect of subordinates (Lau et al., 2020) and that it distinguishes between right and wrong, doing the right thing, striving to achieve justice, honesty, honesty, and practicing good leadership (Daft & Lane, 2015). Not only that, but they have unusual behaviors and models that support and encourage ethical behavior in the organization, which can be followed or imitated, as well as are transparent in terms of enforceable instructions and decision-making, and they care about the work of subordinates and provide the necessary services and they act as a servant to them (Gu et al., 2015). He dedicates his job to providing important feedback to performance-related feedback, which helps subordinates in assessing their efficiency and advancement, provides respect for them, provides a space for independence in their work, is a good listener of their concerns, and allows them to participate in decision-making, which reflects positively on the organization in general (Li et al., 2012). Moral leadership contributes to setting the rules of competence and equal competition for self or personal management, which helps to raise their morale and give them hope for achieving equal opportunities in terms of the promotion side, and thus it is possible from what has been mentioned may affect the increase in the perceived quality of life of subordinates (Huang et al., 2020). Moral leadership provides many advantages to the organization, including when employees trust their moral leadership, this contributes to encouraging, motivating and inspiring them to innovate at various levels in the company, enabling them to achieve greater success and gain a competitive advantage in light of the highly competitive atmosphere in the market in which these organizations operate (Avella, 2015). It affects the psychological empowerment of the employees, which reflects positively on increasing their motivation to work better (Wu, 2012). The more the moral leader interacts well, the more that helps the employees to understand the expectations of their leader and how to perform their job tasks efficiently and effectively and contribute to knowing more about the requirements of and job duties entrusted to them (Yao & Li, 2019).

The Employees’ Voice Behavior

Organizations in various sectors are now facing more complications in their work environment that is characterized by speed and constant change in fluctuating and unconfirmed work procedures, which posed a further challenge for leaders and managers in these organizations to cope with this matter and solve problems and obstacles and address them appropriately (Elsaied, 2019). From multiple perspectives, reliance on the usual leadership and management level is not only a unit, but the need for support and support from employees in this aspect has become very urgent (KA, 2020). Increased and dramatically by researchers in various administrative and non-administrative disciplines, and it has become a continuous central concept for their research in an effort to uncover its precise contents and the positive or negative factors that hinder or limit interest and focus on it more by organizations in general and university education in particular. It may be defined as the ways and means by which subordinates try to have an opinion and potential influence on organizational matters related to issues that affect their work and the interests of officials and decision-makers in the organization in general (wikinson et al., 2014). An appreciative informal communication in which the employee provides ideas, interests, suggestions, and information about work-related issues and problems to individuals who may be able to take adequate and appropriate measures aimed at improving and raising the overall performance levels of the organization (Morrison, 2011; Morrison, 2014). And as a proactive challenge to the status quo in the organization by providing useful suggestions (Dai, Kim & Kiura, 2020). Any appropriate means by which an employee can have an increasingly noticeable impact on some part of the organization (wikinson et al., 2015). Relevant studies have shown that the Employees’ Voice Behavior has many positive effects on the organization in general. It is considered an essential element for developing the competitive capabilities of the organization, because it brings innovative ideas to the fore, contributes to correcting the errors associated with work and helps to improve the competitive advantage of the organization (Son, 2019). and contributes to restoring employee satisfaction, facilitates their jobs and gives them the opportunity to promote issues of interest to them, occupy their thinking and direct attention to them to pay more attention to them in terms of social as well as in terms of its resources, and increases the sense of self of employees in the workplace (Lin et al., 2019). It prevents the occurrence of crises, improves the efficiency of the production processes in the organization, increases employees' commitment to their organization, contributes accurately to identifying problems and works to address them, and increases the ability of the organization to adapt to high degrees in the face of the constantly changing work environment (Aryee et al., 2017; Vihari & Rao, 2018; Nechanska et al., 2020; Dai et al., 2020; Zhan, 2020). It develops administrative effectiveness, adds economic value to the organization, and solidifies the decision-making process, and is an important way to enhance organizational participation, positively affects individual and group performance, reduces employee turnover (Malik, 2018: Xia et al., 2020; Wilkinson & Barry, 2016 & Eibl et, al., 2020). Despite the many advantages that vocal behavior provides to employees, it is risky behavior (Peng & Wei, 2019). As relevant studies indicated that employees are not ready to speak and engage with their vocal behavior in work affairs for fear of the reaction of their leaders and officials. The employees feel that if they do this, it will lead to the loss of their jobs because their leaders have the authority, power and resources, in addition to this being interpreted by the leaders that he interfered in their affairs and their powers and thus they view it as a threat to them and their existence and accept it in a negative way from the employees, which indicates that there is a misfortune. An awareness among the leaders of the reasons for the employees 'silence and their loss of the proper thinking compass, which makes them feel that the employees are unable to solve the problems and that they know all the parts of the work and there is no need for the employees' opinions and suggestions in this aspect (Son, 2019; Chou, et al., 2019; Morrison, 2014). (Table 2)

