Keywords

Responsible Leadership, SMEs, Work Environment, Affective Commitment; Turnover.

Introduction

The investigation into responsible leadership has identified many flaws in the existing leadership principles (Pless & Maak, 2011). Therefore, many renowned scholars in association with “World responsible leadership Business Council for Sustainable Development” have defined the corporate “social responsibility’as the important and main task of leadership” (Quinn & Baltes, 2007). However, the significance of Human Resource Management (HRM) has so far gone unnoticed in developing responsible leadership (responsible leadership) abilities (Bhattacharya et al., 2008). This is controversial as managerial motivations and standards play a vital role in responsible leadership establishment (Waldman et al., 2019). Appropriate training programs should be implemented to develop leaders who are responsibe, including PwC 'Project Ulysses' examine by Pless et al. (2011).

Nevertheless, it is purely the Humann Resourse executives' responsibility to successfully carry out these training activities to develop leaders who are responsible . In accordance with Pless & Maak (2005), the primary goal of responsible leadership is to organize and involve the workforce in a 'relationally intelligent' manner to support society. Therefore, in Pless's view, “a responsible leader is the one who reunites the idea of effectiveness with the idea of corporate responsibility by being an active citizen and promoting active citizenship inside and outside the organization”. This leadership motivates the employees' towards organizational citizenship behavior (Han et al., 2019). Subsequently, the idea of responsible leadership has emerged as an essential component of organizational studies and numerous conceptualizations describing the role and responsibilities of responsible leaders (Waldman, 2014). Since the last decade, many studies and literature on leadership have highlighted the importance of practicing responsible leadership and its actual implications. Still, only a few of them have actually focused on exploring this leadership's relation with employee and organizational outcomes.In accordance with, Maak & Pless (2009) described (responsible leadership) as “a values-based and principle-driven relationship between leaders and stakeholders who are connected through a shared sense of meaning and purpose through which they raise to higher levels of motivation and commitment for achieving sustainable value creation and responsible change”.

Organizational leaders are well aware of the importance of sustainable development for business when seeking to cope with new economic, social, ecological challenges. In addition to responsible leadership, we can say that vision and long-term commitment are essential in achieving true sustainability (Paliwoda et al., 2009). Similaresponsible leadership y, Szczepa?ska-Woszczyna & Kurowska-Pysz (2016) reported that responsible leadership significantly influences the sustainable development of SMEs. In HRM context, the impact of responsible leadership on commitment of SME's employees must be investigated because commitment of employees towards a company is a critical driver that enhances employee performance. Likewise, the “leadership” literature has well illustrated the effectiveness of employee commitment toward the organization (Miska & Mendenhall, 2015). However, effective leadership is essential to ensure employee commitment (Gardner, 1990). In accordance with, Buenaventura-Vera (2018), several studies explain the relationship among leaders and workgroups. However, different leadership styles and their organizational commitment impacts vary accordingly.

Nevertheless, it is entirely the management's responsibility to inspire organizational members, align and motivate people, and establish directions to ensure work efficiency (Fitzgerald & Schutte, 2010). Thus, we can say that effective leadership leads to a high-commitment environment. A group of scholars has argued that leadership style influences but is only the leadership that drives employee commitment (Cerit, 2010). Above all, the most important task for the management is to promote such an organizational atmosphere that spontaneously enhances worker's organizational commitment. In their studies, many scholars have suggested that employee organizational commitment is influenced by responsible leadership (Doh & Quigley, 2014; Afsar et al., 2020). However, in view of Meyer & Allen (1997), employee's affective commitment is the result of their emotional attachment to an organization, for example, an employee impressed by the organization's vision and mission. Additionally, several scholars have reported that employee's affective commitment is significantly associated with Transformational Leadership TL (Rhoades et al., 2001). It is necessary to point out that small and medium enterprises have a considerable reputation and are considered the backbone of industrial development because of their extensive contribution to the country's economy (Long et al., 2014). Cardon et al. (2004) highlighted the key challenges faced by SME's HR managers, including the retention of talented employees and reducing employee turnover. According to Long et al. (2014), employee turnover is a sensitive issue that needs to be addressed in a very appropriate manner, especially in SMEs. The affective commitment leads to better employees’ performance and also has great influence on behavioral outcomes (Demirtas & Akdogan, 2015).

In view of Danish et al. (2013), a facilitative and safe work environment encourages employees to perform their duties effectively. As a result, we can say that the WE is an essential factor that increases employee satisfaction and commitment to the organization. Hanaysha (2016) described the work environment as the atmosphere, place, or location of the organization where the employee performs their duties. Several studies highlight the significance of the work environment on organizational commitment (Vanaki & Vagharseyyedin, 2009). Furthermore, numerous researchers have investigated leadership and work environment and explored their relationship with self-efficacy, job satisfaction behavior, and employee performance (Safarudin et al., 2015; Chandra, 2015; Nugroho et al., 2020). The leaders of the organization are well aware of the importance of sustainable development for businesses as they seek to address new economic, social and environmental challenges. In addition to responsible leadership, we can say that long-term vision and commitment are essential to achieving true stability. On the other hand, we did not find any study that has investigated the relationship between leadership and the work environment.

The economy of Jordan is known as SMEs based economy because it contributes more than 50 % to the GDP of country. In Jordan, these SMEs contribute 98% of total Jordanian enterprises, and around 60 % of the labor force is associated with them. The country's development has also created a lot of challenges to SMEs as the market is now highly free and open. The quick up-gradation has affected SMEs. Its a dire need to focus on employees associated with them so that SMEs can keep on creating employment opportunities (Moh’d Al-Tamimi & Jaradat, 2019). The SMEs in Jordan are mostly family-owned and privately-owned funds of owners finance 80%. The average investment in SMEs is around 100000$, and the average number of employees is 10. The significant investment in SMEs is seen in printing, plastic, and chemical industries, whereas the lowest investment in the garments industry. Elseoud et al. (2019) studied the current SMEs state operating in Arab countries, including Bahrain, Egypt, and Jordan. Their study revealed that the SMEs sector contributes significantly to these countries' economy, but still, it faces many external and internal (i.e., Domestic) challenges. Therefore, keeping in view the central issue of the high turnover ratio in Jordan's manufacturing SMEs (Al-Khrabsheh et al., 2018), this research has introduced the employee turnover intention as a mediator. Moreover, the study ensured that whether the work environment strengthens or weakens the relationship of responsible leadership and affective commitment.Therefore, it can be concluded that the study focused on two covariates, one independent and one dependent variable in the model of this study. Conscountly, this research aims to highlight responsible leadership's impact on affective commitment of staff working in manufacturing SMEs of Jordan. Moreover, the study also seeks to identify the interceding role of turnover intention and the work environment's moderating role between responsible leadership and affective commitment.

