leadership styles explored

LEADERSHIP STYLES EXPLORED

THEIR RELATION TO THE ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE AND EMPLOYEES’ JOB TYPE

Master thesis, MscBA, specialization Human Resource Management

University of Groningen, Faculty of Economics and Business

July 14, 2010

GEESJE VAN DEN AKKER

Student number: 1752839

Alsemveld 15

7006 TC Doetinchem

Tel: +31(0)628407999

e-mail: [email protected]

Supervisor – university:

dr. P.H (Peter) van der Meer

Co-assessor – university:

drs. J. (Hans) van Polen

Supervisor – field of study

This information is not provided.

The real name of the organization is replaced by an imaginary name: Fresh

mailto:[email protected]

2 Leadership Styles Explored: their relation to the organizational climate and employees’ job type

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT 1. INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………...……… 4

1.1 Leadership…………………………………………………………………………………. 4 1.2 Organizational Climate……………………………………………………………………. 5 1.3 Job Type…………………………………………………………………………………… 6

2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK………………………………………………...…………... 7 2.1 Leadership style influencing organizational climate dimensions…………………….…… 7 2.1.1 Passive/ avoidant leadership style…………………………….……………… ……. 8 2.1.2 Transactional leadership style……………………………………………………… 9 2.1.3 Transformational leadership style……………………….…………………………. 9 2.2 Transactional and Transformational leadership paradigm…………..……………………. 11 2.3 The Organizational Climate influencing Leadership Styles………………………………. 14 2.3.1 Business Strategy…………………………………………………………………… 14 2.3.2 Organizational Climate and Leadership.…………………………………………… 16 2.4 Leadership style influenced by job type…………………………………………………... 17 3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY……………………………………. ………………………. 18 3.1 Participants……………………………………………………………………………….. 19 3.2 Procedure…………………………………………………………………………………. 19 3.3 Measures and data analyses………………………………………………………………. 21 4. RESULTS…………………………………………………………………………………….. 23 4.1 Description of results… .…………………………………………...……………………. 24 4.2 Sub-questions and expectations.…………………………………………………………. 26 4.2.1 Leadership style influencing organizational climate dimensions………………….. 26 4.2.2 Transactional and Transformational leadership paradigm…………..……………... 27 4.2.3 The Organizational Climate influencing Leadership Styles……………………….. 28 4.2.4 Leadership style influenced by job type…………………………………………… 28 5. DISCUSSION………………………………………………………………………………… 29 5.1 Summary…………………………………………………………………………………. 29 5.2 Theoretical implications…………..……………………………………………………… 30 5.3 Research limitations………..…………………………………………………………….. 32 5.4 Conclusion……………………………..…………………………………………………. 33 REFERENCES………………………………………………………………………………….. 34 Appendix A, Climate Survey 2009 ……………………………………………………………. 37 Appendix B, The Multifactor Leadership Interview…………………………………………... 39 Appendix C, Interview Statements grouped by the different Leadership Styles………………. 42


LEADERSHIP STYLES EXPLORED

THEIR RELATION TO THE ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE AND EMPLOYEES’ JOB TYPE

GEESJE F. VAN DEN AKKER

University of Groningen

ABSTRACT

Although academic research has focused on the antecedents of leadership,

there is still minor work concerning the existence of the relationship between

leadership style and the organizational climate of an organization. This is astounding,

given the importance of leadership and a good organizational climate for most

modern work organizations. Building on this notion, the present study empirically

investigated the link between leadership and organizational climate, and also the

effect of the job type on leadership styles of executives is studied. Sub-questions and

expectations were developed in order to answer the research questions, and tested

with the help of executives and employees of a soft drink organization. Results

indicated that the leadership styles of executives did not influence the explored

dimensions of the organizational climate in this company. However, the

organizational climate seems to affect the leadership styles within the organization.

The job type of employees may possibly influence the leadership styles of executives,

too. Future research is necessary to demonstrate the relation of leadership to

organizational climate and job type in depth.


1. INTRODUCTION

Leadership is one of the most researched areas around the globe and important for the effective

functioning of any organization. Leaders influence not only tasks, strategies and organizational goals, but

also beliefs, attitudes and behaviour of organizational members (Yukl & Van Fleet, 1998 cited Suar et al.,

2006 p. 95). However, times are changing as a consequence of the globalization of the market, and

rapidly changing environments confronting organizations today has resulted in calls for more adaptive

leadership (Bass et al., 2003). Therefore our knowledge and practice of leadership must adjust to these

changes if organizations want to continue playing a role in the market (Sarros & Santora, 2001).

In recent years, topics of leadership and organizational climate have attracted considerable

interest from academics and practitioners. Subsequently, the questions arise: what is it that makes these

topics interesting? How are the concepts leadership and organizational climate described? And, does it

matter whether these concepts are aligned?

Fresh, a soft drinks manufacturer, distributor and sales organization, operates in a fairly

competitive environment, with close relationships, participation, and caring for employees. In this

organization there is a growing interest in the organizational climate and leadership after results of their

Climate Survey in 2007 showed ‘leadership’ as an area of improvement. Therefore, the present study

takes a closer look into: the different leadership styles of Fresh’s executives, the relation between the

leadership styles of executives and dimensions of the organizational climate, and the influence of

employees’ job type on their style of leadership. The research begins with a review of the literature on the

concepts of leadership and organizational climate. Furthermore, the influence of the job type of

employees on executives’ leadership styles is described. The next section, the ‘theoretical framework’,

elaborates further on these concepts, and sub-questions and expectations are developed. This is followed

by the methodology adopted for the study and the outcomes of this investigation will be described in the

results section. At the end, the discussion section will give a final answer to the research questions. But

first, in order to deepen our understanding on the relationship between the concepts leadership,

organizational climate and job type, the following subsections explain what is meant by these concepts.

1.1 Leadership

‘Leadership’ has been defined in literature as the “process of social influence in which one

person can enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task” (Chemers,

2002). Within the concept of leadership, different styles are distinguished. These styles are used by

leaders to influence others to understand and agree about what needs to be done, how to do it, and the

process of facilitating individual and collective efforts to accomplish shared objectives (cited Yukl, 2005

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_influence


p. 8). In this investigation, three different leadership styles are elaborated: the transformational,

transactional and passive/ avoidant leadership style. Initially, Burns (1978) differentiated the two main

types of leadership, the transactional and transformational style. According to Burns (1978), the

transformational leader motivates its team to be effective and efficient. The leader is adaptive and

participative and communication is the key word for goal achievement. These leaders focus on the big

picture and are always looking for ideas that move the organization to reach the company’s vision. The

leader is highly visible and uses a chain of command to get the job done. On the other hand, Burns (1978)

viewed the transactional leader as a leader who initiates contact with subordinates in an effort to exchange

something of value, such as rewards for performance, mutual support, or bilateral disclosure. Power is

given to the leader to evaluate, correct and train subordinates when productivity is not up to the desired

level, however effectiveness is rewarded when an expected outcome is reached. The third leadership

style, passive/ avoidant leadership is an avoidance or absence of leadership. The leader who utilizes this

style tends to react only after problems have become serious to take corrective action, and often avoids

making any decision at all (Judge & Piccolo, 2004). This style is only considered active to the extent that

the leader ‘chooses’ to avoid taking action. This component is generally considered the most ineffective

form of leadership (Antonakis et al., 2003).

1.2 Organizational Climate

The other concept, organizational climate is often equated to organizational culture. Denison

(1996) stated that “the climate and culture literature actually address a common phenomenon: the creation

and influence of social contexts in organizations”. However, culture and climate are generally

characterized differently but they are also related to each other. Watkin & Hubbard (2003) defined the

organizational climate as a measure of employees’ perception of those aspects of their environment that

directly impact how well they can do their jobs. It has been conceptualised more extensive as the

“relatively enduring quality of the internal environment of an organization that a) is experienced by its

members, b) influences their behaviour, and c) can be described in terms of the values of a particular set

of characteristics (or attitudes) of the organization” (Tagiuri & Litwin (1986) cited Burton et al. 2004,

p. 69). Similarly, Joyce & Slocum (1984) observe that the organizational climate influences the work-

related attitudes and behaviours of employees. They argue that it provides a frame of reference through

which individuals make sense of organizational life (Ngo et al. 2009).

In contrast, Denison (1996) defined culture as the “deep structure of organizations, which is

rooted in the values, beliefs and assumptions held by organizational members”. He stated that culture is

rooted in history and collectively held. Therefore, individual leaders cannot easily create or change

culture because this is a part of the organization. Climate, on the contrary, portrays organizational


environments as “being rooted in the organization’s value system, but tends to present these social

environments in relatively static terms” (Denison, 1996). Thus, climate often refers to a situation and is

linked to thoughts, feelings and behaviours of organizational members. It is temporal, subjective, and

depending on the social environment perceived by organizational members. Culture influences the

characteristics of the climate by its effect on the actions and through processes of the leader (Denison,

1996). It can be stated that culture has an influence on the organizational climate of the organization.

Unfortunately, only a few studies focus on explaining the role of leadership in managing

organizational climate. Most studies describe the role of leadership related to organizational outcomes

such as productivity (Ekvall & Ryhammar, 1998), and innovation (Jung et al. 2003). Also the impact of

transformational, transactional and passive/avoidant leadership on follower performance, satisfaction, and

effectiveness are highlighted (Bass & Avolio, 1993; Howell & Avolio, 1993). Consequently, little

research has been devoted to understand the link between leadership style and organizational climate. The

relationship between organizational climate and leadership models has been largely neglected and further

analysis is necessary to gain remarkable insight in those concepts.