Table 2 Description of the Study Sample in Terms of Demographic Variables
Order of importance	Percentage %	Total	Target group	Effector properties	s
4	3.8	11	Less than 30	Age	1
			years old
2	35.6	104	From 30 less than 40 years old
1	39.4	115	From 40 less than 30
3	21.2	62	so years men
***	100%	292	Total
1	75	219	Mention	Gender	2
2	25	73	female
***	100%	292	Total
4	2.7	8	Junior high or less
5	1.7	5	diploma
2	28.1	82	Bachelor	Academic qualification (certificate)	3
3	20.9	61	M.A.
1	46.6	136	PhD
***	100%	292	Total
2	14.7	43	college of Literature	Workplace	4
7	6.2	18	Faculty of Administration and Economics
9	3.8	11	College of Basic Education/Haditha
8	4.5	13	College of Physical Education and Sports Sciences
3	14.4	42	College of Education for Girls
5	8.9	26	College of Islamic Sciences
3	14.4	42	College of Science
1	17.5	51	College of Engineering
4	11	32	College of Education for Pure Sciences
6	4.8	14	faculty of Pharmacy
***	100%	292	Total

The Applied Side of the Study

Description of the Study Variable

The measurement tool, the questionnaire, was represented by two variables of parental leadership as an independent variable, and the voice behavior of the employees as a dependent variable, which stimulated the current research to use the teaching staff as a sample for research because of their valuable knowledge and information towards the measuring instrument, and therefore Table (3) shows the coding and description of the measuring instrument.

Table 3 Description Of The Variables Included In The Analysis
Variable	Dime nsional	Items	Code
Parental Leadership (PALE)	Authoritarian leadership	6	PAAU
	Benevolence leadership	5	PABE
	Moral leadership	6	PAMO
Employees’ Voice Behavior	One-dimensional	6	EMVB

To Test the Reliability and Reliability of the Measuring Instrument

The Cronbach alpha coefficient represents one of the most important tests to ensure the reliability of the measuring instrument, which in common is that the extracted value is higher than (0.60) in order for the data to be named that it is characterized by stability and reliability, and accordingly Table No. (4) shows that the study measuring tool is characterized by stability and high credibility. The fact that the stability of the overall measurement tool reached (0.863), which means the stability of the questionnaire with the opinions of our employees at the university, and this matter is due to the value added by the study variables represented in the parental leadership and voice behavior of the employees consistently amounted to (0.854, 0.856), respectively.

Table 4 Cronbach Α Coefficients For Input Variables
Variable	Cronbach Alpha variants	Dimensional	Items	Cronbach AlphaDimensions	Cronbach Alpha forStudy
Parental leadership	0.854	Authoritarian leadership	6	0.864	0.863
		Benevolence leadership	5	0.849
		Moral leadership	6	0.850
Employees’ Voice Behavior	0.856	One- dimensional	6	0.856

Confirmatory Factor Analysis

Parental Leadership Variable

The results shown in Figure (2) indicate that the quality indicators were identical according to the indicators set by (Hair et al., 1998) and the study presented by (Liu & Liu, 2017), so the value of (X2/df) amounted to less than (5) and its value (2.918), the value of the Good Match Index (GFI) reached (0.900) and the Corrected Match Goodness Index (AGFI) was (0.900), in addition to the high value of the Comparative Match Index (CFI) and its value (0.904), while the Standard Match Index (IFI) and its amount (0.905), and therefore the (RMSEA) index was identical with an amount of (0.071). Therefore, it can be said that the findings of the study are consistent with the findings of the study (Liu & Liu, 2017).

