379/67531/metadc332356/...identification of leader behavior that is interactional or determined by...
TRANSCRIPT
379 //£/a
/ W , 3 d ? 8
AN ANALYSIS AS TO THE CAUSATION OF LEADERSHIP
STYLE BASED UPON VALUE SYSTEM
DETERMINANTS
DISSERTATION
Presented to the Graduate Council of the
University of North Texas in Partial
Fulfillment of the Requirements
For the Degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
By
Rodney E. Hilpirt, B.B.A., M.S,
Denton, Texas
December, 1989
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES V
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS vi
Chapter
I. INTRODUCTION 1
Rationale of the Study Purpose of the Study Statement of the Problem Methodology Hypotheses Definition of Terms Summary
II. RELATED RESEARCH AND LITERATURE 14
Introduction Early Leadership Concepts Behavioral Theories of Leadership The Four-Factor Leadership Theory Situational-Contingency Theories of
Leadership Concept of Values Values and Leadership Values and Research Summary
III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND DATA PRESENTATION . 47
Introduction Research Methodology Data Presentation Other Findings Summary of Findings
IV. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 69
Conclusions Recommendations
i n
fa-
Hilpirt, Rodney, E., An Analysis as to the Causation of
Leadership Stvle Based Upon Value System Determinants.
Doctor of Philosophy (Personnel and Industrial Relations),
December, 1989, 95 pages, 6 tables, bibliography, 119
titles.
Leadership behavior has been a popular research topic
for many years. Much of this research has focused upon the
identification of leader behavior that is interactional or
determined by the situation which influences leadership
style. Current leadership theories raise the question of
the relationships between leadership behavior and personal
work values. The problem of this research is to investigate
the relationship of leadership style with an individual1s
values for working.
The purpose of this study is to examine the relation-
ship between variables which characterize leadership styles
and variables related to working values. The hypotheses
hold that work values will correlate positively with leader-
ship style.
Data were collected through the administration of three
research instruments to ninety-two managers of five business
firms. The instruments were the participant cover letter
providing demographic characteristics, Leader Behavior
Analysis II identifying style of leadership, and Values for
Working identifying personal work values.
Coefficients of determination were calculated to
identify possible relationships between leadership style and
personal work values. No significant statistical correla-
tion was found. The conclusion is that leadership style
appears to be a function of something other than an individ-
ual 1s work values.
Page
APPENDICES
A. Instruction Packet for Participants 76
B. Leader' Behavior Analysis II
(Self) 78
C. Values for Working 83
REFERENCE LIST 86
IV
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. Terminal and Instrumental Values 31
2. Frequencies and Percentages of the
Status Variables/Covariates 54
3. Regression Analysis of Covariates 56
4. Hierarchical Multiple Regression Correlations Between a Manipulative Value System and Leadership Styles 57
5. Hierarchical Multiple Regression Correlations Between a Sociocentric Value System and Leadership Styles 60
6. Hierarchical Multiple Regression Correlations Between an Existential Value System and Leadership Styles 62
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure Page
1. Ohio State Leadership Grid 20
2. The Managerial Grid Leadership Styles 24
3. The Situational Leadership Grid 26
4. Value Systems 36
vx
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Understanding the concept of leadership may be likened
to understanding the concept of relativity; that is, despite
their unquestioned importance, most of us know little about
each. The study of leadership has not suffered from a lack
of attention, for more has probably been written about the
leadership phenomenon than any other single management
theme. Few would disagree that there are as many defini-
tions of leadership as there are individuals attempting to
define it (24).
Stodgill .(23) suggests that the leadership phenomenon
is as empirically obvious as it is theoretically elusive by
defining it as: a person possessing a large number of
desirable personality and character traits, a personality
and group phenomenon, a social process in which one assumes
dominance over others for the attainment of a specified goal
or goals. Leadership, then, may be thought of as a category
of behavior influenced by values and personality.
Leadership behavior, therefore, is those actions
demonstrated by a leader in directing and coordinating the
activities of others. Leader behavior should be understood
as encompassing a wide range of activities, including
structuring, work, organizing teams, praising and criticiz-
ing, and showing consideration (9).
Within the last six decades, leadership theorists have
mainly focused on the characteristics of leadership, exhib-
ited leadership behavior, and those situational factors
which determine effective approaches to leadership in terms
of style. These approaches to explaining leadership theory
are known as trait theory (4, 10, 15, 23); leader behavior
theory (23), and continaencv-situational theory (9, 14, 25),
respectively.
Leader trait theory seeks to identify those traits
thought to be widely shared among great leaders. While some
of the early findings indicated that clusters of similar
traits were to be found among successful leaders, contem-
porary thought is that although some traits may enhance
effectiveness of those in positions of leadership, these
traits do not guarantee success (17).
Leader behavior theory focuses on what a leader does
and emphasizes the relationship between style of leadership
and satisfaction of subordinates. Two categories of leader-
ship behavior have been identified: (1) that which is task
oriented and ('2) that which is people oriented.
Contingency-situational theory suggests that effective
leaders exhibit behaviors as determined by type of situa-
tion, task involved, type of subordinate, and decision
involved. This, in turn, is reflected by the type of
relationship between leader and subordinate (3).
Although the concept of leadership has been examined in
more than three thousand studies, the theory that best
explains effective leadership remains elusive (26). Writers
are even questioning what, if anything, has been learned
from the extensive studies of leadership. For example,
Pfeffer (20) questions whether leaders have any impact on
the performance of the organization; Gibb (11) argues that
leadership is not determined by situation; Miner (18)
questions leadership as a concept; and Dubin (6) finds
little correlation between leadership behavior and gains in
productivity.
Although a consensus about the theory which best
explains effective leadership is lacking, many studies
conclude that certain styles of leadership are appropriate
to certain situations, and therefore a "style" can be
learned. This approach suggests that style of leadership is
a "value" concept which expresses attitudes through inferen-
ces and assumptions about leader behavior.
Rationale of the Study
While numerous writers (21, 22) have supported the need
to identify specific attributes of leadership through
research, they have done so relying on the notion that
behavior of leaders is interactional or determined by the
situation, which influences style of leadership. Research
has done little to support the interactional notion of
leadership style; that is, style of leadership and interper-
sonal behavior are related. In fact, one study concludes
that leadership style and interpersonal behavior are not
related and suggests that they are separate and distinct
concepts (1).
While there are several studies on the relationship
between interpersonal values and managerial effectiveness,
none have linked values to leadership style, and the major-
ity of the research deals with interpersonal value relation-
ships (2, 7, 8, 12, 17, 19). With that in mind, the
objective of this study is to investigate the relationship
between style of leadership and the leader's value system.
In this context, values explain why a leader behaves in a
certain manner, hence, they are determinants of style.
This study does not deal with interpersonal behavior;
therefore, the instruments selected for this research had to
be capable of identifying an individual leader's values and
leadership style. To that end, the Values for Working and
the Leader Behavior Analysis II questionnaires were selected
as research instruments.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to examine the relation-
ship between variables which characterize leadership styles
identified by the Leader Behavior Analysis II and variables
related to values identified by the Values for Working ques-
tionnaires .
Statement of the Problem
The problem of this study concerns the relationship
between a leader's value system and generally accepted
identifiable leadership styles.
Methodology
Survey Instruments
Three survey instruments were completed by each partic-
ipant .
1. The participant cover letter collected demographic
data.
2. The Leader Behavior Analysis II collected informa-
tion that identified a leader's style of leadership.
3. The Values for Working developed data regarding a
leader's value-system orientation.
This research study involved hypothesis testing in the
sense that the researcher sought to test for the existence
of a potential relationship between a leader's value system
and leadership style.
Samples of each instrument are included in Appendices
A, B, and C. The survey instruments did not ask for the
participants' names; therefore, complete anonymity was
assumed for all participants.
Population
The sample population consisted of exempt employees in
a direct supervisory role employed by five corporations.
The five organizations were selected because each company
was in the midst of a major organizational change with a
management development program in place which required the
managers' completion of the research instruments during one
of the training sessions. The sample size was estimated to
be approximately one hundred individuals.
Statistical Procedure
For the purposes of this study, it was assumed that the
sample population was normal and that variances were not
heterogeneous.. Therefore, parametric statistics were used
to analyze and test the data.
The Statistical Package for the Social Services (SPSS +
3) at the University of North Texas was utilized for data
analysis. For this study, the technique of hierarchical
multiple regression analysis was utilized. This allowed the
causal priority of each independent variable to be examined.
Hypotheses
The following hypotheses are tested in this study:
Hj—A manipulative value system as identified by the
Values for Working will be positively related to an S-l
leadership style as identified by the Leader Behavior
Analysis II.
H 2—A manipulative value system as identified by the
Values for Working will be positively related to an S-2
leadership style as identified by the Leader Behavior
Analysis II.
H 3—A manipulative value system as identified by the
Values for Working will be positively related to an S-3
leadership style as identified by the Leader Behavior
Analysis II.
H 4—A manipulative value system as identified by the
Values for Working will be positively related to an S-4
leadership style as identified by the Leader Behavior
Analysis II.
H 5—A sociocentric value system as identified by the
Values for Working will be positively related to an S-l
leadership style as identified by the Leader Behavior
Analysis II.
H 6—A sociocentric value system as identified by the
Values for Working will be positively is related to an S-2
leadership style as identified by the Leader Behavior
Analysis II.
H 7—A sociocentric value system as identified by the
Values for Working will be positively related to an S-3
leadership style as identified by the Leader Behavior
Analysis II.
H 8—A sociocentric value system as identified by the
Values for Working will be positively related to an S-4
leadership style as identified by the Leader Behavior
Analysis II.
H g—An existential value system as identified by the
Values for Working will be positively related to an S-l
leadership style as identified by the Leader Behavior
Analysis II.
H10—An existential value system as identified by the
Values for Working will be positively related to an S-2
leadership style as identified by the Leader Behavior
Analysis II.
H n — A n existential value system as identified by the
Values for Working will be positively related to an S-3
leadership style as identified by the Leader Behavior
Analysis II.
H1Z—An existential value system as identified by the
Values for Working will be positively related to an S-4
leadership style as identified by the Leader Behavior
Analysis II.
Definition of Terms
The following terms have been defined for the purposes
of this study.'
Values are constructs representing patterns of learned
beliefs that are relatively enduring and considered impor-
tant by an individual.
Value system depicts a specific behavioral activity.
Leadership stvle represents a pattern of learned
leadership behavior.
High task-low relationship behavior or high directive
and low supportive behavior fS-1 stvle) represents behavior
characteristic of the leader who defines the roles and tasks
of subordinates (4, 13).
High task-high relationship behavior or high directive-
high supportive behavior fS-2 stvle) represents behavior
characteristic of the leader who attempts to gain the
support of subordinates for decisions that are leader
directed (5, 13).
High relationship-low task behavior or high supportive
and low directive behavior fS-3 style) represents behavior
characteristic of the leader who is participative and
facilitative (5, 13).
Low relationship-task behavior, or low supportive and
low directive behavior (S-4 style) represents behavior
characteristic of the leader who delegates responsibility
decisions and only exercises general supervision (5, 13).
Conformist value system refers to enforcing an organi-
zation's rules and policies to avoid discipline problems and
trying to improve everyone's working conditions (16).
10
Manipulative value system refers to utilizing people
for maximum short-term productivity (16).
Sociocentric value system refers to trying to create a
pleasant and supportive work environment in which all are
treated equally (16).
Existential value system refers to allowing an open
environment in which everyone can develop and achieve
personal goals with minimum supervision (16).
Summary
This study is concerned with the relationship between a
leader's value system and leadership style. Chapter II
presents a review of the relevant literature. Chapter III
details the methodology and findings. Chapter IV offers the
conclusions and presents recommendations for further study.
CHAPTER REFERENCE LIST
1. Allen, Billie. 1987. A construct validation study of the relationship between interpersonal behavior styles as described by the social style of behavior profile and leadership styles as described by the leader behavior analysis. Ph.D. diss., University of North Texas.
2. Allport, G. W., P. E. Vernon, and G. Lindzey. 1960. A study of values. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
3. Biggart, Nicole W., and Gary Hamilton. 1987. An institutional theory of leadership. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 4: 429-441.
4. Bird, C. 1940. Social psychology. New York: Apple-ton-Century.
5. Blanchard, K. H., D. Zigarmi, and M. Zigarmi. 1985. Leadership and the one minute manager. New York: William Morrow and Company, Inc.
6. Dubin, R. 1965. Supervision and productivity: Empirical findings and theoretical considerations. In Leadership and productivity, ed. R. Dubin and others. San Francisco: Changler.
7. England, G. W. 1967. Personal value system of Amer-ican managers. Academy of Management Journal 10: 53-68.
8. Ewing, D. W. 1964. The managerial mind. New York: Free Press.
9. Fiedler, Fred E. 1967. A theory of leadership effec-tiveness. New York: McGraw Hill.
10. Geier, John G. 1967. A trait approach to the study of leadership in small groups. Journal of Communica-tion 4 (December): 316-323.
11. Gibb, Cecil. 1969. Leadership. In The handbook of social psychology, 2d ed., ed. G. Lindzey and R. Aronson. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
11
12
12. Gordon, L. V. 1976. Survey of interpersonal values; Revised manual. Chicago: Science Research Asso-ciates.
13. Hersey, P., and K. H. Blancard. 1982. Management of organizational behavior: Utilizing human resour-ces. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
14. House, R. J., and M. L. Baetz. 1979. Leadership: Some empirical generalizations and new research directions. In Research in organizational behavior. New York: JAI Press.
15. House, R. J., and T. R. Mitchell. 1974. Path goal theory of leadership. Journal of Contemporary Business 3 (June): 97.
16. Hughes, Charles L., and Vincent S. Flowers. 1978. Value systems analysis theory and management application. Dallas, Texas: Center for Values Research.
17. Lusk, E. J., and B. L. Oliver. 1974. American mana-gers1 personal value systems—revisited. Academy of Management Journal 17: 549-554.
18. Miner, J. B. The uncertain future of the leadership concept: An overview. In Leadership frontiers, ed. J. G. Hunt and L. L. Larson. Kent, Ohio: Comparative Administration Research Institute.