Literature Review

Responsible Leadership

Since the last two decades, responsible leadership has received considerable attention and revived the leadership philosophies (Doh & Stumpf 2005; Maak et al., 2016; Waldman et al., 2019; Cismas et al. 2016). It recognizes businesses work in an integrated globalized environment and adapt to ever more connected ways of engagement with all the components. “In a stakeholder society, leadership has to reach beyond the traditional leader-follower concepts. Here, the leaders become a coordinator and a cultivator of relationships towards different stakeholder groups” (Maak et al., 2016). According to Pless & Maak (2005), the ultimate goal of responsible leadership is to offer an improved perspective on Corporate Social Responsibilty CSR management because the interpersonal and social perspectives of leadership theory and basic concepts and frameworks of stakeholder theory are the basis of responsible leadership (Bass & Stogdill ,1990; House & Aditya 1997; Freeman, 1984; Freeman et al., 2007; Waldman et al., 2019). The paradigm of responsible leadership is mainly focused on the theories of stakeholders (Antunes & Franco, 2016) and has been put into practice concerning the employee views regarding leader's behavior in building organizational value (Miska & Mendenhall 2015). Recently, a group of scholars (Waldman & Balven 2014; Maak et al., 2016; Witt & Stahl, 2016) has recognized “responsible leadership” responsible leadership is a fundamentally and normative approach of leadership which is different from other values-centered leadership philosophies, including transformational leadership authentic leadership (Gardner et al., 2005), servant leadership (Greenleaf, 2002) and ethical leadership (Brown & Treviñ, 2006). In consideration of Maak et al. (2016), sustainable value creation is the main focus of responsible leadership, which differentiates this approach from other values-centered approaches. Therefore, responsible leadership must be viewed from a relational and ethical perspective (Miska & Mendenhall, 2015; Maak et al., 2016; Hashim et al., 2016).

Organizational Commitment

The term organizational commitment has a broad canvas. If we consider it a concept from organizational behavior, it is described as affective attachment of employees toward organization. Consequently, this affective attachment is the ultimate reason that drives an employee to share values of organization, lower turnover intention, and the eagerness to work more effectively to produce better results (Mowday et al., 1979). Studies found that an employee's affective attachment toward the organization is the combination of three components, including “affective (product of emotional attachments), continuance (the costs of leaving, such as losing attractive benefits or seniority), and normative commitment (individual's values) (Meyer et al., 1993; Brief (1998)”. However, leadership style also has considerable importance in achieving organizational goals and improving employee commitment to the organization (Chi, et al., 2007). The leaders' commitment seems to be the key to high organizational commitment. In addition, some researchers highlighted that transactional leadership is the key to organizational commitment. In this regard, Yukl et al. (2002) defined transformational leadership as an approach that made employees share organizational values and commit themselves to an organization's missions and goals. It is strongly believed that organizational commitment and effectiveness is significantly influenced by transformational leadership (Chi et al., 2012; Keskes, 2014). Therefore, two approaches of leadership, including transformational leadership and transactional leadership, progressively shape employees' organizational commitment.

Employee Turnover Intention

The turnover intention of an employee is basically a measure how employ make decioons to left their positions or either company removes organization from their jobs. “Turnover intention” can be involuntary or in voluntary. The term “employee turnover intention” is also known as withdrawn behavior of employees who are still at work but not engaged. It indicates an employee's intentions to leave and shift the organization mainly due to an unsafe working environment and managerial behavior. According to Blau (2007), employee turnover is characterized as an intention to say goodbye to their current employment or company while keenly pursuing other career opportunities. Samad (2006) reported that scholars had investigated the concept of employee turnover intention in various disciplines by means of behavioral, attitudinal and aspects related to organization. For instance, issues related to work such as managerial leadership or organizational commitment , personal issues such as health conditions or illness, external factors (social impressions about the organization), and job-related factors (job environment) are considered essental for an employee's turnover intention.

Work Environment

The environment is defined as the circumstances, objects, or conditions by which a man is surrounded. It is a geographical area or surrounding in which an individual lives and struggles for his survival. However, unfair and unbalanced management of the environment poses risks and results in lower worker productivity. Thus, according to Chapins (1995), a workplace is an environment that enables workers to perform their duties. On the other hand, the environment of an effective workplace is defined as an atmosphere that encourages workers to perform efficiently and produces results that meet organizational objectives (Mike, 2010). Therefore, we can say that an effective workplace environment is the one where the results meet the expectations of the management. Consequently, the physical environment of an organization determines how the organizational employees are being led, performed tasks, and interact with each other. It is important to understand that the physical environment has similar importance as of work environment which delicately influences employee's psychology, relational interactions, and efficiency. This is because the characteristics of the surrounding pose serious effects on the productivity and satisfaction level of individuals. In today's business woresponsible leadership d, the workplace environment is one of the essential elements that lead to employee satisfaction (Ajala, 2012). It is argued that an organization's working environment is basically a combination of three sub-environments, including human, technical and organizational environments. The technical environment consists of tools, equipment, infrastructure, and other technical elements.But, the human environment includes colleagues and peers with whom employees can relate, and form teams, such as the discussions of workgroups, leadership, and management.

Responsible Leadership and Affective Commitment

In the business woresponsible leadership, employees have the reputation of being the principal and foremost stakeholders of the organization. Therefore, responsible leadership as a social-relational practice implement “social identity theory” (SIT) for describing the relationship between responsible leadership and employee commitment. The (SIT) aims to investigate the relationship among an individual and a group and described the way indvidilas recognize themselves and act within their group (Tajfel & Turner 1986). Moreover, the SI theory has proved its worth in many different fields. For example, “psychology (e.g. Tajfel & Turner 1986), management, and explaining the nature of group relations (e.g. Turner, 1982).” Leadership studies have strongly recognised SI theory and described “leadership as a group process that is the result of social classification and depersonalization processes related to social identity (Hogg, 2001). According to Doh et al. (2011), responsible leadership perceptions of employees is significantly influenced by the stakeholder culture, managerial support, and human resource practices. In consideration of Yiing & Ahmad (2009), organizational commitment is influenced by the leadership styles and, consequently, the job performance of an employee is influenced by organizational commitment. In his study, Ekeland (2005) suggested that transformational leadership significantly influences the worker's affective commitment. Furthermore, many studies highlighted transformational leadership's significance on affective commitment (Chandna & Krishnan, 2009). Thus we hypothesized that:

H₁ There is positive relationship between responsible leaderhip and affective commitment

Employee Turnover Intention, Affective Commitment and Responsible Leadership

The idea of employee turnover intention is different from actual turnover. The employee intends to vigorously look for career alternatives while working in an organization until the next and more suitable job is acquired (Fakunmoju & Kersting, 2016). The turnover intention leads employees to lose interest in organizational objectives and bothered their work efficacy. This is because the intention to leave is deemed as the main indicator to leave the organization. Besides, a responsible leader can increase employee commitment by successfully implementing the applications of SIT and by establishing responsible action behavior with all stakeholders. Thus, the combination of responsible leadership and responsible approach enables employees to become members of the in group (e.g. Waldman & Galvin 2008), leading to higher employee loyalty and attachment to the responsible leadership and organization. According to Sulamuthu & Yusof (2018), the leadership approaches, styles, and behaviors of organizational managers have a direct impact on employees' psychology that in result influences employees and the organization's performance. Furthermore, there is an extensive amount of studies by various scholars (e.g. Long et al., 2012) describing the volunteer employee and leadership intention of turnover in both public and private areas. Though, these studies have found transformational leadership to be essential in alleviating turnover. However, there is still unsatisfactory evidence that which leadership style is more effective in reducing employee turnover (Amankwaa & Anku-Tsede, 2015). On the other hand, a group of scholars has suggested that a weak psychological relationship with the organization and leadership leads to feeble commitment and withdrawal behaviors, which results in “turnover intentions” (Christian & Ellis, 2014). Ahmad et al. (2020) highlighted the mediating turnover intention role among “responsible leadership” and work place divergent conduct. As no research upto authors’ knowledge has been undertaken in the best possible manner to elaborate on the consequence of “responsible leadership” on “affective commitment” with the mediating role of employee turnover intention and organizational commitment. Thus, the following hypotheses are formulated accordingly:

H₂ There is negative relationship between responsible leadership and employee turnover intention

H₃ There is negative relationship between employees turnover intention and affective commitment

H₄ Employee turnover intention mediates the relationship between responsible leadership and affective commitment

Responsible Leadership, Affective Commitment and Working Environment

In order to maintain and improve organizational commitment, the difference between the real and desired working environment of employees must be considered seriously, particularesponsible leadership y in those work conditions that involve wide interaction with service recipients (Westerman & Cyr, 2004). In an educational organization, a working environment's characteristics contribute to employees' satisfaction and lead to affective commitment. Nugroho et al. (2020) investigated the relationship between transformational leadership and employees’ performance. They tested this relationship further by mediating role of work environment. Similaresponsible leadership y, the leadership can plays an active role in creating healthy working environment (Raso et al., 2020). Ervin & Langkamer (2008) revealed that leadership plays a significant role in employee's affective commitment and is the main indicator of the psychosocial work environment. Therefore, we concluded that work environment characteristics lead to organizational commitment (Brooks & Seers 1991; Harahap et al., 2020).

H₅ Work environment moderates the relationship between responsible leadership and affective commitment.

On the basis of literature dicussed above, following conceptual model was introduced by this study (See, Figure 1)

Figure 1 Conceptual Framework

Methods

Research Design

The cross-sectional survey technique was used in this study, and data were collected using close-ended questions. Responses were recorded on a five-point Likert scale for easy analysis and administration of the data (Iacobucci & Churchill, 2010). This field study was carried out in three cities of Jordan; Amman, Zarqa, and Irbid.

Sampling and Data Collection

The data were obtained from supervisors working in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) related to the manufacturing sector (Table 1 shows the demographic details). SMEs plays an important role in the economic development of the country as SMEs are 97 percent of the total private businesses in Jordan. For this research the SMEs were clasifed based on classification of Central Bank of Jordan (2011). Thus, the small business size is 5- 20 employee while the medium business size is 21-100 employee. Al-Ajlouni (2020) explained that its really difficult to get the exact number of SMEs in Jordan and recommend to use exact near possible figure of accurate sample of SMEs as many studies used estimated sample. “A simple random technique was used to select the” target respondent, who worked as supervisors in the SMEs of the manufacturing sector. In all three cities (Amman, Zarqa, and Irbid), total 400 questionnaires were distributed and after two months' time, only 267 responses were recorded from which 8 responses were excluded because of incomplete information. Therefore, the final responses were 259, and the response rate was almost 65 percent. According to Amman Chamber of Commerce (2019) the number of Manufacturing SMEs in Amman, Irbid and Zarqa is 685, therefore to fulfill sampling adequacy, we used Slovin formula for sample calculation. As our total population was 685, hence sample of 254 is enough to represent study population, and our utilizable sample size is 259. Although the samle is acceptable, the response rate could be affected by the the impact of COVID-19 on enterprises in Jordan. In this esecence,m the report by International labour Organization (2020) indicated that 7% per cent of surveyed Jordanian enterprises reported operating as usual at the time of the survey while 39 per cent were operating but with either reduced staff (7%) or reduced working hours (16 %) or both (16 percent). Also many enterprises had closed temporarily.

Measures

The study designs have been operationalized by the implementation of previous reliable and valid analysis initiatives, which are published in peer-reviewed journals. The 13-item scale adapted from the Haque et al. (2019) analysis was used to assess the construction of conscientious leadership Responsible Leadership RL. Affective Commitment AC was assessed using an 8-item scale by Allan & Meyer (1990). In order to calculate the Turnover Intention TI, the 4-item scale of the MacIntosh $ Doherty studies was adopted (2010). A 6-item measurement scale was used to assess the Working Environment WE (perceived atmosphere, supervisory relationships) adopted by the Kundu & Lata (2017).

Analysis Strategy

In order to carry out descriptive analysis of the demographic and pragmatic characteristics of the participant's sample, the responses were then coded. The demographic characteristics of the respondents are presented in Table 1. As suggested by Chin (1998), prior to testing hypotheses, internal consistency, indicator reliability, discriminant and convergent validities were estimated. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to measure measurement model fitness. The multivariate direct and indirect relationship among study variables was examined through structural equation modeling (SEM) using AMOS 24. Furthermore, the moderation effect was tested using Hayes process macro. Frequnsey should fit with utilizable sample size is 259.

Results

To simplify the data and test the validity and reliability of the indicators or objects used in survey questionnaire, an “exploratory factor analysis” (EFA) was performed using AMOS-24 and the findings are presented in Table 2. Results demonstrate that loading values for all items range from 0.61 to 0.91, so no item has been omitted from the final data review.