The results of Table (5) show that the highest paragraph explaining the dimension of authoritarian leadership was represented in the fifth paragraph (PAAU5) with an interpretation value of (0.791), while the lowest paragraph in the interpretation of this dimension was in the second paragraph (PAAU2) with an explanatory value of (0.400). In addition to that, the highest explanation of the benevolence leadership dimension was represented in the fourth paragraph (PABE4) and its value (0.868), while the lowest explanatory value was in the first paragraph (PABE1) with an explanatory value of (0.753). Finally, the Moral leadership dimension included the sixth paragraph (PAMO6) as the highest explanatory value of (0.877), in addition to the lowest paragraph represented in the second paragraph (PAMO2) with an explanatory value of (0.399).

Table5 TheStandard Weights of the Standard Modelfor the Parental Leadership Variable
Track			Value
Authoritarian Leadership
PAAU	<---	PAAU1	0.550
PAAU	<---	PAAU2	0.400
PAAU	<---	PAAU3	0.628
PAAU	<---	PAAU4	0.583
PAAU	<---	PAAU5	0.791
PAAU	<---	PAAU6	0.624
Benevolence Leadership
PABE	<---	PABE1	0.753
PABE	<---	PABE2	0.760
PABE	<---	PABE3	0.863
PABE	<---	PABE4	0.868
PABE	<---	PABE5	0.794
Moral Leadership
PAMO	<---	PAMO1	0.824
PAMO	<---	PAMO2	0.399
PAMO	<---	PAMO3	0.402
PAMO	<---	PAMO4	0.569
PAMO	<---	PAMO5	0.703
PAMO	<---	PAMO6	0.877

The Employee's Voice Behavior

It is noticed from the results shown in Figure (3) that the quality indicators were identical according to the standards set by (Hair et al., 1998), so the value of (X2/df) was less than (5) and its amount was (2.728), and the value of the Good Match Index (GFI) It is equal to (0.972) and the Corrected Matching Goodness Index (AGFI) amounted to (0.934), and an improvement in the value of the Comparative Match Index (CFI) and its amount is (0.975), while the Standard Conformity Index (IFI) included an interpretative value of (0.976). The index (RMSEA) conforms to the criteria with a rating of (0.077).

The results of Table (6) show that the highest explanatory value for the employee's voice behavior variable was in the third paragraph (EMVB3) and its amount is (0.773), while the lowest explanatory value was included in the first paragraph (EMVB1) with an explanatory value of (591).

Table 6 The Standard Weights of the Standard Model of the Employee Voice Behavior Variable
Track		Value
EMVB	<---	EMVB1	0.591
EMVB	<---	EMVB2	0.746
EMVB	<---	EMVB3	0.773
EMVB	<---	EMVB4	0.735
EMVB	<---	EMVB5	0.718
EMVB	<---	EMVB6	0.600

Since the study questionnaire depends on the five-year Likert gradient, there are five categories to which the arithmetic averages of the two variables of the study belong, and the category is determined by finding the range `` R '' (the upper limit of the scale - the lower limit of the scale), and then divide the range by the number of categories to find the length of the category “L” and according to the variables of the study, as follows:

R=5-1=4

Analysis of the Opinions of the Research Sample on the Paragraphs on the Parental Leadership Variable (PALE)

The results of Table (7) resulted in the general average of arithmetic meanings of parental leadership amounted to (3.49) and a standard deviation of (0.472), and this matter in turn shows the consistency and harmony of the responses of the research sample towards this variable with a difference coefficient of (14%) and in the direction of a high response, i.e. of relative importance. Its amount is (70%), which means that the university pays attention to the parental leadership in dealing with employees, as for the dimensions of parental leadership, it was represented in the following:

Table 7 Comparison Criterion for the Level of Availability of Parental Leadership and Employees’ Voice Behavior
Category Length	Availability Level
1-1.80	very low
1.81-2.60	Low
2.61-3.40	Moderate
3.41-4.20	High
4.21-5.00	very high