19. Nash, A. V. 1966. Development and evaluation of a SVIB key for selecting managers. Journal of Applied Psychology 50: 250-254.
20. Pfeffer, J. 1978. The ambiguity of leadership. In Leadership: Where else can we go?, ed. M. W. McCall and M. M. Lombardo. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
21. Rosenfeld, L. B., and T. G. Plax. 1974. Personality determinants of autocratic and democratic leader-ship. Speech Monographs 42 (August): 203-208.
22. Sargent, J. R., and G. R. Miller. 1971. Some dif-ferences in certain communication behaviors of autocratic and democratic group leaders. Journal of Communications 21 (September): 233-252.
13
23. Stodgill, R. M. 1948. Personal factors associated with leadership. Journal of Psychology 25 (Janu-ary) : 35-71.
24. Stoner, J. A. 1978. Management. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
25. Vroom, Victor H., and Phillip W. Yetton. 1973. Leadership and decision-making. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
26. Yukl, Gary A. 1981. Leadership in organizations. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
CHAPTER II
RELATED RESEARCH AND LITERATURE
Introduction
Leadership, leader style, and leader behavior comprise
an almost inexhaustible supply of published material dealing
with the study of each. A comprehensive analysis and review
of these studies is beyond the scope of this project. For
this project, emphasis will be on the chronological develop-
ment of leadership theory as it pertains to an enhanced
understanding of leadership style and behavior. Addition-
ally, research relating to the notion of values and value
systems will be contained in this chapter.
Those leadership concepts that gave rise to early
leadership theories will initially be discussed. The second
section will focus on leader behavior research which sought
to identify styles of leadership and the remaining sections
will examine contingency-situational leadership theories and
value-based leadership.
Early Leadership Concepts
The historical concept of leadership was based upon a
leadership role in a religious setting. Prophetic individ-
uals such as Muhammad, Moses, Jesus, and others have
inspired and mobilized thousands of followers. Thus, a
14
15
solitary, inspirational persona was the essence of leader-
ship (39) .
The concept of the personalization of leadership
contributed the ideas of leader status and hierarchy. A
leader had power through status and position (40). Conse-
quently, early literature on leadership suggests the image
of a leader as an entity endowed with magical attributes and
occupying a status position in relation to other individ-
uals.
Great Man Theory
Because history is personalized through stories of
leadership by which outstanding leaders determined the
course of history, the earliest accepted theory of leader-
ship was the great man theory. Accordingly, great leaders
possessed the dissimilar characteristics of task-oriented
behavior and the ability to be concerned for their followers
(6). Individuals showing both qualities at the same time
were revered as great men and would be great leaders regard-
less of the situation. This theory assumed that great
leaders were born with these qualities indicating that
leadership was not a behavior to be learned.
The idea that great man qualities could not be learned
and the work of early behavioral psychologists led to
studies which sought to identify those traits which were
16
common to great leaders. This led to the trait theory of
leadership.
Trait Theory
The trait approach to leadership was based on the
notion that there were certain personal characteristics or
qualities that separated natural leaders from the general
populace. These early studies focused on a search for
universal traits related to leadership. It was believed
that universal traits were physical, mental, and personal-
ity-based. There were some research-based conclusions that
good leaders tended to be physically attractive, possessed
above-average intellect, and were well liked (32).
The trait approach grouped all successful leaders
together without a concern for the specific situations of
each and were plagued with weak and inconsistent findings.
Because of this, researchers began to question the existence
of leadership traits and the necessity for further study.
Jennings suggests that after fifty years of research, no
single leadership trait, or set of traits could distinguish
leaders from nonleaders (24) .
Because the trait approach had almost no analytical or
predictive valXie, research began to focus not on the charac-
ter of a leader but on what a person does that makes that
person an effective leader. Many of the resulting studies
focused on the behavior of a leader interacting with
17
subordinates. The research sought to identify leadership
styles and the relationship between style and subordinate
satisfaction.
Behavioral Theories of Leadership
The Iowa Studies
Many consider the studies of Kurt Lewin and his asso-
ciates at the University of Iowa in the 1930s to be the most
widely known works in leadership that launched the scien-
tific study of leadership (45). The focus of the studies
was to analyze the effects of laissez-faire, democratic, and
autocratic styles of leadership on the behavior of children
organized into four, hobby-club groups.
The laissez-faire leader abdicated responsibility to
lead and only provided help when asked. The democratic
leader involved the group in the decision-making process and
encouraged upward communication. The authoritarian leader
decided what was to be done and how, and directed the group
to implement orders. The Iowa studies showed that the
groups led by democratic leaders had more group commitment
and unity and less aggression and apathy than the two other
groups (30).
The Anderson Studies
While the Iowa studies were conducted in an experimen-
tally-manipulated group environment, Anderson and Brewer
(4), in the early 1940s, focused on real life situations by
18
examining the behavior of teachers and their pupils in
several classrooms. The naturally-occurring variations in
leadership styles were characterized as either dominate or
socially integrative.
The definition of a dominative leader was similar to
the authoritarian leader, and an integrative leader was
similar to a democratic leader. The study concluded that
the behavior of the students in the integrative teacher
environment was more productive compared to the dominative
teacher environment where there was a much higher percentage
of unproductive behavior.
The Anderson studies reinforced the findings of the
Iowa studies of leadership style in an entirely different
context and set the stage for numerous studies based on a
continuum of leadership style. Models were developed such
as authoritarian versus democratic, task-oriented versus
socioeconomic, and employee-centered versus production-
centered.
The Ohio State Studies
The Ohio State studies, beginning in the early 1940s,
consisted of a series of research projects with the princi-
pal focus of identifying the basic dimensions of leadership
behavior in a business, military, and educational environ-
ment (41). Based on the statistical analyses of over 1,500
behavior descriptions, a two-dimensional explanation of
19
leadership behavior emerged. Halpin (16) identified the two
dimensions as initiating structure and consideration.
Consideration is behavior which is indicative of
respect, warmth, friendship, and mutual trust. Initiating
structure is behavior which organizes and defines roles or
relationships and ways of getting the job done. In order to
gather data about leader behaviors, the Ohio State staff
developed the Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire
(LBDQ). This instrument was completed by the leader's
superiors, subordinates, and peers. In addition, the staff
developed the Leader Opinion Questionnaire (LOQ) which was
completed by leaders as a self-perception of their own
leadership style.
The Ohio State studies found that leadership behavior
did not fit on a single-dimensional continuum. Initiating
structure and consideration were separate and distinct
dimensions. These studies enabled leader behavior to be
plotted on two separate axes or a grid format rather than on
a continuum as illustrated in Figure 1.
The Michigan Studies
During the early 1950s, a major program of research on
leadership behavior was being carried out at the University
of Michigan. In a wide variety of industrial situations,
the focus was the study of leadership by locating clusters
20
(High) C o High High n Consideration Consideration s and and i Low High d e
Structure Structure
r a Low High t Consideration Structure i and and o Low Low n Structure Consideration
(Low) (Low) Initiating Structure (High)
Fig. 1. Ohio State leadership grid
of characteristics that correlated positively to each other
and various indicators of effectiveness (26).
The research led to the identification of two indepen-
dent dimensions called Employee Orientation and Production
Orientation. An employee-oriented leader stresses the
relationships aspect of the job while the production-ori-
ented leader emphasizes the technical and production aspects
of the job. These two orientations parallel the authoritar-
ian (task) and democratic (relationship) concepts (27).
The Four-Factor Leadership Theory
After a detailed reexamination of the findings in the
earlier Ohio State and Michigan studies, Bowers and Seashore
(11) in the mid 1960s determined that a great deal of
conceptual content was consistent in the various research
programs. This led to a four-dimensional analysis of
21
leadership behavior. The four dimensions of leadership
behavior are support, interaction facilitation, goal empha-
sis, and work facilitation.
Support behavior enhances another's feelings of self-
worth. Interaction facilitation behavior encourages indi-
vidual group members to develop mutually satisfying rela-
tionships. Goal-emphasis behavior stimulates enthusiasm for
meeting group performance objectives. Work-facilitation
behavior helps the group achieve performance goals by
planning, scheduling, coordinating, and providing materials
and resources.
The Ohio State and Michigan studies and subsequent
similar research stemmed the tide of leader trait theories
toward leader behavior theories. Generally, these studies
which focused on leader behavior suggested that there were
multidimensional leadership styles. These distinct styles
were task-oriented, production-centered, instrumental,
initiating-structure, employee-oriented, people-centered,
expressive, and initiating-structure, to name a few.
Further advances in leadership theories have been made
by research projects that are interactional in scope. This
approach is the contingency-situational theory of leader-
ship. Essentially, leaders engage in behaviors reflecting
characteristics of the situations they are in, including the
types of subordinates, decisions, tasks, and organizations
involved (45).
22
Situational-Continaencv Theories of Leadership
Fiedler's Contingency Theory
Fiedler (12) recognized that while one form of leader-
ship was associated with effective group performance in some
circumstances, there were circumstances in which a quite
contrary form seemed most effective. Fiedler, therefore,
developed a contingency model of leadership effectiveness.
Fiedler defined leadership style as the extent to which
a leader is task-oriented versus relationship-oriented.
Leadership style was contingent upon three critical situa-
tional determinants. These were identified by Fielder as
(1) leader-member relations, (2) task structure, and
(3) position power (13).
On the basis of a number of studies, Fielder concluded
that if the situational determinants or variables were very
favorable or very unfavorable to the leader, then a task-
oriented leader was most effective. On the other hand, a
relationship-oriented leader performs best in situations
that are intermediate in favorableness (18). His emphasis
on restructuring the environment to improve leadership is
unique, but the selection of subordinates to fit the manager
is most unrealistic.
Path-Goal Theory
The path-goal theory of leadership, developed by Robert
House (20), is based on expectancy-motivation theory and the
23
concepts of consideration and initiating structure. The
theory attempts to explain the complexities of leadership
style based on the idea that the leader is the major influ-
ence on subordinates' work goals, personal goals, and the
paths to goal attainment.
The effective leader is thus one who clarifies and
expedites the path to a subordinate's goal. The theory
suggests that four leadership styles are used by the same
leader in different situations (21). The four styles are
(1) directive, (2) supportive, (3) participative, and
(4) achievement-oriented.
Managerial Grid Theory
A variation of the two-dimensional approach was deve-
loped by Blake and Mouton (6). The authors proposed that
leadership style could be plotted on a two-dimensional grid
expressed in terms of concern for people and concern for
production, corresponding to consideration and initiating
structure illustrated in Figure 2.
One purpose of the grid is to help leaders define that
style which is dominant in them. The grid theory is widely
used in the workplace because it is a confluence of several
streams of past studies and it presents an uncomplicated and
practical way of expressing the amount of theoretical
knowledge available.
24
(High) C o n c e r n
F o r
P e 0 P 1 e
(Low)
1-9
(Country Club)
5-5
(Middle of road)
(Impoverished)
1 - 1
9-9
(Team)
(Task)
1-9
(Low) Concern for Production (High)
Fig. 2. The managerial grid leadership styles
Hersey and Blanchard's Situational Leadership Theory
Originally called the Life Cvcle Theory of Leadership,
Hersey and Blanchard (18) assimilated Black and Mouton's
Managerial Grid and Reddin's (36) Three-Dimensional Manage-
ment Style theory. Essentially, it is a contingency leader-
ship theory concerned with two categories of leadership
behavior. These are task behavior and relationship beha-
vior. Task behavior refers to leader efforts to set well-
defined patterns of organization, channels of communication,
and work procedures. Relationship behavior refers to leader
efforts to develop rapport, friendship, trust, and open
communications with workers (18). Task behavior
25
approximates initiating structure in the Ohio State studies
and relationship behavior corresponds to consideration.
The situational leadership theory requires a leader to
analyze the maturity of workers to find the right leadership
style. Maturity is found by evaluating the following:
(1) the workers' level of achievement motivation, (2) the
workers' level of willingness to accept responsibility,
(3) the ability of workers to accept responsibility, and
(4) experience level of the workers. Maturity is apparently
measured only in relation to a task that the worker is to
perform.
According to the theory, leaders engage in either high
or low levels of task and relationship as determined by the
maturity level of their subordinates. Therefore, four
different leadership styles are plotted on a four-sided grid
as in Figure 3.
Combinations of task behavior and relationship behavior
dimensions determine the four leadership styles of S-l
(telling), S-2 (selling), S-3 (participating), and S-4
(delegating). The S-l style is characterized by' above-
average amounts of task behavior and below-average amounts
of relationship behavior. The S-2 style has above-average
amounts of both behaviors. An S-3 style exhibits above-
average amounts of relationship behavior and below-average
task behavior. The S-4 style has below-average amounts of
both behaviors (18).
26
Style of Leader
High High Task Relationship and
and High Low Task Relationship
Participating S-3 Style Selling S-2 Style
Low High Task Relationship and
and Low Low Task Relationship
Delegating S-4 Style Telling S-l Style
(Low) Task Behavior (High)
Maturity of Follower(s)
M-4 M-3 M-2 M-l
High Moderate Moderate Low
Fig. 3. The situational leadership grid. (Source: P. Hersey and K. H. Blanchard, Management of Organizational Behavior: Utilizing Human Resources. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1982).
27
The situational leadership theory relates style to both
self-perception and observed behavior within the leadership
environment. Additionally, it specifies the need for the
leader to understand the needs of the followers first and
then adjust leader behavior, not follower behavior. That
is, the emphasis on flexible, adaptable leader behavior.
The tomes written about leadership, leadership style,
and leadership behavior is a maze of meaning. What are the
determinants of a leader's behavior from whence a style of
leadership emerges? The literature is vague on this ques-
tion. This study contends, after reviewing the literature,
that values are prime determinants of leadership style.
Research on the concept of leadership has focused on
three main lines of study. The first attempted to identify
the attributes of great leaders, such as Napoleon and
Lincoln, that set them apart from others. These studies
focused on those traits that seemed to be shared among great
persons.