1.3 Job Type

It would be interesting for this study to examine how jobs on different levels of the organizational

hierarchy, with different tasks, influence the impact of the transformational, transactional and passive/

avoidant leadership styles. Additionally, the job type, job level and individual accountability of

employees may influence the leadership styles of executives. Suar et al. (2006) indicated that important

aspects related to styles of leadership are: traits of a leader, attributes of employees and situational factors

(e.g. nature of task). In this way, a leader needs to operate in a specific way depending on the maturity of

employees and situational factors. There may be presumed that employees lower or higher in the

organization are in need of different leadership styles depending on their nature of task and level of

maturity (Suar et al., 2006). In a matter of speaking, the nature of task actually decides the achieved level

of education needed for an employee to perform well in the job. In this research the nature of task and, the

employees’ education level needed to accomplish the job, is called the ‘job type’. Thus, according to the

literature of Suar et al. (2006) leadership styles seem dependent on the job type of employees as well. In

chapter 2 of this research, the influence of job type on executives’ leadership styles is described more

extensively. Considering the research findings in this area, the limited character of these findings suggests

a need to investigate the nature of the relationship between leadership style and job type. Hence, the

present study will evaluate the role of job type in relation to leadership.

After explaining all concepts, the following research questions are developed for this research:


Is there a relationship between leadership styles and the organizational climate? Does the job type of

employees influence the leadership styles of executives?

To answer these questions, there are a few other things that need to be taken into consideration:

- Do executives of Fresh make use of different leadership styles or a combination of styles? Or

does one specific leadership style dominate?

- Is there a relationship between leadership styles and the organizational climate of Fresh?

- If executives of Fresh display different styles of leadership, is this caused by differences in job

type between employees?

2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

This section will give an extended description of the different concepts of this research. After

each description sub-questions and expectations are developed in order to answer the research questions.

In the first part, the effect of leadership styles on dimensions of the organizational climate is outlined

(2.1), and the passive/ avoidant, transactional and transformational leadership styles are further elaborated

(2.1.1, 2.1.2 & 2.1.3). Next, the augmentation model of both leadership styles is evaluated combined with

the leadership strategy of Fresh (2.2). Subsequently, the importance of the organizational climate is

stressed and how this influences leadership, then the leadership strategy of Fresh is analysed (2.3, 2.3.1 &

2.3.2). Finally, the relationship between the different leadership styles and the role of job type is explored

(2.4).

2.1 Leadership Style influencing Organizational Climate Dimensions

In recent years, Fresh is recognizing the role that organizational climate and leadership plays in

the organization. As research has revealed, leadership behaviour influences climate for 70% (van den

Brink & Van der Veer, 2008). Improving the organizational climate in Fresh is about engaging the

employees to go the extra mile and work as a team to achieve their challenging targets. Litwin and

Stringer (1968) were the first to study the organizational climate. They stated, in motivational terms,

when leaders get the organizational climate right, they positively impact the effort of the subordinates.

When leaders fail, it can result in withdrawal of all effort (Goleman, 2001 cited Watkin & Hubbard, 2003

p. 380). Climate makes differences to performance because it indicates how energising the work

environment is for employees (Ostroff & Schmitt, 1993; Riordan et al., 2005 cited Ngo et al., 2009 p. 69).

As Beu & Buckley (2004) stated, the organizational climate is to a certain extent created by the beliefs

and actions of the management of the organization. A positive climate will be developed if the leaders of

the company adopt certain principles such as fairness and equal opportunities in the way they treat their


subordinates (Ngo et al., 2009). An example of dimensions of the organizational climate are perceptions

of employees about the: direction, goals and objectives of an organization, the management team, their

leader, their job, cooperation and teamwork with other departments and within their own team, external

focus, innovation, rewards and recognition, personal development, and their overall attitude about the

organization. In Fresh, all the perceptions of employees about these dimensions of the organizational

climate are measured by making use of a Climate Survey customized for the organization. But, are these

organizational climate dimensions affected by the use of different leadership styles? In this research, the

organizational climate dimensions Innovation, Rewards & Recognition and My Manager are used to

investigate this possible relationship. Appendix A presents a part of the Climate Survey in 2009, there

will be elaborated on this survey in the methodology section of this study.

As mentioned in the introduction, three different leadership styles are investigated at Fresh: the

transactional, transformational and passive/avoidant leadership style. Below, the transactional and

transformational leadership styles are further described. First, a short explanation is given about the

passive/ avoidant style.

2.1.1 Passive/ avoidant Leadership Style

In the passive/ avoidant leadership style, two styles of passive leadership can be distinguished:

the laissez-faire and management-by-exception (passive) style. Laissez-faire leaders avoid making

decisions, hesitate in taking actions, are absent when needed and delay in responding to urgent questions.

Similar to this passive, avoidant behaviour is the management-by-exception (passive) style (Bass &

Avolio, 2005). In this style passive leaders fail to interfere until problems become serious, wait for things

to go wrong before taking action and show a firm believer in ‘if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it’. These passive

leaders avoid specifying agreements, clarifying expectations, and providing goals and standards to be

achieved by followers. In this regard the management-by-exception (passive) style is similar to the

laissez-faire style or ‘no leadership’. Both types of behaviour have negative impacts on followers.

Accordingly, both styles can be grouped together as ‘passive avoidant leadership’ (Bass & Avolio, 2005).

Researchers have argued that these passive styles, because it represents the absence of any leadership (e.g.

transactional or transformational), should be treated separately from the other leadership styles (Judge &

Piccolo, 2004). However, the management-by-exception (passive) and laissez-faire style are used for this

investigation to see whether employees are encountering these styles of leadership within Fresh, although

this is not expected.


2.1.2 Transactional Leadership Style

Transactional leadership, also called the telling style, has dominated leadership research since

World War ІІ. Exhibiting transactional leadership meant that followers agreed with, accepted, or

complied with the leader in exchange for praise, rewards, and resources or the avoidance of disciplinary

action. Rewards and recognition were provided on followers successfully carrying out their roles and

assignments (Podsakoff, Todor & Skov, 1982 cited Bass et al. 2003 p. 208). According to Bass (1985),

transactional leadership clarifies expectations and offers recognition when goals are achieved. Bass

(1985) differentiated two types of transactional leadership according to the leader’s level of engagement

with followers and activity level. In the first type, the contingent reward leadership, the leader and

follower negotiate an agreement regarding what rewards or recognition the follower will receive for a

specific level of performance. Rewards, recognition, or both are provided when the follower attains the

contracted level of performance. Furthermore, the leader discusses in specific terms who is responsible

for achieving performance targets. The majority of research findings suggest that contingent reward

leadership has a positive effect on individual follower performance (Howell & Hall-Merenda, 1999). The

second type, management-by-exception (active), contains a leader who avoids giving directions if the old

ways are working and allows followers to continue doing their jobs as always if performance goals are

met. This leadership style implies closely monitoring for deviances, mistakes and errors and then taking

corrective action as quickly as possible when they occur. Empirical examination of the impact of

management-by-exception (active) leadership on followers’ performance has obtained mixed results

(Howell & Hall-Merenda, 1999).

2.1.3 Transformational Leadership Style

Transformational leaders are flexible, focus on the goals of the organization and are always

looking for ideas that move the organization to reach the company’s vision (Burns, 1978).

Transformational leaders are called flexible and participative, therefore they motivate employees to do

more than originally expected as they transmit a sense of mission, stimulate learning experiences, and

arouse new ways of thinking (Hater & Bass, 1988). The fast changing environments affecting

organizations today has resulted in calls for more adaptive, flexible leadership. Transformational leaders

work more effectively in these changing environments and work with their followers to generate creative

solutions to complex problems, while also developing them to handle a broader range of leadership

responsibilities (Bennis, 2001 cited Bass et al. 2003 p. 207). The dynamics of transformational leadership

involve strong personal identification with the leader and joining a shared vision of the future. Bass

(1985) noted that such a transformation can be achieved by raising awareness of the importance and value

of designated outcomes, getting followers to transcend their own self-interests, or altering or expanding


followers’ needs on Maslow’s hierarchy of needs (Hater & Bass, 1988). Howell & Hall-Merenda (1999),

observe that transformational leaders who encourage followers to question assumptions and generate new

ideas, develop their capabilities, and aspire to accomplish challenging future goals are expected to

enhance followers’ performance on the job. Also, results of Politis (2001) indicate that the leadership

styles that are characterized by participative behaviour, mutual trust and respect for subordinates’ ideas

and feelings are correlated stronger. Shamir, House and Arthur (1993) suggested that transformational

leaders transform the self-concepts of their followers. They build personal and social identification among

followers with the mission and goals of the leader and organization. The followers’ feelings of

involvement, cohesiveness, commitment, potency, and performance are because of that enhanced.

Transformational leadership develops followers to believe in themselves and their mission (Bass et al.

2003). In sum, Bass & Avolio (2003) categorized the features of transformational leadership in the

following factors. At first: Idealized influence (attributes and behaviour), the leader instills pride, faith,

respect and displays a sense of power and confidence. The leader has a gift for seeing what is really

important, and transmits a sense of mission. Secondly: Inspirational motivation, these leaders behave in

ways that motivate those around them by providing meaning and challenge to their followers’ work. They

are enthusiastic and optimism is displayed. Furthermore, these leaders articulate a compelling vision of

the future. The third factor is: Intellectual stimulation, these leaders stimulate their subordinates to be

innovative and creative by questioning assumptions and approaching old situations in new ways. There is

no ridicule or public criticism of individual members’ mistakes. At last, the factor: Individual

consideration plays a role in transformational leadership. Attention is paid by the leader to the

individual’s need for achievement and growth by acting as a coach. New learning opportunities are

created along with a supportive climate in which to grow and individual differences in terms of needs and

desires are recognized.

