THE MODERATING ROLE OF PSYCHOLOGICAL EMPOWERMENT ON THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BENEVOLENT LEADERSHIP AND WELL-BEING IN THE CONTEXT OF EMPLOYEES WITH DISABILITIES

DOI: 10.22146/jlo.68003 Main Objectives: This study aims to evaluate the moderating role of psychological empowerment on the relationship between benevolent leadership and employees’ well-being. Novelty: Since research involving disabled employees is rare, this study adds to the current body of knowledge by confirming the links between benevolent leadership, job satisfaction, and perceived discrimination. It also aims to find out how psychological empowerment influences the relationship between benevolent leadership and job satisfaction, as well as the association between benevolent leadership and perceived discrimination. Research methods: This research involves 85 respondents. They are employees with various disabilities working in different organizations. Moderated regression analysis is employed to analyze the data. Finding/Results: This study found that benevolent leadership significantly affect employees’ well-being: job satisfaction, and perceived discrimination. In addition, as expected, psychological empowerment strengthens the positive impact of benevolent leadership on job satisfaction. On the contrary, psychological empowerment weakens the negative impact of benevolent leadership on perceived discrimination. Conclusion: Based on the conservation of resources theory, resources provided by the organization, in this case is benevolent leadership, perceived by employees with disabilities as a recovery of the loss of resources (disabilities). Recruiting benevolent leaders or developing existing leaders to be more benevolence is important to improve disabilities employees’ well-being. ___________ * Corresponding Author at Department of Management, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Gadjah Mada. Email Address: gugup_kismono@ugm.ac.id JOURNAL OF LEADERSHIP IN ORGANIZATIONS


Introduction
Research on benevolent leadership has been conducted by many researchers in different organizational context (Ghosh, 2015;Gumusluoglu et al., 2017;Ho & Le, 2020; investigating its impact on various organizational outcomes (X. P. Chen et al., 2014;Karakas, 2009;Karakas & Sarigollu, 2012;Lin et al., 2018;. However, research involving disabilities employees is very rare (T. . Since employees with disabilities indicated a comparable performance with their nondisabled employees, study involving employees with disability is valuable. In addition, more people with various disabilities have been entering job market (ILO & OECD, 2018).
The Indonesian Law (Article 53 of Law Number 8 of 2016) requires companies to accommodate disabilities at least 2% for the public sector, namely the government and state-owned companies, and 1% of the workforce for the private sector (Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 8 Tahun 2016Tentang Penyandang Disabilitas, 2016. The data shows the employees who work in formal sector in 2019 were 56,02 million (Badan Pusat Statistik, 2020;Jayani, 2020). This means that there are at least 560,200 employees with disabilities who should be employed in the formal sector in various organizations or companies. Since the number of potential disabled workers is quite large, more thoughtful attention is required. Furthermore, if the obligation to employ disabled employees in the public and private sectors is met optimally, managing employees with disabilities will become a significant challenge.
Unfortunately, those with severe disabilities account for only 0.26 percent of all formal workers (ILO, 2017). People with disabilities have lower levels of job opportunities, job satisfaction, higher levels of job dissatisfaction, and a higher likelihood of discrimination than non-disabled employees (Nilawaty, 2019;Uppal, 2005). As with salaries, the amount received by disabled employees varies, they do not receive insurance or other benefits, and they work fewer hours. In general, the mandated rights of employees with disabilities to access and advance in their careers have not been fully implemented. These conditions occur in a variety of contexts since aspects of their work environment are not supportive for developing self-identity and self-confidence, necessitating adequate organizational supports (Park et al., 2016).
Once again, one of the limitations of research on benevolent leadership is the use of research objects which are still dominated by non-disabled employees. When the research findings are used to develop organizational policies for disabled employees, this can be misleading. In addition, research related to benevolent leadership and job satisfaction was not always consistent. For examples, Pellegrini et al. (2010) and Shi et al. (2020) found that benevolent leadership did not significantly affect job satisfaction. Thus, the relationship between benevolent leadership and job satisfaction is still unclear.
Several studies related to disability, such as those conducted by T.  and T. T. , identified the relationship between benevolent leadership and wellbeing. The impact of benevolent leadership on well-being is not direct but mediated by important variables such as disability inclusive climate, job resources, and personnel resources. Those relationships may also be moderated by another variable, for example psychological empowerment.
Thus, the impact of benevolent leadership on well-being is not yet clear-cut.
In those studies mentioned above (T. , employee wellbeing is measured using several variables, for instances job satisfaction, affective team commitment, need for recovery, and perceived discrimination. Job satisfaction is commonly used to determine the level of well-being. However, in Indonesian context, perceived discrimination is more likely to become an important variable since discrimination against employees with disability is relatively severe (Karunia, 2021). Therefore, in this study, well-being is measured using job satisfaction and perceived discrimination.
The problem with the psychological state of people with disabilities who work is the occurrence of dissatisfaction with the work undertaken, viewing the profession as a burden because of a deficiency in themselves, resulting in a decrease in job satisfaction and an increase in feelings of discrimination. Employees with disabilities experience these perceived deficiencies as a loss, prompting them to seek alternative resources in the workplace to compensate. This is consistent with the theory of resource conservation (Hobfoll, 1989;Hobfoll et al., 2018). In this context, the resources the organization provides, including the leadership they feel care about, will be greatly appreciated. Therefore, benevolent leadership facilitates job satisfaction, and reduces negative perceptions of unfavorable organizational situations.
The relationships between benevolent leadership and positive or negative organizational outcomes may be affected by psychological empowerment. Employees with disabilities who feel empowered psychologically may respond more positively to benevolent leadership than employees who perceived to have lower psychological empowerment (Chan, 2017). On the contrary, psychological empowerment may negatively moderate the impact of benevolent leadership on negative organizational outcome. The influence of benevolent leadership on perceived discrimination is weaker for employees with disabilities who perceived to have strong psychological empowerment. However, these claims have yet to be empirically tested for employees with disabilities.
This study is conducted to investigate several issues. Firstly, it is designed to empirically test the impact of benevolent leadership on job satisfaction and perceived discrimination. Secondly, it is to ascertain the role of psychological empowerment in moderating the relationship between benevolent leadership and job satisfaction. Thirdly, this study is developed to empirically test the moderating role of psychological empowerment on the influence of benevolent leadership on perceived discrimination. Thus, the model involves direct and moderated influence involving benevolent leadership, job satisfaction, perceived discrimination, and psychological empowerment.