A second line of research focused on the behavior of
the leader, not on the character of the leader. These
studies sought to identify those things that a person does
that makes him or her an effective leader, that is, the
identification of patterns or styles of leadership.
A third approach dismisses the idea of a "best" style
of leadership; rather, leaders engage in behaviors reflect-
ing characteristics of the situations they are in, including
28
the types of tasks, decisions, subordinates, and organiza-
tions involved.
Concept of Values
Values may refer to preferences, duties, desires,
likes, pleasures, aversions, moral obligations, and many
other moralities of selective orientation (37). Values are
found in the vast universe of selective behavior. To better
understand values, it is necessary to identify the common
features of all value phenomena. It seems that all values
have a selective or directional quality, that they have some
affective component, and contain some cognitive elements
(34) .
Values act as criteria for selection in action. When
explicit and reflective, values become criteria for choice,
preference, and judgement. When implicit and unreflective,
values perform as if they constitute a basis for decisions
in behavior. After all, individuals do prefer some things
to others. People do pick one course of action rather than
another from a range of alternatives and judge the conduct
of others (28).
Values are not motives for a given value and may be
independent of any particular motive. Values are not the
same as norms of conduct. Norms are rules for behaving in
certain situations, whereas values are standards of
29
desirability that are more nearly independent of specific
situations (44).
The literature on values encompasses several thousand
studies of varying length of law^ religion, ethics, art, and
more. Values of societies, groups, and personalities have
been examined. In short, values are embedded as variables
in systems of personality or society as well as in culture
(23) .
As empirical elements in human behavior, values arise
out of human experience and may be affected by any condi-
tions that affect experience. Once established, values
operate as independent variables in the human behavior
equation. Allport, Gordon, and Vernon (2) suggest that
values are the core element of the dynamics of behavior.
That is, all other attitudes, orientations, and behaviors
arise out of individuals' values. As components of the
"black box" of human behavior, values may be said to be
complex precodings for a behavioral choice of which the
precodings continually change in response to current inputs.
Rokeach (38) suggests that the number of values people
possess is relatively small, and that individuals possess
the same values, only in different degrees. Two types of
values have been identified by Rokeach as terminal values
and instrumental values.
Instrumental values prescribe desirable modes of
conduct of methods for attaining an end. Terminal values
30
prescribe desirable ends or goals for the individual. Table
1 presents the terminal and instrumental values Rokeach
attributed to being the most important in our society.
In the early 1950s, Clare Graves was responsible for
teaching a course entitled "Theory of Normal Personality."
After several years of teaching this course, he grew reluc-
tant to continue his usual procedure of providing students
with a definition of a "healthy personality." His reluc-
tance came about because of the growing doubts in his own
mind as to what constituted a healthy personality and
because there began to be considerable confusion in the
psychological literature of the time as to one "correct"
theory (15). Graves developed a three-part teaching
strategy that relieved him of the responsibility of stating
a position on this issue and at the same time gave him an
opportunity to conduct a study of personality.
Step one of his teaching strategy was to ask, during
the first few weeks of each semester, that each student
write his or her own description of a healthy personality.
Graves collected these descriptions and turned them over to
a group of colleagues whom were to serve as judges. These
professors were asked not to judge the papers for correct-
ness, but rather to categorize the descriptions in catego-
ries they could identify.
The second step of the strategy was to make available
to the students the writings of authorities in the field of
31
Table 1.—Terminal and Instrumental Values
Terminal Values
A comfortable life (a prosperous life)
An exciting life (a stim-ulating, active life)
A sense of accomplishment (lasting contribution)
A world at peace (free of war and conflict)
A world of beauty (beauty of nature and the arts)
Equality (brotherhood, equal opportunity for all) Family security (taking care
of loved ones) Freedom (independence,
free choice) Happiness (contentedness) Inner harmony (freedom from
inner conflict) Mature love (sexual and
spiritual intimacy) National security (protec-
tion from attack) Pleasure (an enjoyable,
leisurely life) Salvation (saved, eternal life) Self-respect (self-esteem) Social recognition (respect,
admiration) True friendship (close
companionship) Wisdom (a mature under-
standing of life)
Instrumental Values
Ambitious (hard-working, aspiring)
Broadminded (open-minded) Capable (competent,
effective) Cheerful (lighthearted,
joyful) Clean (neat, tidy) Courageous (standing up for your beliefs)
Forgiving (willing to pardon others)
Helpful (working for the welfare of others)
Honest (sincere, truthful) Imaginative (daring, creative)
Independent (self-reliant, self-sufficient)
Intellectual (intelligent, reflective)
Logical (consistent, rational)
Loving (affectionate, tender)
Obedient (dutiful, respectful)
Polite (courteous, well-mannered)
Responsible (dependable, reliable)
Self-controlled (restrained, self-disciplined)
Source: Milton Rokeach, The Nature of Human Values. New York, Free Press, 1973.
personality. The students were again asked to write
descriptions of a healthy personality changing their ori-
32
ginal descriptions only if changes were necessary. A panel
of judges was asked to categorize the descriptions.
The final step was to allow each student to defend her
or his description before the rest of the class. Upon
completion of the defense, students were asked to rewrite
their descriptions for a third time. The descriptions were
submitted to the judges.
This teaching strategy was used with classes over a
period of years, giving Graves the opportunity to collect
hundreds of descriptions as well as employing a wide variety
of judges.
The categories the judges consistently identified were
two distinct ideologies; one, labeled "deny self" and the
other he labeled "express self." As the study proceeded,
Graves pressed the judges to make more specific groupings
under each of these two ideologies. The judges were able to
sub-divide each grouping as follows:
"Deny self" subdivided into (1) deny self for reward later and (2) deny self for acceptance now. "Express self" sub-divided into (1) express self in a calculating fashion and at the expense of others and (2) express self but not at the expense of others.
As work on the theory continued, Graves began to
observe a regularity in the changes students made in their
written descriptions. Whesn changes occurred, they always
occurred across categories rather than within the same
category. A pattern was identified in the changes as
follows:
33
1. Deny self now for later reward changed to,
2. Express self calculatingly for self gain changed
to,
3. Deny self now to get acceptance now changed to,
4. Express self but not at the expense of others.
Having developed a hierarchy to this point, Graves came
to believe that there was no such thing as a "healthy
personality," rather there were at least four types of
healthy personalities each consistent with the world view
(psychological level of existence) of the individual expres-
sing it. Further, he became convinced that individuals
could change their world view and therefore their personali-
ties when confronted with either authorities or peer pres-
sure (15) .
Having satisfied himself that the four categories were
correct and the pattern of change consistent, Graves
broadened his study by administering standard tests of
personality, intelligence, and problem solving to students
at each level to determine any correlations that might
exist.
As Graves expanded his research to include individuals
other than university students, he identified two additional
levels, "Deny self to authority" and "express self
impulsively at any cost."
In 1971, M. Scott Myers was on leave from Texas Instru-
ments as visiting professor of Organizational Psychology and
34
Management at the Alfred P. Sloan School of Management,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology. During this time,
Myers and his wife Susan became intrigued with Graves'
Theory of Values. With an acute understanding of Graves'
theory, and with the assistance of Graves, Myers developed
seven levels of human existence. The seven levels are (1)
reactive, (2) tribalistic, (3) egocentric, (4) conformist,
(5) manipulative, (6) sociocentric, and (7) existential.
Upon returning to Texas, M. Scott and Susan Myers began
to examine the applicability of the theory to employees in a
business organization. Through item-factor analysis of
aptitude surveys developed at Texas Instruments, eight
distinct job factors were developed by Myers. These eight
factors were the basis upon which Myers designed the Values
for Working guestionnaire. In summary, the Values for
Working relates Graves' theory to the business environment.
It offers insight into the values of employees at each level
toward each job factor.
Believing in the Graves theory and refining the ori-
ginal Myers guestionnaire, Hughes and Flowers (2 3) through
their center for values research have emphasized the use of
the Values for Working questionnaire as a viable management
tool. To date, over 2 5,000 blue-collar and clerical employ-
ees throughout the United States have been administered the
questionnaire and, in 1975, 1,707 U.S. managers participated
35
in a nationwide American Management Association study
utilizing the Values for Working questionnaire.
Graves' theory postulates physiological correlates of
the psychological changes in people and speculates that
people progress through levels of psychological existence
from birth. The theory contends that the psychology of the
mature human being or groups of mature human beings is an
unfolding process marked by the progressive subordination of
older lower-level value systems to newer, higher-level value
systems (23).
Mature persons tend to change their psychology as the
conditions of their existence change. Each successive value
system is a state of equilibrium through which people pass
to other states of equilibrium. In any value system,
individuals have a psychology which is particular and
peculiar to that value system. Acts, feelings, motivations,
ethics, preferences, and thoughts come about as behaviors
one must adopt in order to solve his problems at that level
of existence.
Because the Values for Working instrument used in this
study was developed from Graves* theory, a brief description
of each level of value systems is in order. The seven value
systems are shown in Figure 4 and defined below:
1. A Reactive value system is primarily restricted to
infants, people with serious brain deterioration, and people
with certain psychopathic conditions. They respond without
System 6 - Sociocentric Deny self to get acceptance now
System 4 - Conformist Deny self now for reward later
System 2 - Tribalistic Deny self now to authority and/or tradition
Figure 4. Value systems
36
System 7 - Existential Express self but not at expense of others
System 5 - Manipulative Express self calculat-ingly for self gain
System 3 - Egocentric Express self impulsively at any cost
System 1 - Reactive
thought to basic physiological needs for food, warmth,
sleep, and comfort.
2. A Tribalistic value system is based on classical
conditioning principles. People in this value system
37
believe their Tribalistic way is inherent in the nature of
things. Their form of existence is based on myth, tradi-
tions, spirits, magic, and superstition.
3. An Egocentric value system is indicative of indi-
viduals that have gained insight into their existence as an
individual being. People in this system are self-assertive
and believe that anything goes in an effort to dominate and
win.
4. A Conformist value system is marked by people who
have a low tolerance for ambiguity, have difficulty in
accepting people whose values differ from their own, and
have a need to get others to accept their values. Though
often perceived as docile, conformists will assert or
sacrifice themselves in violence if their values are
threatened. They prefer authoritarianism to autonomy, but
will respond to participation if it is prescribed by an
acceptable authority, and if it does not violate deep-seated
values.
5. Manipulative value system individuals value accom-
plishing and getting, having and possessing. They thrive on
gamesmanship, politics, competition, and entrepreneurial
effort, measure their success in terms of materialistic gain
and power, and are inclined to flaunt self-earned status
symbols. In this value system, people create wealth and the
techniques to gather that wealth.
38
6. Sociocentric value system individuals are concerned
with the relation of their individual selves to other
selves. They are concerned with belonging, with being
accepted, with not being rejected, with knowing the inner
side of self and other selves so that human harmony can
prevail. For the first time, subjectivity is dominant.
These people value the authority of those contempora-
ries whom they hold in high esteem. Their values are
Sociocentric because their peer group determines the means
by which their end value, community for each with his valued
others, is to be obtained. Getting along with is more
important than getting ahead.
7. An Existential values system is a reality-oriented
system. When people reach this value system, they have
crossed the bridge from animalism to humanism, from deficit
motivation to abundance motivation, from subsistence level
to a being level. These people have resolved the basic
human fears, and, with this resolution, a marked change
occurs in their conception of existence. Each is faced with
the restoration of his world so that life can continue to
be. Existential individuals have high tolerances for
ambiguity, and for people whose values differ from their
own.
People do not automatically move up to another level of
existence. They may not be genetically or constitutionally
equipped to change when the conditions of their existence
39
change. They may move through a hierarchically ordered
series of behavior or value systems to some end, or they may
stabilize and live out their lives at any time in any one or
a combination of value systems in the hierarchy.
Individuals may show the behavior or a value system in
an active or passive manner, or they may regress to a
behavior or value system lower in the hierarchy. Thus,
people live in a potentially open system of needs, preferen-
ces, and aspirations.
Values and Leadership
Values or value systems affect not only the effective-
ness of a leader but leader style as well. Tannebaum and
Schmidt (42) suggest that internal forces influence
leadership style; one of these being the leaders' value
system. Jennings (24) argues that future successful leaders
must develop the necessary values to become successful.
Katz (25) believes that developing better human relations
skills in managers can only be achieved through a better
understanding of values. Argyris (5) emphasizes that
differences in individuals;1 basic values are instrumental in
the ability to make decisions.
Hamilton and Biggart (17) propose that to ignore values
and their capacity to dir€»ct the conduct of leaders and
followers alike is to miss an essential component of leader-
ship. Tosi (4 3) contends that because values have a
40
systematic effect on behavior patterns, they are an integral
part of leadership and should be considered in research.
Bales and Isenberg (7) argue that in the selection and
training of individuals for leadership positions, it is
necessary to understand the values of the leader and of the
group to be led. Kohlberg (29) proposes that behavior
displayed by individuals is a product of their level of
values maturity. Locke (31) suggests that what a leader can
accomplish depends not only on his own actions but on the
values of his subordinates. Peters and Waterman (35)
express whether it is possible to be an excellent company
without clarity on values and having the right sort of
values.
Values and Research
One of the most widely-used measures of values in
leadership or managerial research is the Allport-Vernon (3)
study of values and the Gordon (14) survey of interpersonal
values. Gordon conducted several studies using The Survey
of Interpersonal Values and found positive correlations
between leadership value and leadership behavior (14).
England (11) concluded that a manager's personal value
system provides the rationale for the impact of values on
behavior.
Fleishman and Peters (13) showed positive correlations
between leader style and interpersonal values. Singer (45)
41
found higher scores on certain personal value measures were
indicative of being a successful manager or not. Howard
(22) suggests that the differences between American and
Japanese managerial values are why the Japanese are more
productive.
Numerous studies examining the relationship of values
and managerial action have been conducted by researchers in
the fields of sociology and psychology. Drake (10) reports
that the perceived usefulness of group decisions is posi-
tively related to the similarity of values between the
decision makers. Pennings (33), arguing that managerial
actions are likely to affect and be affected by members*
values, found promotion rates to be directly related to
values of subordinates. Additionally, Hesel (19) reports a
positive relationship between the values of teachers and
their pupil-control ideology.