After taking these findings into account, in the transformational leadership style leaders seek to

optimize individual, group and organizational development, and innovation (Bass & Avolio, 2003). They

focus on the teaching and coaching of employees and suggest new ways of looking how to complete

assignments compared to the transactional leadership style focussing on the achievement of performance

targets, rewards and recognition. Therefore, I expect that executives of Fresh display different leadership

styles at which the transformational leadership style will affect the organizational climate more positively

in terms of innovation, and that the transactional leadership style has a positive effect concerning the

rewards and recognition of the organization. Accordingly, one sub-question and two expectations are

developed:


Sub-question 1) Do executives of Fresh make use of different leadership styles? And if so, which

leadership styles do they generally apply?

Expectation 1a) Based on the literature, I expect that executives who make use of the transactional

leadership style will have a more positive influence on the perceptions of employees concerning the

rewards and recognition dimension of the organizational climate compared to executives who display the

transformational leadership style.

Expectation 1b) Based on the literature, I expect that executives who make use of the transformational

leadership style will have a more positive influence on the perceptions of employees concerning the

innovation dimension of the organizational climate compared to executives who display the transactional

leadership style.

2.2 Transactional and Transformational Leadership Paradigm

Burns (1978) first introduced the concepts of transformational and transactional leadership in his

treatment of political leadership. Burns considered the transformational leader to be distinct from the

transactional leader, where the latter is viewed as a leader who initiates contact with subordinates in an

effort to exchange something of value, such as rewards for performance, mutual support, or bilateral

disclosure. At the other pole of the leadership style dimension, Burns viewed the transformational leader

as one who engages with others in such a way that the leader and the follower raise one another to a

higher level of motivation and morality (Lowe, et al. 1996).

Contrary, Bass (1985) viewed the transformational/ transactional leadership paradigm as being

comprised of complementary rather than polar constructs. He integrated both styles by recognizing that

the styles may be linked to the achievements of desired goals and objectives. From this point of view, the

transformational leadership style is complementary to the transactional style and likely to be ineffective in

the total absence of a transactional relationship between leader and subordinate (Bass, Avolio &

Goodheim, 1987 cited Lowe et al., 1996 p. 387). Bass (1985) proposed a model for the relationship

between transformational and transactional leadership. He stated that transactional leadership provides a

basis for effective leadership, but a greater amount of success is possible when transformational leaders

motivate followers to perform beyond their own expectations based on the leaders' idealized influence,

inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration (Bass & Avolio, 2004).

These transformational leadership styles build on the transactional base in contributing to the extra effort

and performance of followers (Bass, 1985). In this way, the application of transactional leadership must

take individual needs into account. When these needs are evaluated, the leadership begins its shift from


transactional to a mix of both transformational and transactional leadership styles. Thus, the full range of

potential is achieved through both, not either one versus the other leadership style (Bass & Avolio, 2004).

Also Howell & Avolio (1993) and Judge & Piccolo (2004) pointed out that transformational leadership

does not replace transactional leadership, but augments transactional leadership in achieving the goals of

the leader, associate, group, and organization.

In figure 1, the newer paradigm, transformational leadership is added to previous transactional

leadership models.

FIGURE 1

The Augmentation model of Transactional and Transformational Leadership

Source: Bass & Avolio (2004)

Conger and Kanungo (1998) noted the difference between these two leadership styles in terms of

what leaders and followers offer one another. Transformational leaders offer a purpose that exceeds short-

term goals and focuses on intrinsic needs. In contrast, transactional leaders focus on the proper exchange

of resources (Judge & Piccolo, 2004). The models differ with regard to the process by which the leader

motivates subordinates as well as the types of goals set. A transactional leader may initiate structure and

display consideration to increase the subordinates’ expectancies that if their efforts succeed, they will be

rewarded with a merit increase. On the other hand, a transformational leader may display transactional

leadership at times but may also use symbolism or imaging to elevate the importance of increased effort


for an organizational mission, which serves as a motivator itself (cited Hater & Bass, 1988 p. 695). More

than three decades of research in performance-oriented and maintenance-oriented behaviour by leaders

has provided consistent evidence that both types of behaviour, thus combined leadership styles, lead to

success within the team (Hater & Bass, 1988).

Also Bass & Avolio (2003) state that the best leaders use a full range of transformational and

transactional leadership styles, both styles are related to the success of the department. They assume that

the success of departments is measured by the level of extra effort accomplished by executives, their

effectiveness, and the satisfaction of the executives about their own leadership style. In this way,

executives try to increase the willingness of employees to work effectively and to achieve successful team

performances. Besides, an executive satisfied about his/her leadership style may positively affect the

success of the department (Bass & Avolio, 2003). In addition, Bass & Avolio (2003) state that

transformational and transactional leadership are both related to the satisfaction of the employees about

their leader. They suppose that employees are more satisfied when executives make use of both leadership

styles. Based on the literature of Hater & Bass (1988) and Bass & Avolio (2003, 2004), I expect positive

results concerning the success of the departments, when executives use a combination of both

transformational and transactional leadership styles. I expect that the extra effort of the executive, his or

her effectiveness and satisfaction about leadership may influence this success. Therefore, another question

is added below the research questions:

“Does a mix of both transactional and transformational leadership behaviours positively influence the

perceived success of executives in the department and employees’ satisfaction about their leader?”

However, before this additional question can be answered it would be wise to know more about

the leadership strategy of Fresh. What kind of leadership strategy does Fresh prescribe, and does this

organization stimulate the use of both transformational and transactional leadership styles?

In an excellent climate, Fresh expects their employees to stay, to perform better, enhance quality

of products and pass on their enthusiasm to the customers. In order to reach this climate, leaders play an

important role in providing clarity on expectations and fit in their objectives into the bigger picture. Then,

employees are held accountable for delivering results and constructive feedback should be provided.

Successes are celebrated and excellent performance is recognised and rewarded, but also

underperformance is addressed. This part of the strategy shows a transactional leadership style.

Employees are also stimulated to share ideas and to find new and creative solutions, which indicates a

transformational leadership style (Van den Brink & Van der Veer, 2008). Thus, based on the leadership

strategy of Fresh, both transformational and transactional aspects are described. Therefore, it can be

concluded that executives of Fresh may display either a transformational or transactional leadership style

or a combination of both. I anticipate the following sub-question and expectations:


Sub-question 2) Do executives of Fresh make use of a combination of both the transformational and

transactional leadership styles, or do they principally apply one specific leadership style?

Expectation 2a) Based on the literature, I expect that executives who display both the transformational

and transactional leadership style perceive more success within their department than executives who

display either the transformational or transactional leadership style.

Expectation 2b) Based on the literature, I expect that executives who display both the transformational

and transactional leadership style have more employees that are satisfied about their leadership style

than executives who display either the transformational or transactional leadership style.

2.3 The Organizational Climate influencing Leadership Styles

2.3.1 Business Strategy

Considering the theory of Bax (2003), the success of an organization is largely dependent upon

the balance between the human resources and business strategy. ‘Leadership style’ is one of the

distinctive competencies with a direct link to the HR policy in an organization. Examples of other

distinctive competencies are: shared values, culture, commitment, and identification. Bax (2003) defined

the business idea as “the coherent selection that an organization makes from the whole of its distinctive

competencies with the goal of gaining competitive advantage on the market.” The business idea of Fresh

is to be an innovative, trustworthy and service oriented organization. The choice for a certain business

idea also presupposes an idea about how the labour allocation process can best be designed. Therefore,

Fresh developed core competencies that fit with the individual competencies of the employees who are

working for Fresh. These core competencies are: creativity, adaptability and a result-driven mentality. In

the process of selection and recruitment, only people who match with these core competences are

selected. In this way, Fresh adapts to their business idea and keeps up with their competitors. According

to the theory of Henry Mintzberg (1983) Fresh can be considered as an organization with a dynamic

environment. The unpredictable environment results in an internal coordination which can be described as

less formal. Fresh exists predominantly of teamwork and the in-house expertise is optimally utilized. This

soft drink organization tries to adapt itself to the variety of the market and can only maintain by remaining

flexible (Bax, 2003). Linking these environmental characteristics to the supply side of the labour

allocation process it becomes clear that the environment has influenced the way the work is organized at

Fresh. Caused by the dynamic, unpredictable environment, there is a high division of labour to keep up

with the competitors of the soft drink market. Employees are dependent upon one another and hierarchy is

less important.


Burns & Stalker (1961) introduced the mechanistic and organic regimes. In the mechanical

regime the task (or department) that the employee is responsible for is not brought into relation with the

organization’s overall production process. The coordination of independent tasks takes place at a higher

level of the hierarchy (cited Bax, 2003 p. 66). Fresh can be characterized as an organization with an

organic regime. Here it is all about the communal achievement of the goals. The process of dividing

labour within the organization ensures a mutual dependency that creates bonds and cohesion. As also

confirmed by Bax (2003), a dynamic, complex environment with a normal level of competition requires

an organic regime because of its flexibility and quick adjustments.