The Authoritarian Leadership Dimension

It is noted from the results of Table (7) that the response level of the authoritarian leadership dimension is moderate with an arithmetic mean of (3.37) and a standard deviation of (0.417) in addition to the consistency and harmony of the responses of the research sample towards this dimension and a difference coefficient of (12%) and a relative importance of (67%). Perhaps the paragraph that contributed to this was represented in the second paragraph (PAAU2) with an arithmetic mean of (3.98), a standard deviation of (0.887), a coefficient of variation equal to (22%) and a relative importance of (80%), while the fifth paragraph came (PAAU5) With an arithmetic mean of (2.97), a standard deviation of (1,257), a variation coefficient of (42%), and a relative importance of (59%). This shows that the administrative leadership practices in the researched colleges always require subordinates to fully adhere to the decisions and instructions in force without flexibility in that, which may generate a feeling among subordinates of constant pressure to accomplish administrative and non-administrative tasks.

The Dimension of Benevolence Leadership

The results of Table (7) show that the general average of the arithmetic means for the dimension of Benevolence leadership is (3.56) and a standard deviation of (0.872). Therefore, the university must make more efforts to reduce the dispersion of its capabilities and the good efforts it makes with a coefficient of variation of (25%). Towards a high answer, with a relative importance equal to (71%). Perhaps the paragraph that contributed to this goes back to the fourth paragraph, with an arithmetic mean of (3.68), a standard deviation of (0.983), a coefficient of variation equal to (27%), a somewhat high response direction and a relative importance of (74%). While the second paragraph came in the last place, with an arithmetic mean of (3.39), a standard deviation equal to (1.08), a difference coefficient of (32%), and a relative importance of (68%), which means that the administrative leaderships in the researched colleges work towards continuous encouragement and moral development For subordinates to solve problems inside and outside their organizations, which generates a feeling among subordinates that their managerial leaders deal with them in the spirit of one cooperative family.

The Moral Leadership Dimension

The results of Table (7) indicate that the mean average for Moral leadership is (3.69), with a standard deviation equal to (0.761), with a difference coefficient of (21%), and with a high response direction, i.e. with relative importance of (74%). Perhaps the paragraph that contributed to this is the first paragraph with an arithmetic mean of (3.95), a standard deviation equal to (0.967), a difference coefficient of (24%), and a relative importance of (79%). As for the third paragraph, it came in the last place with an arithmetic mean of (3.52) and a standard deviation of (1.101) and a difference coefficient equal to (31%) with a somewhat high response direction and a relative importance of (70%). This indicates that the administrative leaderships in the researched faculties are characterized by With a high degree of credibility, integrity and transparency in performing the tasks entrusted to them, they do not attribute the outstanding performance and success that the subordinates achieve for themselves, which helps the subordinates to follow their leader and view them as leaders who deserve praise, respect and ability, and work with them with all sincerity and dedication to reach positive outcomes at various levels. (Figure 4)

Analyzing the Opinions of the Research Sample on the Paragraphs on Employee Vocal Behavior

The results of Table (8) show that the general arithmetic mean of the employee's vocal behavior variable reached (4.02) with a standard deviation of (0.57), and this in turn shows the consistency and harmony of the responses of the research sample towards this variable and a variation coefficient equal to (14%) with a rather high level of response, what is of relative importance of (80%), and perhaps the paragraph that contributed to that is the sixth paragraph (EMVB6) with an arithmetic mean of (4.12) and a standard deviation of (0.79) and a difference coefficient of (19%) with a somewhat high response level and with a relative importance of (82). As for the fifth paragraph (EMVB5), it ranked last, as it got the lowest arithmetic mean of (3.93), a standard deviation equal to (0.754), a variation coefficient of (19%), and a relative importance of (79%). Through the above results, it is evident that the leaderships in the colleges in which the research was conducted are working to provide the appropriate atmosphere for employees by giving them the freedom to express opinions, ideas and constructive proposals and apply them on the ground, which contributes to the advancement of the colleges, their organizational and administrative progress, and the solution of obstacles and problems that occur at work. Up-to- date, and thus positively reflected on the employees' enthusiasm towards providing positive performance.