Discriminant and Convergent Validity

“Composite reliability” (CR) and “average variance extracted” (AVE) was utilized to test “Composite reliability”, while discriminant validity was tested through the values of maximum shared variance (MSV) and square root of AVE. In accordance with Bagozzi &Yi (1988) for convergent validity, the values for CR should be greater than 0.60, whereas values of AVE should be higher than 0.50. In accordance with, Fornell & Larcker (1981) also established that a construct is valid if its AVE value is greater than 0.50.

The results shown in Table 2 demonstrate that all AVE values and CR values are higher than the recommended threshold. According to Fornell & Larcker (1981), if the values for square root of AVE is higher that the construct's correlation values and AVE values are greater than the MSV values, it will confirm discriminant validity. Results in Table 2 show that all the correlation values are less than the square root of AVE, and MSV is also lower than AVE, therefore, discriminant validity is also established.

Model Fit Analysis

CFA technique was used to test the measurement model fitness. According to the recommendations of MacCallum et al. (1996), and Hayduck (1987), X2/d.f, CFI, TLI, IFI, and RMSEA were used as fit-indices. The model-fit results are presented in Table 3, which indicate that our baseline four-factor measurement model demonstrate excellent model-fit (χ2/df=194, RMSEA=0.05, IFI=0.95, TLI=0.94, CFI=0.95) (Table 3). The achieved values for model-fit are well according to the cutoff criteria recommended by Hu & Bentler (1999). Four-factor measurement model is shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2 Measurement Model

Test of Hypotheses

Direct and indirect effect was measured through covariance based “structural equation modeling” (SEM), using AMOS-24. Coefficients of Standardized Path and reveal that “responsible leadership” has positive and significant impact on “affective commitment” (β= 0.199, P<0.01). Moreover, results indicate negative but significant influence of responsible leadership on turnover intention (β=-0.175, P<0.01). Furthermore, the direct relationship between turnover intention and affective commitment is also negative and significant (β=-0.132, P<0.05). As our data results are consistent with our hypothesized relationship, hence, all hypotheses (H1, H2, H3) related to direct effects are accepted and well supported (Table 4).

The unintended influence of “responsible leadership” on “affective commitment” through the turnover intention is also positive and significant (β=0.096, P<0.05). The results presented in Table 5 indicate that when there will be responsible leadership in the organization, the employee will show more commitment, and the negative effect of turnover intention will be minimum. Based on data results, our mediation hypothesis (H4) is also accepted (Table 6).

The positive influence of workplace environment in the relation of “responsible leadership and employee affective commitment” was assessed using a slope test in Hayes & Preacher's (2014) Model 04., developed for testing statistical moderation. Significant interactions “for high and low (Mean + SD) values of the moderator” is plotted in Table 6 and Figure 3. The results reveal that employees' affective commitment will be high when there will be high responsible leadership, but this relationship will become stronger in the presence of good working environment. When there will be better working conditions, even with low responsible leadership, the affective commitment will be high as compared to unsupportive and worse work environments.

Figure 3 Moderation Graph

The results of the moderating effects are given in the Table 6, indicate that in presence of less supportive work environments the relationship between responsible leadership and affective commitment is low (β=0.187, P<0.001), and this relationship becomes strong when work environment is moderate/improved (β=0.291, P<0.001), while this relationship for better work environment gets stronger (β=0.381, P<0.001). Therefore, the moderation hypothesis (H5) is also well supported by our study results.

Discussion

The environment is a most important factor that helps to support life or survival of life on earth, but there are always some issues which cause damage life, especially to the earth's ecosystem. In addition, these issues affect the environment and also everyone who is residing in a specific environment. The biggest challenge for our woresponsible leadership d is to get rid to these issues. Therefore, it is important to understand that woresponsible leadership d governments alone cannot deal with these rapidly growing social and environmental problems but it's possible with the collaboration and cooperation of businesses, organizations, and firms. Such issues can be handled in an organizational scenario by implication of CSR or its application. Thus, this concept has gained considerable attention from scholars and experts in both theory and practice (Fehre & Weber, 2019; Hu et al., 2018). Many scholars from different business backgrounds have highlighted the lack of studies promoting CSR activities and have actively demanded more research on this domain (Margolis & Walsh, 2003; Hoffman & Bazerman, 2007) especially from reference to SMEs. To seek CSR knowledge from an organizational perspective, the researchers of organizational behavior focused on the term “responsible leadership” because leadership has a defining role in determining organizational practices and especially organizational strategies (Groves & LaRocca, 2011). Unlike multinational corporations, SMEs always face different challenges and in-depth analysis of literature highlighted that responsible leadership and affective comment are two most important issues faced by SMEs of Jordan, and researchers never discuss these issues. In Jordan, the majority of enterprises are categorized in small and medium-sized enterprises and 98 % manufacturing industry of country is based on these SMEs (Al-Mahrouq, 2010). This study centred on a wide variety of important organisational behaviour themes, including responsible leadership, organisational engagement, affective commitment, work climate and employee turnover intentions. It thus has a range of theoretical and functional ramifications, which can be widely facilitated. These SMEs helped a lot in reducing unemployment in Jordan (Moh’d Al-Tamimi & Jaradat, 2019). This study highlighted the industrial environment, leadership, and employee turnover problems with reference to employees working SMEs, which accounts for two-thirds of the total Jordanian Labor force. The leadership studies mostly focus on the employees' outcomes. Every study focused on different domains of leaderships including ethical leadership (Byun et al., 2018), servant leadership (Karatepe et al., 2019) and transformational leadership (Mansoor & Ali, 2020) to investigate their relationship with employee outcomes. Among employee outcomes, the most prominent is an organizational commitment because of its predictability. These study are unable to relate the effect of responsible leadership. Therefore, this study emphasized to reveal the role of responsible leadership on affective commitment of employees working in SMEs of Jordan. The SMEs sector of Jordan plays an important role in economic development of country and majority of exports, GDP contribution and employment generation are linked with sector (Lozi, 2008). The turnover of employees from this sector can ruin the productivity, thus, this study explored the mediating role of employee turnover intention between the relationship of responsible leadership and affective commitment. Moreover, the work environment's effect was analyzed as a moderator between the relationship as mentioned earesponsible leadership ier. The results highlighted the relevance of studying the important concept of responsible leadership from the employee perspective. In addition, the results extended the available literature on relationships between “responsible leadership and affective commitment”, “responsible leadership and employee turnover intention”, “employee turnover intention and affective commitment”, “responsible leadership, work environment, and affective commitment”.