Furthermore, Bax (2003) describes the relationship between characteristics of the production

technology, the environment, the culture and structure of an organization. He developed the TECS

(technology, environment, culture and structure) model, an analytical instrument with which you can

systematically put the organization into perspective from the demand side of the labour allocation

process. This model shows whether or not the demand side of the labour allocation process is internally

consistent and if it is in alignment with environmental requirements. Applying this model, Fresh must pay

attention to ensure that each of their choices remain consistent with other elements of their business

policy. Figure 2 shows an example of the TECS model in balance applied to Fresh.

FIGURE 2

An example of the TECS model in balance applied to Fresh

Mechanical Organic

T ■

E ■

C ■

S ■

In 1983, Williamson & Ouchi made the distinction between hard and soft contracts. Fresh can be

characterized as an organization with soft contracts that focus on the vision and values of the

organization. This is denoted by a long term socialization process and reward experience while employing

people in careers rather than jobs. Fresh has a conscientious career policy, and career planning promotes

commitment to the organization and culture. In contrast, hard contracts can be associated by high levels of

standardization. Employees are rewarded according to such criteria as hours worked or units produced. In


hard contracting people have jobs rather than careers (Bax, 2003). In sum, Fresh can be characterized as

an organic organization with soft contracts. Based on the strategy of Fresh, Miles and Snow (1987) would

classify Fresh principally as a prospector. These organizations follow a strategy of innovation and try to

bring new products and services to the market (Bax, 2003). The prospector tries to create a distinctive

product. This fits to the business strategy of Fresh. In figure 3 an overall picture of Fresh’s strategy and

traits is outlined. In addition the theory of Bax (2003) is added to the figure.

FIGURE 3

A summary of Fresh’s Strategic Orientation Category (Miles & Snow, 1987)

and the Classification Scheme (Bax, 2003)

Strategic Orientation

Main focus Traits Classification scheme

Contract type

Prospector Entrepreneurial, innovative and new opportunity orientated

External orientation, environment scanning, maximizing new opportunities. Innovative to meet marked needs. Flexibility and freedom from constraining company rules and regulations. Welcomes changes and sees the environment as 'uncertain'

Organic Soft

2.3.2 Organizational Climate and Leadership

The organic character of the organization Fresh with soft contracts and an organizational culture

that has an accent on their vision and values most probably influences the characteristics of the

organizational climate, too. As the organization develops and time passes, the created culture of the

organization, which affects the organizational climate, exerts an influence on the leader and shapes the

actions and style of the leader (Ogbonna et al. 2000). Bass (1985) adopted the mechanistic/organic

classification scheme of Burns and Stalker (1961) and argued that transformational leadership is more

likely to emerge in organizations with less constrictive, organic environments. Similarly, he contended

that transformational leadership is less likely to emerge in more constrictive, mechanistic organizations.

In contrast to mechanistic organizations, private organizations, with their market focus, may have less

institutionalized substitutes for leadership, and managers may engage in transformational leadership

behaviours to motivate their employees to achieve ‘performance beyond expectations’ (Lowe et al.,

1996). Based on this notion, the organic organizational style of Fresh should have a greater opportunity

for realizing performance beyond expectations by employees resulting from the transformational activity

of leaders. This only occurs when leadership styles of Fresh’s executives are based on their organizational

culture or climate. Considering the literature of Lowe et al. (1996), a transformational leadership style is


expected in an organic environment as Fresh. However, the leadership strategy of Fresh strives for a

combination of both transformational and transactional leadership. The results of this research show if

executives are following the leadership style prescribed by Fresh or whether they are following a

transformational leadership style which fits the organic character of the organization.

Overall, the literature on culture and leadership clearly indicates that organizational culture and

leadership are linked. Schein (1992) suggests that the relationship between culture and leadership

represents an ongoing interplay in which the leader shapes the culture and in turn is shaped by the

resulting culture (cited Ogbonna et al., 2000 p. 770). Similarly, Brown (1992) observes that good leaders

need to develop the skills that enable them to alter aspects of their culture in order to improve their

organizational performance (cited, Ogbonna et al., 2000 p. 770). Thus, as far as leadership is concerned,

leadership not only affects the organizational culture, but is also affected by culture itself (Mamatoglu,

2008). Because organizational climate is part of the organizational culture I expect the same relationship

between climate and leadership. The following sub-question and expectation are developed:

Sub-question 3) Does the organizational climate affect the leadership styles of executives?

Expectation 3a) Based on the organic character of Fresh, I expect that executives generally display the

transformational leadership style .

2.4 Leadership Style influenced by Job Type

As mentioned in the introduction, traits of a leader, attributes of employees and situational factors

(e.g. nature of task) are also important aspects related to leadership (Suar et al, 2006). A leader needs to

work depending on the maturity of subordinates and situations. The maturity of subordinates can be

defined in terms of the capacity to set high but attainable goals or achievement of motivation, willingness

to take responsibility and education or experience (cited Suar et al. 2006 p. 97). According to Suar et al.

(2006), the preferred leadership style for less mature subordinates with simple tasks is a transactional

leadership or telling style. This style is high task oriented and there is lower attention for the relationship

between leader and employee. As the degree of maturity increases, the leader is expected to shift first to a

selling, and then to a participating or transformational style. Considering both styles there is more focus

on the relationship between leader and subordinate at the transformational style. However, a

transformational style is only conductive when employees understand and accept the organization’s

normative structure and goals and when they develop a commitment to the organization (Suar et al. 2006).

Commitment increases only if the leader realizes the values and goals of the organization and behaves in

a supporting, participative manner. Research indicates that a leader supporting participation,

administering rewards fairly, creating a good organizational climate and improving human relations


increases the organizational performance and satisfaction of the subordinates in higher levels of the

organization (Suar et al., 2006). Applying this literature to the organization Fresh, the nature of the job

and education level of the employee may also affect the leadership style of executives. Although, the

leadership style is expected to be mainly transformational, it may occur that executives who manage

lower levels of the organization apply a more transactional leadership style based on the degree of

maturity of the employees. For instance, employees with a lower level of education in the production area

of Fresh, who accomplish simple tasks, may not understand, accept or are just not interested in the

organization’s normative structure and vision of the organization. In this case a transactional, telling

leadership style could work best for the team. Therefore it is expected that the concepts leadership and job

type are linked (Suar et al., 2006). As mentioned before, the job type is described as the nature of task in

combination with the educational level of the employee. For this research employees with a lower level of

education are certified at a Secondary Vocational Education level (MBO), and employees with a higher

level of education are at least certified at a Higher Vocational Education level (HBO).

I suppose that the job type of employees has an influence on the leadership styles of executives,

too. According to this expectation the following sub-question and expectations are proposed:

Sub-question 4) Do executives of Fresh display different leadership styles depending on the job type of

employees?

Expectation 4a) Based on the literature, I expect that executives display relatively more transactional

leadership styles in departments where employees work who are certified at a lower level of education

and accomplish simple tasks.

Expectation 4b) Based on the literature, I expect that executives display relatively more transformational

leadership styles in departments where employees work who are certified at a higher level of education

and accomplish more complex tasks.

3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This section elaborates on the participants and procedure of the research and the measures and

data analysis used to investigate the proposed sub-questions and expectations. The research is conducted

by interviewing executives about their leadership styles and perceived success in the department.

Moreover, results of Fresh’s Climate Survey 2009 are used to analyse the sub-questions and expectations

concerning dimensions of the organizational climate. Then, job descriptions helped in exploring the role

of job type on leadership styles of executives.


3.1 Participants

Data for the present study were gathered from 21 executives in the upper level of the organization

in order to explore their leadership styles and perceived success within the department. These data were

acquired from executives of the main departments of Fresh, which are the Food, Marketing, Out of Home

& Export, Supply Chain, Security and the Human Resources department. Most executives participating in

this research were male (95%) and the age of the executives ranged from 32 to 56 years. The educational

level of executives ranged from Higher Vocational Education to University level. Employees participated

in this study too, in order to examine their perceptions about dimensions of the organizational climate of

Fresh. Concerning the employees, mainly males participated in this research (84%). The age of the

employees ranged from 23 to 63 years. The employees were educated from Secondary Vocational

Education level to University level. The teams of the departments involved were ranging in size from 5 to

20 members. The participants seem to be representative because all prominent leaders participated in this

study and only departments of at least 6 employees were used for a comparison between leadership styles

and organizational climate dimensions.

3.2 Procedure

Interviews. Interviews were developed by translating the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire

(MLQ 5X short) of Bernard Bass and Bruce Avolio (2003) to Dutch. In appendix B, a sample of the

Multifactor Leadership Interview is presented. This instrument was chosen for the research because it is

the most commonly employed measure of leadership. It shows strong validity, reliability, and evidence of

prediction of organizational effectiveness (Bass & Avolio, 2005). Additionally, interviews were utilized

to: inform the executive personally about the research, assure their confidentiality, have the opportunity to

give additional explanation about the statements, and to make sure that highly qualitative information is

collected at the end of the interview. In order to increase the participation rate of executives, all of them

were invited by email and informed about the purpose of the research beforehand. The time the interview

would take and their confidentiality during and after the interviews were mentioned to make them

enthusiastic to participate in the research. Subsequently, all executives were contacted individually by

telephone in order to make an appointment for the interview, however participation was voluntary.

Eventually, all interviews were planned in one-and-a-half week and the executives attended a 30 minutes

interview session to complete the interview. Each interview started with an introduction in which once

more the purpose of the research was explained. As well as, a succinct description of the sub-questions

and expectations and the time the interview would take. The processing of their answers in a confidential

and anonymous way was stressed. During each interview, I read the descriptive statements aloud in the

same order and noted down the answers on the interview form.