Benevolent leadership
Leadership is an activity to influence and manage feelings, thoughts, attitudes, and behaviors to realize an adjustment through organizational motivation and coordination in achieving common goals (Kouzes & Posner, 2012). Leadership theories have emerged regarding the type or style of leadership in different aspects or contexts. One approach to this leadership style is benevolent leadership (H. Y. Chen & Kao, 2009;W. J. Chou et al., 2015;Karakas & Sarigollu, 2012).
Benevolence is personality related to desire to do good for others. It positively motivates people to bring about or create or enhance happiness and well-being for others (Brandt, 1976;Erkutlu & Chafra, 2016). Benevolence also encourages people to avoid things that can disturb or reduce the happiness of others. Related to leader's behavior, benevolence suggests that leaders lead their employees through care, support, concern for subordinates' personal and familial well-being (X. P. Chen et al., 2014;. Benevolent leadership refers to the leaders' personality that motivate them to take care their subordinates, show concern for them, and maintain their well-being, in order to promote subordinates' gratitude and improve their performance in work domain or non-work domain (Cheng et al., 2004;Erkutlu & Chafra, 2016;Karakas & Sarigollu, 2012). According to Karakas and Sarigollu (2012), benevolent leadership is a construct that differs from other leaderships variables. Benevolent leaders show ten attributes including self-awareness, integrity, wisdom, hope, ethical sensitivity, spiritual depth, positive engagement, community responsiveness, calling, and stewardship (Karakas, 2020;Karakas & Sarigollu, 2012;. However, various studies consider benevolence as the dimension of paternalistic leadership (X. P. Chen et al., 2014;Cheng et al., 2004;W. J. Chou et al., 2015). It is rooted in Chinese culture and has been claimed to be one of prevalent style of leadership in Asia . Even though the approach to define benevolent leadership different, those studies mentioned share important characteristics. Benevolent leadership emphasizes on the motivation to do good, act for the benefit of others (employees), and expected by subordinates for their well-being.