Summary
The concept of leadership is a complex and multi-
dimensional phenomena. As such, leadership has been ana-
lyzed from many different viewpoints. Scholars and
researchers have added much to the body of knowledge
comprising leadership theory. Inherent in the research are
attempts to isolate and identify those things which consti-
tute successful leadership.
42
As a result, three major leadership approaches have
evolved. These are the trait, style of leadership based on
leader behavior, and the situatiorial/contingency approach.
These approaches have sought to link leadership to specific
characteristics or traits, skills, situations, behaviors,
and followers.
Based upon the review of the approaches to leadership
in this chapter, it is apparent that there have been far
more foci on the outcomes of leader behavior than on the
determinants of leader behavior. The focus of this research
project was on the idea that leader behavior is a dependent
variable and not an independent variable and is strongly
influenced by a leader's value system orientation.
Chapter III, Research Methodology and Data Presenta-
tion, presents the data, data analysis, and statistical
procedures. The hypotheses are tested and the results
shown.
CHAPTER REFERENCE LIST
1. Albert, Ethel M., and Clyde Kluckhohn. 1959. A selected bibliography on values, ethics, and esthetics in the behavioral sciences and philosophy 1920-1958. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.
2. Allport, Gordon W., and Philipe Vernon. 1931. A study of values. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
3. Allport, G. W., P. E. Vernon, and G. Lindzey. 1960. A study of values. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
4. Anderson, Harold H., and Helen M. Brewer. Studies of teachers' classroom personalities, 1, dominative and socially integrative behavior of kindergarten teachers. Applied Psychology Mono-graph . 6, Stanford: Stanford University.
5. Argyris, Chris. 1986. Interpersonal barriers to decision making. In People: Managing vour most important asset. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review, Harvard University.
6. Bales, R. F., E. F. Borgatta, and A. S. Couch. 1954. Some findings relevant to the great-man theory of leadership. American Sociological Review 19: 755-759.
7. Bales, Robert F., and Daniel J. Isenberg. 1982. Symlog and leadership theory. In Leadership beyond establishment views, ed. James G. Hunt, Uma Sekaran, and Chester A. Schriesheim. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
8. Blake, R. R., and J. S. Mouton. 1978. The new manage-rial grid. Houston: Gulf.
9. Bowers, D. G., and S. E. Seashore. 1966. Predicting organizational effectiveness with a four-factor theory of leadership. Administrative Science Quarterly 11: 238-263.
10. Drake, J. W. 1973. The backgrounds and value systems of transportation modeling project participants and their effects on project success. Transportation Research Forum Proceedings 1: 649-672.
43
44
11. England, G. W. 1967. Personal value system of Amer-ican managers. Academy of Management Journal 10: 53-68.
12. Fiedler, F. E. 1964. A contingency model of leader-ship effectiveness. In Advances in experimental social psychology', ed. L. Berkowitz. New York: Academic Press.
13. Fleishman, E. A., and David R. Peters. 1962. Inter-personal values, leadership attitudes, and mana-gerial success. Personnel Psychology 15: 127-143.
14. Gordon, L. V. 1976. Survey of interpersonal values: Revised manual. Chicago: Science Research Asso-ciates.
15. Graves, Clare W. 1970. Levels of existence: An open system theory of values. Journal of Humanistic Psychology 2 (Fall): 20-45.
16. Halpin, A. W. 1954. The leadership behavior and combat performance of airplane commanders. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 49: 19-22.
17. Hamilton. G. G., and N. W. Biggart. 1985. Why people obey: Theoretical observations on power and obedience in complex organizations. Sociological Perspectives 28: 3-28.
18. Hersey, P., and K. H. Blanchard. 1982. Management of organizational b€»havior: Utilizing human resour-ces. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
19. Hesel, R. 1971. Value orientation and pupil control ideology of public school educators. Educational Administration Quarterly 42: 24-33.
20. House, R. J. 1971. A path goal theory of leader effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly 16: 321-339.
21. House, R. J., and T. R. Mitchell. 1974. Path goal theory of leadership. Journal of Contemporary Business 3 (June): 97.
22. Howard, Ann. 1983. Motivation and values among Japanese and American managers. Personnel Psychol-ogy 36: 883-898..
45
23. Hughes, Charles L., and Vincent S. Flowers. 1978. Value systems analysis theory and management application. Dallas, Texas: Center for Values Research.
24. Jennings, E. E. 1972. An anatomy of leadership: Princes, heroes and supermen. New York: McGraw-Hill.
25. Katz, D., and R. L. Kahn. 1952. Some recent findings in human relations researcher. In Readings in social psychology, ed. E. Swanson, T. Newcomb, and E. Hartley. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Win-ston.
26. Katz, D., N. Maccoby, G. Gurin, and L. Floor. 1951. Productivity, supervision and morale among railroad workers. Ann Arbor,: Survey Research Center, University of Michigan.
27. Katz, D., N. Maccoby, and N. Morse. 1950. Productiv-ity. supervision, and morale in an office situa-tion. Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research.
28. Kluckhohn, Clyde. 1951. Values and value-orientations in the theory of action: An exploration in defini-tion and classification. In Toward a general theory of action, ed. Talcott Parsons and Edward Shils. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
29. Kohlberg, L. 1969. The cognitive-developmental approach to socialization. In Handbook of sociali-zation theory and research, ed. D. A. Goslin. Chicago: Rand McNally.
30. Lewin, K., R. Lippitt, and R. K. White. 1939. Pat-terns of aggressive behavior in experimentally created social climates. Journal of Social Psy-chology 10: 271-301.
31. Locke, Edwin A. 1970. The supervisor as "motivator": His influence on employee performance and satisfac-tion. In Managing for Accomplishment, ed. B. M. Bass, R. Cooper, and J. A. Haas. New York: D. C. Heath and Company.
32. Mann, R. D. 1959. A review of the relationships between personality and performance in small groups. Psychological Bulletin 56: 241-270.
V
46
33. Pennings, J. M. 1970. Work-value systems of white-collar workers. Administrative Science Quarterly 15: 397-405.
34. Pepper, Stephen C. 1958. The sources of value. Berkeley: University of California Press.
35. Peters, Thomas J., and Robert H. Waterman. 1982. In search of excellence. New York: Harper and Row.
36. Reddin, W. J. 1967. The 3-d management style theory. Training and Development Journal 4: 8-17.
37. Rokeach, Milton. 1973. The nature of human values. New York: The Free Press.
38. Rokeach, Milton. 1979. Understanding human values. New York: The Free Press.
39. Selvin. H. C. 1960. The effects of leadership. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.
40. Stodgill, R. M. 1948. Personal factors associated with leadership. Journal of Psychology 25 (Janu-ary) : 35-71.
41. Stodgill, R. M. 1974. Handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research. New York: The Free Press.
42. Tannenbaum, R., and W. H. Schmidt. 1958. How to choose a leadership pattern. Harvard Business Review 3: 95-101.
43. Tosi, Henry J. Jr. 1982. Toward a paradigm shift in the study of leadership. In Leadership bevond establishment views, ed. James G. Hunt, Uma Sekaran, and Chester A. Schriesheim. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
44. Williams. Robin M. Jr. 1951. American society: A sociological interpretation. New York: Knopf.
45. Yukl, Gary A. 1981. Leadership in organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND DATA PRESENTATION
Introduction
This study was undertaken to determine if the value
system orientation of an individual correlates with a recog-
nized style of leadership. Covariates employed in the study
were race, sex, seniority, time in position, and line/staff
function.
Research Methodology
Research objectives ctre typically grouped as follows:
(1) descriptions of characteristics or other phenomena of a
subject population, (2) determination of the proportion of a
population with these characteristics, (3) discovery of any
association among different variables, and (4) discovery and
measurement of cause-and-effeet relationships among the
variables (4). Studies relating to the first three objec-
tives are termed "descriptive,11 while studies using the
fourth objective are known as "experimental."
This study relates to the first three objectives and
represents non-experimental, descriptive research. As such,
descriptive and inferential statistics were used to describe
the data set. Based on the theoretical nature of the
hypothesis under consideration, leadership styles were
47
48
treated as dependent variables. All other variables were
treated as independent variables for the purpose of this
study. The coefficient of determination, R2, was a primary
indicator as to how well style of leadership related to a
value system orientation.
Description of the Population
The population involved in this study were employees of
five business organizations located in the Dallas-Fort Worth
metroplex. The actual number of participants in the study
was 92. All are exempt employees representing different
levels of management. The sample included males and
females. Demographic data such as race, years with the
company, years in present position, and designation as line
or staff were collected. Each participant completed two
research instruments: (1) Values for Working, and
(2) Leader Behavior Analysis II. These instruments are dis-
cussed in the following-section.
Description of the Research Instruments
The Leader Behavior Analysis II
The Leader Behavior Analysis II was developed by
Blanchard, Hambleton, Zigarmi, and Forsyth (1). It was
selected for use in this study because it identifies several
recognized styles of leadership, is situational in concept,
and is a self-administered instrument, as is the Values for
Working instrument.
49
The Leader Behavior Analysis II consists of twenty
brief descriptions of typical job situations that involve a
leader and one or more staff members. Each situation
contains four choices of actions that a leader may take.
The individual completing the instrument is asked to choose
which of the four decisions he or she would make in each
situation. Only one choice is made per situation. The
instrument is scored by summing the number of like-
responses, for example all the "0" responses, and this total
determines a dominant or primary style of leadership.
The validity of the instrument rests upon those cor-
relations between the "Leader Behavior Analysis II and the
Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire (LBDQ) which were
conducted by the Blanchard Training and Development Inc.
staff. The correlations are reported in the following
discussion. Style 1 (high task and low relationship) and
Style 2 (high task and high relationship) correlate with
LBDQ dimensions of initiating structure at the .001 level of
significance; Style 2 (high task and high relationship)
correlates with the LBDQ consideration or relationship
dimension at the .001 level of significance. The reliabil-
ity (Cronbach alpha) coefficients for the Leader Behavior
Analysis II ranged from .49 to .56.
50
The Values for Working
The Values for Working was developed by Hughes,
Flowers, and Myers and Myers based upon the research of
Clare Graves (6, 7, 9). The Values for Working was selected
because it is self-administered and identifies value dimen-
sions based upon work-related behavior.
The instrument consists of eight statements with each
statement having up to six possible responses. The person
completing the Values for Working is asked to indicate to
what extent he or she agrees with some or all of the six
responses by assigning a numerical value to them, for a
total of twelve points for each question. The more a person
agrees with a particular response, the more points he or she
should assign it.
In terms of validity of the instrument, no correlations
have been made between the Values for Working and any other
instrument. Additionally, no reliability coefficients exist
for the Values for Working; therefore, face validity was
accepted.
Procedures for Collecting the Data
Packets of data were distributed to the participants in
this study by a member of each firm's personnel department.
Each packet (see Appendix A) contained a cover letter
detailing the instructions, the Values for Working, and the
Leader Behavior Analysis II. All participants were provided
51
with an envelope in which to submit their completed ques-
tionnaires to an employee of the company's personnel depart-
ment or the participants could mail their responses directly
to the researcher, thereby ensuring the confidentiality of
participants' responses. The completed questionnaires
provided the data for this study.
Method of Data Analysis
The instruments used in this study were scored and the
resulting scores represent-independent and dependent vari-
ables. Multiple regression/correlation (MRC) was used
because of the number of independent variables and the
nature of the covariate or status variances and their
presumed causal priority.
MRC analysis was used because it calculates an analysis
of variance (ANOVA) among all the variables and the magni-
tude of the relationship of the independent variables to the
dependent variable, including the partial relationships.
MRC analysis detects the portions of explained variance in
the dependent variable that are unique to each independent
variable. MRC can also detect redundancy and suppression
among the independent variables as they interact with the
dependent variable (2).
This research selected hierarchical analysis as the
primary analytical strategy. In hierarchical analysis, k
independent variables are entered cumulatively in a
52
prespecified sequence. The R squared (R2? explained vari-
ance) is calculated as each independent variable is entered.
The choice of the particular sequence of independent
variables entered into the hierarchy is specified in advance
to meet the purposes and logic of the research. Criteria
considered in determining the sequence included causal
priority, the removal of confounding or spurious relation-
ships, research relevance, and structural properties of the
research factors (2).
In addition to R2, several statistical indices are
obtained from MRC analysis. The regression coefficients (B)
of each independent variable are useful for assessment
purposes. These reflect the amount of average change in the
dependent variable attributable to each of the independent
variables when the value of the other independent variables
is held constant.
Statistical significance for any independent variable
is determined by the F value. The F value is a function of
R2 and the degrees of freedom (2).
A t-test was used to determine the confidence interval
for a specific variable. Similar to the F-test, the t-test
includes the semipartial correlation coefficient (sr) as an
element applicable to the specific variables (2). Employing
Fisher's protected t-tests, confidence intervals for the F
statistic are checked and explicit t values for independent
variables are considered significant only if the overall F
53
meets a predetermined level of significance. The
conventional level for both F and t of .05 will be utilized
in this study (2).
Limitations
The limitations of this study are:
1. A strong reliability coefficient for the Reader
Behavior Analysis II is not available.
2. Reliability coefficients for the Values for Working
are not available.
3. Small sample size was due to individual firm
constraints.
Delimitations
1. This is not an experimentally-designed study.
2. Face validity was accepted for the Values for
Working instrument.
Composition of the Population
The composition of the population in this study was
determined with respect to sex, race, organizational func-
tion, years of service with the company, and years of
service in present position. These items represent the
status variables or the covariates in this study. The
frequencies and percentages of the covariates are illustra-
ted in Table 2.
54
Table 2.—Frequencies and Percentages of the Status Variables/Covariates
Variable Total Frequency Percent
Sex Male 61 66.0 Female 31 34.0
Race White 77 84.0 Other 15 16.0
Organizational Function 72.0 Line 66 72.0
Staff 26 28.0 Years with Company
>Five years 20 22.0 <Five years 71 78.0
Years in Position >Five years 9 10.0 <Five years 82 90.0
Total 92* 100.0
*N=92
Data Presentation
Data presentation and hypothesis testing were done by
employing hierarchical analysis using multiple regres-
sion/correlation analysis on the data. Initially, covariate
analysis is presented. This is followed by an analysis of
the relationship of leadership style to value systems.