Table 8 Descriptive Analysis of Paragraphs of Employee Vocal Behavior
s	Items	SMA	Standard deviation	Coefficient of Variation %	The Level of the Answer	Relative Importance	Order of Importance
EMVB1	I talk and encourage the staff in the group to be involved in the issues affecting mycollege.	4.05	0.742	18%	high	81%	2
EMVB2	Suggest ideas for new projects or changes in procedures based on my great interest inmy college.	4.02	0.753	19%	high	80%	4
EMVB3	I offer solutions to the problems facing my college.	4.04	0.743	18%	high	81%	3
EMVB4	I communicate my views with others about employment issues in the college even if my opinion is different fromthem.	3.95	0.754	19%	high	79%	5
EMVB5	Stay well informed about matters on which my opinionis useful to the college.	3.93	0.754	19%	high	79%	6
EMVB6	I speak in my voice to defend My college.	4.12	0.79	19%	high	82%	1
EMVB	Employees’ Voice Behavior	4.02	0.57	14%	high	80%	***

Measuring the Correlation Relationship between Research Variables

In order to measure the consistency of the internal variables in the analysis, the study should resort to measuring the correlation coefficients between the parental leadership (an independent variable) and its dimensions, and the voice behavior of the employees (dependent variable) by adopting the correlation matrix of the Pearson Simple Correlation Coefficient, which was extracted by means of the statistical package. (SPSS.V.25), and Table (9) shows a matrix of the correlation between the variables included in the analysis.

Table 9 Matrix of the Correlation Relationship Between The Variables Included in the Analysis
	PAAU	PABE	PAMO	PALE	EMVB
PAAU	1
PABE	- 0.161**	1
PAMO	- 0.062	0.647**	1
PALE	0.166**	0.790**	0.770**	1
EMVB	0.022	0.364**	0.339**	0.420**	1
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Sig. (2-tailed)= 0.000				N=292

The results of Table (9) show that there is a correlation between the parental leadership and the voice behavior of the employees, and the strength of this relationship was (0.420) and this reflected the first main hypothesis, and this relationship was identical to the results reached by studies (Nazir et al., 2020; Chan, 2014) that addressed parental leadership and employee voice behavior. From this hypothesis, there are three sub hypotheses, which are:

The First Sub-Hypothesis There is a correlation between authoritarian leadership and the Employees’ Voice Behavior), and accordingly the study found that there is not morale correlation and this came in accordance with the findings of most studies, which stands in the forefront (Zhang et al., 2015; Chan, 2014; Chan, 2017; Jia et al., 2020) This shows the rejection of the first sub-hypothesis, since the assumption of this hypothesis did not meet the required criteria.

The Second Sub-Hypothesis (There is a correlation relationship between the Benevolence leadership and the voice behavior of the employees), and the study found a logical relationship of (0,364) and this confirms the validity of the second sub-hypothesis. The results of this hypothesis are in agreement with the findings of the study by (Jia et al., 2020). This result does not agree with the findings of the study (Soomro et al., 2020).

The Third Sub-Hypothesis (There is a correlation between the moral leadership and the voice behavior of the employees), and the study found a positive relationship of (0.339), and this confirms the validity of the third sub-hypothesis. The results of this hypothesis were consistent with the findings of the study (Nazir et al., 2020; Dedahanov et al., 2016) and disagreed with the findings of the study (Chan, 2014).

Test the Influence Relationship between the Input Variables

Figure (5) shows the standard model for the effect of parental leadership on the Employees’ Voice Behavior by adopting the modeling of the structural equation by means of the statistical package (AMOS, V.25), which is based on the interpretation of the greatest path between the dimensions of parental leadership in the voice behavior of the workers. While the results shown in Table (10) represent a significant effect of parental leadership on the vocal behavior of the employees, and this matter means that the parental leadership contributed to the explanation of (0.239) of the issues and phenomena that stand unresolved and the evolution of the employees' vocal behavior, and the rest for other reasons outside the scope of the research. This result is in agreement with the findings of the study (Lin et al., 2015) and from this hypothesis, three sub-hypotheses are branched out:

Table 10 Results of Testing the Effect of Parental Leadership on The Employees’ Voice Behavior
Track			Value	S.E.	C.R.	R2	Probability (P)
PAAU	<---	EMVB	- 0.258	0.057	-4.53	0.239	***
PABE	<---	EMVB	0.193	0.075	2.573		***
PAMO	<---	EMVB	0.384	0.083	4.627		***

Conclusion and Recommendations

Conclusions

1. The results of the study showed that there is a correlation between parental leadership and the Employees’ Voice Behavior at Anbar University, which is statistically significant, which contributes to building positive relationships that enhance the commitment and loyalty of employees towards the university.