Climate Survey. Employees’ answers on statements of the Climate Survey were used to analyse

the sub-questions and expectations in which the climate dimensions Innovation, Rewards & Recognition

and My Manager were involved. In appendix A, these climate dimensions are presented, as they are part

of the Climate Survey. The data with answers of all participating employees in the Climate Survey were

gathered in an Excel file from the Organizational Climate department. In order to acquire reliable results,

departments with at least 6 employees completed the survey and a reliability analysis was made for the

Innovation, Rewards & Recognition and My Manager dimensions to measure the internal consistency

between the statements belonging to each climate dimension. Therefore, the Climate Survey output was

converted from Excel to the SPSS program so that the Cronbach’s Alpha for each climate dimension

could be analysed. Unfortunately, it was not possible to use SPSS for the comparison between the

organizational climate dimensions and the different leadership styles. This was due to the fact that the

acquired Climate Survey answers of employees were recorded in the Excel file according to the five main

departments of Fresh in its entirety. For instance, one of the main departments ‘Out of Home’ exists of 5

executives who were interviewed. All answers of the Climate Survey concerning the employees working

in the Out of Home department were recorded together, hence it was not possible to filter these answers

separately according to the different executives of the department. Therefore, the online ‘Climate Survey

Tool’ was utilized in this research to see the results of employees concerning their favourableness about

the climate dimensions Innovation, Rewards & Recognition, and My Manager for each department. From

2 out of 21 departments it was not possible to analyse the answers of employees considering all climate

dimensions. The first department consisted mainly of temporary workers and for this reason their answers

were not taken into account. For the other department, I was not able to obtain reliable results because of

a low response rate. In another department the executive started working at Fresh after the

implementation of the Climate Survey in 2009, therefore it was not possible to compare the results of this

department, concerning the climate dimension My Manager, to the leadership style of the executive.

Job descriptions. The information about the job type of employees was gathered by making use

of job descriptions of all jobs within Fresh. With the help of these job descriptions it was possible to

differentiate jobs with employees certified at a lower level of education who are accomplishing simple

tasks and jobs with higher educated employees who are accomplishing more complex tasks.

3.3 Measures and Data Analysis

Leadership styles of executives

In this study the Self Rating Leader Form of the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) is

used in its most recent version (Form 5X short), where supervisors rate themselves as leaders (ratees)

during the interview. This validated form of the MLQ is available for organizational survey and research


purposes. Thirty-two descriptive statements are mentioned during this interview, each of them is related

to the transformational, transactional or passive/avoidant leadership style. Appendix C demonstrates the

statements that belong to each leadership style. In this self rating, leaders evaluate how frequently, or to

what degree, they believe they engage in a certain leadership behaviour toward their associates. However,

a combined style of the two leadership styles, transformational and transactional leadership, is also a

possibility. For rating the frequency of leadership behaviours a five point scale is used, according to a

tested list of anchors provided by Bass, Cascio, and O’Connor (1974). The anchors used to evaluate the

MLQ factors are presented as follows:

Rating Scale for Leadership Items

0 = Not at all

1 = Once in a while

2 = Sometimes

3 = Fairly often

4 = Frequently, if not always

All 21 most prominent executives were invited for this investigation and 21 interviews were

accomplished, giving a participation rate of 100%. In view of the high participation rate and the

willingness of executives to react to the statements during the interview, the interview seems

representative enough to use as a source for the evaluation of the sub-questions and expectations.

Success factors

Furthermore, at the end of the interview, statements about the level of extra effort accomplished

by executives, their effectiveness, and the satisfaction about their own leadership behaviour are used in

this interview to measure the perceived success of executives in their department. At the bottom of

appendix C the statements related to success are described. In this study, the Multifactor Leadership

Interview was only useful to measure the perceptions of executives about the statements related to

success. In order to measure the satisfaction of employees about the leadership style of their executives,

answers of the climate survey were used concerning the organizational climate dimension ‘My Manager’.

Leadership styles and organizational climate dimensions

In order to make a comparison between the different leadership styles of executives and the

organizational climate dimensions Innovation, Rewards & Recognition and My Manager, the Climate

Survey was used to find out the answers of employees for each climate dimension. For rating the answers


of employees on the climate dimensions of the Climate Survey, a six point scale is used. The anchors

used to evaluate the Climate Survey are presented as follows:

Rating Scales for Climate Survey

1= Strongly Agree 1= Very Good

2= Agree 2= Good

3= Neither Agree Nor Disagree 3= Average

4 =Disagree 4= Poor

5= Strongly Disagree 5= Very Poor

6= Not Applicable 6= Not Applicable

In total, 357 Climate Surveys were distributed and 307 surveys completed giving a response rate

of 86%. Thus, 307 employees of Fresh were involved in this investigation. With the help of the online

‘Climate Survey Tool’, the results of employees concerning their favourableness about the climate

dimensions Innovation, Rewards & Recognition, and My Manager were presented in percentages. The

expected relationship between leadership styles and organizational climate dimensions was investigated

by making use of these outcomes in percentages. The percentages of all departments, with executives who

display a common leadership style, were added up and a mean was calculated for each leadership style.

The mean of these percentages was utilized to calculate the number of employees who were favourable

about a certain climate dimension and in command of the same leadership style. This information

clarified whether differences in the leadership styles of executives affect the organizational climate

dimensions.

As mentioned in the procedure (3.2), the reliability analysis evaluated the internal consistency

between the statements belonging to Innovation, Rewards & Recognition and My Manager, in order to

make a reliable conclusion about leadership styles affecting these climate dimensions. The reliability

statistics presented the following outcomes:

- Innovation was measured by 3 items. The response rate for the dimension innovation was 99.4%. The

Cronbach’s Alpha for these questions was .69.

- Rewards & Recognition was measured by 3 items. The response rate for this dimension was 99.0%.

The Cronbach’s Alpha for these questions was .62.

- My Manager was measured by 8 items. The response rate for this dimension was 99.4%. The

Cronbach’s Alpha was .93.

In appendix A, the statements that belong to the Innovation, Reward & Recognition and My Manager

dimensions are presented in the Climate Survey. In order to analyse the other side of the relationship

between leadership styles and the organizational climate dimensions, the effect of the organizational


climate of Fresh on the different leadership styles of executives was also taken into consideration. These

outcomes were gathered by making use of the Multifactor Leadership Interview to see whether the

transformational leadership style was generally displayed, as expected, within the organic organization

Fresh.

Leadership styles influenced by job type

Job type was measured by making use of the company documentation of Fresh. The job

descriptions for each department indicated the job type of employees. This information supplies an

overview of the departments with employees educated below the Higher Vocational Education level who

are accomplishing simple tasks. It was expected that the job type of employees would influence the

leadership style of executives. The interview results, with information about the different leadership styles

of executives, were compared to the job types in Fresh to see whether a relatively more transactional

leadership style is displayed in departments where lower level educated employees accomplish simple

tasks. Whereas, a relatively more transformational leadership style is applied in departments where

employees certified at a higher level of education accomplish more complex tasks.

4. RESULTS

This section first gives a general description of the interview results, the Climate Survey results,

and the outcomes concerning the analysis of the job descriptions. Secondly, the sub-questions and

expectations are elaborated in order to provide information about the possible relationship between

leadership and the organizational climate, and also the effect of the job type on leadership styles of

executives. All results are visualized in table 1 till 4 and described extensively. The results of the

interview statements are described in table 1. Table 2 shows the outcomes regarding executives’

perceived success in relation to the different leadership styles. In table 3, the number of employees who

responded favourably to the climate dimensions Innovation, Rewards & Recognition and My Manager are

presented. These employees are arranged according to the leadership styles of their executives. The last

table pinpoints whether the job type of employees influence the leadership style of executives (table 4). In

their legend, all tables show a norm of ≥ 3.0. This means that only executives who scored at least an

average of ‘Fairly Often’ (3.0) on one specific leadership style on the interview statements are considered

to use that style, or when two styles are on average ≥ 3.0, then both styles are used by the executive.

However, in table 1, one executive scored below the 3.0 score for all leadership styles. For this executive

it was not possible to allocate him/her to a specific leadership style.


4.1 Description of Results

The results of the interviews conducted explain to what degree executives believe they engage in

a certain leadership behaviour toward their associates. In view of table 1, most executives of Fresh

generally display a more transformational leadership style. Secondly, the combined style of both

transformational and transactional leadership is applied. None of the executives make use of the

transactional or passive/ avoidant leadership style.

TABLE 1 Interview Results of Leadership Styles related to the norm

Leadership Styles of

Executives

Number of Executives Mean Score on Leadership

Style

Transformational 13 3,4

Transformational &

Transactional

7 3,4

Transactional 0 0,0

Passive/ Avoidant 0 0,0

Below Norm 1 2,1

Total Executives 21

Note: Norm ≥ 3.0

The interview outcomes describe the perceived success of executives in their department. Table

2, on the next page, shows that executives who use a mix of both transformational and transactional

leadership perceive relatively more success in their department than executives who apply only the

transformational leadership style.


TABLE 2 Interview results concerning perceived success of Executives


Executives

Number of Executives Mean Score on

Success

Perceived Success in

%

Transformational 13 3,2 80%

Transformational &

Transactional 7 3,5 88%

Transactional 0 0,0 0%

Passive/ Avoidant 0 0,0 0%

Below Norm 1 2,6 0%

Total Executives 21

Note: Norm ≥ 3.0

The answers of employees according to the dimensions of Climate Survey were analysed in order

to make a comparison between the different leadership styles of executives and the organizational climate

dimensions Innovation, Rewards & Recognition and My Manager. Table 3 indicates that employees led

by a combined style of both transformational and transactional leadership are most favourable about all

climate dimensions compared to executives who utilize only the transformational leadership style.