Covariate Analysis
The covariates of sex, race, service with the company,
years in position, and organizational function were
regressed against each dependent variable of leadership
55
style. Table 3 summarizes the statistical indices of
importance in the analysis.
The most significant finding, shown in Table 3, was as
the independent variable "years" in present position entered
into the equation. It explained an additional 7 percent of
the variance in the S-2 style at the .05 significance level.
Because of this, the variable "years" in present position
was then regressed to S-2 style, but no significant rela-
tionship was discovered.
Analysis of Style to Value System
To determine the strength of the relationships between
leadership style and value systems, each value system was
regressed against each recognized style of leadership. The
results of these correlations are illustrated in Tables 4
through 6. As a result of these hierarchical MRCs, conclu-
sions can be drawn with respect to the hypotheses of this
study.
Hypothesis one stated: A manipulative value system as
identified by the Values for Working will be positively
related to an S-l leadership style as identified by the
Leader Behavior analysis II.
Based on the data presented in Table 4, Hypothesis one
is rejected. There is no significant relationship between a
manipulative value system as identified by the Values for
56
Table 3.—Regression Analysis of Covariates
R2 Significance Significance R2 Change of F' of t
S-l Style
Sex .00781 .00781 .3843 .3843 Race .01477 .00696 .4895 .4122 Seniority .01742 .00265 .6417 .6138 Years/Job .07825 .06083 . 1016 .0145 L/S* .09102 .01277 .1084 .2560
S-2 Style
Sex .00049 .00049 .8276 .8276 Race .00782 .00733 .6860 .4018 Seniority .03121 .02339 .3873 .1332 Years/Job .10199 .07078 .0369 .0077 L/S .10390 .00190 .0656 .6578
S-3 Style
Sex .00097 .00097 .7598 .7598 Race .00425 .00328 .8150 . 5750 Seniority .02086 .01661 .5697 .2074 Years/Job .02180 .00095 .7184 .7637 L/S .02589 .00408 .7798 .5340
S-4 Style
Sex .00452 .00452 .5086 .5086 Race .00504 .00052 .7846 .8225 Seniority .00665 .00161 .8878 .6956 Years/Job .04013 .03348 .4210 .0734 L/S .04014 .00001 .5681 .9718
fL/S = Line or Staff
Working and an S-l leadership style as identified by the
Leader Behavior Analysis II.
mi G -P 0 G •H (I) tfl -H o CO <Js CM CD cfl a CO CO o
3 CD -h CTi o «<*
rH JH rH rH rH in (0 O o o CO > a> CD * • • •
& o a\ CD a | 1 i > •H CD
0 (G c rH <d 3 0 rH r* CO CO •H «P| r- a\ CO o •H <W eg in <J\ o c •H <U in in 0\ r-(d C 0 • » « •
s •H < 03
c CD CD 0) O * G -P w fd CD cu O N in CO CO rH CQ rH •H in o CO r-
>i <W <4H CM rH VO in 01 -P •H O o O rH rH G CO G • • • *
0 CT» •H a •H -p -H CO fd x! rH W CD k U CD u v /it r* CO o 0 <0 Hs V0 o o a a) f* . r* CO CO o rH J « £ o o o o g (v f* o o o o o v •H c
X* O
* • • •
w m w VO <T\ CO r-a> s CM CO VO in cd n CTi CM CO tT>-P ttl <T» CM a) to cH CM rH rH OS >, • • • •
CO a) rH a •H •P a) s cd e CD S cd n -P g a) > CD > <D > CD > CD rH CD rH •H -P •H 4J •H 4J •<H +J 0 TJ X3 •P CO CO •P cn -P CO S c <d <d >i fd >i fd >i fd >i
cd -h rH CO rH CO rH CO rH CO rH a SH a 2 a fd cd (d a a) a cd a cd a cd 0 <3 > •H 0 •H a •H 3 •H D •H G G rH G rH G rH C rH x: H rd fd fd fd fd fd fd <d 0 S > s > £ > £ > fd JH a) <w MH MH <w
0 0 0 0 1 a a a a 1 •P a) *H 0) *H Q) *<H <D *H • c a) rH X5 rH XS rH x: rH x; CD rH >i cn >1 Cfl >1 to >1 03 cd
TS XI -P U •P JH -P u +j )H cd G fd CO <D CO CD CO CD CO CD rH CD -H T3 T3 T5 T5 XI CU rH f0 CM fd co (0 ^ fd fd CD fd i a) 1 CD 1 CD I CD E-» Q > CO ^ CO *1 CO J CO 1-3
57
58
Hypothesis two stated: A manipulative value system as
identified by the Values for Working will be positively
related to an S-2 leadership style as identified by the
Leader Behavior analysis II.
Based on the data presented in Table 4, Hypothesis two
is rejected. There is no significant relationship between a
manipulative value system as identified by the Values for
Working and an S-2 leadership style as identified by the
Leader Behavior Analysis II.
Hypothesis three stated: A manipulative value system
as identified by the Values for Working will be positively
related to an S-3 leadership style as identified by the
Leader Behavior analysis II.
Based on the data presented in Table 4, Hypothesis
three is rejected. There is no significant relationship
between a manipulative value system as identified by the
Values for Working and an S-3 leadership style as identified
by the Leader Behavior Analysis II.
Hypothesis four stated: A manipulative value system as
identified by the Values for Working will be positively
related to an S-4 leadership style as identified by the
Leader Behavior analysis II.
Based on the data presented in Table 4, Hypothesis four
is rejected. There is no significant relationship between a
manipulative value system as identified by the Values for
59
Working and an S-4 leadership style as identified by the
Leader Behavior Analysis II.
Hypothesis five stated: A sociocentric value system as
identified by the Values for Working will be positively
related to an S-l leadership style as identified by the
Leader Behavior Analysis II.
Based on the data presented in Table 5, Hypothesis five
is rejected. There is no significant relationship between a
sociocentric value system as identified by the Values for
Working and an S-l leadership style as identified by the
Leader Behavior Analysis II.
Hypothesis six stated: A sociocentric value system as
identified by the Values for Working will be positively
related to an S-2 leadership style as identified by the
Leader Behavior Analysis II.
Based on the data presented in Table 5, Hypothesis six
is rejected. There is no significant relationship between a
sociocentric value system as identified by the Values for
Working and an S-2 leadership style as identified by the
Leader Behavior Analysis II.
Hypothesis seven stated: A sociocentric value system
as identified by the Values for Working will be positively
related to an S-3 leadership style as identified by the
Leader Behavior Analysis II.
Based on the data presented in Table 5, Hypothesis
seven is rejected. There is no significant relationship
cm
C -P o e •H 0) tfl *H
0) tn O rH vO CO CO 3 a) -H vO in o o r-1 U M-4 co CO co CO *3 oa H rH co > a> a) o o o o
PES 0 • • • •
0 u I l i •H
a) -P 0 C c 0) <0 as 0 0 Os VO CM as 0 •H -PI CN on CO vo •H <W O <n 0 •H *W r- in r- H 0 C 0 * • • •
CO tp •H
«« CO
C CD <u 0) 0 s c 4-> W fd
in CD 0) O OJ rH in PQ rH -H CL,| r* vO CM CN
>i <JH H O H rH m 4-> •H <W O o rH rH c co C O * • • •
0 tr» •H 04 •H -H CO
o3 x: iH W <u $4 u a) k TJ a OJ rH O CN 0 (0 O* on in o VO o Q> ri C H CM H O J OH! fd O o O CN
c xs o o O O 0 TJ a • • • *
•H C 01 fd CO KO on co 0) 6 in CO CN U 0) R< in as CO en tT*-P 0S1 CPi cH 0) CO
0S1 H oa H rH
>i • • • •
CO a) rH O M4 +J 0 6 o g 0 g 0 s -P c a) •H <D *H 0) *H a) •H a) rH <D rH M «P SH 4-> JH -P *4 4-> 3 t3 XI •P tn -P tn +j tn ,p tn £ c fd C >i C >i C >1 c >»
a) -H CD CO CD CO <D CO CD CO rH a u O 0 0 0
o) (d O 0) O CD O CD O Q> O T3 > •H 3 •H 0 •H 0 •H D •H C 0 rH 0 rH O rH O rH X5 H o fd o fd 0 fd o fd 0 CO > CO > CO > CO > JH (0 u Q> *H <4H 4H <M <4H ffi 0 0 0 0
a a a a 1 •P a) -H CD *H a) -H 0) -H « c a) rH x: rH x: rH XI rH XI to <D rH >i cn >1 tn >1 tn >i tn
T5 12 -P JH •P JH -p u «p a) c <d CO <1) co a) CO CD co a) rH CD -H T5 T3 *0 X3 a sh rH fd CN fd ro fd fd (0 a) to 1 <u i a) i a) 1 CD
Q > CO J CO J CO J CO k-3
60
61
between a sociocentric value system as identified by the
Values for Working and an S-3 leadership style as identified
by the Leader Behavior Analysis II.
Hypothesis eight stated: A sociocentric value system
as identified by the Values for Working will be positively
related to an S-4 leadership style as identified by the
Leader Behavior Analysis II.
Based on the data presented in Table 5, Hypothesis
eight is rejected. There is no significant relationship
between a sociocentric value system as identified by the
Values for Working and an S-4 leadership style as identified
by the Leader Behavior Analysis II.
Hypothesis nine stated: An existential value system as
identified by the Values for Working will be positively
related to an S-l leadership style as identified by the
Leader Behavior Analysis II.
Based on the data presented in Table 6, Hypothesis nine
is rejected. There is no significant relationship between a
existential value system as identified by the Values for
Working and an S-l leadership style as identified by the
Leader Behavior Analysis II. While the significance of t is
.0398, note that employing Fisher's protected t-test yields
an overall F of .7283, which does not meet the .05 level of
significance.
Hypothesis ten stated: An existential value system as
identified by the Values for Working will be positively
CD 3
rH <d >
(0 •H -P c <u -P CO •H X w
c <
c 0) 0) »
a) CQ 0} c o •H -p (0
rH a>
o a
c o
•H w w a) cn a) pes • CD
rH a •H -P rH 3 s m a •H x: 0 u <d }H a)
•H i i
VO g
a) a) rH -P X3 W 03 >i fH W
CO a)
rH >1 •P cn a •H X! w u cd •o <G a
TJ C <d
ffll C 4J o c •H CD tn -h w o CD -H tT»<*H 0) 0) « o
u
a) o c (d o •H «P| <4H •H <W c o u>
•H cn
a) o c fd o •H M <JH •H <W C O tP •H cn
a) CP
a
oil
-p C <D O rH •d sx c <o CD -H a 5h <d fd Tf > c
62
CO to VJD
CO co O
VO CO cm o
r-rH rH O
00 in VD CM O
O r-CO
o
rH
in
CO r* CM
co o 00 VO CO in Kl* 0% CM r- o r-r* CM CO ON
• • *
cm r-4 <3* rH rH V0 rH o rH o r- o O rH o o o O o o • • • •
CO O 00 co rH v£> o CO o o CO in CN CN rH rH
* • « *
e s s e rH <D rH <D rH <D rH CD «d -P *d -P fd -P fd -P
•H 01 •H (fl •H 03 *H U] •p >1 -P >i -P >i -P >n c,cn c cn C CO c cn a> 0) 0) CD -p a) •P aj -P CD a) w 0 Cfl 3 CO 3 cn 3
*H rH •H rH •H rH •H rH X fd X (0 X (0 w > w > W > w >
MH <4H <4H t+H 0 0 0 0
a a a a -p d) «rH CD -H CD *rl CD "H C CD rH & rH X3 rH x: rH XI CD rH >1 W >I U3 >1 w >» Cfl *0 XI 4J 3H -p ^ 4-J ?H C fd cn a> cn a) cn cd cn cd CD *H 13 TS T3 13 a k rH fd CM (d co cd ^ fd CD fd 1 0) 1 CD 1 <D 1 CD Q > cn J cn J cn *-3 cn 4
63
related to an S-2 leadership style as identified by the
Leader Behavior Analysis II.
Based on the data presented in Table 6, Hypothesis ten
is rejected. There is no significant relationship between a
existential value system as identified by the Values for
Working and an S-2 leadership style as identified by the
Leader Behavior Analysis II. While the significance of t is
.0117, note that employing Fisher's protected t-test yields
an overall F of .2753, which does not meet the .05 level of
significance.
Hypothesis eleven stated: An existential value system
as identified by the Values for Working will be positively
related to an S-3 leadership style as identified by the
Leader Behavior Analysis II.
Based on the data presented in Table 6, Hypothesis
eleven is rejected. There is no significant relationship
between a existential value system as identified by the
Values for Working and an S-3 leadership style as identified
by the Leader Behavior Analysis II.
Hypothesis twelve stated: An existential value system
as identified by the Values for Working will be positively
related to an S-4 leadership style as identified by the
Leader Behavior Analysis II.
Based on the data presented in Table 6, Hypothesis
twelve is rejected. There is no significant relationship
between a existential value system as identified by the
64
Values for Working and an S-4 leadership style as identified
by the Leader Behavior Analysis II.
Other Findings
The stated hypotheses for this study evaluated the
relationship between leadership style as described by the
Leader Behavior Analysis II and value systems as described
by the Values for Working instrument. Analysis of the data
revealed no significant relationships in that there was no
•explained variance in leadership style using the variables
involved.
As the findings were quite unexpected, an analysis of
instrument reliability was undertaken. Since reliability
coefficients are not available for the Values for Working
questionnaire, its reliability was analyzed.
The reliability of the value constructs in the ques-
tionnaire was measured using Cronbach's alpha (3). This
internal consistency method established correlation between
responses for all items relating to a specific factor within
the questionnaire. Nunnally (10) advocated a minimum-
reliability of .60 for a research instrument.