Perceived discrimination
The American Psychological Association defines "discrimination is the unfair or prejudicial treatment of people and groups based on characteristics such as race, gender, age or sexual orientation" (Association American Psychological, 2019). Discrimination in workplace is related to inequality such as restricted access to jobs or opportunities, biased evaluations, and an unfair allocation of rewards (Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 8 Tahun 2016Tentang Penyandang Disabilitas, 2016. In addition, according to Raver and Nishii (2010), discrimination also often takes on an interpersonal practice, including verbal harassment, bullying, and incivility.
Discrimination can occur in any social context. However, in workplaces with diverse population, a certain group of employees is more likely to experience a higher levels of perceived discrimination (Baruch et al., 2016). Since discrimination involves an action that exclude, disadvantage or simply differentiate individuals or groups of individuals, based on attributes or personal characteristics (Giurgiu et al., 2015), it may result in several work related issues including stress, physical and mental health problems (Adams et al., 2020;Pascoe & Richman, 2009), psychological and social well-being (Bodkin-Andrews et al., 2010;Jang et al., 2008;Schmitt et al., 2014), performance (Craig & Smith, 2014), job satisfaction, organizational commitment, turnover intention (Ensher et al., 2001;Qablan & Farmanesh, 2019). Thus, managing perceived discrimination is important to promote well-being.

Job satisfaction
There are various approaches to define job satisfaction (Aziri, 2011). Job satisfaction can be any combination of psychological, physiological and environmental circumstances that cause a feeling of satisfaction, affective orientations of individuals toward work roles, the way how people feel about their job and its various aspects, a combination of positive or negative feelings that workers have towards their work (whether expectation is matched), the organizational outcomes resulted from job satisfaction, intrinsic rewards, the attitudes and feelings people have about their work. Therefore, the concept of job satisfaction may relate with needs fulfilment, affective orientation or feeling of like or dislike toward job, intrinsic motivation, challenge, or any factors affecting satisfaction (Aziri, 2011;Uppal, 2005).
Job satisfaction is subjective and individualistic response on employee's job situation (Macdonald & Maclntyre, 1997;Park et al., 2016). Employees may respond similar work situation differently since they have different personal characteristics, different expectation, different needs. However, group of employees who have similar characteristics may share similar expectation and needs. Therefore, it is important to identify the levels of job satisfaction experienced by individuals or group of employees, particularly the minority groups such as employees with disabilities.
The topic of job satisfaction has been studied by many researchers. One of the publications on job satisfaction that is widely cited by researchers is Spector (1997). According to Spector (1997), job satisfaction is simply how people feel about their jobs and different aspects of their jobs. As a global feeling of the job, it is generally considered from the perspective of need fulfilment and attitudinal viewpoint. Job satisfaction is important issue since it is related with individual as well as organizational outcomes. High levels of job satisfaction may result in improving positive organizational outcomes. On the contrary, job satisfaction may correlate negatively with undesirable job consequences. It is also influenced by various personal and organizational factors. Since employees' with disabilities may experience unfavourable circumstances regarding job and non-job aspects, they may show specific characteristics related to job satisfaction (Park et al., 2016). Research findings resulting from studies involving non-disabled employees may not be relevant to employees with disabilities.

Psychological empowerment
Psychological empowerment is an intrinsic motivation that reflects a sense of self-control and active involvement in individual's work role which is resulted from perceptions of meaning, competence, self-determination, and impact (Malik et al., 2021;Seibert et al., 2011;Spreitzer, 1995). It is affected by individual characteristics as well as contextual antecedents. Seibert (2011) identified two different important outcomes: attitudinal, and behavioral consequences. Both are positive outcomes that should be managed by the organizations. Therefore, psychological empowerment may directly influence positive outcomes such as individual performance, organizational commitment, job satisfaction, organizational citizenship behavior, innovative behavior, employee engagement (Seibert et al., 2011;Wagner et al., 2010). On the contrary, it may negatively affects outcomes, for example turnover intentions, job strain, and burnout (Wagner et al., 2010). The role of psychological empowerment is not only directly and indirectly (mediated by various variables) influence individual outcomes, this variable may also moderate the relationships between antecedents such as various types of leadership and behavioral as well as attitudinal outcomes (F. Chen et al., 2019;Grošelj et al., 2020;Maynard et al., 2012;Pieterse et al., 2010;Seibert et al., 2011;Zhang et al., 2020).
Psychological empowerment differs from structural empowerment (Maynard et al., 2012). Unlike structural empowerment, it is less concern about the actual transition of authority and responsibilities from upper levels management to subordinates. Psychological empowerment focuses on a motivational process related to the individuals' need to believe that they can do their job well on their own.