2. The results of the study showed that there is no correlation between the authoritarian leadership and the voice behavior of the employees to achieve effective organizational results, in addition to that, this result was consistent with the findings of previous relevant studies.

3. The results of the study showed that there is an adverse effect between authoritarian leadership and the vocal behavior of employees at University of Anbar, which confirms that the higher the practices of authoritarian leadership by officials and decision-makers, the vocal behavior is decreased and vice versa.

Recommendations

1. It is imperative that the administrative leaderships in the colleges in which the research was conducted continue to focus on two dimensions of patriarchal leadership, namely, moral and benevolent leadership in the field of practicing their work and at all administrative levels.

2. The necessity for the leaderships in the researched colleges to focus on developing human and social relations with employees at various administrative levels, which would contribute to increasing job satisfaction and its implications for their performance in general.

3. Work to enhance the Employees’ Voice Behavior by leaderships as one of the main tools to reach creativity and organizational innovation.

4. Providing a safe environment to encourage employees to raise problems, obstacles, and organizational errors, and to understand them by the administrative leaders, which contributes to the formation of an appropriate atmosphere of constructive joint cooperation to achieve the goals that these colleges aspired to more quickly.

References

1. Bao, Y., & Li, C. (2019). From moral leadership to positive work behaviors: The mediating roles of value congruence and leader-member exchange. Frontiers of Business Research in China, 13(1), 1-18.
2. Bedi, A. (2019). A meta?analytic review of paternalistic leadership. Applied Psychology, 0(0), 1-49.
3. Burris, E.R. (2012). The risks and rewards of speaking up: Managerial responses to employee voice. Academy of management journal, 55(4), 851-875.
4. Chan, S.C. (2014). Paternalistic leadership and employee voice: Does information sharing matter? Human Relations 67(6), 667-693.
5. Chan, S.C., Huang, X., Snape, E., & Lam, C.K. (2012). The janus face of paternalistic leaders: Authoritarianism, benevolence, subordinates' organization?based self?esteem, and performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(1), 108-128.
6. Chen, S.C. (2017). Paternalistic leadership and cabin crews’ upward safety communication: The motivation of voice behavior. Journal of Air Transport Management, 62, 44-53.
7. Chen, X.P., Eberly, M.B., Chiang, T.J., Farh, J.L., & Cheng, B.S. (2014). Affective trust in Chinese leaders: Linking paternalistic leadership to employee performance. Journal of management, 40(3), 796-819.
8. Cheng, M.Y., & Wang, L. (2015). The mediating effect of ethical climate on the relationship between paternalistic leadership and team identification: A team-level analysis in the Chinese context. Journal of business ethics, 129(3), 639-654.
9. Chiang, C.F., & Chen, J.A. (2020). How empowering leadership and a cooperative climate influence employees’ voice behavior and knowledge sharing in the hotel industry. Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism, 1-20.
10. Chou, H.H., Fang, S.C., & Yeh, T.K. (2019). The effects of facades of conformity on employee voice and job satisfaction: The mediating role of emotional exhaustion. Management Decision, 58(3), 495-509.
11. Daft, R.L., & Lane, P.G. (2015). The leadership experience, (6th edition). South-Western Cengage Learning, Stamford, USA.
12. Dai, Y.D., Zhuang, W.L., Yang, P.K., Wang, Y.J., & Huan, T.C. (2020). Exploring hotel employees’ regulatory foci and voice behavior: The moderating role of leader-member exchange. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 33(1), 27-47.
13. Dedahanov, A.T., Lee, D.H., Rhee, J., & Yoon, J. (2016), Entrepreneur’s paternalistic leadership style and creativity: The mediating role of employee voice. Management Decision, 54(9), 2310-2324.
14. Subhakaran, E.S., Dyaram, L., Dayaram, K., Ayentimi, D.T., & Khan, N. (2020). Leaders’ accounts on employee voice in the Indian context: An exploratory study. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 58(4), 485- 503.
15. Elsaied, M.M. (2019). Supportive leadership, proactive personality and employee voice behavior. American Journal of Business, 34(1), 2-18.
