This study examines coaching leadership behaviors among top-division university badminton teams in Taiwan. Our analytical framework is based on the concepts of Confucianism and its values regarding the behaviors proposed by Mencius that comprise the “Five Cardinal Relationships” (Wulun). As Confucianism is the basis for the Chinese order, Wulun is a unique cultural phenomenon in Chinese society that dominates role norms and duties. A total of 10 relationships based on the relationships associated with Wulun shape the relationship networks of Chinese individuals and thus the behaviors of individual Chinese people. Methodologically, 10 interviews were conducted with two coaches, two player coaching assistants and six players from two first-division university badminton teams in Taiwan. Paternal leadership is a style of leadership associated with authority, discipline, fatherly benevolence and strong morals. First, our results indicate that on Taiwanese sports teams, the leadership behavior of a coach must meet the expectations associated with Wulun relationships. If there is a threat to the image required to play this role, authoritarian leadership becomes the most commonly used style. Second, when a coach consciously demonstrates benevolent and virtuous leadership, relationships have the potential to evolve into friendships. Third, when a coach delegates power to an assistant, the assistant's leadership style becomes rather similar to that of the head coach, thereby maintaining harmony in relationships.
HuangYHNienCL. Mediating role of coach–athlete relationship on the association between paternalistic leadership and team cohesion. Sports Exerc Res2015; 17: 203–219.
3.
ChenSPHsuKP. Influences of coaches’ professionality on coach–athlete relationships. J Natl Taiwan Univ Sport2017; 6: 47–55.
4.
CôtéJGilbertW. An integrative definition of coaching effectiveness and expertise. Int J Sports Sci Coach2009; 4: 307–323.
5.
YangSXJowettS. Psychometric properties of the coach–athlete relationship questionnaire (CART-Q) in seven countries. Psychol Sport and Exerc2012; 13: 36–43.
6.
HofstedeGBondMH. The Confucius connection: from cultural roots to economic growth. Organ Dyn1988; 16: 5–21.
7.
ChatterjeeSR. Relevance of traditional value frameworks in contemporary Chinese work organizations: implications for managerial transition. J Human Values2001; 7: 21–32.
8.
ChienCL. Conceptualization and empirical studies on Chinese authoritarian orientation: an indigenous approach. PhD thesis, National Chengchi University, TWN, 2013.
9.
FerstlC. The Olympic movement: a review on the dissemination of sport in the Taiwanese culture. MA Thesis, Da-yeh University, TWN, 2010.
10.
MarkusHRKitayamaS. Culture and the self: implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychol Rev1991; 98: 224–253.
11.
YangGS. Familization, panfamilism, and organizational management. In: ChengBSHuangKLKuoCC (eds) Organization and management across the Taiwan. Taipei: Yuan-Liou Publishing Co., Ltd, 1998, pp.19–59.
12.
ZhuYT. The history of Chinese traditional ethical thought. 4th ed. Shanghai: East China Normal University Press, 2012.
13.
HsuSC. Parent-child role obligation and interaction under the ethic-centered Chinese culture. PhD thesis, National Taiwan University, 2015.
14.
WangGM. History of Chinese rites and customs. Taipei: Wenchin Publishing Co., Ltd, 1993.
15.
HsuTH. A discussion on Mencius concept of the king–minister relationship: from the ancient sage kings and ministers to Li-Fen. Stud Chin Lit2016; 41: 67–112.
16.
LinCP. "Jun" (君), "Chen" (臣) and "Min" (民) in pre-Qin Confucianism thought. Natl Cheng Chi Chin J2011; 15: 143–168.
17.
ChengBSJiangDY. The loyalty in Chinese corporate organizations. In: YangCFYangKS (eds) Chinese Indigenous psychology. Taipei: Yuan-Liou Publishing Co., Ltd, 2005, pp. 789–831.
18.
KaoSFWatsonJCChenYF,et al.Relationships between the congruence of required and perceived leadership behavior and satisfaction in athletes. Psychol Rep2015; 117: 391–405.
19.
LinCFChengBS. Innovation and mass production in enterprises: the effect of Confucian and Christian cardinal relations. Indig Psychol Res Chin Soc2011; 35: 103–144.
20.
KuoCM. The new thinking of sports coach leadership: an initial exploration of paternalistic leadership. Sports Res Rev2004; 72: 151–155.
