La mediación de la satisfacción laboral en la relación del estilo de liderazgo y el compromiso organizacional

El objetivo de este trabajo fue determinar la relación entre el estilo de liderazgo laboral y la satisfacción laboral, y cómo esta relación afecta el compromiso organizacional; utilizando la teoría del liderazgo de Bass y Avolio, a través del cuestionario MLQ. El compromiso organizacional se midió con la herramienta generada a partir de la teoría de Meyer y Allen y la satisfacción laboral con el cuestionario de Paul Spector. El estudio se diseñó sobre la base teórica del enfoque cuantitativo, deductivo, método transversal. La recolección de datos se realizó a través de la encuesta con el respectivo cuestionario para cada variable, el muestreo fue por conveniencia y 386 personas participaron de manera voluntaria. Los datos se analizaron con un modelo SEM. Los resultados muestran que los datos tienen un buen ajuste según la prueba de Chicuadrado; además, se realizó validez convergente y divergente. Por tanto, en la realidad ecuatoriana se demostró que el liderazgo transformacional se relaciona con la satisfacción laboral (r = .55, p <0.05), mientras que el liderazgo transaccional se relaciona negativamente con la satisfacción (r = -. 154, p <0.05). Sin embargo, el liderazgo transaccional no está relacionado con el compromiso organizacional (p> 0.05) y la satisfacción laboral influye en el compromiso organizacional (r = .608, p <0.05). Los resultados obtenidos en la cultura ecuatoriana demuestran resultados de estudios previos realizados en otras culturas, el estilo de liderazgo transformacional tiene un impacto positivo en la satisfacción laboral y el compromiso organizacional, mientras que el estilo de liderazgo transaccional tendría un impacto negativo con las demás variables estudiadas.

The majority of studies of this type carried out in recent years were carried out in European or Anglo-Saxon countries. This work sought to contribute by expanding research to Latin America, specifically to Ecuador, to check if the results obtained previously resemble a different cultural reality (Robbins, Judge, Millett y Boyle, 2013;Shanker, 2016;Shrama y Bajpai, 2010).
We sought to understand the behavior of service companies in Ecuador due to the growth and importance of the industry for the generation of welfare. The permanent crises that affect the countries have generated changes in the markets that are increasingly composed of serviceoriented companies, even when they continue to produce products. Globalization has forced companies to seek better levels of competitiveness and service (Bejarano, 2018;Chib, 2016; Garcia-Almeida, Fernández-Monroy y Saá-Pérez, 2015;Quintana, Park y Cabrera, 2015;Shanker, 2016); to return customers to consume their products, which generates higher profitability (Bejarano, 2018;Chib, 2016;García-Almeida, Fernández-Monroy y Saá-Pérez, 2015;Quintana, Park y Cabrera, 2015;Shanker, 2016). Human resources play an essential role in this goal. Their level of commitment is related to their level of performance (Chen, Lyu, Li, Zhou y Li, 2017; Pantouvakis y Bouranta, 2013b).
Cultural aspects would also influence human behavior in collectivist cultures, for example, people consider financial security more important than individual well-being In Ecuador, 77.3% of companies depend in some way on customer service (INEC, 2014), despite this, the companies affected by this item do not have good results in general, which does not allow generating greater well-being in the country (Daude y Fernández-Arias, 2010;Ordoñez, 2011;Rucalcaba, Gago, Ariano y Tripathi, 2016).
The aforementioned has, as a consequence, that despite being an item that generates millions of jobs has a negative result in their balance, they are companies that fail to take advantage of their importance and fail to have efficiency levels that allow them to be more profitable (Falconí, 2015). Hofstede (1983) classifies Ecuador as a country of a collectivist culture, that is to say, that it would have great distances of power and active avoidance of uncertainty. Those mentioned above would mean that in order for an organization to be successful, it must be a collective concern for employees, which implies a concern for organizational culture. It should be noted that the results obtained by the heads of groups are also affected by the national culture (Hofstede, 1983;Al-Laymoun, 2017;Jha y Pandey, 2015). This study seeks to show if the transactional leadership style has a better or equal performance than the transformational leadership style in employee satisfaction and then if these relationships affect the level of present commitment.