16. Erben, G.S., & Güne?er, A.B. (2008). The relationship between paternalistic leadership and organizational commitment: Investigating the role of climate regarding ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 82(4), 955-968.
17. Erkutlu, H., & Chafra, J. (2016). Benevolence leadership and psychological well-being. Leadership & organization development journal, 37(3), 369-386.
18. Erol, E., & Senturk, I. (2018). Paternalistic leadership scale turkish adaptation: A validity-reliability study. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 4(4), 267-288.
19. Ghosh, K. (2015). Benevolence leadership in not-for-profit organizations. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 36(5), 592-611.
20. Gu, Q., Tang, T.L.P., & Jiang, W. (2015). Does moral leadership enhance employee creativity? Employee identification with leader and Leader–Member Exchange (LMX) in the Chinese context. Journal of Business Ethics, 126(3), 513-529.
21. Gumusluoglu, L., Aygün, K.Z., & Hu, C. (2020). Angels and devils? How do benevolent and authoritarian leaders differ in shaping ethical climate via justice perceptions across cultures? Business Ethics: A European Review, 29(2), 388-402.
22. Gumusluoglu, L., Aygün, K.Z., & Scandura, T.A. (2017). A multilevel examination of Benevolence leadership and innovative behavior in R&D contexts: A social identity approach. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 24(4), 479-493.
23. Ho, H.X., & Le, A.N.H. (2020). Investigating the relationship between Benevolence leadership and the organizational citizenship behaviour of academic staff: The mediating role of leader-member exchange. Management in Education, 1-11.
24. Hou, B., Hong, J., Zhu, K., & Zhou, Y. (2019). Paternalistic leadership and innovation: The moderating effect of environmental dynamism. European Journal of Innovation Management, 22(3), 562-582.
25. Huang, Q., Liu, H., & Chu, C. (2020). Effects of paternalistic leadership on quality of life of grassroots officials in china: Mediation Effects of Burnout. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 1-18.
26. Huang, T.Y., & Lin, C.P. (2020). Is paternalistic leadership a double-edged sword for team performance? The mediation of team identification and emotional exhaustion. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 1-14
27. Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E., & Tatham, R.L. (1998). Multivariate data analysis, 5(3), 207- 219, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River.
28. Jia, J., Zhou, S., Zhang, L., & Jiang, X. (2020). Exploring the influence of paternalistic leadership on voice behavior: A moderated mediation model. Employee Relations, 42(2), 542-560.
29. Kim, H., & Kiura, M. (2020). The influences of social status and organizational justice on employee voice: A case of customer care workers. International Journal of Business Communication, 1-21.
30. Lau, W.K., Li, Z., & Okpara, J. (2020). An examination of three-way interactions of paternalistic leadership in China. Asia Pacific Business Review, 26(1), 32-49.
31. Li, C., Wu, K., Johnson, D.E., & Wu, M. (2012). Moral leadership and psychological empowerment in China. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 27(1), 90-108.
32. Lin, C.P., Lin, M.Z., & Li, Y.B. (2015). An empirical study on the effect of paternalistic leadership on employees’ voice behaviors–the intermediary role of psychological empowerment. Journal of Interdisciplinary Mathematics, 18(6), 789-810.
33. Lin, X., Lam, L.W., & Zhang, L.L. (2019). The curvilinear relationship between job satisfaction and employee voice: Speaking up for the organization and the self. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 1-21.
34. Liu, H.J., & Liu, X.B. (2017). Relationship between paternalistic leadership and employee’s voice behavior based on regression analysis. Journal of Discrete Mathematical Sciences and Cryptography, 20(1), 205-215.
35. Malik, A. (2018). Strategic human resource management and employment relations. Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
36. Morrison, E.W. (2011). Employee voice behavior: Integration and directions for future research. Academy of Management annals, 5(1), 373-412.
37. Morrison, E.W. (2014). Employee voice and silence. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1(1), 173-197.
38. Nazir, S., Shafi, A., Asadullah, M.A., Qun, W., & Khadim, S. (2020). Linking paternalistic leadership to follower's innovative work behavior: The influence of leader–member exchange and employee voice. European Journal of Innovation Management.