However, there is only a small difference in percentage between the outcomes of employees arranged

according to the transformational or the combined leadership style.

TABLE 3 Employees’ Climate Survey Scores on the Climate Dimensions

Leadership

Styles of

Executives

Total

Employ.

Employees

favourable

about IV

= in % Employees

favourable

about RR

= in % Employees

favourable

about MM

= in %

Transformational 129 80 62% 71 55% 92 71%

Transformational

& Transactional 178 121 68% 105 59% 137 77%

Transactional 0 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%

Passive/ Avoidant 0 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%

Total Employees 307

Note: Norm ≥ 3.0; IV= Innovation, RR= Rewards & Recognition, MM= My Manager


Finally, job descriptions of every department in Fresh were analysed. They indicate the difference

in job type between employees. The results concerning leadership styles and job type are shown in table

4. It shows that transformational leadership styles are principally displayed for higher educated employees

who accomplish relatively more complex tasks. At the same time, executives leading employees in the

production sector of Fresh, who are lower educated and accomplish simple tasks, make more use of both

transformational and transactional leadership.

TABLE 4 Leadership styles and job type


Executives

Executives leading Higher

Educated employees

(complex tasks)

Executives leading Lower

Educated employees

(simple tasks)

Transformational 11 1

Transformational &

Transactional

6 2

Transactional 0 0

Passive/ Avoidant 0 0

Below Norm 1 0

Total Executives 18 3

Note: Norm ≥ 3.0

4.2 Sub-questions and Expectations

4.2.1 Leadership style influencing organizational climate dimensions

In this part, the sub-questions and expectations developed in chapter 2 will be elaborated.

According to the first sub-question it can be stated that most executives, 13 out of 21 executives, perceive

that they are making use of the transformational leadership style. None of the executives believe that they

engage in only transactional or passive/ avoidant leadership behaviour. However, a combination of both

transformational and transactional leadership is perceived by 7 executives. Considering table 1, it can be

stated that two different leadership styles are applied, but most executives make use of the

transformational leadership style. The first expectation (1a) stated that executives who make use of the

transactional leadership style will have a more positive influence on the perceptions of employees

concerning the Rewards & Recognition dimension of the organizational climate compared to executives

who display the transformational leadership style. However, table 3 showed that none of the executives


perceive their style as generally transactional. Moreover, 59% of the employees, managed by executives

with a mix of both leadership styles, are favourable about rewards and recognition within the

organization. At the same time, also 55% of the employees, led by executives with only a

transformational leadership style, are favourable about rewards & recognition. This indicates a small

difference in percentages between the outcomes of the employees arranged according to the

transformational and combined style of both transformational and transactional leadership. Therefore no

clear relationship is noticeable between the different leadership styles and the Rewards & Recognition

dimension.

Expectation 1b predicted that executives who make use of the transformational leadership style

will have a more positive influence on the perceptions of employees concerning the Innovation dimension

of the organizational climate compared to executives who display the transactional leadership style.

Actually, table 3 demonstrated that 62% of the employees, who are managed by a transformational

leadership style, are positive about innovation. However, employees with a manager who uses a

combination of both transformational and transactional leadership are even more favourable about the

innovation in the organization (68%). For expectation 1b also counts that no relationship is noticeable

between the leadership styles and the Innovation dimension.

4.2.2 Transactional and transformational leadership paradigm

According to the second sub-question it can be stated that besides executives who display either a

transformational or transactional leadership style, there are also executives who use both leadership

styles. As mentioned before, 7 executives of Fresh use a combination of both transformational and

transactional leadership. Using this information it was possible to answer the expectations. The first

expectation (2a) predicted that executives who display both leadership styles perceive more success

within their department than executives who display only a transformational or transactional leadership

style. Table 2 indicated that executives who apply a mix of both transformational and transactional

leadership experienced on average more success in their team (88%) compared to executives who made

use of only a transformational style of leadership (80%). Anyhow, both leadership styles show a high

percentage of perceived success. This argues that 20 of the 21 executives are satisfied about the factors

that lead to success in their team.

Expectation 2b predicted that executives who display both leadership styles have more employees

that are satisfied about their leadership style than executives who display either the transformational or

transactional leadership style. Table 3 showed that on average 77% of the employees are satisfied about

their leader when the executive uses both leadership styles. This is only 6% more than the 71% employees

who indicate that they are satisfied about their transformational leader. Thus, a relatively small difference


is visible between the leadership styles in relation to the ‘satisfaction about the leader’ and, on average,

most employees are satisfied about their leader.

However, while studying the results of the Climate Survey it is notable that employees working in

the production sector of Fresh are less satisfied about their leader. On average, only 53% of the

employees working in the production sector are satisfied about their leader. This is noteworthy because

the transformational or mixed leadership style is used by all executives of Fresh while a transactional

leadership style may work best for the production departments where lower level educated employees are

accomplishing simple tasks.

4.2.3 The organizational climate influencing leadership styles

It was expected, that the organizational climate affected the leadership styles of executives. As

described in the section ‘business strategy’ (2.3.1), the organizational character of Fresh is considered as

organic. Table 1 and 2 indicated that approximately two-thirds of all executives are displaying the

transformational leadership style, that fits the organic character of Fresh. But, also one-third of the

executives make use of a combination of both transformational and transactional leadership behaviour. It

can be stated that the leadership styles within Fresh are generally based on the organizational climate of

the organization.

4.2.4 Leadership style influenced by job type

In view of the fourth sub-question and expectations it was predicted that the leadership style of

executives will differ depending on the job type. In departments where employees are certified at a lower

level of education and accomplish simple tasks, relatively more transactional leadership styles were

expected to be used by executives. Whereas, executives in departments where employees work who are

certified at a higher level of education and accomplish more complex tasks were expected to apply

relatively more transformational leadership styles. Table 4 showed that transformational leadership styles

are used mainly in departments with higher educated employees who accomplish relatively more complex

tasks. But, the combined style is applied more often by executives who lead lower educated employees

who perform simple tasks. The employees from these 3 departments are all working in the production

sector of Fresh. It is remarkable that, although most executives apply the transformational leadership style

within Fresh, 2 of the 3 departments with lower level educated employees make use of the combined style

of both transformational and transactional leadership instead of a transformational leadership style. This

indicates a shift from only transformational to relatively more transactional leadership behaviour.


5. DISCUSSION

5.1 Summary

The goal of the present study was to investigate a possible relationship between leadership styles

and the organizational climate. Furthermore, the impact of the job type of employees was examined in

relation to leadership. Other questions that needed to be considered were:

- Do executives make use of different leadership styles or a combination of styles? Or does one

specific leadership style dominate?

- Is there a relationship between leadership styles and the organizational climate of Fresh?

- If executives of Fresh display different styles of leadership, is this caused by differences in job

type between employees?

- Does a mix of both transactional and transformational leadership behaviours positively influence

the perceived success of executives in the department and employees’ satisfaction about their

leader?

The first question was answered with the help of the interview results. It can be concluded that executives

of Fresh make use of only the transformational leadership style or a combination of both transformational

and transactional leadership. However, most executives of Fresh display a transformational leadership

behaviour. The information to answer the second question was based on results of the Multifactor

Leadership Interview and the Climate Survey outcomes. The results showed that the leadership styles of

executives probably did not influence the organizational climate dimensions of Fresh, no clear

relationship was noticeable. On the other hand the organizational climate seem to affect the leadership

styles of executives since the transformational leadership style, applied by most executives, fits in best

with the organic character of Fresh. The third question was answered by comparing the job descriptions

of Fresh with the interview results. The results indicated that differences in job type between employees

may possibly influence the leadership styles of executives. Most executives of Fresh use transformational

leadership styles for higher educated employees who accomplish complex tasks. At the same time,

executives who lead lower educated employees who accomplish simple tasks make more use of a

combined style of both transformational and transactional leadership. As expected, the transactional

leadership style is relatively used more in departments with lower educated employees who perform

simple tasks. The last question was answered by making use of the results of the Multifactor Leadership

Interview and the Climate Survey of Fresh. With help of these results it became clear that executives who

use both leadership styles have relatively better results concerning their perceived success in the

department and the satisfaction of employees about their leadership than executives who display only a

transformational leadership style. However, this evidence is too small to indicate a relationship.


5.2 Theoretical Implications

In the present study the results display that executives of Fresh principally make use of the

transformational leadership style. Secondly, the combination style of both transformational and

transactional leadership is used. The other leadership styles, transactional or passive/ avoidant, are not

applied by any executive. The results in this study are consistent with the findings of Bass (1985) and

Lowe et al. (1996), who demonstrated that transformational leadership is more likely to emerge in

organizations with less constrictive, organic environments. Thus, in Fresh the leadership style dominates

that fits the organic regime, namely the transformational leadership style. The adoption of a combination

of both transformational and transactional leadership by executives is not surprising, either. Based on the

leadership strategy of Fresh, both transformational and transactional aspects are described (Van den Brink

& Van der Veer, 2008). The use of both leadership styles could be explained by the prescribed leadership

style of Fresh in which the use of transactional leadership is partly stimulated by the organization.

Therefore, the prescribed leadership style of the organization exemplifies that one-third of the executives

makes use of both leadership styles.