Hypotheses Development
The role of benevolent leadership in influencing employees' well-being has been studied by many researchers in various contexts and involving different participants The relationships between benevolent leadership and the dimensions of well-being are complicated. Other variables may influence those relationships. However, for employees with disabilities, psychological empowerment may present a very important role. This is related to their experiences regarding limited access to various resources needed by employees with disabilities to feel more capable and effectively handle their work. In addition, discrimination is also often experienced by them.
Regarding the effect of benevolent leadership on job satisfaction, Chou (2012) showed the positive effect of benevolent leadership on job satisfaction. T. Luu (2019) and T. T. Luu (2019) found similar results. Benevolent leadership presented a positive influence on job satisfaction involving participants with disabilities. However, Shi et al. (2020) found that benevolent leadership did not significantly affect job satisfaction. Moreover, Pellegrini et al. (2010) found interesting results. In the context of American culture, paternalistic leadership did not significantly affect job satisfaction. Since benevolent leadership is a dimension of paternalistic leadership, the relationship between benevolent leadership and job satisfaction is still unclear. Therefore, research to clarify the relationship is needed.
In this research, benevolent leadership is expected to affect positively job satisfaction. On the basis of the conservation of resources (Hobfoll, 1989;Hobfoll et al., 2018) it is a reasonable argument. Limited access to information, and exclusion from important opportunities may be perceived as a loss of resources that must be compensated for by other resources. Benevolent leadership is anticipated to facilitate and empower employees with disabilities to gain better access to important organizational resources. Benevolent leaders are also anticipated to act for the benefit of employees, concern with individuals' well-being. Then, it is argued that benevolent leadership positively affects job satisfaction. Hypothesis 1: benevolent leadership positively influences job satisfaction.
The effect of benevolent leadership on perceived discrimination Benevolent leaders are always nurturing and caring, so that employees will feel comfortable and enthusiastic while working. Benevolent leaders act fairly, facilitate employees, motivate them, and improve their self-efficacy. Benevolent leaders prevent from acting to discriminate against employees, especially those with special needs such as employees with disabilities. Benevolent leaders develop inclusive organizational climate (T. T. . Employees with disabilities with strong social inclusion needs are more likely to perceive care and nurturing from benevolent leaders as a valuable resource in developing positive attitude and affective responses. Various factors both inside and outside organizations may contribute to the practices of discrimination. However, as explained by Erden and Ayse (2019), work domain constitutes the most dominant area of discrimination. Benevolent leadership may be an important organizational variable to influence perceived discrimination.
Despite inconsistencies in research on the influence of benevolent leadership on job satisfaction, the arguments used to hypothesize the effect of benevolent leadership on job satisfaction can be applied to the relationship between benevolent leadership and perceived discrimination. Since perceived discrimination is an opposite work outcome of job satisfaction, it is argued that benevolent leadership negatively affect perceived discrimination. Therefore, hypothesis 2 is developed. Hypothesis 2: benevolent leadership negatively affects perceived discrimination.