39. Nechanska, E., Hughes, E., & Dundon, T. (2020). Towards an integration of employee voice and silence. Human Resource Management Review, 30(1), 100674.
40. Nunn, S.G., & Avella, J.T. (2015). Does moral leadership conflict with organizational innovation? Journal of Leadership Studies, 9(3), 85-87.
41. Özçelik, G., & Cenkci, T. (2014). Moderating effects of job embeddedness on the relationship between paternalistic leadership and in-role job performance. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 150, 872-880.
42. Peng, H., & Wei, F. (2019). How and when does leader behavioral integrity influence employee voice? The roles of team independence climate and corporate ethical values. Journal of Business Ethics, 1-17.
43. Saygili, M., Özer, Ö., & Karakaya, P.Ö. (2020). Paternalistic leadership, ethical climate and performance in health staff. Hospital topics, 98(1), 1-10.
44. Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2016). Research methods for business: A skill building approach (7th edition). John Wiley & Sons, United Kingdom.
45. Sheer, V.C. (2012). In search of Chinese paternalistic leadership: Conflicting evidence from samples of mainland China and Hong Kong’s small family businesses. Management Communication Quarterly, 27(1), 34-60.
46. Shen, Y., Chou, W.J., & Schaubroeck, J.M. (2019). The roles of relational identification and workgroup cultural values in linking authoritarian leadership to employee performance. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 28(4), 498-509.
47. Siddique, C.M., Siddique, H.F., & Siddique, S.U. (2020). Linking authoritarian leadership to employee organizational embeddedness, LMX and performance in a high-power distance culture: a mediation- moderated analysis. Journal of Strategy and Management, 13(3), 393-411.
48. Son, S. (2019). The role of supervisors on employees’ voice behavior. Leadership & Organization Development Journalm, 40(1), 85-96.
49. Soomro, B.A., Memon, M., & Shah, N. (2020). Paternalistic leadership style, employee voice and creativity among entrepreneurs. Management Decision, 59(2), 285-305.
50. Thompson, S.K. (2012). Sampling, (3th edition). John Wiley & Sons, New Jersey.
51. Ugurluoglu, O., Aldogan, E.U., Turgut, M., & Ozatkan, Y. (2018). The effect of paternalistic leadership on job performance and intention to leave the job. Journal of Health Management, 20(1), 46-55.
52. Ünler, E., & K?l?ç, B. (2019). Paternalistic leadership and employee organizational attitudes: The role of positive/negative affectivity. SAGE Open, 9(3), 1-14.
53. Vihari, N.S., & Rao, M.K. (2018). Antecedents and consequences of sustainable human resource management: empirical evidence from India. Jindal Journal of Business Research, 7(1), 61-85.
54. Wilkinson, A., & Barry, M. (2016). Voices from across the divide: An industrial relations perspective on employee voice. German Journal of Human Resource Management, 30(3-4), 338-344.
55. Wilkinson A., Donaghey, J., Dundon, T., & Freeman, RB. (2014). Handbook of research on employee voice. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltanham, UK.
56. Wilkinson, A., Townsend, K., Graham, T., & Muurlink, O. (2015). Fatal consequences: An analysis of the failed employee voice system at the B undaberg Hospital. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 53(3), 265- 280.
57. Wu, M. (2012). Moral leadership and work performance: Testing the mediating and interaction effects in China. Chinese Management Studies, 6, 284-299.
58. Wu, T.Y., Liu, Y.F., Hua, C.Y., Lo, H.C., & Yeh, Y.J. (2020). Too unsafe to voice? Authoritarian leadership and employee voice in Chinese organizations. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 58(4), 527-554.
59. Wu, Y.C., & Tsai, P.J. (2012). Multidimensional relationships between paternalistic leadership and perceptions of organizational ethical climates. Psychological reports, 111(2), 509-527.
60. Xia, Y., Schyns, B., & Zhang, L. (2020). Why and when job stressors impact voice behaviour: An ego depletion perspective. Journal of Business Research, 109, 200-209.
61. Zakkariya, K.A., & Aboobaker, N. (2020). Spiritual leadership and intention to stay: Examining the mediating role of employee voice behaviour. Journal of Management Development.
62. Zhan, M. (2020). When to speak up at work: A review of employee voice and silence behavior using a prospect approach. Atlantic Journal of Communication, 28(5), 273-288