Leadership styles
For this work, the proposal by Bass and Avolio (1990) that classify leadership into three transactional, transformational, and laisse faire styles were chosen from among the different leadership theories. This theory is one of the most studied and accepted for some decades, to measure this variable, the authors created the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ), which has been translated into different languages and validated in previous studies (Alonso, Sabiya y Guirado, 2010).
Theoretically, transformational leadership is considered to encourage personal and professional development in workers, as well as organizational principles, bosses who apply these types of styles are usually aware of what the company's goals are and motivate teamwork for achievement of objectives (Bass y Avolio, 2003;Bass y Avolio, 1994;Wang y Howell, 2010).
Transformational leaders often challenge their followers by understanding their needs, which can generate innovation in the way they solve their problems (Jain, 2016).
That the leaders had a relationship of rewards with their followers was what was customary, for the theory mentioned, this type of interaction is defined as transactional leadership that is based on the compensation of the achievements obtained by the workers that can result in levels of well-being in workers and better performance when applied correctly (Bass, 1988). The transactional leader sets the goals of his team and how they will be compensated. It must be clear when defining it, to ensure compliance, which becomes vital for the success of the model. Another critical factor is the knowledge of the skills of the members of their teams to establish the challenges properly, understanding that the focus of these leaders is the result obtained by their team, not their personal development (Avolio, Bass y Jung, 1999;Bass, 1985;Bycio, Hackett y Allen, 1995;Xirasagar, 2008;Yahaya, Ebrahim y Sheard, 2016).
The MLQ questionnaire is made up of six dimensions, divided between the three styles (Bass, 1985) the transformational leadership represented by (a) the charism; (b) intellectual stimulation and, (c) individualized consideration. Transactional leadership: (d) contingent reward and (e) administration by active exception; laisse faire represented by (f) passive avoidance leadership (Avolio, Bass y Jung, 1999).
This study sought to establish whether there are differences due to the type of style that the bosses apply with their work teams and the effect that this has on the perception of well-being at work, that is, job satisfaction. Previous studies show a positive relationship between these variables (Ali, Sidow y Guleid, 2013;Arzi y Farahdob, 2014;Bass, Avolio, Jung y Berson, 2003;Cardona, 2000;Guerrero, Añazco, Valdivieso y Sánchez, 2018;Quintana, Park y Cabrera, 2015).
Other studies have resulted in differences in styles and their impact on satisfaction due to other factors such as national culture, organizational, type of company, and the climate of the same (Bass, 1997;Hussain y Riaz, 2010;Politis, 2002;Vigoda-Gadot, 2007). According to Bass (1988), the transactional leader can achieve positive results using his appropriate style, and the transformational creates an environment of desirable commitment in companies. Other works that have compared the two styles have found in their results that the Transformational leadership could obtain better results when obtaining low staff turnover rates, higher job satisfaction and better performance (Armanddi, Oppedisano y Sherman, 2003;Arzi y Farahdob, 2014;Bartram y Casimir, 2007;Bhatti, Maitlo, Shaikh, Hashmi y Shaikh, 2013;Braun, Peus, Weisweiler y Frey, 2013;Hussain y Riaz, 2010;Yaghoubipoor, Tee y Ahmed, 2013;Zhao, Ghiselli, Law y Ma, 2016).
In this case, the national culture is a factor that influences the level of influence of the leadership style in aspects such as satisfaction, according to various studies this would allow affirming that no style can be considered superior to another in all cases, the two styles in different Studies have yielded positive results with different variables such as job satisfaction (Hussain y Riaz, 2010;Vigoda-Gadot, 2007;Avolio, Bass y Jung, 1999;Yiing y Ahmad, 2009). The type of company is also a factor that affects this relationship (Nawaz, 2010). In this work, two dependent variables were identified, the job satisfaction that is defined as an emotional state that affects the employee's performance in the company, and the Organizational Commitment that is defined as an attitude of the worker towards the organization (Gyamfi, 2014).

Job Satisfaction
Satisfaction is also defined as the worker's taste feels with his work, and it is affirmed that he has a positive relationship with his well-being (Bandura y Lyons, 2014; Locke, 1976;Spector, 1997). Some previous work proved that job satisfaction influences the level of performance of companies, defining that satisfied employees can satisfy customers. Likewise, generates better Factors such as gender and age influence employee satisfaction, making it easier to satisfy older employees than by their levels of responsibility. They may feel satisfied in a stable work environment, while younger generations look for jobs that generate more significant challenges.
In terms of gender, for women in general, salary is one of the most critical dimensions of satisfaction, while for men, recognition (El Badawy y Magdy, 2015; Maamari, 2014;Saner y Sadikoglu, 2016;Vetráková y Mazúchová, 2015).
This study has taken the satisfaction questionnaire developed by Spector (1985) that establishes three main dimensions of satisfaction: (a) participation in decision making; (b) organizational identification; and (c) the relationship between the employee and the leader (Pujol-Cols y Dabos, 2018), this questionnaire has been translated and validated by its author in several languages and culture.