The moderating roles of psychological empowerment
Psychological empowerment is related to the leaders' behavior to take care their subordinates, motivate them to do their jobs on their own. By doing so, it is expected that the subordinates' self-efficacy improved. Then, the levels of motivation are high. Employees will also respond to organizational context, including benevolent leadership, positively.
Psychological empowerment is relevant for various contexts and industries such as public sector, health industry, not for profit organizations, profit oriented organizations, hospitality industry, managers, employees, students (Bhatnagar, 2005;Chiang & Jang, 2008;Meyerson & Kline, 2008;Pieterse et al., 2010;Skrinou & Gkorezis, 2020). However, employees with disabilities may show certain unique features that distinguish them from non-disabled employees (Park et al., 2016). Employees with disabilities may believe that they are losing resources as a result of their disability, motivating them to compensate with other resources. In addition, access to information, resources, and other facilities needed by employees with disabilities may be limited. They tend to be discriminated or excluded from various important organizational opportunities and activities (ILO & OECD, 2018;Karunia, 2021;Park et al., 2016). Caring and supports from the organization are very meaningful for employees with disabilities.
Even though the relationships between benevolent leadership, job satisfaction. perceived discrimination, and psychological empowerment has not been tested empirically, psychological mechanisms developed based on empirical findings obtained by Chan (2017) seems logical. This research found that the positive influence of benevolent leadership on employees' performance was stronger when leaders are perceived to psychologically empower their subordinates. Psychological empowerment interacts with benevolent leadership and positively affects the relationship between benevolent leadership and job performance. Employees with high levels of psychological empowerment are more likely to show high self-efficacy and believe that they can manage their works well. When employees experience high levels of psychological empowerment, they will be more sensitive to benevolent leadership. The interaction between the variable of benevolent leadership and psychological empowerment is stronger. In this situation, employees with higher levels of psychological empowerment will show stronger influence of benevolent leadership on performance.
Since the employees' performance is a positive outcome similar to job satisfaction, it is expected that psychological empowerment moderates the influence of benevolent leadership on job satisfaction. The effect of benevolent leadership on job satisfaction will be stronger for employees with disabilities who feel psychologically empowered than their counterpart with low level of psychological empowerment. Therefore, this research is attempting to test the hypotheses regarding the role of psychological empowerment on the relationships between benevolent leadership and job satisfaction. Hypothesis 3: psychological empowerment positively moderates the impact of benevolent leadership on job satisfaction. The influence of benevolent leadership on job satisfaction for disabled employees with higher levels of psychological empowerment differs from those who show lower levels of psychological empowerment.
Benevolent leadership is expected to negatively influence perceived discrimination. Disabled employees who feel that they are taken care by their leaders will be less likely to experiences discriminated against. Psychological empowerment may strengthen the negative impact of benevolent leadership on perceived discrimination. Employees who feel highly psychologically empowered experience a sense of control and involved in their own works (Morrongiello et al., 2017). Therefore, they show individual's belief in his or her ability to carry out work activities. On the contrary, employees with low levels of psychological empowerment perceived that they experience less involved in their work activities. They are less likely to feel empowered in accessing information and resources to support their works. This condition interacts with benevolent leadership and affect employees' well-being (particularly job satisfaction and perceived discrimination).
According to Chan (2017), a positive relationship between psychological empowerment and benevolent leadership strengthens the influence of benevolent leadership on positive outcomes (employee performance). On the contrary, employees who feel psychologically empowered have a stronger negative impact of benevolent leadership on perceived discrimination, according to the arguments offered. Thus, benevolent leadership will have a weaker impact on perceived discrimination (as a negative consequence) for disabled employees who are perceived to have low levels of psychological empowerment. However, those arguments have yet to be empirically tested. Employees who believe their leaders treat them well are less likely to perceive being discriminated. As a result, hypothesis 4 is formulated. Hypothesis 4: psychological empowerment negatively moderates the effect of benevolent leadership on perceived discrimination. The impact of benevolent leadership on perceived discrimination differs between disabled employees with higher levels of psychological empowerment and those with lower levels of psychological empowerment.

Research Model
The impact of benevolent leadership on employees' well-being is constructed in Figure 1. As hypothesized, benevolent leadership positively affects job satisfaction (H 1). Hypothesis 2 presents that benevolent leadership negatively influences perceived discrimination. Regarding the roles of psychological empowerment, it is argued that psychological empowerment positively moderates the impact of benevolent leadership on job satisfaction (H3). On the contrary, the negative moderation is considered for the effect of benevolent leadership on perceived discrimination. The model is then tested for its validity using the moderated regression method.

Measurements
This study adapts scale utilized by Sheer (2010) to measure benevolent leadership. Job satisfaction is modified from job descriptive index (JDI) questionnaire as described by Spector (1997) and Theodosis and Giannouli (2017) that asses five facets: work, pay, promotion, supervision, and coworkers. Subsequently, perceived discrimination is measured using scale modified from Workplace Prejudice/Discrimination Inventory developed and validated by James et al. (1994) and evaluated by Burkard et al. (2002). Lastly, psychological empowerment is measured utilizing scale modified from Spreitzer (1995). All items use 5-point Likert scale.
Modifying measurements from original scales is a common practice in research, as demonstrated by Sheer (2010) and T. . The modification is done based on the facts that the participants of this research different from the context that the original scale developed. According to Stewart et al. (2012) several considerations including different in meaning related to conditions of respondents, time availability given to respondents, willingness to involve in the survey, and sensitivity to the questions felt by the respondents. This modification process is carried out through a discussion involving ten employees from various organizations. They are presented the original version and asked to give feedback to the researchers. Among the important feedbacks include the quantity of items, the relevance, practicality and also whether the question caused them any discomfort. However, important questions representing any dimensions assessing the variables such as benevolent leadership, job satisfaction, perceived discrimination, and psychological empowerment are retained.