Many researchers highlighted that leadership type could impact the employee commitment towards any organization (Kim & Brymer, 2011). The studies also suggested that organizational commitment is influenced by responsible leadership (Voegtlin et al., 2012; Miska & Mendenhall, 2015). On the basis of this, the first and foremost important hypothesis of this research H1 highlighted the positive relationship between responsible leadership and affective commitment. The role of responsible leadership with organizational commitment is investigated by many studies but only few linked responsible leadership with affective commitment. The significant and positive relationship between these variables explains that responsible leadership can effectively influence employees' affective commitment. In terms of overall commitment the results of this hypothesis are aligned with the study of Doh et al. (2011) who presented that responsible leadership can be an important construct to link the employees to an organization. The commitment of employees need some effective and efficient leadership (Gardner, 1990), and this leadership can be no other than transformational leadership (Bycio et al., 1995) or responsible leadership, which especially has a significant impact on affective commitment (Mousa, 2017). Thus, this study confirmed that affective commitment can be generated by only one effective leadership strategy, responsible leadership. This leadership can attract employees towards their leaders and enable them to change their decision-making abilities within an organization. This attraction can also increase employees' job performance (Yiing & Ahmad, 2009) or increase their attachment with an organization that can lead to commitment (Doh et al., 2011).

The employee turnover is considered as an important issue which is still datable in SMEs (Long et al., 2014). The similar situation is prevailing in the SMEs of Jordan and many researchers highlighted the different possible reasons behind turnover of employees. These reasons differ from employees to employees and for majority of employees this reason can be ineffective leadership style (Myatt, 2008). To sort the actual reason in scenario of SMEs of Jordan, second hypothesis H2 of study tried to investigate the negative relationship between responsible leadership and turnover intention. The employees are the stakeholder of any company and if the responsible leader will engage them and his or her leadership will inspire them then may not leave the job (Haque et al., 2019). The responsible trait of leader can decrease turnover intention of employees working in SMEs of Jordan. Leadership style can influence the organizational commitment which leads to better job performance (Yiing & Ahmad, 2009) and less turnover intention. The study investigate the relationship among “turnover intention and affective commitment” of SMEs employees, the study formulated third hypothesis H3, which revealed the negative relationship between these variables. The justification of this negative relation can be judged by psychological contract which is the major reason behind withdrawal behavior of employees from particular organization and leadership goes parallel to this turnover intention (Griffith, 2004).

The connection of “responsible leadership and affective commitment” can be interceded by employee turnover intention. This relationship was predicted in the fourth hypothesis H4 of study. The employee turnover intention can positive or negative, these role entirely depend upon the style of leadership and type of organizational obligation. It has a robust effect on performance of employee. The results of study highlighted that employee turnover intention fully “mediate the relationship between responsible leadership” and affective commitment, and these results deviate from the findings of Haque et al. (2019) who found the partial mediation between aforementioned relation. This relationship can be strengthened or weakened by the involvement of the work environment. Many studies linked this environment with organizational commitment (Khuong & Le Vu, 2014; Abdullah & Ramay, 2012). The safe work environment encourages the employees to perform their duties more efficiently (Danish et al., 2013) and an effective workplace can be explained as an encouraging platform for workers that enables them to meet organizational objectives more productively (Shikdar, 2002). The better work environment of SMEs in Jordan can lead to more commitment of employees. The environment is an important analyst of organizational commitment (Brooks & Seers, 1991), and it can be managed by leadership (Ervin & Langkamer, 2008). The results of study for this hypothesis are in line with different studies. First of all, these results supported the study of Dramstad (2004), which highlighted that environment can play a vital role in increasing the employee's affective commitment. Secondly, and at last, the results also confirmed the recommendations of (Haque et al., 2019), who pointed to investigate the work environment as a potential moderator.

Implications

This research has focused a broad spectrum and highlighted many core organizational behavior concepts including responsible leadership, organizational commitment, affective commitment, work environment and employee turnover intention. Therefore, it has many theoretical, and practical implication which can facilitate broadly.

Theoretical Implications

This study has highlighted many technical issues in manufacturing SMEs of Jordan and beside this it has several theoretical implication which can help the researchers, literature analysts, SMEs surveyors and audience interested in getting knowledge of responsible leadership. This report has also broadened the already narrow definition of “responsible leadership” and its relationship with least studied type of organizational commitment (i.e. Affective commitment). This commitment was found as main issue in SMEs of Jordan. The self-identity theory and stakeholder theory, these two theories were used to analyze the relationship between variables of this study. In comparison of prior studies, this research is unique every context and relationship development. Previous studies focused only on leadership or different aspects of leadership including toxic leadership and ambidextrous leadership but this research conceptualized the responsible leadership. Similaresponsible leadership y, this research focused on affective commitment instead of utilizing overall concept of organizational commitment while analyzing it responsible leadership. In addition, the research introduced the moderating role of work environment and mediating role of employee turnover intention. This is the first research which extended the responsible leadership theory on basis of relational elements associated with employee's psychological contract and introduced work environment as moderator.

Practical Implication

The small and medium enterprises of Jordan involved in manufacturing were considered by this research and problems related to organizational behavior were discussed. Therefore, this research has many practical implication. First of all the reserh is focused on concept of “responsible leadership”, and as per results, the SMEs should make the leaders responsible for developing affective commitment among employees which will reduce the turnover intention and also appropriately focus on better working environment. The inauguration of leadership development programs or leadership skills training can enable the managers of SMEs to adopt the comprehensive and competitive responsible leadership practices. The qualities of responsible leadership can be obtained by formal training session or training seminars (Pless et al., 2011) and such leaders always treat employees as stakeholders of company which have equal right in making non-programmed or some programmed organizational decision (Waldman & Galvin, 2008). The mangers, owners and supervisors of SMEs can use this research as a catalog of enhancing affective commitment employees which is possible by better work environment, responsible leadership and less turnover intention. Thus, they can make the human resource strategies and policies by focusing on perspective highlighted by this research.

Limitations and Future Recommendations

The shortcomings of the analysis could be an incentive or a research agenda for prospective researchers who wish to work in a similar or more similar field. No study is complete without potential limitations. Therefore, this study has many limitation which can be used by future studies or researchers to sort the other issues in SMEs of Jordan or manufacturing SMEs of other countries. First, the research focused on SMEs of Jordan and more specifically the small and medium enterprises involved in manufacturing. Second, to collected data we focus only on few big cities of Jordan. These limitations can be addressed by focusing on other SMEs or replacing SMEs with MNCs'. The data can also be collected from SMEs of other developed countries and comparison can be done by comparing results of developed or underdeveloped countries. Third, the research utilized the relational element of responsible but its more viable to consider psychological contract as mediating variable between relationship of responsible leadership and affective commitment. Fourth, the focus was mostly paid on affective commitment and future studies can use the normative or continuance commitment from SMEs sector.