The reliability analysis revealed that the Values for
Working questionnaire was unreliable as the criterion of .60
was not met on the value constructs. Additionally, relia-
bility analysis of the Leader Behavior Analysis II revealed
65
that it, too, was not a reliable instrument at the .60
level.
Based upon the results of the reliability analysis,
factor analysis was performed on the instrument statements.
Factor analysis is a technique for analyzing the internal
structure of a set of variables (8). Utilization of the
SPSS/PC+ factor feature determined the number of factors
underlying the variables.
This procedure involved several steps. First, the
correlation matrix of all variables was computed and vari-
ables not related were identified from the matrix. The
second step of factor extraction determined the number of
factors to represent the data. Those factors that accounted
for variances greater than one (the Eigen value is greater
than one) were extracted. The third step involved the
transformation of the factors to make them more inter-
pretable. This was achieved by orthogonal rotation which
minimized the number of variables that had high loadings on
a factor.
After the factors were rotated, they were interpreted.
This was done by determining the salient loadings. "Sali-
ent" refers to high loadings. While the absolute value of
.30 as the minimum loading for interpretation was advocated
(5), Nunnally (10) suggested minimum loadings of .40.
Minimum loadings of .40 were used in this analysis.
66
The Values for Working questionnaire yielded seventeen
factors of which eight satisfied the reliability criterion
of .60. The Leader Behavior Analysis II yielded only one
factor, consisting of seven questions, which met the relia-
bility criterion of .60.
MRC analysis was used on the factors obtained from
factor analysis. Specifically, hierarchical analysis was
the primary analytical tool. The independent status vari-
ables and those obtained from the factor analysis were then
regressed against the dependent variable style. The order
of entry of the independent variables was such that all
combinations were analyzed.
The results yielded no new insights. No common vari-
ance was found. Rather, leadership style appears to be a
function of something other than a value orientation.
Summary of Findings
The purpose of this study was to determine the rela-
tionship between leadership style and value system orienta-
tions. No such statistically significant correlation was
found. All hypotheses were rejected due to lack of statis-
tical proof of correlation. /
Secondary results indicated that the lack of findings
or correlation was due, in part, to the unreliability of the
instruments used in this study. Further, as there was no
explained variance in leadership style using the variables
67
involved, leadership style appears to be a function of
something other than a value orientation.
CHAPTER REFERENCE LIST
1. Blanchard, K. H., and others. 1981. Leader Behavior analysis. Escondido, California: Blanchard Training and Development, Inc.
2. Cohen, J., and P. Cohen. 1983. Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
3. Cronbach, Lee J. 1951. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psvchometrika 16: 297-334.
4. Emory, C. William. 1985. Business research methods. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin.
5. Gorsuch, Richard L. 1983. Factor analysis. Hills-dale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
6. Graves, Clare W. 1970. Levels of existence: An open system theory of values. Journal of Humanistic Psychology 2 (Fall): 20-45.
7. Hughes, Charles L., and Vincent S. Flowers. 1978. Value systems analysis theory and management application. Dallas, Texas: Center for Values Research.
8. Jackson, Barbara. 1983. Multivariate data analysis: An introduction. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin.
9. Myers, Scott M., and Susan S. Myers. 1973. Adapting to the new work ethic. The Business Quarterly (Winter): 70-84.
10. Nunnally, Jum C. 1978. Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
68
CHAPTER IV
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Conclusions
The results of this study provide no support for the
twelve hypotheses tested. In addition, after factor-analyz-
ing the research instruments, the general hypothesis that
values positively relate to a leadership style cannot be
supported.
While the expected results concerning the relationship
between value systems and leadership styles were disappoint-
ing, the results confirmed the unreliability of the measure-
ment instruments but not the belief that a relationship
exists. Unreliable instruments make it difficult to draw
conclusions from a study because the variance among vari-
ables becomes too large (16). If an instrument is unreli-
able, then the instrument is invalid. Rather, the instru-
ment cannot really measure the characteristic in question.
Measurement is a process of taking an observable
response—from a self-administered questionnaire—and
determining the relationship to an unobservable concept. In
other words, linking abstract concepts to empirical
indicators (5). The results of this study were in large
part due to the unreliable and invalid nature of the instru-
69
7 0
merits which prevented the indicators from representing the
abstract concept "value system."
Additionally, it is believed that instrument reactivity
played a role in determining the results of this study (16).
That is, it may affect someone's values to fill out a value
questionnaire, and it may alter leader behavior if an
individual knows behavior is being observed. To that end,
Haley (13) found that managers have a tendency to choose
relationship-oriented styles when using the Leader Behavior
Analysis II instrument. Evans (10) suggests that human-
relations training in organizations is biased toward the
relationship-oriented leader. Further, managers may be
biased toward the more socially-acceptable responses. That
is, they choose responses that are generally associated with
the way people are supposed to act rather than the way they
really act (13). Also, the Leader Behavior Analysis II has
situational construction that leads to biases toward certain
leadership styles (12).
The results of this study underscore that the hypothe-
ses were rejected due to unreliable measurement instruments.
This is not to say that values do not influence an individ-
ual's style of behavior. Current research indicates mixed
results in the relationship between personality factors and
leadership style (1, 6, 13, 15). For example, Clifford and
Cohn (6) report results indicating leadership style was, at
least in part, a function of personality variables. Haley
71
(13), however, reports no relationship between personality
variables and leadership style.
The idea that values influence leader behavior is very
much a current topic of interest. Allcorn (2) formulated a
model of leader values which determines leadership style.
Axiology, the study of values, is being touted as a uniquely
precise social science and a useful management tool (4).
Rather, since behavior is determined by values, the ability
to measure a leader's values will help to select and develop
better managers. Ernest (8) contends that values shape not
only management style but employees' day-to-day behaviors.
Quick (14) has called for a new direction in leadership in
which existential management, based on the Hughes and
Flowers model, is practiced in corporate America.
In the past, research tended to focus on the relation-
ship between values and managerial effectiveness as well as
on the relationship between values and managerial success
(3, 7, 9, 11, 17). These studies emphasize the interper-
sonal nature of managerial values but not how values deter-
mine a leader's behavior, hence a leadership style. This
study sought to establish the fact that leadership style is
not an implementation concept but a value concept held by
the individual whereby values determine style as continually
stated in the literature.
72
Recommendations
The lack of specific empirical research in the area of
leadership style and individual value orientation, and the
fact that no significant relationships were found in this
study warrant further investigation of the possible rela-
tionship between these two constructs. There are several
recommendations which are appropriate as a result of the
findings of this study.
1. The Values for Working instrument has been widely
used as a management tool for over twenty years. It has
been used in the selection, placement, and development of
employees by hundreds of companies and, as such, has a high
degree of face validity. However, the Values for Working
instrument should be validated prior to its use in any
serious research project.
2. A Values for Working-Other instrument should be
developed whereby an individual's value orientation is
assessed by others. In conjunction with the Leader Behavior
Analvsis-Other. a study should be designed to determine the
relationship between leader behavior and values as others
perceive it.
3. A study should be designed using a Values for
Working-Other instrument and the Merrill (14) Social Stvle
of Behavior Profile to determine the relationship between an
individual's values and behavior.
73
4. A study should be designed to determine the rela-
tionships between the Values for Working instrument and
other self-report "values" measures. Specifically, the
Allport-Vernon-Lindzey (3) study of Values, the Survey of
Personal Values, and The Work Environment Preference Sche-
dule.
5. This study should be replicated using a stratified
random sample to include an equal distribution of each of
the four leadership styles and each of the value-system
orientations.
CHAPTER REFERENCE LIST
1. Abdel-Halim, A. A. 1981. Personality and task modera-tors of subordinate responses to perceived leader behavior. Human Relations 23: 73-88.
2. Allcorn, Seth. 1988. Leadership styles: The psycho-logical picture. Personnel 65: 46-54.
3. Allport, G. W., P. E. Vernon, and G. Lindzey. 1960. A study of values. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
4. Burns, Scott. 1989. Simple personality test a useful management tool. The Dallas Morning News. 30 May, 1.
5. Carmines, Edward G., and Richard A. Zeller. 1985. Reliability and validity assessment. Sage Univer-sity Paper Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences. Series 07-017. Beverly Hills and London: Sage Publications.
6. Clifford, C., and T. S. Cohn. 1964. The relationship between leadership and personality attributes perceived by followers. Journal of Social Psycho-logy 64: 64-67.
7. England G". W. 1967. Personal value system of American managers. Academy of Management Journal 10: 53-68.
8. Ernest, Robert C. 1985. Corporate cultures and effective planning. Personnel Administrator 30: 49-60.
9. Ewing, D. W. 1964. The managerial mind. New York: Free Press.
10. Evans, M. G. 1970. The effects of supervisory beha-vior on the path goal relationship. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 5: 277-298.
11. Gordon, L. V. 1976. Survey of interpersonal values: Revised manual. Chicago: Science Research Asso-ciates .
75
12. Graef, C. L. 1983. The situational leadership theory: A critical review. Academy of Management Review 8: 285-291.
13. Haley, M. J. 1983. Relationship between internal-external locus of control beliefs, self-monitoring and leadership style adaptability. University Microfilms International. Ann Arbor, Michigan.
14. Merrill, David W., and Roger Reid. 1981. Personal styles and efective performance. Radnor, Pennsyl-vania: Chilton Book Company.
15. Quick, Thomas L. 1976. Understanding people at work. New York: Executive Enterprises Publications.
16. Runyon, R. E. 1973. Some interactions between person-ality variables and management style. Journal of Applied Psychology 57: 288-294.
17. Spector, Paul E. 1986. Research designs. Sage University Paper Series on Quantitative Applica-tions in the Social Sciences. Series 07-023. Beverly Hills and London: Sage Publications.
18. Yukl, Gary A. 1981. Leadership in organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
APPENDIX A
INSTRUCTION PACKET FOR PARTICIPANTS
76
77
Appendix A
Instruction Packet for Participants
Dear Participant: Many thanks to you and your company for your time and effort in helping in this small research project. There are absolutely no right or wrong answers to the two question-naires, and your total time to complete both should be about 30-45 minutes. Do not put your name on any of the material. Each questionnaire and this page of instructions are num-bered simply to allow us to associate the answers to one individual. We are not interested in identifying your par-ticular response, but a summary of similar jobs, age, etc.
Instructions: Two questionnaires are enclosed. Values for Working and Lead(self). Values for Working; This questionnaire contains eight (8) statements about work. Each statement can be completed by six phrases. Your task is to distribute 12 points among the six possible phrases for each of the 8 questions based on how much you agree with the statement as completed. You MUST DISTRIBUTE 12 POINTS AMONG EACH OF THE SIX PHRASES FOR EIGHT OF THE EIGHT STATEMENTS. You may give one phrase all 12 points, allocate 2 points to each of the six, or any combination of points as long as 12 points are distributed.
Lead(self): This questionnaire contains 20 situations similar to the situations faced by the typical supervisor or manager. Your task is to select ONE answer from the four choices for each of the 20 situations that represents how you would probably react to that situation.
Please call your company's coordinator if you have any questions.
DEMOGRAPHIC DATA: Please complete this section. Only summarized results will be-used. No data will be reported for small departments where there might be the risk of identifying an individual's response because of race, sex, or other demographic categories. PLEASE ANSWER THE FOLLOW-ING ITEMS COMPLETELY.
RACE: Caucasian American Indian Oriental Black Hispanic
YEARS OF SERVICE WITH PRESENT ORGANIZATION YEARS IN PRESENT JOB LINE STAFF SEX: Male Female Please return forms to your company's coordinator in the envelope provided. Thanks for your help. Rod Hilpirt, Dept. of Management, UNT.
APPENDIX B
LEADER BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS II (SELF)
78
LBA Leader Behavior
Analysis Developed by Kenneth H. Blanchard, Ronald K. Hambleton, Drea Zigarmi and Douglas Forsyth
79
Self Perceptions of Leadership Style
Directions: The purpose of the LBA-Self is to provide you with information about your perceptions of your own leadership style. The instrument consists of twenty typical job situations that involve a leader and one or more staff metnbers. Following each situation are four possible actions that a leader may take. Assume that you are the leader involved in each of the twenty situations. In each of the situations you must choose one of the four leader decisions. CIRCLE the letter of the decision which you think would most closely describe YOUR behavior in the situation presented. Circle only one choice.
bid Blanchard Training and Development, Inc.
A Human Resource Development Company
2048 Aldergrove Ave., Suite B, Escondido, CA 92025 (619) 489-J005
® 1981 by Blanchard Training and Development, Inc.
6th Printing
(Form A)
LEADER BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS-SELF
80
You hava asked one of your subordinates to write a report concerning the acquisition of some new equipment for your division. He usually can be given an assignment and it is completed on time with encouragement from you. The report is now overdue.
YOU WOULD . . .
b.
Tell him you want the report, explain what you want in the report, and check on his perform-ance daily. Give him more time to complete the assign-ment.
c.
d.
Tell him what you expect, when you want the report completed, but discuss with him why the report is late. Talk to him and encourage him to complete the report.
Tin tnterdepartmeitt task fore* which you manage has been working hard to complete its division-wide report. One of your task fore* members has been lata for the list five meetings. He has offered no excuses or apologies. Furthermore, he is way behind in com-pleting the cost figures on his department. It is imperative that he present these figures to the task force within the next three days.
YOU WOULD . . .
a. Tell him exactly what you expect and closely supervise his work on this report.
b. Discuss with him why he has been late, and support his efforts to complete the task.
c.
d.
Emphasize when the cost figures are due and support his efforts. Assume he will be prepared to present the cost figures to the task force.
3. In t in past, you have tad a gnat deal of trouble with one of the people you supervise. She has been lackadaisical, and only your constant prodding has brought about task completion. However, you recently have noticed a change. Her performance has improved and you have had to remind her of meeting deadlines less and less. She has even initiated several suggestions for improving her performance. YOU
WOULD... a. Continue to direct and closely supervise her c- Incorporate her suggestions and support her
efforts. b. Continue to supervise her work, but listen to her
suggestions and incorporate those that seem reasonable.
ideas. d. Let her take responsibility for her own work.