The findings considering the influence of different leadership styles on dimensions of the

organizational climate seem to have no relationship. This is not in line with the expectations. An

explanation for this result is that it was only possible to make a comparison with the transformational, or

the mixed style. In this research, no comparisons could be made with the transactional or passive/

avoidant leadership styles, because none of the executives applied these styles. The passive/avoidant

leadership style was not expected within Fresh in contrast with the expected transactional leadership style

in departments with lower educated employees. Research of Bass (2004) indicated that managers tend to

underutilize transactional leadership methods even when called for by leader or situation. Time pressures,

poor appraisal methods, discomfort to leader and associate, and lack of skill or confidence are all possible

reasons for the failure to use transactional leadership. Presumably, the transactional leadership style is less

used by executives of Fresh because this style of leadership does not fit the organizational strategy and

executives lack the resources to deliver the needed rewards. Considering the organizational climate

dimension Rewards & Recognition, it is not usual in Fresh to provide rewards towards employees for

achieved performance targets. Only excellent performance is recognized with a single bonus, which

happens sporadic. Incentives are only used for employees at the top of the organization. However,

rewards are principally based on appraisals. Employees with good appraisals, receive a marginally

increase of their salary. On the whole, Fresh is not commercially-managed. Therefore the transactional

leadership style is probably not recognized separately. Furthermore, the results concerning the

organizational climate dimension Innovation did not show a higher percentage of favourable employees

when executives display a transformational leadership style compared to executives who use both


leadership styles. Unfortunately, here, too, counts that no comparison could be made with executives

using the transactional leadership style. In general, employees are more positive about innovation than

about rewards & recognition within the organization. This emphasizes the common use of

transformational leadership behaviour.

Yet, the organizational climate may possibly affect the leadership styles within the organization.

It is not by chance, that most executives make use of a transformational leadership style that fits the

organizational culture and climate. Even in departments with employees certified at a lower level of

education who accomplish simple tasks, the transformational style or combined style is used. This

indicates that the organizational culture of Fresh, that influences the climate, determines the leadership

styles within the organization. This is in line with the literature of Ogbonna et al. (2000) and Mamatoglu

(2008). They stated that as far as leadership is concerned, leadership not only affects the organizational

culture, but is also affected by the culture itself.

Furthermore, the results display that executives who applied the combined style of both

transactional and transformational leadership behaviours experienced on average more success in their

team compared to executives who made use of only the transformational style of leadership. Broadly

speaking, the results indicate that executives are on average very satisfied concerning the success within

their team, if a combination of transformational and transactional leadership is used. This is in line with

the literature of Bass & Avolio (2004) and Suar et al. (2006) who disseminate that both leadership styles

are necessary for leadership effectiveness, satisfaction with the leadership and extra effort (performance

beyond expectations). However, executives with only a transformational style of leadership perceive a

high level of success in their team, too. Therefore, it cannot be concluded that executives who display

both leadership styles are more satisfied than transformational leaders, concerning the success of the

group. Just as no comparison could be made with executives using the transactional or passive/avoidant

leadership style. The same conclusion counts for the outcomes based on the ‘satisfaction about the leader’

measured with the organizational climate dimension My manager. Executives who display both

leadership styles have on average very positive results concerning the satisfaction of employees about

their leadership. This is in line with the literature of Bass & Avolio (2003) who stated that employees are

more satisfied when executives make use of both leadership styles. But the results showed a high

percentage of satisfied employees about transformational leaders, too. Nevertheless, in both cases the

scores about ‘perceived success’ and ‘my manager’ are slightly higher when leaders make use of both

leadership styles compared to transformational leaders. However, irrespective of the leadership style of

their executives, most employees are satisfied about their leader. Only employees working in the

production sector of Fresh are on average less satisfied about their leader.

Lastly, the findings considering the effect of job type on leadership behaviour indicate that the


job type of employees may possibly influence the leadership styles of executives. It can be stated that

transformational leadership styles are generally used for departments with higher educated employees

who accomplish relatively more complex tasks. Although, the combined style is applied more often by

executives who lead lower educated employees who perform simple tasks. This outcome was partly

expected according to the theory of Suar et al. (2006). They stated that the preferred leadership style for

less mature subordinates with simple tasks is a transactional leadership style. The results showed that in

Fresh the transactional leadership style is also displayed relatively more often in departments with lower

level educated employees who accomplish simple tasks, even though this transactional style is combined

with transformational leadership. This result can be explained by the fact that employees educated at a

lower level are in need of a more transactional leadership style. These employees would like to be

directed by their leader. In this case, the transactional leadership style works best for the team, although

the transformational leadership style is applied in other departments where employees educated at a

higher level are in need of a more transformational leadership style.

5.3 Research Limitations

Some limitations should be considered carefully when interpreting the findings. First it is

important to make notice of the executives who were part of the research sample. Like mentioned in the

methods section, executives used the Self Rating Leader Form of the Multifactor Leadership

Questionnaire, where supervisors rate themselves as leaders. For this investigation only the perceptions of

executives themselves are used to describe their leadership style. However, since leadership is in the ‘eye

of the beholder’, why are data only collected from the ‘self beholder’? Unfortunately, interviewing 357

employees was no option, and it was not authorized to accomplish leadership surveys for employees.

Nonetheless, the Self Rating Form for executives was experienced as representative because of the high

response rate on my invitation email and 100% participation rate. All executives were willing and

enthusiastic to take part in my research. For further research, involving the Rater Form of the Multifactor

Leadership Questionnaire gives an even stronger establishment for the research findings. This rater form

is used by employees to describe the leadership style of their executive as they perceive it.

Secondly, as explained in the procedure (3.2) of this research, for 2 out of 21 executives it was

not possible to make a comparison between their leadership styles and the organizational climate

dimensions. For another department, it was not possible to compare the results concerning the climate

dimension My Manager to the leadership style of the executive.

The third limitation which has to be mentioned is about the Cronbach’s Alpha related to the

organizational climate dimension Rewards & Recognition. This Cronbach’s Alpha is .62 which is quite


low. Taking this into consideration, a measurement error may have attenuated the results concerning the

relationship between Rewards & Recognition and leadership styles.

In the fourth place, it was not possible to compare the results between the organizational climate

dimensions and the different leadership styles with the use of the SPSS program. Fortunately, the

‘Climate Survey Tool’ could be applied in order to make this comparison.

Finally, it was unfortunate that no comparisons could be made between executives displaying

either a transformational or transactional leadership style. None of the executives made use of a solitary

transactional leadership style while this was expected for the research.

5.4 Conclusion

Broadly speaking, the results show that about two-thirds of Fresh’s executives generally make use

of the transformational leadership style. Also one-third of the executives displays a mix of both

transformational and transactional leadership behaviour. In this study, the leadership styles do not affect

the explored dimensions of the organizational climate. However, the outcomes explain that the

organizational climate may possibly influence the leadership styles within the organization. The results

indicate as well, that differences in job type between employees may possibly affect the leadership styles

of executives. Evidence, that the combined leadership style more positively influences the perceived

success of executives about their team and the satisfaction of employees about their leader compared to

executives displaying the transformational leadership style, is too small to demonstrate a relationship.

Therefore, it can be concluded that most executives in Fresh apply the transformational leadership

style that fits in best with the organic character of the organization. But Fresh should be aware of the fact

that relatively more employees who are educated at a lower level and accomplish simple tasks are led by a

combination of both transformational and transactional leadership styles. Presumably, for these

employees the transactional style is needed, too, in order to acquire the best results. Even, it may be

initiated that only the transactional leadership style could work best for these departments. For Fresh, it

may be a matter for consideration that, although the transformational leadership style fits in best with the

organic character of the organization, employees in the production sector who are educated at a lower

level and accomplish simple tasks may be in need of transactional leadership behaviours.


REFERENCES

Antonakis, J., Avolio, B.J., & Sivasubramaniam, N. 2003. Context and leadership: an examination of the

nine-factor full range leadership theory using the multifactor leadership questionnaire. The

leadership quarterly. 14: 261-295.

Bass, B.M. & Avolio, B.J. 1993. Transformational leadership: A response to critiques. In M.M. Chemers

& R. Ayman (Eds.), Leadership Theory and Research: perspectives and directions. San Diego, CA:

Academic Press.

Bass, B.M. & Avolio, B.J. 2003. Multifactor leadership questionnaire. Published by Mind Garden, Inc.

Bass, B.M. & Avolio, B.J. 2004. Multifactor leadership questionnaire manual and sampler set.

Published by Mind Garden, Inc.

Bass, B.M. & Avolio, B.J. 2005. Multifactor leadership questionnaire feedback report. Published by

Mind Garden, Inc.

Bass, B.M., Avolio, B.J. & Jung, D.I. 1999. Re-examining the components of transformational and

transactional leadership using the multifactor leadership questionnaire. Journal of Occupational and

Organizational Psychology. 72: 441-462.

Bass, B. M., Cascio, W. F., & O’Connor, E. 1974. Magnitude of estimations of frequency and amount.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 59: 313–320.

Bass, B.M., Jung, D.I., Avolio B.J. & Berson, Y. 2003. Predicting unit performance by assessing

transformational and transactional leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2: 207-218.

Bax, E.H. 2003. Kansrijk Kiezen. Raamwerk voor strategisch human resource management. Den Haag.

Sdu uitgevers.

Burton, R.M., Lauridsen, J. & Obel, B. 2004. The impact of organizational climate and strategic fit on

firm performance. Human Resource Management, 43: 67-82.

Burns, J. M.. 1978. Leadership. New York: Harper and Row Publishers Inc.