21.
YangKSYehMH. Familyism and pan-familyism. In: YangKSHwangKKYangCF (eds) Chinese Indigenous psychology. Taipei: Yuan-Liou Publishing Co., Ltd, 2005, pp.249–292.
22.
LuFJLeeWPChangYK, et al.Interaction of athletes’ resilience and coaches’ social support on the stress burnout relationship: a conjunctive moderation perspective. Psychol Sport Exerc2016; 22: 202–209.
23.
SheridanDCoffeePLavalleeD. A systematic review of social support in youth sport. Int Rev Sport Exerc Psychol2014; 7: 198–228.
24.
ShenCS. The great learning’s philosophy and extrapolation spirit. Taipei: Wu-Nan Book Inc, 2004.
25.
KaoSFLeePLShiehMH. Authoritarian, corporal punishment, discipline, and blame in coaching leadership: no more corporal punishment. Q Chin Phys Educ2016; 30: 229–235.
26.
ChenGMChungJ. The impact of Confucianism on organizational communication. Commun Q1994; 42: 93–105.
27.
ChouTYHsuR. A cultural perspective of the Chinese employees’ work role behaviors: an exploratory qualitative study. Technol Human Educ Q2018; 5: 25–48.
28.
SuSC. Body and education: body discipline in vocational school in Taiwan under Japanese colonial rule (1919-1945). MA thesis, National Chi Nan University, TWN, 2004.
29.
WangCH. Relevance of culture for stakeholder theory: an ethnographic examination of a sport event in Taiwan. PhD thesis, University of Texas at Austin, UA, 2012.
30.
PoczwardowskiABarottJEHenschenKP. The athlete and coach: their relationship and its meaning. Int J Sport Psychol2002; 33: 116–140.
31.
WyllemanP. Interpersonal relationships in sport: uncharted territory in sport psychology research. Int J Sport Psychol2000; 31: 555–572.
32.
ChelladuraiP. Leadership in sports. In: TenenbaumGEklundRC (eds) Handbook of sport psychology. 3rd ed. Hoboken: Wiley, 2007, pp. 113–135.
33.
ChelladuraiP. A contingency model of leadership in athletics. PhD thesis, University of Waterloo, CA, 1978.
34.
FarhJLChengBS. A cultural analysis of paternalistic leadership in Chinese organization. Indig Psychol Res Chin Soc2000; 13: 126–180.
35.
ChengCMHuangHCHuangFM,et al.A multilevel analysis of coaches’ paternalistic leadership on burnout in Taiwanese athletes. Percept Mot Skills2019; 126: 286–304.
36.
ChengBSChouLFWuTY,et al.Paternalistic leadership and subordinate responses: establishing a leadership model in Chinese organizations. Asian J Soc Psychol2004; 7: 89–117.
37.
FarhJLChengBS. A cultural analysis of paternalistic leadership in Chinese organizations. In: JTLTsuiASWeldonE (eds) Management and organizations in the Chinese context. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2000, pp. 84–127.
38.
ChouWJChengBSLienYH. Authoritarian leadership: a review and agenda for future research. Chin J Psychol2014; 56: 165–189.
39.
OuCM. The formation of the dual role of teacher/coach. Taipei: Shtabook, 2018.
40.
KaoSFLienYHChengYH,et al.Literature review of transformational leadership and paternalistic leadership in sport: current status and future direction. Chin J Psychol2020; 62: 267–298.
41.
LinTTLienYH. Literature review of coach’s paternalistic leadership in the sport context. Phys Educ J2016; 49: 125–142.
42.
YangCFPengSQ. Human affection and relationship in interpersonal communication. In: YangKSHwangKKYangCF (eds) Chinese Native psychology. Taipei: Yuan-Liou Publishing Co., Ltd, 2005, pp.483–519.
43.
JiangMH. The subjectivity in five essential relationships of Confucian ethics of virtue. J Nati Hua Lien Univ2001; 13: 87–104.
44.
KuoCCLinTTChouWJ,et al.Leadership differentiation and subordinate effectiveness: the moderating effect of average moral leadership. Indigenous Psychol Res Chin Soc2015; 43: 125–172.
45.
ChangMYChangTH. A study in introduction and development of badminton in Taiwan. Sports J Chung Hsing Univ2010; 10: 85–94.