Validity and Reliability
The original English-language survey was back translated into Bahasa Indonesia using the back translation process in order to contextualize the situation and Indonesian work culture (Souza et al., 2017). The survey questionnaires are then checked for face validity, which includes observing the relevance of items to measurable variables (Beugelsdijk & Welzel, 2018) and working circumstances based on potential respondents' perceptions and experiences. Face validity is also used to assess a question's applicability, as well as to investigate the respondent's understanding of the topic and allow comments if the question is unclear (Connell et al., 2018;Nevo, 1985). This procedure is carried out through a discussion involving ten employees from various organizations. As a result, modified questionnaires are generated. The most significant modification is applied on perceived discrimination by changing the scale from negative to positive. Based on the scale modification, the results of statistical calculations will be also modified.
The face validity draft is then subjected to validity and reliability analysis to assess the content and internal consistency across various question items in each variable. The validity assessment utilized in this study is convergent validity. Convergent validity refers to how well a set of measured items represents the theoretical content domain that these items are intended to measure (Hair et al., 2017). The measures' validity is indicated by factor loading. When items have adequate factor loadings values, they can be considered good measures. The validity of the measurements presented in Table 1. Several items (*) are insignificantly loaded.
Consequently, those items are excluded from the further analysis.
Cronbach's alpha is the criterion used for reliability testing. The alpha coefficient is widely used in a variety of studies (Streiner, 2003). The alpha value should not be less than 0.7 (Hair et al., 2017). Table 2 displays the results of the reliability tests. The dimensions and all questions resulted from the validity analysis are regarded as reliable.

3.1.Data Collection Methods
Persons with disabilities are defined as those who have long-term physical, mental, intellectual, or sensory impairments that, when combined with additional impediments, prevent them from fully participating in society on an equal footing with others. It is critical to understand that disability is not a medical condition; rather, it is the outcome of people's relationships (ILO, 2017). Respondents with any sort of disability who had worked in various organizations for at least three months and were able to respond to the questionnaires independently were included in this study. The data collection process is conducted online using google forms. Because respondents work in a variety of cities throughout Indonesia, online data collection is intended to make their participation more convenient. All participation is entirely voluntary. This is underlined in the questionnaire's introduction.
Online data collection procedures are as follows: (1) request participation from respondents via various media such as Twitter, Line, Facebook, and Instagram; (2) attach the questionnaire link in google forms; (3) briefly explain the research being studied and how to fill out questionnaires; and (4) respondents may participate in survey at any time until the data collection process end. As stated by Asai et al. (2003), various steps in the data collection process via online surveys are taken to maintain some important ethical points in survey research.
Questionnaires are also anonymous in order to protect participants' interests and improve the usefulness of research (Wainwright & Sambrook, 2010). A total of 85 people completed the research questionnaire, resulting in the data collected. There are 55 men (65%) and 30 women (35%).

Profile of Respondents
The majority (41%) of disabled employees are >39 years old. Participants with 30-39 years old is 31%, and the rest (28%) are aged 18-29 years. This condition, in general, indicates that young people with disabilities have not received adequate attention.
Based on the type of disability, there are 68% with physical disabilities. Physical disabilities include amputation, paralysis, paraplegia, stroke, disabilities due to leprosy, and cerebral palsy. In addition, there are 22% with sensory disabilities. Sensory disabilities include blind, deaf, and speech impaired. Finally, there are 10% with intellectual disabilities. Intellectual disabilities include mental retardation, down syndrome, cretinism, and scaphocephaly. This data could imply that the majority of employees with physical disabilities are thought to be more adaptable in the workplace. However, there is no information available about the respondents' unique disability.
The majority of respondents (16%) work as teachers. Other professional jobs include cleaning service, drivers, field workers, batik employees, boutique tailors, and finance. In addition, there are three job positions as personnel, administration, and repairman staff. Lastly, several employees with disabilities work as child social workers, HR analysts, personal admins, nurses, and content creators. All participants are employed in the formal sector and supervised by their supervisors or managers.

Descriptive Statistics
From the data collected, benevolent leadership show the lowest mean score of 3.843. However, this score is quiet high on a scale of 1 -5. Perceived discrimination and job satisfaction present 4.182 and 4.045 respectively.
Lastly, psychological empowerment shows mean score of 4.030.  Table 3, correlations between variables are statistically significant except benevolent leadership and psychological empowerment. The strongest correlation value of 0.395 is between job satisfaction and psychological empowerment. The correlation coefficient is relatively low. It reflects that the variables are distinct or indistinguishable from the others (Daoud, 2018;Fairchild & MacKinnon, 2009). The weak correlation also means that variables in this study are less likely to exhibit multicollinearity, which does not interfere with the explanatory power of the variable predictor and moderator on the dependent variable.