Conclusion

Many studies ignored the issues related to organizational behavior faced by manufacturing-based small and medium enterprises of Jordan. Therefore, this study srt and explore the issues regarding SMEs. The study analyze the the relationship among “affective commitment and responsible leadership” by using social identity and stakeholder theory. This relation was further analyzed by interceding role of employee turnover intention andmodereating role of work environment. The results study explained the significant and positive relationship etween among leadership and affection commitment. Whereas, the negative relationship was analyzed among “responsible leadership and employee turnover intention” and “employee turnover intention and affective commitment”. The moderation of the work environment strengthens the connection between “responsible leadership and affective management”. This study has also concentrated on a broad concept of responsible leadership that can strengthen the affective contribution of workers of small and medium-sized companies and reduce their attrition intentions.

References

1. Abdullah, A. & Ramay, I.M. (2012). Antecedents of organizational commitment of banking sector employees in Pakistan. Serbian Journal of Management, 7(1), 89-102.
2. Afsar, B., Maqsoom, A., Shahjehan, A., Afridi, S. A., Nawaz, A., & Fazliani, H. (2020). Responsible leadership and employee's proenvironmental behavior: The role of organizational commitment, green shared vision, and internal environmental locus of control. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 27(1), 297-312.
3. Ahmad, M. S., Iqbal, F., Siddique, R., Abbas, S., & Fakhr, Z. (2020). Responsible leadership and workplace deviant behaviour: modelling trust and turnover intention as mediator. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 41(7), 939-952.
4. Ajala, E.M. (2012). The influence of workplace environment on workers' welfare, performance and productivity. The African Symposium, 12(1), 141-149
5. Al-Ajlouni, M.I. (2020). Can high-performance work systems (HPWS) promote organisational innovation? Employee perspective-taking, engagement and creativity in a moderated mediation model. Employee Relations: The International Journal.
6. Al-Khrabsheh, A.A., Abo-Murad, M., & Bourini, I. (2018). Effect of organizational factors on employee turnover intention: An empirical study of academic professionals at Jordanian Government Universities. International Journal of Human Resource Studies, 8(2), 164-177.
7. Al-Mahrouq, M. (2010). Success factors of small and medium-sized entrerize (SMEs): The case of jordan. Anadolu University Journal of Social Sciences, 10(1). 1-16.
8. Amankwaa, A., & Anku-Tsede, O. (2015). Linking transformational leadership to employee turnover: The moderating role of alternative job opportunity. International Journal of Business Administration, 6(4), 19.29.
9. Amman Chamber of Commerce (2019). Retrieved July 22, 2020, from https://arab.org/directory/amman-chamber-commerce/
10. Antunes, A., & Franco, M. (2016). How people in organizations make sense of responsible leadership practices. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 37 (1), 126-152.
11. Bagozzi, R.P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 74-94.
12. Bass, B.M., & Stogdill, R.M. (1990). Bass & Stogdill's handbook of leadership: Theory, research, and managerial applications. Simon and Schuster. Bhattacharya, C.B., Sen, S., & Korschun, D. (2008). Using corporate social responsibility to win the war for talent. MIT Sloan Management Review, 49(2), 37-44.
13. Blau, G. (2007). Does a corresponding set of variables for explaining voluntary organizational turnover transfer to explaining voluntary occupational turnover?. Journal of Vocational behavior, 70(1), 135-148.
14. Brief, A.P. (1998). Attitudes in and around organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Brooks, J.L., & Seers, A. (1991). Predictors of organizational commitment: Variations across career stages. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 38(1), 53-64.
15. Brown, M.E., & Treviño, L.K. (2006). Ethical leadership: A review and future directions. The leadership Quarteresponsible Leadership, 17(6), 595-616.
16. Buenaventura-Vera, G. (2018). Impact of the characteristics of the leader over the characteristics of work teams, leadership, suleyman davut göker, intechopen. Retrieved May 5, 2020, from https://www.intechopen.com/books/leadership/impact-of-the-characteristics-of-the-leader-over-the-characteristics-of-work-teams
17. Byun, G., Karau, S.J., Dai, Y., & Lee, S. (2018). A three-level examination of the cascading effects of ethical leadership on employee outcomes: A moderated mediation analysis. Journal of Business Research, 88, 44-53.
18. Cardon, M.S., & Stevens, C.E. (2004). Managing human resources in small organizations: What do we know?. Human Resource Management Review, 14(3), 295-323.
19. Central Bank of Jordan. (2011) Retrieved July 28, 2020, from https://www.cbj.gov.jo/Pages/viewpage.aspx?pageID=176
20. Cerit, Y. (2010). The effects of servant leadership on teachers' organizational commitment in primary schools in Turkey. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 13(3), 301-317. Chandna, P., & Krishnan, V.R. (2009). Organizational commitment of information technology professionals: Role of transformational leadership and work-related beliefs. Tecnia Journal of Management Studies, 4(1), 1-13.
21. Chandra, T. (2015). The Influence of Leadership Styles, Work Environment and Job Satisfaction of Employee Performance--Studies in the School of SMPN 10 Surabaya. International Education Studies, 9(1), 131-140.
22. Chapins, A. (1995). Workplace and the performance of workers. Reston: USA.
23. Chi, H.K., Lan, C.H., & Dorjgotov, B. (2012). The moderating effect of transformational leadership on knowledge management and organizational effectiveness. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 40(6), 1015-1023.
24. Christian, J.S., & Ellis, A.P. (2014). The crucial role of turnover intentions in transforming moral disengagement into deviant behavior at work. Journal of Business Ethics, 119(2), 193-208.
25. Cismas, S., Ion Dona, I., & Andreiasu, G. (2016). Responsible leadership. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 221,111-118.
26. Danish, R.Q., Ramzan, S., & Ahmad, F. (2013). Effect of perceived organizational support and work environment on organizational commitment; mediating role of self-monitoring. Advances in Economics and Business, 1(4), 312-317.
27. 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.
28. Doh, J.P., & Quigley, N.R. (2014). Responsible leadership and stakeholder management: Influence pathways and organizational outcomes. Academy of Management Perspectives, 28(3), 255-274.
29. Doh, J.P., & Stumpf, S.A. (2005). Handbook on responsible leadership and governance in global business. Edward Elgar Publishing.