Chemers, M.M., 2002. Meta-cognitive, social, and emotional intelligence of transformational leadership:

Efficacy and Effectiveness. In R. E. Riggio, S. E. Murphy, F. J. Pirozzolo (Eds.), Multiple

Intelligences and Leadership.

Denison, D.R. 1996. What is the difference between organizational culture and organizational climate? A

native’s point of view on a decade of paradigm wars. Academy of Management Review. 21:619-654.

Ekvall, G. & Ryhammar, L. 1998. Leadership style, social climate and organizational outcomes: a study

of a Swedisch University College. Creativity and Innovation Management. 7: 126-130.

Fullan, M. 2001. Leading in a culture of change. Jossey-Bass: A Wiley company San Francisco.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotional_intelligence


Haakonsson, D.D., Burton, R.M., Obel, B. & Lauridsen, J. 2008. How failure to align organizational

climate and leadership style affects performance. Management Decision. 46: 406-432.

Hater, J.J. & Bass, B.M. 1988. Superiors’ evaluations and subordinates’ perceptions of transformational

and transactional leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology. 73: 695-702.

Howell, J.M. & Avolio, B.J. 1993. Transformational leadership, transactional leadership, locus of control,

and support for innovation: key predictors of consolidated business-unit performance. Journal of

Applied Psychology. 78: 891-902.

Howell, J.M. & Hall-Merenda, K.E. 1999. The ties that bind: the impact of leader-member exchange,

transformational and transactional leadership, and distance on predicting follower performance.

Journal of Applied Psychology. 84: 680-694.

Judge, T.A. & Piccolo, R.F. 2004 Transformational and Transactional leadership: A meta-analytic test of

their relative validity. Journal of Applied Psychology. 89: 755-768.

Jung, D., Chow, C. & Wu, A. 2003. The role of transformational leadership in enhancing organizational

innovation: hypothesis and some preliminary findings. The leadership quarterly. 13: 193-215.

Lowe, K.B., Kroeck, K.G. & Sivasubramaniam, N. 1996. Effectiveness correlates of transformational and

transactional leadership: A meta-analytic review of the MLQ literature. Leadership Quarterly. 7: 385-

425.

Mamatoglu, N. 2008. Effects on organizational context (culture and climate) from implementing a 360-

degree feedback system: the case of Arcelik. European Journal of Work and Organizational

Psychology. 17:426-449.

Ngo, H.Y., Foley, S. & Loi, R. 2009. Family friendly work practices, organizational climate, and firm

performance: A study of multinational corporations in Hong Kong. Journal of Organizational

Behavior, 30: 665-680.

Ogbonna, E. & Harris, L.C. 2000. Leadership style, organizational culture and performance: empirical

evidence from UK companies. Journal of Human Resource Management. 11:766-788.

Politis, J.D. 2001. The relationship of various leadership styles to knowledge management. Leadership &

Organization Development Journal. 22: 354-364.

Sarros, J.C. & Santora, J.C. 2001. The transformational-transactional leadership model in practice.

Leadership & Organization Development Journal. 22: 383-393.

Suar, D., Tewari, H.R. & Chaturbedi, K.R. 2006. Subordinates’ perception of leadership styles and their

work behaviour. Psychology and Developing Societies. 18: 95-114.

Van den Brink, D. & Van der Veer, I. 2008. Climate drives performance. Special edition horizon: proud

to be green. 2-3.


Watkin, C. & Hubbard, B. 2003. Leadership motivation and the drivers of share price: the business case

for measuring organizational climate. Leadership & Organization Development Journal. 24: 380-

386.

Yukl, G.A. 2005. Leadership in organizations. Pearson Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs.


Appendix A

Climate Survey 2009

C My Manager

10 How would you rate your direct manager on: Dealing fairly with everyone, playing no favourites Very Good Good Average Poor Very Poor Not

applicable

11 How would you rate your direct manager on: Being accessible/ available when you need him or her Very Good Good Average Poor Very Poor Not

applicable

12 I have trust and confidence in my direct manager Strongly Agree Agree

Neither Agree Nor Disagree

Disagree Strongly Disagree

Not applicable

13 Day-to-day decisions and actions of my direct manager are consistent with his/her words Strongly Agree Agree



Not applicable

14 My direct manager stimulates me to improve my performance Strongly Agree Agree



Not applicable

15 My direct manager provides clear and regular feedback on my performance Strongly Agree Agree



Not applicable

16 My direct manager keeps me informed about important company developments Strongly Agree Agree



Not applicable

17 I can freely express my views without fear Strongly Agree Agree



Not applicable

F Innovation

32 I am encouraged to be innovative in my job (i.e., to come up with new or better ways of doing things) Strongly Agree Agree



Not applicable


33 Employees are encouraged to take reasonable risks (e.g., try new ideas, new ways of doing things) Strongly Agree Agree



Not applicable

34 I often waste a significant amount of time and effort because of unnecessary procedures Strongly Agree Agree



Not applicable

H Rewards and Recognition

38 I believe I am paid fairly for the work I do Strongly Agree Agree



Not applicable

39 The better my performance, the better my pay will be Strongly Agree Agree



Not applicable

40 I receive recognition when I do a good job Strongly Agree Agree



Not applicable


Appendix B

Multifactor Leadership Interview Leadership styles of Executives

By Bernard Bass & Bruce Avolio (2003)


MULTIFACTOR LEADERSHIP INTERVIEW

This interview is to describe your leadership style as you perceive it. If an item is irrelevant, or you are

unsure or do not know the answer, the item is left blank. Thirty-two descriptive statements are

mentioned during this interview. Judge how frequently each statement fits you.

The following rating scale is used:

Not at all

0

Once in a while

1

Sometimes

2

Fairly often

3

Frequently, if not always

4

1. I talk optimistically about the future…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

2. I provide others with assistance in exchange for their efforts….…………………………………………………………………

3. I spend time teaching and coaching and help others to develop their strengths……….....................................

4. I wait for things to go wrong before taking action………………….…………………………………………………………………….

5. I discuss in specific terms who is responsible for achieving performance targets……………………………..…………

6. I act in ways that build others’ respect for me………………………………….………………………………………………………….

7. I avoid getting involved when important issues arise……………………………………………………………………………….....

8. I concentrate my full attention on dealing with mistakes, complaints, and failures……………………………………..

9. I display a sense of power and confidence……….…………………………………………………………………………………………..

10. I keep track of all mistakes……………………………………………………….…………………………………………………………………..

11. I delay in responding to urgent questions………….…………………..……………………………………………………………………

12. I talk about my most important values and beliefs………………….……………………………………………………………………

13. I focus attention on irregularities, mistakes, exceptions, and deviations from standards…..……………………….

14. I demonstrate that problems must become chronic before I take action..……………………………………………………

15. I specify the importance of having a strong sense of purpose………………………………………………………………………

16. I direct my attention toward failures to meet standards…………………………………………………..………………………….

17. I fail to interfere until problems become serious………………………………………………………………………………………….

18. I talk enthusiastically about what needs to be accomplished..……………………………………………………………………..

19. I make clear what one can expect to receive when performance goals are achieved……..……………………………

20. I articulate a compelling vision of the future…………………………………….………………………………………………………….

21. I avoid making decisions……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

22. I re-examine critical assumptions to question whether they are appropriate………..………..……………………………

23. I express satisfaction when others meet expectations….………………………………………………………………………………


24. I show that I am a firm believer in ‘if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it’…………………………………………………………………….

25. I suggest new ways of looking at how to complete assignments……………..….……………………………………………….

26. I am absent when needed………………………………………………………………………….…………………………………………………

27. I treat others as individuals rather than just as a member of a group…………….…………………………………………….

28. I work with others in a satisfactory way……………………………………………………………………………………………………….

29. I get others to do more than they expected to do………………………….……………………………………………………………

30. I increase others’ willingness to try harder…………………….…………………………………………………………………………….

31. I lead a group that is effective………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

32. I use methods of leadership that are satisfying..…………………………………………………………………………………………..

Note: a Dutch translation of the statements is used during my interviews.


Appendix C

Interview Statements grouped by the different Leadership Styles

TRANSFORMATIONAL STATEMENTS

I talk optimistically about the future

I spend time teaching and coaching and help others to develop their strengths

I act in ways that build others’ respect for me

I display a sense of power and confidence

I talk about my most important values and beliefs

I specify the importance of having a strong sense of purpose

I talk enthusiastically about what needs to be accomplished

I articulate a compelling vision of the future

I re-examine critical assumptions to question whether they are appropriate

I suggest new ways of looking at how to complete assignments

I treat others as individuals rather than just as a member of a group

TRANSACTIONAL STATEMENTS

I provide others with assistance in exchange for their efforts

I discuss in specific terms who is responsible for achieving performance targets

I concentrate my full attention on dealing with mistakes, complaints, and failures

I keep track of all mistakes

I focus attention on irregularities, mistakes, exceptions, and deviations from standards

I direct my attention toward failures to meet standards

I make clear what one can expect to receive when performance goals are achieved

I express satisfaction when others meet expectations

PASSIVE/ AVOIDANT STATEMENTS

I wait for things to go wrong before taking action

I avoid getting involved when important issues arise

I delay in responding to urgent questions

I demonstrate that problems must become chronic before I take action

I fail to interfere until problems become serious

I avoid making decisions


I show that I am a firm believer in “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”

I am absent when needed

SUCCESS STATEMENTS I work with others in a satisfactory way

I get others to do more than they expected to do

I increase others’ willingness to try harder

I lead a group that is effective

I use methods of leadership that are satisfying

leadership styles explored

Documents