Hypotheses Testing
To test the hypotheses, this research utilizes regression method. Benevolent leadership is directly regressed on job satisfaction and perceived discrimination. Then, moderated regression method is employed to evaluate the moderating role of psychological empowerment on the impact of benevolent leadership on well-being (job satisfaction and perceived discrimination). The result is presented in Table 4. The results show that benevolent leadership positively and significantly affect job satisfaction (β = 0.318 and ρ = 0.001). Benevolent leadership, on the other hand, has a negative and significant impact on perceived discrimination (β = -0.220 and ρ = 0.003). Therefore, hypothesis 1 and hypothesis 2 are supported. A benevolent leader is more likely to promote well-being by increasing job satisfaction and avoiding discrimination against subordinates. On both relationships model, only 10% and 5% of job satisfaction (R2 = 0.101) and perceived discrimination (R2 = 0.048) variances are explained by benevolent leadership. Similarly, small variances are also found by Erden and Ayse (2019).
The positive impact of benevolent leadership on job satisfaction is moderated by psychological empowerment. It is reflected in the interaction effect of benevolent leadership and psychological empowerment (BL*PE) that is significant (β = 0.610 and ρ = 0.004). Thus, hypothesis 3 is supported.
The regression slopes of benevolent leadership on job satisfaction differ for employees who are highly psychologically empowered and those who are not. As shown in Figure 1, the slope for employees with high levels of psychological empowerment is flatter than the slope for employees with low levels of psychological empowerment. This suggests that, while psychological empowerment is an important moderator in the relationship between benevolent leadership and job satisfaction, its effectiveness diminishes for highly psychological empowered employees. Psychological empowerment also moderates the impact of benevolent leadership on perceived discrimination, albeit in the opposite direction. The interaction effect of benevolent leadership and psychological empowerment (BL*PE) is negative and significant (β = -1.857 and ρ = 0.001). Psychological empowerment exacerbates the negative impact of benevolent leadership on perceived discrimination. Furthermore, disabled employees with high levels of psychological empowerment are distinguished from those with low levels of psychological empowerment. Hypothesis 4 is thus supported. Figure 2 presents the moderation effect of psychological empowerment. Interestingly, the pattern of moderation differs significantly between employees with high levels of psychological empowerment and those with low levels of psychological empowerment. Employees with low levels of psychological empowerment exhibit positive moderation, whereas those with high levels of psychological empowerment exhibit negative moderation.
For disabled employees with high levels of empowerment, psychological empowerment may reinforce the negative influence of benevolent leadership on perceived discrimination. Highly psychologically empowered employees are less likely to perceive discrimination from their benevolent leaders. Those with low levels of psychological empowerment may feel discriminated against by a benevolent leader. In general, however, psychological empowerment is required to amplify the negative impact of benevolent leadership on perceived discrimination.

Theoretical implications
This study findings present evidence on the influence of benevolent leadership on employees' well-being, and the role of psychological empowerment on the relationships between the variables. Benevolent leadership has a positive and significant impact on job satisfaction, as well as a negative but significant impact on perceived discrimination. Furthermore, psychological empowerment moderates the impact of benevolence behavior of leaders on job satisfaction and perceived discrimination.
Research engaging disabled employees is still rare. Since the disabled employees may perceived they have lost their valuable resources to work relatively normally, then according to conservation of resources theory (Hobfoll, 1989;Hobfoll et al., 2018) they are sensitive to benevolent leadership. This caring behavior is expected to give the disabled employees chances that they will be able to compensate for the perceived loss of resources. This study provide evidence to confirm this argument. Benevolent leadership facilitates disabled employees to improve their well-being, specifically to increase job satisfaction and to reduce perceived discrimination. In other words, disabled employees appreciate benevolent leaders since they are able to improve their well-being, creating higher job satisfaction and preventing any discriminatory policies and practices. These findings are comparable with those presented by T. Luu (2019) and T. T. . However, those studies did not involve psychological empowerment as a moderating variable.
Regarding the role of psychological empowerment on the relationships between benevolent leadership and positive outcomes, disabled employees with high levels of psychological empowerment are more likely to believe that benevolent leadership improves well-being. This study support Chan (2017) that the moderating role of psychological empowerment on the relationships between benevolent leadership and supervisory support as a positive outcome is significant.