30. Doh, J.P., Stumpf, S.A., & Tymon, W.G. (2011). Responsible leadership helps retain talent in India. In Responsible Leadership. Springer, Dordrecht. Ekeland, T.P. (2005). The relationships among affective organizational commitment, transformational leadership style, and unit organizational effectiveness within the corps of cadets at texas A&M University. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Texas A&M University.
31. Elseoud, A., Sayed, M., Kreishan, F.M., & Ali, M.A.M. (2019). The reality of SMEs in Arab nations: Experience of Egypt, Jordan and Bahrain. Journal of Islamic Financial Studies, 5(2), 110-126.
32. Ervin, K.S. & Langkamer, K.L. (2008). Psychological climate, organizational commitment and morale: Implications for Army captains' career intent. Military Psychology, 20(4), 219-236.
33. Fakunmoju, S.B., & Kersting, R.C. (2016). Perceived effects of student loan forgiveness on turnover intention among social workers in Massachusetts. Social work, 61(4), 331-339.
34. Fehre, K., & Weber, F. (2019). Why some are more equal: Family firm heterogeneity and the effect on management’s attention to CSR. Business Ethics: A European Review, 28(3), 321-334.
35. Fitzgerald, S. & Schutte, N.. (2010). Increasing transformational leadership through enhancing self-efficacy. Journal of Management Development, 29 (5), 495-505.
36. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D.F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
37. Freeman, R.E. (1984). Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. B. The politics of stakeholder theory: Some future directions. Business Ethics Quarteresponsible Leadership, 4(4), 409-421.
38. Freeman, R.E., Harrison, J.S., & Wicks, A.C. (2007). Managing for stakeholders: Survival, reputation, and success. Yale University Press.
39. Gardner, J.W. (1990). Leadership and the future. The Futurist, 24(3), 8-1.
40. Gardner, W.L., Avolio, B.J., Luthans, F., May, D.R., & Walumbwa, F. (2005). “Can you see the real me?” A self-based model of authentic leader and follower development. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 343-372.
41. Greenleaf, R.K. (2002). Servant leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate power and greatness. Paulist Press.
42. Griffith, J. (2004). Relation of principal transformational leadership to school staff job satisfaction, staff turnover, and school performance. Journal of Educational Administration, 42(3), 333-356.
43. Groves, K.S., & LaRocca, M.A. (2011). Responsible leadership outcomes via stakeholder CSR values: Testing a values-centered model of transformational leadership. In Responsible leadership.
44. Springer, Dordrecht. Han, Z., Wang, Q., & Yan, X. (2019). How responsible leadership motivates employees to engage in organizational citizenship behavior for the environment: A double-mediation model. Sustainability, 11(3), 605.
45. Hanaysha, J. (2016). Testing the effects of employee engagement, work environment, and organizational learning on organizational commitment. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 229(8), 289-297.
46. Haque, A., Fernando, M., & Caputi, P. (2019). The relationship between responsible leadership and organisational commitment and the mediating effect of employee turnover intentions: an empirical study with Australian employees. Journal of Business Ethics, 156(3), 759-774.
47. Harahap, D.P., Ronaldi, J., Darman, D., & Eliza, Y. (2020). How motivation works to promote the relationship between work environment and organizational commitment to the performance of dharmasraya district secretariat. Jurnal Manajemen dan Sains, 5(1), 10-19.
48. Hashim, R.A., Ahmad, B., & Jamaluddin, A. (2016). Relationship between leadership styles and affective commitment among employees in national anti-drugs agency (NADA). Global Business & Management Research, 9, 39-51.
49. Hayduck, L.A. (1987). Structural equation modeling with LISREL. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkings University Press.
50. Hayes, A.F., & Preacher, K.J. (2014). Statistical mediation analysis with a multicategorical independent variable. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 67, 451-470.
51. Hoffman, A.J., & Bazerman, M.H. (2007). Changing practice on sustainability: Understanding and overcoming the organizational and psychological barriers to action. Organizations and the sustainability mosaic: Crafting long-term ecological and societal solutions.
52. Hogg, M.A. (2001). A social identity theory of leadership. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5(3), 184-200.
53. House, R.J., & Aditya, R.N. (1997). The social scientific study of leadership: Quo vadis?. Journal of Management, 23(3), 409-473.
54. Hu, L.T., & Bentler, P.M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55.
55. Iacobucci, D., & Churchill, G.A. (2010). Marketing research methodological foundations-international edition. Hampshire: South-Western Cengage Learning.
56. International labour Organization. (2020). Retrieved December 21, 2020, from https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---arabstates/---ro-beirut/documents/publication/wcms_749136.pdf
57. Karatepe, O. M., Ozturk, A., & Kim, T. T. (2019). Servant leadership, organisational trust, and bank employee outcomes. The Service Industries Journal, 39(2), 86-108.
58. Keskes, I. (2014) Relationship between leadership styles and dimensions of employee organizational commitment: A critical review and discussion of future directions Intangible Capital, 10(1), 26-51
59. Khuong, M.N., & Le Vu, P. (2014). Measuring the effects of drivers organizational commitment through the mediation of job satisfaction: A Study in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. International Journal of Current Research and Academic Review, 2(2), 1-16.
60. 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.
61. Kundu, S.C., & Lata, K. (2017). Effects of supportive work environment on employee retention. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 25 (4), 703-722.
62. Long, C.S., Ajagbe, M.A., & Kowang, T.O. (2014). Addressing the issues on employees' turnover intention in the perspective of HRM practices in SME. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 129, 99-104.
63. Long, C.S., Thean, L.Y., Ismail, W.K.W., & Jusoh, A. (2012). Leadership styles and employees’ turnover intention: Exploratory study of academic staff in a Malaysian College. Woresponsible leadership d Applied Sciences Journal, 19(4), 575-581.
64. Lozi, M. (2008). Small scale industries in the globalization era: the case of Jordan. Journal of bUsiness and Public Affairs, 2(1), 1-11.
65. Maak, T., & Pless, N.M. (2006). Responsible leadership in a stakeholder society–a relational perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 66(1), 99-115.
66. Maak, T., & Pless, N.M. (2009). Business leaders as citizens of the woresponsible leadership d. Advancing humanism on a global scale. Journal of Business Ethics, 88(3), 537-550.