4. Your group usually functions effectively with encouragement and direction from you. In the last few weeks, their performance has dropped drastically. They are not mooting deadlines and the quality of their work is unacceptable. YOU WOULD . . .
a. Let the group work out their problems by them- c selves.
b. Make sure that deadlines are met and the quali-ty of the work is good, but talk with the group to d
get its recommendations.
Inform the group of exactly what you expect, when it is needed, and supervise their work closely. Help the group determine what they need to do and encourage them to take the necessary steps.
of budget restrictions imposed.on your department, It is necessary to consolidate. You have asked a highly experienced member of your departmenttotaln charge of the consolidation. This person has worked in all areas of your department. In the past, she has usually been eager to help. White you feel she has the ability to perform this assignment, she seems indifferent to the Importance of the task. YOU
WOULD . . .
a. Take charge of the consolidation but make sure you hear her suggestions.
b. Assign the project to her and let her determine how to accomplish it.
c. Discuss the situation with her. Encourage her to accept the assignment in light of her skills and experience.
d. Take charge of the consolidation and indicate to her precisely what to do. Supervise her work closely
6. A highly productive and efficient woman on your staff has asked for ybur help on a task. She is accustomed to working effectively on her own. Recently, some work problems have developed that she feels she can't solve by herself. YOU WOULD
a. Analyze the problems and outline methods to solve them.
b. Continue to allow her to figure out an ap-propriate solution independently.
c. Determine and implement an appropriate solu-tion, but work with her in problem-solving.
d. Discuss the problems with her and support her efforts to find appropriate solutions.
: Cooynght 1981 — Slanchard Training & Development. Inc
You have asked one of your senior employees to take on a new job. In his other responsibilities, he has performed adequately with moderate supervision and support from you. The job you have asked him to do is important to the future of your work group. He is insecure and doubts he can handle the new job. YOU WOULD . . .
a. Discussthejobwith him, supporting hisability to c. Let him determine how to do the job. doit. d. Specify what he is to do, but solicit any ideas he
b. Define the activities necessary to successfully m a y have. complete the job and supervise his work closely.
One of your staff is feeling insecure about a job you have assigned to him. He is highly competent and you know that he has the skills to complete the assignment successfully and efficiently. YOU WOULD . . .
a. Listen to his concerns and let him know you have confidence in his ability to complete the assignment.
b. Structure the assignment so that it is clear, but consider any helpful suggestions he may have.
c. Tell him exactly what to do to get the job done and check his work daily.
d. Let him figure out how to do the assignment on his own.
Your staff has asked you to consider a change in their work schedule. In the past, you have encouraged and supported their sugges* tions. In this case, your staff is well aware of the need for change and is ready to suggest and try an alternate schedule. Members are very competent and work well together as a group. YOU WOULD . . .
Allow the staff to formulate and implement the a. Allow staff involvement in developing the new schedule and support the suggestions of group members.
b. Design and implement the new schedule yourself, but incorporate staff recommenda-tions.
c.
d.
new schedule on its own. Design the new schedule yourself and closely direct its implementation.
D. You have arrived ten minutes late for a meeting with your staff. Based on their past performance, you expected a great deal of socializ-ing to be going on. You were surprised, however, to find the group enthusiastically discussing the assigned task. This task is very dif-ferent from other tasks the group has worked on. YOU WOULD . . .
a.
b.
Let the group work on the task without any direction from you. Take control immediately and direct the group.
c. Direct their interactions toward task comple-tion, but encourage group discussion.
d. Let the group continue to discuss the assigned task and provide as much support as possible.
1. A member of your department has had a fine record of accomplishment with your support and encouragement but little direction. He has been given similar tasks to accomplish for the coming year and you must decide how to supervise him. YOU WOULD . . .
a. Let him function by himself providing his own support and direction.
b Emphasize to him the importance of meeting deadlines and direct his efforts at accomplish-ing assigned tasks.
c. Talk with him and set goals and objectives for his task accomplishment, but consider his sug-gestions.
d. Involve him in setting goals and support his efforts.
2. In the past, you worked closely with your staff directing and supporting their efforts. Productivity is high and people get along well together. Recognizing their abilities, you feel they can now work more on their own. You have redirected your energies to new areas and they have continued to produce good results. You must now ask them to accept additional work. YOU WOULO . . .
c. Make sure they know what you want them to do, but incorporate any helpful suggestions they may have.
a.
b.
Assign the work to them, make sure they know exactly what to do, and supervise them closely. Give them the job. Tell them that you are pleased with their past performance and that you are sure they will do well with this assign-ment.
d. Let them determine assignment.
how to complete the
3. You have recently been assigned a new employee who will perform an important job in your office. Even though he is inexperienced and lacks confidence in this area, you feel he has the potential to do the job. YOU WOULD . . . a. Let him determine what to do. c. Let him know what you want him to do, but see if
b. Tell him exactly what the job entails, what you expect of him and supervise him closely.
he has any recommendations.
Encourage him to do the job and support his efforts.
14 Your boss has asked that your division increase its productivity 10%. You know this can be done, but it will require your active involve-ment To free yourself to do this, you must reassign the task of developing a new cost control system to one of your divisional employees. The person to whom you are thinking of assigning the task has had considerable experience with cost control systems, but she is a little un-sure about doing this task on her own. YOU WOULD . . .
b.
Ask her to take on the project. Encourage and support her efforts. Discuss the project with her. Explain how you want the job done, but see if she has any ideas.
c. Assign her the project and let her determine how to do it.
d. Assign her the project and prepare a detailed memo explaining ail the steps necessary to get the project done.
15 One of your subordinates has made a suggestion for change in the operations of the unit that makes sense to you. In the past, she has been able to offer and implement other helpful suggestions in a productive manner with your support and encouragement. You have confidence in her abilities. YOU WOULD . . .
a. Take charge of the suggestion and direct her in its implementation. .
b. Discuss the suggestion with her, and support her efforts to direct its implementation.
c. Organize the implementation, but include her ideas.
d. Give her the responsibility for implementing the suggestion without involvement from you.
16. Due to illness in your family, you have been forced to miss the first two meetings of a committee under your direction. You have found, upon attending the third meeting, that the committee is functioning well and making good progress toward completion of its goals. You are unsure about how you fit into the group and what your role should be. YOU WOULD .
a.
b.
Attend, but let the group continue to work as it has during the first two meetings. Assume the leadership of the committee and begin to direct its activities.
c. Do what you can to make the committee feel important and involved, and support their past efforts.
d. Direct the activities of the group, but incor-porate group members' suggestions.
17. Your staff is very competent and able to work well on their own. You have generally left them alone and delegated key responsibilities to individual members. Their performance has been outstanding. YOU WOULD .
a. Provide continual support and encouragement to group members.
b. Direct and closely supervise the activities of your staff.
c. Continue to let the group work on its own.
d. Direct their efforts, but work closely with your staff to solicit their suggestions.
18. You and your superiors havo decided that a new procedure has to be installed in your department if long-term gains in performance are to be obtained. In the past, when new procedures were installed, your group has been eager to use them but has initially lacked the skills to do so. YOU WOULD . . .
a. Closely direct the group in the use of the new procedure.
b. Make sure that you direct the implementation of the new procedure, but involve the group in discussion.
Get the group involved in a discussion of the procedure and encourage their cooperation and involvement. Allow the group to implement the new pro-cedure on its own.
19. You have been recently appointed thahead of a division. Under the division's former boss, the staff has functioned adequately with considerable supervision and support. Since you have taken over, however, the staff appears to be more concerned with sociaf activities than with carrying out their responsibilities. The staff's performance to date has been poor. YOU WOULD . . .
staff members to define their own a.
b.
Discuss the low performance with the staff and support their efforts to specify corrective measures. Define roles and responsibilities and supervise their work closely.
c. Allow responsibilities and tasks
d. Direct and organize the necessary corrective action, but make sure staff members' sugges-tions are heard.
20. One of your employees is eager to take on a new assignment. She has had little experience in the area in which she wants to work. She has done a good job with other tasks you have given her. YOU WOULD . .
Explain to her what she must do, but support her enthusiasm for the new assignment. Give her the assignment and let her determine the best way to do it.
Encourage her to try the job and support her efforts. Tell her exactly what must be done to suc-cessfully complete the assignment and closely supervise her.
C Copyright 1981 — Bianchard Training & Development, Inc. Reproduction of this document is prohibited without written authorization from Blanchard Training and Development. Inc.
APPENDIX C
VALUES FOR WORKING
83
a J B O O * -
o
O 0 ) ( 8 T 3 84
2 o
i i I s
1 < WJ e 13
!l U s* «• s «S i s
ill 5^3 i°l
* *0 s ! 3 | O "g Ui -a A -Ui 2 O S I H E i
*fi it
2i j r
it 1 M
i a ' o o
e J n OS
2 2
2 _ > « a
Ui c ; z 5
O = • 2 .
«
£ ® § 6 "8 "8* «E — -o n § e» •
© -o SS 1 = • a OS
o •a
c g • § . E E « o
> ! i 1 ^ r 2 S r
| s — JC !? 6
S £ £ 0
J*S S U
« m
l i (8 M
> X3 aL 3 C -a > ? l i (8 M
s*i 9 » E E & 8
s s £ «
i f ,
i s
8 ? 2 c
i l l •1 •» 01 $ S c o f i > £|
I s l •
s N S • •> — s i o •
a c ^ £ •
E e
3 3
1 . § £ ? § E g
li 3-0 S * E = • &
« E s 3
< a. 2 8 < UL O <r a LU X H
•©
s •* <# «* a»8 c 8
8 o o s ^ 3 3 E
• c
a O > Ui
ii
» ?! — o 2 E
o o
0) > (fl JC >»
1 w 15 o JZ * 9 a
It I 2 >* ~ 9
if A»E
> o a E © 41
8 - a
© >
• < •
a o
! • 8i «•-£ c
& s
11
§ C
s
o 3
C « © w ©
3 X) c <0
T3 c (0 . © 2 a o 3
U « «
to £« — q» w « ••
^ >*
2 I
ii i; S? _ 0) o £ e >
2 8
© 0) £ ii
1 * § s
2 «
? i 5 g
• X? £ $ e 5
lei <Z> © *»
£ J 2 ® r s 228
s c J§
i Z w
ill i-i Iss. Mi a>ss fsi *£\§ • s * ^ 5 ; 3 - 2 : s 5
i l l gf C 2 = • 2 3 i C a2
-v 0 4 3 0 ) ( 0
2 o
5 ® 5
1 1 : | ! s 5 3 * m m JZ
l;i .2 9 3 • S • «r • O* 3 <• C ?41
</> z < UI 2 >
-1 « a
f3 S.5.
8 * Sis 551 Zj « <8 S* 9 O © ®
> Z < flu 2 o o i§ C T3
11
Ui § .£ 2 I i o « •
£ « *. S S
s f § l|| 3 e 2 « s a £ * S * " S "* s S o * ' £ •
f:2 ill «• >» c
2 a «
c
1
E o *a
>» E
C m
it
0 "O TJ e « c 8
1 % 3 E S jO O . ' « ! <c 2
i . «
f i
e
i i x: >L •» Q M E a ai E <2 Sf « o o
9 c c
If
« M c m
9 x:
0 X 1 LU z o to Ui •
| i I f
1 ?
I I — ~a tn to O m u. o Q Z 2 UI X
-c z j £
^ 8 i s
:§ ES . 2 ^ 2 s
8 0
1
i o ©
E 9) * o
3 A
3 O
3 E S
a SL 9
I s
£ s • % 0 8 5
i f i CI e 0 I S
2 © jc i
& •» e 0
©? ? i ^ w
0 O* CO © • * .E © a i s
1 ! -3 -E c • 0 © 9 e ©
2 <° m ^ v ^ Oi3 •
* a>
• > » m
11 1 1
1 1 — c m • s s
«9 C s € J e ES _ © > s ai <0
CM
to o> II
! *
2 o
l i s I S ! i l l
! %
s a l l « £
III a S | E a £
I?! >3 2
•C •
! 11 28
?£ 2 ! ~ a
J5
i i } ? E E .
s e
Ii 2 W. WWW [ S | ! j
> 2 5 c a 5 i i , E " o A •» s JJ o
O
S l i f l i s = i • - § s a f I s * . e • • • * £ ^ £ ? | S •S^ e a &» * I S • ?52 * ^ »«TJ £ &
ilil
3 Jj
i l l i s « *2 > * • 5 2 si;
I ** ^ I!
i s * S 5 | • > 4 M I e * g Ss «i. 5
*!« ill | J s S I S S 2
• *
3
!8
* 3 * 3
2 s E S 2 s 5 I S i ® S 3 f s i l * •§ • « S £ S£i
N
O) H» CC 2 ui o £ CL yj j o i < UD X J 2 2 rf a < > — IIJ *» to *T O «J o
g I
e
i i n o ; «»§• C CL c « g < U M * s o * 5 i-» : >*i * s ' oSc
< tU 0 Ui <z £2 J ® 2* g c H & <® < > x § . o o - a u. S = c 5 s ui 2« 5 US £ 5 s u Q -
REFERENCE LIST
Abdel-Halim, A. A. 1981. Personality and task moderators of subordinate responses to perceived leader behavior. Human Relations 23: 73-88.
Albert, Ethel M., and Clyde Kluckhohn. 1959. A selected bibliography on values, ethics, and esthetics in the behavioral sciences and philosophy 1920-1958. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.
Allen, Billie. 1987. A construct validation study of the relationship between interpersonal behavior styles as described by the social style of behavior profile and leadership styles as described by the leader behavior analysis. Ph.D. diss., University of North Texas.
Allcorn, Seth. 1988. Leadership styles:' The psychological picture. Personnel 65: 46-54.
Allport, Gordon W., and Philipe Vernon. 1931. A study of values. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Allport, G. W., P. E. Vernon, and G. Lindzey. 1960. A study of values. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Anderson, Harold H., and Helen M. Brewer. 1945. Studies of teachers' classroom personalities, 1, dominative and socially integrative behavior of kindergarten teachers. Applied Psychology Monograph. 6, Stanford: Stanford University.