Managerial implications
While the impact of benevolent leadership on employees' well-being have been studied by many researchers (Arnold, 2017;Donaldson-Feilder et al., 2013;Erkutlu & Chafra, 2016;Ince et al., 2016) and found the similar findings with this study, however, those studies are done in the context of nondisabled employees. Human resource policies based on those findings may be lacking in sturdiness. Organizational policies regarding disabled should also be developed based on research involving that specific groups of employees.
Because benevolent leadership is positively related to employee well-being, benevolent leaders are expected to improve disabled employees' job satisfaction and eliminate perceived discrimination. Human resources management practices can be used to implement a variety of strategies. First, organizations may recruit and select candidates who exhibit strong benevolence behavior. This type of leadership behavior should be applied not only within organizations, but also in the personal situations of disabled employees. Leaders must express their explicit concerns about subordinates by facilitating better access to information and organizational resources, as well as receiving support in any activities that will improve their self-efficacy to manage tasks on their own. Second, organizational programs to improve positive leadership behaviors, such as caring for personal and family issues, coaching skills to make disabled employees more comfortable, and motivating skills when employees perform poorly, should be developed. Furthermore, positive attitudes toward disability are crucial. These attitudes are required to prevent leaders from enacting discriminatory or unjust policies or actions against disabled employees.
Third, employees' psychological empowerment should be enhanced. Benevolent leaders should help subordinates improve their perceived psychological empowerment by making their jobs more meaningful, providing opportunities for skill development, and providing positive experiences to boost self-determination. Furthermore, proper autonomy should be provided to disabled employees in order for them to have a variety of experiences, develop their skills in preparation for future assignments, and advance their careers. Disabled employees are more likely to respond positively to benevolent leadership when they feel highly empowered. As a result, the impact of benevolence behavior presented by leaders on well-being is stronger.

Conclusion, Limitations, and Future Research
These research findings support the notion that benevolent leadership generate a positive impact on job satisfaction and reduce a negative outcome that is perceived discrimination. As expected, psychological empowerment presents important role in strengthening the positive impact of benevolence behavior on job satisfaction. On the contrary, psychological empowerment weaken the impact of caring orientation that is presented by leaders on perceived discrimination. Theoretical frameworks utilized to explain the effect of benevolent leadership on individual as well as organizational outcomes may be varied (Inceoglu et al., 2018). For instance, Dedahanov et al. (2019) used social exchange theory to explain the impact of benevolent leadership on positive outcomes. When leaders are perceived to treat their subordinates well, employees are more likely to return the favor by doing their jobs better.
However, in relation with disabled employees, the conservation of resources theory may be more appropriate to apply. The conservation of resources theory asserts that people are motivated to acquire and reinvest resources, to grow them further, and to secure them in order to avoid losses. Disabled employees who believe they are missing an important resource expects their leaders to provide means of obtaining other important resources. Benevolent leaders are believed to be able to facilitate disabled employees in obtaining those resources (T. . As a result, it is reasonable to argue that benevolent leadership has a positive impact on job satisfaction while having a negative impact on perceived discrimination. Several limitations should be considered in interpreting this research findings. First, the participants are relatively small. More than 100 employees responded to this survey. However, only 85 data can be further analysed. From 85 respondents, almost 70% are employees with physical disabilities, and the rest are sensory and intellectual disabilities. Therefore, generalization of this research findings should be done carefully. Second, the measurements have been modified based on previous research conducted in various contexts. The process of contextualization of disabled employees working in various organizations in Indonesian culture is carried out with caution. Nonetheless, several items related to benevolent leadership (1 item), job satisfaction (3 items), and perceived discrimination (1 item) are deemed invalid and are excluded from the following analysis. The process's outcomes could lead to inaccuracies in variable measurement, particularly in the case of job satisfaction, which only has two valid items. This limitation should be considered in future research.
Third, in this study, disability is defined as loss or limitation of opportunities in organizational as well as social life (Flacks, 2012;Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 8 Tahun 2016Tentang Penyandang Disabilitas, 2016. This definition is influenced by the social-deviance paradigm (Thomas, 2012;Zhu et al., 2019). According to this paradigm, disability treated as a medical or somatic problem that should be reduced by providing work aids (Zhu et al., 2019). A different perspective on disability is based on the social-oppression paradigm (Thomas, 2012). The social-oppression view argues disability is socially construed, instead of a medical deviation. This paradigm regard disability as unfair social treatment that exclude disabled people from having equal access to workplace (Flacks, 2012). Paradigm chosen in conducting research on disabled employees will affect the variables studied and the construction of the relationship between these variables. Further studies need to consider this limitation.