67. Maak, T., Pless, N.M., & Voegtlin, C. (2016). Business statesman or shareholder advocate? CEO responsible leadership styles and the micro?foundations of political CSR. Journal of Management Studies, 53(3), 463-493.
68. MacCallum, R.C., Browne, M.W., & Sugawara, H.M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1(2), 130-149.
69. MacIntosh, E.W., & Doherty, A. (2010). The influence of organizational culture on job satisfaction and intention to leave. Sport Management Review, 13(2), 106-117.
70. Mansoor, S., & Ali, M. (2020). Transformational leadership and employee outcomes: the mediating role of psychological empowerment. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 42 (1), 30-143
71. Margolis, J.D., & Walsh, J.P. (2003). Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative Science Quarteresponsible Leadership, 48(2), 268-305.
72. Meyer, J.P., & Allen, N.J. (1997). Commitment in the workplace: Theory, research, and application.
73. Meyer, J.P., Allen, N.J., & Smith, C.A. (1993). Commitment to organizations and occupations: Extension and test of a three-component conceptualization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(4), 538.
74. Mike, A. (2010). Visual workplace: How you see performance in the planet and in the office. International Journal of Financial Trade, 11(3), 250-260.
75. Miska, C., & Mendenhall, M.E. (2015). Responsible leadership: A mapping of extant research and future directions. Journal of Business Ethics, 148(1), 117-134.
76. Moh'd AL-Tamimi, K.A., & Jaradat, M.S. (2019). The role of small medium enterprises in reducing the problem of unemployment in jordan.
77. Mousa, M. (2017). Responsible leadership and organizational commitment among physicians: Can inclusive diversity climate enhance the relationship?. Journal of Intercultural Management, 52(2), 103-141.
78. Mowday, R.T., Steers, R.M., & Porter, L.W. (1979). The measurement of organizational commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14(2), 224-247.
79. Myatt, M. (2008). How to reduce employee turnover. Retrieved May 5, 2020, from https://www.cpexecutive.com/post/management-matters-with-mike-myatt-how-to-reduce-employee-turnover/
80. Nugroho, Y.A., Asbari, M., Purwanto, A., Basuki, S., Sudiyono, R.N., Fikri, M.A.A., Hulu, P., Mustofa, M., Chidir, G., Suroso, S., & Xavir, Y. (2020). Transformational leadership and employees' performances: The mediating role of motivation and work environment. EduPsyCouns: Journal of Education, Psychology and Counseling, 2(1), 438-460.
81. Paliwoda, S.J., Slater, S., & Borland, H. (2009). Conceptualising global strategic sustainability and corporate transformational change. International Marketing Review.
82. Pless, N. M., & Maak, T. (2005, August). Relational Intelligence for Leading Responsibly in a Connected Woresponsible leadership d. In Academy of Management Proceedings ( 2005(1), I1-I6).
83. Pless, N.M., & Maak, T. (2011). Responsible leadership: Pathways to the future. In Responsible leadership.
84. Springer, Dordrecht. Pless, N.M., Maak, T., & Stahl, G.K. (2011). Developing responsible global leaders through international service-learning programs: The Ulysses experience. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 10(2), 237-260.
85. Quinn, L., & Baltes, J. (2007). Leadership and the triple button line. bringing sustainability and corporate social responsibility to life. A CCL Research White Paper.
86. Raso, R., Fitzpatrick, J.J., & Masick, K. (2020). Clinical nurses' perceptions of authentic nurse leadership and healthy work environment. The Journal of Nursing Administration, 50(9), 489-494.
87. Rhoades, L., Eisenberger, R., & Armeli, S. (2001). Affective commitment to the organization: The contribution of perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 825-836.
88. Safarudin, A., Astuti, E.S., Raharjo, K., & Al Musadieq, M. (2015). The effect of transcational leadership style and work environment on computer self efficacy, job satisfaction, behavior and performance of computer operator. European Journal of Business and Management, 7(14), 97-113.
89. Samad, S. (2006). The contribution of demographic variables: job characteristics and job satisfaction on turnover intentions. Journal of International Management Studies, 1(1), 1-12.
90. Shikdar, A.A. (2002). Identification of ergonomic issues that affect workers in oilrigs in desert environments. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, 10(2), 169-177.
91. Sulamuthu, G.A., & Yusof, H.M. (2018). Leadership style and employee turnover intention. Proceedings of the international conference on industrial engineering and operations management bandung, Indonesia.
92. Szczepa?ska-Woszczyna, K., & Kurowska-Pysz, J. (2016). Sustainable business development through leadership in SMEs. Engineering Management in Production and Services, 8(3), 57-69.
93. Turner, J.C. (1982). Towards a cognitive redefinition of the social group. Social Identity and Intergroup Relations, 15-40.
94. Turner, J.C., & Tajfel, H. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. Psychology of Intergroup Relations, 5, 7-24.
95. Vanaki, Z., & Vagharseyyedin, S.A. (2009). Organizational commitment, work environment conditions, and life satisfaction among Iranian nurses. Nursing & Health Sciences, 11(4), 404-409.
96. Voegtlin, C., Patzer, M., & Scherer, A.G. (2012). Responsible leadership in global business: A new approach to leadership and its multi-level outcomes. Journal of Business Ethics, 105(1), 1-16.
97. Waldman, D. A. (2014). Bridging the domains of leadership and corporate social responsibility. In The Oxford Handbook of Leadership and Organizations.
98. Waldman, D., Siegel, D., & Stahl, G. (2019). Defining the socially responsible leader: Revisiting issues in responsible leadership. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 27(1), 5-20
99. Waldman, D.A., & Balven, R.M. (2014). Responsible leadership: Theoretical issues and research directions. Academy of Management Perspectives, 28(3), 224-234.
100. Waldman, D.A., & Galvin, B.M. (2008). Alternative perspectives of responsible leadership. Organizational Dynamics, 37(4), 327-341.
101. Westerman, J.W., & Cyr, L.A. (2004). An integrative analysis of person–organization fit theories. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 12(3), 252-261.
102. Witt, M.A., & Stahl, G.K. (2016). Foundations of responsible leadership: Asian versus Western executive responsibility orientations toward key stakeholders. Journal of Business Ethics, 136(3), 623-638.
103. Yiing, L.H., & Ahmad, K.Z.B. (2009). The moderating effects of organizational culture on the relationships between leadership behaviour and organizational commitment and between organizational commitment and job satisfaction and performance. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 30(1), 53-86.
104. Yukl, G., Gordon, A., & Taber, T. (2002). A hierarchical taxonomy of leadership behavior: Integrating a half century of behavior research. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 9(1), 15-32.