Argyris, Chris. 1986. Interpersonal barriers to decision making. In People: Managing vour most important asset. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review, Harvard University.
Bales, R. F., E. F. Borgatta, and A. S. Couch. 1954. Some findings relevant to the great-man theory of leader-ship. American Sociological Review 19: 755-759.
Bales, Robert F., and Daniel J. Isenberg. 1982. Symlog and leadership theory. In Leadership bevond establishment views. ed. James G. Hunt, Uma Sekaran, and Chester A. Schriesheim. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
86
87
Bass, Bernard M. 1960. Leadership, psychology, and organizational behavior. New York: Harper.
Bellucci. J. T. 1970. The contribution of values in predicting success in practical nursing training programs. Ph.D. diss., Lehigh University.
Berelson, Bernard, and Gary A. Steiner. 1964. Human behavior; An inventory of scientific findings. New York: Harcourt.
Biggart, Nicole W., and Gary Hamilton. 1987. An institutional theory of leadership. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 4: 429-441.
Bird, C. 1940. Social psychology. New York: Appleton-Century.
Bisbee, K. K. 1973. The interpersonal values and role perceptions of beginning vocational education teachers in Missouri. Ph.D. diss., University of Missouri.
Blair, E. L. 1972. A study of students' values in three university programs in nursing. Ph.D. diss., University of Colorado.
Blake, R. R., and J. S. Mouton. 1978. The new managerial grid. Houston: Gulf.
Blanchard, K. H., and others. 1981. Leader Behavior analysis. Escondido, California: Blanchard Training and Development, Inc.
Blanchard, K. H., D. Zigarmi, and M. Zigarmi. 1985. Leadership and the one minute manager. New York: William Morrow and Company, Inc.
Borgatta, Edgar F. et al. 1954. Some findings relevant to a great man theory of leadership. American Sociological Review 19: 755-759.
Bowers, D. G.,. and S. E. Seashore. 1966. Predicting organizational effectiveness with a four-factor theory of leadership. Administrative Science Quarterly 11: 238-263.
Browne, Clarence, and Thomas S. Cohn (Eds.). 1958. The study of leadership. Danville, IL: Interstate Printers and Publishers.
88
Burns, Scott. 1989. Simple personality test a useful management tool. The Dallas Morning News. 30 May, 1.
Carmines, Edward G., and Richard A. Zeller. 1985. Reliability and validity assessment. Sage University Paper Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, series 07-017. Beverly Hills and London: Sage Publications.
Carter, Launor F. 1953. Leadership and small-group behavior. In Conference in social psychology. University of Oklahoma. Group relations at the crossroads. ed. Muzafer Sherif and M. D. Wilson. New York: Harper.
Carter, Launor F., and Mary Nixon. 1949. Ability, perceptual, personality, and interest factors associated with different criteria of leadership. Journal of Psychology 27: 377-388.
Clifford, C., and T. S. Cohn. 1964. The relationship between leadership and personality attributes perceived by followers. Journal of Social Psychology 64: 64-67.
Cohen, J., and P. Cohen. 1983. Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences.- Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cronbach, Lee J. 1951. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psvchometrika 16: 297-334.
Drake, J. W. 1973. The backgrounds and value systems of transportation modeling project participants and their effects on project success. Transportation Research Forum Proceedings 1: 649-672.
Dubin, R. 1965. Supervision and productivity: Empirical findings and theoretical considerations. In Leadership and productivity, ed. R. Dubin and others. San Francisco: Changler.
Emory, C. William. 1985. Business research methods. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin.
England, G. W. 1967. Personal value system of American managers. Academy of Management Journal 10: 53-68.
Ernest, Robert C. 1985. Corporate cultures and effective planning. Personnel Administrator 30: 49-60.
89
Ewing, D. W. 1964. The managerial mind. New York: Free Press.
Evans, M. G. 1970. The effects of supervisory behavior on the path goal relationship. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 5: 277-298.
Fiedler, F. E. 1964. A contingency model of leadership effectiveness. In Advances in experimental social psychology. ed. L. Berkowitz. New York: Academic Press.
Fiedler, Fred E. 1967. A theory of leadership effective-ness. New York: McGraw Hill.
Firth, Raymond. 1953. The study of values by social anthropologists. Man 53: 146-153.
Fleishman, E. A., and David R. Peters. 1962. Interpersonal values, leadership attitudes, and managerial success. Personnel Psychology 15: 127-143.
Flowers, Vincent S., Charles L. Hughes, M. Scott Myers, and Susan Myers. 1975. Managerial values for working. A Nationwide A.M.A. Survey Report (January).
Flowers, Vincent S., and B. A. Coda. 1974. A human resource planning model. Personnel (January-February).
Flowers, Vincent S., and Charles L. Hughes. 1973. Why employees stay. Harvard Business Review (July-August).
Garrison, W. A., H. E. Wilson, and E. K. Warne. 1963. Interpersonal values related to college achievement. Proceedings: Montana Academy of Science 22: 127-131.
Geier, John G. 1967. A trait approach to the study of leadership in small groups. Journal of Communication 4 (December): 316-323.
Gibb, Cecil. 1969. Leadership. In The handbook of social psychology. 2d ed., ed. G. Lindzey and R. Aronson. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Gordon, L. V. 1976. Survey of interpersonal values: Revised manual. Chicago: Science Research Associates.
Gorsuch, Richard L. 1983. Factor analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
90
Graef, C. L. 1983. The situational leadership theory: A critical review. Academy of Management Review 8: 285-291.
Graves, Clare W. 1970. Levels of existence: An open system theory of values. Journal of Humanistic Psychology 2 (Fall): 20-45.
Haley, M. J. 1983. Relationship between internal-external locus of control beliefs, self-monitoring and leadership style adaptability. University Microfilms International. Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Halpin., A. W. 1954. The leadership behavior and combat performance of airplane commanders. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 49: 19-22.
Hamilton. G. G., and N. W. Biggart. 1985. Why people obey: Theoretical observations on power and obedience in complex organizations. Sociological Perspectives 28: 3-28.
Hayes, H. J. 1971. Personal values, personality factors and decision making behavior of a sample of Illinois school district superintendents. Ph.D. diss., University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana.
Hemphill, John K. 1949. Situational factors in leadership. Monograph No. 32. Columbus: Ohio State University, Bureau of Educational Research.
Hemphill, John K. 1961. Why people attempt to lead. In Leadership and interpersonal behavior, ed. Luigi Petrullo and Bernard M. Bass, 201-215. New York: Holt.
Hersey, P., and K. H. Blancard. 1982. Management of organizational behavior: Utilizing human resources. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Hesel, R. 197-1. Value orientation and pupil control ideology of public school educators. Educational Administration Quarterly 42: 24-33.
Hollander, E. P. 1961. Emergent leadership and social influence. In Leadership and interpersonal behavior, ed. Luigi Petrullo and Bernard M. Bass, 30-47. New York: Holt.
91
House, R. J. 1971. effectiveness. 321-339.
A path goal theory of leader Administrative Science Quarterly 16:
House, R. J., and M. L. Baetz. 1979. Leadership: Some empirical generalizations and new research directions. In Research in organizational behavior. New York: JAI Press.
House, R. J., and T. R. Mitchell. 1974. Path goal theory of leadership. Journal of Contemporary Business 3 (June): 97.
Howard, Ann. 1983. Motivation and values among Japanese and American managers. Personnel Psychology 36: 883-898.
Hughes, Charles L., and Vincent S. Flowers. 1974. New goals in personnel. Management bv Objectives 3(4), Surrey, England. (Reprinted in Indian Management, Summer, 1975).
Hughes, Charles L., and Vincent S. Flowers. 1973. Shaping personnel strategies to disparate value systems. Personnel (March-April).
Hughes, Charles L., and Vincent S. Flowers. 1975. Toward existentialism in management. The Conference Board Record (September).
Hughes, Charles L., and Vincent S. Flowers. 1978. Value systems analysis theory and management application. Dallas, Texas: Center for Values Research.
Jackson, Barbara. 1983. Multivariate data analysis: An introduction. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin.
Jennings, E. E. 1972. An anatomy of leadership: Princes, heroes and supermen. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Katz, D., and R. L. Kahn. 1952. Some recent findings in human relations researcher. In Readings in social psychology, ed. E. Swanson, T. Newcomb, and E. Hartley. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Katz, D., N. Maccoby, G. Gurin, and L. Floor. 1951. Productivity, supervision and morale among railroad workers. • Ann Arbor,: Survey Research Center, Univer-sity of Michigan.
92
Katz, D., N. Maccoby, and N. Morse. 1950. Productivity, supervision, and morale in an office situation. Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research.
Kirchner, E. 1970. Values and value changes during and after graduate study in psychology. Journal of Clinical Psychology 26: 252-256.
Kluckhohn, Clyde. 1951. Values and value-orientations in the theory of action: An exploration in definition and classification. In Toward a general theory of action, ed. Talcott Parsons and Edward Shils. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kluckhohn, Florence R., and Fred L. Strodtbeck. 1961. Variations in value orientations. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson.
Kohlberg, L. 1969. The cognitive-developmental approach to socialization. In Handbook of socialization theory and research. ed. D. A. Goslin. Chicago: Rand McNally.
Lewin, K., R. Lippitt, and R. K. White. 1939. Patterns of aggressive behavior in experimentally created social climates. Journal of Social Psychology 10: 271-301.
Litzinger, W. D. 1965. Interpersonal values and leadership attitudes of branch bank managers. Personnel Psychology 18: 193-198.
Locke, Edwin A. 1970. The supervisor as "motivator": His influence on employee performance and satisfaction. In Managing 'for Accomplishment, ed. B. M. Bass, R. Cooper, and J. A. Haas. New York: D. C. Heath and Company.
Lusk, E. J., and B. L. Oliver. 1974. American managers' personal value systems—revisited. Academy of Manage-ment Journal 17: 549-554.
Mann, R. D. 1959. A review of the relationships between personality and performance in small groups. Psychological Bulletin 56: 241-270.
Miner, J. B. The uncertain future of the leadership concept: An overview. In Leadership frontiers. ed. J. G. Hunt and L. L. Larson. Kent, Ohio: Comparative Administration Research Institute.
Morris, B. B. 1968. Cross-validation of the Gordon SIV. Perceptual and Motor Skills 27: 44-46.
93
Morris, Charles W. 1956. Varieties of human value. University of Chicago Press.
Mukerjee, Radhakamal. 1949. The social structure of values. London: Macmillan.
Myers, M. Scott, and Vincent S. Flowers. 1974. A framework for developing human assets. California Management Review (Summer).
Myers, M. Scott, and Susan S. Myers. 1973. Adapting to the new work ethic. The Business Quarterly (Winter): 70-84.
Nash, A. V. 1966. Development and evaluation of a SVIB key for selecting managers. Journal of Applied Psychology 50: 250-254.
Nunnally, Jum C. 1978. Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Pennings, J. M. 1970. Work-value systems of white-collar workers. Administrative Science Quarterly 15: 397-405.
Pepper, Stephen C. 1958. The sources of value. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Peters, Thomas J., and Robert H. Waterman. 1982. In search of excellence. New York: Harper and Row.
Petrullo, Luigi, and Bernard M. Bass (Eds.). 1961. Leadership and interpersonal behavior. New York: Holt.
Pfeffer, J. 1978. The ambiguity of leadership. In Leadership: Where else can we go?, ed. M. W. McCall and M. M. Lombardo. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Quick, Thomas L. 1976. Understanding people at work. New York: Executive Enterprises Publications.
Reddin, W. J. 1967. The 3-d management style theory. Training and Development Journal 4: 8-17.
Rohan, Thomas M. 1975. Should a worker's personality affect your managing. Industry Week (May): 28-38.
Rokeach, Milton. 1973. The nature of human values. New York: The Free Press.
94
Rokeach, Milton. 1979. Understanding human values. New York: The Free Press.
Rosenfeld, L. B., and T. G. Plax. 1974. Personality determinants of autocratic and democratic leadership. Speech Monographs 42 (August): 203-208.
Ross, Murray G., and Charles E. Hendry. 1957. New understandings of leadership: A survey and application of research. New York: Association Press.
Runyon, K. E. 1973. Some interactions between personality variables and management style. Journal of Applied Psychology 57: 288-294.
Sargent, J. R., and G. R. Miller. 1971. Some differences in certain communication behaviors of autocratic and democratic group leaders. Journal of Communications 21 (September): 233-252.
Selvin. H. C. 1960. The effects of leadership. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.
Siegel, Bernard J. 1948. Currents of anthropological theory and value concepts. Southwestern Journal of Anthropo1ogv 4: 199-210.
Smith, M. Brewster. 1963. Personal values in the study of lives. In The studv of lives: Essavs on personality in honor of Henrv A. Murray, ed. Robert W. White, 324-347. New York: Atherton.
Spector, Paul E. 1986. Research designs. Sage University Paper Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences. Series 07-023. Beverly Hills and London: Sage Publications.
Stodgill, R. M. 1974. Handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research. New York: The Free Press.
Stodgill, R. M. 1948. Personal factors associated with leadership. Journal of Psychology 25 (January): 35-71.
Stoner, J. A. 1978. Management. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Tannenbaum, R., and W. H. Schmidt. 1958. How to choose a leadership pattern. Harvard Business Review 3: 95-101.
95
Tosi, Henry J. Jr. 1982. Toward a paradigm shift in the study of leadership. In Leadership bevond estab-lishment viewsr ed. James G. Hunt, Uma Sekaran, and Chester A. Schriesheim. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
Vogt, Evon Z., and Ethel M. Albert (Eds.). 1966. People of Rimrock: A study of values in five cultures. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
Vroom, Victor H., and Phillip W. Yetton. 1973. Leadership and decision-making. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Wadsworth, B. J., R. M. Runte, and T. Tookey. 1968. Values of seminarians and novices. Psychological Reports 23: 870.
White, R. K. 1951. Value analysis. Glen Garden, NJ: Libertarian Press.
Williams. Robin M. Jr. 1951. American society: A sociological interpretation. New York: Knopf.
Yukl, Gary A. 1981. Leadership in organizations. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.