46.
PengYCShenWJ. Perceived coaching style: the examination of variable- and person-centered approach. Phys Educ J2018; 51: 169–186.
47.
HeYHChenSJZhaoZY. Relational orientation: finding answers for Chinese social psychological methodology. In: YangGSHwangKK (eds) Chinese Psychology and behavior. Taipei: Laureate Book Co., Ltd, 1991, pp.49–66.
48.
PangKHChenML. The review of coaching leadership. Bei Tai J Gener Stud2006; 2: 291–302.
49.
KaoSC. 18 lessons on qualitative research – the first research. Kaohsiung City: Liwen Publishing Group, 2008.
50.
ChengBSChouLFFarhJL. A triad model of paternalistic leadership: constructs and measurement. Indigenous Psychol Res Chin Soc2000; 14: 3–64.
51.
ChenXP. A brief analysis of the theory of the relationship between Confucianism, Mohism, Taoism and Legalism in pre-Qing dynasty. J China Three Gorges Univ (Humanit Soc Scis)2005; 27: 91–95.
52.
ChengCY. Organizational loyalty in Chinese enterprises: structure and history. MA thesis, National Taiwan University, TWN, 1996.
53.
LiMH. The connotation, influencing factors and behavior results of organizational loyalty - taking Taiwan's small and medium-sized enterprises as an example. MA thesis, Fu Jen Catholic University, TWN, 1992.
54.
ChouWJChengBS. Differential treatments in a team: the role differentiation on separation and encouragement. J Hum Res Manag2014; 14: 1–29.
55.
ChengBS. Familism and leadership behavior. In: YangCFKaoSJ (eds) Chinese Heart: personality and society. Taipei: Yuan-Liou Publishing Co., Ltd, 1991, pp. 362–407.
56.
HuangKEKuoCCChengCF. Authoritarian leadership among Chinese coach and athlete’s perception of coach effectiveness: the mediating role of psychological collectivism. Phys Educ J2019; 52: 109–125.
57.
ChouWJChouLFChengBS,et al.Juan-Chiuan and Shang-Yan: the components of authoritarian leadership. Indig Psychol Res Chin Soc2010; 34: 223–284.
58.
LiBDittmoreSWParkJA. Exploring different perceptions of coach–athlete relationship: the case of Chinese Olympians. Int J Sports Sci Coach2015; 9: 59–76.
59.
BurnsM. The relationship between the coach-athlete relationship and quality of life among Paralympic athletes. PhD thesis, Ashford University, UA, 2020.
60.
SunYTLiYF. Relationship between coaches and athletes from Confucius thought. J Shan Dong Insti Phys Educ Sports2009; 25: 17–20.
61.
YuYS. A modern interpretation of Chinese ideological traditions. 2nd ed. Taipei: Linking Publishing Company, 2018.
62.
YangKS. Indigenization research on Chinese psychology. Taipei: Laureate Book Co., Ltd, 2002.
63.
LiuQ. To become a filial son, a loyal subject, or a humane person? On the Confucian ideas about humanity. Asian Philos2009; 19: 173–188.
64.
YuJBairnerA. The Confucian legacy and its implications for physical education in Taiwan. Eur Phy Educ Rev2011; 17: 219–230.
65.
HsuHP. The operation and coping process of Yuanfen in Chinese Guanxi interaction. Indig Psychol Res Chin Soc2012; 37: 57–97.
66.
WangSMChouWJWuTY,et al.The double-edged sword of benevolence: a dual paths model of benevolent leadership and creative performance. Chin J Psychol2018; 60: 57–79.
67.
PellegriniEKScanduraTA. Paternalistic leadership: a review and agenda for future research. J Manag2008; 34: 566–593.
68.
KaoSFChenYF. The didactic leadership in coaching: a case study of two high school sports teams. Sports Exerc Res2006; 8: 97–111.
69.
WuTYHuCJiangDY. Is subordinate’s loyalty a precondition of supervisor’s benevolent leadership? The moderating effects of supervisor’s altruistic personality and perceived organizational support. Asian J Soc Psychol2012; 15: 145–155.
70.
ChengCFChangCWangFJ,et al.Differential leadership model for sports teams in a Chinese context. Phys Educ J2019; 52: 223–240.
71.