Organizational commitment
The organizational commitment is the link that affects the permanence in the companies of the employees, models their way of doing things, and decreases levels of rotation of the human resource. It is a desired attitude for entrepreneurs but challenging to achieve (Ahluwalia y Preet, 2017;Cohen, 2007;Jernigan, Beggs y Kohut, 2002;Kuo, 2013;Meyer, Samley, Hercovich y Topolnytky, 2002;Shanker, 2016). A high level of organizational commitment affects the company's performance and how this effect produces better work climates, better willingness to change and to the proper management of knowledge, as well as its generation (Shanker, 2016;Karim y Rehman, 2012;Meyer y Herscovitch, 2001;Shurbagi, 2014;Feinstein, Vondradesk, Martin, Ogawa, Dalbor, Stefanelli y Cannon, 2001).
Cultures and types of companies also affect the level of organizational commitment within companies, for example, public companies tend to provide greater security among employees, which generates a higher level of commitment in employees; Age, level of education and time at work also influence this variable (Mahanta, 2012;Mathieu y Zajac, 1990;Savery y Syme, 1996;Meyer y Allen, 1991).
Some studies have shown that the level of commitment is low in most companies despite its importance, so this study aims to understand what affects it (Bersin, Agarwal, Pelster y Schwartz, 2015). The instrument used to measure organizational commitment corresponds to the one defined based on the theory of Meyer & Allen (1991), which divides it into three dimensions: (a) active commitment, (b) the commitment to continuity, and (c) the normative commitment (Jha y Pandey, 2015).
Because leadership does not directly affect organizational commitment, job satisfaction served a double function, in addition to being a dependent variable, it was a mediator for the relationship between leadership style and organizational commitment, in the same way, national culture (Keller, 2006;Walumbwa, Lawler y Avolio, 2007;Slocum y Hellriegel, 2009). National culture politically and sociologically affects decision-making in companies, which also influences the styles of leadership applied and the results obtained (Hofstede, 1983).

Methodology
This study was quantitative, deductive, post-positivist, and transversal. Correlated the variables in companies in the service sector in Ecuador. We worked with 386 valid answers, being valid to apply the SEM method to analyze the data using SPSS and AMOS, the method of structural equations has been used in previous studies (Long, Yong y Chuen, 2016;Shurbagi, 2014;Zahari y Shurbagi, 2012;Chen, Lyu, Li, Zhou y Li, 2000).
Participants' goodwill was assumed as well as their condition to understand and answer the surveys based on the truth properly; It is also assumed that the performance of companies is affected by the leadership style and that companies with a better level of commitment get better performance (Kuo, 2013;Anari, 2012).
The sample was non-probabilistic and convenience. The study was limited to companies in the service sector of the city of Guayaquil, Ecuador. We sought to obtain a representative sample of types of services, obtaining results from health companies, technological services, tourism, industrial automation, education, among others. Three hundred eighty-six valid responses were obtained out of a total of 405 sent. We worked with a total of 27 companies in the services sector, and 15 employees of each were applied to people of middle management to reduce the risk of bias in the responses.
Three questionnaires were used for tools for information gathering, (a) the multifactorial leadership questionnaire (Avolio, Bass y Jung, 1999); (b) the three-dimensional organizational commitment questionnaire (Jha y Pandey, 2015); and (c) the job satisfaction questionnaire (Spector, 1997), all three applied at the same time.     previous studies analyze the relationship between the variables of leadership styles, job satisfaction and organizational commitment that include the transactional leadership style, which is why it was merited to include them in this study, to understand that differences could be found in Ecuador in the results due to cultural factors. It should be noted that in the previous study carried out in Pakistan (Hussain Haider & Riaz, 2010) they showed that there is a culture similar to that of Ecuador, it was also found that transactional leadership has a significant relationship with job success (0.628), unlike than transformational leadership with career satisfaction (0.545). Finding that the relationship between transactional leadership style and job satisfaction is significant but negative, it is suggested in subsequent studies to analyze only one type of service company in order to discover the positive relationship between transactional leadership style and job satisfaction.  significant influence on job satisfaction, no dimension gave a negative result, intellectual stimulation obtained a result of 0.573, also significant, among the conclusions that were defined in this work, they declared that the leader from the perspective of the administration or the direction is one of the most essential sources or agents of change, the companies then must worry about developing their bosses or managers to allow them to become leaders generating satisfaction in their employees in order to achieve the common objectives of the organization (Omar & FausiHussim, 2013). These data coincide with those obtained in the present study.
The H3     According to Hofstede (2002), Ecuador is one of the least individualistic countries analyzed, which means that in this culture, people avoid conflicts to guarantee the harmony of the group in which they operate. They can show many gestures of solidarity and empathy with the members of their team, but in the same way, they can be somewhat hostile towards strangers or new to a group in order to maintain the harmony of the group.
Ecuadorian culture is also considered more masculine, which implies that present conflicts are generally resolved by allowing the strongest to win; there is great admiration for successful people. Also considered a culture with high avoidance of uncertainty, which means high stress for this cause, it is considered a continuous threat that must be fought, in this type of culture, there is a greater need for laws and rules to follow. Ecuador has a great distance from power, which means that it is a society with little equity, there are hierarchies out of necessity, people with power are considered inaccessible and with privileges (Hofstede, 2002