노동조합지도자 리더십 효과성：전투성향과 온건성향에 관한 상황 이론의 탐색

The purpose of this study is to extend leadership theory developed in the field of organization behavior to labour movement and explore the possibility of developing the situational leadership theory specific to Korean labor movement. Attention is given to the dyadic relationship between union leader and union members. This attempt is new and different from the past research in union militancy, a well-developed trend in the field of industrial relations. 37 Union leaders’ ideological behavior pattern is classified either as militancy or as moderation in this study. This classification originates from an enduring controversy surrounding whether the tendency of union moderation since the 1980s was socially desirable or not, especially as it is perceived in the eyes of trade unionists. Kelly(1986) argues that militant trade union, as opposed to moderate trade union, are more likely to secure union survival and recovery. Kelly’s rejection of union moderation was based on the argument that moderation inhibits the growth of union activity in the workplace by eroding the willingness and capacity of union members to resist employers. Other scholars in United States, however, argue union moderation can lead to a reduction in grievances, leading to mutual gains. They argue that union-management cooperation leads to less management retaliation, fewer grievances, less communication breakdown, less industrial conflicts, all of which are regarded as mutual gains. In Korea, this controversy has been heated since the year 1987 when labor unions were practically authorized under institutional settings. According to dyadic relationship from the previous leadership theory, this study assumes the union tendency either toward militancy or moderation would be influenced by or caused from union leadership patterns. This study argues that union leadership effectiveness depends on the situational factor such as pragmatic propensity of union members. To be effective, union leaders’ militancy or moderation has to retain favorable situation conditioned by the extent of employees’ pragmatism. The pragmatic extent of union members would be determined by two kind of components such as ‘them and us attitude’ and ‘union instrumentality.’ These two constructs were introduced to the components of union member pragmatism in this study. The following diagram displays the conditional definition of pragmatic propensity which was represented as lower ‘them and us attitude’ and higher ‘union instrumentality.’ After a series of discussion, this study made a situational leadership hypothesis as follows. Situational Leadership Hypothesis: The higher the pragmatic extent of union members is, the more effective moderate leadership would be. Otherwise, the more effective the militant leadership would be. The data were collected using a survey of union members affiliated with Federation of Korean Trade Unions (FKTU). Hierarchical multiple regression was adopted and two way interaction and three way interaction was analyzed. The research model can be displayed in this diagram. As a whole, the results support situational leadership hypothesis. We found some implications for practitioners and academics. To activate unions, leaders’ ideological behavior pattern need to be matched to members’ attitude (specifically ‘pragmatic extent’). The discrepancy between leaders’ ideological behavior pattern and members’ pragmatic extent determines the labor leaders’ effectiveness. According to the results, the effectiveness of union leadership is contingent on members ‘pragmatic extent. Finally, this study challenges to the negative views that moderate union leadership cannot evoke union members’ activism and their willingness to participate in union activities.