ChouLF. Relationship and interpersonal network. In: ChengBSJiangDYChengHY (eds) Organizational behavior research in Taiwan: retrospect and prospect. Taipei: Hwa Tai Publishing Co., Ltd, 2007, pp.206–247.
72.
KuoNY. Where is the friendship? From Confucius and Meng’s ‘friends’ discussion. Shi Sui2012; 5: 1–38.
73.
YangCF. The constructivization of interpersonal relationships and interpersonal emotions. Indig Psychol Res Chin Soc1999; 12: 105–179.
74.
LinJC. A review on code of ethics of sports coaches. Sports Coach Sci2009; 14: 1–8.
75.
YouYRChiangHT. The analysis of coach behaviors for the loss of sports ethics under utilitarianism. Q Chin Phys Educ2015; 29: 175–180.
76.
JowettSArthurC. Effective coaching: the links between coach leadership and coach–athlete relationship - from theory to research to practice. In: AnshelMHPetrieTASteinfeldtJA (eds) APA Handbook of sport and exercise psychology, vol. 1. Sport psychology. Worcester: American Psychological Association, 2019, pp.419–449.
77.
SungYFTangHJ. A study of swimming coaches’ paternalistic leadership in universities in Taiwan. Sports Exerc Res2005; 7: 151–160.
78.
HamiltonGG. Patriarchy, patrimonialism, and filial piety: a comparison of China and Western Europe. Br J Soc1990; 41: 77–104.
79.
ChangSN. Changing Chinese values – the interaction of education, politics and social structure. Taipei: Shinning Culture Publishing Co., Ltd, 2000.
80.
KaoSF. A study of trust in sport team in a Chinese context. Sports Exerc Res2005; 7: 115–126.
81.
LougheadTMHardyJEysMA. The nature of athlete leadership. J Sport Behav2006; 29: 142–158.
82.
ChenCC. How does paternalistic style leadership relate to team cohesiveness in soccer coaching?Soc Behav Personal: An Int J2013; 41: 83–94.
83.
HuCWLeeMCChouCC. Factors alcohol use among college student–athletes in Taiwan. Phys Educ J2010; 43: 63–78.
84.
LinCH. Impacts of paternalistic leadership on school leadership. Sch Adm2009; 63: 36–46.
85.
ChenYJ. An analysis of the way and scope of influence of seniors on juniors: a case study of students in political warfare schools. MA thesis, Fu Hsing Kang College, TWN, 2003.
86.
TsengKY. Analysis of phenomena of Chinese professional baseball league. MA thesis, National Taichung University of Education, TWN, 2018.
87.
HongCCChangPL. The role and functions of hierarchy of seniority in volleyball team: a men’s “a level” university volleyball team as the example. Arch Univ Educ Sports2007; 7: 368–372.
88.
WestwoodR. Harmony and patriarchy: the cultural basis for ‘paternalistic headship’ among the overseas Chinese. Organ Stud1997; 18: 445–480.
89.
WangAC. Developmental or exploitative? How Chinese leaders integrate authoritarianism and benevolence to cultivate subordinates. Acad Manag Discov2019; 5: 291–313.
90.
KaoSFChugCJ. Paternalistic leadership, team socialization and team culture: a study of sports teams. Res Appl Psychol2009; 42: 187–213.
91.
LiJLiSHuJ,et al.Coaching by age: an analysis of coaches’ paternalistic leadership on youth athletes’ organizational citizenship behavior in China. Front Psychol2021; 12: 1–10.
92.
YuYMTsaiCAYenCL. Culture and corruption: the blurring effect of Confucian relationalism on legal boundaries. Public Adm Policy2019; 69: 85–118.
93.
HuangKEChengCF. The impact of Chinese differential leadership on performance in sports teams. Q Chin Phys Educ2016; 30: 171–178.
94.
HuCWChengCH. Michel Foucault: the hierarchy of power in sport. J Sports Res2012; 21: 59–72.
95.
KuoWC. The new ethics in Wei-Jin. MA Thesis, National Cheng Kung University, TWN, 2013.
96.
ShenCSHwangKK. Ren-based thinking style in Confucian society. Indig Psychol Res Chin Soc2014; 41: 261–304.
97.
HsuSCYehKH. A review of Chinese indigenous research on interpersonal and intergroup relations. Indig Psychol Res Chin Soc2019; 51: 33–88.
